IR 05000368/2014301
| ML14107A370 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Arkansas Nuclear  |
| Issue date: | 04/17/2014 |
| From: | Vincent Gaddy Operations Branch IV |
| To: | Jeremy G. Browning Entergy Operations |
| References | |
| ER-14-301 | |
| Download: ML14107A370 (15) | |
Text
ril 17, 2014
SUBJECT:
ARKANSAS NUCLEAR ONE, UNIT 2 - NRC EXAMINATION REPORT 05000368/2014301
Dear Mr. Browning:
On February 27, 2014, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) completed an initial operator license examination at Arkansas Nuclear One, Unit 2. The enclosed report documents the examination results and licensing decisions. The preliminary operating test results were discussed on February 14, 2014, with Mr. P. Williams, Operations Manager, Mr. R. Byford, Training Manager, and other members of your staff. A telephonic meeting was conducted on March 19, 2014, with Mr. R. Martin, Operations Training Superintendent, who was provided the NRC licensing decisions.
The examination included the evaluation of eight applicants for reactor operator licenses, three applicants for instant senior reactor operator licenses, and three applicants for upgrade senior reactor operator licenses. The license examiners determined that eleven of the applicants satisfied the requirements of 10 CFR Part 55. Ten licenses have been issued and one license is being held in abeyance by NRC Region IV until proposed license denials become final or resolution of any examination appeal. There were three post examination comments submitted by your staff. Enclosure 1 contains details of this report and Enclosure 2 summarizes post examination comment resolution.
No findings were identified during this examination.
In accordance with 10 CFR 2.390 of the NRC's "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 NRCs document system (ADAMS). ADAMS is accessible from the NRC Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html (the Public Electronic Reading Room).
Sincerely,
/RA/
Vincent G. Gaddy, Chief Operations Branch Division of Reactor Safety Docket: 50-368 License: NPF-6
Enclosure:
1. NRC Examination Report 05000368/2014301 2. NRC Post Examination Comment Resolution
REGION IV==
Docket: 05000368 License: NPF-6 Report: 05000368/2014301 Licensee: Entergy Operations, Inc.
Facility: Arkansas Nuclear One, Unit 2 Junction of Hwy. 64 West and Hwy. 333 South Location:
Russellville, Arkansas Dates: February 10 - March 19, 2014 Inspectors: B. Larson, Chief Examiner, Senior Operations Engineer S. Garchow, Senior Operations Engineer G. Apger, Operations Engineer T. Farina, Operations Engineer D. Strickland, Operations Engineer Approved By: Vincent G. Gaddy, Chief Operations Branch Division of Reactor Safety-1- Enclosure 1
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
ER 05000368/2014301; February 10 - March 19, 2014; Arkansas Nuclear One, Unit 2; Initial
Operator Licensing Examination Report.
NRC examiners evaluated the competency of eight applicants for reactor operator licenses, three applicants for instant senior reactor operator licenses, and three applicants for upgrade senior reactor operator licenses at Arkansas Nuclear One, Unit 2.
The licensee developed the examinations using NUREG-1021, "Operator Licensing Examination Standards for Power Reactors," Revision 9, Supplement 1. The written examination was administered by the licensee on February 27, 2014. NRC examiners administered the operating test on February 10-14, 2014.
The examiners determined that eleven of the applicants satisfied the requirements of 10 CFR Part 55. Ten licenses have been issued and one license is being held in abeyance by NRC Region IV until proposed license denials become final or resolution of any examination appeal.
NRC-Identified and Self-Revealing Findings
None
Licensee-Identified Violations
None
REPORT DETAILS
OTHER ACTIVITIES (OA)
4OA5 Other Activities (Initial Operator License Examination)
.1 License Applications
a. Scope
NRC examiners reviewed all license applications submitted to ensure each applicant satisfied relevant license eligibility requirements. Examiners also audited three of the license applications in detail to confirm that they accurately reflected the subject applicants qualifications. This audit focused on the applicants experience and on-the-job training, including control manipulations that provided significant reactivity changes.
b. Findings
No findings were identified.
.2 Examination Development
a. Scope
The NRC developed the written examination outline and reviewed all other outlines, draft examination, and test submitted by the licensee against the requirements of NUREG-1021, "Operator Licensing Examination Standards for Power Reactors." The NRC examination team conducted an onsite validation of the operating test.
b. Findings
No findings were identified.
