ML22335A437

Outline and Op Test Checklists: 2.3-1; 2.3-2

ML22335A437
Person / Time
Site:	Beaver Valley
Issue date:	04/04/2022
From:	Gaydosik T Energy Harbor Nuclear Generation LLC
To:	Todd Fish NRC/RGN-I/DORS/OB
References
EPID L-2022-OLL-003
Download: ML22335A437 (1)

Text

Form 2.3-1 Examination Outline Quality Checklist Facility:

Date of Examination:

Beaver Valley Unit 2 04/18 through 4/29/2022 Item Task Description (Y)es / (N)o a

b*

c#-

a.

The outline was systematically and randomly prepared in accordance with the z

instructions in Section B of ES-4.1, and all knowledge and ability (KIA) categories are

• .{*

w appropriately sampled.

rrl-

• r,:

~

~

b.

The outline does not overemphasize any systems, evolutions, or generic topics.

mt- -~ -n::.

s C.

Justifications for deselected or rejected KIA statements are acceptable.

rr,l- $-" ~

a.

Using Form 3.4-1, Events and Evolutions Checklist verify that the proposed scenario set contains the required number of normal evolutions, reactivity evolutions, instrument 7F and component failures, manual control evolutions, technical specifications, and major ty>L-r transients.

0:::

0

b.

There are enough scenarios (and spares) for the projected number and mix of

~

applicants in accordance with the expected crew composition and rotation schedule

~

without compromising exam integrity. Ensure that scenarios will not be repeated on

~

~

~

subsequent days.

u5 C.

Ensure that all scenarios are new or significantly modified in accordance with ES-3.4 Mi-- ~ 7r-and that no scenarios are duplicated from the applicants' audit test(s).

d.

To the extent possible, assess whether the outline(s) conforms with the qualitative

~ t"r-andquantitative simulator set criteria specified on Form 2.3-2.

,w-.

a.

Verify that the administrative outline meets the criteria specified in the instructions on rnL-F cF Form 3.2-1 and that no tasks are duplicated from the applicants' audit test(s).

b.

Verify that the control room and in-plant systems outline meets the criteria specified in Cf) the instructions on Form 3.2-2 and that no tasks are duplicated from the applicants' mL

~

~ rt=

a..

audit test(s).

""")

C.

Determine whether the number of job performance measures (JPMs) and JPM types is sufficient for the projected number and mix of applicants and ensure that no items Yy7L_ r cP areduplicated on subsequent days.

a.

Assess whether the appropriate exam sections cover plant-specific priorities

~ ~

(includingprobabilistic risk assessment and individual plant examination insights).

ml..

b.

Assess whether the 10 CFR 55.41, 10 CFR 55.43, and 10 CFR 55.45 sampling is m<- ~ ~

appropriate.

....J

~

c.

Check whether KIA importance ratings (except for plant-specific priorities) are greater

~ CF w

than or equal to 2.5.

~

z w (9

d.

Check for duplication and overlap across the exam and with the last two NRG exams.

()1l...av I~

e.

Check the entire exam for balance of coverage.

Vl1L. g/ TF

f.

Assess whether the exam fits the appropriate job level (reactor operator or senior ml-- ~ ~

reactor operator).

Printed Name/Signature o/

Date

a. Author Y'r-1,e.h.,,,._.\\

\\l_\\,.-..c.er--.-c;,-...,~ ~;',,,.;,-~.-

4-r-..:::Z;;;L-

b. Facility Reviewer(*)

