ML20137H303
| ML20137H303 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Millstone, Haddam Neck File:Connecticut Yankee Atomic Power Co icon.png |
| Issue date: | 03/31/1997 |
| From: | NORTHEAST NUCLEAR ENERGY CO. |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20007F829 | List: |
| References | |
| PROC-970331, NUDOCS 9704020123 | |
| Download: ML20137H303 (22) | |
Text
_
Docket Nos. 50-213 50-245 50-336 50-423 B16329 l
l i
i i
Attachment 6 !
l Haddam Neck Plant Millstone Nuclear Power Station, Units 1,2, and 3 Process instruction Redacted Version March 1997 9704020123 97053123 DR ADOCK 05
o-4 Nuclear Training LOIT/ LOUT Audit Reviews Created by: Brad W. Ruth .I M}
Reviewed by: Roger A. McBeth !2D Approved by: Michael J. Ross M b 3 fl.f Page 1 of 22 Revision 2 March 24,' 1997
0
Background
Following the most recent Millstone Unit One Licensed Operator Initial Training (LOIT) class, in which 6 of the 7 candidates failed the NRC exam, Training management commissioned an independent root cause team (IRT) to examine this event. The subject NRC examination occurred during the week of December 2,1996. The IRT assembled and began their investigation during the week of January 6,1997.
As part of the IRT review, a records review of each student that participated in the NRC examination was performed. This review revealed that, in several cases, the required facility training for a Reactor / Senior Reactor Operator had not been completed. The requirements for completion of the LOIT class were,in part: a set of on-the-job training (OJT) cards,5 reactivity manipulations for Reactor Operators and Instant Senior Reactor Operators, and a specified number of hours of under-instruction watchstanding.
Once these deficiencies were identified, it was decided to broaden the scope of the audit to include both Licensed Operator Initial Training (LOIT) and Licensed Operator Upgrade Training (LOUT) classes at all four units. An independent audit review was commissioned by Training management to undertake this task. This audit team was assembled and began audit activities on January 30,1997.
Scope The initial scope of the audit review was to perform a detailed records review of the following license classes:
. Millstone Unit One 1996 LOUT e Millstone Unit One 1995 LOIT
- Millstone Unit Two 1996 LOUT
- Millstone Unit Two 1996 LOIT
. Millstone Unit Three 1995 LOIT ;
e Connecticut Yankee 1996 LOIT/ LOUT l Ilased on the initial findings of the audit review, it was decided to expand the scope of the audit l review to include the following license classes:
- Millstone Unit One 1993/94 LOIT/ LOUT l e Millstone Unit Two 1994 LOIT l
. Millstone Unit Two 1994 LOUT !
Millstone Unit Three 1993/94 LOIT l
Connecticut Yankee 1994 LOIT/ LOUT A complete listing of the target classes reviewed for each unit can be found in Attachment 1. l 1
i Page 2 of 22 Revision 2 l March 24,1997 I j
/
- Objective:
To determine whether the program requirements in place at the time oflicense classes were satisfied prior to submittal of the NRC 398 forms.
Audited Items The following items were evaluated during this audit:
- Required prerequisites completed
- Under instruction watches completed e Reactivity manipulations completed e Required OJT completed The criteria used for determining successful completion of above items are explained in detail later in this document.
Non-Audited items The following items were NOT evaluated during this audit:
- SAT-based program
. Training classroom / simulator attendance Process The first step in the process was to determine the Training Program requirements which existed at the time the courses were conducted. This determination was made by comparing the approval dates for the governing documents to the timc f=::: for each of the licenw classes being audited. A matrix (see Attachment 2) was developed which shows the completion regmrenn...t:
and prerequisites required by each of the governing documents for each program (LOIT/ LOUT) at each of the four units. The governing documents include:
. 10 CFR 55 i e NUREG 1021
- Training Program Implementing Procedure e
Training Program Description (unique to each class at each facility)
)
i Signed copies of the actual NRC 398 fonns submitted to the Commission were obtained from I records and/or from the Commission. These forms were reviewed to determine the actual date of .
submittal which was used as the cut-off date for training requirement completion.
Each of the governing documbnts were reviewed to determine the expected data for edch license class. License candidate records were then reviewed for the actual data. A comparison between actual and expected data was then conducted. These comparisons were then represented on a !
matrix for each license class. A typical requirements summary matrix is represented in j Attachment 3. i i
Page 3 of 22 Revision 2 l March 24,1997 i i
Each audit for each license class was conducted separately due to the varyim criteria in place for each license class at each of the four units over the large time-frame under consideration. Each '
license class audit is represented on a separate matrix.
Deviations between actual and expected data were re-examined and supporting documentation was obtained, where available. Where these deviations could not be explained, or resolved, the Training Department met with Operations management and determined a course of action for the subject license.
