ML22192A203
| ML22192A203 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Quad Cities  |
| Issue date: | 07/09/2021 |
| From: | Randy Baker NRC/RGN-III/DRS/OLB |
| To: | |
| Baker R | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20139A015 | List: |
| References | |
| Download: ML22192A203 (41) | |
Text
ES-301 Operating Test Review Worksheet Form ES-301-7 Facility: Quad Cities Exam Date: June 2021 1 3 4 ADMIN 2 Attributes Job Content 5 6 Admin JPMs Topic LOD I/C Critical Scope Perf Job U/E/S Explanation and (1-5) Cues Overlap Key Minutia K/A Focus Steps (N/B) Std Link 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 GENERIC 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?)
1 Updated 5/24/2021
ES-301 Operating Test Review Worksheet Form ES-301-7 Facility: Quad Cities Exam Date: June 2021 1 3 4 ADMIN 2 Attributes Job Content 5 6 Admin JPMs Topic LOD I/C Critical Scope Perf Job U/E/S Explanation and (1-5) Cues Overlap Key Minutia K/A Focus Steps (N/B) Std 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.
- 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 RO JPM A1.1; included with the Thunderstorm Initiate Protective COO E 2 X Warning rather than the Tornado Actions for Severe G2.1.17 S Warning?
Weather
- 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 2 Updated 5/24/2021
ES-301 Operating Test Review Worksheet Form ES-301-7 Facility: Quad Cities Exam Date: June 2021 1 3 4 ADMIN 2 Attributes Job Content 5 6 Admin JPMs Topic LOD I/C Critical Scope Perf Job U/E/S Explanation and (1-5) Cues Overlap Key Minutia K/A Focus Steps (N/B) Std 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.
- 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)
RO JPM A1.2; Unit 2. Simulator Setup Instructions Operator COO E a. Add instruction to ensure that 2 X Verification of G2.1.25 S parameters to be obtained and SBLC Limits recorded fall with the range required for this JPM
- b. If parameters are not stable enough, override indications or post a graphic indicating desired 3 Updated 5/24/2021
ES-301 Operating Test Review Worksheet Form ES-301-7 Facility: Quad Cities Exam Date: June 2021 1 3 4 ADMIN 2 Attributes Job Content 5 6 Admin JPMs Topic LOD I/C Critical Scope Perf Job U/E/S Explanation and (1-5) Cues Overlap Key Minutia K/A Focus Steps (N/B) Std 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 4 Updated 5/24/2021
ES-301 Operating Test Review Worksheet Form ES-301-7 Facility: Quad Cities Exam Date: June 2021 1 3 4 ADMIN 2 Attributes Job Content 5 6 Admin JPMs Topic LOD I/C Critical Scope Perf Job U/E/S Explanation and (1-5) Cues Overlap Key Minutia K/A Focus Steps (N/B) Std 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
- 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 RO JPM A.2; Enter verification should be critical EC U a Control Rod 3 X (JPM steps that are required to meet the G2.2.14 S Substitute Position 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, 5 Updated 5/24/2021
ES-301 Operating Test Review Worksheet Form ES-301-7 Facility: Quad Cities Exam Date: June 2021 1 3 4 ADMIN 2 Attributes Job Content 5 6 Admin JPMs Topic LOD I/C Critical Scope Perf Job U/E/S Explanation and (1-5) Cues Overlap Key Minutia K/A Focus Steps (N/B) Std Link F.1.i for new core load JPM is now SAT.
- 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.
RC E Chimney Gas 2 X G2.3.5 S 1) Added correct alarm Monitor Operation
- 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
6 Updated 5/24/2021
ES-301 Operating Test Review Worksheet Form ES-301-7 Facility: Quad Cities Exam Date: June 2021 1 3 4 ADMIN 2 Attributes Job Content 5 6 Admin JPMs Topic LOD I/C Critical Scope Perf Job U/E/S Explanation and (1-5) Cues Overlap Key Minutia K/A Focus Steps (N/B) Std Link
- 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 SRO JPM A1.1; only after applicant locates them.)
