ML20199G847
| ML20199G847 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 08/02/1979 |
| From: | Tam P Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards |
| To: | Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20151H981 | List:
|
| References | |
| FOIA-84-656 ACRS-GENERAL, NUDOCS 8604090249 | |
| Download: ML20199G847 (19) | |
Text
~
'nkW-W2
[ UNITED STATES ,
- P -
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[ //
l/( J [..
, y ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON REACTOR SAFEGUARDS W ASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 g
%e,,,s*#g August 2,1979 ACRS Members NRC STAFF MEETING TO DISCUSS THE STATUS OF TMI-2 TASK GROUPS The NRC Staff held a meeting in the Holiday Inn in Bethesda on August 1,1979, to discuss the status of THI-2 related activities by NRC task groups. Several hundred representatives of utilities were present at the meeting who also parti-cipated actively in question and answer periods.
The meeting consisted of four main sessions, presented by directors of the four Task Groups. These sessions can be summarized as follows:
LESSONS LEARNED (R. Mattson)
Dr. Mattson indicated that his group has published an interim report, "TMI-2 Lessons Learned Task Force Status Report and Short-Tern Recommendations,"
NUREG-0578. (Copies of this report were distributed to ACRS members and tech-nical Staff about two weeks ago). His presentation consisted of glossing over the 23 recommendations discussed in the report, indicating that some of these recommendations will be enforced by rule making. Utilities are welcome to recommend how to put more or less substance into these.
Dr. Mattson decried the large number of reportable events per year (~3000) and stated that these can be reduced to a small fraction of 3000, if not to zero. Some plants have many nore reportable events than others, indi-cating there is much room for improvement.
All the questions were directed to the requirement of a " shift technical adviser" in the control room. The Staff described such an individual as a degreed, non-management, advisory person. A series of lively questions ensued, paraphrased asi Where do you get such a super person?
If he is so good, why should he work in a remote location such as j
a nuclear plant?
j If he merely advises the SRO, but has not authority over him, why need him anyway?
If he is a young person in his early twenties, his credibility may be near zilch in the control room where seniority does count.
Denton and Mattson offered no specific answers to these questions but said that if enough pay is offered, such a person can be located and persuaded to accept the position. Utilities' acceptance of this recommendation was below luke warm.
~
BELL 84-656 PDR
l
- a. ACRS Members .
On safety valves performance testing, the question was raised as to where one
- j can have such done. Mattson said that such is being done in France, Gemany, and Japan, and that Wiley Laboratories in the U.S. can also do it.
Safety systems are being relied upon more frequently than they were intended to be. Dr. Mattson suggested that this should be corrected.
BULLETINS and ORDERS (D. Ross)
~
The purpose of this group is to review generic implications of TMI-2 for all operating plants to confirm bases for their continued safe operation, and to advise Lessons Learned Task Force of any actions identified during the review.
The scope of review includes loss of feedwater events and small break LOCAs.
ACRS input, represented by the "Michelson Concerns", is also factored into
- the review. This presentation follows closely its handout material (Attachment 1).
l l EMERGENCY PROCEDURES (B. Grimes)
Regulatory Guide 1.101, " Emergency Planning for Nuclear Plants," has not been i fully implemented in the past. Furthermore, there are some additional areas where improvements have been highlighted by the TMI-2 accident. The Staff 4
plans to undertake an intensive effort in the next year to improve licensee
! preparedness at all operating plants and those applying for an OL. The main i
elements of this effort are:
i j
Upgraded licensee emergency plans to satisfy Reg. Guide 1.101.
Require instrumentation to follow the course of accidents and relate such infomation to emergency plan levels.
Determine that an Emergency Operations Center for Federal, i state, and local personnel has been established.
Assure that improved licensee offsite monitoring capabilities have been provided.
Assess the relationship of state / local plans, and assure these plans cover to a distance of 10 miles from the plant.
