ML16085A259

From kanterella
Revision as of 10:39, 21 January 2019 by StriderTol (talk | contribs) (Created page by program invented by StriderTol)
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Nine Mile Point Unit 2 - Final Qa/Related Forms (Folder 1)
ML16085A259
Person / Time
Site: Nine Mile Point Constellation icon.png
Issue date: 12/22/2015
From:
NRC Region 1
To: Brian Fuller
Operations Branch I
Shared Package
ML15135A302 List:
References
TAC U01920
Download: ML16085A259 (12)
v • d • e


Text

ES-201 Examination Outline Quality Checklist Form ES-201-2 Facility:

Nine Mile Point Unit 2 Date of Examination:

November 2015 Initials Item Task Description a b* c# 1. a. Verify that the outline(s) fit(s) the appropriate model, in accordance with ES-401 or ES-401 N. m

  • f'. w R b. Assess whether the outline was systematically and randomly prepared in accordance with Pf1 f I Section D.1 of ES-401 or ES-401 N and whether all KIA categories are appropriately sampled. T T Assess whether the outline over-emphasizes any systems, evolutions, or generic topics. ,,, 0( y E c. N ,,, f d. Assess whether the justifications for deselected or rejected KIA statements are appropriate.
2. a. Using Form ES-301-5, verify that the proposed scenario sets cover the required number of y normal evolutions, instrument and component failures, technical specifications, and major rn s transients.

I M b. Assess whether there are enough scenario sets (and spares) to test the projected number and u mix of applicants in accordance with the expected crew composition and rotation schedule f L without compromising exam integrity, and ensure that each applicant can be tested using at Pfl A least one new or significantly modified scenario, that no scenarios are duplicated from the T applicants' audit test(s), and that scenarios will not be repeated on subsequent days. 0 To the extent possible, assess whether the outline(s) conform(s) with the qualitative and fr1 Th f R c. quantitative criteria specified on Form ES-301-4 and described in Appendix D. 3. a. Verify that the systems walk-through outline meets the criteria specified on Form ES-301-2:

(1) the outline(s) contain(s) the required number of control room and in-plant tasks distributed ff' ( w among the safety functions as specified on the form A (2) task repetition from the last two NRC examinations is within the limits specified on the form L (3) no tasks are duplicated from the applicants' audit test(s) K (4) the number of new or modified tasks meets or exceeds the minimums specified on the form (5) the number of alternate path, low-power, emergency, and RCA tasks meet the criteria on T the form. H t\-R b. Verify that the administrative outline meets the criteria specified on Form ES-301-1:

"' y: 0 (1) the tasks are distributed among the topics as specified on the form u (2) at least one task is new or significantly modified G (3) no more than one task is repeated from the last two NRC licensing examinations H Determine if there are enough different outlines to test the projected number and mix of Pf1 f c. applicants and ensure that no items are duplicated on subsequent days. 4. a. Assess whether plant-specific priorities (including PRA and IPE insights) are covered in the ,,, f appropriate exam sections.

G rf1 l{t.......

f-E b. Assess whether the 10 CFR 55.41 /43 and 55.45 sampling is appropriate.

N Ensure that KIA importance ratings (except for plant-specific priorities) are at least 2.5. rn f E c. R rfl '{ d. Check for duplication and overlap among exam sections.

ri A frl r<-f L e. Check the entire exam for balance of coverage.

f. Assess whether the exam fits the appropriate job level (RO or SRO). pf\ 0/ f v Pri d Date a. Author Paul Isham I
b. Facility Reviewer(*)

Patrick Foti I

c. NRC Chief Examiner (#)

AW\, lo/l/lS d. NRC Supervisor IAI I ....

/f\ll () v .... '----I Of i'f 1.5 "--.../ Note: # Independent NRC reviewer initial items in Column "c"; chief examiner concurrence required.

  • Not applicable for NRG-prepared examination outlines.

,v 'Ne ,.,,,,e ES-201 Po1tJT vw1 T 2 1. Pre-Examination l..Gl 11/-1 r.JR' ".Ta11Jf4L 6'<""'1 Examination Security Agreement Form ES-201-3 I acknowledge that I have acquired specialized knowledge about the NRC licensing examinations scheduled for the week(s) of 11 ! o />-IS 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 beefrauthorized by the NRC chief examiner.

I understand that I am not to instruct, evaluate, or provide performance feedback to those applicants scheduled to be administered these licensing examinations from this date until completion of examination administration, except as specifically noted below and authorized by the NRC (e.g., acting as a simulator booth operator or communicator is acceptable if the individual does not select the training content or provide direct or indirect feedback).

Furthermore, I am aware of the physical security measures and requirements (as documented in the facility licensee's procedures) and understand that violation of the conditions of this agreement may result in cancellation of the examinations and/or an enforcement action against me or the facility licensee.

I will immediately report to facility management or the NRC chief examiner any indications or suggestions that examination security may have been compromised.

2. Post-Examination To the best of my knowledge, I did not divulge to any unauthorized persons any information concerning the NRC licensing examinations administered during the week(s) of . From the date that I entered into this security agreement until the completion of examination administration, I did not instruct, evaluate, or provide performance feedback to those applicants who were administered these licensing examinations, except as specifically noted below and authorized by the NRC. PRINTED NAME JOB TITLE I RESPONSIBILITY DATE SIGNATURE (2) DATE NOTE 1. Gl*P..." Mntol?.. 2. == 3. ui f'y& __ 4. CA 2 Q.; ,;1 /4l:tff1uv*

3'{P"'-__ 5.

u:t.. OPS __ _-.,.A"."-L'A"'"--------

...........

