ML20042D074
| ML20042D074 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Zion File:ZionSolutions icon.png |
| Issue date: | 08/23/1988 |
| From: | SCIENCE APPLICATIONS INTERNATIONAL CORP. (FORMERLY |
| To: | NRC |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20042D076 | List: |
| References | |
| CON-NRC-03-82-096, CON-NRC-3-82-96 SAIC-88-3021, TAC-51217, TAC-51218, NUDOCS 8808260424 | |
| Download: ML20042D074 (7) | |
Text
.-
l l ENCLOSURE r;
SAIC 88/3021.
(
h
'l TECHNICAL EVALUATION REPORT.
0F THE
.c DETAILED CONTROL ROOM DESIGN REVIEW FOR-COMMONWEALTH' EDISON. COMPANY'S 4
ZION STATION, UNITS 1 AND 2 f
TAC N0s. 51217 AND'51218 I
(
J it J-
~
am==ae-w on
.i-Prepared for:
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission Washington, D.C. 20555 Contract NRC 03 82 096 Task Order No. 19 g
g g
(x' W DYM gy ep
)
o 5
4 TABLE OF CONTENTS Section.
Eggg
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1 2.0 EVALUATION..,......................
1 2.1 Establishment of a Qualified Multidirciplinary a
Review Team.....................
2' 2.2 System Function and Task Analysis.........
2-2.3~ Com>arison of Display and Control Requirements Wit i a Control Room Inventory...........
2 2.4 Control Room Survey.......
2 2.5 Assessment of Human Engineering Discrepancies (HEDs) to Determine Which Are Significant and Should Be Corrected..'..............
2 2.6 Selection of Design Improvements 2
2.7 Verification That Selected Design Improvements Will Provide the Necessary Correction.........
3 2.8-Verification That the Selected Design Improvements
,i Will Not Introduce New HEDs............
3 2.9 - Coordination of Control Room Improvements With Changes From Other Improvement Pr.ograms Such as the Safety Parameter Display System,-Operator Training, Regulatory Guide 1.97 Instrumentation, and Upgraded o
Emergency Operating Procedures 4
3.0 CONCLUSION
S 4
4.0 REFERENCES
5 le l
l l^
l l
11
[
- - 4
~.
TECHNICAL EVALUATION REPORT 0F THE DETAILED CONTROL ROOM DESIGN REVIEW FOR COMMONWEALTH EDIS0N COMPANY'S ZION STATION, UNITS 1 AND 2 I
1.0 INTRODUCTION
The Comonwealth Edison Company submitted the Summary Report for the Zion Station, Units 1 and 2 Detailed Control Room Design Review (DCRDR) to the Nuclear Regulatory Comission (NRC) on April 18,1986(Reference 1).
In order to obtain clarification for several concerns identified in the review of the Summary Report, a meeting was held with Comonwealth Edison Company on December ll, 1986.
Several of the concerns from the Sumary Report were resolved at the meeting and these resolutions were documented by Commonwealth Edison Company in a supplement to the-Summary Report dated December 30,.1986(Reference 2). The staff review of.the supplement and the Zion Station DCRDR was documented in a Safety Evaluation Report dated March lo, 1987 (Reference 3). The Safety Evaluation Report identified several unresolved concerns regarding the DCRDR activities conducted at Zion-
.]
Station.
In response-to these concerns, Commonwealth Edison Company submitted a second supplement to the Summary Report dated June 30, 1987 l
(Reference 4).
This Technical Evaluation Report is based on Science Applications International Corporation's review.cf the second supplement and previous information submitted to the'NRC concerning the Zion Station DCRDR.
2.0 EVALUATION The purpose of the evaluation was to determine whether the nine DCRDR requirements in NUREG-0737, Supplement 1 (Reference 5) had been satisfied.
The evaluation was performed by comparing the information provided by Commonwealth Edison Company with the criteria in NUREG-0800, Section 18.1, Revision 0,
Appendix A of the Standard Review Plan (Reference 6).
The review team's evaluation of the DCRDR for Zion Station, Units 1 and 2 is provided below, i
1 l
.m m
_m___.
m 2.')
Establishment of a Qualified Multidisciolinary Review Team Ilt' is the review team's judgment that Commonwealth Edison Company has met the NUREG-0737, Supplement 1 requirement for establishment, of a-
. qualified multidisciplinary review team.
2.2 System Function and Task Analysis It is the review team's judgment that Commonwealth Edison Company has if met the NUREG-0737, Supplement I requirement for a function and task
-analysis to identify control room operator tasks and information and control requirements during emergency operations.
2.3 Comoarison of Disolav and Control Reauirements With-a Control Room Inventerv It is the review team's judgment that Commonwealth Edison Company has met the NUREG-0737, Supplement I requirement for a comparison of display and control requirements with a control room inventory.
