ML22192A203

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
2021 QC Ile ES-301-7 Operating Test Review Worksheet-Final
ML22192A203
Person / Time
Site: Quad Cities  Constellation icon.png
Issue date: 07/09/2021
From: Randy Baker
NRC/RGN-III/DRS/OLB
To:
Baker R
Shared Package
ML20139A015 List:
References
Download: ML22192A203 (41)
v • d • e


Text

ES-301 Operating Test Review Worksheet Form ES-301-7 1

Updated 5/24/2021 Facility: Quad Cities Exam Date: June 2021 Admin JPMs 1

ADMIN Topic and K/A 2

LOD (1-5) 3 Attributes 4

Job Content 5

U/E/S 6

Explanation I/C Focus Cues Critical Steps Scope (N/B)

Overlap Perf Std Key Minutia Job Link GENERIC GENERIC COMMENTS

1.

All validated and submitted JPM must include the supporting pre-prepared paperwork provided to the applicant as part of the JPM test item for review.)

2.

Several JPMs identify the Suggested Testing Environment as Simulator.

Reevaluate each (no need to tie up the simulator if this can be performed elsewhere (e.g., Classroom) and if the JPM can be performed in the Classroom, include it in the Suggested Testing Environment.

(This was also addressed in the Exam Outline review comments sent to facility.)

3.

The Actual Testing Method on the JPM

SUMMARY

page should not be checked. It would be checked by the JPM administrator to indicate where the JPM was actually administered.

4.

ALL JPM cover pages will need approval signatures and dates for final submittal.

(Why werent these completed prior to submittal?)

5.

Validation checklists completed prior to final submittal.

(Was the Op test Validation signed off properly prior to submittal?)

6.

It appears that several procedure references have been revised since the JPMs were written. Need to ensure that all the JPMs reflect the current/frozen version of the references.

(This was referenced in the submittal cover letter - Why?)

ES-301 Operating Test Review Worksheet Form ES-301-7 2

Updated 5/24/2021 Facility: Quad Cities Exam Date: June 2021 Admin JPMs 1

ADMIN Topic and K/A 2

LOD (1-5) 3 Attributes 4

Job Content 5

U/E/S 6

Explanation I/C Focus Cues Critical Steps Scope (N/B)

Overlap Perf Std Key Minutia Job Link

7.

ENSURE that examinee Cue Sheets reflect any changes made to the INITIAL CONDITIONS and/or INITIATING CUES.

NRC:

Were the previous Generic Comments all addressed and corrections incorporated?

Response

All Generic Comments addressed.

RO JPM A1.1; Initiate Protective Actions for Severe Weather COO G2.1.17 2

X E

S

1.

Include OP-AA-108-111-1001 (with title) in Reference(s) section of JPM Summary page.

2.

Simulator Setup Instructions - JPM does not appear to require any specific simulator setup. If testing environment is changed then no simulator setup is required.

3.

Init Cond

a.

Shouldnt the expected rainfall be included with the Thunderstorm Warning rather than the Tornado Warning?

b.

Include procedure titles with number

4.

Step D.2 STANDARD-Is there an alternate number that could be used?

If applicant uses an alternate phone number is that consider failure criteria.

Recommend removing number from STANDARD.

5.

Step D.4 STANDARD - If applicant does not repeat the warning, does that

ES-301 Operating Test Review Worksheet Form ES-301-7 3

Updated 5/24/2021 Facility: Quad Cities Exam Date: June 2021 Admin JPMs 1

ADMIN Topic and K/A 2

LOD (1-5) 3 Attributes 4

Job Content 5

U/E/S 6

Explanation I/C Focus Cues Critical Steps Scope (N/B)

Overlap Perf Std Key Minutia Job Link constitute a critical step failure? [See comment 4]

6.

Step D.5 STANDARD - Visual Sightings of what?

7.

D.6.c - Evaluate whether this step should remain a critical step.

Response

1) Added reference to JPM
2) Correct
3) Changed amount of rain to be read with thunderstorm vs tornado.
4) Added alt extension for Security.
5) Removed second announcement bullet
6) Added visual sighting of tornado to step.
7) Made this step not critical.

Changed steps D.6.a & D.6.c wording to posted safe areas vs following JPM is now SAT.

RO JPM A1.2; Unit Operator Verification of SBLC Limits COO G2.1.25 2

X E

S

1.

JPM Summary Page - Wrong K/A Number is listed (2.1.14 instead of 2.1.25)

(JPM is constructed to fit 2.1.25)

2.

Simulator Setup Instructions

a.

Add instruction to ensure that parameters to be obtained and recorded fall with the range required for this JPM

b.

If parameters are not stable enough, override indications or post a graphic indicating desired

ES-301 Operating Test Review Worksheet Form ES-301-7 4

Updated 5/24/2021 Facility: Quad Cities Exam Date: June 2021 Admin JPMs 1

ADMIN Topic and K/A 2

LOD (1-5) 3 Attributes 4

Job Content 5

U/E/S 6

Explanation I/C Focus Cues Critical Steps Scope (N/B)

Overlap Perf Std Key Minutia Job Link values.

3.

Change Initiating Cue to include documentation of discrepancies

4.

Provide examinees with the following:

a.

When located/obtained

i. QOS 0005 Pages 1-4 and 27 (step 46) ii. Tech Spec Figures 3.1.7-1 and 3.1.7-2 (typo - incorrect number

[3.7.1-2] in submitted copy Initial Conditions page.)

b.

With Cue Sheet - QOS 0005-S01, Pages 1,2, 28 (step 46), and 45 (Remarks page)

5.

Add non-critical items to appropriate STANDARD to document discrepancies by circling OOS readings and adding comment(s) in REMARKS section of S01. [I assume that the information between the is critical and the information not bound by is non-critical.]

6.

Add non-critical step to evaluate Tank Temperature

7.

Add KEY indicating correct locations (interpretations) on TS graphs.

8.

S01 specifies current requirement as 2 milliamps; JPM STANDARD should read the same.

Response

1) K/A corrected
2) The indications for SBLC for this JPM are not in the control room
3) Changed initiating cue
4) Verified that I made paperwork to

ES-301 Operating Test Review Worksheet Form ES-301-7 5

Updated 5/24/2021 Facility: Quad Cities Exam Date: June 2021 Admin JPMs 1

ADMIN Topic and K/A 2

LOD (1-5) 3 Attributes 4

Job Content 5

U/E/S 6

Explanation I/C Focus Cues Critical Steps Scope (N/B)

Overlap Perf Std Key Minutia Job Link accompany the JPM which matches the comment.

5) Clarified critical and non-critical portions of steps.
6) Added step.
7) Key of correct graph reading created.
8) 0.2 milliamps corrected.

Added procedure name to initial conditions Add Key to final JPM JPM is now SAT.

RO JPM A.2; Enter a Control Rod Substitute Position EC G2.2.14 3

X U

S

1.

Recommend adding a note prior to Step *F.1.a that entries for Attachment B steps 4 and 5 may be worded differently as long as pertinent information is provided.

2.

To be consistent with other entries on Attach B, requests for/obtaining the QNE review signature, US authorization, and the installation verification should be critical (JPM steps that are required to meet the task standard, but are not verifiable actions, must still be marked as critical steps.)

