Text

Impact of Past Incorrect Calibration of SG Levels of Afas Setpoints,Rev 0. Actual Rept Number JPN-PSL-SEIP-96-068 Rev 0
	ML20137L055
Person / Time
Site:	Saint Lucie
Issue date:	02/22/1996
From:	; FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT CO.
To:	;
Shared Package
ML17354B293	List: IA-46-485, Advises That Changes in Rev 23 to Radiological Emergency Plan for St Lucie,Consistent W/Provisions of 10CFR50.54(q), 10CFR50.47(b),10CFR50 & App E to 10CFR50; IR 05000528/1996009; ML20137K471; ML20137K491; ML20137K574; ML20137K611; ML20137K664; ML20137K745; ML20137K761; ML20137K771; ML20137K803; ML20137K822; ML20137K864; ML20137K929; ML20137K935; ML20137K945; ML20137K966; ML20137K982; ML20137K991; ML20137L003; ML20137L009; ML20137L035; ML20137L055; ML20137L061; ML20137L085; ML20137L098; ML20137L150; ML20137L168; ML20137L209; ML20137L231; ML20137L237; ML20137L252; ML20137L275; ML20137L283; ML20137L297; ML20137L303; ML20137L307; ML20137L314; ML20137L322; ML20137L853; ML20137L880; ML20137L897; ML20137L934; ML20137L948; ML20137L961;
References
	FOIA-96-485 JPN-PSL-SEIP-96, JPN-PSL-SEIP-96-068, JPN-PSL-SEIP-96-68, NUDOCS 9704070146
	Download: ML20137L055 (66)
	v • d • e

. _ _ _ . _ . . _ . _ . _ . _ _ . . . _ . _ _ . _ _ _ . . . ._ _ _ _ _ . . _.. . _ _ _ _ . . _ _ _ . . _ _ . _ _

l

.. PAGE 1 OF 8 l p

a i

l ST. LUCIE UNIT 1

- - - --- ~- . . . . . . ._ l 1

IMPACT OF PAST INCORRECT CALIBRATION OF THE STEAM GENERATOR LEVELS ON AFAS SETPOINTS s I

l

)

i JPN-PSL-SEIP-96-068 l REVISION 0 SAFETY RELATED FLORIDA POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY JUNO BEACH, FLORIDA i

4 ev96448.w51 l/L 9704070146 970325 i

PDR FOIA l BINDER 96-485 PDR

l

JPN-PSL-SEIP-96-068 -

Revision 0 Page 2 cf 8 1

~ REVIEW AND APPROVAL RECORD PLANT St I mes* Pl==* UNrr i TITLE Imnae' of Past Incorrect Calibration of the Stamm Generator I2vels on AFAS Se* mints

LEAD DISCIPLINE PSL PEG I&C ENGINFFRING

' ENGINEERING ORGANIZATION FPL - I&C ENGINEERING

l I REVIEW / APPROVAL:

i 1

INTERFACE TYPE Pt[ PARED VERIFIED APPROVED FPL APPROVED' '

GROUP l INPUT REVIEW N/A '

MMMM M

WMMM N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A MECH N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A l ELECT

!&C LEAD d6 , jf. C y

h#M a y --

N/A r/A N/A N/A N/A N/A CIV!L N/A N/A N/A NUC" YES I

N/A N/A N/A ,-w R/4 N/A

. E$1 N/A > N/A NUC F1)EL TE$ N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A STAFF

' For Contract.or Evals As Determined 8y Pro,tets

" Review Interface As A Nin On All 10CFR50.59 Evals and PLAs FPL PROJECTS APPROVAL: # DATE: M/#'

OTHER INTERFACES eW648.w51

JPN-PSL-SEIP-96-068 i Revision 0 t

Page 3 of 8 ,

i

~ ~ ~ ~ -- -

--TABLE-OF CONTENTS -

f SECTION TITLE PAGE 1

Cover Sheet Review and Approval Record 2 Table of Contents 3 Purpose and Scope 4 1.0 Safety Classification 4 2.0 4

4 3.0 Eval'uation f

Verification Summary 6 4.0 '

7 5.0 Conclusions 7

6.0 References

! ATTACHMENTS:

AFAS LOOKBACK 12 vel Errors @ Setpoint (1 Page)

Attachment 1 l 1

Error Determination (4 Pages) l 4

Attachment 2 (1 Page)

Attachmeni 3 AFAS SSRS Narrow Range Uncertainty 4

1 !

' AFAS ERROR Analysis (2 Pages)

Attachment 4 (1 Page)

Attachment 5 AFAS Bistable Calibration Data l I

\

2

~

. I

)

l ev9648.w51 l

JPN-PSI. SEIP-96-068 Revision 0 j

~ Page 4 of 8 i -

PURPOSE AND SCOPE 1.0 The purpose of this evaluation is to assess the impact from the incorrect past calibrations l

' of the low Steam Generator (SG) level setpoint for AFAS actuation. The evaluation for i condition report number 96-1532 (Reference 3) will determine, from a lookback analysis, the magnitude and direction of the errors, nd the effect they would have had on the Technical Speci6 cation (R L cs 1) and/or the FSAR (Reference 2) accident analytical limit for the following transmitters:

4 '

4 i TAG No. Function l

' LT-9013A,B,C,D AFAS LT-9023A,B,C,D AFAS

2.0 SAFETY CLASSIFICATION l 1

This eng",neering evaluation involves the review and evaluation of instrumentation required for the safe operation of the plant, including the Auxiliary Feedwater Actuation System (AFAS), Since the AFAS is designed to mitigate the consequences of design basis accidents, this evaluation has been classified as Safety Related.

3.0 EVALUATION 3.1 Error Determination Attachment 1 is an EXCEL spread sheet summarizing the steam generator level errors of the PSL-1 AFAS Lookback. The level errors, in, percent of span at the setpoint level, were due to the valt ts used in the past for calibrating the transmitters, compared to the values calculated using PSL-lFJI-93-013, Rev.1 (Reference 4). The steam generator cold dimensions, instrumentation tap locations, and condensate pot elevations are based upon this PSL-1 steam generator level calculation, however, each tap location ~is used in this evaluation rather than the average dimensions. This calculation's methodology (Reference

4) was also used to establish the "true or actual" level values at the AFAS serpoint of ~

19.5%; which were compared to the " indicated" levels, resulting from the values used for calibration of the instruments (References 10 & 14).

The operating conditions used in this evaluation of 850 psia. the downcomer density effect,

, and the lack of SG thermal growth or static pressure zero shift correction, were consistent with the CE Calculation (Reference 5) which was the bases for the past calibration values.

Attachment 2 provides a sample calculation (using the downcomer density effects),

formulas and a summary of the input data used to generate the level error spread sheet

( Attachment 1). The downcomer dimensions were generated from drawings 8770-552 and ev96.o6s.w$1

. l JPN-PSI.-SE1P-96 0.68 l

' Revision 0 Page 5 of 8 l l

4 a nGG324 (Reference-16).- A-reference-leg-temperature of 111T was used based.on past Plant conditions (Reference 6).

)

i 3.2 Imop Uacestainty Analysis l The Total Imop Uncertainty (TLU) in combination with the calibration error determined l

in section 3.1 provides the necessary data to determine if the AFAS function may have j been outside the Technical Specification and/or the FSAR analytica11imit. 'Ihe 'ILU was l

prepared as Attachment 3 and included a reduction factor for setpoints with a single side of interest, in accordance with FPL Standard No. IC-3.17 (Reference 7). It was based l l

. upon CE r=L-14= 19367-1CE-36308 (1(eference 12), FPL fNimidon PSL-1FJI-93 002

(Reference 13) and calibration r >cedure 1-1400153A (Reference 14).

t 3.3 Iaokback Error Analysis The AFAS ERROR Analysis spreadsheets (Attachment 4) evaluate the effect of the calibration error and total loop uncertainty in combination with the AFAS Cabinet circuitry and operation. 'Ihe calibration setting tolerance for the transminers and bistables is 0.25 %

of span and is included in the loop uncertainty calculation (Attachment 3), also the bistables are checked monthly to insure their setpoint calibration is within tolerance. A twelve month sampling of Bistable calibration data is included as Attachment 5, which shows the worst case deviation to be -0.08% of span. 'Ihis is well within the 0.25%

===ad in the uncertainty calculation (Attachment 3). 'Iherefore it is reasonable to expect that all deviations, including calibration errors and uncertainties, would emanate from the nominal setpoint as shown in this lookback analysis.

The following bases were used for the lookback analysis. Review of the AFAS vendor manuals (8770-10118, Reference 8 & 8770-10119, Reference 9) and the maintenance procedures (1-0700051, Reference 10 & 1-0700052, Reference 11) were used tc establish these bases-

Each AFAS Channel, A,B,C & D, consists of 2 input loops, one for each Steam Generator (SG) designated AFAS-1 & AFAS-2.

l

An AFAS Channel in Test affects both SG's (AFAS-1 & AFAS-2) input loops.

1

Only one Channel can be in Test at a time, due to circuit design (alternate action pushbuttons interconnected). l

Only one Bistable input can be tested at a time, due to circidt design (common selector switch).

Only one Channel can be in Bypass at a time for each SG, due to circuit design (holding coil pushbuttons interconnected).

ew6-068351

..- . - _ - . . - . - - . ~ - . - - - - _ - . - _ - - - . _ . - - - . - - . . _ . - .

i

! JPN-PSL-SEIP-96-068 i* RevisiCn 0 Page 6 of 8

)

~-

- Monthly Test gd.wl4700051rroquires each Naael under. Test to have_both

AFAS inputs Bypassed. ,

Penodac Test procedure 10700052, for AFAS actuation relay testing, only requires that the Channel be in Test, hov4ver, it does operate the actuated equipment during l

1 the testing.

3

! From the above it can be shown:

I - 1. During normal operation, any one Channel for each SG could be in Bypass and not j be available as an input to the 2 dht of 4 logic for AFAS initiadon.

2. Dunng Monthly Nanal testing both AFAS trams would have the same Channel l

in Bypass and therefore could not be combined with 1. above.

i

3. During actuation relay testing, one Channel could be in Test for both SG's and still have different Channels in Bypass for each SG. However, during actuation relay ;

testing, only the selected output relay (s) for AFAS-1 or -2 would be out of service,-

l j since the inputs are not affected by this procedure.

1 i ne most limiting configuration would be to have the best (most accurate) input for each

SG in the Bypass condition (1 above) and then take a single failure on the next best input of either SG-1 A or SG-1B. His would result in two inputs of one SG and one input of the j

other, to be Out Of Service (OOS) at any one time. His would leave the SG with only

! one input OOS able to meet the analytical limit. However, if the initiating event assumed j in the FSAR accident analysis is the steam line rupture of one SG (taking it OOS) the i worst case configuration would have the best input channel of the other SG in the Bypass position, and take the single failure on it's next best input.

4.0 VERIFICATION

SUMMARY

This engineenng evaluation investigates an error in the past calibration of the Steam Generator level transminers for PSL Unit 1. De impact of this error on the AFAS setpoints has been evaluated for the subject instruments.

This engincenng evaluation was reviewed to insure that the overall conclusions met applicable requuements. De criteria and design inputs required to evaluate the results were adequately described, reasonable, and appropriately identified for subsequent reverification. ,

. De rationale provided in assigning the safety classification for this evaluation was verified. His engineering evaluation has been correctly specified as Safety Related.

ev96-068.w51

JPN-PSL-SEIP-96 06@

' Revision'0 Page 7 of 8 l.

I.

-- --5.0-CONCLUSIONS __ .. --- - _ _ - . ,

i The FSAR analytical limit is 15.3% for the low SG level AFASr actuation. If the best i input was in Bypass, and the single failure occurred on EeM; other than an input loop to AFAS, the 2/4 logic configuration would result in the "2nd best" and "next worst" l

- inputs of a SG determining the actuation level. From attachment 4, this would' result in

-* O 16.0% for SG-1A and 15.5% for SG-1B. Thessione both AFAS-1 & 2 wou have actuated within the analytical limit. In mMirian, the thenmal height growth of the SG i

(approximatly 1") will increase the actual water volurae compared to the indicated level by at least 0.5% and the seismic uncertainty used for the transmitters contains l

approximately 0.1% conservatism.

1 From attachment 4, the worst case scenario would have a SG-1A steam line rupture, i

taking it out of service, combined with SG-1B's best inputs (B&C) as bypassed and the single failure. T'eis would leave SG-1B the operational heat sink with AFAS-2 initiation

@ 14.9%, determined by the two worst inputs (A&D), however, with the thermal growth margin (0.5 %) considered, actuation would occur @ 15.4 %, which is above the analytica .

limit of 15.3%. Additional margin would also be available from the Rosemount seismic l

uncenainty used in the calculation. l Therefore, plant operation with the incorrect calibration values would not have exceeded the analytica11imit for AFAS actuation.

l

6.0 REFERENCES

1 St. Lucie Unit 1 Technical Specification, Amendment 145.

{

2 St. Lucie Unit 1 FSAR, Amendment 14.

l 3 Condition Report No. 96-1532.

4 FPL Calculation PSL-1FJI-93-013, R-1, S/G 1.evel Transmitter Calibrated Range.

5 CE Calculation 19367-1CE-0613-00, S/G 1.evel Measurement.

6 FPL Calculation PSL-BFJI-92-003, R-2, Environmental Parameters for Instrument Uncertainty Analysis.

7 Discipline Standard No. IC-3.17, R-5, Instrument Setpoint Methodology for Nuclear Power Plants.

8770-10118, R-5, Auxiliary Feedwater Actuation System Manual, Volume 1.

8 )

l ev% 068.w$1 i

JPN-PSL-SEIP 96 068 Revision 0

Page 8 of 8 9 8770-16H9;-R-7, Auxiliary Feedw*r Actuation System Manual, Volume 2. _ _ .

10 ' Maintenance Procedure 1-07251, R-15, Auxiliary Feedwater Actuation System Monthly Functional Test.

11 Maintenance Procedure 1-0700052, R-8, Auxiliary Feedwater Actuation System Actuation Relay Test.

12 CE Calculation 19367-ICE-36308, R-0, St. Lucie Unit 1 RPS, ESF, and AFS Setpoints and Allowable Values.

13 FPL Calculation PSL-lFII-93 002, R-1, St. Lucie Unit 1 RPS/AFAS Steam Generator Downcomer Level Transmitter Uncertainty Determination (LT-9013/23A,B,C,D).

