ML022390309
| ML022390309 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Calvert Cliffs  |
| Issue date: | 07/11/2002 |
| From: | Hornick J Constellation Nuclear |
| To: | Conte R NRC/RGN-I/DRS/OSB |
| References | |
| 50-317/02301, 50-318/02301 | |
| Download: ML022390309 (13) | |
Text
ES-201 Examination Preparation Checklist Form ES-201-1 Facility:
Cf '9 CV Date of Examination: 7 z
Examinations Developed by:
(Facili I
NRC (circle one)
Target Chief Date*
Task Description / Reference Examiner's Initials
-180
- 1. Examination administration date confirmed (C.1.a; C.2.a & b)
-120
- 2. NRC examiners and facility contact assigned (C.l.d; C.2.e)
-120
- 3. Facility contact briefed on security & other requirements (C.2.c)
-120
- 4. Corporate notification letter sent (C.2.d)
[-901
[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)
-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 NRC supervisor for facility licensee review (C.2.h; C.3.0 e
s
-14
- 12. Examinations reviewed with facility licensee (C.a.j; C.2.f & h; C.3.g)
-7
- 13. Written examinations and operating tests approved by NRC supervisor (C.2.i; C.3.h)
-7
- 14. Final applications reviewed; assignment sheet updated; waiver letters sent (C.2.g, ES-204) p e
h
- 15. Proctoring/written exam administration guidelines reviewed with
-7 facility licensee and authorization granted to give written exams (if applicable) (C.3.k)
-7
- 16. Approved scenarios, job performance measures, and questions distributed to NRC examiners (C.3.i)
STarget dates are keyed to the examination date identified in the corporate notification letter. They are for planning purposes and may be adjusted on a case-by-case basis in coordination with the facility Appiesonl toexainations prepared by the NRC.
'I
23 of 24 NUREG-1021, Revision 8, Supplement 1 ES-201 Examination Outline Form ES-201-2 Quality Checklist Facility:
Date of Examination:
Item Task Description Initials a
b*
c#
- 1.
- a. Verify that the outline(s) fit(s) the appropriate model per ES-401.
4"'
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 KIA categories are appropriately sampled.
I 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.
- 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.
/
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 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-301-4 and described in Appendix D.
I
- 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.
24
- d. Determine if there are enough different outlines to test the projected number and mix of 4
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 appropriate exam section.
G E
- b. Assess whether the 10 CFR 55.41/43 and 55.45 sampling is appropriate.
N E
- c. Ensure that K/A importance ratings (except for plant-specific priorities) are at least 2.5.
R A
- d. Check for duplication and overlap among exam sections.
L
- e. Check the entire exam for balance of coverage.
- a. Author Printed Nme / Signature D te
- b. Facility Reviewer ()
- c. NRC Chief Examiner (#)
04 O
V W/f J'.,\\.
- d. NRC Supervisor T
//",
. ('_,'/4/ /
L-
- L"./
Note:
Not applicable for NRC-developed examinations.
- Independent NRC reviewer initial items in Column "c;" chief examiner concurrence required.
I I
I
-,i)
I
ES-201 Examination SecurtyAgreement Form ES-201-3
- 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 bee 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 didnot divulge to any unauthorized persons any information concerning the NRC licensing examinations administered during the week(s) of r--.
4 -rom 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 NOIE y1--,---
/2-.
- 5. IDevt6_
._____*t_-.
- 8.
- 3.
C7ý 1
41-
-~
J/
7.. -...
9 S--
13.-_ _.
Z o
- _m
,xa~
5-OP NUREG-1021, Revision 8 24 of 2ý 0 l0U3AI
ES-201 Examination SecurityAgreement Form ES-201-3
- 1.
Pre-Examination Fr S2-I acknowledge that I have acquired specialized knowledge about the NRC licensing examinations scheduled for the week(s) of I "
aYi 's of the date of my signature. I agree that I will not knowingly divulge any information about these examinations to any persons who have notthe 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) oflI*-
, rrom 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 R SPONSIBILITY SIGNATU AE (1)
DATE SIGNATURE (2)
DATE NOTE 2.-
£ "3.
712 ---
46 7D..
0
_-_-2 5
5._
_L
_-*_*__-~
7 Z
8 S
o1
~/-O.
1.
d~-Z---------
15.
NOTES:-------
7 13 14.15------------
15 -
NOTES:
NUREG-1021, Revision 8 24 of 24
ES-301 Operating Test Quality Checklist Form ES-301-3 Facility:
Date of Examination:
Operating) Test Number:
- 1. GENERAL CRITERIAJ Initials a
b*
c#
- a.
The operating test conforms with the previously approved outline; changes are consistent with samplina 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 durnn this examination.
- c.
The operating test shall not duplicate items from the applicants' audit test(s)(see Section D.l.a). 77
- 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 applicants at the designated license level.
