ML20216B214

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Summarizes 971112-13 Training Managers Conference Conducted at Atlanta Federal Ctr & Exam Workshop on 980127-29.Agenda for Conference,List of Attendees & Presentation of Slides on Present Status of Operator Licensing Encl
ML20216B214
Person / Time
Site: Crystal River Duke Energy icon.png
Issue date: 03/03/1998
From: Peebles T
NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II)
To: Thomas Taylor
FLORIDA POWER CORP.
References
NUDOCS 9803130006
Download: ML20216B214 (23)


Text

Il L

L s. p

, March 3, 1990 l

l

! Florida Power Corporation l ATIN: Mr. Thomas P. Taylor, Director Nuclear Operations Training 8200 West Venable Street l-Crystal River, FL 34429 l

SUBJECT:

MEETING SUMMARIES - NOVEMBER 1997 NRC REGION II TRAINING MANAGERS' CCNFEREKE AND JANUARY 1998 NRC REGION II EXAMINATION WORKSHOP l

Dear Mr. Taylor:

This letter refers to the Training Managers Conference conducted at the Atlanta Federal Center on NovemM r 12 and 13. 1997 and the Examination

! Workshop conducted at the Richard B. Russell Building on January 27-29, 1998.

Representatives from all utilities in Region II participated in both meetings.

l The agenda for the Training Managers Conference is Enclosure 1 and the list of l attendees is Enclosure 2. We appreciate the participation of you and your

! staff and believe that the goal of providing an open forum for discussion of I

operator licensing issues was met. Mr. Gallo. Chief of the Operator Licensing l Branch. Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation (NRR), made a presentation on the L present status of operator licensing and his slides are Enclosure 3. During i the meeting. it was decided that a workshop on operator licensing examination writing was needed and uculd be held at the first of the year. Also, we have tentatively set the date for the 1998 Training Manager's Conference as l November 4 and 5.

Additionally. I am enclosing our preliminary schedule for FY 1998 and FY 1999, dated February 18, 1998, as Enclosure 4. Please review the schedule and supply comments to my staff or myself.

The Examination Workshop was conducted with participation by everyone. A list I

of attendees is Enclosure 5. A standard Job Performance Measures (JPM) format was reviewed anci commcnts collected by the Southeast Training Managers (SSNTA), with a final vei sion expected this summer. Concerns on the ex:mination process were collected and is included as Enclosure 6. These c.vcerns were forwarded to NRR for review.-

(Av N

.hh - .__

11 M Wmem s s

j%44 9003130006 900303

\ lllE!E!I}lE,II}Illllll

@f ADOCK 050 302

{DR

j. ,

J h FPC- 2 i

During the workshop..we discussed some of the problems with the initial-examination process as.it is being implemented be Revision 8 of NUREG-1021'.

l A discussion of those' issues is ene.losure 7.

l 'It is our opinion that this conference was beneficial and provided an excellent opportunity for open discussion of various concerns about the

l. Operator Licensing. process, especially the techniques of writing the licensing L examination.

i If you have any questions regardina the content of this letter.'please contact me at (404) 562-4638.

Sincerely,

j. Original signed by l ' thomas Peebles Thomas A. Peebles. Chief l Operator Licensing and Human Performance Branch Division of Reactor Safety l Docket No.: 50-302 License No.: DPR-72 1.

Enclosures:

1. Agenda for Training Managers' Conference j 2. List of Attendees for 1997 Training Managers' Conference
3. Mr. Gallo's Slides L 4. Region II Examination Schedules for FY 97 & 98

! 5. List of Attendees for 1998 Examination Workshop

6. Concerns Expressed during Workshop
7. Discussion of Workshop Issues cc w/encls:

R. A. Anderson, Senior Vice President.

Crystal River Nuclear Plant Distribution w/encls: (See page 3) l

e 4 4

I' FPC 3 Distribution w/encls:

