ML20078F655

Forwards NRC Form 474 Simulation Facility Certification, Update Info

ML20078F655
Person / Time
Site:	Beaver Valley
Issue date:	11/03/1994
From:	George Thomas DUQUESNE LIGHT CO.
To:	NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM)
References
NUDOCS 9411150330
Download: ML20078F655 (22)

Text

l L W W ee,. e,,v ilev o-ers i.oo r

Shrppengport, PA 1507T-0004

)

(412) 393-5206 l

(412) 643-8%9 FAX i

GEORGE S. THOMAS November 3, 1994 Dmsson Vice President Nuclear ServK,os Nuclear Power Dmsion l

U.

S.

Nuclear Regulatory Commission Attn:

Document Control Desk Washington, DC 20555

Subject:

Beaver Valley Power Station, Unit No. 1 Docket No. 50-334, License No. DPR-66 Simulation Facility Certification - NRC Form 474 Update Information

Reference:

NRC Form 474, dated December 18, 1990

" Simulation Facility Certification" In the above reference, Duquesne Light Company identified j

exceptions to ANSI /ANS 3.5-1985 and Regulatory Guide 1.149.

One of j

these exceptions, the plant process computer, was identified as not i

being replicated as part of the simulator because t:1e installed computer was scheduled for replacement and because its main functions were computerized trending and monitoring.

The submittal identified our intention to install a simulator process computer 18 months after the final acceptance of a new plant process computer.

In the

interim, the monitoring and trending functions of the process computer would continue to be provided by the training instructors, as they have been since 1985 when the simulator was first placed in service.

Training of operators on i

features of the process computer system would continue to be performed on the in-plant computer.

In Section 1.2.3 of the above reference, the need to assess the training impact resulting from any future upgrade of the plant process computer was also identified.

The Unit 1 Simulator Certification Committee, which is comprised of representatives from Operations,

Training, Engineering and Licensing, met on April 12, 1994 at which time they determined that the simulator process computer should be upgraded to visually simulate and replicate the Unit 1 plant process computer consistent with ANSI /ANS 3.5-1985.

This upgrade associated with physical fidelity will be completed by March 31, 1995.

The committee also concluded that ANSI /ANS, 3.5-1985 does not require a

working simulation of the plant,pipeess computer as part of the simulator, p-

/ i i

1 9411150330 941103 PDR ADOCK 05000334 Y

PDR

)

i Bbaver Vallay Powsr Station, Unit No, 1 Simulation Facility Certification - NRC Form 474 Update Information Page 2 The Committee based its determination on the following:

1.

The current plant process computer is used for periodic monitoring and trending of equipment and heat balance calculations.

2.

The guidance of ANSI /ANS 3.5-1985 for physical fidelity will be achieved with the upgrade.

3.

The simulator training program has had an excellent record over the last nine years and will continue using proven methods relative to the plant process computer.

4.

The in-plant process computer will be utilized to train operators on the features of the computer system.

5.

Information associated with annunciators, recorders, and computerized monitoring and trending of plant parameters driven by the plant process computer will continue to be provided in the simulator by the training instructors.

6.

The UFSAR, Chapter 7, states that the plant process computer provides supplemental information for monitoring and is not required for safe operation of the unit.

This information is being provided as a status update and wi;.1 be reflected in the quadrennial recertification scheduled for December 1994.

Any questions concerning this topic may be directed to Ernie Chatfield, General

Manager, Nuclear Support Unit, at (412) 393-5710.

Sincerely, 6'

' jQ fing George S. Thomas Attachment cc:

Mr.

L.

W.

Rossbach, Sr. Resident Inspector Mr. T.

T.

Martin, NRC Region I Administrator Mr.

G.

E.

Edison, Sr. Project Manager Mr.

T.