Summary of Discrepancies During the audit process, the audit team members kept a running log of the potential discrepancies for each candidate. Individual student summary sheets (see Attachment 8) were prepared for each candidate. The student summary sheets list all of the issues associated with each candidate's license, and include space for management disposition as well as review and approval signatures. The " Audit Reviewed" signature block will be signed be a member of the audit team responsible for the subject audit. The " Disposition Approved" signature is signed by a member ofline management responsible for the disposition.
Control of Revisions Following the submittal of the LOIT/ LOUT Audit Review summaries to the NRC, these materials will come under intense scrutiny by numerous organizations ouside the original document review process. This additional scrutiny may reveal some minor errors not discovered during the thorough review process these documents underwent prior to approval. If any errors are found in the material, they will be corrected immediately, and the applicable documentation will be revised. Depending on the scope of the revision, one of several paths will be followed to ensure timely distribution of the changes to the applicable organizations.
Distribution of Changes 1
Minor changes that do not affect the potential status of a candidate's license, or the overall l outcome of the audit will be submitted to the appropriate organizations as a revision via normal channels.
1 i
Significant changes that DO affect the potential status of a candidate's license, or the overall '
outcome of the audit will be submitted to the NRC and all other appropriate organizations on an expedited basis.
j I
l 1
Page 4 of 22 Revision 2 )
March 24,1997 I
=6 Specific Audit Criteria i Prerequisites I 4
-j The prerequisites required for successful completion of each license class were determined from [
the reviews of the governing documents and are shown on the prerequisites matrix for each l l
license class. Prerequisites were verified by researching the data contained in the candidates' !
individual training records. A typical prerequisites matrix is represented in Attachment 4. !
Shaded blocks in the matrix are not required for that candidate, "XXX"in a box indicates that the !
candidate fully satisfied that particular requirement. Note # in a box indicates that the candidate did not fully satisfy that particular requirement. The corresponding Note # at the bottom of the I page provides clarifying infonnation on requirements not fully met. Notes shown on the matrix in " RED", indicate a discrepancy with the candidate's NRC Form 398. Notes shown in black ,
denote programmatic and/or student issues not affecting the candidates license.
Under-instruction watches Under-instruction watches were verified using the following sources: '
. Trainees' records of on-shift time e Shift Manager's Log (as necessary) e Shift Turnover Sheets (as necessary)
- Control Room security access logs (as necessary)
The information obtained from each of the above sources was cross checked against the 1
, other two sources (when available) to provide reasonable assurance of the accuracy of the j
- data in each source.
Determination of reactor power levels for the time periods that under-instruction watches were stood was determined from the trainees records of on-shift time when available. In some instances when no power level was recorded in the trainees' records, the Shift Manager's Log and/or reactor power history records were accessed to determine the power level. When necessary to provide complete data, a matrix (Attachment 5) was developed for each license class being audited. Each matrix contains the following attributes:
Dates on which trainees stood watches under instruction.
Number of under instruction hours stood on each date.
- Differentiates between under instruction hours stood with the plant above and below 20% power.
Differentiates between source documents used to obtain number of hours under instruction credited to each trainee. -
Differentiates between under instruction hours stood prior to, and after submittal of the NRC 398 forms.
Page 5 of 22 Revision 2 March 24,1997 s
Reactivity manipulations All reactivity manipulations were reviewed and validated. The results are shown on the
" Reactivity Control Manipulation Matrix"(Attachment 6). The matrix includes the following concerning reactivity manipulations:
- Number toeged
. Number available (based on evolution (s) performed as recorded in the Shift Manager's Log and shown at the top of the matrix)
- Number actually credited based on this audit
. Number which creceded the number available Each reactivity manipulation signed off on the Reactivity Manipulation Individual Tracking Log was listed by date, individual performing the manipulation, and the type of manipulation.
Attachment 7 is a representation of a typical worksheet used. The compiled list of reactivity manipulations was checked for the following:
- To determine if an individual took credit for more than one manipulation of the same one without a turnover on any given day. If an individual recorded more than one reactivity manipulation of the same type on any given day, without a turnover, the extra reactivity manipulations were not credited to that trainee. (Not applicable to CY, for historical reasons, explained in detail later in this document.)
. Plant evolutions performed on specific dates were reviewed to determine the maximum number of reactivity manipulations avaih,ble to all of the trainees. The number of ava!Iable manipulations were compared to the number of reactivity manipulations Ioeved on any given day to determine the number of reactivity manipulations that could be credited for that particular day. If the number of credited manipulations creceded the number of available manipulations, the number of excess evolutions were recorded on the :natrix.
e in some cases, power level information, from Reactor Plant Engineering, was reviewed to determine actual power level changes to determine the number of reactivity manipulations available on the specific dates in question. Since some of the required reactivity manipulations specify that power level must be changed by l
>5%
Page 6 of 22 Revision 2 March 24,1997
t e
Criteria for Crediting Trainees With Reactivity Manipulations [
f The following constitute reactivity control manipulations:
Reactor startups to include the attainment of criticality (1 person per event).
