ML093640778

Initial Retake Exam 2009-302 Final Administrative Documents

ML093640778
Person / Time
Site:	McGuire, Mcguire
Issue date:	12/08/2009
From:	Division of Nuclear Materials Safety II
To:	Duke Energy Carolinas
References
50-369/09-302, 50-370/09-302
Download: ML093640778 (29)

Text

FACILITY NAME: McGuire Section 7 REPORT NUMBER: 05000369,370/2009302 FINAL ADMINISTRATIVE DOCUMENTS CONTENTS:

(X) Exam Preparation Checklist (ES-201-1)

(X) Final Exam Outline Quality Checklist (ES-201-2)

(X) Exam Security Agreements (ES-201-3)

(NA) Final Administrative Topics Outline (ES-301-1)

(NA) Final Control Room & Walk-Through Test Outline(ES-301-2)

(NA) Final Operating Test Quality Check Sheet (ES-301-3)

(NA) Final Simulator Scenario Quality Check Sheet (ES-301-4)

(NA) Final Transient and Event Check Sheet (ES-301-5)

(NA) Final Competencies Check Sheet (ES-301-6)

(X) Final Written Exam Sample Plan (ES-401-1/2)'f (X) Final Record of Rejected KAs (ES-401-4)

(X) Final Written Exam Quality Check Sheet (ES-401-6)

(X) Final Written Exam Review Work Sheet (ES-401-9)

(X) Written Exam Grading Quality Check Sheet (ES-403-1)

(with RO computer answer keys)

Location of Electronic Files:

Primary Folder:

All applicable documents are attached Submitted By: ___

~----'_.~

. __ V~ifiedBY~

FACILITY NAME: McGuire Section 7 REPORT NUMBER: 05000369,370/2009302 FINAL ADMINISTRATIVE DOCUMENTS CONTENTS:

(X) Exam Preparation Checklist (ES-201-1)

(X) Final Exam Outline Quality Checklist (ES-201-2)

(X) Exam Security Agreements (ES-201-3)

(NA) Final Administrative Topics Outline (ES-301-1)

(NA) Final Control Room & Walk-Through Test Outline(ES-301-2)

(NA) Final Operating Test Quality Check Sheet (ES-301-3)

(NA) Final Simulator Scenario Quality Check Sheet (ES-301-4)

(NA) Final Transient and Event Check Sheet (ES-301-5)

(NA) Final Competencies Check Sheet (ES-301-6)

(X) Final Written Exam Sample Plan (ES-401-1/2)'f (X) Final Record of Rejected KAs (ES-401-4)

(X) Final Written Exam Quality Check Sheet (ES-401-6)

(X) Final Written Exam Review Work Sheet (ES-401-9)

(X) Written Exam Grading Quality Check Sheet (ES-403-1)

(with RO computer answer keys)

Location of Electronic Files:

Primary Folder:

All applicable documents are attached Submitted By: ___

~----,,--.~

. __ VerifiedBY~

ES-201, Rev. 9E Examination Preparation Checklist Fonn ES-201-1 OPNA Facility:

McGuire Date of Examination:

WR 11119109 Facility NRC Examinations Developed by:

Written Written Exam Outline only Target Chief Date

• Task Description (Reference)

Examiner's Initials

-180

1.

Examination administration date confirmed (C.1.a; C.2.a and b) rfa

-120

2.

NRC examiners and facility contact assigned (C.l.d; C.2.e) rfa

-120

3.

Facility contact briefed on security and other requirements (C.2.c) rfa

-120

4.

Corporate notification letter sent (C.2.d) rfa

[-90]

(S. Reference material due (C.1.e; C.3.c; Attachment 2)]

rfa

{-7S}

6.

Integrated examination outline(s) due, including Forms ES-201-2, ES-201-3, ES-301-1, ES-301-2, ES-301-S, ES-D-l's, ES-401-1I2, ES-401-3, and ES-401-4, as rfa applicable (C. I.e and f; C.3.d)

{-70}

{7. Examination outline(s) reviewed by NRC and feedback provided to facility rfa licensee (C.2.h; C.3.e)}

{-4S}

8.

Proposed examinations (including written, walk-through JPMs, and scenarios, as applicable), supporting documentation (including Forms ES-301-3, ES-301-4, rfa ES-301-S, ES-301-6, and ES-401-6), and reference materials due (C.1.e, f, g and h; C.3.d)

-30

9.

Preliminary license applications (NRC Form 398's) due (C. I.!; C.2.g; ES-202) rfa

-14

10. Final license applications due and Form ES-20 1-4 prepared (C. I.!; C.2.i; ES-202) rfa

-14

11. Examination approved by NRC supervisor for facility licensee review rfa (C.2.h; C.3.f)

-14

12. Examinations reviewed with facility licensee (C.1.j; C.2.f and h; C.3.g) rfa

-7

13. Written examinations tu18 8f}@Fsting t88t8 approved by NRC supervisor rfa (C.2.i; C.3.h)

-7

14. Final applications reviewed; 1 or 2 (if> 1 0) applications audited to confirm qualifications / eligibility; and examination approval and waiver letters sent rfa (C.2.i; Attachment 4; ES-202, C.2.e; ES-204)

-7 IS. Proctoring/written exam administration guidelines reviewed with facility licensee rfa (C.3.k)

-7

16. Approved scenarios, job performance measures, and questions distributed to NA 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.

[AJ>Plies only] {Does not apply} to examinations 2repared by the NRC.

ES-201, Rev. 9E Examination Preparation Checklist Fonn ES-201-1 OPNA Facility:

McGuire Date of Examination:

WR 11119109 Facility NRC Examinations Developed by:

Written Written Exam Outline only Target Chief Date

• Task Description (Reference)

Examiner's Initials

-180

1.

Examination administration date confirmed (C.1.a; C.2.a and b) rfa

-120

2.

NRC examiners and facility contact assigned (C.l.d; C.2.e) rfa

-120

3.

Facility contact briefed on security and other requirements (C.2.c) rfa

-120

4.

Corporate notification letter sent (C.2.d) rfa

[-90]

1S. Reference material due (C.1.e; C.3.c; Attachment 2)]

rfa

{-7S}

6.

Integrated examination outline(s) due, including Forms ES-201-2, ES-201-3, ES-301-1, ES-301-2, ES-301-S, ES-D-l's, ES-40l-1I2, ES-40l-3, and ES-401-4, as rfa applicable (C. I.e and f; C.3.d)

{-70}

{7. Examination outline(s) reviewed by NRC and feedback provided to facility rfa licensee (C.2.h; C.3.e)}

{-4S}

8.

Proposed examinations (including written, walk-through JPMs, and scenarios, as applicable), supporting documentation (including Forms ES-301-3, ES-301-4, rfa ES-30l-S, ES-301-6, and ES-401-6), and reference materials due (C.1.e, f, g and h; C.3.d)

-30

9.

Preliminary license applications (NRC Form 398's) due (C. I.!; C.2.g; ES-202) rfa

-14

10. Final license applications due and Form ES-20 1-4 prepared (C. I.!; C.2.i; ES-202) rfa

-14

11. Examination approved by NRC supervisor for facility licensee review rfa (C.2.h; C.3.f)

-14

12. Examinations reviewed with facility licensee (C.l.j; C.2.f and h; C.3.g) rfa

-7

13. Written examinations 8ft8 8fJ@fstmg t88t8 approved by NRC supervisor rfa (C.2.i; C.3.h)

-7

14. Final applications reviewed; 1 or 2 (if> 1 0) applications audited to confirm qualifications / eligibility; and examination approval and waiver letters sent rfa (C.2.i; Attachment 4; ES-202, C.2.e; ES-204)

-7 IS. Proctoring/written exam administration guidelines reviewed with facility licensee rfa (C.3.k)

-7

16. Approved scenarios, job performance measures, and questions distributed to NA 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.

JC/NIJL ES-201 Examination Outline Quality Checklist Facility: McGuire Nuclear Station Date of Examination: 11119/2009 Item

1.

W R

I T

T E

N

2.

S I

M U

L A

T 0

R

3.

W 1

T

4.

G E

N E

R A

L Task Description

a.

Verify that the outline(s) fit(s) the appropriate model, in accordance with ES-401.

b.

Assess whether the outline was systematically and randomly prepared in accordance with Section D.1 of ES-401 and whether all KiA categories are appropriately sampled.

c. Assess whether the outline over-emphasizes any systems, evolutions, or generic topics.

d Assess whether the justifications for deselected or rejected KiA statements are appropriate.

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 transients.

b.

Assess whether there are enough scenario sets (and spares) to test the projected number and mix of applicants in accordance with the expected crew composition and rotation schedule without compromising exam integrity, and ensure that each applicant can be tested using at least one new or significantly modified scenario, that no scenarios are duplicated from the applicants' audit test(s), and that scenarios will not be repeated on subsequent days.

c.

To the extent possible, assess whether the outline(s) conform(s) with the qualitative and quantitative criteria specified on Form ES-301-4 and described in Appendix D.

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 among the safety functions as specified on the form (2) task repetition from the last two NRC examinations is within the limits specified on the form (3) no tasks are duplicated from the applicants' audit testis)

(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:

(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 licensing examinations

c.

Determine if there are enough different outlines to test the projected number and mix of applicants and ensure that no items are duplicated on subsequent days.

a.

Assess whether plant-specific priorities (including PRA and IPE insights) are covered in the appropriate exam sections.

b. Assess whether the 10 CFR 55.41/43 and 55.45 sampling is appropriate.

c.

Ensure that KiA importance ratings (except for plant-specific priorities) are at least 2.5.

d. Check for duplication and overlap among exam sections.

e. Check the entire exam for balance of coverage.

f.

Assess whether the exam fits the appropriate job level (RO or SRO).

a. Author Fred 8KJI'kJr /~m~r~

b. Facility Reviewer (*)

.S-k1L~n -.L Mcdelkf l~

c. NRCChiefExaminer(#)

~

A/~/ ~

Form ES-201-2 a

.~

~

~

~

JfII<

't/{<<

(f~

~

Initials b*

c#

9JII

~

iJ!1 "

.V1

~

0"\\ \\.

~A

<P-N{t\\

I'-

wi/"

NitJ tJ/r Date 1/-13-09 d NRC Supervisor A1AI//v 1L i.lJJlfWAJI.,A( /{l\\ ~

IhJ-dJ

///$'or It/truj

/ t7JVn,~

II-N-o-t-e-:-----------#--,-nd-e-p-e-n-d-e-nt-N--R-C-r-e-v-ie-w-e-r-in-it-ia-'-it-e-m-s-i-n-c-o-'u-m-n~"c'"~;-Ch-i-ef-e-x~a-m-i-ne-r-c-o-n-c-u-rr-e-n-ce--re-q-U-ir-e-d-.---------41

• Not applicable for NRC-prepared examination outlines JC/NIJL ES-201 Examination Outline Quality Checklist Form ES-201-2 Facility: McGuire Nuclear Station Date of Examination: 11119/2009 Initials Item Task Description a

b*

c#

1.

a.

Verify that the outline(s) fit(s) the appropriate model, in accordance with ES-401.

W l~ 9JII

~

R

b.

Assess whether the outline was systematically and randomly prepared in accordance with

~ "

I Section D.1 of ES-401 and whether all KiA categories are appropriately sampled.

iJ!1 T

~

~

T

c. Assess whether the outline over-emphasizes any systems, evolutions, or generic topics.

.V1 E

N d

Assess whether the justifications for deselected or rejected KiA statements are appropriate.

~

0"\\ \\.

2.

a.

Using Form ES-301-5, verify that the proposed scenario sets cover the required number JfII<

of normal evolutions, instrument and component failures, technical specifications,

~A S

and major transients.

