ML20028A734
| ML20028A734 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Point Beach  |
| Issue date: | 08/17/1982 |
| From: | SCIENCE APPLICATIONS INTERNATIONAL CORP. (FORMERLY |
| To: | NRC |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20028A733 | List: |
| References | |
| CON-NRC-03-82-096, CON-NRC-3-82-96, TASK-1.A.2.1, TASK-2.B.4, TASK-TM SAI-186-029-12, SAI-186-29-12, TAC-44188, TAC-44189, TAC-44538, TAC-44539, NUDOCS 8211240334 | |
| Download: ML20028A734 (14) | |
Text
,
c SAI-186-029-12 e
TECHNICAL EVALUATION REPORT IMPROVEMENTS-IN TRAINING AND REQUALIFICATION PROGRAMS AS REQUIRED BY TMI ACTION ITEMS I.A.2.1 AND II.B.4 for the Point Beach Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2 (Dockets 50-266 and 50-301) so.-
August 17, 1982 Prepared By:
Science Applications, Inc.
,,1710 Goodridge Drive McLean, Virginia 22102 Prepared for:
l U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commis.sion j
Washington, D.C. 20555 Contract'NRC-03-82-096 4l 1
9211240334 821115 l
PDR ADOCK 05000266 science Applications,ine.
(
P PDR
e TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Pa'ge I.
INTRODUCTION.....................
1 II.
SCOPE AND CONTENT OF THE EVALUATION.........
1 A.
I.A.2.1:
Immediate Upgrading of RO and SR0 Training and Qualifications 1
B.
II.B.4:
Training for Mitigating Core Damage..
7 III.
LICENSEE SUBMITTALS.................
7 IV.
EVALUATION......................
8
~
A.
I.A.2.1:
Immediate Upgrading of R0 and SRO Training and Qualifications 9
B.
II.B.4:
Training for Mitigating Core Damage._.
11 Vtar -
CONCLUSIONS.....................
11 VI.
REFERENCES......................
12 4
6 A,
e e
0 e
e
'he.
9 i
b
I.
INTRODUCTION Science Applications, Inc. (SAI), as technical assistance contrac-tor to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, has evaluated the response by Wisconsin Electric Power Company for the Point Beach Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2 (Dockets 50-266 and 50-301) to certain requirements contained in post'-
TMI Action Items I.A.2.1, Immediate Upgrading of Reactor Operator and Senior Reactor Operator Training and Qualifications, and II.B.4, Training-for Mitigating Core Damage. These requirements were set forth in NUREG-0660 (Reference 1) and were subsequently clarified in NUREG-0737 (Reference 2).*
The purpose of the evaluation was to determine whether the.
licensee's operator training and requalification programs satisfy (TAC) the requirements.
The evaluation pertains to Technical Assignment Control System numbers :
I.A.2.1 II.B.4 Unit 1 44187 44538 Unit 2 441881 44539 As delineated below, the evaluation covers only some aspects of item I.A.2.1.4.
The detailed evaluation of the licensee's submittals is presented in Section IV; the conclusions are in Section V.-
so II.
SCOPE AND CONTENT OF THE EVALUATION A.
I'. A.2.1:
Imediate Upgrading of R0 and SR0lraining and Qualifications The clarification of TMI Action Item I.A.2.1 in NUREG-0737 incor- [
porates a letter and four enclosures, dated March 28, 1980, from Harold R.
Denton, Director, Office of Nuclea'r' Reactor Regulation, USNRC, to all power reactor applicants and licensees, concerning qualifications of reactor operators (hereaf ter referred to as Denton's letter).
This letter and enclosures imposes a number of training requirements on power reactor licensees.
This evaluatiori specifically addressed a subset of the require-ments stated in Enclosure 1 of Denton's letter, namely: Item A.2.c, which relates to operator training requirements; ithm A.2.e, which concerns instructor requalification; and Section C, which addresses operator requali-fication.
Some of these requirements are elaborated in Enclosures 2, 3, and 4 of Denton's letter.
The training requirements under evaluation are sum-marized in Figure 1.
The elaborations of these requirements in Enclosures 2, 3 and 4 of Denton's letter are shown respectively in Figures 2, 3 and 4.
