ML072960405
| ML072960405 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Brunswick  |
| Issue date: | 07/31/2007 |
| From: | - No Known Affiliation |
| To: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| 50-324/07-301, 50-325/07-301 50-324/07-301, 50-325/07-301 | |
| Download: ML072960405 (81) | |
Text
"
I ADMINISTRATIVE DOCUMENTS (Yellow Paper) 1.
Exam Preparation Checklist ES-201-1 2.
Exam Outline Quality Checklist ES-201-2
~
3.
Exam Security Agreement(s)
ES-201-3 -:
4.
Administrative Topics Outline (Final)
ES-301-1/
5.
Control Room Systems & Facility Walk-through Test Outline (Final)
ES-301-2 v-6.
Operating Test Quality Check Sheet ES-301-3 7.
Simulator Scenario Quality Check Sheet ES-301-4 ~
8.
Transient and Event Checklist ES-301-5.--
9.
Competencies Checklist ES-301-6 i-:
10.
Written Exam Quality Check Sheet ES-401-6 ~
11.
Written Exam Review Worksheet ES-401-9/
12.
Written Exam Grading Quality Checklist ES-403-t.*/
13.
Post-Exam Check Sheet ES-501-1../
BSEfoq-605~
~
14.
Facility Submittal Letter. Lj... JO-c2trtJ 't:
[vi g - / -.c> 9 (KJ -SEPCr-r-06=;i) ~
/' l< D.I... !J /T;t/(!..H M E AJ.-r.s-3
/'
BRUNSWICK JULY-AUG EXAM - 325,324/2007-301 ADMINISTRATIVE DOCUMENTS
ES-201 Examination Preparation Checklist Form ES-201-1 Facility:
BRWSW,lcK 200t"J-3 0 1 Date of Examination: :fuly ;)tM'1 Developed by: Written - Facility IZI NRC 0 II Operating - Facility Gd' NRC 0 Target Chief Date*
Task Description (Reference)
Examiner's Initials
-180 1.
Examination administration date confirmed (C.1.a; C.2.a and b) mJ3
-120 2.
NRC examiners and facility contact assigned (C.1.d; C.2.e) m£
-120 3.
Facility contact briefed on security and other requirements (C.2.c) fJ1EJ
-120 4.
Corporate notification letter sent (C.2.d) n1b
[-90]
[5.
Reference material due (C.1.e; C.3.c; Attachment 2)]
fYfl3
{-75}
6.
Integrated examination outline(s) due, including Forms ES-201-2, ES-201-3, ES-301-1, ES-301-2, ES-301-5, ES-D-1's, ES-401-1/2, ES-401-3, and rYffJ ES-401-4, as applicable (C.1.e and f; C.3.d)
{-70}
{7.
Examination outline(s) reviewed by NRC and feedback provided to facility
~
licensee (C.2.h; C.3.e)}
{-45}
8.
Proposed examinations (including written, walk-through JPMs, and scenarios, as applicable), supporting documentation (including Forms ES-301-3, ES-301-4, ES-301-5, ES-301-6, and ES-401-6, and any Form mE ES-201-3 updates), and reference materials due (C.1.e, f, g and h; C.3.d)
-30 9.
Preliminary license applications (NRC Form 398's) due (C.1.1; C.2.g; tYf8 ES-202)
-14 10.
Final license applications due and Form ES-201-4 prepared (C.1.1; C.2.i; mB ES-202)
-14 11.
Examination approved by NRC supervisor for facility licensee review MP (C.2.h; C.3.f)
-14 12.
Examinations reviewed with facility licensee (C.1.j; C.2.f and h; C.3.g) vvt6
-7 13.
Written examinations and operating tests approved by NRC supervisor O~:
rwi5 (C.2.i; C.3.h)
Wt~ I11S 6
f
-7 14.
Final applications reviewed; 1 or 2 (if >10) applications audited to confirm
~ l\\pr5 "......."
qualifications / eligibility; and examination approval and waiver letters sent
.l\\1tf:>
(C.2.i; Attachment 4; ES-202, C.2.e; ES-204)
-7 15.
Proctoring/written exam administration guidelines reviewed f\\P6 with facility licensee (C.3.k)
-7
- 16. Approved scenarios, job performance measures, and questions V~
distributed to NRC examiners (C.3.i)
- Target dates are generally based on facility-prepared examinations and are keyed to the examination date identified in the corporate notification letter. They are for planning purposes and may be adjusted on a case-by-case basis in coordination with the facility licensee.
[Applies only] {Does not apply} to examinations prepared by the NRC.:
ES-201, Page 24 of 27
ES-201 Examination Outline Quality Checklist
\\;1'1 Rn\\EN t="J Nlft,...
iJ?h'1/o'?
Form ES-201-2 Facilitv:
Brunswick Date of Examination:
July/Aug 2007 Item Task Description Initials a
tt....J c#
1.
a.
Verify that the outline(s) fit(s) the appropriate model per ES-401.
(() IIIf'
\\IU17 b.
Assess whether the outline was systematically and randomly prepared in accordance
~
W with Section 0.1 of ES-401 and whether all KiA categories are appropriately sampled.
Sf)
Jl43 R
Assess whether the outline over-emphasizes any systems, evolutions, or generic topics.
~~
I c.
Sf)
T d.
Assess whether the justifications for deselected or rejected KiA statements are IA",\\jj T
appropriate.
E N
s,f) 2.
a.
Using Form ES-301-5, verify that the proposed scenario sets cover the required number lit
)
of normal evolutions, instrument and component failures, technical specifications, and 5D I1J:{)
S major transients.
I b.
Assess whether there are enough scenario sets (and spares) to test the projected M
number and mix of applicants in accordance with the expected crew composition and
)
U rotation schedule without compromising exam integrity; and ensure that each applicant 1/1 can be tested using at least one new or significantly modified scenario, that no L
scenarios are duplicated from the applicants' audit test(s), and scenarios will not be A
repeated on subsequent days.
59 vwB T
c.
To the extent possible, assess whether the outline(s) conform(s) with the qualitative and AI-J 0
quantitative criteria specified on Form ES-301-4 and described in Appendix D.
R 50
'N~
3.
a.
Verify that systems walk-through outline meets the criteria specified on Form ES-301-2:
(1) the outline(s) contain(s) the required number of control room and in-plant tasks, W
distributed among the safety functions as specified on the form
/
(2) task repetition from the last two NRC examinations is within the limits specified on T
the form, (3)*
no tasks are duplicated from the applicants' audit test(s)
!If
)
(4) the number of alternate path, low-power, emergency and RCA tasks meet the
'/VfJ criteria on the form.
SO b.
Verify that the administrative outline meets the criteria specified on Form ES-301-1:
(1) the tasks are distributed among the topics as specified on the form JIll (2) at least one task is new or significantly modified
~tV~
(3) no more than one task is repeated from the last two NRC licensing examinations 5.9 c.
Determine if there are enough different outlines to test the projected number and mix of vf applicants and ensure that no items are duplicated on subsequent days.
So 4.
a.
Assess whether plant-specific priorities (including PRA and IPE insights) are covered in
~fl'1l?
the appropriate exam section.
5D G
b.
Assess whether the 10CFR 55.41/43 and 55.45 sampling is appropriate.
.,n "1'M3 E
c.
Ensure that KiA importance ratings (except for plant-specific priorities) are at least 2.5.
,;.')
~
N E
d.
Check for duplication and overlap among exam sections.
>0 ~
R e.
Check the entire exam for balance of coverage.
5'0
'0 A
L f.
Assess whether the exam fits the appropriate job level (RO or SRO).
Sf) ~ NiB J/;nMed NameI S~oa"""
Date a.
Author Steven Dennis I
~ L '
/J h--
- -/S-<J?
b.
Facility Reviewer (*)
t1fIINts T~/ h
~U 17-/,-t?7 c.
NRC Chief Examiner (#)
N\\/1.A,*1?,ml:<;! r17oJ.-C(1 ~~ :>
0'8/03-lafiXl d.
NRC Supervisor
/Z.rN 4~/4/~
~R/c'J NOTE:
- Independent NRC reviewer initial items in Column *c*, chief examiner concurrence required.
NUREG-1021, Revision 9
ES-201 Examination Outline Quality Checklist Facility:
Brunswick Date of Examination:
JulV/AUQ 2007 Item Task Description a
Initials b*
c#
/
/
11/
51) a.
Verify that the out/ine(s} fit(s} the appropriate model per E8-401.
b.
Assess whether the outline was systematically and randomly prepared in accordance with Section 0.1 of ES401 and whether all KiA categories are appropriately sampled.
c.
Assess whether the outline over-emphasizes any systems, evolutions, or generic topics.
a.
Using FOrm E5-301-5, verify that the proposed scenario sets cover the required number of normal evolutions, instrument and component failures, technical specifications, and major transients.
c.
To the extent possible, assess whether the outline(s} conform(s) with the qualitative and quantitative criteria specified on Form ES-301-4 and described in Appendix D.
d.
Assess whether the justifications for deselected or rejected KiA statements are appropriate.
b.
Assess whether there are enough scenario sets (and spares) to test the projected number and mix of applicants in accordance with the expected crew composition and rotation schedule without compromising exam integrity; and ensure that each applicant can be tested using at least one new or significantly modified scenario, that no scenarios are duplicated from the applicants' audit test(s), and scenarios will not be repeated on subsequent days.
- 1. 1\\ I---.:....-..-------.:---'------------+-~+___l_~_I S
I M
U L
A T
o R
2.
W R
I T
T E
N 3.
W 1
T a.
Verify that systems walk-through outline meets the criteria specified on Form ES-301-2:
(1)/he outline(s} contain(s} the required number of control room and in-plant tasks, distributed among the safety functions as specified on the form (2) task repetition from the last two NRC examinations is within the limits specified on
/' the form, (3)*/flo tasks are duplicated from the applicants' audit testes)
(4) the number of altemate path, low-power, emergency and RCA tasks meet the v criteria on the form.
b.
Verify that the administrative outline meets the criteria specified on Form ES-301-1:
(1)...{he tasks are distributed among the topics as specified on the form (2).--at least one task is new or significantly modified (3)..Ato more than one task is repeated from the last two NRC licensing examinations Facility Reviewer (*)
NRC Chief Examiner (#)
NRC Supervisor Date 7-2.--0) 6J7l>507
()')-/'3*,9tJlJ'l 7/ (?>h 7 90 V
Printed Name 1Signature Steven Dennis 1(ll/t
~. //
/
$l'/rCl?F#'?~SIW1 v'~ /~
Check for duplication and overlap among exam sections.
Check the entire exam for balance of coverage.
Assess whether the exam fitsthe appropriate job level (RO or SRO).
Assess whether plant-specific priorities (inclUding PRA and IPE insights) are covered in the appropriate exam section.
Determine if there are enough different outlines to test the projected number and mix of applicants and ensure that no items are duplicated on subsequent days.
Assess whether the 10CFR 55.41/43 and 55.45 sampling is appropriate.
Ensure that KiA importance ratings (except for plant-specific priorities) are at least 2.5.
b.
c.
4)f a.
G b.
E N
c.
E d.
R e.
A L
f.
a.
Author c.
d.
NOTE:
- Independent NRC reviewer initial items in Column "CD, chief examiner concurrence required.
NUREG-1021, Revision 9
0n I-'
rt 0<,
0 a
U1
.eo 0
0
-l
..,J a
- a U1..
I-'
I-'..
W U1
"'lJ I-'
~
H
~
LL 0
III 0
n 0)
..n c::
111
- J
,'Ii Ul
~
- s-ID
......'1:1 7'0
.... z
((
tI:I Z
'1:1 ttj 0
"Ij I-'
(Iim 0
I
..J W
CD I
Ul
-4lo-
-.J Ul
......... --~,
'-"-"~~a"'frtllliD~ S~riw M"f;emlnl FOrm~li*201.3
"-'----------~~""-=.-
~tGns' tJ-l: ~J.",.'~ 1?D'oIle$
'S~.,ed oN'
+-~e s~~ur:+y. aj, r-ee~+
Dn Oc+ok.. zrJ!l) 2()o1 wjf{
-S/-UeYl
- .",,'
- J.& Vltt N:Jp.sl~.'ml.1111'ij~il}!1\\l
+~ le~nf.crG~'
~,
~q*iEaIl'tl!MIiqo Toltl. ~Hl 01 my~n~.iS"s. Itlel /101 d'MJlge 10..n~ UI'lWlnothed III:rsllJ1$ '-'v I,.,ronllsllon 31'ICernln91he-MaC Ilt~Alh.!l n.minatiOOI
~_I_'_'_
~-I***~.. _t~_
.__.1.._
_._1.1
~
I"~
.~.
...- **11'"'
IV urw
-".~~"".
I 11.,
IOI.I..V \\IIU,t u"...
1111 "WC1ilUIW,,.. WPlII U.~ ".""I1'1IDUUII,.U.NlDlntlllll,lIWl.
.1d1n1of1lral'ol'l., didnet '"IIIUd,'~I~lfe. er p/'O'lld. pirfa/m..,ce fHdllacK b l}\\CIa "Illlliell'll.&MIawa~ :ad~lnicl.reclNil! UCI"1~
e~iI\\'lllll;lionf, t~t.1 SlltcitlCanYll'lltad tlslowarlitI@gnzedby lhe N~C.
5.e, 1.
~.
1}.10.----
11.
1,.--,----
13.--'- -
K l~. _....--..*._-
~.-.-**
L
. Prt-b.arnlg3!jl1tl I~"~o"i~d~e'ha.' Ihtva QCqulred!>~l!Crllluld IlnoVJ[1lJ91 IbovIUllJ fiRe.:elNillg Clllimll'la.lion, l~fJl,/!~rJ tJr OIi:.WUkS(~1 a1 ?J;I.~,
as 01 Ih~ d 11.ll at my aTgl1afl.re.,_greGIhll rlIlill NIl MncwJ~~ i:lhlUlII a~1' 111/0N1'IItion about IPlese ~nmitlali)n~ to 11\\)'pa1!ons~flOt beel'l IU1horlzed by1M N!\\C 'll./l" ael.i~1l as I limullllo, bcoll\\operalar or ClrnmUJIjcalcr ;, 1C<:lIjIlsllfll rlItlllhUl~Idi.l1I '*:115 "01 !11"cl Ike "iI"I"9 camel'll orpt'<Wld. dl1t1el or j~ired 1aedbtct Furt~ennllM.1am IMrl Qrthep~'fU:i11 !eC\\J~ meulM'du.r.d reqlllrel'l1l1l'1l! <-I
!Iot.um~"lild inll1ll'fJ~ltl"ie.tr'll!l*1 ~~~l!I/lurlnl'l'Id lR1dsteland !/llhlolatlaf' oIl1.l;9MJ~onc af Ihlslar&e~I!n'l miloy 185\\111 in ean~~,llan ar lhi! ti:B1IIlnatlonllllldlot In,"rwesner<< KlI~ ag.h.~ ~or 1M rlCln,V ~cl!t\\!ee.
~ YoU lmm.dlalG'~*tIJlOr\\
lofacilil~ mmlgimllllll:lr!l'li NRC thl6f e,IIlmtMr III\\Y indt;tliClnl Clos\\lgge'tfons tIl.l.KJIIlilllt'l)n IIWr11r mtrJ"aile been CDmllrOO1i1Id,
.~"',......,.T1M.."'O.'lB'LllY", it~IfjT.NOH 1'Hf" ~
a7~1
.J}
~
~
~
u--.::~s,.\\art'V
- "T Z 7 ~
'8~lMJstJtJ fCA:
es*~a;*
~-:--'. -
~."
r..
II....
~
0 I'll "I
11\\
III l'"
IT}..
l/I
~
I
- tI
~
!It
~
~
~
'll II
- 1 l!
fI' 11
-r"
- I. -J il
'~I til!
~,
~1
~:
~ I t
~ r
- 1 ~
fit
~
\\I
- .', e e
r r-I) o l:
fle
~(
L III C
"'lJ.
I'UI§I oo
ES~201 Examination Security Agreement Fonn ES~201-3 o
oen o-t en
- J H
~
oo 0)
~
Pre-Examination 1.
o,-u-..I:-y e~4..,
On~
I acknowledge that 1have acquired specialized knowledge about the NRC licensing examinations scheduled for the week(s) of J, I (,~o, as ofthe date of my signature. I agree that I will not knowiTLgly divulge any information about these examinations to any persons who have not been authorized by the NRC chief examiner. I understand that I am not to instruct, evaluate, or provide performance feedback to those applicants scheduled to be administered these licensing examinations from this date until completion of examinalion administration, except as specifLcallynoted below and authorized by the NRC (e.g., acting as a simulator booth operator or communicator is acceptable if the individual does not select the training content or provide direct or Indirect feedback). Furthermore, I am aware of the physical security measures and requirements (as dOCumented in the facility licensee's procedures) and understand that violation of the conditions of this agreement may result in cancellaUon of the examinations and/or an enforcement action against me or the facility licensee. I win immediately report to facility management or the NRC chief examiner any indications or suggestions that examination security may have been compromised.
2.
Post-Examination
~
tt:I Z
tr:l o"!j DATE NOTE DATE 7q
/'1--
JOB TITLE / RESPONSIBILITY
_._--------'-"=-------_.----
PRINTED NAME
--------------+/--..J,......1---
( l
~~o the,~est Of.~y"S~?~~d.~eJ~i~~~~~~19.J:!?
~..n!. ~~~~~~~~.::~ ~::~~~: ~~~ ~n..~~:n.:~~~. ~~~~~~~~I:tr~~<;':i~~~~~",~~~~~~~i~~~:t1~inlis~ered
, /
~~t'~~,' :v;~~~~:/o~';;o?de'~erfu;~-;;~~'fe~dba~kt~th~~~~;~Pli~'~i~;h;-;~r;~~d;i~~*t*e~~d*th;s;-li~;~~'i'~g'~~~~i~*ati~~s.except ~s specifLC~I~/~~ted t*n7 below and authorized by the NRC.
Ix....,
O*f ES~201, Page 26 of 27 I§!
oo
(.0
1.
Pre-Examination T-l
'l~7 T./~ JQ <1....,
i.J;"
I
...?
~_
~
1acknowledge that I have acquired specialized knowledge about the NRC ficensing examinations scheduled for the week(s) of
".' -::as of the date of my signature. I agree that I will not knowingly divulge any information about these examinations to any persons who have n t been authorized by the NRC chief examtner. r understand that I am not to instruct, evaluate, or provide performance feedback to those applicants scheduled to be administered these licensing examinations from this date until completion of examination administration, except as specifically noted below and authorized by the NRC (e.g., acting as a simulator booth operator or communicator is acceptable if the Individual does not select the training content or provide direct or indirect feedback). Furthermore, I am aware of the physical security measures and requirements (as documented in the facility licensee's procedures) and understand that violation of the condftions of this agreement may result in cancellation of the examinations and/or an enforcement action against me or the facility licensee. I will immediately report to facility management or the NRC chief examiner any indications or suggestions that examination security may have been compromised.
-ES-201 Examination Security Agreement Form ES-201-3 i-'
o<,
o
<:n o-I
- J i-'
i-'
<:n N
- 2 H
oo 2.
Post*Examinatlon To the best of mv knowledae. I dld not dlvuloe to any unauthorized persons any information concerning the NRC licensing examinations administered during the weekes) of;:ic:;:' i-"/!.l::jJm the date that I entered into this security agreement until the completion of examination administration, I did not instruct, evaluate, or provide performance feedback to those applicants who were administered these ffcensing examinations, except as speciflcally noted below and authorized by the NRC.
PRINTED NAME 1.KtN~ ~~o.--J
- 2. fY1r1-Ar<
Ayr wJ1fL 3.~n £. Sp?cqr 4.
'v-X lid KJIf£suf L
~: ~~tl~'PJ~
- 7. a~
UQj~-'t..-
.",. ~"...,./
JOB TITLE / RESPONSIBILITY
-Ad, U<4&1d;'M_n-crd-kif S~~11Nf,. e" ~X/of:('
D~5
'f1l.JJG J~.srtZw...TrJtt
~t -r;....f r" rhu..tL,~
~r<dOr
~
Ito SIGNATURE (1)
~'
~~-r-
~-=--z_~
C)m~*~d DATE SlGNATURE (2)
DATE NOTE
'"0
~
ttl Z
'"0 tI:lo
"':l i-'
ES-201 r P-'16 26 of 27 I!§;I oo,;..
