IR 05000348/1998099

SALP Repts 50-348/98-99 & 50-364/98-99 Covering Period 961124-980530

ML20236J812
Person / Time
Site:	Farley
Issue date:	06/29/1998
From:	NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II)
To:
Shared Package
ML20236J811	List: IR 05000348/1998099 ML20236J807
References
50-348-98-99, 50-364-98-99, NUDOCS 9807090017
Download: ML20236J812 (5)

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, Division of Reactor Projects; and H. N. Berkow. Director Project r

'

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 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

PDR

.

j

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ - _ _ _ _ _

l

,

.

l

procedures have continued.

This inattention was also noted in non-licensed operators not consistently identifying degraded plant

)

conditions during routine plant tours.

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.

)

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.

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.

!

Enclosure i

_ - - - _ - - - - - - - -

-

J

,

..

.

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

.

,

component cooling water systems. The Configuration Control Board was effective in controlling design changes.

Engineering design of some equipment and systems testing programs was not thorough.

Inattention to acceptance criteria and test objectives l

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

.

.

.

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.

Enclosure l

l

_

_

__________ - __

_