ML041530463

Final Qa/Related Forms

ML041530463
Person / Time
Site:	Ginna
Issue date:	04/02/2004
From:	Maciuska F Rochester Gas & Electric Corp
To:	Conte R NRC/RGN-I/DRS/OSB
Conte R
References
50-244/04-301
Download: ML041530463 (16)

Text

ES-201 Examination Preparation Checklist Form ES-201-1 Target Chief Date* Task Description / Reference Examiner's Initials

-180 1. Examination administration date confirmed ((2.1 .a; C.2.a & b) TF

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

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

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

-75 6. Integrated examination outline(s), including Forms ES-201-2, ES-201-3, ES-301-1, ES-301-2, ES-301-5, ES-D-l's, ES-401-112, ES-401-3, and ES-401-4, as applicable, due (C.1 .e & f; C.3.d) TF

-70 7. Examination outline(s) reviewed by NRC and feedback provided to facility licensee (C.2.h; C.3.e)

8. Proposed examinations (including written, walk-through JPMs, and scenarios, as applicable), supporting documentation (including Forms ES-301-3, ES-301-4, ES-301-5, ES-301-6, and ES-401-6), and reference materials due (C.l .e, f, g & h; C.3.d)

9. Preliminary license applications (NRC Form 398's) due (C.l .I; C.2.g; ES-202)

-14 I O . Final license applications due (C.l .I; e E S - 2 0 2 )

-14 11. Examination approved by NRC supervisor for facility licensee review (C.2.h; C.3.f) TF 11 -14 I 12. Examinations reviewed with facility licensee (C.1.j; C.2.f & h; C.3.g) I -its I) -7 I 13. Written examinations and operating tests approved by NRC supervisor (C.2.i; C.3.h)

I -7 I 14. Final applications reviewed;

- examination approval and w a m k c h m e n t 4, ES-204) -7% I

15. Proctoring/written exam administration

. . guidelines reviewed with facility licensee 3 C.3.k)

~ ~~

-7 16. Approved scenarios, job performance measures, and questions distributed to NRC examiners (C.3.i) 49 of 27 NUREG-1021,Revision 9

ES-201 Examination Outline Quality Checklist Form ES-201-2 Facility: .RE G AAR Date of Examination: B4/0s/ao@i Item 1 Task Description I ,Initial; a b* c#

W

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

Kd w I

T '

b. Assess whether the outline was systematically and randomly preparedin accordance with Section D.1 of ES-401 and whether all WA categories are appropriately sampled. Kd w T c. Assess whether the outline over-emphasizes any systems, evolutions, or generic topics.

F I d. Assess whether the justificationsfor deselected or rejected WA statements are appropriate. (cd c ~~

<c

2. a. Using Form ES-301-5, verify that the proposed scenario sets cover the required number of normal evolutions, instrumentand 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@)*,

and scenarios will not be repeated on subsequent days.

re distributed among the safety function groupings as specified in ES-301, conducted in a low-power or shutdown condition, for SRO-U) of the tasks require the applicant to implement an alternate path specific priorities (including PRA and IPE insights) are covered in the

a. Author

b. Facility Reviewer (*)

c. NRC Chief Examiner (#)

d. NRC Supervisor Note:

• Not applicable for NRC-developedexaminations.

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

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

1. Pre-Examination I acknowledge that I have acquired specialized knowledge about the NRC licensing examinations scheduled for the week(s) of April !jth2004 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 April Sth 2004 . 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

1. -Kenneth Masker -Lead Exam Developer

&; . -.TAffe APE&

Notes: This Security Agreement

ES-301 Operating Test Quality Checklist Form ES-301-3 11 Facility: R.E. Ginna Date of Examination: 4/5/04 Operating Test Number: 04-1 r I lnitia

1. GENERAL CRITERIA a b*

I

2. WALK-THROUGH CRITERIA

a. Each JPM includes the following, as applicable:

I

. 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 successfulcompletion of the task

- identification of critical steps and their associated performance standards

- restrictions on the sequence of steps, if applicable 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.

