ML20245C730

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Provides Status of Backlog Reduction.Actions Taken Over Recent Months to Reduce Work Backlog Listed.Related Info Encl
ML20245C730
Person / Time
Site: Pilgrim
Issue date: 03/01/1987
From: Bird R
BOSTON EDISON CO.
To: Murley T
NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I)
Shared Package
ML20245C721 List:
References
FOIA-87-650 87-042, 87-42, NUDOCS 8711030483
Download: ML20245C730 (10)
v • d • e


Text

{{#Wiki_filter:. _ - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - - n ~. . 

  ..   ~

BOSTON EDISON Executie offices 800 Boylston Street < Boston, Massachusetts 02199  ! March 1, 1987 Ralph G. Bird - 

                                                                              .BECo Ltr. #87-042                             l sen.or vice Presu$ent - Nuclear                                                                                    ]

Dr. Thomas E. Murley . Regional Administrator, Region I 

         <U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 631 Park Avenue K4ng of. Prussia, PA                                                                                               ]

19406 ' License.No. DPR'-35  ! Docket No. 50-293- j

Dear Dr. hurley:

i This letter'provides'the status of our backlog reduction, an area in which you a have expressed particular interest. Details of our efforts are contained in 

         . our response to.NRC Letter 86-41, relevant parts of which are attached.,                                           ;

The project was begun in.the. third quarter of 1986. At that time, our work '! control system had been better defined and planners had been assigned to each section in The. Nuclear Operations Department. We were not satisfied.with our progress by the last quarter of-1986 and took

steps to improve our closure rate. He are still not satisfied. We have however, identified all previously open (prior to 9/1/86) items and have determined-that most will be closed prior to startup. The exceptions will include some maintenance items and those items requiring specific plant conditions for closure.

To improve.our progress in maintenance, we have over the past five months y increased contractor work force in the areas of management, supervision and craft by 165 personnel. Our objective is to reduce our incomplete maintenance 1 work to about the industry average before startup b M RF0 #7. He will report our progress in this area as part of our periodic upoate of issues summarized in NRC Letter 86-41. Actions we have taken over recent months to r' educe our work backlog include: 1

1. Established a maintenance planning function which has developed into centralized planning and scheduling. .

{ l l

2. Developed weekly planning and coordinating maintenance meetings to '

address station priorities.

3. Increased contractor work force in the area of management, supervision and craft to impact the current backlog.

x 

               '4.       Monitor the effectiveness of ongoing activities in controlling the N
                        . maintenance request inventory.

87110 0483 g71030 PDR DIA PDR sORgIs7-650 gp {

i 

             .                                                                                                                i s'     *
)

l, I'  : BOSTON EDISON COMPANY-

f. Dr. Thomas E. Hurley LL, March 1, 1987 Page Two If you have additional questions or concerns, please contact us, Very'truly yours, d
                                                        . G. Bird I

Attachments:

1. Issue 3.A.2 - Lielted Maintenance-Operations Interface
2. Issue 3.A.3 - Implementation of Maintenance Planning Group (Backlog Disposition) . )
3. Issue 6.A.1 - Continuing Heaknesses in Following Up Problems
4. Issue 6.A 3 - Termination of the Use of Long-Term Compensatory Measures 5.-Issue 7 A 3 - Prioritization of Fire Protection Maintenance cc: Senior Resident Inspector Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station

( i

l 

                                                 ,=      .

IS5UE~ 3.A,2 Limited Maintenance - Operation Interface PROBLEM The weaknesses were inconsistent prioritization of work by different operational shifts, and actual repair status was not always provided by 

                          ' maintenance to operations. Additionally, communication of actual repair status between operational' shifts was deficient.

The analysis of this problem indicated that: a) prioritization of Maintenance Requeste (MR's) must' stress an integrated approach to address the station's needs.'b) implementation of the prioritized work 11st must_be properly - coordinated to ensure that station resources are used efficiently, and c) better communications between all sectioqs was needed. 

                                           .             ACTION              ,                     STATUS
1) Attend industry conference on 1) Complete - September 1985.

this_ subject. Maintenance Manager. Operations Manager, and Chief Operating Engineer attended.

