ML20211Q891

Sumbits Summary of Training Managers Conference on Recent Changes to Operator Licensing Program.Meeting Covered Changes to Regulations,Exam Stds,New Insp Program & Other Training Issues.List of Attendees Encl

ML20211Q891
Person / Time
Site:	Summer
Issue date:	09/01/1999
From:	Christensen H NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II)
To:	Gabe Taylor SOUTH CAROLINA ELECTRIC & GAS CO.
References
NUDOCS 9909150198
Download: ML20211Q891 (85)

Text

_ - _ _ - _ _ - _ _ - - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ____

%, l i

September 1, 1999 South Carolina Electric & Gas Company ATTN: Mr. Gary J. Taylor Vice President, Nuclear Operations Virgil C. Summer Nuclear Station P. O. Box 88 Jenkinsville, SC 29065

SUBJECT:

TRAINING MANAGERS CONFERENCE MEETING

Dear Mr. Taylor:

On August 12 -13,1999, Region 11 hosted a Training Managers Conference on recent changes to the operator licensing program. The meeting covered changes to the Regulations, the Examination Standards (NUREG 1021), the new inspection program, and other training issues.

Enclosure 1 is the list of attendees and Enclosure 2 is a copy of the slide presentations.

Enclosure 3 is a list of questions received from the participants. These questions will be a reviewed and addressed at a future date.

If you have any questions concerning, the conference please contact me at 404-562-4638.

Sincerely, Original signed by Harold O. Christensen Harold O. Christensen, Chief Operator Licensing and Human Performance Branch Division of Reactor Safety Docket No. 50-395 License No. NPF-12

Enclosures:

1. List of Attendees

2. Licensee Presentation Handouts

3. Participants Questions f

cc w/ encl: (See page 2) ,,.

, ,a I

I t

9909150198 990901 PDR ADOCK 05000395 V PDR

[ff CIG

/cid , h6/DET / /

+

r-

]

. a.

N

(~

SCE&G 2 1

cc w/encls:

Terry Matlosz Training Manager Virgil C. Summer Nuclear Station P. O. Box 88 (Mail Code P-40)

Jenkinsville, SC 29065 R. M. Fowlkes, Manager Operations (Mail Code 303)

South Carolina Electric & Gas Company Virgil C. Summer Nuclear Station Electronic Mail Distribution April Rice, Manager  !

Nuclear Licensing & Operating Experience (Mail Code 830)

Virgil C. Summer Nuclear Station Electronic Mail Distribution Distribution w/ encl:

K. Cotton, NRR R. Gallo, NRR D. Trimble, NRR R. Conte, RI D. Hill, Rill J. Pellet, RIV PUBLIC OFFICE Ril:DRS Ril:DRS ,

SIGNATURE ls MW NAME Mdiristensen BHaab DATE- 4 / ,j /99 y y/ ( /99 8/ /99 8/ /99 8/ /99 8/ /99 8/ /99 COPY? /iE8 NO ' YES [NO) YES NO YES NO YES NO YES NO YES NO OFF/CIALRECORDCOPY DOCUMENT NAME: G : \DOCUME N T \SCE & G\sc e& g suna ry. wpd

=

LIST OF ATTENDEES U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 1-l ' Luis A. Reyes, Regional Administrator l Victor McCree, Deputy Director, Division of Reactor Safety (DRS)

Harold Christensen, Chief, Operator Licensing & Human Performance Branch, (OLHP), DRS

,- Fred Guenther, Senior Reactor Engineer, Nuclear Reactor Regulator l

' Ronald F. Aiello, Reactor Engineer, OLHP, DRS Richard S. Baldwin, Reactor Engineer, OLHP, DRS Michael E. Ernstes, Reactor Engineer, OLHP, DRS George T. Hopper, Reactor Engineer, OLHP, DRS Larry S. Mellen, Reactor Engineer, OLHP, DRG Beverly Michael, Licensing Assistant, OLHP, DRS Mark S. Miller, Reactor Engineer, OLHP, DRS Charles Payne, Reactor Engineer, OLHP, DRS Marvin Skyes, Reactor Engineer, OLHP, DRS Hironori Peterson, Senior Examiner, Region lli LICENSEE CAROLINA POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY Max Herrell, Training Manager, Brunswick Ralph Mullis, Operations Training Superintendent, Brunswick Gregg Ludiam, Supervisor - Operator Continue Training, Brunswick l Mark Keef, Training Manager, Harris Thomas Natale, Operations Training Manager, Robinson DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION Al Undsay, Training Manager, Catawba

_ James Teofilac, Operations Training Manager, Catawba Al Orton, Operations Training Manager, McGuire -

Ronnie White, Site Training Manager, McGuire Robby Pope, Supervisor of License Requal Training, McGuire Gary Voller, Operations Human Performance Manager, McGuire Tom Coutu, Superintendent of Operations, Oconee i John Steely, Supervisor Nuclear Operator Training, Oconee Paul Stovall, Manager Operator Training, Oconee Scott Hollingsworth, Operations Training Uaison, Oconee Rick Robinson, Operations Training Liaison, Oconee Jack Brission, Operations, Oconee Enclosure 1 L

1

)

l

i 2

FLORIDA POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY Mark Shepard, Operations Training Supervisor, St. Lucie Jo Magennis, Nuclear Assurance, St. Lucie Maria Lacal, Training Manager, Turkey Point Phillip Finegan, Operations Training Supervisor, Turkey Point ,

Bill Burrow, Online Schedule Supervisor, Turkey Point FLORIDA POWER CORPORATION Ken McCall, Operations Training Manager, Crystal River Frank Dola, Senior Nuclear Operations Specialist, Crystal River Tony Roberts, {FRG Corporation} Representative SOUTHERN NUCLEAR OPERATING COMPANY. INC.

Scott Fulmer, Training Manager, Farley Joe Powell, Nuclear Operations Senior Instructor, Farley Gerry Laska, Nuclear Operations Instructor, Farley Gary O'Hustede, Operation Training Plant Instructor, Farley John Lewis, Training Manager, Hatch j

. Steven Grantham, Operations Training Supervisor, Hatch j

' Robert Brown, Plant Training & Emergency Preparedness Manager, Vogtle  !

SOUTH CAROLINA ELECTRIC AND GAS COMPANY Albert Koon, Operations Training Manager, Summer Perry Ramicone, Lead Instructor Exam Development, Summer James Callicott, Training Evaluation Coordinator, Summer l TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY Daniel Sanchez, Training Manager, Browns Ferry Ardie Champion, Operations Training Manage, Browns Ferry l Denny Campbell, Shift Operations Supervisor instructor, Browns Ferry ,

John Parshall, Shift Operations Supervisor Instructor, Browns Ferry l Richared Driscoll, Training Manager, Sequoyah  !

Walt Hunt, Operations Training Manager, Sequoyah John Rodden, Operations Training Manager, Watts Bar Tom Wallace, Operations Superintendent, Watts Bar VIRGINIA ELECTRIC AND POWER COMPANY Joe Scott, Operations Training Supervisor, North Anna Steve Crawford, Senior Instructor Nuclear, North Anna i David Llewellyn, Superintendent of Nuclear Training, Surry Harold McCallum, Operations Training Supervisor, Surry Michael Brady, Supervisor of Nuclear Training, Surry OTHERS James Makucin, INPO Bob Post, NEl Enclosure 1

( o j

. . . cm. . .

p**"""%

(k6)

WELCOME TO

{

~

U.. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION REGION II TRAINING MANAGER'S CONFERENCE AUGUST 12-13,1999 SAM NUNN ATIANTA FEDERAL CENTER 61 FORSYTH SW, SUITE 23T85 ATLANTA, GA 30303 . .

.e ENCLOSURE 2 000=-

REGION ll TRAINING MANAGER CONFERENCE AGENDA Sam Nunn Atlanta Federal Center (Bridge Conference Room B)

Thursday, August 12,1999 8:30 - 9:00 a.m. Introduction L Reyes V. McCree C. Christensen 9:00 - 10:00 a.m. Summary of Significant C. Christensen NUREG 1021 Changes 10:00 -10:15 a.m. Break

., 10:15 - 11:45 a.m. ES-200 Series (Exam Process) M. Emstes 11:45 a.m. - 1:00 p.m. Lunch 1:00 - 2:00 p.m. Changes in the NRC B. Boger 2:00 - 2:15 p.m. Break 2:15 - 3:45 p.m. ES-300 Series (Operating Test) R. Aiello 3:45 '4:00 p.m. Break 4:00 - 5:00 p.m. New inspection Program C. Christensen Friday, August 13,1ths 8:00 - 8:15 a.m. Day 2 Opening Remarks C. Christensen 8:15 - 9:45 a.rn. ~ ES-400 Series (Wntten Exams) R. Baldwin 9:45 - 10:00 a.m. Break 10:00 - 11:00 a.m. ES-500 Series C. Payne (Post-Exam Process) 11:00 a.m. - 12:00 p.m. Recent Training Program issues G. Hopper 12:00 - 1:00 p.m. Lunch 1:00 - 2:00 p.m. ES - 600 Series (Requal Program) M. Sykes G. Hopper 2:00 - 3:00 p.m. Closing Remarks L.Reyes V. McCree C. Christensen

l TRAINING MANAGERS CONFERENCE l

August 12 - 13,1999 y'#*%

(.,Y.)

' ,e'

~.

TRAINING MANAGERS CONFERENCE INTRODUCTION pW  % ,

/ ,

Luis Reyes  !

Victor McCree .

Chns Christensen i

~- l TRAINING MANAGERS

,' CONFERENCE AGENDA - DAY ONE j

+ 8:30 a.m. Introduction  !

? '.S:00 a.m. NUREG 1021 Changes  !

10:00 a.m. Break I

• 10:15 a.m. Exam Process  :

• 11:45 a.m. Lunch  !

• 1:00 p.m. Changes in the NRC l 2:00 p.m. Break 1 2:15 p.m. Operating Test j

• 3:45 p.m. Break .

i

• 4:00 p.m. New inspection Program j 5:00 p.m. End Day One I

]

e I

4 4

4 1

l

-i

• f TRAINING MANAGERS CONFERENCE I

, /% ,

9.9....f), I YlCTOR M. McCREE

'! Deputy Director, Division of Reactof $aftry l Region II August 12 13,1999

'f I

q .

t kN) REGULATORY TRENDS i -

e BACKGROUND  !

e DESCRIBE THE CHALLENCE FACING NRR i

• EXPLAIN HOW NRR IS MEETING THE CHALLENCE e DISCUSS HOW NRR IS DEFINING SUCCESS e DISCUSS STATUS OF HIGH PRIORITY AREAS FOR ACTION i e THEN.NOW AND THE FUTURE f

i BACKGROUND e U S. Necisor Resener inelestry Average Safety Performance Has leproved

$ seedily -

~

a Nember of Aceident Segmenee Precersers Declined Significently 5.nes t 1944

• n=e of The NRC Trocked Performance Indicaners Show Signirment '

improvement Sines 1985 (seiomatic screms. safety system accessions, '

signincast evenes, equipment forced ousages and eellective redesteen espesure)

• Challenge is se Denne Progrees (in Rapidly Changing Seeines And Reguietery Environments) et 4 Level % hich:

• Meantain Safety e Redece Unnecessary Regelesery Borden

= lacrosse rebeie Confessenes i e improve Efficiency And Effectiveness e

i e

AREAS OF NRC

-. STAKEHOLDER CONCERN  ;

\

e Senate & Hesse Committee Reports se NRC Appropriations-Early {

Jose.1998 i

e Commissies bleeting with Stakeheaders-July 17 A Nov.13,1998 l e NRC Oversight Hearing With Seeste Subcommitta. July 30,1998 j

e Regenesery Framework Needs to Be Predictable, Objective, And -

l Timely l e Ceeeern Esists That Some NRC Regulations And Regulater Practice Pese Usseesssary Borden se beensees e le Deregelesed Electric Utility Eevironment, Unnecessery Regeiesory tarden is of SigniGcent Cessere to beensees

. e Need For Castissess leprovement la Regelesery Effectiveness i And Efficiency .

l POST-HEARING TASKING MEMO I

e Aleme From Chairmes se EDO-August 7,1998 i e identifice Commissies Proposed liigh Priority Areas For Acties f f

, e Tasking bleme Response = August 25.199g-Conseins Sheri And I leeg Term Actions (Updaeed bienthly)

I e Alemanising Safety Remains gjgigt Priority e blemy Tasks Previsesty identified And le Operating Pise:

Renaisies Tasks Added e some Esisties Tasks bley Be Approprinse to Slew. Defer.Cancet, Osher se Accelerate l J g

s Challenge is to biaissain Safety while Redecing Ussecessary Bordee '

i f

) PERFORMANCE GOALS FOCUS ATTENTION TO blEASURE NUCL EAR REACTOR SAFETY PROGRAbt OUTCOh!ES: _  ;

e $1AINTAIN SAFETY ,

e REDUCE UNNECESSARY REGULATORY BURDEN e INCREASE PUBLIC CONFIDENCE e INCREASE EFFICIENCY / EFFECTIVENESS OF KEY NRC  ;

PROCE&SES '

Determined by NRC Neciser Reacter Regeisties Team Working With 1 Centracter to Define And implement Planning Badgetieg And  !

4 Performenee Alemagement Process (PSPAI) {

i I

1

i l

i 1

... PRIMARY AREAS OF AGENCY FOCUS i

e Riskinforened And Performance-Based Regulation e Reactorlaspection And Enforcement a Reacter Licensee Performance Assessment

{

e ReseterLicensing And Oversight l

e NRC OrganizationalStructure And Resources j e Other Agency Programs And Areas of Focus (Le. License Transfers,

, Dry Cask Storage. Decommissoning) g i e Urenium Recovery issues i

, = Changes to NRC's Hearing Process q

I i

~

e REACTOR OVERSIGHT

. . . PROCESS IMPROVEMENTS ASSESSMENT.LNSPECTION AND ENFORCEh!E.%T eSuspended SALP Progren, hiedified Periodic Plant Reviews a Perferniance Raults Will Be Erslussed so Desemine w ben Enhanced j NRC Deegnosis of Licensee Performance is Warranted. A Rasbinformed i Baselene laspection Program Will se Performed For All Siset

, eFramework: Performance ladicators And Risbinformed lanpecteen Coules Will Be Used se Measure Licensee Sefery Performance. Resutra Will Be Evaluesed Using Equivaient Risbinformed Sesees,(Thrmheads) ainspechens Will aecome More Risbinformed and Raults Will Be  !