14 Maintenance Procedure 1-1400153A, R-7, RPS - Loop Instrumentation Calibration of Steam Generator 1.evel.

15 CE letter F-SF-1086, Dated November 5,1976. S/G Level Transmitter Calibrations 16 8770-552, R-2, & 8770 3524, R-0, CE Steam Generator drawings.

l ev%-o68.w51

i PSL1' JPN-PSL SElP 96-068 [

Steam Generator Levels AFAS LOOKSACK R: vision 0 l

. Ermr O Setpoints Attachment 1 l

__.30._ 41A NR i i -

Tao LT-9013A LT-90138 LT 9013C ILT 90130 i i

H 15.253 15.227 15.2481 15.2481 i

L 1.946 1.942 1.901i 1.8111 t i

Delta Pum -7.17509 -7.16257 7.154231 -7.11668 i j l DeRaPuu -2.29417 -2.28989 2.27481l -2.23727 Spencac - -135.3333- ~135.1049 135.2916H 35.2916

! t 8.003 6.003 6.013' 6.013 ;

Yo i j 2.97336 t h e.198H 2.974336 2.900365 2.97338

i DeRa P, 4.20097 4.1981 4.18842 4.15088 i i 172.156 -171.855 -171.586 170.545, 1

, SPact DP.act -198.944 -198.597 -198.365 -197.324 :

DPicenct 4 3.6104 4 3.4918 43.0738 4 2.0327 Spenene -137.8 137.4 137.6 l -137.61 DP.cm . 202.9 201.5 l -201.81 200.7' 45.1 44.1 -64.21 4 3.11 DPiancate SPeace -176.029 -174.707 -174.968i 173.8681 ,

1 SPausan I 3.87298 -2.85234i -3.381561 -3.322611

%Sparm ! 2.8% ( 2.1%i 2.5% ' 2.4%' l t i SG 18 NR i .

l Tag LT 9023A LT 90238 !LT 9023C LT 90230 - . _ _

H 15.18 15.175 15.186 15.1641 L 1.567 1.577 1.717 2.0021 DeRaPum 4.98652 4.98861 -7.0491 :

-7.16132l Delta Puu -2.12906 2.13277 -2.19164i 2.30894l Spencate 134.6829 134.6379: 134.6829! 134.5421!

i 5.962 5.9571 5.962 5.961, Yo .

hm.195H ! 2.9601 2.9591251 2.9601 2.95698i Delta Py ! 4.02502 4.027431 -6.0676i -6.20084:

SPact ' 167.056 -167.1221 168.791. 171.931:

DPact i -193.715 193.7731 -195.451 -198.562l DPiact I 59.0324 59.*3531 4 0.76751 44.01991 Spencate 137 -136.9I 137 136.9' DP.cate 198.71 -196.9: -198.5' 202.8 ~

DPicacate 41.7i -60i -61.5 -6 5.9 -

I -171.985 -170.205i -171.785. 176.105-SPcx.

i -4.92C14 t -3.08252i -2.99406+ 4.1744-SPeuson

%Sparw I 3.6 % I 2.3%I 2.2% 3.0% '

i Notes:

Operation G 850 psia (835.3 psig) and 525.2* F with a Reference Leg Temp @ 111* F C-: =r. comer Effed included. SG Thermal Growth Excluded, dimensions based on Cold conditions Calculatens vnthout Zero Span Effect Corrections Calibration values (cue) are the " indicated" values Calculated values (exc..ct) are the "actuat* values Setpoint Error (SPanon) is the

indicated

minus the " actual

setpoint (

wc)

Therefore the % Error is the % level the indication is above (+) or below (-) the true or actual level Page 1 EV96-068.xis

! JPN PSL-SEIP-96-068 Revisi:n 0 Attachment 2 l l

- - - - - - . _ _ _ _ ___ ERROR DETERMIN ATION l

BACKGROUNDt I The existing level transmitter calibration data contained in ICC Procedure 1-1400153A (Ref.14) is based on CE letter F-SF-1086 (Ref.15) . It appears these 4 values were developed using the methodology contained in CE Calculation 19367-ICE- )

0613-00 (Ref. 5) for the following conditions. 1 l

-5/G Operating Pressure = 850 psia

-S/G Saturation Temperature = 525.24*F

-Reference Leg Temperature = 120*F G 850 psia

-Feedwater Temperature = 435'F G 850 psia (p, = 52.32 lb/ f t')

e -Downcomer Density (pe) = 48.65 lb/ft

-Circulation Ratio (CR) = 4.2 0 100% Pow (r ;

-Calibration Reference = Inches of H:o e 68'T (Ref. 5) l

-S/G Thermal Growth = Not Included 1 l

1 Based on the CE Calculation (Ref. 5), the S/G dimensions were obtained from the 4, and not the S/G S/G General Arrangement & Assembly Drawing, 233-601, Rev. The reference for the as-built drawings utilized in the FPL Calculation (Ref. 4) .

condensate pot elevations used for the final CE calibration data (Ref. 15) is unknown. In addition, S/G growth effects were not included based on operating conditions at hot full power, and therefore are based on S/G dimensions at " COLD" conditions and S/G process at " HOT" conditions. l i

The purpose of the ERROR DETERHINATION is to establish the magnitude and direction l of the past error introduced from the incorrect calibratton of the Unit 1 S/G level transmitters on the low S/G level AFAS setpoints.

FORMUIJLS

l Differential Pressuret (Ref. 4)

APup, = ((H + L)pc) - [(H + L) pal AP w = [(L)po + (H - D)pt + (D)pe) - [(H + L)pa)

APvaa = ((H + L - d,po + (d)pe) - [(H + L)pa) where,APu,, = Delta-P 9 the min. operating level,,1b/ft*

APw = Delta-P G the max. operating level, Ib/ft*feed-ring, Ib/ft*

APvan = Delta-P G variable operating level below H = S/G Narrow Range tap to tap dimension, ft .

dimension, ft L = S/G Narrow Range upper tap to condensate pot D = Yo = Downcomer dimension (0 feed-ring to lower tap), ft d = h = Variable downcomer level below feed-ri,ng, ft po = density saturated steam 9 850 psia, Ib/ft p, = density reference leg fluid e 850 psia /lll'F, Ib/ft' pt = denetty saturated liquid 9 850 psia, Ib/ft' pc = density of downcomer liquid 9 850 psia, Ib/ft' Downcomer Densitys (Ref. 5) pc ",((CR-1)pt + p,j/CR where,pe = density of downcomer liquid 0 850 psia, *b/ft' . f i

Ib pt = density saturated liquid 9 850 psia,Ib/ft'/ft p, = density of feedwater 0 850 psia, CR = Circulation Ratio of 4.2 4 100% Power f

1 ev96-068.w51

JPN.PSL.SEIP 96-068 Revision 0 l.

Attachment 2

]

TAaLE 1-1 4

- ( AIL dimensions are given in feet unless noted otherwise)

TRANSMITTER H L D = Yo d u. =h 15.253 6.003 2.974

~"

LT-9013A' 1.946 j

LT-90138 15.227 1.942 6.003 2.969 a

LT-9013c 15.248 1.901 6.013 2.971

__ LT-9013D 15.248 1.811 6.013 2.973 LT-9023A 15.18 1.567 5.962 2.96 a LT-90235 15.175 1.577 5.957 2.959 LT-9023C 15.18 1.717 5.962 2.96 LT-9023D 15.164 2.002 5.961 2.957 j

i NOTE: 1. Dimensions based on Reference 4 and Attachment 1 i

TABLE 1-2 STEAM CENERATOR 1A & IB PROCESS CONSTANTS Calibration Reference Density (p.) 6 68'r 62.321 lb/ft' Reference Leg DJnsity (pe) 0 111*F/850 psia 61. 9 5 lb / f t'

! S/G Liquid Density (pt) 0 850 psia 47.505 lb/ft' i S/G Steam Density (po) 0 850 psia 1.876 lb/ f t' f Feedwater Density (p,) 0 435'r/850 psia 52.32 1"b/ft' l Downcomer Dens, icy ( pe) 48.65 lb/ft' 4.2

, Circulation Ratgo ,(CR) 9 100% Power SAMPLE CALCULATIONt

$ Steam Generator 1At (LT-9013A) j I

APu, = [ ( 15. 2 53 + 1. 94 6 ) 1. ,87 6 ] -

[ ( 1,5. 2 5 3 + 1,. 9 4 6 ) 61. 9 5 ] = -103,3.1527 lb/ft or

) -7.1746 lb/ in* or -7.17 46 osi 4 = (-1033.1527 lb/ f t-) x (1 f t /144 in') = i j APars =

((1.946)1.876 + (15.252 - 6.003)47.505 + (6.003148.65) l

[(15.253+1.946)61.95]

= -330.3458 x (1 f t*/144 in )

l

= -2.294 lb/in lb/f or t* or-2,294 (-330.3458 osi lb/ f t )

l APi us =

((15.253 + 1.946 - 2.974)1.876 + (2.974)48.65) 1 ((15.253+1.946)61.95) 2

' = -894.0468 lb/*ft or (-894.0468 lb/f t ) x (1 f t /144 in )

= -6.2086 lb/in or -6.2086 osi i

i 1

ev96-068.wS1 :

i

JPN-PSL-SEIP-96-068 Revision 0 Attachment 2 memam cenerator lar ( LT-9,02 3 A) ._

- = -1006.06 lb/ft or APu,, = ((15.18+1.567)1,.876) ( g15.18 + 1,. 567 ) 61. 9 5 )

= (-1006.06 lb/ft) x (1 f t /144 in* ) = -6.986 lb/in' or -6.986 osi AP., = ( (1.567)1.876 + (15.18 - 5.962147.505 + (5.962 )48.65 ) -

[(15.18+1.567)61.95)

= -306.597 lb/*fort*-2.129 or (-306.597 lb/f t*) x (1 f t*/144 in*)

= -2.129 1hlin mal APm. = ( ( 15.18 + 1. 567 - 2. 96 ) 1. 87 6 + ( 2. 96 ) *48. 65 ) - ( ( 15.18 + 1. 567 ) 61.95 )

=

-867.608 lb/af t* or (-867.608 lb/f t*)

x (1 f t /144 in')

e = -6.025 lb/im or -6.025 osi ,

Plant calibration will be performed using test gauges calibrated in in. Hp 9 68'F. Therefore, conversion from psi to in. Hp G 68'T is required to be consistent with Plant conditions. The conversion factor, in in. Hp ,/ psi, is 27.727 in. E.O.*y M (Ref 4).

Using the conversion factor and the APup,, APuu , and AP ,4s values for Steam i Generatore 1A and 18, the actual AP and span can be determined in in. Hp 9 68'r and are presented in the following table.

TABLE 1-3 ACTUAL AP Span ACTUAL AP APum (in. Ep.r) APuu (in. Ep.*,) (in. Ep g) APi ,3, (in.

Ep .,)

-198.93 -63.61 135.32 -172.15 LT-9013A LT-90135 -198.60 -63.49 135.10 -171.86

-63.07 135.29 -171.59 LT-9013C -198.36 LT-9013D -197.32 -62.03 135.29 -170.55

-193.72 -59.04 134.68 -167.06 LT-9023A

-193.77 -59.14 134.63 -167.12 LT-90235

-195.45 -60.77 134.68 -168.79 LT-9023C

-198.56 -64.02 134.54 -171.93 LT-9023D I

1 ev96-068.w51

. . - - . .. . . . . . . _ ~ _ .- - .. .. .- - - - . .-~ . . - .-- - - - .-

JPN PSL-SEIP-96-068 Revision 0 t

Attachment 2 i - - - ._ BEET 1 . _ _

1 1 The RESULTS section compares the above ACTUAL 6 Pius for the 19.5% S/G 1evel setpoint to the transmitter calibrated AP for the 19.5% S/G 1evel setpoint to determine the t Error in % S/G 1evel for each transmitter. See Reference 14 for ~

transmitter calibrated AP. ,

TABLE 1-4 Level s/G S/C Dim. Signal xmtr. Cal. Actual Error.

AP 6F % Level Transmitter Level in. mA~

in. HAs*,

% in. HA. r 4

i -63.6 100 183.03 20 -65.1 LT-9013A 35.69 7.12 -176.0 -172.1 +2.8

19.5 O O.00 4 -202.9 -198.9 4 100 182.72 20 -64.1 -63.5 LT-9013B 35.63 7.12 -174.7 -171.9 +2.1 19.5 -

0 0.00 4 -201.5 -198.6 l

i 100 182.97 20 -64.2 -63.1 I LT-9013C 7.12 -175.0 -171.6 +2.5 19.5 35.68 4,

0 0.00 4 -201.8 -198.4 4

e -62.0 100 182.97 20 -63.1 I LT-9013D 7.12 -173.9 -170.5 +2.4

19.5 35.68 i O O.00 4 -200.7 -197.3 100 182.16 20 -61.7 -59.0 I

LT-9023A 35.52 7.12 -172.0 -167.1 +3.6 19.5 l

O O.00 4 -198.7 -193.7

)

20 -60.0 -59.1 l 100 182.1 l LT-90235 35.51 7.12 -170.2 -167.1 +2.3 19.5 O O.00 4 -196.9 -193.8 i 20 -61.5 -60.8 100 182.16

~

35.52 7.12 -171.8 -168.8 +2.2 j 19.5 0 0.00 4 -198.5 -195.5 1 i

'-i 181.97 20 -65.9 -64.0 j 100 LT-9023D 35.48 7.12

-176.1 -171.9 +3.0 19.5 0 0.00 4 -202.8 -198.6 Note: The % error value indicates the deviation f rom true level to indicated level 4 when true level is 19.5%.

i 1

' 4 ev96-068.w51 i

i Steam Generator Levels PSL 1 JPN PSL SEIP 96-068 l

- Loop Uncertainty Analysis AFAS SRSS Revision 0 Attachment 3

)

l I

6 I ANALYSIS OF ST. LUCIE UNIT 1 SG NARROW RANGE LEVEL UNCERTAINTY FOR AFAS LOOPS I I i Ref. A Ref. B AFAS Bistable SG Lvl Xmtr

% SPAN % SPAN Accuracy 0.1 0.25 M&TE 0.1 0.35 Set .Tol. 0.25 0.25 Drift 0.05 0 17 Temp. Effect 0.25 0.42 .

Static Press. Effect 0 0.65 ;

Seismic 0 0.58 i .

SRSS 0.38 1.10 i SRSS Total Uncert. (B/S & PT) 1 17 TLUssesx .839 (sir le side reductior f actor) = 0.98 % span l l

i Ref. A) CE % m 19367-4CE-36308. Rev 0. ST. LUCIE UNIT 1 RPS. ESF. AND AFS SETPOINTS AND ALLOWABLE V Note: the riegetme tuas a m ete coriservanve erectpm. therefore not included 1 Ref. B) FPL Calculmbon PSL 1FJLSS4o2. Rev.1. ST LUCIE UNIT 1 RPS/AFAS STEAM GENERATOR DOWNCCMER i

TRANSMITTER UNCERTAINTY DETERMINATION (LT 9013"23A.B.C 0) :

And Procedure 1 1400153A. LOOP INSTRUMENTATION CALIBRATION OF SG LEVEL EV96 068.x!S = age 1

PSL-1 JPN-PSL-SEIP-96-068

, Steam Generator Levels ErmrAnalysis AFAS ERROR Revisaon 0

'

Attadwnent 4 4

. _ . . _ _ . ANALYSIS OF ST. LUCIE UNIT 1 SG 1 A NARROW RANGE LEVEL UNCERTAINTY -

j EVALUATION OF UNCERTAINTIES IN AFAS START FUNCTON AT AN OF19.5%-- -- -

' l AFAS-1 SG 1A LT-9013A LT 90138 LT 9013C LT-90130 Ermr(% of Level Spen) + 2.8 +2.1 +2.5 +2.4 Attachment 2

, Indicated Level when true level is 19.5 22.3 21.6 22.0 21.9

! l Total Loop L _- _, for Level Transmitter and AFAS 84 stable is 11.0% of Span Attachment 3 i a

y

+ Uncertainty (fmm indicated Level) 23.3 22.6 23.0 22.9 Indicated Level when true level is 19.5 22.3 _ 21.6 22.0 21.9

- Uncertainty (from Indicated Level) 21.3 20.6 21.0 20.9 1 i 23.3 I I 23.0 i i i l 22.9 SG1A I I 22.6 i j l I i I i ! I l ? I t t t i i j l 1 i

21.3 , 1 .

21.0 i 1 i i i l 20.9 1 20.6 Compare level loops 14 selecting the he0 hest values when levels are et their highest uncertainty W conservative value) for input to 2/4 logic l l l A B l C D Highest i i 23.3 i 22.6 i 23.0 22.9 i Worst Case loop i ! X e i !

