IR 05000247/2003301
| ML031340620 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Indian Point  |
| Issue date: | 05/14/2003 |
| From: | Conte R NRC/RGN-I/DRS/OSB |
| To: | Dacimo F Entergy Nuclear Operations |
| Shared Package | |
| ML023260235 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-247/03-301 | |
| Download: ML031340620 (10) | |
Text
SUBJECT:
INDIAN POINT NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION, UNIT 2 OPERATOR AND SENIOR REACTOR OPERATOR INITIAL EXAMINATION REPORT NO. 50-247/03-301
Dear Mr. Dacimo:
This report transmits the results of the Reactor operator (RO) and Senior reactor operator (SRO) licensing examination conducted by the NRC during the period of March 10-21, 2003.
This examination addressed areas important to public health and safety and was developed and administered using the guidelines of the Examination Standards for Power Reactors (NUREG-1021, Revision 8, Supplement 1).
Based on the results of the examination, two of three Senior Reactor Operator and two of the three Reactor Operator applicants passed all portions of the examination. One Senior Reactor Operator and one Reactor Operator applicant failed the simulator portion (Part C operating test) of the examination. Examination results indicated that generally the applicants were well prepared for the examination. On April 24, the NRC provided final examination results, including individual license numbers, during a telephone call between Mr. R. Conte and Mr. L.
Cortopassi and others of your staff. No findings of significance were identified.
In accordance with 10 CFR 2.790 of the NRC's "Rules of Practice," a copy of this letter and its enclosure will be available electronically for public inspection in the NRC Public Document Room or from the Publicly Available Records (PARS) component of NRCs document system (ADAMS). These records include the final examination and are available in ADAMS RO and SRO Written - Accession Number ML031200103; RO and SRO Operating Section A -
Accession Number ML031200138; RO and SRO Operating Section B - Accession Number ML031200207; and RO and SRO Operating Section C - Accession Number ML031200432, and Facility Post Examination Comments on the Written and Operating Exams - Accession No.
ML031200391. ADAMS is accessible from the NRC Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html (the Public Electronic Reading Room).
Mr. Fred Dacimo 2 Should you have any questions regarding this examination, please contact me at (610) 337-5183, or by E-mail at RJC@NRC.GOV.
Sincerely,
/RA/
Richard J. Conte, Chief Operational Safety Branch Division of Reactor Safety Docket No. 50-247 License No. DPR-26
Enclosure:
Initial Examination Report No. 50-247/03-301
REGION I==
Docket No: 50-247 License No: DPR-26 Report No: 50-247/03-301 Licensee: Entergy Facility: Indian Point 2 Dates: March 21, 2003 (Written Examination Administration)
March 10-14, 2003 (Operating Test Administration)
March 21-April 4, 2003 (Examination Grading)
Examiners: J. Caruso, Senior Operations Engineer (Chief Examiner)
S. Barr, Operations Engineer J. Laughlin, Operations Engineer Approved by: Richard J. Conte, Chief Operational Safety Branch Division of Reactor Safety Enclosure
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS IR 05000247/03-301; March 10-21, 2003; Indian Point 2; Initial Operator Licensing Examination. Four of six applicants passed the examination (2 ROs, 1 SRO instant, and 1 SRO upgrade).
The written examinations were administered by the facility and the operating tests were administered by three NRC region-based examiners.
A. Inspector Identified Findings No findings of significance were identified.
B. Licensee Identified Findings No findings of significance were identified.
ii Enclosure
Report Details 1. REACTOR SAFETY Mitigating Systems - Reactor Operator (RO) and Senior Reactor Operator (SRO) Initial License Examination a. Scope of Review The licensees examination team developed the written and operating initial examinations and together with NRC personnel verified or ensured, as applicable, the following:
- The examination was prepared and developed in accordance with the guidelines of Revision 8, Supplement 1 of NUREG-1021, "Operator Licensing Examination Standards for Power Reactors. A review was conducted both in the Region I office and at the Indian Point 2 plant and training facility. Final resolution of comments and incorporation of test revisions were conducted during and following the onsite preparation week.
- Simulation facility operation was proper.
- A test item analysis was completed on the written examination for feedback into the systems approach to training program.
- Examination security requirements were met. However, the licensee reported to the NRC per telephone conversation, before the written examination was approved by the NRC for administration, that it was their intention to replace the first 25 questions on the written exam. The licensee proposed this action because they had terminated the employment of an individual who had previously reviewed and had knowledge of the first 20-22 questions on the proposed written examination. The facility recommended replacement of the first 25 questions on the written exam as a conservative measure to ensure exam security would not be compromised. The NRC concurred with the facilities recommendation at the time to replace these questions prior to exam administration.
