Text

Rev 3 to Vol 2 of Crdr:Apps
	ML20137N496
Person / Time
Site:	Beaver Valley
Issue date:	12/13/1984
From:	Deflin M, Eilmann E, Kurtz E; DUQUESNE LIGHT CO.
To:	;
Shared Package
ML20137N440	List: ML20137N434; ML20137N456; ML20137N496; ML20137N514;
References
	NUDOCS 8512040129
	Download: ML20137N496 (185)
	v • d • e

5

'e.

b

't

-w;v 3,1=

r-

.x w ~,.x _.'

, > u p

s.

3 J y~. ;"m.6g-y g,.. ffv:ye [.y-;r@j s a.

<s s

2

~

t 3

r

'q i

i b yi y

+p.

1

.m.. -

.m., -y y m.m

~

c

+

e

^

ea f'.

A.

v

_ _h,. ' '.,

3 1

,,R.

i,'-./

'._'y.,

M3dN,1I,ND6,\\.(ROOM 16ESIGN' REVIEW

~

r 4~

n c

./v s

., ::. ~W " -

. : e j'

=

..f..

<,-Mk.

r

. *.: =.

g

{;x\\

l~?;'

A I'

9,

~

y'v,

4.' u

.~r.,

,s

'f

,,,j l;.f,

^'

v s

a*

l ' "

l

\\'-'l.

1 a

, 'EW

. l f.. ~ ;

3 g_ ;3 v 1

%, w$w

' < :j* - (,.,

y

' ~Q

. b' 4 6

r, m

+:

1:Q.,Q- 'N, i,. -$ppendices:

c w:,

~.

^

L h ik. :. :

.. yG * ?,'hG

it.l n il}

s y,

y.m w m

Y,d" Nh:j,sjOS

W

+

s m

q b A 1 h-.ut.w. e h.

N N 'N [

VOlu, me12J,1 3:.$ \\

. e am 1 pjp w-w-

g ~ m,

y - 9 9:.y y p y +., ; y~

y;.-

-8 gg p' x :

.3 ;l y

'~

.t y'__<

L

'4' N

% g.

l $,.l-

~

~L,

-. a. ' '

~

.,y y

.g s h _.. g'y ' +..

s

~, 'g; 6

+

,e..

+

s-

-. '4 4 :WS,),,

x e

y..,; - - ' '

?

[J.!' l.k.

3

_[_

. 9

% l m.

+., ' ' t.[

yg~m.~ w '

~

t Mi g,,.."

"..gr.' % Q.,

'+

Q l

y",

i

~;

',3

i

~

u'"'n

+

p

.c # s i-y1 4

&ph,

~;n~

a w

. w,. n O.% 7,n*_>

DMf

. A_x..

p x

s e s

3

',[

^

+

4

.y' f

s m

s

.-s 5

} Q.l.Nfr ~

f h m,

,., ~

5

n(

..f

'r r +

g..3 y

7 s

'y r

J.

-Ww S.L. -r -

(

y

?, + y....

f T ',,

.~_

g j% :

.\\

~

A

,,r:.

y y,;g:

c u

+ s-i,

. a..,

u... w,

-.= e m..

,,...;e m

.r-.

y ~.,

. s p-

~,

-gyu j, f**'

i

> iqa.

m

. m.;.:4+m

~

. _3

/,

x,

w g.

BQ%l

.W i

W

%(V'[ @k & '

[

~

~,

.~,

': a s

~

Q

A+y,,,

1 r

,; ; M.QA -

.. y*

QFL pg, u.

G L:

s..

4 m

a

.,: ;u u :n n

a ;

2 E '

L. @M ;j

's

?:00' -

j J

/ '

o

.,n.s%m

^%'"-}.

j +%f I

3

~

t_

.A,, wn..,.

aa, w

.}

u s w, se

~ a:

v-8 &:

ve?<

~

r

.-n x~

m e-:

A;, ;

w, n;,.a c

1.-

wr ~

. p;-

wa.

+

_ y 4.

+- a u

q.

a 3) y

[

l l

A

,,,s.

. : :w w.+

n n

F3t@'M #f 8512040129 851202 x

ZGF1% PDR A DOCK 05000412

,I 5,

F PDR ce f

hDJ

.f

..g"'~

?

- c.

-M 1*

f,

.-., _he r,--

e w

neJ4.+ set-e

-:'4.,d a,e

-:~r m. '."

e

%c 4

,gi=

i. "

._r

4.smo,

=+

,+r+46.

r-*J.-J.sw w4ssn m

<-.,se-+.L-e.--'

-s-

=

"2 A

e 4

.-y W

l BEAVER VALLEY POWER STATION l

UNIT - 2 l

CONTROL ROOM DESIGN REVIEW f

1 4

Volume 2 i

i I

VOLUME 2 l

APPENDICES APPENDIX.A -- BVPS - 2 CRDR Charter APPENDIX B -- BVPS - 2 CRDR instructions APPENDIX.C -- Unit 1 Operator Interviews and Questionnaires Methodology APPENDlX D -- NUREG 0700, Section 6.0 Guideline /

BVPS-2 CRDR Finding Cross Reference APPENDIX E -- NRC Clarification of Task Analysis Requirements i

l

--- -~

l APPENDIX A BVPS - 2 CRDR CHARTER

REVISION: 03 DATE: December 13, 1984 BEAVER VALLEY POWER STATION - UNIT NO. 2 CONTROL ROOM DESIGN REVIEW CHARTER APPROVED:

/ 2 -/3 -J' f E. F. Kurtf/

p' (Date)

DLC-Man g r, Regulatory Affairs

/1 ~ f.T - / W E. T. E11mann (Date)

DLC-Review Team Leader Ybh

/Z/3lTY M. E. Deflin /

(Datie)

DLC-Technical Coordinator h-l2 //3 /84 D. 5/ Vochinsky 9

(Date) 1-P iram Coordin r

S 38

/. J. \\qk / /'

(IVte) '

1-Proja:t Manpement k

REVISION: 03 PAGE 10F 15

TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION SilMECT ffff 1.0 Purpose 3

2.0 Objectives 3

3.0 CRDR Activities 4

4.0 CRDR Organization 4

3.0 Schedule 4

6.0 Monthly Report 4

7.0 Contractor / Subcontractor 4

8.0 Records 5

9.0 Final Report Format 5

10.0 Regulatory Issues 5

11.0 Audits 5

12.0 Revisions to Charter 5

13.0 Document Control 5

14.0 Instructions 5

ATTACHENTS A

BVPS-2 CRDR Organization B

CRDR Task Identification / Matrix C

Monthly Report Format D

Data Base Management System E

Final Summary Report Format REVISION: 03 PAGE 2 0F 15

BEAVER VALLEY POWER STATION - UNIT NO. 2 CONTROL ROOM DESIGN REVIEW CHARTER

1.0 PURPOSE

The purpose of the Control Room Design Review (CRDR) is to evaluate, from a human engineering point of view, the total control room work space, cnvironment, instrumentation, controls, and other equipment for both system demands and operator capabilities; and to identify, assess, and recommend c:ntrol room design modifications. The review is conducted to ensure tnat the BVPS-/ control room and remote shutdown panels will support safe plant operation during emergency conditions.

2.0 OBJECTIVEsr To ensure that the CRDR fulfills its stated purpose, several objectives utll be met. These objectives are as follows:

a) To meet the intent of the requirements specified in NUREG 0737, Supplement 1, Item I.D. 1, " Detailed Control Room Design Review."

o) Review input documentation, including any applicable operating experience data, plant design information, and any applicable standards and regulations.

c) Provide an inventory of the control room instrumentation.

d) Perform a human factors control room survey that compares the existing contsol room design with accepted human engineering guidelines.

o) Determine the input and output requirements of control room operator tasks during emergency conditions.

f)

Verify that the instrumentation required for the above operator tasks during emergency conditions is available and suitable.

g)

Validate that control room functions can be exercised.

h)

Identify Human Engineering Discrepancies (HEDs).

1) Assess identified HEDs.

j)

Identify corrective actions for HEDs.

k) Verify that improvements will provide necessary correction of HEDs.

1) Verify that improvements will not introduce new HEDs.

REVISION: 03 PAGE 3 0F 15

3.0 CRDR ACTIVITIES; The following areas of activities will be addressed during the CRDR to assess the control room for both completeness and suitability of the d; sign.

o Review Phase Task 1 - Operating Experience Review Task 2 - Control Room Inventory Task 3 - Control Room Survey Task 4 - System Review and Task Analysis (SRTA)

Task 5 - Verification of Task Performance Capabilities Tasx 6 - Validation of Control Room Functions o

Assessment and Implementation Phase o

Documentation Phase i

4.0 CRDR ORGANIZATIONr 1

An overview of the CRDR organization and a CRDR task matrix chart are attached for reference. An overview of the CRDR organization may be found in Attachment A and a CRDR task matrix may be found in Attachment B.

5.0 SCIEDULE

The CRDR schedule shall be maintained by the DLC CRDR review team leader.

The schedule may be revised on an informal basis with DLC approval.

6.0 MMTHLY REPORT:

The CRDR monthly report format may be found in Attachment C.

7.0 CONTRACTOR / SUBCONTRACTOR The following identifies the commercial responsibility between DLC, W;stinghouse Electric Corporation, and Esse) Corporation.

a) As per the tems and conditions of the commercial agreement betwo n DLC and Westinghouse, Westinghouse will serve as contractor to DLC during the BVPS-2 CRDR.

b) As a subcontractor to Westinghouse, Essex will function under the direction of Westinghouse during the BVPS-2 CRDR.

REVISION: 03 PAGE 4 0F 15

8.0 RECORDS

R0sumas/ qualifications of active participants will ba maintained in the W stinghouse shop order files.

Microfilm copiars of th3 Entire CRDR shop crder file will be released to DLC at fuel load. _The CRDR shop order file shall be structured consistently with that af Attachment D.

9.0 FINAL REPORT FORMAT The CRDR final summary report format will be consistent with that of Attachment E.

10.0 REGULATORY ISSUESt The DLC CRDR review team leader will be responsible for keeping the CRDR team informed of all regulatory changes pertaining to the CRDR or other rolated post-TMI activities.

11.0 AUDITS:

The DLC CRDR review team leader will have the responsibility of coordinating DLC/NRC audits and inspections.

12.0 REVISIONS TO CHARTERr The DLC CRDR review team leader has the authority to revise the BVPS-2 CRDR cf.2rter and must notify the core team of any revisions.

13.0 DOCUENT CONTROL:

Issuance of the BVPS-2 CRDR charter and instructions will be the responsibility of the DLC review team leader in accordance with the existing DLC Nuclear Construction Division Document Control procedures.

14.0 INSTRUCTIONS:

i Instructions shall be generated for all CRDR tasks outlined in the Review and Assessment Phases. These instructions shall address the following:

a) Scope b) Acceptance criteria, if applicable.

c) Records REVISION: 03 PAGE 5 0F 15

d) R5sponsibilities

0) Task rcvice cycle Each instruction shall be signed by the preparer, reviewed by the CRDR rcview team leader, and approved by Manager, Regulatory Affairs.

k, O

a A

i o

REVISION: 03

^

i 1

BVPS-2 CRDR ORGANIZATION PROJECT TEAM Manager, Regulatorv Affairs E. F. Ku rtz, J r.

Mananar. NCD Engineering H. M. Siegel Sunarintendant. BVPS-2 Onnrations T. P. Noonan SWEC Proinct Enginaar P. Knobel

~

Wartinahnuma Protect Managar T. Lex SUPPORT IAC Encinaar D. Szucs CORE TEAM W. Young BOP Sva+=== Enginmet Review T--- Iandar P. Knobel E. T. Eilmann Nuclear Safetv/Licensino Technical rwardinator M. E. Deflin M. E. Deflin Ha==n Factorm Snacialists

.I&C Eng1naar D. Eike D. J. Vochinsky J. Farbry H. VanCott Raactor 0;arator C. Baker R. G. Orendi

"t Hn-mn Factors Snacialist onarator W. T. Talley/T. J. Voss F. Schuster 4

REVISION: 03 ATTACHMENT A PAGE 7 0F 15

i TASR TDENTIF1 CATION TASK 1Ar LER Review s

TASK.. lB:

CROPS TASK 2r Control Room Invei. tory TASK 3:

Control Room Survey TASK 4r.s SRTA

/..7s TASK Sr Verification TASK 6:

Yalidation TASK 7:

Assessment and. Implementation TASK 8Ar Final Report TASK 88:

Chapter 18

'6 (Page 1 of 2)

REVISION: 03 ATTACHMENT B PAGE 8 0F 15

(?

CRCR TAS% MATRfX Tasks Team Member lA 1Es 2

3 4

5 6

7 8A 88 Review Team Leader (DLC)

R R

R P

Technical Coordinator /

Licensing Engineer (DLC)

P A

A P

P P

I&C Engineer (g)

P R

P A

A P

P P

P R

Reactor Operator (g)

A A

A P

A Human Factors Specialist (Essex)

A P

R P

R A

P P

P R

I&C Engineering Suppott (DLC, g)-

A A

A R

P A

R BOP System Engineer (SWEC)

A A

A R

P A

R NSSS Engineer (g)

P

-Human Factors Supplemental Specialists (Essex)

P P

R R

Operations Support (DI.C)

A A

P K'I P - Primary A - Assist R - Review (Page 2 of 2)

REVISION: 03 ATTACHMENT B PAGE 9 0F 15

BEAVER VALLEY UNIT 2 CONTROL ROOM DESIGN REVIEW mci 4THLY REPORT FORMAT 1)

Highlights 2)

Personnel:

a) names, titles b) time involved c) changes / additions 3)

Activities performed 4)

Performance indicator (scheduled activities) 5)

Scheduled activities for the following month (s) 6)

Workscope changes 7)

Current problem areas 8)

Miscellaneous REVISION: 03 ATTACHMENT C PAGE 10 0F 15

DATA BASE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM (File Index) 1.0 DATA FILE INDEX 2.0 REGULATORY ISSUFS 2.1 Letter 82-33 2.2 Safety Evakation Report 2.3 Miscellanecos 3.0 PROGRAM PLAN 3.1 Submittal to NRC 3.2 NRC Comments 3.3 Response to NRC Comments

.3.4 Exceptions to Program Plan 4.0 REFERENCE MATERIAL INDEX

-5.0 CORRESPONDENCE 5.1 Meeting Minutes 5.2 Agendas 5.3 Attendance Lists 5.4 Monthly Reports 6.0 DETAILED CROR IWLEENTATION PLAN FLOW OIAGRAN 7.0 SCHEDULES 7.1 Overall 7.2 Individual Phases 8.0 ORIENTATION / TRAINING 8.1 Agenda 8.2 Attendance Lists 8.3 - Presentation Material 8.4 Team Member's Resumes / Qualifications 9.0 REVIEW PHASE DOCUMENTATION 9.1 Operating Experience Review 9.1.1 LER Review 9.1.1.1 Instr:ctions/ Guidelines 9.1.1.2 LER Summary Sheet 9.1.1.3 Results - Completed LER Summary Sheets 9.1.1.4 Final Report Input (Page 1 of 4)

REVISION: 03 ATTACHMENT 0 PAGE 11 0F 15

DATA BASE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM (File Index) 9.1. 2 Control Room Operating Personnel Surveys (CROPS) l l

9.1.2.1 Instructions / Guidelines j

9.1.2.2 Questionnaires / Interviews l

9.1.2.3 Results i

9.1.2.4 Final Report Input 9.2 Control Room inventory l

9.2.1 Instructions / Guidelines l

9.2.2 Inventory Data Sheet L

9.2.3 Results - Completed Inventory Data Sheets 9.2.4 Final Report Input 9.3 Control Room Survey 9.3.1 Task Plans 9.3.1.1 Work Space 9.3.1.2 Anthropometrics 9.3.1.3 Emergency Equipment 9.3.1.4 HVAC 9.3.1.5 Lighting 9.3.1.6 Ambient Noise 9.3.1.7 Maintainability 9.3.1.8 Communications 9.3.1.9 Annunciator System 9.3.1.10 Controls 9.3.1.11 Displays 9.3.1.12 Labels and Location Aids 9.3.1.13 Computer Systems 9.3.1.14 Conventions 9.3.2 Instructions /Guidelir.os 9.3.3 Task Plans - NUREG 0700 Section 6 Cross Reference 9.3.4 Results.- Completed Task Plans 9.3.5 Final Report Input 9.4 System Review and Task Analysis 9.4.1 Instructions / Guidelines 9.4.2 Task / System Sequence Matrix 9.4.3 Element Table 9.4.4 Instrumentation Requirements Table 9.4.5 Control "tequirements Table 9.4.6 Results - Completed Matrices and Tables 9.4.7 Final Report Input (Page 2 of 4)

REVISION: 03 ATTACHMENT D PAGE 12 0F 15

DATA BASE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM (Filo Indzx) 4.5 Verification of Task Performance Capabilities 9.5.1 Instructions /Gu'delines 9.5.2 Checklists 9.5.3 Results 9.5.3.1 Availability Checklists Summary 9.5.3.2 Suitability Checklists Summary 9.5.4 Final Report Input 9.6 Validation of Control Room Functions 9.6.1 Instructions / Guidelines 9.6.2 Event Sequence Checklists 9.6.3 Results 9.6.3.1 Talk-Through Observations 9.6.3.2 Walk-Through Observations 9.6.4 Video Tapes 9.6.5 Final Report Input

10.0 ASSESSMENT

10.1 Instructions / Guidelines 10.2 HED Status 10.3 Implementation Schedule 11.0 DOCUMENTATION 11.1 Final Report 11.1.1 Report Outlir..