Gso-l'.C""" S t:,; N ls.~

~~~

-~/'" erl-rlzz.

"'f"oJ o\\ *ft< h / <l:j'}J.. ~

C if I(), I Y1'_.

I C. NRG Reviewer (#)

NRG Chief Examiner

~ L( c/.d, I'...: ~,.J;.~ ~ \\.

~l.'l?'J 6-9, NRG Supervisor

~~,i ~Jl,.J I,J ~

~w~,,,_.,_

• The facility licensee signature is not applicable for NRC-developed testJ

1. An independent NRC reviewer performs the steps in column "c." This may be the NRC Chief Examiner if he/she did not develop the outline under review.

Rev. AG

Form 2.3-2 Operating Test Quality Checklist Facility: BVPS Unit 2 Date of Examination: 4/18/22 Operating Test Number: 2LOT22 General Criteria (Y)es/(N)o a

b*

c#

a.

The operating test meets the criteria on the associated test outline.

rn-- ls,J Tt=-

b.

There are enough test items so that test items will not be repeated on more than 1 day of the operating test.

!Yi.. ~

1F C.

The operating test does not duplicate items from the applicants' audit test(s).

l))l_ JI.) <<

d.

Overlap with the written examination and between different parts of the operating test is minimized.

ml... ;}'/ ~

e.

It appears that the operating test will differentiate between competent and less-1f than-competent applicants at the designated license level.

~.av Walkthrough Criteria

a.

Each job performance measure (JPM) includes the following, as applicable:

. task standard initial conditions initiating cues references and tools, including associated procedures reasonable and validated time limits (average time allowed for completion) and specific designation if the facility licensee deems it to be time critical alternate path JPMs are labeled as "alternate path" operationally important specific performance criteria that include the following:

Tf detailed expected actions with exact criteria and nomenclature system response and other examiner cues statements describing important observations to be made by the applicant criteria for successful completion of the JPM task standard identification of critical steps and their associated performance standards m'-

.~

restrictions on the sequence of steps, if applicable

b.

Ensure that any changes from the previously approved JPM outlines (Forms 3.2-1 and 3.2-2) have not caused the test to deviate from any of the acceptance criteria (e.g., item distribution, bank

~ 8'-1 TP use, repetition from the last two NRC examinations} specified on those forms.

Simulator Scenario Set Criteria for Scenario Numbers: 1/2/3/4 QUALITATIVE ATTRIBUTES

1.

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

fYt_ gt/ ff

2.

The scenarios consist mostly of related events.

(YI-. JP ~

£

3.

Each event description consists of the following:

the point in the scenario when it is to be initiated the malfunction(s} or conditions that are entered to initiate the event n1-- JI.I

• the symptoms/cues that will be visible to the crew the expected operator actions (by shift position}

the event termination point (if applicable)

ES-2.3, Page 1 O of 19

QUALITATIVE ATTRIBUTES (continued)

(Y)es I (N)o a

b*

elf.

4.

The events are valid with regard to physics and thermodynamics.

rrL ~ 'f(

5.

The sequencing and timing of events is reasonable and allows the examination team to observe

~ ff and evaluate applicant performance.

rn(_

6.

If time compression techniques are used, the scenario summary clearly so indicates. Operators have sufficient time to carry out expected activities without undue time constraints. Cues are fW-- ~

--Cf given.

7.

The simulator modeling is not altered.

tr(__ i$f-/ tr:

8.

The scenarios have been validated. Pursuant to 10 CFR 55.46(d), any open simulator performance deficiencies or deviations from the referenced plant have been evaluated to ensure n+~ ~,a1 that functional fidelity is maintained while running the planned scenarios.

9.

Scenarios are new or significantly modified in accordance with ES-3.4.

trl--- 3'1 tF 1 O. Scenarios (as grouped) allow each applicant to be significantly involved in the minimum number of transients, events, and evolutions specified on the version of Form 3.4-1 tyJt-. ~ ~

submitted with the scenario set.

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

,nL. ~ fP scenarios, when possible.

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

ML- ~,P Actual Attributes by (Y)es I (N)o TARGET QUANTITATIVE ATTRIBUTES per Scenario (See ES-3.4)

Scenario No.

1 I 2 / 3 / 4 a

b*

elf.

1.

Malfunctions after emergency operating procedure (EOP) 3 I 3 I 4 I 4 entry (1-2)

'ff>'- ~ if

2.

Abnormal events (2-4) 4 I 3 I 3 I 2 r,1-Sf,.I ~

3.

Major transients (1-2) 2 I 2 I 1 I 1 ml-, fl/ -(F

4.

EOPs entered/requiring substantive actions (1-2) 3 I 2 I 2 I 2 (YI.. ~ tf

5.

Entry into a contingency EOP with substantive actions

(~ 1 per scenario set; set is the entire set of scenarios 1 I 1 I 0 I 1 (W-. ~ tt:

prepared for the scheduled exam)

6.

Preidentified critical tasks (~ 2) 3 I 3 I 3 I 3 (Yt.. ff/ 1'f Printed Name/Signature Date

a.

Author

~~ fYl,J-\\~I J<. l,"""ia/1 s.-, Ji.. ~ A ::z__

Facility Reviewer(*)

~~~~/,,.r~

~ ls.

'f/y/22.

b.

'7---

l':,~e>

l"~,.s

~ :~

"Toil f~~ / J ~ $-~ i

• /, {l I

I C.

NRC Reviewer (#)

q u 1-j ~

NRC Chief Examiner

• ,:u h*i'- 1::;: 1,:i

'f ltr 1/i'l-

~~\\ cl ~~/,f)Q J l.1 __,) --q ' \\ \\{ ?7..---

NRC Supervisor

~ J r

\\

L.../

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

1. An independent NRC reviewer performs the steps in column c. This may be the NRC Chief Examiner if he/she did not develop the operating test under review.

ES-2.3, Page 11 of 19