ML20041F135
| ML20041F135 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Seabrook  |
| Issue date: | 03/11/1982 |
| From: | Devincentis J PUBLIC SERVICE CO. OF NEW HAMPSHIRE, YANKEE ATOMIC ELECTRIC CO. |
| To: | Miraglia F Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| SBN-230, NUDOCS 8203160221 | |
| Download: ML20041F135 (158) | |
Text
<
SEMOM SMM lPUB A lC SERVICE Engine % Omce.
Companyof New Hampshre 1671 Worcester Road Framinoham, Massachusetts 01701 (617). 872 8100 March 11,1982 SBN-230 6'D
/ A v\\
a T.F.
B 7.1.2,'y' g)
United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission 032> ;J
~
Washington, D. C.
20555 f*'?i 9
- i n r.:]43li f, t w
/
h '^-
f Attention:
Of fice of Nuclear Reactor Regulatio Mr. Frank J. Miraglia, Chief
,A
,A /,,
4 g\\ g, /
Licensing Branch No. 3 s7 l
Division of Licensing rU
References:
(a ) Construction Permits CPPR-135 and CPPR-136, Docket No s. 50-443 and 50-444 (b) USNRC Le t ter, da ted December 17, 1981, "FSAR Chapter 13.1 Review," F. J. Miraglia to W. C. Tallman
Subject:
Submittal of Responses to Seabrook Station FSAR Chapter 13 Requests for Additional Informaton
Dear Sir:
In response to the Reference (b) Requests for Additional Information (RAI) on Seabrook Station FSAR Chapter 13, that were received on December 23, 1981, please find enclosed one (1) copy of our responses to these RAIs (630.1 through 630.22).
The majority of the responses refer to the appropriate revised FSAR section(s) within Chapter 13 or the Technical Specifications.
These revised sections are included as At tachments to the responses.
This revised material will be incorporated into the FSAR in the next amendment.
Very truly yours, YANKEE ATOMIC ELECTRIC COMPANY M
J J. DeVincentis
[
Project Manager
]O JDV : RAM : dad I(
1 8203160221 820311 PDR ADOCK 05000443 l
A PDR
r-Question 630.1 I
In regard to the professional members of the PSNil corporate organization described in FSAR Section 13.1.1.1, provide the following:
(a) The technical and educational background and PWR experience of indivi-duals assigned to the management of Seabrook Project activities, including identification and qualifications of the management official in overall charge of nuclear power.
(b) The qualification requirements for those professional staff members not yet assigned.
(c)
Specific milestone points for assignment of indiiiduals to the staff.
(d) Address training requirements for corporate staff.
Respone to 630.1 Part (a) FSAR Section 13.1.1.1 will be amended as per Attachment A to pro-vide this information.
In addition, the attached resumes for the corporate staff currently assigned will be included in this amendment as Appendix 13A.
Part (b) FSAR Section 13.1.1.1 will be amended as per Attachment A to pro-vide this information.
Part (c) FSAR Section 13.1.1.1 will be amended as per Attachment A to pro-vide this information.
Additionally, the attached Figure 13.1-3 showing the nuclear production staffing milestones will be included in this amendment.
Part (d) FSAR Section 13.1.1.1 will be amLnded as per Attachment A to pro-vide this information.
[
F i
i i
l Question 630.2 l
In regard to the contracting with YNSD for operational support service, described in FSAR Section 13.1, provide the following:
(a) A description of the contract between PSNH and YNSD, including over-sight and control provisions that exist at the various levels below the level of the PSNH Executive Vice President.
(b) The number, by discipline, of professional persons at YNSD assigned or expected to be assigned to the Seabrook Project at the time of plant s tart-up.
(c) The qualifications of those YNSD persons assigned to support the Seabrcok Project and a description of the qualifications of those to be assigned at the time of plant start-up.
(d) The expected propertion of time YNSD personnel will be assigned to the Seabrook Project, at the time if plant start-up, if they have assign-ments to other projects.
Response to 630.2 Part (a) PSNH and YNSD have developed and enacted a document known as the "Second Memorandum of Agreement" which delineates the specific operational services supplied by YNSD for PSNH and the working relationships between the two organizations for the period of the operating license. A description of the geceral provisions of the Second Memorandum, including oversight and control provi-sions, will be added to FSAR Section 13.1.1 and 13.1.1.3 as per Attachment A.
To illustrate the application of Appendix I of the Second Memorandum and the assignment of organizational responsibility on a task-by-task basis, the following examples f rom Appendix I are provided:
Responsibility Level Task Activity for Organization Number Description A
B C
D I
B-1.1 Initiate and prepare engi-l neering design changes 2
3 1
5 A-5.3 Es tablish in-plant emer-gency procedures 3
2 3
I where A = YNSD l
B = Seabrook Station Personnel C = PSNH Production Department D = PSNH Training Center 1-5 = Responsibility levels as defined in revised FSAR Section 13.1.1 as per Attachment A.
l
e With respect to Task B-1.1, " Initiate and Prepare Engineering Design Changes," PSNH Production Department has the final appro-val and ultimate authority for this activity with YNSD having chief responsibility for coordination and implementation.
For this task, the PSNH Nuclear Production Superintendent would authorize the YNSD Seabrook Project Manager to proceed with the engineering design change evaluation.
The Plant Engineering Department Manager would assign the appropriate personnel to this task and actively solicit Seabrook Station personnel involvement for this particular activity in accordance with the terms of the Second Memorandum. As indicated in the Appendix I task-responsibility matrix above, they would not, however, need to solicit input from the PSNH Training Center unless specifically requested to do so by the PSNH Production Department. Once the engineering design change evaluation has been completed and all comments from within YNSD and Seabrook Station Staff have been resolved, the design change would be forwarded to PSNH Production for their final approval.
The second example Task A-5.3, " Establish In-Plant Emergency Procedures," involves the assignment of different organizational responsibility for coordination and implementation of this task.
For this task, Seabrook Station personnel must ensure the man-datory participation of YNSD and Production Department personnel.
This participation is to include YNSD/ Production involvement in the decision-making process and must ensure the resolution of all their comments. Oversight and control provisions for this acti-vity would be exercised in the same fashion as described above.
(b) FSAR Section 13.1.1.3 will be revised as per Attachment A to indicate the number of dedicated, part time-equivalent, and total YNSD person-nel, by discipline, expected to be assigned to the Seabrook Project at the time of plant start-up.
(c) FSAR Section 13.1.1.3 will be revised as per Attachment A to indicate the general experience and qualifications of engineers that will pro-vide operational support services to Seabrook Station.
(d) FSAR Section 13.1.1.3 will be revised as per Attachment A to indicate the expected proportion of time YNSD personnel will allocate to Seabrook Station if they have assignments to other projects.
Question 630.3 In regard to FSAR Section 13.1 provide the following:
(a)
A description of the relationship between the nuclear oriented sections of the PSNH crganization to the rest of the corporate organization.
(b)
A description of the provisions made for support of nuclear activities by otber sections of the corporate organization.
Response to 630.3 Part (a)
FSAR section 13,1.1.1 will be amended as per Attachment A to provide this information. Additionally, the attached Figure 13.1-1 showing the corporate organization structure will be included in this amendment.
Part (b)
FSAR Section 13.1.1 will be amended to include Subsection 13.1.1.6 as per Attachment A to provide this information.
l l
l l
l l
(
l
1 l
Question 630.4 In regard to FSAR Section 13.1.1.2 provide o description of the capabili-ties of the training center staff, or alternatives, to provide instruction in engineering topics such as heat transfer, fluid flow and thermodynamics.
Response to 630.4
,FSAR Section 13.1.1.2 will be amended as per Attachment A to provide this information.
I t
i l
l l
I l
a--_._
A a
m Question 630.5 In regard to FSAR Section 13.1 and 14.2, it is our position that the corporate technical staff be utilized in the initial test program to the maximum extent possible. Provide a description of the involvement of the nuclear production staff in the initial test program.
I Response to 630.5 FSAR Section 13.1.1.1 will be amended as per Attachment A *:o provide this information.
4 9
D I
f i
[
\\
l t
I f.
1
+-
c
-eve---w.v+
w-w
-+-rw-v v
e-v m---
Question 630.6 Regarding the Operations organization described in FSAR Sections 13.1.2.1 and 13.1.2.2.b:
(a) Commit to a five shif t crew rotation or demonstrate that remaining in four operating crews will not result in excessive overtime situations for your staff.
(b) Clarify the position of the Assistant Ooerations Mar.ager in the line of succession to the Station Managet's authority.
Response to 630.6 Part (a) FSAR Section 13.1.2.1 will be amended as per Attachment A to com-mit to a five shift crew rotation.
Part (b) FSAR Sections 13.1.2.2.a and 13.1.2.2.b will be amended as per Attachment A to clarify the Assistant Operations Manager's authority.
l I
l f
f I
I t
i l
I I
Question 630.7 Regarding the Technical Services organization described in FSAR Section 13.1.2.2.c:
(a) Describe the duties, responsibilities and authority of the Assistant Technical Services Manager.
(b) Describe the extent of involvement of the Technical Services organiza-tion in the Initial Test Program.
Response to 630.7 Part (a) FSAR Section 13.1.2.2.c and Figure 13.1-5 will be amended as per Attachment A and Technical Specification Figure 6.2-2 will be amended as per Attachment B to provide this information.
Part (b) The Technical Services organization has assumed responsibility for various testing support activities. Example summaries of these activities follow:
1.
The Technical Services organization is providing engineering and instrumentation and control personnel for the purpose of test procedure generation. The depr:;tment will provide engi-neering personnel and instrumentation and control personnel to conduct preoperational and acceptance tests.
2.
The Instrumentation and Control Department will perform testing on " specialty" systems and safety related systems under the direction and guidance of the YNSD Start-up Test Group.
3.
The Maintenance and Instrumentation Departments will verify "As-Built" equipment installations for the purpose of supplying spare parts, for procedure development and to gather baseline data for station maintenance and surveillance programs.
4.
The Chemistry Department will provide sampling and analytical services to the UESC and YAEC start-up groups to the same extent that these services are provided in the operational phase.
5.
All departments are supporting the Joint Test Group in test procedure review and will participate in the evaluation of test results.
This is accomplished through active membership on Joint Test Group subcommittees which review test procedure drafts and revisions. The subcommittees are comprised of designated personnel from the station staff, YAEC and UE&C organiza-tions. Subcommittees, of similar composition, will evaluate test procedure data and results for acceptance or rejection recommendation to the Joint Test Group.
1 1
)
i 1
6.
All departments will provide operational e.nd maintenance sup-port of systems commencing with turnover of system (s) to the Station staff.
FSAR Section 13.1.2.2.c will be revised as per Attachment A to discuss the. extent of involvement of the Technical Services organization in the. initial Test Program.
Question 630.8 Regarding FSAR Section 13.1.2.2.d, describe the Training staff's capability to conduct general employee, radiation protection and non-licensed personnel technical training.
Include a discussion of the number of people assigned to the Training staff and describe their qualifications.
Response to 630.8 1.
The demands on the station training department are expected to be heaviest prior to initial core load. After core load of Unit 1 the department will concentrate on training for replacement employees and general employee training and radiation worker training for temporary personnel.
PSNH placed the development of the non-licensed training program under the administration and supervision of a professional educator with a background in curriculum development and supervision of instructors. The instructors have been carefully selected to each have a significant background in one or more of the necessary tech-nical fields.
The following is a brief summary of the background of these instruc-tors, as of January 1,1982:
G. M. Bachman
Subject:
Auxiliary Operator Training Six years as fossil power plant equipment operator. Licensed Operator
(#0P-4438-2) on Salem Units 1&2 with over 6000 hours0.0694 days <br />1.667 hours <br />0.00992 weeks <br />0.00228 months <br /> of control board experience on these nuclear plants.
K. E. Doyle
Subject:
Instrumentation and Controls Two and a half years as classroom and in-plant instructor at the Navy D-1-G prototype. Two years service as qualified ship-board nuclear plant operator, Leading Petty Of ficer of Engineering Training Division and Training Petty Officer of Reactor Control Division. One year as Training Engineer in Westinghouse Nuclear Service Division, including the job of Lead Engineer for development and administration of Westinghouse's Instrumentation and Control Technician Training Program.
1 D. M. Jansen
Subject:
Maintenance Ten years service with Westinghouse Service Division, which includc 8 exteasive training and experience in mechanical and electrical systems and positions as Senior Service / Erection Engineer and Supervisor of i
turbine installation.
l l
l
R. Litman
Subject:
Radiation Chemistry Holds Ph.D. in Analytical Chemistry. For six years held the posi-tion of Assistant Professor of Chemistry teaching and performing research in nuclear chemistry at Lowell University.
Co-author of 14 arti '
7ublished in 6 dif ferent. professional journals.
J. C. Wood
Subject:
Health Physics Seventeen years experience as Health Physics Technician and Health Four Physicist at Electric Boat Division of General Dynamics Corp.
years as Health Physics Supervisor at Salem Nuclear Generating Station.
A more complete resume for each of the instructors is available should further details of their backgrounds be of interest.
2.
FSAR Section 13.2 will be amendeo as per Attachment A to separate the licensed and non-licec. sed training programs consistent with NUREG 0800. Revised Section 13.2.2 will provide additional information on the non-licensed training program.
Question 630.9 Regarding Shif t Staffing as described in FSAR Section 13.1.2.3 and in Proposed Technical Specification 6.2:
(a) Commit to having a rad / chem technician on-site at all times when a unit is in Modes 1-4 or justify not doing so.
(b) Commit to having a Shif t Technical Advisor who meets the requirements and qualifications discussed in Item I.A.1.1 of NUREG-0737 on-site at all times when a unit is in Modes 1-4.
Response to 630.9 Part (a) FSAR Section 13.1.2.3 will be amended as per Attachment A to com-mit to this requirement.
Part (b) PSNH has implemented a long-term program of enhanced operator qualifications and improved control room design in lieu of providing the short-term Shif t Technical Advisor program described in NUREG 0737 Item I. A.1.1.
The details and justifica-tions of this permanent program were described in a letter to Mr.
Robert Tedesco, Assistant Director of Licensing, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission dated February 18, 1982.
O
=r-r
Question 630.10 Regarding the qualifications of plant personnel described in FSAR Section 13.1.3:
(a)
Neither the Station Manager nor the Assistant Station Manager appears to have indepth experience in the overall management of an operating commercial nuclear power plant.
Describe the steps you are taking to provide this experience for the senior plant staff.
(b) For the Technical Services organization:
1.
Describe, in detail, the experience of the incumbent Maintenance Department Supervisor in the electrical maintenance area and discuss his knowledge of applicable electrical codes.
ii.
Describe, in detail the qualification and experience of the Electrical Supervisor.
iii. Describe the steps you have taken to ensure an adequate level of electrical experience within the Maintenance Department.
iv.
Explain why the designated level of qualification listed in this section for the Instrumentation and Control Department Supervisor is " Professional-Technical: instead of " Supervisor Not Requiring an NRC License."
(c) Although the incumbent Training Manager has an extensive background in the field of education, he appears to lack specific experience in the area of nuclear power plant training.
Describe the steps you have taken to provide this specific experience within the Training Organization.
Response to 630.10 Part (a)
(1)
ANS 3.1-1978, as well as the 12/6/79 and the 10/23/80 draft revisions, have been reviewed with respect to the qualifications of the Station Manager and the Assistant Station Manager. The two draft revisions are more detailed than the published 1978 version so a comparison to the draft requirements, follows:
Station Manager A.
Education The Station Manager has a Bachelor's degree in Engineering from Yale University and a PE license in Nuclear Engineering f rom State of California.
He has a Master's Degree in Business Administration.
I I
l l
B.
Experience He has eighteen years of power plant experience including twelve years at Electric Boat Division of General Dynamics where he was directly involved with testing of the S5W-PWR naval power plant as a licensed Senior Test Engineer, during the refueling of 10 submarine reactors, and during the overhaul and construction of several others. He has been assigned to the Seabrook Project since 1975. During that time he has participated in system design reviews, simulator design and construction, and managed all activities leading up to the current operational status of the station whose staff stands at approximately 250 people.
It is our position that the above experience meets the proposed requirements for plant managers, as stated in the draft versions of ANS 3.1, of six years of power plant experience of which three years shall be nuclear.
During his assignment to the Seabrook Project he spent approxima-tely six months at Maine Yankee. During this period he'was under direction of the current Manager of Yankee Operations who was then Maine Yankee superintendent. Maine Yankee operated at full power, operated during a core coastdown, went through a routine refueling outage and start-up.
During his period with Electric Boat he directed start-up as STE for two initial submarine criticalities. He also spent five weeks at Vermont Yankee outage in 1975 during refueling and start-up.
During his career the station manager has had 17 years of super-visory or management experience.
C.
Training The Station Manager was a qualified senior test engineer on a i
Westinghouse design naval PWR.
This qualification involved a written AEC examination and an oral exam.
He has completed the Nuclear Reactor Fundamentals program, obser-vation training, reactor start-up experience, and the site spe-cific STA training conducted for cold license candidates on site.
He will complete the detailed systems and simulator training leading to certification on the site specific Seabrook simulator.
Assistant Station Manager A.
Education The Assistant Station Manager has a Bachelor of Science degree in Engineering from the U.S. Naval Academy. He is a graduate of the Naval Nuclear Officer's Training Program and has a Master's l
Degree in Business Administration from the University of New Hampshire.
I i
B.
Experience The Assistant Station Manar2r has five and one half experience in training and operation of Faval Nuclear f acilities including two nuclear submarine patrols,_ a period in the Groton Shipyard and as leading instructor at a p.ototype. During his four years as Assistant Station Superintendent at PSNH's 400 MW Fossil Station in Newington N.H. he was involved in personnel selection and hiring, training program aesign and implementation, and start-up and turnover of the station from construction to operation. He has been assigned to the Seabrook Project as Assistant Station Manager for three years. It is our position that the above experience meets the proposed requirements for plant managers, as stated in the draft versions of ANS 3.1, of six years of power plant experience of which three years shall be nuclear.
The Assistant Station Manager:
(1) Operated many months above 20% power as E00W during navy nuclear assignments.
(2) Observed the 1979 refueling outage at Maine Yankee including operations testing and start-up after refueling.
C.
Training He qualified as E00W on DIG, S5W and S3G naval (PWR) nuclear power plants. Qualified LE00W at S3G and served 18 months as a shif t operational instructor and section leader.
He has completed the NRF, reactor start-up and STA training to date at Seabrook. He will complete detailed systems and simulator training leading to certification on the site specific Seabrook simulator.
(2)
In addition the Station Manager and the Assistant Station Manager are surrounded by individuals with commerical nuclear power plant e xpe rience. The Nuclear Production Superintendent has sixteen years nuclear power plant experience including 8 years of Vermont Yankee and f our years at Seabrook. The Operations Manager, has 18 years nuclear experience including 4 years at Conn. Yankee, eight years at Maine Yankee and three years at Seabrook. The Technical Services Manager has i5 years of nuclear power plant experience including seven years at Maine Yankee and three years at Seabrook. The Compliance Manager has twenty three years of nuclear power plant experience including six years of commercial nuclear power experience. The Assist. Technical Services Manager, the Assist. Operations Manager, all of the Technical Services Department heads and all shif t superintendents have com-merical nuclear power experience.
(3) FSAR Appendix 13D will be amended as per Attachment A to include revised resumes of the Station Manager and Assistant Station Manager which describe their experience at commercial installations.
Part (b) (i)
(1) The experience and qualification of the Maintenance Department Supervisor in the electrical maintenance is described below:
The Maintenance Department Supervisor has twenty (20) years of nuclear experience either in naval or large commerical PWR licensed power plants. From 7/70 to 12/78, he was in a position of direct super-visory respoasibility over mechanical as well as electrical discipli-nes including; planning, scheduling, per&ormance evaluation of personnel and equipment, training, outside vendor contract administra-tion, corrective and preventive maintenance programs, surveillance programs, hiring, discharging and promoting personnel, and purchase of tools, equipment and spare parts for the mainte.tance of plant equip-ment assigned to the licenseg's maintenance / electrical department.
(2) FSAR Appendix 13D will be amended as per Attachment A to include a revised resume of the Maintenance Department Supervisor. As described in the resume, the incumbent supervisor has dealt extensively with mechanical and electrical codes and standards over the cost recent twelve year period both as a supervisor and as a QA/QC representative in a total of four organizations associated with large PWR commercial nuclear power stations.
Part (b) (ii)
The experience of the Electrical Supervisors and the Electrical Engineer in the Engineering Services Department is described below:
(1) Electrical Supervisor No. 1 (a) Eighteen (18) years direct or industry related nuclear power plant experience in electrical disciplines.
(b) Five years in supervisory electrical maintenance positions in a large New England commercial BWR.
(c) Eight years in direct support of commerical nuclear power plants under construction or in refueling or other outages.
(d) An AS degree in Electrical Engineering (2) Electrical Supervisor No. 2 (a) Twelve years commercial power generating and naval shipyard electrical discipline experience.
(b) Successfully completed a formal four year electrician apprentice trainin, program administered by the Department of the Navy.
(c) Seven years, construction, start-up and commercial operation of a large, commercial, fossil power generating facility in New Hamps hire.
(3) Electrical Supervisor No. 3 (a)
BSEE from Lowell University (1977).
(b) Nine years experience directly related to commerical nuclear power plant operation, (six years US Naval Nuclear Power sub-marine service (Electrical Division LPO), and three years Nuclear Shift Test Engineer qualified on both S6C and S8G Naval Nuclear Power Plants).
(4) Electrical Supervisors (4 thru 6)
(a) First line electrical supervisors total 35 (+) years direct and indirect commercial nuclear power plant experience.
(5) Electrical Engineer in Engineering Services Department (a) 30 (+) years of naval and NSSS/A.E. electrical experience, much of it in senior supervisory positions of responsibility; 6 1/2 years with Architectural Engineering Organizations 17 1/2 years with an NSSS organization 6 1/2 years with a U.S. Naval laboratory (civilian electronic scientist)
Part (b) (iii)
PSNH is confident that the necessary depth of electrical experience and knowledge of applicable electrical codes are well satisfied by the staff assembled to date. Moreover, the electrical training portion of the non-licensed training program and the plan to hire additional electrical engi-neers in the Engineering Services Department will serve to strengthen the level of electrical experience and knowledge.
Part (b) (iv)
Section 4.4 of ANSI /ANS 3.1-1978 presents the qualification requirements for the " responsible person" in each of several selected
" Professional-Technical" disciplines. Second on this list (section 4.4.2) is the technical discipline " Instrumentation and Control". Since the PSNH person who is responsible for I&C is the "I&C Department Supervisor", he is listed as satisfying this " Professional-Technical" position.
The alternative choice of qualification requirements given under section 4.3.2 (" Supervisors Not Requiring NRC Licenses") was not invoked for the following reasons:
A.
Section 4.4.2 requires more experience than Section 4.3.2; i.e.,
5 years rather than 4 years.
B.
Section 4.4.2 requires more experience on an operating nuclear power plant than Section 4.3.2; i.e.: one year rather than none.
C.
Section 4.4.2 requires more related technical training than Section 4.3.2; i.e.,
two years rather than tone.
D.
The section 4.3.2 requirement for "high school diploma or equivalent" is not considered to be of greater significance than A, B, and C above.
Part (c)
The nuclear power plant training experience of the Training Organization has been fully discussed in response to Questio i 63C.8.
e e
a Question 630.11 Describe, in detail, your Shif t Technical Advisor (STA) training program.
Include in your description:
(a) The approximate duration in weeks for each segment of the program.
(b)
The number of STA's being trained and the current position titles for these STA's.
(c) A comparison of the STA training program to the program described in Appendix C of NUREG-0737.
(d) Milestone date, in months orior to Fuel Load, for completion of your initial STA training program.
(e) A discussion of the STA retraining and replacement training program.
(f) A discussion of the remedial training requirements for an STA who has been absent f rom STA duties for a period of 30 days or longer.
Response to 630.11 FSAR Section 13.2.1 will be amended as per Attachment A to provide this information.
Question 630.12 Describe your plans for conducting the Position Task Analysis program discussed in Item I,A.2.2 of NUREG-0660.
Response to 630.12 PSNH will apply the generic task analyses under development by INP0 to site specific positions. Additional training found necessary as a result of the review will be provided'.
m
)
l l
l 1
l l
Question 630.13 Figure 13.2-1 shows the training milestone dates for Licensed Operator Training.
Provide a chart similar to Figure 13.2-1 which shows the training milestones for each of the other major organizational units discussed in FSAR Section 13.1.2.
Response to 630.13 FSAR Section 13.2 will be amended as per Figure 13.2-2 of Attachment A to provide the non-licensed training milestones.
Question 630.14 Provide information showing the extent of completion of each of your training programs as of January 1,1982 and discussing your contingency plans for these programs if the Fuel Load date is significantly delayed.
Response to 630.14 As of January 1,1982, the following progress was made in non-licensed training. Most of the training is scheduled during 1982-83.
POSITION & NUMBERS TRAINING REQUIRED TRAINING COMPLETED Man-Weeks Man-Weeks 172 Supervisors and Professionals 2234 920 41%
33 Mechanies 924 86
' 8.7%
17 Electricians 493 34 7%
17 Chem Techs 544 88 16%
17 H.P. Techs 493 33 6.7%
36 Auxiliary Operators 1764 252 14%
45 I&C Techs 1215 242 20%
Should there be a delay in the core load date, hiring and training will be delayed to accounnodate the change.
Question 630.15 Explain the methods you will use to evaluate the ef fectiveness of the STA and non-licensed training programs and to provide an evaluation of each employee involved.
Response to 630.15 FSAR Section 13.2 will be amended as per Attachment A to provide this information.
I i
~
Question 630.16 Regarding the non-licensed personnel training program described in FSAK Section 13.2.1.1.d:
(a) Elaborate on the Training you will give to supervisors and technical personnel.
Include in your discussion, the course, content, duration in weeks for each major segment, the teaching organization and the number and position titles of the expected trainees.
(b) Similarly, describe the training which you will give to the tech-nicians and craf tmen in your Technical Services organization.
(c)
Describe the Auxiliary Operator training program.
Response to 630.16 FSAR Section 13.2 will be amended as per Attachment A to include Subsection 13.2.2 which will include this information.
e e
Question 630.17 Describe your training given in response to Item II.B.4 of NUREG-0737
" Training For Mitigating Core Damage" include:
(a) A syllabus or description of course content.
(b) The number and position titles of the trainees.
(c)
Identification of the teaching organization.
(d) A differentiation between the classroom and on-the-job training aspects of the program.
Response to 630.17 FSAR Sections 13.2.1 and 13.2.2 will be amended as per Attachment A to pro-vide this information.
Question 630.18 In response to the. description of the facility's Review and Audit Program presented in Section 13.4 provide the details pertaining to the Review and Audit program developed in accordance with the guidelines of ANSI N18.7-1976 as endorsed by Regulatory Guide 1.33.
Response to 630.18 Section 13.4.3 " Audit Program" of the FSAR is being deleted to conform to NUREG 0800 " Standard Review Plan".
The infor-mation previously contained in this section is incorporated into FSAR Section 17.2.
Those portions of the review and audit program pertaining to the Station Operation Review Committee, Nuclear Safety Audit and Review Committee and the Independent Safety Engineering Group will be incorporated into FSAR Sections 13.4.1, 13.4.2, and 13.4.3 respectively as per Attachment A.
Question 630.19 In regard to the discussions of the On-Site Review Committee in Section 13.4.1, provide the following:
(a) A description of the Committee's charter.
(b) Discuss Committee review responsibilities regarding the Initial Test Program.
(c) A description of the provisions for maintaining Committee meeting minutes.
Response to 630.19 FSAR Section 13.4.1 will be amended as per Attachment A to provide this information.
i
}
4
Question 630.20 In regard to the description of the Nuclear Safety Audit sud Review Committee in Section 13.4.2 provides (a)
A description of the committee's charter.
(b) Resumes or other qualifications details of its members.
(c) A description how the qualifications of the members meet the requirements of Section 4.7 of ANS 3.1-1978.
Response to 630.20 FSAR Section 13.4.2 will be amended as per Attachment A to include descrip-tions of the Nuclear Safety Audit and Review Committee Charter and the general qualifications and expertise of its members.
l
Question 630.21 Your discussions in Chapter 13, did not address the f acility's Independent Please provide your plans to establish the Safety Engineering Group.
Independent Safety Engineering Group in accordance with the guidelines fur-nished in Item I.B.1.2 of NUREG-0660 and NUREG-0737.
Response to 630.21 FSAR Section 13.4.3 will be amended as per Attachment A to provide our plans for establishing the Independent Safety Engineering Group.
l I
l l
_,y_,.-
m._.__... _ -, _. _ _ __-..,,._-,-. _-_,.... ___
Ouestion 630.22 With reference to the discussions of Administrative Procedures presented in Section 33.5.1:
(a) FSAR Section 1.8 references Revision 3 of Regulatory Guide 1.33 while FSAR Section 13.5.1 references Revision 2 of this Regulatory Guide.
Resolve this Diocrepancy.
(b) Describe how the Administrative Procedures will comply with the requirements of ANSI N18.7-1976.
(c)
Identify the persons (by position) responsible for the development, implementation and control of the Administrative Procedures.
(d) Describe the Administrative Procedures governing the Initial Test Program. Your discussions should include details of the procedures that control:
1.
The development of individual test procedures.
11, The conduct of the various phases of the test program.
iii. The review, evaluation and approval of test results, and iv.
The selection of individuals to perform the tests.
(e) Describe the Administrative Procedures implemented to:
i.
Substantially relieve the Shift Supervisor of routine administra-tive duties.
ii. Establish the overtime policy for members of the plant staff.
iii. Establish the organizational lines of succession and provide for the delegation of the Station Manager's authority including his authority to issue Special and Standing Orders.
Response to 630.22 Part (a)
The proper revision reference for Regulatory Guide 1.33 is Revision 2.
FSAR Section 1.8 was revised accordingly as part of Amendment 44 to the FSAR to correct this discrepancy.
Part (b)
FSAR Section 13.5.1 will be amended as per Attachment A to describe the compliance of the Administrative Procedures with ANSI N18.7-1976.
FSAR Section 13.5.1 will be amended as per Attachment A to Part (c) include Table 13.5-1 which designates the person responsible for each Administrative Procedure.
Part (d)(i)
FSAR Section 13.5.1 will be amended as per Attachment A to provide the requested information.
Part (d),
This information is contained in Chapter 14 (ii),(iii),(iv)
o FSta Section 13.5.1 will be amended as per Attachment A to Part (c) provide the requested information.
l
\\
t B
r l
ATTACIDiENT A FSAR CHAPTER 13 REVISIONS 1
l I
h l
I i
--.__m.m t
TAB 13.1 ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE l
SB 1 & 2 FSAR CHAPTER 13 CONDUCT OF OPERATIONS 13.1 Organizational Structure Th!s section describes the organizations of Public Service Company of New Hampshire (PSNH) and the Nuclear Services Division (YNSD) of Yankee Atomic Electric Company which are responsible for the operation and operational support of Seabrook Station. The qualifications of both organizations are offered as supporting evidence that the operationa'. responsibilities for Seabrook Station can and will be discharged in a competent and efficient manner.
13.1.1 Management and Technical Support Organiza{io; Public Service Company of New Hampshire is responsible for the operation of the nuclear-fueled generating station at Seabrook, New Hampshire to be known as Seabrook Station.
The overall responsibility for all activities associated with Seabrook Station rests with the PSNH Chairman and Chief Executive Of ficer and Executive Vice President, who is designated as the management official in overall charge of nuclear power.
The Executive Vice President has a corporate Production Division and a corporate Engineering Division, both under a Vice President, reporting to him. Also reporting to the Executive Vice President are Nucler Projects, Energy Management and Research Department and the Fuel Procurement and Supply Department. The corporate organizational relationships are shown in Figure 13.1-1.
The Vice President -Production has direct responsibility for the opera-tion of Seabrook Station and maintains a Nuclear Production Staff for opera-tional management and support of the station, a Station Staff for actual operation of the station, a Training Center Staff for training of licensed sta-tion operators and a Nuclear Quality Staff for assuring the proper implemen-j tation of the Seabrook Station Operational Quality Assurance Program.
Also reporting to the Vice President Production are the Steam Production Superintendent, who is responsible for the Operation of the fossil units and the Hydro Production Superintendent, who is responsible for the operation of the 2
hydroelectric units, and the Power Supply Department.
PSNH has contracted with YNSD for a wide range of additional operation support services, and YNSD is l
responsible to the PSNH Executive Vice President for these activities.
The organizational interfacing and responsibility reporting lines between PSNH and YNSD are shown in Figure 13.1-2.
PSNH has contracted for certain operational services from YNSD and has retained certain operational activities for its PSNH staff.
PSNH and YNSD have developed and enacted a document known as the "Second Memorandum of Agreement" which deli-neates the specific operational services supplied by YNSD for PSNH and the working relationships between the two organizations for the period of the l
operr.cing license.
13.1-1
SB 1 & 2 FSFR There are two appendices to the Second Memorandum of Agreement.. Appendix I to the.Second Memorandum provides a detailed listing of support activities, the organizations responsible for the activity, and the degree of responsibility.
There are nine broad categories of activities which are broken down into more precise sub-activities (see Table 13.1-1).
These nine broad categories are (1)
Environmental (Radiological and Non-radiological), (2) Engineering, (3) Quality Assurance, (4) Nuclear Material, (5) Projects, (6) Operational Services, (7)
Licensing, (8) Nuclear Engineering, and (9) Information Services. A summary of the services provided by YNSD to Seabrook Station is given in Section 13.1.1.3.
For each designated sub-activity in Appendix I, one of five responsibility levels has been assigned to the organizations involved. These five levels are (1) Final approval and ultimate authority for the activity; (2) Chief responsibility for coordination and implementation; (3) Mandatory participation in decision making (right of appeal, must be con-sulted and comments must be resolved);
(4) Maintains cognizance of activity through reviews (recommends changes but 3e not directly involved in decision making); and (5) No responsibility unless specifically requested.
