ML20098G505
| ML20098G505 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Crane  |
| Issue date: | 10/03/1984 |
| From: | Bauser D GENERAL PUBLIC UTILITIES CORP., SHAW, PITTMAN, POTTS & TROWBRIDGE |
| To: | UNION OF CONCERNED SCIENTISTS |
| References | |
| CON-#484-263 SP, NUDOCS 8410050068 | |
| Download: ML20098G505 (9) | |
Text
_-.
l SQRRs;SPONDFMCE O
I October 3, g g 1
USNP.C UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 14 00T -4 M1 :29 I
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION CFFICE OF SEudi,e.
00CMEIING & SERV 4.
BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARDNCH In the Matter of
)
)
METROPOLITAN EDISON COMPANY
)
Docket No. 50-289 SP
)
(Restart-Management Remand)
(Three Mile Island ~ Nuclear
)
Station, Unit No. 1)
)
LICENSEE'S ANSWERS TO UNION OF CONCERNED SCIENTISTS' FIFTH SET OF INTERROGATORIES AND DOCUMENT REQUESTS TO GENERAL PUBLIC UTILITIES Licensee General Public Utilities Nuclear Corporation (GPU Nuclear), purssar.. to 10 C.F.R. S 2.740b, hereby submits the following answers to " Union of Concerned Scientists' Fifth Set of Interrogatories and Document Requests to General Public Utilities."
The provision of answers to these interrogatories is not to be deemed a' representation that Licensee considers the information sought to be relevant to the issues to be heard in'this remanded proceeding.
1 6
INTERROGATORIES 5-1.
Has GPU prepared job analyses for use in the op-erator training programs?
If so, provide.
ANSWER._
Yes.
A copy of the TMI-l Job Analysis for ROs and SROs is available in the discovery reading room.
1 b
8410050068 841003 PDR ADOCK 05000289 0
w 9
5-2.
Does GPU currently use job analyses prepared by itself or consultants, contractors or others in its operator training programs?- If so, provide.
ANSWER.
Yes.
A job analysis has been completed for those tasks which are applicable to the Basic Principles Training Simulator.
The results of this analysis have been in-corporated into the Reactor Operator Replacement Program de-scription provided in response to TMIA (Second Set) document
' production request 9e.
The Job Analysis pertinent to the BPTS is provided in response to TMIA (Second Set) document produc-
}
tion request 24.
5-3.
Has GPU prepared or does it otherwise have de-scriptions of the actual tasks peformed by TMI-l operators?
If so, provide and describe how the task descriptions have been used in the' development of current GPU training and testing programs.
ANSWER.
The TMI-l Job Analysis provided in response to Interrogatory 5-1 contains descriptions of actual tasks per-formed by TMI-l licensed operators.
A description of the pro-cedure uued in the development of this task analysis is provid-ed in response to Interrogatory 5-1.
The task analysis i
described in response to Interrogatory 5-2 has been incorpo-rated into the Reactor Operator Replacement Program.
An out-line for incorporation of the TMI-l Job Analysis comparison into the present CRO, SRO and Licensed Operator Requalification programs is available in the discovery reading room.
5-4.
Has GPU prepared or does it otherwise have a de-scription of the knowledge, skills and abilities needed by op-erators to perform the tasks which they are called upon to per-form?
If so, provide and describe how this description has been used in the development of current GPU training and testing programs.
- 1 4-n..
,.,_..c..,.
..--,,,.r----..,c-m_..,
..m,,,--__,,y,-,.,,,,-w_,.mw.,.,
._,m,_,
,,mm,,m.m,...w.,,.m.w,.mm,,,
.s ANSWER.
See response to Interrogatories 5-1 and 5-3.
5-5.
Describe the process and procedures used by GPU to ensure that the training program matches the description of the skills, knowledge and abilities needed by operators.
Pro-vide all relevant documents describing these processes and pro-cedures.
ANSWER.
The' process and procedures used by GPU in the initial development of its operator programs is addressed in the INPO Self Evaluation provided in response to TMIA (Second Set) document production request 25.
During 1983, an analysis of the INPO Plant Specific Job Survey Report, provided in response to TMIA (Second Set) docu-ment production request 24, was conducted to establish those tasks which could be applied to the Basic Principles Training Simulator.
