ML20153B155
| ML20153B155 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 04/27/1988 |
| From: | Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards |
| To: | Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards |
| References | |
| ACRS-2566, NUDOCS 8807120725 | |
| Download: ML20153B155 (22) | |
Text
_
inifi%'
2/S MM
^
[] W..ll i? W M p
fDB '7NEY N.T W 2y v
b CERTIFIED COPY DATE ISSUED: April 27, 1988 SUH4ARY/ MINUTES HUMAN FACTORS SUBCOMMITTEE MEETING MARCH 28, 1988 The Human Factors Subcommittee met on March 28, 1988 to discuss:
1.
The Human Factors Research Program Plan 2.
The Draft Policy Statement on Training and Qualification of Nuclear Power Plant Personnel 3.
The proposed Fitness for Duty Rule.
The Subconraittee met in Room 1046, at 8:30 a.m. at 1717 H St. NW, Washington, D.C.
Dr. Forrest Remick was the Chairman of the Subcommit-tee. Pembers in attendance were: David Ward, Charles, Wylie, Carlyle Michelson and Harold Lewis.
Kris Gimmey was a consultant to the subcom-mittee.
Notice of the meeting was published in the Federal Register on March 12, 4988. There were no oral or written statements from members of the public.
Principal NRC Staff attendees were: Brian Sitteron, Alan Rubin, Jim Partlow, Jon Olson, Brian Grimes, J. Persensky and Tom Ryan.
Attached are copies of the Federal Register Notice, tentative schedule, list of attendees and a list of the handouts.
f,e i
i f
h.I'f'g:o71hi723eeM7 ed
- *
- carcinir; s
%,oy
-as s
a
Minutes / Human Factors Subcomittee 2 Meeting, March 28, 1988 Opening Statement Dr. F. Remick, Subcomittee Chairman. Dr. Remick introduced the ACRS members and consultant. He asked if any of the members had any comments.
He remarked that there will be another Human Factors -Subcommittee on April 27, 1988. He then introduced Mr.. Brian Sheren as the first presenter.
Brian Sheron, Director of the Division of Reactor and Plant Systems, Human Factors Research Plan Mr. Sheron presented an introduction to the presentation.
He noted that -
after TMI the Human Factors Division was established.
Research was started in 1981 on Human Factors.
In 1985 the research was terminated because of budget restrictions.
In 1986 the National Academy of Sciences report recommended intersifying human factors research.
In April of 1987 the NRC had a ma.ior reorga-nization and a human factors reliability and human factors branch was established.
l In February of 1985, the National Academy of Sciences reported on what kind of human factors research was needed.
l Mr. Sheron noted that one of the first' things they felt was needed was to develcp a program plan. The plan should have goals which identified I
who the users were and how the research was going to be utilized in the regulatory process. The intention is to brief the Commission on the program plan in May 1988.
Minutes / Human Factors Subcommittee 3 Meeting, March 28, 1988 Mr. Sheron pointed out the need for human factors research.
He noted that human performance is a significant contributor to risk.
Alan Rubin, Section Leader, Human Factors Section Mr. Rubin noted that the objectives of the plan are to outline a summary of the structures of a human factors research program which is in line with the Commission's policy and planning guidance, which was a commit-ment to explore methods to better understand the causes of human error and to reduce its incidence.
He remarked that the result of this research program and the product that we obtained from them are aimed at developing the bases to support reconnandations or guidance or requirements to reduce the likelihood of human errers that could adversely affect the public health and safety.
Mr. Rubin remarked that the plan is divided into five major research areas.
These are: man-machine interface, procedures, oualifications and traininc, organization and manacement, and human performance and human reliability assessment.
The man / machine interface is the link between people and systems and hardware and software in +.he nuclear power plant. The ob.iective of this research area is to identify concerns or to determine if the man / machine interface is compatible with human performance capabilities.
Minutes / Human Factors Subcommittee 4 Meeting, March 28,.1988 He remarked that some of the key anticipated results expected from this research are human perforrance guidelines for advanced controls, in-strumentation which will be used to support reviews of advanced control rooms or modifications or review of codifications or backfits to exist-ing control rooms in nuclear power plants.
