IR 05000155/1976003
| ML20002D734 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Big Rock Point File:Consumers Energy icon.png |
| Issue date: | 03/04/1976 |
| From: | Finn J, Hueter L, Hunter D, Jordon E NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20002D728 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-155-76-03, 50-155-76-3, NUDOCS 8101220264 | |
| Download: ML20002D734 (8) | |
Text
- O,
'
'
,
,
.
_
,
U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY CO.'NISSI6N -
-
,
0FFICE OF INSPECTION AND EN"0RCEMENT,
.
REGION III
.
Report of Operations' Inspection
-
.
. IE Inspection Report No.- 050-155/76-03=
-
.
'
Licensee:
Consumers Poder Company
_.
.
Big Rock Point Nuclear Plant License No. DPR-6 Charlevoix,.ichigan Category: C
,
.
-
Type of Licensee:
.
Type of Inspection:
Special, Announced
.
!'
,
-
Dates of Inspection:
January 5-9 and February 2-6, 197_6
DrW8
~g/3/7c
~
Principal Inspector:
D. R.. Hunter (Date)
.
ll Accompanying Inspectors: J. A. Finn 4*
_ M a ')/f (February G-5, 1976)
~ t(Date):
k YPY L.D. Hueter I[7[.
'
(Date)
Other Accompanying Personnel: None h
a be's-----
Reviewed"By:
E. L fordan,-Chief
/ 7[
s Reac or Projects
/ (bate)
Section No; 2
! (-.
.
.
-
4-t
.
.
-m
-,
,
-v
.
y
--,.c
,
---
__ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _
,
,
,
.
.
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
.
.
.
....
.
- p
! Inspection Summary
,
Inspection on January 5-9 and February 2-6 ', - (7 6-03) : Review of
_
operator retraining activities _and the RWP exempt training program. =One-item of noncompliance was identified concerning operator retraining f
activities.
A.
Vic13tions
.
.
None.-
-
-
,
,
B..
Infractions
.
-
Contrary to paragraphs 2 and 4.b of Appendix AItofl0 CFR 55:
1.-
The requalification program did not include preplanned lectures in those areas where results of the 1974 annual operator exams-indicated an emphasis in' scope and d'pth of coverage was needed.
(Paragraph 4 b, Report Details I)
,
i 2.
Written examinations were not provided during the one; classroom day per five weeks portion of the 1973-1975 retraining' cycle, to determine the operators' knowledge of subjects covered'and to
- ,
provide a basis for evaluating their knowledge of abnormal and -
'
emergency procedures.
(Paragraph 2.b, Report Details 1)
C.
Deficiencies
,
None.
.
Licensee Action on Previously~ Identified Enforcement Items
.
N/A.
Other Significant Findings A.
Systems and Components None.
B.
acility Items (Plans and Procedures)
.
- None.
-
-
C.
kbnagerial Items.
None.
'{
- -2-
.
.
O v-
~
, _ _ __
_ _ _ _
-
--
_
-_ _ - _ _
_ _ _ _ _ _ - _,
,..
.
.
.
(
' Noncompliance Identi'. icd and Corrected by Licensee D..
None.-
'
'
.
E.
Deviations None.
-
F.
Status of F.eviously Reported -Unresolved Items None.
.
Management Interview The management interview was conducted on January 9,' February 5, and
~
February 6,1976, with the following persons present :
C. J. Hartman, Plant Superintendent'
C. R. Abel, Operations Superintendent D. E. DeMoor, Technical Superit'endent
-
C. C. Tyson, Ibintenance Superi..cendent E. F. Pelticr, Shift Supervisor
-
R. E. Voll, Reactor Engineer C. E. Axtell, Chemistry and Radiological Protection Supervisor l_
-T. M. Brun, Assistant Chemistry and Radiological Protection Supervisor-A.
The inspector stated that an inspection concerning the plant
~
~
retraining program revealed one item of noncompliance with Appendix A of 10 CFR 55 concernin; the evaluations and impic-mentation of rctraining activities.
(Paragraphs 2.b and 4.b, Report Details I)
B.
The inspector noted that retraining and walkthroughs had rot been completed on the newly written emergency procedures.
The inspector asked the licensee to consider a more timely schedule for the completion of the emergency procedures retrain-ing and walkthroughs.
The licensee stated that the retrain-ing and walkthroughs would be rescheduled. By telephone communica-cation with the project inspector on January 14 and 20,1976, 'the-
licensee stated that the retraining activities scheduled-for January, February and Ibrch will include the retraining and walkthroughs of nine emergency procedures.
