ML18044A177

2017 Byron Station Initial License Examination Outline Review Comments

ML18044A177
Person / Time
Site:	Byron
Issue date:	12/14/2017
From:	Jesse Seymour, Bielby M NRC/RGN-III/DRS/OLB
To:	Exelon Generation Co
Seymour J
Shared Package
ML17152A381	List: ML18039A553 ML18039A572 ML18039A648 ML18039A664 ML18044A146 ML18044A169 ML18044A173 ML18044A177
References
Download: ML18044A177 (2)

Text

2017 BYRON STATION INITIAL LICENSE EXAMINATION OPERATING TEST OUTLINE REVIEW COMMENTS RO ES-301-1

1. KA 2.1.31 (Ability to locate control room switches, controls, and indications, and to determine that they correctly reflect the desired plant lineup) - Some variation of the same surveillance test - Performing the Off-Site AC Power Availability - was used in 2010, 2012 and 2016.

a. Discussed with facility representative and they will likely replace the surveillance test with a different activity related to the selected K/A

2. KA 2.2.41 (Ability to obtain and interpret station electrical and mechanical drawings) was selected on the 2012 and 2014 NRC Exams, as well as the 2016 Facility Audit Exam.

This appears to be too frequent for the selection process to be random.

a. Discussed with facility representative and they will likely select a different K/A.

SRO ES-301-1

1. Radiation Control - How does the identified activity test KA 2.3.5 (Ability to use radiation monitoring systems, such as fixed radiation monitors and alarms, portable survey instruments, personnel monitoring equipment, etc.) Additionally, it appears that this activity is from the 2012 NRC Exam and not the 2013 NRC Exam.

a. Discussed with facility representative and K/A will be changed to KA 2.3.6 (Ability to approve release permits). Will update previous exam date to 2012.

ES-301-2

1. (f) Supply Non-ESF Bus from ESF Bus was used in 2016 not 2013.

a. Discussed with facility representative and the previous exam date revised to 2016.

Scenario N17-1 ES-D-1

1. Events 8 and 9 (CV Pump trip and AFW start failure) do not appear to be separate creditable failures (no apparent verifiable actions). They appear to be precursors to a 2nd Major event (loss of heat sink/feed and bleed).

a. Discussed with facility representative and they were not taking credit for the events as an instrument or component malfunction. They will likely combine the two events into a single Major event (e.g., Loss of Heat Sink).

Scenario N17-2 ES-D-1

1. Recommend adding another TS event. The same LCO is exercised in events 3 and 5; resulting in little diversity in the evaluation.

a. Discussed with facility representative and they will evaluate adding an additional TS event or replace one of the events with an event affecting a different LCO.

Scenario N17-3 ES-D-1

1. If the crew changes recommended below are not made, remove one of the TS events.

Two of the 5 SROI candidates end up with 5 TS events otherwise. Eliminating one of the events will balance the TS exposure.

a. Discussed with facility representative and they will evaluate making the crew change discussed below.

2017 BYRON STATION INITIAL LICENSE EXAMINATION OPERATING TEST OUTLINE REVIEW COMMENTS Scenario N17-4 ES-D-1

1. Scenarios in both 2014 and 2016 contained ATWS events which required manual control rod insertion with the only difference being the initiating event. The ATWS response in this scenario does not appear does not appear to be significantly different.

a. Discussed with facility representative and no change will be made since the addition of the rod speed malfunction significantly alters the event response.

2. The same 2014 and 2016 scenarios contained a Failure of the Main Turbine Trip with the same response as in the scenario.

a. Discussed with facility representative and they will evaluated changing the event response from initiating a turbine runback to an inability to runback the turbine requiring manual isolation of the Main Steam lines.

3. Events 6 & 7 (HD Pump Trips resulting in Turbine Runback) appear to be nearly identical to Scenario N14-4 Events 4 and 5.

a. Discussed with facility representative and there is a delay between starting the standby pump and its subsequent failure. Considering moving the initial pump trip event to earlier in the scenario.

ES-301-5

1. Recommend swapping the RO applicant (R-1) on Crew A with the SROI applicant (I-3) from Crew C. This will reduce the TS exposure for the SROI candidate who is the SRO for both scenarios in 1 and 3. The realignment will also 4 of the 5 SROI applicants to be evaluated in all three positions (SRO, ATC, and BOP)

a. Facility will evaluate making the recommended crew changes.