Next Worst Loop i i i i X i

- , i i If both of the lowest anputs are out of sofvice. one in Bypass & one due to a single failure:

I Worst Case indecsted Level is 23.3% when True Level is 19.5% (error of 3.8%)

Stated another way. AFAS Channel A will not indiate a start until true level is 15.7% (=19.5 3.8)

I i ! i I i if only the lowest input was in Bypass and out of service, the second worst would be limding.

That Indicated level is 23.0% when True level is 19.5% (ermr of 3.5%) !

Stated another way. AFAS Channel C will not initiate a start until true level is 16.0% (=19.5-3.5)

! t : I t i

CONCLUSION: i . i i With 2 inputs out of service. AFAS-1 wnli initiate a start at a true level of 15.7%

This value is above the analyticallima of 15.3% >

i

, i With only 1 input OOS. AFAS 1 vnll initiate a start at or above a SG level of 16.0%. i Thii value is above the analytical lima of 15.3%

Analytical Limd for AFAS start is 15.3% *

Ref. 2 (FSAR) Table 10.5-5 .

EV96-068.xis Page1

t

Steam Generator Levels PSlot' JPN-PSL-SEIP'96-068 Ermr Analysas AFAS ERROR Revision 0 r,

Attachment 4 r

"-~~

ANALYSIS OF ST. LUCIE UNIT 1 SG 18 NARROW RANGE LEVEL UNCERTAINTY -

I EVALUATION OF UNCERTAINTIES IN AFAS STARTFUNCTION AT A SETPOINT OF 19.5% - -

l AFAS 2 SG 18 l LT-9023A LT 90238 LT-9023C LT 9023D Ermr(% of Level 8 pen) + 3.6 +2.3 +2.2 +3.0 Attadiment 2 indecated Level when true level is 19.5 % 23.1 21.8 21.7 22.5 I l Total Loop t-:- - '^i for Level Trenarrutter and AFAS 84 stable is 11.0% of Spen Attachment 3 I

+ Uncertainty (kom Indicated Level) 24.1 22.8 22.7 23.5

. Indicated Level when true level is 19.5 % 23.1 21.8 21.7 22.5

- Uncertainty (from indicated Level) 22.1 20.8 20.7 21.5 I

i 24.1 1 23.5 l 22.8 l 22.7 i SG 1B i l l l 1 i 22.1 l i ! i e I i 21.5 i j -

1 20.8 20.7 I i Compare both level loops by soledang the highest value when levels are at their highest (least conservative value) for input to 2/4 logic l l l

i A i B C i D i HiQhest 4

! 24.1 1 22.8 22.7 i 23.5 i Worst Case loop i i X i l Next Worst Loop I i ! X i i l i j If both of the lowest inputs are out of service, one in Bypass & one due to a single failure:

Worst Case indscated Levet is 24.1% when True Level is 19.5% (ermr of 4.8%) l Stated another way, AFAS Channet A will not initiate a trip until true level is 14.9% (=19.5 4.8) i i i i

}

if only the lowest input was in Bypass and out of service, the second worm would be limiting.

That Indicated level is 23.5% when True level is 19.5% (error of 4.0%) I i Stated another way, AFAS Channel D will not instiate a start untilinse level is 15.5% (=19.5 4.0) i 1 I i i CONCLUSnON: j i i i

{

Wrth 2 inputs out of sence, AFAS 2 will instiate a start at a true level of 14.9% ,

This value is below the analytical limd of 15.3% I i 1 .

With only one input OOS, AFAS-2 will instiate a start at or above a SG level of 15.5%. !

This value is above the anatyticallimd of 15.3% , t Analytical UmA for AFAS start is 15.3% *t

Ref. 2 (FSAR) Table 10.5-5 EV96-068.xis Page 2

I 0

JPN-PLS-SEIP-96-068 R:vicien O j Attcchment 5 9

l

___.. _ __. __ _ _ . ___ _AFA_s__s_ team _ G_e_n_e ra__t_or__B_i_s

.__.._ table Ca libra tion Data _

The following data was compiled from the QA Vault copies of twelve monthly j functional tests procedures 1-0700051 (Reference 10) for the AFAS trip setpoints ;

(Reference 10) . The bistables have a 19.5% NR SG 1evel setpoint equal to - 1.780 i Volts, with a setting tolerance of +/- 0.002 Volts.

Date AFAs Bistable Channel A Channel B Channel C channel D 12/20/94 1 1 -1.780 -1.781 -1.780 -1.780 2 4 -1.780 -1.750 -1.781 -1.750 1/17/95 1 1 -1.789 -1.780 -1.780 -1.780 2 4 -1.780 -1.780 -1.780 -1.780 2/21/95 1 1 -1.778 -1.780 -1.778 -1.778 2 4 -1.778 -1.778 -1.779 -1.778 3/22/95 1 1 -1.780 ~-1.780 -1.779 -1.779 l 2 4 -1.780 -1.780 -1.780 -1.779 l 4/18/95 1 1 -1.780 *1.781 -1.780 -1.780 l 2 4 -1.780 -1.780 -1.781 -1.780 l

5/16/95 1 1 -1.780 -1.781 -1.780 -1.780 '

2 4 -1.780 -1.780 -1.780 -1.780 6/19/95 1 1 -1.780 -1.781 -1.780 -1.780 !

2 4 -1.780 -1.780 -1.780 -1.780 l 7/21/95 1 1 -1.780 -1.781 -1.780 -1.780 I 2 4 -1.780 -1.780 -1.779 -1.780 l

8/15/95 1 1 -1.778 -1.779 -1.778 -1.778 2 4 -1.778 -1.778 -1.777 -1.778 9/21/95 1 1 -1.780 -1.760 -1.779 -1.780 2 4 -1.780 -1.780 -1.782 -1.780 10/16/95 1 1 -1.780 -1.780 -1.780 1.7 2 4 -1.780 -1.780 -1.780 -1.780 11/15/95 1 1 -1.780 -1.780 -1.780 -1.780 2 4 -1.780 -1.780 -1.780 -1.780 Notes

.AFAS 1 Channel D on 10/16/95 appears to be a recording error and is therefore not evaluated.

AFAS 2 Channel C on 8/15/95 0 -1.777 Volts is the worst case error of 0.003 Volts which is 0.C8% of span.

ev96-068.wS1

11-12-1996 11:31AM St Lucie Resident OH ace 1 407 461 4622 P.02 11108/96 Floride PJwer and Light C mpany 10:56 Nuclear Generation Data 10/13/96 to 11/7/96 Item l Totals l l l l Units l PSL 01 l PSL-02 l l01 l Generation l M=hl 538.200 l 551,470 l l 1.089.670 l l Mwh l 27,794 l 28.377 l l 56,171 l l02 l Auxiliaries l03 l Net Output l Mwhl 510,406 l 523.093 l l 1.033,499 l l04 {Cepechy Factor l %l 97.34 l 99.76 l l 98.55 l l06 l Net Output Feeter l %l 97.34 j 99.76 l l 98.55 l l06 l Fuel Consumed l Mbtu l 5.578,212 l 5,742.046 l l 11,320,258 l l 07 j Urvt Operetten l Mrs. Min l 625.00 l 625.00 l l 625.00 l j 08 lMw Used Off !ine l Mwhl 0l 0l l 0l j l09 l Net Hast 7 tete j Btu /Kwh l 10.929.0 l 10.977.1 l l 10,953.3 l l 10 l Avg Net Oper Heatrete l Btu /Kwh l 10.929.0 l 10.977.1 l l 10,953.3 l l11 lBurnup j Efph l 605.35 l 623.11 l l l l12 l Accumulated Burnup l Efphl 2.215.90 l 6.996.25 l l l l13l Boron l Ppm l 25.005 l 18.494 l l l l1a lEquv. Bbl Fuel Consumed l SW l 882.628.5 l 908.551.5 l l 1,791,180.1 l l15 l Output Per Equiv. SW l Kwh/BW j 578.3 l 575.7 l l 577.0 l l Unit Power l Startup HSS HSD CSD Refuel l l l l l l l l 01 625.00 g 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 l16 l l [ l l l l l 02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 l l l 625.00 l l l l l l l )

l17 lPft. Mea He Gen. Output.Hr ;' hh, Hrs l 0l 0 l 0.0 l l18 lDete Ste Ma Hour con } l l l19 lDate Ste Mx Hour Out l l l Comrnente: See Unit 1 GADS report n

v\

v 0

lh

//

f!

12-22-1996 11: 31A/1 St Lucie Residrnt Office 1 407 461' 4622 P.03 L

' Date: 11/08/96 Florida Power And ught Company Page1of1 Time: 10:55:58 Outage toport For PSL 01 g Period : 10/13/96 to 11/7/96 l

Period Cumulative Cutage EEI Start Date End Date MW MM/DD HH:MN Type Curt Romerks NHH;MM Cycle DD:HH;MM Cycles Cumber Code MM/DD HH:MN 5.35 04:22:00 0 00001048 3341 10/17 16:25 10/17 22.00 6 88 4B LP Hester LeeE 42-00 06:16.00 0 00001049 3110 10/17 22:00 10/19 16.00 5 216 CondenserTube Lost 333 1A TCW Heat Exchanger 20:41 23:00.25 0 00001061 2825 11/04 02:44 11/04 23:25 5 7;17 25:22:30 0 00001053 3502 11/07 14:13 11/07 21:30 5 66 SB Heater Level Control Sys.

Outage Surnmary

Outoge Number of Total Equivalent Type Occurences Hours : MN Hours : MN 1 0 0:00 0:00 EFOR 3.23 2 0 0:00 0.00 96.77 l

3 0 0:00 0:00 EAF 1 e 0 0:00 0 00 4 75:33 20:10 FOF 3.23 5

6 0 0.00 0.00 '

0:00 MOF 0.00 A 0 0.00 D 0 0.00 0.00 PCF 0.00 E O 0 00 0:00 l

F 0 0:00 0:00 EFDHR$** 0:00 l 0 0 0:00 0:00 Total 4 75:33 20:10 Total Number of Hot Cycles = 0 Service Hours = 625:00 j

Total Number of Cold Cycles = 0 .

Total Number of X Cycles = 0 Total Number of Cycles = 0 i " Equivalent Forced Dersted Hours On Reserve Shutdown 1 - Full Forced 2 - Full Mainstenance i 3 - Full Planned j 4 - Reserve Shutdown 5 - Partial Forced 6 - Partial Maintenance A - Partial Plenned D - Startup failure E - Planned Extension F - Partial Planned Extension G - Peak Forced i

Y

11-12-1996 11:32Ari St Lucie R sident Office 1 407 461 4622 P.04 foge 1 of 1 Floride Power And Light Company Date: 11/08/90 Outage Report For PSL 02 Time: 08:04:22 Period : 10/13/M to 11/7/96 Outage eel start Date End Date MW Period Cumulative Number Code mea /DO HH:MN MM/DD HH:MN Type Curt Romerke HHH:MM Cycle DD:HH MM Cyclee

~ 00001050 4266 10/29 21:10 10/30 01:2$ A 75 TurtHne Verve Test 4:1$ 17:02:2$ 0 00001062 4267 11/0$ 10:54 11/06 00 10 5 59 ControlVelve Testing 13:16 24:01:10 0

Outege Summary

Outage Number of Te'el Equivalent Type Occurences Heure : MN Hours : MN 1 0 0:00 0:00 EFOR 0.15 2 0 0:00 0.00 3 0 0:00 0:00 EAF 99.79 4 0 0:00 0;00 5 1 13:16 0;SS PW ,

0.15 6 0 0:00 0:00 A 1 4:15 0:22 MOF 0.00 0 0 0:00 0:00 E O 0:00 0:00 0M F 0 0:00 0:00 EFDMRs** 0:00 0 0 0:00 0:00 Total 2 17:31 1:17 Total Number of Hot Cyclee = 0 Service Houre = 625.00 Total Number of Cold Cyclee = 0 Total Number of X Cyclee = 0 Mumber of Cyslee

O

" Equivalent Forced Dessend Heure On Reserve Shutdown 1 - Full Forced 2 - Pull Meineanence 3 - Full Planned o- Reserve Shutelown 6 - Partial Forced 6 - Portlel Memtenance A - Porttel Planned 0 - Startup feilure E - Planned Extenelon F - Pernal Planned Estenelon G - Peak Forced i

1 l

l i

l e

h

,4

' ST. LUCIE PLANT QUALITY ASSURANCE DEPARTMENT CORRECTIVE ACTION STATUS FPL I

ITEM IDENTIFICATION )

Audit Report No CSL.PM. 96 18

_ Finding No 1 Report Date _f 0/0795 ORGANIZATION /INDMDUAL RESPONSIBLE FOR RESPONSE:

R:sponse Ove Date ' t /c6/96 REPORTa BILITY:

Th3 item identified above ts/is not X 1 ocestrence (LER) potentia:ty reportable in accordance with 10 CFR 21 or as a reportable

.. Betev J Lowem g(/UDITCR, (/

See paragraphs 4 3 and 5 4 2 of SLOD 0116 i for instructions if the item any to these recusrtments i is potentiany reportab STATUS; .

onctuce Date of Entry Reference Object.ve Evcence if Any: Inrhaisi 10/07/96 issued report correctiv: action Condition response Report 8,/L e96-2163 was issued and signed by plant manager en 9/7/96 to ootain 11/7/96 Received Correctrve Action Response for evaluation The response is acceptable Tuvo PMAI s were PM96-11 112. *Revow fitness for duty program to ensure fatque as cov .

due 1/5517. An addeonel PMAl was genereted per the CR but not incluoede in the Cormesve Amens .

(PM96-11 110).

Specs BA The PMAI wd track the promse of rernoving the Overtrne Requrement from the T ech FINAL DISPOSITION: i Clos 1d and Ven6ed Lead Aucftor Date /f

/

4evcwer and <

10proved 'l

/

QA Supenosor/ Manager Date * [/

~.00 Of 161 Rev 3 Page ' of J

J FMAI Form Vers.on: 0

. . P M AI ,.Co rrective A ctio n c-PMAl Site:P_SL Source Number:PME11 110 Document: CR 96-2417 originator n ,,m Dept: PE Due Date: 12/0%7 Aselened NP'N LlQ LlO Q

Implementor Name Unit Outoge Mode SNONCR OWA

Title:

2 QA AUDrT QSL-PM-9618 Dese:1ption: 96-2417. REMOVE THE REQUIREMENT FORM THE TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS .

Due Date Extension / Transfer Responsibility Requests l tixtend To Date Appvd By Request by /Date tmpiementing Dept. Onginating Dept.

Supervoor /Date Implemeneng Dept ~

/Date Manager /Date Appvd By tixtend To Date ~ Request by /Date~

Implementing Dept. Ongmatang Dept' Supervoor /Date Implemenleig Dept

/Date Manager /De Reasons:

-XtLR Resp. To _ _ Request by iDate- Appvd By Imp 6ementmg Dept ~ Impeernenting Dept. Recapsent Dept /Date Supervoor /Date Manager /Date Reasone Comp:31 Section Compienon Date:

Close Out n~r rs_

W Implementor- _

t trrG..ntor Date:

(Signature)

Revowed By: (Pnnt)

I

rGTero.5 Supv. Date:

(Signature)

Approved By- (Pnnt)

I Date:

Implementmg Dept Mgr. (Signature)

Revowed By- (Print) ,

I Crs ein9 Dept Date:

(Signature)

(Pnnt)

.. . _ . _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ . - ~ . . . - _ . - - _ . . . . . .. . . . . _ . - . . . . _ _ . . . . . - . _ _ . _ . . - - .

i a & '

, PMAI Form Version: 0 PMAIC rrective A ctio n Fe j . . ~

PMAI Site:ESL l

! Source Orloinator Number:PMes-11-111 Documcnt: CR E2111 dept

E!d Due Date: 01/OfW97 a

i Assigned \

Department 13 ISMOLT I

t Q

a ;'- w Name Unit Outogo Mode SNO NCR OWA i

Title:

2 QA AUDff QSL-PM-518 i>

Description:

REVISE NP-306, PSL 202 AND AP 0010119 TO CLARtFY THE ISSUES LISTED ON PG 4 OF 6, i ATTACHMEUT 2 OF CR 96-2417.

e q _

i 4

4

.I Due Date Extension / Transfer Responsibility Requests l Appvd By

) ~Talene To Date - Request by /Dete implemeritsng DepL Onginetang Dept ,,is._

I Suponnsor /Date 1, Dept.

