ML12172A185
| ML12172A185 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Fermi  |
| Issue date: | 03/19/2012 |
| From: | Bielby M E NRC/RGN-III/DRS/OLB |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML11354A138 | List: |
| References | |
| Download: ML12172A185 (6) | |
Text
2012 FERMI 2 POWER PLANT INITIAL LICENSE EXAMINATION PROPOSED EXAM FILES Fermi 2 6400 North Dixie Hwy., Newport, MI 48166 Detroit Edison 10 CFR 55.40 February 2,2012 NRC-12-0007 Mr. Hironori Peterson Chief, Operations Branch Division of Reactor Safety Region III U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 2443 Warrenville Road, Suite 210 Lisle, Illinois 60532-4352
References:
Fermi 2 NRC Docket No. 50-341 NRC License No. NPF-43 NRC letter dated September 13,2011, "Fermi Power Plant Confirmation of Initial License Examination"
Subject:
Fermi 2 Initial License Operator Examination Enclosed please find the following examination material in preparation for the Fermi 2 Initial License Operator Examination scheduled to occur during the week of March 19,2012: Modified Examination Outlines (modified during the examination development process) Seventy-five (75) written examination items for the Reactor Operator examination Twenty-five (25) written examination items for the Senior Reactor Operator examination Ten (10) Plant Systems related Job Performance Measures Five (5) Administrative topic Job Performance Measures Two (2) Simulator Scenarios FEB 3 2012 A DTE Energy Company USNRC NRC-12-0007 Page 2
- Supporting Reference Material
- Quality Verification Checklists from NUREG 1021, Revision 9. The examination material was developed using the appropriate guidance contained in NUREG 1021, "Operator Licensing Examination Standards for Power Reactors," Revision 9. The examination material shall be withheld from public disclosure until after the examinations are complete.
We look forward to working with you and your examination team during the examination development and administration process. If you have any questions or comments regarding the contents of the items listed above, please contact Mr. David G. Coseo, General Supervisor, Operations Training, at (734) 586-4055.
Sincerely, Rodney W. Johnson Manager, Nuclear Licensing Enclosures [w/o Enclosures]
NRC Project Manager Reactor Projects Chief, Branch 4, Region III NRC Resident Office Document Control Desk Washington D C
--* Operating Test Quality Checklist Form ES-301-3 I Facility: Date of Examination:
alllil/2Q12 Operating Test Number: 2012*1 Initials 1. GENERAL CRITERIA b*a C# The operating test conforms with the previously approved outline; changes are consistent sampling requirements (e.g., 10 CFR 55.45, operational importance, safety function There is no day-to--day repetition between this and other operating tests to be administered this The operating test shall not duplicate items from the applicants' audit test(s)(see Section 0.1.a). -g Ice, Overlap with the written examination and between different parts of the operating test is acceptable limits. I CfJI;It appears that the operating test will differentiate between competent and less-than-competent
'J}Jl applicants at the designated license level. Es 2. WALK-THROUGH CRITERIA --Each JPM includes the following, as applicable: initial conditions initiating cues If 8 CPJreferences and tools, including associated procedures reasonable and validated time limits (average time allowed for completion) and designation if deemed to be time critical by the facility operationally important specific performance criteria that
- detailed expected actions with exact criteria and
- system response and other examiner -statements describing important observations to be made by the
- criteria for successful completion of the
- identification of critlcal steps and their associated performance
- restrictions on the sequence of steps, if Ensure that any changes from the previously approved systems and administrative outlines (Forms ES-301*1 and 2) have not caused the test to deviate from any of the 1JP criteria (e.g., item distribution, bank use, repetition from the last 2 NRC examinatlons) specified on those forms and Form ES-201-2.
- 3. SIMULATOR CRITERIA --The associated simulator operating tests (scenario sets) have been reviewed in accordance with rO'Form ES-301-4 and a copy is attached. Date printe/Name I
- a. Author TiNlCrT 14'1 <f-BIfR..t!;T r /-. :;'-l-I Z b. Facility Reviewer (*) bAVI f) 6. c.oSr::v ."c. NRC Chief Examiner (#) WI:<h**' t-!>le\\', t,'11t<.;;J 3lzltz.. d. NRC Supervisor
=-*0 ' La(O\lne, , oliir2.. NOTE:
- The facility signature is not applicable for NRC-developed # Independent NRC reviewer initial items in Column "c"; chief examiner concurrence is ES-301, Page 24 of 27 ES-301 Simulator Scenario Quality Checklist Form ES-301-4 Facility:
Fermi-2 Date of Exam: 3/19/2012 Scenario Numbers: 1 12 / Operating Test Number: 2012-1 Initials QUALITATIVE ATIRIBUTES b* C# 1. The initial conditions are realistic, in that some equipment and/or instrumentation may be out of ff 7 service, but it does not cue the operators into expected events. '[Jj 2. The scenarios consist mostly of related events. 1)J It 0tI? 3. Eaeh event description consists of
- the point in the scenario when it is to be initiated
- the malfunction(s) that are entered to initiate the event # tr GNJ* the symptoms/cues that will be visible to the crew
- the expected operator actions (by shift position)
- the event termination point (if applicable)
- 4. No more than one non-mechanistic failure (e.g., pipe break) is incorporated into the scenario TJJ 1CA"J without a credible preceding incident such as a seismic event. S. The events are valid with regard to physics and thermodynamics.