Require test exercises of approved plans.
i (Attachment 2 is the Comission paper describing this effort).
OPERATOR TRAINING ( P. Collins)
This topic generated the most interest from the audience and was punctuated frequently by questions. Fifteen recomendations are made by this task force.
The handout material for this presentation, listing all fifteen recommendations is attached for your information (Attachment 3).
t
,. ACRS Members .
(It is not clear, from the presentations, how the task groups interact, how they avoid overlapping of review areas, and how the industry would relate to them.
Two of the task groups, " Emergency Preparedness" and " Operator Training", seem to have bean either newly formed or newly emerged from obscurity. In addition.
I&E is forming a new task group called, tentatively, "TMI-2 Implications on the Inspection and Enforcement Program.")
Peter Tam Staff Engineer Attachments:
i As stated
, cc: ACRS Technical Staff
- n. ... -_-. . . . .~ .. _ __ ._
r .
yg L=~LJm ,
NCuk i, Bjl1 Ells & ORERS TASK FORE ..
PURPOSE o REVlW GBERIC IWLICATIES OF 1NI-2 ACCIN FOR AU_ OPEPATING PlMTS TO CONFIRM BASES RR llEIR CONTINED SAR OPERATION.
o AINISE LESSONS lEARED TASK RRCE OF ANY ACTIONS IENTIFIED DURINGTHEREVIW.
SCO T OF REVI&l o LDSS OF RENATER EWNT
. ANALYSIS
. SYSES
. GUIE LINES #tD PROCEDURES
. OPERATOR TPAINING o SPALL BREAK IKA
. A"ALYSIS
. SYSIB E
, GUIELINES AND PROEIURES
. OPEPATOR TPAINING e
y "' /*
.5 c
m.
Ba0 EVALUATION SEQUENCE TMI-2 l ACCIDENT ,
l I .
l VENDOR IEBs UTILITY MEETINGS ISSUED MEETINGS _
v IEB RESPONSES r y o ,
B&O LL B&O EVALUATION TASi' FORCE GENERIC STUDY REPORT o
if SERs INSTRUCTIONS T0 ISSUED UTILITIES '
o UTILITY '
l .
RESPONSES 1-ShRs ISSUED I
IMPLEMENTATION
( BY l
l UTILITIES.
=
t ,
~
1*
l
. r M ^ Cr.J J r-E SQ 01 glQ CQ M W LLJ
< V) V) in M U u... ..
'J "1
& Cf. C. O e-*
M Cri e"C I *i .
>- 00
.-=
I l
l
.m M, v 5;;
?'."*..'
M C
W ..
I C4 e C*: >- .
O b O. m W M >-
C.4 - N ...
=:
N v en t.)
m g y a 9 M h.:' J & i. .
O < < N 2' > (n c= 2.:
< O
~ O C 22' v
,H .
C.3 :.
Lu H .
n J C !". . . .
-- ~ ll> n n EM-J J 4 :-- -
>J cc ^ . ;n
_a J c.
ac;"
W E.
J e-a E: * !" E C.: ~ w u <
y Cz:; A n r.- ::-
. . ca
. O Cdv X C;a . LLJ 3.* v w v .
C. M W V) v H E~ V)
E': ...
&~ V) W 4nag- :.2 y,.
CL v E. . . .-
g :'
^ -C. E CL 2 CL MM LA.J OO CC t--
& LJ ) l o :h :s.:t sa
- w w
! M &
O J *
, cd W r. .
4 Q ::C v
s I
.e
<e
i l
ACRS SUBCOMMITTEF is.
~ ;. . .
ON .
BULLETINS At!D ORDERS -
i l
j i 1979 I e FORMED IN MID-jut!E e MEMBERSHIP W. MATHIS (CHAIRMA0 :
L
=.
