IR 05000413/2015301

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Er 05000413/2015301, 05000414/2015301, Operating Test May 18 - 21, 2015 & Written Exam May 28, 2015; Catawba Nuclear Station; Operator License Examinations
ML15194A281
Person / Time
Site: Catawba  Duke Energy icon.png
Issue date: 07/13/2015
From: Eugene Guthrie
Division of Reactor Safety II
To: Henderson K
Duke Energy Corp
References
50-413/15-301, 50-414/15/301
Download: ML15194A281 (25)
v • d • e


Text

UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION uly 13, 2015

SUBJECT:

CATAWBA NUCLEAR STATION - NRC OPERATOR LICENSE EXAMINATION REPORT 05000413/2015301 AND 05000414/2015301

Dear Mr. Henderson:

During the period May 18 - 21, 2015, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) administered operating tests to employees of your company who had applied for licenses to operate the Catawba Nuclear Plant. At the conclusion of the tests, the examiners discussed preliminary findings related to the operating tests and the written examination submittal with those members of your staff identified in the enclosed report. The written examination was administered by your staff on May 28, 2015.

After administering the written examination, your staff discovered that the version of the written examination given to the Reactor Operator (RO) applicants was not NRC approved. The actual as-given written examination administered on May 28, 2015, was the initial examination submittal and did not include a number of significant changes that were made to resolve NRC pre-examination review comments. The NRC performed a comprehensive review of the as-given exam to determine whether it satisfied the requirements of NUREG-1021, Operator Licensing Examination Standards for Power Reactors. This review is included in this report as Enclosure 3. Based on the acceptable quality of the as-given exam, the NRC used the results of this exam in the licensing decisions for the RO applicants.

Four Reactor Operator (RO) and three Senior Reactor Operator (SRO) applicants passed both the operating test and written examination. There were no post-examination comments. A Simulator Fidelity Report is included in this report as Enclosure 2.

During the review of the circumstances involving the administration of the unapproved written examination the NRC determined that a licensee-identified Non-cited Severity Level IV violation of NRC requirements occurred. If you contest this NCV, you should provide a response within 30 days of the date of this examination report, with the basis for your denial, to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, ATTN: Document Control Desk, Washington DC 20555-0001; with copies to the Regional Administrator, Region II; the Director, Office of Enforcement, United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001; and the NRC Resident Inspector at the Catawba Nuclear Station. The initial examination submittal was within the range of acceptability expected for a proposed examination. For the SRO examination, all examination changes agreed upon between the NRC and your staff were made according to NUREG-1021, Operator Licensing Examination Standards for Power Reactors, Revision 9, Supplement 1.

In accordance with 10 CFR 2.390 of the NRCs Rules of Practice, a copy of this letter and its enclosures will be available electronically for public inspection in the NRC Public Document Room or from the Publicly Available Records (PARS) component of the NRCs document system (ADAMS). ADAMS is accessible from the NRC Website at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm.adams.html (the Public Electronic Reading Room).

If you have any questions concerning this letter, please contact me at (404) 997-4662.

Sincerely,

/RA/

Eugene F. Guthrie, Chief Operations Branch 2 Division of Reactor Safety Docket Nos: 50-413, 50-414 License Nos: NPF-35, NPF-52

Enclosures:

1. Report Details 2. Simulator Fidelity Report 3. Examination Validity Analysis

REGION II==

Docket No.: 50-413, 50-414 License No.: NPF-35, NPF-52 Report No.: 05000413/2015301, 05000414/2015301 Licensee: Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC Facility: Catawba Nuclear Station, Units 1 & 2 Location: York, SC 29745 Dates: Operating Test - May 18 - 21, 2015 Written Examination - May 28, 2015 Examiners: Gary Callaway, Chief Examiner, Senior Reactor Technology Instructor Peter Presby, Senior Operations Engineer Joseph Viera, Operations Engineer Approved by: Eugene Guthrie, Chief Operations Branch 2 Division of Reactor Safety Enclosure 1

SUMMARY OF FINDINGS ER 05000413/2015301, 05000414/2015301, Operating Test May 18 - 21, 2015 & Written Exam May 28, 2015; Catawba Nuclear Station; Operator License Examinations.

Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) examiners conducted an initial examination in accordance with the guidelines in Revision 9, Supplement 1, of NUREG-1021, "Operator Licensing Examination Standards for Power Reactors." This examination implemented the operator licensing requirements identified in 10 CFR §55.41, §55.43, and §55.45, as applicable.

Members of the Catawba Nuclear Station staff developed both the operating tests and the written examination.

The NRC administered the operating tests during the period May 18 - 21, 2015. Members of the Catawba Nuclear Station training staff administered the written examination on May 28, 2015. Four Reactor Operators (RO) and three Senior Reactor Operator (SRO) applicants passed both the operating test and written examination.

Due to an error by the licensee, the written examination administered to the applicants on May 28, 2015, was not the version that had been approved by the NRC. This unapproved version of the exam was subsequently reviewed by the NRC and was determined to be valid. There were no post-examination comments.

A licensee-identified non-cited violation of 10 CFR 55.49 was identified for administering an unapproved written examination which compromised the integrity of the examination process.

The violation was characterized as a Severity Level IV consistent with Section 6.4.d. of the NRC Enforcement Policy.

The initial examination submittal was within the range of acceptability expected for a proposed examination.

REPORT DETAILS 4. OTHER ACTIVITIES 4OA5 Operator Licensing Examinations a. Inspection Scope Members of the Catawba Nuclear Station staff developed both the operating tests and the written examination. All examination material was developed in accordance with the guidelines contained in Revision 9, Supplement 1, of NUREG-1021, "Operator Licensing Examination Standards for Power Reactors." The NRC examination team reviewed the proposed examination. Examination changes agreed upon between the NRC and the licensee were made per NUREG-1021 and incorporated into the final version of the Senior Reactor Operator (SRO) examination materials. Because the licensee inadvertently gave the incorrect Reactor Operator (RO) exam, none of the examination review changes were incorporated into the as-given version of the RO examination materials.

The NRC reviewed the licensees examination security measures while preparing and administering the examinations in order to ensure compliance with 10 CFR §55.49, Integrity of examinations and tests.

The NRC examiners evaluated four Reactor Operator (RO) and three Senior Reactor Operator (SRO) applicants using the guidelines contained in NUREG-1021. The examiners administered the operating tests during the period May 18 - 21, 2015.

Members of the Catawba Nuclear Station training staff administered the written examination on May 28, 2015. Evaluations of applicants and reviews of associated documentation were performed to determine if the applicants, who applied for licenses to operate the Catawba Nuclear Station, met the requirements specified in 10 CFR Part 55, Operators Licenses.

The NRC evaluated the performance or fidelity of the simulation facility during the preparation and conduct of the operating tests.

b. Findings One finding of significance was identified and is discussed below.

The NRC determined, using NUREG-1021, that the licensees initial examination submittal was within the range of acceptability expected for a proposed examination.

Four RO applicants and three SRO applicants passed both the operating test and written examination.

Copies of all individual examination reports were sent to the facility Training Manager for evaluation of weaknesses and determination of appropriate remedial training.

The licensee did not submit any post-examination comments. A copy of the final written examination and answer key, with all changes incorporated, may be accessed not

earlier than May 29, 2017, in the ADAMS system (ADAMS Accession Numbers ML15181A229 and ML15181A232).

4OA6 Meetings, Including Exit Exit Meeting Summary On May 21, 2015, the NRC examination team discussed generic issues associated with the operating test with K. Henderson, Site Vice President and members of the Catawba Nuclear Station staff. The examiners asked the licensee if any of the examination material was proprietary. No proprietary information was identified.

On June 6, 2015, the NRC examination team presented inspection findings to S. Tripi.

4OA7 Licensee-Identified Violations The following Severity Level IV violation was identified by the licensee and is a violation of NRC requirements which meets the criteria of the NRC Enforcement Policy, for being dispositioned as a Non-Cited Violation.

Following the facilitys administration of the initial written examination on May 28, 2015, the licensee identified that an earlier version of the examination was inadvertently provided to the RO applicants. The licensee immediately informed the NRC. The earlier version of the examination did not include the changes that were made to resolve NRC comments provided during the preexamination review of the written examination. This earlier version of the examination had not been approved by the NRC for administration to the license applicants.

