ML20199L875
| ML20199L875 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Davis Besse  |
| Issue date: | 07/01/1986 |
| From: | Morisseau D Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Booher H Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8607100037 | |
| Download: ML20199L875 (6) | |
Text
_ _.
$$ ibh!5kk, Q
4y q
l DISTRIDUTION: m F' Central ] 1esi!!
MTB'R/F JUL 1 1986 JPersensky DM6risseau ghb MEMORANDUM FOR: Harold R. Booher, Chief Maintenance and Training Branch Division of Human Factors Technology ThRU:
Julius J. Persensky, Section Leader Personnel Training Section Maintenance and Training Branch, DHFT FROM:
Dolores S. Morisseau, Training and Assessment Specialist Personnel Training Section Maintenance and Training Branch, DHFT
SUBJECT:
OBSERVATION OF INP0 ACCREDITATION TEAM VISIT A CAVIS-BESSE (TOLEDO EDISON)
N l
Introduction During the week of June 16 - June 20, Pat Eng (RIII) and I were NRC observers during the INPO Accreditation Team Evaluation of six training programs at Davis-Besse. The programs that were evaluated against Revision 1 of INPO Criteria 85-002 are:
Nonlicensed Operator Licensed R0 Licensed SR0 Instrument and Control Technician Electrical Maintenance Mechanical Maintenance l
The training and orientation session for Peer Evaluators was conducted on Monday morning.
(The list of Accreditation Team personnel, including Peer Evaluators, is enclosed.) The team was also given an overview of the Davis-Besse organization, the Training System Development (TSD) Model, job analysis methods, and the training materials matrix. Ms. Eng attended the morning portion of this meeting. We both participated in a tour of the training l
facility.
The formal entry meeting was held on Monday afternoon. The team leader introduced the members of his team and outlined the qualifications of each.
He emphasized the role of the NRC observers, i.e., "they're here to watch us,
(
not Davis-Besse." He also reviewed the roles of the evaluation team, the Accreditation Board, and the process for tracking open items, I
I I
emen)
B607100037 860701 I
!sumaus)
PDR ADOCK 05000346 v
PDR cars) i n:c rc w ne no, sos sacu oua OFFICIAL RECORD COPY W u.s.opo answoo.m w
g
)
D n$dhfh b.4 2
The Accreditation Process The process was the same as that described in previous trip reports. The program content and process groups met with their respective leaders each af ternoon; the combined groups met after these meetings. Open items and concerns were discussed and then communicated to utility perscnnel each morning by team and group leaders. A schedule of interviews was posted on the board in the INPO workroom to_ prevent as much duplication of effort as possible.
Interviews I observed interviews that covered the analysis, development, implementation and evaluation phases of Training Systems Development. The interview on task analysis was extremely thorough and established what methods were used to select and validate tasks. The interviewers asked many questions designed to provide understanding of how the Training Information Management System (TIMS) was developed and maintained.
It was particularly interesting that a lesson plan package was prepared to explain the TSD process and the validation process to the subject matter experts, job incumbents, and operations support personnel who participated in the validation. Other interviews covered the development cf the training material and the evaluation of both trainees and program. No interviewer was satisfied until he or she had covered every possible phase of that aspecc of the process being examined.
If the team leaders had additional questions, the interviewers generally went back to find answers.
Class Observation Opportunities to observe training were severely limited by the strike at Davis-Besse. A smaller team of INP0 personnel will return, possibly in July, to observe simulator training and operator training classes.
There was a mechanical maintenance class and a lab on packing valves. The class was conducted for the management level personnel required to cover maintenance during the strike. Two observers evaluated this class -- one before and one after the break.
I attended the entire class. The lab was evaluated by a peer evaluator who was part of the content evaluation group.
I also attended the lab.
In both classroom and lab, the INPO team observers used the training department's evaluation form which covered both content and instructor skills. These observers also followed the lesson plans during the instruction.
Results The following are concerns and open items that the INP0 evaluation team communicated to the utility with respect to the Davis-Besse training programs being evaluated:
EATEh
""*"'*"' """2' OFFICIAL RECORD COPY
- u.S. GPO 1983-400 247 g
-~
i Pn M
kg w&
D
%i k
, The process for analyzing new task information needs to be procedurally formalized to ensure repeatability.
Revision of system study guides needs to be completed.