/Date Manager /Dets 4

Appvd By Extena To Date Request by /Date implementang Dept. Ongensung Dept L. J ._-. ,DepL Suponnsor /Date /Dete Manager 4

/Dete !

Reasons:

-_m. --

i

t Appvd By a

M t;M Resp. To Request by /DeT l implementing Dept implemenhng Dept Recupent Dept /Dets 4 Supenneer /Date Manager /Dete i

.. Reasons 7

I lComplogon Sectionl '

Comptemon Date:

- .. CW Documents-u i

j 1

i j implementor- 1

~

Date:

implementor (Signature) (Print)

Reviewed By: / Date:

i implemeneng Supv. (Signature) (Print)

Approved sy: i

mes:

} lmptomenung Dept Mgr, (Signature) (Print) l -

Revowed By: /

1 Date:

Origmc'Jng Dept (Signature) (Pnnt) i l

4 e i ~

PMAl Form Version: 0 P M AI C o rre ctiv e A ctio n Fb r i

PMAl Site:ESL Source Numcor: PME11 112 Document: CR E2417 Originator Dept: Py f

Due Data: 01/05/97 Assigned Department: ggg gygg g impeementor Name Unit Outege Mode SNO NCR OWA

Title:

82 QA AUDIT QSL-PM-96-18

Description:

REVIEW FITNESS FOR DUTY PROGRAM TO ENSURE THAT WORKER FATIGUE IS PROPERLY COVERED IN THE PROGRAM.

Due Date Extension / Transfer Responsibility Requests l Appvd By E.xtend To Date Request by /Date implemenbng Dept. Onginabng Dept. Implementag Dept.

Supervoor /Date /Date Manager /Date Appvd By Extend To Date

Rorguest by /Date -

Implementog Dept. onginabng Dept. implemeneng Dept.

Supervisor /Date /Date Manager /Date Reacons:

Appvd By At t.H Resp. To Request by /Date Impeementog Dept. Implementog Dept. Reapent N /Date Supervoor /Date Manager /Date Reasons:

Completion Sectionj compwoon Dais:

cione out Documente comments Implementor: i

Date:

Imp 6ementor (Signature) (Print)

Reviewed By* / Date:

Imptemenung Supv. (Signature) (Pnnt)

Approved By. f Dete:

Implemeneng Dort Mgr. (Signature) (Print)

Reviewed By- I U"

Origmeeng Dept. (Signature) (Pnnt)

. 6

, Inter-Office Correspondence 1 .-

FE JQQ-96-126 l To: W. G. White Date: September 12,1996 From: L. W. Bladow Department: JNA/PSL

Subject:

Gate Log Summaries Attached is a list of 12 badged personnel at St. Lucie site. For the purpose of auditing compliance with Tech Spec and Admm procedure requirements regarding overtime controls, QA is requesting a Gate Log printout of time spent on site for the two week period from August 24,1996 to September 8,1996.

L. W. Bladow 4E Quality Manager - PSL

~ ~~ ~ ~ 4P NI Ub y46I LWB/BJL/mkl Jp ft.

Attachment 9 W k 's g,

94.s QII ptf

{h.

i

1

' 8

~ cL %

j ooo\

l personnel List for Gate Log Summaries - 8/24/96 to 9/8/96 i

dere ne A-KfBeehd "o'd 0 Rotating Maintenance Shift Supervisor JJJ' 5 L' 3808 t

d. Brady Rotating Maintenance Shift Supervisor 24 7 -5/ - dok 9 1

/7.E. Burgess Rotating Maintenance Shift Supervisor ab%-76-##'7

Gigele Rotating Maintenance Shift Supervisor 338 fil O

A. Large Rotating Maintenance Shift Supervisor 246 -2 3 - 5154 l

'4fPrice Engineering Component Lead 350-46-412-)

MWolf Electrical /I&C Lead 464 'YI7 l AV'Jenkins Maintenance Project Coordinator 264 -# ~ '9 77

-0.Sk= U.EA& # Mechanical Maintenance / Primary Valves 3o 5 355 7 vfd J.P. Korte "1056 Electrical Maintenance Supervisor ar, s 3 s/0 ,

/R. Williams *afr5 S&C Engineering sa7-/t -6 W1 l

./J. Priolo Mechanical Engineering Lead o 44 5o2 7 :

}0 0 -J o 9 i ko - bo- s' '

i I

l I

e

/

SEVEMY EM b ~ Mlbb

& o 3 e s*n '

CONDITION CR NO.

L a O ' "" *" 1 C. [3J0 calende den REPORT "" U *2 '" O D O "" f

( 93 j g/ql9(, PAGE l OF _ D

/

l ' om

1. SYSTEM #/NAME 999 O l

COMPONENTNAME AII UNrr COMPONENTID _NA wCADON(BI.DCsa.EV) MO DISCOVERY DATEMME

/ ~Ad/ //v4 96 EVENTDAD:/UME _ NA /

CR ORJGINATOR 3. U. bow eb / '

DEFI7 PHONE - OA

2. MEN & W PMES AS NBCESSARM

/ TSf4 m eosomoN otscurnow " t/z ot.A r2 oy s 0 F C USA 7'.r m t GurOE4rMGS *t See. w%6ed (skM 3 Rote _'._ _Q _F_lu_o_z_u_q _w_t_u_._ _S_e_ ._ ^_2_s s_a_ _a_ _

I C, 9

~

g o

(c) tuwto 47:Acnows TAK2N ht W, fL/)tlT P1sQt//)&(M&l7 l W l'/I.'11[ d f

(D) kaCOMMENDED EDONW5UOGESTED AS$40 WEE

__________ ___________________________ l (E) ADOGONA1.LEFEREMCES PWONmsk Ponamese hwsk Penaus P m)______

See Cthe.d k heb &

3. ORIGNATORREQUnaaCOPYOFrTrMFnCOND uONREPORT SUPERVISOR NORF1 CAT 10N: I 0 WMJ mwr

/ /Djm4 $YES o N,A O NO ase.em

/- j

4. OPERABIIIIYREKmIABIIIIYDeaa:xMINATION .

OUTAGE RELATED7 YES NO \

A. OPERABt1RY A tot *MDfT REQUIRED Q WORK DAYS)

O B. rOTortiA1tY RsrORTABu cATT4cn sus woResurrr.ir usin)MODE HOm O YES QNO

_B. C. NO OPERABluTY CDNGRN/N7f REPORTABE POR ENTRY D(TD MODE g O o.ontrR

_ commons i., o i s NPSUBCRRP

/ \b' ! '""

) - DATEmME

5. CONDTDONREPORTASSIGNEDTO.

OoMMans Pni-& dous-O NP-700 REPORT O ROOTCAUSE SIS , 7 &N s PIANTGENERAL MANAGERGBCRRP e

7'- -

Mf' L t[ A--- DATE i/ / Y 9[

/

~

< i /

Fam54tHamendad) M QlB M >>aCRs ARE QA RECOdWHEN CLOSED; PMASE ENSURE Al.I. RESPONSES AND AT Fanm 54t3 > WRa,496

{-

coyomos at,om % -2I63 , ct , o, h6

s. m oa, nm n3< ,n x r a ume F1m $ , r. J A ticoww- / C.A M o " n

,s.<r

+==

l 7. INytsT1GATM3N: AMALYERS,EIE13C17vt ACnONS,SNERIC DOUCATIONS.DUPosmON DETAILS.wCEE INfrRUCnONS(ATTACH ADDmONAL PACES AS NECESSARY)

Tor onewr Iswes. Ipmnnb ca Tnc krauwear t%c Ew Coaaorrib uom ome2 0 T tSturS k"b H"E b>'d Apagss,b As A Gh hab r Rapow asy-Pn-96 \ 8 Fi&wr# .

A g. spec e- (0,m Br bet entrib on CE. T6 - 2 4 0 . 'Pu cos.1 i ofb. y oa.s SA o,J io os ; 9 6 . Tc-H h. Adm3 W/ Tm.s.

Miecmt.

= = = =

g

{ g me ~d a _ 0__ 'd _ _

s< wxxtum ______ __ _ _ __ __ _ ____

CAU3E

{ __ , , . , _ , , , _ _ _ . _

j - - - . . -

8. T10N g ,,, N6m r*o ao O m e REA 1001t50.5e O m a iocmi O m Et ena C?. ib-7A 17 Anax Om (E(*

9. O IISPOE! TION" N/A O arwOat O merAna Oonas

,O uss Aus

10. DR3PO5 MON SIGNATUtti (

N/A d ans apphsmMs)

PREPA12A hMg re <r

/

_( .pwtan v b

terr

/ *){

noe DAT l0 0t T[

on== Den ADcoNCUi- - M/&/ '

/ m oe.

FNSCTRG REvavt CJ m k DePAaTwswriaAD b. OC= htN / net i i \ I / ~ ***us

11. n smDredBUMSUle4ARY.Iff EYDrTINEDARR. V [ bODERESTR33 DON RIMASEDt O vus O wA O.-f m w $ lu O d S A % c. QM Adf -

1 i

k 5

arvwwrm. A I&rr / I ner / DIM

_ . - - Om v.

h 12. 71tO&NSC REVEW Of nupeut a Bime 10)

CHAltMAN Det ,

Y "a^"".i.s/M / _/ -

- 'od/6 t i

- CRs ARE.Q(RECORDS WHEN CLOSED; PLEASE ENSURE ALL RESPONSES AND ATTACHMENTS ARE MGlBil!!!

J .-

. ]l Block 2 continued. CR# 76-A l61 l Condition Description Page 3 Of _6_

l Violation of Overtime Guidelines A. During the period July 7, through August 4,1996,16.7% of i the target population exceeded one or more of the overtime guidelines.

B. Overtime deviation requests are not being filled out and I forwarded to the vault as required.

)

l C. Existing Engineering Department guidance does not provide )

adequate measures to authorize, document and monitor '

deviations of the overtime guidelines.

1 Criteria- PSLl/2 Technical Specifications 6.2.2.f Paragraph 1 Admmistrative procedures shall be developed and implemented to limit i the working hours of unit staff who perform safety-related functions; e.g.. senior reactor operators, reactor operators, health physicists, ,

auxiliary operators, and key maintenance personnel. !

Paragraph 2 l Adequate shift coverage shall be maintained without routine heavy use of .

overtime. The objective shall be to have operating personnel worta 1 normal 8-hour day, 40-hour week while the plant is operating.

However, in the event that unforeseen problems require substantial !

amounts of overtime to be used, or during major plant modification, on a temporary basis the following guidelines shall be followed:

f 1. An individual should not be pertnitted to work more than 16 hours1.851852e-4 days 0.00444 hours 2.645503e-5 weeks 6.088e-6 months straight, excluding shift turnover time.

2. An individual should not be permitted to work more than 16 hours1.851852e-4 days 0.00444 hours 2.645503e-5 weeks 6.088e-6 months in any 24-hour period, nor more than 24 hours2.777778e-4 days 0.00667 hours 3.968254e-5 weeks 9.132e-6 months in any 48-hour period, nor more than 72 hours8.333333e-4 days 0.02 hours 1.190476e-4 weeks 2.7396e-5 months in any 7-day period, all excluding shift turnover time.

3. A break of at least 8 hours9.259259e-5 days 0.00222 hours 1.322751e-5 weeks 3.044e-6 months should be allowed between work periods. including shift turnover time.

Any deviation from the above guidelines shall be authorized by

. s -

, i

.s

^

CR# % d/$3 Page 4 Of O the Plant General Manager or his deputy, or higher levels of management... .... Controls shall be included in the procedures such that individual overtime shall be reviewed monthly by the Plant General Manager or his designee to assure that excessive hours have not been assigned."

Nuclear Division Overtime Policy Revision 1

" Variations from this policy can only be authorized by an officer of the i Nuclear Division or his designee. In the event that unusual circumstances require the utilization of overtime in excess of the limits set forth herein, the officer or his designee taking action shall document, in writing, with a copy to the office of the undersigned, the circumstances which justify this extraordinary action."

AP0010119 " Overtime Limits for Plant Personnel" Rev.15 Parafraoh 8.2 '

"The nuclear plant personnel in all departments shall be covered by I these instructions."

Paraprach 8.4

" Deviation from the overtime guidelines shall be approved by the Vice President St. Lucie Plant, Plant General Manager, or Services Manager."

l Discualon: The sampled population consisted of 18 department managers and selected maintenance sup.rvisors. The individuals selected for review were identified using the July 1996 PSL organizational chart. Gate logs were

?

requested and obtamed for the period July 7 through August 4,1996. Time on site was totaled and entered into an Excel Database. .

Allowing 30 minutes for lunch and applying the established allowance for shift turnover to the criteria provided by in AP0010119, the following maximum thresholds for allowed hours on site were established:

1. No inore than 17.5 hours5.787037e-5 days 0.00139 hours 8.267196e-6 weeks 1.9025e-6 months in 24

2. No more than 27 hours3.125e-4 days 0.0075 hours 4.464286e-5 weeks 1.02735e-5 months in 48

3. No more than 82.5 hours5.787037e-5 days 0.00139 hours 8.267196e-6 weeks 1.9025e-6 months in 7 days

4. An 8 hour9.259259e-5 days 0.00222 hours 1.322751e-5 weeks 3.044e-6 months break exists between work periods (including shift turnover) t

. s g

/

CRs % -a l 4 3 Page 5 Of 6 No cases were identified in which criterion number (1) above was I exceeded. There were cases in which criteria number (2) and (3) werel exceeded. In this regard, three personnel exceeded the 27 hour3.125e-4 days 0.0075 hours 4.464286e-5 weeks 1.02735e-5 months in 48 hour5.555556e-4 days 0.0133 hours 7.936508e-5 weeks 1.8264e-5 months limit and two personnel exceeded the limit of 82.5 hours5.787037e-5 days 0.00139 hours 8.267196e-6 weeks 1.9025e-6 months in 7 days . In addition. one individual reentered the protected area prior to completing the required 8 hour9.259259e-5 days 0.00222 hours 1.322751e-5 weeks 3.044e-6 months break. In summary,16.7% of the sampled population exceeded the criteria at least once during the period reviewed.

AP0010119 requires that a form entitled " Request To Deviate From 4

Overthne Guidelines", be completed for all individuals who exceed the oveitime guidelines. One individual above had submitted a deviation report that covered eight identified cases in which criteria were exceeded. The l President of the Nuclear Division was not copied on this correspondence l as required by NP-306. The same individual also exceeded the guidelines on two other occtsions but had not submitted a deviation report. This is indicative of a failure in the review and monitoring process. There were i no forms relating to other violations of the guidelines on file in the plant quality records for the sampled period.

AP 0010119 provides clearly defined processes to identify, delineate and obtain approval for deviations from the overtime limit guidelines for use by nuclear plant personnel. In contrast, the Engineering Departnwnt manages ovenime deviations through direct use of the provisions of the Nuclear 1 Division, Ovenime Policy, NP-306.

