ML20151Y324

Transcript of ACRS Human Factors Subcommittee 880427 Meeting in Washington,Dc.Pp 1-162.Supporting Documentation Encl

ML20151Y324
Person / Time
Issue date:	04/27/1988
From:	Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards
To:
References
ACRS-T-1661, NUDOCS 8805040424
Download: ML20151Y324 (259)

Text

-

AC(25(.- M / Ca nu %L  ;

l l

UNITED STATES

'O NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION l

m a am m mm mm mm mm mm m mm mm m mm mm m mm m mm me = = =m um m mm mm m m aa mm mm m mm m mm mm mm m m l

I In the Matter of:

I HUMAN FACTORS SUBCOMMITTEE O -

- , r g . _ ~ .

~

. . . . . .c Pages

1 through 162 . : , ;. r ,

- /,,

Place: Washington DC Date: April 27, 1988 J

I

. . . . sm - - - - - - - . sm . . . . . . - - - - = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

r HERITAGE REPORTING CORPORATION O omune 1220 L Street, N.W., Suite 600 Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 628-4858 8805040424 880427 PDR ACRS T -- 1661 DCD

. .- . ~. - .

f 1 PUBLIC NOTICE BY THE L/- 2 UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION'S 3 ADVISORY COKMITTEE ON REACTOR SAFEGUARDS 4

5 6

7 , The contents of this stenographic transcript of the

.8 oroceedings of the United States Nuclear Regulatory 9 Commission's Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards (ACRS),

10 as reported herein, is an uncorrected record of the discussions 11 recorded at the meeting held on the above date.

12 No member of the ACRS Staff and no participant at 13 this meeting accepts any responsibility for errors or

[} 14 15 inaccuracies of statement or data contained in this transcript.

16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

-( ) Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888

I l

1 1 l i

r W -

.D' 'l UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION j 1

2 ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON REACTOR SAFEGUARDS 3

)

4 In the Matter of: )

)

5 )

HUMAN FACTORS SUBCOMMITTEE )

6 )

)

7 Wednesday, 8 March 27, 1988 9 Room 1046 1717 H Street, N.W.

10 Washington, D.C. 20555 11 The above-entitled matter came on for hearing, *-

12 pursuant to notice, at 8:30 a.m.

(^T 13 BEFORE: DR. FORREST J. REMICK

\l Associate Vice President for Research 14 and Professor of Nuclear Engineering The Pennsylvania State University ,

15 University Park, Pennsylvania 16 ACRS MEMBERS PRESENT:

17 DR. HAROLD W. ?.EWIS i Professor of Physics 18 Department of Physics University of California

19 Santa Barbara, California  ;

, 20 MR. CARLYLE MICHELSON "

i Retired Principal Nuclear Engineer i 21 Tennessee Valley Authority Knoxville, Tennessee 22 and Retired Director, Office for Analysis

! and Evaluation of Operational Data l 23 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.

24

[

25 I

I HERITAGE REPORTING CORPORATION -- (202)628-4888  !

s

2 fx 1 HR. CHARLES J. WYLIE Retired Chief Engineer 2 Electrical Division Duke Power Company 3 Charlotte, North Carolina 4 MR. DAVID A. WARD Research Manager on Special Assignment 5 E. I. du Pont de Nemours & Company Savannah River Laboratory 6' Aiken, South Carolina 7 ACRS COGNIZANT STAFF MEMBER:

8 Herman Alderman 9 NRC STAFF PRESENTERS:

10 Garmon West Tom Ryan 13 Consultants:

12 K. Gimmy

(:)

14 15 16 17 l

l 19 20

'll 21 i i

22 l 23 24 25 O

HERITAGE REPORTING CORPORATION -- (202)628-4888

3 1 I N D-E X 1 1

2 Items Discussed- Page 3 Industry comments on conduct of operators 5 4

Proposed policy statement

~~

5~ on conduct of operators 67 6 Cognitive environment simulator 113 l

7 r i

8 r

9 10  ;

i 11 12 l lll 13 14 3 3

l 15  !

I 16 '

?

17 .

c 1

i  !

18

19 i

! 20 -

i i

1 21

! 22 ,

23  !

l  :

f I

- 24 1 i l 25  !

r

.i t

i HERITAGE REPORTIllG COMPAllY -- (202)628-4888

4 1 PROCEEDINGS. .\

(q,) 2 CHAIRMAN REMICK: Good morning, ladies and I This is a

~

3 gentlemen. The mee-4.ng will now come to order.

l 4 meeting of the ACRF Subcommittee on Human Factors. I an.

5 Forrest Remick, Chairman of the subcommittee. Other ACRS 6 members in attendance today are Charlie Wylie, David Ward, 7 Carlyle Micholson. Harold Lewis will be joining us shortly, 8 and consultant Chris Gimmy from Savannah River Laboratory.

9 The Subcommittee will review and discuss the 10 proposed policy statement on the professional conduct of 11 nuclear power plant operators. We will have a presentation by 12 NUMARC and INPO on the industry views on the professional

(} 13 conduct of nuclear power plant operators.

14 Later Dr. Tom Ryan from the staff will discuss 15 cognitive environmental simulation, and the nuclear 16 computerized library.

17 Herb Alderman is the cognizant ACRS staff member for 18 today's meeting. The rules for participation in today's l

l 19 meeting have been announced as part of the notice of this i

20 meeting that was published in the Federal Register on March 21 30th.

22 This meeting is being conducted in accordance with 23 the provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee Act and the

{} 24 Government in the Sunshine Act. We have received no written 25 or oral statements from members of the public. It is i

HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4888 .

_ _ - __ _ _ _ _ - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ i

t; 5

1 requested that each speaker first identify hims' elf or herself q,) 2 and speak with sufficient clarity and volume so that he or che 3 can be heard readily.

4 Do any of my Subcommittee eclieagues have any 5 comments they wish to make?

6 All right. Then we will proceed with the

-7 presentations. On the agenda this morning we have some input 8 from industry, taking Joe Colvin, who is the Executive Vice 9 President and Chief Operating Officer of the NUMARC up on his 10 offer when he spoke to the Full Committee several months ago 11 to help us get industry input on various issues that we are 12 considering.

(} 13 We asked Joe if he wished to have industry input at P

14 our Subcommittee meeting today, and so he will be addressing 15 us briefly, and then turning the meeting over to Ken McCoy 16 from INPO who will tell us about some of the industry 17 initiatives in this area, and then we will be following up 18 with a presentation on the proposed policy statement by Garmon F 19 West from the NRR staff.

20 So Joe, with that, I will turn the meeting over to 21 you at this time. We welcome you back.

22 MR. COLVIN: Yes, sir. Thank you. Good morning.

23 As Forrest said, I am Joe Colvin, Executive Vice President and 24 Chief Operating Officer of NUMARC. And good morning, Dr.

25 Remick, Subcommittee members, ladies and gentlemen.

HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4888

6 1 We want to thank you for the opportunity to appear 7

(m) 2 before the Human Factors Subcommittee to discuss some of the 3 i'ndustry efforts to enhance operator professionalism or really 4- to enhance the professionalism of our personnel. The industry s

5 is very keenly interested in enhancing the professionalism of 6 our employees and at the same team, recognizing the special 7 professional capabilities necessary in the operating staff, 8 and we will be commenting on that in some specifics later 9 today.

10 We have undertaken many industry-wide initiatives 11 that, whose root cause. really relates to, directly to the 12 issue of operator professicnalism, and to the operator's '

() 13 ability to operate the plant safely, and at the same time, 14 affect the morale of our people. For sometime, the industry 15 has been working through NUMARC and through INPO and other 16 industry organizations, and for example, through NUMARC in 17 1984, and '85, committed to some 59' described commitments in 18 ten major areas that were really related more or less to the

, 19 issue of our operator professionalism, professionalism of our ,

20 employees, to the people-related issues that we have, and 21 those areas, the primary one as we have discussed before with 22 the Subcommittee and Full Committee, was the accreditation of 23 the training programs. Clearly that has a major effect on the 24 professionalism of our people and how they view their

}

25 profession.

HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4888

3, 7 A In other areas we worked on shortage of qualified

(~T

(_). 2. personnel, management effectiveness, even areas such as 3 . fitness for duty which really our people related and are 4- involved in this, the same, same category.

5 We are pleased to report that as-NUMARC reported to 6 the commissioners in 1986, that all those, the described 7 commitments were met by August of 1986. Recently, the 8 industry and'NUMARC have been very active in working with the 9 staff in the area of operator requalification, and we have 10 discussed some of that with the Full Committee earlier, but we 11 are working to try to denelop wit ~n the staff a credible and 12 reliable examination, a reasonable examination in the area of

(). 13 NUMARC administered requalification examinations for the 14 operators, and the examination is credible in the eyes of the P

15 operator, credible and professional. I think these examples 16 are really tied to professionalism in the broad sense because 17 they affect the morale of the people, the way they view their 18 profession, and the way they operate the plant.

19 INPO has also focused since its beginning in the i 20 people-related area, on the broad operations of the plant, the 21 management, has focused on the oparating staff, and has looked 22 at that through its plant evaluation program, and then in many l 23 areas, in its corporate support for the nuclear stations. Its

/~T 24 evaluations of that really focus also in the, on the V

25 people-related issues that relates to professionalism.

HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4888

8 1 Today Ken McCoy in-just a minute is going to brief

() 2 -you on INPO's initiatives, some of the recent INPO initiatives 3 in cperator professionalism. These are initiatives that are 4 really more specifically focused in the examples that I have 5 just given you and are directly related to the issue of 6 professionalism of the personnel, of the plant personnel. I 7 think this is very appropriate since the leadership for these 8 initiatives really was undertaken by Zack Pate, president of 9 INPO, in his, in the CEO conference speech he made before the 10 INPO CEOs in November of 1987, and as a result of that, there 11 where several challenges and initiatives undertaken and an ad 12 hoc committee was set up. Ken will discuss this in more

() 13 detail.

14 I had the privilege to serve on this ad hoc 15 committee that developed principles for enhancing the 16 professionalism of our plant personnel, operating personnel, 17 and Ken will discuss that in more detail. So without any 18 further delay, subject to any questions or comments you might 19 have, I will turn this over to Ken, and I will be available 20 with Ken to respond to any questions or comments that the 21 Subcommittee members might have.

22 CHAIRMAN REMICK: Any questions, gentleinen?

23 Something you might think about, Joe mentioned something that

{} 24 Herman and I have been talking about several times, and that 25 is I think it would be appropriate either to have a l

i HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (2021628-4888 l

9 1 Subcommittee meeting or a briefing of the Full Committee on

(_ 2 the revised requalification programs, and I think there have 3 been now two tests that have--Robinson, and was the other Wolf 4 Creek?

5 HR, COLVIN: Would be--and Fort Calhoun are the 6 first two pilots. This is pilot in each of the five regions 7 and I think so far, our feedback is both from the staff and 8 from the industry that those are working very well. I think 9 that that's probably one of the most optimistic initiatives 10 that we have undertaken, both with the staff, and there is 11 lots of, lots of good examples of cooperation and actually 12 getting to the root cause of the problem.

() 13 CHAIRMAN REMICK: I have received very favorable 14 comment, too, from those first two pilot programs. I think it 15 is something that either the. Subcommittee or the Full 16 Committee might be interested in hearing about because it is a i

17 rather dramatic change from what we have been hearing for the 18 last four or five years and so I just throw that out as 19 something to think about and whether you want to have a 20 Subcommittee meeting on it or a briefing of the Full 21 Committee.

22 MR. WARD: Maybe a Full Committee briefing.

23 CHAIRMAN REMICK: We can discuss that next week.

24 Good morning, Ken.

}

25 MR. McCOY: Dr. Remick, members of the Committee, i

HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4888

10 j 1~ -4nd ladies and gentlemen ~, I am Ken McCoy, Director of the

( ) 2 Plant Operations Division, the Institute of Nuclear Power 3- . Operations.

4 As Joe indicated, I would like to talk to you about 5 'ene industry efforts underway to enhance professionalism in 6 the operator ranks specifically, and in all personnel '

7 as'saciated with our nuclear plants in general.

8 First, there are three documents that have been ,

9 provided to you, and these documents provide a history and r 10 outline of the industry efforts that are currently underway, 11 and I will be referring to those in more detail as we go 12 through the presentation.

O

%/

13 The first document I would like you to refer to is .

14 the copy of the speech to the CEO workshop by Zack Pate. This 15 speech was presented to the CE)s of all the utilities that [

16 operate nuclear stations in November of 1987, and the most 17 important thing perhaps in that is it is a good recap of the 18 historical events that led to a poor atmosphere for operator 19 professionalism in the U.S. industry. I would encourage you 20 to take a look at that. Than from that background, challenges 21 were developed for the, for the industry to improve the 22 environment and the professionalism of operators.

23 At the end of Zack's speech in November, he issued q

b 24 challenges to the utilities, to the NRC, to NUMARC, and 25 to--let me get this straight here--and to INPO, and I would HERITAGE REPORTING CO!!PANY -- (202)628-4888

11 1 like to review those for you.- They are listed in the back of

() 2 his speech, but so we have these in mind, and I can give you a 3 etatus tf them.

4~ Zack asked that the utili*ies begin now if not 5 already in progress, to work with the operators to develop a 6 professional code for operators.

7 If you are recall, in 1986 and 1987, there were a 8 number of events that occured in the industry that raised 9 questions about the professionalism of the operators and

-10 whether there was a uniform understanding of what the proper 11 rules of conduct and ethics should be for operators.

12 Secondly, he asked that each CEO handpick a senior

() 13 reactor operator to attend a February workshop which was 14 hosted by INPO to develop from the operators themselves a 15 clear understanding of what the elements of a proper 16 professional code should be, and I will review that in a few i 17 minutes. He cha'.lenged the utilities then to have in place by 18 mid-1988 an operator code at each utility, and then to be 19 receptive to a set of broad management principles which I will 20 discuss further in a few minutes, developed by your peers, 21 meaning the peers of the executives from other utilities, that 22 can lead to an improved climate for professionalism.

23 (Slide)

{} 24 MR. McCOY: And finally to the utilities above all 25 else, to expect and insist on professionalism by your  !

HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4888

1 operators in all that they do; expect the best from them not 2 only technically, but ethically as well, expect their 3 character to be above are reproach.

4 (Slide) 5 MR. McCOY: Zack challenged the NRC to continue to 6 improve its licensed operator requalification program and as 7 Joe has mentioned, that effort is well underway and we think 8 is progressing well.

9 Secondly, to be receptive to a set of broad 10 management principals, again the same principals that I will 11 discuss in a few minutes.

12 Third, to resolve the degree on shift question

() 13 preferably after reviewing and commenting on the set of broad 14 management principles just mentioned, and the reason for this 15 particular challenge is outlined in the history portion of his 16 speech, which outlines the impact that the uncertainty on this u

17 issue har had on the operator community over the past eight 18 years, so that the challenge there is to get on with 19 establishing a stable environment for the operators.

20 Zack then challenged NUMARC to assist with the 21 y inciples. As Joe mentioned, he served on the ad hoc 22 :vmmittee from NUMARC, and also to assist in gaining NRC 23 understanding and support in the manner that we are doing

(} 24 today.

25 And for INPO, he challeng>ad the employees of INPO to HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4888

13 1 carry out the commitments-outlined in his task, to work with

(.

-( -

2 the ad hoc industry committee and with NUMARC to get a sound

3. set of principles into the hands of CEOs by the end of March

~4 of '88, and to facilitate a development of a code, a l 5 professional code, at each' utility by mid-year. +

6 CHAIRMAN REMICK: Two things, Ken, that are being 7 talked about--one is a code, professional code for operators, 8 and the other is principles for management to encourage 9 professionalism, is that right?

10 MR. McCOY: Right. That is correct, and it is, a 11 good point you bring up now that I have gone through it is, 12 that is probably the appropriate *.ime to say that the strategy i,

() 13 here is to work both ways. First, to establish an environment l 14 where professionalism will be encouraged starting from the 15 CEOs and working down through the utility, and that's the 16 purpose of the management principles.

17 The second is to begin to work with the personnel in t

18 the plant starting with the operators since we feel that they 19 have the major impact in establishing the climate in the l 20 plant, to start with the operators in developing from the 21 bottom up a common commitment and understanding of what is 22 expected of professional conduct in the plants, so we are  ;

23 working that both ways, and that's why I will move to--

! i f (} 24 CHAIRMAN REMICK: When you say operators, are you 25 limiting it to licensed operators?

HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4808

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

14 ,

1 MR. McCOY: No. We-specifically refer to .

) 2 non-licensed and licensed operators, and I will come back to 3 that in a minute.

4 DR. LEWIS: Have people made progress uriting the 5 code? I have a problem in that professionalism is a little 6 bit like beauty. You know it when you se., it, but it is hard 7 to define. And typically when people define it, they sort of 8 constrict it in such a way that it doesn't have much meaning.

9- Have people had success in writing such codes?

10 MR. McCOY: Yes, and I will show you in just a few 11 minutes the elements that the senior reactor operators--we had ,

12 173 senior reactor operators representing all utilities at

() 13 this workshop, and one of the objectives of that workshop was 14 to come out with an agreement of what the key elements should 15 be in a professional code, and I will review those with you. i 16 DR. LEWIS: Very good; I will wait.

17 MR. McCOY: But the point you make is very valid, 18 and the definition of professionalism varies widely.

19 (Slide) 20 MR. McCOY: With that, I will move into discussing 21 the professional code, and you have in the handouts we gave 22 you an attachment that I will give you additional copies so 23 you won't have to sort through and find that. This is the attachment to the letter that was sent to the senior executive

(} 24 25 point of contact at each utility transmitting the result of HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4888

{

15- ,

1 the workshop for senior reactor operators. This was the key

() 2 attachment. This is what the operators themselves developed.

3 They arrived at seven elements that they-considered 4 to be most inipor tant in a professional code. First was 5 personal integrity. They defined that as demonstrated-6 personal integrity and honesty in all aspects of one's job, 7 exhibiting professional behavior and conduct in conduct and 8 appearance.

9 DR. LEWIS: If you will forgive me, in the first 10 year of-English we would have problems with a professional 11 code defined by saying that you have to exhibit professional 12 behavior. We would make trouble for people who did that.

(} 13 MR. McCOY: I understand what you are saying, and 14 perhaps the words could have been chosen better.

15 DR. LEWIS: I am being too destructive. Let's go 16 on.

17 MR. McCOY: But it was an attempt, and again let 18 me--this was an attempt by operators themselves to develop ,

d 19 their perception of how they could establish this personal

• 20 integrity.

21 The second was that they should be committed to 22 excellence, to strive to do the best job possible.

23 A third was that there should be a commitment to ,

24 individual knowledge and skills, and they recognized that that 25 requires continual work to maintain improved job-related HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)623-4888

t 16 1 knowledge and skills. ,

.(- .

is 2 They recognized that they should take responsibility 3 for actions, accept the responsibilities for one's own actions  ;

4 and decisions, assume ownership for the job and the plant, 5 also that they have a responsibility to protect the public, to 6 operate in a manner that protects public safety above all 7 other considerations, and recognize the responsibility to 8 operate in a manner that merits public confidence; to monitor 9 and respond to plant conditions, to continually monitor plant 10 parameters and aggressively pursue any abnormal indications; i

11 to anticipate potantial problems before they occur; to make 12 every effort to perform all operational activities correctly

() 13 the first time.

14 This perhaps is their clearest attempt to define the 15 specific activities that they are expected to do as an 16 operator. And finally, that there is an element or regulatory 17 procedure and compliance that is essential to their job as a 18 licensed operator, and that includes adhering to all 19 applicable regulations and procedures to ensure public 20 protection and plant safety. ,

21 DR. LEWIS: I know I am being a pest, but allow me, 22 bear with me for one more second. I am just not in general a 23 believer of codes and that sort of thing. They tend to be

(} 24 empty. And every now and then you know, either the Post 25 Office or a Police Department or somebody goes on a kind of HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4888

?'

17 1 ' strike and what it is is not really'a strike. They just

-X 2 decide one day to obey all applicable rules and regulations

(_)  !

3 and if they do that, it isn't possible to function in their 4 jobs, which is what they are trying to establish'.

5 If'one were-to really adhere to all. applicable- -

6 regulations-and rules , which I doubt that anybody knows, 7 would it be possible to operate a nuclear power plant?

8 MR. McCOY: Yes, I think so. To the extent that the 9 operator is aware of any rules and regulations,'it is 10 certainly my belief that today that all operators sincerely 11 try and comply with all the regulations and rules that we.are i 12 aware of.

{} 13 DR. LEWIS: I am not questioning their integrity. I

.i 14 am questioning whether the people who write the rules and 15 regulations are in fact so completely aware of all of the 16 rules and regulations that there are really no internal ';

17 contradictions that make it possible--they are completely 18 rational and I just find that incredible because it is not 19 ' rue in any other area I know of, including flying.

I 20 MR. ficCOY: Yes. I understand your point, and I 21 certainly couldn't take issue with that point, but I think you 22 are aware that the environment today is such in the nuclear ,

23 plants that the operators really work extra hard at ensuring 24 that they are trying to do that.

25 DR. LEWIS: I am not questioning their integrity at HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4888 .

m ._ _ - , . . , _

18 1~ all. I am just questioning whether this is, if you will

( 2 forgive the word, pap. Forgive me.

3 MR. McCOY: I don't think I can really offer 4 anything. Joe?

5 HR. COLVIN: I guess onn of the basic thoughts of 6- establishing a code from the operator's point is to get'the 7 openers themselves to establish the principles that they felt 8 .most important, and that by establishing that, that would 9 bring those to their awareness and periodically they would 10 discuss this and that heightened sense of awareness of the way 11 to operate, what we are striving for, is kind of like setting 12 a goal and objective in many instances. We recognize we may

() 13 never quite attain it. We hope we can, but we strive for it.

14 It is almost the same in the sense of excellence, i 15 the approach that the industry has taken, so I understand your ,

16 point that you are making, and it is, I guess we think this is  ;

17 one of the best attempts we have to get the people who are 18 most affected involved in what they are doing and establishing 19 the basic principles of their operation to allow them to 20 enhance their ability to perform them.  ?

21 DR. LEWIS: You must understand I am not denigrating 22 the effort. I think that professional meetings among people 23 trying to do a professional job are wonderful and mutually

(} 24 beneficial, uplifting. The only question is whether at the 25 end of it you have to write a Bible.

HEkITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4888

o -

19 1 MR. McCOY: Right. Perhaps the title that has been

() 2 chosen,'. professional code, is the hang up here. One of the 3 things that we see as beneficial coming out of this is a 4 conmon understanding among the operator community of what 5 their expectations of each other is, and one of the strongest 6 forces in the operator community is peer pressure, what is 7 expected by the other members on shift and so forth, so if 8 they have arrived through much discussion and talk and 9 thoughts about some key principles that they expect of each 10 other in their jobs, then we think that that will in the 11 proper environment, contribute to higher' level of performance.

12 DR. LEWIS: I agree peer pressure is more important

(} 13 than management pressure in enhancing professionalism. If you 14 have ever sat at an airport with a pilot, he tends to watch 15 every other pilot's landing just, you know, as he is talking 16 to you, and that peer pressure and exchange is what does 17 olevate the standards.

1 P, I'm sorry. Please go on.

19 MR. McCOY: I think you, you get our thrust of what 20 we sere trying to do with working with the operator community 21 here.

22 (Slide) 23 MR. McCOY: They also discuss some other elements 24 which they didn't feel were as key to be defined in a code, 25 but I think it is significant that they discuss these and they HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4888

1 l

20 l 1 were distributed for consideration by all the utilities. ,

(~x '

\_I 2 And I won't read through these, but I will'just let you glance 3 down that list of some of the other things that were 4 considered.

5 You can see many of these are elements that no one 6 would really argue with, but they tried in their working 7 groups to stay out of all of these things, what are the key  !

8 elements, and that's the seven that I brought up earlier R.

9 (Slide) 10 HR. McCOY: One point in this is that where we go 11 from here with this operator code, we asked each utility to 12 work with their operators to develop their operator code,

() 13 whether you call it code or standards, or whatever, and to 14 publish that and provide a copy of that to INPO by mid-year of 15 this year, and that effort is well underwef, and this workshop 16 was a means of facilitating that, getting input from a much 17 broader audience than just within one utility, so each utility -

s 18 is developing.their own set, which ,we will then compile, and 19 if you will notice in Zack's speech, he said ultimately it may -

20 be desirable to mo>e toward a national code, but at the 21 present time, we considered it more important that within each !

22 utility, they establish a code so that will be the outcome of  !

23 this effort.

{} 24 CHAIRMAN REMICK: Am I correct some utilities had 25 some forms of code even before they started? l 1

HURITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4888

!l 21 >

1 MR. McCOY: Yes. There were several that had

( 2 previously developed a code, and those, in fact at the 3 workshop, those utilities, the SROs of those utilities gave 4 talks on their experience with developing and using a code, 5 how it had been received, how it was perceived by the 6 operators, and they gave advice to the other operators on how 7 to approach the development of the code, and so that's a good 8 point.

9 I would like to now move into discussing the 10 principles. Again, this is an attachment to the other letter 11 you have, the letter that was sent out on March 30th of this 12 are year to each CEO, and this provided the results of the ad

() 13 hoc committee that was formed after the CEO workshop to work 14 on improving the environment for professionalism in the 15 nuclear stations.

16 (Slide) i 17 MR. McCOY: And I would just like to kind of guide 18 you looking through this. If you look at the first page, i

19 there are a number of elements that were listed under managing 20 for excellence and professionalism, sort of a broad overall 21 set the stage kind of comments, and under the second item, I 22 just point out these were some of the specifics--that senior 23 management establish an overall philosophy that permeates the 24 organization. That's recognition that it has to come from the

}

l 25 top and it has to be a philosophy that is communicated from HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4888

22 1 the top down, that management sets the example by conducting O).

(_ 2 itself with commitment and integrity. There was agreement 3 that, that clearly if we were going to expect those kinds of 4 things from the operators, the example had to be set at the 5 top.

6 That management establishs safety as a personal, 7 moral responsibility, and ensures the safety of the public, 8 utility personnel, and the plant; that management maintains an 9 atmosphere of open communications such that problems are 10 brought to its attention undiluted, and that management sets 11 goals that encourage continual improvement in performance and 12 avoid a sense of self-satisfaction or complacency.

13 Moving into the more specific elements on the second

,}

14 page, in managing nuclear personnel, here are some of the L

15 specific issues that the ad hoc committee came up with that 16 would improve the environment in the area of personnel 17 management.

18 The first is that a recognition of the people and 19 their professional capabilities as the corporation's most 20 valuable resource in the nuclear area.

21 Second, that programs be established and implemented 22 to recruit and select individuals with qualifications and 23 abilities to perform the jobs for which they are being hired 24 but also with the ability to develop the skills and knowledge O .

25 required for higher level positions.

I I HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4888

23 1 I won't spend a lot of time on that, but we had r

( 2 observed in some utilities they had hired people into the 3 operations area th t could function taking direction as an 4 equipment operator but really there was not within that 5 community of operators enough talent to move up and generate 3

6 that operating experience, so there was a clear recognition  !

4 7 that that was, should be one of the objectives in their hiring L I'

8 policy, hiring and selection.

9 And that the knowledge and skills are developed, 10 maintained and enhanced through appropriate training and  :

11 career development. I think you are all aware of the efforts [

12 through the National Academy of Nuclear Training to improve

() 13 training throughout the industry. There has also been efforts 14 in the career development area, and in Zack's speech he talked 15 in particular about providing an atmosphere to develop 16 personnel who held operating experience in the plant to assume I

17 line management positions of higher responsibility.

18 And that management practices and policies convey an 19 attitude of trust and approach, and thac approach that is

20 supportive of teamwork at all levels, before I go on, let me 21 say that as I go through this, you might say well, this sounds i

22 like motherhood. This is things that everyone would expect,

! 23 but what is important here is that the utility industry as a  :

24 whole is adopting these. Each utility's management is saying

}

25 that they make a commitment to adopt these principles, and as HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4888

24 ,

1 you will see in the letter, Zack has asked for a report back n

is,) 2 from each CEO that they have reviewed these and incorporated 3 them into their policies, and that will be reviewed at the CEO 4 conference this fall where all the utilities' CEOs reconvene.

5 so it is more than just words. There is a commitment 6 involved.  ;

7 CHAIRMAN REMICK: Can I bring up a point that I 8 thought about? Looking at these, particularly perhaps the 9 code for operators, they tend to be motherhood type of 10 statements which I support, but one wa*'--and those are easy to 11 say well, yes, that makes sense, but it seems to me that a 12 follow-up that an organization like INPO might have to do is '

() 13 hold workshops where you have case studies where people are 14 faced with the particular situations in which these are to be 15 applied, but it is not a straightforward, you know, there are 16 conflicting considerations. I think then people begin to get l' a little better appreciation of what the words mean.

l 18 MR. McCOY: That's a good idea. In fact, it kind of [

19 goes in with a concept that is gaining momentum in the 20 training area, and that is the use of case studies in training 21 operators in general, and the point that you made that I don't 22 think we have discussed is that perhaps we should choose some 23 cf these example case studies that challenge people, challenge

(} 24 people to think about the issues that are in this code, the 25 ones that are a little more subtle and there is no clear HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4888 ,

25 1 lines.

(,

o) 2 MR. MICHELSON: Are there any words in this document 3 pertaining to dedication to safety, that sort of thing, safety 4 first or whatever?

l 5 DR. LEWIS: I found it.

6 MR. MICHELSON: Where is it?

7 DR. LEWIS: I passed it, unfortunately.

8 MR. COLVIN: It is on the first slide in this 9 section. It is under management for excellence.

10 MR. MICHELSON: Oh, yes.

11 MR. McCOY: It is in item No. 1, managing for 12 exec 11ence and professionalism. It is the third bullet under

(} 13 item 2.

14 MR. MICHELSON: I thought it had to be somewhere.

15 MR. McCOY: I'll just lead you thro.tgh these other 16 key elements on managing personnel, but one of the elements t 17 here that some people have gotten off base on over the years

! 18 is the line organization is the principal focus of management, 19 the principle source of information, and the only source of 20 direction, and I'm sure you have seen examples over the years  ;

I 21 where people have forgotten that principle, and invariably 22 they tend to get in trouble when they do that.

23 CHAIRMAN REMICK: I might be able to use that at 24 home in fact! My home organization I am thinking of.

I 25 DR. LEWIS: They get in trouble with the line i

HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4888

26 1 organization, or the plant gets in trouble?-

2 MR. McCOY: The project gets in trouble. If you 3 don't have clear lines of communication, clear definitions of 4 who gives directions, then you get into situations of 5 conflicting or misunderstanding information.

6 DR. LEWIS: You can't think of any situation in 7 which it would actually be safer to go around the line 8 organization?

9 MR. McCOY: Well, it depends on what you mean by 10 going around the line organization.

11 DR. LEWIS: Either up or down.

12 MR. McCOY: I think clearly there are times when

() 13 situations arise that individuals feel that they need to go 14 around some layers of line management to make their concerns 15 known or because of the priority of the issue, and one of the i 16 elements that was in the code that I, or in the principles 17 that I mentioned earlier was establishing an open atmosphere 18 within all level of management that promotes people to bring 19 their concerns forward and to contribute in that manner, so if 20 that's what you mean by going around--for instance, if someone 21 has a safety concern that he thinks is not being addressed 22 appropriately, that he feels completely comfortable to go to 23 someone higher in the organization who he thinks may have a 24 better ability or be more receptive to the issue, and--

{~}

25 DR. LEWIS: Doesn't that compromise the line HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4888

nk 27 ,

1 structure?

(~

(>) 2 HR. McCOY: No, I don't think se. .

3 HR. COLVIN: I was going to say from participating I e

4 in the meeting, we had a lot of discussion on this item, and I 5 might express a couple of thoughts on it.

6 One of the concerns that the ad hoc committee had 7 was that in managing a plant or corporation, many times we put 8 in place some organizational structure that ends up subverting 9 line management, going around line management, or 10 inadvertently set up a group or organization to perform a 11 function of review, audit. Quality assurances is a classic 12 axample where we set up a quality assurance organization or

() 13 another on-site review organization, or that kind of a 14 process, that ends up its prime purpose is to provide input to 15 management to allow management to make decisions, but in many 16 cases, we find that the plant or other people are responding 17 to the, to this group without going through the line 18 management, so what you have done is you set up management 19 direction through line and management direction through the 20 quality assurance group, management direction these other 21 things and so the focus of this was to say in all those other 22 sources, to provide the input into management, and they 23 provide, I mean they provide necessary information to

(} 24 management, but the decisions, the only direction that the 25 decisions are made by line management, and the only direction HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628 4888

28

[

1 to that come from line management, so it wasn't in the safety

) 2. area. It wasn't in the concept of someone having an open door I

3 policy, you had to go through the line, you couldn't go talk 4 to the CEO if he had an open door policy. It wasn't in that 5 sense at all. It war establishing other layers, layers upon 6 layers that ended up subverting the actual line management.

l 7 There is a very strong opinion that many times we '

8 get pushed into setting up some other approach rather than 9 fixing the root cause of the problem, which is ineffective  !

10 line management, and so we wanted to focus that as a primary l 11 issue.  !

12 HR. McCOY: Thank you.  ;

13 HR. WARD: I think is a good principle because I

(~}

14 mean the NRC in its regulations and regulatory style I guess 15 has tended to encourage an approach really other than this. I i

16 mean you know, we hear so often from regulators and from -

17 regulator politicians I guess that QA organizations must have 18 shutdown authority, and all sort of dramatic things like that, 19 and I think it really has gotten, I don't know if it has 20 reached the dangerous phase, but undesirable thing, and I 21 think this is, you know, one of the most important things you c

22 have got ic, here.

23 CHAIRMAN REMICK: I agree. It is import 1nt, too, 24 and there are some past examples that I have seen in the old 35 NRC organization where you had a separate INE where you could f HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4888  ;

39 j 1 have an INE inspector come and try to impose a requirement

-( ) 2 that was not in the license or in the tech specs and were 3 approved by NRR, but the inspector felt that was important.and

• 4 tried to get the licensee to do something that the licensee felt was'in conflict, and I have seen that occur, and it is a '

5 6 type of thing I think is being talked about here. You have 7 people that are special assistant to the plant manager or 8 special assistant to a president and so forth giving f 9 directions not through line management, but through 10 individuals.  :

t 11 HR. McCOY: That's' a good example. l 12 HR. WYLIE: With regard to your question raised by [

() 13 going around line management, if you adhere to these 14 principles laid out here, particularly the one on the [

t

. 15 management maintain an atmosphere of open communications,  ;

16 understand the problems brought to their attention undiluted, I i

17 you won't have a reason to go around him, you know, line j 18 management. I think these are good principles.  !

i 19 HR. McCOY: That's good discussion, some good r

20 points, and I particularly appreciate the suggestion about i 21 that there.  ;

22 CHAIRMAN REMICK: There is no way to have a better 23 understanding of the words than to be faced with a situation I

(} 24 where you have to make a decision la something ethically t

25 correct or correct or not realize that there are many j i

HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4888 7

30 1 ramifications, interpretations.

() 2 MR. McCOY: I hadn't thought about that, but clearly 3 one of the things that we will have to face in the 4 implementing this is gaining better understanding and so 5 forth, and that method of using the_ case studies that can do 6 that back on the code is clearly a good suggestion.

7 HR. MICHELSON: Is there a dissenting opinion 8 process somewhere in this outline that we will come to? If we 9 have a good, if you have a workable dissenting opinion 10 process, then you can prevent bypassing line management.

11 MR. WYLIE: Isn't that what it says right here in 12 this bullet under managing for excellence and professionalism.

(} 13 Carl?

14 MR. MICHELSON: I was trying to read these things, 15 not the bullets.

16 MR. WYLIE: Isn't this a summary of what is in l

17 there?

l 18 HR. McCOY: Yes, it is.

19 MR. MICHELSON: Which number is it?

20 MR. WYLIE: Management, professionalism; this bullet 21 says management should maintain an atmosphere of open 22 communication.

23 MR. McCOY: This is under item one.

24 MR. MICHELSON: That is a little different 25 philosophy, of course, than the establishing a process by HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4888

31 i

1 which--  :

()

(> 2 HR. WYLIE: That includes that process. ,

3 HR. HICHELSON: If you read it broadly.

4 HR. WYLIE: You can't spell out everything here, but <

'P 5 a good program would have one where you have--

6 HR. MICHELSON: Most companies have a dissenting 7 opinion process, and it is spelled out, then you know it is 8 being encouraged. It it is not spelled out--

f 9 HR. WYLIE: If you had a problem and you couldn't ,

~

10 get an answer, you had a route by which you go all the way to 11 the Chief Executive officer.

l 12 HR. HICHELSON: That is not necessarily built into

() 13 those words, but it could be conceivably inferred I guess, f

14 Better to come out and say it if that's what is meant.

r

' P 15 DR LEWIS: I missed a moment, but very often there 16 sre different procee nes which are appropriate in the middle i r

r 17 of a crisis than there are in the normal management of an -

i 18 operation. I don't think there has been any major military 19 crisis in the country in which the President hasn't asked for -

20 direct line to the captain of the ship or the leader of the i

21 patrol or something like that, so everything falls apart then 22 and it is good to have principles for how you work under those b

23 conditions, too. ,

(} 24 HR. McCOY: Hoving on, I won't go through all of

{

25 these, but just let you look up and down them. This one is i

HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4888 j

32 1 kind of related to the topic that was brought up. Management

) 2 seeks input and feedback on policies and practicus. That's 3 not exactly dissenting opinion, but that's another element to 4 get input from the people on how things are working.-

5 And lastly, here I point out this--recognition that 6 it is important that personnel be recognized for their 7 achievements, both within their work groups and in the company 8 as a whole, and that in our industry there has tended to be a 9 great emphasis on the negative and the down side and a little, 10 and little emphasis on the positive achievements and 11 recognition, so I think it was important that they chose to 12 address that.

(} 13 (Slide) 14 HR. McCOY: Moving to the next section of the paper 15 on developing management personnel, the committee felt that 16 this was an important enough area to be included in the' 17 principles, and has been a problem in some utilities where 18 they have developed in the absence of well-qualified strong 19 management in the utilities, so they outlined some principles 20 in this area of developing management personnel--first, that 21 there is a thought-out approach or program to select and 22 develop individuals.

