ML110620439

Final Qa/Related Forms (Folder 1)

ML110620439
Person / Time
Site:	Vermont Yankee File:NorthStar Vermont Yankee icon.png
Issue date:	01/05/2011
From:	Entergy Nuclear Vermont Yankee
To:	D'Antonio J Operations Branch I
Shared Package
ML102070016	List: IR 05000271/2010301 ML102110017 ML103280164 ML110110502 ML110110512 ML110110519 ML110110525 ML110200243 ML110200247 ML110200254 ML110200260 ML110620439
References
TAC U01769
Download: ML110620439 (15)

Text

~~9-sy'p] -final-ronus-rus doc

lrxamination Preparation Checklist Form ES-201-1 Facility: if:. y1. 117 :.,.,,- (Ii ,,/J/."'"

.,/ '

d .. c- Date of Examination: llll'i - 11. j, Developed by: Written - Facility [zj- NRC D II Operating - Facility ~ NRC Target Chief Date'" Task Description (Reference) Examiner's Ini~ls

-180

-120 1.

2.

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

NRC examiners and faCility contact assigned (C.1.d; C.2.e) a

,"~

I

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

~

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

~

[-90] [5. Reference material due (C.1.e; C.3.c; Attachment 3)]

~

~

{-75} 6. Integrated examination outline(s) due, including Forms ES-201-2, ES-201-3, ES-30H, ES-301-2, ES-301-5, ES-D-1's, ES-401-1/2, ES-401-3, and ES-401-4, as applicable (C.1.e and f; C.3.d)

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

~

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

scenarios, as applicable), supporting documentation (including Forms 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.1.e, t, g and h; C.3.d) tfA.;

-30 9. Preliminary license applications (NRC Form 398's) due (C.1.!; C.2.g; I' ES-202)

~

~

-14 10. Final license applications due and Form ES-201-4 prepared (C.1.1; C.2.i; ES-202) 11.

-14 Examination approved by NRC supervisor for facility licensee review (C.2.h; C.3.f) I'AIf;

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

~

i -7 13. Written examinations and operating tests approved by NRC supervisor (C.2.i; C.3.h)

'/

-7 14. Final applications reviewed; 1 or 2 (if >10) applications audited to confirm qualifications I eligibility; and examination approval and waiver letters sent (C.2.i; Attachment 5; ES-202, C.2.e; ES-204)

~

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

~

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

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

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

ES-201 Examination Outline Quality Checklist Form ES-201-2 I Facility: VERMONT YANKEE Date of Examination: NOVEMBER 29, 2010 Initials Item Task Description a b* c#

1.

w

a. Verify that the outline(s) fit(s) the appropriate model, in accordance with ES-401. ,~ P Ij Assess whether the outline was systematically and randomly prepared in accordance with R b.

Sk. p T

T I

c.

Section 0.1 of ES-401 and whether all KIA categories are appropriately sampled.

Assess whether the outline over-emphasizes any systems. evolutions. or generic topics. & (J ". '"

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

~ IP ......

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

I of normal evolutions. instrument and component failures. technical specifications.

and major transients. 151- 1° #

M b. Assess whether there are enough scenario sets (and spares) to test the projected number U and mix of applicants in accordance with the expected crew composition and rotation schedule L without compromising exam integrity, and ensure that each applicant can be tested using A

T at least one new or significantly modified scenario, that no scenarios are duplicated from the applicants' audit testes). and that scenarios will not be repeated on subsequent days.

~ ~> IV' 0

c. To the extent possible. assess whether the outline(s) conform(s) with the qualitative R

and quantitative criteria specified on Form ES-301-4 and described in Appendix D. ~ f' V

3. a. Verify that the systems walk-through outline meets the criteria specified on Form ES-301-2:

(1 ) the outline(s) contain(s) the required number of control room and in-plant tasks W distributed among the safety functions as specified on the form I (2) task repetition from the last two NRC examinations is within the limits specified on the form T (3) no tasks are duplicated from the applicants* audit testes)

~ ~

(4) the number of new or modified tasks meets or exceeds the minimums specified on the form (5) the number of altemate path. low-power. emergency. and RCA tasks meet the criteria on the form. IY

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

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

~ p I}

!