PUBLIC J 1

B. Michael . DRS  ;

i I

l l I

I l

i-I l

OFFICE RII DRS SIGNAivas gg

mAuE reEEst.ES I DATE 3/ y /98 3/ /98 3/ /98 3/ /98 3/ /98 3/ /98 3/ /98 l COPY? YES NO YES NO YES NO YES NO YES NO YES NO YES NO l

i OFFICIAL RECORD COPY DOCUMEWT NAME: As\CRYLTR.JC I

I I

l l

r l

1 os

, 9 SOUTHEAST TRAINING MANAGER'S CONFERENCE U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Region II Atlanta, Georgia Meeting Agenda November 12-13,1997 Atlanta Federal Center Wednesday. 11/12/97 8:00 a.m. Conference Registration Conference Center Conference Room C 8:20 a.m. Introduction Thomas A. Peebles, Chief, Operator Licensing & Human Performance Branch 8:30 a.m. Welcome Johns P. Jaudon, Director Division of Reactor Safety 9:00 a.m. Welcome Bruce S. Mallett, Acting Deputy Regional Administrator 9:30 a.m. Overview of Pilot Exam Process

. Thomas A. Peebles, Chief, Operator Licensing & Human Performance Branch 10:00 a.m. Break 10:30 a.m. Examination Communications Ron Aiello, Ril Exam Development & Coordination l 11:00 a.m. Examination Security Issues Paul Steiner, RII I

i 11:45 a.m. Lunch 1:00 p.m. Resident Review of Training Paul Harmon, RII 1:30 p.m. Lessons Learned from Recent Exams Charlie Payne, RII 2:15 p.m. Break 2:30 p.m. Examination Questions and Answers George Hopper, RIl Examples of questions 4:00 p.m. Meet with Principal Examiners All 4:30 p.m. Adjorn ENCLOSURE 1

+ ,,

Thursday. 11/13/97 8:30 a.m. Recap Tom P' bles 8:45 a.m. Reactivity Changes and Other Issues Robert M. Galia, Chief Operator Licensing Branch, NRR 9:30 a.n , Medical Exam Issues - Conditions Charlie Payne, RII 10:00 a.m. Break 10:15 a.m. Open Session - Or.her Issues Training Managers 12:00 p.m. Adjorn 1

I W

ENCLOSURE 1

o .

REGION ll TRAINING MANAGERS CONFERENCE NOVEMBER 12-13,1998 Timothy L. Norris . Onsite Engineering General Manager Brian Haagensen PSHA CP&L

, Larry Dunlap BK Supv. Ops Cont Tmg Rick Gamer HR Supv Ops Tmg Tom Natale RBL Supt Ops Tmg -

William Noll . BK. Ops Tmg Supv Max Herrell BK Trng Mgr .

Scot Poteet RB Exam Team Leader Crystal River - FPC Jack Springer ~CR Supv Simulator Tng Tom Taylor CR Dir Nuc Ops Tmg Duke Pogg Garmon Clements CT Human Perf Mgr )

Camden Eflin OC Ops Trng Richard P. Bugert Corp Ops Trng Spec Gabriel Washburn OC Req Team Leader l Charles Sawyer Corp Sr Tech Spec Ronnie B. VAite, Jr MG Trng Mgr .

E.T. Beadle CT Init Lic Exam Leader William H. Miller CT Tmg Mgr I Al Lindsay MG Ops Tmg Mgr Paul Stovall . OC Mgr Oper Trng Bentley Jones OC Tmg Mgr Paul Mabry OC Ops Line FP&L Maria Lacal TP Tmg Mgr Philip G. Finegan TP Ops Trng Supv Dennis L. Fadden SL Services Mgr Jo Magennis Corp Tmg Assessment Spec Kris Metzger SL Ops Trng Supv Southem Nuclear (SNC)

J. M. Donem FA Sr Inst Ops. Trng John C. Lewis HT Trng & EP Mgr Tom Blindauer FA Sr Pit Inst

~ Joe Powell- FA Sr inst Ops Tmg Bill Oldfield FA Nuc Ops Trn Supv q l

Southem Nuclear (SNC) (cont'd oaae 2) i ENCLOSURE 2 I

e a

,s - - - ~ ~ - - ~ - - u_w _ , , ,

OPERATOR LICENSING INITIAL EXAMINATION RULE CHANGE Region ll Training Managers Conference Novernber 13,1997 Robert M. Gallo, '

Chief, Operator Licensing $Nmeh, NRR l

l l

l ENCIDSURE 3 C

]