y;J ))' 6. Sequencing and timing of events is reasonable, and allows the examination team to obtain -pB complete evaluation results commensurate with the scenario objectives.
- 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.
1Z Cues are given. 8. The simulator modeling is not altered. 'Bi 9. The scenarios have been validated.
Pursuant to 10CFR55.46(d), any open simulator I performance deficiencies or deviations from the referenced plant have been evaluated 1JJ tr to ensure that functional fidelity is maintained while running the planned scenarios.
- 10. Every operator will be evaluated using at least one new or significantly modified scenario. -p..V All other scenarios have been altered in accordance with Section D.S of ES-301. 11. All individual operator competencies can be evaluated, as verified using Form ES-301-6 1J-f / (submit the form along with the simulator scenarios). 12. Each applicant will be significantly involved in the minimum number of transients and events 1).g lr IV?specified on Form ES-301-5 (submit the form with the simulator scenarios).
- 13. The level of difficulty i$ appropriate to support licensing decisions for each crew position. ()lNJ Target Quantitative Attributes (Per Scenario; See Section D.S.d) Actual Attributes --1. Total malfunctions (5-8) 7 171 2. Malfunctions after EOP entry (1-2) I 4 131 3. Abnormal events (2-4) 2 121 4. Major transients (1-2) 2 I 1 I 5. EOPs entered/requiring substantive actions (1-2) 2 I 1 / 6. EOP contingencies requiring substantive actions (0-2) 1 I 1 I 7. Critical tasks (2-3) 3 I 2 I ES-301, Page 25 of 27
- Facility:
Fermi-2 Date of Exam: 3/19/2012 Exam Level: RO [gl SRO [gl Initial I Item Description a b* c# 1. Questions and answers are technically accurate and applicable to the facility.
7f? ? =t. 2. a. NRC KlAs are referenced for all questions.
,/ b. Facility learning objectives are referenced as available.
111' h-Jl... 3. SRO questions are appropriate in accordance with Section D.2.d of ES401 l/-J' 0-L 4. The sampling process was random and systematic (If more than 4 RO or 2 SRO questions
(" were repeated from the last 2 NRC licensing exam, consult the NRR OL program office). 11' 5. Question duplication from the license 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 1).-/? _ the audit exam was completed before the license exam was started; or bZ.._ the examinations were developed independently; or .2L the licensee certifies that there is no duplication; or _ other (explain)
- 6. Bank use meets limits (no more than 75 percent Bank Modified New from the bank, at least 10 percent new, and the rest VI new or modified);
enter the actual RO 1 SRO-only 43/11 11/0 21/14 .72.. question distribution( s) at right. 7. Between 50 and 60 percent of the questions on the RO Memory CIA exam are written at the comprehension lanalysis level; 1)11 bs the SRO exam may exceed 60 percent if the randomly 30/9 45/16 $--selected KAs support the higher cognitive levels; enter the actual RO I SRO question distribution(s) at right. 8. Referencesihandouts provided do not give away answers -pJl e 7-or aid in the elimination of distractors.
- 9. Question content conforms with specific KIA statements in the previously approved examination outline and is appropriate for the Tier to which they are assigned;
'1)JJ :;z:.deviations are justified
- 10. Question psychometric quality and format meet the guidelines in ES Appendix B. 1hP 8-11. The exam contains the required number of one-point, multiple choice items; 1}fl ::5l-the total is correct and agrees with value on cover sheet Printed Name I Signature Date a. Author 7//140,HY
';f:
J,-2-t2 b. Facility Reviewer (0) hAv;D 6.
/ ;1.1-2..1 n.. c. NRC Chief Examiner (#)
,'V**_
- d. NRC Regional Supervisor CA ('0\\Y\e-ri \ -\'Ot\ Jii(J' '/ f 1?J }1'1. Note:
- The facility reviewer's initials/signature are not applicable for NRC-developed examinations.
- Independent NRC reviewer initial items in Column "c*; chief examiner concurrence required.
- ES-401, Page 29 of