(2) at least one task is new or significantly modified (3) no more than one task is repeated from the last two NRC licensing examinations

~

c. Determine if there are enough different outlines to test the projected number and mix of applicants and ensure that no items are duplicated on subsequent days. (5 IIr

~ p Cr

4. a. Assess whether plant-specific priorities (including PRA and IPE insights) are covered in the appropriate exam sections.

G I E b. Assess whether the 10 CFR 55.41/43 and 55.45 sampling is appropriate. ~ t> It-N E

i c. Ensure that KIA importance ratings (except for plant-specific priorities) are at least 2.5. 9t. I{)

"""

R I d. Check for duplication and overlap among exam sections. 9~ C) .....

A L e. Check the entire exam for balance of coverage. ~ (U ~

f. Assess whether the exam tits the appropriate job level (RO or SRO). I~ p~

~~~me/Signature Date

a. Author Scott Rua/ -.........\ ~, Q8-24-10

b. Facility Reviewer (*) Kevin Stuoakl tf:01~ 08-24-10

c. NRC Chief Examiner (#) J. J1~~ 1/r1ltLI "

(> ~ '21- -:Ii.

'pL./

d. NRC Supervisor S QIM J.k;..~JJI /~~ .,

L

/Q/.I,.b/i()

/

Note:

.

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

Not applicable for NRC-prepared examination outlines

" fa.'3 e. 1... .. .r.;..

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

1. Pre=Examir,ytiop I acknc:lwiedge that I have acquired specialized knowledge aboUt the NRC licensing examinations scheduled for the weeK($) of 11-29-10 as of 1he date 0( my signatLn. I agree ltlat I will not knowingly divulge any information about these examinations to any persons who have not been authorized by the NRC chief examiner. I understand that I am not to InslruGt. evaluate. or provide pecfonnarIce feedbadt to those apptic:arts 5CheduIed to be adrninIsWed these Iicensiog examinations from thiS date unti completion of examination admlnistradOn. except as speciftGaRy noted below and au1hOt'ized by 1he NRC (e.g.* acting 8$ a simulator booth operator or communicator is accepCabIe It the individual does not select 1he 1raining content or provide direct or inclrect feedback). FUf1hen'nore. I am aware of the physical sea..uity measures and requirements (as doc::utnerded in the facirlly licensee's pnx:edure$) and understand that viotatlon of the conditions of this agreement may result in cancelation of the examinations and/or an enforcement action against me or the faciiity licensee. I wtU immediately report to facility management or the NRC Chief examiner any indlcaIions or suggestions that examination security may have been compromised.

a. PostSxlQ1ination To the best of my knowledge. I did not divulge 10 any unauthorized persons aII'I information CClI'108f1ling the NRC licensing examinations administered during the week(s} of 11-29-10 . From the daCe that I enwed into this &ea.lnty agreement IIIti the compieCion 01 examination admini$lratioo. I did not 1nsIruct, evaluate, or provide petfonnance feedback to those applicants Who were administered these Ucensing examinations. except as specifically noted below and authorized by the NRC.

PRINTED NAME JOB TITlE I RESPONSIBlLllY SIGNATURE (1) DATE SIGNATURE (2) DATE NOTE t>f~~- : ; ; - - -

.~~ ~ 7" ... ~ I, .-----,.

(0 S\~~(\ et\ '\\,<<:. <;~c,-\d.-\. VIC."- t.E:\E..l:t~n*\

........

• t,V)\C1i::,"'~~

MASTER. MASTER

.Ali....

. . . ..,.".11.

VALID ONLY WHEN VALID ONLY WHEN

. STAMP IS RED ...... ~Ifllf 28

'V fa..j e  ::L () f s 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 (I* ';2...,-/0 as of the date of my signature. I agree that I will not knowingly divulge any information about these examinations to any persons who have not been authorized by the NRC chief examiner. I understand that I am not to instruct, evaluate, or provide performance feedback to those applicants scheduled to be administered these licensing examinations from this date until completion of examination administration, except as specifically noted below and authorized by the NRC (e.g., acting as a simulator booth operator or communicator is acceptable if the individual does not select the training content or provide direct or indirect feedback). Furthermore, I am aware of the physical security measures and requirements (as documented in the facility licensee's procedures) and understand that violation of the conditions of this agreement may result in cancellation of the examinations andlor an enforcement action against me or the facility licensee. I will immediately report to facility management or the NRC chief examiner any indications or suggestions that examination security may have been compromised.

2. Post-Examination To the best of my knowledge, I did not divulge to any unauthorized persons any information concerning the NRC licenSing examinations administered during the week(s) of \\*Z9-iO . 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 (1) DATE SIGNATURE (2) DATE NOTE I

dl'itfv£ /Y)fJlf,41AIG til Be) liZ

/Z-o :::z:Di~!E.. ~

/1'11 ]. ..

1t>-if~;Z:> /,L t,r £ ~--=

/'

2. ;:., '-Ii huE <:\

3. W/tkQ*!tMc,. v /lC)d:- 5~;vrf Q(,1\f"

-"'~;,.........."::4:-'-,,) ~.

C I? )

~ ~

cQ ' "

tZY-

_ ~_

...."! . - .J.P.F..LlL

-;t' ftO cJls s,..

cJ.S ",2,-11,1" I~~",

-"q-lO~

, .** "

,;:1.:;;;'0-1f7iI;ro-lZ-2J-It7

_-"CI~fr I_,'~<'~~ - ~ = ~~

.YeS IHL/.

.>

11f', ,-Hw< a" ........~Y ~ tZ.*-~

/1-"'- 4?L" "'~~

"/.<1,,

J//2dl"~~ . .:;~:~~

~-

~ d

-/0

--

,,"':' .-.-,

r-" '.)

~8H-I~

ORIGINAL \;~\L%,q~~N)1,HEN STAMP IS-RED ES-201, Page 27 of 28  : WHEN STAMP IS REf} .

,.~

P¥3<-J3 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 ~\.~-\O as of the date of my signature. I agree that I will not knowingly divulge any information about these examinations to any persons who have not been authorized by the NRC chief examiner. I understand that I am not to instruct, evaluate, or provide performance feedback to those applicants scheduled to be administered these licensing examinations from this date until completion of examination administration, except as specifically noted below and authorized by the NRC (e.g., acting as a simulator booth operator or communicator is acceptable if the individual does not select the training content or provide direct or indirect feedback). Furthermore, I am aware of the physical security measures and requirements (as documented in the facility licensee's procedures) and understand that violation of the conditions of this agreement may result in cancellation of the examinations and/or an enforcement action against me or the facility licensee. I will immediately report to facility management or the NRC chief examiner any indications or suggestions that examination security may have been compromised.

2. Post-Examination To the best of my knowledge, I did not divulge to any unauthorized persons any information concerning the NRC licensing examinations administered during the week(s) of 11-29-\0 . 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 (1) DATE SIGNATURE (2) DATE NOTE

1. L;;m1.ES IriZ~, <Q~~ J}:~:?Y;+f? 11-2,/-10 /Z-3-KL 2.. ,00 i'6(AS iPifit2~ ~ j)£ \ (dfl~ '~.L:..!;Li!!

3. D<:a k 30.-.0J fr oM /I 0 /0 ~~

4. [:>0 V G- ':::Aute~ tlr.s .I.cJs. =frV'c..+O r 1- ... ~ (, ... 16

5. { ~ ~--.A::.A...> Ii ,,"'J 'J.I'tJt-.,-..,;(h // .* 3J /'" -12..::....~u

6. .7'k;g:C;;:hs. Op..s knv,-rC\/C.+c.C 1~-/7-/0 ~;t.,O*IO

7. _ _ __

