ML15167A145
| ML15167A145 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Columbia  |
| Issue date: | 05/05/2015 |
| From: | Vincent Gaddy Operations Branch IV |
| To: | Energy Northwest |
| References | |
| Download: ML15167A145 (2) | |
Text
Attachment 6 OBDI 202 - IOLE Process Rev 1 DRAFT OUTLINE COMMENTS Facility:
CGS First Exam Date:
4/24/15 Written Exam Outline (Date)
Comment Resolution 1
RO Q#48 - K/A was replaced due to could not write a question to this K/A topic. Request more detail.
Exam writer spent a day attempting to correlate High Drywell pressure and Drywell Radiation levels and could not develop a question making this correlation.
2 SRO Q#95,97 - K/As replaced due to Could not write discernable SRO only question. Request more detail.
SRO #95 - While a question could be written, the exam writer could not develop three credible distractors.
SRO #97 - This generic KA applies to both RO and SRO candidates alike. All questions developed could have been deemed to be RO knowledge also.
Administrative JPM Outline (Date)
Comment Resolution 1
The SAG flowchart does not meet the intent of an E-Plan JPM. Which K/A covers SAG knowledge? Need to justify or replace JPM.
This JPM was removed from the exam and replaced with an EP type JPM..
Control Room / In-Plant System JPM Outline (Date)
Comment Resolution 1
S2, S4, & S7 - all have electric plant shifts. Need further justification as to why they meet the various safety functions.
S2 has no electrical plant actions.
S4 does have electrical board actions.
S7 was replaced due to comment 2.
2 S7 has been on both previous exams -
need to replace this JPM due to predictability.
S7 was removed from the exam and a new JPM was developed as a replacement.
3 It does not appear that any ESF systems are actually operated in S2. Need to justify or replace JPM.
The EN designations for this JPM was removed from the outline.
4 Does the simulator model the remote shutdown panel? Does the remote shutdown panel JPM have other in-plant actions?
The operation of RCIC from the RSD panel was removed from the exam and replaced with a different plant JPM.
5 Is P-3 in the RCA - the R count says Added R to this JPM designation.
OBDI 202 - IOLE Process Rev 1 3, but there is no R designation for P-3 Simulator Scenario Outline Comments (Date)
Comment Resolution 1
Only 1 scenario that is going to be run (Scenario 4) has any instrument failures.
Scenarios 1, 2, &3 are all component failure exclusive. Need to replace some Cs with Is.
Added an instrument failure to scenario 1.
I took a look at the event types for the remaining scenarios and noted some that were classified as C should have been classified as I Scenario 2 has two Is; Scenario 3 has one I; Scenario 4 has three Is; Scenario 5 (Spare) has two Is.
2 In general - Critical tasks need to be bounded with some conditions that state by when the task must be accomplished.
In progress.
3 Scenario 1 - I7&I10 are listed as SRO and BOP. Their BOP should be moved to Scenario 2.
Corrected.
4 I2, I5, I8 & I11 only get one I/C in ATC position (3 in BOP position). This leaves us close to missing a requirement if these applicants do not respond to this one event. Need to add I for these applicants at the ATC position.
Added note to scenario guide. Reviewed guide and fairly confident ATC will get his bean.
5 Scenario 1 - what is the reason for the second normal (DG surveillance)?
Removed TSW pump swap normal evolution.
6 Scenario 1 - does the uncoupled rod have verifiable actions?
Yes - fully insert the control rod.
7 Scenario 2 - does not have any I/C failures after the major event designated.
Need to clarify what is being taken credit for or add two malfunctions.
Corrected. Event 8 has a component failure which has been indicated on its D-1.
8 Scenario 3 - DG fails to auto start - are there verifiable actions?
Yes - Start the DGs.
9 Scenario 4 - Is the electrical ATWS truly an instrument failure or is it a component failure?
Yes - relays are failed to give ATWS condition.
10 Scenario 5 - CRD flow controller failure should be I not C.
Corrected.