11.1.2 Final Document 11.2. Chapter 18 11.2.1 Guidelines 11.2.2 Final Document 11.3 HED Reports 11.3.1 Instructions Guidelines 11.3.1.1 HED Report Form (Page 3 of 4)

REVISION: 03 ATTACHMENT D PAGE 13 0F 15

DATA BASE MANAGEMENJ SYSTEM (Filo Indxx)

.11.3.2 Unit 1 Reports (LER Review Only) 11.3.3 Unit 2 Reports 11.3.4 HED Photographs 12.0 COORDINATION (UNIT 1 AND UNIT 2) 12.1 Instructions / Guidelines 12.2 Unit 1 and Unit 2 Differences 5

3 (Page 4 of 4)

REVISION: 03 ATTACHMENT D PAGE 14 0F 15

FINAL

SUMMARY

REPORT FCPRAT

1) Executive Sumary 2)

Introduction

3) Me chodology

4) 'CRDR Results

5) Short-term corrective action recomendations

6) Loig-term enrrective action recommendations 7)

Implementation schedule l

REVISION: 03 ATTACHMENT E PAGE 15 0F 15 l

s i

APPENDlX B BVPS - 2 CRDR NSTRUCTIONS R401 A -- LER Review R401B --- CROPS R402 -- Inventory R403 -- Control Room Survey R404 -- SRTA R405 -- Verification R406 -- Validation R407 -- Assessment R408 -- Final Summary Report R409 -- HED Report

m

v

' - +-w-ws-e- - - - - -

r

--v-+"

-~,+ - -

w-m w

u-----

I DISTRL'CTICN ' OEVISTCN I EFFECTIVE 1 PAGE NO.

NO.

DATE R 401 A

.I

.1,1/20/84 I of 10 A Q aru q @ %,f

[/[CATE:

l Ah PREPARED BY:

92L /p v/2s/ss S.UCLEAR CCNSTFttCTICN DIVISICN DATE:

INS 7?.LCICN APP p:

/$h Y

^

9./

q,'/

CONTROL ROOM DESIr-N REVIEW TITLE: TASK 1A, LER REVIEW I

PAGES DATE REVISION I - 10 07/25/84 0

'l - 10 11/20/84 1

I 8

i INSTRUCTION NO. R 40l-A TITLE:

CONTROL ROOM DESZGN REVIEW:

1ASK 1A, LER REVIEW 1.0 PURPOSE AND SCOPE This instruction is established to meet Section 4.1.1 of the BVPS-2 Control Room Design Review (CkDR) Program Plan.

In addition, this instruction shall be utilized as guidelines during Task 1A of the BVPS-2 CRDR, License Event Report (LER) Review.

2.0 APPLICABILITY This instruction applies to Task 1A of the CRDR, LER Review.

3.0 REFERENCES

3.1 NUREG 0700, " Guidelines for Control Room Design Reviews," dated September 1981 3.2 NCDP 1.12, "NCD Instruction Manual" 3.3 NCDP 1.3, " Procedure Format" 3.4 NCDP 1.6, " Document Control" 3.5 BVPS-2 CRDR Charter 3.6 BVPS-2 CRDR Program Plan 4.0 DEFINITIONS 4.1 Control Room Design Review (CRDR)

An evaluation from a human engineering point of view of the total control room work space, environment, instrumentation, controls, and other equip-ment for both system demands and operator capabilities.

4.2 CRDR Core Team The CRDR Core Team is comprised of the Review Team Leader, the Technical Coordinator, an Instrumentation & Control Engineer, a Reactor Operator (RO), and an HFS.

4.3 Licensee Event Report (LER)

The process for reporting operational experiences at nuclear power plants (10CFR50.7 3).

PAGE 2 0F 10 REVISION: 1

i INSTRUCTZON NO. R 401-A TZTLE:

CONTROL ROOM DESIGM RtVIEW:

TASK 1A, LER REVIEW 4.4 LER Leview A review of available documentation of operating difficulties and inci-dents, as outi.ined. in plant-specific LER's, in order to identify condi-tions that may cause human performance problems.

4.5 Human Engineering Discrepancy (NED)

A departure from some benchmark of system design suitability for the roles and capabilities of the human operator.

4.6 Human Factors Specialist (HFS)

One who specializes in human f actors engineering, the science of optimiz-ing the performance of human beings.

5.0 RESPONSIBILITIES 5.1 Manager Regulatory Affairs (MRA) f The MRA is responsible for the overall effort associated with Task 1A of the CRDR, LER Review.

5.2 Review Team Leader (RTL)

The RTL, under the direction of the NRA, is responsible for the coordina-tion and direction of Task 1A of the CRDR, LER Review.

5.3 Technical Coordinator (TC)

The TC assumes the duties of the RTL, with respect to the LER Review, when the RTL is not available.

5.4 CRDR Core Team and Support Team The CRDR Core Team and Support Team are responsible for performing the LER Review under the direction of the RTL in accordance with this in-struction. The Core Team and Support Team are defined in Attachments A and B of the BVPS-2 CRDR Charter.

6.0 INSTRUCTION 6.1 The CRDR LER Review shall be conducted in accordance with the methodology presented in this instruction.

=

PAGE 3 0F 10 REVISION: 1

TITLE:

CONTROL ROOM DESlGN 8NSTRUCTION NO. R 401-A REVIEW:

TASK 1A, LER REVIEW 6.1.1 The CRDR kTL, or designee, shall review and finalize the LER Review instruction.

6.1.2 The CRDR RTL, or designee, shall submit the LER Review instruc-tion to the MRA in accordance with the BVPS-2 CRDR Charter for review and approval.

6.2 The CRDR Core Team members shall campile the LER's to be reviewed.

6.2.1 The LER's shall be from nuclear power plants with similar plant designs as that of BVPS-2.

These plants shall include North Anna Unit No. I and Surry Unit No. 1.

6.2.2 The LER's reviewed shall date back no earlier than February 28, 1976.

6.2.3 The LER's shall be representative of the following cause codes:

6.2.3.1 Operator error 6.2.3.2 Defective procedures 6.2.3.3 Equipment / component failure 6.3 The CRDR Core Team shall develop the LER Report Summary form to be used in Section 6.8 (See Figure R 401A-1).

6.4 The CRDR Core Team shall determine the LER Review screening criteria based on their interpretation of guidelines set forth in Section 3.3.1.2 of NUREG 0700 issued September 1981.

6.4.1 The CRDR Core Team shall initially screen LER's and eliminate those that are not associated with the following screening cri-teria:

6.4.1.1 Operator error 6.4.1.2 Lack of operator reaction 6.4.1.3 Inappropriate / deficient operational procedures 6.4.1.4 Operator unaware of maintenance problems 6.5 The Preoperational Test Section shall review the LER's which have been eliminated per Section 6.4 of this instruction to assure that no control-room related LER's have been included. The Preoperational Test Section L

shall document all discrepancies via formal correspondence.

6.6 The HFS shall review the LER's which have been eliminated per Section 6.4 to assure that no LER's with human factors implications have been includ-ed.

The HFS shall document all discrepancies via formal correspondence.

PAGE 4 0F 10 REVISION: 1

TITLE:

CONTROL ROOM DESIGN INSTRUCTION NO. R 401-A REVIEW:

TASK LA, LER REVIEW 6.7 Upon completion of the screening associated with Sections 6.4, 6.5, and 6.6, the remaining LER's shall be divided among the CRDR Core Team mem-bers by the CRDR RTL.

6.8 Each Core Team member shall complete the LER Report Summaries, Sections I, II, and III.A (Figure R 401A-1).

LER Report Sunnary Instructions may be found in Figure R 401A-2.

6.9 Each core team member shall divide the completed LER Report Summaries into the following categories:

6.9.1 Corrective action taken terminated the consequences associated with the event.

6.9.2 Corrective action taken was adequate but in the judgment of the reviewer, sufficient action was not taken to prevent the recur-rance of the problem.

6.9.3 Corrective action taken was not sufficient in the judgment of the reviewer.

6.10 Those LER's and Report Summaries pertaining to Section 6.9.1 shall be forwarded to the HFS. The HFS shall verify that no LER's with human factors implications were eliminated during this screening process.

6.11 Upon review of section 6.9.1 LER's, the HFS shall document all discrep-1 ancies via formal correspondence.

6.12 Those LER'- and Report Summaries pertaining to Sections 6.9.2, 6.9.3, and 6.11 shall be reviewed by the core team.for ' concurrence / nonconcurrence.

6.13 The CRDR Core Team shall review the LER Report Summaries for concur-rance/nonconcurrance.

The RTL, or designee, shall then complete Section III.B.

The remaining core team members shall complete Section III.C of the LER Report Summary.

6.14 The CRDR Core Team shall then determine whether or not the event has any relevance to BVPS-2.

6.14.1 If the event has no relevance to BVPS-2, no preliminary HED is assigned (check "no" in Section 3.D of Figure R 401A-1).

6.14.2 If the event is relevant to BVPS-2, and introduces a deficiency that is within the BVPS-2 CRDR scope, a preliminary HED is issued by placing a check in the "yes" category of Section 3.D of Figure R 401A-1.

PAGE 5 0F 10 REVISION: 1

INSTRUCTION NO. R 401-A TITLE:

CONTROL ROOM DESIGH REVZEW:

TASK 1A, LER REVIEW 6.14.3 If the event is relevant to BVPS-2, and introduces a deficiency not within the BVPS-2 CRDR Scope, no preliminary HED is issued (check "no" in Section 3.D of Figure R 401A-1).

1 6.15 The CRDR RTL is responsible for assigning a number to each preliminary HED in Section III.D of the LER Report S umma ry.

In addition to prelimi-nary HED's generated during the BVPS-2 CRDR LER Review, HED's generated from the BVPS-1 document review will be obtained and assigned a BVPS-2 number.

6.16 All preliminary HED's generated during the LER Review shall be filed in accordance with the BVPS-2 Charter and retained for further analysis during the BVPS-2 CRDR Assessment Phase.

6.17 The RTL reviews the Core Team LER Review results by signing the LER Report Summary Section III.E.

6.18 The CRDR team shall prepare the LER Review results in the final report format.

7.0 RECORDS 7.1 The documents resulting from this instruction are Quality Assurance records as defined in ANSI M45.2.9 - 1974, and may be included in the Quality Assurance audits of the Nuclear Construction Division. As such, th,ese documents shall be retained for information as outlined in Section 8.0 of the BVPS-2 CRDR Charter.

8.0 FIGURES 8.1 Figure R 401A-1, "LER Report Sussnary" 8.2 Figure R 401A-2, "LER Report Summary Instructions" REVISION: 1 PAGE 6 0F 10

TITLE: CONTROL ?.0CM DESION D:STAUCTIO% 50. R 401-A REVIEW: TASK 1A, t ra aimer mf LER REVIEW

tcites 5 W eaf:08

.:.,..e '..v :

rfary leaver '.* alley Pcwe *tation. ;nts 2

! ate-t,...

r:

l l

l itC! ice 2. Spotest i

..,=, !:st :c,;nts (tf stfrerect's P.

: ort ' ate:

. 'esort w.4 5.

erst

ns 1: 4tes:

i. *esert "stle:

r.

par,:

e M.

Error Claaetfiestion by Utilityt 8esults An Joerettag.1sts une esseosse

_ Operstar Error

_ Eaws m Fetlure

_ :nsteens witmus cenesessnee

_ Pressesre Prestem

_ :neteent vita cenesessnee

_ off-aeruna oestament stanse

_ Otner uttanut essene

_ #eesses plant evealesalityr

_ frts (Seres), Nrs

_ Sustassa Mrs eresee to I,

hPo I.

- Weste.d Cerfoot&te Jettent J.

fellow =wS Milent CICT!0s !. t.83 amaLf323

.. rou

u. -tion senst.,

_ r.e ce..i.

1 l

Q.

Core fees Reviews _ Canour De not concur treesen fee nonsensurrenees) l i

. %re teen nemeer*s insttaiss 3.

ntD seeset generetes:

es _ fes. HED me.

i c.

ce tese t.

eci Figure R 401A - 1 REVISION: 1 PACP. 7 0F 10

TITLE: CONTE 0L ROOM DESIG'i I?:STRt:CTZO ; ::0, R I.01-A REVIEU: TASK IA.

' en. ce r:. spuu;_;v. r ye_ _ c_r_i r_. m_ y e

-m.

7 Only Section 1. Section 2 A through J, and Section 3.A are to be 1

completed by the reviewer.

2)

Complete Section 1 as follows:

A)

- vi*w*"

Name of review team member completing LER Report Sum.ary.

9) Laag The date Sections 1, 2 A through J, and 3.A of the LER Report Sumary were completed.

3)

Complete Section 2 A through J as follows:

Enter the utility, station, and unit for whien the LER was issued.

A)

For example:

vEPCO/SURRY/1 VEPCO/NA/1 This can be Enter the date the report was issued for the LER.

B) found under " REPORT DATE" in the lef t-hand column of the LE printout.

For example:

If "REPOR1 DATE" reads 84012u, then the date to be entered shall be 01/24/84 C)

Reeert E unher left-hand col'umn of This corresponds to the "LER NUMBER" in the the LER printout.

D) on.cstine seneus This can be found under " FACILITY STATUS" in tne left-nand column of the LER printout.

E) Renart Titia Provide the subject of the LER report.

Figure R 401A - 2 (Page 1)

Pact t; 0F 10 k

REVISION:

1

l f.--"C' b M. 7

'hdL :

C0!: TROL K00". DES!6N

~

40!-A REVIEW: TASK IA, j-

)

,,y LER REVIr.W L

This does not include technical Bria#1v de:cribe the event.

specification numbers. A description of the event may be founc under " EVENT DESC" in the upper right-h:nd quadrant of the LER printout.

G)

Result This Check the appropriate item (s) which resulted from the event.

infor1 nation must be extracted from the LER printout.

An OeerattNL I 4 mi t W;.s f re medad spec. violatiorf in which an operating limit was exceeded.

A tech.

For example, P/T, boron concentration, etc.

facident wir*, nut cnnnennonce An incident with no damage to equipment, no injury to personnel, j

or no radiation release to the public.

Tne* dent with cnnnennonces An incident with d. image to equipment, injury to personnel, or radiation release to the public.

Orr.Nemm1 Cnni - nt Sestum Withnut nmnse.

A tech. spec. violation in which the minimal amount of required equipment was not asailable.

H) ggrer c1==mittentinn bv UH i t ty Check the appropriate item (s) which caused the event.

This may be found undar " PROXIMATE CAUSE" in the left-hand column of the LER printout?

I)

Tsunediate carrective Action Enter the innediate corrective action that was taken to respond to the event.

This can be found under the "CiUSE DESC" in the lower right quadrant of the LER printout.

If no corrective action was taken, write "NONE".

