IR 05000341/2018301: Difference between revisions
StriderTol (talk | contribs) (Created page by program invented by StriderTol) |
StriderTol (talk | contribs) (Created page by program invented by StriderTol) |
||
Line 19: | Line 19: | ||
=Text= | =Text= | ||
{{#Wiki_filter: | {{#Wiki_filter:ril 11, 2018 | ||
==SUBJECT:== | |||
FERMI POWER PLANT, UNIT 2NRC INITIAL LICENSE EXAMINATION REPORT 05000341/2018301 | |||
==Dear Mr. Polson:== | ==Dear Mr. Polson:== | ||
On March | On March 13, 2018, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) completed the initial operator licensing examination process for license applicants employed at your Fermi Power Plant, Unit 2. The enclosed report documents the results of those examinations. Preliminary observations noted during the examination process were discussed on March 2, 2018, with yourself and other members of your staff. An exit meeting was conducted by telephone on March 15, 2018, with members of your staff, and Mr. C. Zoia, Chief Operator Licensing Examiner, to review the proposed final grading of the written examination for the license applicants. During the telephone conversation, the final grading of the written examination for the license applicants was discussed. | ||
An exit meeting was conducted by telephone on March 15, | |||
The administered | The NRC examiners administered an initial license examination operating test during the week of February 26, 2018. The written examination was administered by Fermi Power Plant, Unit 2, training department personnel on March 2, 2018. Two Senior Reactor Operator and two Reactor Operator applicants were administered license examinations. The results of the examinations were finalized on March 13, 2018. Four applicants passed all sections of their respective examinations; two applicants were issued senior operator licenses and two applicants were issued operator licenses. | ||
The administered written examination and operating test, as well as documents related to the development and review (outlines, review comments and resolutions, etc.) of the examination will be withheld from public disclosure until March 2, 2020. This letter, its enclosure, and your response (if any) will be made available for public inspection and copying at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html and at the NRC Public Document Room in accordance with Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations 2.390, Public Inspections, Exemptions, Requests for Withholding. | |||
Sincerely, | Sincerely, | ||
/RA/ | /RA/ | ||
Robert J. Orlikowski, Chief Operations Branch Division of Reactor Safety Docket No. 50-341 License No. NPF-43 | |||
===Enclosures:=== | ===Enclosures:=== | ||
1.OL Examination Report 05000341/ | 1. OL Examination Report 05000341/2018301 2. Post-Examination Comments, Evaluation, and Resolutions 3. Simulation Facility Fidelity Report | ||
REGION III== | REGION III== | ||
Docket No: | Docket No: 50-341 License No: NPF-43 Report No: 05000341/2018301 Licensee: DTE Energy Company Facility: Fermi Power Plant, Unit 2 Location: Newport, MI Dates: February 26, 2018, through March 13, 2018 Examiners: C. Zoia, Senior Operations Engineer - Chief Examiner D. Reeser, Operations Engineer - Examiner Approved by: R. Orlikowski, Chief Operations Branch Division of Reactor Safety Enclosure 1 | ||
50-341 License | |||
- Chief Examiner D. Reeser, Operations Engineer | |||
- Examiner Approved by: | |||
R. Orlikowski, Chief Operations Branch Division of Reactor Safety | |||
=SUMMARY= | =SUMMARY= | ||
Examination | Examination Report 05000341/2018301; 02/26/2018-03/14/2018; DTE Energy Company, | ||
Fermi Power Plant, Unit 2; Initial License Examination Report. | |||
The announced initial operator licensing examination was conducted by regional Nuclear Regulatory Commission examiners in accordance with the guidance of NUREG-1021, | |||
Operator Licensing Examination Standards for Power Reactors, Revision 11. | |||
Examination Summary Four of four applicants passed all sections of their respective examinations. Two applicants were issued senior operator licenses and two applicants were issued operator licenses. | |||
(Section 4OA5.1). | |||
=REPORT DETAILS= | =REPORT DETAILS= | ||
Line 66: | Line 61: | ||
====a. Examination Scope==== | ====a. Examination Scope==== | ||
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC)examiners and members of the facility | The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) examiners and members of the facility licensees staff used the guidance prescribed in NUREG-1021, Operator Licensing Examination Standards for Power Reactors, Revision 11, to develop, validate, administer, and grade the written examination and operating test. The written examination outlines were prepared by the NRC staff and were transmitted to the facility licensees staff. Members of the facility licensees staff prepared the operating test outlines and developed the written examination and operating test. The NRC examiners validated the proposed examination during the week of January 29, 2018, with the assistance of members of the facility licensees staff. During the on-site validation week, the examiners audited two license applications for accuracy. The NRC examiners, with the assistance of members of the facility licensees staff, administered the operating test, consisting of job performance measures and dynamic simulator scenarios, during the period of February 26, 2018, through March 1, 2018. The facility licensee administered the written examination on March 2, 2018. | ||
-1021, | |||
Members of the facility | |||
-site validation week, the examiners audited two license | |||
. | |||
====b. Findings==== | ====b. Findings==== | ||
Line 78: | Line 68: | ||
Less than 20 percent of the proposed examination questions were determined to be unsatisfactory and required modification or replacement. | Less than 20 percent of the proposed examination questions were determined to be unsatisfactory and required modification or replacement. | ||
All changes made to the proposed written examination, were made in accordance with NUREG-1021 , | All changes made to the proposed written examination, were made in accordance with NUREG-1021, Operator Licensing Examination Standards for Power Reactors, and documented on Form ES-401-9, Written Examination Review Worksheet. | ||
