IR 05000289/1973003
| ML19256D517 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Crane  |
| Issue date: | 04/13/1973 |
| From: | Brunner E, Dante Johnson NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19256D515 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-289-73-03, 50-289-73-3, NUDOCS 7910180832 | |
| Download: ML19256D517 (20) | |
Text
--
.a.:.
.:
. :.... :.
-.....~.: :
...
.
...
. - ~..
-
~
.
.
'
U. S. ATOMIC ENERGY C0dD!ISSION j (s
.
x'
DIRECTORATE OF RECULATORY OPERATIONS
REGION I
l RO Inspection Report No.:
50-289/73-03 Docket No.: 50-289 Licensee: Metropolitan Edison Company License No. :CPPR-40
.
Priority:
Three Mile Island - Unit 1 Category:_ "
i Location: Middletown, Pennsylvania
,
.
Type of Licensee: PWR 831 MWe (B&W)
Type of Inspection: Unannounced, Routine
.
Dates of Inspection: March 26, 27 and 28,1973
.
January 9, 10, and 11, 1973
-]
, Dates of Previous, Inspection:
Reporting Inspector:
N J
D. F. Jqnnson, Reactor Inspector
'Da t'e I
-
.
Accompanying Inspectors:
None Date
.
Date
Other Accompanying Personnel:
None Reviewed by:
- - - --M
/3/7J E.[.Brunner, Chief,FacilityTesting&
'
Date Sthrtup Branch
-
-
7910180 M I
!'
+
,
1451 08y
.
.-
-
-
u_.u
~. w..
,,.
_s..
......
... _.
..
_.
.
.
,
/\\
s.-
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS i
t Enforcement Action A.
Violations None
.
B.
Safety None Licensee Action on Previously Identified Enforcement Items
\\
'
l None Unusual Occurrences None Other Significant Findings (
A.
Current Findings 1.
Significant personnel changes have been made in the licensee's operating staff.
(Details, Paragraph 2)
2.
Information obtained during this inspection indicated the following status of completion regarding the Facility Pro-cedure Program.
,
a.
Operating Procedures-75%
b.
Emergency Procedures-32% *
c.
Administrative Procedures-40%
-
d.
Surveillance Test and Calibration Procedures-30%
e.
Maintenance Procedures-45%
f.
Alarm Procedures-37%
3.
The RO estimate'of the date for initial fuel load has been revised.
(Details, Paragraph 3)
.
- The licensee expanded emergency procedures pursuant to RO:I inspector's comments resulting in a lower percentage of completion than previously reported in RO:I Inspection Report No. 50-289/72-18
.
1451 090
.
..
.
.
.
t
-
-2-
1( T i s _-
!
B.
Status of Previously Reported Unresolved Items l
1.
The licensee has expanded the scope of the Facility Procedure Program incorporating additional procedures as identified by RO.
This item is considered resolved.
(Details, Paragraph 4)
2.
The licensee has agreed to the review of certain Facility
.
Procedures by the General Office Review Board.
Based on commitments obtained from the licensee, this item is con-
'
sidered resolved.
(Details, Paragraph 8)
Management Interview l
An exit interview was conducted on site at the conclusion of the
'
i i
inspection on March 28, 1973 with Messrs. R. M. Klingaman, Superintendent,
J. G. Herbein, Assistant Superintendent, J. J. Colitz, Station Engineer,
'
J. R. Floyd, Supervisor of Operations, and R. W. Zechman, Training Specialist.
Items discussed cre su=marized as follows:
A.
Facility Procedures
'
1.
Previously Identified Deficiencies
/
The idspector stated that previous deficiencies identified
'-
by RO:I in a prior inspection were discussed with members of the licensee's staff. He indicated that resolution had been obtained for a majority of the*itsms.
(Details, Paragraph 5)
2.
Current Procedure Review
The inspector stated that RO:I review of selected Emergency
and Maintenance Procedures had revealed certain deficiencies which required resolution.
He indicated that these had been discussed with members of the licensee's staff and that com-mitments for resolution had been obtained.
The licensee stated that he was aware of the deficiencies and that he concurred with the commitments for resolution.
