ML20203P999

Site Survey of Brunswick Steam Electric Plant Units 1 & 2 Maint Program & Practices, Technical Ltr Rept

ML20203P999
Person / Time
Site:	Brunswick
Issue date:	03/07/1986
From:	Battelle Memorial Institute, PACIFIC NORTHWEST NATION
To:	NRC
Shared Package
ML20203P998	List: ML20203P997 ML20203P999
References
CON-FIN-B-2984 NUDOCS 8605080501
Download: ML20203P999 (46)

Text

, _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

g TECHNICAL LETTER REPORT  !

l I

SITE SURVEY OF BRUNSWICK STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT UNITS 1 & 2 MAINTENANCE PROGRAM AND PRACTICES r

FIN B2984 i

{

1 I

March 7, 1986 8605080501 860428 PDR ADOCK 05000324 P PDR

. . y 1

EXECUTIVE

SUMMARY

As part of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission's (NRC) Maintenance and ...

Surveillance Program's Survey and Evaluation of Maintenance Effectiveness Project, a site survey was conducted at the Brunswick Steam Electric Plant (BSEP) Units 1 & 2. The purpose of the visit was to collect plant maintenance .

program descriptive information and observations about BSEP's maintenance and surveillance program, using a formalized data gathering outline (protocol).

The site survey was conducted during the week of January 13, 1986, with a team of four NRC and two Pacific Northwest Laboratory (PNL) staff.

Protocol information was collected in five main areas: organization and administration; facilities and equipment; technical procedures; personnel; and J work control. The completed protocol includes the detailed information ,

collected at the site, while this report contains selected observations and summaries extracted from that protocol.

The BSEP maintenance program was assessed as having " satisfactory performance" by the most recent NRC Systematic Assessment of Licensee Performance (SALP)

ratings. The more significant of the survey team observations can be j summarized as

i

)

(1) There are approximately 320 staff in the BSEP Maintenance Department, which serves both units 1 and 2. Besides being split l

into two main areas of expertise (i.e., mechanical and I&C/ electrical), the work crews are assigned to a specific unit (1  !

or 2) and a specific work area (e.g., reactor building, turbine building, diesels and auxiliary systems, surveillance testing, radioactive waster or planning / scheduling). This work force is complemented by a Quality Control staff of 25 inspectors during normal, operation and 43 inspectors during outages. .

(2) There is intensive day-shift maintenance coverage during the work i week, and single shift coverage on swing-shift and Saturday.

Call-outs are used for coverage at other times. Maintenance outage l

shift coverage is provided by the maintenance department and the extent et coverage is dependent on the critical path schedule.

(3) An Outage Management Group was implemented in late 1983 and has been responsible for planning and directing outages since that time.

' Overruns of the outage schedule have been cut dramatically since the group was started, and many plant staff felt that outage planning has been partially responsible for the long (relative to previous power runs at BSEP) power runs following the last two outages.

(4) Numerous formal and informal meetings are held at BSEP to facilitate communications between maintenance and the other departments as well as to facilitate communications down the maintenance chain of (

I command.

(5) Foremen at BSEP estimated that they spend only 15% to 20% of their time doing direct supervision in the field because of the paperwork

requirements of their job. Craft workmen estimate that 30% to 50% 1 of their work day is spent fulfilling administrative requirements. l l

l

'_ . . _ _ _ _ _ . _ . . _ _ . ____i_ _ _ _. _ _ _ _ _ _ .

O g

11 (6) The Brunswick station tour showed the plant to be clean and, with c the exception of areas undergoing construction, without clutter.

l Laydown areas inside the reactor building are minimal, but are

' comparatively large and allow easy machinery access outside the reactor building. Workshop area is minimal for the over 300 man *

, crew. Tool crib storage is adequate for noncontaminated tools, but the contaminated tool crib was cramped. Warehouses are adequate to store the $31M combined plant inventory, and are located approximately one quarter mile from the reactor building.

(7) BSEP has a philosophy that procedures should guide most aspects of maintenance work. BSEP is planning to complete a Maintenance and

• Surveillance Test (MST) Upgrade Program in January 1986. The purpose of the program is to upgrade MSTs using a content guide, a writer's guide, and formal validation and verification of the newly-written or rewritten procedures. This program will be applied to Maintenance Instructions once the MSTs have been developed.

• (8) Turnover in the Maintenance Department has been fairly low over the past three years, except for high I&C technician turnover in 1984.

A local hiring policy has largely taken care of this problem.

(9) Overtime at BSEP has run approximately 20% over the past year for all maintenance staff, despite the 30-week outage in 1985.

(10) BSEP received INPO accreditation in all 3 maintenance areas in December 1985. Aproximately 9% of a craftsman's standard work time was spent in training in 1985. At present, only on-the-job training is used for on-going maintenance training for those techn'icians who have reached the highest technician job category. -

i (11) The application of computer-augmented work control to management of I The the Automated maintenance program Maintenance is just Management begining(at Brunswick.AMMS) had been in use System

- the plant for approximately one month and has not been fully implemented. At the time of this survey, the system was used almost exclusively for job initiation and/or tracking. Work planning and scheduling, securing spare parts, procedure packages, Radiation Work Permits (RWP), obtaining clearance control, and tracking machinery history and trending are administered through hard copy Work Requests (WRs - commonly called trouble tickets).

Full implementation of the AMMS will include all these functions, but it is not expected to be complete for at least two years.

(12) Radiation exposure tracking is done through a centralized Radiological Information Monitoring System (RIMS) that allows daily l tracking of dose against a predetemined exposure goal. The average craft personnel exposure, once the worst in th. C3, is currently at the industry nora due to a vigorous plant cleanup and decontamination program. A 30% reduction in current dose levels is set as a goal for 1986.

111 (13)trending No formal program exists to perform root cause or equipmentSa analysis.

in-service inspection (ISI) surveillance requirements and is documented in the Maintenance Experience Report. ' Plant technical -

personnel do not perform a routine review of completed work packages, but are alerted to unusual maintenance problems via an Engineering Evaluation Request (EER).

(14) BSEP has recently begun a program to upgrade its preventive maintenance (PM) program. The program recommendations are in place, but full implementation is expected to take several years.

(15) The work backlog at the time of the team visit was 6601 active work requests (4177 for electrical /I&C, and 2424 for mechanical craf ts).

Although this number of work requests was somewhat larger than >

other dual unit plants, the time required to complete this backlog (barring new entries) was estimated by the Brunswick plant staff to be about two weeks.

m

.!? -

(

\

iv TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Sumary i Body of the Report 1

A. General Information 1

B. Survey Methodology Descriptive Data 3 C.

Organization and Administration 3 1.

2. Facilities and Equipment 11

3. Technical Procedures 13

4. Personnel 15

5. Work Control 18 D. Conclusions 23 Appendixes Appendix A - Plant Staff Interviewed During Site Visit A.1 Appendix B'- Entrance and Exit Meeting Attendance B.1 Appendix C - BSEP Plant Data C.1 Appendix D - BSEP History of Maintenance Organization D.1 Appendix E - A Sumary of Maintenance-related BSEP Corporate Goals E.1

1 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION DIVISION OF HUMAN FACTORS TECHNOLOGY (DHFT) -

i BRUNSWICK STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT UNITS 1 & 2.-

SITE SURVEY REPORT 1

i A. , GENERAL INFORMATION:

BSEP-1 License No.: DPR-71 BSEP-1 Docket No.: 50-325 BSEP-2 License No.: DPR-62 BSEP-2 Docket No.: 50-324 Carolina Power & Light Company Licensee:

Brunswick Steam Electric Plant *

' P. O. Box 10429 Southport, NC 28461-0429 Survey Conducted: January 13 through January 17, 1986 N. B. Le, NRR, Team Leader Team Members: B. Grenier, MSPP Program Manager, NRR R. Correia, I&E D. Loveless, RII 4 W. Rankin, PNL I

D. Jarrell, PNL B. SURVEY METHODOLOGY:

)

The NRC has ' undertaken a program to investigate, and, if necessary, l

!u initiate industry.

measures to improve maintenance The MSPP has in the U.S. nuc l l'

'f (SECY 85-129) has been prepared to document this program two purposes:

q maintenance and surveillance and (2) Propose alternate regulatory

.4 approaches with respect to maintenance and surveill necessary.

i addressed and directs the integration and planning of NRC's activities to accomplish these objectives.

Phase I of this effort is entitled " Survey and Evaluation of Maintenance A major objective of this project is to obtain Effectiveness."

information and assess the current practices of nuclear power pla i maintenance and surveillance programs.

gathering outline) was developed forData usewere in the collection collected in fiveof mainten and surveillance program descriptive data.

broad categories:

o organization and administration o facilities and equipment

'o technical procedures i

o personnel o work control e

, - . - ,-, ,.,---,,..--..,.,,,,,,,..._..,,.,,-,.----.r---,-, ,-_.- ,,__....-.,.-.n., ,- - -, ,.., - ,--,--,....,-

a e 2

The attached appendixes contain a list of BSEP staff who were interviewed,. . .

a list of the people who attended the entrance and exit meetings, a brief summary of descriptive data concerning BSEP, a history of the BSEP Maintenance Department, and a summary of maintenance-related BSEP goals.

