ML091740125
| ML091740125 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Turkey Point  |
| Issue date: | 06/23/2009 |
| From: | Laska G NRC/RGN-II |
| To: | Florida Power & Light Co |
| References | |
| 50-250/09-301, 50-251/09-301 | |
| Download: ML091740125 (84) | |
Text
ES-201, Rev. 9E Examination Preparation Checklist Fonn ES-201-1 Facility: Turkey Point 2009-301 Date of Examination: 2/23/2008 Facility Examinations Developed by:
Written 1 Operating Test Chief Target Task Description (Reference) Examiner's Date' Initials
-180 1. Examination administration date confIrmed (C.1.a; C.2.a and b) 08/2008
-120 2. NRC examiners and facility contact assigned (C.1.d; C.2.e) 09/03/2008
-120 3. Facility contact briefed on security and other requirements (C.2.c) 09/03/2008
-120 4. Corporate notifIcation letter sent (C.2.d) 09/05/2008
[-90] [5. Reference material due (C. I.e; C.3.c; Attachment 2)] 115/2009
{-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-401-1I2, ES-401-3, and ES-401-4, as 12/08/2008 applicable (C. I.e and f; C.3.d)
{-70} {7. Examination outline(s) reviewed by NRC and feedback provided to facility 12/13/2008 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, 1/5/2009 ES-301-5, ES-301-6, and ES-401-6), and reference materials due (C. I.e, f, g and h; C.3.d)
-30 9. Preliminary license applications (NRC Form 398's) due (C.1.l; C.2.g; ES-202) 1123/2009
-14 10. Final license applications due and Form ES-201-4 prepared (C. 1.1; C.2.i; ES-202) 2/09/2009
-14 11. Examination approved by NRC supervisor for facility licensee review 2/09/2009 (C.2.h; C.3.f)
-14 12. Examinations reviewed with facility licensee (C.1.j; C.2.f and h; C.3.g) 2/09/2009
-7 13. Writt~ examinations and operating tests approved by NRC supervisor (C.2.1; C.3.h) Z~b1ttfi4<,h(jj f71
!q2/1~f) 97 I !>J \.,
-7 14. Final applications reviewed; 1 or 2 (if> 10) applications audited to confIrm qualifIcations 1 eligibility; and examination approval and waiver letters sent 2117/2007 (C.2.i; Attachment 4; ES-202, C.2.e; ES-204)
-7 15. Proctoringlwritten exam administration guidelines reviewed with facility licensee 2/17/2007 (C.3.k)
-7 16. Approved scenarios, job performance measures, and questions distributed to 2/17/2007 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 Examination Outline Quality Checklist Form ES-201-2 Facilily:--"""""\
\)..(
Date of Examination: ~ d2.3 / 0 9 Item Task Description
- 1. a. Verify that the outline(s) fit(s) the appropriate model, in accordance with ES-401.
W R b I
T
- c. Assess whether the outline over-emphasizes any systems, evolutions, or generic topics.
T E
- d. Assess whether the justlfications for deselected or rejected KiA statements are appropriate.
N
- 2. a. Using Form ES-301-5, verify that the proposed scenario sets cover the required number of normal evolutions, instrument and component failures, technical specifications, S and major transients.
I M b. Assess whether there are enough scenario sets (and spares) to test the projected number U and mix of applicants in accordance with the expected crew composition and rotation schedule L without compromising exam integrity, and ensure that each applicant can be tested using A at least one new or significantly modified scenario, that no scenarios are duplicated T from the applicants' audit test(s), and that scenarios will not be re eated on subsequent days.
o c. To the extent possible, assess whether the outline(s) conform{s) with the qualitative R and quantitative criteria specified on Form ES*301-4 and described in Appendix D.
- 3. a. Verify that the 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 1 (2) task repetition from the last two NRC examinations is within the limits speCified on the form T (3) no tasks are duplicated from the applicants' audit testes)
(4) the number of new or modified tasks meets or exceeds the minimums specified on the form (5) the number of alternate path, low-power, emergency, and RCA tasks meet the criteria on the form.
- b. Verify that the administrative outline meels the criteria speCified on Form ES-301-1:
(1) the tasks are distributed among the topics as specified on the form (2) at least one task is new or significantly modified 3 no more than one task Is repeated from the last two NRC llcensin examinations
- c. Determine if there are enough different outlines to test the projected number and mix of ap licants and ensure that no items are du licated on subsequent da s.
- 4. a. Assess whether plant-specific priorities (including PRA and IPE insights) are covered in the a pro riate exam sections.
G b. Assess whether the 10 CFR 55.41/43 and 55.45 sampling Is appropriate.
E N c. Ensure that KIA Importance ratings (exceptfor plant-specific priorities) are at least 2.5.
E
- d. Check for duplication and overlap among exam sections.
R A e. Check the entire exam for balance of coverage.
L
- a. Author
- b. Facility Reviewer (*)
- c. NRC Chief Examiner (#)
- d. NRC Supervisor Note: #
ES-201, Page 26 of 28
ES-201 Examination Outline Quality Checklist Form ES-201-2 DRAFT (written)
Facility: Turkey Point Date of Examination: February 2009 Item 1.
W R
I T
T Assess whether the justifications for deselected or rejected KIA statements are appropriate.
E N
- 2. a. Using Form ES-301-5, verify that the proposed scenario sets cover the required number of normal evolutions, instrument and component failures, technical specifications, and major S transients.
I b.
M U
L c. To the extent possible, assess whether the outline(s) conform(s) with the qualitative and A
T o
R
- 3. a. Verify that the 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 distributed W 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 T (3) no tasks are duplicated from the applicants' audit test(s)
(4) the number of new or modified tasks meets or exceeds the minimums specified on the form (5)the number of alternate path, low-power, emergency, and RCA tasks meet the criteria on the form.
- b. Verify that the administrative outline meets the criteria specified on Form ES-301-1:
the tasks are distributed among the topics as specified on the form at least one task is new or significantly modified no more than one task is from the last two NRC Ii examinations
- c. Determine if there are enough different outlines to test the projected number and mix of
- 4. a. Assess whether plant-specific priorities (including PRA and IPE insights) are covered in the exam sections.
G E
N E
R A
L
- a. Author:
b.
c.
- d. NRC Supervisor Note: # Independent NRC reviewer initial items in Column "c"; chief examiner concurrence required.
- Operating test not developed yet DR FT
~---~'"
,~ ';"
\ Lt.--21 ES-201 Examination Security Agreement Form ES-201-3
- 1. Pre-Examination I acknowledge that I have acquired specialized knowledge about the NRC licensing examinations scheduled for the week(s) of 1/1..'$(0If.. 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 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 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 conditions 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.
- 2. Post-Examination To the best of my knowled~e, I did not divulge to any unauthorized persons any information concerning the NRC licensing examinations administered during the week(s) of 1./'2.:Ji . From 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 licensing examinations, except as specifically noted below and authorized by the NRC.
PRINTED NAME JOB TITLE / RESPONSIBILITY jSIG~f-TURE (~} DATE DATE NOTE 1 "JQi::itf~X01'i--- ___::5JL 4'E-~-1i--n\-- -- - Jf-JL-'c
- 2. J2~11.4._~_-6.rl~~ _____ __ l~l.L __ ~L~ ___~ ____ _~ ~
__~_k -
- _ ---------'il:-ul~t - -~'Iji-"---<<-
2/Lfj.Q1-----
3 A\<:K S'T<Bl>o "" '"Stt.u""" / St '" """'" .. . gl01 i=§~~ ==~~~~=======-~~~=~B== ' -'h-~i:f;ft 7.=~---~:r.==== =====~~===~====~~=~'&£--
- 8. ____ .. ~i_!\..
-;£4:§£r£'.k.{1t!.~~
--,--1'--.-(:.----- ______
- 9. __ __#.!L.bLkL_"<_______
--==i~-::---------:t-=--~~~/~---c
---~~R'~.:;;:~~---
. . -.:________ ..:J~]~L!L;;;;ffjf£
=--=:>:W"C
-- -------__'flt!/~
!!~~!---
1o.--GA-~kL14------ ____t>j'-.O..c..~---------------- ----/AL~ - --------.31l -- ~ ________ iJiiLQ'L----
11~ ____ ~~ ________ ~
~~:========~====== =============~================~-------
14.
15.
N ES-201, Page 26 of 27
/""'-"
ILC -d{
ES-201 Examination Security Agreement Form ES-201-3
- 1. Pre-Examination I acknowledge that I have acquired specialized knowledge about the NRC licensing examinations scheduled for the week(s) of 2./z..3/i) " 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 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 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 conditions 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.
- 2. Post-Examination To the best of my knOWleje, I did not divulge to any unauthorized persons any information concerning the NRC licensing examinations administered during the week(s) of 1/'1. diS . From 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 licensing examinations, except as specifically noted below and authorized by the NRC.
JOB TITLE / RESPONSIBILITY SIGNATURE (2) DATE NOTE
- - - -~()CQ..("\l\~Dr Il.<:" -- --~-f'\. ----------- ----
W,.
c:=- Q<.. Cl.. "'" 1-> \2:\1' II r, p Q , -
t y",~ ~,""'rQiP.(j,.1
- '~?lFL EllAM
~....,
~)(A-vV""
Ex.........
SiM ii"vAt.lA14-'-rO,{
t;",," lfA.1I /..r brV'~
e v At-v n 7l' ~
Gv'...-t.~-",- \-... r ~
,= if '1'l If
,~£ 3 t.'t
- 3. ft?J.o"
~dI<<J7 tf r;x(./..IV/ ])elJe{rJf/...t./"
~
? n~ /L
,;: ;?
~
5 l& IM!:/> Ht#---
~["
!~_.:j~ ~
.-.~~ l'JjJ~
vw",'IW .
-/::: ut,;!,ej /Jlg X I>OrC-S
[~~- ~-oq e~~\ I w(+ lr. C. ~\~ '0' ~/'2.'i to'i ES-201, Page 26 of 27
ES-201 Examination Security Agreement Form ES-201-3
- 1. Pre-Examination I acknowledge that I have acquired specialized knowledge about the NRC licensing examinations scheduled for the week(s) of 2 - Z5-6 as of theI date of my signature. I agree that I will not knowingly 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 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 conditions 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.
- 2. Post-Examination To the best of my knowledge, I did not divulge to any unauthorized persons any information concerning the NRC licensing examinations administered during the week(s) of1.f'J.~lbS . From 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 licensing examinations, except as specifically noted below and authorized by the NRC.
PRINTED NAME JOB TITLE I RESPONSIBILITY DATE NOTE 11Ah p.
~:~t;~t
".-0 4.omMO~
5.t;'vtE5
- 6. f[ ~.L 'k ,.J
'~, ~
7.",(
(9) EftJ"t2:M
- 8. V.j , ~
- 10. "" Pr]n+/-f" tl DVlff~
-=
11.tA'C.~ ~ "/(I..-II):>A'r"'o.,...)
- 12.:DA\J\~ C ])ELL
,::vrI:Ic.lA-> ;> ~* ? '\: '!"5+r== kl':lI U=J ----
13.
14.
15.
~14"jC2p..~!l.44;:?
p~~~*
~ (
VA~Ja~'
f2~~J<"f;;~Ar~7 '-~ ;,____
~
£\:1== r :f/filJi=
NOTES:
ES-201, Page 26 of 27
- <:'Jt:
..:.- .;.~ ::.ii.~
.;> ~'
/" ILc.;~1 ES*201 Examination Security Agreement Form ES"201-3
- 1. Pre-Examination I acknowledge that I have acquired specialized knowledge about the NRC licensing examinations scheduled for theweek{s) of "2..ll.J/~ ~ as of the date of my signature. I agree that f will not knowingly 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 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, Jam 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 cancellation of the examinations andlor 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.
- 2. Post-Examination To the best of my knowle~e, , did neit divulge to any unauthorized persons any information concerning the NRC licensing examinations administered during the week(s) of 1./1. ~5 . From 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 licensing examinations, except as specifically noted below and authorized by the NRC.
JOB TITLE I RESPONSIBILITY It...c.. ~\)(Ja.(\l\~Z)r
~iCl.-..._,-r:se:\J'tl t>P~,-
t;~ "';-~, . . . I d'f/
<?
~.~ .1~~ ~~.~tf~~~~=--~_'~VW.J~':~~jij~~~~::==
~
'it,&tAr L IZnt: !Mt!.A~Hl#-:
~ =
&7Wi'
~~~~~~~~~~~J!1-' ~ -:~ -
~I~
l~~ 'r~e""'!i& d1."""....-' ';- ft.
C.
I
-V "'!1/'2.'t f 'i
<r 3/"101'1
= 1\.
r~ .J*
$-ZD-09 N It'~ N M Ik.,..- I?
ES-201 I Page 26 of 27
,~.
/~
~/ =E~S--2~O~1------------------------------=Ex-a-m~in-a~ti~o-n~S~e-c-u~ri~~-_~A-g-re-e-m-e-n~t------------------------~F~o-rm~E~S~-~20~1~-~3
- 1. Pre-Examination I acknowledge that I have acquired specialized knowledge about the NRC licensing examinations_ scheduled for the week(s) of 2 - Z5-61 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 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 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, [ 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 cancellation of the examinations andfor 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.
- 2. Post-Examination To the best of my knowledge, I did not divulge to any unauthorized persons any information concerning the NRC licenSing examinations administered during the week(s) of7.I'J.~(DI . From 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 licensing examinations, except as specifically noted below and authorized by the NRC.
PRINTED NAME JOB TITLE I RESPONSIBILITY DATE l'1jf'J t::q 2.
3.
~
-0 >"\
P@o 8
ol'S LI.>.wv.dar S,L,t1.
~ IJ , It .
~
~
me Z-!£1
- 4
~?> ~ =-
- 4. .;::J?!ff Mo~
~:jf;rm:~L 7*'~Cuy 4M, 8'~:J(~
C9> ~ , A.
- 10. "" Mn;f.\ ;J 1)v¥~
- 11. ,.A\c..~ ~ \I,,"I..IS>A1:\.~
12.'"T)AN\~ C :DELL
- 13. =:':O8<-'*'
\)tL\~\,ID./0 "AWO~;
C: 2 ~ ~~
.EffiI!f.
- ~
- 14. P~ji:-'Me-r-* ~O\\,d '0- ..- d'
- 15. ~,k'Ji,. t::.""¥-' '".FI".J rf~7 NOTES: '
~ pel' .e t1II.~ll I D tU-lt ( "I/.,./pl,
- J; flU e.,4' t 4- Acl,. ..s ([ 'f (~/6'1 ES-201, Page 26 of 27
~/ '~
\ Lc.... 2~
'=em ad ES-201 Examination Security j\greement Form ES-201-3
- 1. Pre-Examination
'$(
1 acknowledge that I have acquired specialized knowledge about the NRC licensing examinations scheduled for the week(s) of 2/1.. Oi{ as of the date of my signature. I agree that I will not knowingly divulge any information about these examinations to any persons who have not beeil authorized by the NRC chief examiner. 1understand that I am not to instruct, evaluate, or provide performance feedback to those applicants scheduled to be administered these licensing examinations from this date until completion of examination administration, except as speciflcally noted below and authorized by the NRC (e.g., acting as a simulator booth operator or communicator is acceptable if the individual does not select the training content or provide direct or indirect feedback). Furthermore, I am aware of the physical security measures and requirements (as documented in the facility licensee's procedures) and understand that violation of the conditions of this agreement may result in cancellation of the examinations and/or an enforcement action against me orthe facility licensee. I will immediately report to facility management or the NRC chief examiner any indications or suggestions that examination security may have been compromised.
