ML20213E952
| ML20213E952 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 08/01/1984 |
| From: | Dircks W NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR OPERATIONS (EDO) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20213E956 | List: |
| References | |
| FOIA-87-137, TASK-PII, TASK-SE SECY-84-044A, SECY-84-44A, NUDOCS 8408090367 | |
| Download: ML20213E952 (26) | |
Text
[
.,-... ~,.....
-......_..m.r...,....
p%
p i
3 t,
e
%,...../
August 1, 1984 SECY-84-44A (Information)
For:
The Commissioners From:
William J. Dircks Executive Director for Operations
Subject:
NUCLEAR PLANT RELIABILITY DATA (NPRD) SYSTEM
Purpose:
To provide the Commissioners with information on the current status of the NPRD System.
Discussion:
In its affirmation of SECY-81-494, the Commission directed the staff to closely monitor the progress of INP0's manage-ment of the NPRD System and to provide. the Commission with.
semiannual status reports on the effectiveness of INPO man' age-ment of the NPRD System and the responsiveness of the NPRD System to NRC needs.
The. first semiannual report was forwarded to the Commission on July 1, 1982 (SECY-82-279).
Subsequent semiannual reports were forwarded on January 4,1983 (SECY-83-4), on July 5,1983 (SECY-83-4A), and on January 27, 1984 (SECY-84-44).
These reports addressed the status of the NPRD System and the staff's program to monitor improvements in NPRDS data.
In addition, on May 27,1983, Dennis Wilkinson, the President of INPO, briefed the Commission on the status of the NPRD System and on the INPO plans for further improvements.
_. to this paper is the staff's fif th semiannual report.
This report describes the results of the staff's program to monitor and evaluate the quality and quantity of data available in the NPRDS data base.
The staff has the following general observations based on the enclosed report.
1.
The substantial improvements in failure reporting, first seen in the third quarter of CY 1983, have continued.
in The rate of improvement, however, has slowed.
In fact, CONTACT:
Frederick J. Hebdon, AEOD 492-4480 p
~
$0fh
)
m, w
=
The Commicsioners some measures of NPRDS participation remain at ag oxi-mately the same levels as those first seen in the third third quarter of CY 1983..While this is a substantial improvement over the levels observed before INP0 assumed responsibility for NPRDS, additional improvements are necessary before NPRDS achieves routine operation at a satisfactory level.
Some of the measures of NPRDS participation include:
a.
The total number of failure reports added to the data base in the first quarter of CY 1984 was 2307.
This is a slight increase compared to 1986 reports submitted in the third quarter of CY 1983, and 2057 reports submitted in the fourth quarter of CY 1983.
By comparison, the avera9e level.of report-ing for the proceeding five quarters (i.e., the second quarter of CY 1982 through the second quarter of CY 1983) was 763 reports per quarter.
b.
Twenty-eight plants submitted more than 20 failure reports in the first quarter of CY 1984. While,this is an improvement compared to the 16 plants that submitted more than 20 reports in the fourth quarter of CY 1982, it is a slight decrease from the 31 plants that submitted more than 20 failure reports in the third quarter of CY 1983.
c.
Only 7 plants did not submit any failure reports in the first quarter of CY 1984.
This is a slight improvement compared to the 9 plants that did not submit any failure reports in the third quarter of CY 1983.
d.
Based on failures documented in LERs, for each of the past three quarters approximately 40% of the failures reportable to NPRDS have actually reached the data base.
2.
The timeliness of NPRDS reporting continues to improve.
In CY 1983, 47% of the failure reports described failures that occurred in 1983.
This is the highest percent to date of failures reported in the same year as the failure.
Further, the timeliness of the reports for the first quarter of CY 1984 was significantly better than the first quarter of CY 1983 (16% vs 8% occurred in the report quarter).
However, considerable room for improve-i ment remains.
3.
Substantial effort, noted in previous reports, to revise and expand the NPRDS engineering data file continues.
The Reportable System and Component Scope Manual, which was issued by INP0 in August 1983, substantially increased the scope of the NPRD System.
Plants have been asked to
i The Commissioners complete expansicn of their engineering data files on a schedule with completion dates ranging from August 1984 to February 1985.
Based on approximately 80 eligible plants and INP0's estimate of 5000 engineering data reports per plant, the file should eventually contain approximately 400,000 engineering data records.
The NPRD System as of the end of March 1984 contained approximately 217,000 engineering data records.
This is a substantial increase compared to the 140,000 engineering data records that were in NPRDS in the end of CY 1981.
However, at its current rate of growth (2.6% per month) the engin-eering data file will contain only approximately 284,000 records by the end of February 1985, which is approximately 71% of the scheduled number.
4.
The quality of the NPRDS reports appears to be improving.
Over 95% of the NPRDS failure reports were judged by our analysts to contain sufficient information to permit meaningful analysis.