A completed protocol and the materials / references obtained from the site .

,are par t of the MSPP file which will be maintained for data background.

These materials have been cleared by Carolina Power & Light Company with respect to 10 CFR 2.790 (Public Inspections, Exemptions, Requests for Withholding).

4 d .

Il o

v

3 C. DESCRIPTIVE DATA

'~

1. Organization and Administration

a. General Description .

- BSEP is organized such that the Manager of Maintenance, Manager of Technical and Administrative Support, Manager of Environmental Control, Manager of Operations and the Director of Regulatory Compliance report directly to the General Manager of the Brunswick Plant (see Figure 1). The figure also illustrates that the Plant Services Supervisor, the Principal Engineer--Maintenance, and four maintenance supervisors in turn report to the Manager of Maintenance. ,

Excluding the 95 men contracted for painting, lagging, and janitorial services, there are approximately 320 BSEP personnel in the maintenance department. In addition, 50-60 utility-added craft personnel are used during outages. There is one Maintenance Department for both BSEP units. Maintenance coverage is provided on two shifts five days a week and on one shift on Saturday. Call-outs are used for coverage at other times. An Outage Management Group (OMG) is responsible for coordinating and directing all outages and for planning system work on the operating unit. There has been a recent upgrade in the BSEP Maintenance and Surveillance Test Program, and a new program is underway to upgrade the Preventive Maintenance (PM) program. There are numerous daily and weekly, formal and informal meetings to enhance communications between Maintenance and Operations and down through the chain of command in the Maintenance Department. A short description of the evolutionary growth of the maintenance department at bSEP is given in Appendix D, and the stated

maintenance-related corporate goals follow in Appendix E.

• l Specific Observations b.

The BSEP organization is set up such that the Manager of Maintenance reports to the General Manager, Brunswick Plant, along with the Manager of Technical and Administrative Support, the Manager of Environmental and Radiation Control, the Manager of Operations, and the Director of Regulatory Compliance (see Figure 1). The Manager of Maintenance has six people reporting to him (see Figure 2): the Plant Services Supervisor, the Principal Engineer--Maintenance, and four Maintenance Supervisors. Although there is one Maintenance Department for both units, the four maintenance supervisors are divided into functional areas on the basis of Unit (Unit 1 or 2) and area (mechanical or I&C/ Electrical). Thus, there is a Unit 1 supervisor for mechanical, a Unit 1 supervisor for I&C/ Electrical, etc. Under each of the supervisors, the foremen are also split into areas of the plant (see Figure 2). Thus, for example, the Unit 2 mechanical Maintenance Supervisor has five foremen and one senior specialist reporting to him; each has one of the following specific duties:

reactor butiding, turbine building, diesels and auxiliary systems, surveillance testing, rad waste, and planning.

e Vice President Brunswick Nuclear Project I

] I I

[

Manager Manager l Manager General Manager Site Planning Brunswick Nuclear Outages Brunswick Plant .

& Control Project Engineering and Constructors I

I I I I l 1 Manager Manager Manager Manager Project Operations Resident Eng.

Technical aw Environmental & Maintenance Construction Eng. Support Manager

. Administrative Radiation Control Support I I I l oirector Regulatory Principal Operations Compliance Engineer Superintendent Director Omahns j

- Administrative Suppon Environmental 3 Fire Principal

- & Chemistry

- Protection - Engine Supervisor Manager Specialist Operators

- Technical Support Environmental Prirtcipal Pr6ect

& Chemistry

Engineers Engineer Specialist Operations Operations -

5

• Radiation ,

Radweste

- Control Supervisor Supervisors i Shift Foreman Radiation

- Control Specialists Shift

- Operating Supervisor I

Shift Foreman FIGURE 1. Brunswick Plant Organization .

e + - ...

e

. s e

Manager Meentenance I f Centmuod I I e Mem. Supenneer Plant

• Sennces (Une 1 l&C/

Superwser Elect l I I I I I I l&C Foremen l&C Foremen Plant l&C Foremen (4)Peenter a (Surv Testes (Red. Westen Sereces tunet 1 Turinne elds Pee Coverer I*'**** ' " (ell &C Tech 1 (3116C Tech I (511&C Tech 1 (1)l&C Tech 2 (4)l&C Tech 2 (32) Peeneers (2)l&C Tech 2 (3)l&C Tech 3 (Ill&C Tech 3

& Pee Coverers (3)l&C Tech 3 1&C Foremen 3 Ew ,,,,,,,,,,,,,

(3) Mechanics (fiSome, I ' g5) Meen. (Tll&C Tech 1 Planner /Anesyst (Ill&C Tech 2 (2)14C Tech 3 (Il l&C Foeemon Prmcost Enemeer. (Electrecall Meensenance I

I I I I I I Protect Eng (7) Electriceans.

Pro,ect Eng Prosect Eng ,

(3tl&C Tech 1 (Meen Seeff) 1st Class (Mem Programs) (Meen. Procedurest I -

d (3)Sr.Engeneers l d (4)Sr.Enemoors l y,,,$,,,,,,,

N I738'. ems l j d(2tiech. Aede-Meenl (Um: 1 Mechener" d (33 fech. 5-Meen. ,

d (6)TechnecianI l l l 1 i (Il Sr. Spec -Mech- l [ g Mechanic Foremen Sr Speciehst-Mechenec Foremen Mechenec Foremen Mechenec Foremen

'I lUnet 162 Refuehne Mechemcel gnoscoor side I (Turtune Bede ) (Oursede Meen l (11 St. Spec.-Elect. l g43 Mesa.

I I' I

] pionn ,f Aneg gg y

l l [

%3) Tech, Asde 8.Meenl IS) Mechenees. (2)Semor sg) Mechenecs. (2) Semor Mechenecs 1st Class Mechenees 1st Class I I I I (101Mechenecs (2) Sen or (7) Mechenecs. (2)Semor Mechenecs 1st Class Mechenecs 1st Ctess FIGURE 2. Brunswick Maintenance Organization . ,

e _

O P

1. m ,_

M ,_ _

I N .

I 6.

N e

m o .

hc l e M.

r S

c.

ne n '* 2)

(

I em he  !

c r eo*

wF

' s n

ie 4

C l

[

t h e

snW II1s I

S 2l ne '

em he I

nro c.

s c.

uF n n a

e h h c [

-l e

_ M 3 r 1

' S 1(

c. 2)

- n e

I h (n ' l Q =e *

- .s s

e n

e

=m e r

e

• • ss

• a h [ "l )

[

a I t d

I 5M ' "Ce 1 ,

t a2

e. c. n DI y

, n n ae o Muf I hem e c no r s

(

c.

uF n e

' h c [ .

[

e 2 M

' e

, S T) E

c. n ae

)

2 .

(

R nem U

. I  !

G

. c. roe I uF s e F

[ la C

ts

_ 8 31 8

ll n C1 e &h c t

rJ md er 3

31 e o _(T

[l 12 f

~

S n eeis C ee P h S s m

mS a r TT n

eotc a. ss

_ or I CC rF s EE rEa l cew ns I 823 I tc C i

hhh tiP( Sm el mS h ccc eee let E1 s

e r

tTT l i

o :- CCC F

t

&&E ll

/

C ng ) 123 C t_ e36 t

&t I t c I e n.

mes ceee hhhc c gT( 43Ul 4(

[ 2e ee TTT S l I

.sT e , CCC nWE a Cr u e&6 c u lI111) le ,7, mS( S32( I( E-n, f c

e p

uf -

S 43 - '.

nl 123 g ee d hhh r S

mo eee ccc -

TTT I e. sM CCC p n Ct e 6SS 1)I) e a P( S413 I11

. e r

7 There are approximately 320 people in the Maintenance Department.

Specific allocation of personnel is indicated in Figure 2, although the clerks are not included in that figure. In addition, approximately 95 contracted staff are used for painting, lagging, and janitorial services. This number increases to approximatel

• during outages,when approximately 50-60 utility mechanics travelling (y 130 i I

crews) also assist the on-site crew. BSEP utilizes contracted personnel for performing specific task requirements such as plant services, plant modifications, high dose maintenance work, and high expertise jobs (procedures development and training).

The maintenance crews are scheduled to take advantage'of engineering

• availabilit A nominal work crewof(ywhich while providing there completeFigure are 19 total--see coverage as needed.

2) consists of one foreman and 10 craftsmen, However, one craftsman from each crew and two foremen are used to m ke up two Duty Crews. The regular maintenance shift is from 7:30 a.m. to 3:30 p.m. Monday through Friday. The Duty Crews work from 3:30 p.m. to midnight Monday through Friday and from 7:30 a.m. to 3:30 p.m. on Saturday. On Sunday, the Duty Crew is subject to call out. Shift coverage during outages is driven by critical path items. Since the major critical path items during outages involve plant modifications at BSEP, maintenance crews typically start with normal work hours and, move to a two 12-hour shift coverage by the end of the outage.

