ML20203D952
| ML20203D952 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | 05532443 |
| Issue date: | 02/12/1999 |
| From: | Hom S NRC OFFICE OF THE GENERAL COUNSEL (OGC) |
| To: | Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20203D933 | List: |
| References | |
| SP, NUDOCS 9902170037 | |
| Download: ML20203D952 (6) | |
Text
- . - .
February [13Cl99?ED USNRC UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
?) FEB 12 P1 :25 BEFORE THE PRESIDING OFFICER OM: -
RUw -
) ADJUOU In the Matter of r# F
)
)
MICHEL A. PHILIPPON ) Docket No. 55-32443-SP
)
(Denial of Senior Reactor Operator )
License Application) )
)
, NRC STAFF'S RESPONSE TO WRITTEN PRESENTATION BY MICHFL A. PHH IPPON I
The NRC Staff (Staff) hereby files its response to the written presentation of Michel A.
Philippon dated December 30,1998. As is explained in detail in the accompanying affidavit by Mr. Hironori Peterson of the Staff, Mr. Philippon has not demonstrated that he achieved the necessary satisfactory grades on his examination for a senior reactor operator license. Therefore, the Presiding Officer should sustain the Staff's denial of a senior reactor operator license to Mr.
Philippon.
BACKGROUND Mr. Philippon was examined in April 1998 in connection with his application for a senior reactor operator license for the Fermi 2 Nuclear Station. The examination was developed by the licensee for the facility, Detroit Edison Company, and consisted of a written examination, administered by the licensee, and an operating test, administered by the Staff. Mr. Philippon received a passing grade on the written examination, but failed the operating test, which consists l 4
of three portions: A. Administrative Topics; B. Control Room Systems and Facility Walk-
~
9902170037 990212 ,
i l
Through; and C. Integrated Plant Operations (Simulator Test). With respect to the operating test, l
Mr. Philippon received a " satisfactory" on the administrative topics ponion, but received an
" unsatisfactory" on the walk-through and simulator ponions. He was notified of his failure of the operating test, which requires a " satisfactory" on each ponion to pass, and the proposed denial of his application for a senior reactor operator license by letter dated May 20,1998, and advised that within 20 days he could seek an informal Staff review of the grading of the examination, or i
request a hearing. Mr. Philippon requested a 30 day extension of time by which he could request an informal Staff review, which extension was granted by the Staff.
By letter dated July 2,1998, Mr. Philippon filed his request for an "infortnal" staff review of his operating test failure. Staffin Region III undenook an initial review, which was completed in July 1998, and which was in turn reviewed by an Appeal Panel consisting of three members of the Staff not employed in Region III who had not been involved in the original grading of Mr. Philippon's examination. The results of the Appeal Panel's review were then considered by Staffin the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation. The ultimate conclusion reached by the Staff based on the preceding " informal" reviews was that Mr. Philippon's grade on the walk-through ponion of the operating test was revised from an " unsatisfactory" to a " satisfactory," but his overall grade on the simulator ponion of the test terr.ained an " unsatisfactory," despite the fact j i
that cenain changes favorable to Mr. Philippon were made with respect to initial numerical "sub-grades" assigned to cenain " competencies" or topics that constituted pan of the simulator ponion I
of the operating test. Accordingly, the proposed denial of Mr. Philippon's application was sustained, as described in a letter dated October 4,1998 to Mr. Philippon from the Staff. This
- l. letter provided Mr. Philippon a 20 day period to request a hearing on the proposed denial, I l l
. - . . _ . l
9 t
pursuant to 10 C.F.R. I 2.103(b)(2). Mr. Philippon requested a hearing by letter dated October 16,1998, which request the Staff did not oppose.
DISCUSSION Since Mr. Philippon passed the written examination, and the Staff has determined that l i Mr. Philippon's grades on the administrative topics and walk-through ponions of the operating
! test are " satisfactory," the only remaining issue is whether Mr. Philippon's overall grade on the simulator ponion of the operating test should be changed from " unsatisfactory" to " satisfactory,"
thereby pennitting Mr. Phil!ppon to pass the licensing examination. Mr. Philippon has the burden to show that this grade should be changed. See 10 C.F.R. I 2.1237(b); Frank J. Calabrese Jr.
l l (Denial of Senior Reactor Operator License), LBP-97-16,46 NRC 66,68 (1997). The Staff has concluded that Mr. Philippon has not met this burden.
Attached hereto is an affidavit by Mr. Hironori Peterson, who is an NRC inspector and l
senior operator licensing examiner, and who administered the operating test to Mr. Philippon.
Mr. Peterson's affidavit reflects his views on Mr. Philippon's contentions set fonh in his written presentation, and on the grading of relevant ponions of the operating test. The Staff hereby
- adopts Mr. Peterson'.4 affidavit and incorporates it into the Staff's response to Mr. Philippon's written presentation.