There seems to be no weakening of the strong INP0 canmitment to achieving an effective NPRD System.
INP0 continues to place substantial resources on the development and implemen-tation of a comprehensive and well-defined NPRD System, and on using the NPRD System as an it..portant source of operating experience.
Further, INP0 activities continue to verify the completeness and quality of reporting by individual units through periodic plant evaluations.
INP0 notes (see enclosure 2) continued improvements in utility participation in NPRDS, for example:
1.
In 1981, the year before INPO assumed management respon-sibility for NPRDS, only 28 of 69 eligible units submitted component failure reports.
By the end of 1983,100% of the 73 eligible units had commenced component failure reporting.
So far in 1984, 97% of the 76 eligible units have submitted failure reports.
2.
Since July 1,1983 approximately 8600 component failure reports have been submitted and 3400 of these describe failures that occurred in that period.
By comparison, in 1981, 1100 reports were submitted of which only 384 des-cribed failures occurring in 1981.
The average failure discovered and reported to NPRDS since July 1,1983 was 1
received by INP0 within 90 days after discovery. In INPO's opinion, these numbers show a broad based utility commitment to. timely reporting of current failures.
The Commissioners 4~-
3.
By the end of 1981, the data base contained approx.
imately 140,000 engineering data records.
The data base now contains an additional 95,000 records, (238,000 total) of which 75,000 were reported after July 1,1983.
INP0 expects the data base to increase substantially as utilities complete submittal of data for the newly defined reportable scope.
CONCLUSION:
The improvements in NPRDS reporting first seen in the third quarter of CY 1983 have continued into the first quarter of CY 1984.
While these improvements have been substantial, further improvements were expected, but have been limited.
There are still 7 plants (compared to 9 in the third quarter of CY 1983) that did not submit any failure reports during the quarter, and 37 plants (compared to 29 in the third quarter of CY 1983) that submitted 20 or fewer reports in the subject quarter.
In summary, participation in NPRDS continues to improve in terms of the number of participants and the number and timeliness of reporting.
However, in some measures, the rate of improvement has slowed and in some areas little or no additional improvement was noted.
Thus, continued INP0
~
management attention and action will be necessary to achieve a fully operational NPRD System.
V-
-6A e William J. Dircks Executive Director for Operations
Enclosures:
1.
Fif th Semiannual Staff Evaluation of the Current Status of NPRDS 2.
Letter from S. Rosen to C. J. Heltemes dated July 16,1984
\\
\\
l t
FIFTH j
SEMIANNUAL STAFF EVALUATION 0F_ '
THE STATUS OF NPRDS July 1984 9
Prepared by:
Office for Analysis _and Evaluation of Operational Data 1
r t
i h
l
~.
INTRODUCTION The present NPRD System is a voluntary program for the reporting of reliability data associated with selected components and systems in nuclear power plants.
+
Since January 1,1982, the NPRD System has been managed and operated by the
~
Institute of Nuclear Power Operations.
l BACKGROUND l
Former President Carter's 1977 National Energy Plan recommended that the 1
NRC make mandatory the voluntary reporting of minor mishaps' and component i
failures (i.e., NPRDS).
The plan suggested that, mandatory participation would enable the industry and the NRC to develop a more reliable data base which is needed to improve the reactor design, construction, operation, safety, and reliability.
Coincident with the NRC's activities directed toward implementing the President's recommendation, the General Accounting Office (GAO) reviewed the NRC's data-gathering activities concerning unscheduled events at commercial nuclear f
facilities.
In a report issued in late January 1979, the GA0 concluded that it was unlikely that the NRC could justify mandatory NPRDS participation when factors such as additional industry costs, limited expected safety benefits, 4
and duplication of the NRC's LER system were considered. However, the GA0 believed that a full examination of the' issue-was sarranted and suggested that the issue be decided using rulemaking~ procedures.
l Following an April 19, 1979 Commission briefing on the collection and analysis of operational safety data, the Commission concurred with the January 1979 GA0 recommendation that rulemaking be used to decide the question of whether to make NPRDS reporting mandatory.
Accordingly, an Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPRM) was approved by the Commission, and published in the Federal Register on Ji a' v 30,1980 (45 FR 6793).
Numerous public coment s
letters were received in response to the ANPRM.
The predominant message in the comments was an overwhelming opposition to making participation in NPRDS -
mandatory.
3 Despite the opposition to a mandatory system, the staff identified a strong need for failure rate and engineering data.
The requirements for such data 4
indicated a need to revise and reorient the system, in combination with 7
the existing LER system, and to assure its effective implementation through NRC rulemaking.
In order to obtain the necessary improvements in the LER and NPRDS reporting programs, the staff developed conceptually a revised reporting system. This Integrated Operational Experience Reporting System l
(10ERS) would have combined and restructured the NRC LER system and the
~
voluntary NPRD System.