There is an Outage Management Group (OMG), which is responsible for.

planning, scheduling, and directing the outage work. The organization was started in October 15, 1983, lemented on January andwasfullyimp(seeFigure3):

1, 1984. The OMG is composed of three subgroups (1)

Outage Planni_ng and Scheduling: (2) Outage Projects, and (3) Outage .

Turnover and Reviews. There are 22 staff in the OMG, 13 of whom are involved with planning and scheduling. The OMG uses the Artemis computer program for planning / scheduling purposes. Several changes have occurred with the implementation of the OMG:

o outages will be planned on a system-by-system basis, rather than on a component-by-component basis o the outage schedule now includes training needs and procedure development or change needs, so that these items do not become '

critical path items o outage planning now more fully involves maintenance planning rather than mostly planning for plant modifications o the OMG now directs outages rather than just determining whether

,.< the outage schedule is being met and reporting the information ei to plant management.

...-,-,---.-m._..-m_.,_...~. ..-m-,.. . - _ , _ - .

e Outage Management Organization

• BNP Outage Manager a ___7__

i i I I I I I I i I  ; I I I

D Directw D '

Dir '

T/ cept Director O age O age O age O I Director g,n g Protects and Outage Mechanical R&C/ Electrical Health "'

l Operations Physics co l Unit #2 Outage Maintenance Maintenance Sc 3,q Reporting l

I I

I I I I I i .

I I Project  ; ,

Outage I Speciahst i Protect I Manning g and Managers i g I .

Scheduleng l  !

• I I I I t

I

-FIGURE 3.

e I

I

9 These changes pertain to the new outage planning functions for the .~

outage unit. In addition to these functions, the OMG also does the following planning for the operating unit:

o preplanning is done for short forced outages and this planning -

is updated weekly o planning is done or, a " system outage" basis for limiting condition for opera ion (LCO) items, so that all work on such a system can be done at one time As evidence of the success of the outage planning efforts, the following statistics were provided. The last outage prior to the implementation of the OMG was a 22-week planned outage, which had a 100 da; overrun. The first outage after the implementation of the OMG was a 30 week planned outage (approximately 25% more work than the After this outage, Unit previous outage), which had a 17 day overrun.

2 went on its record-breaking 147-day power run, which plant staff The second outage after the partly attributed to the outage planning.

implementation of the OMG was a 30 week planned outage, which had a 7 day overrun.

I BSEP's Maintenance and Surveillance Test / Periodic Test Over(MST/PT) a recent program is based on Standard Technical Specifications.

18-month period, 1975 MSTs were performed on Unit 1 and a like amount are performed on Unit 2.

TheMaintenanceDepartmentbudget($28,831,000)was27%ofthe Maintenance and Operations budget ($108,472,000) in 1986. In addition l to this ' amount, approximately $3.5M has been spent on the HST . ..

(Procedures)~ Rewrite Program over the past several years. Of the j . total maintenance budget, it was estimated by the Maintenance Manager that the manpower was used in the following manner:

f 40% corrective maintenance 20% preventive maintenance 20% maintenance and surveillance tests 10% troubleshooting 10% other BSEP has recently begun a program to upgrade the preventive maintenance (PM) program. The recommendations for the program are in place, and it will take several years to implement the program (1) fully.

the The major perceived problems with the present PM program are:

program is component based rather than system based; (2) it is likely that there is some redundance in the PMs now being performed; and (3) i the frequency of PMs is now based on vendor technical recommendations, which assumes continuous component service. In actuality, many of the l

l systems, and therefore the associated components, at BSEP are used on I a stand-by basis.

I I

i

10 All plant modification work is done through the Project Engineering and Construction Group at BSEP. While the contractors may supply a foreman or lead man, BSEP personnel are typically involved in ...

BSEP QC staff are responsible fcr supervision of all contractor work.The use, supervision, and evaluation the QC of the contractor's work.

of contractor work is closely controlled by administrative procedure. .

For example, a Contract Activity Request must be filled out to justify 1

- the use of contractors; a Weekly Project Report is-filled out, which shows the status of the contract work and status of the contract (especially dollars spent); and at the end of the work, a Contractor Performance Evaluation is completed.

The following estimates were given for the amount of time that the ,

' supervisors and managers spend supervising work in the field:

a 15% - 20% Foremen l 5% Maintenance Supervisors j 5% Maintenance Manager j

Communications between maintenance and operations and within the Maintenance Department itself are achieved through numerous daily and l

weekly, formal and informal meetings. Typical daily meetings l

j include:

6:30 am Senior specialists meet with the shift foremen to determine new equipment malfunction concerns. The Project Engineer then determines whether special support is needed that day for any of the maintenance items.

i 7:00 am Operations Manager, Environmental and Radiation Control

. Manager, and Maintenance Manager meet to discuss the.

• 1 events of the previous 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br />.

lr t

il 7:30 am Maintenance supervisors meet with the Maintenance j' Manager to go over the day's work ,

8:15 am Morning Meeting--this includes all the staff who report who report to the General Manager ()see Figure 2),

head of the On-Site Nuclear Safety Committee, and, approximately once or twice a week, the head of the Training Department and the head of the QA Department.

The meeting is held to discuss the operating plant and its high priority items and the critical path items for the outage plant. Immediately after the meeting, Technical Support and Maintenance Engineering may be brought in to provide more detail on specific items.

10:00 am Outage Meeting to discuss the progress of the outage.

I

11 .

2:00 pm Meeting between the Operation Engineers and the maintenance senior specialists (who head the planning groups) to discuss planned maintenance activities for ,.

{ the next day.

End of Day Maintenance supervisors meet with the Maintenance Manager to discuss the day's work. .

In addition to these daily meetings, each Thursday there is a formal plant tour by all of the Managers to review plant conditions. Also on Thursday, there is a Maintenance Management Meeting to plan and l

schedule next week's maintenance work for the operating unit. The meeting is mainly for the maintenance foremen, the operations

. engineers, and the health physicists, but also includes maintenance ,

supervisors, senior specialists, technical support, and construction 4 (if needed). On a monthly basis, there is a QA meeting with all the plant managers, a Plant Nuclear Safety Committee (PNSC) meeting, which includes the Maintenance Manager, and a meeting with the Plant Reliability Group to discuss factors affecting plant electrical i

generation.

l The BSEP maintenance-related corporate goals for 1985 reflect the company's interest in, and approach to, improving the quality of maintenance at Brunswick. A listing of these goals is summarized in Appendix E.

2. Facilities and Equipment I a. General Description

! The survey team tour of the Brunswick station revealed the BSEP plants-I to be cidan and without clutter. Some debris was noted in i construction areas, but not an unreasonable amount considering the ongoing activities. Workshops were minimal for the number of -

craftsmen at the plant, but machine shop area and equipment were above average. There are no contaminated tool storage areas in the reactor building and only a single small (for a facility of this size) room outside the reactor building, necessitating the disposition of tools that cannot be decontaminated below a 5 mR/hr level. Laydown areas inside containment were limited, but were spacious by most standards outside the primary containment. Equipment maintainability was

, likewise considerably easier outside containment. Warehouse

facilities have adequate space (following'a program to allow tighter

! storage of goods), and a total inventory of approximately $31M.

Delays because of parts unavailability was cited as a problem in approximately 200 current jobs. A computerized inventory control system is in use at BSEP.

b. Specific observations l Component access is for the most part not a problem at BSEP.

Well-thought-out machinery layout and adequate building space provide 9

_ , , _ , ~ _ . _ , , _ _ _ , _

12 good working room. Components in containment were more crowded but do not pose major problems. Appendix R backfits, which*have caused **

extreme space difficulties in some plants, have not been fully implemented at this time at either BSEP unit.

The warehouses are clean and fairly well ordered. Some retrofit

• materials were being stored in a temporary, unlabeled, and untidy fashion. Storage space was stated to be 55,000 square feet for noncontaminated materials. The two main warehouses are located approximately 1/2 mile from the local staging warehouse, which is adjacent to the reactor building. A shuttle served to transport material from the remote areas. It was stated that some delays were experienced in obtaining parts because of this arrangement. ,

A separate wire fenced enclosure in the warehouse is provided for QC l

inspection and hold of incoming materials.

Safety related (Q) and non-safety related (non-Q) parts were stored in separate bin areas. No provision is made for storage of environmentally qualified (EQ) parts requiring temperature and humidity controls (class A storage).

The parts inventory is estimated at $31M total for both units. BSEP is a participating member of the Pooled Inventory Management group and maintains a qualified vendors list.

Warehouse. parts inventory is tracked using a computerized system (the Supply program ) Inventory System or SIS - a compc ;y developed mainframethat alerts' l ware computed minimum level is reached. Obsolescence, periodic rebuild of a large number of identical parts, and retrofit components were stated.

Es the principal contributors to a backlog of approximately 200 jobs that could not be performed due to parts unavailability. For stock items, a 965 availability record has been achieved for trouble ticket parts requests.

