IR 05000321/2015004: Difference between revisions
StriderTol (talk | contribs) (Created page by program invented by StriderTol) |
StriderTol (talk | contribs) (Created page by program invented by StriderTol) |
||
| (3 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 18: | Line 18: | ||
=Text= | =Text= | ||
{{#Wiki_filter: | {{#Wiki_filter:UNITED STATES ary 22, 2016 | ||
==SUBJECT:== | ==SUBJECT:== | ||
| Line 24: | Line 24: | ||
==Dear Mr. Vineyard:== | ==Dear Mr. Vineyard:== | ||
On December 31, 2015, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) completed an inspection at your Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant Units 1 and 2. On January 12, 2016, the NRC inspectors discussed the results of this inspection with you and other members of your staff | On December 31, 2015, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) completed an inspection at your Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant Units 1 and 2. On January 12, 2016, the NRC inspectors discussed the results of this inspection with you and other members of your staff. | ||
In accordance with Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations 2.390, | Inspectors documented the results of this inspection in the enclosed inspection report. The NRC inspectors did not identify any findings or violations of more than minor significance. | ||
In accordance with Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations 2.390, Public Inspections, Exemptions, Requests for Withholding, of the NRC's "Rules of Practice," a copy of this letter, its enclosure, and your response (if any) will be available electronically for public inspection in the NRCs Public Document Room or from the Publicly Available Records (PARS) component of the NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS). ADAMS is accessible from the NRC Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html (the Public Electronic Reading Room). | |||
Sincerely, | Sincerely, | ||
/RA/ | /RA/ | ||
Shane Sandal, Chief Reactor Projects Branch 2 | Shane Sandal, Chief Reactor Projects Branch 2 Division of Reactor Projects Docket Nos.: 50-321, 50-366 License Nos.: DPR-57 and NPF-5 | ||
Division of Reactor Projects Docket Nos.: 50-321, 50-366 License Nos.: DPR-57 and NPF-5 | |||
===Enclosures:=== | ===Enclosures:=== | ||
Inspection Report 05000321/2015004, 05000366/2015004 w/Attachment: Supplementary Information | Inspection Report 05000321/2015004, 05000366/2015004 w/Attachment: Supplementary Information | ||
REGION II== | REGION II== | ||
Docket Nos.: 50-321, 50-366 License Nos.: DPR-57 and NPF-5 Report Nos.: 05000321/2015004 and 05000366/2015004 Licensee: Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Inc. | |||
Facility: Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant Location: Baxley, Georgia 31513 Dates: October 1 - December 31, 2015 Inspectors: D. Hardage, Senior Resident Inspector D. Retterer, Resident Inspector B. Caballero, Senior Operations Examiner, (Section 1R11) | |||
Approved by: Shane Sandal, Chief Reactor Projects Branch 2 Division of Reactor Projects Enclosure | |||
=SUMMARY= | |||
IR 05000321/2015004; and 05000366/2015004, October 1, 2015, through December 31, 2015; | |||
Edwin I. Hatch, Units 1 and 2; Integrated Report. | |||
This report covers a 3-month period of inspection by resident inspectors. No findings were identified during this inspection period. The | This report covers a 3-month period of inspection by resident inspectors. No findings were identified during this inspection period. The NRCs program for overseeing the safe operations of commercial nuclear power reactors is described in NUREG-1649, Reactor Oversight Process, Revision 5. Documents reviewed not listed in the Report Details are listed in the List of Documents Reviewed section of the Attachment. | ||
=REPORT DETAILS= | =REPORT DETAILS= | ||
| Line 71: | Line 59: | ||
==REACTOR SAFETY== | ==REACTOR SAFETY== | ||
Cornerstones: | Cornerstones: Initiating Events, Mitigating Systems, and Barrier Integrity {{a|1R01}} | ||
{{a|1R01}} | |||
==1R01 Adverse Weather Protection== | ==1R01 Adverse Weather Protection== | ||
{{IP sample|IP=IP 71111.01}} | {{IP sample|IP=IP 71111.01}} | ||
====a. Inspection Scope==== | ====a. Inspection Scope==== | ||
Seasonal Extreme Weather Conditions: | Seasonal Extreme Weather Conditions: The inspectors conducted a detailed review of the stations adverse weather procedures written for extreme low temperatures. The inspectors verified that weather-related equipment deficiencies identified during the previous year had been placed into the work control process and/or corrected before the onset of seasonal extremes. The inspectors evaluated the licensees implementation of adverse weather preparation procedures and compensatory measures before the onset of seasonal extreme weather conditions. The inspectors evaluated the following risk-significant systems: | ||
* Plant Service Water | * Plant Service Water | ||
* Diesel Emergency Power | * Diesel Emergency Power | ||
====b. Findings==== | ====b. Findings==== | ||
No findings were identified. | No findings were identified. {{a|1R04}} | ||
{{a|1R04}} | |||
==1R04 Equipment Alignment== | ==1R04 Equipment Alignment== | ||
{{IP sample|IP=IP 71111.04}} | {{IP sample|IP=IP 71111.04}} | ||
====a. Inspection Scope==== | ====a. Inspection Scope==== | ||
Partial Walkdown: | Partial Walkdown: The inspectors verified that critical portions of the following systems or trains were correctly aligned by performing partial walkdowns. The inspectors selected systems for assessment because they were a redundant or backup system or train, were important for mitigating risk for the current plant conditions, had been recently realigned, or were a single-train system. The inspectors determined the correct system lineup by reviewing plant procedures and drawings. | ||