- Enclosure 1 of NUREG-0737 and NRC's Technical Assistance Control System distinguish four sub-actions within I.A.2.1 and two sub-actions within I I.B.4.
These.subdivisio~ns are not carried forward to the actual presentation of the requirements in Enclosure 3 of NUREG-0737. If they had been, the items of concern here would be contained in I.A.2.1.4 and II.B.4.1.
I
Figure 1.
Training Requirements from TMI Action Item I.A.2.1*
Program Element NRC Requirements **. Item A.2.c(1)
Training programs shall be modified, as necessary, to provide training in heat transfer. fluid flow and thennolynamics. (Enclosure 2 provides guidelines for the minimum content of such training.)
e OPERATIONS. Item A.2.c(2)
PERSONNEL Training programs shall be modified. as necessary to provide training in the TRA]N]he.
use of installed plant systems to control or mitigate an accident in which the core is severely damaged. (Enclosure 3 provides guidelines for the minimum content of such training.)
.. Item A.2.c.(3)
Training prograns shall be modified, as necessary to provide increased emphasis on reactor and plant transients.. Item A.2.e lh5TRUCTOR Instructors shall be enrolled in appropriate requalification programs to assure REQUALIFICATION they are cognizant of current operating history, problems, and changes to pro-cedures and administrative limitations.
gg... Item C.1 Content of the licensed operator requalificatiCn programs shall be modified to in*clude instruction in heat transfer. fluid flow. thermodynamics.,and mitigs-tion of accidents involving a degraded core. (Enclosures 2 and 3 provide guide-linesfortheminimumcontentofsuchtraining.). Item C.2
,gg33get The criteria for requiring a licensed individual to participate in accelerated R W ALIFICATICM requalification shalf-be modified to be consistent with the new passing grade for issuance of a license: 80% overall and 70%, each category.. Item C.3 Programs should be modified to require the control ranipulations listed in.
herral control manipulations, such as plant or reactor startups, must be ferformed. Control manipulations during abnormal or emergency opera-tions must be walked through with, and evaluated by, a member of the training staff at a minimumi An appropriate simulator rey be used to satisfy the requirements for control manipulations.
- the recairements shown are a subset of those contained in item 1.A.2.1.
- References to Enclosures are to Denton's letter of March 28. 1980 which is contained in the clarifi.
cation of Item I. A.2.1 in NURIf.-0737.
w.
O 2
-O e e Figure 2. from Denton's Letter TRAINING IN HEAT TRANSFEK, FLUID FLDW AND THERMODYNAMIC $
I 1.
Basic Properties of Fluids and Matter.
j This section should cover a basic introduction to matter and its properties. This section should include such concepts as temperature measurements and effects, density and its effects, specific weigSt. buoyancy, viscosity and other properties of fluids. A working knowledge of steam tables should also be included.. Energy movement should be discussed including such fundamentals as heat exchange, specific heat. Intent heat of vaporization and sensible heat.
2.
Fluid Statics.
This section should cover the pressure, temperature and volume effects on fluids. Example of these parametric changes should be illustrated by the instructor and related calculations should be performed by the students and discussed in the training sessions. Causes and effects of pressure and temperature changes in the various components and systems should be discussed in the training sessions. Causes and effects of pressure and temperature changes in the various components and systems should be discussed as applicable to the f acility with particular emphasis on saf ety significant features. The characteristics of force and pressure, pressure in liquids at rest, principles of hydraulics, saturation pressure and temperature and subcooling should also be included.
3.
Fluid Dynamics.
This section should cover the flow of fluids and such concepts as Bernoulli's principle, energy in moving fluids, flow measure theory and devices and pressure losses due to friction and orificing:
Dther concepts and terms to be discussed in this section are hPSH, carry over, carry under, kinetic energy, head loss relationships and two phase flow fundamentals. practical applications relating to the reactor coolant system and steam generators should also be included.
4.
Heat freesfer by Concuetion. Convection and Radiation.
This section should cover the fundamentals of heat transfer by conductions. This section should include discussions on such concepts and terms as specific heat, heat flun and atomic action. Heat transfer characteristics of fuel rods and heat exchangers should be included in this section.