10 CRF 55.49, Integrity of examinations and tests states, in part, that facility licensees shall not engage in any activity that compromises the integrity of any test or examination required by this part. The integrity of a test or examination is considered compromised if any activity, regardless of intent, affected, or, but for detection, would have affected the equitable and consistent administration of the test or examination.

Contrary to the above, on May 28, 2015, the licensee administered an unapproved RO written examination, an activity that compromised the integrity of the written examination.

The RO applicants did not get the benefit of the question enhancements that occurred during the examination review. The SRO applicants experienced a higher quality exam than that of the RO applicants. This is neither equitable nor consistent. The unapproved version of the exam was subsequently reviewed by the NRC and was determined to be valid. See enclosure 3 to this report to review the analysis of the administered written exam for validity of the exam.

A violation of 10 CFR 55.49 is a violation that potentially impacts the regulatory process, because the examination results are used by the NRC to make licensing decisions. An improperly administered examination has the potential to provide inaccurate information to the NRC regarding the competence of the applicants. There were no actual or potential safety consequences. This violation is being treated as a Severity Level IV non-cited violation consistent with Section 2.3.2.a. of the NRC Enforcement Policy. The violation was entered into the licensees corrective action program as Nuclear Condition report 01931989.

KEY POINTS OF CONTACT Licensee personnel K. Henderson, Site Vice President Bruce Leonard, CNS Nuclear Training Manager Cecil Fletcher, CNS Nuclear Regulatory Affairs Manager Steve Tripi, CNS Nuclear Operations Training Supervisor Paul Simbrat, CNS Nuclear Operations Specialist Berry Foster, CNS Nuclear Operations Manager Wayne Jarman, CNS Nuclear AOM Shift Rusty Miller, CNS Nuclear Control Room Supervisor Bruce Boyette, CNS Nuclear Operations Training Instructor Richard Exley, CNS Nuclear Operations Training Instructor

SIMULATOR FIDELITY REPORT Facility Licensee: Catawba Nuclear Station Facility Docket No.: 50-413, 50-414 Operating Test Administered: May 19 - 22, 2014 This form is to be used only to report observations. These observations do not constitute audit or inspection findings and, without further verification and review in accordance with Inspection Procedure 71111.11, are not indicative of noncompliance with 10 CFR 55.46. No licensee action is required in response to these observations.

No simulator fidelity or configuration items were identified.

Enclosure 2

Examination Validity Analysis The as-given (draft) version contained eleven questions that were originally designated as unsatisfactory by the examiners. They were determined to be unsatisfactory as part of the review of the licensee submitted exam in accordance with NUREG 1021 criteria. As part of the post-exam review of the as-given (draft) exam, the examiners determined that of the eleven questions originally designated unsatisfactory, six of them were determined to have psychometric or job content flaws. The other five unsatisfactory questions were determined to not match the randomly selected knowledge or ability (K/A)

applicable requirements, however they were otherwise satisfactory.

NRC determined that six questions would be deleted with unacceptable flaws and to re-assign the remaining five questions to the specific knowledge and ability (K/A) statements that the questions actually tested. Even though deleting six questions as part of a post-exam resolution is specifically allowed by C. 2.d of ES-501 without further analysis, the attached as-given sample plan summary shows that the as-given exam meets all requirements of form ES-401-2, PWR Examination Outline, and form ES-401-6, Written Examination Quality Checklist, except for the point totals.

Enclosure 3

Question #: 1 EPE007 EK1.05 - Reactor Trip Knowledge of the operational implications of the following concepts as they apply to the reactor trip: (CFR 41.8 / 41.10 / 45.3)

Decay power as a function of time Given the following:

  • Unit 1 entered EP/1/A/5000/ECA-1.1, (Loss of Emergency Coolant Recirculation) following a LOCA outside containment
  • Safety Injection Termination criteria is NOT met o The crew has been directed to determine minimum SI flow per Enclosure 4 (Minimum S/I Flowrate Versus Time After Trip)

Current conditions:

  • The Unit 1 Reactor was tripped 60 minutes ago
  • NCS pressure is 1000 psig.
  • 1B NI pump is running with flow indicated at 320 gpm
  • 1A NV pump is running with flow indicated at 400 gpm Which ONE of the following completes the statements below?

