ML21237A535

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search

NRC Comments on Draft Licensee-Developed Operating Test (Folder 2)
ML21237A535
Person / Time
Site: Peach Bottom  Constellation icon.png
Issue date: 05/10/2021
From: Todd Fish
Exelon Generation Co
To:
Operations Branch I
Shared Package
ML20259A337 List:
References
EPID L-2021-OLL-0002
Download: ML21237A535 (9)
v • d • e


Text

ES-301 Oeeratin§I Test Review Worksheet Form ES-301-7

Facility: PBAPS Exam Date: JUNE 2021 2 3 4 5 6

Admin JPMs U/E/S Explanation ADMINTopic LOO Attributes Job Content and K/A (1-5) I/C Critical Scope Perf. Job Cues Overlap Key Minutia Link Focus Steps (N/8) Std.

Eval High CRD coo Temp on G2.1.32 3.0 s Scram Time Work Hour G2.2.6 COO 3.0 s Rules Initiate Temp EC. 2.8 X E Clarified pass/fail criteria on provided grading sheet.

Proc. Chan e State/Local EP 2.8 s Notications Review of ST coo 3.0 X E Added remainder of the G.2.1.25 ST.

Evaluate coo 3.0 s Thermal Limits G2.1.7 Approve Partial EC G2.2.6 2.8 X E Provided template for answers

  • Procedure.

Approve Kl RC G2.3.14 3.0 X E Provided Release in Progress flowchart.

Issuance EAL Classification EP G2.4.41 3.0 s and Notification

Simulator/In-Plant Safety Function and JPMs K/A

1 Corrected errors on cue sheet. Provided additional JPMA 295037 3.5 E cues related to Electrical Safety.

EA1.01 2

JPM B 295001 3.0 s A4.02 3

JPM C 239001 2.8 s A4.01 JPM D 4 1.0 u Low discriminatory value (LOD=1 ). Wrote new 202001 JPM. /

ES-301 Operating Test Review Worksheet Form ES-301-7

A2.05 5

JPM E 295024 3.0 s -

EA1.11 6

JPM F 262001 2.8 s A4.04 8 Low discriminatory value (LOD=1 ). Wrote new JPM G 400000 1.0 u A2.01 JPM.

9 JPM H 261000 3.0 s

, 5 A2.05

JPM I 295029 3.5 s EA2.01 3

JPM J 239002 3.0 s A2.03 1

JPM K 201001 2.8 s A2.06 ES-301 3 Form ES-301-7

Instructions for Completing This Table:

Check or mark any item(s) requiring a comment and explain the issue in the space provided using the guide below.

1. Check each JPM for appropriate administrative topic requirements (COO, EC, Rad, and EP) or safety function requirements and corresponding KIA. Mark in column 1.

(ES-301, D.3 and D.4)

2. Determine the level of difficulty {LOO) using an established 1-5 rating scale. Levels 1 and 5 represent an inappropriate (low or high) discriminatory level for the license that is being tested. Mark in column 2 (Appendix D, C.1.f)
3. In column 3, "Attributes," check the appropriate box when an attribute is not met:

The initial conditions and/or initiating cue is clear to ensure the operator understands the task and how to begin. (Appendix C, B.4)

The JPM contains appropriate cues that clearly indicate when they should be provided to the examinee. Cues are objective and not leading. (Appendix C, D.1)

All critical steps (elements) are properly identified.

The scope of the task is not too narrow (N) or too broad (B ).

Excessive overlap does not occur with other parts of the operating test or written examination. (ES-301, D.1.a, and ES-301, D.2.a)

The task performance standard clearly describes the expected outcome (i.e., end state). Each performance step identifies a standard for successful completion of the step.

A valid marked up key was provided (e.g., graph interpretation, initialed steps for handouts).

4. For column 4, "Job Content," check the appropriate box if the job content flaw does not meet the following elements:

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

The JPM has meaningful performance requirements that will provide a legitimate basis for evaluating the applicant's understanding and ability to safely operate the plant. (ES-301, D.2.c)

5. Based on the reviewer's judgment, is the JPM as written (U)nacceptable (requiring repair or replacement), in need of (E)nhancement, or (S)atisfactory? Mark the answer in column 5.
6. In column 6, provide a brief description of any (U)nacceptable or (E)nhancement rating from column 5.

Save initial review comments and detail subsequent comment resolution so that each exam-bound JPM is marked by a (S)atisfactory resolution on this form.

ES-301 - 4 - Form ES-301-7

Facilitv: Peach-Bottom Atomic Power Station Scenario:. 1 Exam Date: 06/01/21

1 2 3 4 5 6 7* 8 9 10..

Event Realism/Cred. *

  • Required Verifiable *Loo TS CTs *Seen.*: U/E/S Explanation
  • Actions actions * *Overlap

'. 1 s

2 -X s 3 x s 4 X s 5 X X X E *.* Two expected alarms were missino. Addeq alarms to scenario.

6 X s

  • 7 X X s 8 s

8 1 o* 0 0 3 2 5 -* E

  • _5 -Form ES-301-t*
  • .Facility: Peach-Bottom Atomic Power Station : Exam Date:. 06/01 /21.

