ML101970347

Initial Exam 2008-301 Draft Administrative Documents

ML101970347
Person / Time
Site:	Robinson
Issue date:	06/28/2010
From:	Moore R Progress Energy Carolinas
To:	NRC/RGN-II
References
50-261/08-301
Download: ML101970347 (66)

Text

{{#Wiki_filter:ES-401 Written Examination Quality Checklist D -a)4 Form ES-401-6 Facility: H. B. Robinson Date of Exam: 8/15/2008 Exam Level: RO SRO Ei Initial Item Description b c# 1. Questions and answers are technically accurate and applicable to the facility.

2. a. NRC K/As are referenced for all questions. b. Facility learning objectives are referenced as available. 3. SRO questions are appropriate in accordance with Section D.2.d of ES-401 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 CL program office).

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 X the licensee certifies that there is no duplication; or other (explain) 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 15 / 4 7 / 1 53/ 2 j7 question distribution(s) at right.

7. Between 50 and 60 percent of the questions on the RO Memory C/A exam are written at the comprehension/ analysis level; 20 the SRO exam may exceed 60 percent if the randomly 35 / 10 40 / 15 selected K/As support the higher cognitive levels; enter the actual RO / SRO question distribution(s) at right.

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

9. Question content conforms with specific K/A statements in the previously approved 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. -.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 ignature Date

a. Author R. 0. Moore /

6/18/08

b. Facility Reviewer (*)

J. F. Jones / 6/18/08

c. NRC Chief Examiner (#)

5d,, ,Q)

d. NRC Regional Supervisor Note:

• The facility reviewers initials/signature are not applicable for NRC-developed examinations.

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

7 ES-401 Written Examination Quality Checklist ::D.... a.)--l:: Form ES-401-6 r..* H. B. Robinson Date of Exam: 8/15/2008 Exam Level: RO 0tI SRO 00 Item Description

1.

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

2.

a.

NRC KJAs are referenced for all questions.

b.

Facility learning objectives are referenced as available. ~o

3.

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

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).

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 ~ the licensee certifies that there is no duplication; or _ other (explain) Initial jijo b*

6.

Bank use meets limits (no more than 75 percent I--=Bc.:::ao..:n;..:.k_-I-=':=:':"::':=---!_--':"':~_-l from the bank, at least 1 0 percent new, and the rest Modified New 1~ new or modified); enter the actual RO / SRO-only 15 / 4 7/1 question distribution(s) at right.

7.

Between 50 and 60 percent of the questions on the RO Memory exam are written at the comprehension/ analysis level;

8.

9.

10.

11.

the SRO exam may exceed 60 percent if the randomly 35/10 selected KJAs support the higher cognitive levels; enter the actual RO / SRO question distribution(s) at right. References/handouts provided do not give away answers or aid in the elimination of distractors. Question content conforms with specific KJA statements in the previously approved examination outline and is appropriate for the tier to which they are assigned; deviations are justified. Question psychometric quality and format meet the guidelines in ES Appendix B. 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. 53/2~ CIA 40/15 L

a. Author Printed Nam~~natur:J-\\ J\\

R.O.Moore/ ~J~ V~

b. Facility Reviewer (*)

J. F. Jones / -( /\\;:::,.

c. NRC Chief Examiner (#)

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 n

chief examiner concurrence required.

fh,

.J j Date 6/18/08 6/18/08 J7iPP-4~

The written exams, as submitted, were unacceptable. Per recommendations form the CL Branch Chief and the DRS Division Director, the exams were sent back to the licensee. We agreed to work with the licensee to improve the quality of the exam. The written exams, as submitted, were unacceptable. Per recommendations form the OL Branch Chief and the DRS Division Director, the exams were sent back to the licensee. We agreed to work with the licensee to improve the quality of the exam.

ES-401 PWR Examination Outline - RO Form ES-401-2 Facility: Date of Exam:

ROK/ACapoPoits SRO-Only_Points Tier Group K KKK KKAAAAGI A2 G* Total 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4

• ITotal 1.

1 222 44 4 18 6 Emergency & Abnormal 2 +/- N/A I j_ N/A 1 Plant Evolutions Tier Totals 4 4 3 5 5 6 27 10 1 33322322323 28 5 2. Plant 2 31 110101 020 10 3 Systems Tier Totals 6 4 4 3 2 4 2 3 3 4 3 38 8

3. Generic Knowledge and Abilities 1

2 3 4 10 1 2 3 4 7 Categories 2 2 3 3 Note: 1. Ensure that at least two topics from every applicable K/A category are sampled within each tier of the RO and SRO-only outlines (i.e., except for one category in Tier 3 of the SRO-only outline, the Tier Totals in each K/A category shall not be less than two). 2. The point total for each group and tier in the proposed outline must match that specified in the table. The final point total for each group and tier may deviate by +/-1 from that specified in the table based on NRC revisions. The final RO exam must total 75 points and the SRO-only exam must total 25 points. 3. Systems/evolutions within each group are identified on the associated outline; systems or evolutions that do not apply at the facility should be deleted and justified; operationally important, site-specific systems/evolutions that are not included on the outline should be added. Refer to Section D.1.b of ES-401 for guidance regarding the elimination of inappropriate K/A statements. 4. Select topics from as many systems and evolutions as possible; sample every system or evolution in the group before selecting a second topic for any system or evolution. 5. Absent a plant-specific priority, only those K/As having an importance rating (IR) of 2.5 or higher shall be selected. Use the RO and SRO ratings for the RO and SRO-only portions, respectively. 6. Select SRO topics for Tiers 1 and 2 from the shaded systems and K/A categories. 7* The generic (G) K/As in Tiers 1 and 2 shall be selected from Section 2 of the K/A Catalog, but the topics must be relevant to the applicable evolution or system. Refer to Section D. 1.b of ES-401 for the applicable K/As. 8. On the following pages, enter the K/A numbers, a brief description of each topic, the topics importance ratings (IRs) for the applicable license level, and the point totals (#) for each system and category. Enter the group and tier totals for each category in the table above; if fuel handling equipment is sampled in other than Category A2 or G* on the SRO-only exam, enter it on the left side of Column A2 for Tier 2, Group 2 (Note #1 does not apply). Use duplicate pages for RO and SRO-only exams. 9. For Tier 3, select topics from Section 2 of the K/A catalog, and enter the K/A numbers, descriptions, IRs, and point totals (#) on Form ES-401-3. Limit SRO selections to K/As that are linked to 10 CFR 55.43. ES-401 PWR Examination Outline - RO Form ES-401-2 Facility: Date of Exam: RO KIA Cateqory 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 2 2 2 4 4 4 18 6 Emergency & Abnormal 2 2 2 1 N/A 1 1 N/A 2 9 4 Plant Evolutions Tier Totals 4 4 3 5 5 6 27 10 1 3 3 3 2 2 3 2 2 3 2 3 28 5

2.

Plant 2 3 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 2 0 10 3 Systems Tier Totals 6 4 4 3 2 4 2 3 3 4 3 38 8

3. Generic Knowledge and Abilities 1

2 3 4 10 1 2 3 4 7 Categories 2 2 3 3 Note:

1.

Ensure that at least two topics from every applicable KJA 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 KJA category shall not be less than two).

2.

The point total for each group and tier in the proposed outline must match that specified in the table. The final point total for each group and tier may deviate by +/-1 from that specified in the table based on NRC revisions. The final RO exam must total 75 points and the SRO-only exam must total 25 points.

3.

Systems/evolutions within each group are identified on the associated outline; systems or evolutions that do not apply at the facility should be deleted and justified; operationally important, site-specific systems/evolutions that are not included on the outline should be added. Refer to Section D.1.b of ES-401 for guidance regarding the elimination of inappropriate KJA 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 KJAs having an importance rating (IR) of 2.5 or higher shall be selected. Use the RO and SRO ratings for the RO and SRO-only portions, respectively.

6.

Select SRO topics for Tiers 1 and 2 from the shaded systems and KJA categories. 7.* The generic (G) KJAs in Tiers 1 and 2 shall be selected from Section 2 of the KJA Catalog, but the topics must be relevant to the applicable evolution or system. Refer to Section D.1.b of ES-401 for the applicable KJAs.

8.

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

9.

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

ES-401 2 - RO Form ES-401-2 ES-401 PWR Examination Outline Form ES-401-2 Emergenr.v and Abnormal Plant Evolutions - Tier 1/Group 1 (RO / SRO)

E/APE # / Name / Safety Function K K K A A G K/A Topic(s) IR 12312 000007 (BWJE02&E1 0; CE/E02) Reactor Trip - Stabilization - Recovery / 1 [1]

000008 Pressurizer Vapor Space X AK1.01 Knowledge of the operational implications of 3.2 Accident / 3 [2] the following concepts as they apply to a Pressurizer 3.7 Vapor Space Accident: Thermodynamics and flow characteristics of open or leaking valves. 000009 Small Break LOCA / 3 [31

00001 1 Large Break LOCA / 3 [4] X EAI 12 Ability to operate and momtor the following 4 1 as they apply to a Large Break LOCA: Long-term 4.4

containment of radioactivity.

AK2. 10: Knowledge of the interrelations between the 000015/17 RCP Malfunctions / 4 [51 X Reactor Coolant Pump Malfunctions (Loss of RC 2.8 Flow) and the following: RCP indicators and controls. 2.8 000022 Loss of Rx Coolant Makeup / 2 [6] X AAI.01: Ability to operate and! or monitor the 3.4 following as they apply to the Loss of Reactor Coolant

3.3 Makeup

CVCS letdown and charging. AA2.06: Ability to determine and interpret the 000025 Loss of RHR System / 4 [7] X following as they apply to the Loss of Residual Heat 3.2 Removal System: Existence of proper RHR overpressure

protection.

000026 Loss of Component Coohng X AA1 02 Ability to operate and / or momtor the 3 2 Water / 8 [8] following as they apply to the Loss of Component 3.3 Cooling Water: Loads on the CCWS in the control room. 000027 Pressurizer Pressure Control System Malfunction / 3 [9]

000029 ATWS / 1 [101 X G2.l.28: Knowledge of the purpose and function of 4.1

major system components and controls. 4.1 000038 Steam Gen. Tube Rupture /3 [11 ] X G2.1.20: Ability to interpret and execute procedure 4.6

steps. 4.6 AA1.02: Ability to operate and / or monitor the 000040 (BW/E05; CE/E05; W/E1 2) X following as they apply to the Steam Line Rupture: 45 Steam Line Rupture - Excessive Heat Feedwater isolation. 4.5 Transfer/4 [12]

000054 (CEJEO6) Loss of Main X AAI.02: Ability to operate and! or monitor the 4.4 Feedwater / 4 [13] following as they apply to the Loss of Main Feedwater

4.4 (MFW)

Manual startop of electric and steam-driven

AFW pumps.

000055 Station Blackout / 6 [14]

000056 Loss of Off-site Power / 6 [15] X AA2.67: Ability to determine and interpret the 2.9 following as they apply to the Loss of Offsite Power: 3.1 Seal injection flow (for the RCPs). 000057 Loss of Vital AC Inst. Bus / 6 [16] X G2.2.22: Knowledge of limiting conditions for 4.0

operations and safety limits. 4.7 G2.2.36: Ability to analyze the effect of maintenance 000058 Loss of DC Power / 6 [17] X activities, such as degraded power sources, on the 3.1 status of limiting conditions for operations. 4.2 ES-401 2-RO Form ES-401-2 ES-401 PWR Examination Outline Form E'",,,. r) Emergenc and Abnormal Plant Evolutions - Tier 1/Group 1 (RO 1 SRO) E/APE # 1 Name 1 Safety Function K K K A A G KIA Topic(s) IR 1 2 3 1 2 000007 (BW/E02&E10; CElE02) Reactor Trip - Stabilization - Recovery 1 1 [11 000008 Pressurizer Vapor Space X AKI.O I Knowledge of the operational implications of 3.2 Accident 1 3 [2] the following concepts as they apply to a Pressurizer 3.7 Vapor Space Accident: Thermodynamics and flow characteristics of open or leaking valves. 000009 Small Break LOCA 1 3 [3] 000011 Large Break LOCA 1 3 [4] X EAI.12: Ability to operate and monitor the following 4.1 as they apply to a Large Break LOCA: Long-term 4.4 containment of radioactivity. 000015/17 RCP Malfunctions 1 4 [5] X AK2.10: Knowledge of the interrelations between the 2.S Reactor Coolant Pump Malfunctions (Loss of RC Flow) and the following: RCP indicators and controls. 2.S 000022 Loss of Rx Coolant Makeup 1 2 [6] X AAl.OI: Ability to operate and 1 or monitor the 3.4 following as they apply to the Loss of Reactor Coolant

3.3 Makeup

CVCS letdown and charcrincr. 000025 Loss of RHR System 1 4 [7] X AA2.06: Ability to determine and interpret the 3.2 following as they apply to the Loss of Residual Heat Removal System: Existence of proper RHR overpressure 3.4 protection. 000026 Loss of Component Cooling X AAl.02: Ability to operate and 1 or monitor the 3.2 Water 1 8 [8] following as they apply to the Loss of Component 3.3 Cooling Water: Loads on the CCWS in the control room. 000027 Pressurizer Pressure Control System Malfunction 1 3 [9] 000029 A TWS 1 1 [10] X G2.1.2S: Knowledge of the purpose and function of 4.1 major system components and controls. 4.1 000038 Steam Gen. Tube Rupture 13 [11 ] X G2.1.20: Ability to interpret and execute procedure 4.6 steps. 4.6 000040 (BW/E05; CE/E05; W/E12) X AAI.02: Ability to operate and 1 or monitor the 4.5 following as they apply to the Steam Line Rupture: Steam Line Rupture - Excessive Heat Feedwater isolation. 4.5 Transfer 14 [12] 000054 (CE/E06) Loss of Main X AAI.02: Ability to operate and 1 or monitor the 4.4 Feedwater 1 4 [13] following as they apply to the Loss of Main Feedwater

4.4 (MFW)

Manual startup of electric and steam-driven AFWpumps. 000055 Station Blackout 1 6 [14] 000056 Loss of Off-site Power 1 6 [15] X AA2.67: Ability to determine and interpret the 2.9 following as they apply to the Loss of Offsite Power: 3.1 Seal injection flow (for the RCPs). 000057 Loss of Vital AC Inst. Bus 1 6 [16] X G2.2.22: Knowledge of limiting conditions for 4.0 operations and safety limits. 4.7 000058 Loss of DC Power 1 6 [17] X G2.2.36: Ability to analyze the effect of maintenance 3.1 activities, such as degraded power sources, on the status of limiting conditions for operations. 4.2

= AK3.02: Knowledge of the reasons for the following 000062 Loss of Nuclear Svc Water/4 [18] X responses as they apply to the Loss of Nuclear Service 3.6 Water The automatic actions (alignments) within the 3 9 nuclear service water resulting from the actuation of the ESFAS. AA2.05: Ability to determine and interpret the 000065 Loss of Instrument Air! 8 [19] X following as they apply to the Loss of Instrument Air: When to commence plant shutdown if instrument air 4.1

pressure is decreasing. W!E04 LOCA Outside Containment]3 [201 X EK3.1: Knowledge of the reasons for the following 3.2 responses as they apply to the (LOCA Outside

3.5 Containment)

Facility operating characteristics during transient conditions, including coolant chemistry and the effects of temperature pressure and reactivity changes and operating limitations and reasons for these operating characteristics. EKI.2: Knowledge of the operational implications of W/E1 1 Loss of Emergency Coolant X the following concepts as they apply to the (Loss of 3.6 Recirc. ! 4 [211 Emergency Coolant Recirculation): Normal, abnormal 4.1 and emergency operating procedures associated with

(Loss of Emergency Coolant Recirculation). BW!E04; W/E05 Inadequate Heat Transfer - Loss of Secondary Heat Sink/4 [22]

000077 Generator Voltage and Electric X AK2.06: Knowledge of the interrelations between 3.9 Grid Disturbances ! 6 [23j Generator Voltage and Electric Grid Disturbances 4.0

and the following: Reactor power.

K/A Category Totals: 2 2 2 5 3f4[ Group Point Total: 18 000062 Loss of Nuclear Svc Water/4 [18] AK3.02: Knowledge of the reasons for the following 3.6 X responses as they apply to the Loss of Nuclear Service Water: The automatic actions (alignments) within the 3.9 nuclear service water resulting from the actuation of the ESFAS. 000065 Loss of Instrument Air I 8 [19] X AA2.05: Ability to determine and interpret the 3.4 following as they apply to the Loss of Instrument Air: When to commence plant shutdown if instrument air 4.1 pressure is decreasincr. W/E04 LOCA Outside Containment/3 [20] X EK3.1: Knowledge of the reasons for the following 3.2 responses as they apply to the (LOCA Outside

3.5 Containment)

Facility operating characteristics during transient conditions, including coolant chemistry and the effects of temperature, pressure, and reactivity changes and operating limitations and reasons for these operating characteristics. W/E11 Loss of Emergency Coolant X EK1.2: Knowledge of the operational implications of 3.6 the following concepts as they apply to the (Loss of Recirc. I 4 [21] Emergency Coolant Recirculation): Normal, abnormal 4.1 and emergency operating procedures associated with (Loss of Emercrency Coolant Recirculation). BW/E04; W/E05 Inadequate Heat Transfer - Loss of Secondary Heat Sinkl4 [22] 000077 Generator Voltage and Electric X AK2.06: Knowledge of the interrelations between 3.9 Grid Disturbances I 6 [23] Generator Voltage and Electric Grid Disturbances 4.0 and the following: Reactor power. I//A f"', T. s: 2 2 2 5 3 4 Group Point Total: 18

ES-401 3-RO Form ES-401-2 ES-401 PWR Examination Outline Form ES-401-2 Emergency and Abnormal Plant Evolutions - Tier 1/Group 2 (RO / SRO) E/APE # / Name / Safety Function K K K A A G K/A Topic(s) IR 12312 000001 Continuous Rod Withdrawal/i [1] X AK2.08: Knowledge of the interrelations 3.1 between the Continuous Rod Withdrawal and 3.0 the following: Individual rod display lights and indications. 000003 Dropped Control Rod / 1 [2] 000005 Inoperable/Stuck Control Rod / 1 [3] X AK3.01: Knowledge of the reasons for the 4.0 following responses as they apply to the 4.3 Inoperable / Stuck Control Rod: Boration and emergency boration in the event of a stuck rod during trip or normal evolutions. 000024 Emergency Boration / 1 [41 000028 Pressurizer Level Malfunction / 2 [5] X G2.4.4: Ability to recognize abnormal 4.5 indications for system operating parameters 4.7 that are entry-level conditions for emergency abnormal operating procedures. 000032 Loss of Source Range NI / 7 [6] X AK1.01: Knowledge of the operational 2.5 implications of the following concepts as they 3.1 apply to Loss of Source Range Nuclear Instrumentation: Effects of voltage changes on performance. 000033 Loss of Intermediate Range NI / 7 [7]

000036 (BW/A08) Fuel Handling Accident / 8 [ 8] 000037 Steam Generator Tube Leak / 3 [9] X AA1.06: Ability to operate and! or monitor 3.8 the following as they apply to the Steam 3.9 Generator Tube Leak: Main steam line rad monitor meters. 000051 LossofCondenserVacuum/4 [10]

000059 Accidental Liquid RadWaste Rel. / 9 [ii] 000060 Accidental Gaseous Radwaste Rel. / 9 [12] 000061 ARM System Alarms / 7 [13]

000067 Plant Fire On-site / 8 [14]

000068 (BW/A06) Control Room Evac. / 8 [15] X AA2.05: Ability to determine and interpret 4.2 the following as they apply to the Control 4.3 Room Evacuation: Availability of heat sink. 000069 (W/E1 4) Loss of CTMT Integrity! 5 [16] X AK1.0l: Knowledge of the operational 2.6 implications of the following concepts as they 3.1 apply to Loss of Contaimnent Integrity: Effect of pressure on leak rate. 000074 (W/E06&E07) Inad. Core Cooling / 4 [17]

000076 High Reactor Coolant Activity / 9 [18]

W/EO1 & E02 Rediagnosis & SI Termination / 3 [19]

EK2.2: Knowledge of the interrelations W/E1 3 Steam Generator Over-pressure / 4 [20] X between the (Steam Generator Overpressure) 3.0 and the following: Facilitys heat removal systems, including primary coolant, emergency coolant, the decay heat removal systems, and relations between the proper operation of these systems to the operation of the facility.

ES-401 3-RO Form ES-401-2 ES-401 PWR Examination Outline Form ES-401-2 Emergency and Abnormal Plant Evolutions - Tier 1/Group 2 (RO / SRO) E/APE # / Name / Safety Function K K K A A G KIA Topic(s) IR 1 2 3 1 2 000001 Continuous Rod Withdrawal / 1 [1] X AK2.08: Knowledge of the interrelations 3.1 between the Continuous Rod Withdrawal and 3.0 the following: Individual rod display lights and indications. 000003 Dropped Control Rod / 1 [2] 000005 Inoperable/Stuck Control Rod / 1 [3] X AK3.01: Knowledge of the reasons for the 4.0 following responses as they apply to the 4.3 Inoperable I Stuck Control Rod: Boration and emergency boration in the event of a stuck rod during trip or normal evolutions. 000024 Emergency Boration / 1 [4] 000028 Pressurizer Level Malfunction /2 [5] X G2.4.4: Ability to recognize abnormal 4.5 indications for system operating parameters 4.7 that are entry-level conditions for emergency and abnormal operating procedures. 000032 Loss of Source Range NI/7 [6] X AK1.0l: Knowledge of the operational 2.5 implications of the following concepts as they 3.1 apply to Loss of Source Range Nuclear Instrumentation: Effects of voltage changes on performance. 000033 Loss of Intermediate Range NI /7 [7] 000036 (BW/A08) Fuel Handling Accident /8 [8] 000037 Steam Generator Tube Leak / 3 [9] X AA1.06: Ability to operate and I or monitor 3.8 the following as they apply to the Steam 3.9 Generator Tube Leak: Main steam line rad monitor meters. 000051 Loss of Condenser Vacuum /4 [10] 000059 Accidental Liquid RadWaste ReI. 19 [11] 000060 Accidental Gaseous Radwaste ReI. / 9 [12] 000061 ARM System Alarms / 7 [13] 000067 Plant Fire On-site / 8 [14] 000068 (BW/A06) Control Room Evac. /8[15] X AA2.05: Ability to determine and interpret 4.2 the following as they apply to the Control 4.3 Room Evacuation: Availability of heat sink. 000069 (W/E14) Loss of CTMT Integrity 15 [16] X AK1.0l: Knowledge of the operational 2.6 implications of the following concepts as they 3.1 apply to Loss of Containment Integrity: Effect of pressure on leak rate. 000074 (W/E06&E07) Inad. Core Cooling 14 [17] 000076 High Reactor Coolant Activity 19 [18] W/E01 & E02 Rediagnosis & SI Termination 13 [19] W/E13 Steam Generator Over-pressure / 4 [20] X EK2.2: Knowledge of the interrelations 3.0 between the (Steam Generator Overpressure) and the following: Facility's heat removal 3.2 systems, including primary coolant, emergency coolant, the decay heat removal systems, and relations between the proper operation of these systems to the operation of the facility.

W/E15 Containment Flooding/5 [21] X G2.2.38: Knowledge of conditions and 3.6 limitations in the facility license. 4.5 W!E1 6 High Containment Radiation / 9 [22] BW/AO1 Plant Runback I 1 [23] BW/A02&A03 Loss of NN-XJY /7 [24]

BW/A04 Turbine Trip! 4 [25]

BW/A05 Emergency Diesel Actuation / 6 [26] BW/A07 Flooding / 8 [27)

BW/E03 Inadequate Subcooling Margin /4 [28]

BWIEO8; W/E03 LOCA Cooldown - Depress. /4 [29)

BWIEO9; CE/Al 3; W/E09&ElO Natural Circ. /4 [30] 8W/El 3&E14 EQP Rules and Enclosures [31] CE/All; W/E08 RCS Overcooling - PTS I 4 [32] CE/A16 Excess RCS Leakage/2 [33] CE/E09 Functional Recovery [34] K/A Category Point Totals 2 2 1 1 I I I 2 Group Point Total 9 W/E15 Containment Flooding I 5 [21] X G2.2.38: Knowledge of conditions and 3.6 limitations in the facility license. 4.5 W/E16 High Containment Radiation I 9 [22] BW/A01 Plant Runback 11 [23] BW/A02&A03 Loss of NNI-X/Y I 7 [24] BW/A04 Turbine Trip I 4 [25] BW/A05 Emergency Diesel Actuation I 6 [26] BW/A07 Flooding I 8 [27] BW/E03 Inadequate Subcooling Margin I 4 [28] BW/E08; W/E03 LOCA Cool down - Depress. 14[29] BW/E09; CE/A13; W/E09&E10 Natural Circ. I 4 [30] BW/E13&E14 EOP Rules and Enclosures [31] CEI A 11; W IE08 RCS Overcooling - PTS I 4 [32] CEI A 16 Excess RCS Leakage I 2 [33] CE/E09 Functional Recovery [34] Point Totals: 2 2 1 1 1 2 Group Point Total: 9

ES-401 4 - RO Form ES-401-2 ES-401 PWR Examination Outline Form ES-401-2

Plant Systems - Tier 2/Group 1 (RO I SRO)

System #1 Name K K K K K K A A A A G K/A Topic(s) IR 1 234561234 003 Reactor Coolant Pump [1] X K6.04: Knowledge of the effect of a loss or 2.8 malfunction on the following will have on 3.1 the RCPS: Containment isolation valves

affecting RCP operation.