Reactor control from point of criticality to the Point of Adding Heat (1 person per event).
Reactor shutdown from criticality to insertion of all control rods (1 person per event).
Manual control of Recirculation Flow during plant power changes of greater than or i equal to 5% of full load (1 person per 5% load change).
Manual control of Steam Generator water level during low power conditions, including startup and shutdown, where power level is less than 20% of full load (1 person per 5%
load change OR.1 person per 4-hour period if no power change).
l Reactivity changes to compensate f',r xenon buildup or burnout using control rods and f boration or dilution (PWR) or recirculation flow and control rods (BWR) (1 person per 4- :
hour period).
Boration or dilution control during a power change of greater than or equal to 5% of full load (1 person per 5% load change).
l l
Manual rod control during a power change of greater than or equal to 5% of full load (1 '
person per 5% load change).
Reactor power change greater than or equal to 5% of full load using turbine control (pWR only)(1 person per 5% load change).
The manipulation is performed by the candidate (not observed, not supervised -- 10CFR55 requirement).
The manipulation is dated and signed by a licensed Control Room watchstander.
Single power changes were credited as multiple manipulations if the candidate performed on different reactivity control stations (make-up control, rods, or turbine) for greater than or equal to 5% at EACH station.
Single power changes were credited as multiple manipulations on a single reactivity control station if a tumover occurred AND is documented (i.e., rotated from turbine control to rods &
make-up control then back to turbine control). .
Page 7 of 22 Revision 2 March 24,1997
For MP1, and MP3, single power changes of 5% to 100% were counted as one manipulation if performed at the same reactivity control station (turbine, rods and make-up) without a documented turnover. For example operation at the Turbine Control for a 30% power change and documented as 100% -> 90%,90% -> 80%,80% -> 70% was counted as 1 manipulation HQI 3. Basis: MP1 program guidance specifically prohibits counting one power change as multiple manipulations (as in the example), while the program documents do not address the issue.
For CY, single changes between 10% and 100% were counted as multiple manipulations (in 10%
increments) even at the same reactivity control station, given proper signatures and dates. Basis:
written historical and reconstructed evidence of a formal policy specifically allowing / promoting this practice has been identified. While differing from the MP1 standard, this policy does not appear to be inherently " wrong" and will be allowed.
For MP2, single changes between 0% and 100% were counted as multiple manipulations (in 5%
increments) even at the same reactivity control station, given proper signatures and dates. Basis:
the class trainees were given verbal direction specifically allowing / promoting this practice.
A decrease in power of 5% or more followed by an increase in power of at least 5% (or vice-versa) as part of the same evolution performed from the same reactivity control station was counted as 2 manipulations.
A decrease in power ofless than 5% followed by an increase in power ofless than 5% (or vice-versa) was counted as one reactivity manipulation if the total power change (increase + decrease) was 5% or greater.
Required OJT Completion of required OJT cards was verified by researching the data contained in the candidates' individual training records. Discrepancies were noted on the summary matrix. OJT completion was determined using one of the following methods: )
e Direct verification from complete package provided to the audit team e Nuclear Department Assistants (NDAs), under direct guidance from the review team, reviewed the microfilm records in the nuclear records vault and provided a list of discrepancies to the audit team.
In cases where NDAs were utilized to review records in the nuclear records vault, they were provided a list of the required OJT cards by the audit team. The NDAs then reviewed the microfilm records for completeness (e.g., all required signatures and dates recorded on the OJT cards). When the NDAs discovered a discrepancy with a particular OJT card for a license .
candidate, they recorded the OJT card and discrepancy on a matrix and made a copy of the page(s) in question. The list of discrepancies and copies of the associated pages of the OJT cards were then delivered to the audit team for review / disposition.
Page 8 of 22 Revision 2 March 24,1997
Attachment 1 -- Target Classes !
i' h1illstone Unit One 1996 LOUT -Initial scope Candidate? License Type' . License Status :' -
SRO(l) None SRO(U) Current (RO)
SRO(I) None SRO(1) None SRO(U) Current (RO) l SRO(U) Current (RO) l SRO(I) None l 51illstone Unit One 1995 LOIT - Initial Scope Candidate i License Type' License Status c SRO(I) None SRO(U) Current RO Current RO Current RO Current RO Current l
51illstone Unit One 1993/94 LOIT/ LOUT -- Expanded Scope )
Candidate. License Type.: License Status l RO Current SRO(U) None RO Current RO Current SRO(I) Current SRO(R) Current SRO Current SRO Current RO Current SRO(R) Current RO Current 51illstone Unit Two 1996 LOUT - Initial Scope !