1 2 3. 4 5 -5 10

Event. Realism/Cred. : Required Verifiable LOO - TS. CTs

  • Seen.*.* 'U/E/S Explanation *
  • _Actions actions - *.Overlap*

1 2 X.S 3 X s 4-5 X X -_-. E. ' Crew adioris were differ~ntihan scriptedi Revised scenario script.

6..

.7 E Removed-verbiage on ATWS actions from scenario guide.

8

2_

Form ES-301-7

  • *.Facility:* Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station *. : Exam Date:. 06/01 /21
  • 1 2* 5* 7 8 :

Event : R~quired Verifiable.. Realism/Cred,. Actions actions.. LOD. TS... *CTs * *.*.Overlap* *

  • Seen. *.*. U/E/S.. *.. *..Explc1naUon *.

.1 2 s 3 s 4 X X

  • E * *. Alarms did notmatch ev.ent Revise.d scenario to load ATWS later..

5 s

.6 7 s 8 X.S 9

  • U * : Everit overlap w/Scenario 2. Removed :event from this scenario.

.g. *. 0.2 ES-301 7

Instructions. for Completing This Table~

Use this table for each scenario for evaluation. * * *. *... * ** **.. *.. *. *.* *. *..... * *. *. *... *** *. :. *** *. *... * *. *.. *. : *.. ** *. *. **. *. *. *.*... *. *... *.

. 2 Check this bo~ if the e'(ents are not relat.ed (e.g., seismic.everit followed by a pipe rupture).OR.ifthe events do not obey the laws of phy~ics and th.ermodynamics.

3, 4. In columns 3 and 4, check the box ifthere is no verifiable orrequired action; as appiicable> Examples of required actions.are as follows:*. (ES-301, D.5f) *

  • *. opening; dosing, andihrottling valves*.. **.
  • ~tarting and stopping equipment
  • raising.... and lowering level, flow, and pressure
  • making decisions and giving directions
  • .
  • acknowledging or ~erifying key ala~s and automatic acticiris (Uncomplicated event~ that require no operator action beyond this *.

...* sholjld not be.inc.luded.on th~*Operating test µnless they.are necessary to.set the ~tage for $ubsequent events:. (Appendix D, *B.3})

5. Check this box if the level of difficulty is not appropriate:

6 Check this box if the... *.... '. ',.. *. '.... ' *.... '..... event has a TS; *

. 7. Check thls box if the evenfhasa critical task (CT). lfthe ~anie CT. covers more than orie event~*check the event where the CT started.only:

  • a. Check. this box if the evenfoverlaj:>s with anothetevent on any of the last two NRG *examinations.: (Appendix 0, C.1.f)..
  • 9 Based on the.. in column 9. :.................. reviewer's judgment, is the event as written (U)nacceptable (requiring repai(or replace*rnent), in rieed of(E)nhai,cement; or(S)atisfactory?.. Mark the answer

1 o **. Record any explanation~ of the events here. *

  • In the shaded boxes, sumthe number of check marks in each column....
  • .. In column 1; sum the.......... number ofeverits'. :
  • *. In columris 2-4; record the.............................. total number of check marks for each column.. *.
  • lil column 5; based on the reviewefs judgernerit, place a checkma:rk only if the scenario's LOD is not appropriate.
  • .
  • lri column 6, TS are required to be ~ 2 for each scenario. (Es..:301; DSd)
  • li:1 column 7, preidentified CTs should be*~ 2 Joreach.scenario:. (Appendix D; ES~3b1, D.5.d; ES~30.14).

. *..

  • In column 8; record the number of events notused on the two previous NRG initial licensing exa*rris, A scenario is considered unsatisfactory if there is < :f n~w even.ts. (E$-301, ns:b; App~ildixD, C: t.f).....
  • * *. Ii,* coh.imn 9; r.ecord whether the scenario as written (Li)nacceptable, in need.ot{E)nhancemerit, *or (S)atisfactoryfroni colurnn* 1 f of the simulator..

scenario* table:* *

  • 1:5.:.301 8
  • Form *es-301-7

Facility: Peach. Bottom Atomic Power Station - -* :Exam-Date: 06/01/21

. 1 2 3* : 4* :5 _ 6 7 _ 8 *_1t

  • scenario Event Everits TS - ts *cT ct -_ % Unsat-. -_ \\- Explanation - -

Totals Unsat. Total Unsat. Total !.)nsat. Scenario U/E/S. Elements - -

1.. 8.1 3.o -*.- 2 0.8% E Two expected alarms were missing from the event

2 9 1 2 0 - 2 _Q: *a% E :crew actions were different than scripted.

4 9. 2 - 2. 0 -2 0. 15% E _ Alarms :did riot match event and br\\e evehtoverlapped with scenario 2-.

Instructions. for Completing This Table: *-

Check or mark any item(s) requiring comment and explain the issue iri the space provided.

1, 3, 5 For each simulator scenario,.enter the total number of events (column :1}; TS entries/actions_(column 3); and CTs (column 5).

