ML090710101

Initial Written Retake Examination, 2009-301 Final Administrative Documents

ML090710101
Person / Time
Site:	North Anna
Issue date:	02/10/2009
From:	NRC/RGN-II
To:
References
Download: ML090710101 (45)

Text

ES-201, Rev. 9 Examination Preparation Checklist Form ES-201-1 Facility: North Anna Retake Date of Examination: February 10, 2009 Developed by: Written - Facility X NRC D II Operating - Facility D NRC D Target Chief Date* Task Description (Reference) Examiner's Initials

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

-120 2. NRC examiners and facility contact assigned (C.1.d; C.2.e) PGC 1J1<-

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

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

[-90] [5 Reference material due (C.1.e; C.3.c; Attachment 2)] PGC~

6. Integrated examination outline(s) due, including Forms ES-201-2, ES- 201-3,

{-75} 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)

PGC -+JYL

{7.Examination outline(s) reviewed by NRC and feedback provided to facility

{-70} PGC*l licensee (C.2.h; C.3.e)}

8.Proposed examinations (including written, *....alk throl:Jgh JPMs, and soonarios, as al3l3lioablo), supporting documentation (including Forms ES 301 d, ES 301 4,

{-45}

ES 301 e, ES 301 e, and ES-401-6, and any Form ES-201-3 updates), and PGC~

reference materials due (C.1.e, f, g and h; C.3.d)

-30 9.Preliminary license applications (NRC Form 398's) due (C.1.1; C.2.g; ES-202) PGc#t

-14 1O.Finallicense applications due and Form ES-201-4 prepared (C.1.1; C.2.i; ES-202)

PGC~L

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

PGC~

-14 12. Examinations reviewed with facility licensee (C.1.j; C.2.f and h; C.3.g) PGc#L-

-7 13.Written examinations and ol3orating tosts approved by NRC supervisor (C.2.i; C.3.h) PGC~

14.Final applications reviewed; 1 or 2 (if >10) applications audited to confirm

-7 qualifications I eligibility; and examination approval and waiver letters sent (C.2.i; PGC~)IL Attachment 4; ES-202, C.2.e; ES-204)

-7 15.Proctoring/written exam administration guidelines reviewed with facility licensee (C.3.k) PGC +Jvt

-7 16.Approved soonarios, job l3orformanoo mOaSI:JFOS, and questions distributed to NRC examiners (C.3.i) PGC tJIA

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

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

ES-201 Examination Outline Quality Checklist Form ES-201-2 Facility: i'-J 0 v-+k p.. V'\ V\..Co... Date of Examination: "Z -I 0 - c... co 1 Item 1.

W R

I T

Task Description

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

b. Assess whether the outline was systematically and randomly prepared in accordance with Section 0.1 of ES-401 and whether all KIA categories are appropriately sampled.

~

c" a

Initials b*

.. C#

fP£-

T

c. Assess whether the outline over-emphasizes any systems, evolutions,or generic topiCS. c;- ~

E N

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

~ ~k.-

\

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.

I M b. Assess whether there are enough scenario sets (and spares) to test the projected number U

L A

T o

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

c. To the extent possible, assess whether the outline(s) conform(s) with the qualitative tJ '\

R 3.

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

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

\

~

(1) the outline(s) contain(s) the required number of control room and in-plant tasks W distributed among the safety functions as specified on the form 1 (2) task repetition from the last two NRC examinations is within the limits speCified on the form 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 altemate 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:

t N' c.

(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 Determine if there are enough different outlines to test the projected number and mix 1\

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

a.

~k-

4. 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. <y l~tL N c. Ensure that KIA importance ratings (except for plant-specific priorities) are at least 2.5. "i:s- ,~

E R

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

1'hJt.

A e. Check the entire exam for balance of coverage. ~ I~

L y

f. Assess whether the exam fits the appropriate job level (RO or SRO). 1'foJk.

Date

a. Author 12 -<;. Oi"

b. Facility Reviewer (*) I " ll~t QI- .f- , ...l""~

c. NRC Chief Examiner (#)

d. NRC Supervisor JJ;!iM

/L~

Note: # Independent NRC reviewer initial items in Column "COO; chief examiner concurrence required.

• Not applicable for NRC-prepared examination outlines ES-201 Page 26 of 28 J

~Qr~ ~"A(J... LC~"'-5~ ~.(.-1-~K.L. £~A."

ES-201 Examination Security Agreement Form ES-201-3

1. Pre-Examination ,,\

...... , l"

(-c "I ~)t-J t" "

1-\(11 I acknowledge that I have acquired specialized knowledge about the NRC licensing examinations scheduled for the week(s) o~ 1= as of the date of my signature. I agree that I will not knowingly divulge any information about these examinations to any persons who have n "been authorized by the NRC chief examiner. I understand that I am not to instruct, evaluate, or provide performance feedback to those applicants scheduled to be administered these licensing examinations from this date until completion of examination administration, except as specifically noted below and authorized by the NRC (e.g., acting as a simulator booth operator or communicator is acceptable if the individual does not select the training content or provide direct or indirect feedback). Furthermore, I am aware of the physical security measures and requirements (as documented in the facility licensee's procedures) and understand that violation of the conditions of this agreement may result in cancellation of the examinations and/or an enforcement action against me or the facility licensee. I will immediately report to facility management or the NRC chief examiner any indications or suggestions that examination security may have been compromised.

2. Post-Examination To the best of my knowledge, I did not divulge to any unauthorized persons any information concerning the NRC licensing examinations administered during the week(s) of'Z.J IO/z oo."1From the date that I entered into this security agreement until the completion of examination administration, I did not instruct, evaluate, or provide performance feedback to those applicants who were administered these licensing examinations, except as specifically noted below and authorized by the NRC.

PRINTED NAME DATE DATE NOTE

~\\ ~-., ~~ ~~

"~~_Q ~ b~~~--

<>G8~ :t"/~

O~~~ "b~~l"'-"~~_ ~~R ~~

. . -- . ({N I /OCf- __

<.... '"'1--'

- 1;P

""'~'  !)t...¥l-'r!b

~ M

~'9t(\~

I.. _1.- .

~..

J ~'1oI'l.~, ~

~/ ~~ ..!!fl&~

I . , .--.... ,,-, "t_v-v_ 7.(*1J I tV VV"'"' ,.VIL71 T .  ;! (~I:t--

8. WILLIU. Seley /?ONBC /' I II-'l-'it ~

-9. W r1'l...~~,,.. " sp..O'tPII rHlr- 6f1MQ ~/ U) ~~

10.

11 .

r<o~3{

.::r 1j£; ~V~i=N-:>'t);flc:

(;)2 ;:=NI Tt~Vf)o/f{ 1i.L1J.L-!::P!f~

i{r5"--e&S \Ii ~~

\J.Ni+ Sl;ller(}l!~ ~,~

"13.#,?!.J::r!!..~

12.

14.

?'wt--  !"'roZ,W"-r

~ -<--L> L!6.\,.-' __

. .

tllf(of6

15. I~ St:AJ+/- - - * ~ ... A

-- ""c;"J.......--

NOTES:

ES-201, Page 26 of 27

Novth A~~" L,r~.u! 6:k A-. LRIP-'T~~ )

ES-201 Examination. Security Agreement Form ES-201-3

1. Pre-Examination I acknowledge that I have acquired specialized knowledge about the NRC licensing examinations scheduled for the weekes) of r~b. \0, 2O~9as of the date of my signature. I agree that I will not knowingly divulge any information about these examinations to any persons who have not been authorized by the NRC chief examiner. I understand that I am not to instruct, evaluate, or provide performance feedback to those applicants scheduled to be administered these licensing examinations from this date until completion of examination administration, except as specifically noted below and authorized by the NRC (e.g., acting as a simulator booth operator or communicator is acceptable if the individual does not select the training content or provide direct or indirect feedback). Furthermore, I am aware of the physical security measures and requirements (as documented in the facility licensee's procedures) and understand that violation of the conditions of this agreement may result in cancellation of the examinations and/or an enforcement action against me or the facility licensee. I will immediately report to facility management or the NRC chief examiner any indications or suggestions that examination security may have been compromised.

2. Post-Examination To !he best of my knowlpdle, I did not divulge to any unauthori~ed p~rsons a~y information co~cerning the ~RC licensi~g ~xamina~i~ns a~minist~red dunng the weekes) of'?II, z.oo~ From the date that I entered IOta thiS secunty agreement until the completion of examination' admmlstratlon, I did not instruct, evaluate, or provide performance feedback to those applicants who were administered these licensing examinations. except as specifically noted below and authorized by the NRC.

1. --:--7'-"i-'--+---=-=--r.-,,=,;;;

2. -+"+<-r;-=-~....,...a;;.--;-

,v/ltr? {!In. / ,:. 1<"0 upv.x ...... , ~ "-""-0 (1.fcP( ' - { V1~-

---

ES-201, Page 27 of 28

ES-401, Rev. 9 PWR Examination Outline Form ES ..401-2 fZ.s: ,-AK G:.