There was a brief discussion of the poor labeling of lines and compo-nents outside the control room in nuclear plants.
Mr. Ramey-Smith noted that NRC coordinated this with INP0 and INP0 has incorporated plant labeling in their plant inspections.
Chairman Remick noted that this was something the Subcommittee could look into.
Mr. Rubin stated that procedures are an obvious important part of the human factors program. They are required to provide information and direction to the operator to assure that they can perform their tasks in a manner that satisfies the system goals.
1 The objective of the research program is to determine if procedural problems adversely impact human performance.
If they do, then the objective is to determine if the procedures are inadequate or are they poorly presented to the operator, i
Qualifications include the selection of personnel either with the skills or potential capability to obtain the skills needed to perform their tasks. Training could be used to enhance knowledge and skills to improve operator performance.
In recognization of the work done by INPO and NUMARC, there is less emphasis on this area by the NRC.
Minutes / Human Factors Subconnittee 5 Meeting, March 28, 1988 Regarding organizations and management, Mr. Rubin noted, that operator performance can be affected by organizational structures, corporate policies and management practices. One of the questions is in the area l
of corporate policy or practice does shift scheduling and overtime affect operator fatigue and therefore affect their performance capabil-ities.
Mr. Rubin noted that the human performance and human reliability assess-ment areas are really two objectives. One objective is to develop a data base and human error rates for putting into PRAs. Another objec-tive is to model human performance and to develop a causal model of human errors to determine the significant factors that undermine human performance.
Mr. Rubin remarked that there were three generic issues under man /pechine interface.
The first is a control room design standard.
The objective of this issue was to develop guidance for human factors review of control rooms for new power plants.
This issue is being phased out because the guidance documents already exist.
The second generic issue is on local control stations. The objective is to evaluate need for human factors review of local control stations outside of the control room. The issdes include addressing questions such as: What is the potential safety significance of making improve-ments to local station? How significant are potential operator errors?
Minutes / Human Factors Subcommittee 6 Meeting, March 28, 1988-The third generic issue is a review criteria for advanced control room and instrumentation. Tne objective is to evaluate the need for changes in criteria for control board annunicators. Are operators receiving too many alarms during an event?
Is there a need for alarm prioritization?
Mr. Rubin noted ongoing work in the area of procedures. This is a human factors generic issue called guidelines for upgrading other procedures.
The objective of this project is to determine whether review criteria or guidance are needed for the normal or 6'unormal procedures including the emergency operating procedures. The results of this issue would be an assessment of benefits of imprcving procedures as well as the human factors review criteria for those procedures.
Mr. Rubin remarked that another area in procedures research that is being reviewed is the accident management procedures.
One of the questions here is what level of detail is necessary in procedures that deal with severe accidents? Another question is what operator aids might be available under the area of training? Questions arise as to whether it would be an additional burden to the operator to be trained to cope with severe accident that are unlikely to occur. Under the area of organizatiori and management questions arise about the capability of management to cope with severe accidents.
Mr. Rubin remarked that one project planned for the training area is the issue of training effectiveness. There are questions about how to objectively measure whether or not a training program is producing good or poor operator perfont.ance.
l l
Minutes / Human Factors Subcommittee 7 Meeting, March 28, 1988
.Mr. Rubin discussed research planned to work at operator capability in performance under extreme environmental conditions. This relates to severe accidents where the utility may look at a severe accident and try to determine how they are goisig to cope with it, and take credit for operator actions that may be in harsh environments. Mr. Rubin noted that there is a need for additional guidance as to likelihood for errors of operator performance under those conditions.
Mr. Rubin discussed the program plan in organization and management.
He noted that there were three orgoing projects. One is the human factors generic issue on shift staffing. The purpose of this issue is to develop a regulatory guide to compete with the rule on licensed operator staffing.
There is a project on management and organizational influence on human performance. The objective of this program is to develop methods to estimate how nuclear plant organization and managenent factors influence human performance and plant risk.
The third ongoing project is in programmed performance indicators, which l
has the ob.
- e to develop and to validate improved indicators to l
l monitor trena in license performance.