NI:)
I:)
~
E8-201 ExaminaUon Security Agreemoot FormE8-201-3 o<,
o CJl o
~
1.
Pre=exam1nafionr-:
r'&#
£tI~r~y_
8,.....0' ~...J( 1I.....Jc..r t/_f
- 4-,.".. o~
d...j",
1~ 1:"
I ad<nowledge that f have ;t;qllintd SJle~d knowledge about the NRC Iloeu!ng examinalions schedllled for thewaek(s) cd ~ I',-178Snf Ih~Y r
- t II; date of ~ sigl1ature. Iagree that I ~ not knowingly divulge any Informatiol1about ~ examlnaOonsto any personswho hav not bsan authorized by the NRC chiel ~)(Smil1er. 'llndersland that I am not 10i1struct, lWslua1e. or provide performance teedback 10those a]JtlltC8lltssctJedufedto be administered fueseliceflslng examinationsfrom 1hls dale urdilcomple1fon or examInation admmlstraUon. except as specificallynoled befow C1nd authorizedby the NRC {e.g.. act1ng as a simulator booth operatcr or communlcator is aoceptable if the IndMdual does notselect the training COlIteni or provide director irtdirecl: feedback). Furthermore, I am awareof1he physicaT securftymeasures and req1lirBfTlents (as do<:Urnented In1he racillty Itcensee'a procedtKu) 00d understand1hatvl-olation of ltJe conditions of Ihls agreementmay result in cancella!lDn or lhe examinationsa11dfor an enforQOOle11 ~ actlon a!Jainst m9 or the faclIlty licensee. 1will Immediately faport tofacilly manaaementor the NRC chIefexaminerany indcations or suggestions111211 B)(8minatiDn security may haVebeencornpromlsed.
2.
Post.£xammtion
~....
CJl Nl
~
'0o oo
~
To the best of my know.le:dJ)e. J~Jq Qat divulge to any urtautborized persons any informaUon concerningthe NRC licensing examlna1ions adnl nistered during the weekes) of:;;'-';'2 7:z2~rom the date that I enterecllnto trns secumy agreemeni utlui iiH:jI ~rflvft;iu"lI-'
ul"'iUiliiiitCi~ii u.:....;j~z~:;;';. ! ~!~ :::::t instnJct, evaluate, or provide pe110rmarlce feedback to those applic:ants who wereadministeredthese Iicensll'l9 examinations,exceptas specmcalfy noted belowand authorized by Che NRC.
'"CI
~
toZ
'"CI tr:l o
'Xj
~E(I)
DAle SIGNATURE (2)
.DATE NOTE 2
~ifPt!:-- '<-2 JOB TITlE 1 RESPO~18IL1TY
~NQT:t: (?eefl.:'i4v \\~:
PRIIIJTED ~AME
- 1. ~UBf'J1)At;I' N 2.
3.
4.
5, 6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.,
15.,
f'IOTES:
~
o I:)
'It'
.-I I::<t o
IJ'l
~
~
~
N......
tI:)....
- .:l
- J,..
t-o t?o
"-t-o
)
ES-201, P-j 26 ()f21
)
I§I oo CJl
ES-201 Examination Security~reement Form ES-201-3 o<,
o OJ o
-1 1.
Pre-Examination
.T...
- lQO' I acknowledge that f have acquired specialized knowledge about the NRC licensing examinations scheduled for the week{s) of
- oJ II,: ';-*"~lBl of the date of my signature. I agree that I will not knowingly divulge any information about these exarnlnatlons to any persons who have ot bean authorized by the NRC chief examiner. I understand that I am not to instruct, evaluate, or provide performance feedback to those applicants scheduled to be adrnlnlstered these licensing exarnlnatlons from this date untll completion of examination administration, except as specifically noted below and authorized by the NRC (e.q., acting as a slmulator booth operator or communicator is acceptable if the indivld4al does not select the training content or provide direct or indrrect feedback). Furthermore, I am aware of the physical security measures and requirements (as documented in the facility licensee's procedures) and understand that violatlon of the conditions of this agree ment may resuIt in cancellation of the examinations and/or an enforcement action against me or the facility licensee. I will immediately report to facility management or the NRC chief examiner any indications or suggestions that examination security may have been compromised.
~
OJ N
~
>I:-
oo Cl) 2.
Post-Examination
'"0
~
ttl Z'"0 tI:l o"Ij DATE NOTE
~1$1#t
,+-4""
k{"-~.-~~
DATE PRINTED NAME
....1/
mi~
YIYyt
......y- ~
- !"'~l:.
"k W "' "
- S~
~:;
4$'*"07 4F-..,-
,~"..
~_.-) l7~,
............)...
__ r"'~
t&o'oo;.\\,lC-\\4t'~-....Ul'!,loJ ~('M..
<"::4
!....~ o;kJ,.,.....l>e--
,.r~.J~y~,c""..Lf4P~~;"'1A_)
-(,..-~
.~........ ~YJ.'*--r
~
t:.-fl-S
~<<t..;~
IFlr-07
~
~id7tL
<C~. (,;,-0"7 To ttle best of my know(edge, I didJot divulge to any unauthorized persons any informatEon concerning the NRC licensing examinations administered ciuring Tile weeK\\l:i)oi;-Eiz:'.7 ;;:-t:";'rUfll irltl UClll:l iili:il; tmil:lfl:lU illlV lilj::; ::;o:::~ulilY
<l~::':lIjlai*I' "il';; olie wilip:.::;tivil vf o;';oili;iiCitic" Ci':j;j;":Q~;;:;~c~.: d;d :-:ct instruct, evaluate, or provide performance feedback to those applicants who were administered these licensing examinaUons, except as specifically noted below and authorized by the NRC.
ES-201, Page 26 of 27
[§I oo Cl)
10/05/07 PRIll: 51 FAX 4006 PGN BNP BOF 1 l4l001 Alklll~n ("
11~!ed/~
lA/hi-4t:{ f{
ES-301 Administrative Topics Outline Form ES-301-1 Facility:
Brunswick Date of Examination:
JULY 2007 Examination level (circle one):
RO/SRO Operating Test Number:
NRC 2007 Administrative Topic Type Describe activity to be performed (see Note)
Code*
D Determine Primary Containment Water level and Conduct of Operations Evaluate PCPl-A.
N Perform a portion of Control Operator Daily Conduct of Operations Surveillance Report 201-03.2 and identify 4 OOS readings and appropriate TS entries.
M Generate a Clearance for maintenance activities on Equipment Control the 2C TBCCW Pump.
D Determine Off-Site Release Per PEP-03.4.7 and Complete Radiation Control Notification Form.
N Evaluate plantconditions (includes securityevent) and Emergency Plan classifythe event. Make PAR determination as required.
NUREG-1021, Revision 9
ES-301 Administrative Topics Outline Form ES-301-1 NOTE:
All items (5 total) are required for SROs. RO applicants require only 4 items unless they are retaking only the administrative topics, when 5 are required.
- Type Codes & Criteria:
(C)ontrol room 1-(D)irect from bank (:s; 3 for ROs; !~_1 for SROs & RO retakes)
(N)ew or (M)odified from bank (>1)1-(P)revious 2 exams (:s; 1; randomly selected)?"
(S)imulator 2007 NRC Examination Summary Description of Admin Tasks A.1.a The candidate will determine Primary Containment Water Level and Evaluate PCPL-A This is a bank JPM.
A.1.b The candidate will review a portion of the Control Operator Daily Surveillance Report 201-03.2 and identify 4 OOS readings and appropriate TS entries. This is a new JPM.
A.2 The candidate will generate a clearance for maintenance activities on the 2C TBCCW. This is a modified JPM requiring sequence and dual unit power supply tagging requirements.
A.3 The candidate will determine the offsite release rate and fill out appropriate forms. This is a bank JPM.
A.4 The candidate will evaluate degraded plant conditions which include a security event and make an event classification and PAR as required. This is a new JPM.
NUREG-1021, Revision 9
ES-301 Administrative Topics Outline Form ES-301-1 Facility:
Brunswick Date of Examination:
2007 Examination Level (circle one):
RO/SRO Operating Test Number:
NRC 2007 Administrative Topic Type Describe activity to be performed (see Note)
Code*
D Hand Calculation Of APRM GAFs Per PT-01.8C Conduct of Operations N
Perform a portion of Control Operator Daily Conduct of Operations Surveillance Report 201-03.2 and identify 4 OOS readings.
M Generate a Clearance for maintenance activities on Equipment Control the 2C TBCCW pump.
N Determine Stay Time and Radiological requirements Radiation Control for performing work in a High Radiation Area.
N/A Emergency Plan NUREG-1021, Revision 9
ES-301 Administrative Topics Outline Form ES-301-1 NOTE:
All items (5 total) are required for SROs. RO applicants require only 4 items unless they are retaking only the administrative topics, when 5 are required.
- Type Codes & Criteria:
(C)ontrol room i
(D)irect from bank (::;;~~for ROs; ::; 4 for SROs & RO retakes)
(N)ew or (M)odified from bank (> 1) 2 (P)revious 2 exams (::; 1; randomly selectee)-
(S)imulator 2007 NRC Examination Summary Description of Admin Tasks A.1.a This is a bank JPM. The candidate will manually calculate APRM GAFs.
A.1.b This is a new JPM. The candidate will perform a portion of Control Operator Daily Surveillance Report 201-03.2 and identify 4 OOS readings.
A.2 The candidate will generate a clearance for maintenance activities on the 2C TBCCW.
This is a modified JPM requiring sequence and dual unit power supply tagging requirements.
A.3 This is a new JPM. The candidate will be required to determine stay time and radiological requirements for performing work in a High Radiation Area NUREG-1021, Revision 9
ES-301 Control Room/In-Plant Systems Outline Form ES-301-2 Facility:
Brunswick Date of Examination:
JULY / 2007 Exam Level (circle one):
RO / 5RO (U)
Operating Test No.:
NRC 2007 Control Room Systems@ (8 for RO; 2 or 3 for SRO-U, including 1 ESF)
System / JPM Title Type Code*
Safety Function S-1 Uncoupled Control Rod During Startup N,A, L, S 1
5-2 RCIC Failure to Isolate N,A,S, E 5
S-3 Core Spray Pump Surveillance Min Flow Valve Failure N,A,S 2
5-4 Restore Shutdown Cooling following a spurious isolation lAW N,A, L, S 4
AOP-15 S-5 Primary Containment Venting During Personnel Entry.
D, L, S 9
S-6 Manual Transfer of 4160 Emergency Bus Supply from the DG to N,S 6
the Normal Feeder lAW OOP-50.1 S-7 RWM failure to enforce rod blocks D,S 7
S-8 Re-Establish RBCCW For Drywell Cooling to the Blacked Out Unit D, E,S 8
(RO)
Per AOP-36.2.
In-Plant Systems@ (3 for RO; 3 or 2 for SRO-U)
P-1 Station Blackout: Crosstie of 4KV E-Buses D, E 6
P-2 Control Room Evacuation lAW AOP-32, Placing the RHR Service D,R 8
Water System in Operation.
P-3 Staging the Reactor Recirc Pump Seals.
D,R 1
NUREG-1021, Revision 9
ES-301 Control Room/In-Plant Systems Outline Form ES-301-2 All RO and SRO-I control room (and in-plant) systems must be different and serve different safety functions; all 5 SRO-U systems must serve different safety functions; in-plant systems and functions may overlap those tested in the control room.
/~----I-""
\\".
/........'
.,. __.__-.-~.""
- Type Codes Criteria for RO/{ SRO-II SRO-U- "
'->~
(A)lternate path 4-6/4-6/2-3 (C)ontrol room y
z (D)irect from bank I.J!-:;, 9/-:;, 8124 (E)mergency or abnormal in-plant
\\:::-:1/:::-:1/~1 (L)ow-Power 1Shutdown 7:::-:1/:::-:1/11 (N)ew or (M)odified from bank including 1(A)
":::-: 2 1:::-: 2 1:::-:7..1 (P)revious 2 exams
"-:;, 3/-:;, 3/~ 2 (randomly selected)
(R)CA
~1/:::-:1/~1 (S)imulator 2007 NRC Examination Summary Description of JPMs S-1 This is a new alternate path JPM in the Reactivity Control safety function area. The candidate will be pulling control rods for startup when a rod becomes uncoupled. Actions will be required to insert/re-couple the control rod.
S-2 This is a new alternate path JPM in the Containment Integrity safety function area. The candidate will be placing RCIC in service when an exhaust diaphragm rupture occurs and RCIC will fail to isolate. Actions will be required to manually isolate RCIC.
S-3 This is a new alternate path JPM in the Reactor Water Inventory Control safety function area.
The candidate will be performing the Core Spray Operability Surveillance and the minimum flow valve will fail to function properly. This will require actions to prevent equipment damage.
S-4 This a new alternate path JPM in the Heat Removal From Reactor Core Safety Function area.
The candidate will be required to restore Shutdown Cooling following a spurious isolation signal lAW abnormal procedures and restart an RHRSW pump following a pump trip.
S-5 This a bank JPM in the Radioactivity release safety function area. The candidate will be required to startup Primary Containment Ventilation during personnel entry, per 20P-24 using both purge exhaust fans.
S-6 This a new JPM in the Electrical safety function area.
The candidate will be required to manually transfer the 4160 Emergency Bus Supply from the DG to the Normal Feeder.
S-7 This a bank JPM in the Instrumentation safety function area. The candidate will perform a portion of the RWM operability check.
S-8 This a bank JPM in the Plant Service System safety function area. The candidate will continue re-establishing Drywell Cooling per AOP-36.2 P-1 This is a bank JPM in the Electrical safety function area. The candidate will be required to locally cross-tie the 4KV emergency buses following a station blackout.
NUREG-1021, Revision 9
ES-301 Control Room/In-Plant Systems Outline Form ES-301-2 f1r4fL P-2 This is a bank JPM in the Plant Service System safety function area. The candidate will be required to place RHRSW inservice following a control room evacuation.
P-3 This is a bank JPM in the Reactivity Control safety function area. The candidate will be required to place the Reactor Recirc Pump Seals in service.
NUREG-1021, Revision 9
ES-301 Operating Test Quality Checklist Form ES-301-3 Facility:
Brunswick Date of Examination:
July 2007 Operating Test Number:
- 1. GENERAL CRITERIA Initials A
b*
elf.
a.
The operating test conforms to the previously approved outline; changes are consistent with sampling requirements (e.g. 10 CFR 55.45, operational importance, safety function 50 j/fJ frW distribution).
b.
There is no day-ta-day repetition between this and other operating tests to be administered V!t# v1~
during this examination.
So()
e.
The operating test shall not duplicate items from the applicants' audit test(s) (see Section IfIf ~
D.1.a).
'\\()
d.
Overlap with the written examination and between different parts of the operating test is III~
within acceptable limits.
- S()
It appears that the operating test will differentiate between competent and less-than-
~
II#! UP e.
competent applicants at the designated license level.
$j)
- 2. WAlK-THROUGH CRITERIA a.
Each JPM includes the following, as applicable:
- v initial conditions
- v:initiating cues
- vreferences and tools, including associated procedures
- /reasonable and validated time limits (average time allowed for completion) and specific designation if deemed to be time critical by the facility licensee operationally important specific performance criteria that include:
0/- detailed expected actions with exact criteria and nomenclature
,,- system response and other examiner cues
,.... - statements describing important observations to be made by the applicant
,,- criteria for successful completion of the task
.-/ - identification of critical steps and their associated performance standards 1#~
/- restrictions on the sequence of steps, if applicable 50 b.
Ensure that any changes from the previously approved systems and administrative walk-through outlines (Forms E8-301-1 and 2) have not caused the test to deviate from any of
/If the acceptance criteria (e.g., item distribution, bank use, repetition from the last 2 NRC S'.o
~
examinations) specified on those forms and Form ES-201-2.
- 3. SIMULATOR CRITERIA Ji\\ -
The associated simulator operating tests (scenario sets) have been reviewed in accordance with SO K
~~
Form E8-301-4 and a copy is attached.
Print?b:gn:n Date Author Steven Dennis I
~
7 ~ 2--0'"
a.
b.
Facility Reviewer (*)
- t1()~ ?IUir./ilAoJ ~/
Afr~
ra7tJSt77 e.
NRC Chief Examiner (#)
MARK A.lSA"7F~ / 7l2,AIJ, Jn~
07, /3, tRtJO?
d.
NRC Supervisor K.h~...t Ii AA&/ f0-vr/~
1(1..,,/:>7
~
)
I
/
NOTE:
The facility signature is not applicable for NRC-developed tests.
Independent NRC reviewer initial items in Column "en, chief examiner concurrence required.
NUREG-1021, Revision 9
ES-301 Simulator Scenario Quality Checklist Form ES-301-4 q Facility:
Brunswick Date July 2007 Scenario Operating NRC 2007 of Numbers:
1 2
3 4
Test No:
Exam:
QUALITATIVE ATTRIBUTES Initials a
b*
C#
1.
The initial conditions are realistic, in that some equipment and/or instrumentation may be out of
~ J1vp service, but it does not cue the operators into expected events.
~
2.
The scenarios consist mostly of related events.
S!) I/IIP Arb 3.
Each event description consists of
-the point in the scenario when it is to be initiated
<fhe malfunction(s) that are entered to initiate the event
<the symptoms/cues that will be visible to the crew
/ the expected operator actions (by shift position)
~
~
" the event termination point (if applicable)
Sf}
11 4.
No more than one non-mechanistic failure (e.g., pipe break) is incorporated into the scenario without
~
a credible preceding incident such as a seismic event.
15r>
kit>
5.
The events are valid with regard to physics and thermodynamics.
"50 ID-RS 6.
Sequencing and timing of events is reasonable, and allows the examination team to obtain complete IjJJ ~
evaluation results commensurate with the scenario objectives.
S.,
7.
If time compression techniques are used, the scenario summary clearly so indicates. Operators A~~
have sufficient time to carry out expected activities without undue time constraints.
>9 3.
The simulator modeling is not altered.
~!>
/) rrt 1/15 9.
The scenarios have been validated. Pursuant to 10 CFR 55.46(d), any open simulator performance "
deficiencies or deviations from the referenced plant have been evaluated to ensure that functional
,np fidelity is maintained while running the planned scenarios.
So 10.
Every operator will be evaluated using at least one new or significantly modified scenario. All other
/1 W~
scenarios have been altered in accordance with Section 0.5 of ES-301.
S~
11.
All individual operator competencies can be evaluated, as verified using Form ES-301-6 (submit the,
~
form along with the simulator scenarios).
>.9 12.
Each applicant will be significantly involved in the minimum number of transients and events I~
'I specified on Form ES-301-5 (SUbmit the form with the simulator scenarios).
5()
~fr~
13.
The level of difficulty is appropriate to support licensing decisions for each crew position.
5~ VR ;MiD Target Quantitative Atbibutes (Per Scenario; See Section D.S.d)
Actual Attributes 1
2 3
4 I 1.
Total malfunctions (5-8) 8 8
9 6 Ic,f)
~
2.
Malfunctions after EOP entry (1-2) 3 3
3 2
<:':0 tJ,wt 3.
Abnormal events (2-4) 3 2
3 2
51)
~
iWt 4.
Major transients (1-2) 2 1
2 1
So
!I'd>
5.
EOPs entered/requiring substantive actions (1-2) 2 2
3 2
50
~
6.
EOP contingencies requiring substantive actions (0-2) 1 1
1 0
5f> ~
- llif, 7.
