IR 05000528/2005301
| ML052450475 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Palo Verde  |
| Issue date: | 08/31/2005 |
| From: | Ryan Lantz Operations Branch IV |
| To: | Overbeck G Arizona Public Service Co |
| References | |
| 50-528/05-301, 50-529/05-301, 50-530/05-301 ER-05-301 | |
| Download: ML052450475 (11) | |
Text
ust 31, 2005
SUBJECT:
PALO VERDE NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION -NRC EXAMINATION REPORT 05000528/2005301; 05000529/2005301; 05000530/2005301
Dear Mr. Overbeck:
On August 11, 2005, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) completed an examination at your Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station, Units 1, 2 and 3. The enclosed examination report documents the results of the NRC examination and the examination findings, which were discussed on August 4 and 11, 2005, with you and other members of your staff.
The examinations included an evaluation of five applicants for reactor operator licenses and three applicants for senior operator licenses. The written and operating examinations were developed using NUREG-1021, "Operator Licensing Examination Standards for Power Reactors," Revision 9. We determined that all applicants satisfied the requirements of 10 CFR Part 55, and the appropriate licenses have been issued.
In accordance with 10 CFR 2.390 of the NRC's "Rules of Practice," a copy of this letter and its enclosure will be made available electronically for public inspection in the NRC Public Document Room or from the Publicly Available Records (PARS) component of NRCs document system (ADAMS). ADAMS is accessible from the NRC Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html (the Public Electronic Reading Room).
Sincerely,
/RA/
Ryan Lantz, Chief Operations Branch Dockets: 50-528; 50-529; 50-530 Licenses: NPF-41; NPF-51; NPF-74
Arizona Public Service Company -2-cc Steve Olea Arizona Corporation Commission 1200 W. Washington Street Phoenix, AZ 85007 Douglas K. Porter, Senior Counsel Southern California Edison Company Law Department, Generation Resources P.O. Box 800 Rosemead, CA 91770 Chairman Maricopa County Board of Supervisors 301 W. Jefferson, 10th Floor Phoenix, AZ 85003 Aubrey V. Godwin, Director Arizona Radiation Regulatory Agency 4814 South 40 Street Phoenix, AZ 85040 Craig K. Seaman, Director Regulatory Affairs Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station Mail Station 7636 P.O. Box 52034 Phoenix, AZ 85072-2034 Hector R. Puente Vice President, Power Generation El Paso Electric Company 310 E. Palm Lane, Suite 310 Phoenix, AZ 85004 Jeffrey T. Weikert Assistant General Counsel El Paso Electric Company Mail Location 167 123 W. Mills El Paso, TX 79901 John W. Schumann Los Angeles Department of Water & Power Southern California Public Power Authority P.O. Box 51111, Room 1255-C Los Angeles, CA 90051-0100
Arizona Public Service Company -3-John Taylor Public Service Company of New Mexico 2401 Aztec NE, MS Z110 Albuquerque, NM 87107-4224 Thomas D. Champ Southern California Edison Company 5000 Pacific Coast Hwy, Bldg. D1B San Clemente, CA 92672 Robert Henry Salt River Project 6504 East Thomas Road Scottsdale, AZ 85251 Brian Almon Public Utility Commission William B. Travis Building P.O. Box 13326 1701 North Congress Avenue Austin, TX 78701-3326 Karen O'Regan Environmental Program Manager City of Phoenix Office of Environmental Programs 200 West Washington Street Phoenix, AZ 85003
Arizona Public Service Company -4-Electronic distribution by RIV:
Regional Administrator (BSM1)
DRP Director (ATH)
DRS Director (DDC)
DRS Deputy Director (KMK)
Senior Resident Inspector (GXW2)
Branch Chief, DRP/D (TWP)
Senior Project Engineer, DRP/D (NFO)
Team Leader, DRP/TSS (RLN1)
RITS Coordinator (KEG)
V. Dricks, PAO (VLD)
J. Dixon-Herrity, OEDO RIV Coordinator (JLD)
RidsNrrDipmIipb PV Site Secretary (PRC)
SISP Review Completed: __Y____ ADAMS: : Yes G No Initials: ______
G Publicly Available G Non-Publicly Available G Sensitive G Non-Sensitive SOE:OB SOE:OB SEPI:PSB C:OB C:PBD C:OB JDrake/lmb GJohnston MHaire RLantz TPruett RLantz
