ML070360618

Various Checklists for the LaSalle Initial Examination - November 2006

ML070360618
Person / Time
Site:	LaSalle
Issue date:	11/13/2006
From:	NRC/RGN-III/DRS/OLB
To:	Exelon Generation Co
Shared Package
ML070230277	List: ML070360607 ML070360618 ML070360628 ML070360643 ML070360696
References
50-373/06-301, 50-374/06-301
Download: ML070360618 (14)

Text

VARIOUS CHECKLISTS

-

THE LASALLE INITIAL EXAMINATION NOVEMBER 2006

FORMS FROM ADMINISTRATIVE SUBMITTAL

ES-201 Examination PreDaration Checklist Form ES-201-1

~ ~~

Facility: LaSalle County Station U1N2 Date of Examination: Nov 13. 2006 Developed by: Written - Facility 0 NRC // Operating - Facility NRC Target Chief Date* Task Description (Reference) Examiner's Initials

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

~ ~~ ~~ ~~

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

-1 20 1 3. Facility contact briefed on security and other requirements (C.2.c) I dm

-120 4. Corporate notificationletter sent (C.2.d) dm

[-901 [5. Reference material due (C.1.e; C.3.c; Attachment 2)] dm

(-75) 6. Integratedexaminationoutline(s) due, including Forms ES-201-2,ES-201-3, ES-301-1,ES-301-2,ES-301-5,ES-D-l's, ES-401-1/2, ES-401-3, and dm ES-401-4, as applicable (C.1.e and f; C.3.d)

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

{-45) 8. Proposedexaminations (including written, walk-through JPMs, and scenarios, as applicable), supporting documentation (including Forms nla ES-301-3, ES-301-4, ES-301-5, ES-301-6, and ES-401-6, and any Form ES-201-3 updates), and reference materials due (C.l.e, f, g and h; C.3.d)

-30 9. Preliminary license applications (NRC Form 398's) due (C.l .I; C.2.g; dm ES-202)

-I4 I IO. Final license applications due and Form ES-201-4prepared (C.1.l; C.2.i; ES-202) I I

dm

-14 11. Examination approved by NRC supervisor for facility licensee review (C.2.h; (2.3.9

-14 12. Examinations reviewed with facility licensee (C.1.j; C.2.f and h; C.3.g) dm

-7

~~

I 13. Written examinations and operating tests approved by NRC supervisor

~~

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

~ ~ ~~

I dm

-7 14. Final applications reviewed; 1 or 2 (if >IO) applications audited to confirm qualifications Ieligibility; and examination approval and waiver letters sent dm (C.2.i; Attachment 4; ES-202, C.2.e; ES-204)

-7 15. Proctoringhritten exam administrationguidelines reviewed dm with facility licensee (C.3.k)

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

Target dates are generally based on facility-prepared examinations and are keyed to the examination date identified in the corporate notification letter. They are for planning purposes and may be adjusted on a case-by-case basis in coordinationwith the facility licensee.

[Applies only] {Does not apply} to examinations prepared by the NRC.

\

ES-201 Examination Security Ag reement F o ES-201-3

~

1. Pre-Examlnatlon Iacknowledge that I have acquired specialized knowledge about the NRC licensing examinations scheduled for the week(s) of - '"dl'auas of the date of my signature. I agree that I will not knowingly divulge any information about these examinations to any persons who have not been authorized by the NRC chief examiner. I understand that I am not to instruct, evaluate, or provide performance feedback to those applicants scheduled to be administered these licensing examinations from this date until completion of examination administration, except as specifically noted below and I authorized by the NRC (e.g., acting as a simulator booth operator or communicator is acceptable if the individual does not select the training content or provide direct or indirect feedback). Furthermore, I am aware of the physical security measures and requirements (as documented in the facility licensee's procedures) and understand that violation of the conditions of this agreement may result in cancellation of the examinations andlor an enforcement action against me or the facility licensee. Iwill immediately report to facility management or the NRC chief examiner any indications or suggestions that examination security may have been compromised.

