ML022700410
| ML022700410 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Fort Calhoun  |
| Issue date: | 03/07/2002 |
| From: | Division of Reactor Safety IV |
| To: | Omaha Public Power District |
| References | |
| 50-285/02-301 | |
| Download: ML022700410 (2) | |
Text
Comments on FCS 6/2001 Initial Exam Draft Outlines [FCS response in red]
Written Exam Outlines S
Written Exam Outline for Ros appears appropriate. [No Changes Needed]
S Written Exam Outline for SROs appears ok except for sampling from the 55.43 area.
55.43 states that the written examination for a senior operator... will include a representative sample from among the following seven items... The draft outlines submitted only sample in 4 of the 7 areas. The outline should be changed to incorporate some additional sample areas in 55.43. [ Two administrative KA items were replaced with items associated with these 55.43 topics for the SRO exam, 2.1.10 (55.43(b)(1) and 2.2.32 (55.43(b)(6)]
Job Performance Measures I am assuming that the B.1 grouping of JPMs are conducted in the simulator. The Type Codes do not indicate this. Nor do the JPMs listed in B.2 [ All B.1 JPMs except for B.1(a) should have the S code for simulator. These have been added.]
Need to verify that JPM Transfer PZR Pressure Control from Manual to Auto is not just a repeat of actions taken in Scenario 2, Event 5. [JPM was replaced]
Also, all the SRO JPMs are identical to the RO. What differentiate between the two.
Suggest a couple JPMs for the SROs that are different. [Two of the SRO JPMs have been replaced with unique JPMs ]
Scenarios Need to submit 301-5 and 301-6 with draft operating exams. [ Unsigned forms are now included.. Signed forms will be included with draft exam]
At least one (1) scenario should either have a loss of SPDS malfunction or in the initial conditions have it OOS. This forces the crew to use alternative indications. [
Scenario two has been modified to have the ERF computer OOS as an initial condition. ]
All ScenariosEnsure TS actions incorporated for the SROs such as taking actions to Bypass a failed Channel. [These SRO actions are detailed in the ES-D-2 forms which are not part of the outline]
Scenario 2 has an ATWS (3 rods stuck out and emergency boration as the reactivity manipulation. Need to change this such that a larger ATWS is seen and the reactivity change by emergency boration is greater and makes an actual power reduction. Or change the malfunction to something else. [ The initial power level for scenario 2 was changed to 80% power (consistent with a long term loss of ERF computer) and the 3 stuck rod failure was replaced by a second NI channel failure to have a tech spec required power reduction to 70% power for the reactivity manipulation.]
Spare Scenario has a reactivity manipulation as realignment of a rod with a group. This would be alright if this was a recovery of a dropped rod. The reactivity change needs to be greater. [This was changed to recovery of a dropped rod]
SRO actions look buried in the outlines, such as TS actions. DO the SROs have involvement in all malfunctions? [Yes, SROs have involvement in all malfunctions These SRO actions are detailed in the ES-D-2 forms which are not part of the outline]
Admin RP area same for SRO and RO. Suggest make different for SRO with great difficulty.
[The SRO RP administrative JPM was changed to RCA enter and exit with inoperable PCMs]