ML051260435

Various Checklists for the Duane Arnold Initial Examination - Jan/Feb 2005

ML051260435
Person / Time
Site:	Duane Arnold
Issue date:	03/31/2005
From:	Hironori Peterson NRC/RGN-III/DRS/OLB
To:	Nuclear Management Co
Shared Package
ML050800491	List: ML051260422 ML051260435 ML051260437 ML051260439
References
50-331/05-301 50-331/05-301
Download: ML051260435 (26)

Text

VARIOUS CHECKLISTS FOR THE DUANE ARNOLD INITIAL EXAMINATION JANlFEB 2005

ES-201 Examination Preparation Checklist Form ES-201-1 Target Chief Date' Task Description / Reference Examiner's Initials

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

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

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

-120 4. Corporate notification letter sent (C.2.d) 9/14/04w

[-go] [5. Reference material due (C.1.e; C.3.c)l NIA 1 -75 1 6. Integrated examination outline(s) due (C.1.e & f; C.3.d) I 11/4/04 &

1 -70 I 7. Examination outline(s) reviewed by NRC and feedback provided to facilitv licensee (C.2.h: C.3.e) I 11/9/04 &

/

8. Proposed examinations, supporting documentation, and 12/13-17/94 reference materials due (C.1.e, f. g & h; C.3.d) e 1 -30 I 9. Preliminary license applications due (C.1.I; C.2.g; ES-202) 1 C ~ & 9 u1 -I4

-I4 I

IO. Final license applications due and assignment sheet prepared (C.l .I; C.2.g; ES-202)