HISTORY SECY 95-75 (3/95): Proposed change 1 GL 95-06 (8/95): Solicited vo unteers ROI 95-25 (8/95): Pilot guidance 10/95 - 4/96: Original pilot exams o

5/1/96: CRGR brie"ing o

SECY 96-123 (6/96): Pilot results o

SECY 96-206 (9/96): Pros and cons l

1 o GL 95-06, Sup.1 (1/97): Voluntary continuation of pilot process o NUREG-1021, Interim Rev. 8 (2/97) o SECY 97-79 (4/97?: Proposed rule i o

02 FR 42426 (8/97?: Proposed rule

. _ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . _ . . 1

e THE PRCPCS$D RULE

3. A new s 55.40 is accec to reac as follows:

5 55.40 Imp ementation.

(a) Power reactor facility icensees shall--

(1) Prepare the requirec site-specific written examinations anc operating tests; (2) Submit the written examinations anc operating tests to the Commission for review and approval; and

($) Proctor and grade the NRC-approved site-specific written exsmiristions.

. l i

1 l

THE REST OF THE RULE -

(b) In jeu o requiring a specific power reactor :aciity licensee to prepare the examinations anc tests or to proctor anc grace the site-specific written examinations, the I Commission may elect to perform I tiose tas<s.

L (c) The Commission will prepare anc I

administer the written examinations and operating tests ut non-power reactor facilities. '

l

i OTHER CONSIDERATIONS 1

77e N9C wi prepare one exam per Region per :ca encar. year Facility licensees are expectec to use t7e guicance in \ UR,EG- 021

.\lC wi approve deviations

\lRC wi not compromise statutory responsibiities NRC is committec to maintaining quality, leve of difficulty, consistency, anc security NRC intends to use its "ull '

enforcement authority against  :

persons who willfully compromise an exam in violation of 55.49

BACKGROUND

- Goal was to improve e"iciency w1i e maintaining ef"ectiveness Eliminate reliance on NRC contractors (except GFE)

Increase facility involvement Maintain examination qua ity and difficu ty

- Remain consistent wit, t7e Act and Part 55 C7anges shou d be transparent to I license applicants i

a Initial licensing program was not broken

MILESTONE SCHEDULE

' 0/2' /97:Comnient perioc' enaea 4/1/98: leso.ve comments; revise ru,e and \ UREG ' 021; seek

{

Office concurrence '

4 4/98: Brief CRGR and ACRS 5/22/98: Obtain Office concurrence anc' ceLiver to EDO

.~ 6/98: Oatain EDO anc Commission '

Concurrence 7/98: 3 ublish t7e fina rule anc Revision 8

' 2/31/98: Implement rule and Revision 8

~

i  !

i'  !: i  ;

poT h h T Or F ee r T 1 S i

1 r o Pg i

Y E x

a e o /n 9u i i r

o n l

t 9c 9g 1 a t a 7e 6h t a 9 m is s l n

l C 9 s g u l

Y 2

2 5

t t s 1 e 3 9 5 7 9 4 9 W so

t. f 1

/ 2 /

4 9 2 /

7 3 9

/

1 9

4 r

i R

t ao 4 1

% 95% 38% 45% % t e

O p n 2 n p e e 1 O

a e 3 9 5 8 8 9 5 9 9 p E l

x 1 3

1

/9 0 0 e R X

a a / / 5 / 3 8 r 5% 48% 45%  % taO A 1

r  %

e m 4 7 i 1 n p p l

1 g

M eu 4 8 ns 2 8 4 6 9 3 7 8 5 8 5 4 8 9 T oR R

d / /

o

/ / 3 2 E 8% 45% %

1 io A% 5 t O a

S nn g e A 9 ,' 5 l 2

U L _

R 3 9 1

0 9 1

O /4 3 9 8 9 W S T a 52%

n 0 6 0

/4 1

0 %

6

/

1 4

4

% 29% %

6 3

/

9 5 t r

iR e O t

S __

6 4 n d _

o

n 2 9 1

O _

~ 3 3 9 8 9 p

> e /45 9 89 7 6- 7 9 eS

/2 /6 5 r lgS R aRO 1 /

g:: 2% 0%

4 1

4  % 9% 1  % t i

- 9 6 3 _ n g

z O 2 1 2 9 9 6 6'

