ML20206N580
| ML20206N580 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 01/10/1986 |
| From: | Stello V NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR OPERATIONS (EDO) |
| To: | |
| References | |
| TASK-PII, TASK-SE SECY-86-013, SECY-86-13, NUDOCS 8607010484 | |
| Download: ML20206N580 (43) | |
Text
. - -
_~
FOA a nsc oq'o$
E~
o i
=
\\...../
January 10, 1986 POLICY ISSUE S" 13 For:
The Commissioners From:
Victor Stello, Jr.
Acting Executive Director for Operations
Subject:
RESULTS OF OPERATOR LICENSING EXAMINATIONS AND REQUALIFICATION PROGRAM EVALUATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 1985 AND OPERATOR LICENSING EXAMINATION RESULTS FOR FISCAL YEARS 1984 AND 1985
Purpose:
To inform the Commissioners of examination, licensing and requalification activities for Reactor Operators and Senior Reactor Operators.
Discussion:
The enclosed graphs and tables report national operator licensing results for FY 1984 and FY 1985 and Regional requalification program evaluation results for FY 1985.
From the data available, it does not appear that candidate performance during FY 1985 differed significantly from FY 1984.
Examination results, broken down by license type and examination component, for FY 1984 and FY 1985 are presented in Enclosure 1.
FY 1985 examination results for each Region are presented in.
Generally, the pass rates of all Regions were consistent. The largest deviation was the pass rate on the Reactor Operator written examination, which ranged from 70%
to 90%.
However, comparative baseline data are not available to support a conclusion relative to the deviation. We will continue to evaluate examination results for trends and inconsistencies among Regions as part of our oversight function.
Contact:
Bruce A. Boger, NRR 492-4868 8607oto484 860110 PDR
-01 O
The Commissioners 2-During FY 1985, requalification programs at seventeen facilities were evaluated.
Initial evaluations indicated that eight programs were satisfactory, four were marginal and five were unsatisfactory. As a result of actions taken by the facility licensees after our evaluations, the five unsatisfactory programs were upgraded and are no longer.
considered unsatisfactory. The programs in the marginal category are being upgraded and will be reevaluated during FY 1986. The staff is presently reexamining the need for and the type of NRC involvement in requalification examinations in view of the significant overall progress in the training area over the past few years.
A graphical representation of requalification program evaluations is presented in and individual facility program results are presented in Enclosure 4.
,h j:6. r l }/[
Victor Stello,'Jr.
Acting Execut,1ve Director for Operations
Enclosures:
1.
Examination Results, FY 1984 and FY 1985 2.
Examination Results, Regions 1 through 5, FY 1985 3.
Requalification Program Evaluation Results, FY 1985 4.
Requalification Program Evaluations, by Facility 5.
Operator Licensing Tracking System Activity Status Report, Total (All Regions), FY 1984 and FY 1985 6.
Operator Licensing Tracking System Activity Status Report, Regions 1 through 5, FY 1985 DISTRIBUTION:
Conunissioners OGC OPE OI OCA ACRS EDO SECY f
+ - -.,
I ENCLOSURE (1)
EXAMINATION RESULTS, FY 1984 AND FY 1985 d
, n a
e -
l-I e
i EXAMINATIONRESULkS PERCENTAGE PASS VERSUS EXAM TYPE l
l TOTAL (ALL REGIONS)
TOTAL (ALL REGIONS)
FISCAL YEAR 1984 FISCAL YEAR 1985
,a ge4 M'
eg 8.'
w.
w.
M-M' a-m M
a.-
S.
(627)(580)(234)
(741)(695)(300)
(525)(500)(277)
(564)(521)(358)
RO SRO RO SRO LEGEND WRITTEN E ORAL Numbers in parentheses indicate total candidates taking exa" M sutaAroR
I l
ENCLOSURE (2)
EXAMINATION RESULTS, REGIONS 1 THROUGH 5, FY 1985 1
l i
I
i EXAMINATION RES'LTS U
PERCENTAGE PASS VERSUS EXAH TYPE FISCAL YEAR 1985 REGION 1 REGION 2 REGION 3 f
$41)(141)(69) (16c)(157)(95)
(sos)(se) (75)
(114)(es) (73)
(126)(125)(66)
(tro)(167)(12o)
RO SRO R0 SRO R0 SRO REGION 4 REGION 5 LEGEND M warrreu a.
