ML20116L598

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Forwards Update of Hfe Tier 2 Design Acceptance Criteria
ML20116L598
Person / Time
Site: 05200001
Issue date: 09/11/1992
From: Ross M
GENERAL ELECTRIC CO.
To: Goodman C
NRC
References
NUDOCS 9211190025
Download: ML20116L598 (25)
v • d • e


Text

a .,: -

.. :w

,. ..i. ~, . .. . .

y .;c .: . .n .+.2 .:. .w. . . r ; , h.

4 y .. ,

dc?-fLQ j

.y GEU+w En~py (Eay l 301-50 Y-2 2(~o) ABWR Dn? 9/'s/92 To Cenn Goooma Fax No. frns ?zo ?n-3 y,q c w,,, .,,, ,,,

This p"* plus U pv(s)

R3 0#3. . usICoos 76 f

- 175 Curtner Avenue St n Jm. c o. w:s PMne ('S*?f25- [ 1 3 O .

rn pos) ggiig3 cr V**} CW'C?7 Sub, ject ..UP..On re _

o._f. _.,H FE ^ Ties .2 Di9c "

!s i . C '*Q4_ l t EASE PAS.5 A COPY of TM/J A t. 0^) G 70- y

- Q Enr Pos w w y. ___

J

/h T7't4 CH&0 f.s 7~ME DRAF7 Of" f/E ' J edBJarcr -

" 71s.< 2 DAc "" winea ps.s ssed N vi.st o r o ;

l^ll 0 FOA A 7E ~ TMS ' MidGnivr f/Jr/^ldi.s ^ Of G Lt/DdatE DO C u/*fENT.!. . llt'OJC ' ' AEK+1 df.

L 1

TfhS' OQCunE dr~ 444f/C// ),t4VE-fElb/ 140D/ftGD Y AM / ^/O !CA T60 -tJ/TN A Be c.p

  • c Hades:a n "

^

Id ' THE L6/~7" ' P1ARG/r2 if 7" td3 Kdoed /f You L17;133 wewypara aus., r,os s o x c o. ,. w , n M

L

, ' zee t 9211190025 920912 8' l-jm [:D L Anocx osaoooos 1' PDR <

~

. ),. .

i. , J -

a ' ,: e -c - E i_H ]

18E.2 MMIS !MPLEMENTATION REQUIREMENTS Section 18E.1 describes a process which is typical of those that will be followed in the implemen-tation of ABWR Man-Machine Interface Systems (MMIS). As part of the Table 18E.1.1 '

discussion of the implementation process, the results of key activities are identified as beinj the subject of an NRC conformance review. Tables 18E.2.1 through 18E.2.4 of this section c efine the requirements that are to be met by the MMIS design implementation activities that are to be made available for review by the NRC. The MMIS design implementation-related Design Acceptance Criteria (DAC) which are established through Rule Making. (refer to Sections 3.5 and 3.6 of the Tier 1 Design Certification material for the GE ABWR design), are defined such that there exists a dinct correspondence between the DAC entries and requirements imposed herein on those design activities whose results are to be made available for NRC conformance reviews as identified in Table 18E.1.1. Those requirements presented in Table 18E.2.1 through I8E.2.4 which correspond to individual Tier 1 DAC acceptance criteria are specifically identified. Here-fore, satisfaction of those specific requirements shall result in full compliance with the Cenified Design Conunitment and the corresponding Acceptance Criteria pre sented in the Tier 1 (Rule Making) DAC est.W!ished 'or the MMIS design ir,p%meredon.

1 REV3 Mim

i:n, i E . ,.~. h . J 5 Af Er 3 - T . : ; M.

TABLE 18.E.2.1 liUMAN FAC'IDRS ENGINEEP.ING DESIGN TEAM AND PLANS

1. IIFE DESIGN TEAM COMPOSITION (Satisfaction of the requirements presented herein shall result in the creation of an 11FE.

Design Team which is in full compliance with the item la Acceptance Oiteria presented in Table 3.6 of the T cr 1 Design Certification Material for the GE AIPVR design).

1. ne composition of the Human Factor Engineering (HFE) Design Team shall include, as a minimum, the tachnied skil!s presented in Article (4), below.  ;
2. He education and related professional experience of the HFE Design Team personnel shall satisfy the minimum personal qualification requirements specified in Article (4), below, for each of the areas of required skills, in those skill areas where related professional experi-ence is specified, qualifying exprience of the individual HFE Design Team personnel shall include experience in the A13WR main control room and remote shutdown system Human System Interface (HSI) designs and design implementation activities. The required pro. '

fessional experience presented in those personal c ualifications of Article (4) are to be sat.

isfied by the HFE Design Team as a co:lective whole. Therefore, satisfaction of the pm-fessional experience requirements associated with a particular skill area may be realized through the com"aination of the professional experience of two or more members of the HFE Design Team who each, individually, satisfy the other defined credentials of the particular 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 l'FE Design Team qualWation regnimments for two or mere of the defined skill aters.

3. Altemative personal credentials may be accepted as the basis for satisfying the minimum personal qualification requirements pecified in Article (4), below. Acceptance of such alternative personal credentials shall x evaluatcd on a case by-case basis and approved, documented and .etained in auditable plant constmetion files by the COL Applicant. The i

following fcctors are exnmples of rh: mat ve credentials which are conside:cd acceptable. .

a. A Professional Enpnect's license in the required skill era may bc sobrituted for the required Bschdo Nree,
b. Related experience may substitute for education at the rate of six semester cmdit bour; for each "e:e of experience up to a mryinum of 60 hors cre:11:.
c. Where course work is related tojob assignments, post secc. 7 education may be substituted for experience at the rate of two years of educatio6 t one year experience.

To:a! c7dit for rmt s<;Mndary edur tion rbal! no: exceed two years experience cred!!.

l l

l l'

l s

e nevs viim E

l .-

.2 - -.-ee

,c..,: .

