ML19345D111
| ML19345D111 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 12/02/1980 |
| From: | Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards |
| To: | |
| References | |
| ACRS-T-0801, NUDOCS 8012090091 | |
| Download: ML19345D111 (59) | |
Text
,
1
{J
')
1 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
~
2 NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 4
MEETING OF THE 5
ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON REACTOR SAFEGUARDS 6
SUBCOMMITTEE ON REACTOR OPER ATIONS 7
8
'Nuciear Regulatory Commission Room 1046 9
1717 H Street, N.
W.
Washington, D. C.
10 Tuesday, December 2, 1980 11 12 The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 13 8: 45 a.m.
14 ACRS MEMBERS PRESENT:
15 WILLIAM M. MATHIS, Chairman 18 J. CARSON MARK 17 STAFF PRESENT:
18 l
L.
CROCKER l
19 F.
ALLENSPACH D. VASSALLO 20 S. HANAUER S.
BEAL 7
l 21 l
22 DESIGNATED FEDERAL EMPLOYEE:
23 RICHARD K MAJOR 24 25
(
w Dll)
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, j
400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
2 (l
1 EEOCEEDIEgg v
2 MR. MATHIS:
The meeting will now come to order.
3 This is a meeting of the Advisory Committee on 4 Reactor Safeguards Subcommittee on Reactor Operations.
5 I am William Mathis, r,ubcommittee Chairman.
The 6 other ACRS member present today is Dr. Carson Mark on my 7 left.
8 The purpose of this meeting is to review NRC 9 guidelines for utility management structure and technical 10 resources.
This meeting is being conducted in accordance 11 with the provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee Act 12 and the Governrent in the Sunshine Act.
13 Mr. Richard Major is the designated Federal p.,
k/
14 Employee for this meeting.
15 The rules for participation in today's meeting 18 have been announced as part of the notice of this meeting 17 previously published in the Federal Register on November the 18 18th, 1980.
19 A transcript of the meeting is being kept and it 20 is requested that each speaker first identify hiraself and 21 speak with sufficient clarity and volume so that he can be 22 readily heard.
23 We have received no written statements or requests
)
24 for time to make oral statements from any member of the 25 public.
t
\\
V l
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE, S.W, WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
3
()
1 Carson, do you have any comment?
2 MR. MARKS No.
3 MR. MATHISa With that then we will proceed wi th 4 the~ meeting and I will call on Larry Crocker of the staff to 5 begin.
6 Larry.
7 MR. CROCKER:
Thank you, Mr. Mathis.
8 We have four people from the staff with us this 9 morning.
Dr. Hanauer, whom I am sure you know, is the to Division Director of the Division of Human Factors Safety; 11 Domenic Vassallo who is Chief of the Licensee Cualifications 12 Branch.
He is absent right now but should be back in the 13 room in a moment.
To my immediate right is Fred Allenspach
/~T kY 14 who is a member of the Liccnsee Qualifications Branch as am 15 I.
16 This effort on guidelines for utility management 17 structure is about a year old at this point.
It is based on 18 the lessons learned from TMI and the recommendations of the 19 various groups such as the President's Commission on TMI.
20 There were some recommendations from NRC Commissioners, the 21 Lessons Learned Task Force, the Bogovin Group and the NRC 22 special Inquiry Group.
There were recommendations from the 23 ACBS itself, the Atomic Industrial Forum and the ANS
(
24 Standards Committee.
A lot of these were incorporated 25 ultimately into the TMI Action Plan, NUREG 0660.
h
%.j' l
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, l
400 VIRGINIA AVE, S.W., WASHINGTON D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
4
(~'T 1
Based on all these the staff got started trying to
'J 2 develop these guidelines.
We did it really in a two pronged 3 fashion.
One was internal staff effort and the other has 4 been done under contract with various contractors.
5 We now have three contracts that have been 8 completed addressing this general area.
One by Basic Energy 7 Technology Associates, BETA, resulted in a report, 8 NUREG/CR-1280, entitled " Power Plant Staffing."
This report 9 was published last spring, was issued for public comment and 10 we have in fact received a number of comments on it.
11 Basically BETA looked at a comparison of how the 12 nuclear Navy staff runs its plants versus how the commercial 13 industry does it in comparison to how the NRC requirements,
14 stack up.
15 A second report was prepared for us by Teknekron 16 Research, Incorporated, entitled " Utility Management and 17 Technical Resources."
This was published in October of this l
18 year as NUREG/CR-1656.
l l
19 Basically what Teknekron did was under about a 1
i 20 three-month effort developed a set of criteria that they 21 felt could be used to measure utility management l
l 22 organizations.
Then having developed these criteria they 23 then compared submittals that the industry had made in 24 response to a letter from Mr. Denton of last summer of July
?
%J 25 29th I believe.
l p
V l
l
(
ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY,INC,
?
400 VIRGINIA AVE, S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
5
()
1 They compared the data the utilities had submitted 2 against these criteria and came up with more or less an 3 cverall ra ting of how they felt the utility stacked up.
4 This report was delayed for some time in getting 5 into the public print or out as a NUREG really because there 6 were three or f our' utilities that had claimed some 7 proprietary data and we were having trouble getting this 8 cleared.
9 The raport is on the street now for comments and 10 the comment period expires I believe on the 8th of 11 December.
Some stuff is starting to come but we do not have 12 too much yet.
13 MR. MATHIS:
Is that the first comment on this g)
('>
14 particular report, Larry?
15 MR. CROCKER:
Yes, that would be the first set of 16 comments.
17
'R.
MARK:
The point you mentioned about i
i 18 p ro prie t ary data 19 MR. CROCKER:
Yes.
was that settled by removing it or 20 MR. " ARKS 21 the people were willing to have it be used?
22 MR. CROCKER:
We are still hasseling on the 23 thing.
When we published the NUREG ve settled the problem (nj 24 by removing that data.
There were five utilities involved.
l 25 The data pertaining to those five utilities was pulled from I\\
t R>
l ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (20 0 554 2345
6
()
1 the basic report that had been submitted to us ty Tekenkron 2 when we put it out as a NUREG.
3 MR. MARK Well, was it data of the sort tita t was 4 important to be incorporated into the final thing?
5 HR. CROCKER:
I don't think it was all that 6 critical.
Basically what they were concerned about was the 7 kinds of questions that had been asked last summer a year 8 ago by Mr. Denton.
Their reluctance was if they had this 9 information out in the first place they were violating, at 10 least in spirt, some of the Privacy Act sorts of things, 11 that they were putting out information on people that ther 12 didn't feel was really warranted to get in the public print.
13 There was also some concern registered that if we O
14 tell the world all about our great operators and employees 15 somebody ir going to come out and try to hire them away from 16 us and they were concerned about that also and I think quite 17 rightfully so based on what we have seen in the last year.
18 There Js a lot of that going on.
19 The titird report that we have had performed for us 70 was done by Bio Technology, Incorporated.
This was a very 21 brief study.
It was done early this year and resulted in a 22 report, NUREG/CR-1764, entitled " Review of Staffing 23 Requirements for Near-Term Operating License Facilities."
()
24 What we had run across in the spring of this year 25 was one of the utilities coming up for an operating license O
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE. S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
7
/~T 1 and at the time they were ready to get their license they
\\_)
2 just physically did not have enough warm bodies to staff the 3 plant based on the new requirements that the Commission has 4 laid down.
5 As you are aware I am sure, we have added one SRO 6 to the control room on each shift.
For a normal five-shift 7 operation of course you are talking about at least five 8 additional SR0s then that have to be on site ready to go.
9 We also have imposed restrictions on the amount of overtime 10 that can be used at the plants.
At the time the operator 11 licensing people have jacked up the requirements insofar as
. 12 what would be required to get a license in the first place.
13 The combination of these three got us into some m-)
14 problems with this particular utility because the operators 15 that they had in the pipeline getting ready for the license 16 they thought were ample and probably would have been ample 17 to run the plant in the pre-TMI days.
After we changed the 18 requirements they were coming up short.
19 So we had Bio Technology take a look at this 20 trying to come up with some sort of a recommendation to us 21 as to given the fact you are short of people wha t would be i
22 the optimal way to try to run the plant.
Should we try to 23 do it with f ewer numbers than we think would be nice, should p,
24 ve try to do it with lesser qualifications than we would qJ
~
25 really like to have, or should we let them use some overtime
[
/N;'3 ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
8
()
1 that we really didn't want them to use?
2 The report, like I say, was a very short-term 3 effort over a period of about a month.
The results were 4 really not too conclusive.
As it turned out we did in fact 5 license the plant to operate with the use of some additional 6 ovettine on a more or less continuous basis until they could 7 get some additional operators trained and ready to go and 8 they are in that mode right now as a matter of fact.
9 We also have right now a fourth effort that is 10 underway with Battelle Northwest trying to identify those 11 elements of mangement which should be considered in making 12 our overall determination of the adequa67 of utility 13 organization and staffing.
b'
'~
14 What the staff has looked at in over the last year 15 basically, which you might call almost a bean counting sort 16 of operation, we have looked at the organization patterns, 17 the blocks on the chart to see if they look like they are 18 stacking right.
We have tried to count noses on the number 19 of people and the types and qualifications of people they 20 have got.
21 While these things may be necessary, I don't think 22 they are sufficient for a well-run, well-managed 23 organization.
There are other things like the attitude of Gj 24 the utility toward safety and the attitude of management 25 that we feel has a tremendous impact.
As a matter of fact, h(M ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE, S.W., WASHINGTON. D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
/
9 1 if the attitude is correct probably the actual organization 2 is not all that important anyway.
s 3
Battelle is helpL,s us with this.
We have had one 4 workshop meeting thus far and there are some other efforts 5 planned.