M ORAL
=
M slMULArOR g
E 1
3
[-
g Numbers in parentheses indicate total candidates taking exam.
b (se) (40)
(ss)(se)(14h
- 57) (str (2s)
I ENCluSURE(3)
REQUALIFICATION PROGRAM EVALUATIONS, FY 1985
REQUALIFICATIO N EXAMINATIO N RESU LTS FISCAL YEAR 1985 LEGEND so-SATISFACTORY MARCINAL b[J UNSATISFACTORY i..
him-a g io-5 BEG FY 85 END FY 85 EVALUATION 17 FACat.JTIES EXAMINED i
ENCLOSURE (4)
REQUALIFICATION PROGRAM EVALUATIONS, BY FACILITY
1 RE00ALIFICATION PROGRAM EVALUATIONS The method for conducting requalification program evaluations changed considerably in Fiscal Year 1985. Revision 1 to NUREG 1021 (Operator Licensing Examiner Standards) completely modified nearly all aspects of the evaluations. The most significant change was a requirement to select the candidates examined by the NRC to ensure that, over a five-year period, ell licensed operators at a facility will take an NRC requalification examination. As a result of this revision, different gJidelines for administering requalification evaluation examinations were used during Fiscal Year 1985. The written examinations performed under the original Examiner Standards were partial examinations, i.e., only certain sections of the j
examination were prepared by the NRC.
The revised Examiner Standards require that the NRC develop the entire written exainination. However, determinations of Satisfactory, Marginal, or Unsatisfactory were made in accordance with the l
Examiner Standards in place at the time of the evaluation.
4 f
f f
l J
?
I 4
-- r -.-,
-..---,-vm_.
- - ~ ~.,
,,----.r--rvw=
ae
--t
-ee-=+a---w--
vs
~ - - - -
-"---+*ee--~w~--
- - - - '--*w~='---= " - - - *--
o k
REQUALIFICATION PROGRAM EVALUATION REGION 1 Facility:
Susquehanna Steam Electric Station Date(s):
10/84 Exam Results:
R0 SRO Total Pass / Fail Pass / Fail Pass / Fail Written Exam 7/0 9/0 16/0 Oral Exam 3/0 4/0 7/0 Simulator Exam 3/0 4/0 7/0 i
Overall Program Evaluation at the End of FY 1985: Satisfactory i
Comments: Requalification program very strong. No deficiencies noted.
i V
4 I
(
REQUALIFICATION PROGRAM EVALUATION REGION 1 Facility:
Millstone 2 Date(s):
12/84 Exam Results:
R0 SRO Total Pass / Fail Pass / Fail Pass / Fail Written Exam (Partial) 2/1 9/0 11/1 Oral Exam
- 2/0 2/0 Simulator Exam
- 1 NRC conducted and 1 facility conducted with NRC observing Overall Program Evaluation at the End of FY 1985:
Satisfactory Comments:
None h i
a i
l
~
REQUALIFICATION PROGRAM EVALUATION 1
REGION 1 Facility:
Shoreham Nuclear Power Station Dates (s):
11/84 Exam Results:
R0 SR0 Total Pass / Fail Pass / Fail Pass / Fail J
Written Exam 3/0 6/0 9/0 1
Oral Exam 3/0 6/0 9/0 Simulator Exam i
Overall Program Evaluation at the End of FY 1985: Satisfactory i
Comments:
None i
i
REQUALIFICATION PROGRAM EVALUATION REGION 1 Facility:
Haddam Neck Date(s):
11/84 9/85 Exam Results:
R0 SR0 Total Pass / Fail Pass / Fail Pass / Fail 11/84: Written Exam Oral Exam Simulator Exam
- R0/SRO pass / fail numbers not available 9/85:
This was an audit of the program Overall Program Evaluation at the End of FY 1985:
Satisfactory Comments: In November 1984, the requalification program was determined to be unsatisfactory based on poor performance on NRC administered examinations. The facility upgraded its requalification training program and submitted it to the NRC for review.
Following the determination that the program was satisfactory, it was put into effect without giving examinations.
In September 1985, an audit of the implementation of the approved requalification program was conducted and it was found to be satisfactory.
i REQUALIFICATION PROGRAM EVALUATION REGION 1 Facility:
Nine Mile Point, Unit I Date(s):
3/85 Exam Results:
R0 SRO Total Pan / Fail Pass / Fail Pass / Fail Written Exam 35/4 32/1 67/5 (Partial) 4 Oral Exam 4/0 6/1 10/1 Simulator Exam Overall Program Evaluation at the End of FY 1985: Satisfactory l
l Coments: None f
I t
i l
t
I l
r REQUALIFICATION PROGRAM EVALUATION REGION 2 Facility:
Brunswick Steam Electric Plant Date(s):
9/85 Exam Results:
R0 SR0 Total i
Pass /Fafi Pass / Fail Pass /Fafi Written Exam 4/0 9/2 13/2 Oral Exam Simulator Exam 4/0 9/2 13/2 Overall Program Evaluation at the End of FY 1985:
Satisfactory Comments: None i
e REQUALIFICATION PROGRAM EVALUATION REGION 2 Facility:
Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant Date(s):
9/84 3/85 7/85 Exam Results:
R0 SRO Total Pass / Fail Pass / Fail Pass / Fail 9/84: Written Exam 6/1 3/7 9/8 Oral Exam Simulator Exam 1/1 2/2 3/3 R0 SRO Total Pass / Fail Pass / Fail Pass / Fail 3/85: Written Exam 4/0 3/3 7/3 Oral Exam 5/0 7/0 12/0 Simulator Exam 3/0 6/0 9/0 R0 SRO Total Pass / Fail Pass / Fail Pass / Fail 7/85: Written Exam 1/1 6/1 7/2 Oral Exam 2/0 4/0 6/0 Simulator Exam 2/0 4/0 6/0 Overall Program Evaluation at the End of FY 1985:
Satisfactory Comments: Requalification examinations were administered by the NRC on three different occasions.' Initially, Hatch was considered to have an unsatisfactory requalification program. An accelerated requalification training program was satisfactorily implemented to upgrade the operators' knowledge level.
