NRC Operator Licensing Exam Repts 50-352/97-02OL & 50-353/97-02OL on 970120-24.Exam Results:Good Performance Including Teamwork & Communications Was Demonstrated by Applicants.Six of Seven Applicants Passed ExamML20134M575 |
Person / Time |
---|
Site: |
Limerick ![Constellation icon.png](/w/images/b/be/Constellation_icon.png) |
---|
Issue date: |
02/12/1997 |
---|
From: |
NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
---|
To: |
|
---|
Shared Package |
---|
ML20134M544 |
List: |
---|
References |
---|
50-352-97-02OL, 50-352-97-2OL, NUDOCS 9702200296 |
Download: ML20134M575 (10) |
|
|
---|
Category:EXAMINATION REPORT
MONTHYEARIR 05000352/19993031999-09-0808 September 1999 Exam Repts 50-352/99-303OL & 50-353/99-303OL on 990812.Exam Results: One Reactor Operator Applicant Was Administered Retake Section B of Test & Passed IR 05000352/19993021999-08-0404 August 1999 NRC Operator Licensing Exam Repts 50-352/99-302 & 50-353/99-302 Adminsitered on 990702-14 (Administration) & 990715-22 (Grading).Six of Six Limited SROs Passed All Portions of Exams IR 05000352/19993011999-04-30030 April 1999 NRC Operator Licensing Exam Repts 50-352/99-301 & 50-353/99-301 Administered on 990312-19 (Administration & 990322-26 (Grading).Exam Results:Five RO & Four SRO Applicants Were Administered Exam.One RO & One SRO Failed ML20202F9901998-02-0505 February 1998 Exam Repts 50-352/98-01 & 50-353/98-01 on 980120-23.No Violations Noted.Exam Results:Two Ro,Two Srou & Four SRO Candidates Were Administered Initial Licensing Exams. Everyone Passed All Portions of Exam IR 05000352/19970041997-05-0808 May 1997 Exam Repts 50-352/97-04OL & 50-353/97-04OL on 970501. Exam Results:Initial Retake Exam Administered to One RO Applicant on 970501.Applicant Passed Exam IR 05000352/19970021997-02-12012 February 1997 NRC Operator Licensing Exam Repts 50-352/97-02OL & 50-353/97-02OL on 970120-24.Exam Results:Good Performance Including Teamwork & Communications Was Demonstrated by Applicants.Six of Seven Applicants Passed Exam IR 05000277/19930201993-10-0707 October 1993 Exam Repts 50-277/93-20OL,50-278/93-20OL,50-352/93-21OL & 50-353/93-21OL on 930823-0902.Exam Results:One Applicant Failed Reactor Operator Exam & All Other Applicants Passed Exam IR 05000352/19930181993-09-0101 September 1993 Exam Rept 50-352/93-18OL & 50-353/93-18OL on 930719-23. Exam Results:Examiners Noted That Matl Condition of Plant Was Good & Observed Excellent Communication by Control Room Crews IR 05000352/19910031991-02-25025 February 1991 Exam Repts 50-352/91-03OL & 50-353/91-03OL on 910124-25.Exam Results:Sro Passed Operating & Written Tests,But RO Only Passed Operating Test.Candidates Were Prepared for Exams,But Were Unfamiliar W/Jpm Exam Process IR 05000352/19890131989-09-26026 September 1989 Exam Repts 50-352/89-13OL & 50-353/89-22OL on 890612-16 & 19.Exam Results:All Senior Reactor Operator Candidates Passed Written Exams & Operating Tests.All Reactor Operators Passed Written Exams.All But One Passed Operating Test IR 05000352/19880211989-02-17017 February 1989 Requalification Program Evaluation Rept 50-352/88-21OL of Exams Administered on 881128-1202.Licensed Operator Requalification Training Program Rated Satisfactory.All But One Reactor Operator Passed Exam IR 05000352/19880161988-08-0303 August 1988 Exam Rept 50-352/88-16OL on 880607-09.Exam Results:Of Three Senior