ML070530045

Init Exam - 11/2006 - Public Forms

ML070530045
Person / Time
Site:	Waterford
Issue date:	11/09/2006
From:	NRC Region 4
To:	Entergy Operations
References
50-285/06-301
Download: ML070530045 (15)

Text

April 18, 2006 NOTETO: %IW~ -St*&

Chief Examiner, Operations Branch FROM: Anthony T. Gody, Chief Operations Branch Division of Reactor Safety

SUBJECT:

EXAMINATION ASSIGNMENT You have been assigned as Chief of the Waterford 3 Steam Electric Station examination.

The operating test has been scheduled to be completed by November 17, 2006. Thank you for contacting the Waterford Steam Electric Station facility to finalize the details of the examination. You are reminded that the RPS/IP system must be maintained to ensure that the examiners and numbers of candidates are accurate. In addition, you are reminded that only qualified examiners are permitted to co e examination.

Operations Branc Division of Reactor Safety

Replaces NUREG-1021 Revision 9, ES Forms 201-1 and 501-1 rfiew* Stctka CHIEF: 1' James Drake I FACILITY: I Waterford 3 Steam Electric Station I DATE of OPERATING EXAM: t 11/13/2006 IDate Complete 1 Initials I Notes 5/17/06 I Exam Administration Date Confirmed (C.1.a; C.2.a & b) lY/@@L- 149, I ~____

7/16/06 NRC Staff & Facility Contact Assigned (C.1.d; C.2.e) 7/16/06 Facility Contact Briefed on Security & Other Req's (C.2.c) S/Jk . Q-

/zz/as

~~

7/16/06 Corporate Notification Letter (ES-201 Att-3) Sent (C.2.d) Ec/l produced by Chief Examiner

/

8/15/06 Reference Material Due (if NRC authored) (C.1.e; C.3.c) '48 8/30/06 Integrated Exam Outlines Due (C.l .e & f; C.3.d) 9/4/06 Outlines Review & NRC Feedback Provided (c.2.h; C.3.e) 9/29/06 Draft Exams w/References Due (C.1.e,f,g,h; C.3.d) 10/14/06 *Peer Reviewer Completes Review of Exam on ES-401-9 io/c/ot 10/14/06 *NRC BC Approves Feedback to Facility (C.2.h; C.3.f) lo J 1 2 16 ( cd 10/14/06 *Exams Reviewed w/ Fac. (C.1.h;C.P.f & h; C.3.g) IQ&L ~~

10/14/06 Preliminary Applications Due (C.1.I;C.2.g; ES-202) 10/29/06 10/19/06 Preliminary Applications Reviewed (C.I.I;C.2.g)

IO!ZS!OC; GA 10/30/06 Final Applications Due ('2.1.I;C.2.i;ES-202) jo/3o/e~

10/30/06 On-Site Preparatory Week to Validate Operating Exam Jollc/06 &> "

10/30/06 On-Site Audit (10%) of License App's (ES-202 C.2.e) 11/6/06 Final Appl. OKed & Waiver Letters Sent (ES-204; C.2.e) 11/6/06 I NRC Supervisor Approved Final Exams (C.2.i;C.3.h) 11/6/06 Exam Approval Letter (ES-201 Att-4) and List of Applicants produced by OLA (ES-201-4) Prepared (C.2.i) 11/6/06 Proctor Rules Review w/Fac. @ Written Authorized (C.3.k) 11/6/06 Exam Material to Exam Team (C.3.i) 11/13/06 Administer Operating Exam On-Site 11/25/06 Facility Graded Exam & Comments Received 11/28/06 NRC Written Exam Grading ComDleted 11/28/06 I Examiners Document Exam Grades on ES Forms 12/8/06 NRC Chief Examiner Grading Review Completed 12/9/06 NRC BC Review Completed 12113/06 License/Denials Signed & Report Issued 24f06 12/13/06 RPSllP Number of Examinees Updated print Report-21 12/28/06 Examination Report Issued produced by Chief Examiner 1/4/07 Package Closed Out

~~

1/4/07 Chief QA of ADAMS and SlSP review complete

• Indicates the due dates are more conservative than the ES-201-1 requires.

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

Item Task Description t;T-hlt+Initials

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

W gv R b. Assess whether the outline was systematically and randomly prepared in accordance with I Section D.l of ES-401 and whether all WA categories are appropriately sampled. kl" T

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

T KV .(h E

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

- N i(L' 4

2. a. Using Form ES-301-5, verify that the proposed scenario sets cover the required number of normal evolutions, instrument and component failures, technical specifications, S and major transients.

I M b. Assess whether there are enough scenario sets (and spares) to test the projected number 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 from the applicants' audit test(s), and that scenarios will not be repeated on subsequent days.