/RA/ /RA/ /RA/ /RA/ /RA/ /RA/
08/25/05 08/25/05 08/25/05 08/29/05 08/30/05 08/31/05 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY T=Telephone E=E-mail F=Fax
ENCLOSURE U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION IV
Dockets: 50-528; 50-529, 50-530 Licenses: NPF-41; NPF-51; NPF-74 Report No.: 05000528/2005-301, 05000529/2005-301, and 05000530/2005-301 Licensee: Arizona Public Service Company Facility: Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station, Units 1, 2, and 3 Location: 5951 S. Wintersburg Tonopah, Arizona Dates: July 29 through August 11, 2005 Inspectors: Gary Johnston, Senior Operations Engineer, Operations Branch Mark Haire, Operations Engineer, Operations Branch James Drake, Operations Engineer, Operations Branch Approved By: Ryan Lantz, Chief Operations Branch Division of Reactor Safety-1- Enclosure
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS ER 05000528/2005-301, 05000529/2005-301, 05000530/2005-301; 7/29-8/11/2005; Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station, Units 1, 2, and 3; Initial Operator Licensing Examinations.
NRC examiners evaluated the competency of five applicants for reactor operator licenses and three applicants for senior operator licenses at Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station, Units 1, 2, and 3. The facility licensee developed the examinations using NUREG-1021,
"Operator Licensing Examination Standards for Power Reactors," Revision 9. Licensee proctors administered the written examination to all applicants on July 29, 2005, in accordance with the instructions provided by the chief examiner. The NRC administered the operating tests on August 1- 4, 2005.
Cornerstone: Human Performance No findings of significance were identified (Section 40A5.1).
-2- Enclosure
Report Details 4. OTHER ACTIVITIES 4OA5 Other Activities
.1 Initial License Examination Administration
.1.1 Operator Knowledge and Performance e. Examination Scope On July 29, 2005, the licensee proctored the administration of the written examinations to all eight applicants. The licensee staff graded the written examinations, analyzed the results, and presented their analysis to the NRC on August 4, 2005.
The NRC examination team administered the various portions of the operating examination to all eight applicants on August 1-4, 2005. All eight applicants participated in two dynamic simulator scenarios. The five applicants for reactor operator participated in a control room and facilities walkthrough test consisting of 11 system tasks, and an administrative test consisting of 4 administrative tasks. The three applicants for upgrade to senior operator participated in a control room and facilities walkthrough test consisting of 5 system tasks, and an administrative test consisting of 5 administrative tasks.
b. Findings All eight of the applicants passed all parts of the examinations. The applicants demonstrated good 3-way communications, alarm response, and peer checking.
For the written examinations, the average score for reactor operator applicants was 90.0 percent, and the average score for senior operator applicants was 88.9 percent.
The reactor operator applicant scores ranged from 86.5 to 94.6 percent, and the senior operator applicant scores ranged from 88.9 to 88.9 percent.
The licensee conducted a performance analysis for the written examinations with emphasis on questions missed by half or more of the applicants. After reviewing the licensees analysis, the examiners concluded that the analysis adequately addressed potential training deficiencies, and that the licensee provided adequate remediation for these apparent deficiencies.
.2 Initial Licensing Examination Development The licensee developed the examinations in accordance with NUREG-1021, Revision 9.
Licensee facility training and operations staff involved in examination development were on a security agreement.
-1- Enclosure
.2.1 Examination Quality a. Examination Scope The facility licensee submitted post-examination comments on August 4, 2005.