3. SIMULATOR CRITERIA - --

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

a. Author - Date b Facility Reviewerr)

c. NRC Chief Examiner (#)

d. NRC Supervisor v

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

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

ES-301 Simulator Scenario Quality Checklist Form ES-301-4 ing Test No.:04-1 lnitia

8. The simulator modeling is not altered.

9. The scenarios have been validated. Pursuant to 10 CFR 55.46(d), any open simulator performance deficiencies have been evaluated to ensure that functionalfidelity is maintained while running the planned scenarios.

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.

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

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).

TARGET QUANTITATIVE ATTRIBUTES (PER SCENARIO; SEE SECTION D5.d) Actual Attributes

1. Total malfunctions (5-8) 7 I 7 1 7

2. Malfunctions after EOP entry (1-2) 3 1 1 1 2

3. Abnormal events ( 2 4 ) 4 1 5 1 4

4. Major transients (1-2) 1 I 1 I 1

5. EOPs enteredlrequiring substantive actions (1-2) 2 1 2 1 1

6. EOP contingencies requiring substantive actions (0-2) 0 1 0 1 1

7. Critical tasks (2-3) 21 4 1 2

ES-301 Simulator Scenario Quality Checklist Form ES-301-4 Facility: R.E. Ginna Date of Exam: 4/5/04 Scenario Numbers:4 (spare) Opera 9 Test No.:04-01 QUALITATIVE ATTRIBUTES Initials

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.

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 symptomslcues that will be visible to the crew 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.

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 complete evaluation results commensurate with 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

8. The simulator modeling is not altered.

9. The scenarios have been validated. Pursuant to 10 CFR 55.46(d), any open simulator L.

performance deficiencies have been evaluated to ensure that functionalfidelity is maintained while running the planned scenarios.

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.

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

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 difficulty is appropriate to support licensing decisions for each crew position.

I TARGET QUANTITATIVE ATTRIBUTES (PER SCENARIO; SEE SECTION D5.d) Actual Attributes

1. Total malfunctions (5-8) 7

2. Malfunctions after EOP entry (1-2) 1

3. Abnormal events (2-4) 5

4. Major transients (1-2) 1

5. EOPs enteredlrequiring substantive actions (1-2) 2

6. EOP contingencies requiring substantive actions (0-2) 1

7. Critical tasks (2-3) 2

ES-301 Transient and Event Checklist Form ES-301-5 A licant E lution Scenario Number YYPe 'Ylpe W,n%Y 1 2 3 4 RO BOP RO BOP RO BOP RO BOP Reactivity 1*

RO 1 Normal I* 4 Instrument / 4* 2, 216, Component 4, 7 7

Major 1 6 8 Reactivity 1* 4 RO 2 Normal 1* 1 I8om strument /

ponent 4* 318 1, 3,

5 Major 1 6 6 Reactivity 1* 4 RO 3 Normal I* 5 IEom strument ponent/ 4* 213% 1, 7 3, 6

Major 1 6 8 Continued on the Next page.

Scenario Ev lution S; pe yljilyeu 1 2 Reactivity 0 Normal I* I SRO-U 1 I strument / 2* 2,3,4,7,8

&omponent Major 1 6 Reactivity 0 1 SRO-~2 1 component I Normal I strumenti I*

2* 1 I 4

I Major I 1 I 1 6 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 re verifiable actions that provide insight unt toward the minimum requirement.

Author:

L y NRC Reviewer:

ES-301 Competencies Checklist Form ES-301-6 L.

Exam: Ginna 04-1 RO #I RO BOP Competencies Interpret / Diagnose Events and Conditions Comply With and Use Procedures (1)

Operate Control Boards (2)

Communicate and Interact Demonstrate Supervisory Abilitv (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 t y p m d enter one or more event numbers that will allow the for every applicant.