23 Second, that the practices reflect the fact that 24 work and plant operations provides a broad, integrated view of 25 plant activities needed by nuclear line managers.

HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4888

i 33 1 Third, that promotion and management development

() 2 prcetices seek a balance between career operations individuals 3 and othors who obtain operating experience as a part of their 4 career development, and that the, that is supposed to be plant 5 manager or assistant plant manager in the line organization 6 holds or has held an SRO license or has been certified for the L

7 equivalent SRO knowledge and has extensive nuclear power plant 8 experience, preferably in the operationa department.

9 There have been attempts over the years by industry 10 committees, ANS committees, to define what characteristics 1^

11 should be in plant managers, 12 The fact that this committee in their principles 13 adopted one key element I think is significant in the

(

14 development of plant managers.

15 HR. WARD: I find that one interesting in that the 16 last one, as you have said, the plant manager should hold or 17 has held or have held an SRO license. I know sometimes I 18 think there has been, well, some toying with the requirement 19 to insist that the plant manager, for example, hold an active 20 license. I have been concerned whether that is really 21 appropriate use of the plant manager's time and how do you, I 22 mean what is, what do you think about that?

23 HR. McCOY: I don't think there is a clear consensus 24 among the nuclear executives and the plant managers for that 25 matter. I have heard the argument made on both sides.

HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4888

34 1 One, first, let me say that I nave never heard the

<s

( 2 argument that the plant manager should not have the knowledge ,

3 required of an SRO, so put that behind us, but the argument is 4 should he maintain an active license er should he have had 5 that training in his development?

6 And tLe argument in favor of maintaining the license 7 primarily relates to staying active in the, in the continuing 8 training program for operators, and maintaining a close 9 relationship with the operators through direct involvement in 10 the training programs. That's the chief benefit that the 11 proponents of that idea see, and some plants, as you know, do l

12 that whether they have the commitment in their license to do

{g 13 that or not.

14 The argument against it is that, is the commitment 15 and time that it takes from the plant manager, and some 16 executives and plant managers feel that that time diverts some 17 of the attention from the plant manager that he should be 18 diverting or should be directing toward other matters, so [

19 that's the pros and cons, and Joe, do you want to give us any 20 insight?

21 HR. COLVI!i: We did take a pretty strong position in 22 the development of the principles. It was reflected in the 23 principals themselves and not on this particular slide, but 24 that had to do with the, either the operations superintendent 25 or his assistant had to hold an active SRO license on that l HERITAGE REPORTIllG Colf?AliY -- (202)628-4888

i 35 1 plant, so while we didn't take the position we thought it was,  !

() 2 as Ken expressed, counter to the safety, in many ways to get 3 the plant manager to maintain active license, especially with i

4 the current requirements for his time, he would, he would 5 focus on that, and leave some other very important things to, l 6 to wait, and so we took that and put that position, that 7 requirement, on the operations superintendent, operation ,

t 8 manager, middle manager. Depends on what the title is, and he 9 had to hold active SRO license and also the individual had 4 l 10 extensive experience preferably as a shift supervisor.

11 Now those are steps that are beyond the current f 12 requirement, even the '87 version of ANS 3.1, that they really  ;

{} 13 wanted to try to emphasize the need to have that individual 14 who is responsible for the operations directly with that type i 15 of expertise and background.

16 CHAIRMAN REMICK: You used operations superintendent

[

17 as somebody who is over the shift supervisor?

18 HR. COLVIN: That is correct. It depends on the ,

19 organizational structure within each plant.  ;

20 MR. WYLIE: There are some sites that have a site  !

21 director and then they have individual plant managers with f i

22 each unit. How does this apply to the site director?

23 HR. McCOY: Site director should have this same 24 requirement. I don't think--

4 O 25 HR. WYLIE: As the plant manager? i HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4888 {

e 36

• 1 MR. McCOY: Yes.

2' MR. WYLIE: It is a natter of semantics I guess. [

i 3 MR. McCOY: Yes. ,

4 DR. LEWIS: Could I be the devil's advocate? God j i

5 put the devil on earth for some reason, j 6 On this question of whether the plant manager should  ;

7 have even a former SRO license, because that means that plant [

8 managers are drawn from a specific pool, they are drawn from  :

9 people who have come up through the operations area of the l i

10 plant. The operations manager has to have an active license j t

P 11 as you say, and I wonder whether in fact by requiring that the i 12 plant manager have come up through the operator ranks doesn't

() 13 unnee,essarily restrict his perspective?

14 I will give you an example. The FAA, one of the l

?

15 fundamental problems in the FAA is that the top management is i i

16 made up of only, almost entirely of former air traffic j I

17 controllers, and they have the specific perspective of an air 18 traffic controller. They don't have the larger picture and t

19 there is more to running the organization than being able to 20 control traffic.

21 Did this consideration come up? l 22 HR. COLVIN: Yes, sir, it did. In fact, if I could 23 point to the slide, we really looked at whether the plant 24 manager either held or has held an SRO license or has been t

25 certified for equivalent knowledge. j i

L HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4888  ;

i 37  :

r 1 In many cases, if you looked at'the plant managers j

)( ) 2 out there today, many have come from other professions. A lot f 3 from the Navy nuclear program, that type of a level, and they 4 have then gone through a process of certification which is not-

)

5 the same as having come up through the operator ranks, and yet {

I 6 it provides some basic plant operational knowledge from the i

7 perspective of the SRO through that certification process.

8 HR. HICHELSON: Is that a formal process, NRC 9 certification, or is that a utility process?

10 CHAIRMAN REMICK: Utility certification anymore.

{

11 HR. HICHELSON: There is nothing new at !!RC . L 12 HR. COLVIN: Not anymore; I believe that's the case. i

{} 13 It used to be certification was from the NRC.

14 HR. MICHELSON: Certificatica is a l t

15 utility-by-utility process? I t

16 CHAIRMAN REMICK: Usually means they have gone i I

17 through the training program but not set for the licensing f 18 exam; everything up to the licensing exam. l i

19 HR. HICHELSON: Oone through the simulator training,  !

{

20 all that sort, but didn't actually get a license? l 21 HR. McCOY: The utilities each have--

[

22 DR. LEWIS: I wonder if that is necessary. ,

23 HR. HICHCLSON: I just wanted clarificatien.

24 CHAIRMAN REMICK: That doesn't say was there is a j l

25 limitation. A number of these people could have been the i

! l i )

! I HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (2021628-4888

38 1 assistant SROs but not have been action operator. Could have

/ i

()_

2 -gone and have a degree. It doesn't mean they have spent most 3 of their life as a plant operator, and so forth. It can 4 be--and they can have other experience like being a 5 maintenance manager and things like that, or it'doesn't 6 necessarily limit their capability.

7 DR. LEWIS: It does limit--I don't want to argue the 8 point, but it does limit them. I always think of analogies 9 and I wonder whether a practice requires that the manager of 10 an airline have been, have passed the exam for an air 11 transport pilnt or be ready to pass, if that makes any sense, 12 because the job is a different job, and you know--

() 13 MR. WARD: No. I think you have missed what they 14 have said.

15 DR. LEWIS: That may well be.

16 MR. WARD: This would mean that the operations 17 manager for an airline didn't necessarily have to be an 18 ex-pilot, but he had to go through--the analogy doesn't work 19 real well, but he had to go through some sort of pilot 20 training, a one-shot ad hoc effort, not a career as a pilot.

21- DR. LEWIS: No, no. In this case I have 22 acknowledged the operation manager certainly should. I am 23 just wondering about the plant manager.

'"T 24 MR. McCOY: Let me try and address that. It is CJ 25 ~ addressed in Zack's speech again a little bit, and there has HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4888

39 1~ been a lot of discussion about it, but clearly most of the t'

(s) 2 discussion that I have had recognized, or which utility 3 executives recognizes that a balance is needed, that you need 4 within the organization that runs the plant a balance of 5 engineering experienced people, people who are very familiar 6 with the design, and people who are very familiar with the 7 details of'the plant who have come up through operations and 8 maintenance, et cetera, and tne strongest group is a balance 9 of those two, but if you have someone that comes in from the 10 design area, let's say he has been a reactor engfineer working 11 with fuels and that sort of thing, but has the managt: ment 12 potential and the drive to move in that direction, then what 13 this says is that you should put him through an SRO training

{~}

14 program before he moves into one of those line management 15 positions, so that in addition to his technical expertise, he 16 has sufficient knowledge, not the knowledge that a man who has 17 come up through the operations area would have the details, 18 but he has enough knowledge of the operating requirements and 19 the environment the operators operate under to make decisions, 20 balanced decisions, on the entire operation, so that's the 21 thought.

22 DR. LEWIS: It is, indeed the requirement is that he 23 have sufficient knowledge. How can you I quarrel with that?

g-) 24 But that isn't what it says. It says he has to have or have

\.)

25 had an SRO license.

HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4888

]!" ' ' .l 40 p.

1- MR. WARD: Read'the rest-of it.

- 2 MR.'McCOY: Or equivalent'SRO' knowledge..

13 :DR.tLEWIS: Or certified for equivalent knowledge; I 4 just wonder-whether'all the button' pushing'information is bb' , 5- essential to be~a plant manager.-

6 MR. WARD: What is'the investment of time here? The s

7 . fellow you described who came'from. engineering, how many.

8 . months, weeks, years, has he spent to fulfi.1, to get that?

9- MR. McCOY: Typically takes six months to a year.

10 MR. WARD: Full-time?

11 :MR. McCOY: Yes.

12 DR. LEWIS: That's a big expenditure.

() 13 MR. WYLIE: Sometime during his career?

14 MR. McCOY: Right.

15- MR. WYLIE: Could have been very early in his 16' career.

L 17 MR. WARD: If you bring someone in from let's say an 18 engineering organization in the utility, and you want to, your 19 intent is to make him a plant manager, before you can do that,

~ 20 you have to give him six months to a year training in this 21 program. So that's--

22 DR. LEWIS: That's what they are saying. ,

23 CHAIRMAN REMICK: He ought to know something about i

j 24 the plant I think. I have no problem with that, if he is l

l 25 going to manage the plant. Just prevent the MBAs from coming l

""^"v E.- """^ " **" ""o c -- <202 a28-4888

41 .

i 1 in!

7_,,

k) 2 DR. LEWIS: You are changing. When I raise the 3 question you say he has got to know something about the plant.

4 Of course; I don't disagree with that. The question is 5 whether he has to know which knob to turn, which button to 6 push, which sequence to follow? He has got people under him 7 who are supposed to know that.

8 MR. Me:0Y: That is not what the SRO certification 9 is.

10 MR. MICHELSON: He got the simulator, the bit, so he 11 has got'to know about pushing buttons.

12 MR. McCOY: Let's go back and talk about this one a f1 a

13 minute. I think you are getting into an important area that 14 may represent a little misconception.

15 The SRO training program specifically is not aimed 16 as how you twist the knobs, how you operate the valves out in l

17 the plant. That is, that is aimed primarily at understanding l

18 the basis for the limits on the plant. It is aimed at being 19 able to direct the operation of the overall plant from the l

20 control room to ensure you stay within safe limits and so i

1 21 forth.

22 Now a part of that does involve going through ,

23 transients in the simulator and being familiar with what the

24 response of the plant is, but it is not aimed at learning to

}

25 know--in fact, I say as Forrest referred to an instant SRO HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4888

m 42 1 which is the common name used for engineers who go through the

(> 2 SRO program, typically they don't know a lot that an operator 3 who has come up through the plant knows about, for instance, 4 how you reset turbine trips out in the plant, and things of 5 that nature. And they are not expected to know all of those 6 details. So there is a difference, but I think we made the 7 point on that.

8 Let me move on. We are going to run out of time 9 here.

10 (Slide) 11 MR. McCOY: Going on with the development 12 principles, they recognize that some training in

(~,)

( 13 personnel-related skills, interpersonal skills, was desirable, 14 that, that one of the key elements in developing good, strong 15 leaders is effective role models, and that that should be 16 recognized by management and taken advantage of, that 17 individuals who show potential for growth should be.given 18 opportunities to work with people who have been especially 19 successful as a role model, and that selected personnel are 20 provided opportunities in a variety of functional areas, and I 21 think this might partially address the subject that was raised 22 earlier, that there is an opportunity its, that opportunities 23 are given for individuals who have a particular disciplined

(} 24 background to broaden themselves if they came up in 25 engineering, to get some experience in operations, vice-versa.

i HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4888

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

r

, 43'

.c l -(Slide) 2: HR. McCOY: Moving on to the last area in these 3 ' principles,; managing the operations department personnel, 4 before I-go into that, let me say that originally'the' concept-5 in Zack's speech was that this committee 'would dev'elop this 6 set of principles.for managing operations personnel.

7 When'the ad hoc commitiee got together and started'

'8 working on, on this, they said the problem is bigger-than just 4

9 the operations personnel, and so the decision was made to make 10 this, these principles not only apply to managing operations 11 personnel, but to the other personnel in the nuclear

-12 organization, including maintenance, tec'hnical and  ?

13 ' engineering, and if you look at the bottom of the page, it (f  ;

14 shows that those sections are coming, that they will be r

15 provided before the end of the year. The~one example that we 16' have right now and the one that is applicable to the subject 17 under discussion this morning, is. managing operations 18 department personnel, but there will be others somewhere.

I l

19 I don't think I will go through these. These are j

20 topics ACRS has discussed in the past. I know when Glenn Reed l

21 was a member, I remember much discussion about the importance lp 22 of screening and selecting operators, and so I think he would l,

[i I

23 be happy to see this as a principle adopted.  ;

24 There is some discussion here about the degree which a( )

25 I thought you might find interesting in the principles. There i

r HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4888 i

. . ,m. . ._ __ _ .. ._ . _ . ._ ..

y

44. l S'O . .

q. 1^ is an acknowledgement.that while a college degree in a l I" 2 ^ technical field is not a.necessary requirement.-for operations 3' positions, operators with Bachelors Degrees in technical 4 subjects have a greater likelihood of promotion and success in f; g

~ ' '

5 management positions. This'is a clear statement by utility 6 management that there is an advantage to having within your.

7 operations department some mix of people with degrees. And 8 again, it'goes back to the. issue of having different

't 9 viewpoints, different backgrounds, et cetera.

10. MR. WARD: I find that one is sort of a, I don't ,

-11 know, maybe it is just how it is written, but it is sort of 12 non-parallel with the other statements of principle. Let's T

'() 13 see.

14 MR. McCOY: There has been so 'Auch discussion of 15 that issue over the years, that it may, it may not, it may 16 have been developed partially as a result of some of the

, 17 discussion and pressure.

18 Joe, could you comment,on that?  ;

19 MR. COLVIN: Well, I think you are right, ken. We I

20 had a tremendous amount of discussion as to whether operators

! 21 ought to have that or ought not to have a degree, and we, l 22 although we kept coming back to that question many times, it i

23 war not the commission of that ad hoc committee to determine 24 that, but rather to make some recommendations in there.

}

25 What we did try to weave into that was we tried to HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4888

45 1 get into that the concept that in reality, if you have got a

,-)\

(_ 2 degree, you are going to move up in management, that the 3 people that have those degrees are probably going to have a 4 better success in moving up through the manager chain from, up l 5 through the. plant, and therefore in the corporate, than those l 6 without, and at some point in time, the degree is going to I.

l 7 become a necessary requirement in a career path. That was 8 more this recognition.

9 We could not come to any, we did not even attempt to 10 kind of come to any conclusions, direct conclusions as to 11 whether or not a degree was required or not required. This 12 has been studied many times, and it is not the scope of this

() 13 Committee.

14 CHAIRMAN REMICK: If you read the rest of it--

15 MR. McCOY: That is what I was going to say. We 16 only took a key sentence out of this, but if you, you refer to 17 item C3, which has the, more of the discussion, it puts it in 18 perspective, and I would suggest you just read that.

19 DR. LEWIS: I am amused by the emphasis on the 20 Bachelors Degree. That means that Ph.D. is a handicap?

21 MR. WARD: It is for most things!

22 DR. LEWIS: I could tell you a story about the Air 23 Force later. I just wonder whether it wouldn't have bypassed 24 the whole thing by saying clearly people with more education 25 have a better chance to move up the management ladder, which I

HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4888

g. - - -

46

~

1- is-the way it$reallyfis? i

~2 MR. McCOY: I think that's a-good point.

3 MR. MICHELSON: To-the'Batchelor level; beyond that,

'4 I'm not sure that staterdent is true.

5 DR. LEWIS: 'I will tell you the Air Force' story. I-once chaired an Air Force-committee on officer selection, and

'7 one of the questions I asked early on was to look at the 8 record and find out whether having a Ph.D. was correlated or 9 anti-correlated to moving the crucial step from full colonel

-10 to getting your first star, and it turned out for.many years Lil it was anti-correlated, but the Air Force made a deliberate 12 decision at one point to correlate it. Then it became better.

13' MR. WARD: That is after the first one got in?

-( )-  ;

14 DR. LEWIS: Let's solve the nuclear problem. Then i 15 we will handle the Air Force.

'16 MR. WARD: I guess--let's see. These are supposed k

l 17 to be principles, I mean advice to management on principles it 18 should use.

19 MR. McCOY: The way this is set, .and again if you 20 refer back to the letter that transmitted these principles,  ;

.21 this, that letter talks about how these principles should be ,

22 used, and you may want to see that, but go ahead.

23 MR. WARD: Well, I guess my--it says operators with

(} 24 Bachelors Degrees have a greater likelihood of promotion. I 25 mean I can't tell whether that is just sort of e statement of f HERITAGE REP-2 TING COMPANY -- (202)628-4888

47 1 a natural truth, or whether what you are saying is that

(_) 2 management should favor for promotion operators who have 3 degrees in technical subjects.

4 MR. McCOY: I think maybe we are so close to that 5 issue that we didn't realize it could be read two ways, but 6 what was intended clearly was that it was a statement of fact 7 that operators who have degrees will, will have an enhanced 8 chance of moving up in management, and generally will be 9 better prepared for that, the idea being that if the 10 executives through their policies and practices make that 11 known to people, it will encourage the operator community to 12 take advantage of the opportunities which are being encouraged

() 13 here for operators to get more education, so that was the 14 purpose of it.

15 MR. WARD: So the principle is that management 16 should make known to operators that management believes that c 17 degree is essential or important for promotion. They are 18 advised to be behave accordingly.

19 HR. COLVIN: I was going to interject one comment.

20 I agree with you totally, but the real principle of this, of 21 this item No. 3, starts in the second sentence. I mean we led 22 into it, kind of came in from the back door per se, but the 23 principle is management practices assure that appropriate

/~T 24 numbers of personnel with degrees or potential to acquire O

25 those degrees are selected for operations positions. I HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4888 L

48 1 mean--and we did that kind of if you want coming in the back

) 2 way, but that's really the focus of that whole, whole thing.

3 MR. McCOY: Moving on--which I am not sure how I.

4 MR. WARD: I am not sure how I understand that. It 5 sounds like management is saying when you don't Lave a degree, 6 you just don't have a career here in management.

7 MR. McCOY: That wasn't the intent.

8 MR. WYLIE: It sounds that way, the way I read it.

9 CHAIRMAN REMICK: I see it as a realization that if, 10 well, one, it is good to have people with operation experience 11 go into upper management. The chances of them following that 12 career path are greater if they have a higher education.

f~)

J 13 Therefore, management in hiring people should have appropriate 14 application of pe'ople that either have degrees or have 15 potentia?. of getting additional education, so you have--

16 that's how I read it.

17 MR. COLVIN: One of the discussion items we had, we 18 can look at the analogy with the airline industry. Now what 19 are the requirements for pilots to have degrees? If you look 20 at that, they are, most companies don't have a requirement. I 21 know we checked Delta. At the time Delta had no requirement 22 that even a captain on a 747 be degreed, but if you looked at 23 the community--

{ 24 DR. LEWIS: You shouldn't have chosen Delta these 25 days!

HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4888

w 49 1 MR. WARD: Or 7471 2 MR. COLVIN: But if you looked at that, that 3 community, typically some 90 or plus percent of the people who 4 were in those positions had degrees.

5 If we look at the operator community, and the 6 industry, I think we find just the opposite. Probably at the 7 opposite end of the spectrum, so we think that there ought to 8 be programs in place for utilities to encourage degree for 9 their people, provide the opportunity and appropriate 10 recognition of that, and so over time, we think that we are 11 going to achieve a more people advanced education in some 12 manner in that community and that's going to enhance the

. (<m_j 13 professionalism of the community, and the ability to operate 14 properly, so it is not something that is a direct correlation 15 one for one. We think through encouragement we can build that 16 type of educational background experience.

17 DR. LEWIS: But in the case of pilots, it isn't so 18 much that the degree which of course can be in anything, 19 contributes to their ability to perform as a pilot. It is 20 that the pilot community is drawn out of a cut of society that 21 typically has gone to college and has a degree, and that's 22 really what you are aiming for. Degree is really a symptom of ;

23 what cut of society you are taking it from, and you want to 24 aim for that cut, and I am not so sure that tie emphasis on

,}

25 the symbolism, namely, the degree, is necessari.'y appropriate.

l l

! HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4888 l

50 1 You can mistake cause for quality.

/ ~ '\

~( l' 2 MR. COLVIN: Yes, sir.

3 MR. McCOY: Dr. Remick, I have used my time, and I 4- really am at the last slide. I will let you control how much 5 discussion.

6 CHAIRMAN REMICK: Please proceed. We have time.

7 MR. McCOY: Finishing up, there were two other 8 elements here. One was a recognition that line management up 9 to and including the senior manager on the site should be 10 involved in all phases of training qualification and 11 requalification, simulator pregrams, to ensure that operators 12 are properly qualified to perform their tasks.

(). 13 Without trying to put words into the thinking that 14 went on here, let me just say that that's a recognition that 15 the, that the operator crew in each station plays a key role 16 in the safety of the units by being properly trained and being 17 able to deal with transients and unexpected conditions, and by 18 actively being involved in the training and the qualification 19 and simulator programs, the line management gets a clear 20 appreciation of how well their crews can perform on that vital 21 safety function, and the crews understand that line management 22 realizes that that's important, so that's where tnat one comes 23 from.

24 MR. MICHELSON: It is not very clear whether 25 actively, which is not the word used in the document, is HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4888

51 1 sufficiently, what that really means. What do you mean _ y-

   - (,)      2    sufficient?  You mean up should be attending the classes or 3    does it mean you should make sure that classes are being held, 4    or audited once in a while to see if everybody is there?                                         Some 5    regulatory words are about as good as that one.

6 MR. McCOY: Let me try and answer that from the way 7 we are' approach it at INPO, and I am speaking from INPO's role 8 in this right now. 9 We specifically don't try and define exactly how 10 each manager should do this, but when we examine crews, and 11 we, we at INPO now look at each crew or look at the sampling 12 of the crews at each point in the simulator, and when we do () 13 that, if the crews have problems, we go back to the line 14 management and ask why have you allowed these problems to 15 develop? 16 We expect, our expectation is that the line 17 management is sufficiently involved to ensure that the 18 operators are trained and that they can handle the plant well 19 in the simulator, and so different managers I would submit 20 have different ways of gaining that appreciation. 21 MR. MICHELSON: I think you are just trying to say 22 they should give sufficient attention to these matters to be 23 sure they are being carried out properly. 24 MR. McCOY: That's the thrust of it. 25 CHAIRMAN REMICK: There has been a change that I 1< HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4888

.o 52 1 have observed. It is not just the training people observing (m) 2 people at the' simulator. You now do have plant managers. You 3 do have some vice presidents that come and observe that, the 4 crews at simulator, also which I think is a real improvement. 5 MR. MICHELSON: Yep. 6 MR. McCOY: And finally, that-- 7 MR. WARD: That is just when members of the INPO

                    .8                   accreditation board are on site?!

9 MR. McCOY: Finally, that management policies and 10 practices ensure that the person responsible for the plant 11 after hours, that is in effect the person who acts for the 12 plant manager, whether this is the shift manager, shift {} 13 engineer or shift supervisor, whatever the title is, that this 14 person is selected keeping in mind the great responsibility 15 that the person assumes, and I think the important thing with 16 this was a clear recognition and statement by the utility 17 management of the responsibility and the importance of that 18 job. 19 That concludes my presentation, and I would, and Joe 20 would also be available for any questions, discussions, that 21 you might have. 22 CHAIRMAN REMICK: Make sure we understand now. The 23 code for professional conduct is something that INPO is asking 24 each of the utilities to have established by June or July? O-s 25 MR. COLVIN: July. HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4888

A 53 1 CHAIRMAN REMICK: And send copies to INPO at that 7 1__) 2 time, and have people committed to, to that, or is it just 3 expected they will be that doing that? 4 MR. COLVIN: They want a commitment in the sense of 5 NUMARC commitment taken to a vote, and that in that sense, but 6 the CEOs in the CEO conference committed in that sense to do 7 that, and I'm sure they will. 8 MR. McCOY: We are tracking those and we will follow 9 up. There may be some difficulties in this area. Since, 10 since the code is applicable to all operators at the station, 11 in some cases, this gets into bargaining unit agreements. 12 Some of the representatives of the bargaining units have taken () 13 a position that this code affects work conditions, and so they 14 want to get into negotiations, so there may be some problems 15 along that line, particularly utilities. I just point that 16 out. 17 CHAIRMAN REMICK: On the principles then of 18 management philosophy to enhance professionalism, there is a 19 case where a draft has gone out, it is incomplete because it 20 doesn't include maintenance and a couple other areas, but this 21 has gone out for comment with a request that people get back 22 by August, is that correct? 23 MR. McCOY: Not exactly; the part of the document

  /~N 24   that is out is not a draft. That portion is complete as we

(_) 25 see it now, and the letter that transmitted that requested HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4888

54 1 that the CEO personally have his policies and practices 7 !, j 2 reviewed to see that these principles have been incorporated, 3 and to report back that he has done that by August, so it is a 4 little further along than just the draft stage. 5 CHAIRMAN REMICK: Okay. So you are not, you are not 6 looking then or INPO is not looking for comments on.this as a 7 draft? It is have they reviewed their procedures, 8 administrative procedures and policies and so forth, to have 9 incorporated, or do you expect them to incorporate these 10 principles? 11 MR. McCOY: We expect them to incorporate it, and 12 the report back to the other CEOs at the workshop, I'm not /~T 13 quite sure what form that will take, but there will be V 14 discussion of the status of the utilities in incorporating 15 those, and perhaps if particularly utilities have run into 16 difficulty or hard spots, those things may be discussed with 17 the idea of developing solutions from the interchange of ideas 18 on how to incorporate them, but the thought is that the next 19 CEO workshop will focus on how successful the utilities have 20 been in implementing these practices. 21 MR. WEST: Do you expect any further iterations of 22 these management principles? 23 MR. McCOY: Only, at the present time, only the 24 additional sections that matched operator section at the end; 25 these are the sections in engineering, technical, and l l HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4888 (

                                                               '55 1 maintenance personnel. That's not to say that down the road

(_/ 2 somewhere, it may not be decided that a revision to these is 3 necessary, but at the present time, I have heard no discussion 4 about a revision. 5 MR.-WEST: Those that you meant at the, toward the 6 end that aren't correctly developed, do you expect those by l l 7 the next CEO conference? l l 8 MR. McCOY: Yes. The Committee is working on those 9 now. Drafts have been sent out for all of those, and is there 10 a target date, Joe, that you know for those? 11 MR. COLVIN: We have got some target dates on each 12 individual draft, but I think we are working to completion () 13 prior to the CEO conference in time to support that and that 14 is consistent. Really we are trying to shoot for August. I 15 mean that, at the same time that we get the feedback from the 16 industry what we need to do is determine, as Ken points out, 17 what is on the agenda for the CEO conference. That's a major 18 element, as to what approach we take, what problems are 19 necessary to be discussed, what approaches and so on, so I 20 think the August timeframe is kind of where we are all 21 focusing on and in time to make those decisions prior to the 22 November conference. 23 CHAIRMAN REMICK: Please, Carl? 24 MR. MICHELSON: I wanted to ask the general 25 question--I get a little confused here. The title of the HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4888

i 56 1 document is apparently principles for improving

(,,) 2 professionalism of personnel, which kind of to me meana 3 ganerally the rank and file, the operator, and I was first 4 thinking we were going to hear about how to improve the 5 professionalism of operators. This is one mechanism, through 6 improving the professionalism of management, but these are all 7 management guidelines. 8 CHAIRMAN REMICK: But the company, the code, of 9 course, is for operators. 10 MR. MICHELSON: I don't find anything here. There 11 is a whole lot of other ways of improving professionalism of 12 operators other than through professionalism of the managers. (} 13 Are they there somewhere or is that being--I might have missed 14 it when I was out. I don't know. 15 MR. McCOY: Let me state what the strategy was here. 16 The strateg1 was to first establish an environment that was 17 conducive to the developing professionalism and professional 18 conduct, and that, that is the attempt to establish that 19 environment. 20 MR. MICHELSON: Is there a broader program that I 21 don't see yet that's working on the improving the 22 professionalism through other mechanisms on the part of the 23 rank and file personnel? 24 MR. McCOY: Right. Now that's the bottom up 25 approach, and the first step of that was to get this group of HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4888

57 1 SRos representing all plants in the United States together to '( ) 2 say what are the key principles that should be e.dopted from 3 the bottom up as agreed upon, expected conduct of a 4 professionalism operator, and that was the, the elements that 5 I discussed first. That was what they agreed upon, and the 6 idea of adopting those in each utility will gain bottom up 7 peer acceptance of what is expected. 8 MR. MICHELSON: That must have been the part I 9 missed. 10 CHAIRMAN REMICK: The operators are preparing codes 11 at each utility which they expect to have in place with the 12 exception of some that might have some--

/'  13           MR. MICHELSON:    This is one eleinent of the overall :

V] 14 program? 15 CHAIRMAN REMICK: There is the bottom up operators 16 establishing their own code, and then the top down management 17 environment. 18 MR. MICHELSON: It was covered in one of the 19 handouts? 20 MR. McCOY: Yes. And there is a letter that 21 transmits the results of that workshop there. 22 MR. MICHELSON: Are there going to be eventually 23 some kind of principles formalized like this for that aspect 24 of it? 25 CHAIRMAN REMICK: They mention that INPO will HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4888

58 1 compile all the individual ones with the possibility down the ( ). 2 road that maybe there should be a national code, but no 3 commitment to that. 4 MR. MICHELSON: I remember the words about a

5. national code. I didn't realize--

6 CHAIRMAN REMICK: If either of you differ with my 7 summary of what you said, please express it. 8 MR. MICHELSON: I have got it. 9 MR. McCOY: There is also a, an intention that after 10 the other sections come out that hava to do with engineers, 11 maintenance and technical personnel, that there will be a 12 bottom up effort in those areas to say what is expected in (} 13 those' disciplines similar to what is going on with the 14 operator, but the subject today was specifically for operators 15 of the-- 16 MR. MICHELSON: Some of the breakdowns that we have 17 experienced thus far have been indicative of both a problem 18 with the operators themselves and with the management, and 19 this will only-- 20 HR. WEST: I have one final question. Given these 21 two different approaches that you have going on, are you 22 expecting at the utility plant level any offic?.a1 endorsement 23 of what you finally come up with in terms of operator codes, (g 24 what you finally come up with in terms of management U 25 principles? HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4888

i 59 ) l 1 MR. McCOY: Yes. In fact, let me make that

)    2 distinction. These are not INFO's principles and they are not 3 INPO's codes. They are each utility's principles and each 4 utility's codes.

5 'The way that that is going about is that there was 6 an industry group that developed, the ad hoc group that 7 developed the principles for management, and a letter that 8 transmitted those said for each utility to review their own 9 policies and practices, and incorporate those in the manner 10 that they saw fit. 11 On the other side, we held a workshop to provide a 12 consensus of what all of the operators thought should be in a {} 13 code, but then each utility, their group of operators is 14 developing and adopting their own code, so there may be slight 15 differences from utilities to utilities. 16 MR. COLVIN: Plant to plant or even within the same , 17 utility there may be a code difference. 18 MR. McCOY: As I mentioned, down the road there may 19 be, the industry may decide that it is beneficial to cry and 20 standardize that in some manner, but that's, that's on the 21 horizon. 22 CHAIRMAN REMICK: Let me raise a question with 23 either one of you if you care to make a comment. You may not 24 but, the next thing we are going to do is consider a, a 25 proposed Commission policy statement on professional conduct HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)623-4888

60 1 of nuclear power plant operators. 73 (_) 2 Do either from the viewpoint of INPO or NUMARC you 3 have any views of what a policy statement on setting of 4 professional conduct standards or statements on the 5 professional conduct, would that have any kind of impact on 6 the history effort? 7 MR. McCOY: I will let Joe address that. 8 MR. COLVIN: Ken and I kind of talked about that 9 this morning, and in a sense neither of us have had the 10 opportunity to look at what the staff is proposing. I think 11 it is really difficult to comment. 12 I guess we, in response to your question, Forrest, (~) v 13 we would encourage the staff and ACRS to look at what we have 14 got going in the industry, and not try to put forth something 15 that is going to impact that in negative sense, and it may 16 well be that the staff's proposal interfaces well with the 17 other activities going on. I just don't think we can assess 18 that at the present time. We would look forward to work with 19 the staff and certainly with ACRS to comment on that at some 20 future time, but since we haven't seen it yet, it is difficult 21 to determine. 22 CHAIRMAN REMICK: Any other questions? Chris? 23 MR. GIMMY: I would like to make a comment. This is 24 Chris Gimmy, and I want to briefly sum up what Carlyle 25 Michelson said. This is an awfully high-level document to me, HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4888

61 1 and I'm speaking of experience as a shift supervisor who (/ 2 worked shift for five years. 3 This would not ss1~. on shift. Most, a lot of them 4 would have trouble understanding it. 5 In checking through it here, a suggested title for ) l 6 this thing might be principles for enhancing the 7 professionalism of management because three fourths of the 8 items by count, three fourths of the items start with the word 9 management or have management as a second word. 10 CHAIRMAN REMICK: I think that is the intent. 11 MR. GIMMY: That's the intent, but I am getting to 4 12 my point. Somewhere on shift you need a clear, plain language () 13 statement that says no sleeping, ao walking way from the post 14 without being relieved, no playing radios, no cooking at the 15 console, no football pools, no staying on the phone to manage 16 your farm, et cetera, et cetera. , 17 Now maybe you don't like the no approach. I know 18 that is very negative and maybe there is a way to say that 19 positive, but you need to get it down to the things that are 20 happening and the things that are in the newspapers and the 21 things that are the problems, and if a guy comes around and 22 says hey, I have got the spread here on the Orioles' game, you i 23 want the other guy to say that is unprefessional. {} 24 DR. LEWIS: You picked the wrong team! We shouldn't be doing that. 25 MR. GIMMY: HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4888

62 1 MR. COLVIN: I was going to comment from my-- j _) 2 MR. GIMMY: That is from the bottom up. 3- MR. COLVIN: At INPO, I think we saw--I managed the 4 operations department at INPO from about 1981 until 1983. We 5 saw most utilities that had procedures in place, conduct of 6 operations procedures, that addressed many of the points that 7 you have mentioned. 8 And INPO on the other hand, has a conduct of 9 operations guideline, and it addresses again some of the same 10 points that the utilities should utilize in that. I just 11 don't think that we have that consistency throughout every 12 plant that everyone has some policy that prohibits all those (~') 13 items. v 14 MR. GIMMY: Bottom up effort, f rora the bottom up 15 effort, that a number of operators could agree on a list of 16 these things, and it may not be all inclusive, but certainly a 17 list everybody says no sleeping at the post, I can agree with 18 that. 19 DR. LEWIS: You shouldn't have to write that down, 20 for God's sake. 21 MR. McCOY: Let me comment on that. From having sat 22 through a number of the situation and listened to the SROS, 23 what we did in this workshop, the SROs on several occasions 24 broke into small groups and went and discussed what should be 25 in the code. Then they would come back and hear more HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4888

63 1 discussion and so forth. (,) 2 One_of the things that went on there was a lot of 3 this discussion, should we have specific rules or should we 4 have broad statements that say what the intent is? And if I 5 interpreted their thinking right, the reason they arrived at 6 those seven kind of overall broad things, they said from their 7 point of view. it is impossible to, to anticipate every 8 challenge that will be put to an operator on what his conduct 9 should be, et cetera, and we need to start with establishing 10 what are the broad expectations, and then if there are 11 specific rules that are in their procedures or whatever, then 12 they fall within that, but it kind of relates to what Forrest 13 indicated earlier, that in this area, many times things are (J~) 14 gray. They are not black and white, you know. Is it okay to, 15 to have a football pool in the plant? You know, that some 16 people might say, yes, and some people might say no, but it 17 may be a gray area. 18 The idea is does it interfere with the attention of 19 the operators to their job, the basic principle? And that's 20 where you go back to make the decision. And using the idea of 21 case studies to address those kinds of things, in my mind, 22 establishes the right thinking in the shift supervisors in the 23 station. That is just a thought on that, but it is a good 24 point. 25 CHAIRMAN REMICK: In fact it is interesting because HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4888

1 1 i 64

• l 1 come up when the staff was on, in Appendix B to the package

   ;7 s)  2 that went to Pat Mcdonald having to do with the code, there is 3 an attachment. It says in philosophy, the code should not be 4 a list of do's and don'ts, but rather a statement described as 5 attributes and performance standards expected of a 6 professional operator.