..__ ________ _ 6. RP .:i:/ist.r1d*' --7. D1Y15 8.,G. ai 9. t>1ll See.--.r 1)2.

10. I'c:ff S-031 ,n .... v+/-1.-101-1af

___ _ 11 . .,,,). *r1:rv ... ) .J,.\.. o*t.*-:r v.-ti.-*/).J! . .,ar.

  • 1-11,s-___ _ 12. OMt Bo1pr.F Uf5 v.11,,r*tw&

CO-to1r-___ _ ------------13. /\.6W ,ubR.ot-10 0;:-2 ,*.4t,./\h-t*R..

___ _ 14. J .}y!p'i 11-/f.,'?l[,,,1,*J ( Of') V1L 10 ' ----15. ,r<c.-,.'Fv .nnfr:fd">

/ 1,:1 f l/"/r'/*:

___ _ NOTES: ' * > ES-201, Page 27 of 28 f'/1Nc .,.,,,,e ES-201 Po, ,.,T v,., r r 2 1. Pre-Examination l.Gl 11.J-, N/l.l :1"r.Jt7!;1L Examination Security Agreement Form ES-201-3 I acknowledge that I have acquired specialized knowledge about the NRC licensing examinations scheduled for the week(s) of 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 . 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. "S\20
  • . .. -

__ 2. to f::/J.:L£_

3. JZ.O 4. S rt o . tl1Mti,..,...

_______ _ 5. ________ ------------------------------------

6. ________ -------------------------------

?. ________ -------------------------------

8. ------------
9. ----10. ----11. ----12.________

13. ----14. ----15. NOTES: ES-201, Page 27 of 28

('I I Ne rt<ttt.e ES-201 Po11.11 r 2 1. Pre-Examination

{..C,l 111-1 N/l.C °IaJ17!4L Examination Security Agreement Form ES-201-3 I acknowledge that I have acquired specialized knowledge about the NRC licensing examinations scheduled for the week(s) of !.1 / i o / 1o1 Sas of the date of my signature.

I agree that I will not knowingly divulge any information about these examinations to any persons who have no(beeri authorized by the NRC chief examiner.

I understand that I am not to instruct, evaluate, or provide performance feedback to those applicants scheduled to be administered these licensing examinations from this date until completion of examination administration, except as specifically noted below and authorized by the NRC (e.g., acting as a simulator booth operator or communicator is acceptable if the individual does not select the training content or provide direct or indirect feedback).

Furthermore, I am aware of the physical security measures and requirements (as documented in the facility licensee's procedures) and understand that violation of the conditions of this agreement may result in cancellation of the examinations and/or an enforcement action against me or the facility licensee.

I will immediately report to facility management or the NRC chief examiner any indications or suggestions that examination security may have been compromised.

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

&!:!!1-TURE (1) .DATE 1. A\\:.a<l SlW\. siApport 1-/r3/;'J-

-SIGNATURE (2) DATE NOTE 2. --3. --4. --5. ----6. ----7. ----8. --9. --10. ----11. ----12. ----13. ----14. ----15. NOTES: ES-201, Page 27 of 28 ES-301 Operating Test Quality Checklist Form ES-301-3 Facility:

Nine Mile Point Unit 2 Date of Examination:

December 2015 Operating Test Number: LC2 14-1 Initials 1. General Criteria a b* c# a. The operating test conforms with the previously approved outline; changes are consistent with f fl "" f samplinq requirements (e.q., 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

?f'1 f durinq this examination.

c. The operatinq test shall not duplicate items from the applicants' audit test(s). (see Section D.1.a.) Pf1 ""' d. Overlap with the written examination and between different parts of the operating test is within PM "4'\ f" acceptable limits. e. It appears that the operating test will differentiate between competent and less-than-competent

?f1 iii f 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 ff'1 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

-restrictions on the sequence of steps, if applicable

b. Ensure that any changes from the previously approved systems and administrative walk-through pf1 "4'\ 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.
3. Simulator Criteria ------The associated simulator operating tests (scenario sets) have been reviewed in accordance with ?f1 f Form ES-301-4 and a copy is attached.

Printed Name I Signature Date a. Author Paul F. Isham Jr. I 1'/IJ/1s b. Facility Reviewer(*)

Mark Greer I 411v h>\le>t' I ,

c. NRC Chief Examiner (#) ./1 o...,-\J \....._alt'b.

r\ rvl, ( I L

d. NRC Supervisor

' --t / '-' NOTE:

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

ES-301 Simulator Scenario Quality Checklist Form ES-301-4 Facilty: Nine Mile Point Unit 2 Date of Exam: December 2015 Scenario Numbers: 2/3/4 Operating Test No.: LC214-1 QUALITATIVE ATTRIBUTES Initials a b* c# 1. The initial conditions are realistic, in that some equipment and/or instrumentation may be out fr1 tJo4\ f of service, but it does not cue the operators into expected events. 2. The scenarios consist mostly of related events. pf1 !WI f 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 pr1 fl'\ F
  • the symptoms/cues that will be visible to the crew
  • the expected operator actions (by shift position)
  • the event termination point (if applicable)
4. The events are valid with regard to physics and thermodynamics.

fr-r f 5. Sequencing and timing of events is reasonable, and allows the examination team to obtain complete Pr1 F evaluation results commensurate with the scenario objectives.

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

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

Pr! PM Cues are given. 7. The simulator modeling is not altered. prt ""' ? 8. The scenarios have been validated.

Pursuant to 1 O CFR 55.46(d), any open simulator performance f deficiencies or deviations from the referenced plant have been evaluated to ensure that functional Pf'1 W1\ fidelity is maintained while running the planned scenarios.