/ 0 5' 8

/

1 9

/

3 1 9 1

/

8 9 3 -O 9 2

TS oR 4

2% 0%  % 29% % t _

1 a O -

3 5 7

4 l 1

4 _

-ll -

s

t FY99 INITIAL EXAM RESULTS Fcbruary 20,1998 RO SRO-l SRO-U TOTAL Date Plant Chief Pass # Pass # Pass # Pass 0 9/28/98 Sequoyah MEE 4 10/5/98 Harris RFA 4 2 3 10/19/98 B. Ferry WFS write DCP 4 4 11/30/98 Oconee & MEE 6 6 12/14/98 11/30/98 St Lucie & RSB 15 15 l 12/14/98 l

'l 1/25/99 McGuire & DCP 14 1 15 1 2/8/99 1/25/99 C. River & RFA 10-12

{

2/8/99 3/15/99 Watts Bar & RSB 7 5 3/29/99 l r

3/29/99 Surry & RFA 6 2 4 4/12/99 j 5/17/99 Catawba & 15-18 5/31/99 l 5/10/99 Farley 2 6 Watts Bar ? 6/99 6 4 8 1

07/ /99 Robinson? 4 1 1 07/ /99 C. River? '

08/ /99 Turkey Pt? 20 9/15/99 Summer? 4 09/ /99 Sequoyah ?

_99

'?' designates tentative No Initial exams scheduled for: North Anna L

710/18/99 Brunswick- 9 candidates l 710/ /99 B. Ferry 4r, 4i, 4u 710/25/99 Flatch Br?

i 710/ /99 St. Lucie 2 wk j 712/13/99 Vogtle- Sr, 51, 2u ENCLOSURE 4

kN , FY 98 INITIAL EXAM RESULTS t [10/1/97 - 9/30/98]

FIbru:ry 20,1998 RO SRO-I SRO-U TOTAL Exam PLANT CHIEF PASS # PASS # PASS # PASS #

Week 10/14/97 St. Lucie & - GTH 6 6 1 1 7 7 10/20 11/14/97 Cr. River RETAKE RFA 1 1 1 1 12/1/97 Summer JFM 8 8 8 8 12/1/97 Catawba & DCP 2 3 4 5 6 6 14 12/15 3/2/98 Farley RETAKE RFA 1 1 2/23/98 Robinson + 1 op RSB 3 1+1 1 6 retake 4/13/98 Vogtle (Mellen write) GTH 4 2 6 5/11/98 Brunswick & DCP 5 3 3 11 5/25/98 w Sequoyah Retake + LSM 3 3 6/1/98 op RFA RSB l 6/29/98 Crystal River MEE 6 6 6/22/93 St. Lucie & GTH 8 4 8 7/6/98 8/10/98 Turkey Point DCP 8 8 8/17/98 North Anna & RSB 8 1 6 15 8/31 9/28/98 Sequoyah MEE 4 4 54 28 26 108 RESULTS TO DATE 16 17 5 6 7 7 28 30

'&* designates examinations that will require two weeks to administer

. No exams scheduled for B. Ferry Occ, nee Harris Surry Hatch W. Bar

', McGuire ENCLOSURE 4

l REGION ll WORKSHOP - OPERATOR LICENSING EXAMINATIONS i.

JANUARY 27 - 29,1998 Exam Workshop Attendees

! l'

Charlie Brooks Asst Manager, Ops Trg - INPO Frank S. Jaggar Examiner-WD Associates Ken Masker Senior Licensed instructor Rochester Gas & Electric, R. E. Ginna NPP i

Bob Niedzielski Exam Developer- Baltimore Gas & Electric James F. Belzer instructor- CCNPP/BGE Max Bailey Region lil Operator Licensing Examiner CP&L l Gregg Lualam LOR - Supervisor - Brunswick l William Noll Supt Ops Training - Brunswick

Tony Pearson initial Training - Brunswick

! Richard Edens LOR instructor - Brunswick l

Rick Garner Sup - OTU - Harns  !

