ML12299A089

From kanterella
Revision as of 21:59, 11 November 2019 by StriderTol (talk | contribs) (Created page by program invented by StriderTol)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to navigation Jump to search
NRC Comments on Draft Licensee-Developed Exam (Operating) (Folder 2)
ML12299A089
Person / Time
Site: Beaver Valley
Issue date: 08/31/2012
From: David Silk
Operations Branch I
To: Rudolph W
FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Co
Jackson D
Shared Package
ML12136A033 List:
References
TAC MEU01850
Download: ML12299A089 (2)


Text

Beaver Valley Unit 2 Exam Outline Comments RO 301-1 All four JPMs are the same as the 2010 final outline.

Response: Outline and JPMs were submitted for the 2010 exam but no RO applicants took the exam. Therefore the ~IPMs were not used. However, the outline (and the draft version of the JPMs) were entered into ADAMS and were accessible to the public. Will treat new outline as if 2010 RO admin JPMs exam were administered. Outline will be revised for the 45 day submittal.

Written Exam Outline Comments Same KlAs from last exam: 1,41,53,67,70, 72,91 Same KlAs from 2008 exam: 44, 53, 70, 72, 74, 99 Based up the two comments above, the licensee was directed to re-select KlAs for Q's 53, 70, 72 and any three other questions of their choice.

Three questions related to natural circulation: 2, 11, 26 -licensee will review questions for similarity.

There are three questions related to refueling: 19, 62, 92 - licensee will review questions for similarity.

Scenario Comments/Questions Scenario 1 No comment.

Scenario 2 Events 4&5: Should be combined. Response - will combine.

Scenario 3 Event 2: What are the RO/BOP actions? Response: None. Will change D-1 to reflect change.

Estimated run time? Response: Will monitor during validation.

Scenario 4 Events 1&2 are linked therefore 7 vs 8 malfunctions on Form ES 301-4. Response: Agree. Will change form to reflect comment.

Scenario 5 Event 9: May go away if manual SI occurs as a result of Event 6. Response - Possibility exists but will keep it in the D-1 form.

Beaver Valley 2 Operating Test Comments Admin JPMs SRO A.1.2: Replace - too simplistic.

SRO A.4: Replace with post scenario classification and notification form completion because proposed EPlan JPM was essentially the same as SRO written Question 77.

Simulator JPMs S1: Remove erratic MFRV operation from IC.

S3: Add note about reactor engineering to use board indications and add cue to inform applicant that source range voltage will be checked by another operator.

S5: In Step 7 change note to indicate 15 gallon/% instead of 14.

S6: Add cue at Step 9 to reduce EDG load to 100 KW over five minutes.

S7: Step 7 not critical. Increase initial level of RWST to avoid auto start of pump.

S8: Add steps about re-establishing RHR flow depending upon applicant action.

In-plant JPMs No comments.

Scenarios Scenario 1 Event 4: Add failure of MOV 113A to automatically open.

Scenario 1 Event 5: Add wording about possible entry into AOP for loss of instrument air.

Scenario 2 Event 3: Add description of emergency boration for down power.

Scenario 3 Event 3: Change so that atmospheric steam dump valve will close in manual. This eliminates a real-time Tech Spec call but examiners can ask Tech Spec follow-up questions post-scenario. With this in mind, this scenario may be designated as the backup.

Scenario 4: No comments.

Scenario 5: No comments.