- 2. Post-Examination To the best of my know/edle, I did not divulge to any unauthorized persons any information concernlng the NRC licensing examinations administered during the week(s) of l..("Z:.?Ii . From the date that I entered into this securIty agreement until the completion of examination administration, I did not instruct, evaluate, or provide performance feedback to those applicants who were administered these licensing examinations, except as specifically noted below and authorized by the NRC.
PRINTED NAME JOB TITLE I RESPONSIBILITY DATE NOTE
-:5 w1 /-:s.fC.7J
~6j~L ~ I"" B()D~=
?~. '?
.. DnJ),"p 1"'Sll.I,j~1!.1 4Ls aw'C1'01e
~~..LSf\o
\J$/St/J.
~
Sl fI'\ ~Dt1l
_ ffi
'3/!!f - -
~L'I01
( ()_
t.
- . 6"i-
-&~. ~
- z;
_ J,,_-
3 ~~{,(~rp4--
Q.Cl\
---fr.1\.c..iac
. -~
~
- :J ~/t.:tt ~J;f-UIJIf--
~--JMi~--
- ~.~-- -- ~-
. ~~
7' ---- -~
---;.:;r
~
~ --- ----;... .
~ ~ ------
7' .
ES-201, Page 26 of 27
.,.~"..
ILC. *d.1 E5-201 Examination Security Agreement Form E5-201-3
- 1. Pre-Examination I acknowledge that I have acquired specialized knowledge about the NRC licensing examinations scheduled for the week(s) of L./1..3/i) , 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 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 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 conditions 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.
- 2. Post~Examination To the best of my knowledge, I did not dlvulge to any unauthorized persons any information concerning the NRC licensing examinations administered during the weekes) of . From 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 licensing examinations, except as specifically noted below and authorized by the NRC.
JOB TITLE I RESPONSIBILITY SIGNATURE (1) DATE SIGNATURE (2) DATE NOTE
-"(.,..- -"~- .j, Ike.. ~(",£~i:.z>r C=-RS-g.v-.. Devj.\uf8'f C't6W\ 0g~1G>f"-/
~\~Lor
'f 1. Dr S(is.ft,i t:; i::t::t:
c!)(A-VV" §vA-'-v~1l)rL-Ex........ "v' . . t. . .
Q
,(
~l.-...r
'!!f.!e
~~3"'9' l1>-(~-o8
==
S 1M GN'~ Jl-i.*.:d
':iGq.M ])el/efrJ£ [ IW¥~""~-----====
5lyY?HP1; ifdtI>M"N- #/11, t¥t/,,!, _ __
- ~ It
- Jt!tft:" ~ lIi'A~tv
,~~~L~-r f"~,,~ 1§'~~
~
{ijjf __
tfM.'I\a~ __":'__m_--'-&-6 ____
ES-201, Page 26 of 27
ES-201 Examination Security Agreement Form ES-201-3
- 1. Pre-Examination I acknowledge that I have acquired specialized knowledge about the NRC licensing examinations scheduled for the weekes) of Z- 25-6 [ as of the date of my signature. [agree that I w[(l not knowingly 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 untH 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 conditions 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.
- 2. Post-Examination To the best of my knowledge, I did not divulge to any unauthorized persons any information concerning the NRC licensing examinations administered during the week(s) of . From 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 licensing examinations, except as specifically noted below and authorized by the NRC.
PRINTED NAME JOB TITLE f RESPONSIBILITY DATE SIGNATURE (2) DATE NOTE 1./..L5h~ Pineiro. OPS 1:I\.:>~ckJr Z~~1 ~_ _ _ _ __
- 2. f£i?ttJ K~~ SJt1, ~ tJ {; I?. * '2-2-~al-l_ _ __
- 3. "]-0-11.... -ShiiO$d<i. Zl 0;0 , ~.
4 . .::TeffMo~ V/4i..lbJ4rtJf2.. iI;3{o1--------
5
- 6. ~~
41-. /I~ 5ff,eK<CL I!lh(/JiiJ {L
~Z Z 51 tFf<---_ _ _ _ __
7.' 'MY
- 8. _ _ _ _ 4fv1
______ ~~ _______________________ 'I" - ,_ _ _ _ __
- 9. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __
- 10. _ _ __
- 11. _ _ __
- 12. _ _ __
- 13. _ _ __
- 14. _ _ __
- 15. _ _ __
NOTES:
ES-20 1, Page 26 of 27
ES-301 Administrative Topics Outline Fonn ES-301-1 Facility: Turkey Point Units 3 & 4 Date of Examination: : 2/23/09 Exam Level: SRO (U) & (I) Operating Test Number: 2009-301 Administrative Topic Type Code Describe Activity to be performed (See Note) (See Note)
Al.a Perform a Review of a Manual RCS Leakrate Calculation CR,N Conduct of Operations (2.1.7 SRO 4.7)
A1.b Review 3-0P-062, Safety Injection Attachments CR,N Conduct of Operations (2.1.29 SRO 4.0)
A2 Review Accident Monitoring Instrumentation Channel Checks CR,N Equipment Control (2.2.22 SRO 4.7)
Determine Dose Rates and Radiological Requirements From a A3 CR,M Survey Map Radiation Control (2.3.7 RO 3.5 SRO 3.6)
A4 - SRO Classify Event and complete SNF CR,N Emergency Plan (2.4.41 SRO 4.6)
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.
- Types and Codes (C) Control Room (S) Simulator (CR) Classroom (D)irect from bank (:::;3 for ROs, :S4 for SROs)
(N)ew or (M)odified from bank (2': 1)
(p)revious 2 Exams (:::;1 Randomly selected)
ES-301 Administrative Topics Outline Form ES-301-1 Facility: Turkey Point Units 3 & 4 Date of Examination: 2/23/09 Exam Level: RO Operating Test Number: 2009-301 Administrative Topic Type Code Describe Activity to be performed (See Note) (See Note)
Al Perform a Manual RCS Leakrate Calculation CR,N Conduct of Operations (2.1.7 R04.4)
NIA NIA NIA A2 Perform Accident Monitoring Instrumentation Channel Checks CR,N Equipment Control (2.2.12 RO 3.7)
Determine Dose Rates and Radiological Requirements From a A3 CR,M Survey Map Radiation Control (2.3.7 RO 3.5 SRO 3.6)
A4 - RO Complete a Florida State Notification Form CR,N Emergency Plan (2.4.39 RO 3.9)
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.
- Types and Codes (C) Control Room (S) Simulator (CR) Classroom (D)irect from bank (::;3 for ROs, :s4 for SROs)
(N)ew or (M)odified from bank (2::1)
(P)revious 2 Exams (::;1 Randomly selected)
ES-301 Control Roomlln-Plant Systems Outline Form ES-301-2 Facility: Turkey Point Date of Examination: 2/23/09 Exam Level (circle one): RO Operating Test No.: 2009-301 Control Room Systems@ (8 for RO; 7 for SRO-I; 2 or 3 for SRO-U)
System / JPM Title Type Code* Safety Function a Align RHR For Cold Leg Recirculation A,M,S 2 b Restore Accumulator Pressure D,C 3 c Place RHR In Service L,N,S 4 (PRI) d Manually Initiate Containment Spray A,N,S 5 e Manually Synchronize Main Generator D, L, S 4 (SEC) f Respond to a LT 112 failure A,N,S 7 g Respond to a CCW system leak A, N,L,S 8 h Terminate a Waste Gas Release A,N,S 9 In-Plant Systems@ (3 for RO; 3 for SRO-I; 3 or 2 for SRO-U) i Respond to ATWS Locally A,E,D 1 j Realign Opposite Units HHSI Pumps E,D,R 2 k Locally Start a Diesel Generator A,E,M 6
@ All control room (and in-plant) systems must be differenfand serve different safety functions; in-plant systems and functions may overlap those tested in the control room.
- Type Codes Criteria for RO / SRO-I / SRO-U (A)lternate path 4-6 / 4-6 / 2-3 (C)ontrol room (D)irect from bank ::;9/::;8/::;4 (E)mergency or abnormal in-plant ;::1/;::1/;::1 (L)ow-Power ;::1/<:1/;::1 (N)ew or(M)odified from bank including 1(A) <:2/<:2/<:1 (P)revious 2 exams ::; 3 / ::; 3/::; 2 (randomly selected)
(R)CA <:1/;::1/<:1 (S)imulator
ES-301 Control Room/In-Plant Systems Outline Form ES-301-2 Facility: Turkey: Point Date of Examination: 2/23/09 Exam Level (circle one): SRO-I Operating Test No.: 2009-301 Control Room Systems@ (8 for RO; 7 for SRO-I; 2 or 3 for SRO-U)
System 1 JPM Title Type Code* Safety Function a Align RHR For Cold Leg Recirculation A,M,S 2 b Restore Accumulator Pressure D,C 3 c Place RHR In Service L,N,S 4 (PRI) d Manually Initiate Containment Spray A,N,S 5 e N/A N/A N/A f Respond to a LT 112 failure A,N,S 7 g Respond to a CCW system leak A, N, L,S 8 h Terminate a Waste Gas Release A,N,S 9 In-Plant Systems@ (3 for RO; 3 for SRO*I; 3 or 2 for SRO-U) i Respond to ATWS Locally A,E,D 1 j Realign Opposite Units HHSI Pumps E,D,R 2 k Locally Start a Diesel Generator A,E,M 6
@ All control room (and in-plant) systems must be different and serve different safety functions; in-plant systems and functions may overlap those tested in the control room.
- Type Codes Criteria for RO 1 SRO-I 1 SRO-U (A)lternate path 4-6 1 4-6 1 2-3 (C)ontrol room (D)irect from bank ~9/~8/~4 (E)mergency or abnormal in-plant 2!1/2!1/2!1 (L)ow-Power 2!1/2!1/2!1 (N)ew or (M)odified from bank including 1(A) 2!2/2!2/2!1 (P)revious 2 exams ~ 3 1 ~ 3 1 ~ 2 (randomly selected)
(R)CA 2!1/2!1/2!1 (S)imulator
ES-301 Control Room/In-Plant Systems Outline Form ES-301-2 Facility: Turkey: Point Date of Examination: 2/23/09 Exam Level (circle one): SRO-U Operating Test No.: 2009-301 Control Room Systems@ (8 for RO; 7 for SRO-I; 2 or 3 for SRO-U)
System 1 JPM Title Type Code* Safety Function a N/A N/A N/A b Vent Accumulators D,C 3 c N/A N/A N/A d Manually Initiate Containment Spray A,N,S 5 e N/A N/A N/A f N/A N/A N/A g Respond to a CCW system leak A, N,L,S 8 h N/A N/A N/A In-Plant Systems@ (3 for RO; 3 for SRO-I; 3 or 2 for SRO-U) i Respond to ATWS Locally A,E,D 1 j Realign Opposite Units HHSI Pumps E,D,R 2 k N/A N/A N/A
@ All control room (and in-plant) systems must be different and serve different safety functions; in-plant systems and functions may overlap those tested in the control room.
- Type Codes Criteria for RO 1 SRO-I 1 SRO-U (A)lternate path 4-6/4-6/2-3 (C)ontrol room (D)irect from bank :::;9/:::;8/:::;4 (E)mergency or abnormal in-plant 2::1/2::1/2::1 (L)ow-Power 2::1/2::1/2::1 (N)ew or (M)odified from bank including 1(A) 2::2/2::2/2::1 (P)revious 2 e?<ams :::; 31:::; 3 1 :::; 2 (randomly selected)
(R)CA 2::1/2::1/2::1 (S)imulator
ES-301 Operating Test Quality Checklist Form ES-301-3 Facility;-r-\A"\~,\ fo~Y\-+ U1\:\~ :3 -t ~ Date of Examination: Ql /013/0'j Operating Test Number: il() ~
Initials
- 1. General Criteria a b* C#
~
- a. The operating test conforms with the previously approved outline; changes are consistent with V(j sampling requirements (e.g., 10 CFR 55.45, operational importance, safety function distribution). k' '"
~ 1->
V
~
- b. There is no day-to-day repetition between this and other operating tests to be administered during this examination. ""I
- c. The operating test shall not duplicate items from the applicants' audit test(s). (see Section D.1.a.)
+ V~ ~II ..j
- d. Overlap with the written examination and between different parts of the operating test is within acceptable limits.
- p :~ '"
i'l
- e. It appears that the operating test will differentiate between competent and less-than-competent applicants at the designated license level. ,l- /t q'~
- 2. Walk-Through Criteria -- - --
- a. Each JPM includes the following, as applicable:
- initial conditions initiating cues
- references and tools, including associated procedures reasonable and validated time limits (average time allowed for completion) and specific I
designation if deemed to be time-critical by the facility licensee
- operationally important specific performance criteria that include:
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
/ / 11<t If
- identification of critical steps and their associated performance standards
- restrictions on the sequence of steps, if applicable
- b. Ensure that any changes from the previously approved systems and administrative walk-through outlines (Forms ES-301-1 and 2) have not caused the test to deviate from any of the acceptance criteria (e.g., item distribution, bank use, repetition from the last 2 NRC examinations) speCified on those forms and Form ES-201-2.
~
7/ It
- 3. Simulator Criteria -- -- -
The associated simulator operating tests (scenario sets) have Form ES-301-4 and a copy is attached.
b~ewed in accordance with 1:1 If ~
Nam~ I Si~
~
Printed
- a. Author ~"'~~ \, ~ , I)q
~
Q~i:,J 11 ILIO WI YlJbw,}7M£ L-; Lolj
{d , rr
- b. Facility Reviewer(*) I iI-;~L7.fI1C; Y"j
- c. NRC Chief Examiner (#) Cd'l<.?'\.> kl ~A '-'; ........
- d. NRC Supervisor WJ.t;Au..J...-r. WLDA.tMJV(( UlJhJ( UM- "ZltS/of4
\' /
NOTE:
- The facility signature is not applicable for NRC-developed tests.
- Independent NRC reviewer initial items in Column "c"; chief examiner concurrence required.
ES-301, Page 24 of 27
ES-301 Simulator Scenario Qualiti Checklist Form ES-301-4 I
Facility:\"lAo/\'-..t...\ ' ?D' Ii + Date of Exa:
~rJ: ~:31 O't Scenario Numbers: tI ~/3 Operating Test No.: il <>0<)*3<>
QUALITATIVE ATTRIBUTES Initials a b* C#
~t 1.
2.
3.
The Initial conditions are realistic, in that some equipment andlor Instrumentation may be out of service, but It does not cue the operators Into expected events.
The scenarios consist mostly of related events.
Each event description consists of 1+
-/- r)6 f
t
- -f t ./t the point in the scenario when It Is to be initiated the malfunctlon(s) that are enlered 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)
- 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 even!.
.; C~ .. ,
- 5. The events are valid with regard to physics and thermodYnamics. .,(- .~ .1'
- 6. Sequencing and timing of events is reasonable, and allows the examination team to obtain complete evaluation results commensurate with the scenario objectives. ~ IJ{ J
~ ~6 :;J
- 7. If time compression techniques are used, the scenario summary clearly so indicates.
Operators have sufficient time to carry out expected activities without undue time constraints.
Cues are given. .n .
- 8. The simulator modeling is not altered. '
, 'r;
~ hr'
-I { I~
- 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 fidelity is maintained while running the planned scenarios.
- 10. Every operator will be evaluated using at least one new or significantly modified scenario.
