4.0 Summary of Major DCISC Review Topics, 17th Annual Report - July 1, 2006 thru June 30, 2007
4.22 Training and Development Programs
4.22.1 Overview and Previous Activities
This section of the Annual Report has been renamed by DCISC as “Training and Development Programs” from “Learning and Development Programs”. The focus is on formal environments created to transfer specific knowledge and skills to individuals within the organization for their individual development. Organizational Development is included in Section 4.14 “Organizational Effectiveness and Development”.
The DCISC reviewed the following training items during the previous (2004-2005) reporting period:
- Observe Operator Training on Plant Simulator
In the previous period DCISC concluded that the performance of a DCPP operating crew handling a plant transient on the plant simulator during a training exercise appeared satisfactory. Training personnel appeared knowledgeable, and the plant simulator operated smoothly with no problems.
4.22.2 Current Period Activities
During the current period (2005-2006) the DCISC reviewed the following Learning and Development subjects:
- Supervisor Effectiveness and Training
- Technical and INPO-Accredited Training
- Licensed Operator Examination Performance
Supervisor Effectiveness and Training
The DCISC Fact-finding Team met with Ardela Daniels, Organization Effectiveness Manager, at the January 17-18, 2007 Fact-finding Meeting (Volume II, Exhibit D.6, Section 3.7) to discuss the status of Supervisor Effectiveness and Training.
The key elements for supporting supervisor effectiveness were:
- Clear Roles & Responsibilities
- Aligned Priorities
- Adequate Management Support
- Clear and Effective Initiative
- Reasonable Workloads
Current efforts underway are 1) PG&E Leadership Academy (100% supervisors to attend either Leadership Academy or Crucial Conversations in 2007); PG&E Culture Change Initiative (100% participation, currently in reinforcement phase); and Crucial Conversations Roll Out in 2007. Additional efforts underway are:
- Leadership Coaching and Development Program
- Additional Coaching Efforts
- Department Supervisor Development
The DCPP leadership team is encouraging feedback from employees at the various meetings. The two Vice-Presidents are behind the Management Review Meetings and support them. They plan to improve the Performance Improvement (PI) Roll-up by getting more involvement by craft and individual contributors.
Operations now has a full time coach to support training of operators. He participates in training and performs observations of training instructors. The coach reports to the Operations Manager and is a Senior Reactor Operator (SRO). There are two coaches from PG&E Corporation spending 100% of their time coaching. The one coach from Operations spends 100 % of his time coaching and there are two coaches from Human Performance spending about 50 % of their time coaching and one coach from her department spends about 80 % of his time coaching.
DCPP has external consultant coaches for the Officers who spend about 3 months coaching. Each Officer, Director, Manager, and Supervisor will have a coach assigned to them by March 30, 2007. This coaching is a company wide effort, but DCPP is making this a special effort in Leadership Coaching and Development (LCD) by integrating the many parts of coaching using the INPO model. INPO has been assisting DCPP with this effort as DCPP is considered to be one of the leading utilities in the area of Organizational Effectiveness. There is also improvement by allowing employees solve problems. DCPP has Supervisor alignment meetings monthly.
DCPP has made significant progress with the Supervisor Effectiveness and Training Program. There has been a major change in the DCPP leadership team which is encouraging feedback from employees at the various meetings. DCPP will improve the coaching skills of the extended leadership team by having each leader assigned to a coach from the PG&E Leadership Coaching and Development (LCD) group by March 30, 2007. DCPP hopes to make large improvements in their extended leadership team when they complete the coaching process.
Technical & INPO-Accredited-Training Program
- The DCISC Fact-finding meeting met with Joe Haynes, DCPP Training Manager, at the March 21-22, 2007 Fact-finding Meeting (Volume II, Exhibit D.7, Section 3.12) to review the technical and INPO-accredited training program.