2.4 Centrol Room Survev It is the review team's judgment that Commonwealth Edison company has met the NUREG 0737, Supplement I requirement for a control room survey to identify deviations from accepted human factors principles.
3 2.5 Assessment of Human Enaineerino Discreoancies fHEDs) to Determine Which are Sionificant-and Should be Corrected It is the review team's judgment that Commonwealth Edison Company has met the NUREG-0737, Supplement I requirement for an assessment of HEDs to determine which are significant and should be corrected.
e 2.6 Selection of Desian Imorovements The Safety Evaluation Report identified 13 HEDs that were inadequately addressed at the December 11, 1986 meeting and in previous submittals.
Appendix A of the March 10, 1987 Safety Evaluation Report listed the HEDs 2
L 4..
. for whic'h proposed corrective actions, justifications for no correction, or schedules for implementation of_ proposed corrective actions were found to be-unacceptable.
The second_ supplement to the.Sumary Report provided
. additional detail and clarification for these HEDs.
In all 13 cases, the l
additional information in the June 30, 1987 submittal resolved the concerns, including scheduling, that were identified in the Safety Evaluation Report.
It is the review team's judgment that Comonwealth Edison Company has met the NUREG-0737, Supplement 1, requirement for selection of design improvements.
2.7 Verification that Selected Desian Imorovements Will Provide the Fressary Correction In the. Safety Evaluation Report, the staff stated that in order to meet this requirement, the verification process must be conducted for the resolutions to the 13 open HEDs listed in Appendix A of the report.
In the second supplement, the licensee demonstrated that this verification process was conducted for the 13 open HEDs. The successful resolution of these HEDs j
confirmed that the verification process had been implemented for these HEDs.
It is the review team's judgment that Comonwealth Edison Company has met the NUREG 0737, Supplement I requirement for verification that selected design improvements will provide the necessary correction.
]
2.8 Verification that Selected Desian Imorovements Will Not Introduce New M
)
It is the review team's judgment that Comonwealth Edison Company has met the NUREG-0737, Supplement I requirement for verification that selected (asign improvements will not introduce new HEDs.
l 3
o' -..
2l9 f& ordination of Control Room Imorovements With Chances from Other Imorovement Procrams.
Such as the Safety' Parameter Disclav System.
Doerator Trainina. Reculatory Guide 1.97 Instrumentation. and Unoraded Emeroency Doeratina Procedures is the rev'iew team's judgment that Commonweal $h Edison Companyhas It met the NUREG-0737, Supplement I requirement for coordination of the DCRDR with other Supplement 11 improvement programs such as the Safety Parameter
{
Display System, operator training, Regulatory Guide 1.97 instrumentation, L
-and upgraded Emergency Operating Procedures.
3.0 CONCLUSION
S The Comonwealth Edison Company submitted the DCRDR Sumary Report' for Zion. Station, Units 1 and 2 on April-18, 1986.
In order to resolve the concerns resulting from the review of the Sumary Report, a meeting was held-with Comonwealth Edison Company on December 11, 1986.
Several of the concerns were resolved at the meeting and these resolutions were documented by the licensee in a supplement to the Sumary Report dated December 30,.
1986. The NRC issued a Safety Evaluation Report dated March 10, 1987, that documented the staff's review of the supplement and the Zion Station DCRDR.
The Safety Evaluation Report identified concerns with 13 HEDs that were not resolved in the' previous information submitted to the NRC.
In response to these concerns, Comonwealth Edison Company submitted a second supplement to the.Sumary Report on June 30, 1987. This Technical Evaluation Report
- reflects the findings and conclusions of the review of the second supplement.
It is the review team's judgment that Comonwealth Edison Company has met all nine NUREG 0737, Supplement 1 DCRDR requirements.
4
g...
'40 REFERENCES
'o 1.
"Comonwealth Edison Company's Zion Station Detailed Control ' Room lesign Review Final Sumary Report," Volumes I and II, Comonwealth
. Edison Company, April-18, 1986.
' 2.
" Zion Station Nuclear Power Station, Units 1 and 2 Detailed Control Room Design Review - NUREG-0737, Item I.D.1,' letter and attachments to H.R.
Denton, USNRC, from P.C. LeBlond,. Commonwealth Edison Company, December 30, 1986.
i 3.
" Safety Evaluation Report for the Zion Station, Units 1 and 2, Detailed Control Room Design Review,' U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission, March 10, 1987.
4.
'Comonwealth Edison Company's Zion Station Detailed Control Room Design Review, Supplement 2 - Sumary Report," Comonwealth-Edison i
Company, June 30, 1987.
l 5.
NUREG 0737, Supplement 1,
" Requirement -for Emergency
Response
Capability," U.S. NRC (Generic Letter 82-33), December 17, 1982.
L 6.
" Standard Review Plan," Section 18.1, ' Control Room," and Appendix A,
" Evaluation Criteria for Detailed Control Room Design Review (DCRDR)," September-1984.
i u
g s'
L P
s
!J'
..