ML13109A406

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Final Qa/Related Forms (Folder 1)
ML13109A406
Person / Time
Site: Indian Point Entergy icon.png
Issue date: 03/06/2013
From:
Entergy Nuclear Indian Point 3
To: D'Antonio J
Operations Branch I
Jackson D
Shared Package
ML12214A189 List:
References
TAC U01866
Download: ML13109A406 (15)
v • d • e


Text

ES-201 Examination Preparation Checklist Form ES-201-1 Facility: 'lfl} Date of Examination: 11/11- ~!l'"

r-Examinations Developed by: (FaCilitV> I NRC (circle one)

Target Date*

Task Description (Reference)

Chief Examiners I~IS

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

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

~

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

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

~ / / ' fA

[-90] [5. Reference material due (C.1.e; C.3.c; Attachment 2)] 17/ V 7'

~

-75 6. Integrated examination outline(s) due, in orms ES-201-2, ES-201-3.

ES-301-1. ES-301-2, ES-301-5, ES-O- 01-1/2. ES-401-3, and ES-401-4, as applicable (C.1.e and f; C.3.d)

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

-45 8. Proposed examinations (including written, walk-through JPMs, and /

scenarios. as applicable), supporting documentation (including Forms

~;J ES-301-3, ES-301-4, ES-301-5, ES-301..f3, and ES-401-6). and reference materials due (C.1.e, f. g and h; C.3.d)

-30 9. Preliminary license applications (NRC Form 398's) due (C.1.1: C.2.g; ES-202) ~2J

-14 10. Final license applications due and Form E8-201-4 prepared (C.1.1; C.2.i; ES-202)

(

/Jv

-14

-14

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)

'nfo

{~

-7 ~Written exam;natkms and ope",ting tests approved by NRC ,"peMsor (C.2.i; C.3.h)

~

-7 I

"'inal applications reviewed; examination approval and waiver letters sent (C.2.i; Attachment 4; ES-204) '//JPCJ

-7 15. Proctoring/written exam administration guidelines reviewed with facility licensee (C.3.k) 1;

-7 16. Approved scenarios. job performance measures, and questions distributed to NRC examiners (C.3.i)

'//IN

  • Target dates are keyed to the examination date identified in the corporate notification letttr.

They are for planning purposes and may be adjusted on a case-by-case basis in coordination with the facility licensee.

[ ] 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: Date of Examination:

Initials Item Task Description a b* C#

1, a, Verify that the outline(s) fit(s) the appropriate model, in accordance with ES-401, eft.- ~ (J't W

Ifo ~

R b, Assess whether the outline was systematically and randomly preparecl in accordance with ,V' I Section D,1 of ES-401 and whether all KIA categories are appropriately sampled, T

T c, Assess whether the outline over-emphasizes any systems, evolutions, or generic topics, aP ~ tV

~

E N d, Assess whether the justifications for deselected or rejected KIA statements are appropriate, (lLc. ~

2, a, Using Form ES-301-5, verify that the proposed scenario sets cover thl~ required number S

I of normal evolutions, instrument and component failures, technical specifications, and major transients, e;C. 11> r 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

A T

without compromising exam integrity, and ensure that 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 that scenarios will not be repeated on subsequent days, etv 0/6 If 0

r!F-' 0/6 ry 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

,~ ~

/ (2) task repetition from the last two NRC examinations is within the limits specified on the form d 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 elY ~ y (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, C/p ~ 1)1' II'~ ~~ 4' 4, a, Assess whether plant-specific priorities (including PRA and IPE insights) are covered in the appropriate exam sections, G

E b, Assess whether the 10 CFR 55,41/43 and 55,45 sampling is appropriate, 1(1)G ~ /V' N

E c, Ensure that KIA importance ratings (except for plant-specific priorities} are at least 2,5, l¥- ~!> tv' R d, Check for duplication and overlap among exam sections, (1.fC ~ tv A

L e, Check the entire exam for balance of coverage, ('p.. ~ 'V

f. Assess whether the exam fits the appropriate job level (RO or SRO), {!/k-- '~ 11

~5 ,cuc.l:3n~ ~~nature a, Author b, Facility Reviewer (*)

c, NRC Chief Examiner (#)

d, NRC Supervisor

~\~A..~\\\~N iT', (J'ArIl'-"J9 n,... \... ~.