7 We hear from the staff, theirs is more do's and 8 don'ts,-thou shalt not do this or that. It's a different 9 philosophy in what is being encouraged in the two approaches. 10 One is overall. 11 HR. GIMMY: I was just making the point that 12 if--this is an excellent management document. Don't get me () 13 wrong, but I don't think it would sell good on shift. I don't i. 14 think that anyone would see himself in here. 15 CHAIRMAN REMICK: It is not intended to. 16 MR. GIMMY: The fellcw that is on the phone too much I 17 on private business would not see himself in here. 18 CHAIRMAN REMICK: It does address the question we 19 keep saying quality is, muut be throughout the organization, 20 and the emphasis on safety must be all the way. 21 Professionslism must start at the top. It is consistent with 22 that, and in as much as it is addressing management. The code 23 is to address what the operators feel should be the question. (} 24 MR. MICHELSON: I think we are just faulting the ! 25 title. l HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4888 ,

65 1 MR. WYLIE: There is nothing wrong. () 2 MR. MICHELSON: But part of it is, you know, this 3 isn't helping the guy at the bottom. 4 MR. GIMMY: As long as you understand the two 5 approaches, from the top, the bottom; this is clearly at the 6 top. At the bottom one was earlier. 7 MR. WYLIE: I mean I disagree, Carl. What, as I 8 understand it, and it has been said several times, that what 9 this is for is to guide management in the establishing the or 10 creating the environment for professionalism. I think it does 11 a very good job of that. I 12 HR. GIMMY: It does. 13 MR. MICHELS01: I am not quarreling with the

   }

14 document. I think the title is misleading. That's all. 15 That's a personal opinion. { 16 DR. LEWIS: What Forrest said is really very 17 important. The issue of principles versus lists of do's or 18 don'ts is extremely crucial, and when we get to the staff 19 proposal for Commission policy statement, and skimming through 20 it, I was appalled that the Nuclear Regulatory Commission 21 would issue a statement of policy saying that people shouldn't 22 sleep on the job. That's not a proper subject for statement 23 of policy at high level. And I will say that later. ' 24 MR. WYLIE: Just one other comment--we have visited O 25 several nuclear plants within the last six months or so, and i r I HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4888

66 1 in the control room, .they had some something similar to these (~T y) 2 codes and had them on the wall there. I got a copy one of 3 them. I'm sorry I didn't bring it, and t ey were very proud 4 of the fact that they had those. This is the operators. And 5 I think that the thing it does, it just reminds them of what

                                                      ~

6 they are trying to achieve, and they were very proud of that 7 fact. 8 DR. LEWIS: What will remind them much more is 9 people who adhere to these get promoted a little faster. 10 MR. WYLIE: Yes. 11 CHAIRMAN REMICK: Any other questions or comments 12 before we move on to the staff? () 13 MR. MICHELSON: You look at some of the codes of 14 ethics that have been produced for managers, there are a 15 numoer of elements in those codes that I don't think get 16 through in this document, but maybe, maybe it is built into it 17 and I just don't-- 18 MR. WYLIE: You mean for managers themselves? 19 MR. MICHELSON: Yes. Ethics in management; 20 presumably these are ethical managers and there are a number 21 of things you have to think about, but this is a little more 22 job oriented, focused on the job. I hope it ought to focus on 23 the fact we also have to have ethical managers. 24 CHAIRMAN REMICK: Any other comments or questions? 25 If not, Joe and Ken, we thank you very much. You are welcome HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4888

67 1 to stay on if.you wish. () 2 MR. COLVIN: We have another meeting. We appreciate I the offer, but thank you very.much. 4 CHAIRMAN REMICK: And although we are running 5 behind,-I suggest we continue on with now a presentation by 6- the staff, Garmon West. If staff cares to join us up at the 7 table up here, you are welcome to. 8 MR. WEST: While I am getting situated here, first 9 of all, I am Garmon West from the NRC staff. In particular, I 10 am with the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, the Division 11 of Licensee Performance and Quality Evaluation. And also with 12 me is our branch chief in human factors, Bill Regan to my far () 13 left at the table. 14 There was a slight change to the earlier handout t 15 that I passed out. For those of you that are at the table 16 that have received it already, I will simply make mention of 17 the change that will appear on the first page and the lest 18 page of my presentation. 19 For those of you that haven't received a handout at ( ! 20 all, you will certainly have the one that I will be speaking ! 21 from. l 22 I think it was particularly appropriate that we had 23 a chance to hear from the industry today, both NUMARC and , 24 1NPO, on the topics that I will also address in terms of what l 25 the Nuclear Regulatory Commission is proposing in this area. l HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4888

68 c 1 I am emphasize that the work that is currently underway is at I) 2 the proposed stage. We have' titled the policy statement 3 proposed Commission policy statement on the professional 4 conduct of nuclear power plant operators. ' 5 I will begin by providing some background on the 6 policy statement, and move from there to the broad objectives 7 of the policy statement, and then get into a few of the 8 particulars in trying to give you a description of the 9 proposed policy statement. 10 I would then make mention of, essentially a 11 reiteration of the things that you have already heard about 12 the industry efforts in this area by way of essentially () 13 mention, mentioning as a closing point to my presentation one l I 14 option, one alternative that the staff is currently 15 considering at this point in terms of where we should go from r 16 this point in this area.  ; l 17 Early on, there was some consideration of whether or 18 not the effort in this area should be in the form of a rule, 7 19 or a policy statement. The Commission back in April of 1987 I i 20 cleared up that point and made it rather clear that the staff 21 should move in the direction of a proposed policy statement 22 rather than pursuing a rule. [ L 23 In a similar fashion, around May or so, the 24 Commission's direction was reaffirmed, and subsequently the l 25 staff became involved in the efforts of putting together a l t HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4888

69 1 proposed policy statement right after the most recent NRC (} 2 reorganization. Our particular division picked up on this 3 effort and at that point, the proposed policy statement was in 4 a draft form. 5 We pursued the work and ultimately it culminated 6 into what is currently the proposed policy statement. That 7 was completed around February of this year. 8 Subsequent to that effort, the Commission provided a 9 staff requirements memo that brings us essentially to the 10 current point in time. That staff requirements memo 11 instructed the staff to provide the ACRS with a briefing, and 12 to obtain the comments and recommendations from the ACRS 13 Committee. In addition to that, we were directed to also 14 pursue obtaining the comments and recommendations of the 15 committed, the CRGR group. , 16 CHAIRHAN REMICK: What was the time of that? 17 MR. WEST: We received that about March. 18 CHAIRMAN REMICK: Of this year? 19 MR. WEST: Yes; relatively recently. Here again, to 20 get the comments and recommendations of ACRS and CRGR, take 21 the input from those two groups, modify if it was deemed 22 appropriate the post-policy statement, and send the resulting 23 effort forward for action by the Commission. 24 That's currently where we are, where we are at. The 25 proposed policy statement has essentially two objectives--one, HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4888

70 1 to address instances of what we considered operator () 2 inattentiveness, and I think this is the broad concern that we

     '3 ha'd in formulating this policy statement. That was our upper 4 level of concern, and unprofessional behavior.

5 Now certainly we did get into the particulars of 6 specific kinds of behaviors that we felt were inappropriate on 7 the part of the operator, inappropriate in terms of running a 8 shift and so forth, but again, one broad objective had to do 9 with addressing instances of what we considered operator 10 inattentiveness and unprofessional behavior in control rooms 11 of operating nuclear power facilities. 12 I might add, though, not mislead you, the policy, (} 13 proposed policy statement, also encompasses concerns that 14 would certainly go outside of the control room, and secondly, 15 to encourage licenseees to take appropriate administrative 16 actions to ensure that the standards that we considered 17 oursalves mentioning in the proposed policy statement would be 18 given attention to, here again regarding control room conduct 19 and operator attentiveness. 20 At this point, I'm on the page of my handout that 21 deals with the description of the policy statement. 22 MR. WYLIE: Could I ask a question? 23 MR. WEST: Certainly. 24 MR. WYLIE: In going through this, I gathered that , 25 on page 4, the last sentence of the top paragraph, it defines HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4888

I

• 71

, 1 the operator for which this is intended I suppose. It says g-( 2 consequently, the Commission has decided to issue this policy 3 statement to reiterate its prior guidance regarding control 4 room operator conduct. 5 Although I nee in the policy statement reference to 6 operators in general, senior reactor operators, operators at 7 the controls, and then a statement of all of the operators 8 required to be on site are expected to be attending for tais, 9 just for whom is it intended? 10 MR. WEST: I think clearly it is intended for again 11 persons that would also be outside of the control room. It is 12 clearly intended for both licensed and unlicensed individuals. () 13 I think the statement that you have that you reference on page 14 4 is somewhat restrictive in terms of the .eiteration from the 15 perspective that the better part of the proposed policy 16 statement does indeed come from what is currently on the books 17 if you will. There is an IE circular and there is also an 18 information notice. The information notice appeared in, well, 19 the circular appeared in 1981, and the information notice 20 appeared in 1985 under the same title, performance of HRC 21 licensed individuals while on duty, so from the po4.nt of view 22 of the reiteration, it is specific to that. 23 MR. WYLIE: I, personally I must say it is a little 24 ambiguous to me as to what the intent os.

            }

25 CHAIRMAN REMICK: I got puzzled, too, because at HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4888

                                                                                  -72 1 times, it did say unlicensed as well as licensed, but then-it
           /')          2 talked about all people are required to be at the plant,

(_/ , 3 things like that. I got confused, too, just that it was 4 directed, it seemed like there might be pieces that were 5 inconsistent. 6 MR. WYLIE: I think in particular the last sentence, 7 if I had to take it as it is stated, I would have to conclude 8 it was only for the control room operators. 9 CHAIRMAN REMICK: Yes, if you read that one. 10 MR. MICHELSON: I read it the same, but I thought it 11 said, sentence on page 4, was because the previous guidance ' 12 had been directed only, I had read it the previous guidance *

             <g        13 had been directed only to control room; they were just a

14 referring to the previous guidance. 15 MR. WYLIE: Well-- 16 HR. MICHELSON: Reiterating previous guidance 17 regarding control room operators and adding to it I think; 18 this policy is much more expansive. I assume it is previous , 19 guidance. 20 MR. WEST: Yes, it is. Your point is precisely 21 correct. 22 HR. MICHELSON: ( 23 HR. WEST: Although I do hear exactly what you are 24 saying, certainly if there is ambiguity, we can give attention 25 to that. l l l HERITAGE' REPORTING COMPANY -- (2021628-4888

73 1 HR. MICHELSON: This one is much more encompassing. () 2 I have problems on words like on this same page under, on'page 3 4 under item 3, it talks about unauthorized individuals being o 4 allowed to manipulate controls. I didn't know what it meant 5 by unauthorized because they don't--you can manipulate 6 centrols and not be licensed, depending on what kind of 7 controls they are, what rad waste operator or reactor operator 8 and so forth, but then you go over and on to page 7, under 9 item 6, and it talks about only those persons who meet the 10 requirement, permitted to perform reactivity manipulations. 11 That's an even more narrowing definition than manipulating 12 controls. () 13 Which manipulations are we talking about? Any 14 manipulation, or only reactivity manipulations? 15 HR. WEST: I think the intent here is clearly one of 16 reactivity manipulations. 17 HR. MICHELSON: I didn't think that was the case at 18 all. I thought that was only one ampect of operation we are 19 worried about. Reactivity manipulations are rather narrow set 20 on the board. 21 HR. WEST: Just to give you a little bit of insight 22 on how this particular-- 23 HR. MICHELSON: There is real confusion. {} 24 HR. WEST: As we went about getting some comments by 25 way of the regions, we had, became aware of some instances HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4888

74; 1 where operators had manipulated controls that were unlicensed 2 in that narrew context, so that's what we are trying to focus

      )

3 on there. . 4 CHAIRMAN REMICK: But the thing that surprised me--I 5 interpreted it was reactivity, but I agree it'could be read 6 different ways. The thing that puzzled me is why it would be 7 in the policy statement, though, because the regulations are 8 very clear about who can and cannot, so I thought why is there 9 a need for a policy statement to point out something that is 10 one of the more clearly written things I think in the, in the 11 regulations? 12 MR. WEST: Certainly that's an item that has been a 13 subject for this particular context that is up for 14 consideration, and I think it is certainly appropriate at this 15 level of where the proposed policy statement is at a proposed 16 stage. 17 Your point is well taken from the point of view that 18 the rationale as I have come to understand it for moving from e l 19 a rule to a policy statement was indeed for the reason that JO you have mentioned. 21 MR. MICHELSON: Do the regulations talk about 22 reactivity manipulations? , 23 CHAIRMAN REMICK: They define controls, but things 24 that can affect reactivity, so it is not just control rods. O. , t 25 It could be. I HERITAGE REPORTING COMFANY -- (202)628-4888

v 75 1 MR. MICHELSON: It isn't as comple e a set. I o i,_j 2 thought I didn't, have never gone back and explored it. Can I o 3 start an ECCS pump to test it without bei,ng a licensed 4 operator? It doesn't affect reactivity. It is~all outside 5 the primary loop. 6 CHAIRMAN REMICK: My gut reaction, that would be-- , i > 7 MR. MICHELSON: I don't think anybody, I think only 8 licensed operators can manipulate those ECCS for any reason. 9 DR. SIESE: What is more important, Carl, is can you 10 stop an ECCS pump?

      , 11             HR. MICHELSON:   That's another aspect.

12 DR. SIESS: I recall somebody did that one. () 13 CHAIRMAN REMICK: Could affect reactivity in one way 14 or another. 15 MR. MICHELSON: Not when they are;on test. 16 CHAIRMAN REMICK: What if the valves open? 17 MR. MICHELSON: You start saying what ifs-- 18 CHAIRMAN REMICK: My interpretation would be that 19 is-- 20 HR. MICHELSON: You have to have a license to start 3 21 diesel engine. 22 CHAIRMAN REMICK: Controls is defined in part 23 differently. 24 MR. MICHELSON: That is reactivity. The words in 25 here are right. And I am surprised that they are that i HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4888

76 1 narrowly defined. ( .2 DR. SIESS: I would think most of the things you can 3 do to reactivity controls will simply shut you down. :I can 4 think of an awful lot of things you do to non-reactivity 5 controls that can turn the water off and get you in trouble f 6 with decay heat.  ; 7 MR. MICHELSON: Oh, yes. Shut all of the surface 8 water off and don't cut your activity for a while. 9 CHAIRMAN REMICK: I suggest we let Garmon go ahead 10 and get back-to these. 11 MR. WEST: To get back to the description of the 12 policy statement, and thank you for your comments, we have () 13 included there what we consider to be some representative 14 examples of guidance on appropriate opere. tor conduct. It was t 15 not our intent to come up with a laundry list that we i 16 considered to be all inclusive. That wasn't the intent. We 17 did feel that those items under appropriate conduct were i 18 indeed representative and should be considered by the 3 19 industry, 20 Secondly, we were rather specific about activities 21 and behaviors that we felt should be prohibited. And thirdly, 22 one of those related areas, not so much in being prohibited l l >- 23 necessarily, but we did feel that there should be some (} 24 attention given to the whole area of under what context, if 1 25 any, it would be appropriate in terms of the use of electronic  ; HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4888

77 1 entertainment devices in the control rooms. There we are () 2 speaking specifically to the use of radios, televisions, and

     '3 similar kinds of electronic devices.                            I 4            MR. MICHELSON:   What do you define as the control 5 room, keeping in mind the nuclear plant very often has rad 6 waste control rooms, et cetera, reactor control rooms and so 7 forth?  There are other processes going on around the plant 8 which I think as the rad waste operator, is he just certified 9 by the utility or is there a licensing process for him?

10 CHAIRMAN REMICK: He now participates in accredited 11 programs. 12 MR. MICHELSON: It is not a licensing, but in the r~ 13 rad waste control, I don't know that much about it, but I i b} . 14 guess you begin to get the plant in some kind of trouble, or 15 the public, from manipulations there. 16 Is that control room under this same policy 17 statement or is that different? - r t 18 MR. WEST: I don't think we have, we certainly 19 haven't gone to that level of detail. 20 MR. MICHELSON: That is not a very high level of 21 detail. I think we ought to be clear as to where we talk 22 about reactor control or whether we are talking about rad 23 waste as well or any other important control rooms that might 24 he on site. 25 DR. LEWIS: There is a lot of ambiguity through this . HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4888

78 s 1 whole thing.  : 1 2 CHAIRMAN REMICK: Since we interpreted Garmon, let l 3 me read you what Part 50 says.about controls. It says, 4 "Controls when used with respect to nuclear reactors means 5 apparatus and mechanisms,' manipulation of which directly 6 affects the reactivity or power level of the reactor. 7 Controls when used with respect to any other facility means [ 8 apparatus and mechanisms, the manipulation of which could 9 affect the chemical, physical, metallurical or nuclear process 10 of the facility in such a manner as to affect the protection 11 of health and safety against radiation." 12 HR. MICHELSON: We should be using both terms in () 13 this policy statement. [ t 14 CHAIRMAN REMICK: My interpretation, and they were 15 talking about the reactor, maybe I'm wrong, but I read it-- 16 DR. SIESS: What was the introduction to the second 17 definition?  ! 18 CHAIRMAN REMICK: Controls when used with respect to j 19 any other facility. 20 DR. SIESS: Doesn't that mean fuel, fuel cycle 21 facilities, rather than reactor power plants? Isn't that the 3 i 22 distinction they are making there?  ; i 23 CHAIRMAN REMICK: I honestly don't know. You think  : (} 24 it is? Okay. 25 DR. SIESS: I think that's the distinction that l I HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4888

                                                        '"            -                                                79 1  was--I don't'kr.ow what section you are reading from, but I'm

() 2 sure it applies to both. 3 CHAIRMAN REMICK: It is part--it applies to both.

4. DR. LEWIS: This refers to 50.54M2III.

5 CHAIRMAN REMICK: I was looking that up. I decided, i 6 S0.54-- 7 DR. LEWIS: M Arabic 2, Roman three.  ! 8 DR. SIESS: Forrest, I think the point you made 9 about repeating something in the policy statement about, you 10 know, as a matter of policy you should read the regulations, 11 it just seems a little ridiculous on the face of it, and I t 12 have been concerned now for sometime with the problems the i 13 staff has been having in regulating under a body of

  /}

14 regulations, augmented by in some cases not by policy 4 15 statements, safety goal policy statement, severe accident  ! l 16 policy statement, advanced reactor policy statement. None of , 17 these which are there, that book, and almost every time we i 18 talk to the staff they are having a problem dealing with two 19 types of regulations, and I think what we are seeing in the  ! l 20 policy statements is policy statements getting more specific i 21 and more prescriptive when the staff writes them because they 22 are anticipating this problem of regulating by policy 23 statement, and I think wa need t- watch for that. Policy L 24 statements ought to be policy statements. They shouldn't be t 25 pseudo regulations. l > l HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4888 [

r

                       ~j
            .                                                 80 1           DR. LEWIS:  I certainly agree with that.

2 DR. SIESS: You couldn't agree! o 3 DR. LEWIS: I do agree. I do agree. 4 DR. SIESS: I will re-think it! 5 DR. LEWIS: They should be broad gauge policy 6 statements. 7 HR. MICHELSON: We should understand the policy 8 statement as to what it pertains to. Sleep in the rad waste 9 control room, for instance, is that in this policy statement? 10 DR. SIESS: The Commission wants to Foster an 11 attitude of professionalism not only in the control room, but 12 in the rad waste control room, and the maintenance people, () 13 that maybe that's what they want all over. 14 DR. LEWIS: In that case, they should exhibit 15 professionalism by issuing a policy statement that is, can be 16 understood. 17 MR. WYLIE: What you say, it seems to me that, and I 18 agree that this policy statement ought to state the policy and 19 then if you are going to write a generic letter or whatever to 20 implement whatever the policy is, that's fine--spell out the 21 details. Much of which is spelled out in here, the details of 22 do's and don'ts and what have you, should be in the generic 23 letter, but not in the policy statement. , (} 24 DR. LEWIS: There are some things in here that I 25 belong, and the addenda, for example, on page 3, item 3, i HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4888 f

81 1 second paragraph, it says attentive to all aspects of plant () 2 status and so forth. Nobody is attentive to all aspects of 3 plant status. That's just absurd, and writing absurdities 4 like that detracts attention from what you are trying to say. 5 I hate to say motherhood statement because, of course, the 6 world is over populated, but-- 7 CHAIRMAN REMICK: I highlighted a lot of words like 8 that where the same one--all aspects of, fully aware, any 9 operational problems. 10 DR. LEWIS: How about highly trained? 11 CHAIRMAN REMICK: There were a lot of things  ; 12 that--all times, all on duty operators at all times--well, we {} 13 are, let's let Garmon continue his presentation. 14 MR. WEST: Relevant to your point, we did have in A5 mind that we would at the point that it became a final policy 16 statement, to issue it, and provide a copy to all of the 1 l 17 licensed operators. We were thinking of something along that 18 line. t 19 MR. WYLIE: The point I was making, that the-- 20 MR. WEST: Some of the things here should probably 21 more appropriately be placed in a generic letter rather than 22 here, exactly. 23 MR. WYLIE: Rather than in the policy statement. [ f I 24 MR. WEST: All right. As I mentioned, we did 25 include the whole area of electronic containment devices. We f HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4888

82 1 also made a point in terms of discouraging eating meals at

      )  2  work stations, and finally, the overall emphasis of the policy 3  statement is one toward requesting licensees to, in a 4  voluntary fashion, to review their administrative controls to 5  ensure that the specific as well as the general concerns of 6- the policy statements of the policy statement are indeed 7  addressed.

t 8 CHAIRMAN REMICK: On what basis did the staff decide 9 that the electronic entertainment devices in control rooms are 10 adverse to safety? On what base was that judgment made? 11 MR. WEST: I think one, it's here again a part of , 12 what we currently have on the books in terms of the IE () 13 circular that I referenced back in '81, and also the 14 information of this back in 1985, so it does appear there. 15 As I mentioned, too, we did indeed by design 16 incorporate the better part of those two particular documents 17 in this one. 18 CHAIRMAN REMICK: That was sent out basically a , 19 Commission directive, that IE notice? 20 MR. WEST: Yes, sir. Yes. 21 CHAIRMAN REMICK: But has the staff, any evidence I 22 that--let's take playing music, whether it is a tape recorder 23 or a radio, is adverse to safety? There are some people argue 24 that that's one way to keep operators awake. { 25 MR. WEST: Right. I grant you that this is not an I HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4888

83 1 area that has a conclusive type of unfolding. I would also 2 grant you that we as a staff have been taking a clear-cut 3 position to the extent that we have addressed the issue in < 4 terms of responding to inquiries of one' kind or another. - 5 It has been pretty much one of leaving it to the 1 6 utility' management to make an assessment of whether or not 7 they are going to utilize radios, televisions and so forth, 8 and as part of that assessment to consider the safety  ; 9 consequence of it, and I think here again embodied even in 1 10 this proposed policy statement, we don't come out and say 11 precisely that they shouldn't be used or precisely that they  ! 12 should be. What we do try to emphasize is that if they are to () 13 be used, there should be some consideration of the fact of

• 14 whether it is going to impact the performance of the operator 15 or not.

I 16 DR. LEWIS: Impact substantially; in fact there is i 17 nobody in the world that I know who can maintain vigilance 18 through an eight-hour shift without, you know, daydreaming for f 19 a moment or putting his hands in his pocket or something like 20 that, and I, you know, many people I know function very well 21 with soft music in the background. In fact I wasn't brought F 22 up that way, but there is a whole generation that--and in fact 23 there was once a mathematician who did all his work in front [ il (} 24 of a television set that was turned on. The mind boggled, but 25 that was the way he worked best, and the same thing applies to HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4888

84 , i 1 meals at work stations. Some people function well if they are r () 2 nibbling. Other people don't function well if they are , 3 nibbling, and I just wonder if one isn't being just all

,                                                                                                              b 4 through this much too specific in making it without evidence 5 that, or maybe there is evidence, that this is generically a 6 problem, at reactors?

7 CHAIRHAN REMICK: Haybe I overreacted perhaps to the 8 words. I Eppreciate if people are using these things, one 9 should be sure it does not adversely affect their performance, 10 but the wording on page 2 of the policy, not the policy 11 statement itself, the SECY, it says accordingly, the proposed 12 practices for the maintenance of a professional atmosphere in () 13 the control room call for the facility licensees either to f 14 provide assurance that.the use of electronic entertainment  ! 15 equipment in the control room maintains or enhances operator , . 16 performance or to prohibit such equipment, so it seems like i 17 they have to do some research to assure, to provide assurance  ; 18 that use of electronic entertainment equipment in control room f 19 maintains or enhances, that I don't know how they are going to 20 do that. It seems like their only option is to prohibit it. } l 21 otherwise they are going to get enforcement action if they 22 don't have some pretty conclusive assurar.ce that it maintains  ; 23 or enhances. It was the selection of the wording I guess that I, {} 24 maybe I read into it more, but I thought gosh, this is, this  ! ! 25 l i HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4888  ;

l 85 l l l 1 is telling them it is up to you, but you have it pretty well 2 documented or you are subject tc enforcement on this. That's 3 how I interpreted it. Maybe I am overreacting to it. 1 4 MR. WEST: I understand. I hear clearly what you  ; 5 say. I don't know clearly either how that would be done, but ' 6 certainly our intent was to key in on the concern that if  ; 7 indeed electronic entertainment devices are to be utilized, 8 some attention should be given to the effect on an operator 9 performance. 10 I would grant you as well that the literature would 11 probably pan out equally in both areas of argument as personal 12 experience would in terms of, particularly in terms of whether () 13 an individual is affected either favorably or unfavorably in 14 terms of listening to music. , 15 DR. LEWIS: It even goes further because on, you f 16 know, you can get a sense of,.some of us, this is overly  ; 17 restrictive. You may have noticed that, but on page, just to 18 make the point as strongly as possible, on page 4, it says  ! 19 that the Commicsion, unambiguously the Commission finds that 20 all behavior by licensed reactor operators that detract from

• 21 accepted attenativeness is unacceptable and inconsistent with 22 their licensed duties.

23 That means it threatens their license if they are (} 24 caught doing it. And if I were on shift and I saw that my f 25 fellow operator had a scorpion on his back, I wouldn't tell , i I HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4888

i i 86- b l l 1 him he had because that would certainly detract from his -l

)   2 attentiveness.

3 That's, of course, a whimsical example, but there 4 are lots of things that detract from your attentiveness, and a 5 blanket statement that anything that does is a violation of 6 your licansed duty is just not realistic.  ! 7 MR. WEST: The point is well taken. 8 DR. SIESS: I suspect some of the enunciators 9 detract from more important things that operators are dcing. 10 I seem to have heard that. 11 DR. LEWIS: Give me a scorpion any day. 12 DR. SIESS: You are right. (J' 13 MR. WEST: I would like to shift gears here a little 14 built. Again, I think it was a go-/. background in terms of 15 hearing from the industry in terms of what the current effort 16 is. 17 The staff certainly became aware of the effort or 18 the initiative on the part of the industry, INPC in 19 particular, and just to revisit this effort, as we understand 20 it, it is primarily in two areas. They are developing as you 21 hear today at a greater level of detail, they are developing 22 management principles, and they are formulating professional 23 codes for nuclear power plant openers. (} 24 This leads towards the final point that I want to make in terms of one alternative, one option with respect to 25 HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4868

87 [ l the current policy statement that has been developed. () 2 It seems that the industry is certainly pretty far 3 along in terms of having something relatively soon with 4 respect to both operators and management principles. As I f i 5 recall from what I heard today, there is something expected in < 6 both areas about middle, the middle of this year, and I'm also 7 aware not only expected, it is the expectation as I have 8 interpreted it that the operator codes will truly be in place  ! 9 at the various plants by mid-year or so. 10 It is also my understanding that the next Chief i 11 Executive Officers conference by INPO will give some , 12 particular attention,' focus to this broad area of (} 13 professionalism on the part of operators and manacament. 14 DR. SIESS: I notice the INPO letter says the scope l i 15 of the principles has been expanded to include all nuclear f 16 personnel, for example, maintenance, technical and 17 engineering, rather than limiting it to just the operators. . i 18 HR. WEST: I see. i 19 DR. SIESS: But the policy statement as we were 20 discussing just a few minutes ago, seems to limit itself to i 1 21 operators in the control room. l 22 CHAIRMAN REMICK: And elsewhere in the plant.

                                                                                                                       ]

23 HR. WEST: I think-- 24 DR. SIESS: But I think--I am not sure, but I 25 thought the policy statement was essentially limited to HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4888

4 3 88 1 licensed operators. 2 HR. WEST: No, that's not the case. It is clearly 3 intended to address both licensed and non-licensed operators, 4 and'it is clearly intended to address the location of those 5 individuale both.in the control roon and outside of the 6 control room. l 7 DR SIESS: It does not include r.aintenance 8 personnel? 9 "hR. MICHELSON: Where do they do that?  ! 1 , 10 HR. WEST: We didn't speak specifically to i

i. 11 maintenance personnel, no.

i a 12 HR. HICHELSON: Where are these clear statements?  ! 13 CHAIRMAN REMICK: On page 2 of the SECY document,

                             '( }

14 not the policy statement, the SECY document, the top 15 paragraph. 16 HR. HICHELSON: De I have it with me? i 17 CHAIRMAN REMICK: It says the policy statement also , 18 applies to unlicensed operators and to licensed operators  : i  : l 19 outside of the control room who are performing assigned l t 1 l 20 functions.  ! i I 21 MR. MICHELSON: Why isn't that in the policy l f 22 statement? j 4  ! l 23 HR. WYLIE: It should be. That's the general I l j 24 comment we started with I think is that there should be a 25 definition up front somewhere that clearly defines who this j i l  ! r HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4888

s 89  ; 1 applies to. 2 HR. HICHELSON: -Right. That's usually--find out who 3 it is addressed to. Then you state the policy. 4 HR. WYLIE: If you go through here, you will see 5 words that eventually lead you to say well, it encompasses 6 everybody because-- 7 CHAIRMAN REMICK: There are inconsistencies. 8 DR. SIESS: Don't care whether it is limited or 9 broad. I mean I think the intent ought to be clear. It 10 doesn't have to be so specific because nobody can lose a 13- license for not complying with a policy statement. They can 12 lose a license for not complying with the regulations, so you () 13 really, it is not a legal type of definition, but if it is . 14 intended to be a narrow issue be prescribed, if it is intended 15 to be broad, some of the things that now tend to narrow it 16 should be taken out, and I think it is sort of in limbo. 17 Taken together with the SECY, you can read it one way, but 18 then that's really not the way the policy statement ought to 19 be, i 20 DR. LEWIS: Page 3 says all operators required to be t 21 on site, 22 DR. SIESS: What is an operator? 23 HR. WYLIE: We need to define it. (} 24 HR. MICHELSON: Those that manipulate reactivity 25 controls. HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4888

90  ; P 1 CHAIRHAN REHICK: I really think wo made our point  ! (~)%

   \_    2 that there are inconsistencies on what is meant.                                                          I think we   3 P

3 interrupted you when you were about ready to make a bottom 4 line point. 7 5 HR, WEST: Yes, and I will revisit that. I think it ! 6 is certainly clear that that is an area in terms of clarifying  ; 7 precisely who the policy statement ia directed toward, and we  ; 8 can certainly do something a little bit better in that area. 9 The point that I was leading to is that given the 10 current initiative on the part of industry, developing codes 11 of conduct for operator, developing management principles, and  ! 12 given that thic is not only at a developmental, stage but is () 13 underway and there is some expectation that something will be 14 coming about about mid-year or so, that there is going to be 15 an emphasis on this particular area of professionalism at the  ; 16 next INPO conference toward the end of this year, the staff is i 4 17 considering that one option, one alternative, and perhaps the i 18 way to proceed in this area would be to consider deferring the j I 19 action on the proposed policy statement until the staff has a l 20 char.ce to discuss INPO's initiative with INPO, and to also j f

.       21 take a look at it in a very thorough fashion to see, to                                                                i i                                                                                                                                !

22 evaluate it and to make some assessment as to whether or not

• 23 it can be, it can in fact do essentially what we are trying to I

[} 24 accomplish even though the approach obviously might be different, if it can in fact accomplish what we are trying to 25 { j i

91 1 accomplish by way of the proposed policy statement. O 2 Taat e se=tiativ o#e atter ative at tai rei t 3 that we are considering. Certainly there will be a lot of i 4 .imptications that could come out of such an effort if we do in I 5 fact deem that the INPO effert is an acceptable one.  ! 6 One possibility would be in fact to issue a policy l i 7 statement that would in fact endorse the INPO effort. We . 8 would certainly have in that same context just for the sake of 9 discussion the possibility of adding or deleting from the i 10 particulars of the INPO effort whatever we would deem l I 11 appropriate at that time in the context of the policy i 12 statement that we might issue. [ 13 CHAIRHAN REMICK: When you say being considered by 14 the staff, is an official NRR option being proposed or is this  ; i 15 a branch type of option? l 16 HR. WEST: I can certainly address that. Bill, [ . 17 wnld you care to answer that? , t 18 HR. REGAN: This is more in the way of a suggestion 19 from the ?*.aff. I look forward to the EDO and the Commission i 20 in terms of an option that is certainly worth considering at , t l 21 this point in time. Since these two things seem to be  ! 22 converging at a given point, it is a very viable option, very [

I 23 serious option..

l 24 We are not--the Commission has asked for the staff l [ 25 to develop a policy statement. We are not in a position to i i I HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4888

I 92-t i say no, we don't think we want to give you one rather or l 2 suggesting at this point in time there is or-- t 3 CHAIRHAN REMICK: You have sentfup a SECY document f 4 now and they have come back apparently and asked you to run it- t t 5 through ACRS and CRGR. Now would that be that you would send . I 6 up another document then and say that this is one option we l E 7 think the Commission should consider? 8 HR. REGAN: It either might be a separate 9 communication, or it might be, it might be an alternative that i 10 is added to it, so Garmon, refresh my memory. Was that, was ; I 11 that an alternative in the paper that was sent to the  ! 12 Commission earlier? f 1 () 13 HR. WEST: No, it wasn't, but your point is a good f t I 14 one.- It could be in either form. Certainly at the level of 15 the discussion, it is not final. Within the context of our i l 16 division, it could proceed as a separate communication or we . i { 17 could propose it as a-- 18 CHAIRHAN REMICK: What the Commission has in front i ' 2 19 of them now is a SECY document. 20 HR. WEST: Precisely. f 21 CHAIRMAN REMICK: Okay. 22 DR. LEWIS: Can I ask one point of clarification? i i-i 23 HR. WEST: Certainly. f; l (} 24 DR. LEWIS: On page 3 of the proposed policy f 25 statement it has this thing about all of the operators HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (2021628-4888 j

93 1 required to be on site by 10 CFR 50.54H are expected to be 2 attentive. 3 Does that, is your interpretation that presumably a 4 plant could have more operators on site than are required by 4 5 50.54H7 Are they allowed to sleep on the tables?

• 6 HR. WEST: Say again. >

7 DR. LEWIS: Are they allowed to sleep on the tables 8 in the spirit of this? , 9 HR. WEST: No. I wouldn't think so.  ! 10 DR. LEWIS: It doesn't say so. 11 HR. WEST: It may not explicitly say that, but f I 12 certainly that would be-- l , i () 13 DR. LEWIS: It is explicit. It says all the 14 operators required to be on site are expected to be attentive. 15 And a reasonabic reading of that is that anyone who is there, 16 isn't required to be on site, need not be at?.entive. [ I 17 HR. WEST: I hear what you are saying. That i

18 certainly wasn't our intent, but it is noted.

r 19 CHAIRMAN REMICK: Chet? 20 DR. SIESS: I would like to return to the question 21 of what the staff could or should do about this. INPO is 22 obviously moving in a desirable direction. Whether it is the { I 23 same direction or as far, I won't discuss for the moment. {} 24 In previous most recent instances of policy statements, there has cene following issuance of policy 1 25 I i HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4888

94 1 statement, a request by the Commission that the staff develop 1 (~/'T

    \_     2  a plan for implementing the policy.

3 Now clearly unless something is done to implement a 4 policy, it really isn't much more than a piece of paper, and

        ,  5  let's face it. This. policy statement without an             ,

6 implementation plan, clearly is not going to do as much as the 7' INPO program is likely to do, and so the question is do you 8 have a proposal or'im'plementation plan or is this simply a 9 sort of a statement of faith and motherhood?

10. If it endorsed the INPO program or something like 11 that, it would be some additional support to INPO in getting 12 so-called voluntary cooperation from the industry, but a

() 13 policy statement by itself, you know, isn't enforcible, and 14 the Comnission always says how about implementation? And 15 that's where we have a problem. We are still trying to 16 implement the safety goal policy. We tried to implement the 17 severe accident policy, and there are some others I could name 18 MR. WEST: You are exactly right. To the extent 19 that there is any consideration of implementation as the 20 proposed policy statement currently exists, it is simply in 21 the area of voluntary responsa on the part of the utilities 22 with respect to giving attention to their administrative 23 controls and the particulars of what is presented here, and {} 24 certainly you are correct, well, in the sense that this is 25 indeed a proposed policy statement and given the nature of the HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4888 L-

c 95 l' policy statement, unlike a rule, you don't have the

 ,x:

k_ 2 enforcement capabilities. 3 DR. SIESS: Does this recognize the INPO effort 4 anywhere? 5 MR. WEST: It does in terms of the Commission-paper 6 or the SECY that proceeds the policy statement; not in the 7 policy statement itself, no. 8 DR. SIESS: The Commission has issued policy 9 statements where they recognized an industry effort, endorsed 10 it, haven't they? 11 MR. WEST: Certainly. 12 DR. SIESS: Fitness for duty which is the one I am () 13 most familiar wi':h would be the policy statement on training 14 and qualification. That's in fact what was done in that area.

        ,15             MR. MICHELSON:      Would you c3arify for me what the 16  enforcement statement on page 7 of the policy means?          It 17  seemed to be very, the first sentence of the enforcement, I 18  think it is more than a piece of paper if this is issued, 19   isn't it?