M. PENDER
' x H. ETHERINGTON
- S. LAWROSKI 4
M. PLESSET .
6 P. SHEWMON .
, F:::
j ::U-
, ,, . . . =. ... .o . m. . ~ . . e._. .. ___ _ __ . _
2 .m ~ _ ___1
. 1 l
IbtD REVIEW 1%TTERS RR.W PUWTS o LONG-TERM ETIONS IINTIFIED IN C0mlSSION ORIRS FOR B&W RMS o LONG-TERM ACTIONS IIlfflFIED IN STAFF SER'S ON B&W PLANTS l o EAR-TERM ET10NS 11NTIFIED IN NLREG-0578 RELATING TO B80 REVIEWSCOPE c.
e 1
. REVIEW f% TIERS ITNTIFIED IN CONISSION @IFRS AND STAFF SER'S F m B2W PLANTS C&filSSION GTRS o FAILTE FDDES AND EFFECTS NRYSIS OF INTE@ATED CONTRO o SAFETY-GRAIE REACTOR TRIP IN LOSS OF MAIN FEEDWATER o IFPROVEFENTS IN AUXILIARY FEEDWATER SYSTEMS o CONTINLED OPERATOR TRAINltra, STAFF SEP/S o TRANSIENT #RYSES o SFRL BREAK LOCA ABRYSES o SAFETY AND RELIEF VALVE STUDIES o PRESSLRE VESSEL INTEGRllY o AUXILIARY FEEDWATER SYSTEM RELIABILITY STUDY o AUXILIARYFEEDWATERSYSTEMCONTROLTESTS l
l
n .~., ., ..c... ~.. _ _ .. .. . . --- -
1 l
SOEDLIE AND GRON0 LOGY & EERIC EVIEW .
& B&W R E TS ACTIVITY MIE ISSLE ORERS l MY 7-17,1979 ISSLE SER: LIFT ORTRS MY18-JLLY6,1979 s ' \s s% *% \' \ s % \
\'\\\\\\\\\'\\\\\'\\s s \' ' \ s LIENSEES SUBMITTAL E SCEDLLE FORLONG-TERMACTIONS JUE 18 - Mio AUGUST 1979 REVIEWLONG-TERMACTION: ONG0ING ISSLE EVALUATION EVALllATE ACCIENTS AND TRANSIENTS ECEMER EYOND ClRRENT ISIGN EASES n'
6
...r i
e- .
f
. }
=
SCEDIF AND CW0l(10GY T EERIC ARTSSWNT T WSTINGHOUSE-IFSIGED TERATING RETS f%Y 1,1979 INITIATE EERIC REVIEW EETINGS WITH LIENSEE$ ON AUXILIARY f%Y 22-26,1979 FEEDWATER SYSTEfB IEETINGS WITH LIENSEES REGARDING FRY 30,1979 FEf% TION E OfERS' E0UP EETING WITH SF%ll BREAK ANALYSIS SUBC0FlilTTEE ,
FRY 31,1979 OF 0#ERS' GROUP JUIE I4,1979 EERIC RE0lESTS FOR IEORf% TION ISSLED EETING WITH PROCEDLRES SUBC0FiilTEE JLLY 18,1979 E OktERS' GROUP Mio-AUGUST 1979 ISSLE STAFF INSTRUCTIONS TO LICENSEES EARLY-SEPTEMBER 1979 ISSLE EERIC REPORT Mio-SEPTEMBER 1979 LICENSEE RESPONSES T0 INSTRUCTIONS Mio-0CT0ER 1979 ISSLE STAFF EVALUATION ON INITIAL PLANT i
EVALlRTION OF ACCI!ENTS & TRANSIENTS BEYOND CLRRENT ISIGN ECEMBER I
i
SOEDULE AND GRMCtDGY OF'EERIC ASSESSEENT OF C0BUSTION ENGITFRING WSIGED OPERATING PLANTS EWNT IRTE (1979)
MY 1 INITIATE OERIC EVIEW 0F C-E ESIGED OPERATING PUNTS KET WITH LIENSEES EGARDING AljXILIARY EEINATER SYSTEM MY22-26 KET WITH LIENSEES AND C-E EGARDING TIE R)RMING OF A C-E 04ER'S GRDLP JlfE 12 EET WITH ANALYSIS StBComlTEE OF 04ER'S GR0lP JtfE 15 &
JULY 24 KET WilH PROEDUES AND GUIDELIE stb 00mlTIEE JlfE 29 &
AUGUST 10 OF (MER'S GROLP LATE AUGUST ISSLE STAFF EQUIEENTS TO LIENSEES MID SEPEMER ISSLE EERIC [ PORT LATE SEPENER APPLICNffS ESPOND TO STAFF EQUIEENTS LATE OCf0BER ISSIE STAFF EVAllRTION EPORT ON INDIVIDUAL PLANTS (FIET KPORD EVALLATION OF ACCIDENTS & TPANSIENTS BEYOND CUREIT EEEERESIGl
" -w- - --,-, , . ,
a..._..._~.m...m.____...