Candidate : License Type - License Status-SRO(U) Current SRO(U) Current SRO(U) Current SRO(U) Current Page 9 of 22 Revision 2 March 24,1997
h Millstone Unit Two 1996 LOIT - Initial Scope Candidate" '
License Type? License Statusi SRO(I) ,
Current RO Current SRO(I) Current RO Current SRO(1) Current SRO(I) Current RO Current RO Current i SRO(I) Current RO None RO Current RO Current Millstone Unit Two 1994 LOIT - Expanded Scope Candidate:: , :> License Type.L . License Statusi [
RO Current ;
RO Current RO Current RO Current ,
Millstone Unit Two 1994 LOUT - Expanded Scope Candidate / . License Type ; License Status -
SRO Current SRO Current l Millstone Unit Three 1995 LOIT -- Initial Scope Candidate : License Typec License Status :<
SRO(U) Current RO Current RO Current RO Current SRO - Current RO Current SRO(U) Current SRO(l) Current SRO(U) Current SRO(I) -
Not Current -
Page 10 of 22 Revision 2 March 24,1997 i
w
Millstone Unit Three 1993/94 LOIT - Expanded Scope i Candidates -
License Typei: License Status::
RO Current RO Current RO Current .
Connecticut Yankee 1996 LOIT/ LOUT - Initial Scope Candidatei -
m License Typei - . License Status!
RO Current RO Current SRO(I) None !
RO Current SRO(U) None RO None ,
SRO(U) None !
SRO(I) None .
SRO(U) None RO None SRO(I) None RO None Connecticut Yankee 1994 LOIT/ LOUT -- Expanded Scope :
Candidate : License Type c License Status ; !
SRO(U) None SRO(U) None RO Current SRO(U) None RO None RO None i RO Current t
SRO(I) None RO None RO Cunent l
i Page 11 of 22 Revision 2 March 24,1997 i i
w..
Attachment 2 - Program Prerequisites / Completion Matrix Deenseret Approval / ifeit Program Prerequisites Conspletion Date 1 PIP Rev.0 All LOIT
- NC:w Qual (6.2.4.1) =
Full Attendance (6.l.kt)
NTM-3.078 12/25 S 3 e Reference 3.4, NUREG 1021 (6.2.4.2)
- 520 hours0.00602 days <br />0.144 hours <br />8.597884e-4 weeks <br />1.9786e-4 months <br /> on-shift (w/240 hrs. >20%) as required by Reference 3.4,
, (7.078) . Unit Specific TPD (6.2.4J) NUREG 102I (6.1.6.2)
NRC GFES (6.2.6.I)
- 5 reactivity manipulations (6.t.6J)
. Prior to 398 Submitta! 13 Weeks ofOJT (6.2.63)
- IPIP Rev.I All LOUT
- Onst Director (6.2.3)
- Full Attendance (6.l.6.1)
NTM-3.079 2SN5 .
Licensed I Year on Unit (6.2.4.1)
- UI to satisfy SAT and Technical Specifications (6.1.6.2)
(7.079)
- Eligible NUREG 102I (6.2.4.2)
- OJT complete prior to 398 submittal (6.2.6.2)
- Additional TPD requirements (6.2.4J) e GrES (6.2.6.1)
MPI 1 PIP Rev.2 MPI LO!I e As Delined m Program Descnption (6.2.3) e N/A MTM-3.026 9/21/89 MPI 1PD Rev: 3 MPl Loir = 2 Years Power Plant Experience (8 Yr Nuclear
- N/A NTM-3.026 1/23/90 Power Plant 6 months at MPI)(3.1.1)
- Completed MPI PEO Qualifications (3.1.2) e StafrLicenses complete PEO OIT Cards as defined by TPCC. (3.1J)
Page 12 Of 72 Revision 2 -
March 24,1997
.- __- _ _ _ . _ . . . . _ __ _ . _ . _ _ _ __ _ _. _ _ _ . . _ . _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . . . _ . . _ . . . ~ _ _ . _ . _ _ _ _ _ . . _ _ . . . _ _
Document Approval / t ' nit Program I*rerequisites Cenoptetion Date MPI SROI f . 4 year degree in engmeenng or applied se ence . N/A LOUT (311)
+ 2 years responsible nuclear power plant ciperience (may be staff engineer)(3.2.1.I) e Minimum 6 months at MP3 (3.2.I.2) e Ops Dept Candidates shall hase comp!cted PEO Qualification (3.2.I.3) e All other candidates shall have completed applicable portions of PEO OJT cards es directed by TPCC (3.2.I.4)
- Without 4 year degree must have: (3.2.2) e Minimum of 4 Yr responsible power plant experience as a Control Room Operator (2 years must be nuclear)(3.2.2.1) e Licensed RO at same facility I year (any of following): (3.2.2.2) e MPI Licensed RO I Year
. Licensed RO or SRO at another facility fix at least I 3 tar
. Navy Nuclear (PPWO. EOOW, PPWS, ERS, RO.CRW)
