Disruption mitigation remains a critical challenge for future tokamaks, where runaway electron formation during the disruption may lead to severe wall damage [1]. Studies have shown that minimizing the hot-tail seed is crucial for achieving runaway electron mitigation in large tokamaks [2]. In this work, we investigate the impact of neutral beam injection (NBI) on the hot-tail runaway electrons during the thermal quench of disruptions in the Tokamak à Configuration Variable (TCV) tokamak. A neutral beam deposition model has been implemented in the \DREAM\ framework [3], accounting for beam geometry, charge-exchange, ionization processes, and energy partition between electrons and ions. The deposition model is benchmarked against analytical calculations [4] and applied to TCV discharges, with free parameters inferred using Bayesian techniques [5]. To isolate the effect of NBI, additional power scans are performed in which free parameters are held constant. These scans demonstrate a clear increase in the electron temperature with increasing NBI power, confirming that NBI influences the thermal quench time. The impact on runaway electron generation is studied using both fluid- and kinetic models of the hot-tail mechanism. While fluid simulations show that increasing NBI initially suppresses hot-tail formation, kinetic simulations reveal a later phase characterized by a larger electric field that instead increases runaway electron production. Overall, the net effect of NBI on hot-tail generation is found to be modest, indicating that NBI has little influence on runaway electron generation through the hot-tail mechanism. However, the results show the importance of competing thermal and electric field dynamics in determining runaway production during the thermal quench. References [1] S. Ratynskaia et al, Plasma Physics and Controlled Fusion (2025), https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-6587/ae1c6c [2] O. Vallhagen et al, Nuclear Fusion (2024), https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1741-4326/ad54d7/meta [3] M. Hoppe et al, Computer Physics Communications (2021), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpc.2021.108098 [4] J.A Rome et al, Nuclear Fusion (2021), https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/0029-5515/14/2/001 [5] A.E Järvinen et al, Jounal of Plasma Physics (2022), https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S0022377822001210/type/journal_article