All final approval authority, as defined in Appendix I, has been granted to the appropriate organizational entity within PSNH.
The responeibilities delineated in the agreement can be changed or added to with the mutual consent of PSNH and YNSD. Changes to the agreement must be approved by the YNSD President and the PSNH Executive Vice President.
Appendix II to the Second Memorandum of Agreement contains a detailed listing of Seabrook Station systems, components, and structures. Design changes for the items listed in Appendix II must be reviewed and approved by YNSD.
13.1.1.1 PSNH Nuclear Production Organization, Responsibilites and Authority j
The Nuclear Produciton Staff is part of the Production Division of PSNH under the overall direction of a Vice President - Production.
l PSNH has recognized the unique aspects of the operation of a nuclear station and has formed a highly qualified group of experienced nuclear personnel who, in concert with YNSD personnel, provide the operational support for Seabrook Station. There are four organizations within Production responsible for station operations and support. The Seabrook Station and the Training Center Staffs are two of the organizations and are located at the site.
The other organiza-l 13.1-2
SB 1 & 2 FSAR tions are the Nuclear Production Staff and Nuclear Quality Staff located in Manchester. The responsibilities, training, organization, and qualifications of the Station and Training Center staffs are discussed in Subsections 13.1.2 and 13.1.1.2 respectively. The responsibilities of the Nuclear Quality Staff and Nuclear Production Staff are discussed in the following paragraphs.
The Nuclear Production Superintendent is responsible for the operation and operational support of Seabrook Station. To assist him in the accomplishment of these responsibilities, the Nuclear Production Superintendent has the Seabrook Station Manager, the Training Center Manager, and the Nuclear Production Staff reporting directly to him.
The Nuclear Production Superintendent reports to the Vice President - Production - and has the necessary qualifications and job posi-tion to qualify as " Engineer in Charge" as defined in ANSI /ANS 3.1 - 1978. The Nuclear Production Superintendent will be actively employed prior to the start of preoperational testing.
The Nuclear Production Staff contains the necessary expertise and authority to provide support for two basic functions. They are an operations function under the Operations Support Manager and associated support group, and an engineering function under an Engineering Manager and associated group. The staffing milestones for the Nuclear Production Staff are shown in Figure 13.1-3.
The Operations Support Group is located in the home office and is composed of a manager and a staff of at least two operations engineers. The Operations Support Manager will have a minimum of eight years of power plant experience with two years of the experience associated with start-up or operational support. The staff engineers will have 3 to 5 years experience with at least one year of power plant experience. The group functions in direct support of the station in the area of refueling, maintenance, training, operations and security. The group will also maintain communications with YNSD's Operations personnel on sta-tion activities. The Operations Support Manager will be actively employed prior to any significant pre-operational testing.
Additionally, an operations engineer will be assigned to the site to participate in initial startup testing to provide first hand experience to the Operations Support Group of operational problems encountered during start-up testing.
The Engineering Manager is responsible for a multi-disciplined group of at least three staff engineers possessing expertise in the areas of systems e.gineering and electrical and instrumentation controls engineering.
The group has a wide i
ranSc of responsibilities, including reviews of design changes, supervision of large backfit projects and state and local licensing.
The group maintains close coordination with the YNSD Project and Licensing activities. The Engineering Manager will have a minimum of eight years of power plant experience with five years of the experience in nuclear power engineering, a baccalaurate degree in an engineering or scientific field, and will be employed prior to any signifi-cant pre-operational testing. The staff engineers will have 3 to 5 years experience with at least one year of power plant experience.
The Nuclear Quality Manager has overall responsibility for assuring that the Seabrook Operational Quality Assurance Program is effectively implemented by all organizations performing work on safety-related systems and equipment at i
13.1-3
{
)
SB 1 & 2 FSAR Seabrook Station. The Fuclear Quality Manager reports directly to the Vice President - Production.
Ris staff consists of a minimum of three quality assurance engineers / engineering technicians.
The Nuclear Quality Staff has the f reedom and authority to perform independent reviews of quality related work and request work stoppages or remedial actions if conditions adverse to quality are encountered.
Their authority extends over the Nuclear Production Staf f, the Seabrook Station Staff, the Training Center Staf f, YNSD and any other organization performing quality-related work for Seabrook Station. The responsibilities of the Quality Assurance Group are described in Subsection 17.2.1.
The qualifications and experience of the Nuclear Quality Manager are as defined in ANSI /ANS 3.1 - 1978 for Professional-Technical.
The Nuclear Production Staff will receive the General Employee Training and the Training for Supervisors described in Section 13.2.
The Executive Vice President, Vice President - Production, Nuclear Production Superintendent, Operations Support Manager and Engineering Manager will also receive a plant operations orientation course taught on the Seabrook simulator which includes training for mitigating core damage. The resumes of appropriate corporate management, Nuclear Production Staff and Nuclear Quality Staff personnel are contained in Appendix 13A.
The following is a compilation of the responsibilities of the Nuclear Production Superintendent and staff in various support areas:
a.
Environmental and Radiological 1.
Review and approval of the Environmental Radiation Monitoring Program, Radiation Protection Program, Radiological Emergency Plan, Industrial Medical Plan, and Medical Emergency Plan.
2.
Participate in the selection of locations for offsite radiologi-cal monitors and in emergency plan drills.
t 3.
Cognizance of Seabrook Environmental Radiation Monitoring and Radiation Protection.
4.
Provide liaison with state and local officials for environmental and radiological safety programs and plans.
5.
Approve and coordinate implementation of a corporate ALARA Program.
b.
Engineering and Design 1.
Coordinate activities between YNSD engineering and the Station Staff related to design changes, engineering consultants, engi-neering specifications and licensing activities.
2.
Provide project engineering assistance for implementation of cer-tain design changes at the station.
13.1-4
Prepare assigned design change requests.
4.
Review and maintain cognizance of specification revisions and of design changes.
5.
Cognizance of engineering consultants and NRC inspection and audit findings in the engineering areas.
c.
Nuclear Materials 1.
Participate in the establishment of nuclear material, i core component requirements and schedules.
2.
Cognizance of nuclear material procurement, conversion and enrichment, fuel economic analyses, and nuclear material accountability.
d.
Project Coordination with YNSD 1.
Approve engineering budgets, project personnel and out-of-budget requests.
2.
Participate in establishing priorities, schedules, budgets, and manpower estimates for activities.
1 3.
Cognizance of work order status, cash flow and manpower usage.
e.
Operations 1.
Review and approval of the Fire Protection Emergency Plan, Security Plan, Training Center organizational changes, Station organizational changes, contracts for training and station ser-vices, operational or technical specification changes, and licen-sec event reports.
2.
Provide corporate supervision of the Station Manager and Training Center Mansger.
3.
Provide a system to maintain awareness of industry operating problems and evaluate them for possible applicability to the sta-tion.
4.
Coordinate the station interface with the New England Power Pool j
Exchange.
5.
Cognizance of station audits by YNSD or NRC inspectors and pro-vide final resolution of written audit findings.
6.
Provide corporate responses to NRC requests.
l l
i t
13.1-5 l
1
Maintain daily commanication with the station to ascertain operating conditions and status of maintenance and other signifi-cant activities.
8.
Provide membership for the Nuclear Safety Audit and Review Committee and provide resolution to its findings.
9.
Cognizance of contractor progress, station work orders, opera-tional reports, fire protection inspections, and security audits and drills.
10.
Cognizance of station outage planning and provide direct support of station staff in completion of specified outage activities.
11.
Review specified operating and emergency procedures.
12.
Provide administrative support to Station and Training Center personnel in the areas of personnel administration, budgeting, and purchasing.
f.
Licensiag 1.
Formulate and provide PSNH corporate licensing policy.
.2.
Provide liaison with state and local agencies and departments.
3.
Provide liaison with federal agencies.
4.
Maintain cognizance of YNSD interface with the NRC.
5.
Provide responses to NRC requests for information in the areas within Nuclear Production's responsibilities.
6.
Provide reviews and comments to industry standards, guides, etc.,
on a generic basis.
g.
Nuclear Engineering 1.
Approve reload analysis technical specification changes.
2.
Cognizance of reload talysis and licensing, benchmark testing of transient and physics analyses programs, review of operation pro-(
cedures for compatibility with analyses, and use of realistic l
analyses for operator training, h.
Initial Start-up Testing 1.
Review the results of the initial testing of all safety-related systems and major support systems.
l 13.1-6 w
r SB 1 & 2 FSAR-13.1.1.2 PSNH Training Center Organization, Responsibilities and Authority PSNH has recognized the importance of operator training by establishing a Training Center facility and organization which is independent of the station f acilities and management, by providing a Seabrook site specific simulator, and by having the Training Center Manager report to the same level of home office management as the Station Manager.
The Training Center is located on the Seabrook site outside of the protected area.
The Training Center f acility contains classrooms, office space, a library, study areas, an instructor material preparation room, a computer room, administrative areas, and a simulated Seabroook control room with a full size main control board and various main control room panels. The ' simulator control board is manuf actured by Link, a division of the Singer Company. Link has had extensive experience with nuclear simulators and a myriad of simulators for military applications.
Seabrook represents the eighteenth simulator built for the nuclear industry by Link. The simulator control room is not only similar to the actual control room in appearance, but is also operated under the same working conditions as the actual main control room to provide a realistic atmosphere for operator training.
The Seabrook simulator meets the requirements of Regulatory Guide 1.149, 1981 except as noted in FSAR Section 1.8.
The Training Center Manager reports to the Nuclear Production Superintendent in the home office as shown by Figure 13.1-2.
The Training Center organization is shown in Figure 13.1-4.
The organization is divided along two. functional areas.
One area is the maintenance of the simulator hardware and software under a staff which includes a supervisor, a sof tware specialist and a technician. These per-sonnel undergo extensive training initially by Link in such areas as assembly language programming, simulator sof tware and hardware, mathematical modeling, and preventative maintenance. The second functional area is operator instruc-tion under a staff which includes a supervisor and four instructors. The Training Center Manager and Training Supervisor meet the ANSI /ANS 3.1 qualifica-tion requirements for Supervisors Requiring NRC Licenses.
The primary responsibility of the Training Center Staff is to provide the License Training and Requalification Training Programs for the Seabrook opera-tors.
The staff also must maintain the instruction material and the simulator up-to-date with the current Unit I design.
The resumes of the Training Center Staff are contained in Appendix 13B.
The Training Program for the instructors is identical in scope to the Seabrook operator training required for a senior reactor operator license, except that instructors are provided additional training on simulator contaol functions and to improve teaching skills. The training center staff instructors will be cer-tified under f acility procedures to conduct specific courses of instruction.
Instructors will meet the qualification requirements of ANSI /ANS 3.1 - 1978 for licensed operators.
Initially, the instructors will participate in the cold license program of the Operator License Training Program.
Replacement instruc-tors will participate in the hot license program. The Operator License Training Program is described in Section 13.2.
13.1-7
r SB 1 & 2 FSAR All courses of instructior. in engineering topics such as heat transfer, fluid flow and thermodynamics for the initial group of license candidates, including training center staff members, have been taught as fully accredited courses by f aculty members of Memphis State University. Memphis State University is accre-dited by the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools.
13.1.1.3 YNSD Operational Organization, Responsibilities and Authority The Yankee Nuclear Service Division (YNSD) of Yankee Atomic Electric Company has functioned as the PSNH Engineering and Construction Department in the design and construction phases of Seabrook Station. YNSD is highly qualified for these PSNH has functions and is equally as qualified for operational support services.
contracted with YNSD for certain operational support services and will depend on YNSD's qualifications and organizational expertise for station support not available within PSNH. PSNH has delegated to YNSD the necessary authority and organizational f reedom to accomplish their support services.
Yankee Atomic Electric Company, an electric utility company, was incorporated as a Massachusetts electric company in 1954 under provisions of the Massachusetts utility law which permits two or more electric companies to join in the construction and operation of a generating plant to service their common needs.
The Yankee Atomic Electric Company was sponsored by twelve New England utilities for the purpose of constructing and operating New England's first nuclear power In addition to the corporate functions of generating, buying and selling plant.
electricity, it has broad related functions, including conducting research and The twelve (now eleven) assisting others engaged in the nucelar power business.
sponsoring utilities own the entire common capital stock of Yankee Atomic in the percentages indicated below.
Percent of Stock Sponsoring Company New England Electric System 30.0 l
New England Power Company i
Northeast Utilities 15.0 The Connecticut Light & Power Co.
9.5*
The Hartford Electric Light Co.
7.0 Western Massachusetts Electric Co.
New England Gas & Electric Assoc.
2.5 t
l New Bedfored Gas & Electric Light 2.0 Cambridge Electric Light Co.
9.5 Boston Edison Company 9.5 Central Maine power Company 7.0 Public Service Co. of New Hampshire i
l Eastern Utilities Associates 4.5 l
Montaup Electric Company 3.5 Central Vermont Public Service 100%
Includes 0.5% originally allocated to the Connecticut Power Co. which sub-sequently merged into the Hartford Electric Light Company.
i l
13.1-8
SB 1 & 2 FSAR The corporate headquarters of the Yankee Atomic Electric Company is located at 1671 Worcester Road, Framingham, Massachusetts.
In the construction and operation of the Yankee Atomic Electric Company plant at Rowe, Massachusetts a group of engineering, operating and support personnel with valuable knowledge and experience in nuclear plant matters was assembled.
Personnel were later assigned f rom this group to Connecticut Yankee project.
Since completion of the Connecticut Yankee project, other nuclear projects have been completed, including the jointly sponsored Maine Yankee and Vermont Yankee proj ects. Other projects have also been undertaken individually by several of the sponsoring utilities of Yankee Atomic. With this increase in the number of nuclear projects in New England, it became apparent that a nuclear services organization was desirable to develop the required support for the major New England utilities.
The purpose of YNSD is to provide a vehicle and a place for the assembly of a group of engineering, operating and support personnel that is:
- 1) under the common control of New England sponsors of the various nuclear plants being built in the New England area and, 2) available to provide general advice on nuclear power matters to the sponsoring companies.
This group of personnel is located at the corporate headquarters of the company in Framingham, Massachusetts.
During Seabrook station design and construction, YNSD functions as the Engineering Department for PSNH and has been granted the responsibility and authority required to act on all related matters. This is the same position it has occupied on the Yankee Nuclear Power Station project, the Connecticut Yankee project, the Vermont Yankee project, and the Maine Yankee project. Although the vehicle for ownership of Seabrook Station is not identical to the predecessor Yankee projects, the role of YAEC during design and construction is unchanged f rom earlier projects.
The organization of YNSD for operational support services varies only slightly f rom the organizational structure used during construction and, therefore, the l
expertise and experience gained by YNSD during the design and construction phase of Seabrook station, as well as their considerable operating experience on the three Yankee plants, will be utilized to its fullest in the operational support of Seabrook Station. There will be little change in authority and responsiblity for YNSD f rom design and construction phase to the operational phase, and YNSD will still function as administrative and technical authority for YNSD to carry out this responsiblity has been extended to them.
YNSD uses the Project Manager concept to oversee and control work undertaken for l
Seabrook Station.
The YNSD Seabrook Project Manager has direct responsibility for the overall coordination and implementation of many of the operational sup-port services outlined in the second memorandom.
These operational support ser-vices, as well as requests from PSNH for other special services are controlled by the Project Manager in the following manner. The Project Manager authorizes the appropriate YNSD deparment/ group to provide the support service in accor-l dance with the terms of the Second Memorandum. A cognizant engineer, which is l
the fundamental organizational element for the accomplishment of work within 13.1-9
I SB 1 & 2 FSAR YNSD, is assigned by the appropriate line department / group manager to assume the respensibility of assuring that the task is completed ou schedule. The Project Manager and appropriate department / group management are kept informed of the task progress and development by the cognizant engineer. Various forms of com-munications, including working level discussions, between the active YNSD and PSNH participants (Production Department, Seabrook Station, and Training Center) for the assigned task occur directly and with whatever frequency is deemed necessarf. Conflicts that cannot be resolved at the YNSD/PSNH working level are brought progressively to the attention of increasingly higher levels of line management of each organization with utlimate resolution, if required, by the PSNH Executive Vice President and YNSD Vice President.
The Yankee Nuclear Services Division is organized to provide a complete spectrum of expertise for the operational support of Seabrook Station.
The follwing describes the functional arrangement, as well as services provided:
a.
Quality Assurance The functions and responsibilities of the YNSD Quality Assurance Department are contained in Subsection 17.2.1.
b.
Operations The Operations Department is composed of a Manager of Operations and group, who report to the Manager of Operations.
The specific responsibilities of the Operations Department for Seabrook are:
1.
Prepare Fire Protection Emergency Plan, provide independent fire pro-tection and loss preventation inspection and audit, and maintain tech-nical liaison with insurance agencies.
2.
Assist in the development of fire protection procedures and resolution of fire protection audit findings.
3.
Provide industry wide experience to the development of the Security Plan and procedures.
4.
Cognizance of the operator training program and provide industry wide experience to it.
5.
Provide an initial interview of key station staff members.
6.
Maintain daily awareness of station operating tests, schedules, shut-downs and maintenance activities.
7.
Provide reviews of selected station procedures for compatibility with the design criteria and accident analyses.
8.
Provide input to the Station and Nuclear Production Staffs on signifi-cant industry problems which could effect the station.
I 13.1-10 l
Recommend shutdown of the station to Nuclear Production Super-intendent if operational or engineering circumstances analyzed by YNSD dictate it.
10.
Review NSARC and Station Operation Review Committee minutes.
11.
Assist in the preparation of NRC information requests, preparation of Licensee Event Reports and resolution of NRC inspection findings.
c.
Plant Engineering The Plant Engineering Department is composed of an Instrumentation and Control Engineering Manager and group, an Electrical Engineering Manager and group, a Mechanical Engineering Manager and group, and a Systems Engineering Manager and group. The specific responsibilities of the Plant Engineering Department for Seabrook are:
1.
Initiate and prepare engineering design changes.
2.
Review and approve design changes initiated by the Station or Production for specified systems.
3.
Update or review specifications and system descriptions.
4.
Review station non-conformance reports for possible design deficiencies.
5.
Provide engineering information for NRC requests.
6.
Assist in the preparation of engineering technical specification changes.
7.
Prepare In-Service Inspection (ISI) Program, analyze ISI data, eva-luate repairs, and prepare ISI summary reports.
8.
Assist in the preparation of ISI procedures and schedules and assist in the ISI interface with the Authorized Inspector and NRC inspectors.
9.
Prepare specifications for irradiation surveillance specimen removal, evaluate test data, prepare test reports and modify technical specifi-cations operating curves.
10.
Assist in the evaluation and make corrective recommendations as a result of anomalous reading from tha loose parts monitoring system.
d.
Licensing The Licensing Department is composed of a Licensing Manager, and a group of licensing engineers. The specific responsiblity of the Licensing Department for Seabrook is to provide responses to industry standards and NRC guides and regulations which have been issued for comment.
e.
Nuclear Engineering 13.1-11
SB 1 & 2 FSAR The Nuclear Engineering Department is composed of a department manager, and f
five groups with an associated group manager. They are LOCA. Group Manager, Reactor Physics Group Manager, PWR Transient Analysis Group Manager, BWR Transient Analysis Group Manager and Applied Methods Develonent Group Manager. The specific responsibilities of the Nuclear Engineering Depart-ment are:
1.
Evaluate plant specific methods to be applied in reload licensing.
2.
Prepare reload analyses and technical specification changes for reload licensing.
3.
Provide physics, thermal hydraulic, fuel behavior and hydrodynamic analyses for station operations and NRC responses.
4.
Review design changes, technical specification changes and emergency procedures to assure their compatibility with accident analyses.
5.
Perform station operation analyses to provide data for operational decisions and for method validation.
6.
Assist in the development of core related computer programs for the station process computer.
7.
Review fuel design limits.
8.
Provide alternative fuel management strategies.
9.
Provide realistic station transient analyses for operator training.
10.
Provide station startup predictions for initial core.
11.
Review and validate Westinghouse methods of power distribution predic-tions using movable detectors.
12.
Devleop methods to calculate core power f rom fixed / movable incore detectors.
f.
Projects The Projects Department is composed of the Manager of Projects, and the Seabrook Project Manager. The Seabrook Project Manager is dedicated solely to Seabrook support and is generally responsible for overall coordination of the YNSD engineering services for Seabrook. The specific respon-sibilities of the Projects Department within YNSD are:
1.
Open and close engineering work orders.
2.
Determine priorities for engineering work and assignment of personnel.
3.
Maintain engineering records.
13.1-12
Provide engineering budgets, cash flows, and manpower estimates.
5.
Approval of out-of-budget requests.
6.
Administer and coordinate licensing correspondence with the NRC.
7.
Provide continuous communications with the NRC project managers.
g.
Environmental Engineering The Environmental Engineering Department is composed of a department manager and five groups with associated managers. They are the Radiation Protection Group Manager, the Radiological Engineering Manager, the Environmental Sciences Manager, the Radiological Environmental Laboratory Manager, and a Total Radiation Assessment Program (TRAP) Records and Dosimetry System Group. The specific responsibilities of the Environmental Engineering Group are:
1.
Prepare an Environmental Radiological Monitoring Program and coordinate its activities with the Environmental Laboratory and station including assistance in preparation of procedures, training, shipping of samples, specifying monitoring equipment, locating sample stations, and selecting sample media.
2.
Provide environmental laboratory services for radiological monitoring program and provide a verification sample audit program.
3.
Review and analyze Radiological Monitoring Program data, identify cri-tical radionuclides and pathways, provide dose analysis and prepare annual report.
4.
Provide a central meteorological system for the collection of meteoro-logical data.
5.
Analyze meteorological data, calculate dispersion parameters and pre-pare reports.
l 6.
Provide assistance in calculating dispersion parameters in emergency l
situations.
7.
Evaluate effects of accidental releases, correlate release history with meteorology, and assist in the preparation of radiological effluent reports and environmental dose summaries.
8.
Prepare and maintain an offsite dose calculation manual.
9.
Assist in the preparation of the Radiation Protection Program and ALARA Program.
10.
Prepare the Radiological Smergency Plan, YNSD emergency preocedures and training; provide accident analysis support and conduct Emergency Plan drills.
13.1-13
Assist the Station and Nuclear Production Staff in preparation of emergency procedures and training and assist with the Emergency Plan liaison with the NRC, state and local agencies.
12.
Prepare medical emergency plan.
13.
Maintain cognizance of the hydrological monitoring program for its effect on station operations and compliance with technical specifica-tions.
h.
F,uel Cycle The Fuel Cycle Department is composed of a department manger, and the Nuclear Materials Group supervised by the Neulear Material Manager and the Core Components Group. The specific responsibilities of the Fuel Cycle Department are:
1.
Establish nuclear material requirements, schedules and prepare bid packages.
2.
Solicit, negotiate and administer uranium supply, conversion services and services agreements.
3.
Provide fuel cost analyses, fuel cash flow estimates, uranium alloca-tion information, and material allocation and value reports.
4.
Provide the independent nuclear accountability function and maintain an in-process nuclear material inventory.
5.
Assist the station in maintaining a nuclear material site inventory accountability system.
6.
Provide for spent shipping and reprocessing, when available.
7.
Solicit, negotiate, schedule and contract for fuel f abrication.
l 8.
Review fuel designs and development tests.
9.
Assist in the analysis of core loading, startup and operational test results.
10.
Analyze operating reports and incore inspection data.
11.
Solicit, negotiate, schedule, administer and contract for core components.
The resumes of the YNSD supervisory and lead Seabrook engineering personnel are contained in Appendix 13C. The training of YNSD personnel is dictated by their job functions and a comprehensive training program is employed by YNSD to assure that sufficient training and retraining has been administerad to meet the needs of the specific job functions. The responsibilities for the va ious departments 13.1-14 9
SB 1 & 2 FSAR within YNSD do not substantially change between the construction and operation phases; therefore there will be no continuity lost in the switch 'to operational support by YNSD.
A summary of the general experience of YNSD personnel is provided in Table 13.1-2.
As seen in Table 13.1-2 the " average" YNSD support engineer has a total of 9.2 years experience of which 5.7 years is nuclear related. The experience and qualifications of YNSD engineering personnel that may be assigned to support Seabrook would typically encompass the qualifications required for the positions of Associate Engineer, Engineer, Titled Engineer, or Senior Engineer. To pro-vide an indication of the minimum education, training, and experience required for these positions, job classification descriptions are provided in Table 13.1-3.
The numbers, by discipline, of dedicated and equivalent YNSD personnel expected to provide operational support services for Seabrook Unit 1 are provided in Table 13.1-4.
It can be seen from Table 13.1-4 that 37 dedicated and a total of 99 equivalent YNSD personnel are expected to provide operational support services.
The dedicated Seabrook personnel represent about 15% of the present YNSD tech-nical manpower resource and would not be shif ted from their Seabrook responsibilities without senior management approval.
Additional manpower needs for Seabrook will be obtained either f rom the YNSD manpower resource maintained to meet the requirements of Seabrook and three other plants (Maine Yankee, Vermont Yankee, and Yankee), or, in the case of special projects, through contracts with consultants and technical firms routinely used to supplement YNSD's staff. The YNSD manpower resource distributes its time in support of these plants on an "as required" basis.
It is expected that, on the average, YNSD non-dedicated personnel will distribute their support equally between Seabrook and the other three plants. There are several advantages that accrue to Seabrook as a result of this manpower distribution including:
An awareness of problems and their resolutions at several operating plants that could aid in preventing similar situations at Seabrook; An increased knowledge of the capabilities of, and the establishment of, good working relationships with a variety of consultants and contractors who could also provide support services to Seabrook; A broadening of the experience of YNSD's cadre of engineers; and The maintenance of a greater staff awareness of the various regulatory requirements imposed upon operating power reactor facilities.
It is also YNSD's operational philosophy to maintain sufficient flexibility in the allocation of its manpower resource to meet the priority support needs of each of its plants. Thus, based on over 20 years of providing operational sup-port services, YNSD has never failed in meeting the support needs of its plants; a record which YNSD fully intends to uphold in meeting the operational support needs of Seabrook Station.
13.1.1.4 PSNH - YNSD Operational Interfaces 13.1-15
SB 1 & 2 FSAR The responsibilities for both PSNH and YNSD have been stated in some detail in Subsections 13.1.1.1 and 13.1.1.3, respectively. If conflicts occur, they will be resolved through the management of both organizations, and the final authority will be the PSNH Executive Vice President.
YNSD is supplying Seabrook Station with supporting nuclear expertise in the fol. lowing specific areas:
Mechanical Engineering Electrical Engineering Instrument and Control Engineering Systems Engineering Welding In Service Inspection Nuclear Engineering Accident Analyses Transient Analyses Reload Analyses Health Physics Dose Assessment NRC Licensing Meteorology Fuel Fabrication Fuel Procurement Operations Fire Protection Vendor QA Auditing Engineering QA Emergency Planning Environmental Engineering The Station, Nuclear Production, Nuclear Quality and Training Center staffs supply the additional necessary expertise to support and operate the station. A combination of administrative controls, the setting of specific responsibilities for each organizations are used to assure a safe and efficient working rela-tionship between the support organizations.
13.1.1.5 Construction and Operation Interface The PSNH Nuclear Production Staff and YNSD function as the operational support organization for Seabrook Station, and their responsibilities, authority, quali-fications and training have been presented in the preceding sections. However, since Seabrook is a two-unit station with one unit scheduled later than the
(
other, there will be construction and operation at the site occuring l
s imu ltaneously. The role assumed by YNSD for engineering, design and construc-l tion phases of Unit I will continue intact until Unit 2 is constructed.
There are additional groups, other than those shown in Figure 13.1-2, which take l
part in the construction phase and will continue until Unit 2 is complete.
PSNH I
has a project group reporting to the Executive Vice President whose general responsibilities are to monitor and provide PSNH inputs into the station design 13.1-16 t
SB 1 & 2 FSAR and construction. YNSD has a construction department for the construction phase only. There are also contactor. organizations who will be involved in the construction of Unit 2 while Unit 1 is in operation.
Westinghouse is responsible for the design, fabrication and delivery of the nuclear steam supply system, related auxiliary systems and the nuclear fuel.
Technical direction for the installation of the equipment and technical assistance throughout the pre-operational testing, initial core loading and testing programs are further responsibilities of Westinghouse.
United Engineers and Constructors (UE&C) is responsible for the engineering, design and construction management of the station.
Included in their services is the furnishing of the balance of plant systems and components, structures and switchyards such that a complete and integrated facility will result.
General Electric is responsible for the design, fabrication and delivery of the turbine-generator unit.
13.1.1.6 PSNH Nuclear /Non-Nuclear Interface The support of nuclear activities will come under the direction of the Production Division with the following exceptions:
a.
The purchase of materials for the Seabrook Station will be coordinated through the corporate level Purchasing Deparment. The corporate level Purchasing Department will be responsible for the commerical aspects of materials procurement only. The Seabrook Station staff is respon-sible for the technical aspects of material procurement including equipment specifications, receipt inspection, and warehousing.
b.
The commerical aspects of nuclear fuel procurement will be administered by the Fuel Procurement and Supply Department. Yankee Nuclear Services Division Fuel Department will provide the technical expertise for fuel procurement as identified in FSAR Sectioh 13.1.1.3.h.
l c.
The engineering and maintenance support of high voltage electrical equipment (> 15kV) is provided by the Engineering Division of PSNH.
YNSD is responsible for the engineering support for all safety-related electrical equi: ment.
The Station Staff has overall responsibility for day-to-day maintenance activities and coordination of off-site support.
13.1.2 Operating organization 13.1.2.1 Station organization l
The Seabrook Station organization chart is shown in Figure 13.1-5.
This chart l
depicts the titles and the minimum number of employees assigned to each posi-l tion.
The station organization includes all the technically trained personnel necessary to support all aspects of Unit 1 and Unit 2 operation.
13.1-17 l
(
SB 1 & 2 FSAR The key supervisory positions for the station organization were filled in 1979, approximately five years prior to scheduled fuel loading of Unit '1.
Personnel to meet the operational requirements of Unit I will be hired on a phased basis consistent with the training and licensing requirements of the individual posi-tions. The station organization will be expanded beyond the normal needs of Unit 1 in order to meet the additional organizational requirements for Unit 2.
By the time of Unit 2 fuel loading, the Seabrook Station will have a staf f of more than 255 employees. The schedule for this expansion is shown in Figure 13.1-6, which also shows the fuel loading and ciber key milestones for Unit 1.
l The Units 1 and 2 on-duty operating shift crews will be composed as shown in Technical Specification Table 6.2-1, and will meet the requirements outlined in Technical Specification Subsection 6.2.2 describing the plant organization.
Manpower necessary to staff five shift crews will be provided.
Each member of the station organization will meet, or exceed, the minimum qualifications recommended for comparable positions in Regulatory Guide 1.8, Revision 1-R, except ANSI /ANS 3.1 - 1978 will be used as the standard rather than ANS 3.1/ ANSI 18.1 -1971.
The employees assigned to the station organization will be trained as described in Section 13.2.
All personnel will be available for work on either unit.
I 13.1.2.2 Station Personnel Responsibilities and Authorities a.
Overall Station Management The Station Manager of the Seabrook f acility is responsible for overall management of Units 1 and 2.
In his absence, the Assistant i
Station Manager assumes this responsibility.
In the event of unex-pected contingencies of a temporary nature occuring during the absence of these two managers, the Operations Manager will be respon-sible for overall station operations.
In his absence, the Assistant Operations Manager assumes this responsibility. The Shift Superintendent assumes the responsibility for overall management of Units 1 and 2 when the above station management is not within the sta-tion.
In addition, the Station Manager may designate in writing other qualified personnel to assume overall station responsibility in his absence.
l The Station Manager reports to the Nuclear Production Superintendent of Public Service Company of New Hampshire (PSNH) for all tetivities related to the Station.
Reporting to the Station Manager, ar l
his assistant, are five managers:
1.
Operations Manager:
Responsible for the operation of Units 1 and 2
2.
Technical Services Manager:
Responsible to provide support fc the operation and refueling of Units 1 and 2.
13.1-18
Training Manager:
Responsible for the training of station person-nel in activities not requiring an operator's license. Training to meet NRC license requirements is performed under the direct supervision of the Training Center Manager.
4.
Administrative Services Manager:
Responsible for general admi-nistration activities of the Station.
5.
Compliance Manager:
Responsible f or scaitoring the compliance of Station functions with stated requirements.
These managers will be responsible for activities of both Units 1 and 2.
Functions, responsibilities and authorities for station positions
.under the direct cognizance of these managers are defined below.
b.
Operations The Operations Manager is responsible for the operation of the two units. He reports to the Assistant Station Manager, and maintains close communications with the other managers with regard to all acti-vities at the station.
He is responsible for the safety and operation of the units' equipment in accordance with written and approved sta-tion procedures. He has the authority to order the shutdown of either reactor, when in his judgement such action is required to protect the safety of the station or the health and safety of the public. The Operations Manager will hold a Senior Reactor Operator's License for both units.
The Assistant Operations Manager directs the activities of the Shif t Superintendents, Unit Shift Supervisor / Trainees, Day Shift Superintendents and the Waste Facility Supervisor. He reports to the Operations Manager and will assume the responsibilities of the Operations Manager in his absence.
He is responsible for the safety and operation of the Unit's equipment, in accordance with written and approved station procedures. He has the authority to order the shut-down of either reactor, when in his judgement such action is required to protect the safety of the station or the health and safety of the public. The Assistant Operations Mnnager will hold a Senior Reactor Operator's License for both units.
1.
