IR 05000454/1996011

Insp Repts 50-454/96-11 & 50-455/96-11 on 961104-08.No Violations Noted.Major Areas Inspected:Aspects of Licensee Operations,Training & Plant Support

ML20132G414
Person / Time
Site:	Byron
Issue date:	12/18/1996
From:	NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III)
To:
Shared Package
ML20132G401	List: IR 05000454/1996011 ML20132G398
References
50-454-96-11, 50-455-96-11, NUDOCS 9612260252
Download: ML20132G414 (7)

Text

.

.

, U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION REGION lil Docket Nos: 50-454; 50-455 Licenses No: NPF-37; NPF 66 Reports No: 50-454/96011(DRS); 50-455/96011(DRS)

Licensee: Commonwealth Edison Company (Comed) ,

l

!

Facility: Byron Generating Station, Units 1 & 2 ,

i

'

Location: 4448 North German Church Road Byron, IL 61010-9750 [

Dates: November 4-8,1996 i

.!

Inspectors: R. M. Bailey, Reactor inspector P. C. Cataldo, inspector-in-Training ;

,

Approved by: Melvyn Leach, Chief, Operator Licensing Branch ;

Division of Reactor Safety i l

9612260252 961218 PDR ADOCK 05000454 G PDR

.. . . _ _ _ _ . . _ . _ . _ - - . _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ . . .. _ _. - _ .. _ - __ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ . , _ - .

t

.  !

-

.

. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY i

Byron Generating Station, Units 1 & 2

'

NRC Inspection Reports 50-454/96011; 50-455/96011  :

I

!

The inspection included aspects of licensee operations, training, and plant support. The  !

report covers a 1-week, announced inspection which included a review of adrninistrative I training procedures and operating examination material; observation and evaluation of *

facility evaluators during an operating examination; an assessment of simulator fidelity; an  !

assessment of programmatic controls to ensure systematic approach to training; and a j review of requalification training record !

The inspectors used the guidance contained in inspection procedure (IP) 71001 and no l violations of NRC requirements were identified during tNs perio Ooerations  !

!

A lack of formal controls to limit examination material overlap was a weakness (Section 05.2).

l The requalification training feedback system was good (Section 05.4). l

implementation of the licensed operator requalification training program was in accordance  !

with 10 CFR Part 55 requirements (Section 05.7). )

l i

i

.

!

l

)

!

'

)4

. . - - - . . . , , - . .

, . - _ , _ _ , . -_ . _ _ _ _ _ , _ . _ _ _ . - - . . - ,

-

- . _ ,

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

i

'

.

[

.

. .

,

e Rooort Details i 1. Operations  !

l l

05 Operator Training and Qualification l i

!

05.1 90eratina Historv

Insoection Scoce (71001)  !

!  !

l The inspectors reviewed the following to assess the licensed operator  !

requalification training program's effectiveness regarding operator performance: l

e Most recent inspection report (95006) related to operator trainin !

e Resident inspector observations and reports (96003,96004,96005,96007 j and 96008) regarding operator performanc o Licensee event reports (6/95 - 10/96).

e Licensed Operator Requalification training schedul I e Interviews with licensed operators and facility trainers, Observations and Findinas ,

!

i The inspectors determined that plant and industry events relating to ineffective operator performance were included in the licensed operator requalification training program. The program incorporated lessons learned such that operator skills and  ;

knowledge needed to safely operate the Byron Nuclear Power Station were emphasize !

05.2 Reaualification Examinations Insoection Scooe (71001)

The inspectors reviewed the following to assess the licensee's examination  !

materials' quality and content:

e Examination banks (written, dynamic scenario, and job performance measure).

e Current sample pla e Comprehensive written exams (8/95 - 10/96).

,

e Annual operating test Observations and Findinas The operating examinations consisted of a set of dynamic scenarios on the plant specific simulator involving a 5-member crew of licensed operators. Additionally, l the operators were administered a plant specific walkthrough consisting of five Job l Performance Measures (JPMs).

.

l

i l

.

.

.

