ML17298C028
| ML17298C028 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Palo Verde  |
| Issue date: | 04/04/1985 |
| From: | Van Brunt E ARIZONA PUBLIC SERVICE CO. (FORMERLY ARIZONA NUCLEAR |
| To: | Knighton G Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| ANPP-32311-EEVB, NUDOCS 8504120150 | |
| Download: ML17298C028 (22) | |
Text
REGULATOR ZNFORMATION DISTRIBUTION TEM (RIOS)
ACCESSION NBRi8504 F AC IL., ST N ~5 0 ~528 STN~S0~529 STN 50 530 AUTH',NAME VAN BRUNT'g E>>e E'i REC IP ~
NAME'NIGHTON G ~ W ~
1201'50 DOO ~ DATE! 85/Otr/Orl NOTARIZED!; NO DOCKET' Palo Verde Nucl e'er Stations Un),t li Ar3zona Publi 05000528 Pal o Ve'r de Nuclear Stat) on~
Un)it 2i Ar )zona Publ i 05000529 Palo Ye'rde Nucle'er Stations Unit 3i Arizona Publi 05000530 AUTHOR AFFILIATION Arizona Public Senyice Co.
RECIPIENT AFFILIATION Licensing Branch "3
SUBJECT:
Forwards-Summary of participant" listing function 8 -task anal review summary rept" DI'STRIBUTION CODE!
A0030
<<COP T'ITLE'!<< OR/Licensing Submittal NOTES!Standardized plant ~
OLti2/31/84 Standard)zed plant.
Standardized plant.
NRC"~Comments re'roposed program plan, 8 handouts for 850308 meet$ np concerning ysis'iper>> detailed control room de'sign 8 'SSER 7, IES gECEI VEO! LT<<R
'NCL~
SIZE".'"
Suppl 1 to NUREG"0737(Generic Ltr 82"53)
OSOOOS28 05000529 05000530 RECIPIENT'D CODE/NAME/
NRR LB3 BC INTERNAL: ADM/I.FMB NRR PAULSONgW NRR/OHFS/PSRB NRR/OL/ORB5 NRR/OSI/ICSB NRR RAB LES EXTERNALS LPDR NSIC
~COPIES LTTR ENCL 7
7 1
0 1
1 1
1 5
5 1
1 1
1 1>>
1 1
1 1
1 RECIPIENT ID CODE/NAME IE/DEPER/EPB NRR/DHFS/HFEB NRR/DL/ORAB NRR/DSI/CPB NRR/DS I/METB NRR/DSI/RSB RGN5 NRC PDR "COPIES LTTR ENCL' 3<<
5 5
1 1<<
1 1>>
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
'TOTAL NUMBER-'F COPIES REQUIRED!
LTTR 34 ENCL 33
ir J
f' fl
0 Director of Nuclear Reacto g
Mr. George W. Knighton, Chief Licensing Branch No. 3 Division of Licensing U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
20555 Arizona Nuclear Power Project P.o. BOX 52034 o
PHOENIX. AAIZONA85072-2034 ANPP-32311-EEVB/WFQ r Re ulation April 4, 1985
Subject:
Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station (PVNGS)
Units 1, 2, and 3
Docket Nos.
STN 50-528(License No. NPF-34)/529/530 Task Analysis Meeting on March 8, 1985 File: 85-056-026.
G.1.01.10
References:
(1)
PVNGS Unit 1 Operating License, NPF-34, License Condition C(19)(c)
DCRDR Summary Report.
(2)
Safety Evaluation Report related to the Operation of Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station Units 1, 2, and 3, Supplement 7 dated December 1984.
I.
Dear Mr. Knighton:
License Condition C(19)(c) of Reference (1) requires that APS submit a supplemental DCRDR Summary Report by August 31, 1985.
The required contents of this report are described in Section I.D.l, Chapter 22 and Appendix I of Reference (2).
A requirement of the supplemental DCRDR Summary Report is to address the methodology and results of the PVNGS function and task analysis.
This function and task analysis will identify control room operator tasks and operator information/control requirements to be used during PVNGS emergency operations.