All other scenarios have been altered in accordance with Section 0.5 of ES-301. ~ { ~
- 11. All individual operator competencies can be evaluated, as verified using Form ES-301-6 (submit the form along with the simulator scenarios). ..f ( .~~
[
- 12. Each applicant will be significantly involved in the minimum number of transients and events specified on Form ES-301-5 (submit the form with the simulator scenariOS). ~ ~ J/
- 13. The level of difficulty is appropriate to support licensing decisions for each crew position. !~ 6 ;F~
Target Quantitative Attributes (Per Scenario; See Section D.5.d) Actual Attributes - - ",,1
- 1. Total malfunctions (5-8) 't,ql 9 ..-I r ;J.
- 2. Malfunctions after EOP entry (1-21. Q. ,$ 1 iJ.. ~ f
- 3. Abnormal events (2--4) t( 1 <I, S- I~ (
4.
5.
Major transients (1-2)
EOPs entered/requiring substantive actions (1-2)
I I~ I I f {
1'&.1 I -.f.- fJ r.
- 6. EOP continQencies requiring substantive actions (0-2) I ,D I D Y 0; ",1
- 7. Critical tasks (2-3) :.J. 13, 3 --I- D{J ~
ES-301 Transient and Event Checklist Form ES-301-5 .
ES-301, Page 25 of 27
r//IJ/(L, ES-301
-<V(lf
~ .* ,
Simulator Scenario Quality Checklist n
-'/;. '<:..
~>L~~l~~Scenario Numbers::~ / NI",
Fonn ES-301-4 Facility: \ W\.~":Yo\t\-+ Date of Exam: OperatinQ Test No.: O/voCj'* 3/) I QUALITATIVE ATTRIBUTES Initials a b* C#
- 1. The Initial conditions are realistic, in that some equipment and/or instrumentation may be out of service. but It does not cue the operators into expected events. ~j t I~
- 2. The scenarios consist mostly of related events. !.p 6 14:l
- 3. Each event descriptlon consists of
- the point in the scenario when it is to be initiated the malfunctlon(s) that are entered to Initiate the event the symptoms/cues that will be vlslble to the crew the expected operator actions (by shift position) the event termlnationpoint (If applicable)
</ ( I*~~
- 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. I rr lJ1 '/1
- 5. The events are valid with regard to physics and thermodynamics. 1-,0 I~
-/
- 6. Sequencing and timing of events Is reasonabie, and allows the examination team to obtain complete evaluation results commensurate with the scenario objectives. -i I( J
- 7. If time compression techniques are used, the scenario summary clearly so indicates.
Operators have sufficient time to carry out expected activities without undue time constraints.
Cues are given. Icf ('1 i I'~
- 8. The simulator modeling is not altered. ..c.f f
- 9. The scenarios have been validated. Pursuant to 10 CFR 55,46(d), any open simulator performance deficiencies or devlations from the referenced plant have been evaluated to ensure that functional fidelity Is maintained while running the planned scenarios. -I ( ~
0
~'I
- 10. Every operator will be evaluated using at least one new or significantly modified scenario.
All other scenarios have been altered in accordance with Section 0.5 of ES-301. 1-1 6
- 11. All individual operator competencles can be evaluated, as verified using Form ES-301*6 (submit the form along with the simulator scenarios).
yJ 6
- 12. Each applicant will be signifi(~ntIY involved In the minimum number of transients and events specified on Form ES*301-5 submit the form with the simulator scenarios). ~U. ~
- 13. The level of difficulty Is appropriate to support licensing decisions for each crew pOSition. ~ P{ ~
Target Quantitative Attributes (Per Scenario' See Section D.S.d) Actual Attributes
.- -" - 1
- 1. Total malfunctions (5-8) ,j /\ I 10:}) 6' ~ ~)
- 2. Malfunctions after EOP entry (1-2) I / \/ l-h {
- 3. Abnormal events (2-4) if I ~ J :../-: ( ,~
V
- 4. Major transients (1-2) I I 'r'4 ~ f .If)
- 5. EOPs enteredlreQuirim~ substantive actions (1-2) I I I \ -f- (j ~ )
\ ~6:
6.
7.
EOP contingencies requiring substantive actions (0-2)
CrHlcai tasks (2-3)
(.I I J.. I I
I
\ 1+VI ., f ES-301 Transient and Event Checklist Form ES-301-5 ES~301, Page 25 of 27
1ES-301, Rev. 9 Transient and Event Checklist Form ES-301-5 Facility: Turkey Point Units 3 & 4 Date of Exam: 02/23/2009 Operating Test No.: 2009-301 A E Scenarios P V 1 2 3 4 T M P E 0 I L N CREW CREW CREW CREW POSITION POSITION POSITION POSITION T N I T A I C S A B S A B S A B S A B L M A T R T 0 R T 0 R T 0 R T 0 U N Y 0 C P 0 C P 0 C P 0 C P M(*)
T P R I U E
RO RX 4 3,5 3 3 .1 1 1 0 0 NOR 4 3 3 3 1 1 1 I/C 1,2 1,3 2,4 1,2, 1,4 2,5 4 2 4 4 2 5
MAJ 5 5 6 6 6 6 5 5 2 2 1 TS 0 2 2 SRO-I RX 4 3 1,3 1 1 0 NOR 5 1 1 1 I/C 1,2, 1,2, 1,2, 2,4 4 4 2 3 3,4 4,5 MAJ 5 6 6 5 2 2 1 TS 1,3, 2,4, 1,2 2,3 0 2 2 4 5 ,4 RX 4 3 1,3 1 1 0 SRO-U NOR 5 1 1 1 IIC 1,2, 1,2, 1,2, 2,4 4 4 2 3 3,4 4,5 MAJ 5 6 6 5 2 2 1 TS 1,3, 2,4, 1,2 2,3 0 2 2 4 5 ,4 RX 1 1 0 NOR 1 1 1 I/C 4 4 2 MAJ 2 2 1 TS 0 2 2 Instructions:
- 1) Check 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 serve 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.
- 2) Reactivity manipulations may be conducted under normal or controlled abnormal conditions (refer to Section D.5.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.
Competencies Checklist Facility:',
lA' k-t1 R'..f If}
Date of Examination: ~
0?~3 I<
09 Operating Test No.:
db,>'i* 30 I APPLICANTS RO [Q-"" RO D RO D RO D SRO~I D SRO-I ~ SRO-I D SRO-I 0 SRO-U D SRO-U 0 SRO-U [jJ.. -- SRO-U 0 Competencies SCENARIO SCENARIO SCENARIO SCENARIO 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 I nterpretiDiagnose 1,1., f,<, 11<, \ 12., t,l, '/1, I,~,
- "1 If <, I,l) 112 Iz. ,,
-3 '1,f ).t '3,{ '3 I{,\ 1, f,
~/~ J
),1, V,'; I{' 1,1 Events and Conditions '5 5" Comply With and
- ,l., e,f, Id, ('I 'II 2,~, I (3~ ~~ ~3i
(,3 1 '2;3,
'1,4 if,) ~I(, 'l All AI)
Use Procedures (1) </(\ \(,(' tf,r <I,.t; ~
)'~, fd J I/l[ 1,.~, ','l, Operate Control Boards (2)
Ilk All '1,(
/j) ti" II" A/I '}t,fl. 1/\ 1111 1111 '} ,t/, /\
Ii
~)
Communicate
~H All Atl AU fll' 1111 flU ;}If ~II It II A')
and Interact 11" I-- t--M ~
Demonstrate All PlI
~" 1.1 /1 11 All A JlII J\1f Supervisory Ability (3) !--
Comply With and -N! 1,3, 1,'1, f ,2, Cf ~,
'il, 4r.f, i,2; 2;~,
Use Tech. Specs, (3) ~ " i'- II/f'f" )~& (p- ~S 'I" ,
.,~ (p ,/,(
Notes:
(1) Includes Technical Specification compliance for an RO.
(2) Optional for an SRO-U, (3) Only applicable to SROs.
Instructions:
Check the applicants' license type and enter one or more event numbers that will allow the examiners to evaluate every applicable competency for every applicant.
~~ ~/p../c:>1 ES-301, Page 27 of 27
ES-401; Rev. 9 PWR Examination Outline Form ES-401-2 Facility: Date of Exam:
RO KIA Category Points SRO-Only Points Tier Group K K K K K K A A A A G A2 G* Total 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4
- Total
- 1. 1 3 3 3 3 3 3 18 3 3 6 Emergency &
2 2 1 2 2 1 1 9 2 2 4 Abnormal Plant N/A N/A Evolutions Tier Totals 5 4 5 5 4 4 27 5 5 10 1 3 2 3 3 2 3 2 3 2 2 3 28 2 3 5 2.
2 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 10 0 2 3 Plant Systems Tier Totals 4 2 4 4 3 4 3 4 3 3 4 38 2 5 8
- 3. Generic Knowledge and Abilities 1 2 3 4 10 1 2 3 4 7 Categories 2 2 3 3 1 2 2 2
- 1. Ensure that at least two topicS from every applicable KIA category are sampled within each tier of the RO and SRO-only outlines (Le., except for one category in Tier 3 of the SRO*only outline, the "Tier Totals" in each KIA category shall not be less than two).
- 2. The point total for each group and tier in the proposed outline must match that specified In the table.
The final point total for each group and tier may deviate by +/-1 from that specified In the table based on NRC revisions. The final RO exam must total 75 points and the SRO-only exam must total 25 points.
- 3. Systemslevolutions within each group are Identified on the associated outline; systems or evolutions that do not apply at the facility should be deleted and justified; operationally important, site-specific systems that are not included on the outline should be added. Refer to ES-401, Attachment 2, for guidance regarding the elimination of inappropriate KIA statements.
- 4. Select topics from as many systems and evolutions as possible; sample every system or evolution in the group before selecting a second topic for any system or evolution.
- 5. Absent a plant-specific priority, only those K/As having an importance rating (lR) of2.5 or higher shall be selected. Use the RO and SRO ratings for the RO and SRO'only portions, respectively.
- 6. Select SRO topics for Tiers 1 and 2 from the shaded systems and KIA categories.
- 7. 'The generic (G) KIAs in Tiers 1 and 2 shall be selected from Section 2 of the KIA Catalog, but the topics must be relevant to the applicable evolution or system.
- 8. On the following pages, enter the KIA numbers, a brief description of each topic, the topiCS' importance ratings (IRs) for the applicable license level, and the point totals (#) for each system and category. Enter the group and tier totals for each category In the table above; iffuel handling eqUipment is sampled In other than Category A2 or G* on the SRO-only exam, enter It on the left side of Column A2 for Tier 2, Group 2 (Note
- 1 does not apply). Use duplicate pages for RO and SRO-only exams.
- 9. For Tier 3, select topics from Section 2 ofthe KIA catalog, and enter the KIA numbers, descriptions, IRs, and point totals (#) on Form ES-401*3. Limit SRO selections to K/As that are linked to 10 CFR 55.43.
ES-401, REV 9 T1G1 PWR EXAMINATION OUTLINE FORM ES-401-2 KA NAME I SAFETY FUNCTION: IR K1 K2 K3 K4 K5 K6 A1 A2 A3 A4 G TOPIC:
RO SRO 007EK2.03 Reactor Trip - Stabilization - Recovery 3.5 3.6 D~DDDDDDDDD Reactor trip status panel 11 Knowledge of the interrelations between (EMERGENCY PLANT EVOLUTION) and the foliowing:(CFR: 41.7 145.7 145.8) 008AG2.2.44 Pressurizer Vapor Space Accident 13 4.2 4.4 0 D D D D D DOD D ~ Ability to interpret control room indications to verify the status and operation of a system, and understand how This is a Generic, no stem statement is operator actions and directives affect plant and system associated. conditions 009EA2.06 Small Break LOCA 1 3 3.8 4.3 0 D D D D D D ~ D D D Whether PZR water inventory loss is imminent Ability to determine and interpret the following as they apply to (EMERGENCY PLANT EVOLUTION):(CFR: 41.10 1 43.51 4S.13) 01SAA2.08 RCP Malfunctions / 4 3.4 3.S D D D D D D D ~ D D D When to secure RCPs on high bearing temperature Ability to determine and interpret the following as they apply to ABNORMAL PLANT EVOLUTION):(CFR: 41.10 143.SI 45.13) 022AK1.02 Loss,of Rx Coolant Makeup 1 2 2.7 3.1 ~ D D D D D DOD D D Relationship of charging flow to pressure differential between charging and RCS Knowledge of the operational implications of the following concepts as they apply to the (ABNORMAL PLANT EVOLUTION):(CFR: 41.8 to 41.101 45.3) 025AG2.4.46 Loss of RHR System 14 4.2 4.2 0 D D D D D DOD D ~ Ability to verify that the alarms are consistent with the plant conditions.
This is a Generic, no stem statement is associated.
Page 1 of 3 8/18/2008 5:59 AM
ES-401, REV 9 T1G1 PWR EXAMINATION OUTLINE FORM ES-401-2 KA NAME I SAFETY FUNCTION: IR K1 K2 K3 K4 K5 K6 Ai A2 A3 A4 G TOPIC:
RO SRO 026AA2.06 Loss of Component Cooling Water 18 2.8 3.1 D D D D DOD ~ DOD The length of time after the loss of CCW flow to a component before that component may be damaged Ability to determine and interpret the following as they apply to ABNORMAL PLANT EVOLUTION):(CFR 41.10/43.51 45.13) 029EG2.4.4 ATWSI1 4.5 4.7 D D D DOD D D D D ~ Ability to recognize abnormal indications for system operating parameters which are entry-level conditions for This is a Generic, no stem statement is emergency and abnormal operating procedures.
associated.
040AK1.04 Steam Line Rupture - Excessive Heat 3.2 3.6 ~ D D DOD D D D D D Nil ductility temperature Transfer / 4 Knowledge of the operational implications of the following concepts as they apply to fue(ABNORMALPLANT EVOLUT[ON):(CFR: 41.8 1041.10 145.3) 054AK1.02 Loss of Main Feedwater 1 4 3.6 4.2 ~ D D D DOD D D D D Effects of feedwater introduction on dry S/G Knowledge of the operational implications of the following concepts as they apply to fue (ABNORMAL PLANT EVOLUTION):(CFR 41.8 t041.10 145.3) 055EK2.04 Station Blackout ( 6 D*~DDDDDDDDD Pumps Knowledge of the interrelations between (EMERGENCY PLANT EVOLUTION) and the foliowing:(CFR: 41.7/45.7/45.8) 056AA1.25 Loss of Off-site Power 16 2.9 2.9 DODD 0 D ~ DOD D Main steam supply valve control switch Ability to operate and 1 or monitor fue following as they apply to (ABNORMAL PLANT EVOLUTION):(CFR: 41.7 I 45.5 /
45.6)
Page 2 of 3 8/18/2008 5:59 AM
ES*401, REV 9 T1G1 PWR EXAMINATION OUTLINE FORM ES*401-2 KA NAME / SAFETY FUNCTION: IR K1 K2 K3 K4 KS K6 A1 A2 A3 A4 G TOPIC:
RO SRO 057AK3.01 Loss of Vital AC Inst. Bus 16 4.1 4.4 D D ~ D D D D D D D D Actions contained in EOP for loss of vital ac electrical instrument bus Knowledge of the reasons for the following responses as they apply to (ABNORMAL PLANT EVOLUTION):(CFR: 41.S/41.10 1 4S.6 1 45.13) 058AA1.01 Loss of DC Power I 6 3.4 3.5 D D D D D D ~ D D D D Cross-tie of the affected dc bus with the alternate supply Ability to operate and f or monitor the following as they apply to (ABNORMAL PLANT EVOLUTION):(CFR: 41.7/4S.5f 4S.6) 062AK3.02 Loss of Nuclear Svc Water I 4 3.6 3.9 D D ~ D D D D D D D D The automatic actions (alignments) within the nuclear service water resulting from the actuation of the ESFAS Knowledge of the reasons for the following responses as they apply to (ABNORMAL PLANT EVOLUTION):(CFR: 41.S f 41. 10 I 45.6/45.13) 065AK3.04 Loss of Instrument Air I 8 3 3.2 D D ~ D D D D D D D D Cross-over to backup air supplies Knowledge of the reasons for the following responses as they apply to (ABNORMAL PLANT EVOLUTION):(CFR: 41.5/41.10 I 45.6 145.13) 077AA1.01 Generator Voltage and Electric Grid 3.6 3.7 D D D D D D ~ D D D D Grid frequency and voltage Disturbances I 6 Ability to operate and f or monitor the following as they apply to (ABNORMAL PLANT EVOlUTION):(CFR: 41.7/45.51 45.6)
WE11EK2.1 lossofEmergencyCoolantRecirc.f4 3.6 3.9 D ~ D D D D D D D D D Components and functions of control and safety systems, including instrumentation, signals, interlocks, failure Knowledge of the interrelations between modes and automatic and manual features.