- 2. WALK-THROUGH (CATEGORY A & B) CRITERIA
/
- a.
Each JPM includes the following, as applicable:
- 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 in Attachment I 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 integdty
- 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 been reviewed in accordance with Form ES-301-4+ andu a ccopy is attached.
Printed Name /Sig tur Dat
- c. NRC Chief Examiner (#)
F ~~'/;*
i/
'O
-*i'*
7/+z NOTE:
- The facility signature is not applicable for NRC-developed tests.
- Independent NRC reviewer initial items in Column "c:" chief examiner concurrence reguired.
23 of 26 NUREG-1021, Revision 8, Supplement 1
ES-301 Operating Test Quality Checklist Form ES-301-3 Facility:
Date of Examination:
Operatin-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).
- ',L4
- b.
There is no day-to-day repetition between this and other operating tests to be administered during this examinations C.
The operating test shall not duplicate items from the applicants' audit test(s)(see Section D.1.a).
- d.
limts rOverlap with the written examination and between operating test categories iswithin acceptable
- e.
It appears that the operating test will differentiate between competent and less-than-competent adelicants at the desienmed tlcense level.
faltics
- 2. WALK-THROUGH (CATEGORY A & B) CRITERIA t
ic
- a.
Each JPM includes the following, as applicable:
- initial conditions Sinitiating 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 cctical 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 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.
~a. Th assoiated
- 3. SIMULATOR (CATEGORY C) CRITERIA
- a.
Theorassciateds simulator operating tests (scenario sets) have been reviewed in accordance with Form ES-301 -4 and a copyis attached.I/I P~nted Name/ Signatue Date
- a. Author co
\\L\\ yQ m
- b. Facility Reviewer(*)
I
-3
- c. NRC Chief Examiner (#)
0A-
.,./'
- d. NRC Supervisor I? A NOTE:
- The facility signature is not applicable for NRC-developed tests.
- Independent NRC reviewer initial items in Column "c;" chief examiner concurrence required.
23 of 26 NUREG-1021, Revision 8, Supplement 1 I
I
ES-301 Simulator Scenario Quality Checklist Form ES-301-4 Date of Exam:
... Scenaro Numbers:
/
/I-iJ'l Operating Test No.:
QUALITATIVE ATTRIBUTES
- 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 mostl 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)
- 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.
- 5.
The events are valid with regard to physics and thermodynamics.
- 6.
Sequencing and timing of events is reasonable, and allows the examination team to obtain complete evaluation results commensurate with the scenario obiectives.
- 7.
If time compression techniques are used, the scenario summary clearly so indicates. Operators have sufficient time to carry out expected activities without undue time constraints. Cues are ven.
- 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 fidelit is maintained while running the planned scenarios.
- 10.
Every operator will be evaluated using at least one new or significantly modified scenario. All other scenarios have been altered in accordance with Section D.4 of ES-301.
- 11.
All individual operator competencies can be evaluated, as verified using Form ES-301-6 (submit the form alonl with the simulator scenarios.
- 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 d ificuiltis appropriate to su port licensing decisions for each crew position.
TARGET QUANTITATIVE ATTRIBUTES (PER SCENARIO; SEE SECTION D.4.)
- 1.
Total malfunctions (5-8)
- 2.
Malfunctions after EOP entry (1-2)
- 3.
Abnormal events (2-4)
- 4.
Major transients (1-2)
- 5.
EOPs entered/requiring substantive actions (1-2
- 6.
EOP contingencies requirin1 substantive actions (0-2)
- 7.
Critical tasks (2-3)
NURE-1021/ Re-S,upem 2o-ee C4 NUREG-1 021, Revision 8, Supplement 1 24 of 26 Actual Attributes
- $ /.,
/ st/
I
/ /0,//
,2
/
a b*
c#
I
Az' 4,'
Is F
,4 25_ý I
ES-30 Simulator Scenario Quality Checklist Form ES-3014 F i Date of Exam:
Scenario s
I Operatin Test No.:
QUALITATIVE ATTRIBUTES Initials
- 1.
The initial conditions are realistic, in that some equipment and/or instrumentation may be out of a
b j
service, but it does not cue the operators into expected events.
C 2 The scenarios consist mostly of relatexpect p
rao io
- 3.
Each event description consists of ms the point in the scenario when it is to be initiated hesfethe malfunction(s) that are entered to initiate the event
- 8. Th 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 onee non-mechanistic failure (e.gl, pipe break) is incorporated into the scenario without a crediblr e preceding incident such as o seismic event.
m
- 5.
The events are valid with regard in accranc thermocinaD. of
- 6.
Sequencing and timing of eventcis reasonable, ald allows the examination team to obtain complete evaluation results commensurate with the scenario objectives.
- 7.