The last NRC requalification examination showed that their program had progressed to the extent that it could be considered satisfactory.
]
REQUALIFICATION PROGRAM EVALUATION REGION 2 Facility:
Crystal River Date(s):
3/85 5/85 7/85 Exam Results:
R0 SR0 Total Pass / Fail Pass / Fail Pass / Fail 3/85: Written Exam 2/5 3/7 5/12 Oral Exam 7/0 7/3 14/3 Simulator Exam R0 SRO Total Pass / Fail Pass / Fail Pass / Fail 5/85: Written Exam 7/1 5/1 12/2 Oral Exam 4/0 3/0 7/0 Simulator Exam R0 SR0 Total Pass / Fail Pass / Fail Pass / Fail 7/85: Written Exam 6/3 4/4 10/7 Oral Exam 7/0 7/0 7/0 Simulator Exam Overall Program Evaluation at the End of FY 1985: Marginal Comments: Crystal River's requalification program was considered unsatisfactory as a result of poor performance on NRC administered examinations. As a result, the only operators who are allowed to operate the plant are those who have passed an NRC examindtion.
Crystal River has submitted a requalification program to the NRC for review and approval.
Pending approval and satisfactory implementation of the program, the Crystal River requalification program will continue to be considered marginal.
REQUALIFICATION PROGRAM EVALUATION REGION 3 Facility:
Donald C. Cook Nuclear Plant Date(s):
10/84 Exam Results: NRC did not administer any examinations during FY 85.
Program evaluation was based on monitoring implementation of requalification program and review of the facility's examination.
Overall Program Evaluation at the End of FY 1985:
Satisfactory Comuents: Initial program evaluation in June 1984 was unsatisfactory. The operators were removed from licensed duties and placed in an accelerated requalification training program. The facility submitted the requalification examination for NRC approval prior to its administration.
The NRC monitored the administration of the examination in October 1984 and the results were satisfactory.
Another training assessment will be made in Fiscal Year 1986.
l r
REQUALIFICATION PROGRAM EVALUATION REGION 3 Facility:
Prairie Island Nuclear Power Plant Date(s):
3/85 6/85 Exam Results:
R0 SR0 Total Pass / Fail Pass / Fail Pass / Fail 3/85: Written Exam 1/2 4/6 5/8 Oral Exam 1/0 7/0 8/0 Simulator Exam 1/0 2/0 3/0 6/85:
NRC review and approval of facility administered requalification examination.
Overall Program Evaluation at the End of FY 1985:
Satisfactory Comments: Initial program evaluation in March 1985 was unsatisfactory.
The operators were removed from licensed duties and placed in an accelerated requalification training program. The facility submitted the requalification examination for NRC approval prior to its administration. The NRC monitored the administration of the examination in June 1985. The examination results were satisfactory and the operators were returned to licensed duties.
Therefore, the overall program was deemed satisfactory. Another training assessment will be made in Fiscal Year 1986.
I
REQUALIFICATION PROGRAM EVALUATION REGION 3 Facility:
Palisades Generating Station Date(s):
7/85 8/85 Exam Results:
R0 SRO Total Pass / Fail Pass / Fail Pass / Fail 7/85: Written Exam 1/2 4/1 5/3 (Partial)
Oral Exam Simulater Exam 8/85: NRC review and appioval of facility administered requalification examination.
Overall Program Evaluation at the End of FY 1985:
Satisfactory Comments: Initial program evaluation in July 1985 was marginal. The operators were removed from licensed duties and placed in an accelerated requalification training program.
The facility submitted the requalification examination for NRC approval prior to its administration.
The examination results were satisfactory and the operators were returned to licensed duties.
