ML17346A637
| ML17346A637 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Saint Lucie, Turkey Point, 05000000 |
| Issue date: | 11/06/1984 |
| From: | Varga S Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Williams J FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT CO. |
| References | |
| TAC-51205, TAC-51206, TAC-5121, TAC-51214, NUDOCS 8411280533 | |
| Download: ML17346A637 (41) | |
Text
D ket N s 50-250 November 6, 1984 and 50-251 Mr. J.
W. Williams, Jr., Vice President Nuclear Energy Department Florida Power and Light Company Post Office Box 14000 Juno Beach, Florida 33408 DI'STRIBUTZON 3 L PDR Gray File 3
ORBg3 Rdg DMcDonald DEisenhut OELD EJordan JKramer NRC PDR Gray File 1
ORB81 Rdg CParrish DSells ACRS 10 PMcKee RFerguson
Dear Mr. Williams:
Reference:
TAC Nos.
- 5121, 51214, 51205 and 51206
SUBJECT:
SUMMARY
OF MEETING HELD ON OCTOBER 2,
- 1984, TO DISCUSS SUBMITTAL OF SUPPLEMENTAL
SUMMARY
REPORTS FOR DETAILED CONTROL ROOM DESIGN REVIEWS (DCRDRs)
FOR TURKEY POINT AND ST.
LUCIE By letter dated February 2,
- 1984, we provided'our draft Safety Evaluation (SE) and Technical Evaluation Report of your DCRDR's for Turkey Point 3 and 4 and St. Lucie 1 and 2.
We indicated a pre-implementation audit would be necessary to resolve the open or confirmatory items identified in the SE.
The staff, assisted by our contractor Science Applications, Inc. (SA),
conducted a pre-implementation audit at the Turkey Point site for both Tur'key Point and St. Lucie on April 2-6, 1984.
By letter dated May 21,
- 1984, we provided a report documenting the results of our audit.
The report identified those open or confirmatory items in the draft SE which have been resolved and those items, including items identified as the result of the audit, requiring additional information.
We further indicated that a meeting would be appropriate to discuss your plans, methods and schedules for submittal of a supplement to you'r Summary Reports for both Turkey Point and St. Lucie.
This meeting was held on October 2, 1984.
The enclosure to this letter provides the minutes of the meeting.
Attachment 1 of the Enclosure is an outline of your methodology for resolving the open DCRDR requirements, Attachment 2 is an outline of your Task Analysis Upgrade Program and Attachment 3 provides a list of the meeting attendees.
The supplements to the Sumary Report will contain detailed descriptions of the methods/processes described at the meeting to address our concerns as stated in the DCRDR Pre-Implementation Audit Report dated May 10, 1984.
The results of all task analysis completed at the time the supplements are submitted to the NRC for review shall be provided.
The NRC staff will evaluate the supplements and provide the results within a month of receipt of the supplements.
84ii280533 84ii06 PDR ADOCK 05000250 F
11<< '
P I
V I
1 Ul I
~
'kh her A,t ll l I'
I f
e
~
Vh
'I, ll 11
~
W 1
1
]If 1 I
p' "A"A'U '
l I) 'f tt-l
<<A ykk N;<<
I' I
r I
Ah
'1 ll )k hl jtW "Ur ~,
A 1 *h J
I 11.1 '1
~
C
~
I f
,tV<<
I I
J
~
A
~ 'l t,'g/<<IV I
IVI AAI')
1 t
~
A h<<k<<AAA I" >4 U
~r li wr
<<W
'ktk I
r II I'Ij I
QJ
<< IV
'I A
11 A
1<<)
W "A Lf,k W1 I<<>
I "I
I U
Il W>
~
1 I
k
'll 1 I tr I'l A
U 'I I
W tlk 1
E h
Y
~I tt IA L
U',
U 3'V I
A
.1 1
g, A
II I h'(<<k "W
I'I A
I hrh I
~ kV',V
~ VW I
~
<<]
I ht Aj A W I '
k" tl
~
C h
I I
I't,"7
~
V 1
kf/
k'<<$ )j k)<< I>
U I
PA, k
it
)<<f i<<t'"1',,
'VIII I>t IV A
w U
I 1<<$
1 W I
Mr. J.