Right now they are not too well defined, but we 8 hope to within the next few months anyway to get some sort 7 of a better feel for how one might go about measuring or at 8 least getting a feel for these other elements that we really 9 f eel are there if we can just put our finger on them and 10 figure out how to look at them.
11 So those are the contractor efforts that have been 12 underway.
13 On the part of the staff, I began really last O
~
14 spring with a small group of staff people trying to come up 15 with what we then called criteria for utility management.
16 This has been out in a number of draft versions, copies of 17 which were furnished to the committee early, I think two 18 different versions.
Finally in September of this year we 19 have published this as a draft document, NUREG 0731, 20 entitled " Guidelines for Utility Management Structure and 21 Technical Resources."
22 Over the period that this document has been 23 developing we have in fact used it to evaluate a num*ar of u
7 24 utilities that have been coming up for operating licenses.
25 One form or another of the draft guidelines were used to O
ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON. D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
10 1 evaluate Sequoyah, that would be Sequoyah 1, North Anna 2, 2 Salem 1, McGuire 1, Farley, Diablo Cany2n, Zion, Indian 3 Point 2 and 3 and THI-1.
These have been a joint Office of 4 Inspection and Enforcemen t/NRR teams that have gone out to 5 look at the utilities and the pla'nt organization, staffing 6 and structures.
7 We have fed this information into the final safety 8 evaluation reports that have been used to make a 9 determination on recommendations for issuance of operating 10 licenses for these facilities -- well, operating licenses 11 for some of them.
In t'ae case of Zion and Indian Point it 12 was a special inspection that was ordered.
Of course for 13 THI-1 we are looking at restart.
O 14 We have fed back into the staff effort the things 15 we have learned from these other inspection trips.
We have 16 had some interaction with various industry groups.
17 Particularly the Atomic Industrial Forum and Edison Electric 18 Institute have had some input already to these draft 19 guidelines in an earlier version.
20 The guidelines right now have been issued.
They 21 are on the street for public comment.
The comment period 22 now is to expire on the 19th of December of this year.
23 Our intent is to take whatever comments we get on 24 the NUREG both from industry, interested members of the 25 public and the staff and incorporate these together with O
A1.DERSoN REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
11
()
1 such thoughts and comments on the other two contractor 2 reports, the NUREG, the " Power Plant Staffing" report, and 3 the NUREG 1656, the Teknekron report.
4 Our thought was to take the comments and the 5 thoughts from.these reports as well as f rom the staff effort 6 and get these back into a revised version of NUREG 0731.
If 7 there are major changes there may be a need to circulate 8 0731 again, the revised version, for an additional round of 9 comments from the public.
10 In any event, we are due under the present 11 schedule to have a paper to the Commission by about the end 12 of the year, which obviously is not going to make it right 13 now, to get their blessing on a document that ultimately is O
14 to be published about March of '81 and applied to the 15 industry, to the operating plants.
16 MR. MATHIS:
Larry, that document, how is it to be 17 used then?
Are you going to rule-making or where are you 18 going beyond that stage?
Is it still just a guideline or 19 has that been thought through?
20 MR. CROCKER:
I don't think it has been completely 21 thought through at this point.
Certainly it has not been 22 thought through by me at this point.
1 will put it that way.
23 MR. VASSAL 10s I don't think we really have
()
24 thought of it in terms of a rule at this stage.
25 MR. HANAUER:
I have been some thinking about O
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY. INC, 400 YIRG'NIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.O. 20024 (202) 554 2345
12 s
1 this.
The final document, I think it may well come out in
()
2 parts.
The staffing requirements, for exanple, we are 3 already working on a proposed rule.
The organization and management are not likely to be anything more than review 5 guidelines and there may be a reg. guide that comes out of 6 it some day.
It is a little too soon to tell in any detail 7 but it may turn out to be more than one document.
8 MR. MATHIS:
And whatever comes out of it isn't 9 going to happen tomorrow.
I mean, it is out in the future.
10 MR. HANAUER:
No, sir, it will be next week at 11 least.
12 (laughter.)
13 MR. MATRIS:
Carson.
(~'\\
~
\\"'
14 M3. MARK:
larry, yoy described a process where I 15 am sure initially there were frantic objections to the 16 proposals you were trying out but now there has been some 17 back and forth.
How would you describe the sta tus then of 18 things?
You have guidelines or suggestions with thich you 19 are presumably still fairly content and the utilities have j
20 in at least a few cases adapted to those.
21 MR. CROCKEBa Yes.
i l
22 MR. MARK:
Have they now forgotten how badly hurt l
23 they were so that things go along or are they still sure
/~
l
(,N!
24 that you are being totally unreasonable, or how does that i
25 stand?
(v) l l
ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY,INC.
400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON. O.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
l l
13 j
s
(,)
1 MR. CROCKER:
My impression '
at utilities that 2 we have contacted thus far don't really feel that this is 3 all that unreasonable.
4 The one thing that we have become absolutely 5 convinced of on the staff is that there is no way for us to 8 sit here in our infinite wisdom and prescribe how a utility 7 should be organized or staff.
Each one of them has its own 8 problems.
They arrived in the position they are now because 9 somebody thought this was the best way to go.
I think we 10 are in a very awkward position to be trying to second-guess 11 them at this point in time and force them into a different 12 organization.
13 Now, in some ways we are pushing, for example, to 7_
(
)
14 have a very high-level corporate official like a vice 15 president who is in charge of the nuclear end of th e 16 utility's business, somebody that we can look to that has 17 responsibility f or all things nuclear for that utility, if 18 you will.
This gentleman or lady will have the nuclear side 19 of the house under his fingers so he is responsible and he 20 knows he is responsible and he can devote his attention to 21 it.
22 We don't really see any, or I have not seen any 23 argument about this from the utilities.
Many of them have 24 been going this way on their own even before we got to 25 them.
Of course some were that way before TMI.
I think the
~-
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
l I
i 14 O
te e==
tre r"r aeve not tea== to 11 er tae-the 2 necessity of having someone at a relatively high level in 3 the company that really is devoted to the nuclear platit 4 safety and we haven't had any fuss about this at all.
5 MR. MARKS I take from this that you expect once 6 the exact number of warm bodies sort of problem has had time 7 to be met that you anticipa te really a fairly smooth 8 transition to a pattern that you think is what it should be?
9 MR. CROCKERs I think really we will see it that 10 way.
Of course the ones we have looked at so far I have got 11 to admit we have been spoiled.
We looked at TVA, for 12 example, and they are sitting down there with some 40,000 13 employees.
We looked at Duke Power with some 46,000.
We O
14 have done Public Service Electric and Gas with 28,000.
I 15 mean they have got a lot of people in these places.
When 16 you say I want one or we think you ought to have three or 17 four more engineers out in'this area, why they say sure, no 18 problem.
19 What I am concerned about is when you get to some 20 of the smaller utilities that have a single plant and they 21 are probably struggling right now to get enough support for 22 it and I can see some problems coming there.
23 We are not trying, by the way, to legislate that q,/
24 each one will have some absolute minimum number of people as 25 a magic number.
I am not sure we can even define what that O
ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
~_
I 15 1
is.
2 What we are concerned with is that they have the 3 right kinds of technical support either in-house or
()
4 avai$.able under contract somehow to them and identify it so 5 if they get into trouble, for example, on the accident like 6 something at Three Mile where somebody can pick up a phone 7 and he knows he has got guys standing by that he can get 8 into help with some advice and assistance.
You would avoid 9 the great wheel-spinning operation that went on after Three 10 Mile trying to get the troops mobilized and ready to help.
11 MR. MARK:
Where can they find such outside 12 contracted support, from the manuf acturers?
13 MR. CROCKER:
From the vendors, the O
14 architect / engineers and the industry itself now is setting 15 up I believe it is INPO.
They are in the process right now 16 of compiling a shopping list, if you will, of all of the 17 resources that are available throughout the industry and 18 could come to the assistance of a plant in trouble 19 somewhere.
All the various utilities, vendors and AE's are l
l l
20 contributing in making resources available to this group.
21 They would be on an on-call basis basically.
We are not 22 really into it although we are aware of it but the 23 arrangements I think would have to be between each specific 24 utility and INPO or the people involved.
So at least there 25 will be a list of what is available to help and they can ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
16
(}
1 make their plans accordingly based on some of this.
2 MR. MARK:
It reminds me of the Mathematics 3 Society soliciting a list of re tired professors who would be 4 available to fill in for a semester when somebody is on 5 leave and things like that.
Maybe you would be on it.
6 (Laughter.)
7 MR. MATRIS:
Well, Larry, I noticed in your 8 emergency planning and so forth here, and I forget'what it 9 is called, but anyway it specified that there would be three to two-man radiation protection teams available.
That is six 11 people you have got to drag from somewhere and they aren't 12 going to exist in your shif t crews.
Would that come from 13 INP07 (D
14 3R. CROCKERa No.
That sort of help would have to 15 be available really within the utility somewhere.
I think 16 the way the emergency planning people are coming out now 17 they are talking of 30- to 60-minute response times on these 18 rews to get on site and ready to go.
So that has pretty 19 much got to be in place ahead of time.
20 I don't think this implies even in their minds 21 that all of these crews need necess.trily be rad protection 22 people.
You could have one guy with the training and then a 23 helper to go along with him on this two-man team sort of (n,)
24 thing.
It would be nice if both of them were radiation 25 people but I don't think it is mandatory.
O ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY. INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE, S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
17
(~}
1 By the,way I should point out tha t our 0731 does v
2 have a section in there now on emergency planning and the 3 kinds of staffing that are required.
We put a caveat in the 4 front of the document when it first came out that indicated 5 that th e re was another group withi: the Commission that is 6 working on emergency planning, this s Brian Grimes bunch, 7 and they in fact have now published their document in final 8 form, NUREG 0654.