This section should cover the fundamentals of heat transfer by convection. Natural and forced circula-tion should be discussed as applicable to the various systems at the f acility. The convection current patterns created by expanding fluids in a confined area should be included in this section. Heat transpo*t and fluid flow reductions or stoppage should be discussed due to steam and/or noncondensible gas formation during normal and accident conditions.
This section should cover the fundamentals of heat transfer by thermal radiation in the form of radiant 4
energy. The electromagnetic energy emitted by a body as-a result of its temperature should be discussed and illustrated by the use of equations and sample calculations. Comparisons should be made
- of a black body absorber and a white body emitter.
5.
Chance of Phase - Boiline.
N This section should include descriptions of the state of matter, their inherent characteristics and thermodynamic properties such as enthalpy and entropy. Calculations should be performed involving steas quality and void fraction preperties. The types of boiling should be discussed as applicable to the f acility during normal evolutions and accident conditions.
6.
BurnoutandFlowInstabilitg l
This section should cover descriptions and mechanisms for calculating such terms as critical flux, critical power. Dh5 ratio and hot channel factors. This sectiqn should also include instructions for preventing and monitoring for clad or fuel damage and flow instabilities. Sample calculations should be illustrated by the instructor and calculations should be performed by the students and discussed in the training sessions. Methods and procedures for using the plant computer to determine quantitative i
values of various factors during plant operation and plant heat balance determinations should also be covered in this section.
7.
Reactor Heat Transfer Limits.
l This section should include a discussion of heat transfer limits by esamining fuel rod and reactor l
design and limitations. The basis for the limits should be covered in this section along with t
recommended methods to ensure that limits are not approached or exceeded. This section should cover discussions of peaking f actors, radial and axial power distributions and changes of these f actors dse I
to the influence of other variables such as moderator tegerature, menon and control rod position.
j l
i
~
I l e l
3
Figure 3. from Denton's Letter TRAINING CRITERIA FOR MITIGATING CORE DAMGE A.
Inco e Instrumentation 1.
Use of fined or movable incore detectors to determine entent of core damage and geometry changes.
2.
Use of thermocouples in determining peak temperatures; methods for extended range readings; methods for direct readings at terstnal junctions.
3.
Methods for calling up (printing) incore data from the plant computer.
B.
[ score Nuclear Instrumentation (NIS) i 1.
Use of NIS for determination of void formation; void location basis for NIS response as a function of core temperatures and density changes.
C.
Vital Instrumentation 1.
Instrumentation response in an accident environment; f ailure sequence (time to failure, metnod of f ailure); indication reliability (actual vs indicated level).
2.
Alternative methods for measuring flows, pressures, levels, and temperatures.
a.
Determination of pressuriter level if all level transmitters fail, b.
Determination of letdown flow with a clogged filter (10w flow).
c.
Determination of other Reactor Coolant System parameters if the primary method of measurement has f ailed.
%er -
D.
Primaev Chemistry 1.
Empected chemistry results with severe core damage; consequences of transferring small quantities cf liquid outside centainment; importance of using leak tight. systems.
2.
Espected isotop1c breakdown for core damage; for clad damage.
3.
Corrosion effects of extended immersion in primary water; time to f ailure.
E.
Radiation Monitorint 1.
Response of Process and Area Mon $tbrs to severe damages; behavior of detectors when saturated; method f or detecting radiation readings by direct measurement at detector output (overranged detector); espected accuracy of detectors at different locations; use of detectors to determine entent af core damage.
2.
Pethods of determining dose rate inside containment from measurements taken outside containment.
F.
Gas Generation 1.
Methods of My generation during an accident; other sources of gas (Ie, Ke); techniques for venting er disposal of non-condensibles.
2.
Hg f149Rability and explosive limit; sources of 02 in cor.tainment or Reactor Coolant System.
- Me O
4
-l Figure 4.
Control Manipulations Listed in Enclosure 4.
~
CohTROL MAN 1PutAT]QN5
- 1.
Plant of reactor startups to include a range that reactivity feedback from nuclear heat addition is noticeable and heatup rate is established.
2.
Plant shutdown.
'3.
Manual control of steam generators and/or feedwater during startup and shutdown.
4.
Scration and or dilution during power operation.
- 5.
Any significant (greater than 105) p >er changes in manual rod control or recirculation flow.
6.
