IR 05000315/1980011
| ML17319A536 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Cook  |
| Issue date: | 07/10/1980 |
| From: | Baker K, Schulz R, Swansen E NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML17319A534 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-315-80-11, 50-316-80-09, 50-316-80-9, NUDOCS 8008120699 | |
| Download: ML17319A536 (6) | |
Text
U.
S.
NUCIEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT
REGION III
Report No.
50-315/80-11; 50-316/80-09 Docket No.
50-315; 50-316 License No. DPR-58; DPR-74 License:
American Electric Power Service Corporation Indiana and Michigan Power Company 2 Broadway New York, NY 10004 Facility Name:
Donald CD Cook Nuclear Plant Inspection At:
D.
C.
Cook Site, Bridgman, MI Inspection Conducted:
June 26 and 27, 1980 Inspectors:
~~~~a~~
R.
D. Schulz 7': go
+c-Approved By:
K. R.
Ba er, iaaf, Nuclear Support Section
)0 Ins ection Summa Ins ection on June 26 and
1980 (Re ort No. 50-315/80-11 50-316/80-09)
Areas Ins ected:
Routine, unannounced inspection of the licensee's non-licensed personnel, and the licensed operator requalification training program.
The inspection involved 30 inspection hours by two NRC inspec-tors.
Results:
Of the two areas inspected, no apparent items of noncompliance or deviations were identified in one area, one item of noncompliance was identified in one area (Deficiency failure to follow requalification program for review of Facility Design Change, Procedure Change and Facility Licensee Change Review paragraph 4).
DETAILS 1.
Personnel Contacted
- D. Shaller, Plant Manager-G. Svenson, Assistant Plant Manager D. Nelson, Training Coordinator
- J. Stietzel, QA Supervisor-L. Matthias, Administrative Supervisor
""R. Masse, NRC Senior Resident Inspector The inspectors also talked with and interviewed technicians, licensed operators, new and existing employees and temporary employees.
"-Denotes those attending the exit interview.
Licensee Action on Previous Ins ection Findin s (Closed)
Noncompliance (315/80-01-7; 316/80-01-7): Failure to take prompt corrective action on audit findings.
The inspector found that the departments responsible for corrective action on audit findings have supplied close-out dates for audits and in general are more responsive in resolving audit findings.
(Closed)
Noncompliance (315/80-01-7; 316/80-01-7): Failure to esta-blish a formal audit program for the corporate office.
The inspector reviewed Revision 2 to QA Procedure QA Audits (QAP-191)
and the current audit schedule dated February 27, 1980 and found that the program appears to be adequately implemented.
(Closed)
Noncompliance (315/80-01-1; 316/80-01-1): Failure to main-tain the Master Surveillance Schedule current.
The inspector re-viewed the May 21, 1980 revision to PMI-4030 by temporary change sheet and determined that the system has improved.
Current plans to computerize plant surveillance test requirements will provide a much improved centralized tracking system.
(Open) Unresolved Items (315/80-01-9; 316/80-01-9): Failure to control ignition sources.
The inspector reviewed several permits and determined that permits are still not specific enough in scope or duration to adequately control ignition sources.
(Closed) Unresolved Item (315/80-04';
316/80-03): Calculation of subcooling instrument errors.
The inspector was provided additional memoranda which adequately detail the calculational methods to satisfy this concer The inspectors verified by direct questioning of one new, one exis-ting, and one temporary employee that administrative controls and procedures, radiological health and safety, industrial safety, controlled access and security procedures, emergency plan, and quality assurance training were provided as required by the lic-ensee's technical specifications; verified by direct questioning of one craftsman and one technician that on-the-job training, formal technical training commensurate with job classification, and fire fighting training were provided.
The following procedures were reviewed:
PMI 2070 Rev. 6, September 5,
1979; "Training" GET Outline
, October, 1976 A formal training and retraining program has been established for new employees, technicians, craftsmen and temporary and existing em-ployees.
The program was being evaluated periodically and respon-sibilities were assigned to assure the training program requirements -.
have been met.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
4.
License 0 erator Re uglification Trainin'ro ram The licensee has implemented a lecture schedule, which has identi-fied deficient areas for lecture topics.
Lesson plans were estab-lished which describe the scope of the lectures.
The inspectors reviewed the records of two control room operators holding NRC Reactor Operator licenses, two shift supervisors holding NRC Senior Reactor Operator licenses, and two Reactor Operators not actively engaged in operating or directing operation of the faci-lity. The records contained the following:
a.
Copies of the most recent annual written examination and the individuals'esponse.
b.
Documentation of attendance at all required lectures.
c.
Documentation of the required control manipulations.
d.
The results of performance evaluation e.
Documentation of additional training received in identified de-ficient areas.
Documentation of required procedure reviews, exluding revision review.
g.
Copies of the most recent annual oral examination and the indi-viduals response.
Means are provided in the training program for evaluation of the operators and evaluation of the training programs'ffect-iveness.
There were no operators that received unsatisfactory performance for on-the-job evaluation.
The inspectors interviewed one licensed control room operator, one shift supervisor, and one licensed reactor operator not actively engaged in operating or directing operation of the facility.
Their comments verified the training they had re-ceived; including its nature, duration, and sufficiency for their job requirements.
In reviewing records and in discussion with the Training Coordinator it was discovered that shift IV - licensed operato'rs, had not docu-mented their review of revisions on seven change notifications in a period from 2/26/80 to 5/12/80.
These notifications take the forms of procedural changes, design changes, IE Bulletins and Information Notices, and facility license change review.
This review is to be documented on Form G-4 per D.C.
Cook License Operator Requalification Program in the area designated Facility Design Change, Procedure Change, and License Change Review.
"Each licensed operator is responsible for reviewing these revisions and documenting this review on Form G-4."
The other three shifts and extra shifts had adequately documented review of revisions and only Shift IV was deficient in this area.
This finding represents noncompliance with 10CFR50.54 (i-1) and licensee's Requalification Program 6.
Exit Interview The inspectors met with the licensee representatives (denoted in paragraph 1) on June 27, 1980 and summarized the scope and findings of the inspection.
With regard to the noncompliance, the licensee stated that appropriate measures would be taken concerning documen-ting review of revisions for shift IV, licensed operators.
4