Critical tasks (2-3) 2 4
4 3
~
NUREG-1021, Revision 9
ES-301 Transient and Event Checklist Form ES-301-5 Facility:
Brunswick Date of Exam:
July 2007 Operating Test No.:
NRC A
E Scenarios P
V P
E 1
2 3
4 T
M L
N 0
I I
T T
N C
CREW POSITION CREW POSITION CREW POSITION CREW POSITION A
I A
T L
M N
Y U
T P
M(*)
E S
A B
S A
B S
A B
S A
B R
I U
R T
0 R
T 0
R T
0 R
T 0
0 C
P 0
C P
0 C
P 0
C P
RX 0
y 1
1 0
v NOR 1
1 2
~
1 1
1 r SROU 1 I/C 2,3, 3,
11 4
4 2
6,8, 4,5, 10, 6,8 11 v
MAJ 7,9 7
3 2
2 1 "
TS 5
4,6 3 v 0
2 2/
RX 0
r 1
1 0
NOR 1
1 2
v 1
1 1
SROU 2 I/C 2,3, 3,4, 11 4
4 2
6,8, 5,6, 10, 8
11 v
MAJ 7,9 7
3
~
2 2
1,
TS 5
4,6 3,
0 2
2 v RX 2"
L 1 0/
1 0
NOR 1 0/
1 v 1
1 1
RO 1 IIC 2,6Y
.9'~
6 4
4 2
- 10:
H 1"1 v
MAJ
- 7,9, 7/
3 v 2
2 1
~
TS 0,
Ov 2
2 RX 2"
1 1
1 0
/
NOR 1,
1 v
1 _
1 1
R02 I/C
~,6,~
3,6 6
4 4
2 JO, Y
./
c-\\
-11' MAJ v7,9v 7./
3./
2 -
2 1
TS o "
0 2
2 RX 4/
1 1
1 0
~
/
NOR 1v 1 "
1 r:
1 1
R03 I/C 3r V5,6(
5 4
4 2
~-,1f
/8--'
L\\
y v
MAJ
/7,9/
7/
3 -'
2 y 2
1 TS OJ 0_
2 2
NUREG 1021 Revision 9
ES-301 Transient and Event Checklist Form ES-301-5 Facility:
Brunswick Date of Exam:
July 2007 Operating Test No.:
NRC A
E Scenarios P
V P
E 1
2 3
4 T
M L
N 0
I I
T T
N C
CREW POSITION CREW POSITION CREW POSITION CREW POSITION A
I A
T L
M N
Y U
T P
M(*)
E S
A B
S A
B S
A B
S A
B R
I U
R T
0 R
T 0
R T
0 R
T 0
0 C
P 0
C P
0 C
P 0
C P
RX 2
1 1
1 0
v
~
~
NOR 1.,.-
1 -
1
~
1 1
R04 I/C
'5,;;;9 3,6 7
4 4
2
,10v
~
'-j
)A
~
~
MAJ Iht21}>
7~
3 "
2 "
2 1
TS 0
o ~
2 2
RX 2./
1 1
~
1 0
NOR
(~ <,
L*
1 z-1
?
1 1
ROS I/C
~~
'5,6~
6 4
4 2
~
8/
'-I ~
~
MAJ 8,V" 7"
3 2
2 1
\\:>1Zv-
./
TS 0
v o v 2
2 RX 4"
1./
1 1
0
~
NOR 1~
1 -
1 v 1
1 R06 I/C 3,v 5,.7;9 7
4 4
2
~,-p(
,10,v d-\\
~1 v
v MAJ
_7,9v 8'~J 4
~
2 c-2 1
TS 0 -
0" 2
2 RX 2""
1 -
1 -
1 0
NOR
)
1 /
1 1
1 R07 I/C v2,6,v
.s.e.,
7 4
4 2
.....10,
.r u
~
I v
MAJ
_7,9 e.>
4 2
2 1
/
J2\\:J TS 0 -
o ~
2 2
Instructions:
1.
Circle the applicant level and enter the operating test number and Form ES-D-1 event numbers for each event type; TS are not applicable for RO applicants. ROs must service in both the "at-the-controls (ATC)" and "balance-of-plant (BOP)" positions; Instant SROs must do one scenario, including at least two instrument or component (I/C) malfunctions and one major transient, in the ATC position.
NUREG 1021 Revision 9
ES-301 Transient and Event Checklist Form ES-301-5 Facility:
Brunswick Date of Exam:
July 2007 Operating Test No.:
NRC A
E Scenarios P
V P
E 1
2 3
4 T
M L
N 0
I I
T T
N C
CREW POSITION CREW POSITION CREW POSITION CREW POSITION A
I A
T L
M N
Y U
T P
M(*)
E S
A B
S A
B S
A B
S A
B R
I U
R T
0 R
T 0
R T
0 R
T 0
0 C
P 0
C P
0 C
P 0
C P
2.
Reactivity manipulations may be conducted under normal or controlled abnormal conditions (refer to Section D.S.d) but must be significant per Section C.2.a of Appendix D. (*) Reactivity and normal evolutions may be replaced with additional instrument or component malfunctions on a 1-for-1 basis.
3.
Whenever practical, both instrument and component malfunctions should be included; only those that require verifiable actions that provide insight to the applicant's competence count toward the minimum requirements specified for the applicant's license level in the right-hand columns.
NUREG 1021 Revision 9
ES-301 Competencies Checklist Form ES-301-6 Facility:
Brunswick Date of Examination:
July 2007 Operating Test No.
BOP/ACRO Competencies SCENARIO SCENARIO SCENARIO 1
2 3
4 1
2 3
4 1
2 3
4 InterpretiDiag-2,3,5, 2,4,5, 3,4,5, 3,4,5, 3,6,7, 2,6,7, 2,4,5, 4,5, nose Events 6,7,8, 6,7,8, 6,7,8, 3,4,5, 6,7,8, 2,6,7, 10,11 3,4, 9,10, 6,7,9, 7,8,9, 5,6,7, 9,10, 9,10, 9,10, 6,7,8 8,10 6,7,8 10,11 8
and Conditions 11 11 11,12 9,11
,12 11 11
,12 Comply With 3,4,5, 1,2,6, 2,3,6, 1,2,6, 2,3,4, 1,4,5, and Use ALL ALL ALL ALL 6,7,8, 7,8, 7,8, 2,3,4, 7,9, 5,6,7 6,7,8, 1,5,6, 6,7,8 9,10, 7,8 Procedures (1) 9,11 10 12 11 9,11 11,12 Operate 3,4,5, 2,3,6, 1,2,6, 2,3,4, 1,5, Control Boards N/A N/A N/A N/A 6,7,8, 1,2,6, 7,8, 2,3,6, 7,9, 5,6,7, 7,8,9, 1,5,6, 7,8 7,8 10,11 7,8 (2) 9,11 12 11 11
,12 Communicate 2,3,6, 1,2,4, and 3,4,5, 1,2,6, 7,
1,2,3, 1,2,6, 2,3,4, 5,7,8 1,2,5, ALL ALL ALL ALL 6,7,8, 7,8, 4,5,6, 7,9, 5,6,7, 9,
Interact 9,11 10 8,10, 7,8 11 9,11 10,11 6,7,8 12
,12 Demonstrate Supervisory ALL ALL ALL ALL N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Ability (3)
Comply With and Use Tech.
5 5
4 4,6 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Specs. (3)
Notes:
(1)
Includes Technical Specification compliance for an RO.
(2)
Optional for an SRO-U.
(3)
Only applicable to SROs.
Instructions:
Circle the applicants' license type and enter one or more event numbers that will allow the examiners to evaluate every applicable competency for every applicant.
NUREG-1021, Revision 9
08/01/07 WED 14:42 FAX 4006 ES-401 PGN BNP EOF 1 Written l:xamination Quality Checklist Form ES-401-6 I4J 002
\\/-IllrT,£N fINM.
~I t 10'7
~~i1ity; g{tV('lS WiCK Date of Exam; Aver :Lao7 Exam level: ROIII SROrg Inllial Item Descrlpllon a
b" r!
1 Questions and answersare technicallyaccurateand applicable to ltte facilitY.
SO ~ m:D 2
a.
NRC KlAe are referenced for all questions.
S'()
JIL-I'!l8 b.
f'aeility learningobjective", <Ire refel'l;lnced as available.
3 SROquestionsare appropriate In accordance with SeetJol'I D.2.d Of ES-401
- 30 A(
lYVB 4.
The sampling processwas randomand systematic (If morethan 4 RO or 2 SROquestions
'5D ;4/( MP were repeated from the lasI 2 NRClicensingexams,consultthe NRROl programoffice).
5.
QuesllonduplicationfromtM licensescreening/audit exam \\NI;lScontrolled as Indicated below(check the Itemthat applies)end appearaappropriate;
- x the auditexamwas systematically and randomly developed; or
_ the audil examwas completed beforethe licenseexamwas started; 01' the examinations weredeveloped independently. or
__ the licenseecertifiesIn<ll thel'l;l is noduplication; or vvlE>
_ other(explain)
SI) ~
6, Bankuse meetslimits (no morethan 75 percent BMk Modified New from the bank,at least 10 percentnew,and the rest new or modified); enter the actualROI SRQ-only
- 61 /I plJf J./O 11"'/ sf) ~ !tYlD Question distribution(s)at right 7.
Between 50 and 60 percentof the CluesliOl'ls On the RO Memory CIA examal'& writtenat the comprehel'lsiol'i/ anal)'..i!; level; tne SROexam may exoeed60 percentif the randomly 3b l g 39' 117 selectedKlAs supportthe higher cognitivelevels;enter Sf}
Att-1mB the actualRO I SRO questiondistrlbutlon(s) at right.
8.
Reterenceslhandouts provideddo not give aWOl)' anewers 59 ~
t?@j or aid In the eliminationof distractors.
8.
Quel;tioncontentconformswith specificKIA statementsIn the previouslyapproved examination outline and is appropriate for thetier to whichthey are assigned; 59
~ nih deviatiOl'ls are justil'ied.
10, Questionpsychometric g,ua1ity and formatmeetthe guidelines in ~$ Appendixa.
59
.,(II( (Y'f[S 11.
The examcontains the requirednumberof one-point, multiplechoiceItems:
)1/ ~ n1b the total is eorreet and agree.. with the value on the coversheet.
Printed7J.signatull Date
) t>> J.rJ
() f...hJ/.5 7("':Io~r>?
a, Author t, FacilityReviewer(oJ ST'G/lEIJ K. ¥f~ /
AL._.
~
.~.
71:JO/07 c, NRC Chief Examiner(#)
~~ j':\\, MTO/IJ'rLJJ. f. '.rl';.$?
c'l!tJ;J./iJ.iJCil
- d. NRC Regional Supervisor J£-/~ /I~lllI /
d9'v!../c-9
/
~Iote; o The facilityreviewer'sinltlals/slgnature are not applicablefur NRl;-i;Ieveloped examinations, Inl;\\e~ndent NRC reviewerInitialItemsIn Column'c": chiefexaminerconcurrence reguired.
ES-401, Page 29 of 33
ES-401, Rev. 9 Written Exam Review Worksheet Brunswick 2007-301 Form ES-401-9 Q#
KJA#
B L
L Psvehometric Flaws Content Flaws U
Comment M
0 0
Stem Cues TIF 1 Non
>1 Non Partial Min Q=
SRO E
Explanation N
K D
Focus Crcd Crcd KJA Only S
Dist Dist BIW GENERAL Get a copy ofthe Audit Exam for review.
GENERAL Most exams will consistently use the "which ONE of the following..."
terminology in every question. In this exam it is sometimes used and sometimes not used. Have the licensee evaluate ifthey want their applicants to see consistent wording in the exam question statements.
Comment addressed GENERAL There is inconsistent documentation for "Proposed references to be provided to applicants during examination." Many times the blank line is left with no information and sometimes it will be filled with "none" or "N/A." For consistency, place an "N/A" or "none" in the blank for all questions that do not require a reference. Comment addressed GENERAL All Bank questions from a Brunswick Bank shall have the COITect answer shuffled to a different position. I.E. ifthe correct answer was "A" in the BW Bank, then shuffle that answer to either position "B", "C", or "D" and move either "B", "C'\\ or "D" to position "A". 111iswill help reduce the possibility ofan applicant simply recognizing the question and recalling that the answer for the Bank Question was in position "A". The questions do not necessary need to be changed ifthey are designated BANK, the answer choices just need to be shuffled. Also, the answer choices should still be listed in a logical order, so it may at times make sense to reverse the order, for instance if each answer choice contains a number. Comment addressed GENERAL All questions shall actually ask a question in the stem. In other words (RO#53 as an example), many ofthe proposed questions simply have the applicant finish a sentence. All questions must explicitly ask a question.
It is OK ifthe question does not use the "which ONE ofthe following" terminology, but nevertheless, a question must be presented to the applicants. Comment addressed GENERAL This is a closed book exam. A limited number of questions (I.E. < 5), may require references to be supplied in the form of graphs. In general, mitigation of events and required operator actions will be tested in the closed book format, CE informed licensee that it may be acceptable on a limited basis to provide references, but the licensee submitted 16 questions that they are proposing that references be provided to the applicants.
Comment addressed Page I of37
ES-401, Rev. 9 Written Exam Review Worksheet Brunswick 2007-301 Form ES-401-9 Q#
KlA#
B L
L PsychometricFlaws Content Flaws U
Comment M
0 0
Stem Cncs T/F 1 Non
>1 Non Partial Min Q=
SRO E
Explanation N
K D
Focus Crcd Crcd KIA Only S
Dist Dist BIW GENERAL All KIA changes to the approved outlines will be made by the CEo If KIAs were changed without the consultation or approval ofthe CE, then the question must be written to the original KIA, which is the KIA on the approved outline. There were also four KIA changes submitted with the draft outlines that were initially rejected. The original KIA must be used for these four KIAs, unless approval is obtained from the CEo Conunent addressed If the original KIA Ca1UlOt support writing a question, then the CE should be notified. The CE, will either provide suggestions on how to attempt to match the KIA, or the CE will randomly select a new KIA. Comment addressed ROEXAM I
203000 B
H 3
S Question is SAT.
A3.09 2
205000 N
F I-x
.g Minimally discriminating.
If the LOD on the exam as a whole is Sat, then K2.02 2
this question's LOD will be acceptable.
S Is "Unit I is shutdown" in the stem necessary? Consider deleting.
Phrase was deleted.
A question must be presented to the applicant. - See GENERAL conunent at beginning of401-9. Stem was re-worded into a question: "Which ONE of the following is affected ifpower is lost to Panell-XDA?"
3 205000 N
F 2
x x
Y This valve is a flexible wedge gate valve. If the containment side disc has A4.05 a hole and the other disc doesn't, then "A" and "B" are subsets of "C."
S The subset issue must be addressed to ensure plausible distrators and only one correct answer. (see comment below)
"D" is not plausible. It is not logical for the applicant to think that the question would ask about valve leakage for a valve that had no leakage issues. "D" must be replaced.. (see comment below)
What is the difference between leakage "along its valve disk" and "leakage through its valve disk"? If there is no difference, then "B" and "C" should use consistent wording.. (see comment below)
Ask a different question on valve logic and expected valve response based on flow. The original question was changed from asking about designed leakage past the RHR min flow valve to asking about how the valve logic was designed.
Page 2 of37
ES-401, Rev. 9 Written Exam Review Worksheet Brunswick 2007-301 Form ES-401-9 Q#
KlA#
B L
L Psychometric Flaws Content Flaws U
Comment M
0 0
Stem Cues TIF 1 Non
>1 Non Partial Min Q=
SRO E
Explanation N
K D
Focus Cred Cred KIA Only S
Dist Dist BfW A question must be presented to the applicant. - See GENERAL comment at beginning of401-9. The stem was re-worded to have which ONE ofthe following....
4 206000 N
F 3
S Re-order words in "C" and "D" to say "discharge pressure reaches...." (vs K4.IS reaches #psig discharge pressure)
A question must be presented to the applicant. - See GENERAL comment at beginning of401-9.
S 217000 B
H 3
x
- y UNAUTHORIZED KIA CHANGE. LICENSEE CHANGED KIA AI.OS WITHOUT CONSULTING WITH CEo QUESTION MUST BE S
WRITTEN TO MATCH ORIGINAL KIA. THEREFORE, THIS QUESTION IS UNSAT DUE TO NOT MATCHING THE KIA ON THE APPROVED OUTLINE. IF A DISCRIMINATING QUESTION CANNOT BE WRITTEN FOR THE ORIGINAL KIA, THEN DISCUSS WITH THE CE THE POSSillILITY FOR SELECTING A DIFFERENT KIA. CE WILL SELECT ALL KIAs WHEN CHANGES TO THE APPROVED OUTLINES ARE WARRANTED. Original KA 217000 K2.02 was used; unauthorized KA 217000 AI.OS was NOT used.
COMMENTS BELOW DO NOT NEED TO BE ADDRESSED DUE TO THE ABOVE COMMENT.
The question needs to have a "?" at the end. Comment addressed Otherwise question is SAT.
6 209001 N
H 3
x E
Need to split up each answer into at least two rows.
KI.09 S
Need to add F031 open to "D" to enhance credibility. Comment addressed The answer choices need to be specific on what is running and what is shutdown - pumps? Comment addressed 7
209001 N
F 2
x x
x
- y UNAUTHORIZED KIA CHANGE. LICENSEE CHANGED KIA A4.09 WITHOUT CONSULTING WITH CEo QUESTION MUST BE S
WRITTEN TO MATCH ORIGINAL KIA. THEREFORE, THIS QUESTION IS UNSAT DUE TO NOT MATCHING THE KIA ON THE APPROVED OUTLINE. IF A DISCRIMINATING QUESTION CANNOT BE WRITTEN FOR THE ORIGINAL KIA, THEN DISCUSS WITH THE CE THE POSSillILITY FOR SELECTING A DIFFERENT KIA. CE WILL SELECT ALL KIAs WHEN CHANGES TO THE APPROVED OUTLINES ARE WARRANTED. Original KA 202002 A4.09 was used; unauthorized KA 209001 A4.09 was NOT used.
Page 3 of37
ES-401, Rev. 9 Written Exam Review Worksheet Brunswick 2007-301 Form ES-401-9 Q#
KiA#
B L
L Psvehometric Flaws Content Flaws U
Comment M
0 0
Stem Cues T/F 1 Non
>1 Non Partial Min Q=
SRO E
Explanation N
K D
Focus Cred Cred KiA Only S
Dist Dist BIW COMMENTS BELOW DO NOT NEED TO BE ADDRESSED DUE TO THE ABOVE COMMENT.
"C" is correct also (this is a subset ofaction steps used when filling the torus from the MUD tank per PCCP step SP/L-20).
Stem focus: How did torus level get low following a MSL break outside the drywell?
8 211000 B
H 2
S Question is SAT.
A2.04 9
212000 N
H 2
x E
"D" is the same as "C". Change "D" to give Yz scram on "A" side: F022D K6.05 and F028D. (See last comment below)
S In the stem, shouldn't MSIV 2B21-22D be 2B21-F022D instead?
Comment addressed Question can be better if stem asked which valve(s) closure would cause a Yz scram on "B" RPS? Then have the answer choices be represented as items that will cause a Yz scram on "A" only, Yz scram on "B" only, full scram, and no full or Yz scram. Question revised to ask for additional valve closure that would cause Yz scram ONLY on "B" RPS.
10 212000 N
H 2
x x
E "C" is not plausible. There is no downscale condition that will cause a A2.09 scram signal (feature does not exist). "C" must be replaced. Comment S
addressed Is there a reason for "A" to state "reset" and "B" to state "Inhibit"? If "reset" is incorrect, can this be used to develop a replacement for "C"?
Comment addressed Question should state"....required to reset RPS in accordance with LEP-02". This may require that "A" and "B" simply state - "Install jumpers" without the procedure name and number. Comment addressed The question asks for what is necessary to reset RPS - a verification is typically not a necessary action because a verification is not really an action. TIle other items in the question seem to represent the higher level steps in the supplied documents. Would it be better to replace the verification with ENSURE the DISCH VOL VENT & DRAIN TEST switch is in ISOLATE? It may depend on the other switch positions that can be used (NORMAL?). Comment addressed 11 215003 N
F 3
x
.y UNAUTHORIZED KIA CHANGE. LICENSEE CHANGED KIA Page 4 of37
ES-401, Rev. 9 Written Exam Review Worksheet Brunswick 2007-301 Form ES-401-9 Q#
KiA#
B L
L PsychometricFlaws Content Flaws U
Comment M
0 0
Stem Cues T/F 1 Non
>1 Non Partial Min Q=
SRO E
Explanation N
K D
Focus Cred Crcd KiA Only S
Dist Dist B/W K6.05 WITHOUT CONSULTING WITH CEo QUESTION MUST BE S
WRITTEN TO MATCH ORIGINAL KIA. THEREFORE, THIS QUESTION IS UNSAT DUE TO NOT MATCHING THE KIA ON THE APPROVED OUTLINE. IF A DISCRIMINATING QUESTION CANNOT BE WRITTEN FOR THE ORIGINAL KIA, THEN DISCUSS WITH THE CE THE POSSIBILITY FOR SELECTING A DIFFERENT KIA. CE WILL SELECT ALL KlAs WHEN CHANGES TO THE APPROVED OUTLINES ARE WARRANTED. Original KA (215003 K6.02) was NOT used see record of rejected KAs; replacement KA 215003 K6.05 was used instead.