W. Williams, Jr.
November 6, 1984 We may perform an additional audit of the Task Analysis Upgrade Program at a later date and resolve any confirmatory items which could result from our evaluation of your supplements.
We request that you provide the schedules for your supplements within 30 days from receipt of this letter.
It is our understanding that the Turkey Point supplement may be available in the July 1985 time frame and the ST. Lucie schedule is dependant on the Combustion Engineering Group (GEOG) Operations subcommittee.
The reporting and/or recordkeeping requirements of this letter affect fewer than ten respondents; therefore, OMB clearance is not required Under P.L.96-511.
/s/SVarga
Enclosure:
As stated Steven A. Varga, Chief Operating Reactors Branch ¹1 Division of Licensing cc w/enclosure:
See next page ORB¹1.
L DMcDonald;ps ll/gg/84 1 / /84
- DL Sel-l.s 1/5/84 JMi11e 11/'4
&ff
'ff It II ff ll
, tht
'N ff 4
b
~
ff ff I ff h
'N ll
'I ~ It f e t
Florida Power
& Light Company CC Harold F. Reis, Esquire Newman
& Holtzinger 1615 L Street, N.
W.
Washington, DC 20036 Norman A. Coll, Esquire McCarthy, Steel, Hector and Davis 14th Floor, First National Bank Building Miami, Fl or ida 33131 Administrator Department of Environmental Regulation Power Plant Siting Section State of Florida 2600 Blair Stone Road Tallahassee, Florida 32301 Mr. Weldon B. Lewis County Administrator St. Lucie County 2300 Virginia Avenue, Room 104 Fort Pierce, Florida 33450 U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency Region IV Office ATTN:
Regional Radiation Representative 345 Courtland Street, NE Atlanta, Georgia 30308 Mr. Charles B. Brinkman Manager - Washington Nuclear Operations C-E Power Systems Combustion Engineering, Inc.
7910 Woodmont Avenue
- Bethesda, Maryland 20014 Regional Administrator Nuclear Regulatory Commission Region II Office of Executive Director for Operations 101 Marietta Street N.W,, Suite 2900 Atlanta, Georgia 30323 Mr. Jack Schreve Office of the Public Counsel Room 4, Holland Building Tallahassee, Florida 32304 Resident Inspector c/o U.S.
NRC Senior Resident Inspector 7585 S.
Hwy A1A Jensen
- Beach, Florida 33457 State Planning
& Development Cl earinghouse Office of Planning
& Budget Executive Office of the Governor The Capitol Building Tallahassee, Florida 32301
gp~ REC(g~
~c~
UNITED STATES N
LEAR REGULATORY COMMISSIO WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 November 6, 1984 Docket Nos.
50-250 and 50-251 Mr. J.
W. Williams, Jr.,
Vice President Nuclear Energy Department Florida Power and Light Cempany Post Office Box 14000 Juno Beach,. Florida 33408
Dear Mr. Williams:
Reference:
TAC Nos.
- 5121, 51214, 51205 and 51206
SUBJECT:
SUMMARY
OF MEETING HELD ON OCTOBER 2,
- 1984, TO DISCUSS SUBMITTAL OF SUPPLEMENTAL
SUMMARY
REPORTS FOR DETAILED CONTROL ROOM DESIGN REVIEWS (DCRDRs)
FOR TURKEY POINT AND ST.
LUCIE By letter dated February 2,
- 1984, we provided our draft Safety Evaluation (SE) and Technical Evaluation Report of your DCRDR's for Turkey Point 3 and 4 and St. Lucie 1 and 2.
We indicated a pre-implementation audit would be necessary to resolve the open or confirmatory items identified in the SE.
The staff, assisted by our contractor Science Applications, Inc. (SA),
conducted a pre-implementation audit at the Turkey Point site for both Turkey Point and St. Lucie on April 2-6, 1984.
By letter dated May 21,
- 1984, we provided a report documenting the results of our audit.