If time compression techniques are used, the scenario summary clearly so indicates. Operatoz have sufficient time to carry out expected activities without undue time constraints. Cues arevent T liven.
- 8.
The sim ulator E
odelinES is not altered.Sc
- 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.
- 10.
Every operator will be evaluated using at least one new or significantly modified scenario. All other scenarios have been altered in accordance with Section D.4 of ES-301.
- 11.
All individual operator competencies can be evaluated, as verfied using Form ES-301-6 (submi the form alona with the simulator scenarios).
- 12.
Each applicant will be significantly involved in the minim um number oftransienan specified on Form ES-301-5 (submit the form with the simulator scenarios).
saneet
- T e evel of difficult y
is appropriate to su ppor t licensin g
decisions for each cr position
[TARGEETT QUUANTITATIVE ATTRIBUTES (PER SCENARIO; SEE SECTION DA.4D)
Actual Attributes
- 2.
Malfunctions after EOP entry (1-2)
/
/*
- 3.
Abnormal events (2-4) 71 f*
- 4.
Major transients (1-2)
/
I/2
- 5.
EOPs entered/requidn g]
substantive act~i ons (1
-2) i i
/
i
- 6.
EOP contingencies requiring] substantive actions (0-2) 0
/
- 7.
Critical tasks (2-3)
/
/
//
NUREG-1021, Revision 8, Supplement 1 24 of 26
ES-301 Transient and Event Checklist Form ES-301-5 OPERATING TEST NO.:
Aplicant Evplution Minimum Scenario Number I ype ype Number 1
2 3
4 Reactivit 16 X
N~ormal
- 1.
- -"- ;_41 RO Instrument/
43
ý
,, /21"3,
'Ro/6p P
Component j" /',*
I Major 1
,7 Reactivity 1
-q 9
/
Normal 0
As RO Instrument2 Component 2
./ 3 3,)
5 2 /
3, /
Major 1
'2 SRO-I Reactivity 0
Normal 1
5-V I
As SRO Nra Instrument 2
Com onent Major 1
5,1 e Reactivity 0
Normal 1
5-
/
SRO-U Instrument /
2 i
Component Major 1
s-.,
61 Z 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 D.
(3)
Whenever practical, both instrument and component malfunctions should be included; only those that require verifiable actions that provide insight to the plicant's etence count toward the minimum requirement.
Author:
NRC Reviewer:
25 of 26 NUREG-1021, Revision 8, Supplement 1
ES-301 Competencies Checklist Form ES-301-6 Competencies Understand and Interpret Annunciators and Alarms Diagnose Events and Conditions Understand Plant and System Response Comply With and Use Procedures (1)
Operate Control Boards (2)
Communicate and Interact With the Crew Demonstrate Supervisory Ability (3)
Comply With and Use Tech. Specs. (3)
Notes:
Applicant #1 RO O-I/SRO SCENARIO 1134 1-7 i--i 1,3-4 2-7 1-7 i-7 1-4 2-7
'-~7
'-7
'-4 1-?
-7
'-4
-7
(-7 Applicant #2 CO/SRO--ISRO-U SCENARIO
- 2i31 4
.--*7 3--7 2.3
~5-7 Al/A
/
s/,
4
/*
-7 2- --7 J, 2 l2
4 I, 2
/-4 1,2
+ 4
-7 i- -
, - 4 1-7
, / a p / A, //
22-1 L!2-7 I) -
'/3 -7 1,3-7 N/A
' -v I
/
- 11/1 1 -/1, Applicant #3
(
SRO-I/SRO-U SCENARIO 1
2 3
4
.,.2.
Ij -7 5--7 3-(
1,2.
q
-7 3-6 7
5--.7
-7 3 q-7 Sq-7 Y-7 3-('
-/-3 N/
A-/4
/-- A N-
/-
(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:
NUREG-1021, Revision 8, Supplement 1 26 of 26 3-7 S-7 i7 I-J-7
/-7
-'7 I
!*-401 Written Examination Form ES-401-7 Quality Checklist NUREG-1021, Revision 8, Supplement 1 42 of 46 I
ES-401 Written Examination Form ES-401-7 Quality Checklist NUREG-1021, Revision 8, Supplement 1 42 of 46
ES-403 Written Examination Grading Form ES-403-1 Quality Checklist Facility:
Date of Exam:
Exam Level: RO/SRO Initials Item Description a
b c
- 1.
Clean answer sheets copied before grading
\\.-
_,4 r
- 2.
Answer key changes and question deletions justified and documented I__
- 3.
Applicants' scores checked for addition errors A./
A (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 I
/
are justified A vI
- 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 A, -4
- b. Facility Reviewer(*)
- 2161,
- c. NRC Chief Examiner (*)
-7
//
5-'9 "i'K' 7/
- 2.
- d. NRC Supervisor (*)
Cr.\\/_
-J2
(*)
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 1 I
)