One of the cases above in which the guidelines were exceeded is related to l the Engineering Department. In this case three ccMAIL messages were provided indicating approval by the appropriate Nuclear Division Officer to exceed the ovenime guidelines. The first of the messages addressed a

- specific project. The latter tv>o messages provided this permission to l

.uidress " outage issues", These messages did not provide a limitation on the

~ duration of the pennission. The messages were not copied to the President, Nuclear Division as required by NP-306. ccMail correspondence does not have record status with respect to Quality

, Assurance Program compliance. This level of administrative control is considered unsatisfactory to meet Technical Specification and Nuclear Division requirements.

Payroll time sheets were reviewed for individuals noted in excess of the overtime limits via the gate log review. In all cases concerning the management level time repons, no deviations in excess of the two week,

W l

1

]

I

.s CR#95-4/43 Page 6 Of

80 hour9.259259e-4 days 0.0222 hours 1.322751e-4 weeks 3.044e-5 months period were recorded.

It is noted that the time frame covered by this audit encompassed a period during which plant personnel were developing and implementing corrective actions to recent NRC Violations and a QA Finding in this area.

l However, an inter-office memo generated by the Plant General Manager on {

June 19,1996 and distributed to 44 management and key supervisory l personnel pre-dated the period of the audit sample and outli.ned the responsibilities of all plant personnel with respect to the ovenime

)

guidelines. Specifically, the memo reiterated the guidelines us stated in the Technical Specifications, NP-306, PSL-202, and AP0010119.

4*.

I I

l 9

e

\

SEVERITY EVE '( E CRNO. N

2 Y/2 'i

_ ^. o s e asn Cb1 TION i e. '"*""" !

C. % 30 calendar days REPORT "" o =a 'a o '

D. O mer gt gj jgg p3ag i op L N / o*

/ 1. sYsIEMCNAME 999 l

UNrr O QMPONENTID m MPONMTNAME l LCCADON(BtLGELEV) I DtsCOVERY DATEmME / EVWTDM/UME /

CR OR1GINATOR OOYOb0(MfMI DEPT / PHONE N / '71 I 1

2. (ATTACH AD0mONAL PAGES AS NECESSARY) a ) - o ucar no,, Please provide 30 day response to Finding # 2 ofQA Audit QSL-FM-96-18 in I accordance with the audit cover letter. Please note that the response to this Finding must be !

signed by the Vice President - PSL and must be received by QA by 11/6/96 l

- - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _\

l l

0 i l

g t

i l Provide audit response per audit cover letter - Recommended

- ' anignee - Frant Manager (E) AD0mONAL 9,EFDENCES(Pwo mamme(sk riocarkse Namubs(sl Pommes Casammt,eE)

QA Audit - QSL-PM-96-18

3. OR1GawiOR REquEsIs MPY Or cwsEn coNDmON REeORr

[t/ES O NO Bladow k[eum - h L.W M ow ONiA SvPERvnsORuonnCanON:

.y

/

4. OPERABI!JIY/REPORTABIIIIYDETERMINATION -

O OtJTAGE RELATED7 0 YES % NO A. OPERABFJTY ASSESSMDrT REQtARED 0 WORK DAYS)

B. POTDrnAILY REFoltIABLE (ATTACH ENS WORKSHEET,IF US!2))

MODE HOID? O YES 8 No C. NO OPERABIUTY CONCERN /NOT REPoltTABLE FOR D(TRY Df!O MODE g C D.ODER COMMENIS A/"f 0 nn

\

NPsaCRnP ,

0 A.mabhhb/

7

[ W /)I O me.cmi - -

ommug /O-ML / K1s~ !

t

! 5. CONomON REPORr AssiGNEo m. Few couMENIs

LJ' u na n J J ha O&-

2 O V 3 O NP 700 REPORT O ROOTCAUSE YSIS [ &QGATE & CORRECT s

PLANTGENERAL MANAGER /JBCRRP /2

/ /

DA1E /0 8b

/. /

if f f "CRs ARE QA RECORDS WHEN CLOSED: PLEASE ENSURE ALL RESPONSES AND ATTACHMEN13 ARE, f ann 54*3 (ourW MGIBHab Fann 543(Nan.5incked)Rev 496

e 3

^

. [**,

^j I

CONDTilON REPORT 8 6[a- 2YI 7 PAGE2OF L

{

~

f ' e NONCDF*u2NCE00) ,,,,,

m 3No g sy: ($k N Trl2.-- /

~I FtJNCTIONAL FALURE: YES X NO

i

7. N:

FB.Drr i SMGJkE _

j ANALYSLLNN ACTKD43 WHERJC DdPUCATIONS, CESP0am0N DETALS, WORK INSTRUCTIONS (ATTACH ADOm W4 $$$Ces C Tt OA)

AVdlT~ Adf94.T

/ /# @ M /41" M A f sfkad d l

CA 1 .USE CODE o.1 3 u__

CAUSE r-___ __ ____

o________

f._ ,_._ ,,,_,

8. DOCUMENDLI134 0 wA Y REVIEW RIiQURED PCR.:

so O m ETNo pzA ioomos O m GrNo !

a ioo Rai O ras ETNo on.R -

AsuEx: O vas EINo )

I 9.

N3LDESPOSTDON: T ** O arvoax 0 anAra O uss Anas Oorwen

10. DSPOSm0N 59GNATURE1 [A W" ')

ta=*.= -A/#gd / ZM.mw 4rW new ec(/m7 = //- f-

curr asse CHER DErr. HEADCONCUt*

, [ Daft PNSCTRO REVIEWF ["3 Yts No N

DemARTMENT HEAD ff -

s f same f - / O 8k K LA DATE It f8 Q fe

/ aseaus / /

V / /

I1. NNmSLENAM2 @ EVIBfTDGARE: O 1 O A[ IEEERESTRICTIONRREASED: O YES N/A M U 12.lSID W , % dakR. W fM R T k6 /.1C.

N Al f W

p efMAI M 78 ~ b OLAa E / II W

. eurk see- k v5.0 y w & e&"-"*

a 5

n,v,,,a. At (cver -

Af w Darn lll7lf4

> --- om er6 12, TRG&NSC REVEW Of sugared in Bhut 10) /)/ cg4ax4x DATE f "O N M '"

aCRs ARE(bArnECORDS WHEN Ct.OSED; PLEASE ENSURE ALL RESPONSES AND ATTACHMEN

(!7 _

LEGIBLE >>

. 3 .

1 Inter-Office Correspondence '

l

.c

""**?Wn1, P FPL g

p otp ,

JQQ-96-138 I l

To: J. Scarola Date: October 7,1996 I From: L. W. Bladow Department: .TNA/PSL

Subject:

Quality Assurance Audit l OSL-PM-96-18 Attached is the Monthly Performance Monitoring Audit for September. The following findings l are documented in this report and have been discussed with appropriate personnel and exited with PSL Plant Management.

Finding 1: Noncompliance w3h AP 1 / 2 - 0010123, " Administrative Control of Valves, Locks and Switches ' has resulted in three lost controlled keys by the Operations Department.

Finding 2: A. During the period July 7, through August 4, 1996, 16.7 % of a sampled population (3 individuals out of 18 sampled) exceeded one or more of the overtime guidelines. An additional review during the period of Aug. 24 through Sept. 8,1996, revealed that 41.7% of a sampled populatio'n (5 individuals out of 12 sampled) exceeded the guidelines.

B. Overtime deviation requests are not being filled out and forwarded to the vault as required.

C. Existing Engineering Department guidance does not provide adequate measures to authorize, document and monitor deviations from the overtime guidelines. -

Finding 3: In several cases, changes to plant systems that were made using the WIN process did not adequately address configuration control and 10 CFR 50.59 screening requirements.

Findine 4: A. The Plant General Manager has delegated approval authority for all procedure changes, new procedures, plant changes and other matters before the F.R.G. to the F.R.G. chairman or alternate without limitation.

B. In some cases Plant General Manager approval of the documents reviewed by the F.R.G. has occtured after the issuance of the documents.

Finding 5: The processes for the conversion of plant procedures to guidelines and for revisions to guidelines do not meet several regulatory requirements.

i Attachmsnt # _l

October 7,1996 CR # f6 -2.9 I? !

j. , -

Page 2 Page 3 l'

i

.( J _ of 6 _

Findina 6: ;

[ Records documenting completion of corrective action in response to NRC

{ and taken.

QA Audit Findings are not of sufficient detail to recreate the corrective i

] I Condition Reports have been generated for the above fmdings. In accord '

Assurance Program, please ensure that the Condition Reports which addres

responded to within 30 days of origination. As noted in SQM 16.0 responses must include the following: ;

t

1. t The results of review and investigation of the findings including identification of t probable root cause/ causal factors.

2.

j Results of your examination of potential weaknesses in departmental self-asses programs which may have impeded self-identification of the problem. !

1

3.

A determination of the generic impact of the finding, i.e., whether it extends to othe i areas, systems, drawings, procedures, etc., or whether it is isolated to those examp in the audited report.

\ '

4. !

Actions taken or planned to correct the fmdings identified and to prevent recurrence o j

! deficiency. Corrective actions should address the causal factors and enhancement audited department's self-assessment program. !'

5. 1

Date when full corrective action was or will be achieved.

6.

Identification of the individual (s) responsible for the corrective action.

j For those corrective actions which cannot be completed within 90 days from the 1 transmittal, the response shall (1) include an explanation why the action cannot be co 90 days and (2) include both the cognizant Vice President (or Director where the Directo report of the President - Nuclear Division) and the. Director - Nuclear Assurance on distributi 3

i Please note that the audit fmding response must be signed by the Vice President - PSL in be accepted by Quality Assurance.

i

An evaluation should be made of the fmdings identified in this audit to determine reporta We sincerely appreciate the cooperation we received from your staffduring the course of the au j

Please :. contact me at extension 7111 or the respective QA contact if you have any quest h ((Sv4 AVE-i ' L. W. Bladow g - Quality Manager - PSL . I LWB/DCUmkl

] Attachment Copies to: Dist. Attached i

~

. l Attach:r..a o I

@ FPL

.i CR

Page T G 2. t a 3 of (

AUDIT REPORT QSL-PM-96-18 Page 26 of 45 e.

Finding 2: A. During the period July 7, through August 4,1996,16.7% of a sampled population (3 individuals out of 18 sampled) exceeded one or more of the overtime guidelines. An additional review during the period of Aug.'24 through Sept. 8,1996, revealed that 41.7% of a sampled populatior. (5 individuals out of 12 sampled) exceeded the guidelines.

B. Overtime deviation requests are not being filled out and forwarded to the vault as required.

C. Existing Engineering Department guidance does not provide adequate measures to authorize, document and monitor deviations from the overtime guidelines.

Criteria: PSL1/2 Technical Specifications 6.2.2.f Paragraoh 1 i Admmistrative procedures shall be developed and implemented to limit the working hours of unit staff who perform safety-related functions; e.g., senior reactor operators, reactor operators, health physicists, auxiliary operators, and key l maintenance personnel. j Paragranh 2 l

Adequate shift coverage shall be maintained without routine heavy use of '

overtime. The objective shall be to have operating personnel work a normal 8-hour day,40-hour week while the plant is operating. However, in the event that unforeseen problems require substantial amounts of overtime to be used, or during major plant modification, on a temporary basis the following guidelines shall be followed:

1. An individual should not be permitted to work more than 16 hours1.851852e-4 days 0.00444 hours 2.645503e-5 weeks 6.088e-6 months straight, excluding shift tumover time.

2. An individual should not be permitted to work more than 16 hours1.851852e-4 days 0.00444 hours 2.645503e-5 weeks 6.088e-6 months in any 24-hour period, nor more than 24 hours2.777778e-4 days 0.00667 hours 3.968254e-5 weeks 9.132e-6 months in any 48-hour period, nor more than 72 hours8.333333e-4 days 0.02 hours 1.190476e-4 weeks 2.7396e-5 months in any 7-day period, all excluding shift turnover time.

I

3. A break of at least 8 hours9.259259e-5 days 0.00222 hours 1.322751e-5 weeks 3.044e-6 months should be allowed between work periods, including shift turnover time.

Any deviation from the above guidelines shall be authorized by the Plant General Manager or his deputy, or higher levels of management . . . ,

Controls shall be included in the procedures such that individual overtime w

l Attachm3nt # 1 EE

, CR # _ f(- 2.w /

98 y OI g AUDIT REPORT QSL-PM-96-18 Page 27 of 45 4

shall be reviewed monthly by the Plant General Manager or his designee !

to assure that excessive hours have not been assigned."

Nuclear Division Overtime Policy Revision 1

" Variations from this policy can only be authorized by an officer of the Nuclear

{

Division or his designee. In the event that unusual circumstances require the utilization of overtime in excess of the limits set forth herein, the officer or his designee taking action shall document, in writing, with a copy to the office of the undersigned, the circumstances which justify this extraordinary action." i f

AP0010119 " Overtime Limits for Plant Person l Rev.15 Paracranh 8.2 i

"The nuclear plant personnel in all departments shall be covered by these instructions."

Paracraoh 8.4

" Deviation from the overtime guidelines shall be approved by the Vice President St. Lucie Plant, Plant General Manager, or Services Manager."

i Discussion: The sampled population consisted of 18 department managers and selected maintenance supervisors. The individuals selected for review were identified using the July 1996 PSL organizational chart. Gate logs were requested and obtained for the period July 7 through August 4,1996. Time on-site was totaled

and entered into an Excel Database.

Allowing 30 minutes for lunch and applying the established allowance for shift turnover to the criteria provided in administrative procedure AP0010119, the following maximum thresholds for allowed hours on-site were established:

1. No more than 17.5 hours5.787037e-5 days 0.00139 hours 8.267196e-6 weeks 1.9025e-6 months in a 24-hour period.

2. No more than 27 hours3.125e-4 days 0.0075 hours 4.464286e-5 weeks 1.02735e-5 months in a 48-hour period.

3. No more than 82.5 hours5.787037e-5 days 0.00139 hours 8.267196e-6 weeks 1.9025e-6 months in 7 days.

4. An 8-hour break exists between work periods (including shift tumover).

No cases were identified in which criterion number (1) above was exceeded.

There were cases in which criteria number (2) and (3) were exceeded. In this

. regard, three personnel exceeded the 27 hour3.125e-4 days 0.0075 hours 4.464286e-5 weeks 1.02735e-5 months in 48-hour limit and two personnel exceeded the limit of 82.5 hours5.787037e-5 days 0.00139 hours 8.267196e-6 weeks 1.9025e-6 months in 7 days. In addition, one individual re-entered the protected area prior to completing the required 8-hour break. In summary, a

Attachment # /

4 9FR

.s CR # fS*~ 2 't O Page f _,_ o f [

AUDIT REPORT QSL-PM-96-18 Page 28 of 45 4

16.7% of the sampled population exceeded the criteria at least once during the period reviewed.

Administrative procedure AP0010119 requires that a form entitled " Request To Deviate From Ovenime Guidelines," be completed for all individuals who exceed i the overtime guidelines. One individual above had submitted a deviation repon l

that covered eight identified cases in which criteria were exceeded. The President of the Nuclear Division did not receive a copy of this correspondence as required by NP-306. The same individual also exceeded the guidelines on two other occasions but had not submitted a deviation report. This is indicative of a faihire in the review and monitoring process. There were no forms relating to other violations of the guidelines on file in the plant quality records for the sampled l period. '

Administrative procedure AP 0010119 provides clearly dermed processes to identify, delineate and obtain approval for deviations from the overtime limit guidelines for use by nuclear plant personnel. In contrast, the Engineering l Departrnent manages overtime deviations through direct use of the provisions of l the Nuclear Division, Overtime Policy, NP-306.