On March 8, 2018, the licensee submitted documentation noting that there was one post-examination comment for consideration by the NRC examiners when grading the written examination. The post-examination comment and the NRC resolution for the post-examination comment is included as Enclosure 2 to the report. | |||
- | |||
The written examination outlines and worksheets, the proposed written examination, as well as the final as-administered examination and answer key, will be available in 24 months, electronically in the NRC Public Document Room or from the Publicly Available Records component of NRC's Agencywide Document Access and Management System (ADAMS Accession Number ML17164A400). | |||
The NRC examiners graded the written examination on March 13, 2018, and conducted a review of each missed question to determine the accuracy and validity of the examination questions. | |||
: (2) Operating Test The NRC examiners determined that the operating test, as originally proposed by the licensee, was within the range of acceptability expected for a proposed examination. | |||
Following the review and validation of the operating test, minor modifications were made to several Job Performance Measures (JPMs), and some minor modifications were made to the dynamic simulator scenarios. | |||
In addition, one Senior Reactor Operator (SRO) Administrative JPM required several changes to enhance its clarity and accuracy during exam administration. All changes and related explanatory notes were documented as mark | During administration of the operating test, one Simulator Control Room JPM was replaced after it was found to be flawed. Specifically, critical steps would be met automatically if corrective actions were delayed beyond their nominally expected time. | ||
- | |||
. The revised SRO JPM set was verified to meet all required criteria. Finally, a training building-wide power outage occurred during the administration of a scenario, resulting in an approximately 1-hour delay because all building lighting and simulator power were lost. The scenario was just started, so there was minimal impact on the exam | This flaw was not identified until after the JPM had been administered to several applicants. Thus, another bank JPM was selected, significantly modified, validated, and administered to all applicants. | ||
. All applicants were sequestered until power was restored , hardware impacts were addressed, and the simulator was reset to | |||
. A Condition Assessment Resolution Document 18-21907 was written to document the power loss, and three power losses that subsequently occurred when no NRC simulator exam was in | In addition, one Senior Reactor Operator (SRO) Administrative JPM required several changes to enhance its clarity and accuracy during exam administration. All changes and related explanatory notes were documented as mark-ups to the as-administered JPM file. | ||
-progress. All changes made to the operating test were made in accordance with NUREG | |||
-1021, | Also, a Simulator Control Room JPM assigned to only the Reactor Operator (RO)applicants was administered to both RO and SRO applicants. The administration error was corrected by reassigning an approved JPM originally assigned to be given to all applicants, and administering it only to the RO applicants. The revised SRO JPM set was verified to meet all required criteria. | ||
). The NRC examiners completed the operating test grading on March | |||
Finally, a training building-wide power outage occurred during the administration of a scenario, resulting in an approximately 1-hour delay because all building lighting and simulator power were lost. The scenario was just started, so there was minimal impact on the exam. All applicants were sequestered until power was restored, hardware impacts were addressed, and the simulator was reset to that point in the scenario when the power loss occurred. A Condition Assessment Resolution Document 18-21907 was written to document the power loss, and three power losses that subsequently occurred when no NRC simulator exam was in-progress. | |||
All changes made to the operating test were made in accordance with NUREG-1021, Operator Licensing Examination Standards for Power Reactors, and were documented on Form ES-301-7, Operating Test Review Worksheet. The Form ES-301-7, the operating test outlines (ES-301-1, ES-301-2, and ES-D-1s), and both the proposed and final operating tests, will be available, in 24 months, electronically in the NRC Public Document Room or from the Publicly Available Records component of NRC's Agencywide Document Access and Management System (ADAMS Accession Numbers ML17164A403 and ML17164A400, respectively). | |||
The NRC examiners completed the operating test grading on March 13, 2018. | |||
: (3) Examination Results Two applicants at the SRO level and two applicants at the RO level were administered written examinations and operating tests. | : (3) Examination Results Two applicants at the SRO level and two applicants at the RO level were administered written examinations and operating tests. | ||
* Four applicants passed all portions of their examinations and were issued their respective operating licenses on March 13, 2018. | |||
Four applicants passed all portions of their examinations and were issued their respective operating licenses on March | |||
===.2 Examination Security=== | ===.2 Examination Security=== | ||
====a. Scope==== | ====a. Scope==== | ||
The NRC examiners reviewed and observed the licensee's implementation of examination security requirements during the examination validation and administration to assure compliance with | The NRC examiners reviewed and observed the licensee's implementation of examination security requirements during the examination validation and administration to assure compliance with Title10 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Part 55.49, Integrity of Examinations and Tests. The examiners used the guidelines provided in NUREG-1021, Operator Licensing Examination Standards for Power Reactors, to determine acceptability of the licensees examination security activities. | ||
, | |||
====b. Findings==== | ====b. Findings==== | ||
None. | None. | ||
{{a|4OA6}} | {{a|4OA6}} | ||
==4OA6 Management Meetings== | ==4OA6 Management Meetings== | ||
