ML030430598
| ML030430598 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Sequoyah  |
| Issue date: | 12/20/2002 |
| From: | Ernstes M Operator Licensing and Human Performance Branch |
| To: | Scalice J Tennessee Valley Authority |
| References | |
| 50-327/02-301, 50-328/02-301 50-327/02-301, 50-328/02-301 | |
| Download: ML030430598 (33) | |
Text
Administrative Documents (Yellow Paper)
- 1. -- Exam Preparation Checklist....................
- 2. -- Exam Outline Quality Checklist.................
- 3.,XExam Security Agreement.....................
- 4.
7Administrative Topics Outline (Final)........
5./
ES-301 -1
/
Control Room Systems and Facility Walk-through Test Outline (Final)....................................
- 6.
/Operating Test Quality Check Sheet.......
- 7. / Simulator Scenario Quality Check Sheet....
- 8. W-transient and Event Checklist............
- 9.,-Competencies Checklist................
- 10. /Written Exam Quality Check Sheet........
- 11.
Written Exam Review Worksheet..........
- 12. 1 Written Exam Grading Quality Checklist....
- 13.
Post-Exam Check Sheet................
ES-301-3 ES-301-4 ES-301-5 ES-30.1-6 ES-401-7 ES-401-9 ES-403-1 ES-501-1
ES-201 Examination Preparation Checklist Form ES-201-1 Facility:
C-"
Date of Examination:
0.-2"/
Examinations Developed by:
Facility
/ NRC (circle one)
'*-P",*
,/
OP Target Chief Date*
Task Description / Reference Examiner's 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) b
-120
- 3. Facility contact briefed on security & other requirements (C.2.c) 1,/
'2/
-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.1.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)
/
6
-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)
-7
- 14. Final applications reviewed; assignment sheet updated; waiver letters sent (C.2.g, ES-204)
- 15. Proctoring/written exam administration guidelines reviewed with facility licensee and authorization granted to give written exams (if applicable) (C.3.k)
I
/
/1 9flr
-7
- 16. Approved scenarios, job performance measures, and questions I
distributed to NRC examiners (C.3.i) a questions 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
-7
ES-201 Examination Outline Form ES-201-2 Quality Checklist Facility:
4/ý7a
,o
' A/&.e-lr t Date of Examination: /Z-O'O' 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 All I
Section D.1 of ES-401 and whether all K/A categories are appropriately sampled.
T
- c. Assess whether the outline over-emphasizes any systems, evolutions, or generic topics.
i/
p E
N
- d. Assess whether thejustifications for deselected or rejected K/A statements are appropriate.
I
- 2.
- a. Using Form ES-301-5, verify that the proposed scenario sets cover the required number of
.c4e, 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 A4 compromising exam integrity; ensure each applicant can be tested using at least one new or
'/
4 4
significantly modified scenario, that no scenarios are duplicated from the applicants audit test(s)t, 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
.3 quantitative criteria specified on Form ES-301-4 and described in Appendix D.
- 3.
- a. Verify that:
4 9*A (1) the outline(s) contain(s) the required number of control room and in-plant tasks, C
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, S /
l (2) one task is conducted in a low-power or shutdown condition, 1
(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
//
i (5) the in-plant walk-through requires the applicant to enter the RCA.
4I,
- c. Verify that the required administrative topics are covered, with emphasis on performance-3,t ' /
41*
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.
E
- b. Assess whether the 10 CFR 55.41143 and 55.45 sampling is appropriate.
A*
E
- c. Ensure that K/A importance ratings (except for plant-specific priorities) are at least 2.5.
7 W A
- d. Check for duplication and overlap among exam sections.
L
- e. Check the entire exam for balance of coverage.
Aj) *,*
Printed
- e (Si 44r*
- a. Author AI, rP r.a
- b. Facility Reviewer()
4 eterý, g: 1"ea'1 c
- c. NRC Chief Examiner (#
- d. NRC Supervisor
, A 4(
n'v Note:
- Not applicable for NRC-developed examinations.
- Independent NRC reviewer initial items in Column "c;" chief examiner concurrence required.
23 of 24 NUREG-1021, Revision 8, Supplement 1 I
rs,n ExmntinScuiyA20eet1umLL
- 1.
Pre-Examination
//
1 acknowledge that I have acquired specialized knowledge about the NRC licensing examinations scheduled for the week(s) of:t*:
as ohe 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 A_4 1.Z-- 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.
1.1 2.,Ž
- 3. t 4.:
- 5.,
- 7. 8.7 9.
- 10.
- 11.
- 12.
"13.
- 14.
"15.
