ML14309A136

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
2014 Palisades Nuclear Plant Initial License Examination Proposed Exam Files
ML14309A136
Person / Time
Site: Palisades Entergy icon.png
Issue date: 09/12/2014
From: David Reeser
NRC/RGN-III/DRS/OLB
To:
Shared Package
ML13093A493 List:
References
Download: ML14309A136 (8)
v • d • e


Text

2014 PALISADES NUCLEAR PLANT INITIAL LICENSE EXAMINATION PROPOSED EXAM FILES

0Entergy Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc.

Palisades Nuclear Plant 27780 Blue Star Memorial Highway Covert, Ml 49043 269,764.2000 Walter E. Nelson Training Manager PNP 2014-070 July 7, 2014 NUREG-1021 Mr. David Reeser U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Region Ill 2443 Warrenville Road Suite 210 Lisle, IL 60532-4352 Palisades Nuclear Plant Dockets 50-255 and 72-07 License No. DPR-20

Subject:

Initial Operator License Examination Materials

Dear Mr. Reeser:

Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc. is submitting the initial license examination for the Palisades Nuclear Plant, in accordance with NUREG-1021, "Operator Licensing Examination Standards for Power Reactors," Revision 9, Supplement 1. The initial license examination is scheduled for September 8 through September 19, 2014. The following materials are enclosed:

One CD with electronic copies of the following:

  • ES 201-3, Examination Security Agreement (updated)
  • ES 301-1, Administrative Topics Outline (updated) (2)
  • ES 301-2, Control Room/In-Plant Outline (3)

ES 301-6, Competencies Checklist (3)

  • ES 401-2/3, PWR Examination Outline (updated)
  • ES 401-4, Record of Rejected K!As (updated)

JUL - 9 2014

PNP 2014-070 Mr. David Reeser Page 2

  • ES 401-7, RO Written Examination Coversheet
  • ES 401-8, SRO Written Examination Coversheet
  • RO Written Examination
  • RO Written Examination Modified Question Originals
  • RO Written Examination Key SRO Written Examination SRO Written Examination Key

Task Summary

  • Scenarios (4)

Scenario Outlines (4)

  • Operating Test Schedule (updated)

One CD with electronic copies of the following:

Palisades NRC Initial License Exam References Hard copies with signatures of the following forms:

  • ES-301-3, Operating Test Quality Checklist
  • ES-301-4, Simulator Scenario Quality Checklist
  • ES-401-6, Written Examination Quality Checklist

PNP 2014-070 Mr. David Reeser Page 3 In accordance with NUREG-1 021, ES-201, Attachment 1, these materials shall be withheld from public disclosure until after the examinations are complete.

Please contact Steve Botimer at (269) 764-2975 if you have any questions regarding this submittal.

This letter contains no new commitments and no revisions to existing commitments.

CC Administrator, Region Ill, USNRC (w/o enclosures)

Project Manager, Palisades, USNRC (w/o enclosures)

Resident Inspector, Palisades, USNRC (w/o enclosures)

Document Control Desk, USNRC (w/o enclosures)

ES-301 Operating Test Quality Checklist Form ES-301-3 Facility: Pali§ades Date of Examination: September 2014 Operating Test Number: 1 Initials

1. GENERAL CRITERIA a b* c#
a. The operating test conforms with the previously approved outline; changes are consistent with sampling requirements (e.g., 10 CFR 55.45, operational importance, safety function distribution). eb ~ :L
b. There is no day-to-day repetition between this and other operating tests to be administered during this examination. ~ ~ ~
c. The operating test shall not duplicate items from the applicants' audit test(s)(see Section D.1.a).

\h ~  ::L

d. Overlap with the written examination and between different parts of the operating test is within acceptable limits. d1 ~ ~
e. It appears that the operating test will differentiate between competent and less-than-competent applicants at the designated license level. d> tSA-5 ~
2. WALK-THROUGH CRITERIA - -- --
a. Each JPM includes the following, as applicable:
  • initial conditions
  • initiating cues
  • references and tools, including associated procedures
  • reasonable and validated time limits (average time allowed for completion) and specific designation if deemed to be time critical by the facility licensee

~

  • operationally important specific performance criteria that include:

- detailed expected actions with exact criteria and nomenclature ~ 1.:1£-

-- system response and other examiner cues statements describing important observations to be made by the applicant

- criteria for successful completion of the task

-- identification of critical steps and their associated performance standards restrictions on the sequence of steps, if applicable

~

b. Ensure that any changes from the previously approved systems and administrative walk-through outlines (Forms ES-301-1 and 2) have not caused the test to deviate from any of the acceptance criteria (e.g., item distribution, bank use, repetition from the last 2 NRC examinations) specified ~ ~

on those forms and Form ES-201-2.