, Evaluated For Thei* Ruk Significance Using Rules Bened (Esamples)

Scals e Assassient: a Streamlined, Structured Review Proces Will Be Used. An Action Matria Will Prov.de Cons stencyin Making Repense Decisions. ,

i REGULATORY FRAMEWORK i s

a  ;

4 Please See Handout ' 1 l

B l

I l

I

i 6

- ACTION MATRIX I Please See Handout l s

i  !

i I

l l

4

{

l e

l l

h TRAINING MANAGERS CONFERENCE l

, j AGENDA - DAY TWO  ;

o 8:00 a.m. Opening Remarks j c 8:15 a.m. Written Examination I l

. o 9:45 a.m. Break i c10:00 a.m. Post Exam Process a 11:00 a.m. Recent Training

Program issues i a 12:00 p.m. Lunch e1:00 p.m. Requal Program 1 i

a2:00 p.m. Closing Remarks ,

j i

Question From the Last Training Managers Conference j 1 November 5.1998 i

- o Need to stay flexible on exam schedule and  !

do not wait until the last minute to accept the criteria from licensee. Suggested method I was to accept the criteria early in process of l the prep week. Would prefer to have 30-45  ;

days prior to the scheduled Exam. l l l

. The Finial Rev 8 Examiner Standard now request that Outlines be sent 75 days prior to the exam  ! j date and that the Exam be sent 45 days prior to i the exam date. This can be negotiated with the '

j i

Chief Examiner.  ;

l 1

I i

l Last Conference Questions 3 eThe NRC should pubysh the exam schedule  !

early. Suggestion was to publish at least 1

• year in advance.  !

• An Operator Licensing WEB page will be coming soon and it will have the exam schedules. ,

Additionally, we have been sending confirmation }'

letters to each licensee on the exam schedule.

o Recommend the NRC tum over the GFES to the Licensee.

• The near term we plan to go to three GFES exams per year. Long Term we plan to develop a  ;

computerized GFES.  ;

{ Last Conference Questions  !

l .

[ = The issue of written exams and limited staff

, in NRC create a "de facto" situation for '

licensees to have to write their own exams.  ;

• For FY2000 we are writing more exams and j Headquarters has requested for additional

. resourses. However you may be requested to i i write an exam if you want a given date.  !

- = The issue of tying up exam writers, j The security requirements are like Requal exam i requirements now.

i e

Questions for last Conference )

e There is inconsistency in the examiner

{

standards and the K/A manual. For example the sampling plan and Part 20 references. i e Final Rev 8 issued, however we need more j information to better answer questions.

cln using the Requal procedure, is the NRC going to inspect manipulations for reactivity .

levels on an individual basis? Or can the .

record be maintained as a team.  ;

e Records should be individual because the license '

is issued to an individual.

Questions for last Conference  !

I i aWould like NRC clarification on following the  ;

10 CFR for an SAT program rather than following the guidance in the memo once I issued by the Director of NRR.  !

• You can follow your SAT based program, however ,

if you have a Tech Spec or FSAR requirement

. you need to follow those requirements or get them changed.  !

o Written exams are getting harder due to the raising cognitive levels. Can there be less of i

' acceptance % for the higher level.  !

• Rev 8 placed a limit on the higher level questions [

50 -60% and no more. Additionally, the time limit i

, for the exam has been extended to 5 hours5.787037e-5 days <br />0.00139 hours <br />8.267196e-6 weeks <br />1.9025e-6 months <br />. j

1 1

f

SUMMARY

OF SIGNIFICANT l CHANGES OR CLARIFICATIONS 1

Chns Chnstensen '

I

,r*%

a ,'

i i

s I }

a

[  %, ..e/ I i

i I

. l 1

<' l

SUMMARY

OF SIGNIFICANT CHANGES OR CLARIFICATIONS

o Changes to 10 CFR 55 .

l

+ New 10 CFR 55.40

- Exams Prepared Using NUREG-1021 ,

. - Licensees may Prepare, Proctor and Grade Wntten  ;

4 Exam a

! - Licensees May Prepare Operating Test  !

- Licensees Shall Estabitsh Procedures to Control Exam Secunty and integnty When Prepanng Examinations I

- Authon=ed Representative Shall Approve Exams Before l Submittal to NRC

- Licensees Must Receive NRC Approval of Exam f

- NRC shall Prepare, Proctor and Grade Examinations Upon Licensee's Wruten Request

SUMMARY

OF SIGNIFICANT -

! CHANGES OR CLARIFICATIONS

, oChanges to 10 CFR 55

+ 10 CFR 55.49 -

-Was Revised to Clarify Compromise and Securay l Expectations a Changes to NUREG 1021

• ES 200 Series: Examination Process  ;

, - Due dates for Exam Outline and Draft Eram Advanced

- PersonnelRestrictions are Like Requal ' j l

, -The Region May Approve Separating the Wntten Exam '

and Operating Test By up to 30 Days i l l

1 I

4

SUMMARY

OF SIGNIFICANT l' 1

CHANGES OR CLARIFICATIONS e Changes to NUREG 1021

• ES 300 Series: Operating Tests

- Dominant Acodent Sequences Should Be Considered ,

, for Sampling During Operating Test  !

- Presenpied JPM Questions Deleted  !

l - Can use fehe questions for Cause j - Asemate path JPMs increased to 40% l 4

- No Rouse of Material on Subsequent Days {

l - STA Use OK per Licensee Practice l

SUMMARY

OF SIGNIFICANT l CHANGES OR CLARIFICATIONS i

'a e Changes to NUREG 1021 ,

• ES 400 Series: Written Examination  !

- Systematic Sampling Required for Outline Construction

- Leaming Otsectives Not Required

- Hegher Cognitive Questens 50- 60*/s of Exam

- New and Updated Forms l

- 30 Quesdon Sampling Review  !

- Exam Time Raised to 5 Hours ,

, - Clean Copy of Answer Sheet Required ES 500 Series: Post Examination

- May Hold License for 80-81% Passes

- Administrative Review Process Streamhned

- Uconsee May tre Requested to Provice Reference Matenal and

• T.enn si,varm.uon

SUMMARY

OF SIGNIFICANT i CHANGE OR CLARIFICATIONS i

, o Changes to NUREG 1_021

. ES 600 Series: Requalification

- Test item Duplication Expectations Clanfed >

- Licensed Operators Detailed Off-site Clarifed

. - Proficiency Watch Expectatens Clanfed .

e ES 700 Series: Limited SRO

- 50 Question wntien Examination e Appendices

- Guidance for Developing Multiple Choice Questions in

i App. B . g

- App. E Ctanfed Making Assumptions

, - App. F - Defined:

- Responsele Power Phnt Emponence .

- Tecnneal specereauons as a Reference .

t I

r i

i i

! Examination Process

ES-200 Series i

i Mike Emstes l

1 t

.! ES-201

Examination Process

, ., Faokey : esennomons must meet the foesnev (1) emmpey wan NUREG-1021 (2) esm enseament erus mensam escuny proceeses (3) enam outwneses emot be approved my en suinenrod ;e c (e) NRC must approve the proposed amenmater.s.

C.1 a Reausets for NRC 2-__ _ _ __ _ . of esarmnahans must to m wntng m ,

accorneru:s wan to CFR 5540 (c).

l

-s C.,toCNR.e.anrmel__

Respond _R.o.n

,eni ,. Cnef ot. .M,y asper an.d eon

- tonego- heepnregen SDoremed.of any

! esses and seweepmera encons Pertel coweepment may be negomed

• i

' l.

s i

ES-201 Examination Process C.1.n The egency enforcement pohcy appees to saam compramme. 1 Anachmers i.h_as c escean

. mo asued e.am seaw'Other

. ,- Cons.oera.nens*

e_3 wesen was not m i

C.1 e The amount of reserorce masones reauesaed porn me facday heensee we be '

adpussed booed on gne NRC's teved Of ewoswomerW m the taammaten l C- _

J process. The Casef Gammner weg descusa reverstica materal e

- corners and me meios dweg the pnene cell pnar to tne 12t> day antier, I i

3 The hoenese m emouesed to subme trase copes of the omhnes and esenmatums. Orey one copy of the references is roosed (Regen 13 -

nHiuest) l C.1.f A faakty amerweer er manager snes . __ _..;iy rew w we esammeren outhnes and the proposed esame before iney are sammelied to me NRC.

e r

i

!' ES-201  !

I I

Examination Process i

' C.1.g An autnanted repressmatwo of to facesy beensee shes approve the '

outrHRais before sendrig them to sie NRC for revow. The aumanrod representafwo e not Ina same person as l'io feedey revower The auenorueo represeruatwo we be the earne person get to 12Goar intter e

(

ears to. No oues not need to revow ye inst soms not be on the escurvy l

'" l l

C.I J Facdwy a encouraged in turnmurucune agrurzens canaams wth the careent I for ademy of to NRC prepared enom of ine cnanges tiet the NRC has '

erecsed for as proposed enam. '

f C.1 k Faceny we mene any necessary changes to the exammeraris es agreed upon wun the NRC.

I Cic About sour masens before the - _, we Chet Esammer we ces to facdwy to docuss the nme esms essed. Negohouan of seinery estes may i be moos to amow mooi empent revow.

l.

Clf Enemmers have We ophon a not perhcoote m the prep week vet a

l

~

l ES-201 1 4

Examinabon Process i t

g C2.h The wnnen and opersarig ponens of ine emens may be spot by up to 30 asys. .

! CJJ Srench Cemet we agri re oA enests when he e eenened enet te l

' {

enemmenens are ressy for sem j

.C 3 f sar cg Raws of to ennen nmaan non ee - .

w<nin mie weet of reconne re esamream and me benance of we revow

)

cumpamed m suo weeks efter recompt ,

I C.3 J sRO iogreses fdhng en RO or BOP poeshon do not need so be evehmed '

• ]

i j l

J

, I i

ES-201  !

Examination Process DJ a Facety enound bna access to ervy those portsons wruch the sidwukei bears  !

respon*bsty D2 b t cos enomspes of *pronemed scannes' for suswduais on re Securny l Agr-I supervoors m1 menagers on the sec6eity Agreemorit may cartunue ther '

genered og 4 re trarwig program etckserig feview of esamreuens and remodel trarwg They may not provase me=icual appuceru leedteck, s i ,

e i

i I i

ES-202  ;

I Prepanng and Review Operator Limnsing Applications l 1

1 i c.i.e n - ,.oe ,,,en e,

. ne.o.se.e.n.ce.

, ones , . e - no s.,. .e.eises, l j -, ,s onse.e. -wi.e t

.i l C.2.0 The roernmet ser two ogwant eeovey men,uset.onsis serv.d. l I

i

o.3 Eheeday oesne for Lenned Sener Rosaw os.resers me c tem ES-701. I i .I i i i

. i

~

l ES-204 i f

Processing Waiver Request -

i I

o.t e A,ew osam,--n.must ene year w v. e en.n.n

- e.een.moe.e ,. -w e.:omo mass en .

i

e. w -nous an en esemauen a v. som.en

} o 1 o .Ts.es,ee.n mey Pevemmy hemmend at tne same facety_ edust have esmmesed

1. v1,eswel tasa men hvo years age {

oia7,,e - ,,y- ,e m.ie - ,

-i_. - a r se.e.,se.es ns , men.u.soons .us i.e ense.

enuteipset A esef er refusertg beense w.llse a.m1 i

i i  !

l ES-205 t Generic Fundamentals Examination Program i

1 4 C.1.a Fasskfy scensee shaAf needy me NRR emerater henneng progrom effee N .!

v.y eso or es en snewusuoi from iner Poweussy sutenmoo ,ogeesien '

asser for p. GFES ambe the o.amawan a senas red. '

i .

A ewd GFE S is f== ri 2000 Otseeer 1999, feerwary 2000. & June 1 2000 are thesy eseen. >

The GFES esam eme e on.eys tne wee. easy e,ier me rrs: Sunemy at me monet e

I i

a T

N

EN MO EI E

C GA T N AL E NU R RAG 4

E OME T

FS CM R N E99 EAR OC 9 RRO D,OC GT I I CF1 R FO12 RRA E 1 EP ER G1 T GN AN S OOR NO AI G U BI A

.T E MGU ACL E EC GR .E A P U N CN U SN E I

RI F N

I BFO A OE R NC T OF I

I S F I

O V

I D

4

tnr eto me n

,e lo .h e en

_c l

e n

,n aStee rn croo ys r o

_a

_B r ro d

EC d

e Ir "[_ ic

_e

.s r

r e t

n h

c n h r

e h

c n

.hc n a c n a n. na

_A fom & n e or r r a& r e o B a s B irv B ov t oec t s n

d.Br G.

tn n&s r r ng n

z.  ;- epme cr ir o

.n et t io o ac E. i k

,  ; ir Disy mteD it a et

.i o Raiz mca se en ur

,, A e ic s s l..e r

c _hc nyot r r u f

ic ed e .R s le s u u ooPp e s r s .re icR n

_n l na s pt o

s

,a r ea t e p ed A .w i r

e .B lvlu D S kn .o e &.

R l

Og e

h c Le t ts n C P. n ne e n "f_. R e S e v o Gn T i E N F e

m e

rr og tcro eP ir l D& I en teio it n cc o oe sp i

t s s An e

c pen t h c

n no

.s n n ;m a

m r i

s a oit u. ,

r o in mro et B r

ia tc g H.

gnS f r gc oa er m ee pt .t t

f ni a r sal c nef h r aD g n isPc oMy o i&n n n oer a r

t c r e&a t

P d cB ic e r femu r ap Or e m nn ean L r

cB n

gD k oa V. ee t

no or c

e An tam r r is P p

s Qia eo pf r i

n M OeP lv I O

r n ao eti r

o a

t a .

lcl r c e uu or N gt i r t g f ecd fj oec r in n

cRe ry r ot o or nt is o

rit c Pe ce t

e c oDup edmr m is t

if c e ir Daggay neD i I O

E O O m

m f a D P P o Oe noia n nt up P c e

R lo sMe D n  !

V D

f ive c f DiL O P

e ts i e

ly a

n A

rl oa is r o fr ic o l h lah t e

n o hn f r

r o

icv n iccn o t

cc ee t o gt nc iCar ma er dCn r

iT cie r r &B hB a&h e eI lag Cg D& a an nc l

r l

ieD ci n &inr e g Dny r cl a t

an t lUu r

t in ae e lse ir le r tc t. B ii ce tonp hci n ia en e e on se leEe v D eg Mn r i teg en l

E =

o .

AskL E l

i e O ME tr.

s t n w j c

e I

or P

s h f, r y is c n h h

c

, ol a a n c ya n r

f r a e

r oat no B B

r r

- t c&e c s m s leB tat e r e m S n r yi i t Def y D ts y

e ts

.e bosm n ot S y S r s oSu p r o t Pe s

le e e tc n s lv i mD e te A e e P Dt s R y 6 S

~

S L S A E M

O .

\ O C

x G Dr:$S[T I-  ;:. gh 4

h

j. ki sv [;-

' I T U

E ,'

2 O

G C n ~

- P'

?

.. N I

N i

0

% ;i 2 V

y

) E A

' . e 7

%_ g I

g '-

f,i(4 $.,n; i H

?

? ' , (g . C M

~

9"

, f. p;W-fr' f 1 a.

A f:,E .,;'h}-q, -

R 4 .  :

i,

, b- . f. 2, N

O t- -

c ' . ,

O

~

- ;.al@lM@A(:t(9.f% - ,i S -

F U -

C -

R O F

E '

P

~

N -

O -

^T I C

E - D T - N S O U)

"RP -

A NN I

A MO O I U LEIT T G I A

BAU E N OCO L F O I A I T

RFS S PI E A

P NTR U - E C - D C - I O -

Y -

TN C -

E FI A I

L K.

AL SIVTR O B

U P

R - S O

W DI NC CN AO N

O Y E

C S

K R R E

M AFEI T HOR I

T T E YE CN S

R O U A A A F O T O .