Response

1) Added note.
2) Made step critical Updated rod position on initial conditions, step F.1.a, F.1.c, F.1.h,

ES-301 Operating Test Review Worksheet Form ES-301-7 6

Updated 5/24/2021 Facility: Quad Cities Exam Date: June 2021 Admin JPMs 1

ADMIN Topic and K/A 2

LOD (1-5) 3 Attributes 4

Job Content 5

U/E/S 6

Explanation I/C Focus Cues Critical Steps Scope (N/B)

Overlap Perf Std Key Minutia Job Link F.1.i for new core load JPM is now SAT.

RO JPM A.3; Main Chimney Gas Monitor Operation RC G2.3.5 2

X E

S

1.

Step F.4 STANDARD for sub-step f) has the wrong Alarm listed

2.

Step F.3, F.4, & F.5 do not include operation of Reset switch.

3.

Step F.7 is designated as critical

(*preceding step number). Switches are verified in step C.2 and are not operated during the JPM. Remove

  • from step number. (Typo?)

(Are the switches ever repositioned during performance of the JPM?

4.

Remove last step (US Notification).

Procedure does not require it and it is not included in previous JPMs.

Response

1) Added correct alarm
2) Added using reset switch to steps
3) Removed critical step
4) Removed last step added overrides for alarm and recorder response added reset to steps F.3, F.4, & F.5 added evaluator note and role play for alarm not coming in Need to add Task Number and Title to JPM Summary page JPM is now SAT.

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

Updated 5/24/2021 Facility: Quad Cities Exam Date: June 2021 Admin JPMs 1

ADMIN Topic and K/A 2

LOD (1-5) 3 Attributes 4

Job Content 5

U/E/S 6

Explanation I/C Focus Cues Critical Steps Scope (N/B)

Overlap Perf Std Key Minutia Job Link SRO JPM A1.1; Determine Shift Staffing Requirements COO G2.1.5 3

X U

S

1.

INITIATING CUE - Recommend the following change: Determine if any staffing adjustments are needed, time constraints associated for making any necessary adjustments, and take action, as necessary, to fill any vacancies.

a.

Specifically directing the call out cues the examinee that adjustments will be necessary.

b.

Examinee should be able to locate the necessary procedure without being told what it is. Provide it only when located.

(The initial Cue provides procedures only after applicant locates them.)

2.

Clearly identify the critical elements of JPM Step 2.

(Determination of time constraint is the only item in Step 2 [QAP 0300-03 C.6]

and that is critical per the JPM Task Standard. The first part of Step 3 is a repeat of Step 2 and the Element should replace the Element of Step 2.

Then, as stated below Step 3 becomes the determination of who can be called in [Critical for who may or may not and why - see Comment 3 below] and the second part of Step 3 [or make it Step 4] becomes the completion of of SY-AA-102-201

[Critical per JPM Task Standard].)

3.

The last step of the JPM should be implements call-out procedure to

ES-301 Operating Test Review Worksheet Form ES-301-7 8

Updated 5/24/2021 Facility: Quad Cities Exam Date: June 2021 Admin JPMs 1

ADMIN Topic and K/A 2

LOD (1-5) 3 Attributes 4

Job Content 5

U/E/S 6

Explanation I/C Focus Cues Critical Steps Scope (N/B)

Overlap Perf Std Key Minutia Job Link ensure that shift staffing is restored within the 2-hour time constraint.

STANDARD should consist of the following:

a.

Obtains call out list

b.

Obtains/implements SY-AA-102-201 and completes Attachment 1 while performing the call-out.

c.

Determines that STA #1 is unavailable due to inability to report to work by 0400

d.

Determines that STA #2 is unavailable due to work-hour restrictions

e.

Determines STA #3 is available and directs STA #3 to report to work.

Response

1) Updated to match recommendation
2) Made second step critical but not the first step. Clarified which parts of the standards were critical.
3) Made all change recommendations.

Added procedures into Init Cue Removed cue above c.1.d to provide copies Added operator names to STA Call Out sheet Updated estimated time to 10 mins JPM is now SAT.

ES-301 Operating Test Review Worksheet Form ES-301-7 9

Updated 5/24/2021 Facility: Quad Cities Exam Date: June 2021 Admin JPMs 1

ADMIN Topic and K/A 2

LOD (1-5) 3 Attributes 4

Job Content 5

U/E/S 6

Explanation I/C Focus Cues Critical Steps Scope (N/B)

Overlap Perf Std Key Minutia Job Link SRO JPM A1.2; Executing ReMA Review Checklist COO G2.1.37 X

E S

1.

JPM

SUMMARY

page and SIMULATOR SETUP INSTRUCTIONS

- revise to indicate Suggested Testing Environment Classroom or Simulator

2.

QNE Presence is incorrect in both step 1 of 2 and 2 of 2. JPM step should be repeated for each Attachment 2 step.

(This could potentially be a Typo on Att. 2 Step 2 of 2. If not, then will need an additional Critical Step.)

3.

JPM will need to be revised due to changes in the procedure (specifically to Attachment 1 and 2) since the JPM was written.

(Actual forms are arranged differently and the Support doc for the completed ReMA Plan must be redone.)

Response

1) Corrected
2) Correct QNE Presence for second critical step.
3) The attachment was only a sample for what the REMA should look like.

The form used is approved for use at Quad Added to REMA: date range, multiple activations yes, signatures OP-AB-300-1003 added to initiating cue Added procedure to give examinee JPM is now SAT.

ES-301 Operating Test Review Worksheet Form ES-301-7 10 Updated 5/24/2021 Facility: Quad Cities Exam Date: June 2021 Admin JPMs 1

ADMIN Topic and K/A 2

LOD (1-5) 3 Attributes 4

Job Content 5

U/E/S 6

Explanation I/C Focus Cues Critical Steps Scope (N/B)

Overlap Perf Std Key Minutia Job Link SRO JPM A2; Approve Unit 1 Electrical Distribution Breaker and Voltage Verification Surveillance EC G2.2.15 X

E S

1)

JPM Step H.1.a - STANDARD needs to reflect required performance by applicant, e.g., Determines that only 1 offsite line is available and that acceptance criteria G.1.a.(1) is not met.

(This may be worded more directly to support Critical Step identification.)

2)

JPM Step H.1.a - Procedure markup instructions in the setup section state to mark H.1.a.(3) as N/A. However Initial Conditions state Transmission has provided a predicted voltage below the minimum. Given the setup, this error should also be identified by the examinee. Clarify and/or correct if necessary.

(Make sure Task Standard and Critical steps match.)

Response

1) Added wording to support critical step ID
2) Removed Post LOCA low voltage Removed This JPM is time critical from the ICs JPM is now SAT.

SRO JPM A3; Determine Status and Compensatory Actions for the Service Water Radiation Monitor RC G2.3.11 2

X E

S

1.

SIMULATOR SETUP INSTRUCTIONS

- Delete the NOTE; there is no setup.

2.

INITIAL CONDITIONS - revise the last two bullets to include the final values after adjustments were attempted, then delete the first two JPM steps and

ES-301 Operating Test Review Worksheet Form ES-301-7 11 Updated 5/24/2021 Facility: Quad Cities Exam Date: June 2021 Admin JPMs 1

ADMIN Topic and K/A 2

LOD (1-5) 3 Attributes 4

Job Content 5

U/E/S 6

Explanation I/C Focus Cues Critical Steps Scope (N/B)

Overlap Perf Std Key Minutia Job Link associated cues. (Good suggestion.)

3.

JPM Step H.1.d - revise to state ODCM LCO Action Completion time.

