ML080720485
| ML080720485 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Sequoyah |
| Issue date: | 01/31/2008 |
| From: | Widmann M Division of Reactor Safety II |
| To: | |
| References | |
| Download: ML080720485 (59) | |
See also: IR 05000327/2008301
Text
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
ADMINISTRATIVE DOCUMENTS
(Yellow Paper)
E
P
.
C
ES-201-1/'
xam
reparation
hecklist
.
/
Exam Outline Quality Checklist. J:>:u=:
Exam Security Agreement(s)
ES-201-3./
Administrative Topics Outline (Final)
ES-301-1 /
C~ntrol Room Systems & Facility Walk-through Test Outline
./
(Final)
/
Operating Test Quality Check Sheet
J
Simulator Scenario Quality Check Sheet
8.
Transient and Event Checklist
.
9.
Competencies Checklist
.
10.
Written Exam Quality Check Sheet
.
I
/
.
/
11.
Written Exam Review Worksheet
12.
Written Exam Grading Quality Checklist
ES-403-1 ./
13.
Post-Exam Check Sheet
ES-501-1/'
14.
Facility Submittal Letter.s ( 0
SE{}uoyAH
oZO~8-JL)/
[]
~.
ES*201
Examination Preparation Checklist
Form ES*201*1
Facility:
<: lVlAO;! rW
Date of Examination: -:r4-N. &'OClC~
Developed by: Written - Facility ~NRC 0
II
Operating - Facility MNRC 0
Target
Chief
Date"
Task Description (Reference)
Examiner's
Initials
-180
1.
Examination administration date confirmed (C.1.a; C.2.a and b)
IJifS
-120
2.
NRC examiners and facility contact assigned (C.1.d; C.2.e)
r~
-120
3.
Facility contact briefed on security and other requirements (C.2.c)
r0kP
-120
4.
Corporate notification letter sent (C.2.d)
y11f>
[-90]
[5.
Reference material due (C.1.e; C.3.c; Attachment 3)]
!Y~
{-75}
6.
Integrated examination outline(s)due, including Forms ES-201-2, ES-201-3,
ES-301-1, ES-301-2, ES-301-5, ES-O-1's, ES-401-1/2, ES-401-3, and
~
ES-401-4, as applicable (C.1.e and f; C.3.d)
{-70}
{7.
Examination outline(s) reviewed by NRC and feedback provided to facility
tms
licensee (C.2.h; C.3.e)}
{-45}
8.
Proposed examinations (including written, walk-through JPMs, and
scenarios, as applicable), supporting documentation (including Forms
m$>
ES-301-3, ES-301-4, ES-301-5, ES-301-6, and ES-401-6, and any Form
ES-201-3 updates), and reference materials due (C.1.e, f, g and h; C.3.d)
-30
9.
Preliminary license applications (NRC Form 398's) due (C.1.1; C.2.g;
I~
-14
10.
Final license applications due and Form ES-201-4 prepared (C.1.1; C.2.i;
/I~
-14
11.
Examination approved by NRC supervisor for facility licensee review
- }~
(C.2.h; C.3.f)
-14
12.
Examinations reviewed with facility licensee (C.1.j; C.2.f and h; C.3.g)
'rn!b
-7
13.
Writt~n exam~ons and oper~tests approved by NRC supervisor
(C.2.1; C.3.h)
-7
14.
Final applications reviewed; 1 or 2 (if >10) applications audited to confirm
flI4IP
qualifications / eligibility; and examination approval and waiver letters sent
(C.2.i; Attachment 5; ES-202, C.2.e; ES-204) ],w-s;..v--et'::,-,,) :2 G..K!~"""'-l.£v;....J
-7
15.
Proctoring/written exam administration guidelines reviewed
mrs
with facility licensee (C.3.k)
-7
16. Approved scenarios, job performance measures, and questions
~
distributed to NRC examiners (C.3.i)
- Target dates are generally based on facility-prepared examinations and are keyed to the examination date
identified in the corporate notification letter. They are for planning purposes and may be adjusted on a case-by-
case basis in coordination with the facility licensee.
[Applies only] {Does not apply} to examinations prepared by the NRC.
ES-201, Page 25 of 28
ES*201
Examination Outline Quality Checklist
Form ES*201*2
c#
b'
a
~1ZJrwP
~7ZJIMP
-~ 'llJ r#b
Initials
Date of Examination: 1/;)..00?:j'
Task Description
d.
Assess whether the justifications for deselected or rejected KIA statements are appropriate.
a.
Verify that the outline(s) fit(s) the appropriate model, in accordance with ESA01.
f--.--*-*--------------------------------+--t-'-~+_~__11
b.
Assess whether the outline was systematically and randomly prepared in accordance with
--2..,,:cOon 0.1 of ES-401 ar:.d whether all KIA cateqories are appropriately sampled.
c.
Assess whether the outline over-emphasizes any systems, evolutions, or generic topics.
Item
I----+-*--------------------------------t-::..-j-..:;:--t-~I
1.
W
R
I
T
T
E
N
c.
To the extent possible, assess whether the outline(s) conform(s) with the qualitative
and quantitative criteria specified on Form ES-301-4 and described in Appendix D.
a.
Using Form E$-301-5, verify that the proposed scenario sets cover the required number
of normal evolutions, instrument and component failures, technical specifications,
and major transients.
f--*-------------'-----------------------;---;f-<--t---il
b.
Assess whether there are enough scenario sets (and spares) to test the projected number
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 davs.
2.
I
M
U
L
A
To
R
s
Ir----I-*--*-~----------------------------_t_-+_-+--_il
3
W
I
T
a.
Verify that the systems walk-through outline meets the criteria specified on Form ES-301-2:
(1)
the outlir&(s) contain(s) the required number of control room and in-plant tasks
distributed among the safety functions as specified on the form ./'
(2)
task repetition from the last two NRC examinations is within the limits specified on the fonrn ......
(3)
no tasks are duplicated from the applicants' audit test(s)./
1~."11
J fY\\tS
(4)
the number of flew or modified tasks meets or exceeds the minimums specified on the form ,/
.
/!II./ I
(5)
the number of alternate path, low-power, emergency, and RCA tasks meet the criteria.>
on the form.
-;~tZ..
Iv~
15 '1?J ifVIfJ
i1'~ 1lJ 1~
f0~'iv~
-j-:) 7lJ \\\\rR>
Assess whether the 10 CFR55,41 143 and 55,45 sampling is appropriate.
Assess whether the exam fits the appropriate job level (RO or SRO).
e.
Check the entire exam for balance of coverage.
d.
Check for duplication and overlap among exam sections.
b.
1-*-*-----------------....:..--:..-..:....:....:....:..-----------j-!:~+"u::.'9-'~-i1
c.
Ensure that KIA importance ratings (except for plant-specific priorities) are at least 2.5.
G
E
N
E
R
p.,
L
b.
Verify that the administrative outline meets the criteria specified on Form ES-301-1:
(1)
the tasks are distributed among the topics as specified on the form ,./
(2)
at least one task is new or significantly modified ,./
(3)
no more than one task is repeated from the last two NRC licensing examinations ./'
c.
Determine if there are enough different outlines to test the projected number and mix
0/'
,..--.-
of applicants and ensure that no items are duplicated on subsequent days.
4.
R.
Assess whether plant-specific priorities (including PRA and IPE insights) are covered
in the appropriate exam sections.
Note:
Date
j 1/7(t/'8
I JI7/~
Q2 /0.4bM'-,
t'-7{l5'I",
a. Author
b. Facility Reviewer (')
c. NRC Chief Examiner (if)
d. NRC Supervisor
IJA.II'Fn..l./~\\nll.Uf..:,/
~
II-'
--Ifll.<::~~.,/Y 'L
- Independent NRC reviewer initial items in Colbmrr"C"; ctlref examiner concurrence required.
- j,; >:>>.:,c,;c 'z... .,f<:'., ... ,'
",.; 11;;',;!:>;['
- );V,':".
E8-201, Page 26 of 28
Examination Outline Quality Checklist
DIll
7
Form ES-201-2
(
(
Facility:
Date of Examination:
Initials
Item
Task Description
b*
c#
a
1.
a.
Verify that the outline(s) fills) the appropriate model, in accordance with ES-401.
~ V
~
W
./
R
b.
Assess whether the outline was systematically and randomly prepared in accordance with
-IS .#J.... '01{S
I
Section 0.1 of ES-401 and whether all KiA cateqories are appropriately sampled.
T
Assess whether the outline over-emphasizes any systems, evolutions, or generic topics.
--1) .,~ *
T
c.
E
d.
Assess whether the justifications for deselected or rejected KiA statements are appropriate.
~ I-ra)
N
NJ6
2.
a.
Using Form ES-301-5, verify that the proposed scenario sets cover the required number
~ 1Y
of normal evolutions, instrument and component failures, technical specifications,
M$
S
and major transients.
I
M
b.
Assess whether there are enough scenario sets (and spares) to test the projected number
U
and mix of applicants in accordance with the expected crew composition and rotation schedule ~ ~ r1£
L
without compromising exam integrity, and ensure that each applicant can be tested using
A
at least one new or significantly modified scenario, that no scenarios are duplicated
T
from the applicants' audit testis). and that scenarios will notbe repeated on subsequent days.
0
c.
To the extent possible, assess whether the outline(s) conform(s) with the qualitative
p
R
and quantitative criteria specified on Form ES-301-4 and described in AppendiX2Ctt -tlcn
Irv ~
-
30
'
u.h
.~ w.A
,'U
wl-\\'
. L ioCe\\15E'e
YIlt!> ~
~ *td
t:S-
i-l.IWa.S""Y\\Df- s
~\\'
Lv. u..
{)IIVII~
W(V.[\\SI".fL "i-iAS
~,IA
~'1'v)k-\\t: .
3.
a.
Verify that the systems walk-through outline meets the criteria specified on Form ES-301-2:
(1 )
the outline(s) contain(s) the required number of control room and in-plant tasks
W
distributed among the safety functions as specified on the form
r<<V
/
(2)
task repetition from the last two NRC examinations is within the limits specified on the form
76 rr
T
(3)
no tasks are duplicated from the applicants' audit testis)
(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:
(1 )
the tasks are distributed among the topics as specified on the form
7!J ~
(ff6
(2)
at least one task is new or significantly modified
(3)
no more than one task is repeated from the last two NRC licensinq examinations
c.
Determine if there are enough different outlines to test the projected number and mix
15,iJ ~
of applicants and ensure that no items are duplicated on subsequent days.
4.
a.
Assess whether plant-specific priorities (including PRA and IPE insights) are covered
76 ~ tI1t
in the appropriate exam sections.
G
b.
Assess whether the 10 CFR 55.41/43 and 55.45 sampling is appropriate.
.~ ~ tWP
E
N
c.
Ensure that KiA importance ratings (except for plant-specific priorities) are at least 2.5.
76 .<lJ ~
E
d.
Check for duplication and overlap among exam sections.
76 .<tJ ~
R
A
e.
Check the entire exam for balance of coverage.
76 4r/ \\'\\Xb
L
Assess whether the exam fits the appropriate job level (RO or SRO).
o>> ~v..I 'f\\\\t5
f.
7"1omitS -:s:::
Printed Na
...' JO
ioltcPJih
a. Author
O"V'" .:>
~
~~
b. Facility Reviewer (*)
TJJ& I""" "'~
0
cJA If.."
e,
/-- Y
"' r. trJ/
jV//? (07
c. NRC Chief Examiner (#)
M.AI\\~ A- 'B4-r£5 I ~ ~ L/ J O<.:t.':is
"'/fltlo7
d. NRC Supervisor
J IIUI'N 1.(1:\\\\IfT)dlHIi-! / tfb'
1
{I/N!lJ1
(
-,
r
....
Note:
- Independent NRC reviewer initial items in Coiwr;n "c"; chief examiner concurrence required.
- ()(C~'h\\trl.s
CU'- i1cted
d'Y1
L1'Mf\\'\\eJ."\\1- 'S"'~-\\-.
ES-201, Page 25 of 27
Examination Security Agreement
Form ES-201-3
1.
Pre-Examination
J/:< elog ike!
I acknowledge that I have acquired specialized knowledge about the NRC licensing examinations scheduled for the week(s) of ,7/?I/o(f
as of the
date of my signature. I agree that I will not knowingly divulge any information about these examinations to any persons who have not been authorized
by the NRC chief examiner. I understand that I am not to instruct, evaluate, or provide performance feedback to those applicants scheduled to be
administered these licensing examinations from this date until completion of examination administration, except as specifically noted below and
authorized by the NRC (e.g., acting as a simulator booth operator or communicator is acceptable if the individual does not select the training content or
provide direct or indirect feedback). Furthermore, I am aware of the physical security measures and requirements (as documented in the facility
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 kno~ledg2~1
id not divulge to any unauthorized persons any information concerning the NRC licensing examinations administered
during the week(s) of !h9 -
i'~ O:9From 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.
.
JOB TITLE / RESPONSIBILITY
- szl14E
DP~Tlo~
ES-201, Page 26 of 27
Examination Security Agreement
Form ES-201-3
1.
Pre-Examination
/
/
I
I
'2.~{ o?f t"~v
I acknowledge that I have acquired specialized knowledge about the NRC licensing examinations scheduled for the week(s) of ;2./ 'lJ(0'if as of the
date of my signature. I agree that I will not knowingly divulge any information about these examinations to any persons who have not been authorized
by the NRC chief examiner. I understand that I am not to instruct, evaluate, or provide performance feedback to those applicants scheduled to be
administered these licensing examinations from this date until completion of examination administration, except as specifically noted below and
authorized by the NRC (e.g., acting as a simulator booth operator or communicator is acceptable if the individual does not select the training content or
provide direct or indirect feedback).
Furthermore, I am aware of the physical security measures and requirements (as documented in the facility
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 knowled~e I did not divulge to any unauthorized persons any information concerning the NRC licensing examinations administered
during the week(s) of ~~ - Y'f'OG' From the date that I entered into this security agreement until the completion of examination administration, I did not
instruct, evaluate, or provide performance feedback to those applicants who were administered these licensing examinations, except as specifically
noted below and authorized by the NRC.
JOB TITLE / RESPONSIBILITY
kD
Ifo
~ogo
/20
ES-201, Page 26 of 27
DATE
SC-&>>fY#/
l:-£JOf"
ES~201
Examination See!~tl-A-8-ree-m-l!-n-t-F-crm-------------f-o-nn""(~s-2ft1*3
Pre-Exarnin:atfon
)!;z.r;/t;?
~wV
I ackrlo.edge that Ehave acquirHdspecialized knowledgeabout the-tIRe Ijc;ensing examillations t.cheduled for the week(s) of ?j~10 "l
as of the
date o.fmy signaturtr. I agree that I will no'! knowin{ly divulge any infurmation about these examinaoons to aly per-mns who haw not been authnrized
by the NRC chief examinet'". I urtde:rsland t'lat I ern £101to instruc;l. evaluate, or provide performeoce feedback 10thoseapj;li[;Clnls scheduled to be
admil'iisteled these licensing examinatlO1l$. from this dat.eunlil c:omplel:ion of examination administniliorl, except as specificalit noted oolow and
aultlorized byttle NRC (e.g., acting as a simt.Jator boot!
h 'Opef~or or eemmurlicatOl' is aooeptableif 111 iii indi\\lidLSlI does not select the fJainingCOnient or
llfovide direct a'" indirec1 feedback). Furthemllre. I aIrI aware of !tie physical security measures aJ1d rE!q\\lirernel11s (as documented fl the facjlil~
lit:erJsee's procecb'es) and understand thai vio!a1ionof the conditions of thks agreem enJ. mayrestflt in carnl!Dalion (If the elo:aminatioos and/or an
enfDlcement action agains1 me or lhefaGilitv licensee. Iw. immEdialelyreport to facility managemeritOf tire NRC chief examio@r 8rIY indications Dr
suggesfons that eKaminal~on o.ewrity may ha\\19 been compromised.
