ML17296A026

2017-09-Public Forms

ML17296A026
Person / Time
Site:	Callaway
Issue date:	09/20/2017
From:	Vincent Gaddy Operations Branch IV
To:	Union Electric Co
References
Download: ML17296A026 (12)

Text

OBDI 202 - INITIAL OPERATOR LICENSING PROCESS ```````

EXAM ASSIGNMENT TICKLER Chief: Kirkland Facility: CW Date of Written Exam: 9/20/2017 U/I: Start of Op Test: 9/11/2017 End of Op Test: 9/15/2017 Written Exam Developed By: NRC / Facility Operating Test Developed By: NRC / Facility Due Date Description Date Complete Initials Notes For NRC prepared exams, arrangements made 1/14/2017 Examination administration date confirmed 12/19/16 for the facility to submit reference materials 2/13/2017 NRC examiners and facility contact assigned 12/19/16 2/13/2017 Facility contact briefed on security and other requirements 12/19/16 2/13/2017 Reference material due for NRC prepared exams N/A ES-201 Att-3 2/13/2017 Corporate Notification Letter sent 2/27/17 ES-201 Att-4 produced by CE 2/28/2017 NRC developed written examination outline sent to facility contact 12/19/16 ES-401-1/2 and ES-401-3 4/14/2017 Operating test outline(s) and other checklists due 6/16/17 ES-201-2, 201-3, 301-1, 301-2, 301-5, D-1 Operating test outline(s) reviewed by NRC and feedback provided 4/28/2017 to facility licensee 6/26/17 ES-201-2 signed by CE & BC Proposed exams, outlines, supporting documentation, and Exams prepared by the NRC are approved by BC 6/28/2017 reference materials due.

7/25/17 and forwarded for facility licensee review 7/5/2017 Peer review of written exam complete 7/27/17 Document review on ES-401-9 7/23/2017 Written exam and operating test reviews completed 8/4/17 Document review on ES-401-9 8/7/2017 Feedback approved by Branch Chief 8/4/17 Examination review results discussed between NRC and facility 8/7/2017 licensee 8/17/17 8/12/2017 Preliminary license applications & waiver/excusal requests due 8/10/17 NRC Forms 398/396 8/14/2017 On-site validation & 10% audit of license applications 8/14/17 8/19/2017 Preliminary license applications and waivers reviewed 8/17/17 8/28/2017 Final license applications & waiver/excusal requests due 8/28/17 ES-201-4 prepared by LA 9/4/2017 Written exams and operating tests approved by Branch Chief 9/7/17 9/4/2017 Request facility licensee management feedback on the exam N/A Final applications reviewed and audited; exam approval and LA produces / BC signs Exam Approval Letter 9/4/2017 waiver/excusal letters sent 9/7/17 (ES-201 Att-5)

Proctoring/written exam administration guidelines reviewed with 9/4/2017 facility licensee 9/18/17 9/4/2017 Approved scenarios and JPMs distributed to examiners 9/7/17 9/11/2017 Administer Operating Test 9/14/17 9/22/2017 Examiner's document op test results on ES 303's 9/25/17 10/10/2017 Post exam comments and graded exams received 9/25/17 ES-403-1 to BC Post exam written comments reviewed and incorporated and 10/17/2017 NRC grading completed 9/26/17 Post exam operating test comments reviewed and ES-303-1 10/17/2017 updated 9/26/17 Chief examiner review of operating test and/or written exam 10/24/2017 grading completed 9/26/17 Signed ES 303's to BC 10/31/2017 Branch Chief review of exam results completed 9/27/17 11/14/2017 Waivers/deferrals reviewed for impact on licensing decision N/A 11/14/2017 License/Denial letters mailed; Facility notified of results 9/28/17 11/14/2017 RPS/IP number of examinees updated 9/27/17 print Report-21 11/21/2017 Examination Report Issued 10/12/17 produced by CE 11/28/2017 SUNSI checklist complete and exam docs to ADAMS 10/23/17 SUNSI checklist to LA 12/5/2017 Ref Mat'l Returned after Final Resolution of Appeals N/A Replaces NUREG-1021, Revision 11, Forms ES-201-1 and ES-501-1

ES-201 !Examination Outline Quality Checklist Form ES-201-2 Facility: Date of Examination:

Initials Item Task Description a b* c#

1.

w

a. Verify that the outline(s) fit(s) the appropriate model, in accordance with ES-401 or ES-401N. /J(YJ,. ~ ~

I~'~

R b. Assess whether the outline was systematically and randomly prepared in accordance with

!

