IR 05000280/2012301
| ML12297A403 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Surry  |
| Issue date: | 10/22/2012 |
| From: | Mark Franke Division of Reactor Safety II |
| To: | Heacock D Virginia Electric & Power Co (VEPCO) |
| References | |
| 50-280/12-301, 50-281/12-301 | |
| Preceding documents: |
|
| Download: ML12297A403 (13) | |
Text
October 22, 2012
SUBJECT:
SURRY POWER STATION - REACTOR AND SENIOR REACTOR OPERATOR INITIAL EXAMINATIONS - 05000280/2012301 AND 05000281/2012301
Dear Mr. Heacock:
During the period of August 13 - 22, 2012, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC)
administered operating tests to employees of your company who had applied for licenses to operate the Surry Power Station. At the conclusion of the examination, the examiners discussed the examination questions and preliminary findings with those members of your staff identified in the enclosed report. The written examination was administered by your staff on August 28, 2012.
Six Senior Reactor Operator (SRO) applicants and five Reactor Operator (RO) applicants passed both the written and operating examinations. There were two post administration comments concerning the written examination. The resolution to the licensees comments are provided in this report as Enclosure 2. A Simulation Facility Report is included in Enclosure 3.
In accordance with 10 CFR 2.390 of the NRC's "Rules of Practice," a copy of this letter and its enclosures will be available electronically for public inspection in the NRC Public Document Room or from the Publicly Available Records (PARS) component of NRC's document system (ADAMS). ADAMS is accessible from the NRC Website at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html (the Public Electronic Reading Room). If you have any questions concerning this letter, please contact me at (404) 997-4436.
Sincerely,
/RA/
Mark E. Franke, Chief
Operations Branch
Division of Reactor Safety
Docket Nos.: 50-280 and 50-281 License Nos.: DPR-32 and DPR-37
Enclosures:
1. Report Details 2. NRC Resolution to the Facility Comments 3. Simulation Facility Report
REGION II==
Docket No.:
50-280, 50-281
License No.:
Report No.:
05000280/2012301, 05000281/2012301
Licensee:
Virginia Electric and Power Company
Facility:
Surry Power Station
Location:
5850 Hog Island Rd.
Surry, VA 23883
Dates:
Operating Test - August 13 - 22, 2012
Written Examination - August 28, 2012
Examiners:
Richard S. Baldwin, Chief Examiner, Senior Operations Engineer Kenneth D. Schaaf, Operations Engineer Mark J. Riches, Operations Engineer
Approved by:
Mark E. Franke, Chief
Operations Branch
Division of Reactor Safety
Enclosure 1
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
ER 05000280/2012301, 05000281/2012301, 08/13 - 22/2012 & 08/28/2012; Surry Power
Station; Operator License Examinations.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) examiners conducted operator licensing initial examinations in accordance with the guidance in NUREG-1021, Revision 9, Supplement 1,
Operator Licensing Examination Standards for Power Reactors. This examination implemented the operator licensing requirements of 10 CFR §55.41, §55.43, and §55.45.
The written examination was developed by the NRC and operating tests were developed by members of the Surry Power Station staff.
The NRC administered the operating tests during the period of August 13 - 22, 2012. Members of the Surry Power Station training staff administered the written examination on August 28, 2012. Six Senior Reactor Operator (SRO) applicants and five Reactor Operator (RO) applicants passed both the written and operating examinations. Six SRO applicants and five RO applicants were issued an operating license commensurate with the level of examination administered..
There were two post-examination comments on the written examination. The NRC resolution to the comments are summarized in 2.
No findings were identified.
REPORT DETAILS
OTHER ACTIVITIES
4OA5 Operator Licensing Initial Examinations
a. Inspection Scope
The written examination was developed by the NRC and operating tests were developed by members of the Surry Power Station staff. All examination material was developed in accordance with the guidelines contained in Revision 9, Supplement 1, of NUREG-1021, "Operator Licensing Examination Standards for Power Reactors." The NRC examination team reviewed the proposed examination. Examination changes agreed upon between the NRC and the licensee were made per NUREG-1021 and incorporated into the final version of the examination materials.
The NRC reviewed the licensees examination security measures while preparing and administering the examinations in order to ensure compliance with 10 CFR 55.49, Integrity of examinations and tests.
The NRC examiners evaluated six Senior Reactor Operator (SRO) applicants and five Reactor Operator (RO) applicants using the guidelines contained in NUREG-1021. The examiners administered the operating tests during the period of August 13 - 22, 2012.
Members of the Surry Power Station training staff administered the written examination on August 28, 2012. Evaluations of applicants and reviews of associated documentation were performed to determine if the applicants, who applied for licenses to operate the Surry Power Station, met the requirements specified in 10 CFR Part 55, Operators Licenses.
b. Findings
No findings were identified. The NRC determined, using NUREG-1021, that the licensees initial operating examination submittal was within the range of acceptability expected for a proposed examination. The NRC developed the initial written examination.
Six SRO applicants and five RO applicants passed both the written and operating examinations. Six SRO applicants and five RO applicants were issued a license.
Copies of all individual examination reports were sent to the facility Training Manager for evaluation and determination of appropriate remedial training.
The licensee submitted two post-examination comments concerning the written examination (ML12254A061 and ML12277A072). A copy of the final written examination and answer key, with all changes incorporated, may be accessed in the ADAMS system (ADAMS Accession Numbers, ML12269A249 and ML12269A248).
4OA6 Meetings
Exit Meeting Summary
On August 23, 2012, the examination team discussed generic issues associated with the operating test with Mr. Sloane and members of the Surry Power Station staff. The examiners asked the licensee whether any materials examined during the inspection should be considered proprietary. No proprietary information was identified.