2) Establish a method to prioritize 2) Complete - Neekly planning NR'.s and inform affected depart- meetings are held by maint-ments of results, enance to review and address station needs. All sections and groups are involved. A feedback method ensures,the l
                                   +                                              -

originator is informed if his MR will not be worked. '

3) Establish method for implementation. 3) Complete - The plan-of-the-day identifies work prioritization for all disciplines related to i the approved schedule. lit is reviewed and updated twice daily. All sections'and
                                               ,                                          groups are routinely represented at the daily and weekly swetings.

i i I

ISSUE i 3. A . 3 ' ~ICplementa' tion of Maintenance Planning Group (Backlog Disposttlon) 1 PROBLEM
                            'A la'rge backlog of open Maintenance Requests (MRs) existed.. dating back to                  !

1980. ~ Lack of adequate control was the root cause for the backlog. The ' 

                            . course of action to address the. root cause was to estabitsh a centralized planning and scheduling function within the Maintenance. Group to provide the necessary control.. The objectives of this function are:

i i 1). Provide MR . status by maintaining a clear picture of station material condition through accurate physical control of work requests for the maintenance disciplines.

2) Achieve more effective supervisory involvement in ongoing maintenance by providing effective planning and scheduling of work activities.
3) Increase maintenance efficiency by improving coordination of work activities between the various disciplines.

BECo is not satisfied with progress toward. elimination of the work backlog. l The root causes for the slow progress to date are:

1) . Larger.than-' anticipated' effort required'in review and disposition of MR backlog.
                                   '2)     Incorrect MRs entered into the database which made accurate status             i
                                       . hard to find.                             .
3) Delays in developing specific . instructions / guidelines for the conduct -
e of operations of the planning and scheduling function, including interfate with other groups.
4) Staffing problems discussed in Issue 3.A.I. ,
5) Heavy normal day to' day workload caused insufficient attention to the backlog.

ACTION- STATUS

1) Estabitshed the maintenance 1) In November 1985, the planning function. maintenance planning function was estabilshed with existing personnel from the individual disciplines. Also planning support was assigned full time to this effort. In December 1985, these individuals provided their initial effort when they prepared the plans and schedule for their first mini-outage. i l

ISSUE 3'. A . 3 ( Con t ' d ) implementation of Maintenance Planning Group (Backlog l Disposition) l l

2) Centralize planning 2) In March 1986, the single 1 4 and scheduling activities, maintenance planning area was established and the individual discipline planning i functions were relocated. In July 1986, completed the centralization (control) of the maintenance requests within this area. ,
             .3)        Develop a weekly planning                                                                             3) In April 1986, the weekly I                        and scheduling effort                                                                                    discipline work schedule was for the routine maintenance                                                                       -

formalized. In May 1986, the activities. first task-ready package was implemented using the mainten- o ance planning concept. <

4) Correct the data contained in the 4) In July 1986, the administrative control of the MR. centralization of the mainten-ance requests was completed.

In September 1986, the 1980-1982 MRs were validated and the 1983-1986 NRs were inventoried.

5) Coordina.te thi maintenance 5) In July 1986, the weekly activities between the ,

maintenance planning and various disciplines, scheduling meeting was established (it included Operations. Health Physics, and Quality Control). In January 1987, the weekly meeting sequence was reformatted to include any group's input (e.g. Fire Protection, Security, ALARA, OHG, etc) and also provided a feedback of actual status of the previous week's scheduling.

6) Implement a new maintenance 6) This document is in progress manual to provide guidanca and is expected to be issued . . ,

for the conduct of the in March 1987. planning and scheduling effort. c l l

1 ISSUE 3.A.3 (Cont'd) Implementation of Maintenance Planning p Group-(Backlog Disposition). l 1 L

7) Improve the rate of reduction 7) Increased the contractor work  !

of the outstanding maintenance force (including engineers, backlog. supervisors and craft). I Presently there are l approximately 165 additional teaporary personnel supporting the maintenance backlog { efforts. In February 1987, ' the Maintenance Group was ] restructured to provide increased management attention to both outage-related j maintenance.and backlog. I 1 9 9 9 4 - '1... I l 

                                                                                                           .                            I L

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ 1

6

  • ISSUE 6.A.1 Continuing Weaknesses in Following Up on Problems i PR06LEM Inspection reports and BEco observations indicated weaknesses in the security l organization follow up on problems.