2. Post-Examination To the best of my knowledge, I did not divulge to any unauthorized persons any information concerning the NRC licensing examinations administered during the week(s) of .%om the date that I entered into this security agreement until the completion of examination administration, I did not instruct, evaluate, or feedback to those applicants who were administered these licensing examinations, except as specifically noted below and authorized by the NRC.

PRINTED NAME JOB TITLE I RESPONSIBILITY SIGNATURE (1) DATE SIGNATURE (2) DATE NOTE

4. --

5. --

6.

7

14. --

15. --

NOTES:

ES-201,Page 26 of 27

ES-201 Examination Security Agreement FOII ES-201-3

1. Pre-Examlnatlon

,///3/J -

I acknowledge that I have acquired specialized knowledge about the NRC licensing examinations scheduled for the week(s) of ///;1/b fs of the date of my signature. I agree that I will not knowingly divulge any information about these examinations to any persons who have not been authorized by the NRC chief examiner. I understand that I am not to instruct, evaluate, or provide performance feedback to those applicants scheduled to be administered these licensing examinations from this date until completion of examination administration, except as specifically noted below and authorized by the NRC (e.g., acting as a simulator booth operator or communicator is acceptable if the individual does not select the training content or provide direct or indirect feedback). Furthermore, I am aware of the physical security measures and requirements (as documented in the facility licensees procedures) and understand that violation of the conditions of this agreement may result in cancellation of the examinations and/or an enforcement action against me or the facility licensee. I will immediately report to facility management or the NRC chief examiner any indications or suggestions that examination security may have been compromised.

// 3 /O 6 -

2. Post-Examination 1,

///t//6 To the best of my knowledge did not divulge to any unauthorized persons any information concerning the NRC licensing examinations administered during the week(s) of . From the date that I entered into this security agreement until the completion of examination administration, I did not instruct, evaluate, or provide performance feedback to those applicants who were administered these licensing examinations, except as specifically noted below and authorized by the NRC.

PRINTED NAME JOB TITLE I RESPONSIBILITY SIGNATURE f1) DATE S \ G & U R E ( ~ ~ DATE NOTE ES-201, Page 26 of 27

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

1. Pre-Examination I acknowledge that I have acquired specialized knowledge about the NRC licensing examinations scheduled for the week(s) of 131C . \b\z,lasof the date of my signature. I agree that I will not knowingly divulge any information about these examinations to any persons who have not been authorized by the NRC chief examiner. I understand that I am not to instruct, evaluate, or provide performance feedback to those applicants scheduled to be administered these licensing examinations from this date until completion of examination administration, except as specifically noted below and I authorized by the NRC (e.g., acting as a simulator booth operator or communicator is acceptable if the individual does not select the training content or provide direct or indirect feedback). Furthermore, I am aware of the physical security measures and requirements (as documented in the facility licensees procedures) and understand that violation of the conditions of this agreement may result in cancellation of the examinations and/or an enforcement action against me or the facility licensee. I will immediately report to facility management or the NRC chief examiner any indications or suggestions that examination security may have been compromised.

2. Post-Examination To the best of my knowledge, I did not divulge to any unauthorized persons any informationconcerning the NRC licensing examinations administered during the week(s) of ,\\\> - - . B ~ L From

~ ~ L the date that I entered into this security agreement until the completion of examination administration, I did not instruct, evaluate, or provide performance feedback to those applicants who were administered these licensing examinations, except as specifically noted below and authorized by the N R S ,

PRINTED NAME JOB TITLE / RESPONSIBILITY SIGNATURE (1) DATE SIGNATURE (2) DATE NOTE

.-.

