ML112270549

Initial Exam 2011-301 Final Administrative Documents

ML112270549
Person / Time
Site:	Vogtle
Issue date:	08/08/2011
From:	NRC/RGN-II/DRS/OLB
To:	Southern Nuclear Operating Co
References
05-424/11-301, 05-425/11-301
Download: ML112270549 (47)

Text

ES-201 Examination Preparation Checklist Form ES-201-1 Facility:

Vogtle 2011--301 DateofExamination:

3/14/11 Developed by: Written

- Facility NRC LI ii Operating

- Facility EX NRC LI Target Chief Date*

Task Description (Reference)

Examiners Initials

-180 1.

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

-120 2.

NRC examiners and facility contact assigned (C.1.d; C.2.e)

-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 3)]

{-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 applicable (C.1.e and f; C.3.d)

{-70}

(7.

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

{-45}

8.

Proposed examinations (including written, walk-through JPM5, and scenarios, as applicable), supporting documentation (including Forms ES-301-3, ES-301-4, ES-301-5, ES-301-6, and ES-401-6, and any Form ES-201-3 updates), and reference materials due (C.1.e, f, g and h; C.3.d)

-30 9.

Preliminary license applications (NRC Form 398s) due (C.i.l; C.2.g; ES-202)

I J1J/L

-14 10.

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

I) I, L

-14 11.

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

IJ.4.

-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; I or2 (if >10) applications audited to confirm qualifications / eligibility; and examination approval and waiver letters sent f

(C.2.i; Attachment 5; ES-202, C.2.e; ES-204) 1,

-7 15.

Proctoring/written exam administration guidelines reviewed with facility licensee (C.3.k) 1

-7 16.

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

V

• Target dates are generally based on facility-prepared examinations and are keyed to the examination date identified in the corporate notification letter. They are for planning purposes and may be adjusted on a case-by case basis in coordination with the facility licensee.

[Applies only] {Does not apply} to examinations prepared by the NRC.

ES-201, Page 25 of 28

ES-201 Examination Outline Quality Checklist Form ES-201-2 Facility:

Date of Examination:

Initials Item Task Description

1.

a.

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

.J/4 AJ iJf4 R

b.

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

Section D.l of ES-401 and whether all K/A categories are appropriately sampled.

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.

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, tTh1 S

and major transients.

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 jJP TY 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-aol -4 and described in Appendix D.

3.

a.

Verify that the systems walk-through outline meets the criteria specified on Form ES-30l -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 I

(2) task repetition from the last two NRC examinations is within the limits specified on the form

-u) f ) ffk.

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.

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.

c.

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

irT R

d.

Check for duplication and overlap among exam sections.

Ett f jL A

L e.

Check the entire exam for balance of coverage.

c:f.ct-j f.

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

£i Printed Name/Signature Date

a. Author

--e tV

b. Facility Reviewer (*)

6 rIztI0

c. NRC Chief Examiner (#)

Wi/

d. NRC Supervisor IWTJlPAAL,k1AI I

/

Ut&

Note:

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

Not applicable for NRC-prepared examination outlines

14L-f( AJkC..

ES.201 Examination Security Agreement Form ESm2O13 1.

Pre-Examination 4,

I acknowledge that I 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 I

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 3/fq/(

To the best of my knowledg/?did not divulge to any unauthorized persons any information concerning the NRC licensing examinations administered during the week(s) of From the date that I entered into this security agreement until the completion of examination administration, I did not instruct, evaluate, or provide performance feedback to those applicants who were administered these licensing examinations, except as specifically noted below and authorized by the NRC.

PRINTED NAME JOB TITLE / RESPONSIBILITY GNATURE(1)

DATE ATURE(2)

DATE NOTE i

1AJAiAL4m,r

,VucgT Pr-im- -iA2______________

I

2. - c-su

• ES. N__c._0 ? c__o_I.

3. L..ei,s V.VA,vsuM OP3P/Gnt/v5t

\\

ø/t4, t

21

,IA__t i(/1I ad-o-5%

/,/c,c of Pe*,r /r

5.,Aari< /

7

daijd, 4%ttt t9/ 7:a41;Z.J57

6. TSoA 4 TI,aro%tid &3 -

+1-fz,-/

9. iL Cooydrn4 ja-15-jp________________

i-

7. /YIICK yoanlthik$

iai-4-Th,.

8. ck &4D1 Lg%r Euapv

/2-7.-i Y

10..j4A /

2

.16n I 0 LL k4-,,-

(/l Jt4&9

14. 5, 11 /1.

ips Fk,j fI-c 4

I Il L

c4o

(

. //

NOTES:

ES-201, Page 26 of 27

/

-J c

LtJ

-JI Co Co CJ 0) to tO Co F

U cJ CJ Co 2:

z i-I ft (T

LU LU 6,

6, UI 63

-I r-4 63 6,

Co Co lU HL1LNRG Exm1neton SecuittyAcweement Fcnm ES2O14 t

PrExamnatfon 3(p iue that I haveaAjad apuLioIIzed kwMede ai,ani the NRC Ioens1n evam&mtlons scitediez1 forthe wsek(s efthe dale c>fmy sinaire.

reethat Iv,4[I neL nlydMJgeany lnfonnaflon nfautthe3e exnInaffone Ia any persons w1ohave nolbeem authxfzat bSi NRC chief eiznifnet imde%ssr1 that I am riot lo,s1mct, eva1ai or pwMe pa nnanoefaedbak Iatho apjdhinle athe&iied Lo be a&nhed these 1ien enina1ons om this &e imU cipiB&rL ol axrnafn arThuInIratoe, eept as specificiy rioedbw andiord hy Ihe NRC (e., ecrss nu!alobonlh oparnr.orcanioiunioaor is aceqable if the IndMdua does noLse1& thetraInnp careror prida okor Iritheot reedbac). Fwihemicre, I em awe of the pliykal seiiriLy nieaiesid reqnimenis (as doctnealed in the wty rcensees procedures) and underatwd that voatlo of the candIons ofINs camentmayruL hi canoe1eton oYthsexiinaNons andlwt enforcement aion aahisi me or thofaty1iceiisee. I wi 1mmeIsle1yrepcittafary managwnert4x the NRC def enbier any h one or auges&ns thai exatiinetion 5evunly may have been wmpmmlsei Z.

Foat-Ezajnfqatlen To the best of my knawiede,fdId no vue hi any unaiAhoizedpersons any 1nfwmon oonccng If NRC licensmg exnInaons aiInitn1sled dg d,edc{s) of W

- From tha &aIliat I e4erad hihiNs eecinityegeement mill the con1p1etlol of e,n1riatIon ad almthri 1 I d1 not insuet, evuate, or provIde perfromlencefeedbadcto those,plIoantswho ware xhriiniatered these 1ioistng exmwaiaoiis, exceptas sped*ca11t rioted below and eiord lyThe NRC.

PRINTED NME JOB HUE !RESPOMSIBIL1TY OATE NOTE JRE (1)

DATE

. S ii4c /&fl.b*Ta$

t(-1w A i*

J-i/1_

iL4 i-fl

14. rn 5cS 4

/F 114,1 Iti4ii

. i1;wr

/ 141A irk Ie i11 H;=fr (A) 6 c4ot.

7.

VIftnmic C. f1wV W

1 f

1 d

A.!fl1L/

Lht Sci t

n 1/

£./5-?

2 -ft--k L

j.

2..11 441 12F cujjç-

1P I1% IjL I

2f 13 4

15 IeC,6E(/

L4V NOTES:

2Gf4 E$-201, Pte 27 of 28

-7 3

af4 ES-201 HL16 RC 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___________ 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.

Wi/i To the best of my knowledge, lnot divulge to any unauthorized persons any information concerning the NRC licensing examinations administered during the week(s) of From the date that I entered into this security agreement until the completion of examination administration, I did not instruct, evaluate, or provide performance feedback to those applicants who were administered these licensing examinations, except as specifically noted below and authorized by the NRC.

PRINTED NAME JOB TITLE / RESPONSIBILITY SIGNATURE (1)

DATE SIGNATURE (2)

DATE NOTE 1.