12 215004 N
F I
x
.y Distractors "A" and "B" are not plausible because ofthe statement K5.01 "inversely proportional." Ask a question related to the SRM detector S
movement circuitry. Comment addressed Delete the first sentence. This is not needed for the question. Question re-written to ask about SRM detector movement circuitry.
A question must be presented to the applicant. Comment addressed I3 215005 B
H 3
x x
.y UNAUTHORIZED KIA CHANGE. LICENSEE CHANGED KIA G2.4.10 WITHOUT CONSULTING WITH CEo QUESTION MUST BE S
WRITTEN TO MATCH ORIGINAL KIA. THEREFORE, THIS QUESTION IS UNSAT DUE TO NOT MATCHING THE KIA ON THE APPROVED OUTLINE. IF A DISCRIMINATING QUESTION CANNOT BE WRITTEN FOR THE ORIGINAL KIA, THEN DISCUSS WITH THE CE THE POSSIBILITY FOR SELECTING A DIFFERENT KIA. CE WILL SELECT ALL KIAs WHEN CHANGES TO THE APPROVED OUTLINES ARE WARRANTED. Original KA 215005 G2.1.20 was used; unauthorized KA 215005 G2.4.10 was NOT used.
COMMENTS BELOW DO NOT NEED TO BE ADDRESSED DUE TO THE ABOVE COMMENT.
Why was G 2.1.20 rejected?
Typo: Flow Ref OffNormal annunciator procedure is A-06, 5-7 (vs 6-7)
Typo: Listed as Tier 2 Group 2 on question worksheet. (should be Tier 2 Group I).
Need to add reference (SD 9.6) to Technical Reference List because it states that critical selftest fault causes both the Upscale and Trouble Alarm together.
Stem does not include OPRM enabled alarm that will also come in (A-OS, Page S of37
ES-401, Rev. 9 Written Exam Review Worksheet Brunswick 2007-301 Form ES-401-9 Q#
KlA#
B L
L PsychometricFlaws Content Flaws U
Comment M
0 0
Stem Cues T/F 1 Non
>1 Non Partial Min Q=
SRO E
Explanation N
K D
Focus Cred Cred KIA Only S
Dist Dist BIW 4-8). Include alarm in stem to lend credibility to "A" distractor.
Snggest modifying "B" to say "one of two low voltage power supplies (LVPS) failed to zero" and modifying "A" to say recircpump trip.
A question must be presented to the applicant.
14 217000 N
F I
x
.y No discriminatory value.
Distractors not plausible. Correct answer would G2.1.33 not be incorrect in any circumstance. Also notifying a System Engineer is S
almost always a good idea and could be considered correct. 111isK./A should allow for a discriminating question. Question must be replaced.
NRC can help develop a question ifneeded. Comment addressed by replacing question.
LOD=I due to above comments.
15 218000 B
H 3
S Question is SAT.
K4.02 16 218000 N
F 1
x x
x
.y If there are procedurally directed followup actions to trip the turbine, then G2.4.49 "D" can potentially be argued as correct. Comment addressed S
"B" is a subset of "D", therefore "D" is not plausible. Comment addressed "C" is a subset of"A", therefore they are not credible. Comment addressed Font size in the question stem is not the same. Comment addressed Periods appear instead of Fahrenheit degree symbols in "B" and "D". Comment addressed Stem states "Additional" - should this be "Additionally"? Comment addressed Delete "OPEN and CLOSE OR". Operators are either-going to be cycling an ADS valve or a non ADS valve. Comment addressed LOD=l due to above comments. Comment addressed A question must be presented to the applicant. Comment addressed 17 223002 B
F 3
x
.g "D" is not plausible ifall MSlVs remain open. Snggestions include K4.05 S
modifying question to have a high steam flow instrument fail high in Mode
- 2. Comment addressed Page 6 of37
ES-401, Rev. 9 Written Exam Review Worksheet Brunswick 2007-301 Form ES-401-9 Q#
KiA#
B L
L PsychometricFlaws Content Flaws U
Comment M
0 0
Stem Cues TIF 1 Non
>1 Non Partial Min Q=
SRO E
Explanation N
K 0
Focus Cred Cred KiA Only S
Dist Dist BIW 18 239002 B
F 1-B The last sentence shall be deleted in all four answer choices. This KI.07 2
S information is not needed to make the answer choices unique. TIle only purpose that it serves is to provide extra information to allow applicants to discredit answer choices. Comment addressed LOD= I. Ifabove comment is incorporated, then LOD will be 2.
19 259002 N
F 3
x x
- y Is there a typo on the 401-4 for the KIA number? 259000 vice 259002?
K4.06 K4.10 vice K3.l0?
S UNAUTHORIZED KIA CHANGE. LICENSEE CHANGED KIA WITHOUT CONSULTING WITH CEo QUESTION MUST BE WRITTEN TO MATCH ORIGINAL KIA. THEREFORE, THIS QUESTION IS UNSAT DUE TO NOT MATCHING THE KIA ON THE APPROVED OUTLINE. IF A DISCRIMINATING QUESTION CANNOT BE WRITTEN FOR THE ORIGINAL KIA, THEN DISCUSS WITH THE CE THE POSSIBILITY FOR SELECTING A DIFFERENT KIA. CE WILL SELECT ALL KIAs WHEN CHANGES TO THE APPROVED OUTLINES ARE WARRANTED. Original KA (259002 K4.l0 was used; licensee's replacement KA 259002 K4.06 was NOT used instead.
COMMENTS BELOW DO NOT NEED TO BE ADDRESSED DUE TO THE ABOVE COMMENT.
Why was K3.l0 rejected?
TIle top portion ofthe stem is not needed. Just ask them which one ofthe following will cause shift to l-element.
20 261000 B
H I-x x
- y "C" and "D" are not plausible since the stem picture reflects both switches KI.09 2
aligned in the System Preferred position.
S There is no feature that would start only one train. Discuss with licensee.
Also, the stem provides a cue because it states that a LOCA begins in the drywell. This is not necessary since the DW pressure meter reflects 2 psig already. TIley should be able to make determinations on the indications. I Information about the LOCA in the D/W should be deleted.
Add to question: "Based on the above control room indications....."
Comment addressed by replacing entire question with a different question.
21 262001 N
F 2
x B
Eliminate first sentence in the stem.
A3.03 S
Re-word stem to say:
Page 7 of37
ES-401, Rev. 9 Written Exam Review Worksheet Brunswick 2007-301 Form ES-401-9 Q#
KlA#
B L
L PsychometricFlaws Content Flaws U
Comment M
0 0
Stem Cues T/F 1 Non
>1 Non Partial Min Q=
SRO E
Explanation N
K D
Focus Cred Cred KIA Only S
Dist Dist BIW "Which ONE of the following identifies the loads and the associated signals for the Full Time Load Shed scheme on Unit 2 during normal full power operation?" Comment addressed 22 262002 N
F I-x lot "A" and "B" are not plausible since there is no such thing as 120VDC.
K4.01 2
S A question must be presented to the applicant. Comment addressed 23 263000 B
F 2
x
.g TIle stem of the question provides a cue by stating that the Division II K2.01 switchboard is lost. Use 125/250 VDC Switchboard 2B. Comment S
addressed Add reference fr0111 SD-51 page 43/87 to Technical references List.
Note that says loss ofDiv II causes outboard MSIVs to close. Comment addressed Modify stem to ask what inunediate impact this power loss will have on the MSIVs and SRVs... (versus reactor). Conunent addressed 24 264000 B
H 2
x
.g Change question wording to:" Which one of the following states the time Kl.07 that the core spray pump first auto starts?" Comment addressed S
"B" isn't plausible because if you add 15 seconds to any ofthe timeline points, 24 seconds is not obtained.
Comment addressed Add reactor pressure in the stem. Conunent addressed Change "A" from" 14" to "0". Conunent addressed Change "B" fr0111 "24" to "14". Conunent addressed 25 300000 B
H 3
x lot UNAUTHORIZED KIA CHANGE. LICENSEE CHANGED KIA K3.02 WITHOUT CONSULTING WITH CEo QUESTION MUST BE S
WRITTEN TO MATCH ORIGINAL KIA. THEREFORE, THIS QUESTION IS UNSAT DUE TO NOT MATCHING THE KIA ON THE APPROVED OUTLINE. IF A DISCRIMINATING QUESTION CANNOT BE WRITTEN FOR THE ORIGINAL KIA, THEN DISCUSS WITH THE CE THE POSSffiILITY FOR SELECTING A DIFFERENT KIA. CE WILL SELECT ALL KIAs WHEN CHANGES TO THE APPROVED OUTLINES ARE WARRANTED. Original KA (300000 K2.01) was NOT used see record ofrejected KAs; replacement KA 300000 K3.02 was used instead.
THIS KIA CHANGE WAS NOT APPROVED AND COMMUNICATED TO THE LICENSEE VIA PHONE AT THE TIME THE OUTLINES Page 8 of37
ES-401, Rev. 9 Written Exam Review Worksheet Brunswick 2007-301 Form ES-401-9
.Q#
KlA#
B L
L PsychometricFlaws Content Flaws U
Comment M
0 0
Stem Cues T/F 1 Non
>1 Non Partial Min Q=
SRO E
Explanation N
K D
Focus Cred Cred KIA Only S
Dist Dist BIW WERE INITIALLY APPROVED.
COMMENTS BELOW DO NOT NEED TO BE ADDRESSED DUE TO THE ABOVE COMMENT.
Be consistent with periods in answer choices.
Is there an extra "s" prior to all commas in the answer choices.
26 400000 B
H I
x x
.y "A" is not plausible because these valves only have an auto-"throttle" A3.01 feature (40 psig for 70 seconds) vs an auto-close feature. See conunents S
below "B" is not plausible since the normal supplies only shut when there isn't sufficient pressure... not enough information in stem to determine. See comments below "C" is not plausible because there is no auto-open feature associated with 2-SW-VIII. See comments below Question stem can be enhanced to allow for more ofthe details surrounding valve operation to be tested, thus allowing more plausible distractors to be developed. See comments below KIA Match: It appears that the question is written to test knowledge ofthe SWS, vice CCW system. Discuss with licensee. Comments addressed by re-writing question to match the KA 27 201002 B
H 3
x E
TIle stem was confusing. Need to reword the stem to ask: Which one of A4.02 the following actions wiII stop the rod prior to reaching position "06"?
S Comment addressed Need to include the name & number ofthe Rod Out Notch switch in the stem.
Conunent addressed 28 201003 B
F 2
x x
x
.y UNAUTHORIZED KIA CHANGE. LICENSEE CHANGED KIA K5.01 WITHOUT CONSULTING WITH CEo QUESTION MUST BE S
WRITTEN TO MATCH ORIGINAL KIA. THEREFORE, THIS QUESTION IS UNSAT DUE TO NOT MATCHING THE KIA ON THE APPROVED OUTLINE. IF A DISCRIMINATING QUESTION CANNOT BE WRITTEN FOR THE ORIGINAL KIA, THEN DISCUSS WITH THE CE THE POSSIBILITY FOR SELECTING A DIFFERENT KIA. CE WILL SELECT ALL KIAs WHEN CHANGES TO THE APPROVED OUTLINES ARE WARRANTED. Original KA (20 I003 AI.02) was NOT used see record ofrejected KAs; replacement KA.201003 K5.01 was used instead.
Page 9 of37
ES-401, Rev. 9 Written Exam Review Worksheet Brunswick 2007-301 Form ES-401-9 Q#
KlA#
B L
L PsychometricFlaws Content Flaws U
Comment M
0 0
Stem Cues T/F 1 Non
>1 Non Partial Min Q-SRO E
Explanation N
K D
Focus Cred Cred KIA Only S
Dist Dist BIW THE KIA CAN BE REPEATED FROM A PREVIOUS NRC EXAM, BUT THE QUESTIONS MUST BE DIFFERENT.
COMMENTS BELOW DO NOT NEED TO BE ADDRESSED DUE TO THE ABOVE COMMENT.
Applicant could argue that "A" is COITect based on the SD-8, Section 2.I 1.3 wording that the rod may not fully insert with only the accumulator assist at reactor pressures above 1000 psig. Modify stem to ensure that this argument cannot be successful. Comment addressed "C" is not plausible... how could this ball valve failure make the rod move faster? Comment addressed Clarify the stem wording to be "As the control rod 10-1I is scramming inward, the ball check valve fails to re-position." This is clearer.
Comment addressed A question must be asked to the applicants. Comment addressed 29 201006 N
F 2
S A question must be asked to the licensee. Comment addressed K6.01 30 202001 N
F 3.
x
.g TIle stem wording"....LPCI Intiation Logic Division I has failed high" K3.06 may be confusing. Consider rewording the stem to ensure that applicants S
understand what is being asked. Comment addressed "D": B32-F032A should also be included. Comment addressed The question is worded to ask how the system will (Future) be affected, but the answers are worded in a maimer that states how the system was (past) affected. Maintain a consistency oftense in sentence structure. Comment addressed 31 202002 B
H 3
x
.g Top ofstem should be that Unit I WAS operating with the following K4.02 conditions. Comment addressed S
TIle Reactor Level Hi/Lo alarm is irrelevant since the next sentence states that level drops to scram setpoint and goes to +110".
Delete unnecessary information, Comment addressed Write in disclaimer.."Assuming all other equipment operated properly and all operator scram actions performed correctly, what will be the final status ofthe recirc pumps after the scram?" Comment addressed Page 10 of37
ES-401, Rev. 9 Written Exam Review Worksheet Brunswick 2007-301 Form ES-401-9 Q#
KlA#
B L
L Psychometric Flaws Content Flaws U
Comment M
0 0
Stem Cues TIF 1 Non
>1 Non Partial Min Q=
SRO E
Explanation N
K D
Focus Cred Cred KIA Only S
Dist Dist BIW "D" distractor...remove reason for trip. COl11l11ent addressed 32 204000 B
H 3
x x
.y SAMPLE PLAN STATES K5.05 FOR THE KIA, YET QUESTION KI.05 STATES K1.05? THE KIA STATEMENT SPELLED OUT IN THE S
QUESTION DOCUMENTATION DOES NOT APPEAR TO MATCH THE Kl.05 STATEMENT IN THE KIA CATALOG. HAVE LICENSEE EXPLAIN. THE APPROVED OUTLINE REQUIRES THE QUESTION TO BE WRITTEN TO K5.05 (FLOW CONTROLLERS). Original KA (204000 KI.05) was NOT used see record ofrejected KAs; replacement KA 204000 K5.05 was used instead.
KIA asks for the operational implication offlow controllers on the RWCU system. The question asks for how a loss ofair affects RWCU (not the flow controller). Suggestion: Ask a question related to remote manual/automatic controller G31-FHC-R606 reject blowdown controller isolation, etc. Comment addressed "A" and "D" are not plausible becanse there are no auto start features associated with RWCU pumps. It appears that none ofthat information is needed to make the answer choices nnique anyway. 111isinformation is unnecessary and supplies applicants with additional methods to discredit answer choices. Comment addressed Need a space after "100" in the stem. Comment addressed Need a space after "0" in the stem. Comment addressed 33 241000 B
H 3
II A question must be presented to the applicants. Comment addressed A1.l4 Suggest:
S Which ONE ofthe following describes how the control valves and bypass valves will respond ifthe "pressure setpoint decrease pushbutton" is held in the depressed position?
Comment addressed Need to change "D" to same format as the other answer choices. Comment addressed 34 202001 B
H 3
x x
.y UNAUTHORIZED KIA CHANGE. LICENSEE CHANGED KIA AI.09 WITHOUT CONSULTING WITH CEo QUESTION MUST BE S
WRITTEN TO MATCH ORIGINAL KIA. THEREFORE, THIS QUESTION IS UNSAT DUE TO NOT MATCHING THE KIA ON THE APPROVED OUTLINE. IF A DISCRIMINATING QUESTION CANNOT BE WRITTEN FOR THE ORIGINAL KIA, THEN DISCUSS WITH THE CE THE POSSffiILITY FOR SELECTING A DIFFERENT KIA. CE WILL SELECT ALLKlAs WHEN CHANGES TO THE APPROVED OUTLINES ARE WARRANTED. ). Original KA (256000 AI.09) was NOT used see record ofrejected KAs; replacement KA 202001 Page 11 of37
ES-401, Rev. 9 Written Exam Review Worksheet Brunswick 2007-301 Form ES-401-9 Q#
KJA#
B L
L Psychometric Flaws Content Flaws U
Comment M
0 0
Stem Cues T/F 1 Non
>1 Non Partial Min Q=
SRO E
Explanation N
K D
Focus Cred Cred KJA Only S
Dist Dist B/W AI.09 was used instead.
COMMENTS BELOW DO NOT NEED TO BE ADDRESSED DUE TO THE ABOVE COMMENT.
Is question piece ofstem worded appropriately? Comment addressed Re-word stem to say:
Given these conditions, which ONE ofthe following is indicated?
Comment addressed "A" is capitalized whereas "B" is not. (make the same). Comment addressed Why is Unit I seal staging alarm different? LE. Unit I does not have a LO Flow Alarm Setpoint. Comment addressed Delete in stem, "All other indications are nonna!." Comment addressed 35 268000 N
F 2
x
- y KIA Match: Qnestion does not test the ability to manually operate and/or A4.01 monitor, the sump integrators in the control room. Question tests S
knowledge ofplant location of equipment and leakage tech specs.
Comment addressed The middle sentence in each answer choice is not needed to make the answer choice unique and can be deleted from the question. Conunent addressed Write a question pertaining to the leak detection timers, i.e., Ist timer starts when pump is manually started. If still running when timer times out this causes alarm... 0R write a question where applicant is provided last integrator reading and asked to identify whether the identified or unidentified limit was reached. Conunent addressed 36 286000 B
F 2
x
- y Approved sample plan states K2.03. ES-401-4 states K2.02. Is this a K4.01 typo?
S UNAUTHORlZED KIA CHANGE. LICENSEE CHANGED KIA WITHOUT CONSULTING WITH CEo QUESTION MUST BE WRITTEN TO MATCH ORIGINAL KIA. THEREFORE, THIS QUESTION IS UNSAT DUE TO NOT MATCHING THE KIA ON THE APPROVED OUTLINE. IF A DISCRIMINATING QUESTION CANNOT BE WRITTEN FOR THE ORIGINAL KIA, THEN DISCUSS WITH THE CE THE POSSffiILITY FOR SELECTING A DIFFERENT KIA. CE WILL SELECT ALL KIAs WHEN CHANGES TO THE Page 12 of37
ES-401, Rev. 9 Written Exam Review Worksheet Brunswick 2007-301 Form ES-401-9 Q#
KiA#
B L
L Psvehometric Flaws Content Flaws U
Comment M
0 0
Stem Cues T/F 1 Non
>1 Non Partial Min Q=
SRO E
Explanation N
K D
Focus Cred Cred KiA Only S
Dist Dist B/W APPROVED OUTLINES ARE WARRANTED. Original KA (286000 K2.02) was NOT used see record ofrejected KAs; replacement KA 286000 K4.0l was used instead.
COMMENTS BELOW DO NOT NEED TO BE ADDRESSED DUE TO THE ABOVE COMMENT.
Why was K2.03 deselected? (power supply to fire detection is not minutia)
Comment addressed AOP 36.2 is Station Blackout procedure which directs EOP-OI-LEP-OI (Altemate Coolant Injection) which directs to maintain FP tank level greater than 27'6". If cannot be maintained, then go to OP-4I to used MUD tank. How is level maintained before using MUD tank? Comment addressed 37 290001 N
F 3
x
.y "A" and "D" are not plausible because the feature ofonly one SBGT auto-A3.02 starting doesn't exist. Comment addressed S
"C" is not plausible because the feature of only the outboard BFIVs closing doesn't exist.
