ML20095D914
| ML20095D914 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Grand Gulf  |
| Issue date: | 04/17/1992 |
| From: | Cottle W ENTERGY OPERATIONS, INC. |
| To: | NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM) |
| References | |
| GNRO-92-00042, GNRO-92-42, NUDOCS 9204270257 | |
| Download: ML20095D914 (4) | |
Text
,,...
I Entergy operatirens. Inc.
'S ENTERGY W. T. cottle April 17, 1992 U.S. Nuclaar Regulatory Commission Mail Station P1-137 Washington, D.C.
20555 Attention:
Document Control Desk
~
Subject:
Grand Gulf Nuclear Station Unit 1 Docket No. 50-416 License No. NPF-29 Response to Grand Gulf Nuclear Station Examination Repcrt No. 50-416/92-300 GNRO-92/ 00042 Gentlemen:
During the week of January 27, 1992 the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) administered examinations to employees of Entetgy Operations who had applied for licences to operate Grand Gulf Nuclear Station.
Subsequently,
+
the NRC issued the subject Grand Gulf Nuclear Station examination report, The test report indicated that five of nine candidates failed to achieve the minimum requirement necessary to obtain ar operating license.
The report further indicated that tha 55 liercent failure rate for the candidates tested was consiuered a high f ailure rate and that the average candidate performance was considered low.
Additionally, it was noted that Grand Gulf was the only facility i the nation to have a failure on the February 1992 Generic Fundamentals examination. The NRC requested information concerning plans to address these trends.
Entergy Operations s concern *d with the tesults of this exam!n nion and will dedicate the esppropriate level of managemant attention to preclude a recurrence during future license examinations. Attached is the plan to address the low candidate performance and examination pass rate.
0-c Should you have any questions concerning this response please contact this M$
office.
40 00 rdo Yours truly,
&O bth 6-D I CimD 00 b<
Q WTC/WBB/mtc Otr attachment: Response to Examination Report No. 50-416/92-300
.$@y cc:
(See Next Pagn) g c
nG9204161/SNLICFLR - 1
)
/
o <1 U L ! d I
-. ---~-- -
.. - -, - ~ _~ -. - --
Attachment to GNRO-92/00042 RESPONSE TO EXAMINATION _R_EPORT_ N_0. J0-41,6/_92-300 The management of GGNS shares ' the concerns identified in Examination j
Report 50-_416/92-300. Accoroingly, we are taking a number of steps to aggressively address these concerns while conduct.ing further investigations to inentify fundamental causes.
Following the examination week of January 27, 1992, self assessment processes were initiated to identify problem areas associated with the j
training of the January license class.
/ Quality Principles and Practices (QP&P) session was scheduled which included participation of training supervision, training instractors, and six candidates from the license class. The Nuclear Assurance Department from our corporate office, although previously-scheduled to perform an assessment of ocorator training in general, waa provided specific objectives tm evaluate.
This sesessment provided additional insight into the low performance of the licenue class.
Upon receipt of the examinatica report, pdditional activities were undertaken. Numerous interviews with Operations and Training personnel were performed to provide insight to perceived program problem areas.
Detailed examinution analysis was performed on the January license written Lexamination and the June 1991-and February 1992 Generic F6 idamentals Examinations (GFES). 'A-root cause analysis by an inacpendent group was initiated.
The final report from i.he ennJv,is will be issued at the end of April, 1992.
Based on the assessments performed, the following improvements to the
. License Operatoc Training Program are being pursued.
A.
GENERIC FUNDAMENTAL lI EXAMINATION L
Through candidate interviews and the QP&P, it was identified that
~ he course scheduling nooded modification.
Fast acheduling t
practices resulted in systems being taught immediately following Fundamentals. With the establishment of the GFES examination schedule, the GFES exam dates occurred after systems training had commenced, resulting in the class having to stop systems training to take the CFES' exam.
Course scheduling-has been adjustd L3 allow completion of Fundamentals, including the GFES exam, prior to the start of systems training. Also, the candidates expressed a concern that too such information was being presented-in the time frame allotted. Consequently, the general schedule for Fundamentals training has been adjusted to allow additional time for self: study.
l j.