004 Chemical and Volume X Al.05: Ability to predict and/or monitor 2.9 Control [2] changes in parameters (to prevent 3.2 exceeding design limits) associated with operating the CVCS controls including: SIG pressure and level. 005 Residual Heat Removal [3] X Kl.06: Knowledge of the physical 3.5 connections and/or cause-effect 3.6 relationships between the RIIRS and the following systems: ECCS. 006 Emergency Core Cooling [4] X K2 01 Knowledge of bus power supplies 3 6

to the following ECCS pumps 39 007 Pressurizer Relief/Quench X K4.01: Knowledge of PRTS design 2.6 Tank [5] feature(s) and/or interlock(s) which 2.9 provide for the following: Quench tank g

008 Component Cooling Water [6] X A4.05: Ability to manually operate and/or 2.7 monitor in the control room: Normal 2.5 CCW-header total flow rate and the flow rates to the components cooled by the CCWS. 010 Pressurizer Pressure Control X K5.01: Knowledge of the operational 3.5 [7) implications of the following concepts as 4.0 they apply to the PZR PCS Determination of condition of fluid in PZR using steam tables. 012 Reactor Protection[8] X K6.01: Knowledge of the effect of a loss or 2.8 malfunction of the following will have on 3.3 the RPS: Bistables and bistable test equipment. 013 Engineered Safety Features X G2.2.38: Knowledge of conditions and 3.6 Actuation [9]

limitations in the fadllity license. 4.5 022 Containment Cooling [10] X A3.01: Ability to monitor automatic 4.1 operation of the CCS, including: Initiation 4.3 of safeguards_mode_of operation. 025 Ice Condenser [11]

REJECTED

Al.01: Ability to predict and/or monitor 026 Containment Spray [12) X changes in parameters (to prevent 3.9 exceeding design limits) associated with 4.2 operating the CSS controls including Containment pressure. 039 Main and Reheat Steam [13] X G2 420 Knowledge of the operational 3 8 implications of EOP warnings, cautions, 4.3 and notes. ES-401 4-RO Form ES-401-2 ES-401 PWR Examination Outline Form ES-401-2 Plant S stems - Tier 2/Group 1 (RO / SRO) System # / Name K K K K K K A A A A G KIA Topic(s) IR 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 003 Reactor Coolant Pump [1] X K6.04: Knowledge of the effect of a loss or 2.8 malfunction on the following will have on 3.1 the RCPS: Containment isolation valves affecting RCP operation. 004 Chemical and Volume X Al.OS: Ability to predict and/or monitor 2.9 Control [2] changes in parameters (to prevent 3.2 exceeding design limits) associated with operating the CVCS controls including: S/O pressure and level. 005 Residual Heat Removal [3] X KI.06: Knowledge of the physical 3.5 connections and/or cause-effect 3.6 relationships between the RHRS and the following systems: ECCS. 006 Emergency Core Cooling [4] X K2.0I: Knowledge of bus power supplies 3.6 to the following: ECCS pumps. 3.9 007 Pressurizer Relief/Quench X K4.0I: Knowledge ofPRTS design 2.6 Tank [5] feature(s) and/or interIock(s) which 2.9 provide for the following: Quench tank coolincr. 008 Component Cooling Water [6] X A4.0S: Ability to manually operate and/or 2.7 monitor in the control room: Normal 2.5 CCW-header total flow rate and the flow rates to the components cooled by the CCWS. 010 Pressurizer Pressure Control X KS.OI: Knowledge ofthe operational 3.5 [7] implications of the following concepts as 4.0 they apply to the PZR PCS: Determination of condition of fluid in PZR, using steam tables. 012 Reactor Protection[8] X K6.0I: Knowledge of the effect of a loss or 2.8 malfunction of the following will have on 3.3 the RPS: Bistables and bistable test equipment. 013 Engineered Safety Features X 02.2.38: Knowledge of conditions and 3.6 Actuation [9] limitations in the facility Iicense_ 4.5 022 Containment Cooling [10] X A3.0I: Ability to monitor automatic 4.1 operation of the CCS, including: Initiation 4.3 of safeguards mode of operation. 025 Ice Condenser [11] REJECTED 026 Containment Spray [12] Al.OI: Ability to predict and/or monitor X changes in parameters (to prevent 3.9 \\ exceeding design limits) associated with 4.2 operating the CSS controls including: Containment pressure. 039 Main and Reheat Steam [13] X 02.4.20: Knowledge of the operational 3.8 implications of EOP warnings, cautions, 4.3 and notes.

059 Main Feedwater [14] X A2.0S: Ability to (a) predict the impacts 3.1 of the following malfunctions or 3.4 operations on the MFW; and (b) based on those predictions, use procedures to correct, control, or mitigate the consequences of those malfunctions or operations: Rupture in the MFW suction or discharcre line. 061 Auxiliary/Emergency X A3.01: Ability to monitor automatic 4.2 Feedwater [15] operation of the AFW, including: AFW 4.2 startup and flows. 062 AC Electrical Distribution [16] X K2.01: Knowledge of bus power supplies 3.3 to the following: Major system loads. 3.4 063 DC Electrical Distribution [17] X K3.02: Knowledge of the effect that a loss or malfunction of the De electrical 3.5 system will have on the following: 3.7 Components usincr DC control power. 064 Emergency Diesel Generator X 02.1.7: Ability to evaluate plant 4.4 [18] performance and make operational 4.7 judgments based on operating characteristics, reactor behavior, and instrument interpretation. 073 Process Radiation X A4.01: Ability to manually operate and/or 3.9 Monitoring [19] monitor in the control room: Effluent 3.9 2r_ .........~.;.~.;.'- lU 201 .iI '.'1>.. I'*.**** I; IC. ~ r,,; I~,: I*.i fi~ i::';ij ~H y 1,"';;;:' yl.v~!'l'Vater: ./. I;l; iK4:! !~1"~ I~;; I, I~ }"I:\\:;'; '.!!'~ I:!; .: ea I;]~ )i:[?

i~f~:

Ii i/:*;. 1:/ I?'ii iOI?~~!~~.'.~::: I"t.... ), ';CI"": ! *.*.* ; I* .! I; Ii .iso!atidnvitl i< 078 Instrument Air [21] X K1.03: Knowledge ofthe physical 3.3 connections and/or cause-effect 3.4 relationships between the lAS and the following systems: Containment air. 103 Containment [22] K3.01: Knowledge of the effect that a loss 3.3 X or malfunction of the contaiument system will have on the following: Loss of 3.7 containment integrity under shutdown conditions. 004 Chemical and Volume X K3.08: Knowledge of the effect that a loss 3.6 Control [23] or malfunction of the eves will have on 3.8 the following: RCP seal injection. 007 Pressurizer Relief/Quench l...xv . /1. /.Oz. 3.1 v' KS.02: Knowledge of the operational Tank [24] implications of the following concepts as 3.4 the apply to PRTS: Method of forming a steam bubble in the PZR. Kl.Ol: Knowledge of the physical 3.1 039 Main and Reheat Steam [25] X connections and/or cause-effect relationships between the MRSS and the 3.2 following systems: S/O. 062 AC Electrical Distribution [26] X A3.0S: Ability to monitor automatic 3.5 operation of the ac distribution system,

3.6 including

Safety-related indicators and controls. 039 Main and Reheat Steam [27] X K3.06: Knowledge of the effect that a loss 2.8 or malfunction of the MRSS will have on 3.1 the following: SDS.

026 Containment Spray [28] X A2.04 Ability to (a) predict the impacts of 3.9 the following malfunctions or operations 4.2 on the CSS; and (b) based on those predictions, use procedures to correct, control, or mitigate the consequences of those malfunctions or operations: Failure of spray. 064 Emergency Diesel Generator X K6 07 Knowledge of the effect of a loss or 27 [29] malfunction of the following will have on 29 the EDIG system: Air receivers. E Z:Tr: [ K/A Category Point Totals 3 3 3 2 2 3 2 2 3 2 3 Group Point Total 28 026 Containment Spray [28] X A2.04 Ability to (a) predict the impacts of 3.9 the following malfunctions or operations 4.2 on the CSS; and (b) based on those predictions, use procedures to correct, control, or mitigate the consequences of those malfunctions or operations: Failure of spray. 064 Emergency Diesel Generator X K6.07 Knowledge of the effect of a loss or 2.7 [29] malfunction of the following will have on 2.9 the ED/G system: Air receivers. KIA Category Point Totals: 3 3 3 2 2 3 2 2 3 2 3 Group Point Total: 28

ES-401 5 - RO Form ES-401-2 ES-401 PWR Examination Outline Form ES-401-2

Plant Systems - ller2/Grou.22 (RO / SRO)

System #1 Name K K K K K K A A A A G K/A Topic(s) IR 1234561234 001 Control Rod Drive [1]

002 Reactor Coolant [2] X K6.07: Knowledge of the effect or a loss or 2.5 malfunction on the following RCS

2.8 components

Pumps.

01 1 Pressurizer Level Control [3] 014 Rod Position Indication [4] X KI.01: Knowledge of the physical 3.2 connections and/or cause-effect relationships 3.6 between the RPIS and the following systems: CRDS. 015 Nuclear Instrumentation [5] X K4.01: Knowledge of NIS design feature(s) 3,1 and/or interlock(s) provide for the following: 3.3 Source-Range detector power shutoff at high powers.

016 Non-nuclear Instrumentation [6]

017 In-core Temperature Monitor X K3.01: Knowledge of the effect that a loss or 3.5 [7] malfunction of the ITM system will have on 3.7 the following: Natural circulation indications. 027 Containment Iodine Removal X K1.01: Knowledge of the physical 3.4 [8] connections and/or cause-effect relationships 3.7 between the CIRS and the following systems: cSS. 028 Hydrogen Recombiner and Purge Control [9]

029 Containment Purge [10]

033 Spent Fuel Pool Cooling [11]

034 Fuel Handling Equipment [12] X A4 02 Ability to manually operate and/or 35 monitor in the control room: Neutron levels. 3.9 035 Steam Generator [13] X A2.06: Ability to (a) predict the impacts of 4.5 the following malfunctions or operations on 4.6 the GS; and (b) based on those predictions, use procedures to correct, control, or mitigate the consequences of those malfunctions or operations: Small break LOCA. 041 Steam Dump/Turbine X A4.06: Ability to manually operate and/or 2.9 Bypass Control [14] monitor in the control room: Atmospheric 3.1 relief valve controllers. K1.18: Knowledge of the physical 045 Main Turbine Generator [15] X connections and/or cause-effect relationships 36 between the MT/G system and the following systems:_RPS. 055 Condenser Air Removal [16] 056 Condensate [17] 068 Liquid Radwaste [18]

ES-401 5-RO Form ES-401-2 ES-401 PWR Examination Outline Form ES 'A A Plant S stems - Tier 2IGroup 2 (RO / SRO) System # / Name K K K K K K A A A A G KIA Topic(s) IR 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 001 Control Rod Drive [1] 002 Reactor Coolant [2] X K6.07: Knowledge of the effect or a loss or 2.5 malfunction on the following RCS

2.8 components

Pumps. 011 Pressurizer Level Control [3] 014 Rod Position Indication [4] X Kl.Ol: Knowledge of the physical 3.2 connections and/or cause-effect relationships 3.6 between the RPIS and the following systems: CRDS. 015 Nuclear Instrumentation [5] X K4.01: Knowledge of NIS design feature(s) 3.1 and/or interlock(s) provide for the following: 3.3 Source-Range detector power shutoff at high powers. 016 Non-nuclear Instrumentation [6] 017 In-core Temperature Monitor X K3.01: Knowledge of the effect that a loss or 3.5 [7] malfunction of the ITM system will have on 3.7 the following: Natural circulation indications. 027 Containment Iodine Removal X Kl.0l: Knowledge of the physical 3.4 [8] connections and/or cause-effect relationships 3.7 between the CIRS and the following systems: CSS. 028 Hydrogen Recombiner and Purge Control [9] 029 Containment Purge [101 033 Spent Fuel Pool Cooling [111 034 Fuel Handling Equipment [12] X A4.02: Ability to manually operate and/or 3.5 monitor in the control room: Neutron levels. 3.9 035 Steam Generator [13] X A2.06: Ability to (a) predict the impacts of 4.5 the following malfunctions or operations on 4.6 the GS; and (b) based on those predictions, use procedures to correct, control, or mitigate the consequences of those malfunctions or operations: Small break LOCA. 041 Steam DumplTurbine X A4.06: Ability to manually operate and/or 2.9 Bypass Control [14] monitor in the control room: Atmospheric 3.1 relief valve controllers. Kl.18: Knowledge of the physical 3.6 045 Main Turbine Generator [15] X connections and/or cause-effect relationships between the MT/G system and the following

3.7 systems

RPS. 055 Condenser Air Removal [16] 056 Condensate [17] 068 Liquid Radwaste [18]

071 Waste Gas Disposal [19] 072 Area Radiation Monitoring [20] 075 Circulating Water [211 X K2.03: Knowledge of bus power supplies to 2.6 the following: Emergency/essential SWS 2.7 pumps. 079 Station Air [22] 086 Fire Protection [23] K/A Category Point Totals: 3 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 2 Group Point Total: 10 071 Waste Gas Disposal [191 072 Area Radiation Monitoring [20] 075 Circulating Water [21] X K2.03: Knowledge of bus power supplies to 2.6 the following: Emergency/essential SWS 2.7 pumps. 079 Station Air [22] II 086 Fire Protection [23] KIA Category Point Totals: 3 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 2 Group Point Total: 10

Generic Knowledge and Abilities Outline (Tier 3) - RO Facility: Date of Exam: Category K/A # Topic RO SRO-Only IR IR 2.1.26 Knowledge of industrial safety procedures (such as rotating 3.4 X equipment, electrical, high temperature, high pressure, 1. caustic, chlorine, oxygen and hydrogen). Conduct of Operations 2.1.28 Knowledge of the purpose and function of major system 4.1 X components and controls. 2.1. 2.1. 2.1. Subtotal 2.2.6 Knowledge of the process for making changes to 3.0 X procedures. 2. 2.2.40 Ability to apply Technical Specifications for a system. 3.4 X Equipment 2.2. Control 2.2. 2.2. Subtotal 2.3.4 Knowledge of radiation exposure limits under normal or 3.2 X emergency conditions. 3 2.3.13 Knowledge of radiological safety procedures pertaining to 3.4 X Radiation licensed operator duties, such as response to radiation Control monitor alarms, containment entry requirements, fuel handling responsibilities, access to locked high-radiation areas, aligning filters, etc. 2.3.7 Ability to comply with radiation work permit requirements 3.5 X during normal or abnormal conditions. 2.3. 2.3. Subtotal 2 4 16 Knowledge of EOP implementation hierarchy and 5 coordination with other support procedures or guidelines 4 such as, operating procedures, abnormal operating Erner enc procedures, and severe accident management guidelines. Procedures / 2 4 22 Knowledge of the bases for prioritizing safety functions 3 6 Plan during abnormal/emergency operations. 2.4.23 Knowledge of the bases for prioritizing emergency 3.4 procedure implementation during emergency operations. 2.4. 2.4. Subtotal Tier 3 Point Total 10 ES-401 Form ES-401-3 ES-401 Generic Knowledge and Abilities Outline (Tier 3) - RO Form ES-401-3 Facility: Date of Exam: Category KIA # Topic RO SRO-Only IR IR 2.1.26 Knowledge of industrial safety procedures (such as rotating 3.4 X equipment, electrical, high temperature, high pressure,

1.

caustic, chlorine, oxygen and hydrogen). Conduct 2.1.28 Knowledge of the purpose and function of major system 4.1 X of Operations components and controls. 2.1. 2.1. 2.1. Subtotal 2.2.6 Knowledge of the process for making changes to 3.0 X procedures.

2.

2.2.40 Ability to apply Technical Specifications for a system. 3.4 X Equipment 2.2. Control 2.2. 2.2. Subtotal 2.3.4 Knowledge of radiation exposure limits under normal or 3.2 X emergency conditions.

3.

2.3.13 Knowledge of radiological safety procedures pertaining to 3.4 X Radiation licensed operator duties, such as response to radiation Control monitor alarms, containment entry requirements, fuel handling responsibilities, access to locked high-radiation areas, aligning filters, etc. 2.3.7 Ability to comply with radiation work permit requirements 3.5 X during normal or abnormal conditions. 2.3. 2.3. Subtotal 2.4.16 Knowledge of EOP implementation hierarchy and 3.5 X coordination with other support procedures or guidelines

4.

such as, operating procedures, abnormal operating Emergency procedures, and severe accident management guidelines. Procedures / 2.4.22 Knowledge of the bases for prioritizing safety functions 3.6 X Plan during abnormal/emergency operations. 2.4.23 Knowledge of the bases for prioritizing emergency 3.4 X procedure implementation during emergency operations. 2.4. 2.4. Subtotal Tier 3 Point Total 10

ES-401 Record of Rejected K/As Form ES-401 -4 Tier I Group Randomly Selected Reason for Rejection K/A 1/1 000029.G2.3. 13 Cannot write a quality question concerning radiological actions for an ATWS event. (Replaced with G2.1.28) 1/1 000057.G2.1.41 Does not meet NUREG 1021, ES-401, D.1.b guidelines. (Replaced with G2.2.22) 1/2 000028.G2.4.39 Does not meet NUREG 1021, ES-401, D.1.b guidelines. (Replaced with 2.4.4) 1/2 W/E 15. G2.2.22 RNP has no LCO actions for Containment Sump high level addressed in Technical Specifications. (Replaced with G2.2.38) 2/1 026.A1.04 RNP does not have the capability to monitor Containment Humidity remotely. (Replaced with A1.01) 2/1 059.A2.07 RNP does not have Turbine Driven Feed Pumps. (Replaced with A2.05) 2/1 061.A3.04 RNP does not have automatic isolation features for AFW to the S/Gs. (Replaced with A3.01) 2/2 014.K2.02 RNP does not correct the NIS for power. RPI is an independent system which is temperature corrected only. (Replaced with K1.01) 2/1 076.K4.03 RN? does not have any automatic isolations for the CCW heat exchangers. (Replaced with) ES-401 Record of Rejected KI As Form ES-401-4 Tier / Group Randomly Selected Reason for Rejection KIA III 000029.02.3.13 Cannot write a quality question concerning radiological actions for an ATWS event. (Replaced with 02.1.28) 111 0000S7.02.1.41 Does not meet NUREO 1021, ES-401, D.1.b guidelines. (Replaced with 02.2.22) 112 000028.02.4.39 Does not meet NUREO 1021, ES-401, D.1.b guidelines. (Replaced with 2.4.4) 112 WIE IS. 02.2.22 RNP has no LCO actions for Containment Sump high level addressed in Technical Specifications. (Replaced with 02.2.38) 211 026.A1.04 RNP does not have the capability to monitor Containment Humidity remotely. (Replaced with A1.01) 2/1 OS9.A2.07 RNP does not have Turbine Driven Feed Pumps. (Replaced with A2.0S) 211 061.A3.04 RNP does not have automatic isolation features for AFW to the S/Os. (Replaced with A3.01) 2/2 014.K2.02 RNP does not correct the NIS for power. RPI is an independent system which is temperature corrected only. (Replaced with Kl.OI) 2/1 076.K4.03 RNP does not have any automatic isolations for the CCW heat exchangers. (Replaced with)

111-------+------+--------111

ES-401 PWR Examination Outline - SRO Form ES-401-2 Facility: Date of Exam:

SAC-Only_Points Tier Group KKKKKKAAIAAG A2 G* Total 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2134 Total 1. 1

18 3 3 6 Emergency & Abnormal 2

N/A

N/A

9 2 2 4 Plant Evolutions Tier Totals 27 5 5 10 1 28 2 3 5 2. Plant 2

10 0 3 3 Systems Tier Totals 38 2 6 8

3. Generic Knowledge and Abilities 1

2 3 4 10 1 2 3 4 7 Categories 1 3 0 3 Note: 1. Ensure that at least two topics from every applicable K/A category are sampled within each tier of the AC and SRO-only outlines (i.e., except for one category in Tier 3 of the SRO-only outline, the Tier Totals in each K/A category shall not be less than two). 2. The point total for each group and tier in the proposed outline must match that specified in the table. The final point total for each group and tier may deviate by +/-1 from that specified in the table based on NRC revisions. The final AC exam must total 75 points and the SAC-only exam must total 25 points. 3. Systems/evolutions within each group are identified on the associated outline; systems or evolutions that do not apply at the facility should be deleted and justified; operationally important, site-specific systems/evolutions that are not included on the outline should be added. Refer to Section D.1.b of ES-401 for guidance regarding the elimination of inappropriate K/A statements. 4. Select topics from as many systems and evolutions as possible; sample every system or evolution in the group before selecting a second topic for any system or evolution. 5. Absent a plant-specific priority, only those K/As having an importance rating (IR) of 2.5 or higher shall be selected. Use the RO and SRC ratings for the RC and SRC-only portions, respectively. 6. Select SRC topics for Tiers 1 and 2 from the shaded systems and K/A categories. 7* The generic (G) K/As in Tiers 1 and 2 shall be selected from Section 2 of the K/A Catalog, but the topics must be relevant to the applicable evolution or system. Refer to Section D.1.b of ES-401 for the applicable K/As. 8. Cn the following pages, enter the K/A numbers, a brief description of each topic, the topics importance ratings (IRs) for the applicable license level, and the point totals (#) for each system and category. Enter the group and tier totals for each category in the table above; if fuel handling equipment is sampled in other than Category A2 or G* on the SRC-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 AC and SAC-only exams. 9. For Tier 3, select topics from Section 2 of the K/A catalog, and enter the K/A numbers, descriptions, IRs, and point totals (#) on Form ES-401 -3. Limit SAC selections to K/As that are linked to 10 CFR 55.43. ES-401 PWR Examination Outline - SRO 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 18 3 3 6 Emergency & Abnormal 2 N/A N/A 9 2 2 4 Plant Evolutions Tier Totals 27 5 5 10 1 28 2 3 5

2.

Plant 2 10 0 3 3 Systems Tier Totals 38 2 6 8

3. Generic Knowledge and Abilities 1

2 3 4 10 1 2 3 4 7 Categories 1 3 0 3 Note:

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.

Systems/evolutions within each group are identified on the associated outline; systems or evolutions that do not apply at the facility should be deleted and justified; operationally important, site-specific systems/evolutions that are not included on the outline should be added. Refer to Section D.1.b of ES-401 for guidance regarding the elimination of inappropriate 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 KlAs having an importance rating (IR) of 2.5 or higher shall be selected. Use the RO and SRO ratings for the RO and SRO-only portions, respectively.

6.

Select SRO topics for Tiers 1 and 2 from the shaded systems and KIA categories. 7.* The generic (G) KlAs 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. Refer to Section D.1.b of ES-401 for the applicable KlAs.

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; if fuel handling equipment is sampled in other than Category A2 or G* on the SRO-only exam, enter it on the left side of Column A2 for Tier 2, Group 2 (Note #1 does not apply). Use duplicate pages for RO and SRO-only exams.

9.

