IA-87-652, Ack Receipt of 870105 Comments on NUREG/CR-4600, Human Factors Study Conducted in Conjunction W/Mini-Round Robin Assessment of Ultrasonic Technician Performance. Use of Method Warrants Further Consideration by Industry
| ML20245A002 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 01/30/1987 |
| From: | Russell W Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Woody C FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT CO. |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20235B538 | List:
|
| References | |
| FOIA-87-652, RTR-NUREG-4600, RTR-NUREG-CR-4600 NUDOCS 8702050405 | |
| Download: ML20245A002 (1) | |
Text
- _-_ _____-___. . _ - _ _ ___
'* W k b g[ h o DISTRIBUTION: 4 Central Files 1 January 30, 1987 hT B-1 JPersensky GCwalina DPersinko Mr. C. D. Woody BDLiaw Group Vice President Nuclear Energy CYCheng Post Office Box 14000 JCollins Juno Beach, Florida 33400-0420 JSpanner, PNL
Dear Mr. Woody:
4
SUBJECT:
NUREG/CR-4600, " Human Factors Study Conducted in Conjunction with a ,
Mini-Round Robin Assessment of Ultrasonic Technicians Performance" l l
We appreciate your comments on the above NUREG that were contained in your January 5, 1987, letter.
The NUREG was provided for NUHARC's use in improving the performance of NDE !
inspectorsconductingultrasonictesting(UT). We believe that the NUREG provides useful insight into human factors considerations affecting the inspectors' perforniance. Additionally, because of the success obtained using the relative operating characteristic (ROC) method of representing technician performance, it appears that use of this method warrants further consideration by the industry.
As a point of clarification, you attributed the lack of UT technician improvement in this study when compared to a previous study conducted at Pacific Northwest Labs in 1982 to differences between labcratory fabricated intergranularstresscorrosion(IGSC)cracksandrealIGSCcracks. It should be pointed out that the test specimens containing the short cracks were the same in both studies.
We were encouraged to learn that EPRI currently has a study underway to better evaluate the findings in the NUREG as they pertain to UT training programs and practices. We would appreciate learning about this study as well as any results when they become available. Because of the knowledge gained by us and our contractor Pacific Northwest Laboratories, we would be happy to discuss the report further with you or to assist you in other mutually agreeable ways to improve UT technician performance.
Sincerely, I
O W '
I William T. Russell, Director Division of Human Factors Technology k
QQP[
_ P2/LTR TO Y-2 , i /f *SEE PR,EVIOUS ORC,FOR CONCURRENCE j
(
a"'" > N.I)/.P.0f.T... .. ...NNP.Vf.T..... hhHFI,,,,,, ,,,p,Q/,pg
,,,,pg , ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
'a a '" 4 )P,e,r,s j,n,k,o/,b,r. ,,* GC,wa ,1,j,n a,, ,,, ,*(f g,$,p,q s ky,, ,,, R AB p cj@,,,,,,, ,,,,W,I . , ,ql,1,,,
ein) 1/27/87 1/27/87 1 20 1
.................. .................... . . . ./../.i ..........8. .7 . . . ./. .'./. 8 7F. ..........
. 1. /.}*. . /.8. 7.
=cronu m no o acu or o OFFICIAL RECORD COPY * * * "" * *"
, , WI ..
3 MAR 3 01987 MEMORANDUM FOR: Inez K. Bailey, Chief Record Services Branch, IRN !
FROM: Theodore L. Szymanski, Acting Chief Operator Licensing Branch, DHFT ;
MINUTES OF NUMARC MEETING - February 11, 1987 i
SUBJECT:
Please p'tce the enclosed minutes in the Public Document Room (PDR).
Theodore L. Szymanski, Acting Chief Operator Licensing Branch, DHFT
Enclosure:
As stated DISTRIBUTION:
Central Files OLB RF SFShan'kman JNHasmonw%
TLSzymanski j DW/ MINUTES OF NUM4RC MEETING / SUSAN 6 OLB OLB:DHFT : T SF n:tc JNHannon TLSzynnski 3 87 3ff0/87 3/3>/87
~
[ ,
Mr
, . n 4
MINUTES OF MEETING OF NRC WITH NUMARC AND UTILITY LICENSEES FEBRUARY 11, 1987 I
A public meeting was held between the NRC staff and utility representatives to discuss possible improvements to the conduct of the current NRC pilot test of an alternative requalification program evaluation methodology. The meeting was held at 9:00 a.m. on February 11, 1987 in Roon 5033, Air Pights Building, 4055 Montgomery Avenue, Bethesda, Maryland. The seeting was conducted by staff sf the Division of Human Factors Technology (DHFT) for the )
Commission and by J:hn Griffin of Arkansas Power and Light for NUMARC. !
Representatives fran utilities involved in Phase I and Phase II of the i requalification pilot test and representatives from NRC regional offices attended. ,
Opening remarks by William Russell, Director, DHFT, addressed the status of !
the pilot test as detailed in SECY 86-333, dated November 12, 1986. The ]
pilot test was successful enough in Phase I to be *xtended to April,1987.
Phase 11 results are to be reported to the CominM in May,1987.
Mr. Russell emphasized that to determine if tha NRC, with little involvement, can have confidence in the facility results, the alternative requalification prograc evaluation methodology judges the ability of the facility examiner M well as the content of the facility's written examination and operating test.
Mr. John Griffin also noted that the purpose of the meeting was to make Phase 11 of the pilot test more effective.
John Hannon, Secticn Leader, Operator Licensing Branch, DHFT, noted that NRC review of the f acility examination, and independent evaluation of the operating test witt the option of substituting NRC questions for facility questions, are impcrtant components of this process. He noted that a problematic issue is the relationship of the pilot test process to ES 601 of the Examiner Standards (NUREG 1021). Mr. Hannon summarized the issues of concern in Phase I as: examination format; examination security; and simulator examination scenario content.
NRC staff noted that an objective of Phase II is to see if tihe process can work on a variety of programs. Comments were made by utility representatives and NRC regional mpresentatives about the lessons learned in Phate 1 and che implications for Ptase II. The plants in Phase I were: Wolf Crrek, Callaway, Byron, Plant Hatch, and Salem. Coments were made abNt learring objectives; scheduling; segmented programs; use of simulators; criteria for satisfactory, marginal and unsatisfactory programs; and the time needer to resolve answer keys.
Mr. Hannon concluded the meeting by emphasizing that the pilot progrcm should' not change utility requalification programs. Mr. Griffin asked util! ties to keep him informed ef the results of their experience with the altern('ive requalification prtgran evaluation. The meeting was adjourned at noot