ML020940648
| ML020940648 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Oconee  |
| Issue date: | 02/11/2002 |
| From: | Division of Nuclear Materials Safety II |
| To: | Duke Energy Corp |
| References | |
| 50-269/02301, 50-270/02301, 50-287/02301 | |
| Download: ML020940648 (18) | |
See also: IR 05000269/2002301
Text
OCONEE EXAM
50-269, 270, 287/2002-301
February 11 - 15, 2002
Administrative Documents
(Yellow Paper)
L,ý Exam Preparation Checklist ................... ....... ES-201-1
....... ES-201-2
Exam Outline Quality Checklist ................
....... ES-201-3
3. Exam Security Agreement .....................
....... ES-301-3
L.4. Operating Test Quality Check sheet .............
....... ES-301-4
-5X. Simulator Scenario Quality Check sheet ..........
....... ES-301-5
Lvf6. Transient and Event Checklist ..................
....... ES-301-6
,,,-7. Competencies Checklist ......................
....... ES-401-7
,A. Written Exam Quality Check sheet ..............
....... ES-403-1
x,9. Written Exam Grading Quality Checklist .........
,-,-0. Post Exam Check sheet ............... ... ES-501-1
Examination Preparation Checklist Form ES-201-1
. " Date of Examination: R///-/
Facility: 6&-oA
Examinations Developed by: c-" I/5* (circle one)
Chief
Target
Task Description / Reference Examineres
DateT*
F Initials
-180 1. Examination administration date confirmed (C.l.a; C.2.a & b)
-120 2. NRC examiners and facility contact assigned (C.1.d; C.2.e) _ t _
-120 3. Facility contact briefed on security &other requirements (C.2.c)
-120 4. Corporate notification letter sent (C.2.d)
[-90] [5. Reference material due (C.1.e; C.3.c)]
-75 6. Integrated examination outline(s) due (C.1.e & f; C.3.d)
-70 7. Examination outline(s) reviewed by NRC and feedback provided
to facility licensee (C.2.h; C.3.e) //W"/
-45 8. Proposed examinations, supporting documentation, and
reference materials due (C.l.e, f, g & h; C.3.d)
-30 9. Preliminary license applications due (C.1.1; C.2.g; ES-202)
-14 10. Final license applications due and assignment sheet prepared
(C.1.1; C.2.g; ES-202)
-14 11. Examination approved by NR 8 ervisor for facility licensee
review (C.2.h; C.3.f) A*a' W
-14 12. Examinations reviewed with facility licensee (C...j: C.2.f & h; C.3.g)
-7 13. Written
NRC supervisor (C.2.1;and
examinations operating tests approved by
C.3.h)
-7 14. Final applications reviewed; assignment sheet updated; waiver
letters sent (C.2.g, ES-204)
15. Proctoring/written exam administration guidelines written reviewed with
facility licensee and authorization granted to give exams
-7
(ifapplicable) (C.3.k)
-7 16. Approved scenarios, job performance measures, and questions
I
distributed to NRC examiners (C.3.1)
corporate notification letter.
Target dates are keyed to the examination date identified in the basis in coordination
They are for planning purposes and may be adjusted on a case-by-case
with the facility licensee.
Applies only to examinations prepared by the NRC.
NUREG-1021, Revision 8, Supplement 1 22 of 24
ES-201 ciL'<. . " Examination Outline Form ES-201-2 (R8,S1)
Quality Checklist
Facility: Oconee Date of Examination: February 4, 2002
Initials
Item Task Description
a b* c#
1. a. Verify that the outline(s) fit(s) the appropriate model per ES-401.
W
R b. Assess whether the outline was systematically and randomly prepared in accordance with
I Section D.1 of ES-401 and whether all K/A categories are appropriately sampled. ___
T
T c. Assess whether the outline over-emphasizes any systems, evolutions, or generic topics. '
E
N d. Assess whether the justifications for deselected or rejected K/A statements are appropriate. _/7
2. a. Using Form ES-301-5, verify that the proposed scenario sets cover the required number of
normal evolutions, instrument and component failures, and major transients.
S
I b. Assess whether there are enough scenario sets (and spares) to test the projected number and
M mix of applicants in accordance with the expected crew composition and rotation schedule without
compromising exam integrity: ensure each applicant can be tested using at least one new or
significantly modified scenario, that no scenados are duplicated from the applicants' audit test(s)*,
and scenarios will not be repeated over successive days.
c. To the extent possible, assess whether the outline(s) conform(s) with the qualitative and
quantitative criteria specified on Form ES-301-4 and described in Appendix D.