Any reactor power change of 105 or greater where load change is performed with load limit control or where flua, temperature, or speed control is on manual (for HTGR).
- 7.
Loss of coolant including:
1.
significant PWR steam generator leaks 2.
inside and outside primary containment 3.
large and small, including leak rate determination 4.
saturated Reactor Coolant response (PWR).
8.
Loss of instrument air (if simulated plant specific).
g.
Loss of electrical power (and/or degraded power sources).
- 10.
Loss of core coolant flow / natural circulation.
12.
Loss of service water if required for safety.
13.
Loss of shutdown ' cooling.
14.
Loss of component coollag system or cooling to an individull conponent.
15.
Loss of normal feedwater or normal feed.ater system f ailure,
~
i
- 16.
Lcts of all feed.atar (normal and ewr,gency).
17.
Less of protective system channel.
18.
Mispcsitioned control rod or rods (or rod drops).
Ig.
Inability to drive control rods.
20.
Conditions reoutring use cf emergency boration or standby liquid control system.
21.
Fuel cladding f ailure or high activity in reactor coolant or-offgas.
l 22.
Turbine or generator trip.
23.
Malfunction of automatic control system (s) which affect reactivity.
24 Malfunction of reactor coolant pressure /volpe control system.
25.
26.
Main steam line break (inside or outside contaireent).
27.
Nuclear instreentation f ailure(s).
- Starred items to be performed annually, all others biennially.
m.
5
(
l
As noted in Figure 1, Enclosures 2 and 3 indicate minimum require-ments concerning course content in their respective areas. In addition, the Operator Licensing Branch in hRC has taken the position (Reference 3) that the training in mitigating core damage and related subjects should consist of at least 80 contact hours
- in both the initial training and the requali-fication programs.
The NRC considers thermodynamics, fluid flow and heat transfer to be related subjects, so the 80-hour requirement applies to the combined subject areas of Enclosures 2 and 3.
The 80 contact hour criterion is not intended to be applied rigidly; rather, its purpose is to provide greater assurance of adequate course content when the licensee's training courses are not described in detail.
Since th'e licensees generally have their own unique course out-lines, adequacy of response to these requirements necessarfly depends only on whether it is at a level of detail comparable to that s'pecified in the enclosures (and consistent with the 80 contact.h)ur requirement) and whether it can reasonably be concluded from the licccGee's description of his train-ing materiaY that the items in the enclosures'are covered.
. The Institute of Nuclear Power Operations (INPO) has' developed its own guidelines for training in the subject areas of Enclosures 2 and 3.
These guidelines, given in References 4 and 5, were developed in response to thelsame requirements and are more than adequ' ate, i.e., training programs br. sed specifically on the complete INP0 documents are expected to satisfy all the requirements pertaining to training material which are addressed in this evaluation.
The licensee's response concerning increased emphasis on tran-sients is considered by SAI to be acceptable if it makes explicit reference to increased emphasis on transients and gives some indication of the nature of tne increase, or, if it addresses both normal and abnormal transients (without necessarily indicating an increase in emphasis) and the requalifi-cation program satisfies the requirements for control manipulations, Enclo-sure 1, Item C.3.
The latter requirement calls for all the manipulations listed in Enclosure 4 (Figure 4 in this report) to be performed, at the frequency indicated, unless they are specifically not applicable to' the licensee's type of reactor (s).
Some of these manipulations may be performed on a simulator.
Personnel with senior licenses may be credited with these activities if they direct or evaluate control manipulations as they are performed by others.
Although these manioulations are acceptable for meet s
ing the reactivity control manipulations required by Appendix A paragraph 3.a of 10 CFR 55, the requirements of Enclosure 4 are more demanding. requires about 32 specific manipulations over a two-year cycle while 10 CFR 55 Appendix A. requires only 10 manipulations over a two-year cycle.
- A contact hour is a one-hour period in which the course instructor is present or available f or instructing or' assisting students; lectures, seminars, discussions, problem-solving sessions, and examinations are considered contact periods. This definition is taken from Reference 4.
6 i
8.
II.B.4:
Training for Mitigating Core Damage Item II.B.4 in NUREG-0737 requires that " shift technical advisors and operating personnel from the plant manager through the operations chain to the licensed operators" receive training on the use of installed systems to control or mitigate accidents in which the core is severely damaged.