Author:

NRC Reviewer: J& $Ax

ES-301 Competencies Checklist Form ES-301-6 Y

Exam: Ginna 04-1 RO #2 RO BOP Competencies Interpret / Diagnose Events and Conditions Comply With and Use Procedures (1)

Operate Control Boards (21 Communicate and Interact Demonstrate Supervisory Abilitv (3)

Comply With and Use Tech. Specs. (3)

--- Notes:

(1) includes Technical Specification compliance for an RO.

(2) Optional for an SRO-U.

53) 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 eve ompetency for every applicant.

Author:

NRC Reviewer:

ES-301 Competencies Checklist Form ES-301-6 Exam: Ginna 04-1 RO #3 RO BOP Competencies SCENARl0 Interpret / Diagnose Events and Conditions Comply With and Use Procedures (1)

Operate Control Boards (2)

Communicate and Interact 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.

53) Only applicable to SROs.

Instructions:

Circle the applicants license type an-er one or more event numbers that will allow the examiners to evaluate ev Author:

/

NRC Reviewer: . i

ES-301 Competencies Checklist Form ES-301-6 Exam: Ginna 04-1 SRO-U- #I I I Competencies Demonstrate Supervisory Ability (3)

I I Comply With and z4,5 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:

NRC Reviewer: 4& $A

SRO-lJ42 SRO Competencies SCENARIO 1 2 3 4 Interpret / Diagnose Events 1,2,4,5 and Conditions Comply With and 1,2,3,5,6 Use Procedures (1)

Operate Control Boards (2)

Communicate and 1,2,3,4,5,6 Interact Demonstrate Supervisory 2,4,6,7 Ability (3)

Comply With and 375 Use Tech. Specs. (3)

Instructions:

Circle the applicant's licen one or more event numbers that will allow the examiners to ev able competency for every applicant.

Author:

NRC Reviewer: &A

ES-401 Written Examination Form ES-40?-6 Quality Checklist Facility: R.E. Ginna Date of Exam: 4/5/04 Exam Level: Bott Initial Item Description a -b* c#

1. Questions and answers technically accurate and applicable to facility

2. a. NRC WAS referenced for all questions

b. Facility learning objectives referenced as available

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 X 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 RO / 45/15 612 2418 SRO-onlv auestion distribution(s\ at riaht I I

7. Between 50 and 60 percent of the questions on Memory CIA the RO exam are written at the comprehensionlanalysis level; the SRO exam may exceed 60 percent if the randomly selected WAS support the higher cognitive 34/11 41 114 levels; enter the actual RO / SRO question distribution(s) at right

8. Referenceslhandouts provided do not give away answers U

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

10. Question psychometric quality and format meet ES, Appendix B, guidelines

11. The exam contains the required number of one-point, multiple choice items; the total is correct and agrees with value on cover sheet

a. Author

b. Facility Reviewer (')

c. NRC Chief Examiner (#)

&g

d. NRC Regional Supervisor

• 0-L

/

Note:

• The facility reviewer's initials/signature are not applicable for NRC-developed examinations,

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

ES-403 Written Examination Grading Form ES-403-1 Qualitv Checklist Facility: R.E. Ginna Date of Exam: 4/2/04 Exam Level: SRO I

Item Description a b

- C

1. Clean answer sheets copied before grading KM 4NTF

2. Answer key changes and question deletions justified and documented

3. Applicants scores checked for addition errors 3UN (reviewers spot check > 25% of examinations) TF Grading for all borderline cases (80 +/- 2% overall and 70 +I-4% on the SRO-only) reviewed in detail A 4 flp N.AZ 1 5. All other failing examinations checked to ensure that grades are iustified ~~ ~ ~~ ~~

6. Performance on missed questions checked for training deficiencies and wording problems; evaluate validity of F questions missed by half or more of the applicants

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

5 of 5 NUREG-1021, Draft Revision 9

ES-403 Written Examination Grading Form ES-403-1 Quality Checklist Facility: R.E. Ginna Date of Exam: 4/2/04 Exam Level: RO Initials Item Description a l b l c

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-only) reviewed in detail

5. All other failing examinations checked to ensure that grades are iustified ~ ~~

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 A Date

/ I

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

50f5 NUREG-I 021, Draft Revision 9