ML20198K515

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Discusses Headquarters Operator Licensing Branch Visit to General Physics Corp on 971216 to Exchange Info & Obtain Industry Feedback Re Operator Licensing Exam Process & Proposed Part 55 Rule Change
ML20198K515
Person / Time
Issue date: 01/07/1998
From: Gallo R
NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned)
To: Spessard R
NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned)
References
NUDOCS 9801150022
Download: ML20198K515 (4)


Text

i

  1. 8800 9

, y t UNITED STATES

<1 B NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION t WASH:NQToN, D.C. 30666 4 001

\ *****p f January 7,1998 MEMORANDUM TO: R. Lee Spessard, Direvor Division of Reactor Controls and Human Factors FROM: Robert M. Gallo, Chief Operator Licent;ng Branch Division of Reactor Controls and Human Factors

SUBJECT:

HEADQUARTERS OPERATOR LICENSING BRANCH (HOLB) VISIT TO GENERAL PHYSICS CORPORATION On Tuesday, December 16,1997, Frark Collins and I visited the offices of General Physics Corporation (GP) in Columbia, MD. GP was represented by Mr. Donald Duquette, Vice President - Energy Services and Mr. F. J. Colby, Director - Simulatin i Services with Mr. J. Pierce of his staff. The purpose of the trip was to exchange init n ition and obtain industry feedback regarding the operator licensing examination process and the proposed Part 55 rule change. HOLB oversight of simulator certification and current regulatory expectations regarding simulator testing requirements were also discussed. No NRC commitments were made.

GP has contracted with several facility licensees to draft operator licensing examinations.

Their experience has been that it is sometimes difficult to judge the appropriate level of difficulty for a given examination. GP indicated that the NRC chief exaininer's approval of an examination may be subjective and could be in conflict with contractual constraints between the facility licensee and a contractor who is developing the examination. Close coordination between the chief examiner and the facility licensee / contractor team is required to mitigate this concern.

GP questioned several aspects of simulator certification and oversight, particularly NRC's perspective regarding:

- definition of and testing associated with major modifications.

- applicability of single simulation facilities to multi-unit facility licensees.

- requirements for the use of controlled procedures in the simulator.

- use of the simulator in the training accreditation process.

1 GP was refered to applicable sections of NUREG-1262. " Answers to Questions at Public g Meetings Regarding implementation of Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 55 on Operators' Licenses" and Regulatory Guido 1.149, " Nuclear Power Plant Simulation -

g3fQ au uUd 9901150022 990107 4[ f>T55

"" " * ""^

em  ! N 5.E

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

,L.-.

'4

~

i Y

l q

2-

- Facilities for use in' Operator License Examinations," NRC also explained the role'of the

Institute for Nuclear Power Operations in accreditation along with NRC's oversight of the -'
process.: .

j A discussion of the similarities and differences between the 1985,1993, and proposed - *

,= 1998 revisions of ANSI /ANS 3.5, " Nuclear Power Plant Simulators for Use in Operator

~ ' Training and Examination. GP_ expressed a view that unless NRC opts to endorse the 1998 c  : standard when it is pubilshed to the exclusion of previous revision, facility licensees will i

have little incentive to adapt their simulator and training programs to the current  :

technology and standard. - NRC discussed an intention to review the 1998 revision of the -

  • standard when it is published to determine whether it will be endorsed. NRC explained the  :

1 requirement for the backfit analysis process to be applied before requiring any facility l U

. licensee to commit to a newly revised standard.

't V

-f i

s W

S I

+

r e

4 j

e 6

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

-f. -9 e_

m -

2-

" Facilities for use in Operator License Examinations." ' NRC also explained the role of the

. institute for Nuclear Power Operations in accreditation a,ong with NRC's oversight of tho' process.-

A discussion of the similaritier and differences between the 1985,1993, and proposed 1998 revisions of ANSI /ANS 3.5, " Nuclear Power Plant Simulators for Use in Operator Training and Examination. GP expressed a view that unless NRC opts to endorse the 1998 standard when it is published to the exclusion of previous revision, facility licensees will

-- have little incentive to adapt their simulator and training programs to the current technology and standard. NRC discussed an intention to review the 1998 revision of the standard when it is published to determine whether it will be endorsed. NRC explained the requirement for the backfit analysis process to be applied before requiring any facility-licensee to commit to a newly revised standard.

DISTRIBUTION!

HOLB RF; _

{ CENTRAL (FILESj),

PUBLIC

- DOCUMENT NAME: G:\ COLLINS \GP12-97.WP5

v. w . - .e m. - ce - c., ew .n. cam.no.nw. r - c.y en .n.cnm.nv.ncio . v - % c.,

OFFICE HOLB:DRCH V 6 E HOL8]DBCM-- lC l l l NAME FCollins u RGalTo DATE / /6 /98 I/7/Yh 0FFICIAL RECORD COPY i

____1_______-

y. . o .

2 Facilities for use in Operator License Examinations." NRC also explained the role of the institute for Nuclear Power Operations in accreditation along with NRC's oversight of the process.

A discussion of the similarities and differences between the 1985,1993, and proposed 1993 revisions of ANSI /ANS 3.5, " Nuclear Power Plant Simulators for Use in Operator <

Training and Examination. GP expressed a view that unless NRC opts to endorse the 1998 standard when it is published to the exclusion of previous revision, facility licensees will have little incentive to adapt their simulator and training programs to the current technology and standard. NRC discussed an intention to review the 1998 revision of the standard when it is published to determine whether it will be endorsed. NRC explained the requirement for the backfit analysis process to be applied before requiring any facility licensee to commit to a newly revised standard.

DISTRIBUTION:

HOLB RF CENTRAL FILES PilBLIC DOCUMENT NAME: G:\ COLLINS \GP12-97 T:P5 To seceive o ease of thle doovment, "-In the bos 'C' = Copy withmrt attachmentlenetosure "E' = Copy with attachment / enclosure 'N' = No copy 0FFICE HOLB:DRCH W E H0LTJDi3C4t-- lC l l NAME FCollins u RGallo _

l DATE / /6 /48 //7/ W l OFFICIAL RECORD COPY