I T Section D.1 of ES-401 or ES-401N and whether a!I KIA categories are appropriately sampled. ~

T E

N

c. Assess whether the outline over-emphasizes any systems, evolutions, or generic topics. ~ '-<...- 1D'-

d. Assess whether the justifications for deselected or rejected KIA statements are appropriate. 14'- \....c._... #-

2. a. Using Form ES-301-5, verify that the proposed scenario sets cover the required number of I s normal evolutions, instrument and component failures, technical specifications, and major transients. ll~ l"-L 1P'-

I I l

M b. Assess whether there are enough scenario sets (and spares) to test the projected number and I u mix of applicants in accordance with the expected crew composition and rotation schedule II L without compromising exam Integrity, and ensure that each applicant can be tested using at least one new or signfficantly modified scenario, that no scenarios are duplicated from the

~

A T applicants' audit test(s), and that scenarios will not be repeated on subsequent days. k..t.-

11 I

0 c. To the extent possible, assess whether the outline(s) conform(s) with the qualitative and R

quantitative criteria specified on Form ES-301-4 and described in Appendix D. ~ l,,z__... ~

I

'

3. a. Verify that the systems walk-through outline meets the criteria specified on Form ES-301-2:

(1) the outline(s) contain(s) the required number of control room and in-plant tasks distributed w among the safety functions as specified on the form A (2) task repetition from the last two NRC examinations is within the limits specified on the form fr'l-L (3) no tasks are duplicated from the applicants' audit test(s)

K (4) the number of new or modified tasks meets or exceeds the minimums specified on the form (5) the number of alternate path, low-power, emergency, and RCA tasks meet the criteria on 'Mt:_

F T the form.

H R b. Verify that the administrative outline meets the criteria specified on Form ES-301-1:

0 (1) the tasks are distributed among the topics as specified on the form I~ I p-u (2) at least one task is new or significantly modified G (3) no more than one task is repeated from the last two NRC licensing examinations 1~

11 H I Determine if there are enough different outlines to test the projected number and mix of c.

I applicants and ensure that no items are duplicated on subsequent days. ~ ~ P-

-

4. a. Assess whether plant-specific priorities (Including PRA and IPE insights) are covered in the appropriate exam sections. ~ *Jo.v_ ~L G

E b. Assess vmether the 10 CFR 55.41/43 and 55.45 sampling is appropriate. 1'.-<... #-

N E

c. Ensure that KIA importance ratings (except for plant-specific priorities) are at least 2.5. ~Ai 'l..c.... .p-R d. Check for duplication and overlap among exam sections. lfll '>o.(_ ..µ_

A L e. Check the entire exam for balance of coverage. & "--<... ..µ.

I

! f. Assess vmether the exam fits the appropriate job level (RO or SRO). *~ ""'-<-- '/(£-

p~:\\,;o ~~1~e1;~

Date

a. Author c;f1-..Ll1

b. Facility Reviewer (*) MteYk G-ve.,. I ?u4. , L 7-l'f-/1

,Joht'l. .IL1&-'~"'~ I~-""'-~

1. iiJ;~

c. NRC Chief Examiner(#)

d. NRC Supervisor VmtMH-?llAtlv I 1/Ji':t..J l /?r-,U'\

,' v ,

Note: #Independent NRC reviewer initial Items in Column "c"; chief examiner concurrence required.

• Not applicab!e for NRG-prepared examination outlines.

ES-401 Written Examination Quality Checklist Form ES-401-6 Facility: Callaway Date of Exam: 9/20/17 Exam Level: RO SRO 't Initial Item Description a b* c*#

1. Questions and answers are technically accurate and applicable to the facility. {J.A./

~ {VL-

2. a. NRC K/As are referenced for all questions.

b. Facility learning objectives are referenced as available.

c. Correct answer explanation and distractor analysis provided (ES-401, D.2.g) &t.v ~ ..µ--

~

3. SRO questions are appropriate in accordance with Section 0 .2.d of ES-401 ht-

~

4 The sampling process was random and systematic. (If more than four RO or two SRO questions were repeated from the last two NRC licensing exams, consult the NRR/NRO OL program office). fJv- ~ ~

5. Question duplication from the licensee screening/audit exam was controlled as indicated below (check the item that applies) and appears appropriate.

