ML23354A112
| ML23354A112 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Susquehanna  |
| Issue date: | 08/07/2023 |
| From: | Todd Fish NRC/RGN-I/DORS/OB |
| To: | Talen Energy Susquehanna Steam Electric Station |
| References | |
| EPID L-2023-OLL-0009 | |
| Download: ML23354A112 (1) | |
Text
1 Form 2.3-3 Operating Test Review Worksheet (JPMs)
Facility: SSES Units 1 & 2 Exam Date: Weeks of 7/31/2023 and 8/07/2023 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 Admin COO1 (RO & SRO)
A N
4.0 S
A N
3.5 S
A N
3.0 S
Admin RC (SRO only)
A N
3.5 S
A Y
3.0 S
A N
3.5 S
Sim A S
Y 4.0 S
Sim B S
N 3.0 S
Sim C S
Y 3.0 S
Sim D S
N 2.5 S
Sim E S
Y 3.0 S
Sim F S
Y 3.5 S
Sim G S
N 3.0 S
Sim H S
Y 3.0 S
In-Plant I P
N 3.0 S
In-Plant J P
N 3.0 S
In-Plant K P
Y 3.0 S
2 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.
3 Form 2.3-3 Operating Test Review Worksheet (Scenarios)
Facility: SSES Units 1 & 2 Scenario: SSES-2023 NRC-S1 (Scenario 1)
Exam Date: Weeks of 7/31/2023 & 8/07/2023 1
Scenario Event ID/Name:
2 Scenario event errors 3
U/E/S 4
Explanation Realism/
Credibility Performance Standards Verifiable Actions Critical Task TS Event 1 S
Event 2 S
Event 3 S
Event 4 S
Event 5 S
Event 6 E
E Enhanced the Critical Task #1 statement with the bounding criteria provided by the facility in the CT basis section.
Specifically, added "...before Thermal Hydraulic Instabilities occur.
Event 7 S
Event 8 S
Event 9 E
E Enhanced the Critical Task #2 statement with the bounding criteria provided by the facility in the CT basis section.
Specifically, added... within 15 minutes of ALL RPV Level Instrumentation failing upscale.
Enhanced the Critical Task #3 statement with the bounding criteria provided by the facility in the CT basis section.
Specifically, added... within 30 minutes of ADS Valves being opened.
4 Form 2.3-3 Operating Test Review Worksheet (Scenarios)
Facility: SSES Units 1 & 2 Scenario: SSES-2023 NRC-S2 (Scenario 2)
Exam Date: Weeks of 7/31/2023 & 8/07/2023 1
Scenario Event ID/Name:
2 Scenario event errors 3
U/E/S 4
Explanation Realism/
Credibility Performance Standards Verifiable Actions Critical Task TS Event 1 S
Event 2 S
Event 3 S
Event 4 S
Event 5 S
Event 6 S
Event 7 S
Event 8 S
Event 9 S
Event 10 S
5 Form 2.3-3 Operating Test Review Worksheet (Scenarios)
Facility: SSES Units 1 & 2 Scenario: SSES-2023 NRC-S3 (Scenario 3)
Exam Date: Weeks of 7/31/2023 & 8/07/2023 1
Scenario Event ID/Name:
2 Scenario event errors 3
U/E/S 4
Explanation Realism/
Credibility Performance Standards Verifiable Actions Critical Task TS Event 1 S
Event 2 S
Event 3 S
Event 4 S
Event 5 S
Event 6 E
E Enhanced the Critical Task #1 statement with the bounding criteria provided by the facility in the CT basis section.
Specifically, added "... and establish the RWL Band within 12 minutes.
Enhanced the Critical Task #3 statement with the bounding criteria provided by the facility in the CT basis section.
Specifically, added "... before exceeding Heat Capacity Temperature Limit (HCTL).
Event 7 S
Event 8 S
Event 9 E
E Enhanced the Critical Task #2 statement with the bounding criteria provided by the facility in the CT basis section.
Specifically, added "... OR when level drops below -179 inches, restore and maintain RPV level above -179 inches within 8 minutes.