4.

JPM Step H.2 - Include a copy of CY-QC-130-650 to be available to examinee for reference. Experience has shown that one or more applicants will want to refer to the procedure (since the outage report refers to it), to verify that the requirements of the procedure satisfy the ODCM requirement.

Response

1) Note deleted
2) Deleted Steps and Cue
3) Revised per comment
4) Added copy of reference to JPM JPM is now SAT.

SRO JPM A4; Event Classification and NARS Notification EP G2.4.41 4

X E

S

1.

This JPM as written is testing two different tasks (classification and notification). Limit the task to one or the other. The following comments change the focus to notification only.

2.

INITIAL CONDITIONS

a.

Revise the 1st bullet to state that a SITE AREA EMERGENCY (FS1) instead of an ALERT. Revise form instructions in Setup section to match.

b.

Delete the 3rd bullet; since this is a simulation of an actual event and the NARS information is not being

ES-301 Operating Test Review Worksheet Form ES-301-7 12 Updated 5/24/2021 Facility: Quad Cities Exam Date: June 2021 Admin JPMs 1

ADMIN Topic and K/A 2

LOD (1-5) 3 Attributes 4

Job Content 5

U/E/S 6

Explanation I/C Focus Cues Critical Steps Scope (N/B)

Overlap Perf Std Key Minutia Job Link transmitted it is unnecessary.

3.

INITIATING CUE - Add It is now 1304.

4.

Move This JPM is time critical to be the last line of the INITIATING CUE.

5.

Change the EVALUATOR note before the 1st JPM step to read that completed within 10 minutes of JPM start time (acknowledgement of Initiating Cue [task assignment]).

Response

1) Task modified to Notification only
2) Added SITE vs ALERT. Deleted bullet
3) Added 1304
4) Moved to Init Cue
5) Changed to 11 mins Added screenshot reference of windspeed Added full NARS procedure to setup JPM is now SAT.

ES-301 Operating Test Review Worksheet Form ES-301-7 13 Updated 5/24/2021 Facility: Quad Cities Exam Date: June 2021 Simulator/In-Plant JPMs 1

Safety Function and K/A 2

LOD (1-5) 3 Attributes 4

Job Content 5

U/E/S 6

Explanation I/C Focus Cues Critical Steps Scope (N/B)

Overlap Perf.

Std.

Key Minutia Job Link SIM JPM a; Start-Up the Reactor Recirculation System 1

202001 A4.01 3

X E

S

1.

INITIAL CONDITIONS

a.

Where are the steam dome and bottom head drain temperatures monitored and why is it necessary for an extra RO to monitor and report these values?

b.

Similarly, for the loop d/t

2.

JPM Step 10.e

a.

ELEMENT - Should be worded to match procedure step: Verify <15 minutes have elapsed since time recorded in steps F.7.d and F.9.e.

b.

STANDARD - The verification is NOT the difference between the two steps. The purpose of the step is to verify that the pump is started within 15 minutes of the time the two differential temperatures are recorded [refer to Limitation E.6].

Standard should reflect that there are two separate verifications: 1)

Verify that <15 minutes has elapsed since the time recorded in Step F.7.d; and 2) Verify that <15 minutes has elapsed since the time recorded in step F.9.e.

c.

Additionally, there appears to be a procedure deficiency here in that step F10.e verifies that the differential temperatures associated with Limitation E.6 are verified but not the speed of the operating pump.

3.

JPM Steps F.11.c-f - each of these steps is identified as a critical step.

What is the consequence if the examinee does not complete the steps as written?

ES-301 Operating Test Review Worksheet Form ES-301-7 14 Updated 5/24/2021 Facility: Quad Cities Exam Date: June 2021 Simulator/In-Plant JPMs 1

Safety Function and K/A 2

LOD (1-5) 3 Attributes 4

Job Content 5

U/E/S 6

Explanation I/C Focus Cues Critical Steps Scope (N/B)

Overlap Perf.

Std.

Key Minutia Job Link

Response

1. Deleted these points as it does not matter to JPM
2. a/b updated the standard per comments
2. c Step f.9.f.3 of the procedure shows how this comment is covered in procedure
3. The way the switch works, it will not allow an operator to jog it for longer.

Will cover on site or on phone Added step F.7.d & F.9.e differential temps taken 1 minute and 2 minutes ago, respectively, to the Initial Conditions. (Addresses Critical Step F.10.e Standard enhancements.)

Revised Validation time to 15 mins Added procedure name for QCOP 0202-43 to Init Cue JPM is now SAT.

SIM JPM b; Post Scram Startup of the RWCU System with a Subsequent Line Break in the Heat Exchanger Room 2

204000 A2.10 X

E S

1.

When is the leak activated?

a.

Setup states when 1201-78 c/s is taken to OPEN

b.

The NOTE prior to JPM Step HC 12 states when the RWCU pump c/s is taken to START

c.

JPM Step HC.12 and HC.13 seem to imply that the leak is started after 1201-80 is throttled open.

2.

Either JPM Step B.1.a or B.1.b should be critical but not both. Shutting either valve will isolate the penetration.

3.

Why is JPM Step B.1.c not critical?

ES-301 Operating Test Review Worksheet Form ES-301-7 15 Updated 5/24/2021 Facility: Quad Cities Exam Date: June 2021 Simulator/In-Plant JPMs 1

Safety Function and K/A 2

LOD (1-5) 3 Attributes 4

Job Content 5

U/E/S 6

Explanation I/C Focus Cues Critical Steps Scope (N/B)

Overlap Perf.

Std.

Key Minutia Job Link

Response

1. Leak will be triggered on the 78 c/s to OPEN. Removed other possibilities.

(verified week of 5/10)

2. Made either one of the steps critical
3. Made B.1.c critical (**Revised)

Hard cards authorized added to ICs along with procedure name for QCOP 1200-7 Added notes and cues to align the timing of the sump alarm and the EO report to the control room Removed This JPM is time critical from the ICs

    • JPM Step B.1.c is not critical, due to system config (in-line check valve)

JPM is now SAT.

SIM JPM c; Control Reactor Pressure using the Main Steam Line Drains 3

239001 A4.02 2

X U

S

1.

SIMULATOR SETUP INSTRUCTION

  1. 1 - Revise to specify any at power IC with significant operating history.

Necessary to ensure that there is enough decay heat such that pressure is not decreasing simply due to ambient losses.

2.

TASK STANDARD (JPM Summary Page) needs to be revised to remove reference to opening Main Steam Isolation valves and specify that a cooldown rate greater than ambient losses is established.

3.

INITIAL CONDITIONS - Revise the 3rd bullet to read The Unit Supervisor is

ES-301 Operating Test Review Worksheet Form ES-301-7 16 Updated 5/24/2021 Facility: Quad Cities Exam Date: June 2021 Simulator/In-Plant JPMs 1

Safety Function and K/A 2

LOD (1-5) 3 Attributes 4

Job Content 5

U/E/S 6

Explanation I/C Focus Cues Critical Steps Scope (N/B)

Overlap Perf.

Std.

Key Minutia Job Link implementing QGA 100 and determined that a cooldown at

<100°F/Hr be established. [As currently written the mention of RCIC is unnecessary and the mention of MSL drains duplicates the Initiating Cue.]

4.

INITIATING CUE - revise to include direction to include a desired cooldown rate, e.g., maximum attainable cooldown rate without exceeding 90°F/Hr (or desired value <100°F/Hr).

5.

JPM Step F.3 should be a critical step.

o ELEMENT - include to achieve desired cooldown rate.

o STANDARD - include and establishes the desired cooldown rate.

Response

1. Updated
2. Removed Main Steam Isolation and added establish a C/D rate...
3. Bullet updated per comments
4. Updated per comments
5. Added crit step Removed pressure is lowering from cue below step F.3 Changed task standard to line up from reduce RPV pressure Removed This JPM is time critical from the ICs Added procedure name for QCOP 0205-05 to Init Cue

ES-301 Operating Test Review Worksheet Form ES-301-7 17 Updated 5/24/2021 Facility: Quad Cities Exam Date: June 2021 Simulator/In-Plant JPMs 1

Safety Function and K/A 2

LOD (1-5) 3 Attributes 4

Job Content 5

U/E/S 6

Explanation I/C Focus Cues Critical Steps Scope (N/B)

Overlap Perf.

Std.

Key Minutia Job Link JPM is now SAT.

SIM JPM d; Startup the HPCI System in Pressure Control Mode 4

206000 A4.04 3

S

1.

SIMULATOR SETUP INSTRUCTIONS need to include steps to establish conditions to match INITIAL CONDITIONS, i.e., loss of offsite power, unit shutdown, EDGs supplying the vital AC buses, RPV level at +30 inches with RCIC and SSMP feeding, and RPV pressure >1000 psig.

2.

Recommend changing the K/A to A4.06

Response

1. Updated simulator setup instructions per comment
2. Changed K/A per comment Covered on week of 5/10; changed simulator setup instructions to remove those specifics given in ICs Added procedure name for QCOP 2300-06 to Init Cue JPM is SAT.

SIM JPM e; Start RHRSW System with Reduced Pump Capacity 5

219000 A4.05 3

X E

S

1.

JPM Steps F1.b (1) and F.2.b.(1) [in both locations].

a.

Insert a NOTE to Evaluator prior to each JPM step that describes the NORMAL lineup (Valves MO-1001-4A(B) and 185A(B) are OPEN and 186A(B) and 187A(B) are CLOSED.

b.

Revise STANDARD to read:

Verifies NORMAL FLOW valves MO-1001-4A(B) and

ES-301 Operating Test Review Worksheet Form ES-301-7 18 Updated 5/24/2021 Facility: Quad Cities Exam Date: June 2021 Simulator/In-Plant JPMs 1

Safety Function and K/A 2

LOD (1-5) 3 Attributes 4

Job Content 5

U/E/S 6

Explanation I/C Focus Cues Critical Steps Scope (N/B)

Overlap Perf.

Std.

Key Minutia Job Link 185A(B) OPEN lights are lit.

2.

JPM Step F.3.b - STANDARD should read: Secures running RHRSW Loop B pumps IAW step F.2.e (1) - (4). List sub-steps (1) through (4) with sub-steps (1)-(3) marked as critical.

3.

Insert NOTE to Evaluator prior JPM Step F.3.d. stating that procedure step F3.c is not applicable.

Response

1. Updated per comments
2. Updated and added crit substeps
3. Added note Added EO standing by for post start checks to initial conditions Added cue for US to order continuing with efforts to establish proper loop flow parameters Removed cue to verify triggers for degraded flow deleted Added procedure name for QCOP 0202-43 to Init Cue JPM is now SAT.

SIM JPM f; Energize Bus 14-1 with Crosstie Failure and Subsequent SBO Startup 6

262001 A4.04 3

X E

S

1.

INITIAL CONDITIONS

a.

Move the 5th bullet (bus 14-1 deenergized) to become the 2nd bullet.

b.

Indent the next three bullets under the new 2nd bullet.

c.

Add from Bus 24 to the Bus 24-1 energized bullet

d.

Delete the Low Press ECCS bullet and associated sub-bullets. This

ES-301 Operating Test Review Worksheet Form ES-301-7 19 Updated 5/24/2021 Facility: Quad Cities Exam Date: June 2021 Simulator/In-Plant JPMs 1

Safety Function and K/A 2

LOD (1-5) 3 Attributes 4

Job Content 5

U/E/S 6

Explanation I/C Focus Cues Critical Steps Scope (N/B)

Overlap Perf.

Std.

Key Minutia Job Link information is provided by cue.

e.

Move the Hard Card use authorization to the INITIATING CUE.

2.

ALTERNATE PATH BEGINS HERE

a.

Revise the first US CUE to state:

What action do you recommend for restoring power to Bus 14-1?

b.

Move the 2nd US CUE (last cue) to follow the first cue and revise to state: As Unit Supervisor, if asked for permission (or suggestion is made) to energize Bus 14-1.

Response

1. Updated per comments 2 Updated per comments Removed time critical from Init Cue Added CS & RHR pumps in PTL to Init Cue HC step1, per initial conditions removed HC step 6, changed to 901-74 panel Added procedure name for QCOP 6500-08 to Init Cue JPM is now SAT.

SIM JPM g; Withdraw an SRM for Maintenance 7

215004 A4.02 X

E S

1.

INITIAL CONDITIONS

a.

Add procedure title for QCIS 0700-09

b.

Recommend deleting the 3rd bullet (QCOS 0300-17); could find no reason for it.

c.

Move the next to last bullet (work instructions require) to following

ES-301 Operating Test Review Worksheet Form ES-301-7 20 Updated 5/24/2021 Facility: Quad Cities Exam Date: June 2021 Simulator/In-Plant JPMs 1

Safety Function and K/A 2

LOD (1-5) 3 Attributes 4

Job Content 5

U/E/S 6

Explanation I/C Focus Cues Critical Steps Scope (N/B)

Overlap Perf.

Std.

Key Minutia Job Link the IM troubleshooting bullet and indent the subsequent bullets (except the last bullet) beneath it.

Response

1. Updated all per comments Removed time critical from ICs Removed step f.4.i and cue above Updated final cue to say another NSO will finish the evolution Added procedure name for QCOP 0700-01 to Init Cue JPM is now SAT.

SIM JPM h; Inject SSMP to Unit 1 with Trip of Normal Feed 2 [9]

217000 A4.04 X

U S

1.

JPM needs to be replaced with a SF8 or SF9 system JPM.

Response

1)New JPM SF 9 sent Evaluator note below step F.1.d swapping supply and exhaust Added procedure name for QCOP 5750-02 to Init Cue JPM is now SAT.

IP JPM i; Change-Over SSMP Suction from CCSTs to the Fire Main 8

[2]

[295031 EA1.08]

2 X

E S

1.

This is not a SF8 task; it is related to ensuring a suction source for an alternated injection system.

a.

Change the safety function to SF2

b.

Change the K/A to 295031 EA1.08

ES-301 Operating Test Review Worksheet Form ES-301-7 21 Updated 5/24/2021 Facility: Quad Cities Exam Date: June 2021 Simulator/In-Plant JPMs 1

Safety Function and K/A 2

LOD (1-5) 3 Attributes 4

Job Content 5

U/E/S 6

Explanation I/C Focus Cues Critical Steps Scope (N/B)

Overlap Perf.

Std.

Key Minutia Job Link

2.

INITIAL CONDITIONS - Recommend changing the 7th bullet to state: The Unit Supervisor has determined that use of the Safe Shutdown Make-Up Pump (SSMP) is required to maintain RPV water level.

