ML12045A150: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
StriderTol (talk | contribs) (Created page by program invented by StriderTol) |
StriderTol (talk | contribs) (Created page by program invented by StriderTol) |
||
| Line 17: | Line 17: | ||
=Text= | =Text= | ||
{{#Wiki_filter:Outline Comments for the 2011 DAEC Exam | {{#Wiki_filter:Outline Comments for the 2011 DAEC Exam | ||
: 1) General Comment: | : 1) General Comment: Comments were provided on 3 of the 4 scenario outlines submitted which needed to be addressed, if used, because the bean count could be affected. At the OV, 2 scenarios (3 and 4) were selected for use in the exam due to their discrimination value and bean counts. The remaining scenarios were returned to the licensee. | ||
: 2) Scenario 1: | : 2) Scenario 1: Comments were not addressed because the scenario was not utilized in the examination. | ||
Comments were not addressed because the scenario was not utilized in the examination | : 3) Scenario 2: Comments were not addressed because the scenario was not utilized in the examination. | ||
: 4) Scenario 3: | |||
: Comments were not addressed because the scenario was not utilized in the examination | : a. Event 5: What are the critical Operator actions? This may only be a Tech Spec call for the SRO. This was evaluated and found to be acceptable at the OV (In addition to the Tech Spec call, there were AOP actions required by the operators) | ||
: b. Event 6: Is this a water leak or a steam leak? Im pretty sure its steam based on the critical tasks. This was clarified on the Form ES-D1 to be a steam leak.}} | |||
: | |||
: b. Event 6: Is this a water leak or a steam leak? | |||
-D1 to be a steam leak.}} | |||
Latest revision as of 09:15, 12 November 2019
| ML12045A150 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Duane Arnold  |
| Issue date: | 07/11/2011 |
| From: | NRC/RGN-III |
| To: | NextEra Energy Duane Arnold |
| References | |
| 50-331/11-301 | |
| Download: ML12045A150 (1) | |
Text
Outline Comments for the 2011 DAEC Exam
- 1) General Comment: Comments were provided on 3 of the 4 scenario outlines submitted which needed to be addressed, if used, because the bean count could be affected. At the OV, 2 scenarios (3 and 4) were selected for use in the exam due to their discrimination value and bean counts. The remaining scenarios were returned to the licensee.
- 2) Scenario 1: Comments were not addressed because the scenario was not utilized in the examination.
- 3) Scenario 2: Comments were not addressed because the scenario was not utilized in the examination.
- 4) Scenario 3:
- a. Event 5: What are the critical Operator actions? This may only be a Tech Spec call for the SRO. This was evaluated and found to be acceptable at the OV (In addition to the Tech Spec call, there were AOP actions required by the operators)
- b. Event 6: Is this a water leak or a steam leak? Im pretty sure its steam based on the critical tasks. This was clarified on the Form ES-D1 to be a steam leak.