6 Form 2.3-3 Operating Test Review Worksheet (Scenarios)
Facility: SSES Units 1 & 2 Scenario: SSES-2023 NRC-S4 (Scenario 4 - SPARE)
Exam Date: Weeks of 7/31/2023 & 8/07/2023 1
Scenario Event ID/Name:
2 Scenario event errors 3
U/E/S 4
Explanation Realism/
Credibility Performance Standards Verifiable Actions Critical Task TS Event 1 S
Event 2 S
Event 3 S
Event 4 S
Event 5 S
Event 6 S
Event 7 S
Event 8 S
Event 9 S
7 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.
Form 2.3-5 SSES Written Examination Review Worksheet sQ#
- 1.
LOK (F/H)
- 2.
LOD (1-5)
- 3. Psychometric Flaws
- 4. Job Content Flaws
- 5. K/A Use Flaws
- 6. Source (B/M/N)
- 7. Status (U/E/S)
- 8. Explanation Stem Focus Cues T/F Cred.
Dist.
Partial Job Link Minutia
- /Units Logic Q-K/A License Level 1
F 2.5 N
2 H
3 B
3 H
2.5 N
4 H
3 N
5 F
3 N
6 F
2.5 B
7 F
3 B
8 F
3 N
9 H
4 N
N U
KA mm. selected new KA, and wrote new Q 10 H
3 B
11 F
2.5 N
12 F
3 N
13 H
3 N
14 H
3 N
15 H
4 N
16 F
3.5 N
U Not Tier 1 Q. wrote new Q for Tier 1, EPE, to same KA 17 H
3.5 B
18 H
3 N
Form 2.3-5 Written Examination Review Worksheet 19 F
3 X
N U
Distractors B & D are implausible (using compressed air on a wet pipe is implausible). Selected new KA, and wrote new Q 20 H
3.5 N
21 H
3 N
22 H
3 N
23 F
3.5 N
24 H
3 N
25 H
3.5 N
26 H
3 N
27 H
3 N
28 H
3 B
29 F
3 N
30 H
2.5 N
31 H
3 N
32 H
3 N
33 F
3 N
34 F
3 B
35 H
3 N
36 F
3 N
37 H
3 N
E re-formatted choices A, B, and C to match statements as in D 38 F
3 N
Form 2.3-5 Written Examination Review Worksheet 39 H
4 N
40 F
3 N
E Added formal RPS bus nomenclature 41 H
3.5 B
42 F
3 N
43 F
3 B
44 F
3 N
45 H
3.5 N
46 H
3 N
47 F
3 N
48 H
3 B
49 F
3.5 N
50 F
3 B
51 H
3.5 N
52 H
2.5 N
53 H
3 N
54 F
3 N
55 H
3 N
56 F
3 X
B E
Added additional descriptions to all choices to enhance Qs operational validity 57 H
3 B
58 H
3 N
Form 2.3-5 Written Examination Review Worksheet 59 H
3 N
60 F
3 B
61 F
3 B
62 F
3 N
63 H
3 B
64 H
3 B
65 F
3 B
U Not a Tier 3 Q. Wrote new Q to the same KA 66 F
3 N
67 F
3 N
68 F
2.5 B
69 F
2.5 B
70 F
2.5 N
71 F
3 B
72 F
2.5 B
73 H
3 N
74 H
3 N
75 H
3 N
76 H
2.5 N
77 F
3 N
Form 2.3-5 Written Examination Review Worksheet 78 H
3.5 N
79 H
3 N
80 H
3 N
81 H
3.5 N
82 H
3 N
83 H
3 N
84 H
2.5 N
85 H
3 N
E Added procedure steps to enhance details for correct answer 86 F
3 N
U Not Tier 2 Q. wrote new Q to same KA 87 H
3 N
88 H
3 N
89 H
3 N
90 H
3.5 N
91 H
3.5 N
92 H
3.5 N
93 H
3.5 N
94 H
3 N
95 H
3 N
96 F
3 N
97 H
4 B
Form 2.3-5 Written Examination Review Worksheet 98 H
3.5 N
99 H
3 N
100 H
3 N
U Overlap w/JPM 5 (Event classification). Wrote new Q to same KA