Operating Shift Crew An operating shift crew will normally consist of a Shift Superintendent and one Unit Shif t Supervisor, two Control Room Operators and two Auxiliary Operators for each unit. The Shift Superintendent and Unit Shif t Supervisor will possess a Senior Reactor Operator's License and the Control Room operators will possess a Reactor Operator's License. The minimum shift crew composition for various modes of unit operation is shown in Technical Specification l
Table 6.2-1.
13.1-19 l
r SB 1 & 2 FSAR (a) Shift Superintendent Each Shift Superintendent reports to the Assistant Operations Manager. He is responsible for the safety and operation of both unit's equipment, in accordance with written and approved station procedures. Each Shif t Superintendent has the authority to order the shutdown of either reactor when in his judgement such action is required to protect the safety of the unit or health and safety of the public. The Shift Superintendent shall possess, a Senior Reactor Operator's License and the training and qualifica-tions of a Shif t Technical Advisor, or a qualified Shif t Technical Advisor will be assigned to his shif t.
The Shift Superintendent will function as the Shif t Technical Advisor for both units and provide requisite technical expertise to the Unit Shift Supervisor in the event of any abnormal operational occurrences.
(b) Unit Shift Supervisor The Unit Shift Supervisor is responsible for all unit operations being conducted in accordance with appropriate station orders, procedures and technical specifications. He is responsible for maintaining a record of all shift activities and establishing unit electrical load, as directed by the Shift Superintendent or as emergency conditions dictate. He has the authority to order the shutdown of the unit reactor, when in his judgement such action is required to protect the safety of the unit or the health and safety of the public. Each Unit Shif t Supervisor will hold a Senior Reactor Operator's License f or his unit.
(c) Control Room Operator The Control Room Operator monitors the unit's status and makes adjustments, as needed, to maintain control of the various plant Most of his duties are confined to the control room proceeses.
although he may perform specific activities in other areas of the station under the direction of the Unit Shift Supervisor. The Control Room Operator will hold a Reactor Operator's License for
~his unit.
(d) Auxiliary Operator The Auxiliary Operatr,c performs routine inspections and sur-veillance activities in other areas of the unit. He maintains various logs and records as required by station procedures. In the abseace of a Health Physics Technician, he makes radiation and contamination surveys within the controlled areas.
During periods when the unit is shut down, he makes routine tests and clears and returns equipment to service as directed by the Unit Shift Supervisor. The Auxiliary Operator is unlicensed.
13.1-20
Technical Services The Technical Services Manager reports directly to the Assistant Station Manager, and directs and coordinates the activities of the Assistant Technical Services Manager and the following Department Supervisors:
1.
Assistant Technical Services Manager The Assistant Technical Services Manager reports directly to the Technical Services Manager and assumes all Technical Services Manager duties, responsibilitfes and authorities in his absence.
The Assistant Technical Services Manager position is a line-authority position directly responsible for all maintenance, tech-nical, and engineering activities including management of all out-ages necessary for the safe and cost effective operation of Seabrook Station.
2.
Chemistry Department Supervisor The Chemistry Department Supervisor is charged with the direct responsibility for ensuring that the nuclear and steam portions of the station operate within the appropriate water quality specifi-cations. He is responsible for water treatment and conditioning for specific station needs. He is responsible for verifying that all liquid, resin and gaseous wastes are properly analyzed and processed for station reuse or disposal.
3.
Health Physics Department Supervisor The Health Physics Department Supervisor is the Station Radiation Protection Manager and as such has the responsibility and authority to report to the Station Manager on any aspect of the Radiation Protection Program or its implementation as he deems necessary. He is responsible for monitoring station activities for compliance with all Health Physics related regulations and p rograms. The entire station staff, from the Station Manger on down, recognizes and honors this responsibility, thereby ensuring that the Health Physics Department Supervisor, in concert with the members of his appropriately trained and experienced staff, will fully implement the station radiation protection program at all times. He is responsible for all monitoring devices used by per-sonnel at the station and the maintenance of all required radiation exposure records for all station and visiting personnel.
He ensures that appropriate monitoring devices and protective clothing are available.
He is responsible for verifying that all solid radioactive wastes meet packaging and shipping requirements of the station and federal regulations.
4.
Instrumentation and Control Department Supervisor 13.1-21
r SB 1 & 2 FSAR The Instrumentation and Control Department Supervisor is respon-sible for the maintenance of all instrument and control equipment associated with the reactors, their auxiliary systems and the con-ventional steam portions of the station. He maintains station process and control instrumentation in proper operating condition, as well as the maintenance of all station radiation monitoring equipment. He also maintains and directs the repair of all control circuitry associated with the reactor, turbine and auxi-liary systems. He will establish a program of preventative main-tenance, corrective maintenance, surveillance testing and record keeping, as r' quired by the station license, approved station pro-e cedures, and/or other station requirements.
5.
Maintenance Department Supervisor l
The Maintenance Department Supervisor is responsible for all sta-tion mechanical and electrical maintenance work required for safe, efficient and dependable service from Units 1 and 2.
He will establish a program of preventative maintenance, corrective main-tenance, surveillance testing and record keeping, as required by the station license, approved station procedures, and/or other station requirements.
6.
Reactor Engineering Department' Supervisor l
The Reactor Engineering Department Supervisor is responsible for the analysis of core performance to ensure operation of the sta-tion within the facility license limitations. He will calculate i
reactivity requirements, evaluate the'thermalhydraulic performance of the reactor cores, specify control rod patterns, prepare fuel I
movement sequences, and be responsible for fuel accountability.
He is responsible for preparing and maintaining reactor engi-neering related detailed plans, procedures and records required for safe and efficient operation of the reactors.
7 Engineering Services Department Supervisor l
The Engineering Services Department Supervisor is responsible for
~ the general engineering and quality engineering support services performed on-site. He supervises a multidisciplined staff of gra-duate engineers who c.rform a wide spectrum of activities including:
initiation and preparation of design change requests, l
preparation and review of safety-related procedures, test perfor-I mance and inspection, and carrying out assigned engineering programs.
8.
Computer Engineering Department Supervisor l
The Computer Engineering Department Supervisor is responsible for operation and maintenance of the station process computer, including implementation of the computer functions. He will also I
13.1-22
r SB 1 & 2 FSAR train operating and technical personnel in the use of the computer.
s The Technical Services Department staff has assumed several responsibilities in support of the Initial Test Program in order to increase staff awareness of the Preoperational Test
. Program details, provide staff contribution to the program imple-x mentation details and procedures, insure staff readiness to accept the completed systems and derive as much training bene-fit as possible from the Initial Test Program effort. These sup-
. port efforts > include the loan of staff personnel to the YNSD Start-Up Group, the assumption of Preoperational testing respon-sibilities, the verification of design and installation, che-mistry support, procedure review, evaluation of test data and operational as well as maintenance support of plant systems prior to final acceptance turnover of the systems.
d.
Other Station Managers,
The following are the managers reporting to the Station Manager or Assistant Station Manager, other than the managers of the operations or technieni service areas, who have responsibilities for various sta-tion functions.
1.
Training Manager The Training Manager reports to the Assistant Station Manager and is responsible for all training and retraining activities with the exception of operator license training.
2.
Administrative Services Mananger The Administrative Services Manager reports to the Station Manager and is responsible'for administrative support of the sta-tion. He is directly responsibl( for the station fire protection program, security services, stores, records, of fice support, sta-tion nurse, plant servicSs-and contract janitorial service.
s 3.
Compliance Manager The Compliance Manager repo'rts to the Station Manager and is responsible to assure that-applicable procedures, specifications, licenses and regulations are satisfied.
13.1.2.3 operating Shift crews The position titles, applicable operator licensing requirements, and the minimum numbers of personnel planned for each shif t are described in detail in Subsection 13.1.2.2b and Technical Specification Subsection 6.2.2.
A normal operating shif t will consist of two Auxiliary Operators, two Control Room 13.1-23
SB 1 & 2 FSAR Operators, a Unit Shif t Supervisor for each unit, and a Shift Superintendent for the Station.
During unit refueling operations, when the reactor core configuration is being altered, an individual having a Senior Reactor Operator's license will directly supervise the refueling activities in the reactor containment.
All non-licensed operating personnel will be qualified in the station radiation protection procedures and will be capable of performing routine or special radiation surveys using portable radiation detectors. Qualification of these operators will include the use of protective barriers and signs, protective clothing and breathing apparatus, performance of contamination surveys, and the l
limits of exposure rates and accumulated dose. The Shift Superintendent is responsible for implementing the radiation protection program in the absence of the Health Physics Department Supervisor or his designated alternate. An on-site technician qualified in certain chemistry and health physics functions will provide additional support to the Shift Superintendent when a unit is in Modes 1-4.
13.1.3 Qualification of Nuclear Plant Personnel 13.1.3.1 Qualifications Requirements The recommendations of Regulatory Guide 1.8, " Personnel Selection and Training",
Revision 1-R, have been used as the basis for establishing minimum qualifica-tions for all management, supervisory and professional-technical personnel in the Station organization, with the exception that ANSI /ANS 3.1 - 1978 will be used as the standard in lieu of ANS 3.1/ ANSI 18.1 - 1971.
The education, training and experience requirements for operators, technicians and mechanics will equal er exceed the qualifications for the positions stated in ANS 3.1-1978 and Regulatory Guide 1.8.
Established company training programs include documented academic and on-the-job training plus comprehensive qualifi-cation examinations applicable to the skill level of the position assignment.
Where desirable, of f-site f acilities may be used for specialized training.
Records of the scope, general content and level of accomplishment for each per-son attending off-site training are retained at the station.
The title of plant management and supervisory personnel who will meet the mini-mum requirements of ANS 3.1-1978 and Regulatory Guide 1.8 are listed below with their equivalent ANS 3.1-1978 title.
j Station Title ANS 3.1 Title 1
a.
Station Manager Plant Manager b.
Assistant Station Manager Plant Manager c.
Operations Manager Operations Manager i
13.1-24
SB1&2 FSAR d.
Assistant Operations Manager Operations Manager e.
Technical Services Manager Technical Manager f.
Assistant Technical Services Manager Technical Manager g.
Compliance Manager Supervisor without NRC License h.
Shift Superintendent Supervisor with NRC License 1.
Unit Shift Supervisor Supervisor with NRC License
- j. Chemistry Department Supervisor Prof essional-Te clinical k.
Maintenance Department Supervisor Maintenance Manager 1.
Engineering Services Department Professional-Technical Supervisor m.
Reactor Engineering Department Professional-Technical Supervisor n.
Instrumentation and Control Professional-Technical Department Supervisor o.
Health Physics Department Professional-Technical Supervisor p.
Radioactive Waste Facility Supervisor without NRC Supervisor License q.
Computer Engineering Department Supervisor without NRC Supervisor License
(
r.
Training Manager Supervisor without NRC License s.
Administrative Services Manager Supervisor without NRC License l
13.1.3.2 Qualifications of Station Personnel l
The key management, supervisory and technical positions in the station organiza-l tion have bee.: filled by individuals thoroughly trained in their specialty.
In addition, most of the individuals have had extensive experience at operating nuclear power plants in their specialty. The nuclear experience of senior per-sonnel at the time of Units 1 and 2 startup will generally be in the range of 8 to 20 years. These personnel include the Station Manager, Assistant Station Manager, Operations Manager, Technical Services Manager, Training Center Manager, Shif t Superintendents, Engineering Services Department Supervisor, 13.1-25
r SB 1 & 2 FSAR Instrumentation and Control Department Supervisor, Chemistry Depa. tment r
Supervisor and Health Physics Department Supervisor. Many of the key personnel will have had Senior Operator Licenses or Operator's Licenses at other operating Most of plants or have had extensive nuclear navy operational responsibilities.
the Unit Shif t Supervisors and Control Room Operators and at least one indivi-dual in each of the major technical disciplines (nuclear engineering, chemistry, health physics, instrumentation and controls) will have had at least five years of similar experience. Resumes for personnel holding key positions in the ini-tial plant organization are included in Appendix 13D.
4 13.1-26
r SB 1 & 2 FSAR Table 13.1-1 Index to Appendix I of the Second Memorandum of Agreement Between PSNH and YNSD A.
Environmental 1.
Radiation Environmental Surveillance 2.
Meteorological Program 3.
Radiological Release Ef fects Analysis 4.
Radiation Protection 5.
Emergency Planning 6.
Industrial Medical Planning 7.
Emergency Medical Planning 8.
Hydrology 9.
Non-Radiological, Aquatic Ecology 10.
Non-Radiological environmental Surveillance and Licensing 11.
Laboratory Analyses 12.
Emergency Response 13.
Miscellaneous Laboratory Activities 14.
Personnel Dosimetry and Exposure B.
Engineering 1.
Engineering and Design 2.
In-Service Inspection Services 3.
Irradiation Surveillance 4.
Core Barrel Vibration and Loose Parts Monitoring C.
Quality Assurance 1.
Seabrook Quality Assurance Program 2.
Seabrook Quality Assurance Program Implementation 3.
Audit. Se rvices D.
Nuclear Materials 1.
Nuclear Material Procurement, Conversion, and Enrichment 2.
Fuel Economic Analysis 3.
Nuclear Material Accountability 4.
Spent Fuel Shipping and Processing 5.
Fuel Reloads 6.
Core Components E.
Projects 1.
Project Coordination l
SB 1 & 2 FSAR Table 13.1-1 (Cont'd)
F.
Operational Services 1.
Fire Protection 2.
Security 3.
Training 4.
Station Staffing 5.
Station Operations 6.
Procedures 7.
Operational Monitoring 8.
General Operational Duties G.
Licensing 1.
Technical Licensing Services 2.
Generic Licensing Reviews and Information 3.
Licensing H.
Nuclear Engineering 1.
First Core Licensing and Benchmarking Activities 2.
Reload Licensing 3.
Station Operational Support 4.
Fuel Design / Management 5.
Operator Training Support 6.
Station Start-up Program 7.
Incore Analysis Support 8.
Studies and Evaluations I.
Information Services 1.
Management Information Systems Development 2.
Data Management Systems Support 3.
Computer Hardware Support 4.
Computational Resources 1
l
Table 13.1-2 Summary of YNSD Personnel Experience (9/1981)
---Years of Experience Cumulative **
Nuclear Utility Total Experience 2,672 1,759 1,523 39 Supervisors
- 812 598 576 203 Supporting Engineers 1,860 1,161 947 Average Experience 39 Supervisors
- 20.8 15.3 14.8 203 Supporting Engineers 9.2 5.7 4.7 Number of Academic Degrees Bachelor 179 Masters 69 Do ctorate 6
254
- Supervisors = Department Managers, Group Managers, Principal Engineers, Officers.
- Total Work Experience (Nuclear /Non-Nuclear, Utility /Non-Utility)
SB 1 & 2 FSAR Table 13.1-3 Yankee Atomic Electric Company Job Classification CLASSIFICATION - Associate Engineer (1)
Satisfaction of educational requirements of a Graduate Education, Training and Engineer (ie. completion of Bachelors Degree requirements Experience in an appropriate discipline and graduation from an accredited college or university) or educational and experience requirements of an Engineering Associate (ie.
completion of Bachelors Degree requirements in a math or science field and graduation from an accredited college or university, or sufficient experience to attain equivalent knowledge and skills);
(2)
Satisfactory completion of at least one year of employment at a professional level in the field for which employed or completion of an advanced degree; and (3) Attainment of Engineer-In-Training qualification is desirable as a first step in obtaining certification as a Registered Professional Engineer.
l CLASSIFICATION - Engineer (1)
Satisfaction of educational and experience requirements Education, Training and for an Associate Engineer; j
Experience (2)
Satisfactory completion of at least three years of employment at a professional level in field for which employed which demonstrates a progression of competence in field of expertise (Note:
advanced education may be
(
substituted for work experience); and (3) Attainment of Professional Engineer's License is desirable.
CLASSIFICATION - Titled Engineer (1)
Satisfaction of educational and experience requirements Education, Training and for an Engineer; and Experience (2)
Satisf actory completion of at least five years of employment at a professional level in field of expertise which demonstrates a progressive competence (Note:
advanced education may be substituted for work experience).
. = - -
SB 1 & 2 FSAR Table 13.1-3 (Cont'd)
CLASSIFICATION - Senior Engineer (1)
Satisf action of educational and experience requirements Education, Training and for Titled Engineer; Experience (2)
Satisfactory completion of at least seven years of employment at a profe'ssional level in field of expertise which demonstrates a progressive development of competence; and (3) Completion of an advanced degree in area of expertise is desirable when appropriate.
Table 13.1-4 YNSD Operational Support to Seabrook Station - Unit 1 Number of Expected Total Dedicated-Part Time Equivalent Discipline Personnel Man Years Man Years Environmental 5
8 13 Plant Engineering 10 13 23 Quality Assurance 3
15 18 Fuel Management 0
3 3
Projects / Licensing 3
1 4
Operational Services 1
2 3
Nuclear Engineering 8
8 16 Computer Services 6
11 17 Construction Support 1
1 2
37 62 99 Total
CHA!Rff.AN Ato CitEF EXECUTIVE OfflCER PF.ESIDENT Ato CHEF OPERATING OFFICER I
I I
I VICE PRESIDENT &
E XECUi4VE EXECUTIVE FINANCIAL VICE PHLSCENT VICE PRESIDENT CENERAL COUNSEL OPERATIONS & SERVICES ENCINEERING & PRODUCTION T
I I
I I
VICE FiMs1DEt4T VICE PFES! DENT VICE PRES 6 DENT VICE PRESIDENT Etn OPERAT10NS AfD EMPLOYEE REL ATIONS GOVEfEENTAL ENGINEERING PRODUCTION AFFhRS GEP.ERAL SERVICES
& PURCHASING I
I 1
I CE R DIVISION OPERATIONS EMPLOYEE RELATIONS PRODUCTION DIVISION ON g
GENERAL SERVICES PURCHASING MAINTETIAf4CE POVER SUPPLY ENGitJEERING RATES & LOAD RESEARCH NUCLEAR PROJECTS StPERNTENDENT MARKETir4G ENERGY MANAGEAENT P M NORMA M
& RESEARCH FLEL PROCUREMENT
& SUPPLY PUDUC SERVICE COMPANY OF PEEW HAMPSHIRE NTE MTION SEABROOK STATION-UNITS 1 & 2 FINALSAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT l
FICT4131-1
1 l
7 1; ! I,3 J' 4 A
q'! 3 l
. L _ _ _
R.
G K
1 O M G
OT N
RC I
l I
SE R
AJ E
EO G
E N
SR T
T P
I
}
N G
T RI N
N l
N N
E E
G E
E D
0
- rl I
L E
E E
1 C1 N
J M
N 5
IVE 5
R E
I E
E A
G G
R R
T E
=
N J
N A
N P
P
)
5 I
G_
E N
E N
G M
A
-- EC N
R R
O N
f5 O
-_. A l
N M
IT E
E A
G E
A A
T N
R L
'Y A
L I
Q N E
R N
E I
E V
C A
A C
N U
U P
l F
DL
'E l
'N M
l D
RC NAE I
l l [!Il l,
- u. B Y.
ylIII OA I
R t
IE&
/
. g HTH AH E
C N
FS
~
E Rf CR GA NE f
OP I
O AG T
NE 5
i t.
IAT I A TNS L
A AD N
P T
MA SMN OM C
A g I ) t_
l E
5I GR T
4_ a_.
NE I
T N
i I
N A E R C T
g 7
~
H T
P N
a R U S
O N.
SO D
OPR i4_ t.
I PO' P
. P T
E T
R N
N P
E s
UG V
E N
E E
S TCI C1 Il RE IE D
0 N
AT L RI e_
O UIS I
5 EN CVE VE L T E
R R
CE UP A A X
P P
NIC N U ON E
S P
I U
R U I4_ t T
G O CM NR NM E G UO C_
F E
R T
Y E
gg t I
F T
I WE AT F R Y E
EI F S
RD E
A T A]
T ElG LLA l t E/ VT l
LlA CA T -
4I E
I UU L
Y M
CAN S
C T M
UUA R
NO UE D O NQ NFANC M
S A
$ $H OQgo ooZ
- C mC(CO CmD$Om O@'>z4 OhmE I>g]7_3A O'D 3
- zHmmv Om i
D A
r cmOO*Q>dO2i z d
- p. m D
O z>r (> my >z>ry Omm O i n
D-rbCmA P?w 1
2 o@
E 3m b
gO MONTHS PRIOR TO FUEL LOAD 90 g%
3635 343332313029282726 25 2423222120191817 16151413121110 9 8 7 65432 1 BB fd'a Q
h 2A Jk Ak OPERA M SUPPORT M
OPERATIONS OPERATIONS MANAGER o
m g
q 71 ENGINEER ENGINEER mmz sa7k
-t r
4k Ak Ak M
STAFF STAFF MANAGER GROUP ENGINEER ENGINEER Ak STAFF e
ENGINEER sa
=g Eg
%e S9s m
3 8e H
a
TRAINING CENTER MANAGER TRAINING SIMLA.ATION SUPERVISOR SUPERVISOR SOFTWARE INSTRUCTOR STAFF TECHNICIAN PUBUC SERVICE COMPANY OF NEW HAMPSHIRE SEABROOK STATION SEABROOK STATION - UNITS 1 & 2 TRAINING CENTER ORGANIZATION FINAL SAFTEY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 131-4
~
E 6;
}
r 3
o, 3
_gl.
6
!?]
.I f
5 !!
?:
53
~l l-ill --n lf;!
!)
, j!,
iE3 "1
8 3 93 E.
s i
s*!
I 4
3 6
.!65 --("!5 -(sit t!
t
- l. i,,;
3 r
.a
-n
- 3 z.
,,i at-II r
=*
1:5
=
ti 6
w
_sg
=.
- i g
jj ;
s v
IN5 I
l 55 i.!! -i)5
-ifi5 l
s s:
aqa "e
ag}
z},
l.e..
-iy 11]:
91 57 g
FII t1 b
- t:
g3j:
a-g-
- i t
~
is f
3.1 h,s..
L...
s..
2 b3
.l?9'
'til 2j' 118 18 5
s!
01 si sd
_:.;i 5
i r
..t i..
e s
sa v*tt g38 sg
!I E,!3 i!!
is 8
- =
,, =
II
.5 I
I.
I Y:3._ 2 t.
g '3 s
Ea 3
as
<a
!E3 85 h,
a lij if 3
18 3 15 3
F 3 ll 2.:5 2. s f,8. !. ! i lt 3.1 s 5 1 g $I I 3.! s 0 l$ IE5 0 I v3a ~7 e 5 -Se $ Ee 38] 3
- 1 1
1 "g -1 Mls Q l s
- s
-is _$2 = v il - l5-15 - l.i a: -) 5 1 .a ia 12EF: O is t _2 _:3 !,3 5 5*a
- 5 3*
3 a = i l [ l
l MONTHS PRIOR TO CORE LOAD 1P 60 48 36 24 12 u POFITIOtt l,,,,,,,,, , l,,,,,,,,,,, l,,, ,,,,,,,l ,l STATIOrJ f.%t4AGER + HEY STAFF SELEC TIOh AEOT ST A18011 mat 4ACER ACr?tJ SERVICES MArJAGER p UCENSED STAFF OffRATION3 MAtJAGER 4 SELECTION FUNDAMENTAL DETAILED SYSTEM AND TEOl SEllVICES MAtJAGER e NUCLEAR AND SAMULATOR TR/.!N:NG. r o r. :!t:..- r,t53 OBSERVATIOtt, PREOPERATIONAL TESTING W 6 tx re..i.tr. a n u. ;i. visor TRAINING FINAL PROCEDiriE V/RITING FAtFT StlifRINTfflDEtIT (6) e d Utilf Sil1FT SUF ERV;SOR(6) 4 3 h6%-f (12) STAFF bCTION TRA:t;;;G t.iAtlAGER 4 E P." F '.a n 3.N f"<:CE S 4 u.. )a.. r.i pfr.ipsoR DEVELOP STATION PROCEDURES PREOPERATIONAL TESTNG
- tA
- tDENT
,$N ', 4 gg l A_.* l.T. 6 l e t.L.CS e [? . t r '.If
- a CFFWISOR p.ti s e04; s. C CE.W RTMLt4T e
5h $ Ti :'?Q a J. C. P t. : f r.ii>4T e en,.t.: u t TECH.J:Cil.t33 NOPH.lCENSED PJiCHAtJICS TRANNG AUX;LIARY OPERATORS 4
- COMMENOE POSITION RESPONSIBitJTIES NOTE: ACTMTIES ENCLOSED WIT)#N BOXES APPLY TO APPROPRIATE POSITIONS.
ACTMTIES NOT ENCLOSED V4THN BOXES APPLY TO ALL POSITIONS. I PUBLIC SERVK;E COWANY OF NEW MMeSHIRE SEA 8 ROOK STATION UNIT #1 SEABROOK STATION-UNITS 1 & 2 KEY OPERATIONAL DALECTONES FINAL SAFETY ANALYGIS REPORT l FIOL*RE 111-6 ;
TAB 13.2 TRAINING l l 5
SB 1 & 2 FSAR 13.2 TRAINING l l 13.2.1 Operator License Training Program a. General Discussion The program will provide personnel associated with the operation of Seabrook Station, Units 1 and 2, training in various disciplines necessary to insure that each individual can safely and effectively perform his various assignments. The degree to which an employee is trained will be consistent with the individual's experience, intended position and regulatory requirements. The overall objectives of the Operator License Training Program are: To train a staff to operate and maintain the units safely, dependably and econoalcally. To prepare shift superintendents, unit shift supervisors, control room operators and selected station managers for the NRC licensing examination for Reactor Operator (RO) and Senior Reactor Operator (SRO). The safe, efficient operation of a nuclear power plant depends on the qualifications and proficiency of its personnel. l Several basic categories of training are necessary to provide licensed personnel with a high degree of competence and pro-fessionalism. Specifically, these categories of training are as follows: 1. Operator License Training All personnel requiring NRC operating licenses, as specified in ANSI /ANS 3.1-draf t revision 1980, will have to undergo intensive l training which will meet or exceed the minimum requirements of 10CFR55. The Licensed Operator Training Program conducted one time prior to the initial criticality is termed " Cold License Training Program". The Replacement Operator Training Programs completed af ter initial criticality are termed " Hot License Training Programs". 2. Shift Technical Advisor Training Public Service Company of New Hampshire has upgraded the training program for the Shift Superintendents and Unit Shift Supervisors to meet the long term plan of eliminating the need for a Shift Technical Advisor on shift. Table 13.2-1 provides the comparison of Seabrook's license program to the recommended guidelines referenced by NUREG-0737. 3. Operator Requalification Program 13.2-1
SB 1 & 2 FSAR This category describes the training necessary to maintain the pro-ficiency of all Seabrook licensed personnel. This program will meet or exceed the minimum requirements of 10CFR55, Appendix A. In addition, the annual requalification recommendations for shift technical advisors, per Attachment C of NUREG-0737, shall be included in the requalification program for Unit Shift Supervisor and Shift Superintendent positions. 4. Replacement Training Operators joining the Seabrook organization af ter the start of power operation will be given appropriate training to satisfy their job classifications. The extett and duration of the training period depends upon their previous experience and job aptitude. If an NRC Operator's License is required for a specific job category, g suitable classroom and practical training is provided. l b. Responsibilities The following Seabrook personnel are responsible for various areas of Seabrook's Operator License Training Program. 1. Station Manager The Seabrook Station Manager has the overall responsibility for qualification and proficiency of its personnel. As such, the Station Manager will review and approve all plant training programs. 2. Assistant Station Manager The Assistant Station Manager is responsible to the Station Manager for administration of all station training programs. He will review all station training programs annually. 3. Training Center Manager The Training Center Manager is responsible for development, imple-mentation and administration of Licensed Operator Training. This will include initial as well as requalification training. I 13.2.1.1 Program Description - Initial Operator License Training This program will provide an individual with the knowledge and experience level necessary to obtain an NRC Senior Operator's License or Operator's License. The program has been developed and scheduled in a modular fashion to be implemented in segments. In most cases, each licensing candidate will participate in each segment. However, whether an individual participates in all segments will depend upon previous nuclear experience and previous license qualification. Program par-ticipation has been categorized on Table 13.2-2. 13.2-2
SB 1 & 2 FSAR The license training program schedule will insure that a sufficient number of licensed personnel will be available prior to fuel load, and will continue to meet applicable technical specification conditions with respect to the number of licensed operators on shif t crews. A program for effectiveness monitoring is established for all areas of Evaluation of program effectiveness shall be per-license training.