1.
2_
Post-E nmination
To tf1ebest of my lfficMtIedge. td id not divLIIgeto any un<llJthorlzed persons any irforrnatiQn ooncemiog the NRC Ii-cerlsing exarnillaticns admTiistered
dlJri1g the week(s) of
. From the dale that I entered into this sewlil1' agreemeflt unlil ttle compleliort of e:xami1ation admi1istratioo. rtid oot
instrudl. evaluale, or provide pelfurmance feedback m thase applicants who were administered these licensi"lg elC3minations, ext:ept as spef;ifically
noted beJow:and authorized by the NRC
.
ES-201, Page 26 of27
JOB rrns I RESPONSIBILITY
fS. \\J !ef'JPR
PRlmED!'WAE~
SIGNAT~
DJ}T~. ~."
T
{
VA E
1:~s8'H M.$G..*Jb(
.f-~-Fli../L-:o,..t
=,-,_"L-J-=;;:..__~
__
Yf_
- _~iLE:.!LQ.7~~Z* Jl oK
2.
---l.[~>--*-----
~_"
_
3.
.
--'-
_
4.
.
_
5.
.
_
6.
_
7.
_
a.
9.
--:.~
_
10.,
_
11.,
.
_
12.,
~__
13,,
_
14.
15_,-='
NOTES:
C
0-
Administrative Topics Outline
Form ES-301-1
(
(
Facility:
Sequoyah 1 & 2
Ro9
Date of Examination:
1/2008
Examination Level (circle one):
Operating Test Number:
NRC
Administrative Topic
Type Code*
Describe activity to be performed
(see Note)
Conduct of Operations
2.1.1
Knowledge of conduct of operations requirements. (CFR:
N,R
41.10/45.13)
3.7/3.8
Determine license status
Active / Inactive
Conduct of Operations
2.1.33
Ability to recognize indications for system operating
parameters which are entry-level conditions for technical
D,S
specifications. (CFR: 43.2 /43.3/45.3)
3.4 / 4.0
Perform Shift Log SI-2 SG Level Instrumentation (JPM
176)
2.2.18
Knowledge of the process for managing maintenance
Equipment Control
activities during shutdown operations.
N,R
(CFR: 43.5/45.13)
3.6
Containment Closure Time
Radiation Control
2.3.10
Ability to perform procedures to reduce excessive levels of
radiation and guard against personnel exposure. (CFR:
D,R
43.4 / 45.10)
2.9/3.3
Survey Map (JPM 166)
2.4.41
Knowledge of the emergency action level thresholds and
classifications.(CFR: 43.5/45.11)
4.1
D,S
Classify the REP Degraded Core with Possible Loss of
Coolable Geometry and Likely Cntmt Failure (JPM 109)
NOTE:
All items (5 total are required for SROs.
RO applicants require only 4 items unless they are retaking
only the administrative topics, when 5 are required.
- Type Codes & Criteria:
(C)ontrol room
Class(R)oom
(D)irect from bank (:S: 3 for ROs; :s: for SROs & RO retakes)
(N)ew or (M)odified from bank (> 1)
(P)revious 2 exams (:S: 1; randomly selected)
(S)imulator
Revision 9
Administrative Topics Outline
Form ES-301-1
(
A1a
The applicant will evaluate the status of licensed operators work history to determine if license is active or
inactive.
A1b
The applicant will be required to recognize a required Technical Specification entry while completing and a
portion of the daily shift surveillance instruction.
A2
The applicant will evaluate a request to open a containment penetration during a refuel outage and determine
the requirements.
A3
The applicant will use a survey map to determine anti-contamination clothing requirements, stay time, and
radiation levels in area.
A4
The applicant will evaluate conditions for entry into the E-Plan, determine the proper classification, protection
action recommendation, and make required notifications.
Revision 9
Control Room/In-Plant Systems Outline
Form ES-301-2
(
Facility:
Sequoyah 1 & 2
Date of Examination:
1/2008
-
Exam Level (circle one):
R~SRO~I SRO (U)
Operating Test No.:
NRC
Control Room Systems@ (8 for RO; 7 for SRO-I; 2 or 3 for SRO-U, including 1 ESF)
System I JPM Title
Type Code*
Safety
Function
a.
W/E14 High Containment Pressure
(EA-1.1 )
3.7 I 3.7
D,A,S
5
Respond to High Containment Pressure (JPM 057AP1)
b.
003 Reactor Coolant Pump System
(A2.01 )
3.5 I 3.9
N,L,S
4P
Respond to a #1 RCP Seal Failure
c.
001 Control Rod Drive System
(A3.05)
3.5 I 3.5
M,A,L,S
1
Shutdown Bank Withdrawal
d.
004 Chemical and Volume Control System (A4.06)
3.6 13.1
N,L,S
2
Fill and Vent Excess Letdown
e.
038 Steam Generator Tube Rupture (EA1.32 )
4.6 14.7
D,A,S
3
SG tube rupture with MSIV fails to Close (JPM 075AP)
f.
015 Nuclear Instrumentation System (A1.01) 3.5 I 3.8
D,A,S
7
Calibrate Power Range Nuclear Instrumentation (JPM 22-AP2)
g.
064 Emergency Diesel Generator (ED/G) System (A4.06)
3.9 I 3.9
M,D,S
6
Shutdown the Diesel Generator (1A-A and 1B-B) (JPM 046-1)
h.
In-Plant Systems@ (3 for RO; 3 for SRO-I; 3 or 2 for SRO-U)
i.
061 Auxiliary I Emergency Feedwater System
(A2.04)
3.4 I 3.8
D,A,E,R
4S
Operate the TO AFW Pump Locally (JPM 74-2AP)
j.
004 Chemical and Volume Control System
(A2.25)
3.8 14.3
D,R
1
Uncontrolled Dilution Flow Path Isolation (O-SI-OPS 063-214.0)) (JPM 40-2)
k.
062 AC Electrical Distribution
(A2.10)
3.0 13.3
D,A
6
Transfer 480v SO Board 2A1-A from Normal to Alternate (JPM 061AP2)
@
All RO and SRO-I control room (and in-plant) systems must be different and serve different safety functions;
all 5 SRO-U systems must serve different safety functions; in-plant systems and functions may overlap
those tested in the control room.
Revision 9
Control Room/In-Plant Systems Outline
Form ES-301-2
\\,
~
- Type Codes
Criteria for RO / SRQl-1 j SRO-U
" --
(A)lternate path
4-6/4-0'/2-3
iJJ
(C)ontrol room
ff!:<;47
(D)irect from bank
'5,9 /
(E)mergency or abnormal in-plant
1 /
1"1:?: 1 \\
(L)ow-Power / Shutdown
<:: 1 /
11:'?:1 .:>
(N)ew or (M)odified from bank including 1(A)
2/'?2"1'2:1-1
(P)revious 2 exams
3/
3/
2 (randomly selected) 0
(R)CA
1 /
1/<:: 1 .......-
(S)imulator
JPM Summary
JPMA
JPM B
JPM C
JPM D
JPM E
(
'-
JPM F
JPM G
JPM I
RHR spray will be established in accordance with FR-Z.1, High Containment Pressure. This is a Bank
Alternate Path JPM.
An RCP seal failure will be diagnosed and the Abnormal Operating Instruction used to remove the pump
from service. This is a new low power/shutdown JPM
A failure of the step counter will occur during the withdrawal of Shutdown Rods requiring a reactor trip.
This is a new alternate path low power/shutdown JPM.
Excess letdown system will be filled and vented from the control room using the system operating
instruction. This is a new low power/shutdown JPM.
A Main Steam Isolation valve will fail to close during the isolation of steam side of a ruptured steam
generator will be isolated.. This is a Bank Alternate Path JPM.
Power Range nuclear instruments will be adjusted in accordance with the surveillance instruction O-SI-OPS-
092-078.0. This is a Bank Alternate Path JPM.
Unit 1 Diesel Generators will be shutdown per EA-82-1. This is a Bank modified JPM.
Plant JPM -The trip and throttle valve will not open electrically while TDAFW pump is being placed in
service locally. This is an Alternate path Bank JPM using emergency abnormal procedure performed inside
the RCA.
JPM J
Dilution flow path will be isolated using O-SI-OPS 062-214.0.
This is a Bank JPM performed inside the
RCA using an Appendix contains in a surveillance instruction.
JPM K
Plant JPM - A breaker will fail to operate while a transfer of a 480v Shutdown Board is being attempted.
This is a Bank Alternate Path JPM.
Revision 9
Control Room/In-Plant Systems Outline
Form ES-301-2
(
Facility:
Sequoyah 1 & 2
Date of Examination:
1/2008
-
Exam Level (circle one):
Operating Test No.:
NRC
Control Room Systems@ (8 for RO; 7 for SRO-I; 2 or 3 for SRO-U, including 1 ESF)
System I JPM Title
Type Code*
Safety
Function
a.
W/E14 High Containment Pressure
(EA-1.1 )
3.7 I 3.7
D,A,S
5
Respond to High Containment Pressure (JPM 057AP1)
b.
003 Reactor Coolant Pump System
(A2.01)
3.5 I 3.9
N,L,S
4P
Respond to a #1 RCP Seal Failure
c.
001 Control Rod Drive System
(A3.05)
3.5 I 3.5
M,A,L,S
1
Shutdown Bank Withdrawal
d.
e.
f.
g.
h.
In-Plant Systems@ (3 for RO; 3 for SRO-I; 3 or 2 for SRO-U)
i.
061 Auxiliary I Emergency Feedwater System
(A2.04)
3.4 I 3.8
D,A,E,R
4S
Operate the TD AFW Pump Locally (JPM 74-2AP)
j.
004 CI,eli lieal alld 'v'olUilie Conti 01 Systel Ii
(AZ.25)
3.8/4-:&-
D,R
'---1--
Ulieo'iti~IIedDilution Flow Patll IS9Iatiol~I-OPS0,6~+4:&)7~('"d'~!\\11~40'"2>>-~
~'f.
tl143 "I ~3/z~~n,
C-Y-tc.<,;"",<'d
'?e-t-
p/~.;,,,r
"-G'v-.t-_<:.~
<-..~
~(A.
'.
k ..A,,-(.j..*W,J. 1:::>, s<:..."""",t ... / L,="'-
k.
D(PJ. /tc EIe..G\\-t-\\c::..",J, 1:);sk\\"Du-Hc"" (A J, 10) :,.0/3,.3
D 1 ri
0
-Y;:-e",v5k ~v 'SD ~e.....J. 2.;11-1-14
~.iVv\\. (Vct1'f"'oC...(, ~ i41~ok(W(t
O~ I /l.p2.)
@
All RO and SRO-I control room (and in-plant) systems must be different and serve different safety functions;
all 5 SRO-U systems must serve different safety functions; in-plant systems and functions may overlap
those tested in the control room.
Revision 9
Control Room/In-Plant Systems Outline
Form ES-301-2
(
(
(
- Type Codes
Criteria for RO / SRO-I / SRO-U
(A)lternate path
4-6 / 4-6 / 2-3 :>
(C)ontrol room
(D)irect from bank
~9/:':;8/
4],
(E)mergency or abnormal in-plant
1 /
1/:2::1\\
(L)ow-Power / Shutdown
1 /
1 / 21
7-
(N)ew or (M)odified from bank including 1(A)
2/
2/
1'</
(P)revious 2 exams
3/
3/
2 (randomly selected)
(R)CA
?; 1 /
1/21!fJ
(S)imulator
JPM Summary
JPM A
RHR spray will be established in accordance with FR-Z.1, High Containment Pressure. This is a Bank
Alternate Path JPM.
JPM B
An RCP seal failure will be diagnosed and the Abnormal Operating Instruction used to remove the pump
from service. This is a new low power/shutdown JPM
JPM C
A failure of the step counter will occur during the withdrawal of Shutdown Rods requiring a reactor trip.
This is a new alternate path low power/shutdown JPM.
JPM I
Plant JPM -The trip and throttle valve will not open electrically while TDAFW pump is being placed in
service locally. This is an Alternate path Bank JPM using emergency abnormal procedure performed inside
the RCA.
JPM J
Dilution flow path will be isolated using O-SI-OPS 062-214.0.
This is a Bank JPM performed inside the
RCA using an Appendix contains in a surveillance instruction.
Revision 9
Operating Test Quality Checklist
Form ES-301-3
(
(
(
Facility:
Sequoyah 1 & 2
Date of Examination:
1/28/2008
Operating Test Number:
NRC
1. GENERAL CRITERIA
Initials
a
b*
c#
a.
The operating test conforms with the previously approved outline; changes are consistent
with sampling requirements (e.g. 10 CFR 55.45, operational importance, safety function
'/6 -;LJ t~~
distribution).
b.
There is no day-to-day repetition between this and other operating tests to be administered -rs
lyK!?
during this examination.
-rZJ
c.
The operating test shall not duplicate items from the applicants' audit test(s) (see Section
/'~
\\ri:7
D.1.a).
,7ZJ
d.
Overlap with the written examination and between different parts of the operating test is
/0
t~
within acceptable limits.
rzJ
e.
It appears that the operating test will differentiate between competent and less-than-
~
~ifv
competent applicants at the designated license level.
JZ---'
2. WALK-THROUGH CRITERIA
-
-
-
a.
Each JPM includes the following, as applicable:
initial conditions .,..
initiating cues ./
references and tools, including associated procedures v
reasonable and validated time limits (average time allowed for completion) and specific
designation if deemed to be time-critical by the facility licensee /"
17--~
operationally important specific performance criteria that include:
76
- detailed expected actions with exact criteria and nomenclature v
- system response and other examiner cues .,'
- statements describing important observations to be made by the applicant ,"
- criteria for successful completion of the task ",,"
- identification of critical steps and their associated performance standards ./
- restrictions on the sequence of steps, if applicable ."
b.
Ensure that any changes from the previously approved systems and administrative walk-
through outlines (Forms ES-301-1 and 2) have not caused the test to deviate from any of
~
f7J {~
the acceptance criteria (e.g., item distribution, bank use, repetition from the last 2 NRC
examinations) specified on those forms and Form ES-201-2.
3. SIMULATOR CRITERIA
-
-
-
The associated simulator operating tests (scenario sets) have been reviewed in accordance with
~ -n: .~
Form ES-301-4 and a copy is attached.
Printed Name / Signa~Q.
Date
.---r/'
~rvz'-5 /-:~~,
/1--
//;7108
a.
Author
7 hOl11ffS
b.
Facility Reviewer (*)
~,
i.)tlJLc.~
-:>>:
Iff 7/0 4
. I
...."'"'- '-'
.1-_ ./~~~..I~
c.
NRC Chief Examiner (#)
't-f\\ MUl A"'v':) AIK7 '/n~..~/l fti. 1l1'::1f:--.-..
o i /1"3!~trJB
d.
NRC Supervisor
J).AtG(jJJ...l.\\V If)MJJ.JAJ I 7!:.mlor
....-.--
t'i!lJ/!",
\\ " \\
.~
NOTE:
The facility signature is not applicable for NRC-developed tests.
Independent NRC reviewer initial items in Column "c"; chief examiner concurrence required.
Revision 9
Simulator Scenario Quality Checklist
Form ES-301-4
(
(
Facility:
Sequoyah 1 & 2
Date of Exam:
1/28/2008
Scenario Numbers:
1,2,3,4
Operating Test No.:
NRC
QUALITATIVE ATTRIBUTES
Initials
a
b*
c#
1.