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

ES-401 2-SRO Form ES-401-2 ES-401 PWR Examination Outline Form ES-401-2 Emergency and Abnormal Plant Evolutions - Tier 1/Group 1 (RO / SRO)

E/APE #1 Name / Safety Function K K K A A G K/A Topic(s) IR 1 2312 000007 (BW/E02&Ei 0; CE/E02) Reactor Trip - Stabilization - Recovery/i [1]

G2.4. 11: Knowledge of abnormal condition 000008 Pressurizer Vapor Space x procedures. 4.0 Accident/3 [2]

(CFR:41.10/43.5/45.13) 4.2 000009 Small Break LOCA /3 [3]

000011 Large Break LOCA / 3 [4]

000015/17 RCP Malfunctions/4 [5]

000022 Loss of Rx Coolant Makeup / 2 [6] X AA2.03: Ability to determine and interpret the 3.1 following as they apply to the Loss of Reactor Coolant

3.6 Makeup

Failures of flow control valve or controller (CFR:_43.5! 45.13) 000025 Loss of RHR System / 4 [7] X AA2.07: Ability to determine and interpret the 3.4 following as they apply to the Loss of Residual Heat 3.7

Removal System: Pump Cavitation. (CFR 43.5/45.13)

G2.2.38: Knowledge of conditions and limitations in 000026 Loss of Component Cooling X the facility license. (CFR: 41.7/41.10/43.1/45.13) 3.6 Water!8 [8]

4.5 000027 Pressurizer Pressure Control System Malfunction / 3 [9]

000029ATWS!i [10]

000038 Steam Gen. Tube Rupture /3 [11

000040 (BW/E05; CE/E05; W!Ei2) Steam Line Rupture - Excessive Heat Transfer / 4 [12]

000054 (CE/E06) Loss of Main Feedwater/4 [13]

EA2.01: Ability to determine or interpret the 000055 Station Blackout! 6 [14] X following as they apply to a Station Blackout: Existing valve positioning on a loss of instrument air system. 37 (CFR: 43.5 / 45.13) 000056 Loss of Off-site Power / 6 [15]

000057 Loss of Vital AC Inst. Bus! 6 [16]

2.1.32: Ability to explain and apply system limits and 000058 Loss of DC Power! 6 [17] X precautions. (CFR: 41.10/45.5 /45.12/45.13) 000062 Loss of Nuclear Svc Water!4 [18]

000065 Loss of Instrument Air! 8 [19]

W/E04 LOCA Outside Containmentl3 [20]

W!Ei 1 Loss of Emergency Coolant Recirc. /4 [21]

BW!E04; W!E05 Inadequate Heat Transfer - Loss of Secondary Heat Sink!4 [22]

000077 Generator Voltage and Electric Grid Disturbances! 6 [23]

K/A Category Totals: [ = = = 3 3 Group Point Total: 6 ES-401 2-SRO Form ES-401-2 ES-401 PWR Examination Outline Form ES_1n1_'J Emergenc and Abnormal Plant Evolutions - Tier 1/Group 1 (RO I SRO) E/APE # I Name I Safety Function K K K A A G KIA Topic(s) IR 1 2 3 1 2 000007 (BW/E02&E10; CElE02) Reactor Trip - Stabilization - Recovery 11 [1] 000008 Pressurizer Vapor Space X G2.4.11: Knowledge of abnormal condition 4.0 procedures. Accident I 3 [2] (CFR: 41.10/43.5/45.13) 4.2 000009 Small Break LOCA I 3 [3] 000011 LarQe Break LOCA I 3 [41 000015/17 RCP Malfunctions I 4 [5] 000022 Loss of Rx Coolant Makeup I 2 [6] X AA2.03: Ability to determine and interpret the 3.1 following as they apply to the Loss of Reactor Coolant

3.6 Makeup

Failures of flow control valve or controller (CFR: 43.5/45.13) 000025 Loss of RHR System I 4 [7] X AA2.07: Ability to determine and interpret the 3.4 following as they apply to the Loss of Residual Heat 3.7 Removal System: Pump Cavitation. (CFR 43.5/45.13) 000026 Loss of Component Cooling X G2.2.38: Knowledge of conditions and limitations in 3.6 Water I 8 [8] the facility license. (CPR: 41.7/41.10/43.1/45.13) 4.5 000027 Pressurizer Pressure Control System Malfunction I 3 [9] 000029 A TWS I 1 [10] 000038 Steam Gen. Tube Rupture 13 [11 ] 000040 (BW/E05; CE/E05; W/E12) Steam Line Rupture - Excessive Heat Transfer I 4 [121 000054 (CE/E06) Loss of Main Feedwater I 4 [131 000055 Station Blackout I 6 [14] X EA2.01: Ability to determine or interpret the 3.4 following as they apply to a Station Blackout: Existing valve positioning on a loss of instrument air system. 3.7 (CFR: 43.5/45.13) 000056 Loss of Off-site Power I 6 [15] 000057 Loss of Vital AC Inst. Bus I 6 [16] 000058 Loss of DC Power I 6 [17] X 2.1.32: Ability to explain and apply system limits and 3.8 precautions. (CPR: 41.10/45.5/45.12/45.13) 4.0 000062 Loss of Nuclear Svc Water/4 [181 000065 Loss of Instrument Air I 8 [19] W/E04 LOCA Outside Containmentl3 [20] W/E11 Loss of Emergency Coolant Recirc. I 4 [21] BW/E04; W/E05 Inadequate Heat Transfer - Loss of Secondary Heat Sinkl4 [22] 000077 Generator Voltage and Electric Grid Disturbances I 6 [23] II KIA Category Totals: 3 3 Group Point Total: 6

ES-401 3 - SRO Form ES-401-2 ES-401 PWR Examination Outline Form ES-401-2 Emergency and Abnormal Plant Evolutions - Tier 1/Group 2 (RO / SRO) E/APE#/Name/SafetyFunction K K K A A G K!ATopic(s) IR 1 2312 000001 Continuous Rod Withdrawal! 1 [1]

000003 Dropped Control Rod! 1 12] 000005 Inoperable/Stuck Control Rod! 1 [3]

000024 Emergency Boration! 1 [4] X AA2.02: Ability to determine and interpret the following as they apply to the Emergency Boration: When use of manual boration valve is needed. (CFR: 43.5 /45.13) 000028 Pressurizer Level Malfunction / 2 [5] 000032 Loss of Source Range NI !7 [6] 000033 Loss of Intermediate Range NI /7 [7] AA2.10: Ability to determine and interpret 3.1 the following as they apply to the Loss of 3 8 Intermediate Range Nuclear Instrumentation: Tech-Spec limits if both intermediate range channels_have_failed._(CFR:_43.5_/_45.13) 000036 (BW/A08) Fuel Handling Accident! 8 [ 8] 000037 Steam Generator Tube Leak /3 [9] 000051 Loss of Condenser Vacuum! 4 [10]

000059 Accidental Liquid RadWaste Rel. /9 [11] G2.4.4:Ability to recognize abnormal indications for system operating parameters that are entry-level conditions for emergency and abnormal operating procedures. (CFR: 41.10/43.2/45.6)

000060 Accidental Gaseous Radwaste Rel. /9 [12] 000061 ARM System Alarms /7 [13] 000067 Plant Fire On-site! 8 114] 000068 (BW!A06) Control Room Evac. /8 [15] 000069 (W!E14) Loss of CTMT Integrity! 5 [16] 000074 (W!E06&E07) Inad. Core Cooling! 4 [17] G2.2.42: Ability to recognize system* parameters that are entry-level conditions for 4 6 Technical Specifications. (CFR: 41.7/41.10/43.2/43.3/45.3) 000076 High Reactor Coolant Activity! 9 [18]

W/EO1 & E02 Rediagnosis & SI Termination! 3 [19] W/E1 3 Steam Generator Over-pressure / 4 [20] W/E1 5 Containment Flooding /5 [21] W!E1 6 High Containment Radiation / 9 [22] K/A Category Point Totals: [ = = = I 2 I 2 I Group Point Total: 4 ES-401 3-SRO Form ES-401-2 ES-401 PWR Examination Outline Form ES-401-2 Emergency and Abnormal Plant Evolutions - Tier 1/Group 2 (RO / SRO) E/APE # / Name / Safety Function K K K A A G KIA Topic(s) IR 1 2 3 1 2 000001 Continuous Rod Withdrawal / 1 [1] 000003 Dropped Control Rod / 1 [2] 000005 Inoperable/Stuck Control Rod / 1 [3] 000024 Emergency Boration / 1 [4] X AA2.02: Ability to determine and interpret the 3.9 following as they apply to the Emergency Boration: When use of manual boration valve is 4.4 needed. (CFR: 43.5 1 45.13) 000028 Pressurizer Level Malfunction /2 [5] 000032 Loss of Source Range NI /7 [6] 000033 Loss of Intermediate Range NI /7[7] X AA2.10: Ability to determine and interpret 3.1 the following as they apply to the Loss of Intermediate Range Nuclear Instrumentation: 3.8 Tech-Spec limits if both intermediate range channels have failed. (CFR: 43.5 1 45.13) 000036 (BW/A08) Fuel Handling Accident! 8 r 8] 000037 Steam Generator Tube Leak / 3 [9] 000051 Loss of Condenser Vacuum / 4 [10] 000059 Accidental Liquid RadWaste ReI. /9 [11] X G2.4.4: Ability to recognize abnormal 4.5 indications for system operating parameters that are entry-level conditions for emergency 4.7 and abnormal operating procedures. (CFR: 41.10/43.2/45.6) 000060 Accidental Gaseous Radwaste ReI. / 9 [12] 000061 ARM System Alarms / 7 [13] 000067 Plant Fire On-site / 8 [14] 000068 (BW/A06) Control Room Evac. /8[15] 000069 (W/E14) Loss of CTMT Integrity / 5 [16] 000074 (W/E06&E07) Inad. Core Cooling / 4 [17] X G2.2.42: Ability to recognize system 3.9 parameters that are entry-level conditions for Technical Specifications. (CFR: 4.6 41.7/41.10/43.2/43.3/45.3) 000076 High Reactor Coolant Activity / 9 [18] W/E01 & E02 Rediagnosis & SI Termination / 3 [19] W/E13 Steam Generator Over-pressure / 4 [20] W/E15 Containment Flooding / 5 [21] W/E16 High Containment Radiation / 9 [22] KIA Category Point Totals: 2 2 Group Point Total: 4

ES-401 4 - SRO Form ES-401-2 ES-401 PWR Examination Outline Form ES-401-2 = = lant Systems - her 2/GroupjjRO / SRO) = System #1 Name K K K K K K A A A A G K/A Topic(s) IR 1 234561 234 003 Reactor Coolant Pump [1]

004 Chemical and Volume Control [2)

005 Residual Heat Removal [3]

006 Emergency Core Cooling [4]

A2.03; Ability to (a) predict the impacts of 007 Pressurizer Relief/Quench X the following malfunctions or operations 3.6 Tank [5] on the P S; and (b) based on those predictions, use procedures to correct, control, or mitigate the consequences of those malfunctions or operations: Overpressurization of the PZR (CFR: 41.5/43.5/45.3/45.13) 008 Component Cooling Water [6)

010 Pressurizer Pressure Control [7]

012 Reactor Protection[8]

G2. 1.7; Ability to evaluate plant 013 Engineered Safety Features X performance and make operational Actuation [9] judgments based on operating characteristics, reactor behavior and instrumentation interpretation. (CFR 41.5, 43.5, 45.12, 45.13) 022 Containment Cooling [10]

025 lceCondenser[11]

026 Containment Spray [121

039 Main and Reheat Steam [13]

059 Main Feedwater [14]

G2. 1.27; Knowledge of system purpose 061 Auxiliary/Emergency X and/or function. (CFR; 41.7) Feedwater[15J

4.0 062 AC Electrical Distribution [16)

063 DC Electrical Distribution [17]

064 Emergency Diesel Generator [18]

073 Process Radiation Monitoring[19]

O76ServiceWater[20]

=

= ES-401 4-SRO Form ES-401-2 r-" <n1 PWR Examination Outline F~'~ cC' .~ n Plant S stems - Tier 21Group 1 (RO / SRO) System # / Name K K K K K K A A A A G KIA Topic(s) IR 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 003 Reactor Coolant Pump [1] 004 Chemical and Volume Control [21 005 Residual Heat Removal [31 006 Emeraency Core CoolinQ [4] X A2.03: Ability to (a) predict the impacts of 3.6 007 Pressurizer Relief/Quench the following malfunctions or operations Tank [5] on the P S; and (b) based on those 3.9 predictions, use procedures to correct, control, or mitigate the consequences of those malfunctions or operations: Overpressurization of the PZR (CFR: 41.5/43.5/45.3/45.13) 008 Component Cooling Water [6] 010 Pressurizer Pressure Control [7] 012 Reactor Protection[8] G2.1.7: Ability to evaluate plant 4.4 013 Engineered Safety Features X performance and make operational Actuation [9] judgments based on operating 4.7 characteristics, reactor behavior and instrumentation interpretation. (CFR 41.5, 43.5,45.12,45.13) 022 Containment CoolinQ [101 025 Ice Condenser [111 026 Containment Spray [121 039 Main and Reheat Steam [13] 059 Main Feedwater [14] G2.1.27: Knowledge of system purpose 3.9 061 Auxiliary/Emergency X and/or function. (CFR: 41.7) Feedwater [15] 4.0 062 AC Electrical Distribution [16] 063 DC Electrical Distribution [17] 064 Emergency Diesel Generator [18] 073 Process Radiation MonitorinQ [191 076 Service Water [20]

078 Instrument Air [21] X A2.Ol Ability to (a) predict the impacts of 2.4 the following malfunctions or operations 2.9 on the lAS and (b) based on those predictions, use procedures to correct, control, or mitigate the consequences of those malfunctions or operations Air dryer and filter malfunctions. (CFR: 41.5/ 43.5/ 45.3 / 45.13) G2.4.30: Knowledge of events related to 103 Containment [221 X system operation/status that must be 2.7 reported to internal organizations or 4.1 external agencies, such as the State, the NRC, or the transmission system operator. (CFR: 41.10/43.5/45.11) K/A Category Point Totals [ =

= =

2 I 3 I Group Point Total 5 078 Instrument Air [21] X A2.01: Ability to (a) predict the impacts of 2.4 the following malfunctions or operations 2.9 on the lAS; and (b) based on those predictions, use procedures to correct, control, or mitigate the consequences of those malfunctions or operations: Air dryer and filter malfunctions. (CFR: 41.51 43.5/45.3 1 45.13) G2.4.30: Knowledge of events related to 103 Containment [22] X system operation/status that must be 2.7 reported to internal organizations or 4.1 external agencies, such as the State, the NRC, or the transmission system operator. (CFR: 41.10/43.5/45.11) KIA Category Point Totals: 2 3 Group Point Total: 5

ES4O1 5 - SRO Form ES-401-2 ES-401 PWR Examination Outline Form ES-401-2 Plant Systems_ Tier 2/Group_2_(RO / SRO) System #1 Name K K K K K K A A A A G K/A Topic(s) IR 1234561234 001 Control Rod Drive [1] G2.2.40: Ability to apply Technical 002 Reactor Coolant [2] X Specifications for a system. (CFR: 41.10/43.2/43.5/45.3) 47 G2.4.50: Ability to verify system alarm 01 1 Pressurizer Level Control [3) X setpoints and operate controls identified in 4.2 the alarm response manual. (CFR: 4.0 41.10/43.5/45.3) 014 Rod Position Indication [4] 015 Nuclear Instrumentation [5] 016 Non-nuclear Instrumentation [6]

017 In-core Temperature Monitor [7] 027 Containment Iodine Removal [8]

028 Hydrogen Recombiner and Purge Control [9] 029 Containment Purge [10]

033 Spent Fuel Pool Cooling [11]

034 Fuel Handling Equipment [12] 035 Steam Generator [13] 041 Steam Dump/Turbine Bypass Control [14] 045 Main Turbine Generator [15]

055 Condenser Air Removal [16]

056 Condensate [17] 068 Liquid Radwaste [18) 071 Waste Gas Disposal [19] X G2.2.25: Knowledge of the bases in Technical 3.2 Specifications for limiting conditions for 4.2 operations and safety limits. (CFR: 41.5/41.7/43.2) 072 Area Radiation Monitoring [20]

075 Circulating Water [21]

079 Station Air [22]

086 Fire Protection [23] K/A Category Point Totals: 3 Group Point Total: ES-401 5-SRO Form ES-401-2 ES-401 PWR Examination Outline Form ES-401-2 Plant S stems - Tier 21Group 2 (RO I SRO) System # I Name K K K K K K A A A A G KIA Topic(s) IR 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 001 Control Rod Drive [1] 002 Reactor Coolant [2] 02.2.40: Ability to apply Technical X Specifications for a system. (CFR: 3.4 41.10/43.2/43.5/45.3) 4.7 011 Pressurizer Level Control [3] X 02.4.50: Ability to verify system alarm setpoints and operate controls identified in 4.2 the alarm response manual. (CFR: 4.0 41.10/43.5/45.3) 014 Rod Position Indication [4] 015 Nuclear Instrumentation [5] 016 Non-nuclear Instrumentation [61 017 In-core Temperature Monitor [7] 027 Containment Iodine Removal [8] 028 Hydrogen Recombiner and Purge Control [9] 029 Containment Purge [10] 033 Spent Fuel Pool Cooling [11] 034 Fuel Handling Equipment [12] 035 Steam Generator [13] 041 Steam Dump/Turbine Bypass Control [14] 045 Main Turbine Generator [15] 055 Condenser Air Removal [16] 056 Condensate [17] 068 Liquid Radwaste [18] 071 Waste Gas Disposal [19] X 02.2.25: Knowledge of the bases in Technical 3.2 Specifications for limiting conditions for 4.2 operations and safety limits. (CPR: 41.5/41.7/43.2) 072 Area Radiation Monitoring [20] 075 Circulating Water [21] 079 Station Air [221 086 Fire Protection [23] II KIA Category Point Totals: U= 3 Group Point Total: 3

ES-401 Generic Knowledge and Abilities Outline (Tier 3) - SRO Form ES-401-3 Facility: Date of Exam: Category K/A # Topic RO SRO-OnIy IR IR 2.1.41 Knowledge of the refueling process. 2.8 X 1 (CFR: 41.2141.10143.6145.13) Conduct 2.1. of Operations 2.1. 2.1. 2.1. Subtotal 2.2.18 Knowledge of the process for managing maintenance 2.6 X activities during shutdown operations, such as risk 3.9 assessments, work prioritization, etc. 2. (CFR: 41.10/43.5/45.13) Equipment Control 2.2.15 Ability to determine the expected plant configuration using 3.9 X design and configuration control documentation, such as 4.3 drawings, line-ups, tag-outs, etc. (CFR: 41.10/ 43.3/45.13) 2.2.36 Ability to analyze the effect of maintenance activities, such 3.1 X as degraded power sources, on the status of limiting 4.2 conditions for operations. (CFR: 41.10/3.2/45.13) 2.2. 2.2. Subtotal 2.3. 2.3. 3. 2.3. Radiation Control 2.3. 2.3. Subtotal 2.4.6 Knowledge of EOP mitigation strategies. 3.7 X 4. (CFR: 41.10/43.5/45.13) Emergency 2.4.8 Knowledge of how abnormal operating procedures are used 3.8 X Procedures! in conjunction with EOPs. (CFR: 41.10/43.5/45.13) 4.5 Plan 2 4 18 Knowledge of the specific bases for EOPs. 3 3 X (CFR: 41.10/43.1/45.13) 4.0 2.4. 2.4. Subtotal Tier3PointTotal 7 ES-401 Generic Knowledge and Abilities Outline (Tier 3) - SRO Form ES-401-3 II . *ty: Date of Exam: Category KJA# Topic RO SRO-Only IR IR 2.1.41 Knowledge of the refueling process. 2.8 X (CFR: 41.2/41.10/43.6/45.13) 3.7

1.

Conduct 2.1. of Operations 2.1. 2.1. 2.1. Subtotal 2.2.18 Knowledge of the process for managing maintenance 2.6 X activities during shutdown operations, such as risk 3.9 assessments, work prioritization, etc.

2.

(CFR: 41.10/43.5/45.13) Equipment Control 2.2.15 Ability to determine the expected plant configuration using 3.9 X design and configuration control documentation, such as 4.3 drawings, line-ups, tag-outs, etc. (CFR: 41.10/43.3/45.13) 2.2.36 Ability to analyze the effect of maintenance activities, such 3.1 X as degraded power sources, on the status of limiting 4.2 conditions for operations. (CFR: 41.10/3.2/45.13) 2.2. 2.2. Subtotal 2.3. 2.3.

3.

2.3. Radiation Control 2.3. 2.3. Subtotal 2.4.6 Knowledge of EOP mitigation strategies. 3.7 X (CFR: 41.10/43.5/45.13) 4.7

4.

Emergency 2.4.8 Knowledge of how abnormal operating procedures are used 3.8 X Procedures / in conjunction with EOPs. (CFR: 41.10/43.5/45.13) 4.5 Plan Knowledge of the specific bases for EOPs. 2.4.18 (CFR: 41.10/43.1145.13) 3.3 X 4.0 2.4. 2.4. Subtotal Tier 3 Point Total 7

ES-401 Record of Rejected K/As Form ES-401-4 Tier I Randomly Selected Reason for Rejection Group KJA RNP does not have indication of individual load amps for RHR Pumps. 1/1 000025.AA.2.O1 480V loads are provided with bus amperage instead of individual load amperage readings. (Replaced with A2.07) 000026.02.3.4 Does not meet NUREG 1021, ES-401, D.1.b guidelines. (Replaced with 02.2.38) 000058.G2.1.9 Does not meet NUREG 1021, ES-401, D.1.b guidelines. (Replaced with 02.1.32) Does not meet NUREG 1021, ES-401, D.1.b guidelines. 1/2 000059.G2.3.15 (Replaced with 02.4.4) 1/2 000074.G2.1.34 Does not meet NUREG 1021, ES401, D.1.b guidelines. (Replaced with 02.2.42) ESF is defeated when the plant enters Mode 5 and will not actuate during 2/1 013. 02.1.40 refueling activities. (Replaced with 02. 1.7) Does not meet NUREG 1021, ES-401, D.1.b guidelines. 2/1 061.02.2.18 (Replaced with 02. 1.27) Does not meet NUREG 1021, ES-401, D.1.b guidelines. 2/1 103.02.3.6 (Replaced with G2.4.30) Does not meet NUREG 1021, ES-401, D.1.b guidelines. 2/2 002.G2.1.15 (Replaced with G2.2.40) Does not meet NUREG 1021, ES-401, D.1.b guidelines. 2/2 011.G2.3.13 (Replaced with 02.4.50) ES-401 Record of Rejected KI As Form ES-401-4 Tier / Randomly Selected Reason for Rejection Group KIA RNP does not have indication of individual load amps for RHR Pumps. 111 000025.AA.2.01 480V loads are provided with bus amperage instead of individual load amperage readings. (Replaced with A2.07) 111 000026.02.3.4 Does not meet NUREO 1021, ES-401, D.1.b guidelines. (Replaced with 02.2.38) 111 000058.02.1.9 Does not meet NUREO 1021, ES-40 1, D.1. b guidelines. (Replaced with 02.1.32) 112 000059.02.3.15 Does not meet NUREO 1021, ES-40 1, D.1. b guidelines. (Replaced with 02.4.4) 112 000074.02.1.34 Does not meet NUREO 1021, ES-401, D.1.b guidelines. (Replaced with 02.2.42) ESF is defeated when the plant enters Mode 5 and will not actuate during 211 013.02.1.40 refueling activities. (Replaced with 02.1.7) 211 061.02.2.18 Does not meet NUREO 1021, ESA01, D.1.b guidelines. (Replaced with 02.1.27) 211 103.02.3.6 Does not meet NUREO 1021, ES-401, D.1.b guidelines. (Replaced with 02.4.30) 2/2 002.02.1.15 Does not meet NUREO 1021, ESAOl, D.1.b guidelines. (Replaced with 02.2.40) 212 011.02.3.13 Does not meet NUREO 1021, ESAOl, D.1.b guidelines. (Replaced with 02.4.50)

f2o&vt Ot9 ADMN1STRATIVE DOCUMENTS (Yellow Paper) 1 J Exam Preparation Checklist Exam Outline Quality Checklist Exam Security Agreement(s) 7) z4. Administrative Topics Outline (Final) .5. Control Room Systems & Facility Walk-Thru Test Outline ,6. Operating Test Quality Check Sheet A. Simulator Scenario Quality Check Sheet 8 Transient and Event Checklist 9 Cornpetencies Checklist /1O. Written Exam Quality Check Sheet vil. Written Exam Review Worksheet .A2 Written Exam Grading Quality Checklist Post-Exam Check Sheet Facility Submittal Letter [-1 (Final) ES-201-1.L-ES-2O1 ES-2O1-3 ES-3O1 ES-3O1-2--- ES-301-3 ES-301-4 / ES-301 ES-301-6 ES-4O1-6 ES-4O1-9fr-ES-403-IL-- ES-501-1 t-- ADMINISTRATIVE DOCUMENTS (Yellow Paper) ~ ~, ~, f\\

1.

Exam Preparation Checklist................................. ES-201-1./ /. Exam Outline Quality Checklist............................... ES-201-2v vi. Exam Security Agreement(s)................................ ES-201-3 r" ~4. Administrative Topics Outline (Final). ~ ES-301-1~ A. Control Room Systems & Facility Walk-Thru Test Outline (Final)..... ES-301-a--- /0. Operating Test Quality Check Sheet........................... ES-301-3V ,/ ./7. Simulator Scenario Quality Check Sheet....................... ES-301-4 ~/ Transient and Event Checklist................................ ES-301-5'/ Competencies Checklist.................................... ES-301-0 JiG. Written Exam Quality Check Sheet............................ ES-401-0 vff Written Exam Review Worksheet............................. ES-401-9~ v12. .Written Exam Grading Quality Checklist........................ ES-403-1v /. Post-Exam Check Sheet..,................................. ES-501-1 ~ Facility Submittal Letter

ES-201, Rev. 9E Examination Preparation Checklist Form ES-201-l Facility: HB Robinson Date of Examination: August 2008 Facility Examinations Developed by: Written I Operating Test T Chief r Task Description (Reference) Examiners Initials -180 1. Examination administration date confirmed (C. 1.a; C.2.a and b) / -120 2. NRC examiners and facility contact assigned (C.1.d; C.2.e) 4 -120 3. Facility contact briefed on security and other requirements (C.2.c) -120 4. Corporate notification_letter_sent_(C.2.d) [-90] [5. Reference material due (C. 1.e; C.3.c; Attachment 2)] {-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-ls, ES-401-1/2, ES-401-3, and ES-401-4, as 5,19 applicable (C.l.e and f; C.3.d) {-70} {7. Examination outline(s) reviewed by NRC and feedback provided to facility licensee (C.2.h; C.3.e)} {-45} 8. Proposed examinations (including written, walk-through JPMs, and scenarios, as applicable), supporting documentation (including Forms ES-301-3, ES-301-4, ES-301-5, ES-301-6, and ES-401-6), and reference materials due (C.1.e, f, g and h; C.3.d) -30 9. Preliminary license applications (NRC Form 398s) due (C.1.1; C.2.g; ES-202) -14

10. Final license applications due and Form ES-201-4 prepared (C.1.l; C.2.i; ES-202)

-14 1 1. Examination approved by NRC supervisor for facility licensee review (C.2.h; C.3.f) -14

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

-7

13. Written examinations and operating tests approved by NRC supervisor (C.2.i; C.3.h)

-7

14. Final applications reviewed; 1 or 2 (if>10) applications audited to confirm qualifications / eligibility; and examination approval and waiver letters sent (C.2.i;_Attachment_4;_ES-202,_C.2.e;_ES-204)

-7

15. Proctoring/written exam administration guidelines reviewed with facility licensee (C.3.k)

-7

16. Approved scenarios, job performance measures, and questions distributed to NRC examiners (C.3.i)

Target dates are generally based on facility-prepared examinations and are keyed to the examination date identified in the corporate notification letter. They are for planning purposes and may be adjusted on a case-by-case basis in coordination with the facility licensee. [Applies only] {Does not apply} to examinations prepared by the NRC. ES-201, Rev. 9E Examination Preparation Checklist Form ES-201-1 Facility: HB Robinson Date of Examination: August 2008 Examinations Developed by: Facility Written / Operating Test Target Chief Date

• Task Description (Reference)

Examiner's Initials -180

1.

