ML103410223

Final Qa/Related Forms

ML103410223
Person / Time
Site:	Indian Point  (DPR-064)
Issue date:	11/22/2010
From:	David Silk Operations Branch I
To:	Ferrick J Entergy Corp
Hansell S
Shared Package
ML100980645	List: IR 05000286/2010301 ML102670379 ML102720572 ML103080903 ML103080910 ML103080920 ML103080923 ML103090017 ML103090020 ML103090036 ML103090054 ML103410223
References
TAC U01789
Download: ML103410223 (20)

Text

ES-201 Examination Preparation Checklist Form ES-201-1 Facility:

~;4'\\ P+- J Date of Examination:

L~'f/-!o Developed by: Written - Facility ~NRC "

Operating - Facility ~ NRC Target Date*

-180

-120

-120

-120

[-90]

{-75}

{-70}

{-45}

-30

-14

-14

-14

-7

-7

-7

-7 Task Description (Reference)

1.

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

2.

NRC examiners and facUity contact assigned (C.1.d; C.2.e)

3.

Facility contact briefed on security and other requirements (C.2.c)

4.

Corporate notification letter sent (C.2.d)

[5.

Reference material due (C.1.e; C.3.c; Attachment 3)]

6.

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

{7.

Examination outline(s) reviewed by NRC and feedback provided to facility licensee (C.2.h; C.3.e)}

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

9.

Preliminary license applications (NRC Form 398's) due (C.1.1; C.2.g; ES-202)

10. Final license applications due and Form ES-201-4 prepared (C.1.1; C.2.i; ES-202)

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

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

13. Written examinations and operating tests approved by NRC supervisor (C.2.i; C,3,h) 14, Final applications reviewed; 1 or 2 (if >10) applications audited to confirm qualifications I eligibility; and examination approval and waiver letters sent (C.2.i; Attachment 5; ES-202, C.2,e; ES-204) 15, Proctoring/written exam administration guidelines reviewed with facility licensee (C.3,k)

16. Approved scenarios, job performance measures, and questions distributed to NRC examiners (C.3.i)

Chief Examiner's Initials JtJ

~

JJJ

~

~

~

~

J:t b

~

c4i i~

~

~

i~

0i

• 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 25 of 28

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

-r-P~3 Date of Examination: '\\, 1DJ~-tl J 0 I

Initials Item Task Description i

a b'

C#

1.

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

La1,~ ~Mi W

R

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

~~

~

I Section 0.1 of ES-401 and whether all KiA categories are appropriately sampled.

T

~~ oj.d;J.

T

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

E

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

q4 oJ ():1 N

2.

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

~~lag tt+

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 1Rf6. bi U

and mix of applicants in accordance with the expected crew composition and rotation schedule

~i!k 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 P4 /~ rJJJ 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 94 l.i~~

1 (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) vtl (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:

19M ~ ~

(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

~134.tk"10':,

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

~

(J.. {.H, I in the appropriate exam sections.

G

~'}.(Jr.~ ~

E

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

N

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

~ I~ V!

E R

d. Check for duplication and overlap among exam sections.

~

I f).:t:, ~

A

""l L

e. Check the entire exam for balance of coverage.

3fti~rlJJ1

f.

Assess whether the exam fits the appropriate job level (RO or SRO).

f~ ~&

a. Author 11

~

print!1~me/~e 1<<'1 M. -Je,v'\\/(,v\\S \\l

'1Y)\\..

k~)

'1flntJ

b. Facility Reviewer (.)

(~. '<V\\ ~ 0.,.. /.t+~.r.M 5;...&~

'tJ.Ao

c. NRC Chief Examiner (#)

J\\a rJ 811<:.

//~,4,,".l\\

V "771/16

d. NRC Supervisor "S'~"" dr. -'If /~A"'" 3./

/::::J l"?.......

/7cWt.