(Details, Paragraph 6)
B.
Training Program
,
The inspector examined in detail, the licensee's documentation concerning implementation of the following programs:
- Senior Reactor Operator Training
- Reactor Operator Training
.
- Auxilliary Operator Training 1451 09i
_
.
.
eu's
=e4
-
-we--
-, ~,.
w._-.-
-..p.
_,, _.
_,,,
,
__
.
-
.
'
-
_3_
f. ~ j r
i i
- Maintenance Department Training j
- Training Records The inspector reviewed the above programs with respect to scope and effectiveness and informed the licensee that inspection find-ings showed apparent conformance with FSAR and Technical Specifi-cation requirements and appear to satisfy the criteria of ANSI
,
N.18.7.
(Details, Paragraph 7)
C.
Review and Approval of Facility Procedures The inspector discussed with licensee representatives, the review, approval and audit responsibilities of the on-site and off-site Safety Revity Committees.
The inspector reviewed TMI Administrative
,
Procedure #1001 " Control of Operating, Emergency, Maintenance and Surveillacce Procedures" and informed the licensee that the approval precedures stated in administrative procedure #1001 are in conflict with the requirements of the FSAR.and proposed Technical Specifications.
The licensee stated his intentions are to adhere to the approval procedures as state.d in Administrative Procedure #1001 and that if necessary, the FSAR and Technical Specifications would be acncnded to be in accordance with Administrative Procedure #1001.
(Details,
, ' ')
Paragraph,8)
- u-t 1.451 092
,
.
t
.
e
%
\\
%__.
.
..
_
_ _ _ _ _ _ _.
...
.
.
'
!
I
! ('S s -
DETAILS
,
!
1.
Persons Contacted
.
R. M. Klingaman, Superintendent J. G. Herbein, Assistant Superintendent J. J. Colitz, Station Engineer
.
J. R. Floyd, Supervisor of Operations H. R. Morris, Jr., Supervisor of Maintenance R. W. Zechman, Training Specialist
-
D. E. Barry, Foreman, Maintenance W. W. Peiffer, Foreman, Maintenance
'
2.
Personnel Changes
=
The licensee informed the inspector of the following organiza-
'
l tional changes :
Mr. J. J. Colitz, formerly Operations Supervisor, has been a.
promoted to Station Engin'eer.
b.
Mr. J. R. Floyd, formerly Nuclear Engineer, has been promoted
, '~'i to Operations Supervisor, ur s
Mr. G. F. Larizza, formerly Nuclear Engineer Unit #2, has been
!
c.
assigned as Nuclear Engineer Unit #1.
3.
Plant Physical Inspection
.
The inspector conducted a physical inspection of the Three Mile Island 1 Plant. He discussed the results of this inspection with licensee representatives and 7tated that the milestone date for initial fuel load of November 1973 is doubtful, based on the observed status of construction. Licensee representatives informed the inspector that the estimate core loading date has ' en revised from
.
November 1973 to February 1974.
4.
Facility Procedure Program Revisions The licensee has rev'ised the Facility Procedure Program incorpor-ating the following items as identified by RO:I in a previous inspec-tion:
-
a.
Responsibilities and Authorities of Shif t Personnel (R0 Report No. 50-289/72-18, Paragraph 2.a. (1),B)
The licensee has written Administrative Procedure #1009,
" Station Organization and Chain of Command", which states
-
.
'
1451 093
.
_
-
- -
-
_
.
.
-5-p
~.
the responsibilities and authorities of Three Mile Island
'
shift personnel.
b.
Procedures for Bypass of Safety Functions and Jumper Control (R0 Report No. 50-289/72-18, Paragraph 2.a. (1)(c))
The licensee has written Administrative Procedure #1013 "By-pass of Safety Functions and Jumper Control" that specifys pro-
'
cedures and instructions for the bypassing of safety functions and jumper control.
-
c.
Locking and Tagging Procedures (R0 Report No. 50-289/72-18, Paragraph 2.a. (1)(d))
.
The licensee has written Administrative Procedure #100.^ Rules foe the Protection of Men Working on Electricel and reehanical Apparatus", this procedure incorporates detailed instruc: ions i
on Three Mile Island's tagging procedures.
