ML20154C160

Summary of 880830 Meeting W/Licensee Representatives at Util Site Re Operator Training Program & License Exam Results. W/List of Attendees,Agenda & Viewgraphs

ML20154C160
Person / Time
Site:	Comanche Peak
Issue date:	09/02/1988
From:	Charemagne Grimes NRC OFFICE OF SPECIAL PROJECTS
To:	NRC OFFICE OF SPECIAL PROJECTS
References
NUDOCS 8809140255
Download: ML20154C160 (24)

Text

l i

[s neos, #o, UNITED STATES l'

3m y j NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION W ASHINGTON. D, C. 20555 f

r g

s

\\'

/

September 2, 1933 DOCKET:

50-445 and 50-446 APPLICANT:

Texas Utilities Electric Company FACILITY:

Coranche Peak Steam Electric 5tation SUBVECT:

MEETING

SUMMARY

- AUGUST 30, 1968 OPERATOR TRAINING AND EXAM RESULTS On August 30, 1988, the NRC staff met with representatives of Texas Utilities Electric Company (TV Electric) at the CPSES site to discuss the operator training program and license examination results. The meeting attendees and slides are enclosed.

The purpose of the meeting was to discuss TV Electric's response to the concerns raised in Examination Report 50 445/0L88-01 dated July 27, 1988.

In particular, TV Electric described preliminary results of their assessment of the adequacy of the operator training program and the significance of the relatively high failure rate observed in the operator exam results administered by the NRC.

A. B. Scott indicated that TU Electric has identified weaknesses in the operator training program caused, in large part, by the transition from traditional training to performance-based training and inactivity resulting from construc-tion delays.

In addition, TU Electric reeds to prepere their training program for lhP0 accreaitation.

With respect to tht' operator exam results, TU Ele:tric has identifieo the need for improved screen 1rg criteria for candidate selection and diagnostic evalua-tion for both reactor operators (RO) and senior reactor operators (SRO).

In addition, an irproved auxiliary operator ( AO) training pregram will enhance the development of qualified candidates for the 90 training program.

TV Electric's corrective action efforts consist principally of the following items:

1.

Establish a training board.

Thoroughly review tce training program, develop a plan to prepare 2.

the program for accreditation, and establish actquate screening criteria.

3.

Strengthen management ane operations staff involverent in the evaluation and monitoring of trainirig activities.

4 Implement an effective applicent selection process.

5.

Strengthen the A0 ter.ining progren.

9009140255 000902 PDR ADOCK 05000445 V

PNV

Texas Utilities Electric Company 2-Despite these weaknesses in the training program and a relatively high failure rate in requalification exams, TU Electric believes that there is an adequate number of above. average personnel assigned to shift crews to support plant operation. Nevertheless, TV Electric will similarly review the requalification training program, implement performance-based examinations, and establish screening criteria to identify marginal performance.

TU Electric indicated that training and exam improvements would be completed in preparation for an INPO "quick.look" training evaluation near the end of the year and the INP0 full licensing readiness review in the spring of 1989.

In addition, five training programs are scheduled to be submitted for accreditation in June 1989.

The staff indicated that it plans to conduct requalification exams scheduled in April 1989 and, if necessary, repeat enms in November. December 1988.

The requalification exams will be conducted for about 20% of the operators.

The staff further indicated that a follow.up meeting will be scheduled after the INP0 "quick-look" to discuss the progress on training improvements.

Christopher I. Grimes, Director Comanche Peak Project Division Office of Special Projects

Enclosures:

1.

List of Attendees 2.

Slides cc w/ enclosures:

See next page Distribution:

hTCTLocal70Rs J. H. Wilson F. Miraglia Docket File J. Lyons E. Jorjan CPPD Reading R. Warnick B. Grimes OSP Reading M. Malloy NRC Participants J. Partlow D. Terao ACRS (10)

C. Grimes Licensing Assistant P. McKee OGC.WF QTt

D:CPPD:05 NAME :CIGrimes:cm/c :

DATE.4/9 /88 0FFICIAL RECORD COPY

' \\

Texas Utilities Electric Company.

i I

y Despite these weaknesses in the training program and a relatively high failure rate in requalification exams, TV Electric believes that there is an adequate

.,~

number of above-average personnel assigned to shift crews to support plant j

operation.

Nevertheless, TV Electric will sinilarly review the requalification training program, implement performance-based examinations, i

and establish screening criteria to identify marginal performance, j

t l

TV Electric indicated that trainin and exam improvements would be completed I

In preparation for an thP0 "quick-cok" training evaluation near the cnd of the year and the INPO full licensing readiness review in the spring of 1989, i

In aedition, five training programs are scheduled to be submitted for l

accreditation in June 1989, The staff ir.dicated that it plans to conduct requalification exams scheduled j

in April 1989 and, if necessary, repeat exams in November-December 1988.

