ML22241A023

Adams 2B Na Exam Administrative Items

ML22241A023
Person / Time
Site:	North Anna
Issue date:	08/29/2022
From:	NRC/RGN-II
To:	Dominion Energy
References
Download: ML22241A023 (27)

Text

EXAM ASSIGNMENT TICKLER Chief:

Mike Kennard Facility:

NA 6/15/2022 U/I:

Start of Op Test:

6/6/2022 6/10/2022 Due Date Date Complete Initials 10/4/2021 6/25/2021 mnk 11/8/2021 6/25/3021 mnk 11/8/2021 6/25/2021 mnk 11/8/2021 N/A 11/8/2021 10/29/2021 mnk 11/22/2021 6/30/2021 mnk 1/3/2022 1/6/2022 mnk 1/17/2022 1/6/2022 mnk 3/21/2022 3/14/2022 mnk 3/28/2022 3/30/2022 mnk 4/18/2022 3/30/2022 mnk 5/2/2022 3/31/2022 mnk 5/2/2022 4/14/2022 mnk 5/9/2022 5/1/2022 mnk 5/2/2022 5/2/2022 mnk 5/16/2022 mnk 5/23/2022 mnk 5/30/2022 mnk 5/30/2022 5/26/2022 mnk 5/30/2022 mnk 5/30/2022 5/26/2022 mnk 5/30/2022 5/26/2022 mnk 6/6/2022 6/6/2022 mnk 6/17/2022 6/17/2022 mnk 7/5/2022 7/8/2022 mnk 7/13/2022 7/13/2022 mnk 7/13/2022 7/13/2022 mnk 7/20/2022 7/20/2022 mnk 7/27/2022 7/21/2022 mnk 8/3/2022 7/25/2022 mnk 8/3/2022 7/25/2022 mnk 8/3/2022 7/25/2022 mnk 8/24/2022 8/19/2022 mnk 8/31/2022 8/19/2022 mnk 9/7/2022 8/19/2022 mnk 10/5/2022 8/26/2022 mnk 21 days after proposed denial letters mailed.

Preliminary license applications and waivers reviewed Request facility licensee management feedback on the exam Operating test outline(s) reviewed by NRC and feedback provided to facility licensee ES-201-2 signed by CE & BC Peer review of written exam complete Document review on ES-401-9 Proposed exams, outlines, supporting documentation, and reference materials due.

Exams prepared by the NRC are approved by BC and forwarded for facility licensee review Written exam and operating test reviews completed Written exams and operating tests approved by Branch Chief Administer Operating Test NRC examiners and facility contact assigned Facility contact briefed on security and other requirements Operating test outline(s) and other checklists due ES-201-2, 201-3, 301-1, 301-2, 301-5, D-1 Reference material due for NRC prepared exams ES-201 Att-3 Corporate Notification Letter sent ES-201 Att-4 produced by CE NRC developed written examination outline sent to facility contact ES-401-1/2 and ES-401-3 Date of Written Exam:

Description Notes Examination administration date confirmed For NRC prepared exams, arrangements made for the facility to submit reference materials End of Op Test:

Written Exam Developed By: Facility Operating Test Developed By: Facility Document review on ES-401-9 Preliminary license applications & waiver/excusal requests due NRC Forms 398/396 Feedback approved by Branch Chief Examination review results discussed between NRC and facility licensee On-site validation & 10% audit of license applications Final license applications & waiver/excusal requests due ES-201-4 prepared by LA Proctoring/written exam administration guidelines reviewed with facility licensee RPS/IP number of examinees updated print Report-21 Waivers/deferrals reviewed for impact on licensing decision Post exam written comments reviewed and incorporated and NRC grading completed Chief examiner review of operating test and/or written exam grading completed Branch Chief review of exam results completed Approved scenarios and JPMs distributed to examiners Examiner's document op test results on ES 303's Final applications reviewed and audited; exam approval and waiver/excusal letters sent LA produces / BC signs Exam Approval Letter (ES-201 Att-5)

Post exam comments and graded exams received ES-403-1 to BC Final Denial Letters mailed (if no request for informal review)

Replaces NUREG-1021, Revision 11, Forms ES-201-1 and ES-501-1 Post exam operating test comments reviewed and ES-303-1 updated Signed ES 303's to BC produced by CE License/Proposed Denial letters mailed; Facility notified of results SUNSI checklist complete and exam docs to ADAMS SUNSI checklist to LA Ref Mat'l Returned after Final Resolution of Appeals Examination Report Issued ML22241A023

Operating Test Review Worksheet Form ES2.3-3 Rev. 11 Facility: North Anna Exam Date: 6/6/2022 1

2 3

Attributes 4

Job Content 5

6 Admin JPMs ADMIN Topic and K/A LOD (1-5)

U/E/S Explanation I/C Cues Critical Scope Overlap Perf.

Key Minutia Job Link Focus Steps (N/B)

Std.

SRO A1 G2.1.18 2

E Add to the cue after approve or disapprove completed 1LOG-20 and identify if any required actions COmplete SRO A2 G2.1.37 1

X U

Does not meet license level this could be a JPM to have a second RO verify the correct addition.

Simply approving or disapproving the add does not seem to rise to the level of SRO only. Also just by giving a SRO something to approve seems like they would assume that they cannot approve it as it is a JPM and they need to be able to find something. Facility is swapping JPM to get an SRO level JPM Complete SRO A3 G2.2.41 2

X U

Does not meet license level this could be a JPM to have a second RO verify the isolations. Simply approving or disapproving the add does not seem to rise to the level of SRO only. Also just by giving a SRO something to approve seems like they would assume that they cannot approve it as it is a JPM and they need to be able to find something.

Complete SRO A4 G2.3.14 2

E Lets get the numbers something that is less obvious. Make it so one can do it and the other cannot.Complete SRO A5 G2.4.41 2

S No comments prior to validation RO A1 G1.37 2

S No comments prior to validation RO A2 G2.1.25 2

S No comments prior to validation RO A3 G2.2.41 2

S No comments prior to validation RO A4 G2.3.12 2

S No comments prior to validatioon 1

Simulator/In-Plant Safety Function and K/A JPMs SIM A 1

001A2.24 2

E No Alternate path, The cue for step 9 should be.

If asked the SRO will ask what they recommend and then concur with what they say. If it is acceptable to or withdraw control rods to achieve the 1.5 degrees we should let them and have it in

Operating Test Review Worksheet Form ES2.3-3 Rev. 11 the guide. If it is not acceptable it would be a failure of the jpm. Complete Sim B 2

004A4.19 2

E Not alternate path, we can pre-brief this JPM. Is step 5 critical if flow is less than 25 gpm will it not isolate again due to temperature? Complete SIM C 3

038EA1.04 3

E No alternate path. Will need to see how the operator verify that < 300-degree delta t is maintained. If they fall outside of this parameter, is it a failure? Complete SIM D 4P 005A4.01 3

E Need to verify alternate path, Complete SIM E 4S WE05EA1.20 3

E Need to verify this is alternate path. If all the failures are present when the JPM starts it is not alternate path even if it uses an RNO column. A failure needs to occur during the task given requiring the applicant to identify the failure and use an alternate procedure method to deal with the issue. Alternate path did not exist facility is modifying the JPM to get alternate path Complete SIM F 5

WE11EA1.15 2

E Need to verify alternate path during validation. A failure needs to occur during the task given requiring the applicant to identify the failure and use an alternate procedure method to deal with the issue. Complete SIM G 7

015A4.04 2

S Not Alternate path, SAT pending validation Complete SIM H 8

075A4.09 2

S Alternate Path, Sat once verified during validation PLANT I 1

024AA2.02 2

S Alternate path, Sat once verified during validation PLANT J 6

055EK3.02 2

S Not alternate path, Sat once verified during validation PLANT K 2

086A2.05 3

S Not Alternate path, Sat once verified during validation

3 Form 2.3-3 Rev. 11 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.

4 Form 2.3-3 Rev. 11 Facility: North Anna Scenario: 1 Exam Date: 6/6/2022 1

2 3

4 5

6 7

8 9

10 Event Realism/Cred.

Required Actions Verifiable actions LOD TS CTs Scen.

Overlap U/E/S Explanation

1. charging pump swap X

S normal evolution,

2. 1MS-PT-1447 fail low X

X S

Instrument failure

3. main turbine bearing degrades S

Action to trip the main turbine and reactor actually occur during event 5.

4. 1CH-MOV-1115C closed gas binding X

X E

CT bounding conditions should be prior to the need for charging required in event 7.

5.

transformer temp>90 S

Basically, ramping the unit down to 780 MW. When turbine bearing gets bad enough to warrant a reactor trip.

6. Control rods fail to insert on trip X

E Need to verify critical task during validation

7. MSLB due to seismic event S

Sat pending on site validation 7a. 1-FW-MOV-150B fails to close automatically S

Sat pending on site validation

8. Manually actuate Phase A isolation S

Sat pending on site validation 2

3 0

5 Form 2.3-3 Rev. 11 Facility: North Anna Scenario: 2 Exam Date: 6/6/2022 1

2 3

4 5

6 7

8 9

10 Event Realism/Cred.

Required Actions Verifiable actions LOD TS CTs Scen.

Overlap U/E/S Explanation

1. Raise Power S

Reactivity event, Sat once validated

2. Sheered Shaft 1 BC-P-1A S

Sat once validated

3. 1-HV-AC-6 trips X

S No verifiable actions for RO TS only event.

4. 2SW-P-1A OC trip X

X S

Sat once validated

5. 1-RC-PCV-1455A fails open X

S Sat once validated

6. Restore power to 1J, EDG failure X

S Not sure this is critical. Need to validate.