The IDERS concept included two principal features:
(1) the collection of detailed technical description of significant events, and (2) the collection of component reliability data.
~
While thh staff still believes that both types of data are essentirl to the NRC mission,-the possibility arose that the NRC could obtain the needed reliability data without assuming direct responsibility for its collection.
On June 8, 1981, the INP0 Board of Directors decided that because of its role as an active user of NPRDS data, INP0 would assume responsibility for
' management of NPRDS.
Further INP0 proposed developing criteria to be used in their management audits of mem,ber utilities to assess the adequacy of NPRDS pa rtici pation.
Therefore, rather than preempt the INPO activities by pro-ceeding with the 10ERS rulemaking, the staff recommended and the Commission approved (SECY-81-494) proceeding to modify and codify the existing LER reporting requirements as a separate rulemaking while holding the 10ERS rulemaking in abeyance.
In approving SECY-81-494, the Commission directed that the staff closely monitor the progress of INP0 management of the NPRDS and provide the Commission
~
with semiannual status reports on the effectiveness of INPO management of the NPRDS.
In order to monitor the completeness and quality of NPRDS data, AE0D estab-lished an evaluation program at the Reliability and Statistics Branch, EG&G Idaho.
The initial purpose of this program was to provide a baseline of information concerning the completeness and quality of the NPRDS failure reporting and engineering data files as they existed prior to INP0's assumption of responsibility for the management of NPRDS.
Subsequent analyses of the completeness and quality of the files are being conducted periodically in order to provide a measure of the improvements in NPRDS under INP0 management and technical direction.
The scope and results of this evaluation program have been discussed in reports to the Commission dated July 1,1982 (SECY-82-279), January 4,1983 (SECY-83-4), July 5,1983 (SECY-83-4A), and January 27,1984 (SECY-84-44).
The information that follows provides the results of the evaluation activities using the NPRDS data base as of the end of the first quarter of CY 1984.
COMPARISON OF NPRDS FAILURE REPORTS AND LERS The initial evaluation of the NPRDS data consisted of sampling approximately 100 LERs and attemptina to find corresponding NPRDS failure reports for'the failures-described in the LERs.
Task A The first sample (Sample A) involved failures that occurred in January-August 1981 (before INP0 assumed responsibility for the management of NPRDS).
Based on the description of the failures contained in the LERs, the analysts iden-tified 97 failures that they believed should have b.een reported to NPRDS.
The analysts then attempted to find corresponding NPRDS failure reports for the 97 reportable failures.
In the NPRDS data base as it existed in October 1981 (i.e., Tape A), only 11 failure reports that matched the failures described in the LERs were found.
Therefore, less than 12% (i.e.,11 of
- 97) of t'he failures that should have been reported to NPRDS had actually been reported as of October 1981.
~
. The analysts also reviewed the entry in Block 24 of the LER where the licensee is requested to enter a "Y" if an NPRDS failure report had been or would be submitted for one or more of the. failures described in the LER.
Of the 100 LERs in the sample, 50 LERs (representing 55 failures) indicated that an NPRDS failure report had been submitted.
However, only ten matching NPRDS failure reports were found (the eleventh match referred to above was for an LER coded as not being reportable to NPRDS, i.e., an "N" in Block 24).
Table 1:
Results of the Task A Event Dates: January 1981 - August 1981 t?RDS Data Base as of: October 31,1981 (Tape A)
LERs Sampled (Sample A):
100 Failures Identified:
121 Failures Reportable to NPRDS: 97 Failure Reports Found in NPRDS File (Tape A):
11 LERs That Indicated an NPRDS Failure Report Submitted:
50(55 failures)
Task B and Beyond Subsequent samples of LERs have been analyzed using LERs from the first quarter of CY 1982 (Sample B) through the first quarter of CY 1984 (Sample J).
These samples have been compared to the NRPDS data base.
NPRDS data for more recent quarters continues to be evaluated quarterly and the results described in subsequent reports.
In addition to comparing each sample of LER reported failures to the associated NPRDS tape (e.g., Sample C to Tape C), each version data base was used to analyze preceding samples (e.g.(i.e., data tape) of the
, Tape C was searched to find: reports of failures in Samples B and A).
Beginning with Tape G, only the preceding three quarters were analyzed in this way.
The results of these analyses are summarized in Tables 2, 3, and 4.
Table 2 identifies the sample period and the number of failures reportable to NPRDS from each sample [e.g., the sample from the period October-December 1982' (Sample E) described a total of 110 component failures that should have been reported to NPRDS). Table 3 identifies when NPRDS evaluation tapes were produced.
Prior to the two most r,ecent sample quarters, each tape reflected the NPRDS data file as it existed one month after the close of the quarter to account for the permissible 30 day delay in submitting NPRDS reports (e.g.,
Tape E contains the NPRDS data base as it existed on January 31,1983).