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

I[ I -&

~ ~~~ ~

-14 L 2 . Examinations reviewed withfacilitiicensee (C.1.j; C.2.f 8 h; C.3.g)

~~~~ ~ ~

Written examinations and operating tests approved by NRC supervisor (C.2.i; C.3.h) 1 -7 1 14. Final applications reviewed; assignment sheet updated; waiver letters sent (C.2.a. ES-204)

15. Proctoringlwritten exam administration guidelines reviewed with facility licensee and authorization granted to give written exams (if applicable) (C.3.k)

16. Approved scenarios, job performance measures, and questions distributed to NRC examiners (C.3.i) 2dP

• Target dates 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 to examinations prepared by the NRC.

p 1 ,I Examination Seck, Ity Agreement Form ES-,JG

1. Pre-Examination IahwkdgethatI haveacquireds~l~edknchvkigeabouttheNRClcensingexamina~nsscheduledfwtheweek(s)of of my signature. Ia g that~ I will not knmingty divulge any ihfmmkm about k s e examinakmsto any perjonswho have understand that Iam not to insbxt evaluate or proMe pemXmance feedbadc to tkse applicants scheduled to be administered these licensing examinatonsfrwn this date until cornpieton of examinatonadminisbation, except as spxkalty noted below and authmizd by the NRC. F u r t h e m , I am aware of the physical security measures and requirements (asdocumented in the facility lcensee's procedures) and understand that W o n of the condihns of this agreement may resuN in cancelrnn ofthe examinatons andlor an enforcement &on against me or the f a d l i licensee. Iwill immediately repwt to facility management wthe NRC c h i examiner any indkahs OT suggestiw that examinaton secunty may have been comprwnised.

2. Post-Examination Tothebestofmyknchvkige, Id~notdivulgetoanyu~utho~edperjonsanyin~nmncemingtheNRClcensingexamin~administeredduring the week(s) of d a N - t & y3 I ,2cw5 . From the date that Ie n t a d into this secunty agreement untilthe compktbn of examinakm adminkbah, I dd not in&@ evaluate, or p m d e p f c f m n & feedbedc to those applicants who were administeredh s e licensing examinations,except as specmCaliy noted below and authorized by the NRC.

DATE SIGNATURE (2) DATE NOTE 1.

2.

3.

4.

@e 5.

P 6.

7.

6.

9.

10.

11.

12.

13.

14.

15.

NOTES:

of 25 File: NUREG-1021 Drafi Rev 9 Form ES-201-3.doc Page 1 of Y 25 NUREG-1021, Draft Revision 9 ZaL PL3he.T / U d . W *%

JES9bt Examination Secb.,ity Agreement Form E S - d Q

1. Pre-Examination I xkn-e that Ihave acquired spxml& k n W g e about the NRC licensing examinabons scheduled fcfthe&(s) of ?,.,,,..VI, 31. 2009 asofthedate of my signature I agree that I will not knowingly divulge anyn-i about t?eseexaminahs to any personswho have not been adbmed by the NRC chief examiner I understand that I am not to in- evaluate or p v k k pemXmancefeedbadc to those applcants scheduled to be administwedthese licensing examinabnsfrom this date untilm p l e b n of examination adminkbath, except as specmCally noted below and authcfied by the NRC. F u r t h e m , Iam aware of the physical secunty measuresand requirements(asdocumented in the facility licensee's procedures) and undentand that vidation of the cmdlbons of this agreement may resuk in cancellationof the examinabns and/or an enforcement &n against me cr the facility licensee. I will immediately report to k i l i management or the NRC chief examiner any indkahs or suggeshs that examinabn secunty may have been compmtied.

2. Post-Examination Tothebestofmyknml~xlge,I dd notdwlgetoanyunauthorizedpersonsanyinhbn mncwningtheNRClicensirgexaminahsadrninkteredduringthe week(s) of L M , . # U 31, d m l , - . From the date ttwt I entered into thi secunty agreement untilt h e m p l e h of examinah adminislmlbn, Idd not insbuct. evaluate, or m v d e Dehnnancefeedbadt to those applicants

.. who WE administeredthese licensing.examinatbns, except as specmCally noted below and authorized by the NRC.

JOB TITLE /

PRINTED NAME SIGNATURE (1) DATE SIGNATURE (2) DATE NOTE RESPONSIBILITY 25 of 25 NUREG-1021, Draft Revision 9 File NUREG-1021 Drafl Rev 9 Form ES-201-3.doc Page 2 of 9

/ES-2L, Examination Secb; ity Agreement Form E S - - J ~