Examination administration date confIrmed (C.1.a; C.2.a and b) .RI ;i -120

2.

NRC examiners and facility contact assigned (C.l.d; C.2.e) ~;t -120

3.

Facility contact briefed on security and other requirements (C.2.c) /;L -120

4.

Corporate notifIcation letter sent (C.2.d) L,L [-90] [S. Reference material due (C.1.e; C.3.c; Attachment 2)] Lei {-7S}

6.

Integrated examination outline(s) due, including Forms ES-201-2, ES-201-3, ES- ~ot 301-1, ES-301-2, ES-301-S, ES-D-1's, ES-401-1/2, ES-401-3, and ES-401-4, as S/19 applicable (C.1.e and f; C.3.d) {-70} {7. Examination outline(s) reviewed by NRC and feedback provided to facility A:/ 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, ~ci 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. 1.1; C.2.g; ES-202) LJ -14

10. Final license applications due and Form ES-20 1-4 prepared (C.1.l; C.2.i; ES-202) k.~

-14

11. Examination approved by NRC supervisor for facility licensee review L/

(C.2.h; C.3.f) -14

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

~t?t -7

13. Written examinations and operating tests approved by NRC supervisor

~ci (C.2.i; C.3.h) -7

14. Final applications reviewed; 1 or 2 (if> 10) applications audited to confIrm qualifIcations / eligibility; and examination approval and waiver letters sent

~ c:t (C.2.i; Attachment 4; ES-202, C.2.e; ES-204) -7 IS. Proctoring/written exam administration guidelines reviewed with facility licensee.4'.7 (C.3.k) -7

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

~c1 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 Facility: H.B.Robinson Date of Examination: 8/26/08 Initials Item Task Description

1. a. Verify that the outline(s) fit(s) the appropriate model, in accordance with ES-401. R b. Assess whether the outline was systematically and randomly prepared in accordance with I Section D.1 of ES-401 and whether all K/A categories are appropriately sampled. flL T T c. Assess whether the outline over-emphasizes any systems, evolutions, or generic topics. d. Assess whether the justifications for deselected or rejected K/A statements are appropriate., T1 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, /j S and major transients. c_.

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 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.

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 / (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: (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. U

4. 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. 7 4 ,.4 c. Ensure that K/A importance ratings (except for plant-specific priorities) are at least 2.5. ..-. (/2i R d. Check for duplication and overlap among exam sections. L e. Check the entire exam for balance of coverage. J f. Assess whether the exam fits the appropriate job level (RO or SRO).

a. Author

b. Facility Reviewer (*)

c. NRC Chief Examiner (#)

d. NRC Supervisor Note:

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

Not applicable for NRC-prepared examination outlines I ES-201 Examination Outline Quality Checklist Form ES-201-2 Facility: H.B.Robinson Date of Examination: 8/26/08 Item

1.

W R I T T E N

2.

S I M U L A T o R

3.

W / T

4.

G E N E R A L Initials b* c# Task Description a

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./ 1111 Section D.1 of ES-401 and whether all KIA categories are appropriately sampled.

<.......- fiV

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

.<::: ~ A ILL

d. Assess whether the justifications for deselected or rejected KIA statements are appropriate..c"'i:1ft } IL1

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 ~pV 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 f~rm II A (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:

~.' (1) the tasks are distributed among the topics as specified on the form 61/ If\\. \\ .i. t (2) at least one task is new or significantly modified (j V" d koL (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 JJdAICl tJ. 1\\IfC;1~ NJ:~lJ~l)/~

b. Facility Reviewer (*)

ffhMe ~ P. J" "p s / fP)tJAr*~

c. NRC Chief Examiner (#)

d. NRC Supervisor Note:

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

• Not applicable for NRC-prepared examination outlines

ES-201 Examination Security Agreement Form ES-201-3 1. Pre-Examination I/-__J I acknowledge that have acquired specialized knowledge about the NRC licensing examinations scheduled for the week(s) of U//s /2-? as of the date of my signature. 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 licensees 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 wUl 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) o{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. 15.S#u, iL LL,-. NOTES: PRINTED NAME JOB TITLE / RESPONSIBILITY SIGNATURE (1) DATE S(1JRE (2) DATE NOTE

1.. F.

s e L / h 2. V. LL+k .5r AIcL.d 4r4; 7 vk /gf

C bjv //E

4. M;ci_ f1..

jvC crvwL i ) ki_ /z/ )/ 1 1L/,4/c-_ J, 7 /

5. u1 /4je.pJ Co4T,STrPCJ/

Øc/g 6. C, /t)X Cf (t /2/b12 7

7. is..,l fwifr Q g/i, t

) fZ

8. SA <Hfu.MY jJ 1

cc& 3(- 0

9. t* c. TM

&ic-f -Sto 8/9

10. A4 vi 50 11.

oAI-jAJQ4 V

12.,

t-Jj.- 6

13.Vp1-i-r ( ia) 14. IO Oi c-7-E ( s io / c77ic ES-201, Page 27 of 28 ES-201 Examination Security Agreement Form ES-201-3

1.

Pre-Examination '1 ?f,1 - - s / '2-&6 I acknowledge that I have acquired specialized knowledge about the NRC licensing examinations scheduled for the week(s) of Y /j, I L 1 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 divulge to any unauthorized persons any information concerning the NRC licensing examinations administered during the week(s) oller' 'lo,/tJr. 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 SIGNATURE (1) DATE DATE NOTE

12. C. hO(\\.A-H~*"V

13. ~i

\\p<~+rr<...tL

14. rOE:

Pr;;JJNiNUT()Ai

15. !::>-huc f.£.J.kc NOTES:

• • ~..... _

",,+,~' ~1;;' L '. W\\,- ~-.~ P(O-'-'-'~- ,....... -.*... v*-.-- <++-.. ~ - -".- ~ ~~~ 7.'"1

• _I

~ ~ "'-'-J * ......... 7 ~ ~ ~M~~~~~~,~~~A~._~~~

{'

• v t

I. C'" V I ~ ---,. ("v'........ '" VI VI' ,,.V_ I ~A' 'j!';L If! T -- ....!;/L/(t/(/ . -~.v.:- _. *... ~ ,~ 1tJit~ ~ ~ pycc j'Ao ~6J' - / S'-A' 5~O $;~~.~. ~o "5",Mt - Of.;;;, T"...... (Ir/;vt')

5.:l~~

RO' ';;-7-fj (j~ S fLo Cli/a-/ "?":: ~~=--'--_ ES-201, Page 27 of 28

ES-201 Examination Security Agreement Form ES-201-3 1. Pre-Examination I acknowledge that have acquired specialized knowledge about the NRC licensing examinations scheduled for the week(s) of as of the date of my signature. I agree that I will not knowingly divulge any information about these examinations to any persons who have 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 licensees 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, J did not divulge to any unauthorized persons any information concerning the NRC licensing examinations administered during the week(s) of %/j S/Vi From the date that I entered into this security agreement until the completion of examination administration, 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 1. cwnQ.

2. O\\çki 3.

?t2e4.

4. 2eAQ.p

5.

6. fcrd, m-AJ

7. T / 8.

9. Afe

.t&Y ii ti J 11.1QC5 I-. 1r.W /

12. L/A-Jc,t,A--

13..3c,?

4 14. LL -v,c/,J 15. t-roJ JOB TITLE / RESPONSIBILITY t4-Q SP SRo AG.-. SIGNATURE (1) 1j7 k--- Ao S 5C NOTES:

6 2 e-dc1e Zr DATE SIGNATURE (2) DATE NOTE Zfr - /Z - 1-2 -cS-

Lk21/4

• 1

//cS ,/6.l ?.-. i/z/ 7/2/> 7/,/i4-e/eI8 7/3/q,A/L 1 /2WJ 7V/o8 .3f7 Iciic Lz.loe 7(P te -jo. 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 1s!t~--tfz1 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, did not divulge to any unauthorized persons any information concerning the NRC licensing examinations administered during the week(s) of '6 J S--~ ~. 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 SIGNATURE (1) SIGNATURE (2) DATE NOTE ]);/uIDr-£si eo. Cf'eotk'ft, ~~~=~Mt51 ~ ~"~ 5AO ?~ ~:4; $R () '/ jzf?/(( to ilzi/!? /~'-' Jj~Jf $"$0

9.

ex:<l...... \\e.... ~ .r/~.*, 5 R 0 G,l.... A~.Aqe 10.~~\\{N:....... + Iii) c*,,">cb *..ey*

-.JU C[~£;'!J \\h",,-r-11.*TbatNlc\\?

~. 11':+t I AO-i? J;:e-4=~.?" C-=<-re/

12. 7urvv Is A cJ(V'L S.A 0

>=' 13..)",,,12O.L+/-n~~ $~ -~ "4 '~".~'<T_ "IA ~~. Jl!C~EW s~~;""ofUOlDi~\\,}A!

==g~. NOTES: "-\\l'Q.t~. '7 Q 5t-o ~"..d:ck<-{.e {;"r f'.-t?x:+ ~,~:--( Clot.:55 (jfLe -10), 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 I/S //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, 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 licensees 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 s- /i). From the date that 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 1. 2. cz 3. ficrtr3c 5.

• _.1_1

6. v4gP 7.

cJ&

8. j.

9. F1 LLA-

10. :Ppz-,-J

11. rEV t(

6 WE 12&t( Bs4.i 1 3./( re4 Oc,j-)

14. A1wf 4tAy

15. f/L4JL kL C (2S5 / sa o

f2p /si-v S1c 5s 5Ocrr -c.2 OT1 oPS 1JS1ifa& SaP . 7 r JOB TITLE / RESPONSIBILITY SIGNATURE (1) Mz4 - /-i__,- 4

• L-

,4% / 7/ NOtES: S DATE SINATUR&12) DATE N TE cg _S-Z-O%

S//Va nbv r/)i/ h/ (a-a) _s&cr -j, _/c:/ ç 1-i.2 6____

4 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 ifts -%7!Z>ls 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 comp'letion 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 i!f/r(- ~b1. 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 SIGNATURE (1) DATE

1. d'et? u"kt/

2. 61! '(A/.5t, (A/1lt..J).,fM :z~ _-!-C.'--"'-,,:::....-.::.-.:::.~ ______

~>PJ~. ~t!~: k t C.(tS5 1 Sl'l:o _.* -.... Ai"" 3 1 SMq. 7

5.

1(<& \\tc?\\. e-s

6. i./ioNArt,O w. ('I'TT':>

7. ~:

c:....v..... !\\c.... \\. _~-;;iS""'R=,...=::O~~,.--..."...-,r--__

8. J. C\\l\\.c..~

S'SD-o~~"i ~ ~ cz.><

9. r~p l"'-w/'Vtt.e..

50g;) - cg) ~~

10. :::rc:>H,...15ftClbN itAeelS> -- "ScTT 1~.

H~S 0151iJ>"f1WCftZtL-@"(' 1. h Mtwa-¥' -'SH-~tf diS - lNP 13.JiI1=I.'I ROw~ Sf.).P - OC'f 14://1f!¥t/1£ ~ff-~I)'< ....:::...::~::-:-w-:-~~->""-' -----

15. VI wrt,/Sw.Z);J,z;.. I "

!fx== '-y/-+1 NOTES: (j) S'31'1@cI.'~ eNt;,,". ~~J.p'p ES-20 1, 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 /f) 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 licensees 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 knowIpdg I did not divulge to any unauthorized persons any information concerning the NRC licensing examinations administered during the week(s) of /i /29 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 SIGNATURE (1) DATE SIGNATURE (2) DATE NOTE SreTh %Jç/gf 9ZJfz&r 2. f J -r IM11r! - L_QJJ 1 [ai(o 3 14I ( DfT L/J66

4. ff,cjPW,q.(e 1

r-r $r-/.-rL.

6. 7. 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 it) --o/?la.s 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 een 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 knowlpdge I did not divulge to any unauthorized persons any information concerning the NRC licensing examinations administered during the week(s) of 'iJ/IS- /(;lj'J 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 SIGNATURE (1) SIGNATURE (2) DATE NOTE 1.~Jt"'- Ie ~Y'~ ~ '\\'> "S....... S"'rrlA.-C!.... :<:>'{" ~~.. .~ ~/'

2.

lJ.'c-~~s.~(eJ cr. 1"-lS'r(l.I!D-c( ~ ~

3. 11 q',i.gl:;I' r;&'S D IT J V~Tl'VC.l 0 Y-

4. XI!)$'ePfi Ac(e.........

OIl I"'$;-Il"~o(.. 5.~ __ ~

6.

7.

8.

9.

/

10.

11.

12.

13.

14.

15.

~ NOTES: ES-201. Page 27 of 28

3 ES2O xamhiation Security Agreement Form ES4OI-3 1. Ire.Examlnatfon acknowledge that have acquired specialized knowledge about the NRC licensing exaininations scheduled for the week(s) of 4s 4411 of the date olmy signature. agree that I wili not knowingly divulge any information about these examinations to any persons who have not been authorized by the NRC chief examin-er. I understand thai I am riot to instruct, evaluate, or provide performance feedback to theseapplicarils scheduled to beadmirestered these licensing examinations-from this dale until compiedon of examination administration, except as specilically noted below and authorized by the NRC (e.g.. acting as a simulator booth operator or communicator is acceptable if the iridhedual does not select the training content or provide direct or indirect feedback). Furthermore, I are avare of the physical security measures and requirements (as documented in the facility licensees procedures) and understand that violation of the conditions of this agreement may result in cancellation of the ec minations and/or an enforcement action against rue or the facility licensee. 1 will immediately report to facility management or the NRC chief examiner any indications or suggestions that exammalion security may have been compromised. 2. Poat-Examination To the best of my knowlpdge/ did not divulge to any unauthorized persons any inforrnalion concerning tJe NRC licensing examinations administered during the week(s) of( 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 suihorized by the NRC. PRINTED NAME JOB TITLE! RESPONSIBILITh SIGNATURE (1) DATE SIGNATURE (2) DATE NOTE 1.J4 £ 7 >4r iD

2. c tfL 1/,7L

u 5-8 3 r Jttt1eL G /Z o 4. OL4I 1A

5. j(e i P I..-ISpp-.

4

6. Jcevigt

fit, J1,p ts-rA

7. &Jc

\\\\

8. N.4-D 5-5O 4

N Ef ZrS w_ -*i LMei o 0 1izt o I cf1L-1) 1r41 °-) / L f m.=. 14 4tfy It 15.J[y4 NOTES o e d ; itc ES.201, Page 27 of 28 cc

-.:I o

'I 0 SJ§l 1.1 D

r L

x: ~

z.

r L

Z. J-t E 1:: ~ ...J Z. -l

r 0

E If.) Z.... f:Q 0 ~ 00 00 00 S) I-

-..I 10 D

>0

r Y)

<':l D 0 cc 'l K 0 Y) r:... J.r.> T\\ Cl S) -l -l - P D 00 S) 0 S) <=> 'l "" D C() 'l "" ~, D OX) SJ 0 \\ '~ .,.1" ) ES*201 ExClminaUon Security Agreement Form ES~2.01*3

1.

Pre-Examination f acknowledge that f have acquired speciaHzed know!edge about the NRC licensing examina'tlons svheduled for the week(s) of its.o/~~!tla~ of the dale of my signature. I afJree that j will not knowingly divulge any information about these examinations to any persons who halfe not been aul\\lorizl'ld by the NRC chief examiner. I understand lh~1 r am not to instruct, evaluate, or provide performance feedback to those*applicants schedule<l to be'a<lministered these licensing examinations-from this date until completion of examination adminlstration, except as specificany noted below and authorized by the NRC (e.g., aGting as a simu[atof booth operatOr or communicator is acceptable if the individual does not select the tralnlng rontent or proyjde<.11rector indirect feedback). Furthenno~. I am aware of the physicat security measures and requirements {as documented in the facility licensee's proCf;dures} and understand thal violation of the conditions of this agreement may resutt in cancellation of the exam~natTons and/or an enforcement action against me or the facility licensee. 1 will immedialel y report to facility manayement or the NRC cl1ief examiner any i nd1r::ations or sU9gestions that examination security may have been comprom[sed. 2, Post-Examination To the best of my knOWlfldg~ did nal. divulge to any unaulhorized persons any information concerning the NRC licensin.g examinatJons administered during: thB week(s) of WIt-31 From the date thatl entered intQ this security agreement until the rompletion of examination admin[stratlol1, I did not instruct,. evaluate, or provide performance feedback to those appllcaflts who were administered these Iicel1sing examinations, except as specifically rioted below and authorized by the NRC. PRtNTED NAJo,1E JOB TitlE / RESPONSiBILITY SIGNATURE (1) DATE . SIGNATURE (2) DATE NOTE IJ) ~~ (;;:ftJ,"'$~~7l-

3. :"r£. ~:r.."..G

~1':- 4,1J6 JnAIiifl. ~ "f"(Un,.,I.A f1 __

5.

1&0... ~'\\.~ 5s ('> - fl_E--S~ ~JLii.

6. i.ONAfJ.f> wd't-rr~

~ n...O 1$.., A

l. __

7. 't~:uc.. Rob SRo

8. ). M~

!7Sb-o~~'"'i) ~cS __

9. £1~\\lJ L~Wf'Vt Q..

50<[5" - cg) !!:LY!/Pe 10, :n:~~1)PrCf!lN IMe£.ts --'Sox,,---

11.

,--.rJs. fH.;f&Jc;(lId..-.11#-"-,,- '1'-'_-~ 1 -. frk.w "'f (--sffilt ttI5 - f.,N~ ~

13.

(( L4 R o""~ S u.p ~ 0<:'7" .f: -/J __

14.

119t!f£,tff.~i< -,s.~~:;...:...;:o~/.-;-:r~--_____ -f~~~~~t-_---..:'!:--~= _____

15. /Lie.-UiCJFJ:.l",i:...} L, t?~ £..c... y..vt NOTES:

0 (j) 5i3M?r:l,.r'-" er;(;-r. l-W-;;::& ~/P.F ES*201, Page 27 of 28

PRINTED NAME JOB TITLE I RESPONSIBIUTY SIGNATURE (I) DATE SIGNATURE (2) DATE NOTE t12 R) o ro o c = rii p Ci)- - -I 0) ri-I r-i C) 1 1. ç 2, ci Wqt6.iz-4- osi 01 3 C i çLs5im L4i1. Jkt - r, 5. /(L lI4iøj q .jvgp fir, f&p 1rA 7.LJ

8. ),ett..Q W

9. fl Ltt I q lii.

Meti

elf fZ.if tJD ow.. SuP UL /° NOTES: ,qeJ ii -ffcc. ( ES-20t Examinaiton Security Arement Form ES-2014 (/ 1, Pre-Exangnlp I acknoedge that I have acquired specialized knowledge about the NRC Ncensrnq elantinatioas scheduled tOT the week(s) of V1S of the date of my signature. agree that I wII not knowingly divulge any information about These examinations to any persons who have not been authorized by the NRC chiefexaminer. I understand that I am not to instruct, evaluate, or provide performance feedback to those applicants scheduled to be administered these licensing examinatknfrom this date until completion of examInation administration, except as specflcaIly noted below and authorized by the NRC (e.g., acting as a simulator booth operator or communicator is acceptable it the individual do-es not select the training content or provide direct or indirect feedback), FuThermore, lam aware of the physical security measures and requirerrients(as documented In the facfty licensees procedures) and understand that violation of the conditions of this agreement may result in cancellation of the examinations and/or an entorcenierit action against me or the facility licensee. I witi 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 knawlp4o,) did not divulge to any unauthorized persons any irifornialion concerning the NRC licensing examinations administered dudng the week(s) of WIf W2i From the date that I entered into this security agreement until The completion of examination administration, I id not instruct, evaiuate or provide performance feedback to those applicants who were administered these licensing examinations, except as speciffcay noled below and authorized by the NRC. -c cD ES-201 Page 27 of 28 c ( (' ES*201 Examinatton Security_Agr~ement Form ES-2.f}1..J

1.

Pre-Examination I aclmowled9& that I have acquired specialized knowiedge about the NRC ~censrng examinations ~edLlled* tnT the week(s) 01 ~S -o/z.f/Dls of the date of my signature. 1 agree that I will not knowingly divulge any information aooul these examinations to any persons "mo have not bean Buthonzad by the NR~ chief examiner. 11,mderstand that j amnol to Instruct, evaluate, or provide perionnance fee-dbac1< to those applicants sCihedulmi to be a<.tmlnistered these Ifoensing eKaminatlon&from this date untU oompletion of examination administration, except as specffically noted blow and authorized by the NRC t e.g., acting as a simulator booth operatOr or communrcator is acoeplabJe it the indIvidual does not select the training conlent Of provide direct or indirect feedback), Furtnetmo~, I am aware ofth~.1?~Y?!~L~ClJri.tY rn.~~u.(!'s and requirements (as dO.c.umenled In fue facWty licensee's proceduJl:!s) and uruJersland that violation of the conditions of this agreemenl may result in cancellation of the examlnatwns an d/Ol an enforcement aetlon against me or the facility licensee. I will lmmediately mport to facility managemen1 or the NRC chief examiner any indications Of suggestions that examination security may have been oompromised.

2.

Posl-Examinatton To the best of my kno~~ did not divulge to any unaulhor!zed persons any information conceming the NRC Uoonsing examinations adminlsteroo during fu& week(s) of ff- ~ From the date that.! entered into this security agreement until the completion of examinat40n administration, I <lld not inslruct, evaluate, or provlde perfonnance feedback to those appHcanls who ~Te adminLstered these licensing examinations, xoept as specifically noled below and aIJthOlized by the NRC, PRINTED NAME JOB TITLE I RESPONSiBILITY StGNATURE (1) DATE SfGNATURE (2) DATE NOTE ~:£~lj~~. jo~. ~ ~777\\ :;~ 4:iO;~. ~~~t?bZ~- S~~ ~ l.D

5.

/(f.cQ, ~'" '"1

6. i.Gall4gp w!{Tt'~

7, ~:cJ(..R4;h. 8,~* -

9.

~~=~~A~_-C~&~)---------~~mt~~~====~:

10.

~ --SOT.,...

11.

oJ!,~...:- (lIIf 1. J9M.¥':iS'*WDIS-lNi ~

13.

SlAP - Dt.,.. ,;~,. i

14.