The report identified those open or confirmatory items. in the draft SE which have been resolved and those items, including items identified as the result of the audit, requiring additional. information.
We further indicated that a meeting would be appropriate to discuss your plans, methods and schedules for submittal of a supplement to your Sumary Reports for both Turkey Point and St. Lucie.
This meeting was held on October 2, 1984.
The enclosure to this letter provides the minutes of the meeting.
Attachment 1 of the Enclosure is an outline of your methodology for resolving the open DCRDR requirements, Attachment 2 is an outline of your Task Analysis Upgrade Program and Attachment 3 provides a list of the meeting attendees.
The supplements to the Summary Report wi,ll contain detailed descriptions of the methods/processes described at the meeting to address our concerns as stated in the DCRDR Pre-Implementation Audit Report dated May 10, 1984.
The results of all task analysis completed at the time the supplements are submitted to the NRC for review shall be provided.
The NRC sta f will evaluate the supplements and provide the results within a month of receipt of the supplements.
Mr. J.
W. Williams, Jr.
November 6, 1984.
He may perform an additional audit of the Task Analysis Upgrade Program at a later date and resolve any confirmatory items which could result from our evaluation of your supplements.
We request that you provide the schedules for your supplements within 30 days from receipt of this letter.
It is our understanding that the Turkey Point supplement may be available in the July 1985 time frame and the ST. Lucie schedule is dependant on the Combustion Engineering Group (CEOG) Operations subcommittee.
The reporting and/or recordkeeping requirements of this letter affect fewer than ten respondents; therefore, OMB clearance is not required Under P.L.96-511.
Enclosure:
As stated
)
1 i
9 even A.
- arga, h'ef Operating Reactor anch ¹1 Division of Licensing cc w/enclosure:
See next page
J; W. Williams, Jr.
Florida Power and Light Company Turkey Point Plants Units 3 and 4
cc:
Harold F. Reis, Equire Newman and Holtziner P.C.
1615 L Street, N.W.
Washington, DC 10036 Bureau of Intergovernmental Relations 660 Apalachee Parkway Tallahassee, Florida 33130 Norman A. Coll, Esquire
- Steel, Hector and Davis 4000 Southeast Financial Center Miami, Florida 33131-2398 Mr.
Ken N. Harris, Vice President Turkey Point Nuclear Plant Florida Power and Light Company P.O.
Box 013100 Miami, Florida 33101 Mr.
M. R. Stierheim County Manager of Metropolitan Dade County Miami, Florida 33130 Resident Inspector Turkey Point Nuclear Generating Station U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Post Office Box 57-1185 Miami, Fl orida 33257-1185 Regional Radiation Representative EPA Region IV 345 Courtl and Street, N: W.
- Atlanta, GA 30308 Mr. Jack Shreve Office of the Public Counsel Room 4, Holland Building Tallahassee, Florida 32304 Administrator Department of Environmental Regulation Power Plant Siting Section State of Florida 2600 Blair Stone Road Tallahassee, Florida 32301 James P. O'Reilly Regional Administrator, Region II U.S Nuclear Regulatory Commission Suite 2900 101 Marietta Street
- Atlanta, GA 30303 Martin H. Hodder, Esquire 1131 N.E. 86th Street Miami, Florida 33138 Joette Lorion 7269 SW 54 Avenue Miami, Florida 33143 Mr. Chris J.
Baker, Plant Manager-Turkey Point Nuclear Plant Florida Power and Light Company P.O.
Box 013100 Miami, Florida 33101 Attorney General Department of Legal Affairs The Capitol Tallahassee, Florida 32304 Mr. Ulray Clark, Administrator Radiological Health Services Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services 1323 Winewood Blvd.
Tallahassee, Florida 32301
ENCLOSURE MEETING MINUTES DETAILED CONTROL ROOM 'DESIGN REVIEW MEETING FOR FLORIDA POWER AND LIGHT's TURKEY POINT UNITS 3 8 4, and St.
LUCIE UNITS 1
8 2
OCTOBER 2, 1984 Florida Power and Light (FP8L) evaluated the NRC DCRDR Pre-Implementa-tion Audit Findings (Ref.