Facility: ~i'~~ Date of Exam: :4I C l.Ll.'> o 1 RO.KIA Category Points SRO-Only Points Tier Group K K K K K K A A A A G A2 G* Total 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4

• Total

1. 1 3 3 3 3 3. 3 18 3 3 6 Emergency & 2 1 2 9 2 2 4 2 2 1 1 Abnormal Plant N/A N/A Evolutions Tier Totals 5 4 4 5 4 5 27 5 5 10 1 2 2 3 3 3 3 3 2 3 2 2 28 3 2 5

2. 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 10 2 3 Plant Systems Tier Totals 3 3 4 4 4 4 4 3 4 3 2 38 5 3 8

3. Generic Knowledge and Abilities 1 2 3 4 10 1 2 3 4 7 Categories 2 2 3 3 2. 2 1 2

1. Ensure that at least two topics from every applicable KIA category are sampled within each tier of the RO and SRO-only outlines (Le .. exceptfor one category in Tier a of theSRO-only outUne, the "Tier Totals" in each KIA category shlllJ flot.be less than two).

2. The point total forellch group and tier in the proposed outline must match that specified in thelable.

The final point total for. each grotipand tier may deviate by +/-1 from thatspaclfied in the table based on NRC revlsloJ1$. Theflnal RO exam must total 75 paint!;; and the SRO-only exam must total.25 points.

a. Systems/evolutions within each group are identified on the aSsociated outline; systems or evolutions that do not apply at the facility shOUld be deleted arid justified; operationally important, site-specific systems that are not included on the outline should be added. Refer to ES-401 ,Attachment 2, for guidance regarding the elimination of inappropriate KIA statements.

4. Select topics from as many systems and evolutions as possible; sample every system or evolution in the group before selecting a second topic for any system or evolution.

5. Absent a plant,specific priority. orily those KIAs having an importance rating (IRJ of 2.5 or higher shall be selected. Use the RO and SROratings fortheRO and SRO-only portions, respectively.

6. Select SRO topics for Tiers 1 and Zfrom the shaded systems and KIA categories.

7. *The generic (G) K/As in Tiers 1 and 2 shall be selected from Section 20fthe KIA Catalog, but the topics must be relevant to the applicable evolution or system.

S. On the following pages, etlterthe K/Anumbers, a brief description of each topic, the topics' Importance ratings (I Rs) for the applicable license level , and the point totals (#) for each system and category. Enter the group and tier totals for each category iri the table above; if fuel handling equipment Is sampled In other than Category A2 or G* on the SRO-onlyexam, enter it on the left side of Column A2 for Tier 2, Group 2 (Note

1. 1 does not apply). Use duplicate pages for RO and SRO-only exams.

9. For Tier 3, select topics from Section 2 ofthe KIA catalog, and enter the KIA numbers, descriptions, IRs, and point totals (#) on FormES-401"a *. Umit SRO selections to. K/As that are linked to 10 CFR 55.43.

ES-401, REV 9 T1G1 PWR EXAMINATION OUTLINE FORM ES-401-2 KA NAME I SAFETY FUNCTION: IR K1 K2 K3 K4 K5 K6 A1 A2 A3 A4 G TOPIC:

RO BRO 008AG2A.30 Pressurizer Vapor Space Acddentl3 2.7 4.1 0 0 0 DO 0 DO 0 0 ~ Knowledge of events related to system operatlonsl~tus

\\ This is a Generic, no stem statement is that must be reported to internal orginizations or outslcie agencj~s.

associated.

\:1 009EK1.02 Sman Break LOCA 13 3.5 4.2 ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Useofsteamtables I.(;~~\~

Knowledge of the operational implications t;V-VJ of thte following concepts as they apply to thte EMERGENCY PLANT EVOLUnON):(CFR: 41.8to 41.10145,3) 015AA1.22 RCP Malfunctions} 4 4 4.2 0 0 0 00 0 ~ DODD RCP seal failure1malfuhction 06 AbilitytooperBte and I or monitor the following as they (ipply to (ABNORMAL PLANT EVOLUTION):(OFR: 41.7 145.5/

45.1)

~\ 022AK1.01 LosS of RXCooiarit Makeup f 2 2.:8 3.2~OOOOOODOOO Consequences of thermal shOck to RCPseals Knowledge ofthe.oPemtional implfc(ltjons of the foUowingconceptsas they apply to tflte(ABNORMAL PLANT, EVOLUnON):(CFR: 4UHo 41.101 4!f3) 025AK1.01 Loss of RHR System 14 3.9 4.3 .'.~ 0 0 0 0 0 DOD 0 0 Loss.ofRHRS during all modes of operation z~ KnoWle<jge of the operational implicatiQilS of the fqllowinQ coneeptsBj> they aPply to the(AeNORMAL PLANT EVOLUnON):(CFR: 41.8to 41.1 (J/45.3) 026AA2.04 Loss ofComponentCooltngWater/8 2.5 2.9 DO 0 0 0 0 0 ~ DO 0 The no(mal values and. upper limits for the tempteratutes of the cOmponents cooled by CCW 25 Ability to determine and interpret the follQwing as they apply to ABNORMAL PLANT EVOLUTION):(CFR: 41.10/43.51 45.13)

P<tge 1 of 3 8/13/2008 6:44 AM

ES-401, REV 9 T1G1 PWR EXAMINATION OUTLINE FORM ES-401*2 KA NAME I SAFETY FUNCTION: IR K1 K2 K3 K4 K5 K6 A 1 A2 A3 A4 G TOPIC:

RO SRO 027AK3.02 Pressurizer Pressure Control System 2.9 3 DD~DDODDODD Verification of alternate transmitter and/or plantccimp.Llter l~

Malfunction13 prior to shifting flow chart transmitters Knowledge of the reasons for the following responses as they apply to (ABNORMAL PLANT EVOLUTION):(CFR: 41,5/41.10 I 45.6 I 45.13)

O~EK2:06 ATWS 11 2.9 3.1 0 I~l 0 DOD 0 ODD 0 Breakers. relays, and disconnects.

Knowledge of theAnterrelations i:letween

~L- (EMERGENCY PLANT EVOLUnON) and fherfoUowing:(CFR: 41.7 I 45.t 145.8) 04OAA2.U4 Steam Line Rupture - ExcessiVe Heat 4.5 4.70 DOD DOD ~ 0 D 0 Conditions requiring ESFAS iriitiation TranSfer 14 AbilIty to determIne andihterpret the

~l following ~ they app[y to ABNORMAL PLANT EVOLUTION):(CFR: 41.10 143.51 45.13) 054AK3;U4 Loss of Main Feedwaler I 4. 4.4 4.60 0 ~ 0 0 ODD 0 0 0 ACtions contained in EOPsfor [0:;5 of MFW Knowledge of therea$Ql1s for the following

'-\~ respo~es as they apply to (p;BNORIinAL PLANT EVOLlJTfON):{CfR: 4U141~ 101 45.6145.13) 055EK2.04 Station Blackout /6 D*~ODODDDDOD Pumps

,-\\ Knolli/ed.ge oithe irllerrefations between (EMERGENCY PLANT EVOLUTION) and the fol]owing:(CFR: 41.7 J 45:7 145.$)

056AG2.4.8 Loss of Off-site Power /e 3.8 4.5[j DODO DOD [] cr ~ KnoWledge: of how abnormal operating procedures are used in conJunction with EOPs. .

This is a Generic, no stem statement is I,.tV

\

associated.

1t 057AG2.2.38 Loss of Vital AC Inst. B.us 16 3.6 4.5 0 0 0 0 0 DOD 0 0 ~ Knowledge: of<:onditions and limitations in the faciiity license.

• 3 This is a Generic, no stem statement is associated.

Page 2 of 3 811312Q08 6:44 AM

ES-401, REV 9 T1G1 PWR EXAMINATION OUTLINE FORM ES-401-2 KA NAME I SAFETY FUNCTION: IR K1 K2 K3 K4 KS K6 A1 A2 A3 A4 G TOPIC:

RO SRO 062AA1.07 Loss of Nuclear Svc Water I 4 2.9 3 DOD DO 0 ~ D DOD Flow rates to the components and systems that are serviced by the SWS; interactions among the components f+i Ability to operate and lor monitor the following as they apply to (ABNORMAL PLANT EVOLUTION):(CFR: 41.7/45.SI 45.6) 065AA2.01 Loss of Instrument Air I 8 2.. 9 3.2 0 ODD 0 0 0 ~ 0 0 0 Cause and effect of low-pressure instrument air alarm Ability to determine and interpret the 53 following as they apply to ABNORMAL PLANT EVOLUTION):(CFR: 41.10 143.SI 4S.13) 077AA 1.03 Generator Voltage and Electric Grid 3.8 3.7 DOD 0 D 0 ~ 0 0 0 0 Voltatge regulator controls Disturbances / 6 Ability to operate and lor monitor the

\CJ following as they apply to {ABNORMAL

)fj PLANT EVOLUTION):(CFR: 41.7/45.51 45;6}

WE04EK3.2 LOCA Outside Containmenti 3 3.4 4.0 0 0 ~ 0 0 DOD 0 0 0 Normal, abnormal and emergency operating procedures associated with (LOCA Outside Containment).