(EMERGENCY PLANT EVOLUTION) and the foliowing:(CFR: 41.7 145.7 145.8)
Page 3 of3 8/18/2008 5:59 AM
ES-401, REV 9 T1G2 PWR EXAMINATION OUTLINE FORM ES-401-2 KA NAME I SAFETY FUNCTION: IR K1 K2 K3 K4 KS K6 A1 A2 A3 A4 G TOPIC:
RO SRO 001AK3.02 Continuous Rod Withdrawal / 1 3.2 4.3 0 0 ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Tech-Spec limits on rod operability Knowledge of the reasons for the following responses as they apply to (ABNORMAL PLANT EVOLUTION):(CFR: 41.S/41.10 /
4S.6/4S.13)
OOSAA1.01 Inoperable/Stuck Control Rod 11 3.6 3.4 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ 0 0 0 0 CROS Ability to operate and 1 or monitor the following as they apply to (ABNORMAL PLANT EVOLUTION):(CFR: 41.7 14S.51 45.6) 024AA2.01 Emergency Boration 1 1 3.B 4.1 DOD 0 0 0 0 ~ 0 0 0 Whether boron flow and/or M OVs are malfunctioning from plant conditions Ability to determine and interpret the following as they apply to ABNORMAL PLANT EVOLUTION}:(CFR: 41.10/43.51 45.13) 036AK3.02 Fuel Handling Accident IB 2.9 3.6 0 0 ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Interlocks associated with fuel handling equipment Knowledge of the reasons for the following responses as they apply to (ABNORMAL PLANT EVOLUTION):(CFR: 41.S/41.10 /
45.6/45.13) 059AK1.02 Accidental Uquid RadWaste ReI. 19 2.6 3.2 ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Biological effects on humans of various types of radiation, exposure levels that are acceptable for nuclear Knowledge of the operational implications power plant personnel and the units used for radiation-of the follOwing concepts as they apply to intensity measurements and for radiation exposure levels the (ABNORMAL PLANT EVOlUTION):(CFR: 41.Bto 41.10/45.3) 067AG2.4.49 Plant Fire On-site 19 B 4.6 4.4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ Ability to perform without reference to procedures those actions that require immediate operation of system This is a Generic, no stem statement is components and controls.
associated.
Page 1 of2 Bf1B12008 5:59 AM
ES-401, REV 9 T1G2 PWR EXAMINATION OUTLINE FORM ES-401-2 KA NAME / SAFETY FUNCTION: IR K1 K2 K3 K4 K5 K6 A1 A2 A3 A4 G TOPIC:
RO SRO WE08EA 1.3 RCS Overcooling - PTS 14 3.6 4.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ 0 0 0 0 Desired operating results during abnormal and emergency situations.
Ability to operate and 1 or monitor the following as they apply to (EMERGENCY PLANT EVOLUTION):(CFR: 41.7/45.5/
45.6)
WE09EK1.3 Natural Circ. / 4 3.3 3.6 ~ 0 0 U 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Annunciators and conditions indicating signals, and remedial actions associated with the (Natural Circulation Knowledge of the operational implications Operations).
of the following concepts as they apply to the EMERGENCY PLANT EVOLUTION):(CFR: 41.8 to 41.10 / 4S.3)
WE14EK2.1 Loss of CTMT Integrity IS 3.4 3.7 D ~ 0 0 0 DOD 0 0 0 Components and functions of control and safety systems.
including instrumentation, signals, interlocks, failure Knowledge of the interrelations between modes and automatic and manual features.
(EMERGENCY PLANT EVOLUTION) and the foliowing:(CFR: 41.7/45.7/ 4S.8}
Page 2 of2 8/18/2008 5:S9 AM
ES-401, REV 9 T2G1 PWR EXAMINATION OUTLINE FORM ES-401-2 KA NAME / SAFETY FUNCTION: IR K1 K2 K3 K4 K5 KS A1 P2 A3 A4 G TOPIC:
RO SRO 003K1.13 Reactor Coolant Pump 2.5 2.5 ~DDDDDDDDDO RCP bearing lift oil pump Knowledge of the physical connections and/or cause-effect relationships between (SYSTEM) and the following:(CFR: 41.2 to 41.9 f 45.7 to 45.8) 003KS.04 Reactor Coolant Pump 2.8 3.1 DDDOO~DDDDO Containment isolation valves affecting Rep operation Knowledge of the effect that a loss or malfunction of the following will have on the (SYSTEM):(CFR: 41.7/45.7) 004A2.13 Chemical and Volume Control 3.S 3.9 DDDOOOO~DDO Low RWST Ability to (a) predict the impacts of the following on the (SYSTEM) and (b) based on those predictions. use procedures to correct, control. or mitigate the consequences of those abnormal operation:(CFR: 41.5/ 43.5/
45.3/45.13) 00SKS.03 Residual Heat Removal 2.5 2.S DDDOO~DDDDn RHR heat exchanger Knowledge of the effect thct a loss or malfunction of the follOWing will have on the (SYSTEM):(CFR: 41.7/45.7) 006A2.0S Emergency Core Cooling 3.3 3.5 DDDOOOD~DDO Water hammer Ablllty to (a) predict the impacts of the following on the (SYSTEM) and (b) based on those predictions. use procedures to correct, control, or mitigate the consequences of those abnormal operation:(CFR: 41.5/ 43.5/
45.3/45.13) 007A4.09 Pressurizer Relief/Quench Tank 2.5 2.7 DDDOOODDD~O Relationships between PZR level and changing levels of the PRT and bleed holdup tank Ability to manually operate and/or monitor in the control room:(CFR: 41.7 f 45.5 to 45.8)
Page 1 of 5 811812008 6:00 AM
ES-401, REV 9 T2G1 PWR EXAMINATION OUTLINE FORM ES-401-2 KA NAME I SAFETY FUNCTION: IR K1 K2 K3 K4 K5 K6 A1 />\2 A3 A4 G TOPIC:
RO SRO 008JI.4.03 Component Cooling Water 2.7 2.5 0 DOD D D DOD ~ D Throttling of the CCW pump discharge valve Ability to manually operate and/or monitor in the control room:(CFR: 41.7/45.5 to 45.8) 008K3.01 Component Cooling Water 3.4 3.5 DD~DDDDDDDD Loads cooled by CCWS Knowledge of the effect thct a loss or malfunction of the (SYSTEM) will haw on the fOliowing:(CFR: 41.7 145.6) 01OK1.02 Pressurizer Pressure Control 3.9 4.1 ~DDDDDDDDDD ESFAS Knowledge of the physical connections and/or cause-effect relationships between (SYSTEM) and the foliowing:(CFR: 41.2 to 41.9145.7 to 45.8) 01OK5.01 Pressurizer Pressure Control 3.5 4.0 DDDD~DDDDDD Determination of condition of fluid in PZR, using steam tables Knowledge of the operation a implications of the following concepts as they apply to the (SYSTEM):(CFR: 41.5/45.7) 012A3.04 Reactor Protection 2.8 2.9 DDDDDDDD~DD Circuit breaker Ability to monitor automatic operations of the (SYSTEM) inciuding:(CFR: 41.7 145.5) 0131<2.01 Engineered Safety Features Actuation 3.6 3.8 D~DDDDDDDDD ESFAS/safeguards equipment control Knowledge of electrical power supplies to the foilowing:(CFR: 41.7) 022K4.03 Containment Cooling 3.6 4.0 DDD~DDDDDDD Automatic containment isolation Knowledge of (SYSTEM) design feature(s) and or interlock(s) which provide for the failowing:(CFR: 41.7)
Page 2 of 5 811812008 6:00 AM
ES-401, REV 9 T2G1 PWR EXAMINATION OUTLINE FORM ES-401-2 KA NAME / SAFETY FUNCTION: IR K1 K2 K3 K4 K5 K6 A1 K2. A3 A4 G TOPIC:
RO SRO 026A1.03 Containment Spray 3.5 3.5 000000210000 Containment sump level Ability to predict andlor monaor changes in parameters associated with operaing the (SYSTEM) controls including:(CFR: 41.51 45.5) 026A2.04 Containment Spray 3.9 4.2 DDDDDDD2lDDD Failure of spray pump Ability to (a) predict the impacts of the following on the (SYSTEM) and (b) based on those predictions. use procedures to correct.
control, or mitigate the consequences of those abnormal operation:(CFR: 41.5/43.51 45.3145.13) 039A1.05 Main and Reheat Steam 3.2 3.3 000000210000 RCS T-ave Ability to predict and/or monitor changes in parameters associated with operciing the (SYSTEM) controls includlng:(CFR: 41.5/
45.5) 0591<3.03 Main Feedwater 3.5 3.7. 002100000000 SIGS Kncmledge of the effect thci a loss or malfunction of the (SYSTEM) will have on the foUcming:(CFR: 41.7/45.6) 061K4.06 Auxiliary/Emergency Feedwater 4.0 4.2 ODD2lDDDODDD AFW startup permissives Kncmledge of (SYSTEM) design feature(s) and or interlock(s) which prollide for the foliowing:(CFR: 41.7) 061K6.08 Auxiliary/Emergency Feedwater 2.6 2.7 ODDDD2lDODOD Pumps Kncmledge of the effect thci a loss or malfunction ofthefollcming will have on the (SYSTEM):(CFR: 41.7/45.7)
Page 3 of 5 8118/2008 6:00 AM
ES-401, REV 9 T2G1 PWR EXAMINATION OUTLINE FORM ES-401-2 KA NAME I SAFETY FUNCTION: IR K1 K2 K3 K4 K5 K6 A1 ft2 A3 A4 G TOPIC:
RO SRO 0621<1.03 AC Electrical Distributim 3.5 4.0 ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 DC distribution KnOlVledge of the physical cmnedions and/or cause-effect relationships between (SYSTEM) and the foIiOlVing:(CFR: 41.2 to 41.9 145.7 to 45.8) 063K2.01 DC Ele~rical Distribution 2.9 3.1 0 ~ D D DOD D D D 0 Major DC loads KnOlVledge of electrical pOIVer supplies to the foilowing:(CFR: 41.7) 064G2.4.30 Emergency Diesel Generator 2.7 4.1 DO 0 0 0 DOD 0 0 ~ KnOlVledge of events related to system operations/status that must be reported to internal orglnizations or outside This is a Generic. no stem statement is agencies.
associated.
064K3.02 Emergency Diesel Generator 4.2 4.4 0 D ~ D DOD 0 D D D ESFAS controlled or actuated systems KnOlVledge of the effect that a loss or malfunction of the (SYSTEM) will ha\A9 on thefollOlVing:(CFR: 41.7/45.6) 073K5.01 Process Radiatim Monitoring 2.5 3.0 DOD 0 ~ DOD 0 0 0 Radiation theory. including sources, types, units and effects KnOlVledge of the operational implications of the follOlVing concepts as they apply to the (SYSTEM):(CFR: 41.5/45.7) 076G2.1.23 Service Water 4.3 4.4 DOD DOD DOD 0 ~ Ability to perform specific system and integrated plant procedures during all modes of plant operation.
This is a Generic, no stem statement is associated.
076K4.06 Service Water 2.8 3.2 DOD ~ DOD DOD 0 Service water train separation KnOlVIedge of (SYSTEM) design feature(s) and or interlock(s) which provide for the foilowing:(CFR: 41.7)
Page 4 of 5 811812008 6:00 AM
ES-401, REV 9 T2G1 PWR EXAMINATION OUTLINE FORM ES-401-2 KA NAME I SAFETY FUNCTION: IR Ki K2 K3 K4 K5 K6 Ai /l2 A3 A4 G TOPIC:
RO SRO 078A3.01 Instrument Air 3.1 3.2 D D DOD DOD ~ D 0 Air pressure Ability to monitor automatic operations of the (SYSTEM) including:(CFR: 41.7 145.5) 103G2.2.36 Containment 3.1 4.2 D D DOD DOD D D ~ Ability to analyze the effect of maintenanoe activities, such as degraded power sources, on the status of limiting This is a Generic, no stem statement is conditions of operations associated.
Page 5 of 5 811812008 6:00 AM
ES-401, REV 9 T2G2 PWR EXAMINATION OUTLINE FORM ES-401*2 KA NAME I SAFETY FUNCTION: IR K1 K2 K3 K4 K5 K6 A1 A2 A3 A4 G TOPIC:
RO SRO 011 K6.06 Pressurizer Level Control 2.5 2.8 0 0 0 0 0 ~ 0 0 0 0 0 Correlation of demand signal indication on charging pump flow valve controller to the valve position Knowledge of the effect that a loss or malfunction of the following will have on the (SYSTEM):(CFR: 41.7 145.7) 014G2.4.35 Rod Position Indication 3.8 4.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ Knowledge of local auxiliary operator tasks during emergency and the resultant operational effects This is a Generic, no stem statement is associated.
016K3.07 Non-nuclear Instrumentation 3.6 3.7 0 0 ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ECCS Knowledge of the effect that a loss or malfunction of the (SYSTEM) will have on the foliowing:(CFR: 41.7 145.6) 017K4.03 In-core Temperature Monitor 3.1 3.3 0 0 0 ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Range of temperature indication Knowledge of (SYSTEM) design feature(s) and or interlock(s) which provide for the following:(CFR: 41.7) 027A4.04 Containment Iodine Removal 2.8 2.9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ 0 Filter temperature Ability to manually operate andfor monitor in the control room:(CFR: 41.7 f 45.5 to 45.8) 035A1.01 Steam Generator 3.6 3.8 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ 0 0 0 0 S/G wide and narrow range level during startup, shutdown and normal operations Ability to predict and/or monitor changes in parameters associated with operating the (SYSTEM) controls including:(CFR: 41.5 I 45.5) 041K1.06 Steam DumplTurbine Bypass Control 2.6 2.9 ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Condenser Knowledge of the physical connections and/or cause-effect relationships between (SYSTEM) and the following: (CFR: 41.2 to 41.9 I 45.7 to 45.8)
Page 1 of 2 8/18/2008 6:00 AM
ES-401, REV 9 T2G2 PWR EXAMINATION OUTLINE FORM ES-401-2 KA NAME I SAFETY FUNCTION: IR K1 K2 K3 K4 K5 K6 A1 A2 A3 A4 G TOPIC:
RO SRO 045A2.17 Main Turbine Generator 2.7 2.9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ 0 0 0 Malfunction of electro hydraulic control Ability to (a) predict the impacts of the following on the (SYSTEM) and (b) based on those predictions, use procedures to correct, control, or mitigate the consequences of those abnormal operation:(CFR: 41.5 143.5 I 45.3 145.13) 055A3.03 Condenser Air Removal 2.5 2.7 DOD DOD 0 0 ~ D 0 Automatic diversion of CARS exhaust Ability to monitor automatic operations of the (SYSTEM) including:(CFR: 41.7/45.5) 071K5.04 Waste Gas Disposal 2.5 3.1 0 D D 0 ~ 0 0 DOD 0 Relationship of hydrogen/oxygen concentrations to flammability Knowledge of the operational implications of the following concepts as they apply to the (SYSTEM):(CFR: 41.5/45.7)
Page 2 of2 811812008 6:00 AM
ES*401, REV 9 T3 PWR EXAMINATION OUTLINE FORM ES*401*2 KA NAME / SAFETY FUNCTION: IR K1 K2 K3 K4 K5 K6 A1 A2 A3 A4 G TOPIC:
RO SRO G2.1.18 Conduct of operations 3.6 3.8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ Ability to make accurate, clear and concise logs, records, status boards and reports.