Administrative Procedure #1011 " Locked Valve Control" is being written and will include locking procedures.
d.
Schedule for Surveillance Testing and Calibration
,..
j(_)
(R0 Report No. 50-289/72-18, Paragraph 2.a. (1)(e))
i The licensee has written Administrative Procedure #1010 " Schedule for Surveillance Testing and Calibration", which includes a complete schedule of surveillance and calibration tests to be i
performed.
c.
Standby Personnel Recall (RO Report No. 50-289/72-18, Paragraph 2.a. (1)(f))
The licensee has written Administrative Procedure #1014 " Recall of Standby Personnel", which includes instructions on when and how standby personnel can be recalled with cognizant telephone numbers of personnel to be called.
f.
Shift and Relief Turnover (RO Report No. 50-289/72-18, Paragraph 2.a. (1) (g))
The licensee has written Administrative Procedure #1012 " Shift Relief Turnover and Log Entries", that specifys what must be done by a relief shif t prior to assuming control of the plant; it further specifys pertinent logs, equipment and plant status that must be checked by the oncoming shif t.
1451 094
'
.
,
_... _.
. -
-
-
-
--
_... _.......,.......
.
...
.
.
.,
'
-6-tor#
t i
g.
Temporary Changes to Procedures j
i (RO Report No. 50-289/72-18, Paragraph 2.a.(2))
Administrative Procedure #1001, "Three Mile Island Procedure Controls" has been revised to include the requirement that temp 3rary changes to procedures will be entered in the operating log, properly datad, initialed and cognizant personnel notified
of the change.
j h.
Scram Recovery l
(R0 Report No. 50-289/72-18, Paragraph 4.a. (1))
i
,
The licensee stated Operating Procedure #1102-2 " Plant Startup"
- '
has been revised to include operator guidance and instructions '
l for a recovery from a scram.
I j
i.
Communication Systems (R0 Repc'rt No. 50-289/72-18, Paragraph 4.a. (4))
The licensee has prepared a Systems Description for Three Mile j
Island communication systems which gives a detailed description g
of each individual system and contains system functions, mode of operation, safety precautions and maintenance.
!
Inspector's Comment - The above additions and revisions to the j
Facility Procedures were examined by the inspector, as a result of his findings, items a through i are considered to be resolved.
-
'
There cre no further questions in these areas.
j.
Containment Access Requirements
(R0 Report No. 50-289/72-18, Paragraph 2.a. (1)(a))
t The licensee stated that containment access requirements will be included in Health Physics Procedures. HP #1630 is being prepared and will contain instructions and requirements for containment entry.
k.
Fire in Control Room (R0 Report No. 50-289/72-18, Paragraph 3.a.(2))
The licensee stated fire protection procedures are written for station fires and are included in the emergency plan, a separate procedure for a specific fire in the control room will be written and included in the station emergency procedures.
1451 095
-
.
....
... _.
.,. _ _ _ _.... _. _ _
. _. _. _ _
_ _ _
. _ _
.
___
_
-.
_ _
___
.
-7-
- 3
/
r ~'
.
!
I 1.
Loss of Instrument Air t
(R0' Report No. 50-289/72-18, Paragraph 3.c(1))
The licensee stated Procedure #1102.26 " Loss of Instru-ment Air" is under revision to incorporate the inspector's comments but is not complete at present.
.
m.
Refueling Procedure j
(R0 Report No. 50-289/72-18, Paragraph 4.a. (2))
,
l The licensee stated that initial fuel loading procedures
,
are being written that will contain all fuel handling and loading equipment procedures; from these procedures a re-fueling procedure will be adapted.
=
i
!
Inspector's Comment - The inspector stated that items j,k, 1,r remain unresolved and these deficiencies will be examined for resolution on a subsequent inspection.
l 5.
Previously Identified Deficiencies in Facility Procedures The licensee's actions en deficiencies identified in a prior
.-])
inspection are as follows:
'
,
f Inspector's Comment - A taster list indicating the status of procedures should be maintained and kept up to date to include such data as date drafted reviewed, approved, etc.