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

All other f N "1 f' scenarios have been altered in accordance with Section D.5 of ES-301. 10. All individual operator competencies can be evaluated, as verified using Form ES-301-6 Pf1 y (submit the form along with the simulator scenarios).

11. The scenario set provides the opportunity for each applicant to be evaluated in each of the applicable (f1 "" rating factors, (Competency Rating factors as described on forms ES 303-1 and ES 303-3) 12. Each applicant will be significantly involved in the minimum number of transients and events specified fPr IW\ F on Form ES-301-5 (submit the form with the simulator scenarios).
13. The level of difficulty is appropriate to support licensing decisions for each crew position.

Pf1 "' F Target Quantitative Attributes (Per Scenario; See Section D.5.d) Actual Attributes

1. Malfunctions after EOP entry (1-2) 3 I 2 I 1 Pr1 ""' 2. Abnormal events (2-4) 4/2/2 Pr1 f"\ r-3. Major transients (1-2) 2 I 2 I 1 f{'? w.l.. p 4. EOPs entered/requiring substantive actions (1-2) 2/2/2 P1'11 5. EOP contingencies requiring substantive actions (0-2) 1 I 1 I 1 Pf'7 "" r 6. Critical tasks (2-3) 2/2/2 """ y NOTE:

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

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

Nine Mile Point Unit 2 Date of Exam: December 2015 Operating Test No.: LC2 14-1 A E Scenarios p v 1 (Backup) 2 3 4 5 T M p E 0 I L N CREW CREW CREW CREW CREW N T I T POSITION POSITION POSITION POSITION POSITION I c A M A T s A B s A B s A B s A B s A B L u N y R T 0 R T 0 R T 0 R T 0 R T 0 M(*) T p 0 c p 0 c p 0 c p 0 c p 0 c p R I u E RX 2 1 1 1 0 RO 1 NOR .. 1 1 2 1 1 1 & l/C 3, 7, 3, 5, 5, 6, 9, 8 8 9 4 4 2 R03 MAJ 6,8 6, 7 7 5 2 2 1 TS 0 2 2 RX 2 1 1 1 0 R02 NOR 1 1 1 1 1 & l/C 4, 5, 7, 4, 5, 9 8 7 4 4 2 R04 MAJ 6, 8 6,7 4 2 2 1 TS ' 0 2 2 RX 2 1 1 1 0 NOR 1 1 2 1 1 1 R05 l/C 4, 5, 7, 3, 5, 9 8 3,8 9 4 4 2 MAJ 6, 8 6,7 7 5 2 2 1 TS 0 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 (1/C) malfunctions and one major transient, in the ATC position.

If an Instant SRO additionally serves in the BOP position, one 1/C malfunction can be credited toward the two 1/C malfunctions required for the ATC position.

2. Reactivity manipulations may be conducted under normal or controlled abnormal conditions (refer to Section 0.5.d) but must be significant per Section C.2.a of Appendix D. (*) Reactivity and normal evolutions may be replaced with additional instrument or component malfunctions on a 1-for-1 basis. 3. Whenever practical, both instrument and component malfunctions should be included; only those that require verifiable actions that provide insight to the applicant's competence count toward the minimum requirements specified for the applicant's license level in the right-hand columns. 4. For licensees that use the ATC operator primarily for monitoring plant parameters, the chief examiner may place SRO-I applicants in either the ATC or BOP position to best evaluate the SRO-I in manipulating plant controls.

ES-301 Transient and Event Checklist Form ES-301-5 i=,,-:i:.

  • . II.. -*. Point Unit 2 Date of Exam: November 2015 Operating Test No.: LC2 14-1 A E Scenarios p v 1 2 3 4 5 T M p E L N CREW CREW CREW CREW CREW 0 I I T POSITION POSITION POSITION POSITION POSITION T N c A I A T s A B s A B s A B s A B s A B M L N y R T 0 R T 0 R T 0 R T 0 R T 0 u T p 0 c p 0 c p 0 c p 0 c p 0 c p M(*) E R I u . RX 2 2 2 3 1 1 0 ISRO 1 NOR L 1 1 .*. 2 1 1 1 & 3, 4, ISR02 l/C 5, 7, 3, 4, 9, 5,8 3, 8 11 4 4 2 MAJ 6, 8 6, 7 7 5 2 2 1 TS 3,4 3,4 4 0 2 2 RX 2 2 2 3 1 1 0 NOR 1 1 2 1 1 1 ISR03 3, 4, l/C 5, 7, 4, 5, 3, 5, 9, 8 6,8 12 4 4 2 MAJ 6,8 6, 7 7 5 2 2 1 TS 3,4 4,5 4 0 2 2 RX 2 2 2 1 1 0 ISR04 NOR 1 1 2 1 1 1 l/C 3, 7, 3, 4, 5, 6, 9, 5, 8 8 10 4 4 2 MAJ 6,8 6, 7 7 5 2 2 1 TS 3,4 2 0 2 2 ES-301 Competencies Checklist Form ES-301-6 Facility:

Nine Mile Point Unit 2 Date of Examination:

December 2015 Operating Test No.: LC2 14-1 APPLICANTS RO 1 R02 R05 & & R03 R04 Competencies SCENARIO SCENARIO SCENARIO 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 ATC BOP BOP BOP ATC BOP BOP ATC lnterpret/Diagnos 3, 6, 7, 3, 5, 6, 5, 6, 7, 4, 5, 6, 4, 5, 6, 4, 5, 6, 3, 5, 6, e Events 8, 9 7,8 8 7,8,9 7,8 7,8,9 7,8 3, 7,8 and Conditions Comply With and 2, 3, 6, 1, 3, 5, 1, 5, 6, 1, 4, 5, 2, 4, 5, 1, 4, 5, 1, 3, 5, 2, 3, 7, Use Procedures 7,8,9 6, 7,8 7,8 6, 7, 8, 6, 7,8 6, 7, 8, 6, 7,8 8 (1) 9 8 9 Operate Control 2, 3, 6, 1, 3, 5, 1, 5, 6, 1, 4, 5, 2, 4, 5, 1, 4, 5, 1, 3, 5, 2, 3, 7, Boards (2) 7,8,9 6, 7,8 7,8 6, 7, 8, 6, 7,8 6, 7, 8, 6, 7,8 8 9 9 Communicate All All All and Interact All All All All All ' Demonstrate Supervisory Ability (3) Comply With and Use Tech. Specs. (3) 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-301 Competencies Checklist Form ES-301-6 Facility:

Nine Mile Point Unit 2 Date of Examination:

December 2015 Operatinq Test No.: LC2 14-1 APPLICANTS ISRO 1 ISR03 ISR04 & ISR02 Competencies SCENARIO SCENARIO SCENARIO 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 SRO SRO ATC SRO ATC SRO ATC SRO lnterpret/Diagnos 3, 4, 5, 3, 4, 5, 3, 4, 5, 4, 5, 6, 3, 4, 5, 3, 6, 7, 3, 4, 5, e Events 6, 7, 8, 6, 7,8 3, 7,8 6, 7, 8, 7,8 6, 7,8 8,9 6, 7,8 and Conditions 9 9 Comply With and 2, 3, 7, 2, 4, 5, 2, 3, 6, Use Procedures All All 8 All 6, 7,8 All 7,8,9 All ( 1) 8 Operate Control 2, 3, 7, 2, 4, 5, 2, 3, 6, Boards (2) 8 6, 7,8 7,8,9 Communicate All All All and Interact All All All All All Demonstrate Supervisory All All All All All Ability (3) Comply With and Use Tech. Specs. 3,4 3,4 3,4 4,5 3,4 (3) 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.

4 BOP 5, 6, 7, 8 1, 5, 6, 7,8 1, 5, 6, 7,8 All ES-401 Written Examination Quality Checklist Form ES-401-6 lilly. '""'"' nit 2 Date of Exam: December 2015 Exam Level: RO/SRO Initial Item Description a b* c# 1. Questions and answers are technically accurate and applicable to the facility.

p(1 Ji\ f 2. a. NRG K/As are referenced for all questions.

pfl "" f b. Facilitv learnina obiectives are referenced as available.

3. SRO questions are appropriate in accordance with Section D.2.d of ES-401 pr1 #\ 4. The sampling process was random and systematic (If more than 4 RO or 2 SRO questions f fl f were repeated from the last 2 NRG licensinq exams, consult the NRR OL program office). 5. Question duplication from the license screening/audit exam was controlled as indicated below (check the item that applies) and appears appropriate:

_x_ the audit exam was systematically and randomly developed; or f _ the audit exam was completed before the license exam was started; or ff1 Mt _ the examinations were developed independently; or _x_ the licensee certifies that there is no duplication; or _other (explain)

6. Bank use meets limits (no more than 75 percent Bank Modified New f from the bank, at least 10 percent new, and the rest *M new or modified);

enter the actual RO I SRO-only 33 I 9 210 40I16 question distribution(s) at right. 44%/36% 3%/0% 53%/ 64% 7. Between 50 and 60 percent of the questions on the RO Memory CIA exam are written at the comprehension I analysis level; f the SRO exam may exceed 60 percent if the randomly 32 I 5 43/ 20 vri "' selected K/As support the higher cognitive levels; enter the actual RO I SRO question distribution(s) at right. 43%/20% 57%/ 80% 8. References/handouts provided do not give away answers ftl "" F or aid in the elimination of distractors.

9. Question content conforms with specific KIA statements in the previously approved pn r= examination outline and is appropriate for the tier to which they are assigned;

""' deviations are justified.

10. Question psychometric quality and format meet the guidelines in ES Appendix B. 9r1 " f 11. The exam contains the required number of one-point, multiple choice items; the total is correct and aqrees with the value on the cover sheet. f\ll\ I'\ Printed Name I Si Date Author 11/13/15 a. Paul F. Isham Jr. I b. Facility Reviewer (*) Mark Greer I AA '1
c. NRG Chief Examiner (#) 11l rvl le¥' 1 1 ){1 /Yhl1J.. , "AU'\ ) fl 015 d. NRG Regional Supervisor .. ,. f,.f I.... _V-. ./ ,1/./(.,-A,, l I ,\ .lt1l1'\ ,,.., -/ * -Note:
  • The facility reviewer's initials/signature are not applicable for NRG-developed examinations.
  1. Independent NRG reviewer initial items in Column "c"; chief examiner concurrence required.