In order to be consistent with the analysis procedures used by INP0, the tapes beginning in fourth quarter of CY 1983 contain the data base as it existed on the last day of the subject quarter'(e.g. Tape J contains the NPRDS data base as it existed on March 31, 1984).
- 1. 4 -
Table 2:
Samples NPRDS Reportable Sample Sample Period Failures in Sample A
Jan-Aug 1981 97 B
Jan-Mar 1982 104 C'
Apr-Jun 1982 99 D
Jul-Sep 1982 107 E
Oct-Dec 1982 110 F
Jan-Mar 1983 112 G
Apr-Jun 1983 99 H
Jul-Sep-1983 101 I
Oct-Dec 1983 100 J
Jan-Mar 1984 -
100 Table 3:
Versions of the NPRDS Data Base Version Date of Version A
Oct 1981 B
Apr 1982 C
Jul 1982 D
Oct 1982 E
Jan 1983 F
Apr 1983 G
Jul 1983 H
Oct 1983 I
Dec 1983-J Mar 1984 a
e r
I
. ~
Finally, Table 4 contains the results of efforts to find corresponding NPRDS failure reports for failures described in the sample LERs (e.g., Tape D contained NPRDS failure reports fo" 25 of the 97 NPRDS-reportable failures -
in the LER Sample A).
Table 4:
Summary of Matching NPRDS Failure Reports ano LER-Reporteo Failures Version (Tape)
A B
C D
E F-G H
I J
A
' 11 21 25 25 30 31 B
0 4
8 14 21 C
1 2
5 16 Sample D
1 6
12 13 E
4 13 16 38 F
5 12 43 46 G
3 28 37 43 H
21 33 40 I
18 38 J
19 Conclusion The data for the most recent quarter shows that the significant increase in the NPRDS reporting first seen in the third quarter 1983, is continuing.
The initial percentage of matching NPRDS failure reports has remained essen-tially constant for the last three quarters at about 20%.
For earlier samples (failures that occurred in late 1983) the percentage of failures that have been reported to NPRDS by March 1984 has also remained relatively constant at about 40%.
Thus, the data base is substantially improved over the past years, but there has been no apparent change or further improvement for the past three quarters.
5 D
~ MEASURES OF NPRDS PARTICIPATION Table 5 indicates that a modest improvement in the quantity of reperting continues to be made.
In the first quarter of CY 1984, a total of 2307 rep 9rts were received; a 15% improvement over the previous quarter.
Further, this is more than twice the number of failure reports added to the data base in the comparable quarter one year earlier.
In addition, Figure 1 is a plot of component failure transactions (additions plus revisions) for the NPRD System as a function of calendar quarter.
While these numbers do not reflect the level of timely reporting, they do in a sense measure NPRDS activity or e f fort.
The figures do show a definite rise in the level of activity for the system.
Table 5:
TIMELINESS OF NPRDS FAILURE REPORTS I
Year in Transaction Quarter which the (Quarter in which the report was added to the data base) failure occurred 82-2 82-3 82-4*
83-1 83-2 83-3 83-4 84 1 1984 371 1983 72 191 1088 1304 1019 1982 33 30 273 604 260 639 454 222 1981 188 13 264 201 34 146 132 159 1980 166 1
192 90 28 77 54 223 1979 105 0
149 75 6
19 43 74 1978 30 2
187 58 5
6 29 35 1977 14 0
233 13 1
3 14 50 1976 32 1
109 0
7 4
3 39 1975 7
0 86 3
4 3
8 37 1974 0
3 24 0
2 1
16 71 1973 5
1 11 1
0 0
0 7
580 lC[
1528 1117 538 1986 2057 10017
- Significantly affected by one-time mass revisions.
One is tempted to divide the quarterly figures by the number of eligible plants and use this figure for tracking NPRDS completeness. Unfortunately, such an average is not always representative since the total number of reports often reflects the contribution of only a small group of plants reporting to the system.
For example, in the fourth qutrter of CY 1982 a total of 1,528 component failure reports were entered into the file.
However, two units accounte5 for 783 (51%) of the total entries for the quarter, and there were no entries for 44 plants.
.Thus, summary statistics (e.g., average number of failure reports per plant per year) continue not to be good measures of NPRDS participation.
D The dominance of a few plants in each quarter appears to have resulted from 2
one or more plants conducting an extensive review of their maintenance records -
and submitting a large batch of reports of failures that occurred over an extended period of time.
This adds to the difficulty of using any single summary statistic associated with NPRDS reporting as a measure of the overall industry Yevel of participation in the NPRD System.
Figures 2 through 6 plot the number of plants vs. the number of reports for 4
each plant for the quarter (e.g., from Figure 2, in the first quarter of 1983, 19 plants submitted between 1 and 20 reports). Clearly a key figure to watch is the number of plants submitting zero reports in a given quarter.