Response

1. Changed to SF 2 and K/A 2 Changed Initial conditions Added step F.2 applicants Cue page (blue sheet)

Added procedure name for QCOP 2900-02 to Init Cue JPM is now SAT.

IP JPM j; Locally Reset Control Room Ventilation 9

290003 A4.01 2

S

1.

For the marked-up procedure, it seems that Prerequisite C.2 should also be N/A. (Consider a Typo - missed one block/step.)

Response

1 Updated paperwork for JPM Added procedure name for QCOP 5750-09 to Init Cue JPM is SAT IP JPM k; Locally Start the U-1/2 Diesel Generator with a Failure of the 1/2 EDGCWP 6

264000 A3.06 3

X E

S

1.

Either the copy of the procedure provided to the examinees needs include mark-up of the prerequisites as complete or steps added to the JPM for the examinee to complete.

ES-301 Operating Test Review Worksheet Form ES-301-7 22 Updated 5/24/2021 Facility: Quad Cities Exam Date: June 2021 Simulator/In-Plant JPMs 1

Safety Function and K/A 2

LOD (1-5) 3 Attributes 4

Job Content 5

U/E/S 6

Explanation I/C Focus Cues Critical Steps Scope (N/B)

Overlap Perf.

Std.

Key Minutia Job Link

2.

Should include JPM steps for procedure steps F.1, F.3 and F.4.

Examinees should sign them off based on the provided INITIAL CONDITIONS.

3.

JPM Step F.11 - Need to fix the associated Cue; current cue provides voltage information rather than frequency information.

Response

1. Prerequisites in procedure signed off (not required in an emergency situation)
2. These steps are included in the JPM
3. Cue fixed Removed JPM is time critical from ICs Added procedure name for QCOP 6600-11 to Init Cue JPM is now SAT.

ES-301 Operating Test Review Worksheet Form ES-301-7 23 Updated 5/24/2021 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 K/A.

Mark in column 1. (ES-301, D.3 and D.4)

2.

Determine the level of difficulty (LOD) 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 reviewers 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 Operating Test Review Worksheet Form ES-301-7 1

Updated 5/24/2021 Facility: Quad Cities Scenario: 1 (90% RTP)

Exam Date: June 2021 1

2 3

4 5

6 7

8 9

10 Event Realism/

Cred.

Required Actions Verifiable actions LOD TS CTs Scenario Overlap U/E/S Explanation 1(N); SW Pump Swap S

Similarities with 2018 NRC Scenario 1, Event 2. The 2018 event involved a failure of the 1A Service Water pump, with degradation of the standby pump (1B), requiring a third pump to be started, then a fourth pump so that the degraded pump could be secured.

(Immediate action for abnormal event different from normal event.)

1. Revise the 1st BOP action to state: Identifies and locates Section F.3 as the applicable section to be used for pump start.
2. Similarly, revise the 6th BOP action to state: Identifies and locates Section F.8 as the applicable section to be used for pump shutdown.

(These actions may be addressed as part of brief conducted prior to taking the shift since this is prebriefed as a normal event.)

Response

1 Updated per comments 2 Updated per comments Added 1 min callback to SIMOP role play before end of event.

Event is SAT.

2(R); Raise Power N/A S

None.

3(I/TS),

APRM Fails X

E S

1. QCAN directs reader to refer to QCOA 0700-03; Include any applicable actions; If none simply indicate that SRO may refer to the QCOA.
2. Identify the TS Table 3.3.2.1-1 functions that are impacted.

(Instrument TS grading requires identification to the Function level.)

Response

1. Updated per comments

ES-301 Operating Test Review Worksheet Form ES-301-7 2

Updated 5/24/2021 Facility: Quad Cities Scenario: 1 (90% RTP)

Exam Date: June 2021 1

2 3

4 5

6 7

8 9

10 Event Realism/

Cred.

Required Actions Verifiable actions LOD TS CTs Scenario Overlap U/E/S Explanation

2. Updated per comments Added note that BOP may reset seal in light for APRM for to eval note Event is now SAT.

4(C);

Degraded CRD Pump X

E S

This event is very similar to 2018 NRC Scenario 3, Event 2 except for the magnitude of degradation. This event is a 40% degradation of the pump, where the 2018 event was a shaft shear (100%

degradation).

1. The field report, that the pump motor casing is hot, seems inconsistent with an indication that pump current is decreasing.

Consider a report of There is no obvious indications at the pump other than lower than normal discharge pressure. If there is a local indication of flow include that in the report.

(Indication should be consistent with malfunction.)

2. Need a contingency plan if the examinee enters the QCOA and decides that since the pump is not tripped decides to use QCOP 0300-23 to swap pumps.

(QCOA 0300-01 does not provide procedural direction to swap CRD pumps, only to start the Standby CRD pump if the in-service pump trips. Agree with not tripping the in-service pump, and change D-2 to use QCOP 0300-23 to actually swap running CRD pumps as the mitigating actions-more discriminating.)

Response

1. Updated indications to match desired casualty.
2. If pump trip actions required, referenced QCOA 0300-01 Scenario 3: Added At lead examiners discretion to role play for CRD pump trip if no action taken by crew to mitigate

ES-301 Operating Test Review Worksheet Form ES-301-7 3

Updated 5/24/2021 Facility: Quad Cities Scenario: 1 (90% RTP)

Exam Date: June 2021 1

2 3

4 5

6 7

8 9

10 Event Realism/

Cred.

Required Actions Verifiable actions LOD TS CTs Scenario Overlap U/E/S Explanation Event is now SAT.

5(C); TB HVAC Exh Fan trip S

None.

6(TS);

DW/Torus Vac Bkr Fails X

E S

Tech Spec only event.

Combined role play for 2251-24 panel for system engineer with EO when dispatched Added Note for TS 3.6.2.5 entry if d/p is less than 1.0 Event is now SAT.

7(M); Small Break LOCA X(3)

X E

S Similar to 2018 NRC Scenario 1, Event 8/9. Differences include:

2018 Sequential Loss of Feedwater (loss of one pump prior Major) with loss of second due to loss of Bus 11; this event Loss of Feedwater due to loss of Buses 11 and 12 2018 HPCI failure to start due to stuck stop valve; This event (8) prevents HPCI operation with trip of Aux Oil Pump.

2018 Event 0.25% break of RR Suction Line; this event 0.5%

break of RR Discharge Line ramped over 15 minutes.

1. 1st SRO Action associated with QGA 100 - add and enters QGA 200 between QGA 100 and when Drywell...
2. CT-1 (Initiating DW Sprays)
a. Will both trains of RHR be needed to ensure core cooling?

If so then reevaluate this task as a critical task. Is it conceivable that this task might be delayed until after blowdown?

b. boundary criteria is insufficient. Recommend boundary of INITIATE Drywell Sprays: 1) before Drywell/Torus pressure PSP (CT-3); OR 2) within (TBD) minutes of Torus Pressure exceeding 5 psig.

(Need better defined boundary criteria?)

3. Explain why CT-2 (Inhibit ADS) is listed since the scenario is designed to require Emergency Depressurization.

ES-301 Operating Test Review Worksheet Form ES-301-7 4

Updated 5/24/2021 Facility: Quad Cities Scenario: 1 (90% RTP)

Exam Date: June 2021 1

2 3

4 5

6 7

8 9

10 Event Realism/

Cred.

