ML20206R908

Forwards Insp Criteria to Be Used During Future Insp of Oconee Activities

ML20206R908
Person / Time
Site:	Oconee
Issue date:	05/08/1998
From:	Casto C NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II)
To:	Landis K, Ogle C, Michael Scott NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned)
Shared Package
ML15253A418	List: ML15253A417 ML20206R908
References
NUDOCS 9901210119
Download: ML20206R908 (17)

Text

._

~-

I i

/s,o sac,o s

o UNf7ED STATES

[,

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

'I '

f

{

/ j REG 10N il a

ATLANTA FEDERAL CENTER k

8 61 FOR$YTH STREET, SW. SUITF 23785 ATLANTA. GEORGIA 30303 3415

)

+

• e e*

May 8, 1998

.)

1

'i MEMORANDUM T0:

Kerry D. Landis, Chief "I

Engineerirg Branch lt Division of Reactor Safety

]

Charles R. Ogle. Chief j

Reactor Projects Branch 1 Division of Reactor Projects j

J Michael A. Scott. Senior Resident inspector Oconee J

Division of Reactor Projects FROM:

Charles A. Casto. Deputy Directo Division of Reactor Projects j

M7 f

1

SUBJECT:

INSPECTION CRITERIA TO BE USED OURING FUTURE INSPECT a

OCONEE ACTIVITIES ll To support the efforts of the ongoing Oconee Management Oversight Group.;!

please ensure that the guidance of the. attachment is implemented for all future inspections at Oconee.

.i

Attachment:

Inspection Criteria I.

cc w/att:

ORP Branch Chiefs ORS Branch Chiefs M. Tschiltz. NRR t

D. LaBarge. NRR

't H. Berkow. NRR B. Mallett. Rll L. Plisco. Ril f

B. Mallett. Ril R. Carroll l<

i l'

9901210119 980611 PDR ADOCK 05000269 l

P PDR

,tvACHMENT ?

I i

gyngr. _

^

^

INSPECTION CRITERI A 1.

Support of the M0G's function to provide oversight of Oconee activities will require modi fying inspection report inputs.

This applies to DRP and DRS inputs Spec i f ica l ly.

the M0G will need an assessment of the licensee's performance in the ar -is inspected in each of the applicable template areas.

2.

To accomplish this, the conclusion of each item documented in an Oconee report including open items, will contain an assessment of the licensee's performance in each of the applicable template areas.

normally developed ds pa", of the inspection process.This is in addition to any conclusio Perform =nce in each of the applicable template areas will be assessed as:

These will be captured using the standard PIM entry categories as shown belowexcell following pro; ides assessments for each of the standard PIM entries.

The PIMSHADINkPIMENTRY ASSESSMENT FOR ITEMS INSPECTED E

l STRENGTH Excellent Performance lG l POSITIVEGood performance - Performance is more than adequate lA

$fl POSITIVE Adequate performance which at least meets regulatory l

.p.5, El NEGATIVE requirements Poor performance (For violations. LERS and NCVs. poor WEAKNESS performance is in area of violation)

LER V10tATION NCV Each conclusion will contain an executive summary bullet for that conclusion The ultimately the corresponding PIM item) 1s clearly understoodexecutive sum 3.

along with designation of the applicable template area designation will retain responsibility for entering these bullets into the P]M The Oconee SRI i

lhese will be graphically displayed on the PIM as shown above to provide visual representation of licensee performance.The attached matrix provides the template areas and subcategories.

Further information 15 provided in the attached exemples

$ l [( h'# 5 'a 4

CATECO3YI I

I Opertting Perf,rm:nce 2 Mtterkt Cetdesbn

) !!menn Performance 4 Engineer.ng Design 5 Preblem ID/Itesolutien SUt1CA T !!aw die plant es operased ne performarux and ilmv indevn.hsals do their worL llow the plarw desegn basis ne recognnsort,

analysis, and during both normal and conddion of plant estuepment, within a given environment and design art documcrited, resolutsoft of material and performance transeent conditions usmg the how they arc mamt.uned and usmg the programs and understood, modiTied and established programs and tested dwough the peocesses that support the apphed and how engineering hcensee effort in scif-assessment tssues withm the pl ant, inclodmg processes, mcludmg support implementaten of estabbshcJ muk.

support is provided to the programs programs ud processes fxdity A

Norm:10persticas l'qwir aent Condition Work Performance Desgn Identir. cation Operatens* during nonna!