Determine Shift COO U 2. Clearly identify the critical elements of 3 X Staffing G2.1.5 S JPM Step 2.
Requirements (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 Attachment 1 of SY-AA-102-201
[Critical per JPM Task Standard].)
- 3. The last step of the JPM should be implements call-out procedure to 7 Updated 5/24/2021
ES-301 Operating Test Review Worksheet Form ES-301-7 Facility: Quad Cities Exam Date: June 2021 1 3 4 ADMIN 2 Attributes Job Content 5 6 Admin JPMs Topic LOD I/C Critical Scope Perf Job U/E/S Explanation and (1-5) Cues Overlap Key Minutia K/A Focus Steps (N/B) Std 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
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
8 Updated 5/24/2021
ES-301 Operating Test Review Worksheet Form ES-301-7 Facility: Quad Cities Exam Date: June 2021 1 3 4 ADMIN 2 Attributes Job Content 5 6 Admin JPMs Topic LOD I/C Critical Scope Perf Job U/E/S Explanation and (1-5) Cues Overlap Key Minutia K/A Focus Steps (N/B) Std Link
- 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.)
SRO JPM A1.2; COO E Executing ReMA X Response:
G2.1.37 S Review Checklist
- 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
9 Updated 5/24/2021
ES-301 Operating Test Review Worksheet Form ES-301-7 Facility: Quad Cities Exam Date: June 2021 1 3 4 ADMIN 2 Attributes Job Content 5 6 Admin JPMs Topic LOD I/C Critical Scope Perf Job U/E/S Explanation and (1-5) Cues Overlap Key Minutia K/A Focus Steps (N/B) Std Link
- 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 SRO JPM A2; has provided a predicted voltage Approve Unit 1 below the minimum. Given the setup, Electrical this error should also be identified by EC E Distribution X the examinee. Clarify and/or correct if G2.2.15 S Breaker and necessary.
Voltage Verification (Make sure Task Standard and Critical Surveillance steps match.)
Response
- 1) Added wording to support critical step ID
- 2) Removed Post LOCA low voltage
SRO JPM A3; 1. SIMULATOR SETUP INSTRUCTIONS Determine Status - Delete the NOTE; there is no setup.
and Compensatory RC E 2. INITIAL CONDITIONS - revise the last 2 X Actions for the G2.3.11 S two bullets to include the final values Service Water after adjustments were attempted, Radiation Monitor then delete the first two JPM steps and 10 Updated 5/24/2021
ES-301 Operating Test Review Worksheet Form ES-301-7 Facility: Quad Cities Exam Date: June 2021 1 3 4 ADMIN 2 Attributes Job Content 5 6 Admin JPMs Topic LOD I/C Critical Scope Perf Job U/E/S Explanation and (1-5) Cues Overlap Key Minutia K/A Focus Steps (N/B) Std Link associated cues. (Good suggestion.)
- 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
- 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.
SRO JPM A4; 2. INITIAL CONDITIONS Event Classification EP E a. Revise the 1st bullet to state that a 4 X and NARS G2.4.41 S SITE AREA EMERGENCY (FS1)
Notification 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 11 Updated 5/24/2021
ES-301 Operating Test Review Worksheet Form ES-301-7 Facility: Quad Cities Exam Date: June 2021 1 3 4 ADMIN 2 Attributes Job Content 5 6 Admin JPMs Topic LOD I/C Critical Scope Perf Job U/E/S Explanation and (1-5) Cues Overlap Key Minutia K/A Focus Steps (N/B) Std 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
12 Updated 5/24/2021
ES-301 Operating Test Review Worksheet Form ES-301-7 Facility: Quad Cities Exam Date: June 2021 1 3 4 2
Simulator/In-Plant Safety Attributes Job Content 5 6 LOD JPMs Function I/C Critical Scope Perf. Job U/E/S Explanation (1-5) Cues Overlap Key Minutia and K/A Focus Steps (N/B) Std. Link
- 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 SIM JPM a; Start- two differential temperatures are 1
Up the Reactor E recorded [refer to Limitation E.6].
202001 3 X Recirculation S Standard should reflect that there A4.01 System 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?
13 Updated 5/24/2021
ES-301 Operating Test Review Worksheet Form ES-301-7 Facility: Quad Cities Exam Date: June 2021 1 3 4 2
Simulator/In-Plant Safety Attributes Job Content 5 6 LOD JPMs Function I/C Critical Scope Perf. Job U/E/S Explanation (1-5) Cues Overlap Key Minutia and K/A Focus Steps (N/B) Std. 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
- 1. When is the leak activated?
- a. Setup states when 1201-78 c/s is taken to OPEN SIM JPM b; Post b. The NOTE prior to JPM Step HC Scram Startup of 12 states when the RWCU pump the RWCU 2 c/s is taken to START E
System with a 204000 X c. JPM Step HC.12 and HC.13 seem S
Subsequent Line A2.10 to imply that the leak is started Break in the Heat after 1201-80 is throttled open.
Exchanger Room 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?
14 Updated 5/24/2021
ES-301 Operating Test Review Worksheet Form ES-301-7 Facility: Quad Cities Exam Date: June 2021 1 3 4 2
Simulator/In-Plant Safety Attributes Job Content 5 6 LOD JPMs Function I/C Critical Scope Perf. Job U/E/S Explanation (1-5) Cues Overlap Key Minutia and K/A Focus Steps (N/B) Std. 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
- **JPM Step B.1.c is not critical, due to system config (in-line check valve)
- 1. SIMULATOR SETUP INSTRUCTION
- 1 - Revise to specify any at power IC with significant operating history.
Necessary to ensure that there is enough decay heat such that pressure SIM JPM c; is not decreasing simply due to Control Reactor 3 ambient losses.
U Pressure using 239001 2 X 2. TASK STANDARD (JPM Summary S
the Main Steam A4.02 Page) needs to be revised to remove Line Drains 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 15 Updated 5/24/2021
ES-301 Operating Test Review Worksheet Form ES-301-7 Facility: Quad Cities Exam Date: June 2021 1 3 4 2
Simulator/In-Plant Safety Attributes Job Content 5 6 LOD JPMs Function I/C Critical Scope Perf. Job U/E/S Explanation (1-5) Cues Overlap Key Minutia and K/A Focus Steps (N/B) Std. 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
- Added procedure name for QCOP 0205-05 to Init Cue 16 Updated 5/24/2021
ES-301 Operating Test Review Worksheet Form ES-301-7 Facility: Quad Cities Exam Date: June 2021 1 3 4 2
Simulator/In-Plant Safety Attributes Job Content 5 6 LOD JPMs Function I/C Critical Scope Perf. Job U/E/S Explanation (1-5) Cues Overlap Key Minutia and K/A Focus Steps (N/B) Std. Link JPM is now SAT.
- 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 SIM JPM d;
Response
Startup the HPCI 4 System in 206000 3 S
- 1. Updated simulator setup instructions Pressure Control A4.04 per comment Mode
- 2. Changed K/A per comment
- Covered on week of 5/10; changed simulator setup instructions to remove those specifics given in ICs
- 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 SIM JPM e; Start 5 NORMAL lineup (Valves MO-RHRSW System E 219000 3 X 1001-4A(B) and 185A(B) are with Reduced S A4.05 OPEN and 186A(B) and 187A(B)
Pump Capacity are CLOSED.
- b. Revise STANDARD to read:
Verifies NORMAL FLOW valves MO-1001-4A(B) and 17 Updated 5/24/2021
ES-301 Operating Test Review Worksheet Form ES-301-7 Facility: Quad Cities Exam Date: June 2021 1 3 4 2
Simulator/In-Plant Safety Attributes Job Content 5 6 LOD JPMs Function I/C Critical Scope Perf. Job U/E/S Explanation (1-5) Cues Overlap Key Minutia and K/A Focus Steps (N/B) Std. 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
- 1. INITIAL CONDITIONS
- a. Move the 5th bullet (bus 14-1 SIM JPM f; deenergized) to become the 2nd Energize Bus 14- bullet.