--

NOTES:

ES-201, Page 26 of 27

ES-401, Rev. 9 Record of Rejected WAS Form ES-401-4

~~~

Tier I Randomly Reason for Rejection Group Selected WA 1I1 295001A103 Replaced by 295001K103. Determined during validation that there was insufficient information, within the stem, to arrive at correct answer (Q#86). Replacement question provided by licensee did not match original KIA.

1I1 295004 G2.1.16 Plant phonelpaging systemltwo-way radios not impacted by loss of DC power. Randomly replaced by G2.3.11 1I1 295016K1 No knowledge statements listed under K1. Randomly replaced by 295016K2 1I1 295038K209 The High Radiation Sample System (equivalent to PASS) is abandoned at LaSalle. Randomly replaced with K211.

Replaced by 295038K203. Original question (Q#l9) was determined not to be an RO only question during on-site validation. Replacement question provided by licensee did not match original KIA.

1I1 295026 G2.2.11 Control of suppression pool temperature does not involve application of any temporary modifications. Randomly replaced by G2.4.3.

1I1 295030A204 Replaced by 295030 G2.1.12. Original question (Q#81) was determined not to be an SRO only question during on-site validation. Replacement question provided by licensee did not match original WA.

1I2 295013A202 Replaced by 295013A201. Accuracy of distractors in original question (Q#22) could not be proved during on-site validation. Replacement question provided by licensee did not match original KIA.

211 203000K203 Replaced by 203000K407. Original question (Q#28) determined to be too difficult during validation. Replacement question provided by licensee did not match original WA.

211 209001A202 Replaced by 209001A205. Determined during validation that plant procedures did not support original question (Q#86). Replacement question provided by licensee did not match original WA.

211 2 18000A204 Replaced by 205000A207 (This KIA similar to 219000K608 which was orignally assigned to the RO exam) 211 223002 G2.2.2 Replaced by 223002 G2.4.16. Original question (Q#88) was determined not to be an SRO only question during on-site validation. Replacement question provided by licensee did not match original KIA.

--

~~ ~~ ~

Tier I Randomly Reason for Rejection Group Selected KIA 211 262002K5.01 Importance rating less than 2.5. Replaced by 262002K6.02 (K5 and K6 categories switched between 262002 and 263000 to maintain balance in category totals.)

211 263000K6.02 Replaced by 263000K5.01 (K5 and K6 categories switched between 262002 and 263000 to maintain balance in category totals.)

212 256000K2 Importance rating less than 2.5. Randomly replaced by 256000K3 212 214000K2 No knowledge statements listed under K2. Randomly replaced by 214000K5 212 219000K608 Replaced by 239001K601 (This KIA similar to 218000A204 which originally assigned to the SRO exam) 3 G2.1.8 Replaced by G2.1.1I . Original question (Q#94) was determined not to be an SRO only question during on-site validation. Replacement question provided by licensee did not match original KIA.

ES-403 Written Examination Grading Form ES-403-1 Quality Checklist I Facility: LaSalle County Station U 1 ~ 2 Date of Exam: NOV 1 1,2006 Exam Level: R O I X SRO I

Initial Item Description a b I C

1. Clean answer sheets copied before grading s I ikr-.

2. Answer key changes and question deletions justified and documented (rz

3. Applicants' scores checked for addition errors (reviewers spot check > 25% of examinations) 6L w

4. Grading for all borderline cases (80 &YO overall and 70 or 80, as applicable, 24% on the SRO-only) reviewed in detail srz,

5. All other failing examinations checked to ensure that grades are justified & BA-

6. Performance on missed questions checked for training deficiencies and wording problems; evaluate validity of questions missed by half or more of the applicants I Printed Name/Signature Date

a. Grader b. (?gQSw / Iz/l a/ob

b. Facility Reviewer(*) RYwk~ LM+~: d&A \L/

c. NRC Chief Examiner (*) 1 Z!f&.

d. NRC Supervisor (*)

1 (*I The facility reviewer's signature is not applicable for examinations graded by the NRC; two indenendent NRC reviews are reauired.

FORMS FROM PROPOSED EXAMINATION SUBMITTAL

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

I

1. General Criteria a b c#

a. The operating test conforms with the previously approved outline; changes are consistent with sampling requirements (e.g., 10 CFR 55.45, operational importance, safety function distribution).

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

C. The operatingtest shall not duplicate items from the applicants audit test@).(see Section D.1 .a,) Y/d I

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

e. It appears that the operating test will differentiate between competent and less-than-competent applicants at the designated license level.

2. Walk-Through Criteria _- __ --

a. Each JPM includes the following, as applicable:

initial conditions initiating cues references and tools, including associated procedures reasonable and validated time limits (average time allowed for completion) and specific designation if deemed to be time-critical by the facility licensee operationally important specific performance criteria that include: t+

- detailed expected actions with exact criteria and nomenclature

- system response and other examiner cues

- statements describing important observations to be made by the applicant

- criteria for successful completion of the task

- identification of critical steps and their associated performance standards

- restrictions on the sequence of steps, if applicable b Ensure that any changes from the prewously approved systems and administrative walk-through outlines (Forms ES-301-1and 2) have not caused the test to deviate from any of the acceptance criteria (e g , item distribution, bank use, repetition from the last 2 NRC examinations) specified rb Bc-on those forms and Form ES-201-2

3. Simulator Criteria -_ -- --

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

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

ES-301, Page 24 of 27

ES-301 Simulator Scenario Quality Checklist Form ES-301-4 Facility: LaSalle County UllU2 Dale of Exam: 11/14/06 Scenario Numbers: 1 I 2 I 3 Operating Test No.: 2006301 I

QUALITATIVE AlTRIBUTES

-C#

drn

-

-dm n it is to be initiated drn

-

drn

-

-drn drn

-

drn

-

-drn dm

-

dm dm drn

ES-301 Competencies Checklist Form ES-301-6 Facility: LaSalle Co Station Date of Examination: Nov 14, 2006 Operating Test No.:2006301 APPLICANTS RO [l SRO-I I1) 1 SRO-3 SRO-U Competencies 1 SCENARIO I I SCENARIO SCENARIO 2 1 3 I

A II I AII I AII I) AII I I AII nla 5.7 I I I I I

Notes:

(1) Includes Technical Specification compliance for an RO.

(2) Optional for an SRO-U.

(3) Only applicable to SROs.

Instructions:

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

