ML041760152

Various Checklists for D.C. Cook Initial Examination - March 2004

ML041760152
Person / Time
Site:	Cook
Issue date:	03/15/2004
From:	Lanksbury R NRC/RGN-III/DRS/OLB
To:	Nazar M American Electric Power Co
References
50-315/OL04-301, 50-316/OL04-301
Download: ML041760152 (17)

Text

VARIOUS CHECKLISTS FOR THE D. C. COOK INITIAL EXAMINATION - MARCH 2004

ES-201 Examination Preparation Checklist Form ES-201-1 Target Date*

11 Facility: DC Cook Units 1 and 2 Chief Exam iner's Initials Task Description / Reference Date of Examination: March 15-25, 2004

-120

-120

-120

[-go]

-75

-70

-45

-30

~~~~~~~

~

w mu w3

/(/A

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

3.

4. Corporate notification letter sent (C.2.d)

Facility contact briefed on security & other requirements (C.2.c)

15. Reference material due (C.l.e; C.3.c)]

6. Integrated examination outline(s) due (C.l.e & f; C.3.d)

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

8. Proposed examinations, supporting documentation, and reference materials due (C.l.e, f, g & h; C.3.d)

Preliminary license applications due (C.l.I; C.2.g; ES-202)

WlH

/tm MQ5

9.

11

-1 80 I 1. Examination administration date confirmed (C.l.a; C.2.a & b)

I Izi@

-1 4

-1 4

10. Final license applications due and assignment sheet prepared (C.l.I; C.2.g; ES-202)

Vk@

review (C.2.h; C.3.f)

MGG

11. Examination approved by NRC supervisor for facility licensee I

1

-7

-7

-7

13. Written examinations and operating tests approved by NRC supervisor (C.2.i; C.3.h) rn

14. Final applications reviewed; assignment sheet updated; waiver

15. Proctoring/written exam administration guidelines reviewed with facility licensee and authorization granted to give written exams (if applicable) (C.3.k) letters sent (C.2.g, ES-204)

-14 I 12. Examinations reviewed with facility licensee (C.1.j; C.2.f & h; C.3.g) I

&f@

I

16. Approved scenarios, job performance measures, and questions 11

-7 I

distributed to NRC examiners (C.3.i)

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.

[ ]

\\

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

1.

Pre-Examination CCrv&2L@f/NE r&+w 1

I acknowledge that I have acquired specialized knowledge about the NRC licensing examinations scheduled for the week(s) of 54&

f :l:L$

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 licensees 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 during the unauthorized persons any information concerning the NRC licensing examinations administered date that I entered into this security agreement until the completion of examination administration, I did not to those applicants who were administered these licensing examinations, except as specifically noted below and authorized by the NRC.

DATE SIGNATURE (2) DATENOTE A

PRINTED NAME JOB TITLE / RESPONSIBILITY SIGNATURE (1)

NOTES:

NUREG-1021, Revision 8, Supplement 1 24 of 24

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

1.

Pre-Examination I acknowledge that I have acquired specialized knowledge about the NRC licensing examinations scheduled for the week@) of 3/22,/~

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 licensees 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.

as of the To the best of my knowled$, I did not 8vulge to any unauthorized persons any information concerning the NRC licensing examinations administered during the week@) 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.

PRINTED NAME JOB TITLE / RESPONSIBILITY SIGNATURE (1)

DATE SIGNATURE (2) WTENOTE NOTES:

NUREG-1021, Revision 8, Supplement 1 24 of 24

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

1.

Pre-Examination I acknowledge that I have acquired specialized knowledge about the NRC licensing examinations scheduled for the week@) of y/$)Cf 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 NRCFurthermore, 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 3 Y'-

Z z J Z a a Y 3 t4/z!m-c/

To the best of my knowledg, I did not divulge to any unauthorized persons any information concerning the NRC licensing examinations administered during the week@) of 1

. 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 NUREG-1021, Revision 8, Supplement 1 24 of 24

ES-301 ODeratina Test Qualitv Checklist Form ES-301-3 I/ Facility: DC Cook Nuclear Station Date of Examination: 03/15/2004 Operating Test Number:

1. GENERAL CRITERIA Initi: I The operating test conforms with the previously approved outline; changes are consistent with samolina reauirements (e.a.. 10 CFR 55.45. ooerational imoortance. safetv function distribution).

b.

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

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

C.

Overlap with the written examination and between operating test categories is within acceptable limits.

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

I

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 specific performance criteria that include:

designation if deemed to be time critical by the facility licensee

- 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 predominantly open reference and meet the criteria in Attachment 1 of ES-301.

acceptable lirnits,(30% for the walk-through) and do not compromise test integrity.

C.

Repetition from operating tests used during the previous licensing examination is within w& P At least 20 percent of the JPMs on each test are new or significantly modified.