ES-403 Written Examination Grading Quality Checklist Facility:

Nine Mile Point 2 Date of Exam: 12/8/15 Exam Level: Item Description

1. Clean answer sheets copied before grading 2. Answer key changes and question deletions justified and documented
3. Applicants' scores checked for addition errors (reviewers spot check> 25% of examinations)
4. Grading for all borderline cases (80 +/-2% overall and 70 or 80, as applicable, +/-4% on the SRO-only) reviewed in detail 5. All other failing examinations checked to ensure that grades are justified
6. Performance on missed questions checked for training deficiencies and wording problems; evaluate validity of questions missed by half or more of the applicants
a. Grader Printed Paul F. Isham/ ' b. Facility Reviewer(*)

Mark Greer/ c. NRC Chief Examiner (*)

(/)x Form ES-403-1 RO Ii SRO Initials a b c 10f1 1\1/.A N/A PFI Bf JSF rv/A N/A PFf Mc BF Date 12/?;/s ' I n/,/i 12/z'i_.1s D-\J ') j

d. NRC Supervisor

(*) ,,// ' i_......---

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

ES-201 Examination Outline Quality Checklist Form ES-201-2 Facility:

Nine Mile Point Unit 2 Date of Examination:

November 2015 Initials Item Task Description a b* c# 1. a. Verify that the outline(s) fit(s) the appropriate model, in accordance with ES-401 or ES-401 N. m

  • f'. w R b. Assess whether the outline was systematically and randomly prepared in accordance with Pf1 f I Section D.1 of ES-401 or ES-401 N and whether all KIA categories are appropriately sampled. T T Assess whether the outline over-emphasizes any systems, evolutions, or generic topics. ,,, 0( y E c. N ,,, f d. Assess whether the justifications for deselected or rejected KIA statements are appropriate.
2. a. Using Form ES-301-5, verify that the proposed scenario sets cover the required number of y normal evolutions, instrument and component failures, technical specifications, and major rn s transients.

I M b. Assess whether there are enough scenario sets (and spares) to test the projected number and u mix of applicants in accordance with the expected crew composition and rotation schedule f L without compromising exam integrity, and ensure that each applicant can be tested using at Pfl A least one new or significantly modified scenario, that no scenarios are duplicated from the T applicants' audit test(s), and that scenarios will not be repeated on subsequent days. 0 To the extent possible, assess whether the outline(s) conform(s) with the qualitative and fr1 Th f R c. quantitative criteria specified on Form ES-301-4 and described in Appendix D. 3. a. Verify that the systems walk-through outline meets the criteria specified on Form ES-301-2:

(1) the outline(s) contain(s) the required number of control room and in-plant tasks distributed ff' ( w among the safety functions as specified on the form A (2) task repetition from the last two NRC examinations is within the limits specified on the form L (3) no tasks are duplicated from the applicants' audit test(s) K (4) the number of new or modified tasks meets or exceeds the minimums specified on the form (5) the number of alternate path, low-power, emergency, and RCA tasks meet the criteria on T the form. H t\-R b. Verify that the administrative outline meets the criteria specified on Form ES-301-1:

"' y: 0 (1) the tasks are distributed among the topics as specified on the form u (2) at least one task is new or significantly modified G (3) no more than one task is repeated from the last two NRC licensing examinations H Determine if there are enough different outlines to test the projected number and mix of Pf1 f c. applicants and ensure that no items are duplicated on subsequent days. 4. a. Assess whether plant-specific priorities (including PRA and IPE insights) are covered in the ,,, f appropriate exam sections.

G rf1 l{t.......

f-E b. Assess whether the 10 CFR 55.41 /43 and 55.45 sampling is appropriate.

N Ensure that KIA importance ratings (except for plant-specific priorities) are at least 2.5. rn f E c. R rfl '{ d. Check for duplication and overlap among exam sections.

ri A frl r<-f L e. Check the entire exam for balance of coverage.

f. Assess whether the exam fits the appropriate job level (RO or SRO). pf\ 0/ f v Pri d Date a. Author Paul Isham I
b. Facility Reviewer(*)

Patrick Foti I

c. NRC Chief Examiner (#)

AW\, lo/l/lS d. NRC Supervisor IAI I ....

/f\ll () v .... '----I Of i'f 1.5 "--.../ Note: # Independent NRC reviewer initial items in Column "c"; chief examiner concurrence required.

  • Not applicable for NRG-prepared examination outlines.

,v 'Ne ,.,,,,e ES-201 Po1tJT vw1 T 2 1. Pre-Examination l..Gl 11/-1 r.JR' ".Ta11Jf4L 6'<""'1 Examination Security Agreement Form ES-201-3 I acknowledge that I have acquired specialized knowledge about the NRC licensing examinations scheduled for the week(s) of 11 ! o />-IS 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 beefrauthorized by the NRC chief examiner.

I understand that I am not to instruct, evaluate, or provide performance feedback to those applicants scheduled to be administered these licensing examinations from this date until completion of examination administration, except as specifically noted below and authorized by the NRC (e.g., acting as a simulator booth operator or communicator is acceptable if the individual does not select the training content or provide direct or indirect feedback).

Furthermore, I am aware of the physical security measures and requirements (as documented in the facility licensee's procedures) and understand that violation of the conditions of this agreement may result in cancellation of the examinations and/or an enforcement action against me or the facility licensee.

I will immediately report to facility management or the NRC chief examiner any indications or suggestions that examination security may have been compromised.

2. Post-Examination To the best of my knowledge, I did not divulge to any unauthorized persons any information concerning the NRC licensing examinations administered during the week(s) of . From the date that I entered into this security agreement until the completion of examination administration, I did not instruct, evaluate, or provide performance feedback to those applicants who were administered these licensing examinations, except as specifically noted below and authorized by the NRC. PRINTED NAME JOB TITLE I RESPONSIBILITY DATE SIGNATURE (2) DATE NOTE 1. Gl*P..." Mntol?.. 2. == 3. ui f'y& __ 4. CA 2 Q.; ,;1 /4l:tff1uv*

3'{P"'-__ 5.

u:t.. OPS __ _-.,.A"."-L'A"'"--------

...........

..__ ________ _ 6. RP .:i:/ist.r1d*' --7. D1Y15 8.,G. ai 9. t>1ll See.--.r 1)2.

