ML17079A517

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
2016 LaSalle County Station Initial License Examination Outline Review Comments
ML17079A517
Person / Time
Site: LaSalle  Constellation icon.png
Issue date: 11/16/2016
From:
NRC/RGN-III
To:
Exelon Generation Co
Shared Package
ML15274A408 List:
References
Download: ML17079A517 (4)
v • d • e


Text

2016 LaSalle Exam Outline Comments COMMENT RESOLUTION

1. Tier 3 of the NRC written exam outline The Q#98 K/A (2.3.04) was changed to 2.1.7 on does not meet NOTE 1 on Form ES-401-1: Form ES-401-3 of the NRC Exam outline. This was there was only 1 Category 1 K/A (Conduct also documented on Form ES-401-4, Record of of Operations) selected for the SRO Rejected K/As.

exam, but there were 2 Category 3 (Radiation Control) K/As.

2. Tier 3 of the NRC written exam outline NRC Exam Q#94 and Q#72 need to be compared and the Cert. Exam both have K/As 2.1.35 for overlap with their corresponding Cert. Exam and 2.3.5 selected. While K/A overlap is questions during exam review.

not prohibited, the questions cannot.

3. Form ES-201-2, Exam Outline Quality Discussed with the Exam Author, who affirmed Checklist is missing an initial under a that the task was completed but the initialing was (Author) for GENERAL item 4.a (PRA and missed. Corrected by initialing the original IPE assessment). All other required document when the hard copies of revised signatures and reviews were outline forms (noted above) were delivered to documented correctly. NRC Region III.
4. Scenario 1 and Cert Exam 1 both have Discussed with the Exam Author.

Rod Withdrawal reactivity manipulations. Revise one of these to avoid duplicating test items.

5. Scenarios 1, 3, 6, and 7 all have Discussed with the Exam Author.

Blowdown events. Explain how the operator actions required to address these are different or revise as appropriate

6. Scenario 2, Cert Exam 2, and Cert Exam 7) Discussed with the Exam Author.

have ATWS events. Revise these as needed to avoid duplicating test items or explain how the operator actions required to address these are sufficiently different.

7. Scenario 3 has the first three events Discussed with the Exam Author.

designated as Optional. Explain why this is appropriate or revise as necessary.

8. Scenario 1 and Cert Exam1 both have Discussed with the Exam Author.

EHC pump events. Revise one of these to avoid duplicating test items or explain how the operator actions required to address these are sufficiently different.

9. Scenario 5, Cert Exam 1, and Cert Exam 4 Discussed with the Exam Author.

have LOCA events. Revise these as needed to avoid duplicating test items or explain how the operator actions

required to address these are sufficiently different.

10. Are the operator actions sufficiently Discussed with the Exam Author.

different for Main Steam Line Leak in Main Steam Tunnel in Scenario 7 and Feedwater Break in the Main Steam Tunnel in Cert Exam7? Please address.

11. Scenarios 1, 7 and Cert Exam1 have CRD Discussed with the Exam Author.

pump failures. Revise one of these to avoid duplicating test items or explain how the operator actions required to address these are sufficiently different.

12. Scenarios 5, 6 and Cert exam 7 have RR Discussed with the Exam Author.

events. Ensure that the operator actions required to address these are sufficiently different or revise accordingly.

13. What is 1VT79YA/B/C, and how is this Discussed with the Exam Author.

addressed in Scenario 6?

14. RO Admin JPM 1 and NRC Exam Q# 67 Discussed with the Exam Author.

(Tier 3 Outline) both reference K/A 2.1.19. Ensure that the operator actions or knowledge required to address these are sufficiently different or revise accordingly.

15. RO Admin JPM 3 refers to K/A 2.2.4.4. Discussed with the Exam Author.

Typographical error - should be 2.2.44?

General Comment - Several Generic K/As are used in conjunction with System K/As; for example, SRO Q#92 (NRC) uses K/A 2.2.44 with 215001, TIPs. ES-301 requires that The walk-through and simulator tests should not be redundant, nor should they duplicate material that is covered on the written examination.

16. RO Admin JPM 4 and NRC Exam Q# 98 Discussed with the Exam Author.

(Tier 3 Outline) both reference K/A 2.3.4.

Ensure that the operator actions or knowledge required to address these are sufficiently different or revise accordingly.

17. SRO Admin JPM 4 and Cert Exam Tier 3 Discussed with the Exam Author.

Written Outline both reference K/A 2.3.11. Ensure that the operator actions or knowledge required to address these are sufficiently different or revise accordingly.

18. Ensure that NRC Systems JPM h and Discussed with the Exam Author.

NRC Exam Q#33 examine different operator actions or knowledges; K/A 209002 is referenced for both.

19. Ensure that NRC In-Plant JPM k, NRC Discussed with the Exam Author.

Exam Q#43, and Cert Exam Q#43 (& 44) examine different operator actions or knowledges; K/A 239002 is referenced for both.

20. Ensure that NRC Systems JPM b and Discussed with the Exam Author.

Cert Exam Q#54 examine different operator actions or knowledges; K/A 201006 is referenced for both.

21. Ensure that NRC Systems JPM g, Cert Discussed with the Exam Author.

Exam JPM c, and Cert Exam Q#40 examine different operator actions or knowledges; K/A 217000 is referenced for both.

22. Scenario #2: one of the two required ATC Discussed with the Exam Author.

malfunctions occurs after the major transient (ARI failure following electric ATWS).

23. Scenario #3: no TS calls for SRO. 301-5 Discussed with the Exam Author.

indicates that all SROs in the US position for this scenario should be N+1 (ATC, SRO, SRO) and already have the requisite 2 TS call minimum.

24. Scenario #3: BOP events will be Discussed with the Exam Author.

contingent on need based upon the N+1 SRO (SRO, ATC, BOP) needing additional I/C malfunctions following their ATC scenario).

25. Scenario #3: one of the two ATC failures Discussed with the Exam Author.

is five control rods remaining out following the scram.

26. Scenario #4: one of the two required BOP Discussed with the Exam Author.

malfunctions occurs after the major transient (HPCS failure to auto start).

27. Scenario #4: only has one TS call for the Discussed with the Exam Author.

SRO in the US position; according to 301-5 all applicants affected by this will receive at least one other TS call in another scenario to bring them up to the minimum. Also malfunctions after EOP entry should influence the operators choice of mitigative strategy; if the BOP can simply manually start the HPCS

pump, it is unlikely that event #9 meets this standard (BOP I/C malfunction credit might be a separate issue).

28. Scenario #5: one of the two ATC failures Discussed with the Exam Author.

is an RPS train failing to de-energize in conjunction with the major transient and scram; the ATC is given a total of 3 I/C malfunctions however one of this is a feed pump oil leak (will need to see detailed actions to see if credit can be given for this).

29. Scenario #6: only has one TS call for the Discussed with the Exam Author.

SRO in the US position; according to 301-5 all applicants affected by this will receive at least one other TS call in another scenario to bring them up to the minimum.

30. There is no spare scenario included in the Discussed with the Exam Author. Confirmed that outline. a spare scenario will be developed.
31. Systems JPM G of the NRC exam Discussed with the Exam Author.

appears to duplicate systems JPM C of the audit (both S-RI-13). Affects both RO and SRO exams.

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML17079A517&oldid=2009943"