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.

C#

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.

23 of26 NUREG-1021, Revision 8, Supplement 1 I

LS-301 Simulator Scenario Quality Checklist Form tS-301-4 TARGET QUANTITATIVE AmRlBUTES (PER SCENARIO; SEE SECTION D.4.D)

1.

Total malfunctions (58)

2.

Malfunctions after EOP entry (1-2)

3.

Abnormal events (2-4)

4.

Major transients (1-2)

5.

6.

EOPs enteredlrequiring substantive actions (1-2)

EOP contingencies requiring substantive actions (0-2)

7.

Critical tasks (2-3)

Facility: DC Cook Nuclear Station Date of Exam: 3/15/04 Scenario Numbers: 01/02/05 Operating Test No.:=

Actual Attributes 61616 21212 41414 1 I1 1 1 21211 O / l I l 21212 QUALITATIVE ATTRIBUTES

1.

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

The scenarios consist mostlv of related events.

2.

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 applicable)

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.

The events are valid with regard to physics and thermodynamics.

Sequencing and timing of events is reasonable, and allows the examination team to obtain complete evaluation results commensurate with the scenario objectives.

If time compression techniques are used, the scenario summary clearly so indicates. Operators have sufficient time to cany out expected activities without undue time constraints. Cues are aiven.

4.

5.

6.

7.

Initials =IF NUREG-1021, Revision 8, Supplement I 24 of 26

ES-301 Transient and Event Checklist Form ES-301-5 OPERATING TEST NO.:DC Cook 2004 Set 1 As RO Reactivity 1

1 1

1 Normal 0

Instrument /

2 3

4 2

Major 1

1 1

1 Component instructions:

(1)

Enter the operating test number and Form ES-D-1 event numbers for each evolution type.

As SRO Author:

NRC Reviewer:

Reactivity 0

1 1

1 Normal 1

1 1

1 Instrument /

2 6

6 6

Component Major 1

1 1

1 (2)

Reactivity manipulations may be conducted under normal or confro//ed abnormal conditions (refer to Section D.4.d) but must be significant per Section C.2.a of Appendix D.

Whenever practical, both instrument and component malfunctions should be included; only those that require verifiable actions that provide insight (3) imum requirement.

SRO-U NUREG-1021, Revision 8, Supplement 1 Reactivity 0

Normal 1

Instrument /

2 Major 1

Component

E S-30 1 Competencies Checklist Form ES-301-6 DC Cook 2004 Simulator Exams Set l(a)

Competencies Position ScenarioCookO4-Understand and Interpret Annunciators and Alarms Diagnose Events and Conditions Understand Plant and System Response Crews 5,6 SCENARIO SRO RO SRO 01 02 05 3,4S 3,6, 2,3, A 7 7 3 43, 73, 9

3/45 3,6, 23,

,6,7 7,8 47, 8,9 3,43 3-4, 23,

,6,7, 67, 4 3,

8,9 8

7,8, 9

Applicant # I SRO-I Comply With and Use Procedures (1) 3,4,5 34, 23,

,73, 67, 45, 9

8 73, 9

Operate Control 3,4, 6.7, Boards (2)

Communicate and Interact With the Crew Demonstrate Supervisory I Ability (3) 8 2 3 4 3,6, 23, 5 7,

7 3 43, 8 3 78, 9

23,4 23, 5 7 43, I

I I 73:s I

3,4,5 Comply With and 2

Use Tech. Specs. (3)

Notes:

Applicant #2 Applicant #3 1

RO SRO-I SCENARIO SCENARIO (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:

NRC Reviewer:

NUREG-I 021, Revision 8, Supplement 1

ES-301 Competencies Checklist Form ES-301-6 Comply With and DC Cook 2004 Simulator Exams Set 1 (b) 1,5,6 2,3,7

,7,8

,8 Crew 4 Operate Control Applicant #I 1

Ro 1,2,5 2,3,8

,7,8 SCENARIO Position Scenario Cook06 Competencies Understand and Interpret Annunciators and Alarms Diagnose Events and Conditions Understand Plant and System Response Use Procedures (1 )

I I

I I

Boards (2)

I I

I I

I 2.;7 I 2, y I 1

Communicate and Interact With the Crew Demonstrate Supervisory Ability (3)

Comply With and Use Tech. Specs. (3)

Notes:

Applicant #2 RO SCENARIO u

(I)

Includes Technical Specification compliance for an RO.

(2) Optional for an SRO-U.

(3) Only applicable to SROs.

Applicant #3 SCENARIO 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:

NRC Reviewer:

d d L NUREG-I 021, Revision 8, Supplement 1

LS-301 Simulator Scenario Quality Checklist Form tS-301-4 QUALITATIVE ATTRIBUTES Initials a

b*

c#

1.

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

The scenarios consist mostly of related events.

Each event description consists of

2.

3.

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)

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.

The events are valid with regard to physics and thermodynamics.

Sequencing and timing of events is reasonable, and allows the examination team to obtain complete evaluation results commensurate with the scenario objectives.

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.

The simulator modeling is not altered.

I 4.

5.

6.

7.

a.

The scenarios have been validated. Any open simulator performance deficiencies have been evaluated to ensure that functional fidelity is maintained while running the planned scenarios.

Critical tasks (2-31 NUREG-1021, Revision 8, Supplement 1 24 of 26

ES-301 Transient and Event Checklist Form ES-301-5 Reactivity Normal Instrument /

Component Major 0

1 1

1 1

1 2

6 6

1 1

1 OPERATING Evolution Type

-EST NO.:DC Cook 2004 Set 2 Scenario Number Applicant Type Reactivity I

I Normal RO Instrument /

Component Major SRO-U Instructions:

(1)

(2)

Enter the operating test number and Form ES-D-1 event numbers for each evolution type.

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.

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

Author:

NRC Reviewer:

NUREG-1021, Revision 8, Supplement 1

ES-301 Competencies Checklist Form ES-301-6 Communicate and Interact With the Crew Demonstrate Supervisory Ability (3)

Comply With and Use Tech. Specs. (3)

DC Cook 2004 Simulator Exams Set 2

,6,7, 6 7,

8,9 8,9 2,3,5 2,4,5 67,,6,7, 9

8,9 2,3,5 2,4,5 Crews 1,2,3 Applicant # I SRO-U Applicant #2 Applicant #3 RO SCENARIO (1

SCENARIO Notes:

(I)

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:

NRC Reviewer:

NUREG-1021, Revision 8, Supplement 1

ES-401 Written Examination Form.ES-401-7 Quality Checklist

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 question distribution at right Facility: DC Cook Nuclear Stations Date of Exam: 03/15/2004 Exam Level:

Initial Bank. Modified New

-55" 19 *3 7-25 I

Item Description

1.

2.

Questions and answers technically accurate and applicable to facility

a. NRC WAS referenced for all questions

b. Facility learning objectives referenced as available

7.

Between 50 and 60 percent of the questions on the exam (including 10 new questions) are written at the comprehension/analysis level; enter the actual question distribution at right a I b* I c#

Memory CIA Q6-ktd

• Pfs5 4 7 c3

?%2iJ I

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 he examinations were developed independently: or f

the licensee certifies that there is no duplication: or other (explain)

8.

Referencesfhandouts provided do not give away answers

@a l l

9.

Question content conforms with sDecific WA statements in the Dreviouslv 1

1 I

approved examination outline and is appropriate for the Tier to'which thky are assigned; deviations are justified

10.

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

• ad

11.

The exam contains 100, one-point, multiple choice items; the total is correct and agrees with value on cover sheet

a. Author

b. Facility Reviewerr)

Note:

• The facility reviewer's initaldsignature is not applicable for NRC-developed examinations.

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

NUREG-1021, Revision 8 42 of 45

ES-401 Written Examination Quality Checklist Form ES-401-7 Facility: DC Cook Nuclear Stations Date of Exam: 0311 512004 Exam Level: SRO Item Descriotion

1.

Questions and answers technicallv accurate and aoolicable to facilitv

2.

a. NRC WAS referenced for all questions

b. Facility learning objectives referenced as available RO/SRO overlap is no more than 75 percent, and SRO questions are appropriate per Section D.2.d of ES-401 Question selection and duplication from the last two NRC licensing exams appears consistent with a systematic sampling process 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

3.

4.

5.

other (explain)

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 question distribution at right Between 50 and 60 percent of the questions on the exam (including 10 new questions) are written at the comprehensionlanalysis level; enter the actual question distribution at right

7.

Bank I Modified I New I

I Memory *

8.

9.

Referenceslhandouts provided do not give away answers Question content conforms with specific WA statements in the previously approved examination outline and is appropriate for the Tier to which they are assianed: deviations are iustified IO.

11.

Question psychometric quality and format meet ES, Appendix B, guidelines The exam contains 100, one-point, multiple choice items; the total is correct and agrees with value on cover sheet Initial *

a. Author

b. Facility Reviewerr)

Note:

• The facility reviewer's initalslsignature is not applicable for NRC-developed examinations.

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

NUREG-I 021, Revision 8 42 of 45

ES-403 Written Examination Grading Form ES-403-1 Quality Checklist Item Description Facility:

&oI<

Date of Exam 3/L4bL/ Exam L e v e l m S R B I

Initials I

1 a

I b

l C

4.

Grading for all borderline cases (80% +/- 2%) reviewed in detail Gfi&

8 U q e y 3 J / o ) K All other failing examinations checked to ensure that grades are justified

5.

6.

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

1.

Clean answer sheets copied before grading W ' M 6p N/k-l?A M

A q

By'@ P t

2.

Answer key changes and question deletions justified and documented

3.

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

a. Grader

(*)

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 I

Facility:, d C h m d Date of Exam 3/a7/.L/l Exam Level:-R&$

1 Item Description

1.

2.

Clean answer sheets copied before grading Answer key changes and question deletions justified and documented

~

3.

4.

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

Grading for all borderline cases (80% +/- 2%) reviewed in detail

5.

All other failing examinations checked to ensure that grades are justified Performance on missed questions checked for training deficiencies and wording problems; evaluate validity of questions missed by half or more of the applicants

6.

I Initial!

I C

oe bp 64 Printed Name / Signature Date II 11 a. Grader

b. Facility Reviewer(*)

&-A7 6; 4/9/&

ci 122 bv

c. NRC Chief Examiner (*)

d. NRC Supervisor (*)

(*)

The facility reviewers 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