.5'~a~L ~f lfn'1,t4!_-c., 15, -.l1(.~~~~_~'-.:::lr.~=.L NOTES: (J) S/5M J.'" -t",;r < ~ ~kP ES*201, Page 27 of 26 0-W tTl -0 N I I>> 0 N No I 0-N 0 0 tI/J 0 ~: c:: t-o tTl "" 0 w .~ g ~-o 00 rI:> w 00 (JJ -.] l-' 00 00 00 ~ g Z til ~

s:

tTl R'" tTl 0 ~'TJ >:D ..... x Z H.z Zo C>- CD CD w en N w ,p,. ,p,. en

-c s

0 0 oN

ES-201 Examination Security Agreement Form ES2O1 -3 1 Pre-Examlnetlon lacknowledgethallhave acquired specialized knowledge aboulihe NRC licensing examinations sheduled for the week(s) of_________ as of the date of my signature. I area that I will not knowingly divulge any lnfonnaffon about these examinations teeny persons who have not been authorized by the NRC chief exanliner. I understand that I era not to instruct, evaluate, or provide performance feedback to those applicants scheduled to be administered these licensing examinations from this dale until compleUon of exarrrination admnistralicn, except as specirceIty noted below and authorized by the NRC (eg. 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). Eurtliermore, tarn aware a the physical security measures and requlremerda{as umenled in the facility Iioensees procedures) and understand that violation of the conditions of this agreement may result in cancellation of The examinations andlor an enforcement actiofl against me or the facility licensee. I will immediately report to (acHity management or the NRC chief examiner any indications or suggestions that exanilnaticri security may have been compromised. 2, Post..ExamItIpn To the best of my knowIdge) did not divulge to any naulho,ized persons any information concerning the NRC licensing examinations administered during the week(s) of IisY. Frame the date that I entered into this security agtement 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. $flc2 c 1 Ld.ey _j P ll.flILc T.i1 I At1 12.ZJW,s 11 ( ( PRINTED NAME J08 T1TLE/RESPONSIOILITY SIGNATURE (1) DATE SIGNATURE (2) DATE NOTE

3. ac_

4 1 J. 4 ]i___________________ 5. Aik. DO.I7%,. s.1ci-i

i.ti.C 8 44LWL1 9jtv-o U) -t N ro N° ro a co = N N Ci.) Cu cD 0 a° c.,i CD 1 -c o G L J4

15. A piitiwIiej NOTES:

I

d.da4e tAJc+ z 1 ,q( C &.LS OL C -JO 3.4p

t - ---.t cItJ ES-201, Page 27 of 28 ( ( ( ES*201 ExamtnatJon Security Agreement Form ES-2tl1-3 1 : pre-ElulmlnatJ on I acknowledge that I have acquired 5pecialized knowledge about the NRC 1\\{;-en~n9 examinations sche<luled for the week(s) at ~Ii--9i'1 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 autf1oriz.eest of my knOW~g~ did not divulge to any unaUlhorize<:i persons any Information concerning the NRC licensing examinations admlnlstered during the week(s) of g Jr'" 21. From the dat& that I entered into this security agreement until the completion of examination administration, [ did not instruct, evaluate, or provi\\je perfOlTJ'tilnce feedback to those applicants who were administered lhese licensing examinations, except as s~ifica!ly noted below anti authorized by the NRC, PRINTED NAME JOB nTLE I RESPONSIBILITY SIGNATURE (1) DATE SI GNA TURE (2) DATE NOTE ckmz.-y r ".....-- ~7f '!'! JJc8_ . ~ A:I O~CR_ ~L-- lAiulr-6si" Q!~~ ~(\\M=

4.

--'9~ca.r-..L--.--~-

5.

-Jj~j('1:CJ*""" ------ 6'~~:4!b'llik~L- --=~;--::;------- 7.~-~~~L tOo -Lj~~~~--.

.~~..u~~ ;:--'"~~(),"=---:---r-~-;~~~~::==

10.

II!. 0 .~~&iJ:4" ~-- A<I~F C,~",\\b,.ct: "3~!l

12. -:TQf/e'" Is It dlY"Z....

1 1J. ~~T,~,"l=- ~~~~======:'S~i~~==~~~~~~~==~::~~ ~~:f~ U~ -~ NO~: ~ 5~\\,"*Dt~I~~J ~ LV 5!-b Q,.....cl.; cJa...~ {;.r ~.eJc4 ::r:;.. q, ~ ( C / ) ,.v ~j(jfLc.-JO. ES~201. Page 27 of 28 0 U) 00 tTl " -0 N I 0> C> N I 0 N 0 C> oc C> ~ CD --3 c: i-' tTl C> W U1 C> ~ --.J -0 00 ::;:: ... tTl to> K'" GO tTl en 0 ""I I-" go 00 0> g - z VI ~ ~-r .... ::r> zX - ZZ G"lp co co w OJ N W .p, .p, OJ -c m-oe::: ou.; -tA

Aug 1 2008 7:44AM RHP EXAM Rti 8438571005 p.1 IS-301 Admistrative Topics Outline F( mES-301-1 acility: HB ROBINSON Examination Level (circle one): RO! SRO1 Date of Examination: Operating Test Number: 8/l 2008 G2.3.4 (3.7): Given a set of conditions, c lowest dose path to a job and the lowest equipment manipulations. Declare an emergency event. G2.441 (4.6): Given a set of conditions, event lAW the Emergency Action Level complete the Emergency Notification Fo ondition. applicable ritical ELEASE lassify the latrices and n. Administrative Topic Type Describe activity to be perforrr (see Note) Code*

M Manually calculate an Estimated Critical onduct of Operations G2.2.1 (3.9): Given a set of conditions ai references, perform a Manual Estimated (ADM a) Condition Calculation. N Review EMP-022, GASEOUS WASTE F Donduct of Operations PERMIT.

• (ADM SRO bi)

G2.1.4(3.8): Given a partially completed CV Vent Release permit, determine if all are met to allow the release. V J I N Review and approve TechnicI Specific Equipment Control surveillance. G2.2.39 (4.5): Given a completed, flawe (ADM SRO c) SHIFTLY SURVEILLANCES, perform th approval and apply applicable ITS. Radiation Control (ADM d) N DetermThe ALARA dose. MP-O22, ondition s ion OST-020, review and Iculate the 3tay Time for Emergency Plan (ADM SRO e) M NOTE: All items (5 total) are requ red for SFIOs. RO applicants require only 4 tems unless they are retaking only the administrative topics, when 5 are required. Type Codes & Criteria: (C)ontrol room (D)irect from bank ( 3 [or ROs; for SPOs & RO rel kes) (N)ew or (M)odified from bank (> 1) (P)reviots 2 exams ( 1; randomly selected) (S)irnula or 474 NRC Chief xminr NUREG-1 021, Revision 9, Supplemet 1 Aug ~1 2008 7:44AM RNP EXAM R~i 8438571005

p. 1

\\~ .~. 1:8-301 Admi1istrative Topics Outline ~~~----------------~~ F( m ES-301-1 ! :acility: HB ROBINSON

xamination Level (circle one):

ROI SRol Date of Examination: Operating Test Number: 8/1c~ -.-~ r Administrative Topic l (see Note) I Type Code" Describe activity to be perforrr ~d ~/ )onduct of Operations (ADM a) M Manually calculate an Estimated Critical ~ondition. G2.2.1 (3.9): Given a set of conditions at j applicable references, perform a Manual Estimated ~ritical Condition Calculation. L __________________ +-______ -+ __________________________ ___ V :::onduct of Operations "(ADM SRO b1) Ji Equipment Control (ADM SRO c) J Radiation Control (ADM d) j Emergency Plan (ADM SRO e) N N N M Review EMP-022, GASEOUS WASTE F :LEASE PERMIT. G2.1.4 (3.8): Given a partially completed ::MP-022, CV Vent Release permit, determine if all :onditions are met to allow the release. Review and approve Technical Specificc..ion surveillance. G2.2.39 (4.5): Given a completed, flawe! OST-020, SHIFTLY SURVEILLANCES. perform th review and approval and apply applicable ITS. Determine ALARA dose. G2.3.4 (3.7): Given a set of conditions, c dculate the lowest dose path to a job and the lowest 3tay Time for equi pment man ipu lations. Declare an emergency event. G2.4,41 (4.6): Given a set of conditions, ;Iassify the event lAW the Emergency Action Level latrices and complete the Emergency Notification Fe n. NOTE: All items (5 total) are requ red for SROs. RO applicants require only 4 terns unless they are retaking only the ~dministrative topics, when 5 are required. "Type Codes & Criteria: (C}ontrol room (D)irect f rom bank (~ 3 for ROs; :;; for SROs & RO re1 kes) (N)ewor (M)odified from bank (> 1) (P)revioliS 2 exams (::;; 1; randomly selected) (S)imulaor roval for replacement J PM --------,..(1"-1-..r !&.,)~ ~£ ¢~bo.P /~~L~ +-\\f--->~--"-------<"""~t/o 8 y Representative I~RC Chief ~minCr. e1rondh Chief NUREG-1021, Revision 9, Supplemelt 1

08/21/2008 08:07 4045624514 REGION II UBNRC DRP PAGE 01/01 200e7:44FW1 RNP ECAM RN 8436571005 p.1 G.3.4 (3.7): Given a set of conditions, c lowest close paTh to a job and the Iowet equipment manipulations. DzL2t l*C ChIef crnin& S-3O1 AdmhistratiVe Topics Outline

gIty:

HB ROBINSON Date of Exarrnaticn: 8,/li, xamirtation Level (circle one): RO Operating Test Number: F mES-301-1 Administrative Topic Type Describe activity to be perlorrr (see Note) C0de1

M Manually calculate ar Estimated Critical onduct of Operations 02,2.1 (3.9): Given a sot of coridition ar references, perform a Manual Estimated (ALJM Condition Calculation. N Review EMP-022, GASEOUS WASTE F onduct of Operations (ADM c bI) Gl.4(3.8): Given a partially completed CV Vent Release permit, determine if Il are met to allow the release. N Review and rove Technica Speciffc Equipment Control sueiIlance. (ADM SRO C) 02.2.39 (4.5): Given a corripleted, flawe SHIFTLY SURVEILLANCES, perform lh approval and apply applicable ITS. 2008 onditior?. J applicable ritical L.EASE MP-O22,

onditions

Qfl OST-020 review and Iculate the tay Time for Radiation Control (ADMd)

N Determine ALAPA dose. M Dec/are an emergency event.

Emergency Plan 02.4.41 (4.6): GIven a set of conditions, lassify the event lAW the Emergency Action Level latrices and (ADM SRO e) complete the Emergency Notification Fo ri. NOTE: MI items (5 total) are requ red for SROs. RO applicants require only 4 tems unless they are retaking only the admlnistralive topics, when 5 are required. Type Codes & Criteria: (C)ontrol room (D)irect from bank ( 3 for ROs; S for SROs & RO rel kes) (N)ew or (M)odified from bank (> 1) (P)revioirs 2 exams (5 1; randomly selectocl) (S)imnula:or

• Aoval for replacHment JPM

a y Representative NUREG-1021, Revision 9, Supplement 1 08/21/2008 08:07 4045524514 RNP EXAM R~I REGION II USNRC DRP 8438571005 PAGE 01/01

p. 1 Aug ?1 2008 7:44AM

\\. _ "I :S-301 Admiilstrative ToeiCS Outline ~-----------~--~~ F( m ES-301-1 I =acility: HB ROBINSON Date of Examination: 8111 '2008

xamination Level (circle one):

RO/S@ Operating Test Number: Administrative Topic (see Note) ~onduct of Operations (ADM a)

Ionduct of Operations

-(ADM SRO b1). Equipment Control (ADM SRO c) Radiation Control (ADM d) Emergency Plan (ADM SRO e) Type Code* M N N N M Describe activity to be perlam ld Manually caicu/lite an Estimated Critical :ondition. G2.2.1 (3.9): Given a set of conditions al J applicable references, perform a Manual Estimated ;ritical Condition Calculation. Review EMP-02.2. GASEOUS WASTE F :LEASE PERMIT. G2.1.4 (3.8): Given a partially completed :MP-022, CV Vent Release permit, determine if all :onditions are met to allow the release. Review and approve Technicaf SpecificE ion $I)rveillance. G2.2.39 (4.5): Given a completed, flawel OSr-020, SHIFTLY SURVEILLANCES, perform 1h review and approval and apply applicable ITS. --'.---1 Determine ALARA dose. G2.3.4 (3.7): Given a set of conditions. C Ilculate the lowest close path to a job and the lowest ;tay Time for equipment manipulations. Declare an emergency event. G2.4.41 (4.6): Given a set of conditions, :Iessify the event lAW the Em9rgency Action Leval latrices and complete the Emergency Notification Fa n. NOTE: All items (5 totar) are requ red for SROs. RO applicants require only 4 fems unless they are retaking only the ~dmlnistra1ive topics, when 5 are required. -Type Codes & Criteria: (C)ontrol room (D}irect from bank (~3Ior ROs; ~ for SROs &. RO relKes) (N)ew or (M)odified from bank (> 1) (P)reviolls 2 exams (~ '; randomly selected) (S)imulaor oval for replacement JPM ----------------10..;- ~:c:<::::-1-..,/~,he .~~~~~~~-' y Representative NUAEG-1021, Revision 9, Suppleme,t,

ES-301 Administrative Topics Outline Form ES-301 -1 Facility: HB ROBINSON Date of Examination: 8/18/2008 Examination Level (circle one): RO il SRO Operating Test Number: Administrative Topic Type Describe activity to be performed (see Note) Code* M Manually calculate an Estimated Critical Condition. Conduct of Operations G2.2.1 (3.9): Given a set of conditions and applicable (ADM a) references, perform a Manual Estimated Critical Condition Calculation. N Review EMP-022, GASEOUS WASTE RELEASE Conduct of Operations PERMIT.

• (ADM SRO bi)

G2.1.4 (3.8): Given a partially completed EMP-022, CV Vent Release permit, determine if all conditions are met to allow the release. N Review and approve Technical Specification Equipment Control surveillance. ADM SRO c G2.2.39 (4.5): Given a completed, flawed OST-020,

SHIFTLY SURVEILLANCES, perform the review and approval and apply applicable ITS. N DetermThe ALARA dose. Radiation Control G2.3.4 (3.7): Given a set of conditions, calculate the (ADM d) lowest dose path to a job and the lowest Stay Time for equipment manipulations. M Declare an emergency event. Emergency Plan G2.4.41 (4.6): Given a set of conditions, classify the (ADM SRO e) event lAW the Emergency Action Level Matrices and complete the Emergency Notification Form. NOTE: All items (5 total) are required for SROs. RO applicants require only 4 items unless they are retaking only the administrative topics, when 5 are required.

• Type Codes & Criteria:

(C)ontrol room (D)irect from bank ( 3 for ROs; for SROs & RO retakes) (N)ew or (M)odified from bank (> 1) (P)revious 2 exams ( 1; randomly selected) (S) i mulator

• A royal for replacement JPM adilty Representative NRC Chief x mm r

NRC Branch Chief NUREG-1 021, Revision 9, Supplement 1 ES-301 Administrative Topics Outline Form ES-301-1 Facility: HB ROBINSON Date of Examination: 811812008 Examination Level (circle one): RO~SROI Operating Test Number: Administrative Topic Type Describe activity to be performed (see Note) Code* M Manually calculate an Estimated Critical Condition. Conduct of Operations G2.2.1 (3.9): Given a set of conditions and applicable (ADM a) references, perform a Manual Estimated Critical Condition Calculation. N Review EMP-022, GASEOUS WASTE RELEASE Conduct of Operations PERMIT.

• (ADM SRO b1)

G2.1.4 (3.8): Given a partially completed EMP-022, CV Vent Release permit, determine if all conditions are met to allow the release. N Review and approve Technical Specification Equipment Control surveillance. (ADM SRO c) G2.2.39 (4.5): Given a completed, flawed OST-020, SHIFTLY SURVEILLANCES, perform the review and approval and apply applicable ITS. N Determine ALARA dose. Radiation Control G2.3.4 (3.7): Given a set of conditions, calculate the (ADM d) lowest dose path to a job and the lowest Stay Time for equipment manipulations. M Dec/are an emergency event. Emergency Plan G2.4.41 (4.6): Given a set of conditions, classify the (ADM SRO e) event lAW the Emergency Action Level Matrices and complete the Emergency Notification Form. NOTE: All items (5 total) are required for SROs. RO applicants require only 4 items unless they are retaking only the administrative topics, when 5 are required.

• Type Codes & Criteria:

(C)ontrol room (D)irect from bank (~3 for ROs; ~ for SROs & RO retakes) (N)ew or (M)odified from bank (> 1) (P)revious 2 exams (~ 1; randomly selected) (S)imulator

• A roval for replacement JPM

£0 ~.,)~8 ............ acil y Representative &)-?j,;;! a tpPbof __ NRC Chief ~~r NRC Branch Chief NUREG-1 021, Revision 9, Supplement 1

ES-301 Administrative Topics Outline Form ES-301 -1 HB ROBINSON NRC SRO EXAMINATION CONDUCT OF OPERATIONS; Given a set of conditions and applicable references, perform a Manual Estimated Critical Condition Calculation. The applicant will be given all applicable data curves and GP-003, NORMAL PLANT STARTUP FROM HOT SHUTDOWN TO CRITICAL, 0.1, and will be required to calculate an ECP to within +/- 250 pcm of actual Reactor Engineering calculation. 250 pcm is the tolerance contained in GP-003 between a manually calculated ECP and one that would be received from Reactor Engineering. This JPM will be performed by both RO and SRO candidates. (Modified bank JPM for this exam) CONDUCT OF OPERATIONS: Given a partially completed EMP-022, CV Vent Release permit, determine if all conditions are met to allow the release. The applicant will be required to determine from the given conditions, what is incorrect and if it must be corrected to allow the CV vent to be performed. This JPM will be performed by SRO applicants only. (New JPM for this exam) EQUIPMENT CONTROL: Given a completed portion of OST-020, SHIFTLY SURVEILLANCES, that has faulted data, perform the review and approval of the surveillance. The applicant will be required to identify that 2 Safety Injection Accumulators are out of tolerance and initiate action lAW ITS. Since 2 SI accumulators are out of the specified tolerance, LCO 3.0.3 must be applied. This JPM will be performed by SRO candidates only. (New JPM for this exam) RADIATION CONTROL: Given a set of conditions, the applicant will determine the most efficient method of performing a job to receive the lowest dose for work in an RCA. The applicant will be given 2 possible paths to get to a work site and the option of using 1 or 2 workers. This JPM will be performed by both PC and SRO candidates. (New JPM for this exam) EMERGENCY PLAN: Given a set of conditions, classify the event lAW the Emergency Action Level Matrices. The applicant will be required to classify a set of conditions using EPCLA-01, EMERGENCY CONTROL, and the EAL Matrices as guidance. Upon completion of the event classification, the applicant will be required to manually fill out an Emergency Notification Form. This JPM is Time Critical; the classification must be made within 15 minutes and the ENF must be completed within 15 minutes from completion of the classification. This JPM will be performed by SRO candidates only. (Modified bank JPM for this exam) NUREG-1 021, Revision 9, Supplement 1 ES-301 Administrative Topics Outline Form ES-301-1 HB ROBINSON NRC SRO EXAMINATION CONDUCT OF OPERATIONS: Given a set of conditions and applicable references, perform a Manual Estimated Critical Condition Calculation. The applicant will be given all applicable data curves and GP-003, NORMAL PLANT STARTUP FROM HOT SHUTDOWN TO CRITICAL, 0.1, and will be required to calculate an ECP to within +/- 250 pcm of actual Reactor Engineering calculation. 250 pcm is the tolerance contained in GP-003 between a manually calculated ECP and one that would be received from Reactor Engineering. This JPM will be performed by both RO and SRO candidates. (Modified bank JPM for this exam) CONDUCT OF OPERATIONS: Given a partially completed EMP-022, CV Vent Release permit, determine if all conditions are met to allow the release. The applicant will be required to determine from the given conditions, what is incorrect and if it must be corrected to allow the CV vent to be performed. This JPM will be performed by SRO applicants only. (New JPM for this exam) EQUIPMENT CONTROL: Given a completed portion of OST-020, SHIFTLY SURVEILLANCES, that has faulted data, perform the review and approval of the surveillance. The applicant will be required to identify that 2 Safety Injection Accumulators are out of tolerance and initiate action lAW ITS. Since 2 SI accumulators are out of the specified tolerance, LCO 3.0.3 must be applied. This JPM will be performed by SRO candidates only. (New JPM for this exam) RADIATION CONTROL: Given a set of conditions, the applicant will determine the most efficient method of performing a job to receive the lowest dose for work in an RCA. The applicant will be given 2 possible paths to get to a work site and the option of using 1 or 2 workers. This JPM will be performed by both RO and SRO candidates. (New JPM for this exam) EMERGENCY PLAN: Given a set of conditions, classify the event lAW the Emergency Action Level Matrices. The applicant will be required to classify a set of conditions using EPCLA-01, EMERGENCY CONTROL, and the EAL Matrices as guidance. Upon completion of the event classification, the applicant will be required to manually fill out an Emergency Notification Form. This JPM is Time Critical; the classification must be made within 15 minutes and the ENF must be completed within 15 minutes from completion of the classification. This JPM will be performed by SRO candidates only. (Modified bank JPM for this exam) NUREG-1 021, Revision 9, Supplement 1

ES-301 Administrative Topics Outline Form ES-301 -1 Facility: HB ROBINSON Date of Examination: 8/18/2008 Examination Level (circle one): RO 4 SRO Operating Test Number: Administrative Topic Type Describe activity to be per(ormed (see Note) Code* M Manually calculate an Estimated Critical Condition. Conduct of Operations G2.2.1 (3.9): Given a set of conditions and applicable (ADM a) references, perform a Manual Estimated Critical Condition Calculation. M DetermThe if required shift mannmg is met. Conduct of Operations G2.1.4 (3.8): Given a set of circumstances, determine (ADM SRO b) whether the shift complement requirements are met. N Review and approve Technical Specification Equipment Control surveillance. 1 ADM SRO c G2.2.39 (4.5): Given a completed, flawed OST-020,

/ SHIFTLY SURVEILLANCES, perform the review and approval and apply applicable ITS. N Determhe ALARA dose. Radiation Control G2.3.4 (3.7): Given a set of conditions, calculate the (ADM d) lowest dose path to a job and the lowest Stay Time for equipment manipulations. M Declare an emergency event. Emergency Plan G2.4.41 (4.6): Given a set of conditions, classify the (ADM SRO e) event lAW the Emergency Action Level Matrices and complete the Emergency Notification Form. NOTE: All items (5 total) are required for SROs. RO applicants require only 4 items unless they are retaking only the administrative topics, when 5 are required.

• Type Codes & Criteria:

(C)ontrol room (D)irect from bank ( 3 for ROs; for SROs & RO retakes) (N)ew or (M)odified from bank (> 1) (P)revious 2 exams ( 1; randomly selected) (S)imulator NUREG-1021, Revision 9, Supplement 1 ES-301 Administrative Topics Outline Form ES-301-1 Facility: HB ROBINSON Date of Examination: 811812008 Examination Level (circle one): RO A SRol Operating Test Number: Administrative Topic (see Note) Conduct of Operations (ADM a) Conduct of Operations (ADM SRO b) Equipment Control (ADM SRO c) Radiation Control (ADM d) Emergency Plan (ADM SRO e) Type Code* M M N N M Describe activity to be performed Manually calculate an Estimated Critical Condition. G2.2.1 (3.9): Given a set of conditions and applicable references, perform a Manual Estimated Critical Condition Calculation. Determine if required shift manning is met. G2.1.4 (3.8): Given a set of circumstances, determine whether the shift complement requirements are met. Review and approve Technical Specification surveillance. G2.2.39 (4.5): Given a completed, flawed OST-020, SHIFTLY SURVEILLANCES, perform the review and approval and apply applicable ITS. Determine ALARA dose. G2.3.4 (3.7): Given a set of conditions, calculate the lowest dose path to a job and the lowest Stay Time for equipment manipulations. Dec/are an emergency event. G2.4.41 (4.6): Given a set of conditions, classify the event lAW the Emergency Action Level Matrices and complete the Emergency Notification Form. NOTE: All items (5 total) are required for SROs. RO applicants require only 4 items unless they are retaking only the administrative topics, when 5 are required.

• Type Codes & Criteria:

(C)ontrol room (D)irect from bank (~ 3 for ROs; ~ for SROs & RO retakes) (N)ew or (M)odified from bank (> 1) (P)revious 2 exams (::; 1; randomly selected) (S)imulator NUREG-1 021, Revision 9, Supplement 1

ES-301 Administrative Topics Outline Form ES301 -1 Facility: HB ROBINSON Date of Examination: 8/18/2008 Examination Level (circle one): I SRO Operating Test Number: Administrative Topic Type Describe activity to be performed (see Note) Code* M Manually calculate an Estimated Critical Condition. Conduct of Operations G2.2.1 (3.9): Given a set of conditions and applicable (ADM a) references, perform a Manual Estimated Critical Condition Calculation. M Overtime extension determination. Conduct of Operations G2.1.5 (2.9): Given a set of circumstances, determine (ADM RO b) if work hour limits will be exceeded and notify supervision. N Determine CVCS Blender controls potentiometer Equipment Control settings. (ADM RO c) G2.2.12 (3.7): Given a set of conditions, perform the Administrative Daily Checks to determine potentiometer settings for FCV-1 1 3A, Boric Acid Flow and HFC-114, Primary Water Flow Auto Mode. N Determine ALARA dose. Radiation Control G2.3.4 (3.2): Given a set of conditions, calculate the (ADM d) lowest dose path to a job and the lowest Stay Time for work on equipment. Not selected for RO. Emergency Plan NOTE: All items (5 total) are required for SROs. RO applicants require only 4 items unless they are retaking only the administrative topics, when 5 are required.

