ML22186A162

2018 DB Ile ES-301-3 and ES-301-4 Op Test Quality Checklists-Final

ML22186A162
Person / Time
Site:	Davis Besse
Issue date:	12/29/2017
From:	Randy Baker NRC/RGN-III/DRS/OLB
To:	FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Co
Baker R
Shared Package
ML17068A444	List: L-17-349, 2018 DB Ile Proposed Examination Submittal Letter 11-21-2017 ML22186A133 ML22186A134 ML22186A135 ML22186A137 ML22186A162 ML22186A163 ML22186A167
References
Download: ML22186A162 (2)

Text

ES-301 Operating Test Quality Checklist Form ES-301-3 IL Facility: Davis Besse Nuclear Power Station Date of Examination:2/5/2018 to 2/16/2018 OperatinQ Test Number: DB NRC 2018 Initials

1. GENERAL CRITERIA a

b*

c#

a.

The operating test conforms to the previously approved outline; changes are consistent with sampling requirements (e.g., 10 CFR 55.45, operational importance, safety function distribution).

Jok-3-\\' GR>

b.

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

sr,k :sfl ~~

C.

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

1/4

~k :;f

d.

Overlap with the written examination and between different parts of the operating test is within acceptable rs;o..t

~~

limits.

.:Sf

e.

It appears that the operating test will differentiate between competent and less-than-competent applicants at

~

the designated license level.

~j-l3{)

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 1Plt

~

designation if deemed to be time critical by the facility licensee

J(J

• -specific performance criteria that include:

J

- 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

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 1")( IJ-P ~

distribution, bank use, repetition from the last 2 NRC examinations) specified on those forms and Form ES-201-2.

3. SIMULATOR CRITERIA

a.

The associated simulator operating tests (scenario sets) have been reviewed in accordance with Form ES-301-4

~/4'""' :Sf ~

and a copy is attached.

Printed Name/ Signature Date

a. Author T.A Gal£doslk

~o...L.~

11l,':)11

b. Facility Reviewer(*)

J.D Phillippe 7

,e-:: f &/fr-,--

"I ),o I (7

c. NRC Chief Examiner (#) 7 81'-'t>'""--1'> TIA~ ~

Q..__ ~

,a-[:rr L:ztr7 t

d. NRC Supervisor Q.. h.,.-t ~' ( )("t'l.. -~ / Ill JIM! )l, -

uh.&L).o,-i I

,. I

~.

NOTE:

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

II

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

(J} IPlt.L VA~*°MTf ~Ctl>/.lCf\\T!Of-) c'f,/Tl;*"'f.../1{ 01Jtf: /ql(~a- ~

,WAa,ft1J(;J;.. ~

NUREG-1021, Revision 11 FENOC Facsimile Rev 1

ES-301 Simulator Scenario Quality Checklist Form ES-301-4 Facility: Davis Besse Date of Exam:2/5/2018 to 2/16/2018 Scenario Numbers / 1 / 2 / 3 / 4 Operating Test No.: DB NRC 2018 QUALITATIVE ATTRIBUTES Initials a

b*

c#-

1. The initial conditions are realistic in that some equipment and/or instrumentation may be ~t out of service, but it does not cue the operators into expected events.

~ ~

2. The scenarios consist mostly of related events.

-1:0.t

-:s f ~

3.

Each event description consists of the following:

the point in the scenario when it is to be initiated

,rolr 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) s)P the event termination point (if applicable)

4. The events are valid with regard to physics and thermodynamics.

~/2-- J~ ~

5.

Sequencing and timing of events is reasonable and allows the examination team to ia,~

~,:S()

obtain complete evaluation results commensurate with the scenario objectives.

1 <'

6.

If time compression techniques are used, the scenario summary clearly so indicates. Operators have sufficient time to carry out expected activities without

'lOt-

..:s~

~

undue time constraints. Cues are given.

7.

The simulator modeling is not altered.

-.roAr

rQ ~

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

,o,!--

sP

""i:-olb evaluated to ensure that functional fidelity is maintained while running the planned scenarios.

9.

Scenarios are new or significantly modified in accordance with Section D.5 of ES-301.

W~

s-r ~~

10. All individual operator competencies can be evaluated, as verified using Form ES-s-o.A- :r? ~

301-6 (submit the form alonq 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 10.A-- }f ~

ES-303-1 and ES-303-3.)

12. Each applicant will be significantly involved in the minimum number of transients and

~otr

'tJ3 events specified on Form ES-301-5 (submit the form with the simulator scenarios).

"51<

. 13. Applicants are evaluated on a similar number of preidentified critical tasks across

5Q ~

scenarios, when possible.

-Wh--

14. The level of difficulty is appropriate to support licensing decisions for each crew position.

lu-t--

.JI?

~

TARGET QUANTITATIVE ATTRIBUTES (PER SCENARIO; SEE SECTION 0.5.d)

Actual Attributes

1. 1

1. 2

1. 3

1. 4

1.

Malfunctions after EOP entry (1-2) 1 1

1 1

1u-t-JP "?~

2.

Abnormal events (2-4) 3 4

5 4

~o4-Sf ~

3.

Major transients (1-2) 1 1

1 1

-J;v.f-

JP t'.:,~

4.

EOPs entered/requiring substantive actions (1-2) 1 1

1 1

,:fZ-.K" Jf' ~

5.

Entry into a contingency EOP with substantive actions 1

1 1

1

Sf r?~

(~ 1 per scenario set)

,rok

6.

Preidentified critical tasks (~2) 2 2

2 2

<:rur

s0 R~

II NOTE:

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

(BY SCENARIO#)

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

~!J~!::G.. ~ 021, Revision 11 FENOC Facsimile Rev 1