ML041320474

Init Exam - 03/2004 - Draft Operating Exam Comments

ML041320474
Person / Time
Site:	Fort Calhoun
Issue date:	04/16/2004
From:	Gody A Operations Branch IV
To:	Ridenoure R Omaha Public Power District
References
50-285/04-301 50-285/04-301
Download: ML041320474 (5)

Text

JPM#

4.I; 1u;j;,s APPENDIX E - REGION IV IPERATING TEST JOB PERFORMANCE MEASURE QUALITY REVIEW MATRIX 6.

Explanation (See below for instructions)

Job- Minutia RO-2004-1 I I s 1 RO-2004-2 S RO-2004-3 S RO-2004-4 1 I s SRO-2004-1 S SRO-2004-2 S SRO-2004-3 I I

II s 1 I SRO-2004-4 S SRO-2004-5 Instructions for Completing Matrix This form is not contained in or required by NUREG-I021. Utilities are not required or encouraged to use it. The purpose of this form is to enhance regional consistency in reviewing operating tests. Additional information on these areas may be found in Examination Good Practices Appendix D. Check or mark any item@)requiring comment and explain the issue in the space provided.

1. Determine whether the task is dynamic (D) or static (S). A dynamic task is one that involves continuous monitoring and response to varying parameters. A static task is basically an system reconfiguration or realignment.

2. Determine level of difficulty (LOD) using established 1-5 rating scale. Levels 1 and 5 represent inappropriate (low or high) discriminatory level for the license being tested.

3.

Check the appropriate box when an attribute weakness is identified:

The initiating cue is not sufficiently clear to ensure the operator understands the task and how to begin.

The JPM does not contain sufficient cues that are objective (not leading).

All critical steps (elements) have not been properly identified.

Scope of the task is either too narrow (N) or too broad (B).

Excessive overlap with other part of operating test or written examination.

4.

Check the appropriate box when a job content error is identified:

Topics not linked to job content (e.g., disguised task, not required in real job).

Task is trivial and without safety significance.

5. Based on the reviewers judgment, is the JPM as written (U)nacceptable (requiring repair or replacement), in need of (E)ditorial enhancement, or (S)atisfactory?

6. Provide a brief description of problem in the explanation column. Provide conclusion on whether JPM SET criteria satisfied (Le., number/distribution of safety functions, A.3 and A.4 integrated with parts BIC, Admin topics per section meet ES).

- Page 1 -

APPENDIX E - REGION IV OPERATING TEST JOB PERFORMANCE MEASURE QUALITY REVIEW MATRIX

3. Attributes 4. Job 5. 6.

JPM# lDyn Content UIE Explanation Errors IS (See below for instructions)

Cue Critic SCOF Ove Jo Minuti s a1 e r- b- a Step (NIB lap Link S

S OOIORW D X E this is written as if it will really be performed (vice simulated) in the plant -

is this really the intent (to change valve positions in the plant during the exam)? Response: No, the cues will be edited.

X E steps 2 and 3 have, as a critical task, to ensure... which is just like verify... - it is difficult to evaluate whether someone has ensured or verified something that is already in the correct position, so it really shouldnt be a critical task unless it requires the applicant to take observable actions that, if not taken, would jeopardize the success of the task. Response: Agree, they are not critical tasks.

S E initiating cue should tell the applicant that this is a time-critical JPM.

Response: Agree, it will be added.

S 0613M I D S 0621M I I

D S S

S I

S

- Page 1 -

Instructions for Completing Matrix This form is not contained in or required by NUREG-1021. Utilities are not required or encouraged to use it. The purpose of this form is to enhance regional consistency in reviewing operating tests. Additional information on these areas may be found in Examination Good Practices Appendix D. Check or mark any item(s) requiring comment and explain the issue in the space provided.

1. Determine whether the task is dynamic (D) or static (S). A dynamic task is one that involves continuous monitoring and response to varying parameters. A static task is basically an system reconfiguration or realignment.

2. Determine level of difficulty (LOD) using established 1-5 rating scale. Levels 1 and 5 represent inappropriate (low or high) discriminatory level for the license being tested.

3. Check the appropriate box when an attribute weakness is identified:

The initiating cue is not sufficiently clear to ensure the operator understands the task and how to begin.

The JPM does not contain sufficient cues that are objective (not leading).

All critical steps (elements) have not been properly identified.

Scope of the task is either too narrow (N) or too broad (B).

Excessive overlap with other part of operating test or written examination.

4. Check the appropriate box when a job content error is identified:

Topics not linked to job content (e.g., disguised task, not required in real job).

Task is trivial and without safety significance.

5. Based on the reviewers judgment, is the JPM as written (U)nacceptable (requiring repair or replacement), in need of (E)ditorial enhancement, or (S)atisfactory?

6. Provide a brief description of problem in the explanation column. Provide conclusion on whether JPM SET criteria satisfied (i.e., number/distribution of safety functions, A.3 and A.4 integrated with parts B/C, Admin topics per section meet ES).

- Page 2 -

S \DRS\OB\EXAMS\fcs\March2004exam\FCS-03-2004-Scenario-QualityRvw.wpd Scen 1 2 10 Explanation (See below for instructions)

Set ES TS 1

2 eliminated to conform with the attributes list (2-3 critical tasks).

3 X guidance from HQ confirms that ISRO-2 must face a scenario in the RO 4

nstructions for Completing Matrix rhis form is not contained in or required by NUREG-1021. Utilities are not required or encouraged to use it. The purpose of this form is to enhance regional

onsistency in reviewing operating test scenario sets. Additional information on these areas may be found in Examination Good Practices Appendix D. Check

)r mark any item(s) requiring comment and explain the issue in the space provided.

I. ES: ES-301 checklists 4, 5, & 6 satisfied.

!. TS: Set includes SRO TS actions for each SRO, with required actions explicitly detailed.

1. Crit: Each manipulation or evolution has explicit success criteria documented in Form ES-D-2.

1. IC: Out of service equipment and other initial conditions reasonably consistent between scenarios and not predictive of scenario events and actions.

). Pred: Scenario sequence and other factors avoid predictability issues.

). TL: Time line constructed, including event and process triggered conditions, such that scenario can run without routine examiner cuing.

I L/C: Length and complexity for each scenario in the set is reasonable for the crew mix being examined, such that all applicants have reasonably similar exposure and events are needed for evaluation purposes.

I. Eff: Sequence of events is reasonably efficient for examination purposes, especially with respect to long delays or interactions.

1. Based on the reviewers judgment, is the scenario set as written (tJ)nacceptable (requiring repair or replacement), in need of (E)ditorial enhancement, 01 (S)atisfactory?

0. Provide a brief description of problem in the explanation column

II APPENDIX N - REGION IV OPERATING TEST SCENARIO REVIEW MATRIX I RESPONSE: THE CRITICAL TASKS WILL BE REVIEWED AND ELIMINATED IF THEY DO NO MEET THE CRITERIA. FOR NUMBER 3, THE SCHEDULE WILL BE REVISED TO GIVE THE INSTANT A POSITION AS RO. FOR NUMBER 4, THE TASK NUMBERS MEET THE CRITERIA.

- Page 2 -