===.1 Debrief | ===.1 Debrief=== | ||
, and Chief Nuclear Officer , and other staff members of Fermi Power Plant, Unit 2 | The chief examiner presented the examination team's preliminary observations and findings on March 2, 2018, to Mr. K. Polson, Senior Vice President, and Chief Nuclear Officer, and other staff members of Fermi Power Plant, Unit 2. The examiners asked the licensee whether any of the material used to develop or administer the examination should be considered proprietary. No proprietary or sensitive information was identified during the examination or debrief meeting. | ||
. The examiners asked the licensee whether any of the material used to develop or administer the examination should be considered proprietary. No proprietary or sensitive information was identified during the examination or debrief meeting. | |||
===.2 Exit Meeting=== | ===.2 Exit Meeting=== | ||
The chief examiner conducted an exit meeting on March 15, | The chief examiner conducted an exit meeting on March 15, 2018, with Mr. A. Pullam, Training Manager, and other members of the Fermi Power Plant, Unit 2, staff by telephone. The NRCs final exam results were disclosed during the exit meeting. | ||
, staff by telephone. The | |||
ATTACHMENT: | |||
=SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION= | =SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION= | ||
SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION KEY POINTS OF | SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION | ||
KEY POINTS OF CONTACT | |||
: [[contact::K. Polson ]], Senior Vice President and Chief Nuclear Officer | Licensee | ||
: [[contact::L. Bennett]], Operations Director | : [[contact::K. Polson]], Senior Vice President and Chief Nuclear Officer | ||
: [[contact::L. Bennett]], Operations Director | |||
: [[contact::A. Pullam]], Training Manager | : [[contact::A. Pullam]], Training Manager | ||
: [[contact::S. Maglio]], Licensing Manager | : [[contact::S. Maglio]], Licensing Manager | ||
: [[contact::M. Donigian]], Operations Training Lead | : [[contact::M. Donigian]], Operations Training Lead | ||
: [[contact::J. Vanbrunt]], Operations Training | : [[contact::J. Vanbrunt]], Operations Training | ||
: [[contact::S. Schmus]], Operations Training | : [[contact::S. Schmus]], Operations Training | ||
U.S Nuclear Regulatory | U.S Nuclear Regulatory Commission | ||
Commission | |||
: [[contact::C. Zoia]], Chief Examiner | : [[contact::C. Zoia]], Chief Examiner | ||
: [[contact::D. Reeser]], Examiner | : [[contact::D. Reeser]], Examiner | ||
: [[contact::T. Briley ]], Senior Resident Inspector | : [[contact::T. Briley]], Senior Resident Inspector | ||
: [[contact::P. Smagacz]], Resident Inspector ITEMS OPENED, CLOSED, AND DISCUSSED | : [[contact::P. Smagacz]], Resident Inspector | ||
ITEMS OPENED, CLOSED, AND DISCUSSED | |||
Opened, Closed, and Discussed | Opened, Closed, and Discussed | ||
None LIST OF ACRONYMS | None | ||
LIST OF ACRONYMS USED | |||
NRC U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission | JPM Job Performance Measures | ||
RO Reactor Operator | NRC U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission | ||
SRO Senior Reactor Operator | RO Reactor Operator | ||
SRO Senior Reactor Operator | |||
POST-EXAMINATION COMMENT, EVALUATION, AND RESOLUTION | POST-EXAMINATION COMMENT, EVALUATION, AND RESOLUTION | ||
QUESTION No. | QUESTION No. 22 | ||
The plant has been operating at 100 | The plant has been operating at 100 percent power for 300 consecutive days, when the | ||
percent power for 300 consecutive days, when the following events | following events occur: | ||
occur: A reactor scram causes the crew to place the Mode Switch in Shutdown. | * A reactor scram causes the crew to place the Mode Switch in Shutdown. | ||
The MSIVs closed 10 | * The MSIVs closed 10 minutes later. | ||
minutes later. | * RPV Pressure is currently 1095 psig. | ||
RPV Pressure is currently 1095 psig. | * The CRLNO has been directed to maintain RPV Pressure 900-1050 psig. | ||
The CRLNO has been directed to maintain RPV Pressure 900 | How many SRVs are going to be required to restore and maintain RPV pressure in the desired | ||
-1050 psig. | control band considering heat input by DECAY HEAT GENERATION ONLY? | ||
How many SRVs are going to be required to restore and maintain RPV pressure in the desired control band considering heat input by DECAY HEAT GENERATION ONLY? | A. One SRV opening and closing at its Low-Low Set setpoints. | ||
A. One SRV opening and | : [[contact::B. One open SRV will restore RPV pressure in band]], then it can be closed | ||
closing at its Low-Low Set setpoints. | for the duration of the event. | ||
: [[contact::B. One open SRV will restore RPV pressure in band]], then it can be closed for the duration of the | : [[contact::C. One Low-Low Set SRV will be open continuously]], with the second | ||
event. | opening and closing at its Low-Low Set setpoints. | ||
: [[contact::C. One Low-Low Set SRV will be open continuously]], with the second opening and closing at its Low-Low Set setpoints. | D. Both Low-Low Set SRVs will be open continuously with the CRLNO | ||
D. | opening and closing one additional SRV. | ||
SRV. Answer: | Answer: A | ||
The conditions in the stem of the question have caused a High Reactor Pressure. The candidate will have to determine the impact of decay heat generation so as to | Answer Explanation: | ||
The conditions in the stem of the question have caused a High Reactor Pressure. | |||
The candidate will have to determine the impact of decay heat generation so as to correct | |||
percent power, initially the thermal output of the reactor | the High Reactor Pressure and control RPV Pressure in the designated control band for the | ||
will be about | duration of the event. Decay heat produced is at a level dependent on power history. From | ||
100 percent power, 7 percent supplied by decay heat. | a scram at 100 percent power, initially the thermal output of the reactor will be about | ||
Thermal heat output decreases rapidly | 100 percent power, 7 percent supplied by decay heat. Thermal heat output decreases rapidly | ||
to the decay heat level. | to the decay heat level. Eight to ten seconds after the scram, thermal output is due mainly to | ||
