IR 05000416/2013302

ER 05000416/13-302; 11/8/2013 - 11/21/2013; Grand Gulf Nuclear Station; Initial Operator Licensing Examination Report

ML13336B037
Person / Time
Site:	Grand Gulf
Issue date:	12/02/2013
From:	Vincent Gaddy Division of Reactor Safety IV
To:	Mulligan K J Entergy Operations
Apger G W
References
50-416/13-302
Download: ML13336B037 (9)

Text

December 2, 2013

Kevin Mulligan Vice President Operations Entergy Operations, Inc. Grand Gulf Nuclear Station P.O. Box 756 Port Gibson, MS 39150

SUBJECT: GRAND GULF NUCLEAR STATION - NRC EXAMINATION REPORT 05000416/2013302

Dear Mr. Mulligan:

On November 14, 2013, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) completed an initial operator license examination at Grand Gulf Nuclear Station. The enclosed report documents the examination results and licensing decisions. The preliminary examination results were discussed on November 14, 2013, with Mr. J. Miller, and other members of your staff. A telephonic exit meeting was conducted on November 21, 2013 with Mr. S. Reeves, Operations Lead Exam Writer, who was provided the NRC licensing decisions.

The examination included the evaluation of eight applicants for instant senior reactor operator licenses. The license examiners determined all of eight applicants satisfied the requirements of 10 CFR Part 55, and the appropriate licenses have been issued. There were two post examination comments submitted by your staff, the enclosure contains details of this report. No findings were identified during this examination. In accordance with Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) 2.390, "Public Inspections, Exemptions, Requests for Withholding," a copy of this letter, its enclosure, and your response (if any) will be available electronically for public inspection in the NRC's Public Document Room or from the Publicly Available Records (PARS) component of the NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS). ADAMS is accessible from the NRC Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html (the Public Electronic Reading Room).

Sincerely,/RA/ Vince G. Gaddy, Chief Operations Branch Division of Reactor Safety Docket: 50-416 License: NPF-29

Enclosure:

NRC Examination Report 05000416/2013302

w/Attachments:

1. Supplemental Information 2. NRC Resolution to the Grand Gulf Nuclear Station Post Examination Comments cc w/enclosure: Electronic Distribution Electronic distribution by RIV: Regional Administrator (Marc.Dapas@nrc.gov) Deputy Regional Administrator (Steven.Reynolds@nrc.gov) DRP Director (Kriss.Kennedy@nrc.gov) DRP Deputy Director (Troy.Pruett@nrc.gov) DRS Director (Tom.Blount@nrc.gov) DRS Deputy Director (Jeff.Clark@nrc.gov) Senior Resident Inspector (Rich.Smith@nrc.gov) Resident Inspector (Blake.Rice@nrc.gov) GG Administrative Assistant (Alley.Farrell@nrc.gov) Branch Chief, DRP/C (Don.Allen@nrc.gov) Senior Project Engineer (Ray.Azua@nrc.gov) Public Affairs Officer (Victor.Dricks@nrc.gov) Public Affairs Officer (Lara.Uselding@nrc.gov) Project Manager (Alan.Wang@nrc.gov) Branch Chief, DRS/TSB (Ray.Kellar@nrc.gov) RITS Coordinator (Marisa.Herrera@nrc.gov) ACES (R4Enforcement.Resource@nrc.gov) Regional Counsel (Karla.Fuller@nrc.gov) Technical Support Assistant (Loretta.Williams@nrc.gov) Congressional Affairs Officer (Jenny.Weil@nrc.gov) RIV/ETA: OEDO (Brett.Rini@nrc.gov) Regional State Liaison Officer (Bill.Maier@nrc.gov) NSIR/DPR/EP (Eric.Schrader@nrc.gov) ROPreports ADAMS: No Yes SUNSI Review Complete Reviewer Initials: VGG dll Publicly Available Non-Sensitive Non-publicly Available Sensitive SOE:OB OE:OB SOE:OB STI:TTC SGarchow GApger TBuchanan GCallaway /RA/SGarchow for /RA/SGarchow for /RA/ /RA/ 11/26/13 11/26/13 12/2/13 11/26/13 C:PB C:OB DAllen VGaddy /RA/ /RA/ 12/2/13 12/2/13 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY T=Telephone E=E-mail F=Fax Enclosure U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION REGION IV Docket: 50-416 License: NPF-29 Report: 05000416/2013302 Licensee: Entergy Operations, Inc. Facility: Grand Gulf Nuclear Station Location: Waterloo Road Port Gibson, Mississippi 39150 Dates: November 8 to November 14, 2013 Inspectors: S. Garchow, Chief Examiner G. Callaway, Senior Training Instructor, G. Apger, Operations Engineer T. Buchanan, Operations Engineer Approved By: Vince G. Gaddy, Chief Operations Branch Division of Reactor Safety Enclosure