V Note:

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

. Not applicable for NRC-prepared examination outlines

Indian Point Energy Center 450 Broadway. Suite 3 P.O. Box 249 Buchanan, N.Y. 10511-0249

-===- Entergy Tel (914) 788-2611 John Ferrick Manager, Training & Development NL-10-127 IP-TNG-1 0-021 November 22,2010 Mr. William Dean Regional Administrator Region I U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 475 Allendale Road King of Prussia, Pennsylvania 19406-1415

Subject:

Indian Point Unit 3 Initial Licensed Operator Post-Examination Submittal Indian Point Unit 3 Docket No. 50-286 DPR-64 Dear Sir; In accordance with NUREG 1021, Revision 9, "Operator Licensing Examination Standards for Nuclear Power Reactors", Section ES-501 "Initial Post-Examination Activities," Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc. (Entergy) is providing your Mr. David Silk the enclosed documentation for the Indian Point Energy Center Initial Reactor Operator and Senior Reactor Operator written examinations, completed on October 13, 2010.

Entergy is making no commitments in this letter. Should you have any questions regarding this matter, please contact Mr. Stephen Davis, Superintendent, Operations Training - ILO at (914) 788-2904, or Mr. Robert Suneson, Senior Instructor at (914) 788 2635.

Sincerely, JF/aas

Enclosures:

Examination Security Agreement cc:

Document Control Desk U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Mail Stop O-P1-17 Washington, DC 20555-0001 Mr. Samuel L. Hansell, Jr.

