ML17241A228

301 ADAMS2D Page 1 Exam Admin Items Immediate Release

ML17241A228
Person / Time
Site:	Catawba
Issue date:	08/29/2017
From:	NRC/RGN-II
To:	Duke Energy Corp
References
Download: ML17241A228 (32)

Text

ES-201 Examination Preparation Checklist Form ES-201-1 Facility: Date of Examination: 3,p Z/

Developed by: Written: Facility NRC II Operating Facility NRC

. . Chief Target Task Description (Reference)

Date Examiners Initials

-180 1. Examination administration date confirmed (Cia; C.2.a and b) /fl

-150 2. NRC examiners and facility contact assigned (C.1.d; C.2.e)

-150 3. Facility contact briefed on security and other requirements (C.2.c)

-150 4. Corporate notification letter sent (C.2.d) VIAK2,

[-120] 5. Reference material due (C.l.e; C.3.c; Attachment 3) n44,

{-90} 6. Integrated examination outline(s) due, including Forms ES-201-2, ES-201-3, ES-301-1, ES-301-2, ES-301-5, ES-D-1, ES-401-1/2, ES-401N-1/2, ES-401-3, ES-401N-3, ES-401-4, and ES-401N-4, as applicable (C.1.e and f; C.3.d)

{-85} 7. Examination outline(s) reviewed by NRC and feedback provided to facility licensee (C.2.h; C.3.e)

{-60} 8. Proposed examinations (including written, walk-through ]PMs, and scenarios, as applicable), supporting documentation (including Forms ES-301-3, ES-301-4, ES 301-5, E5-301-6, and ES-401-6, ES-401N-6, and any Form ES-201-2, ES-201-3, ES-301-1, or ES-301-2 updates), and reference materials due (C.1.e, f, g and h; y)43 C.3.d)

-45 9. Written exam and operating test reviews completed. (C.3.f)

-30 10. Preliminary license applications (NRC Form 398s) due (C.1.l; C.2.g; ES-202) fl/]

-21 11. Examination approved by NRC supervisor for facility licensee review (C.2.h; C.3.f) y)4

-21 12. Examinations reviewed with facility licensee (Cli; C.2.f and h; C.3.g)

-14 13. Final license applications due and Form ES-201-4 prepared (C.1.l; C.2.i; ES-202)

-14 14. Written examinations and operating tests approved by NRC supervisor (C.2.i; C.3.h)

-7 15. Facility licensee management queried regarding the licensees views on the examination. (C.2 j)

-7 16. Final applications reviewed; 1 or 2 (if >10) applications audited to confirm qualifications / eligibility; and examination approval and waiver letters sent (C.2.i; Attachment 5; ES-202, C.2.e; ES-204)

-7 17. Proctoring/written exam administration guidelines reviewed with facility licensee (C.3.k)

-7 18. Approved scenarios, job performance measures, and questions distributed to NRC examiners (C.3.i)

Target dates are generally based on facility-prepared examinations and are keyed to the examination date identified in the corporate notification letter. They are for planning purposes and may be adjusted on a case-by case basis in coordination with the facility licensee.

[Applies only] {Does not apply} to examinations prepared by the NRC.

ES-201 Examination Outline Quality Checklist Form ES-201-2 FINAL SUBMITTAL Facility: Catawba Nuclear Station Date of Examination: 06126/17 Initials Item Task Description a b c#

1. a. Verify that the outline(s) fit(s) the appropriate model, in accordance with ES-401. _

fl R b. Assess whether the outline was systematically and randomly prepared in accordance with I Section D.1 of ES-401 and whether all K/A categories are appropriately sampled. WI T

T c. Assess whether the outline over-emphasizes any systems, evolutions, or generic topics.

d. Assess whether the justifications for deselected or rejected KJA statements are appropriate.

2. a. Using Form ES-301-5, verify that the proposed scenario sets cover the required number of normal evolutions, instrument and component failures, technical specifications, ))9(J S and major transients. (3\ j m5 M b. Assess whether there are enough scenario sets (and spares) to test the projected number U and mix of applicants in accordance with the expected crew composition and rotation schedule L without compromising exam integrity, and ensure that each applicant can be tested using at least one new or significantly modified scenario, that no scenarios are duplicated A

from the applicants audit test(s), and that scenarios will not be repeated on subsequent days.

JQ T N

c. To the extent possible, assess whether the outline(s) conform(s) with the qualitative and quantitative criteria specified on Form ES-301-4 and described in Appendix D.

3. a. Verify that the systems walk-through outline meets the criteria specified on Form ES-301-2:

(1) the outline(s) contain(s) the required number of control room and in-plant tasks W distributed among the safety functions as specified on the form I (2) task repetition from the last two NRC examinations is within the limits specified on the form T (3) no tasks are duplicated from the applicants audit test(s)

(4) the number of new or modified tasks meets or exceeds the minimums specified on the form (5) the number of alternate path, low-power, emergency, and RCA tasks meet the criteria on the form.

O7) çØ

b. Verify that the administrative outline meets the criteria specified on Form ES-301-1:

(1) the tasks are distributed among the topics as specified on the form (2) at least one task is new or significantly modified (3) no more than one task is repeated from the last two NRC licensing examinations

c. Determine if there are enough different outlines to test the projected number and mix of applicants and ensure that no items are duplicated on subsequent days.

4. a. Assess whether plant-specific priorities (including PRA and IPE insights) are covered in the appropriate exam sections.

E b. Assess whether the 10 CFR 55.41/43 and 55.45 sampling is appropriate.

c. Ensure that K/A importance ratings (except for plant-specific priorities) are at least 2.5. Y5 R d. Check for duplication and overlap among exam sections.

L e. Check the entire exam for balance of coverage.

t. Assess whether the_exam_fits_the_appropriate job_level_(RO_or_SRQ).

inte nature Date

a. Author Rusty Miller / 06/06/17 NRC Examiner (#)

d. NRC Supervisor (kCo. )1kçA.c...

Note: # Independent NRC reviewer initial items in Column c; chief examiner concurrence required.

Not applicable for NRC-prepared examination outlines

ES-30f Operating lest Quality Checklist Form ES-301-3 Facility: Catawba Nuclear Station Date of Examination: June 2017 Operating Test Number: 2017301

. 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).

b. There is no day-to-day repetition between this and other operating tests to be administered during this examination. (QJI

c. The operating test shall not duplicate items from the applicants audit test(s). (see Section D.1 .a.) ..

f VV

d. Overlap with the written examination and between different parts of the operating test is within acceptable limits.

e. It appears that the operating test will differentiate between competent and less-than-competent applicants at the designated license level.

QS7

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 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 p,(

N1 I3

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. J

3. Simulator Criteria -- --

The associated simulator operating tests (scenario sets) have been reviewed in accordance with Form ES-301-4 andacopy is attached. iV Q ,v Printee / Sig Date

a. Author Rusty Miller! 06/06117

b. Facility Reviewer(*) RP Jones! 06/06/17

c. NRC Chief Examiner (#) 1LI&

d. NRC Supervisor Gero.cL ) ( c(7 NOTE:

• The facility signature is not applicable for NRC-developed tests.

1. Independent NRC reviewer initial items in Column c; chief examiner concurrence required.

ES-301 Simulator Scenario Quality Checklist Form ES-301-4 Facility: Catawba Nuclear Station Date of Exam: June 2017 Scenario Numbers: 1 12 I 3 14 Operating Test No.: 2017301 QUALITATIVE ATTRIBUTES Indials 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.

ft

2. The scenarios consist mostly of related events.

3. Each event description consists of

• the point in the scenario when it is to be initiated

. the malfunction(s) or conditions 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. The events are valid with regard to physics and thermodynamics.

5. Sequencing and timing of events is reasonable, and allows the examination team to obtain complete evaluation results commensurate with the scenario objectives.

6. 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.

7. The simulator modeling is not altered.

8. The scenarios have been validated. Pursuant to 10 CFR 55.46(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. )N

9. Every operator will be evaluated using at least one new or significantly modified scenario. All other scenarios have been altered in accordance with Section D.5 of ES-301.

10. All individual operator competencies can be evaluated, as verified using Form ES-301-6 (submit the form along with the simulator scenarios).

11. The scenario set provides the opportunity for each applicant to be evaluated in each of the applicable rating factors. (Competency Rating factors as described on forms ES-303-1 and ES-303-3.)

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 oosition.

Target Quantitative Attributes (Per Scenario; See Section D.5.d) Actual Attributes -- --

1. Malfunctions after EOP entry (1-2) 2/3 1212 jA i13

2. Abnormal events (2-4) 4 14 I 4 14 W

3. Major transients (12) ii 1 I 1 I 1 / I

4. EOPs entered/requiring substantive actions (12) 1 I I /I I1 I3

5. EOP contingencies requiring substantive actions (0-2) 1 I 010 I 1 6.

NOTE:

EOP based Critical tasks (23) 3 I 2 I 3 12 fr The facility signature is not applicable for NRC-developed tests.

1. Independent NRC reviewer initial items in Column c; chief examiner concurrence required.

ES-301 Transient and Event Checklist Form ES-301-5 Facility: Catawba Date of Exam: June 2017 Operating Test No.: 2017301 A E Scenarios P V Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3 T M P E O I L N CREW CREW CREW CREW T N I T A I C POSITION POSITION POSITION POSITION L M A T S A B S A B S A B S A B U N Y R T O R T O R T O R T O M(*)

T P O C P O C P O C P O C P R I U E

RO 1 RX 1 5 2 1 1 0 SRO-I NOR 1,4 2 1 1 1 I/C 3,5,7 2,5,7,9 1,2,7 10 4 4 2 SRO-U MAJ 3 2 2 1 6 6 6 TS 0 0 2 2 RO RX 5 1 1 1 0 NOR 1 1 2 1 1 1 SRO-I 1 I/C 2,4,8 2,3,4,5 1,2,7 10 4 4 2 SRO-U MAJ 6 6 6 3 2 2 1 TS 4,5 2 0 2 2 RO RX 4 1 1 1 0 NOR 1 5 2 1 1 1 SRO-I 2 I/C 2,3,4,5, 3,8 3,4,8 10 4 4 2 SRO-U 8 MAJ 6 6 6 3 2 2 1 TS 3,4 2 0 2 2 RO RX 1 1 1 1 0 NOR 1,4 5 3 1 1 1 SRO-I 3 I/C 3,5,7 2,5,7,9 1,2,3,4 11 4 4 2 SRO-U MAJ 6 6 6 3 2 2 1 TS 3,4 2 0 2 2 Instructions:

1. Check the applicant level and enter the operating test number and Form ES-D-1 event numbers for each event type; TS are not applicable for RO applicants. ROs must serve in both the at-the-controls (ATC) and balance-of-plant (BOP) positions; Instant SROs must do one scenario, including at least two instrument or component (I/C) malfunctions and one major transient, in the ATC position.

2. Reactivity manipulations may be conducted under normal or controlled abnormal conditions (refer to Section D.5.d) but must be significant per Section C.2.a of Appendix D. (*) Reactivity and normal evolutions may be replaced with additional instrument or component malfunctions on a 1-for-1 basis.

3. Whenever practical, both instrument and component malfunctions should be included; only those that require verifiable actions that provide insight to the applicants competence count toward the minimum requirements specified for the applicants license level in the right-hand columns.

ES-301 Transient and Event Checklist Form ES-301-5 Facility: Catawba Date of Exam: June 2017 Operating Test No.: 2017301 A E Scenarios P V Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3 T M P E O I L N CREW CREW CREW CREW T N I T A I C POSITION POSITION POSITION POSITION L M A T S A B S A B S A B S A B U N Y R T O R T O R T O R T O M(*)

T P O C P O C P O C P O C P R I U E

RO RX 4 1 1 1 0 SRO-I 4 NOR 1 5 2 1 1 1 I/C 2,3,4,5, 3,8 3,4,8 10 4 4 2 SRO-U 8 MAJ 6 6 6 3 2 2 1 TS 3,4 2 0 2 2 RO RX 4 1 1 1 0 NOR 1 5 2 1 1 1 SRO-I 5 I/C 2,3,4,5, 3,8 3,4,8 10 4 4 2 SRO-U 8 MAJ 6 6 6 3 2 2 1 TS 3,4 2 0 2 2 RO RX 1 1 0 NOR 1 1 1 SRO-I I/C 4 4 2 SRO-U MAJ 2 2 1 TS 0 2 2 Instructions:

1. Check the applicant level and enter the operating test number and Form ES-D-1 event numbers for each event type; TS are not applicable for RO applicants. ROs must serve in both the at-the-controls (ATC) and balance-of-plant (BOP) positions; Instant SROs must do one scenario, including at least two instrument or component (I/C) malfunctions and one major transient, in the ATC position.

2. Reactivity manipulations may be conducted under normal or controlled abnormal conditions (refer to Section D.5.d) but must be significant per Section C.2.a of Appendix D. (*) Reactivity and normal evolutions may be replaced with additional instrument or component malfunctions on a 1-for-1 basis.

3. Whenever practical, both instrument and component malfunctions should be included; only those that require verifiable actions that provide insight to the applicants competence count toward the minimum requirements specified for the applicants license level in the right-hand columns.

ES-301 Transient and Event Checklist Form ES-301-5 Facility: Catawba Date of Exam: June 2017 Operating Test No.: 2017301 A E Scenarios P V Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3 T M P E O I L N CREW CREW CREW CREW T N I T A I C POSITION POSITION POSITION POSITION L M A T S A B S A B S A B S A B U N Y R T O R T O R T O R T O M(*)

T P O C P O C P O C P O C P R I U E

RO RX 5 1 1 1 0 SRO-I NOR 1 1 1 1 1 I/C 2,3,4,5 1,2,7 7 4 4 2 SRO-U 1 MAJ 2 2 2 1 6 6 TS 4,5 2 0 2 2 RO RX 1 1 1 1 0 NOR 1 1 1 1 1 SRO-I I/C 3,5,7 2,3,4,5 7 4 4 2 SRO-U 2 MAJ 6 6 2 2 2 1 TS 4,5 2 0 2 2 RO RX 0 1 1 0 NOR 1,4 5 3 1 1 1 SRO-I I/C 2,5,7,9 1,2,3,4 8 4 4 2 SRO-U 3 MAJ 6 6 2 2 2 1 TS 3,4 2 0 2 2 RO RX 0 1 1 0 NOR 1 5 2 1 1 1 SRO-I I/C 2,4,8 1,2,3,4 7 4 4 2 SRO-U 4 MAJ 6 6 2 2 2 1 TS 3,4 2 0 2 2 Instructions:

1. Check the applicant level and enter the operating test number and Form ES-D-1 event numbers for each event type; TS are not applicable for RO applicants. ROs must serve in both the at-the-controls (ATC) and balance-of-plant (BOP) positions; Instant SROs must do one scenario, including at least two instrument or component (I/C) malfunctions and one major transient, in the ATC position.

2. Reactivity manipulations may be conducted under normal or controlled abnormal conditions (refer to Section D.5.d) but must be significant per Section C.2.a of Appendix D. (*) Reactivity and normal evolutions may be replaced with additional instrument or component malfunctions on a 1-for-1 basis.

3. Whenever practical, both instrument and component malfunctions should be included; only those that require verifiable actions that provide insight to the applicants competence count toward the minimum requirements specified for the applicants license level in the right-hand columns.

ES-301 Competencies Checklist Form ES-301-6 Facility: Catawba Nuclear Station Date of Examination: June 2017 Operating Test No:2017301 APPLICANTS RO (1) RO RO SRO-I SRO-I (1) SRO-I (2)

SRO-U SRO-U SRO-U Competencies SCENARIO SCENARIO SCENARIO 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 Interpret/Diagnose 3,5,6,7 2,5,6,7, 1,2,6,7 2,4,6,8 2,3,4,5, 1,2,6,7 2,3,4,5, 3,6,8 3,4,6,8 Events and Conditions 9 6 6,8 Comply With and ALL ALL ALL ALL ALL ALL ALL ALL ALL Use Procedures (1)

Operate Control ALL ALL ALL ALL ALL ALL ALL Boards (2)

Communicate ALL ALL ALL ALL ALL ALL ALL ALL ALL and Interact Demonstrate ALL ALL Supervisory Ability (3)

Comply With and 4,5 3,4 Use Tech. Specs. (3)

Notes:

(1) Includes Technical Specification compliance for an RO.

(2) Optional for an SRO-U.

(3) Only applicable to SROs.

Instructions:

Check the applicants license type and enter one or more event numbers that will allow the examiners to evaluate every applicable competency for every applicant. (This includes all rating factors for each competency.) (Competency Rating factors as described on forms ES-303-1 and ES-303-3.)

ES-301 Competencies Checklist Form ES-301-6 Facility: Catawba Nuclear Station Date of Examination: June 2017 Operating Test No:2017301 APPLICANTS RO RO RO SRO-I (3) SRO-I (4) SRO-I (5)

SRO-U SRO-U SRO-U Competencies SCENARIO SCENARIO SCENARIO 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 Interpret/Diagnose 3,5,6,7 2,5,6,7, 1,2,3,4, 2,3,4,5, 3,6,8 3,4,6,8 2,3,4,5,6, 3,6,8 3,4,6,8 Events and Conditions 9 6 6,8 8 Comply With and ALL ALL ALL ALL ALL ALL ALL ALL ALL Use Procedures (1)

Operate Control ALL ALL ALL ALL ALL ALL Boards (2)

Communicate ALL ALL ALL ALL ALL ALL ALL ALL ALL and Interact Demonstrate ALL ALL ALL Supervisory Ability (3)

Comply With and 3,4 3,4 3,4 Use Tech. Specs. (3)

Notes:

(1) Includes Technical Specification compliance for an RO.

(2) Optional for an SRO-U.

(3) Only applicable to SROs.

Instructions:

Check the applicants license type and enter one or more event numbers that will allow the examiners to evaluate every applicable competency for every applicant. (This includes all rating factors for each competency.) (Competency Rating factors as described on forms ES-303-1 and ES-303-3.)

ES-301 Competencies Checklist Form ES-301-6 Facility: Catawba Nuclear Station Date of Examination: June 2017 Operating Test No:2017301 APPLICANTS RO RO RO SRO-I SRO-I SRO-I SRO-U (1) SRO-U (2) SRO-U (3)

Competencies SCENARIO SCENARIO SCENARIO 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 Interpret/Diagnose 2,3,4,5, 1,2,6,7 3,5,6,7 2,3,4,5, 2,5,6,7, 1,2,3,4, Events and Conditions 6 6 9 6 Comply With and ALL ALL ALL ALL ALL ALL Use Procedures (1)

Operate Control ALL ALL ALL Boards (2)

Communicate ALL ALL ALL ALL ALL ALL and Interact Demonstrate ALL ALL ALL Supervisory Ability (3)

Comply With and 4,5 4,5 3,4 Use Tech. Specs. (3)

Notes:

(1) Includes Technical Specification compliance for an RO.

(2) Optional for an SRO-U.

(3) Only applicable to SROs.

Instructions:

Check the applicants license type and enter one or more event numbers that will allow the examiners to evaluate every applicable competency for every applicant. (This includes all rating factors for each competency.) (Competency Rating factors as described on forms ES-303-1 and ES-303-3.)

ES-301 Competencies Checklist Form ES-301-6 Facility: Catawba Nuclear Station Date of Examination: June 2017 Operating Test No:2017301 APPLICANTS RO RO RO SRO-I SRO-I SRO-I SRO-U (4) SRO-U SRO-U Competencies SCENARIO SCENARIO SCENARIO 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 Interpret/Diagnose 2,4,6,8 1,2,3,4, Events and Conditions 6 Comply With and ALL ALL Use Procedures (1)

Operate Control ALL Boards (2)

Communicate ALL ALL and Interact Demonstrate ALL Supervisory Ability (3)

Comply With and 3,4 Use Tech. Specs. (3)

Notes:

(1) Includes Technical Specification compliance for an RO.

(2) Optional for an SRO-U.

(3) Only applicable to SROs.

Instructions:

Check the applicants license type and enter one or more event numbers that will allow the examiners to evaluate every applicable competency for every applicant. (This includes all rating factors for each competency.) (Competency Rating factors as described on forms ES-303-1 and ES-303-3.)

ES-403 Written Examination Grading Form ES-403-1 Quality Checklist Facility: Date of Exam: Exam Level: RO SRO Item Description Initials a b c

1. Clean answer sheets copied before grading

2. Answer key changes and question deletions justified and documented

3. Applicants scores checked for addition errors (reviewers spot check > 25% of examinations) M%

4. Grading for all borderline cases (80 +/-2% overall and 70 or 80, as applicable. +/-4% on the SRO-only) reviewed in detail

5. All other failing examinations checked to ensure that grades are justified w4

6. Performance on missed questions checked for training deficiencies and wording problems; evaluate validity of questions missed by half or mote of the applicants Printed Name/Signature Date

a. Grader 7?JA?Ai 4.

A14

b. Facility Reviewer(*)

c. NRC Chief Examiner (*) 1zg. A.1-15//ZZ/7 7,h//,7

d. NRC Supervisor (*) cCct\ CjJ )SkLC\ g-/3 /7

(*) The facility reviewers signature is not applicable for examinations graded by the NRC; two independent NRC reviews are required.

ES-403, Page 6 of 6

Tom SimriI DUKE Vice President EI\iERGY Catawba Nuclear Station Duke Energy CN01VP I 4800 Concord Road York, SC 29745 o: 803.701.3340 f: 803.701.3221 torn .sirnril@duke-energy.corn Personal Information Withhold from Public Disclosure Under 10 CFR 2.390 CNS-1 7-038 July 12, 2017 Mr. Mark Bates, Senior Operations Engineer U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Region II Marquis One Tower 245 Peachtree Center Ave., NE Suite 1200 Atlanta, GA 30303-1257

SUBJECT:

Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC Catawba Nuclear Station, Units I and 2 Docket Numbers: 50-413 and 50-414 Post Examination Documentation Enclosed are the post examination materials for the Catawba Nuclear Station initial license examination completed on July 6, 2017, submitted in accordance with NURE G

1021, ES 501, C.i.a.

Enclosure A: Original examination answer sheets, one clean copy and examination cover sheets Enclosure B: Master examinations and answer keys Enclosure C: Questions asked by applicants during exam Enclosure D: Substantive comments made by applicants following the written examination Enclosure E: Written examination seating chart Enclosure F: Completed Form ES-403-1, Written Examination Grading Quality Checklist; one sheet for RO and one sheet for SRO Enclosure G: Written Examination Performance Analysis Enclosure H: Form ES-201 -3, Examination Security Agreement (preliminary)

Enclosure I: Post Exam Comments www.duke-energy.com

U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission CNS-1 7-038 July 12, 2017 Page 2 A follow up submittal of Form ES-201 -3, Examination Security Agreement will be provided to include all required signoffs.

If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact Tim Thompson, Training Supervisor at (803) 701-3177 or Steven Tripi, Operations Training Manager at (803) 701-3770.

Sincerely, Tom Simril Vice President, Catawba Nuclear Station

U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission CNS-1 7-038 July 12, 2017 Page 3 xc: without attachments Gerald McCoy, Branch Chief U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Region II Marquis One Tower 245 Peachtree Center Ave., NE Suite 1200 Atlanta, GA 30303-1257 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Document Control Desk Washington, D.C. 20555-0001 Joe Austin Senior NRC Resident Catawba CNO1NC

U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission CNS-1 7-038 July 12, 2017 Page 4 bxc: without attachments Steve Tripi CTO1A Marie Morgan CTOIA (Records)

ELL EC2ZF bxc: cover etter with correspondence review documentation only CN-940.00 CNO4DM

4% DUKE I

Vice ENERGY Catawba Nuclear Station Duke Energy Withhold from CNO1VP 14800 Concord Road Public Disclosure Under JO CFR 2.390 York, SC 29745 0: 803.701.3340 f: 803.701.3221 E-mail: Tom.Simril@Duke-Energy.com CNS-1 7-02 5 April 27, 2017 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Region II Mr. Mark Bates, Senior Operations Engineer Marquis One Tower 245 Peachtree Center Avenue, NE Suite 1200 Atlanta, GA 30303-1257

Subject:

Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC Catawba Nuclear Station, Unit 1 and 2 Docket Nos.: 50-413 and 50-414 Reactor and Senior Reactor Operator Initial Examinations Submittal

Reference:

Letter from NRC to Duke Energy Corporation; Reactor and Senior Reactor Operator Initial Examinations, Catawba Nuclear Station, 05000413/2017301 and 05000414/2017301, Dated January 25, 2017 The examination materials for the Catawba Nuclear Station Initial License Examination scheduled to begin on June 26, 2017 as listed below, are enclosed for your review.

a. ES 201 Examination Security Agreement (updated copy)

b. ES 301 Administrative Topics Outline (Reactor Operator)

c. ES 301 Administrative Topics Outline (Senior Reactor Operator)

d. ES 301 Control Room/In-Plant Systems Outline (Reactor Operator)

e. ES 301 Control Room/In-Plant Systems Outline (Senior Reactor Operator)

f. ES 301 Control Room/In-Plant Systems Outline (Instant Senior Reactor Operator)

g. ES 301-3 - Operating Test Quality Checklist

h. ES 301-4 - Simulator Scenario Quality Checklist

i. ES 301-5 - Transient and Event Checklist

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission April27, 2017 Page 2of4

j. ES 301-6 Competencies Checklist

k. ES D-1 Forms for 4 (four) Simulator Scenarios Outlines I. Eleven (11) System Job Performance Measures, Four (4) RO Administrative Job Performance Measures, and Five (5) SRO Administrative Job Performance Measures

m. Simulator Scenarios 1,2,3 and 4 The enclosed material contents shall be withheld from public disclosure until after the 2017 Catawba Nuclear Station Initial Examinations are complete. If you have any questions or need any additional information, please contact Tim Thompson, Nuclear Training Supervisor at 803-701-3177 or Steven Tripi, Operations Training Manager at 803-701-3770.

Sincerely, Tom Simril Site Vice President www.duke-energycom

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission April27, 2017 Page 3 of 4 xc: Without Attachments U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Gerald McCoy, Chief Marquis One Tower 245 Peachtree Center Avenue, NE Suite 1200 Atlanta, GA 30303-1257 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Document Control Desk Washington, DC 20555-0001 Joe Austin, Senior Resident Inspector Catawba CNO1 NC www.duke-energy.com

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission April 27, 2017 Page 4of4 xc: without attachments B. Leonard CIO1A T. Thompson CTO1A S. Tripi CTOIA B. Webster CTO1A K. Alcorn CTOIA ELL EC2ZF bxc: cover letter with correspondence review documentation only CN-940.00 CNO4DM www.duke-energy.com

Tom Simrii DUKE Vice President EI\JERGYC Catawba Nuclear Station Duke Energy Withhold from CNO1VP I 4800 Concord Road Public Disclosure Under 10 CFR 2.390 York, SC 29745 0: 803.701.3340 f: 803.701.3221 E-mail: Tom.Simril@Duke-Energy.com CNS-1 7-017 April 6, 2017 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Region II Mr. Mark Bates, Senior Operations Engineer Marquis One Tower 245 Peachtree Center Avenue, NE Suite 1200 Atlanta, GA 30303-1257

Subject:

Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC Catawba Nuclear Station, Unit I and 2 Docket Nos.: 50-413 and 50-414 Reactor and Senior Reactor Operator Initial Examinations Submittal

Reference:

Letter from NRC to Duke Energy Corporation; Reactor and Senior Reactor Operator Initial Examinations, Catawba Nuclear Station, 05000413/2017301 and 05000414/2017301, Dated January 25, 2017 The examination materials for the Catawba Nuclear Station Initial License Examination scheduled to begin on June 26, 2017 as listed below, are enclosed for your review.

a. ES 201-2 Examination Outline Quality Checklist

b. ES 201-3 Examination Security Agreement (updated copy)

c. ES 401-4 Record of Rejected K/As

d. ES 401-6 Written Exam Quality Checklist

e. RO Written Exam questions Seventy-Five (75) questions with references

f. SRO Written Exam questions Twenty-Five (25) questions with references

g. Plant Reference Documents

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission April 6, 2017 Page 2 of 4 The enclosed material contents shall be withheld from public disclosure until after the 2017 Catawba Nuclear Station Initial Examinations are complete. If you have any questions or need any additional information, please contact Tim Thompson, Nuclear Training Supervisor at 803-701-3177 or Steven Tripi, Operations Training Manager at 803-701-3770.

Sincerely, Tom Simril Site Vice President www.duke-energy.com

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission April 6, 2017 Page 3of4 xc: Without Attachments U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Gerald McCoy, Chief Marquis One Tower 245 Peachtree Center Avenue, NE Suite 1200 Atlanta, GA 30303-1257 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Document Control Desk Washington, DC 20555-0001 Joe Austin, Senior Resident Inspector Catawba CNO1 NC www.duke-energy.com

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission April 6, 2017 Page 4of4 xc: without attachments B. Leonard CTOIA T. Thompson CTOIA S. Tripi CTOIA B. Webster CTO1A K. Alcorn CTOIA ELL EC2ZF bxc: cover letter with correspondence review documentation only CN-940.00 CNO4DM www.duke-energy.com

Catawba 2017-301 Exam - Op Test Outline Comments Admin JPMs

1. A.1-1 (RO&SRO): Should this be a Time Critical JPM? What is the Tech Spec Action if they do not complete the calc within one hour (shutdown preps?)? What is the predicted validation time, which should be known since its a bank JPM?

Systems JPMs

1. JPM b: the safety function appears to potentially be incorrect. Ensuring containment isolation appears to be more appropriately associated with safety function 5 (containment pressure), rather than 2. Discuss the inventory control impact of the valves that failed to reposition. That conversation will help determine if the appropriate safety function has been designated. When evaluating this comment, it may help to review WE14EA1.1 to see if it is a better fit.

2. JPM c: JPM itself looks OK. Review WE05EA1.1 and WE05EA2.2 to see if you think they may be a better fit for the emergency evolution that is being performed.

3. JPM d: JPM itself looks OK. Review KA 054AA1.01 to see if you think that it is a better fit for the emergency evolution that is being performed.

4. JPM f: The importance rating may not be appropriate for the task. Most all of the KAs that are associated with Circ Water are less than 2.5, which indicates that most tasks associated with this system are not eligible for JPM administration. It appears that matching a generic with an IR above 2.5 for a system that hardly has any tasks that rate greater than 2.5 would not be in good keeping with the spirit and intent of the importance rating. (ES-301, pg 6 states that IR should not be less than 2.5).

Scenarios

1. Sc 4, Critical Task 2: Manually starting RN pumps to prevent EDG damage appears to be a satisfactory CT as long as the simulator is programmed to model EDG failure based on a parameter that contains a solid technical basis for overheating in the absence of cooling. Will the EDG automatically fail based on a technically valid parameter when it is not being cooled?

Catawba 2017 Op Test Review Scenario Comments

1. Scenario 1 / Event 4: Loss of 1A NV pump - do the verifiable actions meet the definition of a CT, in that if nothing is done, the reactor will eventually trip? Will the trip happen within a time frame that can be evaluated during the course of scenario administration?

2. Scenario 2 / Event 3: Is isolating PORV a critical task?

3. Scenario 2 / Event 4: restoring rods above insertion limits appears like it might be a CT.

Plant is in an unanalyzed condition as long as rods are below insertion limits.

4. Scenario 3 / Event 3: Is starting standby pump a CT?

5. Scenario 4 / Event 4: Is starting an RL pump a CT?

Admin JPM Comments

1. A.1-1:

a. Delete 5th bullet in Initial Conditions. The JPM should not be teaching them that there is a one hour Tech Spec. Applicants are required to know that.

b. How many SDM calc procedures exist? First bullet should not tell them which procedure to use and should also not tell them which section to use.

c. Step 13: It appears that power defect could be interpolated. Is an acceptance band needed? If so, carry that band forward in the calculation.

2. A.1-2:

a. Why does the first bullet in the Initial Conditions tell the applicant exactly what procedure to use?

b. What is the purpose of the second bullet in the initial conditions?

c. Do some of these steps require acceptance bands? If no bands are stated in the Step Standard, we will hold the applicants to that exact value stated in the step.

Bands should usually be stated if there is possibility of inconsequential rounding.

3. A.2:

a. This calculation is pure plug and chug with the forms that are given. There is really no aspect of finding information, analyzing information, etc. Furthermore, it is better to have a set of Admin JPMs that are not entirely composed of calculations. We should discuss replacement options for a non-calculation based JPM.

4. A.3:

a. How was the upper end of the acceptance band of 169 determined? It appears that 168 would accommodate any rounding errors.

b. Why does the JPM tell them which procedure attachment to use?

5. A.4:

a. Critical steps need to be designated on the ENF. Typically we would consider any step that would cause a failed Performance Indicator to be a critical step.

b. Last bullet of initial conditions should just state that the task is time critical or has time critical elements.

c. Why is the classification not time-critical? The classification needs to be done in less than 15 minutes and then the notification form needs to be done within 15 minutes of the classification. Overall JPM standard also needs to reflect this.

Systems JPM Comments

1. JPMs a, b, c

a. These JPMs only have 2 or 3 critical steps. This comment does not require action at this time. It is mentioned here as a reminder to the examiners for prep week to ensure we are comfortable with so few critical steps being used on multiple JPMs.

2. JPM d

a. Step 2 (Proc Step 7.b - close 1CS-19): discuss whether this should be a critical step.

3. JPM k

a. Removing the lock appears to be a critical step. The task cannot be completed without doing this.