NRC examiners provided outline, draft examination, and post-validation comments to the licensee. The licensee satisfactorily completed comment resolution prior to examination administration.
NRC examiners determined that the written examinations (both Reactor Operator and Senior Reactor Operator portions) were outside of the acceptable quality range as identified in NUREG-1021. For the Reactor Operator examination, 28 questions (37.3 percent) were determined to be Unsatisfactory on draft examination submittal. For the Senior Reactor Operator examination, 12 questions (48 percent) were determined to be Unsatisfactory on draft examination submittal. For both examinations, significant effort was required by multiple examiners to revise the questions to a satisfactory rating. Due to the poor quality of the examinations submitted, administration of the written examinations was delayed for 3 weeks. Also for both examinations, the question flaws were spread across the spectrum of errors that are identified by examiners. Question
flaws included knowledge and abilities (K/A) mismatches, non-credible distractors, stem focus, minutia, backward logic, and cues.
NRC examiners determined the operating test initially submitted by the licensee was within the range of acceptability expected for a proposed examination.
.3 Operator Knowledge and Performance
a. Scope
The NRC examination team administered the various portions of the operating test to all applicants on February 10-14, 2014.
On February 27, 2014, the licensee proctored the administration of the written examination to all 14 applicants. The original written examination administration date was February 7, 2014, but was delayed 3 weeks due to the significant amount of rework required to obtain a satisfactory examination. The licensee staff graded the written examinations, analyzed the results, and presented their analysis to the NRC on March 4, 2014.
b. Findings
No findings were identified.
Twelve applicants passed the written examination and 13 applicants passed all parts of the operating test. The final written examination, final operating test, post examination analysis, and comments may be accessed in the ADAMS system under the accession numbers noted in the Supplemental Information attachment. (Public release of the final written examination has been delayed for 24 months from the date of administration at the request of the licensee.) There were three post examination comments submitted by the licensee. All the post examination comment recommendations were rejected by the NRC and no changes were made to the written examination answer key. (See 2 for the question, licensee comment and recommendation, and the NRC resolution.)
The examination team noted the following generic weaknesses during administration of the operating test:
- (1) Simulator JPM S4: Shutdown EFW Train A with EFAS Signal Present. The applicants were expected to override 2P-7B EFW pump discharge and flow control valves in order to feed both SGs to 60 percent during a period of time where the SGs were cycling between EFAS actuation and clearing signals.
Essentially all applicants displayed unsatisfactory knowledge of system knowledge on how and when to override the valves. A wide variety of actions were observed.
- (2) Scenario 2, Event 1: Perform Red Train Proportional Heater test. Two of the four crews had confusion regarding the 0 output on PZR pressure controller
equating to 100 percent heater output. However, both crews were able to self-correct by discussing the issue amongst themselves.
- (3) Admin JPM A4 / A8: Review Emergency RWP. Several applicants miscalculated stay times because they used 10 CFR Part 20 exposure limits and not the RWP dose alarm setpoint.
Copies of all individual examination reports were sent to the facility for evaluation and determination of appropriate remedial training.
.4 Simulation Facility Performance
a. Scope
The NRC examiners observed simulator performance with regard to plant fidelity during examination validation and administration.
b. Findings
No findings were identified.
.5 Examination Security
a. Scope
The NRC examiners reviewed examination security during both the onsite validation week and examination administration week for compliance with 10 CFR 55.49 and NUREG-1021. Plans for simulator security and applicant control were reviewed and discussed with licensee personnel.
b. Findings
No findings were identified.
4OA6 Meetings, Including Exit
Exit Meeting Summary
The chief examiner presented the preliminary operating test results to Mr. P. Williams, Operations Manager, Mr. R. Byford, Training Manager, and other members of the staff on February 14, 2014. A telephonic meeting was conducted on March 19, 2014, with Mr. R.
Martin, Operations Training Superintendent, who was provided the NRC licensing decisions.
The licensee did not identify any information or materials used during the examination process as proprietary.
ATTACHMENT:
SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION
KEY POINTS OF CONTACT
Licensee Personnel
- R. Byford, Training Manager
- C. Simpson, Operations Training Superintendent
- R. Martin, Operations Training Superintendent
NRC Personnel
- B. Tindell, Senior Resident Inspector