ML20215L190
| ML20215L190 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 09/23/1986 |
| From: | Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards |
| To: | Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards |
| References | |
| ACRS-2455, NUDOCS 8610280523 | |
| Download: ML20215L190 (16) | |
Text
CERTIFIED MINUTES DATE ISSUED: Sept. 23,1986 i
q f;iB ous-a4ss 7
?
,U bh b$
por mapy
SUMMARY
/ MINUTES ACRS SUBCOMMITTEE ON MAINTENANCE PRACTICES AND PROCEDURES AUGUST 13, 1986 WASHINGTON, D. C.
A meeting was held by the Maintenance Practices and Procedures Subcom-mittee on August 13, 1986, in Washington, D. C.
Notice of this meeting 28, 1986 (Attachment A).
was published in the Federal Register on July A
A schedule of the items discussed in this meeting is in Attachment 8.
A list of the handouts in list of the attendees is in Attachment C.
Herman The handouts are filed with the office copy.
Attachment D.
Alderman was the Designated ACRS Staff Engineer for this meeting.
Principal Attendees ACRS G. Reed, Subcommittee Chairman C.d Michelson C. Wylie J. Ebersole Opening Remarks - Subcommittee Chairman G. Reed Mr. Reed noted that the Maintenance and Surveillance Program Pla Phase 1, didn't have much in it that pertains to craf tsmanship or craft.
He noted truch of it pertains to what he would call maintenance office activities, i.e., engineering scheduling, program data, work, logging He suggested we need more emphasis on craft.
and so forth.
hs 23 h
h [).
gQf eon 3a g;
acmf omcum
- j Certiffeq py gf/_jg p
Minutes / Maintenances 2
and Procedures August 13, 1986 Meeting Mr. Ebersole emphasized restoration of the environment characteristics of equipment. He noted that he had doubts about any attention paid to the restoration of environment capacity during maintenance and noted that no tests are made to determine the vulnerability of such equipment to those hostile external influences.
Mr. Michelson commented on the apparent slow pace of the maintenance program plan.
He noted that he had reviewed the maintenance program plan about 2 years ago and doesn't seem to see any major changes since that time.
Mr. Wylie noted the differences in practices between differynt com-panies.
He noted that the indicators of maintenance are also an in-dication of how well the job was done originally. He applauded the effort toward trying to get a uniform plan to improve maintenance practices in the utilities.
G. Cwalina - Maintenance and Surveillance Section In response to Mr. Michelson's comments, Mr. Cwalina noted that the MSPP was approved for implementation by the E00 in January 1985. The MSPP was made final in April. The project wasn't really started until about the May-June time frame.
The purpose of Phase I is to establish baseline on maintenance and to determine the status of maintenance that exists in the industry today.
~
3 Minutes / Maintenances and Procedures August 13, 1986 Meeting The purpose The survey of maintenance was broken down into two parts.
of the survey was to obtain current industry information on maintenance The first thing that programs and practices at nuclear power plants.
was done was to send a questionnaire to all the resident inspectors.
The other aspect was to go out on site surveys. A protocol was devel-oped so that the same amount and types of information was developed from each of the eight sites.
Each team was The site survey teams were composed of 5 or 6 members.
headed by a member of the maintenance and surveillance section.
Mr. Ebersole mentioned that maintenance personnel can either follow a He noted that doing it his check list or do maintenance in his own way.
own way, the worker could defeat the original objective of both the Mr. Ebersole asked how was the operation as well as the maintenance.
industry in regard to the use of written procedures and check lists and following the book.
Mr. Cwalina replied that practices ranged from one extreme to the other.
He noted this aspect would be taken up in Phase 2 of the MSPP.
Mr. Wylie asked hcw the sites to be visited were selected.
Mr. Cwalina replied that Salem was selected because of the Salem event.
The others The NRC management requested that Davis Besse be visited.
l
~.
4 Minutes / Maintenances and Procedures August 13, 1986 Meeting were selected to attempt to get a cross section of. age, size and type of i,
nuclear plants.
B. Grenier Maintenance Surveillance Section Mr. Grenier mentioned that most of the questionnaire and site survey was done under contract with contract support. Mr. Grenier managed the contract.