.< . .  : .1 -  : - ~

r m

,tp

.1 TABLE 18. Ell !!UMAN FACTORS ENGINEERING DESIGN TEAM AND PLANS

4. Fesuirrd MdRMs Emonal Oualifntion
8. Technical Pmject Manncement a. Bachelor's degree, and five years experience in nuclear power plant design operations, and thm. years mansrement expenence
b. Systems Enrineering b. - Bachelor's of Science degree, and

- four years cumulative experience in at least three of the following areas of systems engineering; design, development, integm.

tion, operation, and test and evaluation

c. Nedent Enrneer:ng c. - Bachelor's of Science degree, and

- four years nuclear design, development, test or operanons err nence

d. Control and Instrumentarion d. - Bachelor's of Science (Ud) Enriacerirg degree, and

- four years experience in design of process

, control systems, and

  • - expenence in at least one of the following amas of C&I engineering development, power

. , , , ., . plant operanons, and test r.nd evabanon

c. Architact En'incerin"

. c. - Bachelor's of Science degree,and

- four years power plant control room desiy expmence 3 REV.3 9,1 LT

}f , * ,-  ; < .. $- ,mi.- ~tP ,i Y,1 iS 4

TABLE 1R.E.2,1 HUMAN FACTORS ENGINEERING DESIGN TEAM AND PLANS R m.id w M t-ill M a finenM_Qur,11ricarica .

f. Human Frcters f. - - Bachelor's degree in human factors engi.

neenng, engineenng psychology or related science, and -

. four years cumulative experience related to the human factors aspects of human-com? uter inter-faces. Quiifying experience siullinclude .

expenence in at least two of the following  ;

human factors related activities; design, devel-opnent, and test r nd evaluation, and four years cumulative etperience related to the human facto:s field of .

cegonomics. Again, qualiiying experience shallinclude experience in at least two of the

- following areas of -

l- human factors activi-ties; design, develop-

, ment, and test and -

l cvahution l g. Plant Oparr!!cns g. - Have or have held a -

L Senior Reactor Operator l two years experiencein BWR nuclear power -

pl u ope :nions -

h. Computer System Engineering h. ' - Bachelor's degree in Electrical Engineering or -

Computer Science, or graduate degree in other -

engineering discipline (e.g., Mechanical Engineering or Chemical Eng:ncering), and

- four years experience in the design of digital

- computer systems and real time systems applications 4 .REV3 W1102 =

c . , , .. .,,. .. ..- ....

_.,------------ -------------------------n-,_-77m--

(=

i .

TABI E l'.E.2.1 HUMAN FACTORS ENGINEEPING D1iSIGN TEAM AND PLAIC Emvirvd_hkillArn Ectwnal_QUPliflCPS2

i. Plc.nt Drocetti- Devtlopinent i, . Bachelor's degree, and

. frur years expcrience in developing nuclear power plant oper:t ing .

pmeedures J. Pem)nnel T Tinina j. . Bachelor's degree, and four years experience in the ( 'clopment of personn i training pro-13mt fo, pawer plants, .

and exptince in the appli, i cath 1 of systematic tra ei evelopment t.,et:u is

!! HUM AN FACTOi'S ENONEEUNG PR XRAM PLAN

1. (Satisfaction of the requir.:ments presen ed harin shall result in the creation of a 'Juman Factors Fngineering P.ogram Plan which is in full compliance with the item 1.b.

Acceptance Criteda presented in Tab!c 3.6 of the Tier 1 Design Cenification material for the GE /.EtWR !csipt The lhmar. Factors Ergincenng (HFE) Program Plan shall estabi;.:h: *

a. Methods and criteria, for the development and evaluat:on of the Main Control Room (MCR) and Remote Shutdown System (RSS) HS: which are consistent with accepted HFE practices and principles. Within the defined scoy e and content of the HFE I d

Pmgram Plan. accepted HFE methods an criteria ale pment.-d in the folicw;ng chum ats:

w~

a. AR 602-1, Mcmar. Ecctors Engir.ccring Program,1933,(Dept. of Defense)

L. DI HFAC-S0740, '!uman Engineering Program Plan,1989,(Dept. of D :fense)

- DOD-HDBK 763. Human Engineering Procedures Guide, Chapters 5-7 rnci Appndices A and B,1991,(Dep;, of Defene)
d. EPRI NP-3659, Human Factors Guide for Nuclear Power Plant Control Room <

Developmem.19M (Electric Power I!cserrch Instite:e)

c. IEEE Std. 1023-1988,IEEE Guide to the Application of Human Factors Engineering to Systems. Equipmem 54 srcilities of Nocher Pover Gen rating Stations, l ..gg, (!E:1E)
f. MIL-H-46855B, Human Engineeriry;
  • yattements for M litary Systems, luipment and Facilities,1979,(D ;it. of Defense) ,
g. NUREG-0700, Guidelines for Comrol Room Design Reviews,1981, (U. S.

Nuclear Regulatory Commission) 5 REV3 311m l

1

i_

3... .- c. .x

=

i i

TA!!!.E 18.517.1 11UMAN FACTORS ENGINEEPING DESidN TEAM AND PLANS

h. NUREO 0737, Clarification of TMI Action Plan Requiitments (ltem I.C.5, Teedback of Operating E> perien e to Plant Staff'),1993. (1L S. Nncient Re guhtory Commbsion)

NUREO 0899, Guidelines for the Preparation of Emergency Operating Pro:cdures. l'182. (U. S. Nuclest Re~idatory Commission)

j. NUREG/CR-3331, A Methodology for Allocating Nuclear Power Plant Control Funct!cn.e to liutn9n nnd Aotemved Contml,1013 (U. S. No.C) i '

j in TOP 12 610, Test Operating Prmedore Pan 1,1990,(Dept, of Defense)

Note tha' vithin the set of documents listed above, differences may exist reganhng speciGc methods and criteria a >plicable to the life Program Plan. In situations that such differences exist, all of the methods and criteria presented within those docements are considered to be egoally appropriate and valid and, therefore, any of the alnve lircel documentr. may t>e r!ceted ns the basis for cicments of the LIFE Frogram.

b. The primary objectives of the llFE Program shall include, at the minimum, the objective to develop ra ml wUch ** poteih% safe effi iet, and r: Sable operer n for, c:c. )
c. The goals of the life Program which shall be stated in " operator-centered terms and serve r,s criteria for test and evolustion retivities. %ete "openint-cent:wd"1U9 C @ conts sLW inch !--

(i) The operating team can accompibh all wired tarts within system defined time and reifr..w:e cr!'cris.

(ii)The system and allocation of funct ic ui" pmvide necept ble wn'kload levels nn !

f:aP.Nt: cp wter vi 7.ilan=.

(iii) The ryste m will supoort n high degree of 0:erating crew "rituation awatrness."

(iv) Signal detection and event recognition trquirements will be kept vithin the opcmtors'information processing limits and will ni-imire the. need for operators to m m".11yn't rform data in erder to be ernb!a.

(v) The sysicm will minimize operator n,cmor'y inad.

(vi) The opemter interfaces will minimite the potential for operator enor.

d. lISI duign and evaluation scope which consist. of the Main Control Room and Remote Shutdown System operations, maintenanc?, test, and inspection interfaces, op- ating technic:1 prmadortc, and ider.tification of personnel trainine needs.

6 REV.3 Mim I miii i . . imp

. , ,, . .  :  : w . .

