ML20034G136
| ML20034G136 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | 05200001 |
| Issue date: | 03/04/1993 |
| From: | Huffman B Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Fox J GENERAL ELECTRIC CO. |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9303090111 | |
| Download: ML20034G136 (46) | |
Text
4 l
March 4, 1993 Docket 52-001 NOTE TO:
JACK FOX, GE FROM:
BILL HUFFMAN, NRR/ADAR/PDST
SUBJECT:
MARKUPS OF HUMAN FACTORS ITAAC & SSAR CHAPTER 18, APPENDIX E Attached are markups by NRC staff from the Human Factors Branch on the ABWR ITAAC and Chapter 18, Apeced x f, of the SSAR.
Please be prepared to discuss these items at the 1:30 7. EST, 3/5/93, conference call (tomorrow). Please call me at 301 11-1114 if you have any questions.
cc: Document Control Room Chet Poslusny 050007
,z.g
$0
\\
'//
9a mo,0111,3030, DR ADOCK 05200001 PDR 1.
U.*
- s -
_. _ a. _ _____
/-
fftllO ABWR oesign Document 3.6 Human Factors Engineering Design Description fs.
The ABWR certified sign's an-system interfaces (HSI) will be developed,desi d,and evaluate ed upon a human factors systems analysis l
and shall reflec hum nnciples. The pdmmfRSI scope is li-icd m e sLJ1 meLJ
~
Og
>yy m re! 2nd meriter:ng in:er f= cfic phnt opmdampersonaedn'the Main geg g Control Room (MCR) and Rego utdown System (RSS). Further,within the in e 4u^^--
MCR, the MSI scope e E_. u = that area which provides the displays, h
controls and alarms required for normal, abnormal and emergency plant operanons.
The HSI design effort will be directed by a multi-disciplinary HFE Design Team comprised of personnel with expertise in HFE and in other technical areas relevant to the HSI design, evaluation and operations. An HFE Program Plan shall be developed, by the HFE Design Team, which establishes the methods for implementing the HSI design through a process of human factor systems analyses as shown in Figure 3.6. Implementation of that process will be as follows:
(a) A System Functional Requirements Analysis Implementation Plan shall be developed which establishes that plant system functional [~
requirements will be analyzed to identify those functions which must be performed to satisfy the objectives of each functional area. System function requirements analyses will be conducted to determine the objective, performance requirements and constraints of the design; and establish the functions which must be accomplished to meet the objectives and required performance.
i (b) An Allocation of Functions Implementation Plan will be developed W
which establishes the methodology of allocating functions to personnel, dhbg cNN system elements and personnel-system combinationgAn analysis of the
+QLsaLik-aiiccation orsystem functions will be carried out according to the lyold C RNoO provisions of the Allocation of Functions Implementation Plan.
sf-fa s wL ci-3 gg g (c) A Task Analysis Implementation Plan will be developed which 7
,g y
establishes the methods for the conduct of the task analysis. The task analysis will be conducted according to the provisions of the Task W
Analysis Implementation Plan and will be used to identify the behavioral requirements of the tasks the personnel are required to
^
perform in order to achieve the functions allocated to them. The task
~
analysis will also be used to maintain human performance requirements within human capabilities; as an input for developing personnel skill, personnel training, plant procedures and system communication requirements and as an input to the evaluation of established plant 3.6
-1 p*C N0/27/92
j i
ABWR Jesign Document j
I operations control room staffing levels. The task analysis will form the basis for specifying the requirements for the displays, data processing and controls needed to carry out the tasks.
i l
(d) A Human-System Interface Design Implementation Plan will be developed which establishes the methods for applying human engineering principles in the design definition and evaluation of the l
human-system interface (HSI). Human engineering principles will be used, as pr escribed by the HSI Design Implementation Plan, during the HSI design definition and evaluation.
(e) A Plant and Emergency Operating Procedure Development f
Implementation Plan will be developed which establishes the methods l
j for the preparation of plant and emergency operating procedures.
t Plant and emergency operating procedures will be prepared to support and guide human interaction with plant systems and to support and guide human interactions in the control of plant operations. Human engineering principles and criteda will be applied in the procedures O
i preparation. 'TI.a f M e4 9
p reOK-sia.ek p Pow ep.edess, s, uitlam ey~s p t< o&s, (f) A Human Yerification and Validation Implementation Plan will b,e -Ece I /*4 -
{
developed which establishes the methods for the conduct of the Sucue;/d'
- i M
evaluation of the HSI design as an integral system using HFE evaluation 3
l procedures and principles. The HSI design will be evaluated as an k
e integrated system using the HFE evaluation procedures and principles q%
prescribed by the Human Factors Vedfication and Validation a4.,.
Implementation Plan.
Inspections, Tests, Analyses and Acceptance Criteria
~
Table 3.6 provides a definidon of the instructions, tests, and/or analyws together with associated acceptance criteria which will be performed to demonstrate compliance with the HFE commitments for the certified design.
l 16
-2 10/27/92
O '
uti.
Table 3.6: Human Factors Engineering Inspections, Tests, Analyses and Acceptance Criteria Design Commitment inspections, Tests, Analyses Design Acceptente Criterie 1.a. A multi-displinary Human Factors 1.a. The composition of the HFE Design 1.a. The HFE design team shall be comprised Engineering (HFE) Design Team shall be Team shall be reviewed.
of the following expertise:
established and be comprised of personel with expertise in HFE and in other technical (1) Technical Project Management areas relevant to the HSI design, evaluation and operation.
(2) Systems Engineering 3
(3) Nuclear Engineering (4) Control and Instrumentation Engineering j
t 9
(5) Architect Engineering (6) Human Factors (7) Plant Operations (8) Computer Systems Engineering (9) Plant Procedure Development (10) Personnel Training l
- S 2
w-e-
>m,--.-es--wo,
---we
.mwnww-ww*er~~wn-
--m-.
o,--
e---e.,ve
--w
.w n
--n-s,-v-w--
e
,[
r l
- h
'l l
t
.l d
hg m
o n a e
c n
)
is e e
g n
s r.
ihi me la gi s
n s
r s
r t s
/
o wo os sy sm t
o n
r t
E et r
i soyec rl s
d F
i t
e r
ein nRSr n ne di d
s n
l e
e soa r
H a
n m
p i
ol de otsieh c
d a
a u
o o oio ndg it r
(
e I) a g
r yt s
e o
cmt t
g Sd l
it is le s
an i
t ar war asn c s nh s
it it t r
n Hn la al v
me q
e o aoCuh edol pec l
egr e ne i
s r t a
u a
r denol et ap C i:
(
npodamnp nmno r
n r
h r p eh es e
m e
p it lot nh dut pit s pm le e
r l
t i
a e
eis cd s
n oe r
s c
nl ao n
o a
ga rh a
o o d
n ib f
c a
n ni y
a un f
r nt e
P ec o
o iu r
r ur niSenl n I
c nqiaS aa pa nla ee l
et
's q o
o l
t t
s f
anl e ol oca, phi mH e
m vopMt ha l
p s
t i
k r
Inm m
o e Ee t
r e
r l
ecee sf wS
,e r
a dehhmIsmno sHsh f
o p
o e
it c
sl t
mn a
ot c
rl g
m n
r l
w.
g*
a n t
A oa o
g ye e
eSr ondreT t t i*
i r
e f
r nh oi t h ei n
nRHnt ooot it r
o l
n es n
cs t t t
at oi oc ps o
o f
aii g
a sa r
in n
a*
t g Fn yu P
bo s aa r '
oe a
p g
e debrt t
t enhae ae nnn.
r nos t
l is a
Sl pe peio c
r s
naT r
e nl a
E ask rl oi r
ei e*
e o e
e ist c sa n).laodgmgt D
aP nv F
ee pi s
g O **
p hr p
h eif oR)Smt is c
a ae H
hpt Ov npr mm md T
i
)
)
I nerC Sr a nri Tp O T
dsr s n
udp ie e u a e
i)
)
Hr u n
)
i s
h i
v v
v Sot eMRol ouqn
)
i n
n g Ha T
i i(
(
i(
(
(
H c i p(
npcdeui
(
(
eo
)
)
)
a hr 1
2 3
)
y
(
(
(
i d
r e
e b.
u t
1 i
n r
C it n
e
)'
o t
o c
.p f f
C n
(
a t
t g
p s e p
n e
e b s
l i
c y la r
c t
ee A
o h n
s O
n d A n
ig n
, a s
l n
a t
P s
E s e m
e T s
a s
r ro y sn g
t a
o o
l r
c i
n t
P a
c h
lO F
A e Ed p F e n
s s Hw a
t n
e ei s
i m
e Te L
h v u T
.r C
H b.
f s
3 t
hN 1
n
- 6 o
i c
gN D, e
e D
l b
p n
la e
l a
s d
e a T
n h
h e pm, t h i
s ou i
t i dn de of a i
eh eo nh oM 4Q l
t vyppaTd
(
er ou e s e t
dal s
.t eht emedisict u n
e ylsema nh e
biv pli f esl ml r
riS t
l pd a a i el cet i
a eebn nbn e e t
m h h b d ai n o i
rl n
st l e s plagom m
o aa amsh n se nt l t
C la hh uer sr rR i
o o e Pt sl t ast et pd n
ss g mee v y c pi n
e sa o ns e
sadrs c on a is ah c f
r nsmimo glif noal D
r t
obeat o
,cmSda o r at Pt ndauHnreR si f
a Ee e
h yl pl oom hmn n r
F egac a o t
r e Hc r t imlemt n n s t
t i t s
n nh s a
yeuferi ol oy Awsdh b..
r pcpCS 1
g s33 i
=.
f g
Table 3.6: Human Factors Engineering (Continued) inspections, Tests, Analyses and Acceptance Criteria Design Commitment Inspections, Tests, Analyses Design Acceptance Criteria 1.b. Continued 1.b. Continued address the development of operating technical procedures for normal, abnormal and emergency plant operations and the identification of personnel training needs applicable to the HSI design.
(4) The HFE Design Team as being responsible for:
(i) the development of HFE plans and procedures; (ii) the oversight and review of HFE l
i' design, development, test, and evaluation activities; (iii) the initiation, recommendation, and provision of solutions through l
designated channels for problems identified in the implementation of the HFE activities; (iv) verification of implemention of solutions to problems; (v) assurance that HFE activities comply to the HFE plans and procedures, and (vil phasing of activities.
8 u
3 (5) The methods for the identification, closure and documentation of human factors issues.
1.
(6) The HSl design configuration control procedures.-
g Table 3.6: Human Factors Engineering (Continued)
Inspections, Tests, Analyses and Acceptance Criteria Design Commitment inspections, Tests, Analyses Design Acceptance Criteria 2.a. A System Functional Requirements 2.a. The System Functional Requirements 2.a. The System Functional Requirements Analysis implementation Plan shall be Analysis implementation Plan shall be Analysis implementation Plan shall developed which establishes that plant reviewed.
establish:
system requirements shall be analyzed to identify those functions which must be (1) Methods and criteria for con-performed to satisfy the objectives of each ducting the System Functional functional area. System function analysis Requirements Analysis, shall determine the objective, performance requirements, and (2) That system requirements shall constraints of the design;and establish the define the system functions and functions which must be accomplished to those system functions shall pro-meet the objectives and required vide the basis for determining the performance.
associated HSI performance requirements.
