ML13248A600

WC-2013-07 Draft Operating Test Comments

ML13248A600
Person / Time
Site:	Wolf Creek
Issue date:	07/26/2013
From:	David Strickland Operations Branch IV
To:
laura hurley
References
Download: ML13248A600 (5)

Text

WC-2013-07 DRAFT OPERATING TEST COMMENTS ADMIN JPMS

4. Job Content

1. 3. Attributes

2. Errors 6.

Dyn 5.

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

)

Focus Steps (N/B) lap Link RO (A1) S 2 S Updated initial condition statement and added the word boron to chemistry sample results. DGS RO (A2) S 4 E Typo in JPM performance step 9. It states divide the upper normalized current by avg of lower normalized currents from 8.4.4.1. it should be upper divided by upper (see step 8.4.5 of procedure STS RE-012). This JPM was NOT marked as Proprietary. Now marked proprietary. Corrected typo.

DGS Updated task standard to reflect procedure step info. DGS RO (A3) S 3 E Shouldnt the word PASSED at the bottom of the surveillance be lined out or corrected somehow to show failed? If so, the JPM standard should state that the applicant lined out PASSED and initialed or something like that. Comments incorporated. DGS Updated initial conditions so cueing is not required by examiner. Removed alert conditions. DGS RO (A4) S 3 S Updated initial conditions to better reflect that first part was completed using a different RWP. DGS SRO (SA1) S 4 S JPM marked as Proprietary-therefore do not include this data when uploading to ADAMS. I think your error bars on the calcs could be loosened up some. How do you read -6.31 to -6.36 on a graph that does not have increments that small? Comments incorporated. DGS Updated initial condition to simplify the statement. DGS SRO (SA2) S 3 S Shouldnt the first few steps of JPM state independently calculated by applicant or applicant reviewed the ROs previous calc for step xx.yy? Added to examiner note that applicant will be independently calculating all values. DGS Removed steps completed after unique error is found. No value added. DGS SRO (SA3) S 3 E JPM standard does not match key exactly. Firstly, step 8.4.4.2 N42 value is 0.958 whilein JPM standard it is 0.955. Secondly, N43 value in key is 0.996 while in JPM it is 0.997. Thirddly, max radial QPTR calc in key is 1.099 while in the JPM standard is 1.098. Also, several of these numbers are wrong/different in the task standard. These need to all agree. Reduced Tech Spec required to 2 calls.

Key fixed. DGS SRO (SA4) S 3 S Added a space to separate the two steps for better clarification. Removed date as a critical step DGS SRO (SA5) S 3 S Need to see this run to see when to time the start of the clock. Should put more detail in the JPM to cover this information because it is time critical, it is really important to note the correct start time from a dynamic scenario in the simulator like this. Jane to administer this JPM. WC has a unique way to do this one (EP call on dynamic simulator). DGS 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. 0 Page 1 of 5 OBDI 202 - IOLE Process

• 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. 0 Page 2 of 5 OBDI 202 - IOLE Process

WC-2013-07 DRAFT OPERATING TEST COMMENTS CONTROL ROOM/IN-PLANT SYSTEMS JPMS

4. Job Content

1. 2. 3. Attributes 6.

Errors 5.

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

Focus Steps (N/B) lap Link S1 D 2 S S2 D 3 S S3 D 2 S S4 D 3 S S5 D 3 E This is a long JPM, could be shortened by removing certain steps. I am not sure how much value is added in having such as long JPM. JPM shortened with new starting point and stopping point. Reduced from 30 min to 15 minutes DGS S6 D 3 S S7 D 3 S The procedure does not direct (in step 6.10.1.12) the operator to use GT RIC-23B if RIC-21B cannot be verified. This may or may not be a problem for operators. I guess we will see if it is an issue during validation. Not a problem during validation. DGS S8 D 3 S Removed start time, not time critical. DGS P1 S 3 S P2 S 2 S P3 S 2 E In initiating cue, you are cueing the applicant that they need to do B5 and that is a part of the alt path of the JPM. I would recommend removing the B5 from the Initiating Cue and just state that complete the task starting at B4 Comments incorporated. DGS 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. 0 Page 3 of 5 OBDI 202 - IOLE Process

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. 0 Page 4 of 5 OBDI 202 - IOLE Process

WC-2013-07 DRAFT 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 S 2 S 3 S 4 S 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. 0 Page 5 of 5 OBDI 202 - IOLE Process