ML020940648
| ML020940648 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Oconee  |
| Issue date: | 02/11/2002 |
| From: | Division of Nuclear Materials Safety II |
| To: | Duke Energy Corp |
| References | |
| 50-269/02301, 50-270/02301, 50-287/02301 | |
| Download: ML020940648 (18) | |
See also: IR 05000269/2002301
Text
OCONEE EXAM
50-269, 270, 287/2002-301
February 11 - 15, 2002
Administrative Documents
(Yellow Paper)
L,ý
Exam Preparation Checklist ...................
Exam Outline Quality Checklist ................
3.
Exam Security Agreement .....................
L.4.
Operating Test Quality Check sheet .............
-5X.
Simulator Scenario Quality Check sheet ..........
Lvf6.
Transient and Event Checklist ..................
,,,-7.
Competencies Checklist ......................
,A.
Written Exam Quality Check sheet ..............
x,9.
Written Exam Grading Quality Checklist .........
....... ES-201-1
....... ES-201-2
....... ES-201-3
....... ES-301-3
....... ES-301-4
....... ES-301-5
....... ES-301-6
....... ES-401-7
....... ES-403-1
... ES-501-1
Post Exam Check sheet ...............
,-,-0.
Examination Preparation Checklist
Form ES-201-1
Facility:
6&-oA
.
"
Date of Examination: R///-/
Examinations Developed by:
c-"
I /5*
(circle one)
Target
Chief
DateT*
Task Description / Reference
Examineres
F
Initials
-180
1. Examination administration date confirmed (C.l.a; C.2.a & b)
-120
2. NRC examiners and facility contact assigned (C.1.d; C.2.e)
_
t
_
-120
3. Facility contact briefed on security & 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)]
-75
6. Integrated examination outline(s) due (C.1.e & f; C.3.d)
-70
7. Examination outline(s) reviewed by NRC and feedback provided
to facility licensee (C.2.h; C.3.e)
//W"/
-45
8. Proposed examinations, supporting documentation, and
reference materials due (C.l.e, f, g & h; C.3.d)
-30
9. Preliminary license applications due (C.1.1; C.2.g; ES-202)
-14
10. Final license applications due and assignment sheet prepared
(C.1.1; C.2.g; ES-202)
-14
11. Examination approved by NR 8 ervisor for facility licensee
review (C.2.h; C.3.f)
A*a' W
-14
12. Examinations reviewed with facility licensee (C...j: C.2.f & h; C.3.g)
-7
13. Written examinations and operating tests approved by
NRC supervisor (C.2.1; C.3.h)
-7
14. Final applications reviewed; assignment sheet updated; waiver
letters sent (C.2.g, ES-204)
15. Proctoring/written exam administration guidelines reviewed with
-7
facility licensee and authorization granted to give written exams
(if applicable) (C.3.k)
-7
16. Approved scenarios, job performance measures, and questions
distributed to NRC examiners (C.3.1)
I
Target dates are keyed to the examination date identified in the corporate notification letter.
They are for planning purposes and may be adjusted on a case-by-case basis in coordination
with the facility licensee.
Applies only to examinations prepared by the NRC.
NUREG-1021, Revision 8, Supplement 1
22 of 24
ciL'<.
. "
Examination Outline
Form ES-201-2 (R8,S1)
Quality Checklist
Facility: Oconee
Date of Examination: February 4, 2002
Initials
Item
Task Description
a
b*
c#
1.
a. Verify that the outline(s) fit(s) the appropriate model per ES-401.
W
R
b. Assess whether the outline was systematically and randomly prepared in accordance with
I
Section D.1 of ES-401 and whether all K/A categories are appropriately sampled.
___
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 K/A statements are appropriate.
_/7
2.
a. Using Form ES-301-5, verify that the proposed scenario sets cover the required number of
normal evolutions, instrument and component failures, and major transients.
S
I
b. Assess whether there are enough scenario sets (and spares) to test the projected number and
M
mix of applicants in accordance with the expected crew composition and rotation schedule without
compromising exam integrity: ensure each applicant can be tested using at least one new or
significantly modified scenario, that no scenados are duplicated from the applicants' audit test(s)*,
and scenarios will not be repeated over successive days.
c. To the extent possible, assess whether the outline(s) conform(s) with the qualitative and
quantitative criteria specified on Form ES-301-4 and described in Appendix D.