NOTES:
NURFG-1021, Revision 8, Supplement 1
/
2A nf 24 stvc Form LS-2u01 -a Examination Security Agreement
" F£-?N1
EýS Examination
'Ity Agreement Form
"'01-3
- 1.
Pre-Examination I acknowledge that I have acquired specialized knowledge about the NRC licensing examinations scheduled for the week(s) of.q 9t_ d L.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..,-9De4-.O--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 1.(Veome £a.er~s
- 2. i,,Wa 62' 9&Ž'
- 3.
- 4.
- 5.
- 6.
- 7.
- 8.
- 9.
- 10.
- 11.
- 12.
- 13.
- 14.
15.
JOB TITLE/ RESPONSIBILITY SIGNAT E (1)
DATE
..IGNATURE (2)
DATE NOTE Iu NOTES:
NUREG-1021, Revision 8 24 of 24 0'
0
ES-201 Examination Security Agreement Form ES-201-3 Z
Dee-1 Pre-Examination I acknowledge that I have acquired specialized knowledge about the NRC licensing examinations scheduled for the week(s) o as o he
-- /
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 &..I-4.
r 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) DATENOTE NOTES:
NURFG-1 021, Revision 8, Supplement 1 2,A nf 24
"I nnl CnrmCC)fl1) i-vnminntinn NeriJrIrv iareemeni I U' III L..rCAJ I PRINTED NAME JOB TITLE / RESPONSIBILITY SIGNATURE (1)
DATE SIGNATURE (2)
- /1 3
NOTES:
NUREG-1021, Revision 8, Supplement 1
/
DATENOTE oUr II..m LUI,.
Pre-Examination d--
o,-.
I acknowledge that I have acquired specialized knowledge about the NRC licensing examinations scheduled for the week(s) oft o/--fas' he 1
0 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 andlor 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 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.
2Al 'f 24
ES-301 Administrative Topics Outline Form ES-301-1 Facility:
Sequovah Date of Examination:
12-02-02 Examination Level (circle one): SRO Operating Test Number:
1 Administrative Topic/Subject Description A.1 Plant Parameter Verification Refueling Operations A.2 Equipment Control Describe method of evaluation:
- 2. TWO Administrative Questions JPM # 161, Calculate Subcooling Margin Maximum # of fuel assemblies in refueling canal.
2.2.30/3.5 Unexpected increase in count rate during fuel load.
2.2.30/3.5 Work Request Priority. 2.2.19/3.1 Releasing equipment for maintenance. 2.2.17/3.5 A.3 Radiation JPM (NEW) Calculate Stay Time Control A.4 Emergency JPM #164, (NEW) Classify the REP Plan
Form ES-3U1-1 ES-301 Administrative Topics Outline Facility:
Seauoyah D
Examination Level (circle one): RO Ope I -
.AI Administrative Topic/Subject Description Plant Parameter Verification Refueling Operations Equipment Control A.1 A.2 A.3 ate of Examination:
12-02-02
,rating Test Number:
1 Uescribe methnoa OT evaluation:
- 2. TWO Administrative Questions JPM # 161, Calculate Subcooling Margin Maximum # of fuel assemblies in refueling canal.
2.2.30/3.5 Unexpected increase in count rate during fuel load.
2.2.30/3.5 Abnormal Seal leakoff. 2.2.2/4.0 Rod Thermal Lockup. 2.2.1/3.7 JPM (NEW) Calculate Stay Time A.4 Emergency JPM #156, Monitor Status Trees Plan
- Industry OE importance item Radiation Control Form ES-301-1 ES-301 Administrative Topics Outline
ES-301 Control Room Systems and Facility Walk-Through Test Outline Form ES-301-2 Facility:
Sequoyah Date of Examination:
12-02-02 Exam Level (circle one): RO Operating Test No.:
1 B.1 Control Room Systems System I JPM Title 150, Flush Unit 1 Blender Piping Type Code*
I Safety Function I.
I 3
136, Recovery from SI and Solid Water Conditions 077-4 AP2, Perform D/G Load Test on 1A-A D/G 34AP, Loss of Secondary Heat Sink 021, Respond to a Failure of PR N-41 065-1, Re-establishment of Containment Pressure Control 014, Control Room Inaccessibility D,S,L UA I
.4 I
D, 5, L, A, 45 D, S, L,A, PSA D,S D,S,M 7
5
-I I
NSL U
099 AP, Locally Align 1 B-B CCS Pump to Supply B Train 42, Placing Vital Inverter 1-11 Back in Service 201 R AP1, Local Isolation of Charging with Local Control of Seal Injection Flow D, P, R,A D
N, P, R, L, A
- Type Codes: (D)irect from bank, (M)odified from bank, (N)ew, (A)lternate room, (S)imulator, (L)ow-Power, (R)CA path, (C)ontrol 8
6 2
I D, S 3
D, S5, A 6
4S5 8
N,S, L
ES-301 Control Room Systems and Facility Walk-Through Test Outline Form ES-301-2
ES-301 Operating Test Quality Checklist Form ES-301-3 Facility: --
-(-twý44, Date of Examination: /7/"---
Operating Test Number.