* Unit 1 A train of RHR system after being recently realigned due to C RHR Pump Outage, October 16, 2015 | |||
lineup by reviewing plant procedures and drawings. | |||
* Unit 1 | |||
* Unit 1 EDG HVAC system after recent maintenance of system louvers, October 23, 2015 | * Unit 1 EDG HVAC system after recent maintenance of system louvers, October 23, 2015 | ||
* Unit 1 | * Unit 1 B EDG aligned to Unit 1 while the Unit 1 A EDG was out of service for maintenance, November 3, 2015 | ||
* Unit 2 RCIC system while HPCI was out of service for maintenance, November 12, 2015 | * Unit 2 RCIC system while HPCI was out of service for maintenance, November 12, 2015 | ||
====b. Findings==== | ====b. Findings==== | ||
No findings were identified. | No findings were identified. {{a|1R05}} | ||
{{a|1R05}} | |||
==1R05 Fire Protection== | ==1R05 Fire Protection== | ||
{{IP sample|IP=IP 71111.05AQ}} | {{IP sample|IP=IP 71111.05AQ}} | ||
====a. Inspection Scope==== | ====a. Inspection Scope==== | ||
Quarterly Inspection: | Quarterly Inspection: The inspectors evaluated the adequacy of selected fire plans by comparing the fire plans to the defined hazards and defense-in-depth features specified in the fire protection program. In evaluating the fire plans, the inspectors assessed the following attributes. | ||
* control of transient combustibles and ignition sources | * control of transient combustibles and ignition sources | ||
* fire detection systems | * fire detection systems | ||
| Line 111: | Line 94: | ||
* passive fire protection features | * passive fire protection features | ||
* compensatory measures and fire watches | * compensatory measures and fire watches | ||
* issues related to fire protection contained in the | * issues related to fire protection contained in the licensees corrective action program The inspectors toured the following four fire areas to assess material condition and operational status of fire protection equipment. | ||
* Unit 2, diesel generator area, fire zone 2401/2402/2403/2405/2406/2407 | * Unit 2, diesel generator area, fire zone 2401/2402/2403/2405/2406/2407 | ||
* Unit 1, diesel generator building switchgear rooms, fire zones 1404/1408/1412 | * Unit 1, diesel generator building switchgear rooms, fire zones 1404/1408/1412 | ||
| Line 118: | Line 101: | ||
====b. Findings==== | ====b. Findings==== | ||
No findings were identified. | No findings were identified. {{a|1R06}} | ||
{{a|1R06}} | |||
==1R06 Flood Protection Measures== | ==1R06 Flood Protection Measures== | ||
{{IP sample|IP=IP 71111.06}} | {{IP sample|IP=IP 71111.06}} | ||
====a. Inspection Scope==== | ====a. Inspection Scope==== | ||
Underground Cables: | Underground Cables: The inspectors reviewed related flood analysis documents and inspected the areas listed below containing cables whose failure could adversely impact risk-significant equipment. The inspector directly observed the condition of cables and cable support structures and, as applicable, verified that dewatering devices and drainage systems were functioning properly. In addition, the inspectors verified the licensee was identifying and properly addressing issues using the corrective action program. | ||
program. | |||
* Unit 1, PB1-BG and PB1-BW | * Unit 1, PB1-BG and PB1-BW | ||
====b. Findings==== | ====b. Findings==== | ||
No findings were identified. | No findings were identified. {{a|1R11}} | ||
{{a|1R11}} | |||
==1R11 Licensed Operator Requalification Program and Licensed Operator Performance== | ==1R11 Licensed Operator Requalification Program and Licensed Operator Performance== | ||
{{IP sample|IP=IP 71111.11}} | |||
====a. Inspection Scope==== | ====a. Inspection Scope==== | ||
Resident Inspector Quarterly Review of Licensed Operator Requalification: | Resident Inspector Quarterly Review of Licensed Operator Requalification: On November 3, the inspectors observed a simulator scenario conducted for training of an operating crew for requalification. The inspectors assessed the following attributes. | ||
* licensed operator performance | * licensed operator performance | ||
* the ability of the licensee to administer the scenario and evaluate the operators | * the ability of the licensee to administer the scenario and evaluate the operators | ||
* the quality of the post-scenario critique | * the quality of the post-scenario critique | ||
* simulator performance Resident Inspector Quarterly Review (Licensed Operator Performance): | * simulator performance Resident Inspector Quarterly Review (Licensed Operator Performance): The inspectors observed licensed operator performance in the main control room during Unit 1 coastdown operations and traversing in-core probe system operation. The inspectors assessed the following attributes. | ||
* use of plant procedures | * use of plant procedures | ||
* control board manipulations | * control board manipulations | ||
| Line 148: | Line 126: | ||
* use of human error prevention techniques | * use of human error prevention techniques | ||
* documentation of activities | * documentation of activities | ||