2.

r A)s 0 pi P6J £1-, hc.J 3.

&sY

4. J t.55 5 LJe, O&i)

6. _jj5 y4a/

c I

7.

8.

9.

10.

11.

12.

13.

14.

15.

NOTES:

I I:

ES-201, Page 27 of 28

ES-20 I HL-16 NRC Examination Security Agreement Form ES-201-3 I.

Pre-Examination

//((_f/P I acknowledge that I have acquired specialized knowledge about the NRC licensing examinations scheduled for the week(s) of YfZf 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 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 1lL,

To the best of my knowledg(did not divulge to any unauthorized persons any information concerning the NRC licensing examinations administered during the week(s) of

. From the date that I entered into this security agreement until the completion of examination administration, I did not instruct, evaluate, or provide performance feedback to those applicants who were administered these licensing examinations, except as specifically noted below and authorized by the NRC.

PRINTED NAME 1.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10..

11..

12.

13.

14.

15.____

NOTES:

JOB TITLE / RESPONSIBILITY OPS217 SIGNATURE (1)

DATE IGNATUR (2)

DATE NOTE 4f4 ES-201, Page 27 of 28

ES-301, Rev. 9 Administrative Topics Outline Form ES-301-1 Facility:

Plant Vogtle Date of Examination: 03/14/2011 Examination Level:

RO I1 SRO 0 Operating Test Number: 2011-301 Administrative Topic (see Type Describe activity to be performed Note)

Code*

R,M

Title:

AFD Monitoring

==

Description:==

With data provided, Candidate will perform 14915 Conduct of Operations Datasheet 6 AFD Monitoring KJA:G2.1.37 (4.4)

Title:

Critical Safety Function Status Tree Evaluation R,D,P

==

Description:==

Students will be provided a listing of plant parameters. This Conduct of Operations will require manually evaluating each status tree to determine the challenges to each tree and identify the highest priority challenge.

K/A: G2.1.7(4.4/4.7)

R,M

Title:

Determine mode change requirements

==

Description:==

Candidates will be provided a Plant initial condition listing Equipment Control of plant equipment out of service/degraded Candidate must identify those items that would prevent mode change K/A: G2.2.38 (3.6/ 4.5)

R,D

Title:

Stay time calculation for emergency exposure to protect valuable equipment RadIation Control

==

Description:==

Candidate s will be provided survey data and time estimates. Calculate maximum stay time so as not to exceed the Emergency Exposure Limit K/A: G2.3.7 (3.5 / 3.6)

Title:

N/A Emergency Procedures/Plan

==

Description:==

K/A:

NOTE: All items (5 total) are required for SROs. RO applicants require only 4 items unless they are retaking only the administrative topics, when all 5 are required.

• Type Codes & Criteria:

(C)ontrol room, (S)imulator, or Class(R)oom (D)irect from bank (<3 for ROs; <4 for SROs & RO retakes)

(N)ew or (M)odifled from bank (> 1)

(P)revious 2 exams ( 1; randomly selected)

ES-301 Administrative Topics Outline Form ES-301-1 Facility:

Plant Vocitle Date of Examination:

03-14-2011 Examination Level:

D RO 11 SRO Operating Test Number:

201 1 -301 Administrative Topic Type Describe activity to be performed (see Note)

Code*

Title:

Evaluate Inoperable AFD Monitor Alarm

==

Description:==

With data provided, Candidate select 14915 Datasheet 6 Conduct of Operations R,M AFD Monitoring and evaluate the data and take appropriate actions.

K/A:G2.1.37 (4.7)

R,D,P

Title:

Critical Safety Function Status Tree Evaluation Conduct of Operations

==

Description:==

Candidate will be provided a listing of plant parameters.

This will require manually evaluating each status tree to determine the challenges to each tree and identify the highest priority challenge.

K/A: G2.1.7(4.414.7)

Title:

Determine mode change requirements

==

Description:==

Candidates will be provided a Plant initial condition Equipment Control R,M listing of plant equipment out of service/degraded.Candidate must identify those items that would prevent mode change and what must be done to allow mode change KJA: G2.2.38 (3.6 / 4.5)

Title:

Life Saving in Emergency Conditions Radiation Control R,D

==

Description:==

During a radiological emergency, person must be rescued from a very high point source. The candidate must calculate the projected dose to the rescuer, determine who must approve this emergency exposure, and given 91301-C complete data sheet 1 for this exposure KJA Number: G2.3.4 (3.2/ 3.7)

Title:

Classify an Emergency Event Emergency Procedures/Plan R,M

==

Description:==

Classify an emergency with one unit in mode 5 or 6 and complete NMP-EP-1 10 Checklist 1..

K/A Number: G2.4.38 (2.4 / 4.4)

NOTE:

All items (5 total) are required for SROs. RO applicants require only 4 items unless they are retaking only the administrative topics, when all 5 are required.

• Type Codes & Criteria:

(C)ontrol room, (S)imulator, or Class(R)oom (D)irect from bank ( 3 for ROs; 4 for SROs & RO retakes)

(N)ew or (M)odified from bank ( 1)

(P)revious 2 exams ( 1; randomly selected)

ES-301 Control Room/In-Plant Systems Outline Form ES-301-2 Facility: Plant Vogtle Date of Examination: 03/14/2011 Exam Level (circle one): AC I SRO-I / SAC-U (see each JPM)

Cperating Test No. :201 1 -301 Control Room Systems@ (8 for RC; 7 for SAC-I; 2 or 3 for SRC-U, including 1 ESF)

System / JPM Title Type Code*

Safety Function

a. Emergency Borate due to Rods below insertion limits (RIL)

D,A,S,P 1

==

Description:==

RWST flow path required due to equipment failures. This JPM has been modified to require the student to determine if rods are below RIL by responding to a rod bank 10-10 limit alarm using the Core Operating Limits Report prior starting the emergency boration.

(RO I SRO-l)

K/A: 004A2.14 (3.8 / 3.9)

b. Establish Safety Grade Letdown D,S 2

==

Description:==

The plant was manually tripped due to a nonisolable instrument air break. Safety grade letdown is placed in service to control RCS inventory, (ROISRO-l)

K/A: 004A2.11 (3.6/4.2)

c. Depressurize RCS to Reduce Break Flow to Ruptured Steam M,A,S 3

Generator-Normal Pressurizer Spray Not Available

==

Description:==

A SGTR has occurred.The candidate task is to Depressurize the RCS beginning with 1 9030-C step 34, until one termination criterion is met.

Normal spray controllers will not function. Candidate should use a PORV with complications.

(RO / SRO-l ISRO-U)

K/A 038EA1.04 (4.3/4.1)

d. Isolate a Faulted Steam Generator D,A,S 4P

==

Description:==

The candidate is tasked with identify and isolate the faulted SG.

When MSLI is performed all SGs are still depressurizing with indicated steam flow.

This will require transition to 19121-C,Uncontrolled Depressurization of all SGs to perform mitigation.

(RO/SRO-l)

K/A: WE12EA2.2 (3.4/3.9)

ES-301 Control Room/In-Plant Systems Outline Form ES-301-2

e. Place Containment Hydrogen Monitors in service using D,S, 5

13130-1

==

Description:==

A LOCA has occurred and the candidate is directed to place the Containment Hydrogen Monitors in service.

(PC / SRO-I)

K/A:

028A1.01 (3.4 / 3.8) f.

DG Parallel Operation with voltage regulator failure M,A,S,P,EN 6

==

Description:==

DG KVAR lowers uncontrollably after paralleling during the loading of the DG to full test load. This requires tripping the DG output breaker.

(PC / SR0-I I SR0-U)

K/A: 062A1.01 (3.4 / 3.8) g.

Perform Power Range NI ACOT M,S 7

==

Description:==

The candidate will perform an ACOT on one power range NI channel. The High flux trip setpoint will be unsat (>109%).

