ML18088A723

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Final Qa/Related Forms (Folder 1)
ML18088A723
Person / Time
Site: Nine Mile Point 
(DPR-063)
Issue date: 03/29/2018
From: Brian Fuller
Operations Branch I
To:
Exelon Generation Co
Shared Package
ML16210A438 List:
References
CAC U01941
Download: ML18088A723 (12)
v • d • e


Text

ES-201 Examination Preparation Checklist Form ES-201-1 Facility: Nine Mile Point Unit 1 Date of Examination: 216117 Developed by: Written:

Facility X NRG D II Operating Facility X

NRG D Target Task Description (Reference)

Chief Examiner's Date*

Initials

-180

1.

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

-150

2.

NRG examiners and facility contact assigned (C.1.d; C.2.e)

~

-150

3.

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

-150

4.

Corporate notification letter sent (C.2.d)

F

[-120)

5.

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

F

(-90)

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, ES-401-1/2, ES-401N-1/2, ES-401-3, ES-401N-3, F

ES-401-4, and ES-401 N-4, as applicable (C.1.e and f; C.3.d)

(-85)

7.

Examination outline(s) reviewed by NRG and feedback provided to facility licensee p

(C.2.h; C.3.e)

(-60)

8.

Proposed examinations (including written, walk-through JPMs, and scenarios, as applicable), supporting documentation (including Forms ES-301-3, ES-301-4, ES-r 301-5, ES-301-6, and ES-401-6, ES-401 N-6, and any Form ES-201-2, ES-201-3, ES-301-1, or ES-301-2 updates), and reference materials due (C.1.e, f, g and h; C.3.d)

-45

9.

Written exam and operating test reviews completed. (C.3.f)

F

-30

10.

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

-21

11.

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

~ t-/A

-21

12.

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

-14

13.

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

F

-14

14.

Written examinations and operating tests approved by NRG supervisor (C.2.i; F

C.3.h)

-7

15.

Facility licensee management queried regarding the licensee's views on the F ~/A examination. (C.2 j)

-7

16.

Final applications reviewed; 1 or 2 (if > 10) applications audited to confirm F

qualifications/ eligibility; and examination approval and waiver letters sent (C.2.i; ; ES-202, C.2.e; ES-204)

-7

17.

Proctoring/written exam administration guidelines reviewed with facility licensee F

(C.3.k)

-7

18.

Approved scenarios, job performance measures, and questions distributed to NRG

,=-

examiners (C.3.i)

  • 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 NRG.

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 or ES-401 N.

Pf1 r!J,tf w

R

b.

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

~

I PF/ t4 T

Section D.1 of ES-401 or ES-401 N and whether all KIA categories are appropriately sampled.

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

Pn v1J ~

E C.

N Pf1 iA)..;

d. Assess whether the justifications for deselected or rejected KIA statements are appropriate.
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, and major

('rl VJ el s

transients.

I M

b.

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

mix of applicants in accordance with the expected crew composition and rotation schedule ffl \\IJ L

without compromising exam integrity, and ensure that each applicant can be tested using at el A

least one new or significantly modified scenario, that no scenarios are duplicated from the T

applicants' audit test(s), and that scenarios will not be repeated on subsequent days.

0 To the extent possible, assess whether the outline(s) conform(s) with the qualitative and

~ ff R

C.

ft'I 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 distributed w

among the safety functions as specified on the form Pn iJ A

(2) task repetition from the last two NRC examinations is within the limits specified on the form L

(3) no tasks are duplicated from the applicants' audit test(s) fJf K

(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 T

the form.

H

,,~

R

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

Pr1 Vu 0

(1) the tasks are distributed among the topics as specified on the form u

(2) at least one task is new or significantly modified G

(3) no more than one task is repeated from the last two NRC licensing examinations H

Determine if there are enough different outlines to test the projected number and mix of

\\/J (l}-

c.

Pr1 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 Pf1 Iv el appropriate exam sections.

G fr1

,1,of E

b. Assess whether the 1 O CFR 55.41/43 and 55.45 sampling is appropriate.

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

ff1

,JJ f/r E

c.

R

d. Check for duplication and overlap among exam sections.

Pfl w ~f A

\\(I.) f)f L

e. Check the entire exam for balance of coverage.

ff1

f.

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

PM

,A ~f P~-Name/Signa Date

a. Author Paul Isham

/,,-.-

/Of1t,/II,

--,,r-:', :.:' /"""';".:

~

lr\\l-z57/k

b. Facility Reviewer (*)

Pat O'Brien C. NRC Chief Examiner (#)

R21AN V,\\IJ'~V

- f'v?l.~* '.a t 7

10 1317Lfl;

d. NRC Supervisor Doa.>A-1,...., J.,,ek,-wt.J A 'x.} /

J ' ~

IOJ 1, r,,

'U Note:

  1. Independent NRC reviewer initial items in Column "c"; chief examiner concurrence required.
  • Not applicable for NRC-prepared examination outlines.

Nine IVllle Point Unit 1 2017 Initial NRC Exam ES-201 Examination Securi~reement Fonn 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 February 6 & 13. 20F 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.

