ML033030022

Various Checklists for the Point Beach Initial Examination - September 2003

ML033030022
Person / Time
Site:	Point Beach
Issue date:	09/29/2003
From:	Lanksbury R NRC/RGN-III/DRS/OLB
To:
References
50-266/03-301, 50-301/03-301
Download: ML033030022 (11)

Text

VARIOUS CHECKLISTS FOR THE POINT BEACH INITIAL EXAMINATION SEPT 2003

I -

' 6' c GS+/<3 EXAMI[NATION SECURITY AGREEMENT (EVALUATORS OR OTHERS INVOLVED)

Pre-Examination:

I acknowledge that I have acquired specialized knowledge about the 2003 NRC Initial License Training exmination scheduled to be administered during the week of September 29,2003. I agree to not knowingly divulge any information about this examination to any unauthorized persons. An unauthorized person is any individual who has not been approved by an Operations Training Coordinator to receive specialized knowledge of the examination. I understand that I am not to participate in any instruction or tutoring involving those individuals scheduled to be administered this examination until completion of their examination administration.

I further understand that violation of the conditions of this agreement may result in cancellation of the examination and/or an enforcement action against me or the facility licensee.

Post-Examination:

I did not, to the best of my knowledge, divulge any information concerning the examination, administered during the week of September 29,2003, to any unauthorized persons. I did not participate in instructing those licensees who were administered this examination from the date that I entered into the security agreement until the completion of their examination administration.

Name Pre-Examination Certification Date Post-Examination Certification I Date /

PBF-6805 Revision 2 (1 1/24/99)

File: A8.16.13

EXAMINATION SECURITY AGREEMENT (EVALUATORS OR OTHERS INVOLVED)

Pre-Examination:

I acknowledge that I have acquired specialized knowledge about the 2003 NRC Initial License Training examination scheduled to be administered during the week of September 29, 2003. I agree to not knowingly

' divulge any information about this examination to any unauthorized persons. An unauthorized person is any individual who has not been approved by an Operations Training Coordinator to receive specialized knowledge of the examination. I understand that I am not to participate in any instruction or tutoring involving those individuals scheduled to be administered this examination until completion of their examination administration.

I further understand that violation of the conditions of this agreement may result in cancellation of the examination and/or an enforcement action against me or the facility licensee.

Post-Examination :

I did npt, to the best of my knowledge, divulge any information concerning the examination, administered duringthe weck of September 29,2003, to any unauthorized persons. I did not participate in instructing those licensees who were administered this examination from the date that I entered into the security agreement until the completion of their examination administration.

Page 1 o f 2 PBF-6805 Revision 2 (1 1/24/99)

File: A8.16.13

t I EXAMINATION SECURITY AGREEMENT (EVALUATORS OR OTHERS INVOLVED)

Pre-Examination:

I acknowledge that I have acquired specialized knowledge about the 2003 NRC Initial License Training examination scheduled to be administered during the week of September 29,2003. I agree to not knowingly divulge any information about this examination to any unauthorized persons. An unauthorized person is any individual who has not been approved by an Operations Training Coordinator to receive specialized knowledge of the examination. I understand that I am not to participate in any instruction or tutoring involving t hose individuals scheduled to be administered this examination until completion of their examination administration.

I further understand that violation of the conditions of this agreement may result in cancellation of the examination and/or an enforcement action against me or the facility licensee.

Post-Examination:

I did not, to the best of my knowledge, divulge any information concerning the examination, administered during the week of September 29,2003, to any unauthorized persons. I did not participate in instructing those licensees who were administered this examination from the date that I entered into the security agreement until the completion of their examination administration.

Page 1 of 2 PBF-6805 Revision 2 (1 1/24/99)

File: A8.16.13

ES-301 Operating Test Quality Checklist FOITIIES-301-3 I

I a.

1. GENERAL CRITERIA The operating test conforms with the previously approved outline; changes are consistent with sampling requirements (e.g., 10CFR55.45, operational importance, safety function distribution).

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

C. The operating test shall not duplicate items from the applicants audit test(s) (see Section D. 1.a).

d. Overlap with the written examination and between different parts of the operating test is within acceptable limits.

e. It appears that the operating test will differentiate between competent and less-than-competent applicants at the designated license level.

2. WALK-THROUGH CRITERIA

a. Each JPM includes the following, as applicable:

initial conditions I 0 initiating cues 0 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. 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.

C. At least 20 percent of the JPMs on each test are new or significantly modified.

a.

3. SIMULATOR CRITERIA The associated simulator operating tests (scenario sets) have been reviewed in accordance with Form ES-301-4 and a copy is attached.

Printed Name I Signature j$$i Date

a. Author

b. Facility Reviewer (*)

c. NRC Chief Examiner (#)

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.