3. a. Verify that:
(1) the outline(s) contain(s) the required number of control room and in-plant tasks,
W (2) no more than 30% of the test material is repeated from the last NRC examination, - ?VM
/ (3)* no tasks are duplicated from the applicants' adlt.n.s), and
T (4) no more than 80% of any operating test is taken dimcy from the licensee's exam banks.
b. Verify that:
(1) the tasks are distributed among the safety function groupings as specified in ES-301,
(2) one task is conducted in a low-power or shutdown condition,
(3) 40% of the tasks require the applicant to implement an alternate path procedure,
(4) one in-plant task tests the applicant's response to an emergency or abnormal condition, and
(5) the in-plant walk-through requires the applicant to enter the RCA.
c. Verify that the required administrative topics are covered, with emphasis on performance
based activities.
d. Determine if there are enough different outlines to test the projected number and mix of
applicants and ensure that no items are duplicated on successive days.
4. a. Assess whether plant-specific priorities (including PRA and IPE insights) are covered in the - t ___
appropriate exam section.
G
E b. Assess whether the 10 CFR 55.41/43 and 55.45 sampling is appropriate. *n__
N
E c. Ensure that K/A Importance ratings (except for plant-specific priorities) are at least 2.5.
R sections.
d. Check for duplication and overlap among exam
e. Check the entire exam for balance of coverage.
f. Assess whether the exam fits the appropriate job level (RO or SRO).
Printed Na e Sig t Date
a. Author £ IIŽ&A11-SS0
b. Facility Reviewer (*) M _ThVAL,
AL4L. - *
m c"* tL Jf -*l
c. NRC Chief Examiner (#) ý ,ý0 *TJ'f
- 02.
d. NRC Supervisor 1 -f.L Sflw, 71 - - ___/_/_
Note: * Not applicable for NRC-developed examinations.
- Independent NRC reviewer initial items In Column "c;" chief examiner concurrence required.
ES-201 Examination Outline Form ES-201-2 (R8,S1)
Quality Checklist
Facility: Oconee Nuclear Station Date of Examination:
Initials
Task Description
Item
a b* c#
1. a. Verify that the outline(s) fit(s) the appropriate model per ES-401.
W
R b. Assess whether the outline was systematically and randomly prepared in accordance with ha
I Section D.1 of ES-401 and whether all K/A categories are appropriately sampled.
T
T c. Assess whether the outline over-emphasizes any systems, evolutions, or generic topics.
E N/a/
N d. Assess whether the justifications for deselected or rejected K/A statements are appropriate.
2. a. Using Form ES-301-5, verify that the proposed scenario sets cover the required number of
normal evolutions, instrument and component failures, and major transients.
S
the projected number
I b. Assess whether there are enough scenario sets (and spares) to test
and mix of applicants in accordance with the expected crew composition and rotation schedule
M
without compromising exam integrity; ensure 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 scenarios will not be repeated over successive days.
c. To the extent possible, assess whether the outline(s) conform(s) with the qualitative and
quantitative criteria specified on Form ES-3014 and described in Appendix D.
3. a. Verify that:
(1) the outline(s) contain(s) the required number of control room and in-plant tasks,
W (2) no more than 30% of the test material is repeated from the last NRC examination,
/ (3)* no tasks are duplicated from the applicants' audit test(s), and
T (4) no more than 80% of any operating test is taken directly from the licensee's exam banks.
b. Verify that:
(1) the tasks are distributed among the safety function groupings as specified in ES-301,
(2) one task is conducted in a low-power or shutdown condition,
(3) 40% of the tasks require the applicant to implement an alternate path procedure,
(4) one in-plant task tests the applicant's response to an emergency or abnormal condition, and
(5) the in-plant walk-through requires the applicant to enter the RCA.
c. Verify that the required administrative topics are covered, with emphasis on performance
based activities.
d. Determine if there are enough different outlines to test the projected number and mix of
applicants and ensure that no items are duplicated on successive days.
and IPE insights) are covered in the ' l
4. a. Assess whether plant-specific priorities (including PRA
appropriate exam section.
G
NE b. Assess whether the 10 CFR 55.41/43 and 55.45 sampling is appropriate.
E c. Ensure that K/A importance ratings (except for plant-specific priorities) are at least 2.5.