Mr. Rubin noted that there has been a signif; cant amount of work that has been done on shift scheduling and overtimc. The objective of the research program is confirmatory in natur'c and concerns shift duration, shift schedule including rotation and overtime.
l L
Minutes / Human Factors Subconnittee 8 Meeting, March 28, 1988 Mr. Rubin discussed the ongoing projects on human performance and human reliability assessment. The purpose of the program is to start data collection on human error performance. The program is called NUCLARR.
The results of that research will be computerized software and documen-tation for data base of human reliability performance. (Note: Dr. T.
Ryan will discuss the NUCLARR program at the April 27th Human Factors Subcommittee meeting.)
Mr. Rubin discussed the cognitive model which is to develop improved techniques to mode cognitive performance of nuclear power plant person-nel, to focus human decision making.
(Note: Dr. T. Ryan will discuss cognitive simulation during the April 27th Puman Factors Subcommittee meeting.)
Mr. Rubin noted that one of the human performance projects is called MAPPS - Maintenance Personnel Performance Simulation. The objective of this research is to improve methods to analyze and evaluate plant maintenance and activities.
Mr. Wylie asked if any study of natural abilities of operators and maintenance personnel would be a research project?
Mr. Rubin responded that there is not'an identified project to work on that.
Minutes / Human Factors Subcommittee 9 Meeting, Patch 28, 1988 Mr. Jones added that the NRC made a conscious decision several years ago that the business of selection and qualification of testing is an industrial problem that the NRC won't regulate.
Tom Ryan. Senior Engineering Psychologist, Office of Research Dr. Ryan noted that his discussion would cover the human reliability research activities; and specifically two research activities. The first is a computer based data management system known as NUCLARR or the nuclear computerized library for assessing reactor reliability. The second is an artificial intelligence based decision-making as intention formation anelyses which is known as CES or cognitive environment sinulation.
Dr. Ryan noted these programs have two objectives:
- 2. To extend some nf these methods and data to larger human factors issues.
l l
Dr. Ryan remarked that there were five elements of these programs:
l l
0 Acquisition of human performance data o
Tools, model, etc. to use that data t
A management system or reporting for this probabilistic data o
l 50 it can be used by the risk community.
l o
Procedures for integrating these methods and data and
(
behavioral science into the PRA.
i o
Develop ways of systematically using these tools.
l l
l l
l l
Minutes / Human Factors Subcomittee 10 Meeting, March 28, 1988 Dr. Ryan's presentations on NUCLARR and CES were cut short due to time limitations. Current plans are to present these during the April 27, 1988 Human Factors Subcommittee meeting.
Mr. Coffman discussed staffing and budget. The Reliability and Human Factors Branch has eight professionals. All have graduate degrees.
Half of the staff has Ph.D's.
All are multidiscipled.
The work on human performance and human reliability assessment runs about one million dollars per year.
The current budget is about 3 million dollars per year.
The meeting was ad.icurned at 12:25 p.m. to reconvene at 1:30 p.m. the sane day.
Policy Statement on Training and Qualification - Dr. J. Persensky The Human Factors Subcommittee Chairman, Forrest Remick, noted that he was a member of the National Nuclear Accreditation Board and remarked that today's discussion was a review of a review of those activities.
l Therefore, he abstained from chairing this portion of the meeting and noted that he would refrain from votin'g during the full Comittee discussion of this topic.
He then turned the chair over to Dave Ward, who acted as Chairman Pro Tem for this portion nf the meeting, i
l i
i
Minutes / Human Factors Subcommittee 11 Meeting, March.28, 1988 Dr. Persensky noted that his topic would be the Policy Statement on Training and Qualification which is a revision to an existing po' icy statement which was issued in March 1985.
In the policy statement (1985) the staff indicated that they would revise the issue after as two-year period of evaluation which ended about a year ago.
Based upon that, the staff suggested that a new policy state e t be drafted.
The program was initiated as a result of the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1983.
Part of the Act required the NRC to develop rules or regulatory guidance in the area of training for nuclear power plant staff, in the 1984 time frame the NRC staff prepared three different SECY papers that proposed rules in the area of training. At the same time that NRC were preparing the rules, INP0 and NUMARC were very active in developing their accreditation program. They made some very strong commitnant to the Commission that they would do certain things like getting all ten programs ready for accreditation within a two-year period if the NRC would refrain from rulemaking during that period.