= Program Prerequisites may be waived by Validation of Equivalent Trsining
= Ops Dept shall complete PEO quals (3.2.23)
. Staff PEO OJT defined by TPCC. (3.2.2.4)
MP1 ~1 PD Rev.3 MPI LOLT e 3 3rs. power plant cxperience . 13 weeks (65 days)on shift pnor to 398 submittal (6.8.1 and 6.8.2)
NTM 3.026 3/2/95 (w/ I yr. at MPI)(3.1.I) = 20% ofOJT signed by management (6.8.4)
- e
. 6 months as PEO (3.1.2) RO position for RO(6A3) e GFI's prior to completion (3.I.3) = 5 reactivity manipulations (6.8.7) e fligh school diploma OR GED (3.I.4) . Evaluated by Ops or Trng performing 50% of all in-plant JPMs (6.8.5)
MPI SROIT e 4 yrs. power plant experience (2 yrs. nuclear)(6 e 13 weeks (65 days) on-shift prior to 398 sutwnittal (611 and 6.8.2) weeks RO power levels greater than 20*'. - may . 20% of OJT signed by management (6.8.4) be part of board time)(311)
= 1 yr. MPI RO or equivalent (3.2.2) = 5 reactivity manipulations (6.8.7) e 6 months at MPI (3.2J) e GFES (3.2.4) e Iligh school diploma OR GED (3.2.5)
Page 13 Of 22 Revision 2 March 24,1997
. . . . _ _ ___ _ i m___ 1 .
e i Decesment Approval / t! nit Program Preregleisites Completsee hoe MPI 1PD Rev.0 MPI LOUI e Umt Director, ANSI NI8.1-1974 NUREO 1021
- 4 weeks (20 days) OJT (8 hour9.259259e-5 days <br />0.00222 hours <br />1.322751e-5 weeks <br />3.044e-6 months <br /> shift mintmum) 6/10?96 and LOUT TPIP(3.0)
- While assigned to training - 6 weeks >20% power enay in completed
. 4 Yrs Responsible Power Plant Experience (2 of after conclusion of LOUT prior to issuing licenses. (3.6 and IIL On -
4 Nuclear)(3.1) Shift Training)
= .
Performed RO Duties MPI I Yr or(1021 SRO position for OJT(6.8.2) _
criteria)(3.2) e Students will be evaluated while performing at least 5% of all in-Plant
'j
- 6 months at MPI (3.3) JPMs. (6.8.4)
. NRC GES (3.4) . Instant SROs - 5 reactisity manipulations (6.8.6)
. Ifigh School Diploma or GED(3.5) e Due to plant shutdown all ISRO 6 weeks >20% following NRC License Examination (6.8.6)
MP21PD Rev.O MP2 LOlI e IPCC input with final selection by Umt Director =
13 weeks on shift (III.)
NTM 3.078 3/3064 (3.0)
- On shift time completed prior to 398 submittal (III.)
- Tech Spec 63 (Iligh School diploma OR GED,2
- Certified as successfully cornpleting LOIT program if. Training courses ,
years power plant experience, I year nuclear) completed and pass Fmal Simulator Exam, Written Exam, and In-Plant (3.0) JPMs (5.0)
SROIT e I PCC input with final selection by Unrt Director e Same as LOIT (3.0)
= Tech Spec 63 (Iligh School diploma or GFD,4 years power plant. I years nuclear 13.0)
MP2 IPD Rev.I MP2 LOUI
- Selected by Umt 2 Director (3.0)
- Day I-65 on shift (5.0)
LOUT 93-1 93-1
- 4 yrs. power plant experience (2 yrs, nuclear)(6 months on unit)(3.1) ,
- I yr. RO at MP2 (4 yr. engineering or applied science degree)(3.2) !
- Iligh school diploma OR GED(3.3)
MP2 IPD Rev.O MP2 LOII- = llTC input with final selection by Unit Director
- 13 weeks on shift (Ill.)
NTM-7.05I 3/31M5 95/96 (3.0)
- On shift time completed prior to 398 submittal (III.)
. Tech Spec 63 (Iligh School diploma OR GED,2
- Certified as successfully completing LOIT program if Training courses
. years power plant experience, I year nuclear) completed and pass Final Simulator Exam, Written Exam, and In-Plant <
(3.0) JPMs (5.0)
SROII e i PCC input with linet selection by Umt Director
- Same as LOIT (3.0) '
. Tech Spec 63 (Iligh School diploma or GED,4 years power plant. I years nuclear (3.0)
MP2 IPD Rev.I MP2 LOUI
- Selected by Unit 2 Director (3.0)
- Day I 50 on shift (5.0) 3/2195
- 4 yrs. power plant experience (2 >Ts. nuclear)(6 months on unit)(3.1)
- I yr. RO at MP2 (4 yr. engineering or applied science degree)(3.2) e fligh school diploma OR GED(3.3)
MP31PD Rev.I MP3 LO!I' . Selected by Unit Director (3.0)
- On-lhe-Job Training,4 weeks setf paced (Ill.)
