ML20034C069
| ML20034C069 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Monticello  |
| Issue date: | 04/19/1990 |
| From: | Bielby M, Jordan M NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML113202641 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-263-OL-90-01, 50-263-OL-90-1, NUDOCS 9005020032 | |
| Download: ML20034C069 (5) | |
Text
est Ti e
W U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION REGION 111-Report No.: 50-263/0L-90-01 l
Docket No.: 50-263 License No.: DPR-22 Licensee:
Northern States Power Company-414 Nicollet Mall Minneapolis, MN 55401 Facility Name: Monticello Nuclear Generating-Plant Examination Administered: Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant Monticello, MN 55113 Chief Examiner: M
/f4p4/4 fo I4. Bielby
/
Date Approved By:
[
/f Apa/4-N M. J. Jord'an, Chief /
.-Date Operator Licensing Section 1 Examination Summary Examination administered on March 26-30, 1990 (Report No. 50-263/0L-90-01):
Requalification examinations were administered to nine Senior Reactor-Operators-(SR0s)andsixReactorOperators(R0s).
Because of a previously satisfactory requalification program evaluation, the NRC observed two operators per examiner in the simulator, and each operator-performed five (vice ten). Job Performance Measures (JPMs).
Eight SR0s and six R0s completed the written and JPMs portion.-
{
The ninth SR0 was included in the simulator staff crew as^aLfollowup to failure-on the February 1989' requalification examination.
In conjunction with'the
~-
simulator portion of these examinations, two shift crews and=one staff crew were evaluated.
Ro.sults: The NRC passed all crews and individuals in all-portions of the i
examination, including the one SRO retaking.the simulator portion of the -
1 examination only.
Independent grading by the facility and NRC satisfied the criteria of NUREG-1021, Revision 1, 0)erator Licensing Examiner Standards,_
ES-601. As a result, the Monticello lequalification Program is assigned an overall' rating of satisfactory.
Strengths:
(Refer to Paragraph 2.a. for details):
3 1
Operator communication.
Exam material and schedule organization.
Facility evaluator demeanor.
I 4
Weaknesses:
(Refer to Paragraph 2.b. for details):
i q
The facility Requalification Examination JPM Question Bank.
h g502co32900420 V
ADOCK 05000263 PDC
C
,T REQUALIFICATION PROGRAM EVALUATION REPORT Facility: Monticello Nuclear Generating Station Chief Examiner:
M. E. Bielby', Senior Dates of Evaluation: March 26-30, 1990-Areas Evaluated: Written, Oral and Simulator Examination Results:
R0 SRO Total Evaluation Pass / Fail tass / Fail Pass / Fail (S or U)
Written' Examination:
6/0-8/0 14/0 S
Operating Examination:
Oral (JPMs):
6/0 8/0 14/0-S l
Simulator:
6/0 9/0 15/0 S.
Written Examination Grading: The facility grading closely matched the NRC i
grading. The examination used multiple choice type questions.
Crew Examination Results:
Crew 1 Crew 2 Crew 3 Evaluation I
Pass / Fail Pass / Fail Pass / Fail (S or U)
Operating Examination:
Pass Pass Pass S
Overall Program Evaluation Satisf actory i
Su,bmi,ted:
F rwarded:/
A pro,ved:
/
t FF. E. Biel y, Sr.
.J dan G. C.
rig t Examiner Section Chief Branch Chief 4/ /90 4/a3/90 443l/90 f
h
~
o
-a c-REPORT DETAILS 1.
Examiners M. B'ielby, Senior, Chief Examiner, NRC, Region III~
J. Hammer,_ Examiner, NRC, Region 111 C. Tyner, Examiner, Idaho National Engineering Laboratory 2.
Exit Meeting-
~An exit meeting was conducted on March 30;1990, at the Monticello-
' Training Facility.
Northern States Power Company (NSP)
D. Antony, Plant. Manager L. Waldinger, Manager, Production Training.
J. Swailes, General Superintendent, Training -
D. Nevinski, General Superintendent.;0perati_ons R. McGillic. Operations Training-Supervisor D. Horgen, Technical. Support Training Supervisor M. Oweu, Shift Manager R. Bowen, Senior Technical Instructor, Lead / Training Representative M. Brandt, Shift Group Leader U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (U.S.-NRC)
M. Bielby, Chief Examiner J. Hammer, Examiner P. Moore, Resident Inspector-Following a pre-exit meeting with-the training staff, a formal management-exit meeting was' conducted. 'The following items-were. discussed during-these meetings:
a.