E. Murley, Director, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

l NHC rO84M 414 U S. NUCLE AH fu GULATOHY COMMISSION APeHowtO eV OMS. NO. 3tS00138

( arint E. 9 30 97 H p:n 10 Cr 84 % 4' (14

($f tMATLD BurtD( N Pt H Hl$PON5E 10 tX)MPLY WITH THis M a cM Mh INF OHM A t ION cXM LICIlON HtGU(ST: 170 Hits. FOHwArto

~ SIMULATION FACILITY CERTIFICATION ma J,,"'$ fl',?,^=;;==n'/",4J 47..";'ya A

U,s NUCLE AH HtGULATOnY COMMISSION. W ASHINGTON, Dd r

70'.%. AND TO IH( P AP(ftWORIC HrDUCllON PitOJECT 0150 l

0138L Or r ICE OF M ANAG[Mt N T ANO fiUDGET, WASHfNGTON, DC 70$03

[.

i (NS T HUCilONS.1his forrn is to be (ded for instial artifecation. secertif. cation Of eequiredl, and for any change en a simulat.on f acd.ty performance testing plari m*1e aber in,tial I

submertal of such a plan. Provide the followieg information, erw1 check the appropiiate (som to isusicate reason for sutsmettal.

DOCAll NUMBL H 7gg g y y neaver Valley Power Station Unit 1

%334 i

uCE N3U lOATE j

Duttuesne 1,ight Company 12/18/90 This is to certsf r that:

1.

1he above namat f acilny Ikensee is using a sianutation f acility consistino solely of a plant <eferenced simulator that meets the requirements of 10 Cf R 55.45.

l 2.

Documentation is availatile for NRC seview in accordance with 10 CF R M.4SM.

3.

This simuletion facility meets the guidance contained in ANSI /ANS 3.5,1985, as eru$orted by N HC flegalatory Guide 1.149.

If there are any onceptsons to the certification of this item check here [ X] seuj descritse fully on edditional pages as necessary.

l NAME (orother kfeatification) AND LOCATION OF SIMULATION F ACluTY Beaver Valley Power Station Unit 1 Simulator l

l Beaver Valley Training Center l

Shippingport. PA 15077 SIMutATION FACILITY PE RFORMANCE TEST ABSTRAOTS ATTACHED. (forparforrnance rests condueratin theperiod ending wirk the dare af ths cet/ficarkws/

y DESCR(PTION OF PERFORMANCE T ESTING COMPLET ED (hrach additions /pege(sf as rNonssary, a<xf kfenrify the han description heing criatinumfl.

Initial Certification - See attached Transient Steady State Malfunction crid s

tiormal Operating Tests.

1 l

1 1

StMULATION F ACI U T Y PE RFORMANCE TESTING SCHEDULE ATTACHED. (/or the conduct of approximately 251 of perfbrmaica testsper peer for the sbar peer 7

period commerring with the dare of this certification.)

,lESCRIPilON OF PEftVOR MANCL TLST1NG TO 8E CONOUCT L D. IAttach additionalpage(s) as necessary, and klantity the kan description bang continuaf) 1 Refer To Enclosed Test Schedule.

W PE RF ORMANCE TESTING PLAN CHANGE, (for any rmufification to a peformance testing plan submitted on a previous certification)

DESCRIPTION OF PERFOR MANCE T ESTING PLAN CHANGE (Attach eddirlonalpage(rj as nowssary, stalidentify the lren description taring continueff 1

l flo t Applicable.

Initial Submittal

}

R t ct R m icA s son m.ca.e rwr.:ria scr on, ra e, orrach resuits of compieradperro,ma<u, resring en accor,sance with f o cia s ssssess/srivt.

Arteh enrionaisurts) namsarv. entisantity rke iten deniorion t,eing continu.fJ l

Not Applicable.

Initial S'ubmittal i

i Lay v.i nr.

ni o, ome.on e is.s oocumeni.nciud.aa.mchments. mar i.e suweci to ci.. and crim.aai unctions. e cei.'y u, 5-r-.'ry of r<iury that o.e iafor-ma sa *

[ te. docon.m.nd en.chmenu. m,e ms conect.

l TITLE bGN A3 IR -

THORIZE0 ftf rRESEN TATIVE DATE k

\\

R-b O

g

.D.

Sieber Vice President IJuClear Group en oddaw esth 10 Cf R 6 iM, Conimunications, thes form stwil tse outsennted to the NRC as follows:

SY MAIL ADDRESSED TO: DMecsor,Of%e of hdear R-flegutetson BY DEUVERY IN PEftSON One whete f eet soorth U.1. %d.or ft gidetory C 101HE NRCOFFICE AT:

11 A6 Rodea. Pee WesMageon,DC 20Fs6ib Rod este. 64) i amC ooa*. 474 t e M

Exceptions to Af1SI/Af1S 3.5 and/or Regulatory Guide 1.149 The following exceptions represent equipment function required by Af1SI/Af1S 3.5, which are not available in the Unit 1 Simulator.

