ML052380297
| ML052380297 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Fort Calhoun  |
| Issue date: | 08/25/2005 |
| From: | Ryan Lantz Operations Branch IV |
| To: | Ridenoure R Omaha Public Power District |
| References | |
| 50-285/05-301 50-285/05-301 | |
| Download: ML052380297 (9) | |
See also: IR 05000285/2005301
Text
August 25, 2005
R. T. Ridenoure
Vice President
Omaha Public Power District
Fort Calhoun Station FC-2-4 Adm.
P.O. Box 550
Fort Calhoun, NE 68023-0550
SUBJECT: FORT CALHOUN STATION- NRC EXAMINATION REPORT 05000285/2005301
Dear Mr. Ridenoure:
On July 14, 2005, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) completed an initial operator
licensing examination at Fort Calhoun Station. The enclosed report documents the examination
findings, which were discussed on July 14, 2005, with members of your staff.
The examination included an evaluation of six applicants for reactor operator licenses and four
applicants for senior operator licenses. The examinations were developed using NUREG-1021,
"Operator Licensing Examination Standards for Power Reactors," Revision 9. The examiners
determined that all applicants satisfied the requirements of 10 CFR Part 55, and the appropriate
licenses have been issued.
A licensee-identified violation, which was determined to be of very low safety significance is
listed in this report. If you contest the noncited violation in this report, you should provide a
response within 30 days of the date of this inspection report, with the basis for your denial, to
the NRC, Attn.: document Control Desk, Washington DC 20555-0001; with copies to the
Regional Administrator Region IV; the Director, Office of Enforcement, U. S. NRC, Washington,
DC 20555-0001; and the NRC Resident Inspector at Fort Calhoun Station.
In accordance with 10 CFR 2.390 of the NRC's "Rules of Practice," a copy of this letter, its
enclosure(s), and your response will be made 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/
Ryan Lantz, Chief
Operations Branch
Division of Reactor Safety
Omaha Public Power District -2-
Docket: 50-285
License: DPR-40
Enclosure:
NRC Inspection Report 05000285/2005301
w/Attachment: Supplemental Information
cc w/enclosure:
Joe l. McManis, Manager - Licensing
Omaha Public Power District
Fort Calhoun Station FC-2-4 Adm.
P.O. Box 550
Fort Calhoun, NE 68023-0550
David J. Bannister
Manager - Fort Calhoun Station
Omaha Public Power District
Fort Calhoun Station FC-1-1 Plant
P.O. Box 550
Fort Calhoun, NE 68023-0550
James R. Curtiss
Winston & Strawn
1400 L. Street, N.W.
Washington, DC 20005-3502
Chairman
Washington County Board of Supervisors
P.O. Box 466
Blair, NE 68008
Sue Semerena, Section Administrator
Nebraska Health & Human Services
Dept. of Regulation & Licensing
Division of Public Health Assurance
301 Centennial Mall, South
P.O. Box 95007
Lincoln, NE 68509-5007
Daniel K. McGhee
Bureau of Radiological Health
Iowa Department of Public Health
Lucas State Office Building, 5th Floor
321 East 12th Street
Des Moines, IA 50319
Omaha Public Power District -3-
Electronic distribution by RIV:
Regional Administrator (BSM1)
DRP Director (ATH)
DRS Director (DDC)
DRS Deputy Director (KMK)
Senior Resident Inspector (JDH1)
Resident Inspector (LMW1)
Branch Chief, DRP/E (DNG)
Senior Project Engineer, DRP/E (VGG)
Team Leader, DRP/TSS (RLN1)
RITS Coordinator (KEG)
J. Dixon-Herrity, OEDO RIV Coordinator (JLD)
RidsNrrDipmIipb
FCS Site Secretary (BMM)
SISP Review Completed: __Y____ ADAMS: 3 Yes G No Initials: __TOM____
3 Publicly Available G Non-Publicly Available G Sensitive 3 Non-Sensitive
SOE:OB SOE:OB SOE:OB C:PBE D:DRS C:OB
TOMcKernon/lmb TFStetka RELantz DGraves DDChamberlain RELantz
/RA/ /RA/ /RA/ /RA/ /RA/ /RA/
8/22/05 8/23/05 8/24/05 08/24/05 08/24/05 08/25/05
OFFICIAL RECORD COPY T=Telephone E=E-mail F=Fax
ENCLOSURE
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION IV
Docket: 50-285
License: DPR-40
Report No.: 05000285/2005301
Licensee: Omaha Public Power District
Facility: Fort Calhoun Station
Location: Ft. Calhoun, NE
Dates: July 8-14, 2005
Inspectors: T. McKernon, Senior Operations Engineer, Operations Branch
T. Stetka, Senior Operations Engineer, Operations Branch
R. Lantz, Senior Emergency Preparedness Inspector, Operations Branch
Approved By: Ryan E. Lantz, Chief
Operations Branch
Division of Reactor Safety
-1- Enclosure
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
ER 05000285/2005301 on July 8-14, 2005; Fort Calhoun Station, initial operator licensing
examination.