Terry Toler Project Tech Spec - Hams I Wiley Killette Project Tech Spec - Harns Scott Poteet Exam Team - Robinson Bill Nevins- Instruct Tech - Robinson 1

Crvstal River - FPC Alan Kennedy Senior Licensed Instructor l Johnte Smith Training Supervisor l i

Jack Springer Training Supervisor Duke Power Alan Whitener Ops instructor i Edward A. Shaw Ops Instructor Bobby Ayers Ops Instructor - Oconee Steve Helms Trat.,ing Super Charles Sawyer Initial Training - McGuire Reggie Kinvay initial Trining Lead i E. T. Beadle Nuclear instructor -f;N_S James K. Black Nuclear Instructor- DRS l Gabriel Washburn Nuclear Instructor - QN_S Camden Eflin' Team Leader - HLP - Oconee (Exam Workshop Attendees cont'd - See page 2)

ENCIDSURE 5

L

l' , .

E ffj 2

l- (Exam Workshop Attendees cont'd)

I FP&L

-Ivan Wilson Operations Manager i Kris Metzger ~ Ops Training Supervisor- St. Lucie j Roger, Walker - Instructor - St. Lucie Tim Bolander Instructor _- St. Lucia.

David P. Clark - Instructor - St. Lucie

' Maria L. ' Laca! Training Manager- Turkev Point Rich Bretton - Ops Cert Trng Sup - Turkev Point Philip G. Finegan Ops Trining Supervisor - Turkev Point i

Michael E. Croiteau Cont Trng instructor - Turkey Point Southern Nuclear (SMQ l_

Joel L. Deavers Senior Instructor- Farlev i Scott Fulmer Training & Emergency Preparedness Manager- Farlev .i

. Gerard.W. Laska ' Training Instructor- Farley i Charlie Edmund Plant instructor- Hatch l David Gidden Training Supervisor- Hatch Ed Jones Plant Instructor - Hatch Dan Scukanec _ Ops Tmg Supv - Vogtle Fred Howard Plant Instructor- Vogtle 1

L Viroinia Power Keith Link Requal ..... - North Anna

. Ed Trask Instructor- North Anna  ;

l; Joe Scott Supervisor Operations Training - North Anna i

! Ken Grover - Senior Instructor (NUC) - Surry l l Harold McCallum Supervisor Ops Training - Surry  :

i Paul K. Orrison Ops Instructor - Surry i

]yA l Ray Schorif . instructor - Browns Fer.ty )

Denny Campbell Instructor - Browns Feny Bob Greenman Training Manager - Browns Ferry - l Marvin Meek Instructor'- Browns Ferrv  !

' A. R.- Champion _

Instructor - Browns Ferry L

Rick King Sr Ops Instructor - Seauovah Frank Weller - Instructor - Seouovah

Phillip H.- Gass Sim Instructor - Seouovah Ed Keyser Instructor- Seavovah Harold Birch Instructor - Seauovah

(' Exam Workshop Attendees cont'd - See page 2)

r 3

(Exam Workshop Attendees cont'd)

. TVA cont'i l Terry Newman SRO Instructor - Watts Bar l Rancy Evans SRO Instructor - Watts Bar f Rick O' Rear Sift Manager- Watts Bar i

V. C. Summer- SCE&G Perry Ramicone Ops Instructor Bruce L. Thompson Ops Instructor William R. Quick Ops Instructor l

I l

l l

l l

i

i-CONCERNS EXPRESSED DURING THE REGION ll EXAMINATION WRITING WORKSHOP The following is a condensation of the concems received from the attending facilities during the January 1998 Workshop on Examination Writing. The workshop attendees and I would appreciate your consideration of the concems during your revision to the Examiner Standards.

1) Security requirements are too restrictive, considering the limited resources 1- available. Also, more guidance on minimum security expectations is needed.

(three comments) l 2) The NRC should develop the sample plan as this would save both utility and NRC l resources. (two comments)

3) If independent groups generate the audit and licensing exams, some overlap should be allowed. (one comment, also I believe the standards allow this now?)
4) The K/A catalog contains errors and omissions and should be corrected, or at the least an errata sheet of know errors should be published. (two comments)
5) If an exam bank item has not been used during the licensing class, the exam item should be considered at " face value" for the licensing exam. (one comment)
6) The length of time allowed for written exams should be revised to a more reasonable period. Does this time also apply to continuing education.

