IR 05000498/1996019

Insp Repts 50-498/96-19 & 50-499/96-19 on 960909-16.No Violations Noted.Major Areas Inspected:Operations, Engineering & Mgt Meetings

ML20129G675
Person / Time
Site:	South Texas
Issue date:	09/26/1996
From:	NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV)
To:
Shared Package
ML20129G636	List: IR 05000498/1996019 ML20129G630
References
50-498-96-19, 50-499-96-19, NUDOCS 9610030123
Download: ML20129G675 (5)

Text

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

. l

<

j i

,

ENCLOSURE U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

REGION IV

Docket Nos.: 50 498,50-499 )

License Nos.: NPF-76, NPF-80 Report No.: 50-498/96 19,50-499/96 19 i Licensee: Houston Lighting & Power Company Facility: South Texas Project Electric Generating Station, Units 1 and 2 *

Location: FM 521 - 8 miles west of Wadsworth Wadsworth, Texas  :

Dates: September 9-16,1996 Inspector: Howard F. Bundy, Reactor Engineer Approved By: Thomas O. McKernon, Acting Chief, Operations Branch Division of Reactor Safety I

ATTACHMENTS:

Attachment 1: Partial List of Persons Contacted Attachment 2: Final Written Examination and Answer Key l

l l

l

<

l I

"

9610030123 960926 PDR ADOCK 05000498 G PDR

.

.

2-EXECUTIVE SUMMARY South Texas Project Electric Generating Station, Units 1 and 2 NRC Inspection Report 50-498/96-19;50-499/96-19 This inspection evaluated the competency of a senior operator license applicant for issuance of an operating license at this dual unit facilit Operations

,

• One applicant passed the written portion of the license examinations. Because he had previously passed the operating test portion of the license examination, that portion was waived. The applicant satisfied all requirements of 10 CFR 55.33(a)(2)

and was issued a senior reactor operator license in accordance with 10 CFR 55.51 (Section 05.1).

• The licensee's remediation training program was effective in preparing the applicant

"

for the retake written examination (Section 05.2c).

I

.

l 1 I

l

!

. . . - - - . . . - . ..- .. . -. . - . - . . - . . - . --.. . . - .- .-

a

.-

-3-Report Details 1. Operations )

l 05 Operator Training and Qualification ,

!

05.1 General Comments-l The inspection assessed the eligibility and administrative and technical competency l of an applicant for issuance of a license to operate and direct the operation of the l reactivity controls of a commercial nuclear power facility in accordance with 10 CFR ,

'

Part 55 and NUREG-1021," Operator License Examiner Standards," Revision 7, Sections 200 (series), 300 (series), and 400 (series).

On September 16,1990, an examination was administered to one applicant for a senior operator license. Because the applicant had previously passed the operating t test portion of the examination, the operating test was waived. The applicant displayed the requisite knowledge and skills to satisfy the requirements of 10 CFR 55.33(a)(2) and was recommended to be issued a senior operator license in i accordance with 10 CFR 55.5 !

05.2 Written Examination Insoection Scope

The written examination for one senior operator applicant was administered on site by the senior resident inspector on September 16,199 . Observations and Findinos

'

'

The reference material provided by the facility was adequate to support development of the examination. The licensee was provided an ooportunity to .

} review the draf t examination under security agreement on September 9,199 :

'

Licensee representatives provided several comments to improve the technical validity of the examination, as noted in Attachment 2. All licensee pre-examination comments were incorporated in the final examinatio ,

,

! The chief examiner graded the examination and performed a question analysis. As

,

a result of this analysis the chief examiner determined that Ouestion 70 required the ,

,

applicant to recallinformation regarding decsy heat generation obtained from a i j figure in a procedure from memory. Because an operator would normally be

.,

expected to obtain this information from the procedure rather than recall it from memory, this question was deleted. The applicant's final grade was 86.9 percent.

( ,

,

j 5 i

k

, i

-

,

...v .- - - ,,-.r g--,,,, , _ ,a. - - - y4 ,

, ..e .

e

..

4 Conclusions One applicant for a senior operator license passed a retake written examinatio The licensee's remediation training program was effective in preparing the applicant for the retake written examinatio . Enaineerina E2 Engineering Support of Facilities & Equipment E Review of the Upd6ted Final Safety Analysis Report Commitments A recent discovery of a licensee operating their facility in a manner contrary to the Updated Final Safety Analysis Report description highlighted the need for a special focused review that compares plant practices, procedures, and/or parameters to the Updated Final Safety Analysis Report descriptions. While performing the inspection discussed in this report, the inspector reviewed the applicable portions of the Updated Final Safety Analysis Report that related to the areas inspected. The inspector verified that the Updated Final Safety Analysis Report wording was consistent with the observed plant practices, procedures, and/or parameter V. Manaaement Meetinas X1 Exit Meeting Summary The inspector presented the inspection results to Mr. Michael DeFrees during a telephone conference at the conclusion of the inspection on September 16,1996. Mr. DeFrees acknowledged the findings presente The licensee did not itlentify as proprietary any information or materials examined during the inspectio . i

I l

. .. _ . . . . . . _ _ _ _ . . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ . _ _ . . . . . . . _ . _ _ ,

..

,

-

e

..  :

'

ATTACHMENT 1 -

PARTIAL LIST OF PERSONS CONTACTED LICENSEE J. Calvert, Operations Training Division Manager J. Carlin, Manager Nuclear Training M. DeFrees,' Lead Instructor, Licensed Operator Training K. Struble, instructor, Licensed Operator Training i

!

i NRC  !

i D. Loveless, Senior Resident inspector  ;

s

.

l

,

f

!

,

I i

I

a

!  !

;

. *

t i E i

h

-

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