ML14338A078

301 Final Administrative Documents

ML14338A078
Person / Time
Site:	Vogtle
Issue date:	12/03/2014
From:	NRC/RGN-II
To:
References
Download: ML14338A078 (85)

Text

ES 201-1 ES-201 Examination Preparation Checklist Form ES-201-1 5/12 to 5/16 Date of and 5/29, Facility: Vogtle Units 1 and 2 Examination: 2014 Examinations Developed Facility NRC by: Written / Operating Test Written / Operating Test Chief Target Task Description (Reference) Examiners Date*

Initials JAT

-180 1. Examination administration date confirmed (C.1.a; C.2.a and b)

JAT

-120 2. NRC examiners and facility contact assigned (C.1.d; C.2.e)

JAT

-120 3. Facility contact briefed on security and other requirements (C.2.c)

JAT

-120 4. Corporate notification letter sent (C.2.d)

JAT

[-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-JAT 201-3, ES-301-1, ES-301-2, ES-301-5, ES-D-1's, 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 JAT 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 JAT 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 398's) due (C.1.l; C.2.g; JAT ES-202)

-14 10. Final license applications due and Form ES-201-4 prepared (C.1.l; C.2.i; JAT ES-202)

-14 11. Examination approved by NRC supervisor for facility licensee review JAT (C.2.h; C.3.f)

JAT

-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 JAT (C.2.i; C.3.h)

-7 14. Final applications reviewed; 1 or 2 (if >10) applications audited to confirm JAT 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 JAT with facility licensee (C.3.k)

-7 16. Approved scenarios, job performance measures, and questions JAT 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 201-2 ES-201 Examination Outline Quality Checklist Form ES-201-2 Facility: Vogtle 1 & 2 Date of Examination: 05/12/2014 Operating Test Number: 2014-301 Item Task Description 1 a. Verify that the outline(s) fit(s) the appropriate model, in accordance with ES-401.

w 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.

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

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.

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

G E 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.

R d. Check for duplication and overlap among exam sections.

L e. Check the entire exam for balance of coverage.

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

- Prnted Name! i re Dat a.

b.

Author Facility Reviewer (*)

Kri 4i ,/

) c-)

c. NRC Chief Examiner (#) . Tc.-4 f3o )2O

d. NRCSupervisor CruiN-iyi /(,. / ij Note: # Independent NRC reviewer initial items in Column c; chief examiner concurrence required.

Not applicable for NRC-prepared examination outlines

Vcr pA?l,e ?LA-t oc-(

ES-201 Examination Outline Quality Checklist Form ES-201-2 Facility: j Date of Examination: lI\ fr( 10 $

Initials Item Task Description a b* c#

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

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

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

A

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, 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 V 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 R and quantitative criteria specified on Form ES-301-4 and described in Appendix D.

3. a. Verify that the systems walk-through outline meets the criteria specified on Form ES-301-2:

(1) the outline(s) contain(s) the required number of control room and in-plant tasks W distributed among the safety functions as specified on the form I (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.

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.

N c. Ensure that K/A importance ratings (except for plant-specific priorities) are at least 2.5. (3

d. Check for duplication and overlap among exam sections. A A e. Check the entire exam for balance of coverage. A

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

, Printed Name/Signature Date

?\\ O.

a. Author

b. Facility Reviewer (*) IA OC(w.x4

/

c. NRC Chief Examiner(#) iOPr

d. NRCSupervisor Note: # Independent NRC reviewer initial items in Column c; chief examiner concurrence required.

Not applicable for NRC-prepared examination outlines

?%\

jt(i ES-201, Page 26 of 28

ES 201-3

ES 301-1 RO ES-301 Administrative Topics Outline Form ES-301-1 Facility: Vogtle 1 & 2 Date of Examination:

Examination Level: RO 1 SRO Operating Test Number: 2014-301 Administrative Topic (see Note) Type Describe activity to be performed Code*

Conduct of Operations (a) R, M a. V-NRC-JP-19263-HL19: Determine Maximum Allowable Venting Time for Venting Voids in the Reactor Vessel

Description:

Unit 2 tripped due to a LOCA. RCS pressure is recovering and the crew is responding to voids in the reactor vessel. Using provided data, the candidate will be required to calculate the maximum allowable venting time using 19263-C, Attachment 3, Instructions for Determining Venting Time.

G2.1.25 RO 3.9 Conduct of Operations (b) R, D b. V-NRC-JP-14005-HL19: Determine Shutdown Margin With One Stuck Rod

Description:

During control rod operability testing on Unit 1, one control rod fails to move when demanded. The candidate will be required to calculate the available shutdown margin for the given conditions using 14005-1, Shutdown Margin and Keff Calculations.

G2.1.43 R04.1 Equipment Control (c) R, M c. V-NRC-JP-14915-HL19: Perform Quadrant Power Tilt Ratio Surveillance for Inoperable QPTR Monitor Alarm

Description:

The QPTR Monitor Alarm is inoperable. With data provided, the candidate will complete 1491 5-1, Special Conditions Surveillance Logs, Data Sheet 7, to calculate Quadrant Power Tilt Ratio for the inoperable QPTR Monitor Alarm.

G2.2.12 RO 3.7 Radiation Control (d) N/A N/A

Emergency Procedures/Plan (e) 5, D e. V-NRC-JP-NMP-EP-111-HL19: Perform ERO Recall and ENN Notification

Description:

Candidate will perform an ERO recall and an ENN roll call, and will confirm receipt of the Emergency Notification by State and Local Authorities by reading the first five lines of the Emergency Notification Form over the ENN and requesting acknowledgement. Task is Time Critical.

G2.4.43 RO 3.2 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 301-1 SRO ES-301 Administrative Topics Outline Form ES-301-1 Facility: 1 &2 Date of Examination: 05!12/2014 Examination Level: RO SRO I SROU 1 Operating Test Number: 2014-301 Administrative Topic (see Note) Type Describe activity to be performed Code*

Conduct of Operations (a) R, M a. V-NRC-JP-19263-HL19: Determine Maximum Allowable Venting Time for Venting Voids in the Reactor Vessel

Description:

Unit 2 tripped due to a LOCA. RCS pressure is recovering and the crew is responding to voids in the reactor vessel. Using provided data, the candidate will be required to calculate the maximum allowable venting time using 1 9263-C, Attachment 3, Instructions for Determining Venting Time.

Same as RO Admin JPM a.

G2.1 .25 SRO 4.2 Conduct of Operations (b) R, D b. V-NRC-JP-14005-HL19: Determine Shutdown Margin With One Stuck Rod

Description:

During control rod operability testing on Unit 1, one control rod fails to move when demanded. The candidate will be required to calculate the available shutdown margin for the given conditions using 14005-1, Shutdown Margin and Keff Calculations.

Same as RO Admin JPM b.

G2.1.43 SRO 4.3 Equipment Control (c) R, M c. V-NRC-JP-14915-HL19: Perform and Evaluate Quadrant Power Tilt Ratio Surveillance for Inoperable QPTR Monitor Alarm

Description:

The QPTR Monitor Alarm is inoperable. With data provided, the candidate will complete 14915-1, Special Conditions Surveillance Logs, Data Sheet 7, to calculate Quadrant Power Tilt Ratio for an inoperable QPTR Monitor Alarm, evaluate the data, and determine appropriate Tech Spec actions.

G2.2.12 SRO 4.1

Radiation Control (d) R, M d. V-NRC-JP-91301-HL19: Assess Radiological Conditions in an Emergency and Determine if a Task Can be Performed

Description:

During a General Emergency, a Systems Operator is to be dispatched to operate equipment. The candidate must determine the appropriate Emergency Exposure Limit based on the given conditions and assigned task, and then assess the radiological data provided to determine if the task can be completed without exceeding the applicable Emergency Exposure Limit of 91301-C.

G2.3.14 SRO 3.8 Emergency Procedures/Plan (e) R, M e. V-NRC-JP-NMP-EP-11O-HL19: Classify an Emergency Event and Complete the Emergency Notification Form

Description:

Based on the given conditions, the candidate will use NMP-EP-1 10 to determine the highest emergency classification level. WebEOC will not be available, which will require the candidate to manually complete the Emergency Notification Form from NMP-EP-1 1 1 -Fl 0.

G2.4.41 SRO 4.6 NOTE: All items (5 total) are required for SROs. RO applicants require only 4 items unless they are retaking only the administrative topics, when 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 301-2 RO/SRO-I/SRO-U ES-301 Control Room/In-Plant Systems Outline Form ES-301-2 Facility: Voqtle 1 & 2 Date of Examination: 05/12/2014 Exam Level: RO J SRO-l d SRO-U zl Operating Test Number: 201 4-301_

Control Room Systems@ (8 for RO); (7 for SRO-l); (2 or 3 for SRO-U, including 1 ESF)

System / JPM Title Type Code* Safety Function

a. V-NRC-JP-13009-HL19: Perform a Manual Makeup to the VCT A, M, 5

Description:

The unit is at 100% power with the VCT level at 32%. Automatic makeup to the VCT is not available due to a level control circuit malfunction. The candidate is directed to perform a manual makeup to raise VCT level to 50% using 13009-1. During the manual makeup, the BA FLOW DEVIATION alarm will be received, which will require the candidate to manually stop the makeup to limit the effects of a dilution event.

(RO / SRO-l / SRO-U) 004A4.12 RO 3.8 SRO 3.3

b. V-NRC-JP-19014-HL19: Transfer ECCS Pumps to Hot Leg A, EN, L, M, S 3 Recirculation

Description:

A large break LOCA occurred approximately 7.5 hours5.787037e-5 days <br />0.00139 hours <br />8.267196e-6 weeks <br />1.9025e-6 months <br /> ago. The ECCS pumps are currently operating in the cold leg recirculation mode. The candidate is directed to transfer the ECCS pumps to the hot leg recirculation mode using 1901 4-C.

The SI pump B to the hot legs isolation valve will not open, so SI pump B will have to be realigned to cold leg recirculation. All other ECCS pumps will be aligned for hot leg recirculation.

(RO / SRO-l / SRO-U)

O11EA1.11 RO4.2 SRO4.2

c. V-NRC-JP-19012-HL19: Isolate Accumulators During Post- A, EN, L, M, S 4P LOCA Cooldown

Description:

The reactor was tripped following a LOCA, and a cooldown and depressurization were performed. Adequate RCS subcooling and pressurizer level are available to isolate the SI accumulators. The candidate is directed to isolate the SI accumulators using 19012-C. One accumulator isolation valve will fail to close, which will require the candidate to vent the non isolable accumulator.

(RO/SRO-l)

WEO3EA1 .1 RO 4.0 SRO 4.0

d. V-NRC-JP-13610-HL19: Restore TDAFW Flow with Actuation D, EN, L, S 4S Signal Present

Description:

A reactor trip occurred due to a loss of main feedwater, which led to a loss of heat sink. All SG WR levels are less than 9%, and RCS bleed and feed has been initiated. The TDAFW pump tripped on overspeed and is ready to be returned to service. The candidate will be required to reset and restart the TDAFW pump and restore AFW flow to the SGs using 19231-C.

(RO/SRO-l)

WEO5EA1.1 R04.1 SRO4.0

e. V-NRC-JP-13125-HL19: Reduce Containment Pressure M, S 5 Following an Inadvertent CVI

Description:

A containment pressure relief using the purge system was in progress when an inadvertent CVI occurred due to a faulty slave relay. Following repair and testing of the faulty relay, the candidate will be required to re-initiate containment pressure relief and lower containment pressure to zero +/-0.1 psig using 13125-1.

(RO I SRO-l) 103A1.01 RO 3.7 SRO 4.1

f. V-NRC-JP-13830-HL19: Synchronize Main Generator to the A, D, S 6 Grid

Description:

The unit is starting up following a refueling outage.

The main turbine is at 1800 rpm and generator excitation has been established. The candidate will use 13830-1 to synchronize the main generator to the grid. One phase will not indicate current, which will require tripping the main turbine.

(RO / SRO-I) 062A4.07 RO 3.1* SRO 3.1*

g. V-NRC-JP-13301-HL19: Manually Align Control Room D, EN, S 7 Isolation on High Radiation

Description:

The unit is at 100% power when high radiation is detected in the control room ventilation. Control Room Isolation (CR1) fails to automatically actuate, so the candidate will be required to manually align the control room ventilation system using 13301-C.

(RO/SRO-IISRO-U) 061 AA1 .01 HO 3.6 SRO 3.6

h. V-NRC-JP-19253-HL19: Respond to Containment High D, L, S 9 Radiation RO ONLY

Description:

The unit was at 100% power when a LOCA occurred. While performing the actions for the loss of reactor coolant, the containment area radiation monitors indicate greater than 750 mrem/hour. To respond to the high containment radiation level, the candidate will be required to perform the actions of 19253-C to isolate containment and to place the required containment ventilation units in service.