SUMMARY OF FINDINGS

ER 05000416/2013302; November 8 to November 21, 2013; Grand Gulf Nuclear Station; Initial Operator Licensing Examination Report.

NRC examiners evaluated the competency of eight applicants for instant senior reactor operator licenses at Grand Gulf Nuclear Station. The licensee developed the examinations using NUREG-1021, "Operator Licensing Examination Standards for Power Reactors," Revision 9, Supplement 1. The written examination was administered by the licensee on November 8, 2013. NRC examiners administered the operating tests on November 11 to November 14, 2013.

The examiners determined that all eight applicants satisfied the requirements of 10 CFR Part 55, and the appropriate licenses have been issued.

A. NRC-Identified and Self-Revealing Findings

None.

B. Licensee-Identified Violations

None.

REPORT DETAILS

4OA5 Other Activities (Initial Operator License Examination)

.1 License Applications

a. Scope

NRC examiners reviewed all license applications submitted to ensure each applicant satisfied relevant license eligibility requirements. Examiners also audited three of the license applications in detail to confirm that they accurately reflected the subject applicant's qualifications. This audit focused on the applicant's experience and on-the-job training, including control manipulations that provided significant reactivity changes.

b. Findings

No findings were identified.

.2 Examination Development

a. Scope

NRC examiners reviewed integrated examination outlines and draft examinations submitted by the licensee against the requirements of NUREG-1021. The NRC examination team conducted an onsite validation of the operating tests.

b. Findings

NRC examiners provided outline, draft examination and post-validation comments to the licensee. The licensee satisfactorily completed comment resolution prior to examination administration. NRC examiners determined the written examinations and operating tests initially submitted by the licensee were within the range of acceptability expected for a proposed examination.

.3 Operator Knowledge and Performance

a. Scope

On November 8, 2013, the licensee proctored the administration of the written examinations to all eight applicants. The licensee staff graded the written examinations, analyzed the results, and presented their analysis to the NRC on November 18, 2013.

The NRC examination team administered the various portions of the operating tests to all applicants on November 11 to November 14, 2013.

b. Findings

No findings were identified. All applicants passed the written examination and all parts of the operating tests. The final written examinations and post examination analysis may be accessed in the ADAMS system under the accession numbers noted in the attachment. There were two post examination comments as documented in the licensee submittal.

.4 Simulation Facility Performance

a. Scope

The NRC examiners observed simulator performance with regard to plant fidelity during examination validation and administration.

b. Findings

No findings were identified.

.5 Examination Security

a. Scope

The NRC examiners reviewed examination security for examination development during both the onsite preparation week and examination administration week for compliance with 10 CFR 55.49 and NUREG-1021. Plans for simulator security and applicant control were reviewed and discussed with licensee personnel.

b. Findings

No findings were identified.

4OA6 Meetings, Including Exit

The chief examiner presented the preliminary examination results to Messrs. Jay Miller, General Manager Plant Operations, Jeff Gerard, Operations Manager, Jerry Giles, Training Manager, and other members of the staff on November 14, 2013. A telephonic exit was conducted on November 21, 2013 between Mr. Steve Garchow, Chief Examiner, and Mr. Steve Reeves, Operations Exam Writer. The licensee did not identify any information or materials used during the examination as proprietary.