Initials
- 1. GENERAL CRITERIA a
b" c#
- a.
The operating test conforms with the previously approved oudine; changes are consistent with sampling requirements (e.g., 10 CFR 55.45, operational importance, safety function distribution).
4V9
- b.
There is no day-to-day repetition between this and other operating tests to be administered I"
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 am,.
e limits.
- e.
It appears that the operating test will differentiate between competent and less.than-competent
,Wj, a
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 predominantiy open reference and meet the criteria in Attachment 1 of E5-301.
C.
Repetition from operating tests used during the previous licensing examination is within I/' 4 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.
II/'
- 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 Date
- a. Author 1, e..,j' e
,P 7
- b. Facility Reviewer(*)
6\\4 'r e-p ST
/1ee dL.iLLŽ
- c. NRC Chief Examiner (#)
- 2 Z
- d. NRC Supervisor 01h, f.M ;1
£l sc
/7 (J
s'/0 2 c
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
ES-301 Simulator Scenario Quality Checklist Form ES-301 -4 Facility:
Date of Exam:
/Z/OZ.a Scenario Numbers:
OpI i
"Operating Test No.:
QUALITATIVE ATTRIBUTES a
initials b*
c#
- 1.
The initial conditions are realistic, in that some equipment and/or instrumentation may be out of
- V.
4/
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 aplicable)
- 4.
No more than one non-mechanistic failure (e.g., pipe break) is incorporated into the scenario 4/
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 4
complete evaluation results commensurate with the scenano objectives.
- 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 tA W\\fr
- 8.
The simulator modelinq is not altered.
- 9.
The scenarios have been validated. Any open simulator performance deficiencies have been 41P A
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
{
AtM other scenarios have been altered in accordance with Section D.4 of ES-301.
ii.
All individual operator competen cies can be evaluated, as verified using Form ES -301 -6 (sub mfit
- t AIK*
the form alonq with the simulator scenarios.
- 12.
Each applicant will be significantly involved in the minimum number of transients and events g//-
,I specified on Form ES-301 -5 Isubmit the form with the simulator scenarios.
- 13.
The level of difficulty is appropriate to support licens'inq decisions for each crew o~s iti on' C/
/
/ " '
TARGET QUANTITATIVE ATT-RIBUTES (PER SCENARIO; SEE SECTION D.4.D)
Actual Attributes 1.
Total m alfu nctio n s (5-8)
I i
/
I
- 2.
M alfunctions after EOP entry (1-2)
/.
/ z1 A
- 3.
Abnormal events (2-4) s
- /
d4
/
- 4.
Major transients (1-2)
I ii I
4
- 5.
EOPs entered/reguiringc substantive actions (1-2) 3 2,
I evj usl V l5 A~
- 6.
EOP contingencies requiring substantive actions (0-2)
"7 Critical tasks (2-3)
I
/0 NUREG-1021, Revision 8, Supplement 1 24 of 26 I
I I
7 Criicaltasks(2-3
. I
ES-301 Transient and Event Checklist Form ES-301-5 OPERATING TEST NO.:
Applicant Evlution Minimum Scenario Number i ype Iype Num er 1
2 3
4 Reactivity 1
L e--
Normal I
RO lstrument/.
4 8omponent I
_Major I
Reactivity 1
Normal 0
As RO lstrument/
2 Sonent Major I
SRO-l Reactivity 0
Normal 1
As SRO Igstrumentj 2
Comonent Major I
Reactivity 0
L I Normal 1
/
/
SRO-U
. Jstrumeent(
2 3,
_omponen 5o 7
q,(_
Major 1
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 D.
(3)
Whenever practical, both instrument and component malfunctions should be included; only those that require verifiable actions that provide insight to th applicant's competence count toward the minimum requirement.