3. SIMULATOR CRITERIA -- -- --

The associated simulator operating tests (scenario sets) have been reviewed in accordance with Form ES-301-4 and a copy is attached. 6'J ~ .z.

~arne I Signature

a. Author Steve Botimer I ~~~ "' 01,f,t~J~-z. rwa4

!::. ... _~

,~,

,I I

b. Facility Reviewer(*) Bret Baker I
c. NRC Chief Examiner(#)
d. NRC Supervisor NOTE:

1/,f fi-r 1/ ~ f/7h,.

~"':Deu>

/L_

-s._ Qe e~ k ~),.4 y l ~ ~--

P'rt' * ~ ~rrPr ~ ~ 1:2(

/_3/-

  • The facility signature is not applicable for NRC-developed tests u
  1. Independent NRC reviewer initial items in Column "c"; chief examiner concurrence is required.

- -:i ES-301, Page 24 of 27

ES-301 Simulator Scenario Quality Checklist Form ES-301-4 Facility: Palisades Date of Exam: September 2014 Scenario Numbers: 1/2/3 Operating Test Number: 1 Initials QUALITATIVE ATTRIBUTES a b* c#

1. The initial conditions are realistic, in that some equipment and/or instrumentation may be out of service, but it does not cue the operators into expected events. d1 ~ dL-
2. The scenarios consist mostly of related events. ~ ~  :;e..
3. Each event description consists of
  • the point in the scenario when it is to be initiated the malfunction(s) that are entered to initiate the event the symptoms/cues that will be visible to the crew the expected operator actions (by shift position) the event termination point (if applicable)

~ ~

~

4. No more than one non-mechanistic failure (e.g., pipe break) is incorporated into the scenario without a credible preceding incident such as a seismic event. ~ t!'Z-
5. The events are valid with regard to physics and thermodynamics. cl) ~ en-

~

6. Sequencing and timing of events is reasonable, and allows the examination team to obtain complete evaluation results commensurate with the scenario objectives. ~ ~
7. If lime compression techniques are used, the scenario summary clearly so indicates.

Operators have sufficient time to carry out expected activities without undue time constraints. Cues are given. ~ ~ c:&-

8. The simulator modeling is not altered. .:b ~ n-
9. The scenarios have been validated. Pursuant to 10CFR55.46(d), any open simulator performance deficiencies or deviations from the referenced plant have been evaluated to ensure that functional fidelity is maintained while running the planned scenarios. ~ ~~ oz...

~ ~ tl..

10. Every operator will be evaluated using at least one new or significantly modified scenario.

All other scenarios have been altered in accordance with Section 0.5 of ES-301.

11. All individual operator competencies can be evaluated, as verified using Form ES-301-6 (submit the form along with the simulator scenarios). dJ ~ ~
12. Each applicant will be significantly involved in the minimum number of transients and events specified on Form ES-301-5 (submit the form with the simulator scenarios). ~ &.6 ;z..
13. The level of difficulty is appropriate to support licensing decisions for each crew position. $ 16M> ~

Target Quantitative Attributes (Per Scenario; See Section D.S.d) Actual Attributes -- -- --

1. Total malfunctions (5-8) 61815 <t) B.66 1L
2. Malfunctions after EOP entry (1-2) 2/3/2 *~ b 10116 ~
3. Abnormal events (2-4) 3/3/2 ~() ~ z..
4. Major transients (1-2) 1 /1 /1

\~ I~ 1.

5. EOPs entered/requiring substantive actions (1-2) 1 /1/1 *~ 10 666 z
6. EOP contingencies requiring substantive actions (0-2) 0/1/0 ~ 0 ~ cz
7. Critical tasks (2-3) 2/3/3 1.3:> ~ ~

ES-301, Page 25 of 27

ES-301 Simulator Scenario Quality Checklist Form ES-301-4 Facility: Palisades Date of Exam: September 2014 Scenario Numbers: Spare Operating Test Number: 1 Initials QUALITATIVE ATTRIBUTES a b* c#

1. The initial conditions are realistic, in that some equipment and/or instrumentation may be out of service, but it does not cue the operators into expected events. \b ~ :IL
2. The scenarios consist mostly of related events. .sn ~!I ~
3. Each event description consists of
  • the point in the scenario when it is to be initiated the malfunction(s) that are entered to initiate the event

~

the symptoms/cues that will be visible to the crew fA6 liZ-

  • the expected operator actions (by shift position)
  • the event termination point (if applicable)
4. No more than one non-mechanistic failure (e.g., pipe break) is incorporated into the scenario without a credible preceding incident such as a seismic event. ~ \3A{) .,z..
5. The events are valid with regard to physics and thermodynamics. I sO ~ 1-"Z..
6. Sequencing and timing of events is reasonable, and allows the examination team to obtain complete evaluation results commensurate with the scenario objectives. ~ ~ JZ...

~

7. If time compression techniques are used, the scenario summary clearly so indicates.

Operators have sufficient time to carry out expected activities without undue time constraints. Cues are given.

~ ~

8. The simulator modeling is not altered. ~ ~ JZ-
9. The scenarios have been validated. Pursuant to 10CFR55.46(d), any open simulator performance deficiencies or deviations from the referenced plant have been evaluated to ensure that functional fidelity is maintained while running the planned scenarios. 4> ~e
z..

~

10. Every operator will be evaluated using at least one new or significantly modified scenario.

All other scenarios have been altered in accordance with Section 0.5 of ES-301. Sr4b ~

11. All individual operator competencies can be evaluated, as verified using Form ES-301-6 (submit the form along with the simulator scenarios). \h ~ ~
12. Each applicant will be significantly involved in the minimum number of transients and events specified on Form ES-301-5 (submit the form with the simulator scenarios). ~ ~ ~
13. The level of difficulty is appropriate to support licensing decisions for each crew position.

~ ~ {1...

Target Quantitative Attributes (Per Scenario; See Section D.S.d) Actual Attributes -- -- --

1. Total malfunctions (5-8) 6

\~ ~

d"'

~~ ~

~""'

2. Malfunctions after EOP entry (1-2) 2
3. Abnormal events (2-4) 2

~ rl ~ cltfk

4. Major transients (1-2) 1

~ b ~ lcJ-

~

'~00

5. EOPs entered/requiring substantive actions (1-2) 1 ~
6. EOP contingencies requiring substantive actions (0-2) 1 ~

~""

7. Critical tasks (2-3) 3 ~t> Mi> ~

r 1). /:>_ - - ES-301 Page 25 of 27 dtk -

I

,-o~ ';1-t/e, '~ ~ 1-c-fee'Tit O~s-/ae;JS

ES-401 Written Examination Quality Checklist Form ES-401-6 Facility: Palisades Date of Exam: September 2014 Exam Level: RO 181 SRO 181 Initial Item Description a b* c#

,3:) ~

1. Questions and answers are technically accurate and applicable to the facility.

J~*"

~b ~

2. a. NRC K/As are referenced for all questions.
b. Facility learning objectives are referenced as available. ~
3. SRO questions are appropriate in accordance with Section D.2.d of ES-401 S/) ~

It****/'**

4. The sampling process was random and systematic (If more than 4 RO or 2 SRO questions were repeated from the last 2 NRC licensing exam, consult the NRR OL program office). *}. 1,20* ~
5. Question duplication from the license screening/audit exam was controlled as indicated below (check the item that applies) and appears appropriate:

~~

.2L the audit exam was systematically and randomly developed; or

_ the audit exam was completed before the license exam was started; or

_ the examinations were developed independently; or ~

_ the licensee certifies that there is no duplication; or

_ other (explain)

6. Bank use meets limits (no more than 75 percent Bank Modified New

~

from the bank, at least 10 percent new, and the rest new or modified); enter the actual RO I SRO-only 54/10 8/0 13/15 ~ ~

question distribution(s) at right.

7. Between 50 and 60 percent of the questions on the RO Memory CIA exam are written at the comprehension /analysis level; the SRO exam may exceed 60 percent if the randomly selected KAs support the higher cognitive levels; enter the actual RO I SRO question distribution(s) at right.

30/12 46/13 00 ~ Ol--

~

8. References/handouts provided do not give away answers or aid in the elimination of distractors. ~ Jl-
9. Question content conforms with specific KIA statements in the previously approved examination outline and is appropriate for the Tier to which they are assigned; deviations are justified ~ ~ i:)

l(li

10. Question psychometric quality and format meet the guidelines in ES Appendix B. (l) ~ ~~
11. The exam contains the required number of one-point, multiple choice items; the total is correct and agrees with value on cover sheet $ ~ ~

Printed Name I Signature Date

a. Author SteveBotimer/ ~~A/ o1/D~4
b. Facility Reviewer(*) Bret Baker I fo-

\"1<1" 'I_ "

Jh-lto'i

c. NRC Chief Examiner (#) ~ 'J<<u:a ~- n. .- or/4u,t: 1/ftf'L :II.MAY 9/Psb"IJ
d. NRC Regional Supervisor ~,il"\~ jJf",;lp/t)"; ~~~/'U._'\.'/-;:::::Z,I'>( /,L)... ~ut!hb

'F1 /

Note:

  • The facility reviewer's initials/signature are not applicable fori.JRC-de~eloped exami~tions.
  1. Independent NRC reviewer initial items in Column "c"; chief examiner concurrence required.

ES-401, Page 29 of 33

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML14309A136&oldid=2450917"