^

I l

TAT 11.E 18.E.2.1 liUM AN FACTORS ENGINEtIn.ING DESIGN TEAM AND PLAN.9

c. %e !!FE Design Team as being terpriMe for:

(1) the development of IIFE plans and procedures;

(!i) the oversight and review of HFE design, development, tett, and evaluation acti"!!hs; (41) the initiation, recommendation, and provision of solutions through designated chr:mels fm r:Her e iArtied ir the imp!cmantatian of the IIF'i n:th9ics; (iv) verification ofimplemen'ation of tenm recommendathns, (v) assurance thr.t all IIFE activities comply to the life plans and procedures, and

( i) sch:dulina of activities and milestreer.

f. The life Design Team having the authority and organizational freedom to accomplish its responsibihties. The team shall have the authonty to determine where its input is required and to access work areas, and design documentation. The Team shall have the authority to control funher processing. delivery, installation or use of HFE/IISI products until the disposition of a nonenformve, dc.~.ciency or ursatisfact,ry ,

conditio.. has b en achieved.

g. An life issue tracking systein which monitors the identification and closuit of human factors issues. De HFE issue tracking system shall document and tack human factors engineering issues and concems, from identification until elimination or reduction to a 1; vel ec:cp!Me to the HFE Deegn Team.
h. The Design Control procedures through which the results'of the iterative design development activities are documented and processed to maintain integration of design activities nrid assuit that the design, design analyses and documentation are consiste nt and appropiate!y reflect the deta is of design imp!cmentation decisien:.
2. The 1FE Program Pla'1 shall also establish:
a. nat each IIFE issue / concern shall be entered on the life Issue Tracking System log when first identified, and each action taken to eliminate or reduce the issue /concem should be documented. The final resolution of the issue / concern, as accepted by the

,  !!FE DesignTeam, shall ts (iocumented in detail. along with information regartling ilFE Design Team acceptance (e.g., person accepting, date, etc.) the individual responsibilities of the HFE Design Team members when an IIFE issue / concern is identified, including definition of who should log the item, who is responsible for tracking the resolunon effons, who is responsible for acceptance of a resolution, and who t.ha:1 enter the necer.sary closecut data, and

b. That the HFE issue Tracking System shall address human factors issues that are identified thmughout the development and evaluations of the Mnin Control Room and

_ Remote Shutdauen System llSI Design implementation.

3. The HFE Pmgram Mzingenv:nt Plan docuircr.t shallinclude:
a. The purpose and organintion of the pinn 7 REV.3 W1192

.. 9 . -

y .

r,  ;

TAD'.E 18.fia.1 HUMAN FACTORS ENGINEERING DESIGN TEAM AND PLANS

b. The overe'l HE progrrm goals and ob*cetives
c. 'Ihe relationship between the life program and the overall plant equipment precomment in.! construction program (organization and schMute),
d. N6nition of the HFE Design Team and their activities including:

(i) Description of the HFE Design Team function within the broader scope of the plant equipment procurement and construction program, including charts to show organirational and functional relctionships, reporting relatienships, and lines of commennton; (ii) Description of the responsibility, authority and necountability of the HFE Design Tc:an orga"!tation; (iii) Description of the prmess through which management decisions willle made regvdhg PQ; (iv) Description of the prxess thmugh which technical decisions will be made by the Hm Asi~ Team (v) Description of the tools and techniques (e.g., review forms, docurnentation) to be uti! ired 1 y t'n HFE Design Team in fe' filling their responritf s'er (vi) Description of the the HFt! Design Team staffing, job descriptions of the inc'ivih!! 93! Detign Teara peronm! and their personal qi alificadons, and:

(vii) Definition of the procedores tha' vill govern the intomal management of the HFE D=i::1 Tom.

c. Dennidon nf the HFE 1rsue Tr:. eking Sy: tem and its implementation including: .

(i) Individual HFE Design Team member responsibilities regarding IIFE issue id nt!9 cation, ogging, issue resolutier., aralissue closecut; (ii) Procedures and documentation requirements regarding HFE issue identification.

These shallinclude description of the HFE issue, effects of the issue if no design change action is taken and an itssessment of the criticality and likelihood of the -

identified !!FE issue manifesting itself into unacceptable HS! 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 HE issue manifesting itself into unacceptable HSI pe:formr.nce,

f. Identincation and description of the fol!owing implementation plans to te developed; (i) System Funct!onal Requi:emenis Development, L (ii) Alineation of Functien, l (iii) Task Analysis, 1

8 REV3 W11M l

L

. . . .:,- s - . .; r, - . m -

TABLE 1F.E.7.1 1!UMAN FAC'lORS ENGINEER!NO nESIGN TEAM AND PLANS (iv)lluman system Interface Design, (v) Plant and Fmergency Operating Pmcedure Development, and (vi) Thtman Feetors Verification and Valid, tion

g. Dennition of11FE program mile tones including:

(i) Identification of!!FE milestones at which evaluations of the effectiveness of the

!!FE effon are to can be made, and the relationship of the inilestones to the integrated plant construction sequence of events; (ii) A pmgram schedule of IlFE tasks which addresses the relationships between HFE elements and activines, the developant of IIFE repons and :he conduct of IIFE reviewr, and (iii)ldentification of other plant equipny:nt procurement and construction activities wLeh are related to HFE Design Team acth i ics bot outsik the rey ef !% teem (e.g., C&1 equ!pment mnnufactu:0

h. De6nition of HFF derm ntntion requirrments end pro:cduren for reten' ion and nMvs!. and
i. Description of the manner in which IIFE Program requirements will be communicated to all applicable personnel and organizations, including those which may be subcontracted, who nie responsible for the perfonnance of work associated with the Win Can'ro! " nam and Remote Shethwn Synem design implenrntation.

111. SY",TF.M I'l'NC110NAL REQtIlltEMENTS ANALYSIS IMPLEMENTATION PLAN

!. (Satisfaction of the requirements presented herein shall re. ult in the erration 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 _

material for the GE ABWR design). ' Die System F:'netiend Requirements Analysis Imrkm ntation Plan shall crnbbsh:

a. .Methodh and criteria for condu;tiog the Systern FunctionalRequirements Analysis which are consistent with accepted life pracuces and principles. Within the context of system functional requirtments analysis, accepicF HFE methcxh and criteria are prerented in the following dmuments:
a. AD/A233 168, System Engineering Management Guide 1990,(Dept. of Defen<c -

Defent- Systems M.'nngeny nt Cellege, Ko;kler, F., et al)

h. AR6021,llaman Factors Enginee-ing Program,1983,(Dept. of Defense)
c. EPRI NP-3659 Husaan Facton Guide for Nuclear Power Plant Control Room Development,1981, (Electric Power Research Instimte)
d. IEC 964, Design for Control Roon,s of Nuclear Power Plants,1989 (Bucau Central de h Comimtrion Electrote:hnique Intema'icnale) i 0 REV.3 MIT

$sv.,

. =.

_m : _. w..