An increasing difficulty of obtaining Q replacement parts has resulted in some parts levels at less than the minimum. This situation stems from vendors no longer maintaining qualified parts or from vendors going out of business.

Valve labeling in both plants is very complete, with administrative controls that prohibit operation of any unlabeled valve. High contrast labeling was evident on some machinery but was not used on valves. Maintenance work crews are split by plant, and wrong-train wrong-unit type events have not occurred in several years.

The most significant single factor affecting the material condition of the plant was, in the opinion of the BSEP maintenance personnel, the continual backfit modification effort that is still underway at both units.

13

}

3. Technical Procedures ,

a. General Description BSEP has a philosophy that procedures should guide most aspects of ,

maintenance work. To accomplish this philosophy, a host of procedures are written in an attempt to clearly define maintenance methodology; Administrative Procedures (APs), Administrative Instructions (Als),

Maintenance Procedures (MPs), Maintenance Instructions (mis), and i Maintenance and Surveillance Test Procedures (MSTs) are all applicable 4 to the maintenance function. BSEP has undertaken a MST Upgrade Program which will be completed in January 1986. At that time, the

• program will apply the MST writer's guide, verification procedure, and validation procedures to upgrade the mis.

t

b. Specific Observations i

i The procedures used at BSEP fall into the following catagories:

, o APs provide procedures regarding general plant policy.

l o AIs provide unifonn procedures fcr implementing specific topical requirements.

o MPs (of which there are approximately 52 in number) are

generally implementation procedures, but a few apply to special l or large-scope, maintenance tasks.

) o mis (there are approximately 1850 for both units, with more  !

J TTEely to be written in the follow-on program) are the. .

I step-by-step procedures used by the craftsmen and involve: (1)

{ calibration procedures, (2) preventive maintenance procedures,

(3) corrective maintenance procedures, and (4) primary loop i instrument calibration procedures.

o MSTs (of which there are approximately 480 total for both units) are the I&C maintenance test procedures that satisfy Technical

, Specification Requirements.

o pts (Periodic Tests) for determination of equipment performance status are carried out by operations personnel.

In October 1983, the Maintenance and Surveillance Test Upgrade Program was begun in response to a self-evaluation of the quality of the BSEP Periodic Test procedures. The p gram systematically approached the upgrade of the pts to MSTs by: ( developing a philosophy for

! procedure content requirements; ) developing a style manual so that the fonnat of the procedures would be standardized; (3) developing a program for verifying the technical adequacy and written correctness of the procedures; (4) developing (a program for validating the5) setting up an

usability of the procedures; and system for producing the MST procedures.

! . - -- -- _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ . _ . ~ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ -

l .

A 14 i .

One positive side effect of the MST Upgrade Program is that the style

guide is now being used to update the mis as they come up for their regular biannual review. This program is to be finished by the end of January 1986. Approximately 24 contractor staff and 12 CP&L staff have participated in the program. All have backgrounds that would ,

qualify them as subject matter experts. Technical writing skills have been gained through experience.

> A second positive side effect of the MST Upgrade Program has been the upgrading of vendor technical data. Prior to writing an MST or rewriting a PT into an MST, the relevant vendors were sent a list of the most recent revision of the technical data that BSEP had. The vendors were asked to send them more recent revisions, if such '

existed. BSEP has had approximately a 70% response rate to these requests.

\

j A third positive side effect of the MST Upgrade Program is that, once i

the program is finished, BSEP will have one style guide that covers j both mis and MSTs, one content guide for mis, and one content guide for MSTs. ,

l None of the mis and MSTs simply have vendor technical data appended to the procedure. When vendor technical data is used, it is always i

rewritten and incorporated into the procedure.

1 There are. written specifications (QAP-204) regarding which QC hold

points should be included in the mis and MSTs and where they should be

, placed. Until December 1985, QA reviewed all procedures for proper

! use and placement of QC hold points. Now, the first and second

technical reviewers of the procedure are responsible for verifying - -

i that QAP-204 was implemented correctly. QA still reviews procedures i that have QC hold points in them and can add additional hold points, ,

i if necessary.

j MSTs and mis are verified for technical accura'cy and written i correctness using BSEP Fom 13, which is a 6-page checklist. Two j independent verification reviews are required for each procedure. (In i addition, all new MSTs are reviewed by engineers in the Onsite Nuclear i SafetyGroup.) In oroer to qualify to verify procedures, the i potential "verifter" must have two years of experience in the field, j an engineering degree or related experience, and have completed a l

two-to four-hour training course on the use of the checklist.

! MSTs are validated for usability by first having the surveillance ,

i testing crews evaluate the MST to see if they think that it will work (

i correctly. Then the procedure writer goes out with a crew on the first use of the MST to see that it is usable.

1 l

l l

! \

1 . .

15 (1)Dall safety-related The policy on the use of procedures is that:

work must be done by procedure, except for some filter change-outs; ,,

(2) if a procedure is part of the work package, strictjadherence is .

required. Approximately 50% of non-safety-related work is done by

' procedure.

The Onsite Nuclear Safety Group has developed a ISt of This single listpoint is failures (i.e., where.one failure could. trip the plant).

used Dy the procedure writers to determine which components The procedure writing need to be handled very carefully during maintenance.

staff believes that this is one reason why the BSEP maintenance i

program is getting better.

I Administrative Procedures require that all maintenance procedures are

!' reviewed (and updated if necessary) every 2 years.

A Procedure Revision Request is used for identifying and documenting A Temporary Revision is issued for l the need to change a procedure.The Temporary.Revi'sion must be removed, quick changes to a procedure.or processed through a Procedure R period to become permanent. ,

s I'

4. Personnel

a. General Description a unionized facility. Turnover in the Maint'ena e

l BSEP is not .

Department has been,relatively low, except for I&C turnoverSalaries of the in 1984.

l! Local hiring has largely ended this turnover problem.

l- maintenance staff are kept competitive within the toutheast region

!i Overtime at BSEP has not been

!; using a' yearly corporate salary review. extremely high, averagin despite the; fact that BSEP is usually in an outage situation. has been

,. However, the main purposes of the outages, besides refueling,d INPO to carry out major plant modification work. BSEP has receive accreditation in all three maintenance areas (I&C, mechanical, and electrical). Training is done in Raleigh, at the BSEP training center, and in the Maintenance Department for "need-to-know-quickly" l

items. Last year approximately 9% of a craf,tsman's standard work time BSEP has a very structured or.-the-job (0JT) l-

was spent in training. Maintenance requalificatfon training, at present, training program.

t is OJT training.

b. Specific Observations f

Turnover in the Maintenance Depa'.tment, except for I&C technicians in I

1984, has been relatively low over the past 3 years ranging from This 0% to 8%.

In 1984, approximately 40% of the 84 I&C technicians (1) more lucrative job left.

j one-time major turnover was attributed to:

offers; (2) the feeling that they w)ere not being treated in a professional enough manner; and 3 th " herd" instinct as a large i

i

, - . . ~ . - - _ , _ , , _ _ _ - , - - , . - . , - ----------__,-,_-----y-r..yym,,m.,

. ..-.._,.._m, . , , _ _ _ e.,_..., ,....-,e.~,y._._..-,,_,,,9-wr.,...qm.mm-,.

16 number began to leave. The Maintenance Manager also,noted that most of those who left were not from the area, which has affected

subsequent BSEP hiring policy regarding I&C technicians.

On a monthly basis, unfilled positions within the Maintenance Department ranged from 0% to 3% in 1985. ,

BSEP personnel are either Category 1 (nonexempt), which includes all j the craftsmen or Category 2 (exempt), which includes the foremen, specialists, engineers, supervisors, and managers. Salary of the Category 1 and 2 personnel is kept competitive within the southeast region through the use of a corporate-lead yearly salary survey.

Overtime at BSEP has not been extremely high (approximately 20.6%

overall for all personnal in the Maintenance Department in 1985),

despite the outage work. Specific breakdowns by staff type for i overtime in 1985 are as follows:

Category 1 Personnel % Overtime Category 2 Personnel  % Overtime i . Mechanical 19.4 Mgr./Supv. 24.0

) I&C/Elec 15.9 Staff 19.3 Plant Services 27.8 Foremen 18.2 i

Category 1 personnel get paid 1.5X base rate for all overtime over 40 hours4.62963e-4 days <br />0.0111 hours <br />6.613757e-5 weeks <br />1.522e-5 months <br />. Category 2 personnel get paid on a straight-time basis during Extended Work Schedule periods for hours over 40 and through 60, after i they have worked 48. hours.

Category 1 personnel are appraised every 6 months. Positive -

1 aopraisals are needed for movement through the 10 steps that a

! technician goes through to reach the highest technical level.

I Category 2 personnel are evaluated every 12 months. Their appraisal results are also tied directly to their salary actions, t

BSEP staff are not unionized. Numerous steps--including competitive salaries, a comprehensive benifits package, and a rapid advancement system--have been undertaken to keep the Category 1 personnel from feeling the need to unionize.