(R0 Report No. 50-289/72-18, Paragraph 2.a. (6))
Licensee's Response - The licensee provided the inspector with an updated report indicating the status of the Facility Procedure
' Program.
Inspector's Comment - The inspector stated that 'tpon review of the
.
Facility Procedures index, it appears that a procedure for Emergency Boration is lacking.
(R0 Report No. 50-289/72-18, Paragraph 3.a. (1))
Licensee's Response - The licensee stated that emergency boration procedures are contained in Operating Procedure #1103-4 " Soluble Poison Concentration Control" and concurred that procedures for rapid boration are adequate.
.
1451 096
,
,
e
...
.p gg w =. ~ = -. - - - -
-%-.--e
--
.u~.-...-...
...... -.... -.. -.
....
.
.
i
.
-8-
'
,
'
Inspector's Comment - The inspector stated upon review of the Facility Procedure index, it appears that a procedure for Loss of Containment Integrity is lacking.
(R0 Report No. 50-289/72-18,
'
Paragraph 3.a.(3))
L_icensee Action - The licensee stated Operating Procedure #1101-3
" Containment Integrity and Access Limits" has.been revised to in-
clude loss of containment integrity.
.
,
Inspector's Comment - The inspector reviewed procedure #1101-3 and verified coverage for loss of con'tainment integrity. This
,
item is considered resolved.
j
'
I The inspector stated that upon review of Emergency Procedure
- 1202-07 " Loss of Boron", the following deficiencies were identi-
-
fied.
(R0 Report No. 50-289/72-18, Paragraph 3.b)
The magnitude or change of boron concentration that constitutes a.
.
an emergency condition should be indicated to ensure sufficient guidance to the~ operator in recognizing that an abnormal condi-i tion exists and to take the correction action required.
'
' g,)
Licensee Action - The licensee stated that the exact magnitude
' u or change of boron concentration is not known at present but will be determined at a later date. He further stated the pro-cedure has been revised to allow space for entry of magnitude change when determined.
Inspector's Comment - The inspector stated proc. ',ure #1103-4
" Soluble Poison Concentration Control" will be reviewed for inclusion of magnitude or change of concentration on a sub-sequent inspe; tion.
b.
The expected level change in the make up tank or pressurizer should be specified to ensure moderate dillution is recognized and corrective action taken.
Licensee's Action - The licensee agreed to revise the procedure to include specific level changes that will indicate an abnormal condition exists.
Inspector's Comment - The inspector will review procedure #1103-4
" Soluble Poison Concentration Control" for inclusion of make-up tank level on a subsequent inspection.
I451 097
.
.
\\
.. _ _ _ _
._.
.. _.. _ _ _ _ _ _
_ _ _ _ _ _
__
.
!
-9-
!b
i
!
Under symptoms for loss of boron, a simple statement that
-
c.
n power level increase will indicate this condition is in-afficient. To enable the operator to recognize a particu-lar abnormal condition, specific power levels expected should be stated and the type of transient, i.e., a slow step or rapid ramp indicated.
.
Licensee's Action - The licensee reviewed and evaluated the loss of Boron with respect to power level changes expected. The licensee's conclusion is that due to design limitations, the maxi-
mum flow rate for dillution is insufficient to cause a power tran-s sient, therefore, loss of boron does not constitute an emergency
condition. Loss of boron will, therefore, be included in Operating
Procedure #1103-4 " Soluble Poison Concentration Control" and
'
=
deleted as an Emergency Procedure.
The Inspector concurred with the licensee's conclusions.'
d.
The inspector stated the use of abbre.viations within the body of a procedure should ae avoided whenever possible.
If unavcidable,
.
I system and component abbreviations when used, should be written
,,
out the first time they appear in the procedure to ensure under-d'
standing by all,
c.
Caution statements within'the body of a procedure should be cap-italized and double spaced to ensure they stand out.
t f.
Referencing other pr"--9ures should be avoided, if the information
,
is important it should t e specified in the procedure.
'
i
'
g.
Precautions should be in the body of the procedures preceeding a specific step.