Required Actions Verifiable actions LOD TS CTs Scenario Overlap U/E/S Explanation (Preclude premature/uncontrolled depressurization?)

4. Under the Alternate Level Control Actions, the last SRO Action should read verifies > 2 L3 Injection Sub-systems lined up with pumps running. [Not all available; CS B is OOS.]
5. Under QGA 100 RPV Blowdown Actions
a. Delete the first action item and move the 2nd and 3rd action items to the QGA 100, Alternate Level Control Actions section, following the determination that RPV Water Level cannot be held above -59 inches. The action to secure sprays and cooling should be performed at this point if needed to restore and maintain RPV water level above-142 inches.
b. Insert new SRO Action at beginning: Determines that RPV water level cannot be restored and held above -142 in. and transitions to RPV Blowdown

Response

1. SRO action step updated 2a. Will start before blowdown. All actions were grouped by their QGA (leg) and are not listed chronologically. 2b. CT boundary criteria provided in Clarifications.
3. This is a QC critical standard requirement to place in inhibit to prevent uncontrolled blowdown
4. Updated per comments 5.a. Sprays and cooling of containment are not secured until after the blowdown has commenced and the order to maximize injection is given. If RWL less than -142, all injection must be to the vessel. If greater than -142 and going up, flow may be diverted to containment cooling.

5.b. Updated per comments

  • Added reference for closing 1-2301-14 valve

ES-301 Operating Test Review Worksheet Form ES-301-7 5

Updated 5/24/2021 Facility: Quad Cities Scenario: 1 (90% RTP)

Exam Date: June 2021 1

2 3

4 5

6 7

8 9

10 Event Realism/

Cred.

Required Actions Verifiable actions LOD TS CTs Scenario Overlap U/E/S Explanation Event is now SAT.

8(?); Loss of Feed/HPCI Inject X

E S

This event should be combined with the Major event and not listed as a separate event. No verifiable action to mitigate HPCI failure.

1. Which procedure directs enabling the HPCI Trip Latch?
2. Wrong QCAN for HPCI listed; should be QCAN 901-3 B-9.

Response

1. QCAN subsequent actions/response
2. Updated per comments Event is now SAT.

9(C); Core Spray Auto-Start Failure S

None.

Evaluate whether crews should also be administered Scenario 1 & 2.

S Overall Scenario Assessed as SAT.

ES-301 Operating Test Review Worksheet Form ES-301-7 6

Updated 5/24/2021 Facility: Quad Cities Scenario: 3 (75% RTP)

Exam Date: June 2021 1

2 3

4 5

6 7

8 9

10 Event Realism/

Cred.

Required Actions Verifiable actions LOD TS CTs Scenario Overlap U/E/S Explanation 1(N) Main Turb Stop Valve Test S

None.

In crew turnover, changed rod step to 18 and FCL to 97% from new rod pattern, and added statement for raising power IAW QCGP 3-1 and 4-1.

Event is SAT.

2(R) Raise Power with Control Rods S

None.

3(C) Stuck Control Rod E

S 2018 NRC Scenario 2 had a stuck rod event, but rod was withdrawn and was immovable in that event.

1. Revise first ATC Action Item to ATC selects and attempts withdrawing control rod P-8 from position 00.
2. ATC Action Item following completion of QCOA 0300-02 Steps D.1 through D.4 - preface action with If adjustment to Drive Water Pressure was made per Step D.4, attempts.

(This will be evaluated for inclusion during onsite validation.)

Response

1. Updated to state begins withdrawing...per CE
2. Per CE, not included Updated all P-8 rods to K-8 per rod pattern change.

Event is now SAT.

4(I/TS) RBM Dnscl Failure X

E S

TS Actions - Identify which function(s) listed in TS Table 3.3.2.1-1 is/are inoperable.

(Instrument TS grading requires identification to the Function level.)

Response

1. Updated per comments

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

Updated 5/24/2021 Facility: Quad Cities Scenario: 3 (75% RTP)

Exam Date: June 2021 1

2 3

4 5

6 7

8 9

10 Event Realism/

Cred.

Required Actions Verifiable actions LOD TS CTs Scenario Overlap U/E/S Explanation Event is now SAT.

5(C/TS) SRV Fails Open X

X E

S 2018 NRC Scenario 1, Event 4; valve did not close until fuses were pulled 2019 NRC Retake Scenario 2, Event 4 (Valve does not close)

1. TS Actions - Specify Required Action (A.1) to be implemented.
2. TS Actions - Add that the SRO locates requirement to perform functional test of Suppression Chamber-to -Drywell Vacuum Breakers within 12 hours1.388889e-4 days <br />0.00333 hours <br />1.984127e-5 weeks <br />4.566e-6 months <br /> of all ERV/SRVs being closed. This requirement is called out in QCAN 901-3 E-13, QCAN 901-3 E-14, and QCOA 0203-01, and is required per the Basis for TS 3.6.1.8, SR 3.6.1.8.2.

Response

1 Updated per comments 2 Updated per comments Removed TS 3.5.1 H from summary Event is now SAT.

6(C) TBCCW Pump Degrades X

S None.

7(M) Main Turb Hi-Vibe/

Scram X

E S

This is the Major Event and not a malfunction after EOP entry. This is the EOP entry. (Scram)

1. SRO Action Item for power reduction - specify Emergency Power Reduction.
2. SRO Action Item for tripping the Main Turbine - Add the following Turbine trip is required even though the Reactor fails to trip.
3. Last SRO Action Item for Event 7 - Include enters Scram Procedure (QCGP 2-3)

ES-301 Operating Test Review Worksheet Form ES-301-7 8

Updated 5/24/2021 Facility: Quad Cities Scenario: 3 (75% RTP)

Exam Date: June 2021 1

2 3

4 5

6 7

8 9

10 Event Realism/

Cred.

Required Actions Verifiable actions LOD TS CTs Scenario Overlap U/E/S Explanation

Response

1. Updated for rapid power reduction per QCGP 3-1
2. Updated per comments
3. Updated per comments Event is now SAT.

8(C)

Full Core Hydraulic ATWS X(4)

X E

S 2018 NRC Exam Scenario 2, Event 7 (IC 25% RTP) 2019 NRC Retake Scenario 2, Event 5 (IC 75% RTP) 2020 NRC Scenario 2, Event 9 (Following Emergency Power Reduction from IC 40% RTP)

This is malfunction after EOP entry. (ATWS)

1. The remaining level control actions on page 3 of 4 of the event should be listed under Section Title of QGA 101 Level Leg Actions
2. I may be overlooking something but what causes Torus Level to drop in this scenario. If anything, I would expect it to rise due to SRV operation. Maybe the BOP Action Item should be CREW -

Reports QGA 200 Entry Condition(s)

3. CT1 - Need more specific boundary criteria; Boron injection must be initiated prior to the BIIT (Torus temp < 149°F). To be successful either control rods have to be inserted such that Torus temperature is maintained < 149°F OR Boron Injection is initiated prior to Torus temperature reaching 149°F
4. CT4 - Consider adding the following success criteria to the clarification: RPV water level maintained > -162 inches OR Core Steam Flow is maintained above the Minimum Core Steam Flow (QGA 101, Detail 3)

Response

ES-301 Operating Test Review Worksheet Form ES-301-7 9

Updated 5/24/2021 Facility: Quad Cities Scenario: 3 (75% RTP)

Exam Date: June 2021 1

2 3

4 5

6 7

8 9

10 Event Realism/

Cred.