One of the cases above in which the guidelines were exceeded is related to the Engineering Department. In this case three ccMail messages were provided indicating approval by the appropriate Nuclear Division Officer to exceed the overtime guidelines. The first of the messages addressed a specific project. The latter two messages provided this permiss. ion to address " outage issues." These messages did not provide a limitation on the duration of the permission, and were not copied to the President, Nuclear Division as required by NP-306. Cc: mail correspondence does not comply with requirements for record status specified in the Quality Assurance Program. This level et admmistrative control is considered unsatisfactory to meet Technical Specification and Nuclear Division requirements.

Payroll time sheets were reviewed for individuals noted in excess of the overtime limits via the gate log review. In all cases conceming the management level time reports, no deviations in excess of the two-week, 80-hour period were recorded.

It is noted that the time frame covered by this audit encompassed a period during which plant personnel were developing and implementing corrective actions to recent NRC Violations and a QA Finding in this area.

However, an inter-office memo generated by the Plant General Manager on June 19,1996 and distributed to 44 management and key supervisory personnel pre-dated the period of the audit sample and outlined the responsibilities of all plant

Attrchment # /

W'" W G

EE

/

CR #

Page 5 of 6 AUDIT REPORT Qst-PM-96-18 Page 29 of 45 personnel concerning overtime guidelines. Specifically, the memo reiterated the guidelines as stated in the Technical Specifications, NP-306, PSL-202, and AP0010119. Condition Report 96-2163 was written to document the identified overtime violations and track corrective action.

A follow-up evaluation of security gate log entries and exits was performed on a pre selected population of twelve personnel involved in the 1B Transformer repair.

The security gate logs for the selected time period of August 24 through September 8,1996 were reviewed.

Additional violations of criteris (3) and (4) were identified. One case involved an individual violating the criteria requiring an 8-hour break between work periods.

Numerous violations of over 27 hours3.125e-4 days 0.0075 hours 4.464286e-5 weeks 1.02735e-5 months worked in a 48-hour period were identified.

Specifically 5 of the 12 sampled personnel, (41.7%), exceeded the criteria at least once during the evaluation period.

The overtime deviation file and the associated payroll time sheets were evaluated.

No deviation requests were found which apply to this target population and evaluation period. He payroll time sheet review revealed that personnel were not effectively tracking on-site time.

His is a repeat Finding, the same problem having previously been identified in 1 Finding 3 of Audit QSL-PM-96-08. I l

Recommendations:

The following recommendations are offered to aid you in responding to the finding. However, additional or alternate actions may be necessary based upon your investigation of the finding and causal factors and generic implications l identified. Your response must address each of the five elements in the. audit l cover letter.

1. Enforce the technical specification requirements as outlined in Admmistrative Procedure 0010119, Nuclear Policy 306 and St. Lucie Policy 202.

2. Ensure that all management personnel record and track on-site time.

. 3. Engineering should develop an overtime guideline procedure or follow the PSL site AP.

Attachment # 2.

f CR # VS~*4'?

Condition Report No.96-2417 Response Page / of-. i Section 7.

Discussion:

l This condition report was written by Quality Assurance to ensure I a response to finding #2 of QA Audit QSL-FM-96-18.

There were three observations contained in the finding: l A. During the period July 7, through August 4, 1996, ,

3 individuals out of 18 sampled exceeded the overtime j guidelines and during the period of August 24, through -

_ September 8,1996, 5 of 12 people sampled exceeded the overtime guidelines.

)

B. Overtime deviation request were not filled out for the above ;

examples. !

C. The Engineering Department does not provide adequate guidance l to comply with the overtime guidelines. l As the QA findings indicate, there is some variation in the understanding and interpretation of the overtime guidelines.

Thi-s variation has existed for some time and has been the target of many attempts to correct or eliminate. The issue originates with the NRC concern with operators and other key personnel, doing safety related work, while being too tired to do an effective job. !

The interpretation and applicability of this has changed over the years as we have tried to implement it under different circumstances. This changing interpretation exist through out the industry and within the company as different companies have implemented it differently and we have implemented it differently i at our three sites. Despite the several times that this issue has been addressed it still is not clear who it applies to, what work ;

it applies to or what has to be done to comply. Attempts to improve one part of the problem has often resulted in adding to the problem elsewhere. Mixed in'with the basic issue that the NRC is concerned about are issues involving overtime distribution within the Union, budget constraints and control as well as industrial safety. The fundamental reason that caused the overtime guideline to be developed no longer exist. During the time that the guidelines were invoked' the industry routinely 4

worked operators for extended hours. This was at a time that the industry was growing very fast and new units were starting up which required more operators. Operators were moving from one

AK2chmsnt # 2.

CR # 9S ~L YI ?

,. Page 1 of 4 plant to another and it was very difficult to have a full staff.

Many companies were training operators as fast as they could but still could not keep up. It was routine for operators to work very long hours even if the unit was not in refueling. The NRC became concerned about this and issued the overtime guidelines.

This was before there was a fitness for duty program. Those conditions no longer exist, the industry has stabilized and most companies have little trouble maintaining a full staff of operators. The overtime today is low compared to the amount typically worked back then. We now have the fitness for duty program which is aimed at ensuring that all workers are fit all the time. This is behavior and observation based and accounts for all reasons that an individual may be at risk. We have gotten increasingly detailed in our attempt to comply with the guidelines and made it more and more difficult for more and more people to do their jobs. We have lost sight of the basic concern and instead focused on compliance with administrative details.

The technical specifications state that the guidelines only apply to safety related functions. Generic Letter 82-12 clarifies that

" key maintenance personnel" is defined as:" Key maintenance personnel are those personnel who are responsible for the correct performance of maintenance, repair, modification or calibration of safety-related structures, systems or components, and who are personnel performing or immediately supervising the performance of such activities." This seems to imply that the guidelines apply to work done on plant equipment and this is further strengthened by GL 82-12 when it states that the definition of

" safety-related" is the same as applied to electrical equipment in 10 CFR 50.49 (b) (1) .

Some examples of variation of interpretation and understanding that , exist are: -

Technical specifications

1. List specific examples of who it applies to and all of them are hands on workers who do work on plant equipment that di,rectly affects the unit. Other company documents imply that it applies to all division people.

2. It specifically says that it applies to safety related functions. Other' company documents imply that it applies to all work.

2.

Atttchmsnt O CR # f#~1fl7 j Page } of C

3. It uses the term "should" for the actual hour limits but uses the term "shall" for the monthly review-and authorization.

This implies that it is more important for management to review what is happening on an ongoing basis than it is to control what is happening on a day to day basis.

4. It says that the objective is that " operating personnel work a normal-8 hour day, 40 hour4.62963e-4 days 0.0111 hours 6.613757e-5 weeks 1.522e-5 months week while the unit is operating".

None of the implementing documents are designed to produce that results. This was also noted by the resident in NRC inspection report 96-09.

NP-306

1. Does not specify who is covered and who is not.

2. Does not refer to or invoke any other document.

3. Uses the term "should" in all cases of specifics.

4. Does specify an exception that allows 84 hour9.722222e-4 days 0.0233 hours 1.388889e-4 weeks 3.1962e-5 months work week for STAS.

5. Does not specify what work it applies to.

6. Uses the terms " unusual circumstances" and " extraordinary action" when referring to exceeding and approving exceeding the guidelines. This implies that it is really not to be done.

And in fact the difficulty in justifying exceeding the guideline caused people to work around by using different interpretations of what it meant.

PSL-202

1. It is written with cost control as the main theme.

2. Does not specify who is and is not covered.

3. Does not specify what work is covered.

. 4. Uses the term "should" in all cases.

5. Refers to and implements NP-306 and does not refer to any l other document.

\

AMrchmsnt # 1 I

.' ' CR # fi- Lyt 7

.( Page_-4 __ of _ 4 AP No.0010119

1. Specifically states in the scope that it applies to overtime work on safety related functions.

1

2. Uses both terms " plant personnel" and " Nuclear Division personnel" when referring to steps in the procedure. ]

It is clear from the above examples that the issue of overtime work on safety related functions is not clearly understood, interpreted or applied.

In an. effort to improve this situation the following corrective actions are proposed:

1. IfEiuvvhequirement from the technical's 1 cations. l 1

Other companies afe' acing

kin nd e it does not eliminate ~

the need to control overt , it does r administrativo b of compliance. A PMAI will be o implemen s, the responsibility is the licensing L ic-7 ment.

qh jg ~

p 7-f ql

2. Revise NP-306, PSL-202 and AP No 0010119 to clarify the h8 following issues:

1. What work the guidelines apply to. They should apply on y to safety related work.

2. What classifications they apply to. They should apply only to those-persons that do safety-related activities as defined in GL 82-12,

3. What the record of compliance is. It should be the time sheet.

4. How the review must be done..

5. How all of the departments on site will implement the guidelines. AP No.0010119 Should be used by all.

departments.

A PMAI will be opened to implement the above changes, the responsibility is the services department. I5 gg, , g _ g fl

3. The Fitness for Duty Program should be reviewed to ensure that worker fatigue is properly covered in the program. A PMAI will be opened to implement this, the responsibility is the

. services department. Sec QG-p l-lil . j I

i

-i A

Aurchmsnt # :

i .

CR # fl~1Y'7 -

l of 8

. Page # l I

The following six items are in response to SQM 16.0. [

t

1. A review of the information related to this issue reveals that ,

there were no violations of any document. The tech spec applies to safety related functions, NP-306 does not specify ,

what it applies to. PSL-202 does not specify what it applies to. And AP No. 0010119 specifically applies to safety relate 6 l functions. There was no evidence that any of the examples in the finding involved safety related functions. Discussions with the individuals indicate that they were not performing or ,

_ _ directly supervising safety-related work as defined by GL 92- L

12. Since none of the work involved safety related functions

'nd the requirement is for compliance on safety related functions there can be no violation'. However the root cause

_ and causal f actors for the apparent violation nust be the j confusion over the application of the overtime guidelines as pointed out above.

j -

I

2. A review of the potential weaknesses to self-identification reveal the following. Since the issue was basically one of management oversight it is the management self-assessment *

-process that needs to be evaluated. The management self- l 4

assessment process basically consist of the Quality Assurance organization and the Condition. Report process. Both of these ;

processes identified the continuing problem.

3. The generic issue is why our repeated efforts over several years to improve a given problem frequently result in attempting to manage ever increasing detail while missing the basic point. This seems to say something about the way we respond to problems. It seems like we often only respond in small detail, one at a time and the small details add up over time to something other than what was originally intended. It seems that our corrective actions sometimes miss the mark and do not have the intended results as our process is focused on compliance rather than results. There may in fact be many more ,

areas where this is a problem. Our self-assessment <

pr,ocess should help us with this.

+

.4. The corrective actions proposed are listed in the above discussion section. ,

=

l

e . -_ _. _ - .- -

l.

Att chm 2nt 0 A CR # N" #

, Page 4 of [

5. Since the implementation of the corrective action affects both plants, the development of optimum policies and procedures l needs to be done in a coordinated effort. The expectation is to have the specific corrective actions clearly defined and ca9.cner 4

-u e-%ani. <-r ig l;.,~ucau.ou with-in 90 days of this response.

9g l

6. The responsibility for each of the corrective actions is as p, shown above, pg Approved: .

J.A. Stall, Site Vice-President 88 /L, /4 C Date:

//

i l

l l

i I

l i

l l

l

{

PMAl Form Version: 0 P M A I C o r r e c t i v e A c t i o n Fo

, a a PMAl Site:2.3L So"rce Originator Number: EM96-11 110 Document: CR 96 2417 Dept: P,33 Due Date: 12/05/97 Assigned Department: g g g implementor Name Unit Outage Mode SNO NCR OWA

Title:

2 QA AUDfT QSL-PM-96-18

Description:

REMOVE THE REQUIREMENT FORM THE TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS. SEE ATTACHMENT 2 OF CR 96-2417.

1 Due Date Extension / Transfer Responsibility Requests Appvd By Extend To Date Muest by /Date Imptomenhng Dept. Onginating Dept. Implemenbng Dept.

Supervisor /Date /Date Manager /Date i

I' Appvd By Extend To Date Request by /Date implemenbng Dept. Ongneung Dept. Implementing Dept.

Supervisor /Date /Date Manager / Deen !

Reasons: l i

Appvd By M bR Resp.To Request by /Date implemenbng Dept. Implementing Dept. Recip. erst Dept. /Date Supennsor /Date Manager /Date Reasons Completion Sectionl Complebon Date:

Closecut Documents.

Comments:

Implementor: I Date:

Implementor (Signature) (Pnnt)

Revewed By: I Date:

Implementing Supv. (Signature) (Print)

Approved By: / Date:

implementing Dept Mgr. tSignature) (Print)

Revowed By: I Date:

Originatmg Dept. (Signature) (Print)

t%

4

. PMAI Form Version: 0 P M AI C o rrective A ctio n Fo

,[ .

~

PMAI Site:ESL 4

Source Originator 3~

Number: PM96-11-111 Document CR 96-2417 Dept: EM Due Date: 01/05/97 Assigned Depanment 13 IS/ HOLT Q implementor Name Urdt Outage Mode SNO NCR OWA

Title:

2 QA AUDIT QSL-PM-96-18

Description:

REVISE NP 306. PSL-202 AND AP 0010119 TO CLARIFY THE ISSUES USTED ON PG 4 OF 6 ATTACHMENT 2 OF CR 96-2417.

Due Date Extension / Transfer Responsibility Requests Apovd By Extend To Date Request by /Date implemenung DepL Onginahng Dept implementmg Dept.

Supervoor /Date /Date Manager /Date Appvd By Extend To Date Request by /Date implementmg Dept Ongmatmg Dept implemenung Dept Supervoor /Date /Dete Manager /Date Reasons:

_.Al-LR Resp. To Appvd By Request by /Date implemenhng Dept implemenbog Dept.' Recapsent Dept /Date Supervoor /Date Manager /Date Reasons Completion Section Comp 6eton Date:

Close Out Documents:

Comments:

Implementor- /

Date:

Implementor (Signature) (Pnnt)

Reviewed By: / Date:

Impeemenung Supv. (Signature) (Pnnt)

. Approved By- / Date:

Implemenung Dept. Mgr. (Sagnature) (Print)

Reviewed By: / Date:

Ongmatmg Dept. (Signature) (Print)

__ . . . . . _ . . . - - - - - - - - = - - - - - '

/__ ~

PMAI Form Version: 0 P M Al C o rrectiv e A ctio n Fb f

PMAl Site:P_SL Source Originator Number: PME11112 Document: CR %2417 Dept: P_M Due Date: 01/05/97 Assigned Department: g g g implementor Name Unit Outage Mode SNO NCR OWA

Title:

2 QA AUDIT OSL-FM 9618

Description:

REVIEW FITNESS FOR DUTY PROGRAM TO ENSUitE THAT WORKER FATIGUE IS PROPERLY COVERED IN THE PROGRAM.

l Due Date Extension / Transfer Responsibility Requests l Appvd By Extend To Date Request by /Date implementing Dept. Ongsnabng Dept. Implemenhng DepL Supervisor /Date /Date Manager /Date Apped By Extend To Dete Request by /Date Irnplementag Dept. Onginabog Dept implemonung Dept Supennsor /Date , /Date Manager /Date Reasons: _

Appvd By Al-t;M Reep. To .. Request by /Date implemenbng Dept. impiernenbng Dept. Recapent Dept. /Date Supervisor /Date Manager /Date Reasons:

l Completion Sectionl Compiebon Date:

Cloe+out Documents Comments:

~ -

Implementor. / Date:

. Implementor (Signature) (Pnnt)

Revewed By- / Date:

Implementmg Supv. (Signature) (Print)

. Approved By- / Date:

Implementing Dept. Mgr. (Signature) (Print)

_ Reviewed By: / Date:

Origanabng Dept. (Signature) (Print)

g,, - 3.; u . fg - 56 I'd

/si . 7f :'s? 'N

,. hter-Office Correspondence FPL JQQ-96-114 To: W. G. White Date: August 16,1996 From: L. W. Bladow Department: JNA/PSL

Subject:

Gate Log Summaries Attached is a list of 18 badged personnel at St. Lucie site. For the purpose of auditing compliance with Tech Spec and Admin procedure requirements regarding overtime controls, QA is requesting a Gate Log printout of time spent on site for the two week period of 7 July 96 to 4 August 96.