This number should rnatch the respective sc~naiio from the event~based scenario tables (the sum from -columns 1, 6, and 7, _respectively)..

2,4,6 For each.simulator scenario, evaluate each event, TS, and CT.as (S)atisfactory, (E)nhance; or (U)nsatisfactory based ori the* following criteria:

  • 8. Events. Each event is described on a Form ES-D-2, _including all switch manipulations, pertinent alarms, and verifiable actions'. : Event actions _are baianced between_ at-the-controls and balarit:e~of-plantapplicants during the scenario:. All evenFrelated attributes: on Form ES-301-4 arff met Enter.the total number of unsatisfactory events in column 2.
b. TS. A scenario includes at least two TS entries/actions across at least two different events.* TS entries and.actions are detailed ori Fomi ES~D-2. Enter the total number of unsatisfactory TS.entries/actions in column 4. -(ES-301, D,5d)
  • C. CT. Check-that ascenario includes at-leasttwo preidentified CTs.. This criterion is a target quantitative attribute, not an absolute minimum requirement. Check -

that each CT is explicitly bounded on Form ES~Da2 With measurable performance standards (see Appendix ). Enter the total number of unsatisfactory CTs in column.6.

7

  • In coiumri 7., calculate the* percentage ofunsatisfacfory scenario elements: (2+4-+6). - 1+ 3 + 5 _ 100%

8 If the value in column.7 is> 20%, i'narldhe scenario as (U)nsatisfactdry in qolurnh 8. If column 7 is s 20%, annotate wi_th (E)nhancement or (S)atisfactory. -

9 In coJumn 9, explain each unsatisfactory event, TS; and CT._* Editorial comrnents ca.n also be added here. * \\ '*

Save initial review comments and detaii subsequent comment resolution -so that each _exam-bound scenario is rriar.ked by a ($ )atisfaciory res.olutlon on this form.

.*ES-301 :* Forni.ES-301-7 I

Site name: Peach* Bottom Atomic Power Station Exam Date: 06/01/21

OPERATING TEST TOTALS Total Total

  • Total* Total Explanation.

. Urisat: E.dits Sat..

I.

Admin. 9 0 4 9 Minor edits. to add needed referenceis and

.. 1 :

J. _*. '. :*... **_. :.... *'.

Sim./ln.:Plarit.. 0 9 two JPMs graded as LOO 1 and replaced with*

  • 11 *2.. other JPMs.-

I..........

...

  • Scenario 4, event.9 was overlapped with scenarios*** ;3 0 5 3 *
  • scenario 2; everit 2.. Removed event from.

.*

  • 1. scenario 9.. *..

Op~Test 23 2 9 21 9.5%

.**.1Totals:

lnstructlonSto'r Completing This Tabie:... *.......... *. *...... : :. *.. *.... *... *..*.. *.*... *. : *...*....

. 1.. *.. *.. * *.. **...*.* *.* *.*.*.*.... :..... :.... *.*.. *.. *.. :..... * *.. : *..

. Update data for this table from quality reviews and totals _in th~ previous tables and then calcJ.Jlate the percentage of total items that are unsatisfactory and give an explanation in the space provided. *. *.

. f 'i.... *.. Enter the tot~I nuni~er of ;terns submitted for the operating test inthe iTotal'.' column. For example, if..

  • nine administrative JPl\\lls were submitted, enter '!9" in the "Total;' items column.for administrative JPMs: :

For scenarios, enter.the total number of simulator scenarios.

  • I.*_...... ' *.. :........... -..... -_. :..

I I'.*. Enter the tot~i numb~r of (U)nsafisfactory JPMs and scenarios fr~m the

2. twc:i jpM~ coltimn*s and.
  • . sim1,1iator scenarios column 8 in the previous tables; Provide an explanation in the space provided.
  • tables. This Ent~r* totais for (E)nharicements needed and (S)atisfactory JPMs and sceriariosfrom ttie previdus task is for trc;1cking onli * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Total each column and enter the amounts in the Op. Test Totaliif'.row: :
5.. : Calculate ttie percentage ofthe operating test that is (U)nsatisfactory* (Op. Test total Urisai.)/(Op. Test Total) and place this.... '. '.... valu_e in the bolded '.'% Unsat.11 cell:. * * * *

.*.1.

... R~fe;r to ES-501, E._3:a,to r~te the overall operaUng test as foUows;

  • .. satisfactory, ifthe tOp. Test.Total""% Unsat.'.' is s 20%

.. **.unsatisfactory, if"Op:... -...... Test Tcitc;1r' "% Unsat" is.> 20.%.

6... Update this table arid the tables above With post~exam changes ii. the 1'.aS-adriiinlstered" operating test require~f content changes, ineluding the foUoWing:...

  • The JPM performance standards were incorrect..
  • The administrative JPM tasks/keys were incorrect..

.

  • CTs were incorrect iri the scenarios (not iricludirig postscehario critical tasks defined in I. Appendix D).. *. * * * *
  • The EOP strategy'was incorrect iii a sceriario(s)..

. *. TS entries/actions. were determined to be incorrect in a.scenario s.

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML21237A535&oldid=3747535"