(RO)

WE16EA1.1 R03.1

In-Plant Systems@ (3 for RO); (3 for SRO-l); (3 or 2 for SRO-U)

I. V-NRC-JP-13405-HL19: Place Train B Battery Charger D, E, L 6 1BD1CA in Service

Description:

Unit 1 experienced a loss of 125 VDC bus 1BD1 due to an electrical fault. After repairs to bus 1 BD1 are complete and battery 1 BD1 B is placed in service, the candidate will be directed to locally place battery charger 1 BD1 CA in service using 13405-1.

(RC/SRO-l) 058AA1 .03 RO 3.1 SRO 3.3

j. V-NRC-JP-18038-HL19: Locally Energize Train A Switchgear D, E, L 8 Following Local Diesel Start

Description:

The control room has been evacuated and control has been established at the shutdown panels. DG2A has been locally started. The candidate will locally energize Unit 2, Train A 4160 VAC and 480 VAC buses, two NSCW pumps, and one MDAFW pump using Attachment B of 18038-2.

(RO / SRC-l I SRO-U) 068AA1.21 R03.9 SRO4.1

k. V-NRC-JP-17213-HL19: Respond to 1-RE-0018 Alarm During a A, D, E, P, R 9 Liquid Radwaste Release

Description:

During a liquid radwaste release, a high alarm is received on 1 -RE-001 8. The candidate will be directed to respond to the Waste Process Liquid Panel (PLPP) and take the appropriate actions per 17213-1. 1 -RE-001 8 will not close, so manual isolation will be required.

(ROISRO-l/SRO-U) 059AA2.05 AC 3.6 SRO 3.9

@ All RO and SRO-l control room (and in-plant) systems must be different and serve different safety functions; all 5 SAC-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 / SRO-U (A)lternate path 4-6 / 4-6 / 2-3 (C)ontrol room (D)irect from bank 9/ 8I 4 (E)mergency or abnormal in-plant 1 I 1 I 1 (EN)gineered safety feature - I - I 1 (control room system)

(L)ow-Power I Shutdown 1 I? 1 I 1 (N)ew or (M)oditied from bank including 1 (A) 2I 2/ 1 (P)revious 2 exams 3I 3 I 2 (randomly selected)

(R)CA (S)imulator

ES 301-3 ES-301 Operating Test Quality Checklist Form ES-301-3 Facility: Vogtle 1 & 2 Date of Examination: 05/12/2014 Operating Test Number: 2014-301

1. General Criteria Initials a b* c#

a. The operating test conforms with the previo usly approved outline; changes are consisten sampling requirements (e.g., 10 CFR 55.45, t with operational importance, safety function distrib ution). U

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

11

)j rp.D

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

d. Overlap with the written examination and D.1.a.) k Qj between different parts of the operating test acceptable limits. is within At- co-P

e. It appears that the operating test will differe ntiate between competent and less-than-com applicants at the designated license level. petent A(

V =

2. Walk-Through Criteria

a. Each JPM includes the following, as applica ble:

• 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 asso ciated performance standards restrictions on the sequence of steps, if applica ble

b. Ensure that any changes from the previously approv ed systems and administrative walk-through outlines (Forms ES-301-1 and 2) have not caus ed the test to deviate from any of the acceptan criteria (e.g., item distribution, bank use, repetit ce ion from the last 2 NRC examinations) specifi on those forms and Form ES-201-2. ed U

3. Simulator Criteria The associated simulator operating tests (scena rio sets) have been reviewed in accordan Form ES-301-4 and a copy is attached. ce with kb-riJ Printed Name I Signature Date

a. Author Ki ILirS /2itc EZZ o/4+

b.

c.

Facility Reviewer(*)

NRC Chief Examiner (#)

C / /a s// y li ° j 4

L V

d. NRC Supervisor kCAJ (cNk,vis s( (i NOTE:

• The facility signature is not applicable for NRC-d eveloped tests.

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

ES 301-4 Simulator Scenario Quality Checklist Form ES-301-4 ES-301 Scenario Numbers: 1 / 2 / 3 / 4 Operating Test No.: 2014-301

[ Facility: VogUe 1 & 2 Date of Exam: 05/12/2014 Irutials QUALITATIVE ATTRIBUTES a b* c#

and/or instrumentation may be out

1. The initial conditions are realistic, in that some equipment rs into expect ed events.

of service, but it does not cue the operato

2. The scenarios consist mostly of related events. L.

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 7\r. )i O

. the expected operator actions (by shift position)

. the event termination point (if applicable) break) is incorporated into the scenario j

4. No more than one non-mechanistic failure (e.g. pipe t such as a seismi c event.

without a credible preceding inciden O

ics. Ik

5. The events are valid with regard to physics and thermodynam examination team to obtain

6. Sequencing and timing of events is reasonable, and allows the 1 io objectives.

compl ete evalua tion results comme nsurate with the scenar

7. If time compression techniques are used, the scenario summa Operators have sufficient time to carry out expect ed activit ies ry clearly so indicates.

withou t undue time constraints.

4 A S qjOO Cues are given.

8. The simulator modeling is not altered.

d), any open simulator

9. The scenarios have been validated. Pursuant to 10 CFR 55.46( c ncies or deviati ons from the referen ced plant have been evaluated to ensure that -V-r\ R performance deficie -J g the planne d scenar ios.

functional fidelity is maintained while runnin cantly modified scenario. All other :44( j Every operator will be evaluated using at least one new or signifi 10.

scenar ios have been altered in accord ance with Sectio n D.5 of ES-301. JL d Form ES-301-6 (submit the

11. All individual operator competencies can be evaluated, as verifie using form along with the simulator scenar ios).

r of transients and events

12. Each applicant will be significantly involved in the minimum numbe A1 specified on Form ES-301-5 (submit the form with the simulator scenarios). jj ns for each crew position.

13. The level of difficulty is appropriate to support licensing decisio Actual Attributes Target Quantitative Attributes (Per Scenario; See Section D.5.d) 8 /8 / 7/ 6

1. Total malfunctions (58)

2. Malfunctions after EOP entry (12) 3 d/2 / 1 f) A cL 4 / 5 / 5 /4

3. Abnormal events (24)

4. Major transients (12) i li / 1 / 3 \ p.j.A 2/212/3 t..tJ

5. EOPs entered/requiring substantive actions (12)

6. EOP contingencies requiring substantive actions (02) 0/0/0/ 1 (\

7. Critical tasks (23)

(EOP CTs)4 /4/4 / / j( ,p (TotalCTs)4/4/7/4 j___

ES 301-5 Form ES-301-5 ES-301 Transient and Event Checklist Date of Exam: 05/12/2014 Operating Test No.: 2014-301 Facility: Vogtle 1 & 2 E Scenarios A M 4 T P V 1 2 3 o

P E CREW CREW N N CREW CREW T L

I T POSmON 9]J S A B S A B A

L A B S A B C S 0 R T 0 R T 0 M(*)

R T 0 R T A T C P 0 C P 0 C P 0 C P 0 R)U N Y T P E

7 2 3 110 RO RX 5 1 4 111 D 4 4 5 NOR SROI ic 5,6, lxi 3,5, 3,6, 3,4, 9, 6, 9, 7, 9 SRO-U 6, 9, 10 10, 10 lxi 11 8, 6 221 7 7 8 MAJ 10, 11 56 8 022 16 26 26 TS 5 7 23110 RX 5 3 111 NOR 4 4

RO 3,4, 16 4 4 2 1,3, 3,8, 2,4, IX] I/C 6, 8, 9, 11 6, 10 9 SRO-l 8 8, 6 2 2 1 MAJ 7 7 SRO-U 10, 11 I: 0 022 TS 0 110 RO RX 7 13111 NOR SRO-l 13 5613 610 9 7 D 10 SRO-U 8 8 6 221 MAJ 7 7 10 11 0 022 TS Instructions:

RO applicants.

rs for each event type; TS are not applicable for ng test number and Form ES-D-1 event numbe and the ATC positions, 1 Check the applicant level and enter the operati balanc e-of-pl ant (BOP) positions; Instant SROs must serve in both the SRO

-contro ls (ATC) and nally serves in the BOP ROs must serve in both the at-the position. If an Instant SRO additio malfunctions and one major transient, in the ATC including at least two instrument or component (I/C) malfun ctions require d for the ATC position.

d toward the two I/C position, one I/C malfunction can be credite cant per Section C2.a of (refer to Section D.5i) but must be signifi Reactivity manipulations way be conduc ted under normal or controlled abnormal conditions nent malfun ctions on a 1-for-i basis.

2. nal instrum ent or compo ons may be replaced with additio Appendix D. () Reactivity and normal evoluti to the applicants that require verifiable actions that provide insight nent malfunctions should be included, only those

3. Whenever practical, both instrument and compo applica nts license level in the right-h and columns.

ments specified for the competence count toward the minimum require

ES 301-6 Form ES-301-6 Competencies Checklist ES-301 2014-301 05/12/2014 Operating Test No.:

Date of Examination:

Facility: Vogtle 1 & 2 APPLICANTS SRO-U fJ JXI SRO-I RO SCENARIO SCENARIO Competencies SCENARIO 4 1 2 34 1 2 3 1 2 3 4 3,4, 1,2, 1,2, 1,2, 3,4, 3,4, 1,2, 1,2, 1,2, 4, 5, 6, 1,2, 1,2, 1,2, 5, 6, 3, 5, 3, 5, 3, 5, 6, 3, 5, 3, 5, 3, 4, 6, 8, 7, 8, ents 3, 3, 5, 3, 4, 7, 8, 6, 7, 6, 7, Interpret/Diagnose Ev 6, 7, 6, 8, 6, 7, 6, 8, 7, 8, 6, 7, 8, 9, 9, 9, 10, ns 6, 7, 8, 9, 8, 9, 9, 10 9, 10, 8, 9, 11 and Conditio 8, 9, 8, 9, 9, 10 9, 10, 11 10 10, 10 11 10 10, 10 10, 11 11 1,2, 1,2, 11 1,2, 1,2, 1,2, 1,2, 1,2, 1,2, 1,2, 1,2, 1,2, 3, 4, 3, 4, 3, 4, 1,2, 3, 4, 3, 4, 3, 4, 3, 4, 3, 4, 3, 4, 3, 4, 3, 4, 6, 5, 6, 5, 6, 5, 6, 3, 4, 5, 6, 5, 6, 5, Comply With and 5, 6, 5, 6, 5, 6, 5, 6, 5, 6, 7,8, 7,8 , 7, 8, 7,8, 5, 6, 7,8, 7,8, Use Procedures (1) 7,8 , 7, 8, 7, 8, 7,8, 7,8, 10 9, 10, 9, 9, 10, 7,8, 9, 9, 10, 9, 10 9, 10, 9, 9, 10 9, 10, 9, 10 9, 10, 11 11 1Q........ 11 11 11 12___ 11 1,2, 1,2, 1,2, 1,2, 1,2, 1,2, 1,2, 1,2, 4, 3, 4, 3, 4, 3, 4, 3, 4, 3, 4, 3, 4, 3, 3, 4, 5, 6, 5, 6, Operate Control 5, 6, 5, 6, 5, 6, 5, 6, 5, 6, 5, 6, 7, 8, 7, 8, 7, 8, 7, 8, Boards (2) 7, 8, 7, 8, 7, 8, 7, 8, 9, 9, 10, 9, 10 9, 10, 9, 10 9, 10, 9, 10 9, 10, 11 11 11 1011 1,2, 1,2, 1,2,

, 1,2 , 1,2, 1,2, 1,2, 1,2, 1,2, 1,2, 1,2 3, 4, 3, 4, 3, 4, 1,2 3, 4, 3, 4, 3, 4, 3, 4, 3, 4, 3, 4, 3, 4, 3, 4, 5, 6, 5, 6, 5, 6, 3, 4, 5, 6, 5, 6, 5, 6, Communicate 5, 6, 5, 6, 5, 6, 5, 6, 5, 6, , 7,8 , 7,8, 7,8, 5, 6, 7,8, 7, 8, 7,8 and Interact 7,8, 7,8, 7,8, 7,8, 7,8, 10 9, 10, 9, 9, 10, 7,8, 9, 10 9, 10, 9, 9, 10, 9, 10 9, 10, 9, 11 11 9, 10 9, 10, 11 11 ii iq___ 11 1,2, 1,2, 1,2 , 1,2 , 1,2 , 1,2, 1,2, 1,2, 3, 4, 3, 4, 3, 4, 3, 4, 3, 4, 3, 4, 3, 4, 3, 4, 6, 5, 6, 5, 6, 5, 6, Supervisory 5, 6, 5, 6, 5, Demonstrate 5, 6, 5, 6, 7,8, 7,8 , 7,8, 7,8, 7,8, 7,8, Ability (3) 7,8, 7, 8, 10 9, 10, 9, 9, 10, 9, 9, 10, 9, 10 9, 10, 9, 11 10 11 11 11 5,6 1,6 2,6 2,6 5,6 1,6 2,6 2,6 Comply With and Use Tech. Specs. (3)

Notes: an RO.

fication compliance for (1) Includes Technical Speci (2) Optional for an SRO-U.