The affidavit reveals that Mr. Philippon has failed to demonstrate that he achieved satisfactory performance in two competency areas of the simulator test, Competency.C.4 (compliance with and use of procedures) and Competency C.8 (compliance with and use of technical specifications). With respect to Competency C.4, the technical details of i Mr. Philippon's proffered contentions, and the Staff's responses to them, are discussed in I
T paragraphs 31 through 49 of Mr. Peterson's affidavit. With respect to Competency C.8, paragraphs 50 through 67 of the affidavit discuss Mr. Philippon's contentions and the Staff's l
responses regarding ensuring compliance with technical specifications and action statements, and
, recognizing when conditions are covered by technical specifications.
After its earlier "infonnal" review of the examiner's initial grading in response to Mr. Philippon's request, the Staff determined that for Competencies C.4 and C.8 of the simulator test, Mr. Philippon received a total grade of 1.75 and 1.80, respectively. In accordance with NUREG-1021, " Operator Licensing Examination Standards for Power Reactors," ES-303,
" Documenting and Grading Initial Operating Tests" (Interim Revision 8, January 1997) at 7, if the total grade in Competency C.4 or C.8 is 1.8 or less, the applicant's overall performance for the simulator test is " unsatisfactory." Mr. Philippon's u ritten presentation contains nothing that would now provide a basis for the Staff to change the above grades assigned to Competencies C.4 and C.8.
What this case boils down to is a difference of opinion between the applicant and the Staff responsible for grading senior reactor operator license examinations. The Staff undertook, at Mr. Philippon's request, a more than generous multi-layer " informal" review process to ensure that Mr. Philippon's performance on his examination was graded accurately. No less than nine individuals of the Staff, from the senior operator license examiner to the Director of the Division of Reactor Controls and Human Factors, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, have evaluated l
l Mr. Philippon's performance on the operating test and have concluded that it was unsatisfactory.
l Four of these Staff members have now further analyzed Mr. Philippon's written presentation, and have concluded, as reflected in Mr. Peterson's attached affidavit, that Mr. Philippon has not met i
a i >
l 5
l his burden to change the grading of the operating test such that he would be able to obtain the senior reactor operator license for which he applied.' The Staff believes that the Presiding Officer, after reviewing Mr. Philippon's written presentation and Mr. Peterson's attached i
t affidavit, should and will agree. l r
l CONCLUSION
- I In consideration of the foregoing, the Staff's denial of a senior reactor operating license to Mr. Philippon should be sustained.
Respectfully submitted, f -
ven R. Hom Counsel for NRC Staff i
l Dated at Rockville, Maryland L this 12th day of February 1999 l
l l
l l
l As is more fully discussed in the accompanying affidavit of Mr. Peterson, there are three l l initial numerical "sub-grades" associated with each of the eight " competencies" constituting the simulator test. In order for Mr. Philippon to obtain an overall " satisfactory" grade on the simulator test, at least one initial grade for both Competency C.4 and Competency C.8 would i need to be elevated. The Staff has concluded that Mr. Philippon has not demonstrated that any I initial grade in either competency should be increased. While Mr. Philippon, in his written
- presentation (pages numbered 1,20), notes that his " performance grades in the remaining 6
- sections of the operating test are well above the minimum standard," his performance in the six l competencies of the simulator test not at issue here should have no bearing on the two !
l competencies that are the subject of this proceeding. See Calabrese, LBP-97-16,46 NRC at 88.
f
- . - , . -=
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE PRESIDING OFFICER in the Matter of )
) Y) FE812 P 1 :25 MICHEL A. PHILIPPON ) Docket No. 55-32443-SP
) OFFa F (Denial of Senior Reactor Operator ) %
ADJUm,1 -
.s c,pp License Application) )
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that copies of"NRC STAFF'S RESPONSE TO WRTITEN PRESENTATION l BY MICHEL A. PHILIPPON" in the above-captioned proceeding have been served on the following by U.S. Mail, first class, or, as indicated by a single asterisk through deposit in the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's internal mail system, this 12th day of February,1999:
Administrative Judge Adjudicatory File * (2)
Thomas S. Moore
- Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Presiding Officer Mail Stop: T-3 F23 Atomic Safety and Licensing Board U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Mail Stop T-3 F23 Washington,DC 20555 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555 Atomic Safety and Licensing Board FAX: 301-415-5595 Panel
- Mail Stop: T-3 F23 Administrative Judge U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Dr. Charles N. Kelber* Washington,DC 20555 Special Assistant Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Secretary * (2) ,
Mail Stop T-3 F23 Attn: Rulemakings and !
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Adjudications Staff Washington, DC 20555 Mail Stop: OWFN-16 Cl U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Michel A.Philippon Washington,DC 20555 13871 Capernall Road Carleton, MI 48117 Public Document Room' ;
Gelman Buildins ;
Office of Commission Appellate U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Adjudication
- Washington, DC 20555 l Mail Stop: OWFN-16 C-1 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington,DC 20555 4~$h=
isteven R. Hom Counsel for NRC Staff
~ . - .- .. . .