Mr. Grenier noted that from an overall standpoint there was a lot of variability.
Mr. Ebersole asked if they had any observation about what type of organization works best. Mr. Grenier said he would hold off on any judgments of this type right now.
Mr. Grenier noted that by calling attention to maintenance it might be possible to cause improvement.
The question was asked about the adequacy of vendor information.
The response was that this was not investigated.
Mr. Grenier noted the biggest problem was lay down space and equipment accessibility. Another problem was the lack of spare parts.
1
5 Minutes / Maintenances and Procedures August 13, 1986 Meeting Backlog is an area that is being looked at as a performance measure, f
Mr. Grenier pointed out that it is an area that could be deceiving. 'In some cases a high backlog could be worked off very easily because in many cases many of the individual worker orders are for simple, easily accomplished things.
T. Le, Maintenance and Surveillance Section Most of the utility staff time is spent in corrective rather then He noted that most of the backlog is due to preventative maintenance.
The the time spent on corrective rather than preventative maintenance.
utilities would prefer to spend more time on preventative maintenance.
Mr. Michelson asked the staff about what they intended to do with the information collected during the site surveys.
Mr. Cwaline replied that they intended to analyze the data and see if they could identify problem areas.
Mr. Le pointed out that some plants have space problems due to modific As an example he noted that utilities have been tions to the plant.
installing additional ventilation to meet equipment qualification This additional equipment restricts access to equipment requirements.
for maintenance.
Mr. Le noted that if the maintainability of equipment is incorporated during the plant design it seems to facilitate maintenance.
6 Minutes / Maintenances and Procedures August 13, 1986 Meeting He noted that during the site surveys that Mr. Le discussed procedures.
five plants are undergoing major upgrading of their procedures because of either human error, or technical upgrading of equipment due to vendor Some of the plants are using INPO information that they need to update.
Brunswick spent about a million guidelines on how to write procedures.
dollars to have a contractor come in and develop the whole procedure and training the staff on writing procedures.
Mr. Ebersole asked if the procedures preserve, maintain and even upgrade the environmental qualification characteristics.
Mr. Le replied that an environmental qualification inspection checks whether maintenance information preserves the equipment qualification after the maintenance has been performed.
He As a area that needs improvement, Mr. Le mentioned communications.
noted communication between operation and maintenance needs improvement.
The staff found out that training provides a mechanism in that if the maintenance workers has a system level knowledge he has a better basis for communication with operations and vice versa.
Mr. McLaughlin, Maintenance and Surveillance Section He noted this area of Mr. McLaughlin discussed trends and patterns.
Basical-responsibility was the development of a maintenance data base.
ly development of a data base will aid in describing the current stan-It will also assist dards of maintenance in the U. S. nuclear industry.
I
r 7
Minutes / Maintenances and Procedures August 13, 1986 Meeting in identifying plants with good and bad maintenance programs and prac-L The data base will also aid in selecting and validating mainte-tices.
The maintenance performance indicators nance performance indicators.
The will be incorporated into the agency wide performance indicators.
initial set of maintenance performance indicators are scheduled to M ready in September.
The maintenance data base will be derived from existing sources of Most of the analyses of the data will be done by PNL.
information.
When the PitL contract concludes, the staff will continue the analysis on an in house basis.
Mr. McLaughlin noted that they are looking at the mean time between The subcommittee discussed the component failure forced outages.
Mr. McLaughlin noted they meaning of component failure forced outages.
use the definitions for scheduled and forced outages calculation and time as listed in IEEE 762.
Mr. Persinko, Wrong Unit, Wrong Train Events Mr. Persinko noted that he was responsible for the investigation of the contributors to the wrong unit - wrong train events for the MSPP.
The wrong unit - wrong train event is a human error that was done by an individual whereby the individual performed an incorrect action or an incorrect unit of a multi-unit facility, or an incorrect train of either
F 8
Minutes / Maintenances and Procedures August 13, 1986 Meeting a single or dual unit facility. Also included in the study is wrong L
component events.