,
Licensee's Action - The licensee stated all procedures have been reviewed with respect to the context of the inspector's remarks and revised as applicable.
h.
In Step 3, the statement reads, "stop all pumps", this statement is too generalized, further direction and specifics of what pumps, what valves should be given.
Licensee's Action - The licensee stated procedure #1103-4 " Soluble Poison Concentration Control" has been revised to include specific pumps and valve numbers as applicable.
1451 098
.
\\
-.
- - -.
.
.-
_... -
.._..
..
n_..
- -. - - -,
.. - _.
.
- 10 -
,
,
s
/
,
1.
In manual action step 2, it states " sample and analyze for boron concentration".
The inspector inquired as to who aamples for boron concentration and how is sample obtained.
Licensee Response - The licensee stated all auxilliary opera-tors are qualified to obtain sample water for analysis, but only day shift capabilitf for analyzing boron concentration.
,
The licensee is currently looking at the probability of pur-chasing a boron analyzing unit to have around the clock capa-bility.
- Inspector's Comment - The inspector stated all shifte should have the capability to ascertain the concentration of boron i
present in the primary coolant water.
This item will be re-
viewed in a subsequent inspection.
The ' inspector stated that upon review of Operating Procedure
- 1103-6 "Reacto~ Coolant Pump. Operation", the following defi-
!
ciencies were identified.
(R0 Report No. 50-289/72-18, Para-graph 4 b)
(1)
Step 14 reads " carefully observe all parameters" without
,
listing parameters to be observed or stating values.
~)
Licensee's Action - The licensee has revised step 14 and included specific values for applicable parameters.
Inspector's Comment - The inspector reviewed procedure
,
- 1103-6 " Reactor Coolant Pump Operation" and verified entry of applicable parameters.
This item is considered resolved.
(2) Procedure 6.3.2.2 states, "when pump has stopped rotating and anti reverse rotation has been verified"; how does the operator know if the pump has stopped and anti reverse rotation has been verified? This indication should be in the procedure.
Licensee's Action - The licensee has revised step 6.3.2.2 to include operators zere speed switch indication for deter-mining pump stcppage and reverse rotation.
Inspector's Comment - The inspector reviewed procedure #1103-6
" Reactor Coolant Pump Operation" and verified zero speed switch indication has been included.
This item is considered resolved.
1451 099
-
,
-
_
-.
--
i
- 11 -
,(,
'
!
Inspector's Comment - Operating Procedure #1102-01 " Plant Pre-startup Check" does not appear to cover plant heatup.
i Licensee's Action - The licensee stated Procedure #1102-01 I' Plant Heatup to 5250F" has been written and approved and that Plant Pre-startup Check is an enclosure to #1102-01.
.
.
7fsector's Comment - The inspector reviewed procedure
11t02-01 and verified plant heatup to 5250F is contained
,
vtthin the procedure.
This item is considered resolved.
6.
Current Procedure Review f
i The inspector reviewed the following procedures and identified
,
I deficiencies to the licensee.
The inspector's comments and j
licensee's responses are as follows:
,
f Emergency Procedure #1202-1 " Load Rejection".
a.
Inspector's Comment - The inspector stated the follow up action step 1 states, " Observe makeup, letdown and spray flow, initiate manual control if necessery to control pressurizer level and
, ')
pressure". The inspector questions the ability of the operator
,_
l to perform the above tasks without further guidance or direction.
Specific values for flows should be stated, and if incorrect,
'
operator actions should be included to restore flows to accep-table values.
If the operator is required to control levels and pressures, the procedure should include instructions as to how
,
l he is to. accomplish the required task.
Licensee's Response - The licensee agreed to revise brocedure
- 1202-1 " Load Rejection" to incorporate the inspector's comments.
'
b.
Emergency Procedure #1202-4 " Reactor Trip".
,
The inspector stated that all reactor trips should be listed in the symptoms section.
Manual Action st,ates, " monitor and control if necessary, the following:
,
- pressurizer /makerp tank level
- reactor coolant pressure
- reactor coolant flow
- reactor coolant temperature 1451 100
!
.
s
-
.-
.. -
.
__~
-
- -, _
.-
,.
.
