IR 05000313/1988021

Insp Repts 50-313/88-21 & 50-368/88-21 on 880620-24.No Violations or Deviations Noted.Major Areas Inspected: Licensed Operator Training,Nonlicensed Staff Training,Qc Training Program & Plant Tour

ML20151D985
Person / Time
Site:	Arkansas Nuclear
Issue date:	07/14/1988
From:	Gagliardo J, Greg Pick, Vickrey R NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV)
To:
Shared Package
ML20151D978	List: IR 05000313/1988021 ML20151D976
References
50-313-88-21, 50-368-88-21, NUDOCS 8807250314
Download: ML20151D985 (11)

Text

_ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _

- , .:

i APPENDIX-

/ U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

'

REGION IV

NRC Inspection Report: 50-313/88-21 Operating Licenses: DPR-51 50-368/88-21 'JF-6 Dockets: 50-313

, 50-368 Licensee: Arkansas Power & Light Corrpany (AP&L)

P.O. Box 551 Little Rock, Arkansas 72203 Facility Name: Arkansas Nuclear One (AN0), Units 1 and 2 Inspection At: ANO.-Russellville, Arkansas Inspection Conducted: June 20-24, 1988 Inspector (s):

'

.

a .

A. Pick, Reactor Inspector,'

~

s _L erational

' 7-OY[

Date Programs Section

// _

-

hlY-f Tate

. B. Vickrey, Reactor Inspector fperational

'

Programs Section /

Approved:

.T. Gagliardo, ChieT,lperatlona

~

.

/ w grams

}/k_h Date Section Inspection Sunnary Inspection Conducted J_une 20-24, 1988 (Report 50_-313/88-21; 50-368/88-21)

Areas Inspected: Routine, unannounced *nspection of licensed operator training, non-licensed staff training, quality control training program, and plant tour Results: Within the area inspected, no violations or deviations were identifie '

8807250314 080715 ADOOK 050 3 gDR

- . . . . . . -

.

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

~

{;e j .

,

. .

+ .

L

.

..

,

-4

>:

DETAILS Persons Contacted AP&L

• E. Ewing', General Manager, Plant Support,

• E. Force,' Superintendent,-Operations Training

• D. Howard, Manager, Licensing

. *D. Lomax, Plant Licensing Supervisor

• P. Michalk, Licensing Specialist

. *W. Perks, Manager, Training D. Smith, Lead Trainer E..Wentz, Lead Trainer NRC p *W.-Johnson, Senior Resident Inspector

.

'Other persons contacted include administrative personnel, trainers, licensed operators, and technician * Attended exit meeting on June 24, 1988.

~ Followup on Previously_ Identified Items

_ (Closed) Unresolved Item (313;368/8721-01): Decrease in the NRC Approved Requalification Program Scope Without Prior NRC Approval A review was performed in July 1987 to verify that revisions made to the : licensee's NRC approved requalification program had not degraded the program requirements. The NRC had identified that, during a previous revision, the lic~nsee e hao deleted tnc requirements to remove an individual from. licensed duties upon re.e.eipt of an unsatisfactory evaluation; thereby, decreasing the scope of the approved requalification progra During this inspection, the NRC inspector verified that the licensee had returned the prev.iously deleted requirement to Procedure 1063.0 Revision 8 "Operations Training Program," dated October 8, 198 The requirement was added as Step 6.6.3.D(2) and prescribed that an unsatisfactory performance evaluation shall require a reactor operator (RO)orseniorreactoroperator(SRO)toberelievedof licensed duties so that he/she may participate in an accelerated requalification progra This item is considered close P m

s ., ;

~

. .

'

<

.

. (Closed) Open Item (313;368/8721-02):- Revision of' Rec ualification Program to Formally Specify Activities Being Conductec LDuring'the July 1987 inspection, the NRC identified that the ,

requalification prograr procedure used by the-licensee did not comply ,

with-Section 6.11- of the licensee's NRC approved requalification program. 'Section 6.11 stated that special training will be; conducted in the areas of-significant plant events and operations experience.-

-

The NRC inspector had determined that the lectures were being conducted, even though the requirement was not specified in the procedure being utilize During this inspection, the NRC inspector determined that'a requirement'was added to Step 6.6.2.B stating, "Licensed operators shall be informed of . . . significant plant events and topics deemed necessary by the OEAG or the Operations Superintendent."