<P-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 't/{<<

L without compromising exam integrity, and ensure that each applicant can be tested using N{t\\

A at least one new or significantly modified scenario, that no scenarios are duplicated I'-

T from the applicants' audit test(s), and that scenarios will not be repeated on subsequent days.

0 To the extent possible, assess whether the outline(s) conform(s) with the qualitative tf,f<

R

c.

wi/"

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:

NitJ (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 IJR' T

(3) no tasks are duplicated from the applicants' audit testis) tJ/r (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:

1ft (1 )

the tasks are distributed among the topics as specified on the form J-I~

(2) at least one task is new or significantly modified (3) no more than one task is repeated from the last two NRC licensing examinations

c.

Determine if there are enough different outlines to test the projected number and mix 1ft ~

of applicants and ensure that no items are duplicated on subsequent days.

4.

a.

Assess whether plant-specific priorities (including PRA and IPE insights) are covered 161..

~

in the appropriate exam sections.

5Ur\\

G 1f4(

~

E

b. Assess whether the 10 CFR 55.41/43 and 55.45 sampling is appropriate.

)J.JI\\

N Ensure that KiA importance ratings (except for plant-specific priorities) are at least 2.5.

E

c.

~

.Sl.M ~

R

d. Check for duplication and overlap among exam sections.

1tlJI, I~ ~~,

A t!K.

~fl; L

e. Check the entire exam for balance of coverage.

<liA

f.

Assess whether the exam fits the appropriate job level (RO or SRO).

~

~ '\\

Fred 8KJI'kJr /~m~r~

Date

a. Author 1/-13-09

b. Facility Reviewer (*)

~~n~ Mcdell<<-l~~-;l IhJ-D~

c. NRC Chief Examiner (#)

~A/~/ ~

///$'Or d NRC Supervisor A1AI//v lL i.lJJlfJ//AJI.,A( /{l\\ ~

I t/L1/D.j.

/ (/

,"-, flU(

Note:

1. Independent NRC reviewer initial items in Column "c n

chief examiner concurrence required.

. Not applicable for NRC-prepared examination outlines

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 ('/r:8 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 resuH 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 kno~Al/Jqid 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 I RESPONSIBILITY SIGNATURE (1 DATE SIGNATURE (2)

DATE NOTE ES-201, Page 27 of 28 ES-201 Examination Security Agreement

1.

Pre-Examination I ackno'oAo1edge that 1 have acquired specialized knoYJIedge about the NRC licensing examinations scheduled for the weekes) of ) 01.,!cfl 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 perfonnance 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 securtty measures and requirements (as documented in the facility licensee's procedures) and understand that violation of the conditions of this agreement may resu" 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 thai examination securtty may have been compromised.

2.

Post-Examination To the best of my knO~ifl:a;qid 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 I RESPONSIBILITY DATE SIGNATURE (2)

DATE NOTE ES-201, Page 27 of 28

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 fjA ('/or 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

, did not divulge to any unauthorized persons any information concerning the NRC licensing examinations administered during the week(s) of ii7lr:b1!f. From the date that I entered into this security agreement until the completion of examination administration, I did not instruct, evaluate, or p~rformance 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

" A SIGNATURE (1) 1.~L \\)~ lLc IOh ~\\tx

~Yl~

! iii~ f/[sf!irre /!f~, ~

5. ____________________________ _

DATE SIGNATURE (2)

DATE NOTE l~~ fIE

~

p~

~.

6. ____________________________ _

7. ____________________________ _

8. ____________________________ _

9. ____________________________ _

10. _____________________________ _

11. _____________________________ _

12. _____________________________ _

13. _____________________________ _

14. _____________________________ _

15. ____________________________ _

NOTES:

ES-201, Page 27 of 28 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 fjA ('/or 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 knoM~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 previ e 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

" A SIGNATURE (1) 1.~L \\)~ lLc IOh ~\\tx

~Yl~

! iii~ f/[sf!irre /!f~, ~

5. _______________________________________________________________ ___

PRINTED NAME DATE SIGNATURE (2)

DATE NOTE l~~ fIE

~

p~

~.

6. ______________________________________________________________ ___

7. _____________________________________ _

8. ___________________________________________________ _

9. __________________________________________________ __

10. ______________________________________________________________ ___

11. _________________________________________________________ ___

12. _____________________________________ _

13. ___________________________________________________________ ___

14. ________________________________________ _

15. ___ -------- _________________________ _

NOTES:

ES-201, Page 27 of 28

FINAL ES-401. Rev. 9 Record of Rejected KJAs Form ES-401-4 Tier /

Randomly Reason for Rejection Group Selected KA 1/1 APE022 AK1.04 (Q42) 9/15/09: It is not possible to write a discriminating question for this KIA. This KIA is being replaced by APE 027 AK3.04 which was randomly selected by Lead Examiner.

1/1 APE027 AK3.02 Q(44) 9/15/09: Replacement KIA requested because it was impossible to construct a discriminating question with the origional KIA. APE 027 AK3.04 was randomly selected and provided by the lead examiner.

1/1 APE062 AA1.03 Q(53) 9/15/09: It is not possible to write a question that matches this KA. Replacing with APE 062 AA1.05 which was randomly selected by Lead Examiner.

1/1 WE05 EK2.1 Q(55) Unable to write question tor RO level. Chief Examiner randomly selected new K/A WE05 EK2.2 1/1 WEll 2.4.8 Q(56) Unable to write RO level question. New KIA (WEll 2.1.27) selected by Lead Examiner.

FINAL ES-401. Rev. 9 Record of Rejected KJAs Form ES-401-4 Tier /

Randomly Reason for Rejection Group Selected KA 1/1 APE022 AK1.04 (Q42) 9/15/09: It is not possible to write a discriminating question for this KIA. This KIA is being replaced by APE 027 AK3.04 which was randomly selected by Lead Examiner.

1/1 APE027 AK3.02 Q(44) 9/15/09: Replacement KIA requested because it was impossible to construct a discriminating question with the origional KIA. APE 027 AK3.04 was randomly selected and provided by the lead examiner.

1/1 APE062 AA1.03 Q(53) 9/15/09: It is not possible to write a question that matches this KA. Replacing with APE 062 AA1.05 which was randomly selected by Lead Examiner.

1/1 WE05 EK2.1 Q(55) Unable to write question tor RO level. Chief Examiner randomly selected new K/A WE05 EK2.2 1/1 WEll 2.4.8 Q(56) Unable to write RO level question. New KIA (WEll 2.1.27) selected by Lead Examiner.

f!'IN4L ES-401 Written Examination Quality Checklist Form ES-401-6 Facility:

McGuire Nuclear Station Date of Exam:

11/19/2009 Exam Level:

RO ~ SRO

4.

I 5.

6.

7.

Item Description Questions and answers are technically accurate and applicable to the facility.

a.

NRC KlAs are referenced for all questions.

b.

Facility learning objectives are referenced as available.

SRO questions are appropriate in accordance with Section D.2.d of ES-401

--~ ---. ------- -- -

--~----- --- -

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).

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 iZ'the examinations were developed independently; or

_ the licensee certifies that there is no duplication; or

_ other (explain)

- - r -----

Bank use meets limits (no more than 75 percent from the bank, at least 10 percent new, and the rest new or modified); enter the actual RO / SRO-only question distribution(s) at right.

~ ___ Bankj_~_()dified_

I 36 / -

I 3 / -

1_ L Memory CIA Between 50 and 60 percent of the questions on the RO exam are written at the comprehension/ analysis level; the SRO exam may exceed 60 percent if the randomly selected KlAs support the higher cognitive levels; enter the actual RO / SRO question distribution(s) at right.

1-31 /

44 /

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

Initial a

b*!

c*

j I

f!KI~;'-\\

I, l~i9P~

,---- - -1

---

1 1tf/4,Jlffi "-

I- -,j--1 ---

I

',1 11fA< 19J'\\! \\) :

-~ ----t---I-I i

I 1'\\ i I

d/);/, Ij..I\\. I

71.:7\\

I I

j

~:gjI\\ ~

I i

Question content conforms with specific KIA statements in the previously approved examination outline and is appropriate for the tier to which they are assigned;

~

i /, lfI ~

deviations are justified.IP.~

'

J-F' I

10.

- ~:-stl~n psychometric qua~~_~~-f~~n1~: m~et~he~~~d~l~es~~ -~~~~pp:~;~~-~ ~~=~=-------1~,d~~-_t; _1 iii !

i 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.

i a. Author i b. Facility Reviewer (*)

! c. NRC Chief Examiner (#)

I d. NRC Regional Supervisor Note:

• The facility reviewer'S initials/signature are not applicable for NRC-developed examinations.

1. Independent NRC reviewer initial items in Column "c"; chief examiner concurrence required.

!~ISU'" ~

~

_ _ J _

Date f!'IN4L ES-401 Written Examination Quality Checklist Form ES-401-6 Facility:

McGuire Nuclear Station Date of Exam:

11/19/2009 Exam Level:

RO ~ SRO

1.

2.

3.

4.

I 5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

Item Description Questions and answers are technically accurate and applicable to the facility.

a.

NRC KlAs are referenced for all questions.

b.

Facility learning objectives are referenced as available.

SRO questions are appropriate in accordance with Section D.2.d of ES-401

--~ ---. ------- -- -

--~----- --- -

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).

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 iZ'the examinations were developed independently; or

_ the licensee certifies that there is no duplication; or

_ other (explain)

- - r -----

Bank use meets limits (no more than 75 percent from the bank, at least 10 percent new, and the rest new or modified); enter the actual RO / SRO-only question distribution(s) at right.

~ ___ Bankj_~_()dified_

I 36 / -

I 3 / -

1_ L Memory CIA Between 50 and 60 percent of the questions on the RO exam are written at the comprehension/ analysis level; the SRO exam may exceed 60 percent if the randomly selected KlAs support the higher cognitive levels; enter the actual RO / SRO question distribution(s) at right.

1-31 /

44 /

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

Initial a

b*!

c*

j I

f!KI~;'-\\

I, l~i9P~

,---- - -1

---

1 1tf/4,Jlffi "-

I- -,j--1 ---

I

',1 11fA< 19J'\\! \\) :

-~ ----t---I-I i

I 1'\\ i I

d/);/, Ij..I\\. I

71.:7\\

I I

j

~:gjI\\ ~

I i

Question content conforms with specific KIA statements in the previously approved examination outline and is appropriate for the tier to which they are assigned;

~

i /, lfI ~

deviations are justified.IP.~

'

J-F' I

- ~:-stl~n psychometric qua~~_~~-f~~n1~: m~et~he~~~d~l~es~~ -~~~~pp:~;~~-~ ~~=~=-------1~,d~~-_t; _1 iii !

10.

i 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.

i a. Author i b. Facility Reviewer (*)

! c. NRC Chief Examiner (#)

I d. NRC Regional Supervisor Note:

• The facility reviewer'S initials/signature are not applicable for NRC-developed examinations.

1. Independent NRC reviewer initial items in Column "c"; chief examiner concurrence required.

!~ISU'" ~

~

_ _ J _

Date

ES-401 Q#I

1. I 2.

lOK lODr---,---.--.---.-

(CIA) (1-5)

Partial Job-link Written Examination Review Worksheet McGuire 2009-302

4. Job Content Flaws Minutia I

1. 1 Back-units I ward

5. Other Q= I SRO KIA Only

6.

U/E/S

7.

Explanation Instructions

[Refer to Section D of ES-401 and Appendix B for additional information regarding each of the following concepts.]

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

Enter the level of knowledge (LOK) of each question as either (F)undamental or (H)igher cognitive level.

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).

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 dlstracters contain cues (i.e., clues. specific determiners, phrasing, length, etc).

The answer choices are a collection of unrelated true/false statements.