(3) Only applicable to SROs t will allow the Instructions:

lice nse typ e an d en ter one or more event numbers tha Check the applicants licable competency for eve ry applicant.

s to ev aluate eve ry app examiner

ES 401-4 Page 1 of I Record of Rejected KIAs ES-401-4 K/A K/A listed in column 2 is the relected Tier I Randomly Selected KIA I Reason for Rejection j_____________________________

L Group are oil cooled with a 01 5AA1 .04 Vogtles RCPs are not fan cooled; they T1G1 the ACCW system.

heat exchanger that rejects heat to that directly cool the RD Vogtle does not even have area fans inside the bio-shield that RCPs. They are in an open space has general area cooling.

cted 01 5AA1 .23 as the NRC Chief Examiner randomly sele replacement K/A.

een the NSCW system 075K2.03 Vogtles only inter-connection betw T2G2 electrical distribution and Circulating Water system is the er supply and the RD system, though NSCW has a 1 E pow

-i E power supply.

Circulating Water system has a non 001 K2.03 as the NRC Chief Examiner randomly selected replacement K/A.

ces associated with a TIG1 WEIIG2.2.4 Vogtle does not have any Unit differen lation.

Loss of Emergency Coolant Recircu RD WE11G2.1.25 as NRC Chief Examiner randomly selected the replacement K/A.

l impact on the 010K6.04 A loss of the PRT has no operationa T2G1 . If the PRT overheated pressurizer pressure control system disks would blow, but RD and/or overpressurized, the rupture ssu re control system.

there would be no effect on the pre 010K6.02 as the NRC Chief Examiner randomly selected replacement K/A.

Examiner, it was 055G2.4.42 After discussions with the NRC Chief T2G2 -only question linking determined that developing an SRO entry conditions is SRD condenser air removal and Tech Spec eptable question, a difficult. After attempting to write an acc decision was made to replace the K/A 055G2. 1.23 as the NRC Chief Examiner randomly selected replacement K/A.

ES 401-6 y Checklist Form ES-401-6 ES-401 Written Examination Qualit VLO SI2(2oI+

Exam Level: RD [SI SRO LXI Date of Exam: -05/12/21-4 Facwty: Vogtle 1 & 2 initial b* c#

a item Description t e to the facility.

technically accurate and applicabl

1. Questions and answers are 1?JAL2 all questions. Li

a. NRC K/As are referenced for

2. referenced as available.

b. Facility learn ing obje ctive s are cf) L d of ES-401 e in accordance with Section D.2.

3. SRD questions are appropriat 4 RD or 2 SRO questions t:j om and systematic (if more than 4 The sampling process was rand NRR DL program office).

4. NRC licensing exa ms, cons ult the were repeated from the last 2 was controlled license screening/audit exam

5. Question duplication from the appl ies) and app ears appropriate:

item that as indicated below (check the and rand omly deve lope d; or L the audit exam was systematically re the license exam was started; or m was com plete d befo the audit exa ed independently; or the examinations were develop e is no duplication; or x the licensee certifies that ther other (exp lain)

Bank Modified New ro.D than 75 percent rJ

6. Bank use meets limits (no more the rest t new, and 30/ 9 from the bank, at least 10 percen 29 / 8 16 / 8 (j l RD / SRO-only new or modified); enter the actua question distribution(s) at right Memory C/A the questions on the RD

7. Between 50 and 60 percent of level ;

hension! analysis (

exam are written at the compre 39 / 14 SRO exam may exceed 60 percent if the randomly 36! 11 the itive level s; ente r er cogn selected K/As support the high distribution(s) at right.

the actual RD / SRO question pzP 0 rO do not give away answers V

8. References/handouts provided actors.

or aid in the elimination of distr the previously approved with specific K/A statements in

9. Question content conforms whic h they are assigned; ropriate for the tier to examination outline and is app deviations are justified. P 1 s in ES Appendix B.

and format meet the guideline

10. Question psychometric quality choice items; number of one-point, multiple

11. The exam contains the required valu e on the cove r sheet.

with the the total is correct and agrees Date Printed Name / Signature K-r kni /

a. Author / 4

(*)

b. Facility Reviewer NRC Chief Exam iner (#)

çcr-

/ 1,t,Al J

c.

d. NRC Regi onal Supe rviso r I11v

-developed examinations.

nature are not applicable for NRC Note:

The facility reviewers initials/sig chief exam iner concurrence required.

l items in Column c;

1. independent NRC reviewer initia

ES 401-9 ES-401 Vogtle 2014-301 - Written Examination Review Worksheet Form ES-401-9

1. 2. 3. Psychometric Flaws 4. Job Content Flaws 5. Other 6. 7. 8.

Q# LOK LOD (F/H) (1-5) Stem Cues T/F Cred. Partial Job- Minutia #/ Back- Q= SRO B/M/N 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. 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. Enter question source: (B)ank, (M)odified, or (N)ew. Check that (M)odified questions meet criteria of ES-401 Section D.2.f.

7. 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?

8. 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. 8.

Q# LOK LOD (F/H) (1-5) B/M/N U/E/S Explanation Key/Summary S Indicates SAT: 18 SRO, 40 RO (initial submittal) 25 SRO, 75 RO SAT in final submittal Question distribution:

RO SRO E Indicates Enhancement: 2 SRO, 22 RO (initial submittal)

Bank 32 (8 previous NRC exam, 4 of 8 (4 previous NRC exam, 2 of which U Indicates UNSAT: 4 SRO, 7 RO (initial submittal) which are within last 2 exams) are within last 2 exams)

U/E Indicates UNSAT/ENHANCEMENT (likely due to two non-plausible Modified 16 (12 modified from previous 8 NRC exams) distractors that are the same, as in a 2x2, i.e., the same distractor counted 2x as non-plausible)

New 27 9 1 SRO, 6 RO (initial submittal)

(pre) Indicates presubmitted question comments

1. 2. 3. Psychometric Flaws 4. Job Content Flaws 5. Other 6. 7. 8.

Q# LOK LOD (F/H) (1-5) Stem Cues T/F Cred. Partial Job- Minutia #/ Back- Q= SRO B/M/N U/E/S Explanation Focus Dist. Link units ward K/A Only (1) 64 F 2 B S 075K2.03 Replaced with 001 K2.03 on 10/3/2013 Question appears to match the KA.

Question appears to be SAT. JAT 3/11/2014 (2) 28 H 2 N S 003A3.04 Question appears to match the KA. RCS flow is used to determine which RCPs tripped due to underfrequency.

Question appears to be SAT. JAT 3/11/2014 Final submitted question is SAT. JAT 4/25/2014 (3) 29 H 2 B S 004K6.09 Question appears to match the KA.

Question appears to be SAT. JAT 3/12/2014 Final submitted question is SAT. JAT 4/25/2014

1. 2. 3. Psychometric Flaws 4. Job Content Flaws 5. Other 6. 7. 8.

Q# LOK LOD (F/H) (1-5) Stem Cues T/F Cred. Partial Job- Minutia #/ Back- Q= SRO B/M/N U/E/S Explanation Focus Dist. Link units ward K/A Only (4) 30 H 3 X N U 005A2.02 Question appears to match the KA.

What is the basis for the plausibility of the two parts of distractor A together? If the applicant thinks that the charging considerations outweigh the RHR cooldown, stopping the RHR pump would serve to further exacerbate the pressure increase.

Similarly, for distractor D, if the applicant has the misconception that the pressure decrease due to cooldown outweighs the pressure increase from charging (or discounts any pressure increase), why would they choose to stop the charging pump rather than the RHR pump?

A simple fix to this question may be to ask in part (2):

Per 18028-C, Loss of Instrument Air, to mitigate the pressure transient, the crew [will/will not] stop RHR pump B.

The two parts of each distractor become more plausible with each other because the applicant does not have to choose CCP or RHR pump, they must make a determination on the RHR pump alone. (Please ensure that there is one and only one correct answer if the question is asked this way

-the way I read 18028-C, an RHR pump is stopped only if you have two running, and the question sets them up to have only one running, which would make [will not] the correct answer for part 2.)

JAT 3/12/2014 Final submitted question is SAT. JAT 4/25/2014 S

(5) 19 F 2 N E 005AK3.05 Question appears to match the KA.

Recommend adding per 18003-C to the beginning of the part (2) question so there is no question that 18003-C refers to both parts of the question.

Otherwise, question appears to be SAT. JAT 3/12/2014 S Final submitted question is SAT. JAT 4/25/2014

1. 2. 3. Psychometric Flaws 4. Job Content Flaws 5. Other 6. 7. 8.

Q# LOK LOD (F/H) (1-5) Stem Cues T/F Cred. Partial Job- Minutia #/ Back- Q= SRO B/M/N U/E/S Explanation Focus Dist. Link units ward K/A Only (6) 31 H 2 X  ? N E/U 005K5.09 Question appears to match the KA.

Need to make sure that a successful argument cannot be made for two correct answers: is it written anywhere that a chemical addition is to be considered a dilution, regardless of how negligible? If not, is it an operations expectation that chemical additions be considered to be a dilution? There needs to be a definitive answer in the event that someone chooses the wrong answer and appeals the question based on the fact that the dilution amount is negligible.

Not sure that 4h in an 8h period is plausible. However, the specification states less than or equal to one hour, so you can rework the part (2) question to ask something to the effect of:

and, per TS 3.9.5, RHR pump B [is/is not] required to be returned to service within 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br /> of being stopped.

JAT 3/12/2014 S Final submitted question is SAT. JAT 4/25/2014

1. 2. 3. Psychometric Flaws 4. Job Content Flaws 5. Other 6. 7. 8.

Q# LOK LOD (F/H) (1-5) Stem Cues T/F Cred. Partial Job- Minutia #/ Back- Q= SRO B/M/N U/E/S Explanation Focus Dist. Link units ward K/A Only (7) 32 H 2 X M E 006A1.06 Question appears to match the KA.

Will re-actuating SI accomplish the same thing as restarting SIP B? If so, then there is arguably more than one correct answer, since the 19012-C foldout page states to Operate ECCS pumps as necessary under SI Reinitiation Criteria. If the pumps operate, especially without causing harm to the system, an argument in favor of simply reactuating SI can be made since the end result is the same.

To eliminate this problem, and to keep the question at the RO level, I would put a condition in the stem that will give an indication that containment is/is not adverse, and then give subcooling in the second part of the question as somewhere between 24 and 38F. Then you can query on SIP B [is/is not] required to be restarted.

Additionally, consider moving the information from the part (2) question to a conditions heading:

Initial Conditions:

[same as you have]

Intermediary condition:

-CCP A is stopped per 19012-C.

Current conditions:

-SIP B is stopped per 19012-C.

-Subcooling margin is [between 24 and 38F] and lowering

-[whatever info is needed for adverse/non-adverse containment]

WOOF Completes the following statements?

(1) When CCP A was stopped, RCS subcooling margin INITIALLY

[increased/decreased].

(2) Based on the current conditions, the OATC [is/is not] required to restart SIP B JAT 3/12/2014 S Final submitted question is SAT. JAT 4/25/2014

1. 2. 3. Psychometric Flaws 4. Job Content Flaws 5. Other 6. 7. 8.

Q# LOK LOD (F/H) (1-5) Stem Cues T/F Cred. Partial Job- Minutia #/ Back- Q= SRO B/M/N U/E/S Explanation Focus Dist. Link units ward K/A Only (8) 33 H 2 X X B U 006G2.4.47 Question appears to match KA.

ES 401-5 states that the reference to be provided is step 18, Figure 1, and table 1 of 19111-C, however, the page numbers listed actually correspond to steps 18-24 of 19111-C.

Additionally, this question essentially gives the RO a number of parameters and then has them navigate 19111-C. Although the procedural steps are provided to the RO, the question is still asking the RO a question that appears to be at the SRO-only level.

Also, since the procedure steps are provided, distractor D is not plausible (you want the distractor to be plausible because the applicant has a misconception, not because they misread something that is provided to them).

I would recommend either replacing the question or reframing the question and placing the applicant at the step 18.b RNO for determining the minimum ECCS flow required using the following: TABLE 1 or FIGURE

1. If you decide to keep the question, you may write out the verbiage in the step 18.b RNO, but I would not give them the whole procedure. (Or even the excerpted procedure, apart from what you write out in the stem of the question.) You may provide them Figure 1 and Table 1.