Therefore, the overall program evaluation was deemed satisfactory. Another training assessment will be made in Fiscal Year 1986.
l l
i r
REQUALIFICATION PROGRAM EVALUATION REGION 4 Facility:
Fort Calhoun Station f
Date(s):
11/84 3/85 1
Exam Results:
R0 SR0 Total Pass / Fail Pass / Fail Pass / Fail 11/84: Written Exam 2/0 2/3 4/3 Oral Exam 2/0 5/0 7/0 Simulator Exam R0 SR0 Total i
Pass / Fail Pass / Fail Pass / Fail 3/85: NrittenExam 2/0 2/0 Oral Exam Simulator Exam Overall Program Evaluation at the End of FY 1985: Marginal Connients: The November 1984 evaluation was marginal and operators were removed from licensed duties ar.d placed in accelerated training.
Re-examination took place in March 1985 of two of the operators who failed the examination in November 1984. Although they passed, they scored lower in the operational categories of the examination than in the other sections. This performance still indicated problems resulting from lack of on-shift experience as a shift supervisor and deficiencies in the content of material covered in the classroom.
For this reason, the evaluation of marginal will remain until the next comprehensive set of requalification examinations is administered by the NRC in November 1985.
a
~
REQUALIFICATION PROGRAM EVALUATION REGION 4 Facility:
Comanche Peak Station Date(s):
4/85 Exam Results:
R0 SRO Total Pass / Fail Pass / Fail Pass / Fail Written Exam 2/1 4/3 6/4 Oral Exam 3/0 7/0 10/0 Simulator Overall Program Evaluation at the End of FY 1985: Marginal Comments: Evaluation of marginal will remain pending completion of accelerated training and re-examination of licensed personnel who failed the written examinaticn. NRC administered requalification examinations in October 1985.
Results are not yet available, i
t REQUALIFICATION PROGRAM EVALUATION REGION 4 Facility:
Fort St. Vrain Date(s):
5/85 Exam Results:
R0 SRO Total Pass / Fail Pass / Fail Pass / Fail Written Exam 1/2 4/1 5/3 Oral Exam 3/0 5/0 8/0 Simulator Exam Overall Program Evaluation at the End of FY 1985: Marginal Comments: Evaluation of marginal will remain pending completion of accelerated training and re-examination of licensed personnel who failed the written examination.
NRC will administer the next set of requalification examinations in May 1986.
0 1
i REQUALIFICATION PROGRAM EVALUATION REGION 4 Facility:
Cooper Nuclear Station Date(s):
9/85 Exam Results:
R0 SRO Total Pass / Fail Pass / Fail Pass / Fail Written Exam 2/1 4/1 6/2 Oral Exam 2/1 5/0 7/1 Simulator Exam I
Overall Program Evaluation at the End of FY 1985:
Satisfactory Comments:
None
REQUALIFICATION PROGRAM EVALUATION REGION 5 Facility:
San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station, Unit 1 Date(s):
10/84 7/85 Exam Results:
R0 SRO Total Pass / Fail Pass / Fail Pass / Fail 10/84: Written Exam (Partial) 3/2 3/1 6/3 Oral Exam
- 2/0
- 2/0 4/0 Simulator Exam l
R0 SR0 Total Pass / Fail Pass / Fail Pass / Fail 7/85: Written Exam 4/0 3/0 7/0 Oral Exam 3/0 3/0 6/0 Simulator Exam
- 1 NRC conducted and 1 Facility conducted with NRC observing l
Overall Program Evaluation at the End of FY 1985:
Satisfactory Comments: The San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station Unit 1 (SONGS 1) requalification program was evaluated on two separate dates.
During the evaluation of October 1984, all personnel tested passed the NRC administered portions of the examination, while three people failed portions of the written examination administered by I
facility personnel. The facility and NRC grading were consistent, therefore, the requalification program was evaluated as satisfactory. This evaluation was performed under the original guidelines for requalification program monitoring.
In July 1985, the SONGS 1 requalification program was again evaluated, this time under the requirements of Revision 1 to the Examiner Standards and it was again determined to be satisfactory.