A
R d. Check for duplication and overlap among exam sections.
A
L e. Check the entire exam for balance of coverage.
f. Assess whether the exam fits the appropriate job level (RO or SRO).
- ,inted Name / Signature /* *rDateW
a. Author Ronald F. Aiello/ N
1. RFA signed for written only
2. Two questions did not but wyre supported by an EO
b. Facility Reviewer (*) A//A
c. NRC Chief Examiner (#) "V-
M)l 0-1 L Lk. I
l14-r j I'
d. NRC Supervisor
Note: Not applicable for NRC-developed examinations.
- Independent NRC reviewer initial items in Column "c:" chief examiner concurrence required.
ES-201 Examination Outline Form ES-201-2 (R8,SI)
Quality Checklist
Facility: Oconee Date of Examination: March 21, 2002
Initials
Item Task Description a b- cG#
iMIA v/W
1. a. Verify that the outline(s) fit(s) the appropriate model per ES-401.
w ith
W b. Assess whether the outline was systematically and randomly prepared in accorda
I Section D.1 of ES-401 and whether all K/A categories are appropriately samp e
T c. Assess whether the outline over-emphasizes any systems, evolutions, or ened cs
IN d. Assess whether the justifications for dleselected, r reje K/tatements are appropriate.
2. a. Using Form ES-301-5, verify t at thepr scenrosets cover the required number of
normal evolutions, instrument an*n** *I failures, and malor transients-.'
I b. Assess whether there are l.p h scenario sets (and spares) to test the projected number and
I M mix of applicants i a or with the expected crew composition and rotation schedule without
compromising e rity; ensure each applicant can be tested using at least one new or
significantly scenario, that no scenarios are duplicated from the applicants' audit test(s)*,
an s will not be repeated over successive days.
c o the extent possible, assess whether the outline(s) conform(s) with the qualitative and
quantitative criteria specified on Form ES-301-4 and described in Appendix D.
3. a. ) Verify
(1
that:
the outline(s) contain(s) the required number of control room and in-plant tasks,
W (2) no more than 30% of the test the material is repeated from the last NRC examination,
/ (3)* no tasks are duplicated from applicants' audit test(s), and
banks.
T (4) no more than 80% of any operating test is taken directly from the licensee's exam
b., Verify that:
in ES-301,
01) the tasks are distributed among the safety function groupings as specified
(2) one task is conducted in a low-power or shutdown condition,
(3) 40% of the tasks require the applicant to implement an alternate path procedure,
condition, and
(4) one in-plant task tests the applicant's response to an emergency or abnormal
(5) the in-plant walk-through requires the applicant to enter the RCA.
c. Verify that the required administrative topics are covered, with emphasis on performance
based activities.
of
d. Determine if there are enough different outlines to test the projected number and mix
applicants and ensure that no items are duplicated on successive days.
covered in the
4. a. Assess whether plant-specific priorities (including PRA and IPE insights) are
appropriate exam section.
G
E b. Assess whether the 10 CFR 55.41/43 and 55.45 sampling is appropriate.
IN
at least 2.5.
E c. Ensure that K/A importance ratings (except for plant-specific priorities) are
R
A d. Check for duplication and overlap among exam sections.
L
e. Check the entire exam for balance of coverage.
f. Assess whether the exam fits the appropriate lob level (RO or SRO)
. .. .... ProtSPONamW0/ ignatuM.
a. Author
b. Facility Reviewer (*
C. NRC Chief Examiner (#)
d. NRC Supervisor
Note: Not applicable for NRC-developed examinations.
- Independent NRC reviewer initial items in Column "c;" chief examiner concurrence required.
ES-201 Examination Security Aqreement Form ES-201-3 (R8, $1)
1. Pre-Examination
I acknowledge that I have acquired specialized knowledge about the NRC licensing examinations scheduled for the week(s) of 2/4, 2/11-2002 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. Furthermore, I am aware of the physical security measures and requirements (as documented in the facility licensee's
procedures) and understand that violation of the conditions of this agreement may result in cancellation of the examinations and/or an enforcement action
against me or the facility licensee. I will immediately report to facility management or the NRC chief examiner any indications or suggestions that
examination security may have been compromised.
2. Post-Examination
To the best of my knowledge, I did not divulge to any unauthorized persons any information concerning the NRC licensing examinations administered
during the week(s) of 2/4, 2/11-2002. 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.
