ML082750593

Arkansas Nuclear One, 2008-09-Public Forms

ML082750593
Person / Time
Site:	Arkansas Nuclear
Issue date:	09/05/2008
From:	Larson B T NRC Region 4
To:
References
Download: ML082750593 (11)

Text

OBDI 202 - INITIAL OPERATOR LICENSING PROCESS E r I I Chief: I Brian T. Larson Facility:

AN 1 Date of Written Exam:

9/5/2008 Operating Test Developed By: NRC I LA produces /5C signs Exam Approval Letter (ES-201 Att-5) 11 8/29/2008 IProctoring/written exam admin guidelines reviewed w/facility I ?/J/dp I &z I -11 I/ 9/1/2008 lExam material to exam team 11 I I I 11 11/7/2008 lRef Marl Returned after Final Resolution of Appeals R Replaces NUREG-1021. Revision

9. Supp 1 Forms ES-201-1 and ES-501-1 ES-201 Form ES-201-2 Facility:

ANO-Unit 1 Date of Examination:

9/5/2008 - Item 1. w R I T T E N 2. S I M U L A T 0 R - 3. W I T 4 Task Description a c. Assess whether the outline over-emD its specified on the form nimums specified on the form RCA tasks meet the criteria

a. Author b Facility Reviewer

(*) c. NRC Chief Examiner

(#) d. NRC Supervisor II -.

ES-401 Written Examination Facility: Arkansas Nuclear One - Unit I Date of Exam:

9-8-08 Exam Level: RO SRO I 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 - X other (explain)

Audit exam has not been developed at this time. Exam team will insure no duplication. I I I 6. Bank use meets limits (no more than 75 percent from the bank, at least 10 percent new, and the rest a. Author

b. Facility Reviewer

(*) c. NRC Chief Examiner

(#) d. NRC Regional Supervisor Initial I I Date 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-304 uality Checklist Form ES-301-3 Facility: Arkansas Nuclear One - Unit 1 Date of Examination:

9-8-08 Operating Test NL I. General Criteria

a. The operating test conforms with the previously approved outline; changes are consistent with sampling requirements (e.9..

10 CFR 55.45, operational importance, safety function distribution).

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

b. c. d. 0 The operating test shall not duplicate items from the applicants' audit test(s). (see Section D.1.a.) Overlap with the written examination and between different parts of the operating test is within acceptable limits.

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

e. 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 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.

b. 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. Printed Name

/ Signgtwe iber: 2008-1 Initials Date a Author b Facility Reviewerr) c NRC Chief Examiner

(#) NOTE

• The facility signature is not applicable for NRC-developed tests Date of Exam: 9!t1i2008 Scenario Numbers: I i 2 / 3 Onerating Pest No.: 213108-3 1 The initial conditions aie realistic, in that some equipment and/or ins~umenta~ion may be out of seivice but it does not cue the operators into expected events The scenarios consist mostly of related events Each event description consists of e 0 + e a No more than one non-mechanistic failure (e g , pipe break) is incorporated into the scenario witnout a credible precedinq incident such as a seismic event 2 3 the point in the sccnario wnen it is lo be inrtiated the ~ialfunction(s~

that are entered io initiate the event the symptomsicues that will be visible to the crew the expected operator actions (by shift position) the event terniinatiori point (if applicable) 4 6 Se~~ie~&ing anu timing of events is reasonable and aiiows the e~aminat~on teain to obtaiii complete evaluation results commensurate wiih the scenario obiectives 7 If time compression techniques are used tne scenario summary cleariy so irtdicaies Opeiators have sufficieit time to carry out expected activities without mdue time constraints I Cues are qiven 10 Every operator MI/ be evaluated using at least one new or si~niftcantly modified scenario All other scenarios have been altered in accordance with Section D 5 of ES-301 ed, as verified wng Form ES-301-6 ES-403 Written Examjnatjon Grading Form ES-403-1 Quality Checklist Facility:

ANO-I Unit I Date of Exam:

9/5/2008 Exam Le> el: RO SRO Item Description

1. 2. Clean answer sheets copied before grading Answer key changes and question deletions justified and documented

3. 4. 5. Applicants' scores checked for addition errors (reviewers spot check > 25% of examinations) Grading for all borderline cases (80 +2% overall and 70 or 80, as applicable, +4% on the SRO-only) reviewed in detail 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 NameISignature Initials ~ I I Date a. Grader 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.

l- t-: 4 m 2 Z cf % 9 LL LL LL c .- E 2 W ?$ $5 cu 0 m 0 0 cu m . Iz m 0 0 0 m 0 a, . s 2 zrl %X E# at- Urn om =Jm $2 m 0 0 cu co 0 m 0 . . -J a v) hi 0 (5: a, u) m L: n. P 0 0 0 N 0 m m b .--. c - m c g 0 B Y 0 3 0 B .J a go 25 E 3 L v) Em '0 i 2" -1 a v) hi W 0 0 8 m r a e 0 m C m X e .- Y .- E u;' 21 c I? 1 co rr, z 0 Lu K w J 4 t- m 0 . 3 w 2 0 W t- rr a 2 z