The MINIMUM required injection flowrate to remove current reactor decay heat is _____(1)_____.

The 1B NI Pump _____(2)_____ be secured.

REFERENCE PROVIDED A. 1. 340 gpm 2. will NOT B 1. 340 gpm 2 will C. 1. 360 gpm 2. will D. 1. 360 gpm 2. will NOT NRC Analysis & Resolution for Question #1:

This question is a level of difficulty 1. The first part of the question is valid (determine minimum flow),

but, once this flow is determined, all the applicant has to know to answer the second part is that 400 (the remaining flow after 1B is tripped) is greater than 360. The fact that 400 is greater than 360 is common knowledge.

This question should be removed from the exam, because in its as-given form, it does not discriminate against less than competent applicants.

Question #: 4 APE025 AA2.01 - Loss of Residual Heat Removal System (RHRS)

Ability to determine and interpret the following as they apply to the Loss of Residual Heat Removal System: (CFR: 43.5 /

45.13)

Proper amperage of running LPI/decay heat removal/RHR pump(s)

Given the following:

  • Unit 1 is in Reduced Inventory following refueling
  • The crew has transitioned to Enclosure 8 (Restoring an ND Train to Operation), started 1A ND pump, and reached the following table to determine maximum allowed flow:

NC Level Maximum Allowed ND Flowrate Greater than or equal to 39% 3000 GPM Greater than or equal to 24% 2000 GPM Greater than or equal to 15% 1500 GPM Greater than or equal to 11% 1000 GPM Which ONE of the following completes the statement below?

The crew will NOT exceed a MAXIMUM ND flowrate of _____(1)_____ in order to prevent 1A ND Pump _____(2)_____ .

A. 1. 1500 gpm 2. runout B. 1. 1500 gpm 2. cavitation C. 1. 2000 gpm 2. runout D. 1. 2000 gpm 2. cavitation NRC Analysis & Resolution for Question #4:

This question was designated unsatisfactory because it does not match the K/A. The reason is that there is no connection to pump amperage in the question. It is otherwise a valid question. This question should remain on the exam with the following re-assigned K/A:

APE025 AA2.07 - Loss of Residual Heat Removal System (RHRS)

Ability to determine and interpret the following as they apply to the Loss of Residual Heat Removal System: (CFR: 43.5 /

45.13)

Pump cavitation

Question #: 8 APE054 AK1.01 - Loss of Main Feedwater (MFW)

Knowledge of the operational implications of the following concepts as they apply to Loss of Main Feedwater (MFW): (CFR 41.8 / 41.10

/45.3)

MFW line break depressurizes the S/G (similar to a steam line break)

Given the following:

  • A Feed Line Break has occurred on Unit 2
  • 2A S/G pressure is 600 PSIG and decreasing
  • 2B, 2C and 2D S/G pressures are 860 PSIG and decreasing
  • Containment pressure is 2.8 PSIG and increasing
  • NC system Tavg is 565°F and decreasing
  • NC system pressure is 1980 PSIG and decreasing Based on the conditions above, which ONE of the following completes the statements below?

A Feed Water Isolation signal _____(1)_____ been generated.

A Main Steam Isolation signal _____(2)_____ been generated.

A. 1. has 2. has NOT B. 1. has NOT 2. has C. 1. has 2. has D. 1. has NOT 2. has NOT NRC Analysis & Resolution for Question #8:

This question was designated unsatisfactory because it does not match the K/A. The reason is that this question does not compare the effects of steam and feed breaks. It is otherwise valid. This question should remain on the exam with the following re-assigned K/A:

013 K4.03 - Engineered Safety Features Actuation System (ESFAS)

Knowledge of ESFAS design feature(s) and/or interlock(s) which provide for the following:

Main Steam Isolation System

Question #: 24 APE076 AK2.01 - High Reactor Coolant Activity Knowledge of the interrelations between the High Reactor Coolant Activity and the following: (CFR 41.7 / 45.7)

Process radiation monitors Given the following:

  • Unit 1 is in Mode 3 at EOL.
  • NC temperature is 557°F.
  • NC system boron concentration is 2200 ppmB.
  • NV letdown flow is 75 gpm.
  • 1EMF-18 (568 KK, 56 NC Filter 1A) countrate is increasing.

