IR 05000390/2010301

NRC Operator License Examination Report 05000390-10-301

ML103130549
Person / Time
Site:	Watts Bar
Issue date:	11/09/2010
From:	Widmann M Division of Reactor Safety II
To:	Krich R Tennessee Valley Authority
References
50-390/10-301
Download: ML103130549 (9)

Text

UNITED STATES ber 9, 2010

SUBJECT:

WATTS BAR NUCLEAR PLANT - NRC OPERATOR LICENSE EXAMINATION REPORT 05000390/2010301

Dear Mr. Krich:

During the period of August 23 - 31, 2010, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC)

administered operating tests to employees of your company who had applied for licenses to operate the Watts Bar Nuclear Plant. At the conclusion of the tests, the examiners discussed preliminary findings related to the operating tests and the written examination submittal with those members of your staff identified in the enclosed report. The written examination was administered by your staff on September 22, 2010.

Four Reactor Operator (RO) and eight Senior Reactor Operator (SRO) applicants passed both the operating test and written examination. Three SRO applicants failed the written examination. There were no post-examination comments. A Simulator Fidelity Report is included in this report as Enclosure 2.

The initial written SRO examination submitted by your staff failed to meet the guidelines for quality contained in NUREG-1021, Operator Licensing Examination Standards for Power Reactors, Revision 9, Supplement 1, as described in the enclosed report.

In accordance with 10 CFR 2.390 of the NRCs Rules of Practice, a copy of this letter and its enclosures will be available electronically for public inspection in the NRC Public Document Room or from the Publicly Available Records (PARS) component of the NRCs document system (ADAMS). ADAMS is accessible from the NRC Website at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm.adams.html (the Public Electronic Reading Room).

TVA 2 If you have any questions concerning this letter, please contact me at (404) 997-4550.

Sincerely,

/RA/

Malcolm T. Widmann, Chief Operations Branch Division of Reactor Safety Docket No: 50-390 License No: NPF-90

Enclosures:

1. Report Details.

2. Simulator Fidelity Report.

REGION II==

Docket No.: 50-390 License No.: NPF-90 Report No.: 05000390/2010301 Licensee: Tennessee Valley Authority Facility: Watts Bar Location: Spring City, Tennessee Dates: Operating Test - August 23-31, 2010 Written Examination - September 22, 2010 Examiners: G. Laska, Chief Examiner, Senior Operations Examiner E. Lea, Senior Operations Engineer M. Riches, Operations Engineer Approved by: Malcolm T. Widmann, Chief Operations Branch Division of Reactor Safety Enclosure 1

SUMMARY OF FINDINGS ER 05000390/2010301; operating test, August 23 - 31 2010, & written exam, September 22, 2010; Watts Bar; Operator License Examinations.

Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) examiners conducted an initial examination in accordance with the guidelines in Revision 9, Supplement 1, of NUREG-1021, "Operator Licensing Examination Standards for Power Reactors." This examination implemented the operator licensing requirements identified in 10 CFR §55.41, §55.43, and §55.45, as applicable.

Members of the Watts Bar staff developed both the operating tests and the written examination.

The NRC developed the written examination outlines. The initial written SRO examination submittal did not meet the quality guidelines contained in NUREG-1021.

The NRC administered the operating tests during the period August 23 - 31, 2010. Members of the Watts Bar training staff administered the written examination on September 22, 2010. Four Reactor Operator (RO) and eight Senior Reactor Operator (SRO) applicants passed both the operating test and written examination. Three SRO applicants failed the written examination.

Ten applicants were issued licenses commensurate with the level of examination administered.

Two SRO applicants passed the operating test, but passed the SRO portion of the written examination with a score less than 74%. These applicants were issued a letter stating that they passed the examination and issuance of their license has been delayed pending any written examination appeal that may impact the licensing decision for their application.

There were no post-examination comments.

No findings of significance were identified.

Enclosure 1

REPORT DETAILS 4. OTHER ACTIVITIES 4OA5 Operator Licensing Examinations a. Inspection Scope Members of the Watts Bar Nuclear Power Plant staff developed both the operating tests and the written examination. All examination material was developed in accordance with the guidelines contained in Revision 9, Supplement 1, of NUREG-1021, "Operator Licensing Examination Standards for Power Reactors." The NRC examination team reviewed the proposed examination. Examination changes agreed upon between the NRC and the licensee were made per NUREG-1021 and incorporated into the final version of the examination materials.

The NRC reviewed the licensees examination security measures while preparing and administering the examinations in order to ensure compliance with 10 CFR §55.49, Integrity of examinations and tests.

The NRC examiners evaluated four Reactor Operator (RO) and eleven Senior Reactor Operator (SRO) applicants using the guidelines contained in NUREG-1021. The examiners administered the operating tests during the period August 23 -31 2010.