Reactor Operators (SRO) & Two Reactor Operators (Ro), Two SROs & One RO Passed Written Exam & Three SROs & One RO Passed Operating Exam IR 05000352/19870071987-05-18018 May 1987 Requalification Program Evaluation Rept 50-352/87-07OL for 870309-25.No Violations Noted.Deficiencies Noted:Senior Reactor Opertors Not Trained to Reenter Emergency Operating Procedures Following Reentry Conditions IR 05000352/19860241987-01-12012 January 1987 Exam Rept 50-352/86-24 OL on 861020-23.Exam Results:Three Reactor Operators,Four Senior Reactor Operators & One Instructor Certification Candidate Passed IR 05000352/19850411986-02-14014 February 1986 Exam Rept 50-352/85-41 on 851111.Exam Results:One Senior Reactor Candidate Failed Written Portion & One Failed Simulator Exam.All Instructor Certification Candidates Passed All Portions of Exam 1999-09-08
[Table view] Category:TEXT-INSPECTION & AUDIT & I&E CIRCULARS
MONTHYEARPNO-I-99-045, on 990923,operators at Limerick Generating Station Declared Unusual Event Due to Presence of Toxic Gases within Site Boundary.No Toxic Gases Were Detected within Main Cr.No Personnel Were Injured or Made Ill1999-09-24024 September 1999 PNO-I-99-045:on 990923,operators at Limerick Generating Station Declared Unusual Event Due to Presence of Toxic Gases within Site Boundary.No Toxic Gases Were Detected within Main Cr.No Personnel Were Injured or Made Ill IR 05000352/19990051999-09-16016 September 1999 Insp Repts 50-352/99-05 & 50-353/99-05 on 990713-0816.One Violation Noted & Being Treated as Ncv.Major Areas Inspected:Operations,Maint,Engineering & Plant Support IR 05000352/19993031999-09-0808 September 1999 Exam Repts 50-352/99-303OL & 50-353/99-303OL on 990812.Exam Results: One Reactor Operator Applicant Was Administered Retake Section B of Test & Passed IR 05000352/19990041999-08-10010 August 1999 Insp Repts 50-352/99-04 & 50-353/99-04 on 990525-0712.One Violation Noted & Being Treated as Ncv.Major Areas Inspected:Aspects of Licensee Operations,Engineering & Maint IR 05000352/19993021999-08-0404 August 1999 NRC Operator Licensing Exam Repts 50-352/99-302 & 50-353/99-302 Adminsitered on 990702-14 (Administration) & 990715-22 (Grading).Six of Six Limited SROs Passed All Portions of Exams IR 05000352/19990031999-06-24024 June 1999 Insp Repts 50-352/99-03 & 50-353/99-03 on 990413-0524.No Violations Noted.Major Areas Inspected:Operations, Maintenance,Engineering & Plant Support.Also Inspected, Radiological Protection,Security & Inservice Insp IR 05000352/19990021999-05-0707 May 1999 Insp Repts 50-352/99-02 & 50-353/99-02 on 990302-0412. Violations Noted & Being Treated as non-cited Violations. Major Areas Inspected:Operations,Maint,Engineering & Plant Support IR 05000352/19993011999-04-30030 April 1999 NRC Operator Licensing Exam Repts 50-352/99-301 & 50-353/99-301 Administered on 990312-19 (Administration & 990322-26 (Grading).Exam Results:Five RO & Four SRO Applicants Were Administered Exam.One RO & One SRO Failed PNO-I-99-019, on 990420,Limerick Unit 1 Automatically Shutdown from 100% Power on Low Rwl Due to Loss of Mfw. Normal Feedwater Sys Has Been Restored,Which Allowed for Securing of RCIC & HPCI Systems.Licensee Issued Pr1999-04-21021 April 1999 PNO-I-99-019:on 990420,Limerick Unit 1 Automatically Shutdown from 100% Power on Low Rwl Due to Loss of Mfw. Normal Feedwater Sys Has Been