ML20237F123

Ack Receipt of Informing NRC of Actions Taken to Correct Violations Noted in Insp Repts 50-272/87-21 & 50-311/87-26

ML20237F123
Person / Time
Site:	Salem
Issue date:	12/16/1987
From:	Gallo R NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I)
To:	Corbin McNeil Public Service Enterprise Group
References
NUDOCS 8712290374
Download: ML20237F123 (2)

See also: IR 05000272/1987021

Text

- _ - _ _ - _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ .__

.

M5

. .;

..

J

DEC161337 l

i

l

Docket Nos. 50-272

50-311

,,-

Public Service Electric and Gas Company

ATTN: Mr. Corbin A. McNeill Jr.

Vice President - Nuclear

P.O.. Box 236 i ',

Handcocks Bridge, New Jersey 08038 > ,

,

.,

'

'

Gentlemen:

SUBJECT: Inspection 50-272/87-21 (OL) snd 50-311/87-26 (OL)

This refers to your letter dated October 28, 1987, in rcsponse to,saur letter ,'i-

dated August 27, 1987.

r

, .I i

,

'

Thank you for informing uo of the shorf and long term corrective' a.:.tions <1

documented in your letter. These actiork will be examined during a #uhre"#

'

'

inspection of your requalification progrw p

1 r > < v.

Your cooperation with as 12 eereciated ,

j fe

Sincerep',,i );' ,

,.

(,o h

i;s ll n

(

R OTD.i. J L t T f ,, f

-

.-

,'s

,

.I

,

,

,- -

.

i

,

i ,

> w

,

,

g g ,

, 1

[

'

l Goberfd Gallo, Chief

Operatians Eiranch

'

'

a

-

f Divisioc of Reactor 'Afety i

, , s , y- .

'

i * ' I

cc w/cac1- > ,

Thomas S. Shaw

J. M. Zupko, f r.,

Jr., Vice i'rnident - Production , f4 Z' b.},  ; 3

General Manager - Salem Operatiop ,\ $ .-

3

'

B. A. Prnton,11anager, Licensing and Regulations. E. viiltenberger, ). Vice jPresidentj~- N

General Manrger Nutlear Safety Review .

) - {'

M. J. Wettertahn, Esquire

R. ; Fryil.y, Jr. , Esquice

c

/

-

0

,e

('/)'(

>*/

>

,

Public Document Room (PDR)

'

,

,' i ) s \, / \

Local Public Docmnt Room (LPDR)  ! 4 i

- Nuclear .iaf ety 1.1 formation Center (NSIC) ,'

', s

I'

N3C h sident Inspector ,

'

j 5

State of New Jersey .

/

3. ' ,

j (

' t ,

,

',, *

.,> ) *"

~? ).

'

",_

,

1

-l ,

t

/

t,

'

4 . > .,

OFFIlALRECORDCOPY OL P. SAW p h BM01.0.0

12/3fpF ' l ~

^

8712290374 ' B712.16 '

'f'

>

'

bqt

DR ADUCK 05000272 '

,

-

DCD t c' Ilg

__, _> ' - > _ t _1_

,,

1

p,

~

r

I ,

( ..

s.

..

. .g

i

)

l

l + r

'

l bec w/ encl:

Region I Docket Room (with c. occurrences).

Management Assistant, DRMA (w/o enc 1)

DRP Secti.:n.. Olief

Robert J. EresT DRSS . s,

,

'

s <

i

)

11

,

,

. , ,

.

(,

4

,

% a \

, 13

s

t

i. i

i -

1

e

b

e

'{

RI:D RI: d5* ORT L

Dudi t

Ke{ (

12/M/87 12/ /87 ., 13/{b/ V f '

OFFICIAL RECORD COPY 0.1RLSALEM 87-21 - 0001.1.0

U./10, C7 ,.

!

1

• $ a

'

_,.

- . - - - - - - - - . _ _ _ _ . - _ -

-_-

.'

.e. i jk

.. 1

'

/

..

Pubbc Service

Electnc and Gas

Company

o

Stiven i. Writenberger Pubhc Service Eiectnc and Gas Company P O Box 236, HancoCxs Bndge. NJ 08038 609 339-4 '99

/ce penbq {

t u er c u q ues

.

October 28, 1987

NLR-N87206

United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission

Document Control Desk

Washington, DC 20555

Gentleme n:

SALEM LICENSED OPERATOR REQUALIFICATION EXAMINATION

REPORT RESPONSE

SALEM GENERATING STATION

t UNIT NOS. 1 AND 2

(I DOCKET NO. 50-272/50-311

Public Service Electric and G.as Company (PSE&G) hereby submita

its response to your letter dated August 25, 1937,

"Requalification Program Evaluation Report Nos. 50-272/87-21 (OL)

>

-

and 50-311/87-26 (OL)." An Examination Peview Team was formed to

determine the root cause of the examination failures. The

findings of the review team along with the sopropriate correctivr;

actions are included in the attachment.

