|
---|
Category:EXAMINATION REPORT
MONTHYEARML20153F8201998-09-23023 September 1998 NRC Operator Licensing Exam Rept 50-346/98-301OL (Including Completed & Graded Tests) for Tests Administered on 980803-07 IR 05000346/19973081997-09-23023 September 1997 NRC Operator Licensing Exam Rept 50-346/97-308OL Administered on 970707-10 to Three RSO License Applicants. Exam Results:Applicants Passed All Portions of Respective Exam & Were Issued SRO Licenses ML20129G2781996-10-23023 October 1996 NRC Operator Licensing Exam Rept 50-346/OL-96-02 Administered on 960829.Exam Results:All Four Candidates Failed SRO Level Exam & Will Be Denied Licenses ML20126E9401992-12-17017 December 1992 Initial Retake & Requalification Exam Rept 50-346/OL-92-02 on 921118 & Wk of 921130.Exam Results:All Five ROs & Four SROs Passed All Sections of Requalification Exams ML20006B6541990-01-18018 January 1990 Exam Rept 50-346/OL-89-02 on 891218-22.Exam Results:All Reactor & Senior Reactor Operators Passed Exam ML20248J4731989-04-0303 April 1989 Exam Rept 50-346/OL-89-01 on 890130.Exam Results:Of 10 Senior Reactor Operators,Seven Passed & of Six Reactor Operators,Three Passed Exams ML20207N0771988-10-0606 October 1988 Exam Rept 50-346/OL-88-02 During Wk of 880829.Exam Results: Five of Nine Senior Reactor Operators & One of One Reactor Operator Passed Exam ML20195J2461988-06-15015 June 1988 Exam Rept 50-346/OL-88-01 on 880517.Exam Results:Nine Senior Reactor Operators & One Reactor Operator Candidates Passed Exam ML20147C2821988-01-0606 January 1988 Exam Rept 50-346/OL-87-02 on 871130.Exam Results:Four Senior Operator Candidates Passed Exams ML20235X5531987-10-0909 October 1987 Exam Rept 50-346/OL-87-01 on Wks of 870817 & 24.Exam Results:Two Reactor Operators & Two Senior Reactor Operators Failed Exams ML20214D1931986-11-14014 November 1986 Exam Rept 50-346/OLS-86-02 on 861024.Exam Results:All Senior Operators & All Reactor Operators Passed ML20136D5961985-12-31031 December 1985 Exam Rept 50-346/OL-85-02 on 851119,20 & 21.Exam Results: Four of Eight Senior Reactor Operator Candidates Passed & Single Reactor Operator Candidate Failed ML20205G3541985-11-0707 November 1985 Exam Rept 50-346/OL-85-01 on 850924-26.Exam Results:All Six Candidates Passed 1998-09-23
[Table view] Category:TEXT-INSPECTION & AUDIT & I&E CIRCULARS
MONTHYEARIR 05000346/19990171999-10-26026 October 1999 Insp Rept 50-346/99-17 on 990928-1001.No Violations Noted. Major Areas Inspected:Implementation of Licensee Protected Area Ingress Search Program,Maint Support for Security Sys, Alarms Stations & Communications & QA IR 05000346/19990101999-10-0808 October 1999 Insp Rept 50-346/99-10 on 990802-0913.One NCV Occurred. Major Areas Inspected:Operations,Maint & Engineering IR 05000346/19990091999-08-20020 August 1999 Insp Rept 50-346/99-09 on 990623-0802.Noncited Violations Noted.Major Areas Inspected:Aspects of Licensee Operations, Maint,Engineering & Plant Support IR 05000346/19990151999-08-0909 August 1999 Insp Rept 50-346/99-15 on 990712-16.No Violations Noted. Major Areas Inspected:Effectiveness of Licensee Program for Mgt of Solid Waste,Transportation of Radioactive Matl & Radwaste & Radiological Environ Monitoring ML20210P7981999-08-0606 August 1999 Notice of Violation from Insp on 980901-990513.Violations Noted:Prior to 980901,licensee Inadvertently Performed Field Change to Pressurizer Spray Valve RC-2,not Approved by Organization That Performed Original Design IR 05000346/19990081999-07-20020 July 1999 Insp Rept 50-346/99-08 on 990513-0628.Three Violations Noted & Being Treated as non-cited Violations.Major Areas Inspected:Aspects of