By comparing Figures 2 and 6, a substantial decrease from 40 to 7 plants that did not provide any reports is seen between the first quarter of CY 1983 and the first quarter of CY 1984.
However, this is not a sufficient measure.of success since one report from each plant for a period of three months would 4
result in 100% of all plants participating but would not constitute acceptable pa rticipation. For the first quarter of 1984, for example, 28 plants submitted more than 20 reports.
Thus these plants were participating at the average i
rate projected by INP0 (approximately 100 reports per year).
However, the participation of. the majority of, plants (44 of 72 plants) fell short of this goal.
Conclusions j
l.
A large percentage of eligible plants submitted NPRDS reports in the first quarter of CY 1984.
For this quarter (January to March 1984),65 plants submitted at least one failure report.
Only 7 plants submitt'ed no failure reports during the quarter. Although there are still many plants that have submitted a rather small number of reports (37 plants submitted from 1 to 20 reports each during the most recent evaluation quarter), the first quarter results provide a continuing indication that more plants -are participating, at least at some minimal level, in the NPRD System.
2.
The data from the most recent quarter continue to show a much broader i
participation. In the past, the reporting for a quarter was typically I
dominated by one or two units submitting a large number of reports while 1
most' plants submitted little or nothing.
For example, in the fourth quarter of CY 1982, two units submitted 51% of the reports received, while only 16 plants submitted more than 20 reports each.
By comparison, in the first quarter of CY 1984, 28 plants submitted more than 20 failure reports i
each.
l 4
TIMELINESS OF NPRDS DATA On January 28, 1983, INPO sent a letter to utilities urging that priority i
in failure reporting be given to recent failures.
The staff has-examined the data.to determine the degree of response to this letter in terms of quantity and timeliness of the data.
Table 5 shows the component failure records sorted by the transaction quarter (i.e., the quarter that the record was added to the data base) and the year in which the failure occurred.
It should be recognized that the 82-4 column (i.e., the fourth quarter of CY 1982) is somewhat distorted due l
~
to the mass revisions of older reports by two plants during that quarter.
1'8 1
9 1
)
8 l
I l
3 38 91 2
1 R
A l
E Y
/
3 R
2 E
8 9
T 1
1 R
er A
u 2
g U
i Q
F 1
li 3
1 89 1
2 1
y 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 5
0 5
0 5
0 5
0 5
9 5
2 0
7 5
2 0
7 5
2 2
2 2
1 1
1 1
1
009-19) to a
CD 09t-199 z
-- E s
Z 095-Itt z
D Ott-I2t O
b O
a:
Q 02t-I0t p
$h g
o<
OOP-ISC O
'$.9?~19C
[:3 c:
09C-19C Z
s_
m-
~
Ott-LEE E M
?
Z Z
OEC-IOC $
g
~,
D J
000-192 E R
^
b k<
a 092-192 ;
~E
^
092-152 r'-
C b
Z Ov8-182 Z f-Q 2
Z 028-102 3u O
4 I N 002-191 'o u
-2 I
091-191 @
O c
091-19I s z
03 OVT-121 c0 021-101 W
001-19 O'
09-19 b
i CO I
09-17 9hkh 05-12 61khkkkhhkh 02-1
~
OtNy\\g\\Q$$$\\Q%%%$$ \\%
0 e
e e
es 6
e e
e SJ.NY1d.!O ' 2EHnb!
d
}
\\
s l
009-19t 097-199 g
b 09t-Itt Z
D' Ott-12t O
i:
O E
02t-10t o
P
[h 00t-190 Z
05 O
'j-e.
~
a e0 g
09C-19C OFC-12C 2
o 5
02E-10E h C
000-192$
J 3
~<
. 092-192-6 m
5 P
' 092-198'g g
Ora-taa S Z
E M
022-102 @
Z u
O 002-191
(=-
4 O
y 091-191 5 O
ca Ost-Itt E -
g 1 N Otl-IBI CO L
C I(0z1-101 001-19 G
09 -19 O
09-17 2
C\\2 t
OF-IB h\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\
02-1 32 ithwNh%%%%%%NNS o e,
e e
6 e
6 6
SINY'id 20 22EMON
i 009-19t i
(f2 09V-19)
E C
t Z
Ost-it t D
3 O
e-Ott-12t O
E n
~
6 O
~
Q' l_
O oge_ ige M
5 A
090-19C
~
W E'
m 3
OPC-IEC $
N 5
S Z
02C-10C y
,.b D,
00S-182 $
O, i<r,
! 092-192 3 Z
092-It2 E-5 h
! Or2-IEE [
M
=
E g
l 022-f02 :5 5
O p
O 002-191 t-
~
o
~
i 2
' 091 5
O
-191 a
_O 2 j'sN]091-lVI!