Chemistry reports:

  • Isotopic analysis shows high levels of Cobalt 60 is present in the NC system.
  • Iodine concentration has remained stable since the unit was shutdown.

Which ONE of the following describes:

(1) The cause of the above conditions?

(2) The required action(s), in accordance with AP/1/A/5500/018, (High Activity in Reactor Coolant)?

A. 1. Failed fuel 2. Ensure at least one mixed bed demineralizer is in service B. 1. Failed fuel 2. Isolate all demineralizers and place second NC filter in service C. 1. Crud burst 2. Ensure at least one mixed bed demineralizer is in service D. 1. Crud burst 2. Isolate all demineralizers and place second NC filter in service NRC Analysis & Resolution for Question #24:

This question was designated unsatisfactory because it does not match the K/A. The applicant does not have to know anything about radiation monitors to determine the answer. Diagnosis of the information is based on the given chemistry report information. It is otherwise valid. This question should remain on the exam with the following re-assigned K/A:

APE076 AK3.01 - High Reactor Coolant Activity Knowledge of the reasons for the following responses as they apply to the High Reactor Coolant Activity:

RCS differentiating activity due to fission products and due to corrosion products, from chemistry report

Question #: 26 WE08 EK3.3 - Pressurized Thermal Shock Knowledge of the reasons for the following responses as they apply to the (Pressurized Thermal Shock)

(CFR: 41.5 / 41.10, 45.6, 45.13)

Manipulation of controls required to obtain desired operating results during abnormal, and emergency situations.

Given the following:

  • A Small-Break LOCA has occurred on Unit 1
  • Containment pressure is 1.2 PSIG
  • NC system pressure is 400 PSIG
  • EP/1/A/5000/FR-P.1 (Response To Imminent Pressurized Thermal Shock) has been implemented
  • SI Termination criteria per FR-P.1 has been met Which ONE of the following completes the statement below?

To terminate Safety Injection, FR-P.1 directs the operator to reset

_____(1)_____ and stop _____(2)_____ .

A. 1. Safety Injection ONLY 2. both NI pumps and all but one NV pump ONLY B. 1. Safety Injection AND the Sequencers 2. both NI pumps, both ND pumps and all but one NV pump C. 1. Safety Injection ONLY 2. both NI pumps and all but one NV pump ONLY D. 1. Safety Injection AND the Sequencers 2. both NI pumps, both ND pumps and all but one NV pump NRC Analysis & Resolution for Question #26:

This question was designated unsatisfactory because it does not match the K/A. The question does not ask anything that is unique to pressurized thermal shock. The question can be answered based on knowledge of safety injection (SI) termination. It is otherwise valid. This question should remain on the exam with the following re-assigned K/A:

WE02 EA1.1 - SI Termination Ability to operate and / or monitor the following as they apply to the (SI Termination)

Components, and functions of control and safety systems, including instrumentation, signals, interlocks, failure modes, and automatic and manual features.

Question #: 29 SYS004 A2.26 - Chemical and Volume Control System Ability to (a) predict the impacts of the following malfunctions or operations on the CVCS; and (b) based on those predictions, use procedures to correct, control, or mitigate the consequences of those malfunctions or operations: (CFR: 41.5/ 43/5 / 45/3 / 45/5)

Low VCT pressure Given the following:

  • A malfunction of 1NV-224 (H2 Sup to VCT Press Reg Vlv) has isolated the VCT Hydrogen supply Which ONE of the following completes the statements below?

As VCT pressure decreases, NCP #1 Seal leakoff flow will _____(1)_____ .

NV pump suction _____(2)_____ automatically transfer to the FWST as a result of low VCT pressure.

A. 1. decrease 2. will B. 1. decrease 2. will NOT C. 1. increase 2. will D. 1. increase 2. will NOT NRC Analysis & Resolution for Question #29:

This question was designated unsatisfactory because it does not match the K/A. This is an abilities category A2 K/A that only tests the (a) portion (predict the impact) of the K/A knowledge. This is not acceptable per ES-401 D.2.A. It is otherwise valid. The second part of the question requires the operator to know that auto swap of the charging pump (NV) suction is not based on a pressure value, but a level input. This question should remain on the exam with the following re-assigned K/A:

SYS004 A1.06 - Chemical and Volume Control System Ability to predict and/or monitor changes in parameters (to prevent exceeding design limits) associated with operating the CVCS controls including:

VCT level

Question #: 38 SYS013 K4.09 - Engineered Safety Features Actuation System (ESFAS)

Knowledge of ESFAS design feature(s) and/or interlock(s) which provide for the following : (CFR: 41.7)

Spurious trip protection Which ONE of the following describes features of the Engineered Safety Features Actuation System (ESFAS) which are designed to prevent spurious actuations?

A loss of _____(1)_____ Vital I&C channel(s) will NOT result in an actuation.

Hi Containment Pressure Safety Injection signal logic requires _____(2)_____

channels above setpoint for actuation.

A. 1. one 2. 2 of 3 B 1. one 2 2 of 4 C. 1. two 2. 2 of 3 D. 1. two 2. 2 of 4 NRC Analysis & Resolution for Question #38:

This question does not have credible distractors because of the answer subsets: If C is true then A is also true. If D is true then B is also true.

This question should be removed from the exam, because in its as-given form, C and D are not credible distractors. In its as-given form, it does not discriminate against less than competent applicants.

Question #: 39 SYS022 A4.01 - Containment Cooling System (CCS)

Ability to manually operate and/or monitor in the control room: (CFR: 41.7 / 45.5 to 45.8)

CCS fans Given the following:

  • Unit 1 is at 100% RTP
  • The following Lower Containment Ventilation Units (LCVU) are operating in low speed:

o LCVU 1A o LCVU 1B o LCVU 1D

  • Upper Containment Ventilation Unit (UCVU) 1C is the only operating UCVU
  • Containment pressure is at 0.2 psig
  • LCVU 1D then trips on overcurrent Which ONE of the following describes:

(1) the next required action for providing additional containment cooling, per OP/1/A/6450/001, (Containment Ventilation Systems), in addressing the above conditions; AND (2) if this action is NOT successful, AND no further operator actions are taken, which LCO entry, or alarm condition, will FIRST be reached for containment pressure?

A. 1. Start LCVU 1C in low speed, AND start ALL UCVUs 2. LCO 3.6.4 (Containment Pressure)

B 1. Start LCVU 1C in low speed, AND start ALL UCVUs 2 Annunciator LIT which instructs operators to initiate high speed for LCVUs C. 1. Start LCVU 1C in low speed ONLY 2. LCO 3.6.4 (Containment Pressure)

D. 1. Start LCVU 1C in low speed ONLY 2. Annunciator LIT which instructs operators to initiate high speed for LCVUs NRC Analysis & Resolution for Question #39:

This question does not have credible distractors. It is not reasonable that one tripped fan must be replaced with several fans. The only credible response is to start the same kind of fan that was lost, or like-for-like..

This question should be removed from the exam, because in its as-given form, answers A and B are not credible distractors. In its as-given form, it does not discriminate against less than competent applicants.

Question #: 59 SYS028 K2.01 - Hydrogen Recombiner and Purge Control System (HRPS)

Knowledge of bus power supplies to the following: (CFR: 41.7)

Hydrogen recombiners Which ONE of the following completes the statements below?

Containment Hydrogen Recombiners receive power from a(n) _____(1)_____

Motor Control Center.

Containment Hydrogen Recombiners should not be placed in service if Containment Hydrogen concentration is greater than or equal to _____(2)_____ .

A. 1. unit 2. 4%

B 1. unit 2 6%

C. 1. essential 2. 4%

D. 1. essential 2. 6%

NRC Analysis & Resolution for Question #59:

This question does not have credible distractors because of the answer subsets: If A is true then B is also true. If C is true then D is also true.

This question should be removed from the exam, because in its as-given form, A and C are not credible distractors. In its as-given form, it does not discriminate against less than competent applicants.

Question #: 60 SYS041 K6.03 - Steam Dump System (SDS)/Turbine Bypass Control Knowledge of the effect of a loss or malfunction on the following will have on the SDS: (CFR: 41.7 / 45.7)

Controller and positioners, including ICS, S/G, CRDS Given the following:

  • Unit 1 has tripped from 100% power
  • 1A Rx Trip Breaker is OPEN
  • 1B Rx Trip Breaker is CLOSED Which ONE of the following completes the statements below?

Steam Dumps will be operating to control NC system temperature at _____(1)_____ degrees F by modulating the _____(2)_____ .

A. 1. 557 2. condenser dumps ONLY B 1. 557 2 condenser and atmospheric dumps C. 1. 560 2. condenser dumps ONLY D. 1. 560 2. condenser and atmospheric dumps NRC Analysis & Resolution for Question #60:

This question has no correct answer because it is technically incorrect. The steam dump load rejection controller, which will be controlling RCS temperature in this case, is a proportional-only controller. The RCS temperature will vary based on decay heat, and will not be controlled at any specific temperature.

This question should be removed from the exam, because in its as-given form, there is no correct answer.

Question #: 75 GEN2.4 2.4.25 - GENERIC - Emergency Procedures / Plan Emergency Procedures / Plan Knowledge of fire protection procedures. (CFR: 41.10 / 43.5 / 45.13)

Given the following:

  • The shift has just completed a Fire Brigade drill
  • The entire Fire Brigade participated and brought all necessary equipment to fight a simulated electrical fire in the Unit 2 Turbine Building basement Which ONE of the following completes the statements below?

Per RP/0/B/5000/029 (Fire Brigade Response), PT/0/B/4600/032 (Fire Brigade Equipment Inspection/Inventory) _____(1)_____ required to be performed following the drill.

If performed, PT/0/B/4600/032 will be forwarded to the _____(2)_____ .

A. 1. is 2. Operations Site Fire Marshal B 1. is 2 Emergency Planning Manager C. 1. Is NOT 2. Operations Site Fire Marshal D. 1. Is NOT 2. Emergency Planning Manager NRC Analysis & Resolution for Question #75:

This question is a level of difficulty 1. It is common knowledge that equipment should be properly put away after it is used. It is general employee knowledge that the emergency planning manager does not keep track of fire equipment.

This question should be removed from the exam, because in its as-given form, it does not discriminate against less than competent applicants.

Overall Evaluation of Form ES-401-2, PWR Examination Outline The revised sample plan meets all NUREG 1021 requirements except for the total number of questions (69 instead of 75).

Overall Evaluation of Form ES-401-6, Written Examination Quality Checklist The only deviation from the eleven items on Form ES-401-6 is the required number of questions (criterion 11).

Conclusion of Draft Exam Validity After analysis, the draft version of the RO written exam meets the acceptability standards of NUREG-1021, Rev. 9 because the examination still meets all NUREG-1021 requirements except for the total number of questions. Deleting six questions as part of a post-exam resolution is specifically allowed by C. 2.d of ES-501 without further analysis.

ES-401 PWR Examination Outline Form ES-401-2 Facility: Catawba as-given exam Date of Exam: 5/28/2015 RO K/A Category Points SRO-Only Points Tier Group K K K K K K A A A A G A2 G* Total 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 * Total 1. 1 1 3 3 3 3 3 16 6 Emergency &

Abnormal 2 1 1 3 N/A 1 2 N/A 1 9 4 Plant Evolutions Tier Totals 2 4 6 4 5 4 25 10 1 2 2 1 2 3 3 5 2 2 2 3 27 5 2.

Plant 2 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 8 3 Systems Tier Totals 3 2 2 3 4 3 6 3 2 3 4 35 8 3. Generic Knowledge and Abilities 1 2 3 4 9 1 2 3 4 7 Categories 2 2 3 2 Note: 1. Ensure that at least two topics from every applicable K/A category are sampled within each tier of the RO and SRO-only outlines (i.e., except for one category in Tier 3 of the SRO-only outline, the Tier Totals in each K/A category shall not be less than two).