The training impact and/or plan to address their di f ferences are as follows.

Scheduled changes to the simulator will reduce the number of. exceptions taken in future reports.

1.

Unit I Plant Process Computer (P-250)

AflSI/Af1S 3.5 Section 3.2.1

- Currently the Unit I plant process computer is not replicated on the simulator.

The Unit I plant process computer is scheduled 'for replacement during the 1991 refueling outage. Training impact is limited to the inability to perform computerized monitoring and trending.

These functions are currently provided by the training instructor.

The replacement plant process computer hardware for the simulator has been ordered, and should be available for training' within 18 months after plant acceptance.

(Refer to Section 3.6 for planned completion) 2.

flormal Plant Evolutions Af1SI/ Alls 3.5 Section 3.1.1 (7) - flormal Plant Evolutions - The evolution of plant startup, shutdown and power operations with less than full coolant flow will not be performed as BVPS-1, is not licensed to, or have procedures to operate with less than full core flow.

3.

E.R.F. Electrical Distribution / Turbine Water Induction Panel Af1SI/Af1S 3.S Sections 3.1.1 (3) and 3.2.1 flormal Operations and Panel Simulation -

E.R.F.

Electrical Distribution / Turbine Water Induction Panel is retired in place in the Unit I Control Room with the exception of 4 control switches for reheater excess vent valves.

The panel is not installed in the simulator and the control switches are controlled by a local Operator Action feature of the simulator.

The four (4) reheater excess vent valve control switches change the vent path of the reheater and do not have any observable affect on any plant parameter.

The panels and switches will not be installed.

4.

_ Radiation Monitorino System Control Console Af1SI/Af1S 3.5 Section 3.2.1 - The Radiation lionitoring System Control Console which includes the steam generator blowdown radiation monitor is not installed in the simulator control room. Af ter review of this console functions, it was determined to install this console and to integrate the steam generator blowdown radiation monitor.

The steam generator blowdown radiation monitor is addressed in the emergency and abnormal procedures as an indicator for steam generator tube leaks.

The training impact is a concern since the operator is unable to access the correct panel in the simulator.

Administrative action to purchase and integrate the console has commenced.

Expected integration to occur within 18 months af ter procurement is authorized.

1 1.2.1 Control Room Physical Arranqement The physical arrangement of the simulator's control room i

duplicates the Beaver Valley Power S'tation Unit I controls area.

The controls area is defined in Figure 1.2.1.1.

The BVPS Unit I i

control room drawing, is provided as Figure 1.2.1.2, and the simulator control room in Figure 1.2.3.

I f

i W

i l

l 4

,r l

e o.v.P.S. - O.M.

Boavor Valloy Control Room. Area I

e J

~

V t

1 1.:.,..

t:

_i i

l i

i r

I i

n :-

\\

'I s

unst t 1

Un*t 2 '

IfId!!!!ki 7

[,

j i___

I l

t_.

I 1

l W

W - rusi..rv.at.nc. portso < contros. 4c...

2.f -t.htt.d surv.m ace per'<Ms

• Control. Ar.a*

1 l'i gu re 1.2.1.1

Figure 1.2.1.2 (s

'[

~#

PREZUfMZER forW AtJD scHTING N N[LS OC OIST Ptil 150,3 iST PNL TR Alte A

50. i VITAL DOS CAOS SVElY W.VE ACOUSTCIT4L W AlH CONTROL 00ARD V E R T I C A 1. S E C T I O N FAULT' RLC eNt ERF Elf OtST fill CON THO L BEN C H DO ARO

\\_

soto stRvicts r

CONTROL PNL TURBt4E YATER ROJCTOtt Pt4L o%e

,~.