z i
03 IS! Ovi-T2T Q
1 5] 021-101 i
rg H
2['s'N 001-19 g
Mk(Q} 09 t
.y 9lM\\h' 09-It 91k'[ \\b'kk I'\\ M k N OF-12 62kkNN}'sk'g\\'kkh%'\\N(hshhMkN 02-1
\\
hk%%N 0
6 s
de d
i
'il et i
6 SINY7d 20 239NON
- e e
8
\\
005-184 m
-)f(
084-164 d
R 2,
Z 064-144 C
5 O
g 044-124 O
3 0
024-104 zg
- t 004-183 083-163 O
g 063-143 Z
E
- 3 O'43-123 m M
5 s
Z 023-103 5 C
g M
F 003-182 %
g 9>
~ 082-IS2 @
062-142 H d
9 S.
Z M
. 042-122 0, c
j 2
022-102@
O 002-181 g
081-161 $
O m
..Q 1h061-141j i
z DC
. 1$'041-121 DC 2
021-101 y
.1k H
001-18 Dl 2 h 08-16 A
h\\hkkkk 01 06-14 91 N k k k k k k k k h h 0 4 -12 S2 [N h h h h h h k k Q k M M 02-1 Yhkk 01 0
Y
?
?
?
?
?
9 7
- prapmateana
1 009-19t g
_[f) g 09t-ISt b
~
i g
099-itt j
D Ott-12t O
t O
O Cat-ICt i
p b
E 00t-IBC Z
03 "O
P i
090-19C A
E; N
I \\ 092-ItC Z
S I
E Ott-IZE c::
i e
E 2-g 02C-100y D
G ogg-Iga y d-w a
r
- 082-192j 4m 092-172 i-r z
i I$_-
e o
E c-,
- Ot2-IZZ $
j c-
^
=?
Z 022-102 2 O
8 002-191 a.
A O
091-191 6
~
I 091-191 Z
9 OtI-IET co W
i 2 {X 02I-10i
~
t 001-19 I
09-19 l
hkk 09-I'i, L
hhkkkk ZI Ov-12 i
LC h k k k k k k k k k k k k k k k k k k h 02-1 Ehhhhhh 0
x d
d d.
d' 6
i i
SINY'Id 20 P.3 EXON i
t.
. In terms aof the timeliness of reporting, in the first quarter of CY 1984, 371 component failures were reported that occurred in 1984. This nunber is 16% of 1
the total entries for the quarter.
By comparison, in the first quarter of CY
~
1983, only 72 reports (6%) of the reports described failures that occurred in 4
1983.
}
Overall fo'r 1983, 47%.of the component failure reports submitted reflect i
failures that occurred in 1983.
By comparison, in the final three quarters j
of CY 1982 only 16% of the reports described failures that occurred in 1982.
Conclusion The timeliness of NPRDS failure reporting continues to improve, although at a modest rate.
In 1983, 47% of the reports submitted described failures that occurred in 1983, a substantial increase over previous years.
1 OUALITY OF NPRDS REPORTS t
l In this report, for the first-time an assessment is made of the quality, as well as the quantity, of NPRDS reports.
J Quality of the NPRDS Failure Report Narrative j
To assess the quality of the NPRDS Failure Reports, a sample of one NPRDS j
Failure Report per plant was selected for each plant filing a report in the latest quarter.
The narrative description of the failure was reviewed to 4
j determine if the text described the failure in sufficient detail that system users could understand the failure, its cause, corrective actions, and the i
implications for similar equipment.
The narratives were graded as adequate, probably adequate, and inadequate.
The results of this analysis are presented in Table 6:
Table 6:
OUALITY OF NPRDS FAILURE REPORTS Third Quarter Fourth Quarter First Quarter 1983 1983 1984 Adequate SD%
71 %
63%
82%
95%
97%
Probably Adequate 32%
24%
34%
Inadequate 18%
5%
3%
j Total Number of Plants 60 62
-68 l
The percentage of adequate and probably adequate narratives increased from 82%
in the third quarter of CY 1983 to 97% in the first quarter of CY 1984.
l
~
Conclusions The quality of the NPRDS reports '(particularly the Failure Reports) has improved and remains at a relatively high level.
Over 95% of the NPRDS failure reports were judged by the analyst to contain sufficient informa-tion to permit meaningful analysis.
OVERALL
SUMMARY
The improvements in NPRDS reporting first seen in the third quarter of CY 1983 have continued into the first quarter of CY 1984.
While these improvements have been substantial, further improvements were expected, but have been limited. There are still 7 plants (compared to 9 in the third quarter of CY 1983) that did not submit any failure reports during the quarter, and 37 plants (compared to 29 in the third quarter of CY 1983) that submitted 20 or fewer reports in the subject quarter.
The participation in NPRDS continues to improve in terms of the number of participants and the number and timeliness of reporting.
However, in some measures, the rate of improvement has slowed and in some areas little or no additional improvement was noted.