Eight to ten seconds after the scram, thermal output is due mainly to decay heat and drops to 7 | decay heat and drops to 7 percent of rated thermal output. After approximately 1 minute, | ||
percent of rated thermal output. | thermal output is 3 to 5 percent of rated and drops to about 2 percent after about 10 minutes. | ||
After approximately | One hour after a scram, decay heat is about 1 percent rated thermal output. The information | ||
minute, thermal output is 3 to 5 | given in the stem of the question indicates that the reactor has been shut down for about | ||
percent of rated and drops to about 2 | minutes, so decay heat generation will be approximately 2 percent. SRV capacity (steam | ||
percent after about | flow) is given in Updated Final Safety Analysis Report Paragraph 5.2.2.3.3.4 as 87E4 lb./hr. (or | ||
minutes. One hour after a scram, decay heat is about 1 | 870,000 lb./hr.) at 1090 psig, which is approximately where the stem of the question has the | ||
percent rated thermal output. | plant. Updated Final Safety Analysis Report Section 1.2.2, Plant Description, shows that rated | ||
The information given in the stem of the question indicates that the reactor has been shut | steam flow at Fermi 2 is 14.9 lb./hr., at 991 psia., 2 percent of this value is 298,000 lb./hr., which | ||
down for about | is within the capacity of one SR | ||
minutes, so decay heat generation will be approximately 2 | : [[contact::V. Therefore]], the candidate should determine that one SRV. | ||
percent. SRV capacity (steam flow) is given in Updated Final Safety Analysis Report | opening and closing at its Low-Low setpoint will be enough to control the steam generated from | ||
Paragraph 5.2.2.3.3.4 as 87E4 lb./hr. (or 870,000 lb./hr.) at 1090 psig, which is approximately where the stem of the question has the plant. Updated Final Safety Analysis Report | decay heat approximately 10 minutes after plant shutdown from 100 percent power operation. | ||
Section 1.2.2, Plant Description, shows that rated steam flow at Fermi 2 is 14.9 lb./hr., at 991 psia., 2 percent of this value is 298,000 lb./hr., which is within the capacity of one SR | |||
: [[contact::V. Therefore]], the candidate should determine that one SRV. opening and closing at its Low | |||
-Low setpoint will be enough to control the steam generated from decay heat approximately 10 | |||
minutes after plant shutdown from 100 | |||
percent power operation. | |||
POST-EXAMINATION COMMENT, EVALUATION, AND RESOLUTION | POST-EXAMINATION COMMENT, EVALUATION, AND RESOLUTION | ||
Distractor | Distractor Explanations: | ||
Distractors are incorrect and plausible because: | |||
B. The candidate could determine that there is no significant decay heat generation | B. The candidate could determine that there is no significant decay heat generation | ||
minutes after shutdown and, once RPV pressure is lowered back in band by opening an SRV, it will | minutes after shutdown and, once RPV pressure is lowered back in band by opening | ||
remain in band with no further SRV actuations. | an SRV, it will remain in band with no further SRV actuations. This is incorrect because | ||
This is incorrect because decay heat, in the 2 | decay heat, in the 2 percent range, exists and will continue to exist at the 1 percent | ||
percent range, exists and will | value one hour after shutdown, so further SRV actuation must occur to control RPV | ||
continue to exist at the 1 | pressure. | ||
C. The candidate could determine that the decay heat generated 10 minutes after | |||
control RPV pressure. C. The candidate could determine that the decay heat generated 10 | shutdown is above the capacity of one, but within the capacity of two Low-Low Set | ||
minutes after shutdown is above the | SRVs. This is a common misconception because most candidates readily remember | ||
capacity of one, but within the capacity of two Low | that decay heat drops to 7 percent within several seconds of a plant shutdown, due to | ||
-Low Set SRVs. This is a common misconception | the decay of delayed neutrons and they determine that 7 percent is the capacity of about | ||
because most candidates readily remember that decay heat drops to 7 | one and a half SRVs. However, as stated above, after approximately 10 minutes, | ||
percent within several seconds of a | thermal output due to decay heat drops to about 2 percent, which is within the capacity | ||
plant shutdown, due to the decay of delayed neutrons and they determine that 7 | of one Low-Low Set SRV. | ||
percent is the capacity of | D. The candidate could determine that the decay heat generated 10 minutes after | ||
shutdown is above the capacity of both Low-Low Set SRVs, which would require the | |||
However, as stated above, after approximately | operator to manually actuate one additional SRV to control RPV pressure in band. | ||
minutes, thermal output due to decay heat drops to about 2 | This is incorrect, however, as stated above, because after approximately 10 minutes, | ||
percent, which is within the capacity of one Low | thermal output due to decay heat drops to about 2 percent, which is within the capacity | ||
-Low Set SRV. | of one Low-Low Set SRV. | ||
D. The candidate could determine that the decay heat generated 10 | |||
minutes after shutdown is above the | |||
capacity of both Low | |||
-Low Set SRVs, which would require the operator to manually actuate one | |||
additional SRV to control RPV pressure in band. This is incorrect, however, as stated above, because | |||
after approximately | |||
minutes, thermal output due to decay heat drops to about 2 | |||
percent, which is within | |||
the capacity of one Low | |||
-Low Set SRV. | |||
Reference Information: | Reference Information: | ||
BR08Sr5 Operational | BR08Sr5 Operational Physics May 2011 - Reactor Operational Physics GFE Student Text, | ||
Physics May 2011 | Page 33; description of decay heat generation after shutdown from 100 percent power. | ||
- Reactor Operational Physics GFE Student Text, Page 33; description of decay heat generation after shutdown from 100 | UFSAR Section 1.2.2, Plant Description. | ||
percent power. UFSAR Section 1.2.2, Plant Description. | |||
UFSAR Section 5.2.2.3.3.4, Safety/Relief Valve Characteristics. | UFSAR Section 5.2.2.3.3.4, Safety/Relief Valve Characteristics. | ||
APPLICANT COMMENT/CONTENTION | APPLICANT COMMENT/CONTENTION | ||