PSE&G believes the short and long term corrective actions will

significantly improve both operator tr6ining e.nd operator

.

p e r +? ro' n a n e . This, coupled with a more challenging and brcader '

'

operator k weledge requirement, should ensure successful

-cow.intion in all ft.ture requalification exams. '

t

S'nculd you have any cuestions concerning this response, please

contact us.

Sincerely,

- (m t,c, f A

V

, Attachment

q,

m { i rs ,- , . , < ,

__

y V ./w U v

. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

_ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

Document Control Desk 2 10-28-87

l

C Mr. E. C. Wenzinger, Chief

Reactor Projects Branch No. 2 -

USNRC Reaion I

Mr. D. C. Fischer

USNRC Licensing Project Manager

Mr. T. J. Kenny

USNRC Senior Resident Inspector

Mr. W. T. Russell, Administrator '

USNRC Region I

Mr. D. M. Scott, Chief

Bureau of Nuclear Engineering

Department of Environmental Protection

380 Scotch Road

Trenton, NJ 08628

.

k

--

~~

f

-

ATTACHMENT

ROOT CAUSE FOR THE HIGH FAILURE RATE

l

l

No single root cause for the high failure rate could be

determined; however, three diverse groups of failures were

revealed.

1. Two of the Senior Reactor Operator (SRO) failures resulted

from a single action taken during the operational exam. One

.

SRO was acting as Shif t Supervisor and the other as the desk

I operator. While in a Dropped Rod scenario, the desk

operator reset the negative flux rate trip at the Shift

Supervisor's command prior to being directed to do so by

procedure. In review it was determined that lack of

familiarity with the procedure, trying to move too rapidly

through the procedure and poor judgement in not evaluating

the potential consequences of this action all contributed to

l this operational error.

l

2. One staff SRO and one staff Reactor Operator (RO) who were

members of the same team performed unsatisfactorily on the

simulator portion of the operational examination. These

I failures were attributed to insufficient experience as part

I of the control room functional team. In reviewing simulator

l training it was found that staff license simulator training

time was unintentionally reduced, to increase shift

simulatcr training time. Thus, a degradation in staff

license skills and performance had resu;ted.

3. Twc SROs and one RO failed one or more sections of the

wr.itten examination. These failures were not specifically

related; however, a need for ensuring that a broader

technical knowledge is maintained by all operators at all

times was identified.

Sh0RT TERM CORAFCTIVE ACTIONS

1. All individual exam failures have been remediated in f

accordance with Training Procedures (TP)-305, " Licensed

Operator Requalification." All remedial training and

re-examination is complete. We consider this item closed.

2. The Operations Department has revised Operations Directive

( OD- 15 ) to describe the proper use of Operations Department

procedures. This will standardize the use of procedures and

ensure that proper procedural sequence is followed. We

consider this item closed.

i

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ - - .

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - - -

..

,. 3.

An increased emphasis on understanding the basis for

procedural steps, cautions and continuous actions has been j

incorporated into the Requalification Program. This will  !

lead to a better overall understanding of the procedures and

I

ensure a more strict compliance to them. We consider this

item closed,

4. i

The two SROs involved in the Rod Drop scenario have been 1

!

counseled by the Operations Department management concerning

the proper use of procedures and strict adherence to them. i

This item is considered closed. j

5.

i The detailed examination review revealed eleven topics

needing

have beenincreased emphasis

prioritized during training. These topics

and incorporated

Requalification Cycle. We consider this into the 1987-88

item closed.

6.

A set of " generic requalification objectives" have been

developed

to describe the general areas of technical

information

know,

for which a licensed operator is accountable to

at all times,

This should broaden the scope ofas partlicensed

of the requalification

operator process.

knowledge,

all enabling the operator

future Requalification exams. to successfully complete

closed. We consider this item

7.

The need

result, for staff licenses has been re-evaluated. As a

will resultseveral staff licenses have been terminated. This

needs for both theincreased

in an remainingfocus on the

staffspecific traiaing j

and tae licensed shift personnel.

licensed individua}s l

oetter overall exam performance in theThis f u t uwill

r e ,,result

Wo

in

consicer 3

th'.s item c]cseo. i

LONG TEPX CORRECTIVE ACTION

1.

A standard of perfor.mance governing the conduct of control

room operators, including command and control functions

during

31, 1987.transient conditions, will be developec by Decem'rer j

Segment 4, This standard will be incorporated in the j

1987-88 Requalification Training Cycle. i

5

2.

Senior Operations Department and other station line

management will participate more often in the observation

and critique of simulator training sessions.

!

3.

The Operations Training Group is currently reviewing

NUREG-1122 K&A items to ensure all significant items are ,

included in the Operation Training Program Learning

Objectives.

4.

Requalification Examination difficulty is being increased by

incorporating a significant number of questions requiring

synthesis and analysis. This process has been included in

the

closed.

current Requalification Cycle. We consider this item

i

1

. - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - _ _ _ _ _ - _ . .,