IR 05000423/2009302
| ML093060099 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Millstone  |
| Issue date: | 11/02/2009 |
| From: | Hansell S Operations Branch I |
| To: | Christian D Dominion Resources Services |
| Shared Package | |
| ml083020478 | List: |
| References | |
| FOIA/PA-2011-0115 ER 09-302 | |
| Download: ML093060099 (10) | |
Text
November 2, 2009
SUBJECT:
MILLSTONE POWER STATION, UNIT 3 - NRC EXAMINATION REPORT 05000423/2009302
Dear Mr. Christian:
On September 22,2009, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) completed an examination at Millstone Unit 3. The enclosed report documents the examination findings, which were discussed on October 9,2009, with Mr. D Rodgers, Supervisor Initial Operator Training, and other members of your staff.
The examination included the evaluation of three applicants for reactor operator licenses, six applicants for instant senior operator licenses and three 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, Supplement 1.
The license examiners determined that twelve of the twelve applicants satisfied the requirements of 10 CFR Part 55, and the appropriate licenses were issued on October 9, 2009.
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 NRC's document system (ADAMS). ADAMS is accessible from the NRC Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/reading
~..;::;..:;.::;:;;.;..:=-:...;= (the Public Electronic Reading Room).
Sincerely, IRA!
Samuel L. Hansell, Jr., Chief Operations Branch Division of Reactor Safety Enclosure:
NRC Examination Report 05000423/2009302 cc w/encl: Distribution per ListServ
Mr. David
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
ER 05000423/2009302; September 14-22, 2009; Millstone Power Station, Unit 3; Initial
Operator Licensing Examination Report.
NRC examiners evaluated the competency of three applicants for reactor operator licenses, six applicants for instant senior operator licenses and three applicants for upgrade senior operator licenses at Millstone Power Station Unit 3. The facility licensee developed the examinations using NUREG-1 021, "Operator licensing Examination Standards for Power Reactors," Revision 9, Supplement 1. Three NRC examiners administered the operating tests on September 14-18, 2009. The written examination was administered by the facility on September 22, 2009. The license examiners determined that twelve of the twelve applicants satisfied the requirements of 10 CFR Part 55, and the appropriate licenses have been issued.
NRC-Identified and Self-Revealing Findings
No findings of significance were identified.
Licensee-Identified Violations
None.
ii
.1
REPORT DETAILS
OTHER ACTIVITIES (OA)
40A5 Other Activities (Initial Operator License Examination) License Applications
a. Scope
The examiners reviewed all twelve license applications submitted by the licensee to ensure the applications reflected that each applicant satisfied relevant license eligibility requirements. The applications were submitted on NRC Form 398, "Personal Qualification Statement," and NRC Form 396, "Certification of Medical Examination by Facility Licensee." The examiners also audited supporting documentation for these license applications to confirm that they accurately reflected the applicants' qualifications. This audit focused on the applicants' experience and on-the-job training, including control manipulations that provided significant reactivity changes.
b. Findings
No findings of significance were identified.
. 2 Operator Knowledge and Performance
a. Examination Scope
On September 22, 2009, the licensee proctored the administration of the written examinations to all twelve applicants. The licensee staff graded the written examinations, analyzed the results, and presented their analysis to the NRC on September 29,2009.
The NRC examination team administered the various portions of the operating examination to all twelve applicants on September 14-18, 2009. The three applicants for reactor operator licenses participated in two dynamic simulator scenarios, a control room and facilities walkthrough test consisting of eleven system tasks, and an administrative test consisting of four tasks. The six applicants seeking an instant senior operator license participated in two or three dynamic simulator scenarios, a control room and facilities walkthrough test consisting of ten system tasks, and an administrative test consisting of five tasks. The three applicants for upgrade senior operator licenses participated in two dynamic simulator scenarios, a control room and facilities walkthrough test consisting of five system tasks, and an administrative test consisting of five tasks.
b. Findings
All twelve of the applicants passed all parts of the written and operating tests. For the written examinations, the reactor operator applicants' average score was 91.1 percent and ranged from 90.7 to 92.0 percent and the senior operator applicants' average score was 94.0 percent and ranged from 90.0 to 98.0 percent. The overall written examination average was 93.3 percent. The text of the examination questions, the licensee's examination analysis, and the licensee's post-examination comments may be accessed in the ADAMS system under the accession numbers noted in the attachment.
