ML20198H656
| ML20198H656 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Perry  |
| Issue date: | 09/12/1997 |
| From: | Myers L CENTERIOR ENERGY |
| To: | NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| References | |
| PY-CEI-OIE-0464, PY-CEI-OIE-464, NUDOCS 9709220116 | |
| Download: ML20198H656 (5) | |
Text
____ - _ - - - _ - _
c -,V
' CENTERDOR ENERGY-Power Generation Group Party Nuclear Power Plant Mad Address:
' 216-280-6915 Lew W. M yers 10 Center Road -
P.CL Boa 97 ~
FAX:216-280-8029 Vce Prescent Perry, Oreo 44081 Perry, OH 44081
- September 12,1997
. PY-CEl/OIE-0464L Regional Administrator, Region til United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission 801 Warrenville Rd.
Lisle, Illinois 60532-4351 Perry Nuclear Power Plant Docket No. 50-440 m
s Comments on Written Operator License Examination Ladies and Gentlemen: to this letter details comments pertaining to one question on the written Reactor Operator licensing examination administered at the Perry Nuclear Power Plant on Saturday,
- August 30,1997. In addition, the changes that were made to the written examination by the
- proctor while the examinations were being administered are also listed in Attachment 1. provides the Interim Examination Grading Quality Assurance Checklists (Form ES-403-1) for both the Senior Reactor Operator and the Reactor Operator examinations, in accordance with NUREG-1021, Examiner Standard ES-403.
' If you have questions or require additional information, please contact Mr. IIenry L. llegrat, Man ager - Regulatory Affairs, at (440) 280 5606.
Very truly yours, I
@ $ h A lt "
Lg; Attachments cc:
NRC Project Manager NRC Resident inspector NRC Document Control Desk Mr. D. R. McNeil, Operator Licensing Section, Region 111 9709220116 970912 PDR ADOCK 05000440
Att:chment 1 PY CEllOIE-04641; Page 1 of 2 l
COMMENTS MADE FOLLOWING TIIE EXAMINATION The fo) lowing comment pertains to one question on the written Reactor Operator licensing -
examination administered at the Perry Nuclear Power Plant on Saturday. August 30,1997.
Please consider this comment when grading the Reictor Operator examinations for Perry License Class 96-01.
Question No.16:-
Which one of the following statements is correct concerning an uncoupled control rod during coupling checks?
Up to two attempts may be made to recouple the drive, a.
- b. If attempts to recouple the rod are unsuccessful, the rod should be disarmed at that position.
Digital display of control rod position on the Rod Display Module will go blank if the rod c.
is uncoupled.
- d. - When the ROD UNCOUPLED indicating light has illuminated, it will not clear until the rod is successfully recoupled.
s
-- Answer No.1:
Digital display of contro! rod position on the Rod Display Module will go blank if the rod c.
. is uncouplei
References:
lOff Normal Instruction (ONI)-Cl 1-2, " Uncoupled Control Rod (Unit 1)"
Comments:
ONI-Cl 1 2, section 1.3 states " Digital display of control rod position on the Rod Display Module goes blank." This step provides the reference for distractor "c."
Distractor "a" is also correct because it is not incorrect to attempt to couple : control rod twice.
ONI-Cl1-2, section 4.3.e states "If approved by the Shift Supavisoc, repeat the attempt to recouple the control rod." The original intent of this distractor was to imply that a maximum of two attempts could be made; however, the distractor is not clear in this implication. Therefore, distractor "a" is also correct.
Recommendation:
Both distractors "a" and "c" are correct; therefore, either should be accepted.
I
.,____,--------:-----v-Att:chment i PY-CEl' ole-0464L Page 2 cf 2 COMhlENTS M ADE DURING TIIE EXAMINATION The list of changes that were made to the written examination by the proctor while the
- examinations were being administered are listed below. These comments were agreed to by both the facility and Nuclear Regulatory Commission proctors.
Question No.
Consnrent RO-76 & SRO-48 The words "Rx scram was not on Level 3, a level 3 signal did not occur" were added to the question. This was necessary due to candidates asking questions trying to differentiate between distractors "a" and "d," neither of which was correct, but direction was needed to prevent pointing out that neither was correct.
RO-83 & SRO-55 Prior to the last sentence in the question, the following words were added, "An ATWS results in pcwer stabilizing at 30%." In addition, distractor "d" was deleted. This was necessary due to "d" being correct even though there were no feed pumps being controlled by this controller. The question was also altered to allow the candidate; to dete.mine that the Redundant Reactivity Control System had been initiated. This could not have been inferred by the candidates with the question as it was and the addition was needed to correctly answer the question.
SRO-80 Candidates were informed that the distractors were listed in the wrong order, i.e. "b-a-d-c" vice "a-b-c-d." Candidates were told to use the letter that occurs before the choices and not to re-order them. This was merely a typographical error.
SRO-94 The words "Drywell hydrogen concentration can be maintained <9%"
were added to the end of the question. This was necessary to make the correct answer totally correct in that the Plant Emergency Instruction step that was used to answer this question included this parameter and the candidates asked what the status of this parameter was.
ES-403 INTERIM Examination Grading form ES-403-1 Quality Assurance Checklist Grader's Name:
A$D IufadfW Date of Examination: J/&[]/
Facility / Unit:
fEMd Examination Level:
h/R0 Initials Item Description a,
b.
c.
1.
Answer key changes and question deletions justified J
and documented.
kC
{
2.
Applicants' scores checked for addition errors (reviewers spot check 25% of examinations).
M-k, 3.
Grading for all borderline cases (80% +/- 2%)
reviewed in detail.
M NM Nk 4.
All other falling examinations checked to ensure grades are justified, dD
~
5.
Performance on missed questions checked for training-s deficiencies and wording problems; evaluate items
(
missed by half or more of the applicants for
/
validity.
Printed Names / Signatures Date a.
Grader o {. 3A%WM h
T-8'f/
b.
Facility Reviewer
,v.t(( [,mkM
~ D B-17 c.
NRC Chief Examiner (*)
d.
NRC Supervisor (*)
l E
(*)
Two independent NRC reviews are required.
ROI 95-25
_ _ _ - - - - ~ - - - - - - - - - ' ' - ' - - - ' -
,,e l>Y.Cl!!'Oll'.04 641.
l' ape 2 of 2 ES-403 INTERIM Examination Grading Form ES-403-1 Quality Assurance Checklist rader's Name:
Mtbl.$At>4A%
Date of Examination:
'df5cf9"?
Facility / Unit:
fGtVW Examination Level:
SRO /h Initials item Description a.
b.
c.
1.
Answe* key changes and question deletions justified (j(.d and documented.
f N
2.
Applicants' scores checked for addition errors t
(reviewers spot check 25% of examinations).
M-~
3.
Grading for all borderline cases (80% +/- 2%)
reviewed in detail.
g/V(
L 4.
All other failing examinations checked to ensuro
-D) w grades are justified.
5.
Performance on missed questions checked for training =
deficiencies and wording problems; evaluate items missed by half or more of the applicants for validity.
Printed Names / Signatures Date a.
Grader A\\hD b.hu6u6%
h Td'i'I b.
Facility Reviewer v>.rl(
. [331be,) e. ' 84')
1 NRC Chief Examiner (*)
U c.
d.
NRC Supervisor (*)
Two independent NRC reviews are required.
ROI 95-25
__