One or more distracters is not credible.

One or more distracters is (are) partially correct (e.g., if the applicant can make unstated assumptions that are not contradicted by stem).

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.

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).

Based on the reviewer's judgment, is the question as written (U)nacceptable (requiring repair or replacement), in need of (E)ditorial enhancement, or (S)atisfactory?

At a minimum, explain any "U" ratings (e.g., how the Appendix B psychometric attributes are not being met).

RO/SRO Combined Question Generic:

CAF = Check at Facility DV = Discriminatory Value NP = Non plausible On the fill in the blank Os: State "Which one of the following completes the statement below" One of many examples is 0 8. Many questions marked green require this statement.

M 2

x 2

M 2

x y

N y

N 1

003A1.02 E

Stem: Underline and/or cap the word "minimum" RFA 10/27/09 003A301 E

iSwap B with C so values are increasing Form ES-401-9 ES-401 Q#I

1.

2.

3. Psychometric Flaws LOK LOD (CIA) (1-5) Stem Cues T/F Credo Partial Focus Dist.

Job-Link Written Examination Review Worksheet McGuire 2009-302

4. Job Content Flaws Minutia

1. 1 Back-units ward

5. Other Q=

SRO KJA Only

6.

U/E/S

7.

Explanation nstructions Refer to Section D of ES-401 and Appendix B for additional information regarding each of the following concepts.]

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

16.

7.

Enter the level of knowledge (LOK) of each question as either (F)undamental or (H)igher cognitive level.

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).

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 dlstracters contain cues (i.e., clues, specific determiners, phrasing, length, etc).

The answer choices are a collection of unrelated true/false statements.

One or more distracters is not credible.

One or more distracters is (are) partially correct (e.g., if the applicant can make unstated assumptions that are not contradicted by stem).

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.

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).

Based on the reviewer's judgment, is the question as written (U)nacceptable (requiring repair or replacement), in need of (E)ditorial enhancement, or (S)atisfactory?

At a minimum, explain any "U" ratings (e.g., how the Appendix B psychometric attributes are not being met).

RO/SRO Combined Question Generic:

CAF = Check at Facility DV = Discriminatory Value NP = Non plausible On the fill in the blank Os: State "Which one of the following completes the statement below" One of many examples is 0 8. Many questions marked green require this statement.

M 2

x y

2 M

2 x

y N

N

!UUjAl.U~

E Stem: Underline and/or cap the word "minimum" RFA 10/27/09 Ii'. 'I' 003A301 E

Swap B with C so values are increasing Form ES-401-9

n

1. I 2.

Q#/ILOK LOD~--'---~-.---r-(CIA) (1-5)

Partial 3

M 2

4 c

3 x

5 C

3 x

6 M

1 x

7 C

3 x

Job-Link

4. Job Content Flaws Minutia I

1. 1 I Back-units ward

5. Other Q= I SRO KIA Only

6.

utE/S y NI N

N u

7.

Explanation D: Why would flow go up given this failure and these conditions?

RFA 10108/09 Accepted 10/27/09

':;, i:, f"',

,

"t ', ", ;,... :',

004K5.49 No comment at this time RFA 10/27/09

..,.-. j.

/\\:~. ;J!~" '. ' t' "' ~"

UUbG2.4.50 The second part of distracters A and 8 do not state any manual or automatic actions. That action is not much different then the correct answer a stated in C. Potentially A and C are both correct answers. Modify the second parts of A and 8.

This Q is U because of two potentially correct answers.

RFA 10/27/09

.. '\\ ~,.

,'::\\.!;. ::-:

006K2.01 N

N E

I Please justify why 2EMXA and 2ELXA are plausible.

Neither the distracter analysis nor the reference material supports their plausibility.

N N

N N

E This E is U until justified due to two NP distracters.

RFA 10/27/09 Added feeder to stem of question.

1006K2.04 This Q has low DV. Increase DV by adding a second valve to each choice:

A. XZ incorrect

8. XY correct C. zy incorrect D.. WZ incorrect This Q is U because of low DV RFA 10/27/09

~

• • '.. ::. ~ 1-1 '

~

I 007AT01 The containment floor and equipment sum plausibility is I19t justified. The distracter analvsis says t~e floor is used

) -

1.

2.

3.

Flaws 0#1 LOK (CIA) I (1':.'5) i~~: I.;ues IIr I~t~~ Partial 3

M 2

4 c

3 x

5 c

3 x

6 M,

x 7

c 3

x Job-Link

4. Job Content Flaws

1. 1 Back-units ward

5. Other

~

a'

~~?

KIA i vuly y

N N

N N

N N

N N

N

6.

UIEIS u

E E

7.

Explanation

,"ow 90 up 9"eo!,

RFA 10/08/09 IA",epled 10127109 comment at this lime 10/27/09

,1 IInese The

, part

, A and B do notslale any

~

~Wii' That action is not much

~ ~~:nb~h ~;:,;.;..;;.;

r a-state~ in C. Potentially f A ;nd e.' W"'"

Modify the second I!;;S ;~s U because of two potentially correct answers.

IRFA 10/27/09

, "'" '('

justify

..,raN\\ and 2ELXA are plausible.

i I

I i nor the reference material s their i,

I!~is E is U until justified due to two NP distraclers.

I ~~..\\1 0/2 7/09 IA,dd"d feeder to stem of question.

s a'has low DV, Increase DV by adding a second I e 10 each choice, Xl incorrect

8. XY correct z:f incorrect

, WZ incorrect a is U because of low DV RFA 10/27109 I sump I 1 Is

n n

1.

2.

3. Psychometric Flaws

4. Job Content Flaws

5. Other

6.

7.

Q#I LOK LOD r---

(CIA) (1-5) Stem Cues T/F Credo Partial Job-Minutia

1. 1 Back-Q=

SRO U/EIS Explanation Focus Dist.

Link units ward KIA Only some:.t!mesbut doesn't say when. Consider changln~ A2 and C2 to the radwaste facility or something or justi plausibility.

This Q is E until A2 and C2 are either justified or replaced.

RFA 10/27/09 I

,;,.. Sc.-;\\ ' '.;'/

f:;

', ', :: ~. :..;. '. :. '"

' j;

' i,

I 8

008A2.03 C

3 X

N N

E Change motor bearing temperatures to 190. This will give C1 and D1 more plausibility.

RFA 10/27/09 I '

I ;,'

' : ~

I 9

010K6.04 C

3 X

N N

E It's common knowled~e that the Pzr relief valves dischargel to the PRT. If the PR ruptures, it will result in a lower pressure. This also is common knowledge. Therefore, distracter C is NP. Change C to increase, increase.

RFA 10/27/09 I

I; c':

, : I

~ '/

I 10 012K6.03 C

3 X

N N

E The 3'd bullet is not required because they were never I

declared inoperable.

RFA 10/27/09 I

I 11 013A4.03 C

3 X

N N

E I don't think ~ou need the word ONL Y in A because an I

auto SI will OT reoccur until the timer has timed out as in B. You can also rewrite A as follows: After the SI reset I

push buttons are depressed and the RTBs have been cycled, an auto SI reinitiation can immediatel* occur.

I (Note, this is wrong because the timer has no timed out yet)

I Distracter A is NP as written.

RFA 10/27/09 I

r 1,, 1 I

12 013K1.01 M

2 Y

N S

No comment at this time I

E RFA 10/27/09 Changed question to use Containment Spray logic instead of SI logic based on validation feedback results, This changed the correct answer to 'S'. This also changed the question from an 'S' to an 'E'.

-~

1.

2.

3. Psychometric Flaws

4. Job Conlent Flaws 0#/

LOK LOD (CIA) (1-5) Stem Cues TIF Credo Partial Job-Minutia

1. 1 Back-Focus Dis!.

link units ward B

c 3

x 9

c 3

x 10 c 3

x 11 c

3 x

()

5 _ Oth~

6.

A'"

SRO UIEIS KIA Only N

N E

N N

E N

N E

N N

E

7.

Explanation som~t~me~.out ogesn say w en. conS.I.d~r c an9,n9 IV.

and C2 to the radwaste facility or something or justify plausibility.

This a is E until A2 and C2 are either justified or replaced.

RFA 10f27{09 00BA2.03 Change motor bearing temperatures to 190.

C1 and D1 more plausibility.

RFA 10127/09 010K6.04 This will give It's common knowledge that the Pzr relief valves discharge to the PRT. If the PRT ruptures\\ it will result in a lower pressure. This also is common Knowledge. Therefore, dislracter C is NP. Change C to increase, increase.

RFA 10/27/09 012K6.03 The 31'0 bullel is not required because they were never declared inoperable.

RFA 10f27f09 013M03 I don't think you need the word ONLY in A because an auto 51 will NOT reoccur until the timer has timed out as in B. You can also rewrite A as follows: After the 51 reset push buttons are depressed and the RTBs have been cycled, an auto 51 reinitiation can immediatelK occur.

(Note, this is wrong because the timer has no timed out yet)

Distracter A Is NP as written.

RFA 10f27f09 1~'2-+--~~---+--~-+--+---~--~---+---+----+---~-+---+'

'3~K~, n

.0<

, ---------------------------I M

2 Y

N S

No comment at this lime E

RFA 10/27/09 Changed question to use Containment Spray logic instead of Sllogic based on validation feedback results. This changed the correct answer to '8 ', This also changed the question from an '5' to an 'E'.

t,

( )

U I

1.

2.

3. Psychometric Flaws

4. Job Content Flaws

5. Other

6.

7.

0#1 LOK LOD (CIA) (1-5) Stem Cues T/F Credo Partial Job-Minutia

1. 1 8ack-Q=

SRO UtE/S Explanation Focus Dist.

Link units ward KIA Only Changed Approved RFA 11/12/09 13 022A203 C

3 X

N N

U Under these conditions, I am not sure that Swap&ing to high speed on their normal~ower is plausible.

u~est changing "A" and "cn part ( ) to swap to slow spee on their emergency power.

U because Potentially 2 NP distracters.

Part 2 of the KA is not met (facility identified). Use procedures to correct, control or miti~ate... If fr0u cannot meet the entire KA, you have to mee at least he second part.

CE: Reissue a new KA if necessary.

RF A 10108/09 Revisited A2 needs to read " will remain in slow speed.... "

Part 2 of the KA still not met. CAF RFA 10/27/09 Changed distracters per Chief Examiner's comments.

1;\\. ';

J 14 025K5.02 C

3 X

N N

U Whether the ice sublimates or melts, the result is a higher containment temperature which yields ~her pressures.

Factor in meltin~ instead of pressure.

is not affected.

82 and 02 are P.

This Q is U due to 2 NP distracters.

RF A 10/27/09

' '-:,',4 '

026A208 15 C

3 X

Y N

E CAF: Do ~ou expect the ap~licants to know what 1 NI-185A is? f you state the va ve nomenclature, would that give away the answer?

RF A 1 0108/09 Revisited The valve nomenclature was added RFA 10/27/09

'.\\

.~ :'.-"::- ' t""- :"-1 026G2.2.12 16 C

3 X

Y N

E I am not sure C2 is ~Iausible with the valves open. Please re-evaluate this. If t e disch valvs are open, a basic understanding of fig 7.1 of the reference renders this choice NP.

RFA 10/27/09

~

()

1.

2.

3.

Flaws 0#1 LOK I ~.u~

(CIA) I \\1-:)1 Stem Curu: TIF I~.ed Partial Focus I UISI.

13 c

3 x

14 c

3 x

15 c

3 x

16 c

3 x

Job-Link

4. Job Content Flaws

1. I Back-units ward

()

5.0~

N N

N N

y N

y N

6.

U/£IS u

u E

7.