~~~~ ~~~ ~~~

ES-401 Written Examination Quality Checklist Form ES-401-6 Item Description a b I I

1. Questions and answers are technically accurate and applicable to the facility.

I I ,)LlI L A

2. a. NRC WAS are referencedfor all questions.

b. Facility teaming objectives are referenced as available. Jz Ii+

3. SRO questions are appropriate in accordance with Section D.2.d of ES-401 z 14

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

5. Question duplication from the license screeninglaudit exam was controlled as indicated below (check the item that applies) and appears appropriate:

-the audit exam was systematically and randomly developed; or

-the audit exam was completed before the license exam was started; or

- J the examinations were developed independently; or

- the licensee certifies that there is no duplication; or

- dother (explain) d& DLV gCc7rfD

6. Bank use meets limits (no more than 75 percent from the bank, at least 10 percent new, and the rest new or modified); enter the actual RO I SRO-only question distribution(s) at right. I I I I I I I

7. Between 50 and 60 percent of the questions on the RO exam are written at the comprehension/analysis level; the SRO exam may exceed 60 percent if the randomly selected WAS support the higher cognitive levels; enter the actual RO I SRO question distribution(s) at right.

a. Referencedhandoutsprovided do not give away answers or aid in the elimination of distractors. 3L +

9. Question content conforms with specific WA statements in the previously approved examination outline and is appropriate for the tier to which they are assigned; 32_ 6 I.4 deviations are justified.

10. Question psychometric quality and format meet the guidelines in ES Appendix 8. ,P P/d

11. The exam contains the required number of one-point, multiple choice items; the total is correct and agrees with the value on the cover sheet. & r / 4 Printed Namegiauy- ,i,

a. Author AMlb &PfSfC/ 0 ZOGS

b. Facility Reviewer (*)

c. NRC Chief Examiner (#) /</+&5

d. NRC Regional Supervisor

/p!!%y&

Note:

• The facility reviewers initialskignature are not applicable for NRC-developed examinations.

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

ES-401,Page 29 of 33