0 e'%

9 to b

9

+

G 4

[ cow W CON 5l f

~

l 2

C RADATOtt MOtCTOfut4G SYSTEM P

e cot 4 TROL Cot 4 SOLE (SPt4G)

I 4

INCORCINSTRKS NUCLC AR INST RK$

4 3

2 I

4 3

2 1

f M ADI ATION WMITORING RKs l

- JN i 11ii

.1,.<_.

CTTE OFf8CE

~

f TOILET TR AIN 6

~

3 VITAL BUS C ASS DUCT #

1. SHAFT N PRO.

C WER $

[

c nomoc.c.<.

.c oN,. u. i

_ =r

Beaver Valicy Power Station Unit ~1 Simulator

.. _j g

\\

i i

>D c

~

VERTICALB0dRD *C*'

,t

/

i.\\l, g&'

.S f'

(+

BCNCliDOARD 'C OUILDING N

SERV.PNL

/

b t

s/'

s l

1 I

i T-T%'h

s !

i s

p.

I I

[

m a i e

sl N

m a

s J

m I

\\

4 I

l

\\ h M

W I

\\s

~

aw ca I

[ ^ %.

s t

a g

=

t i

I i

i 1

2 8

~

INSTRUCTORS CONSOLE l

l

-/

I f

an INCORE INST EXCORE INST er RADI ATION t10NITORS ructs : 7

(_.]

?

i Figure 1.2.3

J 4x 1.2.lA Panel /Eqtfipment flot Included in Controls Area The following are layout or major panel differences between the Unit I controls area and the Unit I simulator.

1.

Plant P-250 computer operator consol.e and associated support equipment.

2.

Electrical Fault Monitoring Panel.

3.

Pressurizer PORV and safety valve acoustic monitoring panel.

4.

ERF electrical distribution / turbine water induction panel.

5.

Radiation monitoring system control console.

6.

Sequence of events computer printer.

i 1.2.18 Resolution of Control Area Differences 1.

Plant Process Computer {P-250)

The simulator was ordred without a fully scoped plant process computer, because the Unit I plant had intended to upgrade the plant computer hardware.

The simulator plant process computer hardware is only partially modeled.

Also not installed are the alarm and. trend typewriters, which

/

interface though the P-250 computer.

Not all parameter trends are available to the operator while training with the

.s mu a or.

Examples of some of the parameter trends used i lt r

during normal operation are:

a.

Main generator hot gas temperatures b.

Main feed pump motor temperatures However, any data needed by the. operators, is provided-by the computer engineer, role-played by the simulator instructor.

The current scope of the plant computer,

installation does not impact the operators ablity to correctly use emergency or abnormal procedures.

Unit. I is to install a new plant: computer system during the next refueling outage scheduled in the spring of 1991. 'The~

Unit I simulator be upgraded to replicate the new:compu'ter system.

The new hardware will be installed in the simulator.

(

following installation in Unit..I.

This. acton is being-i tracked by CR 0093.

1 r~--,_.,.

.._,e

-.. ~..

2.

Elect rical fault Monitorina Panel The equipment mounted within the panel is for reviewing post electrical distribution faults.

The system uses magnetic tape for recording and must be read.off-site.

l l

The electrical fault monitoring equipment has no training l

value or direct' impact on operations during normal or i

emergency procedures.

The committee determined that there would be no training value in panel installation.

3.

Pressurizer P.O.R.V.

and Safety Valve Acoustic Moni.torina Panel This panel houses interface equipment between field-mounted acoustic mon i tors and control room area alarms and indication.

The panel also supplements the plant's annunciatior system with its own local al arm, alarm reset and acknowledge push-buttons.

Alarm reset functions are _

performed by the simulator instructor via a local operator i

action (LOA).

The committee directed that the local panel alarm has lim'ited training value.

The Pressurizer P.O.R.V.

Valve Acoustic Monitoring panel that require operator j

actions are addressed in al arm response procedures.

The committee directed that a simulation of the noise generated by a lifting valve be installed.

This additional feature of the Unit I Simulator is tracked by CR 77.

i 4.

Emeroency Resnonse Facility (E.R.F.1/ Turbine Water Induction Panel-This one panel has controls mounted on both sides. One side is the E.R.F. black diesel controls and indication.

On the other side of.the panel is mounted the. turbine water induction equipment.

The design change for water induction has been cancelled and the ERF distribution panels are being-l phased out.