Observarmns and findings Actions of anindividual Documenting, understandmg, Monitonng and review of maecrial cond tens mcludmg shutdown, regardeng the performance or during conduct of work mamtaming. and modifymg condetwm and performance, such as configuraten control, condetoon of ptaru cr,mpment.

activeies the plant design and design identifecation of problems and staffingt resnurces, command, mctudmg housekeerms miention baus tentrol. communicat 9n communication of these to the swareness

• mcludes operatert of suppewt appropnote personnel (twnnetmstation programs R

Operations Durmt Programi and reecesses KSA T rentients Engineerint Support A nstysis I

i ramework and miplemenimg tssues associsted with the Techn, cal supptw1 of the plant Evaluation of edentified essues to Operatem* dormg an, twocedures to test and knowledgc, skdis, and on an ongoeng basrs understand their bremoth and depth unanticipated change m faalety mamtam plane structures, abdities ofindevubals, ecludeg contributeg factors and conditions such as wstems, and components rncluding trement activation of f:mergency flus mctudes the formulation of an appropnate course of setion itespome, plant transient.

m plementaten of thcsc abno+ mal operatens dur'"g P'"g'2'S s'urtdown, mitisteng events.

un.inticmaicd c oposures j

• nstudcs operAm of sieppnet l

pengrams l

('

Programs and Petwesses Work Environment Programs and Processes Iteseistion f

j kstems that provule the Co nest, programs, and the femmework and

%c resource commetment.

l fearwmk, s'r cnere anet processes that influenec and enplementmg gwocedures to i

chedsdmg. trrdmg. compirium and d

s

""t emenh"g reccedit es to supports the ewecution of guide risvitees m support of ssessment of actions to resnive guw!c sn-etf".c setmt es m a

work, such as. physical l

engmeer'ag design, and problems uppnet of sati pfant s

environment, workload, beensing tiersn-s eclud.ng the a

supervisory overs'cht.

i conoweg progenras twocedure qualdy and I

bfego.vtis Ilealth t hs.cs,

{

ownpleteniess I me*ge'ect Pf arw$mg. Securig, j

Chemisto IN c P rHer' sori j

tv_. - - -

_.. t.sn ma S a r*, --.

r

,y, e

.g-m,~s--

-v+

~~ " ~ ' ' ~ ~ ' * ' ~

EXAMPLES The following is a list of examples developed by the Category Development and Criteria Develop. ment workshops, The examples are intended to be a representative sampl

'~

exhau' tive list) of issues reflected in PIM entries. The examples are divided by Template s

subcategory and will assist a Resident inspector and/or Branch Chief to appropriate PIM entries.

1 A. Normal Operations CortGguration control Staffing C8 Command, Control, Communication Execution of support progiams Number of violations of LCOs Number of miscors6guration TS violations Failures in tag outs and lock outs IB. Operations During Transients Emergency response --Identification, Classi6 cation Follow up ConDguration control Stafling C8 Command, Control, Communication Adequacy of event documentation Execution of support programs (including activation of emergency response)

IC Programs and Processes EP Programs Fire Protection Security Program Operations Suppen Program Procedural Development / Quality information Systems Number of LERs involving problems with procedtue inadequacies I

Other Operations Examples Ernmples below are categortzed as either 3A or 3B depending on operatsng condition number ofinadvertent safety system actuations number of problems dunng outages dif6culty during startup j

number of operations induced transients number of operations induced scrams number of operator generated signi6 cant events number of safety system actuations severity of transients (and consequences) number of signi6 cant events or precursors escalation of minor conditions due to inadcquate or uTong operator response timeliness of response to events I

number of operator enors due to poor commumcation number of operator errors due to poor drawings number of operator errors dunng response to transients due to lad of knowirdge i

r-i

,1a 2

number and nature of operator erTors in response to transients occunence of enors of commission during response to transients use of risk information to guide decisions adequacy of work ppckage tiacking (configuration av areness) adequacy of outage planning (risk informed)

Configurotton ControlEcomptes (3A/38) instances in which adequate safety margins were not maintained i

instances in which appropriate defense in depth is not maintained instances in which operators demonstrated lack of knowledge of cunent plan activities ant l

3 instances in which operators did not effectively manage the plant's risk profde j

i Command. Conirot. Communicanon Examples (iM3B) t I

up to-date operstor knowledge of cunent plant conditions t

communications in control room in acccrdance with standards adherence to existing programs and processes instances of procedure violations

