IR 05000219/1982015
| ML20055B427 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Oyster Creek |
| Issue date: | 06/30/1982 |
| From: | Caphton D, Napuda G NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20055B426 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-219-82-15, NUDOCS 8207220225 | |
| Download: ML20055B427 (8) | |
Text
-_
.
.
U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION I
Report No.
50-219/82-15 Docket No.
50-219 License No.
OPR-16 Priority Category C
--
Licensee: GPU Nuclear Corporation 100 Interpace Parkway l
Parsippany, New Jersey 07054 Facility Name: Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station Inspection At:
Forked River, New Jersey
'
i Inspection Conducted: May 24, 25, 27, and 28, 1982 Inspectors:
hdd
[JO
GgNaud ea tor Inspector
/
P&te Approved by:
jvf 6)
h
,,,
D.'L. CaphtonT Chief, Management Programs 04te
'
Section, Engineering Inspection Branch I
Inspection Summary:
Inspection on May 24, 25, 27, and 28, 1982 (Inspection Report 50-219/82-15)
Areas Inspected:
Routine, unannounced inspection by one region based inspector of licensed operator requalification training; general employee training; and, training of non-licensed plant operations support personnel such as craft / trades people, technicians, equipment operators, and engineers. The inspection in-volved 36 hours4.166667e-4 days <br />0.01 hours <br />5.952381e-5 weeks <br />1.3698e-5 months <br /> onsite by one region based inspector.
Results:
Of the three areas inspected, no violations were identified.
8207220'225 820706 PDR ADOCK 05000219 Q
.. _ _
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
-=_
..
-
-..- -
.
.
.
.
DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted F. Aller, Reactor Operator R. Barrett, Operations and Technical Training Manager H. Callahan, Senior Reactor Operator i
H. Behling, Dr., Supervisor Radiation Control Training
!
- J. Carroll, Director Oyster Creek Operations J. Cook, Supervisor Support Program Training
+
- P. Czaya, Licensing
- D. Fawcett, Supervisor Operator Training
- B. Fiedler, Vice President and Director Oyster Creek R. Fleming, Equipment Operator
- D. Gaines, Training Manager J. Hascek, Maintenance I&C Supervisor G. Henderson, Equipment Operator K. Hutko, Nuclear Engineer
- N. Kazanas, Director of QA-GPU Nuclear K. Kenny, Station Helper i
- R. Long, Dr., Vice President and Director Nuclear Assurance F. Miranda, Maintenance Electrician
-
J. Molnar, Station Technical Advisor
i G. Monbleau, Maintenance Electrician D. Opdyke, Maintenance Mechanic M. Orski, Support Program Training Supervisor R. Randol, Maintenance I&C Technician E. Roessler, Supervisor Maintenance Training B. Russo, Maintenance Mechanic D. Shaffer, Reactor Operator
,
S. Singleton, Supervisor Training and Educational Development D. Ste11 horn, Supervisor Administrative Support Training Department H. Thompson, Radwaste Equipment Operator R. Thompson, Station Technical Advisor US Nuclear Regulatory Commission
- J. Thomas, Resident Inspector The inspector also interviewed other licensee and contractor employees including administrative, craft / trades, engineering, maintenance, opera-
,
tions, and training personnel.
>
,
[
- denotes those present at the exit interview conducted May 28, 1982.
Y
i i
--,
.,,,, -,. -.,, - ~ -,
.,
-
m-.
. - -,, - -. - - - - - - -
-
r
-- -- -- ~ -
.
.
2.
General The NRC PAB inspection (Report 50-219/79-18) identified deficiencies and weaknesses in the licensee's training program. The PAB findings were transmitted to the licensee in an NRC letter dated February 10, 1980.
The licensee outlined actions that would upgrade the training program and expand the training staff in a letter to the NRC dated March 17, 1980.
During this inspection the status of this upgraded program was reviewed.
An onsite Manager of Training (MOT) has been appointed and the staff increased from the original four to a current thirty-ttr (an additional two positions are authorized but vacant). The training department is now a part of the corporate structure of the recently established General Public Utilities Nuclear Corporation and the M0T reports to a corporate based Director of Training and Education (DOTE) who in turn is directly responsible to the Vice President Nuclear Assurance (VPNA). The inspector interviewed selected managers and supervisors and determined that they were knowledgeable in the area of their assigned responsibilities and of the overall training program. Management involvement in oversight of the program was evident, an example being the presence of the VPNA at an onsite meeting of QA and Training supervisors and managers. The inspector also noted that input and feedback mechanisms for course content, lesson presentations, and training effectiveness had been established and implemented.