- Thus, based upon License Condition C(19)(c),
APS has redeveloped a program plan to satisfactorily complete the function and task analysis requirements.
This program plan was presented to the NRC Staff at a March 8, 1985 meeting in Bethesda.
The purpose of the meeting was to obtain constructive feedback from the NRC staff on the proposed APS program plan and to obtain assurance that APS was proceeding with an adequate task analysis program.
Attachment 1 of this letter documents our understanding of the staff's comments on the APS proposed program plan to meeting the task analysis requirements.
Attach-ment 2 provides the handouts that were described in detail with your staff at the March 8, 1985 meeting and Attachment 3 lists the participants of the meeting.
If you have any questions concerning any of this information, please contact William Quinn of my staff.
8504120150 850404 PDR ADOCK 05000528 F
PDR EEVB/MAJ/mb Attachment Very truly yours,
~U~3 E
E Van Brunt Jr Executive Vice President Project Director
8 ~',I)
I Jf
Mr. George W. Knighton Task Analysis Meeting on Ma ch 8, 1985 ANPP-32311 Page 2
cc:
H. A. Licitra w/a P.
R.
Zimmerman w/a
'. C. Gehr w/a
r f
I(
Page 1 of 2 ATTACHMENT 1 A summary of the staff's comments on the APS program plan for meeting the function and task analysis requirements are listed below:
NRC Comments:
1.
The task analysis must go beyond the procedural step of "VERIFY X".
The "VERIFY X" step must be broken into explicit and implicit tasks.
2.
Column 7
of Figure 1
(Attachment 2)
"Plant Specific Information/
Controls",
must be stated in terms of the d
h for the task.
The "
d d t
" must also be stated in the same terms as the Figure 2 control room inventory of existing information/
controls so that there can be a one to one comparison made.'.
The control room inventory performed from plant documentation must be verified by an actual control room walkdown. It was suggested that 2 new columns be added for Figure 2 (Attachment 2): "Verified By Control Room Walkdown" and "Differences/Justification".
4.
It was suggested that APS have a data base sorting capability to be able to correlate a given parameter with all the available information/control characteristics and requirements for that parameter.
5.
The staff considers any referenced procedure in the Emergency Procedures as an emergency task which needs to be broken down and described in the task analysis (i.e.,
PVNGS Emergency Procedure 41RO-1ZZ05 Step 9.2 in Appendix A refers operator to the abnormal operating procedure Loss of Nuclear Cooling Water.)
6.
The staff suggests that the task analysis not be limited to maintaining the Safety Function Groups as identified in CEN-152, "Emergency 'Procedure Guidelines",
but should also include the Functional and Optimal Recovery Guidelines of CEN-152 and the consideration, of comment 5 above.
7.
The staff pointed out that this task analysis has the potential to resolve the EOP technical problems the PSRB found during the PGP/EOP audit in September, 1984.
r
)
i1 h
i i
8 h h
Page 2 of 2 ATTACHMENT 1 (Continued) 8.
The staff was very pleased with the fact that APS had decided to produce a task analysis from scratch rather than continuing to pursue that the Systems Factors Review done during the EOP effort and Control Room Design Review was adequate for meeting the requirements.
The staff concurred with the new APS approach (Figures 1
& 2) for meeting the task analysis requirements provided that their comments are addressed.
In addition, the staff concurred that the APS approach willfulfillthe requirement of indicating how the NUREG-0737 Supplement 1 items (SPDS, EOP's, Control
- Boards, R.G. 1.97 Instrumentation and Training) were coordinated.
1'I
(
Attachment 2
0 Page 1 of 7 DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF PVNGS TASK ANALYSIS PROCESS
'Details of Tasks 5 Info/Control Requirements (Figure 1).
'Details of Present Instrumentation R Controls (Figure 2).
COMPARISON
~Fi ure 1
~Fi ure 2
1.
Plant Specific Tasks/Subtasks EOP's Tasks Operator Training 2.'lant, Specific Info/Control Requirements EOP Instruments/Controls Control Boards Instruments/Controls SPDS R.G.