This item is considered closed, (Closed)UnresolvedItem(313;368/8721-03): Failure to Complete All Performance Evaluations The NRC previously identified during an inspection in July 1987, that all three sections of Evaluation Form TF-23A had not been completed annually as required.- Subsequently, the licensee corrected the deficient evaluatica '

During this inspection, the NRC inspector.ddtermined that the licensee had altered Form TF-23A to have only two required section The NRC inspector sampled selected evaluations and verified that all sections on the forms were completed.-

This item is considered closed, (Closed) Open Item (313;368/8721-05): Revise Procedure 1063.08 to Reflect the May 1987 Changes to 10 CFR Part 55

- The NRC inspector verified that the licensed operator requalificatien program section of Procedure 1063.08 was revised reflecting the new 10 CFR 55 requirements and had a 10 CFR 50.59 evaluatio This item is considered close (Closed) Open Item (313/8732-02): Discrepancy in Definition of

"S" Value ir. a Procedure During a previous NRC inspection, the NRC inspector identified an apparent discrepancy between the definition of the "S" Category in Procedure GTEP-21,, "Control of Component QA Category Determination" and what the "S" Category actually meant. The definition was undergoing revisio . .

y

?? h , , '

'

.

,

'

.

During this . inspection, the NRC inspector _ verified the revision had been issJed with the correct changes implemente This item is considered closed, Re_ view of Quality ~

-(Closed)

Assurance Op(QA) Punchlist-en Item (313;368/8734-01): ,

The NRC inspector verified that the licensee had reviewed the manual QA punchlist tracking logs to determine that all open QA punchlist items had been transferred to the computerized system. The licensee stated that the review had been conducted, no other items were found to be missing. and the only items left off had recently been generate This item is considered close No violations or deviations were identifie . Licensed Operat_or_ Requalification Training (41701) ,

The NRC inspector reviewed this program area to evaluate the effectiveness of licensed operator trainin Licensee event reports (LER) were. reviewed.that involved personnel error These errors had the potential to hs e been caused by deficient trainin The events selected are listed below:

LER Number Subject 313/87-003 EFW Actuation During Power Reduction Due to MFW Pump Control Problems l

'

313/87-004 Reactor Trip and EFW Actuation During Power Ascension Due to MFW Pump Control Problems 313/87-006 Failure to Perform Technical Specification Surveillance 368/87-004 Subcritical Reactor Trip During Plant Cooldown Due to Personnel Error / Procedure Deficiency 368/87-009 Subcritical Reactor Trip While Performing a Reactor Shutdown Due to Procedure Deficiency Classroom training and simulator training received by the Unit 1 operators before the events provided sufficient guidance to recognize what was '

occurring during the events and take proper 6ctions. Lessons learned from the Unit 1 events were factored into the training programs. The training

.

- .-

, _ _ _ _ _ - -

. . .

.

o,

received after the events included classroom sessions on the procedure-

. changes and discussion of the events in Industry Events Training and/or required. readin } Training provided to the Unit 2 operators before the' events-did not provide sufficient guidance to the operators. Lessons learned from Unit 2 events were factored into the training programs. -LER 368/87-004 was

~ taught-in the classroom and LER 368/87-009 was covered during simulator trainin Both events were covered specifically pointing out the cause of the events and how to avoid recurrenc From each of the above events, the NRC inspector sampled selected operators, who were onshift during the events, to verify they attended

<related training presented before and after the event The NRC inspector reviewed records of selected SR0s and R0s to verify they participated in the licensee's requalification program on record. The requalification program records reviewed were specified in Procedure 1063.08, Revision 8. For the individuals selected, the NRC inspector reviewed the fol_ lowing: documentation of attendance at required lectures, documentation that required control manipulations were conducted, documentation of their most recent simulator performance evaluation, documentation that required procedure reviews and self-study was completed, documentation that remedial training was conducted, and documentation that special retraining was held for individuals with identified deficiencie Simulator perfontance by individuals was evaluated in the following areas, as appropriate: Control Room Awareness, Event Diagnosis, Incediate Actions, Control Bosrd Manipulations. Use of Procedures and Technical Specifications, Conmunicetions, and .upervisory Ability. For each of the above areas, examples of the evaluation criteria included: monitoring of important parameters, clear / concise comunications directed at a specific