The initial conditions are realistic, in that some equipment and/or instrumentation may be out of
73
service, but it does not cue the operators into expected events.
10 W$
2.
The scenarios consist mostly of related events.
-J~ "J'1-' ~
3.
Each event description consists of
the point in the scenario when it is to be initiated
the malfunction(s) that are entered to initiate the event
1~
/~ JV
the symptoms/cues that will be visible to the crew
the expected operator actions (by shift position)
the event termination point (if applicable)
4.
No more than one non-mechanistic failure (e.g., pipe break) is incorporated into the scenario without '70
1'~
a credible preceding incident such as a seismic event.
7Z/
5.
The events are valid with regard to physics and thermodynamics.
7~ -IZ..-
\\~
6.
Sequencing and timing of events is reasonable, and allows the examination team to obtain complete '76
'j~
evaluation results commensurate with the scenario objectives.
-rt>>
7.
If time compression techniques are used, the scenario summary clearly so indicates.
Operators
/'-5 Jl;
\\,,~
have sufficient time to carry out expected activities without undue time constraints.
8.
The simulator modeling is not altered.
?~ ri- ~
9.
The scenarios have been validated. Pursuant to 10 CFR 55.46(d), any open simulator performance
deficiencies or deviations from the referenced plant have been evaluated to ensure that functional
/~ 71J ~
fidelity is maintained while running the planned scenarios.
10.
Every operator will be evaluated using at least one new or significantly modified scenario. All other
- 7~
~
scenarios have been altered in accordance with Section 0.5 of ES-301.
1V
11.
All individual operator competencies can be evaluated, as verified using Form ES-301-6 (submit the
-/:5
.~
form along with the simulator scenarios).
jJ../
12.
Each applicant will be significantly involved in the minimum number of transients and events
-;!~
~~
specified on Form ES-301-5 (submit the form with the simulator scenarios).
TL/
13.
The level of difficulty is appropriate to support licensing decisions for each crew position.
76 ~ '{'(lD
Target Quantitative Attributes (Per Scenario; See Section D.5.d)
Actual Attributes
-
-
-
1
2
3
4
1.
Total malfunctions (5-8)
8/
16""' 7/ '16/ -;f~ -;L; Mf:,
2.
Malfunctions after EOP entry (1-2)
2""'
1...-- 72/ ;2/ /~
-rc; ~
3.
Abnormal events (2-4)
3""-
3"
4/
3/
.~
"T/.J
l~~
4.
Major transients (1-2)
1/
1v
1 /
1/ /,:) /L
i:~ID
5.
EOPs entered/requiring substantive actions (1-2)
1,/
1/
1/
1/ ?5
'17- "rib
6.
EOP contingencies requiring substantive actions (0-2)
1v
0,/
1/
1/ 7'7
7tr- ~
7.
Critical tasks (2-3)
2/
3v 2/
2/ 7~ -rt- vWJ3
Revision 9
Transient and Event Checklist
Form ES-301-5
(
(
(
Facility:
Sequoyah 1 & 2
Date of Exam:
1/28/2008
Operating Test No.:
NRC
A
E
Scenarios
P
V
P
E
1
2
3
4
T
M
L
N
Spare
0
I
I
T
T
N
CREW
CREW
CREW
CREW
C
POSITION
POSITION
POSITION
POSITION
A
I
A
T
L
M
N
Y
U
T
P
M(*
E
S
A
B
S
A
B
S
A
B
S
A
B
R
I
U
R
T
0
R
T
0
R
T
0
R
T
0
0
C
P
0
C
P
0
C
P
0
C
P
RX
0",,-
1
1
1
1
0
NOR
1/
I
0
1
1
1
1
SROU
I/C
,\\5/
Z
3
8
4
4
2
MAJ
1/
i
0
1
2
2
1
TS
3/
c
0
3
0
2
2
RX
1/
0/
1
1
1
0
NOR
Ov
1/
1
1
1
1
SROI-1
I/C
3/
5/
8
4
4
2
0
MAJ
1v
1 v
2
2
2
1
TS
0
3/
3
0
2
2
RX
0
1/
0
1
1
1
0
NOR
I
0"
1
1
1
1
1
SROI-2
I/C
Y
4/
7
11
4
4
2
MAJ
f
1 v
2
3
2
2
1
TS
~
Ov
2
2
0
2
2
0
1
0
1
1
1
0
1
0
1
2
1
1
1
NA
7
5
3
15
4
4
2
1
1
1
3
2
2
1
2
0
0
2
0
2
2
1
1
0
1
1
1
4
4
2
2
2
1
0
2
2
Revision 9
Transient and Event Checklist
Form ES-301-5
(
Facility:
Sequoyah 1 &2
Date of Exam:
4/9/2007
Operating Test No.:
NRC
A
E
Scenarios
P
V
P
E
1
2
3
4
T
M
L
N
Spare
0
I
I
T
T
CREW
CREW
CREW
CREW
N
C
POSITION
POSITION
POSITION
POSITION
A
I
A
T
L
M
N
Y
U
T
P
M(*
E
S
A
B
S
A
B
S
A
B
S
A
B
R
I
U
R
T
0
R
T
0
R
T
0
R
T
0
0
C
P
0
C
P
0
C
P
0
C
P
1
1
0
1
1
1
4
4
2
2
2
1
0
2
2
1
1
0
1
1
1
4
4
2
2
2
1
0
2
2
1
1
0
1
1
1
4
4
2
2
2
1
0
2
2
Instructions:
1.
Circle the applicant level and enter the operating test number and Form ES-D-1 event numbers for each event
type; TS are not applicable for RO applicants. ROs must service in both the "at-the-controls (ATC)" and
"balance-of-plant (BOP)" positions; Instant SROs must do one scenario, including at least two instrument or
component (I/C) 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 of Appendix D. (*) Reactivity and normal evolutions may be
replaced with additional instrument or component malfunctions on a 1-for-1 basis.
3.
Whenever practical, both instrument and component malfunctions should be included; only those that require
verifiable actions that provide insight to the applicant's competence count toward the minimum requirements
specified for the applicant's license level in the right-hand columns.
This matrix assumes that Scenario 3 is used as the spare. If scenario 3 is used in combination with any
other scenario, the minimum requirements are still met for each applicant.
Revision 9
Competencies Checklist
Form ES-301-6
(
(
Facility: Sequoyah 1 & 2
Date of Exam:1/28/2008
Operating Test No.: NRC
BOP/CRO
Competencies
SCENARIO
SCENARIO
SCENARIO
1
2
3
4
1
2
3
4
1
2
3
4
Interpret/Diag-
2,3,6,
3,4,5,
3,4,5,
2,5,6,
1,2,3,
2,5,6,
3,4,5,
nose Events
2-9
1-7,9
2-9
2-9
9
6,7,9
6,8,9
7,8
4-8
4,7,8
7
9
and Conditions
Comply With
1,2,3,
3,5,6,
1,3,4,
1,2,5,
1,4,5,
1,2,3,
1,2,6,
1,3,4,
and Use
ALL
ALL
ALL
ALL
6,8,9
9
5,6,8,
6,7,8
6,8
5,7
7
5,6,7,
Procedures (1)
9
9
Operate
1,2,3,
3,5,6,
1,3,4,
1,2,5,
1,4,5,
2,3,5,
1,2,6,
1,3,4,
Control Boards
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
6,8,9
9
5,6,8,
6,7,8
6,8,7
7
7
5,6,7,
(2)
9
9
Communicate
1,2,3,
1,3,4,
1,3,4,
and
ALL
ALL
ALL
ALL
6,8,9
3,4,5,
5,6,8,
1,2,5,
1,4,5,
1,2,3,
1,2,5,
5,6,7,
6,7,9
6,7,8
6,8,7
4,7,8
6,7
Interact
9
9
Demonstrate
Supervisory
ALL
ALL
ALL
ALL
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Ability (3)
Comply With
and Use Tech.
2-4
1,2,4
3,4
2,3
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Specs. (3)
Notes:
(1)
Includes Technical Specification compliance for an RO.
(2)
Optional for an SRO-U.
(3)
Only applicable to SROs.
Instructions:
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.
Revision 9
Written Examination Quality Checklist
Form ES-401*6
~-CilitY:5(~~uoyah u s:
Date of Exam: 1/;1.008
Exam Level' RO .:*iSRO~1
..
Initial
Item Description
a
b*
c'
--;15
-
1
Questions and answers are technically accurate and applicable to the facilitv.
71r-J ~
2.
o .
NRC KJAs are referenced for all questions.
-;s
J}--/ rrIf?
b.
Facility learning objectives are referenced as available.
3.
SRO guestions are appropriate in accordance with Section D.2.d of ES-401
--J6
-rz,J
v'v'R>
-
....
4
The sampling process was random and systematic (If more than 4 RO or 2 SRO questions
% 1P ~
were repeated from the last 2 NRC licensmp exams, consult the NRR OL program office).
5.
Question duplication from the license screening/audit exam was controlled
as indicated below (check the item that applies) and appears appropriate:
_
the audit exam was systematically and randomly deveioped; or
_
the audit exam was completed before the license exam was started; or
76 JZJ ~
__ the examinations were developed independently; or
"Jf.- the licensee certifies that there is no duplication; or
__ other (explain)
_._-
Ban:-r Mcditied
6.
Bank use meets limits (no more than 75 percent
New
from the bank, at least 10 percent new, and the rest
- 5/~-r;3 ~
25
/'6 "f1J fYIf;>
new or modified); enter the actual RO / SRO-only
,J,7 I IS
r----
question distribution(s) at right.
7.
Between 50 and 60 percent of the questions on the RO1MClnory
CIA
exam are wntten at the comprehension/ analysis level,
-15
the SR.O exam may exceed 60 percent If the randomly
-n> ~
selected K/As support the hiqhe: cognitive levels, enter
3 c;
/ 7
i70
/ la
the actual RO I SRO question distributiorus) at light
J
8.
References/handouts provided do not give away answers
-;:5 7lr/ IVS
or aid in the elimination of distractors.
9.
Question content conforms with specific K/A statements in the previously approved
examination outline and is appropriate for the tier to which they are assigned;
/6 .-fl-/
/'if:>
~.
deviations are justified.
10.
Question psychometric quality and format meet the guidelines in ES Appendix B.
-/~
--y1--
1W1S
11
The exam contains the required number of one-point, multiple choice items;
-D 11P ~~
the total is correct and agrees with the value on the cover sheet.
____
Printed Name / ~nat~~
Date
a. Author
210mm
O:'IV~'> / '/L/
-
v----:=:-
//1/ot'
b. Facility Reviewer (*J
-Z;Z~~...
/././/6'-
/~~ /'.;, /Z
fft;
c. NRC Chief Examiner (#)
~ It BtrT$/ ff;["J (j, I '" .J;:-:...
d
NRC Regional Supervisor
J..!J4<AUJ---r:. WttiJ)NV.t>J /
~
.
~
(
.
"----'"
"
Note:
- The facility reviewer's initials/signature are not applicable for NRC-developed examinations.
- Independent NRC reviewer initial items in Column "c"; chief examiner concurrence required.
ES-401, Page 30 of 34
ES-401, Rev. 9
Written Exam Review Worksheet
Sequoyah 2008-301
Form ES-401-9
Q#
KiA#
B
L
L
Psychometric Flaws
Content Flaws
U
Comment
M
0
0
Stem
Cues
T/F
1 Non
>1 Non
Partial
Min
Q~
E
Explanation
N
K
D
Focus
Cred
Cred
KiA
Only
S
Dist
Dist
BIW
GENERAL COMMENTS
B= Bank 1M=Modified 1N-New 1F-Fundamental Level (I.E. Memory) 1H-Higher Cognitive Level (I.E. CIA)
I
For All BANK questions: swap the order of the answer choices so that applicants cannot rely on recall of the correct answer location.
ROEXAM
I
007EAl.08
N
H
2
B
Can the first two bullets be replaced with the following single bullet:
"Unit I was at 10% power when both MFPTs tripped."
S
First bullet revised. Second bullet not changed. The teaching in the
second bullet does not affect the a11SWerS to this question or any other
questions. OK MAB 02/04/2008
Can the third bullet read as follows:
"Stearn generator levels dropped to a minimum of##% and then began to
rise." - (use a level that is a couple ofpercent above the AFW start signal)
Incorporated. OK MAB 02/0412008
l
.'
Is there an extra space in the correct answet between "controlled" and
"manually"? Fixed OK MAB 02/0412008
Is there an extra space in "A" and "B" between "required" and "to"?
Fixed OK MAB 02/04/2008
2
008AA2.29
N
H
2
B
Be consistent with periods in answer choices. Fixed. OK MAB
02/0412008
S
Does the cause of the lowering RCS pressure affect which answer is
correct? Is it important to state that pzr pressure is inadvertently lowered
with pzr sprays or that the safety leakage rises, etc? If the pressure drop
results from a problem elsewhere, then the level behavior may change.
Discuss with licensee.
Licensee agreed. Comment incorporated. OK
MAB 02/04/2008
3
009EA2.24
N
H
2
B
There is no point in stating the reason why the RCPs are required to be
tripped. Consider the following suggestion for the answer choices:
S
A.
ALL RCPs are required to be tripped.
Page I of29
ES-401, Rev. 9
Written Exam Review Worksheet
Sequoyah 2008-301
Form ES-401-9
Q#
KJA#
B
L
L
Psychometric Flaws
Content Flaws
U
Comment
M
0
0
Stem
Cues
T/F
1 Non
>1 Non
Partial
Min
Q=
E
Explanation
N
K
D
Focus
Cred
Cred
KJA
Only
S
Dis!
Dis!
BIW
B.
ONLY RCP #1 and #3 are required to be tripped.
C.
ONLY RCP #1 is required to be tripped.
D.
ONLY RCP #3 is required to be tripped.
Incorporated. OK MAB 02/04/2008
4
01lEK3.13
B
F
2
B
Change answer choices to:
A.
Realigns the ECCS suction path from the RWST to the
S
contairunent sump.
B.
No change needed
C.
No change needed
D.
Realigns the ECCS flow to prevent boron precipitation.
Incorporated for "D". Licensee and CE agreed on change for "A". OK
MAB 02/0412008
5
015/017
B
H
2
S
Suggest making slight modification to "C" and "D":
AK2.08
C.
The RCP stator windings will overheat.
D.
The RCP motor bearings will overheat.
Incorporated. OK MAB 02/04/2008
6
022AA2.03
B
H
2
X?
B
Have licensee explain the mechanism for "A" to occur. I need to better
understand the failure mechanism that can cause the charging to go to 120
S
gpm and then retum to normal with pressurizer level also returning to
nonna!.
Licensee modified "A" based on comment. OK MAB 02/04/2008
7
025AK2.05
M
H
2
X?
Y
"B" and "D" plausibility: Why would it be plausible for an applicant to
ii
+
believe that spray pumps would be drawing suction from the sump when
,
there is 68% remaining in the RWST? Also, why would an applicant
S
believe that suction for the spray pumps would be from the sump when
they are in ECA-I.I. If adequate level existed in the sump and spray
pumps are operating why would they be in ECA-I.I ?
Parameters in the stem changed to address these concerns. The changes to
the parameters also caused the correct answer to change. OK MAB
02/04/2008
This question contains overlap flaws with questions on the SRO exam.
This question provides information that indicates that E-Ois entered upon a
reactor trip. I think this comment could alleviate itself ifthe issues on the
SRO exam are resolved. Concern addressed on SRO exam. OK MAB
02/0412008
Add a period after the sentence at 08:0 l. Fixed. MAB 02/04/2008
Does the information in the stem preclude an applicant from assuming that
containment pressure could have been greater than 12 psid and has now
decreased to 9.7 psid? Ifthis is an assumption that the applicants are
Page 2 of29
ES-401, Rev. 9
Written Exam Review Worksheet
Sequoyah 2008-301
Form ES-401-9
Q#
KiA#
B
L
L
Psychometric Flaws
Content Flaws
U
Comment
M
0
0
Stem
Cues
T/F
1 Non
>1 Non
Partial
Min
Q=
E
Explanation
N
K
D
Focus
Cred
Cred
KiA
Only
S
Dist
Dist
B/W
forced to make, would it change the correct answer. Is there a possible
argument that there are two correct answers to this question based on
forcing the applicant to make assumptions? Qnestion statement has been
enhanced to preclnde an assnmption that conld make two answers correct.
There is enough info in the stem to preclnde applicants having a need to
make any assumptions on containment pressure. OK MAB 02/04/2008
8
026AK3.03
B
F
2
x
E
"B" and "C" are really the same distractor. They both state to reduce heat
load, or minimize heat load. "C" implies that RCPs must not be needed if
S
they are not cooled to maintain CCS within design capability.
One ofthese two distractors should be modified/replaced. "B" has been
changed to address concem. OK MAB 02/04/2008
9
027AAI.02
B
H
2
E
"start" should be plural in the answer choices. Fixed. OK MAB
02/04/2008
S
Delete the piece of each answer choice that states that heaters ENERGIZE
or DEENERGIZE. This is not needed to make answer choices unique. I.E.
A. Pressurizer Pressure HI alarm annunciates. Actual pressurizer pressure
starts to rise.
Etc. for the rest ofthe answer choices.
Incorporated. OK
MAB 02/04/2008
10
038G2.1.3
N
F
2
E
Technical accuracy of "A" and "B": Is there a requirement to cool the
plant prior to tumover? The supporting documentation does not support
S
this. The supporting documentation supports that the cooldown is not
J.!
permitted to be performed by an operator who is simultaneously
"
conducting tumover. This is different than requiring that the cooldown
take place prior to tumover. TIle more precise way to phrase this would be
to state the converse ofwhat is stated in "C" and "D". I.E. An operator is
not permitted to simultaneously tumover and perform the cooldown.
Incorporated. OK MAB 02/04/2008
First part of "C" and "D" also needs wording enhancements because
OPDP-I would not provide direction to cooldown while ccncurrently
performing tumover. OPDP-I provides Administrative guidance, not
guidance that is specific to the SGTR accident. Consider: An operator is
permitted to simultaneously turnover and perform the cooldown.
Incorporated. OK MAB 02/04/2008
II
040AKI.03
B
F
2
x
- y
KIA Match: The IvA requires testing knowledge of operational
implications of RCS shrink and depressurization as they apply to steam
S
line break. This question tests knowledge ofbrittle failure which stems
from an RCS cooldown and subsequent pressurization.
New Q written. OK MAB 02/04/2008
Page 3 of29
ES-401, Rev. 9
Written Exam Review Worksheet
Sequoyah 2008-301
Form ES-401-9
Q#
KlA#
B
L
L
Psychometric Flaws
Content Flaws
U
Comment
M
0
0
Stem
Cues
T/F
1 Non
>1 Non
Partial
Min
Q-
E
Explanation
N
K
D
Focns
Cred
Cred
KIA
Only
S
Dist
Dist
B/W
This question has other issues with distractors, but because ofthe above
comment, there is no need to address these comments at this time.
New Q written. OK MAB 02/04/2008
12
055G2.4.29
N
F
I-
x
.y
Is the 19:30 bullet worded correctly?
2
Q replaced. OK MAB 02/04/2008
S
Punctuation in answer does not appear to be correct,
Q replaced. OK MAB 02/04/2008
KIA not Matched: The KIA requires a SBO. Does this question test
knowledge ofa SBO, or just knowledge of a security threat? The way I
read this question is that you could delete all the information in the stem
and simply state that there is a credible insider security t1ueat and it is
necessary to dispatch an operator to the EDG room.
In other words, the
LOOP appears to be irrelevant.
Q replaced. OK MAB 02/04/2008
13
056AKI.03
B
H
I-
x
.g
Be consistent with periods after bullets. Fixed. OK MAB 02/04/2008
2
S
Replace "D" with the logical error that would result from subtracting 15 psi
from 2085.
Incorporated. OK MAB 02/04/2008
Consider combining the subtraction of 15 psi and tile use ofThot to replace
"e".
Incorporated. OK MAB 02/04/2008
Technically this question could be rated as U, but the fix is simple enough
that it is being rated as E. The above comment incorporation will help to
make the LOD more acceptable. As written, two distracters are not
plausible. It is not reasonable for a licensed operator to use Tcold or Tave
in a subcooling calculation.
Noted. Issues addressed. OK MAB 02/04/2008
14
058AK1.01
B
H
2
.g
After 4 hours4.62963e-5 days <br />0.00111 hours <br />6.613757e-6 weeks <br />1.522e-6 months <br /> would the batteries be discharged? Or is there a requirement
that only states that the batteries will not be discharged prior to 4 hours4.62963e-5 days <br />0.00111 hours <br />6.613757e-6 weeks <br />1.522e-6 months <br />?
S
We need to ensure that the aIISWer choices accurately represent the status
ofthe batteries. Concems addressed by changing the wording. OK MAB
02/04/2008
15
062AA1.01
M
F
2
S
Q is SAT.
16
W/E04
B
F
I-
x
X?
.g
Be consistent with periods in the aIISWer choices. Fixed OK MAB
G2.4.28
2
'I
02/04/2008
Page 4 of29
ES-401, Rev. 9
Written Exam Review Worksheet
Sequoyah 2008-301
Form ES-401-9
Q#
KlA#
B
L
L
Psychometric Flaws
Content Flaws
U
Comment
M
0
0
Stem
Cues
T/F
1 Non
>1 Nou
Partial
Miu
Q-
E
Explanation
N
K
D
Focus
Crcd
Crcd
KIA
Only
S
Dist
Dist
B/W
S
Distractor "A" is not plausible. ECCS flow is an indirect parameter, which
will follow RCS pressure, which is answer choice "DO'. It does not have
the procedure guidance to monitor the indirect parameter (ECCS flow)
when the direct parameter is available (RCS P).
Concern addressed. OK MAE 02/04/2008
I also have some issues with "B" because subcooling is calculated from
RCS pressure. It makes no sense to monitor the calculated parameter when
the direct parameter is available. Concern addressed. OK MAB
02/04/2008
The only thing that makes "A" and "B" incorrect is that the procedure does
not state these parameters, but they would work as a method for
determining ifthe leak was isolated. Noted.
MAB 02/04/2008
The KIA does not restrict this question to be written to test leak isolation.
Noted.
MAB 02/0412008
17
W/E05
B
F
2
X?
E
How is "A" different from "D"? Are these unique answer choices? It
EK3.1
should be possible to modify the wording ofthese two distractors to ensure
S
that they are unique, I.E., "A" could be pertaining to high temperatures
and "DO' could speak to cold water on dry tubes as is suggested in the
distractor analysis. Wording in "DO' enhanced to ensure uniqueness of
answer choice. OK MAB 02/04/2008
18
W/Ell
M
H
1
x
Y
Question does not discriminate at the licensed operator level. This is a
EK2.2
h
question that, when provided the reference, almost anyone could arrive at
REF
S
the correct answer.
i
Following suggestion incorporated. OK MAB 02/04/2008
Suggestion to improve question:
Use most of the same items in the stem. Some can be deleted if they
become unnecessary,
Q: Which one ofthe following correctly describes the flow rate that meets
the intent of ECA-l.1, Step 20 RNO?
A.
Establish 325 gpm ECCS flow. ECCS pumps may be started
and stopped as necessary to accomplish the desired flow rate.
B.
Establish 325 gpm ECCS flow. ECCS pumps are not permitted
to be started and stopped as necessary to accomplish the desired
flow rate.
C.
Establish 400 gpm ECCS flow. ECCS pumps may be started
and stopped as necessary to accomplish the desired flow rate.
D.
Establish 400 gpm ECCS flow. ECCS pumps are not permitted
to be started and stopped as necessary to accomplish the desired
flow rate.
This suggestion raises the plausibility ofthe distractors and still tests
Page 5 of29
ES-401, Rev. 9
Written Exam Review Worksheet
Sequoyah 2008-301
Form ES-401-9
Q#
KlA#
B
L
L
PsychometricFlaws
Content Flaws
U
Comment
M
0
0
Stem
Cues
T/F
1 Non
>1 Non
Partial
Min
Q=
E
Explanation
N
K
D
Focus
Cred
Cred
KIA
Only
S
Dist
Dist
B/W
whether the applicants understand the intent of the procedure step.
Suggestion incorporated. OK MAB 02/04/2008
19
001AK2.05
M
H
1-
B
Be consistent with periods behind bulleted phrases. Fixed. OK MAB
2
02/04/2008
S
Would the question be enhanced if one ofthe Thot or Tcold instruments
were to fail instead ofthe Tavg auctioneering unit? Discuss with licensee.
Decided not to make a change on temp inst. OK MAB 02/04/2008
20
033G2.4.2l
M
F
2
S
Q is SAT
21
036AKl.Ol
N
F
2
S
Maintain past tense in third bullet. Somewhat incorporated, but it does not
affect technical accuracy of question. OK MAB 02/04/2008
Question is written in the "NOT' format, which is discouraged by
NUREG-l02l. This question can remain in its current form as long as the
licensee agrees that the question being in this format will not affect
applicant performance. In other words, their applicants have seen
questions in this format and would not get the incorrect answer for any
other reason than a knowledge weakness.
Noted. OK MAB 02/04/2008
22
060AAl.02
M
F
2
X?
x
lei
KIA Match: Have the licensee provide an explanation ofhow the KIA is
matched. The KIA requires testing knowledge ofhow to operate or
S
monitor ventilation systems during an accidental gaseous radwaste release.
- 1'
How is a ventilation system being monitored? Rad Mntr is part ofthe
ventilation system. KIA match is OK. MAB 02/04/2008
When would the Waste Gas Rad Monitor not detect a leak from a Waste
Gas Decay Tank? Changed stem to a flange leak which would not cause
the Waste Gas Rad Mntr to alarm. OK MAB 02/0412008
23
069G2.4.45
N
H
2
B
Technical accuracy ofthe question is a concern because they do not have
to restore integrity within 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br />. Ifthey do not restore integrity within 1
S
hour, then they are required to shutdown. TIle answer choices need to be
more precise in order to be technically correct.
Wording enhancements made to specifically ask for what the Action
Statement states. OK MAB 02/04/2008
24
074EK3.07
B
F
1
x
lei
LOD= 1: Distractors are not plausible. Due to the non-credible distractors,
this question does not discriminate at the appropriate level to make a
S
licensing decision. Changed distractors. OK MAB 02/04/2008
Reflux boiling is a cooling method used when RCPs are off.
How would it be reasonable for an operator to think that starting an RCP
Page 6 of29
ES-401, Rev. 9
Written Exam Review Worksheet
Sequoyah 2008-301
Form ES-401-9
Q#
KJA#
B
L
L
PsychometricFlaws
Content Flaws
U
Comment
M
0
0
Stem
Cnes
T/F
1 Non
>1 Non
Partial
Min
Q-
E
Explanation
N
K
D
Focus
Cred
Cred
KJA
Only
S
Dist
Dist
B/W
would keep pressure from rising?
Changed distractor. OK MAB 02/04/2008
2S
076AK2.01
B
H
I
x
tf
A pinhole leak of a fuel assembly would be evident in RCS samples that
are analyzed for various isotopes; however, small leaks will not necessarily
S
result in rising radiation monitor trends. There are concerns with "B"
being an altemate correct answer because the size of the leak is not
defined. Also, the RCS leakage locations are not defmed, so there are also
concems about whether a small RCS leak would result in a rising rad
monitor reading.
"Significant increase in RCS activity" added to stem. OK MAB
02/04/2008
LOD= I: Distractors are not plausible. Due to the non-credible distractors,
this question does not discriminate at the appropriate level to make a
licensing decision.
Question is on the cusp ofbeing unacceptable due to low LOD. Noted.
MAB 02/04/2008
Consider writing a question that has a plant nip and a SGTL. This will
allow testing MSL monitors as well as Condenser Off Gas Monitors. This
idea may help to raise the question to a level where it could be used to
discriminate between a competent and less than competent licensed
operator.
Not incorporated. Allowed by CEo The rest ofthe exam is at an
acceptable level to not warrant a change to this question. OK MAB
02/04/2008
26
W/E09
B
H
2
B
The "repressurization" piece of "A" and "B" should be deleted. It does not
EA2.1
add information that is needed to make these answer choices unique.
S
Discuss with licensee. Deleted. OK MAE 02/04/2008
Consider rewording the question as follows:
Which one ofthe following correctly states the procedure that maximizes
the allowable cooldown rate for the provided circumstances and the
maximum cooldown rate allowed by that procedure?
A.
Use ES-0.2, Natural Circulation Cooldown. The cooldown
limit is SOF/hr.
B.
Use ES-0.2, Natural Circulation Cooldown. The cooldown
limit is 100F/hr.
C. / Use ES-O.3, Natural Circulation Cooldown with Steam Voids in
Vessel (with RVLSI). The cooldown limit is SOF/hr.
D.
Use ES-O.3, Natural Circulation Cooldown with Steam Voids in
Vessel (with RVLSI). The cooldown limit is SOF/hr
Incorporated. OK MAE 02/04/2008
Page 7 of29
ES-401, Rev. 9
Written Exam Review Worksheet
Sequoyah 2008-301
Form ES-401-9
Q#
KlA#
B
L
L
Psvchometric Flaws
Content Flaws
U
Comment
M
0
0
Stem
Cues
T/F
1 Non
>1 Non
Partial
Min
Q~
E
Explanation
N
K
D
Focus
Cred
Cred
KIA
Only
S
Dist
Dist
B/W
27
W/EI4
B
F
2
S
Q is SAT.
EA2.2
28
003K3.04
B
H
2
S
Q is SAT.
29
003G2.3.10
N
F
2
S
Q is SAT.
30
004K5.26
N
H
2
S
Q is SAT.
31
004A3.08
B
H
I-
X
B
"D": it is not credible for an applicant to make this error. There is no
2
division needed in this calculation.
S
Consider making "D" 60%. Discuss with licensee
Incorporated. OK MAB 02/04/2008
32
005A4.03
B
H
I-
x
- y
"RCS cooldown rate is too high" - what does this mean? It may not
2
matter, but it would be better to provide the applicant with information that
S
they would normally have available to them, such as an actual temperature
at two different times. It may also be necessary to state that SRO gave
them direction to cooldown at a certain value. The question piece would
need to change slightly to ask for the actions needed to comply with the
SRO's directions. (These changes will make "C" plausible)
Q replaced. OK MAB 02/04/2008
Question should be tied to the procedure. I.E. Which one of the following
..... CONSTANT RHR flow, in accordance with 0-SO-74-1, "procedure
title"?
Q replaced. OK MAB 02/04/2008
"A" and "B" do not contain credible misconceptions to discriminate
between competent and less than competent licensed operators.
Q replaced. OK MAB 02/04/2008
33
006KI.02
M
F
2
B
Is there an extra space between "SSPS" and "if' in the stem?
Fixed. OK MAB 02/04/2008
S
Have licensee walk me through the technical aspects of the question. I
may be OK with the question with a couple of minutes of discussion.
Q is SAT. MAB 02/04/2008
34
007K3.01
B
H
2
x
B
Is there an extra space in "D" between "..4," mId "failed"?
Fixed. MAB 02/0412008
S
"C" not plausible because there is no relationship with the PRT.
The following change would correct the distractor plausibility issue:
A.
- 2 seal on RCP #4 failed; Pressurizer Safety Valve, 1-68-568,
failed open; Reactor Head Vent Valve, I-FCV-68-394, Failed
Page 8 of29
ES-401, Rev. 9
Written Exam Review Worksheet
Sequoyah 2008-301
Form ES-401-9
Q#
KlA#
B
L
L
Psychometric Flaws
Content Flaws
U
Comment
M
0
0
Stem
Cues
T/F
1 Non
>1 Non
Partial
Min
Q-
E
Explanation
N
K
D
Focus
Cred
Cred
KIA
Only
S
Dist
Dist
BIW
Open
B.
- 2 seal on RCP #4 failed; Pressurizer Safety Valve, 1-68-568,
failed open; Reactor Head Vent Valve (I-FCV-68-394, Failing
Open, could not cause the stated conditions)
C.
Pressurizer Safety Valve, 1-68-568, failed open; Reactor Head
Vent Valve, I-FCV-68-394, Failed Open (#2 seal on RCP #4
failing could not cause these conditions)
D.
Pressurizer Safety Valve, 1-68-568, failed open (Pressurizer
Safety Valve, 1-68-568, failing open could not cause the stated
plant conditions AND Reactor Head Vent Valve, I-FCV-68-
394, Failing Open could not cause the stated plant conditions.)
Discuss the above change with thelicensee, If we can get this change to
work, then the question may be SAT.
Worked with licensee to develop plausible distractors. OK MAB
02/04/2008
35
007G2.1.1
N
F
2
x
B
Is fourth bullet worded correctly? Fixed. MAB 02/04/2008
S
"A" and "B" are not mutually exclusive, which harms their plausibility. In
other words, If"B" were true, it will still makes sense to do "A". The
problem is that ifthe applicant determines that the alarm is valid, adjusting
level will always be correct.
"A" and "B" corrected. MAB 02/04/2008
Is there an extra space in "C" and "D" between "level" and "alarm"?
They neglected to correct this; however, the extra space appears in the
~! '
correct answer as well as a distractor, so it will not adversely affect
r'
plausibility. OK MAB 02/04/2008
The question should be specific to the answer choices provided:
Which one ofthe following correctly states the validity ofthe PRT level
alarm and the required actions as a result ofthe alarm?
Incorporated. OK MAB 02/04/2008
I would prefer to have "A" and "B" read as follows:
A. The PRT level alarm is valid. (need a better second halfofdistractor)
B. The PRT level alarm is valid. 0-SI-OPS-068-137.0, RCS Water
Inventory, is required to be performed.
A version ofthis comment was incorporated. AOP-R.05 was used. OK
MAB 02/04/2008
I would prefer the second halfof"C" and "D" to read such that it
specifically states the information being tested. I.E.:
C. The PRT level alarm is false. According to OPDP-4, the maximum time
that Maintenance has to correct the condition causing the invalid alarm is 7
days, at which time the alarm is required to be cleared/disabled.
Page 9 of29
ES-401, Rev. 9
Written Exam Review Worksheet
Sequoyah 2008-301
Form ES-401-9
Q#
KlA#
B
L
L
Psychometric Flaws
Content Flaws
U
Comment
M
0
0
Stem
Cues
T/F
1 Non
>1 Non
Partial
Min
Q-
E
Explanation
N
K
D
Focus
Cred
Cred
KIA
Only
S
Dist
Dist
B/W
D. The PRT level alarm is false. According to OPDP-4, the maximum
time that Maintenance has to correct the condition causing the invalid
alarm is 72 hours8.333333e-4 days <br />0.02 hours <br />1.190476e-4 weeks <br />2.7396e-5 months <br />, at which time the alarm is required to be
cleared/disabled.
Incorporated. OK MAB 02/04/2008
36
008K4.07
N
F
2
x
E
Is there an extra space between "CCS" and "Pump" in the stem?
(I am beginning to think that it just may be the way it prints out and that
there may not be an extra space - but it is free to ask.)
S
Fixed. MAB 0210412008
Would it be possible to test the RED light on the throwover switch for the
first part of every answer choice. I think this would be a better test ofthe
actual plant indications. I.E. Either the red light is ON or OFF. Discuss
with licensee.
I think this could help the plausibility of "B".
Did not incorporate after discussions with licensee. MAB 02/04/2008
37
010K6.03
M
H
2
S
Be consistent with periods after bullets. Fixed. MAB 02/04/2008
Simplify the answer choices as follows:
A.
Master controller output would increase. PZR pressure would
be maintained above the reactor trip setpoint.
B.
Master controller output would increase. PZR pressure would
decrease to the reactor trip setpoint.
C.
Master controller output would decrease. PZR pressure would
be maintained above the reactor trip setpoint.
- c
D.
Master controller output would decrease. PZR pressure would
"
be maintained above the reactor trip setpoint
Incorporated. MAB 02/0412008
38
012K4.04
N
H
2
X?
f
"A" and "D" are not plausible because the last bullet in the stem leads the
applicant to only consider answer choices where RTA "A" is different than
S
RTA "B" UV and Shunt coils. Simply using psychometrics, and applicant
can eliminate these two answer choices. Discuss with licensee.
Answer choices simplified. Issue resolved. OK MAB 02/04/2008
39
013K2.01
B
H
2
S
Potential overlap issues with 006Kl.02 should be discussed. Ifit is
determined that there is no overlap, then question may be SAT.
Overlap issue resolved. OK MAB 02/04/2008
40
022A2,04
N
H
2
X?
f
Is the wording correct in the second paragraph, "Compare the effects on of
the .."? Fixed. OK MAB 02/04/2008
S
Have the licensee explain the plausibility of additional cooling units being
placed in service. Are there additional cooling units that would be
available at any time in order to reduce temp? If there are additional
Page 10 of29
ES-401, Rev. 9
Written Exam Review Worksheet
Sequoyah 2008-301
Form ES-401-9
Q#
KiA#
B
L
L
PsychometricFlaws
Content Flaws
U
Comment
M
0
0
Stem
Cues
T/F
1 Non
>1 Non
Partial
Min
Q~
E
Explanation
N
K
D
Focus
Cred
Cred
KiA
Only
S
Dist
Dist
BIW
cooling units that could be used, under what conditions would they
typically be used?
Additional cooling units are available one ofthe units. Unit differences
make the distractors plausible. OK MAB 02/04/2008
41
025K5.02
M
F
2
B
Is the incorrectness ofthis answer choice based entirely on the word
"each"? This needs to be discussed to ensure only one correct answer.
S
Distractors reworked to ensure only one correct answer. OK MAB
02/04/2008
42
026K4.07
M
F
2
B
The licensee needs to explain why the II% level requirement is because of
the I-FCV-74-3 interlock. I am not sure that the attached reference
S
material supports this. Maybe the supporting documentation is in another
print or lesson plan. Also as part ofthis discussion, the wording ofthe
question should be reviewed to ensure that it is accurate and will elicit the
answer.
Licensee explained the level requirement. OK MAB 02/04/2008
43
026G2.4.48
M
H
2
x
lei
Are there extra spaces in "A" and "B"? Fixed. MAB 02/04/2008
S
Will the terminology "loading room" confuse any ofthe applicants?
Should this be defmed with more precise terminology?
"loading room" deleted. OK MAB 02/04/2008
Is the wording of "A" and "B" precise enough? The pump did not (failed
to) auto start - this is a fact. I would prefer more precise terminology such
'1'[
as: "Pump did not auto start even with an auto start signal present."
Altemative similar wording would work as well.
Incorporated. OK MAB 02/04/2008
Should the answer choices contain commas or periods between the two
answer parts. It looks like two complete sentences are separated by
commas.
Two sentences used. OK MAB 02/04/2008
Second set ofbullets should be introduced with a colon, vice semi-colon.
Fixed. MAB 02/04/2008
Time in the stem is only provided to the minute, yet 14:05:00 is almost a
full 4 minutes from 14:07:59. The clock in the control room may read the
same, but this is greater than 180 seconds. Discuss whether this question
needs to be more precise to elicit the correct answer.
More precise times are not needed - I made an error with my math when
this comment was made. OK MAB 02/04/2008
"A" and "B" are not mutually exclusive because it may never be wrong to
Page II of29
ES-401, Rev. 9
Written Exam Review Worksheet
Sequoyah 2008-301
Form ES-401-9
Q#
KlA#
B
L
L
PsychometricFlaws
Content Flaws
U
Comment
M
0
0
Stem
Cues
T/F
1 Non
>1 Non
Partial
Min
Q=
E
Explanation
N
K
D
Focus
Cred
Cred
KIA
Only
S
Dist
Dist
B/W
verify that there is room on the EDG prior to manually placing a load on
the EDG. If "A" is correct, the "B" will also be correct,
Wording revised to ensure unique answer choices. OK MAB 02/0412008
When did the containment pressure reach 2.81 psig? Discuss whether this
is important information to contain in the stem.
Q stem is precise enough. OK MAB 02/0412008
"A" and "B" plausibility: Ifthe pump was supposed to auto start, then I
know, just using common sense, that the EDG is desigoed to have room to
start the pump (assuming that the sequencer has timed out). Ifthe
sequencer has not timed out, then it would not be smart to start the pump
anyway. "A" wording revised.
"B" determined to be OK with the change
to "A". OK MAB 02/04/2008
44
039Al.09
N
H
2
x
.g
KIA Match: The KIA requires testing knowledge ofmonitoring main
steam line radiation monitor parameters associated with operating the
S
MRSS controls to prevent exceeding design limits. How does this question
test the knowledge required by the KIA? How is knowledge ofthe
radiation monitor indications being tested in relation to how those
indications are used to avoid exceeding design limits?
Q replaced. OK MAB 02/04/2008
The question asks for the condition that is causing the alarm. Is there a
possibility that another condition, such as an actual high rad condition
could cause the alarm? High rad may not cause the other conditions, but
,1
could it cause the alarm? The wording ofthe question may need some
minor revision to ensure that the correct answer is elicited.
Q replaced. OK MAE 02/0412008
Are the second parts ofthe answer choices worded correctly? The subject
ofthe sentence appears to be implied. It would be better to state the noun.
Q replaced. OK MAE 02/04/2008
No reference is being suggested. Are the time requirements a closed book
knowledge item at SQ?
Q replaced. OK MAB 02/0412008
45
059A2.07
N
H
2
x
?
B
What conditions would automatically close the 2B MFPT Cond FCVs?
Valve operation depends on power being above or below 60%. OK MAB
S
02/0412008
"A" Plausibility: What is the logic behind the FCVs being re-opened in the
AOP? This distractor may not be plausible. It may not be credible for an
operator to think that they would re-open valves that automatically closed.
Discussed with licensee.
OK MAB 02/0412008
Page 12 of29
ES-401, Rev. 9
Written Exam Review Worksheet
Sequoyah 2008-301
Form ES-401-9
Q#
KiA#
B
L
L
PsychometricFlaws
Content Flaws
U
Comment
M
0
0
Stem
Cnes
T/F
1 Non
>1 Non
Partial
Min
Q=
E
Explanation
N
K
D
Focus
Cred
Cred
KiA
Only
S
Dist
Dist
B/W
The stem and answer choice talks about some AOP that has been entered.
Is there a reason that the AOP that the operators are performing is not
mentioned in the stem or the answer choices? Discuss the possibility of
adding the AOP to tighten the question and tie the answers to a specific
AOP. AOP-S.OI added to the stem. OK MAB 02/04/2008
46
059A4.01
M
H
2
S
Second to last bullet: I assume the SG level is below setpoint, but this
needs to be specific. Fixed. MAB 02/04/2008
Last Bullet: is it necessary to state that the dumps are armed?
No - "armed" deleted. OK MAB 02/04/2008
47
061K5.01
B
H
2
S
Typos in 5th bullet. Fixed. MAB 02/04/2008
Trends are provided for all parameters except for SG levels.
Added. MAE 02/04/2008
48
062KI.02
B
F
2
B
Too many items are being iterated on in the answer choices. This provides
the applicants with multiple ways to eliminate distractors. Discuss with
S
licensee. Discussed. OK MAB 02/04/2008
Consider the following:
A.
After 1.25 seconds, all EDGs will auto start .
B.
After 1.25 seconds, only the IB-B EDG will start.
C.
After 300 seconds all EDGs will autostart.
c
D.
After 300 seconds only the IB-B EDG will statio
Incorporated. OK MAB 02/04/2008
49
063K2.01
N
H
2
?
+
Distractor analysis states that an applicant may think that control power for
the breaker is supplied from the EDG battery. Why would an applicant
S
think this. Do the EDG batteries supply control power to other buses or to
this bus under different plant conditions? I need to understand the credible
misconception a little better.
Answer choices revised to correct issue. OK MAE 02/04/2008
50
064K6.08
B
F
2
x
x
.y
"B" is not plausible: TIle entire reason for having a standby pump is to
have it backup the lead pump. The second pump is not referred to in the
S
distractor as the standby pump, but it is strongly implied by the stem
stating that there is a lead pump. A manual alignment does not appear to
make sense.
Distractors revised. OK MAB 02/04/2008
"C" is not plausible because the stem provides a cue that these pumps start
on tank level. "C" allowed this distractor to stay on exam after discussions
with licensee. OK MAB 02/04/2008
Page 13 of29
ES-401, Rev. 9
Written Exam Review Worksheet
Sequoyah 2008-301
Form ES-401-9
Q#
KlA#
B
L
L
Psychometric Flaws
Content Flaws
U
Comment
M
0
0
Stem
Cnes
T/F
1 Non
>1 Non
Partial
Min
Q=
E
Explanation
N
K
0
Focus
Cred
Cred
KIA
Only
S
Dist
Dist
BIW
"A" is the obvious answer because the stem states that these pumps start on
low tank level. It would also be common sense to assume that the standby
pump would not stilt at the same time or level as the lead pump, which is
why it is a standby pump. After discussion with licensee, decided to allow
this distractor. OK MAB 02/04/2008
If possible, place the conditions of the plant in the stem, rather than making
the answer choices conditional. A specific tank level and switch position
for the backup pump should be placed in the stem.
It is not prohibited to place conditions in answer choices, therefore Q was
not changed. OK MAB 02/04/2008
Consider the following:
Initial plant conditions:
-
-
Fuel oil day tank level = ##%
-
Lead fuel oil transfer pump is running
-
The backup fuel oil transfer pump control switch is in AUTO
Current plant conditions:
-
Lead fuel oil transfer pump shaft completely shears
Which one of the following correctly describes the operation of the backup
fuel oil transfer pump?
A.
The backup pump will be running due to a start signal on low
discharge pressure.
B.
The backup pump will be running due to a start signal on low
tanklevel.
C.
The backup pump will not be running and will not start at
anytime as tank level lowers.
D.
The backup pump will not be running, but will start as tank
level lowers with no discharge pressure on the lead pump.
Allowed Qto remain with only minor revision. OK MAB 02/0412008
51
073AI.01
N
II
2
x
- g
Is second bullet worded correctly? Fixed. MAB 02/04/2008
F
S
Be consistent with periods behind bullets. Licensee did not incorporate
this comment, but does not affect the technical accuracy of the question,
OK MAE 02/0412008
This question is really written at the (Fnmdamental knowledge level.
It
appears like there may be infonnation in the stem that does not add value
to the question. The question really does not ask anything more than:
What automatic actions occur as a result of2-RM-90-123A alarming on
high radiation? Licensee did not incorporate comment, TIley are in the
middle ofthe band for CIA and F questions, therefore designating this
question in either category will not cause all exam metric to be encroached
Page 14 of29
ES-401, Rev. 9
Written Exam Review Worksheet
Sequoyah 2008-301
Form ES-401-9
Q#
KlA#
n
L
L
Psychometric Flaws
Content Flaws
U
Comment
M
0
0
Stem
Cues
T/F
1 Non
>1 Non
Partial
Min
Q-
E
Explanation
N
K
D
Focus
Cred
Cred
KIA
Only
S
Dist
Dist
BIW
upon. I would have required this to be fixed if it affected the adherence to
the higher cog criteria. OK MAE 02/04/2008
"B" is not plausible: What information in the stem would lend credibility
to this distractor. It is very basic that there is an auto isolation ofthe surge
tank. It is not enough to simply test whether an auto isolation exists. I
agree with the plausibility that you have built into the other two distrators.
Is there any way to improve this distractor by requiring the applicants to
know a little more than whether or not an auto isolation exists?
"B" replaced. MAB 02/04/2008
Does "C" contain grammatical errors in both sentences?
Fixed. MAB 02/04/2008
"D": when possible, always word questions and answers for what is
required to be done, not what an operator will or may do. This is because
operators may do anything, but we want to test what they are required to
do.
Revised. OK MAE 02/04/2008
52
076A2.02
N
H
2
- y
Typo in second bullet. Fixed. MAE 02/0412008
S
Is there enough information in the stem to elicit the correct answer?
During the review in Atlanta we will need to pull prints and do a detailed
review of the information in the stem, detennine if the stem permits
applicants, or forces applicants to make assumptions on the location of the
.j(
leak, on how and where the leak is isolated, and whether there are credible
"
arguments for no correct answers or mnltiple correct answers. Plausibility
ofthe distractors will also need to be discussed.
OK. We pulled prints during IP and question is sat. MAB 02/04/2008
This question will be rated as unsat, pending the detailed review that will
take place with the licensee.
Q OK MAB 02/04/2008
53
076A4.02
M
F
2
E
Is there an extra space between "following" and "the"?
Q simplified. Corrected. MAE 02/04/2008
S
"A": Would it be more plausible for I-FCY-67-146 to be "Auto" and 2-
FCY-67-146 to be "Manual"? This qnestion is being asked because on the
surface it may make sense for the valve on the unit with the SI to auto
reposition, rather than the other unit's valve? This may be due to my
unfamiliarity with SQ. Discuss with licensee.
Corrected. MAB 02/04/2008
Is there any possibility that EA-67-1 allows operators to reposition O-FCY-
Page 15 of29
ES-401, Rev. 9
Written Exam Review Worksheet
Sequoyah 2008-301
Form ES-401-9
Q#
KiA#
B
L
L
Psychometric Flaws
Content Flaws
U
Comment
M
0
0
Stem
Cues
T/F
1 Non
>1 Non
Partial
Min
Q=
E
Explanation
N
K
D
Focus
Cred
Cred
KiA
Only
S
Dist
Dist
B/W
67-152, thus bringing into question the possibility that Manual would be
the correct response for all three valves?
Q revised. Corrected. MAB
02/04/2008
The stem contains a lot of words. Are we simply asking the following:
Which one ofthe following correctly describes the following valve
responses to a Unit I safety injection?
0-FCV-67-152
I-FCV-67-146
2-FCV-67-146
A. Auto repositions
Auto repositions
Does NOT auto reposition
B. etc.
Incorporated, OK MAB 02/04/2008
54
078K3.01
M
F
I-
S
Question is right at the cusp ofbeing acceptable. When all other changes
2
to the exam have been made, an overall evaluation ofthe exam will be
performed. Q is OK. MAB 02/04/2008
55
103A3.01
M
H
I-
X
- g
"C" and "D" plausibility: There are no indications in the stem that would
2
lead an applicant to believe that CVI should only have occurred on one
S
train. Are rad monitors train specific for CVI? If so, add values for both
the "A" and "B" monitors, with the "B" at a lower value.
Specific rad monitor information added. OK MAB 02/04/2008
56
011K6.05
N
H
2
?
- g
Be consistent with periods after bullets. Fixed. 02/04/2008
S
'f
What credible misconception would lead an applicant to believe that I-LT-
68-321 would have an impact on pzr level control when I-LT-68-320 is
I
S
selected?"
Licensee revised answer choices to correct. OK MAB 02/04/2008
AJ:e the cold cal instruments ever used for pzr level control?
Cold Cal instruments deleted from answer choices. OK MAB 02/04/2008
57
015K2.01
M
F
I-
x
Y
"B" and "C" are not plausible: These two choices can be eliminated just
2
by knowing that even channels are powered by the same bus and the odd
S
channels are powered from the same bus (or at least the same division of
power). The mixing of even and odd NI numbers make these two
distractors not plausible.
Distractors revised to correct concem. OK MAB 02/04/2008
58
016K1.10
M
F
2
S
Q is SAT.
59
o17K4.03
B
F
I
x
Y
Remaining "in" limits, or "within" limits? Either way - it just depends on
how you want your applicants to read the question. Fixed. MAB
S
02/04/2008
What does "limits" mean in the stem? Is this specific enough to elicit the
Page 16 of29
ES-401, Rev. 9
Written Exam Review Worksheet
Sequoyah 2008-301
Form ES-401-9
Q#
KJA#
B
L
L
Psychometric Flaws
Content Flaws
U
Comment
M
0
0
Stem
Cues
T/F
1 Non
>1 Non
Partial
Min
Q=
E
Explanation
N
K
D
Focus
Cred
Cred
KJA
Only
S
Dist
Dist
BIW
correct answer? I understand what it means only by reading the question
analysis, which the applicants will not have. Wording enhancements
made. OK MAE 02/04/2008
The question should also be tied to the procedure. Incorporated. MAB
02/04/2008
"C" and "D" are not plausible. The magnitude of these two answer choices
make them completely non-credible.
Distractors revised. OK MAB 02/04/2008
Are there any other choices that have meaning at your plant? 600F?
700F? nOF? 750F? Different values were agreed upon with licensee.
OK MAE 02/04/2008
60
045K5.17
N
H
I-
x
Y
"A" is not plausible. This is not a method which is directed by plant
2
procedures, which does not create a plausible distractor.
S
Qand distractor revised to address concem. OK MAE 02/04/2008
"D" is not plausible. Two variables, the two parameters being analyzed,
moving is not plausible. Q and distractor revised to address concem. OK
MAB 02/04/2008
This question is pure GFE. Applicants have already passed a GFE. This is
the Site Specific written exam. Steam header pressure incorporated, which
makes the question more plant specific. OK MAB 02/04/2008
- .
Will the correct answer be correct under all plant conditions that can be
assumed with the information provided in the stem? To be safe, does a
bumup need to be provided in the stem as well? Answer will always be
correct at 50% power. OK MAB 02/04/2008
This question can be brought to an acceptable level by making it plant
specific. Maybe iterating on "B" and "C" and then adding a second half to
the distractors would accomplish plausibility and allow for a plant specific
question. Qrevised. OK MAB 02/04/2008
61
055A3.03
N
H
2
x
g
"C": lacks a period. Fixed. MAB 02/04/2008
S
"B" is not plausible. The reason in "B" is not tied to conditions that are
provided in the stem. Compare to "A" - where "A" contains a reason that
corresponds to an alarm that is provided in the stem. To raise the
plausibility of"B", the reason needs to be tied to a condition in the stem.
Simplified to only tie to high pressure, vice rad inst malfunction. OK
MAE 02/04/2008
Page 17 of29
ES-401, Rev. 9
Written Exam Review Worksheet
Sequoyah 2008-301
Form ES-401-9
Q#
KlA#
B
L
L
PsvchometricFlaws
Content Flaws
U
Comment
M
0
0
Stem
Cues
T/F
1 Non
>1 Non
Partial
Min
Q~
E
Explanation
N
K
D
Focus
Cred
Cred
KIA
Only
S
Dist
Dist
B/W
62
068A4.02
M
F
2
S
Q is SAT. TIle chosen wording does not appear to be the easiest to
interpret, but the Q is OK ifyou want to go with the current wording. If
you would like your applicants to see this question worded slightly
different, I am OK with that too.
OK MAB 02/0412008
63
071K3.04
M
H
2
S
Q is SAT.
64
075G2.2.1 I
N
H
2
- g
Grammar issue in first bullet.
Q replaced. OK MAB 02/04/2008
S
The stem ofthe question is vague with respect to how the design will be
changed. It is implied, that the change will cause the valve to
automatically close. Is it important to state this. Will it be possible for an
applicant to assume a change that would affect the answer choices?
Q replaced. OK MAB 02/04/2008
Do you want to ask this question to all RO? Do you have ally RO learning
objectives associated with temp changes? Is this knowledge part of the RO
ILT program? Discuss with licensee.
Q replaced. OK MAB 02/04/2008
If licensee can produce documentation that this is OK to ask an RO, then
the question is SAT.
Q replaced. OK MAB 02/04/2008
65
086AI.OI
N
F
'5.
x
Y
Answer choices need some "the'ts added between "trip" and "pump".
Qrevised. OK MAB 02/04/2008
S
KIA not matched: The KIA requires testing the ability to monitorlpredict
changes in parameters as they relate to operating controls to prevent
exceeding design limits (fire header pressure). This question only tests
knowledge of existence of design features. The question does not test the
ability to monitor changes in parameters to prevent from exceeding design
limits.
Q revised. OK MAE 02/04/2008
66
G2.I.3
N
F
2
S
Question is written as a NOT question, which is discouraged by the
NUREG. I will allow this format ifthe licensee does not have an issue
with presenting the question to the applicants in this format.
Noted. MAB 02/04/2008
Repeated the word "during" in the stem. Fixed. MAE 02/0412008
67
G2.I.27
B
H
2
S
Third bullet: "start" should be plural. Fixed. MAB 02/04/2008
Page 18 of29
ES-401, Rev. 9
Written Exam Review Worksheet
Sequoyah 2008-301
Form ES-401-9
Q#
KiA#
B
L
L
Psychometric Flaws
Content Flaws
U
Comment
M
0
0
Stem
Cues
T/F
1 Non
>1 Non
Partial
Min
Q-
E
Explanation
N
K
D
Focns
Cred
Cred
KiA
Only
S
Dist
Dist
B/W
Fourth bullet: "level" should be plural. Fixed. MAB 02/04/2008
Be consistent with tense in all answer choices. Consider:
A.
Arming conditions for AMSAC were not present.
B.
AMSAC actuated.
C.
Arming conditions were present, but actuation conditions were
not present.
D.
AMSAC has not actuated, but will actuate after the appropriate
time delay if SG levels stabilize at their current values.
Fixed. MAB 02/04/2008
68
G2.1.28
M
F
2
x
.g
"C" and "D" plausibility: ERCW pumps are the same type ofpump
performing the same function.
If an applicant had a misconception that
S
they were both sequenced on the bus, why would it make any difference
which pump starts first? Are there other pumps in the plant that both get
sequenced on a bus and the order of that sequence is determined by a
switch position that is manipulated by the operators? Discuss with
licensee. Ifthere is more plausibility here than I realize, then this question
may be SAT.
Qreplaced. OK MAB 02/04/2008
"C' and "D" should have an "in which" added.
Qreplaced. OK MAB 02/04/2008
The second part of"A" and "C" appears to be a little cryptic. Is this easily
understandable?
T
Q replaced. OK MAB 02/04/2008
69
G2.2.26
N
H
2
S
Qis SAT.
REF
70
G2.2.33
B
H
2
B
Is there an extra space between "and" and "the"? Corrected. MAB
02/0412008
S
"B" is not plausible. With dumps open and rods inserting it is not credible
for an applicant to have a misconception that temperature will go up.
Consider changing the temperature to something lower than 559 F, but
plausible. Answer choices changed to iterate on temps and speed. OK
MAB 02/04/2008
71
G2.3.2
N
H
2
S
Q is SAT.
72
G2.3.9
B
F
2
S
Be consistent with periods behind bullets. Fixed. MAB 02/04/2008
Q is SAT.
73
G2.3.l0
B
F
I
x
x
x
.g
"A" is not plausible. If"A" is correct, then any of the others would be
Page 19 of29
ES-401, Rev. 9
Written Exam Review Worksheet
Sequoyah 2008-301
Form ES-401-9
Q#
KlA#
B
L
L
Psychometric Flaws
Content Flaws
U
Comment
M
0
0
Stem
Cues
T/F
1 Non
>1 Non
Partial
Min
Q~
E
Explanation
N
K
D
Focus
Cred
Cred
KIA
Only
S
Dist
Dist
B/W
also. TIle question asks for which would be correct to exit the RCA. If it
S
is correct to simply exit, then doing anything above and beyond that would
not be wrong. Q replaced. OK MAB 02/04/2008
"B" is not plausible. PCM-IB monitors alarm quite often. Can you
imagine how many whole body counts would be needed if this were true?
How many times have these applicants had a PCM-IB alarm?
Q replaced. OK MAB 02/04/2008
This question does not discriminate at the appropriate level. An RO
applicant getting tins question correct does not provide useful information
in making a license decision. Q replaced. OK MAB 02/04/2008
74
G2.4.16
B
H
2
S
Typo in "D": E-O? vice E-O. Fixed. MAB 02/04/2008
Typo "D": should "exist" be plural? Licensee failed to correct. It does not
affect tec1micalaccuracy ofquestion. I would make them change it if it
appeared only in a distractor. OK
MAB 02/04/2008
This question looks very familiar. No response needed from licensee - I
am just noting this. Noted. MAB 02/04/2008
75
02.4.22
N
F
2
S
Why is "Larger" capitalized in "A' and "D"? Corrected. MAB
02/04/2008
SROEXAM
76
008G2.4.49
NJH
2
II
"C": Is there an extra space between "and" and "immediately"?
~
Q and KIA changed. OK MAB 02/04/2008
S
"D": Is there an extra space between "in" and "E-O"?
Q and KIA changed. OK MAB 02/04/2008
What pressure causes phase B to actuate?
Would it be incorrect for the SRO to direct starting of the EDG? Is this an
automatic action that should have occurred? Does SQ have all Admin
procedure that states that it is permissible to manually perform an auto
action that should have occurred?
Q and KIA changed. OK MAB 02/04/2008
If this question is determined to require knowledge of procedure selection,
i.e. beyond general rules of procedure usage, then it will be acceptable as
an SRO question. Discuss SRO-only learning objectives that may be
available to support this question as SRO only.
Q and KIA changed. OK MAB 02/04/2008
It is my knowledge that a general Westinghouse rule of usage is that
Page 20 of29
ES-401, Rev. 9
Written Exam Review Worksheet
Sequoyah 2008-301
Form ES-401-9
Q#
KlA#
B
L
L
Psychometric Flaws
Content Flaws
U
Comment
M
0
0
Stem
Cues
T/F
1 Non
>1 Non
Partial
Min
Q=
E
Explanation
N
K
D
Focus
Cred
Cred
KIA
Only
S
Dist
Dist
BIW
operators do not exit E-O until E-O instructs them to exit. I would view this
as RO knowledge unless there is some plant documentation that would
state otherwise.
Q and KiA changed. OK MAB 02/04/2008
77
029EA2.09
M
H
2
x
Y
Discuss deleting parameters at the time oftransition. They do not add
plausibility to "turbine not tripped"; therefore, they may not be necessary
S
information.
PRT values deleted. OK MAB 02/04/2008
Change feed water flow to something that is just over the limit. Like 120
gpm to each SG. Heat sink requirements are 440 gpm total. Discuss with
licensee.
FW flow values revised. OK MAB 02/0412008
Not SRO-only: ROs are required to know status trees. Therefore, the
question can be answered by knowing that H.l is not required to be entered
and that the turbine is tripped. Both of these knowledge items are required
RO-knowledge.
(G2.4.21 has an RO importance rating of 3.7)
Q revised. OK MAB 02/04/2008
78
054AA2.05
N
H
2
x
Y
Not SRO-only: Question requires systems knowledge for response ofthe
MFW B/P Reg Valve, which is RO knowledge. Question also requires
S
knowledge ofAOP and EOP entry conditions, which is also RO
knowledge. Furthermore, the applicant can use systems knowledge to
I
determine that the reactor will not trip and that not SI is present, thereby,
allowing the applicant to eliminate going to E-O, "Reactor Trip or Safety
Injection."
(2.4.1 and 2.4.4 have RO importance ratings of4.3 and 4.0 respectively)
Q revised to make SRO only. OK MAB 02/04/2008
Are the applicants required to go to the AOP? Would an operator be
wrong if the AOP was not entered?
Q revised. OK MAB 02/04/2008
79
057AA2.17
N
H
2
x
y
Is punctuation in second bullet correct?
Q revised. OK MAB 02/04/2008
S
Not SRO-only: Both parts ofthe answer choices can be analyzed using
RO required knowledge. Systems knowledge is required by ROs;
therefore, this question does no require any knowledge that is specific only
to the SRO position.
Q revised. OK MAB 02/04/2008
80
065AA2.01
N
H
2
E
Wording on LCO 3.0.3 is too loose. LeO 3.0.3 is always applicable and
Page 21 of29
ES-401, Rev. 9
Written Exam Review Worksheet
Sequoyah 2008-301
Form ES-401-9
Q#
KiA#
B
L
L
Psychometric Flaws
Content Flaws
U
Comment
M
0
0
Stem
Cues
T/F
1 Non
>1 Non
Partial
Min
Q=
E
Explanation
N
K
D
Focus
Cred
Cred
KiA
Only
S
Dist
Dist
BIW
licensees are always required to comply with 3.0.3. Change the wording
S
to: Required Actions ofLCO 3.0.3 are required to be performed, OR not
required to be performed. This will not change the meaning of what is
being asked, but it will be more direct and more technically correct to
phrase the second part of each answer choice in this manner.
Incorporated. MAB 02/04/2008
Delete the air pressure in the stem. The ala1111 annunciates, which is
enough to inform the operator that pressure is below 68 psig. Discuss with
licensee. Allowed air pressure to remain. OK MAB 02/0412008
The piece of each answer choice that discusses that fuel movement is
required to be suspended does not add value since it is the same in each
answer choice. The answer choices should only contain the information
needed to make them unique answer choices:
A.
ABGTS Train A remains OPERABLE until Train A
Containment Air Isolation Valve automatically closes, at which
time LCO 3.0.3 required actions would NOT be required to be
taken.
B.
ABGTS Train A remains OPERABLE until Train A
Containment Air Isolation Valve automatically closes, at which
time LCO 3.0.3 required actions would be required to be taken.
C.
Both trains of ABGTS would immediately be INOPERABLE
with the current conditions.
LCO 3.0.3 required actions would
NOT be required to be taken.
D.
Both trains of ABGTS would immediately be INOPERABLE
with the current conditions.
LCO 3.0.3 required actions would
be required to be taken
Incorporated. OK MAB 02/04/2008
81
W/Ell
B
H
I-
x
X?
B
Be consistent with punctuation after bulleted items.
Fixed. MAB
G2.4.48
2
02/04/2008
S
Transfer to RHR containment sump is not plausible. The stem clearly
states that a LOCA Outside Containment is occurring. This distractor must
be replaced. Corrected. OK MAB 02/04/2008
Is there a way to provide some indications in the stem that are indicative of
a LOCA outside containment without telling them that the operators are in
ECA-1.2 due to a WCA in the Aux Bid. Is there a less obvious way to
provide indications ofabnormal radiation in the aux building - i.e. and
ala1111? Containment sump level added. OK MAB 02/04/2008
The easiest fix for this question may be to use the two best answer choices
and then iterate on operator actions, etc. I.E. Iterate on ECA 1.I and E- I
AND then operator actions. Incorporated. MAB 02/04/2008
Page 22 of29
ES-401, Rev. 9
Written Exam Review Worksheet
Sequoyah 2008-301
Form ES-401-9
Q#
KlA#
B
L
L
Psychometric Flaws
Content Flaws
U
Comment
M
0
0
Stem
Cues
TIF
1 Non
>1 Non
Partial
Min
Q=
E
Explanation
N
K
D
Focus
Cred
Cred
KIA
Only
S
Dist
Dis!
B/W
-
Another possible fix may be to test procedure path for two transitions.
Operators would go to ECA-I.I, then to ...
Distractors revised. OK MAB 02/0412008
82
W/EI2
B
H
2
x
E
Questions testing knowledge of what operators "should" do are too
G2.I.32
ambiguous to ask. Questions must ask what operators are required to do.
S
This may just be a phrasing issue with the question statement, but
questions need to test requirements.
Corrected. OK MAB 02/0412008
Distractor "B": Not plausible because there is not a credible
misconception that could lead an applicant to stop terminating SI but
remain in the same procedure. At least with the procedure transition they
need to evaluate ifthey are to stop the SI termination in order to make the
transition. Corrected. MAB 02/04/2008
Modify the stem slightly to place the operators at Step 14 where they are
monitoring for SI termination criteria and provide them the criteria that are
indicative of them proceeding to step 15. Answer choices could be
something like:
A.
Terminate SI in ECA-2. I, then transition to E-2
B.
Transition to E-2, then terminate SI
C.
Remain in ECA-2. I. SI termination criteria are not currently
met.
D.
Transition to E-2, SI termination criteria are not currently met.
Discuss this option with licensee.
Incorporated. OK MAB 02/04/2008
83
003G2.2.22
N
F
I
x
x
.y
Can the stem state that the control rod drops to the middle ofthe core?
Otherwise, a rod dropping to the bottom makes "B" non-plausible because
S
there would not be any axial concerns for a rod that falls to the bottom.
Added. OK MAB 02/04/2008
"D" is a correct statement and could successfully be argued as correct by
an applicant. The accident analysis will remain valid at 75% power.
Corrected. MAB 02/0412008
Is there a more specific option to use for "A"? Any reactivity 1power
redistribution issue is going to be a fuel integrity concern.
"A" allowed to remain. OK MAB 02/04/2008
A more specific choice for "A" and replacement of"D" could result in a
satisfactory question.
"D" revised and "A" allowed to remain with the
other changes made to the question. OK MAB 0210412008
Page 23 of29
ES-401, Rev. 9
Written Exam Review Worksheet
Sequoyah 2008-301
Form ES-401-9
Q#
KiA#
B
L
L
Psychometric Flaws
Content Flaws
U
Comment
M
0
0
Stem
Cues
T/F
1 Non
>1 Non
Partial
Min
Q=
E
Explanation
N
K
D
Focus
Cred
Cred
KiA
Ouly
S
Dist
Dist
B/W
84
005AA2.03
N
H
2
X
X
.y
Delete "causing a runback from the stem".
Applicants should have
enough information with the plant at 86% and a MFP trip to understand
S
that a runback will occur. Discuss with licensee to ensure that this is the
case.
Deleted. OK MAB 02/04/2008
Is second bullet worded corrected?
Corrected. MAB 02/04/2008
Not SRO-only knowledge: ROs are required to know reactor trip criteria.
Q revised and allowed for SRO due to location oftrip criteria. MAB
02/04/2008
Is "D" a subset of"C"? Is (ripping the reactor a means of removing the
Unit from service within 6 hours6.944444e-5 days <br />0.00167 hours <br />9.920635e-6 weeks <br />2.283e-6 months <br />? This may be able to be alleviated by
changing the wording of the question to ask for the specific requirements
as stated in AOP-C.OI. Corrected. MAB 02/0412008
85
051AA2.02
M
H
2
X
.y
Is second bullet worded correctly? Corrected. MAB 02/04/2008
S
Delete all unnecessary information in answer choices. In other words,
delete the information that is not needed to make the answer choices
unique.
All ofthe extraneous procedure entry information is not needed to
make the answer choice unique. I.E.:
A.
Manual turbine trip criteria is currently met.
B.
Manual reactor trip criteria is currently met.
C.
Manual turbine trip criteria will be met ifcondenser pressure
I
exceeds 2.7 psia and cannot be restored within 5 minutes.
D.
Manual turbine trip criteria will be met ifcondenser pressure
exceeds 2.7 psia and cannot be restored within 5 minutes.
Extra info deleted from answer choices. MAB 02/0412008
Question should be worded in the plural fonn. Currently it is worded for
singular (or plural), but each answer choice has more than one item.
Corrected. MAB 02/0412008
Not SRO-only: Reactor Trip criteria is RO knowledge. The above
comments will be irrelevant unless the SRO-only issue is corrected.
(G2.1.7 and G2.4.l have RO IRs of3.7 and 4.3 respectively)
Allowed for SRO exam due to knowledge of being able to stay in AOP to
address vacuum problem for 5 minutes. MAB 02/04/2008
86
W/E02
N
H
I
x
.y
Should "Safety" be capitalized in second bullet? "Injection" is also now
EA2.2
capitalized. OK MAB 02/04/2008
S
"B" and "D": This reviewer does not understand how the conditions in the
Page 24 of29
ES-401, Rev. 9
Written Exam Review Worksheet
Sequoyah 2008-301
Form ES-401-9
Q#
KlA#
B
L
L
Psychometric Flaws
Content Flaws
V
Comment
M
0
0
Stem
Cues
T/F
1 Non
>1 Non
Partial
Min
Q~
E
Explanation
N
K
D
Focus
Cred
Cred
KIA
Only
S
Dist
Dist
B/W
stem result in LCO 3.0.3 being plausible. There is not a reasonable
misconception that would lead an applicant to thinking that LCO 3.0.3.
Corrected. MAB 02/04/2008
"C" and "0": Nothing has really occurred in the stem except for an
inadvertent SI. There is no reasonable misconception that would lead an
applicant to E-I for a LOCA.
Condition in the stem revised and distractors changed. OK.MAB
02/04/2008
TIle lack of plausibility in the distractors results in an LOD= I, which does
not allow this question to discriminate between a competent and less than
competent SRO. Q revised to bring to acceptable level. OK MAB
02/0412008
87
W/EI6
M
H
2
x
B
Can "The reactor is in Mode 6 with" be deleted from first bullet?
G2.2.31
2
Deleted. MAB 02/0412008
S
Not SRO-only: ROs are licensed to move fuel and therefore are required
to know how to handle a loss ofrefueling water event.
TIns is snpported
by KIA 036AAI.04, which has an RO IR of 3.7. Lowering water level is a
fuel handling incident, which is supported by AOP-M.04, Refueling
Malfunctions.
See comment below. OK MAB 02/0412008
This was a modified question. TIle reviewer would like to see a copy of
the source question, from which this one was modified. Provided. MAB
02/0412008
Do ROs currently move fuel at SQ? Ifnot, when was the last time an RO
moved irradiated fuel at SQ?
Is there an SRO-only leaming objective to
support tins being SRO-only knowledge? Based on the above reasoning
tins falls into the category of an RO question; however, ifsufficient
justification can be provided it may be permissible to allow this on the
SRO exam.
Licensee provided sufficient justification for SRO only level. MAB
02/04/2008
88
008A2.09
M
H
2
x
- y
Reactor Physics and systems knowledge are the only requirements for
answering this question. Plant response to a controller failure is systems
S
knowledge that is required of an RO. Determining whether a temp change
adds positive or negative reactivity is basic GFE reactor physics
knowledge. This question can be answered only by knowing GFE
knowledge. No SRO-only knowledge is required to answer this question.
Q replaced. OK MAB 02/04/2008
89
0IOG2.4.38
N
F
I
x
- y
"A" and "0": 5 minutes is not plausible. Leading to a LOD
I.
Page 25 of29
ES-401, Rev. 9
Written Exam Review Worksheet
Sequoyah 2008-301
Form ES-401-9
Q#
KlA#
B
L
L
Psvchometric Flaws
Content Flaws
U
Comment
M
0
0
Stem
Cues
T/F
1 Non
>1 Non
Partial
Min
Q=
E
Explanation
N
K
D
Focus
Cred
Cred
KIA
Only
S
Dist
Dist
B/W
Q revised to address concern. OK MAE 02/0412008
S
Question LOD would be acceptable if the acceptable ODS notification
requirement is tested, instead ofthe 15 minute to declare. Test whether the
requirement to notify ODS is 5 minutes from the event or 5 minutes from
making the declaration. This will test knowledge of whether the ODS
notification is required to be made prior to or after event declaration.
Incorporated. OK MAB 02/0412008
90
013A2.05
N
H
2
x
Y
Question is not SRO-only: Can this question be answered using only
systems knowledge?
The first piece of each answer choice can be
S
answered by knowing what the cause ofthe condition could be, which is
systems knowledge. This limits the potential answer choices to "C" and
"D" using RO knowledge. Applicants can also determine that the pumps
will not start manually based on the physical configuration of the plant, I.E.
systems knowledge. Therefore, this question can be answered by an
applicant without needing to use any SRO-only level knowledge.
Concerns addressed. Distractors and stem revised. OK MAB 02/04/2008
91
103G2.2.l4
N
F
2
S
Tie the second halfof the question to the procedure just as you did with
when Containment Closure Control is required to be implemented. I.E.
...who will maintain the listing ofthe Containment Closure Exceptions in
effect in accordance with 0-GO-15.
Incorporated, MAB 02/04/2008
92
029G2.4.46
N
H
3
x
x?
E
Question is backward logic. This is discouraged by NUREG-I 021;
,
- 1
however, it is not prohibited. Licensee does not need to address this
comment if they are satisfied with their applicants receiving this question.
S
Noted. MAB 02/04/2008
Can "B" be eliminated using systems knowledge? Will ABI result in an
auto shutdown of Unit I containment purge when ORA-90-10IA alarms
with Unit I Lower Containment Purge in progress? Discuss with licensee.
This will determine the status of the question.
ABI will not auto SID UI purge. After discussion with licensee, Q is OK.
MAB 02/0412008
93
034A2.02
N
F
2
x
E
"B": Rad Control Manager is not plausible because this is not an irradiated
fuel bundle. Contamination and exposure should not be a concern.
S
Fixed. MAB 02/0412008
Consider the following changes:
. Per AOP-M.04, which one ofthe following correctly describes the
lowest level ofapproval required for approval ofrecovery instructions?
A.
Refueling SRO
B.
Shift Manager
Page 26 of29
ES-401, Rev. 9
Written Exam Review Worksheet
Sequoyah 2008-301
Form ES-401-9
Q#
KlA#
B
L
L
Psychometric Flaws
Content Flaws
U
Comment
M
0
0
Stem
Cnes
T/F
1 Non
>1 Non
Partial
Min
Q~
E
Explanation
N
K
D
Focus
Cred
Cred
KIA
Only
S
Dist
Dist
B/W
C.
Operations Manager
D.
Plant Manager
Incorporated. OK MAB 02/04/2008
94
G2.1.12
N
H
2
S
Is second bullet worded correctly? Fixed. MAB 02/04/2008
REF
Be consistent with periods after bullets. Fixed. MAB 02/04/2008
95
G2.1.33
N
H
2
x
- y
KIA Match: The KIA requires that tech spec entry conditions are tested.
This question skips that part and then tests the actions that are required
S
once the tech spec is entered.
Q revised. OK MAB 02/0412008
TIle stem does not even state that fuel is being moved; therefore, stopping
fuel movement does not appear like a reasonable answer.
Answer choices revised. OK MAB 02/05/2008
Question is disjointed. "A" and "B" are testing knowledge ofmode change
requirements and "C" and "D' are testing knowledge of fuel movement
requirements. This is not the reason the question is unsat, but simply an
observation.
Answer choices revised. OK MAB 02/0512008
96
G2.2.8
B
F
2
.g
Consider wording the Q as follows:
Which one ofthe following correctly describes the MINIMUM required
S
qualifications for the person(s) PREPARING the safety evaluation
I
paperwork in accordance with SPP-9.4, IOCFR50.59 Evaluations of
Changes, Tests, and Experiments?
Incorporated. OK MAB 02/0512008
97
G2.3.l
B
H
2
.g
The topic and construction of the question is satisfactory, There are
concems with the wording ofthe "Why" column choice for "A" and "B".
S
Where is "maintain critical safety function" defined? Would it be wrong
for an applicant to believe that the emergency exposure would be needed to
prevent the conditions from elevating beyond Yellow? Discuss with
licensee.
Q replaced. OK MAB 02/05/2008
98
G2.3.6
M
F
2
x
.g
Tie the question to the procedure, I.E.: Which one ofthe following . ....
in accordance with "procedure name and number"?
S
Incorporated. OK MAB 02/05/2008
Be a little more precise with the first piece of each answer choice. I.E.
Approval not permitted. I Approval is permitted.
The above suggestion is a little more accurate because the SRO could just
choose to not sign it, which is neither disapproving or approving. The
Page 27 of29
ES-401, Rev. 9
Written Exam Review Worksheet
Sequoyah 2008-301
Form ES-401-9
Q#
KiA#
B
L
L
Psychometric Flaws
Content Flaws
U
Comment
M
0
0
Stem
Cues
T/F
1 Non
>1 Non
Partial
Min
Q=
E
Explanation
N
K
D
Focus
Cred
Cred
KiA
Only
S
Dist
Dist
BIW
above wording covers all cases and speaks directly to the procedure
requirement.
Incorporated. OK MAB 02/05/2008
Delete the last piece of"D": ", but dilution flow requirements are raised
due to the higher activity."
This really does not add to plausibility because
it is not needed to make the answer choice unique. If an applicant knows
whether the SM is required to approve, then this extraneous information is
not meaningful.
Incorporated. OK MAB 02/05/2008
"B" is not plausible only because ofthe verbiage. There may be some
improper grammar, which is easily fixed. I.E.:
B.
Approval not permitted. Cannot release monitor tank until 0-
RM-90-122 has been retnmed to OPERABLE status.
Incorporated. OK MAB 02/05/2008
What does "two independent discharge valve lineups" mean? Wording
must be precise and reflect exactly what the procedures require. Do two
lineups need to be performed? Is one lineup performed and then it is
independently verified?
Answer choices modified. OK MAB 02/05/2008
ODCM states that two qualified staffmembers independently verify
release rate calculations. The answer choices in the questions states that 2
release rate calculations are verified. I am not sure that these requirements,
as stated, are exactly the same. Discuss with licensee.
,
Answer choices modified. OK MAB 02/05/2008
99
G2.4.9
B
H
2
x
x
lei
Not SRO-only: Knowing how to recognize pump cavitation and the
actions to take to mitigate the cavitation is RO required knowledge.
S
Knowing that dilution is not permitted is also RO required knowledge.
All I hour and less tech specs are RO knowledge.
Equipment protection actions are also RO knowledge.
Through discussion with licensee, CE allowed Qto remain. OK MAB
0210512008
There are also plausibility concerns with taking suction from VCT with
boron too low. This point is inconsequential due to the question not being
written at the SRO level.
Through discussion with licensee, CE allowed distractors to remain. OK
MAB 02/05/2008
100
G2.4.49
N
H
2
x
lei
"Shutdown Boards Energized" is not an action, it is a statement of fact. -
Similar comment for "Safety Injection Actuated".
S
Qreplaced. OK MAB 02/05/2008
Page 28 of29
ES-401, Rev. 9
Written Exam Review Worksheet
Sequoyah 2008-301
Form ES-401-9
Q#
KiA#
B
L
L
PsychometricFlaws
Content Flaws
U
Comment
M
0
0
Stem
Cues
T/F
1 Non
>1 Non
Partial
Min
Q~
E
Explanation
N
K
D
Focus
Cred
Cred
KiA
Only
S
Dist
Dist
B/W
Not SRO-only: Knowing whether the status ofthe reactor and turbine is
systems knowledge, which is a required RO knowledge item. Knowing
that upon a reactor trip that E-Ois entered is an RO knowledge item. This
is all that is needed to arrive at the correct answer.
Qrevised/replaced to test SRO-only knowledge. OK MAB 02/05/2008
Page 29 of29
Written Examination Grading
Quality Checklist
Form ES-403-1
Facility:
~E('OUD\\(MA
Date of Exam: OJJoO ~B
Exam Level: ROIl SRolro
Initials
Item Description
a
b
c
1.
Clean answer sheets copied before grading
1JK.
NfIJ
Ifff3
2.
Answer key changes and question deletions justified
?Jk.
flJIA
f}$
and documented
3.
Applicants' scores checked for addition errors
sc
~
~
(reviewers spot check> 25% of examinations)
A
4.
Grading for all borderline cases (80 +/-2% overall and 70 or 80,
?1H.
I'k
m>
as applicable, +/-4% on the SRO-only) reviewed in detail
/~
5.
All other failing examinations checked to ensure that grades
~
I~
rrfJ
are iustified
6.
Performance on missed questions checked for training
~
~
n'1O
deficiencies and wording problems; evaluate validity
.~
of Questions missed by half or more of the applicants
Printed Name/Signature
Date
a. Grader
~R.\\AN{) ~~1§.UdtL
z/I er!fJt
b. Facility Reviewer(*)
N)A
.
N;/4
c. NRC Chief Examiner (*)
M"", A,B~I;3,1//2i/}£tp
r:~I.l..ItJ.//J06'el
d. NRC Supervisor (*)
/l.)jJ..UJJLJJ T lVfDj,).AA/A/ /
!1iJjJAfJft~
ozl'l/ItJ?
r
} {
(*)
The facility reviewer's signature is not applicable for ex~ations graded by the NRC;
two independent NRC reviews are required.
ES-403, Page 6 of 6
ES*S01
Post-Examination Check Sheet
Form ES-S01-1
Post-Examination Check Sheet
Facility:
Sf::: (QU 0\\{VtIf
Date of Examination: -:Yt~u.e.,*.'(
0<005
Task Description
Date Complete
1.
Facility written exam comments or graded exams received
();;'/Itt!JDG ~
and verified complete
2.
Facility written exam comments reviewed and incorporated
()J./1'-/J;)C'Cf C;;
and NRC grading completed, if necessary
3.
Operating tests graded by NRC examiners
O?- ) ILl)Jtr/?
4.
NRC chief examiner review of operating test and written exam
OJ!!41;}or/~
grading completed
5.
Responsible supervisor review completed
O;Z I;{d;)C)O C?
6.
Management (licensing official) review completed
o,,:2/;;qIJc;l1} ~
7.
License and denial letters mailed
o2);) JdtJ{)~
8.
Facility notified of results
o;;;./~ J/?CJJ'?,
jJ:i
9.
Examination report issued (refer to NRC MC 0612)
os .' :<oeJg'
10.
Reference material returned after final resolution of any appeals
Aliff
ES-501, Page 23 of 25
Tennessee Valley Authority, Post Office Box 2000, Soddy-Daisy, Tennessee 37384-2000
Confidential information submitted
under 10 CFR 2.390
February 13, 2008
Dr. William D. Travers
Regional Administrator, Region II
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Sam Nunn Atlanta Federal Center
61 Forsyth Street, SW, Suite 23T85
Atlanta, Georgia 30323-8931
Attention: Mr. M. T. Widmann
In the Matter of
Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA)
Docket Nos.
50-327
50-328
SEQUOYAH NUCLEAR PLANT (SQN) - REACTOR AND SENIOR REACTOR
OPERATOR INITIAL EXAMINATIONS - 05000327/2008301 AND 05000328/2008301
In accordance with Examination Standard (ES) 501, "Initial Post-Examination
Activities," of NUREG-1021, "Operator Licensing Examination Standards for Power
Reactors," SON is providing the following information: written examination, examination
answer key, ES 401-8, examination cover sheets, seating chart, student answer
sheets, and student clarifying questions.
In accordance with 10 CFR 55.49, "Integrity of Examinations and Tests," and
NUREG-1021, appropriate measures have been taken to ensure examination integrity
and security. The Examination Security Agreement Form ES-201-3 will be provided
following the post-examination signatures.
Because of the administratively confidential nature, it is requested that the information
contained in the enclosure be withheld from public disclosure in accordance with
10 CFR 2.390(a)(6). This letter contains no new commitments. If you should have any
questions, please contact me at (423) 843-7170.
S.inc.e.relY,. JI
.. ~
_~~Cff-------
.~;:::;?'-
J
,~ .. '~ames D. Smith
Manager, Site Licensing and
Industry Affairs
Enclosures
Printed on recycled paper
Tennessee Valley Authority, Post Office Box 2000, Soddy-Daisy, Tennessee 37384-2000
December 5, 2007
Dr. William D. Travers
Regional Administrator, Region II
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Sam Nunn Atlanta Federal Center
61 Forsyth Street, SW, Suite 23T85
Atlanta, Georgia 30323-8931
Attention: Mr. M. T. Widmann
In the Matter of
Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA)
Docket Nos.
50-327
50-328
(
(
SEQUOYAH NUCLEAR PLANT (SQN) - REACTOR AND SENIOR REACTOR
OPERATOR INITIAL EXAMINATIONS - 05000327/2008301 AND 05000328/2008301
This letter transmits the requested information identified in NRC's letter to
William R. Campbell dated August 3,2007, for the examinations to be administrated the
weeks of January 28, 2008, and February 4, 2008.
There are no commitments contained in this submittal. In accordance with 10 CFR 55.49
and NUREG 1021, "Operator Licensing Examination Standards for Power Reactors,"
appropriate measures have been taken to ensure examination integrity and security.
Accordingly, it is requested that this letter and the enclosed documents be withheld from
public disclosure until the examinations are completed.
TVA's principal contact regarding the license examinations is Tom Jones, SON Operations
Training. Should you require additional information regarding this matter, please contact
Mr. Jones at (423) 843-4206 or contact me at (423) 843-7170.
Sincerely,
w.?~
James D. Smith
Manager, Site Licensing and
Industry Affairs
Enclosure
Printed on recycled paper
(
(
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Page 2
December 5, 2007
JWP:KTS
cc:
L. E. Nicholson, BR 4X-C
B. A. Wetzel, BR 4X-C
The information contained within this document is the Property of the Tennessee
Valley Authority and has been determined to be sensitive. Any further distribution of
its contents will be on a need to know basis only as determined by the originator of
the document or the recipient.
SENSITIVE INFORMATION
I:License\\Operator license\\2007\\Requested information IR2008301
(
(
ENCLOSURE
TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY
SEQUOYAH NUCLEAR PLANT (SQN)
UNITS 1 AND 2
OPERATING EXAMINATIONS FOR REACTOR OPERATOR (RO)
AND SENIOR REACTOR OPERATOR (SRO) CANDIDATES
Written Examination - RO and SRO Portions Including Student Reference Material
Question Development Reference Material for RO and SRO Written Examinations
Job Performance Measures for RO and SRO examinations
Four Simulator examinations
ES-201-3 - Examination Security Agreement
ES-301-2 - Control Room/In-Plant Systems Outline
ES-301-3 - Operating Test Quality Checklist
ES-301-4 - Simulator Scenario Quality Checklist
ES-301-5 - Transient and Event Checklist
ES-301-6 - Competencies Checklist
ES-401-6 - Written Examination Quality Checklist
(
Tennessee Valley Authority, Post Office Box 2000, Soddy-Daisy, Tennessee 37384-2000
October 23, 2007
Dr. William D. Travers
Regional Administrator, Region II
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Sam Nunn Atlanta Federal Center
61 Forsyth Street, SW, Suite 23T85
Atlanta, Georgia 30323-8931
Attention: Mr. M. T. Widmann
In the Matter of
Tennessee Valley Authority
Docket Nos.
50-327
50-328
(
(
SEQUOYAH NUCLEAR PLANT - REACTOR AND SENIOR REACTOR OPERATOR
INITIAL EXAMINATIONS - 05000327/2008301 AND 05000328/2008301
As requested by NRC letter to TVA dated August 3,2007, this letter transmits the
examination outlines identified in NRC's letter to William R. Campbell dated August 3,
2007, for the examinations to be administrated the weeks of January 28, 2008 and
February 4, 2008.
There are no commitments contained in this submittal. In accordance with 10 CFR 55.49
and NUREG 1021, "Operator Licensing Examination Standards for Power Reactors,"
appropriate measures have been taken to ensure examination integrity and security.
Accordingly, it is requested that this letter and the enclosed documents be withheld from
public disclosure until the examinations are completed.
Please direct questions concerning this issue to me at (423) 843-7170.
~rzJ.~
Glenn W. Morris
Manager, Site Licensing and
Industry Affairs
Enclosure
Printed on recycled paper
(
ENCLOSURE
TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY
SEQUOYAH NUCLEAR PLANT (SQN)
UNITS 1 AND 2
The following are included in this enclosure:
License Examination Outlines:
ES-201-2 Examination Outline Quality Checklist
ES-201-3 Examination Security Agreement
ES-301-1 Administrative Topics JPM Outlines for RO and SRO exams
ES-301-2 Control Room/In-Plant Systems JPM Outlines for RO and SRO exams
ES-301-5 Transient and Event Checklist
ES-D-1 Simulator Scenario Outlines for 4 scenarios
ES-401-2 and 3 Written Exam Outlines for RO and SRO exams
ES-401-4 Record of Rejected KlAs for RO and SRO exams
Written Exam development methodology statement
Tennessee Valley Authority, Post Office Box 2000, Soddy-Daisy, Tennessee 37384-2000
August 15,2007
Dr. William D. Travers
Regional Administrator, Region II
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Sam Nunn Atlanta Federal Center
61 Forsyth Street, SW, Suite 23T85
Atlanta, Georgia 30323-8931
Attention:
Mr. R. C. Haag
In the Matter of
Tennessee Valley Authority
Docket Nos.
50-327
50-328
(
SEQUOYAH NUCLEAR PLANT - REACTOR AND SENIOR REACTOR OPERATOR
INITIAL EXAMINATIONS - 05000327/2008301 AND 05000328/2008301
As requested by Mark Bates of your staff, this letter transmits the written examination
outlines identified in NRC's letter to William R. Campbell dated August 3, 2007, for the
examinations to be administrated the week of January 28, 2008.
Due to the administratively confidential nature of the enclosure, it is requested that the
information contained in the enclosure be withheld from public disclosure until after the
examinations are complete.
Please direct questions concerning this issue to me at (423) 843-7170.
~ZuN.~
Glenn W. Morris
Manager, Site Licensing and
Industry Affairs
Enclosure
Printed on recycled paper
(
u.s. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Page 2
August 15, 2007
JWP:KTS
cc:
R. H. Bryan, BR 4X-C
EDMS, WTC A-K
The information contained within this document is the Property of the Tennessee
Valley Authority and has been determined to be sensitive. Any further distribution of
its contents will be on a need to know basis only as determined by the originator of
the document or the recipient.
SENSITIVE INFORMATION
I:License\\Operator license\\2007\\Exam outline IR2008301
ENCLOSURE
TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY
SEQUOYAH NUCLEAR PLANT (SQN)
UNITS 1 AND 2
LICENSE WRITTEN EXAMINATION OUTLINES