Chief, Operational Safety Branch Division of Reactor Safety Region I Nuclear Regulatory Commission 475 Allendale Road King of Prussia, Pennsylvania 19406-1415 Mr. David Silk Chief Examiner Region I U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 475 Allendale Road King of Prussia, Pennsylvania 19406-1415 Resident Inspector's Office Indian Point Unit 3 Nuclear Regulatory Commission Docket No. 50-286 NL-10-127 IP-TNG-10-021 Page 2 of 2 w/o Enclosures w/o Enclosures with Enclosures w/o Enclosures

~~~~~.~ ""

ES-201 Examination Security Agreement Form ES-201-3

1.

Pre-Examination IO-"h:a.PlD I acknowledge that I have acquired specialized knowledge about the NRC licensing examinations scheduled for the week(s) of IP-U' lOlO 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 (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 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 j:~;:?trD. 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 SIGNATURE (1)

DATE SIGNATURE (2)

DATE NOTE frc1\\MIA~Op.u e:xA.-.A :Dt.:N~'pc'{l-

~~

~",.~5;;t \\<"'J

~L~::~~;;

('cnytr8+Dr ::At ptf)(Nt t.£Ae;ro~ &ck). foR.

fl;~~.tIfi!.iM

~\\ ~~"-.., s~i::::)",,";""'\\5vr v

5~"'".r1,:NIlJ..

s-l-rvc~

fl...o 12..0 R.o,

I,j 2

u N

o

~ "

Q.

ES-201 Examination Security Agreement Form ES-201-3

1.

Pre-Examjn'Uon 1(1 -ct -.;lei" c

I acknowledge that I have acquired specialized knowledge about the NRC Ilc;ensing examinations sdleduled for the weekes) of 10 " '."0 81 of the date v..

of my signature. I agree that I wUl not knowingly divulge any information about these.gminalions to any persoos who have not been authorized by the CI')

NRC chief examiner. I understand that I am not to instruct. evaluate, or provide performance feedback to those applicants scheduled to be adminiltered these licensing examinations from this date until completion of examination administration, except as specifically noted below and authorized bV the NRC CD (e.g., acting as a simulator booth operator or communicator Is acceptable if the individual does not select the training content or provide direct 01 indirect N

feedback). Furthemlore. I am aware of the physical securlty measures and requirements (as documented in the facility licensee's procedures) and II) understand that violation of the conditions ofthis agreement may result in cancellation of the examinations and/or an enforcement action against me or II) t""

the faCility licensee. I will Immediately report to facility management or Ute NRC chief examiner any indications or suggestions that examination security may have been comproml&8d*

0')

2.

Post-Examinatign To the best of my knO~~. ~ did not dillUlge to any unauthorized persons any Infonnation concerning the NRC licensing examinations administered during the weekes) of !O..:a';~. From the date that I entered into this security agreement until the complellon of examination administration. I did not instruct, evaluate, or provide performance feedback to those appllcanla who were administered these licensing examinations, except as apecific:aly noted c

below and authorized by the NRC.

.... c PRINTED NAME JOB TITLE I RESPONSIBILITY SIGNATURE (1)

DATE

-'E-;OIiriij!"!:~:7~~~i::::::--

~

SIGNATURE (2)

DATE NOTE L...

U

2.

Iv.

LLI

1.

_~'--:{

~

~I Do

n u

L II

~

8.7.

~.

c LLI

~o

~.~

'\\il,",I/('

~~:cr;"

~o !!'~...

a C'IJ

13.

I Iv ~

I c

14.

~I/...L"'::;o___.....,;;.__*

C o

15.

I "c

c NOTES: r.

"{

o c~e gI Pt CD o..

J a:

Page 1 of 1 Suneson, Robert R From:

Lizzo, Nicholas Sent:

Saturday, October 30,20106:49 AM To:

Suneson, Robert R

Subject:

Yes: Unit 3 ILO security Agreement 11111201 0

Page 1 of 1 Suneson, Robert R From:

Ceglio, Richard M Sent:

Monday, November 01, 2010 8:00 AM To:

Suneson, Robert R

Subject:

Yes: Unit 3 ILO security agreement 1111/2010

Page 1 of 1 Suneson, Robert R From:

Carpino, Ronald J Sent:

Tuesday, November 02,20102:15 PM To:

Suneson, Robert R

Subject:

RE: Unit 3 ILO security agreement Sunny... No Problem....

I will come see you when I get back from Vacation.

Thanks, Ron From: Suneson, Robert R Sent: Monday, November 01,20106:39 AM To: Carpino, Ronald J; Carroll, Michael J; Ceglio, Richard M Cc: Lewis, Matthew W