The NRC examiners administered the operating portion of the examination to all applicants from March 10-14, 2003. Indian Point 2 training staff administered the written examination on March 21, 2003.
b. Findings Grading and Results Four applicants (2 SROs and 2 ROs) passed all portions of the initial licensing examination. One SRO and one RO applicant failed the simulator portion (Part C of the operating test) of the examination.
Enclosure
The licensee submitted two written post-examination comments one on the operating exam and one on the written exam and a third verbal comment was made regarding the Operating Exam. Facility Post Examination Comments on the Written and Operating Exams can be found in ADAMS - Accession No. ML031200391. NRC resolution of the licensees comments is included as Attachment 2. NRC staff accepted both comments.
Examination Preparation and Quality The quality of the draft examinations was within acceptable range.
Examination Administration and Performance NRC examiners did not note generic performance errors by the applicants during examination administration.
4. OTHER ACTIVITIES 4OA6 Meetings, including Exit On April 24, 2003, the NRC provided conclusions and examination results to Mr. L.
Cortopassi, IPEC Training Manager, via telephone. License numbers for four of the six applicants that passed all portions of the initial licensing examination were also provided during this time.
The NRC expressed appreciation for the cooperation and assistance that was provided during the preparation and administration of the examination by the licensees training staff.
Enclosure
Attachment 1 KEY POINTS OF CONTACT LICENSEE L. Cortopassi Manager, Training, Indian Point Station F. Wilson Superintendent, Operations Training W. Altic Licensed Operator Training Unit 2 NRC J. Caruso Senior Operations Engineer S. Barr Operations Engineer J. Laughlin Operations Engineer LIST OF ITEMS OPENED, CLOSED, AND DISCUSSED None.
ATTACHMENT 2 NRC RESOLUTION OF LICENSEE COMMENTS Question: SRO 097 Comment: The question asks the Technical Specification (TS) requirements for a loss of both intermediate range instruments during a start-up. The question is recommended for deletion since none of the 4 choices correctly answers the question.
NRC Resolution: Recommendation accepted. The question is deleted due to no correct answer. Referring to TS table 3.5-2, item #3 indicates with no intermediate channels operable if two or more power range channels are greater than 10% power then the intermediate channels are not required. Intermediate range instruments are required until greater than 10% power by the Unit 2 TS and the question stem stated that power is 6%. Therefore, Unit 2 TS requires Hot Shutdown condition but there is no stated time limit. For example, answer D was incorrect because it stated a time limit of 6 hours6.944444e-5 days <br />0.00167 hours <br />9.920635e-6 weeks <br />2.283e-6 months <br /> to be in hot shutdown.
Administrative JPM, A.4 SRO, Perform Event Classification Comment: This JPM was designed to provide initial conditions such that the applicants would have determined that the RCS Barrier had been lost (LOCA in progress), Fuel Barrier had a potential loss (degraded core cooling FR-C.2 has been entered and exited), and the Containment Barrier had failed (Containment pressure has increased to 2.8 psig and has stabilized) resulting in a General Emergency classification. However, when considering the Containment Barrier integrity based on 25-40 minutes into the accident sequence, with equipment functioning as specified in the JPM conditions, containment pressure will be single digits. Two correct answers are recommended for this JPM either a Site Area Emergency (i.e.,
Loss or potential loss of 2 barriers) or General Area Emergency (i.e., Loss or potential loss of 3 barriers).
NRC Resolution: Recommendation accepted. Two correct answers were accepted. In order for the applicants to assess failure or potential failure of the Containment Barrier, they needed information that was not provided in the initial conditions regarding core spray system operation and containment pressures reached during the accident. Depending on the applicants analysis of the initial conditions and assumptions, the applicants may have determined that either the Containment Barrier had failed (i.e., a loss of all 3 barriers) or that the Containment Barrier had never been challenged (i.e., a loss of only 2 barriers) .
Administrative JPM, A.1b SRO, Review Control Room Log Entries Comment: This SRO JPM was designed to examine an SRO applicants ability to perform a supervisory review of completed control room logs. The initiating cue stated, review log entries taken on the 1900-0700 shift for approval. The facility provided a verbal post exam comment that 2 of the 3 out of specification readings that were intended to be identified were actually listed under the 0700-1900 shift.
NRC Resolution: This exam item was evaluated based on the examiners verbal direction given during exam administration. During administration of this exam item, the examiner verbally briefed the SRO applicants that they were to carry out their normal supervisory responsibilities in reviewing the entire log.