The applicant contended that the question | The applicant contended that the question was not about what the plant will do. | ||
was not about what the plant will do. | |||
FACILITY RESPONSE AND PROPOSED RESOLUTION | FACILITY RESPONSE AND PROPOSED RESOLUTION | ||
Based on the stem of the question, actual plant response | Based on the stem of the question, actual plant response is not the answer. The question is | ||
is not the answer. | about the capacity of SRVs, not about a timeline of events in which an SRV opens. | ||
The question | |||
POST-EXAMINATION COMMENT, EVALUATION, AND RESOLUTION | POST-EXAMINATION COMMENT, EVALUATION, AND RESOLUTION | ||
Valid Question. Answer (A) is correct and the distractors are wrong. Distractor (C) was selected by the applicant. The candidate determined that the decay heat generated 10 | Valid Question. Answer (A) is correct and the distractors are wrong. Distractor (C) was | ||
selected by the applicant. The candidate determined that the decay heat generated 10 minutes | |||
-Low Set SRVs. | after shutdown is above the capacity of one, but within the capacity of two Low-Low Set SRVs. | ||
This is a common misconception because most candidates readily remember that decay heat drops to 7 | This is a common misconception because most candidates readily remember that decay heat | ||
percent within several seconds of a plant shutdown, due to the decay of delayed neutrons , and they determine that 7 | drops to 7 percent within several seconds of a plant shutdown, due to the decay of delayed | ||
percent is the capacity of about one and a | neutrons, and they determine that 7 percent is the capacity of about one and a half SRVs. | ||
half SRVs. | |||
NRC EVALUATION/RESOLUTION | NRC EVALUATION/RESOLUTION | ||
Upon reviewing | Upon reviewing the technical information from the applicant and the facility, the NRC agrees | ||
the technical information from the applicant and the facility, the NRC agrees that answer (A) is the correct answer. | that answer (A) is the correct answer. The decay heat at 10 minutes will be approximately | ||
The decay heat at | percent of rated thermal output, well within the capacity of one SRV opening and closing | ||
minutes will be approximately | at its Low-Low Set setpoints. | ||
percent of rated thermal output | The stem of the question asks How many SRVs are going to be required to restore and | ||
, well within the capacity of one SRV | maintain RPV pressure in the desired control band considering heat input by DECAY HEAT | ||
opening and closing | GENERATION ONLY?, given several conditions. The applicant and the licensee agree that | ||
at its Low-Low Set setpoints | the question is not about providing plant response. The NRC also agrees that the answer | ||
required involves SRV capacity, and not about providing plant response. | |||
CONCLUSION | |||
is not about providing plant response. The NRC also agrees that the answer required | Based the information provided, the NRC concludes that answer (A) is correct answer, per the | ||
original answer key, and the question is considered acceptable as-administered. | |||
Based the information provided, the NRC concludes that | |||
answer (A) is correct answer, per the original answer key, and the question | |||
is considered acceptable as | |||
-administered | |||
. | |||
SIMULATION FACILITY FIDELITY REPORT | SIMULATION FACILITY FIDELITY REPORT | ||
Facility Licensee: | Facility Licensee: Fermi Power Plant, Unit 2 | ||
Fermi Power Plant, Unit 2 | Facility Docket No: 050-341 | ||
Facility Docket No: | Operating Tests Administered: February 26, 2018, through March 1, 2018 | ||
The following documents observations made by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission | |||
February | examination team during the initial operator license examination. These observations do | ||
not constitute audit or inspection findings and are not, without further verification and review, | |||
not constitute audit or inspection findings and are not, without further verification and review, indicative of non | indicative of non-compliance with Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations 55.45(b). These | ||
-compliance with Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations | observations do not affect U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission certification or approval of the | ||
55.45(b). These observations do not affect U.S. Nuclear Regulatory | simulation facility other than to provide information which may be used in future evaluations. | ||
Commission certification or approval | |||
of the simulation facility other than to provide information which may be used in future | |||
evaluations. | |||
No licensee action is required in response to these observations. | No licensee action is required in response to these observations. | ||
During the conduct of the simulator portion of the operating tests, the following items were observed: ITEM DESCRIPTION | During the conduct of the simulator portion of the operating tests, the following items were | ||
observed: | |||
ITEM DESCRIPTION | |||
None | None | ||
3 | |||
}} | }} |
Revision as of 09:21, 21 October 2019
ML18101A244 | |
Person / Time | |
---|---|
Site: | Fermi |
Issue date: | 04/11/2018 |
From: | Robert Orlikowski Division of Reactor Safety III |
To: | Polson K DTE Electric Company |
Zoia C | |
Shared Package | |
ML17164A398 | List: |
References | |
ER 2018301 | |
Download: ML18101A244 (13) | |
Text
ril 11, 2018
SUBJECT:
FERMI POWER PLANT, UNIT 2NRC INITIAL LICENSE EXAMINATION REPORT 05000341/2018301
Dear Mr. Polson:
On March 13, 2018, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) completed the initial operator licensing examination process for license applicants employed at your Fermi Power Plant, Unit 2. The enclosed report documents the results of those examinations. Preliminary observations noted during the examination process were discussed on March 2, 2018, with yourself and other members of your staff. An exit meeting was conducted by telephone on March 15, 2018, with members of your staff, and Mr. C. Zoia, Chief Operator Licensing Examiner, to review the proposed final grading of the written examination for the license applicants. During the telephone conversation, the final grading of the written examination for the license applicants was discussed.
The NRC examiners administered an initial license examination operating test during the week of February 26, 2018. The written examination was administered by Fermi Power Plant, Unit 2, training department personnel on March 2, 2018. Two Senior Reactor Operator and two Reactor Operator applicants were administered license examinations. The results of the examinations were finalized on March 13, 2018. Four applicants passed all sections of their respective examinations; two applicants were issued senior operator licenses and two applicants were issued operator licenses.
The administered written examination and operating test, as well as documents related to the development and review (outlines, review comments and resolutions, etc.) of the examination will be withheld from public disclosure until March 2, 2020. This letter, its enclosure, and your response (if any) will be made available for public inspection and copying at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html and at the NRC Public Document Room in accordance with Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations 2.390, Public Inspections, Exemptions, Requests for Withholding.
Sincerely,
/RA/
Robert J. Orlikowski, Chief Operations Branch Division of Reactor Safety Docket No. 50-341 License No. NPF-43
Enclosures:
1. OL Examination Report 05000341/2018301 2. Post-Examination Comments, Evaluation, and Resolutions 3. Simulation Facility Fidelity Report
REGION III==
Docket No: 50-341 License No: NPF-43 Report No: 05000341/2018301 Licensee: DTE Energy Company Facility: Fermi Power Plant, Unit 2 Location: Newport, MI Dates: February 26, 2018, through March 13, 2018 Examiners: C. Zoia, Senior Operations Engineer - Chief Examiner D. Reeser, Operations Engineer - Examiner Approved by: R. Orlikowski, Chief Operations Branch Division of Reactor Safety Enclosure 1
SUMMARY
Examination Report 05000341/2018301; 02/26/2018-03/14/2018; DTE Energy Company,
Fermi Power Plant, Unit 2; Initial License Examination Report.
The announced initial operator licensing examination was conducted by regional Nuclear Regulatory Commission examiners in accordance with the guidance of NUREG-1021,
Operator Licensing Examination Standards for Power Reactors, Revision 11.
Examination Summary Four of four applicants passed all sections of their respective examinations. Two applicants were issued senior operator licenses and two applicants were issued operator licenses.
(Section 4OA5.1).
REPORT DETAILS
4OA5 Other Activities
.1 Initial Licensing Examinations
a. Examination Scope
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) examiners and members of the facility licensees staff used the guidance prescribed in NUREG-1021, Operator Licensing Examination Standards for Power Reactors, Revision 11, to develop, validate, administer, and grade the written examination and operating test. The written examination outlines were prepared by the NRC staff and were transmitted to the facility licensees staff. Members of the facility licensees staff prepared the operating test outlines and developed the written examination and operating test. The NRC examiners validated the proposed examination during the week of January 29, 2018, with the assistance of members of the facility licensees staff. During the on-site validation week, the examiners audited two license applications for accuracy. The NRC examiners, with the assistance of members of the facility licensees staff, administered the operating test, consisting of job performance measures and dynamic simulator scenarios, during the period of February 26, 2018, through March 1, 2018. The facility licensee administered the written examination on March 2, 2018.
b. Findings
- (1) Written Examination The NRC examiners determined that the written examination, as proposed by the licensee, was within the range of acceptability expected for a proposed examination.
Less than 20 percent of the proposed examination questions were determined to be unsatisfactory and required modification or replacement.
All changes made to the proposed written examination, were made in accordance with NUREG-1021, Operator Licensing Examination Standards for Power Reactors, and documented on Form ES-401-9, Written Examination Review Worksheet.
On March 8, 2018, the licensee submitted documentation noting that there was one post-examination comment for consideration by the NRC examiners when grading the written examination. The post-examination comment and the NRC resolution for the post-examination comment is included as Enclosure 2 to the report.
The written examination outlines and worksheets, the proposed written examination, as well as the final as-administered examination and answer key, will be available in 24 months, electronically in the NRC Public Document Room or from the Publicly Available Records component of NRC's Agencywide Document Access and Management System (ADAMS Accession Number ML17164A400).
The NRC examiners graded the written examination on March 13, 2018, and conducted a review of each missed question to determine the accuracy and validity of the examination questions.
