ML20034B656
| ML20034B656 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Quad Cities  |
| Issue date: | 04/12/1990 |
| From: | Buckley G, Jordan M, Nejfelt G NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20034B655 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-254-OL-90-01, 50-254-OL-90-1, NUDOCS 9004300143 | |
| Download: ML20034B656 (6) | |
Text
fi.
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION REGION 111 Report No. 50-254/0L-90-01 Docket tios.
50-254; 50-265 Licenses No. DPR 29; DPR-30 Licensee: Commonwealth Edison Company Post Office Box 767-Chicago, IL 60690 Facility Name: Quad Cities Nuclear Power Station Examination Administered At: Quad Cities Nuclear Power Station Examination Conducted: March 19-23, 1990 Examiner:
b M
db//- %
G Mnn D. Buc Date Chief Examiner:
. b NM
- r/-70 Gregory M.
elt Date.
h,h, h g/-/.2-po Approved By:
//
Michael Jordan, Chiet - /
Date BWR Section, Operators /'
Branch, Division of Reactor Safety Examination Summary Examination administered on March 19-22,1990(Reporttio. 50-254/0L-90-01):
Written examinations were aaministered to three Senior Reactor Operator (SRO) candidated and three R0 candidates. Operating examinations were given to three SR0 candidates and two R0 candidates.
Results: All Candidates passed.
9004300143 900412 PDR ADOCK 05000254 i
i j
r REPORT DETAILS t
1.
Examiners G. M. Nejfelt, Chief Examiner, USNRC, Region III G. D. Buckley, Examiner, Pacific Northwest Laboratories (PNL) 2.
Exit Meeting At the conclusion of the site visit, the examiners met with facility-representatives. The following personnel attended this exit meeting on March 23, 1990:
Facility Representatives J.E. Sirovy, Services Director G.F. Spedl, Production Superintendent t
J.A. Swales, Operations / Assistant Superintendent of Operations M.A. Rodts, Training / Operations Training Group Leader a
M.H. Swegle, Training / Operations Training Instructor A.M. Scott, Quality Assurance Engineer 1
T.L. Barber, Regulatory Assurance /NRC Coordinator i
)
NRC Representatives R.L. Higgins, Senior Resident Inspector G.M. Nejfelt, Chief Examiner The following items were discussed during the exit meeting:
a.
In the opinion of the Chief. Examiner and contract examiner, the candidates were well prepared and conscientious as observed during the operating portion of the examination, b.
Pre-written examination reviews were conducted in the Regional Offices in approximately five days using two of your facility training staff. As part of the pre-exam review the written examinations were given to three Quad Cities staff members, who were not associated with the initial review of the examinations.
It is the Chief Examiner's conclusion that:
(1) Spreading the facility examination review over a several days with a break in between gave the examiner an opportunity to incorporate comments and to determine areas where additional-effort was needed.
L 2
(E l
(2) Although the examinations.as written were acceptable, the trial administration of the examination pointed out several coments that were not expected either by your staff or the NRC.
With the effort spent in the examination review, there was only; i
one facility post-examination coment to correct a comon typographical error made in the R0 and SRO written examinations given.
See_ Paragraph 3 of this report for correction.made.
- c.
Discrepancies'between training department materials and actual plant procedures were minor. A sumary of these training material discrepancies is provided in Attachment 1.
d.
The following items were identified during the' administration of operating examinations:
(1) Procedural Items:
(a). DIESEL GENERATOR LOCAL STARTUP," QOP 600-11,- Revision = 2,-
Step F.4, could not be p9rformed as written,-because.there was no electrical power to operate e!ther the diesel-generator cooling water purp or the room ventilation fan i
prior to closing the diesel breaker. Also,' referenced in this step was " DIESEL GENERATOR SilVTDOWN," QOP 6600-6, and
" RECEIVING DIESEL OIL," 00P 6600-7, that were irrelevant in starting either the cooling water pump or the room ventilation fan.
(b). "0FF-GAS RADIATION MONITOR," QOP 1100-2, Revision 2, did not apply,- since a new type of radiation monitor was installed.
(c). " DIESEL FIRE PUMP OPERATION," 00P 4100-3, Revision 5, Step F.2.c, did not include range of parameter expected (e.g., oil pressure between 30 to 80 psig, engine temperature between 165 to 195 deg-F, etc.).
(d), "APRM DOWNSCALE," Q0A 900-5-C, Revision 12. Item C-6, omitted " LOSS OF NEUTRON FLUX INSTRUMENTATION "
Q0A 700-3, as a reference in Step 2.a of its immediate operator actions.
(2) Maintenance Items:
(a.)WorkRequestNo.Q83305wasfoundtohaveanincorrect light indication for the " recirculation pump discharge 3
E, valve jog switch" (i.e., light indication erroneously indicated as GREEN / CLOSED rather than as RED /0 PEN).
