ML20149G471

Exam Rept 50-295/OL-94-01 for Units 1 & 2,administered During Wk of 940919.Exam Results:All Candidates Passed Exams

ML20149G471
Person / Time
Site:	Zion  File:ZionSolutions icon.png
Issue date:	10/17/1994
From:	Marissa Bailey, Burdick T NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III)
To:
Shared Package
ML20149G465	List: ML20149G462 ML20149G471
References
50-295-OL-94-01, 50-295-OL-94-1, NUDOCS 9410240004
Download: ML20149G471 (9)

Text

i j

i l

U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION REGION III Report No. 50-295/0L-94-01(DRS)

Docket Nos. 50-295; 50-304 Licenses No. DPR-39; DPR-48 Licensee: Commonwealth Edison Company 101 Shiloh Boulevard Zion, IL 60099 ,

Facility Name: Zion Station Nuclear Plant Examination Administered At: Zion Statian Nuclear Plant Examination Conducted: Week of Septem';er 19, 1994 Chief Examiner: /0[/7!jT'[

'M.' Ba'ittyNJ Date / /

/

I Approved By:

lb T. Burdick, Chief

/6//7/fy Date' /

Operator Licensing Section 2 Examination Summary Examination administered durina the week of September 19. 1994 (Report No. 50-295/0L-94-OlfDRS1)

Written examinations and operating tests were administered to five (5) senior reactor operator (SR0) applicants. An exit meeting was conducted on September 23, 1994, with plant management.

Results: All SR0 applicants passed their respective examinations.

The following is a summary of strengths and weaknesses noted during performance of this examination:

Strenaths

. Examination validation effort was significantly improved from that of previous examinations (Section 4 and 5).

. The crews demonstrated effective communication skills during each l dynamic simulator scenario (Section 4).

t i

9410240004 941018 PDR ADOCK 05000295 V PDR

1 l

1 l Examination Summary 2 l ,

! l l

. The crews demonstrated effective problem solving team work during each l dynamic simulator scenario (Section 4). l Weaknesses

. During operational exam validation, the training staff demonstrated unfamiliarity on how to use the Eberline Radiation SPING monitoring console (Section 5). l l

l

REPORT DETAILS

1. Examiners M. Bailey, NRC RIII, Chief Examiner S. Johnson, Contract Examiner, INEL B. Steinke, Contract Examiner, INEL

2. Exit Meetina Exit meeting with the Zion Station Nuclear Plant training and management staff was held en September 23, 1994. Section 3 of this report is a list of those who attended this meeting. The following items were discussed during the exit meeting:

. Strengths and weaknesses noted in Section 4.

. General observations relating to the plant noted in Section 5.

. Simulator items as noted in Enclosure 4, " Simulation Facility Report".

3. Persons Contacted Licensee Representatives R. Tuetken, Site Vice-President E. A. Broccolo, Station Manager

+D. B. Wozniak, Plant Operations Manager

+N. Valos, Projects Operating Engineer

+L. Laspisa, Training Supervisor

+T. Koleno, Licensed Operator Training Group Leader

+J. Scheif, Initial Operator Training Lead Instructor

+P. DiGiovanna, PWR Licensed Training Program Coordinator

+S. Mehula, Training Instructor

+B. Meade, Training Instructor

+M. Lindemann, Simulator Instructor

+D. Selph, License Operator Requal Training Lead Instructor U. S. Nuclear Reaulatory Commission (NRC)

R. Roton, Senior Resident Inspector P. Lougheed, Resident Inspector

+T. Burdick, Operator Licensing Section Chief, RIII

+B. Hughes, Operator Licensing Program Inspector, NRR

+F. Jaggar, Contract Exam Supervfsor, INEL

+Present at the management exit meeting on September 23, 1994.

3

4. Initial License Examination Observations

. a. Examination Development The licensee's reference material delivered for examination preparation was provided in two formats. The abnormal, emergency and technical specification procedures were adequately bound and labeled in hard book format. The administrative, operating and maintenance procedures were provided on computer discs in a wordprocessing format. The NRC examiners were able for the most part to extract the needed information for examination development with some exceptions:  ;

. System / Component figures attached to training lesson plans were not provided in either format. As a result, the exam  ;

writers had to rely on word description of system design and i operation to gain understanding of complex operations.

. Due to wordprocessing software limitations, difficulties were encountered by the NRC exam team during comprehensive question developmeat and validation of the licensee's reference material. The NRC is evaluating the benefits of j future usage of this method for transferring licensee's 1 material for exam development. )

i Written Examination Administration b.

The licensee's training staff provided the NRC exam team with valuable technical support and professional cooperation during the written examination review. This was a significant effort on the licensee's part as demonstrated by a thorough pre-exam written review requiring N0 post exam comments.