NTM-3.078 6/29/89
- Fully qualified PEOs per NTM-3.077 (3.1)
= GFES (3.2)
, Page 14 Of 22 Revision 2 !
March 24,1997
e Doewment Approval / (!ait Program Prerequisites Contpletion Date MP31PD Rev.2 MP3 LOUT = Selected by Urat Duss,(3.0)
- On-lhe-Job Tramicg. 7 weeks, scif paced NTM-3 079 7/30/92 . Fu:Iy qualified Control Room Operators (3.0)
- ES-202 tequires minimum of 13 weeks can be completed prior to, durieg. or afkr the LOUT pogram.
MP31PD Rev.2 MP3 LOIT
- Sekcco by Umt Dnsdus (3.0) = Complete of $20 hours UI, cornpletson of apphcable watchstation NTM-3 078 10/2/96 e Fully Qualified PEO per NTM 3.077 (3.1.1) OJT Guide (RO. Inst SRO)(llL) e NUREG 1021, ES-202 Eligibility (3 yrs e 570 hours0.0066 days <br />0.158 hours <br />9.424603e-4 weeks <br />2.16885e-4 months <br /> on shift as ROBOP(III.A) l responsible power plant. I of 3 years at MP3,6
- 5 reactivity manipulations NUREG 1021. ES-202 (IILD.I.d) months PEO at MP3, Iligh School Diploma or . Training must te completed and NRC Form 398 signed by senior GED)(3.1.2) ir.se4.m.a and submitted to NRC at least 14 days prior to e GFES (3.1.3) examination date. (5.26)
. TPCC input 13.I.4)
SROIT e SRO LOIT checkhst 13.2.1) =
520 hours0.00602 days <br />0.144 hours <br />8.597884e-4 weeks <br />1.9786e-4 months <br /> under mstruction as RO, BOP, SM, US, & SRO wf majority
. NUREG 1021. ES-202 (unless waiver IAW ES- as US (Ill.A) 204 NTM I.16 NTM Desiation)(3.2.2,3.3,3.4) e Completion of applicable watchstation OIT Guide (RO, Inst SRO) e GFES (3.2.3) (Ill.)
e 5 reactivity manipulations (Ill.D.I.d) e Training complete prior to 398 submittal (S.20)
CY IPD Rev.5 CY LOI T e NSO quahreed (3.1.1) e 13 weeks on stutl(3.3.1) 12/1193 + Complete issued AO cards (3.I.2) e 5 reactivity manipulations (3.3.2) e I year on site ANSI N18.1-1971 (3.1J) = Complete control'nanipulations of Fig. 7.2 of1?IP (3.3.3)
- GFES (3.2.1)
SROII e Complete Non. Operator 1 rammg (iurde (StatT e Same as LOIT only)(3.l.41 CYIPD Rev.6 CY LOUT e 43rs. responsible power plant experience,
- 13 weeks on shift under direction of SRO (3.2.I)
I/25/94 includes:(3.I.1) e Complete Surervisory stills / Admin. training courses (3.2.2)
- I year as licensed RO any facility (3.1.1.1) = Supervbw .s and direction of controls during 5 reactivity changes as e Military Experience (EOOW, EWS, RO) one for defmenn LORT(3.2.3) one basis (3.I.1.2)
. Navy Nuclear Power School and Prototype counts toward one year. (3 I.I.3)
- e CY RO School on a one-forene basis. (3.1.I.4)
= Two Years must be nuclear power plant experience of which at least 6 months at CY.
(3.1.2) e ANSI NI8.1-1971 (4 years Power Plant Experience, I Year Nuclear Power Plant Experience, liigh School Diploma or GED)
(3.I.3)
Page 15 Of 22 Revision 2 March 24,1997 e u._ . - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _-__ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . _ . . _ - - _ - - _ . . - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ~ - +- --w
Attachment 3 - Requirements Summary (Typical)
Program PW#es: See Pre 4equeste summary gar detads Program Requirements to CFR 55 *
- SAT based program (not audited)
- TPD LOIT 94 Rev. 512J01/93
- 13 weets on the (520 hours0.00602 days <br />0.144 hours <br />8.597884e-4 weeks <br />1.9786e-4 months <br />)
_Lc_ ens _e Form 39t) lW O__wA__.