Lesson plan development for the NLO program needs to be completed.
There is no core of performance items on the NLO qualification cards.
The " instant SRO" program needs to formalized.
Lesson plans for the three maintenance programs need to be coa.pleted.
Classroom, lab, and DJT for maintenance programs are not consistently sequenced, i.e., classroom first, lab and/or OJT second.
The I&C program does not presently include splicing and termination.
The course materials on Process Control do not have all objectives Covered.
The Mechanical Maintenance program does not include a course on properties of metals.
l The INPO team noted the following strengths in the six programs evaluated:
There was extensive involvement of plant personnel in the analysis process. 94% of Davis-Besse job incumbents participated in task validation.
The training department has a TSD course module on the PLATO system for all members of the training department and other interested personnel.
There is extensive training for OJT evaluators.
The training facilities are excellent.
There are a number of feedback mechanisms to datermine tiaining effectiveness.
Interviews and document review ascertained that these machanisms are used and are thorough.
The NLO program includes a proficiency manual with refresher knowledge components. This applies even to senior level hl0s and necessitates them going back to review lower level tasks.
The use of shop training councils and training foremen on shift provide invaluable advisory review and coordination.
CATEh NZC FO%M 34 @SOINRCM O240 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY
- u.s. apo 19s3-4oo.247 -
m_ _
.___m,
as
/a e, 4 r sysr
,e&c.+
g fy 1 At the conclusion of the exit briefing, the team leader noted that the final report to the Board may be delayed because of the strike since several team members will have to return to observe operator training.
Conclusions
- The INP0 Evaluation Team and Peer Evaluators all had appropriate qualifications for the program areas they were evaluating.
All document reviews and interviews were thorough.
The team reviewed continuing training as an integral element of TSD.
(Davis-Besse identified tasks for continuing training in the analysis phase of program development.)
The analysis data is very thorough and appears to be well maintained.
The Davis-Besse Training Division has made a great deal of progress in all phases of TSD since the NRC review last October.
'%f nW hw Dolores S. itorisseau, Training and Assessment Specialist Personnel Training Section Maintenance and Training Branch, DHFT
Enclosure:
As stated cc: 11. Russell P. Eng, RIII P. McKee, IE H. Kister, RI C. Julian, RII M. Phillips, RIII R. Cooley, RIV J. Crews, RV A. DeAgazio, NRR PDR PTS Staff DW/DSM1/ DAVIS-BESSETEAMVISIT h
m emery..M..T.B../..
...M..T..O(.
f.T......
- "-> DMot s au/t nJefnnsky i
- k..
ouc>. /.. l../. 8. 6.......
.T. /.. /./. 8. 6.......
N:c roxw ais no<soi nacu o24o OFFICIAL RECORD COPY
- u.s. m usa-=.247
Team Assignments Davis-Besse Accreditation Team Visit June 16-20,1986 Ron Fritchley Team Manager Larry Durham Team Manager in Training Dan Garner Team Manager Assistant for Systems Review Bob Simmons Organization and Management / Resources IPeer Evaluator-Arizona and Facilities Public Service Comoany)
David Stump Training Staff and Training Effectiveness Evaluation Henry Wiedrich Non-licensed Operator Training Process IPeer Evaluator-Public Service Company of Colorado)
Barbara Henton Licensed Operator Training Process
~
(Peer Evaluator-Consumers Power Company)
Bill Nevins Maintenance Training Process Pete Steele Team Manager Assistant for Programs Review Len Cloutier Non-licensed Operator Program Content Steve Allen Reactor Operator Program Content IPeer Evaluator-Carolina Power & Light Company)
Ed Force Senior Reactor Operator Program Content (Peer Evaluator-Arkansas Power & Light Company)
John Cowan Instrument & Control Technician Program Content Bob Rotherme)
Electrical Maintenance Personnel IPeer Evaluator-Commonwealth Program Content Edison Companyi Richard Baum Mechanical Maintenance Personnel (Peer Evaluator-Sacramento Program Content Municipal Utility District)
Davis-Besse Team Assignments Page 2 Harold Ray National Nuclear Accrediting Board (VP and Site Manager, San Observer Ono fre Nuclear Generating Station, Southern California Edison Companyi Pat Eng Observer, NRC Region III Dolores Morisseau Observer, NRC Division of Human Fac tors Technology O
9