The requalification exams will be conducted for about 20% of the operators.

l i

The staff further indicated that a follow-up meeting will be scheouled after the lhP0 "quick-look" to discuss the progress on training improvements.

I i

l CI %

j Christopher 1. Grimes Director

]

Cr unche Peak Project Division i

t Office of Special Projects

(

j I

I J

Enclosures:

1.

List of Attendees

[

j 2.

Slides f

1 i

I cc w/ enclosures:

j See next page t

i I

l 4

1 l

l l

j 1

l I

r l

i k

\\

Texas Utilities Electric Company '

cc w/ enclosures:

Jack R. Newman, Esq.

Asst. Director for Inspec. Programs hewman & Moltzinger, P.C.

Comanche Peak Project Division U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Suite 1000 1615 L Street, N.W.

P. O. Box 1029 Washington 0.C. 20036 Granbury, Texas 76048 Kobert A. Wooldridge, Esq.

Regional Administrator, Region IV horsham, Forsythe, San.pels &

V.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission Wooldridge 611 Ryan Plaza Drive, Suite 1000 2001 Bryan Tower, Suite 2500 Arlington, Texas 76011 Dallas, Texas 75201 Lanny A. Sinkin Mr. Homer C. Schmidt Christic Institute Director of Nuclear Services 1324 North Capitol Street Texas Utilities Electric Company Washington, D.C.

20002 Skyway Tower 400 North Olive Street, L.B. 81 Ms. Billie Pirner Garde. Esq.

Dallas, Texas 75201 Government Accountability Project Midwest Office Mr. R. W. Ackley 104 East Wisconsin Avenue Stone & Webster Appleton, Wisconsin 54911 Comanche Peak Steam Electric Stetton P. O. Box 1002 David R. Pigott, Esq.

Glen Rose, Texas 76043 Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe 600 Montgocery Street Mr. J. L. Vota San Francisco, California 94111 Westinghouse Electric Ccrporation P. O. Box 355 Anthony Z. Roisran Esq.

Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15230 Suite 600 1401 New York Avenue, NW Sus 6n M. Theisen Washington, D.C. 20005 Assistant Attorney General Enviroutental Protection Division Robert Jablen P. O. Box 12548 Capitol Station Ecnnie S. blair Austin, Texas 78711-1548 Spiegel 5 fic0iarmid 1350 New York Avenue, NW Hrs. Juanita Ellis, President Washington 0.C. 20005 4798 Citizens Assottation for Sound Energy 1426 South Polk George A. Parker, Chairman Dallas, Texas 75224 Public Ltility Comittee Senior Citi: ens Allisnce Of Ms. Nancy H. Willians Tarrant County, Inc.

CYGNA Energy Services 6048 Woncer Drive 2121 N.. California B1 d., Suite 390 Fort Worth, Texas 76133 Walnut Creek, CA 94596

+

. To.ec Utfittfer E1cetrfr re g any f

I cc w/ enclosures (continued)

Joseph F. Fulbright a

Fulbright & Jaworski 1301 McKinney Street Houston, Texas 77010 Roger D. Walker Manager, Nuclear Licensing Texas Utilities Electric Company Skyway Tower 400 North D11ve Street, L.B. 81 l

Dallas, Texas 75201 l

Texts Utilities Electric Ccmpany j

c/o Bethesda Licensing 3 Metro Center, Suite 510 Bethesda, Marylano 20814 William A. Burchette. Esq.

g Counsel for Tex-La Electric Cooperative t

[

of Texas l

Heron, Burchette, Ruckert & Rothwell f

Suite 700 i

1025 Thomas Jefferson Street, NW i

Washington, D.C.

20007 t

1 GDS ASSOCIATES INC.

t i

Suite 720 l

.i 1850 Parkway Place Marietta, Georgia 30067-8237

(

]

i i

t l

t l

l i

)

t 9

i

ENCLOSURE 1 LIST OF ATTEN0EES NRC/CPSES OPERATOR TRAINING PROGRAM MEETihG AUGUST 30, 1988 l

l TV Electric CASE l

G. Bell E. Ottney H. D. Bruner

k. D. Cahill Jr.

Newman & Holtzinger W.G.Counsil M. Axelrad J. Donahue A. F. Husain J. Aelley self Employed W. Helton S. Palmer J. L. French J. Rawley J. Redding Sentco, Inc.

