ML16216A532

2016 Quad Cities Nuclear Power Station Initial License Examination Forms ES-301-3 and ES-301-4

ML16216A532
Person / Time
Site:	Quad Cities
Issue date:	05/02/2016
From:	Palagi B Operations Branch III
To:	Exelon Generation Co
Shared Package
ML15274A322	List: ML16216A532 ML16216A544 ML16216A548 ML16216A560 ML16216A566 SVP-16-004, 2016 Quad Cities Nuclear Power Station Initial License Examination Proposed Exam Submittal Letter
References
SVP-16-004
Download: ML16216A532 (3)

Text

ES-301 Operating Test Quality Checklist Form ES-301-3 of Exam N mber: ,I7T 7 lnitials

1. General Criteria

â b* c#

a. The operating test conforms with the previously app roved outline; changes are consistent with CFR f:l lr -6?

b. There is no day-to-day repetition between this and other operating tests to be administered during this N & 0?

The test shall items from the audit D.1 ,?ilJ (

d. Overlap with the written examination and between different parts of the operating test is wthin limits.

,t/ ó tr

e. It appears that the test will differentiats between competent and less-than-competent license MI &w

2. 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 siatements describing important observations to be made by the applicant criteria for successful completion of the task r/ tK identification of critical steps and ther associated performance standards of f b Ensure that any changes f rom the previously approved systems and administrative walk'through outlines (Forms ES-301 -1 and 2) have not caused the test to deviate from any of the acceptance criteria (e.g., item distribution, bank use, repetition from the last 2 NRC examinations) specified on those forms and Form ES-201-2.

rl ü H

3. Simulator Criteria The associated simulator operating tests (scenario sets) have been reviewed in accordance with Form

'(

ES-301-4 and a is attached.

?rl ü Printed / Signature Date

a. Author J.lkøc

b. ,^m)iiit, ¿0 tlc Ql /2 L

c. N?lC Chiéf E*aminer (#)

qór

d. NRC Supervisot I ln I zr't'

$r,9 NOTE:

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

1. lndependent NRC reviewer initial items in Column'b": chief examiner concurrence required.

ES-301, Page 24ot27

ES-301 Simulator Scenario Quality Checklist Form ES-301-4 il,r( of Exam: ScenarioNumbers: / lZ l3 Test No.: )

.rMil QUALITATIVE ATTRIBUTES lntials a b. c#

1. The initial conditions are realistic, in that some equpment and/or instrumentation may be out of service, but it does not cue the operators into expected events. il,fl 4t

/4r w r

2. The scenarios consist mostly of related events. íf,,1

3. Each event description consists of the point in the scenario when it is to be nitiated o the malfunction(s) or conditions that are entered to initiate the event r ,t/

r the symptoms/cues that will be visible to the crew the expected operator actions (by shift position) w o the event termination point (if applicable)

4. The events are vald wth regard to physics and thermodynamics. tl .1r a¿ S. Sequencing and timing of events is reasonable, and allows the examination team to obtain complete

ítl ,il evaluation results commensurate with the scenaro objectives.

6. lf time compression techniques are used, the scenario summary clearly so indicates.

Operators nave sufficient time to carry out expected activities without undue time constrants.

Cues are given.

q:l Lt 4

7. The simulator modeling is not altered l,til & /¿

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 fidelity ítil M is maintained while running the planned scenarios.

Every operator will be evaluated using at least one new or significantly modified scenario. All other 9.

scenarios have been altered in accordance with Section D.5 of ES-301 til ó 0(

10. All individual operator competencies can be evaluated, as verified using Form ES'301 '6 (submit the form along with the simulator scenarios).

q'l N

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.) &w

'?,

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). 0'/ ü &

13. The level of difficulty is appropriate to support licensing decisions for each crew position. l"}rt r' ,(

Target Quantitatve Attributes (Per See Section Actual Attributes

1. Malfunctions after EOP entry (1'2) ?tttt ílrl b W

2. Abnormal events (2-4) tlt4t4 túJ -b Y

3. I I I iill v(

Major transients (1-2) -

4. EOPs entered/requiring substantive actions (1-2) z t2t3 út 0?

,r

5. EOP requiring substantive actions (0-2) 2 tt tl ,1il -b

6. EOP based Critical tasks (2-3) 3 t{tz ilh, ,tY w NOTE:

. Ihe facility signature is not applicable for NRO'developed tests.

1. lndependent NRC reviewer intial items in Column "c"; chief examiner concurrence required.

ES-301, Page 25 of 27

ES-301 Simulator Scenario Quality Checklist Form ES-301-4 1lt/6oateof Exam: Scenario Numbers: 4t Test No.

lnitials QUALITATIVE AfiRIBUTES a b* c#

The initial conditions are realistic, in that some equipment and/or instrumentation may be out of service, 1

but t does not cue the operators into expected events.

'í'l'il

/t ç(

2. The scenarios consist mostly of related events. ,ir, û

3. Each event description consists of o the point in the scenario when it is to be initated o the malfunction(s) or conditions that are entered to initiate the event o the symptoms/cues that will be visible to the crew nl r

o the expected operator actions (by shift position) the event termination point (if applicable) .A N

4. The events are valid with regard to physics and thermodynamics' ûtt, 4> M

5. Sequencing and timing of events is reasonable, and allows the examination team to obtain complete evaluation results commensurate with the scenario objectives.

'd I il

6. lf 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.

d t R

7. The simulator modeling is not altered. ,ld Åt N B. 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 fidelity is maintained while running the planned scenarios. rûJ K

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

scenarios have been altered in accordance with Section D.5 of ES-301.

All other rrJ lt w

10. All individual operator competencies can be evaluated, as verified using Form ES-301'6 (submt the form along with the simulator scenarios) ilúl lt ú?

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.) d ,4J 0(

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). Ml b lt 13 The level of difficulty is appropriate to support licensing decisions for each crew position. l,t/ 15 a(

Target Quantitatve Attributes (Per Scenario; See Section 0.5.d) Actual Attributes

1. Malfunctions after EOP entry (1-2) 2t t A  !^p

2. Abnormal events (2-4) 4t t V

-h &.

3. Major transients (1-2) Itt r'Y as

4. EOPs enteredirequiring substantive actions (1-2) zt t & 0

5. EOP contingencies requiring substantive actions (0-2) I rt ll

6. EOP based Critical tasks (2-3) Zt t b b(

NOE . The facility signature is not applicable for NRO-developed tests.

1. lndependent NRC reviewer initial items in Column'b"; chief examiner concurrence required.

ES-301, Page 25o127