- 1) Training Center management periodic assessment of formed by:
classroom presentation and simulator instructions; 2) independent third party oral and demonstrative audits conducted on at least a yearly Revisions are made to the basis; 3) student generated evaluations. license training program to strengthen weak areas identified through the evaluation process. The following paragraphs provide a general description of the various training segments: I Introductory Training a. In addition to the initial orientation and general employee training described in Section 13.2.2, those individuals specifi-cally designed to become license holders will attend an introduc-The first portion of the program is tory program on PWR systems. a generic course covering the Nuclear Steam Supply System (NSSS). License candidates will also be given an introductory course covering the balance of Seabrook's systems. b. Nuclear Fundamentals Training Program g Fundamentals I l This is an eighteen to twenty week program presented by the Training Center Staff or an outside vendor. The program is designed to provide the reactor operator license candidates with a thorough understanding of the basic principles, charac-The major teristics and unique features of a nuclear system. areas to be covered are mathematics and classical physics, basic nuclear physics, reactor operations, core performance, radiation protection, plant chemistry, instrumentation and control, fluid flow, thermodynamics, heat transfer, and plant An integral part of the Fundamentals I training performance. This is a one week l program is' reactor start-up experience. program presented at a research or training facility by an I outside vendor. Experiments, discussions and demonstrations are I l conducted to compliment the principles and theory taught in the Specific training objectives are selected I fudamentals program. which place additional emphasis on concepts which are dif ficult to visualize in the classroom environment. Fundamentals II I 13.2-3 I --
i SB 1 & 2 j FSAR This is a forty to fifty week program presented by the Training Center staff or an outside vendor. The program is designed to provide the Shift Superintendent and Unit Shift Supervisor with an added depth of knowledge of engineering principles found in nuclear reactor fundamental applications. Selected courses are based upon an analysis of the Shif t Technical Advisor's qualifi-cations and responsibilities outlined in NUREG-0578. The cour-ses include the following: Differential Calculus Integral Calculus Advanced Reactor Physics Material Study Course Fracture Mechanics Corrosion Processes Computer Technology Electric Generator and Transmission Thermodynamics Heat Transfer Fluid Mechanics To supplement Fundamental II courses, workshops will be held to reinforce theoretical concepts learned in the courses with prac-tical Seabrook applications. The workshops will generally consist of a classroom phase and use of the simulator where appropriate. An additional ten to twelve weeks of specialized training is pro-vided to supervisory level license holders. These courses include motivation of personnel, problem and decision analysis, interper-sonal communication, technical writing, stress and human behavior. l c. Operating Plant Observation This segment consists of four to six weeks of plant observation at a PWR similar in size and design characteristics to Seabrook. The major objective is to familiarize each license candidate with the daily routine involved in the operation of a commercial nuclear facility. Other specific areas of observation will be made in security, radiation protection, maintenance, quality control / assurance, fuel handling, and waste disposal / management. i d. Formal On-Site School This segment of approximately 14 to 18 weeks duration will encom-I pass the on-site formal classroom lecture series. This phase of the license program is structured at two levels of presentation, one for the reactor operator candidate and another for the senior operator candidate. The subject areas of instruction are the same for both license can-didate groups. There is, however, a distinction be ween the 13.2-4
SB 1 & 2 FSAR levels at which the subject matter is presented. Th.e SRO program reflects a more indepth treatment of materials consistent with level of responsibility and understanding of advanced engineering principles. The instructors for this lecture series will be permanent and tem-porary members of the Seabrook Station Training Center staff, Seabrook Station Supervisory staff and Yankee Atomic staff. Other consultants and vendor representatives will be invited to discuss topics of special interest. The subjects to be taught and/or reviewed in the formal on-site school are listed below: Math and Physics Reactor Operations Plant Chemistry (Primary and Secondary) Health Physics Heat Transfer Fluid Flow Materials Science Thermodynamics Specific Systems & Components Instrumentation & Controls l Mitigating Core Damage (per Table 13.2-3) i Technical Specifications Administrative Controls Special Topics Included in the classroom training segment will be periodic simula-tor exercises and demonstrations. In addition, directed in-station tours will be conducted to review system and component layout and interface. e. Simulator Training l Seabrook has the distinct advantage of including a site specific simulator as part of the operator training program. The simulator was modeled and built to essentially duplicate the Seabrook main control board as well as real time system response. The simulator meets the requirements of Regulatory Guide 1.149, 1981 except as noted in FSAR, Section 1.8, Conformance to NRC Regulptory Guides. A fully qualified simulator staff, with previously SRO licensed or certified instructors, will implement and conduct this segment of the operator training program. All license candidates will spend time participating in the simulator training program as needed to l prepare for NRC licensing exams. This program will combine hands-on practical experiences with formal classroom instruction. Major ( program emphasis will be placed on obtaining complete f amiliarity with the plant's operating, emergency and surveillance procedures. l 13.2-5
SB 1 & 2 FSAR This familiarity will be obtained and reinforced through actual performance. Successful completion of this program, combined with operating plant observation, will satisfy requirements of 10 CFR 55.25(b) and will provide the basis to establish a candidate's eligibility for cold licensing. f. On-the-Job Training Participation in the pre-operational testing phase of the unit start-up will provide on-the-job training to license candidates. Operating personnel are given departmental work assignments in addition to participating in system turnover and acceptance testing. Throughout this period, assignments will include prepara-tion and/or review of the various operating, emergency, main-tenance, surveillance, and test procedures necessary for the start-up and operation of the unit. g. Program Review and Pre-License Evaluation At the culmination of the training program, each license candidate will participate in review session followed by pre-licensed evaluation. The review session will consist of formal classroom instruction, simulator exercises and individualized study. The review session will emphasize areas where earlier program information may have been shallow or unknown. A final pre-license evaluation of each license candidate will be administered by an independent party. This evaluation will be conducted in two parts: the first will be a written exam to deter-mine the candidate's comprehension and retention. The exam con-tents and degree of dif ficulty will parallel that of a current NRC Operator examination or Senior Operator examination, as applicable. The second portion of the evaluation will be an oral walk-through and simulator demonstration to further evaluate practical knowledge and experience. I This evaluation will insure each candidate is properly prepared for the NRC exam, and is capable of competent and safe operation of the plant controls. I l 13.2.1.2 Coordination With Pre-Operational Tests and Fuel Loading The Station Staff Training program has been developed and will be scheduled to minimize any' conflicts in manpower requirements during the unit's preoperational testing and fuel loading. The positive training effects l gained by actual participation in the start-up will be incorporated in the training program. I 13.2-6 l
SB 1 & 2 FSAR The scheduling interface between the Operator License Training program and 1 the start-up is illustrated in Figure 13.2-1. 13.2.1.3 Licensed Operators - Requalification Training l A comprehensive requalification training program will be conducted for all licensed operators and will be implemented within three (3) months after issuance of the unit's operating license. Licensed operators will, tut pro-vided requalification training for one week during their scheduled rota-tion. A portion of the available training time must address general employee refresher training; however a minimum of ten weeks per two year cycle will be dedicated to the license program. The requalification program is divided into the following areas: a. Annual Requalification Exam Each licensed individual will be administered a comprehensive examina-tion which will parallel, in content and degree of difficulty, an NRC Licensing Exam. The exam will be graded by category. Individuals scoring 80% or greater on a particular category will be exempt f rom attending retraining lectures covering that category. Any licensed operator with an average exam score of less than 80% or a grade of less than 70% in any cate' gory will be relieved from licensed respon-sibilities, and will be placed in a concentrated retraining program. He will be re-examined prior to reassignment to licensed respon-sibilities. Each license holder's graded exam will be retained as a part of the training records. The results of the exam will be used to evaluate past training, and to aid in determining future retraining. 4 9 b. On-The-Job Training During the term of an individual's license, he will perform, or direct, the execution of at least ten evolutions from those categories listed j The evolutions will be a combination of manipulations distri-below. buted among the various categories. Reactor Start-up (to the point of adding heat) Reactor Shutdown (from the point of adding heat) A Power Change of at Least 10% of Full Power A Boron Change of at least 10 ppm Reactor Trip Plant Heatup (of at least 500F) Plant Cooldown (of at least 500F) Plant Start-up (f rom hot standby to generator synchronization) 13.2-7
SB 1 & 2 FSAR Plant Shutdown (f rom generator synchronized to hot standby) Operation of Turbine Controls During Start-up Surveillance Testing of Safety Related Systems (f rom the Control Room) Manual Control of Steam Generator Level During Start-up or Shutdown Rod Drop Timing Tests Refueling Operations where Fuel is Moved in the Core It will be the responsibility of the Unit Shift Supervisors to rotate their shif t complement in an attempt to meet the minimum evolution t requirement. This requirement may be met by use of the on-site simula-tor during scheduled training periods. c. Change and/or Revision Review This portion of the program will insure that all changes or revisions to the license document, i.e., Technical Specifications, significant changes to procedures and completed facility design changes are reviewed. When determined by the Assistant Operations Manager, that a procedure revision or completed facility design change will affect the operation of the unit, it is then included in the review process. Also included in the process, may be othet pertinent documents such as Licensee Event Report (LER's). The requirements of this program will be met by placing a copy of the change or revision, along with a Document Acknowledgement sign-off sheet, in a review notebook. During a Training Shif t, each license holder will review the contents of the notebock and, upon completing the review, will acknowledge by signature and date, his understanding of the change. A file of completed Document Acknowledgement Sheets will be maintained as a record of program ~ compliance. Changes that require immediate operator notification, as in the case of significant interim procedure changes, will be covered as night orders to the Shif t Superintendent or during Operations Department Meetings, followed by a document acknowledgement. The requalification lecture series will include those items applicable to the operator work responsibilities. d. Emergency Operating Procedure Review l In order to insure a continuing awareness of the action and responses necessary during abnormal or emergency situations, a complete review of all emergency operating procedures will be conducted by each licensee, at least annually, and an acknowledgement sheet will be signed at the l training center. This review will be conducted as part of the simulator l training or retraining lecture series. l 13.2-8
SB 1 & 2 FSAR e. Simulator Training The Seabrook specific simulator will be utilized, whenever practical, to fortify the on going operator requalification program. Simulator exercises and evolutions will be preplanned and scheduled to fre-quently interface with the Formal Lecture series. The simulator Requalification Training Program will emphasize such areas as infre-quently accomplished procedures, required responses to abnormal and emergency procedures, and significant operating events. Exercises will include analyzing the effects of potential equipment / system malfunctions, possible causes and recommended operator responses. A program objective shall be involvement of unit shift supervisors and shift superintendents in the capacity of operations assessment and accident analysis during refresher exercise training. A portion of each weeks simulator time, not to exceed twenty percent, will be allo-cated for specific applications requested by the unit shift super-visors. The simulator will also be used as a means of evaluating and indicating areas requiring further retraining emphasis. f. Retraining Lectures for License Holders A formal classroom lecture series, including quizzes, will be conducted each year as part of the Requalification Program. The level of instruction for the retraining lectures will be consistent with the level of license held. To a large extent, the results of the previous l year's annual exam will determine areas to be emphasized in the following year's lectures. As appropriate, the lecture series may also cover other topics of per-tinent information such as refueling work, current industry occurrences and topics of special interest. Whenever appropriate, simulator exercise will be incorporated to enhance the lecture series content. All license holders are encouraged to attend each scheduled requalifi-cation lecture. A license holder.is exempt from attending the lecture if he scored greater than 80% on that corresponding material of the annual exam. Requalification lecture quizzes will be administered to all attendees. To further promote self-study and group discussions, some of these quizzes may be of the open book type. g. Performance Evaluation and Review Requalification training program effectiveness shall be monitored as described in Subsection 13.2.1.1. l At least once per year, each licensed operator will be observed and l evaluated while responding to either real or simulated abnormal or l 13.2-9 i
SB 1 & 2 FSAR emergency conditions. This evaluation will be performed by the individual's immediate arpervisor or a member of the Training Center Staff. A performance review will be conducted when any of the following situations occur: An annual exam score of less than 70%, or A poor performance evaluation, or Prior to resumirg license responsibilities after absence of more than four months. The purpose of the review will be to determine a course of action necessary to upgrade an individual's performance to an acceptable level. Supplemental training programs will be established to upgrade areas where deficiencies are shown. Absence from responsibilities applies to all operational shif t levels; RO, SRO, Unit Shif t Super-visors, Shift Superintendents. The review will be conducted as soon as practical af ter one of the above conditions occur. The action taken will be dependent on such-factors as examination performance, watch standing performance, observed operational performance and judged overall competence. l 13.2.1.4 Replacement Training Individual advancement to increasing levels of responsibilities as oppor-tunities develop within the organization will be encouraged. For an indi-vidual to advance to a more responsible position, he must be fully qualified technically and possess sufficient experience to meet the job require-ments. Replacement Training for Licensed Personnel a. Public Service Company of New Hampshire has recognized the need to have a replacement program which will continually insure the same high quality of licensed personnel as the initial license program. To this end, the l replacement program for licensed operators will include the same ele-ments as the initial Operator License Program detailed in Section 13.2.1.1. Credit will be taken for previous formal training and experience received in an individual's progression to the license level the person is seeking The training program will include as a minimum the following phases: 1. Classroom Instruction Each license candidate will attend a formal on-site school of suf-ficient duration, to complete prescheduled lectures in the following areas: 13.2-10
SB 1 & 2 FSAR 2 Nuclear Reactor Fundamentals - see Section 13.2.1.1.b. Formal On-Site School - see Section 13.2.1.1.d. The lecture program may be supplemented by video tape programs, as determined by the Training Center Staff. Periodic quizzes and exams will be administered to insure student comprehansion and retention. To further evaluate each student's acquired knowledge level, a final exam will be given at the conclusion of the classroom phase. The final exam contents and degree of difficulty will parallel that of an NRC operator license examination or senior operator license examination, as applicable. / 2. Control Room Experience Each license candidate will receive on-the-job experience by par-ticipation in discussions with on-shift operators and by the actual performance of routine control room functions. The discussions will be directed to topics such as systems interface, control capa-bilities and instrumentation available in the control room. Particular emphasis will be placed on system operating charac-teristice and possible malfunctions. License candidates will par-ticipate on shif t in the position of the license being sought, under the instruction of a licensed operator for a period of three months. 3. Simulator Training Included in the operator license training program will be training on the Seabrook specific simulator. The emphasis for this phase of the program will be on normal, transient and emergency operations. Each license candidate will be given the opportunity to witness and respond to numerous exercises involving system and component malfunctions. Demonstration sessions will include transient and accident analysis. Included in this portion of the program will be certification by the Training Center Staff that the license candidate has satisfac-torily demonstrated the following: f Ability to manipulate the controls and keep the reactor 'a. under control during start-up, ,b. Ability to predict instrument response and use the instru-mentation during a reactor start-up, Ability to follow the facility start-up and shutdown proce-c. dures, and d. Ability to explain alarms and annunciators that may occur during this operation. 13.2-11 /
SB 1 & 2 FSAR 4. Pre-License Audit In addition to the final exam administered at completion of classroom training, an oral station walk-through will be given to each candidate to further insure that the individual is properly prepared and is, in fact, capable of competent and safe operation of the station controls. This oral walk-through will be given by a senior licensed member of the unit staff prior to the individual being permitted to take the NRC licensing exam. The areas that are to be stressed while conducting thece walk-throughs are simulated malfunction and emergency situation response, local instrumentation and control, and general plant hardware. 13.2.1.5 Applicable NRC Documents The training programs will be developed and implemented in accordance with the applicable requirements of the NRC Code of Federal Regulations and meet the intent of the recommendations provided by the applicable Regulatory Guides and applicable NRC reports listed below: 10CFR Part 50, " Licensing of Production and Utilization Facilities" 10CFR Part 55, " Operator's Licenses" 10CFR Part 19, " Notices, Instructions and Reports to Workers; Inspections" Regulatory Guide 1.8, " Personnel Selection and Training", Revision 1-R, September 1975 (re-issued May,1977), with the exception that ANSI /ANS 3.1-1978 will be used as the standard in lieu of ANS 3.1/ ANSI 18.1-1971 Regulatory Guide.1.101, " Emergency Planning for Nuclear Power Plants", Revision 1, March 1977 Regulatory Guide 1.149, " Nuclear Power Plant Simulators for Use in Operator Training", April 1981 Regulatory Guide 8.2, " Guide for Administrative Practices in Radiation Monitoring", February 1973 Regulatory Guide 8.8, "Information Relevent to Insuring that Occupational Radiation exposures at Nuclear Power Stations will be as Low as Reasonably Achievable", Revision 3, June 1978 Regulatory Guide 8.10. " Operating Philo.ophy for Maintaining Occupational Radiation Exposures as Low as is Reasonably Achievable", Revision 1-R, September 1975 Regulatory Guide 8.13, " Instruction ;Concerning Prenatal Radiation Exposure", Revision 1, November 1975 " Utility Staffing and Training for Nuclear Power", WASH-1130, Revised June, 1973 13.2-12
- - =. i i i SB 1 & 2 FSAR i 1 "NRC Operator Licensing Guide", NUREG-0094, July 1976 "TM1-2 Lessons Learned Task Force Status Report and Short-Term Recommendations", NUREG-0578 July 1979 1 ANSI /ANS 3.1-draf t revision 1980, "American National Standard f or Selection i and Training of Nuclear Power Plant Personnelt" ANSI /ANS 3.5-1981, " Nuclear Power Plant Simulators for Use in Operator Training." " Nuclear Plant Fire Protection Functional Responsibilities, Administrative Controls and Quality Assurance", issued by USNRC letter in Augusst, 1977. l NUREG 0737, November 1980, " Clarification of TMI Action Plan Requirements". i 13.2.2 Training for Non-Licensed Staff s. General Discussion A comprehensive training program has been developed and scheduled for l l non-licensed personnel, complying with the provisions and intent of NRC Regulatory Guide 1.8, Revision 1-R. The program will provide personnel involved with the startup and operation of Seabrook Station, Units 1 and 2, training in various disciplines necessary to ensure that each can safely and effectively perform his assignments. The degree to which an employee is trained will be consistent with his experience, intended position, and regu-latory requirements. 1 { The overall objectives of the training program are To train a staff to operate and maintain the unfts safely, l dependably, and economically. To prepare technical service groups for their functions necessary for the support and safety of plant operation. b. Responsibilitie: The f ollowing Seabrook personnel are responsible for Seabrook's non-licensed training: 1. Station Manager The Seabrook Station Manager has the overall responsibility for the qualification of personnel. He will review and approve all plant training programs. 2. Assistant Station Manager 13.2-13
SB 1 & 2 FSAR The Assistant Station Manager is responsible to the Station Manager f or administration of all station training programs. He 4 will review all station training programs annually. 3. Training Manager The Training Manager reports directly to the Assistant Station Manager and is responsible f or development, implementation and administration of Non-Licensed Training including General Employee Training, Fire Brigade Training and Specialized Training. 13.2.2.1 Program Description Several basic categories of training are provided to nonlicensed personnel to attain a high level of coupetence and professionalism. Specifically, these categories include the following: a. Initial Orientation All persons joining the Seabrook organization, regardless of job assignment, will receive initial orientation training. This phase of training consists of a brief informational program explaining site organization, employee benefits, company policies and procedures. This phase will include a general site layout f amiliarization and an introduction to job-related procedures and/or instructions. In addition, radiological health and safety training will be provided for employees prior to exposure to radiation or radioactive material b. General Employee Training General Employee Training will consist of six programs covering site f amiliarization, security, radiation protection, industrial safety including fire saf ety, the radiological emergency plan, and quality The appropriate Station personnel will develop the assurance. program content and testing. Audio-visual programs to support the instruction are under contract to a vendor. The programs assume that the general employee has no f amiliarity with nuclear power plants. c. Supervisory Training Supervisory training includes working foreman, supervisors, engineers and managers. Supervisory indoctrination training includes fourteen modules spread over 20 days. The topics include, but are not limited to (1) com-pany, construction, and station organization, (2) purchasing proce-dures, (3) records f amiliarization, (4) audit response, (5) regulatory environment, (6) techniques of supervision, including hiring and personnel appraisal, (7) safety, and (8) technical writing. 13.2-14
SB 1 & 2 FSAR In addition, all supervisors receive a five-day program in problem snalysis, decision analysis, and potential problem analysis. All supervisors, except section leaders in administrative services, par-ticipate in six weeks (half days) of plant systems training. Most supervisors will complete an eight-day (full days) program in the psychology of motivation, organizational climate, and managerial sty-les. d. Desartmental Training The particulars of this training are presented in Section 13.2.2.4. e. Fire Protection Training The fire protection training program for Seabrook Station has been formulated following the guidance provided in the NRC document entitled " Nuclear Plant Fire Portection Functional Responsibilities, Administrative Controls, and Quality Assurance". A description of that training program follows here.
- 1. Fire Brigade (a) Instruction Fire Brigade members will receive instruction in all topics below, as well as in any others deemed necessary by the instructors.
(1) An identification of the fire hazards and associated types of fires that could occur in the station, and an iden-tification of the location of the hazards, including areas i where breathing apparatus is required, regardless of the size of the fire. (2) Identification of the location of installed and portable fire fighting equipment in each area, and familiarization with layout of the station including access and egress routes to each area. (3) The proper use of available equipment, and a recommended method of fighting different types of fires. The types of fires covered will include electrical fires, fires in cables and cable trays, hydrogen fires, flammable liquids, waste / debris fires, record file fires, hazardous process chemical fires and fires resulting from construction or modification hot work. 13.2-15
SB 1 & 2 FSAR (4) Indoctrination in the station fire fighting plan, with coverage of each individual's responsibilities, including changes thereto. (5) The proper use of breathing equipment, communication, lighting and portable ventilation equipment. (6) A detailed review of fire fighting strategies, with par-ticular emphasis on what equipment might be used in par-ticular areas. (7) A review of latest modifications, additions or changes to the facility, fire fighting equipment, fire fighting plan, or fire fighting strategies. (8) The proper method of fighting fires inside buildings, tunnels, and other confined s; aces. (9) The proper method of fighting fires when a radiological hazard exists. (10) The toxic and corrosive characteristics of expected pro-ducts of combustion. Fire Brigade leaders will receive the above listad instruc-tions and special instruction in directing and coordinating fire fighting activities. (b) Practice In addition to the classroom instruction above, all fire bri-gade members will attend regularly scheduled (at least annual) l practice sessions on the proper method of fighting various types of fires. These sessions will provide brigade members with hands-on experience in extinguishing actual fires using the equipment available to them in the station. Practice sessions will also be held which require fire brigade members I to don protective equipment, including emergency breathing apparatus. (c) Drills In order that fire brigade members can practice as a team, periodic drills will be held. These drills will include the following: (1) Simulated use of equipment for the various situations and types of fires which could reasonably occur in each safety-related area. I (2) Conformance, where possible, to the established station l fire fighting plans. 13.2-16
SB 1 & 2 FSAR ~ (3) Operating fire fighting equipment, where practical. This includes self-contained breathing apparatus; communication equipment and portable and/or installed ventilation equipment. The drills will be performed at regular intervals, but not' to exceed quarterly for each fire brigade. The minimum number of fire brigade drills conducted within a quarter will be equal to the number of operating shif ts at the station. Each indi-vidual member of the fire brigades will participate in at least two drills per year. At least one, drill per year for each fire brigade will be unannounced. At least one drill per year per brigade will be on a backshift. l Periodically (at least annually), a drill will involve offsite fire departments. The drills will be preplanned to establish the training objectives of the drills, and will be critiqued to determine how well the training objectives have been met. At a minimum, the critique will assess: (1) Fire alarm effectiveness, response time, selection, place-ment and use of equipment. (2) The leader's direction of the effort and each member's response.
- 2. Other Station Employees All full-time employees will receive instruction on fire protec-tion safety, evacuation routes, the procedures for reporting a fire, and any other subjects deemed necessary.
Security personnel will receive instruction on procedures for entry of off-site fire departments, crowd control procedures for reporting potential fire hazards observed when touring the f aci-lity. Temporary employees and construction personnel will receive the instruction in reporting fires, alarm response, and evacuation routes.
- 3. Fire Protection Staff Training for the fire protection staf f will include courses in the design and operation of fire detection, suppression and extinguishing systems, fire prevention techniques and procedures, training and manual fire fighting techniques, and procedures for plant personnel and the fire brigade.
- 4. Off-Site Fire Departments 13.2-17
SB 1 & 2 FSAR The training for off-site fire departments will include infor-mation on basic radiation principles and practices, and typical radiation hazards that may be encountered when fighting fires.
- 5. Refresher Training The fire protection refresher training program for fire brigade members and for off-site fire departments will be conducted on a two year cycle. Ref resher instruction will be provided to all fire brigade members on a quarterly schedule and will include a review of any changes in the fire protection program. OLfse sta-tion employees receive annual refre. hat training.
f. Training for Mitigating Core Damage Special training for mitigating core damage will be conducted for applicable non-licensed personnel prior to core load, per Table 13.2-3. Instruction for this program will reflect INPO guidelines f or subject material. 13.2.2.2 Coordination with Pre-Operational Tests and Fuel Loading The Station Staf f Training program has been developed and will be scheduled to minimize any conflicts in manpower requirements during the unit's preoperational testing and fuel loading. The positive training effects gained by actual par-ticipation in these phases of the startup will be incorporated in the training program. The scheduling interface between the Non-License Training program and the start-up is illustrated in Figure 13.2-2. l 13.2.2.3 Training Department Staff The training staff for non-licensed training consists of a training manager and five instructors. The training manager has extensive experience as a pro-fessional educator, with a background in curriculium development, teacher training, supervision, and management. Each training instructor has significant experience in one or more technical fields. The staffing levels of the Training Department are based on a periodic eva-luation of station training requirements. 13.2.2.4 Departmental Training Programs In addition to the training described in 13.2.2.1, the training programs as described below will be provided to the individuals who comprise the initial staffs of various station departments.
- a. General Technical Training Instrument and control, chemistry, and health physics technicians, 13.2-18
SB 1 & 2 FSAR and maintenance mechanics and electricians receive a two-week (half days) indoctrination program followed by eight weeks (half days) of nuclear power plant fundamentals, radiation worker training, and site tagging instruction. A pre-test score of 80% or better may exempt an employee from portions of this training. Further training is specific to the department as described below.
- 1. Health Physics Health Physics personnel receive a four-week program (half-days) on health physics fundamentals and an eight-week program on site-specific systems and health physics procedures.
- 2. Chemistry Chemistry technicians receive a six-week (half-days) course in PWR chemistry and detailed chemistry systems, followed by six weeks of secondary chemistry procedures and processes, and eight weeks of primary chemistry procedures and processes.
Certain chemistry techniciaes will receive training in the calibration and use of the multi-channel analyzer.
- 3. Instrument and Control Technician Instrument and control technicians receive a two-week course in electricity and a seven week course in process instrumentation.
Pre-tests and prior training determine the need for training in skills and theory. Certain technicians selected by their department supervisor, also receive training in solid state electronics, the solid state protection system, nuclear instrumentation system, the 7300 process control system, and l the rod control system. (13 weeks)
- 4. Mechanics Mechanics receive training in hand tools (1 week), basic mecha-nics (8 weeks), and mechanical maintenance of site equipment (7 weeks).
- 5. Electricians Electricians receive training in hand tools (1 week), basic electricity (2 weeks), electrical maintenance (8 weeks), and applied electrical maintenance of site equipment (6 weeks).
- b. Auxiliary Operators Auxiliary Operators initially receive up to 11 weeks of classroom training, which includes secondary systems, before going on shift. Following secondary plant qualification they 13.2-19
SB 1 & 2 FSAR receive eight weeks of primary system training followed by a qualification period on the primary plant. The primary and secondary on-shif t qualification training will be performed under the supervision of a qualified watchstander. 13.2.2.5 Position Task Analyses Initial training is being conducted according to descriptions of jobs and tasks as provided by each department. The generic task analysis, presently under development by the Institute of Nuclear Power Operations, will be evaluated for Seabrook specific application and the above training programs modified as determined appropriate. 13.2.2.6 Program Evaluation Testing programs accompany most orientation and all skills training. Tests include proficiency exams and written exams. Procedures provide feedback from department supervisors on the performance of employees and the need for retraining or additional training to upgrade skills. Annual personnel appraisal procedures provide the means for supervision to indicate developmental training needs for each employee during the ensuing appraisal period. 13.'2.2.7 Retraining Non-licensed personnel will receive retraining in the following subjects: Appropriate Administrative Procedures Radiation Protection Security Procedures Radiological Emergency Plan Fire Safety Safe Work Practices This refresher training will be scheduled upon receipt of the operating license and thereafter on a periodic basis, but not less than every two years. Also, periodic drills shall be held to reinforce procedures to be followed in the event of radiological or fire emergencies. 13.2.2.8 Replacement Training Training to fill vacancies in the supervisory, technical, and maintenance staffs will be conducted to assure a sufficient reserve of qualified individuals. This training will be essentially equivalent to the program described in 13.2.2.1. 13.2-20
SB 1 & 2 FSAR TABLE 13.2-1 COMPARISON OF NUREG 0737 APPENDIX C TO SEABROOK STATION OPERATOR LICENSE PROGRAM CUMULATIVE CONTACT HOURS APP C RO USS SUGGESTED SCR0 SS Prerequisite Beyond High School Mathematics 90 45 45 Chemistry 30 45 45 Physics 150 165 165 College Level Fundamentals Mathematics 90 120 Reactor Theory 100 90 135 Reactor Chemistry 30 45 Nuclear Materials 40 90 Thermal Sciences 120 90 Thermodynamics 45 Fluids Heat Transfer 45 Electrical Sciences 60 45 Nuclear Instrumentation & Control 40 45 45 Nuclear Radiation Protection & Health Physics 40 45 45 Applied Fundamentals 460 350 530 Plant Specifics 120 Plant Systems 200 Administrative Controls 80 Operating Procedures 30 Transient / Accident Analysis & Emergency Procedures 30 l Management / Supervisory 40 215 Simulator Training 100 280 380* l l r
SB 1 & 2 FSAR Table 13.2-1 (Cont'd) ~ - Minimum of 100 hours in the position of a supervisor directing activities. RO - Reactor Operator SCR0 - Supervisory Control Room Operator USS - Unit Shif t Supervisor SS - Shift Superintendent i ( i I l
1 E.mw E>W 4EE wP" " a dn44B* 5 a$55" mo# hdh5o n0y >g0 E S C G C N A E I G T M A L D N N T A I O D Y - A O H G GO T C S M C AS NC E I S I DE E MN I R L D T RS GN M AO DE O A R IS AN NO DI NR C C A RR ZO II G T I O I Z CE AP LT N YI BC G T A T HS OC I LD N I H GE E OE L LN MG I R NM NR CL O AO AN Z C N I A O E O I C EI I E E RR I R &S C T TT N R G OA TO SC G O TP AT N E ER / E O E R I I I R R TE SF C R D N DN E O OP AF E O Y O AO P C PO GA R C H M RM O M m
- 8 x D A:~
M M M M M M g M M m" 8 x*8Aa d n U:* m
- s.*""
f M M M M g M M i
- 2S "a*"*
x34* Qm a0 c4: "4I-x M M M g x M x. Na8 m o:"* m4I* M M M M g x M H e n oa. * =:. 4 - M M M M g M M 5". m4;- W$ na m M M M M g M M M m* 2 Oa%
- ".?
M M M M g M M
- $Y" s ; Oa%
- ".?
x M M M g x M Z nh :" ", Mc5. s x M M M g x M W$ n a m 4 ;; :M M M M M M g M M W
- $ $ = ; ) ;; :: N s M
M x M x: dn$
- 5h l
n h 3 os ;:Haa~ M M x M > h & ;; a o;:;no" x x M M M M g x M x M M M M M Jl M g x 3 3-oa On ll Il lll I ,11 Il i, 1 c 1
SB 1 & 2 FSAR TABLE 13.2-2 OPERATOR LICENSING PROGRAM PARTICIPATION ec e p 8, E ~ 4 4 e 4 4 4
- ff e/ }.?
e a e 4 r%~ e ~e e 4
- s s
w h b 4 4 } s 3 m e > ~l e e 9 !~o ~ e ~
- r e
e r ~ ~f e. 9 EJ / 4 y c 44 4 g i r* g i i .O I y 4 / 9 4 o o l OPERATIONS MANAGER X X X* X X X X ASSISTANT OPERATIONS MANAGER X X X* X X X X SHIFT SUPERINTENDENT / UNIT SHIFT X X X X X* X X X X SUPERVISOR SENIOR REACTOR OPERATOR X X X X* X X X X REACTOR OPERATOR X X X X* X X X X X Indicates required participation in that segment of the Training Program. X* Indicated full participation required only to meet cold license eligibility.