The Accredited Training Program (ATP) includes the following:
| Operator | |
|---|---|
| - Non-Licensed Operator | - Reactor Operator |
| - Senior Reactor Operator | - Shift Supervisor |
| - Continuing Training for Licensed Personnel | - Shift Technical Advisor |
| Technical | |
| - Chemistry Technician | - Radiological Protection Technician |
| - Engineering Support Personnel (ESP) | - Mechanical Maintenance Personnel and Supervisor |
| - Instrument and Control Supervisor | - Electrical Maintenance Personnel |
These programs are accredited by INPO’s National Academy for Nuclear Training and are subject to DCPP’s Program Directive TQ2, “Accredited Training Programs,” Revision 4, January 30, 2007. The Directive requires use of a Systematic Approach to Training (SAT) employing a results-oriented, performance-based approach. In addition to INPO’s requirements, the programs must meet the requirements of the NRC. The DCPP Directive specifies lower-tiered Inter-departmental Administrative Procedures (IDAPs) for the Accredited Training Programs:
Each of the two (Operator and Technical) sets of six training programs is evaluated for accreditation renewal every four years on a two-year off-set schedule. DCPP’s Technical training programs will be evaluated in 2007 and Operations programs in 2009. Results from the last Operator and Technical training program evaluations, two and four years ago, respectively, contained no team findings or concerns.
Every two years, DCPP assesses all 12 programs against all six INPO Objectives (using two objectives at a time). The assessment team includes DCPP and external personnel. The last assessment cycle was in November 2006. Each month a program has its evaluation presented to management. To date, all issues have been corrected using the Corrective Action Program. Additionally, performance effectiveness reviews are performed by the line organizations and students. Instructors are evaluated at least annually by observation and feedback from students.
A recent finding from the self-assessment reported that individuals on some jobs were not documented as specifically qualified for each task they were performing. The self-assessment concluded the problem to be the difficulty for line management to easily determine assigned individuals’ qualifications. The system has been improved. Line management checks the system daily and before work is performed on equipment. There were no concerns about use of unqualified individuals during the recent February 2007 INPO evaluation; however, there was an INPO Area for Improvement (AFI) regarding the number of dropouts (approximately 50%) from operator licensing class. DCPP had identified this beforehand and initiated a NCR to evaluate and correct it. One leading cause of dropouts is the requirement to give union-represented employees priority in being selected for licensing class, although certain ones may not be the best qualified. DCPP is working to resolve this issue.
DCPP has what appears to be an effective Institute of Nuclear Power Operations (INPO)-accredited training program in that (1) they had no INPO findings or concerns at the previous two training program accreditation evaluations and (2) they have a rigorous system of self-assessments, feedback, and regular presentations to management for the accredited programs. DCPP is preparing for accreditation renewal of its Technical Training Programs in June 2007.
Licensed Operator Examination Performance
At the June 14, 2007 DCISC Public Meeting (Volume II, Exhibit B.9, Page B.9-23) Mr. Ken Langdon, Director Operations Services, reviewed the performance of license candidates, which saw six of eleven candidates achieving success in obtaining NRC license in May 2007. Previous success rates for DCPP candidates averaged 96%. Actions to improve performance have included addressing labor relations issues, more effective candidate selection and recruitment, elimination of unnecessary course burdens and increasing the quality of line leadership in Operations training. Additional actions are being taken to ensure the current class of seventeen candidates is successful. DCPP assesses candidates before they are examined by the NRC and, of the unsuccessful candidates for the May examination, some had problems with the written portion, the in-plant job performance, or the simulator portion of the exam. The DCISC has a concern about this failure rate and will follow up on this topic during a future Fact-finding. DCPP is currently reviewing its Operations training program with the NRC.
4.22.3 Conclusions and Recommendations
- Conclusions:
- DCPP is making substantial progress in improving its leadership effectiveness with an augmented coaching program, culture change initiative, and Leadership Academy training. DCPP appears to be taking positive steps in preparing for the 2007 Institute of Nuclear Power Operations (INPO) accreditation of its technical training programs. The DCISC is concerned about the low success rate on a recent set of NRC licensed operator exams.
- Recommendations: None