The result of this analysis is provided in response to TMIA (Second Set) document production request 16.
The tasks identified are incorporated in the BPT training program as each area is addressed.
In addition, applicable tasks have been in-corporated into the Reactor Operator Replacement OJT Program.
In August of 1984, further evaluation was undertaken to compare the INPO Job Analysis to TMI Programs.
The procedure used in the most recent effort to compare the Job Analysis to the present programs is provided in response to Interrogatory 5-1.
See response to Interrogatory 5-3 for an outline for in-l corporation of the Job Analysis comparison into the present t.
program.
$-6.
Describe the process and procedures used by GPU to ensure that the written and oral tests given to operators
(.
match the description of the skills, knowledge and abilities l
needed by the operators.
Provide all relevant documents describing these processes and procedures.
i I n
>A ANSWER.
See response to UCS Interrogatory (First Set) 14.
5-7.
Describe the process and procedures used by GPU to ensure that the description of operator skills, knowledge and abilities,-if any, are complete and accurate.
Provide all documents describing these processes and procedures.
ANSWER.
See response to Interrogatory 5-1.
5-9.
Has GPU performed or caused to be performed any evaluations or analysis of the degree to which its training programs are consistent with the skills, knowledge and abili-ties needed by operators at TMI-l?
If so, provide.
ANSWER.
See response tn Interrogatory 5-1.
In addition, an INPO Evaluation of TMI-l in 1983 evaluated this area.
The evaluation is provided in response to TMIA (Second Set) docu-ment production request 74.
5-10.
Has GPU performed or caused to be performed any evaluations or analysis of the degree to which its written and oral examinations are consistent with the skills, knowledge and abilities needed by operators?
If so, provide.
ANSWER.
No formal evaluation has been performed.
In order to provide consistency between skills, knowledge and abilities needed by the operator and the training program' oral and written examination, Operations Department personnel are involved in the review of written comprehensive examinations for replacement programs and the approval of the annual requalification exam.
In addition, operations personnel are involved in the final comprehensive oral required for replace-ment program completion and annual requalification.
5-11.
Mas GPU performed or caused to be performed any evaluations or analyses of the degree to which the on-the-job environment at TMI-l facilitates and/or inhibits (i.e. rein-forces and/or contradicts) the lessons taught in the training program?
If so, provide... -.
4 ANSWER.
An evaluation of the TMI-1 facility was con-ducted by INPO in 1983 which addressed this area.
This evalua-tion is included in response to TMIA (Second Set) document pro-duction request 74.
5-12.
Has GPU performed or caused to be performed any evaluations or analyses of the " managerial climate" or supervi-sors' attitude within GPU or at TMI-l?
If so, provide.
ANSWER.
The Director of Training & Education is con-
'stantly monitoring the managerial climate and supervisory atti-tude within TMI-l Training.
A number of vehicles such as staff meetings, employee meetings, site tours, classroom observa-tions, one-on-one discussions, etc., contribute to the evalua-tion and analysis of the overall training department climate.
Staff meetings are run on a regular basis and organizational climate and concerns are often discussed at the various le.els.
Communication among training management is frank and therefore serves as a reliable source of information.
The Director of Training & Education encourages training management to speak freely and openly, and supports and insists on prompt and ef-fective responses to organizational concerns.
Training manag-ers and supervisors are encouraged to develop challenging goals; all employees are encouraged to strive for above-average performance, and are told that their work effort contributes to the training organization's success.
Highly skilled managers and supervisors are often used on special assignments offering opportunities to provide individual leadership to specific or-ganizational issues.
Management relays to its training ~
L personnel the importance of their attitude towards the licensed operator training program in shaping the views of the students in the program.
(For a general discussion of the management of training, see INPO Report (1983) and Rickover Reports (Nov.
1983) and (April 1984).)
5-13.
Has GPU performed or caused to be performed any evaluations or analyses of the degree to which managerial cli-mate or supervisors' attitudes within GPU or at TMI-l reinforce or contradict the lessons learned in training?
If so, provide.
ANSWER.
See response to Interrogatory 5-12.
Respectfully submitted, b zboys.A h h ',L L Ernest L.
