ML023240212

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Final Qa/Related Forms
ML023240212
Person / Time
Site: Nine Mile Point Constellation icon.png
Issue date: 09/27/2002
From: Pisano L
Constellation Nuclear
To: Conte R
NRC/RGN-I/DRS/OSB
Conte R
References
50-220/02-303 50-220/02-303
Download: ML023240212 (22)
v • d • e


Text

Uf-ftlp'gj

- 9 1 ES-201 mination Preparation Checklist Form ES-201-1 O1O1^r#k71-v Facility: (i/4 1 Date of Examination:

Examinations Developed by: Facility / NRC (circle one) / '

Target Chief Date* Task Description / Reference Examiners Initials

-180 1. Examination administration date confirmed (C.l.a; C.2.a &b) 613 cV

-120 2. NRC examiners and fKcility contact assigned (C.1 .d; C.2.e) 4/3

-120T/h'/

3. Failt ntac{- 4 Aw 9 1.5i

-120 3. Facility contacf efed on security & other Yequiremenl s (C.2.c) Pr

-120 4. Corporate notification letter sent (C.2.d) 1Aw.40 i/D 2.

1-90] [5. Reference material due (C.l.e; C.3.c)]

-75 6. Integrated examination outline(s) due (C.1 .e &f; C.3.d) //it

-70 7. Examination outline(s) reviewed by NRC and feedback provided1 to facility licensee (C.2.h; C.3.e) 1/.3

-7

-45 8. Proposed examinations, supporting documentation, and  ! ./AJ*k.

reference materials due (C.l.e, f, g & h; C.3.d) *_

-30 9. Preliminary license applications due JC.1.1; C.2.g; ES-202) &

-14 10. Final license applications due an assignment sheet preparedf (C.1.1; C.2.g; ES-202)

-14 11. Examination approved by NRC supervisor for facility licensee 911 review (C.2.h; C.3.f)

-14 12. Examinations reviewed with facility licensee (C.1 .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)  ? .*)3

-7 14. Final applications reviewed; assignment sheet updated; waiver/3.

letters sent (C.2.g, ES-204)

15. Proctoring/written exam administration guidelines reviewed

-7 facility licensee and authorization granted to give written exams (ifapplicable) (C.3.k)

-7 16. Approved scenarios, job performance measures, and questiO716 distributed to NRC examiners (C.3.i)

Target dates are keyed to the examination date identified in the corporate notification letter.

They are for planning purposes and may be adjusted on a case-by-case basis in coordination with the facility licensee.

Applies only to examinations prepared by the NRC.

NUREG-1021, Revision 8, Supplement 1 22 of 24

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.

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 A T c. Assess whether the outline over-emphasizes any systems, evolutions, or generic topics.

E/)

N N

d. Assess whether the justifications for deselected or rejected K/A statements are appropriate. 7#' 9/

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 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.
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, i an A' (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 ie. the required administrative topics are covered, with emphasis on performance-bd "Jj 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 whethers plant-specific priorities (including PRA and IPE insights) are covered in the appropriate exam section.#-W.

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. /

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

L e. Check the entire exam for balance of coverage.

P

f. Assess whether the exam fits the appropriate job level (RO or SRO).
a. Author
b. Facility Reviewer (*)
c. NRC Chief Examiner (#)

I"*,* P2r-k &-t, I AG

d. NRC Supervisor , T C.,'", e /, I Note:
  • Not applicable for NRC-developed examinations.
  1. Independent NRC reviewer initial items in Column "c;" chief examiner concurrence required.

23 of 24 NUREG-1021, Revision 8, Supplement I

NOV-20-2002 WED 07:50 PH FAX NO. P. 02 Summary of Personnel on Unit 1 Security Agreement at the There were a total of 44 people signed on the Security Agreement completion of the exam. The following should be noted:

  • 30 of the 44 had some type of exam knowledge.

a 23 people had what is considered as "detailed" exam knowledge.

on as a

  • 14 people are considered to have no knowledge, but were signed exam conservate measure, as they could potentially have obtained Support or making knowledge due to their support function (ie, Simulator be a "security liability or exam copies). These people were not considered to risk".