3.
a. Verify that:
(1) the outline(s) contain(s) the required number of control room and in-plant tasks,
W
(2) no more than 30% of the test material is repeated from the last NRC examination,
-
?VM
/
(3)* no tasks are duplicated from the applicants' adlt.n.s), and
T
(4) no more than 80% of any operating test is taken dimcy from the licensee's exam banks.
b. Verify that:
(1) the tasks are distributed among the safety function groupings as specified in ES-301,
(2) one task is conducted in a low-power or shutdown condition,
(3) 40% of the tasks require the applicant to implement an alternate path procedure,
(4) one in-plant task tests the applicant's response to an emergency or abnormal condition, and
(5) the in-plant walk-through requires the applicant to enter the RCA.
c. Verify that the required administrative topics are covered, with emphasis on performance
based activities.
d. Determine if there are enough different outlines to test the projected number and mix of
applicants and ensure that no items are duplicated on successive days.
4.
a. Assess whether plant-specific priorities (including PRA and IPE insights) are covered in the
-
t
___
appropriate exam section.
G
E
b. Assess whether the 10 CFR 55.41/43 and 55.45 sampling is appropriate.
- n__
N
E
c. Ensure that K/A Importance ratings (except for plant-specific priorities) are at least 2.5.
R
A
d. Check for duplication and overlap among exam sections.
L
e. Check the entire exam for balance of coverage.
f. Assess whether the exam fits the appropriate job level (RO or SRO).
Printed Na e Sig
t
Date
a. Author
£
IIŽ&A11-SS0
b. Facility Reviewer (*)
AL4L.
M
_ThVAL,
-
m
c"* tL
Jf
-*l
c. NRC Chief Examiner (#)
ý
,ý0
-
- TJ'f
02.
d. NRC Supervisor
1
-f.L
Sflw, 71
-
-
___/_/_
Note:
- Not applicable for NRC-developed examinations.
- Independent NRC reviewer initial items In Column "c;" chief examiner concurrence required.
Examination Outline
Form ES-201-2 (R8,S1)
Quality Checklist
Facility:
Oconee Nuclear Station
Date of Examination:
Initials
Item
Task Description
a
b*
c#
1.
a. Verify that the outline(s) fit(s) the appropriate model per ES-401.
W
R
b. Assess whether the outline was systematically and randomly prepared in accordance with
ha
I
Section D.1 of ES-401 and whether all K/A categories are appropriately sampled.
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 K/A statements are appropriate.
N/a/
2.
a. Using Form ES-301-5, verify that the proposed scenario sets cover the required number of
normal evolutions, instrument and component failures, and major transients.
S
I
b. Assess whether there are enough scenario sets (and spares) to test the projected number
M
and mix of applicants in accordance with the expected crew composition and rotation schedule
without compromising exam integrity; ensure each applicant can be tested using at least one
new or significantly modified scenario, that no scenarios are duplicated from the applicants' audit
test(s)*, and scenarios will not be repeated over successive days.
c. To the extent possible, assess whether the outline(s) conform(s) with the qualitative and
quantitative criteria specified on Form ES-3014 and described in Appendix D.
3.
a. Verify that:
(1) the outline(s) contain(s) the required number of control room and in-plant tasks,
W
(2) no more than 30% of the test material is repeated from the last NRC examination,
/
(3)* no tasks are duplicated from the applicants' audit test(s), and
T
(4) no more than 80% of any operating test is taken directly from the licensee's exam banks.
b. Verify that:
(1) the tasks are distributed among the safety function groupings as specified in ES-301,
(2) one task is conducted in a low-power or shutdown condition,
(3) 40% of the tasks require the applicant to implement an alternate path procedure,
(4) one in-plant task tests the applicant's response to an emergency or abnormal condition, and
(5) the in-plant walk-through requires the applicant to enter the RCA.
c. Verify that the required administrative topics are covered, with emphasis on performance
based activities.
d. Determine if there are enough different outlines to test the projected number and mix of
applicants and ensure that no items are duplicated on successive days.