20 DR. SIESS: That enforcement is only under 50.54. 21 MR. MICHELSON: I am sure this is, there is a lot of 22 mechanisms by which they can make this policy stick. I 23 MR. WEST: Certainly if the Commission finds any J 24 inappropriate behaviors, whether they are mentioned in this

 -( }

25 proposed policy statement context or not, there are obviously l HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4888

96 1 enough regulations that are current on the books that some r~T (_) 2 enforcement action can be taken. 3 MR. MICHELSON: What I think they already had the 4 right to do anyway. 5 DR. SIESS: I have never seen an enforcement 6 statement in a policy statement before. 7 MR. MICHELSON: I don't recall one, either, but 8 there is one here. 9 DR. LEWIS: It is odd. 10 DR. SIESS: Did the lawyers put that in? 11 MR. WEST: I haven't found that this is atypical. I 12 have found it to be more of the typical case that you do in () 13 fact have some enforcement statement in policy statements, the 14 one I have seen in recent years. 15 DR. SIESS: I can't think of an enforcement 16 statement in severe accident policy, which is number one on 17 the list. Does that, is that a big issue of regulation? 18 CHAIRMAN REMICK: I think there are some, and it is 19 basically saying that, you know, we do have enforcement 20 capability, and this does not. 21 DR. SIESS: They could shut the plant down tomorrow 22 if they think it is unsafe. I mean the Commission has never 23 issued a policy statement saying when are we going to shut l 24 plants down and when we are going to start them back up. In l 25 fact a number of people around this table and some in Congress  ! l l l HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4888

97 1 have been asking that question. g A) m 2 CHAIRMAN REMICK: I think you are saying this is 3 atypical. I don't think it is. I think there have been some 4 other recent policy statements that do have some kind of an 5 enforcement. I am not justifying it. I am just vague. I 6 think there are some. 7 DR. LEWIS: This particular enforcement statement is 8 slightly inconsistent with the earlier text it is supposed to 9 enforce because the earlier text says inattentiveness is 10 unacceptable. The enforcement statement says inattentiveness 11 that can affect plant safety is unacceptable and their lawyers 12 could drive trucks through that difference. Again, one has to () 13 be consistent. 14 CHAIRMAN REMICK: Because of the enforcement 15 statement that I also got thinking about how are people going 16 to be able to prove the electronic devices maintained or 17 enhanced attentativeness? It seems to me they are going to 18 have to have some kind of documented evidence or otherwise 19 subject to enforcement. That's where I came to that l 20 conclusion. l 21 DR. SIESS: When electronic entertainment ! 22 didn't--otherwise, the CRTs on the control board. 1 23 MR. MICHELSON: They are not entertaining. (} 24 CHAIRMAN REMICK: Do you have other comments? 25 MR. WEST: I think that's essentially it. I think , 1 l HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4888

98 1 you get the general flavor of the proposed policy statement, 2 and also the. specific point that we are considering as a 3 suggestion, as an option, as an alternative given what the 4 INPO initiative is currently doing. 5 CHAIRMAN REMICK: Other questions? 6 DR. LEWIS: Nobody plays music in an airline 7 cockpit. It just isn't done. 8 MR. WEST: Did you have any furthur-- 9 DR. SIESS: You don't have entertainment in the 10 cockpit. 11 DR. LEWIS: I won't put anything on the record, but 12 don't use it in the plane. () 13 DR. SIESS: They tell stories to each other. 14 MR. REGAN: I think I have heard that there are 15 cases where they played music in the operating room. 16 DR. LEWIS: It is just not done. 17 CHAIRMAN REMICK: Questions or comments to Garmon? 18 MR. MICHELSON: Are we going to write a letter? 19 CHAIRMAN REMICK: That comes next, but do you have 20 questions or comments of Garmon? 21 MR. WYLIE: I think it is an alternative, better 22 approach and one they ought to pursue. That's a general 23 comment. That is to defer action until they have had opportunity to see what INPO and NUMARC initiatives accomplish {} 24 25 and if they are going to write something, write something HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4888

99 1 after that. / ') 'L J 2 DR. LEWIS: I have some general remarks, too, but no 3 more questions. 4 CHAIRMAN REMICK: Any more questions? 5 MR. MICHELSON: How much time are we talking about 6 if they waited for NUMARC? 7 MR. WYLIE: This summer. 8 CHAIRMAN REMICK: July for the codes. 9 MR. MICHELSON: In terms of them doing something? 10 CHAIRMAN REMICK: The other codes are supposed to be 11 in effect by July. 12 If we. don't have any more questions or comments, 13 let's go to-- f-]

'v' 14           MR. MICHELSON:    In effect by July; when are we going 15 to see them?

16 CHAIRMAN REMICK: There is no assurance we will see 17 them. I am sure we can see them. They are going to INPO. 18 MR. MICHELSON: I am sure before we adopt them as 19 our alternative to enforcement we would see them. 20 CHAIRMAN REMICK: Oh, sure. 21 HR. WEST: Certainly. 22 CHAIRMAN REMICK: We are not in the loop currently. 23 DR. SIESS: In the regulations in effect, INPO is 24 not proposing any changes in the regulations. 25 MR. MICHELSON: They can't. HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4888

ii 100 1 CHAIRMAN REMICK: Let's go to the question now of ()

 /,

2- what we do'from here on. Now staff has indicated they have a 3 staff requirement memorandum which says that they should go to 4 get input from ACRS, so that ic.euns we probably should write a 5 letter that the Commission has asked that we-review it, and we 6 plan next week to take this up at the Full Committee meeting. 7 I would like the Subcommittee viewpoints on whether-8 you think for that we need a presentation by the staff, by the 9 NUMARC people, one or the other, or none? I would propose 10 that we do it with the Subcommittee report, and ask the staff 11 to have somebody there that in case questions come up that we 12 need input. rT 13 Do any of you object to this approach versus a U 14 formal presentation? 15 MR. MICHELSON: Clarification--when you refer to 16 HUMARC people, they didn't give us anything with any, really 17 directed at this policy. I was out of the room a little bit. 18 I didn't hear anything. 19 CHAIRMAN REMICK: But the question is do we want 20 them to come in and regurgitate for the Full Committee what I 21 the-- 22 MR. MICHELSON: Not what we heard on management. 23 CHAIRMAN REMICK: You are focused in. There are two 24 things. There is management and code of professionalism for l (:) 25 operators. I don't know where we were, but we sure did. l i HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4888

101 1 MR. WEST: Just as you suggested, to have someone (m) 2 available from the staff, would it also be appropriate to have 3 someone available from either IMPO or NUMARC that is 4- knowledgeable of their efforts? 5 CHAIRMAN REMICK: We'can certainly, if the 6 Subcommittee feels that's important, we can invite them to 7 send somebody, yes. 8 DR. LEWIS: The thing that we are directly asked for 9 by the Commission if I understand it is to comment on the 10 policy statement. 11 CHAIRMAN REMICK: That is correct. 12 DR. LEWIS: I think clearly people have to be here. 13 I think you are right to handle it as a Subcommittee report, 14 and I think that if in the Subcommittee discussion your 15 Subcommittee decides that a possible part of our letter might 16 be to say pay attention to what HUMARC is doing as an 17 alternative to a policy statement, then it would be 18 appropriate to have some NUMARC people here, not to give a 19 speech, but to answer questions, but I would say that's 20 contingent on whether we take that approach. We might say 21 that a policy statement is great. We might say go back to the 22 drawing board. 23 CHAIRMAN REMICK: Chet?

  -  24            DR. SIESS:  I was trying to answer the question of 25  what shall we say about issuing a policy statement probably, HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4888

102 1 and then the next step if yes, then this one. I am~2ooking () 2 what is the harm in issuing this policy statement? It is 3 motherhood almost. It might engender the problems with the, 4 unions or on playing radios in the control room, and a policy 5 statement by the Commission is not going to help the utility 6 fight the union. Regulation might, but I'm not sure policy 7 statement will. 8 But what is the harm in doing this? Of course, if 9 there is going to be no implementation of it, and probably no 10 harm, the answer might also be no good. 11 Now if the idea of developing a policy statement on 12 this inspired INPO to its activities, there is some point in (^) 13 the Commission eventually issuing a policy statement so they %J 14 could share the credit for any improvement that it gives, 15 results in the way of professionalism, but the policy 16 statement is essentially motherhood. It is narrower. It 17 deals only with the operators. 18 CHAIRMAN REMICK: Let me try to address what the 19 harm might be as I see it. It is narrow, and industry 20 initiative is much broader. 21 DR. SIESS: Let me modify. I am trying to think of 22 harm in more than one sense, that can it detract from safety? 23 That's one thing. Does it detract from the Commission's image

-     24    which they seem to be concerned about?                                                 And sometimes we 25    are--the Congressional or public image initiatives.                                                   First HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4888

103 l' could we.say does it detract? Is it likely to have adverse 2 effect on safety? (_) , 3 y CHAIRMAN REMICK: Could.

4 '

DR. SIESS: Now-- 5 CHAIRMAN REMICK: Indirectly; one, if it deters the

     '6        industry initiative which is much broader in its grass roots 7     up type of thing from the operators in which they are 8     personally involved.

9 DR. SIESS: If it deters that. 10 CHAIRMAN REMICK: If it deters that effort because 11 if the Commission were to come out with something now, which 12 is always interpreted as minimum standards, you could get e 13 utilities saying we will just do what they are asking in this 14 area and we won't do this broader thing of including 15 maintenance, tech staff, managers, and so forth, so you could 16 argue well, if they don't do that, there is a possibility that , 17 there will be less professionalism than there might otherwise 18 be and that might detract from safety. Affect safety. I can 19 argue that way. 20 MR. MICHELSON: That could be taken care of by 21 simply indicating in the policy that we are willing to review 22 industry efforts at such time as they reach the point where 23 they are in a condition to review. 24 DR. SIESS: The policy statement states it more 25 broadly, is stated more broadly, a reference not necessarily HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4888

E L 104 1 endorsed by, referenced the INPO operation that could avoid () 2 that. I accept that. that is a possible-- 3 CHAIRMAN REMICK: Nobody likes to have a regulator 4 tell them what to do when you are trying to do it yourself. 5 The. bit about license, you do it yourself and you are proud of 6 it, I think you do a better job than when somebody from 7 outside tells you this is what you should do and how you 8 should do it. 9 DR. SIESS: From a completely non-safety related 10 point of view, if the regulator inspired you to do it 11 yourself, and then maybe because of Congressional and public 12 relations, the regulator ought to get a little credit for it, r 13 but if you have thought about it and are doing it yourself and ( 14 have the regulator come in and say yes, that's a good job, 15 that's fine. If the regulator comes in and says the same 16 thing or even less than you are doing without giving you 17 credit for it, it is not good public, it is not good industry 18 relations. I don't know what the public thinks. 19 But again, as far as safety is concerned, I don't 20 see that this does anything. It is not enforcible in spite of 21 that statement; and it is said, it is motherhood, something 22 good and not nearly as effective as what INPO is doing. A { 23 letter from the CEOs I think is going to have a lot more I 24 effect, a lot more specificity than a policy statement. l (2) I 25 MR. MICHELSON: Is there any reason to believe that HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4888

b 105: , 1 .by-the'1st.offAugust we.would be able to know exactly what

     ~

2- INPO and NUMARC are proposing?to do? 3 CHAIRMAN REMICK: On what,-Carl?

                 '4             MR. MICHELSON: 'Well',~what I am saying is I would be 5  perf6ctly willing to endorse our recommendation they delay 6   action on this policy statement for certain reasonable period-

. 7 of. time if that's like August. Ifuit is like August a year. 8 from now, the answer is no. 9 ~ CHAIRMAN REMICK: Well, in July, all utilities are 10 expected to have the code of professional conduct for > 11 operators.that the operators have developed and management has 12 endorsed. Now that's all this speaks to basically.is I {} 13 operators. , 14 Now'that is the, targeted July, so I would assume in 15 August we would know what has been accomplished on that. Now 16 the other subject is this management thing is more delayed 17 because there are pieces for maintenance, for tech staff and 18 other people that haven't been developed yet. l 19 MR. MICHELSON: Since the policy doesn't address l . 20 those areas, we only need to see the part addressing-- i 21- CHAIRMAN REMICK: I want to be sure what you were I 22 talking about. 23- MR. MICHELSON: Would that be ready by August 1? 24 The problem with the utilities is you have got to look at 50 i

       .O 25   different programs to judge whether that is an adequate HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4888

l 106 1 substitute for the policy? l r~x.  ! Is,) 2 DR. SIESS: Do you think a policy statement like I 3 this is any substitute for looking at what 50 utilities-- 4 MR. MICHELSON: No, no. I am just trying to-- 5 DR. SIESS: Of course not; if you want to substitute 6 something for looking at 50 utilities, then you write a 7 regulation and let the staff go out and do all the checking. 8 No policy statement-- 9 CHAIRMAN REMICK: Don't need a policy statement to 10 tell people only operators can manipulate controls. It is one 11 1 of the more clear things that is stated in the regulations. 12 For example, in contrast, there is nothing in the regulation (} 13 that says people have to have training programs. Still 14 boggles my mind. That is no problem. Everybody has them, but 15 that specificity is not in there. However, who can manipulate 16 controls is very clear. It tells you what the exceptions are 17 and so forth. I don't think you need a policy statement as to 18 implement that part. 19 MR. MICHELSON: I thought the policy statement was 20 to make put on the record that the agency really doesn't want 21 anybody sleeping on duty, doesn't want any radios in the 22 control room and certain other specific points. Then it kind 23 of broadens out beyond that admittedly, but it is okay. I t 24 don't think, I mean I favor that kind of policy. I do favor l 25 that we go back and point this out. At least--well, you don't HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4888

i i 107 ) 1 have to. That is a vote of one in favor, but I am willing to 2 hear what IMPO is going to do about it, and NUMARC before we 3 finally pass the policy statement. 4 CHAIRMAN REMICK: Chet? 5 DR. SIESS: My point is that I don't know whether 6 the policy statement says it, but we have said it. We want to 7 see professionalism. Then we are going to say in order to be 8 are professional, you must not eat at the table. You must not-9 read anything but the training manual. You must not do that. 10 You must sit with your legs straight, both feet, we tell him. 11 That, that isn't professionalism. 12 CHAIRMAN REMICK: I agree.

          .13               DR. SIESS:  That's discipline for a sixth grader.

{} 14 DR. LEWIS: Doesn't say you have to wear clothes, 15 DR. SIESS: That's right. I think it is ridiculous 16 to tell people you want them to be professional, and then give 17 them these kind of prescriptive child-like-- 18 ' CHAIRMAN REMICK: As if that is what we mean by 19 professionalism. 20 DR. SIESS: That is not what you mean by 21 professionalism. That's what you mean by disciplined control 22 room operator, for that discipline is going to be enforced by 23 rule of. Professionalism comes from within. 24 CHAIRMAN REMICK: Charlie? 25 MR. WYLIE: Clarification--I thought you, I heard HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4888

108 1 INPO'say that-they.were sending these'l'etters to the. utilities-()l 2 on-the principles, management principles. 3 CHAIRMAN REMICK: Those have been sent. 4 EMR . WYLIE: They are-asking them to review their 5- internal _ operating procedures and what have you against those. T 6 and to respond by-August? 7 CHAIRMAN REMICK: By August.

                                   '8                 MR. WYLIE:   By August.they will have done that.

9 MR. MICHELSON: This doesn't address those. This is-10 not dealing with that. 11 MR. WYLIE: I know, but you are asking what we have. 12 We know more in August, and by that time, the staff, at least {} 13 INPO you know. 14' CHAIRMAN REMICK: I. don't think we would know by 15 August. They indicated'INPO is collecting that information so 16 they can put it in the agenda for their CEO conference, which 17 is usually October I believe, or November time span, and how 18 that is coming along. 19 MR. WYLIE: But if that is procedures, by the end of 20 the year this thing should have jelled to where the staff ' 21 could find out from INPO what is being done and enforce it. 22 CHAIRMAN REMICK: They would have the code for the 23 operators. s 24 DR. SIESS: The Commission doesn't need a policy

                             .25           statement about sleeping on duty. They have shut down a plant l

HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4888 __ _ . ~ - . _ - _ _ . _ ,

109 1 because the operator slept on duty without a policy statement, I 2 without a regulation. They don't need a policy statement. 3 MR. MICHELSON: Make sure they don't have any doubt 4 in anybody's mind about it. 5 DR. SIESS: If they don't have it by now, if the 6 utilities don't have any doubt they could continue to' operate 7 with sleeping. operators, then we better worry about the ' 8 management. 9 CHAIRMAN REMICK: Al? 10 DR. LEWIS: Two things--first, you know, there are 11 three options for us as I see it, on this proposed policy 12 statement as we see it now. One is we can say it is great. I (} 13 am not ready to recommend that ACRS do that. 14 Second option is we can say wait, run a delaying 15 action and see what INPO comes up with, and the third is that, 16 a fairly hard nosed one, which is sort of what Chet is saying 17 and which I am inclined to, which is to say there is ree.lly 18 nothing in this that is of sufficient level to be in a 19 Commission policy statement. That is to say, I agree you 20 don't have to tell people they shouldn't sleep on the job. 21 You don't have to tell people they should wear clothes when 22 they are in the control room. 23 There are certain things which you know, by any 24 reasonable standard, would be upheld if they were subject to 25 enforcement action on them because they are general cannons of HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4088

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

110 i being a professional in any profession, and I haven't seen--I h( ) 2 have got to tell you this thing as it is, the subjects which 3 go beyond that, the only specifics are the ones involving 4 music, and eating at station, which to my mind are unclear or 5 -controversial. I don't believe one should prohibit using 6 this--doesn't do that, but discourages it because there is 7 music and music, you don't want rock. bands. 8 CHAIRMAN REMICK: And there is eating, popping an M 9 & M in your mouth. 10 DR. LEWIS: And/or some people function well eating 11 a hamburger while they are standing there. Also airline 12 pilots eat at their station. There is nowhere else to eat, {} 13 but the rule is that somebody else is in charge while they are 14 doing it. It is the transfer of responsibility, not the place 15 you sit while you are eating that is important, but this 16 concentrates on where you sit while you are eating, so the 17 places where it is specific I think it is arguable, and in 18 certain, and many other places, either arguable or not given 19 in the Commission policy statement, so I would be prepared to 20 say tell, that ACRS which advises the Commission after all, 21 should say to the Commission you know, you were wrong to 22 insist on a policy statement on this thing. 23 CHAIRMAN REMICK: Okay. Any other views? This is 24 becoming very clear to me what your views are. 25 MR. MICHELSON: There is more than one. HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4888

111 1 CHAIRMAN REMICK: Yes. Chris, do you have any

 -( )  2 comments?

3 MR. GIMMY: No. I don't think--my only comment 4 would be that these, I disagree with this gentleman that this 5 is more specific than that. I find this very unspecific. I 6 am holding up the INPO efforts. 7 I don't think you are going to get more 8 ;rofessionalism until you do, you get some specific. That's 9 my input for what it is worth, until you get specific to 10 something that the people on shift can understand. 11 DR.-SIESS: Maybe we need to define professionalism. 12 I am a professional I thought. I am a registered structural 13 engineer. I have a Ph.D., and am I a professional because I 14 adhere to a dress code and always wear a tic? 15 DR. LEWIS: You are a professional because you know r 16 more than is absolutely required to do your job. That's what 17 a prof essional 1:s . , 18 DR. SIESS: I don't know what my job is. i 19 DR. LEWIS: That's the way you bound it. 20 MR. HICHELSON: How about sleeping on duty? 21 DR. SIESS: I do all the time. I am sitting around 22 in front of the television set reading a stack of ACRS 23 documents and late at night I fall asleep. 1 24 DR. LEWIS: I am a theoretical physicist. j 25 CHAIRMAN REMICK: I appreciate your clear guidance. l HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4888

112 1 We will-proceed. I'suggest we take a ten-minute break. We . \,_/ 2 are' running behind here, and then take up the other two issues 3 that were deferred from our last meeting. 4 MR. ALDERMAN: The staff is not coming in? 5 CHAIRMAN REMICK: I think people agree we.will 6 handle it as Subcommittee record. We will ask staff to have 7 somebody there that can answer questions if they come up. 8 ; DR. SIESS: I think we have got enough to do without 9 bringing in staff. 10 CHAIRMAN REMICK: Do you want us to invite somebody 11 from NUMARC or INPO to be there? I personally don't think it 12 is necessary, but I don't know. () 13 DR. LEWIS: I think it is confusing the issue. 14 MR. MICHELSON: Only if they are asked some big , 15 questions. I don't think we can-- i 16 CHAIRMAN REMICK: I will not plan on doing that 17 then, and Garmon, would you see that somebody, either yourself 18 or somebody, is here to represent the staff? 19 Okay. All right. Let's take a ten-minute break 20 until 25 after. 21 (A brief recess was taken.) 22 CHAIRMAN REMICK: We will continue the Human Factors 23 Subcommittee meeting, and we have two items that we deferred 24 from the last meeting of the Subcommittee, both to be 25 precented by Tom Ryan of the Office of Research. 9 HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4888 ,

                                                                                                                      +

113 1 The first one is cognitive environment simulator. g

     '(_)  2 Tom?

3 MR. RYAN: Could I have the lights turned down a 4 little bit? { 5 My name is Tom Ryan. I am an engineering 6 psychologist within the Office of Research, and basically I am 7 here today in response to, from the Subecmmittee to talk a 8 little bit about a couple of the initiatives that are ongoing 9 as part of what we call the human performance reliability 10 research activities. What I would like to do is just say a l 11 few wo.rds about the activity itself and then get into a 12 discuss: cc first of an initiative which is a computer-based () 13 and dat, sanagement system known as NUCLARR, a nuclear 14 computeriz-w1 library for assessing reactor reliability. You 15 were provided a copy of a NUREG CR 4639, an overview of that 16 system, sometime ago. 17 The second thing I would like to talk about is an 18 artificial intelligence-based decision-making analyzer known 19 as CES, or cognitive environment simulation. And likewise, ! 20 you were provided with a copy of NUREG CR 4862, which is an l 21 overview of that system. 22 Before I move on, I would like to call your 23 attention to the last seven pages of the handout that you 24 have. This is a fact sheet that covers this entire activity, [ 25 talks about the purpose, the background, the research l HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4888 / l

114 1 objective, the research elements, the method, what has been

           . (~x =
          -(_)                              2 accomplished to date with proper references, and what is 3 planned and ongoing for FY 1988 and           '89. You will notice on-4 it that-there is a little date, the April 22nd, 1988.            I l

5 update this frequently, and what, its intent it is to provide 6 people with a very thumbnail sketch of the, this hole 7 activity. 8 With that in mind, I would like to say a few words 9 about the activity of which these two projects are a part. 10 First of all, this activity has been ongoing since 1982, and 11 unlike the rest of the human factors program, it was never 12 discontinued, so consequently, there are a number of products () 13 that have come out of it. 14 Basic purpose is to develop data and a method for 15 supporting amongst other things human reliability analysic 16 type work. However, I wish to point out that the emphasis 17 here has been developing methods and data that can support 18 larger human factors type exercises, and I think that will 19 become clearer with what I have to say. 20 As I mentioned, we are involved with data, tools, 21 for doing human performance modeling, a data bank, procedures 22 for integrating the behavioral scientists in this kind of 23 activity, and this final area talks about methods of 24 extensions, larger human factors issues which I will mention (} 25 in a little bit, and down the left-hand side is simply a HERITAGE REPORTINC COMPANY -- (202)628-4888

115 1 listing of the research steps we go through when we are doing .r) (_ 2 efforts in areas, feasibility analysis, developing the 3 prototype, doing initial evaluation,'and.then doing transfer. 4 Very quickly, for 1988, we have ten projects going. 5 I know you see only six entries here. Some are multiple 6 projects. First of all, George Mason University has developed 7 a very interesting methodology which hopefully will allow us 8 to use data from other environments in work in the nuclear 9 setting. That is, give us a set of criteria, both at the 10 behavioral, psychological level, that will permit us to 11 compare tasks performed in the nuclear power plant with those 12 performed and for which a lot of data is available from other () 13 environments. 14 This Brookhaven project is the management project 15 that we discussed at the last meeting which involves 16 developing an organizational model, idantifying the pertinent 17 managers and supervisors, how they influwnce performance and 18 safety, what kind of data is needed to get measures on that, 19 how to go about getting it, and finally, how to take that 20 information and generate your probability statements. 21 At the last meeting you had, we promised you a 22 concept paper which should come to Mr. Alderman probably 23 within the next week for distribution to the members of the 24 Subcommittee for their review.

   }

25 Also have work at the Wostinghouse Research and HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4888

116 1 Development Center. This is the cognitive environment ( 2 simulation that I am going to be talking about in a few 3 mi'nutes. This is work with the Commission in the European 4 community to do some technology transfer research on a 5 maintenance, a model that we have that we have developed, and 6 also do some methods, evaluation work. Work at INEL over here 7 involves NUCLARR, the data bank activities, and out of 8 Lawrence Livermore there is work going on to take the correct 9 PRA process and integrate into it the behavioral scientists, 10 that is, who should he or she be, what should they be doing, 11 the milestones be, and what kinds of tools should they be 12 using to do it, and to interact with the rest of the group. 13 Finally, I would like te say a couple of words about 14 this thing called methods extension. As I mentioned earlier, 15 all of these efforts are based on the assumption that if you 16 really want to analyze human performance, the process is the 17 same whether you want to ultimately generate error probability 18 statement or performance indicator or simply use that 19 information to make changes, so basically the methods that 20 have been developed here require people to go out and do 21 legitimate human factors reviews, use that information as the 22 input to these various modeling techniques, which in our case 23 ultimately result in an error probability statement, but the 24 methods that we, have been developed here and the data can be O 25 used for more general human factors purposes. i HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4888

117 t 1 With that in mind, I would like.tx) turn-to the

        '2   NUCLARR activity.

3 (Slide) 4 HR. RYAN: One of those things I am supposed to talk 5 about; a few years ago the risk assessment community asked 6 that a human reliability data bank be developed'for a nuclear 7, setting. We did do research. This resulted in about two and 8 a half years ago in a NUREG CR 4010 technical specification 9 for a human reliability data bank. 10 We then took that specification, and we had the 11 Idaho National Engineering Laboratory automate it, and develop 12 a computer-based management system for colating, storing, (} 13 aggregating, storing and retrieving human error probability 14 data. Now the PRA community was sufficiently impressed with 15 the taxonomy that we had developed that they asked us to 16 extend it so it would handle component failure, hardware 17 component failure data also. So NUCLARR today is not sin; ply a 18 human reliability data bank. It is a more general data bank 19 for both hardware and human type data. s 20 As I mentioned, it is located, it is up and running. 21 It is located at Idaho National Engineering Laboratory, and 22 basically what we are doing right now is loading data for 23 subsequent dissemination to the user community which is, I {} 24 will explain in just a minute. 25 (Slide) HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4888

118 1 MR. RYAN: A' couple of words about the taxonomy-- (~' ()y 2 basically if you go to the documentation, you will see a sort 3 of nested arrangement or on the vertical axis, we have plant 4 types, venders nested by plant, systems venders, components 5 and systems, and finally displays and controls in components. 6 It takes about 16,000 cells to accommodate that part of the 7 data bank. 8 on the human side, we talk about actors, and action 9 verbs. That is who does what? Now one of the tremendous 10 efforts that took place over a long period of time were 11 developing a set of operating definitions, and you would be 12 very surprised at the difficulty one has when you try to label () 13 things and get mutual agreement. For example, we started out 14 with over a hundred action verbs and when we got finished we 15 had 20 that basically are mutually explosive as far as human 16 behaviors are concerned. 17 Now the horizontal axis, for the hardware side, we

18 have basically component categories as electrical mechanical, 19 the type pumps valve, whatever, the design, centrifugal pump

20 versus other kinds of pumps, and the failure modes start, 21 stop, and that basically is the configuration or the network

. 22 that the user of this particular data base moves through. L i 23 That is matching component configurations by acter and action l ( 24 verbs or by these various categories on the equipment side. L ( 25 MR. HICHELSON: What does failure mode mean in this l l HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4888

119 1 case? 5

 /~

(T / 2 MR. RYAN: If something should be in the off 3 position, it is in the on position. 4 MR. MICHELSON: That's not very clear. You mean 5 that--and this is if it is a reliability data bank, it 6 contains experience on failures I' guess, is that right? 7 MR. RYAN: I am not sure I understand. 8 HR. MICHELSON: Just on, it is just not clear to me 9 what this is. 10 MR. RYAN: Which isn't clear? 11 MR. MICHELSON: The last line of your slide, it says 12 failure mode. I can understand type and design of hardware. () 13 Failure mode and normal state I am not sure of. Failure mode 14 can mean fail on loss of electric power, here is what it does, 15 or it could mean failure experience in this type, broke a 16 shaft and last time it did something else. 17 MR. RYAN: That was what we have. You are talking 18 about-- 19 MR. MICHELSON: The manner in which it failed? 20 MR. RYAN: Not only that, but also indicating to the 21 user what its normal state should be. 22 MR. MICHELSON: Normal state should be that it 23 works. Reliability of a piece of equipment is when you want (} 24 to get it, it works. So well, okay. But failure mode here 25 means whether the shaft broke or switch failed or whatever? HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -~ (202)628-4888

120 1 HR. RYAN: That's right. r ~s k_)' 2 HR. HICHELSON: Thank you. 3 HR. RYAN: Sure. Okay. At the intersects in this 4 type of arrangement, on the human side, in each of the cells, 5 we have data individually presented by medium. We can get 6 data from expert judgment. We can get 1.t as a result of 7 running computer codes. We can get it as a result of doing 8 something in field reports, for example, so that is shown 9 individually. And also there is an indication of what the 10 source was. Did this come from some NUREG or did it come from 11 a PRA or something like that? 12 And basically what the user sees are the task () 13 conditions. He already knows who the actor, what the action 14 is, what the equipment configuration, but now the conditions 15 under which this failure has occurred or this failure rate is 16 representing in terms of how much time might be allowed to do 17 the task or anything that might put conditions on the function 18 that is being performed. The individual gets point estimate 19 on uncertainty confidence intervals where performance shaping 20 factors--training, procedures. or whatever--have been 21 considered. The scale values are there. If in tact raw data 22 was presented in the source, those are indicated, and as a 23 matter of fact, what we have done with this data base which 24 initially was supposed to accept only probabalistic

     /}

25 information, we now have automated a procedure that we have i

i HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)C28-4888

121 1 developed independent of this program that allows us to take a

 '(_)          2   raw data reports and estimate error probability statements on.

3 line. . 4 MR. MICHELSON: Are you using'NPRDS data to put-5 input to you? l 6 MR. RYAN: That couple of slides-- J i 7 MR. MICHELSON: Using LER data as a sourco? 8 MR. RYAN: That's right, yes. 9 MR. MICHELSON: It is not human information source. ', 10 MR. RYAN: Sequence coding system to actually derive - 11 what information. 12 MR. MICHELSON: Doesn't tell you how many times they f () 13 have to do it, that he did it right. 14 MR. RYAN: There is a procedure that is part of this f 15 methodology that is now part of NUCLARR which talks about 16 collecting raw reports and then going through either a task 17 analysis or a concensus expert judgment procedure for I 18 estimating a denominator, and it is on those, on those, either l 19 of those bases that error probabilities are calculated. 20 MR. MICHELSON: They are doing some kind, got some [ 21 kind of standardized estimating process? , 22 MR. RYAN: Right.  ; 23 MR. MICHELSON: Then you are using LER data as an {} 24 indication of failure and you are trying to estimate how many 25 times that same thing worked right? HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4888 l

122 1 HR. RYAN: The methodology, in fact the methodology. k_/ 2 that we developed that is listed >-in the fact sheet you have

3. there under NUREG CR 519 actually used the LERs and the test 4 bed when the methodology was being developed.

5 The other thing he sees is source reference, 6 indication of where the information came from, and basically 7 also have two algcrithms. One is based on classical 8 statistics,' and the other on Basian statistics where certain 9 of-these data are aggregated across the cells. They are also 10 aggregated up through the component and system level, combined 11 in certain ways under certain conditions, mainly because in 12 the human error probability arena, we do not get data at the () 13 system and component level. Most of it is down at things that are done interfacing with individual displays, controls, and 14 15 one thing or another, so we have developed a methodology of 16 actually aggregating data vertically up through the data base. 17 HR. MICHELSON: You are well aware, of course, that 18 the LER system was never intended to be a reliability data 19 base source? 20 MR. RYAN: Yes. 21 MR. MICHELSON: It was only an event source, to find 22 out the kind of events that are occurring. Somehow you have 23 taken an event report and manipulated it into a means of {} 24 determining reliability of components involved in the event. 25 MR. RYAN: What we, we have basically done when we HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4888

l 123 ljl 1 have gone out to search for information, the LER system is one 2 of the systems that we are looking at. 3 MR. MICHELSON: That is a source of informstion on 4 events. It is to my knowledge not a very good source of 5 information on reliability. It is not collected that way at 6 all. 7 MR. RYAN: I don't think that I woulf disagree with 8 you. 9 MR. MICHELSON: Using it for reliability library 10 seems to be kind of strange unless there is no better source 11 in the world than LERs. You use what you have got. 12 MR. RYAN: One of the things that should be kept in () 13 mind, if there is one thing that came out of the developmental 14 phase of the data base itself was, is that the community told 15 us that the users wanted to be the ultimate arbiters of the 16 data, that they wanted the data calculated, and by looking at 17 source references, going back to where the data was generated 18 from, they would make the decision as to whether or not they 19 would use or not use the data. Sc what we are-- 20 MR. MICHELSON: Look at any number in the data base 21 and tell what the source was. 22 MR. RYAN: We have a clearing house. You can call 23 an 800 number, get the documentation itself. If the number, (} 24 for example, came out of a study of some kind, we would give 25 you the study. You can read it to make your final decision. HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4888

124 i 1 'If it came out of a PRA report, we will send you the tables () '2 out of the PRA report that it was in, plus the narrative 3 information associated with that number, how they arrive at 4 it. So.the point hero is the user is the ultimate arbiter. 5 On the hardware side, of course, it is similar kinds 6 of information, failure rate probabilities, confidence 7 intervals, units of analysis, will talk about per unit time or 8 per demand and so on. 9 (Slide) 10 MR. RYAN: Okay. You were asking about data  :

                                                                                                     ,I 11   sources. Basically what we have had to do almost is to 12   develop an accounting system to keep track o2 the potential

{} 13 sources of information that are out there from one place or 14 another. We are entering human error probability data from 15 each EP data source stores such as 1278, the Swaine handbook, 16 and things like the IEEE component failure rate data store. i 17 Those are all being put into the data bank. We have gone 18 through PRA reports and have extracted information from those. i 19 MR. MICHELSON: When you extract that information.  ! i 20 are you indicating the true source of it or are you just , t 21 indicating it care from a PRA report where it may have been a 22 flip of the coin that got it in there? l 23 MR. RYAN: I am going to play to the same thing. We l l 24 take it out of the table and have available--we indicate the l ( 25 source, and you as a user ha*. the freedom to ask for that and l i HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4888

125 1 you will be given the information out of the report that ( 2 pertains to it to help you make a decision as to whether or . 3 not you may or may not be willing to use it. 4 We also are putting information in from research 5 reports. Every one of the evaluations of these methods that 6 we have done have involved people actually using them to 7 calcu. ate error probabilities, so at the end of the report, we 8 have tables of data with appropriate caveat that have come out  ; L 9 of those projects that people ostensibly could use as 10 probabilities. Those are being put here. We are actually 11' running groups. Now we know that there are going to be some 12 data cells that the community tells us that they need data () 13 for, that there is none out there, so we are actually starting 14 to put together consensus of expert judgment groups using 15 things like slim mod. 16 We are also starting to do runs from the MAPPS code 17 and planning to do it with CEScode as soon as we possibly can, 18 focusing on some of the cells that we are told that people 19 want human error probability data for which there is none out 20 there. 21 We are also collecting information for training , 22 simulators. You asked about existing reporting systems. We t 23 are using sequence coding system. Also NPRDS, IIPRDS; we are (} 24 working with the Safeguard people on the SSEL system, and any ! 25 other source that there might be for this kind of information. HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- i202)628-4888

126 1 MR. MICHELSON: Have you experienced any difficulty O (/ 2 on getting access to any part of NPRDS that you might need? 3 MR. RYAN: No. We have an access code. Jeannie

       -4 Boyle, who has responsibility for both systems, has already 5 provided us with an access code so we can go directly to 6 either system to do our retrievals, and that's basically what 7 Idaho is doing.

8 MR. MICHELSON: You said that there was a user, and 9 if I called you up you would send me the documentation. 10 Can you send me the NPRDS documentation, too? 11 HR. RYAN: Send you the same runs they gave us. 1 1 12 MR. MICHELSON: You are not doing your own runs? () 13 You are asking INPO to do the runs? 14 MR. RYAN: They are doing the runs, yes. So you 15 would get, you would, you have available to you the same 16 information that we were given to use to do the estimating. 17 MR. MICHELSON: Delete things like the utilities and 18 so forth, if I really want to find out where the numbers are 19 coming from, I can go back a ways, but maybe not very far. 20

MR. RYAN: Call the 800 number and you would receive 21 in the mail the copy of the material that we used. You would 22 also know that NUREG CR 3519 procedure was used to generate 23 the number and you could go back just like in any other study

(} 24 and make a decision as to whether or not that's a number that 25 you would like to use. HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4888

                                                                                                           '127 1             Finally, I mentioned we have got George Mason coming                                              [

(. 2- up with'a methodology for using data from other environments. 3 They are also putting together a data taxonomy we hope to be

     .4  able to read in the system. We have a lot of data available 5  to us from hotter data bases, and other kinds of work in the 6  military, that we are not putting in the data base yet until 7  George Mason gets finished with some of their work.                                                In fact, t

8 as I speak here, there is a meeting between the Idaho people 9 and George Haeon people to talk about some of that data. . 10 HR. MICHELSON: Does it mean we are getting nuclear 11 Navy data into it? 12 HR. RYAN: Anything that we can, that we can get our 4 () 13 hands on. 14 HR. MICHELSON: Oh--caveat. 15 HR. RYAN: Let me make one quick point which is 16 interesting. You may think it is easy to get people to give I 17 you data you can use. We have spent a lot of time in trying , i 18 to deal with information that people give us to put in the 19 data bank. That has been very difficult because we have to P 20 have, we have to know what the conditions are under which 21 these tasks are performed, where the data came from, how these 22 things were calculated and so on, and we have had to discard 23 tremendous amounts of information because they gave it to us t 24 in an improper way. 25 We have written three documents that if you want to l 9 HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4888 i

128

1. give us training simulator data, for example, here is a t

() 2 self-standing document that tells you how to set it up, how to 3 collect the data, and how to report it to us so that we can t 4 use it. If you want to give'us raw human performance data 5 from the field,-here is a document that we give you to do the 6 same thing. And finally, if you want to give us hardware 7 data, whether it is in probabalistic format or just raw report 8 format, this is a document that we give to people that is 9 self-standing, even has addresses in it where to send it, what 10 forms to fill out and so on. We found that to be absolutely  ! 11 necessary to ensure that when people do some work for us and - 12 give us some data, at least we get it in a form that t:e can I 13 use. I will leave these documents with Mr. Alderman in case

             )

14 anybody is at all interested in it. 15 Input process--the way we put data into this data L 16 base, the staff at Idaho prepares the information. There is a 17 12 step procedure that must be followed to get the information t 18 into the data bank. Once they have a significant amount of 19 information available, we have three standing lists of  ; 20 experts. In one list you have human factors people, second i 21 list, probabalistic risk assessment people, and third list is , 22 operations people. And on a rotating basis, they are brought 23 together at Idaho for a week's period into what we call human  : 24 hardware reliability analysis group, and they actually make , 25 the decisions for each piece of information that goes into HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4888 i

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

129 1 this data base. 2 In fact, we just had a session out there a couple of 3 weeks ago where people came in for a whole week, and this is I I 4 what we basically had them do. So Idaho puts no information 5 into this data bank before it is QAed and passed on, certain , 6 decisions are made about it by a rotating panel of experts I 7 that are brought in. 8 MR. MICHELSON: You didn't name designers as any of ' 9 the people that review this data. You named operations. I 10 don't know. You know, an operator is one thing. You use 1 11 equipment one way, and a designer views performance of 12 equipment a different way. () 13 Don't you have designers reviewing some of this? - 14 MR. RYAN: We basically now have three lists we have  ; i- 15 people from that come together, work together. There is the + i 16 Idaho staff, which they supplement with their own people. I 17 know they have got a large group of people. They have got t 18 some special kind of thing they were dealing with. And we

. 19 have, bring in committees of people for a week that are picked 20 off of each of those three lists to actually make the final I

21 decisions about where the data goes, and so on, if it goes 22 into the data bank and so on. i 23 MR. MICHELSON: I don't know if that answers my I l {} 24 question. Who are on the three lists? What certain l l 25 MR. WARD:  ! l HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4888 ,

130 1 classes of people?