I think it hit the street like yesterday 9 or the day before.
It is brand new.
I don't know if you 10 have copies yet or not but you should have within a day or 11 so at the most.
12 With the publication of 0654 I think our intent 13 now is to try to back away from this as far as our document
(~/3 x_
14 is concerned.
Rather than have two outfits trying to cover 15 the same territory, we feel it would be better for us to get 16 out of it and let the emergency planners take care of that 17 end of the business.
18 Mr. Allenspach was just in touch yesterday with 19 one of these people.
20 Fred, you might tell them what you found out.
21 HR. ALLENSPACH:
As a corollary with the 0654 they 22 slso have had a NUREG 0696 which is a functional criteria 23 for emergency response facilities in which they discuss also
\\.))
24 requirements for the technical support center.
They have 25 undergoing presently a contract with the Bettelle Richland O
k) l ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE S.W., WASHINGTON. D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
18
()
1 to determine more specifically the requirements for manning 2 the tech support center in offsite facilities.
I think that 3 will be a month or two coming back.
I don't know whether it 4 is going to be in revised 0696 or not, but it looks like 5 they are going to be taking a pretty good look in setting 6 criteria for places like the technical support center, in 7 which case then we are just going to back away f rom that and 8 probably delete that from our next version of the 0731.
9 MR. MATHIS:
When you say you will back away from 10 that, you are talking about the technical support center 11 in-house and not the emergency center that is outside the 12 fence?
13 MR. ALLENSPACH:
Well, the emergency center that
- ( )
14 is outside the fence has been theirs all along.
There has l
l 15 been a little bit of overlap between the technical support 16 center where that kind of falls into our bailiwick or the 17 emergency planni ng people 's bailiwick.
Since they have 18 gotten a jump on that and now have a contract out, I think l
19 in the long term we will probably back away from that and 20 let them handle that aspect of it.
21 MR. CROCKER:
Well, that pretty well completes I 22 think sort of an overview of what we have been doing or what 23 we have been trying to do.
I indicated we were due to have r^j x
24 this paper to the Commission by the end of the year and then
(
25 a document on the street by about March of '81 for
)
V ALDERSoN PEPoRTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
19 (v}
1 implementation along about September of
'81.
I suspect this 2 whole business now is slipping a little bit.
I am sure we 3 can 't get a paper to the Commission in time.
There is a 4 possibility of making up a little bit of time later on, but 5 I suspect we are probably talking beyond September for an 6 implementation date.
7 One thing that we have tried to do in this is keep 8 a reasonably open mind.
You know, if we identif y something 9 We think is weak and we feel they need to be beefed up on we 10 have tried to recognize that it is not something that a 11 utility can go out the day af ter tomorrow and hire five more 12 trained people to do something.
It is going to take time to 13 get the right kinds of people onboard even if they have got 14 the right attitude and they are trying to do it.
There are j
l 15 just not that many people available right now.
16 So even though we say implementation in September, I
17 it may be that that is an effective date to start with dates 18 a year or so down the trail or maybe beyond that before we 19 really start holding feet to fire on having wha tever the 20 minimum happen to be.
21 MB. MATHIS:
Larry, in your contacts with the NTOL 22 and some of these others wha + is the reaction to the shift 23 technical adviser so far?
O(/
24 MR. CROCKERa I think it is mixed.
Some have 25 indicated a real delight in having these people around, l
h)
ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) $54 2345
20 f]
1 particularly operators we have talked to have been pleased v
2 at the concept of having somebody there that can give them 3 some help if they get into a bind.
In other case the STAS I 4 suspect are probably not being used properly at this point 5 or not the way we had envisaged when we started out.
In 6 some circles they have been referred to as "UGAP's."
I 7 don 't know if you have heard th a t term before or not..When 8 we asked what UGAP was we were told that this is the guy 9 that stands around in the control room and when something 10 happens he turns to the shift supervisor and says you have 11 got a problem.
12 (Laughter.)
13 If that is all they are going to do it is not GJ 14 going to be much help.
15 Part of it is we are seeing two ways of getting at 16 the shift tech advisers right now.
Some of the utilities 17 are starting out with basically some of their senior reactor 18 operator types and have given them extra training, bo th 19 academic and simulator time, trying to get them upgraded to 20 the point where they do in f act have a good feel for the 21 technical side of things as opposed to just the pure plant 22 operation and would be in a position to render this sort of 23 sdvice and judgment if the plant got into trouble.
O 24 On the other side some of the utilities have gone (j
25 out and hired new engineers and tried to give them a short i\\J I
ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
21
()
1 course in plant operation so that they stand in the control v
2 room and render this advice.
3 I think it is probably the latter category that 4 sort of fit this UGAP business.
There is some problem, for 5 example, on acceptance.
You are talking SB0s and shif t 6 supervisors who have been running the plant now for a number 7 of years.
They know the thing or believe they know it and, 8 as you might anticipate, they are a bit reluctant to listen 9 too hard to what they basically consider is a 90-day 10 wonder.
They really question whether the guy knows that 11 such about the plant.
12 I think over a period of time we are going to see 13 a situation develop where the STAS in fact are better
(~3 s/
14 trained.
On the surface of it I'can't see a preference for 15 taking an SRO and upgrading him technically or taking an 16 engineering and trying to make an SRO out of him.
I think 17 you ultimately get to about the same point although you are 18 really talking about two different kinds of people to get 19 there.
20 As far as what we are requiring for STAS, of 21 course as of January of this year, Janua ry
'80, all plants 22 "are required to have STAS on' shift and the requirements as 23 as qualifications were not all that great.
We are still pl 24 Wrestling with the problem of the actual qualifications we ix_-
25 feel an STA ought to have.
(D w.)
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
22 (a) 1 In the clarification letter that has gone out to 2 industry in NUREG 0737 I believe, which just went out in 3 September or October, we indicated.in there that INPO had 4 come up with basicall; their description of the kind of 5 qualifications they felt an STA should have.
6 We pointed this out to the industry and told them 7 we wanted to hear from them by the end of this year as to 8 what kinds of qualifications their people would have and we 9 would like to see some sort of a comparison of how ther 10 stack up against the guidelines that INPO has put out, 11 although we have not attempted and we do not intend right 12 now to make the'INPO guidelines mandatory for STAS.
13 I really have found no one around that we have 14 talked to that has a reluctance to have the STAS around, 15 somebody available to help the operating people.
Thev seem 16 to think it is a great idea, particularly the operators.
17 MR. MARK:
One other question in that connection.
18 In the safety review resources you call for an independent 19 safety engineering group, an additional independent group of 20 five dedicated full-time site based engineers.
That to me 21 looked like a duplication to some extent of the STA.
22 MR. CROCKER:
It is not really a duplication of 23 the STA.
O( !
24 MR. MATHIS:
When you say evaluation of plant 25 operations from a safety perspective to, me it is the same
(%(
ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
23
/~'s 1
thing.
L.)
2 MR. CROCKER:
Many of the duties are the same 3 certainly.
The group in concept is an organization 4 basically parallel to the organizations that have been in 5 being before, the plant operations review committee and the 6 offsite corporate level review committee.
This independent 7 group, the idea was to have some people, like about five, 8 qualified in various disciplines so that they could come out 9 to the plant, live with the plant, watch what was going on 10 and provide an independent overview on safety basically.
11 As explsined to us earlier in the game, it could 12 be a bunch that really has no assigned duties as such.
They
- 13. should not be involved, in our view, in the plant T^)
(/
14 operations.
That is, if the plant wants to make a change in 15 the tech specs or the manner of operation or their 16 procedures, this should be a plant function to be done by 17 the plant, reviewed by the plant operations review committee 18 and then ultimately up the line, whatever.
19 On the side then this independent group would also 20 look at these things from the standpoint of are we really 21 going in the right direction overall for safety.
It has 22 been sort of a hard concept to get across.
23 I guess maybe I should point out that I am one of
()
24 the hardest ones it was to get across to because I sort of 25 fought it for a while when it came out.
I think it is O
%j ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
24
()
1 probably a goed idea now and I am a good enough trooper to 2 push it.
I am still not sure precisely what I am pushing 3 and I have trouble explain it to the industry as to what we 4 are looking for.
5 MB. MATRISs Well, it is the term " site based" 8 tha t bothered me.
If you wanted to have an overview group, 7 I think that is a very good idea, but call somebody from the 8 home office, somebody who can look with a fresh approach and 9 not be blased by day-to-day kinds of activities.
There is a 10 division needed here I think, and I was just curious as to 11 your thinking.
12 MR. CROCKER:
The general idea was to get some of 13 the people, and it would be, nice to get them from the home 14 office, or they could come from the plant, but remove them 15 from the day-to-day operational pressures so they are not I
16 worried about that, somebody that can sit back and put his l
17 feet on the desk and say, you know, are we really doing the 18 right thing here or are we beating our heads against a wall 19 and could,e better try a different tack on it and get 20 better safety results.
21 The concept originated, as I understand it, from l
22 the old Dupont Savannah River stuff with the words 23 " technical program" down there which was basically an
("N
(,/
24 oversight group like this that had no particular 25 responsibility for the actual operation of the plant but
(
ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
_ _ _ _,. _._ _ _ ~..,
25
()
1 were senior enough and knowledge enough that they could sit 2 back and look at it and say, you b4ow-we might be doing it 3 all right, but we could certainly do it a lot better it we 8
f 4 took a different tack ovet here and they could so recommend 5 to the manager and get it implemented.
The idea behind this 6 independent group is about the same thing.
7 I should point out that the utilities have had 8 trouble with this concept, they really have, because in many 9 vays it looks like you could put this in and replace, for 10 example, the plant operations review committee and let this 11 outfit just take that on in addition to other duties.
It 12 doesn't quite fit because then you get them involved in the 13 day-to-day operations of the plant and we a're trying to keep 14 them separate from that.