(one comment, I had commented that the length of time did not apply to requalification exams the utilities conducted.)

)

7) The NRC should periodically publish problem areas encountered during the exam l process and distribute it to all training managers. (one comment)

I

8) The facilities cppreciated the workshop. They want Region 11 to have another workshop in about six months. The next time they want to concentrate on good and bad examples of written and operating test items and the sample plan. (six comments)

ENCLOSURE 6

v lf . ,

l9 l

DISCUSSION OF WORKSHOP ISSUES

.During the workshop we discussed some of the problems with the revised o)erator licensing examination process as implemented by Revision 8 of i NJREG-1021. The following were three of the principle issues discussed and a summary of the response given by NRC's Region II Operator Licensing staff.

1. Why has exam development take so many man-hours? Some faci 1ities did not fully understand our methodology. concepts and expectations for l developing the initial examination such as content validity, plausible distractors and other psychometric issues. The NRC did not recognize the variance across facilities in their depth of understanding. As a l result, some facilities submitted examinations with the quality lower
'than expected and these examinations did not meet the standards l described in NUREG-1021. The amount of resources required to modify the i examinations to meet the standards was more than either the facility or l the NRC had anticipated. There was general agreement during the workshop that more discussion with the facility examination writers and reviewers, such as these workshops, would better align the facilities'
l. original products with the standards of NUREG-1021 and reduce the l resources required to develop an acceptable examination.

"I l

2) W) has the NRC raised the level of difficulty of the examinations?

Many participants felt that the NRC was " raising the bar." We stated

that the purpose of the initial operator licensing examination is'to l test valid knowledges, skills and abilities required to safely carry out

! duties as a licensed operator at a specific facility. The examination should be written to a discrimination level not specific to the quality of the facility's training program, but so that a minimal competent l operator, with specific site knowledge and skills, will pass the l examination. Therefore. the level of difficulty of the examination should not vary significantly from site to site. The concept of discrimination validity is that a given test item is written at a level which will discriminate between a competent and less than competent operator. In some cases, the NRC examination reviews have adjusted the discrimination validity (difficulty) in order to achieve rmion-wide consistency on what is required of a competent operator. oe try to create an examination such that an applicant who is capable of safely operating the plant will achieve a score of 80 percent or greater. For i facilities that prepare candidates beyond the minimally qualified level. I we would ex)ect the average score to be higher. Historically, nationwide 1RC examination scores have averaged approximately 85 percent, which is a reasonable benchmark and expectation for a 4 discriminating criterion-referenced examination.

I explained ' hat I use a mental description of a minimally competent i o)erator to decide if the question is one that he/she needs to know and w1 ether the overall exam is targeted for that person to achieve a score '

of 80%. An 80% score on the written examination for a minimal competent candidate does not correlate to an 80% pass rate and we have no goal L

I ENCIOSURE 7

I q-l 1

2 regarding pass rate. Overall, we did not intend to change the 'bar' and are reviewing results to ensure our practice meets our intent. l I

3) Why have sorne applicants not been able to corrplete the examination in the four hours currently allowed? Prior to the current examination revision, we had two actions in the implementation phase. One was the improvement in the plausibility of distractors and the other was standardizing the percent of comprehension and analyses questions. In the last two years, we have improved our identification of poor distractors. A question does not have discrimination validity if the distractors (i.e. incorrect answers in a multiple choice test) can be eliminated by a less than com)etent operator due to psychometric flaws in the question structure. T1ese types of flaws are detailed in Appendix B of NUREG-1021. At the workshop, several examples of these psychometric flaws were illustrated and discussed. Answering questions with incorrect but plausible distractors should not take longer for a candidate who is sure of the answer, but does take longer for the candidate who must eliminate each distractor. Also, in general, comprehension / analyses cuestions require more thought process than memory level questions anc consequently more time. The recuirement for a fifty percent minimum of higher level questions was basec on a review of the last two years of examination audits and an effort to standardize <

the level of examination difficulty.

We stated that the ft. nour time limit for the written examination is under review by the NRC for possible extension of the limit and that extensions may be granted in accordance with the examiner standards.