Explanation I "'.," w **

de; 'hese '

i no' su.e 'ha'

'0 i ~~Pn"g"~A~~nd!C"

, swap \\""'0';,peeifon U ~ecause pot:~~~:; NP distracters.

Part 2 of the KA is not met (facility identified), Use

) to correct, control or mitigate... I(you cannot

~ae;t the entire KA, you have to meel at least Ihe second

~~~'Reissue a new KA if necessary.

1"'<1-..... 10f08/09 i i

!Ai needs to read "will remain in slow speed.... "

i p~rt 20f the KA still not met. CAF IRFA10/27109 distracters per Chief Examiner's comments.

I,,. '

,ice,

.me"s, Ille.esu" is a highe.

i

~ whict' pressures.

I B2an~,'~2 a.~ ~P.

'01

. KA is nol affec'ed.

IThi;o Is U due to 2 NP distraclers.

'RFA 10127109 I

r£!A a

Do you expect the applicants to know what 1 NI*

is? If you state the valve nomenclature, would that I ~':': away the answer?

Irtt"A 10108/09 i.

IThe -valve nomenclature was added RFA 10/27/09 E I' am

,th~2~ ~ 'h'e<:ii;~'~ wi'h 'hey~~."~ open. Please I

I

~ ~~I:,<~ are open, a baSIC i l of fig 7.1 ofthe

'endelS 'his I,NP.

RFA 10/27/09

(L

1.

2.

4. Job Content Flaws 0#1 LOK LOD (CIA) (1-5)

Partial Job-Back-Link ward 17 I C I 3 I X I I

18 I C I 3 I X

I 19 I C I 3 I X

I

5. Other I

6.

7.

0 = I SRO I utEIS I Explanation KIA Only N I Y I Y I I

I

(;T;.; :',) ;., ~'< ~': ;",

~ "::' '.':;;:<;\\

039K3.04 N

Since aux steam is normally isolated at 100% power change the stem power level to 85%. This will give Band N I E N I E C more plausibility.

RFA 10/27/09

\\....,/ ;;r:'; j' ;",.'::

"""'~ '::

~:; It; ~~*, ~:"

{

.j

'~

,j -.,,!

... ". /.l

,~ i 059K302

!Choice "cn: Chan~e P-11 to 1960 PSi9r This way they have to know wha pressure P-11 IS.

his will increase plausibility and make the answer less obvious RFA 10/08/09 Revisited I Additional comment:

o is NP for set of events given. For this level of exam and knowled~e, failure to recall that P-11 resets is not likely. There ore 0 is not plausible. I suggest the following:

IA.

Following the CF isolation reset or when the SG Hi-Hi level cleared.

B When the SG Hi-Hi level cleared ONLY C.

FOllowin~ the CF isolation reset or when pressure increase above 1955 psig.

D.

when pressure increased above 1955 psig ONLY RFA 10/27/09

.:::.~".,;f ',;: : :,,:. ~ ;.:,;.. : '; 'f.

~,~ i ~.: ~ :

059K3.03 Too much teaching in all distracters/choices.

Furthermore, the second parts may give away the correct answer.

Reduce to the following:

IA. The feedwater regulating valves on A and 0 SGs only will open.

B. The feedwater regulating valves will remain in the same position for all SGs C. All feedwater regulating valves will open to feed all SG (WR or NR) levels to 65%.

D. The feedwater regulating valves on Band C SGs will open to increase the (WR or NR) levels to 65%.

RFA 10/27/09

'(.'. '

n

(")

1.

2.

3. Psychometric Flaws

4. Job Content Flaws 5.0~ 5.

7.

0#1 I~~:)

l OO 100" I~i~

(1-5) Stem TIF Partial Job-Minutia "

Back-Q' I ~~

UtE/S Explanation Focus Unk units w,rn KIA 17 e

3 X

N N

~;~;~l~

isolated at 1 00% ~owe r to 85%. This wil give 8 and

' ro' 18 e

3 X

Y N

E i i~~'62~an~e P-11 to 1960 PSi~ This way they have'to I ;"andha pressure P-11 IS.

his will increase I

make the answer less obvious RFA i i

comment:

101! NP for set of events given. For this level of exam

[ ~~~I~.nOWled~e, failure to recall that P-11 resets is not

. There ore 0 is not plausible. I suggest the lA,' Following the CF isolation reset or when the SG Hi-Hi level cleared.

I~

When the SG Hi-Hi level cleared ONLY Ie.

FOIIOWln~ the CF isolation reset or when pressure Increase above 1955 psig.

10. when pressure Increased above 1955 psig ONLY IRFA 10127/09 19 e

3 X

Y N

E i

j parts may give away the correct 10 the following:

IA. The feedwaler regulating valves on A and 0 SGs only will open.

lB. The feedwaler regulatiG1 valves will remain in the same position for all S s I

C. All feedwater r~u latin5 valves will open to feed all SG (WR or NR) leve s to 6 %.

10. The feedwater refhulatin2 valves on Band C SGs will IRF:pen 10 increase e (W or NR) levels to 65%.

10127/09 I

( )

l 0

1.

2.

3. Psychometric Flaws

4. Job Content Flaws

5. Other

6.

7.

Q#I LOK LOD

~

(CIA) (1 -5) Stem Cues T/F Credo Partial Job-Minutia

1. 1 8ack-Q=

SRO UtE/S Explanation Focus Dist.

Link units ward KIA Only

(~.r*:*):

!,: ~:{: :'?,,:'.

~~

:TT:;:)

20 I

061Kl.0l M

2 Y

N No comment at this time RFA 10/27109

'1/'"

21 062K4.10 C

3 X

Y N

E Need bounda~ for D. As written, D could be potentially correct since i it takes 30 s or so to return to normal.

Suggestion for D:

Loads will auto swap back to the inverter as soon as inverter over curren is detected to be less than 120%

RFA 10/27109

.'..').'; :;

': {-':.: :",.-

-: ri :'.:"C} ::.:-:';

22 063K2.01 M

1 X

N N

U This Q has low DV. Suggested fix:

A. DIG Fuel Oil Booster Pump and FWPT A Emergency Oil Pump(s)

B. FWPT A Emergency Oil Pump(s) and Reactor Trip Switchgear Control C. Turbine Emergency Bearing Oil Pump and Turbine Backup Vapor Extractor(s)

D. Turbine Emergency Bearing Oil Pump and DIG Fuel Oil Booster Pump This Q is U because of low DV RFA 10/27109 Ii:,;:

):

23 064A3.01 M

2 X

N N

E Move the WOOTF statement to the top.

CAF: Look at A1 and C1 and make sure that they are not subsets of B1 and D1 because 235 psig is between both choices. You might consider using an actual value where the limits have to be applied instead.

RFA 10/27109 Chan~ed the Rressure range for distracters 'B' and "D' to 210 -

25 PSIG.

' ~'..'.. ' 11' <;

24 064K608 C

2 X

Y N

U Since ref is provided, and there is no mention of problems with DG starting air, the second part of A and Bare NP.

Why not chan,ge to 7 days and put a particulate bullet in I the stem that IS within the limits.

Unless I am missing something, this Q is U because of 2 NP distracters.

RFA 10/27109 I J r:-

1.

L.~?

J. Psychometric Flaws 4, Job Content Flaws

5. Other

6.

7.

0#/

LOK I ~~:s Ic"" TIF c,;,~1 Partial Job-Minutia "

Back-Q ~

~~~

UIEIS Explanation Link units ward t<iA 20 M

2 Y

N No co~Vment at this time RFA 10/27(09 21 C

3 X

Y N

E Need

( for.D. As written, 0 could be potentially t sinc~_i! ~ lakes 30 s or so to return to normal.

I cD.

I ~_o~c!s_ ~_" auto swap back to the inverter as soon as

~ :urrent is detected to be less than 120%

RFA 10127/09 22 M

1 X

N N

U I ~hi~ Q has low DV. Suggested fix:

IA. DIG Fuel Oil Booster Pump and FWPT A Emergency Oil Pump(s)

B. FWPT A Emergency Oil Pump(s) and Reactor Trip Switchgear Control Ie. Turbine Emergency Bearing Oil Pump and Backup Vapor Extractar(s)

10. Turbine Emergency Bearing Oil Pump and DIG Fuel Oil Booster Pump I!his Q is U because of low DV RFA 10f27/09 23 M

2 X

N N

E Move the WOOTF statement to the lop.

1 ~1 A1 and C1 and make sure that they are not

? 0L~.~ and 01 because 235 psig is between both

. ~~~e might consider using an actual value where i

to be applied instead.

RFA 10f27f09 l ~t8n~~~ '~§ Ib for dislracters 'B' and "0 ' to 24 C

2 X

Y N

U I~~~;;I I, ~;.,~nd the'~l~~ 7' A,.'nr ~ ~~I~~n Unless I a':~~s;t: ~~~~;~~~, this a is U because of 2 NP distracters.

RFA 10f27/09

n... ___.. _._ _ _

n

1. I 2.

4. Job Content Flaws

7.

Q#I I LOK LOD (CIA) (1 -5)

Partial Job-Back-Q=

Explanation Link ward KIA

,, '.. ~ ~ i.':

/. ~;'"

.\\ ' ;':1'.5 F: i:,'.',', ;;"/>

25 I MI I

I X I I

I I

073A403 2

Y N

U In accordance with the reference, it appears that a source check is required not a setpoint check. Please re-verify correct answer..

The stem ask for a re~uirement. The word "Ensure"

~stracters "c" and "0') are NOT "requirements". These o distracters will be immediately eliminated.

U because "c" and '0" are NP RF A 10108/09 Revisited The stem asks for a requirement. e and 0 are "verify" steps. A and B are performance steps. If the stem asked for a requirement, then the applicant will rule out e and 0 because they are NOT performance steps.

RFA 10/27/09 Added ONLY to distracters 'A' and 'B' and changed distracters 'e' to "Start the associated sample pump AND have RP perform a setpoint check and chan~ed

'0' to to "Start the associated sample pump AND ave RP perform a source check" 26 I M I 2 I X

I N I N I E With train se8aration being common knowledge, I do not believe that is plausible since the suction is common from SNSWP.

Replace D.

RFA 10/27/09 27 I C I 3 I I Y I N 28 I M I 2 I X

I N I N E

If C was correct, 0 would be also.

Modify C or 0 or add an ONL Y to C.

RFA 10/27/09

."'<:,,:,"" ~. '"

~:

29 I I 2 I I

I I 002K3.03 C

X N

N E I "No impact" (distracter B) is not plausible especially with fans in high speed.

Replace B n

()

~

1.

L~?

3. Psychometric Flaws

4. Job Conlent F!aws

5. Other

6.

1.

0#1 LOK I ~~:s ICues T/F I~i~ ' Partial r-Job-Minutia., 8ack-Q.

SRO U/EtS Explanation Link units ward KIA Only 25 M

2 X

Y N

U I ~"~"V'

~_~11 ~ lhe reference, it arpears that a source Icheck.

not a selpoin! chec. Please fe-verify IThe,-stern ask f~r a reg,uirement. The word "Ensure"

~C* and "0 ) are NOT "requirements*. These Itwo I i will be immediately eliminated.

I ~ _because *C* and 'D" are NP I ~FA 10/08/09 I ;~e_ stem asks for a requirement. C and 0 are "verify"

~~ A and B are performance steps. If the stem for a requirement, then the applicant will rule lout c and 0 because they are NOT performance steps.

