IR 05000286/1987003

Exam Rept 50-286/87-03OL on 870224-26.Exam Results:Seven Senior Operator Candidates Passed All Portions of Exams.One Candidate Failed All Portions

ML20210A173
Person / Time
Site:	Indian Point
Issue date:	04/12/1987
From:	Kane W, Keller R, Temps R NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I)
To:
Shared Package
ML20210A096	List: IR 05000286/1987003 ML20210A092
References
50-286-87-03OL, 50-286-87-3OL, NUDOCS 8705050029
Download: ML20210A173 (5)

Text

!

. .

,

U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION REGION I OPERATOR LICENSING EXAMINATION REPORT EXAMINATION REPORT NO. 87-03 (0L) '

l FACILITY DOCKET NO. 50-286 1 I

FACILITY LICENSE NO. OPR-64 LICENSEE: Power Authority of New York P.O. Box 215 Buchanan, New York 10511 l

FACILITY: Indian Point Unit 3 EXAMINATION DATES: February 24-26, 1987 CHIEF EXAMINER: ht/O. N m_

Robert R. Temp " 4- F- 67 i Date Reactor Engi Examiner  !

!

REVIEWED BY: h)

Robert M. Keller, Chief 'Ntv[N

'

Projec s ecti o. 1C APPROVED BY: C William F.'Kane, Director, DRP F/c/8[

Date SUMMARY:

Oral, candidate senior operator written and simulator examinations were administered to eight I

tions of their examinations and will be issued licenses.Seven senior operator ca!

One senior operator candidate failed all portions of the examinatio i j

PDR8705050029 870420 V ADOCK 05000286 PDR

_

-

.

REPORT DETAILS TYPE OF EXAM: Replacement X EXAM RESULTS:

l l SR0 l 1 l l l Pass / Fail i I I I I I I I I I I I I I l Written Exam l I 7 / 1 l l l l l l 1 I I I I I I I I 10ral Exam l l 7 / 1 l 1 l I I I I I I I I I I I I l Simulator Examl 1 7 / 1 l l l l 1 I I I I l l I I I I 10verall l I 7 / 1 l 1 1 1 1 1 I I I I I I I I i CHIEF EXAMINER AT SITE: R.R. Temps, NRC OTHER EXAMINERS: N. Dudley, NRC E. Yachimiak, NRC G. Weale, Sonalysts (NRC Contractor Examiner) No generic weaknesses were noted during conduct of the Operating and Simulator Examination . Generic weaknesses noted from grading of the written examinations:

These comments are provided for your use in upgrading future requalifi-cation and initial operating training programs. No reply is necessar Most candidates did not list peak overlap as one of the three effects which cause the Doppler Temperature Coefficient to become less negative as fuel temperature increase Most candidates stated that the SG Atmospheric Dump Valves remain functional when instrument air pressure is less than 30 psi Per Off Normal Operating Procedure IA-1, the valves fail shu All candidates were unable to properly list the immediate action substeps for verification of main fees.ater isolatio . .

,

.

. All candidates were unable to properly list the three isolation steps, and the basis for each, as found in ECA 0.0 for the RCP seal Most candidates had trouble listing the five parameters and/or trends these parameters should exhibit to indicate that natural circulation flow is in effec All but one candidate were unable to state the three individuals (by title) who may authorize a volunteer rescuer to receive exposure during extreme conditions involving life saving circumstance . Training and Reference Material: Significant problems were noted as to the accuracy and completeness of the System Descriptions. Several chapters of the System Descrip-tions were incomplete (i.e. pages missing), some did not reflect plant modifications and others referenced old emergency procedures no longer in effec Some inconsistencies were noted between information found in the E0P lesson plans and the E0P's themselve . Examination Meetings; Entrance, Exam Review and Exit: Entrance Meeting 1) Personnel Present at Entrance Meeting:

!!RC Richard Barkley Resident Inspector, IP-3 Noel Dudley Lead Reactor Engineer Examiner Robert Temps Reactor Engineer Examiner Gary Weale Licensing Examiner (Sonalysts)

Ed Yachimiak Reactor Engineer Facility Personnel Steve Bridges Operations Training Supervisor Michael Cass Assistant to Resident Manager William Josiger Resident Manager Bryan Ray Training Coordinator Richard Robenstein Training Consultant Richard Tansky Training Superintendent 2) An entrance meeting was held on February 24, 1987 to inform facility personnel of the purpose of the examination trip and to discuss any facility questions regarding the examination proces i

!

!

l l

. _ -

.. . - . . . . __

..

. .