G2.1.45 Conduct of operations 4.3 4.3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ Ability to identify and interpret diverse indications to validate the response of another indication G2.2.35 Equipment Control 3.6 4.5 0 0 0 DOD DOD 0 ~ Ability to determine Technical SpeCification Mode of Operation G2.2.39 Equipment Control 3.9 4.5 DOD 0 DODD D D ~ Knowledge of less than one hour technical specification action statements for systems.
G2.3.11 Radiation Control 3.8 4.3 0 DOD 0 D DOD D ~ Ability to control radiation releases.
G2.3.14 Radiation Control 3.4 3.8 DOD D DOD DOD ~ Knowledge of radiation or contamination hazards that may arise during normal, abnormal, or emergency conditions or activities G2.3.4 Radiation Control 3.2 3.7 DOD 0 D D DOD D ~ Knowledge of radiation exposure limits under normal and emergency conditions Page 1 of2 8/18/2008 6:00 AM
ES-401, REV 9 T3 PWR EXAMINATION OUTLINE FORM ES-401-2 KA NAME / SAFETY FUNCTION: IR K1 K2 K3 K4 K5 K6 A1 A2 A3 A4 G TOPIC:
RO SRO G2.4.13 Emergency Procedures/Plans 4.0 4.6 D D D D D D D D D D ~ Knowledge of crew roles and responsibilities during EOP usage.
G2.4.23 Emergency Procedures/Plans 3.4 4A D D DOD 0 0 0 0 0 ~ Knowledge of the bases for prioritizing emergency procedure implementation during emergency operations.
G2.4.38 Emergency ProceduresfPlans 2.4 4A D D D DOD D D D D ~ Ability to take actions called for in the facility emergency plan. including supporting or acting as emergency coordinator.
Page 2 of2 8/18f2008 6:00 AM
ES-401, REV 9 SRO T1G1 PWR EXAMINATION OUTLINE FORM ES-401-2 KA NAME I SAFETY FUNCTION: IR K1 K2 K3 K4 K5 K6 A 1 A2 A3 A4 G TOPIC:
RO SRO 011EG2.2.37 Large Break LOCA 13 3.6 4.6 0 DOD 0 DOD 0 0 ~ Ability to determine operabnity and/or availability ci safety related equipment This is a Generic, no stem statement is associated.
025AG2.4.S Loss of RHR System I 4 3.S 4.5 0 DOD 0 DOD 0 0 ~ Knowledge of how abnormal operqting procedures are used in conjunction with EOPs.
This is a Generic, no stem statement is associated.
026AA2.01 Loss of Component Cooling Water IS 2.9 3.5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Location of a leak in the CCWS Ability to determine and interpret the following as they apply to ABNORMAL PLANT EVOLUTlON)=(CFR: 41.10 f 43.5/45.13) 056AA2.54 Loss of Off-site Pow!' I 6 2.9 3 DDDDDOD~ODD Breaker position (remote and local)
Ability to determine and interpret the following as they apply to ABNORMAL PLANT EVOLUTlON):(CFR: 41.10/43.5 f 45.13) 065AG2.2.4 Loss of Instrument Air I 8 3.6 3.6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ (multi-unit) Ability to explain the variations in control board layouts, systems, instrumentation and procedural actions This is a Generic, no stem statement is between units at a facility.
associated .
WE04EA2.1 LOCA Outside Containment 13 3.4 4.3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ 0 0 0 Facility conditions and selection of appropriate procedures during abnormal and emergency operations.
Ability to determine and interpret the following as they apply to (EMERGENCY PLANT EVOLUTION):(CFR: 41.10 143.5 f 45.13)
Page 1 of 1 811812008 6:00 AM
ES-401, REV 9 SRO T1G2 PWR EXAMINATION OUTLINE FORM ES-401-2 KA NAME / SAFETY FUNCTION: IR K1 K2 K3 K4 K5 K6 A1 A2 A3 A4 G TOPIC:
RO SRO 003AA201 Dropped Control Rod I 1 3.7 3.9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ 0 0 0 Rod position indication to actual rod position Ability to determine and interpret the following as they apply to ABNORMAL PLANT EVOLUTION):(CFR: 41.10 143.51 45.13) 028AA2.03 Pressurizer Level Malfunction I 2 2.8 3.3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ 0 0 0 Charging subsystem flow indicator and controller Ability to determine and interpret the following as they apply to ABNORMAL PLANT EVOLUTION):(CFR: 41.10 143.5 I 45.13}
068AG2.4.20 Control Room Evac. 18 3.8 4.3 DOD D DOD D D 0 ~ Knowledge of operational implications of EOP warnings, cautions and notes.
This is a Generic, no stem statement is associated.
we10EG2.4.31 Natural Circ. With Seam Void/4 4.2 4.1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ Knowledge of annunciators alarms, indications or response procedures This is a Generic, no stem statement is associated.
Page 1 of 1 8/18/2008 6:00 AM
ES~401, REV 9 SRO T2G1 PWR EXAMINATION OUTLINE FORM ES~401~2 KA NAME I SAFETY FUNCTION: IR K1 K2 K3 K4 K5 K6 A1 A2 A3 A4 G TOPIC:
RO SRO 003G2.4.31 Reactor Coolant Pump 4.2 4.1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ Knowledge of annunciators alarms, indications or response procedures This is a Generic, no stem statement is associated.
005G2.2.25 Residual Heat Removal 3.2 4.2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ Knowledge of the bases in Technical SpeCifications for limiting conditions for operations and safety limits.
This is a Generic, no stem statement is associated.
007 A2.02 Pressurizer Relief/Quench Tank 2.6 3.2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ 0 0 0 Abnormal pressure in the PRT Ability to (a) predict the impacts of the following on the (SYSTEM) and (b) based on those predictions, use procedures to correct. control. or mitigate the consequences of those abnormal operation:(CFR: 41.5/43.5/45.3/45.13) 01QG2.1.19 Pressurizer Pressure Control 3.9 3.8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ Ability to use plant computer to evaluate system or component status.
This is a Generic, no stem statement is associated.
026A2.07 Containment Spray 3.6 3.9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ 0 0 0 Loss of containment spray pump suction when in recirculation mode, possibly caused by clogged sump Ability to (a) predict the impacts of the screen, pump inlet high temperature exceeded cavitation, following on the (SYSTEM) and (b) based voiding) or sump level below cutoff (interlock) limit on those predictions. use procedures to correct. control, or mitigate the consequences of those abnormal operation:(CFR: 41.5/43.5/45.3 J 45.13)
Page 1 of 1 8/18/2008 6:00 AM
ES-401, REV 9 SRO T2G2 PWR EXAMINATION OUTLINE FORM ES-401-2 KA NAME I SAFETY FUNCTION: IR K1 K2 K3 K4 K5 K6 A1 A2 A3 A4 G TOPIC:
RO SRO 034A302 Fuel Handling Equipment 2.5 3.1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Load limits Ability to monitor automatic operations of the (SYSTEM) inciuding:(CFR: 41.7 f 45.5) 072G2.2.44 Area Radiation Monitoring 4.2 4.4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ Ability to interpret control room indications to verify the status and operation of a system, and understand how This is a Generic. no stem statement is operator actions and directives affect plant and system associated. conditions 079G2.2.3 Station Air 3.8 3.9 0 0 0 DOD 0 0 0 0 ~ (multi-unit license) Knowledge of the design, procedural and operational differences between units.
This is a Generic, no stem statement is associated.
Page 1 of 1 8/18/2008 6:01 AM
ES-401, REV 9 SRO T3 PWR EXAMINATION OUTLINE FORM ES-401-2 KA NAME I SAFETY FUNCTION: IR K1 K2 K3 K4 K5 K6 Ai A2 A3 A4 G TOPIC:
RO SRO G2.1.18 Conduct of operations 3.6 3.8 DOD DOD 0 DOD ~ Ability to make accurate, clear and concise logs, records, status boards and reports.
G2.2.1 Equipment Control 4.5 4.4 0 D D D D D D D D D ~ Ability to perform pre-startup procedures for the facility, including operating those controls associated with plant equipment that could affect reactivity.
G2.2.39 Equipment Control 3.9 4.5 0 D D D D D DOD D ~ Knowledge of less than one hour technical specification action statements for systems.
G2.3.4 Radiation Control 3.2 3.7 DOD D D D DOD D ~ Knowledge of radiation exposure limits under normal and emergency conditions G2.3.7 Radiation Control 3.5 3.6 D D D D D D D D D D ~ Ability to comply with radiation work permit requirements during normal or abnormal conditions G2.4.17 Emergency Procedures/Plans - 3.9 4.3 D D D D D D D D D D ~ Knowledge of EOP terms and definitions.
G2.4.35 Emergency ProceduresIPlans 3.8 4.0 0 D D D D DOD 0 D ~ Knowledge of local auxiliary operator tasks during emergency and the resultant operational effects Page 1 of 1 8/18/2008 6:01 AM
F/iJAL ES - 401 Record of Rejected KlAs Form ES- 401-4 Tier I Randomly Group Selected KIA Reason for Rejection T2G2 011 K6.06 Not part of plant equipment. Replaced with 011 K6.03 T2G2 055A3.03 Not part of plant equipment. Replaced with 033A3.02 T2G1 061K6.08 All information listed on sample plan is for KIA 061 K6.02. Corrected typo for listed KIA to 061 K6.02
-r~GI o()~A4, 03 fltSK. rv.d- t:>..l</'.fu"';~ A.f.-r: P. l1./JIAQ~
v~~ ;)O~ AQ, 0 I ES - 401, Page 28 of34
ES-401 Written Examination Quality Checklist Form ES-401-6
.AI
\U~~~" Date of Exam: jV\ Z ~ Exam Level: RO~
Facility: PClIN'T Arc'" 00 "'11 Initial Item Description a b*_
- 1. Questions and answers are technically accurate and applicable to the facility. CJ ~ fA lJ..
- 2. a.
b.
NRC K/As are referenced for all questions.
Facility learning objectives are referenced as available. @) I~~' 7
- 4. The sampling process was random and systematic (If more than 4 RO or 2 SRO questions were repeated from the last 2 NRC licensing exams, consult the NRR OL program office). !~ :t<=C T ~~ '"
- 5. Question duplication from the license screening/audit exam was controlled as indicated below (check the item that applies) and appears appropriate:
)( the audit exam was systematically and randomly developed; or
__ the audit exam was completed before the license exam was started; or
~
__ the examinations were developed independently; or
@ I~
__ the licensee certifies that there is no duplication; or
__ other (explain) t
- 6. Bank use meets limits (no more than 75 percent Bank Modified New from the bank, at least 10 percent new, and the rest new or modified); enter the actual RO / SRO-only
~/¢ 27 /'-/
@ cf question distribution(s) at right. ~O/Zl
- 7. Between 50 and 60 percent of the questions on the RO Memory CIA
~ ~t exam are written at the comprehension/ analysis level; the SRO exam may exceed 60 percent if the randomly @
selected K/As support the higher cognitive levels; enter 3() /. Cj '15 /Ib the actual RO / SRO question distribution(s) at right.
)
tB ~~
- 8. References/handouts provided do not give away answers or aid in the elimination of distractors.
y
~ y;; 1
- 9. Question content conforms with specific K/A statements in the previously approved I ~
examination outline and is appropriate for the tier to which they are assigned; deviations are justified. ~.
- 10. Question psychometric quality and format meet the guidelines in ES Appendix B. ?~) Jr 'J ~
- 11. The exam contains the required number of one-point, multiple choice items; the total is correct and agrees with the value on the cover sheet.
@ ~ .~~
Printed Name / Signatur~ Date
--¥~"~ ~'lo'
- a. Author b.
c.
Facility Reviewer (*)
NRC Chief Examiner (#) -14~~~rca- - -", ~ . -A. 3,fih
'f1~i~
- d. NRC Regional Supervisor _MAUbw.l--ri,>>jf}~ll!fi.~~:J:::-~----===== ~&P~I1-Note:
~
JI.lA/r
- The facility reviewer'S initials/signature are not applicable for NRC-developed examinations.
- Independent NRC reviewer initial items in Column "c"; chief examiner concurrence required.
ES-401, Page 29 of 33
ES*403, Rev. 9 Written Examination Grading Form ES*403*1 Quality Checklist Facility: Turkey Point 3 & 4 Date of Exam: 3/18/2009 Exam Level: RO/SRO Initials a b c Item Description
- 1. Clean answer sheets copied before grading AI N/A 1M
- 2. Answer key changes and question deletions justified and documented I /46
- 3. Applicants' scores checked for addition errors (reviewers spot check> 25% of examinations) j} /43
- 4. Grading for all borderline cases (80 +/-2% overall and 70 or 80, as applicable, +/-4% on the SRO-only) reviewed in detail A ~
- 5. All other failing examinations checked to ensure that grades are justified It /d{)
- 6. Performance on missed questions checked for training deficiencies and wording problems; evaluate validity of questions missed by half or more of the applicants it ~
~
Printed Name/Signature r Ii Date
- a. Grader ~~~ tJ. ~tALLJt;" I kfi 4/0 f/ZlJ() l'
- b. Facility Reviewer(*) j/A I
piA-I
- c. NRC Chief Examiner (*) 1?<<,,,,,~,,,,o 5. ~J...'-f)"'t,J/~, .L /L"..L~ fof/~~J j' ~
- d. NRC Supervisor (*) J./AUDUA.,.-r:. WI,..~UM.I / ; :':\~ U.1&' , 'll'ti/!JCJ
(*)
I {
-- /
The facility reviewer's signature is not applicable for examinations graded by the NRC; two independent NRC reviews are re~uired.
ES-401, Rev. 9 Turkey Point 2009-301 ROWritten Examination Review Worksheet FINAL Form ES-401-9 Q#
1.
LOK I 2.
LOD I 3. Psychometric Flaws 4. Job Content Flaws 5. Other 6. 7.
(F/H) (1-5) Stem /cues/ T/F Focus I I I cred./ partial/ JOb-/ Minutia #1 Back-/ Q= / SRO / utEI Dist. Link units ward KIA Only S Explanation Instructions
[Refer to Section 0 of ES-401 and Appendix B for additional information regarding each of the following concepts.]