L,6.. t.a -

i TABLE 18.E.2.1 HUMAN FACTORS ENGINEERING DESIGN TEAM AND Pl.ANS

e. IEEE Std. 10231988, IEEE Guide to the Application of Iluman Factors Engineerin to Systems, Equipment and Facilities of Nuclear Power Generating Stations,1.>83, (IEEE)
f. MIL H-46855B, Human Engineering Requirements for Military Systems, Equipment rnd Frcilities,1979,(Dep'. of Defense)
g. NUREG 0700 Guidelines for Cont ol Room Design Reviews,1981,(U. S. ,

Nuclear Regulatory Commission)

h. NURE0/CR 3331, A Methodology for Allocating Nuclear Power Plant Control g, Functieris to 11 aman and At:tomated Control,1983. (U. S. NRC)

Note that within the set of documents listed above, differences may exist regarding die specific methods and criteria applicable to the conduct of system functional requirements analysis. In situations that such differences exist, all of th methods and enteria presented within those documents are considered to be equally appropriate and valid and, therefore, any of the above listed dvements may h reheted as the basir for tl.e system functionni requirements ann!ysi+.

b. that system requirements shall define the system functions and those system functions rhli provide the b"dr orr detennining the associ:ted l!SI performance requirements.
c. that critical functions shall be defined (i.e., those functions required to achieve major system perfonnance requirements; or those functions which,if failed, could pose n safety hutrd to plan
  • 1crsonnel or to the generr! public),

d, that safety functions shall be identified along with any functional interrelationship these infety functions may have with non saf:ty systems.

e. that functions shall be defined as the most geneml, yet differentiable means whereby the system requirements are met, discharged, or satisfied. Functions shall be arranged in a logical sequence so that any specific ! cperation,1 usage cf the system can be traced in en er.d to-end p ah.
f. that functions shall be described initially in graphic form. Function diagramming shall be done staning at a " top level", where major functions are described, and continuing to decompose major functions to lower levels until a specific critical end item rec,uirement emerges, e.g., a piece of equipment, software, or an openitor,
g. that detailed nanative descriptions shall be developed for each of the identified functions and for the overall system configuration design itself Each function shall be identified and described in tenns of inputs (observable parameten which will indicate system status) functional processing (control process and perfomiance measures required to achieve the function), functhat operations (including detecting signals, measuring information, comparing one measurement with another, processing information, and acting upon decisions to produce a desired condition or result such as a system or component operation actuation or trip) outputs, feedback (how to determine correct discharge of function), and interface requirements from the top down to that subfuretiens ne reenacind as pr.n of lcrger function.11 elements.

10 REV.3 9niS2

-, a

-- w _ _

r, 4

, f,, o'J i ?

N ' W <.N FACTORS E!'GINTSPING DESIGN TEAM AND PLANS 2 2 C, " eta Functicv1 Reqterements Anclysis implementation Plan shall include:

a. The methods for identinc4 tion of system level ftmetions based upon rys'em prfermance reqWremena
b. De methods for developing graphic function descriptions (e.g., Functional Flow Ille:k Diagmms and Time Line Diegrams)
c. De met %i for developing detailed function narrative descriptions which enenmpm:
0) observabic parameters that indiente system status, (ii) control press and data trquired to achieve the function, and -

Sii) how to determine the mr.nvr in wMeh prorer dischnrge of functbn is to h det:.rmi .ed

d. Analysis methods which define the integration of closely related subfunctions so that day em,le t.mn:d as a er.it
c. Analysis methcds which divide identified subfurctions ira.o tvo rmups according to VActhr:

(i) Common achievement of the subfunction is an essential coniition for the ace,m.ali>hman' of a higher leve! ~ 'v' ion, u Di)The subfunction is an altemative supporting functions to a higher level function or the subfunctinn's necomp1!!hmem n not nc essarily a requirite for a higher level functcn.

i

f. Re'luirements to identify for each integmfed subfunction:

(i) De basis for why tecomplishment of the rubfunedon is required,

(!!) The control actions necesrary for e complishment of the subrunctions, ,

(Di) ne ,-arara -rs necessary for the subrunction contm! aethns, (iv) De criteria for evaluating the resultof the subfunction control actions, l

(v) %e paramet-rs necessary for evaluation of the subfunction l

! bi)The criteria to be used to evaluate the subfunction, and

- (vii)De criteria for selecting altemative function assignmentt if the evelnati on crite ia L is n >t satisNd.

l' IV. ALLCCATION OF FUNCTION IMPLE?.m?? TAT!ON 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 Certi6 cation material for the GE AllWR deri".n). The Albec' ion of Function impbmentation Plan Shall ertnblish:

1 it RW3 MtT

E,,. N LL ;i . id-- ' ' ~

. a j

TABLE 1F.".2.1 HUMAN FACTORS RNGINEERING DESIGN TEAM AND PLANS

a. He methods and criteria for the execution of function allocation which are consistent with acceated life practices and principles. Within the context of function allocation,  ;

accepted ! !FE prneuces and principles are presen:ed in the following docum:n:s:  ;

i

n. AD/A223 168, System Engineering Management Guide 1990,(Dept. cf Defense -

Defense Systems Management College, K ckler, F., et al)

b. AR 6021,11uman Factors Engineering Program,1983,(Dept.of Defense)
c. EPRI NP 3659,iluman Factors Guide for Nuclear Power Plant Control Room l Developrnent,19M,(Electric Power Research Institute)
d. IEC 964, Design for Control Rooms of Nuclear Power Plants,19F9,(Bureau Central de la Commission Electrotechnique Intemationale)
c. NUREG 0700 Guldelines for Control Room Design Reviews,1981,(U. S.

Nuclea Regulatory Commirsion)

L

f. NUREG/CR 3331, A Methodology for Allocating Nuclear Power Plant Control Functions to llumen and Automated Contm!,1983,(U. S. NRC)

~

Note that within the set of documents li'ted above, differences may exist repuding the specific methods and criteria applicable to the conduct and analysis of function allocation. In situations that such differences exist, all of the methods and criteria presented within those documents are considered to be equally appmpriate and valid and, therefort, any of the above listed documents may be selected as the basir for conducting the f metion n!!ocation and analysis.

b. Dat all aspects of system and functions definition shall be analyzed in tenns of remiting human perfortnance requir-ment:; based on the expected user population. .

- c. Dat the allocation of functions to personnel, system ehments, and personne 1 system '

combinations rl.eJ! n.9ect : ,

(il senritivity, precision, time, end safety trquirements.

(ii) required reliability of sys em perfermance, and (iii) the number and the necessary skills of the personnel requhid to operate and main nin the system.

d. The allocation criteria, rational, analyses, and procedures shall be documented.
c. Analyses shall confirm that the personnel elements can conectly perform tasks allocated in them while maintaining operator situation awareness, accen'able prsonnel workhml, and facilitating personnel vigilance.

