ML20236J812
| ML20236J812 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Farley  |
| Issue date: | 06/29/1998 |
| From: | NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20236J811 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-348-98-99, 50-364-98-99, NUDOCS 9807090017 | |
| Download: ML20236J812 (5) | |
See also: IR 05000348/1998099
Text
- _ _ _ _
- _ - _ _ _ - - - __- _ -
_
.
f
SYSTEMATIC ASSESSMENT OF LICENSEE PERFORMANCE REPORT
FARLEY NUCLEAR PLANT
50-348/98-99 AND 50-364/98-99
I. Background-
The SALP. Board convened on June 15. 1998 to assess the nuclear safety
performance-of the Farley Nucleai Plant for the period November 24, 1996
through May 30, 1998. The Board was conducted in accordance with
Management Directive 8.6. " Systematic Assessment of Licensee
Performance." -Board members were B. S. Mallett (Board Chairperson).
Deputy Director. Division of Reactor Safety: L. R. Plisco. Director,
r
'
Division of Reactor Projects; and H. N. Berkow. Director Project
Directorate II-2. Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation. This assessment
was reviewed and approved by the Regional Administrator.
II. Plant Operations
.This functional area assesses the control and execution of activities I
directly related to operating the plant. It includes activities such as
plant startup. power operation. )lant shutdown, and system lineups.
! Thus. it includes activities suc1 as monitoring and logging plant
, conditions, normal operations, response to transient and off-normal
! conditions. adequacy and implementation of emergency operating
, procedures and abnormal operating procedures, manipulating the reactor
l and auxiliary controls, and control room professionalism. It includes
! initial and requalification training of licensed operators.
!
,
Overall performance in the Plant Operations area remained superior
during t11s assessment period. Management involvement in all aspects of
. plant operations was-evident. Plant performance was characterized by
stable plant operations with no automatic trips or significant
transients. Operational decisions by management and operators were
conservative and focused on safety.-
l Control room operators continued to control and execute operations
- activities in a professional manner. Operator attentiveness and
response to alarms and abnormal conditions was exemplary. Operator i
!
response to equipment problems and plant transients was prompt and ;
effective. Defueling and refueling activities were well controlled. '
Operators were experienced and knowledgeable of plant equipment. The
licensed operator requalification training was effective. However, a
decline in the licensed operator initial training program was noted
early in the assessment period.
Personnel errors related to system configuration were identified as a
challenge during~ the previous assessment. Management has implemented
initiatives to address this issue and the significance of the errors
decreased during-this assessment period. Occasional examples of
inattention-to-detail. personnel errors, and failure to follow
Enclosure
'
9007090017 990629 *
gDR ADOCK 05000348 3
PDR .
j
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ - _ _ _ _ _
,
l
.
l
2
procedures have continued. This inattention was also noted in non-
licensed operators not consistently identifying degraded plant )
conditions during routine plant tours. 1
The corrective action orogram was effective in identifying and resolving
problems. Root cause evaluations were thorough, timely, and accurate.
Operations self-assessment activities were comprehensive. The site
audit program conducted by the Safety Audit and Engineering Review group
provided excellent anj detailed analysis and trending of plant issues. )1
The Plant Operations area is rated Category 1. I
i
i
III. MAINTENANCE l
l
This functional area assesses activities associated with either l
diagnostic, predictive, preventive, or corrective maintenance of plant I
structures, systems, and components, or maintenance of the physical
condition of the plant: and training of the maintenance staff. It also
includes the conduct of surveillance testing, inservice inspection and
testing, instrument calibrations, equipment operability testing post- l
maintenance testing, post-outage testing. containment leak rate testing
and special testing.
Maintenance performance continued to improve, reach'ing the superior
level during the latter part of the assessment period. Maintenance and
surveillance testing activities were generally conducted in a thorough
and competent manner by qualified individuals in accordance with plant
procedures and work instructions. This was demonstrated by reduced
equipment failures and increased reliability of safety-related systems.
Improvement in the balance-of-plant equipment and emergency diesel
generator availability was noteworthy and was reflected in plant
operating performance during this assessment period.
Strong management support and involvement continued during in the
planning and conduct of maintenance activities. This involvement was
demonstrated throughout the two refueling outages that involved a
significant maintenance effort on steam generator tube
inspections / repairs and plant upgrades on Unit 2 in preparation for l
power uprate. 1
The large number of maintenance and surveillance activities conducted
were well planned and executed in accordance with requirements by
skilled and knowledgeable personnel. While procedural and personnel
errors declined during this period, the licensee continued to be
challenged by minor errors involving the failure to follow procedural
guidance, procedural deficiencies, and inattention-to-detail by
maintenance workers. In addition, several examples of maintenance and
test ecuipment being calibrated without procedural guidance or control
were icentified late in the assessment period. 4
!
Enclosure
i
_ - - - _ - - - - - - - - - J
,
..
.
3
Inservice inspection and steam generator augmented inspection activities
were well planned and conducted in accordance with requirements. The
Maintenance Rule Program was effectively implemented to keep equipment
and system performance relatively free of operational problems.