RRD REVIEW MATTERS BOILING WATER REACTCR PUWTS o NlEEG-0578 WAR-TERM REQUIREfENTS RELATING TO B&O REVIEW SCOPE o EAR-TERM REQUIREENTS RESILTING FROM B&O EERIC REVIEW & M'S l
l l l
m.._.__ . _ ___ _ -
PROSFCTIVE TAR-TERM REQUIREENTS P20 EERIC REVIEW &
BOILING WATER REACTm PLANTS
- 1. EXUD RNE T WAB LEVEL RECORIRS IN TE CONTROL ROOM: INITI EXTENED RANE RECORERS ON REACTOR TRIP.
- 3. PROVI I FOR AUTOMATIC RE-INITIATIONLEVEL. OF RCIC AND
- 4. PROVII FE ISOLATION OF VENTING FROM ISOLATION CONDENSER RADIATIONLEVELS,
- 5. REDUE FAILUPE OF RELIEF VALVES BY REDUCING CHALLDE RATE IPPROVING ESIGN,
- 6. MDDIFY OPERATING PROCEDlRES TO REQUIRE A LOW PRESSLRE S (LPCI, CORE SPRAY, COLENSATE SYSTEM) EFORE MNUAL EPRESSLRIZATION,
- 7. MAKE PROCEDLRES CONSISTENT WITH OPERATOR SCENARIOS BEIN
- 8. EVELOP EtERIC GUIELIES FOR EERENCY PROCEDLRES.
- 9. ADDITIONALOPERATORTRAINING.
- 10. ESTABLISH N4D MINTAIN DE SET OF AS-BUILT DRAWINGS ON SITE.
- 11. DETERMIE ROLE OF RECIRCl1ATION PltfS IN CASE E INADEQUAT
- 12. INVESTIGATE NATURAL CIRClLATION WITH CEE SPRAY, l
- 13. ANALYSIS OF BREAK IN RECIRClLATION LIE TO ETERMIE METER i VALVES SHOLLD E CLOSED.
1LI. EVELOP IFPROVED SMALL BREAK ETHODS.
SCWDil F AND OR0tn 0GY E EWRIC .,
EVIEW & M'S ACTIVITY D&lE JUE 7,1979 INITIATE EERICt EVIEW JUE 28,19/9 KETING WITH LIENSEES JLY 13,1979 EERIC REQUESTS FOR IEORf% TION ISSLED , s .
. s .s . .