PRINTED NAME JOB TITLE / RESPONSIBILITY SIGNATURE (1) DATE SIGNATURE (2) DATE NOTE
5. - * ..
"' " " 0& ""4A10
'A.r," -,A1&'.,CK
_. r.*p9
7 -- *fJ "~~A"Z-P/
- Z... 4-Z
6. .,
T Z. S 6 1#0. Q 11
7.
8.'oA&) U- r-ot-.'sAM ýZI* /,/ -LAM ,M
IXAWý , *-ml
9. /"/11e., 05. Co//,',7"s S./s-ct
.Wq,o. 9, * * -v __
<*io __*___
1 , l.J!,*_~~~
"iL t2,*,kýL.:i
13. 7;%6m4-s ZA.J2le,ct
14. -rlm Vn4 WV2 51yt2 Aqnt#
15_%n%.,%% V. %.aaAfl Os'2Cc.n 6M
U.J
NOTES:
ES-201 Examination Security Agreement Form ES-201-3 (R8, Si)
1. Pre-Examination
I acknowledge that I have acquired specialized knowledge about the NRC licensing examinations scheduled for the week(s) of 2/4, 2/11-2002 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. Furthermore, I am
aware of the physical security measures and requirements (as documented in the facility licensee's procedures) and understand that violation of the conditions of
this agreement may result in cancellation of the examinations and/or an enforcement action against me or the facility licensee. I will immediately report to facility
management or the NRC chief examiner any indications or suggestions that examination security may have been compromised.
2. Post-Examination
To the best of my knowledge, I did not divulge to any unauthorized persons any information concerning the NRC licensing examinations administered during the
week(s) of 2/4, 2/11-2002. 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.
PRINTED NAME JOB TITLE / RESPONSIBILITY SIGNATURE (1) DATE SIGNATURE (2) DATE NOTE
2 r- 0 2-
2. o7 / 2-ID - o.Z
3. ..-- 220
4.1 /774I Att+br opa v t.
5. Jdj, t Le- otr&+ie.'r Reo.AL TM LjA 1. - 4-c 21-31-o?
6. ___ ___ __ ___ ___ __
7. Sar flar,..p
8. l
10. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
12. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
13. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
14. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
15.
NOTES:
ES-201 Examination Security Agreement Form ES-201-3 (R8, Si)
1. Pre-Examination
I acknowledge that I have acquired specialized knowledge about the NRC licensing examinations scheduled for the week(s) of "____._-__,,_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. Furthermore, I am
aware of the physical security measures and requirements (as documented in the facility licensee's procedures) and understand that violation of the conditions of
this agreement may result in cancellation of the examinations and/or an enforcement action against me or the facility licensee. I will immediately report to facility
management or the NRC chief examiner any indications or suggestions that examination security may have been compromised.
2. Post-Examination
To the best of my knowledge, I did not divulge to any unauthorized persons any information concerning the NRC licensing examinations administered during the
week(s) of 34[-Oa . 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.
PRINTED NAME JOB TITLE / RESPONSIBILITY SIGNATURE (1) DATE SIGNATURE (2) DATE NOTE
4.
atMW.!
6. C2, t
12.6-2c
>T- c~_
813. ________________________________________
15. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
NOTES:
ES-301 Operating Test Quality Checklist Form ES-301-3 (R8, Si)
Facility: Oconee Date of Examination: February 11, 2002 Operating Test Number:
Initials
1. GENERAL CRITERIA
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 distribution).
b. There is no day-to-day repetition between this and other operating tests to be administered
during this examination.
c. The operating test shall not duplicate items from the applicants' audit test(s)(see Section D. 1.a). ,
d. Overlap with the written examination and between operating test categories is within acceptable
limits.
e. It appears that the operating test will differentiate between competent and less-than-competent A*
applicants at the designated license level.
2. WALK-THROUGH (CATEGORY A & B) CRITERIA
a. Each JPM includes the following, as applicable: At
. initial conditions
- initiating cues
- references and tools, including associated procedures
reasonable and validated time limits (average time allowed for completion) and specific
designation if deemed to be time critical by the facility licensee
- specific performance criteria that include:
- detailed expected actions with exact criteria and nomenclature
- system response and other examiner cues
- statements describing important observations to be made by the applicant
- criteria for successful completion of the task
- identification of critical steps and their associated performance standards
- restrictions on the sequence of steps, if applicable
b. The prescripted questions in Category A are predominantly open reference and meet the criteria *AV re ,
in Attachment 1 of ES-301.
c. Repetition from operating tests used during the previous licensing examination is within
acceptable limits (30% for the walk-through) and do not compromise test integrity.
d. At least 20 percent of the JPMs on each test are new or significantly modified. 4
3. SIMULATOR (CATEGORY C) CRITERIA
a. The associated simulator operating tests (scenano sets) have been reviewed in accordance with I IAW
Form ES-301-4 and a copy is attached.