4.
a. Assess whether plant-specific priorities (including PRA and IPE insights) are covered in the
' l
appropriate exam section.
G
E
b. Assess whether the 10 CFR 55.41/43 and 55.45 sampling is appropriate.
N
E
c. Ensure that K/A importance ratings (except for plant-specific priorities) are at least 2.5.
A
R
d. Check for duplication and overlap among exam sections.
A
L
e. Check the entire exam for balance of coverage.
f. Assess whether the exam fits the appropriate job level (RO or SRO).
,inted Name / Signature
/*
- rDateW
a. Author
Ronald F. Aiello/
N
1. RFA signed for written only
2. Two questions did not but wyre supported by an EO
b. Facility Reviewer (*)
A//A
c. NRC Chief Examiner (#)
"V-
d. NRC Supervisor
M)l 0-1
L L k.
l -r
14 I
j
I'
Note:
Not applicable for NRC-developed examinations.
- Independent NRC reviewer initial items in Column "c:" chief examiner concurrence required.
Examination Outline
Quality Checklist
Facility: Oconee
Date of Examination: March 21, 2002
Initials
I
Author
Facility Reviewer (*
NRC Chief Examiner (#)
NRC Supervisor
a
b-
cG#
iMIA v/W
Note:
Not applicable for NRC-developed examinations.
- Independent NRC reviewer initial items in Column "c;" chief examiner concurrence required.
a.
b.
C.
d.
Item
Task Description
1.
a. Verify that the outline(s) fit(s) the appropriate model per ES-401.
w
W
b. Assess whether the outline was systematically and randomly prepared in accorda
ith
I
Section D.1 of ES-401 and whether all K/A categories are appropriately samp e
T
c. Assess whether the outline over-emphasizes any systems, evolutions, or ened
cs
IN
d. Assess whether the justifications for dleselected, r reje
K/tatements are appropriate.
2.
a. Using Form ES-301-5, verify t at thepr
scenrosets cover the required number of
normal evolutions, instrument an*
- I failures, and malor transients-.'
n**
I
b. Assess whether there are l.p
h scenario sets (and spares) to test the projected number and
M
mix of applicants i a or
with the expected crew composition and rotation schedule without
compromising e
rity; ensure each applicant can be tested using at least one new or
significantly
scenario, that no scenarios are duplicated from the applicants' audit test(s)*,
an s
will not be repeated over successive days.
c
o the extent possible, assess whether the outline(s) conform(s) with the qualitative and
quantitative criteria specified on Form ES-301-4 and described in Appendix D.
3.
a. Verify that:
(1 ) the outline(s) contain(s) the required number of control room and in-plant tasks,
W
(2) no more than 30% of the test material is repeated from the last NRC examination,
/
(3)* no tasks are duplicated from the applicants' audit test(s), and
T
(4) no more than 80% of any operating test is taken directly from the licensee's exam banks.
b., Verify that:
01) the tasks are distributed among the safety function groupings as specified in ES-301,
(2) one task is conducted in a low-power or shutdown condition,
(3) 40% of the tasks require the applicant to implement an alternate path procedure,
(4) one in-plant task tests the applicant's response to an emergency or abnormal condition, and
(5) the in-plant walk-through requires the applicant to enter the RCA.
c. Verify that the required administrative topics are covered, with emphasis on performance
based activities.
d. Determine if there are enough different outlines to test the projected number and mix of
applicants and ensure that no items are duplicated on successive days.
4.
a. Assess whether plant-specific priorities (including PRA and IPE insights) are covered in the
appropriate exam section.
G
E
b. Assess whether the 10 CFR 55.41/43 and 55.45 sampling is appropriate.
IN
E
c. Ensure that K/A importance ratings (except for plant-specific priorities) are at least 2.5.
R
A
d. Check for duplication and overlap among exam sections.
L
e. Check the entire exam for balance of coverage.
f. Assess whether the exam fits the appropriate lob level (RO or SRO)
.
..
....
ProtSPO
NamW0/
ignatuM.
Examination Security Aqreement
1.