' person and correct manipulation of control The NRC inspector reviewed the remedial training presented to one licensed operator who failed to understand the "rod bottom interlock" and had difficulty transferring rod groups to auxiliary power in that he did not use the procedure. -The training preLoted covered these specific topics and lasted approximately 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br />. The training provided appeared to be satisfactory. Also reviewed was the remedial-training given to a licensed individual. This training was requested based on observations that the operator may have had some weaknesses. The training presented lasted approximately 12 hours1.388889e-4 days <br />0.00333 hours <br />1.984127e-5 weeks <br />4.566e-6 months <br />. As discussed previously, the training addressed the specific deficiencies identified. The training appeared to be satisfactor In each case, after the training was completed, the licensed operators were teste The NRC inspector reviewed the training activities related to the only licensed individual who had failed the 1987 requalification examinatio L ,

-. - -

y *

.s,-

-

..

, The licensee provided to the NRC inspector the letter that removed the operator from .1_icensed duty and stated that a re-examination of the failed section would be required. Also provided was the reexamination of the licensed operator. Training records for a requalification-cycle the licensed operator attended before the examinations were provided to the NRC inspecto The NRC inspector identified an apparent weakness in specifying accelerated requalification requirements and documenting completion of the requirement Specifically, the letter relieving licensed individual from license duties until remedial training was completed, did. not specify what type of training was to be conducted / attended, nor did the memorandum specify a time for completion of the training.- There was no' attendance shoet identifying'what training was conducted. In sumary, the control over

, remedial training appears to be weak. The followup in this area to determinewhatactionswillbetakenbythelicenseeisanopenitem(313; 368/8821-01).

The results of the NRC initial R0 and SR0 examinations for Units 1 and 2 are identified below:

YEAR Unit 1 Unit 2 1985 R0: 7 Taken/6 Passed 0 SR0: 0 0 1987 R0: 0 6 Taken/5 Passed SR0: 7 Taken/7 Passed 0 1988 R0: 0 _

SRO: 12 Taken/11 Passed 6 Taken/6 Passed As identified above, the number of individuals at ANO taking the NRC license examinations and passing was excellent. The results of the last three requalification examinations conducted at ANO, Units 1 and 2 are given in Attachments 1 and 2, respectivel The NRC inspector reviewed the relative amount of time spent by the Units 1 and 2 operations personnel in the classroom, on the simulator, and for self-study. The Unit 1 breakdown was 22 percent simulator, 53 percent classroom, and 25 percent self-study / required reading and quizze Similarly, the Unit 2 breakdown was 21 percent simulator, 54 percent classroom, and 25 percent self-study / required reading and quizze The NRC inspector noted that, in accordance with the guidelines stated in Generic Letter No. 87-07, on May 6, 1988, AP&L submitted a letter

-

. _ . .-

m

. .

.

certifying that its operations training programs were accredited in Januaiy 1984 and that the licensee utilized a systems approach to trainin No violations or deviations were identifie . . Non-licensed Staff Training (41400)

The NRC inspector reviewed the non-licensed staff training program to verify the program was being implemented in accordance with the requirements of the Technical Specifications and ANSI 18.1-1971,

"Selection and Training of Nuclear Power Plant Personnel." The review included auditing classroom trainin training records, on-the-job (0JT) training g, examination of qualification of maintenance and personnel, and the licensee's program for reviewing operational events and abnormal occurrences which could be attributed to maintenance activities, and the implementing of the lessons learned into the training progra The NRC inspector reviewed the following procedures to verify that the appropriate requirements had been implemente Number Title 1063.05 On the Job Training 1063.06 Trainer / Instructor Training Program 1063.10 Maintenance Training The NRC inspector reviewed training and qualification records of nine selected personnel performing functions in the disciplines covered in the procedures listed above. The training records were reviewed to verify that maintenance personnel were qualified in accordance with commitment The licensee had implemented the use of qualification cards and the NRC inspector found that the licensee had made efforts to utilize the available opportunities for OJT, especially during infrequent maintenance activities. The training department had been maintaining a monthly tabulation of maintenance personnel qualification progress which was reviewed by maintenance supervisory personnel. The NRC inspector found that the licensee seemed to be making extensive efforts to maximize maintenance personnel trainin During the review of personnel records, the NRC inspector found an instance where an individual had signed off more than 30 practical factors in one day, each of which required extensive reading and procedure review. This item was expressed to the training department by the NRC inspector that the signoff date could not reflect the date of actual performance of the training. The training department indicated that the individual involved had actually completed the training requirements on an earlier.date than the signoff date of the qualification card.