12 REV.3 ' M192 n' , w , - - - e- e~ -- g- +w .

,-  ; 3 e- -

TABLE 18.F.2.1 liUMAN FACTORS FNGib'EERING D"SION TEAM AND Pl.AFS

2. The A!!mation of Function implementation Plan shall include:
a. Evablishment of a structured basis and criteria for functinn allmation
b. Defin! tion of furtion allocation analyses requWments including:

(i)Ikfinition of the objectives and renubements for the evaluation of function alloevions (ii) Development of alternative function allocations for use in the condect of compa:ative evah:r.tions (iii) Development of criteria to k used as the basis for selecting ktween alterrotive ~-

function el!omir (iv) Development of evaluation criteria weighting factoa (v) Development of tot and enalysis methals for evaluating function a11oentim a!&.atives (vi) Definition of the methods to be used in conducting assessments of the sensitivity of ~

the comparative function allocatit . -!temr.tives andym rr sults to the individuni analysh inputt n.d criteria (vii) Definition of the methods to be emplcyed in selecting individust function allcration for in:orpm e: ion into the implement:'t derinn.

V. TASM APALYSTF IMPl?. MENTATION PIAN

1. (Satisfaction of the nxjuirements presented herein shall result in the creation of a Task Analysis implementauon Plan which is in full compliance with the item 4.a Acceptance Criteria presented in Table 3.6 of the Tier 1 Design Certification ma:erial for the GE ABWR desi tab The Task Analysis impicmentation Plan sha.11 estabSh: -
a. The methods and criteria for conduct of the task analyses which att consistent with accepted IlFE practices and principles. Within the context of performing task analysis, rmptd !"" netSob and c-i:eria on persenteiin the follmvmp documents:

= 1

a. AD/A223 168 System Engineering Management Guide 1990,(D:pt. of Defense -

Defense Systems Management Collye, Kceller, F., et al)

S. DOD IIDBK 763,iluman Engineering Procedurrs Guide, Chapters 5 7 and App ndices A and B,1991,(Dept. of Defense)

c. EPRI NP 3659,iluman Factors Guide for Nuclear Power Plant Contrn! Room Development,19M,(Elec:*ic Power P,esea ch Insti tute)
d. IEC 964. Design for Control Rooms of Nuclear Power Plants,1989,(Bmrau Central de !" Commission EElecnotechnique Intemninna'e)
c. IEEE Std. 1023-1988,IEEE Guide to the Application ofIluman Factors Engireering to Systems, Fquipmen r.nd Faci!ities of Nuc! car Power Generating Stati-ns,10 N, (!EEE) 13 FG'.3 W11S2

b . :' a _U  ?! .- F. -

3N TAT 11.E 18.R.2.1 HUMAN FACTORS ENGINEERING DESIGN TEAM AND PLANS

f. Mllell 46855B,liuman Engineering Requirements for Military Systems, Equi pment rnd Facilities,1979,(D:pt. of Defense)
g. Mil STIF1478, Task Perfonnance Analysis,1991,(Dept. of Defense)
h. NUREG 0700, Guidelines for Control Room Design Reviews,1981,(U. 3.

No: lear Regulatory Commission)

1. NUREG/CR 3331, A Methodology for Allocating Nuclear Power Plant Contml Functions to lluman and Automated Contro!,1983,(U. S. NRC)

J. NUREG/CR-3371. Task Analysis of Nuclear Power Plant Contml Room Crews

_ _ . (Vol.1),1983, (U. S. NRC)

Note that within the set of documents listed above, differences may exist regarding th specific methods and criteria applicable 4.o the conduct of RFE task analysis, in situations that such differences exist, rJI of the methods and i,.i'eria presented whhin those documents are considered to tv equally appropriate and vand :~1 sheraott, any of the ebove !!sted documents may I e selected as the basis for the task analysis.

b. The scope of the task analysis whic! shallinclude all operations perfomied at the operatorinterface in the main control mom and at the remote shutdown system. We analyses shall be directed to the full range of plant operating nxxies, including stanup, neanal operations, abnormal operations, tensient conditions, low power and shutdown conditions. The analyses shall also .*dditss operator interface operations during periods of maintenon:e tast and inspectio.' of plant systems end equipment md ef th,1131 equipment
c. Wat the analysis shall link the identified and descrit ed tasks in operational sequence diagrams. The task descriptions and operational seg sence diagrams shall be used to identify which tasks are " critical"in terms ofimport. nee for function achievement, ,

potent {al for human error, and impact of task failure . Human actions which are found to affect plant risk in PR A sensitivity an. lyses shall also be considered "critica!",

d. Task analysis shall begin with the development of jetailed narrative descriptions of the personnel activities required for successful compt stion of the task. Task ana'yses sha!!

dMnc the input, procers, and output recyi:rd by i nd cf prsonnel.

c. De task analysis shall be in detail sufficient enough to identify information and control icquirements such that requirements for alanns,dtsplays, data processing, and contmis for human tas). accomplishment may 1.c sycified,
f. De task analysis results shall be made available as input to the personnel training programs.
2. The Task Analysis implementation Plan shallinclade:
a. De methods ned data sources to be userlin tbc conduct of the task anPlysis
b. Le raethMs for conducting the initial (high level) task analysis inch' ding:

14 REV.3 M192

5. . :1 a -:.c .. ..a .- M'.: O-l l

TAftLE 18.E.2.1 HUMAN FACIVRS ENGINEERING DESIGM TEAM AND PLANS (i) converting functions to tasks, (ii) developing narntive task descriptions, (iii) developing the basic statement of the task fonctiont, (iv) decomposition of tasks to individual ectivities, and (v) development of operational sequence diagrams

c. The methods for developing detailed task descriptions that addresst (i) information requirements (i e., information required to execute a tesk, including cues for insk initiation)

(ii) decision making requirements (i.e., decisions that are pmbable based on the evaluations, desenp: ion of the dec!sions tc,ie mad: end the evaluations to be performed),

(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 ::ry o"criap of ta:k requirements such as serial vs. pam!!el tass el:nen:r)

(iv) feedback reavireme. cts (i c., fe,"M tequ red i to irdicate ndequmy of retions tr.hn),

(v) personnel workload (i.e., both cognitive and physical workload and the crtimation of the. !evel of dif0culty asr.ociat-d vth a par iculor wor! hst condition,

. (vil) any associated task support requirements (i.e., special/ protective clothing, job aids

, or reference materials required, en:' tools and equip nent reonited or any enmp.ncr prxessing suppo : aids)

,, (vii) workplace factors (i.e., the workspace envelopeyequired by the action taken, .

workspac.e environmental conditions location that tho.wcrk is to be performed, the physical /rrr.tal attributes of the werk),

(viii) staffing and communication rec utrements (i.e., the number of personnel, their technical specialty, and specific s dlls, the form and content of communications and other personne! interaction required when more than one pmon is invo!ved),

and (ix) the identiScation of any hazardsinvolved in execution of the task,,

i I d. The methods for identification of critical tasks.The identined critical tasks shall L include,at the minimum, those operator action < which have sipn!Ocnnt impact on the l PRA teruits as present:d in Section 19D.7 of the SSAR 1

e. The methods for est iblishing infomrtion and control r quirements l

1s at:va sm2

!? !