6 1 with Crosstie E b. Indent the next three bullets under 262001 3 X Failure S the new 2nd bullet.
A4.04 and Subsequent c. Add from Bus 24 to the Bus SBO Startup 24-1 energized bullet
- d. Delete the Low Press ECCS bullet and associated sub-bullets. This 18 Updated 5/24/2021
ES-301 Operating Test Review Worksheet Form ES-301-7 Facility: Quad Cities Exam Date: June 2021 1 3 4 2
Simulator/In-Plant Safety Attributes Job Content 5 6 LOD JPMs Function I/C Critical Scope Perf. Job U/E/S Explanation (1-5) Cues Overlap Key Minutia and K/A Focus Steps (N/B) Std. 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
- HC step1, per initial conditions removed
- HC step 6, changed to 901-74 panel
- 1. INITIAL CONDITIONS
- a. Add procedure title for SIM JPM g; QCIS 0700-09 7
Withdraw an E b. Recommend deleting the 3rd bullet 215004 X SRM for S (QCOS 0300-17); could find no A4.02 Maintenance reason for it.
- c. Move the next to last bullet (work instructions require) to following 19 Updated 5/24/2021
ES-301 Operating Test Review Worksheet Form ES-301-7 Facility: Quad Cities Exam Date: June 2021 1 3 4 2
Simulator/In-Plant Safety Attributes Job Content 5 6 LOD JPMs Function I/C Critical Scope Perf. Job U/E/S Explanation (1-5) Cues Overlap Key Minutia and K/A Focus Steps (N/B) Std. 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
Response
1)New JPM SF 9 sent SIM JPM h; Inject 2 [9]
SSMP to Unit 1 U 217000 X
- Evaluator note below step F.1.d with Trip of S A4.04 swapping supply and exhaust Normal Feed
IP JPM i; 8 1. This is not a SF8 task; it is related to Change-Over [2] ensuring a suction source for an E
SSMP Suction [295031 2 X alternated injection system.
S from CCSTs to EA1.08] a. Change the safety function to SF2 the Fire Main b. Change the K/A to 295031 EA1.08 20 Updated 5/24/2021
ES-301 Operating Test Review Worksheet Form ES-301-7 Facility: Quad Cities Exam Date: June 2021 1 3 4 2
Simulator/In-Plant Safety Attributes Job Content 5 6 LOD JPMs Function I/C Critical Scope Perf. Job U/E/S Explanation (1-5) Cues Overlap Key Minutia and K/A Focus Steps (N/B) Std. 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)
- 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
IP JPM j; Locally 9 Reset Control 290003 2 S 1 Updated paperwork for JPM Room Ventilation A4.01
- Added procedure name for QCOP 5750-09 to Init Cue JPM is SAT IP JPM k; Locally 1. Either the copy of the procedure Start the U-1/2 6 provided to the examinees needs E
Diesel Generator 264000 3 X include mark-up of the prerequisites as S
with a Failure of A3.06 complete or steps added to the JPM the 1/2 EDGCWP for the examinee to complete.
21 Updated 5/24/2021
ES-301 Operating Test Review Worksheet Form ES-301-7 Facility: Quad Cities Exam Date: June 2021 1 3 4 2
Simulator/In-Plant Safety Attributes Job Content 5 6 LOD JPMs Function I/C Critical Scope Perf. Job U/E/S Explanation (1-5) Cues Overlap Key Minutia and K/A Focus Steps (N/B) Std. 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
22 Updated 5/24/2021
ES-301 Operating Test Review Worksheet 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 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.
