ML20128L342: Difference between revisions

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
VisualWikitext
StriderTol Bot insert
 
StriderTol Bot change
 
Line 18: Line 18:
=Text=
=Text=
{{#Wiki_filter:,
{{#Wiki_filter:,
      .
Ytll
                                                                                        Ytll
.
    .
.
  7
7
                                            June 13, 1985
June 13, 1985
        Georgia Power Company
Georgia Power Company
      ATTN: Mr. R. J. Kelly
ATTN: Mr. R. J. Kelly
                Executive Vice President
Executive Vice President
        P. O. Box 4545
P. O. Box 4545
      Atlanta, GA 30302
Atlanta, GA 30302
        Gentlemen:
Gentlemen:
        SUBJECT: MEETING SUMMARY
SUBJECT: MEETING SUMMARY
        This letter transmits the Meeting Summary for the meeting held between
This letter transmits the Meeting Summary for the meeting held between
      Mr. H. E. Nix, General Manager, Plant Hatch, of Georgia Power Company, and
Mr. H. E. Nix, General Manager, Plant Hatch, of Georgia Power Company, and
        Dr. J. Nelson Grace, Regional Administrator, NRC, Region II, and staff members
Dr. J. Nelson Grace, Regional Administrator, NRC, Region II, and staff members
        of each organization on May 24, 1985. The meeting was held in the Region II
of each organization on May 24, 1985.
        offices, Atlanta, Georgia, and concerned Plant Hatch requalification examina-
The meeting was held in the Region II
        tions.
offices, Atlanta, Georgia, and concerned Plant Hatch requalification examina-
        Region II believes that previous resolution of your concerns was accurate and
tions.
        proper.   However, the examination answer key for Question 8.04 has been revised
Region II believes that previous resolution of your concerns was accurate and
        to allow for a more equitable evaluation of the candidate's knowledge. Details
proper.
      of the subjects discussed are enclosed in the Meeting Summary.
However, the examination answer key for Question 8.04 has been revised
        In accordance with Section 2.790 of the NRC's " Rules of Practice," Part 2, Title
to allow for a more equitable evaluation of the candidate's knowledge. Details
        10, Code of Federal Regulations, a copy of this letter and the enclosure will be
of the subjects discussed are enclosed in the Meeting Summary.
        placed in the NRC's Public Document Room.
In accordance with Section 2.790 of the NRC's " Rules of Practice," Part 2, Title
        Should you have any questions concerning this matter, we will be pleased to
10, Code of Federal Regulations, a copy of this letter and the enclosure will be
        discuss them.
placed in the NRC's Public Document Room.
                                                Sincerely,
Should you have any questions concerning this matter, we will be pleased to
                                              (Original signed by JNGrace)
discuss them.
                                                J. Nelson Grace
Sincerely,
                                                Regional Administrator
(Original signed by JNGrace)
        Enclosure:
J. Nelson Grace
      Meeting Summary
Regional Administrator
      cc w/ encl:     (See page 2)
Enclosure:
                          kDR k322850613
Meeting Summary
                          e           o5000321
cc w/ encl:
                                            PDR                                           l(
(See page 2)
                                                                                          \
kDR k322850613
o5000321
e
PDR
l(
\\
-