A1-

SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION

KEY POINTS OF CONTACT

Licensee Personnel

M. Rasch, Superintendent Operations Training

S. Reeves, Operations Exam Writer

K. Grillis, Operations Exam Writer

M. Pait, Operations Instructor

NRC Personnel

Richard Smith, Senior Resident Inspector

ADAMS DOCUMENTS REFERENCED

Accession No. ML13330A453 - FINAL WRITTEN EXAMS Accession No. ML13330A432 - FINAL OPERATING TEST Accession No. ML13324B069 - POST EXAM ANALYSIS

Attachment 2 NRC Resolution to the Grand Gulf Nuclear Station Post Examination Comments

A complete text of the licensee's post examination analysis and comments can be found in ADAMS under Accession Number (ML13324B069).

RO QUESTION # 50

COMMENT:

The licensee recommended accepting distractor 'A' as correct in addition to distractor 'B'.

This question involved providing the applicant with a set of plant conditions including the loss of battery bus 11DA with Control Rod Drive (CRD) pump 'A' operating.

The applicants were then asked what effect the loss of 11DA would have on the CRD pump 'A' circuit breaker.

The bases for the comment is that distractor 'A' is ambiguous and could be interpreted as being correct due to the ambiguity.

NRC RESOLUTION:

Distractor 'A' for this question states the CRD 'A' breaker "will not be capable of any remote or local operation-" and distractor 'B' states the breaker "can be opened, closed, and reopened once manually, at the breaker."

The intent of distractor 'A' was that the term "local operation" would include both the electrical and manual modes of operation at the breaker cubicle.

This makes this distractor incorrect since the breaker can be operated manually at the breaker cubicle.

However, distractors 'B' and 'C' use the term "manually" implying this term is distinctly different than the term "locally".

If distractor "A' is defined as electrical operation using the local control switch only (i.e. does not include manually operating), than distractor 'A' is correct since the breaker cannot be operated electrically from the control room or at the breaker locally.

Because of the way the distractors are written, the NRC agrees they are ambiguous and therefore, accepts distractors 'A' and 'B' as both being correct.

SRO QUESTION # 93

COMMENT:

In this question, the applicant is given a set of plant conditions and is required to select the correct procedure to implement based on those conditions.

The licensee recommended accepting distractor 'D' as correct in addition to distractor 'A'.

The bases for this recommendation is that the stem states a "spurious IP Condenser Hotwell Level Low signal-occurs due to a relay failure."

The "IP Condenser Hotwell Level Low" alarm typically results in a loss of all condensate pumps and the feedwater pumps would then trip on low suction pressure.

Consequently, a reactor scram would occur due to the loss of feedwater.

The original correct answer is distractor 'A', "implement EOP

EP-2, RPV Control'.

The licensee argues distractor 'D', implement the Alarm Response Instruction is also correct since the feedwater pumps would not be lost on the spurious actuation of a single condenser low level relay.

This is because there is a two-out-of-three logic required to be met and the actuation of a single relay would not satisfy the logic.

NRC RESOLUTION:

The NRC referenced electrical drawing E-1148-001, revision 13, Condensate Pump C003A-N, and E-1148, revision 14, Condensate Auxiliary Relays, since these drawings contain the relay contacts in question and are typical of all three condensate pumps.

Attachment 2 A review of these drawings indicate the alarm given in the stem, "IP Condenser Hotwell Level Low", is actuated by one of three relays; 63X/105, 63X/106, and 63X/107.

If two of these relays actuate, then relay 63X-1/105 actuates initiating the sequence of events as described above.

However, the actuation of only one of the referenced relays would result in a "IP Condenser Hotwell Level Low" alarm with no loss of condensate pumps since the two-out-of-three logic for the condensate pump trip is not satisfied.

The review of the drawings also indicates a failure of relay 63X-1/105 would result in the loss of the condensate pumps, however the "IP Condenser Hotwell Level Low" alarm would not annunciate off this relay.

Because the stem states the "IP Condenser Hotwell Level Low" alarm has annunciated and there is only a single relay failure, relay 63X-1/105 could not have actuated.

Therefore, the condensate pumps would not trip, the feedwater pumps would remain in service, and there would be no reactor scram.

Because there is no loss of feedwater or reactor scram, the EOP's would not be entered making distractor 'A' incorrect.

Therefore, the Alarm Response Instruction would be the governing procedure for the SRO.

The NRC concludes distractor 'D' is the only correct answer.