Pre-Examination
I acknowledge that I have acquired specialized knowledge about the NRC licensing examinations scheduled for the week(s) of 2/4, 2/11-2002 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. 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 2/4, 2/11-2002. 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
5.
-
..
6.
7.
8.'oA&) U- r-ot-.'sAM
9. /"/11e.,
05. Co//,',7"s
1
,
13. 7;%6m4-s ZA. J2le,ct
14. -rlm Vn4 WV2
15_%n%.,%% V. %.aaAfl
JOB TITLE / RESPONSIBILITY
SIGNATURE (1)
T Z. S
6
1#0 .
Q
11
"'
" " ""4A10
0& 'A.r,"
-,A1&'.,CK
_. 7
r.*p9
.,
DATE
SIGNATURE (2)
DATE NOTE
S./s-ct
__
__*___
"~~A"Z-P/
4
--*fJ
- Z...
- Z
ýZI* /,/
-LAM ,M IXAWý
,
- -ml
.Wq,o.
9,
-v
<*io
l.J!,*_~~~
"iL
t2,*,kýL. :i
U.J
NOTES:
51yt2
Aqnt#
Os'2Cc.n
6M
Form ES-201-3 (R8, $1)
Examination Security Agreement
Form ES-201-3 (R8, Si)
1.
Pre-Examination
I acknowledge that I have acquired specialized knowledge about the NRC licensing examinations scheduled for the week(s) of 2/4, 2/11-2002 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. 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 2/4, 2/11-2002. 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 / RESPONSIBILITY
2.
o7
/
3.
..--
Att+br opa
v
t.
4.1
/774I
5. J dj,
t
Le-
otr&+ie.'r Reo.AL TM LjA 1.
6. ___
___
__
___
___
__
7.
Sar
flar,..p
8.
l
10.
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
12.
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
13.
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
14.
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
15.
SIGNATURE (1)
-
4-c
DATE
2-ID - o.Z
21-31-o?
SIGNATURE (2)
DATE NOTE
220
2
r- 0 2-
NOTES:
Examination Security Agreement
Form ES-201-3 (R8, Si)
1.
Pre-Examination
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. 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
34[-Oa
. 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 / RESPONSIBILITY
SIGNATURE (1)
DATE
SIGNATURE (2)
DATE NOTE
12.6-2c
13.
4.
atMW.!
6.
C2,
t
>T-
c~_
8
________________________________________
15.
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
NOTES:
Operating Test Quality Checklist
Form ES-301-3 (R8, Si)
Facility: Oconee
Date of Examination: February 11, 2002 Operating Test Number:
Initials
1. GENERAL CRITERIA
a
b-
c#
a.
The operating test conforms with the previously approved outline; changes are consistent with
sampling requirements (e.g., 10 CFR 55.45, operational Importance, safety function distribution).
b.
There is no day-to-day repetition between this and other operating tests to be administered
during this examination.
c.
The operating test shall not duplicate items from the applicants' audit test(s)(see Section D. 1.a).
,
d.
Overlap with the written examination and between operating test categories is within acceptable
limits.
e.
It appears that the operating test will differentiate between competent and less-than-competent
applicants at the designated license level.
A*
2. WALK-THROUGH (CATEGORY A & B) CRITERIA
a.
Each JPM includes the following, as applicable:
At
. 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
- 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.
The prescripted questions in Category A are predominantly open reference and meet the criteria
- AV
re
,
in Attachment 1 of ES-301.
c.
Repetition from operating tests used during the previous licensing examination is within
acceptable limits (30% for the walk-through) and do not compromise test integrity.
d.
At least 20 percent of the JPMs on each test are new or significantly modified.
4
3. SIMULATOR (CATEGORY C) CRITERIA
a.
The associated simulator operating tests (scenano sets) have been reviewed in accordance with
I
Form ES-301-4 and a copy is attached.
Printed Name / Signature
Date
a. Author
G-- n- VlSKIU RI) I
e*
- -p
U -*AL*
/
b. Facility Reviewer(*)
?Aut..
Al. SISALL
1
t.
-2-'1 -2,
c. NRC Chief Examiner (#)
d
-d" .
-r1
_
_,
d. NRC Supervisor
fM1,Cfl-L
tgIF
. ICA
4/
7Pr
ZV
p-S*
Z
NOTE:
- The facility signature is not applicable for NRC-developed tests.
