IR 05000445/2007301
| ML071800117 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Comanche Peak  |
| Issue date: | 06/29/2007 |
| From: | Gody A Operations Branch IV |
| To: | Blevins M TXU Energy |
| References | |
| 50-445/07-301, 50-446/07-301 50-445/07-301, 50-446/07-301 | |
| Download: ML071800117 (11) | |
Text
une 29, 2007
SUBJECT:
COMANCHE PEAK STEAM ELECTRIC STATION, UNITS 1 AND 2 - NRC EXAMINATION REPORT 05000445/2007301; 05000446/2007301
Dear Mr. Blevins:
On April 20, 2007, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) completed an examination at Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station, Units 1 and 2. The enclosed report documents the examination findings, which were discussed on May 23, 2007, with Mr. Mark Kanavos, Plant Manager, and other members of your staff.
The examination included an evaluation of 5 applicants for reactor operator licenses, 3 applicants for instant senior operator licenses, and 4 applicants for upgrade senior operator licenses. The written and operating examinations were developed using NUREG-1021,
"Operator Licensing Examination Standards for Power Reactors," Revision 9. It was determined that 11 of the 12 applicants satisfied the requirements of 10 CFR Part 55, and the appropriate licenses have been issued.
No findings of significance were identified during this examination.
In accordance with 10 CFR 2.390 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). ADAMS is accessible from the NRC Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html (the Public Electronic Reading Room).
Sincerely,
/RA/
Anthony T. Gody, Chief Operations Branch Division of Reactor Safety
TXU Energy -2-Dockets: 50-445; 50-446 Licenses: NPF-87; NPF-89
Enclosure:
NRC Examination Report 05000445/2007301; 05000446/2007301
REGION IV==
Dockets: 50-445, 50-446 Licenses: NPF-87, NPF-89 Report: 05000445/2007301; 05000446/2007301 Licensee: TXU Generation Company LP Facility: Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station, Units 1 and 2 Location: FM-56, Glen Rose, Texas Dates: April 16 through May 23, 2007 Inspectors: Jim Drake, Chief Examiner, Operations Branch Tom Stetka, Senior Operations Engineer Brian Larson, Operations Engineer Approved By: Anthony T. Gody, Chief Operations Branch Division of Reactor Safety-1- Enclosure
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS ER 05000445/2007301, 05000446/2007301; 04/16-5/23/2007, Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station Units 1 and 2, Operator Licensing Initial Examination Report.
The NRC examiners evaluated the competency of 5 applicants for reactor operator licenses ,
3 applicants for instant senior operator licenses, and 4 applicants for upgrade senior operator licenses at Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station, Units 1 and 2. The facility licensee developed the examinations using NUREG-1021, "Operator Licensing Examination Standards for Power Reactors," Revision 9. The written examination was administered by the facility on April 23, 2007. The NRC examiners administered the operating test April 16-20, 2007. It was determined that 11 of 12 applicants passed all portions of the examination.
A. NRC - Identified and Self- Revealing Findings No findings of significance were identified.
B. Licensee - Identified Violations None.
-2- Enclosure
Report Details 4. OTHER ACTIVITIES (OA)
4OA5 OTHER ACTIVITIES (Initial License Examination)
.1 License Applications a. Scope The chief examiner reviewed all 12 preliminary applications and audited 2 of the license applications in accordance with NUREG 1021, "Operator Licensing Examination Standards for Power Reactors," Revision 9. Since the audit of the physical examination records identified comments and notes by the examining physician, which indicated potential disqualifying conditions in accordance with ANSI 3.4 1983 with no additional explanation for these conditions and no recommended restrictions on the license applications, the chief examiner performed a 100 percent audit of the physical examination records for the applicants. The audit found that two of the applicants had medical conditions that required restrictions on their license applications, although the preliminary applications had recommended no restrictions. Since this was identified by the chief examiner in the preliminary application review and corrected before the final applications were submitted, the issue is considered minor.
b. Findings No findings of significance were identified.
.2 Operator Knowledge and Performance a. Examination Scope The NRC examination team administered various portions of the operating test to all 12 applicants on April 16 - 20, 2007. Most of the reactor operator and instant senior operator applicants participated in two or three dynamic simulator scenarios, a control room and facilities walkthrough test consisting of 10 or 11 system tasks, and an administrative test consisting of 4 administrative tasks for the reactor operator applicants and 5 administrative tasks for the instant senior operator applicants. The four applicants upgrading their reactor operator licenses to senior operator licenses participated in one scenario and took a control room and facilities walkthrough test consisting of 5 system tasks, and an administrative test consisting of 5 administrative tasks.