Figure R 401A - 2 (Page 2)

.ACC 9 0F 10 P.CVISION : 1

T T:.I:

cont:.ot. :,ec:. 3rsic::

I::s T.t*CT *sc:. ::c. c. s0 i-A

^3E I^'

J) E 11ru-Ur ac en

,77,

. rov ide a description of the follow-up action taken, if any, to o

This may be founc :n ene prevent the re.:urrance of this event.

" FUTURE ACTION and/or "CAUSE DESC" sections of the LER pri, tout.

In cases where follow-up action is not applicable, at:alyze innediate corrective action in its place.

a)

Complete Section 3.A as follows:

A)

Indicate whether or not follow-up acticn was adequate.

B)

If not, explain in detail.

If the reviewer cannot determine if the follow-up action was C) adequate, tenue blante.

Figure P. 40 IA - 2 (Page 3) p,wg: go op in P.EVISIOt:: I

I I!iSTECC* ION Fr/ISTON EFFECTIVE '

FAGE o.

No.

cATE R 401 B I

I;/20/84 i of if 1

V MnM @ b@]

N/DATE:

T

~

PREPARED BY:

! * *g

.gf g) 7/z w/SM SUCLEAR CCNSTPt C ICN DIVISION

% TE:

INSW.LCICN APP

,,,, b ' l Y l~

/

9, y

uv TITLE: CONTROL ROOM DESIGN REVIEW: TASK IB, (CROPS)

CONTROL ROOM OPERATING PERSONNEL SURVEY l

1 DATE REVISION PAGES I - 11 07/25/84 0

1 - 11 11/20/84 i

l O

TITLE:

CONTROL ROOM DESIGN INSTRUCTION NO. R 401-B REVIEW : TASK IB, CROPS 1.0 PURPOSE AND SCOPE l

This instruction is established to meet Section 4.1.2 of the BVPS-2 Control Room Design Review (CRDR) Program Plan.

In addition, this ins truct ion shall be 1

utilized as guidelines during Task 1B of the BVPS-2 CRDR, Control Room Operat-ing Personnel Survey (CROPS).

2.0 APPLICABILITY

+

This instruction applies to Task 1B of the CRDR, CROPS.

i

3.0 REFERENCES

3.1 NUREG 0700, " Guidelines for Control Ro'on Design Reviews," dated September 1981 3.2 NCDP 1.3, " Procedure Format" 3.3 NCDP 1.6, " Document Control" 3.4 NCDP 1.12. "NCD Instruction Manual" 3.5 BVPS-2 CRDR Charter 3.6 BVPS-2 CRDR Program Plan' 3.7 NCD Instruction R409 " Human Engineering Discrepancy (NED) Report" 3.8 Task Plan 1.1, "Workspace Survey" 3.9 Task Plan 1.2, "Anthropometrics Survey" 3.10 Task Plan.1.3, " Emergency Equipment Survey" A

3.11 Task Plan 1.4, "HVAC Survey" 3.12 Task Plan 1.5, " Illumination Survey" 3.13 Task Plan 1.6, " Ambient Noise Survey" 3.14 lask Plan 1.7, " Maintainability Survey" 3.15 Task Plan 2.1, "Conusunications Survey" PAGE 2 0F 11 REVISION: 1

INSTRUCTION NO. R 401-B TITLE:

CONTROL ROOM DESZGN REVf BJ :

TASK IB, CROPS 3.16 Task Plan 3.1, " Annunciator Sys tes Review" 3. '1's Task Plan 4.1, " Controls Survey" 3.18 Task Plan 5.1, " Displays Survey" 3.19 Task Plan 6.1, " Labels and Location Aids Survey" 3.20 Task Plan 7.1, " Computer Systems Review" 3.21 Task Plan 8.1, " Conventions Survey" 4.0 DEFINITIONS 4.1 Human Engineering Discrepancy (HED) Report An especially formatted report of an HED (see reference 3.7) 4.2 Task Plan A detailed procedure for the collection, reduction, and analysis of data which results in the comparison of control room design features to guice-lines contained in NUREG-0700. Each task plan identifies the objectives, scope, required personnel, required facilities and equipment, req uired inputs to the' task and an overview of the methods and procedures. Appen-dix A of each task plan contains a subset of the Section 6.0 guidelines from NUREG-0700 applicable to that task as criteria. Appendix B of each task plan contains detailed procedures and all required data collection 1

and analysis forms.

Included in Appendix B is an operator's question-naire/ interview concerning topics pertinent to that task plan. A s tand-alone, complete interview form is constructed by taking copies of each task plan's questionnaire / interview form and collating them into one document. Appendices C and D contain information for the documentation and control of the technical accuracy and completeness of each task plan (not required for conduct of the task).

4.3 Questionnaire An abbreviated set of interview questions in a self-administered format which is distributed to the operators to familiarize them with the CRDR interviews in which they will participate (see also Task Plan).

It is also used to f amiliarize the interviewers to any general or special conditions that should be observed during the interview process.

PAGE 3 0F 11 REVISION: 1

TITLE:

CONTROL ROOM DESIGN INSTRUCTION NO. R 401-B REVIEW : TASK IB, CROPS 5.0 RESPONSIBILITIES 5.1 Manager Regulatory Affairs (MRA)

The MRA is responsible for the overall ef fort associated with Task 1B of the CRDR, CROPS.

1 5.2 Review Team Leader (RTL)

The RTL, under the direction of the MRA, is responsible for the coordina-tion and direction of Task 18 of the CRDR, CROPS.

5.3 Technical Coordinator (TC)

The TC assumes the duties of the RTL, with respect to the LER Review, when the RTL is not available.

5.4 CRDR Core Team and Support Team The CRDE Core Team and Support Team are responsible for performing the CRDPS under the direction of the RTL in accordance with this instruction.

The Core Team and Support Team are defined in Attachments A anc. 5 of the l

BVPS-2 CRDR Charter.

6.0 INSTRUCTIONS 6.1 The CRDR CROPS shall be conducted in accordance with the methodology 1

I presented in this instruction.

6.2 The CROPS instruction consists of the (1) development and finalization of an operator's interview, (2) conduct of interviews with operators, and (3) the analysis of the operator questionnaire / interview data to identify any HED's.

6.3 The BVPS-1 questionnaire results shall be forwarded to the HFS.

PAGE 4 0F 11 REVISION: 1

INSTRUCTION NO. R 401-B TXTLE:

CONTROL ROOM DESEGN REUIEW:

TASK 13, CROPS 6.3.1 BVPS-1 qunscionnaires shall be reviewed by the Core Team HFS and will be used to revise, as required, the interview booklet.

Results of this review shall also be used by the Core Team KFS to indoctrinate and familiarize the interviewers to any general or special considerations which should be observed during the indi-1 vidual operator interviews.

6.4 The TC shall establish a place and a schedule for conduct of the inter-views.

Interviews shall be scheduled at the rate of three per day per interviewer. Each interview will take approximately 2 nours.

6.5 Upon receipt of the interview schedule, the Core Team HFS shall be respons ible for insuring that interviewers are available at the time and place indicated and that interviews are conducted in accordance with the interview' protocol listed in steps 6.5.1 through 6.5.5 below.

6.5.1 All interviewers shall be instructed by the Core Team HFS as to the correct attitude and general approach to ure in conduct of an interview.

At minimum, the following elements must be understood and applied by the interviewer:

6.5.1.1 The interviewer must display an open-minded, apprecia-tive, and non-judgmental attitude towards the respond-ent.

6.5.1.2 The interviewer should introduce himself or herself to the respondent and should indicate to the operator that (1) we (i.e., the evaluators) consider the operator an expert on the control room; (2) that we need his or her expert opinion; (3) that we will be recommending changes that, to a great extent, have already been identified by the operators. What we are furnishing is a management-supported mechanism to give such changes serious cons id-erstion.

6.5.2 The interviewer must advise the operator of the following points concerning the interview:

6.5.2.1 The interview has about 110 questions, one half dozen to one dozen on each major area of interest such as light-ing, controls, displays.

The interviewer will let him or her know when a new area is being discussed.

6.5.2.2 The interview will take about two hours.

6.5.2.3 All responses are confidential. We will not reveal the name of any person who gave a specific response. We PAGE 5 0F 11 REVISION: 1 n

i INSTRUCTION NO. R 401-B TITLE:

CONTROL ROOM DESIGN REVIEW : TASK I B,

CROPS

.o will compile responses to give a summary of the operat-ing personnel's viewpoint.

We may quote a specific response, but we will not ide nt if y the res po nde nt.

6. 5. 2.4 Depending upon the answer, we may ask for brief explana-t io ns.

6.5.2.5 We are interested in problems that have not been resolved rather than problems that have already been eliminated.

6.5.3 The interviewer should insure that the respondent is the one scheduled and that all of the information on the biographical data form (from the questionnaire) is correct and complete before proceeding with the actual interview.

6.5.4 During the course of the interview, the interviewer must employ the following techniques:

6.5.4.1 If the operator does not understand a question, it must be explained in a frank and matter-of-f act manner. The interviewer must not be fudgmental towards any question.

As an example, do not say:

"I know this is a stupid question, but I have to ask it."

Say instead, "I know you may find it dif ficult to res pond, but please try."

6.5.4.2 If an operator is having difficulty responding to a question, use p*obes such as : "Could you briefly describe why you feel this is a problem (or a good fea-ture)?" or "With that specific components (displays, controls, etc.) do you have this problem?"

6.5.5 When the interview is over, the interviewer must inform the respondent that we appreciate the ef fort that was made to answer the questions.

6.6 The interviewers shall summarize, analyse, and document all interview data as described in steps 6.6.1 through 6.6.7 below.

6.6.1 Review operator biographical data and separate interview booklets into 2 to 3 dif ferent experience level groups based upon years of plant experience, licensing level, other related experience, and education level.

6.6.2 Put interview booklets into sequential groups by the determined experience level and number all booklets start ing with the lowes t experience level first. As an example, if there were twelve REVISION: 1 PAGE 6 0F 11

INSTRUCTION NO. R 401-B TITLE: CONTROL ROOM DESEGN REVIEW:

TA SK I B,

CROPS least experienced operators, number their booklets 1 through 12.

If there were ten next higher level experienced booklets, 13 through 22.

Final ly, if there were eleven high level experienced operators, number their booklets 23 through 33.

6.6.3 Make up a supply of datu summary forms similar to that shown in Figure R401B-2. This example (Figure R4015-2) is for question 1 from the Anthropometrics Survey Task Plan. This form should identify the task plan nunber and nase, and the question and question number should be written at the top.

Numbers which coincide with the numbered booklets are written vertically down the left side.

6.6.4 Complete each data summary form by entering operator responses next to the appropriate booklet number.

Enter any necessary clarification statemer.ts next to the response.

~

6.6.5 Make up a supply of tabiilation forma similar to that shown in Figure R4015-3.

6.6.6 Tabulate all response summary data from the summary forma onto the tabulation forms.

6.6.7 Using the tabulation forms, geneeste oreliminary HED reports and attach copies of all related tabulation forms to the appropriate HED report.

Insure that problems which were dif ferentia11y responded to based on dif ferent ecperience levels are so noted on the HED report.

See Reference 3.7 for.HED report instructions.

6.8 The Core Team HFS shall review all summarized response data and prelimi-nary HED reports.

6.9 The Core Team HFS shall submit all preliminary HED reports in accordance with Reference 3.7.

6.10 The Core Team HFS shall generate a summary of results for the CROPS in final report fo rma t.

7.0 RECORDS 7.1 The documents resulting from this instruction are Quality Assurance records as defined in ANSI M45.2.9-1974, and may be included in the Qual-icy Assurance audits of the Nuclear Construction Division.

As such, these documents shall be retained for information as outlined in Section 8.0 of the BVPS-2 CRDR Charter.

PAGE 7 0F 11 REVISION: 1

INSTRUCTION.NO. R 401-B TITI.E:

CONTROL ROOM DESIGN s

REVIEW : TASK I B,

CROPS s

8.0 F,1GURES 8.1 Figure R4015-1, " Example of Operator Questionnaire Instruction Foria" 8.2 Figure R4015-2, " Example of an Interview Question Response Summaary Form". s,.

8.3 Figure R4015-3, " Example of an Interview Question Tabulation Form"

'\\

r..,

v...

A Y

4 i

PAGE 8 0F 11 dEVIS10N: 1

t TITLE: CRDR: TASK IB, CROPS R?ISTRL'CTf09: NO. R401B EXAMPLE OF OPERATOR QUESTIONNAIRE INS'RUCTION FORM Instructions.

1. The following are questions concerning the operations within the control room.

gMost of the questions will require a YES or NO answer, with some additiu

< information.

2. When you have comments or suggestions, use the space provided below each question. If you need additional room, use the backs of the sheets.

i%

3. !Lyou do not understand a question, please contact any of the fo!! awing people at Essex Corporation at (703) 548 4500s o Cliff Baker o Denna Beith o Osvid Elke o Tom Talley o Harcid Van Cott.

4. Please answer all of the questions as completely as possible citing as n.any examples as you wish.

5. If any question does not apply to your' control room, please mark it as N/A.

l

6. All of your answers and your biographical information will be kept in the I

strictest. confidence and will be used only to aid in the performance of the detalled control room design review. No one at DCL

. will see your answers.

7. When you finish the questionnaire, please put it in the envelope provided and mail it to Essex Corporation.

FIGURE R4015-I PAGE 9 0F 11 REVISION: 1

-r-

- ~ ~ - -

,rww

,ww-m- - - - - - - -

--,------w

,_,,,-,,-w-,

N, TITLE: CRDR: TASK IB, CROPS I ;377,t.~.TIO. '80.

R40IB y

I

' EXAMFLE OF AN INTERVIEW Qt'ESTION

RESPONSE

SUMMARY

FOPE TP.1.2 6

1 May 1M3 OPERATOR NTERVigw/tmKSTWC 1.(1) bve you ever W any prehlerne es.ereung a sentrol because it was va m too m.,a if yes, pleens vaplesna

$ _W

t. DK*

4. % VEh E 94 c kW bw 9mp shd+ Shp

.?. N o H. no T. N o GNe

7. No 1 s No '.

$. NO n y,2 c.

I h /a p at.c3 + ua,.u,,,aspa el. MO la. Olt

3. MO IM. N o

/r. 4/ o

14. No

17. N O

Pc No

/1. #6

.a c. po w R M a 1.Ye t ~ % vi iv,c,T, sis, s fy, f f urz As s

2 2.N O h ()K - Ca,(1 Knc o FIGURE R40iB-2 PACI: 10 0F i1 REVISION: 1 4

l TITLE: CRDR: TASK 13, CROPS l

bSTRUCTIO:. : 0..

R40IS EXAMPLE OF AN INTERVIEW QUESTION TABULATION FORM CA

mITm h. w ssyG2 Ib)tu wm w

aM....Y L U mw 21". %

/

6 ERRR!tnCE y

g g

MWL no 7J'4

ILy7,

( y 07,

t.

J MJ

n. 14 no io 9 W.

F%

0%

n es ma wa e et to%

2o'7.

07.

um m is mM m7 wo 74%

/d 49

==

.w

-6

-2 EmA %.SYy(9M C-bN,

." ""* has\\4 < ha

'***A T Abe E q, kb, 3Ak thas A4).

FIGURE R4015-3 PAGC II0F 1I REVISION:

I EFFECTIW PAGE I DISTFUC ICM l :EVISTON NO.

4.

CA"E R 402 I

II/20/84 1 of 8 4,Qn g g 7T PPEPARED BY:

Mf/// CATE:

y 2m /ss i AP

. M t. pg,~

j i

SL'CLT>R CCNSTFitCTICN DIVISICt1

" DATE:

i INS'IPECTION APPROVED BY:

i~ I[ SY

./

{

TITII: CONTROL ROOM DESIGN REVIEW: TASK 2, CONTROL ROOM INVENTORY l

l REVISION DATE PAGES 07/25/84 0

1-9 l

11/20/84 1-8 l

l INSTRUCTION NO. R 402 TITLC:

CONTROL ROOM DESZGN IZYIEW:

TASK 2, l

CONTROL ROOM INVENTORY 1.0 PURPOSE Aha SCOPE This instruction is established to meet Section 4.2 of the BVPS-2 Control Room Design Review (CRDR) Program Plan.