- Independent NRC reviewer Initial items in Column "c;" chief examiner concurrence required.
Operating Test Quality Checklist
Form ES-301-3 (R8, Sl)
Facility: Oconee
Date of Examination: Februa
11, 2002 0 eratin Test Number:
Init *s
1. GENERAL CRITERIA
a
b-
c#
a.
The operating test conforms with the previously approved outline changes are consistent with
a.
sampling re uiremnents (e. ., 10 GFR 55.45, operational importance, safet function distribution)
n1
b.
There is no day-to-day repetition between this and other operating tests to be administered
t
durin this examination.
C.
The o erating test shall not duplicate items from the applicants' audit test s see Secti
D.1 .a .
d.
Overlap with the written examination and between operating test categories is with
acceptable
10
limits.
e.
It appears that the operating test will differentiate between competent and le
-than-competent
i,,J
applicants at the designated license level.
2. WALK-THROUGH (CATEGORY A & B) CRITERI
a.
Each JPM includes the following, as applicable:
- initial conditions
initiating cues
- references and tools, including associated proceduresn
- reasonable and validated time limits (average time
owed for completion) and specific
designation if deemed to be time critical by the fa
ty licensee
specific performance criteria that include:
- detailed expected actions with exact cnit
a and nomenclature
-Rsystem response and other examiner
athepes
l
c statements describing important ob
rvanions to be made by the applicant
-criteria for successful completionof the task
-identification of critical steps a
their associated performance standards
restrictions on the sequence
stepS, if applicable
b.
The
- UCa
gory A are predominantly open reference and meetteciei
in Attachment 1 of ES-301.
,
c.
Repetition Irom operating lsts used during the previouslicnsingexamination is within
rP
acceptable limits !30% 1of the walk-through ad do ntomrom setest integrity.
d.
At least 20 ercent
the JPMs on each test are new or significantl
modified.
3. SIMULATOR JCATEGORY C) CRITERIA
a.
The associ
d simulator operating tests (scenario sets) have been reviewed in accordance with
Form ES-
1-4 and a copy is attached.
Printed Name / Signature
Date
a. Author
/
/
d. RC Supervisor
NOTE:
- The facility signature is not appliable for NRC-deveoped tests.e
- independent NRC reviewer initial items in
-u
"c;" c .....
"
at t+/-a ad' ASt#
Oneratina Test
d*uality Checklist
Form ES-301-3 (R8, Si)
Facility: Oconee
Date of Examination: March 21, 2002 Operating Test Number:
1. GENERAL CRITERIA
bntil
r
btia
c
a.
The operating test conforms with the previously approved outline; changes are consistent with
sampling requirements (e.g., 10 CFR 55.45, operatwonal Importance, safety function distributionj.
b.
There is no day-to-day repetition between this and other operating tests to be administered
a.
Eahe JpMrain cludest h foall own g, asuaplicab
i
e:sfo
h
p lc ns
u i esl)s
eS cinD ta.
during this examinations
ý
inTieoeating cuest hl o ulct tm rmteapiat'adtts~)seScinD~
d.
Overlap with the written examination and between operating test categories is within acceptable
e.
It appears thna the operating test will differentiate between competent
and
s
-ompetentc
applicants at the designated
tbcense level.
2. WALK-THROUGH
(CATEGORY A & B
I
CRITERIA
a.
Each JPM includes the following, as applicable:
a nmct
ninitial conditios
ion
ninitiating
cues
references and tools, including associated procedures
reasonable and validated time limits (average time allowed for completion) and specific
designation if deemed to be timeucitncel by the facility licensee
.
especific performance criteria that include:
i detailed expected actions with exact criteria and nomenclature
- system response and other examiner cues
ac 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
-Mrestrictions on the sequence of steps, if applicable
in A ttachm ent 1 of
'S-3 "01.
_ -.
b o .'"
.= l-
G.
Repetition from operating tests used during the previous licensing examination is within
acceptable limits
(30%
for the walk-tlhrough) and do not compromise test integrity.
d.
At least 20 percent of the JPMs on each test are new or significantly modified.
