IR 05000528/1991022
| ML17305B646 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Palo Verde  |
| Issue date: | 07/02/1991 |
| From: | Wong H NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION V) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML17305B645 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-528-91-22-MM, 50-529-91-22, 50-530-91-22, NUDOCS 9107220059 | |
| Download: ML17305B646 (27) | |
Text
Report Nos.:
Docket Nos.:
License Nos.:
Licensee:
Facility Name:
U.S.
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION REGION V
50-528/91-22, 50-529/91-22 and 50-530/91-22 50-528, 50-529 and 50-530 NPF-41, NPF-51 and NPF-74 Arizona Public Service Company P. 0.
Box 53999, Station 9012 Phoenix, AZ 85072-3999 Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station Units 1, 2 and
Meeting Location:
NRC Region V Office, Walnut Creek, California Meeting Conducted:
Nay 21, 1991 Prepared by:
Approved By:
~Susmar H. Wong, Chief Reac r ProjectsSection II H. Wong, Chic Reactor ProjectsSection II Da e Signed A management meeting was held on Nay-21, 1991 to discuss the proposed revision to the Arizona Public Service Company (APS) guality Assurance Plan, the APS training program, and APS actions related to the NRC Diagnostic Evaluation Team report.
A copy of the licensee's presentation material is attached.
9107220059 910703 PDR ADOCK 05000528 G
DETAILS U. S. Nuclear Re ulator Commission D. Coe, J. Dyer, F.
Gee, G. johnston, D. Kirsch, S. Richards, J. Spraul, M. Magner, H. Mong, R. Zimmerman, Senior Resident Inspector Project Director Region V, NRR Reactor Inspector Licensing Examiner Chief, Reactor Safety Branch Chief, Reactor Projects Branch Quality Operations Engineer, NRR Reactor Inspector Chief, Reactor Projects,Section II Director, Division of Reactor Safety and projects Arizona Public Service APS J. Bailey, B. Ballard, T. Bradish, G. Clyde, P. Dahl, D. Eastman, A. Fernandez, E. Firth, R. Rouse, G. Shell, P. Miley, 2.
Mana ement Meetin Vice President, Nuclear Safety 5 Licensing Director, Quality Assurance Manager, Compliance Engineer, Nuclear-Licensing Manager, Business Planning Senior QA Engineer, Quality Systems Senior QA Engineer, Quality Systems Manager, Training Supervisor, Compliance Manager, Quality Systems Manager, Operations Unit 2 Mr. Ballard began the meeting by reviewing the basis for the recently submitted revision to the Palo Verde Quality Assurance (QA)
Plan.
Mr. Ballard explained that the principal reason for the recently submitted proposed revision to the QA Plan was to provide a
more operationally oriented plan and to remedy some past problems with the existing QA Plan.
For example, in the past, QA requirements were included in several documents, some areas were not well covered, the plan was not oriented towards the working level personnel who were implementing the plan, and there was a tendency of the plan to focus on construction related concerns and not operations issues.
The revised QA Plan is intended to be a complete, stand-alone document which has consolidated the QA requirements and which has not made new commitments.
The QA Plan was described to be more worker usable and will provide the basis for workers to understand the rationale for the QA requirements.
In addition, the Plan was intended to reaffirm the management view that QA requirements are importan ~
i
Mr. Ballard explained that the revised Plan included a description of a graded approach to QA in which the degree of the'application of the QA program would be based on the safety significance of the activity involved.
Mr. Ballard reiterated that regulatory requirements would continue to be met as in the past; however, the graded approach allowed flexibility in the review of activities which were considered to be outside regulations or requirements.
The graded approach also allowed for the utilization of three levels of verification: craftsman, peer, second party and supervisior review; QA/QC inspection and monitoring; and QA overview audits.
Based on NRC questions, Mr. Ballard explained that NRC Standard Review Plan (SRP)
17.3 was not directly used, but its principles were incorporated as much as possible.
APS decided to remain consistent with its current regulatory commitments rather than implement SRP 17.3 and a
new set of Regulatory Guides and referenced industry standards.
Mr. Ballard further described the Quality Augmented QA Program which includes some select QA requirements for fire protection, radwaste, security, emergency preparedness, and Seismic Category IX systems and equipment.
Mr. Zimmerman concluded the discussions in this area and stated that the NRC was currently reviewing the APS submittal and would notify APS upon completion of the review.
APS and NRC staff members continued more detailed discussions of the revised QA Plan separately.
Mr. Firth then continued the meeting by describing various actions concerning the APS training program.
He stated that the training program continued to be supported by senior APS management and that his role as Training Manager was to provide a single point of contact for training in order to properly support and pursue training issues.
Mr. Firth described the latest INPO findings related to training as being generally favorable with some areas needing.improvement.
The weaknesses were described as:
(1) non-licensed operator on-the-job training (OJT)
was viewed to be not consistently implemented; (2) training evaluators were in some cases providing some unintended coaching; (3) training in HVAC was not in the formal training program; (4) the use= of simulation rather than actual job performance for OJT and (5)
some inconsistency in OJT between units.