8. _ _ __

9. ______________________________________________________________________________

10. _ _ __

11. _ _ __

12.________ _ _ __

1 _ _ __

14. _ _ __

15. _ _ __

NOTES:

(\) s (5 ne£ o-+'~ (J e( +-e (lf2 c.o m w {+h.P, :::r: Pt e- ~c..-e. 6M t('Z..<f/2. 0 11 9' I!. ~/-::r; J!1. ~ -r-acl,s MASTER*

VALID ONLY WHEN STAMP IS RED ES-201, Page 27 of 28

ES-301 Operating Test Quality Checklist Form ES-301-3 Facility: VERMONT YANKEE Date of Examination: 11/29110 Operating Test Number:

Initials

1. General Criteria a b* c#

i

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). .9<- P !r I

b. There is no day-to-day repetition between this and other operating tests to be administered during this examination. ~1- ~> tv I'"

c. The operating test shall not duplicate items from the a!)plicants' audit testIs). (see Section D.1.a.) ~"1. f?

d. Overlap with the written examination and between different parts of the operating test is within acceptable limits. 56L tc.5 tV r{

e. It appears that the operating test will differentiate between competent and less-than-competent applicants at the designated license level. S6L t:)

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:

-

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 S1L ¢ tv

- restrictions on the sequence of steps, if applicable

b. Ensure that any changes from the previously approved systems and administrative walk-through outlines (Forms ES-301-1 and 2) have not caused the test to deviate from any of the acceptance criteria (e.g., item distribution, bank use, repetition from the last 2 NRC examinations) specified on those forms and Form ES-201-2. > IP V

3. Simulator Criteria .. .. ..

The associated simulator operating tests (scenario sets) have been reviewed in accordance with Form ES-301-4 and a copy is attached. ~~ tI Printed Name I Signature Date

a. Author ~e.C)\\ M. R\J.& / -~ d~ \ "::d \a-~-lc::.

b. Facility Reviewer(') £G:. \.ft J :STU (?,A-t::- (t- "f ';/1\  :> (O/tJ.,I(u c.

d.

NRC Chief Examiner (It)

NRC Supervisor

.

J. iJlJr~I..p",~

<;::"a~

///Mom Ik.. /e(/ JC(~ ~

l(

1i!::

/0 l..bhO NOTE: The facility signature is not applicable for NRC-developed tests .

It Independent NRC reviewer initial items in Column "c"; chief examiner concurrence reQuired.

Simulator Scenario Quality Checklist Form ES*301-4 Facilty: VERMONT YANKEE Date of Exam:11/29/10 Scenario Numbers: 1/2/3/4 Operating Test No.:

QUALITATIVE ATTRIBUTES Initials

1. The initial conditions are realistic, in that some equipment andlor instrumentation may be out of service, but it does not cue the operators into expected events. ~ p a b'

,clf

2. The scenarios consist mostly of related events. ~ IQ ~

3. Each event description consists of

• the point in the scenario when it is to be initiated

• the malfunction(s) that are entered to initiate the event

• the symptoms/cues that will be visible to the crew

• the expected operator actions (by shift position) the event termination point (if applicable)

~\ ~) IV

~

4. No more than one non-mechanistic failure (e.g., pipe break) is incorporated into the scenario ¥ without a credible preceding incident such as a seismic event. ~)

5. The events are valid with regard to physics and thermodynamics. I~t p IY

6. Sequencing and timing of events is reasonable, and allows the examination team to obtain complete evaluation results commensurate with the scenario objectives. ~ t=) Y'

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

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

Cues are given. ~ ~ It

8. The simulator modeling is not altered. ~ ~) r'