These 0 7 of those 14 were signed on during the exam administration week.

security included management observers for Simulator scenarios and administration. These 7 had personnel to sequester applicants during exam no prior exam knowledge.

having detailed exam The following should also be noted that of the 23 people knowledge:

increased

  • WD started with 3 people on the development team. This number items.

to 6, as additional personnel were needed to re-work test

  • Facility initially was to use 3 in-house instructors to review the test items.

required extensive re-work.

This increased to 9 as all portions of the exam NOU-20-2002 08:13 96% P. 02

£T:80 Z00Z-OZ-(nON 1-717-45G-9109 WD ASSOCIATES, INC. PAGE 02 10/31/2Oe2 08:12 LI-9-2=2TUE 03:55_pFM U!- FAX NO. P. 01 CA 10 7M~

o 7 I.

I im SO to R

40, CO 'd 'ON XVA ~O'd CS:LO UIM KO0-OH-AON

'N XI~AWd

Form ES-201-3 -3 ES-201 Examination SecurityAreement z

Pre-Examinailon C r 1) Zah-is o the theof licensing examinations scheduled for the week(s)of I acknowledge that I have acquired specialized knowledge about the NRC persons who have not been authorized C of my signature. I agree thai I will not knowingly divulge any Information about these examinations to any date scheduled tn be evaluate, or provide performance feedback to those applicants by the NRC chief examiner. I understand that I am not to instruct, noted below atid completion of examination administration, except as specifically administered these licensing examinations from this date until facility licensee's security measures and requirements (as documented in the authorized by the NRC.Furthermore, I am aware of the physical in cancellation of the examinations andfor an enforcement of this agreement may result procedures) and understand that violation of the conditions any indications or suggestions that CD report to facility management or the NRC chief examiner action against me or the facility licensee. I will immediately examination security may have been compromised.

2. Post-Examination administered persons any information concerning the NRC licensing examinations To the best ol my knowledge, I did not divulge to any unauthorized until the completion of examination administration, I did not during the week(s) of , t.7.'4'From the date that I entered into this security agreement except as specificatly applicants who were administered these licensing examinations, instruct, evaluate, or provide performance feedback to those noted below and authorized by the NRC.

DATE SIGNATURE (2) DATE NOTE JOB TITLE / RESPONSIBILITY SIGNATURE (1)

PRINTED NAME m2. "_ 172 Qe 5.

12 3.*~~

10 EG 10 1 Re iio NOTES: U -I &-/""'~ '~'~4a 0.

- RC*

I

(

Examination Security A_ eement Form ES-201-3r ES-201 C*f 1 Pre-Examination week(s) of 016as of theM about the NRC licensing examinations scheduled for the t:o_

1acknowledge that I have acquired specialized knowledge any information about these examinations to any persons who have not been authorized knowingly divulge to those applicants scheduled to be date of my signature. I agree that I will not to instruct, evaluate, or provide performance feedback I understand that I am not by the NRC chief examiner, as specifically noted below and until completion of examination administration, except administered these licensing examinations from this date (as documented in the facility licensee's physical security measures and requirements authorized by the NRC.Furthermore, I am aware of the in cancellation of the examinations and/or an enforcement and understand that violation of the conditions of this agreement may result or suggestions that procedures) any indications report to facility management or the NRC chief examiner action against me or the facility licensee. I will immediately examination security may have been compromised.

2. Post-Examination NRC licensing examinations administered unauthorized persons any information concerning the To the best of my knowledge, I did not divulge to any administration, I did not

.4tJ]--1,'.From the date that I entered into this security agreement until the completion of examination during the week(s) of examinations, except as specifically those applicants who were administered these licensing instruct, evaluate, or provide performance feedback to noted below and authorized by the NRC.

DATE SIGNATU DATENOTE JOB TITLE ! RESPONSIBILITY SIGNATURE (1)

PRINTED NAME

3. .....

I

-- ~--- - - - - --- - --------

Z 7.

4.v ý -- - - - - - ----- ----- ----

12.

91. ----------

-A -0 - - -

12.

13.------ -- ------ - ---

14.-- -- ------- ---- ------ ------------

-15.