In addition, this instruction shall be uti-Lized as guidelines during Task 2 of the BVPS-L Control Room Design Review (CRDR), Control Room Inventory.

2.0 APPLICABILITY This instruction applies to Task 2 of the CRDR, Control Room Inventory.

3.0 REFERENCES

3.1 NUREG 0700, " Guidelines for Control Room Design Reviews," dated September 1981 3.2 NCDP 1.3, " Procedure Format" 3.3 NCDP 1.12, "NCD Instruction Manuals" 3.4 NCDP 1.6, " Document Control" 3.5 BVPS-2 CRDR Charter 3.6 Stone & Webster Engineering Corporation Control Systems Instrument Sched-ute Equipment Type List 3.7 Stone & Webster Engineering Corporation Control System Orientation dated February 27, 1984 3.8 BVPS-2 CRDR Program Plan 4.0 DEFINITIONS 4.1 Control Room Inventory The process of identifying all instrumentation, controls, and equipment within the main control room, the emergency shutdown panel, and the alternate shutdown panel. This task will be conducted using the latest design information.

4.2 Inventory Data Sheet The standard form which will be used to record all attributes of the control panel mounted instrumentation and control devices.

PAGE 2 0F 8 REVISION: 1

TETLE:

CONTROL ROOM DES 1GN LNSTRUCTION NO. R 402 l

REV1EW:

TASK 2, CONTROL ROOM INVENTORY 4.3 Photomosaic A planar engineering model of the BVPS-2 control room used during Task 3 of the CRDR, Human Factors Control Room Survey.

5.0 RESPONSIBILITIES 5.1 Manager Regulatory Affairs (MRA)

The MRA is responsible for the overall effort associated with Task 2 of the CRDR, Control Room Inventory.

5.2 Review Team Leader (RTL)

The RTL, under the direction of the MRA, is responsible for the coordina-tion and direction of Task 2 of the CRDR, Control Room Inventory.

5.3 Technical Coordinator (TC)

The TC assumes the duties of the RTL, with respect to the Control Room Inventory, when the RTL is not available.

5.4 CRDR Core Team and Support Team The TC may call upon members of the core and support teams to assist in the Control Room Inventory.

6.0 INSTRUCTION The BVPS-2 control room inventory shall be conducted in accordance with the following instruction:

6.1 Standard Inventory Format All inventory information (taken from the latest design drawings and the BVPS-2 photomosaic) shall be recorded on an " Inventory Data Sheet" which can be found in Figure R402-1.

The following items / portions shall be inventoried:

6.2 Main Control Room 6.2.1 Inventory all instrumentation, control, and other devices on main control board bench and vertical sections A, B, and C.

I 6.2.2 Inventory all instrumentation and other devices on main control room center island.

PAGE 3 0F 8 REVISION: 1

INSTRUCTION NO. R 402 TITLE:

CONTROL ROOM DESIGN REVIEW:

TASK 2, CONTROL ROOM INVENTORY 6.2.3 Inventory all instrumentation, control, and other devices on main I control room building services control.

6.3 Emergency Shutdown Panel 6.3.1 Inventory all instrumentation, control, and other devices on the emergency shutdown panel bench and vert ical sect ions A, B, C, and D.

6.4 Alternate Shutdown Panel 6.4.1 Inventory all instrumentation, control, and other devices on the alternate shutdown panel vertical and bench sections A and B.

6.5 Compare main control board and emergency shutdown panel photomosaics to inventory results. List all disc repancies.

6.6 Adjust photomosaics to reflect inventory results.

6.7 As approved design changes are implemented, up to and including August 17, 19 84, ad just inventory results to reflect the de s ign ch anges.

6.8 Adjust photomosaics to reflect the latest approved design changes up to and including August 17, 1984.

6.9 A record of approved design changes made after August 17, 1984 shall be maintained by the RTL.

7.0 RECORDS 7.1 The documents resulting from this instruction are Quality Assurance records as defined in ANSI M45.2.9-1974, and may be included in the Qual-ity Assurance audits of the Nuclear Construction Division. As such, these documents shall be retained for information as outlined in Section 8.0 of the BVPS-2 CRDR Charter.

8.0 FIGURES 8.1 Figure R402-1, " Inventory Data Sheet" 8.2 Figure R402-2, " Inventory Data Sheet Instructions" uS.3 Figure R402-3, " Panel Abbreviation Codes" REVISION: 1 PAGE 4 0F 8

INVEllTORY DATA St(ST

..r; t

5 b) Mark No.:

M a) Control Board Section: __

5 z.

?

c) Train (A/8):

d) Controlled Device:

i" f) Vendor Name:

e) Indication / Control (I/C):

g) Model:

h)

Description:

1) Scale (if applicable): Range Type Engr. Units

2) Switch Type (if applicable):

3) Switch Position Labeling (if applicable):

l

-(1) il t'I

4) Nameplate Engraving:

9it b (2)

$55 EGE (3)

E-sE She (4)

o E 'C s

b a

-(5) 2 "e4 w

er1 m

FIGURE R402-1

TITLE:

CONTROL ROOM DESIGN REVIEW:

TASK 2, TNSTRL'CTION 30. R402 CONTROL ROOM INVENTORY CONTROL RDOM INVENTORY DATA SHEET INSTRUCTIONS Control Board (CB) Section A.

abbreviation for the parel location (See Figure 3.10.3-3).

Enter the short Mark No. (if appiicable)

B.

Reference Tab 3 of Reference 3.7.

Also include bill of material item number.

C.

Train (A/B) (if applicable)

(If indicator or If device is safety-related, state whether TRAIN A or B.

recorder, state PAML or PAM2.)

Controlled Device (if applicable)

D.

Briefly describe the device that is manipulated from the control panel.

E.

Indication / Control Stipulate whether control panel device functions as an indication or control.

F.

Vendor Name Denote the manufacturer of the control panel device.

G.

Model, Identify manufacturer's device model number.

H.

Description Include the following:

1.

Scale (if applicable):

a.

Range b.

Type Engr., Units c.

FIGURE R402-2 (page 1)

PAGE 6 0F 3 REVISION:

I

TITLE:

CONTROL ROOM DESIGN INSTRUCTION SO. R402 REVIEW:

TASK 2, l

CONTROL ROOM INVENTORY P

2.

Switch Type (if applicable) 1 Also i

State if switch is. spring return, maintained, push button, or other.

for example, oval, lever, pistol grip, etc.

state knot ty pe,

3.

Switch Position Labeling (if applicable)

State purpose of each switch position.

EXAMPLE: Trip Auto Close 4.

Nameplace Engraving Describe label associated with each device.

w.

w" FIGURE R402-2 (page 2)

PAGE 7 0F 3 REVISION:

1

I.

l INSTRUCTION NO. R 402 TITLE:

CONTROL ROOM DESIGN REVIEW:

TASK 2, CONTROL ROOM INVENTORY PANEL ABBREVIATION (I) DES 1.

MAIN CONTROL ROOM A.

Main Control Board Description Short Abbreviation Description Short Abbreviation Bench Section Vertical Section Al BAl B5 VB5 A2 BA2 B6 VB6 A3 BA3 A4 BAA Bench Section Vertical Section Cl BC1 C2 BC2 A5 VA5 C3 BC3 A6 VA6 C4 BC4 A7 VA7 I

A8 VA8 Vertical Section A9 VA9 C5 VCS Bench Section C6 VC6 C7 VC7 B1 bbl C8 VC8 B2 BB2 C9 VC9 B3 BB3 B4 BB4 B.

Building Services Control Cabinet 1

BSCP II.

EMERGENCY SHUTDOWN PANEL III. ALTERNATE SHUTDOWN PANEL ESl A.

Bench Section ES2 ES3 A

ABA ES4 B

ABB FIGURE R402-3 PAGE 8 0F 8 REVISION: 1

I INS UCC~ ION i FE'/IS TCN I EFFECTP/E PAGE I

';O.

NO.

MTE i

i l

R 403 1

,10/28/85 1 of 7 A dm Q q

A PREPARED BY: N

[ff CATE:

ora 2 g7 v/zu/n NUCLEAR CCNSTPtCTICN DP/ISION DATE:

INS WUCTION APPROVED BY,f

~' 2 6 - E Sl

/

~

./

TITLE: CONTROL ROOM DESIGN REVIEW: TASK 3, HUMAN FACTORS CONTROL ROOM SURVEY t

DATE REVISION PAGES 07/26/84 o

I-7 I-7 10/28/85

)

e O

INSTRUCTION NO. R 403 TITLE:

C0fiTRuL ROOM DESIGN REVIES:

TASK 3, HUMAN FACTORS CONTROL ROOM SURVEY

\\

1.0 PURPOSE AND SCOPE Inis instruction is establisned to meet Section 4.3 of the BVPS-2 Control Roan Design Review (CROR) Program Plan.

In addition, this instruction will i

be used during Task 3 uf the BVPS-2 Control Room Survey, 2.0 APPLICABILITY This instruction applies to Task 3 of the CROR, Control Room Survey, j

3.0 REFERENCES

3.1 NUREG 0700, " Guidelines for Control Room Design Review," Septenber 1981.

3.2 NCDP 1.3, " Procedure Format" 3.3 NCDP 1.6, "Docunent Control" 3.4 NCOP 1.12. "NCO Instruction Manual" 3.5 BVPS-2 CRDR Charter.

3.6 BVPS-2 CRDR Program Plan 3.7 NCO Instruction R 409, " Human Engineering Discrepancy (HEO) Report" 3.8 Task Plan 1.1, "Workspace Survey" 3.9 Task Plan 1.2, " Anthropometrics Survey" 3.10 Task Plan 1.3, " Emergency Equipnent Survey" 3.11 Task Plan 1.4, "HVAC Survey" 3.12 Task Plan 1.5, " Illumination Survey" 3.13 Task Plan 1.6, " Ambient Noise Survey" 3.14 Task Plan 1.7, " Maintainability Survey" 3.15 Task Plan 2.1, "Connunications Survey" 3.16 Task Plan 3.1, " Annunciator System Review" 3.17 Task Plan 4.1, " Controls Survey" REVISION: 1 PAGE 2 0F 7

l INSTRUCTION NO. R 403 TITLE: CONTROL 400M DESIGN REVIEW:

TASK 3, HUMAN FACTORS CUNTROL ROOM SURVEY 3.18 Task Plan 5.1, " Displays Survey" 3.19 Task Plan 6.1, " Labels and Location Aids Survey" 3.20 Task Plan 7.1, " Computer Systems Review" 3.21 Task Plan 8.1, " Conventions Survey" 4.0 DEFINITIONS Not applicable to this instruction.

5.0 RESPONSIBILITIES 5.1 Manager Regulatory Affairs (MRA)

The MRA is responsible for the overall effort associated with Task 3 of the CRDR, Control Room Survey.

5.2 Review Team Leader (RTL)

The RTL, under the direction of the MRA, is responsible for the coordination and direction of Task 3 of the CRDR, Control Room Survey, 5.3 Technical Coordinator (TC)

The TC assumes the duties of the RTL, with respect to the Control Roon Survey when the RTL is not available.

5.4 CRDR Core Tean and Support Team The CRDR Core Team and Support Team are responsible for perfonning the control roon survey under the direction of the RTL.

The Core Team and Support Team are defined in Attachments A and 8 of the BVPS-2 CRDR Charter.

5.5 Human Factors Specialist (HFS)

The Core Tean HFS shall ensure than all phases of the Control Room Survey are conducted and documented as specified in tnis instruction and in the task plans.

5.6 Support HFS The Support HFS, under the direction of the HFS, is responsible for the data collection, data recording, data reduction and data analysis pro-cedures detailed in each task plan.

REVISION: 1 PAGE 3 0F 7

I INSTRUCT 10N NO. R 403 TITLE:

C0dTROL ROOM OESIGN REVIES:

TASK 3, HUMAN FACTORS CUNTROL ROOM SURVEY 6.0 INSTRUCTION f

6.1 The CROR Control Room Survey shall be conducted in accordan.ce with the methodology presented in this instruction and in the referenced Task Plans.

6.1.1 The CRDR RTL shall review and finalize the Control Room Survey instructions.

6.1.2 The CRDR RTL shall submit the Control Room Survey instruction to the MRA for review and approval.

6.'2 For purposes of defining data collection, data reduction, data analyses, and HED report generation methods and procedures, the task plans referenced in Section 3.0 shall be considered an integral part of this instruction.

6.3 The Core Tean HFS shall insure that all phases of the Control Room Survey are conducted and documented as specified in this instruction dnd in the task plans.

6.3.1 The Core Tean HFS shall assign a support HFS to perfom the data collection procedures detailed in each task plan.

For each task plan, data collection procedures will consist of one or more of the following methods:

(1) Measurement of a defined control room design feature using specified instrumentation.

(2) Observation of a defined control room design feature.

(3) Review of documentation and related design engineering infomation sources for a defined control room design feature.

i 6.3.2 Measurement data for the DLC CRDR will consist of linear, force, and torque values (illumination and anbient noise cannot be adequately measured until the unit is operating and construction in the control room is complete).

6.3.2.1 Linear measurements will consist of three general types:

(1) Large measurements for workspace assessment made with tape measures to an accuracy no greater than

+ 1/8 inch REVISION: 1 PAGE 4 0F 7

INSTRUCT!ON NO. R 403 TITLE:

CONTROL ROOM UESIGN REVIEW:

TASK 3, HUMAN FACTORS CONTROL ROOM SURVEY l

(2) Small measurements for the controls survey made with machinist's type scales to an accuracy no greater than +.015 inch.

(3) Fine measurements made for labeling and meter scale evaluations with line comparator devices and magnifying reticles to an accuracy no greater than

+.001 inch for line comparators or +.0005 inch Tor magnifying reticles 6.3.2.2 Force measurements will consist of linear control activation forces in the range of 1 to 80 ounces measured with various push-pull gauge; made to an accuracy no greater than + 1 ounce for v.to-32-ounct values and no greater than-+ 3 ounce for 'L-to-15-pound values 6.3.2.3 Torque measurements will consist of rotary control activation values in the range of 1-to-10-inch-ounces made with torque wrenches to an ar. curacy no greater than +.5 inch-ounces.

6.3.3 Observation data shall be collected using checklists from Appendix 8 of each task plan.

The n:,3tiicd caployed will be to cneck all of a given type of component against one NUREG-0700, Section 6, guideline at a time making appropriate notes in the renarks column of the checklist.

6.3.4 Documentation review data shall be colle-ted using checklists fran Appendix B of each task plan.

The method employed will be to familiarize oneself with all guidelines for a given document then review the document for conformance to all guidelines making appropriate notes in the remarks column of the checklist.

6.3.5 The' Support HFS shall record all data on appropriate forms con-tained in Appendix B of each task plan as directed by that task plan.

6.3.6 The Essex Human Factors Project Manager shall review all data 1

documented on the data collection forms.

6.3.7 The Core Tean HFS shall assign the same or a different Support HFS to perform the data reduction / data analysis procedures detailed in each task plan.

For each task plan, data reduction and data analysis will consist of one or both of the following methods:

' REVISION: 1 PAGE 5 0F 7

INSTRUCTION NO R 403 TI Tt.E :

CONTROL ROOM OdSIG'i REVIEW:

TASK 3, HUMAN FACTORS CONTROL ROOM SURVEY (1) Mathematically calculating, converting, and/or summarizing any numerical data into the required fonn for direct comparison to the appropriate criterion or criteria (2) Comparing raw data that does not require reduction directly to the appropriate criterion or criteria 6.3.8 Mathenatical reduction will consist of algebraically calculat-ing viewing and reach distances, trigonometrically calculating viewing angles and visual angles, and arithmetically calculat-ing ranges and means for forces and torques.

6.3.9 Analysis of all reduced and raw data will consist of comparing each datun to its related criterion. The criteria are contained in' Appendix A of each task plan in checklist format and consist of guidelines taken fran NUREG 0700, Section 6.0.

For all cri-teria not mit in this comparison, preliminary HED reports are generated with appropriate cross-references to the data fonns and criteria lists.

6.3.10 The Support HFS shall record all data reduction and analysis steps and results in the designated areas of the data fonns and task plan appendices.

6.3.11 The Essex Human Factors Project Manager shall review all data 1

reduction and analyses documented in the task plans to ensure accuracy and completeness.