                                      .()                         -2            MR. RYAN:           We have people like Young on the PRA i

3 group, people from Pickard, Lowe and Gary, Bill Hanneman. 4' MR. MICHELSON: Disciplines, not names of people.

                                                                  -5            MR. WARD:           Are there designers on one of the lists?                                                    [

6 MR. RYAN: Designer of nuclear power plants, vender 7 people. 8 MR. MICHELSON: Equipment. 9 MR. RYAN: We have a couple of vender people--Bob 10 starkey from Babcocks and Wilcox if you want to-- 7 11 MR. MICHELSON: What background? He could be a i 12 human factors man working for B&W or he could be a switch gear (} 13 designer or he could be a-- 14 MR. RYAN: The answer to your question is we don't 15 have design engineers. 16 MR. MICHELSON: Many times reliability, to 17 understand reliability data you have to understand the i 18 hardware very well. 19 MR. GIMMY: It is possible you are talking about two l 20 different things. He is talking about human error thing. You 21 are talking about equipment errors. 22 MR. MICHELSON: It is the hardware part. [ 23 MR. RYAN: Let me tell you the kind of decisions. 4 24 They make decisions as to whether or not there is enough 25 information so that a complete cell can be formed from the 4 HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4888

131 1 data. They make some decisions aboit how the estimates were

                      '( )                2   calculated.      They make decicions about what cells they should 3   rightly go in, and they make decisions about whether or not          [

4 aggregation, this particular set, what, what kinds of " 5 aggregations it might or might not participate in. 6 I indicated to you that we have individual entries 7 in a given cell and then we have numbers that represent 8 aggregations across those cells or within the sell, but in i 9 some cases, those, all of the data is not used because it does i 10 not meet certain criteria. 11 MR. MICHELSON: I am a little acquainted with NPRDS, d 12 what is in there, how it is handled, how'can we interpret it, [ r () 13 and I would say that unlecs you are well acquainted in the i 14 hardware area, like electrical switch gear, and you are trying l 15 to interpret this in terms of reliability, and trying to come 16 up with numbers certainly an operations type would not be the 17 man to use. Certainly a human factors man would not be the 18 person to use. ! 19 MR. RYAN: We also have PRA people, i  ! > 20 MR. MICHELSON: They would not necessarily--they 21 might even be lesser qualified than either of the two previous  ! 22 ones. They know how to manipulate matrices and so forth for I

23 fault trees but we are talking now about the fundamentals of 7 t

[ 24 the hardware. It is purported to be a hardware data base 25 which it is in part purported to be. You better have hardware HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4888  :,

       <                                                                                     132 1  people looking at the data, n

(,) 2 MR. RYAN: You don't think the people that work in

3. the plants and mechanical engineers know anything?

4 MR. MICHELSON: You are starting to name mechanical l 5_ engineers. 6 MR. RYAN: The people that, the people--Young is a l 7 mechanical engineer. Postolakas is a mechanical engineer. 8 Many of these people, that's their degreed area. 9 MR. MICHELSON: Then I think that answers my 10 question. Yes, there are people qualified in the areas that 11 you are looking at in hardware to do these kinds of judgments. 12 {} 13 MR. RYAN: Yes. 14 MR. MICHELSON: Okay. Thank you. 15 MR. RYAN: As far as the searches concerned, you can 16 use this data bank and go through on a menu basis, stepping 17 through to find individual cells. 18 We also have the capability of doing ad hoc 19 searches. You will call up the screen and ask for data in any 20 form that you would like it. You can have the data in a 21 variety of ways. 22 First of all, if you have, for example, some 23 statistical code that you would like to do some kind of an 24 analysis of data, you specify what types of data would you 25 like from the data base. We build the file for you, give it HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4888

133 1 to you, and ask you format so you can, you can run it_through

  \          2 some other kind of statistical code. Behavioral scientists, 3 we either work SPSS or SAS, which are two social science
            ~4 codes, but you could use almost any company. We don't do the 5 calculations, but we prepare the data in a way that you can 6 use this.

7 Secondly, in process, we are setting up the data 8 bank so it can talk or interface directly with other computer 9 codes such as IRIS and SARA, so that as a matter of fact, the 10 person that is doing, is setting up the IRIS code and actually 11 doing the core melt frequency calculations using SARA can 12 interface directly with the data bank. () 13 And I mentioned already we do have a clearing house 14 feature that in any of this information, you have an 800 15 number you can call to get the referenced documentation. 16 MR. GIMMY: Question--do you have any plans to put 17 your raw data file in a form it can be used on McIntosh 18 instead of IBM? Because there are a lot of codes such as file 19 HAJOR and REFLEX that make it-- I 20 MR. RYAN: Deal with this format. 21 MR. GIMMY: Yes. I think then they can input it in 22 ASCII. What I am saying is I went through your procedure to 23 get something, which is in the paper here, and it is pretty 24 complex. There are a lot of, as you probably know, a lot of 25 McIntosh codes where you can make calculations or do searches i HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4888  ;

134

   ,1  very easy in something like FILE or even easier in REFLEX.

p) (_ 2 You just draw a line between the name and say you want to 3 connect these, please tell me-- 4 DR. SIESS: REFLEX, that's on the IBM, too.

    -5            MR. GIMMY:  Is it?                                                                 ;

6 CHAIRMAN REMICK: I thought they were from 7 California. Are they from South Carolina? 8 MR. RYAN: All of this is coded on modular 2 IBM PC 9 system, so basically we are mostly compatible with IBM PCs. 10 Keep in mind that the government allows us to deal with 11 certain kir.ds of computers. I don't believe McIntosh is one 12 of them. In fact, to go to modular 2 we had to get an (} 13 exception from the current ADP guidelines and regulations with 14 the NRC. 15 MR. GIMMY: I was looking for transportabuilt of 16 your data base. I wasn't asking to work it up, but what would 17 you think would be the best medium to transport it to a place 18 where all the PRA guys had Apples? They don't all have IBMs. 19 MR. RYAN: I will get into the-- 20 MR. GIMMY: Despite it being a federal government 21 directive. 22 MR. RYAN: All I can tell you is data that comes 23 out, can be manipulated by other codes, comes out in this 24 format. If it turns out the government goes to some other 25 computer system, then obviously we will have to generate HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4888

a 135 1 software that will accommodate it, but right now, that's the

      ~T     2 environment that we are working on.

(G 3 As,here, output cell presentation, summary reports, 44 we will even give you graphics, time line curves it will 5 generate based on your ad hoc searches, and finally in this 6 format.. 7 CHAIRMAN REMICK: Gentlemen, I think we have lost i 8 control. We have a number of conversations going on. I have 9 lost control. 10 MR. RYAN: Okay. Lastly, you talked about the 11 medium. This data base comes in two forms, one on diskette 12 form, and the other in hard copy. The data base is intended 13 for us to give to you with all of the capabilities we have to 14 operate on your own PC wherever you may be located. 15 MR. MICHELSON: Does that need AT? 16 MR. RYAN: IBM PC, AT, XT, other series. 17 MR. MICHELSON: It will work on XT as well? 18 MR. RYAN: That's right. I have got one on mine 19 right now. The way it is documented, you have got Volume 1 of 20 this 4639 which is the quick overview. Volume 2 is for the - 21 programming people. It is all the documentation per the ADP 22 requirements of this agency. 23 Volume 3 is for the people that are managing the 24 data base and providing the clearing house function. 25 Volume 4 are the user procedures, and if you are a i l HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4888 j

i" 136 1 contributor to this data base, what you get with' Volume 4 are ,~ (_) 2 the series-of diskettes to run the whole system up on your PC. 3 MR. MICHELSON: How big is it presently? 4 MR. RYAN: I have it up. They are going to bring me 5 version 1.1 tomorrow and it takes about--I have got a hard 6- disc, and.it takes eight diskettes to put on the whole 7 operating system plus the data storage. 8 MR. MICHELSON: How many megabytes is that? It does 9 take about eight diskettes to load it up? 10 MR. RYAN: Right. That is everything. 11 CHAIRMAN REMICK: The data store will continually be 12 expanding. () 13 MR. MICHELSON: Double-sided diskettes? 14 MR. RYAN: Right. If you are one of the people that 15 provides us any data, you also get the diskettes to run from 16 your location. We plan to publish this along with the 17 diskettes early in May, the first go-around, and what the , 18 intent is, is as we expand the data store, we just send you 19 new diskettes, the data side to expand them. We realize there 20 are people that don't have computers, so we are also 21 publishing Volume 5, which is the hard copy. It is in four 22 parts. Part 1 is a short document like you have seen. 23 Appendix, the first appendix is the HEP information. Appendix 24 3 is the hardware, and Appendix 4 are a set of aggregated ("}

\_-                                                                       '

25 numbers that have been requested of us by the community. HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4888

137' 1 Since you don't have the capability in thw hard copy-n: (_f 2 version to go for ad hoc searches and combined data in various 3- ways, we are putting together a volume of aggregations that 4 have been requested of us, and that's going to be sort of a 5 living document. .It is going to come out in a binder form 6 so-- 7 CHAIRMAN REMICK: Is it true there are users who 8 would not have computers, realizing one in a thousand might 9 have an Apple, but-- 10 MR. RYAN: What we'run into, the Europeans are very 11 interested and they have different, non-compatible computer 12 systems. We have got a person out at Idaho trying to figure () 13 out if you have got an Apple, what do we have to do to this so 14 you can run it up on your Apple? How complicated does that 15 get for us? Surprisingly, I guess a lot of these people _that 16 are out actually doing PRAs do not have expansive computers. 17 CHAIRMAN REMICK: I can't imagine they can do PRA 18 without some kind of computer. 19 MR. RYAN: I agree with you. There are people in 20 universities and so on that are interested in this that don't. 21 HR. MICHELSON: How big is the control program for 22 this? I assume you have to load up some kind of control 23 program. Then you feed a burch of data diskettes, and put (} 24 your control programs as one shot each time. One diskette has 15 all the controls. HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4888

138 1 MR. RYAN: -There are a couple of them, but keep in 2 mind also we are developing this interface. 'The evolution of [G~T 3 the system is going forward a little bit, so probably the 4 first two or three iterations of sending out the diskettes l 5 will involve control diskettes as well as the data store, and l 6 hopefully after that point in time it will be just pretty much 7 the data store. i 8 One of the things, I have been having, you know, 9 sort of everybody wants their idea incorporated in this, and i i 10 we have been trying to hold the line a little bit because we  ? 11 don't want to get to the point we can no longer use it on a 12 PC. There are all kinds of nice things that you might do, but ' 13 pretty soon people say you have got to may have a mainframe 14 for that. 15 HR. MICHELSON: The control diskettes set up the 16 format on which these things will run out. Can you change the 17 format or you would have to do your own programming? i 18 MR. RYAN: You have got ad hoc search capability. 19 That will allow you to print things out in a variety of ways, - 1 20 including graphics. We do not allow you to do things, make 21 any changes, put any data into the data base. You are locked , l 22 out of the input side.  ! l l 23 MR. MICHELSON: Once you get the diskettes and the l  ; I 24 control programs, I think you could probably do anything you l l t 25 wanted to, couldn't you?  : i l l HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4888

I' I 139 [. 1 .MR. RYAN: I would assume if you are sharp enough

     '.( )             2  and a fifteen-year old kid in some high school, if they could 3 break into some of these codes in the Pentagon, I guess you 4 could.

5 The idea is to maintain configuration control over

                      '6 .the data bank, therefore not having people make their own 7 changes because we request that they submit us the information 8 by this other means so that we can put it in the data bank, 9 make it available to everyone.                             That's basically what we are 10 attempting to get people to do.

11 MR. MICHELSON: If somebody said I only want a 12 certain kind of data, would you run new diskettes for them, 13 just a kind of data on it? 14 MR. RYAN: What we will do is include the clearing 15 house function, and this is mentioned in some of the other 16 documentation. Let's say you called, say you were a hard copy 17 user. You can call us and say look, I would like the 18 following kind of run. I have this application, I don't have 19 the ad hoc screen, that I can request this be done from my 20 location, would you please take the following directions and 21 do a run? We will do that. And then we would basically send j 22 you the hard copy printout. 23 MR. MICHELSON: I just wondered, you started getting 24 very bit, you will exceed the hard discs a lot of people have 25 unless they bought real big ones and then it would be nice to HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4888

i 140 1 get enough data to look at your disc and throw the surplus ( (_)/ 2 away. 3 MR. RYAN: What we would be happy to did do--Mr. 4 Gertman is basically the manager of this. He is in town right 5 now--is if the Subcommittee is interested in having a copy of 6- this--we have got all kinds of IBM PCs--would like a copy of 7 an operating system and data base, we have no objection to 8 that. And once you have that, any one of us can come down and 9 talk to you Ebout it. 10 MR. MICHELSON: Is it copy protected or can you make 11 copies of.the copy you send us? 12 MR. RYAN: The intent is that we control the () 13 distribution of them. 14 MR. MICHELSON: Yes, but that doesn't answer my 15 question. You will send me, you send me a set of diskettes. 16 Could I make copies of them? 17 MR. RYAN: The intent is not to allow to you do 18 that, and that is more--as a matter of fact, we would be very 19 happy to expand our usership. It is more so that we can keep 20 track of who has got things rather than being so nervous about 21 the fact that there are being bogus copies out there because 22 the next time around, if you are making a copy for your 23 friend, that we go cut with updated data store, we want to {} 24 make sure that individual gets it, and so it is morei 25 isn't our intent to really try to eliminate. Early i HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4888 I i

141 1 benefit for people to get their own set of diskettes, we are 2 saying that if you give us any data, we will give you the 3 diskettes. 4 MR. WARD: Why don't we get a set? Herman, could we 5 get a set for the Committee? 6 MR. RYAN: It will come with the users NUREG. It 7 will be volume 4. Also give you a copy of Volume 5 which is 8 the hard copy. 9 CHAIRMAN REMICK: Any other questions on NUCLARR? I 10 think we need to move along to keep on schedule? Any other 11 questions on NUCLARR? 12 DR. SIESS: Yes. ( '; 13 CHAIRMAN REMICK: Okay. Go ahead. 14 DR. SIESS: How is this going to enhance safety? 15 MR. RYAN: This is intended as a data bank for 16 people deing reliability evaluations. 17 DR. SIESS: I understand that. I don't consider 18 that an answer. Try again. 19 MR. RYAN: Well, to the degree that reliability 20 evaluations enhance safety, this will-- 21 DR. SEISS: PRA improves safety? 22 MR. RYAN: I would, I would say if the PRA was done 23 correctly, or at least the HRA part of it certainly could. 24 DR. SIESS: How? 25 MR. RYAN: That doesn't mean t. hat I think that the HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4888

142 1 we.y they are done now-- ( 2 DR. SIESS: PRA results in a book, you know, stack L 3 of things that go on the shelf about that long. How does that l 4 -improve safety? 5 HR. WARD: He just wants you to say someone has to  ; 6 take the results and interpret it and do something with them. , 1 7- MR. RYAN: Yes. We are on the input side here. We f 8 would hope that people would come to NUCLARR, would use the 9 information that is in it. 10 DR. SIESS: The people that are doing PRAs? 11 HR. RYAN: This is a data bank that focuses on error . 12 probability data. However, because there are raw data () 13 indicated in some of the cells,- one could sit down and  ; 14 literally treat this as a data base that goes beyond just 15 error ;:robability statements, but the main purpose of it is to i 16 support people who are doing reliability evaluations with the 17 best probabalistic data that we can find that they can use as 18 inputs to whatever, f 19 DR. SIESS: Your customer, your user, is the person 20 who is doing a reliability analysis of a system or [ t 21 probabalistic reliability analysis of a plant? 1 b 22 HR. RYAN: That is correct. That's the community , 23 that requested the research. {} 24 DR. SIESS: That is why you are doing this? Because l 25 they need the data? [ HERITAGE REPORTING COMPA!TY -- (202)628-4888  !

f. ( ,

143 1 HR. RYAN: They have requested a repository for  ! n (_) 2 available dat'a that they can go to to support their analysis, j 3 and that's basically what it is signed. 4 HR. MICHELSO!!: Is this preserved for people who 5 need it, need it, or do you have to pay for it? If I were an 6 outsider, would I have to pay for it? 7 HR. RYAN: This is basically intended to be treated 8 as any other program the NRC has, and that is eventually it 9 goes into the library available to the general public. 10 HR. HICHELSON: The general public has got to pay 11 for it? 12 HR. RYAN: It would be treated under the rules and () 13 regulations that exist within the agency. 14 HR. WARD: That includes the data base which would 15 be updated? 16 HR. RYAN: That is correct. Sure. 17 CHAIRMAN REHICK: I suggest we go on to cognitive 18 environment simulation. 19 HR. RYAN: Okay. 20 (Slide) 21 HR. RYAN: A request that was r,ade a number of years 22 ago, and not just by the ERA community but the general human 23 factors community, was can one come up with some kind of a 24 model or simulation that will have us deal with the

       }

25 decision-making behavior? C HeANv - (2023 s28-4888 E _ ----------_---- ------- HeRIyA s Ree Rn N

144 1 Two and a half years ago we did let a contract to . () 2 the Westinghouse Research and Development Center to help us 3 look into this possibility, and basically, what they did for 4 us was a feasibility study which is documented in this 1 5 document right here. It is recommended that we proceed with 6 an artificial intelligence approach, that development of what 7 we now call the cognitive environment simulation. 8 Now having developed that, that is documented in 7 9 NUREG CR 4862. Now because CES is a deterministic simulation E 10 and does not give you probability numbers, we also had to 11 develop a techraique that we called CREATE--cognitive 12 reliability evaluation technique--to take the output from CES 13 and generate error probability estimates, and that's why you 14 see the CES CREATE here. l 15 The main purpose of my discussion today is to 16 basically talk about CES, and basically the intent of it is to 17 analy:e

                                                                                               . decision-making or intention for formation aspect of 18 behavior. We have, do not involve ours with execution errors.

19 What we are interested in is the, is the cognitive processing i 20 that leads up to a decision to do something or not to do I 21 something. The actual carrying of it out is not part of CES. i  ! 22 As I mentioned here, it is deterministic. It tells j 23 you what the solution is or if it could not arrive at a , 24 solution, and it gives you what we call a process audit. fou l C) 25 can go back in the stream of consciousness so to speak, to l HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4888

145 7 1 make a determination of what was looked at, what the search

  )  2 strategy was, what kind of hypotineses were developed, how they 3 were resolved one way or another, and it is only when it is      .

4 coupled with this CREATE that we actually can use it for human 5 reliability analysis purpose. 6 HR. MICHELSON: The process you are talking about is 7 the mental process that the operator, for instance, is going 8 through to arrive at a decision? 9 HR. RYAN: Right. 10 HR. MICHELSON: You are dealing with that part of 11 the process? . t 12 MR. RYAN: That's the part that we are interested , I () 13 in. The execution of whatever the decision is, is not. 14 HR. MICHELSON: You are dealing, though, with the , 15 reliability of that process? ' 16 MR. RYAN: No. Only after we take the CES outputs i > 17 and run them through this other technique we call CREATE.  ! i 18 MR. HICHELSON: Is CREATE then going back to i , 19 evaluate the mental process? 20 MR. RYAN: CREATE takes the output from the 21 simulation and generates an error probability statement. 22 HR. HICHELSON: Of mental? [ i 23 HR. RYAN: That segment of the--if we can think, if , i t {} 24 I commit an error, okay, incorporated into that probability 1 25 are two things--my decision to make the, whatever it was I l P i i HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4888 j

s . 146 < 1 did, if it is an error of commission and actually execute it 2 or being able to. 3 MR. MICHELSON: I have decided to do something. I 4 reach for the wrong switch. That's one type of orror, but the 5 decision is what is going-- 6 MR. RYAN: We are only interested in what you are 7 going through, mental process, to decide. 9 8 HR. MICHELSON: That's a tricky business, simulate 9 and estimate errors, and mental thought. 10 MR. RYAN: The CES will analyze independent and 11 dependent errors of omission, comission, wrong decision, and 12 it will deal with the phenomenon of recovery. That's () 13 basically what it is designed to do. 14 And of interest to people both inside and outside of 15 HRA, it will pir. point the circumstances and situations in 16 which these kinds of errors can be predicted because basically J.7 what we do is we start running the simulation. We make the 18 situation more complex, vary things until the simulation can 19 no longer solve the problem, and we then say under these 20 conditions, error will always occur, if you have these kinds 21 of conditions set up. 22 DR. SIESS: Don't give people any credit for being 23 smarter than the machine? {} 24 MR. RYAN: Basically what we are mimicking is the 25 knowledge base of the process mechanisms of the individuals HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4888

e: 147 1 that have been assigned to do the particular task. 2 DR. SIESS: You can reach a point where you can say r 3 with confidence that the error will always occur? 4 HR. RYAN: That is correct. 5 DR. SIESS: You can make it so complicated that 6 nobody can ever solve it? 7 HR. RYAN: Host of these, yes. You can when you 8 start varying things like time allowed. Once I get it, I will [ 9 show you how we manipulate the simulation, set it up. That 10 may becone a little clearer. 11 I mentioned this is located right now because we are , 12 doing testing at Westinghouse Research and Development Center ( () 13 outside Pittsburgh, and basically we are doing three things [ 14 as part of this. , 15 Number 1, we held a while back a seminar for people 16 from the various disciplines to look at this, and to give us 17 feedback as to the worthiness of it. For example, we had Alan 18 Newell, one of the fathers of artificial intelligence. Dick 19 Pugh, who I think conducted a seminar for you a while back, [ 20 served as the human factors expert. John Young, who is well f 21 known around the NRC, was our PRA specialist, and we had some 22 others. And basically we held a two-day workshop for them to i 23 go through every aspect of this and give us some suggestions , (} 24 about some finetuning to set it up for our evaluation. 25 And at the present time, we are starting the runs , i HERITAGE REPORTIdG COMPANY -- (202)628-4888 '

146' , I 1 with CES. We have collected training simulated data using  ;

   ..k.  ,,) .                                       2                          people, and we are now going to compare the behavior of CES 3-                         relative to those simulator data. and as far as CREATE is 4                          concerned, we are running another workshop to bring in people                                                          i 5                          for two more days to actually take CES outputs and actually go                                                          !

i 6 through the process we have set upsta generate the error

• i 7 probability statement. We hope to finish this work by the end  ;

8 of September, at which time I will receive possession of all , l 9 of this, and we are going to start the technology transfer , 10 part of the work. , 11 (Slide) i i 4 12 HR. RYAN: How does it operate? Well, as I  ! () 13 mentioned before, it uses an artificial intelligence based i 14 control package called EAGOL which was developed at the l i 15 University of Pittsburgh. Systems was given to us under which 16 to support this work. There have been systems that have been I , 17 set up using this. For instance, one used by the medical 18 profession to do medical diagnosis, but basically the shell f 4 19 that we are using, artificial intelligence cell which CES was  ! ( 20 built on, is something called EAGOL, licensed from the 21 University of Pittsburgh. l f ] 22 Basically what this operates on is a knowledge base.  : i 23 That is what the decision-maker knows about the plant, and i (} 24 process mechanism, how he or she goes about monitoring, , 25 buildings, explanations, and cercain management rules used by i r 4 , HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4888

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

              ?!.

149 ' 1 th3t person to reconcile their knowledge base with their () t 2 perception of what is going On. 3 HR. MICHELSON: This simulation assumes perfect  ; 4 ~ recall of whatever knowledge? 5 HR. RYAN: Doesn't assumu anything. It assumes that 6 you have or I-- [ 7 HR. HICHELSON: Simulates the fact I might have t 8 forgotten. 9 HR. RYAN: I am going to get into that, of how we 10 manipulate. Let's assume if you had a perfect knowledge base, l 11 knew everything there was to know about the plant, and you had 12 the process mechanism set up in a way you could probably solve  : 13 almost any problem-- 14 HR. MICHELSC4: I was thinking of I have a fixed i 15 knowledge base, imperfect. It is fixed. To what extent do I 16 forget some of what is in that knowledge base in the process 17 of simulation? 7 l-18 HR. RYAN: Let me get into some things we are going l 19 to simulate. 20 hR. MICHELSON: Thank you. 21 HR. RYAN: The other aspect of this, I mentioned i 22 that we do not execute decisions. Now when you go through a 23 complex scenario, for instance, an accident sequence in a , 24 nuclear power plant, the minute the individual makes the first O 25 decision, this would all have to come to a stop because we  ! t l l i HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4888 m

p.

             >i                                     ;,;    ,
                    /         4                                                                                         130-
                .41:        >

J-

 ,                              IL         don't execute anything,'so what we do is we hook _CES up to a

[ ) p -'2 ' train'ing_ simulator, and what happens-is the minute that'the

                                                                                                                    ~

m ~ 3- decision is'nade, it i's executed through~'the training 4 si,(simulator. The' training simulator algorithm digests itiand i 5J feeds r back the new plant status to CES:to continue along-the-6- process, so what you can see here~is any kind of fixed-fault

                                                -1.
                                                              ~
         -                      7           tree kind of analysis here is sort of out-the window because 8            the world keeps changing, and that's what really happens in T

9 the real.world as we march down some path. There isn't just 10 usually one decision. There are several points that have vr > 11 tremendous impact on how the whole situation begins to evolve . 12~ Now this is hooked up at' Westinghouse to a training () 13- simulator. I hope next year to be able to do the same thing [ 14 with one of the simulators down in Chattanooga, so that when 15' they are not using it for.other things, we can literally from + 16 a remote station up here run CES and have the training _  : 17 simulator' executing the decisions and coming back with the i 18 next array of stimuli to be analyzed by CES. l 19 You asked about manipulating. l 20 HR. WARD: You don't really need a training 21' simulator. You just need a-- 22 MR. RYAN: You could do it manually, but it gets-- l 23 MR. WARD: You, I mean you don't need a full scope l {} 24 repitea simulator? You just need the software? We don't use anybody in L L25 MR. RYAN: That is correct. . i ! HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4888

a. 151 1 the simulator. We tre just worrying about the software, the 7 -k,) 2 algorithm. 3 MR. WARD: If there is an engineering analyzer, 4 whatever that means, but okay. 5 HR. RYAN: Decision would have to be made how 6- complex is the_ situation I am trying to mimick and do I think 7 that's going to give me sophisticated enough feedback to march 8 through this. Right now we are using a, the full-blown 9 training simulator algorithm, and the intent is to look into 10 possibly doing that with Chattanooga after this program ends 11 because Westinghouse is letting us, sort of giving us free 12 time on the simulator to hook this up to.

m. 13 You asked about how we manipulate things. Well, we

() 14 talk here--my friend David Woods doesn't like the term 15 performance shaping factors, so we will call them performance 16 adjustment factors but despite what he might tell you, they 17 are all the same. But what we do is we simulate situations by 18 manipulating the knowledge base or the process mechanisms. 19 For example, during our evaluation, we are going to 20 be interested in simulating different mental models, and 21 basically what you do is that has two aspects to it. On the 22 knowledge case side, what kind of knowledge does the 23 individual have? (} 24 Now the knowledge statements in the knowledge base If I see this, that's what it means. In 25 are sort of in them. HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4888

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

152 [ l addition to that, these statements have different valences.

         '2 In many situations, I am in that very gray area, especially 3 problem solving area, and if I see something that might 4 suggest a number of variety of things to me, the way that I 5 might go has to do with how strong I really think that 6 bounding is, and even though we all are presented with the 7 same training and all the rest of it, personal styles may 8 cause you to go a different path than 1 might, so when we are 9 trying to work with mental models or mental model here, we are 10  talking about manipulating the data, the knowledge base side 11  in terms of what is known and what the valences are that are 12  associated with different things.

() 13 With regard to this thing called dynamic heuristics, 14 what we are talking about here is, is quality of the mind. 15 This has to do with the order in which, on the knowledge based 16 side, people will deal with these if/then statements. 17 It also gets us into the search strategy. How wide 18 and how narrow do we attempt to go into the knowledge base to 19 seek information before we make a decision? 20 MR. MICHELSON: It is variable according to the 21 individual. Do you progress in, at some kind of a Monte Caric 22 weight or salary actually? 23 MR. RYAN: Actually the intention is to go out and (} 24 to gather the information to set the model up that reflects as 25 closely as possible the machine it will model that the HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4888

153 1 operator has in the plant. f) (.) 2 MR. MICHELSON: I concede they are~different from 3 individual to individual. Don't they?- The way in which I 4- search out the same set of--if everybody here was given the 5 same set of information, how I might search it out would be . 6 different than how Charlie might do it; no two people think 7 the same way with the same set cf information. 8 MR. RYAN: The simulation doesn't care whether we 9 model yours or whether we model this group and arrive at some 10 kind of consensus on that. 11 DR. SIESS: Is it deterministic? 12 MR. RYAN: Yes. It tells you what the decisions () 13 are, and by the uay, some of the decisions can be wrong, but 14 very logical, if you go back through the process. 15 DR. SIESS: Deterministic? 16 MR. RYAN: That is exactly right. Right. 17 DR. SIESS: Now I thought you said that you could 18 set up the conditions where the decision would always be 19 wrong? 20 MR. RYAN: Right. 21 DR. SIESS: I am trying to, you Icnow, I won't 22 pretend to understand 90 percent of what you have, but I could 23 understand that statement, and suppose I am the operator and

    '}   24     something has happened, and the only thing I could possibly do              i 25     is either stop this pump or let it run?

HERITAGE R8 PORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4888

                        .-       -  . - .- - - .           .-    ,  . _ _ .-.         , ._ J

l a 154 1 MR. RYAN: Right.

 -( ,j   2             DR. SIESS:      Now if I flip a coin, I have got a 50/50 3  . chance of being right. So how can I have a process where I am 4   always wrong?   At the worst, I am only wrong half the time.

5 MR. RYAN: I am, I can have a situation which would

6. be set up, the stimulation that you receive,.the indications 7 that you receive that something was wrong, are very, very 8' slight, and may not even trigger you to attend to them. I can 9 set'it up so that you have such little time that you were 10 unable to in any rational way really react and make any kind 11 of situation.

12 DR. SIESS: I am not going to react rationally. (} 13 MR. RYAN: Remember, we have three kinds of behavior 14 that we like to talk about--skill, knowledge and skill, rule 15 and knowledge based behavior; skill-based behavior over 16 learned behavior where we don't think about it, just 17 react--athletic type things. 18 Rule based, we follow very carefully a set cf 19 procedures. What we are interested in here is the knowledge I 20 base, the creative kinds of behavior, those situations where l 21 the operator is asked to make decisions especially in l 22 situations that are not strictly black and white situations. l 23 DR. SIESS: In the case I cited, there is no way I l l t es 24 can be always wrong. If I do absolutely-- l k_) 25 MR. RYAN: My guess is depending upon the way that HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4888

155 1 the situation was. presented to you, that the cues would not be (_/ 2' obvious and you would probably never make the decision that I 3 have to flip a switch. 4 DR. SIESS: If the proper decision ras not to push

5. the button, I would have done the right thing.

6 MR. RYAN: The simulation would come back to you and 7 it would say cannot solve that problem. You would not get a 8 clear decision from it. You would get a trace which would 9 show you that the simulation got itself into a situation where 10 it just couldn't resolve all the options. 11 DR. SIESS: If I did something, it was not because I 12 made a decision, so that's outside of the framework.

  ')

( 13 MR. RYAN: That's right. We are merely interested 14 in how did you decide, the flipping a switch, or turning a 15 dial, or doing something. 16 DR. SIESS: If I chose to flip a coin, it is really 17 outside the framework of this process. 18 MR. RYAN: We assume there is some rational process 19 that you go throug' to make your decisions, and we are trying 20 to understand the conditions under which you would be 21 successful versus those which you would be unsuccessful, and 22 when we go back and talk about mental models that are, the 23 people that talk about--we talk about certain dynamic (} 24 heuristics, search strategies that are replete in the j 25 literature, we have something here we call fixation proneness HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4888

156 1 that some people claim is what really has. happened in most of () 2 .these power plant situations where--and it is a very typical 3 thing with human beings, I make a commitment early on. I may 4 'have-a wide, wide search strategy in the beginning, but we 5 make a commitment. We make the first decision, and we are 6 sufficiently committed to that that we start not to see 7 anything but those things that sort of support what we have 8 already done, and we call that fixation proneness, and it has 9 to do with the search strategy and what we call workload 10 cutoff. That.is we no longer will entertain new information. 11 And if, you can go to literature and see studies where people 12 make commitments early on, will defend those commitments. () 13 DR. SIESS: If I act without thinking, that's 14 outside of this process? That's another-- 15 MR. RYAN: If there is such a thing as acting 16 without thinking, and we characterize it as skill-based 17 behavior. That is your reaction when I sneak up behind you 18 and-- 19 DR. SIESS: Skill-based behavior is not what you are 20 talking about? 21 MR. RYAN: We are talking about behavior where there 22 is an overt requirement to take information, process it, and 1 l

     -23 make a decision, and we are interested in that process.                             Once

[} 24 you have made the decision, our interest sort of ceases. We need somebody to execute. 25 Executing is another thing. HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4888

1

                                                                                            ,I l

157  ! i 1 DR. SIESS: At some point you must be interested in .,y (,) 2 whether the operator choses that process or some other

    '3         process.           That's another branch point before you get.to here.

4 MR. RYAN: That is exactly right. 5 MR. MICHELSON: If I run the same exercise three 6 times with this process, do I arrive at the same decision? 7 MR. RYAN: If you don't, there is something' wrong 8 with.the simulation. If you don't, there is something wrong. 9 Let me tell you what happens. 10 MR. MICHELSON: That's the part that puzzled me at 11 first. This is really, it is quite deterministic. 12 MR. GIMMY: It is adjustable. If you sit down and (} 13 put in a problem, and it comes back, that you need to solve 14 this problem, you need to know 90 percent of the data base, 15 you need to have five minutes to think about it, so forth, 16 that's what it comes back, and then you look at the real 17 world, and you find that your operators are only testing 80 18 percent on this and in their test--and it is, it goes dry in 19 30 seconds, then you are saying hey, that's something that we 20 probably can't operate. 21 MR. RYAN: You can look at all of these things 22 simply. The other thing is the creativity of the simulation 23 itself. Many times it will take a situation that came up with 24 a variety of right answers, some of which we have never 25 thought about, but going back into the process printout, we HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4888 _ _ . . _ _ . _ _ . - - _ _ _ ._, _ ._ - ~_. , _ _, . , ,_. .,. __

158 1 can see how somebody looking at it from a little different It.f 2 perspective could get at that right answer, take a little ' 3 different route than we would normally expect them to. 4 MR. MICHELSON: Always arrives at the same decision 5 with the same input? 6 MR. RYAN: That is_ exactly right. Now r tress, 7 again, we add to what we talk _about the scope of the attention , 8 field, this workload cutoff, people that are under a lot of 9 stress, there tends to be narrowing of the attention field, 1 10 and there are also tends to be this process of not considering 11 everything that is available to us so we can, we are going to 12 simply look at that kind of thing, and then procedures. () 13 By this we are gstting at what kind of cues do 14 procedures give us to trigger the right kind of an approach to

                                                                        +

15 a given problem? And it is an interesting way of looking at 16 procedures, not so much just to carry things out, especially 17 the symptom based, but what kind of cues do they provide us 18 that start us off in this process to successfully solve a 19 problem for which we really can't write procedures? 20 So those are basically the kinds of things that we 21 are simulating systematically out at Westinghouse. Now as 22 part of the evaluation of this, and as I say, here you get a 23 list of decision options that are made by the simulation, and (} 24 the processing audit, and basically we are where decision 25 can't be made, it will provide the audit. HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4888

159 1: HR. WYLIE: By the way, what these people call the (-) 2 process. trace, and it is an analysis up to the point at which 3 the simulation could not continue and ostensibly the 4 human-being would be left in a corner? 5 MR. MICHELSON: This should be a very good check of 6 procedures. 7 MR. RYAN: Yes. It is limited only by the 8 creativity of the user. 9 MR. MICHELSON: But I mean you could plug in a 10 certain knowledge base into a hypothetical operator, and you 11 could feed this thing with a certain procedure, and then you 12 can see what his thought processes might have been along the () 13 way. 14 MR. RYAN: Do the procedures really key that 15 individual to what is really important, or do we have--and by 16 the way, one of the things you find mostly is procedures are 17 too prescriptive and too extensive. A lot of times they end 18 up confusing people in these kind of tasks more than helping 19 them. 20 MR. MICHELSON: That should show up in the process 21 of this simulation. 22 MR. RYAN: That's the whole idea behind this whole 23 keying process. What does the individual get cued to? 24 MR. MICHELSON: Now do you then--then you go back I (~N) m 25 guess and you change the knowledge base of the operator to see HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4888

l n 160 1 if that helps the feed into the additional information? (.) 2. MR. RYAN: Say here is our characterization at' plant 3 X or individual Y, and'then say okay, what would happen if we 4 trained him on this and expand the knowledge base here, or 5 gave him some new ideas of ways to search for information and 6 then we can' rerun the simulation? 7 MR. MICHELSON: This is already workable hardware? 8 MR. RYAN: Yes, already up and running; remember you 9 have to think of this in the same way we do as the management 10 system versus the data store. We have everything up. What we 11 are building now is knowledge base, and that's where it is 12 labor intensive, so we can only run some fairly limited series 13 of scenarios now, because of the intensity of the labor to f [) 14 build the knowledge base in that, but once knowledge bases get 15 built, you can use them for, you can reuse them, modify them a 16 little bit for a new suggestion, so we see this as something 17 that is very intensive early on, but as we go along, it 18 becomes easier and easier. 19 MR. MICHELSON: Is this where we find out whether a 20 college degree helps an operator any? 21 DR. SIESS: Depends on whether it is in psychology 22 or engineering. 23 MR. MICHELSON: You feed it in as the knowledge base {} 24 and vary that knowledge base, but I guess you could creatively 25 find out if the greater knowledge--it is a little pie in the HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4888

161 1 sky.

