IR 05000341/2018301
| ML18101A244 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Fermi  |
| Issue date: | 04/11/2018 |
| From: | Orlikowski R J Division of Reactor Safety III |
| To: | Polson K DTE Electric Company |
| Zoia C D | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML17164A398 | List: |
| References | |
| ER 2018301 | |
| Download: ML18101A244 (13) | |
Text
April 11, 2018 Mr. Keith Polson, Senior VP and Chief Nuclear Officer DTE Energy Company Fermi 2 - 260 TAC 6400 North Dixie Highway Newport, MI 48166 SUBJECT: FERMI POWER PLANT, UNIT 2
-NRC INITIAL LICENSE EXAMINATION REPORT 05000341/2018 301
Dear Mr. Polson:
On March 1 3, 201 8, 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 examination s. 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, 201 8 , 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 w as discussed.
The NRC examiners administered an initial license examination operating test during the week of February 26, 201 8. The written examination was administered by Fermi Power Plant, Unit 2, training department personnel on March 2, 201 8. Two Senior Reactor Operator and two Reactor Operator applicants were administered license examinations. The results of the examinations were finalized on March 13, 201 8. Four applicants passed all sections of their respective examinations; two applicants were issued senior operator license s 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 resolution s, etc.) of the examination will be withheld from public disclosure until March 2, 20 20.
K.Polson-2-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/ R obert J. Orlikowski, Chief Operations Branch Division of Reactor Safety Docket No. 50
-341 License No. NPF
-43 Enclosures: 1.OL Examination Report 05000341/201 8 301 2.Post-Examination Comments, Evaluation,and Resolutions 3.Simulation Facility Fidelity Reportcc: Distribution via LISTSERV A.Pullam , Training Manager,Fermi Power Plant, Unit 2 K.Polson-3-Letter t o Keith Po ls on from R obert O rlikowski da ted April 11 , 201 SUBJECT: FERMI POWER PLANT, UNIT 2-NRC INITIAL LICENSE EXAMINATION REPORT 05000341/2018 301 DISTRIBUTION
- Jeremy Bowen RidsNrrDorlLpl3 RidsNrrPMFermi2 Resource RidsNrrDirsIrib Re source Steven West Darrell Roberts Richard Skokowski
Allan Barker DRPIII DRSIII Caroline Randiki
Colleen Schmidt ADAM Accession Number: ML18101A244 OFFICE RIII RIII RIII RIII NAME CZoia:jw ROrlikowski DATE 04/10/18 04/11/18 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY
Enclosure 1 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION III
Docket No:
50-341 License N o: NPF-43 Report No:
05000 341/20 1 8 301 Licensee: DTE Energy Company Facilit y: Fermi Power Plant, Unit 2 Location: Newport, MI Dates: February 2 6, 2018, through March 1 3, 201 8 Examiners: C. Zoia , Senior Operations Engineer
- Chief Examiner D. Reeser, Operations Engineer
- Examiner Approved by:
R. Orlikowski, Chief Operations Branch Division of Reactor Safety 2
SUMMARY
Examination
Report 05000341/2018301
- 02/26/201 8-03/1 4/201 8; 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 1 1. Examination Summary Four of four applicants passed all sections of their respective examinations. Two applicant s were issued senior operator licenses and two applicants were issued operator licenses. (Section 4OA5.1).
3
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 licensee's staff used the guidance prescribed in NUREG
-1021, "Operator Licensing Examination Standards for Power Reactors," Revision 1 1, 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 licensee's staff.
Members of the facility licensee's 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, 201 8, with the assistance of members of the facility licensee's staff. During the on
-site validation week, the examiners audited two license application s for accuracy. The NRC examiners, with the assistance of members of the facility licensee's staff, administered the operating test, consisting of job performance measures and dynamic simulator scenarios, during the period of February 2 6, 2018, through March 1, 201 8. 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 9, "Written Examination Review Worksheet
." On March 8, 201 8 , 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 1 3, 2018, and conducted a review of each missed question to determine the accuracy and validity of the examination questions.
4
- (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 foun d to be flawed. Specifically, critical steps would be met automatically if corrective actions were delayed beyond the ir nominally expected time. Th is flaw was not identified until after the JPM had been administered to several applicants.
Th us , 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
-up s 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. Th e 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 th at point in the scenario whe n 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 7, "Operating Test Review Worksheet." The Form ES 7, the operating test outlines (ES 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 ML17164A40 3 and ML17164A400, respectively
). The NRC examiners completed the operating test grading on March 1 3, 201 8.
- (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 1 3, 201 8.
.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 Title 10 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 licensee
's 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, 201 8 , 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, 201 8, with Mr. A. Pullam , Training Manager , and other members of the Fermi Power Plant, Unit 2
, staff by telephone. The NRC
's final exam results were disclos ed during the exit meeting
. ATTACHMENT:
SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION
SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION KEY POINTS OF CONTAC
T 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 USE
D JPM Job Performance Measures
NRC U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
RO Reactor Operator
SRO Senior Reactor Operator
POST-EXAMINATION COMMENT, EVALUATION, AND RESOLUTION
QUESTION No.
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. Bot h 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
minute, thermal output is 3 to 5
percent of rated and drops to about 2
percent after about
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 Explanation
s: 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
percen t 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
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
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
i s 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
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 involve s 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:
50-3 4 1 Operating Tests Administered:
February 2 6, 2018, through March 1, 201 8 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