A. Scott D. Poole C. L. Turner R. D. Walker E

C. I. Grimes J. L. Milhoan J. L. Montgomery J. G. Partlow J. L. Pellet R. F. Warnick J. E., Whittercre J. S. Wiete

j l

)

i l

i l

i i

l CPSHS I

l l

l l

OPHMATOM TMA[N:NG PROGMAM i

i t

i August 30,1988 1

Austin B. Scott, Jr.

l Vice President i

Nuclear Operations j

i i

l t

l' 1

l l

l l

i I

r

AGENDA INTRODUCTION AND STATEMENT OF PURPOSE TRAINING PROGRAM OBJECTIVES i

Learning Ob,ectives and Lesson Plans l

Training Scope Training Philosophy EVALUATION OF LOW EXAM PASSING RATE l

Root Causes Corrective Actions f

l

[

REQUALIFICATION EXAMS Evaluation of Low Exam Passing Rate Operator Readiness for Plant Operation

SUMMARY

)

l f

4 l

V 1

4 PURPOSE l

RESPOND TO NRC LETTER OF 27 JULY l

Inadequate Candidate Screening High Failure Rate Exam Question Validity Criteria i

DESCRIBE COURSE OF CORRECTIVE ACTION j

Analyze Exam Results Review Past Practices l

License Training i

Candidate Selection l

Curriculum Candidate Preparation Screening

]

Grooming i

Exam Preparation Determine Root Causes Verify Conclusions i

l Make Required Changes l

i i

l i

i I

)

I t

1

TRAINING PROGRAM OBJECTIVES LONG TERM PRODUCE SUFFICIENT NUMBERS OF LICENSED REACTOR OPERATORS TO SAFELY AND EFFICIENTLY OPERATE CPSES THROUGH A TRAINING PROGRAM WHICH MEETS REGULATORY AND COMPANY REQUIREMENTS.

l SPECIFIC Create and Install a Performance-based Training Program i

l Achieve Accreditation

[

{

Maintain Operator Proficiency l

Requalification Syllabus j

Written and Oral Exams Simulator i

Train Replacement Operators l

(

i l

l i

~

I CPSES TRAINING PROGRAM HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENT

• Bought the Generic Training Package Offered by Westinghouse Modified to Make it Plant Specific Lesson Notes Drawings, Diagrams, Plans Procedures Off Site Practical Training Startups and Shutdowns Simulator Practice Walk through Exams

+ Began Modification to Accommodate Performance based l

Criteria l

l Hired Training Consultant (Harless Performance Guild)

Began Job Task Analysis Process l

Began Curriculum Development t

Current Systems l

Hybrid System Systems Training RO/SRO Licensing Syllabus f

l l

I

l-LEARNING OBJECTIVES AND I

LESSON PLANS LEARNING OBJECTIVES l

. initially

• Assumed

)

• Not Prominent Part of Lesson Plan l

. Transition to Performance Basis

• Attempted to Backfit Without Extensive i

Lesson Plan Revision

• Put into Requalification Program First

• Gradually Inserted into Systems Syllabus j

• Did Not Pursue For RO Licensing New Syllabus Coming No More Cold License Classes Planned i

Heavy Resource Commitment to Job-l Task Analysis l

Currently l

• Still in Transition l

l LESSON PLANS Still Using Those Initially Developed 1

. Audited Against NUREG-1122 Will"Be Replaced by Accredited RO Modules j

c 4

I l

l l

l

O pa TT/AINING SCOPE - OPERATOR INITIAL LICENSE CLASS Pre-selection General Physics interviews

. Pre-training (Math / Physics Review)

General Physics TU Training Group

. Westinghouse Nuclear Training Center-Zion Theory Systems Training integrated Plant Operations - Simulator

. Plant specific Training On Site

. Pre-exam

. License Eram SUBSEQUENT CLASSES

.Second End Third l

No Pre-screen Test (Mostly USN Input)

Pre-Training On Site (3 6 Weeks)

Zion l

Second:

Entire Syllabus Third: NTR and Simulator Only

. Follow-on Classes No Pre screan Test Pre-training On Site Theory and Systems On Site PITR Training Off Site ON-SITE SYLLABUS

.Th,eory 9 Weeks

. Systems - 27 Weeks I

.Walkdown 20 Weeks

. Simulator - 12 Week Pre-exam t

i i

l l

l TRAINING PHILOSOPHY BEST JOB PERFORMANCE COMES FROM THE RIGHT l

COMBINATION OF PERSONNEL SELECTION, MOTIVATION, ENVIRONMENT, AND TRAINING.

l THE PERFORMANCE-BASED TRAINING PROCESS SPONSORED BY NUMARC AND INPO IS RIGHT FOR TU ELECTRIC.