15 We have felt that if you are going to have a group 16 like this the place they should be stationed is at the plant 17 and not back at the home office because if they are really l
18 going to get a feel for what the plant is doing and how it l
19 is doing it they have just about got to have immediate
?
20 access to what is going on there at the facility.
That is l
21 really is why we emphasized being stationed on site.
22 We have tried to arrange it so that reporting 23 other than through the power production management chain be 24 somewhere on the technical side of the house or at least at 25 a level high enough up that they are not apt to be involved
]
ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY. INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
26
(")
1 in operational decisions.
x/
2 MR. MATRIS Have you had much discussion with the 3 Dupont people on this particular concept?
4 MR. CROCKER:
No, we really haven't.
I have had 5 none.
There was an effort earlier, six or eight months ago, 6 an effort to get a number of the Dupont people that had been 7 involved and were f amilia r with this work 's technical 8 business.
Was it Kreusi at Dupont?
I do not know Mr.
9 Kreusi.
10 MR. HANAUER:
Yes, Frank Kreusi.
11 dR. CROCKER:
He was trying to get in touch with I 12 think a number of the ex-Dupont people, retired folks, that 13 could provide some sort of a overview judgment on how we
/~'s
\\'/
14 could get a better handle on safety 1n this sort of an 15 independent group approach.
I have heard nothing from them 16 in a number of months.
I don 't know if this ef f ort is still 17 underway or not.
We have had no input that I am aware of.
18 HR. HANAUER:
We have a number of people who 19 worked in that system in the NBC.
M r. Denton, of course, 20 has firsthand experience of it from his Dupont experience.
21 MR. VASSALLO:
One of the other things we have 22 said concerning this group is that we would look at the 23 performance of this in about a year's time for all of the O
6 1
24 utilities upon which cre have imposed this.
.We have not yet w/
25 made a decision to impose this group on all operating o
ALDERSoN F EPORTING COMPANY, INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
27 p3 1
plants.
That is something that we are still considering.
I
>'w]
2 really quess we do have to wait and just see how it works 3 out.
It is very early because it has just been imposed on 4 these plants that have recently been licensed and some of 5 those have not really started up.
They have been in the 6 starting and start-up phase.
So there are not really that 7 many that have been in operation for that long a period of 8 time.
9 We do have some difficult with the concept and the 10 utilities trying to understand the purpose of it, although 11 some seem to understand it better than others.
12 MR. MATHIS:
It is a tough one.
13 MR. MARK:
What is a round number for the number
[)
14 of engineers in a small single plant utility organization, 15 six?
16 MR. VASSALLO:
Do you mean at any that is required ?
17 MR. MARK:
Take some plant, not TVA which is a 18 system and not a plant, take some plant that Larry was 19 referring to earlier where you count th e people one a t a 20 time.
21 MR. MATHIS Rancho Seco may be a good example, 22 right?
That is a single unit.
23 MR. VASSALLO:
We made a survey of this a number r~N
(,)
24 of months ago and it kind of va ries all over the lot.
25 Surprisingly some plants which are considered run by small f)
'm/I ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC.
400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
28
(}
1 utilities have a fair number, like maybe 25 to 30.
Then 2 there may be some larger ones which have fever.
I am 3 talking about graduate engineers.
4 MR. MARK Yes, that is what this group of five 5 consists of.
6 MR. CROCKER:
Yes.
7 MR. MARK:
They have been removed from all useful 8 duty out of a group of possibly 20.
It is quite a jolt.
9 MR. CROCKER:
This is one of the big arguments 10 that we have heard about the group, as a matter of fact.
11 MR. MARK:
In fact it sounds a little as if, you 12 know, how does he keep himself busy with his feet up all day 13 which gives him cramps.
r~(_x 14 (Laughter.)
l l
15 MR. ' MATH :S a' Particularly when there is the shift 16 technical adviser in the same kind of generic area.
17 Steve.
18 MR. HANAUER:
I think it is clear that we are 19 somewhere between groping and experimenting in this area.
20 We don't intend these five people to be drawn from the cadre 21 of engineers at the plant but to be added to them, although l
22 this is not necessarily the result.
23 Interestingly enough it is the smaller utilities f) 24 typically who have a fair size cadre of engineers at the l
v l
25 plant.
Whereas in the larger utilities with a number of l
/
}
i I
N./
l ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
29 f) 1 nuclear stations the bulk of the engineers tend to be at th e J
2 corporate office rather than at the plant site.
3 We have not gotten any scientific or definitive 4 handle on how this should be split or even on whether we 5 should dicta te in general the way the engineers should be.
6 We do have the feeling that one needs enough 7 engineering talent at the plant so that one doesn't have a 8 lot of engineers in vans commuting back and forth to a 9 corporate office many miles away but that the plant should to have suf ficient talent available locally.
11 The provision of this group as indeed the 12 provision of the shift technical adviser itself is intended 13 to be reviewed af ter a while to see how it is working and
(,_ )
14 whether the requirement should be modified.
15 As Larry pointed out, we.have not imposed this 16 on-site engineering group on the large majority of operatino 17 reactors but only on the ones newly coming into operation.
18 They are as much of an experiment as anything else to be l
19 reviewed to see did they indeed have their feet up on the l
l 20 desk, what did they turn up, what kinds of useful things did l
l 21 they do and whether they in fact paid their way in a 22 safety-related sense.
23 It seems to me more generally that in a
(")
24 substantial number of these organization and management and
()
l 25 staffing areas we need to proceed with the correct dose of
( (
\\
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
30
()
1 humility in the face of our ignorance as tc what is really 2 required.
3 As far as the control room is concerned, we are 4 intending to do a detailed job function and task analysis 5 under accident and transient conditions probably using 6 simulators to get a better more technical handle on the 7 skills and numbers of people required.
8 I doubt if it will be possible to bring any real 9 technology to bear on the boarder question of how many 10 engineers are needed on site and similarly the shift 11 technical adviser who was originally intended as a stop-gap 12 measure.
13 We have asked the companies who now have a year of i
)
14 experience with these people to project for us what their 15 long range plans are and some of the companies have already 16 told us.
We see by no means monolithic situation.
17 In one company, f or example, they plan to keep the l
18 shift technical adviser as an extra man in the control room l
19 and to rotate all of their engineers through this position.
20 It will be part of the career ladder f or engineers in this 21 company.
22 This will have the very useful result that in a 23 few years the plant engineers and the corporate engineers 24 vill have had a couple of years of operating experience in a 25 n uclea r plan t.
It has the downside that in general the
(~)
Q,1 ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,IflC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S$.. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
31 f')
1 shift technical adviser will be young and relatively s_-
2 inexperienced compared to the operators and particularly the 3 senior operators at the plant and they may not value his 4 advice very highly.
5 At the other end of the scale a number of 6 companies have picked up on some words in the Lessons 7 Learned and look fordard eventually to merging, in some way 8 not altogether clear, the shift technical adviser function 9 and the senior reactor operator function either in the 10 person of the shif t supervisor or in the person of the 11 assigned senior operator in the control room who would then 12 after a considerable period be required to have an 13 engineering degree or some lesser equivalent with the
{}
Y>
14 necessary engineering training, This has the advantage tha t 15 the people who have to direct the operations in the control 16 room will have the engineering understanding.
17 We think that we probably lose something in that 18 the shift technical adviser is able to stand back both from 19 the telephone with the Governor or the NRC at the other end 20 and from the manipulations at the board and get an overall 21 picture.
22 I don't think we really have any definitive 23 requirements yet developed on any scientific or experience (y
,i-j 24 basis and there may be a number of parallel paths developed 25 in the next few years.
n
%s' ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
32 (v^')
1 MR. MARK:
larry, you mentioned th; t you hadn 't 2 been able to get specific commentary on the Savannah River 3 team of this sort which was used as a model.
It would seem 4 to me very important to try to get hold of that to find out 5 whether the people who have been in it found themselves 6 busy, whether the company bis found them usef ul and whether 7 they really have professional work to do or just make-work 8 that they have to think up, because if you had a good start 9 on that you could discuss it both with yourself and with 10 other people a lot better.
11 MR. CROCKERs If I le f t the impression that we 12 couldn ' t get the informatior, I am sorry.
That is not so.
13 I am sure the information is there.
I have not made a real h
x/
14 overt attempt to get it.
There were some dealings earlier l
15 really I think between Mr. Denton and Mr. Kreusi at Savannah I
l 16 River trying to get this and I just never got into the act I
l 17 on it.
I have not seen any output from it.
l 18 The feeling I get from everyone that we have 19 talked to is apparently this works well at Savannah River.
20 They are delighted with it and it is a real fine operation.
21 HR. MARK You need some examples of in what ways 22 and with what frequency they have proved themselves to be 23 invaluable which surely would be a part of trying to In1 24 persuade other people that it is a wonderful idea.
V 25 3R. CROCKER:
Yes, I agree.
/~'%
U ALDERSOH REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
33
(^jT 1
Don, did you have something to say?
2 MR. VASSALLO:
Well, I just wanted to reinforce 3 v 1.a t Dr. Hanauer said.
It did initiate with people who were 4 familiar with it and that is why it was initiated.
Mr.
5 Denton was one of the prime movers of this and he was 6 familiar with the operations of this as well as others in 7 NBC.
8 If we ourselves have trouble articulating it it is 9 because we haven't had firsthand experience a t it, but there 10 are others who are quite familiar with it in our own 11 organization.
My understanding is that is not only in 12 Savannah River but I think it is at Dupont.
It is a concept 13 throughout their plants.
In other words, in their ope,ratons
\\-
14 and so on they were advisers, so to speak, independent 15 advisers and they were free to look at any problem that they 16 saw arise that wasn't directed by anybody else and they 17 could give advice on it.