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

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

(1) the outline(s) contain(s) the required number of control room and in-plant tasks W distributed among the safety functions as specified on the form I (2) task repetition from the last two NRC examinations is within the limits specified on the form T (3) no tasks are duplicated from the applicants' audit test(s)

(4) the number of new or modified tasks meets or exceeds the minimums specified on the form (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.

4. a. Assess whether plant-specific priorities (including PRA and IPE insights) are covered in the appropriate exam sections. /tv G b. Assess whether the 10 CFR 55.41143 and 55.45 sampling is appropriate.

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

d. Check for duplication and overlap among exam sections. 1< v R

A e. Check the entire exam for balance of coverage.

L

- f. Assess whether the exam fits the appropriate job level (RO or SRO). iltV 14 ' 1 9 Date a Author b Facility Reviewer (*)

c NRC Chief Examiner (#)

"53i%&

d NRC Supervisor Note # Independent NRC reviewer initial items in Column "c", chief examiner concurrence required ES-201, Page 25 of 27

ES -401 Written Examination Qualitv Checklist Form ES-401-6 Facility: Waterford 3 Date of Exam: 11/10/2006 Exan Level: B R O B S R O Initial Item Description a b*

1. Questions and answers technically accurate and (applicableto the facility I9 c#

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

4. The sampling process was random and systematic ( if more than 4 RO or 2 SRO questions were repeated from the last 2 NRC Licensing Exams, consult the NRR OL program office.)

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

-- the license certifies the there is no duplication; or

-- other (explain)

6. Bank use meets limits ( no more than 75 Bank Modified New percent from bank at least 10 percent new, and the rest modified); enter the actual RO/SRO- only question distribution(s) at right 7; &

a6 f qdJ 3 I 6 38 I 18

7. Between 50 and 60 percent of the questions Memo: 5 1-E 7 CIA on the RO exam are written at the M 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 34 7 10 3236..

3li/rs F$

&W+w distribution(s) at right

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 approved examination outline and is appropriate for the Tier to which they are assigned; deviations are justified 6 IO. Question psychometric quality and format meets ES, Appendix B, guidelines 27-

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

Printed Name /

a. Author

b. Facility Reviewer (*)

c. NRC Chief Examiner (#)

d. NRC Regional Supervisor (4CbCpeCq L.dta I -

ll /q,cc. LL-Note:

• The Facility reviewer' initials/signature are not applicable for NRC-developed examinations

1. Independent NRC reviewer initial items in column "c," chief examiner concurrence required

ES-301 Operating Test Quality Checklist Form ES-301-3 Facility: Date of Examination: Operating est Number:

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(?.). (see Section D.l .a,)

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

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

• operationally important 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

- 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. Ensure that any changes from the previously approved systems and administrativewalk-through outlines (Forms ES-301-1 and 2) have not caused the test to deviate from any of the acceptance criteria (e.g., item distribution, bank use, repetition from the last 2 NRC examinations) specified on those forms and Form ES-201-2.

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

Printed Name /Signajure Date

a. Author %k&

b. Facility Reviewerr) 4//&

c. NRC Chief Examiner (#)

d. NRC Supervisor

Facility: Waterford 3 Date of Exam: 1111312006 Scenario Numbers: 1 I 2 I 3 Operating Test No. 1 I