(3) That functions critical to safety shall be identified.
(4) That descriptions shall be developm1 for each of the identified functions and for overall system configuration design itself. Each function shall be identified and described in terms of inputs (observable parameters which will indicate system status) functional processing (control process and performance measures required to achieve the function), functional operations (including detecting signals, measuring information,
_.g comparing one measurement with another, processing information, w
b and acting upon decisions to produce a desired condition or result such as a system or component operation actuation or trip) outputs, feedback
g Table 3.6: Human Factors Engineering (Continued) inspections, Tests, Amelyses and Acceptance Criteria Design Commitment inspections. Tests. Analyses Design Acceptonce Criterie 2.a. Continued 2.a. Continued (how to determine correct discherpe of function), and interface requirements i
so that subfunctions are related to larger functional elements.
2.b. An analysis of system functional 2.b. The analyses of the system functional 2.b. The system functional requirements requirements shall be conducted.
requirements shall be reviewed.
analyses is conducted in accordance with the requirements of the Human Factors Engineering Program Plan and the System Functional Requirements Analysis Implementation Plan.
d D
e -
n
g Table 3.6: Human Factors Engineering (Continued)
Inspections, Tests, Analyses and Acceptance Criteria Design Commitment inspections Tests, Analyses Design Acceptance Criteria 3.a. An Allocation of Function implementation 3.a. The Allocation of Function implement-3.a.The Allocation of Function implement-Plan shall be developed which establishes station Plan shall be reviewed.
ation Plan shall establish:
the methods for allocating functions to personnel, system elements, and (1) The methods and criteria for the personnel-system combinations execution of function allocation.
g (2)That aspects of system and functions definition shall be
@h w
analyzed in terms of resulting human performance requirements og cDD based on the user popuiation.
(3) That the allocation of functions to personnel, system elements, and h
personnel system combinations shall reflect:
(i) sensitivity, precision, time, and safety requirements, (ii) reliability of system perfor-mance, and (iii) the number and the necessary skills of the personne! required to operate and maintain the system.
(4) That allocation criteria, rationale, analyses, and procedures shall be documented.
S (5) That analyses shall confirm that the w
D personnel can perform tasks allocated to them while maintaining operator situation awareness, acceptable personnel
=_
t g
Table 3.6: Human Factors Engineering (Continued)
Inspections, Tests, Analyses and Acceptance Criteria.
Design Commitment inspections Tests Anal ses Design Acceptance Criteria
{
y
- 3.a. Continued 3.a. Continued workload, and personnel vigilance.
l 3.b. An analysis of the allocation of function 3.b. The analysis of the allocation of function 3.b.The function allocation analyses is shall be conducted.
shall be reviewed.
conducted in accordance with the requirements of the Human Factors Engineering Program Plan and the Allocation of Functions implementation Plan.
- 4. A Task Analysis Implementation Plan shall 4.a. The Task Analysis implementation Plan 4.a. The Task Analysis implementation Plan be developed which establishes that task shall be reviewed.
shall establish:
analysis shall be conducted and used to identify the behavioral requirements of the (1) The methods and criteria forconduct of tasks the personnel are required to perform the task analyses.
g in order to achieve the functions allocated j
to them. The task analysis shall be used to (2) The scope of t lysis which i
maintain human performance shallinclu ration performed at requirements within human capabilities; be Ine operator iriieNst the Main used as an input for developing personnel Control Room and at the Remote skill, personnel training, and system Shutdown System. The analyses shall communication requirements and as an Y
be directed to the range of plant input to the evaluation of established plant operations control room staffing levels; g
p operating modes, including start-up, normal operations, abnormal and form the basis for specifying the operations, transient conditions, low requirements for the displays, data power and shutdown conditions. The l
processing and controls needed to carry WI analyses shall also address operator c,Mpdf interface operations during periods of out tasks.
p maintenance test and inspection of
[
plant systems and equipment and of the HSI equipment.
g (3) That the analysis shall be used to klentify which tasks are critical to g
safety.
w f
e
--h
- ---=
we-w-e www wa-r*e-T*t-=w
-==wwt'w---tvr we-- v en ew 9 -ww'-
T-a we wwwrvmw-T--ww+'qw-ewwwwe+-r-w 1r M
m-
. m
.'iI' I
- \\!I i
a e
l l
s n
a d
n la e
k ae e
t t -
a n ela hP s
ne t ins dh lp h
h t.
d, ml n
a i
nt o
t n
erk rd a
pef yla b n t
at la I
mu
,oe l ah m t
e df mo n
i s r l s
s y
en e o i
S eqt yyii e
gwc a
nio u
a sf i c t
f i
o csr a P
e t t h ni e
t lops it s la s ut gt H
lpr ear r
f p l
e e e s hl a ni t a dn o n n
r r
ss ps ec erh r
e ni h e n er e ito o
imlot s sd gmdot ir vh c e d, s, sp omPm C
et c f
n gd ei g r hi n
t n d
cs n iut f
e cege a
l t
d u
sl s
ci h
einl n
ia la e
o r a n
i ut buip e
h o ueek ie al ad mro lt r
t s
c l s r s lar l
r k
s l
qem a
it s c oh n sb pI ef n
la e
Smet a h no a h lao r
t rt a
mHpca an e o.
la eeI r
r ndh st s of t t
si s
g t
r n
gnt nmea o eiau r
s r ns e
c p
de t
t sr c s umhseigs p
dg is edaoe rth qk adir ss c
ulpa speh l
e l
i i
isod ispa h
sir t c
ni en v
ri ynr st nly m
a e do pul h s of er e ycuf yf n la i g e Ea s
c at y o
f o
A s
sa la qo lat I
it lol I
c s
ewd sd en nn n so sh n
n dt Saendf la dyc n n e o
y t s g adr o aeg ar yi rA g
on Hmvin
/
r n
e,ana o cnda n
a p
lawo is he r
mi e odelso h naed s
k esi i
kle k
s t
k t
s sb g n ecs e
e s iveie se s emtae em hf ssot s et ik t
t a
n a caa D:
D at t l ariuc in k nFT I h mip t nt yr ua mio ce sri l t lai aip t
e t
v m ti nl t ct s
od t r aqo a ai sa ne Ss u
a ee ane e e nr so t
t f
ri a
t e
h aco her h v a ad ah Hli hq h h noxh h oes macet r
t r b
Tcpam T nac Tr p at t
.n ea Te Tt eomda T
h c u nl ht
)
)
)
)
)
c s
a 4
5 6
TaHaP Te 2
)
1 3
)
i
(
(
(
(
(
d r
e e
b.
a.
u t
4 5
i n
rC i
t l
n e
la o
c h
C n
s
(
a n
t d
a g
p s e
l n
e es w
P c
y i
e A
a ie n
r c
e v
o l
i n
e t
o r
a n d A t
e n
ig n
,s b
e n
a ts m
l E
s e
la e
e T h
lp s
s s
r s
o y
s m
n e
i l
t a
o s
n c
i n
t y
g a
c l
F A
e a
i.
sd n
e p
n s s d a
e Dw a
t n
e k
I e
u c
Si s
i m
e n
a Hv u
T it e
t n
e er H
o h
he sn C.
T Tb 6
o a.
b.
a.
i 4
4 5
3 t
c e
e lb p
e a
s enb l
T n
d bal I
t lau e
l ma h
c s
u h h d
t ian d
s n
nar a t
n o
e e
c lah it n t
r o Ps m
e cit b
ne i
t ohdn i
l it m
la snf i
m h
aliae b sd t
s na o
I C
s et le nS meispgH k
i n
s cs g
a eh nee i
t lpicidh s
f r
t e
o mh pef s
i w gh o D
is dn n
d n
t iein io g
eu ly ri spe n
a eoedte a n
it a
Dl niu n
eil l o
n vgpa I
C A
Senpv H.d e a e a.
b.
a.
4 4
5 g
,9 85"
t I3 Il' I'
9' r
e n s o
s n
iod e.
f e
d o
g-is lant ot i(
f rh n
n n d
t a
t e
o T. l ain e f
l a
s it e ed mlar c
t n
r n
d s s n
n n
a fie eeec gig am r
r is p
a agn de hi t
o dpmfa s
on e ns ee imie pl n ue i
r d na ou d d it h s n yisgpr e
iiurt hsse n adeeD Op eet n e
c nnie r
s t
id b gio bs n oiut gu e
sds t
er m
i t
n dt eiou a s
r nt i eI yi:
e r qi sll nt oe C
d mnhe n ec unS ct h naia sdre n s cu s,
t r g g d /e r
e n n e gt g
m u qigH nns yr so c
a c
niebi r ne eeli ohf e de edmdnmt o
s s
e sicp n
o emo e lpoe Eh n gmb it r a i
a a
iain it n
r l
ote t a t
r a
cseo ul e u Idn d
e t
r a n a
t a aipr dl a
mchs l
ept adc it s
sp p
er aHt hton mlo s rdP r yso eh nnrayo oi uSirS ie e
ol rf c
ee I
t e s it r pt l
s c
is coi v/ateHls nb it c a n E el a os o saie y
n c
t o
vl ui/o gll a ni de a anf e
rdl,spt r
a eE l F
c o
awF n a y
A la rE r
nmm.
nDs e
sr pea noa h
a g
d a
Ft is t
eh e la a epmiot l m
u n
a pk isd of n n HveHn dsc nPn en o
n pi i
t n
s a ho g
eo o t
a s r io ageh go r
l s n a t
r a
e leorlaanp nr a t t i
Seamme bc t
t s
a ul e
k 1
l st t nd i
e nt vneped Hsduaml t
a eeo a
dP s
Sodc sin ia h
r eb pf h v
D a
Hr oe el adt u r e Pe hh n
n Tt p
h y r H gl T daoowa ip ot lu c o
c t
t t
t el el a
a ceop e d
e nr hroio s
esscl h
h oe n h een ev mTPa
)
)
nch r
T. a a t e
t 1
2 T c pi Tr PI t ise
(
(
t b.
a.
)
)
a 4
5 7
5 6
)
i
(
(
d r
e e
u t
p&
i n
rC i
tn e
o c
e n
C n
b o
a l
i t
a ga f.
l t
(
g p s h
n n f
t n
e e
s it e f
s n
am c
y o
i r
r c
l ee ee A a it pl n
a Op n
d A tn m
i e
yi g
n
.s ct m
nn n
a ts e
eed E
s e lp gme e T s
s r
o y s m
epw.
r n
mloie i
l t
a o n
Ee v c
e i
g v
n t
r de a
c s
i F A e
e nDe p
a b
n s s d d
el t
a t
n e
d nrl I
u Se ua s
i m
e n
Hw la d h Pe s u
T it ee e cn n
i o
hv H
oa hrl
,s Te n
C.