* management and supervision Annual Review of Licensee Requalification Examination Results: | * management and supervision Annual Review of Licensee Requalification Examination Results: On October 13, 2015, the licensee completed administration of the annual requalification operating examinations, and on November 25, 2015, the licensee completed administration of the comprehensive biennial requalification written examinations, which are required to be administered to all licensed operators in accordance with Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations 55.59(a)(2), Requalification Requirements, of the NRCs Operators Licenses. The inspectors performed an in-office review of the overall pass/fail results of the individual operating examinations and the crew simulator operating examinations in accordance with Inspection Procedure (IP) 71111.11, Licensed Operator Requalification Program. These results were compared to the thresholds established in Section 3.02, Requalification Examination Results, of IP 71111.11. | ||
====b. Findings==== | ====b. Findings==== | ||
No findings were identified. | No findings were identified. {{a|1R12}} | ||
{{a|1R12}} | |||
==1R12 Maintenance Effectiveness== | ==1R12 Maintenance Effectiveness== | ||
{{IP sample|IP=IP 71111.12}} | {{IP sample|IP=IP 71111.12}} | ||
====a. Inspection Scope==== | ====a. Inspection Scope==== | ||
The inspectors assessed the | The inspectors assessed the licensees treatment of the two issues listed below to verify the licensee appropriately addressed equipment problems within the scope of the maintenance rule (10 CFR 50.65, Requirements for Monitoring the Effectiveness of Maintenance at Nuclear Power Plants). The inspectors reviewed procedures and records to evaluate the licensees identification, assessment, and characterization of the problems as well as their corrective actions for returning the equipment to a satisfactory condition. | ||
* Unit 2, 24 Volt Battery Charger 2C, Charger output failure | * Unit 2, 24 Volt Battery Charger 2C, Charger output failure | ||
* Unit 2, 1B PSW Discharge Check Valve, Check valve failed open | * Unit 2, 1B PSW Discharge Check Valve, Check valve failed open | ||
====b. Findings==== | ====b. Findings==== | ||
No findings were identified. | No findings were identified. {{a|1R13}} | ||
{{a|1R13}} | |||
==1R13 Maintenance Risk Assessments and Emergent Work Control== | ==1R13 Maintenance Risk Assessments and Emergent Work Control== | ||
{{IP sample|IP=IP 71111.13}} | {{IP sample|IP=IP 71111.13}} | ||
====a. Inspection Scope==== | ====a. Inspection Scope==== | ||
The inspectors reviewed the three maintenance activities listed below to verify that the licensee assessed and managed plant risk as required by 10 CFR 50.65(a)(4) and licensee procedures. The inspectors assessed the adequacy of the | The inspectors reviewed the three maintenance activities listed below to verify that the licensee assessed and managed plant risk as required by 10 CFR 50.65(a)(4) and licensee procedures. The inspectors assessed the adequacy of the licensees risk assessments and implementation of risk management actions. The inspectors also verified that the licensee was identifying and resolving problems with assessing and managing maintenance-related risk using the corrective action program. Additionally, for maintenance resulting from unforeseen situations, the inspectors assessed the effectiveness of the licensees planning and control of emergent work activities. | ||
* Unit 1, 10/6/2015,1C RHR Pump Outage and Maintenance | * Unit 1, 10/6/2015,1C RHR Pump Outage and Maintenance | ||
* Unit 1, 10/20/2015, HPCI System Outage and Maintenance | * Unit 1, 10/20/2015, HPCI System Outage and Maintenance | ||
| Line 174: | Line 150: | ||
====b. Findings==== | ====b. Findings==== | ||
No findings were identified. | No findings were identified. {{a|1R15}} | ||
{{a|1R15}} | |||
==1R15 Operability Determinations and Functionality Assessments== | ==1R15 Operability Determinations and Functionality Assessments== | ||
{{IP sample|IP=IP 71111.15}} | {{IP sample|IP=IP 71111.15}} | ||
====a. Inspection Scope==== | ====a. Inspection Scope==== | ||
The inspectors selected the five operability determinations or functionality evaluations listed below for review based on the risk-significance of the associated components and systems. The inspectors reviewed the technical adequacy of the determinations to ensure that technical specification operability was properly justified and the components or systems remained capable of performing their design functions. To verify whether components or systems were operable, the inspectors compared the operability and design criteria in the appropriate sections of the technical specification and updated final safety analysis report to the | The inspectors selected the five operability determinations or functionality evaluations listed below for review based on the risk-significance of the associated components and systems. The inspectors reviewed the technical adequacy of the determinations to ensure that technical specification operability was properly justified and the components or systems remained capable of performing their design functions. To verify whether components or systems were operable, the inspectors compared the operability and design criteria in the appropriate sections of the technical specification and updated final safety analysis report to the licensees evaluations. Where compensatory measures were required to maintain operability, the inspectors determined whether the measures in place would function as intended and were properly controlled. Additionally, the inspectors reviewed a sample of corrective action documents to verify the licensee was identifying and correcting any deficiencies associated with operability evaluations. | ||
* Unit 1, Nelson Pillows Installed Incorrectly, CR10125351 | * Unit 1, Nelson Pillows Installed Incorrectly, CR10125351 | ||
* Unit 2, Diesel Generator Battery Room Fan Non-Conformance, CR10135549 | * Unit 2, Diesel Generator Battery Room Fan Non-Conformance, CR10135549 | ||
| Line 188: | Line 163: | ||