Author NRC Reviewei 25 of 26 NUREG-1021, Revision 8, Supplement I I
I r:
I
ES-301 Transient and Event Checklist Form ES-301-5 OPERATING TEST NO.:
Applicant Evolution Tinnbum Scenario Number I ype lype Num er3 4
_1 2
3 4
Reactivity 1
5 Normal 1
II RO Iast rument I 4
4*
IComponent Major 1
jI1 Reactivity I
Normal 0
As RO lnstrument/
2 SComponent Major I
SRO-l Reactivity 0
Normal 1
As SRO I2strument 2
om Monent Major 1
Reai Q Z-Normal SRO-U lristrument/
1 omponent Major Instructions:
Author.
NRC Reviewer (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 pplicant's crptence count toward the minimum requirement.
Ot AL?
A 25 of 26 NUREG-1021, Revision 8, Supplement 1 I
r:
Transient and Event Checklist OPERATING TEST NO.:
A licant Ev.lution Minimum Scenario Number T ype I ype Num er 1
2 3
4 3
Reactivity I
1 Normal I
RO lIstrument 1 4
-3 Z
z Component I
I I
Major 1
(
1 1
Reactivity 1
Normal 0
As RO lnstrument/
2 Component Major I
SRO-I Reactivity 0
Normal 1
As SRO Instrument /
2 Component Major I
Reactivity 0
0 Normal 1
SRO-U
.0strumnent*
2 14
_ _omponr I
MajorI Instructions:
I Author.
NRC Reviewes (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 conp 7 tence count toward the minimum requirement.
r 4V(1/
z)A,.t
,/
25 of 26 NUREG-1021, Revision 8, Supplement I ES-301 Form ES-301-5 I
I
ES-301 Transient and Event Checklist Form ES-301-5 OPERATING TEST NO.:
Aplicant Evolution uiniMum Scenario Number Type lype Nme 1
2 3
4 P-A*
Reactivity 1
Normal 1
RO Instrument/
4 3
Component
[
Major 1
(07 Reactivity 1
Normal 0
As RO Instrument/
2 Component Major I
SRO-I Reactivity 0
Normal I
As SRO lnstrument/
2 Comonent Malor 1
Reactivity 0
Normal 1
SRO-U Instrument(
2 t___
o jmonernf Major 1
Instructions:
Author NRC Reviewer (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 Hplicant's competence count toward the minimum requirement.
--///[<,A C,.*.
Ao 4W$%
"LI-0-~
AQd t '
25 of 26 NUREG-1021, Revision 8, Supplement I I
I r.
ES-301 Transient and Event Checklist Form ES-301-5 OPERATING TEST NO.:
Applicant Evolution
!lnirnum Scenario Number I ype I ype umber 1
2 3
4 iReactivity I
Normal I
I RO 4nstrument 4
ComponentI Major 1
7 Reactivity I
Normal 0
As RO Instrument/
2 SComponent Major 1
SRO-1 Reactivli 0
Normal 1
As SRO Igstrumentj 2
Comonent Major I
Reactivity 0
Normal 1
SRO-U lastrumrentn 2
_omponrn_
Major1 Instructiions:
(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 comece count toward the minimum requirement.
Author NRC Reviewei
-'V I,
25 of 26 NUREG-1021, Revision 8, Supplement I r
ES-301 Competencies Checklist Form ES-301-6 1,1 X -5 R/O/plicant #1 Applicant #2 Applicant #3 ROI O-I/SRO-U RO/SRO-I/SRO-U RO/SRO-I/SRO-U Competencies SCENARIO SCENARIO SCENARIO 0,
C, C
1 *-w2 3
4
-I 3
4 A
4'2 3
4 Understand and Interpret t,<"
131)/
/ 57 Annunciators and Alarms 5
I S
6' Diagnose Events 3 q* 34 and Conditions 165 Understand Plant Z
I '
Ii-
- 1.
and System Response 5,/6 1/ 0 "4 Comply With and I
3Z9 "
- 1<
Use Procedures (1) 4' I
1 4
<6' (a Operate Control Z
/,3, I "
Boards (2)
"4, &
1r
', -7 d <
!5 Communicate and Z- *,,
,33
- i-
-1<
Interact With the Crew (P
q,/7 b
54 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:
X t
OfIa NRC Reviewer:
7/7 NUREG-1021, Revision 8, Supplement 1 26 of 26 iTh.
ES-301 Competencies Checklist Form ES-301-6 Applicant #1 Applicant #2 Applicant #3 RO/SRO-I/SRO-U RO/SRO-I/SRO-U RO/SRO-ltR -U Competencies SCENARIO SCENARIO SCENARIO S24T 1
23d 4
1 2
3 4
Understand and Interpret p3
- 23 Annunciators and Alarms 3 5" 4 Diagnose Events q3/5' and ignSConditions "3*"
Understand Plant 3,'
2-.;
I!
