ML051960319

Final Qa/Related Forms (Folder 1)

ML051960319
Person / Time
Site:	FitzPatrick
Issue date:	05/11/2005
From:	Berry P, Suzanne Dennis, Devercelly R Entergy Nuclear Northeast, Operations Branch I
To:	Conte R Operations Branch I
Conte R
References
50-333/05-301, ES-201, ES-201-1 50-333/05-301
Download: ML051960319 (11)

Text

ES-201 Examination Preparation Checklist F o ES-201-1

~

Date of Examination: T h -t/.I Target Chief Date* Task Description (Reference) Examiner's Initials

~

-180 1. Examination administration date confirmed (C.1.a; C.2.a and b) so

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

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

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

[-go] I [ 5 . Reference material due (C.1 .e; C.3.c; Attachment 2)J I -

-75 6. Integrated examination outline(s) due, including Forms ES201-2. ES-201-3, ES-301-1, ES-301-2, ES-301-5, ES-D-l's, ES-401-1/2, ES-401-3, and ES-401-4, as applicable (C.1.e and f; C.3.d)

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

-45 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 59 materials due (C.l .e, f, g and h; C.3.d)

-30 9. Preliminary license applications (NRC Form 398's) due (C.1.l; C.2.g; ES-202)

-14 I 10. Final license applications due and Form ES-201-4 prepared (C.1.l; C.2.i; ES-202)

-14 I Examination approved by NRC supervisor for facility licensee review ll.(C.2.h; C.3.f) I 59

-14 12. Examinations reviewed with facility licensee (C.1.j; C.2.f and h; C.3.g) 9'

-7 13. Written examinations and operating tests approved by NRC supervisor (C.2.i; C.3.h)

-7 I 14. Final applications reviewed; examination approval and waiver letters sent (C.2.i; Attachment 4; ES-204)

-7 I I

15. Proctoringlwritten exam administration guidelines reviewed with facility licensee (C.3.k) 1

-' I 16. Approved scenarios, job performance measures, and questions 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 mth the facility licensee.

[ J Applies only to examinations prepared by the NRC.

ES-201, Page 24 of 27

ES-201 Examination Outline Quality Checklist Form ES 201-2 Facility: J. A. FitzPatrick Date of Examination: -

May 16 20,2005 Itam Task Description lnitiats a b*

A I 1.

a. Verlfy that the ouUine(s) ws) the appropriate model, in accordance with ES401. .JL #,+

W

b. Assess whether the outline was systematically and randomly prepared in accordance with Section R

I D.l of ES401 and whether all KIA categories are appropriately sampled. t Q p T

T c. Assess whether the outline overemphasizes any systems,evolutions. or generic topics. .,P E d. Assess whether the justifications for deselectedor rejected WA statements are appropriate.

N

2. a. Using Form ES-3016, venfy that the proposed scenario sets cover the required number of normal evolutions, instrument and component failures, technical specifications, 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 compositionand rotation schedule without U compromising exam integrity,and ensure that each applicant can be tested using at least one new L or significantly modified scenario, that no scenarios are duplicated from the applicants' audlt A test@),and that scenarios will not be mpeated on subsequent days.

T 0 c. To the extent possible, assess whether the outline(s) conform(s) with the qualitative and R quantitative cr#eria specii'ied on Form ES-3014 and described in Appendix D.

3. a. Ver@that the systems walk-through outline meets the criteria specified on Form ES-301-2:

(1) the outline(s) contain($) the required number of control room and in-plant tasks distributed W among the safety fundions as specified on the form I (2) task repetitionfrom the last two NRC examinationsis within the limits specifid on the form T

(3) no tasks are dupliuatedfrom the applicants' audit test($)

(4) the number of new or m o d i tasks meets or exceeds the minimums specified on the form (5) the number of alternate path, kwpower, emergency, and RCA tasks meets the criteria on the form

b. Verify that the administrative outline meets the criteria specified on Form ES-301-1:

(1) the tasks are distributedamong the topics as specified on the f o n (2) at least one task is new or significantly modified (3) no more than one task is repeatedfrom the last two NRC licensing examinations

c. Determine if there are enough diffetrent outlines to test the projeczed number and mix of applicants and eftsure that no items are duplicated on subsequent days.

a. Assess whether plant-specmCpriorities (including PRA and IPE insights) are covered in the

4. appropriate exam sections.

b. Assess whether the 10 CFR 55.41143and 55.45sampling is appropriate.

G E c. Ensure that WA importonce ratings (except for plant-speufic priorities) are at least 2.5.

N E

R

d. Check for duplication and overlap among exam sedions. e 50 A

L e.

f.

CM the entire exam for balance of coverage.

Assess whether the exam Ms the appropriatejob level (RO or SRO).