Printed Name / Signature Date
a. Author G-- n- VlSKIU RI) I e* U -*AL*
- -p /
b. Facility Reviewer(*) ?Aut.. Al. SISALL t. 1-2-'1 -2,
c. NRC Chief Examiner (#) d -d". -r1 _ _,
d. NRC Supervisor fM1,Cfl-L tgIF
. ICA 4/
7Pr ZV Z
p-S*
NOTE: * The facility signature is not applicable for NRC-developed tests.
- Independent NRC reviewer Initial items in Column "c;" chief examiner concurrence required.
ES-301 Operating Test Quality Checklist Form ES-301-3 (R8, Sl)
Date of Examination: Februa 11, 2002 0 eratin Test Number:
Facility: Oconee
Init*s
1. GENERAL CRITERIA a b- c#
function distribution) n1
(e. ., 10 GFR 55.45, operational importance, safet are consistent with
a.
a. sampling
The operating test conforms with the previously approved outline changes
re uiremnents
Secti D.1 .a
. t
There is no day-to-day repetition between this and other operatingaudit tests
test administered
to sbesee
b.
applicants'
durin this examination. items from the
test shall not duplicate
C. The o erating
10
d. Overlap with the written examination and between operating test categories is with acceptable
limits.
and le -than-competent i,,J
e. It appears that the operating test will differentiate between competent
applicants at the designated license level.
2. WALK-THROUGH (CATEGORY A & B) CRITERI
a. Each JPM includes the following, as applicable:
- initial conditions
initiating cues
- references and tools, including associated
proceduresn
- reasonable and validated time limits (average time owed for completion) and specific
designation if deemed to be time critical by the fa ty licensee
specific performance criteria that include:
- detailed expected actions with exact cnit a and nomenclature
-Rsystem response and other examiner athepes l
c-criteria
statements describing important ob thervanions to be made by the applicant
for successful completionof task
-identification of critical steps a their associated performance standards
restrictions on the sequence stepS, if applicable
b. The *UCa gory A are predominantly open reference and meetteciei
,
in Attachment 1 of ES-301.
is within rP
c. Repetition Irom operating lsts used during the previouslicnsingexamination
acceptable limits !30% 1ofthe walk-through ad do ntomrom setest integrity.
the JPMs on each test are new or significantl modified.
d. At least 20 ercent
C) CRITERIA
3. SIMULATOR JCATEGORY
have been reviewed in accordance with
a. The associ d simulator operating tests (scenario sets)
Form ES- 1-4 and a copy is attached.
Date
Printed Name / Signature
/
a.Author /
d. RC Supervisor
NOTE: * The facility signature is not appliable for NRC-deveoped tests.e
"c;" c ..... "
- independent NRC reviewer initial items in -u
at t+/-a ad' ASt#
Q2fl1 Oneratina Test d*uality Checklist Form ES-301-3 (R8, Si)
ES-3 _1w Operating Test duality Checklist
Facility: Oconee Date of Examination: March 21, 2002 Operating Test Number:
bntil
1. GENERAL CRITERIA t
b ia c
r
a. The operating test conforms with the previously approved outline; changes are consistent with
sampling requirements (e.g., 10 CFR 55.45, operatwonal Importance, safety function distributionj.
b. There is no day-to-day repetition between this and other operating tests to be administered
during this examinations * *
ta.
eS cinD
u i esl)s
h p lc ns
e:sfo
g,i asuaplicab test categories is within acceptable
d. Overlap with the written examination
cludest h foallown and between operating
Eahe JpMrain
a.