NRC examiners evaluated the competency of six applicants for reactor operator licenses
and four applicants for senior operator licenses. The licensee developed the examination using
NUREG-1021, "Operator Licensing Examination Standards for Power Reactors," Revision 9.
The licensee provided proctors for the administration of the written examination to all applicants
on July 8, 2005, in accordance with instructions provided by the chief examiner. The NRC
examiners administered the operating test on July 11-14, 2005. One Green noncited violation
was identified. The significance of most findings is indicated by their color (Green, White,
Yellow, Red) using Inspection Manual Chapter 0609, Significance Determination Process.
Findings for which the significance determination process does not apply may be Green or be
assigned a severity level after NRC management review. The NRC's program for overseeing
the safe operation of commercial nuclear power reactors is described in NUREG-1649,
Reactor Oversight Process, Revision 3, dated July 2000.
A. NRC-Identified and Self-Revealing Findings
No findings of significance were identified
B. Licensee Identified Violations
Cornerstone: Not Applicable
One violation of very low safety significance was identified by the licensee.
Corrective actions taken or planned by the licensee have been entered into the
licensees corrective action program. The violation and corrective actions are
listed in Section 4OA7 of this report.
-2- Enclosure
REPORT DETAILS
4. OTHER ACTIVITIES
4OA4 Initial License Examination
.1 Operator Knowledge and Performance
a. Examination Scope
The NRC examination team administered the operating test to the 10 applicants on
July 11-14, 2005. The reactor operator applicants participated in 2 dynamic simulator
scenarios, a control room and facilities walkthrough test consisting of 11 system tasks
and an administrative test consisting of 1 task in each of 4 areas. The 2 applicants for
upgrading their operator license to a senior operator license participated in 1 dynamic
simulator scenario and a control room and facilities walkthrough test consisting of
5 system tasks. The 2 applicants seeking an instant senior operator license participated
in 3 dynamic simulator scenarios, and a control room and facilities walkthrough test
consisting of 10 system tasks. The administrative test for all senior operator applicants
consisted of performing tasks in 5 areas.
On July 8, 2005, the licensee proctored the administration of the written examinations to
all 10 applicants and provided the proposed grades together with the performance
analysis to the NRC for approval.
b. Findings
All applicants passed all parts of the examinations. For the written examinations, the
average score for the reactor operator applicants was 90.5 percent, and the average
score for senior operator applicants was 92.5 percent. The reactor operator applicant
scores ranged from 88 to 94.7 percent, and the senior operator applicant scores ranged
from 89 to 95 percent.
The licensee conducted a performance analysis for the written examinations with
emphasis on questions missed by half or more of the applicants. After reviewing the
licensees analysis, the examiners concluded that all questions were valid and that there
were only minor training deficiencies requiring the licensee to address in its corrective
action program. Licensee personnel indicated that any training deficiencies would also
be reviewed to determine impact on licensed operator requalification training. There
was only one post-examination comment provided on examination questions. The
licensee submitted Question 2 for review on July 21, 2005, with a recommendation that
both answer Choices A or B be accepted as correct answers. The question involved the
restoration of letdown after a small break loss-of-coolant accident had occurred, which
resulted in a plant protection logic system actuation. Answer Choice A referred to the
reset of engineered safeguard relays in accordance with Emergency Operating
Procedure-Abnormal Operating Procedure, Attachment 23. Answer Choice B related to
the blocking of plant protection logic system, and reset of plant protection logic system
and containment isolation actuation signal lockout relays in accordance with the
emergency operating procedure floating step, which while performing the emergency
-1- Enclosure
operating procedures is always active and applicable. The chief examiner reviewed the
licensees recommendation and since both answer choices would result in restoration of
letdown and were actions to be taken by plant procedures, answer Choices A and B was
accepted as correct. The written examinations were regraded based upon the change
to the answer key.