Therefore, the Commission decided to refrain from rulemaking.
The Comission published the Policy Statement on Training and Qualifica-tion of Nuclear Power Plant Personnel. This policy statement endorsed the accreditation programs. The statement reiterated the agreement by i
NUMARC that there would be 610 programs ready for accreditation within a two-year period at 61 sites.
Minutes / Human Factors Subcommittee 12 Meeting, March 28, 1988 In essence, the policy statement gives blanket approval to the training programs. The accreditation programs are given automatic' approval by the NRC.
During the two year period, the NRC observed the accreditation board activities and conducted inspections of the training programs.
After two years, the NRC Staff recommended that they continue to endorse the accreditation program and to defer rulemaking.
The staff recommend-ed the deferral and endorsement continued for an indefinite period, and they would continue to monitor snd review the program.
Dr. Persensky noted that the staff and INP0 have agreed that feedback of operating experience is important and should be integrated into the training programs as quickly as possible.
He also noted efforts should be made to develop training effectiveness measures.
Dr. Persensky discussed expansion of the accreditation program. The staff has proposed that the program include the QA and QC functions and the severe accident management function.
The severe accident management function will center around the,iob requirements of the staff at the TSC and the E.0.F.
Minutes / Human Factors Subcomittee 13 Meeting, March 28, 1988 He noted that IllP0 has decided to expand the accreditation program'by included licensed operator requalification training as an additional
. program.
The subcommittee discussed whether or not to have the staff make a presentation to the full Comittee.
The subcommittee decided to have a subcom : tee report to the full Comittee.
The Fitness for Duty Rule - J. Partlow, Director of Reactor Inspection and Safeguards, Office of Research F. J. Remick resumed his position as Subcomittee Chairman.
Mr. Partlov.' noted that a policy statement on Fitness for Duty was issued in August 1986 and has been in effect since that time.
He stated the Edison Electric Institute developed the guidelines for fitness for duty programs for operating neclear power plants and it has been made a part l
of industry's comitment.
l l
in response to a cuestion regarding what is meant by fitness for duty; j
Mr. Partlow replied that the emphasis is on drugs but as the policy statement is written, it is meant to cover everything from the operator with two broken arms to the operator who in the eyes of his supervisor, is not fit to conduct his duties by virtue of fatigue, drugs, alcohol and psychological stress.
Minutes / Human Factors Subcommittee 14' Mesting, March 28, 1988 Mr. Partlow noted that the eel's guidelines have been made part of the industry commitment by a letter from the President of NUMARC to the Chairman of NRC stating that every chief executive officer of a company that operates a nuclear power plant has committeed to develop a fitness for duty program that would meet these guidelines and meet the expecta-tion of the Commission's_ Policy Statement.
Drug testing under the present commitment is conducted on a pre-employment basis. Following employment, drug testing will be conducted for cause, where supervisors have a reasonable suspicion that someone might not be fit for duty.
4 Mr. Partlow noted that since the policy statement was put into effect in August 1986, the staff has done its own evaluation of the industry's program.
The staff decided that major progress had been made.
In December 1987, the Commission directed the staff to develop rulemaking on fitness for duty. The basis for the decision appears to be a desire to have random testing programs in place. Some utilities have randor testing as part of their program.
Some utilities have been blocked by legal challenges and challenges by labor unions.
A second basis for rulemaking is the different cutoff levels that are used to declare a drug test as either positive or negative for various
)
drugs.
Mr. Partlow posed some ouestions about the proposed rule.
Minutes / Human Factors Subcommittee 15 Meeting, March 28, 1988 1.-
Of all the people involved in NRC regulated activities, to whom, to what kind of activities could this rule apply?
2.
Should the rule be applied to other than operating nuclear power plants.
3.
Should the rule apply to nuclear power plants under con-struction?
Mr. Partlow remarked that the rule would apply to those people who have unescorted access to the protected area.
People with escorts would not have to be covered by the rule. The rule would apply to those people who response to the emergency facilities.
NRC employees could not be covered by the rule. The thinking is that NRC employees are already covered by a fitness for duty nr a drug testing policy.