{

operator awareness as demonstrated by alertness and vigilance

}

adequacy of shift turnover effectiveness of communications with other departments instances of observed crowdmg in the control room demonstrated clanty of decision authority and accountability involvement of appropriate personnelin event response (function a!!ocation) 2A. Equipment Condition I

J Equipment Reliability / Failures

{

Repetitis e Equipment Failures Safety System Reliability /Failurcs 1

Avsitability Equipment Forced Outage Rate Safety System Actuations Annunciator status Unplanned LCOs Equipment response after scram Maintenance Rule Results Performance History MPFFs Eeuipment importance Equipment Problems

{

Common cause failure rate Cleanliness

[

Number of(operator) wort arounds Steam, water' or oilleaks i,

paintmg/ preservation Testing Results (touch, smdi)

Matenal Condaion Tegs l>

r e.

I

.~.

w

.a+1.

n t

3 Number of components in the alen range s

!4 Enyirotunentally induced degradation

[

~~

. Equipment Aging

- Number of temporarymodules/ modifications

= Equipment vibration Control Room DeSeiency -

i i

2B. Programs and Processes Maintenance Propam & Procedures

' Surveillance Propam & Procedures Maintenance / Surveillance Procedure Implementation On line Maintenance i

Maintenance Rule Program Contractor Management / Oversight.

l Resources / Maintenance Staf6ng Available Pans 1

Maintenance State - breakdown, preventive, predictive Tools & Diagnostic Methods.

IST/ISIProgram Maintenance Program -

Testing properly accomplished Trending Program Results Test Pre conditioning Work Package Quality Post. Maintenance Testing Work Control / Execution' i

Foreign Material Exclusion.

I i

Maintenance Backlog

{

- Oierdue PMs

- Reuerk Rates -

Anticipated Deterioration Conective Maintenance Backlog

- Instrumentation and Control Suppon 3A. Work Performance Good communication, communication breakdonu i

Procedure adherence, use of procedures, procedure use enors I.

I Job perfonnance mids Y

' Work hand off

[

1

- ref transients that involve latent errors f

Team performance, teamvork I

Questioning attitude, pro active vs. reactise Formalityin controlroom 5

- Stop, Think, Act, Review (STAR)

Attention to detail

- Cooperation 1

. Escessive ovenime.

c y

b n

'l i

c

l 4

Stop work in questionable situation

.; = -

HRA in PRA i

Goodjob brief Sleeping on duty Overconfidence Conscious vs. automatic fitness for duty Unmotivated personnel Wrongly motivated personnel Appropriate peopic making decisions, decision making, timely decisions t

Malicious compliance /non compliance i

HP contributes to event initiation Inattention to duties l attentiveness, vigilance Cognitive enors,0% enors, personnel error rate Safety focus Number of es ents involving the lack of use of procedures Number and nature of operator enors in response to transients Occunence of errors of commission during response to transients Number of work arounds 3B. KSA/Trai.,ing KSA's, knowledgeable ofjob iasks,53 stems knowledge Adequacy of work package Enm failure rate Worker task qualification prcaess OJT process Training Requalification failure rate i

Use of mock ups and dry runs Requal program Simulation Use SAT, Training program deficiency, incorporated lessons leamed in tra:n:ng i

Conduct job briefings Contractor euclification Number o'

rator enors dunng respense to transients due to lack of knou;cege Operator tr..mng up to date Adequacy of pre briefings and troisung for infrequent tasks 3C. Work Environment Shift schedule Environmental related human errers, stress induced prob! cms, ermtonmereI cenitions Supervision, management oversight Task allocation, function c!!ocation, workload Procedure quality (generic)

Understanding, clear accommility Operator aids Habitual use of overtime i

~. - -

- - - - - ~

~

Rate of staff turnover Numbet.of staffing level exceptiong ng y;ngeg;ng, 4A. Design Environments! De' sign - heat. issues, lighting issues, noise issues Environmental Qua_lification (EQ)- seismic, environmental Maintainability FSAR updates Up to-date drawings Quality of calculations, Design calculations Response to engineering requests Design basis reconstitution Manual operator response time measures Digital / Analog integration CR redesigns Maintenance CDB (Cunent Design Basis) i Design issues - Human Errors (HSI), Design of hardo are 1