Examiners reviewed the submittal against the plant operating procedures and reference materials.
b. Findings The chief examiner determined that the written examination, as modified by the post-examination changes, was within the range of acceptability expected for an initial licensing examination and was satisfactory. Documentation of the licensees post-examination comments and the NRC staff review are located in Section .2.5 below
.2.2 Operating Examination Outline and Examination Package a. Examination Scope The facility licensee submitted the examination outlines and draft examinations on May 18, 2005. Examiners reviewed the submittal against the requirements of NUREG-1021, Revision 9, and forwarded minor comments to the licensee on May 24, 2005. The chief examiner conducted an onsite validation of the examinations and provided further comments during the week of July 11-15, 2005. The licensee satisfactorily completed comment resolution on July 25, 2005.
b. Findings Examiners approved the initial examination outline with minor comments and advised the licensee to proceed with the examination development.
The chief examiner determined that the examinations initially submitted by the licensee were within the range of acceptability expected for a proposed examination and were satisfactory.
No findings of significance were identified.
.2.3 Simulation Facility Performance a. Scope The examination team observed simulator performance with regard to plant fidelity during the examination validation and administration. The chief examiner also reviewed the outstanding simulator work orders to determine if there were any conflicts with examinations administered on the simulator.
-2- Enclosure
b. Findings No simulator deficiency was noted during validation and no findings of significance were identified.
.2.4 Examination Security a. Scope The examiners reviewed examination security both during the onsite preparation and examination administration weeks with respect to NUREG-1021 requirements. Written plans for simulator security and applicant control were reviewed and discussed with licensee personnel. In addition, the chief examiner sampled historical records of the applicants to verify the accuracy of data on their license applications, in accordance with Examiner Standard 202.C.2.e of NUREG 1021.
b. Findings No findings of significance were identified.
.2.5 Post-Examination Comments Question 5. Given the following plant conditions:
Unit 1 at 100% power Pressurizer level setpoint is 53%
Charging Pump selector switch is in the 1-2-3" position B Charging Pump is not currently running Pressurizer level is now lowering At which ONE of the following Pressurizer levels would you FIRST expect B Charging pump to be operating due to an auto start?
a. 19%
b. 29%
c. 38%
d. 43%
Proposed Answer: C Licensee Challenge:
The licensee proposed deleting this question because there is no correct answer as the question is written. With the charging pump selector switch in the 1-2-3" position, the B pump would be the normally running pump. The normally running pump will cycle off at +15 percent and restart at +14 percent. With the level setpoint at 53 percent, the B-3- Enclosure
pump should auto start at a pressurizer level of 67 percent. Therefore, none of the choices are a correct answer and the question should be deleted.
NRC Review A review of the licensees challenge revealed that the licensees argument was valid.
The examination question stem, as modified, resulted in the normally running pump being described as not running vice the standby pump, which was the original intent.
The licensees challenge was accepted. The question was deleted.
4OA6 Meetings, Including Exit On August 4, 2005, the examination team presented the examination results to Mr. Riedel, Director Nuclear Training Department, and other members of the licensee's management staff at the conclusion of the operating examinations. The licensee acknowledged the findings presented. The licensee did not identify as proprietary any information or materials examined during the examination.
On August 11, 2005, the results of the NRC staff review of the post-examination comments from the licensee and subsequent examination regrading were discussed with Pat Wiley, Operations Training Department Leader, and other members of the licensee staff. The final resolution of post examination comments were acknowledged by the licensee.
Attachment: Supplemental Information-4- Enclosure
ATTACHMENT SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION KEY POINTS OF CONTACT Licensee Fred Riedel, Director Nuclear Training Department Reggie Taylor, Shift Manager Training Coordinator Doug Rosenbaum, Operations training Instructor Gary Box, Licensing Initial Training Section Leader Warren Potter, Simulator Support Pat Wiley, Operations Training Department Leader Phillip Capehart, Operations Training Instructor Jim Taylor, Operations Support Department Leader Jim Ledford, Operations Training Instructor NRC personnel Greg Warnick, Senior Resident Inspector Jim Melfi, Resident Inspector Pablo Benvenuto, Resident Inspector Gary Johnston, Senior Operations Engineer Mark Haire, Operations Engineer Jim Drake, Operations Engineer Documents Reviewed Open Simulator Work Orders as of July 11, 2005 Attachment