REQUALIFICATION PROGRAM EVALUATION REGION 5 Facility:
Washington Nuclear Project, Unit 2 Date(s):
11/84 Exam Results:
R0 SR0 Total Pass / Fail Pass / Fail Pass / Fail Written Exam (Partial) 2/1 6/1 8/2 Oral Exam
- 2/0
- 2/0 4/0 Simulator Exam 1/0 1/0 2/0
- 1 NRC conducted and 1 facility conducted with NRC observing Overall Program Evaluation at the End of FY 1985:
Satisfactory Comments:
None i
I t
D
,_..w-.,_
y
O O
w r
ENCLOSURE (5)
FY 1984 TO FY 1985
)
SNO4 I 8 C9 E1 R
E LLU AY
(
L LA LN AC AE 4 1
4 3 4
8 8 TS TK 6 0 8 9 8
4 7 OI OA 5 5 1
6 7 TF TT L
% x x %
x %
5 4.2 61.2 61 1115 13 83 I
RA 2
2 OF 1
1 7 4 2
1 9
T0 1
1 1
A L
//// //// // ////
UM x %
5 6.0 3 9.2 8 9.7 IS 99 15 27 27 SS 9
1 4
0 A 1828 2 5 7 2820 P
8 8 9 9 9
8 9 B
M E
TSYS 4 8
GT/ S NR0 T L
x x %
IO3 L
I 8 7.4 2 7.5 15 4062 75 48 KP/ U A
5 6
CE9 S F
0 8 0 0 4
0 7 AR0 E 8
1 1
1 1
R R L TSH A
//// //// // ////
UG N R GTU O O x x x x x
NAO I
S 23.4 6 0.5 8 3.4 15 38 75 12 ITR T S
3 4
1 8
SSH A A 4941 0 9 15 5962 N T N P
8 9 9 8 9
8 9 EY I
E CT3 M II8 A
LV/ X I1 E
RT0 OC/
TA0 A
1 R
L x %
E I
5 3.8 5 4.1 03.3 28 40 09 64 P
A 2
1 4
4 O
F 12 6 2 0 1
1218 NG 2
1 2 2 2
2 1
E T
//// //// // ////
T
% X x
x %
'c S 5 7.0 62 24.5 7 7.0 60 31 56 hS 3
5 4.
8 A 4743 7 0 18 4761 P
7 8 7 8 7
7 8 B
O O O O O
O O R R R R R
R R S
S S
S S
S E
L N
N D
A O
O A
T LI I
R O
AT T
G T
5 IA A
P 8
TC C
U
/
II I
3 NL L
1 IP P
5/
P P
A A
11 31 E
6 R
3:
2E 1T A
RD
R-1236315 OPERATOR LICENSING TRACKING SYSTEM TOTAL (AI.L REGIONS)
DATES 11/13/85 ACTIVITY STATUS REPORT 10/01/83 THROUGH 09/30/84 FISCAL YEAR 1984 LICENSING ACTIONS SISSUED SDENIED SHITHDRANN INITIAL RG -
418 142 52 APPLICATIONS SRO -
434 100 38 INST CERT -
113 48 32 LTD SRO -
7 0
0 REAPPLICATIONS -
RO -
74 19 6
SRO -
73 18 6
INST CERT -
14 2
1 LTD SRO -
0 0
0 UPGRADE -
SRO -
160 46 13 TOTAL -
RO -
492 161 58 SRO -
667 164 57 INST CERT -
127 50 33 LTD SRO -
7 0
0 RENEHAL -
RO -
425 2
0 SRO -
871 0
4 INST CERT -
1 0
0 LTD SRO -
6 0
0 4
l
'll l1
)S NO5 I8 G9 E1 R R LA LE AY
(
LH L
AE 6 4 9 3 7
5 4 LA TK 0 5 3 2 0
4 8 AC OA 5 3 2
5 5 TS TI OI TF L
% X
% x x
x %
3 6.3 40 1123 33 4 7.4 97 I
RA 2
1 2
OF 3 3 9 3 4
8 3 TO 1
3 1
1 A
L
//// //// // ////
UM
% x x
IS 3470 o947 87 33.0 93 SS 4 2 t
7 5
A 2127 0 6 5 2136 P
9 8 9 6 8
9 8 O
M E
TSYS 5 8
GT/ S NR0 T L
x x x x x
IO3 L
I 8941i 2811 7 e.
00.3 21 KP/ U A 3 2 4
CE9 S F
7 7 1
1 4
8 6 AR0 E O
1 1
d R
R L TSH A
//// //// // ////
UG N R GTU O O x X
% x NAO I
S 5149 5289 70 0099 ITR T
S 4 1
1 6
6 8 SSH A A 4232 8 8 16 4243 N T N P
9 9 4 8 9
9 9 EY I
O CT4 M II8 A
LV/ X I1 E
RT0 EC/
TA0 A
1 R
L x X X x x
x X E
I 37.507 1758 9 e.
