ML081200401

2008-03 - Draft - Operating Test Comments

ML081200401
Person / Time
Site:	Waterford
Issue date:	03/24/2008
From:	Division of Reactor Safety IV
To:	Entergy Operations
References
50-382/08-301
Download: ML081200401 (4)

Text

W3 2008 Exam-APP-E - OPERATING TEST COMMENTS - ADMIN JPMS

4. Job Content

1. 2. 3. Attributes 6.

Errors 5.

JPM# Dyn LOD Explanation U/E/S (D/S) (1-5) IC Cues Critical Scope Over- Job- Minutia (See below for instructions)

Focus Steps (N/B) lap Link RO (A1) S 2 E Step 8 - change Xenon Reactivity Worth to -2.1. Change Trainee to Applicant (all JPMs)

RO (A2) S 2 E Step 4 - adjust band down by 1,000. Attach 2-G - change CSP % from 53 to 55 per ICs RO (A3) S 3 S RO (A4) S 2 S SRO (A5) S 2 E Step 1 - change band to 5.75-5.85. Step 3 - change band to .6-.7 SRO (A6) S 3 S SRO (A7) S 3 E Step 1 - identify equipment in Standards.

SRO (A8) S 1 X U Too much direct lookup with procedure. Replace JPM SRO (A9) S 3 E Step 5 - change wind direction from initial PARS to make critical step Instructions for Completing Matrix This form is not contained in or required by NUREG-1021. Utilities are not required or encouraged to use it. The purpose of this form is to enhance regional consistency in reviewing operating tests. Additional information on these areas may be found in Examination Good Practices Appendix D. Check or mark any item(s) requiring comment and explain the issue in the space provided.

1. Determine whether the task is dynamic (D) or static (S). A dynamic task is one that involves continuous monitoring and response to varying parameters. A static task is basically a system reconfiguration or realignment.

2. Determine level of difficulty (LOD) using established 1-5 rating scale. Levels 1 and 5 represent inappropriate (low or high) discriminatory level for the license being tested.

3. Check the appropriate box when an attribute weakness is identified:

• The initiating cue is not sufficiently clear to ensure the operator understands the task and how to begin.

• The JPM does not contain sufficient cues that are objective (not leading).

• All critical steps (elements) have not been properly identified.

• Scope of the task is either too narrow (N) or too broad (B).

• Excessive overlap with other part of operating test or written examination.

4. Check the appropriate box when a job content error is identified:

• Topics not linked to job content (e.g., disguised task, not required in real job).

• Task is trivial and without safety significance.

5. Based on the reviewer=s judgment, is the JPM as written (U)nacceptable (requiring repair or replacement), in need of (E)ditorial enhancement, or (S)atisfactory?

6. Provide a brief description of any U or E rating in the explanation column.

7. Save initial review comments as normal black text; indicate how comments were resolved using blue text so that each JPM used on the exam is reflected by a (S)atisfactory resolution on this form.

W3 2008 GP5-APP-E - OPERATING TEST COMMENTS - CONTROL ROOM/IN-PLANT SYSTEMS JPMS

4. Job Content

1. 2. 3. Attributes 6.

Errors 5.

JPM# Dyn LOD Explanation U/E/S (D/S) (1-5) IC Cues Critical Scope Over- Job- Minutia (See below for instructions)

Focus Steps (N/B) lap Link S1 D 2 X U Steps 8 and 10 are NOT critical. Step 15 - Change cue such that examiner does not direct the applicant to secure the RCP S2 D 2 X U Step 2 is NOT critical. Step 6 and 10 - eliminate optional remote recorder/meter S3 D 3 X U Step 4 - standard #3 is NOT critical. Step 13 is critical. Step 16 - change cue such that examiner does NOT cue applicant to perform an Emergency Shutdown of the EDG.

S4 D 2 E Minor changes to ICs.

S5 D 3 E Step 6 - identify Pump A or B. Steps 9 and 12 - need expected flow rates in the standards.

Move note from Step 15 to Step 14.