- 1. Enter the level of knowledge (LOK) of each question as either (F)undamental or (H)igher cognitive level.
- 2. Enter the level of difficulty (LOD) of each question using a 1 - 5 (easy - difficult) rating scale (questions in the 2 - 4 range are acceptable).
- 3. Check the appropriate box if a psychometric flaw is identified:
- The stern lacks sufficient focus to elicit the correct answer (e.g., unclear intent, more information is needed, or too much needless information).
- The stern or distractors contain cues (i.e., clues, specific determiners, phrasing, length, etc).
- The answer choices are a collection of unrelated true/false statements.
- The distractors are not credible; single implausible distractors should be repaired, more than one is unacceptable.
- One or more distractors is (are) partially correct (e.g., if the applicant can make unstated assumptions that are not contradicted by stern).
- 4. Check the appropriate box if a job content error is identified:
- The question is not linked to the job requirements (i.e., the question has a valid KIA but, as written, is not operational in content).
- The question requires the recall of knowledge that is too specific for the closed reference test mode (i.e., it is not required to be known from memory).
- The question contains data with an unrealistic level of accuracy or inconsistent units (e.g., panel meter in percent with question in gallons).
- The question requires reverse logic or application compared to the job requirements.
- 5. Check questions that are sampled for conformance with the approved KIA and those that are designated SRO-only (KIA and license level mismatches are unacceptable).
- 6. Based on the reviewer's judgment, is the question as written (U)nsatisfactory (requiring repair or replacement), in need of (E)ditorial enhancement, or (S)atisfactory?
- 7. At a minimum, explain any "U" ratings (e.g., how the Appendix B psychometric attributes are not being met).
1_ 2_ 3_ Psychometric Flaws 4_ Job Content Flaws 5_ Other 6_ 7_
Q# LOK LOD (F/H) (1-5) Stem Cues T/F Cred_ Partial Job- Minutia #1 8ack- Q= SRO utEI Explanation Focus Dist Link units ward KIA Only S 007EK2.03 Question appears to match KIA. 4-0SP 1 H 2 E
-049.1 "Reactor Protection System Logic Test" was listed as a reference, but was not included in the provided reference material. (Select OSPs were included on the stick, but this one was not.
Otherwise question appears to be SAT. Are all the abbreviations to be listed as in the note at the bottom of the page? I not sure that this is acceptable.
NEW Made some changes to stem, removed the notes at the bottom of the page.
SAT 2/11/2009.
- 1. 2. 3. Psychometric Flaws 4. Job Content Flaws 5. Other 6. 7.
Q# LOK LOD (F/H) (1-5) Stem Cues T/F Credo Partial Job- Minutia #1 8ack- Q= SRO u/EI Explanation Focus Dist. Link units ward KIA Only S 00SAG2.2.44 Question appears to match KIA. What 2 H 2 X X U power is Unit 4 at presently? Does the manual of the PORV closure take place in the control room? What PORV is associated with PT-4-445? If the affected PORV indicating lights are green, then the block valve is not required to be closed until it is determined that the valve is leaking by in step 13 of the ONOP. Step 3 of the ONOP has the operator place the spray valves in manual and verify that they are closed. One could argue that by taking manual control of PC-4-444J controller you could also ensure that the spray valves would be closed. (I realize that this is not the problem in this question bu one could argue that this is a correct action) 0 could also be argued as correct. Even if the lights are out and the procedure step does not specifically direct this, it is typical to inform the Electrical Group if the component if faulty.
NEW Changed the stem and distractors to remove the other correct answer.
SAT 2/11/2009 009EA2.06 Question appears to match KIA.
3 H 2 X U Oistractor B is not plausible, if you could stabilize pressurizer level why would you transition to E-O?
Suggest changing the leakage to 150 gpm. This would test the knowledge of the sealleakoff flow, and if this flow is forgotten would add plausibility to distractor A. Is the 3C charging pump tagged out of service?
NEW Rewrote question Changed stem and distractors.
Question appears to be SAT 2/11/2009
- 1. 2. 3. Psychometric Flaws 4. Job Content Flaws 5. Other 6. 7.
Q# LOK LaD (F/H) (1-5) Stem Cues T/F Credo Partial Job- Minutia #1 Back- Q= SRO utEI Explanation Focus Dis!. Link units ward KIA Only S 015AA2.08 Question kind of matches KIA. What 4 F 2 X U power is the plant at? If I assumed the plant was in mode 3, and these conditions existed, there would not be a correct answer. Need to tighten the question up some. (anytime that the plant is mode 1 above P-9, and two RCPs have to be secured you are going to trip the reactor) Are these setpoints the same in the normal operating procedure, or precaution and limitations? If so, then we could cover up the stem telling us we are in the ONOP and just ask the "which one of the following ... "and the question will have nothing to do with the ONOP. In this case the question would not meet the KIA. Also using 3A RCP has a high pump bearing temperature in three distractors tends to let the applicant know that this is probably a true statement.
NEW Made Changes as requested. SAT 02/18/2009 022AK1.02 Question appears to match KIA. Kind of 5 H 2 X X U confusing. Not sure that A, S, or C are plausible.
How could the delta P remain unchanged? How could it continuously increase or decrease, if would have to reach the maximum delta p or equalize? So why would anyone choose A, S, or C. Without any boundaries on the question, one could also argue that all are correct at a certain point in time.
Question will require some modifications.
NEW Replaced question, and changed distractors A and C. New question kind of matches a tough KIA. In a backwards way.
SAT 2/11/2009
- 1. 2. 3. Psychometric Flaws 4. Job Content Flaws 5. Other 6. 7.
Q# LOK LOD (F/H) (1-5) Stem Cues T/F Credo Partial Job- Minutia #1 Back- Q= SRO u/EI Explanation Focus Dist. Link units ward KIA Only S 025AG2.4.46 Question appears to match KIA. Will 6 H 2 X U FT -605 failing high cause FCV to close? (will any interlocks cause this valve to close) If not this is not a plausible distractor. If a failure of PC-3-600 results in a closure of MOV-3-862S, would it not already be closed with the plant in these conditions? With two distractors that are not plausible, this question is Unsat.
NEW Changed all distractors to increase plausibility SAT 2/11/2009 7 F 2 X E 026AA2.06 Question appears to match KIA. D distractor does not appear to be plausible. Need to change distractor D. Changed distractor D.
MODIFIED/BANK SAT 2/11/2009 029EG2.4.4 Question appears to match KIA. Does 8 F 2 S not appear to be modified. (very similar to original question). Otherwise SAT BANK SAT 2/11/2009 9 F 2 X E 040AK1.04 Question appears to match KIA. As written C is not plausible. When would you have to L---_ -
- 1. 2. 3. Psychometric Flaws 4. Job Content Flaws 5. Other 6. 7.
Q# LOK LOD (F/H) (1-5) Stem Cues T/F Credo Partial Job- Minutia #1 Back- Q= SRO utEI Explanation Focus Dist. Link units ward KJA Only S maintain 345 gpm to ALL S/Gs? Might try changing it to any S/G. Is there another flow rate that is required in the procedures? Not really sure if 345 is plausible in this condition. Try the 100 gpm from distractor in question 10. Question is listed as modified but the original question is not included.
BANK Worked on new question. Will bring another back tomorrow.
Made changes SAT 2/18/2009 054AK1.02 Question appears to match KIA. In this 10 F 2 X U question, the leak occurs at a point where re-initiation of feedwater flow is impossible, so why would distractors A, C, and D be plausible? Also in a faulted S/G scenario the faulted S/G is never fed again unless all S/Gs are faulted and it has the smallest leak. Made changes work on distractor C.
NEW Work on C response Made changes to distractor C Okay SAT 2/18/2009 11 H 2 X E 055EK2.01 Change KIA to 055EK3.02 Question appears to match KIA. Is it typical for Unit 3 operators to control Unit 4 HHSI pumps? Someone will ask "what are the conditions on Unit 4"? Need to have a statement like all other equipment operated per design.
NEW Made changes as requested added lAW to stem.
SAT 2/11/2009
- 1. 2. 3. Psychometric Flaws 4. Job Content Flaws 5. Other 6. 7.
Q# LOK LOD (F/H) (1-5) Stem Cues T/F Credo Partial Job- Minutia #1 8ack- Q= SRO utEI Explanation Focus Dist. Link units ward KIA Only S 056AA1.25 Question appears to match KIA. At most 12 H 2 X U sites if an MSIV fails closed the plant will not remain online with or without site power. Distractors A and B do not appear to be plausible.
NEW Rewrote question SAT 2/11/2009 057AK3.01 Question appears to match KIA.
13 F 2 X X U Teaching in stem: "to eliminate the failed channel output". What position is this switch normally kept in?
All that matters is what position the switch was in, after the failure of the vital bus the switch position is changed to allow restoration of letdown. Backwards logic. Need to work on this question. After reading some of the supplied material it seems that this switch position is normally left in position II.
NEW Made some changes, still some work to do.
02/11/2009 Made changes SAT 02/18/2009 058AA1.01 Question appears to match KIA. SAT 14 H 2 S NEW SAT 2/11/2009 062AK3.02 Question may not match KIA. The 15 H 2 X X U licensee needs to show how this question matches the KIA. The only answer that seems to be plausible is the correct answer.
NEW Going to replace/Rework Remove 3A and 3C ICW pumps trip from stem (teaching) Then SAT 02/18/2009
- 1. 2. 3. Psychometric Flaws 4. Job Content Flaws 5. Other 6. 7.
Q# LOK LOD (F/H) (1-5) Stem Cues T/F Credo Partial Job- Minutia #1 Back- Q= SRO utEI Explanation Focus Dist. Link units ward KIA Only S 065AK3.04 Question does not totally meet the KIA.
16 F 2 X X X U All of the reasons are the same, to provide air to Unit
- 4. Why is the order of sources like this in the procedure? Question also potentially has two or three correct answers. Although you state in the stem that Instrument Air compressors are running properly someone will think that maybe all the compressors were not started and pick distractor C.
NEW Made changes to stem and all distractors.
Appears to be.
SAT 2/11/2009 17 H 2 X E 077AA1.01 Question appears to match KIA. Would Unit 3 be tied to the grid at 5% power? Oistractor 0 does not appear to be plausible for this condition.
NEW Made Changes as requested.
SAT 2/11/2009 18 WE/11 EK2.1 Question appears to match KIA. Does F 2 S NOT appear to be modified. (Some eithers and Boths are moved around in distractors c and d.
Answer is the same as the 2004 exam. This is actually a fundamental level question. Otherwise SAT.
BANK Changed the stem to read better.
SAT 2/11/2009
- 1. 2. 3. Psychometric Flaws 4. Job Content Flaws 5. Other 6. 7.
Q# LOK LOD (F/H) (1-5) Stem Cues T/F Credo Partial Job- Minutia #1 Back- Q= SRO U/EI Explanation Focus Dist. Link units ward KIA Only S 001AK3.02 Question kind of matches KIA. Without 19 F 1 X U knowing what the malfunction was how can you determine if the Rod Control System is operable or not. If the malfunction was impulse pressure channel failure or an NI failing, even the rod control system would still be operable. (even though it is not in automatic) So, why would the actual rods even be considered as inoperable? There are not any plausible distractors in this question. Rods are often operated in manual in Westinghouse plants. I also don't believe that there is a technical specification on I the rod control system.
NEW Made changes to 3 out of 4 of the distractors.
And changed the stem.
SAT 2/11/2009 005KAA1.01 Question appears to match KIA.
20 F 2 X X U Distractors Band D do not seem to be plausible.
The urgent failure alarm will not actuate until rod motion is attempted, and no group 1 rods receive a signal. The stem is confusing, it suggests that the alarm will come in during the disconnect switch alignment. The alarm will not actuate until rods are moved.
Modified/BANK Reworded complete question.
SAT 2/11/2009
- 1. 2. 3. Psychometric Flaws 4. Job Content Flaws 5. Other 6. 7.
Q# LOK LOD (F/H) (1-5) Stem Cues T/F Credo Partial Job- Minutia #/ Back- Q= SRO utE/ Explanation Focus Dis!. Link units ward KIA Only S 024AA2.01 Question appears to match KIA.
21 H 2 X X U Distractor A is not plausible, if you verified that the A loop charging valve was open, the procedure has you go to the next step. This distractor is not in accordance with the procedure, and will still not increase boric acid flow. Distractor B is not plausible, why would you isolate the VCT if the RWST was not aligned. As written this would leave the Chg pump with out a suctions source. The stem states that the MOV is placed in open and both red and green lights are out, an applicant could assume that the valve never opened at all and question how he could have 20 gpm flow. If the MOV switch was placed in open would not the green and red lights illuminate, and when the valve tripped then both go out. This would give the indications that the valve attempted to open but tripped, and the flow indicated is inadequate.
MODIFIED/BANK Changed several distractors and parts of stem as requested.
SAT 2/11/2009
-~
- 1. 2. 3. Psychometric Flaws 4. Job Content Flaws 5. Other 6. 7.
Q# LOK LOD (F/H) (1-5) Stem Cues T/F Credo Partial Job- Minutia #1 Back- Q= SRO utEI Explanation Focus Dist. Link units ward KIA Only S 22 F 2 X U 036AK3.02 Question does not meet the KIA. The KIA asks for reasons for interlocks associated with Fuel handling equipment as they apply to the Fuel Handling Incidents. This question does not test an interlock, but an alarm. Essentially the reason is in the stem, the bridge crane is to close to the ...
I believe there are many more interlocks that could be tested. If there are not interlocks associated with the fuel handling equipment then I will consider the alarm. The reference used is also a normal operating procedure. This is an abnormal procedure and should be referenced to an abnormal procedure is available.
NEW Replaced Question changed stem on replaced question. SAT 2/11/2009
'----~~
- 1. 2. 3. Psychometric Flaws 4. Job Content Flaws 5. Other 6. 7. II Q# LOK LOD (F/H) (1-5) Stem Cues T/F Credo Partial Job- Minutia #1 Back- Q= SRO U/EI Explanation Focus Dist. Link units ward KIA Only S 059AK1.02 While this may be considered a 23 H 2 X U accidental radwaste leak, however it is still not meeting the KIA. The KIA asks for the operational implications of the biological effects on humans of various types of radiation, exposure levels that are acceptable for nuclear power plant personnel, and the units used for radiation-intensity measurements and for radiation exposure levels. This question states the basis for the limits on an SGTR release, however there is not a release present in the question, and the limit is a less than 10 CFR 100 limits. What units are these in, what is the limit, etc.
This question needs to be replaced. Listed as NEW, but this question is listed in many banks.
Still to work on 02/11/2009 Question rewritten SAT 02/12/2009 E 067AG2.4.49 Question kir:ld of matches KIA, 24 F 2 although there is not any operation of components or controls, just the PA system. Is the page normally cross-connected? If it is not this should be in the distractors, or someone could argue that there is not a correct answer.
Replaced Question SAT 2/11/2009
- 1. 2. 3. Psychometric Flaws 4. Job Content Flaws 5. Other 6. 7.
Q# LOK LOD (F/H) (1-5) Stem Cues TIF Credo Partial Job- Minutia #1 Back- Q= SRO u/EI Explanation Focus Dist. Link units ward KIA Only S W/E08EA1.3 Question appears to match KIA.
U 25 F 2 X Distractors A, B, and C are not plausible. After the reactor is tripped the steam flow indicators do not accurately reflect correct steam flow, and the auxiliary feed water systems does not usually have a Ibm/hr meter. I also do not know of a place in the procedures that direct the operator to feed based on RCS pressure, or Steam generator pressure.
