ML18153A505

Provides Response to Questions Raised During NRC Training Managers Conference

ML18153A505
Person / Time
Site:	Surry
Issue date:	03/04/1997
From:	Peebles T NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II)
To:	Llewellyn D VIRGINIA POWER (VIRGINIA ELECTRIC & POWER CO.)
References
NUDOCS 9703280053
Download: ML18153A505 (2)

Text

.*

. >I

.March 4, 1997 Virginia Electric and Power Company ATIN:

Mr. D. T. Llewellyn, Superintendent

• Nuclear Training Surry Power Station P. 0. Box 315 Surry, VA 23883

SUBJECT:

RESPONSE TO QUESTIONS RAISED DURING THE REGION II 1996 U. S.

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION (NRC) TRAINING MANAGERS' CONFERENCE

Dear Mr.. Llewellyn:

This is forwarding the response to the four questions raised during our conference. After consultation with headquarters, these responses were determined.

a)

What. is the basis for requal i fication hours having to be the same for active versus inactive operators?.*

10 CFR Part 55.55(e) recognizes the difference between licensed

. operators who.are actively performing the function of an operator and those who are.not, and defines required periods of watchstanding under instruction that must be completed in order to regain active status if proficiency is not maintained.

However Part 55.. 59, "Requalification,"

does not differentiate between active operators ~nd inactive operators.

Each licensed operator is required by Part 55.59 to successfully

. complete a requalificatiqn program developed by the facility licensee in accordance with a systems approach to training. Logically the job tasks, and therefore the training ~equir*ements for a licensed operator do not depend on an inactive or active watchstanding status. NRC's*

position on this issue was clearly stated *in NUREG-1262, "Answers to Questions at Public Meeting Regarding Implementation of Title 10, Code qf Federal Regulations, Part 55 on Operators' Licenses." The answer to question 335 states that the same requalification program applies to operators on shift as well as off shift.*

b)

Can an operator on-site be allowed to not be in requalification training if he is iri a developmental assignment, as an operator off-site in a developmental assignment is allowed?

No. NRR's position is that *individuals who are licens~d will participated in a facility's continuous requaJification program, as required by Part 55.?3(h). Exceptions to this requirement are considered in accordance with Part ~5.59(b), for personnel who,relocated out of the vicinity of the facility for developmental purposes, such as a rotation at INPO, or for personnel who take a leave of absence to

. advance their education.

9703280053 970304 PDR ADOCK 05000280 V

PDR I llllll lllll llll llllll lllll lllll 11111111111111111111111 9

7 II I

~

1 6

3 o

~I

VEPCO 2

c)

Can the requirement be changed to allow reactivity manipulations for initial candidates to be accomplished on the simulator?

The present requirement reflects the Com~ission's view at the time of the rule revision that candidates for operator licenses should have as a minimum the practical experience of performing reactivity manipulations on the plant for which they seek a license. While it may be possible to change the rule, depending on the views of the present.Commission and of the staff, the requirement is not presently considered overly burdensome to the point that rulemaking at this.time is warranted.

For facilities in extended shutdowns, NRC has allowed*candidatesto take licensing examinations and then has held issuance of their licenses pending completion of the requirement.

Under appropriate circumstance, NRR can exempt candidates from the requirement.

d)

Was the recent GFES examination time validated and sho~ld it be?

The October 1996 GFES examination was time validated. The examination is not intended to be time limiting, within reason.

Based on industry feedback, we have increased the allowed time for the GEFS examination from 2.. 5 hour5.787037e-5 days <br />0.00139 hours <br />8.267196e-6 weeks <br />1.9025e-6 months <br />.s tQ 3 hours3.472222e-5 days <br />8.333333e-4 hours <br />4.960317e-6 weeks <br />1.1415e-6 months <br />.

I trust these answers will be of assistance to you.

Also. please note we have a need to move the Training Manager's Conference to November 12 and 13, 1997.

Docket Nos.: 50-280, 50-281 OFFICE RI! :DRS SIGNATURE TP21'7 NAME DATE 03 I c_;* I 97 03 I I 97 COPY?

YES

,N(l)

YES NO Ot-t-ICIAL Kt.COKU CUf'T 11111:i '~:.Nl NAf :

03 I YES Sincerely,

.Thomas A. Peebles, Chief Operator Licensing and Human Performance Branch Division of Reactor Safety I 97 03 I I 97 03 I I 97 03 I NO YES NO

. YES NO YES A:\\RESPQUE.LTR I 97 NO