ML15314A046

2015 Clinton Power Station Initial License Examination Forms ES-201-2 and ES-301-4

ML15314A046
Person / Time
Site:	Clinton
Issue date:	11/09/2015
From:	NRC/RGN-III
To:	Exelon Generation Co
Zoia, C D
Shared Package
ML15124A069	List: ML15314A046 ML15314A047 ML15314A050 ML15314A052 ML15314A054 ML15314A058
References
Download: ML15314A046 (2)

Text

ES-201 Examination Outline Quality Checklist Form ES-201 -2 Facility: Clinton Date of Examination: 3116115 lnltlals Item Task Description a b. C#

1. a. Verify that the outline(s) fit(s) the appropriate model. in accordance with ES-401.

w A b. Assess wnetner tne outline was systematically ano randomly prepared in accordance wrtn I Section 0.1 of ES-401 and whether all KIA categories are appropriately sampled.

T T c. Assess whether the outline over-emphasizes any systems, evolutions, or generic topics.

E N d. Assess whether the justifications for deselected or rejected KIA statements are appropriate.

a. Using Form ES-301-5, verify that the proposed scenario sets cover the required number

2. of normal evolulions, instrument and component failures, technical specifications, and major transients.

s I b. Assess whether there are enough scenario sets (and spares) to test the projected number M and mix of applicants in accordance with the expected crew composition and rotation schedule u without compromising exam integrity, and ensure lhat each applicant can be tested using L at least one new or significantly modified scenario, that no scenarios are duplicated A from the applicants' audit test(s). and scenarios will not be repeated on subsequent days.

T 0

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

and quantitative criteria specified on Form ES-301-4 and described in Appendix D.

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 w distributed among the safety functions as specified on the form I (2) task repetition from the last two NRC examinations is within the limits specified on the form T (3) no lasks are duplicated from the applicants' audit test(s)

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

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

( 1) the tasks are distributed among the topics as specified on the form (2) at least one task Is new or significantly modified 3 no more than one task is re eated from the last two NRC licensin examinations

c. Determine if there are enough different outlines to test the projected number and mix of a licants and ensure that no items are du licated on subse uent da .

4. a. Assess whether p lant-specific priorities (including PAA and IPE insights) are covered In the appropriate exam section.

G

b. Assess whether the 10 CFR 55.41 /43 and 55.45 sampling is appropriate.

E N c. Ensure that KJA importance ratings (excepl for plant-specific priorities) are at least 2.5.

E R d. Check for duplication and overlap among exam sections.

A e. Check the entire exam for balance of coverage .

L

f. Assess whether the exam fits the appropriate job level (RO or SRO).

\ Date \

a. Author 11 2>\o \ t.f

b. Facility Reviewer (') l l,11 I I"(

~~i?t/zf{

c. NRC Chief Examiner(#)

d. NRC Supervisor NOTE: # Independent NRC Reviewer initial items in Column "C"; chief examiner concurrence required.

• Not a licable for NRC* re ared e xamination outlines.

ES-201, Page 26 of 28

ES-301 Simulator Scenario Quality Checklist Form ES-301-4 Facility: Clinton Date of Exam: 3/16/15 Scenario Numbers: 01 I 02 I 030perating Test Number: 2015-301 Initials QUALITATIVE ATTRI B UTES a b. c#

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

~ /IP

2. T he scenarios consist mostly of rela ted events. '('( d/ 1¥?

3. Each event description consists of I I

• the point in the scenario when it is to be initiated me malfunction(s) that are entered to initiate the event

. the symptoms/cues that will be visible to the crew

. I the e xpected operator actions (by shift position) the event termination point (if applicable)

.II' (f

I

4. No more than one non-mechanistic failure (e.g.. p ipe break) is incorporated into the scenario without a credible preceding incident such as a seismic event.

~ ,, /;f

5. The events are valid with regard to physics and thermodynamics.

eJ ~ 'ff?

~~

'/

,, ff

6. Sequencing and timing of events is reasonable , and allows the examination team to obtain complete evaluation results commensurate w ith the scenario objectives. 1.A

7. 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 . Nlf .vA llA

8. The simulator modeling is not altered. d t1, t()

9. The scenarios have been validated. Pursuant to 10CFR55.46{d), any open simulator performance deficiencies or deviations from the referenced plant have been evaluated to ensure that functional fidelity is maintained while running the planned scenarios. ¢ If ~p I

10. Every operator will be evaluated using at least one new or significantly modified scenario.

All other scenarios have been altered in accordance with Section 0 .5 of ES-301 . 1 J/y' f3P 11 . All individual operator competencies can be evaluated, as verified using Form ES-301-6 (submit the form along with the simulator scenarios). '<I /

If

"/

ff

12. Each applicant will be significantly involved in the minimum number of transients and events specilied on Form ES-301-5 (submit the form with the simulator scenarios). :I/4- If ~(J

,'/! l:f

13. T he level of difficulty is appropriate to support licensing decisions for each crew position. I/

I Ta rget Qu antit at ive Attributes (Per Scenario ; See Section 0.5.d) Actual Attributes --,;

1. Total mallunctions (5-8) 5 I <)t ~ (j I If/ el/

~I 'i/ jf fjJ

2. Malfunctions after EOP entry {1-2)

I I

3. Abnormal events (2*4) 711._\ 1\..} '4,,, If ff./

4. Major transients ( 1-2) \ I \ I I 'ff, d IA:'

?-t/. t -;.. 'r11 ~rf

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

(., ~

6. EOP contingencies requiring substantive actions {0-2) I I I I () I//

7. Critical tasks (2-3) J- t)- 1 \, ~1 )J t'fJ v

ES-301 , Page 25 of 27

ES-201 Examination Outline Quality Checklist Form ES-201 -2 Facility: Clinton Date of Examination: 3116115 lnltlals Item Task Description a b. C#

1. a. Verify that the outline(s) fit(s) the appropriate model. in accordance with ES-401.

w A b. Assess wnetner tne outline was systematically ano randomly prepared in accordance wrtn I Section 0.1 of ES-401 and whether all KIA categories are appropriately sampled.