It appears thna the operating test will differentiate between competent s
and -ompetentc
e.
applicants at the designated tbcense level. I
A & B CRITERIA
ý inTieoeatingcuest hl o ulct tm rmteapiat'adtts~)seScinD~
(CATEGORY
2. WALK-THROUGH
a. Each JPM includes the following, as applicable: a nmct
ninitial cues
conditios ion and specific
ninitiating for completion)
time allowed
time limits (average
references and and tools, including associated procedures
validated
reasonable
designation if deemed to be timeucitncel by the facility licensee
. especific performance criteria that include:
i detailed expected actions with exact criteria and nomenclature
of the task
other examiner cues
- system response and completion standards
acstatements for successful
describing important observations
their associated to beperformance
made by the applicant
- criteria and
of critical steps
-identification sequence of steps, if applicable
on the
-Mrestrictions
.= l- *
"01. _ b-.o .'" is within
'S-3
ent 1 of licensing examination
test integrity.
in Attachm during the previous compromise
used do not
operating testswalk-tlhrough) and
G. Repetition from for the
(30%
limits
acceptable
d. At least 20 percent of the JPMs on each test are new or significantly modified.
3. SIMULATOR (CATEGORY C) CRITERIA
a. The associated simulator operating tests (scenario sets) have Ien reviewed in accordance with 1- PJ/t. NA
Form ES-301-4 and a copy is attached. P'e.AOe IA' bbn* aa,
Printed Name ( Signature Date
a.Author G W&3-148 Ž
b. Facility Reviewer(') P*tur. $4. Sr 'L
ad-o 1.
3-
c. NRC Chief Examiner " ' /,,,
V4:
M #
lOL 32
d. NRC Supervisor /MI ,1 ' E
NOTE: - The facility signature is not applicable for NRC-developed tests.
- Independent NRC reviewer initial items in Column "c;" chief examiner concurrence required.
Form ES-301-4 (R8, S1)
ES-301 Simulator Scenario Quality Checklist
Facility: Oconee Date of Exam: February 11, 2002 Scenario Numbers: 1 1 2 / Operating Test No.:
QUALITATIVE ATTRIBUTES Initials
a b* c#
1. The initial conditions are realistic, in that some equipment and/or instrumentation may be out of
service, but it does not cue the operators into expected events.
2. The scenarios consist mostly of related events.
3. Each event description consists of
the point in the scenario when it is to be initiated
- the malfunction(s) that are entered to initiate the event
the symptoms/cues that will be visible to the crew
- the expected operator actions (by shift position)
the event termination point (if applicable) ___ 14#
4. No more than one non-mechanistic failure (e.g., pipe break) is incorporated into the scenario
without a credible preceding incident such as a seismic event. Ve
5. The events are valid with regard to physics and thermodynamics. k fý
6. Sequencing and timing of events is reasonable, and allows the examination team to obtain
complete evaluation results commensurate with the scenario objectives. A r?
Y
7. Iftime compression techniques are used, the scenario summary clearly so indicates.Cues Operators
are 10_4
have sufficient time to carry out expected activities without undue time constraints.
given. f
8. The simulator modeling is not altered.
9. The scenarios have been validated. Any open simulator performance deficiencies have been
evaluated to ensure that functional fidelity is maintained while running the planned scenarios. I
10. Every operator will be evaluated using at least one new or significantly modified scenario. All 1
other scenarios have been altered in accordance with Section D.4 of ES-301. r. 0
11. All individual operator competencies can be evaluated, as verified using Form ES-301-6 (submit
the form along with the simulator scenarios). 01
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).
13. The level of difficulty is appropriate to support licensing decisions for each crew position. *1=
TARGET QUANTITATIVE ATTRIBUTES (PER SCENARIO; SEE SECTION D.4.D) Actual Attributes
1. Total malfunctions (5-8) 6 / A I iWal L'4
Malfunctions after EOP entry (1-2) 1 / 1 / **i
2.
3 1 3 1
3. Abnormal events (2-4)
2 1 1
4. Major transients (1-2)
2 I 2 I
5. EOPs entered/requiring substantive actions (1-2)
2 1I
6. EOP contingencies requiring substantive actions (0-2)
3 4 /
7. Critical tasks (2-3)
ES-301 Transient and Event Checklist Form ES-301-5 (R8, S1)
OPERATING TEST NO.:
Applicant Evolution Minimum Scenario Number
Type Type Number 1 2 3 4
Reactivity 1 3
Normal 1 1
(1-3) Instrument/ 4 2,5, 1,4,
Component 7 5
Major 1 6,8 7
Reactivity 1 6
Normal 0
As RO
Instrument/ 2 2, 3,
Component 5
Major 1 7
SRO-I
(1-3)
Reactivity 0 3
Normal 1 1
As SRO Instrument/ 2 2, 4,
Component 5, 7
Major 1 6, 8
Reactivity 0 N/A
Normal 1 N/A 1
SRO-U Instrument / 2 N/A 1, 2
(1-4) Component 3, 4,
5
Major NIA 7
Instructions: (1) Enter the operating test number and Form ES-D-1 event numbers for each
evolution type
(2) Reactivity manipulations may be conducted under normal or controlled abnormal
conditions~refer to Section D.4.d) but must be significant per Section C.2.a of
Appendix LD.