R TTRR LL I

D A ND EE W A S S _

AU AE F A S CR T C N D Y EP R RA SN I D

O LO .

EP UE ESLO I

R ME N T l _

O HE C ERF OM I I A S i

T CN E ME A CR U SO C R R L AN NR I

L l U OI N N O i G B S Y CV A MI ON FN T E UA RT Y N

T E R T O I

R P EI I

RC R

E OC F E ER S I

I RE F R P l i C AT A S T E BN I S E P

N I O D

- * + + -

,r -

R sl l

n O TY T

N IOS -

atyo, M Cr er e si CEF T A E -

Rv ais A E A CS T -

NoSM R S I TY I S

- E C

M N

,- NA AM MR

' . G NS UOF T

T I R

I TN E AE e

I TV P E -

c I c n N -

iga s I t

a e ma e r r s r o fA e -

t n S re o -

t -

P s r -

e -

n -

r o -

C -

d _

a y B d r e esom 1 1 1 1 11 50% 5 1 E 1 a r hs ap 0 5 0 5 %E%

xes p

kh I t R e

O G

0 a

l A

W 1

0. a 5> l>1 2 t0 2 50 l

> >l>>1 >>>

0. U 0 A 5G5 N _

d -

e h

h yl _

ka dn e S

ek s hs s am 11 1111 11 .

t l u x0  %% EE5M E%5 _

U its ms aq e 1 0

t O

88 3a t0S001 000 222 0

U C

l kmR > > > 1 > >1 >l>>2>1 >>>

5 E _

N d r a s i c e w r i

t d (o v r N u r s b f a

M i u )s e n I s

r w a i y m i k (

(a mr H ss r 1 1 1 1 i 11 a 0 l a l a

i m gG 1s G G C l u 1 5WlM 1

i a

5 D

s i

htr q a i

r 6

i c t P uT i2 f RiI Wl f I 1

oms RI I

M1 NI p

r P t a f 1 O MB>B P e

- 0 (w

l 1 1 a c s h t 0 0

e ia t

ii 7

r

)U S s) s e

Na Oa i

i e p (S kr r l

r u

T 0 p 0

0 e m s tym i F

a 7 t N m g i i q l

l i

n r

xgn n )s la2 1 o

[

i d )s Oe i

a v s i t

c st r mi e rr i i

nd r r n mia r a o ut t

r s c

I at q hqr np Ua F S -i u h I m i t i

w 2

1 de fa t ed s

t e

s k

r mln r a s sa ms S g ye S

y )s yu a

c a pam ni aa 3i t ya e r t t fe a r

t a v u r e 1a f w a u U m Scp U p Sa (a r r h S q

=

=

s ti r es e e y m v S m E g e g i u k h

m s s

t a

g m a l o

C l

h i e h

d n

a y B r e 1 d os i

r a n et l o %  %  %  %  %

uup 0 0 0 0 0 5 qgs 0 0 A 0 0 0 l 1

eee 1 1

/ 7 G 9 l 3 0 5 5 RRR > > N < < < > > > > >

d n

d a

't a y B n i k d r e 1

o eos n C s t h al ao  %  %  % 0  %  %

S s eup 0 0 0 0 0 5 R re r gs c ee 0 0 O 0 9 0 4 0 5 5 G 8 9 5 0 2 2 O h n RR > > > < < < >

l T T I A ) s

. C m s ) l s e 9 I D u r e s eu c r N

i n t r

r e no ni n

e x le u o

I i

x s

,a t r ov r e b f u s e e r d a E a g e uq ,

a u r r g u n t msu C mn l r s

e) q ep p a c c

I r o a r o va u N ( i r

usr e t n o e p gi A t yu d yf o l ae t

h g Oh t e (

e c

n e r o ev r

i vr t R n c s a ( r M v ,

l h s a

i e Ei r s c P p R

it t i c

t no u ly u s ye p e e n er)s m e

c y e n

t O Am i oi v ht q u es (

e r r e fo r

n) i l

it h

F c c l

mer nr o Ki c y )s v ur t r

e a s r b g R i ouo i v f r t

r i ca mte a n mp i

E i f

cp e

mfs e oex ibter l

t c cu P r r i

l i P ug r p ee e Oq foa er u eS mu aa f t

n r u R d minr p gr f r u n u i t uo r a o E e eq 1

Sh

) c i

xu e v

t leq l ef o m P r l

es e S e ad mive o nl ei l

Rr u

o r u s p mo u n n 'n CT mi ,

i xr (

cd r

mo t

mu i o v e or)s E o u) t h Rf o t

ap e r ef n a f r s s e c (

(

m me nc e p a t s s Ce l i

v E o qd gu re e T mn) t t

ei l (h t ( n yu t r a cr e yr i o r o Pl e es a .

er a

n d i

S o eau g p r i t e P v )/ b a i

R ce nv i

u i

r p ge m o e gr e Dt r r

- t s r c e k p av o r i oe s q og u yer n c re np F ioir e t,r n e F( op t t t l S pa aS k o f aa ir t

p o2 i e a a r pp a p1 t

n s,uq L h LeLf P e ii cc)s cg n

x Es u ad d u S a eh ty (r e -

ae r d c i i i

f R au et r u lolu u e Te t i i eq n o se ai o cg .

tr r r s our t t l oao i ee aa e nv Mec Ar u S in r

De c f

i P pt Nd -

n r

o Cvf r lys if t

n o mg a r c

e l

l ea r

dty ir t

oe p

Cn De r d of l

eu oa r

f r

l u et nt ivu r ni a e nd -

d n in x l Or t c a ns s m a t oh o I e ae E Daqh ai b

pg un S u

/

ot s r c

c t

er e eo a nv n cr i / t 4 $ cr t

l Ot a hg t

r a ci r T c s n nrf d e oe Ce oe l

i r R hi lei cu E l c t

ov r eve e Ar e Od R (o P (o P e t

l e R m 'p i

Rp Cp D Et e r i FP n _

t o 1 n y n i t

g a 1 e t

o c n l o

t n s l f i

t t e

e i

o e s a a ia o n

d C 1 e nS d r d m yn c o P o 1a r n in a t

s s l

om i nd e e t

o R l r rC t ce a g r ai a e el at s t

n a pt a Mt cy i c

ie r sy n r u ey o e p ui b fe r e cd o rF a RS C mr c a ua OR PS h

C B4 4 4 EP P

W h*

f f j ,

$hQjf =

$ {9,yyi f i.

p' hk ,v.

/

+ .

, ?w

.. w ,  %

l t h d. h o o it n it N t w e p w le s e in g s g btan ta g r

n ud n t

pl a e r

.a it e Se s it e

e P pdn M ee y. n ee c;Oae ce oBlb mest i e f

di c Mes ac nnn oL nn nn t sa ioee Mek oet n Uadi tp si cm ic ll mteh t e sL e r g to o E s si e sL me imoa t

ari ncy r v :t r omict e e i imro ef veeina r r hafe t min n oe a dRi t v mig na OPPWUS CSM r

OoA r c oen CSa

s. s '

e dl ens.

ot

.eg vn )

n t

n e

eh cit nw n

o no r

te d )

ne e o e ocn e i i t ept u t cdny te dt s rp n i

e nate is m e a n mditea I

F )L tr n

)

m is a sn aueI l

jacf a

sr iog ma a sd Df ( ola r fo s Te cr ua r ;bt f i mia rl n pp ime mroic gr en opt g M m w 't.oouOsignS nn h 44 n e

DeCllenn pe ngn oSin mea f r t g eni d og 0 5.r I n mfr L t w ie

/ nt io nFe ist o erom i

CoSM i

n Pes 2.0 e o eo3YioL vt e r h e e me r anD 25d wec is CPim v

e + _

rd ledtsh eri oio of r e r s n e R it s rt ows i e e ev eio RR 0 ime vs sp s ucng (o s eg t t is it ( s vO nt lice FF 1 y e

pmr e glt a pRi i

e w e mt ud i

Oee n t n or C e pues CC1 A es r eI n m usa c n

> eoeu r oesea r

Dec e c pR s

a sa 00 C As/s m

o Ochn Diist a e RCDMoCMiRM s EML i i LI mN BInC 1 1

- - - R a (w C EDwM A a -

I

) e uicn n w t t e o e e C E E iteps n n if iv h Intum a M R tco on w

C h i e

C N N ee t io )

R Wwprnonwio ein )

t ps tr n NA oi A h s u et i o la h f o R sd pp t l

e AC d2!

e(!et e rt t ese t

c un !s( it Ina nn n gr e i

w i

IX MI RI F d eYiPreMd h ig er nr e f letn w

d C poo n e

r e

R itooe nn n sC ist o sc l

s T ON FG an1Wlems r

gt r o go vlera ga et r n s

e S

emh et aoio t Rn eg / nit wec sn uas R e

A RI S E

es o3eCia My Desya;t r t Rs c r ini e sg s ss i eda ned t e a i

d ieme vs n sp cme s s -

cmt oil n se er lis a es ir M PYT emt nop u nr atSebijnf aeie a Ddimht e eur s cg k r cg r ei Don fr e N E E OCIn roaAOMS r

daw ics v LAO aoe BFD DD oe Asasi(w R

Aec i E F RPL S A e IO NS s T E t u n o p e o C IC G LI N n c n l r oD

)

e it c

t e

A S A

i a a e

)Ce e v e p

s nn tr n

) h it E

ite h inrmneMo ;o y C (r s itcC s oit pa op r oa w n epp l

R 1 Bon e In s t W )fs r rs u c e rR ere e i

(t c r gr n e C ot e eeF f

oN d e N ie r ei n RAR ist o M I

wnnPms eo co ev hiL C ni Dh Cht t a p t n gn i

/ ni wec t Tr r est igCi t ei ewhig eu ei n e ime De n md vs sp De s ura e of fi r e te;c t how ci sns w edma ae nst n or ileo cg n s es r ei n r

o ne n i r ej r b avie e r i eie iccv t s!!

ao oe e-s Dssl Cc O (n o tcSAO BDM LAO BF tiDL D a(w e ,

BL i

e t e h c d )s ee n )

c )e r v t nngnM o o tr n i aan i t y t

cn it c

i t

c! !n oa pp l w

t ntn)dsll e ri s n r ieu r

o pi eo t e

r r dpsee n e gr n t

e e

mfoP ns c i

r(F mF o e s a ist o M mnB(

se soCe nos e ina r C / nit wece sPr St e e r I C e e(

s toi t c;i v e eI n

ntn e f oem nia n bmp vs s Be s s4 c e n eec t

sn no es r s _

it d) r ei n one i

r _

l Auipej t

iI -

k eg e usR ei s n _

is ar o I

pd s Dssl l

r b oe icc t

o Rc RR( S l

AInnnGO I i LA RBP N D a (w SL i

n n o io u

it t c c t t _

yce r A p e y r

n e e n _

one e s to s m m tar e In st s g luf gn e s n

e C -_*aeo gi n

s sr sp e les i et in bs e eo ic R ec t s e us e RC L N RA AR _

PAM -

nHhuy g

WnZ ( {cgT 3 $PDghO m

m m _

) _

2 1

2 8

L G

(

"s t

n .

l a

P '

r e

w o

e l P

r a

e s u c e u n i

g N ile t t d

a a i u

l F e n

g y

n n o c a

i s lo i

c r

e t, n

p _

i P a h n g i t

t i

w h n a t c i t

a i c s e

t n

e r e

f i

c r e t e

T p e p

t n is s

/r O s i n

t o f o

l a

l a

n o

c _

a e c o t r u i

n i s o t n

e g h s n e p

i t c e s _

a t e r t n m .

0 g e O .F

'g h g

n o

l a

p t

a n u C t

s i

s o r

e y u h d m c a t n o i C d a s l

o s p s e n t

a

'oc

,r t

t e

n i t

o e s

s e

a m a m s e g i t s F r a

n l

p le e e _

l a v r o m o y i t n f o c y c e o t i

l o i c e C P lo e s R -

. " P R U N L

h c d e a e h e v t y o r t n b p ae de be p

d a-e d s m n aa r o oh f

o i s l y

r s et e

p i

m bl i

e l

e m i d l

b o wir f t

o - C r ot o sl a a

r d e e t s u 8 n s

w o a im x 9 e 9 dr p b t

es i 1

- u r -

o T- a 5 b s A hd n -

n y

it v

S e

t ea r

3 y S o r

5i o

) t it h o -

N a

( t c t c n ,

Alug a

)al a a f l /

e r

o aio I S e ut a

( u t c

t r

a t

cn N r _

1 p e p ai A yr r- e a

3. n i f

f o- e - e m s 5 a t a

t r

a dh x a t

s r

o e s -

a n nt e 5M h t l a

p t

h a a ce e

- s d c n

e nn e

Ry s n

f- t l

f e e n o u l

I t a - s r Fi o u y n c t Ci tv sil .

it t c i it t

o d e -

a le e u c -

d 'sr l

t s

c lu n aic u 0 a p l a e a ov f

l oo i v

e re d

1 e

i n p h n mtar o e t r R

a l a f oi te ce ,

g t o h

i m u r l

u p n d l

o t

c e a a l

a os yl e e i

a s u s r t b s t

r n e t u

p si mno d 't yn i

v s ve i o h e

i h - ag i

t i

r c t t c9 ai cn a , l _

t n

a n

o c e lu ch a t pa r m mps l pe i

t A4 1g n c d o o f

ng i r y1 ie eat r e b

$t e n

t e mp aor h ey b gan mr i

e u s t t od s i dt h d i

c o en u g nf au 5 u G4 i l wro e l sl f r i

l i in aor e5 p pp e utc otnn n ee us gr y5 l

u esa e Rol l a o i

ar oms r

et o 5

Ct cia Rlau R Riseb t

r u

q n s t

d d d eu u l l t

d g C F m ne ec u s o o eRiM r

l oWW*

p

• te Re 1 0 a

r u o r

l e m C*

• P*

• R*

• m m .

i i  ;

1

,- i i

. i.

i i

ES-301  !.

li Final Rev 8 Change Overview l

i i

+ .

l r

.f Purpose *A*

l I

I i

As appiecents for reactor operator (RO) and senior reactor operator (SRO) scanses at power reactor facehtes are reeuwed to take an operstmg last, untess a has been weared m accordance with 10 CFR 55.47 (refer to ES 204). The specsrc content of the opersteg ,

test depends on sw type of heense for whch tne appicant has appised.

i This standard sescntes the procedure for developmg operstmg i tests that meet the recurements of to CFR 55 45. menudmg the use of reactor p4 ant sanuistion facemes and the conduct of must> unit evalushons, d

~.

1 Background *B*

I

- - i To the extent apphcatne, the operatmg test will regure the apphcant to '

demonstrate an unserstandmg of. and the ability to perfonft. the actions necessary to accomplish a representative sampling from the 13 Rems klenttried m 10 CFR 55 45(a) (ell 13 Nerns do not need to be sempied on every operetang test).

In additen,the content of the operstmg test win to 6dentified,in part, from teameng cDiectives contamed in the faomy iconsee's trammg program and from information m the Anal safety analysis report, system gescnpton manuals and operstmg procedures, the facWity keense and bcense arnendrnents, heensee event reports, and other metenals requested from tne facsaity heansee by the Commission, d

Category "B" .

