ML20205P864
| ML20205P864 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | 05000000, Turkey Point |
| Issue date: | 03/18/1986 |
| From: | Harold Denton Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Stello V NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR OPERATIONS (EDO) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20205D576 | List: |
| References | |
| FOIA-86-126, FOIA-86-127, FOIA-86-131, FOIA-86-166, FOIA-86-201, FOIA-86-209, FOIA-86-263, FOIA-86-80, FOIA-86-82, RTR-NUREG-1021 NUDOCS 8605220498 | |
| Download: ML20205P864 (2) | |
Text
- _____
l l '.
lbeA.)
nee
/
UNITEJ STATES 8
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION i
wasneworow.o.c. noses March 18,1986 MEMORANDUM FOR: Victor Stello, Jr.
Acting Executive Director for Operations FROM:
Harold R. Denton, Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
SUBJECT:
RESULTS OF TURKEY POINT UNITS 3 AND 4 REQUALIFICATION EXAMINATION NRC requalification examinations are given in accordance with ES-601 of NUREG-1021, Operator Licensing Examiner Standards. The standard requires that approximately 20% of a facility's licensed operators be given an NRC examination. A facility's requalification program is evaluated as satisfactory if greater than 80% pass, marginal if 60-80% pass, and unsatisfactory if less than 60% pass. Marginal and unsatisfactory evaluations require additional action by the facility to upgrade their requalification program.
During FY 1985, seventeen requalification programs were evaluated. Of these, eight were evaluated as satisfactory, four as marginal, and five as unsatisfactory. Thus far, in FY 1986, five requalification programs have been evaluated. Of these, three were evaluated as unsatisfactory and two as marginal.
Thehighfailurerate(9of13)oftherandomlyselectedTurkeyPoint operatorsresultedinanevaluationofunsatisfactory)fortheTurkeyPoint requalification program. FourReactorOperators(R0s and nine Senior ReactorOperators(SR0s)wereexamined. All four R0s failed the written examination and one failed the oral examination as well. Four of the SR0s failed the written examination. Of these, two also failed the oral y
examination. One SRO who passed the written examination failed the oral examination.
An NRR review of the Turkey Point examination showed that all questions were in accordance with NUREG-1122. The Knowledges and Abilities Catalog for Nuclear Power Plants Operators: Pressurized Water Reactors, and met all of the quality standards of NUREG-1021. The questions were operationally oriented and were of the appropriate knowledge level.
The facility generated twenty-nine comments during the approximately one week examination review. Of these, twenty-seven were accepted and incorporated into the answer key. Twenty-two of the coments resulted from ntw, incorrect, inadequate or additional reference materialt four coments were the result of NRC errors, and three were for semantic rewording of answers.
The only two comments that were not accepted were in the latter category.
QQM2xk/}ay
,f0 s
m
t.
n Victor Stello, Jr.
-2 March 18, 1986 The history of these operators' examination performance follows:
o Three of the four R0s had previously failed an NRC initial Itcensing examination.
o The four SR0s who passed had not failed previous NRC examinations.
o Two of the five SR0 failures had failed previous NRC examinations.
o The SR0 who failed the oral examination had failed two previous NRC oral examinations.
o One SR0 licensed before the TMI accident had a 75% overall exam grade which would be a failure today.
In our view, Region !!'s examination was of high quality.
The relatively large number of changes resulting from the utility review is a result of poor l
uti ity supplied examination materials. These changes were incorporated in the examination grading and thus had g impact upon ex' amination results.
Region !! followed NRR policy and proce,dures for the conduct of this examination. They are developing the necessary corrective actions to upgrade Turkey Point's unsatisfactory Requalification Training Program.
i Regarding the Turkey Point plant, based on discussions between Region !! and NRR on March 14 Region !! will be conducting written and oral examinations of operators not previously examined. These examinations will be used in i
order to identify a group of operators who are shown satisfactory for restart j
of Unit 3.
l If there are any further questions regarding NRR's policy and procedures for requalification examinations, please contact me or William T. Russell, Director, Division of Human Factors Technology.
/
ew Harold R. Denton, Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation cc:
J. Snierek N. Grace Rl!
J
,