The panel will be retired in place. Located on i

the turbine water induction panel are switches for heater excess vent valves.

These switches are addressed in normal l

t operations procedures for turbine start up.

This function is performed by using a local operation (LOA) feature of the simulator.

The committee determined that the panel need not be installed as there is no impact on training.

5.

Radiation Monitorina System Control Console (Sping)

This console gathers and processes data from' three ventilation particulate monitors, three ventilation noble..

gas monitors and the steam generator blowdown monitor.

These particulate and noble gas radiation monitors are not addressed in any normal or emergency operating procedures.

4 The steam generator blowdown radiation monitor was later installed on this console due to a recent plant modificaton which added a new blowdown system.

This steam generator i

blowdown radiation monitor is addressed in the Unit I emergency operating procedures and abnormal procedures as an t

)

i

~

indicator for steam generator tube leaks or rupture.

The

)

committee recommended the installation of the SPING j

Radiation Console with the features required to use this blowdown radiation monitor. (CR-149) 6.

Senuence of Events Computer Printer (SER)

]

The Sequence of Events Computer Printer is a high speed sequence recorder which has 1400 digital inputs and 200 thermocouple analog inputs.

The digital inputs operate on contact change of state and print in sequence to the nearest 2 milliseconds.

There are no normal or E0P procedures that ' address the. use of the Sequence of Events Computer / Printer.

This system is used primarily as a diagnostic tool for post plant upsets, and therefore, has limited training value.

Information to support training is provided by the simulator instructor during simulator operations.

The committee did not recommend the installation. of the SER, as instructor,,

supplied information adequately replaces' the hardware, based upon training experience and feedback from the Unit I operations staff.

L

1.2.2 Control Area Equ_ipment Differences The Beaver Valley Power Station Unit I simulator controls area comparison was conducted using actual plant photographs and check sheets for each control switch, controller, indicator recorder and meter.

I detailed review of hardware, meters, recorders controllers, control switches, indicators annunciators and other displays that would function during normal, abnormal and emergency evolutions were reviewed by the committee.

The committee's review of control board switches included the following details:

Switch type Lable color, wording, letter size location Available positions 1

l q

1

The committee's review of indicators, recorders and meters included the following details:.

Correct scale Correct engineering units Lable color, wording, letter size Calibration sticker color Location Pointer color and shape Placement of operator aids A review of each annunciator window and status light was conducted with the following details reviewed for each:

Annunciator location Wording and wording size Annunciator window color (green or red)

Status light color The committee concluded that none of the differences are of a,

significance that would cause an operator to take any different action in the simulator than in the Unit I control room.

The committee did-recommend that actions be taken to correct some minor di fferences in scale demarcations and lettering.

These actions are being tracked by the Simulator Discrepancy Reporting and Resolution System.

e.

l

)

i w

n n-

1.2.3 Systems The Beaver Valley Power Station Unit 1 Simulator models most of Unit I control room operated systems.

The following systems are not modeled or not fully modeled in the. Simulator.

These systems provide information to the control room operator during normal, abnormal or emergency operating procedure usage.

1.

Fire Protection 2.

Sping 3.

Plant Variable Computer

, 4..

Plant Computer System P-250 s

5.

Pressurizer PORV and safety (Acoustic Monitor) 6.

Sequence of Events Recorder 7.

Safety Parameter Display System (SPOS) 8.

Liquid Waste 9.

Gaseous Waste 10.

CTMT Wide Range H2 Analyzer 11.

Main Generator Systems

12. Auxillary Building Ventilation

1.2.3 (Con't)

In order for the operator to take expected actions during normal, abnormal and emergency operations during simulator training and evaluation sessions, the committee reviewed systems controlled from the control room or system interfaces that would be observable to the control room operator.

Their recommendations are as follows:

1.

Fire Protection Add deluge valve operation and it's effects. (CR-132) 2.

Spino Add Sping console and interactively model steam generator blow down rad monitor.

~~

/ 3&4. Plant ' Variable Computer t

f Access the P-250- upgrade to determine training impact of 7

[)$5cp <

3 removing current P-250 features then upgrade PVC to Unit I.

1 (CR-93) 5.