The inspector toured several classrooms and noted liberal use of audio-visual aids including the capability for production of TV training tapes.
Several other areas were being prepared and equipped for additional hands-on type of training such as mechanical maintenance and chemistry.
A new Oyster Creek Nuclear _ Generating Station Training Department Administra-tive Manual, Rv. O, has been developed and issued.
This manual provides the policies and procedures that govern the operation of the training department and the Oyster Creek Generating Station Course Catalogue (first edition) lists the various training programs and course titles.
Various Program Documents detail time and type of training for specific positions (e.g. Program Document #411.0 Equipment Operator Initial Training Program Description). The inspector verified by sampling that Lesson Plans also existed.
The inspector determined that adequate progress has been and is being made in upgrading the training program and its status is consistent with licensee commitments in the areas reviewed and discussed in this and subsequent paragraph.
.
i I
3.
General Employee Training (GET)
'
3.1 Program Review The inspector reviewed selected portions of the Training Manual and lesson plans for areas discussed below to verify consistency with the training requirements of 10 CFR 50, Appendix B, Criterion II; 10 CFR 19.12; 10 CFR 20; 10 CFR 73.50; Technical Specifications (TS)
Section 6; and, ANSI N18.11971, Selection and Training of Nuclear Power Plant Personnel, Section 5.4 for new/ existing / temporary employees such as technicians and craft / trade personnel.
,
This training provides plant personnel with indoctrination training and periodic retraining in the following areas.
--
Radiological health and safety; Emergency Plan and Procedures;
--
Access control and security procedures;
--
--
Industrial safety;
--
QA/QC indoctrination; and,
--
Formal training for females concerning prenatal exposure (re-quired by Regulatory Guide 8.13, Appendix A).
.
3.2 Implementation The inspector randomly selected and reviewed licensee training
!
records of nine individuals to verify that the required training had been given.
In addition the inspector conducted eight interviews with individuals whose records were reviewed to verify the following.
The scope of the training was similar to that contained in the
~
--
licensee's training records;
--
The training was meaningful to those attending; and,
-
--
The areas presented were covered accurately and sufficiently i
from the participants' point of view.
,
,
a G,
j'
The interviewees included craft / trade, operations, and technical e
personnel, including one female.
/
'
.
y
'
3.3 Findings
'__ '
. - -
.
The interviewed employees confirmed that records accurately reflected the training each received; the training was meaningful and relevant; and, the training was presented in an acceptable and understandable
,
fashion. Interviewees included electrical, engineering, I&C, mechanical,
-"
operations, and rad-waste disciplines.
.
d
.
dD&
/
'
+ ~.
!
.m,
-
-
.
.
The inspector briefly observed a few sessions of GET; previewed a newly produced QA orientation TV tape with some members of licensee i
QA and Training management; and noted that general Health Physics training now includes actual practice in such things as donning /
removing protective clothing and self monitoring. The inspector reviewed the Summary of Currently Planned Training Programs for 1982 and noted th.t GET, GET annual retraining, and other general types of employee training were included in that document.
The inspector reviewed the Documentation of General Employee Training Program Improvement, March 5, 1982.
This document was a report of an internal evaluation of the program with respect to curriculum and instructors.
Included was an evaluation and improvement recommenda-tions of the six GET Modules; ten identified instructional methods; four necessary instruction skills; and, 29 specific classroom /
presentation skills.
The licensee representative stated that this evaluation is being used to continue improvement of the program.
This is a positive indication of licensee management awareness and involvement in the ongoing program, its level of performance, and
_
-
effectiveness.
'
No items of noncompliance were identified.
4.
Craft / Trade and Technical Training 4.1 Program Review
~
The inspector selectively reviewed the revised training manual and course catalogue (see paragraph 3), and modules and lesson plans to
-
verify that the following training is provided.
--
formal training commensurate with the job classification;
--
fire fighting training; and,
--
on the job training to supplement formal training and education /
experience.
4.2 Implementation The inspector randomly sclected and reviewed licensee training records of eleven individuals to verify that the required training
'
had been given.
The eleven individuals were also interviewed to
"'
verify the following.
--
The scope of training was similar to that contained in the licensee's training records;
.