Restored,Which Allowed for Securing of RCIC & HPCI Systems.Licensee Issued Pr IR 05000352/19990011999-03-26026 March 1999 Insp Repts 50-352/99-01 & 50-353/99-01 on 990112-0301. Violations Noted.Major Areas Inspected:Operations, Engineering,Maint & Plant Support ML20199C6571999-01-0606 January 1999 Notice of Violation from Insp on 981018-1130.Violation Noted:On 981105,procedure M-053-006,required by App a of Reg Guide 1.33,not Implemented as Required by Procedure A-C-079 ML20199C6641999-01-0606 January 1999 Insp Repts 50-352/98-09 & 50-353/98-09 on 981018-1130. Violations Noted.Major Areas Inspected:Operations, Engineering,Maintenance & Plant Support ML20196C3371998-11-23023 November 1998 Insp Repts 50-352/98-08 & 50-353/98-08 on 980901-1017.No Violations Noted.Major Areas Inspected:Operations,Maint, Engineering & Plant Support.Security & Safeguards Activities Were Conducted in Manner That Protected Public Health IR 05000352/19980071998-09-25025 September 1998 Insp Repts 50-352/98-07 & 50-353/98-07 on 980707-0831.No Violations Noted.Major Areas Inspected:Operations, Engineering,Maint & Plant Support IR 05000352/19980051998-08-0707 August 1998 Insp Repts 50-352/98-05 & 50-353/98-05 on 980601-24. Violations Noted.Major Areas Inspected:Backlogged Engineering Activities ML20237A3091998-08-0707 August 1998 Notice of Violation from Insp on 980606-24.Violation Noted: Defective Equipment in Supply Circuit Breaker of Load Ctr 124B Not Identified & Corrected & on 980322 Breaker Tripped Unexpectedly & de-energized All Loads Supplied by Center ML20236X8161998-08-0505 August 1998 Notice of Violation from Insp on 980519-0706.Violation Noted:As of 980304,licensee Had Not Submitted LER for Condition Prohibited by Plant TS within 30 Days After Discovery of Event IR 05000352/19980041998-08-0505 August 1998 Insp Repts 50-352/98-04 & 50-353/98-04 on 980519-0706. Violations Noted.Major Areas Inspected:Aspects of PECO Energy Operations,Engineering & Maint ML20236M7331998-07-0707 July 1998 Notice of Violation & Proposed Imposition of Civil Penalty in Amount of $55,000.Violation Noted:During 970901-980121, Condition Adverse to Quality Existed Involving Inoperability of 1B RHR Min Flow Valve & No C/As Taken ML20237E4241998-07-0101 July 1998 EN-98-049:on 980707,notice of Proposed Imposition of Civil Penalty in Amount of $55,000 Issued to Licensee.Action Based on Two Violations Re Failure to Take Appropriate Corrective Action to Address Conditions Adverse to Quality at Facility IR 05000352/19980031998-06-18018 June 1998 Insp Repts 50-352/98-03 & 50-353/98-03 on 980317-0518. Violations Noted.Major Areas Inspected:Aspects of PECO Energy Operations,Engineering,Maint & Plant Support ML20249C1901998-06-18018 June 1998 Notice of Violation from Insp on 980317-0518.Violation Noted:Measures Established to Correct Nonconformances Re Log Entries,Identified in Violation 97-10-01,did Not Preclude Repetition of Similar Problem PNO-I-98-019, on 980603,operators Found One of Three Standby Liquid Injection Pumps Running & Injecting Into Reactor Vessel.No Alarms Identified on Redundant Reactivity Control Sys Which Provides Automatic SLC Initiation Feature1998-06-0404 June 1998 PNO-I-98-019:on 980603,operators Found One of Three Standby Liquid Injection Pumps Running & Injecting Into Reactor Vessel.No Alarms Identified on Redundant Reactivity Control Sys Which