ML030230696

F1 - Final Qa/Related Forms

ML030230696
Person / Time
Site:	Ginna
Issue date:	02/11/2002
From:	Watts R Rochester Gas & Electric Corp
To:	Conte R NRC/RGN-I/DRS/OSB
Conte R
References
50-244/01-301, ES-201-1 50-244/01-301
Download: ML030230696 (9)

Text

ES-201 Examination Preparation Checklist Form ES-201-1 Facility: 61,/VA/,4 Date of Examination: /ti/5 '

Examinations Developed by: Facility / RC((rcle one)

Target Chief Date* Task Description / Reference Examiner's Initials

-180 1. Examination administration date confirmed (C.l.a; C.2.a & b) 49

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

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

-120 4. Corporate notification letter sent (C.2.d)

[-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)

-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) ,,2

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

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

-14 12. Examinations reviewed with facility licensee (C.1 .j; C.2.f & h; C.3.g) ,_

-7 13. Written examinations and operating tests approved by NRC supervisor (C.2.i; C.3.h) 4/5-

-7 14. Final applications reviewed; assignment sheet updated; waiver letters sent (C.2.g, ES-204)

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)

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: - s Initials Item Task Description a b* c# - i

1. a. Verify that the outline(s) fit(s) the appropriate model per ES-401. /VA 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.

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 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, I (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.

4. a. Assess whether plant-specific priorities (including PRA and IPE insights) are covered in the appropriate exam section.

G ,7 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. It I,

f. Assess whether the exam fits the appropriate job level (RO or S. , I A (Printed iinature *te a- Author

b. Facility Reviewer ()

c. NRC Chief Examiner (#) 7K41 / ,

d. NRC Supervisor Note: Not applicable for NRC-developed examinations.

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

.-$-- ( t 23 of 24 NURE~~2G-1021, Revision 8, Supplement 1

Examination Security Agreement Form ES-201-3 ES-201

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

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

PRINTED NAME JOB TITLE / RESPONSIBILITY -. NATURE (1) DATE SIGNAT URE DTENOTE n&C, 2.64r"i*g-Dj/,.,,-"'

3. (le+l+c-VE1 ],**. __,_ .

4. ee, I-,*,. .

7. I0/*¢6 Z,C,,',/yoý

8. VRW'. A)J,

9. =Q cIQf (j~~d/~~t77)( 4o4 77~

11.

13. rry ______________ __________ 2* ~-z..--

14. r~ V)-~

15.

NOTES:

24 ' 94 NURE -21, Revision 8, Supplement I

)

ES-301 Operating Test Quality Checklist Form ES-301-3 Facility: 1 Agj-Date of Examination: 2/1/4 Zoperating Test Number~

Initials

1. GENERAL CRITERIA a b c#

a. The operating test conforms with the previously approved outline; changes are consistent with e - -

sampling requirements (e.g., 10 CFR 55.45, operational importance, safety function distribution). /1

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

c. The operating test shall not duplicate items from the applicants' audit test(s)(see Section D.l.a).

d. Overlap with the written examination and between operating test categories is within acceptable

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 I

• 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 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 Form ES-301-4 andsimulator a copyoperating tests (scenario sets) have been reviewed in accordance with<<

is attached. .

Printed Name, S' u Date

a. Author ,

b. Facility Reviewer(*) A4,- 4-

c. NRC Chief Examiner (#) , j'--f- .

d. NRC Supervisor "'/.- ,

NOTE:

• The facility signature is not applicable for NRC-developed tests.

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

23 of 26 NUREG-1021, Revision 8, Supplement 1

/0O/ /V1.

N ES-301 Simulator Scenario Quality Checklist Form ES-301-4 Facility: Date of Exam: Scenario Numbers: I 2-1 "3 Operating Test NO.:

QUALITATIVE ATTRIBUTES Initials a b c#

I

1. The initial CondtiKons are realistic, in that some equipment and/or instrumentation may be out of < 7 service, but it does not cue the operators into expected events. NA.-C#

2. The scenarios consist mostly od related events. A

3. Each event description consists of the point in the scenaio when it is to be initialed the malfunction(s) Vt are entered to initiate th event the symptoms/cues OWat will be visible to the crew the expected operator actions (by shit posio)

- 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 regad to physics and thermodynamics.