Required Actions Verifiable actions LOD TS CTs Scenario Overlap U/E/S Explanation

1. Level control section added
2. Group 2 causes the drywell/torus joy air compressor ?to trip?. Due to this, indicated level changes based on the pressure sensed by the d/p cell.
3. Updated per comments
4. Updated per comments Event is now SAT.

E Overall Scenario Assessed as needed Enhancement; Now SAT.

ES-301 Operating Test Review Worksheet Form ES-301-7 10 Updated 5/24/2021 Facility: Quad Cities Scenario: 4 (100% RTP)

Exam Date: June 2021 1

2 3

4 5

6 7

8 9

10 Event Realism/

Cred.

Required Actions Verifiable actions LOD TS CTs Scenario Overlap U/E/S Explanation 1(N) Acoustic Monitor Test S

Change the 1st BOP Action Item to a NOTE indicating that All checks, data, initials, reviews, and approvals are recorded on Attachment A of QCOS 0203-01.

Response

Clarified wording of 1st BOP action item Event is SAT.

2(C) 1A FRV Lockup E

S

1. 2nd ATC Action Item - recommend dividing the statement into two separate sentences/statements: 1) Verifies A FWRV

[Controller] in MAN; 2) Verifies B FWRV [Controller] in AUTO and controlling vessel level. This would alleviate any confusion that the A FRV can be operated prior to resetting the lockup.

2. QCOA 0600-01 directs entry into TS LCOs 3.2.2 and 3.2.3. Why is this not listed as a TS event?

Response

1. Updated per comments
2. With 3 RFPs running; TS entry not required.

Event is now SAT.

3(C/TS)

Control Rod Drifts Out X

E S

1. 1st Operator Action Item - Should be ATC instead of BOP
2. Revise ATC Action Item following determination that rod will not latch at 00 to start with: Reapplies and maintains INSERT signal and.

Response

1 Updated per comments 2 Updated per comments Event is now SAT.

ES-301 Operating Test Review Worksheet Form ES-301-7 11 Updated 5/24/2021 Facility: Quad Cities Scenario: 4 (100% RTP)

Exam Date: June 2021 1

2 3

4 5

6 7

8 9

10 Event Realism/

Cred.

Required Actions Verifiable actions LOD TS CTs Scenario Overlap U/E/S Explanation 4(C/TS)

Spurious ADS Timer Actuation X

S None 5(C) Trip of Bus 16 and Recovery S

(This event was added to provide another component malfunction for the BOP in place of simply reclosing the heater string bypass valve which was made part of the QCOA response to the next event-Loss of Feed Heating.)

No additional comments for this event

Response

Event is SAT.

6(R) FW Htr Tube Leak/

Emergency Power Reduction E

S This is one event not two separated events. Reclosing the Heater String Bypass Valve is part to the QCOA response to loss of feed heating.

(Recommend taking credit for the reactivity event.)

Response

1 Changed to one event; counted as a reactivity manipulation Removed steps to reopen south SJAE valves based on simulator setup Event is now SAT.

7(M) Fuel Failure &

SDV Leak X(2)

E S

1. Regarding the SRO Action Item to initiate a cooldown; Shouldnt the first direction be to stabilize RPV Pressure below 1060 (probably with a control band [800-1000 psig], following by the direction to initiate a cooldown.
2. Where does the guidance/direction for starting the DGCWP come from?

ES-301 Operating Test Review Worksheet Form ES-301-7 12 Updated 5/24/2021 Facility: Quad Cities Scenario: 4 (100% RTP)

Exam Date: June 2021 1

2 3

4 5

6 7

8 9

10 Event Realism/

Cred.

Required Actions Verifiable actions LOD TS CTs Scenario Overlap U/E/S Explanation

3. Add a SRO Action Item, following the report that the Scram cannot be reset, Determines that a Primary System is Discharging into the Reactor Building (SDV Leak) and cannot be isolated.
4. CT2 Bounding Criteria - How long after the criteria for initiating RPV Blowdown before the c/s for the 5 ADS valves must be placed in MAN? Since there does not appear to be any specific parameter upon which to base unsuccessful completion (e.g.

rad levels exceed some value), establish a time limit.

(Need better defined boundary criteria.)

Response

1. Updated per comments
2. QGA 300-start all room coolers. DGCWP provides cooling
3. Updated per comments
4. Updated per comments; criteria-10 minutes Event is now SAT.

8 - Scram Reset Switch Failure X

U S

This malfunction supports the major event and should not be listed as a separate event. Additionally, there is no successful mitigation strategy, therefore no verifiable actions to mitigate the event.

(This Malfunction will count as a post-EOP malfunction. However, this cannot be counted as a component failure for a crew member as there are not any verifiable actions associated with the failure.

Recommend combining with Event 7.)

Response

Combined with Event 7 as simply a post-EOP malfunction Malfunction relocated and is SAT.

S Overall Scenario Assessed as SAT.

ES-301 Operating Test Review Worksheet Form ES-301-7 14 Updated 5/24/2021 Facility: Quad Cities Scenario: 5 (75% RTP)

Exam Date: June 2021 1

2 3

4 5

6 7

8 9

10 Event Realism/

Cred.

Required Actions Verifiable actions LOD TS CTs Scenario Overlap U/E/S Explanation 1(N[/TS])

Core Spray Pump Surveillance X

E S

Event includes TS call (loop inoperable while test valve is open).

Outline and scenario guide should be updated.

Response

1 Added TS 3.5.1 Added note that B loop clean up may be passed at the discretion of the lead examiner.

Event is now SAT.

2(I) LPRM Upscale E

S

1. Apparent typo in Key Parameter response - 901(2)-5 repeated
2. It appears that both the ATC (bypasses APRM) and BOP (bypasses LPRM) should receive credit for this event.
3. Is the OPRM Trouble annunciator actually expected? If so, what actions are necessary (e.g., verify operability of OPRM impacted/not impacted.)

Response

1 Updated per comments 2 Updated D-1 for Event 2 3 Yes Actions done by BOP at 901-27 Event is now SAT.

3(TS) SSMP Room Cooler Inoperable S

None.

Removed continuously from ATC monitoring 4(C) Gland Exhauster Trip S

None 5(C) Recirc Master Cont.

Fails High E

S

1. Should there be an action to reduce Reactor Power to to the power at the beginning of the transient?

ES-301 Operating Test Review Worksheet Form ES-301-7 15 Updated 5/24/2021 Facility: Quad Cities Scenario: 5 (75% RTP)

Exam Date: June 2021 1

2 3

4 5

6 7

8 9

10 Event Realism/

Cred.

Required Actions Verifiable actions LOD TS CTs Scenario Overlap U/E/S Explanation

Response

1 Updated per comments Removed runback from automatic actions Event is now SAT.

6(C/TS/[R])

Recirc Pump Seal Failure X

X E

S Need bounding criteria for completing CT1, e.g., trips pump and isolates the loop such that a Scram (manual or automatic) due to High DW Press does not occur.

(Need better defined boundary criteria.)

Response

1 Updated per comments Event is now SAT.

7(R)

Emergent Power Reduction E

S Event 7 appears to be a continuation of Event 6 and should not be listed as a separate event.

(In this case, the isolation of the Recirc Loop credits the component malfunction. The follow-up power reduction [emergent-not emergency] may be considered a separate event.)

Response

Added note to allow moving on before crew secures feed and condensate pumps.