9. The scenarios have been validated. Pursuant to 10 CFR 55.46(d), any open simulator performance deficiencies or deviations from the referenced plant have been evaluated tv' to ensure that functional fidelity is maintained while running the planned scenarios. 9t- p

10. Every operator will be evaluated using at least one new or significantly modified scenario.

All other scenarios have been altered in accordance with Section D.5 of ES-301. ,52 p 11"1

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

12. Each applicant will be significantly involved in the minimum number of transients and events ,..

specified on Form ES-301-5 (submit the form with the simulator scenarios). ~ i~:>

13. The level of difficulty is appropriate to support licensing decisions for each crew position. <1n. 10 ,y-Target Quantitative Attributes (Per Scenario; See Section D.S.d) Actual Attributes .. -

1. Total malfunctions (5--8) 8/9/8/8 lQ"t..- G ¥

~ ~)

2.

3.

Malfunctions after EOP entry (1-2)

Abnormal events (2-4) 21215/2 314/4/3 I~ P 4

'"

4. Major transients (1-2) 211/212 rSn- l~ r

5. EOPs entered/requiring substantive actions (1-2) 2121212 rScn. ~) .I

6. EOP contingencies requiring substantive actions (0-2) 0/1/1/1 5dt- 10 ,,4.

~ 15--,)

f'.

7. Critical tasks (2-3) 2131212

ES-301 Transient and Event Checklist (TOTALS)

VERMONT YANKEE Date of Exam: NOVEMBER 29, 2010 Operating Test No.: 2010 A E Scenarios P V 1 2 3 4 T M P E 0 I L N CREW CREW CREW CREW T N I T POSITION POSITION POSITION POSITION A I

M C S A B S A B S A B S A B L U A T R T 0 R T 0 R T 0 R T 0 M(*)

N Y 0 C P 0 C P 0 C P 0 C P R I U T P E

RO RX 0 1 0 1 1 0 0SRO-I NOR 1 0 1 1 1 1 D SRO-U IIC 4 3 4 4 4 2 MAJ 2 2 2 2 2  ! 1 0 TS 2* 0 0 0 2 12 I RO RX 0 1 0 1 1 0 0SRO-I NOR 1 0 1 1 1 1 I/C 2 0SRO-U i 4 5 3 4 4 MAJ 1 1 1 2 2 0 TS 2 0 0 0 2 RO RX 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 NOR 1 0 1 1 1 1 SRO-I 0SRO-U IIC 4 4 5 4 4 2 MAJ 2 2 I 2 2 2 1 I 10 TS 2 0 0 2 2 RO IRX 0 1 0 1 1 0 0SRO-I I NOR 1 0 1 1 1 1 I

0  : I/C 3 3 3 4 4 2 SRO-U MAJ 2 2 2 2 2 1 0 TS 2 0 0 0 2 2 Instructions:

1. Check the applicant level and enter the operating test number and Form ES-D-l event numbers for each event type; TS are not applicable for RO applicants. ROs must serve in both the "at-the-controls (ATC)"

and "balance-of-plant (BOP)" positions; Instant SROs must serve in both the SRO and the ATC positions, including at least two instrument or component (l/C) malfunctions and one major transient, in the ATC position. If an Instant SRO additionally serves in the BOP position, one I/C malfunction can be credited toward the two I/C malfunctions required for the ATC position.

2. Reactivity manipulations may be conducted under normal or controlled abnormal conditions (refer to Section D.5.d) but must be significant per Section C.2.a of Appendix D. (*) Reactivity and normal evolutions may be replaced with additional instrument or component malfunctions on a 1-for-1 basis.

3. Whenever practical, both instrument and component malfunctions should be included; only those that require verifiable actions that provide insight to the applicant's competence count toward the minimum requirements specified for the applicant's license level in the right-hand columns.

ES-301 Transient and Event Checklist Form ES-301-5

~: VERMONT YANKEE Date of Exam: NOVEMBER 29, 2010 Operating Test No.: 2010 A E Scenarios P V 1 2 3 4 T M P E a I L N CREW CREW CREW CREW T N I T POSITION POSITION POSITION POSITION A I

M C S A B S A B S A B S A B L U A T R T a R T a R T a R T a M(*)

N Y a C P a C P a C P a C P R I U T P E

RX 1 0 1 1 1 RO-1 NOR IIC 0

3 1

3 Jct= 1 6 4 1 1 4

1 2