Of course, not all Dupont plants i
18 are related to nuclear power.
I think the concept of that l
19 is old with Dupont.
20 MR. MATHIS:
Well, the philosophy and concept l
l 21 still prevails at Hanford, too, again because of the Dupont 22 origination.
So you have got another source there of the 23 same kind of thing.
()
24 MR. CROCKER:
I guess the problem I really have w-25 with it on a personal basis is th a t if you have got the l
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
34
()
1 right kind of people who are dedicated I can see this thing 2 really working fine and I have got no problem with it at 3 all, but what, bothers me is when we attempt to prescribe 4 that they go out and hire five engineers to come in and 5 _think with no real defined goals that you can measure and no 6 duties or anything.
7 It was described at one point in time that this 8 would be the sort of group that would come in on Monday 9 morning and say, well now, what are we going to do this 10 weer?
Should we look at feedvater pumps or boron systems or 11 what?
I guess my reaction was if you go out on the street 12 and hire five people and bring them in and say now this is 13 what you are going to do, they could just as well come in
-14 that Monday morning and say let's play cribbage this week 15 and that bothers me a little bit.
16 MR. VASSALLO:
Well, that is one point, but some 17 of the utilities are not looking totally to get the people l
18 from outside.
Some are going to try to rotate people from l
19 other parts of the operational staff and from other places 1
l 20 in the organization into the group for various period of 21 time.
We have been faced with making some decisions on 22 those as wall.
23 Again, there is probably an optimum time f or
('
24 rotation, and we don't know exactly what it is, but I think
%s 25 you can tell when it is too short.
Again, this is kind of l')
r 1
'% J l
ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
35
( })
1 an experiesental sort of effort.
There is merit in rotating 2 people in from other parts of the organization.
3 Again, as many utilities have mentioned, they feel 4 they would have to do this because otherwise that 5 organization would just be kind of a dead-end organization 6 for those people and you do want to keep them stimulated.'
7 So I think these are some of the cc.ncerns and we are going 8 to see how these work out.
I think it is McGuire that is 9 planning to rotate people in from their operational staff.
10 MR. CROCKER:
That is correct, McGuire.
11 MR. VASSALLO:
So with various ways of 12 implemen ting this over the next year or so I think we will 13 have a better idea and then decide whether we have to modify k-)
14 the requirements for this group or establish different types 15 of requirements or I guess even you might decide that it 16 micht not be necessary.
I don't know what the end result 17 will be.
18 MR. MATRIS:
Well, I am sure it is a touchy 19 subject to sell in many cases but your overall guidelines 20 are going to be that same kind of a problem I would 2t imagine.
You are going to have a broad spectrum of reaction.
22 What about the educational requirements on th e 23 staffing as such?
Are you still holding out for BS degree
(~~)
24 people eventually, for a shift supervisor for example?
(v 25 MR. CROCKER:
Right now I don't think those of us p]
\\-
ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE, S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
36
()
1 who are intimately involved on the firing line feel that 2 this is an absolute criterion.
3 HR. HANAUERs That has gotten to be a question of 4 considerable social importance around the agency.
5 (Laughter.)
8 A number of our betters, including the 7 Commissioners and Mr. Denton, believe that that is 8 necessary.
9 MR. MARKS Believe what?
10 MR. HANAUER:
That that is necessary.
11 NR. MARKS That a BA has got some magic?
12 MR. HANAGERs Yes, sir.
The opinion expressed 13 goes something like this.
At the reactor operator level the 5
- 14 feeling is by some persons that the requirement is the high 15 school diploma and not its equivalent, for example a GED, 18 that what is wanted is not the quantum of learning 17 represented by passing some examination but the traits of 18 character exemplified by sticking it out in high school and 19 completing the task.
20 Similarly some people believe tha t what is desired 21 is not necessarily a certain number of units or hours of 22 learning in calculus or thermodynamics but the ability to 23 start and complete a course of study and that tn.
espskin
,o (ji 24 is important.
~
25 Another point of view, for example, from our most
(
V ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
37
,m.()
1 recent consultant and contractor, the Analysis and 2 Technology Corporation, who has just been working on the 3 question of qualification particularly for licensed 4 personnel, is that it is the function and the knowledge 5 which is important.
6 I think we are going to see a completely 7 scientific approach to resolving this problem.
I think the 8 Commissioners themselves and the responsible officials lean 9 toward the point of view that the sheepskin and the 10 character traits are at least as important as the actual 11 units of knowledge of thermodynamics and the like.
12 MR. MARKS Are they award that quite a number of 13 the people who played in the Probation Bov1 football game bs) 14 are going to have sheepskin ~s?
15 MR. HANAUER:
Yes, sir, and t h r, are also aware of 16 the number of captains of industry who never graduated from 17 this and that who have no sheepskins.
18 MB. MARK:
Technical vocational institutes who 19 have people who have to work at night show quite a lot of 1
20 chsracter and they don ' t get sheepskins.
21 (Laughter.)
j 22 MR. CROCKER:
There is even a further problem here 23 that I am not sure that any of us have faced up to and that l
(_)
24 has to do with the morale of the people who are there now.
l 25 When the operator who is sitting there and is a relatively
,Q N.j' l
l ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY. INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
30
()
1 young fellow sees people bandying requirements around saying 2 you have got to have a bachelor's degree here he may very 3 well feel that he is not ca pable of getting that or doesn't 4 vant to get it and then sta rts looking for a job somewhere 5 else, you know, and we can't afford to lose them.
6 MR. HANAUER:
What is needed is a rationalized 7 approach with some clea rly defined career paths.
It may 8 well be that we end up wi th two ca reer paths, one for the 9 graduate engineer and the other for the high school graduate to cho has received a lot of training.
It may be that the 11 present single path from high school to equipment operator 12 to auxiliary operator to licensed reactor operator to 13 licensed senior reactor operator to shift supervisor will
(/
14 not be so simple and singular in the future.
15 This is very much an open topic at the presen t.
E You should receive in a couple of weeks a copy of the final 17 report from Analysis and Technology.
I got a review copy a 18 couple of weeks ago.
The final was supposed to be in last 19 week or this week.
We will take our usual leisurely 20 printing time to get the bound copies to you.
It is a 21 formidable document I think well worth your perusal.
There 22 is a lot of information and thought in it.
23 MR. MATHIS:
This whole concept of a career path n
i j
24 and career development I think is very important and should v
25 be considered in anything of this nature.
It is not a
<m
\\_)
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
39
( ';
1 simple subject and there is a true conflict in nearly all of 2 these paths as they exist today.
I think you have seen 3 quite a high turnover in a lot of plants just for this 4 particular problem.
5 MR. ALLENSPACH:
I think another factor that comes 6 into play on this, too, is that if you look at the high 7 school graduate his career path may end as a shift 8 supervisor and he may well be happy to stay there for quite 9 a number of years while the graduate engineer after serveral 10 years on a shift is going to be rather unhappy and wanting 11 to get off.
So you may result with graduate engineers with 12 very little experience and on the the side of the coin you 13 end up with high school graduates with a lot of experience.
(~':
k' 14 MR. VASSALLO:
One utility is proposing a career 15 procram of taking young graduate engineers in and providing 18 them with additional training and starting them out in the 17 low levels of operation and working th em up until they would 18 become the equivalent of shift supervisors for let's say two 19 or three years.
Then they would go out into other parts of 20 the orgaization.
21 When they are hired their career path is 22 established at that time, not what particular job they will 23 eventually get into, but with some knowledge that they are
,m I,
j 24 going through this training and learning about operations 25 and workino shifts and so forth for a sort of fixed number
/"s ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
0 40 (v) 1 of years and then moving out into other parts of the 2 organization.
That has some merit and eventually over a 3 long period of time you will have a cadre of knowledgeable 4 people that have been in operations who will get the higher 5 levels in the company.
6 Again, we don't now too much about that, but that 7 is one path that one of the utilities is proposing and there 8 maybe more.
9 Do you know of any others?
10 MR. CROCKER:
Just the one that we have talked to.
11 MR. MATHIS:
Steve.
12 MR. HANAUER:
I think it should be recognized that 13 the jobs in the nuclear power plant control rooms are very q-)
14 stressful in one way.
They have been described as long 15 periods of boredom punctuated by short intervals of terror.
16 These people have a great deal of hedging about with 17 regulations, procedures and so on.
They are also made very 18 aware of the high degree of responsibility not only for the 19 expensive equipment they are entrusted with but for the 20 public health and safety.
21 My experience is that they are very much aware of 22 this and that they feel the stress substantially.
This 23 tells me that personality and character traits are very O(y 24 important as well as technical knowledge and understanding.
25 Yet we do almost nothing with this part of the qualification
/~N NY ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHING".ON, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-2345
t f41 1
and fitness for these jobs and thic is another a rea that 2 needs additional exploration.
8 3
MR. MATHIS:
Well, go ahead, La rry.
4 MR. CROCKER:
I sm sitting temporarily on a dry 5 hole here.
6 (Laughter.)
7 MR. MATHIS:
Carson, do you have any questions?
E 8
MB. MARK:
No.
h, w,
9 Y
10 11 12 13 14 15
.9 17 18 l
19 20 21 22 l
l 23 24 25 I
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC, 400 VIRGINIA AVE., S.W., WASHINGTON. D.C. 20024 (202) 554 2345
AR:ar
~
d2 fols Mary Simon j
MR. VASSALLO:
I think one part that we haven't arl b) 2 really stressed in this draft report is that the other aspect a
f n t nly establishing the guidelines, but also criteria 3
4 or guidelines fo r evaluating management organizations and e
5 resources for the utilities, and that is how do we go about M
N I
6l evaluating these organizations?
There is a lot to learn e
7 there, and we are trying to establish some more definitive g
basis for doing that.
But I guess you have to recognize that dg 9
I don't think you can ever put it on a totally definitive i
10 basis.