NOTES: qlt-1. NI JhIy'/. L.Cpf P,CD. 4 d C71 KIm iP1 _ln1 R*.vision 8. Supplement 1

, (

Examination Security Agreement Form ES-201-3 rD ES-201 CID C-CD I. Pre-Examination for the week(s) of s of the I acknowledge that I have acquired specialized knowledge about the NRC licensing examinations scheduled persons who have not been authorized any date of my signature. I agree that I will not knowingly divulge any information about these examinations to understand that I am not to instruct, evaluate, or provide performance feedback to those applicants scheduled to be by the NRC chief examiner. I as specifically noted below and except administered these licensing examinations from this date until completion of examination administration, in the facility licensee's and requirements (as documented authorized by the NRC.Furlhermore, I am aware of the physical security measures examinations and/or an enforcement may result in cancellation of the procedures) and understand that violation of the conditions of this agreement any indications or suggestions that report to facility management or the NRC chief examiner action against me or the facility licensee. I will immediately examination security may have been compromised.

2. Post-Examination licensing examinations administered To the best of my knowledge, I did not divulge to any unauthorized persons any information concerning the NRCof examination administration, I did not during the week(s) ot(,,4LL p~)2From the date that I entered into this security agreement until the completion examinations, except as specifically instruct, evaluate, or provide erformance feedback to those applicants who were administered these licensing noted below and authorized by the NRC.

JOB TITLE I RESPONSIBILITY NATUR (1) DATE ATU 2) DATENOTE PRINTED NAME

2. _

53.14. P14 9.9 y

1a. --- - ---- -- - - --

9 - --- - -- -

15.

NOTES: TdeRe4visio 8, ~Jy 1A 4 p4 4 &

CDi NUREG-1021, Revision 8, Supplement 1

z 0

.S-201 Examination Security Agreement Form ES-201-3 (R8, S1)

NJ CD PcD MPre-Examination examinations scheduled for the week(s) off I acknowledge that I have acquired specialized knowledge about the NRC licensing hove not been about these e, aminations to any persons who the date of my signature. I agree that I will not knowingly divulge any Information authorized by the NRC chief examiner. I understand that I am not to instruct, evaluate or provid* performance feedback to those applicants from this date until completion of eiamination administration, except as scheduled to be administered these licensing examinations of the physical seiurity measures and requirements (as specifically noted below and authorized by the NRC. Furthermore, I am aware of this agreement may result in cancellation and understand that violation of the condition$

documented in the facility licensee's procedures)

I will immediately report to facility management or the of the examinations and/or an enforcement action against me or the facility licensee.

security may have been compromised.

NRC chief examiner any indications or suggestions that examination

2. Post-Examination concerning the NRC licensing examinations To the best of my knowledge, I did not iv Ige to any unauthorized persons any information
0. From the date that I entered into this security agreement until the completion of examination administered during the week(s) of to those applicants~who were administered these licensing administration, I did not Instruct, evaluate, or provide performance feedback examinations, except as specifically noted below and authorized by the NRC.

SIGNATURE (1) DATE SIGNATLPRE (2) DATE NOTE PRINTED NAME JOB TITLE I RESPONSIBILITY 5 h. [.,A 1K. JA to I O2.tU I E ý X1c,__fEioDFI ZL(

2. At.c.#k¶l5l Mk~~eK~~iI~b LffiL-'

d 3.

  • 5. ___ __ __ __ __>_

6.__

O* 7.

10.

11.

12.

13.

14.

15.

11 _______________________'_________________________

NOTES: M10,,4

ES-301 Operating Test Quality Checklist Form ES-301-3 Facility: Nine Mile Point Unit I Date of Examination: September 30, 2002 Operating Test Number: RO 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). I,-

r 4

b. There is no day-to-day repetition between this and other operating tests to be administered during this examination. _t /
c. The operating test shall not duplicate items from the applicants' audit test(s)(see Section D. L.a). J 5 J.,
d. Overlap limits.* with the written examination and between operating test categories is within acceptable OA
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 dA

- 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. I/i
c. Repetition from operating tests used during the previous licensing examination is within PA 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. , ___
3. SIMULATOR (CATEGORY C) CRITERIA
a. The associated simulator operating tests (scenario sets) have been reviewed in accordance with Form ES-301-4 and a copy is attached.