       .7
     ' () '    '2            MR. RYAN:   So--

3 CHAIRMAN REMICK: Questions or comments? 4 DR. SIESS: Fascinating. 5 MR. MICHELSON: That's right. It is fascineting. 6- CHAIRMAN REMICK: Tom, we thank~you very much. We 7 apologize that at the last meeting we had to cut you short and i 8 bring you in again, but we appreciate it. 9 MR. RYAN: I hope that the little write-up that I 10 gave-you that is on the back of the thing--it is a summary of 11 the whole program, and if it stimulates any interest in 12 anything else, I would be more than heppy-- 13 CHAIRMAN REMICK: You are going to provide some of (~~D

         ,/

14 the diskettes and things? 15 MR. RYAN: I will provide the concept paper on the 16 other project in a week. You are on the mailing list. 17 We will also put you on the mailing list for the 18 Volumes 4 and 5 of the 4639, with the diskettes and the hard 19 copy data store. And certainly any assistance that your staff 20 may need to run it up if they have any trcuble--shouldn't 21 have. l 22 CHAIRMAN REMICK: Thank you. Gentlemen, anything 23 for the good of the Subcommittee? Are you hungry enough we

       /~T    24   should adjourn?

I (-) 25 He adjourn. 1 HERITAGE REPORTING COMPANY -- (202)628-4888

i 162 1 (Whereupon, at 12:32 p.m., the meeting was 2 adjourned.) 3 4 5 6

               .7
    .           8 9

i 10 1 11  ; ! 12 e h 13 . , 14 i. l ! 15 i ! 6 16 l l l-17-t 18 19 , 20  ; 21 ( 22 23 g 24 i 25  : I l 1 l HERITAGE REPORTIllG COMPAliY -- (202)628-4888  ;

1 CERTIFICATE () 2 3 This is to certify that the attached proceedings before tne 4 United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission in the matter of: 5 Name: ACRS--Human Factors Subcommittee 6 , 7 Docket Number: 8 Place Washington, D.C. 9 Date: April 27, 1988 10 were held as herein appears, and that this is the original 11 transcript thereof for the file of the United States Nuclear 12 Regulatory Commission taken stenographically by me and, 13 thereafter reduced to typewriting by me or under the direction 14 of the court reporting company, and that the transcript is a O 15 true and accurate record of the foregoing proceedings. (_/

       '16                  /S/f_sobkT,-,; Y   _                             , . _

17 (Signature typed): Catherine S. Boyd 18 Official Reporter 19 . Heritage Reporting Corporation 20 21 22 l 23 l ! 24 j 25 O Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888

.j .. . . O Professionalism in Operations by

Zack T. Pate President and Chief Executive Officer Institute of Nuclear Power Operations

^ i O I at the Eighth Annual INP0 Chief Executive Officers Conference l Atlanta, Georgia Friday, November 6, 1987 1 1 I O .

 -Y vN--?  --vr-1e-a--se+m    y-+r+ew-  we.- a.---.-syy.,,.,,-o,e-e-,,.--,yrww_,,,,,emmwwwwwm,pg                             _p-y,     -my y-y-- - , - . -mw------9-A A._/                                                      BACXGR0VHD Good Morning.

The definition of a professional, as taken from Webster's dictionary, includes the statement:

                               ... characterized by or conforming to the technical and ethical standards of a profession...."

Professionalism is what I want to talk about this morning, and in my view, the definition describes perfectly the qualities we all seek in nuclear plant operators. I believe we would all agree that recent problems with operator profes-(T Q sionalism are hurting our progress and our image as an industry. And, at the same time, we must accept the idea that our margin of safety is less when operator performance and behavior are not up to the high professional stan-dards that we all expect and that this technology demands. Yesterday we heard several examples of the kind of shortfalls in profes-j sionalism that I am talking about. Those, as well as some others that were i not discussed, but that recently occurred, include the following: I inattentiveness or sleeping on shift trainees conducting a plant startup without proper supervision by l the qualified operator or by the shift supervisor unauthorized and unqualified personnel operating equipment from control room panels l an operator destroying a portion of important plant records senior shift personnel who omit important information on plant behavior when reporting to their management ! O 2-

We have had nine events of this nature reported so far in 1987.

 ]            Digressing for a moment; for the last two CEO Conferences, in 1985 and 1986, we tried to make my talk to CE0s and nuclear vice presidents really count. After all, you are a very special audience to us.

In 1985, I talked about five management principles. In 1986, I discussed the lessons we could lear.' from Chernobyl. A number of historical events involving reactivity mismanagement were described. These were not just my speeches. The entire INP0 senior management team, and several not so senior, worked on the ideas in these talks. They were presentations of points or concerns that reflected INP0's collective experience. With this speech, we would like to try to bring another important issue into focus, and, with your help and the NRC's help, really do something about it. The topic---OPERATOR PROFESSIONALISM---is one of the most controversial we could have chosen, as the speech itself will illustrate. And it is one of the toughest to deal with, as reflected by the now eight years of debate over O issues that 4mpact the c14 mete end environment in whic8 operators must work. Today, it is more important than ever because the demands of the technology are greater. For example, the plants are more complex and the requirements are more extensive and more complex. For purposes of this speech, the term "operators" includes the following: non-licensed operators licensed reactor operators licensed senior reactor operators the shift supervisor or equivalent the STA as appropriate After THI, all operators suffered the stigma associated with the accident, since much of the blame was placed on the THI operators. Shortly after the acci-dent, the operators were witness to many changes in their plants and procedures, and industrywide debates over matters that affected their jobs and their future.

     ,3          Examples of changes that have impacted the operators include the O     following:

human factors upgrades of control rooms development of the safety parameter display systems (SPOS) the many post-THI plant modifications ' development of the symptom based emergency operating procedures (EOPs) the overhaul of many other plant procedures the implementation of new training programs, including accreditation increasing and recent emphasis on disciplinary measures---maybe an overemphasis Examples of issues that have been the subject of much debate include the following: the degree-on-shift question the shift manager vs. STA question the NRC-administered requalification exams for licensed operators the recently initiated INP0 simulator eva kations dress codes for operators At this point, I realize that some in the audience may be thinking:

                        ...Here we go again --- giving operators all the attention. What about maintenance technicians, radiological protection technicians, instrument and control personnel, etc.?"

I agree that high standards of professionalism are needed for all these positions and others. But today, we will talk operators for two reasons.

1) Operators, to a considerable degree, set the tone---set standards---

for the professionalism of other groups at the plant. In our expe-rience, the rest of the plant usually mirrors the standards and practices in the control room. After all, it is the heart of the plant. l and, second: l l

2) We need to start somewhere, and operators are where problems have A the most potential impact---on both our image and on safety. I vividly recall speeches and discussions in early'INP0 CEO Conferences where several CE0s observed that an operator at the control boards has the fate of the company more in his hands than does the CEO.

If we can solve some of the key problems for operators---or with the operators---and establish a more stable climate and environment, and one that really promotes professionalism, I have no doubt that we will have achieved a major milestone in our quest for excellence. HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE Before offering a challenge to each nuclear utility---a challenge to INPO, and yes, a challenge to the NRC as well---challenges intended to improve the climate for professionalism---let me review the history of some of our actions and inactions in this arena since TMI.  ; The post-THI controversy over control room operator competence and profes-sionalism began with the Kemeny Comission report on the accident. The Kemeny Comission recomended the establishment of clearly defined roles and responsi-bilities to ensure accountability and smooth comunications in the control room. l The Comission further suggested that utilities should develop higher standards of organization and management for nuclear operating organizations. The Kemeny recomendations in the area of interest to us today were kind of general, even vague. The Rogovin Report on the THI accident, however, l focused more specifically on the issue. Quotin; from this report:

                                                "Metropolitan Edison must bear the responsibility for failing to put in place a site management organization l                                                technically competent to respond to the accident. But

! everything we have learned in this investigation l O l

suggests that the problems in this area revealed by q Three Mile Island -- inadequate training, unreasonably scanty manning levels, lack of any requirerrents for

 ,                      minimum on-site technical supervisory competence --

are common to many, probably most nuclear plants. There is a clear need to restructure and improve operator training, and to upgrade substantially the requirements for technical qualifications.of on-site supervisors...." In this same time frame, we saw the Nuclear Regulatory Commission address this issue by implementing their requirement for a shift technical advisor (STA). Controversy over the STA position began even before the TMI investi-gations were completed. Quoting again from the Rogovin Report:

                       "The ' Lessons Learned' Report of NRC's Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation (NRR) proposes that a qualified engineer be available on each reactor shif t as a technical advisor. Our recommendation is dis-tinctly different: we believe that que.lified engi-neering personnel must be required in the supervisory chain of command on each shif t...."

By mid-1980 a number of utilities had initiated crash programs to obtain college credits for operaters, anticipating further NRC requirements in this ! area. Thus, operators were soon caught in the middle of a tug-of-war between the NRC and various other views, and often between the NRC and their own utility. l l In the years that followed, we all witnessed the ANS 3.1 standards com-mittee struggle to gain consensus on the issue of selection, qualification and training of operations personnel for nuclear power plants. In response to l expected regulatory changes from THI, the standard was revised in 1981 to l include expanded experience and education requirements and the addition of the STA. ANS 3.1 did not specify a degreed individual as shift supervisor, but it l did suggest certain college level education in fundamentals. O l l

The degree on shift question soon became the focal point of much of the debate about the training and qualification requirements for operators.

     )     Operators have been very concerned about the outcome of the debate throughout because it affects their advancement and, in their view, their job security.

The debate over this issue has been ongoing for over eight years now and it remains unresolved. Let me briefly trace the history of this specific issue: Effective on January 1, 1980, as previously mentioned, NRC required each nuclear power plant to have on duty a shift technical advisor whose role was to provide engineering and accident assessment advice to the shift supervisor. The STA was required to have a bachelor's degree in engineering or equivalent and specific training in plant response to transients and accidents. The STA requirement was described as a temporary or interim solution at the time. This requirement was soon followed by proposals to require enhanced education for shift supervisors, as contained in the NRC's propcsed j () Regulatory Guide 1.8, issued in 1980. As an example of the indus-i try's response to the Reg Guide, the following coments were made publicly by the Atomic Industrial Forum: 1, I

                               "Typically, the impact on utilities to meet the B.S.

degree qualification requirement is that none of the u shift supervisors have degrees and they all will have to be replaced." l So it was an emotional debate. l l - Proposed revisions to Regulatory Guide 1.8 were soon followed in 1981 by SECY 81-84 This formal proposal to the Commissioners would have required that applicants for senior reactor licenses have a bachelor's degree by the end of 1984 and that SR0s renewing licenses after December 31, 1986 also hold bachelor's degrees. o

In September of 1981, an industry panel that included Hal Tucker of Duke eower and Dick Eckert of Public Service Electric and Gas provided industry contents on SECY 81-84 in a public meeting before the Nuclear

r h Regulatory C,ommissioners. Hal Tucker reported on a program at Duke's Oconee Nuclear Station that implemented a formal college education curriculum designed to comply with the recent NRC proposals. He told the NRC that the feedback from personnel involved-- "proved to us that this type of demand imposed on our experienced operators would i

result in increased attrition and a loss of very valuable and experi-enced personnel." Course participants, he said-- "estimated that if we continued our program to completion that we would lose 40 to 60 percent of our . licensed operators." At the same 1981 meeting, Dick Eckert stressed: "recently there have been many changes in the training and examination of these operators. As a result, we are seeing highly qualified and competent individuals deciding to leave the industry rather than accept the trauma to their lives that they now feel is being inflicted upon them." O - eartiy as e result of comments such as these, the Commiss4on appointed a Peer Advisory Panel on Operator Qualifications that fall. This panel included six distinguished members with a variety of backgrounds, mostly outside this industry, but with two advisors who did have industry experience. After some four months of study, the panel reported out in May 1982 with five key recommendations, the first three of which are germane to our discussion today: o The first was that a "bachelor's level degree requirement should not be imposed on the reactor operator, senior reactor operator, or shift supervisor position." o Second, was that "the STA position should not be required." o Third, "assurance of appropriate engineering expertise should be implemented via creation of a ' shift engineer'." p The panel's May 1982 report brought yet another dimension to the debate---the shift engineer---and the NRC took no further action for some time. Then in March 1984, evidently in response to the panel's report, the NRC published SECY 84-106. This proposed rule would have required that nuclear power plants have on each shift a senior manager responsible for integrated management of shift operations who holds a bachelor's degree, has five years nuclear power ope-rating experience, and holds a senior operators license. In the meantime, in the spring of 1984, the original NUMARC had been formed. NUMARC's Executive Group unanimously opposed the senior manager on shift rule. During this time and continuing on into 1985, the Commission staff and NUMARC held extensive discussions dealing with the engineering expertise on shift question. Throughout this period, the NRC staff was working on a proposed policy statement. O V In November 1984, the Commissioners disapproved the proposed rule for a senior manager on shift and directed the staff to complete its work on a policy statement. The policy statement, as submitted to the Commission by the staff, pro-vided that shift supervisors or STAS could acquire t'en necessary engi-neering expertise by any one of the following methods, as well as some others: i l o earning a bachelor's degree in engineerina o holding a Professional Engineer's license o being a. graduate of INPO accredited courses for operators NUMARC agreed with this proposal. l I l l

The Comission finally approved a policy statement on September 12, n 1985, but deleted graduation from INP0 accredited courses as a O means of acquiring the necessary expertise. The policy statement, in fact, reaffirmed the NRC's position that there must be a grad-uate engineer on shift or available to the shift crew---either the STA or a degreed SRO---and further stated that the preferred method was a degreed shift supervisor in lieu of an STA. The debate continued, and the uncertainty in the operator community continued. I doubt if any of us have fully appreciated what it must be like to be an operator through this controversy. At INPO, we know from our visits to all plants that most of the operators followed this controversy closely. The information they received in many cases was hearsay and often inaccurate, but that aspect only aggravated their uncertainty. Utility managers could not allay their concerns by giving them the straight dope because none of us knew where the controversy would lead. I should pause here and say that I am not blaming the NRC or utilities or anyone. I think the responsibility for this situation falls on the shoulders of all of us. INPO has not done enough, and neither has the NRC, and neither have our member utilities. In general, and I have to say it, most utilities have been opposed to any change. In the months following THI, the STA require-ment was not warmly received, to put it mildly. But now that STAS are in place, many utilities vigorously defend that concept. The NRC feels that the industry has tried to block its every move, and the industry feels that NRC t comes up with one unreasonable proposal after another, i At this point, we should all set aside the question of who is responsible and go from here. l The story does not end here, though. In the midst of the NRC, utility, NUMARC, and INPO activities I just described, the Congress entered the picture several times. As probably the most noteworthy example: l O v t I l

On January 2, 1985, Senator Moynihan introduced Senate Bill 16 to establish a federally operated academy for nuclear training. That g] bill was a signal that some in Congress had a low level of confi-

   'd dence in operator training. 'The signal to the operator community was clear.

Industry response to the proposal for a federally run academy was strong and, I believe, effective. In part, the idea for an INP0-sponsored National Academy for Nuclear Training came from Senator Hoynihan's proposal. We all wanted credit for the extensive work that had been done to upgrade training---including huge investments by utilities in training facilities and the staffs to support them---over the period from 1980 to 1985. Then, as the last item in this chronology, on May 31, 1986, the NRC issued an advance notice of rulemaking that would require all applicants for a senior operator license to possess a baccalaureate degree in engineering or q physical science after January 1, 1991. The coment period for this rule V ended on September 29, 1986, with just over 97 percent of the comentors

opposing the rule. To my knowledge, the NRC has not yet taken any final

! action. I believe that brings us up to date on this still unresolved issue. But yet another issue that creates uncertainty for the operators--- perhaps the most uncertainty---remains unresolved through interactions and debate over the past several years. That issue is operator requalification. In 1982, the NRC staff began expanding its role in licensed opera-tor requalification testing. The record of NRC examiners' ability i to test operators on the knowledge and skills needed for their job is not very good. The list of unreasonable and unrelated questions that operators have been asked is endless, and stories among the operators about the lack of qualification of some examiners are n () I legend. And in many cases, the industry has compounded the prob-lem. For example, in a number of cases the material furnished to (^) U the examiners by the utility was out of date or inaccurate. In either case, the operators were victims of exams that came to be viewed as unfair or irrelevant, or both. We were all pleased to see NRC's action in late September to halt NRC-administered requalification exams until some fairly recent NRC activities could be re-evaluated. These activities, brought about because of a March 25, 1987 change in the rule, required that opera-tors be selected at random and that they be examined with two week's notice. The emotional response that this evoked among operators, as well as by some of their managers, can be clearly seen from the transcript of an NRC staff and industry public meeting held in Washington on September 10, 1987. Throughout this period of controversy, the operators' jobs were further complicated by the many changes to the plant, to procedures, and to training that were taking place. As I mentioned earlier, these included the human fac-tors changes to control boards, the post-TMI plant modifications, the develop-ment of safety parameter display systems, new symptom-based emergency operating ' procedures---several versions of these---and the new training requirements. As we all lived thrcugh these past eight years, taken one day at a time, it probably did not occur to most of us just what was happening. But looking back on it, with the benefit of hindsight, it is a sorry story. We collec-tively have not given the operators a fair shake. We have not created a cli-mate.for professionalism. To present a bs.anced picture, however, some mention must be made of what has been done, and we have done a lot. For example: O

Positive management practices of many types at many utilities have compensated for the uncertainti2s and the operators have performed well. IMPO and the industry have successfully formed the National Academy for Nuclear Training, and accreditation of training programs has

               !cen conducted to high standards.

i Utilities have committed enormous resources to training, for training facilities, staffs, and simulators, and many people have worked very hard to prepare training programs for accreditation. Operators are on five or six shifts now instead of three or four, allowing for more time for training and time off. NRC has supported the industry's accreditation initiative, even in the face of Congressional legislation that could have been interpreted to require otherwise. NRC accepted considerable industry input and then issued policy statements in both the training and fitness-for-duty areas. And NUMARC obtained industry support of the concepts that led to the l policy statements. l NRC has held off on rulemaking related to the so-called "general l operating criteria." We do not have a litany of new rules governing management, operations, maintenance, radiation protection, training, etc. And a few years ago, many in the

 ,            industry viewed that as a real threat. The feeling was that NRC

! would over-regulate operations---issue too many paper requirements-

              --as, by the account of many, had been done for construction. That has not happened. NRC has, by and large, respected the need for utility line management prerogatives in their approach to regulating plant operations.

l And these are just a few examples; there are many others. l O l l

But all these acticns have not really gotten at the root cause of much of (.) the anxiety and uncertainty in the operator community. Professionalism in the control rooms falls well short of where it should be. I am not going to go through the painful details of the examples of situa-tions that clearly demonstrate a lack of professicnalism. As I indicated, you heard about several of them yesterday. But I will say that we have seen more examples of this in 1987 than in any prev 10us year since INP0 was formed---more by a sizeable margin. So the problem is with us, and we must face it. I cannot answer for you the degree to which the existing climate, with its attendent anxiety and uncertainty, is contributing to any specific shortfalls in professional performance. But I can tell you from years of experience that we will continue to see similar problems until we improve the climate. It is, in my view, unreasonable to expect the levels of professionalism we all seek when the operators can clearly see that we, their managers and policymakers, are unable to come to grips with basic issues that affect their O environment, their futere, and in the eyes of meny, taeir sob security.

                                                  ---THE CHALLENGE---

The cha11erge for all of us, and I emphasize all of us, can be stated as follows: o to resolve the key iss'ues that I have discussed o to take the additional initiatives that are necessary to create a truly professional atmosphere or climate and O 1

o to then ir.sist that the onerators at every plant adhere to the high standards that are implicit in our definition and our expectations g of a professional

  , L.)

We do not have answers to all the questions or solutions to all the problems. But we do have challenges that can be put before INPO, our member utilities, NUMARC, and the NRC that will go a long way toward improving ope-rator professbnalism. And I now intend to do just that. Most of the challenges will fall to the individual utility. But I know you did not expect otherwise. The complicating factor is that the challenge for utilities cannot be entirely separated from the challenge for the NRC, or from INPO. CHALLENGE FOR UTILITIES After considerable study, we break the challenge for a utility down into three parts:

1) First, a set of principles is needed---broad principles that can guide the overall management of the operators. These principles must be followed and the operators must have confidence that they will endure. These principles cover such items as the following:

o screening or selection of candidates for operator positions o training o educational requirements o advancement o ca'eer r development o requalification Again, as I said, this overlaps in part with the NRC's role. O

                                                                                              ~

2) Second, management expectations, or management standards, or policies, whichever term is preferred, must be clearly communicated to the ope-rators. Examples of management expectations include such items as the following:

o the conduct of shift turnovers . o use of and adherence to procedures o action expected when an error is found in a procedure o investigation of abnormal indications o record or logkeeping practices

3) And third, the operators themselves should have a professional code, as is the case for many other professional groups. You could call this a code of ethics, a code of conduct, a creed, an oath, or otherwise. We prefer to call it a professional code for operators.

All utilities have some of these in place, and perhaps some have essen-tially all three in place, so we are not talking about new concepts. Carolina Power and Light, in fact, developed a code for operators, beginning some two years ago. To our knowledge, theirs was the first such code, developed with ' extensive sperator involvement, in this industry. CHALLENGE TO INP0 INP0's principle challenge is to assist our members in addressing all three of these areas in the most effective manner. Let me take the third item, the professional code, first. We have prepared a set of Guidelines for the Development of a Professional Code for Operators. O

In our view, it is very important that the operators themselves take part---a major role in fact---in the development of their own professional r3 code. When it is complete, they should feel real ownership and that will happen only if they participate. Ideally, the industry should have a uniform Professional Code for Operators. We may get that in time. But as has been the casa in much of INPO's work---I could cite several examples---we believe it is best for each utility to work with its own operators. If the end products are close enough, over time we may reach agreement on a codr. that could be accepted by (11 utilitien, endorsed by the NRC, and published to the American public. Perhaps the INPO senior reactor operator workshops can help lead to that. But it must start with the operators. During the break following my talk, folders will be placed at your seats that 3:entain copies of Guidelines for the Development of a Professional Code. We request that you work with your operators to develop a code in which they can take pride and feel ownership. To that end, INPO has an SRO Workshop scheduled for February 1988. We plan to make the discussion of ideas for a professional code a major theme of the workshop. We will not be seeking a standard code for the industry, but rather we will seek to facilitate your efforts to develop or strengthen your own operators' code. You may want to have your plant managers hand pick the SRO who attends the workshop with this in mind. For the second item, Management Expectations, utilities address this in a variety of ways, such r,s corporate and plant policy manuals, goals and objec-tives, procedures, and standing orders. This area falls between the broad man-agement Principles, Item 1, and an Operator Code, Item 3, in the management l hierarchy. A key IMPO document already addresses management expectations for the conduct of operations. This is important, but we believe that since most utilities have a good start, it will tend to take care of itself if we strengthen Items 1 and 3. O l {

Going now to Item 1, we have developed a "STRAWMAN" or "FIRST ORAFT" of a set of principles along the lines that I have discussed. Copies will be O provided in the same folders I just mentioned. We recognize that for these principles to really work in application, utility management must feel owner-ship just as the operators must feel ownership of a professional code. We ask that you view them in that light, as a stimulus to your own think-ing, and that you give us comments. In the meantime, we plan to form an ad hoc committee of utility execu-tives to help further develop and formalize a set of principles. After comments are received from a number of utilities, we will have the first meeting of the ad hoc group. Our approach will be very similar to the i approach we took some time ago for the development of corporate criteria, and that we took three years ago for the development of performance indicators. I he.ve asked Ed Utley of Carolina Power & Light Company to chair this committee and he has accepted. Working closely with Ed, we will add other capable and > experienced executives to this committee in the near future. O I encourage members of this audience to assist us with this important matter by providing comments and support, as we form the ad hoc committee. The other action INPO is taking to meet our part of the challenge is that we are separating out licensed operator recurrent or requalification training to be accredited as a separate program. To date, there have been 10 training programs that are subject to accreditation. This will be the lith. It is really not a new training activity because it is presently included with Licensed Operator Initial Training. However, by making it a separate program, i it will receive more emphasis and attention. It will include the all impor-tant simulator training that is an integral part of requalification for licensed operators. Over time, we hope and expect that the NRC will give due credit for accredited requalification programs, and that this will reduce the uncertainty about requalification in the minds of operators. In any event, we believe this is the most important training program that can and should be added to the existing 10. 1 l

CHALLENGE TO NRC

 /        How for the challenge for the NRC.

U) INP0 cannot lay out actions that the NRC should take, and we would not attempt to do so. But we can state the challenges in clear terms, and request that the NRC chart a course to meet them. To us, the principle challenges for the NRC, in promoting a climate for operator professionalism, are as follows:

1) Substantially modifying the methods by which the NRC examines licensed operators for requalification. In simple and direct terms, two areas need to be addressed:

o Every examination question and each simulator scenario needs to be based on the knowledge and skills that the operator needs to do his job, and the operators must have confidence that this is and will continue to be the esse. We have a good example in the aviation industry where the written exam bank for airline pilots is manageable, is publicly available, and {} is respected by pilots. o The examiners need to be better qualified and must be respected by the operators. Peer involvement, as has been successfully used in the aviation industry for years, appears to us to be the most promising method by which this can be achieved. Other actions related to requalification may be needed or desired, , but in our view, these two are the most important. I want to acknowledge that in recent weeks the NRC, on its own initiative, has already begun addressing both of these areas in a positive and encouraging manner.

2) Resolve the degree-on-shift question. I am not going to take a position on this issue, since that would likely solve nothing. We do have some observations, however. Some professional groups have a degree requirement and some do not. For example:

O v n 7_-

o doctors g3 o lawyers () o dentists o accountants are required to have degrees in their fields. On the other hand, airline pilots are not required to have a degree, although many or most do. In the navy nuclear program, operators and the senior nuclear plant watchstanders, which we called the Engineering Officer of the Watch, were not, required to have a degree. Most Engineering Officers of the Watch did have a degree, but it was not a requirement. I note with some interest that of the 1000 CEOs listed in the October 23, 1987 issue of BUSlHESS WEEK---called the BUSINESS WEEK TOP 1000---101 did not have degrees. So it is not a requirement to become CEO, even for one of America's biggest corporations.

   \

It is nat a requirement to become a member of Congress, or, to my knowledge, to become an NRC Commissioner. So it is hard to judge by comparing the situation for nuclear plant ope-rators to contemporary practice in America. As I have said, I do not have a pat answer, but we do believe, after eight years of debate, that it is time to resolve the issue. I expect that if the NRC had confidence that the industry, and each utility, would adopt and put into practice a set of PRINCIPLES that really promote operator professionalism, and that lead to a greater number of ope-rators earning degrees, and ultimately to more line management personnel with real operating experience, the Commission would be much less likely to proceed with a hard degree requirement. In our view, the draft PRINCIPLES that we have just discussed are a good start. O q) CHALLENGE FOR HUMARC That brings us to a challenge for NUMARC. Some of the principles that ! have referred to will be controversial. They are not INPO criteria. To make them so would usurp management prerogatives, a practice we strive to avoid. As I have already indicated, the principles must be accepted and adopted by utility managers, just as the professional code must be adopted by the ope-rators. HUMARC, through the utility executive structure, should be able to help promote support of a sound set of PRINCIPLES, both with the NRC and the indus-try. To this end, after we at INPO complete our work with the ad hoc commit-tee, we expect to turn those selected principles for which the industry needs to obtain NRC's agreement over to NUMARC. I believe this action could complement and support NRC's willingness and efforts to help upgrade operator professionalism. CONCLUSION Because of the importance of this subject, and the need for aggressive and cooperative action, I plan to write the CEO and executive point of contact i of each INPO member utility quarterly until we see a distinct change for the better in the climate for professionalism across the industry. In return, we will be asking you to report to us on your status and progress in this area about six months from now. I e To summarize the actions requested---the challenges: o We are asking member utilities: to becin now, if not done already, to work with your operators to develop a Professional Code for Operators; O . to hand pick the SRO who attends our February workshop with this project in mind; ( to have an Operator Code in place by mid-1988; to be receptive to a set of broad management principles,  ; developed by your peers, that can lead to an improved climate for professionalism; above all else, to expect and insist on professionalism by your operators in all that they do. Expect t.he best from them, not only technically, but ethically as well. Expect their character to be above reproach. o lie are asking the NRC: to continue to improve its licensed operator requalifi-g cation program; V to be receptive to a set of broad management principles, along the lines that I have discussed; to resolve the degree-on-shift question, preferably after reviewing and commenting on the set of broad management principles just mentioned; to then assure the industry, and thus the operators, of a more stable environment for the operators. o We are asking NUMARC: to assist us with the principles, and to assist in gaining NRC understanding and support. l t I l

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

o At INPO we will carry out the comitments outlined in this talk. Working with an ad hoc industry comittee and NUMARC, we plan to have a sound set of principles in your hands by the end of March

 !                      1988.

Before I close, I want to fully acknowledge the NRC's statutory responsi-bilities in some of the key areas I have discussed, and to assure the Comission that we will be mindful of their responsibility---mindful indeed that the Comission is entitled to the final say in many or most of these matters---as we proceed. In conclusion I hope the NRC Comissioners and staff present, and those who read this speech later, will take these coments in the spirit intended and, more importantly, that the challenges offered to the NRC and to the industry---to all of us---can be accepted and met. Thank you. O l l O r i o Principles for Enhancing Professionalism of Nuclear Personnel he purpose of these principles is to enhar";e professionalism of T. nuclear personnel. They are principles that manegem nuclear power industry considers important for fostering prcfessionalism Q of all nuclear plant and corporate support personnel. They require contin-ued management attention to be effective. This document provides examples of the types of principles that utilities should adopt and imple-ment to recognize, enhance, and maintain a climate of professionalism. These examples should be used by utility management to examine its policies and practices and to make improvements where needed. Mar;h 30,1988 O

l Principles for Enhancing Professionalism of Nuclear Personnel o O

      . Managing for 1. ne corporate management philosophy and structure ensures that the senior nuclear manager possesses sufficient nuclear power plant knowledge and Excellence and    experience. other corporate ofacers, managers, and staff personnei responsible f r supp ning plant operauons possess the necessary knowiedge and experience Professionalism   to understand nuclear plant activities, problems, and events. Corporate officers and directors above the senior nuclear manager are involved with and informed of plant p:rformance and problems in sufficient detail to maintain a clear understanding of the status of plant safety. Necessary resources and suppon are provided in a timely manner.

2. hianagement provides an environment that is conducive to excellence and professionalism. Bis includes the following elements:

                         . Senior management establishes an overall corporate philosophy that permeates the organization.
                         . hianagement sets the example by conducting itself with commitment and integrity.

3 . hianagement establishes safety as a personal, moral responsibility and (V ensures the safety of the public, utility personnel, and the plant.

                         . hianagement maintains an atmosphere of open communication such that problems are brought to its attention undiluted.
                         . hianagement sets goals that encourage continual improvement in perform-ance and avoid a sense of self satisfaction or complacency.

3. hianagement ensures that work is performed in accordance with established plans, schedules, and procedures to achieve maximum clarity of direction, quality of performance, and management credibility.

4. Appropriate levels of management are actively involved in the day to-day activities of the plant, including routine operations, testing, and outages.

5. hianagement provides plant personnel with a quality plant to operate and maintain by ensuring that plant systems and components are reliable and maintainable and conform to approved design and that high standards for material condition are maintained.

6. hianagement is proactive and responsive. Solutions to problems are pursued with the objective of correcting root causes and improving performance. Solving problems is viewed as an opportunity for making productive improvements.

A V

Principles for Enhancing Professionalism of Nuclear Personnel p V

2. managing .. cene,ai Nuclear Personnel 1. Peopie and their processional capabilities are regarded as the nuclear organi-zation's most valuable resource. Authorized staffing is sufficient to perform all required tasks, and positions are filled with highly trained and fully qualified individuals.

2. Programs are established and implemented to recruit and select individuals with the qualifications and abilities to perform the jobs for which they are being hired and also with the ability to develop the skills and knowledge required for higherlevel positions.

3. Knowledge and skills are developed, maintained, and enhanced through appropriate training and career development. In addition, opponunities are provided for personnel at all levels to work with good role models to foster development. The initial and continuing training programs for applicable plant personnel are accredited by the National Nuclear Accrediting Board. Other training programs are also maintained at high standards, b) v 4. Management practices and policies convey an attitude of trust and an approach that is supponive of teamwork at alllevels. 'Ihese practices and policies recognize and expect professionalism from all personnel. Policies that spell out expectations and standards of performance are well-established and documented. 'Ihese policies are clearly communicated and are well-understood by all personnel and are routinely reinforced in training and in the daily conduct of business.

5. 'Ihe line organization is the principal focus of management, the principal I source ofinformation, and the only source of management direction. Com-I mittees, review boards, and other activities that provide supplemental quality checks ofinfonnation sources are not allowed to dilute or undermine line authority, accountability, or credibility.

6. Management practices encourage communication and require teamwork among and between gmups that operate, maintain, and support the plant. These l practices also encourage personnel to view themselves as a pan of the overall "team" with successful operation of the plant being a common goal and that i

conflicts between the workers and management or between groups are resolved. l Management conscientiously examines these issues on an ongoing basis.

7. Appropriate personnel have professional codes that set forth cenain practices, including ethical practices, that they adopt as a part of their way of doing business. These practices embody high standards of technical and ethical (V3 performance and help build a foundation for safe and reliable plant operations.

These codes are developed and maintained such that individuals feel ownership and pride in their code and its implementation. l

Principles for E hancing Professionalism of Nuclear Personnel g q (

8. Management seeks input on the development, and feedback on the effective-ness, of policies and practices. Open channels of communication are established and maintained such that personnel at all levels are encouraged to provide complete, undiluted input and feedback.

9. Personnel receive appropriate recognition for their achievements, both within their work groups and in the company as a whole.

B. Developing Management Personnel

1. Formal programs are established io select and develop individuals to fill key management positions.

2. Management development and selection practices reflect the fact that work in plant operations provides the broad, integrated view of plant aethities needed by nuclear managers. Individuals with experience in day to-day plant operations are considered as an imponant source of management talent. The policies and practices that govem career development ensure that individuals are aware of the fl opponunity to develop into management positions and that selected individuals V are encouraged and pmvided with opponunities to pursue this career path.

3. Promotion and management development practices seek a balance between career operations individuals and others who obtain operations experience as part of their career development. Operations personnel with the potential to fill key management positions are provided an opportunity for acquiring experience in other groups. Also, other personnel with the potential to fill key management positions are provided an opportunity for obtaining an SRO license or cenifica-tion and operations experience. Engineers who hold bachelors degrees in technical fields are considered a key source of such personnel.

4. The plant manager or assistant plant manager in the line organization holds or has held an SRO license or has been certified for equivalent SRO knowledge and has extensive nuclear power plant experience, preferably in the operations department. The operations manager or middle manager to whom the shift supervisors report holds an active SRO license and has extensive nuclear power plant operations department experience, preferably as a shift supervisor.

In addition, in the long term, it is highly desirable that other key plant manage-ment positions be fill:d by personnel with plant operations experience and who hold or have held an SRO license or certification. Examples of such positions include the following:

          . maintenance manager (vcl     . technical services manager
          . training manager

Principles for Enhancing Professionalism \- of Nuclear Personnel o) L

          . site manager
          . outage manager
          . the various assistants for these key positions

5. Management personnel and candidates for management positions are pro-vided appropriate management and interpersonal skills training and experience to enable them to perform manage' ment and supervisory functions.

6. Candidates for management positions or for promotion to higher level management positions are provided with opportunities to work with and for individuals who can serve as role models to enhance the development ofleader-ship and management capabilities.

7. Selected personnel are provided opportunities in a variety of functional areas in the nuclear organization and are given opportunities to work with utility gmups and to visit other nuclear stations to broaden their exposure and perspective.

O C. Managing Operatloas Department Personnel In addition to the practices and principles described above, the following apply specifically to operations depanment personnel.

1. The initial screening of applicants or candidates for operations positions takes into account the positions of great responsibility that these personnel are likely to fill, for example as reactor operators.

2. Subsequent screening, with nuclear line management involvement, is con-ducted as operators and others are selected as candidates for the senior reactor operator and shift supervisor positions. This screening focuses on leadership and management capabilities.