1e97 Requirements.
I
0 Itta IJI COCOIC IIICIIOaaOatC I
~trmtraC attora I
ItKC orctttc term I
corlpwxs C ~'
Ieoo ol
~atcr IIKIIcrattt I
~aKI I
I OaOI ID<at C I rttaar vlcvtc oeteto tttttt I $Kcvtc tract atrmlKc I oaoaatttoacoattto I
I I
~
aua I VtttftC I ~lIOatCI IIO I
II 5o, II IIIIIIIIIIIIII I
I 1
I 1
I al IK IZtc I era Calli I atlmoac I
aa
~
~
I i
~
I I
tm 'aO I
I I
I I
III M IK II ta t*t'c Klcaocc I
I I
I II II
I ot coe I
I lQ II IIIIII '
I IIItIIt t ~ C CC5Q!COCCO sS IIIIIII IIIIIII IIIIIIII II L4 II IIIIIIIII ItIII IIII IIIIIII I CDaCOCC, I
t I
OCOOOO 5/C NAOS I CCX7ICCIOo I SOXIIIXX II I
I I
I I LCOO IIIIIIItIIII IIIIIIIIIIII I
I I
I I
I I
I I +g I
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII I
IIII IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII III,'e IIItIIIIII IIIIII I
II I
IIIII' I
IIIIIII I
'3 l 5o
'.2b IIIIIIII III I
IIIIIIIIIII II III ~
IIIIIIII III I
IIII 5IIIIIII I
IIIIIIII II II IIIIII IIIII IIIIIIIIIII I One I
I CO COCO.
I meeCC I IOO5
/
~ Ot t OOIIIIOe I COCO i I
I I
IDCS OCOCZCvt,
oO I 51~
t OO I,'ll~ I II I
I I
~
~
~
~
~
Page 4 of 7 PVNGS SYSTEM FUNCTION TASK,ANALYSIS 0737 SUPPLEMENT 1
COORDINATION I
CEN-128 CEN-152 DIFFERENCES GENERIC FUNCTIONS GENERIC I8C PLANT SPECIFIC TASKS PLANT SPECIFIC IKC EOP TASK EOP IRC CONTROL BOARDS R.G. 1.97 SPDS TRAINING
~
~
Page' of 7 PROGRAM PLAN MGM'T Team Program Direction Program-Plan Perform Plant Specific Task Analysis Identify Plant Specific Information 8 Control Requirements Identify Present PVNGS Tasks/Info 8 Control Collect Data Collect Data Collect Data Perform Comparison Document Results Technical Review Committee Review 8 Prioritize MGH'T Team Review Results APS Management Prepares Final Corrective Action Recommendations Reviews Recommendations Report Preparation Schedules Implementation
~
~t Page 6 of 7 COMPOSITION &
UALIFICATIONS OF REVIEW TEAMS
'anagement Review Team Representatives
-Plant Operators
-Nuclear Engineering
-System Analysist Coordinator.
0 Technical Review Committee Representatives
-Plant'Operations
-Nuclear Engineering
-System Anlaysist Coordinator
-Human Factors Specialist.
'echnical Team
-Licensed Plant Operators
-Instrument/Controls Engineers
-System Analysist
-Human Factors Specialists RESULTS
'echnical Information & Control needs on Control Boards SPDS
'dministrative Training Staffing Procedures
~
~
~
Page 7 of 7 REPORTS As a part of the August 31, 1985 Supplemental DCRDR Report Submittal.
'ask Analysis Summary.
~
-Detailed description of the Task Analysis methodology 8 results.
-Sample Checklist Sheets
-Sample Data Sheets
-Documentation of Plant Specific tasks and information control needs addressing:
<Range
+Accuracy
+Resolution
~+Location
+References
+Availability.
e
~
~
Page 1 of 1
ATTACEfENT 3 March 8, 1985 Meeting Attendees:
E. Licitra A. R. Smith D. Tondai M. Goodman G. Sanchez M. Jones NRC NRC/HFEB NRC/HFEB NRC/PSRB ApS/Nuclear Engineering APS/Licensing
~,
P V