Comment addressed Also, "B" and "C" including Purge fan stopping - - these fans are not normally in service. Comment addressed Also every answer includes the same statement that the Rx Bldg fans stop.
Can this be deleted? Comment addressed Suggestion: Write a question testing their knowledge ofhow the building delta P is normally maintained (vs what happens following a LI2 isolation signal) since this will be a better KA match. Comment addressed 38 214000 B
H 2
x
.y UNAUTHORIZED KIA CHANGE. LICENSEE CHANGED KIA KI.05 WITHOUT CONSULTING WITH CEo QUESTION MUST BE S
WRITTEN TO MATCH ORIGINAL KIA. THEREFORE, THIS QUESTION IS UNSA T DUE TO NOT MATCHING THE KIA ON THE APPROVED OUTLINE. IF A DISCRIMINATING QUESTION CANNOT BE WRITTEN FOR THE ORIGINAL KIA, THEN DISCUSS WITH THE CE THE POSSIBILITY FOR SELECTING A DIFFERENT KIA. CE WILL SELECT ALL KIAs WHEN CHANGES TO THE APPROVED OUTLINES ARE WARRANTED. Original KA (290002 K1.05) was NOT used see record ofrejected KAs; replacement KA 214000 Kl.05 was used instead.
Page 13 of37
ES-401, Rev. 9 Written Exam Review Worksheet Brunswick 2007-301 Form ES-401-9 Q#
KlA#
B L
L Psychometric Flaws Content Flaws U
Comment M
0 0
Stem Cnes T/F 1 Non
>1 Non Partial Min Q=
SRO E
Explanation N
K D
Focus Cred Cred KIA Only S
Dist Dist B/W Why was 290002 Kl.05 rejected? This is not minutia and importance is 3.l.
39 295001 B
F 2
x x
Y Provide before and after values for recirc pump speeds, core plate dP,jet A2.05 pump loop flows, etc. and let applicant identify what changed and then S
diagnose the failure. This will allow more plausible distractors, i.e., recirc speed control failure, APRM flow transmitter failure, entry to Low Core Flow AOP, etc. Comment addressed "A" is not plausible since the stem indicates that recirc speeds have not changed. (remove sentence saying speeds have not changed).
("C" and "D" are not plausible for a similar reason) Comment addressed 40 295003 B
H 3
S Distractor Analysis states that "C" is incorrect - this may be a typo.
AKl.03 41 295004 B
F 2
x
.g Cue exists in the stem because Panel 9A is being transferred and the G2.lJO COITect answer contains Panel 9A. Incorporate the following suggestion S
and this concem can be resolved. Comment addressed First paragraph - can everything after the comma be deleted? Ifthe below suggestion is incorporated, can the first paragraph be eliminated? Comment addressed Which ONE of the following identifies the location and the method for transferring Distribution Panel 9A to its altemate source?
A.
Turbine building 4160 Y BOP bus area; close altemate supply before opening the normal B.
Turbine building 4160 Y BOP bus area; open nonnal supply first then close the altemate supply C.
Battery Room in Cable Spread; close aitemate supply before opening the normal D.
Battery Room in Cable Spread; open normal supply first, then close the altemate supply.
42 295005 B
F 3
x x
x
.g The stem ofthe question asks for the MINIMUM that must be sensed... this AK2.01 could allow applicants to appeal since "D" would also be a true answer.
S Be a little more specific by asking for the MINIMUM NUMBER OF TOYs and coincident logic that would produce the scram. Modifying the question slightly should resolve the issue. Comment addressed The stem ofthe question tells the applicants that a "turbine control valve fast closure occurs." Why can't we allow them to recognize the load reject via plant parameters or alarms?
The stem of the question tells the applicants that "low disc dump oil Page 14 of37
ES-401, Rev. 9 Written Exam Review Worksheet Brunswick 2007-301 Form ES-401-9 Q#
KlA#
B L
L PsychometricFlaws Content Flaws U
Comment M
0 0
Stem Cues T/F 1 Non
>1 Non Partial Min Q=
SRO E
Explanation N
K D
Focus Cred Cred KIA Only S
Dist Dist BIW pressure is sensed on...." - delete the parameter that is sensed - applicants should know this. Comment addressed "A" is not plausible because one trip channel can never cause a full scram.
Consider changing "A" to TCVs: (aJld 3 OR 2 and 4? Discuss. Comment addressed 43 295006 B
H 3
x
.y According to APRM downscale alarm (A-6, 2-7), the downscale light will AA2.01 illuminate at 2.4%. Technically this is greater than 2%. What is the S
setpoint for the downscale lights? SD-9.6, Table 9.6-3 lists 2.4%. 01-37.5 page 80 of90 (for step RQ/6 in level power control) states that power is less than downscale setpoint. Comment addressed "C": Are the indications "in" the back panels, or "on" the back PaJle1S?
Comment addressed 44 295016 B
F 2
x
.y AOP-32, Section 4.0 (pg 35 of 72) states that this procedure assumes no AK2.01 other accident occurs when the control room evacuation is required. "C" S
and "D" are not plausible since these are EOP actions and beyond the design ofAOP-32 and the remote shutdown panel.
Use list of equipment in SD-62, page 10 of38, to obtain new plausible distractors and modify answers to include actions such as:
A.
operate RCIC B.
Reject suppression pool water to radwaste C.
Operate HPCI D.
Cool the drywell Comment addressed Consider writing question without the words "and related stations". This opens up the question to many items other than RSDP items. Comment addressed Is there a typo in distractor analysis? - Is "b" the correct answer, or is "A" the correct answer. Comment addressed 45 295018 B
H 3
x
.y KA does not match for two reasons:
AA2.04 I.
The KA is for component cooling water, i.e., closed cooling S
water system (versus service water) And 2.
The KA requires the applicant to determine and interpret system flow following a partial or complete loss ofCCW. Instead, this question requires the applicant to understand the service water valve logic instead ofinterpreting system flow given system parameters.
Comment addressed Page 15 of37
ES-401, Rev. 9 Written Exam Review Worksheet Brunswick 2007-301 Form ES-401-9 Q#
KiA#
B L
L PsvchomctricFlaws Content Flaws U
Comment M
0 0
Stem Cnes T/F 1 Non
>1 Non Partial Min Q-SRO E
Explanation N
K D
Focns Cred Cred KiA Only S
Dist Dist BIW A question must be presented to the applicants. Comment addressed 46 295019 B
H 3
x x
II RB INSTR AIR RECEIVER IB PRESS LOW (VA-OI, 1-2) setpoint is 95 AAI.OI psig and states that IB compressor will start and SY-5481 will auto-open.
S This is testable knowledge, therefore, the stem should not state that IE compressor is running because this diminishes the plausibility of distractor
'A." Comment addressed The first sentence in the stem "TIle RX Bldg Standby Compressors have been returned to service." may not be necessary. Consider deleting.
Comment addressed Also, for instrument and service air pressures listed in the stem, provide the meter numbers and noun names ofthe meters (instead of "at the RTGB")
since these pressure locations are needed to eliminate distractor "B" as correct answer. Comment addressed Modify the question portion ofthe stem to read: Based on these plant conditions, what action(s) will occur? Comment addressed 47 295021 B
F 2
II Reword the stem:
AK2.03 S
Suggest wording the question as follows:
Which ONE ofthe following is the preferred altemate shutdown cooling lineup in accordance with AOP-15.0, including the reason? Comment addressed 48 295023 B
H 3
x x
tJ "D" is only incorrect because ofthe word "auto actions" in the stem.
AK2.03 Suggest: and CAC vent and purge valves auto isolate and CREY System S
auto starts. Comment addressed The stem provides cues to a portion ofthe answer (CAC vent/purge) since it states that these valves are open. Instead, list the equipment that's running, i.e., 2A Purge Fan,etc. and the name and section ofthe procedure that's being used to ventilate the drywell while personnel entry is in progress. (they should know which valves are open based on this information) Comment addressed Shorten the stem by removing the information that SBGT initiated and the Rx Bldg isolated. TIley should be able to predict these auto actions based on the radiation alarms. Comment addressed 49 295024 N
F 3
x x
II Suggested wording:
G2.2.25 Which ONE ofthe following tech spec requirements ensures that the peak S
drywell pressure following a design basis accident will not exceed the Page 16 of37
ES-401, Rev. 9 Written Exam Review Worksheet Brunswick 2007-301 Form ES-401-9 Q#
KJA#
B L
L Psvehometrie Flaws Content Flaws U
Comment M
0 0
Stem Cues T/F 1 Non
>1 Non Partial Min Q-SRO E
Explanation N
K D
Focus Cred Cred KJA Only S
Dist Dist BIW design pressure? Comment addressed "C" is not plausible. Suggest including the tech spec requirement for the rx bldg-to-torus vacuum breakers instead ofthe PCN spec. Comment addressed 50 295025 B
F 2
S Reword the stem to ask a question.
G2.J.23 51 295026 B
H 2
X?
-IJ It is pennissible to provide the HCTL graph to the applicants as the ill!ly G2.1.2 reference. EOP-02-PCCP shall not be supplied to the applicants. They REF S
should know that ifthey get into the UNSAFE region on the HCTL curve that they must EO. Comment addressed Distractors are plausible and K/A is matched.
Is "B" a COITect answer per RCIP-12 thru -17 ofLPC chart? Comment addressed 52 295028 N
H 2
x
-IJ 00 the parameters in the stem unequivocally require EO? IfOW Spray is EIG.OI started, step OW/T-19 allows restoring less than 300 deg. Need to add S
something to stem to say that OW sprays are unavailable.
"A" and "B" are not reasons. (like "C" and "0") Modify as:
A.
Prevent chugging, i.e., fatigue fracture of downcomer due to cyclic condensation ofthe steam at the downcomer openings.
B.
Prevent exceeding the PCPL "A" C.
Prevent exceeding the suppression chamber design temperature O.
Prevent exceeding the SRV maximum qualification temperature Comment addressed Ifwe aren't providing charts on this question, then why don't we simply ask the reason for emergency depressurization when OW temperature cannot be restored and maintained below 300 deg? (instead ofproviding plant data) Comment addressed 53 295028 N
H 2
x E
EOP-02-PCCP shall not be provided to the applicant. Only the OWSIL EAI.04 graph shall be supplied to the applicant, Comment addressed REF S
A question is not presented to the applicants. Comment addressed TIle 7.5 psig OW pressure in the stem is too close to the line - make it 9 psig (don't make it close to 11.5 psig) Comment addressed The stem needs to have a torus pressure provided to help with making "A" wrong. - Add torus pressure of7.5 psig to the stem Comment addressed Page 17 of37
ES-401, Rev. 9 Written Exam Review Worksheet Brunswick 2007-301 Form ES-401-9 Q#
KlA#
B L
L PsychometricFlaws Content Flaws U
Comment M
0 0
Stem Cues T/F 1 Non
>1 Non Partial Min Q=
SRO E
Explanation N
K D
Focus Cred Cred KIA Only S
Dist Dlst BIW Change stem to Unit 2 to minimize the number ofcharts being distributed.
(already have several Unit I questions requiring charts.) Comment addressed Remove the words "and steady" from the drywell average air temperature in the stem because this could preclude "D" being correct. Comment addressed Change "A" and "D" as follows:
A.
Spray the drywell to lower drywell pressure below 1.7 psig.
(this makes "A" wrong since SEP-IO requires stopping sprays at 2.5 psig.)
D.
Spray the drywell to maintain drywell temperature less than 300 deg (this is more correct since current temperature is not currently exceeding the design.) Comment addressed 54 295030 B
F 2
x B
Question could be considered LOK~F. Comment addressed EKI.OI S
Two points to make on reference material:
1.
IfPCCP is distributed for another test item, then this becomes a direct lookup 2.
If containment graphs are not provided, then applicant will not be able to eliminate "A."
Comment addressed Remove the phrase "terminate HPCI operation" from all choices. Comment addressed Re-word "C" and "D" as follows to enhance plausibility:
B.
only if adequate core cooling can be assured.
C.
Only ifPCPL-A is exceeded.
Comment addressed 55 295031 N
F 2
x x
.y Question is written at the (F)undamental LOK. Question only requires the EKI.02 applicant to know what to do when SDC inadvertent isolation occurs. This S
can be answered using "memory" level knowledge, without much, ifany, analytical thought process. Comment addressed KA requires applicant knowledge ofthe operational implications (i.e.,
cannot use recirc loop temps or bottom head temperatures for vessel coolant monitoring, etc.) while at natural circulation RPV level (i.e., what is the lowest level that we can assure natural circulation is occuning).
Question as written is testing loss ofdecay heat removal mitigation strategies. Comment addressed Is there any possibility that the S5 could direct performance of any ofthe other distractors? The NOTE in tile AOP states "or as directed by 55 Page 18 of37
ES-401, Rev. 9 Written Exam Review Worksheet Brunswick 2007-301 Form ES-401-9 Q#
KlA#
B L
L PsychometricFlaws Content Flaws U
Comment M
0 0
Stem Cues TIF 1 Non
>1 Non Partial Min Q=
SRO E
Explanation N
K D
Focus Cred Cred KIA Only S
Dist Dist B/W based on plant conditions."
"C" is correct to maintained below 212 deg lAW AOP-15 step 3.2.12 feed and bleed using the MSL's (OP-32) Comment addressed 56 295037 N
H 2
x x
.g No references shall be provided to the applicant.
Comment addressed EA2.06 REF S
As written, "0" is true under ALL conditions. Connnent addressed 57 295038 N
F 2
x
.y Is this question written at the RO knowledge level? This material is almost EKl.OI exclusively reserved for SRO-only questions. Have the licensee justify the S
reasons for asking this on the RO exam. Also ensure the licensee understands that a consistent application ofthis reasoning must also be applied when the SRO exam is reviewed. Comment addressed "A" and "0" not plausible:
Using common sense for a BWR, the Main Steam and Reactor Coolant fluids are one-in-the-same. Ifthe MSLs run outside of containment, why would a LOCA, which occurs inside containment, be plausible? Comment addressed KA requires knowledge of operational implications of internal exposure concems. Looks like a good question for HVAC controls, RWP items, etc.
58 600000 N
F 2
x
.g KIA statement may be incorrect. "applications" vice "implications"?
AKI.02 Comment addressed S
For "C" and "0" to be plausible, the licensee must supply information that states that other rooms containing safety related pumps do actually contain sprinkler systems. If the licensee can justify plausibility, then "C" and "0" will be satisfactory from a plausibility standpoint. Comment addressed Delete the second part of "C" and "0". This information is not needed to make these answer choices unique. Therefore, "C" and "0" also do not test any precautions that are necessary - which the question asks for in the stem. Comment addressed Answer choice format provides the applicant with three different fire suppression systems and four possible answer choices. TIle answer choices would be better if four different suppression systems were being used with no precautions; or two different suppression systems were being used with two different precautions. This comment is why the second part of "C" and "0" can be deleted. Comment addressed Need a copy ofthe PFP procedures to look at for RCIC and RHR room fire protection systems. Comment addressed Page 19 of37
ES-401, Rev. 9 Written Exam Review Worksheet Brunswick 2007-301 Form ES-401-9 Q#
KlA#.
B L
L Psvchomctric Flaws Content Flaws U
Comment M
0 0
Stem Cues T/F 1 Non
>1 Non Partial Mill.
Q=
SRO E
Explanation N
K D
Focus Cred Cred KIA Only S
Dist Dist B/W 59 295010 B
H 3
X B
Degree F symbol did not print correctly, Comment addressed AK2.05 REF S
No references will be provided to the applicants for this question.
Applicants should know that they need to maintain D/W temp below 152 F and that they need to defeat the LOCA lockout. As written, I agree.
Comment addressed Question is SAT if tile "References to be supplied to applicants" is changed to none. Comment addressed PC/P-4, & -6 allow tOIUS sprays per SEP-03 (answer "C") since drywell pressure is above 1.7 psig. "C" may not be wrong. Discuss with licensee.
Comment addressed 60 295015 N
F 2
x Y
No reference shall be provided to tile applicants. Comment addressed AKl.02 REF S
Proposed question wording does not readcorrectly, The word "directs" should be changed to "informs", Comment addressed Question statement should state, "In accordance with whatever basis document is being used to support tile answer." For example, "Which one of the following is the reason for the above requirement, as stated in "Basis Document Title." Comment addressed "A" can be argued as inoorrect, even though it is quoted from tile reference. TIle reactivity effects are very predictable for a cooldown - A cooldown will predictably add positive reactivity. It could be that tile concern is whether the reactor will remain shutdown if tile rate of positive reactivity addition from the cooldown exceeds the rate of negative reactivity addition from the boron addition. TIle answer verbiage must be specific to the actual concern to ensure that the correct answer cannot be argued as incorrect. Comment addressed Is "partially borated core" a conunon terminology? Would it be better to state that tile reactivity effects of a cooldown are unpredictable when Cold Shutdown Boron weight has not yet been established? Comment addressed "C" is not credible. Unless "controlled" vice "uncontrolled" reactivity manipulation is defined in plant procedures (I.E. Conduct ofOps Procedure). If there is plant documentation to support plausibility, then tile distracor plausibility acceptable. Comment addressed 61 295020 B
H 2.
x B
Is there any way that "A" can be successfuIIy argued as correct? Comment AK1.01 addressed S
Page 20 of37
ES-401, Rev. 9 Written Exam Review Worksheet Brunswick 2007-301 Form ES-401-9 Q#
KlA#
B L
L Psychometric Flaws Content Flaws U
Comment M
0 0
Stem Cues TIF 1 Non
>1 Non Partial Min Q-SRO E
Explanation N
K D
Focus Cred Cred KIA Only S
Dist Dist BIW Is there any way that "B" can be successfully argued as C01Tect? Ifthe Main Condenser is part ofthe condensate system and the Main Condenser is not available, then the part ofthe condensate system is not available.
"B" could potentially be worded better if it were more specific to what part ofthe condensate system is unavailable. Comment addressed Reword the stem question: "Which ONE ofthe following plant conditions means that the condenser is NOT available? Comment addressed Suggest changing "C" (correct answer) to "A1l4KV BOP busses are de-energized. Comment addressed 62 295022 N
F 2
x B
"D" states for the operator to start a CRD - do they actually want to start a AA1.01 Control Rod Drive? Or do they want to start a Pump or a System? Double S
check the wording. Comment addressed "C" is not plausible. Lowering power to 26% would require rod insertion, which is not credible with CRD issues. Comment addressed 63 295029 B
H 2
x x
.y Question does not match KA: KA requires the applicant to EA2.02 determine/interpret REACTOR pressure as it applies to a high torus level REF S
condition, e.g., when emergency depressurization is or is not required; SRV Tail Pipe Level Limit, etc. Instead, this question is incorrectly written for DRWELL PRESSURE. Comment addressed EOP-02-PCCP shall not be provided to the applicants. Comment addressed Is it possible to change the DIW pressure to something above the limit of the curve regardless of level (I.E. 80 psig)? This would allow the question to be asked in a closed book format, It would not be expected for the applicants to have the curve memorized, but they should know that if pressure exceeds 77 psig, that the limit has been violated. Comment addressed A question must be asked to the applicants. The question cannot be implied. Conunent addressed "A" could be correct, There is nothing in the stem that would indicate that release rates would be exceeded; therefore, if containment was vented, then it is possible that ODCM release rates would not be violated. A wording change can likely salvage the distractor. Comment addressed "C": should "assure" be changed to "ensure"? Conunent addressed 64 295033 B
F 2
x
.y Ifthe reference material Call be used to validate the question, then the EK3.04.
question should be SAT. Comment addressed Page 21 of37
ES-401, Rev. 9 Written Exam Review Worksheet Brunswick 2007-301 Form ES-401-9 Q#
KiA#
B L
L Psychometric Flaws Content Flaws U
Comment M
0 0
Stem Cues T/F 1 Non
>1 Non Partial Min Q=
SRO E
Explanation N
K D
Focus Cred Cred KiA Only S
Dist Dist BIW S
KA mismatch: KA pertains to reasons for evacuating the RX BLDG (not turbine building). Suggest writing a EOP-03-SCCP question which involves 2-UA-03, 2-7 or AOP-5. Comment addressed 65 295035 N
F 2
x
.y "0" may be correct (see step SCCP-12) Comment addressed EIG.OI "A" is correct because ifthe blowout panel operates, then SBGT will not S
maintain the negative pressure in the reactor building. Comment addressed Suggest changing the stem as written below and replacing distractors with erroneous information from the OEOP-04-RRCP. Comment addressed Which ONE ofthe following is the basis for entering OEOP-03-SCCP when a positive pressure condition exists in the reactor building? Comment addressed 66 G2.1.32 B
F 2
S Would it be possible for the question stem to be worded: "In Mode 3, OP-10 prohibits venting the drywell and the suppression pool chamber simultaneously because the action could result in...."? Comment addressed If the above comment is acceptable for incorporation, can the first paragraph be eliminated? Comment addressed A question is not presented to the applicants. Comment addressed 67 G2.1.1 B
F I-x
.g Question is at the Fundamental LOK. Recall of or-o1.02 is all that is 2
necessary to arrive at the correct answer. The question really could be S
worded to test the recall of Section 5.1.4.a.