Control Room Systems and Facihty Walk-through (0.2)

)

Category B is divided mto two subcategores. The first and larger i suticategory (B 1.* Control Room Systems") focuses on those systems witn

{ e9ucti noenned operators are most involved (ie.. those having controls and ,

, indecetens m the mem controlroom). The second subcategory (B.2. Facahiy l West.Through7 ensures that the appicant is femiser esth the design and

. operecon of systems located outsee the rnem control room. ,

The applicant's knownedre end abitnoes roantove to each system are .

! eveouesed by adminionenny .Ipus and, when necessary, spectne follow.

tp ipuestions bened on the applocent's perturmence of each .IPM.

i

! i i

e Category "C" i

l Integrated Plant Operations (B.3) l i

i i

! Each sopicant vnust demonstrose proficiency on every competency  :

I apphaende to his or her 6 cense sevet. The oney excepeon es that SRO  !

j Competency NumDer 5

• Control Board Operatens.* ss optenal for SRO-  !

upgroce appicants ti.e 5RO upprede appkcants do not have to CIIa poettien ther i reeutres consros board op e auch e so,,.n. u.ev -or,eretrans;

. , .ed on however, sh.s tr they do resere into mp.,ene ah.y ,,.or not se on wdueour et s.n.d by an ~Rc .se n.c. r .v.nsth.u,,,

escussedin E5 202).

i INSTRUCTIONS ,

I t

General Guis[ eses (D.1.a) .

, Ta truncure predstatnhty and meirnam test meegmy, vaned sutsiects. _

, systems. end operatens shan be evaluated with applicants that are not being j exammed at the some tune, unissa measures are taken to preclude d

. mierecten among the appicants.

The esme .rpus and simulosorscenenos sheII not be repeeted on successive deys. * ~

I l

l l

]1

.. .i 2

1

, General Guidelines (D.1.a) cont f I

s

{

I l

l j operenne tests wntten try the tecety 6censee may not sucheste test items k tesmunetor scenes 4es of Jpets) trem the applicante'au@t test for tests {

if the appiecent de resseing me eser

Wantson) given at or near the end of I 4 1

the htense trosning class. srnudator events and ./ pets that are samster to I' those that were tested on the oudst examinehan are permmed provided the actaons fequwed to inshgate the transsent or comp 6ste the task (e.g., aseing an eherneen path as eMecussed in Appends C) are signincenur emerent trem thene reeuired during the euer t osemmerson. The mcary keeneen ehett 6dentury ser the Nac chier

• i eseminer these sinnuneter evente end JpNs that are similar to those l thet were teeted en me audt eserninetson.

. 'l l

3 I

i General Guidelines (D.1.d)  :

I

! I I

i When setecteg and 1 , ; metenets (JPMs, scenenos, and questsons) for the operating test, ensure that the molenets cenirtnute to the leet's overall capacey to esterenhete between those apphcants who are competent to safety operate the peont and those who are not.  ;

l AddoNonomy, all of the east larme eheund incluene the three hcots of a e sent vekery (Le., content, opermoonel, and ekscrmuneGen) descussed  ;

g in Appends A. I i

i Any test thems that, when messed, would reise questsons reganbng I g

aseeuaie psuncohon for eenrng the apphcants bcense shound not be  :

, incluesd en the operehng tesL i T

i 5

i

~~

General Guidehnes (D.1.1)

' l

_ i i

Every recat et the operaung test. Anet deng the prueertpred Caespory A oueesens and enewers. the Jpers h

• Ceregonen A and B. and the  ;

Cenegory C esmuissorscenerdos, shouht be planned, researcned. ,

veheated, and socumemed to the mesenum ement possines before the i test 6s ednunestered.

That is "BEF0RE~

i I

6

===sm

a I

, General Guidelines (D.1.j) i.

l l

1

- t i

l Eseminers who will be admmistermg the operetng tests but were not

, involved in ther deveeopment are expected to research and study the a

, topes and systems to be esemoed on the opereung test so that they are e propered to ask whatever performance-based follow up questions msght be necessary to determme # the opphcarit is competent eri 1rtote areas.

I As seenedin 10 CFR 66.46(e), the operedng teet requires the applicent j to demonstrate en unseresennno of and the abihty to perform the

l. eenens neceasery to accompken a repreeensetive sempte from emeng t2 nerne kenedin the rure.

-l 1

\

l l

)

i

. General Guidelines (D.1.j) cont .

I i

i I

tt Gee appNcent correcdy performe e .9960 (incluGng both critacel and noncences esepe)and : -_ tenaikenty wrth she equipment t ,and preceduren, tt be not necessary so seh any temp questrons. l

,,ewever, if the appkcent Geien so accomphah the 8eek standerd 9er the JPAf or elemenstresee e doch of unelereesndng regerWing the equipment and precedures such as haveng sterneuNy Gocating 9 ent6rmeGen, control beard inehcetrons, et centreas, she esemsner must t be propered to seh perfernmence-bened 9mNew.up questrens, as e neceanery, to ciertty or conRrm the opphcent's unseretenekng of the l Cyesem os it redevan to the seat that wee performed.

1 3

j General Guidelines (D.1.1)

The presenpted questions ibr Carepory A and the performance based 9eNew.up queetrens ter Cenegory B asey incoune e combonetoon of open. l

. and closenkreference nema. Open. reference noms that require appiecents

! to appey tneer knouneage of the pient to postuisied normal, etnormes, and l l emergency saustions are pretened, t C A.. hems mey be used to evaluate the imrnedete actions of i

. emergency and.otner ene,eciennics. procedures.

e,te.s. se ,00., and certem

, sui,r autometc scha,ns, e eder ,,, etreu.e operetrig l.

,ch.,tres.

- en approprvene so tne reciHry. '

nerer reng

-e o,to- ,tanchnwns c, .ed . ,en4 ,s ter m. oreuos,,.ns

,ence guidance rege,o, e,.,yCe,the dev,elopment a,.nd l or the we . t through seat. To the essent poensboe. the concepts in the enxechment  ;

shouset eJeo be opphed to perfertnence.bened feNomup Quenhons. t I

f 1 i l I

i I

Catagory "A" i I

r i.

Administrative Topics (D.2.b)  !

}

eor.a. e e euw mem.no me besi mee ed w e mummg  ;

, the appicent's kneuteege or stumy in that area. Although a performance- l

' besei m, uomg a smpte annunestretwo JPM is genormty preferred. j two presenpled gueshone may be used to conduct the sweluehen in each specific suspect area ensemed for evolueuon. l The eueneens mey be eneecieeed wNn Cesagory B Jpus or mey rney .

be ademndeoered seperosely.

{'

?

t 6

i I

Administrative Topics (D.2.g)  ;

i  ;

'l Forward the completed euene to the NRC chef emanuner so that R is recewed mythe ese agreed upon weh me NRC repena ence at the tone the emanunemon enangements were corrremed;me sumne a normesy sue appronimesedy rs erys hofere the seeduled e _ _ _ -_ eme. Refer to  !

ES-201 for asamenal snerveens regereng me renew and outenmal of the i

, e_ . euene. j s t f

4 I

i Administrative Topics (D.2.h) l I

i -

After the NRC cluet enemmer approves the opereeng test ochne, propere the final Category A test motores m accoreence unen the generet j operstmg test guseetmos in Seaen D.1, the operwaference questum gusselmes e Appendia 8. and the JPM guseohnes m Appendas C. j t

t (i.e., the JpNs, prescripend euenGens, and enewers)  ?

n ,

9 i

i 1

i 1

L

h Control Room Systems and Facility Walk-Through  ;

i Specific instructions For Category *B* (D.3) l i I

, 7his casepory of she operating test evoluetoe the opphcent on ,

Cyenome nosened M/As by hermg the applicent perform selected tasks '

and, when neceenery, bened on the opphcent's performance, probing l has or her knowiedge of the seek and tse essocseted aystem with y specific slonowp queadons.

i The Category 8 tasks are in edepon to and should be dWerent from the $

events and evolutons conducted dunng Category C. " Integrated Plant  !

Operatons.* j i

l t

Specific Instructions For Category *B* (D.3.a) cont l

i i

The 10 systems and evolutons setected for RO and SRO-I appbcants should evaluate at least 7 defleent safety funchons. AB of the systems and evoluhons in each subcategory of the test should be saaected from delterent safety funchen bets, and the same system or eveduten should not be used to j evolvere more than one setety funchon m each subcategory. For PWR I

'l opereung toets, the permory and secondary systems based under $efety ,

Funcnon 4, *Neet Removel crom Reactor Cere,* in Sectoon 1.0 of ,

1 1

NuREG 1122 neey be treets. as seperete setety functrons; Le., two l l

t yenoms, one perneery and one secondery, may be seeected from Serety Functoon 4.  ;

i 1

I l

Specific instructions For Category *B* (D.3.a) cont The 10 systems and evoluhans seceded for RO and SRO 1 apphcants l sno 3

.v uM eveiuste uions in .acti at least 7 different subcategory samty of the iest funcuons.

smruid All from be seeee.d of the systems and Offlerent safety funchon hsts, and the same system or evolubon shouid not be used to evaluate more than one sakty funchon en each subcategory. j l

For Pwnt operating toets, stre primary and secondary systems hated 1 cnder Safety functoon 4,

• Heat Removal From Reactor core,"in l 1

Sectoon 1.0 of NUREG 1122 may be treated as separere setery ,

functoons: Le., two systems, one prirnery and one secondery, may be l seeected from Safety Functoon 4. e 1

I ll i

I

j e

1 Speerfic instructions For Category *B* (D.3.b)

For each system saisi: sed for evaluaten. select from the apphcable K/A

, catalog or the facality licensee's sne-specMe task hst one task for wfuch a i JPM essets or can be developed. Renew the associated swnulator cutime ,

if it has already been prepared (refer to Secten D.4), and avoid those j tasks Viet have already been setected for evaluehon on the dynamsc

, simulator test.

1 The JPets shousd, indWiduelly and as a group, have uneaningful 1 i performence reeutrornents that willprende a leghornete bassa for  ;

l evaluetong the apporcent's underssenemy of and obthty to aately

, overete the assachered systerns and the punt (as required by 10 CFR 65.45). l 3

4 l

\

i I

Specific instruebons For Category *B" (D.3.b) cont I

l At leest one of the tasks shed be rotated to a shutdown or hpower i condeson, and 40 percent of the tasks (i.e.,4/f D for Ros andinstant i EROS and 215 for upprede 3 roe) shall roeusre the apphcant to e .auw eomenet.peths whhen the facturys op.reeng procedur.s.

,' in additen, et least one of the tasks conducted in the plant (i.e.,

Subcategory B.2) ohefJ evaluate the opphcant's shshly to wnperment actions

, rottured dunng an emergency or atmormai condaion, and another shall t requre the apphcard to nnier the RCA. ,

~j ws provides an escenent opportunny for tne appe,carit to discuss or i

demonstrate the redetson comros subsects descneed n Admrustrouve Tapc Al

' l i

1

~.

t l Specific instructions For Category *B" (D.3.c)

~

I I

' I Forward the completed wakthrough test outhne to the NRC chief Caammer so that a is receeved Dy the date agreed upon with the NRC i

regeonel offce at the time the esamenatson arrangements were (4nfirmed, I the outhnes are normetly due apprortmetely 75 days before the '

scheduled esamenatori date. Refer to ES-201 for additenal metructions .

regardmg the revow and submetal of exammatson outhnes.  !

I

{

l i

! i 4

1 l l l

l Specific Instructions For Category *B* (D.3.e)  :

I.

, Sutwnit Ine entire operstmg test package to the oesgnated facday revower

? er the NRC chef esammer, as appropnate for revew and approval m  !

accorcance wnh Secten E. T by the NRC f m ,,nete,y o .he rete.st musteachedu e<.,et b,.e recewed,ed . chief .

.sa.ess,n.,

un e,,,

.in., a,mn.en,enis have ne.n m.de.

re.  ;

i .

t i

l i j I

{

a i

- j integrated Plant Operations '

Specific instructions For Category *C' (D.4.d)

Each scenarto set must, et a rnwemurn, regure each apphcant to resGond

'; to the types of evolutsons. fadures, and transents m the quatustes esermfed for the apphcant's hconse tevel on Form ES 301-5. "Transent I and Event Checimet." An apphcant should on#y be Owen credit for those events that reques the apphcant to perform verffetHe actens that provide i eneaght to the appiscant's competence.

The required instruneont and component tellures should normally be compoeted 9efere enerting the mejor treneient; those that are inetontett itter the neejar trenseent should be carefully revoewed because they l rney require htne appkcant arvon ared provede htde kneight regardong i thert perforenonce.

~.

~

i Specife instructions For Category *C' (D.4.d) cont

. I Each event should only be counted once per appucant.

, porirsampie: a power chanos can be counted as a normar evolvien oR as a -

reamway marupuisi on.

Senelarly, a component faeure that immedetety resutts in a major transeent {

counts as one of the other, but not both.

I i

Specific Instructions For Category *C' (D.4.d) cont  !

'. Any normel evolution, component failure, or abnormel event (other then a reactor trip or other euromebe power reduction) that reQurros the operator to perform o controNed power or reactivtry thenye will metaty the i f requirement thw a reactivity onenipuention, '

f '

i This includen evente such as en emergency beration, e dropped rod l

recovery, e signtlicent rod bank reedignment, or a menval reactor power ,

i reduction M roepense to a secondary syetem upset. Such events may

. f produce a more timely operator and pient response then a normelpower i thenge.

l 3

t 1

. I

' f i

i Specific Instructions For Category *C'(D.4.d) cont '

I i ff $No faciNty beensee normally operates with and de requwed byits technical specMicekene to have more then two roe in the control I

' room, the chief eneminermay euakertre the une of samtoonal l

! eutroneten to nrieut the crews.

!' .I in euch cases, sehe care in poenning the scenenos to ensure that the endmonal operators do not reduce the eseminers'abitory to evoluete a each apphcant en the requored number of ennis and on envy  :

competenes and reone lector. i i,

i l

I i

Specific instructions Fof Category *C' (D.4.e)  !

l i

vai.n ine proo d senmier ,ereinig iest oumnes are com,me. forwerd ,

them to the f4RC chef esenuner so they era, recorved by the date agreed upon witn the NRC regaial ofree et the time the cannunstron arrangemeres were confrmed; the eutkes are fiormally due ,

eeprorimetely 75 nievs before the actieduted egenunshon date. Refer to ES 201 tot additenal risuuctions reperdung the revow and suommel of tne ,

Czemnation authnes.

i i

l

)

l t

Speerne instructions For Category *C" (D.4 g) l I

i l

Summa the erure operstmp test package to tne designaled fecay revewer l

or the HRC cruef esammer, es appropnete. for renew and approval m accordance with sechon E.

f

? The test must be received by the NRC chef exammer approximemly 45 l siers before the scheduled admirustret:en dete, uniess other ar'angements I

% b.en,nade.

, j l

.i l

QUALITY REVIEWS Facility Management Review (E.1)

If the opermang test was prepared by the fecerty 6censee, the preisnwnery i sudMe afMf the prWpened teef sheff be independently fewwwed by 4

.6 supenneer er manager before they are submmed to the NRC regenal ofice for renew and approval m assordance wan E!c201.

The townwer should evoluete the outhne and test usmg the cruena on Forms !