_ _ _ __ On_-S_nm_I nne__._ -. OrN Otspostion - - --OJT Cards Canmdale Narne Type Dave Satisfed SM Log At Last Date issue Hours W Hours issue %
G-"-1 RO 2/1!94 Juut $20 $20 t/1/94 No ww vpe e No Candida8e 2 RO 2/1/94 XXX 520 520 1/2/94 Pb -
e- ,-
Note 1 OJT-01, rmssag e -
m 3__ _RO_ 2 c .'s m
,_ _,,._ __g/1/94._ XXX_ _
w
_ 520 _520_ _ 113/94_ _ No_ =
_No_
_g .
NOTES:
- 1. OJT-01 not in canedate's record, candidate recent bemg evaluated by J. SrWth Page 16 of 22 Revision 2 March 24,1997 .
O O
I M!W6MM
, n :,
mw wm ,
s
, k t 1
._ s ,.
i , [. mmm .' (a . .
m
~
q ,
r P' ' ' ~M rf ;[ i
r ?l CX C l13i. [j3l3l3, +S
^
b fa ;a:
'. a senu w & '
. I I L U 33
.c -
e
, _ i
$ k c 3 i '. .
Y l'ffdAijh !;
i -i.'I ( I -
'i;; 2 5 05l35 , i bg ' '
[ l v, . i;
- g .
A i : ,= Aa t .
t' t tiH5 g er > . .
},!. t u ! i l g >
t 3
6 I l } g ! ! ! !
8 l ! l i !
'l ln j !i iill i
4 i .
- i I
[1e
! l ll!!
o s t
, :! t, i i!; i liol:ll 8 E i i !!! iJ!l,Jg!fi!I! ! l
! E E
.c: ! :l !: i ; i l ' ill,. iPi)#jlt1k ! q'!i!t U i :. d 0
- lg! I y<l.gl., } *I i ' l l 3., ., ,
Itj'EjII!lgg .' /g~;!b: r d'
3 C
! !h! -
.;;fllflfj h,[
, Wi, 3 34 ulh-94%g.. ijg c dil fl p mi ,
t m i!! i : l i .sr!- , , ;
i l
l l
1 i
l
)
- ; - l ,
m 1
n _
a E ~ - h . E ::, 2 o $
! t b, *Ib o IP. CIf ! =!
h 4 Nr_o lm3
! . lgJ , l
[i l_
! l 5 t l .-! o ,_
h mll[u o
$ J5 _ ,_
! o lg'u ll*
i
! m li.$
J_ m ls) ) li l:*6 )8 6
i m
o
'5 1 !l1 , I gi i
g5 l.
gu o lllB , l ,b 1 _
! lr6 J g$ u m
i
,. u l 1
u m Jh g
llg;f l 1
b nb 1 -
Ii
! , l,5 ,
- 15 5 ,
lei U_o u , ,
! lgii
! m lg0 Ig
, j5 , l l
t I g! , i
? ,
m lgii , i m
m lg1 lg
! . lya '/5 m lgi l i I I i l , ,
! m llgu ., lg '6_ lrn I
! m l
n!$ m !ln6 m m
llrf ri n! !u !
m l
' u$ $ l lt! $ l ri l
- e i i
! m Ur$$
m m lr$
lu$ m lty t ,
I nN m ln$ l,$
m ll"y ,
ub b m .
lgw l ,
lg m lgu lg'ii I g6 i ,
lg:
,, l,6 lu!
lgu
! m llrY l
l I
n! ! i m m ll( b
'JM5 l
l lm5 l
5 m lg!
lr i I I
ub g!*i m
m -
H.5 n5 ,
l lga g m l : *6 I g0 m
_ lgy lln I
i l g m l g I g5
! lgn m llli r I g6 m -
i i
m ig0 Hg:
g6 m
m l lga lg g
, l
!l n' I g0 g: m m lli I
g6 l,!
l,$ m l,!u l!Y l,
le i I m
l.! 6 I ,
i ,
l,$ , l 1 ,b _
l,$
l,$
m il.!6 l!Yi ! 1
.b m
m l!
i i,b ,. l, 6 l!y I n! m m H,$ ,!
l ln5 ! m l!'i ,'
.b ! m l,$ m , l!n i A
l m l,$ $ ., l"0 l
l,5 lgi l ,
I
.h m
ln$
l li$ m lg* lgu l"Ii l
m l:*t I f
t g6 m
m Hg 6_ g m liS l
lgu m
i:'i l i I
i!
g$
! m !l,0 m ! l"Ii !
.! m, -
5 ey l Y
i ,
o ln*ii l
, i mb
, l
! m J ,
Hm$
l l*$
1.
l l
l 1 ll;6n 6*
l J
eh m m$
l
- m. o l l
$ J t!
l mM l
l 5 .
i $
l l
5 .m lmY l
laIi n
f f_
~_
eb .
mb mb m
! l 3 l 5 ls' IL i
l; l.h m l l
5 5 m l;'i ii l!:'j i ,b 5 d m i . f m .
ullq ?l I
i m Ur$ m.Ir
. l ltn
, I i
l
,, , 'th m .