L. W. Bladow Quality Manager - PSL LWB/ sir Attachment e

. . 1 9

J. A. Stall Vice President - St. Lucie Plant R. E. Dawson Business Systems Manager C. L. Burton 5m Id. nde: Services E. Weinkam Licensing Manager G. J. Boissy Materials Manager J. Scarola Plant General Manager R. Sipos Steam Gen. Replacement Project Manager L. C. Morgan Human Resource Manager J. Marchese Maintenance Manager H. Johnson Operations Manager ;

C. Wood Acting Work Control Manager D. Denver Site Engineering Manager L. W. Bladow Quality Assurance Manager K. Beichel Rotating Maintenance Shift Supervisors J. Brady Rotating Maintenance Shift Supervisors E. Burgess Rotating Maintenance Shift Supervisors

. F. Gigele Rotating Maintenance Shift Supervisors L. Large Rotating Maintenance Shift Supervisors M

6 h

W

- e ,

r Paga 5 of 5

, ST. LUCIE PLANT ADMINISTRATLVE PROCEDURE NO. 0010119, REVISION 14

/[M OVERTIME LIMITATIONS FOR PLANT PERSONNEL FIGURE 1 REQUEST TO DEVIATE FROM OVERTIME GUIDELINES TO: Vice President - St. Lucie Plant / Plant General Mgr/Sennees Mgr.

FROM: E MARC 4ESE DATE fdM

SUBJECT:

DEVIATION FROM OVERTIME GUIDELINES FOR (NAMES): /R

3. hA h RC.A EsE /R l ORIGINATOR 1

Request the below listed individuals to exceed the follovnng overtime guidelines !

Greater than 16 hours1.851852e-4 days 0.00444 hours 2.645503e-5 weeks 6.088e-6 months straight Greater than 16 hours1.851852e-4 days 0.00444 hours 2.645503e-5 weeks 6.088e-6 months ici a 24 hour2.777778e-4 days 0.00667 hours 3.968254e-5 weeks 9.132e-6 months period Greater than 24 hours2.777778e-4 days 0.00667 hours 3.968254e-5 weeks 9.132e-6 months in a 48 hour5.555556e-4 days 0.0133 hours 7.936508e-5 weeks 1.8264e-5 months penod

/ Greater then 72 hours8.333333e-4 days 0.02 hours 1.190476e-4 weeks 2.7396e-5 months in a 7 day period A break of at least 8 hours9.259259e-5 days 0.00222 hours 1.322751e-5 weeks 3.044e-6 months (including shift tumover time) 1 SCOPE OF WORK W $2 MTA.

BASIS FOR DEVIATION O Personnel have unique quattrication/ training Sufficient rest will be provided

. O Turnover or personnoi wouid leopardize quaiity of work O p <- ve ioet time wouid occur and sufficient testing wiii ensure quality of actMty Other DETAILED PLANATION OF BASIS FOR DEVIATION MIC. M Ailtc3 ESE. IbEs r PE1EFcnN hD ' pas t c. A V bJoDc. '

Am Fi t.t.6 tu A C, oRoi 4A.Ticc CA. pac-st-v. PtoPen t'as 7 SopEpJ So%

. t TeAN6 Po12 TAT o W D F ? E40t e eo >

mi- ,es aitoatoe.o ecoii.oisaw>

. APPROVAL Approved I-Preement - St. Luoe Plant / Plant Gen. Mgr. / Servees Mgr. (arse one)

ROUTING Oryginal to Nuclear Records Vault.

- . - - - . - - - - . . . - ~ . - - . - . - . - . . - _ - . -

7e n du - r%* 10 *

s' Q, y n

,, g , __ e

. n!! '! U ~ "' pm 7 i inter Offica Ccrreapandencs ; w y, g!

r FPL.

i j To: Department Heads Date: June 19,1996 I

From: J. Scarola ,

Department: Plant Manager i

j

Subject:

OVERTIME LIMITS

) It has come to my attention that there have been recent violations of the plant's policy j on overtime.

SL Lucie Plant has administrative and regulatory limitations on the use of overtime, i

both during refueling outages and during normal operations. The plant's Technical Specification, FPL Nuclear Division Nuclear Policy (NP-306), and St. Lucie Plant

Policy (PSL-202), state:

i

! 1.

An individual should not be permitted to work more than 16 hours1.851852e-4 days 0.00444 hours 2.645503e-5 weeks 6.088e-6 months straight, excluding shift turnover time.

2.

An individual should not be permitted to work more than 16 hours1.851852e-4 days 0.00444 hours 2.645503e-5 weeks 6.088e-6 months in any 24-i i

hour period, nor more than 24 hours2.777778e-4 days 0.00667 hours 3.968254e-5 weeks 9.132e-6 months in any 48-hour period, nor more than 72 hours8.333333e-4 days 0.02 hours 1.190476e-4 weeks 2.7396e-5 months in any 7xiay period, all excluding shift turnover time, i 3.

' A breakof at %8 hours should be allowed between workperiods, including shift turnover time.

{

For St. Lucie Plant, variations from the overtime limits can be authorized on a case-by-I case basis, in advance, by the Plant General Manager or the Services Manager.

\ -

I Violations of the overtime limits will not be tolerated and are subject to disciplinary action. We personally need to be aware of overtime worked, both with respect to our own working hours and those of the people who work for us, to ensure that we do not violate these limits.

Please share this memorandum with your direct reports.

Copies: L. W. Bladow C. L. Burton .

R. E. Dawson D. J. Denver C. A. Pell J. A. Stall E. J. Weinkam p' 8T ,m ,w .., 4

e.

= . .

w 7 "g (M ?$ - !i ,

, Author: Jia Scarsic et USFPL820

/,w" # O '

Dato: 7/25/96 9:46 AM Priority: Normal TO: " Joe Marchese f TO: Chuck Wood j TO: Hugh Johnson

! CC: J A Stall at USFPL830 CC: Chris Burton at USFPL810 CC: Bob Dawson at USFPL810

Subject:

Overtime Restrictions

.................................... Message Contents ------------------------------------

It has come to my that there have been instances where individuals have

+

exceeded the overtime requirements in the past and reflected the time on their time sheets over a longer duration period thus falsely documenting that they met the OT restrictions. I want to make it extremely clear that this practice is not acceptable. This practice will be considered f alsificcien of cotepany records and may lead to discharge. Make certain your subordinates clearly understand my expectation in this area so that there are no surprises.

The budget overruns that we currently have make it imperative that we closely manage any discretionary expenditures. Effective immediately 3

l following unit i return to service, all prescheduled overtime must be reviewed and authorized by you as managers for each individual not just by job.

The department heads, NPS, and rotating maintenance managers j

continue to have the authority to approve emergency OT in direct support of unit operation. I expect you to manage OT so as not to incur any additional LCO out of service time as a result of this requirement.

4 2

]

i 4

i

) ee j .

a D

4 m me== m.m me.

Time Report n.. i. u== - -- .--

we nuareman noexcernous m R === = R somesxt: .u.a. ===

.i ,, = . . -

114-52 140s derela. James em l m,

1 07 18 ts {

m. == i 6 i me met i s.. w fie r. tsan aan esas rte mas rnse su is.n j iam ) asma rne man men t pas TOTAL vue cows 36 07 08 09 le 11 12 13 l 14 l 15 16 17 13 i 19 Mouns a*" 01 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 ) 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 80.0 i

02 y '=== 03

umus

"" 04 summs aanlassens um 21 mm

~

m M M

i -

= 22 summa N

01 sm.e.,

N e.w as.

rea waruus u u u u u u u u u u 80.0 ff mates GEBf OfIIIALs 0l a .

-._.._ vise enesse tsan (sum esom true tweni frum aan tsan tsum asem true nvini frum aan amassstaties se emen MTae [moes 08883P1000 I I

. e mumuut an a suum muns more maan amt n Account Description sun a ears ears es tars suuss u u s,namn amats Regular l Hohday I

. vacanon l Ernp6oyee ligness I other desenbe =>

M TOTALS l NN NN $

M ll. Atl MPteTE0 48 G

- - E0 * ' /

v

/f)mA ynum ene j .

APPROVID tv nana seu l

..m.m.

3 5

i e rum.mu mm.

Time Report a.. = == =m 4

mo som a.

mme mm narnom m n t--.

. n musu

. m

-s--

..c i .m.

is, m.m m.

4 2064 6 2186 Mokhese.Jessph esas 1 Of II 96 l w e ne mas aan am amm me mim mm em man man een me en om em TOTAL tus emas OS 87 88 M 10 11 12 13 14 15 15 17 18 19 i NeURS

c1 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 d.0 8.0 8.0 80.0 i

- " 02 1

y """ 03

meus

""" 04 ammmma 3,

4 1

J

! * * * =

r 16 l

as 21 am

[

e ass 25 ass

., g .w 01

.ms

[ 8'" 22 t emme i 25 4

k

tau sess terms as as sa as es as as u as s 80.0 *"m',"

.,me.

m.

o1.,m s.

i tier. asumes i

(SAT) (SUN) ASONI 1700 mfd) (TNUI fan (SAfl (Suel NOWI RUC MEDI (TNUI WAS nasemmanas a

'ases m5amPfl0s "shes mSM l t

I amam amaanistanes un ammeramusemamme SIS 4

asumust om a asumumaums muun mart maan ma et Account Description amms e ammrr sees a urs esen u u smann amas Regular l 1

l I

Hohday l

^

_ Vecocon l I 1

q Employee lanoes l \

Otner desenbe em I 4

?

i 1

4 l

4- I . . ,

I i .,

{ TOTALS k

au a tu masua esameus asse muu seusse seuss -

Atuangg spenfa m : _

PREPARED IY

[

v -

maass sees -

] / ,

APPROVID tv staast ses O .

se

I Author: Bill Bohlko at unfp1211 !

l Date: 7/22/96 6:27 AM Priority: Normal / !

TO: Dan Denver at USFPL800

Subject:

Re: Revised Overtime Exceedance I

Message contents -----------------------------

DJD, i

Overtime exceedances are approved. Affected individuals should return to normal schedule as soon as is practicable.

WHB

. Reply Separator

Subject:

Revised Overtime Exceedance Author: Dan Denver at USFPL400 Date: 7/21/96 5:02 PM The purpose of this memo is to request your approval for a specific exception from the Nuclear Division overtime guidelines.

The St.Lucie Plant Manager has requested that Nuclear Engineering continue to support the Unit 1 outage issues. In order to meet this request, the JPN personnel listed below will exceed the overtime guidelines:

Gordon McKenzie, John Priolo, and Dan Denver As compensatory measures: I The amount of overtime will be minimized. St.Lucie Project supervision I will assure that the individuals are not fatigued. St.Lucie Project supervision will carefully review the quality of safety related products.

Late Note:

In addition,-Walt Edwards exceeded 24 in 48 hours5.555556e-4 days 0.0133 hours 7.936508e-5 weeks 1.8264e-5 months on 7/18 and 7/19 to support revised SG level calibration calculations.

e

_ _ _ _ _ _ . . ~ . _ _ -__ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ . _ . _ _. . . . . . . . _ _ _ _ _ . . _ . _ _ _ . _

1 ,-

Author: Bill Bohlko et unfp1211 Date: 7/19/96 5:02 PM

. Priority: Normal e a

TO: Dan Denver at USFPL800

Subject:

.Re: Overtime Exceedance

Message Contents -----------------------------

DJD, I You are authorized to exceed overtime. Please ensure that you obtain i

appropriate rest time before resuming your normal schedule and keep me j cppraised of your time worked for the next two weeks.

i ;

WHB Reply Separator j

Subject:

Overtime Exceedance l 4

Author: Dan Denver at USFPL800 i j Date: 7/19/96 3:40 PM l i

L The purpose of this memo is to request your approval for a specific !

4 exception from the Nuclear Division overtime guidelines. I i

The St.Lucie Plant Manager has requested that Nuclear Engineering continue to support the Unit 1 outage issues. In order to meet this ;

i i

request, the JPN personnel listed below will exceed the overtime '

guidelines:

I Dan Denver i l As compensatory measures:

The amount of overtime will be minimized. St.Lucie Project supervision

' will assure that the individuals are not fatigued. St.Lucie Project supervision will carefully review the quality of safety related products,

)

a I

i

~

I I

l N

i Author: Bill Bohlko at uafp1211 Date: 6/22/96 8:09 AM Pri6rity: Normal f

. TO: Dan Denver at USFPIA00 ,

j

Subject:

Re: Overtime Guideline Exceedance

Message Contents ---------------- '------------

Nuclear Engineering shall accommodate the request of the St. Lucie Plant i Manager. Please advise me when the exceedance period is over and regular !

work schedule is resumed.

WHB i

Subject:

Overtime Guideline Exceedance Author: Dan Denver ,

j Date: 6/21/96 14:22

~

The purpose of this memo is to request your approval for a specific

__ exception from the Nuclear Division overtime guidelines.

The St.Lucie Plant Manager has requested that Nuclear Engineering j continue to support the Unit 1 NI Unit 2 feedwater regulating valve j efforts around the clock. In order to meet this request, the JPN 1

personnel ]isted below will exceed the overtime guidelines:

)

] Dan Denver '

Dave Wolf

! As compensatory measures:

jl ..The amount of overtime will be minimized. St.Lucie Project supervision ;

3 will assure that the individuals are not fatigued. St.Lucie Project l l supervision will carefully review.the cuality of safety related i

, products.

4 J

i l

{ 1

~

l 4 _ _

L I

i m_------._-._ _.---- - - _ -- . - . - - , - - v -

Form Ol 18 QAD 13-3 2/15/94

, / Name: Bobby J. Lowery FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY Audit Number:

RECORD OF TECHNICAL SPECIALIST QSL-PM-96-18 AND AUDITOR-IN-TRAINING l QUALIFICATIONS REASO': FOR THIS ACCOMPANYING AUDITOR'S PARTICIPATION Auditor in training for principal auditor certification.

AREA OF RESPONSIBILITY FOR THIS ACCOMPANYING AUDITOR Per Management direction, Review and evaluate plant compliance with requirements

) of Technical Specification 6.2.2.f " Overtime Guidelines."