(RO / SRO-l)

K/A: 015A3.03 (3.9/3.9)

h. Place CNMT Main Purge In-Service D,S,L,P 8

==

Description:==

Unit in mode 5. Student required to shutdown mini-purge system and then place main purge system in service with equipment hatch open. Main purge supply fan should not be placed in service.

(PC)

K/A: 029A2.03 (2.7/3.1)

ES-301 Operating Test Quality Checklist Form ES-301-3 Facility:

Vogtle 1 & 2 Date of Examination:

3/14/11 3/25/11 Operating Test Number: 201 1-301 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 distribution).

b.

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

during this examination.

c.

The operating test shall not duplicate items from the applicants audit test(s). (see Section D.1.a.)

jj[ f d.

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

/9 acceptable limits.

P( i.J e.

It appears that the operating test will differentiate between competent and less-than-competent

/ I applicants at the designated license level.

OW

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

/7

identification of critical steps and their associated performance standards

restrictions on the sequence of steps, if applicable b.

Ensure that any changes from the previously approved systems and administrative walk-through outlines (Forms ES-301 -1 and 2) have not caused the test to deviate from any of the acceptance criteria (e.g., item distribution, bank use, repetition from the last 2 NRC examinations) specified

(çjJ

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.

a.

Author b.

Facility Reviewer(*)

c.

NRC Chief Examiner (#)

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.

Printed Name / Signature

ES-301 Simulator Scenario Quality Checklist Form ES-301-4 Facilty: Vogtle 1 & 2 Date of Exam: 3/14/11 -3/25/11 Scenario Numbers:

1 /2/3 Operating Test No.: 2011-301 QUALITATIVE ATIRIBUTES Initials

a b*

c#

1.

The initial conditions are realistic, in that some equipment and/or instrumentation may be out of service, but it does not cue the operators into expected events.

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 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.

EiW 6.

Sequencing and timing of events is reasonable, and allows the examination team to obtain

/7 \\

complete evaluation results commensurate with the scenario objectives.

7.

If time compression techniques are used, the scenario summary clearly so indicates.

A Operators have sufficient time to carry out expected activities without undue time constraints.

I I Cues are given.

8.

The simulator modeling is not altered.

(v 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 D.5 of ES-301.

11.

All individual operator competencies can be evaluated, as verified using Form ES-301-6 r

1Z \\

(submit the form along with the simulator scenarios).

iYc.V.

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.

Target Quantitative Attributes (Per Scenario; See Section D.5.d)

Actual Attributes 1.

Total malfunctions (58) 6 / 9 / 7 Içç 2.

Malfunctions after EOP entry (12) 2 / 3 / 2 3.

Abnormal events (24) 3 / 5 / 4 4.

Major transients (12) 1 / 2 / 1 5.

EOPs entered/requiring substantive actions (12) 2 / 2 / 2 yç jL_

6.

EOP contingencies requiring substantive actions (02) 0 / 1 / 0 Ec 7.

Critical tasks (23) 3/3 /3

ES-301 Simulator Scenario Quality Checklist Form ES-301-4 Facilty: Vogtle 1 & 2 Date of Exam: 3/14/11 -3/25/11 Scenario Numbers: 4/5 Operating Test No.: 2011-301 QUALITATIVE ATTRIBUTES Initials

a b*

c#

1.

The initial conditions are realistic, in that some equipment and/or instrumentation may be out of service, but it does not cue the operators into expected events.

2.

The scenarios consist mostly of related events.

EiT J1 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 r-fl \\ j without a credible preceding incident such as a seismic event.

?YkC 5.

The events are valid with regard to physics and thermodynamics.

ir.Erv1 jL 6.

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

EriT 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.

(1 Cues are given.

8.

The simulator modeling is not altered.

.EnT 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.

T All other scenarios have been altered in accordance with Section D.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.

E-Target Quantitative Attributes (Per Scenario; See Section D.5.d)

Actual Attributes

1.

Total malfunctions (58) 7 / 6

2.

Malfunctions after EOP entry (12) 3 / 2 EEjvc jIL 3.

Abnormal events (24) 4 / 3 IEftVl 4.

Major transients (12) 2 / 1 5.

EOPs entered/requiring substantive actions (12) 1 / 2 6.

EOP contingencies requiring substantive actions (02) 2/ 0 EJIIT -i;i.t f 7.

Critical tasks (23) 3 / 3 Eil-WE-

ES-301-5 Transient and Event Checklist Facility: Vogtle Nuclear Plant Date of Exam: 3-14-2011 Operating Test No.: 2011-301 A

E Scenarios P

V 1

2 3

4 T

M P

E I

L N

CREW CREW CREW CREW T

N I

T POSITION POSITION POSmON POSmON A

I C

S A

B S

A B

S A

B S

A B

L A

T R

T 0

R T

0 R

T 0

R T

M(*

N y

0 C

P 0

C P

0 C

P o

C P

T R

IU E

RX 1

7 6

2 4

110 SRO-I NOR 441141 1

1 SRO-U I/C 2,3,5 1,2,3 2,3,4 3,4,5 24 4

4 2

7,8 5,6,9 5,8,9 7,8 10, 11 MAJ 6

8 7

6 4

221 TS 2,3,5 1,2,5 2,4,5 4,5 12 0

2 2

6 RX 1

7 6

2 4

110 RO NOR 4

4 0

0 2

111 SRO-l I/C 3,7 3,5,6 2,4,5 3,4,8 14 4

4 2

x 9,11 9

MAJ 6

8 7

6 4

221 TS 0

0 0

0 0

022 RO RX 0

0 0

0 0

110 x

x I/C 2,5 1,2,5 3,8 5,7 11 4

4 2

8 10 MAJ 6

8 7

6 4

221 TS 0

0 0

0 0

022 Instructions:

1.

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

If an Instant SRO additionally series in the BOP position, one I/C malfunction can be credited toward the two I/C malfunctions required for 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.

ES-301-5 Transient and Event Checklist Facility: Vogtle Nuclear Plant Date of Exam: 3-14-2011 Operating Test No.: 2011-301 A

E Scenarios P

V T

T M

P E

L N

CREW CREW CREW T

T N

I T

POSON POSfl1ON Pfl°..N A

A C

S A

B S

A B

S A

B L

L u

A T

R T

0 R

T 0

R T

0

1. 5 1-5 M(*)

N Y

0 C

P 0

C P

0 C

P T

P R

IU E

RX 1

1 5

110 SRO-l NOR 0

0 4

1 1

1 SRO-U I/C 2,3,4 5

29 4

4 2

6,7 MAJ 5

1 5

221 TS 2,3,4 3

15 0

2 2

RX 1

1 5

110 NOR 0

0 2

iii SRO-l I/C 4,6 2

16 4

4 2

MAJ 5

1 5

221 TS 0

0 0

022 RO RX 0

0 0

110 po-i NOR 1

1 7

1 1

1 x

I/C 2,3 3

14 442 7

MAJ 5

1 5

221 TS 0

0 0

022 Instructions:

1.

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

If an Instant SRO additionally serves in the BOP position, one I/C malfunction can be credited toward the two I/C malfunctions required for 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.

ES-301-6 CompetenGiesGhekiist Facility: Vogtle Date of Examination: 3-14-2011 Operating Test No.: 2011-301 APPLICANTS SCENARIO SCENARIO SCENARIO 1

234 1

2 3

4 1

2 3

4 Interpret/Diagnose 123 123 123 123 1234 1234 1234 1234 1234 1234567 1234 1234 Events and Conditions 456 456 456 456 5678 5678 5678 5678 5678 89 5678 5678 78 789 789 789 9

9 9

9 9

10 10 10 11 IL__

Comply With and 123 123 123 123 1234 1234 1234 1234 1234 1234567 1234 1234 456 456 456 456 5678 5678 5678 5678 5678 89 5678 5678 Use Procedures (1) 78 789 789 789 9

9 9

9 9

10 10 10 11

Operate Control 123 123 123 123 1234 1234 1234 1234 456 456 456 456 5678 5678 5678 5678 Boards (2) 78 789 789 789 9

9 9

10 10 LL

Communicate 123 123 123 123 1234 1234 1234 1234 1234 1234567 1234 1234 and Interact 456 456 456 456 5678 5678 5678 5678 5678 89 5678 5678 78 789 789 789 9

9 9

9 9

10 10 10 Ii Demonstrate 1234 1234 1234 1234 1234 1234567 1234 1234 Supervisory Ability (3) 5678 5678 5678 5678 5678 89 5678 5678 9

9 9

9 9

10 10 11 Comply With and 235 Use Tech. Slecs. (3) 256 245 45 235 256 245 45 Notes:

(1)

Includes Technical Specification compliance for an RO.

(2)

Optional for an SRO-U.

(3)

Only applicable to SROs.

Instructions:

Check the applicants license type and enter one or more event numbers that will allow the examiners to evaluate every applicable competency for every applicant.

Competencies RO X

SRO-l X

SRO-U X

ES-301-6 COmpeteflCieSCheCkUSt Facility: Vogtle Date of Examination: 3-14-2011 Operating Test No.: 2011 -301 APPLICANTS

Competencies RO SRO-I X

SRO-U X

SCENARIO SCENARIO 5

5 5

Interpret/Diagnose 1234567 1234567 1234567 Events and Conditions Comply With and 1234567 1234567 1234567 Use Procedures (1)

Operate Control 1234567 1234567 Boards (2)

Communicate 1234567 1234567 1234567 and Interact Demonstrate 1234567 1234567 Supervisory Ability (3)

Corn ply With and 234 234 UseTech.Specs.(3)

Notes:

(1)

Includes Technical Specification compliance for an RO.

(2)

Optional for an SRO-U.

(3)

Only applicable to SROs.

Instructions:

Check the applicants license type and enter one or more event numbers that will allow the examiners to evaluate eveiy applicable competency for every applicant.

Date of Exam:

2 Facility:

ES-401, Rev. 9 PWR Examination Outline Form ES-401 -2 RO K/A Category Points SRO-Only Points Tier Group K

K K

KKKAAAA G

A2 G*

Total 1

2 3

4 5

6 1

2 3

4 Total 1.

1 3

3 3

3 3

3 18 3

3 6

Emergency &

2 2

1 2

2 2

4 Abnormal Plant

N/A N/A

Evolutions TierTotals 5

4 4

5 4

5 27 5

5 10 Plant 2

Systems Tier Totals 4

3 4

4 2

4 3

4 3

38 3

8

3. Generic Knowledge and Abilities 1

2 3

4 10 1

2 3

4 7

Categories 2

2 3

3 2

2 2

1 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 ier 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 4 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 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 I and 2 from the shaded systems and K/A categories.

7.

generic (G) K/As in Tiers I 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 KA5.

8.

On the following pages, enter the K/A numbers, a brief description of each topic, the topicsRmportance 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-40I-3. Limit SRO selections to K/As that are linked to 10 CFR 55.43..

ES-401, REV9 TIGI PWR EXAMINATION OUTLINE FORM ES-401-2 KA NAME / SAFETY FUNCTION:

IR Ki K2 K3 K4 K5 K6 Al A2 A3 A4 G TOPIC:

RO SRO 008AK1.01 Pressurizer Vapor Space Accident! 3 3.2 3.7 Thermodynamics and flow characteristics of open or leak-ing valves 009EG2.4.8 Small Break LOCAl 3 3.8 4.5 Knowledge of how abnormal operating procedures are used in conjunction with EOPs.

011 EA1.03 Large Break LOCA 13 4

4 Securing of RCP5 022AA2.03 Loss of Rx Coolant Makeup! 2 3.1 3.6 Failures of flow control valve or controller 025AK1.01 Loss ofRHRSystem!4 3.9 4.3 Loss of RHRS during all modes of operation 027AK2.03 Pressurizer Pressure Control System 2.6 2.8 Controllers and positioners Malfunction I 3 029EK3.02 ATWS / 1 3.1 3.1 Starting a specific charging pump 038EK3.01 Steam Gen. Tube Rupture /3 4.1 4.3 Equalizing pressure on primary and secondary sides of ruptured S!G 054AG2.449 Loss of Main Feedwater /4 4.6 4.4 Ability to perform without reference to procedures those actions that require immediate operation of system components and controls.

055EA1.01 Station Blackout/6 3.7 3.9 In-core thermocouple temperatures 056AK3.01 Loss of Off-site Power / 6 3.5 3.9 Order and time to initiation of power for the load sequencer Page 1 of 2 10/19/2010 10:18AM

ES-401, REV 9 TIGI PWR EXAMINATION OUTLINE FORM ES-401-2 Components and functions of control and safety systems, including instrumentation, signals, interlocks, failure modes and automatic and manual features.

KA NAME I SAFETY FUNCTION:

IR Ki K2 K3 K4 K5 K6 Al A2 A3 A4 G TOPIC:

RO SRO 057AA2.02 Loss of Vital AC Inst. Bus / 6 3.7 3.8 Core flood tank pressure and level indicators 058AG2.4.49 Loss of DC Power /6 4.6 4.4 Ability to perform without reference to procedures those actions that require immediate operation of system components and controls.

077AA2.07 Generator Voltage and Electric Grid 3.6 4.0 Operational status of engineered safety features Disturbances / 6 WEO4EK1.l LOCA Outside Containment? 3 3.5 3.9 Components, capacity, and function of emergency systems.

WEO5EA1.1 Inadequate Heat Transfer

- Loss of 4.1 4.0 Components and functions of control and safety systems, Secondary Heat Sink / 4 including instrumentation, signals, interlocks, failure modes and automatic and manual features.

WE1 I EK2.2 Loss of Emergency Coolant Recirc. /4 3.9 4.3 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.

WE12EK2.l 3.4 Steam Line Rupture

- Excessive Heat Transfer / 4 3.7 Page2of2 10/19/2010 10:18AM

ES-401, REV 9 TIG2 PWR EXAMINATION OUTLINE FORM ES-401-2 KA NAME I SAFETY FUNCTION:

IR Kl K2 K3 K4 K5 K6 Al A2 A3 A4 G TOPIC:

RD SRO 001AG2.4.9 Continuous Rod Withdrawal / 1 3.8 4.2 Knowledge of low power I shutdown implications in accident (e.g. LOCA or loss of RHR) mitigation strategies.

028AK1.01 Pressurizer Level Malfunction! 2 2.8 3.1 PZR reference leak abnormalities 033AK3.0l Loss of Intermediate Range NI / 7 3.2 3.6 Termination of startup following loss of intermediate-range instrumentation 060AK2.0l Accidental Gaseous Radwaste Rel. / 9 2.6 2.9 ARM system, including the normal radiation-level indications and the operability status 067AA1.07 Plant Fire On-site / 8 2.9 3

Fire alarm reset panel 068AK3.08 Control Room Evac. / 8 3.4 3.9 Trip of the MFW and necessary Condensate pumps 076AA2.03 High Reactor Coolant Activity / 9 2.5 3

RCS radioactivity level meter WEO8EA1.1 RCS Overcooling

- PTS /4 3.8 3.8 Components and functions of control and safety systems, including instrumentation, signals, interlocks, failure modes and automatic and manual features.

weO9EG2.4.9 Natural Circ. / 4 3.8 4.2 El El El LI [1 El El El El Knowledge of low power / shutdown implications in accident (e.g. LOCA or loss of RHR) mitigation strategies.

Page 1 of 1 10/19/2010 10:24 AM

ES-401, REV 9 T2GI PWR EXAMINATION OUTLINE FORM ES-401-2 KA NAME I SAFETY FUNCTION:

IR KI K2 K3 K4 K5 K6 Al A2 A3 A4 C TOPIC:

RO SRO 003K5.03 Reactor Coolant Pump 3.1 3.5 Effects of RCP shutdown onT-ave., including the reason for the unreliability of T-ave. in the shutdown loop 003K6.02 Reactor Coolant Pump 2.7 3.1 El RCP seals and seal water supply 004A3.06 Chemical and Volume Control 3.9 3.8 T-ave. and T-ref 005A1.07 Residual Heat Removal 2.5 3.1 El Determination of test acceptability by comparison of recorded valve response times with Tech-Spec requirements 005A4.03 Residual Heat Removal 2.8 2.7 RHR temperature, PZR heaters and flow and nitrogen 006A1.07 Emergency Core Cooling 3.3 3.6 Pressure, high and low 006G2.1.30 Emergency Core Cooling 4.4 4.0 Ability to locate and operate components, including local controls.

007A1.03 Pressurizer RelieflQuench Tank 2.6 2.7 El El El [1 El El El El El El Monitoring quench tank temperature 010K6.04 Pressurizer Pressure Control 2.9 3.2 El El El El El El El El El El PRT 012A4.07 Reactor Protection 3.9 3.9 El El El El El El El El El El M/G set breakers 013K5.01 Engineered Safety Features Actuation 2.8 3.2 El El El El El El El El El El Definitions of safety train and ESF channel Pagelof3 10119/2010 10:24AM

ES-401, REV 9 T2GI PWR EXAMINATION OUTLINE FORM ES-401-2 KA NAME I SAFETY FUNCTION:

IR KI K2 K3 K4 K5 K6 Al A2 A3 A4 G TOPIC:

RO SRO 022A4.05 Containment Cooling 3.8 3.8 Containment readings of temperature, pressure and humidity system 022K3.02 Containment Cooling 3.0 3.3 Containment instrumentation readings 026K3.02 Containment Spray 4.2 4.3 Recirculation spray system 039G2.2.39 Main and Reheat Steam 3.9 4.5 Knowledge of less than one hour technical specification action statements for systems.

059K4.18 Main Feedwater 2.8 3.0 Automatic feedwater reduction on plant trip 059K4,19 Main Feedwater 3.2 3.4 Automatic feedwater isolation of MFW 061 K2.01 Auxiliary/Emergency Feedwater 4.0 3.8 AFW System MOVs 061K6.02 Auxiliary/Emergency Feedwater 2.6 2.7 Pumps 062K4.02 AC Electrical Distribution 2.5 2.7 LI Circuit breaker automatic trips 063A2.01 DC Electrical Distribution 2.5 3.2 LI LI LI LI LI LI LI LI LI LI Grounds 064G2.2.12 Emergency Diesel Generator 3.7 4.1 LI LI LI LI LI LI [] LI LI LI []

Knowledge of surveillance procedures.

Page2of3 10/19/2010 10:24AM

ES-401, REV 9 T2GI PWR EXAMINATION OUTLINE FORM ES-401-2 KA NAME I SAFETY FUNCTION:

IR K1 K2 K3 K4 K5 K6 Al A2 A3 A4 G TOPIC:

RO SRO 064K3.03 Emergency Diesel Generator 3.6 3.9 EDIG (manual loads) 073K1.01 Process Radiation Monitoring 3.6 3.9 Those systems served by PRMs 073K5.02 Process Radiation Monitoring 2.5 3.1 Radiation intensity changes with source distance 076A3.02 Service Water 3.7 3.7 Emergency heat loads 076K1.05 Service Water 3.8 4.0 DIG 103K1.08 Containment 3.1 3.5 SIS, including action of SI reset Page3of3 10/19/2010 10:24AM

ES-401, REV 9 T2G2 PWR EXAMINATION OUTLINE FORM ES-401-2 KA NAME I SAFETY FUNCTION:

IR Ki K2 K3 K4 K5 K6 Al A2 A3 A4 G TOPIC:

RO SRO 001 K2.05 Control Rod Drive 3.1 3.5 M!G sets 002K5.11 Reactor Coolant 4.0 4.2 Relationship between effects of the primary coolant system and the secondary coolant system 011 K4.03 Pressurizer Level Control 2.6 2.9 Density compensation of PZR !evel 014A1.02 Rod Position Indication 3.2 3.6 Control rod position indication on control room panels 017K6.0l In-core Temperature Monitor 2.7 3.0 Sensors and detectors 029K1.02 Containment Purge 3.3 3.6 Containment radiation monitor 033G2.4.49 Spent Fuel Pool Cooling 4.6 4.4 Ability to perform without reference to procedures those actions that require immediate operation of system components and controls.

035A4.06 Steam Generator 4.5 4.6 fl H

H S/G isolation on steam leak or tube rupture/leak 055K3.0l Condenser Air Removal 2.5 2.7 H H H H H H H H H H Main condenser 068A3.02 Liquid Radwaste 3.6 3.6 H H H H H H H H j H H Automatic isolation Page 1 of 1 10/19/2010 10:24 AM

RO SRO 3.8 4.2 Knowledge of conduct of operations requirements.

4.3 4.4 fl Ability to perform specific system and integrated plant

procedures during all modes of plant operation.

4.1 4.3 Knowledge of tagging and clearance procedures.

3.9 4.3 Knowledge of process for controlling equipment configuration or status.

2.9 3.1 Knowledge of radiation monitoring systems 2.9 2.9 Ability to use radiation monitoring systems 3.5 3.6 fl Ability to comply with radiation work permit requirements during normal or abnormal conditions 3.8 4.5 Knowledge of general guidelines for EOP usage.

4.2 4.1 Knowledge of RO tasks performed outside the main control room during an emergency and the resultant operational effects 4.5 4

. 6 D

L Li D Knowledgeofsystemsetpoints,interlocksandautomatic actions associated with EOP entry conditions.

ES-401, REV 9 T3 PWR EXAMINATION OUTLINE FORM ES-401-2 KA NAME I SAFETY FUNCTION:

IR Ki K2 K3 K4 K5 K6 Al A2 A3 A4 G TOPIC:

G2.l.1 G2.1 23 G2.2.13 G2.2.14 G2.3.15 G2.3.5 G2.3.7 G2.4.14 G2434 Conduct of operations Conduct of operations Equipment Control Equipment Control Radiation Control Radiation Control Radiation Control Emergency Procedures/Plans Emergency Procedures/Plans G2

. 4

. 2 Emergency Procedures/Plans Page 1 of 1 10/19/2010 10:24 AM

SRO TIGI PWR EXAMINATION OUTLINE IR Ki K2 K3 K4 K5 K6 Al A2 A3 A4 G RO SRO 4.3 4.6 3.1 3.5 4.2

4.4 TOPIC

Proper actions to be taken if the automatic safety func tions have not taken place Conditions necessary for recovery when accident reaches stable phase Limitations on LPI flow and temperature rates of change Ability to interpret control room indications to verify the status and operation of a system, and understand how operator actions and directives affect plant and system conditions Ability to recognize system parameters that are entry-level conditions for Technical Specifications Ability to execute procedure steps.

ES-401, REV9 KA NAME I SAFETY FUNCTION:

007EA2.02 Reactor Trip

- Stabilization

- Recovery

/1 011 EA2.08 Large Break LOCA / 3 025AA2.05 Loss of RHR System /4 026AG2.2.44 Loss of Component Cooling Water / 8 FORM ES-401-2 056AG2.2.42 Loss of Off-site Power / 6 3.9 4.6 062AG2.1.20 LossofNuclearSvcWater/4 4.6 4.6 Page 1 of 1 10/19/2010 10:25AM

SRO TIG2 PWR EXAMINATION OUTLINE IR Ki K2 K3 K4 K5 K6 Al A2 A3 A4 G RO SRO 4.0 4.7 DEED EEEE

ÜEEEEEEEE

ÜEEEEEEEE EEEEEEEE TOPIC:

Knowledge of limiting conditions for operations and safety limits.

Occurrence of a fuel handling incident Page 1 of 1 10/19/2010 10:25 AM ES-401, REV 9 KA NAME / SAFETY FUNCTION:

003AG2.2.22 Dropped Control Rod /1 036AA2.02 Fuel Handling Accident! 8 3.4 4.1 FORM ES-401-2 037AG2.4.4 Steam Generator Tube Leak / 3 4.5 4.7 E

068AA2.04 Control Room Evac. / 8 3.7 4

E Ability to recognize abnormal indications for system operating parameters which are entry-level conditions for emergency and abnormal operating procedures.

S!G pressure

ES-401, REV 9 SRO T2GI PWR EXAMINATION OUTLINE FORM ES-401-2 KA NAME I SAFETY FUNCTION:

IR Kl K2 K3 K4 K5 K6 Al A2 A3 A4 G TOPIC:

RO SRO 003G2.2.25 Reactor Coolant Pump 3.2 4.2 Knowledge of the bases in Technical Specifications for limiting conditions for operations and safety limits.

007A2.02 Pressurizer Relief/Quench Tank 2.6 3.2 Abnormal pressure in the PRT 022G2.2.42 Containment Cooling 3.9 4.6 Ability to recognize system parameters that are entry level conditions for Technical Specifications 064A2.14 Emergency Diesel Generator 2.7 2.9 Effects (verification) of stopping ED/G under load on isolated bus 073A2.02 Process Radiation Monitoring 2.7 3.2 Detector failure Pagelofl 10/19/2010 10:25AM

ES-401, REV 9 SRO T2G2 PWR EXAMINATION OUTLINE FORM ES-401-2 KA NAME I SAFETY FUNCTION:

IR Kl K2 K3 K4 K5 K6 Al A2 A3 A4 G

TOPIC:

RO SRO 034K1.04 Fuel Handling Equipment 2.6 3.5 NIS 072G2.4.46 Area Radiation Monitoring 4.2 4.2 Ability to verify that the alarms are consistent with the plant conditions.

086A2.02 Fire Protection 3.0 3.3 El El Low FPS header pressure Pagelofl 10/19/2010 10:25AM

ES-401, REV 9 SRO T3 PWR EXAMINATION OUTLINE FORM ES-401-2 KA NAME I SAFETY FUNCTION:

IR Ki K2 K3 K4 K5 K6 Al A2 A3 A4 G TOPIC:

RO SRO G2.l.23 Conduct of operations 4.3 4.4 Ability to perform specific system and integrated plant procedures during all modes of plant operation.

G2.l44 Conduct of operations 3.9 3.8 Knowledge of RO duties in the control room during fuel handling.

G2.2.12 EquipmentControl 3.7 4.1 Knowledgeofsurveillanceprocedures.

G2.2.44 Equipment Control 4.2 4.4 Ability to interpret control room indications to verify the status and operation of a system, and understand how operator actions and directives affect plant and system conditions G2.3.6 Radiation Control 2.0 3.8 Ability to aprove release permits G2.4.l8 EmergencyProcedures/Plans 3.3 4.0 KnowledgeofthespecificbasesforEOPs.

G2.4.31 Emergency Procedures/Plans 4.2 4.1 Knowledge of annunciators alarms, indications or response procedures Page 1 of 1 10/19/2010 10:26AM

ES-401 Record of Rejected K/As Form ES-401-4 Tier /

Random!y Reason for Rejection Group Selected K/A RepLacement KA T201 Oi5TK21Y3 061K2.01 Vogtle does not have a Diesel Driven AFW Pump T3 02T19 G2.2.14 ROIR2.3(<2.5)

T3 Q241S 02.4.2 RO 1R 2.4 (< 2,5)

T2GI I03Kto3 1031(1.08 Containment SystemDo not have a Shield Building Vent System T2G1

• OE-M-005A1.02 Could not write a discriminating question for this A

ES-401 Written Examination Quality Checklist Form ES-401-6 Facility:

Vogtle 1 & 2 Date of Exam: 4/1/2011 Exam Level: P0 IISR0 FJ Initial Item Description a

b*

c#

1.

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

2.

a.

NRC K/As are referenced for all questions.

. f7\\

ri b.

Facility learning objectives are referenced as available.

j 3.

SRO questions are appropriate in accordance with Section D.2.d of ES-401 Nt 4.

The sampling process was random and systematic (If more than 4 P0 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 i the licensee certifies that there is no duplication; or L.

fji other (explain)

çt

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 P0 / SRO-only 41/11 10/3 24/11 question distribution(s) at right.

7.

Between 50 and 60 percent of the questions on the P0 Memory C/A exam are written at the comprehension/ analysis level; the SRO exam may exceed 60 percent if the randomly 37/6 38/19

/( P1\\

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.

I 9.

Question content conforms with specific K/A statements in the previously approved K

examination outline and is appropriate for the tier to which they are assigned; frj)

-)4,c deviations are justified.

6.

.y

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 / Sign e

Date

a. Author (I,

4 d,v TijO.&v?

b. Facility Reviewer (*)

62t6 4Jit,_s,cLr/,

c. NRC Chief Examiner (#)

d. NRC Regional Supervisor 1tW7

.ut/

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.

VOGTLE 2011 RO 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.

Enter the level of difficulty (LCD) 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).

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).

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?

1.

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

1.

2.

3. Psychometric Flaws

4. Job Content Flaws

5. Other 6.

7.

Q#

LOK LOD

-1 (F/H)

(1-5)

Stem Cues T/F Cred.

Partial Job-Minutia

1. /

Back-Q SRO U/E/5 Explanation Focus Dist.

Link units ward K/A Only New. Not knowing if the SRM trip is active or not, the IRM trip vould always be correct. What situation could make the IRMs 1 N J

orrect and the SRMs incorrect for a power increase trip? Not E

)lausible to choose A or C. The question should ask which one omes in first? 2/23/11 (Editorial) Upon review with the license

his question only needed an editorial correction.

2B S

(2OlOexam)LooksOK

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 UIEIS Explanation Focus Dist.

Link units ward K/A Only could not figure out what this question is asking? Appears to be J

nultiple correct answers. C is the correct answer for a primary 3B E

eak and B is the correct answer for a steam leak. 2/23/11 s

(Editorial) Upon review with the license this question only needed in editorial correction.

E Change 175 deg F to 185 deg F to make RCP 3 more 4B plausible.2/23/22 Also agreed to change the Loop 3 stator and S

motor brg temp. (SAT)

SB E s Looks OK. 2/23/11 Made editorial changes.

New. Does one Tcold failure high cause a 10% change in power 6N E

evel signal to Level program circuit for PZR IvI control? 2/23/11 s

)ne distractor was not plausible, changed the distractor to say no change vs go down.

Jhy is C plausible? Looks like there are multiple correct 7B U

nswers. 2/23/11 Agreed to tabletop this and possibly resample mother KA. KA resampled, new question written for 005A1.02.

SAT 8B Looks OK. 2/23/11 Made editorial changes.

9N New. You require the RO to know this information from memory?

/23/11 Ops confirmed this is yes.

Mod. The question should ask Where are the pumps stopped, 1 OM AW the procedure? C & D not plausible. Reword to say Train

S I only running. 2/23/11 Many minor editorial changes.

11 N New. Looks OK 2/23/11 SAT This does not correspond to the classic TMI mistake. Steam table 12B S

eference sheet not included. 2/23/11. After review, question is

)K as written.

E New. Looks OK 2/23/11 Made editorial change to say would not 1 3N e performed concurrently.

Change distractor C & D to say ONLY Opens 2/23/1 1 Added 14B E

nor PZR PORV opens to C distractor. Removed to isolate to s

revent possible overlap w/ SRO question. Reworded to ask what is available.

This is overlap from scenarios. Need to replace KA if necessary.

15M S

/23/11 Tabletop to verify if this question is different from the

cenario. 2/24/11 The combination of CCPs and SI pumps is

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 Jifferent in the scenario. (i.e. There are CCP5 running in the cenario) 16B E

Looks OK. 2/23)11 Licensee agreed to change 459 to 460.

S 17B Looks OK E

Does this require a 3 part question? 2/23/11 Made editorial 18B hange RPS vs AMSAC. Revisit this question to see if it can be S

urned into a 2 part question. 2/24/11 Question is OK as is.

Looks OK. 2/23/11 LOD upon review with the licensee for the 2nd art of the question was considered to high. Evaluated the 19B S

nclusion of the actual lo lo limit value as part of the stem. The ppIicant still needs to address which RPI is providing the input.

DRPI or step counter).

20B s

Looks OK 2/23/11 Does not match the KA.. 2/23/11 Licensee agreed and is looking 21 B X

o rewrite this question. 2/24/11 Wrote new question given DW

Femp and Press readings, is anything above its TS limit (SAT) rhe question asked is a two part question but the answers are 22B E

nly for the 1St part. Otherwise it looks OK. 2/23/11 Change s

iistractor D to Letdown Control Valve PCV to make D more

)Iausible.

Is this a fundamental question? 2/23/1 1 Tabletop this until 23B 1

omorrow. 2/24/11 New question presented requiring the

nterpretation of adverse numbers.

Nhy not include the B9 action of 18019 as part of the answer.

24B E

/23/1 1 Removed the word promptly and added distractors that s

tate FIRST do this THEN do this i.e. mitigation strategy.

New. Looks OK 2/23/11 Take out Large Break LOCA. Dont give E

he size. Otherwise the conditions dont match up. There would 25N e a sump level increase for a large break LOCA. Also give them drywell pressure condition to make leave the pump running

)lausible.

E

/erify not used on scenario. 2/23/11 Removed the trip statement 26B

)n distractors C&D.

1.

2.

3. Psychometric Flaws

4. Job Content Flaws

5. Other 6.

7.

Q#

LOK LOD

1

(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 Low level of difficulty. Other than knowing the correct LT, this is a 27B E

3FES question.

s

/23Il 1 Remove the CRD info in question stem (not relevant) and change LT to 459 to prevent answering previous question.

C&D do not appear plausible. The question states that SI has not u

ccurred. Why not give a value somewhat above the SI setpoint 28B o make running a CCP for level control plausible. 2/23/11 X

E Licensee agreed to comment and added a low PZR level S

ondition to the question stem to increase plausibility. Also fixed

rocedure typo 211(SAT)

New. C&D do not appear plausible. Why would anyone think that CIA or CVI would occur due to one instrument failure and not at U

he HIGH level? Are there any intermediate CIA or CVIs? Also 29N X

E erify this is not a JPM. 2/23/11 Table this item until tomorrow.

s

/24/11 Reworded question to look at a HIGH RAD condition on ne of the vent rad monitors which causes a CVI.

U

/23/11 A&B not currently plausible. UNSAT Control rods are 30B Iready in Manual. Remove this part, include info to make X

E ddressing the Steam Generator Level plausible.

S 31 N E

New. 2/23/11 Change distractor C to remove from the CR.

2/23/11 Question as presented is in a scenario. UNSAT Table intil tomorrow. 2/24/11 New question written to ask actions with 32B 3G level in affected SG <10% NR therefore you dont isolate flow intil level is recovered for heat sink.

33B s

/24/1 1 Question reviewed in office (SAT).

E

/24/1 I Question reviewed in office (SAT). Minor editorial 34N mprovements.

S 35N

/24/1 1 Question reviewed in office (SAT).

E 2/24/11 Question reviewed in office (SAT). Minor editorial

s mprovementS.

E 2/24/11 Question reviewed in office. (Editorial) Choice D is not 37N

)lausible. Reworded distractors to make D more plausible.

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 E

U24/l 1 Question reviewed in office (SAT). Minor editorial 38M mprovements.

39N s

I24I1 1 Question reviewed in office (SAT).

/24/11 Question reviewed in office (UNSAT). Original question 40N X

ias unsat due to a subset issue.

S 41M S

/24/11 Question reviewed in office (SAT).

E

/24/11 Question reviewed in office (SAT). Editorial change 42N equired to the 2 question asked to ensure.

U

/24/11 C & 0 distractors not plausible. (UNSAT). Could be 43N x

hecked there or in the MCR. Question distractors modified to

orrect plausibility.

!/24/1 I Question reviewed in office (SAT). Minor editorial 44B S

mprovements.

E

/24/11 Question reviewed in office (SAT). Minor editorial 45N mprovements.

S U

/24/11 Two non-plausible distractors presented on original 46M x

luestion. Licensee had a prepared alternative that was (SAT).

E

/24/11 Question reviewed in office (SAT). Minor editorial 47B mprovements.

/24/11 Not sure that this question meets the KA. (UNSAT?)

able until tomorrow. Modified question to match Surveillance 48B E

nformation given in the procedure for when the EDG is S

onsidered inoperable.

E

/24/1 1 Question reviewed in office (SAT). Minor editorial 49N mprovements.

S E

/24/11 Table until tomorrow. LOD is too high. New 2nd part of 50N luestion to be written. 2 part of question reworded to simplify on owered the LOD.

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 junits ward K/A Only 2/24/11 Question plausibility states that power is not restored.

The question stem implies that power has been restored. No 51B x

etector reset criteria is addressed. The question does not make S

ense as is? (UNSAT) Question rewritten (SAT)

E 2/24/11 Question reviewed in office (SAT). Minor editorial 52N mprovements.

S E

Y24/1 1 This question overlaps with another RO question that was 53B hanged earlier Table till tomorrow. New question written to

msure there is no overlap.

E

/24/1 I Question reviewed in office (SAT). Minor editorial 54M mprovements.

E 2/24/11 Question reviewed in office (SAT). Minor editorial 55M mprovements.

E

/24/1 I Question reviewed in office (SAT). Minor editorial 56B mprovements.

E

/24/1 1 Question reviewed in office (SAT). Minor editorial 57N mprovements.

E 2/24/11 Question reviewed in office (SAT). Minor editorial 58M mprovements.

/24/1 1 Question reviewed in office (UNSAT). A is a subset of all 59B X

U

)ther choices therefore the question answers itself as a minimum.

s Reworded to ask, What are the minimum action(s)? (SAT)

/24/1 I Original question was rejected (UNSAT). New question 60B X

rovided from LOIT Bank. This is a repeat question from the last 5

xam.(SAT) 2/24/11 Original question A is a subset of C, B is a subset of D 61B (Editorial). Could be counted as UNSAT but since it was corrected S)nthespot E

2/24/11 Question reviewed in office (SAT). Minor editorial 62B mprovements.

63B

/24/1 I Question reviewed in office (SAT).

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 lunits ward K/A Only 2/24/11 D is a subset of a B.

D (Editorial). Could be counted as 1.4 UNSAT but since it was corrected on the spot. (Editorial) 54B s

Dhanged the question to ask criteria to terminate SI flow (74 deg wbcooling).

E 2/24/11 Question reviewed in office (SAT). Minor editorial 55M mprovements.

56N s

/24/l 1/Verified that this is an appropriate RO level question 57B S

58B s

39N s

Tew.OK TON S

Tew.OK TiN s

ew.0K 72B s

73B S

74B S

75M

)K ES27-401, Rev. 9 2

Form ES-401-9

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

2.

3. Psychometric Flaws

4. Job Content Flaws

5. Other 6.

7.

Q#

LOK LCD (F/H)

(1-5)

U/E/S Explanation Stem Cues T/F Job-Minutia

1. /

Back-Q SRO

Focus Link units ward K/A Only VOGTLE 2011 SRO 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.

Enter the level of difficulty (LCD) 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).

I.

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).

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?

1.

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

1.

2.

3. Psychometric Flaws

4. Job Content Flaws

5. Other 6.

7.

Q#

LOK LCD (F/H)

(1-5)

Stem Cues T/F Cred.

Partial Job-Minutia

1. /

Back-Q SRO U/E/5 Explanation Focus Dist.

Link units ward K/A Only

1.

2.

[

3. Psychometric Flaws

4. Job Content Flaws

5. Other 6.

7.

Q#

LOK LODr

(F/H)

(1-5)

I 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 the answer states: power distribution may be challenged. More than one U

orrect answer. A dropped rod is also a misaligned rod. Subset issue.

76 X

x Uso the RO is required to know the definition of SDM. Not SRO Only.

S 2/22/1 1 In Office licensee provided a replacement question to ask if he rod is operable or not and whether the power dist. limits are affected.

fhe TS LCO Section states: all RCS loops are required to be U

)PERABLE and in operation in these MODES to prevent DNB and cor 77 lamage. The answer gives DNBR. Can eliminate choices A & B. They re functions, not basis statements. (NOT Plausible) (UNSAT)

/22/l I New question written E

)2 (Prelim submittal): This question does not appear to match the KA.

fhe question is written from the viewpoint of the PORV not the PRT.

78 S

Editorial) 2/22/il Reworded question (SAT).

)oesnt meet the KA. Should be an auto failure. (UNSAT) 2 part of 3 & D not plausible. No data given in the question to even support

onsidering voids in the core. Also, NC w/voids can not be entered w/o 79

)assing thru NC C/D procedure i.e. can no go directly to NC w/voids iom the Rx Trip Procedure.

/22/l 1 Reworded question to simplify (SAT)

The 2 part of C & D do not appear plausible. You would have to U

issume that the Rx vessel has been completely emptied to consider 80

hoice C or D. (UNSAT) 2/2/i i Reworded question and simplified s

SAT) u

)istractor B states non-DBA events, should it not state DBA

vents? This is not an entry level TS condition. Does not meet the KA.

81 UNSAT)

S U221 11 Reworded question (SAT)

E vlodified. Asks for indicated flow. Per the procedure 3200 gpm 82 indicated required to ensure actual flow is >3 000 gpm. Based on this, the incorrect answer is selected. Not sure if this question is meeting the KA.

Editorial) The flow limit is irrespective of the Loss of RHR Procedure.

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

2.

3. Psychometric Flaws

4. Job Content Flaws

5. Other 6.

7.

Q#

LOK LOD (F/H)

(1-5)

U/E/S Explanation Stem Cues T/F Job-Minutia

1. 1 Back-Q SRO Focus Link units ward K/A Only 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 he word Emergency in the choice Alert Emergency does not Lppear in the EAL designation. Emergency should be removed.

Reworded the question to state that venting has not occurred. (SAT) 83

Prelim submittal) This question as written allows for multiple answers.

IINSAT) Question reworded (SAT) 84 1ew(Prelirn submittal) Distractor B(2) should be rewritten to eliminate

he reason. 2/22/1 1 Corrected as requested.

ew. Reference information for EAL not submitted. Change distracters 85 E

&B to say no event classification required at this time. A&B non s

vent is not plausible as written. Changes made and also added ED udgement can not be used. (SAT) 86 86Mod. 037G2.4.4 Appears to meet the KA. 2/22/1 1 Editorial changes

aade. New question written to meet the KA. (SAT)

)o you expect the applicants to know the titles of the procedure numbers U

rom memory? Does not meet the KA. (UNSAT) This is an INFO only, u

ot an entry level condition. 2/22/11 New question written but 87

)istractors C & D are not plausible for the rewritten question. (UNSAT)

/23/11 Rewrote question. Added another RWST Variable in the stem s

Boron concentration) to ensure the part of distractor D is plausible.

ew distractors written for C&D. (SAT) 88

ES ew. Appears to meet KA. Editorial 2/22/1 1 Corrections made.(SAT) u ew. No mention of TS reference for this? Does not meet the KA. C &

89

) overlapped with a scenario (UNSAT) 2/22/11 Reworded question to

emove overlap from the scenario (SAT) 90 ES ew. Appears to meet the KA? (SAT)

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 tilE/S Explanation Focus Dist.

Link units ward K/A Only 4od. B.2) is not plausible. Why would you start an additional unit to E

alce the offsite dose less? This is not a modified question.

91 s knowing a step in the AOP to stop one of the filtration units an SRO s

eve! question? 2/22/11 Changes made to B.2 to ensure plausibility SAT).

ew. Is the SRO expected to know these TS from memory? No T.S.

eferences provided as part of the question. Only one distractor (the E

orrect one) used the terminology given in the stem of the question 92 Containment Atmosphere. Also Tech Spec. 3.4.15 C.2.2 is not

)resented as a correct answer also. 2/22/11 Added another detector Plant Vent Noble Gas Activity Monitor to the failure list given and asked if they can continue with the release or not (SAT)

Slew. B is a subset of D therefore, there are two correct answers.

U

/22/1 1 Table topped this (example was given on Friday at the plant site 93 hr this one).

S 1/23/11 Question reworded to ask for starting press 0 f

2 ni pump and

hanged the backup from B.5.B to the Cat 1 Standpipe.

94 E

Slew. Bad sentence structure in bullet has. 2/22/11 Question looks AT as is.

dd JAW Tech Specs to the question and change should to can. No

,lausibility for why you cant stop an RHR pump for this condition U

iven in the plausibility statements. Also the basis statement only 95 Lpplies for stopping the RHR pump, not allowing the pump to stay unning, therefore; B & C are not plausible. (UNSAT) 1/22/11 Question reworded to ask for how long you can stop the RHR

)ump(lhr in an 8 hr period) (SAT).

U (Prelim submittal) B & C are not plausible. Conduct of Operations and 96 ommon sense would not allow this kind of plant operation. (UNSAT)

Thange B to started w/i the next hr and completed within the following S

1 hrs. 2/22/li Made recommended changes (SAT).

fypo in question. Bullet //2 oncomimg vs oncoming. Why is this u

,ullet needed in the stem? 24hrs vs 2 hrs? Doesnt sound very plausible 97 hr not having any power indication at a low power condition.

1/22/I 1 Tabletop this till tomorrow.

S 1/23/il New question written for Unit differences associated with CST eve! and TS minimum level.

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

2.

3. Psychometric Flaws

4. Job Content Flaws

5. Other 6.

7.

Q#

LOK LCD (F/H)

(1-5)

U/E/S Explanation Stem Cues T/F Job-Minutia

1. 1 Back-Q=

SRO Focus Link units ward K/A Only 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. /

Back-Q=

SRO U/E/S Explanation Focus Dist.

Link units ward K/A Only 98 E

In distractor A, remove under any conditions to make more plausible.

fwo tanks cannot be administratively released at the same time. (SAT) 1ew (Prelim submittal) Licensee did not provide plausibility for going E

o the optimal recovery procedure or provide procedure reference for his transition choice. If SG WR Lvl is> 10%, how do you get to a 99

)ptimal recovery procedure to make choices B & D plausible for the 2 hoice.

/22/ 1 1 Made the suggested changes (SAT) u rhis does not appear to be SRO Only. RO is responsible for knowing 100 Nhen a tripped condition exists. (UNSAT)

S I22Il I Wrote a new question for this KA (SAT)

ES-401, Rev. 9 2

Form ES-401-9

ES-403, Rev. 9 Written Examination Grading Quality Checklist Form ES-403-1 Facility:

Vogtle Date of Exam:

4/1/2011 Exam Level: RO Initials Item Description a

b c

1 Clean answer sheets copied before grading 2.

Answer key changes and question deletions justified and documented lJJ4 3.

Applicants scores checked for addition errors (reviewers spot check > 25% of examinations)

4.

Grading for all borderline cases (80 +/-2% overall and 70 or 80, as applicable, +/-4% on the SRO-only) reviewed in detail

7j4L 5.

All other failing examinations checked to ensure that grades 4

are justified ijL

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

/ CJ

/ it

b. Facility Reviewer(*)

c. NRC Chief Examiner (*)

d. NRC Supervisor (*)

(*)

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

ES-403, Rev. 9 Written Examination Grading Form ES-403-1 Quality Checklist Facility:

Vogtle Date of Exam:

4/1/20 1 1 Exam LevelYSRO Initials Item Description a

b c

1.

Clean answer sheets copied before grading 2.

Answer key changes and question deletions justified and N

documented YL

3.

Applicants scores checked for addition errors (reviewers spot check> 25% of examinations)

4.

Grading for all borderline cases (80 +/-2% overall and 70 or 80, as applicable, +/-4% on the SRO-only) reviewed in detail

5.

All other failing examinations checked to ensure that grades 4

1 are justified 6.

Performance on missed questions checked for training deficiencies and wording problems; evaluate validity of 3

questions missed by half or more of the applicants Printed Name/Signature Date

a. Grader

b. Facility Reviewer(*)

c. NRC Chief Examiner (*)

)

/

d. NRC Supervisor (*)

74

(*)

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