- 1) and agreed to the NRC concerns identified during the audit.
The purpose of the meeting was to discuss FP8L plans and methods for resolving DCRDR open items and to determine the content of and schedule for their supplement to the Summary Report submittals.
An outline of the FP8L methodology for resolving open DCRDR requirements, is provided in Attachment 1 of these Meeting Minutes.
An outline of the FP&L Task Analysis Upgrade Program is provided. in Attachment Z.
A list of meeting attendees i.s provided in Attachment 3.
The commitments made by FP8L to resolve the open items in Reference 1 were:
FP8L evaluated the example Operating Experience Review Problems identified by the NRC audit team during the Pre-Implementation
- audit, and was unable to substantiate the example findings in their review.
As a result, FP8L plans no additional work on Operating Experience Review results.
2.
3.
FP8L committed to including their LER results in the Supplementary Summary Report.
FP8L committed to a Task Analysis Upgrade Program.
An outline of the Task Analysis Program is provided in Attachment 2 of these minutes.
The NRC evaluation team agreed that the FP8L methodology could produce the results which would satisfy the Function and TAsk Analysis requirements in Supplement 1 to NUREG-0737.
However, in order to verify the adequacy of the FP8L methodology, the licensee agreed to provide a sample set of completed Task Analysis documentation for NRC evaluation.
Key points in the revised Task Analysis methodology include:
o The Task Analysis review team will consist of a Human Factors Specialist, contractor Gp."rations Specialist, and FP&L DCRDR team members.
o All operator tasks performed during all emergency operations will be analyzed.
This includes branching
- tasks, Cautions,
- Warnings, and Notes.
o The Westinghouse Rev-1 Emergency
Response
Guidelines (ERG) and background documentation will be used as the basis for the Turkey Point plant specific Task Analysis of control room operator tasks (ERG steps).
From each "EGR step," all instrument and control requirements will be identified on Master Information and Control Requirements List.
o The Combustion Engineering Emergency Procedures and Guidelines will be used on the St. Lucie Task Analysis.
However, this Task Analysis cannot proceed until Combustion Engineering has done additional work on the guidelines and provides suitable background documentation.
o The Task Analysis efforts for both Turkey Point and St. Lucie will be directly coordinated with their respective Emergency Operating Procedures Upgrade Programs.
o Because of scheduling differences, the Supplementary Summary Repor ts for St.
Lucie and Turkey Point will be submitted separately.
4.
FP&L committed to a human factors review of all post-survey changes implemented in all four plants.
FP&L will provide a description of the methodology and results of this effort in Supplementary Summary Reports.
5.
FP&L committed to provide additional HED justification which was requested on pages 18 through 22 of the May 2, 1984, NRC FP&L DCRDR Technical Evalaution Report.
2
6.
FP&L committed to the re-verification of instrument and control changes implemented from HED concerns (Supplement 1, Requirement 7).
Th'is includes the verification of changes in all four units.
7.
FP&L committed to the re-verification of changes implemented because of HED concerns in order to ensure that new HEDs were not introduced into the control room by the changes (Supplement 1, Requirement 8).
8.
FP&L committed to provide' description of the formal review process that will be followed by the mul tidisciplinary review team in their evaluation of future plant change modifications.
9.
Schedules for completion of the Supplemental Summary Reports could not be established during the meeting.
The NRC staff agreed to reconsider options related to the amount of detail and results to be included in these reports and agreed to inform FP&L within one week.,
10.
FP&L committed to review all changes that resulted from HED concerns, in order to satisfy the requirement for coordination of the DCRDR with other programs such as SPDS,'perator
- training, and Reg.
Guide 1.97 Instrumentation.
In addition, the FP&L Task Analysis Upgr ade Program'ill be coordinated directly with the Emergency. Operating Procedures Upgrade Programs at Turkey Point and St. Lucie.
FP&L also committed to a Long Range Program which will integrate Human Factors Engineering into all future control room changes.
