ML040120641

Final Qa/Related Forms

ML040120641
Person / Time
Site:	Indian Point
Issue date:	12/08/2003
From:	Christman R Entergy Nuclear Northeast
To:	Conte R NRC/RGN-I/DRS/OSB
Conte R
References
50-286/03-303
Download: ML040120641 (11)

Text

ES-201 Examination Preparation Checklist Form ES-201-1 Date of Examination: December 8,2003 Task Description / Reference with the facility licensee.

[ J Applies only to examinations prepared by the NRC.

1 of 25 NUREG-I 021, Draft Revision 9

ES-201 Examination Outline Quality Checklist Form ES-201-2 Facilib Indian Point 3 Date of Examination: Week Of December 8,2003 Item Task Description - iitials a

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

W R b. Assess whether the outline was systematically and randomly prepared in accordance with I Section D.l of ES-401 and whether all WA categories are appropriately sampled.

T v

A T c. Assess whether the outline overemphasizes any systems, evolutions, or generic topics.

E N d. Assess whether the justifications for deselected or rejected WA statements are appropriate. @

2.

S

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.

b. Assess whether there are enough scenario sets (and spares) to test the projected number and B

I 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@)*,

and scenarios will not be repeatedn- subsequent days.

c. To the extent possible, assess whether the outline@)confom(s) with the qualitative and quantitative criteria specified on Form ES-301-4and described in Appendix D.

3. a. Verify that:

W I

T (1) the outline(s) contain(s) the required number of control room and in-plant tasks, (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@), and (4) no more than 80% of any operating test is taken directly from the licensee's exam banks.

Q

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)48564 - 6 (2- 3 for SRO-U) 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 c o v e r e p w

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 d u b s e q u e n t days. W I

I 1 G 4.

E

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

b. Assess whether the 10 CFR 55.41143and 55.45sampling is appropriate.

w n

~N E c. Ensure that WA importance ratings (except for plant-specific priorities) are at least 2.5.

R n

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

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

f. Assess whether the exam fits the appropriatejob level (RO or SRO).

a. Author

b. Facility Reviewer (3 /\//A A AA.

c. NRC Chief Examiner(#) A h 1 \'&\- c

d. NRC Supervisor R t & ~ d&fit& / 4

ES-201 Examination Outline Quality Checklist Form ES-201-2 Item I Task Description H Initials I

are distributed among the safety function groupings as specified in ESSOI, is conducted in a low-power or shutdown condition, (2 - 3 for SRO-U) of the tasks require the applicant to implement an alternate path

a. Author

b. Facility Reviewer (*)

c. NRC Chief Examiner (#)

d. NRC Supervisor Note:

• Not applicable for NRC-developed examinations.

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

Iof25 NUREG-1021, Draft Revision 9

?';e-Exam-imtion

~ z .5 2 ;ny sigrarura. I agree that I will not knowingly divalge any information about "y :?e iw3C ccief examiner. i understand that I am not to instruct, evaluate, or pro 2 r : ~ nagaiisi ?e cr the facility licensee. I will immediately report to facility manag e x a m i r d o n sec;;ily may have been compromised.

2. --

?x?- Exeqination letion of examination administration, I did not

?!?!STET) NAME DATE NOTE r!

' I NUREG-1021, Draft Revision 9

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

1. Pre-Examination I acknowledge that I have acquired specialized knowledge about the NRC k e n date of my signature. I agree that I will not knowingly divulge any information ab by the NRC chief examiner. I understand that I am not to instruct, evaluate, or p administered these licensing examinations from this date until completion of ex authorized by the NRC. Furthermore, I am aware of the physical security measure procedures) and understand that violation of the conditions of this agreement may or an enforcement action against me or the facility licensee. I will immediately report to facility manag examination security may have been compromised.

2. Post-Examination To the best of my knowledge, I did not divulge to any unauthorized perso RC licensing examinations administered during the week(s) of : 2 / & & / / v From the date that I entered into this n of examination administration, I did not PRINTED NAME JOB TITLE / RESPONSIBI

9. --

IO. --

12. --

25 of 25 NUREG-1021, Draft Revision 9

ES-301 Operating Test Quality Checklist Form ES-301-3 I[

~

Facility: f ~ ) J l i ) . w Po: 51 f 3 Date of Examination: &y 3, im3 Operating Test Number:

I

/

lnitia

1. GENERAL CRITERIA a b*

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).