Blake, Jr.
P.C.
Deborah B.
Bauser SRAW, PITTMAN, POTTS & TROWBRIDGE 1800 M Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C.
20036 (202) 822-1000 counsel for Licensee Dated:
October 3, 1984,
m s
October 3, 1984 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD In the Matter of
)
)
METROPOLITAN EDISON COMPANY
)
Docket No. 50-289
)
(Restart-Management Remand)
-(Three Mile Island Nuclear
)
Station, Unit No. 1)
)
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that copies of " Licensee's Answers to Union of Concerned Scientists' Fifth Set of Interrogatories and Document Requests to General Public Utilities" were served this 13rd day of October, 1984, by hand delivery to the party identi-fled with-an asterisk and by deposit in the U.S. mail, first class, postage prepaid, to the other parties on the attached Service List.
l h'A% A h.l
4* %
Deborah B.
Bauser
2 COLKETED UNC UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION T4 B;1 -4 N1:29 BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD
.. :x u C T,L ira '
f0C I' iib 6 SER BRANCH In the Matter
)
i
)
METROPOLITAN EDISON COMPANY
)
Docket No. 50-289 SP
)
(Restart Romand on Management)
(Three Mile Island Nuclear
)
Station, Unit No. 1)
)
SERVICE LIST Nunzio J. Palladino, Chairran Administrative Judge U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission John H. Buck Washington, D.C.
20555 Atomic Safety & Licensing Appeal Board Thomas M.
Roberts, Commissioner U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
20555 Washington, D.C.
20555 Administrative Judge James K. Asselstine, Commissioner Christine N. Kohl U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Atomic Safety & Licensing Appeal Washington, D.C.
20555 Board U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Frederick Bernthal, Commissioner Washington, D.C.
20555 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
20555 Administrative Judge Ivan W.
Smith, Chairman Lando W.
Zeck, Jr., Commissioner Atomic Safety & Licensing Board U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commissica Washington, D.C.
20555 Washington, D.C.
20555 Administrative Judge Administrative Judge Gary J. Edles, Chairman Sheldon J. Wolfe Atomic Safety & Licensing Appeal Atomic Safety & Licensing Board Board U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Ccmmission U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
20555 Washington, D.C.
20555
~
n
v.'
Administrative Judge Mr. Henry D. Hukill Gustave A. Linenberger, Jr.
Vice President Atomic Safety & Licensing Board GPU Nuclear Corporation U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission P.O. Box 480 Washington, D.C.
20555 Middletown, PA 17057 Docketing and Service Section (3)
Mr. and Mrs. Norman Aamodt Office of the Secretary R.D.
5 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Coatesville, PA 19320 Washington, D.C.
20555 Ms. Louise Bradford Atomic Safety & Licensing Board TMI ALERT Panel 1011 Green Street U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Harrisburg, PA 17102 washington, D.C.
20555 Joanne Doroshow, Esquire Atomic Safety & Licensing Appeal The Cnristic Institute Board Panel 1324 North Capitol Street U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Wast.ington, D.C.
20002 Washington, D.C.
20555 Lynne Bernabei, Esq.
O V*r ment Accountability Jack R.
Goldberg, Esq. (4) r Office of the Executive Legal
.ESS Connecticut Avenue Washington, D.C.
20036 U.S c ear Regulatory Commissinn Washington, D.C.
20555
- Ellyn R. Weiss, Esq.
- iarmon, Weiss & Jordan Thomas Y. Au, Esq.
2001 S Street, N.W.,
Suite 430 Office of Chief Counsel Washington, D.C.
20003 Department of Environmental Resources Michael F.
McBride, Esq.
505 Executive House LeBoeuf, Lamb, Leiby & MacRae P.O. Box 2357 1333 New Hampshire Avenue, N.W.
Harrisburg, PA 17120 Suite 1100 Washington, D.C.
20036 Michael W.
Maupin, Esq.
Hunton & Williams 707 East Main Street P.O.
Box 1535 Richmond, VA 23212 William T.
Russell Deputy Director, Division
(
of Human Factors Safety Office of NRR Mail Stop AR5200 U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission i
Washington, D.C.
20555 i
l l
l l
l I
n