====b. Findings==== | ====b. Findings==== | ||
No findings were identified. | No findings were identified. {{a|1R18}} | ||
{{a|1R18}} | |||
==1R18 Plant Modifications== | ==1R18 Plant Modifications== | ||
{{IP sample|IP=IP 71111.18}} | {{IP sample|IP=IP 71111.18}} | ||
| Line 198: | Line 172: | ||
====b. Findings==== | ====b. Findings==== | ||
No findings were identified. | No findings were identified. {{a|1R19}} | ||
{{a|1R19}} | |||
==1R19 Post-Maintenance Testing== | ==1R19 Post-Maintenance Testing== | ||
{{IP sample|IP=IP 71111.19}} | {{IP sample|IP=IP 71111.19}} | ||
| Line 209: | Line 182: | ||
* SNC715063, 2C EDG Loading Timer Failure, October 9, 2015 | * SNC715063, 2C EDG Loading Timer Failure, October 9, 2015 | ||
* SNC376671, 2T41F003B Disassemble and Inspect Damper Actuator, October 12, 2015 | * SNC376671, 2T41F003B Disassemble and Inspect Damper Actuator, October 12, 2015 | ||
* SNC337315, 1A EDG System Outage, | * SNC337315, 1A EDG System Outage, November 6, 2015 | ||
* SNC337049, 2C EDG System Outage, November 20, 2015 The inspectors evaluated these activities for the following attributes. | * SNC337049, 2C EDG System Outage, November 20, 2015 The inspectors evaluated these activities for the following attributes. | ||
* Acceptance criteria were clear and demonstrated operational readiness. | * Acceptance criteria were clear and demonstrated operational readiness. | ||
| Line 221: | Line 194: | ||
====b. Findings==== | ====b. Findings==== | ||
No findings were identified. | No findings were identified. {{a|1R22}} | ||
{{a|1R22}} | |||
==1R22 Surveillance Testing== | ==1R22 Surveillance Testing== | ||
{{IP sample|IP=IP 71111.22}} | {{IP sample|IP=IP 71111.22}} | ||
| Line 239: | Line 211: | ||
No findings were identified. | No findings were identified. | ||
===Cornerstone: | ===Cornerstone: Emergency Preparedness=== | ||
{{a|1EP6}} | {{a|1EP6}} | ||
==1EP6 Drill Evaluation== | ==1EP6 Drill Evaluation== | ||
| Line 245: | Line 217: | ||
====a. Inspection Scope==== | ====a. Inspection Scope==== | ||
The inspectors observed the emergency preparedness drill conducted on November 17, 2015. The inspectors observed licensee activities in the simulator and/or technical support center to evaluate implementation of the emergency plan, including event classification, notification, and protective action recommendations. The inspectors evaluated the | The inspectors observed the emergency preparedness drill conducted on November 17, 2015. The inspectors observed licensee activities in the simulator and/or technical support center to evaluate implementation of the emergency plan, including event classification, notification, and protective action recommendations. The inspectors evaluated the licensees performance against criteria established in the licensees procedures. Additionally, the inspectors attended the post-exercise critique to assess the licensees effectiveness in identifying emergency preparedness weaknesses and verified the identified weaknesses were entered in the corrective action program. | ||
====b. Findings==== | ====b. Findings==== | ||
| Line 256: | Line 228: | ||
====a. Inspection Scope==== | ====a. Inspection Scope==== | ||
The inspectors reviewed a sample of the performance indicator (PI) data, submitted by the licensee, for the Unit 1 and Unit 2 PIs listed below. The inspectors reviewed plant records compiled between October 2014 and October 2015 to verify the accuracy and completeness of the data reported for the station. The inspectors verified that the PI data complied with guidance contained in Nuclear Energy Institute 99-02, | The inspectors reviewed a sample of the performance indicator (PI) data, submitted by the licensee, for the Unit 1 and Unit 2 PIs listed below. The inspectors reviewed plant records compiled between October 2014 and October 2015 to verify the accuracy and completeness of the data reported for the station. The inspectors verified that the PI data complied with guidance contained in Nuclear Energy Institute 99-02, Regulatory Assessment Performance Indicator Guideline, and licensee procedures. The inspectors verified the accuracy of reported data that were used to calculate the value of each PI. | ||
In addition, the inspectors reviewed a sample of related corrective action documents to verify the licensee was identifying and correcting any deficiencies associated with PI data. | In addition, the inspectors reviewed a sample of related corrective action documents to verify the licensee was identifying and correcting any deficiencies associated with PI data. | ||
===Cornerstone: | ===Cornerstone: Mitigating Systems=== | ||
* safety system functional failures (Units 1 and 2) | * safety system functional failures (Units 1 and 2) | ||
* MSPI, heat removal system (Units 1 and 2) | * MSPI, heat removal system (Units 1 and 2) | ||
| Line 266: | Line 238: | ||
====b. Findings==== | ====b. Findings==== | ||
No findings were identified. | No findings were identified. {{a|4OA2}} | ||
{{a|4OA2}} | |||
==4OA2 Problem Identification and Resolution== | ==4OA2 Problem Identification and Resolution== | ||
{{IP sample|IP=IP 71152}} | {{IP sample|IP=IP 71152}} | ||
===.1 Routine Review=== | ===.1 Routine Review=== | ||
The inspectors screened items entered into the | The inspectors screened items entered into the licensees corrective action program in order to identify repetitive equipment failures or specific human performance issues for followup. The inspectors reviewed condition reports, attended screening meetings, or accessed the licensees computerized corrective action database. | ||
===.2 Semi-Annual Trend Review=== | ===.2 Semi-Annual Trend Review=== | ||
====a. Inspection Scope==== | ====a. Inspection Scope==== | ||
