ML110460709
| ML110460709 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Kewaunee  |
| Issue date: | 02/11/2011 |
| From: | Walton R Operations Branch III |
| To: | |
| References | |
| Download: ML110460709 (2) | |
Text
Kewauanee Initial License Exam 2011 Outline Submittal Comments
- 1. Written Exam Comments: Suggested that last column in 401-2 sheet be used to identify written exam question number so as to better match selected K/A with written exam question.
Licensee Comment: Noted for future use.
- 2. ES 301-5 Sheet for Crew D: Scenario 3, BOP crew position, need to delete 3 from I/C row since Event #3 in scenario is a major, not a component/instrument failure.
Licensee Comment: Will remove 3 from 301-5 sheet, Crew D, 3rd scenario.
- 3. Scenario 1: Need to ensure that BOP gets event 6 after major to ensure proper bean count for applicants. Crews A, B, and C will only perform two scenarios. Dont want to miss an I/C bean for BOP.
Licensee Comment: Post-trip, BOP applicant will perform secondary actions and will identify the AFW failure. The RO performs an attachment that leads him away from AFW panel.
- 4. Scenario 2: Event 5 as written, can not credit this as a component failure for the RO since there are no actions for the RO to take.
Licensee Comment: The RO will report failure of valves to open which changes mitigation strategy. This will cause the RO to stop RHR pumps and ICS pumps (if not previously stopped) as part of another procedure. But will add a failure of a containment valve to close requiring the RO to manually close the valve. This will ensure the RO receives an I/C failure.
- 5. Scenario 3: Event 5, must ensure ATC gets this bean.
Licensee Comment: The ATC will perform an attachment that will check the status of the SI pumps to start. The BOP operator will be on the FW panels and should not get an opportunity to steal this bean.
- 6. Requested to review licensee audit exam outlines, both operating and written to ensure no overlap between licensee audit exam and NRC exam.
Licensee Comment: The audit exam outlines will be provided the week of December 6, 2010 when the as-submitted exam will be submitted for NRC review.
- 7. There are no low power scenarios in this submittal.
Licensee Comment: The audit exam contained a low power scenario. For NRC exams, have not figured a way to put a SRO operator in control room for reactivity additions prior to placing turbine on line. Easier to do low power scenarios in audit exams.
- 8. Admin JPM, Equipment Control: Is there an electrical breaker associated with this tagout review?
Licensee Comment: Yes.
- 9. On ES301-2 Form, it appears that Safety Function 4, Heat Removal From Reactor Core, was chosen twice.
Licensee Comment: One JPM was a primary heat removal and one was a secondary heat removal.
- 10. Does JPM c, Pressurizer Pressure Control malfunction, duplicate Scenario 1, Event 2?
Licensee Comment: Malfunction in JPM and malfunction in Scenario are sufficiently different. (Need to verify during OV.)
- 11. Does JPM d, Rapid Power Reduction, duplicate any actions in any scenarios?
Licensee Comment: Have done Rapid Power Reduction JPM on past NRC exams with downpowers in scenarios and there is sufficient differences between both. (Need to verify during OV.)