ML25352A329

8 - WC-2025-12 Public Forms

ML25352A329
Person / Time
Site:	Wolf Creek
Issue date:	12/16/2025
From:	Patricia Vossmar NRC/RGN-IV/DORS/OB
To:	Wolf Creek
References
Download: ML25352A329 (0)

Text

EXAM ASSIGNMENT TICKLER Chief:

Farina Facility:

WC Retake 12/16/2025 U/I:

Start of Op Test:

12/16/2025 12/16/2025 Due Date Date Complete Initials 10/5/2025 10/5/2025 TF 10/5/2025 10/5/2025 TF 10/15/2025 10/15/2025 TF na na TF 10/15/2025 10/15/2025 TF na na TF 10/31/2025 10/29/2025 TF 11/14/2025 10/30/2025 TF na na TF 11/10/2025 11/3/2025 TF na na TF 11/17/2025 11/17/2025 TF 11/11/2025 11/20/2025 TF 11/11/2025 11/20/2025 TF 12/15/2025 12/15/2025 TF 11/18/2025 10/16/2025 TF 11/25/2025 10/24/2025 TF 12/2/2025 12/2/2025 TF 12/16/2025 12/15/2025 TF NA NA NA 12/9/2025 12/2/2025 TF 12/9/2025 12/15/2025 TF 12/9/2025 NA NA 12/16/2025 12/16/2025 TF 12/30/2025 12/17/2025 TF 1/5/2026 12/17/2025 TF 1/13/2026 NA NA 1/13/2026 NA NA 1/20/2026 12/17/2025 TF 1/27/2026 12/18/2025 TF 2/3/2026 NA NA 2/3/2026 12/19/2025 TF 2/3/2026 12/18/2025 TF 2/24/2026 NA TF 3/3/2026 TBD TF 3/10/2026 NA TF Rev. 12 Examiner's document op test results on ES 303's Replaces NUREG-1021, Revision 12, Forms 2.1-1 and 5.1-1 Post exam operating test comments reviewed and ES-303-1 updated Signed ES 303's to BC produced by CE License/Proposed Denial letters mailed; Facility notified of results Ref Mat'l Returned after Final Resolution of Appeals Examination Report Issued 21 days after proposed denial letters mailed.

Post exam comments and graded exams received Final Denial Letters mailed (if no request for informal review)

RPS/IP number of examinees updated print Report-21 Waivers/deferrals reviewed for impact on licensing decision Post exam written comments reviewed and incorporated and NRC grading completed Chief examiner review of operating test and/or written exam grading completed Branch Chief review of exam results completed Date of Written Exam:

Description Notes Examination administration date confirmed For NRC prepared exams, arrangements made for the facility to submit reference materials End of Op Test:

Written Exam Developed By: NRC Operating Test Developed By: NRC Examination review results discussed between NRC and facility licensee NRC examiners and facility contact assigned Facility contact briefed on security and other requirements Operating test outline(s) and other checklists due Forms 1.3-1, 2.3-1, 3.2-1, 3.2-2, 3.4-1, 3.3-1 Reference material due for NRC prepared exams ES-2.1.F Corporate Notification Letter sent Letter 2.1-1 produced by CE NRC developed written examination outline sent to facility contact Forms 4.1-BWR/PWR and COMMON Approved scenarios and JPMs distributed to examiners BC signs Exam Approval Letter (Form 2.3-1)

Operating test outline(s) reviewed by NRC and feedback provided to facility licensee Form 2.3-1 signed by CE & BC Peer review of written exam complete Form 2.3-5 Proposed exams, outlines, supporting documentation, and reference materials due.