That still will rely, to a great extent, on judgment, f
_y jj but hopefully judgment based on a firmer basis.
<3 g
jq MR. MATHIS:
And because of the variation of the 3
/~') S 13 plants and utilities, you are still going to have to probably k'$
14 stay in the guideline area.
w C
15 MR. VASSALLO:
In the guideline area, but not only u
6 16 that: some of the elements which are more important, like
~
3 A
g-j7 attitude and sort of corporate personality and so on.
I don't d
5 jg know how you really define those, but you certainly can perceive F
1 e
19 them if you are around and do a lot of explanation or just x5 1
20 l interact with the people.
But I don't know how you establish gj the guidelines for that at this point.
22 MR. MATHIS:
One other question:
23,
We have mentioned INPO in and out of here, but i
,~
24 have you had a lot of contact witn them, as far as this i
%/
25; particular document is concerned?
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC.
d.)
ar2 I
MR. HANAUER:
We meet with INPO regularly, every 2
six weeks or so, to exchange technical information and 3
program information, and this is one of the areas in which 4
INPO is most active.
5 j
They do now a large number of management reviews 0
l 0!
and plant operation reviews, including management.
They are n'
- S 7
now doing almost one a week.
M 8
8 n
We have received copies of at least one, and perhaps d
d 9
z.
more, of their reviews, and we expect to receive them regularly O9 10 C
from the plant management.
We don't get them from INPO.
But 3_
k II they are developing and have developed drafts of a large B
d 12 i
number of guidelines, both in the nature of position descrip-R
,)
I tions and on the nature and experience and qualifica*!en 3
14 g
requirements, and in the nature of guidelines for the conduct u
O 15 h
of operations and the management of operations.
.~
T 16 3
It is not alcogether clear just exactly how we are A
l II I going to use each other's work, INPO and NRC.
There is some 18 question of conflict of interest, and we do deal with them
_~H" 19 8
sufficiently at arm's length to avoid the conflict of interest.
r.
20 They are, after all, an organization sponsored 21 and funded by the utilities.
However, they have already done a 22
(
)
large amount of work, a good bit of which we find useful.
I
'0 23 l don't know whether they find ours useful or not, but where we
s 24
(
l find useful ideas, we steal them.
s.-
25 l-The most notable recent example is the shift technical i
3 ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
ar3
$d I
adviser.
We were drafting a set of guidelines for qualification
()
2 and experience in training of shift technical advisers, when we 3
got a rather well-thought-out draft from INPO, which we 4
believed, and still believe, was substantially better than ours.
g 5
What we did was after some comments of ours had N
6 been incorporated in the INPO draft, was to state in our R
- S 7
guidance to licensees that this was an acceptable description 0
and delineation of the qualifications, requirements and d
k 9
training of a shift technical adviser, and the utilities now z
O 10 are as Larry, I guess, said earlier, the utilities are now 3_
5 II tasked with telling us by January 1st, 1981 what their shift 3
12 E
technical advisers have in the way of qualification, experience
=
m y
13 and training, and what their plans are, and to compare what
(
w/
m 5
I4 they propose with the INPO document which we have not adopted as h
IS a < requirement, but have stated we would accept.
x j
16 We are also cooperating with them in other areas M
N II not included in today's meeting, such as control room design d
C 3
18 review, some procedure developments.
P" 19 g
MR. CROCKER:
One thing about our relations with n
20 INPO, that at least was not readily apparent to me earlier --
21 not until we had a meeting with them about a month ago -- they 22
-^
2 are quite concerned about getting into a position where the
(;
NRC adopts some of the INPO guidelines as our own, endorses it, I
24
~
if you will.
And the reason is if you listen to the INPO I i x_
25l people, I guess Mr. Wilkins in particular, talks about his i
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
45 ar4 I
benchmarks of excellence for measurement of utilities, and
('._)z 2
their concern is that after they have established these 3
benchmarks, which they feel are really the ultimate, and which 4
most utilities probably cannot meet, at least in all respects, g
5 that it would be a real disaster for the NRC to come along and h
3 6:
say, " Yeah, fellows, we think this is pretty good.
Let's all R
e
-2 7
of us do it that way," which then becomes a minimum requirement, n
k 8
instead of a goal.
d d
9 3,
So I think we have got to be very careful about this, 10 too, that while we can adopt some of their ideas, and perhaps E
II pursue the same goals, there has to be a minimum acceptable g
12 l e ve l somewhere down below that we feel is adequate.
Either
=
m
(
g 13 that, or the goal is not high enough.
m I4 MR. MATHIS:
But the corollary of that would be that t
x i
g 15 if you don't set your requirement high enough, then they are
=
g' 16 not going to strive to achieve to a higher level.
i p
17 MR. CROCKER:
You're right.
So how do you trade it off?
E" 19 g
MR. CROCKER:
We're still horse-trading right now.
n 20 MR. MATHIS:
Carson?
2I MR. MARK:
This may seem a little aside from the
[i 22 point, I guess, but I hope not too much.
For some of these
\\j 23 qualifications, SRO or senior reactor operator, there are NRC
[")
24,
qualification tests, I believe, administered by the NRC?
us 25 MR. CROCKER:
Yes.
l ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC.
ar5 d6 MR. MARK:
And a man can't be made an SRO by his y
(
')
2 utility without your saying he seems to be acceptable?
u,/
3 MR. CROCKER:
That is correct.
Licensed operators 4
are --
5 MR. MARK:
Where does that start, and where it e
E N
6 starts with operator -- licensed operator?
E o
7 MR. CROCKER:
Yes.
Eg g
MR. MARK:
And goes up from there?
d e
9 MR. CROCKER:
The reactor operator is licensed, i
0 10 and the senior reactor operator is licensed.
Those are the e
3y jj only two, I believe.
<3 g
12 MR. MARK:
You don't cut in on the shift supervisor?
3=
(~ l :
13 MR. F ': N A U E R :
The shift supervisor has to have a
(./ $
14 senior reactor operator's license.
a 2
15 MR. MARK:
- Yes, w=
7 16 MR. HANAUER:
Which is a ticket issued by the NRC.
3W y
17 He also has to be qualified as a shift supervisor, which is w=
Q jg part of our staffing and management requirement, but there is Fe
[
19 no license with that title.
5n l
20 MR. MARK:
The shift technical adviser, he doesn't 21 fall into this?
22 MR. HANAUER:
He does not at the present time fall
..J 23 into the licensing.
f 24 l MR. CROCKER:
Some of them, in fact, are licensed gm i
i._ /
I 25 I right now, but it's not a requirement that they be licensed.
1 ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
~
. h ar6 1
MR. MARK:
You could make it a requirement that i
/
2 he at one cime had an operator's license, if that's suitable.
3 MR. CROCKER:
I suppose we could, yes.
4 MR. MARK:
I'm certainly hoping that you continue g
5 with an easy feeling that you have, that stipulation of 0
6 degrees meets the goal necessary, because as Steve pointed out R
R 7
attitude, character and corporate approach are much more N
k 0
important than --
d c
9 2,
MR. CROCKER:
And I think we agree with you.
In C
g 10 my own case, I just remember back to the days when I had a 3
II nice warm feeling knowing my master sergeants were running 5
N I2 my nuclear plants, and were a long way from having college E
,~ a I3
(
- 5 degrees, most of them.
v u z
5 I4 MR. HANAUER:
Let me frank.
I think Mr. Denton and g
15 the Chairman have decided at this point.
=
y 16 MR. CROCKER:
If you noticed, Reg Guide 1.8, when it M
N II came out, this is the one that's out now for comment -- I don't W
I 3
18 think the committee saw it -- but there is wording in there now C
b I9 g
that indicates that the operators will have a Bachelor's n
20 Degree.
I don't have a copy of it with 2I me.
22 MR. HANAUER:
Shift supervisor.
\\
\\,_ /
23 MR. CROCKER:
But it sort of took us by surprise, I 24
(';
think.
We hadn't seen those words before.
I don't know just x_/
25 l when they got incorporated, or by whom.
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
1 ar7 db I
MR. HANAUER:
They're in the Lessons Learned.
2 s
MR. MARK:
We've a ll learned lessons, and I have 3
known a tremendous number of incompetent Bachelor-holders, and 4
a tremendous number of competent non-degree holders.
5 g
MR. CROCKER:
We agree.
3 6
e MR. MARK:
It doesn't encourage me to think that n'=
7 the guy driving that plane went to some small college in New A2 8
M Mexico and got a degree.
I'd rather he know different kinda d
d 9
2.
of things.
OF 10 C
MR. MATHIS:
You've got a lot of people driving Z
k a plane that have no college degree, too.
E d
12 2
MR. VASSALLO:
I don't think it's meant to suggest
()o that you only need the c611ege degree, but I think again there 3
14 2
are other attributes that one has eo look for, for the job at 8
9 15 g
hand, and as Dr. Hanauer mentioned, there are things of
~
T 16 3
character and personality traits and attitude, and so on, because M
d, 17 that's true; not every college graduate, be it technical
=
5 18 college graduate or not, has the capacity and sometimes the l
H" 19 8
motivation to do that type of work.
Some are more analytically n
20 inclined and so on.
l 21 So I think you have to establish a, qualification e'
22 l
l criteria or guidelines for staffing and requiring personnel.
' U s'
23 l But I guess the first ticket is at least considered to be l
24
/-')
necessary, by some people, is this degree.
But I don't think
./
95
~
it's meant to mean that you just take anybady with a degree.
I ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC.
49 ar8 I
You have to look for other attributes.
()
2 MR. MARK:
That's independent of a degree.
That's 3
whether he knows what he's supposed to know as well as you can 4
determine it, 5
MR. CROCKER:
Right now that is ao, yes.
It's g
?