I and System Response
-7
-p 5i
{" (
3 6 5q Comply W ith and 7-1 q
g -1 Use Procedures (1) t o qr 3<59 Operate Control Z-5 Boards (2) q, q7 Communicate and 1/3 131 L4 1I Interact With the Crew q, 7 (P
q K b1 5s 4
5
+
Demonstrate Supervisory
.3 Abilit (3) 3 Comply With and 3
Use Tech. Specs. (3)
T 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:
U t
NRC Reviewer:
Q NUREG-1021, Revision 8, Supplement 1 26 of 26
'N
2 I
Competencies Checklist Form ES-301-6 Competencies t/z-Applicant #1 RO/SRO-I/SRO-U SCFNAPIO 1I 2
3 Understand and Interpret 4
3<
aS3 II Applicant #2 RO/SRO-I/SRO-U SCENARIO 1
2 3
4 Diagnose Events 7 1 1 212
- t.
and Conditions Understand Plant and System Response hi 3
A Comply With and Use Procedures (1)
I 2 s
Operate Control Boards (2)
Communicate and Interact With the Crew 3
2 I'
Demonstrate Supervisory Ability (3) 3 s-
- j Comply With and Use Tech. Specs. (3)
K ý"
3 4 (1
34 34 34 IC 34 C-
-Lw_
Applicant #3 ROISRO-I/SRO-U SCENARIO 1
2 3
4 w_
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:
G NRC Reviewer:
NUREG-1021, Revision 8, Supplement 1 Ann-~,k, ritflrc
- nd Alnrm*
1,PK
_,Z9.7,C_ _2ý,, zli/ýWý
ý 1
17 26 of 26 I----r---r
-1 11 ES-301 I
ES-401 Written Examination Form ES-401-7 Quality Checklist Facility:
<2ý 6*cOc*,
Date of Exam:
/ZIz/OZ-Exam Level: R0 RO U,
Initial Item Description a
bW c,
- 1.
Questions and answers technically accurate and applicable to facility
,40A
- 2.
- a. NRC K/As referenced for all questions
- b. Facility learning objectives referenced as available W
- 3.
RO/SRO overlap is no more than 75 percent, and SRO questions are appropriate ffi
-. /
L 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 incated below (check the item that applies) and appears appropriate:
Vc the audit exam was systematically and randomly developed; or the audit exam was completed before the license exam was started; or
$ll V2
- the examinations were developed independently; or
_L/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 distribution at right
- 7. '
Between 50 and 60 percent of the questions on Memory C/A the exam (including 10 new questions) are it written at the comprehension/analysis level; mar enter the actual question distribution at right I
- 8.
References/handouts provided do not give away answers
/0/""
1
- 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
- 10.
Question psychometric quality anciformat meet ES, Appendix B, guidelines
/L.
- 11.
The exam contains 100, one-point, multiple choice items; the total is correct and 4*7 agrees with value on cover sheet Printed Name / Si nature Date
- a. Author 4,We
/
____ý,e
- b. Facility Reviewer (')
17,, tee-
.*Y..
- c. NRC Chief Examiner (#)4.
- D?,44A**
- d. NRC Regional Supervisor M1/,t,
7'R9 r
7.X, 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 Facilit:
Date of Exam:
i6/
Exam Level R SRO Initial Item Description a
b-co
- 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
- 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 3.i*
/
- 5.
Question duplication from the license screening/audit exam was controlled as indicated below (check the item that applies) and appears appropriate:
V the audit exam was systematically and randomly developed; or the audit exam was completed before the license exam was started; or/4
- the examinations were developed independently; or z 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,
-,,/,,
arid the rest modified); enter the actual question 3,5 C/
distribution at right V-57 f
- 7.
Between 50 and 60 percent of the questions on Memory C/A the exam (including 10 new questions) are 4I written at the comprehension/analysis level; let-.
i" enter the actual question distribution at right
- 8.
References/handouts provided do not give away answers 4
- 9.
Question content conforms with specific KIA statements in the previously approved examination outline and is appropriate for the Tier to which they are 4
assigned; deviations are iustified
- 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 7
agrees with value on cover sheet Printed Name / Signature Date
- a. Author K,01/610_,
- b. Facility Reviewer W')
/Vi'rc, p*7 otee-t"La
- c. NRC Chief Examiner (#)
2
- d. NRC Regional Supervisor
/)z/Ir6-E&Ald7i-,J s at 1 a.fz.13 L
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 N
ES-401 Written Examination Form ES-401-9 (R8, Sl)
Review Worksheet
- 1.
- 2.
- 3. Psychometric Flaws
- 4. Job Content Flaws
- 5. Other
- 6.
- 7.