10. I'c:ff S-031 ,n .... v+/-1.-101-1af

___ _ 11 . .,,,). *r1:rv ... ) .J,.\.. o*t.*-:r v.-ti.-*/).J! . .,ar.

  • 1-11,s-___ _ 12. OMt Bo1pr.F Uf5 v.11,,r*tw&

CO-to1r-___ _ ------------13. /\.6W ,ubR.ot-10 0;:-2 ,*.4t,./\h-t*R..

___ _ 14. J .}y!p'i 11-/f.,'?l[,,,1,*J ( Of') V1L 10 ' ----15. ,r<c.-,.'Fv .nnfr:fd">

/ 1,:1 f l/"/r'/*:

___ _ NOTES: ' * > ES-201, Page 27 of 28 f'/1Nc .,.,,,,e ES-201 Po, ,.,T v,., r r 2 1. Pre-Examination l.Gl 11.J-, N/l.l :1"r.Jt7!;1L Examination Security Agreement Form ES-201-3 I acknowledge that I have acquired specialized knowledge about the NRC licensing examinations scheduled for the week(s) of 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 . 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. "S\20
  • . .. -

__ 2. to f::/J.:L£_

3. JZ.O 4. S rt o . tl1Mti,..,...

_______ _ 5. ________ ------------------------------------

6. ________ -------------------------------

?. ________ -------------------------------

8. ------------
9. ----10. ----11. ----12.________

13. ----14. ----15. NOTES: ES-201, Page 27 of 28

('I I Ne rt<ttt.e ES-201 Po11.11 r 2 1. Pre-Examination

{..C,l 111-1 N/l.C °IaJ17!4L Examination Security Agreement Form ES-201-3 I acknowledge that I have acquired specialized knowledge about the NRC licensing examinations scheduled for the week(s) of !.1 / i o / 1o1 Sas of the date of my signature.

I agree that I will not knowingly divulge any information about these examinations to any persons who have no(beeri authorized by the NRC chief examiner.

I understand that I am not to instruct, evaluate, or provide performance feedback to those applicants scheduled to be administered these licensing examinations from this date until completion of examination administration, except as specifically noted below and authorized by the NRC (e.g., acting as a simulator booth operator or communicator is acceptable if the individual does not select the training content or provide direct or indirect feedback).

Furthermore, I am aware of the physical security measures and requirements (as documented in the facility licensee's procedures) and understand that violation of the conditions of this agreement may result in cancellation of the examinations and/or an enforcement action against me or the facility licensee.

I will immediately report to facility management or the NRC chief examiner any indications or suggestions that examination security may have been compromised.

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

&!:!!1-TURE (1) .DATE 1. A\\:.a<l SlW\. siApport 1-/r3/;'J-

-SIGNATURE (2) DATE NOTE 2. --3. --4. --5. ----6. ----7. ----8. --9. --10. ----11. ----12. ----13. ----14. ----15. NOTES: ES-201, Page 27 of 28 ES-301 Operating Test Quality Checklist Form ES-301-3 Facility:

Nine Mile Point Unit 2 Date of Examination:

December 2015 Operating Test Number: LC2 14-1 Initials 1. General Criteria a b* c# a. The operating test conforms with the previously approved outline; changes are consistent with f fl "" f samplinq requirements (e.q., 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

?f'1 f durinq this examination.

c. The operatinq test shall not duplicate items from the applicants' audit test(s). (see Section D.1.a.) Pf1 ""' d. Overlap with the written examination and between different parts of the operating test is within PM "4'\ f" acceptable limits. e. It appears that the operating test will differentiate between competent and less-than-competent

?f1 iii f 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 ff'1 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

-restrictions on the sequence of steps, if applicable

b. Ensure that any changes from the previously approved systems and administrative walk-through pf1 "4'\ 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.
3. Simulator Criteria ------The associated simulator operating tests (scenario sets) have been reviewed in accordance with ?f1 f Form ES-301-4 and a copy is attached.

Printed Name I Signature Date a. Author Paul F. Isham Jr. I 1'/IJ/1s b. Facility Reviewer(*)

Mark Greer I 411v h>\le>t' I ,

c. NRC Chief Examiner (#) ./1 o...,-\J \....._alt'b.

r\ rvl, ( I L

d. NRC Supervisor

' --t / '-' NOTE:

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

ES-301 Simulator Scenario Quality Checklist Form ES-301-4 Facilty: Nine Mile Point Unit 2 Date of Exam: December 2015 Scenario Numbers: 2/3/4 Operating Test No.: LC214-1 QUALITATIVE ATTRIBUTES Initials a b* c# 1. The initial conditions are realistic, in that some equipment and/or instrumentation may be out fr1 tJo4\ f of service, but it does not cue the operators into expected events. 2. The scenarios consist mostly of related events. pf1 !WI f 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 pr1 fl'\ F
  • the symptoms/cues that will be visible to the crew
  • the expected operator actions (by shift position)
  • the event termination point (if applicable)
4. The events are valid with regard to physics and thermodynamics.

fr-r f 5. Sequencing and timing of events is reasonable, and allows the examination team to obtain complete Pr1 F evaluation results commensurate with the scenario objectives.

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

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

Pr! PM Cues are given. 7. The simulator modeling is not altered. prt ""' ? 8. The scenarios have been validated.

Pursuant to 1 O CFR 55.46(d), any open simulator performance f deficiencies or deviations from the referenced plant have been evaluated to ensure that functional Pf'1 W1\ fidelity is maintained while running the planned scenarios.

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

All other f N "1 f' scenarios have been altered in accordance with Section D.5 of ES-301. 10. All individual operator competencies can be evaluated, as verified using Form ES-301-6 Pf1 y (submit the form along with the simulator scenarios).