(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 requirement.
Author:
NRC Reviewer: y4aý
NRCReiewr: 2T eZ42wý
ES-301 Competencies Checklist Form ES-301-6 (R8, Si)
Applicant #1 Applicant #2 Applicant #3
RO/SRO-I/SRO-U RO/SRO-I/SRO-U RO/SRO-I/SRO-U
(1-3) (1-3) (1-4)
Competencies SCENARIO SCENARIO SCENARIO
1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4
2, 5, 1, 4, 2,4, 2,3, 1,4, 1, 2,
Understand and Interpret 6, 7 5,7 5,6, 4,5, 7,8 3, 4,
7,8 6,7 5,6,
Annunciators and Alarms 7
2,5, 1, 4, 2,4, 2, 3, 4,7, 2,3,
Diagnose Events 6,7 5,7 5,6, 4, 5. 8 4, 5,
7,8, 6, 7 7
and Conditions
3,5, 1,5, 1,2, 2,3, 1,4, 2,3,
Understand Plant 7, 8 6,7 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 4, 5,
5,6, 7 6,7
and System Response 7,8
3,5, 1,4, 2,3 2,3, 1,3, 4 5,
Comply With and 6,7, 5,6, 4,6, 5,6, 4, 6, 6, 7
7 7,8 7 7,8
Use Procedures (1) 8
3,5, 1,4, 2,3, 1,3,
Operate Control 6,7, 5,6, N/A 5,6, 4,7, N/A
8 7 7 8
Boards (2)
2,3, 1,3, 1,2, 2,3, 1,2, 1,2,
Communicate and 5,6, 4, 5, 3, 4, 4, 5, 3,4, 3,4,
6,7 5,6, 6,7 5,6, 5,6,
Interact With the Crew 7,8
7,8, 8 7
1,2, 1,2,
Demonstrate Supervisory N/A N/A 354 N/A NA ,,
5,6, 5,6,
Ability (3) 7,8 7
Comply With and 2 4,5
Use Tech. Specs. (3) N/A N/A NIA N/A
Notes:
(1) Includes Technical Specification compliance for an RO.
(2) Optional for an SRO-U.
(3) Only applicable to SROs.
Instructions:
Circle the applicant's license type and enter one or more event numbers that will allow the
examiners to evaluate every applicable competency for every applicant.
_ _,,_ _._ _,
Author: __
NRC Reviewer: A f'/
_
ES-401 Written Examination Form ES-401-7
Quality Checklist
Facility: Oconee Nuclear Station Date of Exam: 8//0/at Exam Level: RO
Initial
Item Description a b* c'
1 Questions and answers technically accurate and applicable to facility }A*\ Add' 4W
2. a. NRC K/As referenced for all questions ft
b. Facility learning objectives referenced as available
3. RO/SRO overlap is no more than 75 percent, and SRO questions are appropriate rf>d
per Section D.2.d of ES-401 T% -00V
4. Question selection and duplication from the last two NRC licensing exams
appears consistent with a systematic sampling process "NA4
5. Question duplication from the license screening/audit exam was controlled as
indicated below (check the item that applies) and appears appropriate:
the audit exam was systematically and randomly developed; or A*
the audit exam was completed before the license exam was started; or
X the examinations were developed independently; or
the licensee certifies that there is no duplication; or
other (explain)
6. Bank use meets limits (no more than 75 Bank Modified New
percent from the bank at least 10 percent new, -IT
and the rest modified); enter the actual question ee,2 -i- " -66&5"
distribution at right
7. Between 50 and 60 percent of the questions on Memory C/A
the exam (including 10 new questions) are r.t
written at the comprehension/analysis level; n9- .1-r-
5
enter the actual question distribution at right
8. References/handouts provided do not give away answers rfa 9
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 rA41
assigned; deviations are justified
10. Question psychometric quality and format meet ES, Appendix B, guidelines __40
11. The exam contains 100, one-point, multiple choice items; the total is correct and rfk
agrees with value on cover sheet
Printed Name / Signature - Date
a. Author Ronald F. Aiello -< 12/28/01
b. Facility Reviewer (*)
c. NRC Chief Examiner (#) __._ __,_.- _ _ _-__ .,_
__" ,_/
_.,__ _
d. NRC Regional Supervisor ,l L C. -IN'1ff
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.
