ML20087A858

Forwards Complete Response to Const Implementation Overview Item 056 Re Inconsistencies Noted During Evaluation of Training for Pqci C-1.50

ML20087A858
Person / Time
Site:	Midland
Issue date:	02/29/1984
From:	CONSUMERS ENERGY CO. (FORMERLY CONSUMERS POWER CO.)
To:	STONE & WEBSTER, INC.
References
CSC-7386, NUDOCS 8403080247
Download: ML20087A858 (4)

Text

..

CONSUMERS POWER COMPANY MIDLAND ENERGY CENTER T'*"******

C8C-7386 50-330 Date: February 29, 1984 To:

Sto'ne & Webster P O Box 1963 Midland, MI 48640 Rlt IPAL ' STAFF i

ulb.

W!

Attached Is:

Partial Response To

' vaAi

,e S5~(N&Ts=

f

~

g X

Complete Response 7o s q. g

!ma'n

'A0

C5 e

-'t g

For Your Information

m. m Other

==

Description:==

Tracked Information Item 056.

l l

l Signature: ',

'JGKeppler, NRC Region 'III tw/a -

cc:

JJHarrison, NRC Region III w/a i

RJCook, NRC Site w/a l

RAWells, MPQAD w/a BHPeck, MEC w/a NIReichel, MEC w/a DDJohnson, MEC w/a 8403080247 840229 MAR g IM4 PDR ADOCK 05000329 S

PDR

._SOl iI i_

I' Sheet 1 of 1

'7 "" "

POINT NUMBER STONE & WEBSTER lHOL 05 CONSTRUCTION IMPLEMENTATION

, O TRACKED ACTION ITEM

@ TRACKED INFORMATION ITEM N/Bl4NB NFCLE4R Fl4NTJ.0. NO. /4509 O TRACKED RECOMMENDATION ITEM REFERENCE (S)

C UNTRACKEDITEM Checklist MP-MIS-008E-0001 O HOLD POINT NOTIFICATION CONDITION DETAILS During evaluation of the training for PQCI C-1.50 CIO observed the following:

a) The reference document section of lesson plan shows C-306 at Rev 11 when Rev 12 is current.

b) Attachment A Table B-2 the " note" paragraph addresses spacing of different diameter grouted anchor bolts, referenced Spec C-305

~

has a spec change notice #13007 which also addresses spacing of different diameter anchor bol.ts.

There is an inconsistency between the two.

CIO requests a review to see what impact these items have on the training provided.

Also provide information on how MPQAD assures that changes,such as SCN#13007 or revision 12,are reflected in the lesson plan, when pertinent.

YES

[o".s, NO ATT/CHMENTS ON APPROVED /lDAT DATE RESPONSE REO'D.

INITI ATOR/ D ATE It L}p0 yMk a/,y/gy 2/24/84

,ppu 2,,yjpg

/

/

/

RESPONSE

Reference Page 1 of attached correspondence, Serial 27325 dated February 24, 1984, GFEwert to BHPeck.

(PAGE YES w o.* si NO ATTACHMENTS EST. CORRECTIVE ACTION RESPO DfT TITLE DATE COMPLETION DATE l/c (st57 h y I 2-) ${

/

RESPONSE ACCEPTED DATE REGPONSE VERIFIED / CLOSED DATE n

A To BHPeck

?

From GFEwert g[p/

LONSUMERS POWER Date February 24, 1984 COMPANY Subj ect MIDLAND ENERGY CENTER PROJECT-Internal CIO ITEMS 056 AND 057 Correspondence FILE 24.0 SERIAL 27325 CC DEBeaudoin GEParker GFE 61-84 IDDJ'ohnso'n NIReichel "HPNunes~

RAWells Following is MPQAD's response to the subject Stone. and Webster CIO Items:

ITEM 56 Part A This part reports that the MPQAD lesson plan for PQCI C-1.50 in the refer-ence document section referenced Revision 11 of Specification.C-306 while Revision 12 is the current issued revision. This is in keeping with current pra'ctice in the MPQAD Training Branch and in no way impacts the validity of the training.

MPQAD lesson plans are developed utilizing various documents as refarences.

In order to know the revision of the document when the lesson plan was developed the revision number is included in the lesson plan. Thereafter the revision number is only changed when a revision to the lesson plan is required. Required revisions to lesson plans are determined by appropriate personnel and are based on changes to documents which impact lesson plan source documents which in turn may impact information in the lesson plan.

In this case the revision of Specification C-306 from Rev 11 to Rev 12 did not result in a. revision to the PQCI.

In turn -a revision to the lesson plan was not required.

As a result there is no training impact and the training is acceptable.

i Part B This part reports that PQCI C-1.50 Attachment A Table B-2 is inconsistent l'

with referenced Specification C-305 which has a Specification Change Notice No. 13007 against it.

This is also in keeping with current MPQAD practice and does not impact training.

In this case the' process outlined in the second paragraph of the response to l

Part A was also followed to determine if the lesson plan required revision.

~

(

Since the PQCI-did n'ot require revision due to the SCN, the lesson plan did.

l not require revision and there is no impact on training.

The basis for not revising the lesson plan is that the SCN is clear and usable by inspection personnel without additional training or revision to the.PQCI.

Inspection personnel are required by the PQCI General l

'Instructicas to research and~ utilize the latest inspection criteria.

I IC0284-0003A-QLO7

+

..(

. 2 ITEM 57

'This item recommends that evaluations that are used as part of the " approval,

to instruct process" be performed on no later than the first training class.

taugnt. MPQAD Training Branch practice is to evaluate on instructor the first time'that an instructor instructs.a course (lesson plan or lesson plans). This in fact is requireo by Training. Branch Instruction TBI 1.3.

The TBI establishes a process by which an instructor becomes approved to instruct both a first course and additional courses. The TBI does not require that an instructor become reapproved each time a lesson plan is revised. This is not necessary as the instructor has demonstrated capa-bility through the original approval process. The evaluation may take place

~

doing a pilot class, on actual class, or during any other method that allows the instructor to demonstrate capability and be evaluated.

S 9

0 r0 t

e I

e IC0284-0003A-QLO7

.