_The audit exam was systematically and randomly developed, or

_ the audit exam was completed before the license exam was started, or

_the examinations were developed independently, or

_ the licensee certifies that there is no duplication, or ,,p--

_other (explain). ~

~

6. Bank use meets limits (no more than 75% from the bank, Bank Modified New u,..., ""'"t_ ijtlf.-.-

at least 10% new, and the rest new or modified); enter the actual RO/SRO-only question distribution(s) at right. '2 \/ q.. 4-13 ~--0/ l ..f'?

c. NRC Chief Examiner(#) Jdk.... ~' c- Ll.ivv:r ',y/U ~ rf*~ 'f '"' 17

d. NRC Regional Supervisor v,*.,u,, t b1r A1llf I [/ (jAIJ 1b'-"Vbl t I

'I l~l n Note:

• The facility reviewer's initials or signature are not applicable for NRG-developed examinations.

1. Independent NRC reviewer initials items in Column *c"; chief examiner concurrence is required.

ES-301 Operating Test Quality Checklist Form ES-301-3 Facir : Callawa Date of Examination: 9/11/17- 9/15/17 0 eratin Test Number: 2017-1 Initials

1. General Criteria a b* c#

a.

~

b. There is no day-to-day repetition between this and other operating tests to be administered /tc-t,.

durin this examination. 'l"'<.-

11.v ~

d. Overlap with the written examination and between different parts of the operating test is within ft,1.-'

acce table limits. J>v<_

e. It appears that the operating test will differentiate between competent and less-than-competent a licants at the desi nated license level. itv ""-<...

2. Walkthrou h Criteria

a. Each JPM includes the following, as applicable:

initial conditions initiating cues references and tools, including associated procedures reasonable and validated time limits (average time allowed for completion) and specific designation if deemed to be time critical by the facility licensee operationally important specific performance criteria that include-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 task identification of critical steps and their associated performance standards restrictions on the se uence of ste s, if a licable

b. Ensure that any changes from the previously approved systems and administrative walkthrough outlines (Forms ES-301-1 and ES-301-2) have not caused the test to deviate from any of the acceptance criteria (e.g., item distribution, bank use, repetition from the last two NRC examinations s ecified on those forms and Form ES-201-2.

3. Simulator Criteria The associated simulator operating tests (scenario sets) have been reviewed In accordance with Form ES-301-4, and a co is attached.

Printed Name/Signature Date

a. Author 91¢1

b. Facility Reviewer(*) *

't-S-f?

c. NRC Chief Examiner(#) "'}/ii.Ir?

d. NRC Supervisor 1/1/J1

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

1. The inde endent NRC reviewer initials items in column "c"; the chief examiner concurrence Is r uired.

ES-301 Simulator Scenario Quality Checklist Form ES-301-4 I

Facility: Callaway Date of Exam: 9/11/17 - 9/15/17 Scenario Numbers: 1 (spare)/ 2 / 3 /4 Operating Test No.: 2017 - 1 I QUALITATIVE ATTRIBUTES Initials I a b* c#

i!I

• The initial conditions are realistic in that some equipment and/or instrumentation may be out of service, It '*

I but it does not cue the operators into expected events. ~ 'k<... *fb I 2. The scenarios consist mostly of related events. ~ 11A..<..- 1'4-

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

!I

• ~

• the symptoms/cues that will be visible to the crew I

• the expected operator actions (by shift position) (J/ft_ 'fl'-

i

'

• the event termination point (if applicable) ~

. 4. The events are valid with regard to physics anc! thermodynamics. 6Jt- ~ .µ,

5. Sequencing and timing of events is reasonable and allows the examination team to obtain complete evaluation results commensurate with the scenario objectives. ('fi.L ~ *'fJi

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 given.

ltvrA ~ .p-

7. The simulator modeling is not altered. C£v...-- 1'k<...... 1f!£-

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 that functional Jv4.... 'fl1L (J.L,--'

fidelity is maintained while running the planned scenarios.