$U,:: M I:"i' H 't. O i,i' !#

TAllt.E 18.E.2.1 !!UMAN FACTORS ENGINEERING DESIGN TEAM AND PLANS

f. The methods for conducting alarm, display, processing, and control requirements ,

enalysl l i

g The methods through which the app!! cation of task analysis results are assembled and demen'cd to pmvide input to the development of personnel taining programs

h. the methods to be used to evaluate the mits of the ta6 nnelysit.

I VI. IIST DTISION B4P1EMENTATION PLAN

1. (Satisfaction of the requirements presented herein shall result in the creation of an 1151 Design Implementation Plan which is in full compliance with the item 5.a Acceptance Criteria presented in Table 3.6 of the Tier 1 Design Certification nuterbl for the O!! ABWR dedgn). 'Itc HSi Design implementation Plan shall estab!bh:
a. The methods and criteria for HSI equipment design and evaluation ofIlSI human ,

perfonnance, equipment design and associated work place facton; which are consistent with accepted ITE practices and principles. Within the context of perfonning these I!SI design evaluations, accepted HFE methods and criMria am prerentuiin the fo!!nwing doct:vena:

a. AD/A223 168, System Engineering Management Guide 1900. (Dept. of Defenre -

Defense Syst mr Manayment rolk;'e, Kockle,, F., et e!)

b. ANSI HFS 100. American National Standard for Human Factors Engineering of '

Virri Divplay Termint.! Wrksmic.ns,1988 (Am. Nat'!. Standmis Insti:ute)

c. EPPJ NP 3659, Human Factors Guide for Nuclear Power Plant Control Room Dev 'opment,19% (Elect:ic Po'ver Research 1nstitute)
d. EPRI NP-3701, Computer-Generated Display System Gnidelines,1984,(Electric Power Retentch Institute) e, - ESD TR 86 278, Guidelines for Designing User Interface Software,1990, 0>:p.mment of Ddense)
f. IEC 964, Design for Control Rooms of Nuclear Power Plants,1989, (Bureau Central de b Comrnission E!ectrotechnique Ir' err:' tic, ale)
g. MIL H 46855B, Human Engineering Requirements for Military Systems, Equipmem end Faci!! ties,1979, (Dept. of Defense)
h. MIL HDBK 759A, Humrn Factors Engineering Design for Army Material,1981, (Dept. of Defense)
i. DOD-HDBK 761 A, Human Engineering Guidelines for Management infermation Systems,1990,(Dept. of Defer.se)
j. MIL-STD 1472D, Human Engineering Design Criteria for Military Systems, Equipment and Faci:itier,1989, (Dept. of Defense) i k. NUREG 0696, Functional Criteria for Emergency Response Facilities,1980, (U. S. Nucient Regulatory Commission) l' t

16 REY.3 M1.92

-~ - __ . . _ - . _ -

.c. . .. .  ;, .

TABLE 18.E 7.1 IlUM AN FACTORS ENGINEEP. LNG DESIGN TEAM AND PLANS

' l. NUREG-0700 Guidelines for Control Room Design Reviews.1981, (U. S.

Nuc!ent Reguintory Comm!r.sion)

m. NUREG-0800, Standani Review Plan, Rev.1,1984, (U, S. Noelear Regulatej Commissien)
n. NUREG-OS99, Guidelines for the Preparation of Emergency Opern'ing Procedures.1082 (U. S. Nuclent Reaulatory Commissir.n)
o. NUREG/CR.5228, Techniques for Preparing Flowchart Format Emergency Opmting Procedures (Vols. 1 & 2) 1989. (U. S, l'RC)
p. NUREG/CR.4227,11uman Engineering Guidelines for the Evaluation and Assessment of Video Dispiny Uni'e,1985,(U. S. Nuclear Regu!:irory

- - - - Commission)

Note that within the set of documents listed above, differences may exist regarding the specific methods and criteria applicable to the conduct ofIISI design evaluations. In situations that such differences exist, all of the methods and enteria presented within those documents are considered to be equally appropriate and valid and, theref ore, any of the above lir:cd dNuments may be f.*cted nr the basis for the !!SI design C V?!ua'hns.

b. That the llSI design shallimplement the information and control requirements developed through the task analyses, including the displays, controis and alarms necesv " frr 'im exewicW %5* Th Ment:fteiin N tse! Na! yrs as teir-g en'.al it :r.
c. The methods which will assure that the llSI human performance equipment, design and t

associated workplace factors are cons rrat with those inMe'ed and ev+ated H tSe c: nphed tr '. r.a!,mic.

d. nat the 11S1 design shall not incorporate any equipment (i.e., hardware or software function) which har. not been ::pecif',cr"; evaluated in 'he task snalysis.
c. De 11S1 design criteria and guidance for control room operations during periods of nuintenance, test and inspection of control room HS1 cc.uiptwnt anJ of o her plant equipruent wH:h has contro! nom parsonnel interface.
f. The test and evaluation methods for itsolving HFE/HSi design issues. These test and evaluation methcds shall include the critcria to be used in selecting !!FC./IISI design and ev:luatim taals k hich:

(il may incorporate the use of static mockups and models for evaluating acceu and

.. workspacc re!ated IIFE irsues, nr.d (ii) shall require dynamic simulations and HSI prototypes for conducting evaluations of the human performance associated w!'h the activi'ies in the critical tasks identified i,n the tnsk analysit.

l 17 ftEV3 9M/32 l

E

, c .' . . .. .. ..

s: . :.. ;.

TABLE 18.E.2.1 !!UMA! /ACfDRS ENGINE"R'NG DESIGN TEAM AND Pl.ANS

2. The18cman System !nterface Design implementation Plan shall include:

a Identification of the specific IIFE standards and guidelines documents which substantiate that the selected HS! Design Evaluanon Methoris and Criteria are based upon accepted !!FE practices and prin:1ples,

b. Dennition of st.sndardi _ed HFE design cenventions,
c. Definition that the standard design fea:e . presented in Section 18.4.2 of the Standard Safety Analysis D.eport (SSAR), and the u.andard HSI equipment technologies, presented in Section 18.0 of the FS AR. shi.!! M inentponted es requirements on the Y derign,
d. Definition of the design /cyaluation tools (e.g., prototypes) which are to be used in the conduct of the 11SI design analyses, the specific scope of evaluations for which those tools are to be applied and the rationale for the s&ction of those sp cific ton's and tWr rirssted scope of application.