Members of the Watts Bar Nuclear Power Plant training staff administered the written examination on September 22, 2010. Evaluations of applicants and reviews of associated documentation were performed to determine if the applicants, who applied for licenses to operate the Watts Bar Nuclear Plant, met the requirements specified in 10 CFR Part 55, Operators Licenses.

b. Findings The NRC determined that the licensees examination submittal was outside the range of acceptable quality specified by NUREG-1021. The initial written SRO examination submittal was outside the range of acceptable quality because more than 20%, (13 of 25) questions sampled for review contained unacceptable flaws. Individual questions were evaluated as unsatisfactory for the following reasons:

• 1 question failed to meet the K/A statement contained in the examination outline.

• 6 questions contained two or more implausible distractors.

• 10 questions on the SRO examination were not written at the SRO license level.

• 4 questions contained multiple unacceptable flaws.

Administration of the written examination was delayed, in part, because the quality of the licensees examination submittal was unacceptable. Additional delays were incurred due to the licensees request to change/replace questions on the originally approved examination. Future examination submittals need to incorporate lessons learned.

The NRC determined that the licensees initial operating test submittal was within the range of acceptability expected for a proposed examination.

Enclosure 1

Four Reactor Operator (RO) and eight Senior Reactor Operator (SRO) applicants passed both the operating test and written examination. Three SRO applicants failed the written examination. Ten applicants were issued licenses commensurate with the level of examination administered.

Two SRO applicants passed the operating test, but passed the SRO portion of the written examination with scores between 70 and 74%. These applicants were issued a letter stating that they passed the examination and issuance of their license has been delayed pending any written examination appeal that may impact the licensing decision for their application.

Copies of all individual examination reports were sent to the facility Training Manager for evaluation of weaknesses and determination of appropriate remedial training.

The licensee submitted no post-examination comments on either the operating test or the written examination. A copy of the final written RO and SRO examinations and answer keys, with all changes incorporated may be accessed not earlier than October 26, 2012, in the ADAMS system (ADAMS Accession Number(s) ML102940196 and ML102940181).

4OA6 Meetings, Including Exit Exit Meeting Summary On August 31, 2010, the NRC examination team discussed generic issues associated with the operating test with Mr. Mark McFadden, Operations Manager, and members of the Watts Bar staff. The examiners asked the licensee if any of the examination material was proprietary. No proprietary information was identified.

KEY POINTS OF CONTACT Licensee personnel G. Boerschig, Watts Bar Nuclear Plant General Manager R. Crews, Operations Training Manager N. Good, Training Simulator Manager D. Grissette, Watts Bar Nuclear VP J. Dalton, ILT Supervisor B. Hunt, Ops Superintendent M. McFadden, Operations Manager R. Mende, Director, U1/U2 Integration R. Milner, GM Corporate Nuclear Training C. Riedl, Licensing S. Smith, Operations Facility Representative W. Thompson, Site Training Director NRC personnel R. Monk, Senior Resident Inspector Enclosure 1

SIMULATOR FIDELITY REPORT Facility Licensee: Watts Bar Nuclear Plant Facility Docket No.: 05000390/2010-301 Operating Test Administered: August 23 - 31, 2010.

This form is to be used only to report observations. These observations do not constitute audit or inspection findings and, without further verification and review in accordance with Inspection Procedure 71111.11 are not indicative of noncompliance with 10 CFR 55.46. No licensee action is required in response to these observations.

While conducting the simulator portion of the operating test, examiners observed the following:

Item Description Boration did not start when During scenario 1, the make-up system failed to start in the borate an operator attempted to mode when an operator attempted to start a boration to facilitate a borate. plant downpower. DR3177 was written to address the issue.

MSR Switches failed to During scenario 4, an operator made several attempts to close operate when MSR valves in accordance with Attachment 2 of E-3 Steam manipulated. Generator tube Rupture, and the switches failed to work. DR3187 was written to address the issue.

B Pressurizer Heaters During one scenario, an operator went to off on the B pressurizer failed to turn off when heaters and they failed to de-energize. DR3190 was written to operator took control address the issue.

switch to off.

Valves 1-LCV-62-135 and During the administration of JPM B.1.c, Perform ES-1.3 Transfer 1-LCV-62-136 closure to Containment Sump 1-LCV-62-135 took almost 1 minute to times differed. close, and 1-LCV-62-136 closed almost instantaneously, operators believed that the valves should take the same amount of time to close. DR3186 was written to address the issue.

The ICS hard drive failed During prep week delays were incurred due to the failure of the just prior to prep week and ICS hard drive the week before and ensuing communication had communication issues issues between CERPI and ICS. DR3169 was written to address the issue.

Enclosure 2