Provides Automatic SLC Initiation Feature ML20247J2401998-05-11011 May 1998 Notice of Violation from Insp on 980120-0316.Violations Noted:On 980213,significant Condition Adverse to Quality Identified & Previous C/A on Control of Locked Valves Did Not Preclude Repetition ML20247J2451998-05-11011 May 1998 Insp Repts 50-352/98-02 & 50-353/98-02 on 980120-0316. Violations Noted.Major Areas Inspected:Operations, Engineering,Maintenance & Plant Support PNO-I-98-013, on 980417,alert Declared After Detection by Smell of Unidentified Odor,Initially Believed to Be Acetylene or Propane Gas,Resulting in Evacuation of Area. Fire Brigade Activated1998-04-17017 April 1998 PNO-I-98-013:on 980417,alert Declared After Detection by Smell of Unidentified Odor,Initially Believed to Be Acetylene or Propane Gas,Resulting in Evacuation of Area. Fire Brigade Activated IR 05000353/19970091998-03-11011 March 1998 Insp Rept 50-353/97-09 on 971010-980116.Violations Noted. Major Areas Inspected:Operations,Maintenance,Engineering & Plant Support ML20203G9111998-02-23023 February 1998 Notice of Violation from Insp on 971118-980119.Violation Noted:On 971206,required Narrative Log Entries in Unified Log for Safety Sys Inoperability Were Not Made ML20203G9211998-02-23023 February 1998 Insp Repts 50-352/97-10 & 50-353/97-10 on 971118-980119. Violations Noted.Major Areas Inspected:Operations,Maint, Engineering & Plant Support ML20202F9901998-02-0505 February 1998 Exam Repts 50-352/98-01 & 50-353/98-01 on 980120-23.No Violations Noted.Exam Results:Two Ro,Two Srou & Four SRO Candidates Were Administered Initial Licensing Exams. Everyone Passed All Portions of Exam IR 05000352/19970081997-12-0808 December 1997 Insp Repts 50-352/97-08 & 50-353/97-08 on 970916-1117.No Violations Noted.Major Areas Inspected:Operations,Maint, Engineering & Plant Support ML20198N1771997-10-27027 October 1997 Insp Repts 50-352/97-07 & 50-353/97-07 on 970722-0915. Violations Noted.Major Areas Inspected:Operations,Maint, Engineering & Plant Support ML20198N1701997-10-27027 October 1997 Notice of Violation from Insp on 970722-0915.Violation Noted:Inspector Identified Valve Locking Devices Not Applied Through Valve Handwheel or Other Operating Mechanism to Restrict Operation of Valves Listed on Valve List Exhibits ML20198Q9181997-09-29029 September 1997 Notice of Violation from Insp on 970528-0721.Violation Noted:As of 960726,licensee Did Not Implement & Maintain in Effect Certain Provisions of Approved FP Program as Described in UFSAR for Facility IR 05000352/19970061997-08-13013 August 1997 Insp Repts 50-352/97-06 & 50-353/97-06 on 970528-0721. Violations Noted.Major Areas Inspected:Peco Energy Operations,Engineering,Maintenance & Plant Support ML20210N9861997-08-13013 August 1997 Notice of Violation from Insp on 970528-0721.Violation Noted:Peco Energy Did Not Submit LER within 30 Days After Discovery of an Event Which Occurred on 930316 for Condition Prohibited by Plants TS ML20210K9141997-07-31031 July 1997 EN-97-066:order Prohibiting Involvement in NRC-licensed Activities Issued on or About 970805 to Unlicensed Individual Who Formerly Worked as Primary Chemistry Manager at Limerick Generating Station,Units 1 & 2 ML20210K8841997-07-31031 July 1997 EN-97-065:on 970805,notice of Proposed Imposition of Civil Penalty in Amount of $80,000 Issued to Licensee.Action Includes