(b). To preclude the possible spread of radioactive contamination due to steam condensing ~above a known.
radioactively contaminated area, Health Physics was-contacted. Health Physics installed a plastic funnel with a tygon tube to a floor drain under the boiler steam valve identified by Work Request No. 082035 to. prevent condensing steam from dripping under.the floor plates that were identified as radioactive 1y' contaminated.
(3).EquipmentLabeling:
(a).Theremotemaintenanceswitchesfor.theUnit-1, Unit-2,and-Unit-1/2 Diesel Generators (DGs) on the local panels are not labelled.
In " DIESEL GENERATOR LOCAL -STARTUP,"
QOP 6600-11', Revision 2, Step F.2, it is cautioned'that-the remote maintenance ~ switch be placed-in'the " REMOTE" position, because no electrical power would be supplied by the DG with the remote maintenance switch inadvertently-left in the " LOCAL" position.
(b). The recirculation jog switch:is_ incorrectly labelled to the lef t as " CLOSED" and to the right as "0 PEN." Using this switch results in the discharge valve being jogged opened for 0.5 second when turned to the left and being jogged open for 1.0' seconds when turned to the right.
The control light above the jog switch =is correctly labelled to indicate the expected jogging open interval-for the valve, e.
Security and radiological accesses for examiners to the plant did not result in any undue delays -
3.
Examination Review Only one common typographical error was found in the R0 and SR0 written examinations.
SR0 Question NO. 67 and R0 Question No. 72, which were identical, had their respective answer keys changed from "d" to "b."
There were no technical problems with this common question.
NOTE:
The " Master Copy" for each the R0 and SR0 examinations was corrected with a pen and ink change.
4
Attachment:
1.
Training Material Discrepancies 4
r
,a I
s ATTACHMENT 1
SUMMARY
OF-TRAINING MATERIAL DISCREPANCIES NOTED-DURING THE DEVELOPMENT AND ADMINISTRATION OF THE MARCH 1990 USNRC LICENSlHG EXAMINATION-AT QUAD CITIES' 1.
LER 89-011 Corrective action No, 4 is not reflected in th'e fire protection lesson plan Llc 4100.
Time delay before C02 is injected into the diesel generator room:
in the' lesson plan it is 30 sec; in the LER it is 60 sec.
2.
QAP 300-2, p. 16: Document refers to " Control Room Supervisor." is this the same position as the Shift Control Room Engineer (SCRE)? The designations for this position'throughout the reference materials'is not consistent, although it is predominantly SCRE.
Since the duties and:
responsibilities of this position are safety-related, the title should be consistent.
i 3.
Lesson Plan for Technical Specifications & Procedures,- Rev.1, p. 4:
l q
D.2 states " Appendix R... features!... are required to satisfy i
criterion 3 of 10 CFR 50 Appendix R."
It should be " Appendix A."
4.
QGA Lesson Plan, Rev. 3, p. 18:
6.a.(1) states "... it could be possible for RPV water level to It should be "... Torus water level..-
-l 5.
Lesson Plan LIC 6600, Rev. 4, p. 14:
6.d.2) b) i states "... a droop setting of 100,...".
It should be "10%".
.j 6.
Q0A 1300-6, Rev. 10, p. 3:
Note states "... RCIC Turbine button resets...".
It does not i
mention local manual trip as identified in the Lesson Plan LIC 1300, j
- p. 26 and 40.
7.
Lesson Plan LIC 6000, p. 12:
5.b states that the transformer T-22 is termed Reserve Auxiliary l
Transformer - RAT; p. 8, 8.
Reserve Auxiliary Transformer (RAT -'12 or-22) w -
- m..
~
.,s Figure 2'ident3fied T-22 as BAT.
8.
Lesson Plan 2300, Rev. 3, P. 66:
IV.B.2.(h) states"..., valve 35and35open".- It should be "
~
... _36..."..
9.
Lesson Plan LIC 700-6, Rev. 2, p.'26:
The Interlocks and Trips list states that for Group II Isolation __
functions; "... If the TIP machine is in manual, the operator must J
withdraw the detector..."
l QOP 700-6, Rev. 6 states that'"...la GP. II isolation will override any TIP sequence in progress...". 'These two statements.are inconsistent.
- 10. Q0A'3700-2, Rev 5, p. 1:
Immediate Operator Actions, C.2, states "... Stop reactor cleanup j
recirculation pumps."
If should be "... Stop reactor cleanup pumps."
1
- 11. Lesson Plan LIC 0600:
IA.1.(2) describes " moisture carryunder".
It should be steam or vapor. See LIC 0200-1, Rev. 2, P. 26.
- 12. Q0A 900-5-F-8:
Alarm response refers to Q0A 201-9; which as been deleted.
Should probably refer to QGA 100-1 (?).
- 13. Within the Q0A, QOP and Lesson Plans the titles of tho control modes for the Recirculation Flow Control varies; which are a confusing factor during walkthrough exams with two of the candidates.
l 1
l t
l
?
l I
2 t
.