On April 23, 2007, the licensee proctored the administration of the written examinations to all 12 applicants. The licensee staff graded the written examinations, analyzed the results, and presented their analysis to the NRC on April 30, 2007-3- Enclosure
b. Findings Written Test All of the applicants passed the written examination. The average score for reactor operator applicants was 87 percent, and the average score for senior operator applicants was 82.9 percent for the senior operator portion of the examination and 87.4 percent for the combined written examination. The reactor operator applicant scores ranged from 81 to 93 percent, and the senior operator applicant scores ranged from 72 to 100 percent for the senior operator portion of the examination and 82 to 95 percent for the combined written examination.
NUREG 1021, Revision 9, Section ES-403, requires the licensee to analyze the validity of any written examination questions that were missed by half or more of the applicants.
The licensee conducted this performance analysis for 11 questions. The licensee concluded that all questions were valid and conducted the necessary remediation with the applicants. After reviewing the licensees analysis, the examiners agreed with the licensee's assessment.
Operating Test After grading candidate performance, 11 of the 12 applicants passed all portions of the operating test. During the operating test, the examiners observed some generic weaknesses associated with: (1) the candidates demonstrated understanding of integrated plant operations; and (2) diagnosing malfunctions based upon plant instrumentation and indications.
The licensee agreed to develop remedial training for those candidates who passed the overall examination but demonstrated those weaknesses.
One administrative job performance measure was replaced during the examination because of typographical errors, which in conjunction with an ambiguous procedure rendered the job performance measure invalid. The licensee committed to revise the procedure.
.3 Initial Licensing Examination Development a. Examination Scope The licensee developed the examinations in accordance with NUREG-1021, Revision 9.
Licensee facility training and operations staff involved in examination development were on a security agreement.
The facility licensee submitted the operating examination outlines on January 30, 2007.
Examiners reviewed the submittal against the requirements of NUREG-1021, Revision 9, and forwarded comments to the licensee on February 5, 2007. The facility licensee submitted the draft operating examination package on February 12, 2007, and the draft written examination package on March 2, 2007. Examiners reviewed the draft submittals against the requirements of NUREG-1021, Revision 9, and provided-4- Enclosure
comments to the licensee for the draft operating examination on February 15, 2007, and comments for the draft written examination on March 20, 2007. The examiners conducted an onsite validation of the operating test and provided comments to the licensee during the week of February 26, 2007. The licensee satisfactorily completed comment resolution during the week of April 2, 2007.
b. Findings Examiners approved the initial examination outline with minor comments and advised the licensee to proceed with the examination development.
The chief examiner determined that the operating and written examinations initially submitted by the licensee were within the range of acceptability expected for a proposed examination and were satisfactory after comment resolution.
No findings of significance were identified.
.4 Simulation Facility Performance a. Scope The examiners observed simulator performance with regard to plant fidelity and reliability during the examination validation and administration.
b. Findings On April 16, 2007, the simulator had material problems that delayed the administration of the examination for several hours. The simulator was repaired and the examination schedule was rearranged to minimize the impact on the overall examination. This deficiency is documented in licensee Condition Report SMF-2007-001356-00. No other simulator deficiencies were noted during validation and no findings of significance were identified.
.5 Examination Security a. Scope The examiners reviewed examination security both during the onsite preparation and examination administration week with respect to NUREG-1021 requirements. Written plans for simulator security and applicant control were reviewed and discussed with licensee personnel.
b. Findings No findings of significance were identified.
-5- Enclosure
4OA6 Meetings, including Exit Exit Meeting Summary On April 20, 2007, the examination team presented a debrief to Mr. Steve Sewell, Operations Manager, and other members of the licensee's management staff at the conclusion of the operating test. The licensee acknowledged the findings presented. A subsequent telecom exit was conducted with Mr. Mark Kanavos, Plant Manager, and other members of his staff on May 23, 2007. The findings as detailed in this report and applicant performance during the examination were discussed.
The licensee did not identify as proprietary any information or materials used during the examination.
ATTACHMENT: SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION-6- Enclosure
SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION KEY POINTS OF CONTACT Licensee Personnel Mark Kanavos, Plant Manager Steven Sewell, Training Manager Gary Caspersen, Operations Training Manager Garry Struble, Operations Training Supervisor Rob Slough, Regulatory Affairs NRC Personnel Don Allen, Senior Resident Inspector Alfred Sanchez, Resident Inspector A-1 Attachment