T T c. Assess whether the outline over-emphasizes any systems, evolutions, or generic topics.

E N d. Assess whether the justifications for deselected or rejected KIA statements are appropriate.

a. Using Form ES-301-5, verify that the proposed scenario sets cover the required number

2. of normal evolulions, instrument and component failures, technical specifications, and major transients.

s I b. Assess whether there are enough scenario sets (and spares) to test the projected number M and mix of applicants in accordance with the expected crew composition and rotation schedule u without compromising exam integrity, and ensure lhat each applicant can be tested using L at least one new or significantly modified scenario, that no scenarios are duplicated A from the applicants' audit test(s). and scenarios will not be repeated on subsequent days.

T 0

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

and quantitative criteria specified on Form ES-301-4 and described in Appendix D.

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 w distributed among the safety functions as specified on the form I (2) task repetition from the last two NRC examinations is within the limits specified on the form T (3) no lasks are duplicated from the applicants' audit test(s)

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

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

( 1) the tasks are distributed among the topics as specified on the form (2) at least one task Is new or significantly modified 3 no more than one task is re eated from the last two NRC licensin examinations

c. Determine if there are enough different outlines to test the projected number and mix of a licants and ensure that no items are du licated on subse uent da .

4. a. Assess whether p lant-specific priorities (including PAA and IPE insights) are covered In the appropriate exam section.

G

b. Assess whether the 10 CFR 55.41 /43 and 55.45 sampling is appropriate.

E N c. Ensure that KJA importance ratings (excepl for plant-specific priorities) are at least 2.5.

E R d. Check for duplication and overlap among exam sections.

A e. Check the entire exam for balance of coverage .

L

f. Assess whether the exam fits the appropriate job level (RO or SRO).

\ Date \

a. Author 11 2>\o \ t.f

b. Facility Reviewer (') l l,11 I I"(

~~i?t/zf{

c. NRC Chief Examiner(#)

d. NRC Supervisor NOTE: # Independent NRC Reviewer initial items in Column "C"; chief examiner concurrence required.

• Not a licable for NRC* re ared e xamination outlines.

ES-201, Page 26 of 28

ES-301 Simulator Scenario Quality Checklist Form ES-301-4 Facility: Clinton Date of Exam: 3/16/15 Scenario Numbers: 01 I 02 I 030perating Test Number: 2015-301 Initials QUALITATIVE ATTRI B UTES a b. c#

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

~ /IP

2. T he scenarios consist mostly of rela ted events. '('( d/ 1¥?

3. Each event description consists of I I

• the point in the scenario when it is to be initiated me malfunction(s) that are entered to initiate the event

. the symptoms/cues that will be visible to the crew

. I the e xpected operator actions (by shift position) the event termination point (if applicable)

.II' (f

I

4. No more than one non-mechanistic failure (e.g.. p ipe break) is incorporated into the scenario without a credible preceding incident such as a seismic event.

~ ,, /;f

5. The events are valid with regard to physics and thermodynamics.

eJ ~ 'ff?

~~

'/

,, ff

6. Sequencing and timing of events is reasonable , and allows the examination team to obtain complete evaluation results commensurate w ith the scenario objectives. 1.A

7. 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 . Nlf .vA llA

8. The simulator modeling is not altered. d t1, t()

9. The scenarios have been validated. Pursuant to 10CFR55.46{d), any open simulator performance deficiencies or deviations from the referenced plant have been evaluated to ensure that functional fidelity is maintained while running the planned scenarios. ¢ If ~p I

10. Every operator will be evaluated using at least one new or significantly modified scenario.

All other scenarios have been altered in accordance with Section 0 .5 of ES-301 . 1 J/y' f3P 11 . All individual operator competencies can be evaluated, as verified using Form ES-301-6 (submit the form along with the simulator scenarios). '<I /

If

"/

ff

12. Each applicant will be significantly involved in the minimum number of transients and events specilied on Form ES-301-5 (submit the form with the simulator scenarios). :I/4- If ~(J

,'/! l:f

13. T he level of difficulty is appropriate to support licensing decisions for each crew position. I/

I Ta rget Qu antit at ive Attributes (Per Scenario ; See Section 0.5.d) Actual Attributes --,;

1. Total mallunctions (5-8) 5 I <)t ~ (j I If/ el/

~I 'i/ jf fjJ

2. Malfunctions after EOP entry {1-2)

I I

3. Abnormal events (2*4) 711._\ 1\..} '4,,, If ff./

4. Major transients ( 1-2) \ I \ I I 'ff, d IA:'

?-t/. t -;.. 'r11 ~rf

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

(., ~

6. EOP contingencies requiring substantive actions {0-2) I I I I () I//

7. Critical tasks (2-3) J- t)- 1 \, ~1 )J t'fJ v

ES-301 , Page 25 of 27

'