One member The investigation was conducted by a team of three people.
from AEOD and two from DHFT. One of the team members was a engineering psychologist.
35 events at 10 sites were investigated.
Some of the contributors were:
Poor labeling. Labels were nonexistent or very difficult to read.
Sometimes they were not unique A a unit.
In some cases they were incorrectly labeled.
Training and experience.
In some of the events, the individual was new to his position.
Procedures. The procedures were applicable to multiple units or multiple trains.
.v.
Human Factors. The procedures had insufficient detail or they didn't contain appropriate cautions where they would be useful.
This is a fixed state of mind whereby an individual next Mind set.
work assignment is seen by the individual to be similar to his previous crack assignment. He was in the habit of doing something and he wasn't able to get his mind on the new subject.
I
9
- ^
Minutes / Maintenances and Procedures August 13, 1986 Meeting Communication problems where either verbal or informed handwritten communications were incorrect. Physical stress was a contributor.
Heat, noise and cramped areas could contribute to errors.
Drawings were incorrect in some cases. They were not updated to select modifications done at the plant.
Interruption of work flow. The individuals might be asked to do some-When he returned to thing else, which interrupted his assigned task.
his assigned task, he started in the wrong place in the procedure or he did something wrong that led to the event.
The NRC staff felt that being rushed is a possible Time constraints.
Being rushed is a a sense of urgency, either perceived as contributor.
real.
Mr. Reed stressed the importance of natural aptitude when discussing He recommended to the contributors to wrong train - wrong unit events.
staff that they should consider natural aptitude and evaluate for it in their studies.
The staff evaluated their data on wrong unit - wrong train events and used their judgment to deterr:ine primary and secondary contributors.
Based upon primary contributors, labeling, training and procedures contributed to 60 percent of the wrong unit - wrong train events.
T
_,y-..,.
Minutes / Maintenances 10 and Procedures August 13, 1986 Meeting The primary and secondary contributors to an event were compared.
In most cases, there were a combination of contributors rather than a single contributor.
J. Jankovich - Maintenance and Surveillance Section Mr. Jankovich presented the conclusions for the Phase 1 of maintenance and surveillance program plan.
One objective was to establish a baseline for 1985 and then develop some methods testing instruments. The questionnaire that was sent to the resident inspectors and the site survey protocol were the instruments used.
The maintenance and surveillance staff looked at programs that both the NRC and industry carry on, with the aim of integrating all the mainte-nance activities into the program.
Interface activities were established with NUMARC, and EPRI.
Effective communication was established within the NRC and the regional offices.
Some of the conclusions from the Phase 1 report are:
o Maintenance is not being performed in a number of cases or it is not performed effectively.
11
. Minutes / Maintenances and Procedures August 13, 1986 Meeting A major management commitment to a good maintenance program is o
necessary for maintenance to be effective.
A high percentage of failures or do to improper performance of o
maintenance, Better maintenance performance measures are needed.
o More formal preventive maintenance programs are needed, o
Criteria or standards for maintenance as needed.
o Mr. Jankovich discussed future activities:
The staff would like to visit some plants that haven't been surveyed The protocol would be modified to cover certain areas which before.
need closer attention. The staff would like to revisit some plants to determine how much progress has been made.
The staff will continue to monitor industry initiatives. One possibil-ity is to participate in the INP0 plant evaluation to see h how mainte-nance is being reviewed and see what recommendations are made by INPD The staff would like to study and see if any benefit can team member.
be obtained from the experience that the Federal Aviation Authority has developed over the years.
r
. Minutes / Maintenances 12 and Procedures August 13, 1986 Meeting Mr. Michelson questioned how the utilities look at their own experience D
Mr. Cwalina noted that as part of the Phase 2 visits in maintenance.
they want to look at root cause analysis.
Part of this will be self-evaluations.
Mr. Michelson asked about commnn mode maintenance where a mechanic fixes a number of common things incorrectly. Mr. Cwalina indicated that they weren't specifically looking at this aspect.
Mr. Jankovich noted the staff is thinking about issuing a draft policy statement on maintenance. This would be issued about next June.