.r TPP
- 6 o
a.
b.
a.
i 5
5 6
3 t
e ce lb p
s t
n a
s e
n e r
s ot a T
n b
oh pnm le i
l is p
l t i pau l
a abgulph c
i h
tna n s r
i s
g et h et siot dnpe n
t n
t h
imeat i iagt n
o rdwul tael e
g pniri e
e it rl n
m a
epicp e n f
t p odoed t
n pmh o oin l ee e
O i w yl i
t i,
m ecao nl t m
yndn vat r t
c ipn m
e c ee g
edeonnpe r t er am o
lp emp g n
npoe t
C or e ep ipc n m
gpl i
r o e eb ueabo ng el vml n n
l a sh mll le s
g meeeahmtot i
av vd n uhe e
Ee d
i sud i Hsd s
D Denbash n
.as e
d s
d dd nel eea nsie onr t
e e
arl rdsiot I
r u
Sp ua n e u ui n
Ho nd h la t
t i r l
dumct id it ee lae spegeraa ce cnt c r
c n
hv Poaaods eedo t
o Te h
nyn pnr t
rl r
C.
.d APPt pasioap a.
b.
a.
5 5
6 g
5*
.S$"
i'
L,{,
e' i' I
!l t
t n
e sr n s a
b e
l t
t io e
r a
l ne mu c
p n
n l
e t
l ec pd n
la e
h t
a i
ma lo e enda o
h Pr m
d e
t n
hhnl s
s t
a u n.
e n
f c
i r e t c ap g
dseoh da p
a o
re pn eo ese l
e vr t l t n neht el s
s ni ar t c cP m
d n :e t
iut ep bet na ad u
ado n o
od t
i C
qn dl ll he aml n nd r
t i
shl h F nr c
m oi h l pr po aei ei a
ait t
oyp l
n aPio Vh h
iu e
a r
t c
bgl n cs Pocwanga
&is t
al
)
c t
e u
n m,
f n s ana n
dspmbne ePcemlant Vlb m
l t
os iah r
et i ae r in sa a
ot ai c
r h
n uPt e r t t
a V
vl r
ie l
r e e e o,rgr uh lo p
ea n
o.
gaHmr m os eh o gJ. i g t
t t
e s
f nde e
t e Gc en oef n oi l
a ple cl V
hs r
c iv mdo r
nn cn ri t
c r
r al aoh gO p F a s
t i
sh e oa ni nr c t
t I
A t
S t
nio dt
'r wdf e
h r
f oym ns o
oH oi na
,at eec f r
s n o e
rse or idoepssd mpa sPcI a
gt r
g c c
a e t
t n
c ed nn n r
pO n t nt ma a
pe nee sp r ef r o
i n
u oo o s
dp do Wps o yi n g e e uP na c a f
ot e
ia n s osdmiic l
ngm H
o cde t t l
D mui h
e al ee eraam e
n r
i r
i r
v nemr ep n
ar sg h
e cct e
e t
et a voos eer et t
ce emo e o mt t
e Mo h er r y ppla e
at drgur hi i
h n f
t ur i nEle Tu Hc Ti T dppsooa eedui hm nq gdv
)
)
oe nn e a.
~
)
)
a 3
4 T. E c r E a D 1
2
)
'(
7
(
(
(
i d
r b.
e e
u t
6 i
n rC it V(#,j n
e o
c e
C n
b e
a
(
gl b
l t
g p s
[
_r na la l
h n
e e o
dI i
t s
as h
c 4
- py6 i
y r
c r s s
l et ee A a pl n
n u
Os a
gg n
d A m
l yre P
ig n
y g/g>
s c
V n
a t
ntn s
e e V
E s e gm e T s
5 r
s 5
f.
ep s
r s
r o
y n
/
mo o
r y
t a
o
" of Ee c
l l
t c
j dv a
i n
t a
c g 46 n e F
F A
e c
ad n
p d n
s s e
t e a
f nrd md a
t n
u o
O a u e
+
s n
t l
i u e m
e o
Pedw Hw u
T it g[
eci ei e
e n
H o
hov hv
,s C
Tpr Tr r e e
n 6
o a.
b.
a.
6 6
7 i
3 t
e c
e lb p
l l
a s
a T
n he n
sh o
i nt it g
atan a n
lPh alu it d
t t
a nn s a s
e ed ao e a v n
r.
e i
pe nt hd m
Op otanliseE t F t
o it i
m yl aebaHs e
au e
c m
n v cmt gl l
i e
f s a np e
e evic o
gd irl i
es C
r e e ph n
n eb Vmc e uir ibmp g
ml sI h
r) i l
s Ea oVwll ed at e
d h tc& dhsn D
n aVesya s
d as F(
s e
pn s
de nnoger e
t r
u n u aol i u
miestad lad n
ta ve it Pe r e n
c ud edgc idI o
e o Hl e o AaeSt h r C
r n
T. P
.VbHip a.
b.
a.
6 6
7 g
,c.
,g
g Table 3.6: Human Factors Engineering (Continued)
Inspections, Tests, Analyses and Acceptance Criteria Design Commitment inspections Tests, Analyses Design Acceptance Criteria 7.a. Continued 7.a. Continued (i) The HSI (including both the interface of the operator with the HSI l
equipment hardware and the interface of the operator with the HSI equipment's software driven i
functions).
(ii) The Plant and Emergency Operating Procedures, and (iii) the HSl work environment.
(3) That evaluations of the HSl equipment shall be conducted to confirm that the
.y controls, displays, and data processing I
functions identified in the task analyses i
are provided.
(4) That integration of HSI equipment with each other, with the operating personnel and with the Plant and j
Emergency Operating Procedures shall be evaluated through the conduct of dynamic task performance testing.
The dynamic task performance tests and evaluations shall have as their objectives:
(i) Confirmation that the identified critical functions can be achieved using the integrated HS1 design, 9d I
(ii) Confirmation that the HSI design and configuration can be operated using the established Main Control Room staffing levels.
m.
____m____.______._n--_mm,-..
..,,,,.m%
w..s-_.,._.%w-,,_
.w
_.-..,:,,m,.
,_.7
,,,,r,.
,y--,_ _ _,,,.
,_,_,4,,
I l
,i {
j iIilli' j,
,I h
d s
s t y r
n e
t h
ic l
egwn o
ra be ul c
r f
t e s s
du n e
v n oh sl u
r s
dt dg w
e t t e a s
o n
n i
I e
elee r So t o o rh r
o a
se r
e Hl edi sgt s k
c r e
it t
t cpa it ens s siu a
e la ced ir n o mcm i
ri e e atsd d
c mhe e
nt ut e
t lar s
ie n
n d
i l
P Po oe a cn at r t
hnr a n ef nt mdc alueu yr c a
o a
n it t c uo o
u e
s C
egc sd cs r e i
r ea na at o s
t l
cr r
a k
m hoan nl mv ae map o
u sme o
io a
e f o a r
i r r
t o
m, t t f s t
r c n e
c e
o er mm m
t a k
t t r l
n ar ns a ac o r ad r
r n t pr s bt nf o e ph n e
s w
on i
a h e oamd h ef h pei cor c o wca w
w w
wi t
t pi t f c sei k
a a srn p
t t
e nOcdoa n app sl e
e a
l l
r mi e a e es e
r r
e een o
aa e s
r ce e r
oyribs c
apm cnmc c
s c
r n m
c hp t t r
c t cif it ci t
i nn gs g
d A
andian a eeo cso obk gain g
gr r
t f
t n e n
no so nmkla n
in it io n
mee n l,o i
f r
i mdmc ms o e
c e af i
gd e a t n
ht r i
t evimr ir n pa aoe pt e:
ao a as r
r a c i r g i a e a
t r
t sp rid a
t f ei c
r i
f e
oe r e npuk nig Esips rfrt m s
n r e e a e
ed r
s yt n s F am s
e D
omrhop oeqa duat Hdasr et pw p
pn a
eso pa ee p pac r
oa o
Cept no Cdet la e a
r e h vh p e ened O
o o
t s
)
i)
)
)
i l
a s yh d
)
i v
v l
i i
Tet u hudTa it i(
(
(
(
T i
i v
i(
it
)
)
a 5
6
)
(
(
i d
r e
e u
t i
n rC it n
e o
c C
na
(
t g
p s n
e e s
i c
y r
c l
e A a e
n n
d A ig n
,s n
a t
s E
s e e
T.
o y s s
s r
n l
t a
o c
i n
t a
c F
A e p
d n
s s a
t n
eu s
i me n
i u T n
t H
o
.sn C.
- 6 o
a.
. 3 t
i 7
c e
e lb p
a s
T n
I tn e
m t
i m
mo C
ng ise D
deun i
tno C.
a.
7 g
,y sgu i
s g
Table 3.6: Human Factors Engineering (Continued) inspections, Tests, Analyses and Acceptance Criteria Design Commitment inspections, Tests, Analyses Design AcceptanceCriterie i
7.a. Continued 7.a. Continued (vi) anthropometry evaluations, and (vii) HSl equipment performance measures.
(7) The methods to confirm that HFE issues identified and documented have been resolved, and l
a (8) the methods and criteria to be used to -
Y' confirm that critical human actions, as defined by the task analysis, have been addressed in the integrated HSI design.
I I
7.b. A hornan factors engineering analysis of 7.b. The analyses of the integrated HS1 design 7.b.The human factors engineering analysis of the integrated HS1 design shall be shall be reviewed.
the HSI design shall be conducted in conducted.
accordance with the requirements of the Human Factors Engineering Program Plan and the Human Factors V&V Implementation Plan.
I h
8 d
i i
sO O
.-.---...e,.----,,--,_----me.-..
e
-t
.r i
g SYSTEM FUNCTIONAL REQUIREMENTS ANALYSIS g,3 I
I i
l ALLOCATION OF FUNCTIONS (b) l l
l l
(c)
TASK ANALYSIS q
l l
T I
I o
I HUMAN SYSTEM
(,) PROCEDURE DEVELOPMENT
-H (d)
INTERFACE DESIGN 1
i 1
l
---_-____________q o
HUMAN FACTORS
-J I
VERIFICATION AND VALIDATION (f)
(FEEDBACK)
I f
1P IMPLEMENTED DESIGN n
n Figure 3.6 Human System Interface Design implementation Process
T' Ib k
l.
C~
t
/
18E.2 HSI IMPLEMENTATION REQUIREMENTS Section 18E.1 describes the process thro gh-w
- e ABWR Main Control Ram (MCR)and remote shutdown system (RSS) areas operator interface will be implemented and evaluated. Figure 18E.1-1 presents the re anve timing of the NRC confonnance reviews which are i
planned throughout the MCR and RSS Human-System Interface (HSI) design implementation.
l Tables 18E.2.1 through 18E.2.4 of this section define the requirements that are to be met by the HSI design implementation activities that are to be made available for review by the NRC. The HSI design implementation-related Design Acceptance Oiteria (DAC) which are established i
through Rule Making, (refer to Section 3.6 of the Tier 1 Design Cenification material for the GE ABWR design), are defined such that there exists a dirret correspondence between the DAC entries and requirements imposed herein on those design activities whose results are to be made available for the NRC confonnance reviews, as identified in Figure 18E.1-1. Those requirements presented in Table 18E.2.1 through 18E.2.4 which contspond to individual Tier 1 DAC acceptance criteria are specifically idendned. Therefore, satisfaction of those specific requirements shall result in full compliance with the Cenified Design Commitment and the contsponding Acceptance Criteria presented in the Tier 1 (Rule Making) DAC established for the HSI design implementation.
