ML19249B589

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Responds to NRC Re Violations Noted in IE Insp Rept 70-1151/79-10.Corrective Actions:Refresher Training Examination & Evaluation of Training Program Effectiveness Revised
ML19249B589
Person / Time
Site: Westinghouse
Issue date: 07/27/1979
From: Goodwin W
WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC COMPANY, DIV OF CBS CORP.
To: Sutherland J
NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II)
Shared Package
ML19249B581 List:
References
7907827, NUDOCS 7909040588
Download: ML19249B589 (2)


Text

.

'l I

. l

t t?'3 h Westinghouse gQ*, d

'l,

~

Electric Corporation

] I t, 2 hf July 27, 1979 U. S. Nuclear Pegulatory Ccxmtission ATIN:

Mr. J. T. Sutherland, Chief Pegion II Puel Facilities and bbterials Safety Branch Office of Inspection and Enforccrent 101 Furietta Street, Suite 3100, Atlanta, Georgia 30303 RE: RII: JBK 70-1151/79-10 Gentlen2n:

In response to your letter of July 5, 1979, concerning your inspection of our facilities conducted June 18-22, 1979, and pursuant to the provisions of Section 2.201, Part 2, Title 10, Code of Federal Pegulations, the following ccrm2nts are mde:

The refresher training examination has been revised to rease its scope and inprove its ccgrehensiveness relative to all mjor topics included in the training agenda. The revised exa unation ncw contains questions pertaining to 1) personnel dosimetry, 2) contatination control,

3) airborne radioactivity, 4) respiratory protection and 5) nuclear criticality safety. This exa tination will be used in refresher training sessions conducted in the future, and should enhance our overall evalua-tion of training program effectiveness. Full ccr:pliance with NPC re-quirements has now toen achieved.

We muld like to (ghasize, however, that evalr.ation of training pro-gram effectiveness will not be performed solely on the basis of exanina-tion or testing. Paragraph 3.1.5 of our S W license, " Training", states that training program effectiveness will be nonitored and evaluated through testing, use of questionnaires or review of intemal radiation protection and nuclear criticality safety inspection reports. Accordingly, we will continue to use all of those criteria and any other criteria deemed appropriate by the Radiation Protection Ccrqx>nent.

t sa u e ' a ;

7 9 090 40 ff(f UPHCf AL C,

4 Mr. J. T. Sutherland Page 2 July 27, 1979 Fran our review of your inspection report, we have concluded that no proprietary infornution is identified. We trust that you find the above crrrents responsive to your letter.

If you have any questions regarding this nutter, please write ne at the above address, or telephane me at (803) 776-2610.

Sincerely, KESTINGIIOUSE ELECI'RIC CORPOPATIGJ

4

&07 W. L. Goodwin, mnager Pegulatory Ccnpliance

/A

^

VMW L

M. D'/ core, Manager mnufacturing and Coltrbia Plant WIE/ff

[}Oi3039