1. Pre-Examination I xkndedge that I have acquired Spedaliized knowledge abut the NRC licensing examinabons scheduled for the &(s) ,

of ,&w 3/. a c asofthedate of my signature. I agree that I will not knowingly divulge any ihbmabm abut theseexaminakms to any p e ~ n whos have not been auth& by the NRC c h iexaminer I understandthat Iam not to insbuct evaluate, (x pmvde -we feedbadc to those appliink scheduled to be administwed these licensingexaminakms from U?is date uno1o a n p k n of examinabnadminisbafion,except as specmCally noted below and authcnized by the NRC. F u r t h e m , I am aware of the physicalm n t y measures and requirements (asdocumented in the fadllty licensees procedures)and understand that tolation of the condins of this agreement may result in cancellabon of the examinabns andlor an enforcement acbon against me or the tadlii licensee. Iwill immedihtetyreport to fad11management (x the NRC c h i examiner any i n d m n s or suggestbns that examinakm m n t y may have been compromised.

2. Post-Examination Tothe of E ofmykrowledge, Idd notdwlgetoanyunauthomed pe~nsanyinformationmingtheNRCliinsingexaminahsadministeredduring

31. 200 the week(s)

. From the date that I entered into this m n t y agreement untilthe mplebon of examinationadminishah, Idd not instmct evaluate, orpro\ndeperfomiancefeedbedctothoseappllcanhwho\nrweadministeredtheselicensingewminafiw, exceptasspeaficallynoted below and authorized by the NRC.

JOB TITLE I PRINTED NAME SIGNATURE (1) DATE SIGNATURE (2) DATE NOTE RESPONSIBILITY File. NUREG-IO21 Drafl Rev 9 Form ES-201-3.doc Page 3 of L 25 of 25 NUREG-1021, Draft Revision 9 34

D M -k WC, Examination SecL, r y Agreement Form ES- ..tq

1. Pre-Examination

. a-I I-ethat Ihave acquired speciald k n m e about the NRC licensing e x a m i m s c h e d u fortheweek(s)

~ of e 3/ 4 asofthedate of my signabre. I agree that Iwill rot knmingiy divulge any infcmabn abut these examinas to any perronswho have not been authaizbd by the NRC chef examiner. I understand that I am not to in- evaluate, or pmvide performancefeedback to those applicants scheduled to be administered these licensing examin- from this date until mmplebn of examinabn adminktaton, except as specmCaliy noted b e h and authorized by the NRC. F u r t h e m , I am aware ofthe physical secunty measures and requirements(asdocumented in the facility licensees procedures)and understand that w!ation of the m d m n s of this agreement may resuk in oncellatbnof the examinabns andlor an enforcement acbon against me or the facility licensee I will immedi&iy report to k i l i t y manqf%ent (x the NRC chief examiner any indkalions(x suggestonsthat examination secunty may have been compromised.

2. Post-Examination of ,/A& 2 Tothebestofm knowledge, I nddivulgetoanyunauthomed personsanyinfoimabnconcemingtheNRClicensingexaminabnsadministeredduringthe week@)

J r d 5 . Fromthe date that I entered into this secunty agreement until the m m p l e h of examinabn adrninisb?ltion, Idkl not insbud evaluate, crpro\ndeperfo ncefeedbadctothoseappllcantswhowereadministeredthesel~nsingexamina~,exceptasspeafmllynoted below and authorized by the NRC.

PRINTED NAME SIGNATURE ( 1 ) DATE SIGNATUREP) DATE NOTE File: NUREG-IO21 Drafl Rev 9 Form ES-201-3.doc Page cf of 4 25 of 25 NUREG-1021, Draft Revision 9

2. Post-Examhation

- _ ~

25 of 25 NUREG-1021, Draft Revision 9 Flb: MIREG1021 Drat Rev 9 Fwm ES-2019.dac

W 5 PRINTED W E JOBTITLEI REsWNsIBlLITY SIGNATURE (1) DATE SIGNATURE(2) DATE NOTE 2'

c 1.

2.

V w 3.

n Y 4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

8.

10.

14.

15.

NOTES:

Page 3 of L 25 of25 NUREG-1021, Dran Revision 0

ES-301 Operating Test Quality Checklist Form ES-301-3 Facility: flflec Date of Examination: 01/3?/dg Operatin rest Number:

1. General Crlterla a The operat ng test conforms w l h the previous y approved odtline changes are cons stenl wltn Samp mg reqJ iements (e g 10 CFR 55 45. operational lmponance safely fdnct On oistr bition) b There s no nay-lo-aay repel t on oetween 1n.s and other operat ng tests 10 ne adm nistered d d n g I n s examlnat.0n C Tne operat ng test Shal not OLplicale tems horn tne applicants aLo t lest(s) (see Seaon D 1 a )