NUREG- 1021, Draft Revision 9

ES-301 Simulator Scenario Quality Checklist FOITIES-301-4

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.5 of ES-301. h d

2. Malfunctions after EOP entry (1-2)

3. Abnormal transients (2-4)

4. Major transients (1-2)

5. EOPs enteredrequiring substantive actions (1-2)

6. EOP contingencies requiring substantive actions (0-2)

7. Critical tasks (2-3)

NLTREG- 1021, Draft Revision 9

ES-301 Transient and Event Checklist Form ES-301-5 OPERATING TEST NO.: 2003301 As RO Reactivity 0 NIA NIA Normal 1" NIA 5 Instrument /

2" 1-4,6,7 1-4,7,9 SRO Component Mai or 1 5 6,8 Reactivity 0 NIA NIA 1 SRO-u Normal Instrument/

ComDonent 1"

2" NIA NIA NIA NIA I I I Maior 1 NIA NIA 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.5.d) but must be significant per Section C.2.a of Appendix D.

• Reactivity and normal evolutions may be replaced with additional instrument or component malfunctions on a one-for-one basis.

(3) Whenever practical, both instrument and component malfunctions should be included; only those that require verifiable actions that provide insight to the applicant's competence count toward the minimum requirement.

Author:

NRC Reviewer:

NUREG- 1021, Draft Revision 9

ES-301 Competencies Checklist Form ES-301-6 SRO RO Competencies SCEF ut10 SCENARIO I

1 1 2 InterpretDiagnose Events 6-8 and Conditions Comply With and

~

1 I Use Procedures (1) 1-6 I

I l-*

Operate Control I

Boards (2) N/A N/A Communicate and Interact Demonstrate Supervisory Abilitv (3)

Comply With and Use Tech. Specs. (3)

All I

I All I

N/A N/A Notes:

(1) Includes Technical Specification compliance for an RO.

(2) Optional for an SRO-U (3) Onlv amlicable to SROs.

Instructions:

Circle the applicants license type and enter one or more event numbers that will allow the examiners to evaluate every applicable competency for every applicant.

Author:

NRC Reviewer:

NUREG- 1021, Draft Revision 9

ES-40 1 Written Examination Form ES-401-6 Oualitv Checklist Facility: PBNP Date of Exam: 9/29-10/3/03 Exam Level: RO/SRO Initial Item Description a b*

1. Questions and answers technically accurate and applicable to facility fl

2. a. NRC WAS referenced for all questions

b. Facility learning objectives referenced as available

, Lo SRO questions are appropriate per Section D.2.d of ES-401 Y

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

-he 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) c Id Bank Modified New

6. Bank use meets limits (no more than 75 percent from the bank, at least 10 percent new, and the rest modified); enter the actual RO /

SRO-only question distribution(s) at right

7. Between 50 and 60 percent of the questions on the RO exam are written at the comprehension/analysis level; the SRO exam may exceed 60 percent if the randomly selected WAS support the higher cognitive levels; enter the actual RO / SRO question distribution(s) at right

a. Author

b. Facility Reviewer( *)

c. NRC Chief Examiner(#)

d. NRC Regional Supervisor 1 Note:

• The facility reviewers initiaMsignature are not applicable for NRC-developed examinations.

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

NUREG- 1021, Draft Revision 9

ES-403 Written Examination Grading Form ES-403-1 Quality Checklist Facility: Point Beach Date of Exam: 10/03/03 Exam L e v e l : m S R O Initials Item Description a b C

1. Clean answer sheets copied before grading  %(id 1 2. Answer key changes and question deletions justified and documented

3. Applicants scores checked for addition errors *d (reviewers spot check > 25% of examinations) 1 4.

Grading for all borderline cases (80 +/- 2% overall and 70 +/-

4% on the SRO-onlvl reviewed in detail I ~h I

5. All other failing examinations checked to ensure that grades ~,h N/A are justified

6. Performance on missed questions checked for training deficiencies and wording problems; evaluate validity of 2 d 4 questions missed by half or more of the applicants 1 a. Grader 1 b. Facility Reviewer(*)

~~~~~~~ ~ ~

(*) The facility reviewers signature is not applicable for examinations graded by the NRC; two independent NRC reviews are required.

NUREG-1021, Draft Revision 9 6 of 5

ES-403 Written Examination Grading Form ES-403-1 Qualitv Checklist 11 Facilitv: Point Beach Date of Exam: 10/03/03 xam Level: R O m Initials II Item DescriDtion a

1. Clean answer sheets copied before grading

2. Answer key changes and question deletions justified and documented

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

4. Grading for all borderline cases (80 +/- 2% overall and 70 +/-

4% on the SRO-onlvl reviewed in detail

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 I Printed Name / Signature Date

a. Grader N,rho14 p

• vA&h%dd@@U&.I ro-e-03

b. Facility Reviewer(*) vh

(*) 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, Draft Revision 9