ATTACHMENT:
SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION
PARTIAL LIST OF PERSONS CONTACTED
Licensee personnel
- K. Sloane, Plant Manager
- F. Mladen, Director Station Safety & Licensing
- D. Souza, Training Supervisor
- S. Irwin, III, Sr. Instructor, Nuclear Operations
- J. Spence, Acting, Training Manager
- K. Basehore, Engineering Director
- D. Wilson, Asst. Manager, Operations
- B. Garber, Licensing Supervisor
- R. Johnson, Operations Manager
NRC personnel
- J. Nadel, Acting Senior Resident Inspector
NRC Resolution of Facility Post-Examination Comments
A complete text of the licensees post examination comments can be found in ADAMS under
Accession Number ML12254A0671 and ML12277A072.
RO QUESTION # 66
QUESTION SYNOPSIS: The question identifies a situation where shutting of valve, 1-CH-
MOV-1381, RCP Seal Return valve was NOT directed by the procedure. The question stem
identified that Valve 1-CH-MOV-1381 was to be locally shut which specified as a Containment
Isolation Valve (CIV). The applicant was required to determine whose approval was necessary,
between the Shit Manager or Manager Nuclear Operations, to shut the valve in accordance with
OP-AA-100, Conduct of Operations. Additionally the applicants were expected to determine
the impact on operability of the valve due to manual operation. The initial conditions placed the
reactor plant in mode, INTERMEDIATE SHUTDOWN, which indicated the plant was above
200 degrees Fahrenheit.
QUESTION SYNOPSIS: Facility contends that both answers A and C are correct.
During the post-written examination period the facility licensee identified and provided additional
reference material that identified that the Manager Nuclear Operations in distractor C was an
additional correct answer. The licensee identified in Attachment 6, Status and Configuration
Control, of OPP-AA-100, that for this question, also allowed the Manager Nuclear Operations to
grant permission to manually position a CIV. The facility licensee proposed a change in the
answer key from answer choice A to allow both answer choices A and answer C are acceptable
correct answers.
NRC RESOLUTION: Recommendation accepted. The licensee identified in procedure, OPP-
AA-100, in Appendix 6 additional reference material that identified that the Manager Nuclear
Operations was an additional correct answer for the conditions listed in the question stem.
Upon review the NRC examiners identified that this was an acceptable additional answer. The
Senior Reactor and Reactor Operators answer keys and examinations were changed to reflect
that both answer choices A and C are BOTH considered correct answers.
RO QUESTION # 71
QUESTION SYNOPSIS: The question concerns itself with the identification of how Health
Physics (HP) will post the room in accordance with 10 CFT 20 requirements and the
determination of what type of work permit is required a Specific Radiation Work Permit (RWP)
or a General RWP during a Residual Heal Removal (RHR) Cooling refueling outage in
accordance with VPAP-2101, Radiation Protection Program. The initial condition provides that
Loop A RHR room entrance has a dose rate of 35 mr/hr and the room has a maximum dose
rate of 175 mr/hr around the letdown isolation valves. The initial conditions also identified that
an operator was assigned to hang a tag that was going to take approximately 10 to 15 minutes.
FACILITY COMMENT: Facility contends that the initial correct answer, (C), is incorrect and
should be changed to (D).
The first submittal of the post-exam comments the facility licensee identified assumptions were
necessary to answer the question. The licensee stated that while working in this kind of area
and on RHR system which typically involves opening vents and drains. Because the task
requested the operator to, hang a tagout, a specific RWP should be used as was identified in
VPAP-2101, Radiation Protection Program. The initial submittal provided a comment by the
Manager - Radiation Protection, which was an undocumented practice that at the Surry plant
uses. Manager - Radiation Protection stated that general RWPs are placed on hold and
outage specific RWPs are used for all outage related materials. Since this requirement
concerning the use of general versus specific RWPs is not identified in a reference document
the NRC Chief Examiner asked the licensee to provide written documentation that speaks to
this practice of changing general RWPs to unit specific RWPs during unit outages. The facility
licensee provided a second post-exam comment submittal that provided written statement from
the Radiation Protection (R.P.) Manager that certified to the Surry Training Center that during
refueling outages, that The practice at Surry is to suspend general RWPs and issue Unit
Specific special RWPs for the outage. The R.P. Manger further states that this philosophy has
been used for many years. This action had not at this point been proceduralized.
NRC RESOLUTION: Recommendation accepted. Upon additional review of this comment, the
NRC identified that the documentation concerning the practice of closing all general RWPs to
use unit specific RWPs was not very well identified in the current plant procedures that cover
this topic. The NRC examiners requested that a statement in writing be provided discussing the
process used for specific RWPS during outages at the Surry Power Station. A second
document was emailed that discussed the current plant expectation and utilization of general
and specific RWPs during outages. The NRC examiners identified that the Surry Power Station,
based on certification of the Manager - R.P. email to the Surry Training Center (Second Post-
Exam comment submittal), ONLY uses specific RWPs during refueling outages. Based on the
additional documentation provided during this second post-exam comment submittal the NRC
examiners feel that changing the answer from the original answer of (C) to that of (D) where it
required the specific RWP to be in place is the ONLY correct answer. The Senior Reactor and
Reactor Operator answer keys and examinations were changed to reflect that the (D) answer
was considered as the ONLY correct answer.
SIMULATION FIDELITY REPORT
Facility Licensee: Surry Power Station
Facility Docket Nos.: 05000280/05000281
Operating Tests Administered on: August 13 - 22, 2012
This form is to be used only to report observations. These observations do not constitute audit
or inspection findings and, without further verification and review in accordance with IP 71111.11, are not indicative of noncompliance with 10 CFR 55.46. No licensee action is
required in response to these observations.
No simulator fidelity or configuration items were identified.