Mr. Michelson suggested that some time in the future the staff should see if there is any correlation between those plants that have good maintenance and the use of aptitude tests at those plants.
The meeting was adjourned at 4:45 p.m.
NOTE:
A transcript of the meeting is available in the NRC Public Document Room, 1717 H Street, N.W., Washington, D. C. or can be purchased from ACE-Federal Reporters, 44 N. Capitol Street, Washington, JD. C. 20001(202)347-3700.
NNdM_._
- -q R
3*; ;,cdC.... [h%y,;.kGF@%Q y JIMOMWr.
? e g4 -
~
I w.ms c
J.
{
Federal Register ] Vol. 81. N'c.144'/ Mtinday, id M f
.. s m -.,:
g i
R
.f.
.,.c (DECO ot -a==h= 18eJeb48 b Subcommittee wiB mytew the~
Operstlesh===
.?>'
i NeSonal Endowment on the Arta report on Phase I of Matatenance -
.V..
authorisapperstimmeltha2semb8 4 facDity. The facility is a heGius unutuei Program Plan.
s Muele Adyteory Penel; Meeting Oral statements may be presented by fanclar andislocatedls%uisde i
Pursuant to s'ectiorito(a)(2) of the members of the pub!!c with the :.J -
Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub.
concurrenca of the Submmmittee. ' :. County Michigan.,,4 gg4,e
'
- Am==a-8 M, Md -
1
- 1.32-463). es amended, notice is hereby Chairman; written statement willbe ',
b ~' ~ --
h Nr+.-
scepted and made available to the
's Identa[a'mrim of eJWposesf Amides given that a meeting of the Music Committee. Recordings will be permitted Advisory Panel (Chamber Music /New Music Presenters Section) to the only during those portions of the
. De==@ wedd diow, hra '"
i National Council on the Arts will be meeting when a transcript is be kept' lied pe agle pendmece d and questions may be asked only y.
the containsment to have two isolation
(
held on August 13-14,1986 from 9-00 members of the Subcommittee,its valves ostside containment rather than o.m.-640 p.m. in room 730 of the Nancy consultants, and Staff. Person destring one valve inside and one vetee outelde Hanks Center,1100 Pennsylvania to make oral statements should notify as requimd by Geners! Design Criterion Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20506.
the ACRS staff member named below as (CDC) 34 of Appendix A to toCHt Part his meeting is for the purpose of far in advance as is practicable no that 50.This exemption would extend only ~
Panel review, discussion, evaluation, appropriate arrangements een be made.. unth b dedded nfudhg outage.
and neommendation on applications for During 6e inWal poruon M ee The exemption is in accordance with the me th Me e
licensee's request dated December 31 financial assistance under the National Foundation on the Arts and the n..^
Humamties Act of1965, as amended' present, may exchange pubminary 1
hNeedfor & PrqposedAction including discussion of information views regarding matters to be sidered during the balance of the
%e exemptionis aseded to pennit s
gran app cants rd ce with the
& SubcommitteeN then hear p'
determination of the Chairman at e
published in the Federal Register of presentations by and hold discussions ths t p
February 13,1980, these sessions will be with representatives of the NRC Staff, facility by about the end of July 19e8.
closed to the public pursuant to its consultants, and other interested However, the time required to design, subsections (c)(4), (e) and (9)(B) of persons regarding this review.
prae and batall se bug-term Further information regarding topics modifications required to achieve section 552b of 71tle 5, United States to be discussed, whether the meeting compliance with GDC 56,would extend Code.
has been cancelled or rescheduled.the past the estimated restart date.
Further information with reference to Chairman's ruling on requests for the Enrimunenfalimpact of the Fmposed i
1*
this meeting can be obtained from Mr.
opportunity to present oral statements Action John H. Clark, Advisory Committee and the time allotted therefor can be b increment of environmental Management Officer, National obtained by a prepaid telephone call to Endowment forthe Arts. Washington, the cognizant ACRS staff member,Mr.
Impact is related to the potentially DC 20506, or call (202) 682-5433, Herman Alderman (telephone 202/634--
Increased consequences of the leakage l
John it. C2 ark.