11. The scenario set provides the opportunity for each applicant to be evaluated in each of the applicable (f1 "" rating factors, (Competency Rating factors as described on forms ES 303-1 and ES 303-3) 12. Each applicant will be significantly involved in the minimum number of transients and events specified fPr IW\ F on Form ES-301-5 (submit the form with the simulator scenarios).
13. The level of difficulty is appropriate to support licensing decisions for each crew position.

Pf1 "' F Target Quantitative Attributes (Per Scenario; See Section D.5.d) Actual Attributes

1. Malfunctions after EOP entry (1-2) 3 I 2 I 1 Pr1 ""' 2. Abnormal events (2-4) 4/2/2 Pr1 f"\ r-3. Major transients (1-2) 2 I 2 I 1 f{'? w.l.. p 4. EOPs entered/requiring substantive actions (1-2) 2/2/2 P1'11 5. EOP contingencies requiring substantive actions (0-2) 1 I 1 I 1 Pf'7 "" r 6. Critical tasks (2-3) 2/2/2 """ y NOTE:

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

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

Nine Mile Point Unit 2 Date of Exam: December 2015 Operating Test No.: LC2 14-1 A E Scenarios p v 1 (Backup) 2 3 4 5 T M p E 0 I L N CREW CREW CREW CREW CREW N T I T POSITION POSITION POSITION POSITION POSITION I c A M A T s A B s A B s A B s A B s A B L u N y R T 0 R T 0 R T 0 R T 0 R T 0 M(*) T p 0 c p 0 c p 0 c p 0 c p 0 c p R I u E RX 2 1 1 1 0 RO 1 NOR .. 1 1 2 1 1 1 & l/C 3, 7, 3, 5, 5, 6, 9, 8 8 9 4 4 2 R03 MAJ 6,8 6, 7 7 5 2 2 1 TS 0 2 2 RX 2 1 1 1 0 R02 NOR 1 1 1 1 1 & l/C 4, 5, 7, 4, 5, 9 8 7 4 4 2 R04 MAJ 6, 8 6,7 4 2 2 1 TS ' 0 2 2 RX 2 1 1 1 0 NOR 1 1 2 1 1 1 R05 l/C 4, 5, 7, 3, 5, 9 8 3,8 9 4 4 2 MAJ 6, 8 6,7 7 5 2 2 1 TS 0 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 (1/C) malfunctions and one major transient, in the ATC position.

If an Instant SRO additionally serves in the BOP position, one 1/C malfunction can be credited toward the two 1/C malfunctions required for the ATC position.

2. Reactivity manipulations may be conducted under normal or controlled abnormal conditions (refer to Section 0.5.d) but must be significant per Section C.2.a of Appendix D. (*) Reactivity and normal evolutions may be replaced with additional instrument or component malfunctions on a 1-for-1 basis. 3. Whenever practical, both instrument and component malfunctions should be included; only those that require verifiable actions that provide insight to the applicant's competence count toward the minimum requirements specified for the applicant's license level in the right-hand columns. 4. For licensees that use the ATC operator primarily for monitoring plant parameters, the chief examiner may place SRO-I applicants in either the ATC or BOP position to best evaluate the SRO-I in manipulating plant controls.

ES-301 Transient and Event Checklist Form ES-301-5 i=,,-:i:.

  • . II.. -*. Point Unit 2 Date of Exam: November 2015 Operating Test No.: LC2 14-1 A E Scenarios p v 1 2 3 4 5 T M p E L N CREW CREW CREW CREW CREW 0 I I T POSITION POSITION POSITION POSITION POSITION T N c A I A T s A B s A B s A B s A B s A B M L N y R T 0 R T 0 R T 0 R T 0 R T 0 u T p 0 c p 0 c p 0 c p 0 c p 0 c p M(*) E R I u . RX 2 2 2 3 1 1 0 ISRO 1 NOR L 1 1 .*. 2 1 1 1 & 3, 4, ISR02 l/C 5, 7, 3, 4, 9, 5,8 3, 8 11 4 4 2 MAJ 6, 8 6, 7 7 5 2 2 1 TS 3,4 3,4 4 0 2 2 RX 2 2 2 3 1 1 0 NOR 1 1 2 1 1 1 ISR03 3, 4, l/C 5, 7, 4, 5, 3, 5, 9, 8 6,8 12 4 4 2 MAJ 6,8 6, 7 7 5 2 2 1 TS 3,4 4,5 4 0 2 2 RX 2 2 2 1 1 0 ISR04 NOR 1 1 2 1 1 1 l/C 3, 7, 3, 4, 5, 6, 9, 5, 8 8 10 4 4 2 MAJ 6,8 6, 7 7 5 2 2 1 TS 3,4 2 0 2 2 ES-301 Competencies Checklist Form ES-301-6 Facility:

Nine Mile Point Unit 2 Date of Examination:

December 2015 Operating Test No.: LC2 14-1 APPLICANTS RO 1 R02 R05 & & R03 R04 Competencies SCENARIO SCENARIO SCENARIO 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 ATC BOP BOP BOP ATC BOP BOP ATC lnterpret/Diagnos 3, 6, 7, 3, 5, 6, 5, 6, 7, 4, 5, 6, 4, 5, 6, 4, 5, 6, 3, 5, 6, e Events 8, 9 7,8 8 7,8,9 7,8 7,8,9 7,8 3, 7,8 and Conditions Comply With and 2, 3, 6, 1, 3, 5, 1, 5, 6, 1, 4, 5, 2, 4, 5, 1, 4, 5, 1, 3, 5, 2, 3, 7, Use Procedures 7,8,9 6, 7,8 7,8 6, 7, 8, 6, 7,8 6, 7, 8, 6, 7,8 8 (1) 9 8 9 Operate Control 2, 3, 6, 1, 3, 5, 1, 5, 6, 1, 4, 5, 2, 4, 5, 1, 4, 5, 1, 3, 5, 2, 3, 7, Boards (2) 7,8,9 6, 7,8 7,8 6, 7, 8, 6, 7,8 6, 7, 8, 6, 7,8 8 9 9 Communicate All All All and Interact All All All All All ' Demonstrate Supervisory Ability (3) Comply With and Use Tech. Specs. (3) 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-301 Competencies Checklist Form ES-301-6 Facility:

Nine Mile Point Unit 2 Date of Examination:

December 2015 Operatinq Test No.: LC2 14-1 APPLICANTS ISRO 1 ISR03 ISR04 & ISR02 Competencies SCENARIO SCENARIO SCENARIO 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 SRO SRO ATC SRO ATC SRO ATC SRO lnterpret/Diagnos 3, 4, 5, 3, 4, 5, 3, 4, 5, 4, 5, 6, 3, 4, 5, 3, 6, 7, 3, 4, 5, e Events 6, 7, 8, 6, 7,8 3, 7,8 6, 7, 8, 7,8 6, 7,8 8,9 6, 7,8 and Conditions 9 9 Comply With and 2, 3, 7, 2, 4, 5, 2, 3, 6, Use Procedures All All 8 All 6, 7,8 All 7,8,9 All ( 1) 8 Operate Control 2, 3, 7, 2, 4, 5, 2, 3, 6, Boards (2) 8 6, 7,8 7,8,9 Communicate All All All and Interact All All All All All Demonstrate Supervisory All All All All All Ability (3) Comply With and Use Tech. Specs. 3,4 3,4 3,4 4,5 3,4 (3) 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.

4 BOP 5, 6, 7, 8 1, 5, 6, 7,8 1, 5, 6, 7,8 All ES-401 Written Examination Quality Checklist Form ES-401-6 lilly. '""'"' nit 2 Date of Exam: December 2015 Exam Level: RO/SRO Initial Item Description a b* c# 1. Questions and answers are technically accurate and applicable to the facility.

p(1 Ji\ f 2. a. NRG K/As are referenced for all questions.

pfl "" f b. Facilitv learnina obiectives are referenced as available.

3. SRO questions are appropriate in accordance with Section D.2.d of ES-401 pr1 #\ 4. The sampling process was random and systematic (If more than 4 RO or 2 SRO questions f fl f were repeated from the last 2 NRG licensinq exams, consult the NRR OL program office). 5. Question duplication from the license screening/audit exam was controlled as indicated below (check the item that applies) and appears appropriate:

_x_ the audit exam was systematically and randomly developed; or f _ the audit exam was completed before the license exam was started; or ff1 Mt _ the examinations were developed independently; or _x_ the licensee certifies that there is no duplication; or _other (explain)

6. Bank use meets limits (no more than 75 percent Bank Modified New f from the bank, at least 10 percent new, and the rest *M new or modified);

enter the actual RO I SRO-only 33 I 9 210 40I16 question distribution(s) at right. 44%/36% 3%/0% 53%/ 64% 7. Between 50 and 60 percent of the questions on the RO Memory CIA exam are written at the comprehension I analysis level; f the SRO exam may exceed 60 percent if the randomly 32 I 5 43/ 20 vri "' selected K/As support the higher cognitive levels; enter the actual RO I SRO question distribution(s) at right. 43%/20% 57%/ 80% 8. References/handouts provided do not give away answers ftl "" F or aid in the elimination of distractors.

9. Question content conforms with specific KIA statements in the previously approved pn r= examination outline and is appropriate for the tier to which they are assigned;

""' deviations are justified.

10. Question psychometric quality and format meet the guidelines in ES Appendix B. 9r1 " f 11. The exam contains the required number of one-point, multiple choice items; the total is correct and aqrees with the value on the cover sheet. f\ll\ I'\ Printed Name I Si Date Author 11/13/15 a. Paul F. Isham Jr. I b. Facility Reviewer (*) Mark Greer I AA '1
c. NRG Chief Examiner (#) 11l rvl le¥' 1 1 ){1 /Yhl1J.. , "AU'\ ) fl 015 d. NRG Regional Supervisor .. ,. f,.f I.... _V-. ./ ,1/./(.,-A,, l I ,\ .lt1l1'\ ,,.., -/ * -Note:
  • The facility reviewer's initials/signature are not applicable for NRG-developed examinations.
  1. Independent NRG reviewer initial items in Column "c"; chief examiner concurrence required.

ES-403 Written Examination Grading Quality Checklist Facility:

Nine Mile Point 2 Date of Exam: 12/8/15 Exam Level: Item Description

1. Clean answer sheets copied before grading 2. Answer key changes and question deletions justified and documented
3. Applicants' scores checked for addition errors (reviewers spot check> 25% of examinations)
4. Grading for all borderline cases (80 +/-2% overall and 70 or 80, as applicable, +/-4% on the SRO-only) reviewed in detail 5. All other failing examinations checked to ensure that grades are justified
6. Performance on missed questions checked for training deficiencies and wording problems; evaluate validity of questions missed by half or more of the applicants
a. Grader Printed Paul F. Isham/ ' b. Facility Reviewer(*)

Mark Greer/ c. NRC Chief Examiner (*)

(/)x Form ES-403-1 RO Ii SRO Initials a b c 10f1 1\1/.A N/A PFI Bf JSF rv/A N/A PFf Mc BF Date 12/?;/s ' I n/,/i 12/z'i_.1s D-\J ') j

d. NRC Supervisor

(*) ,,// ' i_......---

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

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML16085A259&oldid=1214136"