ML20147F504

Forwards Comments on Licensee Training Performance During Period of INPO Accreditation Effort.Certification of Licensed Operator Training Program Encl

ML20147F504
Person / Time
Site:	Palisades, Turkey Point, Farley, 05000000, University of Illinois
Issue date:	02/25/1987
From:	Grace J NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II)
To:	Harold Denton Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Shared Package
ML20147E666	List: ML20147E662 ML20147E681 ML20147E767 ML20147E897 ML20147E945 ML20147F032 ML20147F144 ML20147F390 ML20147F504 ML20147F630
References
FOIA-87-787 NUDOCS 8801210349
Download: ML20147F504 (4)

Text

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

) .

8 UNeftD87 Aft 4 b7

,. [# "'* )

+

N9CtfAR Rf.GULATORY COMWSSION REOCNN g IM MAACT A STREEf, N.W., Sulf f 2900 8,

f ATLANTA, GEC40JA 30323 hM I

February 25,1987 MEMORANDUM FOR: Harold R. Denton, Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation l FROM: J. Nelson Grace 1

4 Regional Administrator 1

j

SUBJECT:

REGIOKAL IMPUT TO REPORT ON EFFECT!VENE55 0F TRAINING UNDER THE

'j POLICY STATEMENT ON TRAINING AND QUALIFICATION j

I As requested by your memorandum of December 22, 1986, enclosed are Region II cocinents on licensee training performance during the period of INP0 accreditation I effort. p  !

f i j J. Nelson r ce

Enclosure:

.) Region II C(svents on Effectiveness

, of Trainir.g Under INPO Agreement i'

cc w/ enc 1:

! R. H. Vollmer, RI t A. B. Davis, RIII R. D. Martin, RIV J. 8.

j W. T.'.Ma Russell, rtin.

IRM.RV 7

'l I

1 i,

1

-i I

porn ??-?t7 8801210349 080119

, PDR FOIA DOLEYO7-707 PDR

v ..a.-----.~......- . . . . . . , . . _ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . .... .....a . ~ x.- --

]. , . .

i

!f ENCLOSURE

)

REGION !! COPNENTS ON EFFECTIVENESS OF

TRAINING UNDER INPO AGREENENT

. .j

] We were asked to address the following questions. The Region !! response follows i eAch question:

'l j Question 1

j Are there any overall improvements in personnel perfonnance which could be attributed to INPO accreditation activities?

Response

i

, All utilities have expended a very large amount of resources in a short time

to prepare for accreditation. As of now, we have not observed an overall

., improvement in personnel performance. We ate optimistic, however, that such

. , an improvement will occur when the improved training programs are given time

,; to produce personnel with better training.

Question Are there any areas which have experienced a decline in personnel performance as i a result of INPO accreditation activities?

Response

J.1 i We have observed no general decline in personnel performance as a result of INPO

]  ;

accreditation activities. There have been specific instances where the training staff was so busy preparing for accreditation that they allowed their normal

j training duties to lapse. As an example, Turkey Point suspended all training

.s for maintenance personnel for over a year while the training staff prepared for 1 accreditation. The training hcs since been resumed.

' Ouestion 4 Are there any instances of non-implementation of either the commitment to j actively seek INPO accreditation or to implement accredited programs according

to the INPC criteria?

Response

3 t

1

-! Regian II has identified an instance in which Farley failed to implement att SRO

.i '

upgrade training p;'ogram by the date comitted to INPO as a basis for accredita-tion. This matter was referred to the Division of Human Factors Technology. MRR.

, i for followup with INPO. Region !! observes that INPO has no timel;' mechanism for i followup to confirm that licensees meet their accreditation commitments. This is a weakness in the program. 1

.! i l

_ . _ . .-. --,-. ... .....- ~ . . -... . . .. -. . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . --- - .--... -- -

i . .'

i. ,-

j .

i

.g #

Enclosure 2 We also observed that during the earlier !NPO accreditation efforts, the licensed operator requalification programs were not addressed. Therefore, there are inconsistent standards applied at the various facilities currently holding INPO accreditation. This could have serious implications since the proposed new I

10 CFR 55 regulations :ely heavily on the assumption that all facilities holding 1 IMPO accreditation have met a consistent minimum standard for all phases of i training.

J I

J

'i i

.1

)

4

?

1 1

i 4

e

. ..e ap e -

CONSUMERS POWER COMPANY Big Rock Point and Palisades Plants Docket 50-155 and 50-255 Licenses DRP-6 and DPR-20 1

LICENSED OPERATOR TRAINING PROGRAM CERTIFICATION At the request of the Commission and pursuant to the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 and the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974, as amended, and the Consnission's Rules and Regulations thereunder, Consumers Power Company submits this certification that the Reactor Operator and Senior Reactor Operator training programs are accredited based on a system approach to training (SAT) as defined in 10CTR55.4.

CONSUMERS POWER COMPANY By fm.

/ z t.sd F W Buckman, Vice Presid %

Nuclear Operations Sworn and subscribed to before me this 26th day of May, 1987.

Y Elaine E Buehrer.l otary Public AAL Jackson County My conmission expires October 31, 1989 d

1 Fore ?!7 i

1

1. //s-OC0587-0074-NLO2 i

. - - -- . _ - .