7. SGTR C S/G X

S Sat once validated. May want to shore up the bounding conditions during prep week.

7a. SI fails to auto actuate S

Need for SI based on a SGTR. Need to ensure that SI is required to prevent loosing a safety function for the CT and would like to the have a more concrete bounding criteria.

7b. 1SI P-1B fails to start automatically X

X If you already have o train it the other critical?

2 3

3 0

6 Form 2.3-3 Rev. 11 Facility: North Anna Scenario: 3 Exam Date: 6/6/2022 1

2 3

4 5

6 7

8 9

10 Event Realism/Cred.

Required Actions Verifiable actions LOD TS CTs Scen.

Overlap U/E/S Explanation

1. Transfer bus 2

S Sat pending validation

2. 1-EG-RV-602HB lifts 2

X S

No RO verifiable actions TS only event, Sat pending validation

3. 1-CC-P-1A trips 2

X S

Sat pending Validation

4. 1-CH-PT-1145 fails low 2

X S

TS will possibly be evaluated post scenario, Sat pending validation

5. 1-CH-HCV-1201 fails to open 2

X S

Sat pending validation,

6.

LBLOCA E

Rx trip IMA are these the verifiable actions associated with this or is ti something else as you are taking credit for the SI stuff for other malfunctions.

6a. 1-SI-MOV-1867A fails open X

Criteria for CT-1? It would be helpful if in the write up it shows how the CT meets the criteria of the NUREG.

6b. 1-CH-P-1B fails to start Do we have a better value for the critical task, need to verify during validation week.

7 Form 2.3-3 Rev. 11 General comments for all CTs need to include why the CT is a CT per the NUREG in the write up. If possible, need to have a parameter for the bounding criteria for all CTs very much preferred not to be prior to transition. Should be prior to lockout of only available source of power so it does not occur. Or prior to putting water in the steam lines as the condition is not analyzed. Have hard parameters that are observable in the simulator. Additional malfunctions may be required to ensure all applicants are able to be graded.

7. 1-RS-E-1A tube leak X

Need to have a real bounding criteria for CT-2 why is securing the redundant recirc pumps prior to completion to CT-2 required? This needs to be evaluated during prep week.

3 2

0

8 Form 2.3-3 Rev. 11 Instructions for Completing This Table:

1 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.

9 Form 2.3-3 Rev. 11 Facility: Exam Date:

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

2 9

0 2

0 3

0 0

S 3

9 0

3 0

2 0

0 S

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%

ES-301 10 Form ES-301-7 Rev. 11 See attached pages for post validation coments.

Site name: Exam Date:

OPERATING TEST TOTALS Total Total Unsat.

Total Total Unsat.

Explanation Edits Sat.

Admin.

JPMs 9

2 2

5 22.2 Sim./In-Plant JPMs 10 0

4 6

0 Scenarios 3

0 3

0 0

Op. Test Totals:

9.5%

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 postscenario 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).

ES-301 11 Form ES-301-7 Rev. 11

Form 3.4-1 Events and Evolutions Checklist Facility: North Anna Power Station Date of Exam: 6-6-22 to 6-17-22 Operating Test No.: 2022 A

P P

L I

C A

N T

E V

E N

T T

Y P

E Scenarios 1

2 3

4 T

O T

A L

M I

N I

M U

M*

POSITION POSITION POSITION POSITION S

R O

A T

C B

O P

S R

O A

T C

B O

P S

R O

A T

C B

O P

S R

O A

T C

B O

P RO I

U RO X

SRO-I SRO-U RX 2,6a 2,5 6

4 1

1 0

NOR 1

1 1

1 3

1 1

1 I/C 3,4,6 3,7a, 8

5,7a 2,7b 4,6 3,7 13 4

4 2

MAJ 7

7 6,7 6,7 6

6 4

2 2

1 Man. Ctrl 2,4,6 2,7a, 8

1,7, 7a 1,7b 4,6b 6a 11 1

1 0

TS 0

0 2

2 RO SRO-I X

SRO-U RX 2,6a 2,5 6

4 1

1 0

NOR 1

1 1

1 1

1 1

3 1

1 1

I/C 2,4, 5,6, 6a 3,4,6 3,7a, 8

2,3,4, 5

5,7a 2,7b 3,4, 6a,6b, 7

4,6 3,7 20 4

4 2

MAJ 7

7 7

6,7 6,7 6,7 6

6 6

4 2

2 1

Man. Ctrl 2,4,6 2,7a, 8

1,7, 7a 1,7b 4,6b 6a 11 1

1 0

TS 2,4 3,4 2,3 6

0 2

2 RO SRO-I SRO-U X

RX 0

1 1

0 NOR 1

1 1

3 1

1 1

I/C 2,4, 5,6, 6a 2,3,4, 5

3,4, 6a,6b, 7

14 4

4 2

MAJ 7

6,7 6

4 2

2 1

Man. Ctrl 0

1 1

0 TS 2,4 3,4 2,3 6

0 2

2