IRFA 10/27/09

~~~s~~!~cdfstracters 'A' and '8' and changed I ~~~-~~~;~.

to " Start the associated sample pump perform a setpolnt check and chan ed 1~~i~~~V.~s~:ri the associated sample pump AND ~ave perform a source check"

")'

26 M

2 X

N N

E I ';;~;;;~~

1 ~eing,

~"Ihe! ': knqwle,dge, I do not Ifmm I

~ since I suction IS common D.

IRFA 10/27/09 27 C

3 Y

N I"' comment at this time RFA 10/27/09 26 M

2 X

N N

E If C was correct, 0 would be also.

or 0 or add an ONLY to C.

IRFA 10127/09 I.. '.

29 C

2 X

N N

E I,:,n, ;n,:;t,peed-is not plausible especiaUy with

(,

( )

I......,;

1.

2.

3. Psychometric Flaws

4. Job Content Flaws

5. Other

6.

7.

Q#I LOK I LOD r--

(CIA) (1-5) Stem Cues T/F Credo Partial Job-Minutia

1. 1 Back-Q=

SRO U/E/S Explanation Focus Dist.

Link units ward KIA Only IKI"'A 10/27/09

~: :.:,",.

. :';i::,

~ '

~.

I' r'.,/',

I

,~ (::;:1 i 1",':

.~

~~ :;'~::<.';:' ~~

30 014A1.02 M

2 X

N N

E A is a subset of B.

If C was correct so would D.

Psychometrics need to be addressed.

RFA 10/27/09

..::~ ;' ::.

., '.< "; ::.: ~

~.' ','!':',

", c:

31 017K601 C

3 X

Y N

E I do not see where "An is plausible given the circumstances.

Replace "A" or prove plausibility.

RFA 10/08/09 CAF: Must demonstrate plausibility RFA 10/27/09

\\~<:. ?'t::>'.:

~ :;~~ i;: :.;.~.:..,"~,-'

. ~.. ~** I

.::: :: ~ -i !? :

~

"i,:., :.,:, ',':;' '- ~/

>~

32 029A2.03 C

3 X

Y N

E Identify the procedure that must be used to support the second part of the KA.

..... and how can it be stabilized as stated in procedure RF A 10/28/09 I:

i:':,.

, ~ -:' ::":,r\\

~

" '.lid'*-

/*;**nc*'"

~" : ;~:.

: ~ <.: ~ :~ <J 034A303 33 M

2 Y

N Revisited No comment at this time RFA 10/28109

• 1,,\\,

( : : ':: :. ~ :'-'

~ ;.

045K4.13 34 M

2 Y

N No comment at this time RF A 10/28109

'i.:.

-: r.1'-;*, 'll.~

o

. ~..

. ~_

3 0#/

LUK LUU 1 :~~: l cues IT/I I~i~' Partial Flaws 30 M

2 x

31 c

3 x

32 c

3 x

33 M

2 34 M

2 Job-Unk

4. Job Content Flaws Minutia

1. 1 Back-units ward n

5.0t~

Q~

~R?

t<JA N

N y

N y

N y

N y

N

6.

UIE/S E

KCA I**, -,.,

1014A1.02

7.

E~planation I

I;' 'is a subset of B.

[ii C was correct so would O.

jP,;,cho,nellrics need to be addressed.

jRFA 10/27109

t.

7K601 D

E I;I~, d: ~o,~, ":0::' s~e~e~~W:h:ere "A" is plausible given the If "A" or prove plausibility.

I RFA 10108/09 E

leAF: Must demonstrate plausibility

[RFA 10{27/09 I.\\.

It;

',),

oj'

'I * 'I i the procedure that must be used to support the part of the KA

..... and how can it be stabilized as stated in t'p"""d",.1 IRFA 10/28/09 I

al this time 10/28/09

\\

IUoo" O."

at this time 10/28/09

n

1.

2.

3. Psychometric Flaws

4. Job Content Flaws

5. Other

6.

7.

Q#I LOK LOD r--

(CIA) (1-5) Stem Cues TIF Credo Partial Job-Minutia

1. 1 Back-Q=

SRO U/E/S Explanation Focus Dist.

Link units ward KIA Only 35 I

IUOOK1.UO M

2 Y

N No comment at this time RFA 10/28/09 D'i,,' :'*./'~*~ *"";:'::

~ " :; t':

,:,'!.",'~:

068G2.4.50 36 M

2 X

Y N

E Stem: Delete the word "is."

The reference provided does not support answer and choices.

Facility demonstrate and provide proper reference during review.

RF A 10/28/09 l/

37 071A4.14 C

3 Y

N

' The KA says to operate andlor monitor in the CR. Rad alarms are a form of monitoring. KA is met.

No additional comments at this time RFA 10128/09

.:':':.,;.~:

~ { 'i,

. ~;'. f

',j: ::

38 075K2.03 M

2 X

X Y

N U

If 1 TB supplies power to 1 ETB, then C is also a potentially correct answer. The stem is not specific enough.

This Q is U because of potentially two correct answers.

RF A 10/28/09 If---+--+---+-+---r--+--+---+--I---+-+---+---r---I---I'-Fr i\\;};.

". '. "r.

39 EPE007G2.4.2 M

2 X

X Y

N U

The KA match is OK for actions that should have occurred I

on EOP entry.

"Main feed pump turbines are tripped" is not plausible without something in the stem that might drive the applicant to thinking so. Add something in the stem like a.

failed annunciator that might elude the applicant to thinking so.

This Q is U because of two NP distracters.

RF A 10/28/09 i

40 APE008AK1.01 i

C 3

Y N

Double jeopardy with Q 9: This Q is not double jeopardy with Q 9 because 9 dealt with a ruptured PRT. This Q deals with the usage of the mollier diagram. I am researching the SRO ONLY aspect of this.

RFA 10/28/09

",', ~" :~ ):'

'~.:'

41 1

APE015/017AK2.08 r

()

LbK L~D

3.

. Flaws

4. Job Content Flaws 5.0~

6.

7.

0111 Ie,,,

I'i;,~

I :~:s TIF Partial Job-Minutia

1. I Back-Q" I ~~~ UlEIS Explanation Link units ward KIA 35 M

2 Y

N E mmenl allh" lime 10128/09 r.'

36 M

2 X

Y N

E ISle~: 'D~ lele the word "is,"

ITh~'reference provided does not support answer and demonstrate and provide proper reference during IRFA 10/28/09 I.,

I, '

37 C

3 Y

N KA says to operate and/or monitor in the CR. Rad are a form of monitoring. KA is mel.

additional comments at this lime 10/28/09 38 M

2 X

X Y

N U

I ~('TB power to 1 ETB, then C is also a potentially The stem Is not specific enough.

I~~! a is U because of potentially two correct answers.

10/28/09 I.. "

39 M

2 X

X Y

N u

I Th~KA(~~i~j.:\\s OK for actions that should have occurred I?~<E~::~~~. !p turbines are tripped" is nol plausible i

in the stem that mi.9ht drive the i

I ~. so~ Add something in the stem like a Ifa;l, r Oial might elude the applicant to

'0.

I ~~: Q.

U because of two NP distracters.

10/28/09 40 (1.01 C

3 Y

N

. iQ~

1 w!lh Q9JI~~ ~~1!i~:~~1e. ~opa",y I

~9 I

hlsQ Ideal, w ! Ihe.

f~h~ m0tUei

.m

,-I';; SRO ONLY a'pecl of Ih;,.

41 I'

D

4. Job Content Flaws 0#/1 LOK LODr---.---.--.---.----+---~----~---r-----4

1. I 2. I

3. Psychometric Flaws Stem I Cuesl T/F Icred.1 Partial (CIA) (1-5)

M I 2 42 M

2 43 C

3 44 C

2 Focus Dis!.

x I I

X X

X X

Job-Link Minutia 1 #1 I Back-units ward

5. Other Q= ISRO KIA Only YIN Y

N Y

N Y

N

6.

7.

utE/S Explanation

-r lAIl dloices Involve teaching. AddltJonally, the stem does not solicit much of the info Included.

6 S

E Since the Q is comprehensive, redesign it to a two part Q.

RFA 10/28/09 Changed all distracters for consistency and balance and removed wording that was teaching in the answers.

Approved RFA 11/10109 I APE022AK102 Revisited I

No comment at this time RFA 10/28/09

]APE026AA2.04 I think 120°F is NOT plausible because it is too low.

Consider usinQ a higher temperature. At what temp does the resin bum? Something higher than 138 would also be acceptable.

RF A 10/28/09

'I,

~, I

", ', ii' Following final validation on 11/11/09, the stem of the question was revised to add " due to reactivity effects" after the first blank to clarify that the question was asking for the change in NC system temperature due to the release of boron from the demineralizer and not the potential change due to the increase in letdown/charging temperature. This changed the question from an 'S' to an 'E'.

Changed approved RFA 11112/09 U

Stem: 1 st bullet: Change "has" to "have".

I APE027AK3.04 E

Psychometrics: As written, B is also a correct answer.

Additionally, If C was correct, so would D.

This Q is U because of multiple correct answers.

RF A 10/28/09

, ~:',

, ': ~ ':;.~"

c ' \\'

I Following final validation on 11/11/09, changed first two bullets to set initial conditions as a Steam Break as opposed to a Pressurizer Safety Valve stuck open to improve the plausibility of the initial conditions.

Change approved RFA 11/12/09

()

W:Q#~

~,r::~~K;JI~L02~.D;}~~3.~~~~~F~la~W~'~~:;~~4.~J~O~b~C~Ofo1;*O~I~F;,a~w~'~~f~~5~.~~~~"~r::6:. ~~~~~~~~~~::7:.::~~~~~~~=-"i~

'..i

~

(CIA) I (1-5) Stem Cues T/F I~.ed Partial Job-i Back-Q=

SRO UIE/S Explanation Focus I uisl.

Link units ward KIA Only 42 M

2 43 C

3 X

44 C

2 X

X

-V

-W T notoolicil ~uchoi Ihe info;'

. "'f, Ihe slem does Y

N Y

N s

E Y

N U

E

~ j~:e the Q is comprehensive, redesign it to a two part Q.

tv*,.,. 10/28/09 i '

all distracters for consistency and balance and wording that was teaching in the answers.

RFA 11 /10109 comment at this lime 10/28/09 I ',\\

"I th~k-120oF is NOT ~Iausible because it is 100 low.

I th~"

~,~~~~ a hig er temperature. AI what temp does

~. resin

. Something higher than 138 would also be IRFA'IOI28109 I

\\.,

final I

' ~. ~J~'e,mn. 'h.,'em ofthe i

j to 8 1 l to i

effects"

'1

~ '.~lblank,in Ii Ithe w",

rthe due I :~:he I i,,','~~g~O~uf~~~,~h.;

i~' and not

\\' '5; '0

. This changed the i ""ni an' an 'E',

approved RFA 11112109 I sie~:- 1 sl-bull et: Change "has* to "have".

As written, B is also a correct answer.

i II If C was correc!. so would D.

I ~~: Q is U of multiple correct answers.

10/28/09 I t"';~'

final validation on 11111109, changed fi rst

) bullets.to set initial conditions as a Steam Break I ~s opposed to a Pressurizer Safety Varve stuck open It; improve the plausibitlty of the Initial conditions.

approved RFA t 1/12/09

~,

~

~

1.

2.

3. Psychometric Flaws

4. Job Content Flaws

5. Other

6.

7.

Q#I LOK LOD (CIA) (1-5) Stem Cues T/F Credo Partial Job-Minutia

1. 1 Back-Q=

SRO U/EtS Explanation Focus Dis!.

Link units ward KIA Only 1I::I-'I::lI/!-I{';/ A.2" 45 M

2 Y

N No comment at this time RFA 10/28/09

';';';',~~--i:..'-::,',~ (':,, }',:;

"~ :/;/': ":":')

46 EPE038EA 1.10 M

2 X

X Y

N E

This Q is confusing. NSO-513 states that the best method is EMF-33 and the seconda'6 method is the N-16 monitor. The Q stem asks what the est indication is to determine that a SG tube leak has occurred. The stem seems to contradict the ref material slightly by the way it is worded.

Facility please re-evaluate.

RFA 10/28/09

,,'.. ::'l. '.~(>,j.>:~ nr :\\...,':!' /:~

APE040AK1.01 47 C

3 X

Y N

E Oistracter 0 is NP. Replace 0 with a statement that would cause a CO without stating so. For example openin~ a valve or series in the primary or secondary that woul cause a CD would be acceptable.

RFA 10/28/09 1*\\:.),

(,.,

48 Ape054AA2.08 C

3 Y

N No comment at this time RFA 10/28/09 I "" "

',"';,:" ~ " -: :',

~' ;fj. :.':

49 EPE055EK3.02 M

2 X

Y N

U A is NP because there is nothin% in the stem to indicate that NC system subcooling has een lost or challenged.

There is nothinp in the reference to support the use or potential use 0 CLAs in this case..

Oistracters A and B do not appear to be plausible.

This Q is U until it is proved otherwise.

RF A 10/28/09

{.-', :,:

"'~ ~,.~>~. ; ;

~ ' /:::'

~,.. :';. '.,,>; I'J

~f~ :)'J ;'.< ~~

~ :"

'.

i A n ' ';.:..

"'.: p. ;.

~

I'*"

",. i.'~ ~

1,'<> ',"'>.> <....

50 APE056AA2.37 C

3 Y

N No comment at this time RFA 10/28/09

'i'

)

51 APE057AA1.06 M

2 X

X Y

N E

To be consistent, state in B, C, and 0 the procedure you 0#/

45

1.

LOK (C/A)

M

2. ~~~3t

• P~'~%~hF,0~m~e~~"~F~"JW~'~:t~~4i*~JO~b~C~oi't=e~",~F4"r"~~1 LOD (1-5) Stem !cues TIf I<:r,ed. Partial Job*

i

1. 1 Back-Focus I UISt.

Link units ward 2

()

7.

5.0~ 6.

0-i SRO UlElS E:.:planation 10128109

" I O:~Eomme~~:t this lime II----I----I---I---l----+--I---l---I----I---I-----I---I-----I--I= ""

1.10 46 M

2 x

x y

N 47 c

3 x

y N

48 c

3 y

N 49 M

2 x

y N

50 c

3 y

N 51 M

2 x

x y

N E Thl;~~~,~

I lIhe, 13,

Ithe.1 '~~e N-16 I

iii ~'

, leak ~~~~ be" I,dl" '~;;te~

,eem, Hef

,I "Ighlly by 1e wi;';'",

RF"i" ;~Iease re-evaluate.

comment at this time 10/28/09 I

I

,\\1 U

IA is NP because there is nothing in the stem to indicate Itha-' NC system subcooling has been lost or challenged.

1

~~;:'~':: ill' ~~~r':~;?~,l~

1 the to support the use or I use s in this case..

A and B do not appear to be plausible.

I ~~~ Q is U untit it is proved otherwise.

It'\\rM 10128/09 I,

37 at this time 10{28/09 I"

E I T~ 'be consistent, state in B, C, and D the procedure you

~

1.

2.

3. Psychometric Flaws

4. Job Content Flaws

5. Other

6.

7.

Q#I LOK LOD

~

(CIA) (1-5) Stem Cues T/F Credo Partial Job-Minutia

1. 1 Back-Q=

SRO U/E/S Explanation Focus Dis!.

Link units ward KIA Only will go to affer compTeting lfle lAs.

RF A 10/28/09 I h. *. !'

~

52 I

APE058AK3.02 M

2 Y

N No comment at this time RFA 10/28/09 53 APE062M 1.05 C

3 X

X Y

I N

E Reverse the WOOTF statement and put it up front.

The discussion (distracter analysis) does not line up with the Q. Please re-evaluate. However, the reference does support the correct answer.

RFA 10/28/09 I: J,

~. j -:.

':, ~J

' ~ *

,'. ~ 1'.. :

I*:

,f',,~,';,~:,,~':,,:>:~"'j ;.~;::::"

~ ",~

': u ; 5 ~~

54 WE04EK2.2 C

2 X

Y N

U ; If the graph wasn't marked then I would agree with the

. distracter analysis for distracters Band D. However, since I the graph is incrementallr markedt it is not possible to misread it on the horizon al axis.

herefore, 380 GPM is not plausible.

I do not have a suggested fix for this problem unless you can provide a curve that doesn't have the 2-9 incremental markings.

This Q is U because 2 distracters are not plausible.

RF A 10/28/09 I.. :.

y;.

'," *.. '

r: f

~,\\ ~':

'... ~

55 WE05EK2.1 C

1 X

Y N

U It is common knowledge that an SI signal isolates FW and that FW cannot be regained until SI has been reset.

This Q is U because it has no DV.

RFA 10/28/09

~

/",:.;:.

,L ~

• ~~

r

'\\ ";:",.:,::..,,"{.' ;.'

I L**.. "

: ~ i 56 WE11G2.4.8 C

I 3

X X

X Y

Y U

Band 0 are not plausible because you asked them in the stem WOOTF describes the requirements or implementing...

Therefore Band 0 are automatically ruled out.

Change stem: WOOTF describes whether or not AP-22 can be implemented in conjunction with ECA-1.1.

(something to that affect) n

1.

2.

0#1 LOK I ~.""::

(CIA) I P-:>>

52 M

2 53 e

3 54 c

2 55 c

56 c

3

3.

Flaws Stem I c,,".~,.IT~ Ie,,"

Partial Foclls Dist.

x x

x x

x x

Job-Link x

4. Job Content Flaws Back-units ward 5. 0~

Q=

SRO KJA Only y

N y

N y

N y

N y

y

6.

UlEtS E

u u

u

7.

Explanation

,.he lAs.

the WOOlF statement and put it up front.

The*

(distracler analysis) does nolline up with the Q.

re-evaluate. However, the reference does

.

:~:-.

correct answer.

Kr-A 10/28109

, ~

' Iflh~ o,"ph wasn;. (0' IIhen 1 f~~~ a"'ee v.i.h 'h~;" **

.~eg",ph is 1

!,.itis ~;*~§if2~;:~"'--

. on :he

,I axis.

'31,'0"GP';;

is

• no.

1 Id~rn~t ~~ve a suggested fix for this problem unless you l.c~an~~t~~de a curve that doesn't have the 2-9 incremental

, ~~~ 0 is U because 2 distracters are not plausible.

KI'"A 10/28/09

' !L~"','

knowledge that an 5 1 signal isolates FW and

~:~-I FWcannot be regained until SI has been reset.