Printed Name / Signature Tate

a. Author 6 mA 6 6
b. Facility Reviewer(*)
c. NRC Chief Examiner (*) 66
d. NRC Supervisor(*) R . Co ,71 / To x/,

NOTE:

  • The facility signature is not applicable for NRC-developed tests.
  1. Independent NRC reviewer initial itemsin Column "c": chief examiner concurrence required.

Exam 2 d Submittal Document. RO Operating Test. September 11, 2002 NUREG 1021 Rev 8, Supplement 1 NM Log # 1-02-071

ES-301 Operating Test Quality Checklist Form ES-301-3 Facility: Nine Mile Point Unit I Date of Examination: September 30, 2002 Operating Test Number: SRO Initials

1. GENERAL CRITERIA a b* c#
a. The operating test conforms with the previously approved outline; changes are consistent with A g ),

sampling requirements (e.g., 10 CFR 55.45, operational importance, safety function distribution). .J P!

b. There is no day-to-day repetition between this and other operating tests to be administered during ,. ,,

this examination. k

c. The operating test shall not duplicate items from the applicants' audit test(s)(see Section D. .a). A6 "4 Q
d. Overlap with the written examination and between operating test categories is within acceptable limits. _0
e. It appears that the operating test will differentiate between competent and less-than-competent applicants at the designated license level. Wq
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 I_

b. The prescripted questions in Category A are predominantly open reference and meet the criteria in Attachment 1 of ES-301.1
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. hi___

9' V"

3. SIMULATOR (CATEGORY C) CRITERIA .. . .
a. The associated simulator operating tests (scenario sets) have been reviewed in accordance with ,* _" "_

Form ES-301-4 and a copy is attached. Pt.4 Printed Name / Signature Date

a. Author
b. Facility Reviewer(*) 9/1104~ 3-r;JbL,_____
c. NRC Chief Examiner(*) ,
d. NRC Supervisor () C'y '~ I NOTE:
  • The facility signature is not applicable for NRC-developed tests.
  1. Independent NRC reviewer initial itemsin Column "c": chief examiner concurrence required.

Exam 2nd Submittal Document. SRO Operating Test. September 11, 2002 NUREG 1021 Rev 8, Supplement 1 NM Log # 1-02-072

ES-3 01 Simulator Scenario Quality Checklist Form ES-301-4 Facility: Nine Mile Point Unit 1 Date of Exam: September 30, 2002 Scenario Numbers: 1/3/4/5 (Alt) Operating Test No.: RO 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)

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.--I& A
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 r complete evaluation results commensurate with the scenario objectives. - 4
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 8.

given.

The simulator modeling is not altered. ,2

-A

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. 'Pe)
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. k
11. All individual operator competencies can be evaluated, as verified using Form ES-301-6 ilk (submit the form along with the simulator scenarios). / -1
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. OA TARGET QUANTITATIVE ATTRIBUTES (PER SCENARIO; SEE SECTION D.4.D) Actual Attributes ..

1 3 4 5 (Alt)

I. Total malfunctions (5-8) 7 /5/6/5 - #. \

2. Malfunctions after EOP entry (1-2) 2/1/3/2 *,
3. Abnormal events (2-4) 2/2/2/1
4. Major transients (1-2) li-/i L
5. EOPs entered/requiring substantive actions (1-2) 2 / 2/2 /2 5 ,
6. EOP contingencies requiring substantive actions (0-2) 1/1/2/1
7. Critical tasks (2-3) 3/3/4/3 1A Exam 2nd Submittal Document RO. September 11, 2002 NUREG-1021, Revision 8, Supplement 1 NM Log # 1-02-073

ES-301 Simulator Scenario Quality Checklist Form ES-301I-4 ES-301 Simulator Scenario Quality Checklist Form ES-301-4 Facility: Nine Mile Point Unit I Date of Exam: September 30, 2002 Scenario Numbers: 1/3/4/5 (Alt) Operating Test No.: SRO 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) ___ ___

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 _)n
5. The events are valid with regard to physics and thermodynamics. OAt
6. Sequencing and timing of events is reasonable, and allows the examination team to obtain complete evaluation results commensurate with the scenario objectives. A k
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 given. ,_
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.
10. Every operator will be evaluated using at least one new or significantly modified scenario. All dA other scenarios have been altered in accordance with Section D.4 ofES-301.
11. All individual operator competencies can be evaluated, as verified using Form ES-301-6 (submit the form along 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 difficulty is appropriate to support licensing decisions for each crew position. A A V Actual Attributes TARGET QUANTITATIVE ATTRIBUTES (PER SCENARIO; SEE SECTION D.4.D) 1 3 4 5 (Alt) 7/5/6/5 7/5/6/5
1. Total malfunctions (5-8) 2/l/3/2
2. Malfunctions after EOP entry (1-2) 2/2/2/1
  • 2/2/211
3. Abnormal events (2-4)

Major transients (1-2) 4.