6. Sequencing and iming of events is reasonable, and allows the examination team to obtain 4 complete evaluation results commensurate with the scenario objectives. - ,

7. If time compression techniques are used, the scenario summary dearly so indicates. Operators have sufficient time to cany out expected activities without undue time constraints. Cues are give ._._

8. The simulator modeling is not altered. -p

9. The scenarios have been valdated. Any open simulator performance deficiencies have been evaluated to ensure that functional fidelity is maintained while running the planned scenaros. 6

10. Every operator wnll be evaluated using at least one new or significantly modified scenario. Al other scenarios have been aered in accordance with Section D.4 of ES-301.

11. All individlal operator competencies can be evaluated, as verified using Form ES-301-6 (submit 4 the form along with the simulator soenaros).

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 difficut is appropriate to support licensing decisions for each crew on.

TARGET QUANTITATIVE ATTRIBUTES (PER SCENARIO; SEE SECTION D.4.D) Actual Attributes -

1. Total malfunctions (5-8) _____

2. MalfunclonsafterEOPentry(1-2) /i*./ I

3. Abnormal events (2-4)

4. Maor transients (1-2) L..L......., -

5. EOPs enteredfrequinng substantive actions (1-2) L

6. EOPconti reuri substantive actions 0-2) L& /

• 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.: 0 /-01 Applicant Evolution Minimum Scenario Number I ype I ype Number 1 2 3 4 1 3 4 Reactivity Normal 1 P - P RO Instrument/ 4 "1j 1/-7. 142,2 Component 5"_ "7 (0_" 3__

Major 1 __ q '

Reactivity 1 Normal 0 As RO Instrument I 2 Component Major 1 SRO-I Reactivity 0 Normal 1 As SRO Instrument / 2 Component I Major 1 Reactivity 0 1 4 Normal SRO-U Instrument/ 2 " 77-, /)1, I

Component "7 3,,__7__

Major 1 16) q 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:

NRC Reviewe r: 6 7~-i ~; ~ I 25 of 26 NUREG-1021, Revision 8, Supplement 1

ES-301 Competencies Checklist Form ES-301-6 q

-.. pplicant #1 Applicant #2 -,pplicant#3 RO-VSRO-U ( RO/RO-I/SRO-U (RQ/SRO-VSRO-U Competencies ko SENARIO P OSCENASO S&Nfi*'O in M4 3 4 2 4 1 4 Understand and Interpret Annunciators and Alarms Diagnose Events -3,-q -ý -14 and Conditions - -el Understand Plant q i,*3 41 and System Response 7 _, - -

Comply With and y 3')

Use Procedures (1) ) )(0 Operate Control Boards (2) __ __,

Communicate and - - -

G Interact With the Crew Demonstrate Supervisory -

Ability (3)

Comply With and 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: _AI-6/!/A/ el-/

7/

NRC Reviewer: I NUREG-1021, Revision 8, Supplement 1 26 of 26

ES-401 Written Examination Form ES-401-7 Quality Checklist Facility: C"'iAV/'/? Date of Exam: ,21/ 7-- Exam Level RO/SR Initial Item Description b- c

1. Questions and answers technically accurate and applicable to facility :114

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 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 -

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

__ 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

-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 s'/ -, ,

distribution at right

7. Between 50 and 60 percent of the questions on Memory C/A the exam (including 10 new questions) are f written at the comprehension/analysis level; /

enter the actual question distribution at right f T

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 IT 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 _

Printed Namee Date

a. Author ir , L k ,T

b. Facility Reviewer (*))V

c. NRC Chief Examiner (#)

d. NRC Regional Supervisor 1?4//'

Note:

• The facility reviewers initials/signature are not applicable for NRC-developed examinations.

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

NUREG-1 021, Revision 8, Supplement 1 42 of 46 ree4

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 Ai7 -

2. Answer key changes and question deletions justified and documented A/

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

4. Grading for all borderline cases (80% +/- 2%) reviewed in IVA 1,, l/gl detailI All other failing examinations checked to ensure that grades AM9 - /I v',

5.

are justified

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 / Signa Date

a. Grader .'--L/-- 9 0

b. Facility Reviewer(*) __1

c. NRC Chief Examiner(*)

d. NRC Supervisor (*) A1"cým le. /,, / i6' ./

(*) 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