3. While a college degree in a technical field is not a necessary requirement for operations positions, operators with bachelors degrees in technical subjects have a greater likelihood of promotion to and success in management positions.

Management practices ensure that an appropriate number of personnel with such degrees, or the potential and desire for acquiring such degrees, are selected for operations positions. In addition, management assists and encourages selected operators who have the potentisl to acquire bachelors degrees; programs that lead to degrees in technical subjects are given preference. To assist in ac-complishing this, college credits may be sought for successful completion of O "tiiiir tr>i"i"s presr>==-

Principles for Enhancing Professionalism g of Nuclear Personnel

    ?

4. Management practices governing the conduct of control room operations and simulator training ensure the following:

a 'the line responsibilldes and authorities during off normal or casualty conditions are spelled out with absolute clarity. To the maximum extent possible, the roles of control room personnel during an off normal or casualty situation are the same as for routine duties. (A transfer in respon-sibility when things begin to go wrong is undesirable for many reasons, including the fact that personnel are often unable to determine when such a transfer should be made.)

            . Simulator practices of normal, off-normal, and casualty situations are conducted, to the maximum practical extent, with the same personnel and with the same responsibilities and authorities that are assigned in the plant control room (the team concept).

5. Line management, up to and including the senior manager on site, is suffi-ciently involved in all phases of the training, qualification, requalification, and simulator programs to ensure that operators are properly qualified to perform their assigned tasks.

pd 6. Management policies and practices ensure that the person responsible for the plant after hours (in effect, the person who acts for the plant manager), whether this is a shift manager, shift engineer, or shift supervisor, is selected keeping in mind the great responsibility that the person assums. 'lhe individuals selected have the training, experience, maturity, and judgment to assume this respon-sibility. In selecting and approving these individuals, it is recognized that this person enforces the professional standards and sets the tone not only for the operators but for all personnel at the plant during off-hours. Final approval of the qualifications of individuals assigned to this position is reserved for an appropriate level of senior management. i D, hianaging hiaintenance Personnel E. hianaging Technical Personnel F. hianaging Engineering Personnel NOTE: Principles that specifically apply to maintenance, technical, and O' engineering personnel have been drafted and will be reviewed by utility personnel. After they have been finalized, they will be added to the management and operations-related principles.

0

 +

ATTACHMENT A

      /

O ELEMENTS OF A PROFESSIONAL CODE FOR OPERATORS The following statements reflect the elements that should be considered in a professional code for operators as determined by the SRO workshop participants. The format of the professional code for operators is left to each utility / station? The following seven elements were considered by the breakout session participants to be the most important to be included in a professional code: O o Personal integrity - Demonstrate personal integrity and honesty in all aspects of one's job, exhibit professional behavior in conduct and appearance. o Comitment to excellence - Strive to do the best job possible, o Individual knowledge and skills - Continually work to maintain and improve job related knowledge and skills. o Responsibility for actions - Accept responsibility for one's own 4 actions and decisions, assume ownership for the job and the plant. O I 4

    -         - - -        ~ - - - -      ,a, - - - . - ,,- , . . - - -,- - - -, ,-wn--,-   w- e- -
                                                                                                    -e,  p----,,---, -. - - - , - - - - - , -
                                                                                                                                              ,m,n-- - - - - - - - - <a ----

t ATTACHENT A

t. 4 o Protect public - Operate in a manner that protects public safety O asove aii other considerations. Recognize the res,onsibiiity to operate in a manner that merits public confidence.  :

o Monitor and respond to plant conditions - Continually monitor plant parameters and aggressively pursue any abnormal indications, t

                           ~ Anticipate potential problems before they occur. Make every effort to perform all operational activities correctly, the first                                                !

time. o Regulatory procedure and compliance - Adhere to all applicable , regulations and procedures to ensure pubite protection and plant safety. O The following elements were also identified as desirable in a professional code but did not have the degree of support as the first group. Some are similar in concept to those in the first group. ' o Support of professional industry reputation - Exhibit conduct that upholds the dignity and reputation of the profession and the industry, o Communications - Develop good comunication skills to ensure clear, accurate communications among all personnel. o Accept only professional performance - Encourage all personnel to Q perform professionally and to the best of their ability. Assist fellow workers in developing into more proficient employees. 2

6 ATTACHENT A 1-o Fitness for duty - Ensure personal mental and physical fitness to O discharse assigned duties. Ensure others who are not fit for duty do not take over any plant responsibilities. o Optimize plant performance - Seek to improve plant performance and reliability. o Respect for peers and fellow employees - Treat peer and fellow employees with respect and dignity, o leadership - Demonstrate high standards of performance by word and deed. Provide guidance and encouragement to subordinates to help them perform to the best of their ability and to grow as employees and as human beings. O. 1 o Support station management - Demonstrate support of station management in meeting station goals and objectives and supplying i safe, reliable, and efficient electrical power. l o Learn from experience - Incorporate plant and industry experience j into job related activities to avoid repeating one's own mistakes or the mistakes of others. O

                                          -2 l

g - Institute Of Nuclear Pcwer

 ,                                                                    Operations SAMPLE OF LETTER SENT TO CEOs, WITH                             IN      = 75 Pe r= =e y CCs TO ADMIN POCs, AND EPOCs, WITH                              $$7gg THEIR STANDARD CCs.                                                                             )

INTERNAL DISTRIBUTION TO PRES. OFFICE, GROUP VPs, VPs, AND DDs. 1 l Mr. Joseph M. Farley President and CE0 Alabama Power Company P. O. Box 2641 Birming , Alabama 35291-0001 Dear Mr. a At the 1987 CEO Conference, lHP0 challenged the industry to undertake initiatives aimed at strengthening operator professionalism. In my speecn on operator professionalism, we reviewed the long history of problems in this area and discussed the rationale that led to the challenges we put forward. Our challenges included the following: (1) the development of professional codes for operators (2) The development and adoption of a set of management principles to enhance professionalism Earlier this month, the IMPO executive point of contact at each utility was sent material (with the !NPO letter dated March 14,1988) { t intended to be helpful in developing professional codes for operators, This material included the excellent input from senior reactor operators during the SRO Workshop in February 1988. l The purpose of this letter is to distribute ' Principles for Enhancing

Professionalism of Nuclear Personne1' to assist in meeting challenge #2 above. The principles enclosed with this letter are the product of i extensive work both before and since the CEO Conference.

To review a bit of the background, at the November CEO Conference each utility was provided draft principles for review and cosament. Many coments were received. While a number of cosamenters took exception with a point or two in the principles, virtually all were supportive of the concept, and many commented f avorably on the need. An ad hoc industry committee of experienced nuclear execitives, chaired by Ed Utley of Carolina Power & Light Company, was f;rned to review utility comuments and refine the principles. (Alistofthecommittee O 1 __ . - _ .

Page T=o 9 members is enclosed.)

• view exceptionally fineThe comittee has done considerable work, and in my work, on this project. The quality of the draft O originally iu$staatia" developed by INPO and furnished at the CEO Conference has been uasr**** *aravia ea' co 'tta trarti- ^'sa $ai o oa their input,'the scop'e of the principles has been expanded to inc I

nuclear personnel -- for example, maintenance, technical, and engineering ' personnel -- rather than limiting it to just the operators. Principles for these other areas are beig draf ted ard will be distributed to all utilities for review at a later date. The ad hoc comittee will then ' review these additional pr.inciples anc the utility coments. After this s review, we will add them to the enclosed management- and operations-related principles. We are confident that most utilities already follow many of the orac. tices Personnel." included in ' Principles for Enhancing Professionalism of Nuclear However, to ensure that this is the case, we encourage you and your organization to take an in-depth look at your policies and practices and compare them to the enclosed principles. In addition, we recomend that you use this initiative as an opportunity to communicate your-organization's management principles to all nuclear personnel, with the objective professionalism. of conveying your comitment to support and encourage itself, enhance professionalism. Effective comunication of this comitment should, by This is particularly important since we are asking operators to adopt professional codes that re comitment to the organization and to fellow employees. present their The application of these principles is important to our industry. If each utility formally adopts and puts into practice a set of principles O that effectively promote, encourage, and reward professional performance of nuclear personnel, our plants will be safer and more reliable. Further-more, if the NRC and the Congressional Oversight Committees have confidence i that we are applying these principles, I believe these groups will have greater confidence in the industry's ability to manage its own affairs, and to do so at standards of excellence. Joe, we try to be very selective in asking the CE0's personal l attention to matters because we are seinsitive to the many demands on your time. i In this matter, however, we aret recomending and requesting that you become personally involved in reviewing and communicating princip'es that l promote professionalism. This two-part challenge -- the development of a professional code 'from the bottom up" and the review and application of principles to strengthen and enhance professionalisa 'from the top down' -- l ' can go a long way toward preventing an industrywide setback due to a lack of professionalism, such as we experienced at Peach Bottom and to a lesser degree at other places in recent years, from occurring again. For this reason, and because professionalism it a necessary ingredient for excellence, we are asking your personti attention to this matter. O

 . - - ..- - - - _ _ -     - - - - - - - .            ---.---,,.-n..,,,-___,..,..------,,---,---n                        .,-.-n       - - - -      --

r- , --

                                                                                                                                                                     -a  -- - - - - - - - -

March 30, 1988 Page Three l In our March 14, 1988 letter to executive points of contact, we requested that a professional code for operators be developed and in place O by July co 1988t and that a copy of the code be furnished to INPO when it is aiet d-uid aii aaoreciate e orief ietter fro >ou ea the results of your review and professionalism application of nuclear of the principles for enhancing personnel. If we could receive this input before the end of 1988 CEO Conference. August, it would be most helpful in our planning for the That conference, scheduled for November 3 and 4, will focus substantially on industrywide efforts to enhance professionalism. Thank you for your sup' port of this important effort. Sincerely, ek T. Pate President ZTP:tht

Enclosures:

(1) "Principles for Enhancing Professionalism of Nuclear Personnel * (2) List of Ad Hoc Committee Members cc/w: Mr. R. Patrick Mcdonald O I I t I O

O Ad Hoc Committee to Develop Principles for Enhancing Professionalism of Nuclear Personnel Ed Uttey . Chainnan Oliver Kingsley Serdor Executive Vice President Vice President, Nuclear Operations Power Supply and Engineering System Energy Resources

          & Construction                     Incorporated Carolina Power & Light Company Tom 51alman John Griffin                       Vice President, PWR Operations Senior Vice President              Commonwealth Edison Company Generation Transmission, and Engineering                  Ed Stroczka Arkansas Power & Light Company     Senior Vice President, Nuclear Engineering & Operations George Ilairston                   Nonheast Utilitics O   vice rreside"t x"eie=r oe"erot' "

Alabama Power Company 511ke Ross Plant Operations Director.TMI l Jim llampton GPU Nuclear Station Manager Catawba Nuclear St tion Jim Shiffer Duke Power Company Vice President Nuclear Power Generation

      , Don Illntz                         Pacific Gas & Electric Company Vice President, Nuclear Power Wisconsin Public Service Company   George Thomas Vice President, Nuclear Production Harry Keiser                       Public Service Company of               ,

Vice President, Nuclear Operations New Hampshire Pennsylvania Power & Light Company Joe Colvin NUMARCLiaison Executive Vice President and COO Nuclear Management and Resources Council O

e i o I 1 Principles for Enhancing ' Professionalism of Nuclear Personnel T henuclear purpose of these personnel. They areprinciples principles thatismanagement to enhance in theprofessional nuclear power industry considers important for fostering professionalism O of all nuclear plant and corporate support personnel. They require contin-ued management attention to be effective. His document provides examples of the types of principles that utilities should adopt and imple-ment to recognize, enhance, and maintain a climate of professionalism. These examples should be used by utility management to examine its policies and practices and to make improvements where needed. l March 30,1988 O

 '.                                                   Principles for Enhancing Professionalism of Nuclear Personnel n

U

1. Managing for 1. ne corporate management phDosophy and suucture ensures that the senior nuclear manager possesses sufficient nuclear power plant knowledge and Excellence and expe,$ence, other corporate officers, managers, and staff personnei responsible f ' 5"PP ' ting P ant l operations possess the necessary knowledge and experience Professionalism to understand nuclear plant activities, problems, and events. Corporate officers and directors above the senior nuclear manager are involved with and informed of plant performance and problems in sufficient detail to maintain a clear understanding of the status of plant safety. Necessary resources and support are provided in a timely manner.

2. Management provides an environment that is conducive to excellence and professionalism. This includes the following elements:

                                                         . Senior management establishes an overall corporate philosophy that permeates the organization.
                                                         . Management sets the example by conducting itself with commitment and integrity.
             ]                                           . Management establishes safety as a personal, moral responsibility and ensures the safety of the public, utility personnel, and the plant.
                                                         . Management maintains an atmosphere of open communication such that problems are brought to its attention undiluted.
                                                         . Management sets goa's that encourage continual improvement in perform-ance and avoid a sense of self satisfaction or complacency.

3. Management ensures that work is performed in accordance with established plans, schedules, and procedures to achieve maximum clarity of direction, quality of performance, r .d management credibility.

4. Appropriate levels of management are actively involved in the day to-day activities of the plant, including routine operations, testing, and outages.

5. Management provides plant personnel with a quality plant to operate and maintain by ensuring that plant systems and cornponents are itliabic and maintainacle and conform te approved design and that high standards for material condition are maintained.

6. Management is proactive and responsive. Solutions to problems are pursued with the objective of correcting root causes and improving performance. Solving problems is viewed as an opnortunity for making productive improvements.

O

Principles for Enhancing Professionalism of Nuclear Personnel O v

2. u o ging .. cene,ai Nuclear Personnel . i. peopic and met, professional capabtudes a n.guded as me nuclear organi.

zadon's most valuable resource. Authorized staffing is sufficient to perform all required tasks, and positions are filled with highly trained and fully qualified individuals.

2. Programs are established and implemented to recruit and select individuals with the qualifications and abilities to perform the jobs for which they are being hired and also with the ability to develop the skills ar.d knowledge required for higherlevel positions.

3. Knowledge and skills are developed, maintained, and enhanced through appropriate training and career development. In addition, opponunities are provided for personnel at all levels to work with good role models to foster development. The initial and continuing training progrrms for applicable plant prsonnel are accredited by the National Nuclear Accrediting Board. Other training progrants are also maintained at high standards.

O 4. Management practices and policies convey an attitude of trust and an approach that is supportive of teamwork at all levels. These practices and policies recognize and expect professionalism from all personnel. Policies that spell out expectations and standards of performance are well-established and documented. These policies are clearly communicated and are well understood by all persontal and are routinely reinforced in training and in the daily conduct of business.

5. The line organization is the principal focus of management, the principal source ofinformation, and the only source of management direction. Com-mittees, review boards, and other activities that provide supplemental quality checks of information sources are not allowed to dilute or undermine line authority, accountability, or credibility.

6. Management practices encourage communication and require teamwork among and between gmups that operate, maintain, and support the plant. These practices also encourage personnel to view themselves as a part of the overall "team" with successful operation of the plant being a common goal and that conflicts b: tween the workers and management or between groups are resolved.

Management conscientiously examines these issues on an ongoing basis.

7. Appropriate personnel have professional codes that set forth certain practices.

including ethical practices, that they adopt as a part of their way of doing business. These practices embody high standards of technical and ethical performance and help build a foundation for safe and reliable plant operations. These codes are developed and maintained such that i:'dividuals feel ownership and pride in their code and its implementation.

'l Principles for Enhancing Professionalism of Nuclear Personnel (d"

8. Managemert seeks input on the development, and feedback on the effective.

ness, of policies and practices. Open channels of communication m established and maintained such that personnel at all levels m encouraged to provide complete, undiluted input and feedbrek.

9. Personnel receive appropriate recognition for their achievements, both within their work groups and in the company as a whole.

B. Developing Management Personnel

1. Formal programs are established to select and develop individuals to fill key management positions.

2. Management development and selection practices reflect the fact that work in plant operations provides the broad, integranxi view of plant activities needed by nuclear managers. Individuals with experience in day to day plant operations

               . are considered as an important source of management talent. The policies and practices that govern caer development ensure that individuals m awm of the p

v opponunity to develop into management positions and that selected individuals are encouraged and provided with opponunides to pursue this career path.

3. Promotion and management development practices seek a balance between cmer operations individuals and others who obtain operations experience as pan of their emer developmer2. Operations personnel with the potential to fill key nanagement positions are provided an opponunity for acquiring experience in other groups. Also, other personnel with the potential to fill key management positions are provided an opponunity for obtaining an SRO license or certifica.

tion and operations experience. Engineers who hold bachelors degrees in technical fields are considered a key source of such personnel.

4. The plant manager or assistant plaru manager in the line organization holds or has held an SRO license or has been certified for equivalent 3RO knowledge and has extensive nuclear power plant experience, preferably in the operations department. The operations manager or middle manager to whom the shift supervisors report holds an active SRO license and has extensive nuclen power plant operations depanment experience, preferably as a shift supervisor.

In addition,in the long term,it is highly desirable that other key platit manage. ment positions be filled by personnel vei:h plant operations experience and who hold or have held an f,RO license or certification. Examples of such positions include the following:

                     . maintenance manager a technical services manager
                     . training manager

  ',     Principles for Enhancing Professionalism                                                        l of Nuclear Personnel O

U e site manager

            +   outage manager 3   the various assistants for these key positions

5. Management personnel and candidates for management positions are pro.

vided appropriate management and interpersonal skills training and experience to enable them to perform management and supervisory functions.

6. Candidates for management positions or for promotion to higher level management positions are provided with opportunities to work with and for individuals who can serve as role models to enhance the developmerit ofleader-ship and management capabilities.

7. Selected personnel are provided opportunities in a variety of functional areas in the nuclear organization and are given opportunities to work with utility ,

groups and to visit other nuclear statiom ra broaden their exposure and perspective. O C. Managing Operations Department Personnel in addidon to the practices and principles described above, the following apply specifically to operations department personnel.

l. 'the intial screening of applicants or candidates for operations positions takes into account the positions of great responsibility that these personnel are likely to fiil, for example as reactor operators.  :

1

2. Subsequent screening, with nuclearline management involvement, is con-ducted as operators and others are selected as candidates for the senior reactor operator and shift supervisor positions. This screening focuses on leadership and management capabilities.

3. While a college degree in a technical field is not a ecessary requirement for operations positions, operators with bachelors degrees m technical subjects have a greater likelihood of promotion to and success in management positions.

Management practices ensure that an appropriate number of personnel with such degrees, or the potential and desire for acquiring such degrees, are selected for operations positions. In addition, management assists and encourages selected operators who have the potential to acquire bachelors degrees; programs that

lead to degrees in technical subjects are given preference. To assist in ac. ,

complishing this, college credits may be sought for successful completion of O tititr tr tai s crorr .

Principles for Enhancing Professionalism of Nuclear Personnel j q - O I i I

4. Management practices goveming the conduct of control room operations and i simulator training ensure the following: [

        . The line responsibilides and authorities during off norme.1 or casualty conditions are spelled out with absolute clarity. To the maximum extent possible, the rnles of control room personnel during an off normal or casualty situadon are the same as for roudne duties. (A transfer in respon-sibility when things begin to go wrong is undesirable for many reasons,               ,

including the fact thet personnel are often unable to determine when such a [ cansfer should be made.)

        + Simulator practices of normal, off-normal, and casualty situations are conducted, to the maximum pracdcal extent, with the same personnel and with the same respomibilities and authorities that are assigrKd in the pir.nt control room (the team concept).

5. Line management, up to and including the senior manager on site, is suffi-ciently involved in s'? tases of the training, qualification, requalification, and simulator progrnns to ensure that cpert'. ors are properly qualified to perform their assigned tasks.

L 6. Management policies and practices ensure that the person responsible for the plant after hours (in effect, the person who acts for the plant manager), whether this is a rhlft inanager, shift engineer, or shift supervisor, is selected keeping in raind the great responsibility that the person assumes. The individuals selected have the training, experience, maturity, and judgment to assume this respon-i sibdity. In selecting and approving these individuals,it is recognized that this person enforces the professional standards and sets the tone not only for the operators but for all personnel at the plant during off hours. Final approval of the qualifications of individuals assigned to this position is reserved for an appropriate level of senior management, j D. Managing Maintenance Personnel E. Managing Technical Personnel  ; F. Managtng Engineering Personnel NOTE: Principles that specifically apply to mainteatnce, kehnical, and O en6neering personnel have been drafted and v ill te reviewed by utility personnel. After they have been :4nalized, they i.C te added to the taanagement and operationt related principlet. r

 '$                                                       Institute of Nuclear Power
  .g                                                      Operations Il V                                                    Suite 1500 110o Cuele 75 Parkr<sy Atlanta, Georg;a 3o339 Telephone 404 953-36o0 Harch 14, 1988 Mr. R. Patrick Mcdonald Senior Vice President Nuclear Generation Alabama Power Compary 600 North 18th Street P. O. Box 2641 Birmingt , Alabama 35291-0400

Dear Mr.VPfcDonald:

At the CEO conference this past November, INPO challenged the industry to undertake initiatives to strengthen operator professionalism. My speech on this subject gave an extensive history of the problems in this area and provided the rationale that led to the challenges we put forward. Our challenges included the following: o development of professional codes for operators o refinement of a set of management principles that will lead to an improved climate for professionalism The purpose of this letter is to update you on activities with respect to one of those challenges - the development of a professional code for operators. i A workshop for senior reactor operators (SRO) was conducted in Atlanta in February. Every nuclear plant in the United States and some of cur inter-national members were represented; a total of 173 SR0s were present. As part of that workshop, the SR0s discussed and developed a list of elements they felt were appropriate to be included in a professional code. In addition, several stations were already in the process of developing their code, and l suggestions helpful. made by participants from those stations should be especially l As a result of the workshop, we are providing the following items for l your information and use in working out a professional code with your i operators: o "Key Elements of a Professional Code for Operators," developed by SR0s during the February 1988 workshop (Attachment A) l O

                                                                                                   \

e. 7). , ATTACHMENT A w) KEY ELEMFNTS OF A PROFESSIONAL CODE r0R OPERATORS The followi'ng statements reflect the elements that should be considered in a professional code for operators as determined by the SR0 workshop participant.e. The format of the professional cede for operators is left to each utility / station? The following seven elements were considered by the breakout session participants to ba the most important to be included in a professional code: O o Personal integrity - Demonstrate personal integrity and honesty in all aspects of one's job, exhibit professional behavior in conduct and appearance, o Comitment to excellence - Strive to do the best job possible. o Individual knowledge and skills - Continually work to maintain and improve job related knowledge and skills. J o Responsibility for actions - Accept responsibility for one's own actions and decisions, assume ownership for the job and the plant. Q 9 _ - - - - , - ,c- - - .---- - ., ,

ATTACHENT A 9 o Protect public - Operate in a manner that protects public safety O asove ai, other considerations. aecognize the responsibi14ty to operate in a manner that merits public confidence, o Monitor and respond to plant conditions - Continually monitor plant parameters and aggressively pursue any abnormal indications. Anticipate potential problems before they occur. Make every effort to perform all operational activities correctly, the first time, o Regulatory procedure and compliance - Adhere to all applicable. regulations and procedures to ensure public protection and plant safety. O The following elements were also identif M as desirable in a professional code but did not have the degrae of support as the first group. Some are similar in concept to those in the first group. o Support of professional industry reputation - Exhibit conduct that upholds the dignity and reputation of the profession and the industry. o Communications - Develop good comunication skills to ensure clear, accurate comunications among all personnel. o Accept only professional performance - Encourage all personnel to Q perform professionally and to the best of their ability. Assist fellow workers in developing into more proficient employees.

                                        .g.

 .c ATTACiiMENT A
  ,            o               Fitness for duty - Ensure personal mental and physical fitness to O                        discharge assigned duties.                Ensure others who.are not fit for duty do not take over any plant responsibilities, o                Optimize plant performance - Seek to improve plant performance and reliability.

o Respect for peers and fellow employees - Treat peer and fellow employees with respect and dignity. o Leadership - Demonstrate high standards of performance by word,and deed. Provide guidance and encouragement to subordinates to help them perform to the best of their ability and to grow as employees and as human beings. ! o Support station management - Demonstrate support of station management in meeting station goals and objectives and supplying safe, reliable, and efficient electrical power. o Learn from experience - Incorporate plant and industry experience , into job related activities to avoid repeating one's own mistakes or the mistakes of others. ! O i l

ATTACHENT 8 o SUGGESTIONS FOR DEVELOPING AND INPLEMENTING A CODE The following suggestions for developing and implementing a code were extracted from the SRO workshop presentations and breakout session discussions.

1. Operator involvement in code development should include all available personnel that are affected by the code. This includes non-licensed as well as licensed operators. Soliciting and obtaining coments will help ensure the code reflects the beliefs of those supporting i';.

Broad participation will help the constituants of the code to feel O ownership for it.

2. Understanding -- The reasons for the code and its benefits should be clearly explained to the operators so they have clear understanding of the intent of the code.

3. Content -- Form a comittee of operators to collate the input from all personnel affected by the code and to recomend a draft code for j further operator coment and code refinement. The comittee members

• l should be volunteers and people who are trusted and re 7ected by their

! peers. O l l 1

     ._     _ _.-.       --    -,,-- - - - ~ - - - - - - - - - - ~ ' ~ * - - -      ~   ' - " ' " ' ' '         '~ ' ' ~

1 1 ATTACHMENT B l l

 ,     4. Visibility -- Keep operators well-informed on the progress of code O        development. Let them know the plan for code implementation and that their input is welcome at any time.

5. Management support -- Management support and cooperation are needed to l

develop and implement an effective professional code for operators. Management must supply the resources and time to develop the code. Management must also clearly support the words and intent of the code for operators to feel that they will be backed when they incorporate the code into their operating activities.

6. Content philosophy -- The code should not be a list of "do's and don'ts," but rather a statement that describes attributes and performance standards expected of a professional operator. It should be a relatively short document. It should be specific enough that it is clearly understood but broad enough to guide an cperator in essentially any situation he is faced with on the job.

7. Format -- No single format is considered preferable to another.

Several participants suggested that a document with a general preamble statement followed by more specific individual articles is best. Others felt a paragraph form is desirable. l

8. Enforcement -- The code should not be used by management to discipline personnel. A person should follow the code to the best of his ability and in accordance with his individual convictions. Peer encouragement and influence was generally considered to be the most effective form of enforcement.

l 2 l l -.. -.-

ATTACHMENT C O March 14. 1988 1

Dear (Workshop Attendee):

We were pleased to have you as a participant at the Senior Reactor Operator (SRO) Workshop. As you know, the president of INP0, in his address on "Professionalism in Operations" at the November 1987 CEO conference, identified scveral initiatives intended to improve the environment for professionalism in the industry. These include developing guidelines for the utility for selected aspects of managing nuclear personnel, clearly comunicating management expectations to nuclear personnel, restructuring operator requalification, and implementing a professional code for operators at each station. In support of these initiatives, the SR0 workshop had two main objectives. The first was to discuss aspects of enhancing professionalism at the stations. The second was to facilitate the stations' development of a professional code for operators. Attachment A to this letter is the list of elements that the workshop participants indicated would be appropriate in a professional code for operators. Operators' coments from the 12 breakout session groups were collated and comon elements were identified that the participants felt were the most significant. Attachment B is a sumary of suggestions made during the workshop to

      ,  assist in developing and implementing a professional code for operators.

Attachment C, entitled "Guidelines for Developing a Professional Code for Nuclear Plant Operators," was forwarded earlier to assist you in preparing for the SRO workshop. It is provided again for information to aid you in developing your code. We hope these attachments, along with other materials provided at the workshop, will aid you and your station as you continuew ' ith efforts to enhance professionalism. Please call me at 404-953-7593 or Bob Link at 404-953-5452 if there are any questions. Sincerely, H. E. Marxer Manager Operations Department HEM:m Enclosures (As stated) cc/wo: APOC

ATTACHENT D 11/06/87

• GUIDELINES FOR DEVELOPING A PROFESSIONAL CODE FOR NUCLEAR PLANT OPERATORS GENERAL GUIDANCE' In developing a professional code for operators, the following general approach is recomended:

o Although operators should be allowed to develop the specific elements of the code, management should facilitate the development process by ' encouraging and assisting the operators. Management should also ensure that the code is comunicated to plant personnel, should provide continuing support for its implementation, and should engender an organization environment that reinforces it. o Although there are a large number of possible elements for operator professional codes (some of which are listed below), any one utility's , code should include a more limited number of clear, concise elements so that it is understandable and easily remembered. o The elements should be action-oriented and should be worded from the operator's point of view, preferably in first person. The suggested elements below are worded in a more general way to describe the possible content of an operator's code, not the actual wording of possible elements. Q SUGGESTED CONTENT The following are examples of what should be considered in developing professional codes for operators.

1. a statement of the importance of a safe, reliable, environmentally clean, and economic supply of electricity to the well-being of the people and the economy of the United States

2. recognition of the vital role of nuclear plant operators in ensuring that plant operation is safe, reliable, and efficient

3. a comitment to strive for excellence in operational safety and for continuing improvement in plant reliability and efficiency l 4. a comitment to do their best to do the job right the first time, l every time; acceptance of a career-long comitment to excellence as a i way of life l

5. an acknowledgement that public, personnel, and plant safety outweigh all other considerations in reaching decisions concerning plant operation; that safety takes priority over electricity production, economics, and other considerations

6. a comitment to perform duties with high personal standards of O honesty, integrity, and ethics, including adherence to standards established by others

ATTACHMENT 0 11/06/87

7. a constitment to treat others as professionals

8. non-acceptance of unprofessional performance or unethical actions by peers or by any other plant department or organization

9. acceptance of accountability for one's own. actions and the actions of one's subordinates

10. a statement of pride and satisfaction in being the right kind of person as well as in doing a job well

11. continual efforts to improve job.related knowledge, skills, and performance, both through participation in formal training and through individual study

12. a comitment to assist fellow workers and subordinates in developing into more competent, proficient, and professional operators and technicians

13. a comitment to constantly seek improved performance by learning from one's own experiences and the experiences of others

14. loyalty to the industry and to fellow operators nationwide; active support of industry goals and objectives '

15. a responsibility to adhere to procedures, technical specificaticns, O policies, and resulator> reauirements: suaaort these reauirements and meet their intent as well as their specifics; strive to ensure that proceoures are correct and accurate

16. a responsibility to report for work mentally, emotionally, and physically fit and report to supervisors if, for any reason, duties cannot be properly performed; responsibility to also ensure that fellow workers are fit for duty

17. a comitment to maintain constant alertness and vigilance and a high degree of awareness of plant status (equipment and work activities in progress); to keep others informed of plant status

18. believing instrumentation and other indications of potential abnormalities or problems until and unless such indications are clearly shown to be in error

19. a responsibility to maintain a healthy degree of skepticism; expecting the unexpected

20. a comitment to actively anticipate potential problems; monitoring and reacting to changes and trends in plant operations that could adversely affect safety or reliability, not being complacent or waiting to react to proolems after they occur O 21. a comitment to identify problems early and pursue them until they are satisfactorily resolved 2

 -                                                                                               ATTACHMENT 0 11/06/87 f       22.                   a responsibility to fully understand the potential effects on plant
      \

operation before taking any actions that could impact safety or reliability

23. a comitment to cooperate in working with others as a team to accomplish diverse tasks; to actively promote a cooperative, harmonious, and productive work environment O

O

o 3 THE CHALLENGES () ASKING MEMBER UTILITlis: 0 TO BEGIN NOW, IF NOT DONE ALREADY, TO WORK WITH YOUR OPERATORS TO DEVELOP A PROFESSIONAL CODE FOR OPERATORS 0 TO HAND PICK THE SR0 WHO ATTENDS OUR FEBRUARY WORKSHOP WITH THIS PROJECT IN MIND O TO HAVE AN OPERATOR CODE IN PLACE BY MID-1988 0 TO BE RECEPTIVE TO A SET OF BROAD MANAGEMENT PRINCIPLES, DEVELOPED BY YOUR PEERS, THAT CAN LEAD TO AN IMPROVED CLIMATE FOR PROFESSIONALISM ()

L d

 .,   0 AB0VE ALL ELSE, TO EXPECT AND INSIST O   ON PROFESSIONALISM BY YOUR.0PERATORS IN ALL THAT THEY D0. EXPECT THE BEST FROM THEM, NOT ONLY TECHNICALLY, BUT ETHICALLY AS WELL.

EXPECT THEIR CHARACTER TO BE AB0VE REPROACH O O

l i , I

,                          ASKING THE NRC                !

() 0 TO CONTINUE TO IMPROVE ITS LICENSED OPERATOR REQUALIFICATION PROGRAM 0 TO BE RECEPTIVE TO A SET OF BROAD MANAGEMENT PRINCIPLES, ALONG THE LINES THAT I HAVE DISCUSSED 0 TO RESOLVE THE DEGREE-0N-SHIFT QUESTION, PREFERABLY AFTER REVIEWING AND COMMENTING ON THE SET OF BROAD MANAGEMENT PRINCIPLES JUST MENTIONED () 0 TO THEN ASSURE THE INDUSTRY, AND THUS THE OPERATORS, 0F A MORE STABLE ENVIRONMENT FOR THE OPERATORS C)

I

                                                 \

i i ASKING NUMARC i () ' 0 TO ASSIST US WITH THE PRINCIPLES, AND TO ASSIST IN GAINING NRC UNDERSTANDING AND SUPPORT l l INPO 0 AT INP0 WE WILL CARRY OUT THE COMMITMENTS OUTLINED IN THIS TALK. WORKING WITH AN AD H0C INDUSTRY (} COMMITTEE AND NUMARC, WE PLAN TO HAVE A l SOUND SET OF PRINCIPLES IN YOUR HANDS BY l THE END OF MARCH 1988 i l () L

SEVEN ELEMENTS CONSIDERED BY PARTICIPANTS () MOST IMPORTANT IN A PROFESSIONAL CODE: 0 PERSONAL INTEGRITY - DEMONSTRATE PERSONAL INTEGRITY AND HONESTY IN ALL ASPECTS OF ONE'S J08, EXHIBIT PROFESSIONAL BEHAVIOR IN CONDUCT AND APPEARANCE. O COMMITMENT TO EXCELLENCE - STRIVE TO D0 THE BEST JOB POSSIBLE. 0 INDIVIDUAL KNOWLEDGE AND SKILLS - () CONTINUALLY WORK TO MAINTAIN AND IMPROVE JOB RELATED KNOWLEDGE AND SKILLS. l l 0 RESPONSIBILITY FOR ACTIONS - ACCEPT RESPONSIBILITY FOR ONE'S 0WN ACTIONS AND DECISIONS, ASSUME OWNERSHIP FOR THE JOB l AND THE PLANT. l l l 0 PROTECT PUBLIC - OPERATE IN A MANNER THAT PROTECTS PUBLIC SAFETY AB0VE ALL OTHER CONSIDERATIONS. RECOGNIZE THE RESPONSIBILITY TO OPERATE IN A MANNER THAT MERITS PUBLIC CONFIDENCE.

0 MONITOR AND RESPOND TO PLANT CONDITIONS () - CONTINUALLY MONITOR PLANT PARAMETERS AND AGGRESSIVELY PURSUE ANY ABNORMAL INDICATIONS. ANTICIPATE POTENTIAL PROBLEMS BEFORE THEY OCCUR. MAKE EVERY EFFORT TO PERFORM ALL OPERATIONAL ACTIVITIES CORRECTLY, THE FIRST TIME. 0 REGULATORY PROCEDURE AND COMPLIANCE - ADHERE TO ALL APPLICABLE REGULATIONS AND PROCEDURES TO ENSURE PUBLIC PROTECTION AND PLANT SAFETY. l () l () _ _--~_ ,--. _. _._-. _ ,._..__ _.. _ ___ _ _. _. . _ __-__-______,___._ .__ .___ _ ____ _._ - -

i i ELEMENTS IDENTIFIED AS DESIRABLE IN A () PROFESSIONAL CODE BUT NOT DEGREE OF SUPPORT AS THE FIRST GROUP 0 SUPPORT OF PROFESSIONAL INDUSTRY REPUTATION - EXHIBIT CONDUCT THAT UPHOLDS THE DIGNITY AND REPUTATION OF THE PROFESSION AND THE INDUSTRY. O COMMUNICATIONS - DEVELOP GOOD COMMUNICATION SKILLS TO ENSURE CLEAR, ACCURATE COMMUNICATIONS AMONG ALL PERSONNEL. () 0 ACCEPT ONLY PROFESSIONAL PERFORMANCE - ENC 0URAGE ALL PERSONNEL TO PERFORM PROFESSIONALLY AND TO THE BEST OF THEIR ABILITY. ASSIST FELLOW WORKERS IN DEVELOPING INTO MORE PROFICIENT EMPLOYEES. 0 FITNESS FOR DUTY - ENSURE PERSONAL MENTAL AND PHYSICAL FITNESS TO DISCHARGE ASSIGNED DUTIES. ENSURE OTHERS WHO ARE , NOT FIT FOR DUTY 00 NOT TAKE OVER ANY PLANT RESPONSIBILITIES. l

0 OPTIMIZE PLANT PERFORMANCE - SEEK T0 () IMPROVE PLANT PERFORMANCE AND RELIABILITY. O RESPECT FOR PEERS AND FELLOW EMPLOYEES - TREAT PEER AND FELLOW EMPLOYEES WITH RESPECT AND DIGNITY. O LEADERSHIP - DEMONSTRATE HIGH STANDARDS OF PERFORMANCE BY WORD AND DEED. PROVIDE GUIDANCE AND ENC 0URAGEMENT TO SUBORDINATES TO HELP THEM PERFORM TO THE BEST OF THEIR ABILITY AND TO GROW AS EMPLOYEES AND AS HUMAN BEINGS.