Yll. PLANT AND EMERGENCY OPERNI rNG PROCEDURE DEVEIDPMENT D/P! F. MENTATION P'AN

1. (Satisfaction of the requiremants presented herein shall result in the creation of a Plant and Emergency Operating Procedure Development 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 Plant and Emergency Opervist PnreM D:velopment Implemen'ation Plan shall estrblish :

a. That operator actions identined in the task analysis shall be emi as the basir fer Fre0ifyirq the pro"ef t" s for operet c9?

3

n. ANSI.N18.71976. Administrative Controls and Quality Assurance for the

. Opera:ica Phare of Nuclear Power Plants,1976,(Am. Nat'l, Stds. Instit.)

b. EPRI NP-3659,iluman Factors Guide for Nuclear Power Plant Control Room Developm nt,19% E!cctric Powr Research Insti:t:e
c. IEC 964, Design for Control Rooms of Nuclear Power Plants,1989 (Bureau Centm! de la Commission Electretechnique Irterr 3:tonale) ,,
d. MIL H-46855B, Human Engineering Requirements for Military Systems.

Equipment and Facilities,1979, (Dept. of Defense)

c. NUREG-0899. Guidelines for the Pieparation of Emergency Oper:> ting Pnwedarcs,1982, (U. S. Nuclest Regulatory Commission)
f. NUREG.1358, Lessons learned from the Special Inspection Program for En :rgency Operating Procedurer,1989,(U. S. Nucl. Regul. Commission) 18 REV.3 95162

~ '

n, , . . . . . c,.. a t

Tall!.E 18.F 11 IIUMAN FACTORS ENGib'EEP'NG DESIGN TEAM AND PLANS I

g. NUREG/CR 5228, Techniques for Prepanng Flowchart Fonnat Enerrency Operating Pmcedures (Vols.1 A 2),1989, (U. S. !'RC)  !
h. MIbM - 63035 CrM), Military Specifications Manuals Technicah Front End Analysis,1977,(Dept.cf 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 pmcedures. In situations that such differences exist, all of the methods and criteda presented within those documents are considered to be equally ap ampriate and valid and, therefort, any of the above listed documents may be selecter as the basis for the epniting technical prn:cdure development.

b. 'that the pmcedures to be developed shall address nonnal, abnormal, and emergency erations including plant systems op/ equipment and pn, consideration of plant operations during it underg~ing, tert, mal.-tenance nr irtr:ction.
c. Methods and criteria for development of the openiting technical amcedurts which are consistent with accepted life practices and principles, Within t ie context of operating procedure dewtopment, accepted !!rE wthat nnd c:imria are preeent-d in tLe re!;owing dn:tu wr.ts:
d. 'Diat a Writer's Guide shall be develo3ed which establishes the process for developing the technical procedures for normal p ant and system operation, abnomul plant operations, emergency plant operations and for responding to plant alarm conditions.

The Writer's Guide shall contam objective criteria which will require that the operations technical prcv:t den s .!cveloped are cer.sittent in organiation, style, content and us:qc of tenr.

2. ' Die Plant and Emergency Operating Procedure Development Implement ttion Plan shall ine. h h-
a. Identification of the task analyses' definition of required human actines as the data r~r. to le ured as tL: hasis fc: prc :cdre development,
b. Ikquirernents for the d:vehyment and use of a Technical Procedure Writer's Guide,
c. Definition of the methcxis through which spedfic operator skills and training needs, as nuy be considered necessary for reliable execution of the procedures, will be identified
nd dxumer.ted as pan of the techni:al proced. ires development activities, and i
d. Pequimment thet the dmomented technical procedurts develnped shcIlincluc e:

(i) Title of the pro:cdure (ii) Statement of the pmcedine's goal and applicability (iii) Identification of any refemnce traterial necessary to suppart execution of the prxedum l

19 TV.3 911S2

, , . , - . - - - - - - - . ~ ==

.!U, ; t n 2: :- 'd , M.l M Ai,' ~~ M. i ~ T. E T TATILE LEE.2.1 HUMAN FACTORS ENGINEERING DESIGN TEAM AND PLANS (iv) Identification of any prerequisites conditions which must be satisfied prior to er.ecution of the prc:edor (v) Identification of any precautions ( l.e., wamings, cautions, and nnten) that must be ccnridemd in the crecution of the procedure (vi)Identifiestion of any operationallimits (vii) D:Onition of the specific human actions steps required, and (viii) Identification of the s ycific criteria that the operator may use to judge that the conis of the procedure have been achieved VI!!. IIUMAN FACIDRS VETUFICATION AND VAllDATION IMPLEMENTATION Pl.AN

1. (Satisfaction of the requirements presented herrin shallitsult in the creation of a Human Factors V-Nation and Validation Implementation Plan which is in full compliance with the Item 't.acceptsnce Oiteria presented in Table 3.6 of the Tier 1 Design Cer'ification material for the GE ABWR design). The Human Factors Verification and Validat:on -

(V&V) Implementation Pl n shal: estab!!sh:

a. Human factors VAV methads and criteria which are consistent with accepted HFF.

practices and principles. Within the context of performing human factors V&V, necepted HFE . ethcds and criteria are presented in the following do:uments:

7.,

n. AD/A223 168, System Engineering Management Guide 1990,(Dept. of Defense -

D:fense Systems Manar: ment Onle;;e, Rockler, F., et n!)

b. DOD IIDBK 763,iluman Engineering Procedures Guide, Chapters 5 7 and Appendices A and !),1901,(Dept. of Defense)
c. DODI 5000.2, Defense Acquisit!cn Management Policies and Pmcedures.1991, (Ihpt. of Defenre)
d. EPRI NP-3701, Computer Genersted Display System Guidelines,1984,(Electric Power Rercarch Inrtitute) .
e. IEC 964, DesJgn for Control Rooms of Nuclear Power Plants,1989,(Ilureau Central dc la Commission Electmtechnique Internndenale) ,
f. IEEE Std. 8451988, IEEE Guide to Evaluation of Man Machine Performance in Nuclear Power Generating Station Control Rooms and Other Peripheriet,1988 (IEEE)
g. MIL-H-468558, Human Engineering Requirements for Military Systems, Equipment and Facilities,1979,(Dept. of Defense)
h. DOD HDBK-761 A, Human Engineerina Guidelines for Management Infomution Systems,1990,(Dept. of Defense)

, i- i. NUREG 0700, Guidelines for Control Room Design Reviews,1981, (U. S.

No:le:,r Regulatory Commisrion) 20 IEV3 9"192 l

I-

.hr, i .: ...i. u: , :V' ; Y, u .2 TAPI.E 18.E.2.1 HUMAN FACTORS ENGINEERING DESIGN TEAM AND PLANS .

