ML16152A313

2016-04 - Draft Outline Comments

ML16152A313
Person / Time
Site:	Diablo Canyon
Issue date:	04/25/2016
From:	Vincent Gaddy Operations Branch IV
To:
References
Download: ML16152A313 (5)

Text

DRAFT OUTLINE COMMENTS Facility: Diablo Canyon First Exam Date: April 18, 2016 Written Exam Outline (Review done January 25,2016)

Comment Resolution RO outline, Rejected K/A Tier 2 group 1, New Chief Examiner assigned. All outline 073 K5.03. Correctly identified that the comments addressed through development verbiage did not match the listed K/A, of draft written examination.

which should have been K3.01. Wrote question to K3.01. However, the 1 tier/group table totals still show it is on a K5 question, thus the total number of K3 in T2G1 should be 3 and the total number of K5 is T2G1 should be 2.

Skyscraper was updated correctly with this change.

Be cognizant of repeating questions New Chief Examiner assigned. All outline from the last 2 written exams because comments addressed through development 2 10 questions on this exam have of draft written examination.

identical K/As from the previous 2 written exams.

3 questions in tier 3 have identical K/As New Chief Examiner assigned. All outline in the RO section as the SRO section, comments addressed through development including 1 which was a replacement for of draft written examination.

a rejected K/A (SRO rejected 2.3.5, replaced with 2.2.12). Ensure that these 3

are different questions at the proper levels and if not then replace KAs as necessary to eliminate any potential overlap of knowledge asked for each question.

Delete the password from the ES-401-3 New Chief Examiner assigned. All outline 4 table, in conduct of ops section RO comments addressed through development exam outline. of draft written examination.

Administrative JPM Outline (Review done January 25,2016)

Comment Resolution 1 None Control Room / In-Plant System JPM Outline (Review done January 25,2016)

Comment Resolution OBDI 202 - IOLE Process Rev 2

P-1 JPM from 2012 same title as P-3 for New Chief Examiner assigned. All outline this years exam (perform local start of a comments addressed through development DG-alt path) yet classified as different of draft operating test.

1 SF. This JPM cant be SF8 since DG start is SF6, also system is 068 which would be wrong as well.

Rev 9 form used for all three applicant New Chief Examiner assigned. All outline types (the ES-301-2 you submitted is a comments addressed through development rev 9 form). The EN JPM is required for of draft operating test.

2 all three applicant types (ie > 1 > 1 > 1).

Please resubmit with correct forms.

Ensure all three types get this JPM.

JPM S2 is also an E type JPM for type New Chief Examiner assigned. All outline 3 code, please add. comments addressed through development of draft operating test.

Why is SF9 not ever used on the NRC New Chief Examiner assigned. All outline 4 exams? Last three did not have a SF9 comments addressed through development JPM. of draft operating test.

How do you pick the upgrade JPMs? On New Chief Examiner assigned. All outline 5 the last several NRC exams, 4/5 SFs comments addressed through development match for the SRO-U JPMs picked. of draft operating test. OBDI 202 - IOLE Process Rev 2

Simulator Scenario Outline Comments (Review done January 25,2016)

Comment Resolution General comments on scenarios: New Chief Examiner assigned. All outline a) No CT tables for any scenario. comments addressed through development Will send examples (as of draft operating test.

discussed in workshop) to licensee for CT, bounding criteria, and basis for each.

b) Too many normal events that have minimal grading value and take too much time in the scenarios. The reason that one for one substitutions of Normal and/or Reactivity events was allowed in Rev 9 of NUREG-1021 was because of these two factors. It is okay to use one or 1 so provided they dont take too much time and they have higher numbers of verifiable actions on which to grade the competency of an applicant but one on every scenario does not allow the examiners to adequately determine license decisions.

c) There is way too much overlap on the scenario events and CTs for this exam and the previous two NRC exams. Too much to itemize in this form. Sending separate spreadsheet of overlaps and will discuss required changes on the call.

Scenario 1 New Chief Examiner assigned. All outline a) looks like very long scenario-did comments addressed through development it validate at 90 minutes or do of draft operating test.

you know yet?

b) On the summary page 2 of D-1 it states that applicable short action TS calls are included.

What does short action mean?

2 c) Is there a time associated with restoring seal flow where it is acceptable to do so? If so then how do we ensure the scenario is outside of that time so CT-27 is valid?

d) Why do you lose a DG on fuel failure? OBDI 202 - IOLE Process Rev 2

e) How can you fail CT-24-energize one bus prior to exiting this procedure? Does not seem performance based. The performance measure does not seem discriminating to me.

Discuss with licensee.

f) Need to discuss the TCOA discussion on page 4. I am not sure this is legally defendable as one big TCOA. The PRA may have numbers for restoring power for the coping time, but do you need power to isolate the seals? If not then how are these connected? Is the TCOA bases of 54 minutes really based on the 54 minutes to restore inventory control? If so is this an FSAR commitment or a PRA risk assumption?

Scenario 1 event 4 used on 2012 N/A 3

Scenario 1 NRC exam-FYI only.

Scenario 2 New Chief Examiner assigned. All outline a) Scenario 2, critical task CT-48. comments addressed through development Need to better define what of draft operating test.

controlling temperature and pressure actually means.

b) ECG-what are these calls? Can 4 we replace this with a TS call?

c) CT-1 is repeat from 2014 exam Scenario1-FYI. Also, you need to define before emergency boration is required in the CT table.

d)

Scenario 3 New Chief Examiner assigned. All outline a) CT-36 may take too long to comments addressed through development complete? Validated yet? It of draft operating test.

doesnt look very discriminating either.

b) CT-36-how long does it take to get from 33% RWST level to 4 5

%?

c) Where is the challenge to a SF for CT-9? need to define what the minimum number of ASW pumps is.

d) Change event 2 from OC trip to shaft shear 6 Scenario 4 OBDI 202 - IOLE Process Rev 2

a) Event 2 change to shaft shear of pump from OC trip b) What SF is challenged for CT-10? It is not clear in the D-1.

c) CT-10 already on another scenario-need a different CT.

Scenario 5 New Chief Examiner assigned. All outline a) TS call using ECG-need an comments addressed through development actual TS call here of draft operating test.

b) CT-1 already used on another scenario c) CT-2 need a tighter band on this CT. Is there really a challenge to the SF? If not then it should not be on the exam.

d) CT-11 what is the challenge to the SF? Many of the CTs in this submittal are tied to procedure transitions and this is a last resort for measurable performance indicators and therefore is not discriminating enough to be on the NRC exam.

If there is no actual challenge to a SF then how does it discriminate and how is it actually critical?

e) I am not sure I understand the TCOA notes. Discuss with licensee. OBDI 202 - IOLE Process Rev 2