5. EOPs entered/requiring substantive actions (1-2) 1/1/2/I2ii 2/2/2/2 j
6. EOP contingencies requiring substantive actions (0-2) /1 1t- L
7. Critical tasks (2-3) 3/3/4/3 A6 Exam 2nd Submittal Document SRO. September 11, 2002 NUREG-1021, Revision 8, Supplement 1 NM Log # 1-02-074

L-ES-3 01 ITransient and event Ci~eCKliSt Form L*-S-30-5 OPERATING TEST NO. RO R- 1, R-2, R-3 An licant Evolution Minimum Scenario Number AType Type Number 2 3 4 Reactivity 1 5 Normal 1 2 RO Instrument/ 4 4,7 3,4 (R-1, R-2, R-3) Component Major 1 6 6 BOP CSO Reactivity I Normal 0 As RO Instrument/ 2 Component Major 1 SRO-I Reactivity 0 Normal 1 As SRO Instrument/ 2 Component Major 1 Reactivity 0 Normal 1 SRO-U Instrument/ 2 Component Major 1 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 applicant's competence count toward the minimum requirement.

Author: eatd c( 6zP!- / 4- '1/3 A NRC Reviewer:

Exam 2nd Submittal Document. RO September 11, 2002 NUREG-1021, Revision 8, Supplement 1 NM Log # 1-02-067

EAZ..-U-iJ I ,-acnqin qnri Evenpt CiehCKcII't i'orm iS-3UI 5 I lllllOlt*ll* llll* *v*llt vll*viiixot 5

OPERATING TEST NO. RO R-4 Ap licnt Evolution Minimum Scenario Number 3

I ype Type Number 2 1 5 Reactivity Normal I I RO Instrument/ 4 3,4 2,7 (R-4) Component 6 Major 1 6 BOP/ BOP CSO Reactivity I Normal 0 As RO Instrument/ 2 Component Major 1 SRO-I Reactivity 0 Normal 1 As SRO Instrument/ 2 Component Major 1 Reactivity 0 Normal 1 SRO-U Instrument/ 2 Component Major I 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 applicant's competence count toward the minimum requirement.

Author: -7e4cLId ~4 NRC Reviewer Exam 2 nd Submittal Document. RO September 11, 2002 NUREG-1021, Revision 8, Supplement 1 NM Log # 1-02-068

I*"

  • _'.,i [ "lI ~~

1 raIlSl¢IlL H.IILI I E,',/¢IIL

,-n ~IIAN1~ ~

k../llKS*l*ll*L

~ ~ ~ o ES-301Lwu q 5

OPERATING TEST NO. SRO 1-1, 1-3 Apnlican t Evolution Minimum Scenario Number

'Type Type Number 2 3 Reactivity 1 Normal 1 RO Instrument/ 4 Component Major 1 Reactivity 1 5 Normal 0 As RO Instrument/ 2 2,7 Component Major 1 6 CSO BOP SRO-I (I-, 1,-3) Reactivity 0 Normal 1 2 As SRO Instrument/ 2 3,4,5 Component Major 1 6 SRO Reactivity 0 Normal 1 SRO-U Instrument/ 2 Component Major I 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 applicant's competence count toward the minimum requirement.

