ML20211F250
| ML20211F250 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Vogtle  |
| Issue date: | 09/15/1997 |
| From: | NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20211E060 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-424-97-99, 50-425-97-99, NUDOCS 9709300389 | |
| Download: ML20211F250 (6) | |
See also: IR 05000424/1997099
Text
- . _ - -.
d
.
SYSTEMATIC ASSESSMENT OF LICENSEE PERFORMANCE REPORT
V0GTLE ELECTRIC GENERATING PLANT
50-424/97-99 AND 50-425/97-99
1. BACKGROUND
The SALP board convened on August 27, 1997, to assess the nuclear safety
performance of the Vogtle Electric Generating Plant (VEGP) for the
period January 28. 1996 through August 2. 1997. The board was conducted
in accordance with Management Directive 8.6. " Systematic Assessment of
Licensee Performance." Board Members were J; R. Johnson (Board
Chairperson). Director of Reactor Projects. H. N. Berkow. Pirector.
Project Directorate 11-2. Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation (NRR).
dnd C. A. Casto. Deputy Director. Division of Reactor Safety. This
assessment was reviewed and approved by the Regional Administrator.
II. DLANT OPERATIONS
This functional area addressed the control and execution of activities
directly related to operating the facility. It includes activities such
as plant startup power operation, plant shutdown, and response to
transients. It also includes initial and requalification training
programs for licensed operators.
Overall, performance in the plant operations area remained superior
throughout this assessment period. Management was involved in all
aspects of plant operations and has taken several initiatives this
period to strengthen performance of the operations staff. Operational
management decisions were conservative. A strong safety focus was
demonstrated during risk-significant activities such as reactor plant
startups and shutdowns, reduced reactor coolant system inventory
conditions, and while maintaining plant conditions for retrieval of
loose parts in a Unit 1 steam generator.
Operator knowledge and performance during plant maneuvers continued to
be superior througbut the period. This was demonstrated by handling
plant transients effectively, proper implementation of the Emergency
Operacing Procedures for reactor trips, thoroughly conducting the post-
trip reviews and root cause analyses, and making emergency declarations
in a timely manner. The licensed operator *. raining program resulted in
excellent performance on NRC administered exams. Actions have been
initiated to improve training scenarios and documentation.
Strong operator performance was also demonstrated by appropriate control
of reactivity changes, sound compensatory measures during periods of
heightened risk, and coordination and planning for outage activities.
Several excellent observations were made by operations staff personnel
that identified issues such as the discrepancy in the cooling water
alignment to the safety injection pumas. In general, excellent
professionalism was demonstrated in t1e control room. Operator
Enclosure
9709300309 970915
PDR ADOCK 05000424
O PDR
.
.
.
.
.
2
distractions were kept to a minimum and lit annunciators were
effectively and promptly addressed. There were some limited instances
of informality in the control room and deficiencies observed in operator
diagnostic skills.
Although excellent implementation of routine plant operating and testing
procedures was observed, an area for improvement was noted with
implementation of valve and switch position verification as well as <
infrequeni.ly performed procedures, such as containment closure
veri fication. Although the majority of the observations in this area
have been issues of low safety significance, the repeated finding of
containment debris existing following operations closeout inspections
was of concern. At least in one of the instances, a condition existed
which, had it not been corrected, could have been risk-significant.
The self-assessments conducted of the performance of plant o)erations
were superior. The Independent Safety-Engineering Group (ISEG)
assessments of system status, maintenance, and outage risk were timely "
and provided specific recommendations to plant management on measures
that could be taken to control plant configuration to minimize risk.
The ISEG review of configuration control issues prompted a thorough
corrective action plan. Key operational transient activities such as
startups and shutdowns were routinely monitored by both operations
managers and ISEG observers, with feedback provided to the operations
staff.
The Plant Operations area is rated Category 1.
III. Maintenance
This functional area addresses activities associated with maintenance of
plant structures, systems, and components. It also includes
surveillance and other testing performed to ensure operability.
Overall, performance of maintenance activities was superior.