'

The NRC inspector reviewed some past events and occurrences which could be f attributed to maintenance activities to determine that the licensee had

7; e .

4- .

-

,

b ,.

-

8'

~

taken adequate action to implement the lessons learned into the training program. ' The NRC inspector audited a SKF bearing class that- was being conducted for maintenance personnel. The_NRC inspector interviewed several maintenance-personnel and found a favorable response toward the training' department's support for requested traini g in specific area s No violations or deviations were identifie .' Quality Control (QC) Training Program The licensee was in'the process of developing a formal QC training program

- within the training organization to replace the training program conducted by the QC department and vendor group ,' The'NRC inspector reviewed the status of the development and implementation of_the QC training program. The licensee had developed a short-term action ~ plan in September 1986 to implement a QC inspector training program by August 1, 1987. The licensee's 1987 goals and E -objectives of training for the quality control inspector training program were: Develop Quality Control Contractor Training Progra Identify training that can be accomplished at the training center for Quality Control Inspection personnel and coordinate this trainin Develop Quality Control Inspector Training Progra In May 1987, the licensee-indicated that objective a. had a scheduled completion date by the end of May 1987; objective b. was ongoing; and objective c. had two tasks which needed to be completed, before development of the-program began. In July 1987, the licensee stated to the NRC that the program should be iniplemented by.the end of '1987. In August 1987, the licensee indicated that the initial program course objective and lesson objectives were being written and would be presented for approval in September-1987. In November 1987, the licensee identified additional goals for objective a. with a scheduled completion date of January 1988 and objectives b. and c. were ongoing. During the course of this inspection, the licensee infomed the NRC inspector that the new projected completion for mechanical, electrical, and instrumentation and control in house programs was January 1, 198 Open Item (313;368/8620-03), closed in NRC Inspection R l-10, addressed the development of the QC training progra In view of the continued postponement of full im training program, an open item (313;368/8821-02)plementation will continue to track of the QC the licensee's progress until the QC training program is fully implemente No violations or deviations were identifie _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

j-r,. . .. .

. .

s

,

.

'

-

,

,

'

.9

,. L Plant Tours

.The NRC inspectors. toured the plant observing fire watches, security

, '

'

response to 'an open door alarm, and control. room operator. watchstandin The-NRC inspector; observed the performance of two surveillance test .05 pressurizer -level response quarterly-test and 2104.07 control room

-

emergency. air conditioning system monthly test.-

No violations or deviations were identifie '

-

- : Exit Meeting

'

The NRC inspectors summarized the inspection scope and findings with those

. persons identified in paragraph,1. The licensee did not identify, as-proprietary, any of the information provided to or reviewed by the.NRC inspector .

~~.

>

~ .

_m-

.; ,; ,

-: . ,

-

....

ATTACHMENT 1 Unit 1 Requalification Exam Results

.

1985 -Twenty-six SR0s and twenty-six R0s took the examination with all individuals passing the examination. Two'SR0s and one RO were exempted from taking the requalification examination. One SR0 had

'

1 prepared the examination, while the other SR0 had recently received a license. The R0 had recently obtained his licens :1986- Twenty-nine SR0s and twenty-one R0s took the examination with twenty-six SR0s and eighteen R0s passing the examination. Upon retesting, three SR0s and three R0s passed the reexamination. One .

who SRO,in test prepared and administered the examination, was exempted from 1987 Twenty-six SR0s and twenty-one R0s took the examination with _

twenty-five SR0s and all of the R0s passing the examination. The SR0 who failed the examination passed the test upon reexaminatio Three licensed individuals were exempted from testing because they had prepared and/or administered the examinatio . -. - - - , , . .-

_ _ _ ,_

~

,z., ,s

'

-.

_ ,

. ATTACHMENT 2 Unit 2 Requalification Exam Results

~

,

,

1985 Twenty-one SR0s and thirteen R0s took the examination with two SR0s and one RO failing the test, respectively. Upon reexamination, all SR0s and R0s passed the examination. Additionally, six SR0s and three R0s-were exempted, since they had obtained their initial license Thirty-two SR0s and three R0s took the examination with one SR0 and

one R0 failing the test, respectively. Upon reexamination all y passe Six SR0s and. ten R0s were exempted because they had obtained

-

their initial SR0 and R0 licenses.

?

-1987 Thirty-three SR0s and twelve R0s took the examination. All individuals passed the examination. Two SR0s who had prepared and/or

administered.the examination were exempted.

R

p