ML050350313

Final QA, Exam Preparation/Related Forms (Folder 1)

ML050350313
Person / Time
Site:	Indian Point
Issue date:	10/22/2004
From:	Christman R Entergy Nuclear Northeast
To:	Conte R NRC/RGN-I/DRS/OSB
Conte R
Shared Package
ML041450472	List: ML043170077 ML043170098 ML043170125 ML043170132 ML043170136 ML043220135 ML050350303 ML050350313 NL-01-133, Licensee Post Exam Comments & NRC Resolution (Folder 1)
References
ES-201, NUREG-1021, Draft Rev 9
Download: ML050350313 (13)

Text

I Facility:

xp$-

Date of Examivation:

-45

-30 0 Qers.;nB : i O//& -ao/ou Examinations Developed by:

/

NRC (circle one) tur;+b 5 io /$&/@+

I

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

9. Preliminary license applications due (C. 1.I; C.2.g; ES-202) 7T-Target Date*

Task Description / Reference Chief Examiner's Initials 11

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

I TF 7c 11

-120 I 2. NRC examiners and facility contact assigned (C.1.d; C.2.e)

7. Examination outline(s) reviewed by NRC and feedback provided

-70 I

to facility licensee (C.2.h; C.3.e)

I w-

10. Final license applications due and assignment sheet prepared

-I4 I (C.1.l; C.2.g; ES-202)

11. Examination approved by NRC supervisor for facility licensee

-I4 I I review (C.2.h; C.3.f)

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.

[ ]

25 of 25 NUREG-1021, Draft Revision 9

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

1.

w R

I T

T E

N

2.

S -

a. Veriij that the outline@) fit(s) the appropriate modei per ES-401.

l@pqfl RC examination, ent an alternate path procedure.

ss whether plant-@c priorities (including P

1. Author

3. Facility Re-)

. Chief Examiner

j. NRCSupervisor NUREG-1021, Draft Revision 9 24 of 25

c.

Item ES-20 1 Examination Outline Quality Checklist Form ES-201-2 Initials a

b*

c#

Task Description N

1.

W

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

I I

I I

T

b. Assess whether the outline was systematically and randomly prepared in accordance with Section D.1 of ES-401 and whether all KIA categories are appropriately sampled.

r(A,qfi M b I

T

c. Assess whether the outline over-emphasizes any systems, evolutions, or generic topics.

F

~

2.

c L I d. Assess whether the justifications for deselected or rejected WA statements are appropriate.

I dal d8 I w b

~~

rn

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.

13 I

M

b. Assess whether there are enough scenario sets (and spares) to test the projected number 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 applicants' audit test(s)',

and scenarios will not be repeated on subsequent days.

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

3.

W I

T

a. Verify that:

(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(s), and (4) no more than 80% of any operating test is taken directly from the licensee's 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 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 covered w

number and mix of Date 7-LC g L (

a. Author G;)+c'tmn s.

A

b. Facility Reviewer (*)

c. NRC Chief Examiner (#)

d. NRC Supervisor r

I Note:

,is Q 4 IUREG-1021, Draft Revision 9.

Not applicable for NRC-developed examinations.

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

LLQ,J&&

s fbr Op "Le+-

~6*

oi;kG=

pr~'hdy 5 d b 24of25 d W ; d by L-E-On 'I(iq

ES-201 Examination Security Agreement Form ES-201-3 f 1 I4

1.

Pre-Examination I acknowledge that I have acquired specialized knowledge about the NRC licensing examinations scheduled for the week(s) of 10/11-22/04 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 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 knowledge, I did not divulge to any unauthorized persons any information concerning the NRC licensing examinations administered during the week(s) 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.

25 of 25 NUREG-1021, Draft Revision 9

42-14

'1.

I aekrrwrledge h t I k u s acquired rapeejalized knlaur1-e abwt the NRC liceneing examinations rackdulled fm the Imeekls) td I O!l 1 -22rQ4 a a af the date of my signature. I q r s e that I will rat kncwuiqly dwulge any infwmsrtiw, abut thetie exerninations b m y pernuns wvha hare not been authmizsd by the WRG did examiner. I underletard thal I am rWt tct inetrud, evaluate, or pmpidle perbrmance feedbadr bz~ tbee appIiart& echledulled In km adrninisZwed m i

licensi examinlatbne firm this elate until m p l e t i m o f mamination adniristratim, except as Bpiecifimlly noted below and authcrized by the WRC. Fu rthemxrrre, I am aware of the phyical security meaaums and rquimlenta (as d o c u m h d in the hciliiy licensee"s pmadures] and u r d e m n d that lridation of ths conditions of this agreement may result in canrrrilattirsn d the examinations a n d h an lerrfaroement aetbn again& me arthe fadlity licensee. I will immediately report ~IZI facility management or the NRC chief examiner any irrdiications ar suggrediitionti that mamindtion ~ u r i t y may haw been compromised.

To the beet d my knml~~@e, I did nat dirulge ba any unautbrired p ~ r ~ 3 r ~ e a rry i nfnrmtion conmri ng tlm M RC liceming ~vxmhatimlg adminiated durilpg the week@) of

. From the dab hat I erstrated into this murity ageanent until the mplrrtion arf examination adm ristmlim, I did not inertrud. pvaluaw, or p i d e pwficlrmance fsedbacktn t h a e applieanb whEl wem adrninistrard thsae libeming exam mtians. ex~ept aa spsrjficslly rsdtsd b e h end authorired by the NRC.

PRINTED M M E JOETlTLE f RESPONSIBILKY DATE NOTE 25 0125

ES2U 1 Wa mlnakn Security Agwrnsnt F#lm ES-2l 1-5

1.

I sdimrvledge that I hve acquired spedalirod knclnlledge &cut the NRC licensing examinatiors eWuled fcc tha waek(6) d 1011 1-22'04 as cd the date af my sgnslurrt. I qrse that I will ml knaviqtyddir'ulge any infmsrim abut lhaoe cxaminatbns lo any persons \\ a b have nct been aulhctizd by h e NRC chief examiner. I unjerst& that I am mt Ioinbtrud, maluate, or prolrae performsnae feedback bo t h e applicants scheduled IO te 3dmini6Lwed f h s e licendrg emrninatbnr irm this dale until mplelionof examination admd6ltalim, except 88 speufimlly ncted bdw o d sulhaizd by the NRC. Furhemre. I am a w e of rhe W&cd eecurity mawre6 and requirements (35 dmm-mled In lhs faailily licenw-6 procedures) and understand \\hat ddalion of Ihe condition5 of Ihia agreemenl msy nsull In cenor?lltitbn d the examinations andm 3n enforwnent adbn again81 me or the iadlity licensee. I will immediately reprt Io facilib managemnlor h a NRC dief exsmlnH any irdics!ions, or auggealions hi examindim wurity may have been compomised.

I i

2.

Fast-Examination To he best cf my knclrvlrdge, I di ncl divu$e b any unautbriied persow 3ny informlion conowchg lk NRC licnnsing errarrimlicm adminktersd durinej the.;.reek(@) of

. From tha dak llut I entered into lhis murip$ s g m s n t until dw mpletion of emminPcm adrrMtilralim, I did ml instruct, waluale, or FroJide prlbmrne feedback lo I h e spplicsnts r v b were adminibtered these liwnsing mxm-imiianti, except a8 epeafically mted beksr and autbfired bg Ae NRC.

i PRINTED N4ME DATE SIGNEITURE (25 CATE NOTE NOTES:

25 of 25 NUREGV321. Drat Reviston 9

m v )

co M

v) m v) 9 v )

N a:

a K

J

\\

I-a n

f b

d m

I a N

2.

Rait-EM&Hilhetian NQTES:

I t u

0 25 0125 NUREG-1021. Dmt FlWlsKJn 9

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

Facility:

Date of Examination:

Operating Test Number:

I kAr Overlap with the written examination and between different parts of the operating test eategek is within acceptable limits.

d L

I. GENERAL CRITERIA a

a.

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.

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

fA

b.

C.

bb L A 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.

e.

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

2. WALK-THROUGH-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 t

6c.

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

e

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

a.

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

Date

a. Author f -3 0 -oL(

b. Facility Reviewer(*)

lo 1 I !OY

c. NRC Chief Examiner (#)

d. NRC Supervisor i/

NOTE:

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

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

NUREG-1021, Draft Revision 9 24 of 27

ES-301 Simulator Scenario Quality Checklist Form ES-30 1-4 TARGET QUANTITATIVE ATTRIBUTES (PER SCENARIO; SEE SECTION D.5.d)

1.

Total malfunctions (5-8)

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: Indian Point 2 Date of Exam: 10-1 1-2004 Scenario Numbers:

1 I 2 I 3 14 Operating Test No QUALITATIVE ATTRIBUTES Initi:

I Actual Attributes 61 6 I 6 15 2 1 2 1 2 1 2

&A 3 1 3 1 3 1 2

.lu*7 1 I 1 I 1 I 1 2 1 1 1 2 1 2 0 1 1 1 0 1 1

• 3 1 2 1 2 1 3 I a I b '

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.

The scenarios consist mostly of related events.

2.

I U

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.

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

5.

6.

M #

7.

8.

9.

The simulator modeling is not altered.

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.

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.

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

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).

IO.

11.

12.

11 13.

I I

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

l 25 of 27 NUREG-1021, Draft Revision 9

ES-301 Transient and Event Checklist Form ES-301-5 Reactivity 1*

1 1

1 3

Normal 0

1 Instrument /

2*

2 3 2,3

233, 295, Component 4

6,7 6

As RO I

Major 1

5 4

5 4

OPERATING TEST NO.: 1 Reactivity Normal Instrument /

Component Major As RO 1*

1 1

1 3

0 1

2*

2 3 2,3

233, 295, 4

6,7 6

1 5

4 5

4 AS SRO Reactivity 0

Normal 1*

1 1

1 1

Instrument /

2*

2,3,4,6 2,3,5 2,3,4,7 2,356 Component Major 1

5 4

5 4

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.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.

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

(3)

Author:

NRC Reviewer:

NUREG-1021, Draft Revision 9

~~~~

ES-301 Competencies Checklist Form ES-301-6 BOP SRO 4RIO 3

Competencies SCEl I

I

293, 4,5

274, 597 23, 4

Interpret / Diagnose Events and Conditions Comply With and Use Procedures (1)

I

374, 394, T T

Operate Control Boards (2) 12, 3,4, 5

3,4, 374, -r Communicate and Interact 12,

172, 3947

374, 5,6 5

%f:

394, 3,4,

-t Demonstrate Supervisory Ability Comply With and Use Tech. Specs.

Notes:

(3)

(3) 1 (1)

(2)

Optional for an SRO-U (3)

Only applicable to SROs.

Includes Technical Specification compliance for an RO.

Instructions:

Circle the applicant's license type and enter one or more event numbers that will allow the examiners to evaluate e Author:

NRC Reviewer:

NUREG-1021, Draft Revision 9

ES-401 Written Examination Form ES-401-76 Quality Checklist Facility: s e g c O N 1-r I Date of Exam:

1 Q / % L l d L )

Exam Level: ROlSRC I

I Initial Item Description a

b:

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)

Bank use meets limits (no more than 75 percent from the bank at least 10 percent new, and the rest modified); enter the actual RO / SRO-only question distribution(s) at right Between 50 and 60 percent of the questions on 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 levels; enter the actual RO / SRO question distribution(s) at right

6.

7.

8.

Referenceslhandouts provided do not give away answers I

9.

Question content conforms with specific WA statements in the previously approved examination outline and is appropriate for the Tier to which they are assigned; deviations are justified Question psychometric quality and format meet ES, Appendix B, guidelines IO.

11.

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

Date

a. Author

b. Facility Reviewer (*)

c. NRC Chief Examiner (#)

d. NRC Regional Supervisor __

~

Note:

• The facility reviewers initials/signature are not applicable for NRC-developed examinations.

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

NUREG-1021, Draft Revision 9 30 of 34

ES-403 Written Examination Grading Form ES-403-1 Quality Checklist Item Description initials a

, b C

1.

Clean answer sheets copied before grading PA TQ, M%

Tf, w

q

-Tf&

w Tf, w

TF4 U

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

Answer key changes and question deletions justified and documented Applicants' scores checked for addition errors (reviewers spot check > 25% of examinations)

Grading for all borderline cases (80 +/- 2% overall and 70 +/-

4% on the SRO-only) reviewed in detail 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 I

I fi Printed Name / Signature Date II 11 a. Grader v

(*)

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

f 5 of 5 NUREG-1021, Draft Revision 9