) ) I m C m Co 3m m z>m >m m r25 moo >om m^O -\\ -4 m O < -4 C >Am MONTH 5 PRIOR TO FUEL LOADING q z> pk 4e 47 46 45 44 43 42 di 40 39 38 37 36 35 34 33 32 3130 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 212019 In 17 to 15141312 Il 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 I <9o
- cm zz mm y
mg$ ,,g,y gs,y
- 7
o-I m o. > t -imI i estcetsarsoNAt if 5ffG ,F W s* OPERATOR LICENSE ,,,,,,c, TRAINING Oct airout O V PROGRAM O euNome urat 5 Swar teoexat movisoe ($ra "?M,i ON Sif t SCHOOL Swutafot Rivet w RED -i z O 2< m>m m -i z y m f uNDAMENfat $ ON Sif t SCHOOL $MULATOS 8t vie W ~ OIm m mldA cIz m pmid MOO m3 OIm >OQO - O E ob3 O C -4 5 D 5 i z> 9 r l '? (
c E m O ygg MONTHS PRIOR TO FUEL LOAD N, N 28m
- 8'
$X o 36 35 34 33 323130 29 28 27 26 25 2423 22 212019 18 17 16 15 1413 1211 10 9 8 7 6 S4 3 21 2>OO l o N AUXILIARY $ z <$ 5 GROUP 1 GROUP 2 OPERATORS -< i o 9c' u) z z g" 1Q GROUP 1 CHEMISTRY ooa> TECHICIANS A" Qg GROUP 2 5 m HEALTH PHYSICS GROUP 1 GROUP 2 TECHICIANS o GROUP 1 GROUP 2 CHANICAL oz MAINTENANCE m E r'- O$h ELECTRICAL goz GROUP 1 GROUP 2 MAlfffENANCE .oqm A$ c I - p,g GROUP 1 GROUP 2 GROUP 3 I&C TECHNICIANS r-2 E b@?o o j zm] GROUP GROUP GROUP GROUP GROUP SUPERVISORS o 1 2 3 4 5 3 U$O 3 l ll p O
TAB 13.4 REVIEW AND /,UDIT
SB 1&2 FSAR 13.4 Review And Audit Operating phase activities that affect nuclear safety are reviewed and audited through a comprehensive program. The review and audit program will assure proper review and evaluation of proposed changes, tests, experiments, and unplanned events. Regulatory Guide 1.33 and ANSI N18.7-1976/ANS 3.2 require-ments for reviews and audits will form the basis for the program. 13.4.1 On-Site Review l 13.4.1.1 SORC A Station Operation Review Committee (SORC) will perform the on-site operational review responsibilities. The function, composition, meeting frequency, respon-sibilities and authority of the SORC are contained in Technical Specification 6.5.1. The goal of the SORC is to advise the Station management on all matters related to nuclear safety. 13.4.1.2 SORC Charter A SORC Charter, approved by the Station Manager and Nuclear Production Superintendent, delineates the rules and procedures by which the SORC functions. The Charter contains the following information: Name Basis Purpose Authority Completion Meeting Frequency Quorum Committee Responsibilites Records Amendments Endorsement The SORC composition and qualifications are provided in Technical Specification l 6.5.1. l The qualification levels of Station staff personnel and their alternates assigned to SORC membership meet or exceed those required by Section 4 of ANSI /ANS 3.1-1978. In performing its duties the SORC will establish its own rules of practice that include: A. When less than full membership is present, the quorum will ensure that matters to be considered are limited to those that are within the tech-nical competence of the members present. B. Committee members will ensure an appropriate interdisciplinary l review of activities under discussion. 13.4-1 i
SB 1 & 2 FSAR When C. Sub-committees may be used at the discretion of the Chairman. used, due consideration shall be given to the interdisciplinary com-position of the subcommittee membership. The Chairman may authorize the ur? of expertise f rom sources outside D. the SORC or outside the station staff where the particular matters under consideration cannot otherwise be reasonably resolved. The minutes of each SORC meeting are of ficial plant records and shcIl E. be retained as provided in the station record retention procedures. In addition to distribution of SORC meeting minutes as provided in the F. Technical Specification 6.5.1, copies will be submitted to other appropriate management. 13.4.1.3 Operations Phase Reviews The scope of SORC review matters include those noted in Section 4.4 of ANSI 18.7-1976/ANS3.2 as endorsed by Reg. Guide 1.33, The general topics to be addressed include: Station procedures,and changes thereto that affect nuclear safety. A. Proposed changes to the Operating License or Appendix A Technical B. Specifications. C. Proposed modifications to nuclear safety-related structures, systems, and components. Proposed tests and experiments which affect nuclear safety and are not D. addressed in the FSAR or Technical Specifications. E. Evaluation of unplanned events that affect nucelar safety. l F. Review of events requiring 24 hour written notification to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 13.4.1.4 Start-up Phase Reviews The SORC will be activated a minimum of six months prior to fuel load in order to conduct the following activities: A. Review and accept the test procedures and test results of the integrated system pre-operational tests performed prior to fuel load of each unit. Review and approve the test procedures and test results of initial B. start-up tests. 13.4.2 Independent Review i 13.4-2
j SB 1 & 2 FSAR 13.4.2.1 NSAR Committee A Nuclear Safety Audit and Review Commmittee (NSARC) will be operational six months prior to Unit I fuel loading. The function, composition, qualification, meeting frequency, responsibilities and authority of the NSARC are contained in Technical Specification 6.5.2. The goal of the NSARC is to provide management with an independent evaluation of all aspects of station operation required to ensure safety. The NSARC performs its function through independent reviews and audits of all aspects of station safety. 13.4.2.2 NSARC Charter i A NSARC Charter, approved by the NSARC members and the Executive Vice President, delineates the mechanism for meeting Committee requirements. The Charter contains the following information: Name Authority Goal Function Responsibilities Powers Membership Qualifications Meeting Frequency Rules of Procedure Records Amendments Endorsement The NSARC composition and qualifications are provided in Technical Specifications 6.5.2.2 through 6.5.2.4 The NSARC shall collectively have exper-tise and competence in the designated disciplines. Provisions are included in the Charter to assure that appropriate expertise is in attendance at NSARC meetings to review the operational phase activities being discussed. The Charter also provides that no more than a minority of the quorum have line responsibility for the operation of the Station. The NSARC members are generally selected from senior YNSD and PSNH staff personnel; members may also be selected from outside consultants or organizations. The minimum qualifica-tions of all NSARC members meet or exceed those specified in ANS B31.1 and ANS 3.1-1978. Upon their selection, resumes of the NSAR Committee members will be provided to the NRC. The NSARC is advisory in nature, making recommendations to Company management as deemed necessary. The NSARC has access to the Station and Station information at any time in carrying out its responsibilities. The Charter establishes the powers of the Chairman and the use of subcommittees in performing its function. It also establishes the requirements for distribution of reports and/or meeting minutes and its authorization for initiating work. 13.4.2.3 Reviews 13.4-3
SB 1 & 2 FSAR Technical Specificatica 6.5.2.8 defines the Committee review requirements. These are conducted through a combination of document summary reviews, presen-tations at regularly scheduled meetings and special meetings held to review pro-posed changes to the Operating License or Technical Specifications. The NSAR Committee will be required to review and approve all Operating License / Technical Specification changes prior to their submittal to the NRC. Parti-cular document review assignments may be made by the NSARC to either individual NSARC members or to subcommittees with the appropriate expertise. Their reports or summary documents are reviewed by the full Committee at regularly scheduled meetings. Certain activities, such as In-Plant Audits, are performed under the cognizance of the NSARC. In such cases, written reports are issued to the Committee and the results discussed at regularly scheduled meetings. 13.4.2.4 Audit Program A program of quality assurance audits is described in the Seabrook operational Quality Assurance Program contained in Section 17.2. 13.4.3 Independent Safety Engineering Group An Independent Safety Engineering Group (ISEG) will perform reviews on plant operations, independent of those reviews performed by the Station Operation Review Committee (SORC) and the Nuclear Safety Audit and Review Comnittee (NSARC). The ISEG will be composed of a committee of five engineers who report their findings to the PSNH Executive Vice President. Qualifications of the ISEG mem-bers will meet or exceed the requirements in Section 4.4 of ANS 3.1, ie., a bachelor's degree in engineering and two to four years experience in their field, including one to two years nuclear experience. The ISEG members will receive as a minimum the Training for Supervisors identified in Section 13.2.2. l The ISEG will be activated approximately three months prior to fuel-loading, l 13.4.3.1 Duties and Responsibilities a. The General review functions of the ISEG include: 1. Examine plant operating characteristics, NRC issuances, Licensing Information Service advisories, and other appropriate sources of plant design and operating experience information that may indi-cate areas for improving plant safety. 2. Maintain surveillance of plant operations and maintenance activi-ties to provide independent verification that these activities are performed correctly and that human errors are reduced as far as practicable. 3. Perform independent reviews and audits of plant activities including maintenance, modifications, operational problems, and operational analysis, and aid in the establishment of programmatic requirements for plant activities. 13.4-4
SB 1 & 2 FSAR s 4. Where useful improvements can be achieved, this group will develop and present detailed recommendations to corporate management for such things as revised procedures or equipment modifications. b. The ISEG is not responsible for sign-off functions such that it becomes involved in the operating organization. 13.4.3.2 Reports The ISEG will prepare written summaries of reviews and evaluations performed as noted above. These summaries will include the results of, and recommendations resulting from such reviews and evaluations. Monthly reports containing a sum-mary of work completed and recommendations made will be forwarded to the Executive Vice President Engineering and Production, with information copies to the Nuclear Production Superintendent and Vice President - Procuction. w O 13.4-5
1 i TAB 13.5 PLANT PROCEDURES i l 1 I
J SB 1 & 2 FSAR 13.5 PLANT PROCEDURES This section describes administrative and operating procedures which will be used by the Seabrook Staff to insure that start-up, routine, non-routine, and emergency activities are conducted in a safe manner. 13.5.1 Administrative Procedures 13.5.1.1 Administrative Procedures - General 13.5.1.1.1 Conformance with Regulatory Guide 1.33 The administrative procedures for Seabrook Units 1 and 2 implement the recommen-dations of Regulatory Guide 1.33 " Quality Assurance Program Requirements (Operation)", Rev. 2, dated February, 1978. Specific alternatives, clarifica-tions and er.ptions to these requirements, and to ANSI N18.7 - 1976/ANS 3.2 are listed in FSAR Sections 1.8 and 17.2. 13.5.1.1.2 Preparation of Procedures Procedure development started in 1978 and will be completed before initial core loading, with the possible exception of the relatively few procedures involving activities that will not occur until the first refueling outage. In general each procedure is scheduled to be completed and approved about six months prior to its anticipated need to accomplish nuclear safety related activities. All station procedures, and any changes thereto, are reviewed and approved by appropriate station supervisory and management personnel and in accordance with Section 6.8 of the Technical Specifications and FSAR Section 13.4.1. Table 13.5-1 identifies the individuals (by position) responsible for the deve-lopment, implementation and control of the administrative procedures. 13.5.1.1.3 Procedure Description Seabrook Station administrative procedures are prepared as part of a series of l programs. These programs implement the nuclear safety related administrative activities of the station. Each program encompasses a broad function that f re-quently involves the activities of more than a single station department. Each program has a Program Coordinator who is assigned by station management. These coordinators are directly responsible for the technical and administrative con-tent of their assigned procedure development programs, the coordination of interfaces between programs, and the timely completion of the procedures that constitute the programs. The following categories of administrative procedures incorporate the specific requirements of Regulatory Guide 1.33, ANSI N18.7-1976/ANS 3.2, and NUREG 0737 TMI Action Items. 1. Rules of Practice 13.5-1
SB 1 & 2 FSAR Several policies and procedures address the following: (A) The requirements of ANS-3.2, Section 5.2, ie: (1) Operating philosophy and management policies. (2) Rules and instructions pertaining to personnel conduct. (3) Control of personnel, including consideration of job-related factors which influence the effectiveness of operating and maintenance personnel. This includes such factors as number of hours at duty station and availabi-lity on call of professional and supervisory personnel. (4) Methods of conducting operations. (5) Preparing and retaining plant documents. (B) The requirements of Appendix A to Reg. Guide 1.33, ie: (1) Item 1.k, " Maintenance of Minimum Shif t Complement and Call-in of Personnel". (C) The requirements of TMI Action Items numbered: (1) I.A.1.3 of NUREG 0737, " Shift Manning". 2. Responsibility and Authority of Operating Personnel Several procedures address the following: (A) The requirements of ANS-3.2, Section 5.2.1, ie: (1) The reactor operator's authority and responsibility for shutting the reactor down when he determines that the safety of the reactor is in jeopardy or when operating l parameters exceed any of the reactor protection system l set-points and automatic shutdown does not occur. (2) The responsibility to determine the circumstances, ana-lyze the cause, and determine that operations can pro-ceeed safely before the reactor is returned to power after a trip or an unscheduled or unexplained power reduction. (3) The senior reactor operator's responsibility to be pre-sent at the plant and to provide direction for returning the reactor to power following a trip or an unscheduled or unexplained power reduction. (4) The responsibility to believe and respond conservatively 13.5-2
SB 1 & 2 FSAR to instrument indications unless they are proved to be incorrect. (5) The responsibility to adhere to the plant's Technical Specifications. (6) The responsibility to' review routine operating data to assure safe operation. (B) The requirements of Appendix A to Reg. Guide 1.33, ie: (1) Item 1.b, " Authorities and Responsibilities for Safe Operation and Shutdown". (2) Item 1.h, " Log Entries, Record Retention, and Review Procedures". (C) The requirements of TMI Action Items numbered: (1) I.A.1.1. of NUREG 0737. Shift Technical Advisor. (2) I.A.1.2. of NUREG 0660. Shif t Supervisor Admin. Duties. (3) I.C.3 of NUREG 0660. Shift Supervisor Responsibilities. (4) I.C.5 of NUREG 0737. Feedback of Operating Experience. 3. Procedure Adherence Several procedures address the following: (A) The requirements of ANS 3.2, Section 5.2.2, ie: (1) Procedures shall be followed. (2) Temporary changes to approved procedures can be made when they clearly do not change the intent and are approved by two knowledgeable staf f members, one of whom I holds a senior license. 1 (3) Emergencies not covered by approved procedures shall be handled to protect hecith and safety and to minimize per-sonnel injury and damage to the facility. (4) Guidance on implementation including need for step by step l check-off, steps committed to memory, or verification by initials or signatures as required. 1 (B) The requirements of Appendix A to Reg. Guide 1.33, ie: (1) Item 1.d, " Procedure Adherence and Temporary Change Method". 13.5-3
SB 1 & 2 FSAR 4. Operating Orders Several procedures address the following: (A) The requirements of ANS 3.2, Section 5.2.3, ie: (1) Procedures for dissemination to the Station Staff the instructions of general and continuing applicability, including such matters as: job turnover, watch relief, designation of confines of Control Room, duties of opera-tors and others, transmittal of operating data to management, filing of charts, limitations on access to certain areas and equipment, shipping and receiving instructions and other such matters. (2) Provisions for periodic review and updating of these standing orders. (B) The requirements of Appendix A to Reg. Guide 1.33, ie: (1) Item 1.g, "Shif t Relief and Turnover". (C) The requirements of TMI Action Items numbered: (1) I.C.2 of NUREGS 0660 and 0694. Shift Relief and Turnover. (2) I.C.4 of NUREGS 0660 and 0694. Control Room Access. (D Crane Operations per ANSI B30.2 - 1976. 5. Special Orders Several procedures address the following: l (A) The requirements of ANS 3.2, Section 5.2.4, ie: l (1) Procedures for issuing management instructions which have short-term applicability and which require dissemination. Such instructions, (special orders) encompass special l operations, housekeeping, data taking, publications and i their distribution, plotting process parameters, personnel actions, and other similar matters. l (2) Provisions for periodic review, updating and cancellation j of special orders. (B) The requirements of TMI Action Items numbered: (1) I.C.8 of NUREG 0660. Pilot Monitoring of Selected l emergency Procedures. 13.5-4
1 SB 1 & 2 FSAR l (2) II.K.3.3 of NUREG 0660. Reporting SV and PORY Challenges s and Failures. (C) Other requirements, such as: i( (1) Procedures to handle Special Orders of a transient or self-cancelling character. 6. Temporary Procedures The procedure that establishes and controls Temporary Procedures includes: (A) The requirements of ANS 3.2, Section 5.2.5, ie: (1) Temporary procedures may be issued during the operational phase: to direct operations during testing, refueling, maintenance and modifications; to provide guidance in unu-sual situations not within the scope of the normal procedures; and to insure orderly and uniform operations for short periods when the plant, a system, or a component of a system is performing in a manner not covered by existing detailed procedures or has been modified or extended in such a manner that portions of existing proce-dures do not apply. (2) Temporary procedures shall incl.de designation of the' period of time during which they may be used. (3) Temporary procedures shall be subject to the review pro-cess prescribed in ANS 3.2, Sections 4.3 and 5.2.15 as applicable (4) Temporary procedures shall be approved by the management representative assigned approval authority. 7. Equipment Control Several procedures address the following: (A) The requirements of ANS 3.2, Section 5.2.6, ie: (1) Permission to release equipment or systems for maintenance shall be granted by designated operating personnel. Prior to granting permission, such operating personnel shall verify that the equipment or system can be released, and determine how long it may be out of service. Granting of such permission shall be documented. Attention shall be given to the potentially degraded degree of protection when one subsystem of a redundant safety system has been removed for maintenance. j 13.5-5
', - (( 1 SB 1 & 2 FSAR (2) Af ter permission has been granted to remove the equipment from service, it shall be made safe to work on. Measures shall provide for protection of equipment and workers. Equipment and systems in a controlled status shall be clearly identified. Strict control measures for such / equipment shall be enforced. l (3) Conditions to be considered in preparing equipment for maintenance: include, for example: shutdown margin; method of emergency core cooling; establishment of a path for decay heat removal; temperature and pressure of the system; valves between work and hazardous material; venting. draining and flushing; entry into closed vessels; hazardous atmospheres; handling hazardous materials; and electrical hazards. (4) When entry into a closed system is required, control measures shall be established to prevent entry of extra-neous material and to assure that foreign material is removed'before the system is reclosed. (5) Procedures shall be provided for control of equipment, as necessary, to maintain personnel and reactor safety and to avoid unauthorized. operation of equipment. These proce-dures shall require control measures such as locking or tagging to secure and identify equipment in a controlled i status. t (6) The procedures shall require independent verifications, where appropriate, to ensure that necessary measures, such as tagging equipment, have been implemented. l 't (7)' Temporary modifications, such as temporary bypass lines, electrical jumpers,-lif ted electrical leads, and temporary trip point settings, shall be controlled by approved pro-cedures which shall include a requirement for independent verification. A log shall be maintained of the current status of such. temporary modifications. (8) The procedures shall also require that the status of inspections and tests performed upon individual items on tSe nuclear power plant be indicated by the use of merkings such as. stamps, tags, labels, routing cards, or f other suitable means. Suitable means include iden-tification numbers which are traceable to records of the status of inspections and tests. (9) Procedures shall also' provide for the identification of f items which have satisfactorily passed required inspec-tions and tests, where necessary to preclude inadvertent .i /, bypassing of such ' inspections and tests. / 13.5-6 L J
s SB.1 & 2 FSAR (10) In cases'where required documentary evidence is not available, the associated equipment or materials must be considered nonconforming in accordance with ANS-3.2, Section 5.2.14. Latil suitable documentary evidence is available to show the equipment or material is in conformance, affected systems shall be considered to be inoperable and reliance shall not be placed on such systems to fulfil 1~their intended safety functions. (11) When equipment is ready to be returned to service, operating personnel shall place the equipment in operation and verify and document its functional acceptability. i Attention shall be given to restoration of normal conditions, such as removal of jumpers or signals used in maintenance or testing or such as returning valves, breakers or switches to proper start-up or operating posi-tions from " test" or " manual" positions. When placed into service, the equipment should receive additional sur-veillance during the run-in period. (B) The requirements of Appendix A to Reg. Guide 1.33, ie: (1) Item 1.c, " Equipment Control (e.g., locking and tagging)". (2) Item 1.1, " Access to Containment". (3) Item 1.j, " Bypass of Safety Functions and Jumper Control". (C) The requirements of TMI Action Items numbered: (1) I.C.6 of NUREG 0737. " Verifying Correct Performance of Operating Activities". l (2) II.K.1.10 of NUREG C660. " Operability Status". l (3) II.K.3.17 of NUREG 0737. " Report on Outages of ECCS". 8. Maintenance Program Several procedures address the following: (A) The requirements of ANS 3.2, Section 5.2.7 and 5.2.7.1, ie: (1) Maintenance which may affect functioning of safety-related ~ structures, systems, or components shall be performed in a manner to ensure quality at least equivalent to that spe-cified in original design bases and requirements, materials specifications and inspection requirements. (2) Suitable confidence'in structures, systems, or components 13.5-7
SB 1 & 2 FSAR 4 on which maintenance has been performed shall b'e attained by appropriate inspection and performance testing. (3) Maintenance of equipment shall be preplanned and performed in accordance with written procedures, documented instruc-tions or drawings appropriate to the circumstances which conform to applicable codes, standards, specifications, and criteria. I (4) Definitions will be given to identify situations where skills normally possessed by qualified maintenance person-nel may not require detailed step-by-step delineations in a written procedure. (5) Means shall be given to assure quality of maintenance activities (for example, inspections, measurements, tests, welding, heat treatment, cleanin :. nondestructive examina-tion and worker qualifications in accordance with appli-cable codes and standards) and to document the performance thereof. (6) This documention shall be retained as specified in ANS 3.2, Section 5.2.12. Measures shall be established and docu-mented to identify the inspection and test status of items to be used in maintenance activities. Normally, the point of control for such items should be their storage area. (7) The maintenance program shall maintain safety-related structures, systems and components at the quality required j for them to perform their intenuad functions. (8) Maintenance shall be scheduled and planned so as not to compromise the safety of the plant. Planning shall con-sider the possible safety consequences of concurrent or sequential maintenance, testing or operating activities. Equipment required to be operable for the prevailing mode shall be available, and maintenance shall be performed in a manner such that license limits are not violated. Planning for maintenance shall include evaluation of the use of special processes, equipment and materials in per-formance of the task, including assessment of potential hazards to personnel and equipment. (9) General rules for the development of procedures under a maintenance program shall be consistent with the provi-1 sions noted above and shall be written before start-up. j These general rules shall form the basis for developing I the repair or replacement procedures at the time of failure. Procedures required for maintenance of equipment expected to require recurring maintenance should be writ-ten prior to plant operation. As experience is gained in 13.5-8
SB 1 & 2 FSAR operation of the plant, routine maintenance should be altered to improve equipment performance, a'nd procedures for repair of equipment shall be improved as appropriate. Approved procedures shall be available for repair of safety-related equipment prior to the performance of such repairs. (10) A preventive maintenance program including procedures as appropriate for safety-related structures, systems and components shall be established and maintained which prescribes the frequency and type of maintenance to be performed. i preliminary program based on service con-dicions and experience with comparable equipment should be developed prior to fuel loading. The program should be revised and updated as experience is gained with the equipment. (11) The causes of malfunctions shall be promptly determined, evaluated and recorded. (12) Experience with malfunctioning equipment and similar com-ponents shall be reviewed and evaluated to determine whether a replacement component of the same type can be expected to perform its function reliably. If evidence indicates that common components in safety-related systems have performed unsatisfactorily, corrective measures shall be planned prior to replacement or repair of all such components. Replacement components shall have received adequate testing or shall be of a design for which experience indicates a high probability of satisfactory performance. Consideration shall be given to phased replacement to permit inservice performance of new com-ponent to be evaluated and thereby minimize the possibi-lity of a hidden deficiency producing a systematic failure. An augumented testing and inspection program shall be implemented following a large scale component replacement (or repair) until such times as a suitable level of performance has been demonstrated. (B) The requirements of Appendix A of Reg. Guide 1.33, ie: (1) Item 9.a., maintenance that can affect the performance of safety-related equipment should be pre-planned and per-formed in accordance with written procedures, documented instructions, or drawings appropriate to the circumstan-ces. Skills normally possessed by qualified maintenance personnel may not require detailed step-by-step deli-neation in a procedure. (2) Item 9.b., preventive maintenance schedules should be developed to specify lubrication schedules, inspections of 13.5-9
SB 1 & 2 FSAR equipment, replacement of such items as filters and strainers, and inspection or replacement of parts that have a specific lifetime such as wear rings. (3) Item 9.c., procedures for the repair or replacement of equipment should be prepared prior to beginning work. Such procedures for major equipment that is expected to be repaired or replaced during the life af the plant should preferably be written early in plant life. (4) Item 9.e., general procedures for the control of maintenance, repair, replacement, and modification work should be prepared before reactor operation is begun. These procedures should include information on areas such as the following: (a) Method for obtaining permission and clearance for operation personnel to work and for logging such work where such activities are not covered by the Equip-ment Control procedures. (b) Factors to be taken into account, including the necessity for minimizing radiation exposure to workmen, in preparing the detailed work procedures. 9. Modifications Several procedures include the following: (A) The requirements of ANS 3.2, Section 5.2.7. and 5.2.7.2, ie: (1) Activities cited above for the Maintenance Program and the Equipment Control Program where these apply to modifica-tion activities. (2) The use of the numerous industrial standards which contain useful guidance concerning design and construction related activities associated with modifications. This guidance shall be applied to those activities occurring during the operational phase that are comparable in nature and extent to related activities occurring during initial plant design and construction. These procedures also address the considerable care that is required in assessing which operational phase activities are comparable in nature and extent to activities normally associated with design and construction. (3) Design activities associated with modifications of safety-related structures, systems, and components shall be 13.5-10
i .I SB 1 & 2 FSAR accomplished in accordance with ANSI N45.2.11-1974 and Reg. Guide 1.64. 10. Surveillance Testing and Inspection Several procedures include the following: (A) The requirements of ANS 3.2, section 5.2.8, ie: (1) The surveillance testing and inspection program shall insure that safety-related structures, systems and com-ponents will continue to operate, keeping parameters within normal bounds, or will act to put the plant in a safe condition if they exceed normal bounds. (2) Provisions shall be made for performing required sur-veillance testing and inspections, including inservice inspections. Such provisions shall include the establishiment of a master surveillance schedule reflecting the status of all planned inplant surveillance tests and inspections. (3) Frequency of surveillance tests and inspections may be related to the results of reliability analyses, the fre-l quency and type of service, or age of the item or system, aa appropriate. Surveillance testing which may increase the probability of plant trips or major transients with accompanying safety concerns is deferred to periods when j such plant trips or transients have a minimum impact on safety and reliability. i (4) Additional control procedures shall be instituted, as necessary, to assure timely conduct of surveillance tests and inspections and appropriate documentation, reporting, and evaluation of the results. (B) The requirements of Appendix A to Reg. Guide 1.33, ie: (1) Item 1.f. " Schedule of Surveillance Tests and Calibration". l (2) Item 8. " Procedures for control of Measuring and Test l Equipment and for Surveillance Tests, Procedures, and Calibrations". (b) Specific procedures for surveillance tests, inspec-tions, and calibrations should be written (implementating procedures are required for each sur-l veillance test, inspection, or calibration listed in ( the technical specifications). 13.5-11
SB 1 & 2 FSAk 1 11. Plant Security and Visitors Control Several procedures include the following: (A) The requ'irements of ANS 3.2, Section 5.2.9, ie: (1) Procedures supplement features and physical barriers designated to control access to the plant and, as appropriate, to vital areas within the plant. (2) Information concerning specific design features and admi-nistrative provisions of the plant security program are contained in the Physical Security Plan, the Safeguards Contingency Plan and the Security Training and Qualification Plan, all of which are Safeguards. Information and therefore have limited distribution. (3) The security and visitor control procedures include physi-cal provisions, such as : fences and lighting; lock controls for doors, gates and compartments containing sen-sitive equipment; and provisions for traffic and access control. (4) Also included are administrative provisions, such as: visitor sign-in and sign-out procedures; escorts and badges for visitors; emphasis on inspection, observation and challenging of strangers by operating crews; and a program of pre-employement screening for potential employees. (B) The requirements of Appendix A to Reg. Guide 1.33, ie: (1) Item 1.a. " Security and Visitor Control". (C) The requirements of ANSI N18.17-1973 and Reg. Guide 1.17, Rev. 1, 6/73. 12. Housekeeping and Cleanliness Control Several procedures include the following: (A) The requirements of ANS 3.2, Section 5.2.10, ie: (1) Housekeeping practices shall recognize requirements for the control of radiation zones and the control of work activities, conditions and environments that can affect the quality of important parts of the nuclear plant. (2) Housekeeping encompasses all activities related to the control of cleanness of f acilities, materials, equipment 13.5-12
SB 1 & 1. FSAR fire prevention and protection including disposal of com-bustible material and debris and control of access to areas, protection of equipment, radioactive contamination control and storage of solid radioactive waste. (3) Housekeeping practices shall assure that only proper materials, equipment, processes and procedures are uti-lized and that the quality of items is not degraded as a result of housekeeping practices or techniques. (4) Where necessary, procedures and work instructions needed to assure compliance with specific requirements shall be available; e.g., inspection and cleaning of electrical bus and control centers, cleaning of control consoles, radioactive decontaminations. (5) Particular attention should be given to housekeeping in work and storage areas where important items are handled and stored to preclude damage or contamination. (6) Activities occurring during the operational phase that are comparable in nature and extend to related activities occurring during construction shall be subject to the pro-visions of ANSI N45.2.3 and ANSI N45.2.1. (7) During maintenance or modification activities, certain portions of safety-related systems may be subject to potential contamination with foreign materials. To pre-vent such contamination, control measures, including measures for access control, shall be established. Immediately prior to closure, an inspection shall be con-i l ducted to assure cleanness. The result of such inspec-tion shall be documented. (8) Special consideration shall be given to measures for mini-mizing the introduction of foreign materials during main-tenance or modification, or cleaning following maintenance l or modification of radioactively contaminated systems or of equipment of high radiation fields. (B) The requirements of Reg. Guides 1.37 and 1.39. 13. Corrective Actions Several procedures include the following: (A) The requirements of ANS 3.2, Section 5.2.11, ie: (1) Provide measures to ensure that conditions adverse to i 13.5-13
SB 1 & 2 FSAR plant safety, such as failure, malfunctions, deficiencies, deviations, defective materials and equipment, abnormal occurrences, and non-conformances are promptly identified and corrected. (2) In the case of significant conditions adverse to safety, the measures shall assure that the cause of the condition is determined and corrective action taken shall be docu-mented and reported to appropriate levels of management and for independent review in accordance with ANS 3.2, Section 4.3. 14. Plant Records Management Several procedures comprise the Nuclear Records Management Program and include: (A) The requirements of ANS 3.2, section 5.2.12, ie: (1) Provisions shall be made for preparation and retention of plant records as appropriate. (2) The responsibility for maintaining records and storing them at a specified location or locations shall be assigned. (3) Retention periods of sufficient duration to assure the ability to reconstruct significant events and satisfy any statutory requirements which apply shall be specified. (4) The provisions of ANSI N45.2.9-1979 with alternatives pre-l sented in FSAR Section 17.2 (B) The requirements of Appendix A to Reg. Guide 1.33, i.e.,: (1) Item 1.h., " Log Entries, Record Retention and Review Procedures". l 15. Procurement and Material Control l Several procedures include the following: (A) The requirements of ANS 3.2, section 5.2.13, i.e.,: i (1) Provide measures for procurement, documentation and control of those materials and components including spare and replacement parts necessary for plant operation, refueling, maintenance and modification. 13.5-14
SB 1 & 2 FSAR (2) ANSI N45.2.13 and Reg. Guide 1.123 with alternatives and clarifications presented in FSAR Section 17~.2. (3) Procedures ensure that purchased materials and components associated with safety-related structures or systems are: (a) Purchased to specifications and codes equivalent to those specified for the original equipment, or those specified by a properly reviewed and approved revi-sion. (In those cases where original item or part is found to be commercially "off the shelf", or without specifically identified quality assurance require-ments, spare and replacement parts may be similarly procured but care shall be exercised to assure at least equivalent performance. In those cases where the QA requirements of the original item cannot be determined, an engineering evaluation shall be con-ducted by qualified individuals to establish the requirements and controls. This evaluation shall assure that interfaces, interchangeability, safety, fit and function are not adversely affected or contrary to applicable regulatory or code require-The results of this evaluation shall be ments. documented.) (b) Produced or fabricated under requirements at least equivalent to that of the original equipment, or those specified by a properly reviewed and approved revision. (c) Packaged and transported in a manner that will ensure that the quality is not degraded during transit. i (d) Properly documented to show compliance with appli-cable specifications, codes and standards. (e) Properly ins 9ected, identified and stored to protect against damtgs, deterioration or misuse. (f) Properly controlled to ensure the identification, segregation and di, position of non-conforming material. (4) Special nuclear material and sources shall be shipped and stored as specified in the NRC fuel license and other applicable regulatory documents. 16. Procurement Document Control Several procedures include the following: 13.5-15
SB 1 & 2 FSAR (A). The requirements of ANS 3.2, section 5.2.13.1, i.e.,: (1) Provides measures which assure that applicable regulatory requirements, design bases and other requirements which are necessary to assure adequate quality are included or referenced in the procedures for procurement of items and services. (2) To the extent necessary, procurement documents shall require suppliers to provide a quality assurance program consistent with the pertinent requirements of the Operational QA Program. (3) Changes cade to procurement documents shall be subject to the same degree of control as was used in the preparation of the original documents. (4) Procurement documents shall include provisions for the following as applicable: (a) Supplier Quality Assurance Program. Identification of quality assurance requirements applicable to the items or services procured. (b) Basic Technical Requirements. Where specific tech-nical requirements apply, such as drawings, specifi-cations, and industrial codes and standards, they shall be identified by titles and dates of issue in such a way as to clearly set forth the applicable documents. Where procedural requirements apply, in such areas as test and inspection needs, fabrication, cleaning, erecting, packaging, handling, shipping and storage, they too, shall be identified clearly and in such a way as to avoid uncertainty as to source and need. (c) Source Inspection and Audit. Provisions for access to the supplier's facilities and records for source inspection and audit when the need for such inspec-tion or audit has been determined. (d) Documentation Requirements. Records to be prepared, l maintained, submitted or made available for review, l such as drawings, specifications, procedures, pro-l curement documents, inspection and test records, per-l sonnel and procedure qualifications, and material, l chemical and physical test results. Instruction on i record retention and disposition shall be provided. (e) Lower Tier Procurement. Provisions for extending l applicable requirements to lower tier subcontractors i 13.5-16
SB 1 & 2 FSAR and suppliers, including purchaser's access to faci-lities and records. ~ 17. Control of Purchased Material, Equipment and Services Several procedures include the following: (A) The requirements of ANS 3.2, section 5.2.13.2, i.e.,: (1) Provide measures which assure that purchased items and services, whether purchased directly or through contrac-tors, conform to the procurement documents. These measures shall include provisions, as appropriate, for source evaluation and selection, objtetive evidence of quality furnished by the contractor, inspection and audit at the source and examination of items upon delivery. (2) Measures for evaluation and selection of procurement sour-ces. include the use of historical quality performance data, source surveys or audits, or source qualification programs. (3) Source inspection or audit shall be performed as necessary to assure the required quality of an item. Source inspec-tion or audit may not be necessary when the quality of the i item can be verified by review of test reports, inspection upon receipt, or other means. (4) Where required by code, regulation, or contract require-ments, documentary evidence that items conform to procure-ment requirements shall be available at the nuclear power plant site prior to installation or use of such items. This documentary evidence shall be retrievable and shall be sufficient to identify the specific requirements such as codes, standards and specifications met by the purchased item. Where not precluded by other require-ments, such documentary evidence may take the form of written certifications of conformance which identify the requirements met by the items, provided means are available to verify the validity of such certifications. (5) The effectiveness of the control of quality shall be assessed by PSNH at intervals consistent with the impor-tance, complexity and quality of the item or service. 18. Identification and Control of Materials, Parts and Components Several procedures include the following: 13.5-17
SB 1 & 2 FSAR (A) The r'equirements of ANS 3.2, section 5.2.13.3, i.e.,: (1) Providemeasureswhichidentifyandcontr6kmaterials, parts, and components including partially fabricated subassemblies. (2) Ensure that only correct and accepted items are used and installed, and that an item of production (batch, log, component, part) at any stage, from initial receipt through fabrication, installation, repair or modification is related to an applicable drawing, specification, or other pertinent technical document. (3) Physical identification shall be used to the maximum extent possible. Where physical identification is either impractical or insufficient, physical separation, proce-dural control or other appropriate means shall be employed. Identification may be either on the item or on records traceable to the item, as appropriate. Where identification marking is employed, the marking shall be clear, unambiguous and indelible, and shall be applied in such a manner as not to affect the function of the item. Markings shall be transferred to each part of an item when subdivided and shall not be obliterated or hidden by surface treatment or coatings unless other means of identification are substituted. (4) When codes, standards or specifications require traceabi-lity of materials, parts or components to specific inspec-tion or test records, the procedures shall provide requirements for and methods to ensure such traceability. 19. . Handling, Storage and Shipping Several procedures include the following: (A) The requirements of ANS 3.2, section 5.2.13.4, i.e.,: (1) Provide measures to control handling, storage and shipping, including cleaning, packaging and preservation of material and equipment in accordance with established instructions, procedures or drawings, to prevent damage, deterioration and loss. (2) When necessary f or particular items, special coverings, special equipment and special protective environments, such as inert gas atmosphere, specific moisture.ontent levels and temperature levels shall be specified, pro-vided, and their existence verified. 13.5-18
SB 1 & 2 FSAR (3) For critical, sensitive, perishable or high-value articles, specific written procedures for handling, storage, packaging, shipping and preservation should be used. Special handling tools and equipment shall be pro-vided and controlled as necessary to ensure safe and ade-quate handling. (4) Special handling tools and equipment shall be inspected and tested in accordance with written procedures and at specified times, to verify that the tools and equipment are adequately maintained. (5) Attention shall be given to providing adequate instruc-tions for marking and labeling of items for packaging, shipment and storage. Marking shall be adequate to iden-tify, maintain and preserve the shipment, including indi-cation of the presence of special environments or the need for special control. (6) The provisions of ANSI N45.2.2-1972 and Reg. Guide 1.38 with the alternatives and clarifications presented in FSAR Section 17.2 shall be applied to those activities occurring during the operational phase that are comparable in nature and extent to related activities occurring during construction. 20. Nonconforming Items Several procedures include the following: (A) The requirements of ANS 3.2, section 5.2.14, i.e.: (1) Measures shall be provided to control items, services or activities which do not conform to requirements. These procedures shall include as appropriate, instructions for indentification, documentation, segregation, disposition and notification to affected organizations. (2) Nonconforming items shall be reviewed and accepted, rejected, repaired or reworked in accordance with docu-mented procedures. (3) The responsibility and authority for the disposition of nonconforming items shall be defined. (4) Repaired and reworked items shall be reinspected in accor-dance with applicable procedures. (5) Measures which control further processing, delivery or installation of a nonconforming or defective item pending 13.5-19
SB'l & 2 FSAR a decision en its disposition shall be established and maintained. (6) Nonconforming items may be disposed of by acceptance "as is", by scrapping or repairing the defective item, or by rework to complete or correct to a drawing or specification. Such measures shall provide assurance that the item is identified as nonconforming and controlled. The measures shall require documentation verifying the acceptability of nonconforming items which have the dispo-sition of " repair" or "use as is". (7) A description of the change, waiver or deviation that has been accepted shall be documented to record the change and denote the as-built condition. (8) As a guideline, control of nonconforming items by tagging, marking or other means of identification is acceptable where physical segregation is not practical, although phy-sical segregation and marking are preferred. 21. Review, Approval and Control of Procedures Several procedures include the following: (A) The requirements of ANS 3.2, Section 5.2.15, ie: (1) The administrative controls and quality assurance program shall provide measures to control and coordinate the approval and issuance of documents, including changes thereto, which prescribe all activities affecting quality. i Such documents include those which describe organizational l interfaces, or which prescribe activities affecting safety-related structures, systems, or components. These documents also include operating and special orders, operating procedures, test procedures, equipment control procedures, maintenance or modification procedures; refueling, and material control procedures. (2) These measures shall assure that documents, including revisions or changes, are reviewed for adequacy by appropriately qualified personnel and approved for release by authorized personnel; and are distributed in accordance with current distribution lists and used by the personnel performing the prescribed activity, and that procedures are provided to avoid the misuse of outdated or inappropriate documents. l (3) Procedures for operational phase activities of a nuclear power plant reflect the conditions that exist at the time 13.5-20
SB 1 & 2 FSAR ~ the procedures are written. These conditions include the technical information available, industry experience, and in the case of the initial procedures for a new plant, assumptions made regsrding the detailed behavior of the plant that may not be fully known prior to operation. In order to ensure that the procedures in current use provide the best possible instructions for performance of the work involved, systematic review and feedback of information based on use is required. (4) Each procedure shall be reviewed and approved prior to initial use. The frequency of subsequent reviews shall be specified and may vary depending on the type and complexity of the activity involved, and may vary with time as a given plant reaches operational maturity. (5) Applicable procedures shall be reviewed following an unu-sual incident, such as an accident, an unexpected transient, significant operator error, or equipment malfunction. (6) Applicable procedures shall be reviewed following any modification to a system. (7) Plant procedures shall be reviewed by an individual knowledgeable in the area affected by the procedure no less frequently than every two years to determine if changes are necessary or desirable. A revision of a pro-cedure constitutes a procedure review. (8) Procedures shall be approved before initial use. (9) Rules shall be established which clearly delineate the review of procedures by knowledgeable personnel other than the originator and the approval of procedures and proce-dure changes by authorized individuals. (10) Changes to documents shall be reviewed and approved by the same organizations that perform the original review and approval unless another qualified organization is designated. i (11) The reviewing organizations shall have access to pertinent i background information upon whi-h to base its approval and ( shall have adequate understanding of requirements and intent of the original document. (12) Those participating in any activity shall be made aware of, and use, proper and current instructions, procedures, drawings, and engineering requirements for performing the l activity. I i 13.5-21 l l
SB 1 & 2 FSAR (13) Participating organizations shall have procedures for control of the documents and changes thereto to preclude the possibility or use of outdated or inappropriate documents. (14) Document control measures shall provide for: (a) Identification of individuals or organizations responsible for preparing, reviewing, approving, and issuing documents and revisions thereto. (b) Identifying the proper documents to be used in per-forming the activity. (c) Coordination and control of interface documents. (d) Ascertaining that proper documents are being used. (e) Establishing current and updated distribution lists. (B) The requirements of Appendix A to Reg. Guide 1.33, ie: (1) Item 1.e. " Procedure Review and Approval". 22. Measuring and Test Equipment Several procedures include the following: (A) The requirements of ANS 3.2, Section 5.2.16, ie: (1) The method and interval of calibration for each installed instrument and control device shall be defined and shall be based on the type of equipment, stability and reliabi-lity characteristics, required accuracies and other con-ditions affecting calibration. l (2) Tools, instruments, testing equipment and measuring devi-ces used for measurements, tests and calibration shall be of the proper range and type and shall be controlled, calibrated and adjusted and maintained at specific inter-vals or prior to use to assure the necessary accuracy of calibrated devices, (3) When calibration, testing, or other measuring devices are i l found to be out of calibration, an evaluation shall be I made and documented concerning the validity of previous tests and the acceptability of devices previously tested from the time of the previous calibration. (4) If any calibration, testing or measuring device is con-I l 13.5-22 L
SB 1 & 2 FSAR sistently found to be out of calibration, it shall be repaired or replaced. (5) It is not the intent to imply a need for special calibra-tion and control measures on rulers, tape measures, levels and other such devices if normal commercial practices pro-vide adequate accuracy. (6) Special calibration shall be performed when the accuracy of either installed or calibrating equipment is questionable. (7) Records shall be made and equipment suitably marked to indicate calibration status. (8) ANSI N45.2.4-1972 shall be applied to those activities occurring during the operational phase that are comparable in nature and extent to related activities occurring duirng construction. (B) The requirements of Appendix A to Reg. Guide 1.33, ie: (1) Item 1.f. " Schedule for Surveillance Tests and Calibration". (2) Item 8. " Procedures for Control of Measuring and Test Equipment and for Surveillance Tests, Procedures, and Calibrations". These include: (a) Procedures of a type appropriate to the circumstances to ensure that tools, gauges, instruments, controls, and other measuring and testing devices are properly controlled, calibrated, and adjusted at specified periods to maintain accuracy. 23. Inspections Several procedures include the following: (A) The requirements of ANS 3.2, Section 5.2.17, ie: (1) A program for inspection of activities affecting safety shall be established and executed to verify conformance with applicable documented instructions, procedures, and drawings. (2) Inspections, examinations, measurements, or tests of material, products, or activities shall be performed for each work operation where necessary to assure quality. 13.5-23
SB 1 & 2 FSAR (3) Such inspections shall be performed by qualified indivi-duals other than those who performed or directly super-vised the activity being inspected. (4) Inspection of operating activities (work functions asso-ciated with normal operation of the plant, routine maintenance, and certain technical services routinely assigned to the onsite operating organization) may be con-ducted by second-line supervisory personnel or by qualified personnel not assigned first-line supervisory responsibility for conduct of the work. These independent inspections, i.e., those performed by individuals not assigned first-line supervisory responsibility for the conduct of the work, are not intented to dilute or replace the clear responsibility of first-line supervisors for the quality of work performed under their supervision. ( 5) For modifications and nonroutine maintenance, inspections shall be conducted in a manner similar (frequency, type, and personnel performing such inspections) to that asso-ciated with construction phase activities. (6) Inspections of safety-related activities shall be per-formed in accordance with approved written procedures, which set forth the requirements and acceptance limits and specify the inspection responsibilities. If mandatory inspection hold points are required, the specific hold points shall be indicated in appropriate documents. (7) Information concerning inspection shall be obtained f rom the related design drawings, specifications and/or other controlled documents. (8) When inspection techniques require specialized qualifica-tions or skills, personnel performing the inspection shall meet applicable licensing requirements, codes, and stan-dards appropriate to the discipline involved. (9) If inspection is impossible or disadvantageous, indirect control by monitoring processing methods, equipment and personnel shall be provided. (10) Both inspection and process monitoring shall be provided when control is inadequate without both. (11) In cases where documented verification of quality implied by the above requirements is not possible or feasible, the extent of inspection or performance testing to verify adequacy of structures, systems, or components for service should be, in general, greater than otherwise required. 13.5-24
SB 1 & 2 FSAR (12) Inspection results shall be evaluated along with test results to determine whether the individual inspection and test programs demonstrate that the plant can be operated safely and as designed. (13) Records shall be kept in sufficient detail to permit ade-quate confirm
- tion of the inspection program. The person recording the data as well as the person approving the inspection results shall be identified.