"0" is not plausible. There are no other plant conditions when 5 ROs are required to be in the control room. One suggestion would be to test some aspect of the Tech Spec requirement as well. For instance, TS 5.2.2.b states that at least one RO shall be in the control room when fuel is in the reactor. Maybe each answer choice could be a two part format with one part being Admin Requirements and the other part being Tech Spec requirements? Discuss with licensee. Comment addressed LOD = I to 2. LOD will rise to a 2 if question can be modified to contain 3 plausible distractors. Comment addressed Eliminate confusion by adding words to the question: "What is the MINIMUM number of operators required....to be in the combined UI and U2 main control rooms....." Conunent addressed A question is not presented to the applicants. Comment addressed Page 22 of37
ES-401, Rev. 9 Written Exam Review Worksheet Brunswick 2007-301 Form ES-401-9 Q#
KiA#
B L
L Psychometric Flaws Content Flaws U
Comment M
0 0
Stem Cues T/F 1 Non
>1 Non Partial Min Q=
SRO E
Explanation N
K D
Focus Cred Cred KiA Only S
Dist Dist B/W 68 G2.2.34 N
H 2
X x
Y Is it necessary to state the reason and effect ofbypassing the feedwater heaters. This is teaching in the stem. The applicants should be able to S
conclude that FW temp wiII lower ifthe HP heaters are bypassed. Discuss removing "to achieve an 84F equivalent reduction in final feedwater temperature. Comment addressed Suggest adding "thermal hydraulic' prior to "instability' in the correct answer. Comment addressed "D" is correct also. OGP-I3, P&L 3.4 states "Reduced Feedwater heating increases the core inlet subcooling which shifts flux shape toward the bottom ofthe core. This may challenge thermal limits in this region."
Comment addressed A question is not presented to the applicants. Comment addressed 69 G2.2.3 N
F 1-Y This question is a collection ofTRUE / FALSE statements. Comment 2
addressed S
Consider rewording the question as follows: "Which ONE ofthe following is a difference between the Unit I and Unit 2 condensate and feedwater systems?" Comment addressed GP-05 was not provided to allow the CE to validate the question. Question is UNSAT because ofthis until it can be properly validated - otherwise, the question wiII be rated an "E". Comment addressed Change "A" and "B" to stay with the theme of manual start logic for the condensate pumps. Include items such as Cond Pump discharge header pressure being either < I10 psig or < 130 psig. Comment addressed If "A" and "B" are enhanced, then the LOD wiII rise to an acceptable level (2). Comment addressed 70 G2.3.IO B
F I-x x
Y UNAUTHORIZED KIA CHANGE. LICENSEE CHANGED KIA 2
WITHOUT CONSULTING WITH CEo QUESTION MUST BE S
WRITTEN TO MATCH ORIGINAL KIA. THEREFORE, THIS QUESTION IS UNSAT DUE TO NOT MATCHING THE KIA ON THE APPROVED OUTLINE. IF A DISCRIMINATING QUESTION CANNOT BE WRITTEN FOR THE ORIGINAL KIA, THEN DISCUSS WITH THE CE THE POSSffiILITY FOR SELECTING A DIFFERENT KIA. CE WILL SELECT ALL KIAs WHEN CHANGES TO THE APPROVED OUTLINES ARE WARRANTED. Original K.A G 2.3.2 was used instead of licensee's replacement G 2.3.10 THIS KIA CHANGE WAS NOT APPROVED AND COMMUNICATED TO THE LICENSEE VIA PHONE AT THE TIME THE OUTLINES Page 23 of37
ES-401, Rev. 9 Written Exam Review Worksheet Brunswick 2007-301 Form ES-401-9 Q#
KlA#
B L
L PsychometricFlaws Content Flaws U
Comment M
0 0
Stem Cues T/F 1 Non
>1 Non Partial Min Q-SRO E
Explanation N
K D
Focus Cred Cred KIA Only S
Dist Dist B/W WERE INITIALLY APPROVED.
COMMENTS BELOW DO NOT NEED TO BE ADDRESSED DUE TO THE ABOVE COMMENT.
"A" and "D" are not plausible because placing TIPS under clearance while allowing the mode switch to be in a position where TIPS can still be moved is not a reasonable misconception. 1would compare it to tagging a pump and stating that the breaker be placed in a position where the pump could still be started. This aspect of "A" and "D" must be addressed for the question to be SAT. Different question used.
LOD will lise when above connnent is incorporated.
71 G2.3.l B
F I
x x
Y A question is not presented to the applicants. Comment addressed S
"A" is not credible. 30 Rem does not correspond to any other limit that could be incorrectly linked to the correct answer. Comment addressed "C" and "D" are not credible because 75 Rem and 250 Rem do not have any context to dose limits (even though 250 is 10 times 25). Comment addressed Question is written at the SRO-only level. The supporting reference contains information that supports this being SRO-only knowledge, in that it is the SRO's responsibility to approve any dose expected to exceed Part 20 limits. Discuss with the licensee.
Comment addressed PROPOSED OUESTION fYOGTLE 2005):
An operator beganworkatVogtle inMay2004. Thecurrent dateis May2005. Theoperator has the following dose history (TEDE):
- Year 2004 = 3000 mrern
- Year 2005 = 1427 mrem (Accumulated through May 2005)
Theworker is directed to perform ajobwithanestimated doseof 1156mrem.
WhichONEof the followingcorrectly statestherequired approval, if any,neededpriorto beginning the work?
A.
Vice President B.
HP/C Manager C.
NRC D.
No approval needed m
G2.3.1 Knowledgeof 10 CFR:20 andrelatedfacilityradiation controlrequirements.
Page 24 of37
ES-401, Rev. 9 Written Exam Review Worksheet Brunswick 2007-301 Form ES-401-9 Q#
KiA#
B L
L PsychometricFlaws Content Flaws U
Comment M
0 0
Stem Cues TIF 1 Non
>1 Non Partial Min Q=
SRO E
Explanation N
K D
Focus Cred Cred KiA Only S
Dist Dist BfW KIA MATCH ANALYSIS Question tests the knowledge of plant admin and 10 CFR 20 requirements and what level of approval is needed to perform the work. The applicant must know how to calculate his projected dose, he must know the Admin limits (4500 mrem} and must know that he is not projected to exceed the admin limit, thus not needing approval.
ANSWER / DISTRACTOR ANALYSIS A
Incorrect. Plausible because if the applicant does not understand that the dose limits are on a calandar year, then this would be the correct answer because the limit of 4500 mrem would beexceeded when looking at the previous 12 months.
B. Incorrect. Plausiblebecausethe HP/Cmanagerisresponsibleforthe conductof HP.
C. Incorrect. Plausible because if the applicant makes the assumption that it is a rolling 4 quarters, then NRC would be required to benotified for exceeding the 10 CFR 20 limits.
D. Correct. This is less than 10 CFR 20 limits for TEDE for the calandar year, thus requiring no approval to perform the work.
REFERENCES I. LO-LP-6392O-C-08, Radiation Exposure Limits, Rev. 08, 12/14/2000.
- 2. 0092G-C, Radiation Exposure Limits and Administrative Guidelines, Rev. 14, dated 01/2212004.
72 2.4.27 N
?
2 X
tJ OPFP-O13 was not provided, therefore not allowing the CE to review all aspects ofthe question. Comment addressed S
Are radios used for fire communications? If so, then "C" potentially could be successfully argued as a correct answer. Comment addressed Why do "A" and "B" state that the PAis "restricted to fire communications", yet "C" and "D" only state that the use ofthe PA is "restricted."? It appears that this piece of each answer choice is the same and could be deleted because it does not add anything, to make the answer choices unique. Comment addressed A question is not presented to the applicants. Comment addressed "B" and "D" are not plausible since the SLC system is in the reactor building. This doesn't test the applicants knowledge ofPFP-13. It tests their knowledge ofplant equipment location. Comment addressed 73 G2.4.21 B
F I
x tJ The first part of "C" and "D" are not plausible because the indication has changed from "NO SCRAM" to "SCRAM RODS". Is there any plant S
condition where the "SCRAM RQDS" could be displayed without a scram signal? Comment addressed Suggest modifying "C" and "D" to include some aspect ofrod scram time met or not met and eliminate portion saying scram signal has not OCCUlTed.
Comment addressed Page 25 of37
ES-401, Rev. 9 Written Exam Review Worksheet Brunswick 2007-301 Form ES-401-9 Q#
KiA#
B L
L Psychometric Flaws Content Flaws
- U Comment M
0 0
Stem Cues T/F 1 Non
>1 Non Partial Min Q=
SRO E
Explanation N
K D
Focus Cred Cred KiA Only S
Dist Dist BIW As constructed, question may be too simple to allow for plausible distractors. Comment addressed A question is not presented to the applicants. Comment addressed 74 G2.4.23 N
F 2
x Y
"D" contains a typo - missing "s" on "allow". Comment addressed REF S
"B" is worded generically as compared to "C". Should the specific procedure that is to be entered be stated in "B"?
Discuss with licensee.
Comment addressed "D" is correct, It is true that the operators MAY return to step 14. Discuss with the licensee. Comment addressed No reference should be provided to the applicants for this question.
Comment addressed 75 G2.4.15 N
F I
x Y
"D" reads awkwardly - potentially punctuation is incorrect? Comment addressed S
"B" is not plausible unless there is a phone system at the plant where a dial tone is not present (in a context where it would sometimes be present).
Comment addressed Analysis for answer choice "B" states that there is no "beep" for this system. If that is the case, then how can "A" be correct? Comment addressed Only one portion of "B" should be incorrect - there should not be multiple pieces ofknowledge that can be used to discredit this distractor. Change "three" to "two" if two is correct, Comment addressed Change "C" and "D" to pertain to the Selective Signaling System. "C" and "D" contains information that is clearly intended for radio use of some kind. Comment addressed LOD=I due to above comments.
Is there an administrative procedure which prescribes communications protocol for alarms, directives, etc during EOP implementation? Comment addressed SROEXAM 76 295001 B
F 2
x x
x x
x Y
KA Mismatch: Question does not require the applicant to interpret the Page 26 of37
ES-401, Rev. 9 Written Exam Review Worksheet Brunswick 2007-301 Form ES-401-9 Q#
KlA#
B L
L Psychometric Flaws Content Flaws U
Comment M
0 0
Stem Cues T/F 1 Non
>1 Non Partial Min Q=
SRO E
Explanation N
K D
Focus Cred Cred KIA Only S
Dist Dist BIW AA2.01 power/flow map. Question requires fundamental knowledge of which S
value of core flow to use for determining stability region compliance.
Comment addressed The word "valid" beside the U2CPWTCF 44.6 Mlbm/hris a cue that prompts the correct answer "A", i.e., use U2CPWTCF (delete the word "valid"). If needed, state what color each parameter is, or better yet, print the exam in color so that each parameter is accurately stated. Comment addressed "B" and "D" are the same distractor (safe graph), i.e., both state use the recorder. See suggestion below, which would also address this comment.
Comment addressed The question is not SRO-only because it doesn't require the applicant to select appropriate procedure actions. It only requires the applicant to know that when U2CPWTCF is valid, use that point on the power-to-flow map.
In order to make question SRO only, provide COLR power to Flow Map Figures to applicant for the following question:
Unit 2 is operating at rated power with OPRMs operable, when the field breaker for 2A Reactor Recirc Pump trips OPEN due to a malfunction.
Plant conditions have been stabilized and are as follows:
Total Core Flow Recorder (R613)..... 44 Mlbm/hr Core Plate dP (R613).................. ??
Jet Pump Flow Loop A (R61IA)..... 13 Mlbm/hr Jet Pump Flow Loop B (R6IIB).... 57 Mlbm/hr Computer Point BOl8 (total core flow)... ??
Computer Point U2NSSWDP........... ??
Computer Point U2CPWTCF........... ??
Using the attached Power-to-Flow Maps, which ONE ofthe following is the COITect point on the map and the appropriate actions to take?
A.
OPRM Enabled Region above the rod block line; Perform xyz B.
Scram Avoidance Region above the rod block line; Perform abc C.
OPRM Enabled Region below the rod block line; Perform xyz D.
Scram Avoidance Region below the rod block line: Perform abc Comment addressed If the appropriate actions are tested based on plant conditions, then the above suggestion can be written at the SRO level, For instance, simple procedure entry conditions would be RO knowledge, but specific actions, or intemal procedure transitions could be considered SRO-only knowledge.
Similar to Q#95.
Page 27 of37
ES-401, Rev. 9 Written Exam Review Worksheet Brunswick 2007-301 Form ES-401-9 Q#
KlA#
B L
L Psychometric Flaws Content Flaws U
Comment M
0 0
Stem Cues T/F 1 NOli
>1 Non Partial Min Q-SRO E
Explanation N
K D
Focus Cred Cred KIA Only S
Dist Dist BIW 77 295003 N
F 2
X X
lJ This question does not test the KA because it does not require the applicant G2.1.14 to have knowledge ofsystem status criteria. To match the KA for an SRO, S
write a question testing knowledge of what the system status criteria is for classifying an official "station blackout" (on one unit) and knowledge of the required notifications in accordance with AOP-36.2. Comment addressed From general discussion section ofAOP-36.2 (pg 148 of 180):
The term "Station Blackout" refers to the complete loss of AC power to the essential (emergency) and nonessential (BOP) switchgear busses in a nuclear power plant. Station Blackout, therefore involves a Loss of Off-Site Power concurrent with a turbine trip, and the failure ofthe On-Site Diesel Generator Emergency Power System, but not the loss of available AC power to busses fed by 125 VDC batteries through inverters, or the loss ofpower from alternate AC power sources.
Comment addressed Suggestion:
Test above knowledge and ask tile applicant to evaluate tile appropriate supplementary actions listed in Table I on page 5 of 180. Comment addressed "A" is also partially correct (or at least as correct as "0") because AOP-36.2 only requires two notifications: Dispatcher & Security. A SBO will place them in the E-Plan, which would require NRC notification. Comment addressed CE performed word searched to by to validate "0" as correct, but referenced procedure does not appear to support the correct answer.
Comment addressed Question stem asks for AOP-36.2 required notifications yet "0" is listed as the answer, i.e., Dispatcher, Security, & Mgr Ops. Per AOP-36.2, "0" is not a correct answer. Comment addressed 78 295024 B
H 2
X
.g "C" is not plausible because AOP's never direct SEPs. Comment addressed G2.4.31 S
Consider adding torus venting to two distractors since the torus is required to be vented first in SEP-OI. Comment addressed 79 295025 B
H 2
x x
lJ UNAUTHORIZED KIA CHANGE. LICENSEE CHANGED KIA G2.1.27 WITHOUT CONSULTING WITH CEo QUESTION MUST BE REF S
WRITTEN TO MATCH ORIGINAL KIA. THEREFORE, THIS QUESTION IS UNSAT DUE TO NOT MATCHING THE KIA ON THE APPROVED OUTLINE.
IF A DISCRIMINATING QUESTION Page 28 of37
ES-401, Rev. 9 Written Exam Review Worksheet Brunswick 2007-301 Form ES-401-9 Q#
KlA#
B L
L Psychometric Flaws Content Flaws U
Comment M
0 0
Stem Cues T/F 1 Non
>1 Non Partial Min Q-SRO E
Explanation N
K D
Focus Cred Crcd KIA Only S
Dist Dist BIW CANNOT BE WRITTEN FOR THE ORIGINAL KIA, THEN DISCUSS WITH THE CE THE POSSIBILITY FOR SELECTING A DIFFERENT KIA. CE WILL SELECT ALL KIAs WHEN CHANGES TO THE APPROVED OUTLINES ARE WARRANTED. Original KA (295025 G2. I.27) was NOT used see record ofrejected KAs; replacement KA 295025 G2.4.6 was used instead.
COMMENTS BELOW DO NOT NEED TO BE ADDRESSED DUE TO THE ABOVE COMMENT.
Question proposes to distribute the RVCP flow chart to use on this question. Comment addressed "C" is not plausible because emergency depressurization is not performed in steam cooling mode. In steam cooling, no emergency depressurization is performed - - only attempts to regain an injection system is performed while level is below TAF until LL5 is reached. Comment addressed "D" is not plausible since OP's aren't used in RVCP EOP space. Comment addressed 80 295028 N
H 2
x x
.y Question proposes distributing the PCCP flowchart to answer this question.
EA2.01 Comment addressed REF S
"B" could be successfully argued as a correct answer since RPV level and pressure are not provided in the stem. i.e., SEP-10 (restarting the drywell coolers) can only be performed when a LOCA signal does not exist.
Comment addressed The stem provides a cue that a "small break LOCA" has OCCUlTed.
Let the applicants determine that LOCA signal does not exist by providing RPV level and pressure in the stem. Comment addressed 81 295030 N
H 3
x Ii "A" is not plausible. Core Spray is not violating vortex limitations.
EA2.02 Comment addressed REF S
Add additional explanation in the justification for "C" as tight answer:
RHR is currently violating vortex limit. Comment addressed Will require distributing the vortex and NPSH graphs. Comment addressed Two periods after "D". Comment addressed Delete parts ofdistractors that are not needed to make the answer choices unique. Comment addressed Page 29 of37
ES-401, Rev. 9 Written Exam Review Worksheet Brunswick 2007-301 Form ES-401-9 Q#
KlA#
B L
L Psychometric Flaws Content Flaws U
Comment M
0 0
Stem Cues TIF 1 Non
>1 Non Partial Min Q-SRO E
Explanation N
K D
Focus Cred Cred KIA Only S
Dist Dlst BfW 82 295038 B
H 2
X X
X Y
"0" can be argued as correct IF the MSIVs are still open (but required to G2.1.23 BfW be closed). RVCP step RC/P-05 bypasses the questions related to fuel S
failure and steam line break when anticipation of emergency depressurization occurs. Comment addressed "C" is not past tense like the other answer choices. Comment addressed Backward logic ("C"):
Status ofthe MSIVs need to be provided in the stem to avoid any reverse logic concerns. This wiII require some modification to question and answer choices. Comment addressed "A" is not plausible because all piping penetrations are required to be closed when the vessel is flooded. Comment addressed 83 295008 N
H I
X x
x Y
The stem cues the applicant that a steam flow/ feed flow mismatch has AAl.02 caused transfer to l-element. TIle applicant should be able to interpret that S
the flow transmitter failure wiII cause a transfer to l-element because ofa mismatch. Eliminate this and the other two items below will be fixed.
Comment addressed "A" is not plausible since the stem already tells the applicant that the system automatically shifted to l-element for automatic functions.
Comment addressed "0" is not plausible because l-element control does not require the steam flow transmitters operable. Comment addressed KIA Match: Is any knowledge ofa high reactor water level being tested?
Comment addressed 84 295029 B
F 2
S Question is SAT.
