ML17079A517
| ML17079A517 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | LaSalle  |
| Issue date: | 11/16/2016 |
| From: | NRC/RGN-III |
| To: | Exelon Generation Co |
| Shared Package | |
| ML15274A408 | List: |
| References | |
| Download: ML17079A517 (4) | |
Text
2016 LaSalle Exam Outline Comments COMMENT RESOLUTION
- 1. Tier 3 of the NRC written exam outline does not meet NOTE 1 on Form ES-401-1:
there was only 1 Category 1 K/A (Conduct of Operations) selected for the SRO exam, but there were 2 Category 3 (Radiation Control) K/As.
The Q#98 K/A (2.3.04) was changed to 2.1.7 on Form ES-401-3 of the NRC Exam outline. This was also documented on Form ES-401-4, Record of Rejected K/As.
- 2. Tier 3 of the NRC written exam outline and the Cert. Exam both have K/As 2.1.35 and 2.3.5 selected. While K/A overlap is not prohibited, the questions cannot.
NRC Exam Q#94 and Q#72 need to be compared for overlap with their corresponding Cert. Exam questions during exam review.
- 3. Form ES-201-2, Exam Outline Quality Checklist is missing an initial under a (Author) for GENERAL item 4.a (PRA and IPE assessment). All other required signatures and reviews were documented correctly.
Discussed with the Exam Author, who affirmed that the task was completed but the initialing was missed. Corrected by initialing the original document when the hard copies of revised outline forms (noted above) were delivered to NRC Region III.
- 4. Scenario 1 and Cert Exam 1 both have Rod Withdrawal reactivity manipulations. Revise one of these to avoid duplicating test items.
Discussed with the Exam Author.
- 5. Scenarios 1, 3, 6, and 7 all have Blowdown events. Explain how the operator actions required to address these are different or revise as appropriate Discussed with the Exam Author.
- 6. Scenario 2, Cert Exam 2, and Cert Exam 7) 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.
Discussed with the Exam Author.
- 7. Scenario 3 has the first three events designated as Optional. Explain why this is appropriate or revise as necessary.
Discussed with the Exam Author.
- 8. Scenario 1 and Cert Exam1 both have 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.
Discussed with the Exam Author.
- 9. Scenario 5, Cert Exam 1, and Cert Exam 4 have LOCA events. Revise these as needed to avoid duplicating test items or explain how the operator actions Discussed with the Exam Author.
required to address these are sufficiently different.
- 10. Are the operator actions sufficiently 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.
Discussed with the Exam Author.
- 11. Scenarios 1, 7 and Cert Exam1 have CRD pump failures. Revise one of these to avoid duplicating test items or explain how the operator actions required to address these are sufficiently different.
Discussed with the Exam Author.
- 12. Scenarios 5, 6 and Cert exam 7 have RR events. Ensure that the operator actions required to address these are sufficiently different or revise accordingly.
Discussed with the Exam Author.
- 13. What is 1VT79YA/B/C, and how is this addressed in Scenario 6?
Discussed with the Exam Author.
- 14. RO Admin JPM 1 and NRC Exam Q# 67 (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.
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.
Discussed with the Exam Author.
Ensure that the operator actions or knowledge required to address these are sufficiently different or revise accordingly.
Discussed with the Exam Author.
- 17. SRO Admin JPM 4 and Cert Exam Tier 3 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.
Discussed with the Exam Author.
- 18. Ensure that NRC Systems JPM h and NRC Exam Q#33 examine different operator actions or knowledges; K/A 209002 is referenced for both.
Discussed with the Exam Author.
- 19. Ensure that NRC In-Plant JPM k, NRC Exam Q#43, and Cert Exam Q#43 (& 44) examine different operator actions or knowledges; K/A 239002 is referenced for both.
Discussed with the Exam Author.
- 20. Ensure that NRC Systems JPM b and Cert Exam Q#54 examine different operator actions or knowledges; K/A 201006 is referenced for both.
Discussed with the Exam Author.
- 21. Ensure that NRC Systems JPM g, Cert Exam JPM c, and Cert Exam Q#40 examine different operator actions or knowledges; K/A 217000 is referenced for both.
Discussed with the Exam Author.
- 22. Scenario #2: one of the two required ATC malfunctions occurs after the major transient (ARI failure following electric ATWS).
Discussed with the Exam Author.
- 23. Scenario #3: no TS calls for SRO. 301-5 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.
Discussed with the Exam Author.
- 24. Scenario #3: BOP events will be contingent on need based upon the N+1 SRO (SRO, ATC, BOP) needing additional I/C malfunctions following their ATC scenario).
Discussed with the Exam Author.
- 25. Scenario #3: one of the two ATC failures is five control rods remaining out following the scram.
Discussed with the Exam Author.
- 26. Scenario #4: one of the two required BOP malfunctions occurs after the major transient (HPCS failure to auto start).
Discussed with the Exam Author.
- 27. Scenario #4: only has one TS call for the 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 Discussed with the Exam Author.
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 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).
Discussed with the Exam Author.
- 29. Scenario #6: only has one TS call for the 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.
Discussed with the Exam Author.
- 30. There is no spare scenario included in the outline.
Discussed with the Exam Author. Confirmed that a spare scenario will be developed.
- 31. Systems JPM G of the NRC exam appears to duplicate systems JPM C of the audit (both S-RI-13). Affects both RO and SRO exams.
Discussed with the Exam Author.