PERFORMANCE-BASED TRAINING REQUIRES PERFOfaMANCE-BASED EVALUATION.

1

GENESIS OF THE PAPER"

.lssue of License Exams Raised at RIV Senior Nuclear Executives Periodic Meeting Late Spring 1986

. Led to RIV NRC License Exam Workshop June 24, l

1986, at Arlington

. Paper Entitled "Licensing Examinations and Performance Training" Circulcted by C. L. Turner, Training Manager, TU CPSES

. Thrust Was to Connect Performance based Examining to Performance-based Training

. Paper Was Disetiseed But Failed to Catch Much Notice

.TU Invited to Prepare a Samole t.xam

.RIV Not Impressed

.TU Included Comment on Question Basis With 9/86, 7/87,12/87 and 6/88 Exams Matrix Evaluating Each Question Paper Supplied as Abbreviation Key r

.RIV Not impressed l

.Will Not Be Circulated Again Philosophy is Not Fully Developed Style Tends to Be Abrasive 4

EVALUATION OF LOW OPERATOR EXAM PASSlG RATE ANALYSIS OF CAUSAL FACTORS PRELIMINARY INDICATIONS Inappropriate Perseverance Eight Individuals Account for Sixteen Failures

-Questionable Initial Selection Seniority Criterion (Union issue)

No Pre-screen Exam No Critical Appraisal of Ability 2No Rigorous AO Training Program (RO Only)

Poor On-the-job Training (Aggravated by Ir; activity)

Inadequate Operations Management Involvement Improper use of Diagnostic Exam Results

• Reluctance to Make Close Call Against Candidate

• Failure to Prescribe Sufficient Remedial Course

• Allowing Situational Override Inadequate Exam Preparation Materials Furnished Oral and Simulator Eval and Prep Better e

L

CORRECTIVE ACTION l

. DEFER FURTHER INITIAL APPLICATIONS PENDING Thorough Review of Training Program Decision on Course of Actior<

Overhaul Existing Program, or Bring Forward Accreditation Syllabus Development of a Pre-screening Program

. ESTABLISH A TRAINING BOARD l

. CONTINUE TO STRENGTHEN OPERAT!ONS i

STAI? INVOLVEMENT 8ETTER DEFINE APPLICANT SELECTION PROCESS (AND STICK TO IT)

. STRENGTHEN AO TRAINING PROGRAM (IN PROCESS)

~

l REQUALIFICATION EXAMINATIONS EVALUATION OF LOW PASSING RATE Analysis of Causal Factors Misdirected Requal Program Soft On Academics Two-year Syllabus Unrigorous Written Exams Overemphasis On Current Event Failure to Weed Out Consistent Poor Performers

• Plant inactivity CORRECTIVE ACTION Thoroughly Re-evaluate Program Strengthen Requal Review Board Get Tough With Marginal Performers install Special Training Syllabus Develop Performance-based Re-exam for NRC Review Develop Performance-based Practice Exams t

e REC UALIFICATION FAILURE ANALYSIS SRO LICENSES TOTAL NO. OF FAILURES 37 0

1 2

3 4

Staff 20 15 3

2 Shift 17 12 e

2 RO LICENSES TOTAL NO. OF FAILURES 29 0

1 2

3 4

Staff o

Shift 29 17 e

o a

2 1

I I

t

OPERATOR READINESS FOR PLANT OPERATIONS

. SUFFICIENT DEPTH EXISTS TO STAFF SIX SHIFTS WITH ABOVE-AVERAGE PERFORMERS lNCREASED TEST PROGRAM INVOLVEMENT FOR OPERATORS ALLOWS FOR CRITICAL EVALUATION REMEDIAL ACTION WHERE NECESSARY UPGRADED TRAINING PROGRAM IN PLACE BEYOND NORMAL REQUAL SYLLABUS PREPARATION FOR PERFORMANCE BASED EXAMS lNCREASED MANAGEMENT INVOLVEMENT SCHEDULED TRAINING OBSERVATION

>>SIGNIFICANT PROCEDURAL UPGRADE UNDERWAY EXTENDED HOT PARTICIPATION EXPERIENCE lNPO EVALUATION AND ASSIST VISITS 1

.NRC REQUALIFICATION EXAM

SUMMARY

.RECENT RECORD HAD BEEN REASONABLE 10/15 SRO 12/14 RO

. OPERATING MANAGEMENT DISCONTINUITY

.lNACTIVITY

. POOR SELECTION AND TRAINING PRACTICES CREPT IN l

.NEED FOR THOROUGH RE-EVALUATION INDICATED l

.NO PHILOSOPHY DISCONNECT l

l l

1 t

eensitivity of this detector to gasunaradiation means th most of the signal current (iy in/100).