Licensee Operations,Maint,Engineering & Plant Support IR 05000346/19990041999-06-0707 June 1999 Insp Rept 50-346/99-04 on 990323-0513.Two Violations Noted & Being Treated as non-cited Violations.Major Areas Inspected: Aspects of Licensee Operations,Maint,Engineering & Plant Support ML20207G0691999-06-0404 June 1999 Insp Rept 50-346/98-21 on 980901-1201 & 990425-0513. Violations Identified with Pending Licensee Response.Major Areas Inspected:Review of Licensee Maint Activities Associated with Pressurizer Spray Valve RC-2 IR 05000346/19990051999-04-27027 April 1999 Insp Rept 50-346/99-05 on 990405-09.No Violations Noted. Major Areas Inspected:Licensee on-line Maint Risk Assessment Program IR 05000346/19990011999-03-0505 March 1999 Insp Rept 50-346/99-01 on 990102-0212.No Violations Noted. Major Areas Inspected:Operations,Maint,Engineering & Plant Support IR 05000346/19990021999-02-25025 February 1999 Insp Rept 50-346/99-02 on 990202-05.No Violations Noted. Major Areas Inspected:Aspects of Licensee Program for Controlling Operational Chemistry & External & Internal Exposures IR 05000346/19980181999-01-22022 January 1999 Insp Rept 50-346/98-18 on 981110-990102.No Violations Noted. Major Areas Inspected:Operations,Maintenance,Engineering & Plant Support IR 05000346/19980201998-12-17017 December 1998 Insp Rept 50-346/98-20 on 981116-20.No Violations Noted. Major Areas Inspected:Review of Licensee Licensed Operator Requalification Training Program IR 05000346/19980171998-12-0909 December 1998 Insp Rept 50-346/98-17 on 980918-1109.Violations Noted.Major Areas Inspected:Licensee Operations,Maint,Engineering & Plant Support ML20198B5431998-12-0909 December 1998 Notice of Violation from Insp on 980918-1109.Violation Noted:Maint Work Order Which Contained Instructions to Abandon Primary Water Storage Tank Was Not Appropriate to Circumstance IR 05000346/19980191998-11-20020 November 1998 Insp Rept 50-346/98-19 on 981014-23.No Violations Noted. Major Areas Inspected:Operations,Maint & Engineering IR 05000346/19980151998-10-16016 October 1998 Insp Rept 50-346/98-15 on 980914-18.No Violations Noted. Major Areas Inspected:Review of Emergency Preparedness Program IR 05000346/19980141998-10-14014 October 1998 Insp Rept 50-346/98-14 on 980808-0918.No Violations Noted. Major Areas Inspected:Licensee Operations,Maint,Engineering & Plant Support IR 05000346/19980161998-09-30030 September 1998 Insp Rept 50-346/98-16 on 980831-0904.No Violations Noted. Major Areas Inspected:Plant Support ML20153F8201998-09-23023 September 1998 NRC Operator Licensing Exam Rept 50-346/98-301OL (Including Completed & Graded Tests) for Tests Administered on 980803-07 IR 05000346/19980111998-09-0909 September 1998 Revised Pages 15 & 18 to Insp Rept 50-346/98-11,correcting Number Given for Unresolved Item 50-346/95009-02.Number Should Read 50-346/96002-09 ML20151T0071998-09-0303 September 1998 Insp Rept 50-346/98-11 on 980803-14.No Violations Noted. Major Areas Inspected:Effectiveness of Corrective Action Program IR 05000346/19980131998-08-25025 August 1998 Insp Rept 50-346/98-13 on 980623-0807.No Violations Noted. Major Areas Inspected:Licensee Operations,Maint,Engineering & Plant Support IR 05000346/19980121998-08-14014 August 1998 Insp Rept 50-346/98-12 on 980624-29.No Violations Noted. Major Areas Inspected:Review of Licensee Response & Recovery from Damage Caused by 980624 Tornado,Operations & Plant Support IR 05000346/19980091998-07-28028 July 1998 Insp Rept 50-346/98-09 on 980512-0623.Violations Noted. Major Areas Inspected:Operations,Maintenance,Engineering & Plant Support ML20236W2311998-07-28028 July 1998 