d Overlap warnme wT.lten examinat on an0 oetween different pans of the operat ng test s wlln n acceptaole limits e It appears that me operat ng test w I different ate between competent ana less-Ihan-competent applicants at the oes gnatea cense eve1

2. Walk-Through Crlterla a Each .PM inc does the lollowng as appl cable nitla, cond lions

• n I ating cJes references and tools InC d n g aSSOC ate0 proceaLres reasonan e and va. datw tome iim115 (average lime a1.0we0 lor cOmp etlon) ana Specfc oes gnation I aeemed to De I me-cr tical oy the faci. ly kensee

• operat onally important specfc performance criteria tnat .nclLoe

- deta. ed expected act On5 wlth exact cnterla ana nomenclature

- system response and other examiner cJes

- statemene aescnaong mponant ObSemationS 10 De maae Dy the a w l can1

- cr ter a for s~ccessfd.comp elion of the taS6

- ident fcatlon of cri1.ca Steps ana the r associated peflormance standards

- restr ctions on tne seqLence 01 steps. f applicable a Ensue inat any changes from tne prev OJS y approvea systems and adm.nistrat ve walr-1hroJgn 04ines (Forms ES.301-1 and 2) have not ca~sedhe test 10 deviate from any of tne acceptance criteua (e g item dlStrion on oan* dse repetition from the last 2 NRC exam.nalions) spec fed on lnose forms and Form ES-201-2

3. Slmulator Crlterla The assoc aled sm.lator operat ng tests (Scenario sets) have Deen rev.ewed n accoroance w.tn Form ES-3014 and a copy s attacned a AJtnOl

b. Facility Reviewerr)

c. NRC Chief Examiner (9

d. NRC Supervisor@,&

-,_.- - U NOTE:

• The facility Signature is not applicable for NRCdevelopeU tests.

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

% hkL-Lp%ypw!.

ES-301, Page 24 of 27

ES-301 Simulator Scenario Quality Checklist Form ES-301-4 QUALITATIVE ATTRIBUTES 1 1tie tnitial mndl,orn are reaIs1.c tn lhal m e equipment andm instnrmerdation may be CUI 01 s?rwce but 1 d m n d cue Ihe opcraton into expected events

/ The Scenarios comisl mo511y of related events 3

Each event descriptim CMSists of the pdnt in the scenario when it is to be initiated the malfunction(s) that are entered to initiate the event

.. the symptanslcues that will be visible to the crew the expected operata actims (by shin position) the event termination point (if applicable) 4 ho more lhan one non-mechamsltclailure (e.g , pipe break) is intolpmled irdothe scenallo wthwl a credible preceding mcdent sdch as a selsmc eved 5 The events are vale with regard lo physics and t h e m o d ~ a m c 3 (3- Lf 4 6 Seqbencing and tirmng of events IS reasonable. and allows the examination learn 10 OMaln complete evalualion resuns mmensurale wlh the scena110 objectrves.

7. Iftime compression techniques are used, the scenario summary clearly so indicates.

operators have sumieri time to carry out expected activities without undue time constraints.

Cues are given.

I dfiI (/1 I , . I ..

8. The simulata modeliw is nd anered. la17 I,@

I I I 9 The scenarios have been vatidaled Punuard Io 10 CFR 55 4qd) any Open Slmulala perlonnance derziencin 01 denatums ( r a n the rekrenced plard have been evalualed to ern.re that fundimal fidelity 1s maintained while WMlng Ihe planned scenarms IO Every operala mll be evaluatcd using at least one new OT signhcanlly modified SCeMno AI, dner scenarios have been anered In acmdance wlth SeC(i0n 0 5 of ES 301

11. All individual operator canpetencies can be evaluated. as verified using Form ES-301-6 (submit the f a m almg with Vle Simulator scenarios).

12. Each applicant will be slpnificantly invdved in the minimuw number of transients and events h specified on Fam, ES-301-5 (submit the form with the simulata scenarios).

ES-301, Page 25 of 27

0 I

3-301 Transient and Event Checklist Form ES-301-5 iacility: DAEC Date of Exam: 01/31/05 Operating Test No.: 2005-01 Scenarios 1.x; I ESG 2 ESG 3 w Pnsitio __ Crew Pnsitin ( w POSltlC -BOP N ATC 1 BOP SRO ATC BOP SRO ATC f _-I

-L -

E- I E-3 lIC  :-2 E-5

-4 E-6 E-9

__ E-8 1-7 f

- __ BOP SRO ATC BOP ATC BOP E-7 E- I I E-6 E-8

- ___ -- BOP ATC BOP ATC Tf E-7

~

E-3 E-I I - t-T E-5 E-2 E-6 E-4 E-n E-6 E-7

~

E-7 g-

Instructions:

I. Circle the applicant level and enter the operating test number and Form ES-D-I event numbers controls (ATC) and the balance-of-plant (BOP) positions; Instant SROs must do one scenario.

including at least two instrument or component (IiC) malfunctions and one major transient, in the ATC position.

2. Reactivity manipulations may be conducted under normal or controlled abnormal conditions (refer to Section D.5.d) but must be significant per Section C.2.a pf Appendix D. *Reactivity and normal evolutions may be replaced with additional instrument or component malfunctions on a 1 fro-l basis

3. whenever practical, both instrument and component malfunctions should be included; only those that require verifiable actions that provide insight to the applicants competence count toward the NRC Reviewer

3-301 Transient and Event Checklist Form ES-301-5

-t I

A v Scenarios P E P N ESG 1 I_ T Crew Position I

C SRO ATC BOP A Y N P T E Rx E- 1

<O NOR l1C E-2 E4 RO SRC

\IJ tltl NOR E-3 E-5 E-6 MAJ E-7

Instructions:

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

2. Reactivity manipulations may be conducted under normal or controlled abnormal conditions (refer to Section D.5.d) but must be significant per Section C.2.a pf Appendix D. *Reactivity and normal evolutions may be replaced with additional instrument or component malfunctions on a Ifro-l basis

3. whenever practical, both instrument and component malfunctions should be included; only those that require verifiable actions that provide insight to the applicants competence count toward the minimum requirement.

Author:

NRC Reviewer

1 ES-301 Competencies Checklist Form ES-301-6 Facility Dc~ EC Date of Examination: 6 1 /3I / r c o s Operating Test NO: 2.30s - 0 7 I

• I APPLICANTS Competencies Scenario Scenario Scenario 3 3 i 2 2 3 Interprethliagnose E-2, E-4. E-3, E-5, E-2, E-4, E-3, E-4, E-3, E-4, E-2, E-3, Events and  :-7 E-8 E-6, E-8, E-5, E-6, E-5, E-6, E-5, E-6, E-4, E-5, Conditions E-9 E-1, E-8 E-7, E-8, E-7, E-8, E-6, E-7, E-9 E-8, E-9 E-9 E-8, E-9 Comply with and E-2, E-4. E-1, E-3: E-1, E-2, E-1, E-2, E-I, E-2, E-I, E-2, Use Procedures ( I ) E-1, E-8. E-5, E-6, E-3, E-4, E-3, E-4, E-3, E-4, E-3, E-4, E-8, E-9 E-8, E-9 E-5, E-6, E-5, E-6, E-5, E-6, E-5 E-6, E-7, E-8 E-I, E-8, E-1, E-8, E-1, E-8, E-9 E-9 E-9 Operate Control E-2, E-4. E-1, E-3, Boards (2) E-1, E-8 E-5, E-6, E-8. E-9 Communicate and E-2, E-4. E-], E-3, E- I , E-2, E-I, E-2, E-], E-2, E- I , E-2, Interact E-1, E-8 E-5, E-6, E-3, E-4, E-3, E-4, E-3, E-4, E-3, E-4, 5-8 E-8, E-9 E-5, E-6, E-5, E-6, E-5, E-6, E-5 E-6, E-1, E-8 E-7, E-8, E-1, E-8, E-1, E-8, E-9 E-9 E-9 T

Demonstrate E-1, E-2, E-I, E-2, E-I, E-2, E-1, E-2, supervisory Ability E-3, E-4, E-3, E-4, E-3, E-4, E-3, E-4, E-5, E-6, E-5, E-6, E-5, E-6, E-5 E-6, (3)

E-1, E-8 E-1, E-8, E-1, E-8, E-1, E-8, E-9 E-9 E-9 Comply With and E-2 E-3, E-4, E-3, E-4, E-3, E-4, Use Tech. Specs. E-5 E-5 E-6 E-5 E-6 (3)

Notes:

(I) Includes Technical Specification compliance for RO.

(2) Optional for an SRO-U.

(3) Only applicable to SROs I Instructions:

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

Author:

NRC Reviewer

ES-401 Written Examination Quality Checklist Form ES-401-6 Date of Exam: 0' /3r/20a5 Exam L e v e l : m I W 1 10. Question psychometric quality and format meet the guidelines in ES Appendix E.

The exam conlains Ine reqd red n m b e r of one-Po nl m.. lip e CnOiCe items 11 Ihe total IS correct and agrees min ine "alae on me cover sneei Pr nted Flame I Signaidre Dale

a. Author

b. Facility Reviewer r)

c. NRC Chief Examiner (#)

d. NRC Regional Supervisor Note: + The facility reviewer's initialslsignature are not applicable for NRC-developed examinations.

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

f pt-*

ES-401, Page 29 of 33

~

s-401 Generic Knawledgeand A b i l i Outline-@iir 3) Form ES-401; Facility: DAEC Date of Exam: 01/31/2005 RO SRO-Only Category WA# Topic

1. I #

2.1.3 Knowledge of shift turnover practices. (CFR: 41.10 / 45.13) 3.0 1 Ability to coordinate personnel activities w k i d e the control rwm.

2, (CFR 45.5 / 45.12 145.13) 3.8 1 Ability to recognize indications for system operating parameters which

1. 2.1.33 are enby-level conditions for technical specifications. (CFR: 43.2 / 3.4 1 Conduct of 43.3 145.3)