ATTACHMENT I INTRODUCTION I
UDIT HELD AT TURKEY POINT PLANT ON APRIL 26 1984 FOR aOTH URKEY POINT AND ST s
LUGI E o
SEVEN '.OF NINE REQUIREMENTS FROM NUREG 0737 REQUIRE FURTHER RESOLUT I ON o
NEETING PURPOSE IS TO ADVISE NRC OF FPRL S
METHODOLOGY OF RE SOLUT ION
tttjRE6-0737 SUPPLANT 1 REQUIREMENTS STATUS REQUIREMENT 1 ESTABLISH A QUALIFIED MULTI DISCIPLINARY REVIEW TEAM CLOSED REQUIREMENT 2 CONDUCT A
FUNCTIONAL AND TASK ANALYSIS TO IDENTIFY OPERATOR TASK AND INFORMATION AND CONTROL REQUIREMENTS DURING EMERGENCY OPERATIONS OPEN REQUIREMENT 3 COMPARISON OF INFORMATION AND CONTROL REQUIREMENTS WITH THE CONTROL ROOM INVENTORY OPEN REQUIREMENT 0 CONDUCT A
CONTROL ROOM SURVEY TO IDENTIFY DEVIATIONS FROM ACCEPTED HUMAN 'FACTORS PRINCIPLES OPEN REQUIREMENT 5 ASSESS HED S
TO DETERMINE WHICH.
ARE SIGNIFICANT AND SHOULD BE CORRECTED OPEN
REQUIREMENT 6 SELECT DESIGN IMPROVEMENTS THAT WILL PROVIDE THE NECESSARY CORRECTION CLOSED REQUIREMENT 7 VERIFICATION THAT THE SELECTED DESIGN IMPROVEMENT WILL PROVIDE THE NECESSARY CORRECTIONS OPEN REQUIREMENT 8 DESIGN IMPROVEMENTS DO NOT INTRODUCE NEW HED'S OPEN REQUIREMENT 9 COORDINATION OF CONTROL ROOM IMPROVEMENTS WITH OTHER PROGRAMS OPEN
REQUIREMENTS 2 a 5 TASK ANALYSIS R CONTROL ROOM INVENTORY COMPARISON FOUR METHODS OF RESOLUTION RECOMMENDED BY AUDIT REPORT 1,
TASK ANALYSIS USING WESTINGHOUSE ER6'S 2
e MORE R I GOROUS APPL I CATI ON OF PROCESS USED 3,
COMPARE EXISTING TASK ANALYS,IS TO ER6 S
4e INDEPENDENT METHODOLOGY FOR TASK ANALYSIS o
FPRL WILL PROCEED WITH RECOMMENDATION 3 o
FPRL WILL CONDUCT REVIEW OF WESTINGHOUSE ER6 S
AT TURKEY POINT AND COMPARE THE CONTROL ROOM INVENTORY o
SAME PROGRAM FOR STi LUCIE USING COMBUSTION ENGINEERING EP6'S ESSEX CORPs WILL PROVIDE THE DETAILS OF THIS PROGRAM
REQUIRPKNT 0 CONTROL RON SURYEY 4
AN NULTI"DISCIPLINARY REVIEW TEAM WILL REVIEW ALL CHANGES SINCE SURVEY ANY HUMAN ENGINEERING DISCREPANCIES (HED)
IDENTIFIED FROM THE REVIEW WILL BE RESOLVED BY SAME PROCESS USED IN ORIGINAL PROGRAM PROGRAM FLOW CHART
REV OF CONTROL ROOM CHANGE IDENTIFY CONTROL ROOM CHANGES SINCE END OF ORIGINAL SURVEY TEAM REVIEW