3. SIMULATOR (CATEGORY C) CRITERIA
a.
The associated simulator operating tests (scenario sets) have Ien reviewed in accordance with
1-
PJ/t. NA
Form ES-301-4 and a copy is attached.
P'e.AOe
IA'
bbn* aa,
Printed Name ( Signature
Date
a. Author
G
W&3-148
Ž
b. Facility Reviewer(')
P*tur. $4. Sr
'L
c. NRC Chief Examiner
V4:
/,,,
" '
3-
ad-o 1.
d. NRC Supervisor
/MI ,1 '
M
E
32
lOL
NOTE:
- The facility signature is not applicable for NRC-developed tests.
- Independent NRC reviewer initial items in Column "c;" chief examiner concurrence required.
Q2fl1
Operating Test duality Checklist
_1w
Simulator Scenario Quality Checklist
Form ES-301-4 (R8, S1)
Facility: Oconee
Date of Exam: February 11, 2002
Scenario Numbers: 1 1 2 /
Operating Test No.:
QUALITATIVE ATTRIBUTES
Initials
a
b*
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 operators into expected events.
2.
The scenarios consist mostly of related events.
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)
___
14#
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.
Ve
5.
The events are valid with regard to physics and thermodynamics.
k
fý
6.
Sequencing and timing of events is reasonable, and allows the examination team to obtain
complete evaluation results commensurate with the scenario objectives.
A
r?
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
10_4
given.
f
8.
The simulator modeling is not altered.
9.
The scenarios have been validated. Any open simulator performance deficiencies have been
evaluated to ensure that functional fidelity is maintained while running the planned scenarios.
I
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.4 of ES-301.
r .
0
1
11.
All individual operator competencies can be evaluated, as verified using Form ES-301-6 (submit
the form along with the simulator scenarios).
01
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).
13.
The level of difficulty is appropriate to support licensing decisions for each crew position.
1=
TARGET QUANTITATIVE ATTRIBUTES (PER SCENARIO; SEE SECTION D.4.D)
Actual Attributes
1 .
Total malfunctions (5-8)
6
/
A
I
iWal L'4
2.
Malfunctions after EOP entry (1-2)
1
/
1
/
- i
3.
Abnormal events (2-4)
3 1
3 1
4.
Major transients (1-2)
2
1
1
5.
EOPs entered/requiring substantive actions (1-2)
2
I
2 I
6.
EOP contingencies requiring substantive actions (0-2)
2
1I
7.
Critical tasks (2-3)
3
4
/
Transient and Event Checklist
OPERATING TEST NO.:
Applicant
Evolution
Minimum
Scenario Number
Type
Type
Number
1
2
3
4
Reactivity
1
3
Normal
1
1
(1-3)
Instrument/
4
2,5,
1,4,
Component
7
5
Major
1
6,8
7
Reactivity
1
6
Normal
0
As RO
Instrument/
2
2, 3,
Component
5
Major
1
7
SRO-I
(1-3)
Reactivity
0
3
Normal
1
1
As SRO
Instrument/
2
2, 4,
Component
5, 7
Major
1
6, 8
Reactivity
0
N/A
Normal
1
N/A
1
SRO-U
Instrument /
2
N/A
1, 2
(1-4)
Component
3, 4,
5
Major
7
(1)
Enter the operating test number and Form ES-D-1 event numbers for each
evolution type
(2)
Reactivity manipulations may be conducted under normal or controlled abnormal
conditions~refer to Section D.4.d) but must be significant per Section C.2.a of
Appendix LD.
(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 requirement.
Author:
NRCReiewr:
y4aý 2T eZ42wý
Instructions:
Form ES-301-5 (R8, S1)
NRC Reviewer:
Competencies Checklist
Form ES-301-6 (R8, Si)
Applicant #1
Applicant #2
Applicant #3
RO/SRO-I/SRO-U
RO/SRO-I/SRO-U
RO/SRO-I/SRO-U
(1-3)
(1-3)
(1-4)
Competencies
SCENARIO
SCENARIO
SCENARIO
1
2
3
4
1
2
3
4
1
2
3
4
2, 5,
1, 4,
2,4,
2,3,
1,4,
1, 2,
Understand and Interpret
6, 7
5,7
5,6,
4,5,
7,8
3, 4,
Annunciators and Alarms
7,8
6,7
5,6,
7
2,5,
1, 4,
2,4,
2, 3,
4,7,
2,3,
Diagnose Events
6,7
5,7
5,6,
4, 5.