(F# H (1-5)O Stem CuesI T/F Ce.Pra JbMiuIa
/
Back-Q=
SRO U/E/S Explanation (FH)(15)Focus D t ikuits Iward.KJA IOnly Instructions
[Refer to Section D of ES-401 and Appendix B for additional information regarding each of the following concepts.]
- 1.
Enter the level of knowledge (LOK) of each question as either (F)undamental or (H)igher cognitive level.
- 2.
Enter the level of difficulty (LOD) of each question using a 1 - 5 (easy - difficult) rating scale (questions in the 2 - 4 range are acceptable).
- 3.
Check the appropriate box if a psychometric flaw is identified:
The stem lacks sufficient focus to elicit the correct answer (e.g., unclear intent, more information is needed, or too much needless information).
The stem or distractors contain cues (i.e., clues, specific determiners, phrasing, length, etc).
The answer choices are a collection of unrelated true/false statements.
More than one distractor is not credible.
One or more distractors is (are) partially correct (e.g., if the applicant can make unstated assumptions that are not contradicted by stem).
- 4.
Check the appropriate box if a job content error is identified:
The question is not linked to the job requirements (i.e., the question has a valid K/A but, as written, is not operational in content).
The question requires the recall of knowledge that is too specific for the closed reference test mode (i.e., it is not required to be known from memory).
The question contains data with an unrealistic level of accuracy or inconsistent units (e.g., panel meter in percent with question in gallons).
The question requires reverse logic or application compared to the job requirements.
- 5.
Check questions that are sampled for conformance with the approved K/A and those that are designated SRO-only (K/A and license level mismatches are unacceptable).
- 6.
Based on the reviewer's judgment, is the question as written (U)nacceptable (requiring repair or replacement), in need of (E)ditorial enhancement, or (S)atisfactory?
- 7.
At a minimum, explain any "U" ratings (e.g., how the Appendix B psychometric attributes are not being met).
- 1.
- 2.
- 3. Psychometric Flaws
- 4. Job Content Flaws
- 5. Other
- 6.
- 7.
(F/H)
(1-5)
Stem Cues T/F Cred. Partial Job-Minutia
- /
Back-Q=
SRO U/E/S Explanation I
I Focus Dist.
Link units ward K/A Only 1
H 3b S
H 3r S
H 3s S
040aa201 H
3s x
S other K/As better 026aa2.01 H
2 x
E No ppc malfunction in question as required by K/A 027Akl.02 H
3 S
039K304 2
H 3
S add RCS pressure (reconsider) 3 H
3r S
4 H
3 S
I
- 1.
- 2.
- 3. Psychometric Flaws
- 4. Job Content Flaws
- 5. Other
- 6.
- 7.
Q#
LOK LOD I
j I
(F/H)
(1-5)
Stem Cues TIF Cred. Partial Job-Minutia
- 1 Back-Q= 'SRO U/E/S Explanation Focus Dist.
Link units ward K/A Only 5
H 2r b
x E
2ý -art of K/A not met since same action repeated 4 times. Demin supply would never be a source of HI RAD so not credible.
SM 3
d E
change aux pzr spray valves to PORVs on d 7
H 3
S I
M 2
x E
delete "the reset of" in stem 9
H ir
?
U C would always be correct regardless of other choices.
10 H
3 d
E change d to "Unit runback will occur due to..."
11 M
3r S
12 H
3 x
E need to address the effect on fuel handling system 13 M/H 2
E rethink to comprehension as originally proposed.
14 H
Ir d
E d not credilble because MFP do have trips. Also non discriminatory.
See changes. Prefer to test time delay feature.
15 M
2r E
very similar situation to Q-14. Overlap problem 16 H
3 S
17 M
3r
?
?
How does this relate to a release?
18 H
2 E
Make editorial changes as indicated on question 19 H
3 S
20 M
3 S
21 M
3 1
E Make editorial changes as indicated on question.
22 H(m) 3 b,d E
add "a ground exists" to b,d I23 H
3 S
24 H
4 S
good question 25 H
3 S
26 H
3r a,b,c U
4 correct answers as written. Add ONLY where indicated.
27 M
1r bc a
U bc not credible unless you modify stem to include data taht would be relevant. A possibly correct answer.
28 H
3r x
E Add " assume checklists are completed."
.-1
- 1.
- 2.
- 3. Psychometric Flaws
- 4. Job Content Flaws
- 5. Other
- 6.
- 7.
Q#
LOK LOD I
I I
(F/H)
(1-5)
Stem Cues T/F Cred. Partial Job-IMinutiaI #
Back-Q=
SRO U/EIS Explanation I Focus Dist.