The other type of detector with a solid boro'n lining is the compensated ionisation chamber (CIC) which is a UIC with an additional inner chamber The inner chamber which has no soron-10 lining.therefore only detects gammas a the currents from each chamber we can get the"neut Outer chamber current = La + iy Inner chamber current = iy inner chamber signal = outer chamber current -

Wet current inet = (in + 1 ) - ly 7

in.c = in or neutron only current (Refer to Figures EXC 7 4 8)

To provide equal response to the gasuna flum in each chamber physical esign of the chambers and correct

/

electrical

• compensation" are required for operation of the inner ehmWr la the roccabination Compensation requireneets change depending upon environmental conditions or ameest of residual region.

Proper compensation yields the mostBy under comp gammas.

correct rasponse. level is maintained and thus than actoal countunderertimates the rate of change of ioaisations overc6spensating yields lower levels andEach presents over9stimates the rate of change.

ope';ational problems under certain conditions.

INSTRUmWTATION AND CONTACL 4.0 (N-31, N-32) 4.1 Source Range Instruawnts (Refer to rigure EXC 9)

The Source Range Circuitry is specifically des during shutdown and the initit'. phase of reactor startup/ final phase of reactor shutdown.02-870!

111-1.9

1i j j n!!

ass

.li 1

1 Ei=f is:

i=s l.

I i I

s!i i

iii 22 828

(([

sis c

a p[

3y j=

y S

s ji i lli 7.l 11 i

1 111 i i

=l i

2:]

r 1

gggassa gglassa l

I ::::: I;I e.e.

Y..;;;; }-}-

Yll;:;:;:;:. }};:;:;:;: ll.i.t.:..: \\, I iiillli.... 1111111 1111111.... l f., 3 6 3} is ...I j n 3 il l13'U.:

l:e aasiel u:

3 n I n h::.sc s asua:a Jiiiisi 4444444 di 1i44 5 siididi iiiiiii siddadi E

O CPERATIONS DEPA3tMgNT MANAGED'S ASSESSMENT PERSONNEL Aug 28, 1988 PLANT OBS$3VATION EXPERIENCE - SHIFT SUPERVISORS TABLE D M QAJJ. PLANT VISITED

Q3L1, TOTAL / GOAL SU/SD BAIN T.E.

11/82 PRAIRIE ISLAND 4 4/30 (13) 4/84 TROJAN 12 16/30 3/85 SALIM 10 28/30 10/87 SALEM S 31/30 SD(1) 6/88 WOLF CAIRE 4 35/30 BEAUDIN. T.J. 11/82 PRA!RIE ISLAND 4 4/30 (15) 4/84 TR0JAN 12 18/30 3/85 SALIM to 26/30 3/06 DIABLO CANYON 9 35/30 5/87 CATAWBA 13 48/30 10/87 SALEM 53/30 SD(1) 7/88 RANCHO SECO 10 43/30 l DASEAM, T.J.s 1/83 D.C. COOK 4 4/130 (16) 3/85 SA1,IM 16 20/130 SU(1) 5/85 DIABLO CANYON 8 24/130 2/86 DIABLO CANYON 8 36/130 SU(1) 6/86 DIABLO CANYON 73 110/130 SU(2) 8/87 DIABLO CANYON 1 120/130 7/88 RANCHO SECO 10 130/130 DEEN, M.D. 1/83 D.C. COOK 3 3/130 (WCC) 3/84 TROJAN 14 17/130 3/45 NORTH ANNA 15 32/130 8/85 PRAIRIE ISLAND 4 36/130 5/86 PRAIRIE ISLAND 78 114/130 SU(1) 4/87 PRAIRIE ISLAND 5 119/130 SD(1) LYTLE, 0.D. 11/82 PRAIRIE ISLAND 4 4/30 (14) 3/85 McGUIRE 14 18/30 11/86 DIABLO CANYON 12 30/3C SMITH, M.R. 11/82 PRAIRIE ISLAND 4 4/30 (12) 6/84 BEAVER VALLEY 9 13/30 SU(2) 3/85 McGUIRE 14 27/30 4/86 DIABLO CANYOW 9 36/30 4/87 McGUIRE 4 40/30 SD(2) 2/88 ST. LUC!t to 50/30 FEB 88 9/88 PALO VERDE 11 61/30 INDICATES SUPERVISORS GAINING 6 MONTHS (26 WEI'(S) NOT t

-}}