ML17290A913

Exam Rept 50-397/OL-93-03 on 931206-10.Exam Results:Three Crews of Five Operators Were Examined in Simulator.All Three Crews Passed.Twelve Operators Passed Individual Exams

ML17290A913
Person / Time
Site:	Columbia
Issue date:	12/29/1993
From:	Morrill P NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION V)
To:
Shared Package
ML17290A912	List: ML17290A911 ML17290A913
References
50-397-OL-93-03, 50-397-OL-93-3, NUDOCS 9401250115
Download: ML17290A913 (13)

Text

ENCLOSURE 1

Examination Report No.:

Facility:

Facility Docket No.:

Facility License No.:

50-397/OL-93-03 Washington Nuclear Project No.

2 (WNP-2) 50-397 NPF-21 Examinations administered at WNP-2, near Richland, Washington Examiners:

T. Meadows, Senior Licensing Examiner, RV K. Hikkelsen, Licensing Examiner, PNL G. Buckely, Licensing Examiner, PNL Approved:

Summary:

Philip J.

orr ll, Chief Operations Section C

Date Signed The NRC administered a licensed operator requalification training program evaluation at WNP-2 during the period-.of December 6-10,

1993, per NUREG 1021, Revision 7, "Operator Licensing Examiner Standards."

The licensee's program had beeri previously evaluated as satisfactory during the previous evaluation in November 1992.

Another NRC admini-stered requalification program evaluation was scheduled for December 1993, to verify the continuing adequacy of the requalification program and corrective actions taken by the facility.

Three crews of five operators each were examined in the simulator.

All three crews passed.

Twelve of these operators were required to take a full individual examinat'ion consisting of the written, simulator, and walkthrough portions.

Three operators were only required to take the simulator portion in order to fill out the crew staffing.

All twelve operators evaluated passed their individual examinations.

The WNP-2 licensed operator requalification training program was determined to be satisfactory based on the evaluation results.

However, the licensee's training staff appeared to =have difficulty developing proposed testing materials which met the requirements of the Examiner Standards.

An excessive amount of review and oversight from NRC examiners was required to develop fully satisfactory written questions and examination scenarios.

9'40i25QiaS p5PQQ34$ 7 poac~

V

e

REPORT DETAILS Examiners T. Meadows, Senior Licensing Examiner, RV K. Hikkelsen, Licensing Examiner, PNL G. Buckely,, Licensing Examiner, PNL Persons Attendin the'xit Meetin on December 10 1993 NRC:

T. Meadows, Chief Examiner, RV P. Horrill, Chief, Operations

Section, RV K. Hikkelsen, Licensing Examiner, PNL G. Buckely, Licensing Examiner, PNL R. Barr, Senior, Resident Inspector R. Huey, Enforcement Officer, RV J.

Munro, Senior Reactor Specialist, NRR/HOLB WNP-2:

J.

V. Parrish, Assistant Managing Director for Operations M. Shaeffer,

Manager, Operations G. Smith, -Operations Division Manager J.

Baker, Manager, Nuclear Training H. Baird, Manager, Operator Training P. Taylor, Operations Department Liaison to Training J.

Engbarth, Executive Board Administrative Auditor D. King, Manager, Operations Development Training Test Administration and Results

'a ~

~Back round The facility's program was evaluated as satisfactory during the previous NRC administered evaluation in November 1992.

To verify the continuing adequacy of the requalification program, the NRC elected to administer another requalification program evaluation in December 1993.

The December 6-10, 1993 program evaluation was administered in accordance with NUREG 1021, Revision 7, "Operator Licensing Examiner Standards."

b.

Test Haterial Pre aration Proposed Written Test:

Mith the assistance of representatives of the licensee's staff signed under security agreements, the Chief Examiner reviewed and validated the proposed written examinations in the Region V Office during October and November 1993.

The review found up to 50M of the original proposed questions required replacement or editing to meet the NRC's guidelines for development of open referenced written examination questions in NUREG 1021.

Individual question changes were required for at least one of the following reasons:

(1) double jeopardy, (2) more than one correct

answer, (3) memory excessive (low cognitive level),

(4) not operational, (5) the call'f question did not solicit the expected

answer, or (6) not technically correct.

Although the original proposed tests required significant changes, the facility and the NRC were able to develop validated tests that met NUREG 1021 standards.

Proposed Operating Test:

The proposed operating test, consisting of Job Performance Heasures (JPHs),

and simulator scenario materials were validated by the examination

team, both during the.October November 1993 office review period and during the site preparation week of November 15-19, 1993.

Appropriate licensee personnel signed security agreements to maintain examination security in accordance with the Examiner Standards.'wo significant deficiencies were identified by the NRC; scenario difficulty was not always balanced, and crew critical tasks (CTs) lacked objective acceptance criteria.'ne of the three proposed scenario sets was not balanced in difficulty. This was resolved by switching two of the six scenarios to achieve an acceptable balance in difficulty.

Host of the original CTs appeared to be based on individual simulator critical tasks (ISCTs) that were used for Revision 6 to the Examiners Standards.

The facility and the NRC revised the CTs to meet the Critical Task Hethodology required by ES-604 oF the Examiners Standards.

In general the proposed JPHs were adequate and well organized.

However, a few proposed JPHs contained licensee identified critical steps that if not completed would not prevent satisfactory task completion.

Therefore, these steps did not merit a "critical" rating and would not justify an operator failure if missed.

This problem was corrected by the examination team..

Summary:

The NRC Chief Examiner concluded that the licensee's training staff had difficulty developing adequate proposed testing materials from.their written and scenario training banks.

An excessive amount of review and oversight from NRC examiners was required to complete final testing

f 0

materials which met the requirements of the Examiner Standards.