Subject:

Unit 3 ILO security agreement Gentlemen the exam on Unit 3 is complete and you are required to sign off the security agreement.

This is confirming to the best of your knowledge, you did not divulge to any unauthorized persons any information concerning the NRC license examinations administered during the weeks of 9/30/2010-10/14/2010.

From the date entered into this security agreement until the completion of the examination administration, you did not instruct, evaluate, or provide performance feedback to those applicants who were administered these license examinations.

Respond with the voting button yes (to sign off) or a response to me.

Thanks Sunny Please return your badges at the earliest convenience to either myself or Tim.

Thanks Bob Suneson IPEC ILO Program Lead 914-788-2635-work 845-440-3807 -home 845-401-6987 -cell 914-445-1679-beeper 91444516 79@archwireless.net beeper mail 11/2/2010

1. General Criteria

a.

b.

There is no day-to-day repetition between this and other operating tests to be administered during this examination.

c.

The 0 erating test shall not duplicate items from the a plicants' audit test(s). (see Section D.1.a.)

d.

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

e.

It appears that the operating test will differentiate between competent and less-than-competent ts at th ated license level.

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

Test Number:

Initials a

b*

c#

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 a licable

b.

Ensure that any changes from the previously approved systems and administrative walk-through oullines (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 co is attached.

Date

a.

Author

~/JoLIC.1_0

b.

Facility Reviewer(*)

c.

NRC Chief Examiner (#)

C[I-z. tI/..(1.

d.

NRC Supervisor t;t/~Lta NOTE:

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

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

ES-301 Simulator Scenario Quality Checklist Form ES-301-4

~f'->

Date of Exam:7/wll~cenario Numbers: J/).../ 3>

Operating Test No.:

I QUALITATIVE A TIRIBUTES Initials a

b*

C#

1.

The initial conditions are realistic, in that some equipment and/or instrumentation may be out

~~ ao ~

of service, but it does not cue the operators into expected events.

2.

The scenarios consist mostly of related events.

~ I~ l,{l

3.

Each event description consists of the point in the scenario when it is to be initiated

~1 4

the malfunction(s) that are entered to initiate the event

~

the symptoms/cues 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

~1 Cf6 'r)J without a credible preceding incident such as a seismic event.

5.

The events are valid with regard to physics and thermodynamics.

as I~

6.

Sequencing and timing of events is reasonable, and allows the examination team to obtain f1~ O;D IJ complete evaluation results commensurate with the scenario objectives.

7.

If time compression techniques are used, the scenario summary clearly so indicates.

1. cB. yJ.

Operators have sufficient time to carry out expected activities without undue time constraints.

Cues are given.

~

S.

The simulator modeling is not altered.

~

9.

The scenarios have been validated. Pursuant to 10 CFR 55.46(d), any open simulator 9;'1 (}S,J performance deficiencies or deviations from the referenced plant have been evaluated to ensure that functional fidelity is maintained while running the planned scenarios.

10.

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

~1 :?~ J-Ail other scenarios have been altered in accordance with Section 0.5 of ES-301.

(

11.

All individual operator competencies can be evaluated, as verified using Form ES-301-6

~i ~ W (submit the form along with the simulator scenarios).

12.

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).

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

~:J ~ ml Target Quantitative Attributes (Per Scenario; See Section D.S.d)

Actual Attributes

1.

Total malfunctions (5-8)

~ / '/b

..t14 4B JJ

2.

Malfunctions after EOP entry (1-2) z... /,/ L J}li\\ C28 fJ:/

3.

Abnormal events (2-4)

~ J'~ / "

~1' ~ tlJt

4.

Major transients (1-2)

I

/ I / I

_~'1 d" JJJ

5.