8
4, 5,
and Conditions
7,8,
6, 7
7
3,5,
1,5,
1,2,
2,3,
1,4,
2,3,
Understand Plant
7, 8
6,7
3, 4,
5, 6,
7, 8
4, 5,
and System Response
5,6,
7
6,7
7,8
3,5,
1,4,
2,3
2,3,
1,3,
4 5,
Comply With and
6,7,
5,6,
4,6,
5,6,
4, 6,
6, 7
Use Procedures (1)
8
7
7,8
7
7,8
3,5,
1,4,
2,3,
1,3,
Operate Control
6,7,
5,6,
N/A
5,6,
4,7,
N/A
Boards (2)
8
7
7
8
2,3,
1,3,
1,2,
2,3,
1,2,
1,2,
Communicate and
5,6,
4, 5,
3, 4,
4, 5,
3,4,
3,4,
Interact With the Crew
7,8
6,7
5,6,
6,7
5,6,
5,6,
7,8,
8
7
1,2,
1,2,
Demonstrate Supervisory
N/A
N/A
35 4
N/A
NA
,,
Ability (3)
5,6,
5,6,
7,8
7
Comply With and
2
4,5
Use Tech. Specs. (3)
N/A
N/A
N/A
Notes:
(1) Includes Technical Specification compliance for an RO.
(2) Optional for an SRO-U.
(3) Only applicable to SROs.
Instructions:
Circle the applicant's license type and enter one or more event numbers that will allow the
examiners to evaluate every applicable competency for every applicant.
Author:
__
_
_,,_
_._
_,
A
_
NRC Reviewer:
f'/
Written Examination
Form ES-401-7
Quality Checklist
Facility:
Oconee Nuclear Station
Date of Exam:
8//0/at
Exam Level: RO
Initial
Item Description
a
b*
c'
1
Questions and answers technically accurate and applicable to facility
}A*\\ Add'
4W
2.
a. NRC K/As referenced for all questions
ft
b. Facility learning objectives referenced as available
3.
RO/SRO overlap is no more than 75 percent, and SRO questions are appropriate
rf>d
per Section D.2.d of ES-401
T%
-00V
4.
Question selection and duplication from the last two NRC licensing exams
appears consistent with a systematic sampling process
"NA 4
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
A*
the audit exam was completed before the license exam was started; or
X the examinations were developed independently; or
the licensee certifies that there is no duplication; or
other (explain)
6.
Bank use meets limits (no more than 75
Bank
Modified
New
percent from the bank at least 10 percent new,
-IT
and the rest modified); enter the actual question
ee,2
-i- "
-66&5"
distribution at right
7.
Between 50 and 60 percent of the questions on
Memory
C/A
the exam (including 10 new questions) are
r.t
written at the comprehension/analysis level;
n9-
.1-r-
5
enter the actual question distribution at right
8.
References/handouts provided do not give away answers
rfa
9
9.
Question content conforms with specific K/A statements in the previously
approved examination outline and is appropriate for the Tier to which they are
rA4
1
assigned; deviations are justified
10.
Question psychometric quality and format meet ES, Appendix B, guidelines
__40
11.
The exam contains 100, one-point, multiple choice items; the total is correct and
rfk
agrees with value on cover sheet
Printed Name / Signature
-
Date
a. Author
Ronald F. Aiello
-<
12/28/01
b. Facility Reviewer (*)
c. NRC Chief Examiner (#)
__._
__,_.-
_ _
_-__
__"
.,_
_.,__
_
,_/
d. NRC Regional Supervisor
,l
L C.
-IN'1ff
Note:
- The facility reviewer's initials/signature are not applicable for NRC-developed examinations.
- Independent NRC reviewer initial items in Column "c;" chief examiner concurrence required.