,
,
        a
a
      ,
,
    '
'
  s
s
        Georgia Power Company                     2         June 13, 1985
Georgia Power Company
                                                                              e
2
          cc w/ enc 1:
June 13, 1985
        J. T.lBeckham, Vice. President and
e
          -General Manager - Nuclear Operations
cc w/ enc 1:
        H. C. Nix, Site General Manager
J. T.lBeckham, Vice. President and
          P. E. Fornel, Site QA Supervisor
-General Manager - Nuclear Operations
        L. Gucwa, Chief, Nuclear Engineer
H. C. Nix, Site General Manager
        J. Badgett, Manager, Nuclear Training
P. E. Fornel, Site QA Supervisor
            Corporate
L. Gucwa, Chief, Nuclear Engineer
        C. T. Moore, Manager, Nuclear Training
J. Badgett, Manager, Nuclear Training
            Plant Hatch
Corporate
        bec w/ enc 1:
C. T. Moore, Manager, Nuclear Training
        NRC Resident Inspector
Plant Hatch
        Hugh S. Jordan, Executive Secretary
bec w/ enc 1:
        . Document Control Desk
NRC Resident Inspector
          State of Georgia
Hugh S. Jordan, Executive Secretary
        RII             RII                         RII       RI
. Document Control Desk
        /10M               C   s
State of Georgia
                                      '(II            88k
'(II
        Sdi,lson:ll     AFG     n     P   mis     RDWhTker J     sh nski
88k
        06/5 /95         06/c) 85     ,p6/ /85       06/10/85   6// //85
RII
                                          RIII
RI
                                                iera
RII
                                          o g /85
RII
/10M
C
s
Sdi,lson:ll
AFG
n
P
mis
RDWhTker
J
sh nski
06/5 /95
06/c) 85
,p6/ /85
06/10/85
6// /85
/
RIII
iera
o g /85


r
r
      .-
.-
    .
.
                                              ENCLOSURE
ENCLOSURE
                                          MEETING SUMMARY
MEETING SUMMARY
      Licensee: Georgia Power Company
Licensee: Georgia Power Company
      Facility: Hatch Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2
Facility: Hatch Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2
      Docket Nos: 50-321 and 50-366
Docket Nos: 50-321 and 50-366
      SUBJECT: HATCH REQUALIFICATION EXAMINATIONS
SUBJECT: HATCH REQUALIFICATION EXAMINATIONS
      On May 24,1985, _ representatives of Georgia Power Company (GPC) met with NRC
On May 24,1985, _ representatives of Georgia Power Company (GPC) met with NRC
      Region II personnel in Atlanta, Georgia, to discuss the requalification exami-
Region II personnel in Atlanta, Georgia, to discuss the requalification exami-
      nation conducted at Plant Hatch during the week of March 11, 1985,
nation conducted at Plant Hatch during the week of March 11, 1985,
      (0L-50-321/85-01). The meeting was held at the request of Georgia Power Company.
(0L-50-321/85-01). The meeting was held at the request of Georgia Power Company.
      The purpose was to appeal the resolutions from the April 23, 1985 meeting between
The purpose was to appeal the resolutions from the April 23, 1985 meeting between
      the Region II staff and GPC. Agenda items were unchanged from the April 23-
the Region II staff and GPC.
      meeting. An attendance list is attached as Attachment A to this summary.
Agenda items were unchanged from the April 23-
      After opening remarks by Mr. J. Badgett, Mr. C. T. Moore presented Georgia
meeting. An attendance list is attached as Attachment A to this summary.
      Power's analysis of selected examination items. This analysis was limited to
After opening remarks by Mr. J. Badgett, Mr. C. T. Moore presented Georgia
      Section 8 of the Senior Operator written examination (Administrative
Power's analysis of selected examination items.
      Procedures, Conditions, and Limitations). It was the opinion of GPC that this
This analysis was limited to
      -section was the most substantive for displaying items whose impact was signifi-
Section 8 of the Senior Operator written examination (Administrative
      cant. The specific methodology by which the evaluation was made, the deduced
Procedures, Conditions, and Limitations).
      implications on the accelerated-requalification training program, and the resul-
It was the opinion of GPC that this
      tant concerns with specific questions (to include corrective recommendations)
-section was the most substantive for displaying items whose impact was signifi-
      constituted the background information provided by the briefing. The Region's
cant.
      response (letter of May 3, 1985) was then summarized and rebutted.
The specific methodology by which the evaluation was made, the deduced
                                        .
implications on the accelerated-requalification training program, and the resul-
      Attachment B is the revised answer key with justification, for Question 8.04.
tant concerns with specific questions (to include corrective recommendations)
      For all other questions, the examination and answer key will' remain unchanged.
constituted the background information provided by the briefing.
      All questions are considered to be both relevant and definitive. The specific
The Region's
      comments presented previously by the staff are still considered to be valid and
response (letter of May 3, 1985) was then summarized and rebutted.
      appropriate.   As a generic statement, aids and support devices do not remove the
.
      onus of responsibility from the licensed operator. The requirements for
Attachment B is the revised answer key with justification, for Question 8.04.
      familiarity with, and understanding of, the basis and application of operating
For all other questions, the examination and answer key will' remain unchanged.
      procedures remain unchanged.     Similarly, candidates are expected to have a
All questions are considered to be both relevant and definitive.
      thorough knowledge of Technical Specifications, the bases for the requirements
The specific
      and means to comply with the requirements.
comments presented previously by the staff are still considered to be valid and
      Review of individual performance on the written exam shows that no final statuses
appropriate.
      will be_ changed based upon the answer key modifications made.   Individuals will,
As a generic statement, aids and support devices do not remove the
      however, be contacted concerning their revised scores.
onus of responsibility from the licensed operator.
  .
The requirements for
familiarity with, and understanding of, the basis and application of operating
procedures remain unchanged.
Similarly, candidates are expected to have a
thorough knowledge of Technical Specifications, the bases for the requirements
and means to comply with the requirements.
Review of individual performance on the written exam shows that no final statuses
will be_ changed based upon the answer key modifications made.
Individuals will,
however, be contacted concerning their revised scores.
.