Two Violations Involving Instances of Record Falsification at Limerick Generating Station IR 05000352/19970051997-07-31031 July 1997 Insp Repts 50-352/97-05 & 50-353/97-05 on 970623-26.No Violations Noted.Major Areas Inspected:Licensee Performance During Biennial full-participation EP Exercise ML20210K9771997-07-31031 July 1997 EN-97-067:order Prohibiting Involvement in NRC-licensed Activities Issued on or About 970805 to Sf Nevin Unlicensed Individual at Limerick Generating Station,Units 1 & 2.Action Based on Investigation Conducted by OI IR 05000352/19970031997-07-11011 July 1997 Insp Repts 50-352/97-03 & 50-353/97-03 on 970330-0527. Violations Noted.Major Areas Inspected:Operations,Maint, Engineering & Plant Support ML20149E1391997-07-11011 July 1997 Notice of Violation from Insp on 970330-0527.Violation Noted:Master Keys Were Not Properly Controlled & Were in Possession of Unauthorized Personnel & Temporary Change to GP12 Altered Intent of Original Procedure IR 05000352/19970991997-05-0909 May 1997 SALP Repts 50-352/97-99 & 50-353/97-99 for 950402-970329 IR 05000352/19970041997-05-0808 May 1997 Exam Repts 50-352/97-04OL & 50-353/97-04OL on 970501. Exam Results:Initial Retake Exam Administered to One RO Applicant on 970501.Applicant Passed Exam ML20148C1511997-05-0707 May 1997 Notice of Violation from Insp on 970204-0329.Violation Noted:In Jan 1997,mod Made to Unit 2 Fuel Preparation Machines That Made Info in SAR Incomplete in That Test Fixture Was Added Which Caused Fuel to Be Raised IR 05000352/19970011997-05-0707 May 1997 Insp Repts 50-352/97-01 & 50-353/97-01 on 970204-0329. Violations Noted.Major Areas Inspected:Operations, Engineering,Plant Support & Maintenance ML20136C0891997-03-0606 March 1997 Notice of Violation from Insp on 961217-970203.Violation Noted:Diesel Generator Fuel Oil Storage Tank Level Was Below TS Value & Required Actions for Inoperable Diesel Generator Was Not Performed ML20136C0951997-03-0606 March 1997 Insp Repts 50-352/96-10 & 50-353/96-10 on 961217-970203. Violations Noted.Major Areas Inspected:Operations, Engineering,Maint & Plant Support IR 05000352/19970021997-02-12012 February 1997 NRC Operator Licensing Exam Repts 50-352/97-02OL & 50-353/97-02OL on 970120-24.Exam Results:Good Performance Including Teamwork & Communications Was Demonstrated by Applicants.Six of Seven Applicants Passed Exam ML20134F9051997-02-0303 February 1997 Notice of Violation from Insp on 960305 & 0506 & Between 1003 & 1127.Violation Noted:Electronic Copy of Limerick Physical Security Plan,Located on PECO Nuclear Local Area Network & Document Not Under Control 1999-09-08
[Table view] |
Text
. . .- . . . . .- - -. . . _ - - _ .
l l
.
'
U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
!
l REGION I l
l
!
Docket No , 50-353 License No NPF-39, NPF-85
l Report No /97-02 (OL), 50-353/97-02 (OL)
l l Licensee: PECO Energy Company P. O. Box 195 Wayne, PA 19087-0195 l
!
Facility: Limerick Nuclear Generating Station, Units 1 and 2 Dates: January 20 - 24,1997 l
i-
! Chief Examiner: D. Florek, Sr. Operations Engineer, Region 1 l
l Examiners: C. Sisco, Operations Engineer, Region 1 J. Caruso, Operations Engineer, Region 1 i
l Approved by: Glenn W. Meyer, Chief l Operator Licensing and Human Performance Branch Division of Reactor Safety l
l l
,
- 9702200296 970212
-
PDR ADOCK 05000352
[ V PDR l
l
__ ._-
.
.