--
The training was meaningful to those attending; and, The areas were covered accurately and sufficiently from the
--
-
participants' point of view.
-
.
.
Interviewees included electrical, onsite engineering, I&C, mechanical, and equipment operator disciplines.
The inspector toured several classrooms and noted differing types of equipment that provided hands-on practical experience. The inspector also toured other areas that were being prepared for training presenta-tions and noted that equipment for hands-on training in these locations was waiting to be uncrated. A licensee representative pointed out some crated equipment and stated that it is to be used to establish a-" wet lab" for training HP/ Chemistry technicians.
4.3 Findings The interviewed employees confirmed that records accurately reflected the training each received; the training was meaningful and relevant; and, the training was presented in an acceptable and understandable fashion.
Newer vintage TV tapes and the hands-on training aspects were especially singled out for positive comments. One negative comment consistently mentioned was the absence of exam / test score feedback to the individual. These comments were communicated to the M0T and VPNA.
The inspector reviewed the Proposed Engineer Training Program, December 28, 1981. This document outlined a two year training program for newly hired engineers and others who may have need of it.
Included was On the Job Training (0JT), Nuclear Energy Technology, Plant Systems and Technology, etc.
The inspector noted that the first phase of this training is scheduled for June-July 1982, when approximately 40 non-candidates for NRC Operator Licenses will participate in the Hot Licensing training cycle.
No items of noncompliance were identified.
5.
Licensed Operator Requalification Training 5.1 Program Review l
The inspector reviewed selected portions of the licensee's training I
manuals and lectures / lesson plans to verify consistency with require-ments of 10 CFR 55, Appendix A; the NRC accepted Operator Requalifi-cation Program; and, the revised training criteria of the March 28, 1980 letter to all power reactors from H. Denton (NRC).
.
The inspector determined that the established program included the following.
-
A lecture schedule with instructions in heat transfer, fluid flow, thermodynamics, and mitigation of accidents involving a degraded core among other required subjects;
L
.
.
A continuing lecture schedule appropriate to deficient areas
--
identified during the preceeding exam;
--
That lesson plans or appropriate training materials describe the scope and depth of selected lectures;
--
An accelerated requalification for those scoring less than 70%
in any section and/or less than 80% overall in the previous exam;
--
Documentation of personnel attendance; Reactivity control manipulations on the plant or at a simulator;
--
--
Discussions / reviews of changes in the facility design, procedures, and facility license; Review of abnormal / emergency procedures; and,
--
--
Systematic performance evaluations.
5,2 Implementation The inspector randomly selected and reviewed the training records for six licensed personnel to verify that each included:
Completed examinations including answers and scores;
--
--
Required manipulation of controls for reactivity changes;.
--
Completed oral examinations / evaluations;
--
Completed self study assignments and course / lecture attendance; and,
--
Completed additional training in areas where deficiencies were exhibited.
The inspector interviewed the five available on-shift licensed employees and verified accuracy of records reviewed including the following:
That the scope of training was similar to that contained in the
--
program;
--
That the training was meaningful; and, That the areas covered'were covered accurately and sufficiently.
--
5.3 Findings The inspector noted that the Operations and Technical Training Manager, Supervisor Operator Training, and two operations instructors held current NRC SR0 licenses. Two of the other three instructors who held current NRC R0 licenses were in training for the upcoming NRC administered SRO examination.
The five licensed interviewees included a Shift Supervisor (SRO),
Station Technical Advisor (SRO), and three Control Room Operators (R0s). A common comment was that all licensed personnel should be required to actually operate the plant a minimum number of hours per requalification cycle. Another common attitude was the negative opinion on crediting certain evolutions / manipulations.to an SR0 for
_ _ -
_
.
.
observation / supervision of these actions. The interviewees also expressed a desire to have their opinions made known to NRC management.
The inspector verified that one licensed individual who failed to attain the required exam percentage grade was in an accelerated requalification cycle. This individual does not cur ently have any Control Room operating duties.
The inspector also noted that each operating licensed individual's file contained records of monthly DJT activities and operations evolutions / manipulations.
No items of noncompliance were identified.
6.
Management Meetings Licensee management was informed of the scope and purpose of the inspection at the entrance interview conducted on June 24, 1982. The findings of the inspection were periodically discussed with licensee representatives during the course of the inspection. An exit interview was held onsite May 28, 1982 (see paragraph 1 for attendees) at which time the findings of the inspection were presented.
.