The post-exam review of the written examination by the NRC identified the following deficiencies in the candidates' knowledge as evidence by a majority (50% or more) of the candidates failing to provide the correct response for each particular knowledge area examined. This information is being provide as input to the licensee's system approach to training (SAT) process:

. Knowledge of conditions that effect the Containment Mini-Flow system.

. Knowledge of the Equipment Operator's responsibilities during a Control Room Inaccessibility condition.

4

l l

l

. Knowledge of plant response following the loss of an instrument bus. l l

. Knowledge of administrative requirements for taking a piece l of safety equipment out of service. 1

. Knowledge of administrative requirements for Shift Engineers during abnormal plant situations.  ;

c. Operational Examination Administration

1. Job Performance Measures (JPMs)

Strenath

. All of the candidates demonstrated appropriate familiarity with procedures,the main control board and plant layout, and administrative requirements necessary to perform their assigned tasks.

Weakness

. Some of the candidates did not consistently observe and verify expected control board indications during switch manipulation. Even though switch operations were performed in accordance with procedure, the operator is expected to verify proper indications of anticipated action

. During the performance of placing the RHR system into operation for cooldown, the two candidates with no previous operations experience were observed having difficulties in establishing letdown flow while controlling expected system pressure response. The procedure in use does not provide a NOTE or CAUTION to alert the operators to expect a pressure transient when performing this evolution. Experienced operators demonstrated proper con: J ami mitigated the pressure transient. The licensee tra n .ng representative was informed and acknowledged the need to review current training practice for possible change.

2. Ovnamic Simulator Scenarios Strenoths

. The crews were quick to recognize, acknowledge and respond to perceived radiological problems within the plant and provided prompt public announcement regarding the problem and its location. This action ensured ALARA concerns were addressed in a timely fashion.

5

. Effective use of team briefing technique by the SR0 position during various events added to keeping the crew informed of plant conditions and involved with recove.y actions.

Weakness

. Lack of consistent formal repeat-backs during selected simulator dynamic scenarios was observed but did not impact operator performance.

5. Trainina. Operations. Security. Rad Protection Support The facility's staff involved in the exam support effort demonstrated a professional demeanor and provided valuable technical support during exam validation and administration. Improved cooperation and increased reliability of the simulator greatly reduced the exam validation effort and minimized delays in the exam administration process. This effort ensured a reduction in each candidate's stress level.

Even though the licensee's training staff provided the NRC exam team with valuable technical support during the operational exam validation, one area of operations safety related training was deficient. During validation of simulator JPMs, the training staff demonstrated unfamiliarity with the Eberline Radiation SPING wnitoring console.

This caused the NRC exam team to question operator expectations during the examination and ultimately required the replacement of one JPM with a more appropriate one. Through discussion with other licensed operators the NRC exam team was able to determine that the Eberline console is used regularly in the main control room but on-the-job training (0JT) is required to gain proficiency and it may take months of practice. Since this monitoring console contains safety related radiation monitoring equipment addressed in Technical Specifications, the NRC considers the use of this equipment by a competent operator to be a necessary part of his assigned job task. Further conversation with licensed operators revealed that no extensive formal training or evaluation is conducted during simulator training on use of this equipment. Licensee training representative contacted stated that this issue would be looked into for possible change to current practice.

Plant Operations, Radiation Protection and Security personnel assigned to shift during the inplant portion of the examination provided l appropeiate oversight and prompt assistance. This effort ensured a '

timely c'ompletion of this portion of the exam with minimal impact on plant operations. Both units appeared to be in good material condition with one exception: l l

i l

l 6 l 1

i

. During 'the performance of an inplant JPM requiring the operation of Unit 1 Steam Generator "A" Atmospheric Relief Valve, the NRC l exam team noted that lighting was poor in the area surrounding the I relief valve. With no light fixture in the near proximity of the  !

relief valve and uniform dimness of those fixtures in the valve galley area, these factors contributed to the poor lighting. This i made it difficult for the operator to locate the required valve '

and associated controllers without use of a flashlight. I

6. Simulation Facility Observations l No simulator discrepancies or fidelity issues were identified during the j examination.

l l

l l

1 l

l l

l l

l l

l 4

7

ENCLOSURE 2 FACILITY COMMENTS AND NRC RESOLUTION OF COMMENTS No facility comments were submitted. A post-exam review by the NRC determined all portions of the examination to be valid and N0 changes were necessary.

i

)

l

. . o ENCLOSURE 4 SIMULATION FACILITY REPORT Facility Licensee: Zion Station Nuclear Plant Facility Licensee Docket Nos. 50-295; 50-304 Operating Tests Administered: Week of September 19, 1994 The following observations were made by the NRC examination team during the simulator portion of the September 1993 initial examination. These observations do not constitute audit or inspection findings and are not, without further verification and review, indicative of non-compliance with 10 CFR 55.45(b). These observations do not affect NRC certification or approval of the simulation facility other than to provide information which may be used in future evaluations. No licensee action is required in response to these observations.

ITEM QESCRIPTION NONE

!