NUREG-1021, Revision 8, Supplement 1 42 of 46
ES-401 Written Examination Form ES-401-7
Quality Checklist
Facility: Oconee Nuclear Station Date of Exam: 418/10- Exam Level: SRO
Initial
Item Description a b* ce
1. Questions and answers technically accurate and applicable to facility rIVA .,/A"
2. a. NRC K/As referenced for all questions
b. Facility learning objectives referenced as available
3. RO/SRO overlap is no more than 75 percent, and SRO questions are appropriate rfa
per Section D.2.d of ES-401
4. Question selection and duplication from the last two NRC licensing exams
appears consistent with a systematic sampling process MON
5. Question duplication from the license screening/audit exam was controlled as
indicated below (check the item that applies) and appears appropriate:
-theaudit exam was systematically and randomly developed; or it
the audit exam was completed before the license exam was started; or
X_ the examinations were developed independently; or
the licensee certifies that there is no duplication; or
other (explain)
6. Bank use meets limits (no more than 75 Bank Modified New
percent from the bank at least 10 percent new, -. I
and the rest modified); enter the actual question -ae- +
-is Cal
,-se
distribution at right
7. Between 50 and 60 percent of the questions on Memory C/A
the exam (including 10 new questions) are rfA
written at the comprehension/analysis level; -46- Y3 + -7
enter the actual question distribution at right
8. References/handouts provided do not give away answers P
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 M
assigned; deviations are justified
10. Question psychometric quality and format meet ES, Appendix B, guidelines ri_ pw
11. The exam contains 100, one-point, multiple choice items; the total is correct and rta
agrees with value on cover sheet
Printed Name / Signature Date
a. Author Ronald F. Aiello -,- J -- 12/28/01
b. Facility Reviewer (*) /O//f"
c. NRC Chief Examiner (#) * . Op Z&W LA,6.
d. NRC Regional Supervisor ,milth*tL t. e 4/v,,/<
,tj.J c _"___
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.
NUREG-1021, Revision 8, Supplement 1 42 of 46
Writtenfli Examination Grading i-arm tb-4U3-1
Form ES-4u03-1
ES-403 ,alht, C~hAe~klist
Facir Date of Exam: Exam Level: RO/SRO
Initials
a b c
Item Description
1. Clean answer sheets copied before gradinga . .i/.. I
2. Answer key changes and question deletions justified and
documented A A
3. Applicants' scores checked for addition errors
(reviewers spot check > 25% of examinations)
4. Grading for all borderline cases (80% +/- 2%) reviewed in
detail
5. All other failing examinations checked to ensure that grades
4 W60F
are justified v/oT& :No ,jS/,l ,OrA'WW
6. Performance on missed questions checked for training
deficiencies and wording problems; evaluate validity of
questions missed by half or more of the applicants
Printed Name / Signature Date
a. Grader (sr 14,0M.
b. Facility Reviewer(*)
c. NRC Chief Examiner () c-. 0 4 I'c
d. NRCSupervlsorf* e IHE LAtS-f/j Of"dU'Cs-. 3/r'Ot
(*) The facility reviewer's signature Is not applicable for examinations graded by the
NRC; two independent NRC reviews are required.
5 of 5 NUREG-1021. Revision 8, Supplement I
ES-501 Pnd-Fvminntinn Chnk Sheet rorm L-DU I-I
F-orm ES*-50 I- I
ES-501 Post-Examination Che-ý Sheet
Task Description Date
Complete
1 Facility written exam comments or graded exams received and -/a(/o 2
verified complete
2. Facility exam comments
writtencompleted, reviewed and incorporated and
if necessary
// -/o
2-.2&/02
NRC grading
3. Operating tests graded by NRC examiners 3//,/ -a
4. NRC Chief examiner review of written exam and operating test / Z
3/// 11/f6
grading completed
5. Responsible supervisor review completed 3 ,. 5_
6. Management (licensing official) review completed_.'
7. License and denial letters mailed 3 14z
8. Facility notified of results 32z
9. Examination report issued (referto NRC MC 0610) , /
10. Reference material returned after final resolution of any
appeals
NUREG-102 1, Revision 8 20 of 22