//'

':2,

/NV /./PC:=f.

/V--ev

.o~

lA:bYo\~"

X VI i1t i'

,\

I,

  • '{~~(}f frt 1

~~, l I

Note: # Independent NRC reviewer initial items in Column "c"; chief examiner concurrence required,

  • Not applicable for NRC-prepared examination outlines

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 weekes) of .2-/1-1 ~ 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) orl, t 'e:"L:;,) 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 J RESPONSIBILITY DATE DATE NOTE

~~~~tCQII. ft.'"

$!&.~:~A""\ ~~PJt

.,z

~ J!~§tiiJ':::?! gc ~fi'z~:Jjbv<'d:Jtj'

3. . ',' J. .' ,../' '1:'0 'K I C'XH: hc.,rC" -'1<;- 24 ):7' 6.

7, K-. ~"'I/I-

,,<-.(. ' ' ' ' /

Irlt<l, 8,~1 Mc""L'~>

~oit~..,~*S4\\"""J

"~~J .~ ~

1 "'-'--YVI"?'

, ?:"'/./

vI;:zS u... (lsA" lac

-0 ,- l-~kIOjt7'b.'<.

s,~u.~~:

~

.t '

l,It..;,l' )__

,-d:;. I L "L-.,

~ ~r""" ~~a:v~

(? ." I 12, C ,d?~ .-I'~--

13. c", Rc vo 0.,/ '" "" -;rr
-=

14, 15, NOTES:

tlU::.!L Lel, lA

.:'r'e~k'('),,\ (\Ill'/i;,r

\

C' r3(ftda:tc L M\c.r-l. 2. 21

'?ACr~ z o-y:: ~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 scheduled for the week(s) of 2--1(-1) 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 1-11 ~tttt./J;,. 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.

SIGNATURE (2) DATE NOTE

~: "9~ ~U r,'*~{(~:;;;r;;F

3. i20 VAL.it::1&ro~
4. go VAL.Il>AIGR
5. f"'k&,")"'" =rl;'~,\",,-
6. ~

~:

9.

=: c . ,?IS I 1--0 '(I!.A,lIIilll/.I /. 'Xl y>.<

J£uVl 10.

11.

hoM ,,"'Fry _ _ __

12. _ _ __
13. _ _ __
14. _ _ __
15. _ _ __

NOTES:

Suneson, Robert R From: Suneson, Robert R Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2013 9:33 AM To: Schmidt, William L; Zastrow, Andrew; Carpino, Ronald J; Lewis, Mark ); Duncan, Gary K; Laubach, Mark; Cassidy, Christopher; Hron, Christopher M.; Lizzo, Nicholas; Cramer, Thomas A; Bedka, Richard A; Nunez, Rosendo; McCarthy, Michael; Lewis, Matthew W

Subject:

Unit 3 NRC Security Agreement Tracking: Recipient Response Schmidt, William L Signing off agreemen: 2/20/2013 10:17 AM Zastrow, Andrew Carpino, Ronald J Signing off agreemen: 2/20/2013 9:59 AM lewis, Mark J Signing off agreemen: 2/21/2013 2:20 AM Duncan, Gary K Signing off agreemen: 2/20/2013 12:54 PM laubach, Mark Signing off agreemen: 2/24/2013 11:26 PM Cassidy, Christopher Signing off agreemen: 2/20/2013 6:52 PM Hron, Christopher M.

Uzzo, Nicholas Cramer, Thomas A Signing off agreemen: 2/20/2013 11:45 AM Nunez, Rosendo Signing off agreemen: 2/20/2013 11:38 AM McCarthy, Michael Signing off agreemen: 2/20/2013 10:58 AM lewis, Matthew W Signing off agreemen: 2/21/2013 9:20 AM Gentlemen the exam security 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 2/11/2013-2/20/2013. 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 or a response to me.

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

Thanks Bob Suneson LOI Program Administrator 914-254-2635 (work) 845-440-3807 (Home) 845-401-6987 (Cell) sunbson@me.com (Home) 1

Suneson, Robert R From: Suneson, Robert R Sent: Friday, March 01, 2013 6:49 AM To: Zastrow, Andrew

Subject:

Unit 3 Security Agreement Tracking: Recipient Response Zastrow, Andrew Signing off Security Agreement: 3/1/2013 9:49 PM Gentlemen the exam security 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 2/11/2013-2/20/2013. 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 adrninistered these license examinations.

Respond with the voting button or a response to me.

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

Thanks Bob Suneson LOI Program Administrator 914-254-2635 (work) 845-440-3807 (Home) 845-401-6987 (Cell) sunbson@me.com (Home) 1