Deviations, their cause, and any corrective action completed or planned as a result of the deviations shall be documented.. Inspection records shall be identified as such and shall be retrievable. 24. Control of Special Processes Several procedures include the following: (A) The requirements of ANS 3.2, Section 5.2.18, ie: (1) Measures shall be established and documented to assure that special processes, are accomplished under controlled conditions in accordance with applicable codes, standards, specifications, criteria, and other special requirements, and use qualified personnel and procedures. (2) Qualification of personnel, procedures, and equipment shall comply with the requirements of applicable codes and standards. (3) Special processes are those that require interim inprocess controls in addition to final inspection to assure quality, including such process as welding, heat treating, chemical cleaning, and nondestructive examination. For special processes not covered by existing codes or standards, or where item quality requirements exceed the requirements fo established codes or standards, the necessary qualifications of personnel, procedures, or equipment shall be defined. 25. Test Control 1 Several procedures include the following: (A) The requirements of ANS 3.2, Section 5.2.19, ie: (1) A test program shall be established to assure that testing required to demonstrate that the item will perform satis-factorily in service identified and documented, and that 13.5-25
SB 1 & 2 FSAR the testing is performed in accordance with written test procedures which incorporate or reference, the requirements and acceptance limits contained in applicable design documents. The test program shall cover all required tests including: (a) Tests during the preoperational period to demonstrate that performance of plant systems is in accordance with design intent and that the coordinated operation of the plant as a whole is satisfactory, to the extent feasible. (b) Tests during the initial operational phase to demonstrate the performance of systems that could not be tested prior to operation and to confirm those physical parameters, hydraulic or mechanical charac-teristicsd that need to be known, but which could not be predicted with the required accuracy, and to con-firm that plant behavior conforms to design criteria. The initial start-up test program shall be planned to permit safe fuel loading and start-up; to increase power in safe increments; and to perform major testing at specified power plateaus. If tests require the variation of operating parameters outside of their normal range, the limits within which such variation is permitted shall be prescribed. Prerequisites and record keeping shal.1 be given attention and the scope of the testing shall demonstrate insofar as practicable that the plant is capable of withstanding the design transients and accidents. The suitability of plant operating proce-dures shall be checked to the maximum extent possible during the preoperational and initial start-up test programs. r (c) Surveillance tests during the operational phase to ~ provide assurance that failures or substandard per-formance do not remain undetected and that the i requiced reliability of safety related systems is l maintained. (d) Tests during design, fabrication and construction activities associated with plant maintenance and modifications during the operational phase and the l demonstration of satisfactory performance following l plant maintenance and modifications or procedural changes. (B) The requirements of Appendix A to Reg. Guide 1.33, ie: 13.5-26
i SB 1 & 2 FSAR (1) Item 1.f. " Schedule for Surveillance Tests and Calibration". 26. Plant Fire Protection Program Fire Protection Procedures provide guidance for plant personnel, and spe-cifically to members of the fire brigade, ir the various aspects of the Station Fire Protection Program. Procedures that support this program include those needed to satisfy: (A) The requirements of Appendix A to Reg. Guide 1.33, ie: (1) Item 1.1. " Plant 71re Protection Program". (B) The intent of guidance presented in Reg. Guide 1.120 and Branch Technical Position APCSB 9.5-1 and its Appendix A. (C) The Technical Specification requirements for operation and s r-veillance of fire detection instrumentation, fire suppession systens and fire barrier penetrations. (D) The intent of the guidance in the 1977 NRC document entitled " Nuclear Plant Fire Protection Functional Responsibilities, Administrative Controls, and Quality Assurance". 27. Communication Several procedures include the following: (A) The requirements of Appendix A to Reg. Guide 1.33, ie: (1) Item 1.m. " Communication Systems Procedure". (B) The requirements for normal and emergency communciations both internal to the Station and to external organizations such as PSNH I Headquarters, YNSD, NRC and other Federal, State and local organiza-tions or commercial activities. 28. Control of Radioactivity Several procedures include the following: (A) The requirements of Appendix A to Reg. Guide 1.33, ie: (1) Item 7.e. " Radiation Protection Procedures" that limit materials released to the environment and limit personnel l exposure. These procedures provide controls such as: l (a) Access control to radiation areas including a radiation work permit system. I 13.5-27
SB 1 & 2 FSAR (b) Radiation surveys (c) Airborne radioactivity monitoring (d) Contamination control (e) Respiratory protection (f) Training in radiation protection (g) Personnel monitoring (h) Bioassy program (i) Implementation of ALARA program (B) The requirements of Technical Specifications, ie: (1) Item 6.8.1.b, " Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program". (2) Item 6.8.1.h, " Process Control Program". 13.5.1.2 Administrative Procedures - Initial Test Program The preoperational test program will be administered in accordance with the Preoperational Test Program Description which is prepared by the Startup Test Group and approved by the Joint Test Group participating organizations. Where necessary, due to certain unique activities associated with testing, administra-tive procedures will be prepared by the Startup Test Group and reviewed by the i Joint Test Group; otherwise station administrative procedures will be used as applicable during the initial test program. The initial startup program will be administered in accordance with a startup procedure which is prepared by the Startup Test Group and approved by the Station Operations Review Committee. Normal Station administrative procedures will be used during the initial startup program. Chapter 14 provides additional detail regarding the administration of the ini-tial test program. l l l l 13.5-28 I
SB 1 & 2 FSAR Table 13.5-1 Assignment of Responsibility for Station Procedures The Station Manager has the overall responsibility for development, imple-mentation and control of the Seabrook Station administrative programs and pro-cedures. He exercises this supervisory task by assigning direct responsibility for these programs and their associated procedures to various station managers. The following list indicates which manager has been asrigned this responsibility for the particular administrative program or procedure: Program / Procedure Responsible Manager (1) OPS / ADMIN 1. Rules of Practice 2. Responsibility and Authorities of Operation OPS Personnel OPS 3. Procedure Adherence OPS 4. Operating Orders OPS 5. Special Orders a OPS / ADMIN 6. Temporary Procedures TECH SVC 7. Equipment Control TECH SVC 8. Maintenance Program TECH SVC 9. Modifications TECH SVC
- 10. Surveillance Testing and Inspection Schedule ADMIN
- 11. Plant Security and Visitor Control TECH SVC
- 12. Housekeeping and Cleanliness Control TECH SVC
- 13. Corrective Actions ADMIN
- 14. Plants Records Management TECH SVC
- 15. Procurement and Materials Control I
TECH SVC
- 16. Procurement Document Control l
i
- 17. Control of Purchased Material, Equipment TECH SVC l
and Services l
- 18. Identification and Control of Materials, ADMIN Parts and Components ADMIN
- 19. Handling, Storage and Shipping TECH SVC
- 20. Nonconforming Items
~ SB 1 & 2 FSAR Table 13.5-1 (Cont'd) Assignment of Responsibility'for Station Procedures (Cont'd) Program / Procedure Responsible Manager (1)
- 21. Review, Approval and Control of Procedures ADMIN
- 22. Measuring and Test Equipment TECH SVC
- 23. Inspections TECH SVC
- 24. Control of Special Processes TECH SVC
- 25. Test Control TECH SVC
- 26. Plant Fire Protection Program ADMIN
- 27. Communications OPS
- 28. Control of Radioactivity TECH SVC NOTE: (1):
" ADMIN" means Administrative Services Manager "0PS" means Operations Manager " TECH SVC" means Technical Services Manager l l I i i I i I l
'l ~ SB 1&2 FSAR APPENDIX 13A CORPORATE STAFF RESUMES 1 l
DAVID N. MERRILL EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT Mr. Merrill received his Bachelor of Chemical Engineering Degree from the University of New Hampshire in 1949. He began employment with the Public Service Company of New Hampshire l in the fall of 1949 as Station Chemical Analyst at the mercury binary cycle Schiller Station. In 1952 he was appointed Results Engineer for the station. In 1956 he left Public Service to assume a position with Potomac l Electric Power Company as Chemical Engineer involved with power plant } chemistry. In 1957 he returned to Public Service Company of New Hampshire as company Chemical Engineer in which position he was responsible for water treatment and fuel testing at the company's various stations. In addition, he was involved in engineering design of new stations as well as the redesign of existing systems. In 1959 he became Superintendent of Merrimack Station where he was responsible for selecting an operating staff, developing a training program, and the start up and all phases of operation of the station. In 1962 he became Assistant Production Manager and later in 1962 Manager of Production in which position he was responsible for the operation of all company generating facilities, fossil and hydro. He was elected a Vice President of the company in 1965 and Executive Vice President in 1973. At the present time he has responsibility for Engineerin;;, Production, Fuel' Procurement and Supply, Energy Management and Research, and all aspects of Seabrook construction and licensing. During this period he also had responsibility for the Rate Department. He is an original Director of Vermont Yankee (1966), a Director of Public Service Company of New Hampshire (1973), and a Registered Professional Engineer in New Hampshire. 13A-1
l ll t, WARREN A. HARVEY VICE PRESIDENT l Warren A. Harvey was graduated from Maine Maritime Academy in June,1945 with' / an Ensign's Commission in the U.S. Naval Reserve and a U.S. Coast Guard Third s? f Assistant Engineer's license (unlimited). After service in the U.S. Merchant Marine he was employed in May of 1947 as a laborer by Public Service Company of New Hampshire on the Floating Power Plant Resistance. i In November 1947, he was promoted to Plant Operator, and in May of 1947, was- '/ - promoted to Watch Engineer. In February of 1952, he entered the U.S. Navy and was assigned to a fleet
- D destroyer (DD849) as Damage Control Officer and was later advanced in grade to Lieutenant and Engineer Of ficer.
In January 1954, he returned to employment with Public Service Company of New Hampshire as Watch Engineer on the FPP Resistance. In 1959, he was assigned to Merrimack Station as Maintenance Supervisor and in January of 1962, was promoted to Station Superintendent of Merrimack Station. On March 1, 1967, Mr. Harvey was appointed Steam Production Superir.tendent wath overall responsibility for all of the company's Steam Generating Stations. On September 1, 1970, he was assigned responsibility for all. generating facilities for Public Service Company of New Hampshire, Fossil and Hydro and appointed Director Production Division. In March of 1976, he was elected Vice President with responsibility for the Production Division and the Power Supply Department. Mr. Harvey is a member of the Northeast Power Coordinating Council, the New England Power Exchange Operating Committee and the Edison Electric Institute Prime Movers Committee. 13A-2
~ y a j SB 1 & 2 1 FSAR r l f .i / GEORGE S. THOMAS y [ Nuclear Production Superintendent Mr. Thomas received his Bachelor of Science n gree in Mect anical e Engineering (cum laude) from the University of hassachusetts in 1965. He 4 has completed additional courses in thermo-fluids, power plant design, and engineering management. Upon graduation, he was employed by General Dynamics Electric Boat and Quincy Divisions where he qualified as an S5W Ser*,or Nuclear Test Engineer and supervised the' initial startup of a number or submarine reactors. In 1967 he joined Babco<k and Wilcox Company as a Design Engineer and performid thermo-fluid studies'for the design of light water and liquid metal re' actor components, s In/1969 he joined Yankee Atomic Electric Company and participated in the Yan'ee Rowe Operator T, raining Program. k I In 1970 he was appointed Preoperational Test Coordinator for Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station. 't In 1972-Mr. Thomas qualified for a Senior Reactor Operators license at Vermont Yankge. 4 In 1973 he was promoted.to che position of Assistant Station Superintendent of Vermont Yankee. 'In this position he was' directly responsible for operation, maintenance, and technical support of the i Station. He personally directed initial power escalation testing and several refueling outages.' During the cumulative period 1975 to 1977, I fermont Yankee attained th5 highest capacity facter of a domestic Boiling l Water Reactor. In 1977 Mr. Thomas was appointed Startup Engineer for the Seabrook [ Project. In 1978 he became Startup Manager for YAEC and established the YAEC Startup Test Group at Seabrook Station. Following the Three Mile Island accident, he actively participated in the TMI recovery organization and the post-accident evaluation performed by EPRI-NSAC. i l In September 1980, Mr. Thomas was appointed to the position of Nuclear l Production. Superintendent for Public Service Company of New Hampshire. In I that position, he has overall responsibility for the operation of Seabrook l Station from the corporate office. l l l l 13 A-3
SB 1 & 2 FSAR RESUME: James A. Philbrick
SUMMARY
OF QUALYFICATIONS: 10 years experience in the nuclear industry most of which has been concerned with the design and construction management of Seabrook Station. EXPERIENCE: Oct. 1980 to Present Public Service Company of N.H. Senior Project Engineer - Seabrook Nuclear Station Assigned to the PSNH Seabrook Station Construction Department as supervisor of the Discipline Group. Major respon-sibilities include monitoring the Construction Managers job of evaluating contractor performance for award fee purposes, overseeing all major site purchases, coordinating owner / operator requirements for the test and start-up program as the requirements apply to construction, titiating construction response to YAEC QA items, cocadinating owners response / approval of new construction methods and/or tools and review all non-manual manpower requirements. Jan. 1973 to Oct. 1980 Public Service Company of N.H. Project Engineer Reassigned to the Seabrook Project basically responsible for mechanical engineering aspects pertaining to nuclear side of the plant and quality assurance. Engineering aspects have involved establishment of the conceptual design of systems, design review and authorization of bid evaluations. I Responsible for the engineering aspects of the nuclear steam supply, all radioactive waste processing systems and refueling equipment. Responsible for the review and envolve - ment of PSNH in the Seabrook Quality Assurance Program. Nov. 1969 to Dec. 1972 Public Service Company of N.H. Staff Mechanical Engineer i Assigned to the Newington Station Project Group basically responsible for all phases of mechanical engineering per-taining to design, construction, cost control and scheduling of the project. Specific areas of responsibility were the boiler, piping, valves, fuel oil off loading and storage l facility, precipitator, fans and HVAC. Main functions con-i sisted of reviewing engineering studies, specifications and bid evaluations. i 13A-4 i
Nov.1968 to Nov. 1969 Public Service Company of N.H. l Staff Mechanical Engineer Worked in the Seabrook Project Group basically responsible for Quality Assurance. Coordinated with Ebasco Services Company to establish a QA program for Seabrook. Seabrook Project was cancelled November 1969. 1967 - 1968 American Optical Company, Keene, N.H. Development Engineer Employed as Development Engineer in the area of Medical instrument design. Major project was development of a surgi-cal microscope. 1965 - 1967 Corning Community College, Corning, N.Y. Physics Instructor Taught courses in the engineering curriculum for freshman and sophomore students. Courses taught included engineering phy-sics, modern physics, engineering materials and strength of materials. _E_DUCATION: B.S. in Mechanical Engineering, University of N.H. - 1964 M.S. in Mechanical Engineering - Applied Mechanics, University of New Hampshire - 1965 l l 13A-5
i l STEPHEN D. FLOYD Operations Engineer
SUMMARY
OF OUALIFICATIONS: Over 11 years of nuclear related engineering experience including six years of nuclear plant operations experi-ence as an officer in the Navy's Nuclear Power Program, 2-1/2 years of nuclear project management experience at Oak Ridge National Laboratory and 3 years experience in the operations support of commerical nuclear power plants. EXPERIENCE: Operations Engineer, Public Service Company of New August 1981 hampshire - Nuclear Production Staff to Present Responsible for coordinating the nuclear licensing and regulatory activity for Seabrook Station between the Station staff and Yankee Nuclear Services Division during the operating license review, and for developing files and administrative procedures to provide opera-tions support for the commerical operation of Seabrook Station. Also responsible for coordinating the training programs for the Nuclear Production Staf f and for coordinating industry requests with the Station staff. i 1 December 1978 Carolina Power & Light Company to August 1981 Manager of Licensing / Operating Reactors (4/80): Responsible for scheduling, coordinating and super-vising the day-to-day licensing activities of Brunswick Units 1 & 2(BWR) and H. B. Robinson Unit 2(PWR). Responsible for planning, directing, and managing spe-cial projects such as the expansion of spent fuel pool storage capacity at both plants, the resolution of steam generator tube degradation problems at H.B. Robinson, fire protection modifications, radwaste system modifications, etc. Responsible for acting as the Company's liaison with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission for licensing and regulatory matters for the operating units. Supervised two licensing engineers, a technician and a licensing aide. Senior Licensing Engineer-Shearon Harris Nuclear Power Plant: Responsible for acting as the Company's liaison with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission for licensing and regulatory matters for a 4-unit PWR under construction. Responsibilities included the preparation of a Final Safety Analysis Report and Environmental Report in pur-suit of an Operating License for the plant. 13A-6
i i l July 1976 Union Cgrbide Corporation-Nuclear Division at Oak Ridge to National Laboratory November 1978 Project Manager: Responsible for planning, directing, and managing a l line-ites construction project for a prototype advanced j nuclear fuel reprocessing plant. Responsible for the j generation of detailed design criteria, coordination of all design, procurement, and construction activities, I and the overall control of project cost and schedule. Supervised a 10-discipline project team. Project Engineer: i Responsible for planning, directing and managing numerous capital improvement and expense funded pro-jects for the Advanced Fuel Reprocessing Program at ORNL. Projects included a prototype rotary fuel disolver, rotary kiln voloxidizer, off gas ventilation system, electrical substation, etc. Combined project costs were approximately $15 million. 1 I Quality Assurance Representative: I k 5 Responsible to the Manager of Capital Projects for the i quality assurance programs and assessments of projects at ORNL. Responsible for the training of project engineers in QA practices. Concurrently assigned as a member of the UCC-ND Engineering QA Advisory Committee. ] June 1974 Naval Nuclear Power Training Unit, S3G Prototype to July 1976 Staff Engineer Officer (8/75): I Senior Naval officer at the S3G plant serving in a ) department head billet. Supervised the operation, l training and maintenance practices of all staff l assigned instructors / operators (6 commissioned officers ~ and 175 enlisted). Coordinated and directed the requalification programs of all staff during a refueling outage. Leading Engineering Officer of the Watch: Naval officer in charge of one of four operating crews l l (35 personnel). Supervised operation, training and maintenance practices of the crew. Coordinated the f training of assigned students (40 per quarter for a 6 l l month program). l i 13A-7 i - - - ~ _.._
January 1972 USS Tullibee (SSN 597) A Fast Attack Nuclear Powered to Submarine May 1974 Main Propulsion Assistant (5/73) during refueling outage. Principal assistant to the Engineering Department Of ficer responsible for the scheduling and supervision of the maintenance and overhaul of all mechanical systems of the reactor plant and associated steam plant. Concurrently served as the Chemistry and Radiological Controls Of ficer responsible for the proper chemistry control of the reactor plant and steam generating system, and the accountability and control of all radioactive material generated by the reactor, as well as the administration of all health physics records for shipboard personnel. Functioned as Command Duty Officer during periods of complex reactor plant testing. Supervised 24 personnel. Served as the ships member of the Joint Test Group during the refueling overhaul. Reactor Controls Officer: Responsible for the supervision of operation, main-tenance, and preoverhaul testing of the rod control, reactor plant protection, and primary plant instrumen-tation systems. Supervised 6 personnel. October 1970 Naval Nuclear Power School and Prototype: to } November 1971 Completed 6 months of college level courses in reactor i core construction, operation theory, reactor physics, and related chemistry and radiological controls, followed by 6 months of routine and casualty operations training at the A1W Prototype Reactor at the Naval Reactors Facility, Idaho. EDUCATION & TRAINING B. S. Engineering, U.S. Naval Academy, 1970. U. S. Naval Nuclear Power School and Prototype, 1971. Completed 24 quarter hours of graduate level work toward a M. S. in Engineering Administration, University of Tennessee, 1977-1978. Completed 24 semester hours of graduate level work i towards a Masters of Business Administration, Duke i University, 1980-1981. i l l Completed qualification as senior engineering watch i officer on the following nuclear reactors: A1W (Westinghouse), S2C (Combustion Engineering), S3G (General Electric).
- Completed qualification and certification by Naval Reactors to serve as the Engineer Of ficer of Naval nuclear propulsion plants.
13A-8 t
SB 1 & 2 FSAR NUCLEAR QUALITY MANAGER Resume V. Lewis Killpack, Jr. Summary of Qualifications Mr. Killpack has fifteen years experience in the nuclear industry. Prior to his current position as Nuclear Quality Manager, he has been involved in the NS Savannah Program, the Navy Nuclear Program, Diablo Canyon Plant, and Humboldt Bay Plant. He has held positions in Quality Assurance, Operations, Engineering, and management. He holds an unlimited horsepower marine engineers license for steam and motor vessels and is qualified on the SSG nuclear submarine prototype. Experience I 1981 to Public Service Co. of New Hampshire - Nuclear Quality Present Manager (Joined PSNH in this capacity in September 1981) Areas of Responsibility: Provides assurance that all activities associated with the operation and operational support of Seabrook Station are performed to appropriate quality standards. Reports to Vice President, Production. 1972 to 1981 Pacific Cas and Electric Company, San Francisco, California: l Engineer, Quality Assurance. Responsible for the develop-ment and implemenation of the operational quality j assurance program for Humboldt Bay plant, and for deve-j loping the operational quality assurance program for Didblo Canyon plant. Various other duties such as auditing and procedure writing for the construction phase I of Diablo Canyon. f Senior Engineer, Quality Assurance. Report -d to Director, Quality Assurance and responsible for Operational and Construction phase quality assurance at Humboldt Bay and Diablo Canyon. Supervised Quality Assurance supervisors located at plant sites and general of fice quality assurance engineers. Resident Engineer, Diablo Canyon Project. Managed the mecha-nical work at Diablo Canyon Project during the construction 13A-9
phase. Headed the departments responsible for Nuclear Steam Supply System; Mechanical Equipment; Rupture Restraints; Pipe Supports; Piping and Insulation; Heating, Ventilation and Air Conditioning; and Site Clean-Up. Supervised approximately 600 personnel, including Pacific Gas and Electric Company physical forces, field engineers, inspectors, design engi-neers, consultants, and contractors. Senior Engineer, Nuclear Projects. Managed various programs involving upgrading of Diablo Canyon plant for licensing purposes. Conducted presentations to the Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards; Nuclear Regulatory Commission, etc. 1971 to 1972 General Electric Company, Knolls Atomic Power Laboratory, Operations Department, Idaho Site. Prototype Engineer - Nuclear Plant Engineering Training Program; and watchstanding as Engineering Officer of the Watch. 1967 to 1971 Standard 011 Company of California, Marine Division, Contracted to the U. S. Navy, Vietnam. Marine Engineer-worked aboard Navy owned ships as plant engineer in charg<1 of engine room. Carried out additional respon-sibilities for operation and maintenance of all electri-cal equipment and assisted with other maintenance. Education University of California, Berkeley, Graduate School. Courses in Operations Research. Westinghouse Nuclear Plant Engineering School. l Graduate level school as part of employment with General Electric Company at Knolls Atomic Power Laboratory, 6 Naval Reactors' Facility, Idaho. Bringham Young University, Provo, Utah, Graduate School. Mechanical Engineering Courses. [ i* United States Merchant Marine Academy, Kings Point New York. Graduated in 1967 with a Bachelor of Science degree in Marine Engineering, a U. S. Naval Reserve Commision, and g a Marine Engineer's License. g I 1 I 13A-10
SB 1&2 FSAR APPENDIX 13 C YANKEE NUCLEAR SERVICE DIVISION (YNSD) SUPERVISORY AND LEAD ENGINEERING PERONNEL RESUMES i
= . -. = l 1 SB 1 & 2 i FSAR i JAMES A. TRIBBLE i President i Mr. Tribble graduated f rom Brown University with a Bachelor of Science in l Engineering in 1952, and f rom the Oak Ridge School of Reactor Technology with a Diploma in Nuclear Engineering in 1956. He has worked as a nuclear engineer for various companies, including Bethlehem Steel and Texas Instruments, prior to joining Yankee Atomic Electric Company in 1961. He became Technical Director of Yankee in 1966, responsible for all engineering and physics work for Yankee (Roue), Connecticut Yankee, l Ve rmont Yankee, and Maine Yankee. In 1970, Mr. Tribble became Assistant to the President of New England Electric, and in 1972 he was named a Vice President and Director of New England Power Company, responsible for planning and power supply. He was named a Vice Preisdent of New England Electric System and subsidiaries in 1973, responsible for purchasing, planning, engineering, and construction. 4 Af ter four years in that position, he became Vice President-Finance and Chief Financial Of ficer for New England Electric and its subsidiaries. In this capacity, he was responsibic for finance, accounting, and investor relations. On January 1,1980, Mr. Tribble lef t New England Electric to return to Yankee as President and Chief Executive Office, responsible for operation of } the Yankee (Roue) plant, as well as all activities of the Nuclear Services l Division. This Division provides engineering services to all New England utilities. In Ms.ch,1980, he also was named a Vice President of Vermont Yankee Nucle;r Power Corporation. i J e 6 . _,,,..,, _ _ ~. _ _, _. _ _ - _,, _,. _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _. _ _,, _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _.. -. _ _
SB 1 & 2 FSAR ARTHUR M. SHEPARD DIRECTOR OF QUALITY ASSURANCE Hr. Arthur M. Shepard received his Bachelor of Science degree from Worcester Polytechnic Institute in 1953. His option was Mechanical Engineering, majoring in Thermodynamics. He has taken additional specialized courses in engineering economics and steam power plant design. He served with the U.S. Army at Aberdeen Proving Ground, Maryland, developing and testing fuses for aerial bombs. Mr. Shepard joined the Hartford Electric Light Company in 1955 and was assigned to the Production Department, working at both the South Meadow and Middletown Plants. In 1958 he was transferred to the General Engineering Department (Mechanical Engineering Section) where he worked on economic evaluations, boiler plant design and conventional power station design. Upon his return to Hartford in 1960 Mr. Shepard continued his work on power station design and was Project Engineer on a jet engine driven gas turbine peaking power plant. ,In 1963 Mr. Shepard joined the Connecticut Yankee Atomic Power Company where he was engaged in the design and engineering aspects of the Connecticut Yankee secondary plant and waste disposal systems. He was also responsible for reactor and secondary systems chemistry and the preparation of the plant design reports. In 1967, he was named as a member of the Connecticut Yankee Nuclear Safety Audit and Review Committee. In 1966, Mr. Shepard was named Assistant Project Engineer for the Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station. In this capacity he has been assisting in the coordination, engineering and review of various aspects of I plant design. In 1968, Mr. Shepard was named Project Coordinator for Millstone II and t participated in the preparation of their Preliminary Safety Analysis Report. In 1969, Mr. Shepard was named Project Engineer for Vermont Yankee l Nuclear Power Station, in which capacity he was responsible for coordination l and review of the plant design and licensing activities. 1 In 1973, Mr. Shepard became Project Manager for Seabrook Station, in j i which capacity he was responsible for controlling and coordinating all l activities relating to the station design and licensing. In 1974, Mr. Shepard became Manager of Projects, with responsibility for coordinating the combined engineering and licensing activities of l Seabrook Station and replicate nuclear plants for the New England Power Company and Central Maine Power Company. i 13C-8 l
SB 1 & 2 FSAR i i 4 s In 1981, Mr. Shepard was named Director of Quality Assurance, with j responsibility for both the construction and operational phases of Quality Assurance. In this capacity, he reports to the YAEC Vice-President. Mr. Shepard is a member of the American Society of Mechanical Engineers and a Registered Professional Engineer in the State of California. l ] 1 4 l 4 b n A 4 1 I-e i l 3 4 4 1 1
SB 1 & 2 FSAR DAVID B. PIKE Manager - Operational Quality Assurance Mr. Pike received his Bachelor of Science and Master of Science Degrees in Wildlife Management from the University of Massachusetts in 1958 and 1960, respectively. In 1957 he worked for Yankee performing a preoperational environ-mental survey of the Deerfield River Valley from Sherman Pond to the Connecticut River. In 1961 he worked as a Consultant to Yankee, again collecting environmental data along the Deerfield River, during the operational phase. In August, 1961, he joined the Yankee Plant Staff as a Trainee in Health Physics. In May, 1962, Mr. Pike was promoted to Technical Assistant. In October,1962, he was promoted to Assistant Health Physicist. In 1961 and 1962 Mr. Pike received extensive training at the Taf t Sanitary Engineering Center in Cincinnatti, Ohio, in the areas of Radiological Health; Radionuclides in Air and Water; Occupational Hygiene; and Occupational Radiation Protection. In December, 1963, he was promoted to Plant Health Physicist at Yankee. In October, 1969, he was promoted to Technical Assistant to the Plant Superintendent. In this capacity he served primarily as Special Projects Coordinator including Training Coordinator for the Reactor Operator Training Program; Spent Fuel Shipping Coordinator; and In-service Inspection Program Coordinator. In July, 1971, Mr. Pike was promoted to Assistant Plant Superintendent. In 1972 Mr. Pike developed and participated in a program which allowed hard-hat diving in the shield tank cavity at Yankee to remove the existing control rod shroud tube structure and replace it with a new such structure. This project was successful in that it eliminated remote tool use; radiation exposure was minimal; and the saving in time and money required to replace the shroud tube structure was approximately 30 days and $1,000,000 respectively.