Conservative management decisions regarding maintenance activities were
evident. Decisions regarding power reductions for corrective
maintenance exemplified management's concern for prudent operation of
the units. Refurbishment of major equipment. in a preem)tive manner,
demonstrated a commitment to long-term safe operation. Jeliberate
decisions were made to delay startup after planned and forced outages to
conduct corrective maintenance and appropriate reviews for equipment
malfunctions.
Maintenance activities resulted in a high level of safety equipment
performance and reliability, as evidenced by its operability during and
following several plant trips. Maintenance activities to maintain the
Enclosure
_ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
- . - - - _ - . _ - - . - . -. ._. .- . ._ -
,
.
,.
3
material condition of the plant were effective: however, the material
condition of the nuclear service water system exhibited some weakness.
While corrective steps were taken to improve operation of nuclear
service water, occasional debris fouling of small openings continued.
Self-identification of problems along with root cause determinations
were effective in im) roving compliance with requirements. Several cases
were identified by t1e licensee where electrical circuits were not being
tested properly. In addition, effective self-evaluation by maintenance '
personnel was demonstrated during performance of maintenance activities
and in evaluation of the maintenance programs through line and
independent audits. Audit scope was focused with appropriate emphasis
on identifying weaknesses and development of corrective actions.
- An effective inservice inspection program was apparent in completion of
the ten-year inservice inspection requirement. Aeactor vessel weld
inspections were performed in a timely and proficient manner.
Examination personnel were knowledgeable and well-qualified and the
walu;tions and resolutions of problems were appropriate.
Overall, personnel performance was good. Althour s we personnel errors
were noted in performing routine maintenance acth e.ies, most of these
errors did not result in equipment inoperability or safety concerns.
Major maintenance activities were performed properly.
Equipment testing programs were effective with a few exceptions. Some
surveillance tests conducted for special conditions were missed due to
personnel errors early in the SALP period. However, most maintenance
testing programs, including surveillance and post-maintenance testing,
were effective. Prerequisites were met before testing, instructions
were followed, acceptance criteria were evaluated, and independent
verification was performed according to program requirements.
The Maintenance area is rated Category 1.
IV. ENGINEERING
This functional area addresses the adequacy of technical and engineering
support for all plant activities, including: design control; design,
installation; and testing of plant modifications, operations, outages,
maintenance, testing, surveillance, procurement activities, design basis
information and retrieval, configuration management, and support for
licensing activities.
Engineering performance continued at a superior level during this
Jeriod. Previously identified strengths were maintained and challenges
lave been addressed.
Effective engineering support for operations and maintenance was
provided, particularly for major maintenance activities. Engineering
Enclosure
. . __ . __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ._ __ -__
9
- .
i
4
- evaluations of.the failed control rod drive mechanism guide tube pin
assembly and resultant damage to a steam generator tube sheet from loose
parts were detailed and comprehensive. The engineering modification
packages associated with the guide tube pin failure and the reactor
coolant pump replacements were thorough. Also, the use of the Electric
Power Research Institute Performance Prediction Model for Motor Operated
Valves (MOVs) and the level of knowledge of industry MOV issues were
identified as strengths. Notwithstanding this overall strong support. *
there were a few instances where engineering solutions were not as
thorough. For example, although the licensee had performed several
modifications to the nuclear service cooling water system to address
debris problems, complete and long-term problem resolution was not
'
achieved and the system continued to experience small amounts of debris
intrusion.
Management of engineering-related backlogs was a strength in the
previous _ SALP period, and this excellent performance was sustained
during this period. Backlogs remained stable or t mnded downward in all
categories.
Several self-assessments during this period performed by the Engineering
organization and by other parts of the licensee's organizational
components were comprehensive. effecti 'e in identifying deficiencies,
and resulted in timely and well-managed corrective action plans and
implementation. The quarterly trend reports were excellent trending
tools. The Plant Modifications and Maintenance Support Self-Assessment
was proactive in that it reviewed programs in place to identify where
future problems might occur. Safety Audit and Engineering Review audits
of engineering activities were effective in identifying deficiencies in
engineering performance.
Engineering support for licensing activities remained strong. Requests
for licensing actions and responses to generic letters and bulletins
were generally sup)orted with comprehensive engineering evaluations.