ISSLE EERIC REPORT AND INSTRUCTIONS TOLICENSEES Mio- SEPTEMER i
LIENSEE RESPONSES TO INSTRUCTIONS mo-0CT0ER INITIALSTAFFEVAllRTIONONINDIVIDUAL PLANTS Mio-NOVEMBER EVALUATE ACCIENTS AND TRAf61ENTS EYOND CLRRENT E SIGN BASES [CEffER l
l
EAR TERM EQulf9ENTS RR ESTING100SE AND C0fBUSTIONDGINFFRING OPEPATING PLANTS AUXILIARf RENAER SYSlDi
. GDERIC
. AlHCRE (LD
. SINGE SlLTION VALVE
, ALRlAE WAER SOURE
. CST LGI LEEL ALARM
. PlW DEUP#lE EST
, FLOWINDICATION (LD
, VALE POSITION (LOSS OF AIR)
. ACTUATION 01 LOSS OF ALL AC
. E01 SRCS 6'
s'
- c
' ' ,i ,
i
2......... . . . . . _
o PUNT S#ECIFIC AW PLW TEST CRllERIA mDIFY VALE LIEUPS EV18 COMON M0E ELECTRICAL FAILUES NDIFY SUINEIUME TEST PROEDUES I
I o ,
I .
., ,/*-
{
p.
49 PF0& DUPES o 9%U. M o EXTDIED LDSS OF REWATER o SG DlN VN.E OPERATION o TRAINING 4
I l
i I
e I
l I
e
w ...... .. ...
,. . ..,a.o . - m u. . .. ,.u. m .- m ....- .~ , _ m m m ...,. ., _ _ ..
1 l
ANALYSIS .
o SMAU.BFAK LOCA o EXEEED LDSS OF REIMATER o MIOMELSON 00NERG o WNDOR GUIELIES o COE VERIFICATION o INAEGE COE COOLING SYWiUS/0PERATOR ACTI(NS o STAFF SMALL BEAK AUDITS
p.....~....~......... _..m..._ _ .. _ _ _ -_
Cm/m f km M 2-E.4 Gc n[ '
July 23,1979 SECY-79-450 For: The Commissioners 0 L
L U. 6 Thru: Executive Director for Operations 1 -
From: Harold R. Denton, Director, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Subject:
ACTION PLAN FOR PROMPTLY IMPROVING EMERGENCY PREPARE 0 NESS
Purpose:
To infonn the Commission of the staff's plans to take immediate steps to improve licensee preparedness at all operating power plants and for near-tenn OL's.
Di scussion: While the emergency plans of all power reactor licensees have been reviewed by the staff in the past for conformance to the general provisions of Appendix E to 10 CFR Part 50, the most recent-guidance on emergency planning, primarily that given in Regulatory Guide 1.101 " Emergency Planning for Nuclear Power Plants", has not yet been fully implemented by most reactor licensees. Further, there are some additional areas where improvements in emergency planning have been highlighted as particularly significant by the Three Mile Island accident.
The NRR staff plans to undertake an intensive effort over about the next year to improve licensee preparedness at all operating power reactors and those reactors scheduled for an operating license decision within the next year.
This effort will be closely coordinated with a similar effort by the Office of State Programs to improve State and local response plans through the concurrence process
' and Office of Inspection and Enforcement efforts to verify proper implementation of licensee emergency preparedness activities.
The main elements of the staff effort, as listed in Enclosure 1, are as follows:
(1) Upgrade licensee emergency plans to satisfy Regulatory Guide 1.101, with special attention to the development of unifonn action level criteria based on plant parameters.
calm 60&% Aqq.
- ~ - nn- w _
4:M % M n en w wn m m m a rs.v:.-s, 9
The Commissioners (2) Assure the implementation of the related recanmenda-tions of the NRR Lessons Learned Task Force involving instrumentation to follow the course of an accident and relate the information provided by this instrumentation to the emergency plan action levels.
This will include instrumentation for post-accident sampling, high range radioactivity monitors, and improved in-plant radioiodine instrumentation. The implementation of the Lessons Learned recommendation on instrumentation for detection of inadequate core cooling will also be factored into the emergency plan action level criteria.
(3) Determine that an Emergency Operations Center for Federal, State and local personnel has been established with suitable communications to the plant, and that upgrading of the facility in accordance with the Lessons Learned recanmendation for an in-plant technical support center is underway.