I MAJ 2 1 3 2 2 1 TS 0 II 0 I 0 0 2 2 RX 0 1 I i 1 1 1 0 NOR 1 0 1 1 1 1 RO-2 I/C 4 5 9 4 4 2 MAJ 2 1 3 2 2 1 TS 0 0 0 0 2 2

.

RX 1 0 1 1 1 0 I

RO-3 NOR 0 1

• 1 1 1 1 I/C MAJ II 3

2 5

2 8

4 4

2 +fR

~ ~B I

TS 0 0 RX 1 1 RO-4 NOR 0 I 1 1 I/C 4 4 8 4 MAJ 2 2 4 2 TS 0 0 II I v u Instructions:

1. Check the applicant level and enter the operating test number and Form ES-D-l event numbers for each event type; TS are not applicable for RO applicants. ROs must serve in both the "at-the-controls (ATC)"

and "balance-ot-plant (BOP)" positions; Instant SROs must serve in both the SRO and the ATC positions, including at least two instrument or component (IIC) malfunctions and one major transient, in the ATC position. If an Instant SRO additionally serves in the BOP position, one IIC malfunction can be credited toward the two I/C malfunctions required for the ATC position.

2. Reactivity manipulations may be conducted under normal or controlled abnormal conditions (refer to Section D.5.d) but must be significant per Section C.2.a of Appendix D. (*) Reactivity and normal evolutions may be replaced with additional instrument or component malfunctions on a l-for-l basis.

3. Whenever practical, both instrument and component malfunctions should be included; only those that require verifiable actions that provide insight to the applicant's competence count toward the minimum requirements specified for the applicant's license level in the right-hand columns.

ES-301 Transient and Event Checklist Form ES-301-5 Facility: VERMONT YANKEE Date of Exam: NOVEMBER 29, 2010 Operating Test No.: 2010 A E Scenarios P V 1 2 3 4 T M P E 0 I L N CREW CREW CREW CREW T N I T POSITION POSITION POSITION POSITION A I

M C S A B S A B S A B S A B L U A R T 0 R T 0 R T 0 R T 0 M(*)

N 0 C P 0 C P 0 C P 0 C P R U T

RO-6 SROU-1 MAJ TS RX SROU-2 NOR 1

~--~~--+---4---~~--4---+---~I~--~--+---~~---+----

OC 4 2

2 Instructions:

1. Check the applicant level and enter the operating test number and Form ES-D-1 event numbers for each event type; TS are not applicable for RO applicants. ROs must serve in both the "at-the-controls (ATC)"

and "balance-of-plant (BOP)" positions; Instant SROs must serve in both the SRO and the ATC positions, including at least two instrument or component (I/C) malfunctions and one major transient, in the ATC position. If an Instant SRO additionally serves in the BOP position, one IIC malfunction can be credited toward the two IIC malfunctions required for the ATC position.

2. Reactivity manipulations may be conducted under normal or controlled abnormal conditions (refer to Section D.5.d) but must be significant per Section C.2.a of Appendix D. (*) Reactivity and normal evolutions may be replaced with additional instrument or component malfunctions on a 1-for-1 basis.

3. Whenever practical, both instrument and component malfunctions should be included; only those that require verifiable actions that provide insight to the applicant's competence count toward the minimum requirements specified for the applicant's license level in the right-hand columns.

ES-301 Transient and Event Checklist Form ES-301-5 Facility: VERMONT YANKEE Date of Exam: NOVEMBER 29, 2010 Operating Test No.: 2010 A E Scenarios P V 1 2 3 4 T M P E 0 I L N CREW CREW CREW CREW T N I T POSITION POSITION POSITION POSITION I A

M C S A B S A B S A B S A B L U A T R T 0 R T 0 R T 0 R T 0 M{')

N Y 0 C P 0 C P 0 C P 0 C P R I U T P E

L SROI-1 RX NOR 0

1 0

1 1

0 D 1 2

1 1

1 1

0 1

IIC 4 3 4 11 4 4 2 I

MAJ 2 1 2 5 2 2 1 TS RX i 2

1 t 0 0 0 0 1 0

1 2

1 0 2

NOA 0 1 1 2 1 1 1 SROI-2 I/C 3 4 5 12 4 4 2 MAJ 2 1 2 ' 5 2 2 1 TS 0 2 0 2 0 2 2 AX 0 1 0 1 1 0 SROI-3 NOA 1 0 1 1 1 I/C 4 5 4 4 4 ol:

I MAJ II 2 1 2 2 TS 0 0 I 0 2 RX 0 0 1 1 1

~

~~A1H-SROI-4 1 0 2 1 1

~

+/-I§3 11 4 4 Bl I

MAJ TS Instructions:

i1::t:1:= o 21 2 2

1. Check the applicant level and enter the operating test number and Form ES-D-1 event numbers for each event type; TS are not applicable for AO applicants. AOs must serve in both the "at-the-controls (ATC)"

and "balance-ot-plant (BOP)" positions; Instant SAOs must serve in both the SAO and the ATC positions.

including at least two instrument or component (IIC) malfunctions and one major transient, in the ATC position. If an Instant SAO additionally serves in the BOP position. one I/C malfunction can be credited toward the two I/C malfunctions required for the ATC position.

2. Reactivity manipulations may be conducted under normal or controlled abnormal conditions (refer to Section D.5.d) but must be significant per Section C.2.a of Appendix D. (*) Aeactivity and normal evolutions may be replaced with additional instrument or component malfunctions on a 1-for-1 basis.

3. Whenever practical, both instrument and component malfunctions should be included; only those that require verifiable actions that provide insight to the applicant's competence count toward the minimum requirements specified for the applicant's license level in the right-hand columns.

ES-301 Transient and Event Checklist Form ES-301-5

[acility: VERMONT YANKEE Date of Exam: NOVEMBER 29, 2010 Operating Test No.: 2010 A E Scenarios P V 1 2 3 4 T M P E 0 I L N CREW CREW CREW CREW T N I T POSITION POSITION POSITION POSITION A I

M C S A B S A B S A B S A B L U A T R T 0 R T 0 R T 0 R T 0 M(*)

N Y 0 G P 0 G P 0 G P 0 C P R I U T P E

RX 1 0 o II 1 1 1 0 I

SROI-5 NOR 0 1 1 II 2 1 1 1 14

~f=

I/G 3 4 12 4 2 MAJ 2 1 5 2 2 1 TS 0 2 0 2 0 2 2 RX o  ! 1 i 0 1 1 1 0 NOR 1 0 1 2 1 1 1 SROI-6 IIG 4 5 4 13 4 4 2 MAJ 2 1 2 5 2 2 1 TS 0 0 2 2 0 2 2

! I RX 1 1 0 NOR 1 1 1 I/G 4

~

MAJ 2 2 ITS I 2 RX 1 1 0 IT

, 1 I/G 4 fr Instructions:

II I 2

0 2

12 12 1

1. Check the applicant level and enter the operating test number and Form ES-D-1 event numbers for each event type; TS are not applicable for RO applicants. ROs must serve in both the "at-the-controls (ATG)"

and "balance-ot-plant (BOP)" positions; Instant SROs must serve in both the SRO and the ATC positions, including at least two instrument or component (IIC) malfunctions and one major transient, in the ATC position. If an Instant SRO additionalfyserves in the BOP position. one IIG malfunction can be credited toward the two IIG malfunctions required for the ATC position.

2. Reactivity manipulations may be conducted under normal or controlled abnormal conditions (refer to Section D.5.d) but must be significant per Section G.2.a of Appendix D. (*) Reactivity and normal evolutions may be replaced with additional instrument or component malfunctions on a 1-for-1 basis.

3. Whenever practical, both instrument and component malfunctions should be included; only those that require verifiable actions that provide insight to the applicant's competence count toward the minimum requirements specified for the applicant's license level in the right-hand columns.

ES-301 Competencies Checklist Form ES-301-6 Facility: VERMONT YANKEE Date of Examination: 11-29-10 Operating Test No.:

CRS (4) BOP (4)

Competencies SCENARIO SCENARIO SCENARIO 1 2 3 4 2 3 4 1 2 3 ALL All ALL ALL 1,2, 3,4,5, 2,3,4, 2,3,4, 1,2,4, 1,2.4,5 ALL Interpret/Diagnose 3,5, 6 5,6 5,6 5,6 ,6 Events and Conditions 6 AlL AlL ALL ALL 3,4,5, 3,4,5, 2,3.4, AlL 1,2,4,5 All Comply With and 6 6 5,6 ,6 Use Procedures 3,4,5, 4,5,6 2,3,4, 1,2,4, 1,2,4,5 ALL Operate Control 6 5,6 5,6 ,6 Boards 1,3,4, ALL ALL 1,2,4, 1,2,3,4 ALL Communicate 5,6 5,6 ,5,6 and Interact 2,4 2,4 2,4 Comply With and Use Tech.