Poet-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

. 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

1. Tl-.......

/~

t*~,.. p.** },*

t:..:... t.,*,

),,.-,..(."...-
  • t/,,/i'J
2.

f,w1,.. ~,u~

tMM 1nmtoB-

  • /t'd/lr.
3.

l"1 ll<e A~MJ06"1!.

G.,..1:: ~

i' ~ff'

~: *iciii ~<iE a ~it =

?,ii.t---==

6.

)-:.<(.

P-=..l.c-r:-.<..,

..sr- ("'"-*A'-->~

'flvdlt*----------

7. fcii,-a oa..:.

tt..;"¥ GZ re;_ ~

8.

!~'*-"' J /Ln.. ~o JfL.

~1'.)<Ntv~

I'"\\....--

~ ~

9.

..:r. li,u,vs.

1Yl'fJ5 113

10. <>tJ JD;f"1':>oN oP)

V',/J/,ll)AroR.:,;.p 1.,

11. !k: U1;1,6((

oPS v{h,tM~~

sP.o 12.~k-~e-:-

@s ~w ta 13.-!r: ~

~'t"~ ~

~::~~ 0~i4tel~

NOTES:

ES-201 Examination Securi~reement 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 1Y~l 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 b en 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

. 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

~: ~~~ 1:- s~~f"

~rL-11~* ~f;;;J/'*

3. "i,!;.; iiA4 rto 7ff/JV Ab

-~~

r#'/,

i: ~

.~,.,,~:,~

-~*~ _(( __________ _

8. ~fftt!

S£Q 9.~)t 'i H sf.o

~~:~;~+&zo 1rro~~@?k

==

12. ;ss;;a ft.,.rth,

~ Ro

13. \\,£,µ\\., s:1,')$,9h,>O~> ".._,,.-.--
14.
15.

NOTES:

ES-201, Page 27 of 28

ES-301 Operating Test Quality Checklist Form ES-301-3 Facility: Nine Mile Point Unit 1 Date of Examination: February 2017 OperatinQ Test Number: LC1 15-1

1. General Criteria Initials a

b*

c#

a.

The operating test conforms with the previously approved outline; changes are consistent with ff1 rU 13f samolina reauirements le.a., 10 CFR 55.45, ooerational importance, safety function distribution).

b.

There is no day-to-day repetition between this and other operating tests to be administered pn LO fE durina this examination.

C.

The operatinQ test shall not duplicate items from the applicants' audit test(s). (see Section D.1.a.) p(I

!D BF

d.

Overlap with the written examination and between different parts of the operating test is within i1f1 w ff' acceotable limits.

e.

It appears that the operating test will differentiate between competent and less-than-competent er,

~ r,f aoolicants at the desiQnated license level.

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 pf1 w designation if deemed to be time-critical by the facility licensee e,f 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 administrative walk-through outlines (Forms ES-301-1 and 2) have not caused the test to deviate from any of the acceptance

(?)'1 tO sF 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-n' tO 6P 301-4 and a coov is attached.

z~

Date ili_3o/tfu

a.

Author Paul Isham/

(.JJ;0:?

v.4~/ ~,'/

I 12/S#b

b.

Facility Reviewer(*)

Pat O'Brien /

/Tl£,;:,L.--J" -'7'- --,

C.

NRC Chief Examiner (#) 'BY'u>-K\\ tu II~ ;:S~ r I J:J.'.<')

,Ji.sLn rJJ_J)JJ-\\_-

~

/

l./z./,,

d.

NRC Supervisor

n. *A~.... Jllr~~I.) -

l

/

NOTE:

  • The facility signature is not applicable for NRG-developed tests.
  1. Independent NRC reviewer initial items in Column "c"; chief examiner concurrence required.

ES-301 Simulator Scenario Quality Checklist Form ES-301-4 Facility: Nine Mile Point 1 Date of Exam: February 2017 Scenario Numbers:

1/2/3/4 Operating Test No.: LC1 15-1 QUALITATIVE ATTRIBUTES Initials a

b*

c#

1.

The initial conditions are realistic, in that some equipment and/or instrumentation may be out of service, pr1 i,<J ef but it does not cue the operators into expected events.

2.

The scenarios consist mostly of related events.

pr, vU ~

3.

Each event description consists of the point in the scenario when it is to be initiated pr1 tl the malfunction(s) or conditions that are entered to initiate the event fl~

the symptoms/cues that will be visible to the crew the expected operator actions (by shift position) the event termination point (if applicable)

4.

The events are valid with regard to physics and thermodynamics.

Pf'1 d,

~

5.

Sequencing and timing of events is reasonable, and allows the examination team to obtain complete Pr1

/) ~'

evaluation results commensurate with the scenario objectives.

6.

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

Pf?

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

iu Cues are given.

7.

The simulator modeling is not altered.

P(1 iJU \\)f

8.

The scenarios have been validated. Pursuant to 1 O CFR 55.46(d), any open simulator performance pt}

t>f deficiencies or deviations from the referenced plant have been evaluated to ensure that functional

~u fidelity is maintained while running the planned scenarios.

9.