.y
,e o
p c.,
gb cf P
J e
l 4
e e
N 1
REY.4 102192
TABLE 18.E.2.1 HUMAN FACTORS ENGINEERING DESIGN TEAM AND PLANS I.
HFE DESIGN TEAM COMPOSITION (Satisfaction of the requirements presented herein shall result in the creation of an HFE Design Team which is in full compliance with the Item la Acceptance Oiteria presented in Table 3.6 of the Tier 1 Design Cenification Material for the GE ABWR design).
I 1.
The composition of the Human Factor Engineering (HFE) Design Team shall include, as a minimum, the technical skills presented in Anicle (4), below.
i 2.
The education and related professional experience of the HFE Design Team personnel shall satisfy the minimum personal qualification requirements specified in Anicle (4), below, for each of the areas of required skills. In those skill areas where related professional experi-ence is specified, qualifying experience of the individual HFE Design Team personnel shall ir.clude experience in the ABWR main control room and remote shutdown system Human System Interface (HSI) designs and design implementation activities. The required pro-f'.ssional experience presented in those personal c ualifications of Anicle (4) are to be sat-
.sfied by the HFE Design Team as a collective whole. Therefore, satisfaction of the pro-fessional experience requirements associated with a panicular skill area may be realized through the combination of the professional experience of two or more members of the HFE Design Team who each, individually, satisfy the other defined credentials of the panicular skill area but who do not possess all of the specified professional experience. Similarly, an individual member of the HFE Design Team may possess all of the credentials sufficient to satisfy the HFE Design Team qualification requirements for two or more of the defined skill areas.
3.
Altemative personal credentials may be accepted as the basis for satisfying the minimum personal qualification requirements specified in Anicle (4), below. Acceptance of such attemative personal credentials shall be evaluated on a case-by-case basis and appmved, documented and retained in auditable plant construction files by the COL Applicant. The following factors are examples of altemative credentials which are considered acceptable.
a'.
A Professional Engineer's license in die required skill area may be substituted for the required Bachelor's degree.
- b. Related experience may substitute for education at the rate of six semester credit hours for each year of experience up to a maximum of 60 hours6.944444e-4 days <br />0.0167 hours <br />9.920635e-5 weeks <br />2.283e-5 months <br /> credit.
. c. Where course work is related tojob assignments, post secondary education may be substituted for experience at the rate of two years of education for one year experience.
Total credit for post secondary education shall not exceed two years expenence credit.
1 2
REV.4 102392
~
i 1-1 TABLE 18.E.2.1 HUMAN FACTORS ENGINEERING DESIGN TEAM AhT PLANS I
i 4.
Recuired Skill Ama Personal Ocalifiestion i
i a.
Technical Project Management a.
- Bachelor's degree, and I
five years experiencein nuclear power plant design operations, and
- three, years rmnagement expenence i
i b.
Systems Engineering b.
- Bachelor's of Science i
degree, and
- four years cumulative experience in at least three of the following areas of systems i
engineering; design, i
development,integra-t tion, operation, and test and evaluation c.
Nuclear Engineering c.
- Bachelor's of Science degree, and
- fouryears nuclear design, devel,opment, test or operations expenence d.
Control and Instrumentation d.
- Bachelor's of Science (C&I) Engineering degree, and
- four years experience in design of process contro1 systems, and nence m atleast one
-exyhe fcilowing areas of
- c. t C&Iecgineering; development, power plant oprations, and test anc evaluation c.
Architect Engineering e.
- Bachelor's of Science degree, and
- four years power plant control room design expenence 3
REV.4 102392 i
t 4
t i
i l
TABLE 18.E.2.1 HUMAN FACIORS ENGINEERING DESIGN TEAM AND PLANS Recuimd Skill Ama Personal Oualification f
f.
Human Factors f.
- Bachelor's degree in human factors engi-l neenng, engmeenng i
psychology ornlated science, and
- four years cumulative experience related to the i
j human factors aspects of i
human-com > uter inter-faces. Qualifying I
experience shallinclude experiencein atleast i
- two of the following s
human factors related i
activities; design,devel-1 opment, and test and i
evaluation, and
- four years cumulative experience related to the human factors field of ergonomics. Again,
(
qualifying experience shallinclude experience in at least two of the following areas of human factors activi-i ties; design, develop-ment, and test and evaluation g.
Plant Operations g.
-Have or have held a I
Senior Reactor Operator license
- two years experiencein BWR nuclear power plant operations h.
Computer System Enginec rii.g h.
- Bachelor's degree in ElectricalEngineering or Computer Science,or graduate, degree in other engmeenng discipline (e.g., Mechanical Engineenng or Chemical Engineering), and
- four years experience in the design of digital computer systems and real time systems applications 4
FEV.4 1o2392
4 TABLE 18.E.2.1 HUMAN FACIDRS ENGINEERING DESIGN TEAM AND PLANS Required Skill Area Personal Oualification i.
Plant Procedure Development i.
- Bachelor's degree, and
- four years experience in developing nuclear power plant operating procedures j.
PersonnelTraining j.
- Bachelor's degree, and fouryears experiencein the development of personnel trammg pro-grams for power plants, and
- experience in the appli-cation of systematic training development methods II HUMAN FACTORS ENGINEERING PROGRAM PLAN
^
1.
(Satisfaction of the requirements presented herein shall result in the creation of a Human Factors Engineering Program Plan which is in full compliance with the Item 1.b.
Acceptance Criteria presented in Table 3.6 of the Tier 1 Design Certification material for the GE ABWR design). The Human Factors Engineering (HFE) Program Plan shall establish:
- a. Methods and criteria, for the development and evaluation of the Main Control Room (MCR) and Remote Shutdown System (RSS) HSI which are consistent with accepted HFE practices and principles. Within the defined scope and content of the HFE Program Plan, accepted HFE methods and criteria are presented in the following documents:
(i) AR 602-1, Human Factors Engineering Program,1983, (Dept. of Defense)
(ii) DI-HFAC-80740, Human Engineering Program Plan,1989, (Dept. of Defense)
(iii)DOD-HDBK-763, Human Engineering Procedures Guide, Chapters 5-7 and Appendices A and B,1991, (Dept. of Defense)
(iv)EPRI NP-3659, Human Factors Guide for Nuclear Power Plant Control Room Development,1984, (Electric Power Research Institute)
(v) IEEE Std.1023-1988,IEEE Guide to the Application of Human Factors i
Engineering to Systems, Equipment and Facilities of Nuclear Power Generating i
Stations,1988,(IEEE) r (vi) MIL-H-46855B, Human Engineering Requirements for Military Systems, l
Equipment and Facilities,1979, (Dept. of Defense) '
(vii)NUREG-0700, Guidelines for Control Room Design Reviews,1981, (U. S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission) i 5
REV.4 102392
~
r J
i TABLE 18.E.2.1 HUMAN FACIORS ENGINEERING DESIGN TEAM AND PLANS 1
(viii)NUREG-0737, Clarification of TMI Action Plan Requirements (Item I.C.5,
" Feedback of Operating Experience to Plant Staff"),1983, (U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission)
(ix) NUREG-0899, Guidelines for the Preparation of Emergency Operating Procedures,1982, (U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission)
(x) NUREG/CR-3331, A Methodology for Allocating Nuclear Power Plant Contml Functions to Human and Automated Control,1983, (U. S. NRC)
(xi) TOP l-2-610, Test Operating Procedure - Pan 1,1990, (Dept. of Defense)
- a. pr%c.xGv-issu<,
Note that within tl set of documents listed above, differ 6nces may exist regarding specific methods and crite a applicable to the HFE Program Plan. In situations that such differences exist all of the methods and criteria presented within those documents are considered to be eqm!!y eypicyi.i;c and valid,_d, S;rcforc, any cfic abcvc !b:cd hn's mw he ce!ected = ic L6 for elemeau, vi J.c !IFE 6-~
k
- b. The HFE Program Plan shall addresf k.m 0.au.k c[af A hob 1
g (i) The ability of the operating personnel to accomplish assigned tasksdikin -hh g
4 a a. m 9e.rWmm c,A (ii) Operator workload levels and vigilanceaud. m ovuload.
4
- d. k.4% ef (iii ' Operating personnel " situation awareness."
I
(
p ors nformationprocessing (v) Operator memory requirements.
(vi) T)he potential for operator error.Oeua.ll H F6 Progro m 9 cJs d e i
(yli
- c. HSI design and evaluation scope which cbnsists of the eentre! =d men!:c:ing imi-3
.4res of the phne np Mng persenn-!!.sthe Main Control Room (MCR) and Remote Shutdown System (RSS) The HSI scope shall address normal, abnormal and
}
emergency plant operations. incindin id G
f pimd Opcredcas dd; p-6~ir sk n_ nunnyswmfrqnipmehws;g ccm cis en rcqc:paxn: b edergeing as', maintenance or inspections,The HSI scope hall also address the development of operating technical procedures for normal, abn rmal and emergency platt operation and the identification of personnel training needs applicable to the HSI design.
1 we ll o S sucvdlbe -
+_s4 g a
U I
HST3 4 epus%
h s p c.h c % Y
+ d
%6em.Ls 6
REV.4 102392 a
TABLE 18.E.2.1 HUMAN FACTORS ENGINEERING DESIGN TEAM AND PLANS
- d. The HFE Design Team as being responsible for:
(i) the development of HFE plans and procedures; (ii) the, oversight and review of HFE design, development, test, and evaluation acuvmes; (iii)the initiation, recommendation, and provision of solutions through designated channels for problems identified in the implementation of the HFE activities; (iv) verification ofimplementation of solutions to problems, (v) assurance that HFE activities comply to the HFE plans and procedures, and (vi) phasing of activities.
- c. The methods for identification, closure and documentation of human factors issues. -
- f. De HSI design configuration control procedures.
2.
The HFE Program Plan shLil also establish:
- a. That each HFE issue / concern shall be entered on the HFE Issue Tracking System log when first identified, and each action taken to eliminate or reduce the issue / concern should be documented. The final resolution of the issue / concern, as accepted by the HFE DesignTeam, shall be documented along with information regardir. ~ HFE Design Team accepta nce (e.g., person accepting, date, etc.) the individual responsibilities of the HFE Design Team members when an HFE issue / concern is identified, including definition of who should log the item, who is responsible for tracking the resolution efforts, who is responsible for acceptance of a resolution, and who shall enter the necessary closecut data, and
- b. That the HFE Issue Tracking System shall address human factors issues that are identified throughout the development and evanations of the Main Control Room and Remote Shutdown System HSI Design implementation.
~
C.. /rn oscut Dra p m fw 4L TeeKg %s4c-m,
3.
The HFE Program Managbhient Plan document shall include:
- a. The purpose and organization of the plan.
i
- b. De relationship between the HFE program and the overall plant equipment procurement and construction program (organization and p lasing).
1
- c. Definition of the HFE Design Team and their activities including:
7 REV.4 102392
- ~,.......
TABLE 18.E.2.1 HUMAN FACTORS ENGINEERING DESIGN TEAM AND PLANS (i) Description of the HFE Design Team function within the broader scope of the plant equipment procurement and construction program, including chans to show organizational and functional relationships, reponing relationships, and lines of commumcanon; (ii) Description of the responsibility, authority and accountability of the HFE Design Team organization; (iii) Description of the process through which management decisions will be made regarding HFE; (iv) Description of the process through which technical decisions will be made by the HFE Design Team (v) Description of the tools and techniques (e.g., review forms, documentation) to be utilized by the HFE Design Team in fulfilling their responsibilities (vi) Description of the the HFE Design Team staffing, job descriptions of the individualHFE Design Team personnel and their personal qualifications, and; (vii) Definition of the procedures that will govern the intemal management of the HFE Design Team.
- d. Definition of the HFE Issue Tracking System and its implementation including:
(i) Individual HFE Design Team member responsibilities regarding HFE issue identification, logging, issue resolution, and issue closcout; (ii) Procedures and documentation requirements reganiing HFE issue identification.
These shallinclude description of the HFE issue, effects of the issue if no design change action is taken and an assessment of the criticality and likelihood of the identified HFE issue manifesting itselfinto unacceptable HSI performance, and; (iii) Procedures and documentation requirements regarding HFE issue resolution.
These procedures shall include evaluation and documentation of proposed solutions, implemented solutions, evaluated residual effects of the implemented solution and the evaluated criticality and likelihood of the implemented resolution of the HFE issue manifesting itself into unacceptable HSI perfonnance.
' e. Identification and description of the following implementation plans to be developed; (i) System Functional Requirements Development, (ii) Allocation of Function, (iii) Task Analysis, I
8 REV.4 1o2392
1 l
s TABLE 18.E.2.1 HUMAN FACTORS ENGINEERING DESIGN TEAM AND PLANS l
(iv) Human-system Interface Design, (v) Plant and Emergency Operating Procedure Development, and j
]
(vi) Human Factors Verification and Validation.
4 l
- f. Definition of the phasing of HFE program activities including:
(i) "Ihe plan for completion of HFE tasks which addresses the relationships between i
HFE elements and activities, the development of HFE repons and the conduct of HFE reviews, and
]
(ii) Identification of other plant equipment procurement and construction activities 4
which are related to HFE Design Team activities but outside the scope of the team (e.g., C&I equipment manufacture)
- g. Definition of HFE documentation requirements and procedures for retention and retrieval, and l
- h. Description of the manner in which HFE Program requirements will be communicated to applicable xrsonnei ad organizations, including those which may be i
4 2
subcontractet, who are respnsible for the performance of work associated with the Main Control Room and Ren iote Shutdown System design implementation.
III.
SYSTEM FUNCTIONAL RE(UIREMENTS ANALYSIS IMPLEMENTATION PLAN a
1.
(Satisfaction of the requirements presented herein shall result in the creation of a System Functional Requirements Analysis Implementation Plan which is in full compliance with the Item 2.a acceptance criteria presented in Table 3.6 of the Tier 1 Design Certification j
material for the GE ABWR design). 'Ihe System Functional Requirements Analysis 1
Implementation Plan shall establish:
i
- a. Methods and criteria for conducting the System Functional Requirements Analysis which are consistent with accepted HFE practices and principles. Within the context of system functional requirements analysis, accepted HFE methods and criteria are presented in the following documents:
j (i) AD/A233 168, System Engineering Management Guide 1990, (Dept. of Defense -
Defense Systems Management College, Kockler, F., et al)
(ii) AR602-1, Human Factors Engineering Program,1983, (Dept. of Defense)
(iii)EPRI NP-3659. Human Factors Guide for Nuclear Power Plant Control Room Development,1984, (Electric Power Research Institute)
(iv)IEC 964, Design for Control Rooms of Nuclear Power Plants,1989, (Bureau Central de la Commission Electrotechnique Internationale) s 9
REV.4 1o2392 mm m
m..
TABLE 18.E.2.1 HUMAN FACTORS ENGINEERING DESIGN TEAM AhT PLANS (v)IEEE Std.1023-1988,IEEE Guide to the Application of Human Factors Engineering to Systems, Equipment and Facilities of Nuclear Power Generating y,*h Stations,1988, (IEEE)
J l
d E
(vi) MIL-H-46855B, Human Engincedng Requirements for Military Systems, y
j Equipment and Facilities,1979,(Dept. of Defense)
E (vii)NUREG-0700, Guidelines for Control Room Design Reviews,1981, (U. S.
7 7 Nuclear Regulatory Commission) p 4 9
j
.y 7 (viii)NUREG/CR-3331, A Methodology for Allocating Nuclear Power Plant Control Functions to Human and Automated Control,1983,(U. S. NRC)
N' *k'
[$y
/jfera P e
W v
e Note that within the set of documents listed above, differences ma fxist regarding the
^
t ?
specific methods and criteda applicable to the conduct of system unctional 1
N requirements analysis. In situations that such differences exis all of the methods and criteda presented within those documents are considered to bc<qud:y appspd= arid l
y@
valid and,-therefore,-any of ee above listed documents may be sciccv2 e ic hane Li l
n 6e syste-mfunctiond equimments andy:!L
) ( ' b. that system requirements shall define the system functions and those system functions l
NL shall provide the basis for determining the associated HSI performance requirements.
1
]
{
_!p<'
- c. that functions critical to safety shall be defined (i.e., those functions required to achieve
}
safety system performance requirements; or those functions which,if failed, coul se safety hazard to plant personnel or to the general public),
,..['overall system configuration design itself. Each function shall be ide l.
Hc Q -;;.
descdbed in terms ofinputs (observable parameters which will indicate systems N
status) functional processing (control process and performance measures required to t #
achieve the function), functional operations (including detecting signals, measuring
.p /
information, comparing one measurement with another, processing information, and acting upon decisions to produce a desired condition or result such as a system or 1
0?
component operation actuation or trip) outputs, feedback (how to determine correct discharge of function), and interface requirements so that subfunctions are related to larger funcnonal elements.
2.
The System Functional Requirements Analysis Implementation Plan shall include:
- a. The methods for identification of system level functions based upon system performance requirements. The functions shall be defined as the most general, yet
,M differentiable means whereby the system requirements are met, discharged, or satisfied.
O Functions shall be arranged in a logical sequence so that any specified operational usage of the system can be traced in an end-to-end path.
- b. The methods for developing graphic function descriptions (e.g., Functional Flow Block Diagrams and Time Line Diagrams). The functions shall be described initially in gnphic form. Function diagramming shall be done starting at a " top level", where major functions are described, and continuing to decompose major functions to lower levels until a specific critical end-item requirement emerges, e.g., a piece of equipment, software, or an operator.
10 REV.4 1o2392
TABLE 18.E.2.1 HUMAN FACTORS ENGINEERING DESIGN TEAM AND PLANS
- c. The method for developing detailed function narrative descriptions which encompass:
(i) observable parameters that indicate system status, (ii) control process and data required to achieve the function, and (iii) how to determine the manner in which proper discharge of function is to be detennined.
- d. Analysis methods which define the integration of closely related subfunctions so that l
they can be treated as a unit.
- e. Analysis methods which divide identified subfunctions into two groups according to whether:
(i) Common achievement of the subfunction is an essential condition for the accomplishment of a higher level function, or (ii)he subfunction is an altemativ.: supponing functions to a higher level function or the subfunction's accomplishinent is not necessarily a requisite for a higher level function.
- f. Requirements to identifyp each integrated subfunction:
(i) The basis for why accomplishment of the subfunction is required, (ii) ne control actions necessary for accomplishment of the subfunctions, (iii)The parameters necessary for the subfunction contml actions, (iv) The criteria for evaluating the resultof the subfunction control actions, a
(v) The parameters necessary for evaluation of the subfunction, (vi) The criteria b be used to evaluate the subfunction, and (vii)The criieria for selecting altemative function assignments if the evaluation criteria is not satisfied.
IV.
ALli) CATION OF FUNCTION IMPLEhENTATION PLAN 1.
(Satisfaction of the requirements presented herein shall result in the creation of an Allocation of Function Implementation Plan which is in full compliance with the Item 3.a Acceptance Criteria presented in Table 3.6 of the Tier 1 Design Certification material for the GE ABWR design). The Allocation of Function Implementation Plan Shall establish:
- a. The methods and criteria for the execution of function allocation which'are consistent with accepted HFE practices and principles. Within the context of function allocation, accepted HFE pracnces and principles are presented in the following documents:
11 REV.4 102392
TABLE 18.E.2.1 HUMAN FACTORS ENGINEERING DESIGN TEAM AND PLANS (i) AD/A223 168, System Engincedng Management Guide 1990, (Dept. of Defense -
Defense Systems Management College, Kockler, F., et al)
(ii) AR 602-1, Human Factors Engineering Program,1983, (Dept. of Defense)
(iii)EPRI NP-3659, Human Factors Guide for Nuclear Power Plant Control Room Development,1984, (Electric Power Research Institute)
(iv)IEC 964, Design for Control Rooms of Nuclear Power Plants,1989, (Bureau Central de la Commission Electrotechnique Internationale)
(v) NUREG-0700, Guidelines for Control Room Design Reviews,1981, (U. S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission) l (vi)NUREG/CR-3331, A Methodology for Allocating Nuclear Power Plant Control Functions to Human and Automated Control,1983,(U. S. NRC)
Note that within the set of documents listed above, differences may exist regarding the specific methods and criteria applicable to the conduct and analysis of function 8"'"
allocation. In situations that such differences exist, all of the methods and criteria pmserited within those documents are considered to be equally appropdate and valid and, therefore, any of the above listed dccuments may be selectec; as the basis for "g
I conducting the function allocation and analysis.
- b. That aspects of system and functions definition shall be analyzed in terms of resulting humart perfomaance requirements basqd on the expected user populatipn.7kd b
- c. That the allocation of functions to personnel, system elements, and b e h hbe_a.b. Allh.Ka_. o MQy et-km 5 ystemosold combinations shall reflect :
aJ!ece.h bedtcw5i (i) sensitivity, precision, time, and safety requirements, ocold 6.
(ii) reliability of system performance, and
%Aw (iii)the number and the necessary skills of the personnel required to operate and hWMM maintain the system.
d.
at the allocation criteria, rationale, analyses, and procedures shall be documented.
- e. Analyses shall confhm tnat the personnel can perfonn tasks allocated to them while maintaining operator situation awareness, acceptable personnel workload, and personnel vigilance.
2.
The Allocation of Function Implementation Plan shall include:
- a. Establishment of a structured basis and criteria for function allocation.
- b. Definition of function allocation analyses requirements iricluding:
12 REV.4 102392
l-j j
TABLE 18.E.2.1 HUMAN FACIORS ENGINEERING DESIGN TEAM AND PLANS (i) Definition of the objectives and requirements for the evaluation of function allocations (ii) Development of altemative function allocations for use in the conduct of j
comparative evaluations (iii) Development of criteria to be used as the basis for selecting between attemative function allocations i
J (iv) Development of evaluation criteria weighting factors J
)
(v) Development of test and analysis methods for evaluating function allocation altemauves (vi) Definition of the methods to be used in conducting assessments of the sensitivity of the comparative function allocation altematives analyses results to the individual 4 analysis inputs and criteria 6
(vii) Definition of the methods to be employed in selecting individual function allocation forin
{% gorporation into the implemented, design.
p_. -
.m
-=-g y a
, 1 rp
-,m 1-e & - -
TASK ANALYSIS IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
~~T i
1.
(Satisfaction of the requirements presented herein shall result in the creation of a Task Analysis Implementat:on Plan which is in full compliance with the Item 4.a Acceptance Criteria presented in Table 3.6 of the Tier 1 Design Certification material for the GE ABWR design). The Task Analysis Implementation Plan shall establish:
- a. 'Ihe methods and criteria for conduct of the task analyses which are consistent with t
accepted HFE practices and principles. Within the context of perfonning task analysis, accepted HFE methods and criteria are presented in the followmg documents:
(i) AD/A223168, System Engineering Management Guide 1990, (Dept. of Defense -
Defense Systems Management College, Kockler, F., et al) i (ii) DOD-HDBK-763, Human Engineering Procedures Guide, Chapters 5-7 and Appendices A and B,1991,(Dept. of Defense)
(iii)EPRI NP-3659, Human Factors Guide for Nuclear Power Plant Control Room Development,1934, (Electric Power Research Institute)
(iv)IEC 964, Design for Control Rooms of Nuclear Power Plants,1989, (Bureau c
Central de la Commission Electmtechnique Intemationale)
(v) IEEE Std.1023-1988, IEEE Guide to the Application of Human Factors Engineering to Systems, Equipment and Facilities of Nuclear Power Generating Stations,1988, (IEEE)
(vi) MIL-H-46855B, Human Engineering Requirements for Military Systems, Equipment and Facilities,1979, (Dept. of Defense)
(vii)hUL-STD 1478, Task Performance Analysis,1991,(Dept. of Defense) 13 REV.4 102392
i TABLE 18.E.2.1 HUMAN FACTORS ENGINEERING DESIGN TEAM AhT PLANS (viii)NUREG-0700, Guidelines for Control Room Design Reviews,1981, (U. S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission)
(ix)NUREG/CR-3331, A Methodology for Allocating Nuclear Power Plant Control Functions to Human and Automated Control,1983,(U. S. NRC)
(x) NUREG/CR-3371 Tr.sk Analysis of Nuclear Power Plant Control Room Crews (vol.1),1983, (U. S. NRC)
Note that within the set of documents listed above, differences may exist regarding the specific methods and criteria applicable to the conduct of HFE task analysis. In g,%
situations that such differences exist, all of the methods and criteria presented within g%
those documents are considered to be equally appropriate and valid and, therefore, any of the above listed documents may be selected as the basis for the task analysis.
E,.
- b. The scope of the task analysis which shall include operationy, perform y
operator interface in the Main Control Room and at the Remote Shutdown System. The analyses shall be directed to the full range of plant operating modes, including startup, nonna] operations, abnormal operations, transient conditions, low power and shutdown conditions. The analyses shall also address operator interface operations during periods of maintenance test and inspection of plant systems and equipment and of the HSI equipment.
- c. That the analysis shall link the identified and described tasks in operational sequence diagrams. The task &scriptions and operational sequence diagrams shall be used to identify which tasks are entical to safety in terms of importance for function achievement, potential for human error, and impact of task failure. Human actions which are identified through PRA sensitivity analyses to have significant impact on safet shall also be considered " critical" tasks. Wle c&lha.1 Emc..o W a.
cma.4el emMdu oJ1 km task 6 twe.tod
,odfor, o.u-fem M 4
- d. Task analysis sha$1 develop narrative descriptions of the personne tivities req
-fo 45 for successful completion of the task. A task shall be a group of activities, often i
occurring in temporal proximity, which utilize a common set of displays and controls.
qeguf Task analyses shall define the input, process, and output required by and of personnel. a_cdic45 h
- e. The task analysis shallidentify requirements for alarms, displays, data processing, and g-controls.
- f. The task analysis results shall be made available as input to the personnel training programs.
2.
The Task Analysis Implementation Plan shall include:
- a. The methods and data sources to be used in the conduct of the task analysis
- b. The methods for conducting the initial (high level) task analysis including:
J (i) converting functions to tasks, (ii) developing narrative task descriptions, l
(iii) developing the basic statement of the task functions, 14 REV.4 1o2392
i l
TABLE 18.E.2.1 HUMAN FACIORS ENGINEERING DESIGN TEAM AND PLANS (iv) decomposition of tasks to individual activities, and (v) development of operational sequence diagrams
- c. The methods for developing detailed task descriptions that address; (i) information requirements (i.e., information required to execute a task, including cues for task initiation),
(ii) decision-making requirements (i.e., decisions that are probable based on the j
evaluations, description of the decisions to be made and the evaluations to be l
performed),
j i
(iii) response requirements (i.e., actions to be taken, frequency of action, speed / time line requirements, any tolerance / accuracy requirements associated with the action, consideration of any operational limits of personnel performance or of equipment body movements required by an action taken, and any overlap of task requirements such as serial vs. parallel task elements),
j l
(iv) feedback requirements (i.e., feedback required to indicate adequacy of actions i
taken),
(v) personnel workload (i.e., both cognitive and physical workload and the estimatiod l
of the level of difficulty associated with a pam,cular workload condition),
{
l t
(vi) any associated task support requirements (i.e., special/ protective clothing, job aids j
or reference materials required. any tools and equipment required or any computer l
processing support aids),
j (vii)workplace factors (i.e., the workspace envelope required by the action taken, workspace environmental conditions, location that the work is to be performed, the physical / mental attributes of the work),
(viii) staffing and communication requirements (i.e., the number of personnel, their technical specialty, and specific skills, the form and content of communications and other personnel interaction required when more than one person is involved),
l ud l
(ix) the identification of any hazards involved in execution of the task.
l
- d. He methods for identification of critical tasks. De identified critical tasks shall include, at the minimum, those operator actions which have significant impact on the PRA results as presented in Seenon 19D.7 of the SSAR.
- e. De methods for establishing information and control requirements.
- f. The methods for conducting alarm, display, processing, and control requirements analysis.
1 1
- g. The methods through which the application of task analysis results are assembled and documented to provide input to the development of personnel training programs.
]
i 15 REV.4 1o2392 2
i I
i
)
i l
TABLE 18.E.2.1 HUMAN FACTORS ENGINEERING DESIGN TEAM AND PLANS i
- h. the metho:is to be used to evaluate the results of the task analysis, j
VI.
HSI DESIGN IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 1.
(Satisfaction of the requirements presented herein shall result in the creation of an HSI i
Design Implementation Plan which is in full compliance with the Item 5.a Acceptance 4
j Criteria presented in Table 3.6 of the Tier 1 Design Certification material for the GE ABWR design). The HSI Design Implementation Plan shall establish:
1 1
I
- a. The methods and criteria for HSI equipment design and evaluation of HSI human performance, equipment design and associated work place factors; which are consistent i
with accepted HFE practices and principles. Within the context of performing these l
HSI design evaluations, accepted HFE methods and criteda are presented in the l
following documents:
[
1 (i) AD/A223 168, System Engineering Management Guide 1990, (Dept. of Defense -
l Defense Systems Management College, Kockler, F., et al)
(ii) ANSI HFS-100, American National Standard for Human Factors Engineering of Visual Display Terminal Workstations,1988, (Am. Nat'l. Standards Institute) 2 (iii)EPRI NP-3659, Human Factors Guide for Nuclear Power Plant Control Room j
Development,1984, (Elecnic Power Research Ir.stitute) l (iv)EPRI NP-3701, Computer-Generated Display System Guidelines,1984, (Electric Power Research Institute) i (v) ESD-TR-86-278. Guidelines for Designing User Interface Software,1990, (Depanment of Defense)
(vi)IEC 964, Design for Control Rooms of Nuclear Power Plants,1989, (Bureau Central de la Commission Electrotechnique Intemationale)
(vii) MIL-H-46855B, Human Engineering Requirements for Military Systems, Equipment and Facilities,1979, (Dept. of Defense)
(viii) MIL-HDBK-759A, Human Factors Engineering Design for Army Material,1981, j
(Dept. of Defense)
(ix)DOD-HDBK-761 A, Human Engineering Guidelines for Management Information j
Systems,1990, (Dept. of Defense)
(x) MIL-STD-1472D, Human Engineering Design Criteria for Military Systems, Equipment and Facilities,1989, (Dept. of Defense)
(xi)NUREG-0696, Functional Criteria for Emergency Response Facilities,1980, (U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission) j 16 REV.4 1o'2392
i I
I 1
1 TABLE 18.E.2.1 HUMAN FACIORS ENGINEERING DESIGN TEAM AND PLANS (xii)NUREG-0700, Guidelines for Control Room Design Reviews,1981, (U. S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission) i (xiii)NUREG-0800, Standard Review Plan, Rev.1,1984, (U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission)
(xiv)NUREG-0899 Guidelines for the P rparation of Emergency Operating Procedures,1982, (U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission)
(xv)NUREG/CR-5228, Techniques for Preparing Flowchart Format Emergency Operating Procedures (Vols. 1 & 2),1989, (U. S. NRC)
(xvi)NUREG/CR-4227 Human Engineering Guidelines for the Evaluation and i
Assessment of Video Display Units,1985,(U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission) r 4
i Note that within the set of documents listed above, differences may exist regarding the j
1 specific methods and criteria applicable to the conduct of HSI design evaluations. In y
t i
situations that such differences exist, all of the methods and criteria presented within those documents are considered to be equally appropriate and valid and, therefore; of the above listed documents may be selected as the basis for the HSI design
~
evaluations.
- b. That the HSI design shallimplement the information and control requirements developed through the task analyses, including the displays, controls and alarms 4
necessary for the execution of those tasks identified in the task analyses as being critical tasks.
- c. 'Ihe methods for comparing the consistency of the HSI human performance equipment, design and associated workplace factors with that modeled and evaluated in the i
completed task analysis.
- d. That the HSI design shall not incorporate equipment (i.e., hardware or software function) which has not been specifically evaluated in the task analysis.
l
- e. The HSI design criteria and guidance fo trol roon p rh hHn;; p-dc6 c' A a
- = int==ce, test and Licuiva of cunaul muu,"S! T pMnd of other plant i
equipment which has control room personnel interface.
- f. The test and evaluation methods for resolving HFE/HSI design issues. These test and i
evaluation methods shall include the criteria to be used in selecting HFE/HSI design and evaluation tools which:
(i) may incorporate the use of static mockups and models for evaluating access and workspace related HFEissues, and (ii) sh'. ' require dynamic simulations and HSI prototypes for conducting evaluations of the human performance associated with the activities in the critical tasks identified in the task analysis.
E lu uNN
$G5 lqf s v S a 0- Qjf3 3,a
~
~
~
,.m e
u.-c,
._ m w i=n yvw w
,-..g MM REV.4 102392
TABLE 18.E.2.1 HUMAN FACTORS ENGINEERING DESIGN TEAM AND PLANS 2.
The Human System Interface Design Implementation Plan shall include:
- a. Identification of the specific HFE standards and guidelines documents which t
substantiate that the selected HSI Design Evaluation Methods and Cdteria are based upon accepted HFE practices and principles.
- b. Definition of standardized HFE design conventions.