G2.1.32 85 295032 B
H 3
.g Why is ONLY capitalized in "A" and not in "C"? Emphasis on words in EAl.02 the answer choices must be consistently applied. Comment addressed REF S
TIle correct answer is worded to "consider" performing an action. It is never incorrect to consider performing an action. The answer needs to be worded in a more precise manner. (same comment holds true for "0" also)
- maybe deleting the word "consider" will fix it. Comment addressed Are references needed? Comment addressed Exactly what references are to be supplied to the applicant? Can Table I be the only reference that is supplied? Comment addressed Page 30 of37
ES-401, Rev. 9 Written Exam Review Worksheet Brunswick 2007-301 Form ES-401-9 Q#
KlA#
B L
L Psvchometrlc Flaws Content Flaws U
Comment M
0 0
Stem Cues T/F 1 Non
>1 Non Partial Min Q-SRO E
Explanation N
K D
Focus Cred Cred KIA Only S
Dist Dist BIW 86 203000 B
H 3
X X
.y KIA Match: This question tests system valve logic knowledge and G2.l.23 flowpaths for the different modes of the RHR system. (vs knowledge of S
system procedures and integrated plant procedures (on RHR/LPCI) during the different modes ofplant operation.(shutdown, refueling, etc.) Comment addressed Similarly, the question does not include any ofthe SRO only criteria listed in IOCFR55.43. Knowledge that is specifically required of the SRO (and not ofthe RO) must be tested in order for this question to be written at the SRO level. Comment addressed 87 212000 N
H 3
X x
.y Stem is unclear with respect to the current status of RPS.
Actual electrical A2.02 line-ups need to be supplied in the stem. Comment addressed S
IfE7 is de-energized in accordance with OOP-50.!, Section 7.7 and 20P-03, Section 8.! and 8.5, then the alternate RPS path must be powered from E8. (this is procedure prerequisite to preclude de-energizing "A" RPS when E7 is removed from service). Comment addressed Stem is unclear with respect to what the following phrase means: "if it becomes necessary to supply power to RPS A." Does this mean what ifE8 subsequently becomes de-energized? Ifso, then "A" is correct, Comment addressed 88 215003 N
H I
x
.y No correct answer because IRMs A, E, G (hip system "A") all indicate A2.0l correctly. (note: lRM "C" and "F' are in different trip systems) Comment S
addressed Stem is confusing because it initially states that "All IRMs are operable and on Range 1" whereas the later portion of the stem states" lRMs "C" and "F' are downscale with "All other lRMs are responding as expected.
Comment addressed Suggest providing pre-startup count levels for SRMs and IRMs and then let applicant determined what is wrong and what procedure action should be taken for either:
l.
an overlap problem OR 2.
a voltage pre-amp problem between Range 6 & 7.
Comment addressed 89 215004 B
H 2
x x
.y An RO is required to know when fuel movement is required to be halted.
G2.4.1l Comment addressed S
Where in Fl-l-l l does it state that fuel movement must be stopped ifCRs rise by a factor of 3? Step 4.29.2 does not appear to exist. Word searches in FH-ll did not identify the requirement either. Comment addressed Page 31 of37
ES-401, Rev. 9 Written Exam Review Worksheet Brunswick 2007-301 Form ES-401-9 Q#
KiA#
B L
L Psychometric Flaws Content Flaws U
Comment M
0 0
Stem Cues T/F 1 Non
>1 Non Partial Min Q=
SRO E
Explanation N
K D
Focus Cred Crcd KiA Only S
Dist Dist BIW The answer key refers to a factor of 3 increase whereas OFH-II, Rev 82,
P&L4.39 states: "Fuel movement should be suspended....ifan SRM increases by an OVERALL factor of 5 relative to the baseline SRM count rate obtained after the initial loading of fuel bundles around each SRM centered 4-bundle cell is complete." Which is correct? Comment addressed Does answer "B" mean that step 521 was okay to complete and then quit?
Or quit at the end of step 520? (similarly for "C" and "D") Comment addressed Does the stem imply that 520 bundles have been loaded? Or is this simply step # 520? Comment addressed Is this type ofcore reload performed often? Is the core completely offloaded? Comment addressed Delete the Ist sentence in the second paragraph: "Refuel operations are in progress." This has already been established in paragraph I. Comment addressed Delete the parts ofthe answer choices that are not needed to make those answer choices unique - "and the reactor engineer contactd" Comment addressed 90 300000 N
H 2
x
.y Distractors can be eliminated using systems knowledge? Comment G2.4.6 addressed S
This question is not tied to IOCFR55.43 (5) because the correct answer can be determined without knowing which section of the procedure to use.
Because the stem provides the name of the correct procedure, there is no assessment of facility conditions and selection ofprocedures required.
Comment addressed Suggest providing them with P603 indications which led to determination that HCU solenoids were de-energized and scram valves were not open, i.e., don't tell them that "it has been determined that the air is NOT being ported... " Let them figure that out. Comment addressed I could not find the reference to validate this question. Comment addressed 91 206000 N
H 2
x x
x x
.y No references shall be provided. Comment addressed G2.4.7 REF S
Delete periods after degree symbols. Comment addressed Page 32 of37
ES-401, Rev. 9 Written Exam Review Worksheet Brunswick 2007-301 Form ES-401-9 Q#
KlA#
B L
L Psychometric Flaws Content Flaws U
Comment M
0 0
Stem Cues T/F 1 Non
>1 Non Partial Min Q=
SRO E
Explanation N
K D
Focus Cred Cred KIA Only S
Dist Dist BIW Question is not written at the SRO-only level. Comment addressed "A" can be eliminated using systems knowledge.
"C" can be eliminated using system knowledge.
"0" can be eliminated using systems knowledge.
"B" is the only answer choice that cannot be eliminated using systems knowledge. Suggest wording the stem: Which ONE ofthe following procedures is currently required to maintain RPV level> LlA?
A.
SEP-IO, Circuit Alteration Procedure B.
SEP-09, CRD Flow Maximization C.
LPCI hard card D.
HPCI hard card Stem provides cue that 2B CRD pump is not available with the following sentence: "E4 is de-energized due to an electrical fault ANO THE 2A CRO pump is under clearance." Make this sentence two sentences and remove the words "and the." Comment addressed "A" is not plausible since RCIC injection is accomplished with a "hard card" TIle circuit alteration procedure is not ever used to inject. Comment addressed 92 290001 B
F 2
S Question is SAT.
AZ.03 93 226001 N
F 2
x x
x Y
Two answer choices are labeled "C". Comment addressed G2.1.9 S
00 not state "required" in the stem. Just state how many ADS valves are inoperable. Comment addressed A question must be presented to the applicants. In this instance, the action statements listed in the distractors are COITect because a concise question has not been presented to the applicants. Comment addressed This question is documented as having no references supplied to the applicants. Was there another question where the licensee stated that TS 3.5.1 should be supplied to the applicants? Have licensee double check.
Comment addressed Distractors do not discriminate at the appropriate level if a reference is supplied. Comment addressed Punctuation: "you sent to investigate" needs to have commas before and after.
KIA Match: This KIA requires testing knowledge ofthe Containment Page 33 of37
ES-401, Rev. 9 Written Exam Review Worksheet Brunswick 2007-301 Form ES-401-9 Q#
KiA#
B L
L Psychometric Flaws Content Flaws U
Comment M
0 0
Stem Cues TIF 1 Non
>1 Non Partial Min Q=
SRO E
Explanation N
K D
Focus Cred Cred KiA Only S
Dist Dist BIW Spray Mode Tech Specs. How is this question testing Tech Specs for Containment Spray? Is it possible to write a question to this KIA at BW?
Comment addressed 94 G2.1.l2 B
H 2
x B
Tech Spec Entry Conditions are required closed book knowledge items.
Comment addressed S
Tech Spec Entry Conditions are also RO required knowledge items, but the application ofTS 3.0.6, which is being implemented in this question, makes the question SRO-only knowledge. Comment addressed This question must be revised to allow it to be asked with no references provided to the applicants. The question should be revised to simply test which LCOs require action statements to be entered (I.E. which LCO Requirements are not met) - in this fashion, the question can be tested with no references provided. Comment addressed Did this question come form Example 4 in the TRM SFDP Bases?
Comment addressed 95 G2.1.25 N
H 2
- {!l
.y Question must be presented to the applicants. Comment addressed REF S
What makes this question SRO-only? Why would an RO not be expected to figure out if the plant is in an unacceptable region ofthe Power - Flow Map and then know what actions are required based on that? Comment addressed Discuss which references are going to be provided to the applicants. Only these references shall be listed in the documentation portion of the question (Must be specific on proposed references). Licensee should always attached the proposed references when submitting a question for review.
(This comment applies to other questions that require references.)
Why is supplying an entire procedure necessary (OENP-24.0)?
. 2AOP-03.0 is listed as a reference to be provided to the applicants, yet this reference was not attached to the question and it was not provided electronically. Comment addressed Can "D" be successfully argued as correct? Can "D" be made the same as "B" except to perform actions lAW a different procedure? (LE. GP-12?)
This may help strengthen the SRO-only aspects ofthe question. Comment addressed Too similar to SRO question # 76 Consider fixing this question and using it for Q #76, then develop a new question for this KIA. Comment addressed 96 G2.2.7 B
H I
x
.y Question does not match the KIA. TIle KIA requires testing knowledge of the process for conducting tests (or experiments) not described in the safety Page 34 of37
ES-401, Rev. 9 Written Exam Review Worksheet Brunswick 2007-301 Form ES-401-9 Q#
KJA#
B L
L Psychometric Flaws Content Flaws U
Comment M
0 0
Stem Cues T/F 1 Non
>1 Non Partial Min Q=
SRO E
Explanation N
K D
Focus Cred Cred KIA Only S
Dist Dist BIW REF S
analysis. This question only tests knowledge of Tech Spec entry conditions. Question must be replaced with a question that tests knowledge ofthe process for conducting tests (or experiments) not described in the safety analysis. Comment addressed As stated in conversations with the licensee, this is a closed book exam and references will only be allowed on a limited basis (I.E. 2 or 3 questions).
Each question will be evaluated to determine if a reference is warranted.
This is a KIA that is conducive to writing a closed book question on the process for conducting tests and experiments not described in the FSAR.
Comment addressed In an open book format, the construct ofthis question does not provide for discrimination at the appropriate level for an SRO-only question.
Comment may be moot because the question must be replaced due to not matching the KIA. Comment addressed 97 02.2.25 B
F 2
E No reference is needed to answer the question of what a comprises a subsystem during shutdown conditions. Therefore, no references are REF S
needed to determine ifthe conditions ofthe LCO are met. Tech Spec Entry conditions are required closed book knowledge items.
Question may require a little more work to modify the second part ofall the distractors. Comment addressed In the stem, don't use terminology "Loop 2A"; either use Loop I or Loop A. (same comment for Loop 2B term) Discuss this with the licensee because the question should be presented to the applicant in the manner that is easiest for them to understand.
Comment addressed 98 G2.3.3 B
F 2
x x
X?
.y Question statement needs clarification to ensure that a correct answer is elicited. Currently, the question asks for which one of the following is S
required. - TIle question should be more direct and explicitly ask for what is required prior to moving fuel and what is required prior to rod testing.
(OR, ask: Given these conditions, which ONE ofthe following identifies whether control rod timing and core reload can be performed concurrently) Comment addressed Also Q statement should state.... In accordance with OFH-II. Comment addressed "B" is not plausible. In a situation as stated in the stem, it is not a reasonable misconception for the SRO to believe that fuel assemblies would be required to be unloaded. Comment addressed One suggestion may be to state in the stem that three fuel assemblies have been placed around the SRMs. TIJen more options may be available to test whether or not a neutronic bridge has been established, Page 35 of37
ES-401, Rev. 9 Written Exam Review Worksheet Brunswick 2007-301 Form ES-401-9 Q#
KlA#
B L
L PsvchomctricFlaws Content Flaws U
Comment M
0 0
Stem Cues T/F 1 Non
>1 Non Partial Min Q-SRO E
Explanation N
K D
Focus Cred Cred KIA Only S
Dist Dist BIW or has not been established. I think the procedure states that four fuel assemblies are required for the bridge to be in place, iaw OFH-ll.
The stem states that a core reload sequence is in progress. Therefore any answer choice that states "authorize fuel movement" or "fuel moves may occur" is not testing any required knowledge - the stem provides this cue.
Comment addressed Because iftakes movement of fuel to establish the bridge, it is not credible to think that fuel movement cannot be approved prior to a bridge being established. Comment addressed Does an RO perform a Checklist that is used to determine if conditions are met for performing fuel movement? Comment addressed Do ROs perform the Rod Timing Tests? What procedure do they use? Are the same requirements from FH-il also in the rod timing procedure?
Comment addressed When fuel is moved and when rod timing is performed, are the operators performing these tasks responsible for Precautions and Limitations?
Comment addressed Too similar to another FH-II question # 89. Comment addressed "C" has misspelled word "insure" 99 G2.3.4 B
F 2
II Delete extra period at the end of"C". Comment addressed S
Delete the reasons in "B" and "C". They do not add necessary information. Simply state that exceeding EPA-400 limits cannot be authorized. Comment addressed 10 CFR 20 limits are a subset of EPA-400 limits. TIle question would be better ifthe first part of each answer choice iterated on whether or not EPA-400 limits are exceeded. Then have the second part ofthe answer choices iterate on whether or not the SEC is allowed to authorize the dose.
Comment addressed 100 G2.4.4 B
H x
-\\oJ KJA not matched: KJA requires testing knowledge ofentry-level conditions for EOPs and AOPs. This question tests knowledge ofwhat REF S
classification to assign to the plant conditions and what classification to report. Comment addressed Answer choice construction: I understand what is hying to be accomplished with the use ofthe word "only" in the answer choices. The Page 36 of37
ES-401, Rev. 9 Written Exam Review Worksheet Brunswick 2007-301 Form ES-401-9 Q#
KiA#
B L
L Psychometric Flaws Content Flaws U
Comment M
0 0
Stem Cues TIF 1 Non
>1 Non Partial Min Q=
SRO E
Explanation N
K D
Focus Cred Cred KiA Only S
Dist Dist BfW problem is that this results in the applicants having to read the other answer choices to see what is not being done in the correct s answer. Good question construction allows for an applicant to read the stem and then read and understand the correct answer, without having any reliance on the distractors to clarify what that correct answer is trying to state. Each answer choice should state explicitly what is meant. Comment addressed For this question, it would be better to state in "A" and "B" what is required to be done and what is not required to be done iaw Pep-02.1. Comment addressed The use of the word "only" was used many times throughout the exam.
Attention should be paid to ensure that no ambiguity results and that the licensee is comfortable with the answer choices being presented in that manner. Comment addressed Providing a 24 page reference is not in the spirit of a closed book exam.
The following suggestion would allow a question to be asked Comment addressed Page 37 of37
ES-403 Written Examination Grading Quality Checklist Form ES*403*1 Facility: 1SRLLtJ5w Irl{
Date of Exam:ff?;/o ).mu/
Exam Level: RoD SRO~
Initials Item Description a
b c
1.
Clean answer sheets copied before grading f!JJl N/if rrYfZ>
2.
Answer key changes and question deletions justified %
$JL-N/~
rW1S and documented 3.
Applicants' scores checked for addition errors
~
f'LA ~
(reviewers spot check> 25% of examinations) 4.
Grading for all borderline cases (80 +/-2% overall and 70 or 80, 1/fIL NA 0vB as applicable, +/-4% on the SRO-only) reviewed in detail 5.
All other failing examinations checked to ensure that grades
~ N/A J!Yf£ are justified 6.
Performance on missed questions checked for training
$IV deficiencies and wording problems; evaluate validity N~ rJ6 of questions missed bv half or more of the applicants Printed Name/Signature Date
- a. Grader
- gRUNO ~/g.~
~jz+/o1-NIA
(
N/Pr
- b. Facility Reviewer(*)
- c. NRC Chief Examiner (*)
_MMK A.~(ffiS/rr2J~
O~/;'4/UdtJtz
- d. NRC Supervisor (*)
- <'h,~f- !f.AA&I/4 t /~ /
'Jft~/J]
I I'
(*)
The facility reviewer's signature is not applicable for examinations graded by the NRC; two independent NRC reviews are required.
ES-403, Page 5 of 5
ES-403 Written Examination Grading Quality Checklist Form ES-403-1 Facility:1S R.lU.ISWIG(Z Date of Exam:op,/03/cl./J()7Exam Level: RO~ SRoD Initials Item Description a
b c
1.
Clean answer sheets copied before qradino N/A m13 2.
Answer key changes and question deletions justified AlIA JjI(.
NJA nrI>
and documented 3.
Applicants' scores checked for addition errors
~
N/ft ~
(reviewers spot check> 25% of examinations) 4.
Grading for all borderline cases (80 +/-2% overall and 70 or 80, td<-
N/p. t1t as applicable, +/-4% on the SRO-only) reviewed in detail 5.
All other failing examinations checked to ensure that grades
~
rJ/A rYf1) are justified 6.
Performance on missed questions checked for training deficiencies and wording problems; evaluate validity
~
~A n1D of questions missed by half or more of the applicants Printed Name/Signature Date
- a. Grader lSRltND CbtB'AL~1t(]f~
g-/Zf/t4-I
- b. Facility Reviewer(*)
N/fJr N!A MMK A,13Aff-S / /f2j(),. Ld¢~
- c. NRC Chief Examiner (*)
of;,</;O'll t
- d. NRC Supervisor (*)
tb....~t SA4G- / &W ~
9/,~/~ 7
(*)
The facility reviewer's signature is not applicable for examinations graded by the NRC; two independent NRC reviews are required.
ES-403, Page 5 of 5
ES-501 Post-Examination Check Sheet Form ES-501-1 Post-Examination Check Sheet Facility:
15R.U.tJ$WI eR (7 \\ d7-:J.C1.- ;ltXJ7 Date of Examlnatlon: W:C>'ilJ-CJ3-J.o,ll Task Description Date Complete 1.
Facility written exam comments or graded exams received 08/;'11 :)O()7 and verified complete 2.
Facility written exam comments reviewed and incorporated (Jg/2L/!~tJ7 and NRC grading completed, if necessary 3.
Operating tests graded by NRC examiners o9/bul')o~7 4.
NRC chief examiner review of operating test and written exam 091()~ (:Joe'7 grading completed 5.
Responsible supervisor review completed ocdorzIr;"" ry 6.
Management (licensing official) review completed oqlo?/~()tJ?
7.
License and denial letters mailed 09/10/7007 8.
Facility notified of results oct )/0 Ii)o~'1 9.
Examination report issued (refer to NRC MC 0612) 09//:</71107 10.
Reference material returned after final resolution of any appeals
/'1.0+
~tltS'kel Rj Wov.!>~
ES-501, Page 23 of 25
~ Progress Energy SERIAL: BSEP 07-0056
- u. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Region II ATTN: Mr. Mark Bates Senior Operations Engineer Sam Nunn Atlanta Federal Center 61 Forsyth Street, SW, Suite 23T85 Atlanta, GA 30303-8931 James Scarola Vice President Brunswick Nuclear Plant Progress Energy Carolinas, Inc.
Subject:
Brunswick Steam Electric Plant, Unit Nos. 1 and 2 Docket Nos. 50-325 and 50-324/License Nos. DPR-71 and DPR-62 Integrated Examination Materials
Dear Mr. Bates:
The purpose ofthis letter is to submit integrated examination materials in support of initial license examinations scheduled to be conducted at the Brunswick Steam Electric Plant, beginning the week of July 9, 2007. A list of the integrated examination materials is provided in Enclosure 1. A copy of the integrated examination materials is provided in. Enclosure 3 provides reference materials associated with the examination.
Please refer any questions regarding this submittal to Mr. John Reinsburrow, Senior Nuclear Operations Training Instructor, at (910) 457-3558.
Sincerely, James Scarola WRM/wrm
Enclosures:
- 1. List of Integrated Examination Materials and Reference Materials 2.
Examiner Standard Forms and Associated Checklists 3.