.
!
l
- 12 -
,n.
-
i
'
main steam pressure
{'
-
steam generator level and feed flow i
-
The procedure lacks sufficient direction and guidance for the operator to control these parameters. Detailed instruc-
tions should be incorporated in conjunction with specified values.
- .
Licensee's Response - The licensea agreed to review all
,
procedures with respect to the context of the inspector's
~
'
remarks.
l Inspector's Comment - The inspector stated a review of selected procedures to verify inclusion of the inspector's
,
l comments will be performed on a subsequent inspection.
!
c.
Maintenance Procedure #1401.1.1 " Reactor Coolant Pump Seal Removal and Replacement".
t
!
d.
Maintenance Procedure #1401-1.2 " Reactor Coolant Pump Inter-nals Removal".
Maintenance Procedure #1401-2.3 "Pressuris.er Heater Replacement".
e.
f.
Maintenance Procedure #1401-4.4 " Removal and Replacement of OTSC Manways".
Maintenance Procedure #1401-4.3 "0TSG Orifice Plate Adjustment".
g.
Inspector's Comment - The inspector's review of the above maintenance procedures indicated apparent inadequacies in the performance section.
The above procedures lack a step-by-step e
!
procedure for performing the maintenance task.
Licensee's Response - The licensee agreed to revise the identi-
'
fied maintenance procedures and include a step-by-step procedure.
7.
Training Program
A review of the Thre'e Mile Island Unit 1 training program pursuant to pertinent requirements contained in the FSAR, Chapter 12, Tech-n3 cal Specifications, Section 6, and ANSI N18.1, resulted in findings as follow :
1451 101
-
.
w.
w
-
-er awwmem.
ew-mmw
<
a-e*,-e
.
.aw me m.=
e
.
.
.
- 13 -
<
-
~
I
./
I a.
Senior Reactor Operator Training Program (1) Course outlines and schedules contain each segment of the training program including subject matter content,
'
course duration, time devoted to each aspect of training, on-the-j ob training, and simulator training.
'
(a)
SRO candidates have received the following formalized training.
.
- Supervisor training program conducted at Penn State Research Reactor Facility - 12 weeks
- Observation and on-the-job training at Saxton
,
(PWR Reactor Facility - 24 weeks)
- PWR Technology course conducted by B&W at Lynchburg, Virginia - 8 weeks
- Lec.ture series on plant systems, instrument and operations given by shift supervisors and supple-
mented by NUS video tapes j ~}
,
'5 l-
- Simulator Training by B & W (b) On-the-job training
- SRO candidates have participated in startup and operation at other nuclear power plant facilities.
,
I
- SRO candidates are performing system check offs, writing operating procedures and conducting review
}
seminars for the control room operators. As site construction progresses, SRO candidates will actively
.
participate in the startup program
- Written and oral plant walk-through exams administered by the shift supervisors (c) Training program effectiveness is evaluated by the following methods :
.
- weekly exams
- daily quizzes
- oral exams
- audits of training sessions by the training supervisor and assistant plant superintendent
- reports on individuals progress to the training (' -
supervisor i
1451 102
-
... -. - _.
.
.
l
- 14 -
's
.
f (d) The station engineer is assigned the responsibility for the conduct and administration of the Senior Reactor Operator, Contro' Operator and auxilliary operators training programs. A training specialist has been assigned to assist the station engi ner
.
in these duties.
-
.,
b.
Control Operator Training Program
,
(1) Documentation of a formal training program for control
~
operators is provided by a course outline and schedule containing specific subj ect matter taught, course dura-tion, length of time devoted to each aspect of training
'
and on-the-job traininh.
'
. a) A formalized classroom training program is in pro-(
l gress for control operators comprising 48 weeks of
!
training in mathematics, health physics, nuclear
!
theory and technology, instrumentation, systems and components.
_
(b) Instruction is provided by staff personnel supple-mented by a series of video tapes from Nuclear
.
'
- -
Utilities Corporacion (NUS).
i (c) On-the-job training is provided consisting of system
checkouts, amphasizing theory and operation with sign-offs by shif t foreman, plant walk throughs and oral exams conducted by the station engineer operations i
l supervisor and the nuclear engine.er.