2. The point total for each group and tier in the proposed outline must match that specified in the table.

The final point total for each group and tier may deviate by +/-1 from that specified in the table based on NRC revisions.

The final RO exam must total 75 points and the SRO-only exam must total 25 points.

3. Systems/evolutions within each group are identified on the associated outline; systems or evolutions that do not apply at the facility should be deleted and justified; operationally important, site-specific systems/evolutions that are not included on the outline should be added. Refer to Section D.1.b of ES-401 for guidance regarding the elimination of inappropriate K/A statements.

4. Select topics from as many systems and evolutions as possible; sample every system or evolution in the group before selecting a second topic for any system or evolution.

5. Absent a plant-specific priority, only those K/As having an importance rating (IR) of 2.5 or higher shall be selected.

Use the RO and SRO ratings for the RO and SRO-only portions, respectively.

6. Select SRO topics for Tiers 1 and 2 from the shaded systems and K/A categories.

7.* The generic (G) K/As in Tiers 1 and 2 shall be selected from Section 2 of the K/A Catalog, but the topics must be relevant to the applicable evolution or system. Refer to Section D.1.b of ES-401 for the applicable K/As.

8. On the following pages, enter the K/A numbers, a brief description of each topic, the topics importance ratings (IRs)

for the applicable license level, and the point totals (#) for each system and category. Enter the group and tier totals for each category in the table above; if fuel handling equipment is sampled in other than Category A2 or G* on the SRO-only exam, enter it on the left side of Column A2 for Tier 2, Group 2 (Note #1 does not apply). Use duplicate pages for RO and SRO-only exams.

9. For Tier 3, select topics from Section 2 of the K/A catalog, and enter the K/A numbers, descriptions, IRs, and point totals (#) on Form ES-401-3. Limit SRO selections to K/As that are linked to 10 CFR 55.43.

ES-401 Written Examination Quality Checklist Form ES-401-6 Facility: Catawba as-given exam Date of Exam: 5/28/2015 Exam Level: RO SRO Initial

Item Description a b* c 1. Questions and answers are technically accurate and applicable to the facility. X 2. a. NRC K/As are referenced for all questions. X b. Facility learning objectives are referenced as available.

3. SRO questions are appropriate in accordance with Section D.2.d of ES-401 X 4. The sampling process was random and systematic (If more than 4 RO or 2 SRO questions X were repeated from the last 2 NRC licensing exams, consult the NRR OL program office).

5. Question duplication from the license screening/audit exam was controlled X as indicated below (check the item that applies) and appears appropriate:

__ the audit exam was systematically and randomly developed; or

__ the audit exam was completed before the license exam was started; or

__ the examinations were developed independently; or

__ the licensee certifies that there is no duplication; or

__ other (explain)

6. Bank use meets limits (no more than 75 percent Bank Modified New X from the bank, at least 10 percent new, and the rest new or modified); enter the actual RO / SRO-only 42% 3% 55%

question distribution(s) at right.

7. Between 50 and 60 percent of the questions on the RO Memory C/A X exam are written at the comprehension/ analysis level; the SRO exam may exceed 60 percent if the randomly 46 54%

selected K/As support the higher cognitive levels; enter the actual RO / SRO question distribution(s) at right.

8. References/handouts provided do not give away answers X or aid in the elimination of distractors.

9. Question content conforms with specific K/A statements in the previously approved X examination outline and is appropriate for the tier to which they are assigned; deviations are justified.

10. Question psychometric quality and format meet the guidelines in ES Appendix B. X 11. The exam contains the required number of one-point, multiple choice items; the total is correct and agrees with the value on the cover sheet.

Printed Name / Signature Date a. Author ____________________________________________________ _______

b. Facility Reviewer (*) ____________________________________________________ _______

c. NRC Chief Examiner (#) ____________________________________________________ _______

d. NRC Regional Supervisor ____________________________________________________ _______

Note: * The facility reviewers initials/signature are not applicable for NRC-developed examinations.

  1. Independent NRC reviewer initial items in Column c; chief examiner concurrence required.
Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=IR_05000413/2015301&oldid=2031279"