- Oryinally, CGNS adopted a 70 percent pass / fall criteria which was-consistent with the then current'NRC standard. The NRC l
standard was' subsequently raised tc 80 percent (pass / fall).
In L
response GGNS adoptrd a standard which allowed the total scores l
of the weekly examinations to average 80 percent.
Based on recent candidate performance on CFES examinations, the 80 percent average standard has been deemed inappropriate. The GGNS standard for weekly exams has therefore been raised to match' the E
L NRC criteria of 80 percent.
l-G9204161/SNLICFLR - 4
- - +
e
+---
<~-r-,
--- -<=
.ma
~ _ _ _
Attachment to GNRO-92/00042 RESPONSE _T0_ EXAMINATION REPORT _NO. 50-316f 92-300 (Continued)
Our analysis of the June 1991 and t he February 1992 GrES examinatione indicated weaknesses in electrical science and instrumentation and cont rols.
The length of those modules is being increased t.o allow more in-depth coverage.
The analysis also revealed that the end-of-course comprehensive exam question distribution deviated from the dist ribution used by the NRC, especially in the component.s area.
To prevent such deviation in the future, a desk top instruction providing guidance on the makeup of the comprehensive fundamentals exam, utilizing the question distribution as seen on the GFES exam, is being developed.
The improvements in Fundamentals training are scheduled to be completed prior to the start of t he next Fundamentals class.
B.
LICENSE OPERAT.OR TRAINING _(LOT)
The QP&P and candidate interviews identified that information was presented too quickly.
The LOT schedule has been adjusted to ensurt
.4 minimum of 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> per day for self study.
Also identified was a lack of general understanding of the program schedule, the NRC ernm schedule, and the NRC grading criteria.
An introductory module is being A valoped to specifically address these three items.
Study habit improvement methods and management's perfornance expectat.lons will be included in this introductory module.
The QP&p also revealed the :andidates were not satisfied with the current sequencing of the systems module.
They felt electrical distribution should be taught.- earlier in the-sequence. The schedule for systerr= t raining is being adjusted to teach electrical distribution earl:"r in the systems sequence.
An evaluation was performed of the January license writtsn examiaation to deletmine areas of generic weas. esses.
Procedures were identified as an area in which candidates exhibited a general deficiency.
Specifically ident.ified were administrative procedures, system cperating instructions, and off normal event procedures subsequent act.lons.
The sequencing of classroom procedure training and procedure usage in the_ simulator is being adjusted to provide immediate reinforcement of the classroom instruction through simulator performance.
'The examination report stated thet weaknesses were observed in the performance of job performance measures (JPM), emergency 7
locker familiarization, and plant computer sys t.em operation. The on-the-job (0JT) training and the simulatur segments of the program 'are being reviewed for incorporation of periodic JPMs, emergency locker inventory, and practical use exercisea of the plant computer systems.
G92041til/SNhlCFLR - 5 4
J,.
m r.s.m
_.._.,_:.,,.,.a,_
i i+-
Attachment to GNRO-92/00042 1
RESPONS_E TO EVAMINATIO]LREPORTJ0._50-416/9h300 (Continued) i Additionally, management recognized that current screening processes were ineffective in ensuring the competency of the -
candidates to meet performance stand.irds.
To improve the screening processes, a number of initiatives have been undertaken. The pass / fall criterl of an average of 80 percent for written exams la being changed to a minimum of 80 percent on i
each exam. Remedial training and ret.csting criteria for marginal and/or poor exam performance is being established to provide specific guidance and processes to accomplish the retraining.
Periodic examinations are being improved through the cddition of higher order cognitive t.ype questions and through longer, morn comprehensive exams. The Operations Training Evaluntion Committee (OTEC) is being re-evaluated as to its purpose and i
function. The OTEC is returning to the practice of conducting oral boards for each candidate, concentrating on weaknesses
_ identified by previous evaluations.. Finally, an independent.
audit-exam.will be used to determine final candidate competency.
All candidates will be required to pass thin exam before being allowed to tske the NRC license exams.
These improvements are scheduled to be completed prior to the-start of the particular module affected.
l lJ
- l G9204161/SNLICFLR - 6
. - ~,,. _,, - +,
4
.m--
w c
-- y - -,
y 3