ES-301 Operating Test Quality Chec:.:.:k.:.:lis:.:t=---_ _ _ _=F:or:m==sE:=S:::-3::0:::1:=-3 Facili Date of Examination: Test Number:

Initials

1. General Criteria a b* c#

a.

b. There is no day-to-day repetition between this and other operating tests to be administered durin this examination.
c. The 0 eratin test shall not du licate items from the a licants' audit test s . see Section D.l.a.
d. Overlap with the written examination and between different parts of the operating test is within acce table limits.
e. It appears that the operating test will differentiate between competent and less-than-competent a licants at the desi nated license level.
2. Walk-Throu h 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 se uence of ste s, if a licable

b. Ensure that any changes from the previously approved systems and administrative walk-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 co is attached.
a. Author
b. Facility Reviewer(")
c. NRC Chief Examiner (#)
d. NRC Supervisor NOTE:
  • The facility signature is not applicable for NRC-developed tests.
  1. Inde endent NRC reviewer initial items in Column "c"; chief examiner concurrence re uired.

ES-301 Simulator Scenario Quality Checklist Form ES-301-4 Facility: I N!)"W fb\.vI '3> Date of EX~\ ' \ \lJ Scenario Numbers: , /1-1 >Operating Test No.: ,

QUALITATIVE A TIRIBUTES Initials a b* dI

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. Uc. ~ lif
2. The scenarios consist mostlv of related events. CJ.G ~ IV
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 Cle- ~ ry
    • 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 without a credible preceding incident such as a seismic event Qji ~ ri
5. The events are valid with rejlard to physics and thermodynamics.

()I.G ¥'6 r M-- (#f fY

6. Sequencing and timing of events is reasonable. and allows the examination team to obtain complete evaluation results commensurate with the scenario objectives.

~ t-l\~ rlh

7. Iflime 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 !Jiven.

8, The simulator modeling is not altered, at. '].1 1/

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. e.t. ~ 0'

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 0,5 of ES-301, ~ PP ty IY

11. All individual operator competencies can be evaluated, as verified using Form ES-301-6 (submit the form along with the simulator scenarios),

(!L

~

rut. ~

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).
13. The level of difficulty is appropriate to support licensing decisions for each crew position. IUJ.... ~ [f/

Target Quantitative AttributesjPer Scenario; See Section D.S.d) Actual Attributes -- -- -

1. Total malfunctions (5-8) b '7/.r?

2 Malfunctions after EOP entry (1-2) 2.- / 2-, t...

3.

4, Abnormal events (2-4)

Major transients (1-2)

~

\

/"/ l /

/ ~

2

5. EOPs entered/requiring substantive actions (1-2) 1- / 1-/ L
6. EOP contingencies requiring substantive actions (0-2) t /1/ \
7. Critical tasks (2-3) -:> /-; / ~

ES-301, Page 25 of 27

ES-301 Simulator Scenario Quality Checklist Form ES-301-4 llJ1>\AA> POVJr1. Date of Exa1f: 'I /

IJ

  • Facility: Scenario Numbers:L{ 1 S 1 Operating Test No.: \

QUAliTATIVE ATTRIBUTES Initials a b* C#

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. U'- 1/5 '1
2. The scenarios consist mostly of related events. (!).c iVtJ y
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 ~ ff
    • the symptoms/cues that will be visible to the crew eJ(;

the expected operator actions (by shift position)

  • the event termination point (If applicable)

~ V6