4 8.9 47 P
A 0
3 0
O f 10 4
3 7 9
19 6
NA 2
1 2
1 1
1 E
T
//// //// // ////
T I
% X
% x x
RS 53.9 6 3.132 60 13 1 2.7 03 HS 2
6 2
9 A 3925 6 2 11 4043 P
7 8 9 7 8
3 8 O
9 O O 0 0 O
O O R R R R R
R R S
S S
S S
S E
L N
N D
A O
O A
T LI I
R O
AT T
G T
5 IA A
P 8
TC C
U
/
II I
3 NL L
IP P
1 5/
P P
11 A
A 31 E
6 R
3:
2E 1T A RD 1\\
l
R-1236315 OPERATOR LICENSING TRACKING SYSTEM TOTAL (ALL RECIONS)
DATE: 11/13/85 ACTIVITY STATUS REPORT 10/01/84 THROUGH 09/30/85 FISCAL YEAR 1985 r,
LICENSING ACTIONS RISSUED SDENIED SHITHDRAHN INITIAL RO -
373 125 84 APPLICATIONS SRO -
294 81 49 INST CERT -
4 0
0 REAPPLICATIONS -
RO -
39 4
9 SRO -
27 8
2 INST CERT -
5 1
1 LTD SRO -
1 0
0 UPGRADE -
SRO -
177 49 15 TOTAL -
RG -
412 129 93 SRO -
498 134 66 INST CERT -
85 25 27 LTD SR0 -
5 0
0 RENEHAL -
R0 -
544 0
0 SRO -
875 1
7 INST CERT -
16 0
4 LTD SRO -
8 0
0 Y
l l
e l
l l
i ENCLOSURE (6)
FY 1985
s l
a 1
NO I
G E
R LN AE 6 3 1
0 8
7 6 TK 3 0 1
1 4
4 6 OA 1
1 1
1 TT L
I 3583 0013 00 3395 RA OF 4 0 0 3 0
4 9 TO 1
3 A
L
//// //// // ////
UM x
IS 3 5.7 6 7.8 07 3027 40 65 SS 6
1 6
A 5 9 0 6 0
5 0 P
9 8 0 6 0
9 9 S
1 1
M E
TSYS 5 8
GT/ S NR0 T L
% X
% x x
% X IO3 L I
2 9.1 22 1717 00 3 2.1 33 KP/ U A
1 1
CE9 S F
8 1
6 6 0
9 8 AR0 E O
1 1
1 R
R L
d TSH A
//// //// // ////
UG N R GTU O O x %
% x
% X NAO I
S 3158 5353 40 8 8.4 47 ITR T S 2 9 4
2 SSH A A
11 8
3 3 0
1011 N T N P
9 8 4 8 0
9 9 EY I
G 1
CT4 M 3I8 A
LV/ X I1 E
RT0 OC/
TA0 A
1 R
L x %
x
% x E
I 4 6.1 15 0039 65 4 0.2 05 P
A 2
2 O
F 7 0
- 0 2 2
7 2 NO 1
1 4
1 1
1 E
T
//// //// // ////
T I
% x X x
% x HS 2 4.9 7 0.4 RS 45 5041 25 05 1
4 1
A 12 9
0 7 7
1317 P
8 8 0 5 8
8 8 O
1 O O O O O
0 O R R R R R
R R S
S S
S S
S E
L N
N D
A O
O A
T LI I
R O
AT T
G T
5 IA A
P 8
TC C
U
/
II I
3 NL L
1 IP P
5/
P P
11 A
A 38 E
6 R
3:
2E 1T l
A RD q
<,i i4
!li
W-1236315 OPERATC3 LICENSING TRACKING SYSTEM DATE: 11/13/85 ACTIVITY STATUS REPORT REGION: 1 l
10/01/84 THROUGH 09/30/85 LICENSING ACTIONS DISSUED ODENIED OMITHDRANN INITIAL RO -
108 33 33 APPLICATIONS SRO -
86 27 22 INST CERT -
18 10 4
LTD SRO -
2 0
0 REAPPLICATIONS -
RO -
11 1
1 SRO -
6 4
0 INST CERT -
1 0
0 LTD SRO -
0 0
0 UPGRADE -
SR0 -
45 6
5 TOTAL -
RO -
119 34 34 SRO -
137 37 27 INST CERT -
19 10 4
l LTD SRO -
2 0
0 l
RENEMAL -
RO -
184 0,
0 SRO -
298 0
1 INST CERT -
3 0
0 LTD SRO -
0 0
0 j
e; s'
1 a
I 2
NO IG E
R LN AE 5 7 5 5 5
0 7 TK 1
5 6
2 2 OA 1
1 1
TT L
x %
I 8051 0000 94 8 7.1 47 RA OF 1
6 0 0 1
0 8 TO 1
1 2
1 1
A L
//// //// // ////
UM
% x x %
X
% x 5 0.2 73.6 IS 69 2020 36 13 SS 6
3 6
A 9 3 0 0 8
9 1
P 3 8 0 0 7
8 8 O
1 1
M E
TSYS 5 8
GT/ S NR0 T L
x %
x x x IO3 L
I 4249 0000 52 4192 KP/ U A
CE9 S F
4 8 0 0 2
4 0 AR0 E O
1 1
R R L TSN A
//// //// // ////
UG N R GTU O O