  -
-
      ..
..
    .
.
      Enclosure                               2                     June 13, 1985
Enclosure
      'With respect to the request for waiver made by Georgia Power concerning the
2
      July exams, a response will be made by June 15, 1985.
June 13, 1985
                                              % 4.^U L A
'With respect to the request for waiver made by Georgia Power concerning the
                                              KAfn E. Brockman, Reactor Engineer
July exams, a response will be made by June 15, 1985.
      Attachments:
% 4.^U L A
      A.   Attendance List
KAfn E. Brockman, Reactor Engineer
      B. - Revised Answer Key
Attachments:
A.
Attendance List
B. - Revised Answer Key
!
!
l
l
Line 150: Line 189:
l
l


    ..
..
  ..
..
                                          ATTACHMENT A
ATTACHMENT A
                                        ATTENDANCE LIST
ATTENDANCE LIST
      Georgia Power Company
Georgia Power Company
      .J. J. Badgett, Corporate Nuclear Training Manager
.J. J. Badgett, Corporate Nuclear Training Manager
      W. E. Burns,' Nuclear Engineering & Evaluation Manager
W. E. Burns,' Nuclear Engineering & Evaluation Manager
      C. T. Moore, Training Manager, Plant Hatch
C. T. Moore, Training Manager, Plant Hatch
      H. E. Nix, General Manager, Plant Hatch
H. E. Nix, General Manager, Plant Hatch
      Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Region II
Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Region II
      J. N. Grace, Regional Administrator
J. N. Grace, Regional Administrator
      J. A. 01shinski, Deputy Regional Administrator
J. A. 01shinski, Deputy Regional Administrator
      A. F. Gibson, Chief, Operations Branch
A. F. Gibson, Chief, Operations Branch
      V. L. Brownlee, Chief, Projects Branch #2
V. L. Brownlee, Chief, Projects Branch #2
      B. A. Wilson, Chief, Operator Licensing Section
B. A. Wilson, Chief, Operator Licensing Section
      K..E. Brockman, Reactor Engineer
K..E. Brockman, Reactor Engineer
      R. Carroll, Project Engineer
R. Carroll, Project Engineer
      R. Butcher, Senior Resident Inspector
R. Butcher, Senior Resident Inspector
              .
.
                                .
.
I
I