- c. Definition that the standard design features, presented in Section 18.4.2 of the Standard Safety Analysis Report (SSAR); the Standard HSI equipment technologies, presented in Section 18.4.3 of the SSAR; and the displays, controls and alanns presented in Tables 18F-1,18F-2 and 18F-3 of the SSAR Appendix 18F, shall be mcorporated as requirements on the HSI design,
- d. Definition of the design / evaluation tools (e.g., prototypes) which air to be used in the conduct of the HSI design analyses, the specific scope cf evaluations for which those tools are to be applied and the rationale for the selection of those specific tools and their associated scope of application.
VIL PLANT AND EMERGENCY OPERATING PROCEDURE DEVELOPMENT IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 1.
(Satisfaction of the requirements presented herein shall result in the creation of a Plant and Emergency Operating Procedure 3evelopment Implementation Plan which is in full compliance with the Item 6.a Acceptance Criteria presented in Table 3.6 of the Tier 1 Design Certification material for the GE ABWR design). The Pla6t and Emergency Operating Procedure Development Implementation Plan shall establish :
- a. Methods and criteria for development of the operating technical procedures which are consistent with accepted HFE practices and principles. Within the context of operating procedure development, accepted HFE methods and criteria are presented in the following documents:
1
~
(i) ANSI-N18.7-1976, Administrative Controls and Quality Assurance for the Operation Phase of Nuclear Power Plants,1976, (Am. Nat'l. Stds. Instit.)
(ii) EPRI NP-3659, Human Factors Guide for Nuclear Power Plant Control Room Development,1984, Electric Power Research Institute (iii)IEC 964, Design for Control Rooms of Nuclear Power Plants,1989, (Bureau Central de la Commission Electrotechnique Intemationale)
' (iv) MIL-H-468558 Human Engineering Requirements for Military Systems, Equipment and Facilities,1979, (Dept. of Defense)
(v) NUREG-0899, Guidelines for the Preparation of Emergency Operating Procedures, 1982, (U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission)
(vi)NUREG-1358, I.cssons Izarned from :he Special Inspection Program for Emergency Operating Procedures,1989, (U. S. Nucl. Regul. Commission) s
- sww,
% 13GEf.
l 1
1 j
i TABLE 18.E.2.1 HUMAN FACTORS ENGINEERING DESIGN TEAM AND PLANS (vii)NUREG/CR-5228, Techniques for Preparing Flowchart Format Emergency Operating Procedures (Vols. 1 & 2),1989, (U. S. NRC) l (viii)MII M - 63035 (TM), Military Specifications Manuals, Technical: Front End i
l Analysis,1977,(Dept. of Defense)
Note that within the set of documents listed above, differences may exist regarding the specific methods and criteria applicable to the development of operating technical SN
@nte.4; {
procedures. In situations that such differences exist, all of the methods and criteda pmsented within those documents are considered to be equally ap 3ropriate and valid i
and, therefore, any of the above listed documents may be selectec. as the basis for the l
l operating technical procedure development.
)
l
- b. Hat the procedures to be developed shall address normal, abnormal, and emergency j
plant operations includingm,a, Gen of p!=it og m ene da-ing g.mde aca p!st dM g,qy&=/qu! rum mg * - -Npcreierinicifecc (i.c., s=k con:rc! ro0m) cqu!; ;;;
g hr.w3 a =&:;c.ng4est, mamtenance or mspection. De scope of the p!=: epacc=
a P
i technical procedures development 4s E.i.cd iv Gumdrocedurc%c =d r-fuelload Shuj 3
A11 N
A l
So.ns b5g anginiti !p:aaroperationgMdo nore**( Po#
p, cQ 3
i n.s iWilu
- c. Hat operator actions identified in the task a[afys.is shallbe usedg th
% f*M T%
uo is for CD.D
~ ]ecinge rocedures for operationsa.s we ll 0 5-f sp
- d. nat a Writer's Guide shall be develo# which establishes the process for developing j
g she technical procedures h! pn' and cywm ep-=:ica, :bnc-d p!an; S4e.v. Opmaonsr+mugency p!=: open:icn: =d fe~.,sponding :c p!=: :!=n cond:Ge..;.
l 5
b The Writer's Guide shall contain objective criteria which will require that the operations technical procedures developed are cor:sistent in organization, style, content and usage b
15 U c.ey?{s 1l. nit, ocum k l of termsQ mm +%d pc~ --Lsss, s.n Ok CD.D t.pde,kh-d =^= k ' 4-- O f Prop (1abt. -
1 0Ss.
I i
2.
The Plant and Emergency Operating Procedure Developrhent Implementation Plan shall l
include-
- a. Identification of the task analyses' definition of required human actions as the data source to be used as the basis for procedure development,
- b. Requirements for the development and use of a Technical Procedure Writets Guide,
- c. Definition of the methods through which specific operator skills and training needs, as may be considered necessary for reliable execution of the procedures, will be identified and documented as pa : of the technical procedures development activities, and L
- d. Requirement that the documented technical procedures developed shallinclude:
(i) Title of the procedure (ii) Statement of the procedure's goal and applicability (iii) Identification of reference matedal necessary to support execution of the procedure 19 REV.4 1o7392 l
l TABLE 18.E.2.1 HUMAN FACTORS ENGINEERING DESIGN TEAM AND PLANS
[
(iv) Identification of prerequisite conditions which must be satisfied prior to execution of the procedure 3
(v) Identification of precautions ( i.e., warnings, cautions, and notes) that must be considered in the execution of the procedure i
(vi) Identification of operational limits i
i (vii) Definition of the specific human actions steps required, and (viii) Identification of the specific criteda that the operator may use tojudge that the i
goals of the procedure have been achieved VIII. HUMAN FACTORS VERIFICATION AND VALIDATION IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 1.
(Satisfaction of the requirements presented herein shall result in the creation of a Human i
Factors Verification and Validation Implementation Plan which is in full compliance with the Item 7.a Acceptance Criteria presented in Table 3.6 of the Tier 1 Design Certification material for the GE ABWR design). The Human Factors Verification and Validation (V&V) Implementation Plan shall establish:
- a. Human factors V&V methods and criteria which are consistent with accepted HFE i
practices and principles. Within the context of performing human factors V&V, i
accepted HFE methods and criteria are presented in the following documents:
l (i) AD/A223 168, System Engineering Management Guide 1990, (Dept. of Defense -
Defense Systems Management College, Kockler, F., et al) l (ii) DOD-HDBK-763, Human Engineering Procedures Guide, Chapters 5-7 and Appendices A and B,1991, (Dept. of Defense)
(iii)DODI 5000.2, Defense Acquisition Management Policies and Procedures,1991, (Dept.of Defense)
(iv)EPRI NP-3701, Computer-Generated Display System Guidelines,1984, (Electric f
Power Research Institute)
(v) IEC 964, Design for Control Rooms of Nuclear Power Plants, l989, (Bureau Central de la Commission Electrotechnique Intemationale)
(vi)IEEE Std. 845-1988, IEEE Guide to Evaluation of Man-Machine Performance in Nuclear Power Generating' Station Control Rooms and Other Peripheries,1988 (IEEE) ~
(vii) MIL-H-46855B Human Engineering Requirements for Military Systems, Equipment and Facilities,1979, (Dept. of Defense)
(viii)DOD-HDBK-761 A, Human Engineedng Guidelines for Management Information Systems,1990, (Dept. of Defense)
(ix)NUREG-0700, Guidelines for Control Room Design Reviews,1981, (U. S.
e Nuclear Regulatory Commission) 20 REV.4 toZW2
i TABLE 18.E.2.1 HUMAN FACTORS ENGINEERING DESIGN TEAM AhT PLANS (x) NUREG-0899, Guidelines for the Preparation of Emergency Operating Procedures, 1982, (U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission)
(xi) TOP 1-2-610, Test Operating Procedure - Part 1,1990, (Dept. of Defense)
I (xii)NSAC-39, Verification and Validation for Safety Parameter Display Systems, 1981, (Electric Power Research Institute)
(xiii)NUREG/CR-4227 Human Engincedng Guidelines for the Evaluation and Assessment of Video Display Units,1985, (U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission)
Note that within the set of documents listed above, differences may exist regarding the specific methods and criteria applicable to the conduct of human factors V&V.
In situations that such differences exist, all of the methods and criteria presented within those documents are considered to be equally appropriate and valid and, ccwcd therefort, any of the above listed documents may be selected as the basis for hu factors V&V.
- b. That the scope of the evaluations of the integrated HSI shallinclude:
j (i) The Human-System Interface (including both the interface of the operator with the HSI equipment hardware and the interface of the operator with the HSI equipment's software driven functions)
(ii) The plant and emergency operating technical procedures, and (iii) HSI work environment.
- c. 'Itat static and/or " pan-task" mode evaluations of the HSI equipment shall be conducted to confum that the controls, displays, and data processing functions identified in the task analyses are pe,LJ.: ck Fr pu-a. g H G E? Q A.G o h h u b d p ri w ;C p le. S.
~
- d. The integration of HSI equipment with each other, with the operating personnel and with the Plant and Emergency Operating Technical Procedures shall be evaluated through the conduct of dynamic task performance testing. The dynamic task performance testing and evaluations shall be performed over the full scope of the mtegrated HSI design using dynamic HSI prototypes (i.e., prototypical HSI uipment 4
which is dynamically driven by real time plant simulation computer models), ler evaluation tools and/or past dynamic task performance test and evaluation result e s W
methods for defining the scope and application of the dynamic HSI prototype, past test results and other evaluation tools shall be documented in the implementation plan. The
.a dynamic task performance tests and evaluations shall have as their objectives:
g (i) Confirmation that the identified critical funcdons can be achieved using integratui HSI design, (ii) Confumation that the HSI design and configuration can be operated using the established Main Control Room staffing levels, 21 REV.4 1o'2392
i s
~
TABLE 18.E.2.1 HUMAN FACTORS ENGINEERING DESIGN TEAM AND PLANS (iii) Confirmation that the Plant and Emergency Operating Technical Procedures provide l
direction for completing the identified tasks associated with nonnal, abnormal and emergency operations, and gce l
(iv) Confirmation that the time dependen spects of the HSI equipment performance allow for task accomplishment.
l c.
at dynamic task performance test evaluations shall be conducted over the range of l
operational conditions and upsets, including:
C (i) Normal plant operations, such as plant startup, shutdown, full power cp
{lo y operations, and plant maintenance activities, k
ok (ii) Plant system and equipment failures, Oc MSb N^
h
- )HSI equipment failures, iii g
(iv) Plant transients, and M
(v) Postulated plant accidents conditions.
f
- f. 'Ihe HFE performance measures to be used as the basis for evaluating the dynamic task
~
performance test results. These performance measures shallinclude:
(i) Operating crew primary task performance characteristics, such as task times and procedure compliance, (ii) operating crew errors and error rates, (iii) operating crew situation awareness, (iv) operating crew workload, (v) operating crew communications and coordination, (vi)anthropometry evaluations, and (vii)HSI equipment performance measures.
- g. The methods to confirm that HFE issues identified and documented in the Human Factors Issue Tracking System have been resolved in the integrated HSI design.
- h. The methods and cdteria to be used to confirm that cdtical human actions, as defined by the task analysighave been addressed in the integrated HSI design.
M PM MA
- i. The methods and cdteda to be used(to evaluate the adequacy of the ope procedures.
l 2.