EOPs entered/requiring substantive actions (1-2)

I

/ I / I

~ t:JZ, t!JI

6.

EOP contingencies requiring substantive actions (0-2)

I

/ I I ¥r J¥t' l2& Vj1

7.

Critical tasks (2-3)

.~

/ 2.../)

1. 108 ~~

ES-301 Simulator Scenario Quality Checklist Form ES-301-4 Date of Exam:"I'~()flgcenario Numbers:<1/ I Operating Test No.:

I QUALITATIVE ATTRIBUTES Initials a

b*

C#

1.

The initial conditions are realistic, in that some equipment and/or instrumentation may be out

.oA db ~

of service, but it does not cue the operators into expected events.

2.

The scenarios consist mostly of related events.

~ tP;7 I~

3.

Each event description consists of the point in the scenario when it is to be initiated

~l the malfunction(s) that are entered to initiate the event tfh

~

the symptoms/cues 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

~ 0.8, without a credible preceding incident such as a seismic event

5.

The events are valid with regard to physics and thermodynamics.

_QJJ a:s,M

6.

Sequencing and timing of events is reasonable, and allows the examination team to obtain

~ 0>> lL complete evaluation results commensurate with the scenario objectives.

7.

If time compression techniques are used, the scenario summary clearly so indicates.

~ J Operators have sufficient time to carry out expected activities without undue time constraints.

(If)

Cues are given.

S.

The Simulator modeling is not altered.

~1 a:6 I~

9.

The scenarios have been validated. Pursuant to 10 CFR 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.

10.

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

i a>3 ~

All other scenarios have been altered in accordance with Section 0.5 of ES-301.

~1Jrti'

11.

All individual operator competencies can be evaluated, as verified using Form ES-301-6 r)/1 O!!:> ~

(submit the form along with the simulator scenarios).

12.

Each applicant will be significantly involved in the minimum number of transients and events fjf<<'i ::23 speCified on Form ES-301-5 (submit the form with the simulator scenarios).

13.

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

~1 a<6 ~

Target Quantitative Attributes (Per Scenario; See Section D.5.d)

Actual Attributes

1.

Total malfunctions (5-8)

'7 I

/

~ ~

It.l~

2.

Malfunctions after EOP entry (1-2) 32'/

/

~~1 c/3;tl

3.

Abnormal events (2-4)

"3 /

I

~ 02> 1\\.

4.

Major transients (1-2)

I

/

/

-~ G8 I~

5.

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

I

.... _./

!a.8 I~

6.

EOP contingencies requiring substantive actions (0-2)

I

/

/

I~ a$ lol

7.

Critical tasks (2-3)

L I

I

.~i as ~J

ES*301 Transient and Event Checklist Form ES*301*5 Facility: :rp- :;

Date of Exam: '1 j1e Ii 0 Operating Test No.:,

A E

Scenarios P

V 1

2 3

4 T

M P

E 0

I L

N CREW CREW CREW CREW T

N I

T POSITION POSITION POSITION POSITION A

I M

C S

A B

S A

B S

A B

S A

B L

U A

T R

T 0

R T

0 R

T 0

R T

0 M(O)

N Y

0 C

P 0

C P

0 C

P 0

C P

I lu T

P R

E RO RX 6

1 1 0 0

NOR L.j 2...

1 1 1 SRO-I 0

IIC

'21:'

IV:

7 4

4 2

SRO-U MAJ to

J "2

2 2

1

,OJ TS 21,

')

0 2

2 RO RX I

1 1 0

[l]

NOR t

Y 1

1 1

SRO-I

'21~'f I,p 0

IIC 15

\\0 4 4

2 SRO-U MAJ

'S 6

5

'3 2

2 1

iD TS 0

0 2 2 RO

!RX

\\

1 1 0

[1J NOR

~

"2.

1 1

1 SRO-I

, -~'i If' 0

IIC zS 10 4

4 2

SRO-U MAJ

_'5 b

~

3 2

2 1

ID

J TS 0

0 2

2 RO RX I

I 1

1 0

[3]

NOR

\\

'1 L

1 1

1 SRO-I

".:~ ~

\\ ' ~

0 IIC

~ ~i

~-.

10 4

4 2

SRO-U MAJ 5

~

2 2

1 0

b

.:J TS

()

0 2

2 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 serve in both the SRO and the ATC positions.

including at least two instrument or component (IIC) malfunctions and one major transient. in the ATC position. If an Instant SRO additionally serves in the BOP position. one IIC malfunction can be credited toward the two IIC malfunctions required for 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. (0) Reactivity and normal evolutions may be replaced with additional instrument or component malfunctions on a 1-for-1 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 requirements specified for the applicant's license level in the right-hand columns.

Transient and Event Checklist Form ES-301-5 Facility: :r::f- ~

