ML090200110

2008-12-Public Forms

ML090200110
Person / Time
Site:	River Bend
Issue date:	11/21/2008
From:	NRC Region 4
To:
References
Download: ML090200110 (13)

Text

OBDl 202 - INITIAL OPERATOR LICENSING PROCESS I I ned ES 303's to BC U N S l checklist to LA

ES-201 E x a ~ i n a t Outline i ~ ~ Quality Checklist Form ES-201-2 Facility: River Bend Station Date of Examination: 12/1/2008 Initials Item Task Descriotion

~

1.

W R

I T

T c. Assess whether the outline over-emphasizes any systems, evolutions, or generic topics.

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

Using Form ES-301-5, verify that the proposed scenario sets cover the required number of normal evolutions, instrument and component failures, technical specifications, and major transients.

Assess whether there are enough scenario sets (and spares) to test the projected number L

A T

0 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.

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

/ (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 test(s)

(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 the form. i

b. Verify that the administrative outline meets the criteria specified on Form ES-301-1: i (1) the tasks are distributed among the topics as specified on the form R

I c. Ensure that WA importance ratings (except for plant-specific priorities) are at least 2.5.

.A.

L I f. Assess whether the exam fits the aoorooriate iob level (RO or SRO).

Date

3. Author 8-27-0%

I. Facility Reviewer (*)

.: NRC Chief Examiner (#)

3. NRC Supervisor

~

w e #t Independent NRC reviewer initial items in Column "c", c k f e)lamver concurrewe required

• Not applicable for NRC-prepared examination outlines

ES-401 Written Examination Quality Checklist Form ES-401-6 Facility: River Bend Station Date of Exam: 12/1/2008 Exam Level: RO SRO I , Initial ,

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

- the examinations were developed independently; or

/the licensee certifies that there is no duplication; or

- other (explain) 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, Printed Name / Sianature Date

a. Author

b. Facility Reviewer (*)

c. NRC Chief Examiner (#)

d. NRC Regional Supervisor Note:

• The facility reviewer's initialdsignature are not applicable for NRC-developed examinations.

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

ES-404 Written Examination Quality Checklist Form ES-404-6 Facility: River Bend Station Date of Exam: 12/1/2008 Exam Level: RO Izz] SRO Initial I I

5. Question duplication from the license screening/audit exam was controlled as in icated below (check the item that applies) and appears appropriate:

A h e 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

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 / SRO-only the SRO exam may exceed 60 percent if the randomly selected K/As support the higher cognitive levels; enter

8. Referenceslhandouts provided do not give away answers Oi aid in the elimination of clistiactois.

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 Printed Name / Sianature Date a Author b Facility Reviewer (*)

c NRC Chief Examiner (#)

d NRC Regional Supervisor 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-301 Operating Test Quality Checkiist Form ES-301-3 Facility: River Bend Station Date of Examination: 12/1/2008 Operating ?st Number: 1

1. General Criteria

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 operating test shall not duplicate items from the applicants' audit test(s). (see Section D.l .a,)

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

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:

- 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 nut!ines (Forms ES-391-1 and 2) have not caused ?hetest 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 Form ES-301-4and a copy is attached.

Printed Name / Sianature Date b Facility Reviewer(*)

c NRC Chief Examiner (#)

d NRC Supervisor

'el J

S-301 i ~ u l a t o Scenario r uality Checklist QUALITATIVE ATTRIBUTES Initials b* I c#

1. The initial conditions are realistic, in that some equipment and/or instrumentation may be out of service, but it does not cue the oDerators into exDected events.

3. Each event description consists of the point in the scenario when it is to be initiated

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.

6. Sequencing and timing of events is reasonable, and allows the examination team to obtain complete evaluation results commensurate with the scenario objectives.

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 aiven.

8. The simulator modeling is not altered. I

9. The scenarios have been validated. Pursuant to 10 CFR 55.46(d), any open simulator t performance deficiencies or deviations from the referenced plant have been evaluated to ensure that functional fidelity is maintained while running the planned scenarios.

10 Every operator will be evaluated using at least one new or significantly modified scenario All other qrenarios have heen altered in accordance with Section D 5 of ES-301 . ..

?. -!-=!a! malfundions (5-3) u 1'11-

2. Malfunctions after EOP entrv (1-2) 1 2 / 2 / 1 / 2 I W

ES-403 Written Examination Grading Form ES-403-2 uality Checklist nitials Item Descrbtion 1.,E I

5. All other failing examinations checked to ensure that grades are iustified 6 Performance on missed questions checked for training deficiencies and wording problems; evaluate validity of questions missed by half or more of the applicants Printed Name/Signature Date 9

u. Crardcar UIUUUI

b. Facility Reviewer(*)

c. NRC Chief Examiner (*)

d NRC Supervisor (*)

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

ES-403 Written Examination Grading ualitv Checklist nitials item Description a IC'. Clean answer sheets copied before grading Answer key changes and question deletions justified and documented

3. Applicants' scores checked for addition errors

4. Grading for all borderline cases (80 +2% overall and 70 or 80, as applicable, 54% on the SRO-only) reviewed in detail

5. All other failing examinations checked to ensure that grades Printed NameEignature Date Grader

b. Facility Reviewer(*)

C. NRC Chief Examiner

d. NRC Supervisor (")

II

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

sk?

A A .-A 0

$3 3 2

N 0 0 0 0 0 0 m m m

-ID -In -in b; b $' 8s R  ??  ??a

$2 w.

x?

8 w--

n $2 w.

(Do coo (Do wcn wcn wcn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Rm

. R. .

P m

cn m

N N Iu 0 0 0 0 0 0 m m m w w W s s s!

m a 30 08 C.J W

0) n z1 N

0 F: 2 7 (D

3.

IJ

-u n n n n

n n n n n

5 a

5 n

5 D

cn cn cn

-$? -2 -9 m m m nD n D

nD z z z 5 -I 5

s 0

0 s

0 0

01 W 0 ) 0 )

n n 0 0 N O

( n v ,

n n G

L O

L w v Ln Ln 0 0 0 0

- i . -

0 0

~

n m

E.

0 3

P TI 5

P)

UI m

s 0.

nr VI

TI c0) n CD