    )

O SUPPORT STATION MANAGEMENT - DEMONSTRATE SUPPORT OF STATION MANAGEMENT IN MEETING ! STATION G0ALS AND OBJECTIVES AND SUPPLYING SAFE, RELIABLE, AND EFFICIENT l ELECTRICAL POWER. 0 LEARN FROM EXPERIENCE - INCORPORATE PLANT AND INDUSTRY EXPERIENCE INTO JOB RELATED ACTIVITIES TO AVOID REPEATING ONE'S OWN MISTAKES OR THE MISTAKES OF OTHERS ()

MANAGING FOR EXCELLENCE AND PROFESSIONALISM () MANAGEMENT PROVIDES AN ENVIRONMENT THAT IS CONDUCIVE TO EXCELLENCE AND PROFESSIONALISM 0 SENIOR MANAGEMENT ESTABLISHES AN OVERALL CORPORATE PHILOSOPHY THAT PERMEATES THE ORGANIZATION. O MANAGEMENT SETS THE EXAMPLE BY CONDUCTING ITSELF WITH COMMITMENT AND INTEGRITY 0 MANAGEMENT ESTABLISHES SAFETY AS A () PERSONAL, MORAL RESPONSIBILITY AND ENSURES THE SAFETY OF THE PUBLIC,

UTILITY PERSONNEL, AND THE PLANT.

O MANAGEMENT MAINTAINS AN ATMOSPHERE OF OPEN COMMUNICATION SUCH THAT PROBLEMS ARE BROUGHT TO ITS ATTENTION UNDILUTED. O MANAGEMENT SETS G0ALS THAT ENC 0URAGE CONTINUAL IMPROVEMENT IN PERFORMANCE AND AVOID A SENSE OF SELF-SATISFACTION OR COMPLACENCY.

      -.,,,,w,,,y-.-.,-,--,--w-.                  ---r---g---<v- - - - ----- -r-      -   ~-

MANAGING NUCLEAR PERSONNEL O GENERAL 0 PEOPLE AND THEIR PROFESSIONAL CAPABILITIES ARE REGARDED AS THE NUCLEAR ORGANIZATION'S MOST VALUABLE RESOURCE. O PROGRAMS ARE ESTABLISHED AND IMPLEMENTED TO RECRUIT AND SELECT INDIVIDUALS WITH THE QUALIFICATIONS AND ABILITIES TO PERFORM THE J0BS FOR WHICH THEY ARE BEING HIRED AND ALSO WITH THE ABILITY TO DEVELOP THE SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE

  )           REQUIRED FOR HIGHER LEVEL POSITIONS.

0 KNOWLEDGE AND SKILLS ARE DEVELOPED, MAINTAINED, AND ENHANCED THROUGH APPROPRIATE TRAINING AND CAREER DEVELOPMENT. l 0 MANAGEMENT PRACTICES AND POLICIES u0NVEY j AN ATTITUDE OF TRUST AND AN APPROACH l THAT IS SUPPORTIVE OF TEAMWORK AT ALL LEVELS. l ()

O THE LINE ORGANIZATION IS THE PRINCIPAL () FOCUS OF MANAGEMENT, THE PRINCIPAL SOURCE OF INFORMATION, AND THE ONLY SOURCE OF MANAGEMENT DIRECTION. O MANAGEMENT PRACTICES ENC 0URAGE COMMUNICATION AND REQUIRE TEAM WORK AMONG AND BETWEEN GROUPS THAT OPERATE, MAINTAIN, AND SUPPORT THE PLANT. 0 APPROPRIATE PERSONNEL HAVE PROFESSIONAL CODES THAT SET FORTH CERTAIN PRACTICES, INCLUDING ETHICAL PRACTICES, THAT THEY () AD0PT AS A PART OF THEIR WAY OF DOING BUSINESS. O MANAGEMENT SEEKS INPUT ON THE DEVELOPMENT, AND FEEDBACK ON THE EFFECTIVENESS, 0F POLICIES AND PRACTICES. l 0 PERSONNEL RECEIVE APPROPRIATE RECOGNITION FOR THEIR ACHIEVEMENTS, BOTH WITHIN THEIR WORK GROUPS AND IN THE COMPANY AS A WHOLE. CJ l l u . -

. 1 i l DEVELOPING MANAGEMENT PERSONNEL () 0 FORMAL PROGRAMS ARE ESTABLISHED TO SELECT AND DEVELOP INDIVIDUALS TO FILL KEY MANAGEMENT POSITIONS. O MANAGEMENT DEVELOPMENT AND SELECTION PRACTICES REFLECT THE FACT THAT WORK IN PLANT OPERATIONS PROVIDES THE BROAD, INTEGRATED VIEW 0F PLANT ACTIVITIES NEEDED BY NUCLEAR MANAGERS. O PROMOTION AND MANAGEMENT DEVELOPMENT PRACTICES SEEK A BALANCE BETWEEN CAREER

        )         OPERATIONS INDIVIDUALS AND OTHERS WHO OBTAIN OPERATIONS EXPERIENCE AS PART OF THEIR CAREER DEVELOPMENT.

O THE PLAN MANAGER OR ASSISTANT PLANT MANAGER IN THE LIE ORGANIZATION HOLDS OR HAS HELD AN SRO LICENSE OR HAS BEEN CERTIFIED FOR EQUIVALENT SR0 KNOWLEDGE AND HAS EXTENSIVE NUCLEAR POWER PLANT EXPERIENCE, PREFERABLY IN THE OPERATIONS DEPARTMENT. ()

O MANAGEMENT PERSONNEL AND CANDIDATES FOR () MANAGEMENT POSITIONS ARE PROVIDED APPROPRIATE MANAGEMENT AND INTERPERSONAL SKILLS TRAINING AND EXPERIENCE TO ENABLE THEM TO PERFORM MANAGEMENT AND SUPERVISORY FUNCTIONS. O CANDIDATES FOR MANAGEMENT POSITIONS OR FOR PROMOTION TO HIGHER LEVEL MANAGEMENT POSITIONS ARE PROVIDED WITH OPPORTUNITIES TO WORK WITH AND FOR INDIVIDUALS WHO CAN SERVE AS ROLE MODELS TO ENHANCE THE DEVELOPMENT OF LEADERSHIP AND MANAGEMENT CAPABILITIES.

    )

O SELECTED PERSONNEL ARE PROVIDED OPPORTUNITIES IN A VARIETY OF FUNCTIONAL AREAS IN THE NUCLEAR ORGANIZATION AND ARE GIVEN OPPORTUNITIES TO WORK WITH NUCLEAR ON TO BROADEN H EXPOSURE AND PERSPECTIVE. () t -. .-_ __ . - -

1 1 , MANAGING OPERATIONS DEPARTMENT PERSONNEL () 0 THE INITIAL SCREENING 0F APPLICANTS OR CANDIDATES FOR OPERATIONS POSITIONS TAKES INTO ACCOUNT THE POSITIONS OF GREAT RESPONSIBILITY THAT THESE PERSONNEL ARE LIKELY TO FILL, FOR EXAMPLE AS REACTOR OPERATORS. O SUBSEQUENT SCREENING, WITH NUCLEAR LINE MANAGEMENT INVOLVEMENT, IS CONDUCTED AS OPERATORS AND OTHERS ARE SELECTED AS CANDIDATES FOR THE SENIOR REACTOR OPERATOR AND SHIFT SUPERVISOR POSITIONS. () 0 WHILE A COLLEGE DEGREE IN A TECHNICAL FIELD IS NOT A NECESSARY RE0VIREMENT FOR OPERATIONS POSITIONS, OPERATORS WITH BACHELORS DEGREES IN TECHNICAL SUBJECTS HAVE A GREATER LIKELIHOOD OF PROMOTION TO AND SUCCESS IN MANAGEMENT POSITIONS. O MANAGEMENT PRACTICES GOVERNING THE CONDUCT OF CONTROL ROOM OPERATIONS AND SIMULATOR TRAINING. ()

0 LINE MANAGEMENT, UP TO AND INCLUDING THE l () SENIOR MANAGER ON SITE, IS SUFFICIENTLY INVOLVED IN ALL PHASES OF THE TRAINING,  ; QUALIFICATION, REQUALIFICATION, AND SIMULATOR PROGRAMS TO ENSURE THAT OPERATORS ARE PROPERLY QUALIFIED TO PERFORM THEIR ASSIGNED TASKS. O MANAGEMENT POLICIES AND PRACTICES ENSURE THAT THE PERSON RESPONSIBLE FOR THE PLANT AFTER HOURS (IN EFFECT, THE PERSON WHO ACTS FOR THE PLANT MANAGER), WHETHER THIS IS A SHIFT MANAGER, SHIFT ENGINEER, () OR SHIFT SUPERVISOR, IS SELECTED KEEPING i IN MIND THE GREAT RESPONSIBILITY THAT THE PERSON ASSUMES. l ()

1 4

                      ~

O MANAGING MAINTENANCE PERSONNEL MANAGING TECHNICAL PERSONNEL MANAGING ENGINEERING PERSONNEL O . t i t l O i b i u..-.,____..._.___- . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _

 .                                                                                                                                    /w   2             \

r NRR STAFF PRESENTATION TO THE O ACRS t

SUBJECT:

PROPOSEL COMMISSION POLICY STATEMENT ON THE FROFESSIONAL CONDUCT OF NUCLEAR POWER PLANT OPERATORS (SECY-88-57) DATE: APRIL 27, 1988 l l 4 ESENTER: GADION WEST, JR. PRESENTER'S TITLE / BRANCH /DIV: ENcINEERINc PSYCH 0t0cIST , HUMAN FACTORS ASSESSMENT BRANCH DIVISION OF LICENSEE PERFORMANCE AND QUALITY EVALUATION l l PRESENTER'S NRC TEL. NO.: (301) 492-1029 SUBCOMMITTEE: HUMAN FACTORS O

4 u ., ( . .( ~ l g- > i .

          -Q.

t i i p~ OUTLINE i i L ! BACKGTUND  ; ! OPJECTIVES OF POLICY STATDENT  ; i DESCRIPT!0N OF POLICY STAT 9 Bff - 5 5 L INSTilljTE OF NUCLEAR POWER OPERATIONS (INP0) INITIATIVE  ; i

• OPTION REGARDING INPO INITIATIVE i t

f O i. t

                                                                                                                             ,1 t

b I f 1 i e i i l s O  ! t i f f

I o: , s

      -(
   -i I

v BACKGROUND COMSECY-87 APPIL 7, 1987 4

                           -CCM4ISS10tl DIRECTED TliE STAFF To DEVELOP A POLICY STATEMEf!T Off THE PROFESS 10fML C0fIXJCT OF NUCLFAR POWER PLANT OPERATORS PATHER PURSUE RULEFAk!!G.

• MAY 7, 1987 COMSECY-87-6

                           -C0tHISSION REAFFIRMED ITS DIRECTION THAT SUCH A POLICY STATEMEf(T BE DEVELOPED.

SECY-88-57, PROPOSED Co MISSION POLICY FEBRUAPY 29,1988 STATENENT Oil THE PROFESS 10t&L CONDUCT OF l NUCLEAR POWER PLANT OPEPATORS Q-STAFF REQUIRFPENTS MFJORANDUM MARCH 22, 1988 [

                           -CutHISS10ft DIRECTED THE STAFF TO OBTAIN ACRS Are CRGR REVIEW M'D COHEtITS, FOLLOWED BY REVISif)G
                           #f FORWARD!rs SECY-88-57 TO THE COHISSION FOP ACTION.

F b O l l l t 1 -

v 4

-4 .

4 4 v POLICY STAT 9ENT DESCP.lPTION PROVIDES GUIDANCE ON APPROPRIATE OPERATOR CO@UCT. IDEllTIFIES C0f. TROL ROOM ACTIVITIES AND BEHAVIOR THAT SHOULD BE PROHIBITED. DIS" cES THE 03E OF ELECTRONIC ENTERTAINMENT DEV 'CONTPOL ROOMS. O Discov ^ees e^Ti"o = ^'s ^T woak sTATro"s-REQUESTS LICENSEES TO YOLUNTARILY REVIEW AININISTPATIVE CONTROLS TO ENSURE CONCEPf!S OF POLICY STATEMENT ARE ADDRESSED. O

a ,

 ; y.

c POLICY STATEE NT OPJECTlW.S To ADDPESS INCIDENCES OF OPEPATOR IfMTTEt.'TIVENESS N'D UNPROFFSSI0fML BEHAVIOR IN THE C0fffROL ROOMS OF OPERAT!?S tlVCLEAR POWER FACILITIES NO TO ENCOUPAGE LICENSEES TO TfKE APPROPRIATE ADM!!11STRATIVE ACTIONS TO ENSURE HIGH STN DARDS REGARDING CONTROL POOM C0ta)CT AND OPERATOR ATTEllTIVENESS. l O

                                                                                            ,    c

,:: . n .. . ..

h s  ;

f.h I ., g; l -- t

l -

s. i 1* .i

      'h-L                                                                                                                              .t E

4 i INP0'S INITIATIVE

i p  :

I 'I ^

• DEVELOPING MANAGEKt!T PRINCIPLES CONCER!11t0' ,

PROFESS 10t!ALISM AND  ; L, FORMULATitE A PROFESSIONAL CODE FOR NUCLEAR PLAllT OFERATORS  ; i i ! 6 [ a ,

              ,                                                                                                                     t.

f i - l k I l t + r

                                                                                                                                  -t
                                                                                                                                .E I
                                                                                                                                  -i F

t

                                                                                                                                    )

I h D b i i t 1

                @                                                                                                                   t e
                                                                                                                                   ,i f'

                                               ..                                                    .t
     +
 .         {. ,                                                                                        l s./

i

  , 4 .'

' 0; i i i; s:. !- OPTION FEGARDING INFO'S INITIATIVE I i- - DEFER ACTION ON THE PROPOSED POLICY STATEMENT, i ALLOWING THE STAFF N1 OPPORTUNITY TO REVIEW INP0'S INITIATIVE AND TO EVALUATE ITS POTENTIAL , TO SUCCESSFULLY Ef#iANCE OPERATOR PROFESSIONALISM.

O.

O

s

   /\
   ; J_

PRESENTATION OF SELECTED PRODUCTS OF THE HUMAN PERFORMANCE AND RELIABILITY ACTIVITY HUMAN FACTORS RESEARCH PROGRAM TO THE ACRS SUBCOMMITTEE ON HUMAN FACTORS (~'s BY THOMAS G. RYAN RELIABILITY AND HUMAN FACTORS BRANCH DIVISION OF REACTOR AND PLANT SYSTEMS OFFICE OF NUC. EAR REGULATORY RESEARCH APRIL 27, 1988 l l T'N N_ l

D-HUMAN PERFORMANCE AND RELIABILITY RESEARCH ACTIVITY PURPOSE OF PRESENTATION: O PROVIDE A GENERAL OVERVIEW OF THE RESEARCH ACTIVITY. O DISCUSS TWO SPECIFIC RESEARCH INITIATIVES. COMPUTER-BASED DATA MANAGEMENT SYSTEM XNOWN (]) AS NUCLARR (NUCLEAR COMPUTERIZED LIBRARY FOR ASSESSING REACTOR RELIABILITY) ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE-BASED DECISIONMAKING (INTENTION FORMATION) ANALYZER KNOWN AS CES (COGNITIVE ENVIRONMENT SIMULATION) l

o O O: '~ HUMAN PERFORMANCE AND RELIABILITY RESEARCH ACTIVITY ' FY 1988 FOCUS OF RESOURCES: ELEMENTS DATA TOOLS DATA BANK- PROCEDURES METHODS EXTENSION RESEARCH STEPS FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS TECHNOLOGY GMU BNL LLNL

• DEVELOPMENT 13% 15% 14%

TECHNOLOGY WRDC

• EVALUATION 13%

TECHNOLOGY CEC INEL

• TRANSFER 9% 36%

TOTALS 13% 37% 36% 14% INVESTIGATED AS PART OF OTHER TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT, EVALUATION AND TRANSFER STUDIES.

c.- . - () NUCLEAR COMPUTERIZED LIBRARY FOR ASSESSING-

                                         -REACTOR RELIABILITY (NUCLARR)                .

BACKGROUND: BASED ON EARLIER RESEARCH DOCUMENTED IN NUREG/CR-4010. PURPOSE: COMPUTER-BASED DATA MANAGEMEilT SYSTEM FOR COLLATING, AGGREGATING, STORING AND RETRIEVING HUMAN ERROR PROBABILITY AND HARDWARE COMPONENT FAILURE RATE DATA (3) SOURCE OF INPUT DATA FOR DOING HUMAN AND HARDWARE RELIABILITY AtlALYSES LOCATION: IDAHO NATI0tlAL ENGINEERING LABORATORY STATUS: DATA LOADING AND DISSEMIflATION (TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER) 'l O

O NUCLEAR COMPUTERIZED LIBRARY FOR ASSESSING REACTOR. RELIABILITY (NUCLARR) CONTINUED DATA TAXONOMY: NESTED MATRIX ORGANIZATION WHOSE -

 ~

VERTICAL AXIS INCLUDES PLANT TYPE) VENDOR) SYSTEM) COMPONENT) O DISPLAY / CONTROL HORIZONTAL AXIS INCLUDES FOR HUMAN ACTOR) l 4 ACTION VERB HORIZONTAL AXIS INCLUDES FOR HARDWARE COMPONENT CATEGORY) TYPE) I DESIGN) FAILURE MODE AND NORMAL STATE O  : 1 1

             ...,e-c,- ~-----,,,,-n-      ,----.._.,.,.-.-,,-,,,,---,-.,-,,,--,,x_                  ,,.,m,,, ,,,--m,. .- , - , - , - ..- - - - --- -,, ,.

                                                                                                            .m .  . . _ -       . ..

i j~5- 1 a i NUCLEAR COMPUTERIZED LIBRARY FOR ASSESSING REACTOR RELIABILITY ~ (NUCLARR) . CONTINUED  ! c DATA CELLS: MATRIX INTERSECTS WHICH PRESENT - ! i j HUMAN INFORMATION BY DATA MEDIUM AND SOIr.CE j l 0 TASK CONDITIONS j 0 POINT ESTIMATES l 0 UNCERTAINTY-0R CONFIDENCE INTERVALS 7 0 PERFORMANCE SHAPING FACTOR VALUES { i 5 0 RAW DATA TALLIES j 0 SOURCE REFERENCE l 0 WITHIN AND ACROSS CELL AGGREGATIONS l HARDWARE INFORMATION BY DATA MEDIUM-AND SOURCE i 0 FAILURE RATES OR PROBABILITIES l ) 0 CONFIDENCE INTERVALS I O UNITS OF ANALYSIS (PER TIME UNIT OR PER i DEMAND) O RAW DATA TALLIES i i 0 SOURCE REFERENCE l O WITHIN AND ACROSS CELL AGGREGATIONS  ! ! 1 f () f

4 s NUCLEAR COMPUTERIZED LIBRARY FOR ASSESSING . REACTOR RELIABILITY l (NUCLARR)

              - CONTINUED                                                                                                                                                                   [
                                                        ~

DATA SOURCES: HEP /CFR DATA STORES, PRA REPORTS, RESEARCH REPORTS, EXPERT. GROUPS, COMPUTER CODES, TRAINING SIMULATORS, EXISTING REPORTING SYSTEMS,_ (OTHER , INDUSTRIES AND MILITARY) INPUT PROCESS: NUCLARR STAFF AND HUMAN AND HARDWARE RELIABILITYi ANALYSIS GROUP (HHRAG) O DESCRIPTIVE OR MENU DRIVEN, AD HOC SEARCHES SEARCHES:  ; t REQUESTS: TABULATIONS FOR STATISTICAL ANALYSIS DIRECT INTERFACE WITH ANALYSIS CODE (IN-PROCESS) l CLEARINGHOUSE FOR SOURCE REFERENCE MATERIALS

OUTPUTS

SCREEN OR HARDCOPY O CELL PRESENTATION ,

O

SUMMARY

REPORT , O GRAPHIC O ASCII FORMAT - I O  : f I I

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

O NUCLEAR COMPUTERIZED LIBRARY FOR ASSESSING REACTOR RELIABILITY (NUCLARR) 4 CONTINUED MEDIUM: DISKETTE AND HARDCOPY DOCUMENTATION: NUREG/CR-4639 (VOLUMES 1 THRU 5) 1, NUCLARR OVERVIEW (])

                               --   2, COMPUTER CODES
                               --   3, MANAGEMENT AND CLEARINGHOUSE PROCEDURES
                               --   4, USER PROCEDURES AND DISKETTES
                               --   5, DATA STORE HARDCOPY 4

( i I [

i (21 COGNITIVE ENVIRONMENT SIMULATION (CES) BACKGROUND: RESPONDS TO NEEDS FOR IMPROVED ANALYSES OF DECISIONMAKING TASKS, AS PART OF PRAS. i FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS PRESENTED IN NUREG/CR-4532; CES AND CREATE PROTOTYPES PRESENTED IN NUREG/CR-4862. PURPOSE: ANALYZE DECISIONMAKING (INTEilTION FORMATION) () ASPECTS OF flUCLEAR POWER PLANT PERSONNEL BEHAVIOR. IS DETERMINISTIC AND PROVIDES THE ANALYST DECISI0flMAKING RESPONSES AND DECISION PROCESS AUDITS. COUPLED WITH THE COGNITIVE RELIABILITY ANALYSIS TECHNIQUE (CREATE) PROVIDES DECIS10NMAKING (INTENTION FORMATION) ERROR PROBABILITIES.

y . . - - . l

 ,                                                                                                                                                           1
      -                                                                                                                                                      l I )-                                                                                                                                                      l COGNITIVE ENVIRONMENT SIMULATION (CES)                                                                         -

CONTINUED APPLICATIONS: ANALYZES INDEPENDENT AND DEPENDENT ERRORS'0F OMISSION (N0 DECISION)'AND COMMISSION (WRONG DECISION), AND RECOVERY.

   ~

PINPOIflTS CIRCUMSTANCES AND SITUATI0flS IN WHICH ERRORS OF OMISSION AND COMMISSION CAN BE PREDICTED, () LOCATION: WESTINGHOUSE R&D CENTER, PITTSBURGH, PA STATUS: UNDERGOING OPERABILITY AND VALIDITY TESTING (TECHNOLOGY EVALUATION),  ! O

        ,,     ,w-.,  ,---- - . . . n.-,-m-m         __----_,,,,,,,,,-,,.---n -
                                                                                    .,-----,-,w-,   ,
                                                                                                      .,.g, --- ,-_,,,, y - - - - - - - , ,

s COGNITIVE ENVIRONMENT SIMULATION (CES) CONTINUED CES TECHNOLOGY: USES ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE-BASED CONTROL PACKAGE CALLED EAGOL TO MIMIC THE DECISIONMAKIllG PROCESS, RESOURCES OPERATED ON BY EAGOL ARE A KNOWLEDGE BASE (WHAT THE DECISIONMAKER KNOWS ABOUT THE PLANT), AND PROCESS MECHANISMS (MONITORING, EXPLANATION BUILDING ( AND RESPONSE MANAGEMENT RULES USED BY THE DECISION-MAKER TO RECONCILE SCENARIO INPUTS WITH HIS STATE 0F KNOWLEDGE), CES INTERFACES DIRECTLY WITH A TRAINING SIMULATOR SO THAT ITS DECISIONS CAN BE EXECUTED AND FEEDBACK ON EACH PROVIDED AT EACH STEP IN THE SCENARIO, O

Y () COGNITIVE ENVIRONMENT SIMULATION (CES) - CONTINUED i CONTROLS: THE ANALYST MANIPULATES PERFORMANCE SHAPING (ADJUSTMENT) FACTORS OF INTEREST BY EXPANDING / RESTRICTING THE KNOWLEDGE BASE AND PROCESS MECHANISMS. MENTAL MODELS (KNOWLEDGE BASE INFLUENCE PATTERNS) DYNAMIC HEURISTICS (CALL TO MIND, SEARCH STRATEGY)

      ' ({}                                                                                                 ,

FIXATION PRONENESS (SEARCH STRATEGY, WORKLOAD CUTOFF, < ACTIVITY FIELD) -

                                  --   STRESS (ATTEtlTI0fl FIELD, WORKLOAD CUTOFF)                          ;

PROCEDURES (KNOWLEDGE CUES) OUTPUTS (SCREEN OR HARDCOPY): LIST OF DECISION OPTIONS FOR THE SCENARIO ANALYZED ALONG < WITH PROCESSING AUDITS FOR EACH DECISION. IN INSTANCES WHERE SCENARIOS DON'T RESULT Ifl A DECISION, CES PROVIDES AN AUDIT (PROCESS TRACE) 0F THE ANALYSIS UP TO THE POINT AT WHICH PROCESSING OPTIONS WERE EXHAUSTED. l (E) I , l t

                   ,---.w-,  ,,-       --
                                                  -v-- , - ---- -,- - - -       -- ,-- +- n - , -- - --+---

     .y                                                                           _  - - - - _ - _ - - - - - - - _ - - _ - _ _

HUMAN' PERFORMANCE AND RELIABILITY RESEARCH FOR FY 1988-89

 .V As of: 4/22/88

1. Purpose The purpose of this plan is to briefly describe the NRC Human Performance and Reliability Research Activity undertaken during the past six years and its research on-going and planned for FY 1988-1989. .Research is directed toward improved tools and data for measuring and interpreting performance of NPP personnel from both quantitative and qualitative perspectives during normal, transient and emergency situations.

This Activity was originated in response to a user request from NRR (November 1982). During subsequent years support for Activity goals has  ; come through briefings and coordination with NRR, AE00 and RES management and staff who are involved in reliability and risk assessments and involved in resolving more general human factors issues. Transfer, implementation and institutionalization of Activity products is ongoing inside the NRC, with domestic and international agencies outside the NRC conducting reliability studies, and with the larger human factors community.

2. Background kJ3 The Three Mile Island and Chernobyl accidents demonstrated the importance and potential tenuousness of human behavior in comercial nuclear power plant (NPP) operations, especially operations performed under abnormal i conditions. Therefore, the NRC has recognized the need for research on integrating procedures, quantification tools and data for rigorously benchmarking human performance and assessing its overall impact on NPP safety. To achieve the desired integrating procedures, quantification tools and data, this multi-faceted research activity was established.

3. Research Obiectives The NRC Human Performan:e and Reliability Research Activity has two objectives. First, to develop a technical support system for doing human reliability analysis (HRA) segments of reliability evaluations, especially those employing probabilistic risk assessment (PRA) techniques. Second, to develop tools for systenatically exploiting the potentially rich HRA/PRA process and qualitative and quantitative data that process can generate to:

(1) address safety issues of concern to the NRC, (2) identify irmediate ano future human performance research needs, and (3) support goals of the larger human factors community.

4. Research Elements

, ,3 This research activity is divided into six interactive elements (areas of kJ , i t

o Human Performance / Reliability 2 focus). .The first element is directed toward identifying legitimate sources and collecIing reasonable human performance data for use in constructing error probability estimates. A major problem for reliability and risk assessment practitioners is a lack of reliable data to support those assessments. This is especially true in the area of human performance. Therefore, research focuses on potential data sources inside (FIN A6854) and outside (FIN G1126) the commercial nuclear community. Data from both sources will be used primarily as anchors, or bounding values, to derive situation specific probability estimates, and to support the data base management system discussed below. l The second interactive element is directed toward methods for deriving human error 3robability, performance shaping (causal) factor and uncertainty >ound estimates. This research has achieved an initial set of methods for deriving the desired estimates using raw performance data from field reports, training simulator studies, computer modeling and consensus expert judgement. The NRC is currently seeking feedback on some of these methods from case studies being conducted inside the NRC and in cooperation with domestic and international agencies outside the NRC (FINS D1612 and 02018). The third interactive element is directed toward a comprehensive data base 1 nanagement system for processing and housing human error and hardware failure probability data (FIN A6850). A resulting data base management n

   \.)

system, known as the Nuclear Computerizr:d Library for Assessing Reactor Reliability (NUCLARR), is being implemented at EG&G Idaho Engineering Inc., Idaho Falls, Idaho. The fourth interactive element is directed toward analytic tools for applying data and probability estimates from other Activity elements, to quantify and interpret the effects of human aerformance in safety-related event sequences (scenarios) at commercial iPPs. To date, this element has produced several tools (e.g., THERP. 0ATS, MSF Model) for i quantifying and interpreting independent and dependent errors. Additionally, prototype processors known as the Maintenance Personnel Performance Simulation (MAPPS) capable of simulating overt behavior of maintenance personnel, and the Cognitive Environment Simulation (CES) capable of systematically analyzing the cognitive aspects of human behavior (including recovery strategies), have been developed and are being tested under FINS D2018 and D1167 respectively. Finally, research has been initiated on a method for systematically incorporating supervisor and manager influences in reliability evaluations, severe accident management and perfo mance indicator development (FIN A3956). This will include asset ting the influences of supervisors and managers on operators actions invi.. .'ag high cost to benefit actions such as feed and bleed. The MAPPS and CES codes, and supervisor / manager performance assessment tools are also being designed for use by the general NRC human factors community to support its work on human-machine interface, personnel subsystem, and organization and management concerns of the Agency. The fifth interactive element is directed toward procedures for fully

Human Performance / Reliability 3 i

• O integrating the behavioral scientist, and methods and data developed as i part of this Activity, into the PRA process, to achieve a more realistic assessment of the human's overall contribution to plant safety (FIN A0465).

The success of this element, along with the data acquisition element, are  ; most critical for the success of the overall Activity. That is, no n,atter

 ;                        how adequate the analytic tools, if they are not apolied by knowledgeable behavioral science practitioners as full members of the PRA team, realistic assessments of the impact of human performance on overall NPP safety will
 ;                        never be fully real .' zed.

The sixth interactive element (work planned for FY 1989) is directed toward , methods for systematically applying quantitative and qualitative results from reliability evaluations and other human factors assessments to: (1) prioritize and resolve human performance related aspects of safety i issues, (2) identify immediate and long-term research needs, and (3) support goals of the larger human factors community.

5. Research Method Human performance and reliability research directed toward each Activity

element objective is accomplished through a conditional four-step process.

Feasibility Analysis: The first step is based on the premise that NRC research is primarily applied rather than exploratory. It therefore n V involves a feasibility analysis to determine if state-of-art technologies pioneered in other environments (e.g., aerospace industry, transportation, military) can be applied, in part or in total, to the issue or issues of j research interest. Technology Development: If it is determined that technologies are

 ;                        available and acequatE the second research step involves revising, expanding and/or repackaging one or more of the technologies emerging from the feasibility analysis step, as a stand-alone prototype capable of being 4

tested, i Technology Evaluation: The third research step is directed toward a l rigorous field evaluation / validation of the prototype to determine its practicality, acceptability and usefulness for doing reliability evaluation and/or more general human factors work. Practicality is concerned with cost, personnel and otner resources required, and adequacy of procedures for implementing the prototype. Acceptability is concerned with potential 1 ! user reaction to the technology (les) (e.g., computer processing, artificial intelligence) incorporated in the prototype . Usefulness is concerned with the degree to which the prototype meets the need for which it was developed . and, if appropriate, with the reliability and validity of performance measures derived using the prototype. Technology Transfer: The final step in the research process is directed i towaro final packaging and institutionalization of the prototype. This i involves making the prototype available for use in case studies inside and l outside the NRC, training its users, conducting oversight of its - implementation, and its refinement based on user feeoback. l l >

e r Human Performanco/ Reliability 4 l D =

6. Research Results During the past six years some 48 NUREG/CR and 11 00E Laboratory reports have been published to comunicate NRC Human Performance and Reliability Research Activity findings and products to NRC user groups, and to the general public. The following paragraphs enumerate products developed to date under each Activity element along with its associated NUREG/CR  !

reports. Product titles are underlined along with associated NUREG/CR l reports which contain the procedures for implementing those products.  ; Performance Data Acquisition Methods: o Nuclear Power Safety Reporting System (NPSRS) for acquiring field experience data (NUREG/CRs 3119 2 vols, 4132, 4133). Human Error Probability Estimation: o Methods (Success Likelihood Index [ SLIM-MAUD], paired comaarisons, direct numerical estimation) for deriving human error pro) ability, hardware failure, performance shaping factor and uncertainty bound estimates using consensus expert judgement (NUREG/CRs 2255, 2743, 3688 2 vols, 2986, 3518 2 vols, 4016 2 vols). o Method for computing human error probability, performance shaping factor and uncertainty bound estimates using field report data (NUREG/CRs 1880, O 2416,2417,2987,3519), o Method for computing human error probability, performance shaping factor and uncertainty bound estimates using training simulator data ' (NUREG/CR3309). Data Base Management System: o Nuclear Computerized Library for Assessing Reactor Reliability (NUCLARR) data management system for collating, processing, storing and retrieving human error probability and hardware failure data for use by HRA and PRA practitioners (NUREG/CRs 2744 2 vols, 4009, 4010, 4639 vols 1 thru 5). Human Performance Scenario Quantification: o Maintenance Personnel Performance Simulation (MAPPS) computer code for - analyzing performance of NPP maintenance and to a limited extent operator personnel. (NUREG/CRs 2668, 2669, 2670, 3274, 3275, 3626 2 vols, 3634, 4104), o Prototype Cognitive Environment Simulation (CES) for analyzing cognitive (intention formation) aspects of human behavior under normal, transient and accident situations (NUREG/CRs 4532 2 vols, 4862 vols. I and 2). o Prototype Cognitive Reliability Analysis Technioue (CREATE) for O. employing CES outputs to reflect the effects of human intention formation in reliability and risk assessments (NUREG/CR 4862 vols. 1 and 3). c

 .-                                                                                    I l

Human' Perfonnance/ Reliability 5 l C o Multiple Sequence Failure (MSF) method for analyzing dependencies (conditional probabilities of success) between consecutive steps in human performance segments of accident sequences (NUREG/CRs 2211,3837). o Operator Action Tree (OATS) procedure and computational model for ' carrying out human reliability analysis segments of PRAs using a time-reliability curve approach (NUREG/CR 3010). , o Technique for Human Error Rate Prediction (THERP) procedure and computational model for carrying out human reliability analysis segments of PRAs (NUREG/CRs 1278, 2254 and 4772). Behavioral Science in HRA/PRA: o Analysis of safety issue human performance information/ data requirements and degree to which currently published PRA results respond to those requirements (NUREG/CR 4103).

7. FY 1988-1989 Research During the past six years the NRC Human Performance and Reliability Research Activity has focused primarily on data acquisition methods, on data bank management system development and on tools for conducting r engineering oriented analyses of human behavior.

During FY 1988, and thereafter, human reliability research is shifting its focus to: (1) case studies for transferring prototype products to the O user community, (2) human performance information data acquisition inside and outside the nuclear industry, (3) analytic tools for analyzing the cognitive aspects of human behavior, (4) procedures for integrating the behavioral scientist into the mainstream of the PRA process, and (5)

methods for systematically applying HRA/PRA results and human factors i assessments in prioritization and resolution of safety issues.

In carrying out the above research, interagency agreements, , international agreements, commercial contracts and grants, as well as in-house resources are being employed. Human Performance Data Acquisition: o Human error probability (HEP) estimates are being generated using methods developed earlier in the program and surrogate data from other industries. Final HEP estimates are being processed into the NUCLARR data base management system for immediate use by HRA and PRA practitioners, and larger human factors community. (FIN A6854 interagency agreement with INEL and EG&G Idaho Engineering

Inc., and FIN G1126 grant to the George Mason University)

t l i o Technology transfer of the SLIM-MAUD and MAPPS codes are being , undertaken through a series of case studies.

(FIN 01612 commercial contract co-sponsored with EPRI to the NUS ,

Corporation involving SLIM-MAUD and MAPPS, FIN D2018 international t agreement with the Comission of the European Comunities (CEC) involving MAPPS) , I l i

Human Performance / Reliability 6 O V NUCLARR Data Base Management System: NUCLARR is being enhanced to allow multi-cell retrieval of information, preparation of multiple cell data for analysis by other statistical codes such as SPSS and SAS, and direct interface between NUCLARR and other computer codes such as MAPPS and IRRAS. (FIN A6850 interagency agreement with INEL and EG8G Idaho Engineering Inc.) Performance Modelina Tools: Cognitive process modeling and supervisor / manager factors research involves technology development, evaluation and transfer. The CES described in NUREG/CRs 4532 and 4862, takes advantage of artificial intelligence and other cognitive related techniques appropriate for mapping the cognitive (intention formation) process in a complex system environment such as a NPP. Supervisor / manager factors research takes advantage of earlier and ongoing RES, NRR and AE0D work on organizational and management factors and performance indicators, as well as the current state of knowledge in academia and industry. (FIN D1167 commercial contract with the Westinghouse R&D Center, and FIN UNDES for packaging the CES for general use. FIN A3956 interagency agreement with BNL for developing and evaluating methods for pd incorporating supervisor and manager factors in reliability , evaluations and in other huNn factors applications such as performance indicators and severe accident management). HRA/PRA Integration: This research is directed toward integrating the behavioral scientist into the PRA process. It takes advantage of work ongoing as part of the CEC Human Reliability Benchmarking Exercise, EPRI sponsored Systematic Human Action Reliability Procedure (SHARP), and NRC sponsored Team Enhanced Evaluation Method (TEEM) with BNL, CREATE concept with the Westinghouse R&D Center and Task Analysis-Linked Evaluation Technique (TALENT) concept developed in-house. Anticipated research will involve further development, evaluation and transfer of user procedures based on these concepts to the user comunity. (FIN A0465 interagency agreement with LLNL) Behavioral Science in PRA/PRA: Research will build on findings reported in NUREG/CR 4103 to achieve a method or methods for systematically applying reliability evaluation and human factors assessment results in safety issues prioritization and resolution. Research will involve further development, evaluation and transfer of the resulting method or methods. (FY 1989 anticipated FIN D1699 with a commercial contractor)

u '.'

         ' Human Perfonnance/ Reliability                                                    7 O'      8.                                    Technical Summary Figure 1 presents a technical summary of ongoing (FY 1988) human performance and reliability research projects by Program element and by research process step.

Figure 1 FY 1988 TECHNICAL

SUMMARY

Research Elements Data Data Data Sequence HRA/PRA Methods Acouisition Base Modeling Integration Research Process Steps Feasibility Non-Nuclear Management Analysis: Data Factors O (G1126) (A3956) Tech Event NUCLARR Behavioral Develop- Reporting Enhancements Scientist in ment: (In-house) (A6850) PRAs 1 (A0465) { Tech CES CREATE i Evaluation: (D1167) (01167) l 1 Tech SLIM-MAUD, NUCLARR Transfer: MAPPS and Management NPSRS case (A6854) studies l (D1612) l (D2018) l (01698) l 0}}