There were 7 promotions from Category 1 to Foreman in 1984 and 5 in

, 1985 (23 forementotal). There were 4 promotions within Category 2 in

1984 and 11 in 1985 (59 Category 2 total). This demonstrates the degree of upward mobility that has been available within the Maintenance Department.

Few personnel transfer into the Maintenance Department from other departments at BSEP. Craftsmen on the corporate Travelling Crews like 1

to transfer into BSEP so that they can quit travelling.

a There is a formal means for advancement to other plants or into l

l t

)

- - _- - .- -.. - ..~. . ., -- - --. - _ _..- . .. --._-__- . _ _ - -..- -. - - - - .

4 a 17

~

corporate based on the Candidate Identification System.

Data from the first ,.

Delay hours a're computed as part of the AMMS.,ly 5% of the maintenance month's run of the AMMS shows that approximate craftsman's time.is delay time, although this number is not yetMost plant considered trustworthy by the plant personnel interviewed. .

. personnel estimated that maintenance craft peop r

paperwork requirements.

It was estimated that greater than 90% of the Category 1 personnel are Local commercial vocational / technical schools and recruited locally. community colleges are used especially for the recruitm ,

The military is used as a source for Category 2 technicians. Special recruitment incentives such as paid moving personnel.

expenses and house-hunting trips are used as inducements in hiring I technicians and Category 2 personnel.

Written selection tests (i.he Minnesota Multiphasic Testing Pe test) are used routinely for Category 1 employee screening.

of skills required to fulfill a specific craft position are not used for screening purposes.

BSEP received its INPO Thus, BSEPaccreditation has used a, systematic in all 3approach maintenance to areas on 3

December 11, 1985. Training is done by three different 5 developing its training program.

I groups for BSEP mai.ntenance staff:

o the Craft and Technical Training Group at Raleigh provides most y

generic training for the craftsmen -

?

w o the. Plant Training Unit at BSEP does plant-specific training N o the Maintenance Training Group, which is located in the Maintenance Department under the Project Engineer (Maintenance Staff) [see Figure 2], carries out the Real Time Training Program, which deals with "need to know" items regarding procedure changes, LERs, plant operating experience, and

, industry operating experience.

There are 12 to 15 instructors assigned to maintenanc Raleigh.11 maintenance training personnel in the Plant Training Unit--2 I&C trainers, 2 mechanical trainers, 2 electrical trainers,1 senior specialist,1 project specialist, T training assistants, and 1 supervisor. All BSEP trainers were previously operators or maintenance craftsmen.

BSEP has a very structured on the job (0JT) training program.

Qualification cards are used fer the 5 years that it takes to move l

l

___ ___ _ . . ~ . . __._.._. . ~ _. _ _ , _ - - . - _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ .

l e

I l

18 I

Each f from a Techncian 1, Level 1 to the highest technician level. l maintenance group has a trained evaluator to do the sign-offs on the qualification cards in their maintenance group.

Maintenance requalification training deals with requalification on '

qualification training at this cards, time. and does not include additional classroomReq years once the craftsman has reached the highest technician level. 1 I

5. Work Control _ ,

a. General Description The use of a computer-based work management system is in its inception at BSEP. The Automated Maintenance Management System (AMMS) has been available at the plants for approximately one month and, at the time of the team visit, had not been fully implemented. The in-place method of work authorization and control was by a standard hard copy Work Request / Job Order (connonly called at trouble ticket) which requires a manual generation, approval, clearance, and verification.

Most of the paper generation and job staging is produced by the performing craft, requiring 30 to 50% of a working shift.

Implementation of the AMMS to the extent that planning and scheduling functions are automated is estimated to be one year away, with functions such as machinery history and trend analysis to follow in two years. For the present, the nature of the trouble, the condition in which the component was found, the cause of the trouble, and the g corrective actions required are found on the hard copy of the Work -

j Request.

b. Specific Observations Plant work control at BSEP follows a traditional " paper trail" cycle

~ from deficiency identification through operational test check-out of the repaired equipment (see Figure 4).

I Deficiency reporting may be done by any plant personnel through a work request form or through direct computer terminal interface with the AMMS.

At the time of the survey, most operations personnel (who submit the majority of the work requests) expressed some bewilderment with the one-month-old computerized system. Training on the operation of this system, which is intended for general plant use, is planned, but not yet implemented. Operating Instructions (0I-39) are written to provide guidance for both manual and automated submittals.

l l

1

- _ , _ , . . _ - _ . . __.,.,,..,__m_,....,,__...-._,__.__-_.__._,__,_m_.m._______ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . . . _ _ , . _ _ . . _ _ . . ,

Q* -

OPERATIONS ""AT'wAcmw ON CHECK AND > IDE FC INITIATE CLEARANCE WORK

^ REQUEST CREW FOREMAN > MACHINERY '

HISTORY J REVIEW

^

LCO SHIFT FOREMAN RWlEW i

PRIORI PERFORM c QC REPAlRS HOLD

^ -

=

v

' OPS OUTAGE < CRAFT FOREMAN PLANNING '

. PLANNER

! CLEARANCE n . ,

j i

! L '

CRAFT DRAW PROCEDURE PRE-i TOOLS WORK- SCHED RE MMS c SEMBL <

MEETING l SPARE ,

l RWP PARTS '

i . .

1 FIGURE 4. Work Control Flow j

, i

~

20 l

Work regt!sts receive a shift foreman (SRO q'ualified personnel) review ,

to determine if a Limiting Condition for Operation (LCO) exists and to l establish the appropriate priority classification. The catagories of ,.

maintenance priorities are :

PRIORITY CLASSIFICATION 1 direct safety hazard 1A immediate shutdown if not corrected OR 24 hour2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> LCO OR PM on plant production equipment ,

2 load-affecting equipment 3 routine work OR PM on non-productive equipment 4 nonproductive equipment 5 outage required to repair Seven computerized systems are in use at BSEP. The most useful to management for tracking maintenance progress is the Automated Maintenance Management System (see Work Control), which was implemented on November 11, 1985. In addition the old Work Order -

Tracking System, which the AMMS is replacing, will be kept as a history file. The Equipment Data Base System is used to identify Q components. The Surveillance Test Tracking System schedules the MSTs, which are Technical Specification requirements. The Periodic Test Scheduling Program schedules the surveillance tests that are not required by Technical Specifications. The Supply Inventory System is used to keep track of parts and supplies.

The Brunswick staff review all completed work requests for NPRDS applicability. While the staff does use the NPRDS data base for limited failure trending, several problems were identified by the interviewed staff regarding the use of NPRDS data:

21 o While BSEP attempts to meet the reporting requirements, a definite time lag exists that is in part due to the plant ,

i procedure of keeping a work order open until all postThis practice ha ,

maintenance testing is complete.

to the approximately six-month reporting backlog that existed at i the time of this survey. .

o The utility stated that they were not fully aware of the capabilities of.the NPROS data base, nor how to make use of it. '

o The data base does not contain all thesuch cogas (onents testing needed nor much of the specific information required frequencies).

The BSEP staff agree that the NPRDS data base has potential benefits, but as it is presently configured, they feel it is formatted more ,

toward a design engineering rather than an operational perspective.

The principal maintenance / operations interface A is the weekly l of MMS and pre-MMS meetings for work planning see and Section control.infonna 1.

OrganizationandAdministration).

Operating personnel expressed satisfaction with the qu been observed over the past 2 years. Of particular importance was the increased availability of installed standby equipment.

The team was told that QA and QC at the plant report to a connon ,

l supervisor. Corporate QA services (audit. function) report directly to the company president, f

i; A large QC staff, relative to other inspection work at BSEP. Eighteen (18)surveyed CP&L p(lants, performs 7 for I&C/

?

9 11 for mechanical))

(retro-fit / outage QC inspectors inspectors and on are utilized twenty the site. fiveThe (25) contracto average experience level is estimated at 5 years, and contractor personnel are regarded by QC management as being as competent as utility employees.

l At the time of the survey, the plant staff estimated that 25% of the '

QC inspections are focused on plant maintenance, with the remainder l

~3 ~

dedicated to inspection of construction activities. l l

QC hold points are built into standard procedures based on a task l force review of all procedures. A standard philosophy developed by

' this task force was written into guidelines that are used to establish hold points in new procedures.

Carolina Power and Light onsite QA personnel are comprised'of 4 QA engineers (largely utilized in parts / component upgrade) and 21 QA inspecto/s (5 are engaged in receipt inspection2and Additionally, corporatethe remainder QA perform audits and surveillance). Nine contractor QA personnel are auditors are assigned to the plant.

used to receipt inspect and audit modification components and activities.

l l

--,v. ,-.- , - - - - ,_,__,-__-__,.,-_m- , _,---.c,.-,, - - , - ,.-,_,,---,y- w_.--, ,., - , - . , , , -,.

22 Craft workmen are required to assemble the supporting documentation as Indicated on the work request. Radiation work permits, flame pemits, ,.

system clearance, l

copies of current procedures, work site survey,ls must be tended authorization to commence work and required tooEstimates of the time required by before work can actually commence. .

job preparation ran from 30% to 50% of a workman's eight-hour shift.