c.
c.
      -
-
    .
.
  .
.
                                                                                            I
ATTACHMENT B
                                                                                            !
ANSWER KEY (REVISED)
                                            ATTACHMENT B
8.04 Unit 2 Technical Specifications specify the frequency intervals for the
                                        ANSWER KEY (REVISED)
performance of Surveillance requirements.
        8.04 Unit 2 Technical Specifications specify the frequency intervals for the
This is accomplishea by use of
              performance of Surveillance requirements.     This is accomplishea by use of
FREQUENCY NOTATION.
              FREQUENCY NOTATION.
COMPLETE the following table.
              COMPLETE the following table.   (D0 NOT INCLUDE GRACE PERIODS)
(D0 NOT INCLUDE GRACE PERIODS)
                    NOTATION                             FREQUENCY
NOTATION
              a.       S                     At least once per         hours,
FREQUENCY
              b.       Q                     At least once per         days,
a.
              c.       M                     At least once per         days.
S
              d.                             At least once per 18 months.
At least once per
        ANSWER:
hours,
              a.   12 hours (+0, -25% 0 0.20)                                   (0.25)
b.
              b.   92 days (+0, -25% 0 0.20)                                     (0.25)
Q
              c.   31 days (+0, -25% 0 0.20)                                     (0.25)
At least once per
              d.   R                                                             (0.25)
days,
        Justification:   Acceptability of conservative response in accordance with the
c.
        allowable " grace period," as defined within the surveillance program.
M
At least once per
days.
d.
At least once per 18 months.
ANSWER:
a.
12 hours (+0, -25% 0 0.20)
(0.25)
b.
92 days (+0, -25% 0 0.20)
(0.25)
c.
31 days (+0, -25% 0 0.20)
(0.25)
d.
R
(0.25)
Justification:
Acceptability of conservative response in accordance with the
allowable " grace period," as defined within the surveillance program.
}}
}}

Latest revision as of 14:20, 12 December 2024

Forwards Summary of 850524 Meeting W/Util in Atlanta,Ga Re Requalification Exam OL-50-321/85-01 for Units 1 & 2 Held During Wk of 850311.Exam Answer Key for Question 8.04 Revised to Allow More Equitable Evaluation
ML20128L342
Person / Time
Site: Hatch  
Issue date: 06/13/1985
From: Grace J
NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II)
To: Kelly R
GEORGIA POWER CO.
References
NUDOCS 8507110322
Download: ML20128L342 (6)
v • d • e


See also: IR 05000321/1985001

Text

,

Ytll

.

.

7

June 13, 1985

Georgia Power Company

ATTN: Mr. R. J. Kelly

Executive Vice President

P. O. Box 4545

Atlanta, GA 30302

Gentlemen:

SUBJECT: MEETING SUMMARY

This letter transmits the Meeting Summary for the meeting held between

Mr. H. E. Nix, General Manager, Plant Hatch, of Georgia Power Company, and

Dr. J. Nelson Grace, Regional Administrator, NRC, Region II, and staff members

of each organization on May 24, 1985.

The meeting was held in the Region II

offices, Atlanta, Georgia, and concerned Plant Hatch requalification examina-

tions.

Region II believes that previous resolution of your concerns was accurate and

proper.

However, the examination answer key for Question 8.04 has been revised

to allow for a more equitable evaluation of the candidate's knowledge. Details

of the subjects discussed are enclosed in the Meeting Summary.

In accordance with Section 2.790 of the NRC's " Rules of Practice," Part 2, Title

10, Code of Federal Regulations, a copy of this letter and the enclosure will be

placed in the NRC's Public Document Room.

Should you have any questions concerning this matter, we will be pleased to

discuss them.

Sincerely,

(Original signed by JNGrace)

J. Nelson Grace

Regional Administrator

Enclosure:

Meeting Summary

cc w/ encl:

(See page 2)

kDR k322850613

o5000321

e

PDR

l(

\\

-

,

a

,

'

s

Georgia Power Company

2

June 13, 1985

e

cc w/ enc 1:

J. T.lBeckham, Vice. President and

-General Manager - Nuclear Operations

H. C. Nix, Site General Manager

P. E. Fornel, Site QA Supervisor

L. Gucwa, Chief, Nuclear Engineer

J. Badgett, Manager, Nuclear Training

Corporate

C. T. Moore, Manager, Nuclear Training

Plant Hatch

bec w/ enc 1:

NRC Resident Inspector

Hugh S. Jordan, Executive Secretary

. Document Control Desk

State of Georgia

'(II

88k

RII

RI

RII

RII

/10M

C

s

Sdi,lson:ll

AFG

n

P

mis

RDWhTker

J

sh nski

06/5 /95

06/c) 85

,p6/ /85

06/10/85

6// /85

/

RIII

iera

o g /85

r

.-

.