~~~ Q is U because it has no DV.

KrA 10/28109

~ you asked them in the Band D are automatically ruled out.

~ stem:

whether or not AP*22 Ican be

) that 1d~ct) with ECA-1.1.

1. I 2.

Q#/I LOK LODr---~--~~---r-(CIA) (1-5)

Partial 57 C

3 x

58 C

3 x

x Job-Link

4. Job Content Flaws Minutia I #1 I 8ack-units ward o

5. Other Q= I SRO KIA Only y

N y

N

6.

utE/S

7.

Explanation II agree that tms Q may bEfSRO ONLY Replace the Q or request a new KA.

RF A 10/28/09

\\.F::':" ~;'

, *: **.~{: ( -:"\\

'\\,.~~.,V:

~,

:,

':-: 1-,

" t\\

(~)

APE003AK1.07 E

Please re-evaluate the assumption in the guestion. If they know Xenon did not change, then power did not change and reactivity did not change. This may key them to tfle answer.

Can the assumption be removed without affecting the I question?

RFA 10/28/09

.~'. 'f ~.:. } ~.,: '<.

,, : ':~

.~ :.'

" ~ " :.',

',~ ';

t :,

" r, '

'~< ';

~:.' !

Following final validation on 11/11/09, changed distracters A1 and D1 to 'increases' instead of

'decreases'. This was done since decreasing could be considered correct if the Operator were to perform a SDM determination as opposed to considering the actual change in SDM. If a determination was performed the SDM calculation would yield a decrease In SDM due to the large penalty imposed for a dropped rod (much larger than the actual rod worth for a dropped rod). So, even though ACTUAL SDM does not change, the calculated SDM will always decrease for a dropped rod. Also, in the stem of the question changed the bullet regarding rod motion to say that temperature was restored through manual rod motion instead of automatic rod motion. Also, added a bullet to say that boron concentration has not changed so that the Operator will have all necessary parameters to determine the effect of the dropped rod on SDM.

Changed approved RFA 11/12/09 IAPE005AK2.02 o is not plausible because the stem stated that there w~W no indication that the rod is mechanically bound in the 4 bullet. To state in 0 that it cannot be moved is a contradiction to the stem. The distracter analysis for 0 is not acceptable.

Modify or replace distracter D.

RF A 10/29/09

'il L.

n 0

,~~K, 2

3. Psychometric Flaws

4. Job Content Flaws

5. Other

6.

7.

0#1 LaO

~

(CIA) (1-5) Stem Ic'"' TIF I'i;;~

Pania!

Job-

1. 1 8ack-a~

U/EIS Explanation Focus Link units ward KIA 100';

~.Y,,,. .0 "", ~ "'. ', ue o~v v,,,,

I the Q or request a new KA.

RFA 10128109

~

. ~.

'., d *. ~*

57 e

3 X

Y N

E J r I.th~ assum~tion in the guestion. If they I

) di!;l,nol,'

t en power did not Chan~e

,and f did not I

"~" This may key them to t e jean Ihe I be removed without affecting the IRFA 10/28/09

• i, l fina'

" on1"'

, ih~:;,o.;.~~~:" n:e I ~;50U'd be 1 ~~~I~:i:'~

,!;~e_

" ~' ',10','he a lacI"ai

', In SOM;,~},

~

~~a:,

I the ~D~,

I I I,:"ould' ffor-; decrease lin SOM dU~ IOg~~~:~jr;~'

a, Ir!,d (mUi_~o~{9s~,te\\len ~~:~~~a!(?TduAlrts'D~rd~es not

-'j Ir~ed~

S~~~T~~i.1I always decrease for a

. Also, in the of the question I th~~

~ the bullet i

rod motion to sa.y I was

• od I

'!.O!.

0,od

,~~S~ot~_~:~!aj~J~i' I :~a~~~~h;al 'bo,on: ;'ii~nh: ;!;, 0 has s~ 10

" 'he~ffeci'of

,;;;"on SOM.

RFA 11112/09 58 e 3

X X

Y N

liT nol I. t,'~e,~t,i,s;~~~,emtS,a'fvb~~(~ln Ihe."

',sla:e' Ibe ~oveo i

he stem.

i I

forDis or replace distracter D.

10/29/09

o n

1. I 2.

Q#I I LOK LOD 1'1--.,.--,---,---,-

(CIA) (1-5)

Partial Focus Job-Link

4. Job Content Flaws Minutia I #1 I Back-units ward

5. Other

6.

,I

7.

1 Q=

SRO U/E/S I Explanation KIA. Only

"i '-< f~

~

':," ~,>t;

~,,'

59 CAF: The KA is for low temperature limits for Boron Concentration. This Q references an over-temperature annunciator. Is this for a high temperature or a low temperature condition? The ref does not explain well.

60 C

3 x

Y N

61 M

2 Y

N Stem: Is this a high Temperature or a low temperature condition?

Remove the double period from "C" and "D" RF A 10109/09 Revisited After revisiting this Q, I think 80°F would be more plausible then 65 of. 80 is the excessive water temperature in the RWST where 65 is the min RCS cold leg temp. Consider changing and we will discuss during the on site review.

