ML18043A358
| ML18043A358 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Palisades  |
| Issue date: | 11/20/1978 |
| From: | Little W, Swanson E NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML18043A356 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-255-78-26, NUDOCS 7812290025 | |
| Download: ML18043A358 (4) | |
See also: IR 05000255/1978026
Text
Report No.:
U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT
REGION III
50-255/78-26
Docket No.:
50-255
License No. DPR-20
Licensee:
Consumers Power Company
212 West Michigan Avenue
Jackson, MI
49201
Facility Name: Palisades Nuclear Generating Plant
Inspection At: Palisades Site, Covert, MI
Inspection Conducted:
October 24 and 25, 1978
Inspectors:
Approved By:
- /~
't"r. S ./1.frtle
s ;f I
//J/.I.~
t?.'~.~n"r
/ff/a/_~
~~~i~ch'~ef
Nuclear Support Section 2
Inspection Summary
e/¥8
1do~8
Inspection on October 24 and 25, 1978 (Report No. 50-255/78-26)
Areas Inspected:
Routine, unannounced inspection of training and
requalification training for licensed operators and other plant employees.
The inspection involved 24 inspector-hours on site by two NRC inspectors.
Results:
Of the two areas inspected, no apparent items of noncompliance
or deviations were identified in one area; one apparent item of noncompliance
(deficiency-failure to adhere to procedures for training and documentation -
Paragraph 2a) *
'* *1
" .,
. *;
....
(
DETAILS
1.
Persons Contacted
J. G. Lewis, Plant Superintendent
- H. W. Keiser, Plant Operations Superintendent
- G. H. Petitjean, Technical Engineer
- J. P. Liddel, Training Coordinator Level II
- R. Nelson, Training Coordinator Level I
The inspectors also interviewed 6 other licensee employees during
the course of the inspection.
They included reactor and auxiliary
operators, mechanical repairmen, I&C technicians, and chemistry
technicians.
- denotes those present at the exit interview.
2.
Training
The inspectors examined a cross section of training records including
those of new employees, nonlicensed and licensed personnel, technicians,
and craft personnel and interviewed employees to ascertain the
accomplishment and quality of training.
a.
Records
Fourteen training records belonging to reactor and senior
reactor operators, electrical and mechanical repairmen, and
I&C and chemistry technicians were provided for review.
Deficiencies were found indicating apparent non-accomplishment
and/or lack of documentation of training in the following
requirements.
(1)
New employee training orientation to be administered
within two days of employment for one I&C technician
(Administrative Procedure 13.1, Section 5.2a).
(2)
Respiratory protection indoctrination training to be
administered to new employees within one month for
one mechanical repairman helper (Administrative
Procedure 13.1, Section 5.2c).
(3)
Annual job related quality assurance instruction for
two mechanical repairmen, biennial training in use of
forklift, crane safety, scaffolding/rigging for one
mechanical repairman (Administrative Procedure 13.3.3,
Attachment 13.3.3) *
- 2 -
. '
, .. :: ...
....
(4)
Quarterly job related industrial/fire safety training
for one control operator (Administrative Procedure 13.3.6,
Attachment 13.3.6).
(5)
Semiannual site emergency drill participation by a
chemistry technician (Administrative Procedure 13.4,
Attachment 13.4B).
(6)
Triennial first aid training for a Senior Reactor Operator
(Administrative Procedure 13.4, Attachment 13.4E).
The above constitutes noncompliance with 'the requirement for
records of training and qualification to be retained under
Technical Specification 6.10.le. Training records of licensed
operators that were reviewed were found to be complete in
licensed areas though lacking organization.
b.
Interviews
The inspectors interviewed licensee employees to determine the
effectiveness of the training received.
In general, it appeared
that *the training was satisfactory in both content and
presentation. However, several statements made by persons being
interviewed were of concern to the inspectors and were discussed
with management:
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
On-the-job training was conducted in radiation areas
instead of a mock-up or training facility.
Mechanical repairmen felt that temporary personnel were
inadequately trained in radiation protection.
Relatively new mechanical maintenance personnel were
assigned to critical work without adequate training and
supervision.
Supervisory concern was directed more toward paperwork
than toward actual supervision and instruction.
There does not appear to be any formal acknowledgement
made by women employees with regard to prenatal radiation
exposure training although Regulatory Guide 8.13 is
referenced in Administrative Procedure 13 and recommends
oral and written instruction in addition to written
acknowlegement.
-
3 -
.
.
.. *: . , ..
--.--~ *---**---....--.~ - .. ---- - . __ . .,_ **.-*
---
~ -
. '
-~
3.
Regualification Training
The inspectors reviewed the operator requalification training program
and documentation of on-the-job training by reviewing the records of
four licensed operators.
While reviewing the records of supervisory evaluations and observations
of manipulations and simulations, the inspectors noted a general lack
of constructive criticism and documentation of any follow-up training.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
4.
Exit Interview
The inspectors met with licensee representatives (denoted in
Paragraph 1) at the conclusion of the inspection on October 25, 1978.
The inspectors summarized the scope and the findings of the inspection.
Mr. W. H. Keiser ackowledged the noncompliance item of training and
documentation and commented that a recent audit by their quality
assurance group had revealed similar deficiencies, though the report
was not available. The inspectors stated that the concerns mentioned
in Paragraph 2.b. of this report would be followed up in future
inspections.
-
4 -