4. No more than one non-mechanistic failure (e.g., pipe break) is incorporated Into the scenario ty' without a credible preceding incident such as a seismic event.
5. The events are valid with regard to physics and thermodynamics. e)c-- IW (Ir
6. Sequencing and timing of events is reasonable, and allows the examination team to obtain complete evaluation results commensurate with the scenario objectives. Vb tY JI~ tll" +
7. If time compression techniques are used, the scenario summary dearly so indicates.

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

Cues are given.

8. The simulator modeling is not altered.

o..t IY f!f- ~ rY

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.

All other scenarios have been altered in accordance with Section 0.5 of ES-301 . I~ ?/> rY (J/

11. All individual operator competencies can be evaluated, as verified using Form ES-301-6 (submit the form along with the simulator scenarios). UG ~
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). ~

o.p (lr Jt!./

13. The level of difficulty is appropriate to support licensing decisions for each crew position. tr* W rt Target Quantitative Attributes (Per Scenario; See Section D.S.d) Actual Attributes -- -- -
1. Total malfunctions (5-8) f:, 161
2. Malfunctions after EOP entry (1-2) "Z- 12../
3. Abnormal events (2-4) -:s 131
4. Major transients (1-2) \ I 2-1
5. EOPs entered/reQuiring substantive actions (1-2) Z- / 1-/

\ I 6.

7.

EOP contingencies requiring substantive actions (0-2)

Critical tasks (2-3) '1 1

13/

/

H ES-301, Page 25 of 27

ES-301 Transient and Event Checklist Form ES-301-5 Facility: \A.i'\:)\"N fOVR' '> Date of Exam: 2 \\\ I"> Operating Test No.: (

A E Scenarios P V 1 2 4 T M 3

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 CO NOR I \ '2... 1 1 1 SRO-I 0SRO-U I/C 2 => :3 to 4 4 2 MAJ 1 I ' '1 2 2 1 0 TS 0 2 2 I RO RX \ \ 1 1 o Ii

[i1 SRO-I NOR I \ 2 1 1 1 i 0SRO-U IIC '2.... 5 l.f 1\ 4 4 2 MAJ \ \ l' 3 2 2 1 0

RO 0SRO-I TS RX

, \

, 0 1

2 2 1 0 NOR I 2 1 1 1

[i] I/C '1 1 l{ 10 4 4 2 SRO-U MAJ I I l. ~ 2 2 1 0 TS 1 .t ..'1 0 2 2 RO RX 1 1 0 0SRO-I NOR I \ \ 3 1 1 1

[Jd SRO-U I/C MAJ

)

1 ,S ~

t.....

(0 4 5 2 4

2 2

1 10 TS 1. 2 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 AIC 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 Transient and Event Checklist Form ES-301-5

~ .l\.n-.U.N f'Q\"" ~ 'l-\ \\ \\3 \

Date of Exam: Operating Test No.:

A E Scenarios P V 2 M 1 3 4 T 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

mml RO RX \

DSRO-I NOR I I  ! (

~ I/C L\ 2 Itt D

SRO-U MAJ \ I 1.... I ~ 2 2 1 TS 2 '1 ~ 0 2 2 RO RX l I 1 1 0 DSRO-I NOR I I t. 1 1 GJ I/C .5 ~ '-l It 4 2 SRO-U MAJ I l I ~ 2 2 1 D TS 1.. '1 0 2 2 RO RX 1 1 0 DSRO-I NOR \ l \ ~ 1 1 1

[5J IIC ) '3 5 1\ 4 4 2 SRO-U MAJ 2 L 2 b 2 2 1 D TS 0 2 RO RX 1 1 D

SRO-I NOR 1 1 1 D

SRO-U I/C 4 4 2 MAJ 2 2 1 D TS I

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 A TC positions.

including at least two instrument or component (l/C) 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.S.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: xf3 Date of Examination: 2.. \ \\ , \~ Operating Test No.:

\

APPLICANTS RO OJ RO RO D RO D SRO-I D SRO-I SRO-I SRO-I ~

SRO-U D SRO-U D SRO-U P5 SRO-U D Competencies SCENARIO SCENARIO SCENARIO SCENARIO InterpretlDiagnose , 1 2 2.

3 2.

~

4 1 2 2.

3 4 I

1 4,1 3 8 3 3 2 3 4 1 2 "3 2

b 3 4 Events and Conditions Comply With and '3

'{

~

~

\

3 "f

1.{ I liZ

,,1 I

~

I,l..

1 b 7

.t.t Use Procedures (1)

, 2 I

II~ \

3 I I 7

,,'I.. .,,

2 Operate Control Boards (2) "\., , ~-,

" 1 2 I.f 1

'h1 l..

'i

)