23 Updated 5/24/2021
ES-301 Operating Test Review Worksheet Form ES-301-7 Facility: Quad Cities Scenario: 1 (90% RTP) Exam Date: June 2021 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Realism/ Required Verifiable Scenario Event LOD TS CTs U/E/S Explanation Cred. Actions actions Overlap 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 1(N); SW S pump shutdown.
Pump Swap (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 N/A S None.
Power
- 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.
3(I/TS), E (Instrument TS grading requires identification to the Function X
APRM Fails S level.)
Response
- 1. Updated per comments 1 Updated 5/24/2021
ES-301 Operating Test Review Worksheet Form ES-301-7 Facility: Quad Cities Scenario: 1 (90% RTP) Exam Date: June 2021 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Realism/ Required Verifiable Scenario Event LOD TS CTs U/E/S Explanation Cred. Actions actions Overlap
- 2. Updated per comments
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 4(C);
E QCOP 0300-23 to swap pumps.
Degraded X S (QCOA 0300-01 does not provide procedural direction to swap CRD Pump 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 2 Updated 5/24/2021
ES-301 Operating Test Review Worksheet Form ES-301-7 Facility: Quad Cities Scenario: 1 (90% RTP) Exam Date: June 2021 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Realism/ Required Verifiable Scenario Event LOD TS CTs U/E/S Explanation Cred. Actions actions Overlap Event is now SAT.
Fan trip Tech Spec only event.
6(TS);
- Combined role play for 2251-24 panel for system engineer with E
DW/Torus X EO when dispatched S
Vac Bkr Fails
- Added Note for TS 3.6.2.5 entry if d/p is less than 1.0 Event is now SAT.
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 7(M); Small E QGA 200 between QGA 100 and when Drywell . . .
X(3) X 2. CT-1 (Initiating DW Sprays)
Break LOCA S
- 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.
3 Updated 5/24/2021
ES-301 Operating Test Review Worksheet Form ES-301-7 Facility: Quad Cities Scenario: 1 (90% RTP) Exam Date: June 2021 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Realism/ Required Verifiable Scenario Event LOD TS CTs U/E/S Explanation Cred. Actions actions Overlap (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 4 Updated 5/24/2021
ES-301 Operating Test Review Worksheet Form ES-301-7 Facility: Quad Cities Scenario: 1 (90% RTP) Exam Date: June 2021 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Realism/ Required Verifiable Scenario Event LOD TS CTs U/E/S Explanation Cred. Actions actions Overlap Event is now SAT.
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?
8(?); Loss of 2. Wrong QCAN for HPCI listed; should be QCAN 901-3 B-9.
E Feed/HPCI X S
Inject Response:
- 1. QCAN subsequent actions/response
- 2. Updated per comments Event is now SAT.
9(C); Core Spray Auto- S None.
Start Failure Evaluate whether crews should also be administered Scenario 1 & 2.
S Overall Scenario Assessed as SAT.
5 Updated 5/24/2021
ES-301 Operating Test Review Worksheet Form ES-301-7 Facility: Quad Cities Scenario: 3 (75% RTP) Exam Date: June 2021 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Realism/ Required Verifiable Scenario Event LOD TS CTs U/E/S Explanation Cred. Actions actions Overlap None.
- In crew turnover, changed rod step to 18 and FCL to 97% from 1(N) Main new rod pattern, and added statement for raising power IAW Turb Stop S QCGP 3-1 and 4-1.
Valve Test Event is SAT.
2(R) Raise Power with S None.
Control Rods 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 .
3(C) Stuck E (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.
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.)
4(I/TS) RBM E X
Dnscl Failure S
Response
- 1. Updated per comments 6 Updated 5/24/2021
ES-301 Operating Test Review Worksheet Form ES-301-7 Facility: Quad Cities Scenario: 3 (75% RTP) Exam Date: June 2021 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Realism/ Required Verifiable Scenario Event LOD TS CTs U/E/S Explanation Cred. Actions actions Overlap Event is now SAT.
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-5(C/TS) SRV E 14, and QCOA 0203-01, and is required per the Basis for TS X X Fails Open S 3.6.1.8, SR 3.6.1.8.2.