(4) Assure that improved licensee offsite monitoring capabil-ities (including additional TLD's or equivalent) have been provided for all sites.
(5) Assess the relationship of State / local plans to the licensee's and Federal plans so as to assure the capability to take appropriate emergency actions.
Assure that this capability will be extended to a distance of 10 miles as soon as practical, but not later than January 1,1981. This item will be performed in conjunction with the Office of State Programs and the Office of Inspection and Enforcement.
(6) Require test exercises of approved Emergency Plans (Federal, State, local, licensees), review plans for such exercises, and participate in a limited number of joint exercises. Tests of licensee plans will be required to be conducted as soon as practical for all facilities and before reactor startup for new licensees. Exercises of State plans will be performed 1
i 1
l l
The Commissioners I in conjunction with the concurrence reviews of the Of fice of State Programs. Joint test exercises involving Federal, State, local and licensees will be conducted at the rate of about 10 per year, which would result in all sites being exercised once each five years.
The staff review will be accomplished by about 6 review teams, similar to the concept used to assure
' suitable implementation of the physical security As a minimum, the teams provisions of 10 CFR 73.55.
will consist of a team leader from NRR, a member from Los Alamos Scientific Lab (LASL) and, at least for field visits, a member from the IE Regional office. LASL will be used as the source of non-NRC team members because of the expertise gained and familiarity with the plants acquired during the physical security reviews. The Division of Operating Reactors will have the responsibility for comple-ting these reviews for both operating reactors and near-term OL's. J. R. Miller, Assistant Director, 00R will be respon-sible for implementatiori of the program. General policy and technical direction will be provided by Brian Grimes, Assistant Director, D0R.
The first sites to be reviewed by the teams will be those scheduled for operating licenses within the next year and those sites in areas of relatively high population. Major milestones for the program are being developed and will include regional meetings with licensees to discuss the program, site visits by the review team, and meetings with local officials.
Coordination: This action plan has been discussed with the Task Force on Emergency Planning and the Task Force Chairman, T. F. Carter, has advised that the Task Force deliberations to date have indicated no reason why NRR should not proceed. The Office of State Programs concurs in this plan. The Office of Inspection and Enforcement concurs in the plan.
e v
,r-
.I
~
~
9M .. J
k.%M3nD9#1L&wkwlsa.t::ss;r.a:ra,%:suawuxmw \
l l
The Comissioners NRR expects to perform this task without augmentation of resources beyond those authorized for FY79 and FY80.
$ n Harold R. Denton, Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Encl osure:
Emergency Preparedness Improvements for Operating Plants and Near Term OL's DISTRIBUTION Comissioners Comission Staff Offices Exec Dir for Operations ACRS Secretariat
^\
y r:
+ e i
1
__p____ - - - - - - - - - _ . _ . . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
% ~ -.a....~. . ... .
ENCLOSURE N0. 1
~
EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS IWROVEENTS AND COMMITENTS REQUIRED FOR OPERATING PLANTS AND NEAR TE Implementation Categoryl/
Item A
I
- 1. Upgrade emergency plans to Regulatory Guide 1.101 with special attention to action level criteria based on plant parameters.
- 2. Implement certain short term actions recommended by Lessons Learned task force and use these in action level criteria.2f 2.1.8(a) Post-accident sampling A
Design review complete A
Preparation of revised procedures B
Implement plant modifications A
Description of proposed modification B
2.1.8(b) High range radioactivity monitors A
2.1.8(c) Improved in-plant lodine instrunentation
- 3. Establish Emergency Operations Center for Federal, State and Local Officials I A
(a) Designate location and alternate location and provide communications to plant B
(b) Upgrade Emergency Operations Center in conjunction with in-plant technical '
support center 1/ Implementation prior to OL or by January 1,1980 (see NUREG-0578).
Category A:
Category A1: Implementation prior to OL or by mid-1980.
