IR 05000266/1982014
| ML20054L759 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Point Beach  |
| Issue date: | 06/24/1982 |
| From: | Holzmer M, Shafer W NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20054L754 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-266-82-14, 50-301-82-14, NUDOCS 8207080442 | |
| Download: ML20054L759 (5) | |
Text
1
.
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION III
Reports No. 50-266/82-14(DETP); 50-301/82-14(DETP)
Docket Nos. 50-266; 50-301 Licenses No. DPR-24; DPR-27 Licensee: Wisconsin Electric Power Company 231 West Michigan Milwaukee, WI 53203 Facility Name:
Point Beach Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2 Inspection At:
Point Beach Site, Two Creeks, WI Inspection Conducted: June 7-10, 1982 M. M. lolzp
[, - j j 'd '-
Inspector:
[t), D456tf,er j 97
_
Approved By:
W. D. Shafer, Chief
[p f74 -St ro rams Section
'
Management g$t'L hU.D-d[
Inspection Summary Inspection on June 7-10, 1982 (Reports No. 50-266/82-14(DETP);
50-301/82-14(DETP))
Areas Inspected:
Routine, unannounced inspection of licensed operator re-qualitication training; non-licensed training, and QA program. The inspection involved a total of 30 inspector-hours onsite by one NRC inspector.
Results: Of the three areas inspected, no items of noncompliance were identified.
8207080442 820624 PDR ADOCK 05000266 Q
.
.
,
DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted
- G. A. Reed, Manager - Nuclear Operations
- J. Zach, General Superintendent
- R. Link, Superintendent, Engineering Quality and Regulatory Services
- F.
A. Zeman, Supervisor - Staff Services
- R.
J. Bruno, Superintendent -_ Training The inspector also interviewed several other licensee employees includ-ing operators, instructors, craftsmen, engineers, and clerical personnel.
- Denotes those present at the exit interview on June 10, 1982.
2.
-Requalification Training The inspector verified that any changes made to the requalification pro-gram were in conformance with requirements and commitments; verified that the licensee has prepared lesson plans or other documentation which adequately described the scope and depth of the lectures; and that the licensee had evaluated the results of the most recent annual examina-tions and identified deficient areas to be covered in the lecture series.
The inspector also verified through record review of three control room operators holding NRC Reactor.0perator licenses, and three shift super-visors or staff members holding NRC Senior Reactor Operator licenses, the availability of copies of the most recent annual written examination and the individuals' response, documentation of attendance at required lectures, required control manipulations, performance evaluations, addi-tional training received in identified deficient areas, and required pro-cedure review.
In addition, the inspector attended two hours of lectures.
a.
Documentation Reviewed
- PBNP Procedure 3.12, Superintendent - Training, Revision 0, 6/26/81.
- Point Beach Training Manual Section 4.3, Licensed Operator Requalification Program, Revision 1, 7/30/80.
- Wisconsin Electric Power Company letter to the NRC, dated June 4, 1980, re: Qualifications of Reactor Operators.
- Personnel Training Records
- Required Reading files b.
Findings f
No noncompliances or deviations were noted.
'
.
c.
Discussion The licensee's requalification training program was in a tran-sition phase. Current staffing gaals and efforts were directed toward 6-shift rotation, at which point, one week of every six will be devoted to requalification training.
Evaluations of actions taken during abnormal and emergency condi-tions (actual or simulated) were performed by contract simulator staff personnel in connection with annual simulator training.
These evaluations appeared adequate, however, the inspector commented that the licensee's overview of the adequacy of these evaluations should be strengthened to ensure that future evaluations will be satisfactory.
3.
Training The inspector attended two hours of the licensee's Orientation Train-ing and verified that the training was in accordance with the objectives of ANSI N18.1-1971.
The inspector verified by direct questioning and record review that three new and four existing employees received training in administra-tive controls and procedures, radiological health and safety, industrial safety, controlled access and security procedures, and the emergency plan as required by the licensee's technical specifications. The in-spector also verified by direct questioning of two craftsmen and a Quality Engineer that on-the-job training was provided; verified that all female employees having access to the controlled area were provided instructions concerning prenatal radiation exposure in accordance with Regulatory Guide 8.13.
a.
Documentation Reviewed
- PBNP Procedure 10.1, Training Group Organization and Description, Revision 1, 4/2/82
- Training Manual Chapters:
1.4 Scheduling, Revision 0, 3/1/82 1.6 Evaluations, Revision 0, 3/1/82 2.3 Mitigating Core Damage Training, Revision 0 7/31/81 3.1 Auxiliary Operator Training Program, Revision 0, 3/22/82 9.1 Maintenance Employee Progression Training Program, DRAFT, 1/27/82
- Training Records b.
Findings No noncompliances or deviations were noted.
.
.
c.
Discussion A major reoganization of training department procedures was in progress. A Training Manual had been issued to implement the necessary revisions, and over half of the new procedures were in place. Training records were maintained, but the inspector commented that it was difficult to find all recorded training for individuals under their names, since records were kept in several different files. The licensee stated that they were aware of this and that the matter would be reviewed for' improve-ments in the future.
Training records were not maintained for Quality Assurance (QA)
training activities. Examples include training for the Quality Engineer, Stock Handlers, and QA representatives. The licensee agreed to institute training records for personnel who serve a QA function. This is an unresolved item (50-266/82-14-01; 50-301/82-14-01).
4.
QA Program Annual Review There were no changes to the approved QA Program since 1978. The in-spector verified that implementing procedures conformed with the QA Program.
a.
Documentation Reviewed
- FSAR Appendix H, Sections 1, 2, 12, 13
- QA Manual Volume I procedures:
3.1 Organization, Overall Responsibility and Authority, Revision 9, 4/2/82 3.5 Maintenance Superintendent, Revision 4, 5/3/82 3.12 Superintendent Training, Revision 0, 6/26/81 3.25 Administration of Hardware QA, Revision 10, 4/2/82 5.5 Control of Measuring and Test Equipment, Revision 0, 6/23/72 6.1.1 Spare Parts and Modification Parts, Revision 3, 7/31/81
- QA Manual Volume II, Sections 2, 12, 13, 17
- QAI 9, Training of Quality Assurance Personnel, Revision 4
- QAI PB-6, Release of QA-Scope Materials and Equipment for PBNP i
[
i i
'
i
>
[
'
.
-
-
..
b.
Findings No noncompliances or deviations were noted.
c.
Discussion None.
-
i 5.
Unresolved Items Unresolved Items are matters about which more information is required in order to ascertain whether they are acceptable items, Items of Non-compliance, or Deviations. Unresolved Item disclosed during the inspec-tion is discussed in paragraph 3.
6.
Exit Interview The inspectors met with licensee representatives denoted in Paragraph 1 at the conclusion of the inspection on June 10, 1982. The inspectors summarized the purpose and the scope of the inspection and the findings.
5