Strengths (1) Operators communicated well during the scenarios and JPMs. ' Dur.ing i
scenarios, the shift supervisors periodically-_ updated the crew on.
plant conditions and " plan of attack". During JPMs, operators-a voiced _their thoughts to the-evaluators, and clearly indicated-l meters, lights,-and_ alarms they were observing.
(2) The exam material'was well organized and controlled. The schedule also was well' organized and f-lexible.
j 1
(3) The -facility evaluators performed in a satisfactory manner during the operating examinations. They were not observed
.I i
3
-3
i~:
y
^..
.g
, inadvertently giving verbal _or "bodyLlanguage" cues to the-operators during JPMs, and they-properly recorded ~ operator responses to JPM questions.
(4) The written exams were modified to include 100% multiph choice questions in-an effort to eliminate bias and'to facilitate grading.
During-the preparation week, the question: format wasi revised to satisfy multiple choice question format guidelines of NUREG/BR-0122, Revision 4, Examiner's~Handbork for Developing 0)erator Licensing Examinations. The f acility is upgrading; t1eir Requalification Examination Question BanKLto meet;these-i same guidelines;,
b.
Weaknesses (1) The NRC assisted the training staff in reviewing examination-materials and observ'ed the'following:-
(a) Some JPM did'not contain questions related to3 task-performance.- Future JPM-questions should place more' emphasis on knowledge required for task performance and also ensure the: answer is. not merely a " procedure look-up".
c.
Video Taping-The NRC Requalificatiion Scenarios-were video. taped. lThese tapes ~
were erased at the end of the exam with the: permission of the Chief Examiner in accordance with NUREG-1021. Revision 5, ES-601 ;
d.
gdicalRecords Twenty of-the currently activeLlicensed operator medical records were reviewed and found to be within the two-year.-interval required by Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations-(CFR), Part 55.21.
No~
discrepancies were found, e.
Training Inadequacy On separate occasions during simulator scenerio RQ-SS-6, a' shift-1 operator from different crews elected to reduce load on the main generator. Simulator Malfunctions TC07B and TC070, Stuck Bypass:
Valves (BPVs), had been inserted. One operator failed-to recognize-BPVs were not responding properly. Thelsecond operator. recognized the BPVs were:not opening but continued:to reduce load.
The training staff is aware of this_ deficiency.
1 i
4 i
. kl
a f.
Procedure Inadequacy During performance of JPM 295-007, Manually Opening'the Scram Discharge Volume (SDV) Vent and Drain. Valves-(Operations Manual:
C.5-3004), the operator was required to pressurize-the SDV instrument air lines with a portable nitrogen. bottle to-100 psi or less. This criteria would indicated that 1.psig is: sufficient I=
pressure.- The training staff is aware of this deficiency and.will-take action to correct-same, g.-
- General-Observations
-(1) Plant cleanliness was.--good.
~
~
(2) Security,' Radiation' Protection, and Operations' personnel were very cooperative in ensuring there were no delays;with badging, dosimetry or access to the plant; 3.
Examination Results Comparison A comparison of the exam results between the facility:and.the NRC grading was found to be very consistent.
4 The Requalification Program was' assigned an overallIprogram rating >ofl satisfactory. - The evaluation criteria of NUREG-1021, Revision 5, was met.
(
5.
Observation of Shif t Manager (SM) Position Monticello has submitted a license amendment application to revise'thei Technical Specifications minimum shift manning-limitations:to eliminate the requirement for a separate Shift Technical Advisor (STA) and qualified SR0 to simultaneously fulfill:the Shift Supervisor (SS) permit a and _
STA requirements. The'Monticello llRR Licensing Project Manager observed _-
-operating shift crews configured in the proposed manner perform simulator, scenarios.
He provided no input-to the-examiners::for determination of' crew (s)/ individual (s) pass / fail = decisions.- His purpose was to observe the SM fulfilling the dual role of SS and STA during the:Emergencyj J
Operating Procedures'(E0Ps)-portion'of the-scenarios.'
i:
i t-
,- i j
j q
- 1 5
1
-