Encicsure 3 of Denton's letter provides guidance on the content of this training.
" Plant Manager" is here taken to mean the highest ranking manager at the plant site.
For licensed personnel, this training would be redundant in that it is also required, by I.A.2.1, in the operator requalification program.
However, II.B.4 applies also to operations personnel who are not licensed and are not candidates fo. licenses. This may include one or more of the highest levels of management at the plant. These non-licensed personnel are not explicitly required to have training in heat transfer, fluid flow and thermodynamics and are therefore not obligated for the full 80 contact hours of training in mitigating core damage and related subjects.
Some non-operating personnel, notably managers and technicians in instrumentation and control, health physics and chemistry departments, are supposed to receive those portions of the training which are commensurate with their responsibilities.
Since this imposes no additional demands on the program itself, we do not address it in this evaluation. It would be appropriate for resident inspectors to verify that non-operating personnel receive the proper training.
m The required imple.nentation dates for all items have passed.
Hence, th's evaluation did not address the dates of implementation.
Moreover, the evaluation does not cover training. program modifications that might.have been made for other reasons subsequent to the response to..
Denton's letter.
s III. LICENSEE SUBMITTALS The licensee (Wi,sconsin Electric Power Company) has submitted to NRC a number of items (letters and various attachments) which explain their training and requalification programs.
These submittals, made in response to Denton's letter, form the information base for'this evaluation.
For the Point Beach Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2, there were two submittals with attachments, for a total of seven items, which are listed below.
1.
Letter from C.W. Fay, Director of Nuclear Power Division, Wisconsin Electric Power Co., to H.R.
Denton, Director, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, NRC.
August 7, 1980.
(1 pg, with enclosures: i tems 2 & 3). NRC Acc No: 8008120382.
(re: Transmittal; followed-up response to NRC letter dated March 28, 1980).
~
7 w
.._m
=
1 2.
Amended Licensed Operator Requalification Program", Wisconsin Electric Power Co., Point Beach Nuclear Plant, Revision 1.
July 30,1980. (8pp, attached to item 1). NRC Acc No: 8008120383.
3.
" Control Operator Training Program", Wi-sconsin Electric Power Co., Point Beach Nuclear Plant, Revision 1.
July 30, 1980.
(78 pp, attached to item 1).
NRC Acc No: 8008120383.
4.
Unidentified attachment, " Mitigating Core Damage Training Program", Point Beach Nuclear Plant, Revision 0.
March 16,1981. (5pp).
Excerpt from the Technical Sp(ecifications Document, 5.
Figure 15.6.2-2.
Undated.
Organizational Chart for Plant Operations).
6.
Letter from C.W. Fay, Director of Nuclear' Power Department, Wisconsin Electric Power Co., to H.R.
~
Denton, Director, O'ffice of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, NRC. August 7,1980. (3 pp). NRC Acc No: 8008120465. (re: Activities concerning Items A.2.a & A.2.b).
7.
Excerpt from unidentified submittal from Wisconsin.
Electric Power Co., Point Beach Nuclear Plant.
- ~
dated December 23, 1980. (No. of pages, unknown).
(re: Activities concerning NUREG-0737 Item I.A.2.1.1/4).
Additional information was obtained from the applicant in two telephone conversations:
1 8.
Conference phone. call in response to the NRC request for additional information ma.de on May 19,-
1982 which involved the following participants:
T.
l G. Colburn, NRC ORB-3; S. Salah, NRC; R. T. Liner,.
SAI; J.Z ac h, Point Beach (WEPCO) and R. Bruno,.
Point Beach (WEPC0).
I l
9.
Phorie conversation between Mr. Charlie Trammel, NRC i
and Ray Roland SAI in which requested additional information.regarding the Point Beach training program was transmitted to SAI.
IV. EVALUATION SAI's evaluation of the training programs at Wisconsin Electric Power Company's Point Beach Nuclear Power Plant is presented below. Section
~
A addresses' TMI Action Item I.A.2.1 and presents the assessment organized in the manner of Figure 1.
Section B addresses TMI Action Item II.B.4.
8 w
---=
--e-
,.m--,wr-
,--------.,-----e..e 3-,. -
,-,.,,.---,,,e.---.
