ML21113A002
| ML21113A002 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Columbia  |
| Issue date: | 03/04/2021 |
| From: | Greg Werner Operations Branch IV |
| To: | Energy Northwest |
| References | |
| 50-397/21-02 50-397/OL-21 | |
| Download: ML21113A002 (1) | |
Text
Attachment 6 OBDI 202 - IOLE Process Rev 3 PROPOSED OUTLINE COMMENTS Facility:
CGS First Exam Date:
2/22/21 Written Exam Outline (Date)
Comment Resolution 1
Rejected K/A question 22. I will allow the change, but you have written an SRO level question to this K/A in 2017.
No action necessary Administrative JPM Outline (Date)
Comment Resolution 1
The descriptions of A1 and A5 are identical.
A5 must be written to the SRO level, so the JPMs should be different.
Replaced with modified bank JPM.
2 Is A9 time critical?
Yes, noted a time critical 3
A3. OFR should be FOR. can not should be cannot.
Corrected typos 4
A9. CLSSIFY should be CLASSIFY Corrected typo Control Room / In-Plant System JPM Outline (Date)
Comment Resolution 1
Though not a strict requirement, I would like to see either P1 or P2 as alternate path. As of now, none of the in-plants are alternate path, and would like to see one, and one that is performed by the upgrades.
Made P3 an alternate path and have the upgrade perform P3.
2 The (E) designation is for emergency or abnormal in-plant. None of the simulator JPMs should carry this designation.
Removed the designation.
3 The Upgrade cannot perform both S6 and P1 since they are both safety function 4.
According to NUREG 1021, all five SRO-U systems must serve different safety functions.
Changed the upgrade to perform P3 instead of P1.
Simulator Scenario Outline Comments (Date)
Comment Resolution 1
Scenario 1, it is possible that events 4 and 5 are a single event. Ill need to see it in validation.
Verified separate events