4 QUALIFICATION 1

S Adequate Technical and Communication Skills Commensurate with Responsibilities Assigned 4

i e Instructed in the Audit Plan and Scope e Indoctrinated in the Applicable Portions of the FPL QA Program Qualified By -

7 Lead Auditor Date Original: Audit File Copy: QA Training Coordinator

v SEVERTIYIIVEL CR NO. 9 - 9 / l# b aos e n CONDITION :

E U "O "8 "

i g C l" REPORT 4

D. ] Other g/gM PAGE 1 OF 1 g / nds

/ 1. SY TIEM #/NAME 999 / Moan.in ee h 6UNTT_Q_. COMPONENTID dk OOMPCHENTNAME _h

^

I.OCADON @gg 5sa / (, L DLIOOVERY DA1E/ TIME 9_.4-96 / Ofoo EVENTDATE/nME 9 -'1 - 9 G /* O S/ S

CROR]GINAIDR _f ~4h C Ho a- DEFT / PHONE C5 / 7o7/

g (A7 TACH ADDmONAL PMES ASWENetARY)

(A) CONDm0N DESCRF110N

'4r.,230 fA s k v 4 6 M STRICT A f t C oni PL4 c.a tl et A P 0 01014 9, o v CAT i m (.

l.i rvi t TA f t ow S fo/2 P. A.,7 P g eg o w,, g,L, G o9 g, pgp$og $ , Taaltf /M ol d vi o q 7 "6 *1 HAO AJ1 **d Qi 2 AT g o ca no w owA.rc m Aw A c.cmcar pe.oe To T1> 6scCab t,gry gTAy s oW S Awo O. 0 NOT GELICd6 47 4GCE55Aew r,cuse 3 M *" I

.a A,v A 703 g o, m m. , .w im r o v,. % j WAS 5; s b oC D of* - ce vgge

@lof 7D E JC CE C 0i wC. L a m sta tio.s s , me s e d d A sT SAcac o s e gwats /t E [Avi ed ott eraTe oed j

~

(B) C lNo v o A $ # o n, v b L R (. -70 c I at

$6*aC. LE "fRM 5 f-e G r*t 0fl y I' d fT OECAA7604 A7 ue n,

6. C D od

~Ws2c~e~t eEso7t7s~.alTe7c~TE GA k k'JW 1' M~)

T iewi t of Tes E M suggg 6.00 TD 0 0La g v6 v u dT" l T bi45 A S S *4 >e *0ast wag of PA f A ne g g .,7 g m 90 ETA ce c 0 Av3 dCEOGO TW i4 Pd d$oe.,% L. fi r' C owl t oa To .5 C C, I IT The #" 06.3 "TO CCm PLCh od , *1 e6 Lv A99wm s o A.pt wagi r Avr e .J TW 6 M e d, /> 4. i m t 15 W A5 C.sf Aw1CO 88'8

< E_G_eo ft ._ __________________ ______________________________________

g g a ou,s o en n Asunen. mo.a.o r s .sene cosasebeO.

/

(D) RarnmgNDED ACTD43,5UO(ESTED ASSOdSE

,9 .______________ ______________________________________________________ j (E) ADDmONAL REFERENCES (PWO Mushar(sk Psammese Nummbs(sk Pumans Caumunst, suL)

AP . ootone, R.F. c2Ac uo R , S.E. 9AneasoW, c. o . can e ac.c A, H. ee . *5nu s c a __

l

3. ORIGINATOR REQUESIS OOPY OF CLOSED CONDIDON REPORT p-SUPERVISOR NOTIFICATION -

/

M5 Y -

N/A sener fy -

4. OPERABILTIY/REPORTABILITYDETERMINATION: OUTAGE RELATED7 YES [NO O A.OPERABUTY ASSESSMENTREQtHRED(3 WORKDAYS) MODE HOLD 7 YES

. POTENTIALLY REPORTABLE (ATTACH ENS WORKSHEET. F USED)

FOR ENTRY D(10 MODE C. NO OPERABUTY CDNQRN/NOT REPORTAB12 e O D oTuER z

N.

NPF2C,(RP b MC / ^ DATE/HME !0/

. ~, g n

5. CONDIDON RDORT ASSIGNED TD: -Di- EAlSim,/ - oF5-vAwo6_ 4 N. -

NP.700 REPORT ROOTCAUSE ANALY g & CORRECT PLANTGENERAL MANAGER /mGRP cv00 DATE 9 y -/

// i !

v

<<,Rs ARE QA RECORDS WHEN CLOSED; PLEASE ENSURE ALL RESPONSES AND ATTACHMENTS ARE.

Farus Mt3 (moneauhad) QGBLE>> Fann Hs3 W h4=d)Ra, a

E CONDITION REPORTO A

PAGE 2 OF g s s r n % 1 I g ,f s. Mmxasr=uinoax W PUNCDoNAL FAILURIk .__

vis 'E No YES VNo at ./~ '/l" FFPiptr M E T/ / F #""^MlEE M480 T/V/s '

7.

OfV5fnGM1GM ANALYEE CI3RAECI,YB ACTIONRMNatACBetJCADONS,DEmosm0N DETARJ WOLKIMfrRUCDONS(ATTACH ADDm0NA k

N VO$V Y k l axa houw @ 4 n-d -

W l.-p.eaAclai cAusscoces Tm

, - dAi d__ d,,,,,_,,_,,, j<

4 cause # _f1_

l) 1 s, manmMN O WA REVIEWRBQUIREDPoR:

m-nar mom am i iconos O vas GPNo l Pm 1 scoR2 O vas ENo i

& yaw do dewale from orLlh s

,,,,, a ,,, 94, S.

xmannoN. [I=A O as ons O amua O UN AS4 Oonaa a o m now u c--Ar. - >

l

= &JFwRUL

/ (GLJ- . -

OPS / y2/c, aa sole /%

- t

.. . i on= == =An coNeum-M< v n om FNeorto kEVIEw? CD comansurrHEAD No V -

l

(

\

N DGE

/ sogam # -.f

11. e,nearsrpraanmsuMMAmiMPp EVENTDSHAKEL: .,d_ A PA- 4 MS pw A.a . A e. 01, hEXERESWCDONREZA5En O ves b^

watLJw*~k/ w/ udaA /

mi'A & Ab_- f & ffga>A&

& ~~

& ;6 OPS A bh aal -

v2/ ao- Q Q.M* s n.sa & &m as4, ' A ss .- - -

sa - w s 11 5 ~

or -

pa u' zas l ww J.

e Ad+ - W asvuwen.

IU~ / n na / I y -, Ov af.

12. FRG9NSC REVIEW 6fmomed h Blask 10) gyg, 1/!7

h DER f pt.Awr uAngamaanczar *o% - r--- " -

-)_ oct d'TC s _ m

<<,Rs ARE QA RECORDS WHEN CLOSED: PLEASE ENSURE ALL RESPONSES AND ATTACHMENTS ARE LEGLBLE>>

~

, a u,gw .

,- . Peg 3 5 of 5

! ST. LUCIE PLANT ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE NO. 0010119, REVISION 15 A I

! OVERTIME LIMITATIONS FOR PLANT PERSONNEL W %o-2.165 Ps t of ^t i RGURE 1 j REQUEST TO DEVIATE FROM CVERTIME GUIDELINES TO: Vice President - St. Lucie Plant / Plant General Mgr/ Services Mgr.

i FROM: R. D . 6 A//f/ A)6 6 /S DATE Y'Y-M

SUBJECT:

DEVIATION FROM OVERTIME GUIDELINES FOR (NAMES): i S. E. Po rr6f!50tJ A' F. C2 A C H OR t '

i ORIGINATOR

). Request the below listed individuals to exceed the following overtime guidelines Greater'than 16 hours1.851852e-4 days 0.00444 hours 2.645503e-5 weeks 6.088e-6 months straight f

f X Greater than 16 hours1.851852e-4 days 0.00444 hours 2.645503e-5 weeks 6.088e-6 months in a 24 hour2.777778e-4 days 0.00667 hours 3.968254e-5 weeks 9.132e-6 months penod r, j

{ Greater than 24 hours2.777778e-4 days 0.00667 hours 3.968254e-5 weeks 9.132e-6 months in a 48 hour5.555556e-4 days 0.0133 hours 7.936508e-5 weeks 1.8264e-5 months period i Greater than 72 hours8.333333e-4 days 0.02 hours 1.190476e-4 weeks 2.7396e-5 months in. a 7 day period .

4 X

l A break of at least 8 hours9.259259e-5 days 0.00222 hours 1.322751e-5 weeks 3.044e-6 months (including shift turnover time) l i 1 SCOPE OF WORK I i

06 9 6 LO P ('c 0c 6 0df A L. smitNchow5 M SeMLE m %J "72 A ,v V or m t.4 ~

M5 gglS FOR DEVIATION

~

! E Personnel have unique qualificatiorWraining ,

i l Suthcient rest will be provided i

i O Turnover of personnel would jeopardize quality of work i

O Exoossive lost time would occur and sufficient testing will ensure quality of activity

]

1 Other

AlyED EXPLANAllON QF BASIS FOR DEVIATION Ykt > m.f nn?_e"htA />m Dbasenh (g/htsp>2) ns,i4 "Mee 1 is f n u e w n >>,---> w pa siv>, in . .aue m 6 m k..oims.ozooo.

C*p>31sA2J/L- 8 ht.AbMik.) Jra sl h ** M 4 W y').k w Om ' > b 2 Att 'h'_^ ' A.* ni i A

~

aroDA~& ~v- A M M tem.td2. hh % r Q p> lit innM - dAwada

.c u - v z l~' 6 Lew%c n.

i 2 at 1.Meht hir & .enke >< sk/

. U y y v v APPROVAL ,/p

, Approved by /##1 C L _ N i Vice Preedent St. LIJcie Plant / Plant Gen. Services Mgyr one) ,

)

ROuTiNo Onginal to Nuclear Records Vault.

%O m a A b 4 * ~ ~dMzz.ao I>

W ..GYnW' Y g gg S a

/C.l 1' m a u ww nN,5Nir liu a ls /k % + W Jl%

.pr$ h

. T

-I St. Lucie Nuclear Plant Unit 1 MAIN XFMR B - AIR LEAK -(REMOVE B MTX-GO TO SC".* PWR) 'l-

Work Control -

emi.a uismxt m sma.i uomxr- n se u ao

~

4S5R9W

~

3SEP1996 SSEP1996 ACTIVITY START FINISH __ __. _ _ _ _ . . . _ _ __.1 _ _ _ _ _ . 1 00 04 08 12 16 20 00 04 08 12 16 20 00 04 08 12 16 20

._2_Li.l i. iI6i i1, eIii 14 1 . t i tL4_t. LL2_ a1iti.1iaiIaii iai1.2 i i i e i i i i. IiaeIie 03SEP96 l 18553098 9-2-96 20 00 9-3-96 14 00 '

PC MONITOR XFMR FOR AIR IN-LEAKAGE - 8 MTX 19400020 9-3-96 07 00 9-3-96 20Y t r_z cm : .. ___._J EG E ALUATION FOR OPERATION WIONE TRANSFORME

'19400020 9-3-96 12.00 9-3-96 24.00 LC. r_Z Z--~1 EG PREPARE TSA FOR 8 M i A g 18553097 9-3-96 14 00 9-3-96 16.00 Q PC PERFOR' M LEAKAGE TEST ON COOLER #1 B MTX N-6 OSO2 b. /.

tg PC PERFdRM LEAKAGE TEST ON COOLER #2 B MTX 18553097 9-3-96 16 00 9-3-96 17.30 g

18553097 9-3-96 17.30 9-3-96 19 00 lal PC PERFORM LEAKAGE TEST ON COOLER #5 B MTX '

18553097 9-3-96 19 00 9-3#61900 . PC #5 COOLER TEST FAILED-ENTER CONTINdENCY l14629511 9-3-96 19 00 9-3-96 21.00 1--] IC R'EMOVE B MTX PROT. RELAYS 18553099 9-3-96 19 00 9-3-96 21:00 g:::3 SS 1B MTX REMOVE COVERS 18553099 9-3-96 21.00 9-3-96 23 00 C3 SS 18 MTX REMOVE LINKS 18553099 9-3-96 23 00 949601.00 gdt SS 18 MTX REINSTALL COVERS 19400021 9-4-96 00 00 94960000 b EG FRG APPROVE TSA FOR B MTX 18553099 949601.00 9-4-96 03 00 g: 3 SS 1B MTX REMOVE HIGH SIDE JUMPER 18553098 94960300 9-4-96 04 00 0 PC RELEASE TRANSFORMER DELUGE CLEARANCE 18553098 9-4-96 03.00 949605.00 g:::3 OP REL PC-5 SWITCHING ORDER / INCREASE PWR TO 6*A 18553099 94960400 94-960503 u PC RELEASE MAIN XFMR B FdR OPS 10900015 94-960500 94960515 OP CONDUCT OPS TAILBOARD PRIOR TO TURBINE ROLL 10900016 9-4-96 05.15 94960545 31 OP PREPARE TURB FOR ROl'L NOP1-0030124 SECT 7.5 10900016 9-4-96 05 45 949606.15 u OP ROLL TURB UP TO 520 RPM NOP1-0030124 SECT 7.6 10900017 9-4-96 06 15 949606.30 OP TEST 20ET AND 20AST PER NOP1-0030124 SECT 7 6 'h 10900017 9-4-% 06 30 94960700 IJ OP RE-LATCH AND ROLL TURB TO 1800 RPM h ()

' 12261830 94960630 949614.30 in-_.z z J- EM GEN C Ed PED READINGS DUR TURB ROLL b bo 10900018 , 9-4-96 07.00 94960800 9-4-96 08 00 94960830

[] OP TEST TURB OVRSP" TRIP NOP-1-0030124 APNDX A k * '

18522030 0 PC AUTO SYNCH SYS a EhA CHECKS l e+.

10900019 9-4-96 08 30 94960845 g GP PLACE UNIT ON LINE -

f STRIP 1

.. _m . ~_ _. .

. ~.

3SEP1996 4SEP1996 SSEP1996 'cf ACTMTY START FINISH 00

- _ . . L _..__._ _ ._ ..

04 08 12 16 20 00 04 08 12 16 20 00 04 08 12 l.

16- 20 /-

ti i 1 a i i l i i i i t_ eieiii i.s. .J a a 1. s i_1 1 i a a i a i a 1 i i i i s .s .: iai1 ii1iaiiii 14 4 i tii4 03SEP96 l 9090 94-960845 9-4-96 08.45

. WC UNIT RETURNED TO SERVICE - BREAKER CLOSED 10900020 9-4-96 08 45

9-4-96 09.45 [ J OP INCREASE POWER'TO 25%

10900030 9-4-96 09.45 9-4-96 11 45 [7_J OP INCREASE PONER TO 40%

9092 9-4-96 11 45 9-4-96 11.45 . WC 40 % POWER 10900040 9-4-96 11.45 9-4-96 12.45 l~] OP INCREASE POWER 40 TO 50%

9093 9-4-96 12 45 9-4-96 12.45 . WC 50% POWER' 10900050 9-4-96 12.45 9-4-96 13 45 i 1 OP NUC DELTA'T'S AT 50% PWR PLATEAU t

I on T

%i

_t N o' y

, G-i

' I .

e l ST RIP 2 L__ _ _ _

o ..

. ROOT CAUSE EVALUATION LEVEL 3 Ahcchmeni dI INVESTIGATE AND CORRECT CRs g ff _,gg g

% %d N l I. ANALYSIS OF THE PROBLEM / APPARENT CAUSE:

i h b l4.L k f 04t.N ,

any ma jwuu ma ;

4 eeuu2 l

1

11. SPECIFIC CORRECTIVE ACTIONS A

4

% aaloi d ubd 111. GENERIC ACTION (S) NECESSARY TO PREVENT RECURRENCE N W pranY

&6m&

e e e v.

ML20137L055

Text

SUMMARY

6.0 REFERENCES

Title:

Title:

Description:

Title:

Description:

Subject:

Subject:

Title:

Description:

Title:

Description:

Title:

Description:

Subject:

SUBJECT:

Subject:

Subject:

Subject:

Subject:

Subject:

Subject:

Subject:

Subject:

SUBJECT:

Navigation menu

Search