ML061930036

Final Qa/Related Forms (Folder 1)

ML061930036
Person / Time
Site:	FitzPatrick
Issue date:	06/28/2006
From:	Conte R Operations Branch I
To:	Ted Sullivan Entergy Nuclear Northeast
Sykes, Marvin D.
References
50-333/06-301 50-333/06-301
Download: ML061930036 (5)

Text

ES-201 Examination Preparation Checklist Form ES-201-1 Luaek d-Facility: E; ~?iX.&c; tk [,wrl.t-ten c&&\ Date of Examination: /

6 I~,/OG

.. =-]

Developed by: Written - Facility @, NRC 2 // -&A Target Chief Date* Task Description (Reference) Examiners Initials

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

~

-T6

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

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

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

~~ ~

1-90] [5. Reference material due (C.1 .e; C.3.c; Attachment 2)] NA

6. Integratedexamination outline(s) due, including Forms ES-201-2, ES-201-3, ES-301-1, ES-301-2. ES-301-5, ES-D-ls, ES-401-1/2, ES-401-3, and ES-401-4, as applicable (C.l .e and f; C.3.d) -rF (7. Examination outline(s) reviewed by NRC and feedback provided to facility licensee (C.2.h; C.3.e)) -fP

8. Proposed examinations (includingwritten, 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 any Form ES-201-3 updates), and reference materials due (C.1.e. f, g and h; C.3.d)

TG

~

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

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

-14 11. Examination approved by NRC supervisor for facility licensee review (C.2.h; C.3.f)

-14 12. Examinations reviewed with facilitv licensee (C.1.i; C.2.f and h; C.3.g) I -@

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

-7 14. Final applications reviewed; 1or 2 (if >lo) applications audited to confirm qualifications/ eligibility; and examination approval and waiver letters sent (C.2.i; Attachment 4; ES-202, C.2.e; ES-204)

Ti=

-7 15. Proctoringhitten exam administration guidelines reviewed with facility licensee (C.3.k)

~

-7 16. Approved scenarios, job performance measures, and questions distributed to NRC examiners (C.3.i) Uk Target dates are generally based on facility-prepared examinations and 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] {Does not apply} to examinations prepared by the NRC.

ES-201, Page 24 of 27

ES-201 Examination Outline Quality Checklist Form ES-201-2 Facility:

Xnys A. E+J?a+Gtk Date of Examination: p)-++f/L,b Initials Item Task Description a I b

• I c #

1. a. Verify that the outline(s) fit@)the appropriate model, in accordance with ES-401.

W R

I

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

c. Assess whether the outline overemphasizes any systems, evolutions, or generic topics.

8 /3c

- ,, d. Assess whether the justificationsfor deselected or rejected statements are appropriate.

E WA

a. Using Form ES-301-5, venfy that the proposed scenario sets cover the required number 3

• ff t -

2.

S I

of normal evolutions, instrument and component failures, technical specifications, and major transients.

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

M U and mix of applicants in accordance with the expected crew composition and rotation schedule L without compromising exam integrity, and ensure that each applicant can be tested using A at least one new or significantly modified scenario, that no scenarios are duplicated T

0 from the applicants audit test@). and that scenarios will not be repeated on subsequent days.

c. To the extent possible, assess whether the outline(s) conform(s) with the qualitative I

R and quantitative criteria specified on Form ES-3014 and described in Appendix D.

I

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

(1) the outline@)contain@)the required number of control room and in-plant tasks I - .

W I

T distributed among the safety functions as specified on the form (2) task repetition from the last tva NRC examinations is within the limits specified on the form (3) no tasks are duplicated from the applicants audit test(s)

I (4) the number of new or modified tasks meets or exceeds the minimums spectied on the fom (5) the number of alternate path, low-power, emergency, and RCA tasks meet the criteria on the form.

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

(1) the tasks are distributed among the topics as specified on the form (2) at least one task is new or significantly modified (3) no more than one task is repeated from the last two NRC licensing examinations

c. 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. -9

4. a. Assess whether plant-specific priorities (including PRA and IPE insights) are covered in the appropriate exam sections. 23 .e IT E

N E

b. Assess whether the 10 CFR 55.41/43 and 55.45 sampling is appropriate.

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

d. Check for duplication and overlap among exam sections.

B W X d+-

6 p./((

Jd A e. Check the entire exam for balance of coverage. 0 WTC

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

a. Author

b. Facility Reviewer r)

c. NRC Chief Examiner (#)

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

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 date of my signature. I agree that I will not knowingly divulge any information about these examinations to any persons who ha 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 licensee's 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 administered during the week(s) of 61 ).I/ao Q 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 A SIGNATURE ( 1M, DATE SIGNATURE (2) DATE NOTE I a. --

14. --

15. --

NOTES:

ES-401 Written Examination Quality Checklist Form ES-401-6 Facility: 'JGfle > p. fifap2$/-&&Date of Exam: O6f/6/0 6 Exam Level: RO SRO 3 I

I I

, Initial ,

Item Description a b' - CP

1. Questions and answers are technically accurate and applicable to the facility. 3%

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 the examinations were developed independently; or g the licensee certifies that there is no duplication: or

- other (explain)

I I 1 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 new or modified); enter the actual RO I SRO-only I

question distribution(s) at right.

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

the actual RO I SRO question distribution(s) at right.

8. Referenceslhandouts provided do not give away answers or aid in the elimination of distractors.

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. @

IO. Question psychometric quality and format meet the guidelines in ES Appendix B. dfq

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

Printed Name I Sianature ,/f Date .

a. Author

b. Facility Reviewer y)

c. NRC Chief Examiner (#)

d. NRC Regional Supervisor Note:

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

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

ES-401, Page 29 of 33

ES-403 Written Examination Grading Form ES-403-1 Quality Checklist 1

Item Description a b C

1. Clean answer sheets copied before grading d8

2. Answer key changes and question deletions justified Nh 4@

and documented Pw Q&

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

4. Grading for all borderline cases (80 9% overall and 70 or 80, as applicable, +4% on the SRO-only) reviewed in detail rn?

5. All other failing examinations checked to ensure that grades ,/4 are justified m-7

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 NameEignature Date

a. Grader dll Lick

b. Facility Reviewer(*) _

c. NRC Chief Examiner (*) 7 6 1 ,fl5h

d. NRC Supervisor (*)

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

ES-403, Page 5 of 5