Plant material condition was good with reliable operation of Units 1 and
2. There were isolated systems where the condition was not maintained as
well, which led to leaks or operational challenges.
Self-assessment and audit activities were a strength. Site staff and
management contributed to idenfication and correction of deficiencies
in a timely and thorough manner.
The Maintenance area is rated Category 1.
IV. ENGINEERING
This functional area assesses the adequacy of technical and engineering
support for plant activities. It includes activities associated with
design control; the design, installation, and testing of plant
modifications; engineering and technical support for operations.
outages, maintenance, testing. surveillance and procurement:
configuration management; training of the engineering staff; and support
for licensing activities.
Engineering support to plant operations continued at a superior level of
performance. Evaluations in response to requests and emergent issues
were thorough and timely in most cases. Engineering staff and managers
interfaced well to effect controlled testing evolutions. The backlog of
plant modifications and requested analyses was maintained with a short
turnaround time because of focused management attention.
Engineering and technical support to maintenance activities improved
performance of plant ecuipment and systems. Problems noted with
communications and vencor oversight during the last assessment period
were not noted this assessment period. Management and staff were
proactive in utilizing risk insights to guide monitoring of systems and
components and to guide the performance of on-line maintenance. The
self-initiated safety system assessments were thorough and effective in
identifying areas where equipment and system performance could be
improved. One isolated exception to this thoroughness was noted in the
review of the auxiliary feedwater and component cooling water systems.
Efforts to reverify the Final Safety Analysis Report were aggressive and
resulted in identification and resolution of design and as-built
discrepancies. In general, calculations and other analyses used to
support plant modifications and design were technically sound with some
exceptions noted in those generated for the auxiliary feedwater and
l Enclosure
(
___
___-__ ____-____ _ __ -
s
.
, 4
component cooling water systems. The Configuration Control Board was
effective in controlling design changes.
Engineering design of some equipment and systems testing programs was
l
not thorough. Inattention to acceptance criteria and test objectives
caused some instances where the equipment or system function was not
fully tested.
Self-assessments to improve performance within the engineering
organization were good in identifying problems. Managers and staff were
proactive in taking corrective actions for plant equipment and system l
problems.
Licensing submittals were of good quality and technically sound.
Problems noted with timeliness durin'g the previous assessment period
improved.
The Engineering Area is rated Category 1.
V. PLANT SUPPORT
This functional area assesses activities related to the plant support
function, including radiological controls, emergency preparedness,
security, chemistry, and fire protection. It also includes activities
- associated with occupational radiation safety; radioactive waste
management; radiological effluent control and monitoring: transportation
'
of radioactive materials; licensee performance during emergency
preparedness exercises and actual events that test emergency plans;
emergency plan notifications: interactions with onsite and offsite
emergency response organizations during exercises and actual events:
safeguards measures that protect plant equipment, including physical
security, fitness for duty, access authorization, and control of special
nuclear material: housekeeping controls; and training of staff.
With the exception of procedural adherence and attention to the conduct
of some radiological activities, radiological controls were normally
well focused. Management and staff continued to be effective in
reducing individual and collective radiation dose from that noted in
previous assessments. Area postings, pre-job briefs and health physics I
and other worker interfaces were key contributors to minimizing '
radiation exposure during outages and repair work. Through continued
management and staff attention, radioactive liquid effluent releases
l remained at levels well below regulatory limits. A low number of
personnel contaminations was the result of focused efforts to reduce
contaminated areas and make more areas accessible for routine
operations. -Inadequate procedural adherence and inattention to the
conduct of radiological activities by staff in several plant
organizations continued during this assessment period.
Enclosure
L_-__-___-______ ._ _ _ _J
.
.
.
5
Performance during emergency preparedness exercises, drills, and actual
events indicated a well-qualified emergency response organization. The
program for maintaining ecuipment, procedures and facilities was
aggressive, which resultec in outstanding readiness to support
emergencies.
Day-to-day activities in the security area were conducted with excellent
attention to physical protection-of vital plant equipment. Attention to
searches for materials entering the protected area improved from the
performance noted during the previous assessment period. Management and
staff performance in identifying and responding to problems resulted in
few longstanding equipment problems.
Self-assessments and corrective actions for identified problems were
thorough in emergency preparedness and security. Comprehensive tracking
and followup resulted in the elimination of recurrent problems.
Performance in implementation of the fire protection program improved,
in some areas, from that noted during the previous assessment )eriod.
The fire watch program was administered with good controls. T1e on-
shift brigade demonstrated effective fire-fighting techniques during
drills. The fire prevention program was good with some continued
instances of inadequate controls of barriers and o)en flame permits.
Plant operational problems continued to be caused )y inadequate
maintenance and material condition of the fire protection equipment and
systems.
Increased management and staff attention after refueling outages
resulted in improved housekeeping performance from that noted during the
previous assessment period. In some areas of the plant, housekeeping
controls were not as effective in keeping the area free of debris.
The Plant Support area is rated Category 2.
1
Enclosure l
l
_ _ __________ - __ _