3 6
based directly on his --
R b
7 MR. MARK:
But, of course, it doesn't cover such n[
8 things as whether he goes up in smoke when a red light goes on.
d q
9 MR. CROCKER:
Well, there's some of that involved 2
O g
10 also, I believe.
Part of the test puts them through some 3
11 situations where you get at least a feel for whether or not 3
y 12 the guy can hang in and resolve it, or if he's going to go to 3
(}
13 pieces on the spot.
h 14 MR. MARK:
Yes, you can get that feeling, but what
{_
15 do you do about it, though, when you are faced with a need, x
j 16 did this guy pass his test or not?
You say he fails because M
6 17 his character seems a little flaky to us?
18 MR. HANAUER:
No, he fails because he goes go E"
19 g
pieces on the oral part of the examination, as a result of his 5
20 unsuitability for that kind of work. The examiners deliberately 21 push them in this direction.
I wouldn't want to represent 22 that this is a scientific screening o f personality traits.
23 MR. MATHIs:
one other question:
As I remember 24
(^T some of these documents, and I don't know which one, required V
25 really an operating license equivalent, or senior operating ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
50 ar9 I
license, I should say, for some of the higher members of
()
2 management.
3 Now that means they are going to have to be re-4 j
qualified on what, a two-year basis, which takes an awful lot of 5
g
- time, n
h 0
MR. HANAUER:
They have to re-qualify every year.
R b
7 The alternative is a lot of dormant licenses which we want to N
j 8
avoid at all costs, held by higher members of management.
If d
=;
9 they are not really involved enough to re-qualify every year, 20 10 we want them to turn in their tickets, because we really feel E
k II strongly about the fact that the holders of licenses, operators 3
f II and senior operators, must stay sharp and stay current and c
(} g" 13 really be qualified to take ove,r this operating position, which m
E I4 in fact they sometimes do.
g 15 This does discourage some members of the higher y
16 management from holding onto their licenses, and I think that's M
II probably the right thing.
m 18 MR. MATHIs:
well, I would agree with that, Steve.
P" 19 g
That's the reason I raised the question, because you don't want n
to divert too much of that man's. attention into just re-21 qualifying, because it really isn't accomplishing anything.
22 He's got other things to worry about.
l MR. HANAUER:
Yes, and if he doesn't re-qualify, he 24 V(~'s doesn't get his ticket.
25 MR. CROCKER:
There is another side to that coin, ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
ar10 51 I
tho ug h, that says, for example, if you've got the maintenance 2
superintendent of the plant, it would make me feel at least 3
a little warmer to know that he also knew how the plant 4
operated, as well as what made the pumps turn.
Whether he has 5
g a valid license right now, that is in being.
If he ever had 3
6 e
one in the past, I think it's at least a brownie point in his e'.
b 7
favor that what 3
k MR. MATHIS:
But that would give you the warm d
d 9
feeling, that should be sufficient, really.
j C
H 10 j
MR. CROCKER:
I think so.
Not that he has a valid
=
k current license.
I don't see any need for that.
And as you a
d 12 z
say, it would be a tremendous amount of time he would have to o
/~
d 13
( T, g devote to stay rehqualified in,these positions.
E 14 g
I think what we have got in here is the operations x
9 15 y
supervisor and either the plant manager or assistant plant x
16 3
manager to have valid current licenses.
Is that right, or do A
you have something else?
=
5 18 MR. ALLENSPACH:
The only requirement we have now
=
l 19 8
is that the person in the position of operations manager, that n
20 he is normally probably one step above the shift supervisor, 21 and it's required that he hace a valid license.
It is not i
IT required that any other person on the plant staff have a valid V
23 license.
24 f').T t'at the plant manager at one There is a requirement h
\\_
25 time or other had the qualifications to have taken the exam, ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
f 52 crll I
whether he took the exam or not.
But he does not have to have
(~J T
2 s
a valid license.
3 MR. MATHIS:
Okay.
Do you have any other questions,
/..
4 Carson?
e 5
M MR. MARK:
No, I do not.
3 6
MR. MATHIS:
I think I'm out of questions.
E 7
n 7
Rich, did we miss something?
n g
8 MR. MAJOR:
Do you want to get into the field of d
d 9
i public comments?
=g 10 z
MR. MATHIS:
This is 0731 is out for public comment, E
11
=
g and you said that was due back --
d 12 3
MR. CROCKER:
The 19th of December.
It was due
=d 13
((,s) $
earlier, and we got some requests for extension on it.
E 14 MR. MATHIS:
Do you anticipate quite a bit of comment z
2 15 g
from the public or utilities?
?
16 h
MR. CROCKER:
I really don't know.
I indicated g
17 y
earlier we had discussed the predecessors of 0731 in earlier E
18
=
drafts.
We have had two sessions with the AIF.
As a result of 19 k
each of those, we got a considerable number of comments from 20 them, which we then factored into later versions, I would 21 assume.
We may very well have covered many of these concerns
()
already.
23 6
And, by the way, I should indicate one of their
()
biggest concerns that industry has had and expressed to us both 25 on an individual basis and through AIF, was, "For heaven's sake, ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
53 arl2 I
don'-t try to be prescriptive in this thing."
And we don't 2
disagree with that.
3 The problem is, how do we write it so that it is 4
an objective or goal that we are looking for, without getting a 5
g prescription in on how we bureaucrats feel that ought to be 9
achieved?
R
- E-7 I don't think any of us feel that we are in a N
h.
O position to prescribe to the utilities how they've got to do d*
9
~.
it, or how it can be done bost.
There are all Sorts of ways z
h of skinning a cat, but we have had the comments from them, and
=
k how much more we are going to get, I really don't know.
3 d
12 z
We have had one request that led immediately to (s)S
{
this extension period.
It was from an individual-at Westinghouse, E
14 g
indicating he was consolidating comments for the Westinghouse z
9 15 g
owners' group coming back in.
But we have not seen those yet.
m 16 g
The only real batch of comments we have received i
17 so far had been on thih BETA report, the power plant staffing, az M
18 and I guess if I were to try to summarize the overall viewpoint
=9" 19 8
on that, it is the apparent feeling that you just cannot n
20 compare commercial and industrial concerns, power plants, to the 21 way the Navy does its uusiness.
It doesn't make an awful lot of 22
. O sense to really get into the detail of comparison.
The whcle 23 approach is different.
(}
Just what we do with all this, I don't know.
25 Basically we tend to agree with those comments, I guess.
I don't ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
54 a r,1 3 I
think we are ever going to get the utilities looking like a
(
2 Naval ship somewhere, running along and operating anything
)
3 like th a t, in the fashion the Navy runs its plants.
Nor uJ I 4
think we really should try.
5 g
MR. MATHIs:
well, I felt the only part of the BETA 9
6 report that was maybe valid was the comparisons of the type S
b 7
of training required and this sort of thing, and that was prior 1
3 k
0 to TMI.
So that's been altered sufficiently, so that I think d
q 9
the new requirement basically comes up to the Navy standard, or 2
Cg 10 something similar.
3 II MR. CROCKER:
Yeah, it's being upgraded on requirement.s.
II How close we come, I really don't know.
I mentioned a minute 9
.) u y
13 ago that it would give me a nice warm feeling to know that my I4 maintenance superintendent-had also operated the plant, and I n
g 15 think this is probably the big leg up that the military has e
y 16 over the industry, is the people on the plants basically are M
all double-threat people.
They are trained as maintenance or x
I0 INC or health physicists or something, and they operate the plant P
19 g
on th e side.
That's one of their duties.
n 20 I know the Army was this way, and my understanding I
of the Navy program is this way.
It's real fine to know that
()
the guy who is out maintaining the pump knows the real impact of this pump on the operation of the plant; and by the same
()
token, the guy at the ~ board knows the problems that are going on 25 outside.
I think this is good.
I don't think we are ever going ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
55 arl4 I
to ge t to it in the industry.
But I certainly would have no
()
2 objection to going in that direction.
3 MR. VAssALLos I like the comment, though, that 4
some of the commentators on the BETA report were themse2 'es 5
g Navy people, and they seemed to disagree somewhat with the 9
6 report on the subject that Larry just spoke about, in that R
7 they claim that most of their maintenance, heavy maintenance N
8 8
and so on, is done in the home, in port, and so on, and they dd 9
z, are not necessarily people that are trained to be operations C
j g
10 people or have that kind of knowledge.
They are specialists z
i
=
II in those particular disciplines and so on.
3 g
12 so we still have to go over all those comments, s
I 13 a
but that was one that struck me, is,that there seemed to be u
I4 some disagreement about that, and these commentators claim that a
g 15 tito s e onboard the Navy ships do only minor type of maintenance, z
d I0 which is then redone or to different standards and so on, when A
I7 they get back to port, or by a tender group, tender ship, and z
5 18 so on, that has the specialists onboard.
E I9 g
so I'm not sure that the Navy has all of their n
20 people sort of licensed or familiar with the systems and 21 capable of operating the plant, either.
MR. CROCKER:
I agree.
MR. MATHIS:
Of course, they do have the advantage of having everyone onsite.
5 MR. CROCKER:
They certainly are onsite and ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY. INC.
d 56 ar15 1
available if they need them.
Although I guess if you've got
()
2 some th ing like a carrier, you still have a 30-minute reporting 3
time after you get the word that you want somebody up at a 4
station.
That's a long way from where he might be billeted.
i 5
MR. MATHIS:
okay.
well, then, as far as this g
9 6
particular document is concerned, you will have your comment R
R 7
period ending here on the 19th.
Then hopefully it will be out X
g 8
in some form within a few months after that.
dd 9
MR. CROCKER:
It should be out within two or three I
Og 10 months after that, we hope.