Knowledge ofthe reasons for the following 1 responses as they apply to (EMERGENCY PLANT EVOLUTION):(CFR: 41.S/41.10 /45.61 45.13)

WE05EK2.1 Inadequate Heat Transfer- Loss *of 3.7 3.9 D ~ 0 ODD 0 0 0 0 0 Components and functions of control and safety systems, Secondary Heat Sink I 4 including instrumentation, signals, interlocks, failure Knowledge ofthe interrelations between 1 (EMERGENCY PLANT EVOLUTION) and the followlng:(CFR: 41.7 14S.7 1 45.8}

modes and automatic and. manual features, Page 3 of 3 8/13/2008 6:44 AM

ES-401, REV 9 T1G2 PWR EXAMINATION OUTLINE FORM ES-401-2 KA NAME I SAFETY FUNCTION: IR K1 K2 K3 K4 K5 K6 A1 A2 A3 A4 G TOPIC:

RO SRO 001AK1.04 Continuous Rod Withdrawal/1 3.7 3.9 ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Effect of continuous rod withdrawal on insertion limits and SDM Knowledge of the operational implications t of the following concepts as they apply to the (ABNORMAL PLANT EVOLUTfON):(CFR: 41.8 t041.1 0 I 45.3) 005~ InoperablelStuck Control Rod 11 ,..r.( y.t" 0 ~ 0 0 0 DO 0 0 0 0 MetI'63ee~e.

~r-W~) r(!~_} ~U:vL.V\~

. . . .. a-...J2

~1 A~2..D;2. l ,S '2.. Knowledge of the interrelations between (ABNORMAL PLANT EVOLUTiON) and ~ ~ ";VV;;:h::.t1 es f.-,f7Pi-~ the foliowing:(CFR: 41.7 145.7/45.8) 024AA1.10 Emergency Baratian 11 3.5 3.4 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ 0 D D 0 CVCS centrifugal charging pumps

0) Ability to operate and lor monitor the following as they apply to (ABNORMAL PLANT EVOLUTION)

(CFR: 41.7145.51 45.6) 028A~ Pressurizer Level Malfunction / 2 ,;v.g ~ OOOOOOODOO~ I<Pt8v,'leel!e ef" 18.'& tbbA e: rei IOdi teel iI-liesl sJge6i~ieatiQ'R

~ G.~'~'41 4.2 4.4 This is a Generic, no stem statement is associated.

.aelieI'l8~atill;Qlitpts MP;I/~rh> '~frct ~~ i~

for systems; . ~~ .

"

h

3D *~~ti~ S~C~ ~oI-, p~ ,

¥~/ a::Jl ~S~ h.MJ ~ ~

032AK3.02 Loss of Source Range NIl? 3.7 4.1 0 0 ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 DO Guidance contained in EOP for loss of source-range ~_.11~1 nuclear instrumentation 1ft ~ P~

K.nowle.dgeo. ft.he rea.so.nSfor.th.efallOW.in g .~ ..~

responses as they apply to (ABNORMAL PLANT EVOLUTION):(CFR: 41.5/41.10 / ~.

45.6145.13) 051AG2.4.35 Loss of Condenser Vacuum /4 3.8 4.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ODD D ~ Knowledge of local auxiliary operator tasks during emergency and the resultant operational effects 31 This is a Generic, no stem statement is associated.

Page 1 of 2 8/1312008 6:44 AM

ES-401, REV 9 T1G2 PWR EXAMINATION OUTLINE FORM ES-401-2 KA NAME I SAFETY FUNCTION: IR K1 K2 K3 K4 K5 K6 A1 A2 A3 A4 G TOPIC:

RO SRO 067AK1,01 Plant Fire o n-siteI 9 8 2;9 3.9 ~DDDDDDDDDD Fire classmeations by type 9~if Knowledge of the operational implications of the following concepts as they apply to the (ABNORMAL PLANT EVOLUnON):(CFR: 41.8 to 41.10 145.3) 1~l WE08EA2.2 RCS Overcoollng - PTS I 4 3.5 4.1 DDDDDDD~DDD Adherence to approp~a1e procedures and operation within the limitations. in the facility's license and Ability to determine .and interpret the amendments.

fotlowingas they apply to (EMERGENCY PLANT EVOLUTIC>N}:(CFR: 43,5/45.13)

WE 14EA1.3 Loss of CTMT Integrity 15 3;3 3.8* DDDDDD~DDDD DeSired operatlngr'ElsLilfs diJring abnormal and

R Ability to operate and I or monitor the emerge(iCy srtuat!011s.

(16 folfowing<!lsthey aPply to (EMERGENCY PLANT EVOLUTION):'{CFR: 41.7 I 45.6)

Page 2 of 2 8f 13/2008 6:44 AM

ES-401, REV 9 T2.G1 PWR EXAMINATION OUTLINE FORM ES-401-2 KA NAME I SAFETY FUNCTION: IR K1 K2 K3 K4 K5 K6 A1 A2 A3 A4 G TOPIC:

RO SRO 003A2.02 Reactor Cod ant Pump 3.7 3.9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Conditions which exist for an abnormal shutdown ci an RCP in comparison to a normal shutdown of an RCP Ability to (a) predict the impacts of the foliONing on the (SYSTEM) and (b) based on those pre:!ictions, use procedures to correct, control, or mitigate the consequences of those abnormal operation:(CFR: 41.5/43.51 45.3 145.13) 003A3.02 Reactor CodantPump 2.6 2.5 ODD 0 0 ODD ~ DO Metor current

~

Ability to monitor automatiC operations of the (SYSTEM) inciuding:(CFR: 41.7 f 45.5)

OO~ Chemical and Volume Corilrol ~)A'DOOOO~OOODO .flfiAsi.plgof recjrcfllatjmval\e. ~I'effl\it efl\el'§eRey #le.. e;-en if va/oeiS blocked by cryShlllireEllii9Fit;; acil:i}

~ ~ ~;l3 '31 t -;.~ Knowledge of the effect that a loss or

~VV\f.~ e~ Pwvt~6V1 if{)~. b'lL~y't:4'tl.C/~

malfunction ci the following will have on the (SYSTEM):(CFR: 41.7/45.7) tJ~~&v~t~

005A4,04 Residual Heat Removal 3.1 2.9 ODD D DOD 0 0 I~l 0 Controls .and indication for closed cooling water pumps b Ability to manually operate andlor monitor in the control room:(CFR: 41.7 I 45.51045,8) 005K5.09 Residual Heat Removal 3.2 3A ODD 0 0 DO 0 0 0 0 Dilution and boration considerations

~ Knowledge of the operational implications of the following concepts as they apply to the (SYSTEM):(CFR: 41.5/45.7)

~t

~ % 00000000000 v0.~

OO~ ~.' I RII~ I (estaliilish fie..ole9l; plecilig itt !!e!'t'iee-' e;xc:bat:lgiF jerier Ie

~ ~ Ability to predict andlor monitor changes in ~~OaA) I

-'0/ ' 3 4, 4 parameters associated with operating the

'(~controls including:(CFR:41,S!

SaL 6 e'?; gf';s~ -~ (N(/?f '

45.5) fcC->

(

e l/C-C5 ~ ~

Ie Page 1 of 5 8/13/2008 6

45 AM

ES-401, REV 9 T2G1 PWR EXAMINATION OUTLINE FO.RM ES-401*2 KA NAME I SAFETY FUNCTION: IR K1 1<2 K3 K4 KS KG Ai fo2 A3 A4 G TOPIC:

RO$RO oo7A3.01 Pressurizer Relief/Quench Tank 2.7 2.9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ 0 0 Components which discharge to the PRT 10 Ability to monitor automatic operations of the (SYSTEM) lncludlng:(CFR: 41.7 145.S)

\ -')...., 00002.1.27 Component Cooling Water 3.9 4 0 0 0 0 DO 0 0 0 0 ~ Knowledge d system purpose and or function.

This iSB Generic, no stem statement is assooi!ted.