Written Examination Questions and supporting documentation
- 4. Simulator Scenarios and Job Performance Measures (JPMs)
- 5. Reference Materials P.O. Box 10429 Southport NC 28461 T> 910.457.3698 F> 910.457.2803
Mr. Mark Bates BSEP 07-0056/ Page 2 cc (with Enclosure 1 only):
U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission ATTN: Document Control Desk Washington, DC 20555-0001 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Region II ATTN: Dr. William D. Travers, Regional Administrator Sam Nunn Atlanta Federal Center 61 Forsyth Street, SW, Suite 23T85 Atlanta, GA 30303-8931 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Region II ATTN: Mr. Robert C. Haag, Chief Operations Branch, Division ofReactor Safety Sam Nunn Atlanta Federal Center 61 Forsyth Street, SW, Suite 23T85 Atlanta, GA 30303-8931 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission ATTN: Mr. Eugene M. DiPaolo, NRC Senior Resident Inspector 8470 River Road Southport, NC 28461-8869 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (Electronic Copy Only)
ATTN: Mr. Stewart N. Bailey (Mail Stop OWFN 8B1) 11555 Rockville Pike Rockville, MD 20852-2738 Chair - North Carolina Utilities Commission P.O. Box 29510 Raleigh, NC 27626-0510
BSEP 07-0056 Brunswick Steam Electric Plant, Unit Nos. 1 and 2 Docket Nos. 50-325 and 50-324/License Nos. DPR-71 and DPR-62 Integrated Examination Materials The following documents, developed in accordance with NUREG-1021, "Operator Licensing Examination Standards for Power Reactors," Revision 9, are provided in.
Form ES-201-2 Form ES-201-3 Form ES-301-1 Form ES-301-2 Form ES-301-3 Form ES-301-4 Form ES-301-5 Form ES-301-6 Form ES-401-1 Form ES-401-3 Form Es-401-4 Form ES-401-6 Examination Outline Quality Checklist Examination Security Agreement (copy)
Administrative Topics Outline Control Room/In-Plant Systems Outline Operating Test Quality Checklist Simulator Scenario Quality Checklist Transient and Event Checklist Competencies Checklist BWR Examination Outline Generic Knowledge and Abilities Outline (Tier 3)
Record of Rejected KlAs Written Examination Quality Checklist The following documents are provided in Enclosure 3:
Written examination questions (100) and supporting documentations 75 "Common" Questions 25 SRO Questions
The following documents are provided in Enclosure 4:
Examination Simulator Scenarios 1,2,3, and 4 RO JPMA-1-A RO/SROADMIN JPMA-1-B RO/SRO JPMA-2 RO JPMA-2 RQ JPMA-3 SROADMIN lPMA-l-A SRO ADMIN lPM A-3 SRO ADMIN JPM A-4 PLANT JPMP-1 PLANT lPM P-2 PLANT lPM P-3 SIM JPM S-l SIM JPM S-2 SIM JPM S-3 SIM JPM S-4 SIM JPM S-5 SIM lPM S-6 SIM JPM S-7 SIM JPM S-8 BSEP 07-0056
BSEP 07-0056 The following reference material, in part or in whole, are provided in Enclosure 5:
List of Reference Materials "Hard Copy" Format 1(2)-EOP-OI-RSP (Reactor Scram Procedure) 1(2)EOP-OI-RVCP (Reactor Vessel Control Procedure) 1(2)EOP-OI-LPC (Level Power Control)
OEOP-OI-RXFP (Reactor Flooding Procedure)
OEO-OI-STCP (Steam Cooling Procedure)
OEOP-02-PCCP (primary Containment Control Procedure)
OEOP-03-SCCP (Secondary Containment Control Procedure)
OEOP-04-RRCP (Radioactive Release Control Procedure)
Operator Aid 1(2)/1241 Containment LimitsNortex and HPSF Limits Operator Aid 1/1071 Unit 1 Caution 1 Operator Aid 2/1039 Unit 2 Caution 1 Digital Format (Compact Disc)
Abnormal Operating Procedures (AOPs)
Administrative Instructions (AIs)
Administrative Procedures (APs)
Alternate Safe Shutdown Procedures (ASSDs)
Annunciator Procedures (APPs)
Brunswick Big Notes Engineering Procedures (OENP-24)
Fuel Handling Procedures (PHs)
Nuclear Generation Group Procedures (NGGCs)
Operating Instructions (OIs)
Operating Procedures (OPs)
Operations Work Packages (OWPs)
Periodic Tests (PTs)
Plant Emergency Procedures (PEPs)
Pre-Fire Plans (PFPs)
System Descriptions (SDs)
Technical Specifications (T.S.)
Plant Off-Site Dose Calculation Manual (ODCM) is located in the Technical Specification folder.
~ Progress Energy April 30, 2007 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Region II ATTN: Mr. Mark Bates Senior Operations Engineer Sam Nunn Atlanta Federal Center 61 Forsyth Street, SW, Suite 23T85 Atlanta, GA 30303-8931 JamesScarola Vice President Brunswick Nuclear Plant Progress Energy Carolinas, Inc.
Subject:
Brunswick Steam Electric Plant, Unit Nos. 1 and 2 Docket Nos. 50-325 and 50-324/License Nos. DPR-71 and DPR-62 Integrated Examination Materials
Dear Mr. Bates:
Enclosed are integrated examination materials in support of the Initial License Examination at the Brunswick Steam Electric Plant, scheduled to be administered in July 2007. The following documents, developed in accordance with NUREG-I021, "Operator Licensing Examination Standards for Power Reactors," Revision 9, are enclosed.
Form ES-201-2 Form ES-201-3 Form ES-301-1 Form ES-301-2 Form ES-301-5 Form ES-D-l Form ES-401-1 Form ES-401-3 Form ES-401-4 Examination Outline Quality Checklist Examination Security Agreement (3)
Administrative Topics Outline Control Room/In-Plant Systems Outline Transient and Event Checklist Scenario Outline (4)
BWR Examination Outline Generic Knowledge and Abilities Outline (Tier 3)
Record ofRejected KJAs Please refer any questions regarding this submittal to Mr. John Reinsburrow at (910) 457-3222.
MAT/mat James Scarola Enclosures P.O. Box 10429 Southport, NC 28461 T> 910.457.3698 F> 910.457.2803
(
..~
~ Progress Energy August 1, 2007 SERIAL: BSEP 07-0079
- u. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Region II ATTN: Dr. William D. Travers, Regional Administrator Sam Nunn Atlanta Federal Center 61 Forsyth Street, SW, Suite 23T85 Atlanta, GA 30303-8931 10 CFR 55.40(b)(4)
Subject:
Brunswick Steam Electric Plant, Unit Nos. 1 and 2 Docket Nos. 50-325 and 50-324/License Nos. DPR-71 and DPR-62 Request for Approval of Operator License Examination
Dear Dr. Travers:
10CFR 55.40(b)(4) states that a power reactor facility licensee must receive NRC approval of their proposed written examination and operating tests for an NRC reactor operator license. 10 CFR 55.40(a) requires that the examinations meet the criteria in NUREG-1021, "Operator Licensing Standards for Power Reactors," in effect six months before the examination date. Accordingly, Carolina Power & Light Company (CP&L),
now doing business as Progress Energy Carolinas, Inc., requests NRC review and approval of the enclosed examination outline and proposed examination for NRC operator licenses at the Brunswick Steam Electric Plant. This operator license examination is currently scheduled to be conducted beginning August 3, 2007. Mr. Leonard R. Beller, as an authorized facility representative, has approved the examination outline and proposed examination.
In accordance with 10 CFR 55.49, "Integrity of Examinations and Tests" and NUREG-1021, Revision 9, "Operator Licensing Examination Standards for Power Reactors," Section ES-201, Attachment 1, "Examination Security and Integrity Considerations," CP&L requests that the enclosed material be withheld from public disclosure until after the examinations are complete.
Progress Energy Carolinas, Inc.
Brunswick Nuclear Plant PO Box 10429 Southport, NC 28461
Dr. William D. Travers, Regional Administrator BSEP 07-0079 / Page 2 No regulatory commitments are contained in this letter. Please refer any questions regarding this submittal to Mr. Leonard R. Beller, Superintendent - Operator Training, at (910) 457-2073.
Sincerely,
((01 CdVj Randy C. Ivey Manager - Support Services Brunswick Steam Electric Plant WRM/wrm Enclosure
Dr. William D. Travers, Regional Administrator BSEP 07-0079 / Page 3 cc (without enclosure):
- u. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission ATTN: Document Control Desk Washington, DC 20555-0001
- u. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission ATTN: Mr. Eugene M. DiPaolo, NRC Senior Resident Inspector 8470 River Road Southport, NC 28461-8869
- u. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (Electronic Copy Only)
ATTN: Mr. Stewart N. Bailey (Mail Stop OWFN 8B1) 11555 Rockville Pike Rockville, MD 20852-2738 Chair - North Carolina Utilities Commission P.O. Box 29510 Raleigh, NC 27626-0510
In accordance with NUREG-I021, Revision 9, "Operator Licensing Examination Standards for Power Reactors," Section ES-401.D.l.b, I hereby state that the method for developing the written examination outline was as described in Attachment 1 ofthat section ofthe NUREG In accordance with NUREG-I021, Revision 9, "Operator Licensing Examination Standards for Power Reactors," Section ES-401.C.1.f, I hereby state that as part ofthe examination submittal there is no question duplication between Carolina Power & Light Company's audit and the written examinations.
~d on~R.Beller Superintendent - Operator Training ot/o1pOCJ l Date
FAC.
EXAMINATI.JJECT PLAN CHIEFEaR:
Exam Start Date (from annual letter to licensees):
Written Exam Date (from Corporate Notification Letter):
Operating Test Start Date (from Corporate Notification Letter):
Exam End Date:
-::--~ C).,.r).}.o/<./ h i..) 7:10 :;/2M?'
J This schedule assumes that the exit meeting occurs before both the administration of the written exam and the receipt of facility post-exam comments.
-39269
-39272
-39262
-39246
-39265
-39234
-39209
-39204
-39269
-39262
-39231
-39262
-39201
-39206
~\\ir()~115f2()O*ZIES-201-1 #2 (-120 davs r1L()4M4/200mIES-201-1 #5 (-90 days)
~;i03Kt5120.0]!IES-201-1 #4 (-120 days
~~03t1]QI2()()!IES-201-1 #3 (-120 days Descriotion 35-36 28 39 N/A IComplete licensing / denial actions 40 N/A 41 IReceive Facilitv Post-Examination Comments 48 llssue Exam Report 19,26 38 17,24 33 16,23 14,21 13 5
8 4
10 6-7 11-12 N/A N/A 3
T~sk#
06/15/2007 1 of 1
Operator Licensing Examination Record Retention Checklist FACILITY NAME:
EXAM DATE:
INSPECTION REPORT NO.:
CHIEF EXAMINER:
J2RUN6WIGK 053b3!:koI]
~xam Plan Form #
ocument
~ask #
EXAMINATION PREPARATION - YELLOW COVER SHEET N/A N/A Exarnlnation Folder Assembly
~
ES-201 Att. 3 L-orporate Notification Letter f'/!J
/'
ES-201-1 Examination Preparation Checklist m$
/
!ES-201-3 Examination Security Agreement IlIJ15
~S-201-4 l.ist of Applicants tf$
../'
DRAFT EXAMINATION MATERIAL - PINK COVER SHEET N/A V' N/A Licensee Transmittal Letter(s) rrfI)
ES-401-1,2,3 Draft Written Examination Outlines rrt1?
,/
~S-401-4 Record of Rejected KJAs
~
N/A Draft RO Written Examination
-e N/A Draft SRO Written Examination
~
~
ES-301-1 Draft Administrative Topics Outline rf$$
N/A Draft Administrative JPMs
~
ES-301-2 Draft Control Room/In-Plant Systems Outline ME>
../
N/A Draft Control Room/In-Plant JPMs niB
,/
ES-D-1 Draft Scenario Outlines r$
ES-D-1,2 Draft Simulator Scenarios/Required Operator Actions
~
../
ES-201-2 Examination Outline Quality Checklist
.~
V'
.!J-I 2
~xam Plan Form #
Document trask #
REVIEW COMMENTS - GREEN COVER SHEET
/ES-401-9 tvvritten Examination Review Worksheet mB
..--/
IN/A KJperating Test Comments (if applicable) f$/
QUALITY CHECKLISTS - YELLOW COVER SHEET ES-201-2 II-jnal Examination Outline Quality Checklist
(!1f>
../
ES-301-3 lI=inal Operating Test Quality Checklist 1)$
i-:
ES-301-4 inal Simulator Scenario Quality Checklist mt) v IES-301-5 IFinal Transient and Event Checklist 1nf53 ES-301-6 Final Competencies Checklist 11~
../
IES-401-6 Fina] Written Examination Quality Checklist
>>e ADMINISTERED EXAMINATION MATERIAL - BLUE COVER SHEET
/ES-401-1,2,3 lI=inal Written Examination Outlines ImE>
s--:
IN/A 1Final RO Written Examination (as administered) mJ5
./
N/A inaI SRO Written Examination (as administered) rr$
~
N/A Final RO/SRO Combined Written Examination with m£ c-:
~nalysis and Answers.
IN/A RO/SRO Written Examination Reference Package mJ5
./
ES-D-1,2 lI=inal Simulator Scenarios/Required Operator Actions 17YJfj c-:
IES-301-1 Final Administrative Topics Outline mD
-../
N/A Final Administrative Topics JPMs n18
./
ES-301-2 l=inal Control Room/ln-Plant Systems Outline 11fi3
,/'
N/A Final Control Room/In-Plant Systems JPMs niP>
EXAMINATION DOCUMENTATION - YELLOW COVER SHEET ES-501 Att. 1 Facility Comments and NRC Resolutions mE v".
ES-201-4 ist of Applicants YW3 v"
IES-201 Att. 4 l=xamination Approval Letter 1'm1)
IES-403-1 Written Examination Grading Quality Checklist YYtf>
~
./
ES-501-2 Power Plant Examination Results Summary Y\\1&
3 Exam Plan Form #
ocument Irask #
EXAMINATION DOCUMENTATION - YELLOW COVER SHEET N/A
~xamination Report (with comment resolution) 11$
,/'
ES-501-1 Post-Examination Check Sheet
!/}1b APPLICANT EXAMINATION PACKAGE - NO COVER SHEET ES-303-1 Individual Examination Report fYIb
/
ES-303-2 pperating Test Comments YJ~
t/"
ES-D-1 Simulator Scenarios (as administered) rJ$
/
N/A Failed JPMs (if applicant failed Administrative or Jlf13 Control Room/In-Plant portions)
ES-D-2 Required Operator Actions (if applicant failed fA/A~
c-:
Simulator Operatino Test)
ES-401-7/8 IRO/SHO Site-Specific RO/SRO Written J¥11B v'
Examination Cover Sheet (signed bv applicant)
/
N/A IApplicant's Original Written Examination Answer In1£)
Sheet
Examination Logistics Planning Checklist 0/ I Topic INotes CONTACT FACILITY SIX MONTHS BEFORE EXAMINATION (ES-201 C.2b)
° ° Remind your point of contact (PaC) of the requirements and (Per ES-201.C.2c) See 10CFR55.31 and ES-202 V
. guidelines for submitting license applications.
0/
~ Determine the number of applicants.
Remind your pac to keep you informed of any changes as the class progresses. You are responsible for updating RPS with the number of applicants and for informing the BC when the number of applicants or exam weeks changes.
° ° Ask your pac if they anticipate requesting any waivers.
It is best to discuss waivers as far in advance as possible to allow time for interaction with headquarters.
° ° Determine mutually acceptable dates for prep week and Ensure adequate day shift simulator time is exam week.
available (at least three days for one JPM set and three scenarios).
If the written and operating examinations are going to be more than 30 days apart, contact NRR staff for concurrence (ES-402.C.2.b).
° ° Verify your poe is using the current version of NUREG-
.,/
1021.
° ° Determine which revision of plant procedures will be used The licensee may impose a "freeze" date for for the exam.
procedure changes or may choose to incorporate
/'
some revisions between the delivery date and the exam date. As we have a larger lead time on some exams, this may require another validation by the facility just before the exam.
° ° Determine, by name, who has responsibility for developing Be as detailed as possible, especially on shared
./ each element of all examination materials.
examinations.
° ° Determine delivery dates for outlines and exam materials Set realistic dates based on your respective V
that the facility is preparing.
schedules instead of defaulting to the 60 day and 30 day delivery dates. You can ask them for an earlier delivery date to conform to the reviewer's work schedule.
° ° Discuss the facility specific division of responsibility between
/' the Reactor Operator (at the controls) and Balance of Plant positions.
2 Examination Logistics Planning Checklist
.I ITopic INotes CONTACT FACILITY 120 DAYS BEFORE EXAMINATION (ES-201 C.2.c)
° ° Determine a rough exam week schedule, especially the
° ° Examination length should be determined by v
number of weeks and number of on-site examiners.
the number of applicants as well as the type of applicants being examined. The maximum number of applicants for a one week examination should be 9. If the number of applicants is greater than 9, the chief examiner and the exam team should discuss options, (i.e. a 10 day exam where the team stays the weekend).
Do not schedule an exam day to last more than 10 hours1.157407e-4 days <br />0.00278 hours <br />1.653439e-5 weeks <br />3.805e-6 months <br />. Doing so does not allow for unanticipated scheduling delays (e.g.
simulator malfunctions) or poor applicant performance.
You should get input from all exam team members. Travel outside of normal work hours must be acceptable to all members of the examination team and discussed with the BC.
You should consider the experience level of each examiner and the composition of the exam team, as well as the need to perform an audit of license applications (ES-202), to determine who must attend the prep week.
° ° Remind your POC that they need to deliver the exam (Per ES-201.C.2.c)
/'
outlines to you about 75 days before the scheduled exam date.
0/
Remind your POC that we need reference material in (Per ES-201.C.2.c) hand at least 75 days (and preferably 90 days) before the scheduled exam date in order to develop the exam.
° ° Remind your POC that we need examinations and (Per ES-201.C.2.c)
.,/
reference materials in hand about 45 days before the scheduled exam date.
° ° If we (NRC) are writing the exam many months in The exam schedule may dictate that we write an advance of administration, obtain another POC to answer examination many months in advance. In these technical questions.
cases the licensee will need to provide a point of contact on the security agreement to answer questions about the procedures and systems. This point of contact does not need to be someone familiar with the exam process -- just someone to answer technical questions.
° ° Remind your POC that an authorized representative of (Per ES-201.C.2.c)
/
the facility licensee must approve the exam outlines and exams before they are submitted to the NRC for review.
3
,/ ITopic INotes CONTACT FACILITY 120 DAYS BEFORE EXAMINATION (ES-201 C.2.c)
Point out that the licensee may find it advantageous to (per ES-201.C.2.c) This may increase the efficiency i/"
submit some sample test items (e.g. 5-10 written of the exam review process by allowing early questions, 1 scenario, 1-2 JPMs) for preliminary NRC identification and correction of generic exam review and comment.
development concerns.
Discuss guidelines for developing, administering, and (per ES-201.C.2.c) See ES-401, 402, 403.
.../
grading the written exams, as applicable.
Discuss guidelines for developing and administering the (per ES-201.C.2.c) See ES-301, 302
,/
operating tests.
Get a list of uncorrected simulator performance (per ES-201.C.2.c) deficiencies and deviations from the reference plant and Verify simulator fidelity in accordance with ensure an updated list is available at the time of the 10CFR55.46(c)(1 )(1).
operating tests.
Determine a mutually acceptable format for providing Hard copies of EOPs and AOPs are beneficial but
./
exam reference material (electronic or hard copy).
not required.
Conduct a detailed review of the items in ES201.
Don't just ask for "the usual stuff."
Be cognizant of the scope of your request.
Discuss the availability of indices and cross-reference documents (they have been omitted in the past).
Ensure the format of exam submittals is compatible with Refer to Task 49, Compile Exam Documentation,
/
entry into ADAMS.
and Attachment 2. It is important to ensure the written examination will contain all of the required information for documentation.
Remind your POC about exam integrity and security.
(per ES-201.C.2.c) See ES-201 Attachment 1 and t./
Ensure all facility personnel are aware of exam security Appendix D, section F. There are special requirements.
considerations for shared exams.
For example if Plant X is going to convert the written from Plant Y, individuals from both plants will need to be on both security agreements.
Agree on a method to transmit examination material The Senior Resident staff can transmit information
/'
electronically.
via the NRC e-mail system without potential compromise.
Ask your POC if he/she will agree to provide copying If they agree, let them know that this will be services for the exam.
documented in the 120-day letter.