Regarding NRC's drug testing program, it has been approved by the Commission.
It had to be reviewed by OMB, The Department of Justice and i
Health and Human Services. At the present time, it is awaiting approval of Health and Human Services.
Following that approval, the NRC will l
develop its own testing program.
The NRC program involves random testing.
It covers those with unescort-ed access to nuclear power plants, those who are required to respond to
Minutes / Human Factors Subcommittee 16 Meeting, March 28, 1988 the NRC's emergency center and a limited number of people who have access to sensitive classified material.
Mr. Partlow discussed the requirements for drug testing in the rule.
l There is a requirement for pre-employment drug testing. The rule calls for testing for cause.
The rule also notes that testing would be required under certain conditions where human performance has failed.
The rule calls for random testing.
This testing is required on the basis of a role of 125 percent of the population during the year. Based upon this rate, there is a high probability that about 75 percent of all of the people in population will have had at least one test during the 3 ear.
The staff is advocating that for offsite drug use, a person is to be given one chance at rehabilitation and returned to duty.
If that person is found to be involved in drugs a second time, that person is to be denied access.
The staff is not advocating that the person be fired, rather he is denied unescorted access to the plant for a period of three years.
For on site involvement, the expectation is that that person would be discharged.
The proposed method of operating as of now, would have anyone testing positive for off site drug use, have the test confirmed by a second test. A second positive test would result in that person being referred to an employee assistance program. The employee would be returned to
Minutes / Human Factors Subcomittee 17 Meeting, March 28, 1988 duty following a medical and management determination that that person is fit and ready to assume his safety responsibilities.
Mr. Partlow noted that the Commission had requested tracking of person-nel who has been discharged for drug related reasons be included in the rule.
The guidance testing, sample taking, quality of testing laboratories are to be based upon HHS guidelines.
Mr. Partlow noted provisions in the rule that the utility has estab-lished written policies anri procedures on how they are going to carry out the requirements of the rule.
Nr. Partlow remarked that the rule requires the utility to refer to the local drug enforcement offices and determine what drugs are most preva-lent in the local area and test for those.
The meeting was adjourned at 4:20 p.m.
NOTE:
A transcript of the meeting is available at the NRC Public Document Room, 1717 H Street, NW., Washington, D.C., or can be purchased from Heritage Reporting Corporation, 1220 L Street, NW., Washington, D.C. 20005, Telephone: (202)628-4888.
j gSO Federal R:gisler / Vol. 53, No. 49 / Monday, March 14, 1968 / N:tices 9
(a) Estending the X, Factor curve up to Alternative to the Proposed Acuon Monday, March 18,1ses-aJe s.an. Unul O'
'I"
I Ssace the Coaum!ssion ecocluded that'
/
c
,3, there are no signiacant enviromaresel ne Subcornaltase will be beisled and (b) Clamping the 11pscale Setpoints efrecta that would resch froso the review:11) W Human FacJors Researds proposed actm. any attemattves wtth Program plsn,(2) the Fitrvasa for Duty 3
2 equal or greeter arMr-ntalimpacts Rule, and (3) Pol cy Stateenest en
- j"'-
need riot be evaluatd.
Training and QuahGcation (tentative). -
(c)Im asung ee h Generata Set The principal alteenettre would be m Oral statenames may be presented by mechamral and eisetncal seem m TS deny the requested amendment.'1%
mesabers of abe bubuc with the 4 4.1.1.3 to ph)sically allow for would not reduce enviroementel concurrence of t car = =ttaa increased core now, impacts of plant operetion and would Chairman: wnsten aeseemems wiu be The proposed actitm la in accordanct tesult in reduced opeestional Mexibsty.
accepted and made etauable to the i
with the heensee's application fo7 Committee. Recordings will be permitsad amendmerst dated Decerebet 14.1967.
Alternouve Use o/Resoerces
% during bee podons d b This action does not invohre the use of meeting when a transcript is being kept, N Neadfor the Papsed Aman any resources not previousty comidered and questions may be saked only by The proposed chacge to the TS is tn the Final Envitcmmental Statement for memb-rs of the Subcorninittee,its required in order to prmide the IJcense the Hope Creek Generating Station, consultants, and Staff. Persons desiring with appropriate safety limits for dated December,1964.
to make oral statements should noufy the ACRS staff member named below as operation wdh the Cycle 2 reioed core, Aeemos edPersons CaercAat far in advance as Es precticab!e ao that greater operational fleubiht) during ee t
initial portions of the operating cycle.