Operations 2.1.

2.1.

2.1.

Subtotal 3 Knowledge of surveillance procedures. (CFR: 41.10 145.13) 2,2,12 3.0 1 Knowledge of RO duties n the control rwm ounng fuel nandlmg sJch as alarms from h e hand .ng area / commun catoon w m fuel norage 2.2.30 faoliw / *ems owrated from conm room In sawn of faellno 3.5 1

2. obratibns/ and supporting instrumentation. (CFR: 45.12) -

Equipment 2.2.

Control 2.2.

I Subtotal 12.3.2 I Knowledge of facility AIARA program. (CFR: 41.12 143.4 145.9 I t n\ I 2.5 I 1 1 23 Know a g e of rad abon exposue I nuts ana contam nation mntro 1nc-a ng PeTtn.SS.Qle levels ,n excess of those aJmorua. (CFR.43.4

, 242.5 1 3.

Radiation Control 4.

Emergency Procedures I Plan 2.4.

Subtotal 3 Tier 3 Point Total 10 7 ES-401, Page 26 of 33 Page1 of 1 I

ES-401 Record of Rejected WAS Form ES401-4 Tier I Randomly Group Selected K/A Reason for Rejection Emergency High Reactor Pressure was combined with "ability to determine RO andlor interpret the following as they apply to High Reactor Pressure: Reactor Question l2 Tier 1 295025 water level". A Search of industry questions showed that some plants must Group 1 pressure compensate for water level indicators. Operators at DAEC do not E M .06 adjust RPV level for high reactor pressure. Randomly selected another E M ,

EAZ.01, Reactor Pressure as a replacement.

Emergency High Torus Water Temperature was combined with Knowledge of interrelations with Torus Spray. Normally, initiation of Torus Spray at DAEC is RO Question not dependent on Torus Water Temperature. NPSH limits might apply if Torus Tier 1 295026 Group 1 EK2.02 very hot, >190°. An SRO might be asked to interpret the NPSH EOP curves, but this is not a major EOP breakpoint suitable for ROs. Randomly selected another E D , EK2.01, as a replacement.

Reactor Low Level (Emergency) was combined with generic ability to perform immediate actions without procedures. The resulting question conflicted with RO Question l6 Tier 1 the Low Level (Abnormal) question in TlG2. Also, at the emergencylEOP 295031 stage of this transient, there would be no immediate operator actions.

Group 1 2.4.49 Randomly selected another Generic, 2.1.32, Ability to apply system limits and precautions, as a replacement.

RO Question 19 Plant Fire on site was combined with the knowledge of fire fighting equipment Tier 1 600000 used on each class of fire. Resulting questions had low discriminatory value.

Group 2 AA1.08 Randomly selected another AA1, AA1.05. as a replacement.

Abnormal High Drywell Temperature was combined with system generic RO Question 24 "knowledge of the purpose and function of major system components and Tier 1 295012 controls". Since a High Drywell temperature event does not have components Group 2 2.1.28 or controls, it would not be possible to write a question about their purpose and function. Randomly selected another Generic, 2.1.33, as a replacement.

Secondary Containment high DP was combined with "Knowledge of the reasons for the following responses as they apply to Secondary Containment RO Question "

high DP: Blow out panel operation." Any question that addressed the reason Tier 1 295035 for blowout panels would always have the answer of "preventing overpressure",

Group 2 EK3.01 making this combination too easy. Selected the only other 295035 EK3, EK3.02 as a replacement.

ES-401,Page 27 of 33 c \dauments ard W b w W m m i m r \ m y h m n k \ 2 W 5 nrc erami2005 nrc 110 wlm exam_\ouUlm\m YT) exam nureg-1021 IW 9 he5-4014 recad of rejeded b as dcc Page1 of 4 lul4uno4ilssaM I

ES-401 Record of Rejected WAS Form ES-401-4 Tier I Randomly Reason for Rejection Group Selected WA Shutdown Cooling was combined with knowledge of the effect of a loss or malfunction of Recirculation System. Topic was too closely related to SRO 295001 RO Question 29 Loss of forced circulation with 2.4.9 Knowledge of low power implications in an Tier 2 205000 accident. Randomly selected K6.04, Reactor water level, as a replacement, but tha Group 1 K6.03 WA would still have the same problem. Randomly selected another K6 topic K6.05, Component Cooling Water, as a replacement.