JAT 3/12/2014 S Final submitted question is SAT. JAT 4/25/2014 (9) 34 H 2 M S 007A2.02 HL17 Question appears to match the KA.

007 Question appears to be SAT. JAT 3/12/2014 A2.06 Final submitted question is SAT. JAT 4/25/2014 (10) 1 H 2 B S 007EA2.06 Question appears to match the KA.

Question appears to be SAT. JAT 3/12/2014 Final submitted question is SAT. JAT 4/25/2014

1. 2. 3. Psychometric Flaws 4. Job Content Flaws 5. Other 6. 7. 8.

Q# LOK LOD (F/H) (1-5) Stem Cues T/F Cred. Partial Job- Minutia #/ Back- Q= SRO B/M/N U/E/S Explanation Focus Dist. Link units ward K/A Only (11) 35 H 2 M S 008A1.03 Question appears to match the KA.

Question appears to be SAT. JAT 3/12/2014 Final submitted question is SAT. JAT 4/25/2014 (12) 2 F 2 B E 009EK2.03 HL15 Question appears to match the KA.

009 To avoid any possible problems with using the word ONLY, recommend EK2.03 rephrasing the part (2) question to:

Natural circulation [is/is not] used in conjunction with break flow to accomplish decay heat removal.

Otherwise, question appears to be SAT. JAT 3/12/2014 S Final submitted question is SAT. JAT 4/25/2014 (13) 36 F 2 N E 010A3.02 Question appears to match the KA.

The part (2) answer choices can be read as both PORVs meaning two PORVs, or both PORVs meaning the PORVs AND something else. What you are really asking in the part (2) answer choices is whether the PORV block valves close, I would simply ask that:

if pressure lowers to 2185 psig, both PORV block valves [will/will not]

receive a close signal.

There may be too much overlap between this question and 010K6.04. This question meets the KA with just the part about the PZR heaters, so you could ask something different for this part (2) question (if the part about the stuck open block valve in the next question does not change).

JAT 3/12/2014 S Final submitted question is SAT. JAT 4/25/2014

1. 2. 3. Psychometric Flaws 4. Job Content Flaws 5. Other 6. 7. 8.

Q# LOK LOD (F/H) (1-5) Stem Cues T/F Cred. Partial Job- Minutia #/ Back- Q= SRO B/M/N U/E/S Explanation Focus Dist. Link units ward K/A Only (14) 37 H 2 X M U 010K6.04 HL15 Question does not appear to match the KA. The KA asks about the effect of 007 a loss/malfunction of PRT on the Pressurizer Pressure Control System, K1.01 whereas the question appears to primarily be asking about the indications of a loss of the PRT and a stuck open PORV. The licensee did ask about the KA match for this question previously and did mention that it was previously used on an NRC exam with this specific KA. As such, the U for KA match will not be counted in the overall total number of U questions towards grading the submittal SAT/UNSAT. However, given that the question is predominantly asking about GFE material and is not really asking anything about the PZR PCS, the question needs to be modified/replaced.

Additionally, there may be too much overlap between information contained in the stem of this question and knowledge that is asked for in the previous question (010A3.02). Although this question puts the applicant at a much lower pressure than the previous question, there is indication in the stem of the question that the PORV block valves are supposed to automatically close (and in this case they have not).

One option is to add information to the stem regarding the PRT. For example, you could state that PRT temperature increased to 338F and is now at 212F (with no operator action). You could then ask what repercussions this would have on the PZR PCS. If there is no impact on the PZR PCS, we can replace the KA (in which case, you would not have to modify question 010A3.02).

JAT 3/12/2014 Changed KA to 010K6.02. JAT 3/25/2014 Final submitted question is SAT. JAT 4/25/2014 S

1. 2. 3. Psychometric Flaws 4. Job Content Flaws 5. Other 6. 7. 8.

Q# LOK LOD (F/H) (1-5) Stem Cues T/F Cred. Partial Job- Minutia #/ Back- Q= SRO B/M/N U/E/S Explanation Focus Dist. Link units ward K/A Only (15) 3 H 2 N E 011EK2.02 Question appears to match the KA.

Recommend rephrasing the part (2) question to eliminate use of the word ONLY in the answer choices:

Following alignment to Cold Leg Recirculation, SIPs [are/are not]

providing injection FLOW to the core.

Otherwise, question appears to be SAT. JAT 3/12/2014 S Final submitted question is SAT. JAT 4/25/2014 (16) 56 H 2 B S 011K6.03 Question appears to match the KA.

Question appears to be SAT. JAT 3/12/2014 Final submitted question is SAT. JAT 4/25/2014 (17) 38 F 2 B S 012K5.01 Question appears to match the KA.

Question appears to be SAT. JAT 3/12/2014 Final submitted question is SAT. JAT 4/25/2014 (18) 39 F 3 B S 013K6.01 HL18 Question appears to match the KA.

K6.01 Question appears to be SAT. JAT 3./12/2014 Final submitted question is SAT. JAT 4/25/2014

1. 2. 3. Psychometric Flaws 4. Job Content Flaws 5. Other 6. 7. 8.

Q# LOK LOD (F/H) (1-5) Stem Cues T/F Cred. Partial Job- Minutia #/ Back- Q= SRO B/M/N U/E/S Explanation Focus Dist. Link units ward K/A Only (19) 57 F 2 B E 014A1.02 Question appears to match the KA.

I understand that these are indications that would be received for a simultaneous Data A and Data B failure. However, if H2 is a low worth rod, if it did drop, would any additional alarms come in? If not, then I recommend choosing a higher worth rod, and then adding no other alarms are received. If you WOULD get other alarms with the rod drop (high neutron flux, etc), then just add No other alarms are received to your existing question.

Otherwise, question appears to be SAT. JAT 3/12/2014 S Final submitted question is SAT. JAT 4/25/2014 (20) 58 F 2 N S/E 015A2.04 Question appears to match the KA.

Consider adding All PR Nis are OPERABLE. It is probably not necessary (the applicant should not assume they are inoperable, per NUREG 1021 Appx E), but I also dont want anyone to try and argue no correct answer if they miss it.

Question appears to be SAT. JAT 3/12/2014 S Final submitted question is SAT. JAT 4/25/2014 (21) 4 F 2  ? B S? 015AA1.04 Replaced with AA1.23 on 10/3/2013.

Question appears to match the KA.

Are there other ARPs that direct monitoring of parameters on the plant computer? If so, question appears to be SAT. If, however, the plant computer is not used by the ARPs to monitor RCP parameters, the plausibility of the part (1) distractors is questionable.

JAT 3/12/2014 S Final submitted question is SAT. JAT 4/25/2014 (22) 5 H 2 N S 022AK3.01 Question appears to match the KA.

Question appears to be SAT. JAT 3/13/2014 Final submitted question is SAT. JAT 4/25/2014

1. 2. 3. Psychometric Flaws 4. Job Content Flaws 5. Other 6. 7. 8.

Q# LOK LOD (F/H) (1-5) Stem Cues T/F Cred. Partial Job- Minutia #/ Back- Q= SRO B/M/N U/E/S Explanation Focus Dist. Link units ward K/A Only (23) 40 H 2 B U/E 022K3.02 SONGS Question appears to match the KA.

2006 Part (2) distractor appears to be implausible. If the candidate believes the NRC reference leg to be open, then both temperature and pressure would have an impact on the level instrument readings. Thus, since they have to choose between temperature and pressure, logic (rather than direct knowledge) can be used to eliminate A(2) and C(2) as possible choices. An easy fix to correct this is to simply ask:

the instrument inaccuracies [are/are not] a DIRECT result of changes in containment pressure.

That way, the distractor cannot be eliminated using a logic argument - the applicant has to know that the reference leg is closed rather than open.

JAT 3/13/2014 S Final submitted question is SAT. JAT 4/25/2014 (24) 20 F 2 X N U/E 024AG2.2.22 Question appears to match the KA.

Per TRM 13.1.7, there is an immediate action to enter the applicable TS (3.5.4) when the RWST is inoperable, and therefore it is an RO knowledge item to know those conditions which render the RWST inoperable. Boron concentration is one of the items, and is therefore a required memory item at the RO level, even though the actual specification for boron concentration outside of SR limits is an 8h LCO action (which would normally not be considered RO knowledge).

However, BAST boron concentration is associated with a 72h TRM action statement. Barring a specific learning objective or licensee statement that states that ROs are required to possess this knowledge, this distractor is implausible because ROs are not required to know this number.

JAT 3/13/2014 S

Final submitted question is SAT. JAT 4/25/2014 (25) 41 F 2 B S 026K1.01 Farley Question appears to match the KA.

2010 NRC Question appears to be SAT.

Final submitted question is SAT. JAT 4/25/2014

1. 2. 3. Psychometric Flaws 4. Job Content Flaws 5. Other 6. 7. 8.

Q# LOK LOD (F/H) (1-5) Stem Cues T/F Cred. Partial Job- Minutia #/ Back- Q= SRO B/M/N U/E/S Explanation Focus Dist. Link units ward K/A Only (26) 42 H 2 M E 026K2.02 001 HL 18 (pre) Question appears to match the KA.

NRC Answer choices could be cleaned up by asking:

062 1HV-9001A is __(1)___ and 1HV-9001B is __(2)___.

K1.02 Then all choices can toggle between energized/de-energized.

Question appears to be okay. JAT 12/19/2013 S Comment incorporated. JAT 2/4/14 (pre2)

Question is the same as the resubmitted presubmitted question. Question S appears to match the KA. Question appears to be SAT. JAT 3/13/2014 Final submitted question is SAT. JAT 4/25/2014 (27) 6 H 2 M S 027AK2.03 HL15 Question appears to match the KA.

027 AK2.03 Regarding possible overlap between this question and question 010A3.02:

010A3.02 requires knowledge of the actual pressure at which backup heaters turn on. This question requires knowledge of the difference between the controlling channel and the backup channel - knowledge of the specific pressure at which heaters turn on is not required because the controller fails LOW. This question elicits knowledge of whether the specific channel controls operation of the backup heaters. Thus, these two questions are independent and do not create a double jeopardy situation.

Question appears to be SAT. JAT 3/13/2014 Final submitted question is SAT. JAT 4/25/2014 (28) 59 H 2 X N E 028K1.01 Question appears to match the KA.

The part (2) statement should say a(n) ___(2)____ path entry so that the correct answer is not discounted due to not fitting into the statement grammatically.

Otherwise, question appears to be SAT. JAT 3/13/2014 S Final submitted question is SAT. JAT 4/25/2014

1. 2. 3. Psychometric Flaws 4. Job Content Flaws 5. Other 6. 7. 8.

Q# LOK LOD (F/H) (1-5) Stem Cues T/F Cred. Partial Job- Minutia #/ Back- Q= SRO B/M/N U/E/S Explanation Focus Dist. Link units ward K/A Only (29) 7 F 2 N S 029EG2.4.34 Question appears to match the KA.

Question appears to be SAT. JAT 3/13/2014 Final submitted question is SAT. JAT 4/25/2014 (30) 21 H 2 M S 033AG2.2.44 LOR Question appears to match the KA.

Question appears to be SAT. JAT 3/13/2014 Final submitted question is SAT. JAT 4/25/2014 (31) 60 F 2 N S 034A4.01 Question appears to match the KA.

Question appears to be SAT. JAT 3/13/2014 Final submitted question is SAT. JAT 4/25/2014

1. 2. 3. Psychometric Flaws 4. Job Content Flaws 5. Other 6. 7. 8.

Q# LOK LOD (F/H) (1-5) Stem Cues T/F Cred. Partial Job- Minutia #/ Back- Q= SRO B/M/N U/E/S Explanation Focus Dist. Link units ward K/A Only (32) 8 H 2 X N U/E 038EA2.05 (pre) Question appears to match the KA.

Need to make sure that EOP Background information is RO knowledge.

The question itself should reference the document being used to support the correct answer:

In accordance with <19030-C> intact SG AFW flow rates and in accordance with <E-3 WOG Background Document>, the reason There appear to be 2 non-plausible distractors: why would someone choose B (raise AFW flow to intact SGs due to excessive swell) or C (lower AFW flow to intact SGs due to excessive shrink)?

The answer choices do not need to explicitly call out shrink and swell to match the KA. Testing understanding of AFW reinitiation vs. MSL isolation tests the same concept without leading. One possible idea is to ask:

In accordance with 19030-C step 14, intact SG AFW flow rates are

___(1)____ and then cooldown is initiated per step 17 using ___(2)___.

A. Raised to prevent AFW reinitiation/intact SG ARVs B. Raised to prevent AFW reinitiation/steam dumps C. Lowered to prevent MSL isolation upon initiation of the cooldown/intact SG ARVs D. Lowered to prevent MSL isolation upon initiation of the cooldown/steam dumps The stem will likely need some more information to bolster the correct answer (i.e., preferred cooldown method given the conditions of the stem), but the KA is met with the first part of the question and the distractors are all plausible.