Chapter ES-403 and Form ES-403-1 of NUREG 1021 require 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 three questions (12, 21, and 83) that met this criterion and submitted the analysis to the chief examiner. This analysis concluded that the three questions were difficult but valid based upon a KA (Knowledge and Ability) value ~ 2.5. No changes to training material were required. All applicants were remediated on the topics of these questions during their post examination review.
There were no post-examination comments submitted by the licensee.
. 3 Initial Licensing Examination Development
a. Examination Scope
The facility licensee developed the examinations in accordance with NUREG-1 021, Revision 9, Supplement 1. All licensee facility training and operations staff involved in examination preparation and validation were listed on a security agreement. The facility licensee submitted both the written and operating examination outlines on June 30, 2009. The chief examiner reviewed the outlines against the requirements of NUREG 1021, Revision 9, Supplement 1, and provided comments to the licensee. The facility licensee submitted the draft examination package on July 30, 2009. The chief examiner reviewed the draft examination package against the requirements of NUREG-1 021, Revision 9, Supplement 1, and provided comments to the licensee on the examination on August 10 -- 13, 2009 during the onsite validation of the operating examinations and provided further comments during the week of August 17, 2009. The licensee satisfactorily completed comment resolution on August 27,2009.
b. Findings
The NRC approved the initial examination outline and advised the licensee to proceed with the operating examination development.
The examiners determined that the written and operating examinations initially submitted by the licensee were within the range of acceptability expected for a proposed examination.
No findings of significance were identified.
Simulation Facility Performance
a. Examination Scope
The examiners observed simulator performance with regard to plant fidelity during the examination validation and administration.
.4 b.
Findings No findings of significance were identified.
. 5 Examination Security
a. Examination Scope
On August 6,2009, the facility licensee informed the NRC that a potential existed for simulator-related examination material to be compromised due to an unsecured computer work station in the simulator's computer room. The NRC reviewed the circumstances surrounding this issue. Procedures for simulator security and applicant control were also reviewed and discussed with licensee personnel.
b. Findings and Observations
The unsecured computer work station was added to the simulator computer room when the simulator was upgraded to a new platform about 10 months earlier. This work station can only access real-time simulator activity (i.e., it cannot review simulator history). The licensee's procedure for examination security had not been updated to include this new work station. The licensee entered this issue into the corrective action program (CR344011). In response to this issue, the licensee has revised their security procedure. The licensee now prohibits access to the simulator computer by locking the room and locking the cabinets that contains the newly added work station mentioned above. A password was added to the work station as an additional barrier. All monitors in the simulator computer room are turned off during examination-related activities.
The licensee interviewed the applicants for this examination regarding this issue. When questioned, all of the applicants stated that they did not entering the simulator computer room or the work station. The licensee stated that although the work station could have been accessed by the applicants, the window of accessibility was very limited.
Furthermore, use of the work station requires someone to possess technical knowledge of the system to acquire specific data that is currently being generated by the simulator.
Although there was no known compromise that had occurred, the licensee agreed to modify or replace the simulator scenarios and the simulator job performance measures to ensure that the simulator-related portions of the examination would not be compromised. The licensee made the necessary changes over the weekend of August 8-9,2009, and the examination team reviewed the revised material during the validation week of August 10, 2009. The revised material met the requirements of NUREG-1021 and was sufficiently different from the originally validated examination material.
Overall, there was no evidence to indicate that the originally proposed simulator-related examination material had been compromised. It should also be noted that this work station had been added to the simulator computer room after the 2008 annual operating requalification examinations. Therefore, this work station did not allow for the compromise of last year's requalification operating examination.
There are no findings of significance.
40A6 Meetings, Including Exit The chief examiner presented the examination results to Mr. D. Rodgers, Supervisor Initial Operator Training, and other members of the licensee's management staff on October 9, 2009. The licensee acknowledged the findings presented.
The licensee did not identify any information or materials used during the examination as proprietary.
ATTACHMENT:
SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION
KEY POINTS OF CONTACT
Licensee Personnel
- T. Horner, Simulator Supervisor
- D. Minnich, Unit 3 Instructor
- D. Rodgers, Supervisor Initial Operator Training
- R. Royce, Unit 3 Instructor
- C. Ryan, Supervisor Licensed Operator Requalification Training
NRC Personnel
- B. Haagensen, Resident Inspector
ITEMS OPENED, CLOSED, AND DISCUSSED
Opened
NONE
Opened and Closed
NONE
Closed
NONE
Discussed
NONE