Written exam and operating test reviews completed Document review on Forms 2.3-1 and 2.3-5 NRC-prepared examinations approved by the NRC supervisor and forwarded for facility licensee review Feedback approved by Branch Chief Final applications reviewed and audited; exam approval and waiver/excusal letters sent On-site validation & 10% audit of qual cards Administer Operating Test Preliminary license applications & waiver/excusal requests due NRC Forms 398/396 Final license applications & waiver/excusal requests due Form 2.2-1 Proctoring/written exam administration guidelines reviewed with facility licensee Preliminary license applications and waivers reviewed Facility licensee management feedback on the examination requested by the NRC supervisor Written exams and operating tests approved by Branch Chief

Form 2.3-1 Examination Outline Quality Checklist Facility: Wolf Creek Date of Examination: 12/15/2025 Item Task Description (Y)es / (N)o a

b*

c#

a. The outline was systematically and randomly prepared in accordance with the X

X z

instructions in Section B of ES-4.1, and all knowledge and ability (KIA) categories are w

~

appropriately sampled. (Not Applicable) ii:

b. The outline does not overemphasize any systems, evolutions, or generic topics.

X X

X s

C. Justifications for deselected or rejected KIA statements are acceptable.

X X

X

a. Using Form 3.4-1, Events and Evolutions Checklist, verify that the proposed scenario X

X X

set contains the required number of normal evolutions, reactivity evolutions, instrument and component failures, manual control evolutions, technical specifications, and major transients. (Not Applicable) a::

b. There are enough scenarios (and spares) for the projected number and mix of X

X X

0 I-applicants in accordance with the expected crew composition and rotation schedule

5 without compromising exam integrity. Ensure that scenarios will not be repeated on

~

subsequent days.

ci5 C.

Ensure that all scenarios are new or significantly modified in accordance with ES-3.4 X

X X

and that no scenarios are duplicated from the applicants' audit test(s).

d. To the extent possible, assess whether the outline(s) conforms with the qualitative and X

X X

quantitative simulator set criteria specified on Form 2.3-2.

a.

Verify that the administrative outline meets the criteria specified in the instructions on y

y Form 3.2-1 and that no tasks are duplicated from the applicants' audit test(s).

b. Verify that the control room and in-plant systems outline meets the criteria specified in y

y CJ) the instructions on Form 3.2-2 and that no tasks are duplicated from the applicants'

~

C.

audit test(s).

C. Determine whether the number of job performance measures (JPMs) and JPM types is y

y sufficient for the projected number and mix of applicants and ensure that no items are duplicated on subsequent days. (SRO Upgrade)

a. Assess whether the appropriate exam sections cover plant-specific priorities (including y

y probabilistic risk assessment and individual plant examination insights).

b. Assess whether the 1 O CFR 55.41, 1 O CFR 55.43, and 1 O CFR 55.45 sampling is y

y

..J appropriate. (5 Safety Functions, Required General Topics)

<(

c. Check whether KIA importance ratings (except for plant-specific priorities) are greater y

y a::

w than or equal to 2.5.

z w

C)

d. Check for duplication and overlap across the exam and with the last two NRG exams.

y y

e. Check the entire exam for balance of coverage. (Just JPMs) y y

f. Assess whether the exam fits the appropriate job level (reactor operator or Senior y

y Reactor Operator).

Printed Name/Signature Date

a. Author Andrew J. Servaes c:;:,;;;?;.,, ___,-/

/

~~--

11/03/2025

b. Facility Reviewer(*)

Jer~ Rile,?f/2/{ ~

11/03/2025

c. NRG Reviewer (#)

NRG Chief Examiner NRG Supervisor

• The facility licensee signature is not applicable for NRG-developed tests.

1. An independent NRC reviewer performs the steps in column "c." This may be the NRC Chief Examiner if he/she did not develop the outline under review.

Y Y

Y Y

Y Y

Y Y

Y 11/17/25 11/17/25 T. Farina T. Farina P. Vossmar 11/21/25

Form 2.3-2 Operating Test Quality Checklist Facility: Wolf Creek Date of Examination: 12/15/2025 Operating Test Number:

General Criteria (Y)es / (No

a.

The operating test meets the criteria on the associated test outline A

b*

c#

y y

b.

There are enough test items so that test items will not be repeated on more than 1 day of y

y the operating test.

C.

The operating test does not duplicate items from the applicants' audit test(s).

y y

d.

Overlap with the written examination and between different parts of the operating test is X

X X

minimized. (Not Applicable)

e.

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

competent applicants at the designated license level.

WalkthrOUQh Criteria

a.