Response
1 Updated per comments 2 Updated per comments
6(C) TBCCW Pump X S None.
Degrades 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 7(M) Main Power Reduction.
E Turb Hi-Vibe/ X 2. SRO Action Item for tripping the Main Turbine - Add the S
Scram following Turbine trip is required even though the Reactor fails to trip.
ES-301 Operating Test Review Worksheet Form ES-301-7 Facility: Quad Cities Scenario: 3 (75% RTP) Exam Date: June 2021 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Realism/ Required Verifiable Scenario Event LOD TS CTs U/E/S Explanation Cred. Actions actions Overlap
Response
- 1. Updated for rapid power reduction per QCGP 3-1
- 2. Updated per comments
- 3. Updated per comments Event is now SAT.
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 8(C) drop in this scenario. If anything, I would expect it to rise due to Full Core E SRV operation. Maybe the BOP Action Item should be CREW -
X(4) X Hydraulic S Reports QGA 200 Entry Condition(s)
ATWS 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
8 Updated 5/24/2021
ES-301 Operating Test Review Worksheet Form ES-301-7 Facility: Quad Cities Scenario: 3 (75% RTP) Exam Date: June 2021 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Realism/ Required Verifiable Scenario Event LOD TS CTs U/E/S Explanation Cred. Actions actions Overlap
- 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.
9 Updated 5/24/2021
ES-301 Operating Test Review Worksheet Form ES-301-7 Facility: Quad Cities Scenario: 4 (100% RTP) Exam Date: June 2021 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Realism/ Required Verifiable Scenario Event LOD TS CTs U/E/S Explanation Cred. Actions actions Overlap 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.
1(N) Acoustic S Response:
Monitor Test
- 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 2(C) 1A FRV E is this not listed as a TS event?
Lockup S
Response
- 1. Updated per comments
- 2. With 3 RFPs running; TS entry not required.
Event is now SAT.
- 2. Revise ATC Action Item following determination that rod will not latch at 00 to start with: Reapplies and maintains INSERT signal and .
3(C/TS)
E Control Rod X Response:
S Drifts Out 1 Updated per comments 2 Updated per comments Event is now SAT.
10 Updated 5/24/2021
ES-301 Operating Test Review Worksheet Form ES-301-7 Facility: Quad Cities Scenario: 4 (100% RTP) Exam Date: June 2021 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Realism/ Required Verifiable Scenario Event LOD TS CTs U/E/S Explanation Cred. Actions actions Overlap 4(C/TS)
Spurious X S None ADS Timer Actuation (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.)
5(C) Trip of Bus 16 and S No additional comments for this event Recovery
Response
Event is SAT.
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.)
6(R) FW Htr
Response
Tube Leak/
E Emergency S 1 Changed to one event; counted as a reactivity manipulation Power Reduction
- 1. Regarding the SRO Action Item to initiate a cooldown; Shouldnt the first direction be to stabilize RPV Pressure below 1060 7(M) Fuel E (probably with a control band [800-1000 psig], following by the Failure & X(2)
S direction to initiate a cooldown.
SDV Leak
- 2. Where does the guidance/direction for starting the DGCWP come from?
11 Updated 5/24/2021
ES-301 Operating Test Review Worksheet Form ES-301-7 Facility: Quad Cities Scenario: 4 (100% RTP) Exam Date: June 2021 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Realism/ Required Verifiable Scenario Event LOD TS CTs U/E/S Explanation Cred. Actions actions Overlap
- 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.
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 8 - Scram as there are not any verifiable actions associated with the failure.
U Reset Switch X Recommend combining with Event 7.)
S Failure
Response
- Combined with Event 7 as simply a post-EOP malfunction Malfunction relocated and is SAT.
S Overall Scenario Assessed as SAT.
12 Updated 5/24/2021
ES-301 Operating Test Review Worksheet Form ES-301-7 Facility: Quad Cities Scenario: 5 (75% RTP) Exam Date: June 2021 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Realism/ Required Verifiable Scenario Event LOD TS CTs U/E/S Explanation Cred. Actions actions Overlap Event includes TS call (loop inoperable while test valve is open).
