ML19310A712
| ML19310A712 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 06/10/1980 |
| From: | Ireland R Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Hanauer S Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8006230046 | |
| Download: ML19310A712 (6) | |
Text
Y.-.
((k Attendees NRC/INP0 Meeting - May 29, 1980 NRC INP0 R. Ireland E. L. Thomas D. Ziemann E. P. Wilkinson P. Collins R. W. Pack V. Moore D. Vassallo S. Rubin D. Fischer L. Beltracchi T. Loomis S. Weiss S. Hanauer R. Tedesco D. Tondi T. Novak W. Minners 4
8006230o4(,
...-.:-~~.n..
- z - ~ -=.~..~ ~.
,..._.s.
-t.-c..~,~.
...--s-
--.,-- - ~ - --
fa'aeco
- o, UNITED STATES f
-g NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMI.CSION
.g j
WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 JUN 101980
. MEMORANDUM FOR:
S. H. Hanauer, Director Division of Human Factors Safety FROM:
R. Ireland, DHFS
SUBJECT:
MEETING
SUMMARY
INP0 AND NRC-DHFS MAY 29, 1980 Representatives of. the Institute for Nuclear Power Operations (INP0) and NRRs Division of Human Factors Safety (DHFS) met on May 29, 1980 to exchange technical information on INP0 and DHFS programs of mutual interest. A list of attendees is attached.
In opening remarks, Dr. Hanauer stated that the objectives of the meeting were to exchange technical information on NRC and INP0 programs of mutual interest, to discuss priorities and to explore ways in which NRC and INP0 could coordinate their work at the management and working levels.
E. Wilkinson and R. Pack noted that there was particular need to discuss the path for pro-ceeding with " accreditation" of training institutions and programs and aspects related to control room design reviews.
~
In a general discussion of INP0 activities-it was noted that-all 62 utilities had joined and that they were all eager to support INP0's work.
INP0's inspec-tion efforts will result in reports to utilities, but the general availability of the INP0 reports is still uncertain.
Procedures The current NRC effort on. review of plant p.ocedures is related primarily to
-the short range programs delineated in the TMI Task Action Plan.
This in-volves comparing industry guidelines for emergency procedures with corresponding accident analyses for-validation followed by review of plant specific procedures.
The pilot program now underway is focussed on NT0Ls but it will involve a few operating plants.
The program involves detailed review of selected emergency procedures'(Small Break LOCA, Steam Generator Tube Rupture, Inadequate Core Cool-ing and Loss of Main Feedwater) followed by a " walk-through" of each procedure on a simulator and a plant " walk-through" of one or more. As an outgrowth of the pilot program, it'is. expected that guidelines will be developed for writing of effective plant procedures.
d
..-~y~
_2_
INP0 is starting to work on procedures from a systems and human factors stand point.
Current effort involves work with Duke Power and NSAC on sequence analysis (IREP approach will fault trees) for the purpose of identify-ing sequences that should be addressed by procedures.
Procedures will be check-ed on the simulator and undergo a plant " walk-through".
Swain's manual will be applied.
The total effort is large and is expected to take at least one year.
The Duke model would be applied to other vendors later.
In connection with a brief discussion of ways to avoid unnecessary NRC and INP0 duplication of effort, E. Wilkinson noted that INP0's criteria for in-spections are under development and involve such things as the experience gained at Crystal River. A total check list is not available yet, but E. Wilkinson offered to furnish a preliminary list of " Evaluation Criteria" and " standards".
D. Ziemann agreed to furnish INP0 with IE's Procedures Evaluation Checklist as soon as it is available.
With respect to plant procedures, E. Wilkinson noted that ideally INP0 would like NRC to review and approve procedures so that INP0 could then focus on training.
It was noted that D. Ziemann would be the NRC point of contact for coordination with INPO on the general topic of procedures.
Human Factors Engineering Current effort in the Human Factors Engineering Branch is focused heavily on control room audits for NTOL's. This is being done by in-house teams with participation of consultants.
Draft guidelines (ESSEX) for review of control rooms, to be done by utilities, are incomplete at this point.
It is expected that the draft guidelines can be put out for comment in a few weeks.
R. Pack noted that an EPRI pilot program has led to a number of recommendations for changes in and corresponding assessments of feasibility of changes to exist-ing control rooms.
E. Wilkinson stated that an INP0 draft, which has grown out of the EPRI and INP0's work on control rooms, might be useful to NRC in connec-tion, with.its review of the ESSEX guidelines.
L. Beltracchi stated that functional requirements for such items as the Safety Status Panel and the Technical Support Center, should be ready by mid-August
.1980. He noted that training would be necessary in the use of equipment and communications.
INP0 will coordinate with h3AC and AIF on the Safety Panel and TSC work.
D. Tondi will be NRC's point of contact for coordination with INP0 on matters related to control room design and review.
L
. Organization and Management One of the principle objectives of the Licensee Qualifications Branch is to establish criteria for assessing the technical competence of utilities.
