ML050550081
| ML050550081 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | River Bend  |
| Issue date: | 02/25/2004 |
| From: | Gody A Operations Branch IV |
| To: | Stetka T Operations Branch IV |
| References | |
| 50-458/04-301, NUREG-1021, Draft Rev 9 50-458/04-301 | |
| Download: ML050550081 (14) | |
Text
February 25,2004 Note to: Tom Stetka, Chief Examiner Operations Branch I \
From: Anthony Gody, Chief Operations Branch -
Division of Reactor Safety
SUBJECT:
EXAMINATION ASSlG NMENT You have been assigned as Chief of the River Bend examination. The operating test has been scheduled to be completed by September 24, 2004. Please contact the River Bend facility to finalize the details of the examination by March 28, 2004. You are reminded that the RPS/IP system must be maintained to ensure that the examiners and numbers of candidates are accurate.
Please contact me if you need assistance with RPS/IP.
v) c a,
0 Z
a, e
a,
- P 2 8 Q
e s'2. '2;
$5 0 0 F m au a,
L IC I-P n u h a, a!
cu 3 v) v)
3 ob 0 0 .-v) c! cr 0 7
L v)
G u
e c
a, E
u m
a, m c c L m
.-0) c e
a, tj v) a, 2
c
-1 c
ob 05-0 c a, m a, S E
c K v) 0 0
- v) 0 c v)"
ci 3 8 m 0 S .-e 0
LL m ob m
2c
.-0 c
c 0
a, Q
X tj 0 W a, Y 0 Q n
z v)
- F K 2 3 3 3 3 z z z z m m m m n n [I n
.-a, m L
0 2
I-LL I-2 t-2 I-a, c
m d d d d n 0 0 0 0 O
a, S
co c!
m 7
0 co W
c!
(D 41 m
~~~ ~
ES-201 Examination Outline Quality Checklist Form ES-201-2 Facility: RIVER BEND STATION Date of Examination: 9/20/04 I I Item 1.
w R
I T
T E
N
- 2. 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.
S I
- b. Assess whether there are enough scenario sets (and spares) to test the projected number and mix of M 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. a. Verify that:
(1) the outline(s) containb) the required number of control room and in-plant tasks, I I w (2) no more than 30% of the test material is repeated from the last NRC kxamination, I (3)* no tasks are duplicated from the applicants audit test(s), and T (4) no more than 80% of any operating test is taken directly from the licensees exam banks.
b
- 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,
~
(9) 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. Venfy that the required administrative topics are covered.
- e. Check the entire exam for balance of coverage.
Printed Name /
a Author b Facility Reviewer(*)
NOTE:
- Not applicable for NRC-developed examinations.
- Independent NRC reviewer initial items in Column c; chief examiner concurrence required.
NUREG-102 1, Draft Revision 9
ES-401 Written Examination Form ES-401-6 Quality Checklist Facility: RIVER BEND STATION Date of Exam: 9/20/2004 Exam Level: RO/SRO Item Description
- 2. a. NRC WAS referenced for all questions
- b. Facility learning objectives referenced as available
- 4. Question selection and duplication from the last two NRC licensing exams appears consistent I
- 5. Question duplication from the license screeninglaudit 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 2 t e exams were developed independently; or he licensee certifies that there is no duplication; or
- other (explain)
- 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 1313 918 53/14 question distribution(s) at right I
- 1. Between 50 and 60 percent of the questions on the Memory CIA RO exam are written at the comprehension/analysis level; the SRO exam may exceed 60 percent if the randomly selected WAS 3618 39117 support the higher cognitive levels; enter the actual RO / SRO question distribution(s) at right
- 8. Referenceshandouts provided do not give away answers
- 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
- a. Author
- b. Facility Reviewer( *)
- c. NRC Chief Examiner (#)
- d. NRC Supervisor NOTE:
- The facility signature is not applicable for NRC-developed tests.
- Independent NRC reviewer initial items in Column "c;" chief examiner concurrence required.
NUREG-102 1, Draft Revision 9
ES-301 Operating Test Quality Checklist Form ES-301-3 Facility: RIVER BEND STATION Date of Exam: 9/20/2004
- 1. GENERAL CRITERIA
- 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).
- b. There is no day-to-day repetition between this and other operating tests to be administered during this examination.
C. The operating test shall not duplicate items from the applicants audit test(s)(see Section D.l .a).
- d. Overlap with the written examination and between different parts of the operating test is within acceptable 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 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
- 3. SIMULATOR CRITERIA The associated simulator operating tests (scenario sets) have been reviewed in accordance with Form ES-Date
- a. Author b Facility Reviewer(*)
- c. NRC Chief Examiner (#) =#-* 14 S.feCk4 / d W &
- d. NRC Supervisor NOTE:
- The facility signature is not applicable for NRC-developed te%.
- Independent NRC reviewer initial items in Column c; chief examiner concurrence required.
NUREG- 1021, Draft Revision 9
ES-301 Simulator Scenario Quality Checklist Form ES-301-4 Facility: RIVER BEND STATION Date of Exam: 9/20/2004 ScenarioNumbers: 1 / 2 / 3 [BU]
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.
- 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 symptomdcues 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.
I1 5.
6.
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.
- 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 given. JAI Nil
- 8. The simulator modeling is not altered.
The scenarios have been validated. Pursuant to 10 CFR 55.46(d), any open simulator performance NUREG- 102 1, Draft Revision 9
ES-301 Transient and Event Checklist Form ES-301-5 OPERATING TEST for RIVER BEND STATION, 9/20/04 Reactivity 0 1 5 4 Normal 1" 1 1 SR0-U Instrument / 2" 293, 293, 273, Component 495, 475, 497 7 7 Major 1 6 6 596 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 be included; only plicant's competence count Author:
NRC Reviewer:
NUREG- 1021, Draft Revision 9
ES-301 Competencies Checklist Form ES-301-6 Facility: RIVER BEND STATION Date of Exam: 9/20/2004
~
SRO-U or SRO-I RO or SRO-I as SRO asRO BOP Competencies SCENARIO SCENARIO SCENARIO 1 1 2 IBU BU 1 394, 274, Interpret / Diagnose Events 576 677 and Conditions 394, Comply With and 596 Use Procedures (1) 394, Operate Control 596 Boards (2) 294, Communicate 596, and Interact 7 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 (3) Only applicable to SROs.
Instructions:
Circle the applicants lic ore event numbers that will allow the examiners to evaluate every applic Author:
NRC Reviewer:
NUREG-1021, Draft Revision 9
ES-403 Written Examination Grading Form ES-403-1 Oualitv Checklist Facility: RIVER BEND STATION Date of Exam: 9/17/2004 Exam Level: RO Item Description I- hitials
- 1. Clean answer sheets copied before grading.
- 2. Answer key changes and question deletions justified and documented IU
- 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 justified
- 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 / Si Date
- a. Author
- b. Facility Reviewer (*) 9i9B @cp
- c. NRC Chief Examiner (*)
I
(*) The facility reviewers signature is not applicable for examinations graded by the NRC; two independent NRC reviews are required.
NUREG-102 1, Draft Revision 9
ES-403 Written Examination Grading Form ES-403-1 Quality Checklist Facility: RIVER BEND STATION Date of Exam: 9/17/2004 Exam Level: SRO I
nitials
..-t Item Description
/I 1.
2.
Clean answer sheets copied before grading.
Answer key changes and question deletions justified and documented
- 3. Applicants scores checked for addition errors (reviewers spot check >25% of examinations) l 4. Grading for all borderline cases (80 +/- 2% overall and 70 +/- 4% on the SRO-only) reviewed in detail I 5.
6.
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 amlicants Date
- a. Author
- b. Facility Reviewer (*)
- 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.
NUREG-1 02 1, Draft Revision 9
s c
k
hl w Y b c 0 f