Mr. Wiley highlighted the successful interactions between operations and training in providing training which was more useful to operations personnel.
It was noted that= training instructors have come from the operations department to provide an operations perspective and have provisions to stay in touch with the plant and operations activities.
Licensed operator simulator training time is approximately 60-65 hours per yea The NRC staff commented that the training staff should guard against predictability of simulator scenarios.
Mr. Firth stated that instructors were alert to minimize this potential problem and that precautions had been taken.
In addition, the NRC staff noted that the APS training staff was noticably smaller than at the other facilities and was concerned with the possible impacts that a small staff would have on the upcoming requalification examinations.
Nr. Firth stated that personnel turnover had caused some of the loss of instructors and that he was actively recruiting for replacements.
However, Nr.
Firth indicated he was confident that there were adequate personnel to successfully complete the training needed to support the requalification examinations.
I Mr. Ziamerman stated that the lessons learned from other licensees in Region V and industry overall should be examined particularly since operator examinations would be occurring at Palo Verde in the few next months.
The problems faced by other utilities were recommended to be examined to preclude their repetition at Palo Verde.
Mr. Firth indicated that APS personnel had already visited other facilities to review their programs and weaknesses identified to benefit from their experiences.
Mr. Bailey then provided the introductions for the discussions of the status of APS actions related to the NRC's Diagnostic Evaluation (DET) Report.
Ms. Dahl described the APS efforts to make the DET issues more manageable by taking the approximately 140 individual DET findings and consolidating them into 25 main issues.
In addition, these issues are cross-referenced to the APS Business Plan to assure incorporation of the DET issues into the Business Plan.
Ns.
Dahl explained how the cross-referencing was displayed in progress reports.
Nr. Bradish continued the discussions by describing the method by which the status of the Business Plan tasks which were applicable to the DET report were accomplished.
The 25 issues are being statused quarterly by APS using subjective judgement to assess the degree of completion of the tasks associated with each issue.
The task leader assigned is responsible for providing an overall assessment of the effectiveness of completing the task.
Nr. Bradish indicated that current licensee and NRC inspection findings would be included in the assessment of the task status.
A sample of the evaluation process was discussed to illustrate the evaluation methodology.
One way being used to provide feedback on the effectiveness of the APS actions was through equality Audits and Nonitoring activities.
Nr. Stover then described the progress report for the Business Plan and stated that a report was to be issued in the next few weeks.
It appear ed that a sizeable amount of work was involved with the develpment and maintenance of the progress reports.
For that reason Nr.
Zimmerman emphasized that, although impressed by the reports, the reports should serve as a tool to meet the needs of
APS managers, not the NRC, and if this was not so, a'e-evaluation of the reports should be considered.
Overall, Mr. Zimmerman recognized and supported the use of some style of progress reports as potentially beneficial to APS management.
Mr. Zimmerman then concluded the meeting and expressed his appreciatIon for the discussions'nd responses provided during the meeting.
~Ke further added that a future APS/NRC management meeting would be considered possibly in June or July which would include discussions of safety system unavailability and the status of probabilistic risk assessment activities and application in the operations philosophy at Palo Verd PE TI ALITYA URA E
PLA PALO VERDE NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION
g
~
0 ~
Q ggg
~
~
~eER4r~o O
D'
0
+
rj+e P ~
P P ~
P
~
P P ~
~
P P
P P
~
'
S g
Q g
~
~ 0 S
)
~
i > g g
~ s r
~
I
~
0 S ~
g
)
S ~
5 a
~
S 0 ~
'
S R 0 S a
5 0
)
i
~
~ ~
~
~
0 ~
~ '
~
~
~
1 ~
C
~ ~
'
~
'0 S
g
~