For NTOL reviews that have taken place to date, draft guidelines issued on February 25, 1980 have been utilized. An update of the February draft is nearly complete and it will be furnished to INP0 in the near future.
INPO will conduri. over all appraisals of utility organizations covering such aspects n Management, Engineering Support, maintenance support, licensed and non licensed plant personnel and watch staffing.
E. Wilkinson noted that IE is pushing to get a utilities group involved in establishing criteria for judging management capability, and that there will be a meeting on this topic with H. Thornburg et al on June 18.
S. Hanauer will discuss this with H. Denton.
On the general topic of management effectiveness it was noted by E. Thomas that at theinstigation of State Power Commissions and the like a number of utilities have undergone management auditr. by firms such as Booz Allen.
INP0 is now devoting a lot of effort to management appraisal and upgrading.
A recent workshop for Chief Executive Officers of Utilities covered this aspect, in part.
It was noted that the CE0's all had an excellent attitude toward safety and that a closer look at mid-level management might uncover some problems that need attention.
E. Wilkinson noted that a video tape of a portion of the CE0 workshop would be of interest to NRC, and offered to let us see it.
It was agreed that judging management effectiveness is highly subjective and that two apparently equivalent organizations might be quite different in capability to manage. Thus " indicators" for judging effectiveness would be useful.
E. Thomas noted that one possible " indicator" is employee morale and that another might be managements attitude toward management development programs.
S. Hanauer observed, as an example, that diesel generatcr reliabi-lity records might provide some indication; there are instances where essen-tially i.dentical installations have remarkably different records, suggesting differences in maintenance philosophy.
E. Wilkinson noted that INP0's draft check list of criteria and standards has a number of items which are related to management, but acknowledged that yard-sticks for judging effectiveness are still missing.
It was noted that the
" final" Teknekron report was under review and that it would be sent to INP0 as soon as possible. This report does not have much on management effective-ness, however, E. Wilkinson stated that INP0 would be pleased to have NRC look at their guidelines before they are issued, l
d On training and qualifications, D. Vassallo noted that we have focused on licensed people to this point, but that in the future we would look at non-licensed plant personnel.
E. Wilkinson stated that INP0 would be highly interested in seeing any criteria NRC is developing.
INP0's short term efforts are aimed at requirements for qualification and training of people, first for licensed operator requalification and later for non-licensed people.
INP0 will let us look at draft material it is developing as it becomes available.
In the longer term, INP0 will do job an& lyses and es-tablish objectives for various tasks.
Out of this will come a series of training modules.
On the general subject of accreditation it was noted that the " White House" has charged NRC, DOE and INP0 to coordinate their efforts.
In this connec-
- tion P. Havenstein noted that DOE is actively assisting INP0 through its contractors.
E. Wilkinson noted that INPO was working with P. Collins and that the three parties should continue to work in unism to set up criteria for accreditation.
It was noted that INP0 had held a workshop on Instructor Certification.
INP0 will send us a draft position paper on this topic.
Considerable work remains to provide a final product.
Paul Collins will infonn DOE and INP0 of the results of an Advisory Group meeting on instructor certification to be held on June 12.
It was agreed that INFO and DHFS would meet to exchange-further technical information at 9:30 AM on July 22, 1980.
There will be an exchange of written material in preparation for the meeting.
Summary of Action Items The following list summarizes action items noted during the meeting.
It was agreed that written material would be furnished as soon as reports c-draft material are put into a form that can be released.
INP0 a.
Furnish DHFS with its preliminary list of " criteria" and
" standards".
(E. Wilkinson) b.
Furnish DHFS with INP0s draft control room review guide-lines as soon as they are available.
(R. Pack)
{
c.
Furnish video tape of a portion of CEO workshop, when requested.
(E. Wilkinson) d.
Furnish INP0's management guidelines, when available, for NRC's pre-issuance review.
(E. Wilkinson) e.
Furnish INP0 draft material on qualifications and training for licensed and non-licensed people as it becomes available.
(E. Wilkinson) 3 4 - - - +..
+...
- =+
- DHFS a.
Furnish INPO with IE's procedures evaluation checklist as
. soon as it can:be released.
(D. Ziemann)
-b.
Discuss scope-of procedures work with R. Pack to highlight possible. INP0/NRC areas of duplication (D. Ziemann) c.
Furnish'ESSEX control room review guidelines as soon as they are available.
(D. Tondi) d.
Furnish INP0 with final Teknekron report as soon as internal review is complete.
(D.Vassallo) e.
Furnish INP0 with updated version of February 25 draft manage-ment criteria'when rework is done.
(D.Vassallo) f.
Inform NRR management of forthcoming INP0/IE meeting on criteria for management effectiveness (S. Hanauer).
9 Furnish for INP0 information any criteria on training and quali-fications that may be developed.
(D. Vassallo) h.
Inform DOE and INP0 of' outcome of June 12 Advisory Group meeting.
(.P. Collins) ft.ds L'O
\\
R. Ireland Division of Human Factors Safety cc; Meeting Attendees
'PDR R. Ireland v
t l
t