1414) between 8:15 A.M. and 520 P.M.grom the containment to the atmosphere Persons planning to attend this meetin8 in the event of an accident which
((P' are urged to contact the above named damaged the fool and preseurized the
- "8'
[j#g,,'j f
Individual one or two days before the containment. However, the applicable 1 4 22, tees.
scheduled meeting to be advised of any seguirements for isolation valves on (FR Doc. so-teest Fhd 7-25-es; ec4s am) changes in schedule, etc., which may lines penetrating containment require two valves on these lines: 1.e., one valve
- caos rest.eus have occurred.
Inside and one valve outside Dated: July 22 tesis.
containment.he licensee has NUCLEAR REGULATORY hoorton W. thrking.
committed to modify its existing design Assis tant Executire Duretor for Project to comply with this requirement at the MISSION Jter/ew first scheduled refueling outage.ne Advisory Committee on Reaction p1 Doc. es.teser Fi!sd 7-25-ee; aces am) environmentalimpact,if any,would occur only during this interim period;
== i== coot riso.eus Safeguards Subcomrnittee on Malntenance Practices and 1.e., within 1% to 2 years from the present. For this interim period, the Procedures Meeung (DocketNo.86 3411 licensee has proposed a modification which consists of two automatic valves
%e ACRS Subcommittee on Detrott Edison Co., Wolverine Power outside containment whidi an actuated Maintenance Practicas and Procedures Suppty Cooperettve,Inc.,
by diverse signals.%ese valves were will hold a meeting on August 13,1980, Enytronmental Asseamont and procured and installed to quality Room 1046,1717 H Stnet NW.,
Finding of No Significant lenpact assurance criteria for safety-related Washington. DC. -
%e U.S. Nuclear Regulatory components, are installed in accordance b entire meetmg will be open to with selsmic Category I criteria and will ptblic sitendance.
Commission (the Commission)is be closed by springs in the event of loss
%e agenda for the subject meeting considering tssuance of an exemption from the requirements of General Design of power. Based on these considerations, the NRC staff has shall be as follows:
Wedneedoy, August 13.1985--220 P.Af.
[ Criterion 56 of Appendix A to 10 CFR determined that the proposed interim Part 50 to the Detroit Edison Company unt/lthe conclus/on of business 4
ATTAONENT B TENTATIVE SCHEDULE MAINTENANCE PRACTICES AND PROCEDURES SUBCOMMITTEE 1:00 p.m., August 13, 1986 Room 1046, Washington, D. C.
1 1:00 p.m.
Introductory Remarks - Subcommittee Chairman 1:15 p.m.
Introduction - Phase I 1:45 p.m.
Site visits and Resident Inspectors questionnaires 2:45 p.m.
Data Bank BREAK 3:15 p.m.
3:30 p.m.
Wrong unit - wrong train 4:00 p.m.
Projects without full coverage 4:30 Subcommittee discussion 4:45 p.m.
ADJOURN l
,y y.-m_
,-9_,w,
,.--.,,,m
.-rs__,-,,
.-m----y,,.___.-....,%,_
p,-
a.-.
S AND PROCEDURES ATAAOthi C
.o.
MMITTEE MEETING ON >LUNTINANCE PRACTICE 3
~ ~ ~
iUBCO C.
II St. NN., Washington, D.
Room IQ46, 1717 ICli August 13, 1986 ATTENDANCE LIST AFFILIATION iSE PRINT:
IX4 /a n Fl~
NAME (ices
( a ud.m A)/i'/C / D N FT P. 4' talk'o V'/CE-vet fo~r;-
~
[Je4F/
J ni A'fl/DW7 hitm 1/ c.. a :.
t.. G e e >ii c e Beux-a N 4 A / h u r -r Af/2/2 !d//II!MS LE To rn a-f
/
t
_ (Tf2 bY [i\\tL6l{ l/ A >
m E
L 1
L w
w h
m
l ATTACHMENT D HANDOUTS 1.
Maintenance Survey Methodology 2.
Questionnaire Survey Observations 3.
Site Survey Observations 4.
Maintenance Measures " Trends and Patterns" 5.
Wrong Unit / Wrong Train 6.
Conclusions