ML20211E951

Requests That Util Be Informed of post-accreditation Review of Facility Training Program Starting on 861104.Review Will Focus on Listed Items

ML20211E951
Person / Time
Site:	Arkansas Nuclear
Issue date:	10/20/1986
From:	Cwalina G Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:	Knighton G Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Shared Package
ML20211E957	List: ML20211E951 ML20211G281
References
NUDOCS 8610280413
Download: ML20211E951 (2)

Text

o

$n nc o UNITED STATES g

g 8 o NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 5 j WASHINGTON, D. C. 20655

• • Enclosure

• • • • • g M 10 E MEMORANDUM FOR: George Knighton, Project Director Project Directorate #7 Division of PWR Licensing-B FROM: Gregory C. Cwalina, Acting Chief Maintenance and Training Branch Division of Human Factors Technology

SUBJECT:

POST-ACCREDITATION TRAINING REVIEW AT ARKANSAS NUCLEAR ONE Please inform Arkansas Power and Light that starting on November 4, 1986, we will be conducting a post-accreditation review of the Arkansas Nuclear One Training Programs. This review is in keeping with NRC policy as stated in SECY-85-1, " Policy Statement on Training and Qualifications of Nuclear Power Plant Personnel," which states that the NRC will continue to closely monitor the accreditation process and its results.

We expect to begin this review on the afternoon of November 4 at the Arkansas Nuclear One Training Center. We will conduct an exit briefing at Arkansas Nuclear One in the afternoon of November 6. J. J. Persensky will be the Team Leader for this review. He will be supported by Dolores Morisseau, Jennifer Koontz, and Joe Buzy of the Maintenance and Training Branch, Bruce Boger, Deputy Director of the Division of Human Factors Technology, and a member of the Region IV staff.

The staff will select tasks for review from the licensee's accredited programs, i.e., the nonlicensed operator, senior reactor operator, reactor operator, instrument and control technician and mechanical and electrical maintenance training programs. The review will focus on 1) how the tasks were analyzed, 2) how training objectives were derived from the tasks, 3) how training for the tasks was designed, developed, and implemented, 4) how trainees were observed and evaluated during training to detennine their level of task mastery, and 5) how feedback on training, trainee evaluations, and on-the-job perfonnance indicators are incorporated into revision and evaluation of the training programs.

The following is a general list of the types of documentation we will expect to use to answer questions about the licensee's training programs:

Instructions / Procedures related to:

- Systematic methods used to analyze jobs,

- Training organization goals, objectives, and plans,

- Responsibilities / authority of training organization personnel,

- Methods for evaluating / selecting instructional materials, methods, and media,

@ I)628$y/3 XA

l l l b

- Methods for organizing / sequencing of training.

- Methods for keeping training programs current.

- Maintenance of training records,

- Selection of candidates for training and the granting of waivers / exemptions from training,

- Evaluation of training programs, and

- Training, qualification, and evaluation of instructors.

• Task lists for the job (s) being reviewed Documentation related to:

- Development / validation of task lists.

- Selection of tasks for fonnal trainir.g,

- Analysis of on-the-job perfonnance problems and industry events, and

- Evaluation / audits of the training program (s).

Roster / organization chart for the training organization Training schedule for the past 6 months and the next 6 months Final accreditation team report To assist the review team, the person who coordinated the licensee's efforts toward accreditation should be available. In addition, any other cognizant training personnel involved with the accredited programs should be available to answer questior.s or clarify issues that are not readily apparent through document review. If possible, some trainees may be interviewed.

It should be emphasized that this is not a compliance review but rather a review to moniter the effectiveness of the INP0 accreditation program. As previously mentioned, this type of review is consistent with the provisions of NRC's Policy Statement on training and qualifications of power plant personnel.

Gregor'y C walina Acting Chief Maintenance and Training Branch Division of Human Factors Technology cc: R. Lee G. Vissing e

-,--- , - - - - .. - - ,w, -,.-..-----g