We've got to get a paper to the 3
h II Commission to get their approval on it of whatever we come up 3
y 12 with, and then I really do not know at this point in what form
=
m
~
13
(
it.s goingsto hit the streets, as far as being applied to the m
h I4 industry.
{
15 As Dr. Hanauer mentioned, it could be in several e
j 16 different chunks by the time it finally gets th'e r e.
A I7 MR. MATHIS:
And you have not a feel at the moment x
5 18 as to what you might recommend to the Commission as to how it a
I9 g
could be handled, or ould be?
n 20 MR. CROCKER:
I really don't right now.
21 MR. VASSALLO:
Personally I would like to established 22 as guidelines and not requirements.
I don't know that we have 23 really thought about how to present this idea to the Commission
/~%
24 yet, just because of the nature of this whole subject.
It just
(/
25 seems to me that we should try to achieve a document which l
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
j l
l arli -
[
I establishes sort of functional requirements or guidelines, and (I
2 not establish prescriptive requirements.
l l
3 Maybe Steve might want to comment on his view.
4 MR. HANAUER:
I think I already did.
5 g
MR. MATHIs:
I'm sure the utilities would prefer to l
9 3
6 see it come out as a guideline.
1 R
b I
MR. CROCKER:
We are sort of schizophrenic on this A
k I
in-house, you understand, because in NRR we can look at guide-d q
9 lines and sort of make a few words about why things are all 2Cg 10 right, but then we start talking with our I&E friends, and Z
II they don't want guidelines.
They want to know, "Well, how many D
N II of these guys do you want, and what are their minimum qualifica-3 13
(
tions?"
And they want something they can check against.' So we h
I4 have some in-house troubles trying to resolve these sorts of a
g 15 things, I believe, to get a document that is suitable for the z
y 16 kind of guidancetwe.think ought to be'there,:and sti11' usable W
II by Inspection *& Enforcement ih: their' work, and they have some m
valid points, too.
I can understand.
a-19 3
MR. MARK:
The fact tl.at you have mentioned several 20 stages, that some approach is experimental, tentative, at least II to see how it works and whether it should be given, I hope I
l (')
would keep you from going farther than guidelines, at least U
23 l
for some considerable time.
l 24 I wanted to ask, how does the Navy handle, or does it 25 at all, this function that we talked of earlier, of the l
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
58 arl7 I
engineers abstracted from the hurly-burly, day-to-day experience, s ;
2 to sit back and think?
They obviously don't have five engineering 3
officers doing nothing up there on the bridge.
4 MR. CROCKER:
I'm sure that's so.
I don't know how 5
g they operate. I'm not familiar with the Navy program, but I woulc' 9
6 be willing to wager they've got some sort of a review board or R
b 7
something that looks over the operations of the ship, at least M
k 0
each time it comes back into port, to see what happens.
O" I
9 MR. MARK:
It might be analogous to the operations 2
O g
10 of the Review Committee, however.
=
k II MR. CROCKER:
Could be.
3 MR. HANAUER:
I have some information on that.
3 II V['l First of all,fthere are surveillance groups at the Navy 2
I4 laboratories, Bettis, at Knolls, KAPL, on som e. ships, and at
$j 15 some times there are in fact technical representatives who ride z
d I0 along.
A C
17
'g There is also an elaborate reporting scheme offsite, m
18 so to speak, and the operation and-maintenance and other P"
19 13 aspects of the Navy plants are reported in great detail to an n
20 offsite group of analysts and engineers.
I I do believe, however, that the onsite organization 22 N("]J for the Navy plants is a shift organized and headed by the 23l engineering officer of the watch, who is, of course, required 24
/
to be qualified in an engineering way, as well as an operations 25 way.
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
.~
59 I
i arlE i
r l
y MR. MATHIS:
Okay.
Nothing else?
[
f 2
Thank you, gentlemea.
I guess we will adjourn the i
3
- ti"9-I l
4 (Whereupon, at 10:25 a.m.,
the meeting i
i i
5 was adjourned.)
t e
M
'I i
i, 3
6 a
i R
7 1
i R
7 r
8 8
i t
d d
9 l
io H
10 i
l 0
t z
i
=
l E
11
<m d
12 i5=
Od 13
==
.gz 14 ae2 i
f 15 w
I E
16 I
i m
g 17 I
wz 5
18
=
19 5*
l 20 21 i
l 22 i O 23 24
' 0 4
25l t
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC.
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION a
This is to certify that the attached proceedings before the b
s in the matter of:
ACRS-SUBC. MEETING ON REACTOR OPERATIONS Date of ?roceeding: 12-2-80 Docket ihmb er :
Place of ?roceeding:
Washinoton, D.
C.
sere held as herein appears, and that this is the original transcript therect for the file of the Ccesission.
thrv c. simons Official Reporter (Typed)
O e
!pSbh1 W m jf/ttdm Cfficial Reporter (Signature) l v\\
im
i i
i
- O noctraa atactaroar coxnzssros I
e This is to certify that the attached proceedings before the i
i Advisory Committee on Reactor Sareguards
)
i 1
in the matter of:
}
" Date of Proceeding:
necc.,ber 2.
1990 Docket flumb er :
i Place of Proceeding:
m. _.,. _
l,
.ere held as herein appesrs, and that this is the original transcript i
thereof for the file of the Commission.,
ANN RILEY i
{
Official Reporter (Typad) 1 f
j
$ ' 'r
/! / ?')
{
Official Reporter (/Signature) t I
i I
l 1
i l
6 l
4 l
l 4
O 4
I
4 l.
O O
O i
l i
t i
4 I
i I
I i
I i
i I
t i
r i
GUIDELINES
}
(
]1 FOR l
UTILITY MANAGEMENT STRUCTURE t
7 i
l AND k
[
I l
l TECHNICAL RESOURCES i
i 1
l t
i
}
l 1
l i
I i
4 l
1 l
t r
I l
a l
{
.j
O PURPOSE THE PURPOSE OF THE STAFF EFFORT IS TO PROMULGATE GUIDELINES FOR THE STRUCTURE OF UTILITY ORGANIZATIONS AND FOR TECHNICAL SUPPORT RESOURCES WHICH SHOULD ASSURE THAT PLANTS CAN BE OPERATED SAFELY WITH PROPER MANAGEMENT ATTENTION.
THE GUIDELINES CONSIDER RECOMMENDATIONS FROM:
1.
PRESIDENT'S COMMISSION ON TMI 2.
NRC COMMISSIONERS 3.
LESSONS LEARNED TASK FORCE 4.
NRC SPECIAL INQUIRY GROUP 5.
ACRS 6.
AIF 7.
ANS STANDARDS COMMITTEE 8.
TMI ACTION PLAN (NUREG-0660)
b O
O STUDIES IN ADDITION TO THE STAFF EFFORT, SEVERAL CONTRACTOR STUDIES HAVE BEEN CONDUCTED.
ONE CONTRACTOR EFFORT IS NOW UNDERWAY.
COMPLETED:
BASIC ENERGY TECHNOLOGY ASSOCIATES, " POWER PLANT STAFFING,"
TEKNEKRON RESEARCH, INC., " UTILITY MANAGEMENT AND TECHNICAL RESOURCES," NUREG/CR-1656.
BIO TECHNOLOGY, INC., " REVIEW OF STAFFING REQUIREMENTS FOR NEAR-TERM OPERATING LICENSE FACILITIES," NUREG/CR-1764.
UNDERWAY:
BATTELLE (PACIFIC NORTHWEST LABORATORIES), IDENTIFICATION OF ELEMENTS OF MANAGEMENT WHICH SHOULD BE CONSIDERED IN MAKING AN OVERALL DETERMINATION OF MANAGEMENT ADEQUACY.
e e
O
~
NRR STAFF EFFORT DEVELOP GUIDELINES FOR AN ACCEPTABLE STRUCTURE OF THE UTILITY CORPORATE AND PLANT ORGANIZATIONS AND FOR THE TECHNICAL RESOURCES NEEDED AT BOTH THE PLANT AND CORPORATE LEVELS TO ASSURE ADEQUATE SUPPORT OF PLANT OPERATION.
DRAFT GUIDELINES HAVE BEEN USED BY JOINT IE-NRR TEAMS TO EVALUATE SEQUOYAH, NORTH ANNA, SALEM, MCGUIRE, FARLEY, DIABLO CANYON, ZION, INDIAN POINT 2 AND 3, AND TMI-1.
THE GUIDELINES HAVE NOW BEEN ISSUED IN DRAFT FORM AS NUREG-0731.
PUBLIC COMMENTS HAVE BEEN REQUESTED.
4 e
O
~
SCHEDULE COMMEN1S NOW NOT DUE UNTIL DECEMBER 19, 1980 INTEND TO REVISE NUREG-0731 AS NECESSARY TO INCORPORATE APPLICABLE THOUGHTS OF AND COMMENTS ON NUREG/CR-1280 AND NUREG-0731.
IF CHANGES ARE MAJOR, WE MAY OPT FOR AN ADDITIONAL ROUND OF COMMENTS.
OTHERWISE, WE ARE TO PREPARE A PAPER FOR THE COMMISSIONERS TO OBTAIN THEIR APPROVAL ON THE DOCUMENT WHICH IS TO BE FINALLY ISSUED FOR APPLICATION TO OPERATING PLANTS.
THE SCHEDULE AS ESTABLISHED IN NUREG-0660 WAS TO HAVE THE COMMISSION PAPER READY BY THE END OF 1980, ISSUE THE FINAL DOCUMENT IN MARCH OF 1981, AND HAVE IE BEGIN INSPECTING FOR IMPLEMENTATION IN SEPTEMBER 1981.
IT NOW APPEARS THAT THIS SCHEDULE WILL SLIP - PROBABLY TO AT LEAST THE END OF JANUARY FOR COMMISSION PAPER.
IMPLEMENTATION BY SEPTEMBER IS DOUBTI
..