Notes:

(1) Includes Technical Specification compliance for an RO.

(2) Optional for an SRO-U.

(3) Only applicable to SROs.

(4) Numbers listed are event numbers for that scenario

ES-401 Written Examination Quality Checklist Form ES-401-6 Facility: VERMONT YANKEE Date of Exam: 11/29110 Exam Level: RO 0' SRo0 Initial

~

Item Description a b*

1. Questions and answers are technically accurate and applicable to the facility. 5h- IG)

2. a. NRC KlAs are referenced for all questions.

~ ~~ ;z-..

b. Facility learning objectives are referenced as available.

3. SRO Questions are appropriate in accordance with Section D.2.d of ES-401 ~L (C) IV

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). 5b- ~ tV'

5. Question duplication from the license screening/audit 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

~ the examinations were developed independently; or

./ the licensee certifies that there is no duplication; or other (explain)

SiL p II}/

6. Bank use meets limits (no more than 75 percent Bank Modified New from the bank, at least 10 percent new, and the rest new or modified); enter the actual RO / SRO-only 24/16 17/4 59/80 question distribution(s) at right. ~ 0 1)/

7. Between 50 and 60 percent of the questions on the RO Memory CIA exam are written at the comprehension/ analysis level; the SRO exam may exceed 60 percent if the randomly 47/24 53/76 C*

selected KlAs support the higher cognitive levels; enter the actual RO / SRO question distribution(s) at right. ~ () 'Y

8. References/handouts provided do not give away answers or aid in the elimination of distractors. ~l \0 IV'

9. Question content conforms with specific KIA statements in the previously approved

"..,

examination outline and is appropriate for the tier to which they are assigned; deviations are justified. 54!. lL.>

(

10. Question psychometric quality and format meet the guidelines in ES Appendix B. ~L l0

11. The exam contains the required number of one-pojnt, multiple choice items; p I' the total is correct and agrees with the value on the cover sheet. ~

Printed N~~~ Date

a. Author s.C:J:~.t\.. N\ RU.CL/- . '.-... \ ~ \Cl-<o- 1(.)

~£~~ ~

b. Facility Reviewer (*)

c. NRC Chief Examiner (#) ~ t>

d. NRC Regional Supervisor /~O Note:

• The facility reviewer'S initials/signature are not applicable for NRC-developed examinations.

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

ES-403 Written Examination Grading Form ES-403-1 Quality Checklist lLE.acility: Date of Exam: Exam Level: RO ~ SRO[gJ Initials Item Description a b c

1. Clean answer sheets copied before grading ~ r-:> ,

p i 2. Answer key changes and question deletions justified and documented tJ/A JJ /I*. /} -"':/~

3. Applicants' scores checked for addition errors 1/

(reviewers spot check> 25% of examinations) )k. \C) /'1

,/ /

4. Grading for all borderline cases (80 +/-2% overall and 70 or 80, as applicable, +/-4% on the SRO-only) reviewed in detail tJ/ A r-.ll A r',/?/1

5. All other failing examinations checked to ensure that grades are justified ~/A Nt}\. ,.;/ /; -J l-"c

6. Performance on missed questions checked for training

//1 deficiencies and wording problems; evaluate validity of Questions missed by half or more of the applicants

~ r; //

Printed Name/Signature Date

a. Grader Scott Rua c5t~~ 12/17110

b. Facility Reviewer(*) Kevin Stupak  ;(f~ 12121110

c. NRC Chief Examiner (*) a~d.

, ~ .;:

1"/,;.1["1L!~dd c' ,. t/1.""'r i), 4 t" I hl1:-"L-//: I *

!-k. ::J-l I!/:x--,::1 ~

I

d. NRC Supervisor (*) 0 C1 WI ~

//fJ-iJl

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