Date of Exam: ~ /10 Ii 0 Operating Test No.:

I A

E Scenarios p

V 1

2 3

4 T

M P

E 0

I L

N CREW CREW CREW CREW T

N I

T POSITION POSITION POSITION POSITION A

I M

C S

A B

S A

B S

A B

S A

B L

U A

T R

T 0

R T

0 R

T 0

R T

0 M(*)

N Y

0 C

P 0

C P

0 C

P 0

C P

R I

U T

P E

RO RX

~

\\

1 1 0 0

NOR I

\\

1 1

1 SRO-I

@l IIC 1.-~1

\\ l.~

~

4 4

2 SRO-U MAJ S

S l

2 2

1 10 TS 2.:'

"l 0

2 2

RO RX

\\

I 1

1 0 0

NOR

\\

~

L 1

1 1

SRO-I

\\\\

1~3

[

J\\

[f;]

IIC 2.~'

4 4

2 SRO-U MAJ

~

'4 s

'3 2

2 1

0 TS

).~

"2 0

2.2 RO RX I

1 1 0 0

NOR

\\

I 1

1 1

SRO*I OJ IIC

.~

'8 4

4 2

SRO-U MAJ

7

?

2 2

2 1

0 TS 2.:;'

L 0

2 2

RO RX I

1 1 0 0

NOR

~

I 1

1 1 SRO-I

~

IIC l.l,'i 1'l.3 3

4 4

2 b

SRO-U MAJ

.5

!5 2

2 1

10 TS 1.,

'L 0

2 2 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 serve in both the SRO and the ATC positions, including at least two instrument or component (lie) malfunctions and one major transient, in the ATC position. If an Instant SRO additionally serves in the BOP position, one IIC malfunction can be credited toward the two IIC malfunctions required for 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 C2a of Appendix D. (.) Reactivity and normal evolutions may be replaced with additional instrument or component malfunctions on a 1-for-1 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 requirements specified for the applicant's license level in the right-hand columns.

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

['

xf-3 Date of Exam: 91~u/to Operating Test No.:

I A

E Scenarios P

V 1

2 3

4 T

M P

E 0

I L

N CREW CREW CREW CREW T

N I

T POSITION POSITION POSITION POSITION A

I C

B M

S A

B S

A B

S A

B S

A L

U A

T R

T 0

R T

0 R

T 0

R T

0 M(*)

N Y

0 C

P 0

C P

0 C

P 0

C P

R I

U T

P E

RO RX L\\

i I

1 1 a D

NOR

\\

\\

H SRO-I

[JJ I/C 1")'\\

11S

\\tlO

,"-:1 SRO-U MAJ

~

b

';J

~ 2 2

1 I

D TS l'?>

2*r I I

5 a 2

2 RO RX

\\

I 1

1 a i D

NOR I

\\

4 "2

1 1 1 SRO-I 2~'t t=t=

I~~

~

I/C 1~1

\\ I 4

4 2

SRO-U MAJ

?

,,-IS

?

S 2

2 1

D TS

'2..~

'2.. a 2

2 RO RX

'i 1+1*~I D

NOR I

~

SRO-I

[jJ I/C 1 7 0,"

Ilb 1\\

4 4

2

(..f' I

SRO-U MAJ S

r 5

3 2

2 1

D TS 23>

5 a

2 2

'\\

RO RX

\\

\\

1 1 a D

NOR I

L!

1 1

1 SRO-I BJ IIC

'l44

.~ :-..., I,!,?

I \\

4 4

2 SRO-U MAJ

5

(,'1!r 7

2 2

LRI D

./

TS L.!,

t-a 2

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 serve in both the SRO and the ATC positions.

including at least two instrument or component (l1G) malfunctions and one major tranSient. in the ATC position. If an Instant SRO additionally serves in the BOP pOSition, one I/C malfunction can be credited toward the two I/C malfunctions required for 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 1-for-1 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 requirements specified for the applicant's license level in the right-hand columns.

ES-301 Competencies Checklist Form ES-301-6 Facility: L-f,- ~

Date of Examination: '1rWI,o Operating Test No.: 1 Competencies APPLICANTS RO D

SRO-I W

SRO-U D RO D

SRO-I lli SRO-U D RO D

SRO-I

[3J SRO-U D RO D

SRO-I GJ SRO-U D SCENARIO SCENARIO SCENARIO SCENARIO 1

2 3

4 1

2 3

4 1

2 3

4 1

2 3

4 I nterpretiDiagnose Events and Conditions 1

1 L

(;,

il 1..

5,!o 2., ~

5

'>,i 1

i-")

5,.1..

"L "1

1.

1,1.

~,t.

lti "1",

f l-~

51~

Comply With and Use Procedures (1)

I

~

I ~

b '-\\

i 1 1~5 I

5 I-b ~

I

(

\\-5 Operate Control Boards (2) 1-(;,

1-1 L

/-"7 "1

I~

l-1

~

1->

'7 Communicate and Interact I

7 I-b 16 j-l 1-1 i-l I

1 1

b l~

l-l \\.:? 1-7 Demonstrate Supervisory Ability (3) 1 7

\\

b I-I I

1 I-b 1-1 Comply With and Use Tech. Specs. (3)

L,~ -z.c' l-I~

1.,} L,1 1-, }

Notes:

(1 )

Includes Technical Specification compliance for an RO.

(2)

Optional for an SRO-U.

(3)

Only applicable to SROs.

Instructions,'

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

ES-301 Competencies Checklist Form ES-301 M6 Facility: :t:.f- ~

Date of Examination: ~ b,o\\(o Operating Test No.: \\

APPLICANTS RO RO C

RO C

RO SROMI

~

SRO-I

[§j SRO-I

[))