JAT 12/19/2013 S New question incorporated above suggestion. JAT 2/4/2014 (pre2)

1. 2. 3. Psychometric Flaws 4. Job Content Flaws 5. Other 6. 7. 8.

Q# LOK LOD (F/H) (1-5) Stem Cues T/F Cred. Partial Job- Minutia #/ Back- Q= SRO B/M/N U/E/S Explanation Focus Dist. Link units ward K/A Only S Question is the same as resubmitted presubmitted question, which incorporated the above suggestion. Question appears to match the KA.

Question appears to be SAT. JAT 3/13/2014 Revised question to remove reason and tightened up language. Lack of consensus from VG as to whether background information was RO knowledge, so reason aspect was removed. KA still met because a consequence of shrink and swell is that AFW flow will need to be raised.

Question appears to be okay. JAT 4/1/2014 Final submitted question is SAT. JAT 4/25/2014 (33) 43 H 2 M E 039K4.02 HL 17 Question appears to match the KA.

041 K3.02 Recommend adding, With no operator action, RCS temperature to the question statement.

Otherwise, question appears to be SAT. JAT 3/13/2014 S

Final submitted question is SAT. JAT 4/25/2014 (34) 9 H 2 X N S/E 040AG2.2.36 Question appears to match the KA. This is a difficult to meet KA, given this particular pairing of SL Rupture with effect of maintenance activities on status of LCOs. However, in this case, LCO 3.8.1 requires sequencers to be OPERABLE. The candidate is required to know that this particular maintenance item does not render the sequencer inoperable, and that it will perform its required function in an ESF actuation due to a steam line rupture.

To lend plausibility to the containment High-2 distractor, recommend adding a time (i.e., the presence of an implied rate for SG pressure but not for containment pressure lowers the plausibility of containment High-2 as a distractor).

Otherwise, question appears to be SAT. JAT 3/13/2014 S Final submitted question is SAT. JAT 4/25/2014

1. 2. 3. Psychometric Flaws 4. Job Content Flaws 5. Other 6. 7. 8.

Q# LOK LOD (F/H) (1-5) Stem Cues T/F Cred. Partial Job- Minutia #/ Back- Q= SRO B/M/N U/E/S Explanation Focus Dist. Link units ward K/A Only (35) 61 H 2 N S 045K5.17 Question appears to match the KA.

Part (1) question appears to be particularly easy. However, given that there are competing pressure effects occurring, while it SHOULD be general knowledge which of these effects is greater, there is at least some plausibility to the distractor. However, I would add while maintaining Tavg on program somewhere in the first statement to lend more plausibility to the distractor.

Otherwise, question appears to be SAT. JAT 3/13/2014 Final submitted question is SAT. JAT 4/25/2014 (36) 10 H 2 X N E 054AA1.02 Question appears to match the KA.

The question statement implies that for some reason the MDAFW Pumps are not currently running (by virtue of the fact that the SS directs starting all pumps), however, the correct answer states that they should already be running because they received an auto start signal when the MFP was tripped. I recommend changing the statement about the SS to something like, the SS states to ENSURE all AFW pumps running. Then you can ask the question the way it is.

JAT 3/13/2014 S Final submitted question is SAT. JAT 4/25/2014 (37) 11 H 2 B S/E 055EK1.02 HL18 Question appears to match the KA.

056 To bolster plausibility of the distractors, is it possible to turn the question AK3.02 into a 2x2? The first part can toggle between injecting nitrogen and voiding in the reactor vessel. The second part can toggle between disrupting natural circulation and something else plausible.

JAT 3/13/2014 S Final submitted question is SAT. JAT 4/25/2014

1. 2. 3. Psychometric Flaws 4. Job Content Flaws 5. Other 6. 7. 8.

Q# LOK LOD (F/H) (1-5) Stem Cues T/F Cred. Partial Job- Minutia #/ Back- Q= SRO B/M/N U/E/S Explanation Focus Dist. Link units ward K/A Only (38) 12 F 2  ?  ?  ? N U? 056AK1.01 Not sure that question matches the KA. Natural convection vs. natural circulation?

Terminology of deltaT rising/lowering: is this common terminology for Vogtle? Would it be clearer if this part toggled between increase/decrease?

The knowledge of 74F vs 124F is a fairly specific procedural knowledge requirement - need to ensure that this is required knowledge and not minutia. Is there an RO learning objective associated with this number?

Im reluctant to have this be used for an RO question because there are SRO questions that were justified as SRO only based on specific procedural knowledge requirements similar to this one.

JAT 3/13/20114 Question revised. Natural convection aspect met with CRDM fan part.

Also, natural circulation and natural convection are generally interchangeable, and this more closely meets the KA in that it asks about the convection provided by the CRDM fans. New question matches KA and was revised to remove specific 74F vs 124F knowledge. JAT 4/2/2014 S Final submitted question is SAT. JAT 4/25/2014 (39) 13 F 2 X B E 057AK3.01 Question appears to match the KA.

Subset issue - part (1) of A and B is not actually wrong - if bus voltage lowers to less than 100 VDC, the operator would still be required to remove 1DD1 from service. Recommend changing current condition 3rd bullet to 1DD1 bus voltage is XXX and lowering (choose whatever voltage you want to get the answer you want) and ask:

Per 19100-C, 1DD1 [is/is not] required to be removed from service using 1343101, 120 VAC Vital Instrument Distribution System at this time, And 19100-C contains direction for removing batteries from service to prevent Another option for solving the subset issue is to give a series of times and then ask the earliest time at which 1DD1 is required to be removed from

1. 2. 3. Psychometric Flaws 4. Job Content Flaws 5. Other 6. 7. 8.

Q# LOK LOD (F/H) (1-5) Stem Cues T/F Cred. Partial Job- Minutia #/ Back- Q= SRO B/M/N U/E/S Explanation Focus Dist. Link units ward K/A Only service.

S JAT 3/13/2014 Final submitted question is SAT. JAT 4/25/2014 (40) 44 H 2 X N E/U 059A4.03 Question appears to match the KA.

It seems unlikely that MFP speed would remain constant at 30% power (plausibility of part (1) distractor). One option for this question is to actually ask the part (2) question as a 2x2. KA is still met because main feedwater is being supplied through the BFRVs:

As power increases, the BFRVs will continue to throttle open until [fully open/reaching a prescribed steam flow] and will then [remain as-is/fully close].

JAT 3/13/2014 S Final submitted question is SAT. JAT 4/25/2014 (41) 22 F 2 B S 059AK2.02 LOR Question appears to match the KA.

Question appears to be SAT. JAT 3/13/2014 Final submitted question is SAT. JAT 4/25/2014 (42) 45 F 2 B E 059K4.19 HL16 Question appears to match the KA.

059 All 4 part (1) answer choices contain closing all FWI valves. Recommend K4.19 changing the part (1) statement to: Both MFPTs [are/are not] tripped.

(or something similar) This removes any confusion surrounding the word only, and bolsters the plausibility of the part (1) distractor.

Otherwise, question appears to be SAT. JAT 3/13/2014 S Final submitted question is SAT. JAT 4/25/2014 (43) 23 F 2 B S 061AA2.03 HL18 Question appears to match the KA.

Audit Question appears to be SAT. JAT 3/13/2014 072 Final submitted question is SAT. JAT 4/25/2014 A4.01

1. 2. 3. Psychometric Flaws 4. Job Content Flaws 5. Other 6. 7. 8.

Q# LOK LOD (F/H) (1-5) Stem Cues T/F Cred. Partial Job- Minutia #/ Back- Q= SRO B/M/N U/E/S Explanation Focus Dist. Link units ward K/A Only (44) 46 F 2 B S 061K2.01 HL16 Question appears to match the KA.

061 Consider making the statements complete thoughts for ease of reading:

K2.01 A loss of Train C __(1)___ has occurred, and a loss of Train B __(2)___

has occurred.

Otherwise, question appears to be SAT. JAT 3/13/2014 Final submitted question is SAT. JAT 4/25/2014 (45) 47 H 3 M S 062K3.02 HL17 Question appears to match the KA.

063 Question appears to be SAT. JAT 3/13/2014 K3.01 Final submitted question is SAT. JAT 4/25/2014 (46) 48 H 2 X X N U/E 062K4.07 (pre) Question appears to match the KA.

The last paragraph of explanation of required knowledge seems to be missing something between the end of that page and the middle of the sentence that starts on the next page.

It seems implausible that a candidate would not know that 1CY1A cannot simultaneously have alternate and normal supply breakers closed - are there many examples of 120VAC distribution panels at Vogtle where this is the case? If not, there are two implausible distractors.

The first question asked appears to be somewhat backwards logic - I would recommend stating what the source is for the power (normal or alternate, rather than inverter vs regulating transformer), and then ask if panel 1CY1A is energized or deenergized. This way, the applicant would have to know which source (inverter or regulating transformer) is the normal and which is the alternate source. Additionally, it gets away from teaching in the question (i.e., the way the question is framed, they know that one of the sources of power keeps the panel energized, and if I had to take a guess not knowing anything about the system, I would have guessed the inverter).

JAT 12/19/2013 S/E The new question incorporates the above suggestion, however, more (pre2) information in the stem may be required. JAT 2/4/2014

1. 2. 3. Psychometric Flaws 4. Job Content Flaws 5. Other 6. 7. 8.

Q# LOK LOD (F/H) (1-5) Stem Cues T/F Cred. Partial Job- Minutia #/ Back- Q= SRO B/M/N U/E/S Explanation Focus Dist. Link units ward K/A Only S/E The question is the same as the resubmitted presubmitted question. The question appears to match the KA. The question appears to be SAT, however, consider adding the words to the part (2) question so that someone cannot argue that a long time after the LOSP, 1CY1A will be de-energized. (analyze immediately or five minutes or some other time that would be after a load shed but before 1CY1A would be likely to become deenergized for plausibility)

JAT 3/13/2014 S

Final submitted question is SAT. JAT 4/25/2014 (47) 49 H 3 X X N U 063A1.01 Question appears to match the KA.

Question appears to be requiring TS bases knowledge for RO candidates. Is there a specific requirement at Vogtle that ROs know the battery capacities under specific accident conditions?

Part (2) distractor appears to be correct. P&L 2.1.8 states in lieu of or in addition to, so it is not incorrect for an applicant to state that TDAFW would be controlled via the TDAFW pump discharge throttle valves. To eliminate two correct answers, I would choose one of the two and simply query on that: Per 13610-1, to minimize drain on the C-Train Batteries, TDAFW pump discharge throttle valves [is/is not] permitted to be used to control of the TDAFW flow to the SGs. (You dont have to choose the throttle valves to query on; I was demonstrating why there can be considered more than one correct answer in the original question - the answer to the above statement is is.)

JAT 3/13/2014 S Final submitted question is SAT. JAT 4/25/2014 (48) 50 F 2 N S/E 064G2.1.31 Question appears to match the KA.

The explanation of required knowledge and SOP 13145A-1 both refer to momentarily placing the switch in the UNIT position and verifying the blue light lit. The way these are worded implies that either the switch has a neutral position it remains in, or that the light is not lit the whole time.

Please clarify.

Otherwise, question appears to be SAT. JAT 3/13/2014 S

Final submitted question is SAT. JAT 4/25/2014

1. 2. 3. Psychometric Flaws 4. Job Content Flaws 5. Other 6. 7. 8.

Q# LOK LOD (F/H) (1-5) Stem Cues T/F Cred. Partial Job- Minutia #/ Back- Q= SRO B/M/N U/E/S Explanation Focus Dist. Link units ward K/A Only (49) 14 H 2 N S 065 AA2.08 Question appears to match the KA.

Question appears to be SAT. JAT 3/13/2014 Final submitted question is SAT. JAT 4/25/2014 (50) 24 F 2 X B U 069AA2.02 Question appears to match the KA.

Concerning the part (2) distractor: immediately is within one hour. If there can be one and only one correct answer, then immediately can be eliminated via a logical argument rather than direct knowledge of the TS action statement.

Consider changing the part (2) statement to: the latest time the required action of TS 3.6.2 must be completed is [immediately upon discovery/within one hour of discovery].

Regarding the plausibility of the part (1) distractor: are there other examples when an inoperable component is required to be placed in a specific position in order to maintain integrity of something?

JAT 3/13/2014 Question changed to query on requirements of TS 3.9.4. Although the question is not in modes 1-4, it still deals with requiring containment closure. Since KAs exist in the Containment system related to loss of containment integrity during refueling, it is acceptable to have a Loss of Containment Integrity question set during a refueling outage.