Author:

(~e( I NRC Reviewer NUREG-1021, Revision 8, Supplement 1 Exam 2 Submittal Document. SRO September 11, 2002 NM Log # 1-02-065

Transient and Event thecklist ruijil £O-JUlJ I*OFII P.,*-.)U1-0 I-JulTrninan EvnChcls OPERATING TEST NO. SRO 1-2, 1-4, 1-5 Number Applican t Evolution Minimum Sc:enario

'Type Type Number 2 1 _3 1 _4 p* o~t*t 1 V~~ - 4 + I t Normal 4I RO Instrument/ 4 Component Major 1 I I Reactivity 1 1 t

Normal 0 1

As RO Instrument/ 2 3,5 3,4 Component 1 6 6 Major CSO BOP SRO-I (1-2, 1-4, 1-5) Reactivity 0 1

Normal I As SRO Instrument/ 2 Component 3R4 Major I 6 Instructions: (1) Enter the operating test number and Form ES-D-I 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 require verifiable included; only those thatcount actions that provide insight to the requirement.

applicant's competence toward the minimum Author:

NRC Reviewer NUREG-1021, Revision 8, Supplement 1 Exam 3rd Submittal Document. SRO September 19, 2002 NM Log # 1-02-097

ES-3 01 Competencies Checklist Form ES-301-6 RO Applicant R-1, RO R-2, R-3 Applicant R-4 Competencies SCENARIO SCENARIO 1 4 3 4 BOP CSO BOP/CSO BOP Understand and Interpret 3 3 3 4 Annunciators and Alarms Diagnose Events 4 3 7 6 and Conditions Understand Plant 8 3 3,4 7 and System Response Comply With and 2,4 3,6 3,4 1 Use Procedures (1)

Operate Control 4,7,8 6 3 6,7 Boards (2)

Communicate and 2,4,7,8 3,6 3,4 6,7 Interact With the Crew Demonstrate Supervisory Ability (3)

Comply With and Use Tech. 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 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: J7at t t , 9 - i-Exam 2nd Submittal Document. RO September 11, 2002 NUREG-1021, Revision 8, Supplement 1 NM Log # 1-02-069

ES-301 Competencies Checklist Form ES-301-6 SRO SRO Applicant I-1, 1-3 Applicant 1-2, 1-4, 1-5 Competencies SCENARIO SCENARIO 1 3 4 1 3 4 SRO CSO BOP CSO BOP SRO Understand and Interpret 3,4 6 4 3 3 3 Annunciators and Alarms Diagnose Events 4 7 6 5 7 3 and Conditions Understand Plant 4 7 5 3,4 3,6 and System Response Comply With and 8 7 1 3,5 3,4 6,7 Use Procedures (1) oadOperate(25lii Control 6,7 1,3,5,8 31 Communicate and 866,7 8 3,4 6 Interact With the Crew Demonstrate Supervisory 6 Ability (3)

Comply With and 3,4 2,3 Use Tech. 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 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:

A CJ4 /34s-t,-

NRC Reviewer:

24 A. "I(,

ix Exam 3rd Submittal Document. SRO September 19, 2002 NUREG-1021, Revision 8, Supplement I NM Log # 1-02-098

ES-401 Written Examination Form ES-401-7 Quality Checklist Facility: Nine Mile Point Unit 1 Date of Exam: September 30, 2002 Exam Level: RO Initial Item Description a b c

1. Questions and answers technically accurate and applicable to facility ),,, 3
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 c peSection D.2.d of ES-401 A.

4- Question selection and duplication from the last two NRC licensing exams

  • appears consistent with a systematic sampling process
5. Question duplication from the license screening/audit exam was controlled as indicated below (check the item that applies) and appears appropriate:

X the audit exam was systematically and randomly developed; or the audit exam was completed before the license exam was started; or the examinations were developed independently; or the licensee certifies that there is no duplication; or OA other (explain)

6. Bank use meets limits (no more than 75 Bank Modified New percent from the bank, at least 10 percent new, and the rest modified); enter the actual question 10 9 81 OA distribution at right
7. Between 50 and 60 percent of the questions on Memory C/A the exam (including 10 new questions) are written at the comprehension/analysis level; 45 55 enter the actual question distribution at right
8. References/handouts provided do not give away answers statements in the previously
9. Question content conforms with specific K/A approved examination outline and is appropriate for the Tier to which they are J.

assigned; deviations are justified

10. Question psychometric quality and format meet ES, Appendix B, guidelines
11. The exam contains 100, one-point, multiple choice items; the total is correct and agrees with value on cover sheet Print d Name / Signature D te
a. Author 661_4W U ,
b. Facility Reviewer(*) *.I P 73"
c. NRC Chief Examiner(#)
d. NRC Regional Supervisor(*) /?S Cc Note:
  • The facility reviewer's signature is not applicable for NRC-developed examinations.
  1. Independent NRC reviewer initial items in Column "c"; chief examiner concurrence required.