Every operator will be evaluated using at least one new or significantly modified scenario. All other Pf7 bU f)Y' scenarios have been altered in accordance with Section D.5 of ES-301.

10. All individual operator competencies can be evaluated, as verified using Form ES-301-6 (submit the

?r1

~t t1 form along with the simulator scenarios).

11. The scenario set provides the opportunity for each applicant to be evaluated in each of the applicable pr, vV tr rating factors. (Competency Rating factors as described on forms ES-303-1 and ES-303-3.)
12. Each applicant will be significantly involved in the minimum number of transients and events specified ffl y1) 'i>'<

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(1 i /J f)t Target Quantitative Attributes (Per Scenario; See Section D.5.d)

Actual Attributes

1.

Malfunctions after EOP entry (1-2) 3/2/4/2 Pf'?

Ill ff

2.

Abnormal events (2-4) 4/3/3/3 p{>/

rl tf

3.

Major transients (1-2) 1 /1 /1 /1 pr1 lfa e:f

4.

EOPs entered/requiring substantive actions (1-2) 2/2/2/1 pr? u e,f

5.

EOP contingencies requiring substantive actions (0-2) 1 /1 /1 /2 rn

,L e,f

6.

EOP based Critical tasks (2-3) 2/2/2/3 pi1 vt 6'

NOTE:

  • The facility signature is not applicable for NRG-developed tests.
  1. Independent NRG reviewer initial items in Column "c"; chief examiner concurrence required.

ES-301 A

p p

L I

C A

N T

RO 1 R03 R02 R04 ISRO 1 1SR02 Transient and Event Checklist Form ES-301-5 Nine Mile Point Unit 1 E

V E

N T

T y

p E

RX NOR 1/C MAJ RX NOR 1/C MAJ RX NOR 1/C MAJ TS 3

CREW POSITION s

A B

R T

0 0

C p

4 1,2,3 Date of Exam: February 2017 Operating Test No.: LC115-1 Scenarios 4

1 T

M 0

I CREW POSITION CREW POSITION T

N s

A B

s A

B A

I M

R T

0 R

T 0

L u

0 C

p 0

C p

M(*)

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 (1/C) malfunctions and one major transient, in the ATC position. If an Instant SRO additionally serves in the BOP position, one 1/C malfunction can be credited toward the two 1/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.

4.

For licensees that use the ATC operator primarily for monitoring plant parameters, the chief examiner may place SRO-I a

licants in either the ATC or BOP osition to best evaluate the SRO-I in mani ulatin lant controls.

ES-301 Competencies Checklist Form ES-301-6 Facility: Nine Mile Point Unit 1 Date of Examination: February 2017 Operating Test No.: LC1 15-1 APPLICANTS RO 1 R02 ISRO 1 R03 R04 ISR02 Competencies SCENARIO SCENARIO SCENARIO Interpret/Diagnose Events and Conditions Comply With and Use Procedures (1)

Operate Control Boards (2)

Communicate and Interact Demonstrate Su ervisor 3

4 1

BOP 4,5,7, 8

8 1,4,5, 7,8 1,4,5, 7,8 All Notes:

(1)

(2)

Includes Technical Specification compliance for an RO.

Optional for an SRO-U.

(3)

Only applicable to SROs.

Instructions:

3 4

1 BOP ATC 2,3,4, 3,6,7, 5,6,8 8

7,8 2,3,6, 5,6,8 7,8 2,3,6, 5,6,8 7,8 All All Check the applicants' license type and enter one or more event numbers that will allow the examiners to evaluate eve,y applicable competency for eve,y applicant.

3 4

SRO 3,4,5, 6,7,8 All All All All All 3,4

ES-403 Written Examination Grading Quality Checklist Form ES-403-1 Facility: Nine Mile Point Unit 1 Date of Exam: 2/13/17 Exam Level:

RO M SRO

~

Item Description Initials a

b C

1.

Clean answer sheets copied before grading pr1

,?If ~,p

2.

Answer key changes and question deletions justified and

~p documented Pfl ni/

F

3.

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

PFI ttf)

F

4.

Grading for all borderline cases (80 +/-2% overall and 70 or 80, PP/ nl w,

as applicable, +/-4% on the SRO-only) reviewed in detail F"

5.

All other failing examinations checked to ensure that grades

'(\\f are justified rv/A

11 I.+

F

6.

Performance on missed questions checked for training vib l"P deficiencies and wording problems; evaluate validity of PP1 F

questions missed by half or more of the applicants

a. Grader Printed Name/Signatu~~ Date.

Paul Isham /

~""

?.../; tt /17 I

_,,-;7_

b. Facility Reviewer(*)

Pat O'Brien I.1/J:'~ z!Js!J J MA~~IV P~\\,-/

??LU 2.J' 1o/rr C.

NRC Chief Examiner (*) 'BnA-4'\\ fol le,- &... -.u~ ~J f.r,,u

'2.ll~/11

{JI~(~

d. NRC Supervisor(*)

D>utrJ.k~ A ~ '-\\

j zf,,(17 I

l/

(*)

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

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML18088A723&oldid=5009692"