Thus, continued INP0 maragement attention and action will be necessary to achieve a fully operational NPRD System.
4
j Q -] @7 6
institute of j
Lj 6 Nuclear Power -
a a
W
- Operations 11oo Circle 7s Parkway Suite 1soo Atlanta, Georcia 30339 Tele;: hone doi 9s3-3600 Juiy16,1984 Mr. C. J. Heltemes, Director Office of Analysis and Evaluation of Operational Data U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 23555
Dear Mr. Heltemes:
In my Decembe'r 19,'1983 letter to you, I provided you with our per-spective of utility participation in the Nuclear Plant Reliability Data System. The purpose of this letter is to update that perspective and review -
I the last year since INP0 assumed complete operational as well as management j
responsibility for NPRDS.
j Since July,1983, the following improvements in utility participation j
have been noted:
o In 1981, the year before INPO assumed management responsibility i
for NPRDS, only 28 of 69 eligible units submitted component failure i
reports. By the end of 1983,100% of the 73 eligible units had com-i menced component failure reporting.
So far in 1984, 97% of the 76 eligible units have submitted failure reports. Attachment 1, from our June 1984 data processing summary report, documents this change.
+
Since July 1, 1983, approximately 8600 component failure reports-o
~
have been submitted and 3400 of these describe failures that occurred in that period.
By comparison, in 1981, 1100 reports were submitted of which only 384 described failures occurring in 1981.
The average i
failure discovered and reported to NPP.DS since July 1,1983 was received by INPO within 90 days after discovery.
These numbers show a broad based utility commitment to timely reporting of current fail-ures. They also indicate a substantial effort by utilities to report failures to NPRDS from time periods when utility participation was low. Attachments 2 and 3 illustrate this increase.
ir By the end of 1981, the data base contained approximately 140,000 o
i engineering data records.
The data base now contains an additional 97,000 records, (237,000 total) of which 75,000 were reported after i
July 1, 1983.
INPO expects the data base to increase to between 350,000 and 400,000 records by the end of le84 as utilities complete submittal of data for the newly defined reportable scope.
Mr. C. J. Heltemes July 16, 1984 Page Two INPO efforts in 1983 were directed mainly toward raising the overall level of utility participation and improving the timeliness of reporting.
With these objectives largely achieved, we have, switched our emphasis in 1984 towards improving the quality of the receive'd reports and the existing data base as well as emphasizing utility usage of NPRDS data.
These efforts include the following:
o Revision 10 to the NPRDS Reporting Procedures Manual (INPO 84-011)
(RPM) was published in April,1984.
This revision substantially improved the guidance provided to utilities for identifying and properly reporting failures of NPRDS components.
o A training workshop for utility NPRDS reporters was held in May,1984.
The workshop was attended by 141 individuals from 66 organizations.
The workshop devoted two days of training to the proper reporting of failure and engineering records.
o INP0 technical staff has manually reviewed key fields of over 14,000 historical failure reports. The purpose of the review has been to incorporate enhancements in failure reporting published in the revision to the RPM and to upgrade the quality of selected fields where possible.
Completion of this review is expected by the fourth quarter of 1984.
o' INP0 has been strengthening its audits of incoming failure reports.
Approximately 10-15% of all-submitted reports are initially rejected until additional information is supplied by the reporting utility.
o Formal data retrieval training has been conducted for 98 individuals from 36 utilities.
In addition, since January 1984, INPO evaluations have emphasized usage of the NPRDS data base as a utility tool in improving plant safety and reliability. Although significant effort still remains in improving utility usage of NPRDS, INP0 has observed a rising level of usage of NPRDS.
For example, in June '1984, 36
~
utilities remotely accessed NPRDS during a to'al 738 data retrieval t
sessions. This compares with 396 retrieval sessions by 22 utilities in December, 1983.
o In late August 1984, INPO will commence a review of engineering records in the NPRDS data base. The primary purpose of the review is to realign each unit's data into the systems described in Revision 1 of the Reportable Systems'and Component Scope Manual (INPD 83-020).
During the review, INP0 will also add an application code to the
igngineering records of about 300 key components for each unit. Upon
' completion of this review in the first quarter of 1985, two deficiencies that had limited the usefulness of NPRDS will be corrected. There will be a high degree of standardization in reporting by similar units and information on components used in key applications will be readily retrievable by use of the new application coding.
~
Aw Mr. C. J. Heltemes July 16, 1984
~
Page Three o
INPO evaluations continue to emphasize completeness of failure reporting by individual units and completion of the engineering data base by the end of 1984. To measure the completeness of reporting, INPO staff reviews samples of utility maintenance documentation during each evaluation.
Failures of NPRDS components that should have been reported are compared with reports submitted.
Utility resources, progress to date and schedules for completing submittal of engineering records are also reviewed during the evaluations.