~ ~
~
S
~
S S ~
~ 0 a
~
'P
'j$e,
~; g. p~"
N
~
~
~
~ 0 N ~
~
I
~ 0 0
Q
~ N N
j 0 '
S ~
g
~
I
~
0 Q
~
5 ~ 0
~,
1(
e
'0 S
g
~
~
~
0 ~
0 0
- 4
+~1 tf
-e
~
a
~
~
i
~
~
-0
~
~
)
~
J
)
~ 0 s
)
N
~
-0 e
) ~
~ -
~ -)
S
)
g
~
~ ~
~ >
~
~ i
~
a Q
S R R
a
N g
a p~c (>>
~C R
L a
a
~
~
Q a
~
0 g g
}
g 5 S 0 ~ l
~
0
Q a
S 0 ~
s a
I S
g
~
a ~
~ e y
~
s Q~r~r S
8'
O'
~ I 1'
~ I Ol
~
S 8
L a
GS P
N VX NRC TARP INTRODUCTION - E. Pirth I
Senior~ Management Involvement/Support Action Plan/Business Plan Integration (see attached)
SPOC's/TC's Involvement in Training Process INPO ACCREDITATION TEAM VISIT RESULTS - E Pi.rth/P. Niley OPS/STA/TS (07 -
11 January 1991)
(see attached)
MAINT/RP/CHEM (29 April - 03 May 1991)
(see attached)
SIMULATOR/OPS TRAINING UPDATE - E. Firth/P.Riley Simulator Modification Implementation Plan (see attached)
Simulator Training Schedule for 1991 (see attached)
NRC License Exams (Initial & Requal)
Operator Training Issues (see attached)
EOP Validation Progress TRAINING INITXATZVES - E. Firth Training Program Evaluation Group - Training Weaknesses Noted (see attached)
PRA Training for PVNGS personnel (see attached)
System Engineer Training (see attached)
Maintenance Training Addition of PR&C, HVAC, Welder, Machinist as Formal Programs Supervisor/Management Training (see attached)
RP Development of Dosimetry Tech, RPIT Formal Programs Refuel Team Training PRB Training 50.59; Training (see attached)
i q<1 I
~
~
~ )",
4/29/91 - 5/3/91 ISSUES CONCERNS 1. HVAC (Nuclear Refrigerant Tech)
Training Program not formally added to Electrical Maintenance Accredited Training Program 2. Have not formally designated mandatory Perform (P) items in ELEC/MECH OJT Program 3. (UtilitySelf-Identified Weakness)
l&CTech OJT implementation inconsistent between units STRENGTHS 3. I8 C Tech Exact Replica Simulators 2. Use of Plant Single Points of Contact/Training Coordinators very effective 3. Brainstorming process used for IB C Tech Training Feedback 4. Effective use of individual response Feedback forms in RP Training Program
. OVERALL: INPO felt process of training and plant ownership was solid for these 5 programs. Instructor techniques/class control done well. Overall, Training is consistent between the units.
OTHER ISSUES NEEDED TO BE LOOKED AT:
l. Exam grading in l&CTech area 2. Apprenticeship Program-consider for future addition as Accredited Program?
1/7/94 - 1/C4/94
.ISSUES CONCERNS 1. NLO OJT Program not consistently impiemented 2. OJT Program (for SRO, RO, NLO, STA)
not consistently evaluated STREN TH I. Upper management involvement in training 2. Training Change System 3. Training procedures 4. Tech Staff Continuing Training process 5. Waiver process for Instructors 6. Use and management of Action Plan System to prioritize work load 7. UtilizingTraining Coordinators/Single Points of Contact to push training process
OVERALL: Very much impressed with amount of work done in the last 6 - 9 months.
OTHER ISSUES NEEDED TO BE LOOKED AT:
1. Instructor techniques 2. STA JQS specifics 3. Ops management involvement in annual LOR exams
DIAGNOSTIC EVALUATION STATUS DIAGNOSTIC ISSUES P. J. Dahl
~
COMPOSITE OBSERVATIONS
~
BUSINESS PLAN CROSS-REFERENCE MATRIX DIAGNOSTIC REPORT STATUS T. R. Bradlsh o
EVALUATIONMETHODOLOGY BUSINESS PLAN TASK PLAN STATUS TASK LEADER INPUT ON EFFECTIVENESS STATUS OF INDIVIDUALDET CONCERNS NRC INSPECTION REPORT RESULTS o
RESULTS BUSINESS PLAN D. N. Stover
~
STATUS
~
FUTURE DEVELOPMENT
NAY 21, 1991 WALNUT CREEK MEETING DZAGNOSTTC REPORT TZ NS DEVELOPED A
MATRIX TO CROSS-REFERENCES PROBABLE DZAGNOSTXC OBSERVATIONS AND BUSINESS PLAN OBJECTIVES/TASK PLANS AFTER TASK PLANS APPROVEDX REVISED MATRZX TO REFLECT
~CTUAL CBJECTXVES/TASK PLANS TXGHTENXNG THE ZNTERPRETATXON TOTAL OBSERVATIONS CURRENT SUBMITTAL 140'REATING A SINGLE DOCUMENT FOR REFERENCE OF DIAGNOSTIC XSSVES ORXGZNAL OBSERVATIONS COMBINED INTO BROADER ISSUES OR
"COMPOSZTE" OBSERVATZONS, TOTAL COMPOSITES = 26 ADVANTAGES'ASIER FOR PERSONNEL TO UNDERSTAND ENCOMPASS WHOLE XSSUESX THUS INCREASING PERSONNEL AWARENESS RESPOND TO WHOLE XSSUESX RATHER THAN FRAGMENTS OF ISSUES PRIORITY FOR CLOSURE XS EFFECTIVENESS EASE TRACKXNG OF PROGRESS e
COMPOSITE OBSERVATION f -- $2 CORRESPONDS TP ENGINEERING 8c MAINTENANCE PROGRAMMATiC ISSUES ZN DER PROGRESS REPORT
~
ORIGINAL OSSERVATZON
~
l991 BUSINESS PLAN OBJECTIVE f AND TITLE
~
CLOSURE PACKAGE if RCTS P