ML20214K185
| ML20214K185 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Wolf Creek, Fort Saint Vrain  |
| Issue date: | 05/22/1986 |
| From: | Russell W Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Gibson A, Paperiello C, Starostecki R NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I), NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II), NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20214K187 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8608190284 | |
| Download: ML20214K185 (5) | |
Text
.
C
)
4
- y
/
NY t ? M6 s
L l'
MEMORANDUM FOR:
Richard W. Starostecki, Director i
Division of Reactor Projects, RI Albert F. Gibson, Director Division of Reactor Safety, RII Carl J. Paperiello, Director Division of Reactor Safety, RIII J
Eric H. Johnson, Director t
Division of Reactor Safety and Projects, RIV Dennis F. Kirsch, Director Division of Reactor Safety and Projects, RV FROM:
William T. Russell, Director Division of Human Factors Technology, NRR
SUBJECT:
ALTERNATE APPROACH TO REQUALIFICATION EV4LUATIONS In our conference call of April 30, 1986, we agreed that alternate approaches-to the NRC evaluation of requalification programs, including pilot testing, should be assessed to conserve NRC resources. A list of facilities that have agreed to voluntarily participate in pilot testing is provided in.
Each facility requalification program is scheduled for the noted facilities so that the (pilot tested) gion make arrangements w evaluation this sunener. We request that each Reprogram evaluations are completed prior to the end of September. During October we will discuss and evaluate the results of the pilot testing. Any revision to requalificattoc evaluation policy will be promulgated early in FY-87.
Guidance on the type and level of NRC participation in these pilot tests is provided in Enclosure 2.
Our objective is to detemine whether this method of NRC participation in facility requalification examinations can provide us with sufficient information from which to judge the quality of the facility l
requalification program.
For budget purposes, the pilot tests will be considered as FY-19E6 requalification program evaluations.
bbjdc2 h
^
m I
5 )
St.te )
1 e a c: e m n o m o. u c o u o OFFICIAL RECORD COPY
- us.om me-4 o2
E' E Multiple Addressees Please contact Bruce Boger, FTS 492-4868, with your final schedule and any needs for additional guidance.
Original signed W William T. Russell Director Division of Human Factors Technology, NRR
Enclosures:
As stated cc:
J. Sniezek H. Denton D. Eisenhut R. Bernero T. Novak F. Miraglis J. Griffin (NUMARC WG#11)
D{/825/MEM0TOREG.DIV.DIR.
.OL6..ET........O. L.B..:. DH F T...... I mes)
.u.,p
..ag b;tb W.
B h..
5 /..v.3.../.8. 6.........
.5..
.. 8. 6........
utr >
romu uno so ucu o 4o OFFICIAL RECORD COPY
- u 5-
- 2 " ""~ #
1 ENCLOSURE 1 REGION FACILITY COMMENTS I
Pilgrim Written Only Salem Operating Test Only II Hatch None III Callaway None IV Wolf Creek None V
Byron 1 No RV plant scheduled for requal during summer.
4 4
I i
i
ENCLOSURE 2 NRC participation in the pilot test will be limited to prior NRC review / approval of the written requalification exam developed by the facility training staff, parallel grading of this exam, and prior review, observation and independent evaluation by an NRC examiner of the operating test conducted by the facility staff.
In general, the level of the NRC participation will be commensurate with the review required by the Examiner Standards for NRC contractor developed examinations.
The facility written exam should follow the guidance contained in ES-601 (Rev. 2) with respect to exam format, content, and length. The review of this exam should emphasize depth of knowledge required, comprehensiveness of the exam with respect to broad coverage of systems and procedures, and the relationship with the facility requalification program learning objectives.
Parallel grading of the written examination should be conducted on 20% of the licensed operators examinations developed by the facility staff. The grading can be a random selection performed concurrently with the facility staff grading or can be the selection of a h'igh, medium, and low score after the facility staff has graded the exams. The review of grading should emphasize the awarding of partial credit, consistency of scores, compliance with the answer key, and equivalency to the NRC grade (1 10% per category).
Evaluation of the operating exam should emphasize depth and breadth of questioning and comprehensiveness of simulator scenarios. An independent operating evaluation should be performed by the NRC for one candidate per
. operating test crew observed. NRC procedures (ES-302) for documenting this candidate's performance are to be used. Comparison of NRC and utility evaluations (i.e., parallel grading) will be used to determine if candidate weaknesses are properly evaluated and documented.
Additionally a subjective evaluation of the utility administered operating test should be performed using procedures similar those for NRC examiner certification (ES-105) for each utility examiner observed.
The utility requalification examination results, including their overall requalification program evaluation should be subjectively evaluated using ES-601 criteria as a guide. Utility evaluation of examination weaknesses should be reviewed to determine the adequacy of corrective action for programmatic weaknesses in the facility training program.
0
- - + -,