&1 01OKS.01 Pressurizer PrESsure Control 3.5 4.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 KWiedge dtheoperational implications of

~O. Detehnii1a1ion of condition dfluidin PZR, using :'.Iteam tables the folloWingmepts as they apply to the (SYSTEM);(CFR: 41.S/45;7)

,:;

012f(5.02 Reaetor ProteCtion 3~1 3.3 D [J 0 0 ~ >0 0 0 0 0 0 Powerdaisif,y KWlectge of the opera!ional implica!ions of t.hefolloWiQQ; concepts. as ttlElY apply to. the (SYSTEM):(CFR: 41;S/45.7)

\\0 Of3K6.01 Engineered Safety Features Actuation .2.7 3,1 DODD [] ~ [] 0 0 [] 0 Sensors aOO detectors Knowledge of the effecl: that a loss or malfunction of ihe folloWing Wi:n have on the (SY$TEM):(CFR: 41.7145.7) 022K4.03 Containment Cooling 3.6 4.0 nOD ~ 0 0 0 0 0 DO Automatic containment isolation

)V Knowledge d {SYSTEM) design featuie(s) and orirnerlock(s) which provide fodhe follo.ving:(CFR: 41.7}

026K2.01 Containment Spray 3A 3,6 tl.~ 0 0 DO 0 0 0 0 0 Containment spray pUrT)ps LL, Knowledge of etectrical power supplies to the folIONing:(CFR: 41.7)

Page20fS 811312008 6:45 AM r

I;

!'h,Vfi1"',,/v'V.

v 4/'

'//

ES*401, REV 9 T2G1 PWR EXAMINATION OUTLINE FORM ES-401*2 KA NAME I SAFETY FUNCTION: IR K1 K2 K3 K4 K5 K6 Ai A2 A3 A4 G TOPIC:

RO SRO 026K3.02 Containment Spray 42 4.3 0 0 ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Recirculation spray system 2-7 Knooleclge of the effect that a loss or malfunction of the (SYSTEM) will haw on thefoliowing:(CFR: 41.7/45.6) 039K2.04 Main and Rehea: $t~m 3A 3.7 0 0 DOD 0 0 ~ 0 0 0 Malfunctioning steam dump Ability to (a) predict the impacts of the follcwing on the (SYSTEM) and (b) based on

~\o those prErlictions. use procedures to correct, control, or mitigate the consequences of those abnormal Qperation:(CFR; 41.5143.51 45.3/45.13) 05~ Main Feedwater J% prc-O 0 0 0 0 0 ~ D ElIjEf FEG3 Pump gp&d, iilClUUlil!)h&fiIa1 Cl5I\tI~ Sp&ld fer ~S ~

m

~

Al.f)? ~.~ Z."AbilitytopredictandlotmOriitOr.Chsngesiri 'P~~I~~ ~

parameters associatErlwith op!;!fi;lf:ing the ~ I. A.tO::::W . fJ v-tt-l\j"f!.£ (SYSTEM) controls inciuding:(CFR: 41.6.1 v l) fVV r f V VV1f 3 ~

45.S}

059K3.03 Main Feedwater 3.5 3.7. 0 0 ~ DODO DOD 0 SIGS Kn(MIledge of fuEl effect that a toss or t\S malfunction of the (SYSTEM) wil( haw on the folloWing:(CFR:4.1. tI45.6) /

00 1K1.07 Auxiflary/En'ler'gency Feedwater 3.6 3,8 ~ 0 0 DODO 0 0 0 0 Emergency water source

~0 KnONledgeci the phVSical. connectipns and/or cause-etfect relationships between (SYSTt;:M) and thefoilowing:(CFR: 41.2 to 41.9/45.7 to 45.S) 001K6.02 AuxillarylEmergency Feedwater 2.6 2.7 0 0 DOD I~ 0 0 0 0 0 Pumps KnONlecige of the effect that a loss or Lfl malfunction of thefoltowing will haw on the (SYSTEM):(CFR: 41.7 I 45.7)

Page 3 of 5 81131200S 6:45 AM

ES.401, REV 9 T2G1 PWR EXAMINATION OUTLINE FORM ES-401-2 KA NAME I SAFETY FUNCTION: IR K1 K2 K3 K4 K5 K6 A1 1\2 A3 A4 G TOPIC:

RO SRO 0621<1.04 AC Electrical Distribution 3.7 4.2 ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Off-sitE! power sources Knowledge of the physical connections ct) and/or caJ~e-effect relationships between (SYSTEM} and thefollowing:(CFR: 41.2 to 41.9 145.7 to 45.8) 063A3.01 DC Electrical Distribution 2.7 3.1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ D 0 Meters. annunciators, dials, recorders and indicating lights 50 Ability to monitor automatic operations of the (SYSTEM) including:(CFR: 41.7/45.5) oo3K4,02 DC ElectriCal Distribution 2;9 3,2 dEfD~ ODD ODD 0 Brea.ker Interlocks, permisslves, bypasses and crQSS-ties.

~/

Knowledge of (SYSTEM) design feature(s) and or interlock(s) Wtlich provide for the foU6Niog:(CFR: 41.7) 064A4.04 Emergency Diesel Generator 3.23.2 DD 0 [] [] 0 [] 0 0 ~ [] Rernote'operatloo of theaif compressor sWitch (different modes}

S1- Ability to menualfy operat:sandlor monitor In the control room:(CFR: 41.7 f45.5 to 45.8}

ss J] D ~ D DD [J 0 0 [] 0 07*3K3J)1 Process Radiation Monitoring 3.6 42 Radioactive Eiffluent releases Knowlec:lge of the effect that a loss. or*

iTlalfunctiOn of the (SYSTEM) WiJj have on thefolioWing:(CFR: 41.7/45.6) 07'61<4,01 ServiceWater 2.5 2,9. 0 0 0 ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Conditions initlatingalltomaticclosureof closed cooling

~1 water auxiliary bUildingl1eader supplyandrEitui'n valves KlJONlecige of (SYSTEM) design featute($)

&nd or i~rloCl<<$) which provide for the folIONing:(GFR: 41.7) 0700.02 Instrument Air []~ 0 0 0 0 DOD 0 0 Emergency air compressOr

'*

3.3 3,5 KnONlecige of electrical power supplies to the follawing:(CFR: 41.7) 5(

Page 4 of 5 8/1312008 6:45 AM

ES-401, REV 9 T2G1 PWR EXAMINATION OUTLINE FORM ES-401-2 KA NAME / SAFETY FUNCTION: IR K1 K2 K3 K4 K5 K6 Ai A2 A3 A4 G TOPIC:

RO SRO i03A1.01 Containment 3.7 4.1 0 DOD 0 0 ~ 0 0 0 0 Containment pressure, temperature and humidrty f j"> Ability to predict and/or monitor changes in (jf/ parameters associated with operating the (SYSTEM) controls inciuding:(CFR: 41.5 /

45.5) 103G2A.2 Containment 4.5 4.6 0 0 DOD 0 0 0 0 0 ~ KnolNle::lge of system set points, interlocks and automatic actions associated with EOP entry conditions.

b\ This is a Generic, no stem statement is associated.

PageS of5 8113/2008 6:45 AM

ES-401, REV 9 T2G2 PWR EXAMINATION OUTLINE FORM ES-401-2 KA NAME I SAFETY FUNCTION: IR K1 K2 K3 K4 K5 K6 A1 A2 A3 A4 G TOPIC:

RO SRO 002KU1 Reactor Coolant 4.1 4.2 ~ 0 0 0 0 DOD 0 0 0 SIGS, feed water systems

)) Knowledge of the physical connections andler cause-effect relationships between (SYSTEM) and the folloWing: (CFR: 41.2 to 41.9 145.7 to 45.8) 015A2.04 NuClear Instrumentation S.S 3.8 DDDDDDD~DDD Effects on axial flux density of control rod alignment and sequencing, xenon procfuction and decay, and boron vs.

\l Ability to (a) predict the impactsofthe follewingon the (SYSTEM) and (b) based control rod reactivity changes on those predictions, use procedures to correct, control, or mitigate the consequences of those abnormal operation:(CFR: 41.5 143,5 I 45.3 J 45.13) 0i6KS.OS Non*nuclear Instrumentation 3. 0 3.1 DO~DDODDDDD SOS

\C, Knowledge of the effect that a loss or malfunction oHhe (SYSTEM) will have eJn the foliowing:(CFR: 41.7/45.6) 027A4.01 Containment Iodine Removal 3.3 3.3 DDDDDDDDD~D CIRS controls

~ Ability to manuaJlyoperate andlor monitor in the control room:(CFR: 41.7 f 45.5 to

/)1>

/-(

45.8) 029A1.03 Containment Purge 3.0 3.3 DOD DOD ~ DOD 0 Containment pressure, temperature and humidity Ability to predict and/or monitor changes in

)1 parameters associated with operating the (SYSTEM) controls inciuding:(CFR: 41:5 !

45.5) 034K6.02 Fuel Handling Equipment 2.6 3.3 0 DOD 0 ~ 0 DODD Radiation monitoring systems jL\, Knowledge of the effect that a loss or malfunction of the following will have on the (SYSTEM): (CFR: 41.7 I 45.7)

Page 1 of 2 8113/2008 6:45 AM

ES-401, REV 9 T2G2 PWR EXAMINATION OUTLINE FORM ES-401-2 IR

'*

KA NAME / SAFETY FUNCTION: K1 K2 K3 K4 K5 K6 A1 A2 A3 A4 G TOPIC:

RO SRO 035A3.02 Steam Generator 3.7 3.0 D D D D D DOD ~ D D MAD valves Abillty to monitor !:Iutomatlc operations of the (SYSTEM) induding:(CFR: 41.7/45.5) 3)

041K2.01 Steam DumpITurbine Bypass Conuol 2,8 2.9 [] RI D DOD 0 D DOD ICS, normal !:Iild alternate power supply 7>1 Knowledge of efeCtri981 power supplies to thefOIlQwing:(CFR: 41.7) if? ~5.01

{)11 "1'm!<'rR80IBUOn IVIOfmo1il1g'o

~~ --n~l\ ~.I ~,q

~ ~ DOD 0 ~ DOD 0 0 0 .-Radialioli

~ . theory. , tncludtng. ' rypes, sources . acd.

tlAlt&

~c.ut-~~~

KnoWledge of the operational implications

~112. . (-;r; <f1Yl./ of the fOllo\oVingconceptsas they apply to 1D the (SYSTEM}: (CFR: 41.5 I 45.7) 075K4J,,1 Circulating Water 2.5. 2.8. D' D D ~ 0 0 0 DOD 0 Heatslnk

~V Knowledge of (SYSTEM) design featute(s) and or interlock(s) which provide for the following:(CFR: 41.7)

Page 2 of 2 8113/2008 6:45AM

ES-401, REV 9 T3 PWR EXAMINATION OUTLINE FORM ES-401-2 KA NAME / SAFETY FUNCTION: IR K1 K2 K3 K4 K5 K6 A1 A2 A3 A4 G TOPIC:

RO SRO G2.128 Conduct of operations 4.1 4.1 0 0 0 0 0 0 ooo~ Knowledge of the purpose and function of major system components and controls, 02/

G2.1.4 Conduct of operations 3.3 3.8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ Knowledge of individual licensed operator responsibilities related to shift staffing. such as medical requirements, "no-solo" operation, maintenance of active license statur, 10CFR55 etc.