RFA 10/29/09 5 ": ~.. ~. -: ': / ": ' i:: '::) ' "

IAPE061AA2.04 E

Ilf you wanted to write this W /0 it being a NOT Q, consider the following:

u WOOTF alarm(s) can be used to confirm that the 1EMF-16 alarm is valid?

A. 1EMF-17 annunciator or SFP level Low computer alarm B.

Incore Inst Room Sump Hi Level or 1 EMF-51A alarm C. 1 EMF-17 annunciator ONLY D. 1EMF-51A alarm ONLY RFA 10/29/09

~.

'. -: I' ~ "'

1,.,,

• k.

'( :

IAPE067AK3.02 According to the reference (OMP 2-2, Page 13,) A and B are both correct.

If that is not so then:

Change the 2 nd part of A to "The fire brigade will respond."

Change the 2nd part of B to The fire brigade will NOT respond."

lAs written, the Question is leadinQ the applicant to the r~

0

~

L6K L~D

3.

i Flaws

4. Job Content Flaws 5.0~ 6.

1.

Q#!

ie,,,

I'i:;~

I :~:s TIF Partial Job-Minutia

1. I Back'*

Q.

I~~~

UlEtS Explanation Link units

~,d KJA

, *r' 59 M

2 X

Y N

E I ~AF ~ The KA i.s +~;oCi,

.~~i

"its fo' Boron i

""':n~;'tl;~? 'T

' 0' tow

, con i.

not expl.in well.

I Ste~.; Is this a high T emperalure or a low temperature the double period from "C' and "D" IRFA 10/09/09 IAft~*r-1 i i i think 80°F would be more i

~ th~~.

Is the excessive wat~RCS the RWST where 65 Is the Icald Ie!=! temp. Consider changing and we*wiJi* i

~ the '

review.

IRFA 10129109,

60 C

3 X

Y N

E hfY~~

. write this WID it being a NOT Q, consider ith.

I~~~i

~larm(S~ can be used to confirm that the 1EMF-I is valid.

IA. 1EMF-17 annunciator or SFP level Low computer alarm lB. Incore Inst Room Sump Hi Level or 1EMF-51A alarm 12:: 1EMF-17 annuncialor ONlY

10. 1EMF-S1A alarm ONLY IRFA 10129109 61 M

2 Y

N U

l l~* lhe reference (OMP 2-2, Page 13,) A and B la,e both I mat IS nol so then:

I;'~

~ !~: 2~d part of A to "The fire brigade will respond."

2nd part of B 10 "The fire brigade will NOT I A;:;'riH~n Ih.

"i',i, "h.

i

,lin Ih.

0 0

1.

2.

3. Psychometric Flaws

4. Job Content Flaws

5. Other

6.

7.

Q#I LOK LOD (CIA) (1-5) Stem Cues T/F Credo Partial Job-Minutia

1. 1 Back-Q=

SRO UlE/S Explanation Focus Dist.

Link units ward KIA Only correct answer.

I Currently, the Q is U because of two correct answers.

RFA 10/29/09 fl,!', ;'

i ~ :"

1

):

, 1' J",:

',\\

.~'.

i\\; -; <<.::,"

.:~

. Changed to new question. Original question was determined to be SRO level knowledge following final validation on 11/11/09.

Changed approved RFA 1"1112109 62 APE068G2.1.28 M

2 Y

N S

No comment at this time I

E RF A 10/29/09 1<

. ~..,'

, :'j

.,: -:~.- '

I*'"

63 WE03EK3.2 M

2 Y

N No comment at this time RFA 10/29/09 64 WE09EA1.1 C?

2 Y

N E

I think this is a comprehensive Q since a fair amount of evaluation is required.

RFA 10/29/09

( :

65 WE13G2.2.37 C

3 Y

N S

No comment at this time E

RF A 10/29109

,',\\ /"': "

",' ~.,, '~ ~.... (

~ : !

I ~.

I >,

'; ' I * ~~f- '

~;

~ {

I

.': ~ ;':.

66 G2.1.28 M

2 Y

N No comment at this time RFA 10/29/09

'~;'r-67 G2.1.30 M

2 N

N U

This Q does not have anythin~ to do with locatin~operating local contro S. I suggest writing a Q where e CR haC! to be evacuated an the operator has to report to a local station to operated equipment.

This Q is U because the KA is not met

()

()

1.

2.

3. Psychometric Flaws

4. Job Content Flaws

5. 0~ 6.

7.

0#1 I (~~:)

lOD 1'6,:1 (1-5) Stem IC,,, 71F Partial Job-

1. 1 Back.-

Q~ 1 ~~~

U/EIS Explanation Focus Link units

_,d KJA

~FA:

I the Q is U because of two correct answers.

1\\,

' ~t~ new question. Original question w as i

to be SRO level knowledge following final i

on 11 /11 109.

approved RFA 11 112109 62 N~'

.1.2.

M 2

y N

comment at this time E

RFA 10129/09 r,

1,1 63 M

2 Y

N comment al this time r.:, 10/29/09

"'l,I, 64 C?

2 Y

N E i ihi~k lhi~

'i~ a comprehensive a since a fair amount of I

is required.

IRFA 10129109 65 C

3 Y

N I ~i~omm'ent al this time E

10/29/09 66 M

2 Y

N comment at this lime 10129'09 e., {, r _. c 67 M

2 II N

U ITh i~' cO'