.2 Initial Licensing Examination Development
The licensee developed the examination in accordance with NUREG-1021, Revision 9.
Licensee facility training and operations staff involved in examination development were
on a security agreement.
.2.1 Operating Examination Outline and Examination Package
a. Examination Scope
The licensee staff submitted the operating test outlines on April 1, 2005. The chief
examiner reviewed the submittal against the requirements of NUREG-1021, Revision 9.
The draft examination package was received by the NRC on May 27, 2005. Examiners
reviewed the examination against the requirements of NUREG-1021, Revision 9, and
provided comments to the licensee on June 20, 2005. The chief examiner conducted an
onsite validation of the examinations and provided further comments during the week of
June 20, 2005.
b. Findings
Examiners approved the initial examination outline with minor comments and advised
the licensee to proceed with the operating examination development.
The chief examiner determined that the examination initially submitted by the licensee
staff was within the range of acceptability expected for a proposed examination.
No findings of significance were identified.
.2.2 Simulation Facility Performance
a. Scope
The examination team observed simulator performance with regard to plant fidelity
during the examination validation and administration.
b. Findings
No findings of significance were identified.
-2- Enclosure
2.3 Examination Security
a. Scope
The examiners reviewed examination security both during the onsite preparation and
examination administration weeks with respect to NUREG-1021 and 10 CFR Part 55
requirements. In addition, the chief examiner sampled historical records of the
applicants to verify the accuracy of data on their license applications, in accordance with
Examiner Standard 202.C.2.e of NUREG 1021.
b. Findings
One finding was identified during the examination validation week and is discussed
below in Section 4OA7. During the examination, the licensee kept the applicants well
sequestered and escorted.
4OA6 Meetings, Including Exit
On July 14, 2005, the examiners presented the examination results to Ms. M. Tesar and
other members of the staff who acknowledged the findings. The inspectors confirmed
that proprietary information was not provided or reviewed during the examination
process.
4OA7 Licensee-Identified Violations
The following violation of very low safety significance (Green) was identified by the
licensee and is a violation of NRC requirements, which meets the criteria of Section VI
of the NRC Enforcement Policy, for being dispositioned as an noncited violation.
- 10 CFR 55.49 states, in part, . . . The integrity of an examination is considered
compromised if any activity, regardless of intent, affected, or, but for detection,
would have affected the equitable and consistent administration of the
examination. This includes all activities related to the preparation,
administration, and grading of examinations. Contrary to this, on June 22,
2005, during the examination validation, the licensee staff left keys in key lock
switches on the simulator control boards following the performance of a job
performance measure. Immediately thereafter, the initial licensing applicants
entered the simulator for training and observed the keys in the switches. The
licensee has documented this issue in Condition Report CR 2005-03502. The
licensee staff replaced the job performance measure so there was no impact on
the examination.
The finding is more than minor because it could have compromised the integrity
and discriminatory validity of the license examination. If the practice had gone
undetected, it could have given the applicants unfair advantage and, thus,
lowered the discriminatory value of the examination. The finding is of very low
safety significance since it was detected before license examination
administration and the license examination was modified to replace the job
performance measure.
-3- Enclosure
ATTACHMENT
KEY POINTS OF CONTACT
Licensee Personnel
A. Berck, Operations Training Instructor
G. Cavanaugh, Supervisor, Station Licensing
R. Clemens, Division Manager, Nuclear Assessment
J. Cook, Shift Manager, Training Instructor
P. Cronin, Manager, Shift Operations
D. Dryden, Licensing
M. Frans, Assistant Plant Manager
J. Goodell, Manager, Training (Incoming)
J. Koske, Training Consultant
J. Kuzela, Operations Training Instructor
M. Tesar, Division Manger, Nuclear Support and Supply Division
D. Weaver, Supervisor, Operations and Technical Training
R. Westcott, Manager, Training (Outgoing)
NRC personnel
L. Willoughby, Resident Inspector, Fort Calhoun Station
A-1 Attachment