SBLC was combined with the ability to monitor reactor power which is read on pane RO Question 32 IC05 right next to SBLC control and which obviously goes down when SBLC is Tier 2 211000 initiated. A question to this combination would be.- The clincher was that Group 1 A3.04 we could not find any industry bank questions on this combination. Randomly selected another A3 topic A3.07, Lights and alarms, as a replacement.

Question K2.01, Knowledge of power supply to channelldetectors,was randomly selected for RO 34/35 215003 both IRM and SRM. The answer in both cases is 24 VDC, which is too similar. IRM Tier 2 (IRM) K2.01 has only one K2 topic and SRM has only one K2 topic with an importance rating of Group 1 and 215004 22.5. Randomly selected 215003 (IRM) and then randomly selected A4.01 for that (SRM) K2.01 system.

IRM system was combined with the "ability to manually operate andlor monitor in the control room: IRM recorder Indication."A question to this combination would be Question 34 RO Tier 2 215003 (IRM)

w. The recorders are frequently read at 1C05. Any question that used IRM indication in response to range switches positioning or reactivity changes would Group 1 A4.01 match up better with another WA. Randomly selected another A4 topic, A4.06, Detector Drives, as a replacement.

SRV system was combined with "ability to predict andlor monitor changes in RO Question 51 parameters associated with operating the SRV controls including: Tail Pipe Tier 2 239002 Temperatures". This ability would also be measured during a planned simulator Group 1 A1.O1 normal evolution. Randomly selected another A I topic, A1.08, Torus water temperature, as a replacement.

InstrumentAir was combined with the knowledge of the effect of a loss or malfunction of a service air refusal valve. DAEC has no air system valve by this RO Question 52 name. DAEC does have a valve that isolates the Service Air Header first as Tier 2 300000 pressure lowers during abnormal conditions. Closing it would have no effect on Group 1 K6.04 Instrument Air during normal operations. Randomly selected another K6 topic, K6.03, Temperature Indicators, as a replacement.

InstrumentAir was combined with the knowledge of the effect of a loss or RO Question 52 malfunction of Temperature Indicators. A Loss of a temperature indictor could not Tier 2 300000 have an effect other than loss of the ability to read that temperature. This would Group 1 K6.03 result in a question that was too easv. Randomly selected another K6 topic, K6.12, Breakers, relays and disconnects, as a replacement.

Main and Reheat Steam was combined with the ability to operate or monitor Reactor Level, which is already the topic in 295031(TIGl), 295009 (TlG2) and RO Question 259002 (T2G1). Randomly selected another A4 topic, A4.10 Reactor Power as a Tier 2 239001 replacement. This would result in a question that was too easv. Randomly selected Group 2 A4.08 another A4 topic, A4.05 System Temperature as a replacement.

Knowledge of EOP entry conditions and immediate action steps was in conflict with several SRO questions. In addition, DAEC EOPs have no immediate operator RO Question 73 actions and a memory level question on EOP entry conditions would be too easy.

Tier 3 2.4.1 Randomly selected another Generic 2.4 topic, 2.4.18, Knowledge of specific bases for EOPs as a replacement.

ES-401, Page 27 of 33

ES-401 Record of Reiected WAS Form ESdOld Tier I Randomly Reason for Rejection Group Selected KIA Reactor SCRAM was combined with Ability to perform immediate actions without SRO Question reference to procedures. This Generic WA had already been selected with Tier 1 295006 295031 (RPV Low Water Level) on the RO exam. The two questions would be Group 1 2.4.49 too similar. Randomly selected another Generic, 2.1.7, as a replacement.

Partial or complete loss of instrument air was randomly selected. This Evolution must also be selected for the RO exam in Tier 1. In Tier 2 Group 1, some SRO Question systems must be selected more than once. On the RO exam, System 300000, Tier 1 295019 Instrument Air was one such system. Therefore, on the SRO exam, randomly Group 1 AA2.01 selected 295030 EA2.03 in its place rather than have four questions on I Instrument Air or loss of Instrument Air.