The NRC stiff reviewed the licecsee's appropriate arrangernents can be made.
impecwed power ascensioo capabihty to request and dtd not consuh other Durha the initial portion of the full power and adit,onal abity to agencies or persons meeting. the Subcommitiee, along with any of its consultants who may be compensate be mactrity reductan due Io fud exp>eure donng the operatag Findiac 4 No Signifknot Impact present. may exchange preliminary cy cle.
The Cosenission has determned not views regardmg metters to be Environmen.ollmpcets of the Pxpesed to prepare a n emitorunental iropar.1 considered denng the balance of the statems for the proposM heeo.,
meedng.
Aerion The Subcommittee will then hear a mendmeat.
The proposed revuons to the Based upon the fom presentations by and hold discussions Techmcal Specticanoo hmas environmental assesur.ect, we conclude with representatives of the NRC Staff, its consultants. and other interested adequately compensate for the pic4md that the proposed action will not beve changes in the fuelicad as,d b' ogn/tcant dieet on b goality d h persons regarding this review.
oparatxm wah inuaased core fles and human scrironment.
Further information regarding toples to be discussed.whether the meeting extended load line tats. The pmpowd For further detaHs with respect to this has been cancelled or rescheduled the chacges do not increase the probabity edien. see the appheation for
[
er cor.sepa~n of accidects, m arrendmetri dated December 14.1967 Chairman's ruling on regnests for the changea are being made in the types of which is ava AaWe for public inepectice opyortunity lo present oral statements and the ttrae aRotled therefor can be ar,y effluer.ts that may be rejnu 2 at the Commission's Pubbe Document CII"'* "'d M U L8 8! f" b Room.1717 H Street. NW., Washington, obtained by a prepaid telephone caJi ta 8
the men mt ACRS stallmember. Mr.
letresse in the allow able taindwal or and at the pennstme Pubhc Lib s,190 Herman Ajderrman (telephone 202/6M-cumulative occupatenal rad;A1;oo Seeh Dreadwsy, Permeville* New 3297J between 7.30 a m. and 4.30 p.m.
e2posara. Accord.ngh, the Coe. nsalos m'
concludes that this proposed actica Persons plant ing to attend this meeting wedd resdt in no significan!
Deed at Basesda Marylard IMs 7th da) are urged to contact the above named radidesical savironmental is:paci.
of March 19" individual one or two days before the With regard b potential non.
For the te. dear s@6an -cc scheduled meeting to be advised of any e
i radiolegica impacts, the proposM Waher it. B wtime, change in schedule, etc., which may chac3e to the TS invohes sg sterna o, rector, pro, ct Drewrou /-a avumio/
have occurred.
locatad within the rastrictes ares a.a Ariectar Prop cm f//l. Off.cs of NxJear Datr March 7. Iges.
defined in 1.0 CJ7L Part 2111 does not AeosarA e /coar Morton W. Ubarkin, I
aIfect ncD-tediologicd plant edluents
[TR Dx. 38479 Ned 3-11-est s>as asQ g,,,
p g7 and bai no other emiroarnental e coon m g,,f, y Therefore, the Ccree.isske concludaa /Advtaory Cornmittee on Reactor p Doc. 46-M M F11.a w aN that there are no signiant Lan-na m coce w w i
l radiological environtcen1A] is. par.ta Safeguard 9W-ilties on Humade I
associated with the propoeed Factors; Meeting l
amendment.
Adytsory Corumtttee on Rosetoe
^
"bcomtnittee en cr en The Notice of Consideration of 5
mS M En>%
F d,
li"8 Meeting
!ssuance of Amendment and 1988, Room 1046,1717 H Stre et NW, W'ty be Psbr f*W k
% a shington, DC-The ACRS SubcommJthe on ConascAion with this acticm was subbabed in the Feascal Registar on The entire mwting wal be open sa Structural Engmeenng will hold a annary 14,19e8 [53 71l 9"2) No request pwbte attendance, meeting on March 30.1988. at the for besting or pethe for }erve to
.The ageads for the sabiaca mashes Pacifics Hotel.6181 Cerrt' eta Averree, m
htaever's was hd foDewing tb no6ce. abaHbeasfoliossac Culvet City CA.