• Type Codes & Criteria:

(C)ontrol room (D)irect from bank ( 3 for ROs; for SROs & RO retakes) (N)ew or (M)odified from bank (> 1) (P)revious 2 exams ( 1; randomly selected) (S) Imulator I V V NUREG-1 021, Revision 9, Supplement 1 ES-301 Administrative Topics Outline Form ES-301-1 Facility: HB ROBINSON Date of Examination: 811812008 Examination Level (circle one): [@/SRO Operating Test Number: Administrative Topic Type Describe activity to be performed (see Note) Code* / M Manually calculate an Estimated Critical Condition. Conduct of Operations G2.2.1 (3.9): Given a set of conditions and applicable (ADM a) references, perform a Manual Estimated Critical Condition Calculation. M Overtime extension determination. Conduct of Operations G2.1.5 (2.9): Given a set of circumstances, determine (ADM RO b) if work hour limits will be exceeded and notify supervision. N Determine CVCS Blender controls potentiometer II Equipment Control settings. (ADM RO c) G2.2.12 (3.7): Given a set of conditions, perform the Administrative Daily Checks to determine potentiometer settings for FCV-113A, Boric Acid Flow and HFC-114, Primary Water Flow Auto Mode. I Radiation Control N Determine ALARA dose. V G2.3.4 (3.2): Given a set of conditions, calculate the (ADM d) lowest dose path to a job and the lowest Stay Time for work on equipment. Not selected for RO. Emergency Plan NOTE: All items (5 total) are required for SROs. RO applicants require only 4 items unless they are retaking only the administrative topics, when 5 are required.

• Type Codes & Criteria:

(C)ontrol room (D)irect from bank (:::; 3 for ROs; :::; for SROs & RO retakes) (N)ew or (M)odified from bank (> 1) (P)revious 2 exams (:::; 1; randomly selected) (S)imulator NUREG-1 021, Revision 9, Supplement 1

ES-301 Control Room/In-Plant Systems Outline Form ES-301 -2 Facility: HB ROBINSON Date of Examination: 8/18/2008 Exam Level (circle one): RO / SRO(I) / SRO (U) Operating Test No.: Control Room Systems@ (8 for RO; 7 for SRO-I; 2 or 3 for SRO-U, including 1 ESF) System /JPM Title Type Code* Safety Function a. (IRPI!014): Perform Rod Cluster Exercise lAW OST-Oll. A, M, S 1 b. (ECCS/006): Fill a Safety Injection Accumulator lAW OP-202. C9 2 c. (SGTR/038): Isolate ruptured S/G lAW PATH-2. A: D,)E, L, S 3 -z d. (CSSIO26): Manually initiate Containment Spray lAW PATH-i. A, E, N, S 5 e. (W/E03): Perform a Post-LOCA Cooldown and Depressurization lAW AD? E, L, S 4P EPP-8. f. (NIS/Ol 5): Remove N-44 from service lAW OWP-O1 1. D) S 7 g. (CCW/026): Respond to a Loss of Component Cooling Water. 9i) E, S, 8 h. (SW/076): Limit Radiation Exposure in response to a Radiation alarm D; 5 9 lAW AOP-005. (SRO-l do not perform). In-Plant Systems@ (3 for RO; 3 for SRO-l; 3 or 2 for SRO-U) i. (Rod Control/OO1): Trip the Reactor from the Rod Drive MG Set D,)E, R 1 Room. j. (PZR Pressure/OlO): Energize PZR Heaters from Emergency D, E, L, R 3 busses lAW EPP-21. k. (EDGIO64): Manually start EDG using Air Start Solenoids. A, E, N, R 6 All RO and SRO-l control room (and in-plant) systems must be different and serve different safety functions; all 5 SRO-U systems must serve different safety functions; in-plant systems and functions may overlap those tested in the control room.

• Type Codes Criteria for RO I SRO-l I SRO-U (A)lternate path 4-6 I 4-6 / 2-3 (C)ontrol room (D)irectfrombank (E)mergency or abnormal in-plant 1 I 1 /

1 (L)ow-Power / Shutdown 1 I 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 (5) im ulator NUREG-1 021, Revision 9 ES-301 Control Room/In-Plant Systems Outline Form ES-301-2 Facility: HB ROBINSON Date of Examination: 811812008 Exam Level (circle one): RO 1 SRO(I) 1 SRO (U) Operating Test No.: Control Room Systems@ (8 for RO; 7 for SRO-I; 2 or 3 for SRO-U, including 1 ESF) Type Code* Safety System 1 JPM Title Function

a.

(IRPI/014): Perform Rod Cluster Exercise lAW OST-011.

b.

(ECCS/006): Fill a Safety Injection Accumulator lAW OP-202.

c.

(SGTR/038): Isolate ruptured S/G lAW PATH-2.

d.

(CSS/026): Manually initiate Containment Spray lAW PATH-1.

e.

(W/E03): Perform a Post-LOCA Cooldown and Depressurization lAW EPP-8.

f.

(NIS/015): Remove N-44 from service lAW OWP-011.

g.

(CCW/026): Respond to a Loss of Component Cooling Water.

h.

(SW/076): Limit Radiation Exposure in response to a Radiation alarm lAW AOP-005. (SRO-I do not perform). In-Plant Systems@ (3 for RO; 3 for SRO-I; 3 or 2 for SRO-U)

i.

(Rod ControI/001): Trip the Reactor from the Rod Drive MG Set Room.

j.

(PZR Pressure/010): Energize PZR Heaters from Emergency busses lAW EPP-21.

k.

(EDG/064): Manually start EDG using Air Start Solenoids. A,M,S 1 /' L9/S 2 AjD,)E, L, S \\~ 3 A,E,N,S 5 A/D,iE, L, S 4P \\.,-"./ DiS " 7 is) E, s, 8 DiS 9 ( 'D,lE,R 1 0, E, L, R 3 A,E,N,R 6 All RO and SRO-I control room (and in-plant) systems must be different and serve different safety functions; all 5 SRO-U systems must serve different safety functions; in-plant systems and functions may overlap those tested in the control room. (A)lternate path (C)ontrol room (D)irect from bank

• Type Codes (E)mergency or abnormal in-plant (L)ow-Power 1 Shutdown (N)ew or (M)odified from bank including 1 (A)

(P)revious 2 exams (R)CA (S)imulator NUREG-1 021, Revision 9 Criteria for RO 1 SRO-I 1 SRO-U 4-6/4-6/2-3

s9/:S8/:s4

~1/?:~1/?::1

>.:1/:>.:1/:>.:1

>.:2/2':.2/:>.:1

s 3 I:s 3/:,:; 2 (randomly selected)

?1/?

~1/;,:1

ES-301 Operating Test Quality Checklist Form ES-301-3 Facility: H.B.Robinson Date of Examination: 8/18/08 Operating Test Number: Initials

1. General Criteria

a b* c# a. The operating test conforms with the previously approved outline; changes are consistent with sampling requirements (e.g., 10 CFR 55.45, operational importance, safety function distribut). (t J

b. There is no day-to-day repetition between this and other operating tests to be administered / during this examination. L 4 c. The operating test shall not duplicate items from the applicants audit test(s). (see Section D.1.a.) < d. Overlap with the written examination and between different parts of the operating test is within acceptable limits.

e. It appears that the operating test will differentiate between competent and less-than-competent applicants at the designated license level. .4

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 designation if deemed to be time-critical by the facility licensee ,LJ operationally important specific performance criteria that include: j7 d />

detailed expected actions with exact criteria and nomenclature

system response and other examiner cues

statements describing important observations to be made by the applicant

criteria for successful completion of the task

identification of critical steps and their associated performance standards

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) speci1 ffr on those forms and Form ES-201-2.

3. Simulator Criteria The associated simulator operating tests (scenario sets) have been reviewed in accordance with Form ES-301-4 and a copy is attached.

Printed Name! Sig ature ate a. Author ó. izie,-/.c &Yie ,42 b. FacilityReviewer(*) ç F .io.-e/ i z&DK c. NRC Chief Examiner (#) / Z, -i-- / .) //2/7 d. NRC Supervisor 6 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 Operating Test Quality Checklist Form ES-301-3 Facilit : H.B.Robinson Date of Examination: 8/18/08 Operatin Test Number:

1. General Criteria

a.

The operating test conforms with the previously approved outline; changes are consistent with samplin requirements e..,10 CFR 55.45, operational importance, safet function distribu.

b.

There is no day-to-day repetition between this and other operating tests to be administered durin this examination.

c.

The operatin test shall not duplicate items from the applicants' audit test s. see Section D.1.a.

d.

Overlap with the written examination and between different parts of the operating test is within acceptable limits.

e.

It appears that the operating test will differentiate between competent and less-than-competent a licants at the desi nated license level.

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 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 identification of critical steps and their associated performance standards restrictions on the se uence of ste s, if a licable

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) specifi on those forms and Form ES-201-2.

3. Simulator Criteria The associated simulator operating tests (scenario sets) have been reviewed in accordance with Form ES-301-4 and a co is attached.

a.

Author

b.

Facility Reviewer(*)

c.

NRC Chief Examiner (#) ~::u./.d..I..L!2-~::::..s=-.£~"'::;;'L!....:,-/-""<::::~~<L:=~w:.+~::;,-~

d.

NRC Supervisor NOTE: The facility signature is not applicable for NRC-developed tests. Independent NRC reviewer initial items in Column "c"; chief examiner concurrence required. Initials c#

Target Quantitative Attributes (Per Scenario; See Section D.5.d) Actual Attributes /O 9 ES-301 Simulator Scenario Quality Checklist Form ES-301-4 Facilty: H.B.Robinson Date of Exam: 8/18/08 Scenario Numbers: 1 / 2/3 Operating Test No.: QUALITATIVE ATTRIBUTES Initials

a b* c# 1. The initial conditions are realistic, in that some equipment and/or instrumentation may be out A41 of service, but it does not cue the operators into expected events. ç Jk 1 i_ 2. The scenarios consist mostly of related events.

3. Each event description consists of the point in the scenario when it is to be initiated the malfunction(s) that are entered to initiate the event the symptoms/cues that will be visible to the crew £92/i ,J 4L 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 event. 4 P 5. The events are valid with regard to physics and thermodynamics. 6. Sequencing and timing of events is reasonable, and allows the examination team to obtain complete evaluation results commensurate with the scenario objectives. < 4f(.4 .4

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. (___- (ti 8. The simulator modeling is not altered. 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 1, 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 D.5 of ES-301. 1 3 1-11. All individual operator competencies can be evaluated, as verified using Form ES-301-6 (submit the form along with the simulator scenarios). C; Jf .-J 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). IA 13. The level of difficulty is appropriate to support licensing decisions for each crew position. ,,4 s_ 1. Total malfunctions (58) 2. Malfunctions after EOP entry (12) 3. Abnormal events (24) 4. Major transients (12) 5. FOPs entered/requiring substantive actions (12) j 6. FOP contingencies requiring substantive actions /L(/ ( / 3 32:i 4_ < /j/7_ 7. Critical tasks (23) L 14J di

--i--

I//i li-i-ES-301 Simulator Scenario Quality Checklist Form ES-301-4 Facilty: H.B.Robinson Date of Exam: 8/18/08 Scenario Numbers: 1 /2/3 Operating Test No.:

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

11.

12.

13.

1.

2.

3.

.4.

5.

6.

7.

QUALITATIVE ATTRIBUTES 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. The scenarios consist mostly of related events. Each event description consists of the point in the scenario when it is to be initiated the malfunction(s) that are entered to initiate the event the symptoms/cues that will be visible to the crew the expected operator actions (by shift position) the event termination point (if applicable) 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. The events are valid with regard to physics and thermodynamics. Sequencing and timing of events is reasonable, and allows the examination team to obtain complete evaluation results commensurate with the scenario objectives. 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. The simulator modeling is not altered. 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. 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. All individual operator competencies can be evaluated, as verified using Form ES-301-6 (submit the form along with the simulator scenarios). 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). The level of difficulty is appropriate to support licensing decisions for each crew position. Target Quantitative Attributes (Per Scenario; See Section D.S.d) Actual Attributes Total malfunctions (5-8) /0/9/ C;~ Malfunctions after EOP entry (1-2) t.{/t.(/ Y./ Abnormal events (2-4) ~/3/3/ Major transients (1-2) L/Z. /'Z,.. C" EOPs entered/requiring substantive actions (1-2) 1...- / I /l.. ~ EOP contingencies requiring substantive actions (0-2) I / I / I ~ Critical tasks (2-3) 2- / Z. /1..- r' Initials a b* c# Jij ~ rA J ~,;; ~~ ~,I;~ ~/bI 1 ~I- ~ r i£~

A JI

~~ ~ l,c~ k1~ J £') V~ I.-Iel ~d

ES-301 Simulator Scenario Quality Checklist Form ES-301-4 Facilty: H.B.Robinson Date of Exam: 8/18/08 Scenario Numbers: 4 II Operating Test No.: QUALITATIVE ATTRIBUTES Inhials

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. f 2. The scenarios consist mostly of related events. 3. Each event description consists of the point in the scenario when it is to be initiated the malfunction(s) that are entered to initiate the event the symptoms/cues that will be visible to the crew EL J,J 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 event. 5. The events are valid with regard to physics and thermodynamics. j_ 6. Sequencing and timing of events is reasonable, and allows the examination team to obtain complete evaluation results commensurate with the scenario objectives. 7 4( 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. 8. The simulator modeling is not altered. 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 ,L. -f 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. 1 I1 All other scenarios have been altered in accordance with Section D.5 of ES-301. 4L 11. All individual operator competencies can be evaluated, as verified using Form ES-301-6 (submit the form along with the simulator scenarios). j7L. 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/fr

13. The level of difficulty is appropriate to support licensing decisions for each crew position. Target Quantitative Attributes (Per Scenario; See Section D.5.d) Actual Attributes 1. Total malfunctions (58) / // /

1. 1 2.

Malfunctions after EOP entry (12) 5 / I

3. Abnormal events (24) 1 / / 4. Major transients (12) 3 / /

5. EOP5 entered/requiring substantive actions (12) Z /

/

6. EOP contingencies requiring substantive actions (02) a / / 7. Critical tasks (23) a /

/

ES-301 Simulator Scenario Quality Checklist Form ES-301-4 D D. Date of Exam: 8/18/08 Scenario Numbers: 4/.1, Operating Test No.: QUALITATIVE ATTRIBUTES Initials a b* c#

1.

The initial conditions are realistic, in that some equipment and/or instrumentation may be out ./ ~Ih ~. L.p of service, but it does not cue the operators into expected events. ""--.hI'" 4 £:J-

2.

The scenarios consist mostly of related events. L A ~ J £j

3.

Each event description consists of the point in the scenario when it is to be initiated the malfunction(s) that are entered to initiate the event the symptoms/cues that will be visible to the crew the expected operator actions (by shift position) the event termination point (if applicable)

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.

5.

The events are valid with regard to physics and thermodynamics.

6.

Sequencing and timing of events is reasonable, and allows the examination team to obtain complete evaluation results commensurate with the scenario objectives.

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.

8.

The simulator modeling is not altered.

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).

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).

13.

The level of difficulty is appropriate to support licensing decisions for each crew position. C /" ~ C r" - c c Z- ~ / Target Quantitative Attributes (Per Scenario; See Section D.S.d) Actual Attributes

1.

Total malfunctions (5-8) /1 I - I - ,/'

2.

Malfunctions after EOP entry (1-2) ,I -I... C

3.

Abnormal events (2-4) 0/1 ~/- r

4.

Major transients (1-2) 3 I -I ' ('

5.

EOPs entered/requiring substantive actions (1-2) t.. I <'

6.

EOP contingencies requiring substantive actions (0-2) z.. I -I - ("

7.

Critical tasks (2-3) 2.- I __ I....c 1~ ~ lJ 1'fL,t j ~j )~ \\ ~t J W~ \\ J 1;j /j'tft, j,j ~It ... tJ .J ~IL j -tJ tJltL ~ J 1'j ~~ ~ ~ j:j'. ~ V,/LA ] 1j t1~ J L) V ~.,\\ I~j J ~ l1r , IV J V n, ... lief .A. X V ~ ~ lej v.~ ~~ kf.:t 7/;l V'.l 4fr}

ES-301 Transient and Event Checklist Form ES-301 -5 Facility: Robinson Date of Exam: 8/18/2008 Operating Test No.: NRC Applicant Eve Scenarios nt Type 1 2 3 4 T Minimum (Day 1) (Day 2) (Day 3) (Day 4) 0 (Sim 1) (Sim 2) (Sim 3) (Sim 4) T CREW CREW CREW CREW A POSITION POSITION POSITION POSITION L S A B S A B S A B S A B R I U R T 0 R T 0 R T 0 R T 0 0 C P 0 C P 0 C P 0 C P RX 0 1 1 0 NOR 4 1 1 1 1 I/C 13 34 9 4 4 2 SRO-U (1) 56 68 9 MAJ 79 57

4 2 2 1 TS 23 2 0 2 2 4

1 1 1 0 NOR 0 1 1 1 4 4 2 SRO-I (1) I/C 56 13 5 MAJ 79 57 4 2 2 1 TS 12 3 0 2 2 3 4 1 1 1 0 NOR 4 1 1 1 1 I/C 13 15 6 4 2 RO(1) 8 10 MAJ 79 57 4 2 2 1 TS 0 0 2 2 Instructions: Circle the applicant level and enter the operating test number and Form ES-D-1 event numbers for each event type; TS are not applicable for RO applicants. RO5 must service in both the at-the-controls (ATC) and balance-of-plant (BOP) positions; Instant SRO5 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-i basis. 3. Whenever practical, both instrument and component malfunctions should be included; only those that require verifiable actions that provide insight to the applicants competence count toward the minimum requirements specified for the applicants license level in the right-hand columns. NUREG 1021 Revision 9 ES-301 Transient and Event Checklist Form ES-301-5 Facility: Robinson Date of Exam: 8/18/2008 Operating Test No.: NRC Applicant Eve Scenarios nt Type 1 2 3 4 T Minimum (Day 1) (Day 2) (Day 3) (Day 4) 0 (Sim 1) (Sim2) (Sim3) (Sim4) T CREW CREW CREW CREW A POSITION POSITION POSITION POSITION L S A B S A B S A B S A B R I U R T 0 R T 0 R T 0 R T 0 0 C P 0 C P 0 C P 0 C P RX 0 1 1 0 NOR 4 1 1 1 1 IIC 13 34 9 4 4 2 SRO-U (1) 56 68 9 MAJ 79 57 4 2 2 1 TS 23 2 0 2 2 RX 4 1 1 1 0 NOR 0 1 1 1 IIC 56 13 5 4 4 2 SRO-I (1) 4 MAJ 79 57 4 2 2 1 TS 12 3 0 2 2 3 RX 4 1 1 1 0 NOR 4 1 1 1 1 I/C 13 15 6 4 4 2 RO (1) 8 10 MAJ 79 57 4 2 2 1 TS 0 0 2 2 Instructions:

1.

Circle the applicant level and enter the operating test number and Form ES-D-1 event numbers for each event type; TS are not applicable for RO applicants. ROs must service in both the "at-the-controls (ATC)" and "balance-of-plant (BOP)" positions; Instant SROs must do one scenario, including at least two instrument or component (I/C) malfunctions and one major transient, in the ATC position.

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. NUREG 1021 Revision 9

ES-301 Transient and Event Checklist Form ES-301 -5 Facility: Robinson Date of Exam: 8/18/2008 Operating Test No.: NRC Applicant Eve Scenarios nt Type 1 2 3 4 T Minimum (Day 1) (Day 2) (Day 3) (Day 4) 0 (Simi) (Sim2) (Sim3) (Sim4) T CREW CREW CREW CREW A POSITION POSITION POSITION POSITION L S A B S A B S A B S A B R I U R T 0 R T 0 R T 0 R T 0 0 C P 0 C P 0 C P 0 C P RX 0 1 1 0 NOR 4 1 1 1 1 1 9 4 4 2 SRO-U (2) I/C MAJ 79 4 2 2 1 TS 23 2 0 2 2 RX 4 1 1 1 0 NOR 0 1 1 1 4 4 2 SRO-U (3) I/C 56 13 5 MAJ 79 57 4 2 2 1 TS 12 3 0 2 2 3 RX

4

2 2 1 1 0 NOR 4 1 1 1 1 /C 13 15 48 8 4 2 RO(2) 8 10 MAJ 79 57 56 6 2 2 1 TS 0 0 2 2 Instructions: Circle the applicant level and enter the operating test number and Form ES-D-1 event numbers for each event type; TS are not applicable for RO applicants. ROs must service in both the at-the-controls (ATC) and balance-of-plant (BOP) positions; Instant SROs must do one scenario, including at least two instrument or component (I/C) malfunctions and one major transient, in the ATC position. 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 applicants competence count toward the minimum requirements specified for the applicants license level in the right-hand columns. NUREG 1021 Revision 9 ES-301 Transient and Event Checklist Form ES-301-5 Facility: Robinson Date of Exam: 8/18/2008 Operating Test No.: NRC Applicant Eve Scenarios nt Type 1 2 3 4 T Minimum (Day 1) (Day 2) (Day 3) (Day 4) 0 (Sim 1) (Sim2) (Sim3) (Sim4) T CREW CREW CREW CREW A POSITION POSITION POSITION POSITION L S A B S A B S A B S A B R I U R T 0 R T 0 R T 0 R T 0 0 C P 0 C P 0 C P 0 C P RX 0 1 1 0 NOR 4 1 1 1 1 I/C 13 9 4 4 2 SRO-U (2) 56 MAJ 79 4 2 2 1 TS 23 2 0 2 2 RX 4 1 1 1 0 NOR 0 1 1 1 IIC 56 13 5 4 4 2 SRO-U (3) 4 MAJ 79 57 4 2 2 1 TS 12 3 0 2 2 3 RX 4 2 2 1 1 0 NOR 4 1 1 1 1 I/C 13 15 48 8 4 4 2 RO (2) 8 10 MAJ 79 57 56 6 2 2 1 TS 0 0 2 2 Instructions:

1.

Circle the applicant level and enter the operating test number and Form ES-D-1 event numbers for each event type; TS are not applicable for RO applicants. ROs must service in both the "at-the-controls (ATC)" and "balance-of-plant (BOP)" positions; Instant SROs must do one scenario, including at least two instrument or component (I/C) malfunctions and one major transient, in the ATC position.

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. NUREG 1021 Revision 9

ES-301 Transient and Event Checklist Form ES-301 -5 Facility: Robinson Date of Exam: 8/18/2008 Operating Test No.: NRC Applicant Eve Scenarios nt Type 1 2 3 4 T Minimum (Day 1) (Day 2) (Day 3) (Day 4) 0 (Simi) (S1m2) (Sim3) (Sim4) T CREW CREW CREW CREW A POSITION POSITION POSITION POSITION L S A B S A B S A B S A B R I U R T 0 R T 0 R T 0 R T 0 0 C P OC P 0 C P 0 C P RX 0 1 1 0 NOR 1 1 1 1 1 I/C 34 23 7 4 4 2 SRO-U (4) 68 9 MAJ 57 56 4 2 2 1 TS 46 2 0 2 2 RX 0 1 1 0 NOR 0 1 1 1 I/C o 4 4 2 MAJ 0 2 2 1 TS 0 0 2 2 RX 0 1 1 0 NOR 0 1 1 1 I/C

0 4 4 2 MAJ 0 2 2 1 TS 0 0 2 2 Instructions: Circle the applicant level and enter the operating test number and Form ES-D-1 event numbers for each event type; TS are not applicable for RO applicants. ROs must service in both the at-the-controls (ATC) and balance-of-plant (BOP) positions; Instant SRO5 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-i basis. 3. Whenever practical, both instrument and component malfunctions should be included; only those that require verifiable actions that provide insight to the applicants competence count toward the minimum requirements specified for the applicants license level in the right-hand columns. NUREG 1021 Revision 9 ES-301 Transient and Event Checklist Form ES-301-5 Facility: Robinson Date of Exam: 8/18/2008 Operating Test No.: NRC Applicant Eve Scenarios nt Type 1 2 3 4 T Minimum (Day 1) (Day 2) (Day 3) (Day 4) 0 (Sim 1) (Sim2) (Sim 3) (Sim4) T CREW CREW CREW CREW A POSITION POSITION POSITION POSITION L S A B S A B S A B S A B R I U R T 0 R T 0 R T 0 R T 0 0 C P 0 C P 0 C P 0 C P RX 0 1 1 0 NOR 1 1 1 1 1 I/C 34 23 7 4 4 2 SRO-U (4) 68 9 MAJ 57 56 4 2 2 1 TS 46 2 0 2 2 RX 0 1 1 0 NOR 0 1 1 1 I/C 0 4 4 2 MAJ 0 2 2 1 TS 0 0 2 2 RX 0 1 1 0 NOR 0 1 1 1 I/C 0 4 4 2 MAJ 0 2 2 1 TS 0 0 2 2 Instructions:

1.

Circle the applicant level and enter the operating test number and Form ES-D-1 event numbers for each event type; TS are not applicable for RO applicants. ROs must service in both the "at-the-controls (ATC)" and "balance-of-plant (BOP)" positions; Instant SROs must do one scenario, including at least two instrument or component (I/C) malfunctions and one major transient, in the ATC position.