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

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

d. Overlap with the written examination and between different parts of the operating test is within acceptable limits. 9

e. It appears that the operating test will differentiate between competent and less-than-competent applicants at the designated license level. 9

2. WALK-THROUGH- CRITERIA

a. Each JPM includes the following, as applicable:

iE

. 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

- identificationof critical steps and their associated performance standards

- restrictions on the sequence of steps, if applicable eb. 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.

4c. At least 20 percent of the JPMs on each test are new or significantly modified.

3. S I M U L A T O R W CRITERIA I

I -E-t The associated simulator operating tests (scenario sets) have been reviewed in accordance with Form ES-3014and a copy is attached.

a. Author NOTE:

• The facility signature is not applicable for NRC-developedtests.

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

1 of 27 NUREG-1021, Draft Revision 9

ES-301 Simulator Scenario Quality Checklist Form ES-301-4 QUALITATIVE ATTRIBUTES Initials a b* c#

1. The initial conditions are realistic, in that some equipment andlor instrumentation may be out of service, but it does not cue the operators into expected events.

9

2. The scenarios consist mostly of related events. ?5 I

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 symptomslcues that will be visible to the crew 0

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.

Sequencing and timing of events is reasonable, and allows the examination team to obtain complete evaluation results commensuratewith the scenario 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 given.

0 E

8. The simulator modeling is not altered. E

9. The scenarios have been validated. Pursuant to 10 CFR 55.46(d), any open sirnulator performance deficiencies have been evaluated to ensure that functional fidelity is maintained

S-301 Transient and Event Checklist Form ES-301-5 As RO I SRo-I L As SRO 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.43.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 a p H c a n t ' h c m e n c e count toward the minimum requirement.

n Author:

NRC Reviewer:

1 of 27 NUREG-1021, Draft Revision 9

ES-301 competencies Checklist Form ES-301-6 Competencies I SCENARIO 1 2 3 4 1 2,3, 12 Comply With and 5 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 e ncy for every applicant.

Author: 1;1 g,

.)4ck50n ldd2~03

ES-401 Written Examination Form ES-40136 Quality Checklist

~~ ~

,vel: RO/@

Initial

a. NRC WAS referencedfor all questions

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 D

-other (explain)

6. Bank use meets limits (no more than 75 percent Bank Modified New from the bank at least 10 percent new, and the rest modified); enter the actual RO / SRO-only question distribution(s) at right 31 7 3/ 3 I 15 D

7. Between 50 and 60 percent of the questions on Memory CIA the RO exam are written at the comprehension/analysis level; the 60% &

SRO exam may exceed 60 percent if the randomly selected KlAs support the higher cognitive levels; enter the actual RO / SRO 30 7 95l /6 question distribution(s) at right

a. Referenceslhandouts provided do not give away answers

9. Question content conforms with specific KIA statements in the previously approved examination outline and is appropriate for the Tier to which they are assigned; deviations are justified IO. Question psychometric quality and format meet ES, Appendix B,guidelines 1 I. The exam contains +)&the required number of one-point, multiple choice items; the total is correct and agrees with value on cover sheet

,=

Date

a. Author It/tY/2*3

b. Facility Reviewer (*) "/A

c. NRC Chief Examiner (#) Ah0 Bhwed !L\@T -

d. NRC Regional Supervisor /& >Ly ' &%@ /A&- L Note: The facility reviewer's initialskignature are not applicable for NRC-developed examinations.

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

37 of 34 NUREG-1021, Draft Revision 9

ES-403 Written Examination Grading Form ES-403-1 Quality Checklist Date of Exam: td/,h 3 Exam Level: RO/SRO Initials T

3. Applicants' scores checked for

- (reviewers

--.- spot check > 25% o

5. All other failing examinations check Date a.

b.

C.

d.

._ 5 of 5 NUREG-I021 Draft Revision 9

~