Uill i
li} 3)
I 1 ,
- m. m
. lirl ! i 4$r I m -
m I ,
, ; 1 : _
y2 E a9
@G5$
rEbr g$
Attachment 6 - Reactivity Control Manipulation Matrix (Typical)
Date Desertption of Transient froen SS Log 01/2094 10% med eceactiert 10% aoss reesee 03CtW94 Reeder sterna Reactor t'ip 03r2994 Reactor starha 10% - 30% bad stresse 03f30r94 30% - 70% lead ricrea.e. 70% - 100% load ru:rease 04r11/94 90% had redJesort 10% load reesse 04r21/94 10% load reducsort,10% bas ecosse 07tt1/94 Reector studpan torn 100% power 08/2994 10% toed % 10% load rewase Re u.ay C W Apaniptetanoris 01/2Gv1994 Transent O & 28/1994 Trartsent OS29t1994 Transumt ON30t1994 Transsent Categorf-- ' " Category Desertption- Available Leg 'Avat Credt Eri Lof Avat Ciedt Es~ Cog ~ Avai" Ciidt Enc ~ Cog--' 4~ wee- dreite sir ~e g R.m =ecear - n . a ==zws. _:_. ..__. m cree.my
,p,. ._simeup_ __ __ __ __ _ _ __
a ts.rw n er P.mt of Adeng H.at 1 pw st.n.u. p_
__3__ __ _ ___ _
mat.t a.es t.p._r sh_ues e
_7 , , _ , , , , , , , , , , _ .
%e(BWR)dwtug gas.e p re,enys 5% et 1 p.r 5% I $
%81 d g_ . _
%.a.ec revett e.cene.a.m.s.r a a tuud6ee or tpunMiat
. - . - .e .r .s% i- %
e.ng.
~ y- a e=>, p , e., ~. s% We g. , - s% w.e
- - ~ ~ ~- -- -- - - - - - - - - - - -
. r ~
Iotas Exceeded Iotal Enceeded 1otai Exceeced Tctas Exceeded.
i on w=n Reactivtty Control ManipulaDorts 04/11/1994 Transsent 04/21/1994 Transsemt 0/411/1994 Transient Transent
~-C8/29f94 Cate,orf - - cat.cory Desertpuan ~Avanabi. to, ~ Avai~ Credt ee- cog ~ Avat Cedt exe- tog- AveOCredt exc~ Log ' 'Avet d5dt 5xc~
i ..,-.~e._
ws
_ j.. _ , , , , , _ , , , , , ,,. _ . . . .
ans wee.n er P.we er Aasas H.st 1 pw statup
_ f. . ,,,,,, ,,,,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,
c.nt.1 v.es t p., smyggym,n
%w (PWR) dustig pl nl p.m.r cPeng.s
- 5% of t p,, gas g,,e
%si e
- '9 o m r x.ri m ., -
~
'6
- ~
nan.u. c.d cone dunne e p.m.r ch.nge .t >$%
~' ~ ~'- - - ' ~ - -'- '-~~ - - - ' ~
t per sg i d
,,.% t - ,% ,
.~ ,.
Totat Exceeded Total E xceeded Totallaceedeo Total Exceeded.
l On watcts I
l Page 19 of 22 Revision 2 March 24,1997
Attachment 7 -- Reactivity Manipulation Worksheet (Typical)
Date Category Name Credited 1/1/91 1 Candidate 1 XXX 1/1/91 1 Candidate 2 XXX 1/1/91 1 Candidate 3 XXX 1/1/91 1 Candidate 4 XXX 1/1/91 1 Candidate 5 XXX 1/2/91 1 Candidate 1 XXX 1/2/91 1 Candidate 1 1/2/91 1 Candidate 1 1/2/91 1 Candidate 1 1/2/91 1 Candidate 1 1/3/91 .
2 Candidate 2 XXX 1/3/91 2 Candidate 3 XXX 1/3/91 3 Candidate 2 XXX 1/3/91- 3 Candidate 3 XXX 1/4/91 6 Candidate 5 XXX 1/4/91 6 Candidate 5 1/4/91 6 Candidate 5 1/4/91 7 Candidate 5 XXX 1/4/91 7 Candidate 5 1/4/91 7 Candidate 5
]
4 Page 20 of 22 Revision 2 March 24,1997 1
P Attachment 8 -- Individual Student Summary Sheet (Sample)
Student Summary Sheet Unit: Program: '
Student Name: ,
License Type:
OJT lasuga None Under Instruction Hours None Beactivity Manipulations None Program Prergouisites None I
Audit Reviewed:
i Disposition None Required i i
Disposition Approved:
1 l
P t
i i
Page 21 of 22 Revision 2 ,
March 24,1997 !
,