Event is now SAT.

8(M) Torus Leak/Scram X

E S

1. CT2 Bounding Criteria - How long after the criteria for initiating RPV Blowdown before the c/s for the 5 ADS valves must be placed in MAN? Since there does not appear to be any specific parameter upon which to base unsuccessful completion (e.g.

rad levels exceed some value), establish a time limit.

ES-301 Operating Test Review Worksheet Form ES-301-7 16 Updated 5/24/2021 Facility: Quad Cities Scenario: 5 (75% RTP)

Exam Date: June 2021 1

2 3

4 5

6 7

8 9

10 Event Realism/

Cred.

Required Actions Verifiable actions LOD TS CTs Scenario Overlap U/E/S Explanation

Response

1. Procedure must be entered prior to going below 11 ft in the Torus; this is a hard limit. Once ED is required, no significant delay in opening ADS valves should occur.

Event is now SAT.

9 Spurious Group 1 Isol./

ED X

U S

As written, this is simply a continuation of the Major event. If you want to treat it as a separate event, delay the MSIV closure until after RPV pressure is stabilized following the Scram. Initiate after a cooldown is initiated or if blowdown is anticipated and rapid depressurization is initiated.

(Agreed-This will count as a post-EOP entry malfunction, but the resulting ED will still count as a component failure for crew members.) Recommend combining with Event 8.)

Response

Combined with Event 8 as simply a post-EOP malfunction Malfunction relocated and is SAT.

Response

Event is now SAT.

9 (C)

Blowdown S

None.

S Overall Scenario Assessed as SAT.

ES-301 Operating Test Review Worksheet Form ES-301-7 17 Updated 5/24/2021 Instructions for Completing This Table:

Use this table for each scenario for evaluation.

2 Check this box if the events are not related (e.g., seismic event followed by a pipe rupture) OR if the events do not obey the laws of physics and thermodynamics.

3, 4 In columns 3 and 4, check the box if there is no verifiable or required action, as applicable. Examples of required actions are as follows: (ES-301, D.5f) opening, closing, and throttling valves starting and stopping equipment raising and lowering level, flow, and pressure making decisions and giving directions acknowledging or verifying key alarms and automatic actions (Uncomplicated events that require no operator action beyond this should not be included on the operating test unless they are necessary to set the stage for subsequent 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 this box if the event has a critical task (CT). If the same CT covers more than one event, check the event where the CT started only.

8 Check this box if the event overlaps with another event on any of the last two NRC examinations. (Appendix D, C.1.f) 9 Based on the reviewers judgment, is the event as written (U)nacceptable (requiring repair or replacement), in need of (E)nhancement, or (S)atisfactory? Mark the answer in column 9.

10 Record any explanations of the events here.

In the shaded boxes, sum the number of check marks in each column.

In column 1, sum the number of events.

In columns 2-4, record the total number of check marks for each column.

In column 5, based on the reviewer's judgement, place a checkmark only if the scenario's LOD is not appropriate.

In column 6, TS are required to be 2 for each scenario. (ES-301, D.5.d)

In column 7, preidentified CTs should be 2 for each scenario. (Appendix D; ES-301, D.5.d; ES-301-4)

In column 8, record the number of events not used on the two previous NRC initial licensing exams. A scenario is considered unsatisfactory if there is < 2 new events. (ES-301, D.5.b; Appendix D, C.1.f)

In column 9, record whether the scenario as written (U)nacceptable, in need of (E)nhancement, or (S)atisfactory from column 11 of the simulator scenario table.

ES-301 Operating Test Review Worksheet Form ES-301-7 18 Updated 5/24/2021 Facility: Quad Cities Exam Date: June 2021 Scenario 1

2 3

4 5

6 7

8 11 Event Totals Events Unsat.

TS Total TS Unsat.

CT Total CT Unsat.

% Unsat.

Scenario Elements U/E/S Explanation 1

9 0

2 0

3 0

0 S

3 9

0 2

0 4

0 11 E

4 8

1 2

0 2

0 0

E 5

10 1

2 0

2 0

0 E

Instructions for Completing This Table:

Check or mark any item(s) requiring comment and explain the issue in 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 match the respective scenario 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 on the following criteria:

a.

Events. Each event is described on a Form ES-D-2, including all switch manipulations, pertinent alarms, and verifiable actions. Event actions are balanced between at-the-controls and balance-of-plant applicants during the scenario. All event-related attributes on Form ES-301-4 are 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 on Form ES-D-2. Enter the total number of unsatisfactory TS entries/actions in column 4. (ES-301, D.5d) c.

CT. Check that a scenario includes at least two preidentified CTs. This criterion is a target quantitative attribute, not an absolute minimum requirement.

Check that each CT is explicitly bounded on Form ES-D-2 with measurable performance standards (see Appendix D). Enter the total number of unsatisfactory CTs in column 6.

7 In column 7, calculate the percentage of unsatisfactory scenario elements:

8 If the value in column 7 is > 20%, mark the scenario as (U)nsatisfactory in column 8. If column 7 is 20%, annotate with (E)nhancement or (S)atisfactory.

9 In column 9, explain each unsatisfactory event, TS, and CT. Editorial comments can also be added here.

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

2 + 4 + 6 1 + 3 + 5100%

Scenario is now SAT.

Scenario is now SAT.

Scenario is now SAT.

ES-301 19 Form ES-301-7 19 Updated 5/24/2021 Site name: Quad Cities Exam Date: June 2021 OPERATING TEST TOTALS Total Total Unsat.

Total Total Unsat.

Explanation Edits Sat.

Admin.

JPMs 9

2 7

0 See Comments above.

(2 JPMs UNSAT; 7 JPMs ENHANCED)

Sim./In-plant JPMs 11 2

7 2

See Comments above.

(2 JPMs UNSAT; 7 JPMs ENHANCED)

Scenarios 4

0 3

1 See Comments above.

(1 Scenario SAT; 3 Scenarios ENHANCED)

Op. Test Scenario Totals:

24 4

17 3

16.7 Meets Acceptance Criteria ( 20%).

Instructions for Completing This Table:

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

1.

Enter the total number of items submitted for the operating test in the Total column. For example, if nine administrative JPMs were submitted, enter 9 in the Total items column for administrative JPMs. For scenarios, enter the total number of simulator scenarios.

2.

Enter the total number of (U)nsatisfactory JPMs and scenarios from the two JPMs column 5 and simulator scenarios column 8 in the previous tables. Provide an explanation in the space provided.

3.

Enter totals for (E)nhancements needed and (S)atisfactory JPMs and scenarios from the previous tables.

This task is for tracking only.

4.

Total each column and enter the amounts in the Op. Test Totals row.

5.

Calculate the percentage of the operating test that is (U)nsatisfactory (Op. Test Total Unsat.)/(Op. Test Total) and place this value in the bolded % Unsat. cell.

Refer to ES-501, E.3.a, to rate the overall operating test as follows:

satisfactory, if the Op. Test Total % Unsat. is 20%

unsatisfactory, if Op. Test Total % Unsat. is > 20%

6.

Update this table and the tables above with post-exam changes if the as-administered operating test required content changes, including the following:

The JPM performance standards were incorrect.

The administrative JPM tasks/keys were incorrect.

CTs were incorrect in the scenarios (not including post scenario critical tasks defined in Appendix D).

The EOP strategy was incorrect in a scenario(s).

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

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML22192A203&oldid=3793770"