% x
% x NAO I
S 11 3020 68 98 1 8.4 497 ITR T S
9 3
9 SSH A A
5 1
0 0 7
5 9 N T N P
9 9 0 0 8
9 8 EY I
O 1
1 CT4 M II8 A
LV/ X I1 E
RT0 OC/
TA0 A
1 R
L
% x E
I 63.1 14 0000 36 41 6 9.2 P
A 2
1 2
O F
4 3 0 0 0
3 1
NO 2 2 2
2 2 E
T
//// //// // ////
T I
x x x X RS 66 2040 04 3109 1 7.3 HS 8
5 8 9 A
5 6 0 0 9
6 8 P
7 7 0 0 7
7 7 O
1 1
0 O O O O
0 O R R R R R
R R S
S S
S S
S E
L N
N D
A O
O A
T LI I
R O
AT T
G T
5 IA A
P 8
TC C
U
/
II I
3 NL L
1 IP P
5/
P P
11 A
A 31 E
6 R
3:
2E 1TA RD
,l I
,l I
4 l
R-1236315 OPERATOR LICENSING TRACKING SYSTEM DATE: 11/13/85 ACTIVITY STATUS REPIRT REGION: 2 10/01/84 THROUGH 09/30/85 LICENSING ACTIONS 9 ISSUED SDENIED SHITNDRAMN INITIAL R0 -
95 36 27 APPLICATIONS SRO -
55 20 10 INST CERT -
16 9
9 LTD SRO -
1 0
0 i
REAPPLICATIONS -
RO -
6 0
2 SRO -
9 1
2 INST CERT -
2 0
1 LTD SRO -
1 0
0 UPGRADE -
SRO -
63 24 4
TOTAL -
RO -
99 36 29 SRO -
127 45 16 INST CERT -
18 9
10 i
LTD SRO -
2 0
0 RENEHAL -
RO -
129 0
0 SRO -
215 1
2 INST CERT -
5 0
4 LTD SRO -
0 0
0
! Ik O
8 4
I
+
3 NO I
G E
R LN AE 4 7 4 3 1
8 1
TK 2 1
5 2 7 OA 1
1 1
1 TT L
% x x x 35 0010 33 5 6.1 5 7.1 72 I
RA OF 7 3 0 0 4
7 4 T8 1
0 1
1 A
1 L
//// //// // ////
UM
% x IS 0357 1000 87 38 1 4.0 SS 6 8 1
6 A
2 6 0 0 5
215 P
9 8 0
8 9 8 O
1 M
E TSY -
S 5 8
GT/ S NR0 T L
X %
% x x
IO3 L
I 1036 0000 10 1844 KP/ U A
1 1
CE9 S F
9 2 0 0 2
8 2 AR0 E 8
R R
L TSH A
//// //// // ////
UG N R GTU O O X %
NAO I
S 44 3010 80 36 1 0.1 4 2.6 ITR T S
1 4
1 SSH A A
1117 0 0 8
1117 N T N P
9 9 0 0 9
9 9 EY I
S 1
1 CT4 M II8 A
LV/ X I1 E
RT0 OC/
TA0 A
1 R
L x
% x E
I 34 1 9.1 67 0010 64 1 7.3 P
A 2
1 2
O F
6 3 0 0 1
6 9 NO 1
1 5
3 1
1 E
T
//// //// // ////
T I
x %
RS 3113 2010 56 53.3 76 HS 0 0
3 0
A 1316 0 0 8
1310 P
8 8 0 5 6
8 8 S
1 U O O O O
D O R R R R R
R R S
S S
S S
S E
L N
N D
A O
O A
T LI I
R O
AT T
G T
5 IA A
P 8
TC C
U
/
II I
3 NL L
1 IP P
5/
P P
11 A
A 31 E
6 R
3:
2E 1T i
I A
RD
,i
)
R-1236315 OPERATOR LICENSING TRACKING SYSTEM DATE: 11/13/85 ACTIVITY STATUS REPORT REGION: 3 10/01/84 THROUGH 09/30/85 LICENSING ACTIONS SISSUED SDENIED SWITHDRANN INITIAL RO -
82 17 18 APPLICATIONS SRO -
87 16 6
INST CERT -
16 2
9 LTD SRO -
1 0
0 REAPPLICATIONS -
RO -
4 0
1 SRO -
4 2
0 INST CERT -
2 1
0 LTD SRO -
0 0
0 UPGRADE -
SRO -
35 14 4
i TOTAL -
RO -
86 17 19 l
SRO -
126 32 10 l
INST CERT -
18 3
9 LTD SRO -
1 0
0 RENERAL -
RO -
138 0
0 SRO -
216 0
4 INST CERT -
4 0
0 LTD SRO -
7 0
0 t t t4, e
O 4
XO M
CW E
a 4
m M M M e
e N W
m M w
m 4 O>
M M M M M
M M N M.m e.
6000 00 N M. m e.
g O
f N O O O
== w
- f N
e 4w NNNN \\\\\\\\ \\\\ NNNN 3E M M M M M
M M N N. M w O O O O.
DO NNew M
H w
N w
- N m N O O O
m N n n n n 5>M>
M m n CHN H 280 W M M M M M
M M MOM J
M o. f f.
O O. O O.
M f. f e.