--,-.-,_..-,.-1-.
m.~.-.
-w -
. -- -.. - =
-e
A.
I.A.2.1:
Im. mediate Upgrading of Reactor Operator and Senior Reactor Operator Training and Qualification.
- , Item A.2.c(1)
The basic requirements are that the training programs given to reactor operator and senior reactor operator candidates cover the subjects of heat transfer, fluid flow and thermodynamics at the level cf detail specified in Enclosure 2 of Denton's letter.
Submittal item 3, " Control Operator Training Program -Appendix K",
titled, " Thermodynamics and Heat Transfer" indicates that some of the topics specified in Enclosure 2 of Denton's letter are addressed.
Based on an examination of this portion of the training program it appears that the following topical areas are not addressed: 1) Basic Properties of Fluids i
and Matter, 2) Fluid Statics, 6) Burnout and Flow Instability, 7) Reactor Heat Transfer Limits and part of topical area 4, i.e.,
Radiation He,at Transfer.
The training program description says that the course outlines presented in this submittal item do not represent a rigid description of the training program and that the assigned supervisor can make changes, additions and/or deletions as deemed necessary.
In response to the NRC request for additional information (Reference 6) a conference phone conversation with Point Beach Staff (Submittal Item 7) verified that radiation heat transfer is covered in
~
lectuFes comprising this portion of the operator training program, although not specifically mentioned in the outline.
Likewise it was verified by Point Beach staff (Submittal Item 9) that topical areas specified in
- of Denton's letter are addressed at the required level of detail although they are not specifically mentioned in iiubmittal Item 3, Appendix K.
The requirements of this Enclosure 1 item are therefore met.
,. Item A.2.c(2)
The requirdments are that the training programs for reactor and senior reactor operator candidates cover the. subject of accident mitigation at the level of detail specified in Enclosure 3 of Denton's letter (see Figure 3 of this report).
Submittal item 3, appendix M, titled " Plant Transients / Accident Analysis and Mitigation of Core Damage" contains a Section V which deals with mitigation of core damage.
This section addresses all the topical areas specified in Enclosure 3 of Denton's letter.
Submittal item 4, an unidentified attachment titled " Point Beach Nuclear Plant Mitigating Cnre Damage Training Program" Revision 0 dated March 16,1981, indicates that about 44 contact hours are involved in.this i
area.
During 'a conference ph'o'ne call (Submittal, Item 8) it was verified by the Point Beach staff that training in core damage mitigation and related subjects involved at least 80 contact training hours.
9
-^
r- -,, - -, -,,.
,nn,,
.. ~. - - -.,, - -.,
,,n.-
n,,,.,n-L
It is concluded that the requirements of this Enclosure 1 item are met.
Enclosur~e 1, Item A.2.c(3)
The requirement is that there be an increased emphasis in the training program on dealing with reactor transients.
Submittal item 3, appendix M has sections I through IV which deal with transients in detail, addressing 46 different situations.
Based on the content of these sections it is concluded that sufficient emphasis is placed on dealing with reactur transients., Item A.2.e The requirement is that instructors for reactor operator training programs be enrolled in appropriate requalification programs to assure they are cognizant of current operating history, problems.and changes to procedures and administrative limitations.
" Submittal item 2, Section 4.4 states that instructors who teach plant systems, integrated responses and plant transients shall participate in applicable portions of the requalification program to assure cognizance of current operating history, problems and changes to procedures and administrative limitations. No mention is made'regarding the requirement of this Enclosure 1 item for instructors other than those indentified above.-
Section 4.5 states the Training Supervisor shall designate those non-licelifed persons who must be enrolled in the requalification program in accordance with Section 4.4.
While the letter of the law (Enclosure 1, item A.2.e) may not be strictly adhered to, it is concluded that the spirit / intent of this Enclosure 1 item requirement is complied with',, Item C.1 The primary requirement -is that the requalification programs.have instruction in the areas of heat transfer, fluid flow, thermodynamics and accident mitigation.
The level of detail required in the requalification program.is that of Enclosures 2 and 3 of Denton's letter.
In addition, these instructions must involve an adequate number of contact hours.
Submittal item 2, Sectio'n 5.2.1, lists a series of 11 lectures to be given as part "of the requalification program.