- (2) Operating Test The NRC examiners determined that the operating test, as originally proposed by the licensee, was within the range of acceptability expected for a proposed examination.
Following the review and validation of the operating test, minor modifications were made to several Job Performance Measures (JPMs), and some minor modifications were made to the dynamic simulator scenarios.
During administration of the operating test, one Simulator Control Room JPM was replaced after it was found to be flawed. Specifically, critical steps would be met automatically if corrective actions were delayed beyond their nominally expected time.
This flaw was not identified until after the JPM had been administered to several applicants. Thus, another bank JPM was selected, significantly modified, validated, and administered to all applicants.
In addition, one Senior Reactor Operator (SRO) Administrative JPM required several changes to enhance its clarity and accuracy during exam administration. All changes and related explanatory notes were documented as mark-ups to the as-administered JPM file.
Also, a Simulator Control Room JPM assigned to only the Reactor Operator (RO)applicants was administered to both RO and SRO applicants. The administration error was corrected by reassigning an approved JPM originally assigned to be given to all applicants, and administering it only to the RO applicants. The revised SRO JPM set was verified to meet all required criteria.
Finally, a training building-wide power outage occurred during the administration of a scenario, resulting in an approximately 1-hour delay because all building lighting and simulator power were lost. The scenario was just started, so there was minimal impact on the exam. All applicants were sequestered until power was restored, hardware impacts were addressed, and the simulator was reset to that point in the scenario when the power loss occurred. A Condition Assessment Resolution Document 18-21907 was written to document the power loss, and three power losses that subsequently occurred when no NRC simulator exam was in-progress.
All changes made to the operating test were made in accordance with NUREG-1021, Operator Licensing Examination Standards for Power Reactors, and were documented on Form ES-301-7, Operating Test Review Worksheet. The Form ES-301-7, the operating test outlines (ES-301-1, ES-301-2, and ES-D-1s), and both the proposed and final operating tests, will be available, in 24 months, electronically in the NRC Public Document Room or from the Publicly Available Records component of NRC's Agencywide Document Access and Management System (ADAMS Accession Numbers ML17164A403 and ML17164A400, respectively).
The NRC examiners completed the operating test grading on March 13, 2018.
- (3) Examination Results Two applicants at the SRO level and two applicants at the RO level were administered written examinations and operating tests.
- Four applicants passed all portions of their examinations and were issued their respective operating licenses on March 13, 2018.
.2 Examination Security
a. Scope
The NRC examiners reviewed and observed the licensee's implementation of examination security requirements during the examination validation and administration to assure compliance with Title10 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Part 55.49, Integrity of Examinations and Tests. The examiners used the guidelines provided in NUREG-1021, Operator Licensing Examination Standards for Power Reactors, to determine acceptability of the licensees examination security activities.
b. Findings
None.
4OA6 Management Meetings
.1 Debrief
The chief examiner presented the examination team's preliminary observations and findings on March 2, 2018, to Mr. K. Polson, Senior Vice President, and Chief Nuclear Officer, and other staff members of Fermi Power Plant, Unit 2. The examiners asked the licensee whether any of the material used to develop or administer the examination should be considered proprietary. No proprietary or sensitive information was identified during the examination or debrief meeting.
.2 Exit Meeting
The chief examiner conducted an exit meeting on March 15, 2018, with Mr. A. Pullam, Training Manager, and other members of the Fermi Power Plant, Unit 2, staff by telephone. The NRCs final exam results were disclosed during the exit meeting.
ATTACHMENT:
SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION
SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION
KEY POINTS OF CONTACT
Licensee
- K. Polson, Senior Vice President and Chief Nuclear Officer
- L. Bennett, Operations Director
- A. Pullam, Training Manager
- S. Maglio, Licensing Manager
- M. Donigian, Operations Training Lead
- J. Vanbrunt, Operations Training
- S. Schmus, Operations Training
U.S Nuclear Regulatory Commission
- C. Zoia, Chief Examiner
- D. Reeser, Examiner
- T. Briley, Senior Resident Inspector
- P. Smagacz, Resident Inspector
ITEMS OPENED, CLOSED, AND DISCUSSED
Opened, Closed, and Discussed
None
LIST OF ACRONYMS USED
NRC U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
RO Reactor Operator
SRO Senior Reactor Operator
POST-EXAMINATION COMMENT, EVALUATION, AND RESOLUTION
QUESTION No. 22
The plant has been operating at 100 percent power for 300 consecutive days, when the
following events occur:
- A reactor scram causes the crew to place the Mode Switch in Shutdown.
- The MSIVs closed 10 minutes later.
- RPV Pressure is currently 1095 psig.
- The CRLNO has been directed to maintain RPV Pressure 900-1050 psig.
How many SRVs are going to be required to restore and maintain RPV pressure in the desired
control band considering heat input by DECAY HEAT GENERATION ONLY?
A. One SRV opening and closing at its Low-Low Set setpoints.
- B. One open SRV will restore RPV pressure in band, then it can be closed
for the duration of the event.
- C. One Low-Low Set SRV will be open continuously, with the second
opening and closing at its Low-Low Set setpoints.
D. Both Low-Low Set SRVs will be open continuously with the CRLNO
opening and closing one additional SRV.
Answer: A
Answer Explanation:
The conditions in the stem of the question have caused a High Reactor Pressure.