SB 1 & 2 FSAR During the period July, 1970 through July, 1974 Mr. Pike was licensed by the Atomic Energy Commission as a Reactor Operator at Yankee. In 1974 Mr. Pike was transferred to the then Southboro Office of the Yankee Nuclear Services Division and appointed Manager of the newly formed Quality Control and Audit Department. Concurrent with his appointment as Manager, he was appointed Chairman of the Yankee, Vermont Yankee and Maine Yankee Nuclear Safety Audit and Review Committees. W e
n.- 3 SB 1 6 2 FSAR GERALD F. MCDONALD Construction Quality Assurance Manager Mr. Mcdonald received his Bachelor of Science degree in Management from the Evening Division of the University of Rhode Island in 1973. He also completed evening division studies toward a Bachelor of Science degree in ththematics and Chemistry at Lowell Technological Institute in-1966. Vocational technical studies in Aeronautical Engineering Tech-nology were completed in 1958 at Wentworth Institute of Technology. In addition, he has taken specialized courses in welding engineering, meta-lurgy, nuclear components, and quality assurance and reliability engineering. Mr. Mcdonald joined Raytheon Missile Systems Division in 1958 as a Quality Control Engineer. His assignments included vendor surveillance and audit, environmental testing, reliability engineering, and quality assurance program development. In 1960 he was promoted to Senior Quality Assurance Engineer with lead engineering responsibilities. Mr. Mcdonald served as Chairman of the divisions material review board and was res-ponsible for the divisions corrective action program. His experie,ce in nuclear work began in 1966 when he joined BIF, a unit of General Sigral Corporation, as Quality Control Manager. In this position he was responsible for the development, implementation, and management of the Nuclear and Commercial Quality Assurance Program and related technical services. He was promoted to Quality Assurance Manager in 1969 and to Director of Quality Assurance in 1972. Mr. Mcdonald joined Yankee Atomic Electric Company in 1974 as a Senior Engineer in the Qaality Assurance Department. In this capacity he was assigned lead engineer responsibility for the quality assurance aspects of design, procurement, and construction activities associated with the Seabrook Station. He was named a member of the Nuclear Safety Review and Audit Committee for the Yankee Atomic Electric Company Plant in Rowe, Massachusetts in If75. Mr. Mcdonald was promoted to Senior Quality Assurance Engineer in 1978 and to Construction Quality Assurance Manager in 1981. He is a member of the AIF Committee on Power Plant Design, Con-struction, and Operation, the EEI Prime Movers Quality Assurance Com-mittee, and is an active participant in ASME Section III Subcommittee. i
RUSSELL B. MACPHERSON MANAGER EINIRONMEITTAL SCIENCES Mr. MacPherson received his Bachelor's degree f rom Colby College in June 1970. He received his Master of Science degree in Civil Engineering from the University of Massachusetts in June 1972. From September 1970 to June 1972, he was employed as a Graduate Research Assistant for the University of Massachusetts School of Engineering. In this assignment his responsibilities included engineering design and management of a project to develop engineering laboratory equipment under a research grant from the National Science Foundation. in September 1972, Mr. MacPherson joined Yankee Atomic Electric Comapany as an Engineer in the Systems Engineering Group. His responsibilities included design and testing of fluid and heat transfer systems for operational and proposed nuclear power plants. In 1973, Mr. MacPherson was assigned to the Environmental Engineering Department. His responsibilities included environmental impact assessment, power plant siting studies, hydrological evaluations, thermal discharge modeling and cooling system design for operational and proposed nuclear power plants. In 1975, Mr. MacPherson assumed his present position as Manager of the Environmental Sciences Group. He is responsible for management and technical supervision of non-radiological environmental engineering. This includes studies, investigations and licensing activities in the areas of hydrology, seismology, oceanography, biology, terrestrial ecology, meteorology, power plant siting, cooling systems design, hazardous waste management, thermal-hydraulics and environmental data management. Mr. MacPherson is a registered professional engineer in the states of New Hampshire, Maine, Rhode Island and Massachusetts. m . m
PETER S. LITTLEFIELD MANAGER-RADIOIDGICAL ENGINEERING Mr. Littlefield received his Bachelor of Science Degree in Chemical Digineering from Northeastern University in 1962 e.nd his Master of Science Degree in Radiation Biology from the University of Rochester in 1963 He completed the Health Physics training program sponsored by the U.S. AEC at Brookhaven National Laboratory in the summer of 1%3 Mr. Littlefield was employed by Brookhaven National Laboratory fron 1963 to 1967 with a 2-year leave of absence to serve in the U.S. Army. While at Brookhaven he worked in the Applied Research Section of the Health Physics Department on such projects as mixed field dosimetry, linear energy transfer analysis and low-level radioactive gas monitoring. He co-authored a paper on the continuous environmental monitoring of noble gases and currently holds a patent on a high pressure monitor ' associated with this project. He also received general Health Physics experience at the high energy accelerators and research reactors on the laboratory site. In 1967 Mr. Littlefield joined the General Dynamics Corp., Quincy, Massachusetts as a Radiological Engineer. He became the Health Physics Supervisor in 1967 and remained in that position until he left the Corporation in 1968. During that tine, Mr. Littlefield was responsible for 8 Health Physics Technicians and for providing coverage to the shipyard on a 2h hours a day, 7 days a week basis. He was also the shield survey engineer on 2 new construction nuclear submarines. As such, he was res ponsible for the training of survey teams and data reduction personnel, the control and coordination of the shield survey, the evalua-tion of the data and the preparation of the final written report on the acceptability of the nuclear shielding. In 1968 Mr. Littlefield joined the Yankee Atomic Electric Company as a Safety Analysis Engineer in the Nuclear Services Division. He has worked on dienical sprays and charcoal filters as engineered safeguards for the Yankee plants and has represented Yankee in the area of radiochemical analysis during fuel reprocessing and reprocessing negotiations. He has participated in the writing of safety analysis reports in the areas of process radiation monitoring, waste disposal, accident analysis and environ-mental monitoring. He has also been responsible for hydrogen control and monitoring in containment structures and for detecting primary systems leaks during station operation. In 1973 Mr. Littlefield was appointed Radiological Engineering Manager for Yankee with responsibility for radiological dose calculations, radia-tion environmental surveillance and special site characteristics evaluation. Included in this position is the responsibility for the establishment of functional requirements for radioactive waste treatment systems and for engineered safety systems that mitigate the release of radioactive materials following an accident. Mr. Littlefield is a member of the Health Plvsics Society and has recently served as President of the New England Chapter of this Society. He is certified in Health Physics by the American Board of Health Physics.
.o I JAMES A. MacDONALD Manager - Radiation Protection Group Mr. MacDonald received his Associate in Nuclear Engineering from Wentworth Institute in 1965, his Bachelor of Science in Nuclear Engineering from Lowell Technological Institute in 1968, and his Master of Science in Radiological Health from Harvard University in 1970. In the summer of 1969 he completed the Health Physics Training Program sponsored by ftrookhaven National Laboratory and the USAEC. While completing the last three years of his undergraduate studies, Mr. MacDonald worked for Sanders Nuclear Corporation in Nashua, New Hampshire as an Engineering Assistant. His time was devoted to perfonning analytical design of various sytems employing radioisotopes as heat sources. This work included the feasibility evaluation of the application of radioisotopes for these systems and devices by analytically designing and optimizing fuel capsules, energy conversion systems, and shielding. Typical systems included the SNAP radioisotope devises, isoptic-fueled diving and arctic-flying suit heaters, large-scale isotope systems for the pro-pulsion of underwater workboats, and the radioisotopic-powered artificial heart. In addition, Mr. MacDonald worked on establishing and implementing a facility radiation safety program. This included work on the design and licensing of a remote-handling hot cell and a radiochemistry laboratory. Mr. MacDonald joined Yankee-Westboro in May of 1970 as an engineer within the Radiation Protection Section. In this capacity, Mr. MacDonald assisted in obtaining plant operating licenses in the areas of radioactivity source term analysis and dose evaluations, environmental radiological monitoring, emergency planning,and in-plant radiation protection programs. In addition, he was responsible for the operation of two radiation protection service programs that are in use for the Yankee system. The first is REXCO - a computerized recording system that is used for reporting and maintaining a current, accurate listing of personnel radiation exposure. The second program is the Yankee Body Burden Monitoring Program, instituted and operated for the purpose of assessing internal radioisotope exposure. ~ In September of 1972, Mr. MacDonald transferred to the Safety Analysis Section where he worked in the source term and dose evaluation areas. These evaluations were performed for radioactivity releases associated with normal plant operation and for releases associated with accident conditions. In October of 1973, Mr. MacDonald was appointed to the position of Manager of the Radiation P20tection Group, his current position with Yankee. In this capacity, Mr. MacDonald directs the activities of the group which include both licensing assistance in the radiation protection area for plants under design and construction and operational health physics assistance for operating plants. Principle functions of this Group are radiation protection programs, personnel dosimetry techniques and record-keeping programs, radiation protection procedures t
Page 2 and training program development and maintenance, and emergency plan ( development and maintenance. The emergency plan responsibility of the Group includes implementing procedures, training, and liaison with respon-sible state authorities. Mr. MacDonald is a national and New England chapter member of the Health Physics Society and is certified in the field of health physics by the American Board of Health Physics.
David E. McCurdy Manager - Environmental Laboratory Dr. McCurdy received his Master of Science in Radiological Health from Colorado State University in 1966 and his Doctorate in Radiation Biology from the same institution in 1%9. Dr. McCurdy obtained his graduate school education as a recipient of a U.S. Public Health Radiological Health Specialist Fellowship, as well as an Atomic Energy Commission Assistantship. While completing his graduate studies, Dr. McCurdy performed research dealing His with the inhalation hazards associated with the uranium mining industry. research encompassed a multitude of applieC sciences, some of which were aerosol characterization, alpha spectrometric techniques for the qualitative and quantitative analysis of airborne radon daughter products and personnel monitoring devices applicable to the evaluation of the cumulative lung exposure to radon daughter products within uranium mines and residential homes built on uranium Dr. McCurdy developed and patented a personnel monitoring device which tailings. incorporated thermoluminescent materials to measure airborne radon daughter The monitoring devices were extensively concentrations in terms of working levels. utilized in several collaborative research programs involving uranium mining The basic thermoluminescent bioassay techniques and lung modeling endeavors. characteristics of CaF :Dy were thoroughly investigated as part of the personnel 2 monitoring development program. In 1969, Dr. McCurdy accepted the position as Director of the Environmental In this capacity, Laboratory within the New Jersey Bureau of Radiation Protection. Dr. McCurdy was responsible for the development and implementation of the State's environmental radiation surveillance program relevant to tne nuclear industry In addition, he was responsible for the development of within New Jersey. radiochemical techniques and nuclear instrumentation utilized in the surveillance As Director of the Laboratory, he was the principal investigator of research and surveillance conducted under several Atomic Energy Comission/ Nuclear programs. Under Dr. Regulatory Commission and Environmental Protection Agency contracts. McCurdy's supervision, detailed environmental surveillance programs were conducted at two nuclear power facilities in order to assess their radiological impact on the general public and the abiotic and biotic components of the aquatic and terrestrial These programs included source-term analyses, offsite sampling and environs. monitoring, laboratory analyses of various media and dosimetric evaluation. in 1973, Dr. McCurdy took a one-year leave of absence to join the staff of the Health Services Division of Los Alamos Scientific Laboratory in Los Alamos, New While at Los Alamos Scientific Laboratory, he was engaged in risk on Mexico. f.ault-tree analyses modeling to evaluate transuranic waste disposal areas with respect to their potential hazard and eventual disposition. Upon return to the New Jersey Bureau of Radiation Protection, Dr. McCurdy continued his supervisory role and in the course of his work, implemented a detailed radiological assessment study of a major radiopharmaceutical processor. In addition, he was actively involved in the development of the State's emergency response plan for major nuclear facilities.
O l David E. McCurdy Page Two Dr. McCurdy joined Yankee - Westboro in August of 1976 as the Manager of the Environmental Laboratory Group. In this capacity, Dr. McCurdy is responsible for the technical direction, program coordination and administrative management of the Radiological Environmental Laboratory. The function of the Environmental Laboratory Group is to provide comprehensive laboratory support services for the offsite environmental radiation surveillance programs maintained by nuclear power plants currently operating or under construction. Dr. McCurdy is a national member of the Health Physics Society and served on the Society's Program Committee from 1973 to 1976. He is also a member of the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) and is currently a membcr of the ASTM Subcommittee D-19.04.03 on Water and was on subcommittee D22.10, Methods of Sampling and Analysis of Atmospheres from 1977 1979. Dr. McCurdy has been a visiting f aculty member of the University of Lowell and has taught a graduate level course on Environmental Monitoring Surveillance for the past two years (1980-1981). Dr. McCurdy has authored and/or presented over 38 technical papers whose subject matter have dealt with environmental health physics.
I Dr. Edward E. Pilat MANAGER-ECONOMIC ANALYSIS Dr. Pilat received his BS in Engineering Physics from Cornell University in 1960, his MS in Nuclear Engineering from MIT in 1964, and his PHD in Nuclear Engineering from MIT in 1967. In 1960 and 1961, he worked during the summer with the Theoretical Reactor Physics Group at Brookhaven National Laboratory, investigating flux trap reactor design and neutron slowing down in heavy gases. In 1966, he joined NUS Corporation as a Senior Technical Associate, participating in the design of a reload core for the MH-1A Barge Mounted Reactor. In 1968 Dr. Pilat joined Yankee Atomic Electric Company and worked on reload physics and core follow for the Yankee and Connecticut Yankee plants. From 1970 to 1973, Dr. Pilat worked at NUS Corporation, first in the Fuel Management Department, then as Mana6er of Nuclear Analysis. He was responsible for NUS core analysis training programs and for workships in fuel cycle economics. He participated heavily in pre-senting training programs for plant operators and utility engineers. In 1977 Dr. Pilat became manager of Reactor Physics at Yankee Atomic Electric Company's Nuclear Services Division. Reload physics licensing analyses for Yankee, Connecticut Yankee and Maine Yankee were conducted and submitted to the NRC under his direction. He also directed core follov work for these plants as well as for the Vermont Yankee BWR, and criticality analyses for the licensing of high density spent fuel racks at Yankee, Maine Yankee and Vermont Yankee. In 1977, Dr. Pilat joined Energy Research Group, with responsibility for fuel cycle studies. In 1979, Dr. Pilat rejoined Yankee's Nuclear Services Division as Manager of Applied Methods Development. He directed the development of methods for the steady state and transient reactor physics analyses required to license the Vermont Yankee BWR. Other projects under his purview included development of space -time analyses for PWR's. In 1981, Dr. Pilat assumed his present position as Manager of the Economic Analysis Oroup in the Fuel Cycle Department. He is l responsible for calculating historic and projected fuel costs for Yankee, Maine Yankee, Vermont Yankee and Seabrook. He also directs the evaluation of fuel management alternatives with the aim of minimizing fuel costs while satisfying all technical constraints. Dr. Pilat has taught Nuclear Engineering at Lowell University in Massachusetts as an adjunct professor and has lectured at the RPI summer program in Nuclear Engineering.
SB 1 & 2 FSAR ROBERT A. RICH Manager - Nuclear Materials Dr. Rich received his Bachelor's degree in Geology from Temple University in 1968 and his Master's and Ph. D. degrees in Geological Sciences from Harvard University in 1970 and 1975 respectively. During this period of university education, Dr. Rich was variously employed by the Pennsylvania Department of Highways in Philadelphia, U. S. Geological Survey in Idaho and Montana, The Anaconda Company in Colorado, and as an independent con-sultant for Dames and Moore and Kennecott Copper Corporation. In addition, during his residence at Harvard, Dr. Rich served as a Teaching Fellow and Research Associate. Following completion of his academic studies, Dr. Rich became a Post-Doctoral Research Fellow supported by a U.S. ERDA (now DOE) grant for a pioneer study of the characteristics and genetic theories of vein-type uranium deposits. A reference text on this subject, coauthored by Dr. Rich, was published in 1977 by Elsevier Scientific Publishing Company. . Dr. Rich commenced employment with Yankee Atomic Electric Comapny in 1976 as a uranium geologist in the Nuclear Materials Group. During his first few years with Yankee, Dr. Rich's primary responsibilities were the evaluation of uranium exploration and development joint venture opportunities and the management of a modest independent Yankee exploration program. In time, Dr. Rich also became involved in the business and legal aspects of uranium purchasee and the technical aspects of the geologic disposal of high level nuclear wastes. In 1980, Dr. Rich became Yankee's Nuclear Materials Manager. As such, he directs the activities of a group responsible for negotiating and administering nuclear fuel contracts for uranium and related conversion and enrichment services for five New England reactors. Additional areas of group responsibility include transportation of nuclear materials, spent fuel storage, reprocessing of spent fuel and disposal of high level nuclear wastes. l l l l l l
S B 162 FSAR Richard C. Courtney Manager-Computer Operations Mr. Courtney joined the Honeywell Corporation in 1969 as a computer operator responsible for the operation of various computers. In 1971 he was promoted to the Industry Marketing group as a applications programmer working on various commercial application packages. In 1973 he was promoted to Senior Applications Programmer and put in charge of developing a commercial software package relating to the education field. In 1974 he joined the Gillette Co. as a Senior Systems Analyst, becoming responsible for the design and installation of Gillette's accounts receivable / payables Applications. In 1976 he was promoted to Shif t Manager, becoming responsible for day to day operations of the Computer Operations Area, including keypunch, report distribution and telecommunications. In 1977 he was transferred to the Telecommunications group, becoming responsible for Gillette's Data Communications network worldwide. In 1979 he joined Commercial Union Assurance Co. in Boston as a Senior Telecommunications Specialist, becoming responsible for their Data Network nationwide. In 1980 he joined Yankee Atomic Electric Co. as a Senior Systems Analyst, responsible for day to day operations and support of the Voice and Data network. In 1981 he was promoted to Computer Operations Manager, responsible for day to day operations of the computer area as well as the Voice and Data Communications area.
Mercedes A. Tyler Manager - User Services Mrs. Tyler received a Bachelor of Science degree in unthematics and a Bachelor of Science degree in Computer Science from Framingham State College in 1976. Following completion of her academic studies, Mrs. Tyler began work as a programmer in the Technical Resources Group. During her first few years at Yankee, Mrs. Tyler's primary responsibilities included programming and assorted computer charge back applications, and establishing the first office designed to solve users' computer-related problems. In 1979 she became the supervisor of a newly formed group, User Services Group, dedicated to supporting the user community. During that time she esta-blished the first corporate wide User Group, and was responsible for the development ef forts that produced computer monitoring reports that aided both the users and the computer department's management in holding computer costs to a minimum. In 1981, Mrs. Tyler was promoted te Yankee's User Services Group Manager. As such, she directs the activities of the twelve people responsible for engineering software maintenance, end user support and training, new product implementation, coordination with the computer service's vendor, budgeting control of the company's computer, and long range data processing planning. l l i l l l
SB 1 & 2 FSAR STEFHEN P. SCHULTZ MANAGER-NUCLEAR EVALUATIONS AND SUPPORT Dr. Stephen P. Schultz earned his Bachelor of Science Degree in Engineering from Harvey Hudd College in January,1969, and began graduate studies at the Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute under the Atomic Energy Commission Traineeship program. He completed his Master of Science Degree in Nuclear Science and Engineering in 1970. In September,1970, Dr. Schultz entered the doctoral program in Nuclear Engineering at the Massachusetts Ins titute of Technology. He was awarded a General Electric Fellowship in 1972 and the Sherman R. Knapp Fellowship (Northeast Utilities Service Company) in 1973 and worked as a teaching and research assistant. His doctoral thesis applied nuclear fuel performance prediction methods to improve fuel management s tra te gies. He received his Doctor of Science Degree in Nuclear Engineering in 1977. His work experience during college included six summers of nuclear Be ch tel power plant design and development work as an assistant engineer at Corporation and Northeast Utilities Service Company. Dr. Schultz joined YAEC in September, 1977, as a Development Engineer in the Nuclear Engineering Department. His responsibilities included the direction and execution of tasks to develop computer models to predict the performance of fuel rods and related core components. In September,1979, he was promoted to the position of Senior Engineer and was appointed Manager of the new Fuel and Materials Behavior Group in October. The group's fuel model dev elopment and utilization encompassed applications in safety, LOCA, reactor operation, and fuel design analyses. A comprehensive fuel thermal analysis computer model was developed for these applications. Operational issues related to fuel and materials performance were evaluated. In March,1981, Dr. Schultz was appointed Manager of the BWR Transient Analysis Group to direct model application work. Subsequently, he assumed additional responsiblities as acting manager of the Applied Methods Development Group and Department Coordinator for the BWR Methods Development This program led to the first Vermont Yankee reload licensing Program. subudttal to be based upon YAEC analysis methods. Dr. Schultz was appointed Manager of the new Nuclear Evaluations and Support Group in December,1981, to direct applications and evaluation work regarding probabilis tic risk assessment, licensing issues, and fuel per forman ce. The group also coordinates department involvement in plant training and emergency procedure development and review. Dr. Schultz is a member of the American Nuclear Society and has earned life memberships in the Tau Beta Pi engineering and the Alpha Gamma Sigma junior college honor societies.
Alan E. Ladieu Seabrook Lead Nuclear Engineer Mr. Ladieu received his Bachelor of Science Degree in Engineering Physics from Merrimack College in 1965. He then began gradua te studies in Nuclear Engineering at the University of Wisconsin sponsored by a National Science Founda tion Traineeship. In 1966, he transferred to the Massachusetts Ins titute of Technology graduate school sponsored by an Atomic Energy Commision Special Fellowship. He received his Nuclear Engineer's Degree (course work equivalent to Ph.D., but with emphasis on applied engineering thesis) from M.I.T. in 1968. In Se ptember,1968, Mr. Ladieu joined Yankee Atomic Electric Company as Engineer in the Nuclear Engineering Section. He was initially responsible for Loss-of-Coolant (LOCA) analyses for both the Yankee Rowe and Connecticut Yankee power plants. His responsibilities were expanded into performing steady-state thermal-hydraulic analysis and LOCA analysis for all the Yankee pl an t s. In 1974, Mr. Ladieu was promoted to Senior Engineer in the Safety Analysis Group. He was responsible for thermal-hydraulic and accident analysis for the Yankee Rowe plant and the Seabrook project. Specific tasks included review of reactor supplier and fuel vendor analyses, prepara tion of licensing subadttals to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), solving plant opera tional problems, and completion of reload core performance analyses. In 1976, Mr. Ladieu became Safety Analysis Manager in the Reactor Engineering Department. He directed the activities of five engineers and one technician in the areas of thermal-hydraulics and sa fety analysis for all Yankee plants and projects. During the period, Yankee Atomic 's core reload support capabilities were expanded. In 1977, Mr. Ladieu became Senior Sa fety Analysis Engineer in the Nuclear Engineering Department. In this position, he provided technical support through the development and application of analytical methods to the Seabrook and New England Power projects. In 1981, Mr. Ladieu was appointed to his present position of Seabrook Lead Nuclear Engineer. In this capacity, he serves as focal point for communications between the Nuclear Engineering Department and the Seabrook Project Office, the Sta tion, and Public Service Company of New Hampshire. In his years with Yankee Atomic, Mr. Ladieu has published a series of technical reports on thermal-hydraulic and transient analysis. He has also attended sp'ecial courses in utility ranagement, project mana gemen t, Wes tinghouse reactor design information, reactor safety, and reactor simulator training. He is currently a member of the Yankee Rowe Nuclear Safety Audit Review Committee and the American Nuclear Society.
Richard J. Caccia pouti Manager - Reactor Physics Group Mr. Caccia pouti received his Bachelor of Science Degree in Physics from Lowell Technological Institute in 1963. Af ter gradua tion, he attended the Oak Ridge School of Reactor Techt, ology where he received his certificate in 1964. In 1978, he received his Mas ter of Science Degree in Nuclear Engineering from ~ the University of Lowell. In 1964 Mr. Cacciapouti was employed by the U. S. Atomic Energy Commission at the Connecticut Advanced Nuclear Engineering Laboratory (CANEL) and the New York Operations Office (N700). At CANEL he specialized in developing camputer programs for the calculation and analysis of reactor physics problems. At NY00, he was Project Manager on various isotopic power sys tems for land, marine, and lunar applica tions. Mr. Caccia pouti joined the Yankee Atomic Electric Company engineering s ta ff in September 1966. His duties involved providing analytical and technical support for the Yankee Plant in Rowe, Massachusetts. He was also instrumental in developing and Laplementing the methodology to allow Yankee Atomic Electric Company to perform vendor independent reload physics analysis for the Yankee plant starting with Cycle 8. He also performed the reload physics analysis for Yankee Cycles 9 and 10. Cycle 10 was the transition cycle where Yankee changed from stainless steel clad to Zircaloy clad fuel. During this time he was also responsible for updating the methodology and automa ting data handling within the reactor physics area. In June 1974, Mr. Cacciapouti became a senior engineer. In this capacity he supervised and provided technical and analytical support for both the Yankee and Connecticut Yankee plants in the reactor physics area. During this time he supervised and participated in the reactor physics analysis for Yankee Cycles 11 and 12 and for Connecticut Yankee Cycles 6 and 7. This included reload physics analysis, licensing support, pl an t support and plant operations follow. In June 1976, Mr. Caccia pouti became a Senior Reactor Physicist in the Nuclear Engineering Department. He was responsible for the supervision, technical and analytical support for both Yankee and Vermont Yankee in the reactor physics area. In October of 1978, his responsibilities included coordination of all reactor physics related activities for Yankee, Vermont Yankee, Maine Yankee and Seabrook. In October 1979, Mr. Cacciapouti assumed the duties of Reactor Physics Group Manager. He is responsible for tne activities in the reactor physics These duties involve directing the work of the group in the reload area. licensing analysis of Yankee, Maine Yankee and Vermont Yankee and the application of the reload physics methodology to Seabrook. He is also responsible for all other physics related activities such as plant operation follow and spent fuel rack criticality calculations. Mr. Ca cc iapou ti is a member of the American Nuclear Society and is a member of the Reactor Physics Division Program Committee.
T / PAUL A. BERGERON MANAGER-TRANSIENT ANALYSIS Mr. Bergeron received his Bachelor of Science Degree in Mechanical Engineering from Southeastern Massachusetts University in 1968. He received his Masters of Science Degree in Engineering in 1973 f rom Union College, Schenectady, New York. Upon graduation in 1968, Mr. Bergeron was employed by Raytheon Company. His responsibilities i'.sluded the development of mathematical models for the thermal de' sign of ilectronic equipment in military applications. In 1970, he joined the Knolls dtomic Electric Company in Schenectady, New York, as an engineer in the Thermal-Hydraulic Design and Performance Analysis section for Operating Nuclear Plants. In this capacity, he provided technical support in the area of nuclear plant protection analysis for reactors designed and built f or the U.S. Navy. Mr. Bergeron jo'ined the Yankee Atomic Electric Company in April 1974. His initial assignment was lead safety analysis engineer on the Vermont Yankee and Connecticut Yankee plants. In this capacity, he provided technical support in the safety analysis and thermal-hydraulic areas including direction of ef fort perf ormed at the reactor vendor.. In 1975, he was given lead responsibility for the Maine Yankee safety analysis activities. In :this capacity, Mr. Bergeron participated in developing analytical methods for perf onning plant thermal-hydraulic and safety analysis. He successfully obtained the USNRC endorsement of these methods for application to the Maine Yankee plant. These analytical methods have been applied to support plant operation since 1977, including the support of a plant uprate f rom 2440Myr to 2630MVI. In his present position, Mr. Bergeron is Manager of a group that provides technical support for the Yankee plants including Seabrook in the area of transient, accident and thermal-hydraulic analysis. Mr. Bergeron is a Registered Professional Engineer. He is a member of ASME and ANS (executive committee of the thermal-hydraulic division). He is also a member of the . Maine Yankee.and Yankee plant Nuclear Safety Audit Review Committees.
r-AUSAF HUSAIN Manager - Loss of Coolant Accident Analysis Dr. Husain received his Bachelor's and Master's Degree in Mechanical Engineering from Indian Institute'of Technology in 1967 and 1969, respectively, and his Ph.D from the University of Cincinnati in 1975. Dr. Husain has been responsible for all Yankee LOCA related activities since joining YNSD in 1974. His first accomplishment at Yankee was to develop inhouse IDCA capability for Yankee Rowe. This work was completed in 1975 and has since been successfully used for licensing Yankee Rowa cores 12, 13 and 14. Dr. Husain was task team leader of the Maine Yankee LOCA licensing effort. He was appointed the LOCA group manager in November 1979. Dr. Husain's responsibilities include licensing of Yankee Rowe and Maine Yankee, development of inhouse BWR IDCA analysis capability and development of RELAP5 based PWR LOCA model. Dr. Husain serves on several industry concittees as well. He is a member of the Nuclear Heat Transfer committee of the American Institute of Chemical Engineers and has also served as a member of the Reactor Safety Division Program committee of the American Nuclear Society. Since the accident at TMI-II, Dr. i:usain has served as YNSD's representative on the Westinghouse Post TMI Owners Group and is a member of the Group's analysis subcommittee. l i \\ .r l l l l l l l
GEORGE T. DOWD, JR. MANAGER-INSTRUMENTATION & CONTROL ENGINEERING Mr. Dowd received a Bachelor's Degree in Electrical Engineering from Northeastern University in 1958, and in 1979 he received an Executive MBA degree from Suffolk University. During his.second year at Northeastern, he became affiliated with Brockton Edison Company as a co-operative student and remained there while an undergraduate, working in various departments in the company. In 1958, he joined the National Guard and served 6 months active duty with the U. S. Amy in their Nike Ajax Training Program. He served in the National Guard until 1964 as an Electronics Instructor. In 1959, he joined Sylvania Electric Products, Inc., as a member of the Instrumentation and Support Systems Department where he did circuit and systems design on a specialized mortar location radar system and on phased array radar systems. In 1962, he joined the Nuclear Diagnostics Instrumentation Department of Edgerton, Gemeshausen, and Grier, Inc. He worked as a Project Engineer on the design of various instrumentation systems used in the recording of high speed nuclear phenomena. These systems included a TV remote recording storage tube system, grour.d shock monitoring system and remote frequence monitor system. His responsibilities included supervision of manufacturing, technical liaison and nuclear instrumentation system equipment evaluation. He spent many months at the Nevada test site *upervising the testing and operation of the many systems. In 1967 Mr. Dowd joined the Yankee nuclear engineering staff as a member of the Electrical and Control Design Section with primary responsibilities in the instrumentation areas of the various Yankee plants. These areas of responsibility have included reactor regulating systems, nuclear instrumentation systems, reactor protective systems, and computer interface with various instrumentation systens. In 1968, Mr. Dowd joined the staff of Northeastern University as an evening lecturer. In 1973, Mr. Dowd was chosen chaiman of the IEEE Boston Section Professional Activities Committee. In 1974, Mr. Dowd became a Senior Engineer responsible for the engineering of new concepts being integrated into the design of both new plants and operating plants (e.g., video alams, multiplex systems, advanced control room design, etc). Also, responsible for maintaining familiarity with the generic and licensing issues affecting both Electrical and Instrumentation and Control areas as they apply to the design of new projects and operating plants.
r.. . 3s ..w In 1976, Mr. Dowd became Manager of the Instrumentation and Control Engineering Group. In this capacity, he is responsible for the directing of the Group in providing both engineering and licensing expertise associated with instrumentation and control systems for both operating plants and those plants in the design construction phase. Mr. Dowd has served since 1970 as a member of National IEEE canmittees charged with writing standards for the Nuclear Industry. He is presently a member of Subcommittee 2.0 which is responsible for qualification standards of IE equipment, and a working group charged with the writing of a document to qualify Class IE modules. Also, Mr. Dowd has been chosen as a member of a steering committee formed by Electric Power Research Institute to supervise the state of the art study into aging and qualification as it pertains to IEEE documents. In addition to this, Mr. Dowd has achieved extensive administrative and managerial experiences as an elected executive officer of a large local community. Mr. Dcwd is a registered Professional Engineer in the State of Massachusetts, and is a Senior member of the Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers.