The inspectors reviewed issues entered in the | The inspectors reviewed issues entered in the licensees corrective action program and associated documents to identify trends that could indicate the existence of a more significant safety issue. The inspectors focused their review on repetitive equipment issues but also considered the results of inspector daily condition report screenings, licensee trending efforts, and licensee human performance results. The review nominally considered the 6-month period of July 2015 thru December 2015 although some examples extended beyond those dates when the scope of the trend warranted. | ||
The inspectors compared their results with the licensees analysis of trends. | |||
Additionally, the inspectors reviewed the adequacy of corrective actions associated with a sample of the issues identified in the licensees trend reports. The inspectors also reviewed corrective action documents that were processed by the licensee to identify potential adverse trends in the condition of structures, systems, and/or components as evidenced by acceptance of long-standing non-conforming or degraded conditions. | |||
====b. Findings and Observations==== | ====b. Findings and Observations==== | ||
| Line 285: | Line 260: | ||
====a. Inspection Scope==== | ====a. Inspection Scope==== | ||
The inspectors conducted a detailed review of condition report 798117, Procedure | The inspectors conducted a detailed review of condition report 798117, Procedure Change Results in Nonconservative Acceptance Criteria for LPCI/CS Injection Valves. | ||
The inspectors evaluated the following attributes of the licensees actions: | |||
* complete and accurate identification of the problem in a timely manner | * complete and accurate identification of the problem in a timely manner | ||
* evaluation and disposition of operability and reportability issues | * evaluation and disposition of operability and reportability issues | ||
| Line 298: | Line 273: | ||
====b. Findings==== | ====b. Findings==== | ||
No findings were identified. | No findings were identified. | ||
{{a|4OA6}} | |||
{{a|4OA6}} | |||
==4OA6 Meetings, Including Exit== | ==4OA6 Meetings, Including Exit== | ||
On January 12, 2016, the resident inspectors presented the inspection results to Mr. | On January 12, 2016, the resident inspectors presented the inspection results to Mr. | ||
David Vineyard and other members of the | David Vineyard and other members of the licensees staff. The inspectors confirmed that proprietary information was not provided or examined during the inspection period. | ||
ATTACHMENT: | ATTACHMENT: | ||
=SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION= | =SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION= | ||
| Line 313: | Line 287: | ||
===Licensee personnel=== | ===Licensee personnel=== | ||
: [[contact::B. Anderson]], Health Physics Manager | : [[contact::B. Anderson]], Health Physics Manager | ||
: [[contact::G. Brinson]], Maintenance Director | : [[contact::G. Brinson]], Maintenance Director | ||
: [[contact::C. Collins]], Principal Licensing Engineer | : [[contact::C. Collins]], Principal Licensing Engineer | ||
: [[contact::B. Dean]], Training Director | : [[contact::B. Dean]], Training Director | ||
: [[contact::B. Duval]], Chemistry Manager | : [[contact::B. Duval]], Chemistry Manager | ||
: [[contact::A. Giancatarino]], Engineering Director | : [[contact::A. Giancatarino]], Engineering Director | ||
: [[contact::G. Johnson]], Regulatory Affairs Manager | : [[contact::G. Johnson]], Regulatory Affairs Manager | ||
: [[contact::D. Komm]], Operations Director | : [[contact::D. Komm]], Operations Director | ||
: [[contact::K. Long]], Work Management Director | : [[contact::K. Long]], Work Management Director | ||
: [[contact::R. Spring]], Plant Manager | : [[contact::R. Spring]], Plant Manager | ||
: [[contact::D. Vineyard]], Vice President | : [[contact::D. Vineyard]], Vice President | ||
: [[contact::A. Wheeler]], Site Projects Manager | : [[contact::A. Wheeler]], Site Projects Manager | ||
==LIST OF DOCUMENTS REVIEWED== | ==LIST OF DOCUMENTS REVIEWED== | ||
}} | }} | ||
Latest revision as of 00:05, 20 December 2019
| ML16022A066 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Hatch  |
| Issue date: | 01/22/2016 |
| From: | Shane Sandal NRC/RGN-II/DRP/RPB2 |
| To: | Vineyard D Southern Nuclear Operating Co |
| References | |
| IR 2015004 | |
| Download: ML16022A066 (19) | |
Text
UNITED STATES ary 22, 2016
SUBJECT:
EDWIN I. HATCH NUCLEAR PLANT - NRC INTEGRATED INSPECTION REPORT 05000321/2015004 AND 05000366/2015004
Dear Mr. Vineyard:
On December 31, 2015, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) completed an inspection at your Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant Units 1 and 2. On January 12, 2016, the NRC inspectors discussed the results of this inspection with you and other members of your staff.
Inspectors documented the results of this inspection in the enclosed inspection report. The NRC inspectors did not identify any findings or violations of more than minor significance.
In accordance with Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations 2.390, Public Inspections, Exemptions, Requests for Withholding, of the NRC's "Rules of Practice," a copy of this letter, its enclosure, and your response (if any) will be available electronically for public inspection in the NRCs Public Document Room or from the Publicly Available Records (PARS) component of the NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS). ADAMS is accessible from the NRC Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html (the Public Electronic Reading Room).