The candidate will have to determine the impact of decay heat generation so as to correct
the High Reactor Pressure and control RPV Pressure in the designated control band for the
duration of the event. Decay heat produced is at a level dependent on power history. From
a scram at 100 percent power, initially the thermal output of the reactor will be about
100 percent power, 7 percent supplied by decay heat. Thermal heat output decreases rapidly
to the decay heat level. Eight to ten seconds after the scram, thermal output is due mainly to
decay heat and drops to 7 percent of rated thermal output. After approximately 1 minute,
thermal output is 3 to 5 percent of rated and drops to about 2 percent after about 10 minutes.
One hour after a scram, decay heat is about 1 percent rated thermal output. The information
given in the stem of the question indicates that the reactor has been shut down for about
minutes, so decay heat generation will be approximately 2 percent. SRV capacity (steam
flow) is given in Updated Final Safety Analysis Report Paragraph 5.2.2.3.3.4 as 87E4 lb./hr. (or
870,000 lb./hr.) at 1090 psig, which is approximately where the stem of the question has the
plant. Updated Final Safety Analysis Report Section 1.2.2, Plant Description, shows that rated
steam flow at Fermi 2 is 14.9 lb./hr., at 991 psia., 2 percent of this value is 298,000 lb./hr., which
is within the capacity of one SR
- V. Therefore, the candidate should determine that one SRV.
opening and closing at its Low-Low setpoint will be enough to control the steam generated from
decay heat approximately 10 minutes after plant shutdown from 100 percent power operation.
POST-EXAMINATION COMMENT, EVALUATION, AND RESOLUTION
Distractor Explanations:
Distractors are incorrect and plausible because:
B. The candidate could determine that there is no significant decay heat generation
minutes after shutdown and, once RPV pressure is lowered back in band by opening
an SRV, it will remain in band with no further SRV actuations. This is incorrect because
decay heat, in the 2 percent range, exists and will continue to exist at the 1 percent
value one hour after shutdown, so further SRV actuation must occur to control RPV
pressure.
C. The candidate could determine that the decay heat generated 10 minutes after
shutdown is above the capacity of one, but within the capacity of two Low-Low Set
SRVs. This is a common misconception because most candidates readily remember
that decay heat drops to 7 percent within several seconds of a plant shutdown, due to
the decay of delayed neutrons and they determine that 7 percent is the capacity of about
one and a half SRVs. However, as stated above, after approximately 10 minutes,
thermal output due to decay heat drops to about 2 percent, which is within the capacity
of one Low-Low Set SRV.
D. The candidate could determine that the decay heat generated 10 minutes after
shutdown is above the capacity of both Low-Low Set SRVs, which would require the
operator to manually actuate one additional SRV to control RPV pressure in band.
This is incorrect, however, as stated above, because after approximately 10 minutes,
thermal output due to decay heat drops to about 2 percent, which is within the capacity
of one Low-Low Set SRV.
Reference Information:
BR08Sr5 Operational Physics May 2011 - Reactor Operational Physics GFE Student Text,
Page 33; description of decay heat generation after shutdown from 100 percent power.
UFSAR Section 1.2.2, Plant Description.
UFSAR Section 5.2.2.3.3.4, Safety/Relief Valve Characteristics.
APPLICANT COMMENT/CONTENTION
The applicant contended that the question was not about what the plant will do.
FACILITY RESPONSE AND PROPOSED RESOLUTION
Based on the stem of the question, actual plant response is not the answer. The question is
about the capacity of SRVs, not about a timeline of events in which an SRV opens.
POST-EXAMINATION COMMENT, EVALUATION, AND RESOLUTION
Valid Question. Answer (A) is correct and the distractors are wrong. Distractor (C) was
selected by the applicant. The candidate determined that the decay heat generated 10 minutes
after shutdown is above the capacity of one, but within the capacity of two Low-Low Set SRVs.
This is a common misconception because most candidates readily remember that decay heat
drops to 7 percent within several seconds of a plant shutdown, due to the decay of delayed
neutrons, and they determine that 7 percent is the capacity of about one and a half SRVs.
NRC EVALUATION/RESOLUTION
Upon reviewing the technical information from the applicant and the facility, the NRC agrees
that answer (A) is the correct answer. The decay heat at 10 minutes will be approximately
percent of rated thermal output, well within the capacity of one SRV opening and closing
at its Low-Low Set setpoints.
The stem of the question asks How many SRVs are going to be required to restore and
maintain RPV pressure in the desired control band considering heat input by DECAY HEAT
GENERATION ONLY?, given several conditions. The applicant and the licensee agree that
the question is not about providing plant response. The NRC also agrees that the answer
required involves SRV capacity, and not about providing plant response.
CONCLUSION
Based the information provided, the NRC concludes that answer (A) is correct answer, per the
original answer key, and the question is considered acceptable as-administered.
SIMULATION FACILITY FIDELITY REPORT
Facility Licensee: Fermi Power Plant, Unit 2
Facility Docket No: 050-341
Operating Tests Administered: February 26, 2018, through March 1, 2018
The following documents observations made by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
examination team during the initial operator license examination. These observations do
not constitute audit or inspection findings and are not, without further verification and review,
indicative of non-compliance with Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations 55.45(b). These
observations do not affect U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission certification or approval of the
simulation facility other than to provide information which may be used in future evaluations.
No licensee action is required in response to these observations.
During the conduct of the simulator portion of the operating tests, the following items were
observed:
ITEM DESCRIPTION
None
3