ML23131A168
| ML23131A168 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Nine Mile Point  |
| Issue date: | 05/11/2023 |
| From: | Brian Fuller NRC/RGN-I/DORS/OB |
| To: | Alexander M Constellation Energy Generation |
| References | |
| EPID L-2023-OLL-0006 | |
| Download: ML23131A168 (1) | |
Text
Facility:
Exam Date:
1 JPM # or title 2
Type (S/P/A) 3 ALT (Y/N) 4 LOD (1-5) 5 JPM Errors 6
U/E/S 7
Explanation LOD REF IC TSK CUE CS TL RO COO1 A
N 3
E Edited one initial condition Expanded tolerance on JPM grading RO COO2 A
N 3
S RO EC A
N 3
E Added reference Edited components used RO RC A
N 3
E Edited a cue for clarity Added 2 evaluator notes SRO COO1 A
N 3
S SRO COO2 A
N 3
S SRO EC A
N 3
E Added reference Edited components used SRO RC A
N 3
E Edited a cue for clarity Added 2 evaluator notes SRO EP A
N 3
E Edited Cues Sim a S
N 3
E Added evaluator cue Sim b S
Y 3
E Shortened JPM Sim c S
N 3
E Adjusted simulator IC for one parameter Sim d S
N 3
S
Form 2.3 -3 Operating Test Review Worksheet (JPMs)
Facility:
Exam Date:
1 JPM # or title 2
Type (S/P/A) 3 ALT (Y/N) 4 LOD (1-5) 5 JPM Errors 6
U/E/S 7
Explanation LOD REF IC TSK CUE CS TL Sim e S
N 3
E Adjusted simulator IC to prevent a system actuaon Sim f S
Y 3
E Adjusted one cue Sim g S
Y 3
S Sim h S
N 3
E Adjusted simulator IC for one parameter Added additional attachment to handout In Plant i P
Y 3
S In Plant j P
N 3
S In Plant k P
N 3
S
Form 2.3-3 Instructions for Completing the JPM Table
- 1. Enter the JPM number and/or title.
- 2. Enter the type of JPM(S)imulator, (P)lant, or (A)dministrative.
- 3. Enter (Y)es or (N)o for an Alternate Path JPM.
- 4. Rate the level of difficulty (LOD) of each JPM using a scale of 1-5 (easy-difficult). A JPM containing less than two critical steps, a JPM that tests solely for recall or memorization, or a JPM that involves directly looking up a single correct answer is likely LOD = 1 (too easy). Conversely, a JPM with over 30 steps or a JPM that takes more than 45 minutes to complete is likely LOD = 5 (too difficult).
- 5. Check the appropriate block for each JPM error type, using the following criteria:
LOD = 1 or 5 is unsatisfactory (U).
REF: The JPM lacks required references, tools, or procedures (U).
IC: The JPM initial conditions are missing or the JPM lacks an adequate initial cue (U).
CUE: The JPM lacks adequate evaluator cues to allow the applicant to complete the task, or the evaluator cues are subjective or leading (U).
TSK: The JPM lacks a task standard or lacks completion criteria for a task standard (U).
CS: The JPM contains errors in designating critical steps, or the JPM lacks an adequate performance standard for a critical step (U).
TL: The JPM validation times are unreasonable, or a time-critical JPM lacks a completion time (U).
- 6. Mark the JPM as unsatisfactory (U), satisfactory (S), or needs enhancements (E). A JPM is (U) if it has one or more (U) errors as determined in step 5. Examples of enhancements include formatting, spelling, or other minor changes.
- 7. Briefly describe any JPM determined to be unsatisfactory (U) or needing enhancement (E). Save initial review comments and detail subsequent comment resolution so that each exam-bound JPM is marked by a satisfactory (S) resolution on this form.
Facility: Nine Mile Point Unit 2 Scenario:1, 2 and 3 Exam Date: April 16. 2023 1
Scenario Event ID/Name:
2 Scenario event errors 3
U/E/S 4
Explanation Realism/
Credibility Performance Standards Verifiable Actions Critical Task TS 1
S 2
S 3
S Changed order of events 3 and 4 4
S 5
S 6
S 7
S 8
S 1
S 2
S 3
E Revised flow of event and added procedure information 4
S 5
S
Form 2.3-3 Operating Test Review Worksheet (Scenarios) 6 S
7 S
8 E
Added note about RRCS malfunction 9
S 1
S 2
S 3
S 4
S 5
S 6
S 7
S 8
S
Form 2.3-3 Instructions for Completing the Scenario Table
- 1. For each scenario, enter the scenario event names and descriptions.
- 2. Review the individual events contained in each scenario, and identify and mark event errors:
The scenario guide event description is not realistic/credibleunsatisfactory (U).
The scenario guide event description lacks adequate crew/operator performance standardsneeds enhancement (E).
The scenario guide event description lacks verifiable actions for a credited normal event, reactivity event instrument/component malfunction, or technical specification (TS) event (or a combination of these) (U).
The scenario guide event description incorrectly designates an event as a critical task (i.e., a noncritical task labeled as critical or a critical task labeled as noncritical). This includes critical tasks that do not meet the critical task criteria (i.e., the critical task does not have a measurable performance standard) (U).
The scenario guide event description incorrectly designates entry into TS actions when not required or does not designate entry into TS actions when required (U).
- 3. Based on the outcome in step 2, mark the scenario event as unsatisfactory (U), satisfactory (S), or needs enhancements (E). An event is (U) if it has one or more (U) errors as determined in step 2. Examples of enhancements include formatting, spelling, or other minor changes.
- 4. Briefly describe any scenario event determined to be unsatisfactory (U) or needing enhancement (E). Save initial review comments and detail subsequent comment resolution so that each exam-bound scenario event is marked by a satisfactory (S) resolution on this form.