6.3.12 The Essex Human Factors Project Manager shall review all 1

preliminary HED reports and shall append to these reports reco'anended solutions (if any) for the identified problems.

6.3.13 The Core Team HFS shall submit all preliminary HED reports to the in accordance with Reference 3.7.

6.4 The CRDR RTL shall issue the preliminary HED's for Core Tean review and disposition, and shall be responsible for assigning all HED report num-bers.

6.5 The Core Tean HFS shall generate a sunmary of results for the Control Room Survey in final report format.

7.0 RECORUS 7.1 The docuinents resulting fran this instruction are Quality Assurance records as defined in ANSI N45.2.9-1974, and may be included in the PAGE 6 0F 7 REVISION: 1

!HST4UCTION H0. R 403 TITLE:

CJaTROL RJ0M UESIGN REVIEW:

TASK 3, HUMAN FACTORS CONTROL ROOM SURVEY Quality Assurance audits of the Nuclear Construction Division.

As such, these docunents shall be retained for information as outlined in j

Section 8.0 of the BVPS-2 CRDR Charter.

8.0 FIGURES Not applicable to this instruction.

4 REVISION: 1 PAGE 7 0F 7

! EFFECTIVE PAGE DISTFL'CTICN FE7!STON NO.

NO.

CAE i

i R 404 1

10/28/85 I of 14

! A 1$m Qrs q g b

h [ CATE:

/

4h PPEPARED BY:

92! f g l A 7k'n/T'l SUCLEAR CCNSTPtCICN DIVISION INSTRUCTICN APPf0VED B :

DATE:

{

T - Z / - 4 'l p

/

~

!l h gg, CONTROL ROOM DESIGN REVIEW: TASK 4, SYSTEM REVIEW AND TASK ANALYSIS (SRTA) l l'

PAGES DATE REVISION I - 13 07/26/84 0

1 - 14 10/28/85 l

a 4

l l

0

TITLE:

CONTROL ROOM JESIGt4 INSTRUCTION NO. R404 REVIES: TASX 4, SRTA 1.0 P,URPOSE AND SCOPE This instruction is. established to meet Section 4.4 of the BVPS-2 Control Roon Design Review (CROR) Program Plan.

In addition, this instruction will oe used as a guideline during Task 4 of the BVPS-2 CROR, System Review and Task Analysis (SRTA).

2.C APPLICA8ILITY This instruction applies to Task 4 of the CROR, SRTA.

3.0 REFERENCES

3.1 NUREG 0700, " Guidelines for Control Room Design Reviews," dated Septem-ber, 1981 3.2 NUREG 0737, Supplement 1, " Clarification of TMI Action Plan Require-ments," December, 1982 3.3 Westinghouse Owners Group, " System Review and Task Analysis," dated April, 1983 3.4 INP0 NUTAC 83-046, " Control Room Design Review Task Analysis Guide-line," dated December,1983 3.5 WOG-84-164, " Summary of March 29, 1984 WOG Meeting with NRC on Task Analysis," dated April 24, 1984 3.6 NCDP 1.3, " Procedure Format" 3.7 NCOP 1.6, " Document Control" 3.8 NCOP 1.12. "NCO Instruction Manual" 3.9 BVPS-2 CROR Charter 3.10 SVPS-2 CRDR Program Plan 4.0 DEFINITIONS 4.1 Emergency Operat,ing Procedures (E0Ps)

Plant procedures directing the operator actions necessary to mitigate the consequences of transients and accidents that cause plant parame-ters to exceed reactor protection setpoints, engineered safety feature setpoints, or other appropriate technical limits.

PAGE 2 0F 14 REVISION: 1

Ir4STRUCTION NO. R404 TITLE:

CONTROL ROOM DESIG:4 REVIEW: TASK 4, SRTA 4.2 System F, unction _ Review l

The determination of systen functions required to meet system goals.

4.3 Task Analysis A tool used to delineate system functions and the specific actions that must take place to accomplish those functions.

In the CRDR context, task analysis is used to detennine the individual tasks that must be completed to allow successful emergency operation.

This activity checks the Control Roon match to the E0Ps.

5.0 RESPONSIBILITIES 5.1 Manager Regulatory Affairs (MRA)

The MRA is responsible for the overall effort associated with Task 4 of the CRDR, SRTA.

5.2 Review Team Leader (RTL)

The RTL, under the direction of the MRA, is responsible for the coordi-nation and direction of Task 4 of the CRDR, SRTA.

5.3 Technical Coordinator (TC)

The TC assunes the duties of the RTL, with respect to the SRTA when the RTL is not available.

5.4 CRDR_, Core _ Team _and Support Team The CRDR Core Tean and Support Team are responsible for performing the SRTA under the direction of the RTL.

The Core Tean and Support Team are defined in Attachments A and 8 of the BVPS-2 CRDR Charter.

6.0 INSTRUCTION 6.1 The CRDR System Review and Task Analysis (SRTA) documentation fo*

BVPS-2 shall be developed consistent with the requirements set forth in NUREG 0700, Supplement 1 to NUREG 0737, Item 5.b (II) and in accordance with the methodology presented in this instruction.

6.1.1 The SRTA documentation shall be based on the generic SRTA devel-oped by the Wastinghouse Owners Group (WOG).

6.1.2 The documents that comprise the SRTA program are identified in the following sections.

PAGE 3 0F 14 REVISION: 1

INSTRUCTION NO. R404 TITLE :

CONTROL ROOM DESIGN REVIEW: TAS K 4, S RTA 6.2 System Sequence Matrices shall be devel oped to identify systems accessed during a specific task performance. Tasks are identified as a step, note, or caution in the E 0P.

A System Sequence Matrix table shall be completed for each E0P identified in Section 6.7.5.

A System Sequence Matrix table shall also be developed for any unique task as identified in Section 6.10.

(An example of a System Sequence Matrix is provided as Figure R404-1.)

1 6.2.1 The Step colurnn shall identify the specific step in the associ-ated BVPS-2 E0P.

6.2.2 The Systems section shall identify those BVPS-2 systems which must be accessed to perform the associated step.

(The System Code ' List is provided as Figure R404-2.)

1 6.3 Element Tables shall be developed to identify the requirements the user must address in evaluating the Control Room capability. ( An example of an Element Table is provided as Figure R404-3.)

1 6.3.1 The Function element identifies the operator function (s) that the task or subtask supports.

(A listing summarizing the E0P operation functions and associated operator function categories is provided as Figure R404-4.)

1 6.3.2 The Step element identifies the task identification number and the task title.

6.3.3 The Purpose element identifies "what" the E0P task or subtask is intended to accomplish.

6.3.4 The Actions element identifies the operator action requireinents necessary to perform the task or subtask.

6.3.5 The Instrumentation el ement identifies the instrumentation requirements necessary to provide operator information needs for decis' ion and action requirements.

6.3.6 The Control / Equipment element identifies the controls necessary to perform the action requirements.

6.4 Instrumentation Requirements Tables shall be developed to identify and review requirements for individual instruments.

(An example of an Instrumentation Requirements Table is provided as Figure R404-5.)

1 6.4.1 The System heading identifies the applicable plant system for the subject instrumentation.

REVIS ION: 1 PAGE 4 0F 14

INSTRUCTION N0. R404 TITLE:

CONTROL ROOM DESIGN REVIEd: TASK 4, SRTA i

6.4.2 The Instrumentation heading identifies the subject ins trument a-tion.

6.4.3 The Criteria Requirements column identifies the specific instru-mentation criteria utilized in the BVPS-2 E0Ps as a basis for operator decisions or actions.

6.4.4 The Procedure and Step columns identify the specific E0P loca-tions that utilize the subject instrumentation as a source of information for operator decisions or actions.

6.5 Controls / Indication Requirements Tables shall be developed to identify and review requirements for individual control s.

(An example of a Controls Requirements Table is provided as Figure R404-6.)

1 6.5.1 The System heading identifies the applicable plant system for the subject control.

6.5.2 The Control / Indication heading identifies the subject control.

6.5.3 The I.D.

No. heading identifies the control / indication tag number, if applicable.

6.5.4 The Criteria Requirements column identifies the specific con-trols criteria utilized in the BVPS-2 E0Ps.

6.5.5 The Procedure and Step columns identify the specific E0P loca-tions that utilize the subject controls and/or indications for 1

operator action.

6.6 The final form of the documentation identified in Sections 6.2, 6.3, 6.4, and 6.5 shall be defined at the start of CRDR SRTA program.

6.7 SRTA data shall be developed for event sequences that reflect a spec-trun of plant emergency operations.

6.7.1 The event sequences shall be selected to comply with the recom-mendations in NUREG 0700.

6.7.2 The SRTA documentation shall address the important areas of emergency operations (e.g.,

event diagnosis, critical safety function monitoring, high risk event sequences, etc.)

6.7.3 The event sequences shall exercise all the BVPS emergency systems.

6.7.4 The event sequences selected for the BVPS-2 SRTA are itemized below:

REVIS ION: 1 PAGE 5 0F 14

l l

TITLE:

CUNTROL ROOM UdSIGN INST 4UCTI0ri NO. d404 REVIEd: TASK 4, SRTA 6.7.4.1 Spurious safety injection 6.7.4.2 Loss of reactor coolant (snall break - 1 inch dianeter) 6.7.4.3 Loss of reactor c'olant (snall break - 4 inch dianeter) 6.7.4.4 Loss of reactor coolant (large break) 6.7.4.5 Loss of secondary coolant 6.7.4.6 Combined loss of reactor and secondary coolant 6.7.4.7 Steam generator tube rupture (design basis) 6.7.4.8 Stean generator tube rupture (multiple ruptures in one steam generator) 6.7.4.9 Steam generator tube rupture (ruptures in more than one steam generator) 6.7.4.10 Anticipated transient without scram 6.7.4.11 Inadequate core cooling (resulting from failures in emergency core cooling system) 6.7.4.12 Inadequate core cooling (resulting fran loss of secon-dary heat sink) 6.7.4.13 Pressurized thermal shock 6.7.4.14 Containnent Integrity 6.7.5 SRTA data for the energency event sequences identified in Sec-tion 6.7.4 shall be developed based on the following BVPS-2 E0Ps:

6.7.5.1 Reactor Trip or Safety Injection 6.7.5.2 SI Tennination 6.7.5.3 Loss of Reactor or Secondary Coolant 6.7.5.4 Post LOCA Cooldown and Depressurization 6.7.5.5 Transfer to Cold Leg Recirculation 6.7.5.6 Transfer to Hot Leg Recirculation PAGE 6 0F 14 REVISION: 1

l INSTRUCTION NO. R404 TITLE: CONTROL R0JM UESIG'i REVIEW: TASK 4, SRTA 6.7.5.7 Faulted Stean Generator Isolation 6.7.5.8 Steam Generator Tube Rupture 6.7.5.9 Post-SGTR Cooldown Using Steam Dunp 6.7.5.10 Critical Safety Function Status Trees 6.7.5.11 Response to Nuclear Power Generation /ATWS 6.7.5.12 Response to Inadequate Core Cooling 6.7.5.13 Response to Loss of Secondary Heat Sink 6.7.5.14 Response to Imminent Pressurized Thermal Shock Condi-tions 6.7.5.15 Response to High Containment Pressure 6.8 The SRTA documentation shall be prepared by adapting the generic WOG SRTA documentation.

The basis for adaptation shall be the BVPS-2 E0Ps as identified in Section 6.7.5.

6.9 Where necessary, the generic SRTA documentation shall be augmented to identify any specific instrumentation and controls necessary to perfonn the tasks in the BVPS-2 E0Ps.

6.10 Following the preparation for the BVPS-2 SRTA documentation, the E0Ps omitted from Section 6.7.5 shall be reviewed to identify any additional instrumentation, controls or operator tasks that do not appear in the selected E0PS.

6.10.1 This review shall ensure that the selected E0Ps are representa-tive of energency operations.

6.10.2 Any unique instrunentation, controls, or tasks identified in this' review shall be evaluated for inclusion in the BVPS-2 SRTA documentation.

7.0 RECORDS 7.1 The documents resulting from this instruction are Quality Assurance records as defined in ANSI i445.2.9-1974, and may be included in the Quality Assurance audits of the Nuclear Construction Division.

As such, these docunents shall be retained for information as outlined in Section 8.0 of the BVPS-2 CROR Charter.

REVISION: 1 PAGE 7 0F 14

l l

i INSTRUCTION NO. R404 TITLE:

CONTROL ROOM OESIGN REVIEW: TASK 4, SRTA l

8.0 FIGURES

. 8.1 Figure R404-1, " System Sequence Matrix" 8.2 Figure R404-2, "Systen Code List for System Sequence Matrix Tables" i

8.3 Figure R404-3, "Elenent Table" 8.4 Figure R404-4, " Operator Functions" 8.5 Figure R404-5, " Instrumentation Requirement Table" 8.6 Figure R404-6, " Control / Indication Requirements Table" 1

=.

REVISION: 1 PAGE 8 0F 14

l INSTRUCTION NO. R404 TITLE:

CONTROL ROOM DESIGN REVIEW: TASK 4, SRTA SYSTEM SEQUENCE MATRIK TABLE PROCEDURE:

E.0. RE ACTOR TRIP OR SAFETY INJECTION SYSTEMS G

E C

C C

C D

D E

E F

F F

G H H H H 1

C M N P

Q R

R R R

R R s s s

N V

STEP M N C H N

V A

G s G

P W W N V

V V

V A

s s i G

s C

D H M P

s I

s W N 4

s s

P s

M s s

s F

s w E

s s

C P

R s

C s

s s

s I

s s

s R

s s

s 1N 1

A A

2 3

A 6

5-9 5

6 AA A

A A

7 A

A 8

A 9

A A AAA A

A A

AAA 10 A

II A

12 A

13 14 15 e

a 16-C 16 A

A A

AA A

A A

17 18 A

A 19 A &

A A

20 23 A

A A AA A

AA&&

A AA A

&&&A 4

FIGURE R404..1..-.---

REVISION:

1 PAGE 9 0F 14

TITLE:

CONTROL ROOM Ud$Ia INSTRUCTION No. R404 REVIEW: TASK 4, SRTA BEAVER VALLEY POWER STATION UNIT NO. 2 SYSTEM CODE LIST FOR SYSTEM SEQUENCE MATRIX TABLES BDC 81cwdown - Steam Generator BRS Soron Recovery System CCP Primary Component Cooling CHS Charging and Volume Control System CNM Condensate - Main Condensate CSS Containment Depressurization System CVS Containment Vacuum System DAS Drains (Aerated) System DGS Orains (Hydrogenated) System EGS Emergency Diesel Generator System

' ENS 4160V Switchgear Emergency System ESF Engineered Safeguards FNC Fuel-Nuclear-Fuel Pool Cooling & Purification FPW Fire Protection - Water FWE Feedwater - Emergency Feedwater FWS Feedwater - System GMS Main Generator - System GNS Primary Plant Gas Supply - System HCS Hydrogen Control System (Post DBA)

HVC HVAC - Control Building HVP HVAC - Primary Auxiliary Building HVR HVAC - Reactor Building (and Purge)

HVS Supplementary Leak Collecting System HVZ HVAC - Service, Building IAC Instrument Air Containinent LMS Leakage Monitoring System MSS Main Steam System NIS Nuclear Instrumentation NNS 4160V Switchgear Normal-System PGS Primary Grade Water System 055 Quench Spray System (Containment)

RCS Reactor Coolant System RDC Reactor Rod Drive Control RDI Reactor Rod Drive Instrumentation RHS Residual Heat Removal System RMS Radiation Monitoring System RPS Reactor Protection System RSS Recirculation Spray System - Containment SIS Safety Injection System SSR Sampling System - Radioactive System SWS Service Water System TMS Main Turbine System VRS Vents Gaseous (Hydrogenated) System FIG,URE R404-2

........................ ~.--

REVISION:

I

TITLE:

CONTROL ROOM JESIGN INSTRUCTION NO. R404 REVIEW: TASK 4, SRTA

--~~ --

--- ~~~

ELEMENT TABLE FOR E-0 STEP 7 FUNCTION: Diagnose plant condition STEP:

Check if Si is Actu1ted PURPOSE:

To determine if S! Is in service or is required ACTIONS:

c o Determine if $1 is actuated o Determine if any of the fol?" wing annunciators are lit:

Steamline pressure low reactor trip and safety injection Containment pressure high reactor trip and safety injection Pressurizer low pressure reactor trip and safety injection Reactor trip and low Tavg or $1 main feedwater valve closed o Determine if emergency diesels have auto started o Determine if LHSI pumps have auto started Determine if charging valves have auto aligned for cold leg injection flow o

o Determine if RCS pressure is less than 1875 psig o Determine if CNMT pressure is greater than 1.5 psig o Determine if steamline pressure is less than 525 psig o Actuate S1 INSTRUMENTATION:

o Si status indication (actuated)

o. Status indication for diesel generators (runnings stopped)

LHS1 pumps (runningt stopped) o Position indication for cold leg injection valves

[2515-M0V867A. S. C. D]

(opent closed) o Wide range RCS pressure indication

[2RCS-Pl402, 403] (less than 1875 psig) o Containment pressure Indication

[2LMS-P1950, 951, 952, 953) (greater than 1.5 psig) o SG pressure indication

[2 MSS-Pl474. 484. 494: 475. 485, 495: 476, 486. 4963 (less than 525 psig) o Tavg Indication [2RCS-Tl413. 423]

(nelow low Tave setpoint)

CONTROL / EQUIPMENT:

Switches to actuate SI (actuate)

FIGURE R404,,3,,,,_____

^

AEVISION:

1 e

TITLE:

CONTROL ROOM OESIGN INSTRUCT 10N NO. R404 REVIEd: TASK 4, SRTA OPERATOR FUNCTION CATEGORY VERIFICATION OF AUTOMATIC ACTUATIONS VERIFICATION DIAGNOSIS DIAGNOSIS OF PLANT CONDITION DIAGNOSIS OF PLANT SAFETY STATE MONITOR / REGULATE RCS BORON CONCENTRATION NONITOR/ REGULATE RCS PRESSURE MONITOR / REGULATE RCS TEMPERATURE MONITOR / REGULATE RCS INVENTORY MONITOR / REGULATE SECONDARY PRESSURE MONITORY /REGUTATE SECONDULY INVENTORY CONTROL MONITORY / REGULATE CONTAINHENT ENVIRONMENT EVALUATE EQUIPMENT STATUS MONITOR / RESTORE SUBCRITICALITY MONITOR / RESTORE CORE COOLING MONITOR / RESTORE INTEGRITY MONITOR / RESTORE HEAT SINK HONITOR/ RESTORE CONTAINMENT CONTROL MONITOR / RESTORE INVENTORY l

F I,G,U R E R 4_0 4,- 4,,,,,,..... __ __ _ _.... _ _.-_ _ _- --.

PAGE 12 0F 14 REVISION:

l

INSTRUCTION NO. R404 TITLE: CONTROL ROOM DESIGN REVIEW: TASK 4, SRTA INSTRUMENTATION REQUIREMENTS TABLE

$YSTEM:

LEAKAGE MONITORING SYSTEM INSTRUMENTATION:

Containment Pressure (2 LMS-P l 950,951.952, 953)

CRITERIA RE0VIREMENTS:

PROCEDURE ST[P GREATER THAN 45 PSIG F-0.5 STEP 1 GREATER THAN 10 PSIG ES-1.3 STEP 4 GREATER THAN 8.0 PSIG ECA-1.1 STEP 6 GREATER THAN 8.0 PSIG FR-Z.1 STEP 3 GREATER THAN 3.0 PSIG E-0 STEP 15 GREATER THAN 1.5 PSIG E-0 STEP 7 LESS THAN 45 PSIG F-0.5 STEP 1 LESS THAN 8.0 PSIG ECA-1.1 STEP 5 NORMAL E-0 STEP 26 FIGURE R404-5 REVISION:

1 PAGE 13 0F 14

INSTRUCTION NO. R4U4 TITLE: CONTROL ROOM OESIGN REVIEW: TASK 4, SRTA I

CONTROL /fNDICATION Rt0UIREMENTS TABLE SYSTEMt Reactor Coolant system CONTROL / INDICATION:

Reactor Coolant P ops t,0. Not (2RCS-P2lA.D.C]

CRITERIA REQUIREMENTS PR0Ct00Rt g

STOP t-0 STEP 16 I

RUNNING: STOPPED E-0 STEP 22 STOP E-0 STEP 22 RUNNING: STOPPED t-0 STEP 23 STOP E-0 STEP 23 RUNNING 5 TOPPED t-1 STEP 1 STOP t-1 STEP 1 RUNNING: STOPPED 15-0.1 STEP 20 RUNNING: STOPPED ES-0.1 STEP 24-CAUT10N I RUNNING: STOPPED ES-0.1 STEP 26 START /5 TOP E5-0.1 5TEP 24 RUNNING: STOPPED E5-1.2 STEP 14 RUNNfNG: STOPPED E5-1.2 STEP I5-CAUTION 2 RUNNING: STOPPED ES-l.2 STEP 15 START /STOP E5-1.2 STEP 15 RUNNING: STOPPED ES-l.2 STEP 16 RUNNING: STOPPED ES-1.2 STEP 17 RUNNING: STOPPt0 ES-1.2 STEP 19-CAUTION 2 RUNNING: STOPPED E5-1.2 STEP 21 START /5 TOP ES-1.2 STEP 21 RUNNING: STOPPED E5-1.2 STEP 31 STOP ts-1.2 STEP 31 RUNNING: STOPPED t-3 STEP 1 STOP E-3 STEP I RUNNING: STOPPED t-3 STEP 18 STOP t-3 STEP 18 RUNNING: STOPPED t-3 STEP 19-NOTE RUNNING: STOPPID t-3 STEP 30 RUNNING: STOPPt0 E-3 STEP 36-CAUTl0N 2 RUNNING: STOPPED E-3 STEP 36 START /STOP E-3 STEP 36 RUNellioG STOPPED E5-3.3 STEP 6 RUNNIIeG: STOPPED-E5-3.3 STEP ll-NOTE RUNNING: STOPPED ES-3.3 STEP 11 START /STOP ES-3.3 STEP 11 RUNtilNG: STOPPED ES-3.3 STEP 12 STOP E5-3.3 STEP 12 RUNNING: STOPPED F-0.2 STEP 3 I

i FIGURE R404-6 REVISION:

1 PAGE 14 0F 14

I l

i I DTS~RCC*ICN FEVISTON EFFECTIVE PAGE

'O.

!O.

DATE R405 0

12-26-84 1 of 7 kg q

PPEPARED BY:

1 DATE:

ll 4f

$f.hf5

/2-26-69 NL' CLEAR CCNSTRUCTION DIVISICN y

DATE:

l INSTRUCTICN APP B:

/

l Ifk

/2 #2d ~lf CONTROL ROOM DESIGN REVIEW: TASK 5, TI M *

" VERIFICATION OF TASK PERFORMANCE CAPABILITIES" i-PAGES DATE REVISION

.1 - 7 12-26-84 0

l 9

1 e

. INSTRUCTION NO. R 405 TITLE: CONTROL ROOM DESIGN REVIEW TASK 5, " VERIFICATION OF TASK PERFORMANCE CAPABILITIES" 1.0 PURPOSE AND SCOPE This instruction is established to meet Section 4.5 of the BVPS-2 Control Room Design Review (CRDR) Program Plan.

In addition, this instruction shall be utilized as guidelines during Task 5 of the BVPS-2 CRDR, " Verification of Task Performance Capabilities."

2.0 APPLICABILITY This instruction applies to Task 5 of the CRDR, " Verification of Task Performance Capabilities.

3.0 REFERENCES

3.1 NUREG 0700, " Guidelines for Control Room Design Reviews," dated September 1981 3.2 NCDP 1.3, " Procedure Format," Revision 0 3.3' NCDP 1.6, " Document Control," Revision 0 3.4 NCDP 1.12, "NCD Instruction Manual," Revision 1 3.5 BVPS-2 CRDR Charter, Revision 2 3.6 BVPS-2 CRDR Program Plan 3.7 NCD Instruction R-409, " Human Engineering Discrepancy (HED) Report" 3.8 Task Plan 9.2, Appendix A-1, " Criteria -- Verification of Task Performance Capabilities" 4.0 DEFINITIONS 4.1 Verification The process for determining whether *nstrumentation, controls, and other l

equipment meet the specific requirene nts of the emergency tasks performed l

by operators. The control room survey is a verification activity, checking the control room match to the human operator.

In the DCRDR context, verification implies a static check of the plant instrumentation and. controls agains t human engineering criteria.

5.0 RESPONSIBILITIES 5.1 Manager Regulatory Affairs (MRA)

The MRA is responsible for the overall effort associated with Task 5 of l

the CRDR, " Verification of Task Performance Capabilities."

l PAGE 2 0F 7 REVISION: O l

t

1 INSTRUCTION NO. R 405 TITLE:

CONTROL ROOM DESIGN REVIEW TASK 5, " VERIFICATION OF TASK PERFORMANCE CAPABILITIES" 5.2 Review Team Leader (RTL)

The RTL, under the direction of the MRA, is responsible for tem coordina-tion and direction 'of Task 5 of the CRDR, " Verification of Task Perfor-mance Capabilities."

5.3 Technical Coordinator (TC)

The TC assumes the duties of the RTL, with the respect to the "Verifica-tion of Task Performance Capabilities" when the RTL is not available.

5.4 CRDR Core Team and Support Team The CRDR Core Team and Support Team are responsible for performing the

" Verification of Task Performance Capabilities" under the direction of the RTL in accordance with this instruction. The Core Team is defined in Attachments A and 5 of the 3VPS-2 CRDR Charter.

6.0 INSTRUCTION 6.1 The verification of task performance capabilities phase of the CRDR shall be conducted in accordance with the methodology presented in this instruction.

6.1.1 The CRDR RTL, or designee, shall review and finalize the verifi-cation of task performance capabilities instruction.

6.1.2 The CRDR RTL, or designee, shall submit the verification of task performance capabilities instruction to the DLC MRA in accordance with the BVPS-2 CRDR Charter for review and approval.

6.2 Verfication of Availability The CRDR Team members shall verify the presence of instruments and equip-ment that provide the information and control capabilities necessary to implement each operator task (availability) identified in the SRTA as follows:,

6.2.1 The operator informacion and control requirements (needs) listed in the element tableu produced during the system review and task analysis (SRTA) shall be compared to the inventory data sheets and full-scale photo mock-up to ensure the following:

6.2.1.1 A device exists on the Main Control Board to provide the information and control capabilities necessary to implement each operator task identified in the SRTA.

REVISION: O PAGE 3 0F 7

l l

I INSTRUCTION NO. R 405 TITLE:

CONTROL ROOM DESIGN REVIEW TASK 5, "VERZFICATEON OF TASK PERFORMANCE CAPABIL7. TIES" 6.2.1. 2 The input / output capabilities of existing Main Control Board devices satisfy the input / output requirements specified in the SRTA.

6.2.2 The results of 6.2.1 will be recorded on a standard form, as shown in Figure R405-1. Any mismatches between the operator information and control needs and the inventory results will be identified as a HED, as described in Reference 3.7.

6.2.3 The main control board devices will then be compared against the remaining NUREG 0700, Section 6, guidelines that pertain to veri-fication of task performance capabilities (listed in Task Plan TP-9.2 under " availability;" see Reference 3.8).

Any discrepancy that exists between TP-9.2 and the main control board devices will be identified as a HED, as described in Reference 3.7.

6.3 Verification of Human Engineering Suitability The CRDR Team members shall verify that the characteristics of available equipment and instruments in the control room will support the implemen-tation of each operator task as described in the SRTA,,i.e., Human Engineering Suitability. This will be accomplished as follows:

6.3.1 The operator information and control requirements (needs) listed in the element tables produced during the SRTA shall be compared to the inventory data sheets, instrumentation precision tables (as required), and photo mock-up to ensure that the devices which exist on the Main Control Board have appropriate characteristics (range / accuracy or positions / precision) to support the Lsplemen-tation of each operscor task identified in the SRTA.

6.3.2 The results of 6.3.1 will be recorded on a standard form, as shown in Figure R405-2.

Any mismatches between the characteris-tics needed to support information and control requirements and those present on the Main Control Boards as described in the inventory results or photo mock-up will be identified as a HED, as described in Reference 3.7.

6.3.3 The characteristics of Main Control Board devices will then be compared against the remaining NUREG-0700, Section 6, guidelines that pertain to verification of task performance capabilities (listed in Task Plan - 9.2 under " Suitability;" see Refere.ce 3.8).

Any discrepancy that exists between TP-9.2 guidelines and the Main Control Board devices will be identified as a HED, as described in Reference 3.7.

6.4 The CRDR Team shall prepare the verification results in final report fo rma t, as described in Instruction R-408.

REVISION: O PAGE 4 0F 7

INSTRUCTION NO. R 405 TITLE: CONTROL ROOM DESIGN REVIEW TASK 5. " VERIFICATION OF TASK PERFORMANCE CAPABILITIES" 7.0 RECORDS 7.1 The documents resulting from this instruction are Quality Assurance records as defined in ANSI N45.2.9-1974, and may be included in the Quality Assurance audits of the Nuclear Construction Division.

As such, these documents shall be retained for information as outlined in Section 8.0 of the BVPS-2 CRDR Charter.

8.0 FIGURES 8.1 Figure R405-1, " Verification of Task Performance Capabilities -- Equip-ment Availability" 8.2 Figure R405-2, " Verification of Task Performance Capabilities -- Human Engineering Suitability" PAGE 5 0F 7 REVISION: O

!! STT.CcTION ::C. %05 CC'5 7.0L M

~. e S ~.rv.

c.e\\:.m_.s AS. 5, 1.e e...

.,A..ON..

.c.e l

OT3 C

I 5. w.

.=

M X8-

.a M

w-4 e

+

-.C 6<w 3=

h.e 3

5

_3

=

.e En g

= -

e s

5 E 8w -

3 8 5E w

W tes m

w t.s 3

led G.

w Dea w

w e<

l i

l FIGt'RE F.405-1 PAGE 6 M 7 i.EVISION: o l

T'T;;: CCSTROL ECCM I::SinCCTICS 50. E405 D ES t age, p =t,e e.r e.e,

r.

w.

!ASK 5, VARIFICATION

___==__

I d

-e

<=g t2 TE

2.

!~s.25m

e. s.

M =

IE 5

MC

=

d "h!

g l_E.E.

==

._ s W. M.

5

%g r-=

W w GW

=85 a

g Bw 2

C 53

.W.E.w.

gw t

-EE i

2 J

I_

5"E SW 52

=8I" M

- a.

E *g w

M,a l

FIGUPI R405-2 1

\\

I KEV IS ION : O P.\\GE 7 0F 7 i

l i

I INSTRL'CTICN i Fr/ISTCN '

FFECTTE PAGE I

NO.

DATE e

R406 0

12-26-84 L of 6 l

h &Q g

g, y

l AD PREPAPED BY:

DATE:

?/$$$w

/2- ?d~ B"Y

/

.TCLEAR COJSTRUCTICN DIVISION g,

INd7?ICTICN APP BY:

DATE:

A2 *2l~5Y l

/

CONTROL ROOM DESIGN REVIEW: TASK 6 TITLE:

" VALIDATION OF CONTROL ROOM FUNCTIONS" I

PAGES DATES Revision 1-6 12-26-84 o

i 3

l 0

' INSTRUCTION NO. R 406 TITLE: CONTROL ROOM DESIGN REVIEW TASK 6, " VALIDATION" 1.0 PURPOSE AND SCOPE This instruction is established to meet Section 4.6 of the BVPS-2 Control Room Design Review (CRDR) Program Plan.

In addition, this instruction shall be utilized as guidelines during Task 6 of the BVPS-2 CRDR, " Validation of Control Room Funct ions."

2.0 APPLICABILITY This instruction applies to Task 6 of the CRDR, " Validation of Control Room Functions."

3.0 REFERENCES

3.1 NUREG 0700, " Guidelines for Control Room Design Reviews," dated September 1981 3.2 NCDP 1.3, " Procedure Format," Revision 0 3.3 NCDP 1.6, " Document Control," Revision 0 3.4 NCDP 1.12 "NCD Instruction Manual," Revision 1 3.5 BVPS-2 CRDR Charter, Revision 2 3.6 BVPS-2 CRDR Program Plan 3.7 NCD Instruction R-409, " Human Engineering Discrepancy (HED) Report" 3.8 Task Plan 9.2, Appendix A-2, " Criteria -- Validation of Control Room Funct ions."