SRO Question 5 I System Generic 2.4.16 "Knowledge of EOP implementation hierarchy and Tier 1 295025 coordination with other support procedures" was also selected for the RO exam Group 1 2.4.16 in Tier 3. To avoid duplication, randomly selected generic 2.1.14 in its place.

2.1.14 is a System Generic WA (System status that requires notification of plant SRO Question personnel) that was also selected for System 218000 (ADS) in Tier 2 and Event Tier 1 295008 Group 2 n 1 1. -

295025 in Tier 1. To avoid duplication, randomly selected generic 2.1 3 2 as a L 1.14 I

- replacement.

1295035 Hiah Secondarv Containment Differential Pressure was also selected in 1

..I._

SRO uuesrion I

Y Tier 1 Grolp 2 on the RO exam. Questions would conflict. Randomly selected Tier 1 295035 Group 2 n " .," 295017 from a field of T1G2 Evolutions that were not previously selected on RO L . I.JL I exam. 2.1.32 remained as the Generic topic.

I Abilitv to predict impact of a Stuck Detector (2.03) on IRMs and use DrOCedUreS to co;rect. DAEC has no procedures for a stuck detector. (Checked'ARPs, Ols, SRO Question 12 Tier 2 215003 Group 1 A2.03 SRO Question 15 Tier 2 262002 Group 1 2.4.30 SRO Question 22 Tier 3 2.2.33 procedure, or hardware. Randomly selected Generic 2.2.21 "Knowledge of pre

-~ and post mamtenance operability ;eqJirements' as a replacement - '

~.

. .., 7 7 2 3 2 "Knowledqe of ALARA" was randomlv selected first for tne RO exam SRO Tier 3 2.3.2 Randomly selected 2.3.3 "Knowledge of SRO responsibilities for Auxiliary systems outside of control room" as a replacement for the SRO Exam n

2.3.6 "Knowledge of requirements for reviewing and approving release permits."

This activity is not relevant to the DAEC. The Radwaste Liquid Release line at SRO Question 24 DAEC has been isolated for more than 25 years. Randomly selected 2.3.9, Tier 3 2.3.6 "Knowledge of the process for performing a containment purge" as a replacement for the SRO Exam.

I I

ES-401 Record of Reiected WAS Form ES-401-4 ES-403 Written Examination Grading Form ES-403-1 Quality Checklist I Initials 4 1

Item Description a b

1. Clean answer sheets copied before grading fJ f l L

2. Answer key changes and question deletions justified p l o and documented fLl

3. Applicants' scores checked for addition errors (reviewers spot check > 25% of examinations) 5u I

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

(W I

All other failing examinations checked to ensure that grades 5.

are justified ?d k0

6. Performance on missed questions checked for training deficiencies and wording problems; evaluate validity Printed NamdSignature

a. Grader t-.d?h ~ M  ?-a.

d &-

b. Facility Reviewer(*) &%hK&!li

c. NRC Chief Examiner (*) &U&&U--lefeZ

d. NRC Supervisor (*) @&!&!?+

(*) The facility reviewer's signature is not applicable for examinations graded by the NRC; ES-403, Page 5 of 5

ES-403 Written Examination Grading F o ES-403-1

~

Quality Checklist

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 ci

6. Performance on missed questions checked for training deficiencies and wording problems: evaluate validity Printed NamelSignature Date

a. Grader

b. Facility Reviewer(*) Ja!hd&&!l'

c. NRC Chief Examiner (*) &!@@LO -&&

d. NRC Supervisor (*)

(*) The facility reviewer's signature is not applicable for examinations graded by the NRC; ES-403, Page 5 of 5

ES-501 Post-Examination Check Sheet Form ES-501-1 Facility: Duane Arnold Task Description Date Complete

1. Facility written exam comments or graded exams received 0211 412005 and verified complete Facility written exam comments reviewed and incorporated and NRC grading completed, if necessary I 02/16/2005 1

3. Operating tests graded by NRC examiners 02/17/2005

4. NRC chief examiner review of operating test and written exam 02/18/2005 grading completed

5. Responsible supervisor review completed 2 l d O i

6. Management (licensing official) review completed ~"hJ/c,- .

7 License and denial letters mailed ' / L , /( J -

8. Facility notified of results 7

h/hr 9.

IO.

Examination report issued (refer to NRC MC 0612)

Reference material returned after final resolution of any appeals -