Plant computer issues

{

SPDS redesign l

Design basis understanding Accessibility of design information Maintenance CLB (Cunent License Basis)

Instances of a mismatch between current as built plant and drawings and other docum 4D. Engineer:ng Support Reactor Engineering fuel cycle maaagement Teclutical support

. Material certifications JCOs (Justification for Conimued Operations)

Technical adequacy of procedures Quality of operabihty evaluations Test review and analysis 50.59 Reviews USQ (Unresolved Safety Question)

Control of engineermg backlog Appropriate operating limits in procedures Trend system performance PRA Development OER quality

)

Quality of safety evaluations System Engineering Ownerstup System engineet knouledge of system status Corporate engineering Engineering design backlog System revicws Plant efficiency ~ steam losses, etc

6 Responsiveness to engineenng support requests MotorOperated Valve follow up evaluation of plant modineations - Testtng followu:g design changes 4C. Programs arid Processes Temporarymodification System to prioritize engineering requests Technical specifications Qualitj of exemption tequests

]

Documentationissues I

Quality of amendment requests Modification controlissues Maintenance of vendor documents Quality of module packages Engineering organization intrusis eness Licensing issues Perform Part 2I reviews Set point control Vendor / contractor oversight OER program Maintenance / Surveillance Technical Adequacy I

5A. Identifica tion Self assessment QA Sndings Peer evaluations OER reviews, industry feedback Questioning attitude Problem identification criteria /thre>liold Potential Problem Analysis Process (PPA)

Performance trending Problem report levels adhered to Quality Control / Assurance (QC/QA)

Workers initiate problem reports, problem ID available at :'llevels of personnri

1. of problem 1D problems - man:. or single event Problem ID tag Human performance issues are addressed Performance observation methods Systemic thinking / approach improsement programs Role of QA in the site (reporting level)

Independent tevien/ oversight. ISEG. PORC. off. site comrmitee effecto eneu Corporate culture Openness with NRC Management knowledgeable of prob! ms Employee grievances, employee management relat:ons I

s

.i i

i 7

5B. Analysis r

1 Eventinvestigations

"~

Prioriti'zation ofproblems Self assessment criterion dermed Root Cause Analysis, events and causal factors at:alysis, document reasons for Terminatmg RCA j

Trended including MIS,inethods for capturing trend information i

Operability evaluations are performed Cornmunications ofpriorities 1

Analysis / cvaluation criteria

.]

Identify conditions that the corrective actions are intended to achies e

]

Quali6eations of RCA evaluations j

Specify links between root causes and corrective actions j

Extent of condition review d

Use oflessons leamed from near misses PRA: to evaluate resolutions, prioritize problems, identify precursors PRA to conununicate issues

-}

Auditable I

Trending data includes human performance categories

=}

Quality of LER preparation Document conclusions of RCA j

5C. Resolution Timeliness, average tirm to n oplement fixes External commitments, response to NRC concerns i'

Management support, adequate dollars to 6x problems.

{

Repetitive issues, repeat fai!ure rates l'

Corrective action program Inter departmental communication ofissues Whdation and scr:6 cation, post mod 6 cation t:simg i'.

Conec;is e action backlog

{

Planning, manpower requirernents consicered, CA plan developm:at,imemal comnutments Determined measurable objectives, measures of effectiveness of CA 's Monitoring corrective actions Tracking

1. of operater work arounds IPE follow up Feedback to originator Allegations Employee concems program, satery concems program

- > l t1

,b I

t i

l

)

OCONEE RECOVERY PLAN ISSUES CHECKLIST Area Action NRC lead Licensee NRC Inspection / Action NRC Status (Resuits/lR/Date)

Status LICENSEE RECOVERY. PLAN ACTIONS Design llPI System Review Landis Basis S!!A HPI/LPI System Review Landis Oconee Safety Related Landis Designation (OSRDC)

(NRR-Any licensing issues)

Resolve ECCW Suction Supply Landis to LPSW (OSW) t USFAR Review Project Landis SOUG Outlier Resolution Landis

!!ev iew i

I Emergency Power Project Christnot GL 96-06 Review (non-Landis licensing issues)

EFW SSE1 Landis Configuralion Management Landis Project l'

'i 1

ATIACHMErgt 3

7 System Material Condition Upgrade.

Scott Equipment Control Rod Drive Mechanism-Billings Replacement Top Equipment Problem freeman.

Resolution Process (TEPR)

System Team Development Landis fluid Leak Management Freeman Program Temporary Modifications Landis

.CRIP Management and Bt11ings Reduction Inservice Inspection Program Fredrickson Assessment Secondary System Component Landis Re1labi11ty Humari Human Performance Measures Scott Performance arid Organization Direction (ORP)

Maintenatice Procedures Christnot Self PIP Activity Backlog landis Assessment PIP Ouality Improvements Landis Manager Observations and Landis Group 5 elf Assessment 2

~....m

.e r ~~ n ~ w,~. n m -.~ ~.

n--~ ~ ~ ~: --

\\

inplant Review / Job Billings Observation Program Operational Root Cause Analysis and Landis focus Corrective Action Emergency Operating Landis Procedures Response to Operational Billings Concerns Risk Assessment Freeman Work Backlog Management Fredrickson Outage Readiness Fredrickson Temporary A.1 Management oversight Freeman Defense observation A.2 Management oversight Freeman during startup/ shutdown A 3 inventory Monitoring Freeman fnhancements B Eng/ Ops /Maint Interface tandis/

Fredrickson C

Improved Trouble Shooting Freeman f

Post Maint/ Mod Testing Landis/

Fredrickson F Chemistry / Ops Interface Christnot NRC AREAS OF CONCERN 3

e i

v..

#_..L

. r

. 1 n : ~_.

.m - :

.. _.. _ _ _. _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ - ". ~.

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

^ " " " " "

Human Procedural Scott Performance Controls / Adequacy / Compliance Problem 10 Safety Assessment Quality Christnot and Verification (including OEF)

Resolution Design CREV SSEI landis Basis / Tech Support-Emergency Electrical NRR Distribution System Review (TAC A0886. A0887. A0888)

Equipment Containment Coatings Landis Keowee W Breaker Christnot Mods / Replacement Issues Not Essential for Recovery Code issues 98 01 Przr & letdown welds NRR 98-G0-001 VT-3 exam reg NRR 98-GO-002 Bolting torque NRR 98-GO 003 Alt to exam of NRR concrete containment fatique Analysis NRR Emergency Power System NRR Reliability Assurance Operating Experience Program Christnot 4

L g

=We*-

- - - +

s-Ws w-=

p t WMW. ** f %

yod /MMM --

=

1 Operational Safeguards Landis Response Evaluation (OSRE)

Severe Accident Management Billings Guidelines (SAMGs)

OAC Replacement Project Freeman ONS Equipment Aging Project Freeman Integrated Control System Freerran Replacement t

Other NRR Actions (Not Essential for Recovery)

SOUG (Outliers monitored NRR under licensee's program) 115 NRR HPI Amendment NRR I

CREV (TIA) landis Service Water Amendment NRR NRC letter dated carotete 4/24/98 (TAC M99487 M99488. M99489)

MSL Break Detection NRR (BL 80-04) 5

,w.o a

w'p%_+mf FV -m*

b f'**'"

1. ~

~'

t l>

R0ll.UP CRITERIA The followin performance;g are the criteria which will be useo during assessment of Oconee j

Excellent:

Performance exceeds regulatory standards in the subject area and

}

is critica.lly assessed for improvement.

NRC identified implementation problems.

There are no significant Good.

Performance in subject area r'ets regulatory standards with minor exceptions.

L*;

Adequate:

While performance in sub;"',t area meets regulatory standards.

J problems exist which inottate that additional licensee attention is warranted.

1 Poor:

Significant problems exist in the subject area or there are

?

numerous examples therein which indicete systemic or pervasive

{

problems.

Significant means or results in (1) Severity level 111 j

(or higher) identified violation: (2) Safety or risk significant

l events: (3) Systematic management breakdown: (4) Willful acts: or e

(5) Major variance from requirement.

,j F

i l

l

. s 11 i4 1

5 I$

' ' ' ~ ~ ' ' ^

ATTACHMfNT 4 1

i.

. _ _ _ _. _ - - _. _ _ _ _ _ _ _.. _ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ^ - - ^ ~ ~

" ~ ~~""^^~ " ~ ~ "-'

l e>

rA 1'

e i

i I

D i

C Mm CJ Ec

]

O 8$

tn O N

00 i

v

= aa

\\

1 LO f) a o

C 5

s a

B 8

w D

U O

W I

b O

C C

i O

N o

)

M k

m w

u rol 20 O

UJ O

4

> 3 K

3 N

ZOUO E

\\