S Final submitted question is SAT. JAT 4/25/2014 (51) 62 F 2 B S 071A3.03 Question appears to match the KA.

Question appears to be SAT. JAT 3/13/2014 Final submitted question is SAT. JAT 4/25/2014

1. 2. 3. Psychometric Flaws 4. Job Content Flaws 5. Other 6. 7. 8.

Q# LOK LOD (F/H) (1-5) Stem Cues T/F Cred. Partial Job- Minutia #/ Back- Q= SRO B/M/N U/E/S Explanation Focus Dist. Link units ward K/A Only (52) 63 F 2 M E 072K3.02 HL18 Question appears to match the KA.

072 The part (1) answer choices all contain flashing light. Consider K1.03 rephrasing the statement to say, The personnel in the SFP area

[were/were not] alerted to the failed detector by an audible alarm. This also gets rid of the word ONLY from the distractor.

For the second question, I would simply ask given the current conditions (with 1RE-008 removed from service), if movement of irradiated fuel is allowed to proceed. It elicits the same required information, but since the applicant does not have to choose one monitor over the other, the distractors will have more plausibility. Alternatively, the part (2) statement can be phrased, 1RE-008 [is/is not] required to be in service for movement of irradiated fuel in the SFP. Actually, using the second option phrasing is probably more clearly RO knowledge, because RO would be required to know that RE-008 is not one of the detectors called out in the TS, whereas the first way (with the requirements of realigning ventilation, etc,) may not have as clear of a correct answer.

[Note: This same HL18 question was modified differently for KA 072K3.02]

JAT 3/13/2014 S

Final submitted question is SAT. JAT 4/25/2014 (53) 51 H 2 B S 073K1.01 Question appears to match the KA.

Question appears to be SAT.

Final submitted question is SAT. JAT 4/25/2014 (54) 52 H 2 M S 076K2.04 HL17 Question appears to match the KA.

003 Question appears to be SAT. JAT 3/13/2014 K2.02 Final submitted question is SAT. JAT 4/25/2014

1. 2. 3. Psychometric Flaws 4. Job Content Flaws 5. Other 6. 7. 8.

Q# LOK LOD (F/H) (1-5) Stem Cues T/F Cred. Partial Job- Minutia #/ Back- Q= SRO B/M/N U/E/S Explanation Focus Dist. Link units ward K/A Only (55) 18 F 3 X N E 077AK3.02 Question appears to match the KA.

Regarding the plausibility of the part (1) distractor: it is not wrong to say that DGs are maintained in STBY to comply with TS, and without a background document to reference the specific reason, the part (1) distractor cannot be considered completely incorrect.

JAT 3/13/2014 S Final submitted question is SAT. JAT 4/25/2014 (56) 53 H 2 B S 078A4.01 Question appears to match the KA.

Question appears to be SAT. JAT 3/13/2014 Question still appears okay. JAT 4/2/2014 Final submitted question is SAT. JAT 4/25/2014 (57) 65 F 2 B S 086K4.02 Question appears to match the KA.

Question appears to be SAT. JAT 3/14/2014 Question still appears to be okay. JAT 4/2/2014 Final submitted question is SAT. JAT 4/25/2014 (58) 54 F 2 B S 103A2.03 Question appears to match the KA.

Question appears to be SAT. JAT 3/14/2014 Question still appears to be okay. JAT 4/2/2014 Final submitted question is SAT. JAT 4/25/2014 (59) 55 F 2 N S 103K1.08 Question appears to match the KA.

Question appears to be SAT. JAT 3/14/2014 Question still appears to be okay. JAT 4/2/2014 Final submitted question is SAT. JAT 4/25/2014

1. 2. 3. Psychometric Flaws 4. Job Content Flaws 5. Other 6. 7. 8.

Q# LOK LOD (F/H) (1-5) Stem Cues T/F Cred. Partial Job- Minutia #/ Back- Q= SRO B/M/N U/E/S Explanation Focus Dist. Link units ward K/A Only (60) 66 F 2 X B U G2.1.14 Question appears to match the KA.

The part (1) distractor is implausible. It is unlikely that an applicant would choose shutdown as requiring an announcement when startup is the alternative - i.e., since they have to choose one over the other, essentially, the question is framed such that one of them does not require an announcement. The same holds true for the part (2) distractor, although it is less blatant what the correct answer should be. As such, I recommend you choose the shutdown for the first question and either hot leg recirc or cold leg recirc for the second question, and query on those:

Plant announcements [are/are not] required per UOP 12005-C for reactor shutdowns, and plant announcements [are/are not] required per EOP 19014-C prior to transition to Hot Leg Recirc.

JAT 3/11/2014 S New question submitted. New question matches the KA. New question is okay. JAT 4/2/2014 Final submitted question is SAT. JAT 4/25/2014 (61) 67 F 2 M E G2.1.28 HL18 Question appears to match the KA.

072 Recommend rephrasing the part (1) question to query on whether B FHB K1.03 Post Accident Filter Unit started automatically (rather than having choices of ONLY one or BOTH started).

[Note: This same HL18 question was modified differently for KA 072K3.02]

Otherwise, question appears to be SAT. JAT 3/11/2014 S Question incorporated change. Question appears okay. JAT 4/2/2014 Final submitted question is SAT. JAT 4/25/2014

1. 2. 3. Psychometric Flaws 4. Job Content Flaws 5. Other 6. 7. 8.

Q# LOK LOD (F/H) (1-5) Stem Cues T/F Cred. Partial Job- Minutia #/ Back- Q= SRO B/M/N U/E/S Explanation Focus Dist. Link units ward K/A Only (62) 68 F 2 B S G2.1.8 HL17 Question appears to match the KA.

G2.1.8 Please ensure the preferred communications method is required knowledge (i.e., not minutia).

Otherwise, question appears to be SAT. JAT 3/11/2014 Not considered minutia. Reworded second statement slightly to more closely align with wording of step. Question appears okay. JAT 4/2/2014 Final submitted question is SAT. JAT 4/25/2014 (63) 69 F 1 X N U G2.2.15 (pre) Question appears to match the KA.

All of question (2) is LOD=1 - I would expect that all operators should already know the appropriate way to perform a check of a valve, whether it is open or closed.

Question (1) is a LOD=1 - the answer for part (1) is a direct lookup from the provided lineup, thereby making all of the other distractors non plausible.

Recommend replacing this question. Need to make sure that the selected reference doesnt lend itself to a direct lookup - i.e., you could use a reference for one system where the way another system is aligned impacts the correct answer for the given system. The applicant would need to have plant specific knowledge of the secondary system to know which answer is correct.

JAT 12/19/2013 S* Question is improved, but need to ensure there is only one correct (pre2) answer. Is standby alignment defined anywhere? Is it possible that someone could successfully argue that returning Filter #4 to service and taking filter #8 out of service meets standby alignment (thereby possibly having two correct answers to this question)? JAT 2/4/14

1. 2. 3. Psychometric Flaws 4. Job Content Flaws 5. Other 6. 7. 8.

Q# LOK LOD (F/H) (1-5) Stem Cues T/F Cred. Partial Job- Minutia #/ Back- Q= SRO B/M/N U/E/S Explanation Focus Dist. Link units ward K/A Only S Question is the same as the resubmitted presubmitted question, with the addition of a bullet in the stem indicating that Filter #8 is to remain in service.

1.5 Question still appears to match the KA.

Im still concerned about the LOD of the part (1) question regarding the position of the valves after release from tagout. However, given that two references will be provided that give conflicting position information, and the fact that the applicant must decide which reference takes precedence, there is some plausibility lent to the distractor.

Question appears to be SAT. JAT 3/11/2014 Question appears to be okay. JAT 4/2/2014 Final submitted question is SAT. JAT 4/25/2014 (64) 70 H 2 N E G2.2.23 Question appears to match the KA.

The plausibility of distractor B is weak - it seems implausible that an applicant could conclude that the LCO was not met for only 5 minutes of a 15 minute test if they did not remember that the valves still receive an automatic open signal. Distractor B might be more plausible if the part (1) distractor for A and B were changed to 10 minutes. If the applicant does not think that the discharge valves will automatically open, then it would be reasonable to assume that they would think the pump is inoperable from 1000 to 1005 AND from 1010 to 1015.

With the above suggestion, I am making the assumption that the LCO not met time is cumulative - if that is not the case, then 5 minutes works. But if it is cumulative, I would think that an operator who thinks the LCO is not met from the point at which the discharge valves are shut to the point at which the pump is running would also think it is not met from the point at which the pump is stopped to the point at which it is placed back in standby alignment. (Also goes to plausibliity of distractor A.)

Recommend either bolstering the plausibility of the part (1) and part (2) distractors TOGETHER in distractor B, or change the part (1) distractor.

JAT 3/11/2014 Change incorporated. Question appears to be okay. JAT 4/2/2014 S Final submitted question is SAT. JAT 4/25/2014

1. 2. 3. Psychometric Flaws 4. Job Content Flaws 5. Other 6. 7. 8.

Q# LOK LOD (F/H) (1-5) Stem Cues T/F Cred. Partial Job- Minutia #/ Back- Q= SRO B/M/N U/E/S Explanation Focus Dist. Link units ward K/A Only (65) 71 H 2 B S G2.3.13 Question appears to match the KA.

Question appears to be SAT. JAT 3/11/2014 Modified the correct answer significant radiation exposure to 15 mrem exposure so that D (excessive airborne contamination) cannot be eliminated due to a logic argument. JAT 4/2/2014 Final submitted question is SAT. JAT 4/25/2014 (66) 72 H 2 B S G2.3.15 Question appears to match the KA.

Question appears to be SAT. JAT 3/11/2014 Added following a refueling outage to the initial conditions to more clearly narrow down the correct answer. Question is okay. 4/2/2014 Final submitted question is SAT. JAT 4/25/2014 (67) 73 F 1 x N U G.2.3.5 (pre) Question appears to match the KA, but is not plant-specific and is not at the RO level. Anyone qualified to work in the RCA should know the answer to this question.

I recommend replacing this question. Given that the KA is generic and broad (ability to use radiation monitoring systems pretty much lends itself to any detector used to measure radiation), I would ask a question where a radiation monitor is alarming (during fuel handling, during operations, while shut down, etc) and ask the required actions (can be out of an AOP or annunciator response) or ask if a particular AOP is required to be entered (entry conditions for AOPs and EOPs is RO knowledge). This question can be similar to any questions that may also fit a process radiation monitor question. The key is to keep it plant specific and at the level of an operator.

1. 2. 3. Psychometric Flaws 4. Job Content Flaws 5. Other 6. 7. 8.

Q# LOK LOD (F/H) (1-5) Stem Cues T/F Cred. Partial Job- Minutia #/ Back- Q= SRO B/M/N U/E/S Explanation Focus Dist. Link units ward K/A Only E JAT 12/19/2013 (pre2) Question is plant specific and appears to match the KA. One thing to note is that there are four distinct answers just with the first part of the question - the part regarding the Essential chillers does not appear needed to answer the question. Additionally, since choice A is not specific as to which train of CREFS starts, it is an outlier. Really, what youre asking is which train of CREFS starts and on which units. That can be done by asking:

Unit 1 Train A CREFS [does/does not] start and Unit 2 Train A CREFS

[does/does not] start.

Or something similar i.e., make it a 2x2, soliciting the answer to two pieces of information, since thats what the question ultimately boils down to. It doesnt have to be asked like the example I gave; thats just a starting point. This way, question psychometrics cant be used to whittle the choices down, and you also dont use the word ONLY, which can be problematic. JAT 2/4/14 B S Question appears to match the KA. Question takes suggestion (above) into account and queries on Train B CREFS for U1 and U2.

Question appears to be SAT. JAT 3/11/2014 Question still appears to be okay. JAT 4/2/2014 Final submitted question is SAT. JAT 4/25/2014 (68) 74 F 2 N S G2.4.25 Question appears to match the KA.

Question appears to be SAT. JAT 3/11/2014 Added the word seismic to modify flow path in the second question to avoid the possibility of two correct answers. Also changed phrase will/will not automatically initiate water flow to will/will not be automatically aligned Question still appears to be okay. JAT 4/2/2014 Final submitted question is SAT. JAT 4/25/2014

1. 2. 3. Psychometric Flaws 4. Job Content Flaws 5. Other 6. 7. 8.

Q# LOK LOD (F/H) (1-5) Stem Cues T/F Cred. Partial Job- Minutia #/ Back- Q= SRO B/M/N U/E/S Explanation Focus Dist. Link units ward K/A Only (69) 75 H 2 M S/E G2.4.45 HL17 Question appears to match the KA.