Category B: Implementation by January 1,1981.
2/
~The implementation of the Lessons Learned task force recommendation ite instrumentation for detection of inadequate core cooling, will also be factored into the action level criteria.
,. ......._....._:t .
,.tm....-. . _.. .. _ - ~ _ . . _ _ , . ._
b..w. .,:s,we.2....,. ,.
Implementation Category Item A
- 4. Improve offsite monitoring capability
- 5. Assure adequacy of State / local plans I
A (a) Against current criteria ,
B (b) Against upgraded criteria
- 6. Conduct test exercises (Federal, State, local, licensee)
Al (a) Test of licensees energency plan Al (b) Test of State energency plans (c) Joint test exercise of emergency p]ans (Federal, State, local, licensee)
B New OL's All operating plants Within 5 years
7
"%w T%, " ^ D~'h d Z' j 6
JR caw 3
.j RECOMMENDATION 1 .
INCREASE MINIMUM EXPERIENCE l l REQUIREMENTS FOR SENIOR OPERATOR i APPLICANTS 4 YEARS OF OPERATING EXPERIENCE 2 YEARS NUCLEAR - 6 MONTHS ON SITE !
e NUCLEAR PLANT STAFF ENGINEER OR l e CONTROL ROOM OPERATOR e 2 YEARS MAY BE ACADEMIC !
i -.- - -- --
i,
. ?
l !
RECOMMENDATION 2 l SENIOR OPERATOR APPLICANTS :
MUST HOLD AN OPERATOR l i
LICENSE FOR SIX MONTHS i
~
l
W .v. ;~ av .Lds;~.~. -;:3..;.u^.k,s. 2,;. . L..,-;,L^ ;. ;c;.; g; ,,,;,,w __;; :__
l l
l i
i I
1 o 20
! z 22 m i O
- tb
<m O 2 k hk T o ome z t ha g %2A E OW4 l
i E Am m WE4 i
o me m O
1 m W32
, E tOW O W-O i
l .
1
,.. ,e I ,
e ;
i
\ {
5 1
RECOMMENDATION 4 i
- REQUIRE SIMULATOR TRAINING FOR HOT LICENSE APPLICANTS
., 4 l- '
il
- i i'
i i
RECOMMENDATION 5 .
c i
MORE FREQUENT AUDITING OF TRAINING PROGRAMS, l
INCLUDING ADMINISTRATION OF '
i SOME CERTIFICATION EXAMINATIONS l
9 I
RECOMMENDATION 6 .
i REQUIRE INSTRUCTORS TO i HOLD SENIOR OPERATOR l LICENSES
e 9
RECOMMENDATION $ 7, 8 AND 9
\ REQUALIFICATION PROGRAMS i'
- 1. REQUIRE ANNUAL SIMULATOR RETRAINING
- 2. REQUIRE SPECIFIC EXERCISES 3.NRC ADMINISTER SOME OF THE ANNUAL
, EVALUATIONS
. .?
- . ?.
r L
RECOMMENDATIONS 10, ' l AND13 !
NRC WRITTEN EXAMINAITONS A. INCREASE THE SCOPE TO INCLUDE THERMODYNAMICS, HYDRAULICS AND RELATED SUBJECTS l l
B.NEW PASSING GRADES FOR WRITTEN EXAMINATIONS l t
80% OVERALL 70% EACH CATEGORY i C. INFORM FACILITY MANAGEMENT OF ,
RESULTS
i .
7
- 1. - !
.i RECOMMENDATIONS 11,12 .!
l
(
AND 15 I NRC OPERATING TESTS
! A. PART OF THE OPERATING TEST TO BE ADMINISTERED ON A SIMULATOR B. SENIOR OPERATORS TO BE ADMINISTERED SIMULATOR OPERATING TESTS
~,-
C. REVIEW ANSI /ANS 3.5-1979 " NUCLEAR POWER PLANT SIMULATORS"
~ ~
l t .