G2.2.15 Equipment Control 3.9 4.3 DO DOOOODD~ Ability to determine the expected plaTit configuration r using design andconfiguration controldocumentaion Co~

G2.2.43 Equipment Control 3.0 3.3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 DO ~ Knowledge of the process used to track inoperable alarms

\oCt G2.3.15 Radiation Control 2.9 3.1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ Knowledge of radiation monitoring systems G2.3.4 Radiation Control 3.2 3.7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ Knowledge of radiation exposure limits under normal and emergency conditions 01 G2.3.5 Radiation Control 2.9 2.9 0 0 0 DO 0 0 0 0 0 ~ Ability to use radiati.on monitoring systems r;g Page 1 of 2 8/13/2008 6:46 AM

ES-401, REV 9 T3 PWR EXAMINATION OUTLINE FORM ES-401-2 KA NAME I SAFETY FUNCTION: IR K1 K2 K3 K4 K5 K6 A 1 A2 A3 A4 G TOPIC:

RO SRO 132.4:20 Emergency ProceduresJPlans 3.8 4.3 DOD DO ODD 0 0 ~ Knowledge of operational implications of EOP warnings, cautions and notes.

bl 132.4.37 Emergency Procedures/Plans 3.0 4,1 0 0 0 0 0 ODD 0 D ~ Knowledge of the Hnes of authority during implamentation of an emergency p l a n . ' ,'

lu 00.4.45, Emergency ProdeduresJPlans 4.1 4.3 DOD 0 0 ODD D 0 ~ Ability to prioritize and interpret the significance, of each annunciator or alarm.

11

• Page 2 of 2 811312008 6:46 AM

ES-401, REV 9 SRO T1G1 PWR EXAMINATION OUTLINE FORM ES-401-2 KA NAME / SAFETY FUNCTION: IR K1 K2 K3 K4 KS K6 A 1 A2 A3 A4 G TOPIC:

RO SRO

'1~ 02SAG2.4.11 Loss ofRHR System I 4 4.0 4.2 0 0 ODD DODO D ~ Knowledge of abnormal condition procedures.

This is a Generic, no stem statement is associated.

0tJ~

054AG2.1.27 Loss of Main Feedwater 14 3.9 4 DODDDDOODD~ Knowledge of system purpose and or function.

This is a Generic, no stem statement is associated.

05SEA2:Q$statiqn Blackout 16 0 0 0 DC) 0 0, ~ D C) IJ 97 3.9 4.7 Ability to determine and interpret the fullowing as they apply to (EMERGENCY Actions necessary to restore power PLANT EVOLUTION):(CFR: 43::SI 45.13) 058AA2,02 LoSs of DC Powerf6 3.3 3.6 0 0 0 0 0 DD~ 0 0 0 125V dc.bus voltage, low/critical low, alarm

~) Af)Hity to determine and Interpret the following as they !'IpplY to AfilNORMAL PLANT EVOLUTION):(CFR: 41.10143.51 4S.13) 1L 077AA2.03 GeneratOr Voltage and Ele.wicGrid Disturbances! 6 3.5 3.6 0 0 ODD D 0 ~ 0 D 0 Ger'leratorcurrent outside the generator GSpability curve AbiJity to determii'leandlnterpret the fullowingas they apply toABN.ORMAL pLANT EVOLunON);{CFR: 41.10/43.51 45.13) we05EG2~4.6 Inadequate Heat Transfer - Loss of 3.7 4.7 DOD D D DOD 0 D ~ Knowledge symptom based EOP mitigation strategies.

Secondary Heat Si*nk./4

\e O This is a Generic, no stem statement is associated.

Page 1 011 8/1312008 6:46. AM

ES-401, REV 9 SRO T1G2 PWR EXAMINATION OUTLINE FORM ES-401-2 KA NAME I SAFETY FUNCTION: IR K1 K2 K3 K4 K5 K6 A 1 A2 A3 A4 G TOPIC:

RO SRO 005AG2.2.40 Inoperable/Stuck Control Rod 11 3.4 4.7 0 DOD 0 DOD 0 0 ~ Ability to apply technicaCspecifica1:ions for a system.

13 This. IS a Generic, no stem statement is assoCiated.

024AA2.04 Emergency Boration I 1 SA 4.2 0 DOD 0 0 0 ~ 0 0 0 Availability of BWST

~\ Ability to determine and interpret fl')e following as they apply to ABNORMAL PLANT EVOLUTION):(CFR: 41.10/43.51 45.13) 032AA2,06 Loss of Source Range NI/7 3.9.. 4.1 DO 0 DOD D ~ 0 D 0 Cohfirmation of reactor trip Ability to determine and interpret the follO'iVing as they apptyto ABNORMAL 3'3 . PLANT EVOLUTION):(CFR: 41.10 I 43.51 45.13) 074EG2.1.23 1h8d. CoreCoolingJ4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .~ Ability to perfOrinspecific.systein and integrated plant qD 4.34.4 This is a Generic, .no stem statement is asSociated.

procedures during all modes of plant operation.

Page 1 of 1 8113/2008 6:47 AM

ES-401, REV 9 SRO T2G1 PWR EXAMINATION OUTLINE FORM ES-401-2 KA NAME' SAFETY FUNCTION: IR K1 K2 K3 K4 K5 K6 A1 A2 A3 A4 G TOPIC:

RO SRO 003A2.05 Reactor Coolant Pump 2.5 2.8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ 0 0 0 Effects ofVCT pressure on RCP seal leakoffflows

'1v Ability to (a) predict the impacts of the follOWing on the (SYSTEM) and (b) based on those predictions, USe procedures to correct, control, or mitigate the consequences of tho~ abnormal operation:(CFR: 41.5 I 43$1 45,3 /45.13) 0OP:A2.02 Residual Heat Removal 3.5 3] 0 0 0 0 00 d ~ 000 Pref;!)uretransient protflCtion during cold shutdown 1.1 Ability to (a}'predict the impacts of the follOWing on the (SYSTEM) and (b) based on thosep~lctionS, use procedures to correqt, control, or rnitigate the consequences of tl10se abnoon,al operation:(CFR: 41.5/43.5/45.3/45.13) r1~ \'UA\~

039G2.1.25 Main and Reheat Steam 3.9 42 DOD 0 0 0 Q 0 0 0 ~ Ability to interpret reference materials such as graphs.

monographs and tables which contain perfOrmance data.

This is a Generic, no stem statement is associated.

i'"'

,076A2.02 Service Water 2.7 3.1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ 0 0 0 Service water he<!der pressure Ability to (.a) predIct the impacts of the 1\ following on the (SYSTEM) and (b) based on those predictiOns. use procedures to correct, Control, or mitigate the consequences of thoseal>norrnal operation:(CFR: 41.5 143.5 f 45.3/45.13)

Page 1 of 1 8/1312008 6:47 AM

ES-401, REV 9 SRO T2G2 PWR EXAMINATION OUTLINE FORM ES-401-2 KA NAME f SAFETY FUNCTION: IR K1 K2 K3 K4 K5 K6 A1 A2 A3 A4 G TOPIC:

RO SRO 016G2A.6 Non-nuCiear Instrumentation 3.7 4.7 0 P D D D D D D D D ~ Knowledge symptom based EOP mitigation strategies.

<[0 This IS a Generic, no stem stl!tement is associated.

~> 045A2.17 Main Turbine Generator 2.7 2.9 0 D DOD D 0 ~ 0 0 0 Malfunction of erectrohydraulic control AbiHtyto (a) predict the impacts of the following on the (SYSTEM) and (b) based on those' predictions, use procedures to correct, control, 61' mitigate the

¢Onsequences of those abnormal bperatibn:(CFR: 41.5 143.5 I 45.3' I 45.13)

OooA2:04 CondEmsate 2.6 2.8' DOD 0 DOD ~ 0 0 CI Loss of condensate pumps

~6 Abilityto (a) prE!dlct the impacts of the foIioWitlg on the (SYSTEM"and (b) based on those predictions, use procedures to correct. control, or mitig ate the consequences of those abnormal operation;{CFR: 41.5/43.5/45.3145.13)

Page 1 of 1 811312008 6:47AM

ES-401, REV 9 SRO T3 PWR EXAMINATION OUTLINE FORM ES-401 .. 2 KA NAME I SAFETY FUNCTION: IR K1 K2 K3 K4 K5 K6 .A1 A2 A3 A4 G TOPIC:

RO SRO j G2.1.28 Conduct of operations 4.1 4.1 OOOOOOOOOO~ Knowledge of the purpose and function 01 majOr system romponents and rontrols.