,CEORGE TSOUDEROS SEABROOK LEAD ELECTRICAL ENCINEER From 1959 to 1962, Mr. Tsouderos was associated with the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers in Iran. He served as construction inspector, responsible for maintain-ing surveillance over construction of certain portions of the Sezful Airfield built.by the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers for the Iranian Air Force. From 1962 to 1963, Mr. Tsouderos served as the Resident Engineer for the ~ U. S. Army Corps of Engineers on a construction project for the U. S. Air Force in Irakion Crete. The construction project included an extension to existing power plant facilities and various supporting buildings. In 1967 Mr. Tsouderos received his Bachelor of Science in Electrical Engineering from Lowell Technological Institute, Lowell, Massachusetts. Af ter receiving his degree in 1967, Mr. Tsouderos joined the Electrical and Control Design Group of the Yankee Atomic Electric Company. His primary responsibilities have been in the area of electrical engineering in connection with the various Yankee operating plants, as well as new plants. He served as Cognizant Engineer during the replacement of the emergency diesel generators at Connecticut Yankee. He has participated in the start-up of Vermont Nuclear Power Plant, and during 1973/1974, he served as Project Engineer on the conver-sion of the 115 kV Coolidge Line to 345 kV, at Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Plant. In July 1976, Mr. Tsouderos was promoted to Senior Engineer in the Electrical Engineering Group with responsibility for providing expertise and services in all areas of electrical engineering for Vermont Yankee, Maine Yankee, and Yankee Nuclear Power Plants. Mr. Tsouderos has been intimately involved with the electrical design of the Seabrook Station. In July 1978, Mr. Tsouderos was promoted to Senior Electrical Engineer in the Electrical Engineering Group and in this position is responsible for the technical performance and quality of engineering activities of the Group. Mr. Tsouderos is a member of the IEEE and as a member of the IEEE Working Group on Batteries, participated in the preparation and review of various IEEE Standards.
f SB 1 & 2 FSAR PETER L. ANDERSON SFABDOOK SYSTEMS ENGINEER Mr. Anderson graduated from the Gloucester High School, Gloucester Massachusetts in 1962. He served eight years in the U.S. Navy in various engineering billets aboard a nuclear submarine and as an instructor at the SIC prototype located at Combustion Engineering in Windsor, Connecticut. In 1970 he joined the Maine Yankee Atomic Power Company. During his 10 - plus years at Maine Yankee he worked in the Chemistry / Health Physics Department, Operations Department and the Plant Management staff. He was a member of the Startup Test Group responsible for procedure preparation, pre-operational and Hot Functional testing and the initial licensed operator training program. Following plant licensing he obtained and held an SRO license for over seven years. As a plant Department Head he was responsible for plant Security, Fire Protection, Administrative and all licensed and non-licensed operator training. As the Assistant to the Plant Manager he was responsible for all NRC required reports and correspondence. He served as a member and Secretary of the Plant Operations Review Committee for over six years. In 1981 he transferred to the Yankee Atomic Electric Company as a Senior Titled Engineer for the Systems Engineering Group and was assigned as Lead Engineer for the Seabrook project.
r s. O JOHN R. HOFFMAN MANAGER-MECHANICAL ENGINEERING Mr. Hof fman was graduated from the Cooper Union School of Engineering and Science in 1967, receiving a Bachelor of Engineering in Mechanical Enginee ring. He holds a Master of Science degree in Nucicar Engineering f rom the University of Lowell, awarded in 1977. Upon graduation, Mr. Hof fman joined the Bettis Atomic Power Laboratory, which is operated by Westinghouse Electric Corporation for the Energy Research and Development Agency. Bettis is a prime contractor for power plants in the US Navy nuclear propulsion program and has designed and developed the nuclear power plants for over 100 submarines, two aircraf t carriers and a guided missile cruiser, as of that time. At Bettis, Mr. Hof fman was assigned to the Operating Plant Projects, Primary Coolant Systems Section. In this capacity he was responsible for providing engineering support for the operating fleet. This involved the review and developnent of operating and test procedures, analysis and resolution of problens that arose on operating and new construction reactor plant and the design of new systems to improve the operation of the reactor plants. Mr. Hof fman was also temporarily assigned as a Technical Advisor to Navy and shipyard personnel for the replacement of reactor coolant pumps on the USS Long Beach. In September 1969 Mr. Hof fman joined the Pratt and Whitney Division of the United Aircraf t Corporation as a development engineer. A P6W he was assigned to the Mechanical Components Group, where he assumed responsibility for portions of the JT3D and JT9D component development programs. In this capacity Mr. Hof fman formulated test programs, advised and directed engineering, manuf acturing, assembly and test personnel and prepared summary reports supporting his recommendations as to whether a new or improved components should be released to the airlines for use in their engines. ~ In May 1971 Mr. Hof fman joined the Yankee Atomic Electric Company. He has provided engineering support for the Yankee, Maine Yankee, Pilgrim and Vermont Yankee power plants as well as new projects for future power plants. Mr. Hof fman served as, project engineer for the flux mapping systen replacement at the Yankee Nuclear Power Station, and also acted as project engineer for the control rod replacement program for the Yankee Nuclear Power Station during the period 1972 through 1974. During the lower shroud assembly replacement program for the Yankee reactor, Mr. Hoffman provided engineering assistance in evaluating the new design and worked with contractor and Operations personnel in achieving optimum design and the most ef fective installation procedures.
I O Mr. Hoffman has represented the Engineering Department in the Yankee program for developing updated specifications for the reactor plants under Yankee NSD cognizance. Mr. Hoffman has had responsibility for vibration analysis of the Maine Yankee and Yankee reactor internals, evaluation of a boiling water reactor loose parts monitoring system and several instrumentation programs on the Vermont Yankee reactor. As a result of operating experience at a commercial power plant, Mr. Hoffman initiated a program for evaluation and replacement of the reactor internals core holddown ring for the Maine Yankee and Yankee reactors in 1974 and 1975. In August of 1975, Mr. Hoffman was appointed to the position of Mechanical Engineering Manager. In that capacity, he is responsible for the technical direction and administration of the engineering activities of the Mechanical Engineering Group, which consists of engineers with expertise in the fields of mechanical, materials, civil, piping and structural engineering. Since assuming the position of Mechanical Engineering Manager, Mr. Hof fman has supervised the activities of engineers engaged in the design, fabrication and installation of spent fuel racks, primary containment modification and repair, reactor primary piping replacement, inservice inspection planning and execution, reactor coolant system support re-analysis and general piping design and analysis. In addition to general engineering supervision, Mr. Hoffman has had direct technical and NRC licensing involvement in the resolution of the Maine Yankee seismic piping analysis shutdown in 1979 and the Vermont Yankee support and anchor bolt replacement program in 1979. Since 1975 the staff of the Mechanical Engineering Group has increased from six to fif teen. During the oeriod 1974 through 1977 Mr. Hoffman served as co-ordinator of u joint Yankee-Westinghouse program to develop an advanced fixed-movable incore instrumentation system for Maine Yankee and future New Englan'd nuclear plants. The results of that program were reported in technical report YAEC-1143, published in December 1977 by Yankee Atomic Electric Coupany. The system developed under that program is being installed in the Seabrook Station of. Public Service Company of New Hampshire. Mr. Hof fman is Senior Representative on the Boiling Water Reactor Owners Group on ICSCC representing Vernent Yankee.
e e Mr. Hof fman holds the grade of Member in the American Society of Mechanical Engineers, and he is a Licensed Professional Engineer in Massachusetts, New Hampshire and Vermont. l l i
r WILLIAM N. FADDEN LEAD INSTRUMENTATION AND CONTROLS ENGINEER Mr. William N. Fadden received a Bachelor of Science Degree in Electrical Engineering in 1966 from the University of Minnesota. Upon graduation, he was commissioned in the U. S. Navy and received He served in various training in the nuclear propulsion and submarines. billets aboard a nuclear submarine and as an instructor at a prototyne. In 1971, he was employed by Ebasco Services Inc. as a startup engineer. His startup assignments included activities, mainly instrumentation checkout and maintenance, at the Vermont Yankee, St. Lucie Unit No. 1, and Waterford Unit No. 3 nuclear power plants and at hydroelectric He had engineering assignments to plants in Michigan and Turkey. resolve instrumentation and control problems a Storage Plant and to assist.the Louisiana Power and Light Co. Waterford project group. In October 1980, he joined Yankee Atomic Electric Company as the Lead Instrumentation and Controls Engineer for the Seabrook project. In this position he is responsible for following the instrumentation and controls engineering for the project. l [
F ROBERT K. TUCKER Seabrook Lead Mechsnical Engineer Mr. Tucker received his Associates Degree in Civil and Highway Engineering from Wentworth Institute in 1972. He graduated with his Bachelor of Science degree in Civil Engineering Technology from Wentworth College of Technology in 1974. Upon graduation he joined Stone & Webster Engineering Corporation as a structural designer. Responsibilities in the office included design and analysis of concrete and steel structures, ranging from temporary and light weight structures to Catagory I seismically analyzed structures for Nuclear Power Plants, including Cable Trays and Conduit Supports. Analysis methods ranged from hand analysis to computer analysis, using the following computer programs: Strudl, Ansys and S tard yne. Assignments included assisting in the development of a Standard Calculation Method for the analysis of Base Plates using flexibility criteria for use by Pipe Support Designers. In addition, he developed informational computer systems, with the Computer Department, for Tracking Office and Field Status, as well as permanent document storage for plant records. He assisted in the preparation of design criteria, procedures and reports. In conjuction with there duties, he was responsible for the supervision and assign, ment of work to project personnel. Field responsibilities included acting as liason between the office, field group and.lient personnel to coordinate engineering, construction activities and scheduling. He developed and implemented testing methods and procedures using Destructive and Non-Destructive Testing Techniques (Ultrasound and Radiography). He is experienced as a Radiation Worker in Nuclear Power Plants. He has worked on the following Power Stations in various stages from site location to plant operations: North Anna Units 1, 2, 3 and 4 (VEPCO) Wood Site (Wisconsin Electric Power Company) Point Beach (Wisconsin Electric Power Company) Surry Power Station Units 1 and 2 (VEPCO) Millstone III (NUSCO) Montague (NUSCO) Beaver Valley Units 1 and 2 (DLC) l He joined Yankee Atomic Electric Company in June of 1981 and was appointed to his present position. Mr. Tucker belonEs to the Institute for the Certification of Enginee.ing Technicians #30649 spensored by the National Society of Professional Engineers. i
FAROUK D. BAXTER MANAGER -ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING Mr. Baxter received his Bachelor of Technology Degree in Electrical Engineering (Power) from the Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur, India in 1962. From 1962 to 1964, he was employed by the Tata Power Company, Bombay, India, where he worked in the engineering office on engineering changes for various hydro stations, and in the field on the construction of a new thermal station. In 1964, he joined Bechtel-India in Bombay, where he worked for two years on the engineering of the two unit Tarapur Atomic Power Station. In the capacity of Senior Engineer, he was responsible for major electrical systems on these 200 MW BWR units. In 1966, Mr. Baxter joined Atomic Power Constructions, Sutton, England, and worked on various aspects of control, relaying, and protection in connection with the 1200 MW Dungeness B AGR Nuclear Power Station. In 1968, Mr. Baxter came to the United States of America, where he first worked briefly with Commonwealth Associates, Jackson, Michigan, on the Duane Arnold Nuclear Power Plant and then, in 1969, joined the Yankee Atomic Electtic Company. At Yankee Atemic he was assigned as cognizant electrical engineer on the Maine Yankee project. In 1974, he was promoted to Senior Electrical Engineer, and in 1976, to his present position of Manager of the Electrical Engineering Group. In this position, Mr. Baxter is responsible for providing Yankee Atomic Electric Company with expertise in the area of Electrical Engineering (power), and has exercised this responsibility in undertaking major engineering changes to Yankee Rowe, Vermont Yankee and Maine Yankee; and in establishing and enforcing the electrical design of the Seabrook Station. Mr. Baxter is a Senior Member of IEEE as well as a member of IEEE's Nuclear Power Engineering Committee. He is a Registered Professional Engineer in the States of Massachusetts and New Hampshire.
r. Stanley R. Miller Manager - Systems Engineering Group Mr. Miller Attended Purdue University from 1960 to 1962, performing undergraduate studies in Electrical Engineering. He graduated from Northeastern University in 1973 earning a Bachelor's Degree in Electrical Engineering with a minor in Mechanical Engineering. Mr. Millor served in the U. S. Navy's Submarine Nuclear Power Program f rom 1962 until his discharge in 1966. He served as the Senior Petty Of ficer, supervising the Reactor Control Division. He served as a Reactor Operator for three years and two additional years as a Machinery Watch Supervisor, the senior enlisted watch on a nuclear power plant. Mr. Miller joined General Dynamics, Quincy, Massachusetts in late 1966 as a Nuclear Test Engineer. In 1967 he was promoted to Senior Nuclear Test Engineer responsible for cooriinating and directing all submarine nuclear plant testing and operation on shiit. These duties included directing the ef forts of various shipyard craf ts and the U. S. Navy operating crews. In 1968 Mr. Miller was promo6ed to Assistant Chief Nuclear Test Engineer responsible for assisting in the overall administrative direction and coordiation of scheduling, sequencing plant operations, and testing. Mr. Miller joined Yankee Atomic Electric Company in 1968. He was assigned to the Systems Engineering Group as an Engineer working primarily on the Vermont Yankee plant design and licensing. He served as the Project Enginer for the backfit of a new radioactive gaseous vaste holdup system for the Vermont Yan} ee Plant. In 1974 Mr. Miller became Project Engineer-Mechanical for New England Fower Company's proposed nuclear units' in Charlestown, Rhode Island. He was directly responsible for coordinating engineering, design, and quality assurance activities of Westinghouse, United Engineers and Constructors, Yankee Atomic Nuclear Services Division, various consultants, and New England Power Company. In 1977 Mr. Miller transferred to New England Power Company as Assistant , Project Ibnager for their proposed nuclear units. In addition to the responsibilities of Project Engineer-Mechanical noted above, he directed all activities related to power plant siting studies and real estate acquisition for the proposed site as well as alternative nuclear generating sites. Mr. Miller also managed a search and siting study for potential two-unit, 800 MW coal-fired generating plant in New England. In 1979 Mr. Miller was promoted to Manager of Coal Supply for New England Power Service Company. He was responsible for the procurement of all coal for New England Electric System's power generation. Duties included negotiating coal contracts with suppliers, assuring coal met all environmental and operational specifications, and maintaining coal inventories at adequate levels. In addition, he was responsible for planning, scheduling, loading, and unloading coal into and f rom shipping vessels to ensure a smooth flow of coal to generating plant s. He was responsible for chartering shipping vessels and administering contracts for the ships and coal supplies.
Mr. Miller rejoined Yankee Atomic Electric Company in June 1980 as Manager of the Systems Engineering Group. He is responsible for the administration and conduct of all engineering activities in the Systems Engineering Group. This Group consists of approximately 15 engineers with expertise in the design, operation, and maintenance of commercial nuclear power plant mechanical, fluid, ventilation, and fire systems. Current work consists mainly of engineering design and licensing support for the operating plants of Yankee, Vermont Yankee, and Maine Yankee, and the Seabrook Station which is under c on st ru c tion.
_-_.,-.,-AM ( SB 1&2 FSAR APPENDIX 13D RESUMES OF KEY SEABROOK STATION PERSONNEL i t i I L
i I i i SB 1 & 2 FSAR RESUME: Walter B. Sturgeon, Jr.
SUMMARY
OF QUALIFICATIONS: Joined Public Service Co. of New Hampshire Production Division in June 1975 as a nuclear engineer and was promoted to Station Manager in November 1977. Prior to employment at PSNH, had twelve years of nuclear experience with General Dynamics Electric Boat Division in construction, everhaul, refueling and testing of pressurized water reactors. Academic cre-dentials include BE degree in Mechanical Engineering from Yale University, MBA from the University of Rhode Island, and PE license in Nuclear Engineering Society. EXPERIENCE: November 1977 Station Manager to Present Public Service Co. of New Hampshire. Responsible for planning, recruiting, and staffing Seabrook Station. Responsible for development of training program. Responsible for development of overall management plan for station including personnel programs, opera-tional quality assurance, procedure development, spare parts program, FSAR review, information systems plan, equipment maintenance programs, identification of facilities to support operation, equipping and startup of f acilities, and station security plans. During this period, also going through Reactor l Operator Cold License Program as well as many other l station training programs. Participated in justifi-l cation of purchase, construction, and testing of control room simulator and operator license training facility now on site. Spent several months at Yankee i offices in Westboro under the direction of Yankee I Operations Manager. June 1975 to November 1977 Nuclear Engineer Public Service Co. of New Hampshire. Worked as member of production staff reviewing station design, l attended project meetings, systems engineering review j meetings, model reviews, provided input to Seabrook project manager f rom operations point of view, did l preliminary planning for eventual operation of station. l 13D-1 l
SB 1 & 2 Walter B. Sturgeon, Jr. FSAR Page 2 During this assignment spent six months at Maine Yankee in 1976 under direction of Station Superintendent. During this period Maine Yankee operated at full power for two months, and a core coastdown of approximately one month. Went through a routine refueling outage and subsequent re-start, testing and return to power production. Spent five weeks in 1975 at Vermont Yankee during their refueling outage and subsequent startup. August 1972 to June 1975 Nuclear Ship Manager GD/EB Division, Groton, Connecticut. Responsible for contstruction of SSN-688 Class Reactor Plant including structural, piping, mechanical and electri-cal fabrication and installation. Special projects included development of a computer program relating fabrication and installation work to the nuclear test program for critical path analysis, progressing, and equipment, material, and manpower allocation; new facilities startup task force member for EB S100,000,000 facility expansion and improvement program, and total submarine manufacturing plan task force member. March 1971 to August 1972 Chief Contract Change Negotiator GD/EB Division. Responsible for negotiation and adjudication of all new construction and design contract changes on both Fixed Price and Cost plus-fixed fee type contracts. Position required super-vision of four negotiators and two administrative type personnel. It also required administration of various types of contracts form receipt of the pro-posed change through adjudication and final cer-tification of completion. Gained valuable experience in both contractural and financial elements of businss. October 1966 to March 1971 Chief Refueling Engineer GD/EB Division. Responsible for overall refueling effort on PWR plant. Chairman of Joint Refueling Group. Responsible for the performance of 10 engi-neering and 100 trade personnel. Reviewed and approved the planning and scheduling for the 13D-2
r SB l' & 2 Walter B. Sturgeon, Jr. FSAR Page 3 refueling program. Responsible for technical and safety requirement compliance. Concurred in' com-patibility of refueling and non refueling work. Responsible for preparation, review, and use of all refueling paperwork. Controlled the refueling por-tion of each ship budget. Foreign Advisor July 1968 to December 1968 Rolls Royce and Associates, Derby, England. Acted as advisor for GD/EB Division who had a contract to supply procedures, equipment, and advice on refueling of PWR in Rosyth, Scotland. Gained valuable diploma-tic experience. Refueling Director. April 1965 October 1966 GD/EB Division. Directed shif t operations involving 20 tradesmen. Shif t Representative of Chief Refueling Engineer. Directed all reactor disassembly, fuel exchange, and reactor reassembly operations including fuel and equipment movement. Qualification required written and oral examinations. June 1963 to April 1965 Senior Test Engineer GD/EB Division. Conducted established test program on shift. Directed operations performed by test technicians and ship's force personnel. Program included flushing of systems, cold and hot operations, initial criticality, power range testing, and sea trials. Qualification required written and oral exa-minations and completing of test engineer in training program including a 244 hour course on the S5W PWR covering design, operation, and testing. Finished 3rd in class of 41. l EDUCATION AND TRAINING: M.B.A. in Business Administration, University of i Rhode Island, 1971. Completed course with 3.94 average. Have also had two PSNH sponsored courses in management. B.E. in Mechanical Engineering, Yale University, 1963. Finished in top third of the class. PE License in Nuclear Engineering in State of California, 1976. 13 D-3
i ] l 1 l SB 1 & 2 FSAR RESUME: M'liam Anthony DiProfio SQ{ MARY OF QUALIFICATIONS: Joined Public Service ' Company of New Hampshire in 1971 as a Cadet Engineer and rose to present position of Assistant Station Manager. Prior to employment with PSNH, had six years experience with US Navy in operation, maintenance and testing of nuclear power plants, training and supervising operator / instructors. Graduate of US Naval Academy, B.S. in Engineering and an M.B.A. f rom the University of New Hampshire. EXPERIENCE: 1978 to present Assistant Station Manager - Public Service Company of New Hampshire, Seabrook Station. Responsible for development and implementation of the staffing and training plans including detailed job descriptions, EE0 considerations, and medical requirements; administer Company personnel and safety policies. Responsible for directing operation, main-tenance and training activities, planning for and implementing plant overhauls, and assisting in the preparation of Station budgets. Participation in the Senior Reactor Operator Cold License and Station training programs. I During this period worked at Maine Yankee during the l 1979 refueling outage and subsequent testing, startup and power escalation. He also worked for a year at the Westboro offices of Yankee under the direction of ( ~ their manager of operations. 1974 to 1978 Assistant Station Superintendent - Public Service Company of New Hampshire, Newington Generating Station Assigned to participate in the hiring and training of operators, maintenance employees and supervisors for araveup of a 400 Megawatt generating plant and transfer of responsibility f rom engineering and construction forces to production employees. After station startup in July, 1974, responsible for all phases of station performance including operations, maintenance, purchasing and inventory control, results, safety, security and administration. l 13 D-4
SB 1 5 2 William A. DiProfio FSAR Page 2 EXPERIENCE (cont'd): 1971 to 1974 Cadet Engineer, promoted to Assistant Engineer - Public' Service Company of New Hampshire. Project Engineer - engineering and installation projects at power stations in the Public Service System under direction of Senior Staff Engineer and Production Department Manager. Assignments included: monitoring contractor performance of major turbine overhauls, steel smoke stack installations, redesign and installation of steam air preheating coils, control valve selection and installation and employee f acilities building renovation. 1965 to 1971 US Navy - Discharged honorably as Lieutenant 1. Eighteen months as on shif t leading Navy Supervisor of an operating nuclear power plant prototype (S3G) at the General Electric procotype site in West Milton, New York. Responsibilities: (a) Operation, maintenance and testing of the nuclear power plant under direction of civilian management. (b) Scheduling and implementation of the training in power plant operations and maintenance for 30-70 students comprised of Navy enlisted and officers, and civilian engineers. l (c) Supervision of 25 operator / instructors in the operation, maintenance and testing of the power plant and in carrying out of the training assignment. 2. Two years, six months aboard Fleet Ballistic l Missile Nuclear Submarine, USS Theodore Roosevelt. Completed submarine qualifica-tions. Qualified as officer of the deck, engineering duty officer. Primary duty operation and maintenance of the nuclear and conventional power plant. Operated many months above 20% power as E00W. i 13D-5
SB 1 & 2 Willaim A. DiProfio FSAR Page 3 l EXPERIENCE (cont'd): 1965 to 1971 (cont'd) 3. Qualified as senior watch officer on the following nuclear reactoco: S5W (Westinghouse), S3G (General Electric), DIG (General Electrit). EDUCATION AND TRAINING: 1. One year University of Massachusetts - Engineering. 2. Graduate US Naval Academy 1965 - Bachelor of Science in Engineering, top 1/4 of the class. 3. Graduate US Naval Nuclear Power School, Bainbridge, Maryland, top 1/4 of the class. 4. Graduate University of New Hampshire 1976 - Master of Business Administration. 13D-6
SB 1 & 2 FSAR RESUME NAME: Raymond E. Cyr MILITARY: U. S. Navy 1955-1959 EDUCATION: a) High School graduate b) Presently enrolled in a degree program with the University of NH c) Advanced Technical Training 1. Three (3) months TIG & MMA Welding School, USN - Portsmouth, Va. 1956 2. One (1) month TIG Welding School, Experimental Test Dept., P&W Aircraft, E. Hartford, Conn. (1959) 3. Three (3) months advanced welding school (TIG, MMA, Auto-Weld) to NAV-SHIP-250-1500-1 at Combustion Engineering, Windsor, Conn. (1960) 4. Two (2) months NDT Course (UT, RT, LP, MP) at Combustion Engineering, Chattanooga, Tenn. (1968) 5. One (1) week Ultra-Sonic Test School at Automation Industries, Danbury, Conn. (1969) 6. One (1) week Diesel Engine School, Electromotive Division, General Motors Corp., Chicago, Ill. (1973) 7. Forty (40) hour course on Air Conditioning and Refrigeration, Central Maine Vocational Technical Institute, Auburn, Maine (1974) 8. Forty (40) hour course on Electrical Equipment Testing and Maintenance at George Washington University, Washington, D.C. (October 1979) 9. One (1) week course on Turbine Overhaul at Wheaton College, Chester, Pa. (Feb. 1975)
- 10. One (1) week Management and Labor Relations training at Rutgers University, Brunswick, N.J. (May, 1978)
- 11. Two (2) day training on Grievances and Arbitration at Cornell University, New York City (Oct. 1979) 13D-51
SB 1 & 2 FSAR Raymond E. Cyr - Resume Page Two
- 12. Two (2) day course on IRD Mechanalysis Vibration Analysis Equipment at the University of Maine, Portland, ME (September 1978)
- 13. Forty-five (45) hour course in Advance First Aid and Emergency Care (March 1976)
- 14. Ninety (90) hour course and qualified as an Emergency Medical Technician (Licensed Ambulance Attendant), (May 1976)
- 15. Twenty (20) hour refresher course to maintain Emergency Medical Technicians Qualifications (November 1978)
- 16. Thirty-two (32) hours' training in Technical Writing by Eugene Ehrlich of Columbia University sponsored by PSNH (June 1979)
- 17. Forty (40) hours training in Motivation, Organizational Climate and Managerial Styles by David Burnham (ITC) sponsered by PSNH (1979)
- 18. Forty (40) hour Kepner-Tregoe course in Decision Making and Problem Analysis, sponsered by PSNH (January 1980)
- 19. Two (2) day seminar on Mechanical Seals by Chesterton Corporation, Woburn, Massachusetts (October 1980)
- 20. One (1) day workshop on Interviewing Techniques at the University of New Hampshire, Durham NH (October 1980)
- 21. Two (2) day training on Visual Inspection in accordance with SNT-TC-1A by YAEC at Seabrook Station (July 1980)
- 22. Sixteen (16) hours Introduction to Electrohydraulic Controls - by GE at Seabrook Station, December 8 and 9, 1981.
SUMMARY
OF QUALIFICATIONS: Twenty years in the nuclear field with early years as a nuclear welder at a nuclear submarine prototype facility. Spent time as Field Erection Superintendent responsible for repairs on power plant boiler before returning to the nuclear field. Received training as a Vendor QC Representative for both mechanical and electrical equipment. Worked in the capacity of a Vendor QC Representative for several years. Worked in a commercial nuclear station supervising mechanical and electrical craftsmen /uring verification of proper installation of mecha'nical and electrical systems and equip-ment prior to systems ture over. Supervisor mechanical and electrical craftsmen during plant start-up and subsequent commercial operation for a total of nine (9) years. 13D-52
~ - - - SB 1 & 2 2 FSAR Raymond E. Cyr - Resume Page Three EXPERIENCE: 1978 to Present Public Service Co. of N.H. Seabrook Station Maintenance Department Supervisor 1975 to 1978 Maine Yankee Atomic Power Co. Wiscasset, Maine Senior Maintenance Supervisor Exercised the authority of the Maintenance Department Head during his absence. In this position, had supervisory responsibilities for all preventive and corrective maintenance activities for all mechanical.and electrical equipment and systems. Coordinated all outside mechanical and electrical contractors. Developed, planned, implemented and supervised the preventive maintenance program, maintenance procedures, and spare parts program. Developed a training program for mechanical and electrical craftsmen. Planned, developed and scheduled a welder initial and continued qualification program. Supervised welding and associated non-destructive testing functions. Evaluated the performance of malatenance personnel. Provided recommendations relative to hiring, firing, promotion and other actions affecting personnel. Performed as alternate on the Plant Operation and Review l Committee (PORC). Assisted Department Head in planning and scheduling main-l tenance functions during plant refuelings. July 1970 Maintenance Foreman Planned, scheduled and supervised a to daily work assignment program for all maintenance 1975 personnel. During plant construction, supervised mechanical and electri-cal maintenance personnel in performing daily quality assurance inspections during initial installation of plant mechanical and electrical equipment and systems. Welding Supervisor performing initial procedure and welder perfor-mance qualifications. Developed and implemented maintenance surveillance and equipment calibration program. Provided administrative and specialized assistance to the Maintenance Department Head in the development of departmental programs. Supervised the preparation of reports, logs and historical data. Evaltated the performance of mechanical and electrical maintenance personnel and provided recommendations relative to hiring, firing, promotion and other actions affecting personnel. 13D-53
SB 1 & 2 FSAR Raymond E. Cyr - Resume Page Four Dec. 1969 Quality Assurance Representative Worked in YAEC Quality to Assurance Department, Westboro, Mass. Reviewed and commented July 1970 on Vendor and Maine Yankee Architectural Engineers non-destructive test procedures, Engineering specifications and drawings. Traveled to Vendor facilities and Maine Yankee plant site to appraise and review manufacturing and construc-tion processes for both mechanical and electrical equipment and systems to assure contractural adherence to applicable procedures, specifications and codes. Performed necessary audits. Accompanied NRC inspectors during plant site inspections. Combustion Engineering, Inc. Windsor, Connecticut July 1968 Vendor Quality Control Representatise Required to travel to to vendors facilities to appraise and raview manufacturing Nov. 1969 processes. Witnessed dimensional, nc n-destructive, opera-tional and functional tests and inspections of both mechanical and electrical equipment to assure contractural adherence to applicable procedures, specifications and codes. Performed vendor surveillance and audits. Generated and pre-pared executive reports on results of inspections and audits. Reviewed and commented on vendor non-destructive test procedures, engineering specifications and drawings for both mechanical and electrical equipment. Assisted Engineering in establishing acceptance criteria and quality level require-ments for vendors. Provided technical assistance regarding quality problems and coordinated with vendor personne1' to assure the establishment and proliferation of good vendor relationship. Had a thorough knowledge of ANSI, ASME, ASTM, and Power Piping Codes. Had a working knowledge of IEEE and l NEMA Standards. Accompanied NRC inspector during audits of C.E. vendors. Jan. 1968 Erection Superintendent Traveled to customers facilities to for the repair of Power Plant Boilers. Conferred with July 1968 customer and union representatives to discuss the job, poten-tial manpower requirements, safety and medical arrangements and other special requirements. Hired necessary personnel, l established a payroll, and obtained necessary tools and i equipment. Qualified welders to ASME Code and performed necessary non-destructive test of weldments. Established and maintained progress reports. 13D-54 w
~. - 1 SB 1 & 2 FSAR 1 Raymond E. Cyr - Resume Page Five Aug. 1965 Leadman Welder - Naval Reactors Division Responsible for to the general function and supervision of the weld shop plus Jan. 1968 any welding' performed on the submarine prototype. Qualified weld ers (Navy) to MIL-STD-250-1500-1. Maintained qualifica-tion as an "A" welder. Nov. 1964 Pratt and Whitney Aircraft to Ea.st Hartford, Conn. Aug. 1965 Welder - Experimental Department Performed Heliarc and Electric Arc welding of jet engines in test stands. Nov. 1960 Combustion Engineering, Inc. - Naval Reactors Div. to Windsor, Connecticut Nov. 1964 Welder "A" Performed general silver soldering, electric arc, heliare, and braze welding of various metals to conform to rigid military specification pertinent to nuclear reactors. All weldments were subject to Magnetic Particle and/or Liquid Penetrant test and radiographic inspections. Qualified on Automatic Seal Welding machine and a multitude of machine shop equipment. Feb. 1960 Pratt and Whitney Aircraft to East Hartford, Connecticut Nov. 1960 Production Line Welder Performed production line heliarc and electric are welding on jet engine parts. Also used the j dry box method of heliarc welding of titanium. i 1959 to 1960 Wooster Express Hartford, Connecticut i Truck Driver Local shipments in the Hartford-Springfield area. 1955 to 1959 U. S. Navy - Welder 13D-55
ATTACHMENT B Technical Specification Section 6.0 Revisions
STATION MANAGER I I I I COMPLIANCE ASSISTANT ADMIN. MANAGER STATION SERVICES MANAGER MANAGER OPERATIONS i MANAGER l SRO TRAINING
- ADMIN, MANAGER ORGANIZATION l
ASSISTANT OPERAi10NS l MANAGER TRAINING TECHNICAL l ORGANIZATION SERVIEES MANAGER l l SHIFT RADIDACTIVE SUPER. ,, AS} g, W ORGANIZATION ASSISTANT SRO TECHNICAL l l SERVICES MANAGER I RA010 ACTIVE UNIT SHIFT UNIT 5HIFT FAC1LITY SUPERVISOR SUPERVISOR ORGANIZATION SRO SRO I I I I I I I I I CONTROL ROOM CONTROL ROOM CHEMISTRY MAINTENANCE INST E CONT REACTOR ENGINEERING NEALTH COMPUTER OPERATOR OPERATOR DEPARTMENT DEPARTMENT DEPARTMENT g@yG g@h g,HYSICS g P G SUPERVISOR SUPERVISOR SUPERVISOR SUPERVISOR SUPERVISOR SUPERv1SGR SUPERVISOR R0 20 5 I I I I I 1 1 I I $i AUXILIARY. AUXILIARY CHEMISTRY MAINTENANCE INST E CONT. REACTOR ENGINEERING NEALTC COMPUTER
- E OPERATOR OPERATOR DEPARTMENT DEPARTMENT DEPARTMENT ENGINEERING SERVICES PHYSICS Es*GINEERING DEPARTMENT DEPARTMENT DEPARTMENT DEPARTMENT
[mj 3." e~ E -}}