Sincerely,
/RA/
Shane Sandal, Chief Reactor Projects Branch 2 Division of Reactor Projects Docket Nos.: 50-321, 50-366 License Nos.: DPR-57 and NPF-5
Enclosures:
Inspection Report 05000321/2015004, 05000366/2015004 w/Attachment: Supplementary Information
REGION II==
Docket Nos.: 50-321, 50-366 License Nos.: DPR-57 and NPF-5 Report Nos.: 05000321/2015004 and 05000366/2015004 Licensee: Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Inc.
Facility: Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant Location: Baxley, Georgia 31513 Dates: October 1 - December 31, 2015 Inspectors: D. Hardage, Senior Resident Inspector D. Retterer, Resident Inspector B. Caballero, Senior Operations Examiner, (Section 1R11)
Approved by: Shane Sandal, Chief Reactor Projects Branch 2 Division of Reactor Projects Enclosure
SUMMARY
IR 05000321/2015004; and 05000366/2015004, October 1, 2015, through December 31, 2015;
Edwin I. Hatch, Units 1 and 2; Integrated Report.
This report covers a 3-month period of inspection by resident inspectors. No findings were identified during this inspection period. The NRCs program for overseeing the safe operations of commercial nuclear power reactors is described in NUREG-1649, Reactor Oversight Process, Revision 5. Documents reviewed not listed in the Report Details are listed in the List of Documents Reviewed section of the Attachment.
REPORT DETAILS
Summary of Plant Status
Unit 1 began the inspection period at 100 percent rated thermal power (RTP). On December 10, 2015, the unit entered end of cycle coastdown and remained in coastdown throughout the remainder of the inspection period.
Unit 2 operated at or near 100 percent RTP for the duration of the inspection period.
REACTOR SAFETY
Cornerstones: Initiating Events, Mitigating Systems, and Barrier Integrity
1R01 Adverse Weather Protection
a. Inspection Scope
Seasonal Extreme Weather Conditions: The inspectors conducted a detailed review of the stations adverse weather procedures written for extreme low temperatures. The inspectors verified that weather-related equipment deficiencies identified during the previous year had been placed into the work control process and/or corrected before the onset of seasonal extremes. The inspectors evaluated the licensees implementation of adverse weather preparation procedures and compensatory measures before the onset of seasonal extreme weather conditions. The inspectors evaluated the following risk-significant systems:
- Plant Service Water
- Diesel Emergency Power
b. Findings
No findings were identified.
1R04 Equipment Alignment
a. Inspection Scope
Partial Walkdown: The inspectors verified that critical portions of the following systems or trains were correctly aligned by performing partial walkdowns. The inspectors selected systems for assessment because they were a redundant or backup system or train, were important for mitigating risk for the current plant conditions, had been recently realigned, or were a single-train system. The inspectors determined the correct system lineup by reviewing plant procedures and drawings.
- Unit 1 A train of RHR system after being recently realigned due to C RHR Pump Outage, October 16, 2015
- Unit 1 B EDG aligned to Unit 1 while the Unit 1 A EDG was out of service for maintenance, November 3, 2015
b. Findings
No findings were identified.
1R05 Fire Protection
a. Inspection Scope
Quarterly Inspection: The inspectors evaluated the adequacy of selected fire plans by comparing the fire plans to the defined hazards and defense-in-depth features specified in the fire protection program. In evaluating the fire plans, the inspectors assessed the following attributes.
- control of transient combustibles and ignition sources
- fire detection systems
- water-based fire suppression systems
- gaseous fire suppression systems
- manual firefighting equipment and capability
- passive fire protection features
- compensatory measures and fire watches
- issues related to fire protection contained in the licensees corrective action program The inspectors toured the following four fire areas to assess material condition and operational status of fire protection equipment.
- Unit 2, diesel generator area, fire zone 2401/2402/2403/2405/2406/2407
- Unit 1, diesel generator building switchgear rooms, fire zones 1404/1408/1412
- Unit 1 and Unit 2, intake structure, fire zone 0501
- Unit 1, diesel generator area, fire zone 1401/1403/1405/1407/1409/1411
b. Findings
No findings were identified.
1R06 Flood Protection Measures
a. Inspection Scope
Underground Cables: The inspectors reviewed related flood analysis documents and inspected the areas listed below containing cables whose failure could adversely impact risk-significant equipment. The inspector directly observed the condition of cables and cable support structures and, as applicable, verified that dewatering devices and drainage systems were functioning properly. In addition, the inspectors verified the licensee was identifying and properly addressing issues using the corrective action program.
- Unit 1, PB1-BG and PB1-BW
b. Findings
No findings were identified.
1R11 Licensed Operator Requalification Program and Licensed Operator Performance
a. Inspection Scope
Resident Inspector Quarterly Review of Licensed Operator Requalification: On November 3, the inspectors observed a simulator scenario conducted for training of an operating crew for requalification. The inspectors assessed the following attributes.
- licensed operator performance
- the ability of the licensee to administer the scenario and evaluate the operators
- the quality of the post-scenario critique
- simulator performance Resident Inspector Quarterly Review (Licensed Operator Performance): The inspectors observed licensed operator performance in the main control room during Unit 1 coastdown operations and traversing in-core probe system operation. The inspectors assessed the following attributes.