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. NUREG 1021 Revision 9

ES-301 Competencies Checklist Form ES-301 -6 Instructions: Circle the applicants license type and enter one or more event numbers that will allow the examiners to evaluate every applicable competency for every applicant. Facility: Robinson Date of Examination: 8/18/08 Operating Test No. SRO RO(ATC) BOP Competencies SCENARIO SCENARIO SCENARIO 1 2 34 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 lnterpretlDiag-1,3,4, 1,4,6, 1,3,4, 1,3,5, 1,2,3, 2,3,4, 3,4,6, 1,3,5, 6,7,8 46, 1,2,5 2,4,5, 7,8,9, 7,8,9, nose Events 5,6,7, 467 5,6,7 7,8,9 6,7,9 10 10 11 and Conditions Comply With 1,4,6, 1,3,4, 1,3,5, and Use ALL ALL ALL ALL 4,5,6 1,2,4, 2,4,5, 3,4,6, 1,3,5, 6,7,8 7,8,9, 7,8,9, 5,7 6,8 7,8,9 6,7,9 Procedures (1) 10 10 11 Operate 1,4,6, 1,3,5, Control Boards N/A N/A N/A N/A 4,5,6, 1,2,4, 2,4,5, 1,3,4, 3,4,6, 1,3,5, 6,7,8 789 5,7 6,8 78 9 8,10 7,8,9 6,7,9 (2) iO 11 Communicate and ALL ALL ALL ALL ALL ALL ALL ALL ALL ALL ALL ALL Interact Demonstrate Supervisory ALL ALL ALL ALL N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Ability (3) Comply With and Use Tech. 2,3 12,3 4,6 2,3,4 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Specs. (3) Notes: (1) Includes Technical Specification compliance for an RO. (2) Optional for an SRO-U. (3) Only applicable to SROs. ES-301, Page 27 of 27 ES-301 Competencies Checklist Form ES-301-6 Facility: Robinson Date of Examination: 8/18/08 Operating Test No. SRO RO (ATC) BOP Competencies SCENARIO SCENARIO SCENARIO 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 I nterpretiDiag-1,3,4, 1,2,3, 2,3,4, 1,2,4, 4,5,6, 2,4,5, 1,4,6, 1,3,4, 3,4,6, 1,3,5, nose Events 5,6,7, 4,6,7 5,6,7 5,6,7, 7,9 1,2,5 6,8 7,8,9, 7,8,9, 7,8,9 6,7,9 and Conditions 9 8 10 10 Comply With 1,2,4, 2,4,5, 1,4,6, 1,3,4, 3,4,6, 1,3,5, and Use ALL ALL ALL ALL 4,5,6 5,7 6,8 7,8,9, 7,8,9, 7,8,9 6,7,9 Procedures (1) 10 10 Operate 4,5,6, 1,2,4, 2,4,5, 1,4,6, 1,3,4, 3,4,6, 1,3,5, Control Boards N/A N/A N/A N/A 7,8,9 5,7 6,8 7,8,9, 8,10 7,8,9 6,7,9 (2) 10 Communicate and ALL ALL ALL ALL ALL ALL ALL ALL ALL ALL ALL Interact Demonstrate Supervisory ALL ALL ALL ALL N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Ability (3) Comply With and Use Tech. 2,3 1,2,3 4,6 2,3,4 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Specs. (3) Notes: (1 ) Includes Technical Specification compliance for an RO. (2) Optional for an SRO*U. (3) Only applicable to SROs. Instructions: Circle the applicants' license type and enter one or more event numbers that will allow the examiners to evaluate every applicable competency for every applicant. ES-301, Page 27 of 27 4 1,3,5, 6,7,8 11 1,3,5, 6,7,8 11 1,3,5, 6,7,8 11 ALL N/A N/A

ES-401 Written Examination Quality Checklist Form ES-401-6 Facility: H.B.Robinson Date of Exam: 8/26/08 Exam Level: RO SRO 6. 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. 7. 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 K/As support the higher cognitive levels; enter the actual RO / SRO question distribution(s) at 8. References/handouts provided do not give away answers or aid in the elimination of distractors. 9. Question content conforms with specific K/A statements in the previously approved 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. 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 / Signa ure

a. Author

b. Facility Reviewer (*)

c. NRC Chief Examiner (#)

d. NRC Regional Supervisor EI, 2

4oLL7 Item Description 1. Questions and answers are technically accurate and applicable to the facility. 2. a. NRC K/As are referenced for all questions. b. Facility learning objectives are referenced as available. 3. SRO questions are appropriate in accordance with Section D.2.d of ES-401 4. The sampling process was random and systematic (If more than 4 RO or 2 SRC questions were repeated from the last 2 NRC licensing exams, consult the NRR CL program 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 )< the licensee certifies that there is no duplication; or other (explain) Memory 37 / s F. vie s / I Note:

• The facility reviewers initials/signature are not applicable for NRC-developed examinations.

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

ES-401 Written Examination Quality Checklist Form ES-401-6 I~Robinson Date of Exam: 8/26/08 Exam Level: RO ~ SROI8I Initial Item Description a b* c#

1.

Questions and answers are technicallv accurate and applicable to the facilitv. / 7AL,}..t! ;L -........... 1/ ~

2.

a.

NRC KlAs are referenced for all questions. ~ I~~t

b.

Facility learning objectives are referenced as available. IA. ~

3.

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

4.

The sampling process was random and systematic (If more than 4 RO or 2 SRO questions ci were repeated from the last 2 NRC licensinq exams, consult the NRR OL proqram office).

5.

Question duplication from the license screening/audit exam was controlled as indicated below (check the item that applies) and appears appropriate: ~t1& _ the audit exam was systematically and randomly developed; or _ the audit exam was completed before the license exam was started; or j _ the examinations were developed independently; or ~j ~ the licensee certifies that there is no duplication; or _ other (explain)

6.

Bank use meets limits (no more than 75 percent Bank Modified New t3lbL from the bank, at least 10 percent new, and the rest , 41 new or modified); enter the actual RO / SRO-only I~/ 3 7/ I S"" 3/ 2J:.. ~ J question distribution(s) at riqht.

7.

Between 50 and 60 percent of the questions on the RO Memory CIA r1A exam are written at the comprehension/ analysis level; ~, the SRO exam may exceed 60 percent if the randomly 37 / '1 ~ & / Ib.( .J- ~j selected KlAs support the higher cognitive levels; enter the actual RO / SRO question distribution(s) at right. ]~

8.

References/handouts provided do not give away answers L ~,!;! or aid in the elimination of distractors.

9.

Question content conforms with specific KIA statements in the previously approved 0'ft; t examination outline and is appropriate for the tier to which they are assigned; G ~ iJ-deviations are iustified. lAl\\.,

10.

Question psychometric quality and format meet the guidelines in ES Appendix B. / 1/) '/II; V. ~ ~;t Z ~~ ,~j

11.

The exam contains the required number of one-point, multiple choice items; J the total is correct and agrees with the value on the cover sheet. 1,tiAj)AP~t~dM~;;n?dJc0J/IWtv ~

a. Author g Itl t)6'

b. Facility Reviewer (*)

, ~'" tM.E' ~ F'. jt>..,e~/

c

If 11:>. 1>'(

c. NRC Chief Examiner (#)

Edc.-v.t /7.6 e. a

,..-/ L:;:t!. "-J.,dG, __

(7. !iffff

d. NRC Regional Supervisor

.4AA.J' '" '.,,"~"'f: 1.;If.,,:'/ / / 'i(L (l '7 ( (V') 'J..tfUA 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.

ES-403 Written Examination Grading Form ES-403-1 Quality Checklist Facility:,/4 4 Date of Exam:/Z%,/C Exam Level: RO SRO Initials Item_Description I Clean answer sheets copied before grading 2. Answer key changes and question deletions justified AA 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 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 Date

a. Grader 4, A4iøtW/<

fT/c

b. Facility Reviewer(*)

j OvPS/ c. NRC Chief Examiner (*)

d. NRC Supervisor (*)

,Uo-t chq/g (*) The facility reviewers signature is not applicable for examinations graded by the NRC; two independent NRC reviews are required. ES-403, Page 6 of 6 ES-403 Written Examination Grading Quali!y Checklist Facilit :

1.

2.

Item Descri tion Clean answer sheets copied before Answer key changes and question deletions justified and documented

3.

Applicants' scores checked for addition errors

4.

5.

6.

reviewers s ot check> 25% of examinations Grading for all borderline cases (80 +/-2% overall and 70 or 80, as a licable, +/-4% on the SRO-onl reviewed in detail All other failing examinations checked to ensure that grades are. ustified Performance on missed questions checked for training deficiencies and wording problems; evaluate validity of uestions missed b half or more of the a licants Printed Name/Signature

a. Grader

b. Facility Reviewer(*)

c. NRC Chief Examiner (*)

d. NRC Supervisor (*)

Form ES-403-1 Initials c Date (*) The facility reviewer's signature is not applicable for examinations graded by the NRC; two independent NRC reviews are required. ES-403, Page 6 of 6

ES-501, Rev. 9 Post-Examination Check Sheet Form ES-501-1 Post-Examination Check Sheet: H. B. Robinson Task Description Date Complete 1. Facility written exam comments or graded exams received and 9/9/2008 verified complete 2. Facility written exam comments reviewed and incorporated and N/A NRC grading completed, if necessary 3. Operating tests graded by NRC examiners 9/16/2008 4. NRC chief examiner review of operating test and written exam 9/17/2008 grading completed 5. Responsible supervisor review completed 9/23/2008 6. Management (licensing official) review completed 9/23/2008 7. License and denial letters mailed 9/23/2008 8. Facility notified of results 9/23/2008 9. Examination report issued (refer to NRC MC 0612) 10/6/2008

10. Reference material returned after final resolution of any appeals N/A ES-501, Rev. 9 Post-Examination Check Sheet Form ES-501-1 Post-Examination Check Sheet: H. B. Robinson Task Description Date Complete

1.

Facility written exam comments or graded exams received and 9/9/2008 verified complete

2.

Facility written exam comments reviewed and incorporated and N/A NRC grading completed, if necessary

3.

Operating tests graded by NRC examiners 9/16/2008

4.

NRC chief examiner review of operating test and written exam 9/17/2008 grading completed

5.

Responsible supervisor review completed 9/23/2008

6.

Management (licensing official) review completed 9/23/2008

7.

License and denial letters mailed 9/23/2008

8.

Facility notified of results 9/23/2008

9.

Examination report issued (refer to NRC MC 0612) 10/6/2008

10. Reference material returned after final resolution of any appeals N/A

ES-401, Rev. 9 Written Examination Review Worksheet RO Form ES-401-9 1. 2.

3. Psychometric Flaws

4. Job Content Flaws

5. Other 6.

7. Q# LOK LOD (F/H) (1-5) Stem Cues TIF Cred. Partial Job-Minutia

1. 1 Back-Q=

SRO UIEIS Explanation Focus Dist. Link units ward K/A Only Instructions [Refer to Section D 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 24 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 K/A 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 K/A and those that are designated SRO-only (K/A and license level mismatches are unacceptable). 6. Based on the reviewers 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 X 5? Should not use the word approximately. Show how you determine the points used. CHANGED STEM 35 TO 18 PSIG. REMOVED APPROXIMATELY. CHANGED DISTRACTORS - OK 2 U A & B are not plausible. Are there any scenario, where an automatic valve alignment would occur while an operator is performing a manual transfer or alignment on that system? CHANGED STEM AND REWORDED DISTRACTORS. - OK ES-401, Rev. 9 Written Examination Review Worksheet - RO Form ES-401-9

1.

2.

3. Psychometric Flaws

4. Job Content Flaws

5. Other

6.

7.

0#1 LOK I LOD I (F/H) (1-5) Stem \\cues\\ T/F \\ cred'l Partial I Job-I Minutia

1. / I Back-I 0= I SRO I U/E/S units ward KIA Only Explanation Focus Dis!.

Link Instructions [Refer to Section D 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 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 (Le., 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 (Le., 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 (Le., 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). x S? 2 U Should not use the word approximately. Show how you determine the points used. CHANGED STEM 35 TO 18 PSIG. REMOVED APPROXIMATELY. CHANGED DISTRACTORS - OK A & B are not plausible. Are there any scenario, where an automatic valve alignment would occur while an operator is performing a manual transfer or alignment on that system? CHANGED STEM AND REWORDED DISTRACTORS. - OK

1. 2.

3. Psychometric Flaws

4. Job Content Flaws

5. Other 6.

7. Q#LOK LOD (F/H) (1-5) Stem Cues TIF Cred. Partial Job-Minutia

1. 1 Back-Q SRO U/E/S Explanation Focus Dist.

Link units ward K/A Only 3 1 U LOD. This question is very simple. What indication are provided to indicate there might be a failure of the #2 seal? CHANGED STEM AND DISTRACTORS. OK 4 2 S MADEACHANGETOTHESTEMOK 5 1 U Easy question. Fluctuating cycling. All of the other distractors would result in constant flow or no flow. Very little system knowledge is needed to answer this question. CHANGED STEM OK 6 X S/E Crew is Path-i and is unable MADE CHANGES TO THE STEM OK 7 2 5 CHANGED QUESTION BECAUSE IT WAS TO CLOSE TO 10 QUESTION. OK 8 2 X E In distractor C you are increasing the possibility of a release. Why would this be plausible? CHANGED DISTRACTOR OK. 9 2 S ADDED WORDSTOTHESTEM. OK 10 X X U Look at question 7. Very little difference in the two questions. CHANGED WORDING IN THE STEM AND DISTRACTORS. CHANGED QUESTION 7. OK ii 2 5 OK 12 X X U The stem says that Both PAM operable. There is no need for the applicant to say that he must verify PAM is operable as stated in the distractors A & B. Two implausible distractors A & B. CHANGED DISTRACTORS AND STEM OK. 13H 2 S OK 14 2 H S MADE CHANGES TO THE STEM AND DISTRACTORS. OK. 15 F 2 S CHANGEDDISTRACTORCOK 16 1 S This is a memory level question. Could be improved. CHANGED WORDING IN DISTRACTORS. OK

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. 1 Back-Q= SRO utE/S Explanation Focus Dist.

Link units ward KIA Only 3 1 U LOD. This question is very simple. What indication are provided to indicate there might be a failure of the #2 seal? CHANGED STEM AND DISTRACTORS.- OK 4 2 S MADE A CHANGE TO THE STEM - OK 5 1 U Easy question. Fluctuating - cycling. All of the other distractors would result in constant flow or no flow. Very little system knowledge is needed to answer this question. CHANGED STEM - OK 6 X S/E Crew "is"-...... Path-1 and is unable....... MADE CHANGES TO THE STEM - OK 7 2 S CHANGED QUESTION BECAUSE IT WAS TO CLOSE TO 10 QUESTION. - OK 8 2 X E In distractor C you are increasing the possibility of a release. Why would this be plausible? CHANGED DISTRACTOR - OK. 9 2 S ADDED WORDS TO THE STEM. - OK 10 X X U Look at question 7. Very little difference in the two questions. CHANGED WORDING IN THE STEM AND DISTRACTORS. CHANGED QUESTION 7. - OK 11 2 S OK 12 X X U The stem says that "Both PAM operable." There is no need for the applicant to say that he must verify PAM is operable as stated in the distractors A & B. Two implausible distractors A & B. CHANGED DISTRACTORS AND STEM - OK. 13 H 2 S OK 14 2 H S MADE CHANGES TO THE STEM AND DISTRACTORS. OK. 15 F 2 S CHANGED DISTRACTOR "C" - OK 16 1 S This is a memory level question. Could be improved. CHANGED WORDING IN DISTRACTORS. - OK

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. 1 Back-Q SRO U/E/S Explanation Focus Dist.

Link units ward K/A Only 17 F 2 S CHANGED WORDING IN STEM OK 18 F 2 5 REWORDED ONE OF THE DISTRACTORS OK WILL RE-VALIDATE QUESTION 19 H 1/2 U Based on the information provided, limited information is needed to answer the question IRPI indications increasing and Tavg 1.5 degrees higher than Tref and rods in AUTO = UNC ROD withdrawal. Distractors are not plausible. As written LOD. CHANGED DISTRACTORSOK 20 X U There may be two correct answer or the answer identified as correct is not. If there is a rod that failed to insert, some actions must be taken to insert that rod as some point. The answer you provided as correct states No actions required. CHANGED STEM DISTRACTORS

OK 21H 2 S OK 22 2 X E/S Need to look at plausibility of distractor A -CHANGED DISTRACTOR A. -OK 23 F? 2 X E Distractor A is not plausible. REWORDED STEM AND REWORDED DISTRACTORS. XXXXXX WILL TAKE ANOTHER LOOK AT THIS QUESTION. PROBLEM WITH DISTRACTOR D. 7/22/08 CHANGED DISTRACTOR D. OK. 24F 2 5 OK 25 F? 1 U LOD. The question meets the K/A. Please explain the operational value of this question. How often and in what procedures require the RO to make this determination/perform such a calculation? LICENSEE WANTS TO KEEP QUESTION OK 26 S OK 27 X U Distractors A & B are not plausible. ADDED INFO TO THE STEM, REWORDED DISTRACTOR A. OK. 28 5 OK

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/E/S Explanation Focus Dist. Link units ward KIA Only 17 F 2 S CHANGED WORDING IN STEM - OK 18 F 2 S REWORDED ONE OF THE DISTRACTORS - OK -WILL RE-VALIDATE QUESTION 19 H 1/2 U Based on the information provided, limited information is needed to answer the question - IRPI indications increasing and Tavg 1.5 degrees higher than Tref and rods in AUTO = UNC ROD withdrawal. Distractors are not plausible. As written LOD. CHANGED DISTRACTORS - OK 20 X U There may be two correct answer or the answer identified as correct is not. If there is a rod that failed to insert, some actions must be taken to i insert that rod as some point. The answer you provided as correct states "No actions required." CHANGED STEM DISTRACTORS-OK 21 H 2 S OK 22 2 X E/S Need to look at plausibility of distractor A -CHANGED DISTRACTOR A. -OK 23 F? 2 X E Distractor A is not plausible. REWORDED STEM AND REWORDED DISTRACTORS. - XXXXXX - WILL TAKE ANOTHER LOOK AT THIS QUESTION. PROBLEM WITH DISTRACTOR D. 7/22/08 CHANGED DISTRACTOR D. - OK. 24 F 2 S OK 25 F? 1 U LOD. The question meets the KIA. Please explain the operational value of this question. How often and in what procedures require the RO to make this determination/perform such a calculation? LICENSEE WANTS TO KEEP QUESTION - OK 26 S OK 27 X U Distractors A & B are not plausible. ADDED INFO TO THE STEM, REWORDED DISTRACTOR A. OK. 28 S OK

1. 2.

3. Psychometric Flaws

4. Job Content Flaws

5. Other 6.

7. Q# LOK LCD

(F/H) (1-5) Stem Cues T/F Cred. Partial Job-Minutia

1. 1 Back-Q SRO U/E/S Explanation Focus Dist.

Link units ward K/A Only 29 X X U? Distractor B is not plausible. You said that it was isolated. K/A not matched. NEW QUESTION XXXXXXX NEED TO LOOK AT DISTRACTOR D. WILL REVISIT ON TUESDAY. XXXXXXX 7/22/08 WROTE NEW QUESTION - OK 30 5 OK 31 3 5 OK 32 2 S MADE CHANGES TO DISTRACTORS. OK 33 2 5 OK 34 2 5 MADE A CHANGE TO STEM OK 7/22/08 35 2 S WILL LOOK AT CHANGING DISTRACTOR B X)OO(XXXXXX CHANGED DISTRACTOR B 7/1/31/2008 OK 36 1 X U Distractor A is not plausible. Distractor B is not plausible. Distractors not related to question asked. XXXX WILL TAKE BACK TO LOOK AT ADDING WORDS TO THE DISTRACTOR TO MAKE QUESTION MATCH THE K/A

XXXXXXXXXXXX CHANGED DISTRACTORS OK. 7/31/2008 37 1/2 X E LCD. In distractor C& D are you attempting to say auto start? If so, why not use Auto-start/automatically started? Distractor D plausible? Would such a condition exist for the given plant equipment lineup? Maintenance is in progress -. if proper safety precautions are in place, precautions would be in place to prevent equipment from starting personnel safety is one of the first things addressed when working on equipment that means making sure that equipment will not auto start CHANGED DISTRACTORS OK 38 2 X S/E Distractors are weak. All systems functioned as designed - please explain why anyone would expect the a design limit to be exceed. CHANGED STEM AND DISTRACTORS. OK 39 2 S 40 2 5

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. 1 Back-Q=

SRO U/E/S Explanation Focus Dist. Link units ward KIA Only 29 X X U? Distractor B is not plausible. You said that it was isolated. KIA not matched. NEW QUESTION - XXXXXXX NEED TO LOOK AT DISTRACTOR D. WILL REVISIT ON TUESDAY. XXXXXXX -7/22/08 - WROTE NEW QUESTION - OK 30 S OK 31 3 S OK 32 2 S MADE CHANGES TO DISTRACTORS. - OK 33 2 S OK 34 2 S MADE A CHANGE TO STEM - OK 7/22/08 35 2 S WILL LOOK AT CHANGING DISTRACTOR B XXXXXXXXXX CHANGED DISTRACTOR B - 7/1/31/2008 -OK 36 1 X U Distractor A is not plausible. Distractor B is not plausible. Distractors not related to question asked. XXXX WILL TAKE BACK TO LOOK AT ADDING WORDS TO THE DISTRACTOR TO MAKE QUESTION MATCH THE KIA - XXXXXXXXXXXX CHANGED DISTRACTORS - OK. 7/31/2008 37 1/2 X E LOD. In distractor C& 0 are you attempting to say auto start? If so, why not use Auto-start/automatically started? Distractor 0 plausible? Would such a condition exist for the given plant equipment lineup? Maintenance is in progress - if proper safety precautions are in place, precautions would be in place to prevent equipment from starting - personnel safety is one of the first things addressed when working on equipment - that means making sure that equipment will not auto start...... CHANGED DISTRACTORS - OK 38 2 X S/E Distractors are weak. All systems functioned as designed - please explain why anyone would expect the a design limit to be exceed. CHANGED STEM AND D1STRACTORS. - OK 39 2 S 40 2 S

1. 2.

3. Psychometric Flaws

4. Job Content Flaws

5. Other 6.

7. Q#LOK L0D (F/H) (1-5) Stem Cues T/F Cred. Partial Job-Minutia

1. 1 Back-Q SRO U/E/S Explanation Focus Dist.

Link units ward K/A Only 41 1 LOD To answer this question all one need to remember is a required flow of 300 GPM is needed. The 300 GPM flow requirement is considered common knowledge. Flow is increased by opening a valve/valves. MADE CHANGES TO STEM OK. 42 3 S 43 3 S 44 2 5 45 1 x LCD. Easy distractors. I am not sure if you can do much with this question. Is there a valve that can not be closed form the Panel???? 46 X U As written the question has two correct answers (A & B) 47 2 5 Easy 48 X U Two correct answers (A & B would solve the problem). 49 2 X U Two correct answers - A & D REWROTE QUESTION 7/31/2008 50 1/2 S Easy question CHANGED STEM & DISTRACTORS OK 7/31/2008 51 2 X S? Could C also be correct? 52 2 S 53 1 X ? U LCD. We know that SG A is isolated. A & C removed immediately. Distractors do not appear to be plausible. Make sure K/A matches. 54 X U? Please explain why you consider this a K/A match. STILL NEED TO WORK ON 713112008 XXXXXXXXX WROTE A NEW QUESTION OK 815/2008 55 1 X U LCD. K/A not matched. Setpoint question. As written there is more than one correct answer. 56 2 5 57 2 5

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 utE/S Explanation Focus Dist. Link units ward KIA Only 41 1 LOD To answer this question all one need to remember is a required flow of 300 GPM is needed. The 300 GPM flow requirement is considered common knowledge. Flow is increased by opening a valve/valves. MADE CHANGES TO STEM - OK. 42 3 S 43 3 S 44 2 S 45 1 X LOD. Easy distractors. I am not sure if you can do much with this question. Is there a valve that can not be closed form the Panel???? 46 X U As written the question has two correct answers (A & 8) 47 2 S Easy 48 X U Two correct answers (A & B would solve the problem). 49 2 X U Two correct answers - A & D - REWROTE QUESTION - 7/31/2008 50 1/2 S Easy question - CHANGED STEM & DISTRACTORS - OK 7/31/2008 51 2 X S? Could C also be correct? 52 2 S 53 1 X ? U LOD. We know that SG A is isolated. A & C removed immediately. Distractors do not appear to be plausible. Make sure KIA matches. 54 X U? Please explain why you consider this a KIA match. STILL NEED TO WORK ON - 7/31/2008 XXXXXXXXX WROTE A NEW QUESTION OK 8/512008 55 1 X U LOD. KIA not matched. Setpoint question. As written there is more than one correct answer. 56 2 S 57 2 S

1. 2.

3. Psychometric Flaws

4. Job Content Flaws

5. Other 6.

7. Q# LOK LCD

(F/H) (1-5) Stem Cues T/F Cred. Partial Job-Minutia

1. 1 Back-Q SRC U/EIS Explanation Focus Dist.