Modified/BANK Changed Question as requested. SAT 2/11/2009 W/E09EK1.3 Question appears to meet KIA.
26 H 2 S Change the stem to read which ONE of the following describes the correct action required to mitigate this event lAW ES-O.2. Otherwise SAT BANK SAT 2111/2009
- 1. 2. 3. Psychometric Flaws 4. Job Content Flaws 5. Other 6. 7.
Q# LOK LaD (F/H) (1-5) Stem Cues T/F Credo Partial Job- Minutia #1 Back- Q= SRO u/EI Explanation Focus Dist. Link units ward KIA Only S H 2 W/E14EK2.1 Question does not meet the intent 27 X U of the KIA. This question tests the lineup that is required for the control room and is typically aligned anytime that there is an ESF actuation or a control room Normal Air Intake Radiation monitor alarm. How does it relate to the High containment pressure except that there may be leakage from containment? I understand that it is a step in the procedure, but it does not deal with the high containment pressure. Need to develop a question that tests the concepts on how to deal with the high containment pressure.
BANK Replaced Question SAT 2/11/2009 F 2 003K1.13 Question appears to meet the KIA.
28 X U Distractors c and d are not plausible. Most Reps have an interlock that prevents the Rep from starting unless the oil lift pump has produced a certain pressure. Why would anyone think that if it is "warm" you could start the Rep without the oil lift pump running? Your lesson plan discusses an oil lift pressure of 650 psig will satisfy a permissive to allow starting of the Rep.
MODIFIED/BANK Made changes to stem and distractors. SAT 2/11/2009
- 1. 2. 3. Psychometric Flaws 4. Job Content Flaws 5. Other 6. 7.
Q# LOK LOD (F/H) (1-5) Stem Cues T/F Credo Partial Job- Minutia #1 Back- Q= SRO UlEI Explanation Focus Dist. Link units ward KIA Only S F 2 003K6.04 Question appears to match KIA. Not 29 S very discriminating. SAT MODIFIED/BANK SAT 2/11/2009 H 2 004A2.13 Question appears to match KIA.
30 X E Three of the choices state that it is okay for the pump to continue operating only one distractor states that the pump should be stopped. Look for some other items to be used that could improve question symmetry.
NEW Made several changes to stem and to one distractor. SAT 2/11/2009 F 2 005K6.03 Question kind of meets KIA.
31 X U Distractors C and 0 are not plausible. With the plant transferring to Cold leg recirculation, the S/Gs would not be coupled to the RCS. In fact they may be adding heat at this point.
NEW Will get another examiner to look at plausibility.
Distractor C on new question is not plausible. Need to fix distractor C.
- 1. 2. 3. Psychometric Flaws 4. Job Content Flaws 5. Other 6. 7.
Q# LOK LOD (F/H) (1-5) Stem Cues T/F Credo Partial Job- Minutia #1 Back- Q= SRO utEI Explanation Focus Dist. Link units ward KIA Only S 006A2.06 Question kind of matches KIA. Need to 32 H 2 S ensure that the other distractors are incorrect.
NEW Have someone look at distractor B. The question does not include procedures as stated in the KIA.
need to add procedure actions to correct, control or mitigate.
007A4.09 Question appears to match KIA. The stem 33 F 2 X X U should state lAW 3-0NOP-041.S. The question as I written has two correct answers, Both A and B.
NEW Replaced Question SAT 2/11/2009 008A4.03 Question appears to match KIA. Need to 34 F 2 E state in the stem lAW 3-0SP- 030.1.
NEW Changed as Requested.
SAT 2/11/2009
- 1. 2. 3. Psychometric Flaws 4. Job Content Flaws 5. Other 6. 7.
Q# LOK LOD (F/H) (1-5) Stem Cues T/F Credo Partial Job- Minutia #1 Back- Q= SRO UlEI Explanation Focus Dist. Link units ward KIA Only S 008K3.01 Question appears to match KIA. The off-35 H 2 E normal procedure (ONOP-4-041.1) has the operator~
manually open MOV-4-626. Is this really what would happen, or would the valve be opened from the main control room. The reference that you provided I believe uses the wrong path through the procedure.
Does MOV-4-6386 have any auto trip features? If not this valve is not plausible.
NEW Have another Examiner look at Question to determine if it is of proper discriminatory value.
Changed questions some.
(2/18/2009)Changed stem to say: Based on these conditions, which one of the following identifies the impact on RCP operation and the required operator actions in accordance with ARP ...
010K1.02 Question appears to match KIA. Is there 36 H 2 X U any signal that blocks the opening of pressurizer spray valves? If not, Distractors Band C are not plausible.
NEW Made changes to stem and distractors.
Staff wanted to reverse order on distractor parts.
02/11/2009 NRC Staff rewrote question.
- 1. 2. 3. Psychometric Flaws 4. Job Content Flaws 5. Other 6. 7.
Q# LOK LOD (F/H) (1-5) Stem Cues T/F Credo Partial Job- Minutia #1 Back- Q= SRO UlEI Explanation Focus Dist. Link units ward KIA Only S 010K5.01 Question appears to match KIA.
37 H 2 E Operational validity, is can the RCS pressure be at 2100 psig with steam space temp at 600°F? Can these conditions be achieved on the simulator? Also need to have a value lower than 1118 psig.
NEW Replaced stem and distractors.
SAT 2/11/2009 012A3.04 Not Sure that this question matches the 38 F 2 U KIA. I will have another examiner review this KIA. It does not appear that we are testing the circuit breaker part of the KIA. (If you are referring to reactor trip breakers, they are specifically covered in A3.07. How are C and 0 plausible with the operator taking actions that will only affect feed flow, and S/G levels?
NEW Remove nots from distractors. Then SAT 2/11/2009 Remove "Related to the loss of 3P06" From the stem. Start with WOOTF 013K2.01 Question appears to match KIA. Does 39 H 2 X E 3001 and 3023 supply DC power to Unit 4 ICW pumps? If so, this question is SAT. If not we will need to figure something else out.
NEW SAT 2/11/2009
- 1. 2. 3. Psychometric Flaws 4. Job Content Flaws 5. Other 6. 7.
Q# LOK LOD (F/H) (1-5) Stem Cues T/F Credo Partial Job- Minutia #1 Back- Q= SRO u/EI Explanation Focus Dist. Link units ward KIA Only S 022K4.03 Question does not really meet the KiA.
40 F 1 U What design feature are we testing? Depending on the size of the SGTR the plant may not SI on its own.
These automatic plant responses only occur if an SI occurs. At this level the question is not very discriminating.
NEW Changed question still need to verify that the system works the way they think it does.
Made changes to question appears to be SAT 2/18/2009 026A1.03 Question appears to match the KiA.
41 H 2 X E Need to inform operators the point in ES-1.3 that is being performed. If operators assume that cold leg recirculation is established, then only one CS pump can be operated. This would make D distractor not plausible.
NEW Discovered other concerns with question after further review, licensee will rewrite questions.
Still need to look at this one the replacement question also has issues and overlaps with question 83.
026A2.04 Question appears to match KiA. What 42 H 2 X E procedure directs these actions? If procedure actions are not used to mitigate this event, then it does not meet the KiA.
NEW Made changes to stem.
SAT 02/12/2009
-- - L-- - - L...-
- 1. 2. 3. Psychometric Flaws 4. Job Content Flaws 5. Other 6. 7.
Q# LOK LOD (F/H) (1-5) Stem Cues T/F Credo Partial Job- Minutia #1 Back- Q= SRO U/EI Explanation Focus Dist. Link units ward KIA Only S 039A1.05 Question appears to match KIA Is this 43 H 2 X E how a normal startup is performed? As written B distractor does not appear to be discriminating.
NEW Made changes to stem and distractor B.
SAT 02/12/2009 059K3.03 Question kind of matches KIA This 44 H 2 X X X U question really addresses the effect that a loss of feed pump will have on the turbine (will a runback occur or not) The question may also help to answer question # 38 in that you state 3A S/G level is 63%
and stable, and you state in this question the program levels of 50 and 60%. When does the plant not get a runback on a failure of a MFW pump? If a runback always occurs, then distractors A and Bare not plausible. You could state the runback will go to 45% reactor power, or 45% based on turbine impulse pressure.
NEW Replaced Question.
SAT 02/12/2009 061 K4.06 Question appears to match KIA Distractor 45 F 2 X E C does not appear to be plausible. At what time would a loss of a 4KV bus only start the #1 train of AFW? Need to fix distractor C.
ModifiedlBANK After much discussion this question appears to be SAT.
SAT 02/12/2009
- 1. 2. 3. Psychometric Flaws 4. Job Content Flaws 5. Other 6. 7.
Q# LOK LaD (F/H) (1-5) Stem Cues T/F Credo Partial Job- Minutia #1 Back- Q= SRO utE! Explanation Focus Dist. Link units ward KIA Only S 061 K6.02 Question appears to match KIA. Distractor 46 F 2 X E C needs to be enhanced. (Receives an open signal until the pump trips, valves will go closed).
Modified/BANK SAT 02/12/2009 062K1.03 Question appears to match KIA. Why do 47 H 2 E you state that the 4A KV bus and its associated Load centers are out of service? Why not state that the 4A KV bus Is de-energized, or can these buses receive power from other sources?
NEW SAT 02/12/2009 063K2.01 Question appears to match KIA. What 48 F 2 S does the AS inverter normally supply? Just trying to make sure that Distractor B is plausible. Otherwise SAT NEW Removed 3P93 from stem SAT 02/12/2009 064G2.4.30 Question appears to match KIA.
49 F 2 E Distractor B is not credible. If the EDG is operable, why would it have to be reported to the NRC Ops Center. State in the stem and the reportability requirements to the NRC. In distractor 8 state that only the NRC resident is required to be notified of this condition.
NEW Operations agreed that because it was in TS and ADM that reportability was RO knowledge. Added
- 1. 2. 3. Psychometric Flaws 4. Job Content Flaws 5. Other 6. 7.
Q# LOK LOD (F/H) (1-5) Stem Cues T/F Credo Partial Job- Minutia #1 Back- Q= SRO UlEI Explanation Focus Dist. Link units ward KIA Only S IAWTS.
i I
SAT 02/12/2009 064K3.02 Question appears to match KIA.
50 H 2 X E Oistractor 0 is not plausible, why would you align the two unit 4 HHSI pumps to supply unit 3 but keep the suctions aligned to the Unit 4 RWST? Does not make sense.
NEW Made changes as requested to the 0 distractor.
SAT 02/12/2009 073K5.01 Question appears to match KIA. An 51 F 2 E applicant need only know how N-16 gamma effects are minimized and the type of detector it is. The part about radiation energy levels are moot.
NEW Made changes.
SAT 02/12/2009 076G2.1.3 Question appears to match KIA.
52 F 2 X U Oistractors C and 0 are not plausible for single pump operation.
NEW Made changes as requested SAT 02/12/2009 076K4.06 Question appears to match KIA. Not very 53 F 2 S discriminating. SAT NEW SAT 02/12/2009
- 1. 2. 3. Psychometric Flaws 4. Job Content Flaws 5. Other 6. 7.
Q# LOK LOD (F/H) (1-5) Stem Cues T/F Credo Partial Job- Minutia #1 Back- Q= SRO utEI Explanation Focus Dist. Link units ward KIA Only S 078A3.01 Question appears to match KIA.
54 F 2 X U Distractors A and C are not plausible. Why would I trip Unit 4 because of a Unit 3 air leak, unless I could not isolate it. Try something like CV-3 -1605 will throttle closed, while CV-4-1605 will fully close, and visa-versa, with the pressures indicated. i I
MODIFIED/BANK Replaced Question.
SAT 02/12/2009 103G2.2.36 Question appears to match KIA. SAT 55 H 2 S NEW SAT 02/12/2009 011 K6.03 Question kind of matches KIA. Remove 56 F 2 S the part of "in the absence of operator response" and just place (Assume no Operator Action) after the question mark. Otherwise SAT NEW SAT 02/12/2009 014G2.4.35 Question appears to match KIA. At 57 H 2 X X X U most plants 115B is an MOV just like LCV 115C, unless this is different at TP then distractor C is not plausible. Because the applicant is not directed by any procedure in this question Distractor D could also be argued as correct.
NEW May need New KIA will take one more attempt.
Replaced KA014G2.4.4
-~--- '---~-----
- 1. 2. 3. Psychometric Flaws 4. Job Content Flaws 5. Other 6. 7.
Q# LOK LOD (F/H) (1-5) Stem Cues T/F Credo Partial Job- Minutia #1 Back- Q= SRO UJEI Explanation Focus Dist. Link units ward KIA Only S 016K3.07 Kind of matches KIA. Distractors B,C, and 58 F 2 X U D are not plausible. HHSI pumps only start on an actual SI or LOOP. Reactor trip will only occur if a S/G low level occurred coincident with the bistables, and there is not a S/G level mentioned in the question.
NEW Replaced this question. Changed to fail 447 high.
SAT 02/12/2009 017K4.03 Question appears to match KIA.
59 H 2 X U Distractors Band C are not credible. 700°F is way to low of a temperature for the onset of Zirc-Water reaction. Many plants normally run with hot leg temps above 620°F with any transient, fuel damage would occur.
NEW Made some changes to values. Will work on verifying operational validity for ROs.
Made changes SAT 02/18/2009 027A4.04 Question appears to match KIA. SAT 60 H 2 S NEW SAT 02/12/2009 035A1.01 Question appears to match KIA. SAT 61 H 2 S NEW SAT 02/12/2009
--L..- ---'--- _L-. _'---
- 1. 2. 3. Psychometric Flaws 4. Job Content Flaws 5. Other 6. 7.
Q# LOK LOD (F/H) (1-5) Stem Cues T/F Credo Partial Job- Minutia #1 Back- Q= SRO u/EI Explanation Focus Dist. Link units ward KIA Only S 041K1.06 Question appears to match KIA.
62 H 2 X U Distractors A and 0 are not plausible. For distractor "A" you could use, "valves will reopen when temperature rises to greater than 545°F". For Distractor 0, I know of no plant that can block the low condenser vacuum interlock.
Modified/BANK Modified Question after comments.
SAT 02/12/2009 04SA2.17 Question appears to match KIA. C is also 63 F 2 X E a correct answer because it is a subset of A. Your procedure states 250 rpm or less.
NEW Changed distractors to maximum allowed value.
SAT 02/12/2009 033A3.02 Question appears to match KIA. SAT 64 H 2 S Modified/BANK Still made some changes to the stem and distractors. Question Kind of matches KIA. Very difficult to match KIA.
SAT 02/12/2009 071 KS.04 Question appears to match KIA.
65 F 2 E Distractor A does not appear to be plausible. With 3 distractors indicating that the tank must be re-pressurized and then released.
NEW Changed distractor D.
SAT 02/12/2009
- 1. 2. 3. Psychometric Flaws 4. Job Content Flaws 5. Other 6. 7.
Q# LOK LOD (F/H) (1-5) Stem Cues T/F Credo Partial Job- Minutia #1 Back- Q= SRO UlEI Explanation Focus Dist. Link units ward KIA Only S G2.1.18 Question appears to match KIA. To make A 66 F 2 S and B more plausible, add Responsible Reactor Operator. Otherwise SAT ModifiedlBANK Changed as requested.
SAT 02/12/2009 G2.1.45 Question appears to match KIA. Distractor 67 H 2 X E B is not plausible. (Not to keen on A either)
NEW Changed two distractors.