Link units ward K/A OnlyI 29 M
3 bcd Make editorial changes as indicated on question 30 M
2r d
c c correct since subset of b. D not credible since it is missing "announce over..."
31i H
3 S
32 H
2 S
33 H
Ir U
A room isolation with inlet valves open leads to answer without much specific knowledge. Better to test pressurizing fans.
3 H
3 x
E change K/A to 078A3.01 35 H
3 E
Make editorial changes as indicated on question 38 H
3 S
37 M
1 U
no discriminatory value. 2 dropped rods = trip everywhere.
38 M
3r b
E B not credible since switches in stem have nothing to do with fire suppression systems.
39 M
3 S
40 H
3s E
check for ovedap, another question had channel fail high. Make I
I editorial changes as indicated on question 41 M
2r C
x E
K/A EOP related not AOP. C not credible with pumps in question.
42 43 H
3 S
4 H
3 S
45 H(m) 2 S
46 H
2 E
add tick marks to bullets 47 H
1 U
non discriminatory/ see rewrite attached 48 H
2 S
49 m
2 x
x U
change "control board indications" to 'automatic actions". Answers are not control board indications CCWS K/A Not RCP malfunction. RCPs still have seal injection.
50 H
2 x
E K/A stretched. Not really a design feature to have surge tank expand on loss of cooling.
- 1.
- 2.
- 3. Psychometric Flaws
- 4. Job Content Flaws
- 5. Other 6.7.
Q#
LOK LOD F
I I
(F/H)
(1-5)
Stem Cues T/F Cred. Partial Job-Minutia X
Back-Q=
SRO U/E/S Explanation Focus Dist.
Link units ward K/A Only 51 M
2 x
U GFES. Q not about effects of fuel burnout on reactivity. BOL DRW 52 M
3 d
E Add words to distractor d to make it plausible Should read similar to a.
53 M (h) 3 E
Not comprehension. TS bases question 54 M
3 x
?
Not sure if this is a TC.
55 H
3 S
56 H
3 S
57 M
3r S
58 H
3 S
59 M
1 x
U K/A requires use of control room reference material. This is a setpoint I
question not suitable for SRO only.
60 H
3r x
x x
E Reword to eliminate cue word "confused". See comments for additional I
detail ion distractors.
61 H
4 S
62 H
3r x
?
Given situation not probable. Run on simulator to determine leak size to max cnmt pressure expected. 2.5psid seems small for any break that is expected to be cooling path.
63 H
3s E
Data given is not realistic. A RCS leak must be present to get RM values that high. Telling applicants to make no assumptions also requires that you give them sufficient information to answer the question in a realistic manner.
64 M
3 d
E LOCA outside containment and distractor refers to cnmt spray pumps +
no mention of cnmt pressure in stem.
65 H
2s E
check nomenclature on d. Possible overlap with another question 66 H
3s S
67 M
2 x
E missing remedial actions part of K/A 68 M
2 x
E remove "highest pressure to lowest pressure". Large cue 69 H
3r x
?
?
Possibly SRO only question.
70 H
3 S
71 H
2s S
1.12.
- 3. Psychometric Flaws
- 4. Job Content Flaws
- 5. Other
- 6.
- 7.
Q#
LOK LOD (F/H)
(1-5)
Stem Cues TIE Cred. Partial Job-MinutiaI #/
Back-Q=
SRO U/E/S Explanation
- Focus jDist.
Linkj units ward K/A Only=
72 H
3 x
E question has nothing to do with boric acid storage tanks. Use AA1.17 Emergency borate control valves and indicators.
73 H
2s S
74 H
2 S
75 M
3 x
E remove last bullet since it tells applicant that answer is a caution in procedure. Not necessary to answer question.
76 M(h) 3 x
E EK 3.1 much better question does not operate/monitor the operating characteristics of the facility.
77 M
3 S
78 M
2r x
E 2 part K/A need use procedures part. Adding 2m part will make it an H 79 H
3 x
E Need to add loop Th for subcooled loops since K/A involves methods used to calculate subcooling.
80 H
3 x
E question does not deal with PORV. Use EK2.06 SD and ADVs 81 M(h) 1 U
non discriminating. Feed/bleed vice bleed/feed. Incorporate head vents 82 M(h) 3
?
check knowledge level 83 M(h) 3 b
x U
AK3.01 more accurate K/A. AK2.05 is not a bases for EOP action K/A.
Distractor B not credible since electrical power not an issue.
84 M
3 S
85 86 M
3 E
Make editorial changes as indicated on question.