Link units ward KIA Only 58 2 S Question could be improved!! 59 1 X X U What are you asking? The stem says that Train A Plasma display is mop Then use Train B. Then you ask how to determine subcooling and CET - answer CETC temperatures from Train A and B CETCs. Distractors A & D are not plausible. Are temperatures gotten from a unction box? Why would one be required to look at reading from only one train to make a key determination? 60 2 S 61 2 S 62 X

U Distractors A & D do not appear to be plausible 63 2 S 64 2 S 65 2 S 66 1 X E Distractor C is not plausible. What are Bosuns used for? 67 2 5? See if this question is on the SRO exam. 68 1 X U/E? LCD Do you think this question addresses the knowledge of a process? SAT OK 7/31/2008 69 U LCD It appears that this question can be answered by answering which system/component is most important to plant safety/operation. 70 1 U LCD General rad worker question. Is this specifically RO knowledge? 71 1 ? LCD 72 1 ? LCD 73 1 X ? LCD Simple memory - Distractor C. 74 1 ? LCD

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 utE/S Explanation Focus Dis!. Link units ward KIA Only 58 2 S Question could be improved!! i I 59 1 X X U What are you asking? The stem says that Train A Plasma display is inop..... Then use Train B. Then you ask how to determine subcooling and CET - answer CETC temperatures from Train A and B CETCs. Distractors A & D are not plausible. Are temperatures gotten from a

• unction box? Why would one be required to look at reading from only one train to make a key determination?

60 2 S 61 2 S 62 X U Distractors A & D do not appear to be plausible 63 2 S 64 2 S 65 2 S 66 1 X E Distractor C is not plausible. What are Bosun's used for? 67 2 S? See if this question is on the SRO exam. 68 1 X UtE? LOD Do you think this question addresses the knowledge of a process? SAT - OK 7/31/2008 69 U LOD It appears that this question can be answered by answering which system/component is most important to plant safety/operation. 70 1 U LOD General rad worker question. Is this specifically RO knowledge? 71 1 ? LOD 72 1 ? LOD 73 1 X ? LOD Simple memory - Distractor C. 74 1 ? LOD

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. 1 Back-Q SRO U/E/S Explanation Focus Dist.

Link units ward K/A Only 75 x X U A could be correct. As written the stem states that all immediate actions have been completed. Therefore, is it not right to say that PATH-i actions have been completed? Have you not already ensured that the reactor and turbine ? If only one train of SI and RHR is required, then there may be not correct answer. In your reference you did not provide the bases. Distractors C & D are not plausible. When is an operator required to wait a period of time before attempting to start/make happen an automatic action once it was observed as not having occurred? STILL NEED TO WORK ON 7/31/2008 SWAPPED QUESTIONS 73 BECAME 74; 74 BECAME 75, AND REPLACED

73. OK81512008 54 & 75 NEED TO BE WORKED ON 7/31/2008

1.

2.

3. Psychometric Flaws

4. Job Content Flaws

5. Other

6.

7.

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

1. 1 Back-Q=

SRO utE/S Explanation Focus Dist. Link units ward KIA Only 75 X X U "A" could be correct. As written the stem states that all immediate actions have been completed. Therefore, is it not right to say that PATH-1 actions have been completed? Have you not already ensured that the reactor and turbine......... ? If only one train of SI and RHR is required, then there may be not correct answer. In your reference you did not provide the bases. Distractors C & D are not plausible. When is an operator required to wait a period of time before attempting to start/make happen an automatic action once it was observed as not having occurred? STILL NEED TO WORK ON 7/31/2008 SWAPPED QUESTIONS -73 BECAME 74; 74 BECAME 75, AND REPLACED

73. OK - 8/512008 54 & 75 NEED TO BE WORKED ON - 7/31/2008 I

I

ES-401, Rev. 9 Written Examination Review Worksheet SRO Form ES-401-9 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. 1 Back-Q SRO U/E/S Explanation Focus Dist.

Link units ward K/A Only Instructions [Refer to Section D of ES-401 and Appendix B for additional information regarding each of the following concepts.1 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 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 K/A 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 K/A and those that are designated SRO-only (K/A and license level mismatches are unacceptable). 6. Based on the reviewers 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). 76 X X X U There appears to be unnecessary information in the stem. You identify procedures, then ask what procedures should be used. I do not see this as a SRO only question, If the controller was in AUTO, and the RO noticed that the controller was operating erratically, he/she would take manual control, realize what procedure should be entered, perform immediate actions from memory to correct the problem based on plant conditions SRO directions/instructions would not be required to assure that the immediate actions are complete. ES-401, Rev. 9 Written Examination Review Worksheet - SRO Form ES-401-9

1.

2.

3. Psychometric Flaws

4. Job Content Flaws

5. Other

6.

7.

Q# ILOK I LOD (F/H) (1-5) \\ Stem \\Cues\\ T/F \\ Cred.\\Partial\\ Job-\\ Minutia \\ #/ \\ Back-\\ Q= \\SRO I U/E/S Explanation Focus Dist. Link units I ward I KIA IOnly Instructions [Refer to Section D 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 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 (Le., 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 (Le., 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 (Le., 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 "un ratings (e.g., how the Appendix B psychometric attributes are not being met). 76 x x x U There appears to be unnecessary information in the stem. You identify procedures, then ask what procedures should be used. I do not see this as a SRO only question. If the controller was in AUTO, and the RO noticed that the controller was operating erratically, he/she would take manual control, realize what procedure should be entered, perform immediate actions from memory to correct the problem based on plant conditions - SRO directionslinstructions would not be required to assure that the immediate actions are complete.

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. 1 Back-Q=

SRO U/E/S Explanation Focus Dist. Link units ward K/A Only 77 X U Distractor D is not plausible. There is no information in the stem which H would indicate that a loss of IA had occurred. If we allow the applicant to make that assumption, then the answer could be correct if the failed close position is closed. Assumptions should not be made in selecting the answer. How can Distractor A be plausible, if you sayno action required then conclude with saying that you must Ensure This would be an action 78 H X X U This question can be answered with system knowledge only. Distractor D is not plausible. If a pump is cavitating, why would anyone think that reducing flow would solve the problem. 79 H S 80 H X X X X U Two correct answers -C & D. Based on the information given and the current plant conditions, why would anyone think that they would exit LOSS of instrument air? The stem asked what procedure is required to restore cool cooling - you only need to remember what procedure number. Do reactor operators not know this? Explain why you consider this SRO only. 81 F S/E/U Who is required to know the bases of the cautions in procedures. Can 7 this question be answered based on system knowledge (how system operate for specific conditions)? The basis states The Caution is provided to warn the Operator of the possibility of equipment performing uncontrolled starts. 82 H 2 X X U Not SRO only. System question that an RO can answer. Distractor D not plausible. 83 H X S/E Take a look at distractor B. Make sure that it is not correct. Why do you consider distractor D plausible? 84 F 2 X U Distractors C & D are not plausible. Why do you consider A plausible. The reactor is shut down - Why would one consider Reactor Core Safety Limits a concern when in FRCP-C.1? WROTE NEW QUESTIONS OK 7/31/2008

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. 1 Back-Q=

SRO utE/S Explanation Focus Dist. Link units ward KIA Only 77 X U Distractor D is not plausible. There is no information in the stem which H would indicate that a loss of IA had occurred. If we allow the applicant to make that assumption, then the answer could be correct if the failed close position is closed. Assumptions should not be made in selecting the answer. How can Distractor A be plausible, if you say"no action required" then conclude with saying that you must "Ensure...... " This would be an action 78 H X X U This question can be answered with system knowledge only. Distractor D is not plausible. If a pump is cal(itating, why would anyone think that reducing flow would solve the problem. 79 H S 80 H X X X X U Two correct answers -*C & D. Based on the information given and the current plant conditions, why would anyone think that they would exit LOSS of instrument air? The stem asked what procedure is required to restore cool cooling - you only need to remember what procedure number. Do reactor operators not know this? Explain why you consider this SRO only. 81 F S/E/U Who is required to know the bases of the cautions in procedures. Can ? this question be answered based on system knowledge (how system operate for specific conditions)? The basis states "The Caution is provided to warn the Operator of the possibility of equipment performing uncontrolled starts." 82 H 2 X X U Not SRO only. System question that an RO can answer. Distractor D not plausible. 83 H X S/E Take a look at distractor B. Make sure that it is not correct. Why do you consider distractor D plausible? 84 F 2 X U Distractors C & D are not plausible. Why do you consider A plausible. The reactor is shut down - Why would one consider Reactor Core Safety Limits a concern when in FRCP-C.1? WROTE NEW QUESTIONS - OK 7/31/2008

1. 2.

3. Psychometric Flaws

4. Job Content Flaws

5. Other 6.

7. Q#LOKLOD (F/H) (1-5) Stem Cues TIF Cred. Partial Job-Minutia

1. 1 Back-Q SRO U/E/S Explanation Focus Dist.

Link units ward K/A Only 85 H X ? U What is this question asking? It appears that the question is asking which safety limit is affected once a cool-down is started while implementing FRP-C.1. (Pressure/Temperature) This is RO knowledge, in that they know that pressure and temperature limits are of a concern. They may not know the TS number, but they can identify the limit. Distractors A & D are not plausible. STILL NEED TO WORK ON THIS QUESTION 7/31/2008 CHANGED K/A WROTE NEW QUESTION OK 8/5/2008 86 H X U Not an SRO question. System knowledge question. For the conditions given, after the standby pump is started, observations noted by the RO after starting the pump. He/she recognizes that pressure is increasing and takes appropriate actions according to APP. Why would one think there is a malfunction of the RCS pressure control when we said that the speed controller for the pump was set at maximum. Is the SRO really providing directions or is the RO performing actions and the SRO is agreeing? Would the RO not respond by stopping the activities that started the pressure increase Stopping the standby pump....? CHANGED K/S NEW QUESTION OK 7/31/2008 87 H This is an RO question. To answer the question, based on information U in the stem and the way the distractors are written, all you need to realize is the fact that an SI did not occur. and the distractors, all you need to know to answer this question is Is SI required, yes - go to Path -1. WROTE NEW QUESTION LICENSEE IS HAPPY OK 8/5/2008 88 F X U Please explain why you consider this a SRO only question. 89 H X U As written this is a systems question requiring only RO knowledge to answer. 90F 1 U LOD 91 H 5? Need to make sure there are not two correct answers (D & B)

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/E/S Explanation Focus Dist. Link units ward KIA Only 85 H X ? U What is this question asking? It appears that the question is asking which safety limit is affected once a cool-down is started while implementing FRP-C.1. (Pressure / Temperature) This is RO knowledge, in that they know that pressure and temperature limits are of a concern. They may not know the TS number, but they can identify the limit. Distractors A & D are not plausible. STILL NEED TO WORK ON THIS QUESTION 7/31/2008 - CHANGED KIA - WROTE NEW QUESTION - OK - 8/5/2008 86 H X U Not an SRO question. System knowledge question. For the conditions given, after the standby pump is started, observations noted by the RO after starting the pump. He/she recognizes that pressure is increasing and takes appropriate actions according to APP. Why would one think there is a malfunction of the RCS pressure control when we said that the speed controller for the pump was set at maximum. Is the SRO really providing directions or is the RO performing actions and the SRO is agreeing? Would the RO not respond by stopping the activities that started the pressure increase..... Stopping the standby pump.... ? CHANGED KlS - NEW QUESTION - OK 7/31/2008 87 H This is an RO question. To answer the question, based on information X U in the stem and the way the distractors are written, all you need to realize is the fact that an SI did not occur. and the distractors, all you need to know to answer this question is...... Is SI required, yes - go to Path -1. - WROTE NEW QUESTION - LICENSEE IS HAPPY - OK 8/5/2008 88 F X U Please explain why you consider this a SRO only question. 89 H X U As written this is a systems question requiring only RO knowledge to answer. 90 F 1 U LOD 91 H S? Need to make sure there are not two correct answers (D & 8)

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. 1 Back-Q SRO U/E/S Explanation Focus Dist.

Link units ward K/A Only 92 H 5? May be RO Knowledge. Based on the information provided could an RO not answer the question once it is concluded that RCS leakage is occurring. You could leave on the procedure number and selected correct answer based on name of. procedure only Excessive Leakage. REWROTE QUESTION OK 8/5/2008 93 F 1 U LOD. Identify a system where oxygen limits is required to be maintained to prevent corrossion. 94 F 5? Could C be correct? 95 F? X U? Not SRO only. Who makes the entry? CHANGED STEM AND DISTRACTOR OK 7/31/2008 96 F 1 U LOD. No knowledge of procedures is required. Distractors B not plausible. Distractor A could be correct. 97 F 1 X ? U Distractor C & D are not plausible. CHANGED DISTRACTORS OK 7/31/2008 98H 3 S 99 F 1 LOD Common knowledge, RO would know this, but it is the SRO responsibility to know what to do given the conditions. Memory question.... Which AOPs are considered concurrent AOPs? Which AOPs should be performed concurrently while performing procedures in the EOP network? 100 F 1 X X E Could distractor C be correct? Is knowledge of strategy of actions mean to describe the bases?

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. 1 Back-Q= SRO U/E/S Explanation Focus Dist.

Link units ward KIA Only 92 H S? May be RO Knowledge. Based on the information provided could an RO not answer the question once it is concluded that RCS leakage is occurring. You could leave on the procedure number and selected correct answer based on name of. procedure only Excessive Leakage. REWROTE QUESTION - OK - 8/5/2008 93 F 1 U LOD. Identify a system where oxygen limits is required to be maintained to prevent corrossion. 94 F S? Could C be correct? 95 F? X U? Not SRO only. Who makes the entry? CHANGED STEM AND DISTRACTOR - OK 7/31/2008 96 F 1 U LOD. No knowledge of procedures is required. Distractors B not plausible. Distractor A could be correct. 97 F 1 X ? U Distractor C & D are not plausible. CHANGED DISTRACTORS - OK 7/31/2008 98 H 3 S 99 F 1 LOD Common knowledge, RO would know this, but it is the SRO responsibility to know what to do given the conditions. Memory question.... Which AOPs are considered concurrent AOPs? Which AOPs should be performed concurrently while performing procedures in the EOP network? 100 F 1 X X E Could distractor C be correct? Is knowledge of strategy of actions mean to describe the bases? I I

Progress Energy Serial: RNP-RAIO8-0055 MAY 27 Z008 Mr. Luis A. Reyes Regional Administrator, Region II U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission - Region II Sam Nunn Atlanta Federal Center 61 Forsyth Street S.W., Suite 23T85 Atlanta, Georgia 30303-893 1 H. B. ROBINSON STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT, UNIT NO. 2 DOCKET NO. 50-261/LICENSE NO. DPR-23 REACTOR AND SENIOR REACTOR OPERATOR INITIAL EXAMINATION OUTLINES

Dear Mr. Reyes:

In response to NRC letter dated April 23, 2008, Carolina Power and Light Company, now doing business as Progress Energy Carolinas, Inc., has submitted the requested examination outlines to your staff for H. B. Robinson Steam Electric Plant (HBRSEP), Unit No. 2. The reactor and senior reactor operator initial examination outlines were mailed directly to Mr. Edwin Lea on May 15, 2008. If you have any questions concerning this matter, please contact Mr. C. A. Castell at (843) 857-1626. Sincerely, C. T. Baucom Manager Support Services Nuclear CTB/cac c: Document Control Desk NRC Resident Inspector, HBRSEP Ms. M. G. Vaaler, NRC, NRR Mr. M. T. Widmann, NRC, Region II Pro9ress Energy Car&nas, Inc. Robinson Nuclear Plant 3581 West Entrance Road Natsville, SC 29550 Pr ress Serial: RNP-RNOS-0055 MAY 272003 Mr. Luis A. Reyes Regional Administrator, Region II U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission - Region II Sam Nunn Atlanta Federal Center 61 Forsyth Street S.W., Suite 23TS5 Atlanta, Georgia 30303-S931 H. B. ROBINSON STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT, UNIT NO.2 DOCKET NO. 50-261/LICENSE NO. DPR-23 REACTOR AND SENIOR REACTOR OPERATOR INITIAL EXAMINATION OUTLINES

Dear Mr. Reyes:

In response to NRC letter dated April 23, 200S, Carolina Power and Light Company, now doing business as Progress Energy Carolinas, Inc., has submitted the requested examination outlines to your staff for H. B. Robinson Steam Electric Plant (HBRSEP), Unit No.2. The reactor and senior reactor operator initial examination outlines were mailed directly to Mr. Edwin Lea on May 15, 200S. If you have any questions concerning this matter, please contact Mr. C. A. Castell at (S43) S57-1626. CTB/cac c: Document Control Desk NRC Resident Inspector, HBRSEP Ms. M. G. Vaaler, NRC, NRR Mr. M. T. Widmann, NRC, Region II Progress Energy Carolinas, Inc. Robinson Nuclear Plant 3581 West Entrance Road Hartsville, SC 29550 Sincerely, C. T. Baucom Manager - Support Services - Nuclear

Progress Energy Serjal: RNP-RA/08-0055 LAY $7 2003 MrJuis A. Reyes Regional Administrator, Region II U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission - Region Ii Sam Nunn Atlanta Federal Center 61 Forsyth Street S.W., Suite 23T85 Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8931 H. B. ROBINSON STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT, UNIT NO. 2 DOCKET NO. 50-261/LICENSE NO. DPR-23 REACTOR AND SENIOR REACTOR OPERATOR INITIAL EXAMINATION OUTLINES

Dear Mr. Reyes:

In response to NRC letter dated April 23, 2008, Carolina Power and Light Company, now doing busirn ss as Progress Energy Carolinas, Inc., has submitted the requested examination outlines to your s :aff for H. B. Robinson Steam Electric Plant (HBRSEP), Unit No. 2. The reactor and senior reacto: operator initial examination outlines were mailed directly to Mr. Edin Lea on May 15, 2008. If you have any questions concerning this matter, please contact Mr. C. A. Castell at (843) 857-1626. Sincerely, cEi& C. T. Baucom Manager Support Serv ces Nuclear CTB/cc c: Document Control Desk NFC Resident Inspector, HBRSEP M. M. G. Vaaler, NRC, NRR Mr. M. T. Widmann, NRC, Region II Pri 9ress Fwiqy Carolln,s, Iiic. [Io inson Nijcirar Ptai it 35t 1 Vilest Enti sees ti 551115, SC 79550 .lI j' Progress Energy Serial: RNP-RA/08-0055 MAY 17 2003 Mr. Luis A. Reyes Regional Administrator, Region II U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission - Region II Sanl :~unn Atlanta Federal Center 61 Forsyth Street S.W., Suite 23T85 Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8931 ,..*../ H. B. ROBINSON STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT, UNIT NO.2 DOCKET NO. 50-2611LICENSE NO. DPR-23 REACTOR AND SENIOR REACTOR OPERATOR INITIAL EXAM INA nON OUTLINES

Dear Mr. Reyes:

In response to NRC letter dated April 23, 2008, Carolina Power and Light Company, now doing busim ss as Progress Energy Carolinas, Inc., has submitted the requested exa:nination outlines to your s :aff for H. B. Robinson Stean1 Electric Plant (HBRSEP), Unit No.2. The reactor and senior reacto:' operator initial examination outlines were mailed directly to Mr. Ed~in Lea on May 15, 2008. If you have any questions concerning this matter, please contact Mr. C. A. Castell at (843) 857-1626. CTB/cac c: Document Control Desk NF,C Resident Inspector, HBRSEP M~. M. G. Vaaler, NRC, NRR Mr. M. T. Widmann, NRC, Region II [>n grass Eneroy Carolinas, Inc. nal inson NucirJai Plant 35£1 Wesll:nliance Iload Hat isville. SC 29550 Sincerely, C. T. Baucom Manager - Support SerVices - Nuclear

Progress Energy Serial: RNP-RA/08-0056 JUL 022008 Mr. Luis A. Reyes Regional Administrator U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission - Region II Sam Nunn Atlanta Federal Center 61 Forsyth Street, S.W., Suite 23T85 Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8931 H. B. ROB11TSON STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT, UNIT NO. 2 DOCKET NO. 50-261/LICENSE NO. DPR-23 REACTOR OPERATOR AND SENIOR REACTOR OPERATOR INITIAL EXAMINATIONS

Dear Mr. Reyes:

In response to NRC letter dated April 23, 2008, Carolina Power and Light Company, now doing business as Progress Energy Carolinas, Inc., has submitted the operating and written examination materials identified in Attachment 2 of ES-201 to your staff for H. B. Robinson Steam Electric Plant (HBRSEP), Unit No. 2. The operating and written examination materials were shipped directly to Mr. Edwin Lea on June 23, 2008. If you have any questions concerning this matter, please contact Mr. C. A. Castell at (843) 857-1626. Sincerely, C. T. Baucom Manager Support Services Nuclear CTB/cac C: Document Control Desk NRC Resident Inspector, HBRSEP Ms. M. G. Vaaler, NRC, NRR Mr. M. T. Widmann, NRC, Region II Progress Energy Carolinas Inc. JUL 1 0 2.CU3 Robinson Nuclear Plant 3531 West Entrance Road Hartsville, SC 29550 ~ Progress Energy Serial: RNP-RA/08-0056 JUL 02 200S Mr. Luis A. Reyes Regional Administrator U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission - Region II Sam Nunn Atlanta Federal Center 61 Forsyth Street, S.W., Suite 23T85 Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8931 H. B. ROBINSON STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT, UNIT NO.2 DOCKET NO. 50-2611LICENSE NO. DPR-23 REACTOR OPERATOR AND SENIOR REACTOR OPERATOR INITIAL EXAMINATIONS

Dear Mr. Reyes:

In response to NRC letter dated April 23, 2008, Carolina Power and Light Company, now doing . business as Progress Energy Carolinas, Inc., has submitted the operating and written examination materials identified in Attachment 2 ofES-201 to your staff for H. B. Robinson Steam Electric Plant (HBRSEP), Unit No.2. The operating and written examination materials were shipped directly to Mr. Edwin Lea on June 23,2008. If you have any questions concerning this matter, please contact Mr. C. A. Castell at (843) 857-1626. CTB/cac c: Document Control Desk NRC Resident Inspector, HBRSEP Ms. M. G. Vaaler, NRC, NRR Mr. M. T. Widmann, NRC, Region II Progress Energy Carolinas, Inc. Robinson Nuclear Plant 3581 West Entrance Road Hartsville, SC 29550 Sincerely, Cf2M~ C. T. Baucom Manager - Support Services - Nuclear JUL 1 0 Z008

POST-EXAM COMMENTS (Green Paper) Licensee Submitted Post-Exam Comments [ ] Letter Attached With Comments [ ] Comments Only - No Letter [ ] Letter Stating No Comments [None POST-EXAM COMMENTS (Green Paper) Licensee Submitted Post-Exam Comments [ ] Letter Attached With Comments [ ] Comments Only - No Letter [ ] Letter Stating "No Comments" [/None

Progress Energy Serial: RNP-RA/08-0101 cf e7aAt SEP 2 4 2008 Mr. Luis A. Reyes Regional Administrator United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission Region II Sam Nunn Atlanta Federal Center 61 Forsyth Street, S. W., Suite 23T85 Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8931 H. B. ROBINSON STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT, UNIT NO. 2 DOCKET NO. 50-261/LICENSE NO. DPR-23 POST EXAMINATION COMMENTS FOR OPERATOR INITIAL WRITTEN EXAMINATIONS ADMINISTERED ON AUGUST 26, 2008

Dear Mr. Reyes:

In accordance with NUREG-1021, Operator Licensing Examination Standards for Power Reactors, ES-402, Administering Initial Written Examinations, H. B. Robinson Steam Electric Plant (HBRSEP), Unit No. 2, offers no challenges or formal comments to questions found on the operator initial written examinations administered on August 26, 2008. HBRSEP, Unit No. 2, Operations Training personnel have conducted an examination review with each candidate to ensure any missed questions are understood and that no knowledge deficiencies exist. If you have any questions concerning this matter, please contact me at (843) 857-1626. Sincerely, C. A. Castell Supervisor Licensing/Regulatory Programs CAC/cac c: NRC Document Control Desk NRC Resident Inspector Ms. M.G. Vaaler, NRC, NRR Mr. M. T. Widmann, NRC, Region II, Progress Energy Carolinas, Inc. Robinson Nuclear Plant 3581 West Entrance Road Hartsville, SC 29550 SFt 3 0 £008 Progress Energy Serial: RNP-RA/08-0101 SEP 2 4 2008 Mr. Luis A. Reyes Regional Administrator United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission - Region II Sam Nunn Atlanta Federal Center 61 Forsyth Street, S. W., Suite 23T85 Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8931 H. B. ROBINSON STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT, UNIT NO.2 DOCKET NO. 50-261ILICENSE NO. DPR-23 POST EXAMINATION COMMENTS FOR OPERATOR INITIAL WRITTEN EXAMINATIONS ADMINISTERED ON AUGUST 26,2008

Dear Mr. Reyes:

In accordance with NUREG-1 021, "Operator Licensing Examination Standards for Power Reactors," ES-402, "Administering Initial Written Examinations," H. B. Robinson Steam Electric Plant (HBRSEP), Unit No.2, offers no challenges or formal comments to questions found on the operator initial written examinations administered on August 26,2008. HBRSEP, Unit No.2, Operations Training personnel have conducted an examination review with each candidate to ensure any missed questions are understood and that no knowledge deficiencies exist. If you have any questions concerning this matter, please contact me at (843) 857-1626. CAC/cac c: NRC Document Control Desk NRC Resident Inspector Ms. M.G. Vaaler, NRC, NRR Mr. M. T. Widmann, NRC, Region II, Progress Energy Carolinas, Inc. Robinson Nuclear Plant 3581 West Entrance Road Hartsville, SC 29550 Sincerely, C. A. Castell Supervisor - Licensing/Regulatory Programs SEP 30}}