A health physics survey is required on all jobs, w!th an ALARA review being perfomed on any job with an estimated dose of greater than 10 man-rem.

A centralized Radiological Information Monitoring System (RIMS) tracks exposure on a shift basis against Any ajob predetermined time that is over or line goal for jobs requiring ALARA review. Major ,

under its exposure estimate by 25% requires an investigation.

system modification work is respor.sible for most exposure recorded on the site.

Approximately 130 people are engaged in chemistry and radiological control at the BSEP site. Of these 130 people, 85 are in Radiation Control. The exposure record at the plant was the worst in the industry in 1980. In 1981, a strict health physics program was l

initiated. Work site cleanup, general plant cleanup, intense .

decontamination, and strict enforcement of radiological safety and '

monitoring has brought BSEP to the industry norm for exposure per man during the last year.

Of the 2804 rem recorded during the 1985 calender year,1604 were modification related and 1200 were maintenance related. The site exposure goal stated by the Superintendendent of Environment and  !

a Radiation Control is 2000 rem for 1986. ,

'I-Craft workmen must qualify on a specific component prior to being -

allowed to perfom maintenance unattended. In the future, a computerized system (part of the planned AMMS) will be available for determining who is qualified to work on a specific piece of equipment.

The crew foreman assigns maintenance jobs based on workman

_ BSEP does not have a two qualification and demonstrated skill level. man rule for the perform for by the procedure.

Crew attitude toward the plant was found to be very positive. Those interviewed were aware of work control procedures and restrictions.

They were proud of the maintenance being performed and cited better training, better communication with the operations department, and increased management attention as reasons for the change.

i Following repair performance, the crew foreman reports the apparent ,

cause of component failure on the trouble ticket. No formal program l now exists to analyze root cause other than a specific Engineering  ;

Evaluation Request (EER) when required. Safety-related equipment is i tested per the applicable ISI surveillance test. Post-maintenance testing is documented in the Maintenance Experience Report.

QC inspectors periodically check on-going and completed jobs for proper use of procedures and completeness of documentation.

1

23 s

D. CONCLUSIONS:

Conclusions regarding the five main protocol areas are presented below.

Organization and Administration. BSEP is organized such that the Manager -

of Maintenance reports to the General Manager, Brunswick Plant. Six people report to the Manager of Maintenance, including the Plant Services a

Supervisor, the Principal Engineer--Maintenance, and four supervisors.

1 The work units are split according to functional area, unit, and area of the plant.

I There are approximately 320 personnel in the Maintenance Department. In ,

addition, approximately 95 contracted personnel take care of painting, lagging, and building maintenance, and approximately 50 to 60 utility added mechanics are used during outages. Contracted personnel are typically used for plant services, plant modifications, high dose maintenance work, and high expertise jobs.

There is two-shift r. intenance coverage during the regular work week and i one-shift coverage on Saturday. Call-outs are used at other times. The outage coverage schedule is dependent on critical path items.

An Outage Management Group was implemented in late 1983. This group is responsible for planning, scheduling, directing, and evaluating all outages. This group also preplans for short forced outages and updates this plan weekly. It will also start planning for " system outages" on the operating unit for LCO 1-tems so that all work on such a system can be done at one time.

It was estimated that the manpower in the Maintenance Department is used * ~

in the following manner: 40% corrective maintenance, 20% preventive maintenance, 20% maintenance and surveillance testing, 10%

troubleshooting, and 10% other. BSEP has recently begun a program to update its PM program, so more preventive maintenance is likely to be done in the future.

It was estimated that the craft foremen spend only 15% to 20% of their time doing direct supervision in the field. This is largely due to the

administrative requiremeats of their job.

I Numerous formal and informal meetings are used to establish communications ,

between maintenance and the other departments and to establish l communications within the Maintenance Department.

Facilities and Equipment. The survey team tour of BSEP revealed the plant housekeeping standard to be high and, with the exception of areas undergoing construction, the plant was without clutter. Laydown areas

-inside the reactor building are minimal, but are considered adequate in the turbine building and are even somewhat spacious in the auxiliary machinery spaces.

l i

-y - v. -c -

--,-.--w-. - . - - . - - - - - . _ , . . , s,-._,.-..,..,-,_..%.,_,,,....,,,,-....w,,,..,w,.w.--...,-4 ,-,...--r,,--.,,.r.,-, r.,m.e,--. -

i 24 Based on team observations, workshop area is minimal for the over 300 man P crew, but this finds some compensation in the above average size and condition of the machine shop and welding areas. Tool crib storage is i

adequate for non-contaminated tools, but the contaminated tool crib was cramped. With no contaminated tool storage in the reactor building, all ,

tools are required to be decontaminated to below 5 mR/hr or be disposed of as radioactive waste.

Warehouses are adequate to store the $31M combined plant inventory, and are located approximately 1/4 mile from the reactor building. A shuttle wagon brings required parts to a local staging / warehouse area adjacent to the reactor building. Parts bin labeling was clear and complete, but some

• components, both in and out of the storage bins, were unlabeled. Delays in repair activities due to parts unavailability was cited for approximately 200 jobs (about 3% of workpackage backlog). A computerized inventory control system is in use. BSEP is part of an inter-utility parts loan system.

Technical Procedures. BSEP has the philosophy that procedures should guide most aspects of maintenance work. To accomplish this, Administrative Procedures, Maintenance Procedures, Maintenance Instructions, and Surveillance Test Procedures were found to be extensively developed. All safety-related work is done according to procedure, and about 50% of non-safety-related work is done by procedure.

BSEP is currently finishing a Maintenance and Surveillance Test Procedure Upgrade Program and has structured a PM Upgrade Program for future implementation. This program has established a content guide for the MSTs, has developed a wrlter's guide for standardizing the format of the MSTs, and has established a verification process and a validation process for the procedures. This type of program will be applied to the - .

Maintenance Instructions once the MSTs have been updated.

Personnel. BSEP is not a unionized facility. Turnover has been quite low, except for I&C turnover in 1984. Most hiring of maintenance craftsmen and I&C technicians is done locally to help keep turnover low.

Approximately 90% of the craftsmen are recruited locally. Salaries of the maintenance staff are kept competitive within the southeast region using a corporate salary survey to establish wage guidelines.

Overtime at BSEP has averaged approximately 20% over the past year. This is not high, especially given the amount of outage work carried out.

However, the major work done in the past outages, besides refueling, has been major modification work, which is not done through the Maintenance Department.

Most plant staff estimated that craftsmen spend about 50% of their time at the job site. The rest of the time is spent waiting for signatures, waiting for parts and tools, dressing up and dressing out, and completing paperwork requirements for the work package.

l

25 BSEP rLceived its INP0 accreditation in all 3 maintenance areas in December 1985. Training is done at Raleigh, in the onsite training .-

building, and at the job site for "need-to-know-quickly" items.

Approximately 9% of the craftsman's standard work time was spent in training in 1985. Maintenance requalification training is strictly -

on-the-job training and does not involve any additional classroom training at the present time.

Work Control. The application of computer augmente'd work control to management of the maintenance program is just begining at BSEP. The Automated Maintenance Management System (AMMS) had been in use at the plant for approximately one month at the time of the survey. It has not .

yet been fully implemented. At the time of this survey, the system was used almost exclusively for job initiation and/or tracking. Work planr....g and scheduling, securing spare parts, procedure packages, Radiation Work Permits (RWP), obtaining clearance control, machinery history and trending are handled through hard copy Work Requests (commomly called Trouble Tickets or TTs). Full implementation of the AMMS will include all these functions, but it is not expected to be operational for at least two years.

Radiation exposure tracking is done through a centralized Radiological -

Information Monitoring System (RIMS), which allows daily tracking of dose against a predetermined exposure goal. The average craft personnel exposure, once the worst in the U. S., is currently at the industry norm due to a vigorous plant cleanup and decontamination program. A 30%

reduction in current dose levels is set as a goal for 1986.

The maintenance crew's attitude toward their job performance was found to be very positive. Operations personnel expressed satisfaction with the --

quality of maintenance work and stated that a marked improvement had been observed over the past two years. Better maintenance crew training and increased management attention were cited as perceived reasons for the change.

No formal program now exists to perform root cause or equipment trending analysis. Safety-related equipment is tested per the ISI surveillance requirements and is documented in the Maintenance Experience Report.

I

\

_ - _ . . _ . . . _ ,_ _ _ . . _- . - . . . _ . - ~ . . _ _ _ _ ~ . _ _ . . _ . . _ _ _ _ .

t APPENDIXES A. Plant Staff Interviewed During the Site Visit B. Entrance and Exit Meeting Attendance

< C. BSEP-1&2 Plant Data D. A History of the BSEP Maintenance Organization E. A Summary of Maintenance-related BSEP Corporate Goals

. .i b

e I - .

y .