ES.2012, ES 3013 and ES-30td and include tne signed forms (for eacti i cif*erent opereung test) m the esammelen package submrned to the NRC m accorcance wah ES 201. .'

I t

i ATACHMENTS ,

i l

Attachment 1 (F) j f

"Open-Reference Question Guidelines" I

i i

e 1

1

e I

I I

I

f. e I

t Opef> Reference Question Guidelines i

t t

4 i t, The most appropnete format is the shortenswer questoon, which l requures the opphcent to compose a response rather then select (

from among a set of shernative responses, se in the case with l rnurt ree choice, merching. end eruwtetu quwoons.

l 2. provide ciur, notictt erecdonsiguiowotnes for enswering the

• 1 questoon so that the oppucent unoerotends what constitutes a fully correct response. choeoo words carefuny to ensure that the stipusetsons and requiremente of the queedon are appropriately conveyed. waren euch es *evesuete,* *oudme,*end *uptein.'can invrte e tot of desell that is not necessarily redevant.

l J  !

i l

, Open-Reference Question Guidelines (cont)

3. Atene sure that the espected response merchee (and in #mised to) the requiremente posedin the queeson. Consiner the ernount of pertial creet to be greneed for en incompsene answer. For

. Le sequireng computeven, specny the negree of preciesen espected. Try to mehe the onewer turn our to se whose numeers, i

i 4 Avoid giv6ng swey part or ed of the enewer by the ney the quenhen is woroed. For esemple: *ttthe setdown kne became obetructed.

l' coulst berotron of the pient he accomphshed shordy sher a emector trfp to put the pient in coM shutdown ? ff so, how?* A teet-weee oppkcent sen reekse that the answer has to be yes, or etee the l

second part of the quuuen wouM have read something hee *ff not. -

why not?

i

~

l Open-Reference Question Guidelines (cont)

• 8. Avoid what couM be considered *hcR* questions in which the espected answer does not procmely merch the question. For esernple, eeking *Now(do) the SI nortrunanon erneria change following en $1

, reinttnetron1* imphee tient the termonesion entene will change, when in

, actueisty they do not, i

6. Do 1et une erect look-up questions that only require the oppkcent to receN where to Rnd the answer to the questron. The operatronet oreensetsen required of questions on the weth-through test and the opphcent's accees to roterence documents, argue egernst the use of questrens that test for receit and enemorisotron. Any queetrons that do l not requrre any enelysis, synthesis, or opphcotion ofin96rmation by the <

epphtent shouM be enewereb6e wrthout the med of reference metenels.  !

Rettr to Es-002, Atsechment t, for e onore dese46ed thscussion of erect f so%h.up questrons.

4

I

?

l .

Oper> Reference Question Guidelines (cont) i

, 9, Questions should otso adhere to the generic leem construction principles and gurdehnes in Appendst B. Moreover, form ES-8021,

'NRC Chechhot Mr Open-Nekronce TeetItems,"contains a hat of

, questions that con he need to evaluere the sunablirty of the t queekens for the enem4hrough partnwr of she operetmg test.

I l Although ahe checkhet aves devokped kr use in evoluating requebrRcetion wrtteen esenninettons, all of the crNone escept 9,10, j t1, and the K/A retsag en inern 7 are generically applicable. \

I l

I

, 602-1 Excerpt I items 9,10, and 11 f

I 9. to the question appropnele for the wnteen esoneneren and the schoed format (e.g., enort enewer or tmAgNo choce)?

10. Do questions in Seceson A take adverwege of the eenulator control i room eetteg?

I

11. Does any question have the potental of besng a "doutNepopard( ,

nuem,ont I

i ES FORMS l i

I ES-301-1,2,3,4,5, and 6 l l

l l

l

i Examples of LOW discrimination t JPMs ,

1

____ g ____

i j 1. Roset the Turtune Drwen AFW Pump Tnp Throttle Valve (PWR)  ;

a. w. Aos(.ng e,) (own) !i

3. Start the Hydrogen Recomtuner (without a fault)

{

4. I Locamy narete the RCS weh the emergency manual bareton volve i (PWR)

}

l i

Examples of DISCRIMINATORY  !

JPMs l i

++++ @++++ l

1. Oropped red recovery (drop e second rod dunng recovery requinng reaaer tip) i I

3. Local start of equepment vnth fadures reaumng the use of stemate procedures.

• i i

l l

e

l f

!  ! I I

I i ES-302 (

' i i 1 Final Rev 8 Change Overview I i

i i i

i i

Purpose "A" a

l l

i Thss standard desenbes how to administer operstang tests to bital # cerise apphcents in accordance wem the requirements of 10 CFR 55 45. It Mcludes pohcses and guidehnes for adfmmstenng both the wo4k-through and tne enegreied pient operations casecones of the operaung test. It is assumed that the operatmg tes' was propered en accordance with ES301.

I 4

- ~ !

l t

i Background *B" 4

l As noted in ES-201, facikty 6eensees win generany prepare proposed l _

, operehng tests m accordance with ES 301 and submit them to tnc ,

responsatHe NRC regmnal office for fewew and approval. I I

Cbgerdless of whether 8 was prepared by the facihty beensee or the NRC, ,

every operstmg test will be mdepenoently admenstered and graded by an NCC heenseg esameer an accordance wah the instruchons contame6 '

herem and in ES303. '

l i I I

t I

l l

l l

1

t l Responsibilities "C"

l.

• i Facihty Licensee (C.1.b)

Sefoguard the insegnty and secunty of the operetmg tests m accordence

, evith sleciNty procenkeren enansitehed pureuent to 10 CFR SS 40(b)(2) i and the gumeenes secussed m Anechment 1 of ES-201.

l-I-

i Responsibilities "C" I

i NRC Regional Office (C '2.a)

~

J .,n whh e y e.n.e. so one,.nne.e , -,n. .ent I

admindesreelen schesluis in a neenner shof nasa mee ofWedencyand

J escurwy.

Nerniony, she one,esne seene shaude ne amminw ,ed whhin 30 mere Semre er afser the wetween esenowneefens. The regen shaft steern eencurrenee hem the NRR operecer hcensing program etnce if the treminewen spesen eWwerye ey more then 30 seys. (feeder to ES201 fDradsfreenelguidance repoteng erensinemens thet have so be

, reachentuend 80 schieve en eccepeehde proelucL) i

} Test Administration instructions l and Policies (D) ,

l General (D.1.d)

I .

NonneHy, en NRC esenuner wrn be seeigned so instvieluelly evetuate each eophaent during the einmueeter opreeng seet. However, it e snroe+ereen opereenp crew eene6ese enerely eteentor reactor operoser(sRO) unpreme applicense (who do not have to be evoluesed on the centret hoerue), she chnet esoneiner neey eenign only two

. e4ennners se steerve the crew.

Astroengh she opphconse in the reacter operator end beJence of poent

, ponernens esmey not be snebw6enuouy evoluntad, they will be imeld eccounanese for any en ere shot occur es s reautt er their actents) or

, ineswen(s) and grened on their enmey no *Operese she Centrol i noeres"(i.e., sRO Compeenney $1. SRO.innannt opphcense writ eowere he snenwedueNy eveJuneed by en NRC esenuner regergness whet operessag peereen they are RNump anurung a gewen asenerro.

, 4 l

l I

I 3 General (D,1.j) 4 i Athougti me genuleten facNety operator will normally assume the rose of

! toe amor personnet tnet me oppkcents deset or nouty regardeg piant opershons. tne cowf enemmer may perma other memters of the recahty tromme or operanons etett te p e shift techmeal advisor (STA)) to augment the opereo~ng shift seem W necessary.

. . The chef enemmer shallfully knef those indmduals regardmg ther responettWhhes. reportmg requesments, dules, end level of perticipebon

,j before the opereung test beges. The eneminers must not restnct the eurrogate operators' ectwtes to such on erlerit ttist the opphcents bemg

! evolussed are requeed to assurne responsitNiems beyond the scope of

,8 M poedsen.

I The surrogote operators edt be espected to assume the full responsstukhes j or me reies mey ion. m ine opereong iest coneut=wons wrm en 3TA shell be coneluctedin accordence with the ancility keensee's normal control room precGee; e.g., en S TA eheII not be sectioned in the f simuantor H they are on cellet the site, t

i  !

i e

l Walk Through (Categories A and B)(D.2.b) l l

l

. Ta the essent possible.the enemmer should have the appucent perform the control room JPeds on the semutetor, rather then ashmg the opphcent to

-l desente how he or she wound eccompnen me issa.

1. the esoneiner ebeervee a escrepency befwoon the sianuAetor eerup

' end the een* Gens specniedin a Jpht, then the esenuner ehellstop the JPei and correct the adhfetien, as noteeeery,

1. the seek can be compdored wrth efYoront relues (e.g., wind efirection when decernuning a proceenve steen recommenderson dureng en emergency), then the esereerner shall elocument the eWrerencee and coordonate with the fecHtty conanct and the NRC cheef eseminer to sehdete the oppheent's roepense under the actual conditions, i

f

. y

~

i j Walk-Through (Categories A and B)(D.2.f)

I As seendin 10 CFR is este), the opereeng test requires the opphcent to demonstrete en unelersten6ng of and the abittry to perform the troons neceesary to accomphan a ~representense eampoe from emong 1J home hsted in the rule. .

M the oppkcent correctly performs a Jpht (includung both crtlicaland .

e noncttucalstepe) and dernonstresee temilertty wrth the equipment and

• procedures, the esemoner should trtier that the oppkcent's l

undereseneng of the systenwtesk he seequete end retrein from asking 96homop quesnons.  ;

1 However, n the apolocarrt fans to accomphsh the seek standerd for tore J9ht, eEhtbite beke90ur that eensonstratae e inck of famikerrty wrth the o equrpment and procedures, oris une66e to locate information, control bee =tt in$ cations, or controls, the exemmer should eek pertorrnertce-based toHow.up pressi ierrfy of confirm th

e,,hc.,,rs un , sten.onsno eaor,,,e noteesary to c,t ,s,etes ,o th. ,es eth.t s,em,,,- ,

• • 890 N - l l

l l

s e

i 1 t

i Walk-Through (Categories A and B) (D.2.f) cont ,

' i Simlierty, tf the applicent arves en ambiguous enewer to e prescripted :

administrative queadon in Category A, the eseminer is espected to '

e ask probeng quessons to ensure tnet the appiscent understood the h l Originalquestion and the applicebee knowledge or ability. 1 s The esernener shall docurnent allperformance-bened euestrons and {

l enewers forlaterevolunden. )

l 11en applicent volunteers addttbanal of correctedinformetron efter )

having compteend a teek er euention, the esarmner sheII etter the I apporcent the opporsuntry to enke whatever actsons wound be required  :

in a sinu 6erestuotion in the poent. )

The esenuner wul record any restatens to previously performed tosks i

or enewere 96r ceneideradon when predsng the operating test per ES.

aos. I 1

I {

l i.

(

l Walk-Through (Categories A and B) (D.2.g) l 1

l The esenuner shouw precoce oeer good wen through evoluenon l1 nochn, eves as escussed m seceen o of Appenos c. \

g I

'. i i i l

+  !

l  ;

I  !

I I

l i

1

- I i

,' Waik-Through (Categories A and B)(D.2.0)

I

. f f

l tf the simulation teciNty should Decome inoperable and cause excessive I, de*2y of the operstmg tests.the CPwef exerraner should discuss the  !

situation wnta the facukty licensee Gnd the responsible tegenet supennsor so that management can snake e decasen regarding the conduct of the '

operating tests. It may be necessefy to reschedule the simuistor l esaminetsons for a toler date.

T92 elmuletar should be conebaiored inopersbee under any of the Collowong conOGons: l I e 7tte simulator exhibite a mess /energyimbetence, erretic logic, or I ineuplacobse penelinducetrons ciurrng modeleseCution. ',

1 . rh. smunetor e hibits unpoenn.d and une pseined events or l

errunetrons thet cause the opphcente to evert from th. esp.eted  ;

, tenponeen end success petn er the ptenned scenerio.

l l

1 l

7

. I

! l 1  :

Walk Through (Categories A and B)(D.2.o) cont  ! ,

i i

.*

• The simu6eter autemeGcelly goes to the 'freese* egete during e l t etenerte er a *beyond simuseted Nmits* eserm is received on the -

j hustructor esedert l

- The simueeterinstructorinterms the enemination seem that e l normaore snedule been helted er *Asched out."

Oscurrence of any of these aborerneelsimusetor operedng conewens during en enemmenien eenewtuten autlteient cause to etep the Geenerte, twelueGene of the appl 6 cents' performance aturing any of SNeet almuteter neeNunction eeneNasene sesey be unreliable.

When the admodeter Ass been senterest so fosfl operebidtty, the efeief eneminer erill nietereneine H the scenerte reentree replaceneent, oney be ressenedin progrees, er sesey be renterned from the beginning.

l.

P 6

e e

gy.

I e

I i

i i

ES-303 I

l Final Rev 8 Change Overview e

I e

l t

t l

, Purpose *A*

i

{ This stanseed seurmes the procedures for -r--: . ._.; as eswoores of g- the Opereeng test, ontstag the data to arrwe at a pass or fait re_ . . . - ,, and rev.e.mg the o=._. . to ensure cueny.

i i

I

~.

t.

Background *B*

- 1 i ins standard assumes that the operstag test was prepared and i i

comemstered in accordance unth ES-301 and ES 302. respechwety.

l t

ine proc.dures conia.ned nerem r.au.,e in. . m.nor to.vmune eacn I.

. applicarWs performance on the operstmg test and enske a judgernent as to j i whether the oppdecents level of knowledge end understandmg meet the +

mmimum requiremefits to safely operme the facellty for wrisch the license es  !

, souant 1 I

in. co-ner.wmus.s .cn omed nefic.ncy m s.gnt ef ine toimi nroadtn l

. of umage .nd et,.my .monstra.c oy m amcant e tnai sowei i area l l

~ _

l l 1 i Responsibilities "C" NRC Examiner of Record (C.2) i .s . con .s - ,ie, ..-ele the issuhe . san-er e ,eco,d shall revsew. evaluate, and (maitre each appicant's operstmg test

documentation in accorcance with the instruchons m Section D.

l if en appkcent neede en error with serious sakty consequences, the I eneminet naet recommend an opereeng test feiture even W the I

grealmg instruc#ons in Secnon D would normally result in a possing l prede. Under such cirsuonetences, the eseminer shall thoroughly justify and document she hemis Nr she tenure in accordence wtth

! SecWon D.J.6.

l Maroover, the NMC reprenal office shell obtain wrtnen concurrence I t>om the NMM operetor keensing program office bekre compieting

, a,. ac np .c,oon.

i

~ f l

Grading and Documentation j instructions "D" l {

Evaluate the Applicant's Performance  !