The written examinations were administered prior to this inspection period and were operationally oriented with a moderate level of difficulty. No direct look-up questions were identified. The inspectors compared the most recent written examinations with previously administered ones and determined that the examinations had improved in quality and conten The JPMs addressed operationally important tasks and provided criteria for successful completion. However, one JPM did not provide sufficient evaluator cues to ensure complete and correct performance of the task standard. Additionally, the inspectors identified a program weakness in that JPMs were routinely repeated over subsequent weeks. The amount of overlap increased from week-to-week such that a total of 80% of the subsequent JPMs were repeated by the fifth week of examinations. The inspectors determined that no programmatic control was in place to limit JPM overlap and ensure operating examination integrity during subsequent examination The dynamic simulator scenarios were challenging and provided a good tool for evaluating operator mastery of training objectives. The content of each scenario was consistent with the program's sample plan and contained minimal repeat from previously administered scenario .3 Reaualification Examination Administration Practices Insoection Scoce (71001)

The inspectors performed the following to assess the licensee's policies and practices regarding requalification examination administration, simulator fidelity, and examination security:

e Observed requalification examination administration (operating test).

e Interviewed licensee personnel (licensed operators, instructors / evaluators, and supervisors).

o Observed simulator fidelity performance, e Reviewed the licensee's administrative procedures (BTP 100-16 and BTP 40012) regarding examination administration and contro Observations and Findinas The facility evaluators adequately identified operator performance errors during the operating examinations. The facility evaluated the crew and allindividuals as satisfactory as all critical tasks were accomplished. One senior licensed operator was evaluated as unsatisfactory on one JPM and assigned remediation training to improve the command and control function. The inspectors agreed with the licensee's evaluation results and need for remediatio No simulator fidelity deficiencies were observed and no simulation fidelity report is attache . . . _ _ _ __ . _ _ .. __ . - - _ . . . __ _ _ _ __ ___

l

.  !

i

l

. 05.4 Recualification Trainino Proaram Feedback System 1 Insoection Scope (71001)

The inspectors performed the following to assess the licensee's training program feedback system effectiveness:

e Reviewed employee (trainee) comments to the feedback syste I e Interviewed licensee personnel (licensed operators, instructors / evaluators, and supervisors).

o Reviewed licensee conducted requalification program quality assurance / quality controlinspections (SOV Audit No. 06-95-07). Observations and Findinas The licensee's feedback program incorporated a tracking system to capture procedural revisions, plant modifications, and other significant changes affecting plant operations. The training material was routinely updated to ensure current values were used during requalification training. Additionally, the training department monitored performance by tracking incorrect responses to written questions and placing frequently missed questions into a review process. Also, observation of performance deficiencies during operating tests were documented and referenced in continuing training. Licensed operator feedback into the training process was consistent with licensee's expectation .5 Remedial Trainina Proaram insoection Scooe (71001)

The inspectors performed the following to assess the licensee's remedial training program effectiveness:

e Reviewed individual operator and crew performance evaluations.

.

o Reviewed remediation training plans.

l e Interviewed licensee personnel (licensed operators, instructors / evaluators,and supervisors). Observations and Findinas l l

The inspectors reviewed two previously administered and one current remediation

'

training plan. The previously identified performance deficiencies were addressed in a remediation plan which were determined to be effective in correcting the specific l deficiency.

i I i

l

.

. 5

_ - ,

.

,

F e 05.6 Conformance with Ooerator License Conditions j Insoection Scoce (71001)  !

,

The inspectors reviewed the following documents to assess the facility and ;

operator licensees' compliance with 10 CFR 55.53 license condition l requirements: l e Records pertaining to maintaining active operator license e Records pertaining to reactivated licenses (none this period).

• Individual operator medical record repor Observations and Findinas The inspectors determined that the licensee's controls to ensure licensed operators were conforming to the requirements of 10 CFR 55.53, conditions of license, were goo .7 Conclusions on Ooerator Trainina and Qualification The inspectors concluded the following:

e The licensee's overall implementation of the licensed operator requalification training program was in accordance with 10 CFR Part 55 requirements, o The licensee's informal controls to limit examination material overlap is considered a program weaknes e The licensee's controls to revise the program based on audits, industry and plant events, system and procedure modifications, and operator feedback were goo V. Manaaement Meetinas X1 Exit Meetina Summarv .

The inspectors presented the preliminary inspection results to members of licensee !

management on November 8,1996. The licensee acknowledged the findings  !

presente l The inspectors asked the licensee whether any materials examined during the j inspection could be considered proprietary. No proprietary information was i identifie i i

,

.

e e PARTIAL LIST OF PERSONS CONTACTED Licensee T. K. Higgins, Support Services Director T. Schmidt, Training Manager S. W. Pettinger, Operations Training Supervisor R. G. Brown, Principle Instructor - Requal Program E. Bendis, Shift Operations Supervisor R. Wagner, Shift Operations Supervisor P. DiGiovanna, PWR Operations Training Supervisor - PTC ILRf

'S.' Burgess, Senior Resident inspector

• N. Hilton, Resident inspector (*) Personnel not in attendance at the exit meeting on November 8,199 INSPECTION PROCEDURES USED IP 41500: Training and Qualification Effectiveness IP 71001: Licensed Operator Requalification Program Evaluation ITEMS OPENED, CLOSED, AND DISCUSSED Ooened

,

NONE Closed NONE Discussed NONE 7