Notice of Violation from Insp on 980512-0623.Violation Noted:As of 980522,established Measures Inadequate to Ensure That Design Basis of Containment Bldg Emergency Sump Correctly Translated Into Specifications ML20236G9361998-06-30030 June 1998 Notice of Violation from Insp on 980526-0617.Violation Noted:Record Reviews & Interviews Showed That Unescorted Access to Protected Area Granted to Two Security Officers W/O All Required Elements of Employment History ML20236G9431998-06-30030 June 1998 Insp Rept 50-346/98-08 on 980526-0617.Violations Noted.Major Areas Inspected:Licensee Performance Re Physical Security ML20236F2201998-06-27027 June 1998 Insp Rept 50-346/98-10 on 980608-11.Violation Noted. Major Areas Inspected:Solid Radwaste Mgt & Transportation Program,Radiological Effluent Monitoring & Control Program & Maint Program for Station Emergency ML20236F2001998-06-27027 June 1998 Notice of Violation from Insp on 980608-11.Violations Noted: Licensee Failed to Conduct Audits of Process Control Program & Implementation Procedures for Processing & Packaging Radwaste at Least Once Per 24 Months PNO-III-98-035A, on 980624,reactor Tripped Automatically During Recovery Activities from Tornado Which Damaged Electrical Switchyard & Cut Off Offsite Power Supply1998-06-26026 June 1998 PNO-III-98-035A:on 980624,reactor Tripped Automatically During Recovery Activities from Tornado Which Damaged Electrical Switchyard & Cut Off Offsite Power Supply PNO-III-98-035, on 980624,plant Automatically Shut Down After Tornado Damaged Electrical Switchyard & Cut Off Offsite Power Supply.Licensee Declared Alert Under Emergency Plan. Licensee Assessing Extent of Damage1998-06-25025 June 1998 PNO-III-98-035:on 980624,plant Automatically Shut Down After Tornado Damaged Electrical Switchyard & Cut Off Offsite Power Supply.Licensee Declared Alert Under Emergency Plan. Licensee Assessing Extent of Damage ML20249A6061998-06-11011 June 1998 Notice of Violation from Insp on 980401-0512.Violation Noted:Before 980415,Procedures DB-OP-06230 & DB-OP-03011 Were Not Appropriate to Circumstances Due to Not Providing Instructions for Manipulting Valves as Listed IR 05000346/19980051998-06-11011 June 1998 Insp Rept 50-346/98-05 on 980401-0512.Violations Noted.Major Areas Inspected:Operations,Maint & Engineering IR 05000346/19980061998-06-0909 June 1998 Insp Rept 50-346/98-06 on 980422-0507.Violations Noted. Major Areas Inspected:Aspects of Licensee Code Repairs of MSIV & Nondestructive Exam of Control Rod Drive Housing & Main Steam Nozzle & Decay Heat Sys Welds ML20248M3111998-06-0909 June 1998 Notice of Violation from Insp on 980422-0507.Violation Noted:Condition Adverse to Quality Not Promptly Identified & Corrected,In That on 980515,potential Condition Adverse to Quality Rept Not Initiated After Unauthorized Wire Brush IR 05000346/19980071998-05-26026 May 1998 Insp Rept 50-346/98-07 on 980427-30.No Violations Noted. Major Areas Inspected:Alara Planning & Controls for Eleventh Refueling Outage & Review of Radiation Worker Practices & Recent Events Including Resin Breakthrough ML20248B1621998-05-26026 May 1998 Notice of Violation from Insp on 980427-30.Violation Noted: No Surveys Performed by Licensee on 980421 to Identify Potential for High Dose Rates in Anulus Area During Incore Detector Movement,Prior to Allowing Workers to Enter Area IR 05000346/19980041998-04-10010 April 1998 Insp Rept 50-346/98-04 on 980218-0331.No Violations Noted. Major Areas Inspected:Operations,Maint,Engineering & Plant Support ML20216D8811998-03-10010 March 1998 Notice of Violation from Insp on 980107-0218.Violation Noted:On 980106,during