The licensee kept 4RC well informed of the status of planned licensing
action requests. In support of the request for transfer of the
operating license to the Southern Nuclear Operating Company. the
licensee, on its own initiative, provided a complete update with
supporting information on all license transfer issues since the initial
application was filed in 1992. Prior to the NRC industry-wide
initiative to determine the degree of licensees * conformance with their
design bases, the licensee initiated a comprehensive Updated Final
Safety Analysis Report accuracy verification orogram. Also, the
licensee has maintained the Vogtle Design Manual with cross-references
to important design and licensing basis documents used during design.
licensing and operations up-to-date since original plant construction.
Licensee management continued to focus on reducing personnel errors. As
a result of a previous SALP challenge. the licensee revised its process
to ensure more thorough checking by all cognizant individuals and
'
Enclosure
4
- - . _ - . . .. .- . - - . . . . .-
.
.
5
groups. _ lt also developed written criteria to define what constitutes
major and minor design changes to assure appropriate checks and reviews.
However, some examples of a lack of attention to detail, failures to
maintain procedures up to-date to reflect plant modifications, and
procedural compliance problems continued to occur and require continued
management focus.
The Engineering area is rated Category 1. .
V. PLANT SUPPORT
This functional area addresses radiological controls, radioactive
effluents, chemistry, emergency preparedness, security, fire protection
and housekeeping.
Overall performance in the area of Plant Support was considered
superior. The chemistry and emergency preparedness programs performed
at high levels. Security and radiological controls 3rograms reached a
high level of performance during this SALP period. ire protection and
housekeeping programs were also implemented very well. ,
Radiological controls were effectively implemented. External exposures
were evaluated properly and controls were well managed. Internal
e,^osure controls and monitoring were effective as well. Programs for
general and specialized training, as well as for qualifications
functioned well. Improvements were made in planning and work practices.
Dose control was kept at reasonable levels considering the challenges of
completion of the ten-year inservice inspection program, comprehensive
examination of control rod guide tube pins. and completion of two
planned and several forced outages. Posting and controls for radiation
areas were ap3ropriate: and labeling for radioactive materials was
excellent. T1e ALARA program adequately protected workers from
E excessive exposure.
Management and implementation of the primary and secondary coolant
chemistry program resulted in effective operation of steam generators
and primary systems. Primary and secondary laboratory quality control
activities resulted in accurate measurements. Programs designed to
control and monitor liquid and airborne radionuclide releases were
maintained and implemented properly, with releases well within
,
regulatory limits. Audits were broad, independent, and thorough, with
corrective actions identified and tracked to closure.
Emergency preparedness capabilities resulted in accurate assessments of
plant conditions along with prompt response and resolution of adverse
conditions. Exercise weaknesses were appropriately identified and
resolved. Emergency response-facilities and equipment were well
equipped and maintained. Notification and communications capabilities
were excellent. The Emergency Plan and procedures underwent thorough
-
audits. Emergency preparedness training was effectively implemented.
Enclosure
-
- - . - - . - - - . .. --
.
,
6
Improvements in the security program resulted in effective performance.
Proper response efforts resulted from effective training and -
qualification programs. Security responses to contingencies were
effective in interposing the threat. An effective contingency response
capability was demonstrated during high quality drills. The licensee
maintained control of personnel, Jackages, and vehicles. System
equi) ment was well maintained wit 1 high reliability and availability.
The ritness-for-Duty program was effective, with few exceptions. Plans
and procedures were well-documented. Minor errors in the procedure
revision process were promptly corrected.
The fire protection 3rogram was well implemented. Staffing, training,
and performance of t1e fire brigade organization were good, except for
some radio communication problems. Fire protection equipment was
generally well maintained. Self-assessments and quality assurance
audits were thorough and adverse findings were corrected in a timely
manner.
Although housekeeping continued to be excellent, the high levels of
housekeeping conditions generally noted throughout the plant were not as
evident with respect to maintenance activities associated with
containment. Several examplas of containment post-outage cleanliness
demonstrated that continued management attention is needed to prevent a
decline in performance.
The Plant Support area is rated Category 1.
i
Enclosure
'
l
-- . . - - . -_ _ _ _ .