(d) An audit team from General Physics Corporation are providing written and oral plant walk through exams, closely paralleling current AEC licensing exams both in format and depth of knowledge.
(e) Prior to hot operations, a comprehensive review will be conducted consisting of written, oral exams and plant walk throughs in preparation for AEC licensing
'
exams.
(2)
Evaluation of training program effectiveness is provided by the following:
C 1451 103
.
.
-
-
-. - _. - -.... -...._ _.
.n.-.
.
.
.
- 15 -
.
,
.
!
-
i
,
(a) oral and written exams
'
(b)
training specialist performs audits of training sessions (c) General Physics Corporation provides individual evaluations
.
.
.
(d) periodic audits by training supervisor and assistant plant superintendent (e) evaluation reports from instructors to training specialist
'
,
c.
Aux 1111ary Operator Training Program (1) Formal training for auxilliary operators is identical to training for control operators described above.
(2) Additional. training in Health Physics will be given to
,
auxilliary operators.
!
,(~',
(3) On the job training closely parallels control operator training with more emphasis on balance of plant systems.
s d.
Maintenance Department Training i
(1) A curriculum has been established for the maintenance department including a course outline containing subj ect matter content, course duration, classroom training and
'
on-the-job training.
(2)
Electrical formal training consists of 9 weeks comprising audio visual slide tape presentations in basic power plant termonology and concepts, electrical theory, maintenance of power equipment, A.C. power components.
Classroom lecture series on safety and tagging procedures, plant familicri-zation of systems, components and hastrumentation.
(3)
On-the-job training consists of 140 hours0.00162 days <br />0.0389 hours <br />2.314815e-4 weeks <br />5.327e-5 months <br /> of vendor demon-strations of various equipment and participation in plant pre-startup testing.
-
(4) Mechanical formal training consists of 60 hours6.944444e-4 days <br />0.0167 hours <br />9.920635e-5 weeks <br />2.283e-5 months <br /> of audio visual slide tape presentations or power plant termonology and concepts, equipment theory and operation and fluid systems maintenance.
Classroom lecture series of 75 hours8.680556e-4 days <br />0.0208 hours <br />1.240079e-4 weeks <br />2.85375e-5 months <br /> on plant
,
'
1451 104
,
.
..
.
..
-
--
.
.
_._
,
.
-
16 -
-
_
w" i
design features, safety and tagging procedures.
t (5)
On-the-job training consists of 240 hours0.00278 days <br />0.0667 hours <br />3.968254e-4 weeks <br />9.132e-5 months <br /> in vendor demonstrations on welding and various components, and 52 weeks with the General Public Utilities start-up and testing.
(6)
Instrumentation technician training' consists of video tape presentations on Bailey Instrumentation, supple-
mented bylive instruction in plant design features,
'
theory and participation in IMI operator training course.
.
(7)
On-the-job training is provided by vendor courses and I
participation in startup program.
,
(8) All maintenance department personnel are given Health j
' Physics training.
(9) Conduct and administration of the Maintenance Department
,
i Training is the responsibility of the Supervisor of
'
Maintenance, f
e.
Training Records
Individual training profiles are maintained on each man for all Metropolitan Edison personnel by the training specialist and con-tain the following information:
,
(1)
Education - formal academic and technical (2) Military Training - job related (3) Previous work experience
,
(4)
Licenses held (5) Job Related Training - formal programs attended, dates and length of time devoted, both on and off site programs.
(6)
On-the-job training or experience.
Deficiencies in the training records identified by the inspector's review and licensee's responses are as follows:
1451 105
,
.
\\
~
-- -
-
- -.....
. -..
.--
.l
-
{
~
17 _
.
-
i
- ('
i
-
,
Inspector's Comment - The inspector stated review of the I
foreman's individual training records by comparison indicate inconsistancies with the master training record maintained
'
by the training specialist.
Licensee's Response - The licensee stated he was aware of this descrepancy and that an audit is presently being per-
'
formed by supervisor to alleviate any inconsistancies between their records and the master record.
