ML20198B340
| ML20198B340 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Farley  |
| Issue date: | 10/24/1985 |
| From: | Verrelli D NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | Mcdonald R ALABAMA POWER CO. |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8511060446 | |
| Download: ML20198B340 (7) | |
Text
F-Y2 llt'td
{'
October 24, 1905 e.'
Alabama Power Company vATTN: Mr. R. P. Mcdonald Senior Vice President P. O. Box 2641 Birmingham, AL 35291 Gentlemen:
SUBJECT PLANT FARLEY - LICENSED OPERATOR CANDIDATE PERFORMANCE ON SIMULATOR EXAMINATIONS This letter transmits a sumary of the meeting conducted at the Region II Offices on September 23, 1985, and the followup of a phone conversation held October 3, 1985, between Mr. A. F. Gibson, Director, Division of Reactor Safety and Mr. J. D. Woodard, Plant Manager - Farley Nuclear Plant.
The items discussed were:
(1) the performances by licensed operator candidates on the two most recent simulator examinations; (2) the possible causes and solutions for these examination failures; and (3) a request by the utility for simulator re-examinations for those candidates failing the August 1985 NRC-administered examinations, subject to certain conditions and waivers. Details of the subjects discussed are enclosed in the Meeting Summary.
It is our opinicn that this meeting was beneficial in that it provided both parties with a better understanding of the steps needed to improve candidate performance as well as examination administration.
In accordance with Section 2.790 of the NRC's " Rules of Practice", Part 2, Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations, a copy of this letter and the enclosure will be placed in the NRC's Public Document Room.
Should you have any questions regarding this matter, we will be pleased to discuss them.
Sincerely, (Original signed by SWeise For)
David M. Verrelli, Chief Reactor Project Branch 1 Division of Reactor Projects
Enclosure:
Meeting Summary cc w/ encl:
(Seepage 2)
?D$t f
fj}I V
rt;45'
Y
' Alabama Power Company 2
October 24, 1985
~
cc w/ encl:
J.O.Whitt,ExecutiveVicePresident f.D.Woodard,GeneralManager-Nuclear Plant V. G. Hairston, III, General Manager -
W' Nuclear Support g W.-McGowan, Manager-Safety Audit and Engineering Review pal. G. Ware, Supervisor-Safety Audit and Engineering Review bec w/ encl:
RC Resident Inspector
)f. Reeves, Project Manager, NRR Document Control Desk State of Alabama RI!
RI RII RI!
RII Q.
'b 7A B[ean:ht ilson CJul<ian AFGibson FCantrell 10/JI/85 10/){/85 10/tl/85 10/p/85 10/ U 85 m.
ENCLOSURE MEETING
SUMMARY
Licensee: Alabama Power Company Facility: Farley Nuclear Plant Docket No.: 50-348
Subject:
LICENSED OPERATOR CANDIDATE PERFORMANCE ON SIMULATOR EXAMINATIONS On September 23, 1985, representatives of Alabama Power Company (APCO) Farley Nuclear Plant (FMP) met with NRC Region II personnel in Atlanta, Georgia to discuss the relatively poor performance by FNP's licensed operator candidates on the two most recent NRC-administered operator examinations, particularly on the i
simulator phase of the exams.
The meeting was held at the request of APCO. The attendance list is attached as Attachment A to this Sussiary.
Mr. Jack Woodard initiated the discussion by presenting the following six items that have changed in the past several years, which may have had an impact on f
l their recent spate of simulator failures:
(1) introduction of simulator exams;-
i (2) construction of a site-specific simulator at Farley; (3) development /imple-mentation of Emergency Response Guidelines (ERGS); (4) NRC use of new contract examiners; (5) change in FNPs operational / training philosophy; and (6) decen-tralization of the operator licensing function.
l Of these items, (3) and (5) were identified as having the most significant l
influence and were subsequently discussed in detail.
Mr. Williams presented background information on ERGS, the status of their implementation and how their personnel are trained to utilize them.
It was postulated that NRC and contract examiners may not be sufficiently familiar with the use of ERGS and that a difference in philosophy may exist between the NRC's perception of a Senior Reactor Operator's (SRO) responsibilities and APCO's training program with regard to utilizing the ERGS.
The NRC acknowledged that additional examiner training on vendor ERGS is desirable and is being pursued.
However, the NRC was more concerned with the lack of awareness and responsiveness to control board indications demonstrated by some of the candidates.
It was noted that this particular problem appears to be generic and is not limited to Farley, i.e., candidates tend to focus on the ERGS and the fault trees to the exclusion of maintaining an awareness of plant parameters.
Mr. Woodard then discussed an additional perception of philosophical differences between the FNP and the NRC with regards to operational training of their candidates, specifically as it applies to simulator training.
He said that simulator exams which attempt to measure candidates' responses to multiple plant failures over an unrealistically short period of time lead to intimidation of
/1)ESIGNATED ORIGINAD,
Certifi
Enclosure 2
October 24, 1985 j
candidates and that training using an unrealistic barrage of casualties greatly diminishes the ability of the student to learn. He stated that the NRC utilizes multiple failures consistently in their simulator scenarios which, due to the relatively short time frame during which a simulator examination is conducted, does not allow the candidate to realistically use the ERGS to their conclusion.
As a corollary to the discussion of simulator examinations, Mr. Woodard stressed that the following improvements in the simulator examination structure were required:
(1) development of performance based criteria; (2) dissemination of detailed examination results; and (3) validation of simulator exams by facility personnel.
Upon completion of the FNP presentation, Mr. Albert F. Gibson, Director, Division of Reactor Safety, addressed the following:
1.