NUREG-1021, Revision 8, Supplement 1
42 of 46
Written Examination
Form ES-401-7
Quality Checklist
Facility:
Oconee Nuclear Station
Date of Exam: 418/10-
Exam Level: SRO
Initial
Item Description
a
b*
ce
1.
Questions and answers technically accurate and applicable to facility
rIVA .,/A"
2.
a. NRC K/As referenced for all questions
b. Facility learning objectives referenced as available
3.
RO/SRO overlap is no more than 75 percent, and SRO questions are appropriate
rfa
per Section D.2.d of ES-401
4.
Question selection and duplication from the last two NRC licensing exams
appears consistent with a systematic sampling process
MON
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
it
the audit exam was completed before the license exam was started; or
X_ the examinations were developed independently; or
the licensee certifies that there is no duplication; or
other (explain)
6.
Bank use meets limits (no more than 75
Bank
Modified
New
percent from the bank at least 10 percent new,
-.
I
and the rest modified); enter the actual question
-ae-
-is
+
,-se
Cal
distribution at right
7.
Between 50 and 60 percent of the questions on
Memory
C/A
the exam (including 10 new questions) are
rfA
written at the comprehension/analysis level;
-46- Y3
+
-7
enter the actual question distribution at right
8.
References/handouts provided do not give away answers
P
9.
Question content conforms with specific K/A statements in the previously
approved examination outline and is appropriate for the Tier to which they are
M
assigned; deviations are justified
10.
Question psychometric quality and format meet ES, Appendix B, guidelines
ri_
pw
11.
The exam contains 100, one-point, multiple choice items; the total is correct and
rta
agrees with value on cover sheet
Printed Name / Signature
Date
a. Author
Ronald F. Aiello
-,-
J
--
12/28/01
b. Facility Reviewer (*)
/O//f"
c. NRC Chief Examiner (#)
.
Op
Z&W
LA,6.
d. NRC Regional Supervisor
,milth*tL t.
,tj.J
e 4/v,,/<
c
_"___
Note:
- The facility reviewer's initials/signature are not applicable for NRC-developed examinations.
- Independent NRC reviewer initial items in Column "c;" chief examiner concurrence required.
NUREG-1021, Revision 8, Supplement 1
42 of 46
Written Examination Grading
fli ,alht, C~hAe~klist
i-arm tb-4U3-1
Facir
Date of Exam:
Exam Level: RO/SRO
Initials
Item Description
a
b
c
1.
Clean answer sheets copied before grading
.
.i/..
a
2.
Answer key changes and question deletions justified and
documented
A
A
3.
Applicants' scores checked for addition errors
(reviewers spot check > 25% of examinations)
4.
Grading for all borderline cases (80% +/- 2%) reviewed in
detail
5.
All other failing examinations checked to ensure that grades
are justified
v/oT& :No ,jS/,l
,OrA'WW4 W60F
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
a. Grader
(sr
14,0M.
b. Facility Reviewer(*)
c. NRC Chief Examiner ()
c- .
0
4 I'c
d. NRCSupervlsorf*
e I H E
LAtS-f/j
Of"dU'Cs-.
3/r'Ot
(*)
The facility reviewer's signature Is not applicable for examinations graded by the
NRC; two independent NRC reviews are required.
5 of 5
NUREG-1021. Revision 8, Supplement I
Form ES-4u03-1
I
Pnd-Fvminntinn Chnk Sheet
rorm L-DU I-I
NUREG-102 1, Revision 8
Task Description
Date
Complete
1
Facility written exam comments or graded exams received and
-/a(/o 2
verified complete
2.
Facility written exam comments reviewed and incorporated and
// -/o
NRC grading completed, if necessary
2-.2&/02
3.
Operating tests graded by NRC examiners
3//,/
-a
4.
NRC Chief examiner review of written exam and operating test
/
/
grading completed
3// 11/f6 Z
5.
Responsible supervisor review completed
3
5_
,.
6.
Management (licensing official) review completed_.'
7.
License and denial letters mailed
3
14z
8.
Facility notified of results
32z
9.
Examination report issued (referto NRC MC 0610)
,
/
10.
Reference material returned after final resolution of any
appeals
Post-Examination Che-ý Sheet
F-orm ES*-50 I- I
20 of 22