ACTION STATUS-1): Perform root cause analysis. 1) Completed. Root causes were insufficient supervision, staffing and procedural 

                                    ,,                                                 weaknesses.
                         ~2)~ BEco                                                2)
                                 . a)      Establis'h Security                         a) Completed December 2, 1986.

Operations Group.- b) Add one BECo Security Supervisor b) Completed February 2, 1987. 

                                        .per shift.
  ~

c) Add three staff positions to c) Recruiting / interviewing BEco security. in progress. 

  .                                d)      Review and update / revise          ..      d) In progress - 50% complete.

procedure and security force instructions.

3) CONTRACTED SECURITY FORCE 3) .

a) Estabitsh Security Operations a) Completed January 2,1987. Group. 

    ..-                            b). Add an Access Control Supervisor                b) Completed January 1987.

for each shift. c) Increase the total security force. c) Recruiting continues - 90%  ! complete. I l d) Reduce the supervisor to patrolman d) Completed January 1987. ratto from 1-20 to 1-10 or less. , 

                                                                                                                                                                   \

1 l l l

ISSUE 6.A.3 Termination of the Use of Long Term Compensatory Measures. Problem The use of long term compensatory measures. In place of an aggressive corrective action, response had been a weakness in the security program. ACTION STATUS

1) Conduct an evaluation of.the 1)' Complete. The results-continual uttilzation of- of this analysis indicated i compensatory measures. that the measures had been '

in effect due to hardware and procurement problems that were not aggressively resolved.

2) Increase management's 2) The security technical staff awareness _of the use of has initiated a tracking compensatory measures. mechanism to monitor the
                     .                                 compensatory measures in place; on a daily cir weekly basis, with reports generated weekly to                                      ,

management._ Special 

 ,                                                     compensatory measures problems are discussed in.the daily Nuclear Organization meetings'.

Any compensatory measure in existence for greater than 30 , days is discussed with the responsible individual and required resolutions are promptly planned and scheduled, j

3. "Pe'rform a system level 3) Complete. The results requirements analysis with of this study were combined '

respect to the entire security with a physical inspection plan and identify specific of the entire security l Improvements, hardware system. The I details of the proposed j l improvements and the  ! conceptual design of the  ; hardware system have been , previously discussed with L the NRC Region I and NRR/ 1 NHSS personnel on January 13-15, 1987. .

i 

         <    ISSUE 6. A'. 3 (Cont'd) . Termination of the Use of Long1Tero' Compensatory Measures.
                                                                                          )

ACTION STATUS -l g s In' summary, the specific { design packages which are being implemented include: Protected area fence planned completion before startup. Perimeter CCTV- 

                                                   . planned completion before startup.

Perimeter intrusion planned completion before startup. Perimeter lighting system construction in progress.. Securtty. gate house conceptual design in progress.- e Security computer replacement. procurement specification has been written. Implement in late 1989. '(Attempting to accelerate this completion.) After the major modifications are installed, an effective. preventive maintenance program will be established to prevent a recurrence of this situation. l u I i 

                                                                                               /

a . . . ISSUE 7. A. 3. Prioritization of Fire Protection' Maintenance l 

                             . PROBLEM .                                                                                              l Fire Protection (FP) system maintenance and repair was not being:

performed in a. timely fashion. Compensatory measures, especially fire watches, were substituted for degraded fire protection system components. ACTION STATUS 

                             ' 1) Centra 11ze' fire protection function                  1) Completed December 1986.

at site through establishment of new , group leader.posttion. j i

2) Establish means of assessing 2) Status board developed in l fire. protection system January, 1987 and maintained .l
                                   . operability status.                                     under new FP Group Leader as an         -{
  • aid in verifying compliance with FP regulations. A similar status board will be provided in the Control Room Area for plant operators.
3) Establish prioritization meetings 3) Neekly meetings established.

between FP and maintenance. {

4) Reduce reliance on compensatory 4) In progress, measures.

l l a) Inoperative systems requiring U 

  .. .                              ..                                                            compensatory measures receive review daily, are assigned a priority level and incorporated into the plan-of-the' day.

Compensatory measures work items receive top priority at weekly meetings. b) Established fire watch compensatory measures action items report to assign ownership of problem resolutions. 5). Assess program effectiveness. 5) Assessment in a fornialized I monthly report for upper  ! management. ____._---_a___---m_._m. ___m___. _ _}}

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML20245C730&oldid=3169945"