- use of plant procedures
- control board manipulations
- communications between crew members
- use and interpretation of instruments, indications, and alarms
- use of human error prevention techniques
- documentation of activities
- management and supervision Annual Review of Licensee Requalification Examination Results: On October 13, 2015, the licensee completed administration of the annual requalification operating examinations, and on November 25, 2015, the licensee completed administration of the comprehensive biennial requalification written examinations, which are required to be administered to all licensed operators in accordance with Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations 55.59(a)(2), Requalification Requirements, of the NRCs Operators Licenses. The inspectors performed an in-office review of the overall pass/fail results of the individual operating examinations and the crew simulator operating examinations in accordance with Inspection Procedure (IP) 71111.11, Licensed Operator Requalification Program. These results were compared to the thresholds established in Section 3.02, Requalification Examination Results, of IP 71111.11.
b. Findings
No findings were identified.
1R12 Maintenance Effectiveness
a. Inspection Scope
The inspectors assessed the licensees treatment of the two issues listed below to verify the licensee appropriately addressed equipment problems within the scope of the maintenance rule (10 CFR 50.65, Requirements for Monitoring the Effectiveness of Maintenance at Nuclear Power Plants). The inspectors reviewed procedures and records to evaluate the licensees identification, assessment, and characterization of the problems as well as their corrective actions for returning the equipment to a satisfactory condition.
- Unit 2, 24 Volt Battery Charger 2C, Charger output failure
- Unit 2, 1B PSW Discharge Check Valve, Check valve failed open
b. Findings
No findings were identified.
1R13 Maintenance Risk Assessments and Emergent Work Control
a. Inspection Scope
The inspectors reviewed the three maintenance activities listed below to verify that the licensee assessed and managed plant risk as required by 10 CFR 50.65(a)(4) and licensee procedures. The inspectors assessed the adequacy of the licensees risk assessments and implementation of risk management actions. The inspectors also verified that the licensee was identifying and resolving problems with assessing and managing maintenance-related risk using the corrective action program. Additionally, for maintenance resulting from unforeseen situations, the inspectors assessed the effectiveness of the licensees planning and control of emergent work activities.
- Unit 1, 10/6/2015,1C RHR Pump Outage and Maintenance
- Unit 1, 10/20/2015, HPCI System Outage and Maintenance
- Unit 1 and 2, 11/1/2015 - 11/6/2015, 1A Emergency Diesel Generator planned outage
b. Findings
No findings were identified.
1R15 Operability Determinations and Functionality Assessments
a. Inspection Scope
The inspectors selected the five operability determinations or functionality evaluations listed below for review based on the risk-significance of the associated components and systems. The inspectors reviewed the technical adequacy of the determinations to ensure that technical specification operability was properly justified and the components or systems remained capable of performing their design functions. To verify whether components or systems were operable, the inspectors compared the operability and design criteria in the appropriate sections of the technical specification and updated final safety analysis report to the licensees evaluations. Where compensatory measures were required to maintain operability, the inspectors determined whether the measures in place would function as intended and were properly controlled. Additionally, the inspectors reviewed a sample of corrective action documents to verify the licensee was identifying and correcting any deficiencies associated with operability evaluations.
- Unit 1, Nelson Pillows Installed Incorrectly, CR10125351
- Unit 2, Diesel Generator Battery Room Fan Non-Conformance, CR10135549
- Unit 1, Diesel Generator Switchgear Louver Failure, CR 10137540
- Unit 1 and Unit 2, RHRSW Calculation Appendix R Flow, CR 10135831
- Unit 1, Intake Structure Backdraft Damper Failed Open, CR 10142835
b. Findings
No findings were identified.
1R18 Plant Modifications
a. Inspection Scope
The inspectors verified that the plant modification listed below did not affect the safety functions of important safety systems. The inspectors confirmed the modifications did not degrade the design bases, licensing bases, and performance capability of risk significant structures, systems and components. The inspectors also verified modifications performed during plant configurations involving increased risk did not place the plant in an unsafe condition. Additionally, the inspectors evaluated whether system operability and availability, configuration control, post-installation test activities, and changes to documents, such as drawings, procedures, and operator training materials, complied with licensee standards and NRC requirements. In addition, the inspectors reviewed a sample of related corrective action documents to verify the licensee was identifying and correcting any deficiencies associated with modifications.
- SNC 643429,LPRM 44-21A damaged connector disconnected undervessel
b. Findings
No findings were identified.
1R19 Post-Maintenance Testing
a. Inspection Scope
The inspectors either observed post-maintenance testing or reviewed the test results for the six maintenance activities listed below to verify the work performed was completed correctly and the test activities were adequate to verify system operability and functional capability.
- SNC521617, 1C RHR Pump Outage, October 7, 2015
- SNC714576, 1C RHRSW Pump Seal Leak, October 8, 2015
- SNC715063, 2C EDG Loading Timer Failure, October 9, 2015
- SNC376671, 2T41F003B Disassemble and Inspect Damper Actuator, October 12, 2015
- SNC337315, 1A EDG System Outage, November 6, 2015
- SNC337049, 2C EDG System Outage, November 20, 2015 The inspectors evaluated these activities for the following attributes.
- Acceptance criteria were clear and demonstrated operational readiness.