S6 D 2 E Two step 4s. Capitalize valve/switch names. Step 8 - valve in step description and the standard dont match (SI-139A / SI-138A)

S7 D 2 X U Step 4 is NOT critical S8 D 2 E Two step 2s. Step 6 - provide detail in standard on how gas decay tank is isolated P1 S 2 E Minor editorial changes P2 S 2 E Step 1 - change cue such that applicant must request info prior to providing it P3 S 2 E Multiple Steps - change cues such that applicant must simulate the required action prior to providing the cue.

Instructions for Completing Matrix This form is not contained in or required by NUREG-1021. Utilities are not required or encouraged to use it. The purpose of this form is to enhance regional consistency in reviewing operating tests. Additional information on these areas may be found in Examination Good Practices Appendix D. Check or mark any item(s) requiring comment and explain the issue in the space provided.

1. Determine whether the task is dynamic (D) or static (S). A dynamic task is one that involves continuous monitoring and response to varying parameters. A static task is basically a system reconfiguration or realignment.

2. Determine level of difficulty (LOD) using established 1-5 rating scale. Levels 1 and 5 represent inappropriate (low or high) discriminatory level for the license being tested.

3. Check the appropriate box when an attribute weakness is identified:

$ The initiating cue is not sufficiently clear to ensure the operator understands the task and how to begin.

$ The JPM does not contain sufficient cues that are objective (not leading).

$ All critical steps (elements) have not been properly identified.

$ Scope of the task is either too narrow (N) or too broad (B).

$ Excessive overlap with other part of operating test or written examination.

4. Check the appropriate box when a job content error is identified:

• Topics not linked to job content (e.g., disguised task, not required in real job).

• Task is trivial and without safety significance.

5. Based on the reviewer=s judgment, is the JPM as written (U)nacceptable (requiring repair or replacement), in need of (E)ditorial enhancement, or (S)atisfactory?

6. Provide a brief description of any U or E rating in the explanation column.

7. Save initial review comments as normal black text; indicate how comments were resolved using blue text so that each JPM used on the exam is reflected by a (S)atisfactory resolution on this form.

W3 2008 GP5-APP-E - OPERATING TEST COMMENTS - SCENARIOS Scenario 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9.

10. Explanation (See below for instructions)

Set ES TS Crit IC Pred TL L/C Eff U/E/S 1 E D-2s contain too many steps that are not expected to be performed. TS actions need additional detail 2 E D-2s contain too many steps that are not expected to be performed. TS actions need additional detail 3 E D-2s contain too many steps that are not expected to be performed. TS actions need additional detail 4 E D-2s contain too many steps that are not expected to be performed. TS actions need additional detail Instructions for Completing Matrix This form is not contained in or required by NUREG-1021. Utilities are not required or encouraged to use it. The purpose of this form is to enhance regional consistency in reviewing operating test scenario sets. Additional information on these areas may be found in Examination Good Practices Appendix D. Check or mark any item(s) requiring comment and explain the issue in the space provided.

1. ES: ES-301 checklists 4, 5, & 6 satisfied.

2. TS: Set includes SRO TS actions for each SRO, with required actions explicitly detailed.

3. Crit: Each manipulation or evolution has explicit success criteria documented in Form ES-D-2.

4. IC: Out of service equipment and other initial conditions reasonably consistent between scenarios and not predictive of scenario events and actions.

5. Pred: Scenario sequence and other factors avoid predictability issues.

6. TL: Time line constructed, including event and process triggered conditions, such that scenario can run without routine examiner cuing.

7. L/C: Length and complexity for each scenario in the set is reasonable for the crew mix being examined, such that all applicants have reasonably similar exposure and events are needed for evaluation purposes.

8. Eff: Sequence of events is reasonably efficient for examination purposes, especially with respect to long delays or interactions.

9. Based on the reviewer=s judgment, rate the scenario set as (U)nacceptable (requiring repair or replacement), in need of (E)ditorial enhancement, or (S)atisfactory.

10. Provide a brief description of problem in the explanation column.

11. Save initial review comments as normal black text; indicate how comments were resolved using blue text so that each JPM used on the exam is reflected by a (S)atisfactory resolution on this form.