9. Scenarios are new or significantly modified in accordance with Section D.5 of ES-301. ~ ~ "P-

10. All individual operator competencies can be evaluated, as verified using Form ES-301-6 (submit the Nv--

I~ 'fbL-

,.,,

form along with the simulator scenarios).

11. The scenario set provides the opportunity for each applicant to be evaluated in each of the applicable rating factors. (Competency rating factors as described on Forms ES-303-1 and ES-303-3.) k. IF

12. Each applicant will be significantly involved in the minimum number of transients and events specified on Form ES-301-5 (submit the form with the simulator scenarios). ~ 'ft.£

13. Applicants are evaluated on a similar number of preidentified critical tasks across scenarios, when

"""'"

l6v-"

possible.

-M.<.... '/&--

14. The level of difficulty is appropriate to support licensing decisions for each crew position. i tU- ~ 1µ -

Target Quantitative Attributes per Scenario (See Section 0.5.d) Actual Attributes - - -

1. Malfunctions after EOP entry (1-2) 1/1/1/1 II 1/1/' ~ .p_

2. Abnormal events (2-4) 4/4/4/4 IV 'l..c... #/I~

3. Major transients (1-2) 1/1 /1/1 "'-<..... ./tit-

""'"

4. EOPs entered/requiring substantive actions (1-2) 1/1/1/1

"*' ~ ,,f{L,.

1w I

5. Entry into a contingency EOP with substantive actions ~ 1 per scenario 0/0/0/1 set) k p--

6. Preidentified critical tasks ~ 2) 2/2/2/2 ftv' ~ ip:--

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

1. An independent NRC reviewer initials items in column "c"; chief examiner concurrence is required.

ES-403 Written Examination Grading Form ES-403-1 Quality Checklist Facility: c4 n~W"-f Date of Exam: ((/2tjh Exam Level: RO D SRO [X]

Item Description Initials a b c

1. Clean answer sheets copied before grading Prll- ~ ~

2. Proposed answer key changes and question deletions ,.J/J?-

justified and documented (facility reviewer initials not required (N/R) if NO post-examination comments are submitted) 1lt,._ r.-;/R vfl£'

3. Applicants' scores checked for addition errors (reviewers spot check > 25% of examinations) ('tl.i,..

II. #'

4. Grading for all borderline cases (80% +/-2% overall and 70% or P/I+

80%, as applicable, +/-4% on the SRO-only exam) reviewed in detail ('Jf Pr fJJ~A. 'f'L-

5. All other failing examinations checked to ensure that grades ,J/1t are justified fJ/A.

,..,,,,. ft"--

6. Performance on missed questions checked for training deficiencies and wording problems; evaluate validity of ~

I .p?

questions missed by one-half or more of the applicants Printed Name/Signature Date

a. Grader P--:1\-.f! 13 s..... Lf1r!?L I

'l/_~p'J.

b. Facility Reviewer(*) Cod~ l ~~bQ~lcs I /~ 'fJ.l/17

c. NRC Chief Examiner (*) Joti~ iL,rliJd"'ci;jl~ ~fu./17

d. NRC Supervisor (*)

' }l4A1lh1

\)~mrn ., /ltl 1&4, #

,N.tA-j (

• I '

(*) The facility reviewer's signature is not applicable for examinations graded by the NRC; two independent NRC reviews are required.

ES-403, Page 6 of 6

Page 1 of 4 Operator Licensing Exam Schedule 09/27/2017 13:54:41 From 10/01/2016 To 09/30/2017 Report 21 Region: 4 Phase Code: 5 Exam Week Site/Docket No./Insp Rpt # # Candidates Type Exam Author Chief Examiner Examiners Assigned 04/19/2017 Callaway / 05000483 / 2017301 Prep NFF KIRKLAND, JOHN C. KIRKLAND, JOHN C.

TAC #: X02591 LARSON, BRIAN T.

STEELY, CHRISTOPHER D.

08/14/2017 Callaway / 05000483 / 2017301 Prep NFF KIRKLAND, JOHN C. KIRKLAND, JOHN C.

TAC #: X02591 LARSON, BRIAN T.