The Human Factors Vedfication and Validation Implementation Plan shall include :
- a. DefinitionofTestObjectives 22 REV.4 102392
i.
TABLE 18.E.2.1 HUMAN FACTORS ENGINEERING DESIGN TEAM Aht PLANS i
- b. Definition of Test methods and procedums.
~
a j
- c. Identification of the participants in the dynamic task performance testing, which shall include licensed operators as test subjects.
j i
- d. Definition of dynamic task performance test conditions which shall include:
l i
(i) plant startup operations, (ii) plant power operations, (iii) plant shutdown operations, j
(iv) plant refueling and maintenance operations, j
(v) individual plant system and equipment failures, Thelod AS b
(vi) individual HSI equipment failure (e.g., loss of VDU functions),
(vii) design basis transients (e.g., turbine trip, loss of feedwater),
i (viii) design basis accidents (e.g., LOCAs),
(ix) execution of symptom based emergency procedures, and l
(x) execution of task scenarios which contain critical tasks as identified in the task analyses.
- e. Methods for defining scope and configuration of the prototypical HSI requimd to suppon testing
- f. Methods for defining criteria and performance measums to be used in evaluating test results.
j
' g. Method for conducting analysis of test data.
i
~
f
- h. Requireme~nt that the HSI design shall be reviewed and confinned:
(i) to have incorporated the inventory of controls, displays and alarms presented m i
Tables 18F.1,2 and 3 of the ABWR Standard Safety Analysis Repon (SSAR),
i and (ii) that the implemented design is consistent with the standard design features and 1
technologies as presented in Sections 18.4.2 and 18.4.3, respectively, of the SSAR.
i
- i. Requirements for the development of documented test & evaluation plans and procedures.
- j. Requirements for documenting test results.
5 9
23 REV.4 102392 I
TABLE 18E.2.2 HFE ANALYSIS I.
SYSTEM FUNCTIONAL REQUIREMENTS ANALYSES 2
1.
(Satisfaction of the requirements presented herein shall result in the conduct of system functional requirements analyses which are in full compliance with the Item 2.b Acceptance Criteria presented in Table 3.6 of the Tier 1 Design Cenification material for the GE ABWR design). The system functional requirements analyses shall be conducted in accordance with the requirements of the Human Factors Engineering Program Plan and the System Functior.al Requirements Analysis Implementation Plan.
2.
The results of the system functional requirements analyses shall be documente d in a report that includes the following:
- a. Objectives of the system functional requirements analyses.
- b. Description of the methods employed in the conduct of system functional requirements analyses.
- c. Identification of deviations from the System Functional Requirements Analysis Implementation Plan.
- d. Presentation and discussion of the results of the system functional requirements analysis including discussion of design change recommendations denved from these analyser and/or negative implications that the current design may have on safe plant operations.
- c. Conclusions regarding the conduct of the analyses and the analysis results.
3.
'Ite results of the HFE Design Team's evaluation of the conduct and results of the system functional requirements analyses shall be documented in a report that includes the following:
- a. The methods and procedures used by the HFE Design Team in their resiew of the system functional requirements analyses.
- b. The HFE Design Team's evaluation of the completed system functional requirements analyses including evaluation of the compliance with the System Functional Require-ments Analysis Implementation Plan and the HFE Program Plan.
- c. Presentation and discussion of the HFE Design Team's Review findings.
II.
FUNCTION ALLOCATION ANALYSES 1.
(Satisfaction of the requirements presented herein shall result in the conduct of function allocation analyses which are in full compliance with the Item 3.b Acceptance Criteria presented in Table 3.6 of the Tier 1 Design Cenification material for the GE ABWR design). The function allocation analyses shall be conducted in accordance with the requirements of the Human Factors Engineering Program Plan and the Allocation of Functions Implementation Plan.
~
1 24 REV.4 1o2392
TABLE 18.E.2.2 HFE ANALYSIS 2.
The results of the function allocation analysis shall be documented in a report that includes the following:
- a. Objectives of the function allocation analyses.
- b. Description of the methods employed in the conduct of the function allocation analyses.
- c. Identification of deviations from the Allocation of Function Implementation Plan.
- d. Presentation and discussion of the results of the function allocation analyses including discussion of design change recommendations derived from these analyses and/or negative implications that the cu Tent design may have on safe plant operations.
- e. Conclusions regarding the conduct of the analyses and analysis results.
3.
The results of the HFE Design Team's evaluation of the conduct and results of the function allocation analyses shall be documented in a report that includes the following:
- a. The methods and procedures used by the HFE Design Team in their review of the function allocation analyses.
- b. The HFE Design Team's evaluation of the completed function allocation analyses including an evaluation of the compliance with the Allocation of Function Implementation Plan and the HFE Program Plan.
- c. Presentation and discussion of the HFE Design Team's review findings.
III.
TASK ANALYSES 1.
(Satisfaction of the requirements presented herein shall result in the conduct of task analyses which art in full compliance with the Item 4.b Acceptance Criteria presented in Table 3.6 of the Tier 1 Design Certification material for the GE ABWR Design). The task analyses shall be conducted in accordance with the rec uirements of the Human Factors Engineering Program Plan and the Task Analysis Imp ementation Plan.
2.
The results of the task analyses shall be documented in a report that includes the following:
l
- a. Objectives of the task analyses.
- b. Description of the methods employed in the conduct of the task analyses.
- c. Identification of deviations fro'm the Task Analyses Implementation Plan.
I
- d. Presentation and discussion of the results of the task analyses, including discussion of design change recommendations derived from these analyses and/or negative implications that the cuzTent design may have on safe plant operations, and
- e. Conclusions regarding the conduct of the analyses and the analyses results.
1 25 REV.4 102392 1
.. -. _ - =
i TABLE 18.E.2.2 HFE ANALYSIS 3.
The results of the HFE Design Team's evaluation of the conduct and results of the task analyses shall be documented in a report that includes the following:
- a. The methods and procedures used by the HFE Design Team in their review of the i
completed task analyses.
P
- b. The HFE Design Team's evaluation of the completed task analyses including an evaluation of the compliance with the Task Analysis Implementation Plan and the HFE Program Plan, j
- c. Presentation and discussion of the HFE Design Team's review findings.
f 1
E e
h i
i 8
26 REV.4 1o2192
d TABLE 18.2.3 HUMAN SYSTEM INTERFACE DESIGN AND PROCEDURES.
DEVELOPMENT I.
HSI DESIGN ANALYSES 1.
(Satisfaction of the requirements presented herein shall result in the conduct of HSI design analyses which are in full compliance with the Item 5.b Acceptance Criteria presented in Table 3.6 of the Tier 1 Design Cenification material for the GE ABWR design). He Human System Interface (HSI) design implementation and analyses shall be conducted in accordance with the requirements of the Human Factors Engineering Pmgram Plan and the HSI Design Implementation Plan.
2.
The results of the human system interface (HSI) design analyses shall be documented in a repon thatincludes the following:
- a. Objectives of the HSI design analyses,
- b. Description of the methods employed in the conduct of the HSI design analyses,
- c. Identification of deviations from the HSI Design Implementation Plan,
- d. Presentation and discussion of the results of the HSI design analyses, including discussion of design change recommendations derived from these analyses and/or negative implications that the current design may have on safe plant operations, and
- e. Conclusions regarding the conduct of the analyses and the analysis results.
3 The results of the HFE Design Team's evaluation of the conduct and results of the HSI design analyses shall be documented in a repon that includes the following:
- a. The methods and procedures used by the HFE Design Team in the:r review of the HSI design analyses,
- b. The HFE Design Team's evaluation of tne completed HSI design analyses, including an evaluation of the compliance with the HSI Design Implementation Plan and HFE Program Plan, and
- c. Presentation and discussion of the HFE Design Team's review fir. dings.
II.
PLANT AND EMERGliNCY OPERATING PROCEDURE DEVELOPhENT I.
(Satisfaction of the requirements presented herein shall result in the development of plant operations technical procedures which are in full compliance with the Item 6.b Acceptance Criteria presented in Table 3.6 of the Tier 1 Design Certification material for the GE ABWR design). The development of the plant operations technical procedures shall be conducted in accordance with the requtrements of the Human Factors Engineering Program Plan and the Plant and Emergency Operating Procedure Development Implementation Plan.
2.
He results of the technical procedure development activities shall be documented in a repon thatincludes the followmg:
- a. Objectives of the technical procedure development.
1
- b. Description of the methods employed in the development of the technical pmcedures.
27 REV.4 1o2392
T l
TABLE 18.2.3 HUMAN SYSTEM INTERFACE DESIGN Aht PROCEDURES.
DEVELOPMENT f
- c. Identification of any deviations from the Plant and Emergency Operating Procedure Development Implementation Plan.
j
- d. Pmsentation and discussion of the msults, including a list of the procedures developed, discussion of a representative sample of procedures, and a discussion of design change recommendations dedved during the course of technical procedure development and/or negative implications that the current design may have on safe plant operations.
- c. Conclusions regarding the conduct of the procedures development and regarding the resultant procedures.
3.
'Ihe results of the HFE Design Team's evaluation of the conduct and results of the technical l
procedures development shall be documented in a report that includes the followmg:
- a. The methods and procedures used by the HFE Design Team in their review of the operating technical procedures development.
l
- b. The HFE Design Team's evaluation of the completed technical procedures development, including ra evaluation of the compliance with the Plant and Emergency Operatmg Procedure Development Implementation Plan and HFE Program Plan.
- c. Presentation and discussion of the HFE Design Team's review findings.
l e
Y l
28 REV.4 102392
A TABl_E 18.E.2.4 HUMAN FACTORS VERIFICATION AND VALIDATION I.
HUMAN FACTORS VERIFICATION Aht VALIDATION 1.
(Satisfaction of the requirements presented herein shall result in the conduct of human factors verification and validation activities which are in full compliance with the Item 7.b Acceptance Criteria presented in Table 3.6 of the Tier 1 Design Certification material for the GE ABWR design). The human factors verification and validation (V&V) of the human system interface (HSI) design shall be conducted in accordance with the requirements of the Human Factors Engineering Program Plan and the Human Factors V&V Implementation Plan 2.
He results of the human factor verification and validation (V&V) activities shall be documented in a repon that includes the following:
- a. Objectives of the human factors V&V.
- b. Description of the methods employed in the conduct of the human factors V&V.
- c. Identification of deviations from the Human Factors V&V Implementation Plan.
- d. Presentation and discussion of the human factors V&V results, including discussion of design change recommendations derived from the human factors V&V tests and evaluations and/or significant negative implications that the current HSI design may have on safe plant operations which may have been identified.
- e. Conclusions regarding the conduct of the human factors V&V and the results.
3.
The results of the HFE Design Team's evaluation of the conduct and results of the human factor verification and validation (V&V) shall be documented in a repon that includes the following:
- a. He review methodology and procedures used by the HFE Design Team in their review of the human factor V&V.
- b. The HFE Design Team's evaluation of the completed human factors V&V, including an evaluation of the compliance with the Human Factors V&V Implementation Plan and HFE Program Plan.
- c. The HFE Design Team's evaluation of the completed human factors V&V, including an evaluation of the presentation and discussion of the HFE Design Team's review findings.
l 29 REV.4 102192 l
.