(Paragraph 8, Report Details.1)
'
'C.
The inspector stated that the adequacy of the RWP Exempt Qualifi-cation Test was reviewed from the aspect of Part 19 training requirements and the RWP except program. The licensee indicated
- .
that this was an updating of training of RWP exempt people who had been previously trained and accepted as qualified.
(
No items of noncompliance concerning radiation work' permit exempt
.
training were identified.
(Paragraph 3, Report Details II)
-
.
.
-3-
.
.
.
WD r
M_
%
r p
,
-
'
.
.,
.
.
REPORT DETAILS I
-
,
..
,
' Persons Contacted'
C. J. Hartman, Plant Superin'tendent-C..R. Abel.. Operations Superintendent:
C.'.E.~ Axtell, Chemistry and Radiological Protection Supervisor S. A. ' Carlisle, Shif t Supervisor
,
,
R. W. Doan,' Shif t ' Supervisor. and Training Coordinator.
A. C. Sevener, Shift Supervisor
.
E. F. Peltier, Shift Supervisor =
G.' B. Szczotka, Quality Assurance Superintendent
-
1.
' Licensed Operator Recualification Program
~
a.
A ; letter from Mr. Samuel A. Carlisic,. Shif t f Supervisor at
~
the Big Rock Point facility, addressef. to Mr. D. Hunter
,
,
was received'on November 26, 1975, by the IE:III office.
The letter with enclosure indicate.d that the' burden of retraining had been placed upoo'che employee when it is the responsibility of-the esepany. Specifically, the letter and enclosure indicated:
- (l)
The radiation protection retraining has been' token in
-
nature.
(Paragraph 4.b, Report Detafis I)
(2) The burden of retraiding has been placed on the. employee'
when'it is the responsibility of the company.
(Para' graph 2.b and 4.b, Report Details I)
(3) Apathy in the' retraining program is prevalent in other areas as well.
(Paragraph 2.b, Report Details I).
,
(a) Plant Systems (b):-Technical Specificatio.
-
(c) Procedures
-
(d) Administrative Procedures-(e). Site Emergency Plan (f) Radiation Protection (repeat of item (1))
(,g)
Reactor Technology
.
-
2.
Continuous Retraining Cvele, 1973-1975-This portion of.the retraining progran is descr* bed in Administrative Procedure i.13.B and the Dig Rock Point Plant Licensed Operator (
-4-
.
.
T
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
ll.
.
.
Il. This program consisted of'seven vecks
'
Requalification Program full time classroom training plus one classroom day-per five 1ccks during-the two year cycle for each licensed operator.
.
.
a.
Seven Week-Classroom Phase The inspector found that lesson plans and examinations for-this phase of retraining were utilized and thc1 retraining activity' was administered in accordance with the commitments. ~ The seven week
-
' classroom phase was based on the 1973 cvaluation-examination and, as indicated, emphasized theory.- No discrepancies were noted.
-b.
One Classroom Day per Five Weeks The inspector found that 1csson plans and examinations for this phase of retraining were not utilized as required by
,
-Administrative Procedure 1.13.B.4.1.(b) and 1.13.B.5(b),
respec tively. - The training during this phase was conducted on an informal basis. An example of the informality was -the review of material including facility. changes, procedure changes; operating incidents, commitments and other-license
~
changes and commitments through individual review and sign off rather than by formal-lectures and examinations as required.
Formal _ training on specific. systems, procedures, technical specifications, radiation control and saf ety, and other license requirements was not apparent during -this phase of the retraining as required. No topical examinations and evaluations were performed during this phase of the retraining in accordance with 1.13.B.5(b) and paragraph 4.b of Appendix A.to 10 CFR 55.
.
3.
Continuous Retraining Cycle, 1975-1977 This portion of the retraining program is described in Administrative Procedure 1.13.B and thgjBig Rock Point Plant License Operator.
This program consists of three vecks.
Requalification Progran.
full time classroom training plus one classroom day per five weeks during the two year cycle for'cach licensed operator. This two year training cycle will be repeated on a continuous basis.
4.
Annual Examinations The inspector reviewed the results of the annual' operator examinations t
to determine that they were being administered as required.
'
.
1/
CP to DL, Ltrs, dtd 12/17/73 and 7/19/74.
~
}/
lbid.
-5-(i
.
'
.
e
.
Oe