STEELY, CHRISTOPHER D.

08/19/2017 Callaway / 05000483 / 2017301 Prep NFF KIRKLAND, JOHN C. KIRKLAND, JOHN C.

TAC #: X02591 LARSON, BRIAN T.

STEELY, CHRISTOPHER D.

09/11/2017 Callaway / 05000483 / 2017301 SROI - 6 Admin NFF KIRKLAND, JOHN C. KIRKLAND, JOHN C.

TAC #: X02591 SROU - 1 LARSON, BRIAN T.

STEELY, CHRISTOPHER D.

09/16/2017 Callaway / 05000483 / 2017301 Doc NFF KIRKLAND, JOHN C. KIRKLAND, JOHN C.

TAC #: X02591 LARSON, BRIAN T.

STEELY, CHRISTOPHER D.

Sites: CALL Orgs: ALL Exam Author: ALL

ES-201 Examination Security Agreement Form ES-201-3

1. Pre-Examination I acknowledge that I have acquired specialized knowledge about the NRG licensing examinations scheduled for the week(s) of '?;.. b\ / ').cH J as of the date of my signature. I agree that I will not knowingly divulge any information about these examinations to any persons who hav;~ot t/een authorized by the NRG chief examiner. I understand that I am not to instruct, evaluate, or provide performance feedback to those applicants scheduled to be administered these licensing examinations from this date until completion of examination administration, except as specifically noted below and authorized by the NRC (e.g., acting as a simulator booth operator or communicator is acceptable if the individual does not select the training content or provide direct or indirect feedback). Furthermore, I am aware of the physical security measures and requirements (as documented in the facility licensee's procedures) and understand that violation of the conditions of this agreement may result in cancellation of the examinations and/or an enforcement action against me or the facility licensee. I will immediately report to facility management or the NRC chief examiner any indications or suggestions that examination security may have been compromised.

2. Post-Examination rn To the best of my knowledge, I did not divulge to any unauthorized persons any information concerning the NRC licensing examinations administered during N the week(s) of 1f'20I r-;> . From the date that I entered into this security agreement until the completion of examination administration , I did not

~ instruct, evaluate, or p~ovide performance feedback to those applicants who were administered these licensing examinations, except as specifically noted

-u below and authorized by the NRC .

n>

cc CD PRINTED NAME JOB TITLE I RESPONSIBILITY DATE SIGNATURE (2)

c ES-201 Examination Security Agreement Form ES-201-3

1. Pre-Examination I acknowledge that I have acquired specialized knowledge about the NRC licensing examinations scheduled for the week(s) of ~ l l / ( ] J as of the date of my signature. I agree that I will not knowingly divulge any information about these examinations to any persons who have not befu1 authorized by the NRC chief examiner. I understand that I am not to instruct, evaluate, or provide performance feedback to those applicants scheduled to be administered these licensing examinations from this date until completion of examination administration , except as specifically noted below and authorized by the NRC (e.g., acting as a simulator booth operator or communicator is acceptable if the individual does not select the training content or provide direct or indirect feedback). Furthermore, I am aware of the physical security measures and requirements (as documented in the facility licensee's procedures) and understand that violation of the conditions of this agreement may result in cancellation of the examinations and/or an enforcement action against me or the facility licensee. I will immediately report to facility management or the NRC chief examiner any indications or suggestions that examination security may have been compromised .

2. Post-Examination m To the best of my knowledge, I did not divulge to any unauthorized persons any information concerning the NRC licensing examinations administered during

,:.,, the week(s) of 9/'"tD/ n . From the date that I entered into this security agreement until the completion of examination administration, I did not

~ instruct, evaluate, of prdvide performance feedback to those applicants who were administered these licensing examinations, except as specifically noted

-u below and authorized by the NRC.