ENCLOSURE

MEETING SUMMARY

Licensee: Georgia Power Company

Facility: Hatch Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2

Docket Nos: 50-321 and 50-366

SUBJECT: HATCH REQUALIFICATION EXAMINATIONS

On May 24,1985, _ representatives of Georgia Power Company (GPC) met with NRC

Region II personnel in Atlanta, Georgia, to discuss the requalification exami-

nation conducted at Plant Hatch during the week of March 11, 1985,

(0L-50-321/85-01). The meeting was held at the request of Georgia Power Company.

The purpose was to appeal the resolutions from the April 23, 1985 meeting between

the Region II staff and GPC.

Agenda items were unchanged from the April 23-

meeting. An attendance list is attached as Attachment A to this summary.

After opening remarks by Mr. J. Badgett, Mr. C. T. Moore presented Georgia

Power's analysis of selected examination items.

This analysis was limited to

Section 8 of the Senior Operator written examination (Administrative

Procedures, Conditions, and Limitations).

It was the opinion of GPC that this

-section was the most substantive for displaying items whose impact was signifi-

cant.

The specific methodology by which the evaluation was made, the deduced

implications on the accelerated-requalification training program, and the resul-

tant concerns with specific questions (to include corrective recommendations)

constituted the background information provided by the briefing.

The Region's

response (letter of May 3, 1985) was then summarized and rebutted.

.

Attachment B is the revised answer key with justification, for Question 8.04.

For all other questions, the examination and answer key will' remain unchanged.

All questions are considered to be both relevant and definitive.

The specific

comments presented previously by the staff are still considered to be valid and

appropriate.

As a generic statement, aids and support devices do not remove the

onus of responsibility from the licensed operator.

The requirements for

familiarity with, and understanding of, the basis and application of operating

procedures remain unchanged.

Similarly, candidates are expected to have a

thorough knowledge of Technical Specifications, the bases for the requirements

and means to comply with the requirements.

Review of individual performance on the written exam shows that no final statuses

will be_ changed based upon the answer key modifications made.

Individuals will,

however, be contacted concerning their revised scores.

.

-

..

.

Enclosure

2

June 13, 1985

'With respect to the request for waiver made by Georgia Power concerning the

July exams, a response will be made by June 15, 1985.

% 4.^U L A

KAfn E. Brockman, Reactor Engineer

Attachments:

A.

Attendance List

B. - Revised Answer Key

!

l

l

l

,

l

l

..

..

ATTACHMENT A

ATTENDANCE LIST

Georgia Power Company

.J. J. Badgett, Corporate Nuclear Training Manager

W. E. Burns,' Nuclear Engineering & Evaluation Manager

C. T. Moore, Training Manager, Plant Hatch

H. E. Nix, General Manager, Plant Hatch

Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Region II

J. N. Grace, Regional Administrator

J. A. 01shinski, Deputy Regional Administrator

A. F. Gibson, Chief, Operations Branch

V. L. Brownlee, Chief, Projects Branch #2

B. A. Wilson, Chief, Operator Licensing Section

K..E. Brockman, Reactor Engineer

R. Carroll, Project Engineer

R. Butcher, Senior Resident Inspector

.

.

I

c.

-

.

.

ATTACHMENT B

ANSWER KEY (REVISED)

8.04 Unit 2 Technical Specifications specify the frequency intervals for the

performance of Surveillance requirements.

This is accomplishea by use of

FREQUENCY NOTATION.

COMPLETE the following table.

(D0 NOT INCLUDE GRACE PERIODS)

NOTATION

FREQUENCY

a.

S

At least once per

hours,

b.

Q

At least once per

days,

c.

M

At least once per

days.

d.

At least once per 18 months.

ANSWER:

a.

12 hours1.388889e-4 days <br />0.00333 hours <br />1.984127e-5 weeks <br />4.566e-6 months <br /> (+0, -25% 0 0.20)

(0.25)

b.

92 days (+0, -25% 0 0.20)

(0.25)

c.

31 days (+0, -25% 0 0.20)

(0.25)

d.

R

(0.25)

Justification:

Acceptability of conservative response in accordance with the

allowable " grace period," as defined within the surveillance program.

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML20128L342&oldid=4257033"