Performance of Procedure DB-SP-03357, Rev 01, RCS Water Inventory Balance, Step 4.1.10,RO Erroneously Closed RCP Seal Return Valve MU-38 IR 05000346/19980031998-03-10010 March 1998 Insp Rept 50-346/98-03 on 980223-26.No Violations Noted. Major Areas Inspected:Engineering ML20216D8861998-03-10010 March 1998 Insp Rept 50-346/98-02 on 980108-0218.Violations Noted.Major Areas Inspected:Licensee Operations,Maint,Engineering & Plant Support IR 05000346/19970151998-01-28028 January 1998 Insp Rept 50-346/97-15 on 971110-980107.No Violations Noted. Major Areas Inspected:Operations,Maint,Engineering & Plant Support IR 05000346/19970131997-11-21021 November 1997 Insp Rept 50-346/97-13 on 970929-1110.No Violations Noted. Major Areas Inspected:Licensee Operations,Maint,Engineering & Plant Support IR 05000346/19970141997-11-10010 November 1997 Insp Rept 50-346/97-14 on 971021-23.No Violations Noted. Major Areas Inspected:Maint IR 05000346/19970121997-11-0404 November 1997 Insp Rept 50-346/97-12 on 971006-10.Violations Noted. Major Areas Inspected:Review of Radiation Protection & Chemistry Programs ML20198Q0791997-11-0404 November 1997 Notice of Violation from Insp on 971006-10.Violation Noted:Class 7 Radioactive Matl Package Excepted from Specification Packaging,Marking & Labeling Requirements & Shipping Paper & Certification Were Improperly Transported IR 05000346/19970111997-10-31031 October 1997 Insp Rept 50-346/97-11 on 970818-0929.Violations Noted. Major Areas Inspected:Operations,Maint,Engineering & Plant Support ML20198P0981997-10-31031 October 1997 Notice of Violation from Insp on 970818-0929.Violation Noted:On 970826,NRC Identified That Maint Personnel Did Not Use Four 0-72 Psi Test Gauges w/0.05% Accuracy or Equivalent While Performing DB-MI-03906 IR 05000346/19970101997-10-11011 October 1997 Insp Rept 50-346/97-10 on 970806-07 & 0903-04.No Violations Noted.Major Areas Inspected:Review of Vehicle Barrier Sys 1999-08-09
[Table view] |
Text
. _
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION REGION III Report No. 50-346/OL-92-02(DRS)
Docket No. 50-346 License No. NPF-3 Licensee: Toledo Edison Company Facility Name: Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station Examination Administered At: Centerior Service Company-c/o Toledo Edison Company 300 Madison Avenue Toledo, OH 43652 Examination Conducted: On November 18, 1992, - SRO/ Initial Examination; and During the week of November 30, 1992 Requalification Examinations RIII Examiner: ) /d / T2-
"R. M. Baildy Date Chief Examiner: ( /
/ 2_[I fL J. R. Walker- #
Dath i -.
J Approved By: l2-[! fh Thomas M. Burdick, Chief Dat6 '
Operator. Licensing Section 2 Examination Suratnary -
Examinations were administered on November 18, 1992 and-durina-the week of November 30, 1992. (ReDort No.-50-346/OL-92-02(DRS))
to.one senior reactor operator for an initial retake written examination, and to seven senior. reactor operators and five reactor operators for the requalification examination; _ Crew performance as well as-individual performance was evaluated on the dynamic portion of the operating examination.
An exit' meeting was conducted on December 3, 1992, with plant managemeat.
92123000S3 921218 PDR- ADDCK 05000346-
- v. PDR
(
I Results: All f've
. reactor operators and four senior reactor .
operators passed all sections of the requalification examinations. Three c9nior reactor operators failed the JPM portion of the examination. In addition, one of three crews received an-unsatisfactory-evaluation on the dynamic simulator examination. The senior reactor operator passed the initial (written) retake examination.
The following are examples of the strengths and weaknesses identified by the NRC evaluators.
Strenaths e Demonstrated a thorough knowledge of equipment location.
- One crew did a good job on recapping the events in progress during the performance of the dynamic simulator examination.
This was done when the conditions permitted, allowing the crew to provide important feedback.
Weaknesses
- Communications'between crew members'during dynamic simulator examinations was weak. A lack of feedback resulted in open-ended communication.
- During a rod exercise a majority of the personnel had difficulty in determining that a rod was failed.
These events are addressed in the report details.
i 4
l
-W r -
REPORT DETAILS
- 1. Examiners
- J. Walker, NRC R. Bailey, NRC E. Benjamin, PNL
- 2. Exit Meetino An exit meeting was held on December 3, 1992, with facility management and training staff representatives, t,o discuss the examiner's observations.
NRC Representatives in attendance were:
J. Walker, Chief Examiner R. Bailey, Examiner Facility Representatives in attendance were:
E. F. Bergner, Simulator Supervisor M. Bezilla, Operations Superintendent G. A. Bradley, Licensing Representative G. Homna, Compliance Supervisor, Licensing T. Meyers, Technical Services Director R. A. Simpkins, Operations Training Supervisor M. Stewart, Manager Nuclear Training L. Storz, Plant Manager J. K. Wood, Manager, Plant Operations
- 3. Examination Development The NRC and licensee members of the examination team validated the proposed examination developed by the-licensee >
-during the week of November 16, 1992.
The examination validation was accomplished by comparing the proposed examinations with the applicable guidance of NUREG 1021, " Operator Licensing Examiner Standards,"
Revision 6.
- a. Reference Material The' reference material sent to the NRC for use during examination development of the requalification examination was adequate.
1
- b. Beaualification Written Examination The licensees' proposed written examination generally met the guidance as stated in ES-602. Some questions on Parts A and B examinations:had to be rewritten to clarify information being sought,
- c. Job Performance Measures (JPM)
The Job Performance Measures (JPM) were evaluated during the preparation week. The JPMs met the guidance provided in ES-603.
- d. Dynamic Simulator l
Overall, all scenarios met.the guidance of Attachment ES-604-1. Minor changes were made to enhance the !
actions required during each scenario.
- 4. Examination Administration The licensee was responsible for examination administration while NRC observed. This process allowed the NRC to evaluate the licensee's requalification program as well as the individual operators. The following observations were made by the NRC concerning examination administration:
Written Examination The licensee did a good job scheduling the examination.
This reduced the amount of " dead time" associated with the examination, which was a positive attribute in reducing operator stress during the examination process.
Dynamic Simulator Examination During the dynamic simulator examinations, someLdirection by the NRC evaluators was required.to keep the events flowing smoothly. In one case the simulator operator inadvertently inserted the wrong malfunction. The malfunction was scheduled for later in the scenario. This resulted-in some Individual Simulator Critical Tasks (ISCT) not being evaluated. Use of the-radio headsets aided in keeping all evaluators informed of events in progress and in recovering from tne inadvertent malfunction.
kN A
Job Performance Measures (JPM)
The use of notebooks for JPM administration provided the evaluators with a concise and easily managed evaluation package for each operator. Some critical task standards needed to be clarified following the performance-of the JPMs. In addition, the answer key did not always-indicate all acceptable answers for the questions.
- 5. Evaluation of Facility Evaluators During examination administration, the NRC assessed each' licensee evaluator's ability to conduct consistent and objective examinations and their ability to provide unbiased-operator evaluations. The following observations were made regarding the facility evaluators:
- Evaluators tended, at times, to be less conservative than the NRC evaluators. The NRC identified one crew as unsatisfactory while the facility considered it satisfactory. The facility graded all crew competencies as satisfactory, whereas the NRC-evaluators graded Diagnosis and Control Board Operations as unsatisfactory. This determination was based upon the crew diagnosing a secondary steam leak inside containment as a small primary reactor coolant system (RCS) leak, failing to properly control-the main turbine electro-hydraulic control system-(EHC)'in manual and overfeeding a Ruptured Steam Generator during three independent events.