C{ 3 f 1,3, 1,; i 113 I I 1,1- 1,1 "I'Z..

Communicate 1 1

~

')

and Interact 1,& ~ ~ 'lIb 4 ~I~ b 8 b b J II' Demonstrate I, " 3 Supervisory Ability (3) Ib.1 7 b Comply With and ~ 'l.. 2 Use Tech. Specs. (3) 8 ~ ~

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-301-6 Facility:

r f 3 Date of Examination: 2..\,,\,:, Operating Test No.:

I APPLICANTS RO D RO RO D RO D SRO-I SRO-I SRO-I [5J SRO-I D SRO-U SRO-U SRO-U D SRO-U =:J Competencies SCENARIO SCENARIO SCENARIO SCENARIO 1 2 3 4 *1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1.. \

Interpret/Diagnose "\,1 '3 '3 3 1...

b

~ L S l..

Events and Conditions '8 tf 'i Comply With and \,1 t \  ; \

2 t ,1.

\

1 Use Procedures (1) :3,1 i

3 1 b 1

~ 1 1 I 7 Z Operate Control \ 'IL 1

'i 3 ~ ~

Boards (2)

, , b Communicate and Interact I, }

~I\'

~

l b

1

\

\1 '>

,}

2.

'!I 1

i Ilh-1

} ~

'1.

'i b

}

10 1, '{

Demonstrate ~ }

Supervisory Ability (3) Con '7 ~ b

'i '1.. 1 t Comply With and Use Tech. Specs. (3) 'is' i '3 ~

Notes:

(1 ) Includes Technical Specification compliance for an RO.

(2) Optional for an SRO-U.

(3) Only applicable to SROs.

Instructions:

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

ES-401 Written Examination Quality Checklist Form ES-401-6 Date of Exam: -i...

Item Description

1. Questions and answers are technical! accurate and a licable to the facilit .
2. a. NRC KlAs are referenced for all questions.
b. Facilit learnin ob'ectives are referenced as available.
3. SRO
4. The sampling process was random and systematic (If more than 4 RO or :2 SRO questions were re eated from the last 2 NRC licensin exams, consult the NRR OL ro ram office .
5. Question duplication from the license screening/audit exam was controlled as indicated below (check the item that applies) and appears appropriate: I ftc. ~

_ 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 i?'fhe licensee certifies that there is no duplication: or

_ other (explain)

6. Bank use meets limits (no more than 75 percent Bank New t1/

from the bank, at least 10 percent new, and the rest new or modified): enter the actual RO / SRO-only uestion distribution s at ri hI.

(1.L ofo

~) I/'

7. Between 50 and 60 percent of the questions on the RO 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 ~

the actual RO I SRO uestion distribution s at ri ht.

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'ustified.

10.

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

_,oatr

a. Author

~

b. Facility Reviewer r) ~/
c. NRC Chief Examiner (#)

WJ:II

d. NRC Regional Supervisor  !:/l!!W 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 re uired.

ES-403 Written Examination Grading Form ES-403-1 Quality Checklist Initials Item Descri tion a c 1.

2. Answer key changes and question deletions justified and documented
3. Applicants' scores checked for addition errors reviewers s ot check> 25% of examinations
4. Grading for all borderline cases (80 +/-2% overall and 70 or 80, as a licable, +/-4% on the SRO-onl reviewed in detail
5. All other failing examinations checked to ensure that grades are .ustified
6. Performance on missed questions checked for training deficiencies and wording problems; evaluate validity of uestions missed b half or more of the licants Printed Name/Signature Date
a. Grader
b. Facility Reviewer(*)
c. NRC Chief Examiner (*)
d. NRC Supervisor (*) z/n[rJ

(*) The facility reviewer's signature is not applicable for examinations graded by the NRC; two inde endent NRC reviews are re uired.

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML13109A406&oldid=2520759"