IR 05000271/2009301
| ML090980387 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Vermont Yankee File:NorthStar Vermont Yankee icon.png |
| Issue date: | 04/08/2009 |
| From: | Hansell S Operations Branch I |
| To: | Michael Colomb Entergy Nuclear Operations |
| Shared Package | |
| ML082600332 | List: |
| References | |
| ER-09-301 | |
| Download: ML090980387 (13) | |
Text
April 8, 2009
SUBJECT:
VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER STATION - NRC EXAMINATION REPORT 05000271/2009301
Dear Mr. Colomb:
February 13, 2009
SUBJECT:
VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER STATION - NRC EXAMINATION REPORT 05000271/2009301
Dear M
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
ER 05000271/2009301; February 6-13, 2009; Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station; Initial
Operator Licensing Examination Report.
NRC examiners evaluated the competency of four applicants for reactor operator licenses, three applicants for instant senior reactor operator licenses, and two applicants for upgrade senior reactor operator licenses at the Vermont Yankee facility. The facility 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 facility on February 6, 2009. Three NRC examiners administered the operating tests from February 9-13, 2009. The license examiners determined that eight of nine applicants satisfied the requirements of 10 CFR Part 55, and the appropriate licenses have been issued.
NRC-Identified and Self-Revealing Findings
No findings of significance were identified.
Licensee-Identified Violations
None.
REPORT DETAILS
OTHER ACTIVITIES (OA)
4OA5 Other Activities (Initial Operator License Examination)
.1 License Applications
a. Scope
The examiners reviewed all nine license applications submitted by the licensee to ensure the applications reflected that each applicant satisfied relevant eligibility requirements. The applications were submitted on NRC Form 398, Personal Qualification Statement, and NRC Form 396, Certification of Medical Examination by Facility Licensee. The examiner also audited two license applications in detail to confirm that they accurately reflected the applicants qualifications. This audit focused on the applicants experience, on-the-job training, and eligibility to sit for the instant senior operator license exams.
b. Findings
No findings of significance were identified.
.2 Operator Knowledge and Performance
a. Examination Scope
On February 6, 2009, the licensee proctored the administration of the written examinations to all nine applicants. The licensee staff graded the written examinations, analyzed the results, and presented their analysis to the NRC on February 24, 2009.
The NRC examination team administered the various portions of the operating examination to all nine applicants from February 9-13, 2009. The four applicants for reactor operator licenses participated in two dynamic simulator scenarios, in a control room and facilities walkthrough test consisting of eleven system tasks, and an administrative test consisting of four administrative tasks. The three applicants seeking an instant senior reactor operator license participated in three dynamic simulator scenarios, a control room and facilities walkthrough test consisting of ten system tasks, and an administrative test consisting of five administrative tasks. The two applicants seeking an upgrade senior reactor operator license participated in two dynamic simulator scenarios, a control room and facilities walkthrough test consisting of five system tasks, and an administrative test consisting of five administrative tasks.
b. Findings
All nine applicants passed all parts of the operating test. Eight of nine applicants passed the written examination. For the written examinations, the reactor operator applicants average score was 86.8 percent and ranged from 82.4 to 91.9 percent. The senior reactor operator applicants overall average score was 87.6 percent and ranged from 82.7 to 92.9 percent. One SRO applicant scored less than 70% on the SRO-only portion, and therefore did not pass the written exam. The examination questions and the licensees post-examination comments may be accessed in the ADAMS system under the accession numbers noted in the attachment.
Chapter ES-403 and Form ES-403-1 of NUREG 1021 require the facility licensee to analyze the validity of any written examination questions that were missed by half or more of the applicants. Ten questions met this criterion. The facility licensee conducted this performance analysis and submitted it to the chief examiner. Included in the analysis were post-examination comments related to three questions. The facility licensee recommended accepting two answers for one question, and that two other questions be deleted. The NRC decided to accept the facility licensees recommendation for these three questions, and graded the exam accordingly.
2 summarizes the facility licensees comments and associated NRC response.
.3 Initial Licensing Examination Development
a. Examination Scope
The facility licensee developed the examinations in accordance with the Examination Standards. All licensee facility training and operations staff involved in examination preparation and validation were on a security agreement. The facility licensee submitted both the written and operating examination outlines on November 15, 2008.
The chief examiner reviewed the outlines against the requirements of the Standards, and provided comments to the licensee. The facility licensee submitted the draft examination package on December 19, 2008. The chief examiner reviewed the draft examination package against the requirements of the Standards, and provided comments to the licensee on the examination on January 7, 2009. The examinations were within the range of acceptability for a proposed examination. The NRC conducted an onsite validation of the operating examinations and provided associated comments during the week of January 12, 2009. The facility licensee satisfactorily completed comment resolution on January 30, 2009.
b. Findings
No findings of significance were identified.
.4 Simulation Facility Performance
a. Examination Scope
The examiners observed simulator performance with regard to plant fidelity during the examination validation and administration. Attachment 3, Simulator Fidelity Report, documents several minor observations related to simulator fidelity.
b. Findings
No findings of significance were identified.
.5 Examination Security
a. Examination Scope
The examiners reviewed examination security for examination development and during both the onsite preparation week and examination administration week for compliance with the Examination Standards. Plans for simulator security and applicant control were reviewed and discussed with licensee personnel.
b. Findings
No findings of significance were identified.
4OA6 Meetings, Including Exit
The chief examiner presented the examination results to Mr. Michael Romeo of the licensee's management staff on March 13, 2009.
The licensee did not identify any information or materials used during the examination as proprietary.
ATTACHMENT 1:
SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION
KEY POINTS OF CONTACT
Licensee Personnel
W. Schulze
Facility Exam Developer
J. Paradis
Superintendent Operator Training - Initial Programs
M. Romeo
Training Manager
ITEMS OPENED, CLOSED, AND DISCUSSED
Opened
None
Closed
None
Discussed
None