.w W J D W 5 P Printed Name / Sig

a. Author (Rw O c \ l e c l c e \ \ , I 1/ l d y L

b. Facillty Reviewer (*) $bc%tn,n&-: I I/."/.i-

c. NRCChiefExaminer(#) 3 [ d f

d. NRC Supervisor Note: # Independent NRC reviewer initial items in Column 'c;" chief examiner concurrence required.

I I

(

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 schedule6 for the week(s) of S://b/ol 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 an@

authorized by the NRC (e.g.,acting as a simulator booth operator or communicator is acceptable if the individual does not select the training coMent or provide direct or indirect feedback). Furthermore, I am aware of the physical security measures and requirements (as documented in the facility;  ::ox licensee's procedures) and understand that violation of the conditions of this agreement may result in cancellation of the examinations andlor ah; -..,m enforcement action against me or the facility licensee I will immediately report to facility management or the NRC chief examiner any indicationspr .-'--m L? 2 suggestions that examination security may have been compromised.

L.- .A.

WW m

2. Post-Examination

~~

L m

0 To the best of my knowledge, I did not divulge to any unauthorized persons any information concerning the NRC licensing examinations adrniriisteted during the week(s) of <//&lor' . From the date that I entered into this security agreement until the completion of examination administratio:, I did not instruct, evaluate, or provide performance feedback to those applicants who were administered these licensing examinations, except as specificaiiy noted below and authorized by the NRC.

PRINTED NAME JOB TITLE I RESPONSIBILITY SIGNATURE (1) DATE SIGNATURE (2) DATE NOTE

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 2 ) r d c S - a s 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 (e.g., acting as a simulator booth operator or communicator is acceptable if the individual does not select the training content or provide direct or indirect feedback). 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.

2. Post-Examination To the best of my knowledge, I did not divulge to any unauthorized persons any information concerning the NRC licensing examinations administersd during the week(s) of <//la1 D C F r o m the date that I entered into this security agreement until the completion of examination administration, I dici nci 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 I RESPONSIBILITY 1 c-rn&+

c 2 /7 u .//(./T 10 11 --

12 13 ___-

14 --

15 --

NOTES ES-201, Page 26 of 27

ES-301 ODeratina Test Qualitv Checklist Form ES301-3

~ a d t i : J. A. FitzPatrick ate of Examination: -

May 16 20,2005 Operating Test Number LoI-0!5-01

1. General Criteria Initials

a. The operating test conformswith the prevloustyappromd outline; changes am consistent wtth sampling requirements(e.g.. 10 CFR 55.45, operational importance, safety function distribution). ,

14

b. There is no day-today repetition between this and other operating teststo be administered during this examination.

c. The ooeratina test shall not dudkate items from the applicants' audii test(s)(see Sedii 0.1.a).

d. Overlap with the written examinationand between different pa* oftha operating test is within acceobble limits.

e. It appears that the operabng test will diffarentiate betwsen competent and Whancanpetent aDdicants at the desiinated licancle level.

2. Walk-Through Criteria

a. Each JPM indudes the following, as applicable:

initialconditions 0 initiatingcws 0 referencesand took, includi essociated procedures reasonableand validated tLlla l i (averaget h e allowed for completion) and specific designation if deemed to be time aiticalby the Mi licensee operationally important specilk performance criteria that indude:

- detailed expeded actionswith exact aiteria and nomenclature 9

- system response and other examiner cues

- statementsdescribing important observationsto be made by the applicant

- criteriaforsuccessfulcanpleLionofthetask

- i d e n t i i o n of critical steps and their associated performance standards restrictions on the sequence of steps,ifapplicable

b. Ensure that any changes from the previously approved systems and administnti walk-through outlines (Form ES301-1 and 2) have not caused the test to deviate from any of the acceptance criteria (e.g., item distribution bank use, repetitionfrom the last 2 NRC examinations) specified on those forms and Fonn ES-201-2.

3. SimulatorCriteria The associated simulator operating tasts (scenario sets) have been reviewed in sccottJance with Form ES-3014 and a copy is attached.

Printed Name ISignature Date

a. Author &;dtocd IJ. ~ e & c c e \ . \ l I

b. Faciti Reviewer (*)

c NRC Chief Examiner (#)

d. NRCSupervisor

• The facility signature is nd applicable for NRCdeveloped tests.