SRO-I SRO-U 0 SRO-U SRO-U 0 SRO-U Competencies SCENARIO SCENARIO SCENARIO SCENARIO 1

2 3

4 1

2 3

4 1

2 3

4 1

2 3

I nterpretlDiagnose 2-1

'IL 1.*1 ~,i \\- '> jt1-ffi

£,1

\\-,

Events and Conditions

'5"r(;:

5, 5',"=

~

S",b Comply With and 1-5" L\\

t f l-')

1-'5 i

I 1-)

Use Procedures (1)

Operate Control I~

1-'-\\ \\ -~

l~

1-1{

Boards (2) b '7 Communicate 1-1 I-b 1-7 1-1 and Interact

\\-7 1-7 l-6

\\-7 1-1 Demonstrate 1-1 I-I 1-1 1-1 Supervisory Ability (3)

Comply With and 1.1) l,>

It)

Use Tech. Specs. (3)

Notes:

(1)

Includes Technical Specification compliance for an RO.

(2)

Optional for an SRO-U.

(3)

Only applicable to SROs.

4 Instructions:

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

ES-301 Competencies Checklist Form ES-301-6 Facility: 'J:f ~

Date of Examination: Cf{\\olIQ Operating Test No,: \\

APPLICANTS RO RO OJ RO ill RO W

SRO-I SRO-I SRO-I D SRO-I D SRO-U [J SRO-U SRO-U D.

SRO-U D SCENARIO SCENARIO

! SCENARIO SCENARIO Competencies

!I 1 2

3 4

1 2

3 4

I 1 12 3

4 I 1 I 2 I nterpret/Diagnose I,)

~,i 2... l->

}/1 L 1-)

I"}I, t

Events and Conditions 2..--L. "1

'1 "5

"1 5 1 1 ?

Comply With and

'}

~

1

)

\\

l-(., "1 i

~

)

Use Procedures (1) 1 Operate Control I-?

l-'-l IlL \\-S' I-~ I,t.. 1-<)

\\-~ I, z....

Boards (2)

"1

-, S, L..,

1-,

~,{,..,

1 '7,1:.

Communicate I-£. 1-5 I"'" l.,(,

I-~-

1-) 1-\\ It-S' 1-) 1..(,

and Interact

(

1 1

1

-r Demonstrate Supervisory Ability (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.

3 4

,-}

1

')

1 l-S

'1

,---5

'1 Instructions:

Check the applicants' license type and enter one or more event numbers that will aI/ow the examiners to evaluate every applicable competency for every applicant.

ES-401 Written Examination Quality Checklist Form ES-401-6 Date of Exam: iO- '-(-10 Exam Level: RO[X]

SROOO Initial Item Description 1,

Questions and answers are technicall accurate and applicable to the facilit,

2,

a.

b.

NRC KlAs are referenced for all questions.

Facilit leamin ob'ectives are referenced as available.

3, SRO uestions are appro riate in accordance with Section D,2.d of ES-401 4,

5.

6,

7.

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

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 Lthe 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 new or modified); enter the actual RO / SRO-only question distribution s at ri hI.

Bank Modified Between 50 and 60 percent of the questions on the RO Memory exam are written at the comprehension/ analysis level; the SRO exam may exceed 60 percent if the randomly selected KlAs support the higher cognitive levels: enter

~~1. l.it.iryc the actual RO / SRO question 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 KIA statements in the previously approved examination outline and is appropriate for the tier to which they are assigned; deviations are justified.

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.

a. Author b, Facility Reviewer (*)

c. NRC Chief Examiner (#)

d. NRC Regional Supervisor Note:

• The facility reviewer's initials/signature are not applicable for NRC-developed examinations.

1. Inde endent NRC reviewer initial items in Column "c"; chief examiner concurrence ired.

ES-403 Written Examination Grading Form ES-403-1 Quality Checklist Date of Exam: *.

a b

c Item Descri tion

1.

Iflwf I 2.

Answer key changes and question deletions justified J]h;(

and documented (Aflr...e 05 I

i 3.

Applicants' scores checked for addition errors

,~

____ (reviewers spot ________

check> 25% of examinations __________

~

~

~

~

~~~~

~

~~

I I 4.

Grading for all borderline cases (80 +/-2% overall and 70 or 80, DIll' as a licable, +/-4% on the SRO-onl ) reviewed in detail

5.

All other failing examinations checked to ensure that grades

_J4 are 'ustified

6.

Performance on missed questions checked for training

,£>tAct deficiencies and wording problems; evaluate validity of questions missed b half or more of the a plicants Printed Name/Signature Date

a. Grader itL/fill)

b. Facility Reviewer(*)

\\,cAo..L1o

,o'fZ.7.) 10 IVU/i>

c.

d. NRC Supervisor (*)

(*)

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

((~

2g

-+____~L-~I Va (l

a2J I

/u/Z)ju