Form ES-303-1, Category B (D.2.b)

J j Ts setermme a grade for the syneems/JPMs hated on Form ES-303-1 evaiusie eacn o ricency coo a m the rouan noies for category e. it the famowmg enwns are enet. asa.gn a satsrectory gree by pacmg an s in the *Evolusten* column for that system /JPM, othensase enter a "U";

Time-cnhcal JPMs must be completed wethat the aNoned tune, i I

r k

~.

t i

Evaluate the Applicant's Performance Forrn ES 303-1, Category B (D.2_b) cont The task stancard for the JPM must be accomplished by correctly completag all of the crucal steps. I

- If the opphcant inaally rmased a criucal step, but inter performed it correctty and accomphshed the task standard without cegradmg the condrhon of the system or tne piant, the appicant's performance on that , 1 JPM should be graded as seusfactory. '

l However, the sophcant's error shall be documented in accoroance enth Soceson D.3.

l

! i

? .

Evaluate the Applicant's Performance Form ES-303-1, Category B (D.2.b) cont n . The roeponses to eny performance-based t>How.up questions asked pursuent to sectron D.21of Es.202 must connem that the

eppkcent's underosandmg of the system!Jpht is settafectory.

,g If the 9eNoermo questions reveelthat the appeteent's underesenetrag of the eyesentrJeet is servously elenedent, the l esemener may recommend an unannetectory grade for the syenom even shough the applicent succeeefuuy cornpooned the i ame4 eteneloret for the Jpet. The heeie for the recommendation

} sheH be thoroughlyjussWied and stocumenned in accordance whh s secuen D.2.

! -l i l l

i l

! Evaluate the Applicant's Performance Form ES-303-1, Category B (D.2.b) cont e

l Conversely, if she apphcant ersd teet accompheh the seek saenderd and foNeumop queneemag revea6ed that the feMure nos caused by a de6cheneyin the procenture or sonne other factor heyentf the appireent's con lrol, the esenemer mey adH recomneend a setnekctory prede ter the syneemrJant.

l Dnce apeln, the hesie for the recommenefation sheH be thoroughly

• JusttNod anni clocuneentedin accordence anoth secuen D.2. l l

6 t

I i

~

I Evaluate the Applicant's Performance  !

j Form ES-303-1, Category B (D.2.b) cont i

' I After greeMag the applicant's performance wrth respect to aH the  ;

Category a ayenome, determine en overall prone for Category B by  ;

! calcuteeng the percenteps of setsekctory system predes. '

if the appucent hos en *S* en at enest 80 percent of the systems esemened. the applicant pesnes Casegory B and receives en *S*  :

everell. If the oppheant has en *S* en fewer than 80 percent of the '

eyenema, the appNcant has Category B and receives a *U* overeII.

, l 1

Document the aantinents prede by piecing an *S* or a *U* in bioch B, ,

' Control Room 5yee*ms and Facurry Weih-Through,*in the

• Opereeng Test Summary

• en pape 1 of Form ES-203-1. Enter *NIE*

ff stWs cosegory esos eweivedin accoreence wrth ES-204. Document l

, andjuodf)r every dehceeney in ascernence wrsh secean D.2. ^

l

I ~

Evaluate the Apphcant's Performance Forrn ES-303-1, Category C (D2.c) j i using Form E$.303-3 or ES 303 4. eependmg on the appicant's Ecense level, evaluate any Oefooncses coded for Category C. Circle the intE0ral retang value (t through 3) conespondrig to the Dehavioral anchor t*Lat most accurately reflects the appicant's performance. A retmg of *1' would I tpe justafarJ W ths applicant rmssed a crthcal task (i.e.. by omassson or l incorrect performance) or comrmtted mulupie sfrors of lesser segmrcance j g that have e teoaring on yte ratang tactor, i Missino one or enore erfacel tasks does not nomssertly mean that the  !

l speimant unA fail the semulator test. nor coes success on every critr.al task l

f grevent the esamener from recommencino e fessure of the econcent had l Other esfssences that. ri the aggreoate. tuotify the ladure based on the

. gomeetency eveiustions As descuseed in E5 Jof, Cornposency 6 #s  ;

opoonel for 3RO upproele applicants. However, the eseminer shall evolueen Campetency 5 Wthe appHcent routedinto en operating crew l poeNoon thet required the applicent to maniposene the controls. ,

Docurnent endjustify eoery elencnoneyin accordence with Sectron l o.a. .i i

+ '

Finalize the Documentation (D.3.b) l l

Denciencies that do not contribune to en opersong nest Category tellure shellseno se documented.

, However, a br\ief seneement elescrising the error and the expected etten or reopenee is generoNy sufficient.

Eseminers shou 6d keep in niind that their Scensing recommsndetion s and the secocasted elocamienmWon are suepect to revsew by the ch+ef i esemener and NMC regeonelotnce management.

Them9ere, the elocumenasaien should consern sufncient detailso thet the indepennent reveewer, responsthee supervoor, and Ciceneing ofncial can meene e logical elecmion in support of the esammer's recomtneneletron to deny orissue the orcense.

1 i

~

l I

i Finalize the Documentation (D.3.b) cont Retam rougft documentatson untd the cruef erarmner and NRC regional once management have reviewed the exammers recommendataarts end concurred in the resums (refer to ES-50t). ,

Eseminers shall resein all applicable notes and documentation OsmeConted with proposed 60Neels until the 00mels beCome fin &l. I I ,

Esemmers are advned that auch notes would be subject to l ek3 Closure if requented unoer the freedom of informecon ACt.

i l

I

f i

(

t i

i i

Form ES-303-1 i t i 3 l

, Individual Examination Report t t

i

! ES 303-1 i e

4 I

i i

I  !

I 1

e I

i 1 '

1 l

l l

l l

l a G

9 em 1

1 1

l l

l l

l' i

)

I i.

I _

. l Appendix C Final Rev 8 Change Overv;ew I

I

! I e

i

' i Purpose "A" ,

t This Appenez provises a framework for proponne and evaluateg job l performance measures (JPMs) to ensure they are of appropnote ,

substance and format for drubal operator heensing and requearcahon emanunshens. The fehowing sternents are desChased M Otteil or attached for informahan:

! - a besc procesure for - . . ; ., new JPMs (Secison B). inciueng forms ,

to document the JPW and to essess the quemy of the product (Form ES-  ;

. C-1 and ES-C-2) ,

. gusseenes for the development and use of seemste-path JPMs (Secamn C)

- a oescussen of mem-through evalwahon tecswuques (Seczen D)

.TM2 PRESCRIPTED QUESTION BULLET WAS DELETED t

u t

t l

Development and Reviewing JPMs 'B' i ALL PRESCRIPTED QUESTION DEVELOPMENT PARAGRAPHS WERE DELETED I

r .

) .

i

i l i

r Attachments / Forms i

i ATTACHMENT 1, PRESCRIPTED  ;

QUESTION SAMPLES WERE DELETED .

i l t

i

! j i n

I

\

i 4

9 e

9 e

4 h

~

i TRAINING MANAGERS l CONFERENCE l NEW INSPECTION PROGRAM I- ,

i

! l 1

i

~. a

NEW INSPECTION PROGRAM l

= The New Program Will Establish Baseline I inspections Common to All Plants

.

• Inspection Beyond the Baseline Will Be j Performed at Plants Below a Specifed Threshold j - Predicated on Performance indicators i i -Inspection Findings i

- Response to Speci6c Everts or Prob 6 ems

= Baseline inspections will Be Grounded on l

" Cornerstone" Areas *

• Focused on

• Risk significant* Activities and Systems '

Focused on How Ut:6 ties Find and Fix Problems

. Focused on How Utihties Accept and Encourage '

Employees to Raise Safety issues

^-

t NEW INSPECTION PROGRAM i'

c Major Parts of the Baseline inspection Program , l

• Inspect Areas Not Covered By Performance i

, Indicators  ;

. Inspect to Verify the Per!ormance indicators '

• Inspect / Review Effectiveness of Finding and  ; <

Resolving Problems (Corrective Action Program) oCORNERSTONES

. Monitor Performance in Three Areas:  ;

- Reactor Safety '

- Radiation Safety

+ - Securty ,

i .

l .

i NEW INSPECTION PROGRAM j Cornerstones  :

e Reactor Safety  ;

i + Initiating Events .

.

• Mitigation Systems  ; -

+ Barrier integrity

• Emergency Preparudness

! eRadiation Safety I

+ Plant Worker  ;

j + General Public ,

[ oSecurity

[

+ Physical Protection New inspection Program Cc nerstone Cross-Cutting Eiernents l

o Cross-Cutting Elements l

- Element that Effect Each Cornerstone l j + Human Performance i

- Ability to Raise Safety issues  !

Finding 2.nd Fixing Problems .

. 1 i

i i

~ .

, i l

~

i NEW INSPECTION PROGRAM

{

Major Elemeru of the Baseline Program ,

l

> aThe Program is indicative and Not Diagnostic

• Program Delineates Specific inspection Act'vities

+ Inspection Findings are Evaluated for Significance I --- - -

• Diagnostic /Rnot Cause Determinations Do'e Sy Supplementalinspection Pmgram ,

O meassumme m<

atump

k. -

NEW INSPECTION PROGRAM l

Majc*' Element of Baseline Program i

= Baseline Program is Risk Informed l

. Inspectable Areas Selected based on  ;

Significance from a Risk Perspective j j

• Risk Factor in to Program Four Ways l

-inspectable Areas are Based on importance to l Measuring Comerstone Objective i i -Inspechon Frequency and Number of ActivP.ies and i I Time Spend inspechng Based on Risk

, - Selection of Inspection Activities in Each inspectable

, Area Based on a Rrsk Matnx Modrfied by Plant Specific information l

-Inspectors Are Trained in the Use of Risk information 'l

' o Baseline Program is the Minimum Program l l

i NEW INSPEC . ION PROGRAM ,i Cornerstone link to inspectable Areas '

i l

a g i2EE E M M tagig is m

! m

{$  !

l I

t I

i J I

l l NEW INSPECTION PROGRAM l l PERFORMANCE INDICATORS  !

]

' olnitiating Events:  !

• Unplanned Reactor Shutdown  !

• Loss of Normal Rx Cooling Sys Following j tinplanned Shutdown ,

. Transients - Unplanned Events that result in Rx i Power Change ,

t e MiUgating Systems-

• Safed/ Systems Not Available ',

- Specite KCZ l Emer. , . wr Systems

. Saf.ty Syst=... "ures l

l l NEW INSPECTION PROGRAM j Performance Indicators a lntegrity of Barriers : j

• Fuel Cladding (coolant activity)  ;

• Rx Cooling System Leak Rate i

• Rx Containment Leak Rate I

= Emergency Preparedness:

, + Emergency Response Organization Drill Performance

. Readiness of Emergency Response Organization

+ Availability of Notification System l NEW INSPECTION PROGRAM  !

Performance indicators

, = Occupational Radiation Safety:

+ Compliance with Regulations for Controlling Access to Radiation Areas in Plant

! Uncontrolled Radiation Exposures to Workers Greater than 10% of Regulatory Limit i = Public Radiation Safety:

, . Effluent Releases Requiring Reporting Under  !

NRC Regulations and License Conditions j i

i 1 I

i i

l NEW lNSPECTION PROGRAM Performance indicators ,

. i o Physical Protection:

. Security System Equipment Availability -

• Personnel Screening Program Performance i

+ Employee Fitness-for-Duty Program Effectiveness ,

l l

i

NEW INSPECTION PROGRAM l

' insketion Findings / Performance Indicator Data j

oinspection Findings:

j . Inspector Observations are Evaluatso to i

! j i Deterrtine Significance  !

i

• Use Defined Process: Signithnee Deterrnination .

]

l Process  !,

e Performance Indicators - -

i

• Thresholds Set Regulatory Response

- Example : l 1 t i p.,vo.m.nc. . tn. p.re.ra . or .a orm. ...rm..

.onn.

nd .

.c=-.ctu.I opportunites th.t w.r. p., formed in a tun.ly .r'd

?

,d ,o in. pr... .eni n r. I i

. +

i NEW INSPECTION PROGRAM _

Regulatory Response i e Significance Determination Process '

f + Characterize the Risk Significance of issue

• Each lasue is evaluated and assigned a color Using a Process Flow Chart ~~

- GREEN: Licensee Response  !

, -White; increased Regulatory Response  !

-YeHow Required Regulatory Response

- Red: Plant Not Permitted to Operated within this Band . ,_.

I I

f .

l NEW INSPECTION PROCESS l I

PILOT PROGRAM

. I

^

oTwo Pilot Plants Per Region l

. Sequoyah  !

• Harris }

o Pilot Program Commenced June 1999 l o Full Imp % mentation of New Inspection  !

Program by April 2000 i i

Ng3CLECOM AR RMISSlofyEG ULA Top P r

g t4tt4Gp MANAGggS

~

i C0t4FERENCE -

f"%

' i h~  %

e R

• e

• • • e

/-  !

i

1. /C# BALD %%  !

Training Managers Conference .

C%nges & Clanfica6*;;? to ES-401, Part 1 PREPARING INITIAL SITE.57) nFIC WRITTEN EXAMS e o.i.e the omme must ne sy.iem imany se6ea d. shan not use in. i saa em NA catasog The Ptent Wee Generc (PWG) Tsar 3 showed NOT include syserai genert tasks. The tapes for PWG TesM 2 and the f v NA categones for Ter 3 Shan ne seisaed from secuon 2.

Genenc Knowesoge and Abishes from the NA catalog.

e D.1.c to sae-specerc WAs may repiece 10 systemetc sample tems, for metasis orissues, with basss and Chef Exammer approval, e D.1.0 Ensure authne sampos: at least every WA ares twee and tne sRO sampies topcs regum9d by to CFR 55 43(D).

1

. p.dO9* PWR SRO Emminesen Chsenw* , Form f t 439 3 1

am > of M  !

m og tamm te.es 1 9 auA Cameery Ponts 1 (

KlN 1s2 KfM 3I 4-K K Ess AlA il2s3ieAfA G4 y

1 1.1 1  % M% Ib 24 8C' T Pien E St #

F,,,

ED se

,_t ..3 5 d E.Y 3 Y e -

, t_, i ,s .

21 ir y, 2 17 Syner. 3 4 Ter l 43 f ees. I ,

3 Genenc Knr g ord Ameses Cet t Coe 2 Car 3 l Cat 4 1 h l

}Q- _ --

1 Training Managers Conference i Changes & Clanncations to ES-401. Part 11 .

i h

' e 0.2.a use exatmg. modmed or new queshons. If oevaton from i sutmetes sampos is necessary docuss wvth the Chef. Se able '

l to docuss why the change was neccesary. Document those  :

reasons. l i e D.2.c The wnteen esanuneuen must to SCH60% hegner cognawe '

l ercer tems. (NO more Es)  !

e 0.2.d The sRO only quessons on en esam must be at the SRO ievel.

I not just ausesons et the RO level. Thees should be detneuted

. amongst the 3 hers.

-i -

.i

, i l

i ,

i Training Managers Conference i 1

Changes & Clanfications to ES-401. Part til j I

• D.2.f Retake e. _. _ . . _ may NOT have any overtop or reuse 4 toms frem the toded hcense esammetson.

,. No .ve,ie, .o. ween NRe meien .nd .u.i uniess meepeneeney seed. Then only 5 queshons asowed. 1 Repest of DNLY 2$ questions from test 2 NRC esammahons and mems used in troenmg.