- Effects of testing on the plant were adequately addressed.
- Test instrumentation was appropriate.
- Tests were performed in accordance with approved procedures.
- Equipment was returned to its operational status following testing.
- Test documentation was properly evaluated.
Additionally, the inspectors reviewed a sample of corrective action documents to verify the licensee was identifying and correcting any deficiencies associated with post-maintenance testing.
b. Findings
No findings were identified.
1R22 Surveillance Testing
a. Inspection Scope
The inspectors reviewed the three surveillance tests listed below and either observed the test or reviewed test results to verify testing adequately demonstrated equipment operability and met technical specification and licensee procedural requirements. The inspectors evaluated the test activities to assess for preconditioning of equipment, procedure adherence, and equipment alignment following completion of the surveillance.
Additionally, the inspectors reviewed a sample of related corrective action documents to verify the licensee was identifying and correcting any deficiencies associated with surveillance testing.
Routine Surveillance Tests
- 34SV-R43-001-1, 1A Diesel Generator Monthly Test
- 34SV-C41-002-1, 1B Standby Liquid Control In Service Test
- 42CC-ERP-003-0, LPRM Calibration
b. Findings
No findings were identified.
Cornerstone: Emergency Preparedness
1EP6 Drill Evaluation
a. Inspection Scope
The inspectors observed the emergency preparedness drill conducted on November 17, 2015. The inspectors observed licensee activities in the simulator and/or technical support center to evaluate implementation of the emergency plan, including event classification, notification, and protective action recommendations. The inspectors evaluated the licensees performance against criteria established in the licensees procedures. Additionally, the inspectors attended the post-exercise critique to assess the licensees effectiveness in identifying emergency preparedness weaknesses and verified the identified weaknesses were entered in the corrective action program.
b. Findings
No findings were identified.
OTHER ACTIVITIES
4OA1 Performance Indicator Verification
a. Inspection Scope
The inspectors reviewed a sample of the performance indicator (PI) data, submitted by the licensee, for the Unit 1 and Unit 2 PIs listed below. The inspectors reviewed plant records compiled between October 2014 and October 2015 to verify the accuracy and completeness of the data reported for the station. The inspectors verified that the PI data complied with guidance contained in Nuclear Energy Institute 99-02, Regulatory Assessment Performance Indicator Guideline, and licensee procedures. The inspectors verified the accuracy of reported data that were used to calculate the value of each PI.
In addition, the inspectors reviewed a sample of related corrective action documents to verify the licensee was identifying and correcting any deficiencies associated with PI data.
Cornerstone: Mitigating Systems
- safety system functional failures (Units 1 and 2)
- MSPI, heat removal system (Units 1 and 2)
- MSPI, cooling water system (Units 1 and 2)
b. Findings
No findings were identified.
4OA2 Problem Identification and Resolution
.1 Routine Review
The inspectors screened items entered into the licensees corrective action program in order to identify repetitive equipment failures or specific human performance issues for followup. The inspectors reviewed condition reports, attended screening meetings, or accessed the licensees computerized corrective action database.
.2 Semi-Annual Trend Review
a. Inspection Scope
The inspectors reviewed issues entered in the licensees corrective action program and associated documents to identify trends that could indicate the existence of a more significant safety issue. The inspectors focused their review on repetitive equipment issues but also considered the results of inspector daily condition report screenings, licensee trending efforts, and licensee human performance results. The review nominally considered the 6-month period of July 2015 thru December 2015 although some examples extended beyond those dates when the scope of the trend warranted.
The inspectors compared their results with the licensees analysis of trends.
Additionally, the inspectors reviewed the adequacy of corrective actions associated with a sample of the issues identified in the licensees trend reports. The inspectors also reviewed corrective action documents that were processed by the licensee to identify potential adverse trends in the condition of structures, systems, and/or components as evidenced by acceptance of long-standing non-conforming or degraded conditions.
b. Findings and Observations
No findings were identified.
.3 Annual Followup of Selected Issues
a. Inspection Scope
The inspectors conducted a detailed review of condition report 798117, Procedure Change Results in Nonconservative Acceptance Criteria for LPCI/CS Injection Valves.
The inspectors evaluated the following attributes of the licensees actions:
- complete and accurate identification of the problem in a timely manner
- evaluation and disposition of operability and reportability issues
- consideration of extent of condition, generic implications, common cause, and previous occurrences
- classification and prioritization of the problem
- identification of root and contributing causes of the problem
- identification of any additional condition reports
- completion of corrective actions in a timely manner
b. Findings
No findings were identified.
4OA6 Meetings, Including Exit
On January 12, 2016, the resident inspectors presented the inspection results to Mr.
David Vineyard and other members of the licensees staff. The inspectors confirmed that proprietary information was not provided or examined during the inspection period.
ATTACHMENT:
SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION
KEY POINTS OF CONTACT
Licensee personnel
- B. Anderson, Health Physics Manager
- G. Brinson, Maintenance Director
- C. Collins, Principal Licensing Engineer
- B. Dean, Training Director
- B. Duval, Chemistry Manager
- A. Giancatarino, Engineering Director
- G. Johnson, Regulatory Affairs Manager
- D. Komm, Operations Director
- K. Long, Work Management Director
- R. Spring, Plant Manager
- D. Vineyard, Vice President
- A. Wheeler, Site Projects Manager