,

,

The facility licensee expressed concern on two subject The first dealt with the extent of simulator scenarios, specifically operation of the plant outside of its design basis, and the second dealt with whether or not the NRC has guidelines which cover the extent to which simulator scenarios are take The NRC addressed the first concern by stating that the matter has already been addressed by the Commission in the proposed rule change to 10 CFR Part 55, dealing with degree requirements on shif NRC policy is that it is necessary, at times, to use simulator scenarios which operate the plant outside of its design basis in order to evaluate the effectiveness of the operator candidates in dealing with the situation and their ability to use and transition through the E0P' Regarding the second concern, guidelines in the Examiner Standards (NUREG-1021, ES-302) are used in the development of simulator scenarios. These guidelines are undergoing continuous upgrading and review based on licensee comments, examination development programs and usag B. Written Examination Review A review of the written examination was conducted following the exam. Four facility comments were discussed and all were re-solved at the examination review. As a result, the following changes were made to the answer key:

' Part (a) of question 5.09 was deleted as it dealt with theoretical concepts beyond those required to be used by SR0's. Any value obtained in part (a) was allowed to be used in part (b) and full credit given for determining subcooled margin, provided the correct process was use Point value of the question was reduced accordingl The response to part (e) of question 6.01 was changed to

"NO" as recent plant modifications removed any automatic actions associated with process radiation monitor R-17A/ Also, part (c) was modified to delete reference to the auto start of the dilution fan. Point value of the question was reduced accordingl i

- - - -_ . - ,

-

/ /- / /

-

g

-

'

. .. .

T m he a

- fulatinswer lon cr co to T

pahe edintain que givedinstion 2 t T pa rt answ rs en pr 10 80 m he rt (c()a), e

>

x ate con Epl que ovi CF to R 6w plthe rialcer , cl an st ded 5a0s i ex s n ov assi cl io 4 mited. am re as w er fias n 8 the.7pr, modifi pa th tedt As viewdico c

sifi08 ation ope rtsed t up e NRCo i a re a cusmplete s c atierw r Xo ref, Y acc Exit nd s ed ne on e er andept formpl sul t a c wi ss I.A. 5 Ie I xpa 1)

Me eti to dat f eme utur nt of opy th and wasad I.3 nded ence Z wi was infor-P ng e the of nthe Tr was as m th er so exameasur di accu ra de ad f nnel min es s oted ni cy ai ded ollo ad N_RC Pr ati socussio di crng Depa ons that n, s e of fa a

nd w;f s

for or Ri ese th pa cili nt wil No chard el at l r

beefere fancirtme ent ty r Ba Exit co ence cilis wasfol efer

.

EdRobe rt T Ya Dudleyrkley Me mpl m ty lo ence Fa chimimps e et in ete, ate ha ri s also win sg 1 g: alscom up- >

,- cilit ak Re accur St Mev P er Re Le si ad nt de ateseant to a

Re ctoRea In i nd Br chae Bri sonn el a r ctorspe Jo yan el C dges ctor En Rsi ephR ayass Engigine Encto gi r 2) cha Ru er neer , IP 3 rd s Ope neer Exa An mat exi Tsell an r mi Exami Tr si atio As m ter t me sky ai sta ns ner ner coateri of eti mmi Supe ni n nt Tr als co ng Tr ri g Coto ai T tme mpl was aining nte o Re nin he nt was ete nde rdi si de g Super co Chi to m i

e nt nes hel d Supent n at nt wethendu ef mpr ion s a the ri of Por Ma n visor fa cted Exa ove nd ev age ov mi ed, al e nte ower r exaakn es cili er ner accur ni n nde a min se ty the re the siong a g of nt cka at s er li ai ge io w pr vi tu wi cy ni s ns e n e ew at th of F ion faebr censee vio ed ng Dindic, and oted , theus the ci ulary n w u f the Tr or f ai i ty r 26 Exa epa ated that du ri fee a rtm utu min e nt nya si if ng cili sub the ty mber In a r

ning Dep e ef,1987 er ation w o uld gni se si was spo type r e nd exa a ence T a fi que mul min rtme he nd be c inf nse An iant nt nfor ge reato r orm to of ati nnts. 's o

swer n vi /o r ed a exa ed. ericewofal m

Key pothatqu eminatio we no sti aknthe rtions genon byns ess exami of eri es n c the at ionthe

'

,

,

-

. ,; '

-. - _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _

.

\

l i

, The answer to question 8.06 was modified to accept infor-mation contained in 10 CFR 50.74, parts X, Y and Z with full credit given provided the proper reference was mad The answers to question 8.08 were expanded as follows; for part (a), E plan classification III.3 was added and for part (c), classification I.A.5 was adde . The concern over completeness and accuracy of facility reference materials was discussed with the Training Department following the exam review and a copy of noted discrepancies was also sup-plied. As a result of the discussion, the facility has com-mitted to implement measures so that reference materials sent to the NRC for future examinations will be complete, accurate and up-to-dat Exit Meeting 1) Personnel Present at Exit Meeting:

NRC Richard Barkley Resident Inspector, IP-3 Noel Dudley Lead Reactor Engineer Examiner Robert Temps Reactor Engineer Examiner Ed Yachimiak Reactor Engineer Facility Personnel Steve Bridges Operations Training Supervisor Michael Cass Assistant to Resident Manager Bryan Ray Training Coordinator Joseph Russell Superintendent of Power Richard Tansky Training Superintendent 2) An exit meeting was held the evening of February 26, 1987. The matter of completeness and accuracy of facility reference materials was mentioned, along with the Training Department's commitment to improve the situation for future examination The Chief Examiner reviewed the number and type of examinations conducted over the previous week. In response to a question by the facility licensee, the facility was informed that no generic weaknesses were noted during the simulator / oral portions of the examinations, and that if subsequent review of the examination packages indicated any significant generic weaknesses the l Training Department would be informe j Attachment: Written Examination and Answer Key I