4.0 DEFINITIONS 4.1 Validation The process for determining whether the control roqp operating crew can perform their functions ef fectively given the control room instrumenta-tion, procedures, and training.

In the DCRDR context, validation implies a dynamic performance evaluation.

5.0 RESPONSIBILITIES i

5.1 Manager Regulatory Affairs (MRA)

The NRA is responsible for the overall effort associated with Task 6 of the CRDR, " Validation of Control Room Functions."

REVISION: O PAGE 2 0F 6 l

a--

m-,g--.-

t INSTRUCTION NO. R 406 TZTLE:

CONTROL ROOM DESIGN REVIEW TASK 6, " VALIDATION" 5.2 Review Team Leader (RTL)

The RTL, under the direction of the MRA, is responsible for the coordina-tion and direction of Task 6 of the CRDR, " Validation of Control Room i

Functions."

5.3 Technical Coordinator (TC)

The TC assumes the duties of the RTL, with the respect to the " Validation of Control Room Functions" when the RTL is not availab le.

5.4 CRDR Core Team and Support Team The CRDR Core Team and Support Team are responsible for performing the

" Validation of Control Room Functions" under the direction of the RTL in accordanct with this instruction.

The Core Team is defined in Attach-ments A and B of the BVPS-2 CRDR Charter.

6.0 INSTRUCTION 6.1 The validation of control room functions phase of the CRDR shall be conducted in accordance with the methodology presented in this instruction.

6.1.1 The CRDR RTL, or designee, shall review and finalize the validation of control room functions instruction.

6.1.2 The CRDR RTL, or designee, shall submit the validation of control room functions instruction to the DLC MRA in accordance with the BVPS-2 CRDR Charter for review and approval.

6.2 Using a full-scale photo mock-up, the CRDR Team members, along with DLC operations staf f, shall perform a walk-through/ talk-through validation process in accordance with the guidelines specified in NUREG 0700.

6.2.1 The CRDR Team members shall make a comparison of the inventory results with the full-scale mock-up, and adjust the full-scale mock-up accordingly.

6.2.2 The CRDR Team and DLC operations shall perform walk-throughs covering each of the following procedures using the BVPS-2 validation scenarios:

6.2.2.1 Start-up from cold shutdown to power operation (5%).

6.2.2.2 Load follow from 100% power to 50% power.

6.2.2.3 Reactor trip or safety injection.

REVISION: O PAGE 3 0F 6

INSTRUCTZON NO. R 406 TITLE:

CONTROL ROOM DESIGN REVIEW l

TASK 6, " VALIDATION" 6.2.2.4 S.I. termination.

6.2.2.5 Loss of reactor or secondary coolant.

6.2.2.6 Post-LOCA cooldown and depressurization.

6.2.2.7 Transfer to cold leg recirculation.

6.2.2.8 Transfer to hot leg recirculation.

6.2.2.9 Faulted steam generator isolation.

6.2.2.10 Steam generator tube rupture.

6.2.2.11 Post-SGTR Cooldown using steam dump.

6.2.2.12 Critical safety function status trees.

6.2.2.13 Response to nuclear power generation ( ATWS).

6.2.2.14 Response to inadequate core cooling.

6.2.2.15 Response to loss of secondary heat sink.

6.2.2.16 Response to imminent pressurized thermal shock conditions.

6.2.2.17 Response to high containment pressure.

6.2.3 Prior to performing the walk-through, the CRDR Tess will brief the operating crew on the purpose, objective, and the procedure to be used during the control room validation process.

6.2.4 Prior to performing the walk-through, the foreman or shift super-visor will allocate task between the control room operators.

6.2.5 During the walk-through, the foreman or shif t sup<.rvisor will ensure that the operators verbally describe:

The component or parameter being controlled o-monitored.

The purpose of the action.

The expected result of the action in terms of system re s ponse.

How system responses can be verified.

What actions should be taken if the expected responses do not occur.

6.2.6 During the walk-through, the CRDR Team will note and document any deviations from the applicable 0700 Section 6 Guidelines (see REVISION: O PAGE 4 0F 6

INSTRUCT'.ON NO. R 406 TITLE:

CONTROL B00M DES 1GN REVIEW TASK 6 " VALIDATION" Reference 3.8).

In addition, any concern or questions that surface during the walk-throughs will be noted.

'6.2.7 If, for the given procedure, the chosen scenario creates any dif ficulties or confusion with the operations staf f, the walk-through will immediately stop. The problems will be discussed with the operating crew (talk-through) and when the problem is resolved, the walk-through will continue.

6.2.8 During the walk-through, the CRDR Team will trace and document the movement patterns of the reactor operator, the plant opera-tor, and the foreman or shift supervisor. The movement patterns will be documented on control room layout drawings, as shown in Figure R406-1.

6.2.9 All walk-throughs will be recorded (both video and sound) for CRDR Team review and walk-through documentation.

6.2.10 At the end of each walk-through, a debriefing will be held between the operating crew and the CRDR Team discussing any procedural, operational, or control / display problem that was encountered during the scenario.

6.2.11 At the completion of all the walk-throughs, core team meetings will be held to compare the checklists, operating crew movement patterns, and review walk-through recordings. Any discrepancy that exists between the validation results and the guidelines set forth in Section 6 of the NUREG 0700 shall be reported as described in Reference 3.7.

6.2.12 All HED's generated during the validation of control room func-tions shall be filed in accordance with the BVPS-2 Charter and retained for further analysis during the BVPS-2 assessment phase.

6.2.13 The CRDR Team shall prepare the validation results in final report fo rmat, per Instruction R408.

7.0 RECORDS 7.1 The documents resulting from this instruction are Quality Assurance records as defined in ANSI N45.2.9-1974 and may be included in the Quality Assurance audits of the Nuclear Construction Division. As such, these documents shall be retained for information as outlined in Section 8.0 of the BVPS-2 CRDR Charter.

8.0 FIGURES 8.1 Figure R406-1, " Control Room Layout" PAGE 5 0F 6 REVISION: O

'!!!LI: CCNTis0L F.CC"

!':ST rcTION NO. T.406 DESIGN R2 VIE":

TASK 6, VALIDATICN CONTROL ROOM LAYOUT vgAncAt. SECT *IO A>

c 0

M f

/,

C BELJCN EOAF.C.1ECCOt>

A-g 94 6

2 2

g b

\\,

d o

I-Y s+

Q-9h Y

a I

a FIGURE R406-1 NEVISION: O PAGE 6 0F 6

f INSTRUC* ION FF/ISTCN '

FFECTP/E !

PAGE l

c.

o.

cme E

R407 0

12-26-84 1 of 10 h &g gy g-g g,gg f A$

PREPAFr.D BY:

DATE:

W. S $$k

/2 ~141-89'

)

NCCLEAR CCNSTRUCTICN DD7ISICN f

INdTRUCTICN AP Y:

DATE:

/2 #26 -d'Y

\\

TASK 7,"fSESSMENT"

\\

CONTROL ROOM DESIGN REVIEW:

TITLE:

l PAGES DATE REVISION 1-10 12-26-84 0

1 e

l l

l 0

INSTRUCTION NO. R 407 TITLE:

CONTROL ROOM DESIGN REVIEW TASK 7. " ASSESSMENT" 1.0 PURPOSE AND SCOPE This instruction is established to meet Section 5.0 of the BVPS-2 Control Room l

Design Review (CRDR) Program Plan.

In addition, this instruction shall be

~

utilized as guidelines during Task 7 of the BVPS-2 CRDR, " Assessment."

2.0 APPLICABILITY This instruction applies to Task 7 of the CRDR, " Assessment."

l

3.0 REFERENCES

3.1 NUREG 0700, " Guidelines for Control Room Design Reviews," dated September 1981 3.2 NCDP 1.3, " Procedure Format," Revision 0 3.3 NCDP 1.6, " Document Control," Revision 0 3.4 NCDP 1.12 "NCD Instruction Manual," Revision 1 3.5 BVPS-2 CRDR Charter, Revision 2 3.6 BVPS-2 CRDR Program Plan 3.7 NCD Instruction R-409, " Human Engineering Discrepancy (HED) Report" 4.0 DEFINITIONS Not applicable to this instruction.

5.0 RESPONSIBILITIES 4

5.1 Manager Regulatory Affairs (MRA) j The NRA is responsible for the overall effort associated with Task 7 of the CRDR, " As ses sment."

5.2 Review Team Leader (RTL)

The RTL, under the direction of the MRA, is responsible for the coordina-tion and direction of Task 7 of the CRDR, " Assessment."

5.3 Technical Coordinator (TC)

The TC assumes the duties of the RTL, with the respect to the Assessment task when the RTL is not availab le.

PAGE 2 0F 10 REVISION: O

INSTRUCTION NO. R 407 TITLE: CONTROL ROOM DESIGN REVIEW TASK 7, "A SSESSMENT" l

5.4 CRDR Core Team and Support Team l

The CRDR Core Team and Support Team are responsible for performing the Assessment task under the direction of the RTL in accordance with this instruction..The Core Team is defined in Attachments A and B of the BVPS-2 CRDR Charter.

6.0 INSTRUCTION l

6.1 The Assessment Phase of the CRDR shall be conducted in accordance with l

the methodology presented in this instruction.

6.1.1 The CRDR RTL, or designee, shall review and finalize the assess-ment ins truc t ion, l

6.1.2 The CRDR RTL, or designer, shall submit the assessment instruc-tion to the DLC MRA in accordance with the BVPS-2 CRDR Charter for review and approval.

6.2 Af ter an HKD is identified in the review phase, it shall be submitted to the CRDR assessment team (comprised of the RTL, TC, I&C engineer, RO, human factors specialist, and control systems engineer) to determine the implications of the discrepancy with regard to possible safety and operational sequences.

6.2.1 The outcome of this process shall be dispositioned HED's; i.e.,

j HED's that have been categorized and assigned levels of priority in line with their safety importance and operational significance.

6.2.2 The HED Priority Record, Figure R407-1, shall be used to ansess the priority of all HED's.

The form contains a section for assessment and a logic diagram. The logic diagram shall be used to determine how the data is integrated to assign categorized priority levels to HED's.

6.2.2.1 The category (I, II, or III) of an HED shall be defined as the likelihood of occurrence (potential for degrading performance). Category I HED's are tiose l

which have been noted from documented errors, C ategory II are those which have not been noted but have rela-tively high potential for degrading performance, and Category III discrepancies are those which are associ-ated with a relatively low potential for degrading performance.

Category 1, II, and III HED's are all considered to increase error potential, but system consequence and HED impact shall be assigned to further determine priority levels.

REVISION: O PAGE 3 0F 10

INSTRUCTION NO. R 407 TITLE:

CONTROL ROOM DESIGN REVIEW TASK 7, " ASSESSMENT" 6.2.2.2 The priority (1 through 9) of an HED shall relate its overall importance from a human factors perspective.

Priority shall relate all HED's to one another and provide the necessary input, from a human factors point of view, to Duquesne Light Company management fo r determinig what recommendations will result in design, procedural, training, or administrative changes.

6.3 Each HED shall be evaluated for :orrection by surface enhancement, design alternatives, or procedural, training, or administrative changes.

6.3.1 HED review and recommendations (see Figure R409-1, Section K, Instruction R409) shall first consider resolution / recommendation by surface enhancement. Surface enhancements include such techniques as demarcation, adding system or sub-system mimics, using color patches, and modifying labeling.

6.3.2 If surface enhancements do not provide adequate resolution to the HED, or if surface enhancements are not applicable to the HED, it shall be analyzed for correction by design alternative recommen-dat io ns. Various alternatives shall be considered to ensure that an effective and raasonable design solution will be provided to Duquesne Light Company management for their review and c'isposi-tion.

Specific considerations in this process include the extent of resolution possible, the impact on the existing desii;,c,

general cost and scheduling considerations, and where applicable, ef fects on operator training.

6.3.3 In cases where neither enhancement nor design alternative offers an appropriate solution, a procedure change or an ope' ator r

training solution may be recommended.

6.3.4 In instances in which a decisicr is made to only partially correct or not to correct an HED, a justification shall be provided. If deemed appropriate by the human facters specialists, a justification based upon human factors princip1,is and practices shall be given. Otherwise, an engineering constrtint/ cost-effe:-

tiveness justification shall be supplied by the t eam assessing the HED's for Duquesne Light Company management riview and dis po s ition.

6.4 Once HED recommendations have been agreed upon by the assessment team, and the extent of HED correction detenmined, candidate recommendations shall be assessed using the reassessment of probable error and deviation form, Figure R407-2, to ensure that the HED's have been adequately ad-dressed. This reassessment process has the two objectives of determining whether the correction satisfactorily resolved the existing discrepancy and if it will introduce new discrepancies.

PAGE 4 0F 10 REVISION: O

j INSTRUCTION NO. R 407 TZTLE:

CONTROL ROOM DESZGN REVIEW TASK 7, " ASSESSMENT" 6.4.1 Reassessment criteria shall include extent of deviation from guidelines, error potential, and consequence of error. The criteria shall be scaled subjective judgments (from 1 to 6, see Figure R407-2).

6.5 The major output of the assessment phase shall consist of satisfactorily resolved HED's, or partially resolved and unresolved HED's fo r wh ich justifications have been written. All HED rcport forms shall have completed HED priority records and reassessment of probable error and deviation forms attached to them before submittal to Duquesne Light Company management.

7.0 RECORDS 7.1 The documents resulting from this instruction are Quality Assurance records as defined in ANSI M45.2.9-1974, and may be included in the Quality Assurance audits of the Nuclear Construction Division. As such, these documents shall be retained for information as outlined in Section 8.0 of the BVPS-2 CRDR Charter.

8.0 FIGURES 8.1 Figure R407-1, "HED Priority Record" (3 pages) 8.2 Figure R407-2, " Reassessment of Probable Error and Deviation" (2 pages)

I REVISION: O PAGE $ OF 10

LE: CRDR:

INSTRUCTIO:* SC rk07 TASi; 7, ASSESS :E::T MED PRIORITY RECORD HED 8

1. DOCUMENTED ERROR 7 NO YES t DOCUMENTED UNSAFE NO YES CONDITION OR TECM.

SPEC. VIOLATION 7 '

3. HIGH SAFETi IMPORTANCE NO YES (PAM On 1837

4. ERROR POTENTIAL 7 2

3 4

5 S. CONSEQUENCE OF ERROR:

1 2

3 4

5 1

GW HIGH

(-)

/ **

<r l

.mm.ms

I u

e u

l

[

. i l

,r

,r o

" '"8 i

if if f

if Ni/

/

/ b,/b/

/ \\ __

/\\

]

666666666 FIGURE R407-1 (SHEET I)

Acr 6 0F 10 REvtSION: 0 e

TIT'-.I : CEDR:

I:!STECTIR. ::0. R407 TASK 7, ASSESS:c:::

HED PRIORI 1Y RECORD DOCUMENTED ERROR 1.

Occumented error refers to an error which has actually occurred at Event the plant or a plant of similar design as reported in Licensee (i.e. supported by official

. Reports (LERs), or as verifiable events i

plant documentation reported by plant operations personnel dur ng the OCRDR Operating Experience Review interviews. '

DOCUMENTED UNSAFE CONDITION OR TECHNIC 2.

A documented unsafe condition or technical specification violation J

refers to an unsafe condition or a violation of technical specifications which is evidenced through and suppoorted by official plant re;:ords and deiign information.

3.

HIGH SAFETY IMPORTANCE All human engineering discrepancias identified during the review If phase will be assessed for their potential ispect on safety.

error can impact a safety function (actuation of a IE cJntrol, or interpretation of PAM instrumentation), the HED shall be categorized as high safety importance.

4.

ERROR POTENTIAL Error Refers to probability or likelihood of error occurance.

potential is related more to the physical asnects of the specific situation rather than its relationship within a system and is l

effected by training and experience.

e.g.1 = " EMERGENCY TEET WATER" 6 = 10 of all process controllers working backwards from rest

=

i FIGURE R407-1 (SHEET 2)

PArc 7 ap ;g "FNISICN: 0

!!!!.E :

C'O L.

