ML20245H943
| ML20245H943 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Quad Cities  |
| Issue date: | 07/28/1989 |
| From: | Stols R COMMONWEALTH EDISON CO. |
| To: | Davis A NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8908170363 | |
| Download: ML20245H943 (5) | |
Text
g w j.,
m 'o
- . A,,- - ' /
C$mmonwealth Edison s f
l.
w.
2;t 72 Wzst Adams Street, Chicago Illinois
. Address Reply to: Post Othce Box 767
'" N Chicago, Illinois 60690 0767
' July 28, 1989
.[
]
Mr. A. Bert Davis Regional-Administrator
.U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
- Region III 799 Roosevelt Road Glen Ellyn, IL' 60137 Subject Quad Cities Nuclear Power Station Unit 1 Response to Requalification Examination Report; 50-254/OL-89-02 NRC Docket No. 50-254
' Reference G.C. Wright'le'tter to Cordel1' Reed dated June 28, 1989.
Mr. Davis The referenced letter transmitted the Requalification Examination' Report for.the NRC Administered Requalification' Examination. conducted during the period of May 11-13, 15, and 16, 1989, at the Quad Cities Nuclear Power Station.
In the report your staff identified two (2) programmatic weaknesses with the requalification program.
Attachment "A" provides the corrective action plan to address the programmatic weaknesses. Attachment "B" provides an implementation schedule for the correctivs actions associated with rework of requalification examination materials.
Please direct any questions you may have concering this matter to this 4
office.
Very truly yours, j
l l
1 Nuclear Licensing Administrator
_]
R. Stols 1
Im l
l l.
j l-Attachment 8908170363 890728 PDR ADOCK 05000254 i
y PDC
(.
ces G.C. Wright - Region III 3
T.M. Ross - Project Manager, NRR d, UI 2 8 jggg j
j R.L. Higgins - Senior Resident Inspector, Quad Cities
\\\\
/~
<U221T
gm AIIACHMENT "A" EESP_Q!iSE TO PROGRMRiATIC WEAKNISSEE 1.
KEAEHESS:
The facility-supplied requalification examination material was found to be unsuitable for implementation when initially reviewed by the NRC in March, 1989.
Due to the exam schedule constraints, the rework effort was limited to those' portions of the material selected for the actual exam.
Rework is required for the remainder of the facility requalification exam material. The quality of the examination materia) was identified as a programmatic weakness.
EtapsnEn:
The remaining requalification exmnination material will be reworked and developed in accordance with the guidance provided by the NRC examiners. The examination material will meet or exceed the quality standard established during the examination material rework performed for the May, 1989 NRC administered Requalification Examination.
Canective ActiondsplementslLtign_Datg Milestones for accomplishing the rework are defined in Attachment "B".
2.
HEAENESS:
Problems related to the use and oversight of contractor evaluators during the simulator portion of the examination were identified as follows:
a.
More than one simulator operator was used during the examination.
These operators had not participated in the examination verification conducted two weeks prior to the examination.
As a result, some of the simulator scenarios were not run as the examination team anticipated.
ReEPDAEen Quad Cities Station Training Department has strived to utilize the same simulator operator to validate the requalification examination scenario and to run the simulator during the actual examination; however, due to unforeseen circumstances or scheduling difficulties, deviation from this practice is sometimes necessary. Unfortunately, deviation from this practice was unavoidable during the NRC administered requalification exam due to schedule constraints.
0221T:2
.. L The Administration and Management Information (AMI) document for the l'
License Retraining Program will be revised to specify that the same simulator operator (s) should be'used.for validation as well as for operating the simulator during the annual requalification examina-tion. The AMI revision will also address'the approval mechanism required in the event that, due to unforeseen circumstances, the same
. simulator operator (s) cannot be used. The approval process will ensure that the substitute simulator operator (s) are familiar with the scenario prior to the conduct of the simulator examination.
Corrective Action Implementation:
The AMI will be revised by September 31, 1989.
HEAEHEES:
b.
More than one contractor evaluation team was also used during the examination. This lead to inconsistent evaluation being given to the three crews.being examined.
EREPonse Commonwealth Edison concurs with this observation. The AMI document will be revised to specify that one team of evaluators should be utilized for the annual requalification examination simulator demonstration. This will ensure consistency of the evaluation. The revision to the AMI will also address the approval mechanism required for substitution of an evaluation team member in the event substitu-tion is required due to unforeseen circumstances.
Corrective Action Implementation:
The AMI will be revised by September 31, 1989.
W1AIHEss:
c.
The facility training and operations representatives provided minimal participation during the crew debriefings throughout the simulator examinations. This detracted from the overall quality of crew evaluations since the contractor evaluators cannot be expected to convey the facility training and operating philosophy.
0221T:3
__2__---
._____-__-____-____-___a
EHEPDanet Evaluation teams comprised exclusively of contractors will not be utilized for the 1990 Requalification Examinations.
The evaluation team will primarily consist of licensed or licensed certified personnel from the Station's Operation and/or Training Departments.
l Contractor evaluators may be utilized to augment the evaluation l
teams, as necessary.
Corrective Action Implamentatlant The new composition of the evaluation team will be implemented for the 1990 Requalification Examination.
i 02217:4
-e ATTACHMENT "B" TIMELINE FOR OUAD CITIES REOUALIFICATION EXAMINATION MATERIALS DEVELQEMENT i
TASK HEADING HIARI FINISU Project Ongoing 6/25/90 A.
Item Generation Ongting 12/26/89
- 1.. Section A Questions Ongoing 12/16/89 2.
Section B Questions Ongoing 12/16/89 3.
JPMs Ongoing 12/16/89 y
B.
Item Review Ongoing 2/07/90 1.
Section A Questions Ongoing 2/07/90 2.
Section B Questions Ongoing 2/07/90 3.
JPMs Ongoing 2/07/90 C.
Item Rework Ongoing 3/09/90 1.
Items Needing Rework from 1989 Ongoing 12/26/89 I
Requalification Examination 2.
Section A Questions 8/28/89 3/09/90 3.
Section B Questions 8/28/89 3/09/90 4.
JMPs 8/28/89 3/09/90 D.
Item Acceptance 9/25/89 4/05/90 f
1.
Section A Questions 9/25/89 4/05/90 2.
Section B Questions 9/25/89 4/05/90 3.
JMPs 9/25/89 4/05/90 E.
Scenario Validation 9/25/B9 4/05/90 1.
Section A Scenarios 9/25/89 4/05/90 2.
Dynamic Scenarios 9/25/89 4/05/90 F.
Time Validation 9/25/89 5/25/90 1.
Section A Questions 9/25/89 5/25/90 2.
Section B Questions 9/25/89 5/25/90 L
3.
JMPs 9/25/89 5/25/90
(
(
4.
Dynamic Scenarios 9/25/89 5/25/90 G.
Submission of Materials to NRC for 5/25/90 6/25/90 Requalification Examination, September, 1990.
J 0221T 4 l
l a
._____-_A