87 M
3s d
E 540 deg too high, change to 350 88 M
2 S
89 M
3 b
E change b from sat margin to ouside of electrical limits. See notes.
90 M(h) 3 E
memory question. Make editorial changes as indicated on question 91 H
3 E
change "should" to Must in all choices. Make editorial changes as indicated on question 92 H
3
?
Possible overlap issue with another question.
- 1.
- 2.
- 3. Psychometric Flaws
- 4. Job Content Flaws
- 5. Other
- 6.
- 7.
O#
LOK LOD I
I (F/H)
(1-5)
Stem CuesCTIP cred Partial Job-Minutia
- /
Back-Q=
SRO UIE/S Explanation Focus Dist.
Link units wardKA Only l_
93 M
2 S
94 M
3 S
95 H
3 E
Make editorial changes as indicated on question 96 M
3s E
distractor b has some words missing.
97 M
3s x
E Stem does not accurately descrbe the measured value Fq. Remove "axial" in stem and add "times the" after bound.
98 99 H
2 a
x E
change a to "isolate letdown" vice decrease chg flow. Also K/A is about EOPs not AOPs 100 H
3 S
101 H(m) 3r E
Check distractor b for possible correct answer. Add 'if any" to stem.
102 103 H
2 S
LOK questionable 104 M
3 E
Add "licensed operator trainee" to c to meet CFR requirements.
105 M
2r S
106 H(m) 2s*
a E
Change a to include N2 blanket pressure 107 H
3 S
108 H
3r E
add "with sprays in manual" to answer 109 M
2s*
x E
not SRO only 110 M
2r S
discuss K/A Is question testing a design feature 111 M
3 E
check dwg to ensure logic is "or" and not an "and" gate.
112 M
2 S
remove 'potential" from c 113 M
2 a
U a is correct also lAW reference material 114 M
3 S
115 M
2 S
I
ES-403 Written Examination Grading Form ES-403-1 Quality Checklist Facility: SZFuOrOpdq Date of Exam: /Z/A/o/
Exam Level: RO/SRO Initials Item Description a
b c
- 1.
Clean answer sheetscopied before grading V 14,.fO
- 2.
Answer key changes and question deletions justified and documented Y/A*
04$
- 3.
Applicants' scores checked for addition errors
//W (reviewers spot check > 25% of examinations)
- 4.
Grading for all borderline cases (80% +/- 2%) reviewed in detail I_ /4
- 5.
All other failing examinations checked to ensure that grades are justified N///,4
- 6.
Performance on missed questions checked for training deficiencies and wording problems; evaluate validity of y
4)/ "
questions missed by half or more of the applicants Printed Name / Signature Date
- a. Grader
-TA,6dS.
&- 6/§ 2A*'4-'
- b. Facility Reviewer(*)
///-__
- c. NRC Chief Examiner (*) *,e--"t AtA'!z-
)%e 1219
- d. NRC Supervisor(*)
/iJcxffnf6t C, 61tt"fl7T6S/ )A-t,---z
(*)
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 Facility:
Date of Exam:
Exam Level: RO/SRO Initials Item Description a
b c
- 1.
Clean answer sheets copied before grading
'1< 6 t
- 2.
Answer key changes and question deletions justified and documented
- 3.
Applicants' scores checked for addition errors (reviewers spot check > 25% of examinations)__
4,,*
- 4.
Grading for all borderline cases (80% +/- 2%) reviewed in detail O,
,V/
- 5.
All other failing examinations checked to ensure that grades 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 / Signature Date
- a. Grader
-/4cc----.
t-/94.
- b. Facility Reviewer(*)
05<t6y
.f F
/2-,OZ_
- c. NRC Chief Examiner (A) loo 4"
- d. NRC Supervisor (*)
)
e A4'Z-41 z.-I*
4'e/
(')
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-501 Post-Examination Check Sheet Form ES-501-1 Task Description Date Complete 1:
Facility written exam comments or graded exams received and verified complete
- 2.
Facility written exam comments reviewed and incorporated and NRC grading completed, if necessary Z//f7/O1
- 3.
Operating tests graded by NRC examiners 2-//7,/49 z
- 4.
NRC Chief examiner review of written exam and operating test 12117/,02-.
grading completed
- 5.
Responsible supervisor review completed
/2 A-0-46 2
- 6.
Management (licensing official) review completed 2//W/10,a
- 7.
License and denial letters mailed 12 Z.,a
- 8.
Facility notified of results
,z-/'/o
- 9.
Examination report issued (refer to NRC MC 0610)
/2(Ole-
- 10.
Reference material returned after final resolution of any
//A appeals aNUREG-1021, Revision 8 20 of 22