.HED S
TEAM RECOMMENDATIONS COMPLETE VER IF I CAT ION DOCUMENTATION ENGINEERING DEVELOPS CHANGE PACKAGE TO CORRECT HED
REQUIRPIENT 5 OPEN HED'S ADDITI0NAL DocuNENTATI0N HILL BE PRovIDED FQR THosE HED s LISTED IN AUDIT REPORT SITE TURKEY'POINT 3 8 4 ST, Lucre 1 ST, LucIE 2 NEED DOCUMENTATION 25 33 6
REQU IREtrtENT 7 YERIFICATION OF DESIGN INPROVBIENT IDENTIFY CHANGES IMPLEMENTED FROM HED CONCERNS o
NULTI DISCIPLINE TEAM WILL VERIFY THAT THE SELECTED DESIGN IMPROVEMENT WILL PROVIDE THE NECESSARY CORRECTION PROGRAM FLOW CHART
VERIFICAT OF SELECTED HESIGN IMP ENT IDENTIFY CHANGES DUE TO HED CONCERNS TEAM REVIEW NO PROVIDES CORRECTION YES TEAM RECOMMENDATION COMPLE'fE VERIFICATION DOCUMENTATION ENGINEER ING DEVELOPS CHANGE PACKAGE TO PROVIDE CORRECTION
REQUIRENENT 8 INTRODUCTION OF NEM HED'S o
PROGRAM OUTLINED FOR REVIEW OF CONTROL ROOM CHANGES WILL SATISFY THIS REQUIREMENT
REQUIREMENT 9 COORDINATION OF CONTROL ROOM IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM OUTLINED FOR REVIEW OF CONTROL ROOM CHANGES WILL SATISFY THIS REQUIREMENT
LONG RANGE PROGRN o
NEW PROCEDURES FOR ENGINEER ING WILL INCLUDE HFE GUIDELINES, CHECKLISTS AND INTERFACE GUIDANCE DESIGN VERIFICATION WILL INCLUDE SIGN OFF OF HFE CONSIDERATION o
SUGGESTED CHANGES WILL BE EVALUATED BY ENGINEERING PRIOR TO INSTALLATION OPERATIONS'ILL PROVIDE FEEDBACK ON EFFECTIVENESS OF NOD IF I CATI ON
LONG RANGE PROGRN PLANT CHANGE REQUEST ENGINEERING PROCEDURE HFE GUIDELINES'HECKLISTS AND DISC IPI INE INTERFACE DESIGN YERIF ICATION INCLUDING HFE CONCERNS SUBMIT CHANGE TO PLANT SUGGESTED CHANGES FROM APPROYED DESIGN YES INSTALL CHANGE ENGINEERING EYALUATION OF CHANGE INCLUDING HFE CONCERNS OPERATOR FEEDBACK CHANGE OK YES PC/M CLOSED
ATTACHMENT 2
~
~
FLORIDA POWER R LIGHT TASK ANALYSIS UPGRADE PROGRN 2
OCTOBER 1984
FP&L TASK ANALYSlS UPGRADE PROGRAM ERGs &
PLANTSPECIFIC NRC GUIDANCE DOCUMENTATION PTP TASK ANALYSIS PTP INVENTORY PREPARE TASK ANALYSIS WORK PLAN REVIEW ERGsllD STEPS IDENTIFY I&C REQUIREMENTS WALKTHROUGHI OPERATOR REVIEW
'OMPARE I&C REQUIREMENTS TO INVENTORY DOCUMENT FINDINGSI GENERATE HEDs INPUT SUPP!