A status report with the results of the reviews of NPRDS reporting and usage becomes a part of each evaluation report.
INP0 has found that reliance on the number of reports submitted in a given period as the sole measure of a utility's participation can be misleading.
Units with a low number of reports have sometimes been found to be reporting completely.
Conversely, units with a high number of reports have sometimes been found to need improvement -in the. completeness, quality or timeliness of reporting. An in depth look dtiring evaluations allows us to accurately assess the level and quality of each unit's participation and to assist them in upgrading all aspects of NPRDS participatior..
i We believe that the above information indicates a substantial commitment by utilities to make NPRDS a viable source of nuclear plant componen't reliability information.
I am sure you will agree that much has already been accomplished.
We plan to continue our efforts to assist the utilities to enhance the Nuclear Plant Reliability Data System as an important part of their integrated efforts to strengthen nuclear plant maintenance practices in support of enhanced plant safety and reliability.
Sincerely, S. L. Rosen Division Director Analysis & Engineering 4
RLS:jmn Attachments (3) cc w/ attach.: Jack W. Roe, USNRC Zack T. Pate i.J. Sullivan
=
1-l Figure 5.1 NtNDER OF UNI'IS REPORTING Tills YEAR '10 NO. UNITS SUIY11TTItJG 1901 1902 1983 MotTI11 DNIE 1.
SYSTEtt ENGlh EERING REPORTS 4
9 42 13 -
55 2.
SYSTEtt FAILURE REPORTS
- 9 16 28 7
22 3.
CCNIU4RTP ENGINEERING REPORTS 19 32 75 52 73 4.
C01194DTP FAILURE REPORrS*
20 39 69 50 74 5.
T]MELY C01IUTENr FAILURE REPORTS **
20 10 54 37 71 6.
tor SUIYitTrING CO4PCNENP FAILURE REPORTS
- 47 34, 4
26 2
7.
1 OF 'IUTAL CONEDCIAL UNITS SUMtITTItG*
401 531 951***
66%
97%
i0 CUiPONDir FAILURE REPORTS
- 1N 1901 'lllERG WERE 69 ldITS ROQUIRED 'IO REPORP IN 1902 TilDIE WERE 71 UNITS RIOUIRED '10 REPORT IN 1903 '111ERE WERE 73 UNI'IS RDQUIRED 'IO REPORT CURRDTrLY 'lllERE APE 76 UNI'IS REQUIllED '10 REPORT ONT,Y '1110SC UNITS RDQUIRED '10 REPORT ARE INCTAJDED IN 'IllE FIGURES N
- LESS '111N1 3 iDT111S DElWED1 DNTE OF FAILURE NJD DATE OF REPORT ENTRY INIO DATA BASE ha
- FOUR UNITS SUDMITTED DATA IN LATE DECEMBER 1983 DUT INP0 PROCESSING 0F REPORTS WAS NOT k
COMPLETED U'iTIL JANUARY 1984.
S
i
.)*
l e
t e
Fi ure 6.1:
CllR0tl0 LOGY OF COMP 0tlENT FAILURE REPORTS 9
t DATE OF PROCESSillG DATE OF FAILURE
'e n
- NUMBER NET NO. ADDED YEAR YEAR RECEIVED TO DATA DASE TO DATE 1983
- 1982, 1981 (1981 Year to Date 1984 4527 4846 1516 1703 415 303 909 1983 5227 5033 2233 1778 463 559 1982 3120 2537 3J7 671 1529 1981 1200 1102 348 754
'C u'
CllRON0 LOGY OF COMPONENT FAILURE REPORTS - PERCENT Year to Date 1984 4527 4816 31 35 9
6, 19 i
1983 5227 3033 44 36 9
11 1982 3120 2537 13 27 60 1981 1200 1102 32 68 N;
nh a
~-
n Pd ~
I g
7 '
.s.
s
~
Figure 6.2: QUARTER TO DATE - TIMEl.INESS OF REPORTittG GRAPil s
900 900 854 350 i
Dased on Failure End Date 850
[T
" timely reports, i.e., less l
than 3 mos. from discovery j
h Based on Failure Discovery Date lf 000 776 800 to input (31% of total) l q
F l
j 750 750 l
n
~
v l
if 1
~
I 450 431 l
l l
1 450 D]
i 400 l
3 57 373 400 l
352 l
{
~
350 0
(
316 g'd 296i j
j l
il
- [
I t
300 300
'i l
232 I
I 212 214 l
f 250 200 II I
f'
~
200 l
148 f
f 125 130 3
150 j
b[
l
)
f 150 y
110 108 I
i S
100 1
i l.
100 M
j l
l l
1 0
E-o, h
j l
50 l
50 h,
(
k
(
o 0
1 2
3 f
5 6
67 f'T2
fiumher of Months Between input Date and Failure Discovery /End Date
-