J. NUREG-0899, Guidelines for the Preparation of Emergency Operating Preceda:e,1982 (U. S. l'eclear Perulatory Commission) 1:. TOP 12 610 Ten ;perating Precedure. Part 1,1990,(Dept.of Defenre)

1. NS AC 39, Verincation and Validation for Safety Parameter Disp!ny Systems, 1981,(Elect:ic Power Research Inrthute)
m. NUREG/CR 4227. Human En :ineering Guidelines for the Evaluation and Assessment of Video Disphy Jnitt,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 i.rsented within those documents are considered to he equally appropriate and valid and, therefore, any of the above listed documents n ey be selected at the bris for human fr.c'crs VM .

b. The methods and evaluadon criteria for confinning that the performance of the in'egrated HS!, meets the HFE design goals as establiAed in tbc HIM Progam Plan,
c. The scope of the evalna: ions of the in'egrated HS! shallinclude:

(i) The Human System Interface (including both the interface of the operau r with the HSI equipment hardware and the interface of the operator with the llSi equipmer.W. r.cf: ware dr:ven fucion';)

(!i) ne plant and emergency operating technical procedures, and (iii) The oven 11 HS! work environment O

- d. That static and/or "part task" nxxic evaluations of the HSI equipment shall be conducted to confirm that the controls, displays, and data processing functions identified in the task analyses are provided and that those controls, displays and data processing fungtiont are designed ir ecordance with areerted UFF pnet:cm and pnncir!:s.

+

c. The integration of HSI equipment with each other, with the operating personnel and with the Openitions Techmcal Procedures shall be evaluated through the conduct of dynamic task performance testing. The dynamic task yrformance testing and evaluations shall be performed over the full scope of t le integrated HS! design using dynamic HS! prototypes (i.e., prototypical HSI equipment which is dynamically driven by real time plant simulation computer models), other evaluation tools and/or past dynamic task performance test and evaluation results. The methods for defining the i scope and application of the dynamic HS1 prototype, past test results and other evaluation tools shall be documented in the implementation plan. %c dynamic task Irrfomunce tests and evale9tions sh:dl have as their objectives:

(i) Confinnation that the integrated HSI design facilitatet achievement of tbc Hentified safety fm:tiens and crit:c d fenr*!crr, l

l '

21 REV3 QWJ2 l

i

~' ^

id. If 32 l.. . .,..r .

':E' F.U H 4

TABLE 18.E.2.1 IlUMAN FACTORS ENGINEERING DESIGN TEAM AND PLANS (ii) Confinnation that the allocation of function and the structure of tasks assigned to personnel it consistent with accepted HFE principles, (iii) Confinnation of established main control room staffing and the HSI design and configuratinn pmvided to suppon that staff in accomplishing their assigned tasks, (iv) Confimistion that Operations Technical Procedures are complete and accurate, (v) Confinnation that the dynamic aspecte of the itSI are sufficient for task accomplishment, and (vi) Conftnnation that the integrated !!SI design is condusive to el!minating the potentini for opemtor errors.

f. That dynamic task perfonnance test evaluations shall be conducted over the full ranpc of operational condit'ons and upsets,includingt (i) Normal pinnt o erations, such as plani stanup, shetdown, full power opeWont, and Innt me.intenance activities; (ii) Plant system and equipment faile'er-(iii)!!SI equipment fnitures; (iv) Plant tranrients, and; (v) Portulated ph.nt ucciduts canditians,
g. The HFE perfonnance sneasures to be used as the buts for evaluating the dyn mic task performance :est resuhr. These perintmare rneasun nr!!in:lude:

(i) Operating crew primary insk perfannance chanderistics, such as task times and procedure violations, (ii) opa. rating crew errers andar error rates, (iii) opemting crev situation nwareness, (iv) opemtin3 crew workload.

(v) c,perating crew communications and coordination, (vi) anthropometry evaluations, (vii) physical positioning and intereetionr, and (viii) HSI equipment performance menores

h. The methods to confinn that IIFE issues identified and docume.ited in the Human F,ctor: Irsue Trading System have teen resolved in the integrated JISI design, and 22 REV.3 tm m

7 .

. . r- - . ,.  :...c TABl.R 18.E.2.1 !!UMAN FACTORS ENG.NEERfNO DESIGN TEAM AND PLANS

i. The methods and criteria to be used to confirm that critical human actions, as define <! -

by the task analysis, have been addressed in the integrated HS1 design in a manner consis: nt with r.ccepted ilFE practices and prinelples.

J. The methods and criteria to be used to connnn that the operating technical procedu:-s att correct and enn in cracuted with!, the realm of accepted h'imin gntfortrr.

ecpnhi'it 8es.

2. Th- l'umsn Facto r Verince.' ion and W" !r. tion Implemen::. Hon Plan shn!! inchub : j
a. Definidon of Test Objectives
b. Definition of Test methods and procedures
c. Identification of the participants inthe dynamic task performance tening which shn!!

inchide Nenre.d opemmrs as 'est suWcu

d. Defirdtion of dycamte trsk performance test coniitions which r.hallinchnL:

(i) plart startup cperstions (ii) plant power operndons Oli) plan: du:dewn operations (iv) plent refueling and maintenance oyretions (v) individual plant syvem and equTment failurcs (vi)individw!1 S1 e.quipment failure (e.g.. loss of VDU functions) -i (vil) derign in se transients (e.g., turbine trip, loss of feedwater)

(viii) design basis accidents (e.g., LOCA s)

(ix) execution cf symp:om bered emergency precedun:s (x) execution of task scenarins which contain critical tasks as identined in the tark nnt1/sca

c. Methods for defining scope end con 0goration of the pmtotypical HSI mquired to suppn tesung
f. Methrxh for denning criteria and pe-femunce measures to be used in evahndng tert

- tr su!u

g. Methcd for conducting analysis of test data
h. Requin: ment that the 11SI design sha!! le trvieurd end confinned:

i:

ne/3.911%

a

4 c.,
. .  : ; i TADLE 18.E.2.1 IlUMAN FAC00RS ENGINEEfJNG DESIGN TEAM AND PLANS (i) to have incorporated the inventory of controls, displays and alarms presented in i' Tables 1BF 13.1,2 and 3 of the AnWR Str9dard Sfr.ty Amlysis P.cpon (SSAP),

end (ii) that the implemented design is consistent with the stant.ard design features and technologics as presented in Sections 18A.2 and 18.4.3, respectively,of the SSAR

1. requirements for the devalopment of docume.nted test & evaluation plans and j pre:etrs J. requirements for dcv:umenting test results.

l e

9 i REV.3 9/1192 24 l-

_ .- , , , __ __. . , . , .. - -

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML20116L598&oldid=2807193"