Examiner Proficiency With ERGS and Their Usage - NRC is pursuing additional examiner training with regard to ERG philosophy and usage.
l 2.
Multiple Factors During Simulator Examinations - Many LERs strongly support the probability of multiple failures and that they will continue to be a part of the scenarios used in NRC simulator examinations. The time period of these exams will not be compressed ty the extent that exam validity is compromised.
3.
Simulator Performance Criteria - This is currently in the draft stage within the NRC (NUREG 1121, Examiner's Handbook for Developing Operating Licensing Examinations).
1 4
Detailed Exam Results - The Region continually stresses to its examiners the need for sufficient documentation on exam writeups to support the pass / fail reconsnendation.
Supervisory review of the exasi l
reports is utilized to ensure documentation is sufficient.
5.
Observation of Simulator Exams - Aside from the simulator instructor used to operate the simulator, the examiner standards (NUREG 1021) discourages the observation of simulator examinations by other facility individuals in order to maintain the integrity of the examination.
Specific facility requests for an additional observer may be addressed on a case-by-case basis.
At the conclusion of the meeting, Mr. Woodard requested that the NRC send a group of examiners to FNP to receive specific training on the use of ERGS and then conduct a re-examination of the five individuals who failed the simulator phase of the August operator examinations with a waiver of the 6-month waiting period i
for the two candidates who have failed twice.
He also requested that FNP be allowed to position their own observers in the simulator during the exam for validation purposes.
4 t
Enclosure 3
October 24, 1985 Mr. Gibson said the request would be considered and that he would communicate with Mr. Woodard in the near future to apprise him of the NRC's decision following an internal review of the facts and circumstances associated with the August 1985 simulator examinations.
Summary of Phone Conversation Between Mr. A. F. Gibson and Mr. J. D. Woodard On October 3,1985, Mr. A. F. Gibson, Director, Division of Reactor Safety, called Mr. J. Woodard, Plant Manager, Farley Nuclear Plant (FNP) regarding comments made during the September 23, 1985 meeting and NRC's resolution of requests made by FNP personnel at the conclusion of the meeting.
Mr. D. M.
Verrelli, Chief, Reactor Projects Branch 1 and Mr. W. M. Dean, Reactor Engineer, Operating Licensing were present in Mr. Gibson's office for the phone conver-l sation. The following is a summary of this phone conversation.
1.
Request for Facility Observers During Future Exams:
Mr. Gibson stated that the NRC traditionally discourages observers, both NRC and utility, in order to preserve exam integrity and to avoid unnecessary distractions of the candidates / examiners.
This policy is considered to bef sound and will be continued, but the NRC is willing to make exceptions in special circumstances.
One APC0 observer will be permitted during the next simulator examinations at FNP.
2.
Examiner Knowledge of ERGS:
Mr. Gibson acknowledged that training for examiners in the usage of ERGS would be helpful and that the NRC is pursuing establishment of a training program for examiners in all five regions.
He also expressed appreciation for APCO's offer of site specific training and said that it will be considered at a future date based on what NRC headquarters develops.
Mr. Gibson also stated that it was not clear that a lack of examiner know-ledge was a factor in the latest simulator examination results and noted that two of the five failures were Reactor Operator candidates (R0s) who are not evaluated in ERG usage and that one SRO failed greatly due to his aversion for using procedures at all.
3.
Simulator Scenarios:
Mr. Gibson stated that the examiners would either test scenarios on the simulators prior to using them on candidates or, as a minimum, go over the scenarios with a qualified simulator operator, to ensure no unforeseen simulator problems exist.
He also stated that multiple failures are considered to be realistic and will be continued, i
{
Enclosure 4
October 24, 1985 Mr. Woodard then stated that FNP utilizes multiple failuies in their i
training, which was not the perception of the NRC after the September 23 meeting. He contended that it was the compression of multiple failures into i
an unrealistic time frame that was not fair to the candidate.
Mr. Gibson stated that exam time constraints lead to some unavoidable com-oression within the simulator scenarios, but he agreed that people should 1
not fail due to the compacting of several events in a limited timespan.
4.
August Examination Results:
l Mr. Gibson stated his belief that the August simulator examination results for FNP were valid and that the failures were well documented. He fu-ther j
stated that no basis existed to grant FNP's request for re-examination of r
i these five candidates within the near future with a waiver of the 6 month waiting period for the second failure candidates.
Mr. Woodard eFpressed his disappointment in this decision, and stated that they may appeal the results based on their review of the individual exam j
report.
He also stressed the need for simulator performance criteria, clarity of exam results and presence of facility observers during the simulator exam to improve the exam's validity and to create a fair exam.-
i environment for the candidates.
\\
Both Mr. Gibson and Mr. Woodard expressed that they thought the meeting and phone 3
i conversation were beneficial and that they appreciate the concern and interest
{
each party showed.
i YY LY I f
Wil Fam P.' Dean,' R rector"Ufg1neer Date 51gned
Attachment:
Attendance List i
I r
l l
l J
l i
1
ATTACHMENT ATTENDANCE LIST NRC Personnel A. F. Gibson, Director, Division of Reactor Safety (DRS)
D. M. Verrelli, Chief, Reactor Projects Branch 1, Division of Reactor Projects (DRP)
C. Julian, Acting Chief Operations Branch, DRS B. Wilson, Chief, Operator Licensing Section, DRS B. Debs, Acting Chief, Operations Section, DRS i
A. Johnson, Representative for Chief, Projects Section IB, DRP B. Dean, Licensed Operator Examiner, DRS APC0 Personnel J. Woodard, Plant Manager - FNP L. Williams, Training Superintendent - FNP R. Wiggins, Licensed Operator Training Supervisor - FNP I
i r
1 j
i
.