90 ggs 3 UWe M M
w O-O O
M N (MO W e
9 E
E d HMZ 4
\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\ \\\\ \\\\\\\\
30 E E CW3 O O M M M M M
M M 240 M
N e. w e.
w S.O O.
M@NN.
MWE H m M w.
m of MWE 4 f W O O O
f N 2 > 2 e e O
O e e W>
M w
w Uke E MM4 4
d>\\
M Me W
EWO QUN MMO 4
w E
M M M M M
M M W
w e. w e O O O O.
w M.
w M.N M.
L O
O N O O m
O N i
2
=
w w
w W
W
\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\ \\\\ \\\\\\\\
H M
M M M M M
M M N
e w e e.
M O. M O.
.M N.
N N. c.
ON 3
g
.N m
O N O O f
e N e 4 O O e
W W w
w O O O O O
O O E E E E E
E E M
M M
M l
8 l
l W
J 2
2 O
4 O
O 4
W aw M
M O
4%
Q a
m M4 4
L HU U
3 MM M
M 24 a
MA A
MN A
L ww 4
4 Mw W
4 E
M=
NW
=>
94 EO
OPERATOR LICENSING TRACKING SYSTEM R-1236315 DATE8 11/13/85 ACTIVITY STATUS REPORT REGION: 4 10/01/84 THROUGH 09/30/85 LICENSING ACTIONS SISSUED SDENIED SHITHDRAlfN INITIAL RO -
54 18 4
APPLICATIONS SRO -
42 12 to INST CERT -
12 1
1 LTD SRO -
0 0
0 REAPPLICATIONS -
RO -
4 1
4 SRO -
7 0
0 INST CERT -
0 0
0 LTD SRO -
0 0
0 UPGRADE -
SR0 -
18 2
2 TOTAL -
RO -
58 19 8
SRO -
67 14 12 INST CERT -
12 1
1 LTD SRO -
0 0
0 l
RENEHAL -
RO -
27 0
0 SRO -
56 0
0 INST CERT -
0 0
0 LTD SRO -
1 0
0 l
l 4
r i>
i
)
l i
5 NO I
G E
R LN AE 6 7 6 2 4
2 3 TK 7 3 1
2 9 6 OA TT L
x x x
% x I
5435 1000 t1 6340 RA OF 0
1 0 0 7
1 0
TO 1
1 2
1 1
A L
//// //// // ////
UM
% x X X x
3 6.2 7 7.3 IS 35 4000 39 60 SS 4
1 4
A 9 8 0 0 2
8 0 P
8 8 8
9 8 9 O
M E
T SYS 5 8
GT/ S NR0 T L
% x X X x
IO3 L I
8519 1000 12 9224 KP/ U A
CE9 S F
0 2 5 0 4
1 3
AR0 E O
1 2
1 R
R L
TSH A
//// //// // ////
UG N R GTU O O x x
% X NAO I
S 8 5.3 1 8.5 31 3000 34 66 ITR T S
6 2
7 SSH A A
9 7 5 0 5
8 6 N T N P
8 9 7
9 8 9 EY I
O CT4 M II8 A
LV/ X I1 E
RT0 OC/
TA0 A
1 R
L
% x x
% x E
I 6262 1710 35 09 7 7.1 P
A 2 2
O F
4 6 6 0 2
9 5 NO 3
1 5
1 2
1 E
T
//// //// // ////
T I
x %
% x RS 08.3 43.5 18 4510 15 31 HS 5
1 2
6 A
5 3 3 0 7
0 4 P
6 8 9 5 4
7 8 O
O O D O O
O O R R R R R
R R S
S S
S S
S E
L N
N D
A O
O A
T LI I
R O
AT T
G T
5 IA A
P 8
TC C
U
/
II I
3 NL L
1 IP P
5/
P P
11 A
A 31 E
6 R
3:
2E 1TA RB iI E
'l i',
e l'
R-1236315 OPERATOR LICEOSING TRACKING SYSTEM DATE: 11/13/85 ACTIVITY STATUS REPORT REGION: 5 10/01/84 THROUGH 09/30/85 LICENSING ACTIONS SISSUED SDENIED SWITHDRAlGI INITIAL RO -
36 21 2
i APPLICATIONS SR0 -
24 6
1 INST CERT -
7 2
1 LTD SRO -
0 0
0 REAPPLICATIONS -
RO -
14 2
1 SRO -
1 1
0 INST CERT -
0 0
0 LTD SRO -
0 0
0 UPGRADE -
SRO -
16 3
0 TOTAL -
RO -
50 23 3
SRO -
41 10 1
INST CERT -
7 2
1 i
LTD SRO -
0 0
0 RENEHAL -
RO -
63 0
0 SRO -
87 0
0 INST CERT -
0 0
0 LTD SR0 -
0 0
0 e.
h*
4 k
e
.