DCRI MODIFY I&C REQUIREMENTS DEVELOP MICRL
TASK 1 REVIEW ERCs/IDENTIFY STEPS OBJECTIVE:
~ IDENTIFY AND CONSOLIDATE RECURRENT ERC STEPS ACTIVITIES:
~ REVIEW ERCs AND PLANT-SPECIFIC DOCUMENTATION
~ IDENTIFY RECURRENT STEPS
~ VERIFY INTER-STEP RELIABILITY
~ CONSOLIDATE STEPS ACROSS ERC SEQUENCES PRODUCT:
~ A COMPREHENSIVE LIST OF ERC STEPS ERGs &
PLANTSPECIFIC NRC GUIDANCE DPCUMFNTATIPN PTP TASK ANALYSIS PTP INVENTORY PREPARE TASK ANALYSIS WORK PLAN REVIEW ERGsllD STEPS IDENTIFY 18C REQUIREMENTS WALKTHROUGHI OPERATOR REVIEW COMPARE I8 C REQUIREMENTS TO INVENTORY DOCUMENT FINDINGSI GENERATE HEDs INPUT TO SUPPLEMENT DCRDR RPl'ODIFY IEC REQUIREMENTS DEVELOP MICRL FPSL HFE PROGRAM FPLL TASK ANALYSIS UPGRADE PROGRAM
TASK 2 IDENTIFY IRC REQUIREMENTS OBIECTIVE:
~ IDENTIFY INFORMATION AND CONTROL REQUIREMENTS FOR EACH STEP ACTIVITIES:
~ REVIEW PLANT-SPECIFIC DOCUMENTATION
~ REVIEW PTP DCRDR TASK ANALYSIS
~ CONFER WITH PTP OPERATIONS SPECIALISTS
~ IDENTIFY ALL I&C REQUIREMENTS FOR ALL ERC STEPS PRODUCT:
~ A COMPREHENSIVE LIST OF INFORMATION AND CONTROL REQUIREMENTS FOR ALL ERC STEPS EAGs &
PLANT.SPECIFIC NRC GUIDANCE DOCUMENTATION PTP TASK ANALYSIS PTP INVENTORY PAEPARE TASK ANALYSIS WORK PLAN AEVIEW ERGsllD STEPS IDENTIFY l&C REQUIREMENTS WALKTHAOUGHI OPEAATOR REVIEW COMPARE I&C AEQUIAEMENTS TO INVENTORY DOCUMENT FINDINGSI GENERATE HEDs INPUT TO SUPPLEMENT DCRDR RPT MODIFY I&C AEQUIAEMENTS DEVELOP MICRL FP&L HFE PROGRAM FP8IL TASK ANALYSIS UPGRADE PROGRAM
TASK 3 CONDUCT WALKTHROUGH/OPERATIONSREVIEW OBJECTIVE:
~ VERIFY COMPLETENESS AND ACCURACY OF LIST OF INFORMATION AND CONTROL REQUIREMENTS ACTIVITIES:
~ WALKTHROUCH EACH ERC STEP IN PTP CONTROL ROOM
~ VERIFY I&C LIST THROUCH OPERATOR FEEDBACK
~ INFORMATION REQUIREMENTS RANCEIPRECISIONlACCURACY
~ CONTROI. REQUIREMENTS PRECISION/FEED BACK
~ MODIFY I&C LIST, AS REQUIRED PRODUCT:
~ VERIFIED I&C LIST ERGs 5 PLANTSPECIFIC NRC GUIDANCE DOCUMENTATION PTP TASK ANALYSIS PTP INVENTOAY PREPAAE TASK ANALYSIS WORK PLAN REVIEW EAGsllD STEPS IDENTIFY I4C REQUIREMENTS WALKTHAOUGHI OPERATOA REVIEW COMPAAE 18C AEQUIAEMENTS TO INVENTORY DOCUMENT FINDINGSI GENERATE HEDs INPUT TO SUPPLEMENT DCRDA APT MODIF'Y Id C AEQUIREMENTS DEVELOP MICRL FP&L HFE PROGRAM FPS,L TASK ANALYSIS UPGRADE PROGRAM
TASK 4 COMPARE IKC REQUIREMENTS TO PTP DCRDR INVENTORY OBJECTIVE:
~ DETERMINE AVAILABILITYAND SUITABILITYOF CR COMPONENTS TO MEET INFORMATION AND CONTROL REQUIREMENTS EAGs 8 PLANTSPECIFIC NAC GUIDANCE DOCUMfNTATIPN PTP TASK ANALYSIS PTP INVENTOAY ACTIVITIES:
~ COMPARE I&C REQUIREMENTS LIST TO PTP DCRDR INVENTORY' VERIFY COMPONENT AVAILABILITY