• D.2.g Facshly enemmg eeischve refevues are encouraged but not retured. ,

nis ng ,e ,

i ine . s on ,,.wes oveede.e h.snoi-one e.ine.v4.nd a, pro,nese does imenn.cai noi mv daie .

reerence s. I i

l i

Training Managers Conference Changes & Clan 6 cations to ES-401. Part IV I

e o.2 s The drwt . mmenon must be recewed at inesi e deys >= fare  :

the es.mmaien. i e E.2.s NRC wed review and get supennsory revew before domesmg  !

I with Amnsee.  ;

I e E.2.C The NRC WM perform a 30 guescon sample revow. wm revow ;

all new plus mod 6ed. Questoons. N recured. The sampde we enclude 10 new and 20 moefed queshons. (All 125 quesuons edil undergo a revow.)

l Questens pronously revowed and approved by the NRC for

. tnat facshty enn have Imted revow for unacceptages flaws per E S-401-9.

e

I L

Ie i

Training Managers Conference i -

Changes & Clanfications to ES-401, Part V  !

I e E.2.c if the sampie shows less then 6 mems are unacceptable. metailed '

renew of the rest of the esarmnahon wi# contmue, if greater then 6 Items are found unacceptable. NRC GAA Y retum the esanunaten or we may complete es revew~Te~woow uns use ES.

401-9.

t

, if the esammabon is retumed, we espect that the hcensee correct the alentined flows and those hke lund flaws that were not

. spooficacy hierilined to Wie rest of the questens, j

o E.3.s The NRC Supervisor WU$T rownw and approve ad unecomptseis nem comments.

e E.3.6 The f atC supervoor wtLL rowow and approve each comment that would feeuse the boensee to rework a NRC-vehdated Equesuon. (Provsously used test Nems.)

l l

l l

esaci- w.w.a a = r as4oi.e i

'?-

Reu.s. aus.tensee, l

~ . ,

. t- - - .

I

v. . .-

, .e.__. . ,

._..r..__-....._..- ..

@ 2._,_,,

=_p

,.=....-

==.:_.

7.

i p .=== : ... __ _ ,

23 piff ~~i.*.~_' ====. .==.. ==,- l._.

=,._.7.__.. .. -.. ,

m ,, _ .. ,

Training Managers Conference

. Changes & Chnfications to ES-401. Part VI t

e E.4 Final votesten of emanunstson ener encorporahng changes as t re_.. __._l bul g required f I. ,

1 e Att t Doesttes en acomptable samphn0 enethodology for systenete ,

eseectaen for sie wntien outisne. . I J

e Form Moddled verson of the form provules tienks to record test hem .'

401 7 count for reuse from the last esammatens the source of the l questions and the cognihve level for the que'.*/eris for the esamensbort j e ,o,m ., ne _ ewsw ,.orme ~ dtom,- o, 401-g compted eueshons.  !

I 1

i

. uo,-

-c

. .uos., ,

. -- - - . s.- - s _ .-

l

-s-s.

. . ~

. . _ _ .. t ofgo,.,a - re - -

l

_..s_._._.

s-

, i n.

. . . ._s i , - .

t

, .- . . - ~  :

- . . . ~

_s-8.-

.r -.

._..M s _

i i

Training Managers Conference  !

Changes & Clanfications to ES.402. Part I  ;

ADMINISTERING INITIAL WRITTEN EXAMINATIONS i l

. c.t. Tne nien h io mm.n cure;e e n.

. c.t. The n.ensee rney u.e n c,.,n e .,,ee n.

, requered.

. C.2.. The beensee is nowed to .a.wnister .n NRC developed

e. n on, I i

. C.2 n ounn. . noen. .a on .ee er e .mn.se.md y ,,,one. wnnen es.m.the NRC MUST i be i

.Aher

.me.ennNRC w.pproval. the wnnennes.m d.v.wineose, ietmay be crvunistered .ny ,

I.

1 i

Training Managers Conference Changes & Clanfications to ES-402. Part 11 ,

ADMINISTERING INITIAL-WRITTEN EXAMINATIONS

}

04d New tme 6 met for the i.rmen is 6 hours6.944444e-5 days <br />0.00167 hours <br />9.920635e-6 weeks <br />2.283e-6 months <br />. It can be triended by 30 nunute increments, weh PR#OR NRC .pproval. The new ,

t,me mma should not cn.noe tne oeveiopment process. .

.E4 ucensee should subma formal comments wnhin 5 wortung d.ys .fter the wrflien es.rfWrn. Don is .dmmestered. '

u l

l l

i.

. i Training Managers Conference

, Changes & Clarrfications to ES-403 GRADING INITIAL SITE. SPECIFIC WRITTEN EXAMS .

' l

. C.1.D ff NRC developed, heensee has responsituiny to submd comments i concommg changes to me exammetson.  ;

. C.2.b NRC may amow the iconsee to mectwne grade a NRC developed g j .wmien exammsten.  ;

I

. o.i.e oo tLoi demie any quemen or change en answer wahaut a vei.d i

reeience, unreasonante or unstand auumptions do not justify a i g change. '

t

. o.2.s copy each appecenre answer sheet, and set m.de. Do tioImarx

on the oregmal unta all commerits are fealued.

I i

. o.2.4 ff you dersde to share PREllMIN ARY grades do so wfth cautscwt

! The NRC uAY NoT occept mit the imensee's changes.

. 1

. , i I

. i j i

Training Managers Conference i j

)

Changes and Clanfications To Appendix B '

{ Wntten Examination Guidelines, Part i 1 -

i e c.t.a wA remnces are reou ed but teamme on,ecawes n des ed.

j The is a check and esence on me f. esses iramme program.

iI .. c.t.b make sure the questen matchu me iment of the wA. ,

i  !

. C.t.c .omenmmehan venday is odenned.

em .i e.e. enpon.niu si. ..in.e insikey purpose of any test g.tmemsos  :

)

tweween sete and unsere appheants.* i -

. Impementahon reouses subsectwe judgement in constructeg the  !

stem and detractors.  ;

l

. i i

I.

l Training Managers Conference Changes and Clanfications To Appendix B  !

i Wntten Examination Duidelines, Part il 1 i

i e c.2.a uunie= chose evem.ons wnch reques tne uosT commeer answer a= NoIsaowed. u e a procedureireterenc4. .

. C.2.f All the informenon in the stem should be retevent. (Don't play find the rocat.) Donl add secondary pieces of information in the stem .

tnat are not recevant, in oroer to make the question loot more difficull j P

e C.2.n uw of generceny correct answers is maiowed, but tne stem needs j to be wntien such that'the stem makes them casarly incorrect.  ;

i f

I ES-501 8

INITIAL POST EXAMINATION ACTIVITIES l [ *%,

{

l -'

i

' i D. Charles Payne August 13.1999

)

l I

(

)

ES-501 I

SUMMARY

OF CHANGES $

o Supervisor or manager shall confirm grading

quality and sign OA sheet.

4 o CE independent regrade for 78-82%.

o Potentially hold passes 80-81%.

o Exam report content more clearly defined.

o PDR records defined.

o New letter for delayed results. I ES-501 l

o C.1 No changes to facility requirements. j o Note that clean copy of written exam answer sheet is expected to be provided.

o C.2 No changes to regional requirements.

o Note criteria for determining written exam validity following post-exam comments.

o S% changes / deletions 4 facility explanation.

, c 10% deletions 4 eve'uate adequate sample.

! ES-501

, = D.1 Facility management exam reviews.

j = Supervisor or manauer shall confirm quality j of grading is licensee graded written and sign l

• i QA check sheet. Used to be " authorized l facility representative."

I = Signed QA form represents facility senior management concurrence with Individual and collective exam resutts.

I i ES-501

= D.2 Chief Examiner reviews.

! = No post-exam change will be accepted I

l . ' withoutlesson plans a are valid olant reference. Uncontrollad not acceptable. -

! = Verify answer key used as template or to i machine grade written exam is accurate.

= Independently review every borderline written exam (78-82%).

i i

' ES-501 I

• D.3 NRC management review.

o Pass letters for applicants _who passed exam but licenses are being withheld.

, e if pass written exam with 80-81% and another

' t applicant fails, will hold license until assured I pass / fait decision not affected.

. e For delayed licenses, shall ensure still medically fit

~ within last 24 months, not developed permanent physical or mental condition, and up to date in requal.

' e 11 > 3 months pass, advise licensee to properly l

activate license per 10 CFR 55.53(f).

~

I ES-501  !

i t i

~

= E.1 and E.2 No significant changes.

= Region still will retain EOPs, AOPs, E-Plan and Tech Specs for incident response.  :

= E.3 Exam report documentation. Some i significant changes, j

= Previous revisions stated generic exam I report content requirements. Rev. 8 spells .li out specific types of issues to be included.

I i

i ES-501 i o Factual description of test item changes  !

including type and number of psychometric l

, enhancements made. j l oConclusions regarding adequacy of facility j proposed exams are not recuired and should l only be considered if have a programmatic issue.

l o Any delay in administering the exam and the reason, and any extensions of the written exam time beyond five hours. i o Any exam security issues / incidents.  ;

4 t

! ES-501 l

. o All simulator deficiencies encountered while l preparing or conducting operating tests will be documented in Simulation Facility Report. )

j l

o Generic comments submitted by licensee -

regarding exams or the process are welcome and will be included in exam report. These do not require regional response or  : l resolution. l

o Region will ensure SRO upgrade applicants "

that fail exam still comply with 10 CFR 50 l before resuming RO duties. ,

j

i ES-501 ' l

, c PDR records will include the following:  !

- exam outlines ,

- draft and final written "

i

> - draft and final operating tests l associated QA check sheets  !

I - Other documents"  !

l eIntermediate working copies not needed to  !

I be sent to PDR unless provided to facility l l

licensee to facilitate communication.  :

1 l

1 1

(

e O

i i ES-502 l

~:

PROCESSING REQUESTS FOR ADMINISTRATIVE l REVIEWS AND HEARINGS AFTER INITIAL .

I LICENSE DENIAL l 1

g** % I

%.....l D. Charles Payne ,

i August 13,1999

• I l ES-502

SUMMARY

OF CHANGES I i

a i

l = Reorganized to remove detailed sample j letters and administrative review procedures.

= New section noting expectation of facility licensee support during appeals. i

! = New section to better define NRC  !

! responsibilities.

l

= Administrative review process streamlined.

i l

ES-502

! _ = C.1 Applicant responsibilities. No changes. f'

! = Has 20 days to act on proposed denial. Has i 3 options: l

1. Do nothing. . j

, 2, Request reconsideration. i

3. Request a hearing. l

! elf application denied because of training or l

experience, can reapply when corrected.

l l

I ES-502 I .

l = C.2 Fac;!!ty licensee responsibilities. New

, section. l;

= Facility is expected to provide reference  !

materials and technical support as necessary ,

for NRC to evaluate and resolve concems >

raised by applicant. I eThis includes organizationally supporting the response provided in the answer key.

I l

l

. .t .

ES-502 l

' i

i a C.3 NRC responsibilities. New section but no i new responsibilities.

j aSplits out our responsibilities from mechanics j of the review process.

! e Application denials will be processed per D.1.

e Admin reviews will be processed per D.2.

o Hearings will be conducted per 10 CFR 2,  ;

subpart L.

i

~ .

ES-502 o D.1 Application denial, admin review. l o Not many have occurred in Region 11. But be  !

t cautious of potential outcomes should one be l required, '

o HQ generally will complete the review within  !

60 days. j

- o Since draft applications are not due until 30 l.

i days before exam, any issue with eligibility  !

rnost likely will result in the applicant missing  ;

the scheduled exam. ,

i e

! ES-502 o D.2 Exam failure. Some minor changes.

I cDetailed administrative review procedures

and sample letters have been removed and i

incorporated into separate internal NRC documents.

i o Added option to review the appeal intemally at HQ.

c HQ chooses how to process the appeal.

1. Can reviewintemally j j

f 2. Can refer to affected region

3. Can convene an appeal panel j

I I

I O

F e

W G

)

I i

6 l

! l I D/lBW DJPLCA !

~

i

! I i

i f'*%,

\

l

@i6)* .,<*

I h

1 MISSUE 4

Is it an acceptable pmetice to nadminister an

, identical examinaten to sepamte crews that l' have been separated in time over the finite testing period of the biennial written exam ?

l .

MAJORISSUESREVOLVING

! AROUNDREPE11nVE USE OF  ;

TESTITEMS '

ESTING E6ECUVENESS l

! l

> Do you have a testing practice that measures  ;

up to sound and accepted principles of -

testing? l ]

> Are your examination conditions (size scope, j I discrimination quality) relatively uniform j j among crews.

4

I i

l l

l 4

a i DEFINITIONS i u DISCRIMINATION VALIDIIY-

l 1

! O The ability to discrunmate or to make same

.! distinction along a contintnrn ofexaminee perfornance to detemune whether or not your operators have sufficiently ' mastered" the

)

i knowledge, skills, abilities, and other attributes l toperfoun theirjobs. )

l. I )

l o PREDICTABILITYOFATEST- l

\

' t o "Ihe ability to forecast or anticipate the test items' !

or topics that will appear on an exammation. l l

~

i o Previouslyadministered testitems reduce 1 l examination integrity because examination - '

discranination is reduced.

I i o When the bankofitans is known oranticipated '

i prior to the examination, the exam is behly i predictable. Discrunination is reduced beause l

j. the cognitive level atwhich the examinees are i

tested could decrease to the simple recognition  !

I level. i o To assume that the capability for items within an examination to discriminate, over time, in the ,

s.une manner as those iterns d,iscrunina,ted on the first and second examinations is narve.

l l QUESTION i

+ How does excessive repetitive use of i' i

test items overa short interval of time affect examination validity ?

l l

l

• If the examinees know or can anticipate the

! precise and limited pool fmn which the test .

stems will be drawn, they will tend to only  :

study fmm that pool and may likely exclude a langerdomain ofjob knowledge.

!

• When high percentages of test item duplication takes place (e.g., >50%), the  !

' diser,minant valm' h'ty of the exammation .

i comes underquestion. l

• Successive administations of the same or  !

closely seniinr examinations to difTerent j crews over the period covering the biennial

, written exam raises the potential for .l compromising examination integrity.

l f

GOAL

-l I .

• Achieve uniform testing conditions j

{ among crews as best as can reasonably be achieved so that the exam will be a reliable tool for assessing operator  !

l competence.

i i

l.

ACCEPTABLE  !

i

! PRACTICE  :

> To minimize the potentialof miuced j

discriminant validity, a 50% portion of any readministemi examination should consist of

a replacanent of modified or new items of like Aind content, gchometric attributes,

. and difficulty leve s. Moreover,when items  :

are to be repeated among successive crews, -

they should be trpented m a distributed  !

manner and appmximately equally over all -

l pmious nemt so as to reduce predictability l of a dispmportionately large number ofitem .

1 coming form the most recent examination. -

l l

i

SUMMARY

i

• Successive administrations of the same biennial requalifkstion examination to different emys i

undergoina the gule requalification training is considemfunacceptabic. Thiswould seriousl question the discriminant validity of the exam.y l e W hen the content to be tested becomes highty

predictable, and the boundanes ofwhat will

! likely be tested are known to the candidate, then j the candidate will likely prepare ONLY to that

. level da==W by the exammation.

I l o Improper practiceswilllikelylead to an etusion of ge and long term declinein

• j operator performana; l

~ l WHY  !