-
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Limerick Generating Station, Units 1 and 2 Inspection Report 50-352/97-02 (OL) and 50-353/97-02 (OL)
Ooerations The applicants were generally well prepared for the examination, and as a result,6 of 7 applicants passed the examinations and were subsequently issued licenses. One RO applicant failed the walkthrough portion of the operating examinatio in numerous areas of the operating test, the applicants consistently demonstrated very good performance, including teamwork, communications, prioritization by SROs, use of prints, and use of alarm response procedures. Several applicants were unable to successfully reset a group 7A isolatio PECO Energy did not have a complete understanding of the NRC Examiner Standards in the development of their proposed initial examination. Significant interactions between the NRC and PECO Energy were required to meet the NRC Examiner Standards. In the end, PECO Energy was successful in developing a high quality examinatio ii t
.. . -. . - - - - . - .. ..--- - . . - - - - . -. .. -. . =
!
t
!
Report Details ,;
i l
l. Operations 05 Operator Training and Qualifications 05.1 ' Operator Initial Examinations
. Scope i The examiners administered initial examinations to three RO and four SRO applicants in accordance with NUREG-1021, " Examiner Standards," Revision 7.
,
The examinations were prepared by PECO Energy using the pilot. operator licensing
< initial examination process, and were approved, administered (operating test), and graded by NRC.
+ Observations and Findinas
, The results of the initial examinations are summarized below:
,
SRO RO Pass / Fail
,
,
Written 4/0 3/0 7/0 f Operating 4/O 2/1 6/1
Overall 4/0 2/1 6/1 The examinations were prepared by PECO Energy using the pilot operator licensing j initial examination process. This process authorized PECO Energy to develop the initiallicense examination and administer the written portion of the examination The PECO Energy staff involved with the development of these examinations signed security agreements to ensure the integrity of the initial examination process.
, PECO Energy submitted their proposed sample plan on November 14,1996. The PECO Energy proposed sample plan was not consistent with the NRC Examiner ;
Standards. The PECO Energy proposed sample plan did not recognize the '
differences between the skyscraper model groupings of the SRO and RO and, as a
<
result, the RO examination sample plan did not meet the NRC model. In addition, i
- the PECO proposed sample plan did not address the simulator portion of the !
, examination.
PECO Energy submitted a revised sample plan and proposed SRO and RO
,
examinations for NRC approval on December 10,1996. The sample plan was
. acceptable but the examinations required significant modifications to meet NRC Examiner Standards. The following is a summary of the changes that were required 2 of the proposed examinatio !
,
l E
I
-
.__ ._ .
.
l t .;
- Approximately 80% of the written examination required changes principally -
due to question construction. The written question topic and difficulty were I generally acceptable but distractors were often easily eliminated, thereby i reducing the testing validity of the question j
- Two of the 20 JPMs required substitution. One JPM task was incompatible l with the assigned safety function, and the other JPM did not satisfy the j requirements of a control room tas Approximately 50% of the JPM followup questions required revision or substitution, as the question did not relate to the system or JPM or the -
question was not sufficiently discriminatin ,
-
Three of the five administrative JPMs in the RO examination and four of four administrative JPMs did not meet the requirements for a JPM. Additional questions were developed in these areas, in addition, the SRO administrative JPMs did not test at a SRO leve The proposed simulator scenarios were deficient in technical specification assessment and normal evolution to assess all of the applicants. In addition,
.
,
one of the three scenarios did not contain sufficient malfunctions to assess the required examination competencies in that the crew could successfully respond to the scenario if they took no actions and relied upon automatic plant response. Operator actions were not adequately identified.
l Modifications were made to the scenarios to address these problem l
The NRC Chief Examiner met with the PECO Energy examination team on
,
December 19,1996 and December 31,1996 and held numerous telephone l' discussions to resolve the difficulties in the examination. On January 6,1997, PECO Energy provided an examination which corrected almost all of the !
examination problems. The NRC examination team held examination preparation visits on January 8-10,1997. On January 15,1997, the exa.mination team L reviewed the final simulator examination that reflected concerns identified in the ;
! prior visit. As a result of all of the NRC and PECO Energy interaction, a high quality l l examination was developed and administere PECO Energy administered the written examinations on January 20,1997. The NRC examiners administered the operating examinations, January 21-24,199 At the exit meeting PECO Energy provided the grading of the written examination-and identified comments on two questions. A copy of the January 24,1997 PECO Energy letter is contained in Attachment 3. The NRC accepted the.PECO Energy comments on the written examination. The examiners reviewed the grading of the j
written examinations and concurred with the grading by PECO Energy.
f During the walkthrough portion of the operating test, several applicants performed j poorly in the following area:
l
_ . _ , . _ , _
. _
.