Each job performance measure (JPM) includes the following, as applicable:

y y

. task standard

. initial conditions

. initiating cues

. references and tools, including associated procedures

. reasonable and validated time limits (average time allowed for completion) and specific designation if the facility licensee deems it to be time critical

. alternate path JPMs are labeled as "alternate path"

. operationally important specific performance criteria that include the following:

detailed expected actions with exact criteria and nomenclature system response and other examiner cues statements describing important observations to be made by the applicant criteria for successful completion of the JPM task standard identification of critical steps and their associated performance standards restrictions on the seouence of steos, if aoolicable

b.

Ensure that any changes from the previously approved JPM outlines (Forms 3.2-1 and 3.2-2) y y

have not caused the test to deviate from any of the acceptance criteria (e.g., item distribution, bank use, repetition from the last two NRG examinations) specified on those forms.

Simulator Scenario Set Criteria for Scenario Numbers: N/A I N/A / NIA QUALITATIVE ATTRIBUTES

1.

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

X X

out of service, but it does not cue the operators into expected events. (Not Applicable)

2.

The scenarios consist mostly of related events. (Not Applicable)

X X

X

3.

Each event description consists of the following: (Not Applicable)

X X

X the point in the scenario when it is to be initiated the malfunction(s) or conditions that are entered to initiate the event the symptoms/cues that will be visible to the crew the expected operator actions (by shift position) the event termination point (if applicable)

Y Y

Y Y

Y

QUALITATIVE ATTRIBUTES (continued)

(Y)es I (N)o a

b*

c#

4.

The events are valid with regard to physics and thermodynamics. (Not Applicable)

X X

X

5.

The sequencing and timing of events is reasonable and allows the examination team to X

X X

observe and evaluate applicant performance. (Not Applicable)

6.

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

X X

X Operators have sufficient time to carry out expected activities without undue time constraints. Cues are given. (Not Applicable)

7.

The simulator modeling is not altered. (Not Applicable)

X X

X

8.

The scenarios have been validated. Pursuant to 10 CFR 55.46(d), any open simulator X

X X

performance deficiencies or deviations from the referenced plant have been evaluated to ensure that functional fidelity is maintained while running the planned scenarios. (Not Applicable)

9.

Scenarios are new or significantly modified in accordance with ES-3.4. (Not Applicable)

X X

X

10. Scenarios (as grouped) allow each applicant to be significantly involved in the minimum X

X X

number of transients, events, and evolutions specified on the version of Form 3.4-1 submitted with the scenario set. (Not Applicable)

11. Applicants are evaluated on a similar number of preidentified critical tasks across X

X X

scenarios, when possible. (Not Applicable)

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

X X

X TARGET QUANTITATIVE ATTRIBUTES per Scenario (See ES-3.4)

Actual Attributes by (Y)es / (N)o Scenario No.

(Not Applicable)

I I

b*

c#

a

1.

Malfunctions after emergency operating procedure (EOP)

NIA I NIA I NIA X

X X

entry (1-2)

2.

Abnormal events (2--4)

NIA I NIA I NIA X

X X

3.

Major transients (1-2)

NIA I NIA I NIA X

X X

4.

EOPs entered/requiring substantive actions (1-2)

NIA I NIA I NIA X

X X

5.

Entry into a contingency EOP with substantive actions NIA I NIA I NIA X

X X

e 1 per scenario set; set is the entire set of scenarios prepared for the scheduled exam)

6.

Preidentified critical tasks e 2)

NIA I NIA I NIA X

X X

Printed Name/Signature Date

a.

Author A d J S e-2----/-7 ~=-:---?

n rew. ervaes -'--

/

111312025

b.

Facility Reviewer (*)

Jerrv Rilev /

$1/~~

/

111312025 C.

NRC Reviewer(#)

/;;/ /7 NRC Chief Examiner

{/ {/

NRC Supervisor

• The facility licensee signature is not applicable for NRG-developed tests.

1. An independent NRC reviewer performs the steps in column c. This may be the NRG Chief Examiner if he/she did not develop the operatina test under review.

11/17/25 11/17/25 T. Farina T. Farina P. Vossmar 11/21/25