YOU MAY ASK ?

l'

! > When testing is dkninished in level or i ommitted in kind, knowlege degradation j occurs.

j. > The subtle but important coercion implicit in

! priparation for an examination is lost.

> Attention will be focused on what icads to visible success fora candidate.

, > The loss of specific content area study can -

result in knowlege gaps that cause operator i

envrs.

e O

ES-601/602 -

CONDUCTING NRC REQUALIFICATION

- EXAMINATIONS e NO SIGNIFICANT REV. 8 CHANGES e REACTIVE INSPECTION / EXAMINATION e SCOPE DETERMINATIONS BASED ON: .

o PLANT PERFORMANCE i o INSPECTION PROGRAM RESULTS '

o INITIAL AND REQUAL RESULTS o OTHER FACTORS l

)

i

~

l { j i

ES-601/602 CONDUCTING NRC REQUAL IFICATION EXAMINATIONS fl o NRC CONDUCTED OPERATOR REQUAL I EXAM COMPOSED OF THREE PARTS: '

o TWO SECTION OPEN-REFERENCE WRITTEN O PLANT AND CONTRCL SYSTEMS o ADMNSTRATIVE CONTROLSI PROCEDURAL LIMITS

{

o WALK-THROUGH EVALUATION. j j o ' DYNAMIC SIMULATOR '

l l

I ES-601/602 CONDUCTING NRC REQUALIFICATION i EXAMINATIONS -

! e EVALUATION OF REQUAL PROGRAM  !

AND OPERATORS  :

o MINIMUM 12 OPERATORS REQUIRED i

)

! o 3/4 OF OPERATORS MUST PASS EXAM o 2/3 OF THE CREWS MUST PASS THE i SIMULATOR EXAM l

t i  ;

o t i

N>

l (416) .... ,

, Licensed Operator  !

! Requalification l Inspection Procedure 71111 REACTOR SAFETY. INITIATING EVENTS.

MITIGATING SYSTEMS , BARRIER INTEGRITY ,

{

Attachment 11

'l j

.i i

i INSPECTION OBJECTIVE  :

, 1 l

I o To independently gather baseline inspection indicators to determine whether licensee performance meets the following comerstone

! objectives:

, t  !

' l i )

l a lnitiating Events: To limit the frequency of I those events that upset plant stability and l challenge critical safety functions, during i shutdown as well as ' power operations, i '

c Mitigating Systems: To ensure the  !

availability, reliability, and capability of

! systems that mitigate initiating events to .

prevent reactor accidents.  !

a Barrier integrity: To ensure that physical J barriers protect the public form radionuclide j releases caused by accidents, r t

4 REQUALIFICATION l CORNERSTONES c Mitigating systems (75%)

c Barrier Integrity (25%)

c Emergency Preparedness 1

I

! Inspection Bases

\

l )

l'- e inspection supports cornerstones because it I can assess operator performance adequacy j' in responding to events. This inspection evaluates operator performance in mitigating the consequences of events. Poor operator performance results in increase risk due to {

i the human performance factors terms, and j i

! assumed operator recovery rates and j i personnelinduced common cause error

'- j rates assumed in the facilities IPEs.

i

~.

l INSPECTION AREA VERIFIES:

o Procedure quality and human performance which are both key attributes of the Mitigating Systems cornerstone for which there are no

. performance indicators.

, o Human performance which is also a key I attribute of the Barrier integrity comerstone

!' for which there are no performance l indicators.

l .

N '

4 m

i i

PROCESS OUTUNE i i

i i . . .

MM l M ww~~m

--; . _ - -- 1. p ---.-7z- .-=_ .;;

. . :_~ ..

^**3-~- t -J'h: ~ g g _ _; { . en

~ - - , . ._

~,

) *f ,

e

. l M%

- g f

6 9

1 e

W M

l FY 2000 REGION II EXAMLNATION SCHEDULE Revised Aucun 6 1000 Date Facihty Number of Type of Activity Chief Examiner Exanunation Author Docket No Candidates 9/27/99 Catawba 3 RO Retake R. Baldwin Licensee 50-413 1SROU 10/4/99 Hatch Irunal Prep C. Payne 50-321 10/18/99 Hatch 10 SROI trutial C. Payne NRC / Licensee 11/1/98 50-321 2 SROU 11/8/99 Crystal River Requal Inspection G. Hopper 50-302 11/6/99 Browns Ferry Requal Inspection C. Payne 50-260 11/29/99 Sequoyah Requal inspection L. Mellen 50-327 11/29/99 Vogde Initial Prep R. Baldwui 50-424 12/6/99 St. Lucie Requal Inspection G.Ilopper 50-335 12/13/99 Vogtle 1RO initial R. Baldwin NRC 50-424 3SROI 2SROU 1/10-2/14/00 Farley Requal Inspection TBD 50-348 1/10-2/7/00 Turkey Point Requal inspection TBD 50-280 1/24/00 St Lucie initial Prep TBD 50-335 1/31/00 Brunswick initial Prep G. Hopper 50-325 2n/00 St Lucie 5 RO Retake TBD 54335 ISROI 2SROU 2/- 3/00 North Anna RequalInspection TBD 50-338 -

2/14/00 Brunswick 12 RO Ini ial C. Hopper NRC 2/21/00 50-325 4 SROI 4/20/00 Farley initial Prep M. Ernstes 50-343 4/24/00 McGuire Ininal Prep C. Payne 50 369 _

5/8/00 Farley 6RO Irutial M. Ernstes Licensee 5/22/00 50-348 6 SRO!

S/8/00 McGuire 6 RO Irutial C. Payne Licensee 5/22/00 50-369 2 SRO!

5 SROU 5/29/00 Browns Ferry initial Prep L. Mellen 50-259 6/12 7/14/00 McGuire RequalInspecnon TBD 50-369

r.

1 Date Facihty Number of Type of Activity Chief Examiner Examination Author l Oc' -et No Candidates I

6/12/00 Browns Ferry 10 RO Initial L. Mellen NRC 6/26/00 .50-259 3SRO!

}

3 SROU 1 l

6/26/00 Oconee Insual Prep G. Hopper sn-2m l

\

7/10/00 Oconee 8 RO Irutial G. Hopper Licensee 7/17/00 50-269 [

2 SROI 3 SROU  !

7/20/00 Surr.rner Iturial Prep M. Ernstes 50-395 7/34/00 Sequoyah initial Prep C. Payne 50-327 8/00 Hatch Recual Instiection TBD 8n/00 Summer 8SROU Initial M. Ernstes NRC 50-395 '

80/00 Sequoyah 5RO Initial C. Payne Licensee / NRC

. 50-327 4 SROU 3 SROI 8/14GC Crystal River Initial Prep TBD '

50-302 8/28/00 Crystal River 3 RO Initial TBD Licensee 9/11/00 50 302 3 SROI 3 SROU 8/28/00 North Anna Initial Prep R. Aiello 50-338 I 8/38/00 Surry Initial Prep R. Baldwin 50-280 9/18/00 North Anna 7RO Iniual R. Aiello Licensee / NRC 9/25/00 50-338 1 SROI 3SROU 9/18/00 Surry 8 RO Initial R. Baldwin Licensec / NRC 9/25/00 50 250 2 SROI l

3SROU '

TY200/

11/13/00 St. Lucie Irunal Prep C. Payne 50-335 ..

11/13/00 Turkey Point Initial Prep G. Hopper 50-250 I

11/27/00 Harris Irutial Prep M. Ernstes j SN _

_ i 12/4/00 St. Lucie 4 SROI iniual C. Payne Licensee 50-335 5 SROU 12/4/00 Turkey Point 16 Irutial G. Hopper NRC 12/18/00 50-250 _

17/11/00 Harris 3RO Iruual M. Ernstes Licensee 50-400 2 SRO:

3SROU 3/20/01- Robi'.on 7RO Initial TBD TBD 50-261 5SROU ,1 4

r-'

)

l

. . \

Dat2 Facihty Number of Type of Activity CNef Examiner Docket No Examinanon Author Candidates

=

441 Vogtic 16 Initial 39 NRC N2d 4/01 Catawba la ISti1I TBD t;,,,,,,

50413 5/01 Watts Bar 7 RO Initial TBD Licensee 50 390 3SROI 6 SROU e

9 9

e 4

i

p.- -

~ -

i TRAINING MANAGERS CONFERENCE August 12-13, '999 COMMENTSIQUESTIONS

- A. Written Examination Questio01;

1. The most common issue riised by Hot License Candidates and Requal license

. holders surround the issue of " trick questions" and operator written exams not  ;

being a fair test of operator knowledge. j

2. (

If INPO creates a national initial licensed operator exam bank, will the NRC consider the INPO bank to be current questions that cannot be used as new

)

questions on the exam to be developed?

3. Do not feel that the written exam is a discriminatory tool. How many people do poorly on the written exam that are not weak on the operating test? Let us use our process to take care of the written v/ith our audit exam.

4. The utihties shouldBQI be the ones to develop the sample plan. This should be developed by the NRC for all examinations administered in the region.

5. NRC needs to understand that increased difficulty of exam process is a negative motivator and could be a distraction to competent board operators. Recommend Survey to Understand Scope and Potential Impact on Safe Plant Operations.

6. Evaluate changing initial exam grading to a curve for pass / fail.

7. Exam difficulty his gone beyond reason and is impacting the requal program.

People are not willing to put up with the hassle and it does not result in better operators. It is impossible to meet question standards and avoid " Tricky" questions, very knowledgeable operators can appear less that competent based on complexity of question rather than a test of knowledge.

8. The NRC exam has become an exercise in exam taking skills instead of a knowledge assessment.

9. Would you comment on the following proposal ? Have a " team" from the utility come to the region and work directly with the chief examiner to develop the written exam. I would propose that a team of experienced utility instructions could bring the exam bank :nd associated reference material and they, with the '

chief, could produce the wruen exam in less than 40 hours4.62963e-4 days <br />0.0111 hours <br />6.613757e-5 weeks <br />1.522e-5 months <br />.  !

Benefits - lower man hours cost, reduced security concerns (less time on site),

fever negative exam report corrects.

Enclosure 3 i

n

c ,

2

10. If the utility is producing the written exam, when (how may days / weeks) is your expectation for the chief to get the sample plan to the utility? The point is - getting the sample plan in accordance with NUREG 1021 will not work.

21. In light of the NRC's new goals of reducing unnecessary regulatory burden and increasing efficiency and effectiveness, would it be possible to allow a licensee to build an initial license exam entirely from the bank (rather than 50% new questions), assuming the bank was an appropriate size and security concems could be solved.

12. The examination process'seems to be getting harder as compared to a few years ago.

13. Once we use a comprehensive level question, does it become a knowledge base questions the next time we use it.

14. We may want to have an exam writing workshop.

B. Operatina Examination Questions:

1. The continuous racheting of expectations is bypassing the SAT process. Example -

Cannot use a high importance JPM Wause it is perceived to be too easy, and operators are trained and tested on it.

2. Current subjectivity on what is a discriminatory JPM with the removal of the questions.

3. Need region workshops to calibrate us on future JPM direction.

4. Why can't the selection of JPM's for the license exam be driven by the SAT process and K/A value? " Low discriminatory valve" is a euphemism for "too easy" and as a result, the i difficulty of the exam is racheting up to an unreasonable level. This is contrary to the NRC stated goals.

5. Open Reference Tech Spec. - it's too complicated to memorize. Tech Specs should be  ;

open reference or better yet covered by Operating Exams (JPM). We do not want our  :

Operators to spend valuable time memorizing ITS, nor do we want them to operate from memory.

6. Operatino Exam - Section "A" Admin. (Cateoorv): This " category" of the new exam process needs to be integrated into the written and JPM (walk thru) segments, and l l

eliminated as a separate entity - only a couple of areas are examined, with no margin for error! An individual can scope high on the written exam, do excellent on the simulator, and pass all of the systems JPMs yet fail to get licensed due to not passing a couple of admin " questions"- the knowledge and/or abilities could easily be included with other j exam segments.

l Enclosure 3 L

y, 9 ,

3 L

C. Licensed Operator Experience Questions:

1. What are experience requirements for SRO/RO?

2. For a SAT-based program, what and where are the requirements for " responsible power plant" experience? ,

3. . Question - Experience Requirements e 3 years i e 1 year ,

e 6 months on site What are the real requirements if you have SAT based program?

4. " Responsible" power plant experience e This' issue needs to be resolved e INPO, NRC, NEl need to determine the specifics and let us know.

• We need to know without reservation that SRO instant candidates meet this ambiguous " experience" requirements.grier to them entering a license class.

D. SAT Program Questions:

1. What is/where do I find my " Commission Approved" Training program?

2. How familiar are, and what kind of training have the examiners received on the SAT process? How familiar (knowledgeable) are the headquarters management on the SAT process? What kind of training have they received?

l E. Reactivity Manipulation Questions: '

1. 10 CFR 55.59 - the use of SAT based program vice regulatory based programs. Why do you have to track individual control manipulations if you have a SAT based program? l

2. " Control Manipulations"in Requal- a prior guidance from previous NRC meeting clearly ,

indicated bean counting control manipulation from the Denton letter was a thing of the i past- SAT based requal training would naturally contain a large portion of the annual / biennial tasks and evolutions, therefore, program participants would be involved during simulator training / evaluation, and/or annual Op. Eval. JPMs; " individuals simulator critical tasks" went away and " crew critical tasks" were required.

i

)

1 Enclosure 3 i-

r,..o 3 4

Teamwork / communications command's control /by the team was the raost important.

Bottom line - the implied expectation expessed on 8/12/99 is not congruent with that provided in 1989 by T. Peebles, S. Lawyer, and others who provides us guidance. It appears that we are retuming to the middle to early 80's again.

3. Reactivity Manipulations: 1) For ILO training what is the status of allowing simulator manipulations. (when unable to perform in-plant): also, define (What constitutes a control

.manipa?ation); why is a rod operability surveillance ok at one plant but not another? l Wh 4 constitutes a tsrge change? 2) For LOCT - INPO's policy for tracking manipulation '

seems to be in confFct w/NRC xequirement (INPO doesn't require tracking on individual basis). '

F. GFES Ques; tons or Concerds;

1. 2000 GFES Dates: Licensee have developed schedules and allocated resources to participate in a April GFES. Changing to a February, June, October schedule wou'a be disruptive, perhaps a April, June schedule for 2000 would allow for a smooth trarvtion (others Licensees made same comment).

2. In order to facilitate transition to administering 3 GFE/ year, is it possible to consider administrering exams in April, June, and October during year 20007 This would minimize the impact on utilities that already have an exam scheduled. If implementation occurs in FY 2000 and exams are given in February, June, and October (as proposed),

unr.ecessary burden on these utilities could result.

G. Miscellaneous Questions: ,

l

1. ES-302 - General (D.1.j) - What determint.s if a STA is "necessary"?

2. When evaluating SRO success in Classifying the REP" during the operating exam, what I criteria do the examiners use for, when to start the 15 minute clock (expectation)? (15  !

n?inute from event to classification)

3. Use of instructors is still an issue. The use of an instructor, who is on the exam security agreement, can't teach candidates attending the Requal program. This is an unnecessary burden on resource restrictions.

4. Is there some way to do a better distribution of clarifications / rulings from one site in the region to another? This would help all of us meet your expectations.

l l

Enclosure 3