NUREG-1021, Revision 8, Supplement 1 42 of 46 NM Log # 1-02-085 RO Final

ES-401 Written Examination Form ES-401-7 Quality Checklist Facility: Nine Mile Point Unit 1 Date of Exam: September 30, 2002 Exam Level: SRO Initial Item Description a c*

1. Questions and answers technically accurate and applicable to facility ( ,
2. a. NRC K/As referenced for all questions /-)
b. Facility learning objectives referenced as available V ,  : ..
3. RO/SRO overlap is no more than 75 percent, and SRO questions are appropriate .. ,

per Section D.2.d of ES-401 r

4. Question selection and duplication from the last two NRC licensing exams appears consistent with a systematic sampling process f
5. Question duplication from the license screening/audit exam was controlled as indicated below (check the item that applies) and appears appropriate:

X the audit exam was systematically and randomly developed; or the audit exam was completed before the license exam was started; or the examinations were developed independently; or the licensee certifies that there is no duplication; or 0",

other (explain)

6. Bank use meets limits (no more than 75 Bank Modified New percent from the bank, at least 10 percent new, and the rest modified); enter the actual question 12 6 82 distribution at right
7. Between 50 and 60 percent of the questions on Memory C/A the exam (including 10 new questions) are written at the comprehension/analysis level; 45 55 _4 ,

enter the actual question distribution at right

8. References/handouts provided do not give away answers
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; deviations are justified V
10. Question psychometric quality and format meet ES, Appendix B, guidelines
11. The exam contains 100, one-point, multiple choice items; the total is correct and }r4 ,  !,

agrees with value on cover sheet Printed Name / S' nature Date

a. Author ' z-1'5
b. Facility Reviewer(*) u (P
c. NRC Chief Examiner(#) .P A) C ,
d. NRC Regional Supervisor(*) /-.,J,- j __ C-.,2 4 Note:
  • The facility reviewer's signature is not applicable for NRC-developed examinations.
  1. Independent NRC reviewer initial items in Column "c"; chief examiner concurrence required.

NUREG-1021, Revision 8, Supplement 1 42 of 46 NM Log # 1-02-086 SRO Final

ES-403 Written Examination Grading Form ES-403-1 Quality Checklist Facility: /l/A/. 4/ j",g/- 1 Date of Exam:'//7/._ Exam Level:/RO)RO Initials Item Description a b c

1. Clean answer sheets copied before grading KIT
2. Answer key changes and question deletions justified and documented ___
3. Applicants' scores checked for addition errors Ap (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 _

are justified -'----- J

6. Performance on missed questions checked for training deficiencies and wording problems; evaluate validity of J-. IZ questions missed by half or more of the applicants Printed Name I Signature Date
a. Grader RI
b. Facility Reviewer(*) m /'j__ __
c. NRC Chief Examiner (*) ____

tone

d. NRC Supervisor dn NRC- reviews are rqired.

() 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

ES-403 Written Examination Grading Form ES-403-1 Quality Checklist M,10A Facility:4 "PO/.t Date of Exam: /0/7102 Exam Level: RC/RIS RO Initials a b c Item Description

1. Clean answer sheets copied before grading .&
2. Answer key changes and question deletions justified and documented 1A
3. Applicants' scores checked for addition errors (reviewers spot check > 25% of examinations) "-._
4. Grading for all borderline cases (80% +/- 2%) reviewed in detail ,-, X,/'
5. All other failing examinations checked to ensure that grades are justified L',J , it
6. Performance on missed questions checked for training deficiencies and wording problems; evaluate validity of L39 i-questions missed by half or more of the applicants Printed Name / Signature Date
a. Grader _fJ___J___
b. Facility Reviewer(*) __* ____
c. NRC Chief Examiner (*) ,_ ,__ "7 OL
d. NRC Supervisor (*) ' &C. -Jc L4_1/4*_L.

(*) 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

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML023240212&oldid=2684778"