Outline and scenario guide should be updated.
Response
1(N[/TS])
Core Spray E X 1 Added TS 3.5.1 Pump S Surveillance
- Added note that B loop clean up may be passed at the discretion of the lead examiner.
Event is now SAT.
- 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.)
2(I) LPRM E Upscale S 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 None.
Room Cooler S Inoperable
- Removed continuously from ATC monitoring 4(C) Gland Exhauster S None Trip 5(C) Recirc 1. Should there be an action to reduce Reactor Power to to the E
Master Cont. power at the beginning of the transient?
S Fails High 14 Updated 5/24/2021
ES-301 Operating Test Review Worksheet Form ES-301-7 Facility: Quad Cities Scenario: 5 (75% RTP) Exam Date: June 2021 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Realism/ Required Verifiable Scenario Event LOD TS CTs U/E/S Explanation Cred. Actions actions Overlap
Response
1 Updated per comments
- Removed runback from automatic actions Event is now SAT.
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.)
6(C/TS/[R])
E Recirc Pump X X S Response:
Seal Failure 1 Updated per comments Event is now SAT.
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 7(R) emergency] may be considered a separate event.)
Emergent E Power S Response:
Reduction
- Added note to allow moving on before crew secures feed and condensate pumps.
Event is now SAT.
- 1. CT2 Bounding Criteria - How long after the criteria for initiating RPV Blowdown before the c/s for the 5 ADS valves must be 8(M) Torus E X placed in MAN? Since there does not appear to be any specific Leak/Scram S parameter upon which to base unsuccessful completion (e.g.
rad levels exceed some value), establish a time limit.
15 Updated 5/24/2021
ES-301 Operating Test Review Worksheet Form ES-301-7 Facility: Quad Cities Scenario: 5 (75% RTP) Exam Date: June 2021 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Realism/ Required Verifiable Scenario Event LOD TS CTs U/E/S Explanation Cred. Actions actions Overlap
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.
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.)
9 Spurious U
Group 1 Isol./ X S Response:
- Combined with Event 8 as simply a post-EOP malfunction Malfunction relocated and is SAT.
Response
Event is now SAT.
9 (C)
S None.
Blowdown S Overall Scenario Assessed as SAT.
16 Updated 5/24/2021
ES-301 Operating Test Review Worksheet Form ES-301-7 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 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.
17 Updated 5/24/2021
ES-301 Operating Test Review Worksheet Form ES-301-7 Facility: Quad Cities Exam Date: June 2021 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 11 Scenario % Unsat.
Event Events TS TS CT CT Scenario U/E/S Explanation Totals Unsat. Total Unsat. Total Unsat.
Elements 1 9 0 2 0 3 0 0 S 3 9 0 2 0 4 0 11 E Scenario is now SAT.
4 8 1 2 0 2 0 0 E Scenario is now SAT.
5 10 1 2 0 2 0 0 E Scenario is now SAT.
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.
2+4+6 7 In column 7, calculate the percentage of unsatisfactory scenario elements: 1 + 3 + 5 100%
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.
18 Updated 5/24/2021
ES-301 19 Form ES-301-7 Site name: Quad Cities Exam Date: June 2021 OPERATING TEST TOTALS Total Total Total %
Total Explanation Unsat. Edits Sat. Unsat.
Admin. See Comments above.
9 2 7 0 JPMs (2 JPMs UNSAT; 7 JPMs ENHANCED)
Sim./In-plant See Comments above.
11 2 7 2 JPMs (2 JPMs UNSAT; 7 JPMs ENHANCED)
See Comments above.
Scenarios 4 0 3 1 (1 Scenario SAT; 3 Scenarios ENHANCED)
Op. Test Scenario 24 4 17 3 16.7 Meets Acceptance Criteria ( 20%).
Totals:
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).
19 Updated 5/24/2021