~ VERIFY COMPONENT SUITABILITY
~ DOCUMENT ANY DEVIATIONS OR DISCREPANCIES PRODUCT:
~ A LIST OF ALL INFORMATION AND CONTROL REQUIREMENTSt THAT ARE NOT SATISFIED BY THE PTP CR COMPLEMENT PREPAAE TASK ANALYSIS WORK PLAN AEVIEW EAGsllO STEPS IDENTIFY IKC REQUIREMENTS WALKTHAOUGHI OPERATOR REVIEW COMPARE IKC REOUIAEMENTS TO INVENTORY DOCUMENT FINDINGSI GENEAATE HEO's INPUT TO SUPPLEMENT OCADA RPT MODIFY ISC AEOUIAEMENTS DEVELOP MICRL FPAL HFE PROGRAM FPB I TASK ANALYSIS IIPGRAnE PROGRAM
TASK 5 DOCUMENT FINDlNGS AND GENERATE HEDS OBIECTIVE:
~ TO DOCUMENT THE RESULTS OF THE TASK ANALYSIS UPCRADE PROGRAM AND GENERATE HEDs ACTIVITIES:
~ DOCUMENT THE OBJECTIVES, METHODS, AND RESULTS OF EACH TASK
~ PREPARE MASTER IRC REQUIREMENTS LIST
~ PREPARE HEDs FOR ALL IRC REQUIREMENTS..THAT ARE NOT MET
~ FORWARD HEDs TO HFE PROGRAM FOR RESOLUTION AND INTEGRATION PRODUCT:
~ HEDs
~ MICRL
~ INPUT TO SUPPLEMENTAL DCRDR REPORT ERGs d PLANTSPECIFIC NAC GUIDANCE DOCUMENTATION PTP TASK ANALYSIS PTP INVENTOAY PAEPAAE'-
TASK ANALYSIS WORK PLAN AEVIEW EAGsllD STEPS IDENTIFY IdC AEQUIREMENTS WALKTHROUGHI OPEAATOR REVIEW COMPAAE Idc AEQUIAEMENTS TO INVENTORY DOCUMENT FINDINGSI GENEAATE HED$
INPUT TO SUPPLEMENT DCRDA APT MODIFY Idc REQUIREMENTS DEVELOP MICAL FPdL HFE PROGRAM
FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT TURKEY POINT UNITS 3 & 4 MASTER INFORMATION AND CONTROL REQUIREMENTS LIST INFORMATION AND CONTROL REQUIREMENTS REQUIRED
~ RANGE
~ PRECISION
~ ACCURACY ACTUAL
~ RANGE
~ PRECISION
~ ACCURACY I &CNO.
COMMENTS
~ HED NO.
~ POTENT IAL CONCERNS
COSSPOHENT LEVEL HUHAN fNOIHffAINODISCASPAHCf ASPOAI CCWKNtIIIIlolIAttl JISOCtIIIO IOWIII1I OISOolIAN ~
SUSSYSIf H.
CONTADL HODfSIDISffAY NANCE:
~IIIIL USEl HfD NUHSSA CAf HED NUHSfll OIIIAIIIKI IKS Ia
~LCattI OA SICIIIItt~IIIIKI
REFERENCES 1.
Results of Pre-Implementation Audit of St. Lucie Units 1 and 2, and Tur key Point, Units 3 and 4 Detailed Control Room Design
- Reviews, United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission, May 10, 1984.
ATTACHMENT 3 DETAILED CONTROL ROOM DESIGN REVIEW MEETING TURKEY POINT AND ST.
LUCIE OCTOBER Z, 1984 ATTENDANCE 0.
G.
McDonald J.
H. Osborne W.
R. Klein J.
S.
OeBor H.
P.
Van Cott T. J.
Voss D. Eike J."J.
Kramer T.
C. Grozan D. L. Smith D.
H. Schultz M. Tagliamonte E.
M. Roger P.
Le N. Thompson NRR/OL FPL/Power Plant Eng.
FPL/Power Plant Eng.
SAIC/NRR Essex Essex Essex NRR/OHFS/HFEB FPL/Nuclear Licensing FPL/Power Plant Eng.
COMB/SAIC/NRR FPL/Nuclear Energy Services FPL/St.
Lucie/OPS SAIC/NRR NRR/DHFS/HFEB