-s

'?4 b

=

A.1 AppendixA-PLANTSTAFFINTERVIEWEDDURINGTHESITEVISIT ,,

J. O'Sullivan Manager - Maintenance .

B. Altman, Jr. Project Engineer G. Campbell Harris Maintenance Manager (Observer)

T. Gore I&C Foreman H. Wheeler I&C Foremen R. Whitfield Maintenance Foreman S. Smith I&C Senior Specialist D. Proctor Mechanical Foreman ,

C. Dietz General Manager - BSEP J. Taylor Electrician First Class F. Norris Electrician First Class T. Canterbury Project Engineer - Maintenance P. Musser Senior Engineer S. Choplin Director - Personnel Relations R. Kitchen Unit 2 Mechanical Maintenance Supervisor T. Brennick Senior Specialist Mechanical J. Moyer Director - Training W. Moore Senior I&C/Elec. Spec., Maintenance Training Group M. Shealy Project Specialist Trainer E. Sherman Specialist Plant-Specific OJT J. Holder Manager - Outages M. Harper Project Spec., Outage Planning & Scheduling .

B. Peeler Director. Planning and Scheduling, Outage M w rment R. Eckstein Maintenance Engineer E. Bishop

• Manager -Operations -

A. Heggler Operations Superintendent R. Tart Shift Operations Supervisor D. Pate Shift Foreman L. Matthews Aux 111ary Operator J. Simons Shift Operations Supervisor T. Anderson Auxillary Operator R. Creech Maintenance Supervisor C. Parker Unit 2 I&C/E Specialist L. Jones Director - QA/QC - BNP J. McKee QC Engineer W. Dorman QA Engineer W. Gidbold Electrical QC Inspector T. Eason Mechanical QC Inspector R. Baldwin Corporate QA Lead Auditor G. Cheatham Manager - Env.& Rad. Control J. Wilcox Principal Engineer - Operations M. Nesgoda Mech. Craft second Class M. Stewert Mech. Craft first Class J. Blackburn I&C/E Tech. 1 R. Clark I&C/E Tech. 2

B.1 Appendix B - ENTRANCE AND EXIT MEETING ATTENDANCE ENTRANCE MEETING ATTENDANCE (1/13/86/10:00AM)

BSEP &

Vice President - Brunswick Nuclear Project P. Howe General Manager - BSEP C. Dietz Assistant to the General Manager - BSEP J. Chase J. O'Sullivan Manager - Maintenance E. Bishop Manager - Operations G. Cheatham Manager - Env. & Rad. Control B. Hinkley Manager - Technical Support J. Holder Manager - Outages - BNP G. Campbell Harris Plant Maintenance Manager K. Ewzor Director - Regulatory Compliance L. Jones Director - QA/QC - Brunswick M. Shealy Project Specialist - Training

! W. Murray - Senior Engineer - Licensing I T. Canterbury Project Engineer - Maintenance NRC - .

4 l

N. Le H.Q. Team Leader 4

R. Correia H.Q. I&E D. Loveless R II W. Ruland Senior Resident Inspector L. Garner Resident Inspector Battelle - PNL W. Rankin Senior Research Scientist D. Jarrell Senior Development Engineer l

l l

~~" " ' - -

--r -. _ _ _ _ _

4 5 6

B.2

? .

EXIT MEETING ATTENDANCE 4

(1/17/86 / 9:00 AM)

BSEP P. Howe Vice President, Brunswick Nuclear Plant C. Dietz General Manager - BSEP J. O'Sullivan Manager - Maintenance E. Bishop Manager - Operations J. Holder Manager - Outages - BNP .

K. Ewzor Director - Regulatory Compliance R. Poulk Senior Specialist - Regulatory Compliance M. Allen Technical Aide - Regulatory Compliance ,

R. Schrauder Project Engineer - Licensing i W. Murray Sr. Engineer - Licensing L. Jones Director - QA/QC - BNP T. Wyllie Manager - Engineering and Construction J. Moyer Director - Training W. Hogle Engineering Supervisor - Systems G. Cheatham Manager - E&RC R. Creech Maintenance Supervisor R. Eckstein Maintenance Engineer J. Chase Assistant to the General Manager - BSEP F. Emerson ,

CP&L Onsite Nuclear Safety G. Campbell Harris Plant Maintenance Manager .

NRC l

N. Le NRR, Survey Team Leader G. Cwalina NRR Section Leader B. Grenier NRR Maintenance and Surveillance Pgm. Mgr.  ;

R. Correia HQ-IE D. Loveles's R II E. Sylvester NRR Project Manager M. Grotenhuis NRR W. Ruland Senior Resident Inspector a L. Garner Resident Inspector Battelle - PNL W. Rankin Senior Research Scientist D. Jarrell Senior Development Engineer 1

1 e

., _ . - - , ..-. - - ~ . . . - , , . . - . , . - , n. ., _m,,. , , , , . , , , , , - ,,., e,,.,, . . - , , , . , , , , , , - - - . . , . , , . . , . . , ,, ,.

i C.1 I

. i l

Appendix C - BSEP-1&2 PLANT DATA Specific data about BSEP-1&2 includes: ,

. UNIT 1 UNIT 2 Type BWR BWR Licensed Thermal Power (MWt) 790 790 Condenser Cooling Water Atl. O. Atl. O.

Reactor Supplier GE GE Turbine-Gen. Mfr. GE GE Engineer UE&C UE&C Constructor B&R B&R Construction Permit 2-7-70 2-7-70 Operating License 12-27-74 9-8-76 Critical First Time 3-20-75 10-8-76 Commercial Operation 11-75 3-77 Most Recent SALP Ratings (SALPRept 50-312/85-18 for December 1,1983 - May 21, 1985)

Maintenance 2 Surveillance 2 Quality Program 2 SALP Performance Categories - Definition Category 1: Reduced NRC attention may be appropriate. Licensee management attention and involvement are aggressive and

, oriented toward nuclear safety; licensee resources are. .

ample and effectively used so that a high level of performance with respect to operational safety or construction is being achieved.

Category 2: NRC attention should be maintained at normal levels.

Licensee management attention and involvement are evident and concerned with nuclear safety; licensee resources are adequate and reasonably effective such that satisfactory performance with respect to operational safety or construction is being achieved.

Category 3: Both NRC and licensee attention should be increased.

Licensee management attention or involvement is acceptable and considers nuclear safety, but weaknesses are evident; licensee resources appear to be strained or not effectively used so that minimally satisfactory performance with respect to operational safety or construction is being achieved.

l l

! D.1 AppendixD-AHISTORYOFTHEBSEPMAINTENdNCEORGANIZATION The maintenance organization at Brunswick started in 1972, three years prior to commercial operation, with a total of about 27 personnel (17 .

I&C/E technicians and 10-12 mechanics). Craft crew reported through a foreman in each area to a single malntenance supervisor, who in turn reported directly to the plant superintendent. This organization (Figure D.1) was in place from 1972 until 1977. Additional crews were added in 1974 and again in 1976 to meet the increasing challenge of plant maintenance. One of the crews added in 1976 was.a crew specifically devoted to the accomplishment of periodic testing ,

required by technical specifications.

In 1977, an additional supetvisor was added so that there were ,

supervisors in both the mechanical and the I&C/E areas, each reporting directly to the plant general manager (Figure D.2). Two small

! maintenance staffs reporting to the two craft supervisor were established. In 1980, the craft supervisors were given a common supervisor, who was designated the manager--maintenance (Figure D.3).

In the early 1980's, a significant expansion of the staff occurred and a second maintenance supervisor for each unit was added in each

< discipline area to intensify management of both outage and non-outage -

tasks (Figure D.4). By this time, the organization had grown in size to around.310, of which about 40 report directly as staff personnel, i The plant services organization, originally assigned to the plant administrative support organization, was reassigned to maintenance in the early 1970s, At that time, the organization consisted of a singler ~

j foreman and a~ number of contract personnel, who performed limited insulation, painting, and janitorial services. As plant housekeeping received greater and greater attention, the requirements for i insulation and painting continued to expand. A plant services supervisor was added in 1982, reporting directly to the manager of  :

maintenance. Additional foremen were subsequently ass 12ned (Figure l D.5). Thus, the organization had evolved by early 1985 into the current, much larger and more structured organization. In general, this expansion was due to the ever increasing role of maintenance.

A particularly important expansion occurred in the 1979-1983 time frame with the implementation of an aggressive preventive maintenance effort independent of technical specification requirements. Other major role expansions included the assumption by maintenance of ever larger portions of ISI support taskings, assumption of major turbine deck outage work, and the development of aggressive valve maintenance

-and diesel maintenance programs.

I i

_ . _ . . - _ _ _ _ _ _ . , . _ - _ . _ . . , _ _ . _ _ , . _ _ _ , _ _ _ _ _ . . , , , _ _ , , . , _ , , _ , , _ 4

D.2 In the early 1985 time frame, it was apparent that management of several significant issues had to be improved within maintenance if Specifically, it was quality maintenance service was to continue. decided that too much d .

different technical staff groups within maintenance report to four different supervisors. To solve-this problem, a maintenance engineering organization was created (Figure D.6), which reports through a principal engineer directly to the maintenance manager.