SAT 02/12/2009 G2.2.35 Question appears to match KIA. SAT 68 H 2 S NEW SAT 02/12/2009 2.2.39 Question appears to match KIA. SAT 69 F 2 S ModifiedlBANK SAT 02/12/2009 2.3.11 Question appears to match KIA. SAT 70 F 2 S BANK 2004 NRC Exam.
SAT 02/12/2009 E G2.3.11 Question appears to match KIA. If this is 71 F 2 lAW actions of the procedure then it should state so in the stem.
NEW SAT 02/12/2009 S G2.3.4 Question appears to match KIA. Format is 72 H 2 kind of confusing. SAT.
NEW Changed the format and stem -_._-
- 1. 2. 3. Psychometric Flaws 4. Job Content Flaws 5. Other 6. 7.
Q# LOK LOD (F/H) (1-5) Stem Cues T/F Credo Partial Job- Minutia #1 Back- Q= SRO UlEI Explanation Focus Dist. Link units ward KIA Only S SAT 02/12/2009 E G2.4.13 Question kind of matches KIA. This 73 F 2 question is really procedure oriented and not role oriented. Will Get Second opinion.
Replaced question.
SAT 02/12/2009 S G2.4.23 Question appears to match KIA. SAT 74 H 2 ModifiedlBANK SAT 02/12/2009 E G2.4.38 Question appears to match KIA. Distractor 75 F 2 D's second half is not plausible, need to change the second half of the distractor.
NEW Made changes to stem and all distractors.
SAT 02/12/2009 I -
I 19 Sats, 30 Unsats, and 26 Enhancements Generic Comments: All bank or modified questions should have the answers rotated from original (i.e. if the answer was originally A, swap the correct answer to B, C, or D.
All modified questions were not totally reviewed as modified, but were treated as a BANK question.
ES-401, Rev. 9 Turkey Point 2009-301 SROWritten Examination Review Worksheet FINAL Form ES-401-9
- 1. I 2. 5. Other I 6. 7.
Q# LOK LOD ~--~--,---~----~--~--,-----~~~~
(F/H) , (1-5) Back- Q=
ward KIA
~
I SRO u/EI Only S Explanation Instructions
[Refer to Section 0 of ES-401 and Appendix 8 for additional information regarding each of the following concepts.]
- 1. Enter the level of knowledge (LOK) of each question as either (F)undamental or (H)igher cognitive level.
- 2. . Enter the level of difficulty (LaD) of each question using a 1 - 5 (easy - difficult) rating scale (questions in the 2 - 4 range are acceptable).
- 3. Check the appropriate box if a psychometric flaw is identified:
- The stem lacks sufficient focus to elicit the correct answer (e.g., unclear intent, more information is needed, or too much needless information).
- The stem or distractors contain cues (i.e., clues, specific determiners, phrasing, length, etc).
- The answer choices are a collection of unrelated true/false statements.
- The distractors are not credible; single implausible distractors should be repaired, more than one is unacceptable.
- One or more distractors is (are) partially correct (e.g., if the applicant can make unstated assumptions that are not contradicted by stem).
- 4. Check the appropriate box if a job content error is identified:
- The question is not linked to the job requirements (i.e., the question has a valid KIA but, as written, is not operational in content).
- The question requires the recall of knowledge that is too specific for the closed reference test mode (i.e., it is not required to be known from memory).
- The question contains data with an unrealistic level of accuracy or inconsistent units (e.g., panel meter in percent with question in gallons).
- The question requires reverse logic or application compared to the job requirements.
- 5. Check questions that are sampled for conformance with the approved KIA and those that are designated SRO-only (KIA and license level mismatches are unacceptable).
- 6. Based on the reviewer's judgment, is the question as written (U)nsatisfactory (requiring repair or replacement), in need of (E)ditorial enhancement, or (S)atisfactory?
- 7. At a minimum, explain any "U" ratings (e.g., how the Appendix 8 psychometric attributes are not being met).
- 1. 2. 3. Psychometric Flaws 4. Job Content Flaws 5. Other 6. 7.
Q# LOK LOD (F/H) (1-5) Stem Cues T/F Credo Partial Job- Minutia #1 Back- Q= SRO U/EI Explanation Focus Dist. Link units ward KIA Only S 76 F 2 ? ? E 011EG2.2.37 Question kind of matches KIA.
The question does not really determine the operability or availability of safety related equipment but the mode in which the equipment will be used. This question is asking when the piggy-back mode of operation is to be used. I am not sure this is SRO only knowledge.
Licensee to provide more insight.
NEW Replaced Question Still needs work.
02/11/2009 NOT SRO only and problems with distractors.
NRC wrote a version Licensee to review 77 H 2 025AG2.4.8 Question appears to match KIA.
X U Does not appear to be SRO only. This is procedure entry requirements. Some changes were made from the initial draft but changes are still required.
NEW Replaced Question SAT 02/12/2009
- 1. 2. 3. Psychometric Flaws 4. Job Content Flaws 5. Other 6. 7.
Q# LOK LOD (FIH) (1-5) Stem Cues T/F Credo Partial Job- Minutia #1 Back- Q= SRO u/EI Explanation Focus Dist. Link units ward KIA Only S 026AA2.01 Question appears to match KIA.
78 F 2 X U Not SRO only. Can be answered using only system knowledge.
NEW Replaced question, still not SRO only will continue to work. Source document for CCW head tank level.
02/12/2009 X 056AA2.54 Question appears to match KIA.
79 H 2 U Not SRO only. Can be answered using only system knowledge.
NEW Replaced question SAT 02/12/2009 80 F 2 065AG2.2.4 Question appears to match KIA.
X U Does not appear to be SRO only. Systems knowledge is all that is required to answer the question.
NEW Worked on question, replaced, still needs work. Continue with making it SRO only with which procedure will be used to address the failed closed supply valve.
02/1212009
- 1. 2. 3. Psychometric Flaws 4. Job Content Flaws 5. Other 6. 7.
Q# LOK LOD (F/H) (1-5) Stem Cues T/F Credo Partial Job- Minutia #1 Back- Q= SRO UlEI Explanation Focus Dist. Link units ward KIA Only S W/E04EA2.1 Question appears to match KIA 81 H 2 X U Distractors C and 0 are not plausible. FR-H.5 and FR-1.2 are yellow path procedures and are not required. ERGs contain actions that will mitigate these events. There is not a reason to enter them. However entry is at the discretion of the SRO so they could be considered correct.
NEW Continue to work. Gerry to Look for other questions.
82 H 2 X 003AA2.01 Question appears to match KIA. Is X U not SRO only this question can be answered by just determining that two rods are out of the TIS limits (+/- 18) and arrive at the correct answer.
No other technical specification knowledge is required. Distractors C and 0 do not appear to be plausible.
MODIFIED BANK Reworked question SAT 02/12/2009
-- - ----- L......_ - --
- ----- . ------ ---- L...-
- 1. 2. 3. Psychometric Flaws 4. Job Content Flaws 5. Other 6. 7.
Q# LOK LOD (F/H) (1-5) Stem Cues T/F Credo Partial Job- Minutia #1 Back- Q= SRO U/EI Explanation Focus Dist. Link units ward KIA Only S 028AA2.03 Question appears to match KIA. It is 83 F 2 U very similar to question # 13 on the RO exam.
X Does not appear to be SRO only. This question can be answered using only systems knowledge. By understanding the system an applicant could figure out in A that letdown has already isolated, therefore A is not correct. The applicant could then look at c and d and know that the master charging pump speed controller would be in auto-lockup, and determine that C and D were not correct, leaving only B as the correct answer.
NEW Question was replaced.
SAT 0211212009 84 H 2 068AG2.4.20 Question appears to match KIA.
S SAT MODIFIED/BANK SAT 02/12/2009 W/E10EG2.4.31 Question kind of matches KIA.
85 F 2 S Need to add a statement that all conditions for starting the Rep have been met. Otherwise SAT.
NEW SAT 02/12/2009
- 1. 2. 3. Psychometric Flaws 4. Job Content Flaws 5. Other 6. 7.
Q# LOK LOD (F/H) (1-5) Stem Cues T/F Credo Partial Job- Minutia #1 Back- Q= SRO U/EI Explanation Focus Dist. Link units I ward KIA Only S 86 H 2 003G2.4.31 Question appears to match KJA.
X X E Why does distractor A state plan to be off line in two hours? The procedure does not state this.
Expected Tavg/Tref ~ T changes depending on load reduction rate. The value in distractor C is the manual reactor trip and turbine trip criteria.
Therefore this distractor is not credible.
Question needs some work. The stem should state lAW 3-0NOP-41.1 .
NEW Made changes to question, need to further change to make sRO only by having applicant decide whether to use rapid 5/0 or normalS/D. 02/12/2009 87 H 2 005G2.2.25 Question kind of matches KJA. Due S to the basis in TIS showing the RCS pressure that is required to allow loops to be considered filled, this may meet the SRO only level. Is this value found in any precautions and limitations in GOP's or OP's? The action portion RO knowledge. SAT NEW Rewrote Question SAT 02/12/2009
- 1. 2. 3. Psychometric Flaws 4. Job Content Flaws 5. Other 6. 7.
Q# LOK LaD (F/H) (1-5) Stem Cues T/F Credo Partial Job- Minutia #1 Back- Q= SRO UlEI Explanation Focus Dist. Link units ward KIA Only S 88 F 2 007A2.02 Question kind of matches KIA. Not X U SRO only. The applicant need only recall that 80th PRT level and pressure are blow normal limits. There is only one distractor that states this, and this is RO knowledge. The actions, being all different do not have to be used to find the correct answer.
NEW Rewrote question Need another Examiner to look at to determine if it is SRO only.
02/12/2009 89 H 2 010G2.1.19 Question appears to match KIA.
X X U This is not SRO only knowledge. The RO is required to recognize RCP trip criteria (fold out page), and when it is not met. In this case it is not met. Distractors C and 0 are not plausible.
NEW Replaced Question Work on question.-
2/11/2009
- 1. 2. 3. Psychometric Flaws 4. Job Content Flaws 5. Other 6. 7.
Q# LOK LOD (FIH) (1-5) Stem Cues T/F Credo Partial Job- Minutia #1 8ack- Q= SRO utEI Explanation Focus Dist. Link units ward KIA Only S 026A2.07 Question appears to match KIA. The 90 H 2 u/E concept of CS operation and RWST level has been tested on the RO portion of the exam. If an applicant got it correct before, he would probably get it right again, if he missed it before, he might miss it again. This is double jeopardy and we are supposed to avoid this. Not Sure it is SRO only knowledge.
NEW Still not SRO only need to work on SRO transitions.
91 H 2 X 034A3.02 Question appears to match KIA.
U Distractor A is not plausible. There is not any information in the stem that could give the applicant the idea that the fuel could be hung up, the applicant would have to assume this and assumptions are not allowed. Distractor B is also not plausible, there is not information in the stem to lead an applicant to believe that this is a rodded or unrodded assembly, and again an assumption would have to be made.
NEW Rewrote Question SAT 02/12/2009
1, 2, 3, Psychometric Flaws 4, Job Content Flaws 5. Other 6, 7, Q# LOK LOD (F/H) (1-5) Stem Cues TIF Credo Partial Job- Minutia #1 Back- Q= SRO utEI Explanation Focus Dist. Link units ward KIA Only S 2 072G2.2.44 Question appears to match KIA.
92 H X U Where is the 32 foot area? Is it in containment, X
or is that area called the Mezzanine area? If the 32' foot and 58' areas are outside of containment (or the areas in containment are not called this, then they are not plausible).
Not sure this is SRO only, if the RO were alone in the control room he would perform this procedure, and it would direct the RO to evacuate all of containment.
NEW Revised Question Have another Examiner look at for SRO only.
93 H 2 079G2.2.44 Question kind of matches KIA Not X X U SRO only. System knowledge is all that is required to answer the question as written. If both compressors cannot be operated why would anyone think is would be a satisfactory back up to the Instrument Air System.
Rewrote Question SAT 02/12/2009
- 1. 2. 3. Psychometric Flaws 4. Job Content Flaws 5. Other 6. 7.
Q# LOK LOD (F/H) (1-5) Stem Cues T/F Credo Partial Job- Minutia #1 Back- Q= SRO U/EI Explanation Focus Dist Link units ward KIA Only S 94 F 3 X G2.1.18 Question appears to match KIA.
U Distractors Band D are not plausible. There is not any emergency, why would anyone think that the emergency from need be used. Try using a variation of four hour versus eight hour report with the words from distractors A and C.
Revised SAT 02/12/2009 95 F 2 G2.2.1 Question appears to meet KIA. SAT S NEW SAT 02/12/2009 96 H 2 X G2.2.39 Question appears to match KIA. Not U SRO only. The applicant must know that 4K MCC is required to make DIG operable (RO knowledge) and that both Start up transformers must be verified operable (RO knowledge) only one answer has that both SUTs must be verified operable. Therefore the times after the statement are moot.
NEW SAT 02/12/2009
- 1. 2. 3. Psychometric Flaws 4. Job Content Flaws 5. Other 6. 7.
Q# LOK LOD (F/H) (1-5) Stem Cues T/F Credo Partial Job- Minutia #1 Back- Q= SRO u/EI Explanation Focus Dis!. Link units ward KIA Only S G2.3.4 Question appears to match KIA. NOT 97 H 1 U SRO only. These limits are your admin General X
Employee Training limits for radiation workers a T.P. All individuals are responsible for knowing the limits.
NEW Replaced Question SAT 02/12/2009 98 H 2 G2.3.7 Question appears to match KIA. Not U SRO only. This is basic GET knowledge of X
limits and RWP requirements. All Radiation workers are required to know this.
NEW SAT 02/12/2009 99 H 2 X G2.4.17 Question does not appear to match the U KIA. What terms or definitions are being examined? (Crew Brief Verses Update)? This are not WOG terms. Furthermore your administrative procedure states that UPDATE are not required for procedures that have immediate operator actions.
Question still not acceptable replace KIA.
- 1. 2. 3. Psychometric Flaws 4. Job Content Flaws 5. Other 6. 7.
Q# LOK LOD (F/H) (1-5) Stem Cues T/F Credo Partial Job- Minutia #1 Back- Q= SRO utEI Explanation Focus Dist. Link units ward KIA Only S 100 F 1 X G2.4.35 Question appears to match KIA. Will E discuss the plausibility of reasons in distractors A and C.
NEW Will get another Examiner to look at for SRO only.
4 Sats, 17 Unsats, and 4 Enhancement
ES-403 Written Examination Grading Form ES-403-1 Quality Checklist Facility: Turkey Point 3&4 Date of Exam: 3/18/2009 Exam Level: RO J:8J SR~
Initials Item Description a b c
- 1. Clean answer sheets copied before grading C
- 2. Answer key changes and question deletions justified and documented
- 3. Applicants' scores checked for addition errors (reviewers spot check> 25% of examinations)
- 4. Grading for all borderline cases (80 +/-2% overall and 70 or 80, as applicable, +/-4% on the SRO-only) reviewed in detail
- 5. All other failing examinations checked to ensure that grades are lustified
- 6. Performance on missed questions checked for training deficiencies and wording problems; evaluate validity of questions missed by half or more of the applicants Printed Name/Signature Date
- a. Grader
- b. Facility Reviewer(*) OW6~ 13 TR/o{,~!a.612I 31?Jt!d1
- c. NRC Chief Examiner (*)
- d. NRC Supervisor (*)
(*) The facility reviewer's signature is not applicable for examinations graded by the NRC; two independent NRC reviews are required.