~3 G2.1.32 Conduct of operations 3.8 4.0 0 0 DO 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ Ability to explain and apply all system limits a.nd precautions.

q~

G2.2:21 Eq uij;llilent Control 2.9 4.10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ Knowledge afpre- and post-maintenance operability q5 requirements.

q~ G2.2,S Equipment Control 2.2 3.2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ Knowledge of the process fur making design or operating changes to the facility

'* 11 G2.3.4 Radiation Control 3..2 3.7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .~ Knowledge Qf radiation exposure limits under normal and emergency conditions G2.4:28 Emergency ProceduresJPlans 3.2 4.1 DO 0 0 [j 0 0 0 0 [j ~ Knowledge of procedures relating to emergel1cy response to a security event (non-safeguards 4t information),

G2.4:30 Emergency ProcedureslPlans 2.7 4.10 0 0 0 0 ODD 0 0 ~ Knowledge ofevents relatedto system operationslstatus that must be reported to internal orginizations or outside 11 agencies.

Page 1 of 1 8113/2008 6:48AM

2009 NAPS NRC Exam ES-401 Record of Rejected KlAs Form ES-401-4 Tier I Randomly Reason for Rejection Group Selected KIA T1/G2 005-AK2.03 NAPS does not have a metroscope; RO New KA ~ 005-AK2.02 T1/G2 028-AG2.2.39 NAPS does not have 1 hr. TS for PRZR Level Malf.

RO New KA ~ 028-AG2.2.44 T2/G1 004-K6.12 Recirc valve for CVCS not applicable at NAPS in the RO stated context .

New KA ~ 004-K6.13 T2/G1 006-A1.05 RHR is not an ECCS subsystem at NAPS.

RO New KA ~ 006-A1.17 T2/G1 059-A1.07 NAPS does not have variable speed feed pump nor does it RO utilize the referenced ICS.

New KA ~ 059-A1.03 T2/G2 072-K5.01 Topic is redundant to other selected generic KAs and of RO low discriminatory value.

New KA ~ 017-K5.01 T2/G1 008-G2.2.39 NAPS does not have 1 hr. TS for CC; TRM actions overlap SRO with RHR TS action, difficult to write a question that is not overly complicated or having partially correct distractors New KA ~ 008-G2.2.38

)1(;

ES-401, Rev. 9 North Anna 2009 Retake-301 SRO Written Examination Review Worksheet Form ES-401-9

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

Q# LOK LOD (FIR) (1-5) SRO I U/E/S Explanation Focus Only Instructions

[Refer to Section D of ES-40 1 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 i~ 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 KIA but, as written, is not operational in content).

• The question requires the recall of knowledge that is too specific for the closed reference test mode (i.e., it is not required to be known from memory).

• The question contains data with an unrealistic level of accuracy or inconsistent units (e.g., panel meter in percent with question in gallons).

• The question requires reverse logic or application compared to the job requirements.

5. Check guestions that are sampled for conformance with the approved KIA and those that are designated SRO-only (KIA and license level mismatches are unacceptable).

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

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

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

Q# LOK LOD (F/H) (1-5) Stem Cues T/F Credo Partial Job- Minutia #1 Back- Q= SRO UIEIS Explanation Focus Dist. Link units ward KIA Only Rev 1 shown in green 1 H 3 U Currently A & B are not plausible. Change question to give S temp values so that applicant has to determine that Tave is low and then ask if they are further or nearer to the insertion limits and what happens to SDM. The exam team (including the plant manager) reviewed the question and the decision was made to re-write with the question based more on the operator's knowledge of procedures for the event in progress, and a single concept, effect on SDM. We feel Distractors A&B are plausible since as stated in the distractor analysis, the first part of A&B is an IDA of 1-AP-3, (step 3 RNO), and would be correct if this were a failure of the Tref input (controlling first stage pressure channel) vice Tave input.

2 H 2 S MeetsKA 3 L 2 X ,s Is it realistic to have both the seismic and proximity vibration

,g monitors indicating the same value? Should the proximity value S be raised?

1st part of A is correct. If it is above the DANGER limit than it also above the ALERT limit.

Change the Proximity reading to 15 mils, ARP states more than one indication should be used (What meets ELEVATED definition?) This question is testing trip criteria recall.

Question revised with proximity value of 12 mils provided in stem. This provides a more realistic scenario for expected indications. Both indications are elevated (supports an actual high vibration condition) and since proximity of 12 is elevated, but below alert level of 15, avoids a case where "C" could be argued as a correct answer.

4 H 3 ,g This is not H LOK. Put actual motor current and choices for S subsequent fmal motor current once in Cold SID.

Upon review w/licensee, the question is SAT wi H LOK.

5 b 3 ,g MeetsKA H S This appears it should be "H" LOD vs. "L" Licensee agrees w/comment and change made.

~---_ ~~.--- l....-- ---- - -~- -- -L- - _....... _ - - - - -

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

Q# LOK LOD (F/H) (1-5) Stem Cues TIF Credo Partial Job- Minutia #1 Back- Q= SRO U/E/S Explanation Focus Dist. Link units ward KIA Only 6 H 3 S MeetsKA 7 H 3 S MeetsKA 8 H 3 S Is this a new question? Why is this "H" LOD? Appears to be recall only. Question changed to "modified" upon review.

The exam team considers the question appropriate for an RO since it addresses higher order features or functions of the plant, but since we do not have ROs or SROs memorize TS Bases, we rated this an "H" because the RO would have to demonstrate a knowledge of the system purpose and function based on operational Mode to arrive at the correct answer.

This is a modified question. Reviewed original question. SAT 9 H 3 E Why is the adverse number given? Why not use 350#? It's S above the 225# value required.

Changes were made as noted above.

10 L 2 E Rearrange choices from shOliest to longest with Rep choices together.

S Changes were made as noted above.

11 L 2 S Why is this not SRO Only? You reference an SRO handout.

At NAPS the RO could fill the role of communicator and thus it is an expectation that they have knowledge of reporting times.

12 L 2 X E Appears to be an incorrect statement in the stem. The CC S system serves no accident mitigation function therefore "SGTR is not applicable".

The reference to SGTR has been replaced with "assuming a Service Water temperature of 95°F" which matches discussion contained in the TS Bases.

13 H 3 S MeetsKA

-_.-

'-- L- '-----

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

Q# LOK LOD I

(FIH) (1-5) Stem Cues TIF Credo Partial Job- Minutia #1 Back- Q= SRO u/E/S Explanation Focus Dist. Link units ward KIA Only I 14 H 3 X :y Does not meet KA. No use of steam tables is required to answer S this question. Upon discussion wi licensee determined that steam tables would be required to determine if saturation conditions are present.

15 H 3 B Distractors are in wrong sequence. Should be low to high.

S Should use ~ symbol.

Changes made as noted above.

16 H 3 S MeetsKA.

Verify the logic is correct. Licensee verified.

17 H 3 B MeetsKA.

S Wouldn't one NI channel with AFD > allowable be more plausible for distractors C & D? (Since the stem specifically asks for the "minimum" number of channels using one as a distractor appears to provide better discriminatory value.)

Exam team reviewed, changed question as suggested, question to be re-validated based on change.

18 L 3 S MeetsKA.

19 H 3 S MeetsKA.

20 L 3 S MeetsKA.

21 L 2 B MeetsKA.

S Double jeopardy wi Q#25.

Why not put actual reason for pump radial brg for 2nd half of "C".

While both relate to Rep temperatures, there is enough difference, and these topics are of high enough importance that testing both on a single exam is not inappropriate.

Double jeopardy concern ruled out after discussing w/licensee.

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

Q# LOK LaD (F/H) (1-5) Stem Cues TIF Credo Partial Job- Minutia #1 Back- Q= SRO UIEIS Explanation Focus Dist. Link units ward KIA Only 22 H 3 S MeetsKA.

23 H 4 S MeetsKA.

24 H 3 X Ii: MeetsKA.

S Change "operate" to "open". Isn't "c" also correct lAW step 45 RNa of procedure and is an "action req'd?"

Changed to say "open". Verified that "c" is correct as written.

25 L 2 X Ii: MeetsKA.

S Distractor "D" double jeopardy wi Q#21.

Double jeopardy concern ruled out after discussing w/licensee.

L 2 S MeetsKA.

26 27 L 3 X :g MeetsKA.

S 180 degrees not plausible. Change to: "ONE 360 degree spray ring" or "BOTH 360 degree spray rings."

Changes made as noted above.

28 L 2 S MeetsKA.

29 H 3 S MeetsKA.

30 H 3 S MeetsKA.

31 H 2 S MeetsKA.

32* L 2 -8 MeetsKA.