This organization, including all the former staff and administrative support personnel, seeks to 1) improve the use of the available technical resources without duplicating the technical support '

l organization role and 2) to provide an aggressive and efficient organization to respond to field engineering problems. This is done by breaking down the maintenance engineering tasks into three separate functional areas.

o Production engineering: This group provides day to day field engineering support as its primary responsibility, but it also has specific component-related (as opposed to system related) expertise. In addition, production engineering serves as the coordinating group between maintenance and the plant technical support organization.

o Maintenance programs: This group is primarily responsibile for managing ongoing maintenance programs such as preventive maintenance, predictive maintenance, lubrication, valve maintenance, and diesel engine reliability improvement. Resident in ,this. group are specific component and technical experts in such areas as QA, weight handling, load testing, valves, pumps, --

i diesel engines, I&C/E testing, refueling floor activities, and environmental qualification.

lr o Maintenance staff: This group includes both the clerical and document control functions, which relieves the other technical l organizations of that burden and ensures consistent, high quality

' procedures.

~

The present organization (Figure D.5) thus optimizes both the technical and production efforts. In the production area, from providing dedicated supervisors for each unit results in ongoing continuity of support to both the outage and non-outage units through the use of full time, dedicated crews in the reactor building, turbine building, and periodic testing areas. These permanent crews thus ensure that the quality of maintenance and testing support provided to each unit remains unaffected by activities in the other unit.

l l

l l

l I

l

.- I D.3 i

~

Because of the large, varying workload during outages, traveling .

maintenance crews are assigned to each supervisor to accomplish work Work such ,

that would normally have to be done by contract personnel. l as turbine overhauls, major valve work, ISI support, etc., are done by .

these groups. In addition, it is common during outages to employ

• contract labor for certain high dose rate tasks or other jobs During the current outage, contract requiring special expertise. labor will be used for control rod drive replace nonregenerative heat exchanger tube repairs, residual heat removal

' heat exchanger repairs, and feedwater heater inspection and repair.

It is the goal of the maintenance organization to eventually take over all maintenance done on the Brunswick units, including that which is currently being done by contract labor sources. To meet this challenge, maintenance is organized to provide sufficient coverage during the day shift (when managerial and technical expertise is available) to keep the maintenance production effort effective.

On second shift, a duty crew concept is utilized. The duty crews, one each for the I&C/E and mechanical disciplines, consist of one member of each of the normal crews to provide a well-rounded cadre of experienced personnel to cope with after-hours problems. The duty crew normally works until midnight but continues until 3:00 a.m. when necessary to keep critical work moving. At 3:00 a.m., the duty crew foreman's, normal crew reports to work to relieve the duty crew under such circumstances. In this way, maintenance can easily work inf.o 24-hour coverage on critical jobs when appropriate.

~

j

. S 9

, 3 it-We

-o n <- -,-------..mn ,-- -,m- - - - . - - - - , , , - , -- --,, ,4-m, ., -p- -, ,g-,>,- ,--,-v c-4 --m-

.i i

Plant Superintendent

• i I.

Maintenance i Supervisor i

s

. I i ,

I, .

a Mechanical  !

I&C/E Foreman .

Foreman 0

l FIGURE D.1. Maintenance Organization 1972 - 1977

. . l

i -

l Plant General Manager Mechanical ISC/E - Maintenance Supervisor Supervisor l I l <

Small Small Foremen Foremen Staff Staff i

\

l FIGURE D.2. Maintenance Organization 1977 - 1980 i

]

l l

l Plant General Manager e

Manager Maintenance

. Mechanical I&C/E Maintenance Supervisor Supervisor Planners Staff Planners Staff Foremen Foremen FIGURE D.3. Maintenance Organization 1980 i

-. , n -

, ._.n. . - , - - - - , , , . .,-,-,.,,,,.,,..-,...n,, , - . , . - - _ , , - - . , . , , , , , , , , . , , , . , . , , - , . . . - - - . , , - - . - - - , ,

?

I l

l Plant General Manager i

~,

Maintenance 8

, Manager i

t i

I Mechanical Supe visor Mechanical Supervisor l&C/E Supervisor Unit 2 .

! l&C/E Supervisor Unit 1

' Unit 2 '

i  : Unit 1 4

J J

3 4 _--

i

! FIGURE D.4. Maintenance Organization 1980 - 1982 1

l 1

Plant General Manager Maintenance Manager .

i j

k 1 I I I I i

I&C/E Supervisor I&C/E Supervisor Mechanical Supervisor Mechanical Supervisor Plant Services Principal Engineer Supervisor Unit 1 Unit 2 Unit 1 Unit 2 9

Maintenance i

d) t ) t)

Planners Foremen Planners Foremen Planners Foremen Planners Project Foremen l'

Engineers I I I I I I I I 45 d' Trb.

I . Rx. d i Trb.' i l Pt Rx. d > Trb. il Pt Rx. il 85 Trb. Rx. 'l Bl'dg. Bldg. Bldg. Bldg. Bldg. Bldg. Bldg.

Bldg.

l i

i.

I J

l l FIGURE D.S., Current Maintenance Organization l

i

e

'e Principal Engineer Project Engineer Project Engineer Production Eng.

l Project Engineer Maintenance Programs ,

Maintenance Staff l

. Field Engineering

. Admin Support

. Program Management - Training . Component Expertise

- Preventive Maintenance - Budgeting - CRD's

- Predictive Maintenance

, - Office Services - Recirc MG's

! - Valve Maintenance

- Diesel improvement Regulatory Related Corres. - Turbine Deck i Procedcre Writing - Motors

- Environmental Qualificat.on .

. Welding Expertise

e Component Expertise

- Valves . Liaison with Tech Support

- Pumps ,

~

i - Diesel

- Others ?

j . Technical Expertise

' - Weight Handling / Load Testing *

- - Refuel Floor .

- QA/OC j - Others e

FIGURE D.6.

?

l

} .

E.1 APPENDIX E. ,,

A Summary of Maintenance-related BSEP Corporate Goals This appendix gives a brief statement of 1985 BSEP maintenance related coporate goals as excerpted from "1985 BNP Department Goals"(a).

1. Maintain a detailed budget and schedule on 90% of the ongoing plant modifications. *

2. Limit power production net fuel and purchased power expenses to 5.25 Mills /KWH.

3. Obtain a capacity factor of 73.2% for Unit 1 and 68.8% for Unit 2.

4. Achieve a heat rate of 10,765 BTU /KWH for Unit 1 and 10,675 BTU /KWH for Unit 2.

5. Keep operating and maintenance expenditures (less fuel and purchased power) to under $137,861,000.

6. Reduce radiation exposure to less than 2500 REM for Brunswick.

7. Limit " Lost-time Personal Injury" to less than 0.9 per million hours worked. -

8. Limit "No, Lost-time Personal Injury" to less than 7.0 per million - -

hours worked.

t'

9. Develop a final Manpower Plan by December 15, 1985.

10. Continue to implement craft and technical development training courses upon the schedule developed by corporate.

11. Hold at least 12 employee meetings with an average annual attendance of 80%.

12. Limit growth of BNP ruthorized personnel to 0% in 1985.

13. Reduce the number of non-outage plant contract personnel by 5%.

14. Define, coordinate, and monitor an effective integration of IPBS, Work Force Management, and Outage Planning.

15. Obtain improved SALP evaluation ratings over the 1984 evaluations.

(a) Memorandum from Howe to Utley "1985 BNP Department Goals" January 22, 1985.

. .J E.2

16. Maintain a ratio of 100 NRC inspection hours per violation. ,.

17. Confine the number of forced full outages due to personnel error to the industry average or three per unit, whichever is lower.

1

18. Restrict the forced outage rate to 15% per unit.

19. Limit the monthly average of floor contaminated area in each operating facility to an average of 1.9E5 square feet-(excluding drywells) .

20. Limit the total volume of solid radioactive waste shipped to ,

1.E5 cubic feet.

21. Limit the number of unplanned challenges to reactor protective safety systems due to personnel error which result in an automatic reactor scram, while synchronized, to less than three per unit. ,

22. Limit the number of unplanned automatic reactor scrams, when synchronized, to less than four per unit.

23. Limit the number of automatic reactor scrams while critical but not sychronized, to less than four per unit.

24. Ensure that the RHR (LPCI), Diesel Generators and HPCI systems

' shall ach,teve a availability / reliability of greater than 91%.

25.(*) Achieve improved station performance with regard to INPO l< policies and performance standards.

26.(*) Attain, on schedule, the INPO standards in nuclear personnel i training.

27 (*) Achieve accident frequency rates less than the current three

>l year average of the other southeastern electric utilities.

(*) These items are incentive program goals that offer the employees the

, - opportunity to increase company matching percentage in the Stock 6 Purchase-Savings Plan.

+

t f

f i

I i

_ . . . . . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . _ . _ . _ _ _ . _ _ _ . . . _ . _ . - _ , . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . .