IR 05000254/1997024

Insp Repts 50-254/97-24 & 50-265/97-24 on 971124-1202.No Violations Noted.Major Areas Inspected:Licensed RO & SRO Requalification Training Programs

ML20198N557
Person / Time
Site:	Quad Cities
Issue date:	01/13/1998
From:	NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III)
To:
Shared Package
ML20198N540	List: IR 05000254/1997024 ML20198N535
References
50-254-97-24, 50-265-97-24, NUDOCS 9801210116
Download: ML20198N557 (11)

Text

__- ---_--

.

U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION REGION 111 Docket Nos: 50 254; 50-265 License Nos: DPR-29; DPR-30 Report Nos: 50-254/97024(OL); 50-265/97024(OL)

Licensee: Commonwealth Edison Company (Comed)

Facility: Quad Cities Nuclear Power Station, Units 1 and 2 Locatbi: 22710 206th Avenue North Cordova,IL 61242 Dates: November 24 - December 2,1997 Inspectors: D. McNell, Reactor Engineer T. Jones, Reactor Engineer (in training)

Approved by: M. N. Leach, Chief, Operator Licensing Branch Division of Reactor Safety i

98d1210116 900113 R'7 PDR ADOCK 05000254 EV 0 pm

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

'

i

.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Quad Cities Nuclear Power Station NRC Inspection Reports 50-254/97024; 50-265/97024 This inspection report contains the findings and conclusions from the inspection of the licensed reactor operator (RO) and senior reactor operator (SRO) requalification training programs. The inspection included a review of training administrative procedures and operating examination material; observation and evaluation of operator performance and licensee evaluators during a 1 requalification operating examination; an assessment of simulator fidelity; an evaluation of program controls to assure a systems approach to training; and a review of requalification training records. In addition, the inspectors observed a period of control room operations. The inspectors used the guidance in inspection procedures (IP) 71001 and 7170 Ooerations

. Control room operators were found to be professional and businesslike in the execution of their operator responsibilities. (Section 01.1)

Insoection Results

. The licensed operator requalification program was providing operators with the skills ;

necessary to properly fulfill their job functions. (Section 05.1)

. The examination materials used to examine the operators provided an effective evaluation tool for evaluating operator skills; however, the Category B written examination was considered weak. (Section 05.2)

. The licensed operator requalification program was being implemented in accordance with 10 CFR 55 requirements. (Sections 05.3,05.4 & 05.6)

. . - . . -. -. . , - . .

.=

Report Details 1. Operations 0 Conduct of Operatione -

01.1 Control Room Observations

. Insoection Scoos (71707) -.

The inspectors observed routine control room activities and a shift tumover during the Inspection week, performed a dual unit panel walk-down, reviewed control room logs, -

and questioned operators about plant and equipment statu , Observations and Findinos Control room operators were noted to be o'o serving control room instrumentation at acceptable time intervals and were attentive to the watch station duties. Control room operator demeanor was professional at all times during the observed period. Access to -

<

the control room was being properly controlled by the Shift Technical Advisor, resulting -

in a quiet, businesslike environment in the control roo e

,

• Conclusions The inspectors concluded that the control room operators were discharging their duties in an efficient, professional manner, with proper attention to the control room instruments and control Operator Training and Qualification 05.1 Ooeratina History Insoection Scoos (71001)

The inspectors reviewed the facility's operating history from 1995 through 1997 to determine if any operator errors occurred that could be attributed to ineffective or inadequate trainin , Observations and Findings

The inspectors reviewed the NRC resident reports, the last Systematic Assessment of Licensee Performance (SALP) report for the Quad Cities Nuclear Power. Station and selected Licensee Event Reports (LERs). Inspectors interviewed operators, training

- Instructors and supervisory personnel. Several operator errors were noted during the reviews that resulted in unplanned reactor scrams or equipment start ;

.

r . . c- .

. .

.

. Conclusions The inspectors determined that the errors made during the inspection period were not attributable to inadequate training. The provided training may have been ineffective on a case-by-case basis, but the training program has provided operators with skills necessary to safely operate the Quad Cities Nuclear Power Statio O5.2 Reaualification Examinations IDSRection Scoce (71001)

The inspectors reviewed the training department's sample plan used to develop reactor operator (RO) and senior reactor operator (SRO) examinations, the written examinations (Category A and B), and the annual operating tests (in-plant and control room job performance measures (JPMs) and dynamic simulator scenarios). Observations and Findinos Inspectors reviewed the written examination administered during the inspection period and for two other requalification weeks. The category A written examinations (static simulator examinations) typically contained approximately 15 questions, while the Category B (classroom written examination) contained approximately 35 questions. The category A examinations made excellent use of the simulator. All questions in the Category A examination required use of the simulator te :orrectly answer the questio The questions were written at skill levels above simple emory and frequently required operators to use multiple pieces of information to obtain the proper answer. The category B examination had many questions that were considered by inspectors to be simple memory level questions. Inspectors were able to correctly answer a significant number of the questions on the examination administered during the inspection week without referenc Inspectors reviewed JPMs and scenarios administered during the inspection period and for two other examination weeks (15 JPMs and 6 scenarios). The JPMs reviewed were safety significant tasks relevant to the licensed operator position. No single step JPMs were found in the reviewed tests. Administered JPMs were not repeated during subsequent examination weeks to prevent examination compromise. The dynamic simulator scenarios contained entries into technical specifications, required communications with outside organizations, equipment failures after entry into emergency operating procedures and transitions between flow paths in the emergency operating procedure Conclusions The inspectors concluded that the category B examination was not of sufficient difficulty to challenge a marginal operator. However, because of the difficulty level of the category A examination, the aggregate examination (category A and category B) was a useful tool for evaluating mastery of licensed operator required skills and challenged

_

.

marginal operators. The Category B written examination should be enhanced to provide a more effective evaluation tool. The JPMs and dynamic simulator scenarios were written to the correct difficulty level to assess operator skills. The inspectors concluded that the requalification examination contained the necessary quantitative and qualitative attributes to provide an effective evaluation of operator skills. Examination security was maintained throughout the examinstio .3 Reoualification Examination Administration Practices Insoection Scoce (71001)

The inspectors performed the following to assess the licensee's policies and practices regarding requalification examination administration, simulator fidelity, and examination security:

• Observed requalification operating examination administration e Interviewed licensee personnel (operators, instructors, training supervisor, and evaluators)

• Observed simulator performance o Reviewed the licensee's administrative procedures Observations and Findinos inspectors observed administration of approximately 15 JPMs (10 in the simulator,5 in the plant) during the examination. Evaluators conducting JPMs provided initiating cues and prompts correctly while administering the JPM examination. Some minor suggestions for improving JPM administration were made by examiners to the Operations Training Supervisor. Grading of the JPMs was considered to be correct for all observed JPM Inspectors observed two dynamic simu:ator scenarios administered to one operating crew. All senior reactor operators (SROs) on the crew were rotated to allow each SRO to be evaluated in a technical specification required position. Immediately after completion of each dynamic simulator scenario the evaluators met and discussed followup questions required to be asked of each crew member. All members of the evaluating team were candid about their observations and not restricted by the team leader or any other team members. Upon completion of the scenario set (two scenarios) the team met and discussed crew weaknesses, final grading, and any required reraedial training. NRC inspectors agreed with the evaluator grading of the dynamic simulator examinations. Evaluators assigned to conduct the examinations were professional in their actions and demeanor at all time One simulator problem was noted during administration of the JPMs, An operator performing a RCIC surveillance noted that 1 1701-53, RCIC Test Bypass Valve, was

'

i supposed to be opened a specified number of tums from the shut position. The Indication the operator saw as the simulator operator was controlling 1-1701-53, was the valve stroking closed from the full open position vice being opened from the shut position. The valve stroke from the open position was questioned by the operator and it was determined that the simulator was modeled such that the valve had to stroke from the open position, resulting in an incorrect indication in the control room for positioning the valve. A simulator discrepancy was written and a software change made to allow the valve to stroke from the shut position, giving the expected control room indication during performance of the surveillanc One JPM conducted during the inspection period was repeated during the dynamic scenario examination. This situation allows an operator to get double credit for knowing a single task, or penalizes an operator twice for not knowing the task. When this situation was identified to training department personnel, an immediate change was made to the quality control checklist used to govem creation of dynamic scenarios to include a check for duplicate tasks in the associated JPM examinatio Conclusions The inspectors concluded that the licensee was implementing the Licensed Operator Requalification Training (LORT) program in accordance with program guidance and regulatory requirements stated in 10 CFR Part 55.5 .4 Reaualification Trainina Procram Feedback System Insoection Scoce (71001)

The inspectors performed the following to assess the licensee's training program feedback system effectiveness:

• Reviewed operator and trainer comments on the feedback system

• Reviewed recorded changes to the requalification program o interviewed licensee personnel (operators, instructors, training supervisor) Observations and Findinas Instructors documented individual and crew weaknesses during the requalification period and during the requalification examination. Through observations and interviews, inspectors determined that a mechanism for evaluating crew and individual weaknesses and providing that evaluation to the plant's training review committee was functioning properly. The training committee actively controlled the training program to address the weaknesses that were discovered during training cycle operator evaluations and requalification examinations. Other portions of the feedback system, such as immediate feedback to operator questions during classroom and simulator training sessions, were functioning properl . - ,, -

- .. .. - . . =.

., - ~- . --

'

2  ;

e

~

.

t

- Conclusion -

I

, The inspectors' determined that the feedback portion of the Systematic Approach to .  !

~

Training (SAT) program was functioning properly.-

,

a

]

~

05.5 Remedial Trainina Pressem

al Inspection Scone (71001)- l The inspectors performed the following to assess the licensee's remedial training . ,

program effectiveness:

e: = Reviewed available remediation training plans 1

. i Observations and Findings  :

One remedial training program developed by training department personnel was

reviewed by the inspectors. -The program adequately addressed the operator's weaknesses discovered during the examination proces The inspectors noted that the dynamic simulator examination evaluators used a " Pass with Remediation" grade.. Several individual operators requiring remediation were passed during the inspection period. The inspectors interviewed evaluators conceming the remedial training programs that would be developed for each licensee. Evaluators stated that each remedial training program would be customized for each operator's ,

demonstrated weaknesses. Since none of the programs were developed during the inspection period, these remedial training programs were not inspecte , Conclugloan' ,

Due to the limited amount of available materiai, no significant conclusions were made in this are ,

05.6 Conformance With Ooerator License Conditiorg

, Insoection Smna (71001)

..

- The inspectors reviewed records pertaining to maintaining active operator licenses to

; assess the facility and operator licensees' compliance with 10 CFR 55.53 license

condition requirements: <

b; Observations and Findinos

- The inspectors reviewed operator logs and the plant watchstander proficiency list and

' interviewed operators and training personnel to determine if an operator with an inactive operator license would be able to assume a tech spec required watch in the control roomi For an operator to assume a watchstation, their name must be on the <

,

.. ,.. _ . _ _

. . . - - . .- . - - - . -- -- - -

.

.

watchstander list. This list is strictly controlled, preventing personnel with inactive licenses from assuming a control room watc Medical certifications for the operators were not reviewed; however, inspectors determined that operators were being given an annual physical examination that meets 10 CFR 55 medical requirements. The physical examination was given to satisfy the requirements of being a fire brigade member, Conclusions it was determined the licensed operator watchstanding requirements for active licenses were being implemented in accordance with 10 CFR Part 55 requirement V. Management Meetings X1 Exit Meetina Summarv The inspectors met with licensee representatives on December 2,1997, to discuss the scope and findings of the inspection. During the exit meeting, the inspectors discussed the processes reviewed by the inspectors during the conduct of this inspection and the likely content of the final inspection report. Licensee representatives did not identify any documents or processes as proprietary.

l

,

_

- .. . ._ . .

+  ;

..

' PARTIAL LIST OF PERSONS CONTACTED '

Licensee D. Cook, Plant Manager' . _ _

' J. Easley, Requal Group Leader-=

- L. Pearce, Site Vice President R. Svaleson, Operations Manager _

C.l Symonds, Operations Training Superintendent l F. :Tsakeres, Training Manager _- i 1DBS R. Ganser, IDNS Resident inspector

-.

L. Collins, Ret tdent inspector _

.

,_

C. Miller, Senior Resident inspector R. Walton, Resident Inspector

.

.

i

' '

. - . . - - - , o- n

.-- - .. . . . . - . . .

,

- *..

, ,

INSPECTION PROCEDURES USED -- ,

IP 71001 Licensed Operator Requalification Program Evaluation -

ITEMS OPENED, CLOSED, AND DISCUSSED-None

.

&

I

' 10

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

_

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

~

. .: .

-. :t

'

,,; '

, . < .

'

" Attachment 1- d i

. SIMULATION FACILITY REPORT

. Facility Licensee:' Quad City Nuclear Power Station; Units 1 and 2 : -!

i- - Facility Licensee Dockets No: 50-254,50-26 '- Operating Tests. Administered:' November 24'- 26,1997 This form is to be'used only to report observations; These observations do not constitute audit = 1 or inspection findings and are not, without further verification and review, indicative of . i

-

noncompliance with 10 CFR 55.45(b). - These observations do not affect NRC certification or : 1 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 observation 'j 1While conducting the simulator portion of the operating tests, the following items were observed

'

'

~

-

1(if none, so state):

ITEM DESCRIPTION 4

,  :

1-1703-53,- The RCIC Test Bypass Valve strokes from the open position when j RCIC Test Bypass . required to stroke from the shut position during RCIC surveillance >

>

p.

.

e h .'

.)

r

[

, 'i

,s ea Y

=

h.

-

.,

c

'

, , , . .- ., . . . . . . -