Pressurizer PORV and Safety Valve Acoustic Monitorina Panel I

Research methods available to simulate noise of liting PORV or safety. (CR-77) 6.

Seauence of Events Recorder The committee found that the current method of siraiation was adequate.

7.

Safety Parameter Display System (SPDS)

Determine why; it is necessary to depress the " SHIFT" key in

]

order to page when using the simulator's SPDS - ccrrect if possible. (TR-324) 819. Liq _uid Waste and Gaseous Waste The committee found these systems to be adequate in present 4

scope.

I

1.2.3 (Con't) 10.

[1 drogen Analyzer 1

After the analyzer is started (via. LOA feature), a set value is recorded - committee suggested that a calculated value be recorded based on LOCA size and activity. (CR-143)

11. Main Unit Generator Include "Backfeed" feature and the means to monitor generator gas temperatures with the new plant computer upgrade. (CR-154)

12. Ventilation System Considering adding feature for vibration cutout for containment fans. (CR-154)

Items 6, 8,

9 - The committee found these systems to be adequate in present scope.

T e

1.2.4 Simulator Control Room Environment.

The Beaver Valley Power Station Unit 1 Simulator replicates the Unit I control room environment with differences as noted.

The plant communication systems that an operator needs to communicate with an auxiliary operator or other in-plant support activities are present and operational in the simulator.

This communication equipment includes Bell Telephone, plant paging system, PAX phone' and system operator phone.

The plant's radio system is physically simulated but not operable.

All annunciator panels are operable and have identical tones as the Unit I panels.

M

o 1.2.4A Existing differences in Controls Area Environments are:

BVPS-1 Simulator BVPS Unit I l.

Computer flooring Carpet covered 2.

Limited AC emergency li,ghting DC emergency lighting

^

3.

Flourescent lighting Non-glaze full spectrum tube 1

lighting 4.

Unit II simulator will be Unit II control room sepa-installed in a separate building rated by glass partition 5.

Small video camera and several Four large overhead T.V.

small overhead microphones cameras 6.

Phones - 1 Bell, I system Phones - EPP direct ringdown operator (2), Hansfield (1), Red NRC phone (1), Bell phones (4) 7.

No noise upon CREBAPS initiation Air in-rush noise upon CREBAPS initiation l

}

l l

F 1.2.4B Besolution of Environment Differences 1.

The actual control room floor was fully carpeted in 1988 to reduce overall noise.

The simulator floor is standard computer flooring, and has remained uncovered.

Committee determined that there was no training impact involved with this item and recommended no furter action.

2.

Simulated emergency lighting is limited to partially deenergizing normal fixtures.

This adequately lowers lighting levels during evolutions involving losses of associated power sources.

Committee recommended no further action.

3.

Actual control room flourescent fixtures were recently relamped using non-glaze, full spectrum tubes.

As a result, the existing sinulator ambient light level is relatively brighter.

liowever, this does not detract from training.

Committee recommended no further action.

4.

Since the Unit II simulator was not planned as part of the,

original Unit I simulator building layout.

The Unit II simulator will be located in an adjacent building.

Since simulator exercises involve. phone or page communication between units, visual contact is in not necessary.

Committee recommended no further action.

5.

The simulator video camera and microphones are used to record crew performance for reviews and critiques.

The four large i

cameras in the actual control room were originally used for remote ERF (Emergency Response Facility) viewing of controls

{

during abnormal / accident conditions.

1.2.40 (Con't)

These cameras are currently retired in place.

The size and appearance difference does not affect operator line-of-sight.

Committee determined there was no training impact and recommended no further action.

6.

Although the simulator telephone capability is less than the control room, adequate equipment to all support activities (via instructor booth) is supported.

Currently, plans are to install multiple phone channels to simulate calling specific groups; this i

will enhance the ' simulator instructor's ability to act as these l

l groups / individuals.

Also, the committee recommended that a non-functional Red flRC phone be acquired, if available, and installed on the communications console.

7.

Control Room Emergency Bottled Air Pressurization System (CREBAPS) actuation in the control room yields a noticeable sound.

CREBAPS actuations on the simulator result in changes in associated control and indications.

The committee felt that the lack of audi bl e noise upon initiation had limited training impact.

The committee recommended the installation of simulated noise. (CR-77)

___