, _;~~~ave a"y1hi"~ to do with

~~~P~~

local contro s. I SU9aBst writin~ a Q Iwhere to be evacuated an the opera or has l~h ~:POft to a I station to operated equipment.

a is U because the KA is not mel

o (J

0 1\\

1 I

11

1. I 2.

Q#/I LOK ' LaD ~--r-"":'-.----r--'--

(CIA) (1 -5)

Partial 68 e

3 69 M

2 x

70 e

2 Job-Link

4. Job Content Flaws Minutia I #1 I 8ack-units ward

5. Other I

6.

Q= I SRO I U/E/S KIA Only

7.

Explanation

[RFA 1U/£8/U8

{,)',

':,~ {: ~

,("

(;',

I****

1,

.:(,. ',(.,;

'\\,;-""'::1;:':

'1

~; ':.:"; ;1':

G2.1.31 y

N SIN

.... O comment at this time E

RF A 10/29/09

'" ).~

y N

y N

".1 s;.-:

',:~;:<: <.: >l

~:':,,;t-:,."'

,;~~

" ~

~:

.:.~'" ;:j ;.~.

G2.2.21 E

I Remove double period from "A" and "e" S

E Oistracter analysis: "0" what does "the exposure will be greater if you wear the respirator" have to do with this Q?

"8" and "0": remove "to provide... " as this is teaching.

Plus it is additional information that is not needed.

RFA 10109/09 Revisited There is way too much teaching in all of the choices.

Reduce as follows:

A. 1 NO-15B is interlocked with 1 NO-58A (TRAIN A NO TO NV & NI).

B. 1 NO-15B would cause one NO train to become inoperable.

C. 1 NO-15B is interlocked with 1 NI-136B.

O. Both trains of NO will become inoperable.

Put all of the reasons in the distracter analysis.

RFA 10/29/09 Rewrote per Chief Examiner's suggestion.

... > J,.':..-: I.~

G2.2.35 I think e and 0 will immediately be eliminated but it meets NUREG requirements. The Q IS OK as is.

RF A 1 0/29/09 r

()

0

1.

2.

J. Psychometric Flaws

4. Job Content Flaws 5.0~

6.

7.

0#/

LOK LOO (CtA) (1.5) Stem Cues TIF Credo Partial Job-Minutia "

Back-Q.

SRO UIE/S Explanation Focus Dist.

link units ward t<JA Only

~ KrA Ii )

n 1-*'

I 68 G2.1.31 C

3 Y

N S

No comment at this time E

RFA 10/29/09 e,

'I-69 G2.2.21 M

2 X

Y N

E Remove double period from "A" and *C*

Distracler analysis: "D" what does "the exposure will be greater if you wear the respirator" have to do with this Q?

"8" and "0": remove "to provide.. : as this is teaching.

Plus it is additional information thai is not needed.

RFA 10/09/09 Revisited There is way too much teaching in all of the choices.

Reduce as follows:

A. 1ND*15B is Interlocked with 1ND-58A (TRAIN A NO TO NV & NI).

B. 1ND-158 would cause one NO train to become inoperable.

C. iND*i5S Is Interlocked with iNI*136S.

O. Both trains of NO will become inoperable.

Put all ofthe reasons in the distracter analysis.

RFA 10/29/09 Rewrote per Chief Examiner's suggestion.

70

<32.2.35 C

2 Y

N S

I think C and 0 will immediately be eliminated but it meets E

NUREG requirements. The a IS OK as is.

RFA 10/29/09

1.

2.

3. Psychometric Flaws

4. Job Content Flaws

5. Other

6.

7.

Q#I LOK LOD (CIA) (1-5) Stem Cues T/F Credo Partial Job-Minutia

1. 1 Back-Q=

SRO U/E/S Explanation Focus Dis!.

Link units ward KIA Only

,>:;,,' '.,,', ',: (:;':. ".".. ".,;T :d:,"'*

''J ';

~:.~ L* >

~

~<,1'.. (.~

71 G2.3.12 C

2 X

Y N

E o is not plausible for this failed fuel event. It is common knowledge to redirect letdown.

Replace D.

RF A 10/29/09

.. ~ :'. " : ';

'.. \\:.',li'

, \\: ".' :,,' !;

~!. ". 'f'-,' : :

t' r.~.:.. "

I.-

\\'.

"i'

f :

, !,j,'

.<,;', ; ;.:. <:.. : :.~;:

~

':...r.

. ~..,.f ',, '

72 G2.3.14 C

2 X

Y N

E Distracter A is weak. This is too important of an evolution to be evaluated and approved by an NLO.

Replace A.

Distracter C: State a reason instead of "under these conditions" RF A 10/29/09 I;

~ '.

),

.. ~

.',.~

73 G2.3.7 C

2 X

Y N

E o is not plausible as written.

0: Change to: "should" to "must" and "could" to will

RF A 10/29/09

,,':;,*:i"";:

', ~ ;:.. "

f,:,: (

'. i 1

.~ (P,,/

I 74 G2.4.16 C

2 Y

N S

No comment at this time E

RF A 1 0/29/09 Approved RFA 11/10/09

./'{

. :,,;.; ',:. ~ ",

'c' ~1 ' *

. ~ I(

'\\".

~:;,;...,

r.

C:~

1.

2.

3. Psychometric Flaws

4. Job Content Flaws

5. Other

6.

7.

QNI LOK LOD r--

(CIA) (1 -5) Stem Cues TIF Credo Partial Job-Minutia

1. 1 Back-Qo SRO U/E/S Explanation Focus Dis!.

link units ward t<JA Only 71 C

2 X

Y N

E

,,2.3.12 o is not plausible for this failed fuel event.

knowledge to redirect letdown.

It is common Replace D.

RFA 10129/09 72 G2.3.14 C

2 X

Y N

E Distracter A is weak. This is too important of an evolution to be evaluated and approved by an NLO.

Replace A.

Distracter C: State a reason instead of 'under these conditions*

RFA 10/29/09 73 G2.3.7 C

2 X

Y N

E o is not plausible as written.

0: Change to: "should" to "must" and *could" to "will" RFA 10/29/09 74 G2.4.16 C

2 Y

N No comment al this time E

RFA 10/29/09 Approved RFA 11 /10/09

I,

( )

(J

~

1.

2.

3. Psychometric Flaws

4. Job Content Flaws

5. Other I

6.

7.

Q#I LOK LOD I

~

(CIA) (1-5) Stem Cues T/F Credo Partial Job-Minutia

1. 1 Back-Q=

SRO U/E/S Explanation Focus Dis!.

Link units ward KIA Only 75 IG2.4.4b C

2 X

Y N

Is it fair to ask this question without a reference? If you allow a reference, will it become a direct look up (Ol.U).

Please re-evaluate RFA 10/29/09

,. l~i. : '.

f ~";

~'.

~ f,,:. ;

.:.' '.: : -;.: :. "',: {

",;,. : 1'*,

. ': ~. >,"

.,: ~J:," ";' *. ;...

.,J..:>;-:< ".. (.'~ r~~*.".

SRO ONLY N/A 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 I

84 85 86 87 88 89 90

-~.- ~--

r.

0

~

1

2.

3. Psychometric Flaws

4. Job Content Flaws

5. Other

6.

7.

0#1 LOK LOO (CIA) (1-5) Stem C"" '"

I~i~

Partial Job-i "

Back-Qo I ;~~

UIE/S Explanation Focus Link units ward t<JA 75

.*.* 0 C

2 X

Y N

fair to ask this question without a reference? If you II a reference, Will it become a direct look up (DLU).

re-evaluate 10/29/09

-~ ".

A SRO ONLY N/A 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90

1.

2.

3. Psychometric Flaws

4. Job Content Flaws

5. Other

6.

7.

Q#I LOK LOD

~

(CIA) (1-5) Stem Cues T/F Cre(1. Partial Job-Minutia

1. 1 Back-Q=

SRO UlE/S Explanation Focus Dis!.

Link units ward KIA Only 91 92 193 i 94 95 96 97 98 99 100

---

~-~.-. --... -.-.. ------..... -.-

<l 0

1.

2.

3. Psychometric Flaws

4. Job Content Flaws

5. Other

6.

7.

Q#I LOK LOO r--

(CIA) (1-5) Stem Cues TIF Credo Partial Job-Minutia "

Back-Q ~

SRO UtE/S Explanation Focus Dis!.

link units ward KIA Only 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100

• Independent of whether or not it met the KA, mis-classified WRT RO/SRO, or required grammar or minor enhancement.

Question Statu.

Question is Sat with NO Comments E(42) I Editorial Changes Needed E*

I Questionable Editorial U (14) I Question is All Hosed Up 81(0) I Questionable

$1(0) I Question and stem sat - editorial elsewhere N*(O)

I Partially met KA

• Independent of whether or not it met the KA, mis-classified WRT RO/SRO, or required grammar or minor enhancement.

Quell1lon Status Question is Sat with NO Comments E(42)

Editorial Changes Needed E'

Questionable Editorial U(14)

Question is All Hosed Up 81(0)

Questionable riO)

Question and stem sat - editorial elsewhere 11"(0)

Partially met KA

ES*403, Rev. 9 Written Examination Grading Quality Checklist Facility:

McGuire Date of Exam: Nov 19, 2009 Item Description

1.

Clean answer sheets copied before grading

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 justified

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

./

-~

a. Grader Ronald F. Aiello /

~

A

b. Facility/NRC Reviewer(*) Bruno Caballero/.~C!~

~~

c. NRC Chief Examiner (*)

Ronald F. Aiello/

a rfa NA rfa rfa rfa rfa

d. NRC Supervisor (*)

~~

Malcolm T. Widmann/ I

~l1I---

\\---}

Form ES*403*1 Exam Level: RO Initials b

c blc rfa NA NA blc rfa blc rfa blc rfa blc rfa Date

/h~<J9 11/?1J/or

~ )

/J/?tI;h9

)

tl/~,,/tYl

(*)

The facility reviewer's signature is not applicable for examinations graded by the NRC; two independent NRC reviews are required.

ES*403, Rev. 9 Written Examination Grading Quality Checklist Facility:

McGuire Date of Exam: Nov 19, 2009 Item Description

1.

Clean answer sheets copied before grading

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 justified

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

./

~-:z7

a. Grader Ronald F. Aiello /

~

A

b. Facility/NRC Reviewer(*) Bruno Caballero/ *~udL T--~

c. NRC Chief Examiner (*)

Ronald F. Aiello/

a rfa NA rfa rfa rfa rfa

d. NRC Supervisor (*)

~!fj Malcolm T. Widmann/ I

~lU---

\\---7 Form ES*403*1 Exam Level: RO Initials b

c blc rfa NA NA blc rfa blc rfa blc rfa blc rfa Date

/h~<J9 11/?1J/or

~ )

/J/?tI;h9

)

tl/~,,/tYl

(*)

The facility reviewer's signature is not applicable for examinations graded by the NRC; two independent NRC reviews are required.

KEYID

© r-------,---------y--------------------------j SCORING &

CJ RESCORE C MULTIPLE "4NSWE,'R SCORING

~IJ!rNJIffs~

>-':'.c=i

.. ~-'_C'=_(::')R?_~::cE,::.:(=_7=-_AL>.J,,:-:;S*'::'n~lE=.:Jl='_'-".. ~

"'g~'!lf1~c1.:.::..l?:.:K:':"\\':":.."'_n~~~_":r'='2=T/i::..!.:-,_-:::Q7:N-:L.Y::O}--<

,-._~_",--:,,--____

\\f/1RK(J/dJ ();"};

-fr

-~

-~

-:j

'S

-0

~

-::']

_:::l

-~ ------------

T F l.©@

3@©e

-I@.@

5.©(l!,)@

6@.COCQ)@

7.Cf;.J@

11.©

/3 (l',).GD 14.CID© T F 26.©@

2Se© 29.@© 3fJ.©@@

31 @.(Qj@

32.@© 33.@@

34.@

3.1.(§)@@@

36.(12)@

37.@©CQ)@

3S.@©@

39©.

-IO.©@

16 GD.©CP) 42 (];)@.@

-I3.©@

19.@© 44.@©

-IS@@.',:Q) 46©.

-I7@.© 23@.@

4S©.

U.,C(Q) 49(£;J.

2S.~O*@

50.©©

-fr

-~

-~

-~

~

-~

-0

_s;

-~

\\::

-~

-II

_v'; ---

NUMBER CORRECT PERCENT CORRECT ROSTRR NUMBER SCORE RESCORE T F 51 (];).@

52.@@~

S-l_@©@@

55.©@

56.@©@

57.

5S.

S9.@© 60.© 61.©@

62.

63.@

M.@

65.© 66©.

67©e 68.@©@(~)

69.© 70.@

72.@

n.©@

74@.

COMBINED POINTS EARAED

(;RADE SCORE

-~~~~

-~~-

RESCORE 1 F 76@@

77@© 78@© 79©@

so© 81© 1i2© 83@© 8-1© S5@©@

86© f!7© 88© 8'1@

91J© 91@

92@

93@@

94© 95© 96@

97©© 91i©© 99©

]{)() (ID©© r~

V::)

MARKING INSTRUCTIONS Pearson NCS Test Sheet 100 Form No. 106173 Reorder Form No. J(}6J73 1-8()()-367-6627 Fax 1-S07-4SJ-,f513 va Iii ebridge.llcspearso/!.com

("ANSWER ')

L@:YINFO. I (PERFORMANCE)

I ASSESSMENT I

~FAFYS 1

!TEJl t

' COlt ~

w icD CD CD GJI I CDwG)

I GJG) I I

G)G)

I I

I.

CDCDiJl II

~--

r I

OF POnTS TOTiI_

SCORE EARSED r I" W i

[

~I

,ICD CD CD CD CD

,!CD wCD WW JG) G)

G)IG)

°1G) G)

G)G) r

,t I I

\\

LJ~

CD CD CD

~1 I

Copyright © 1995. 2001 NCS Pearson, Inc.

AI! rights reserved. Printed in U.S.A.

1------------------...,

l STUDENT ID NUMBER I

'---1-1--' --I-----J I

->t,~~-d~£~~~~~~

UVi'ii /\\'(j, 1 Pt'llfi!

i ICD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD Iw CD CD CD CD CD W CD W w I

GJ GJ GJ G) G) G) G) GJ G) G)

G)G)G)G)G)G)G)G)G)G)

I'Aark Reflex' bnns by PC3ison NCS r\\i1M106173 -3 3~

© I

ICD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD I

I@..<;v...

KEYID

~------r---------~-------------------------)

SCORING &

CJ RESCORE C MULTIPLE "4NSWE,'R SCORING

~IJ!rNJIffs~

>-:'.c""~~:-'_C==_(::':)R='.~='E,"":(=.7=-.:""!:..vs=.'n=lE=.:Jl='_'

.. ''._-:g~':"lf1=.Cl..c:I}'-=".K:-:"\\=:..""_n::=~~_:-:r='2:::L""4!=-,.-=Q""N-:L.Y=}*-<

T F l.©@

\\f/lRK (lid.! ();"};

T F

-fr

-~

-~

-:j

,S

-0

~

-::']

_:::l

-~ ------------

3@©e

-I@.

5.©(l!,)

6@.COCQ) 7.Cf;.'J@

11 @.©

/3 (l',).GD 14.CID© T F 26@.©@

2Se© 29.@© 3fJ.©@

31 @.(l!j 32.@© 33.@

34@@.@

.'IS.(§)@@

36.(12)@

37.@©CQ) 3S.©@

39@©.

-IO.@© 16 GD.@CP) 42 (];)@.@@

-I3.©@

19.@@

44.@@

-IS@@.',:Q) 46©.

-I7@@.@

23@@.@

4S@@.

U.,C(Q) 49(£;J.

2S.~O*@

50.@©

--fr

-~

-~

-~

~

-~

-t;:,

_s;

-~

\\::

-~

-II

_v'; ---

NUMBER CORRECT PERCENT CORRECT ROSTRR NUMBER SCORE RESCORE 51 Cf0.@

52@.@~

S-I_@©@@

5S.@

56.@@@

S7.

5S.

S9.@@

60.© 61.©@

62.@

63.@

M.

65@.@

66@@@.

67©e 68.@©@(~)

69.© 70.@

72@.@

n.©@

74@.

COMBINED POINTS EARAED COMBINED I

1 F 76@

77@@@

78@@

79© So@© 81@© 1!2© 83@©@

8..f@

S5@@

86© f!7@@

88@@

8'1© 91J@© 91 @@

92@© 93@

94@

95© 96@@

97@© 91!©@

99©

]{)() (ID@

r~

~

MARKING INSTRUCTIONS Pearson NCS Test Sheet 100 Form No. 106173 Reorder Form No. J(}6J73 1-8()()-367-6627 Fax 1-S07-4SJ-,f513 va Iii ebridge.llcspearso/!.com

("ANSWER ')

L@:YINFO. I

~FAFYS 1

!TEJl t

' COlt ~

w icD CD CD GJI I CDwG)

I GJG) I I

G)G)

I I

I.

CDCDiJl II

~.-

(PERFORMANCE)

I ASSESSMENT I

r cf OF f'( [\\Pi I

TOH/_

), T :.

,SCORE EAR.\\Ui r l".1"" i

[

~I~

,ICD CD CD CD CD

,!CD wCD WW JG) G)

G)IG)

°1G) G)

G)G) r

,t I I I

LJ~

CD CD CD a-;l I

Copyright © 1995. 2001 NCS Pearson, Inc, All rights reserved. Printed in U,S,A, 1.. _*---------------...,

l STUDENT ID NUMBER I

""-1-1--' --I*-.. _*J I

rNAME 2c::xfl N'<<S ~O 1<E1I\\K~

->t '~~-d~£~~~~~~

UVi'ii /\\'(j, 1 Pt'llfi!

i ICD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD Iw CD CD CD CD CD W CD W w I

GJ GJ GJ G) G) G) G) GJ G) G)

G)G)G)G)G)G)G)G)G)G) lSUBJECT AN~i<.. '<<'C}i I

PERIOD DATE

)

I'Aark Reflex' bnns by PC3ison NCS r\\i1M106173 -3 3~

I ICD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD I

I@..<;v....