ML042670513

Init Exam - 05/2004 - Public Forms

ML042670513
Person / Time
Site:	Wolf Creek
Issue date:	05/13/2004
From:	Gody A Operations Branch IV
To:	Muench R Wolf Creek
References
50-482/04-301 50-482/04-301
Download: ML042670513 (16)

Text

ES-201 Examination Outline Quality Checklist Form ES-201-2 Facility: Wolf Creek Generating Station Date of Examination: 05/10104 Task Description Initials Item a b* c#

I.

W ordance with R

I T

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

2.

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

c. To the extent possible, assess whether the outline(s) conform(s) with the qualitative and quantitative criteria specified on Form ES-3014 and described in Appendix D.

3. a. Verify that:

(1) the outline(s) contain(s) the required number of control room and in-plant tasks, W (2) no more than 30% of the test material is repeated from the last NRC examination, I (3)f no tasks are duplicated from the applicants audit test@), and T (4) no more than 80% of any operating test is taken directly from the licensees exam banks.

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) 4-6 (2-3 for SROU) of the tasks require the applicant to implement an alternate path procedure, (4) one in-plant task tests the applicants 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 covered. kv RM d.

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 subsequent days. I;.PQkW

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

G E b. Assess whether the 10 CFR 55.41143 and 55.45 sampling is appropriate. p [h #I N

E R

c. Ensure that WA importance ratings (except for plant-specific priorities) are at least 2.5. es thd@

A d. Check for duplication and overlap among exam sections. pJ4 R h d9 L

e. Check the entire exam for balance of coverage. pli/L+9

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

PriateQNameA Sianature Date

a. Author

b. Facility Reviewerr)

c. Chief Examiner(#)

d. NRC Supervisor

(*) Not applicable for NRC-developed examinations.

(#) Independent NRC reviewer initial items in Column c; chief examiner concurrence required.

WCNOC NRC Written Examination Quality Assurance Checklist Form ES-40 1-6 Initials Item Description I a Ib*lcc#

I I

1. Questions and answers technically accurate and applicable to facility Ifyq'"lr(&,

I' I " I.

2. a. NRC WASreferenced for all questions

b. Facility learning objectives referenced as available 3.

4.

i

5. Question duplication from the license screeninglaudit exam was controlled as indicated below (check the item that applies) and appears appropriate:

_--X 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 other (explain)

I I I

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 RO/SRO ROISRO ROISRO 174 question distribution(s) at right 25 I 4 413 4 6 1 18

7. Between 50 and 60 percent of the questions on the RO exam are written at the comprehensiodanalysis level; the SRO exam c m Memory @!

may exceed 60 percent if the randomly selected WAS support the higher cognitive levels; enter the actual RO ISRO question RO 40=53% RO 35=$$v /$ I distribution(s) at right SRO 1 4 ~ 5 6 % SRO 11=44%

8.

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 I@ llJ&!i

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

a. Author Robert L. Acree I Y/A /&AM/ 5/3/04

b. Facility Reviewer (*) Mona Guyer I &qL*-A&,,n/ I 5/3/04

c. Chief Examiner (#) 'TJl;onas 6 S f e t k o / -lcpn*s/ 4- &

d. NRC Supervisor k.60pr (

Note:

• The facility reviewer's initialslsignature are not applicable for NRC-developed examinations.

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

1

ES-301 ES-301-3

1. GENERAL CRITERIA TpF Initial:

t le.

AA &

I

- System response and other examiner cues I -

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. IW I c. At least 20 percent of the JPMs and questions on each test are new or significantly modified. lbm 7 -

~

3. SIMIULATOR CRITERIA - I -

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

I1 Printed NAmed/ Signature Date

a. Author

b. Facility Reviewer(*)

c. NRC Chief Examiner(#) 4/.7/*f

d. NRC Supervisor 5h/{

Note:

• Not applicable for NRC-developed examinations.

24 of27 NUREG- 1021, Draft Revision 9

~

ES-301 Simulator Scenario Quality Assurance Checklist ES-301-4 Facility: WCNOC Date of Exam: 05110104 Scenario Numbers: 11213 Operating Test No: One Initial QUALITATIVE ATTRIBUTES

-TTF-The initial conditions are realistic, in that some equipment andor instrumentation may be out of t

service, but it does not cue the operators into expected events.

The scenarios consist mostlv of related events.

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 "p

the symptomslcues that will be visible to the crew the expected operator actions (by shift position) the event termination point (if applicable)

I

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 performance deficiencies have been evaluated to ensure that functional fidelity 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 modified in accordance with Section D.5 of ES-301.

11. All individual operator competencies can be evaluated, as verified using 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 along with the simulator scenarios).

13. The level of difficulty is appropriate to support licensing decisions for each crew position.

TARGET QUANTITATIVE ATTRIBUTES (PER SCENARIO; SEE Actual Attributes SECTION D.5.d) 11213 - I-

1. Total Malfunctions (5-8) 7/l 8 I 5

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

3. Abnormal Events (2-4) 4 I 3 1 3

4. Major Transients (1-2) 1'1 1 I 1

5. EOPs enteredrequiring substantive actions (1-2) 11211

6. EOP contingencies requiring substantive actions (0-2) 1.10 IO .

7. Critical Tasks (2-3)  : 3 2 1 2 I/?

25 of 27 NUREG- 1021, Draft Revision 9

ES-301 Transient and Event Checklist Form ES-301-5 OPERATING TEST NO.: I for SRO-U, SRO-11, SRO-12, R01, R03, R05 Instrument/

I SRO-I I As SRO Instructions: (1) Enter the operating test number and Form ES-D-1 event numbers for each evolution type.

(2) Reactivit manipulations may be conducted under normal or controlled abnormayconditions (refer to Section D.5.d) but must be si nificant per Section C.2.a of Appendix D.

• Reactivity and normal evoluf!ons may be replaced with additional instrument or component malfunctions or 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 applicants compeAence count toward the minimum requirement.

Author:

NRC Reviewer: TomStetka Y L &- e /2ZIOq-

ES-301 Transient and Event Checklist Form ES-301-5 OPE ZATING TE ;T NO.: I for R02 and R04 I I Applicant Evolution Minimum Type Type Number 1 2 3 4 I*

I*

4*

I SRO-I Reactivity 0 Normal I*

SRO-U Instrumentl 2"

Component Major 1 Instructions: (1) Enter the operating test number and Form ES-D-1 event numbers for each evolution type.

(2) Reactivit manipulations may be conducted under normal or controlled abnormayconditions (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 or 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: Tom Stetka e I22IaciL

ES-301 Competencies Checklist Form ES-301-6 SRO RO BOP Competencies SCENARIO 1 SCENARIO SCENARIO 1 2 3 4 InterpretlDiagnose Events and Conditions Comply With and Use Procedures (1)

Operate Control Boards (2)

Communicate and Interact Demonstrate Supervisory Ability (3)

Comply With and 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 every applicaJle competency for every applicant.

Author: Robert L. Acree Yl22 187 NRC Reviewer: Tom Stetka 4 Id2 104

ES-301 Competencies Checklist Form ES-301-6 R02 and R04 I I SRO RO BOP Competencies SCENARIO 1 2 3 InterpretlDiagnose Events and Conditions Comply With and Use Procedures ( I )

Operate Control Boards (2)

Communicate and Interact Demonstrate Supervisory Ability (3)

Comply With and Use Tech. Specs. (3)

(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 applicab3 competency for every applicant.

Author: Robert L. Acree 4lZz I Q ~

NRC Reviewer: Tom Stetka  %$ 4 I22 I04

ES-403 Written Examination Grading Form ES-403-1 Quality Checklist Facility: Wolf Creek Date of Exam: 05/07/2004 Exam Level: RO/SRO Initials Item Description a b C r

I) 1. Clean answer sheets copied before grading I 2. Answer key changes and question deletions justified and documented

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

I 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 justified PP

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 /

a. Grader L. &&f, r .-

b. Facility Reviewer(*)fllcU&&O #j&4&/ 6

c. NRC Chief Examiner (*) TUam/lS ~ ~ E I K & / ~ ~

d. NRC Supervisor (*) , & s s r / o ~ & ~ ~ I/ (7. T&d, v

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

NUREG-I 021, Draft Revision 9

0 00 N

!?

2 4

?

a, 3.

3 z

0 3

z0 Z

0 0

E 0

(D 3

v)

(D c

m 3

z 11, Y

ru 0

0 P

z C

A rn 0

2 0

ru U

m 70 ca (D

(D

5. 2 cn.

0 3

CD d &

s0 Z

0 0

r 0

(D 3

rn (D

c a,

3 z

a, Y

h) 0 0

P Z

c A

rn 0

2 0

h) 2

!2

-0 9)

M (D

10 k

i z

'0 m

L m

Ill Ill

9'p MRY-14-2084 08:22RM TELS256 585 3850 IDSTRRINING OEPT PRGE:002 R=1005