040 AA1.20 Regarding distractor D - what is the plausibility of the applicant thinking that the conditions describe a steam line break but that a manual SLI is not required? If they can reasonably think that an automatic SLI might occur, than this distractor is plausible and the question is SAT. If there is not a plausible explanation for this combination of the part (1) and part (2) distractors, we may need to consider rewording the question.

JAT 3/11/2014 S Replaced the second question of the 2x2. Replacement question asks about whether manual SLI is an approved early operator action per the specified procedure. New 2nd question appears to be easy, but is not LOD=1, therefore the question is okay. JAT 4/2/2014 Final submitted question is SAT. JAT 4/25/2014 (70) 25 H 3 M S W/E02EA1.3 HL18 Question appears to match the KA.

WE02 Question is not symmetric, however, I think all of the distractors work and EA2.1 are plausible.

Question appears to be SAT. JAT 3/14/2014 Question still appears to be okay. JAT 4/2/2014 Final submitted question is SAT. JAT 4/25/2014 (71) 15 F 2 X B U/E W/E04 EK1.3 HL18 Question appears to match the KA.

WE04 The part (2) distractor is not plausible. With Pressurizer Pressure offscale EK2.01 LOW at 1700 psig, it is unlikely a candidate would choose this distractor when the conditions given in the stem are for 1500 psig. One possible route to go would be query between RCS pressure stable or and some other diverse indication that the leak is isolated. Since you will reference the procedure in your question statement, the only correct answer will be M RCS pressure.

HL18 S JAT 3/14/2014 WE04 Second half of question changed. Question is now modified vice bank.

EK2.01 Question appears to be okay. JAT 4/2/2014 Final submitted question is SAT. JAT 4/25/2014

1. 2. 3. Psychometric Flaws 4. Job Content Flaws 5. Other 6. 7. 8.

Q# LOK LOD (F/H) (1-5) Stem Cues T/F Cred. Partial Job- Minutia #/ Back- Q= SRO B/M/N U/E/S Explanation Focus Dist. Link units ward K/A Only (72) 17 H 2 M S/E W/E05 EA1.2 HL18 Question appears to match the KA.

054AA Need to verify that knowledge of the EOP bases for the major action 1.04 category steps is RO knowledge (i.e., determining what constitutes

& adequate feed flow and adequate bleed flow).

HL17 Also - the explanation of knowledge states that one PORV, even with head WE05 vents open, is not an adequate bleed path, and therefore a water source EK2.1 to a SG must be established. Consider, then, possibly using the word delay rather than prevent in the part (2) statement JAT 3/14/2014 S Question was revised to replace word prevent with delay. Also, Ops will make a statement stating that this piece of EOP bases knowledge is required of ROs. Question is okay. JAT 4/2/2014 Final submitted question is SAT. JAT 4/25/2014 (73) 27 F 2 B S W/E08EK1.2 Question appears to match the KA.

Question appears to be SAT. JAT 3/14/2014 Changed steam rupture to steam line break. JAT 4/2/2014 Final submitted question is SAT. JAT 4/25/2014

1. 2. 3. Psychometric Flaws 4. Job Content Flaws 5. Other 6. 7. 8.

Q# LOK LOD (F/H) (1-5) Stem Cues T/F Cred. Partial Job- Minutia #/ Back- Q= SRO B/M/N U/E/S Explanation Focus Dist. Link units ward K/A Only (74) 16 F 2  ? B E/U W/E11 EG2.2.4 Replaced with EG2.1.25 on 10/3/2013 Question appears to match the KA.

The question as-is appears to require specific procedural knowledge for an RO, beyond knowing the major actions of the procedure. Recommend changing the question statement to a 2x2. One example could be: (the below is just an example - please feel free to modify as you see fit)

Per 19111-C, under current conditions, [1/0] containment spray pumps are required to be running, and having more than this number of CS pumps running [is/is not] allowed if their suctions are realigned to the Containment Sump.

Asking the question this way matches the KA (determining the required number of spray pumps using the reference) and prevents asking the RO a specific procedural direction question. The second part of the question allows the applicant to demonstrate whether or not they know the reason for the Determine Containment Spray requirements (to preserve RWST level). The answer to the second part of the question is not given away with the procedural steps on the provided reference - the applicant must know what operate as required means.

JAT 3/14/2014 Incorporated change recommended. Second question may not be S plausible as written. First question meets KA, so licensee will rework second question and resubmit. JAT 4/2/2014 Final submitted question is SAT. JAT 4/25/2014 (75) 26 F 3 N S W/E16EK2.2 Question appears to match the KA.

Question appears to be SAT. JAT 3/14/2014 Question still appears to be okay. JAT 24/2/2014 Final submitted question is SAT. JAT 4/25/2014

1. 2. 3. Psychometric Flaws 4. Job Content Flaws 5. Other 6. 7. 8.

Q# LOK LOD (F/H) (1-5) Stem Cues T/F Cred. Partial Job- Minutia #/ Back- Q= SRO B/M/N U/E/S Explanation Focus Dist. Link units ward K/A Only (77) 82 H 2 X M U 001AA2.04 The question appears to meet the KA. The question does not appear to be at the SRO-only level. The trend of reactor power as a result of the inadvertent withdrawal meets the KA but is RO knowledge. The SRO-part of the question, regarding the stuck rod operability, does not meet the KA of relating continuous rod withdrawal to reactor power and its trend.

To bring the question to the SRO-only level, I would recommend asking a procedures question.

You do not need to tell the applicant that reactor power has risen - just tell them reactor power is now 75%.

JAT 3/5/2014 S Question revised. New questions appears to be SAT. Meets SRO-only criteria because they have to interpret counts and determine whether an EAL setpoint has been exceeded. JAT 3/31/2014 Final submitted question is SAT. JAT 4/25/2014 (76) 91 H 2 B S 001G2.1.19 Hatch (pre) Question appears to match the KA. Question appears to be at the SRO 2011 level. Question appears to be okay as-is.

NRC JAT 12/19/2013 G2.1.37 S Question is same as resubmitted presubmittal question. Question appears to meet the KA. Question appears to be SRO-only. Question appears to be SAT. JAT 3/10/2014 Final submitted question is SAT. JAT 4/25/2014 (78) 86 F 2 X N E/U 003G2.4.3 The question appears to KA. Question appears to be at the SRO-only level.

Im not sure that the part (2) answer choices of Thot are plausible. While I understand that Thot is a diverse indication for something else in the same bases document, is there ever a time when Thot is used when Tcold is unavailable? If so, this would lend plausibility to this distractor.

Otherwise, you may need to come up with a different distractor.

JAT 3/5/2014

1. 2. 3. Psychometric Flaws 4. Job Content Flaws 5. Other 6. 7. 8.

Q# LOK LOD (F/H) (1-5) Stem Cues T/F Cred. Partial Job- Minutia #/ Back- Q= SRO B/M/N U/E/S Explanation Focus Dist. Link units ward K/A Only S Question modified to an is/is not question to remove Thot from distractors. Question appears to be SAT. JAT 3/31/201 Final submitted question is SAT. JAT 4/25/2014 (79) 87 H X X N U/E 004G2.2.44 (pre) Question appears to match the KA. Question loosely appears to be at the SRO-only level.

The similarity of the two names does lend some plausibility to the uncontrolled rod motion distractor. However, given that the basis for the uncontrolled rod motion is a trip (rather than an alarm), and given that the entire question is asking about boration, the second part of B and D do not appear plausible.

Additionally, the first question appears to be LOD=1. The applicant is told in the stem that VCT pressure is slowly rising. The applicant does not need to know anything plant specific to determine that flow rate will lower.

Recommend removing the bullet that states the VCT pressure and pressure trend. Given the first sentence of the Explanation of Required Knowledge, the candidate should know that the HI/LO pressure alarm is for a high VCT pressure. However, the distractor for question (1)

(emergency boration flow will rise) will have more plausibility if they are not explicitly told VCT pressure is slowing rising.

A better second question would question what procedures or sections of procedures the SS will go to, if possible. Although TS bases knowledge is SRO-only, this question overall would make more sense if the second part of the question (where the SRO-only part comes in) discusses what the SS will do (provided that can be done using more than just systems knowledge) - for example, if the result of the increase in VCT pressure is that the boration flowpath cannot be relied upon (step 6 of S.O.A. in 17007-1 for Window F05), are there other options the SS has that are explicitly procedurally directed? JAT 12/19/2013

?

The first part of the question is improved. However, I am having difficulty (pre2) seeing the TS completion time connection to the second part of the question, and the way its written, it appears as though the question can be answered solely by knowing what specific direction is contained within the ARP (which is likely not SRO-only, because it does not involve selection of procedures or sections of a procedure, nor does it require knowledge of

>1h TS.). JAT 2/4/14

1. 2. 3. Psychometric Flaws 4. Job Content Flaws 5. Other 6. 7. 8.

Q# LOK LOD (F/H) (1-5) Stem Cues T/F Cred. Partial Job- Minutia #/ Back- Q= SRO B/M/N U/E/S Explanation Focus Dist. Link units ward K/A Only M S New question submitted. Question appears to meet the KA. Question appears to be at the SRO-only level.

One note - if someone were to select initiate 18005-C, they would still end up at the correct place because the first step directs tripping the reactor and initiating 19000-C. HOWEVER, since the question stem says per 13003-1, this choice would be incorrect, since it is not in accordance with 13003-1 (the actions are directed within 13003-1 itself).

Question appears to be SAT. JAT 3/7/2014 Changed answers to say #1/#2 vs number one/number two. JAT 3/31/2014 Final submitted question is SAT. JAT 4/25/2014 (80) 88 H 2 B S 008A2.02 HL18 Question appears to meet the KA. Question appears to be at the SRO-only 008 level.

A2.02 Question appears to be SAT. JAT 3/7/2014 OK JAT 3/31/2014 Final submitted question is SAT. JAT 4/25/2014 (81) 76 H 2 N S 008AG2.4.41 Question appears to match the KA. Question appears to be SRO-only.

Question appears to be SAT. JAT 3/7/2014 Modified the charging flow in the sentence to 122gpm to enhance plausibility of Alert distractor based on M. Donithans comments. JAT 3/31/2014.

Final submitted question is SAT. JAT 4/25/2014 (82) 89 H 2 M S 022G2.1.19 Question appears to match the KA. Question appears to be at the SRO-only level.

Question appears to be SAT. JAT 3/7/2014 No change. JAT 3/31/2014 Final submitted question is SAT. JAT 4/25/2014

1. 2. 3. Psychometric Flaws 4. Job Content Flaws 5. Other 6. 7. 8.

Q# LOK LOD (F/H) (1-5) Stem Cues T/F Cred. Partial Job- Minutia #/ Back- Q= SRO B/M/N U/E/S Explanation Focus Dist. Link units ward K/A Only (83) 77 H 2 N S/E 025AG2.4.30 Question appears to match the KA. Question appears to be SRO-only.

Explanation of required knowledge discusses RCS temperature rising

>200F while in Mode 4 - should this be while in Mode 5?

All part (2) answer choices contain state and local authorities, so what you are really querying on is whether the NRC must be notified within 15 minutes of the emergency declaration. Even though the words as a minimum are added to the question stem, since the NMP says notification of the NRC shall be completed immediately following notifications to the state and county agencies, I have some concern that if someone were to miss the question, they could argue that the NRC is required within the 15 minutes if the state and local agencies are notified in less than 15 minutes. It might be a good idea, then, to modify the second part of the question to ask:

Per NMP-EP-111, Emergency Notifications, the latest time the NRC is required to be notified of the declaration is [1200/1215]. 1215 would be correct answer, because the NRC must be notified within an hour of the declaration (rather than an hour of the actual emergency).

Question appears to be SAT, but consider an enhancement to part (2).

JAT 3/7/2014 Suggested change was made. Question appears okay. JAT 3/31/2014 S Final submitted question is SAT. JAT 4/25/2014 (84) 78 H 2 N S/E 026AA2.06 Question appears to match the KA. Question appears to be at the SRO-only level.

Is the total loss of ACCW criteria met at 1015 or 1016?

Otherwise, question appears to be SAT. JAT 3/7/2014 Slightly backwards way of meeting KA at SRO only level, but question appears okay. The first part of the stem was rewritten to toggle between S the types of temperatures that will exceed limits, rather than time (but are still time-depenedent). JAT 3/31/2014 Final submitted question is SAT. JAT 4/25/2014

1. 2. 3. Psychometric Flaws 4. Job Content Flaws 5. Other 6. 7. 8.

Q# LOK LOD (F/H) (1-5) Stem Cues T/F Cred. Partial Job- Minutia #/ Back- Q= SRO B/M/N U/E/S Explanation Focus Dist. Link units ward K/A Only (85) 83 H 2 N S 028AG2.4.8 Question appears to match the KA. Question appears to be SRO-only.