~
i Inspector's Comment - The inspector stated review of the i
training records indicated, in some instances, ommissions of
'
individuals duration of time devoted to a particular aspect i
of training.
- i Licensee's Response - The licensee stated he would reviev
each. mans record and agreed to include time devoted ta each
!
aspect of training received.
!
Inspector's Comment - The inspector stated the on-the-job
,
i training documentation is too generalized and lacking in specific training received.
I)
Licenspe's Response - The licensee concurred with the inspector's comment and agreed to be more definitive in the area of on-the-job training.
Inspector's Comment - The inspector informed the licensee the Three Mile Island Training Program based on the inspector's find-ings of this inspection, appear to be adequate; there are no
further questions in this area at this time.
~
8.
Review and Approval of Facility Procedures
!
Inspector's Comment - The inspector stated Three Mile Island's admini-strative procedure #1001 " Control of Operating, Emergency, Maintenance and Surveillance Procedures", is in conflict with the requirements for final approval of facility procedures as stated in Chapter 12 of the FSAR and Section 6 of the Technical Specifications. Administrative procedure #1001 states final approval and implementation can be made by signature of either the plant superintendent or the assistant plant superin tendent.
The FSAR and proposed Technical Specifications state plant superintendent approval only.
1451 106
.
e
....--%
.. - -
-
-... _..
.
.
.
.
..
,
- 18 -
i
,
!
Licensee's Comment - The licensee stated the assistant plant super-intendent will have the authority for final approval of plant pro-cedures.
He further stated if this is in nonconformance with the FSAR and Technical Specifications, consideration will be given for amendment of these documents.
Inspector's Response - The inspector stated that the plant super-
'
intendent is responsible for the safety of the plant, which includes approval responsibility of safety related procedures; if this authority ds to be delegated, it should be so stated in the FSAR and Technical Specifications.
This item is considered unresolved and will be examined j
in a subsequent inspection.
The inspector inquired as to the licensee's intentions for review of safety related procedures by the off-site review committee.
Licensee's Comment - The licensee stated the General Office Review Board will provide an independent. review of selected procedures and i
provide comments if applicable to the plant staff of Metropolitan j
ddison Company.
i
' '
Inspector's Comment - There are no further questions in this area at y
the present time.
a s
f
!
'.
.
1451 107
'
-
t
.
e w,W
.
--w-
. - - - w mw w+,. --.
.
... -.
. - = -.
--
ee-.w-e g
.
- __,..-.
......
...
s
-
..
.
.
,
.
k'
i MEMO ROUTE SUP Sa ** * w ta'*-
F or c*acu"*aa-
*"'*a-
,s r,
,.rc.9
. we,. u., i4. iw, atot oz io
,, et, a n,,...,
r.,,,,,,,o,..
r., in eo,...ie.
O ('.arne ana wait)
anstaats atuaans
- 4 _,
k0 Chief, Reactor Con str. Br.
METROPOLITAN EDISON COMPANY
[
RO' Chief, Reactor T&O Br.
I~
20:HQ (5)
pn THREE MILE ISLAND UNIT 1 I
DR Centra.1 Files s
Ret,ional Directors R0 RO INSPECTION REPORT No. 50-289/73-03 TO (Name an, waits I,uTIALs atMAAKs Regulatory Standards, (3)
The subject inspection report is forvarded Directorate of Licens.ng (13)
>
.j E
oAM for information.
,
-
'ocal PDR
.
,1 TO (Name ano unit)
thiflALs REMAAKs
}
TIC i
State of Pennsylvania DAM i
'
.j
_
raoM (Name and unst)
REMAAKs E. J. Brunner, Chief Facility Test & Startup Br.
RO:I
.,
_._
.am j
3943 4/17/73 1,
unovansa roaaconoatn ~xs e m i.n o........
e J--
,..
--
....
.
.
_.
.
. -...
.-
.
.
.
.. e.,
.
..
.-
s..
.
..
.
.-
-
-
.
.
e
.5
'
.
~
- :-
1 4 5 1; 1.0 8
.
.
.
...
- ,
.
'
.
. ;.'.
.
-
e
@g, O
b
.
,
.
.
_.- -