QUALITATIVE ATTRIBUTES Initials a b* c#

~~~

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. KVA I'

f$-af

2. The scenarios consist mostly of related events. KVA &

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 svmDtomslcues that will be visible to the crew i 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.

5. The events are valid with regard to physics and thermodynamics. 1(v 4 ~

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 aiven.

8. The simulator modeling is not altered.

I I ' I Rt

9. The scenarios have been validated. Pursuant to IOCFR 55.46(d), any open simulator performance deficiencies or deviations from the referenced plant have been evaluated to ensure that functional fidelity is maintained while running the planned scenarios. i<bj 4 *j

10. 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, LV A 1' a

ients and events

6. EOP contingencies requiring substantive actions (0-2) 1 1 0 I O

7. Critical tasks (2-3) 2 1 3 1 3 j4 w'

ES-301,Rev. 9 Transient and Event Checklist Form ES-301-5 RO Scenario 1 & 2 Facil : Waterford 3 Date of Exam: 11/13/2006 Operating Test No.: 1

[

A E Scenarios P V 2 3 M 1

P E I L N CREW CREW CREW N

I T POSITION POSITION POSITION I C M A T U N Y M(*)

T P RO iX E

[XI VOR SRO-I

/C 0

SRO-U VlAJ 0

RO rs 3X IXI \OR SRO-I I/C 0

SRO-U MAJ 0

RO i-s RX 0 NOR SRO-I I/C 0

SRO-U MAJ

[XI RO TS RX 0 NOR SRO-I 0 I/C SRO-U MAJ 0 TS Check the applicant level and enter the operating test number and Form ES-D-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 balance-of-plant (BOP) positions; Instant SROs must do one scenario, including at least two instrument or component (I/C) malfunctions and one major transient, in the ATC position.

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 I-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 applicants competence count toward the minimum requirements specified for the applicants license level in the right-hand columns.

ES-301, Rev. 9 Transient and Event Checklist Form ES-301-5 SROUI and 2 Scenario 1 & 2 Facility: Waterford 3 Date of Exam: 11/13/2006 Operating Test No.: 1 A E Scenarios P v P E L N I T C

A T N Y T P 10 RX E

a NOR SRO-I I/C 7

SRO-U MAJ 7

10 TS RX a NOR SRO-I 7 I/C SRO-U MAJ 7

10 TS RX 7 NOR SRO-I I/C 7

SRO-U XI MAJ 10 TS RX 7 NOR SRO-I I/C 7

SRO-U MAJ 7 TS nstructions:

1) Check the applicant level and enter the operating test number and Form ES-D-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 "balance-of-plant (BOP)" positions; Instant SROs must do one scenario, including at least two instrument or component (VC) malfunctions and one major transient, in the ATC position.

9 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 1-for-I basis.

9 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 requirements specified for the applicant's license level in the right-hand columns.

Instructions:

1) Check the applicant level and enter the operating test number and Form ES-D-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 balance of-plant (BOP) positions; Instant SROs must do one scenario, including at least two instrument or component (VC) malfunctions and one major transient, in the ATC position.

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 ma) be replaced with additional instrument or component malfunctions on a I-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 applicants competence count toward the minimum requirements specified for the applicants license level in the right-hand columns.

ES-301, Rev. 9 Transient and Event Checklist Form ES-301-5 SROU3 and 4 Scenario 2 Waterford 3 Date of Exam: 11/I 3/2006 Operating Test No.: 1 E Scenarios v 1 I 2 I 3 I 4 M E I N N T I M

T U Y

M(*)

P tX E

IC AAJ 10R rs

?X dOR

/c rs iX dOR

/C dAJ rs

1) Check the applicant level and enter the operating test number and Form ES-D-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 balance-of-plant (BOP) positions; Instant SROs must do one scenario, including at least two instrument or component (I/C) malfunctions and one major transient, in the ATC position.

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 I-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 applicants competence count toward the minimum requirements specified for the applicants license level in the right-hand columns.

ES-301 Competencies Checklist Form ES-301-6 Facility: Waterford 3 Date of Examination: 11/13/2006 Operating Test No: 1 APPLlCANTS HRO USRO-I USRO-U HSRO-U OSRO-U SCENARIO SCENARIO SCENARIO ComPetencies 2/3/4/5/ 1/2/3/4/ 1/2/3/4/

Interpret / Diagnose Events and Conditions 1/2/3/41 1/2/3/4/ 1/2/3/41 Comply With and 6i7 5/6i7 5/6/7 Use Procedures (1) 1/2/3/4/ 1/3/4/5/ 1/2/3/41 Operate Control 5I6n 6i7 5l6i7 Boards (2) 1/2/3/4/ 1/2/3/4/ 1/2/3/4/

Communicate and 5/6/7 5/6/7 5/6/7 Interact Demonstrate Supervisory Abilitv (3)

Comply With and Use Tech. Specs. (3)

Notes:

I (1) Includes Technical Specification compliance for an RO.

(2) Optional for an SRO-U.

(3) Only applicable to SROs.

Instructions:

Check the applicant's license type and enter one or more event numbers that will allow the examiners to evaluate every applicable competency for every applicant.

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

.eve[:RO @SRO VI Initials Item Description a I b l c

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 +2% overall and 70 or 80, as applicable, +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/Signature Date

a. Grader ///J//J&&

b. Facility Reviewer(*) 4&mb

c. NRC Chief Examiner (*) 0t/ # 6 / 0 7

d. NRC Supervisor (*) Rdm!QL.Rleae \Q%Q&q 1 -

J,

(*) 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

u u z? z?

I- I-s-

I-w s-t; I-k o LL U LL LL LL LL c

E

-0 a

d YZ O E Eo 7

0 m

(D 0

0 N

C

.-0

.Id m

C E

m X

u;'

2 n

-?

~

U b IIIIII IIIIII a,

z n

m R

0

?

UY W

C C

.-0 .-0 c,

c, m m

.-C .-E E

E m m X X

w w c,

v) 2 0 n n r cri