Question appears to be SAT. JAT 3/6/2014 Question ok. JAT 3/31/2014 Final submitted question is SAT. JAT 4/25/2014 (86) 84 H 2 X N U 032AA2.03 Question appears to meet the KA. Question does not appear to be at the SRO-only level. The first part of the question is SRO-only but does not meet the KA. The second part of the question meets the KA, but not at the SRO-only level (systems knowledge).

Recommend giving what the indication is in the stem of the question, and then asking a TS or procedures question as a result of that indication (i.e.,

what actions are required to be taken when one SR NI detector has its high voltage power supply breaker trip open).

JAT 3/6/2014 S New question provided. New question appears to be SAT. JAT 3/31/2014 Final submitted question is SAT. JAT 4/25/2014

1. 2. 3. Psychometric Flaws 4. Job Content Flaws 5. Other 6. 7. 8.

Q# LOK LOD (F/H) (1-5) Stem Cues T/F Cred. Partial Job- Minutia #/ Back- Q= SRO B/M/N U/E/S Explanation Focus Dist. Link units ward K/A Only (87) 92 F 2  ? N E 033A2.03 (pre) Question appears to match the KA. Question appears to be at the SRO-only level.

Need to make sure that section 4.2.4 cannot be argued as a correct answer. The referenced procedure (13719-1 P&L 2.1.7, as well as a number of CAUTION statements) says borated water sources should be used, rather than shall be used. If a technical source cannot be found that explicitly states that 4.2.2 is the one and only correct answer, a statement stating that the Operations expectation is that 4.2.2 is the only correct answer may be sufficient.

Having Keff requirements as a basis for the SFP water level does not seem plausible. However, I think this can be solved by reframing the second question to state: per the Bases of Tech Spec 3.7.15, 'Fuel Storage Pool Water Level, maintaining the required minimum water level in the SFP

_<does/does not>___ ensure adequate iodine decontamination factors are met for a fuel handling accident. Its not the most difficult question; however, the distractor is plausible.

JAT 12/19/2013 The new question incorporates the above suggestion, and the first concern S with the original question has a learning objective to reinforce the use of (pre2) borated water sources. Need to make sure this is definitive enough as a technical source. JAT 2/4/2014 Question is same as resubmitted question. Question appears to meet the S KA. Question appears to be SRO-only. Question appears to be SAT.

JAT 3/6/2014 Will get Operations Expectation for this question to reinforce the Should vs Shall. JAT 3/31/2014 Final submitted question is SAT. JAT 4/25/2014

1. 2. 3. Psychometric Flaws 4. Job Content Flaws 5. Other 6. 7. 8.

Q# LOK LOD (F/H) (1-5) Stem Cues T/F Cred. Partial Job- Minutia #/ Back- Q= SRO B/M/N U/E/S Explanation Focus Dist. Link units ward K/A Only (88) 93 H 2 X M U 055G2.4.42 Question appears to meet the KA. However, question does not appear to meet the KA at the SRO-only level. Knowledge of the limit for primary to secondary leakage is above the line of TS 3.4.13 and therefore RO knowledge. Knowledge of the appropriate procedure navigation is SRO-only, but does not meet the KA of entry level conditions for TS.

This is a difficult KA to meet at the SRO-only level. You could ask something from the bases, but it may be difficult to write a plausible distractor for something relating to primary to secondary leakage taken from the LCO 3.4.13 bases. Thus, if you would like to change KAs, I have randomly chosen KA 055G2.1.23 (Condenser Air Removal: Ability to perform specific system and integrated plant procedures during all modes of plant operation). (Actually, your existing question meets the new KA at the SRO level, but you have the option to ask a different question for this new KA should you choose to do so.)

If you keep this question, you need to ensure that nothing in the Emergency Classification Matrix gives away the acceptable/unacceptable leakage for a SG Tube Leak (i.e., the reference provided for 008G2.4.41 or 025AG2.4.30).

JAT 3/7/2014 S KA changed, but question did not. Question appears SAT. Nothing is given away in the matrix that would help with this question. JAT 3/31/2014 Final submitted question is SAT. JAT 4/25/2014

1. 2. 3. Psychometric Flaws 4. Job Content Flaws 5. Other 6. 7. 8.

Q# LOK LOD (F/H) (1-5) Stem Cues T/F Cred. Partial Job- Minutia #/ Back- Q= SRO B/M/N U/E/S Explanation Focus Dist. Link units ward K/A Only (89) 79 H 2  ? B E 058AA2.03 HL15 (pre) Question appears to match the KA. Not sure if the procedure question is NRC Q at the SRO-only level. The second question is systems knowledge and not 058AA2 at the SRO-only level.

.03 Choices A-D have 4 different answers; the applicant does not need to know the answer to the second question to answer the question correctly.

The explanation states that an automatic reactor trip has occurred, however, the justification for the correct answer is that the RNO step for Verify Reactor Trip, states to initiate 19000-C. Does this mean that, although it occurred automatically, Reactor Trip cannot be verified?

One possible fix could be dropping the second question (and anything in the stem that was solely used to answer the second question) and separate the first question to ask:

the Shift Supervisor <is/is not> required to enter 18034-1 and the Shift Supervisor <is/is not> required to enter 19000-C.

(I still need to think about whether asking it this way is at the SRO-only level. Im leaning towards it IS at the SRO-only level.)

JAT 12/19/2013 New question incorporates the above comments. SRO-only appears to be S met because the question requires knowledge of procedure rules-of-(pre2) usage. JAT 2/4/14 Question is same as resubmitted presubmittal question. Question appears S

to meet the KA. Question appears to be SRO-only. Question appears to be SAT. JAT 3/6/2014 VG is going to rewrite plausibility statement. Question still appears ok. JAT 3/31/2014 Final submitted question is SAT. JAT 4/25/2014

1. 2. 3. Psychometric Flaws 4. Job Content Flaws 5. Other 6. 7. 8.

Q# LOK LOD (F/H) (1-5) Stem Cues T/F Cred. Partial Job- Minutia #/ Back- Q= SRO B/M/N U/E/S Explanation Focus Dist. Link units ward K/A Only (90) 80 H 2 X B U 062AG2.2.12 Question appears to meet the KA. Question appears to be SRO-only.

Distractors A and B are not plausible because they have already elapsed given the conditions in the stem. The stem of the question puts the applicant at 1700 on 5/12/2014, and then asks when must the surveillance be performed (implies future performance) so as not to declare the LCO not met. If an applicant were to choose 0030 on 5/12 or 0630 on 5/12, the LCO would already not be met at the time of discovery. Since future performance was implied in the stem, these two distractors can be discounted.

Also - Im unclear on the plausibility of 0100 on 5-14-14: if the interval is 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br />, 125% of this is 30 hours3.472222e-4 days <br />0.00833 hours <br />4.960317e-5 weeks <br />1.1415e-5 months <br />, and 24h + 125% is 54 hours6.25e-4 days <br />0.015 hours <br />8.928571e-5 weeks <br />2.0547e-5 months <br />. From the time it was last performed (0030 on 5/11), 24+125% = 0630 on 5/13. From the time of discovery (1700 on 5/12), 24+125%=2300 on 5/14. From the time of discovery (1700 on 5/12), 125%=2300 on 5/13. None of these are 0100 on 5/14 One option to fix the question is to ask:

Which one of the following describes the status of the applicable LCO:

A) The LCO was not met as of 0030 on 5-12-14.

B) The LCO was not met as of 0630 on 5-12-14.

C) The LCO is met provided the missed surveillance is performed satisfactorily no later than 1700 on 5-13-14.

D) The LCO is met provided the missed surveillance is performed satisfactorily no later than 2300 on 5-13-14.

JAT 3/5/2014 S

New question incorporates above suggestion. JAT 3/31/2014 Final submitted question is SAT. JAT 4/25/2014 (91) 90 H 2 M S 076A2.02 Question appears to match the KA. Question appears to be SRO-only.

Part (1) appears to be RO knowledge. Part (2) appears to be SRO-only.

Question appears to be SAT. JAT 3/7/2014 Question is the same. JAT 3/31/2014 Final submitted question is SAT. JAT 4/25/2014

1. 2. 3. Psychometric Flaws 4. Job Content Flaws 5. Other 6. 7. 8.

Q# LOK LOD (F/H) (1-5) Stem Cues T/F Cred. Partial Job- Minutia #/ Back- Q= SRO B/M/N U/E/S Explanation Focus Dist. Link units ward K/A Only (92) 85 H 2 N S 076AG2.4.47 Question appears to match the KA. Question appears to be SRO-only.

Question appears to be SAT. JAT 3/7/2014 M. Donithan brought up that this may not meet the KA. VG is going back to look at reworking the question to include a series of activities and times and asking when the first time the LCO was not met.

S Final submitted question is SAT. JAT 4/25/2014 (93) 94 F 2 N S G2.1.34 Question appears to match the KA. Question appears to be SRO-only.

Part (1) is RO knowledge (above the line in TS). Part (2) requires bases knowledge of the reason for the limit and is therefore SRO-only. Question appears to be SAT. JAT 3/10/2014 Deleted the trailing zero in 0.10 and made it 0.1. JAT 3/31/2014 Final submitted question is SAT. JAT 4/25/2014 (94) 95 F 2 B S G2.1.37 Question appears to match the KA. Question appears to be SRO-only.

Question appears to be SAT. 3/10/2014 Question is the same. JAT 3/31/2014 Final submitted question is SAT. JAT 4/25/2014 (95) 96 F 2 B S G2.2.20 HL 18 Question appears to match the KA. Question appears to be SRO-only.

G2.2.20 Question appears to be SAT. JAT 3/10/2014 Question is the same. JAT 3/31/2014 Final submitted question is SAT. JAT 4/25/2014 (96) 97 F 2 B S G2.2.25 LOR Question appears to match the KA. Question appears to be SRO-only.

006 Question appears to be SAT. JAT 3/10/2014 G2.2.39 Question is the same. JAT 3/31/2014 Final submitted question is SAT. JAT 4/25/2014

1. 2. 3. Psychometric Flaws 4. Job Content Flaws 5. Other 6. 7. 8.

Q# LOK LOD (F/H) (1-5) Stem Cues T/F Cred. Partial Job- Minutia #/ Back- Q= SRO B/M/N U/E/S Explanation Focus Dist. Link units ward K/A Only (97) 98 F 2 M S G2.3.4 Question appears to match the KA. Question appears to be SRO-only.

Question appears to be SAT. JAT 3/10/2014 Question is the same. JAT 3/31/2014 Final submitted question is SAT. JAT 4/25/2014 (98) 99 F 2 M S G2.3.7 Question appears to match the KA. Question appears to be SRO-only.

Question appears to be SAT. JAT 3/10/2014 Question is the same. JAT 3/31/2014 Final submitted question is SAT. JAT 4/25/2014 (99) F 2 M S G2.4.46 100 Question appears to match the KA. Question appears to be SRO-only.

Question appears to be SAT. JAT 3/10/2014 Question is the same. JAT 3/31/2014 Final submitted question is SAT. JAT 4/25/2014 (100) H 2 B S* W/E11A2.02 81 HL15 (pre) Question appears to match the KA. Transitioning to the FRGs on an WE11 Orange path is not SRO-only knowledge. Knowledge of what to do when EG2.4.2 RWST reaches 8% may be SRO-only knowledge. Since the 8% RWST does not govern a procedure transition, please make sure this is required knowledge of the operators (i.e., not minutia).

JAT 12/19/2013 S

Question is same as presubmittal question. Question appears to meet the KA. Question appears to be SRO-only. Question appears to be SAT. JAT 3/10/2014 Final submitted question is SAT. JAT 4/25/2014

Final Sample Plan The Vogtle 2014-301 Final Sample Plan is the Draft Sample Plan combined with the ES-401-4 (Record of Rejected KAs).

ES 403-1 ES-403 Written Examination Grading Form ES-403-1 Quality Checklist FacWty: Vq +1 e Date of Exam: 5/ti/i LI Exam Level: RO SRO Initials Item Description a b c

1. Clean answer sheets copied before grading t1P )ji.D

2. Answer key changes and question deletions justified and documented ,4ts

3. Applicants scores checked for addition errors (reviewers_spot_check_>_25%_of_examinations)

4. Grading for all borderline cases (80 +/-2% overall and 70 or 80, as_applicable,_+/-4%_on_the_SRO-only)_reviewed_in_detail

5. All other failing examinations checked to ensure that grades are_justified

6. Performance on missed questions checked for training deficiencies and wording problems; evaluate validity 4, r/A of questions missed by half or more of the applicants U Printed Name/Signature Date

a. Grader A ofd Lf

b. Facility Reviewer(*)

c. NRCChiefExaminer(*) To#k

d. NRC Supervisor (*) I CxA1b+fZ

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