The lecture series in'cludes fundamentals of thermodynamics, heat transfer and fluid flow as well as mitigation of accialents involving a degraded core and plant tran-sients.
Assuming that the lecture materials relating to accident mitiga-tion, operating with a damaged core and plant transients address / review the topics specified in Submittal 3, Appendix M, Sections I through V, which conform to Enclosure 3 of Denton's letter, this portion of the Enclosure 1}
item C.1 requirement is met.
Point Beach staff verified (Submittal Item 9 that the level of detail specified in Enclosure 2 of Denton's letter was provided in the areas of heat tr.ansfer, fluid flow and thermodynamics. A conference phone call (Submittal Item 8) resulted in verification by Point Beach staff that more than 80 contact hours are provided on the subjects of heat transfer, fluid flow, thermodynamics and core damage mitigation.
In view of the foregoing, it is concluded that this Enclosure 1 item is met.
10 M
~
9
., Item C.2 The requirement for licensed operators to participate in the accelerated requalification program must be based on passing scores of 80%
overall, 70% in each category.
Submittal item 2, Sectio ~n 5.5.1, indicates that accelerated requalification will be implemented for any individual (s) (Operators and Senior Operators) whose overall examination score is less than 80% overall or less than 70% in any one section of the annual examination. The same examination is given the Operators and Senior Operators but differentia 1' grading is used. Still, the score criteria remain the same for Operators and Senior Operators relative,to the necessity for accelerator requalifi-cation training. The requirement of this Enclosure 1 item is considered fulfilled.
., Item C.3 TMI Action Item I.A.2.1 calls for the licensed operator requalifi-cation program to include performance of control manipulations involving both normal and abnormal situations. The specific manipulations required and their p(erformance frequency are identified in Enclosure 4 of the Denton letter see Figure 4 of this report).
Submittal item 2, Section 5.4 states that each licensed individual in the requalification program shall perform or participate in plant reacMvity control manipulations and combinations thereof. These control manipulations will be done at the plant as conditions perait, on a simulator or must be walked through under the supervision of a member of the Point Beach Nuclear Plant Training Group, as a minimum.
Section 5.4.1 identifies the required) annually and biennially)..
manipulations which consist of those specified in Enclosure 4 of Denton's -
letter. The requirement of this Englosure 1 item are fulfilled.
B.
II.B.4 Training for Mitigating Core Damage Item II.B.4 requires that training for mitigating core damage, as l
indicated in Enclosure 3 of Denton's letter, be given to shift technical l
advisors and operating. personnel from the plant manager to the licensed operators. This includes both licensed and non-licensed personnel.
l Submittal item 3, Appendix M, Section 5, submittal item 4 and the conference phone conversation (Submittal Item 8) support the conclusion that the requirements of item II.B.4 have been met with regard to course content and personnel trained.
V.
. CONCLUSIONS I
l Evaluation of the TMI"Ai: tion Items in Sections A and B of part IV indicate that the training program requirements of NUREG-0737 items I.A.2.1 and II.B.4 have been met at the Point Beach Plant.
11
~
V.
REFERENCES 1.
"NRC Action Plan Developed as a Result of the TMI-2 Accident." NUREG-0660, United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
May 1980.
2.
" Clarification of TMI Action Plan Requirements," N REG-0737, United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
November 1980.
3.
The NRC requirement for 80 contact hours is an Operator Licensing Branch technical position.
It was included with the acceptance criteria provided by NRC to SAI for use in the present evaluation.
See letter, Harley Silver, Technical Assistance Program Management Group, Division of Licensing, USNRC to Bryce Johnson, Program Manager, Science Applications, Inc.,
Subject:
Contract No. NRC-03-82-096, Final Work Assignment 2, December 23, 1981.
4.
" Guidelines for Heat Transfer, Fluid Flow and Thermodynamics
~
Instruction," STG-02, The Institute of Nuclear Power Operations.
December 12, 1980.
5.
" Guidelines for Training to Recognize and Mitigate the Consequences. of Core Damage," STG-01, The Institute of Nuclear Power Operations.
January 15, 1981.
G.
Letter from NRC requesting additional information sent to the Wisconsin Electric Power Company dated 24 February 1982.
w-L e
e O
e e
9 12
..