<
-
.
.
..
Performing a reset of Group 7A isolation in accordance with procedure GP- During the operating test, the following items were significant and consistent positive observation P&lD, electrical, and logic prints were effectively used by the applicant Teamwork within the crews was very goo Communication within the crews was very good Crew briefings were ;
concise, timely, and appropriate. The applicants were very poised. _ A i concern from the previous examination on inconsistent non-verbal i communication had been effectively addresse :
SRO prioritization techniques were effective such that all crew members understood the SRO-directed important task l Procedures, including alarm response procedures, were effectively used !
during the scenario ,
l c. Conclusions ,
The applicants were generally well prepared for the examination, and as a result, [
6 of 7 applicants passed the examinations and were subsequently issued licenses, ,
One RO applicant failed the walkthrough portion of the operating examinatio !
PECO Energy did not have a complete understanding of the NRC Examiner Standards in the development of their proposed initial examination. Significant i interactions between the NRC and PECO Energy were required to meet the NRC l Examiner Standards. In the end, PECO Energy was successful in developing a high l quality examination.
E.8 Review of UFSAR Commitments l
A recent discovery of a licensee operating their facility in a manner contrary to the updated final safety analysis report (UFSAR) description highlighted the need for a r special focused review that compares plant practices, procedures and/or parameters ;
to the UFSAR descriptions. While performing the examination activities discussed j in this report, the examiner reviewed portions of the UFSAR that related to a i selected examination question. The particular section reviewed was UFSAR Figure i 9.3.7. The selected examination question reviewed was consistent with the !
UFSA i i
,
i
!
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ . . _ . . . _
i
i
,
,
- 4 V. Maneaement Meetinos X1 Exit Meeting Summary ,
.
At the conclusion of the examination, the exami~ners discussed their observations of the examination process with members of PECO Energy management. PECO Energy management acknowledged the examiner observations. The PECO Energy personnel present at the exit included the following:
R. Boyce, LGS Plant Manager T. Dougherty, LGS Operations Training Manager L. Hopkins, LGS Training Director
.
J. Hutton, LGS Sr. Manager Operations L. MacEntee, PBAPS Operations Training Manager P. Orphanos, LGS LOR Lead instructor R. Reiner, LGS LOT Lead Instructor G. Stewart, LGS Engineer Experience Assessment Attacnments:
1. SRO Examination and Answer Key i 2. RO Examination and Answer Key 3. PECO Energy Comments on the written examination 4. Simulator Fidelity Report
,
1
. .
e i
- .
! f I
,
.
.
i
!
1 r
!
l ATTACHMENT 1 SRO EXAMINATION AND ANSWER KEY
!
!
l l
'
,
_
'
y l
9
'
l l
l l
l I
i ATTACHMENT 2 (
RO EXAMINATION AND ANSWER KEY l l
. _ . .. - - -
.
0 s
ATTACHMENT 3 PECO COMMENTS ON WRITTEN EXAMINATION
.
. . .- _._ . - - - - . - - .
g ,
.
a
I
, ATTACHMENT 4 ,
l SIMULATION FACILITY REPORT l l
l Facility Licensee: Limerick Generatina Station Units 1 & 2 l
Facility Docket Nos: 50-352 & 353 Operating Tests Administered from: January 21- 24. 1997 This form is used only to report simulator observations. These observations do not constitute audit or inspection findings and are not, without further verification and review, indicative of noncompliance with 10 CFR 55.45(b). These observations do not affect NRC ,
certification or approval of the simulation facility other than to provide information that j may be used in future evaluations. No licensee action is required in response to these
{
observation None
.