The Chief Examiner discussed the test development issue with the licensee's management staff during the November 15, 1993 site preparation week.

The licensee's management acknowledged this concern and indicated that they too had identified a weakness in their training organization regarding test development.

They stated that communication and cooperation between the Operations Development Training and Operator Training staffs needed to be improved.

c.

Written Test Administration and Results The written examinations were administered on December 6,

1993 at the licensee's Plant Support Facility (PSF) to six reactor operators (ROs) and six senior reactor operators (SROs).

The examination included a

static simulator test and a classroom examination for each of the twelve operators examined.

These operators were also administered the operating examinations discussed below.

The examination's administrative arrangements were satisfactory.

At the conclusion of the written examination, the Chief Examiner conducted a post examination review with the licensee staff, in accordance with the Examiner Standards.

It was agreed that the examinations and keys remained valid.

All of the operators passed the written examinations.

d.

D namic Simulator Test Administration and Results Three crews of five operators each were examined in the simulator (six senior reactor operators and nine reactor operators).

A shift technical advisor (STA) was also present for each crew.

Each crew was examined with two scenarios over the period of December 7-9, 1993.

Six different scenarios were used.

No scenarios were repeated to avoid compromise.

All three crews passed.

No followup testing by the NRC was required for any of the fifteen operators evaluated.

The performance of the licensee's crews and operators appeared consistent with the program evaluation conducted in November 1992.

Although no significant deficiencies were identified, some situations we. e observed by NRC examiners where the formality of communications, and use of procedures could be improved.

The facility evaluators made observations similar to the NRC's.

The facility training department proceeded to develop formal remediation plans to address identified individual weaknesses in accordance with their program.

The remedi ation training plans appeared adequate.

li'l fi i

e.

Walkthrou h Test Administration and Results Six ROs and six SROs were administered walkthrough examinations consisting of five JPMs for each operator.

Individual examinations were administered to -four operators each afternoon after each of the their associated simulator crew evaluations were completed.

All twelve of the operators passed this portion of the examination.

Only one JPH was missed out of the three JPH sets administered.

4.

Pro ram Evaluation Overall, the licensee's program must meet the criteria of the Examiner Standards to be considered satisfactory.

The principal criteria (and results) are listed below.

"A satisfactory requalification program meets each of the following:"

a ~

b; "At least 75% of the licensees must pass all portions of the examination in which they participate.

The pass rate is determined by dividing the number of licensees that pass all portions of the examination in which they participate by the total number of licensees taking the dynamic simulator examination.

The total number of licensees will include those operators who only participate in the simulator examination for the purpose of meeting crew composition requirements."

(100% of the operators passed)

"At least two-thirds (66%) of the crews pass the simulator examination."

(100% of the crews passed)

Furthermore, the NRC examiners found the facility evaluators to be objective and perceptive in their evaluations.

Followup questioning of weak or unclear operator performance was timely and probing.

The facility licensee's program for maintaining examination security appeared good.

The facility licensee's program for maintenance and tracking of operator licenses per 10 CFR Part 55 was also found to be adequate.

The examiners observed that the overall performance of the operators appeared good.'wnership of crew performance was assumed by the shift supervisory staff and facility management.

Conversely, the Chief Examiner observed that the licensee's training staff had difficulty developing proposed testing materials that met the current NRC standards from their written and scenario training banks.

An excessive amount of rev'iew and oversight from the NRC examiners was required to obtain final testing materials that satisfied the Examiners Standards.

0 W

tl

The Chief Examiner discussed the test development issue with the licensee's management staff during the pre-exit meeting on December 9,

1993 and during the formal exit on December 10; 1993.

The licensee's management acknowledged this concern and indicated that they too had identified a weakness in their training organization regarding test development.

They stated that communication and cooperation between the Operations Development Training and Operator Training staffs was a

problem and committed that this would be corrected.

The licensee's management also committed to upgrade their requalification written,

JPH, and scenario banks to NUREG 1021, Revision 7 standards.

They further committed to ensure that all future simulator scenarios administered for operator requalification annual examinations would meet NUREG 1021 criteria and that they would have their entire training bank at that level by April of 1994.

~Ei N ti An exit meeting was held by the NRC examiners with representatives of the licensee's staff on December 10, 1993 to discuss the NRC findings.

The licensee staff acknowledged the examination team's findings, and committed that the steps outlined above would be taken to correct the deficiencies observed during test development;

SIMULATION FACILITY REPORT Enclosure 2

Facility Licensee:

Washington Public Power Supply System (WNP-2)

Facility Docket No:

50-397 Operating Tests Administered on:

December 7-9, 1993 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 non-compliance with 10 CFR 55.45(b).

These observations do not affect NRC certification or approval of the simulation facility other than to provide information which may be used in future evaluations.

No licensee action is required in response to these observations.

During the conduct of the simulator portion of the operating tests, the following items were observed (if none, so state):

DESCRIPTION GDS The graphics display system, frequently stalled and was generally not reliable throughout the examination.

Although this system is not safety related, it is a good operator aide, especially for the

CRS, SM, and STA for a heads up view of plant status.

General:

NRC examiners observed that this simulator usually performed well if the scenarios were carefully prepared and validated.

The malfunction input is heavily dependent on device override features (integrated system malfunctions are lacking).

Therefore, the simulator was manpower intensive to operate and maintain.

The core model was also old and outdated.

Also, there were some control board features that have not been updated,to recent controller upgrades in the actual control room (heater/drains, condensate, new RPV level and pressure indicators, and some new containment parameter indications, etc...).

The licensee was preparing to install a new simulator in early 1994 and has increased staffing to support it.

'r