I
REVISION 3 March 24, 1988 4
TENTATIVE SCHEDULE ACRS HUMAN FACTORS SUBCOMMITTEE MONDAY, MARCH 28, 1988, ROOM 1046 1717 H STREET NW., WASHINGTON, D.C.
8:30 a.m.
Introductory R= marks - F. Remick, Chairman 8:40 a.m.
Human Factors Research Program Plan - Introduction
- Brian Sheron 8:50 a.m.
Overview of the Human Factors Research Program
- Alan Rubin 1.
Objective 2.
Research Areas 3.
Prioritiration 0:25 a.m.
Planned Research Proaram 1.
Man-Machine Interface 9:45 -
BREAK 10:00 a.m.
10:00 a.m.
Planned Research Program (continued) 2.
Procedures 3.
Qualification and Training 4.
Organization and Management 5.
Human Performance and Human Reliability Assessrent 11:00 a.m.
Human Reliability Assessment - 30 Min. - T. Ryan 11:30 a.m.
Concluding Renarks - Resources, Staffing and Budget
- Frank Coffman 11:45 a.m.
Subcomittee Discussion LUNCH 12:00 NOON -
- 1:00 p.m.
1:00 p.m.
Policy Statement on Training and Qualification - 45 Min.
1:45 p.m.
Subcomittee Discussion
2 f=
. Fuman Factors Subcommittee Mtg.
March 28, 1988 Fitness for Duty Rule 2:00 p.m.
Background - 10 Min.
2:10 p.m.
Objectives of Proposed Rule - 20 Min.
t 2:30 p.m. -
Impairment and Reliability - 30 Min.
3:00 -
BREAK 3:15 p.m.
3:15 p.m.
Drug Testing including procedures and frequency - 45 Min.
4:00 p.m.
Employee Assistance Programs - 15 Min.
4:15 p.m.
Conclusion - 15 Min.
1 4:30 p.m.
Subcommittee Discussion - 15 Min.
4:45 p.m.
ADJOURN i
e e
l l
l L-
W~7ELRMaw
,ACRS SUBCOMMITTEE MEETING ON u nva.2 rarTnx 10 CAT 10l:
Room 1036,1717 H St. NW., Washington, D.C.
March 28,1988
- DATE:
ATTENDANCE LIST PLEASE PRINT:
NAME i
BADGE NO.
AFFILIATION
// A Fl+n d r,a n 8.
051y l%h. c, K'. L. S t /1V d-09I$
Osns uNsbf $ OCES av
. _ 1. _ n f h 4 /{ _
CJ A
Y/
/ c:
%,1
- ) Q
[.
OYh
~
f2 77W f.~$$Ii!an
& ~ o'l 69
/(M C Yil]')
7.l 7E7 H I /1_ F-0$VY W fh&i
< m c--.
p f.
M'u ata
. E os %
f.
6,CA.Y l-O ft $
(J. S. D stik F ? E b) O bu.+,.
A wc i, c
., o (7 G.G.ORnnt eos dis %% so m h ten h.C 6/@S E-mrw yiewc H M km-cia. A r se & o, H%
(
on b, C I 60 '1 b ~ h~7 9 Sn k k e N e 1
o Liu Grari E - 01a '
&tLtijn
$cru F A w c -0 va r im c 2 -o ti9 U C Coh tesr 9
- 2. 49y
- f. E. Eo V%a e E. 'b%I NUMt %
ac 4
i 1
4 9-I
'1 LIST OF HANDOUTS 1.
RES Staff Presentation to the ACRS -
Subject:
Human Factors Research Program Plan - Brian Sheron, Frank Coffman, Alan Rubin, Tom Ryan 2.
Policy Statement on Training and Qualifications - J. J.
Perseasky, Ph.D., Section Chief. HF Assessment Branch, Division of Licensee Performance and Quality Evaluation e.