NOTE:

1. Independent NRC re~vknwrinitial items in Column "c;. c h i examiner concurrence required.

_ I

ES-301 Simulator Scenario Quality Checklist F o ES-3014

~

I Facility: J.A. FitzPatridc Date of Exam: May 16-20,2005 Scenario Numbers: 1 / 2 / 3 Operating Test No.: LOI-05-01 QUALITATIVE AlTFtIBUTES Initiats b C#

1. The initial conditions are realistic, in that some equipment and/or instrumentation may be 7 out of service, but it does not cue the operators into expected events. L 2 5-@

2 The scenarios consist mostly of related events.

3. Each event description consists of the point in the scenario when it is to be i n i i e d 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)

Q the event termination point [tapplicable)

4. No more than one mmechanistic 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. Sequendng 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 cany out expeded actiiities without undue time constraints. Cues are given.

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 fundinal fidelity is 7 5 9 maintained while running the planned scenarios.

I O . Every operator will be evaluated using at least one new or significantly modified scenario.

All other scenarios have been attered 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).

7 Y?

12. Each applicant will be significantly involved in the minimum number of transients and events sDeclfied on Form ES-301-5 (submit the form with the simulator scenarios).

7-F 7 59 1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

Total malfunctions (5-8)

Malfunctions after EOP entry (1-2)

Abnonnalevents(24)

Major transients (1-2)

EOPs entered/requiring substantive actions (1-2) 6 2

6 1

2

.A-7 5Q

6. EOP contingencies requiring substantie actions (C2) 1

7. Critical tasks (2-3) 3

ES-301 Transient and Event Checklist Form ES-301-5 I--

Facility: J.A. Fitrl Date of Exam: -

May 16 20,2005 SCENARIOS Operating Test No.: LOI-0501 1 2 3 4 0

C R M POSITION I CREW POSITION Rx w

NOR K

I MAJ TS Rx NOR Ts Rx NOR uc TS Rx NOR MAJ Ts Page 1of2

ES-301 Transient and Event Checklist Form ES-3016 SCENARIOS P E 1 2 3 4 T M P N L T 0 I I CREW POSITION CREW POSITION CREW POSITION T N A I rn C T A Y S I B S A B L M N P U R T 0 T E 0 C P -- M

-0

-1' 1 1' 9 4' 3 2 2

1

- 2 1'

1 1' 7 4' b IRX Instructions:

-2

1. Circle the applicant level and enter the operating test number and Form ESD-1 event numbers for each event type;TS are not applicable for RO applicants. ROs must serve in both the 'at-the-controls (ATC)' and 'belance-of-plant (BOP)' positions; Instant SROs must do one scenario, including at least two instrument or component (VC) matfundions and one major transient, in the ATC position.

2. Reactivity manipulations may be m d u d e d under normal or mnM/edabnormal conditions (refw to Section D.5.d) but must be significant per Section C.2.a &Appendix D. Reactiwty and normal evolutions may be replaced with additional instrument or component malkmctions on a 1-for-I 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:

Page 2 of 2

9 r

I

ES-401 Written Examination Form ES-401-6 Facility: J.A. FitzPatrick Date of Examination: May 16 - 20, 2005 Exam Level: SRO I

Item Description Initials a b' C#

1. Questions and answers technically accurate and applicable to facility

~ ~-

w- so 3 .e=

2. a. NRC WAS referenced for all questions

b. Facility learning objectives referenced as available

3. SRO questions are appropriate per Section D.2.d of ES-401 A &- SP

4. If more than four RO and two SRO questions are repeated from the last two NRC licensing exams, the facility licensee's sampling process was random and systematic.

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

- the examinations were developed independently

6. Bank use meets limits (no more than 75 percent from the bank at least 10 percent new, and the rest new or modified); enter the actual RO I SRO-only question distribution(s) at right.

I ,E:;: 1 I I c9 M;qP 4;;~6

7. Between 50 and 60 percent of the questions on the RO exam are written at the comprehension/ Memory analysis level; the SRO exam may exceed 60 percent if the randomly selected WAS support the higher cognitive levels; enter the actual RO / SRO S/?

question distribution(s) at right. 2515 50 120

8. References / handouts provided do not give away answers or aid in the elimination of distractors.

9. Question content conforms with specific WA statements in the previously 1 10.

approved examination outline and is appropriate for the tier to which they are assigned; deviations are justified.

Question psychometric quality and format meet the guidelines in ES Appendix 8. -1 I Q 5"

'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. 5" Printed Name l Signature Date

a. Author

b. Facility Reviewer (+)

c. NRC Chief Examiner (#)

d. NRC Regional Supervisor Note: The facility reviewer's initialdsignature 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 FOITII ES-403-1 Quality Checklist Facility: c 1 r ZP M A\ CM Date of Exam: /h - k/of Exam Level: R O & $

v Item Description a

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 *2O% overall and 70 or 80, as applicable, f4% 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 NameISignature Date

a. Grader

b. Facility Reviewer(*)

• . NRC Chief Examiner (*)

r.

1. NRC Supervisor (*) m- I I v

/mG&

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

ES-403, Page 5 of 5