- The evaluators tended to allow some operators to continue performing JPMs even though the operators were no longer making reasonable progress.
- Evaluators were not alert to problems noted during simulator setup. During one JPM the expected fault was.
not entered into the simulator as required for the JPM.
- Evaluators were not consistent in reporting back answers to the operators during JPM questions. In some cases the answers were read back verbatim and, in others, the answers were paraphrased when read back.
- The evaluators initially graded two JPMs as satisfactory whereas the NRC evaluator graded them unsatisfactory. The facility was requested to explain their grading methodology. Upon conclusion of this discussion, the tacility evaluators chose to change their grading for both JPMs to unsatisfactory. This resulted in the facility identifying a third failure of JPMs.
E
- _Co-evaluation of the operators' performance was done by the NRC and the facility. This provided the NRC with the necessary information to assess the individual operator's performance as well as the licensee's requalification program performance.
- 6. Recualification Procram EvaluatiQD The overall prograa evaluation for the Davis-Besse facility, based on examinations given the week of November 30, 1992, was satisfactory.
- 7. Additional Examiner Observations The following items are additional observations made during the examination administration:
Strenaths:
- One crew did a good jos on recapping the events in progress during the performance of the dynamic simulator examination. This was done when the conditions permitted, allowing the crew to provide important feedback.
- Operators showed a thorough knowledge of component locations in the plant.
- Operators demonstrated a thorough knowledge of control board component locations.
- Use of the Shift Manager to verify various actions was a strength aiding in the ability to diagnose various events.
Weaknesses:
- Communications between crew members during dynamic simulator examinations was weak. This was demonstrated by a lack of feedback-resulting in open ended communication.
- During a rod exercise JPM a majority of the personnel had difficulty determining that a' rod was failed.
- Assistant Shift Supervisors serving in the Shift supervisor position demonstrated difficulties in determining emergency action level (EAL) classifications.
i l
5 i
i
- Assistant Shift Supervisors serving in the Shift
- Supervisor position demonstrated difficulties in maintaining adequate command and control over the crew.
In many cases,-the operator had to rely on-the incumbent Shift Supervisor to advise them as to what actions to take.
m 2
Enclosure 2 REOUALIFICATION PROGRAM EVALUATION REPORT
- Facility: Davis-Besse Nuclear Station Examiners:- J. Walker, R. Bailey,'E. Benjamin.
Date of Evaluation: Week of November 30, 1992 Areas Evaluated: X Written X Oral X Simulator Examination Results:
RO SRO Total Evaluation Eass/ Fall' Pass / Fall Pass / Fail (S'or U)
Written Examination 5/0 7/0 12/0 'S Operating Examination Oral 5/0 4/3 9/3 S Simulator 5/0 7/0 12/0 S Evaluation of facility written examination grading S Crew Examination Results:
Crew 1 Crew 2 Crew 3 Evaluation-Pass / Fall Pass / Fail Pass / Fail (S or U)
Operatino Examination Pass Pass Fall S Overall Procram EvaluatioD Satisfactory This evaluation includes the results of the examination-administered the week of November 30, 1992. This is in accordance with NUREG 1021 " Operating Licensing Examiner Standards", ES-601, Rev 6, Section C.1.6.4. Reference Examination Report No. 50-346/OL-92-02(DRS).
i WE.ght Walker Burdick
-Examiner Section Chief Branch Chief l
l 1
e ~1* -
Er
Enclosure 4 SIMULATION FACILITY FIDELITY REPORT Facility Licensee: Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station Facility Licensee Docket No.: 50-346 Operating Tests Administered On: Week of November 30, 1992 This form is to be used only to report observations. These observations do not constitute audit or inspection findings and are not, without further verification and review, indicative of noncompliance with 10 CFR 55.45 (b) . These observations do not affect NRC certification or approval of the simulation facility other than to provide information that may be used in future evaluations. No licensee action is required in response to these observations.
While conducting the simulator portion of the operating tests, the following items were observed:
lIEH DESCRIPTION None.
l
_ __.