Ii: This is marked as new. Need verification. Question changed to S modified upon review by licensee.

Verifybrkr designation. Procedure refers to brkrs as 24Al &

24C2.

For symmetry (since two distractors offer "deenergizing station service 480v busses" as an option) we used "MG set supply breakers at station service 480v busses" vice the specific mark numbers of the breakers. This terminology is acceptable and none of the validators were confused or had difficulty readinQ or

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

Q# LOK LOD (F/H) (1-5) Stem Cues TIP Credo Partial Job- Minutia #1 Back- Q= SRO U/E/S Explanation Focus Dist. Link units ward KIA Only understanding as worded.

Brkr designation verified. Question was mis-keyed in LXR and has been changed to "Modified".

33 L 3 B MeetsKA.

S Step 13b refers to the reset as "SR Block & Reset" vs.

Block/Reset.

Does this reset the P-IO interlock as referred in the Handout?

(Step 3.5 of student guide)

Made change to reset switch as noted above. The licensee will follow-up on handout to check for incomplete or erroneous info.

34 H 3 B MeetsKA.

S New? Verify. Licensee verified as new.

B & D do not seem very plausible for MCR Isol.

Should the stem say "Core reload in progress?"

Change to "Fuel Pool Bridge Area Hi HI alarms and then clears 3 minutes later." This will change the answer to ONLY CR Bottle Dump but make B more plausible.

No change necessary after discussion wi licensee. Containment can stay open during Refuel, therefore B & D are plausible.

35 H 3 B Meets KA. NOTE: No MAD vlvs at this site so modified S question to correlate to plant system.

Instead of saying the SD not available, give actual plant alarm or condition that relates to SD not available.

Question revised to eliminate first part of stem which in the context of the KA is essentially "window dressing". Question matches KA of ability to monitor automatic operation of the valves and extraneous wording in stem is eliminated.

36 H 3 X B MeetsKA.

S Is "c" plausible; is the App. R switch in the MCR?

Switch is in the MCR, therefore plausible.

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

Q# LOK LOD (FIR) (1-5) Stem Cues TIF Credo Partial Job- Minutia #1 Back- Q= SRO U/E/S Explanation Focus Dist. Link units ward KIA Only 37 H 3 X B MeetsKA.

S Is "B" plausible? Change wording to have action 1st (Stop quench spray pumps, continue ... ) to match other distractors.

Wording changed as suggested. "8" is a valid distractor.

38 L 2 S MeetsKA.

39 L 2 S MeetsKA.

40* H 3 g MeetsKA.

B New? Verify S Changed to modified as this is similar to bank.

41 H 3 S MeetsKA.

42 H 3 S MeetsKA.

43 L 3 g MeetsKA.

B Is the top part of the stem necessary to answer the question?

S Stem modified to include a realistic scenario for the situation along with the information of operational mode (which is necessary to answer the question correctly). This simplifies the question presentation and avoids confusion.

44 L 2 S MeetsKA.

45 H 3 S MeetsKA.

46 L 2 S MeetsKA.

Is the top part of the stem necessary to answer the question?

Yes. Information must be provided the ECST is NOT intact, otherwise 8 & C could be argued as potentially correct responses.

47 H 3 S MeetsKA.

Should the pump titles be included?

Licensee stated that it is NOT necessary. This is the terminology used at NAPS.

---

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

Q# LOK LOD (F/H) (1-5) Stem Cues TIF Credo Partial Job- Minutia #/ Back- Q= SRO UIE/S Explanation Focus Dist. Link units ward KIA Only 48 H 3 .g MeetsKA.

.g LOK is L, this is memory.

S LOK changed to "L".

49 H 2 S MeetsKA.

50 H 3 S MeetsKA.

51 L 2 X .g ,

MeetsKA.

S Reword distractors to read as complete sentences.

Move D to C (longest to shortest)

Should "B" say: if the other brker is closed the one that was closed will open?

The choices have been reworded.

52* L 2 X .g MeetsKA.

S Add "diesel" after Lister in stem. Should be "the" manual on B

& D. Change A & B distractor to say "will run" vs "runs". This is marked as a new question but the exact same question is attached. Distractor "C" seems incomplete, when air press drops to what?

Licensee agreed with comments and made appropriate changes.

Also changed to "modified".

53* II 3 .g MeetsKA.

L .g This seems to be more of a memory question, ie. "L" LOK.

S This is a new question?

Changed LOK to 'L". Changed to bank.

54 L 3 S MeetsKA.

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

Q# LOK LOD (F/H) (1-5) Stem Cues TIF Credo Partial Job- Minutia #1 Back- Q= SRO u/E/S Explanation Focus Dist. Link units ward KIA Only 55 L 2 .g MeetsKA.

S Swap C & D. Longest to shortest.

NOTE: Symmetrical alignment of distractors were deferred for this exam to minimize the impact on exam submittal.

56 H 3 S MeetsKA.

This is a new question?

Licensee verified as new.

57 H 3 S Meets KA.

58 L 3 .g Meets KA.

S Remove periods at the end of all bulleted items.

Does the VR have an AUTO position or should it say "ON"?

Change distractor "A" to say "continuously lower Base Adjust" and change stem to say "lAW the procedure". This will make "A" a correct statement but is not lAW with the procedure.

Licensee noted that AUTO is the commonly used terminology although the switch position is "ON". No other changes required.

59 L 2 S MeetsKA.

60* H 3 .g MeetsKA.

S Listed as modified. Original question not enclosed as required.

Upon review of the original question. Modified criteria is met.

61 L 3 .g MeetsKA.

S Rearrange short to long distractors.

D distractor is not symmetrical. Reword to say: An ORANGE path does NOT exist for containment Press and Cont. Sump Level: and reorder distractors shortest to longest.

Distractor order not changed see NOTE on 055. Distractor D re-worded as suggested.

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

Q# LOK LOD (FIR) (1-5) Stem Cues TIF Credo Partial Job- Minutia #1 Back- Q= SRO U/E/S Explanation Focus Dist. Link units ward KIA Only 62 H 3 X B MeetsKA.

S Move C distractor to A.

C distractor is not symmetrical. Needs to be rewritten to align wi other choices.

Distractor D rewritten, question symmetry is improved and distractor remains valid.

63* L 2 X B MeetsKA.

S Change stem to combination of 12 & 8 hrs shift to make D more plausible.

Modified - Where is original question?

At NAPS, operators (including off-shift personnel who maintain an active license) only work 12 hour1.388889e-4 days <br />0.00333 hours <br />1.984127e-5 weeks <br />4.566e-6 months <br /> shifts, thus working an eight hour period is not an alternative.

This is a BANK question. This question was replaced during validation and LXR was not updated; LXR Source has been updated to "Bank".

64 H 3 B MeetsKA.

S Get rid of periods at end of bullets. Rearrange from shortest to longest. Reword "A" to match other choices. "The limit for RCS op leakage has NOT been exceeded".

Wording of distractors changed as suggested.

65 L 3 B MeetsKA.

S Change order so weekly is 1st.

Wording of Distractor A changed as suggested.

66 L 3 B MeetsKA.

S Should the stem say "Functional" vs Operable to match TRM?

Is procedure NOTE written correctly?

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

Q# LOK LOD (F/H) (1-5) Stem Cues T/F Credo Partial Job- Minutia #1 Back- Q= SRO U/E/S Explanation Focus Dist. Link units ward KIA Only I Changed to Functional as suggested to match TRM wording. Procedure still says "operable" since for quite some time the term operable was used relatively synonymously with functional. The procedure hasn't been changed yet since this is considered an administrative update and will be done the next time a revision to the procedure is required.

67 L 3 B MeetsKA.

S Add "a" Rad Worker, to the stem.

Changed as suggested.

68 L 2 B MeetsKA.

S Add "the" indication, in the stem.

Changed as suggested.

69 L 3 B MeetsKA.

S Add "an" to C & D and rearrange longest to shortest.

Changed as suggested. Distractor order not changed per NOTE on Q55.

70 L 2 B MeetsKA.

S Move A&C shortest to longest. Distractor order not changed per NOTE on Q55.

71* H 3 S Meets KA.

Modified, where's original question? Upon review, the licensee changed to "BANK".

72 H 3 B MeetsKA.

S Move D to C for symmetry. Distractor order not changed per NOTE on Q55.

73 H 3 B MeetsKA.

-- ---

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

Q# LOK LOD (FIH) (1-5) Stem Cues TIP Credo Partial Job- Minutia #/ Back- Q= SRO UIE/S Explanation Focus Dist. Link units ward KIA Only S Move D to A for symmetry. Distractor order not changed per NOTE on Q55.

Modified, where's original question?

74 H 3 B MeetsKA.

S Move D to B or move A to C for symmetry. No periods at end of bullets. Distractor order not changed per NOTE on Q55.

75 B MeetsKA.

S Move D to C. Distractor order not changed per NOTE on Q55.

Modified, where's original question?

Original question reviewed. Question meets modified criteria.

I 38 Sats 3 Unsats 34 Enhancement

ES-401, Rev. 9 North Anna 2009-301 SRO Retake Written Examination Review Worksheet Form ES-401-9

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

Q# LOK LOD (F/H) (1-5) SRO I U/E/S Explanation Focus Only Instructions

[Refer to Section D ofES-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 ifajob content error is identified:

• The question is not linked to the job requirements (i.e., the question has a valid KIA but, as written, is not operational in content).

• The question requires the recall of knowledge that is too specific for the closed reference test mode (i.e., it is not required to be known from memory).

• The question contains data with an unrealistic level of accuracy or inconsistent units (e.g., panel meter in percent with question in gallons).

• The question requires reverse logic or application compared to the job requirements.

5. Check questions that are sampled for conformance with the approved KIA and those that are designated SRO-only (KIA and license level mismatches are unacceptable).

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

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

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

Q# LOK LOD (F/H) (1-5) Stem Cues TIF Credo Partial Job- Minutia #1 Back- Q= SRO UiE/S Explanation Focus Dist. Link units ward KIA Only Rev 1 shown in green H 3 X B 1) Appears to meet the KA 76 S 2) Do we need to put a time line as to how long it took to get to 23% PZR lvl? Not necessary

3) What make this SRO only? Licensee stated: We would not expect an RO to know the procedure to this level of detail.

H 3 S 1) Appears to meet the KA 77 L 3 X .y 1) Does not meet the KA.

78 S Should be LCO 3.1.4.A not 3.1.6.B.

Licensee stated: Original KA was similar to previous audit & NRC exam.

(Look at changing KA or resampling)

New question written. Meets KA.

L 3 X X B 1) Appears to meet the KA 79 S ~) Remove "App R" statement from B&D.

H 3 .y 1) Does not meet the KA.

80 S Has nothing to do with Non-nuclear Instrumentation.

After discussing wi licensee, this is SAT.

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

Q# LOK LOD (F/H) (1-5) Stem Cues T/F Credo Partial Job- Minutia #1 Back- Q= SRO U/E/S Explanation Focus Dist. Link units ward KIA Only H 3 X II 1) Appears to meet the KA 81 S ~) Change the stem to: "Which ONE of the following identifies the valve manipulations required to align a boration flowpath lAW the procedure in effect due to the given plant conditions?"

h .1 . t. . UQ n 1 . *t. ,.1. .++Q .*1-

'~:;:"HUJ 'J.~ '",

!" 1',D 1- *1.

,.1: .t. .t.

-.tT '", "J

.1,

.+.('1 >J

. UP Q 1 ,I,. h ,,1. -1 . A

~o -0' 'J: . "'1' iAgreed wi licensee that this requires SRO knowledge to

~scertain and therefore choice A&B are still plausible.

H 3 S 1) Appears to meet the KA 82 H 3 II 1) Appears to meet the KA 83 S 2) Why not use FR-P.2 vs. FR-P.l as a distractor?

(Licensee will determine if this change is appropriate and revalidate.)

3) Changes made as noted above.

H 3 II 1) Appears to meet the KA 84 S ")\ T, Pr'Q D. ,.1,,.1 * ,t. ,,/

"J

3) Gan Meae 13e ehangea te Meae ;6 te make ffiefe eegftip.'e ef ehange eeftaitiefts te ha"fe a =1= Ml=G+

H 3 II 1) Appears to meet the KA 85 S Should B&C be rewritten to have the procedure 1st to prevent possible confusion over procedure hierarchy?

(Licensee will determine if this change is appropriate and revalidate.)

Changes made as noted above.

--- -- -- - '-- - -

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

Q# LOK LOD (F/H) (1-5) Stem Cues TIF Credo Partial Job- Minutia #1 Back- Q= SRO U/E/S Explanation Focus Dist. Link units ward KIA Only H 3 X E 1) Appears to meet the KA 86 S ~) 2nd part of A&B is not plausible.

Suggest the license add another component in a different flow path as inop (TS allows separate condition entries) and change iA&B distractor to 8 hrs.

lBased upon further review and in part on the licensees input that

~uring validation, 2 SROs chose distractor A or B, this question

• s SAT as written.

H 3 S 1) Appears to meet the KA 87 H 3 X :y 88 1) Appears to meet the KA S ~) A,B&D are also correct lAW AP-3l Could add additional info into the stem that must be diagnosed as to why the B Condensate pump could not be manually started. (Hi Ht lvI, loss of bus, xconnected to Ul with SI signal, etc.) Still need 2 additional distractors. Could also add motor amps as distractor.

Licensee confirms that there is only one correct choice based on actual system response. Stated that Ops Mgt supports this resolution and would confirm that there is only one correct answer.

L 3 S 1) Appears to meet the KA 89 H 3 E 1) Appears to meet the KA 90 S 2) Subsequent RCP start is based on temp> 1200 F. "not increasing". Give a temperature value instead of saying its still increasing or CETCs have not changed.

Licensee changed the distractor to say that CETC temperature remains the same after the 1st RCP is started. They will also revalidate this question.

H 3 S 1) Appears to meet the KA 91

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

Q# LOK LOD (FIR) (1-5) Stem Cues TIP Credo Partial Job- Minutia #1 Back- Q= SRO U/E/S Explanation Focus Dist. Link units ward KIA Only L 2 X lJ I) Appears to meet the KA 92 S ~) Is not SRO Only lReplace the KA if another SRO Only question can not be written o address grid instabilities.

New question written that meets KA.

L 3 B I) Appears to meet the KA 93 S 2) Distractor B&C plausibility not provided.

3) Suggested to possibly change distractors B&C to "MODE 3 for 2 hrs followed by a 6 hr cooldown "

This change would make the distractor to close to the actual TS and since this question must be answered from memory, it is easonable to leave distractors B&C as is.

H 3 S I) Appears to meet the KA 94 L 3 B 1) Appears to meet the KA 95 S 2) Why is two part question needed?

Licensee changed to a one part question and revalidated.

H 4 X B 1) Appears to meet the KA 96 S 2) Is two part question necessary? Yes for plausible distractors.

Licensee will change A&B to say a 50.59 review is NOT equired. This will improve symmetry of distractors and plausibility.

PfeeeEffiFe step ~ .~.~.e inlfllies that the ~Q.~9 flfeeeEffiFe dees net 8pflly in this situatien. If se, eerreet anS'llef is net-l).;

---

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

Q# LOK LaD (FIR) (1-5) Stem Cues TIP Credo Partial Job- Minutia #/ Back- Q= SRO UIE/S Explanation Focus Dist. Link units ward KIA Only L J S 1) Appears to meet the KA 97*

2 ~) LaD is 2

~) 1st part of question is on the 2008 RO exam (Q#5)

Licensee will change LaD to 2 and verify if there are any additional NRC exam question repeats from the previous 2 NRC exams.

H 4 S 1) Appears to meet the KA 98 L 3 S 1) Appears to meet the KA 99 H 3 S 1) Appears to meet the KA 100

2) Are A&C plausible? They are cued in the stem that they are in the process of establishing bleed & feed. Is trying to establish a SG feed source while depressurizing the SG plausible at this point?

A&C are plausible as written. During validation, A&C were chosen by the staff. These paths are still pursued by the I

I procedure but they should not stop at these steps for the vonditions given.

19 Sats 2 Unsats 4 Enhancement

ES-401 Written Examination Quality Checklist Form ES-401-6 cility: North Anna Units 1 & 2 Date of Exam: 02/1 0/09 Exam Level: RO 0 SROIZ]

Initial Item

1. and answers are accurate and to the facil

2. a. NRC KlAs are referenced for all questions.

3.

4. The sampling process was random and systematic (If more than 4 RO or 2 SRO questions were from the last 2

5. Question duplication from the license screening/audit exam was controlled as indicated below (check the item that applies) and appears appropriate:

_ the audit exam was systematically and randomly developed; or

_ the audit exam was completed before the license exam was started; or

_ the examinations were developed independently; or V' the licensee certifies that there is no duplication; or

_ other (explain)

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

7. Between 50 and 60 percent of the questions on the RO exam are written at the comprehension/ analysis level; the SRO exam may exceed 60 percent if the randomly selected KlAs support the higher cognitive enter

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

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

10. Question n<:"rhnm ..triil" and format meet the idelines in ES Don,n"r,n,y B.

11. The exam contains the required number of one-point, multiple choice items; Date

a. Author I-zg -'Zus:,

b. Facility Reviewer (*)

c. NRC Chief Examiner (#)

d. NRC Regional Supervisor Note:

ES-401, Page 29 of 33

ES-403 Written Examination Grading Form ES-403-1 Quality Checklist Facility: North Anna Units 1 & 2 Date of Exam: 02/10109 Exam Level: Ro0 SRo0 Initials Item Description abc

1. Clean answer sheets copied before grading

2. Answer key changes and question deletions justified and documented

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

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

5. All other failing examinations checked to ensure that grades are justified

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

a. Grader

b. Facility Reviewer(*) J,-l J--)tjd9

c. NRC Chief Examiner (*) ;i-19 lo07 r

2Lv't/o 9

d. NRC Supervisor (*) aZ/~/",

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

ES-403, Page 5 of 5