Q)

<g PRINTED NAME JOB TITLE I RESPONSIBILITY SIGNATURE (1) SIGNATURE (2) 0.5.

os Silo NOTES:

c ES-201 Examination Security Agreement Form ES-201-3

1. Pre-Examination I acknowledge that I have acquired specialized knowledge about the NRC licensing examinations scheduled for the week(s) of 4 / \ \ I t? as of the date of my signature. I agree that I will not knowingly divulge any information about these examinations to any persons who have ndt beJn authorized by the NRC chief examiner. I understand that I am not to instruct, evaluate, or provide performance feedback to those applicants scheduled to be administered these licensing examinations from this date until completion of examination administration, except as specifically noted below and authorized by the NRC (e.g., acting as a simulator booth operator or communicator is acceptable if the individual does not select the training content or provide direct or indirect feedback) . Furthermore, I am aware of the physical security measures and requirements (as documented in the facility licensee's procedures) and understand that violation of the conditions of this agreement may result in cancellation of the examinations and/or an enforcement action against me or the facility licensee. I will immediately report to facility management or the NRC chief examiner any indications or suggestions that examination security may have been compromised.

2. Post-Examination mTo the best of my knowledge, I did not divulge to any unauthorized persons any information concerning the NRC licensing examinations administered during N the week(s) of ~'7f:JJ/t7 . From the date that I entered into this security agreement until the completion of examination administration, I did not r

~ instruct, evaluate, pr~vide performance feedback to those applicants who were administered these licensing examinations, except as specifically noted

-u below and authorized by the NRC.

Ill

~ JOB TITLE I RESPONSIBILITY SIGNATURE (1) DATE DATE NOTE N

-...J

s. 0.S N

CX>

NOTES:

Swan, Phillip B From: Lee and Cheryl Gorman <irish2@satelep hone.com >

Sent: Tuesday, October 03, 2017 1:52 PM To: Swan, Phillip B

Subject:

Re: Callaway Exam Security Signoff To the best of my knowledge, I did not divulge to any unauthorized persons any information concerning 2017 NRC Initial Licensing examinations at Ameren. Furthermore, I did not instruct, evaluate, or provide performance feedback to applicants who were administered these licensing examinations authorized by the NRC.

Regards J. Lee Gorman From: Swan, Phillip B Sent: Tuesday, October 03, 2017 1:28 PM To: irish2@satelephone.com Cc: Otten, Mark

Subject:

Callaway Exam Security Signoff

Lee, Could you do provide an email saying that you "To the best of my knowledge, I did not divulge to any unauthorized persons any information concerning the NRC licensing examination. Furthermore, I did not instru ct, evaluate, or provide performance feedback to those applicants who were administered these licensing examinations , except as specifically noted below and authorized by the NRC." fo r all three master security agreements you were on: ILT, Annual, and Biennial.

Thank You Phillip Swa n Callaway Ops Training - Exam Group pswan@ameren.com 573-544-8102 This communication and any attachments may be privileged and/or confidential and protected from disclosure, and are otherwise the exclusive property of Ameren Corporation and its affiliates (Ameren) or the intended recipient. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. Note that any views or opinions presented in this message do not necessarily represent those of Ameren. All e-mails are subj ect to Ameren policies. If you have received this in error, please notify the sender immediately by replying to the message and deleting the material from any computer.

1

Swan, Phillip B From: Dale Nichols <dalenichols84@gmail.com>

Sent: Monday, October 16, 2017 5:32 PM To: Swan, Phillip B

Subject:

Re: !LT Exam Security signoff I attest to the best of my knowledge I have complied with the exam security requirements stated in this email.

Dale Nichols On Oct 16, 2017 5:20 PM, "Swan, Phillip B" <PSwan@ameren.com> wrote:

Hey Dale, Hope you feel better and look forward to seeing you back at work.

Hated to ask but need to get this completed paperwork to the NRC - so If you can attest (by replying to this email) to the following concerning the ILT exam security.

"To the best of my knowledge, did not divulge to any unauthorized persons any information concerning the NRC licensing examinations administered during the week(s) of. From the date that I entered into this security agreement until the completion of examination administration, I did not instmct, evaluate, or provide perfonnance feedback to those applicants who were administered these licensing examinations, except as specifically noted below and authorized by the NRC."

Let me know ifthere is anything you need.

Phillip Swan This communication and any attachments may be privileged and/or confidential and protected from disclosure, and are otherwise the exclusive property of Ameren Corporation and its affiliates (Ameren) or the intended recipient. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. Note that any views or opinions presented in this message do not necessarily represent those of Ameren. All e-mails are subject to Ameren policies. If you have received this in error, please notify the sender immediately by replying to the message and deleting the material from any computer.

1