I:.STRUCT!!:; !X. R407 TASK 7, ASSESS:4E::T 5.

CONSE00Et:0E OF ERROR Very. uch relateu Refers to the seriousness of error consequence;.

to system interrelationshios not effected by.. sining or experience except both can lessen consequences o~ e error oc. curs.

e.g.1 = Identical switches in close proximity: men's room light and men's room fan.

Release to 6 = Identical switches in close proximity:

atmosphere and containment isolation.

C FIGURE R407-1 (SHEET.1) x_

PAGE 8 0F (0 RC"IS IO*!: O

..;STRL*CT ION :;0. Rt07 MT'E: CRDR TASK 7, AMESSMENT REASSESSMENT OF PROBABLE ERROR AND DEVIATION l

HED #

l COMPLETE

1. EXTENT OF DEVIATION M

SOME 0

1 2

3 4

5 8

FROM GUIDELINES tlJlfdi LOW _

2 3

4 5

6

2. ERROR POTENTIAL 1

3. CONSEQUENCE OF ERROR 2

3 4

5 vas DEV = 0 r ACCEPTA8LE RESOLUTION No '

i f sanon VEs AM 7 ACCEPTABLE RESQLUTION coussouSNc3 K3 No 1 7 i

uc0ery RecomusNOAT10N OR JUST1FY AND 00CUuSNT I

f SIGNOFF: DLC.RTL l

DATE:

1 FIGURE R407-2 (SHEET I)

PAGE 9 0F 10 KEVIS[ON: O

TITLE: CRDR:

INSTRL'CTION NO. R40 7 TAdA 7, ASSg SMENT EXPLAMATILM OF REASSESSMENT CF!TERIA (SCALF0_,UDGMENTS FRCri 1-6)

EXTENT OF DEVIATION FROM GUIDEl.INES 1.

Rating as to how much a specific discrepancy does not coriform To make judgment, a thorough to guideline reconsendations.

Excerience in relating understanding of criterik is important.

Rating HF criteria to nuclear power systems is also very heloful.

is subjec'tive, as are all three ratings, e.g.1 = Space between lines of labeling is slightly less than 1s of letter height, but lables are very readable.

2.

ERROR POTENTIAL.

Error Refers to probability or 1.ik'elihood of error occurance.

potential is related more to the physical aspects of the specific situation rather than its relationship within a system and is affected by training and excerience.

e.g.1 = "DERGENCY F EE1WME R" 6 = 15 of all process controllers working backwards from rest.

3.

C0f:SEQUEtlCE OF ERROR Very much Refers to the seriousness of error consequences.

related to system interrealtionships not effected by training or experience except both can lessen consequences once error occurs.

e.g.1 = Identical switches in close proximity: men's room light and men's room fan.

Release to 6 = identical switches in close proximity:

atmosphere and containment isolation.

FIcuRE R407-2 (SHEET 2)

PAGE to of to MEVISION: O

! EFFECTIVE PAGE l

l DTSUL'C*ICN

IVISTCN F

'O.

NO.

CATE V

R408 0

12-28-84 1 of 4 4

q 9 Af PREPABED BY:

y CATE:

& [$, $

/2-2 d'-ff'

.sL*C:. EAR CCNSTFtTCTICN DU/ISION j

INdW.IITICN APPBOVED B :

DATE:

f

/b-M SY CONTROL ROOM DESIGN REVIEW: TASK 8 g

" FINAL

SUMMARY

REPORT" i

PAGES DATE Revision 1-4 12-26-84 0

O O

INSTRUCTION NO. R 40S TITLE:

CONTROL ROOM DESIGN REVIEW TASK 8 "FlNAL

SUMMARY

REPORT" l.L PURPOSE AND SCOPE This instruction is established to meet Sections 5.4 and 6.0 of the BVPS-2 Control Room Design Review (CRDR) Program Plan.

In addition, this ins truc t ion shall be utilized as guidelines during Task 8 of the BVPS-2 CRDR, " Final Summary Report."

2.0 APPLICABILITY This instruction applies to Task '8 of the CRDR, " Final Summary Report."

3.0 REFERENCES

3.1 NUREG 0700, " Guidelines for Control Room Design Reviews," dated September 1981 3.2 NCDP 1.3, " Procedure Format," Revision 0 3.3 NCDP 1.6, " Document Control," Revision 0 3.4 NCDP 1.12 "NCD Instruction Manual," Revision 1 3.5 BVPS-2 CRDR Charter, Revision 2 3.6 BVPS-2 CRDR Program Plan 3.7 NCD Instruction R-409, " Human Engineering Discrepancy (HED) Report" 4.0 DEFINITIONS Not applicable to this Instruction.

5.0 RESPONSIBILITIES 5.1 Manager Regulatory Affairs (MRA)

The NRA is responsible for the overall effort associated with Task 8 of the CRDR, " Final Summary Report."

5.2 Review Team Leader (RTL)

The JTL, under the direction of the MRA, is responsible for the coordina-tion and direction of Task 8 of the CRDR, " Final Summary Report."

l 5.3 Technical Coordinator (TC) j The TC assumes the duties of the RTL, with the respect to the " Final Summary Report" when the RTL is not available.

REVISION: O PAGE 2 0F 4

INSTRUCTION NO. R 608 TITLE:

CONTROL ROOM DESIGN REVIEW TASK 8, "FlNAL

SUMMARY

REPORT" 5.4 CRDR Core Team and Support Team The CRDR Core Team and Support Team are responsible for writing the

" Final Summary Report" under th.e direction of the RTL in accordance with this instruction. 'The Core Team is defined in Attachments A and B of the BVPS-2 CRDR Charter.

6.0 INSTRUCTION 6.1 The reporting phase of the CRDR shall be conducted in acccordance with the methodology presented in this instruction.

6.1.1 The CRDR RTL, or designee, shall review and finalize the final summary report ins truction.

6.1.2

. The CRDR RTL, or designee, shall submit the final summary report instruction to the DLC MRA in accordance with the BVPS-2 CRDR Charter for review and approval.

6.2 The final summary report shall be maintained in draft form until all sections have been reviewed by the core team and DLC MRA.

6.3 The final summary report shall contain three major sections:

method-ology, review findings, and implementations.

6.3.1 The methodology section shall reference the program plan report and update that material with any changes made during the course of the review.

In addition. the final revision to all the instructions utilized during the CRDR shall be placed in this section, along with the CRDR charter.

6.3.2 The review findings section shall summarize all review phase results. This section shall contain all HED report fo rms, HED priority record, and the reassessment of probable error forms generated during the review and assessment phases of the CRDR.

Discrepancies related to operational dynamics in crew perrormance and procedures, along with ' discrepancies with safety cor sequences shall be discussed. All discrepancies for which no cor:ective actions will be administered, shall be adequately justi. ied from a human factors, engineering, or cost / benefit perspectise, as appropriate to the individual HED.

6.3.3 The implementation section shall provide a summary of control room design improvements already completed, and shall identify and schedule all improvements, approved by DLC management, to be completed at a later date.

Improvements deemed 'long-Tenn Imple-mentation" by DLC management shall also be discussed.

REVISION: 0 PAGE 3 0F 4

gNSTRUCTION NO. R 408-TITLE: CONTROL ROOM DESIGN REV1E'4 TASK 8, " FINAL

SUMMARY

REPORT" 7.0 RECORDS 7.1 The documents resulting from this instruction are Quality Assurance records as defined in ANSI N45.2.9-1974, and may be included in the Quality Assurance audits of the Nuclear Construction Division.

As such, these documents shall be retained for information as outlined in Section 8.0 of the BVPS-2 CRDR Charter.

8.0 FIGURES Not applicable to this Instruction.

e i

1 I

j REVISION: O PAGE 4 0F 4 I

I ISSTRUCTICN FE7I57CN l EFFECTIVE,

FAGE l!l NO.

NO.

f DA'E i

03/25/85!

E R 409 2

I o f it.

& gn_ q g g g-g Af PPEPARED BY: O#

DATE:

NUCI. EAR CCNSTRtiCPICN DIVISION 9l2'If54 472 2~. 0 APPf0VED B [ [

TE:

INS 77tt.ETICN

/

7 - zh 4 y' a

<-.x TITLE: CONTROL ROOM DESIGN REVIEW: HUMAN ENGINEER,

DISCREPANCY (HED) REPORT PAGES DATE REVISION I - 13 07/26/84 o

1 - 14 II/20/84 1

1 - 14 03/25/85 2

4 I

a

J INSTRUCTION NO R 409 TZTLE: CONTROL ROOM DESIGN REVTEW:

HUMAN ENG.

DISCREPANCY (HED) REPORT 1.0 PURPOSE AND SCOPE This instruction is established to meet the Section 4.0 documentation require-ments of the BVPS-2 Control Room Design Review (CRDR) Program Plan.

In addi-tion, this instruction shall be utilized as guidelines during the completion of the Human Engineering Discrepancy (MED) Report.

2.0 APPLICABILITY This instruction applies to the completion of the HED Report (See Figure R409-1).

The HED Report applies to each task of the CRDR effort.

3.0 REFERENCES

3.1 NUREG 0700, " Guidelines for Control Room Design Reviews," dated Septem-ber, 1981.

3.2 NCDP 1.3, " Procedure Format" 3.3 NCDP 1.6, " Document Control" 3.4 NCDP 1.12 "NCD Instruction Manual 3.5 BVPS-2 CRDR Charter 3.6 BVPS-2 CRDR Program Plan 4.0 DEFINITIONS Not applicable to this instruction 5.0 RESPONSIBILITIES i

5.1 Manager Regulatory Affairs (MRA)

The MRA is responsible for the overall effort associated with the RED Report completion.

5.2 Review Team Leader (RTL)

The RTL, under the direction of the MRA, is responsible for the coordina-tion and direction of the HED Report completion.

5.3 Technical Coordinator (TC)

The TC assumes the duties of the RTL, with respect to the HED Report.

REVISION: 2 PAGE 2 0F 14

l LNSTRUCTION NO. R 409 TETLE:

CONTROL ROOM DESIGN REV1EW:

HUMAM ENG.

DESCREPANCY (HED) REPORT 5.4 CRDR Core Team and Support Team The CRDR Core Team is responsible for developing and prioritizing recom-mendations concerning the HED. The TC may call upon members of the Sup-port Team to assist in the HED Report effort.

g 5.5 Instrumentation and Control (I&C) Engineer The I&C engineer (W Program Coordinator) is responsible for reviewing the HED Report to ensur'e accuracy and completeness from a technical stand-point.

5.6 Human Factors Specialist The Human factors Specialist (Essex Human Factors Project Manager) is responsible for reviewing the HED report to ensure accuracy and complete-ness from a Human factors standpoint.

6.0 INSTRUCTION The BVPS-2 CRDR HED Report shall be completed in accordance with the following instruction.

6.1 HFD Report Format All information relevant to the HED shall be recorded on a " Human Engi-neering Discrepancy (HED) Report", which can be found in Figure R409-1, 6.2 HED Report Instructions 6.2.1 Plant / Unit Indicate to what plant and unit HED Report applies (for the Beaver Valley Unit No. 2 CRDR, "BVPS/2" shall be used).

6.2.2 Originator Name of CRDR team member who identifies the HED.

6.2.3 NED No.

HED numbers are composed of an eight digit alpha-numeric identi-fier divided into two groups of four digits by a hyphen (done for ease of reading). All but the last two digits have been assigned special meanings which are listed on the attached pages. The last two digits are a sequence number for the preceding two REVISION: 2 PAGE 3 0F 14

INSTRUCTION NO. R 409 TITLE:

CONTROL ROOM DESIGN REVEEW:

HUMAN ERG.

DISCREPANCY (RED) REPORT l

digits. This allows for up to 100 separate HEDs for any given (component type or design feature) two-digit identifier. Sorting

(

and storing of HEDS should normally be done-independent of the l

physical location code. Below is an example of an HED number which describes a discrete rotary control HED written against the I

Al Benchboard section of the main control board (MCB) for Unit 2.

_.1 M.

Il D.1 UNIT PHYSICAL LOCATION -

COMPONENT TYPE OR DESIGN FEATURE SEQUENCE NUMBER WITHIN THE COMPONENT TYPE OR DESIGN FEATURE The originator shall leave the last two digits (sequence number) blank. The last two digits (sequence number) shall be completed o

by the W Program Coordinator after the preliminary HED is reviewe7 in accordance with paragraph 6.3.

6.2.4 Date Date HED Report is initiated.

6.2.5 HED Title Provide the subject of the HED Report.

6.2.6 Items Involved List the tag no.(s) of the equipment involved or procedure title and number in the HED Report.

If the equipment does not have a tag number, provide a description of the equipment, and its loca-4 tion.

REVISION: 2 PAGE 4 0F 14

INSTRUCTION NO. R 409 TITLE: CONTROL ROOM DESIGN REVZEW:

RUMAN ENG.

DISCREPANCY (HED) REPORT 6.2.7 Problem Description and 0700 Paragraph Number Describe the problem / discrepancy, and record what specific para-graph /sub-paragraph in NUREG 0700 the problem / discrepancy per-tains to.

6.2.8 Data Collection Description and Duquesne Light Company Instruc-tion Number Describe the data collection technique (OER review, control room survey, verification, or validation) used when uncovering the human engineering discrepancy. Also state the number of the Duquesne Light Company instruction that was followed during data collection.

6.2.9 Specific Human Error (s) or Equipment Design Problem Explain the ef fect the problem / discrepancy has on human perform-ance or equipment design.

6.3 The W Program Coordinator and the Essex Human Factors Project Manager shalT review all sections completed by the originator for completeness and accuracy as follows:

6.3.1 If the W Program Coordinator and Essex Human Factors Project

~

Manager concur with the sections completed by the originator, their signatures are placed in Section D.

The W Program Coordi-nator will then assign the last two digits of the HED number (Section C).

6.3.2 If the W Program Coordinator and Essex Human Factors Project Manager do not concur with the sections completed by the origina-tor, then:

6.3.2.1 The sections containing the inaccuracies are corrected, and Sections C & D are completed as described in para-graph 6.3.1.

6.3.2.2 The Human Engineering Discrepancy Report is discarded if a NUREG 0700 section 6 guideline is misinterpreted.

6.4 Section K shall be completed at 'a Core Team meeting. The HED will be reviewed and recommendations shall be listed in Section K and ranked from most to least desirable. Upon concurrance, the W Program Coordionator, the Duquesne Light Company review team leader, and the Essex Human Fac-tors Project Manager shall sign in the space provided in Section K.

REVISION: 2 PAGE 5 0F 14

INSTRUCTION NO. R 409 TITLE:

CONTROL ROOM DESIGN REVIEW:

HUMAN ENG.

DISCREPANCY (HED) REPORT 6.5 Section K shall then be reviewed by Duquesne Light Company Engineering Manager, Regulatory Affairs Manager, and Operations Manager. Approval of the recommendation in Section K will be denoted by the Managers' signa-tures in Section L.

If a Manager disapproves of the recommendation, he shall provide justification in Section L.

2 6.6 An approved HED recommendation will be dispositioned via the CRDR imple-mentation schedule. Disapproved HEDs will be sent back to the Core Team for an alternate recommendation.

7.0 RECORDS 7.1 The documents resulting from this instruction are Quality Assurance records as defined in ANSI N45.2.9-1974, and may be included in the Qual-ity Assurance audits of the Nuclear Construction Division. As such, these documents shall be retained for information as outlined in Section 8.0 of the BVPS-2 CRDR Charter.

8.0 FICURES 8.1 Figure R409-1, " Human Engineering Discrepancy (NED) Report".

(2-sided) 8.2 Figure R409-2, "HED Number: Physical Location." (5 sheets) 8.3 Figure R409-3, "HED Number: Component Type or Design Feature" REVISION: 2 PAGE 6 0F 14

e Ar4 ENGINEERING OISCRE?ANCY O E3) EPCd!

1 L ': ;

S EJC~;2: NO E "C' U!b....

u :

a)

PL,ANf/ UNIT c)

HED NO.:

e) ORIGINATOR:

e)

DATE:

d)

REVIEWED BY:

(Westinghouse)

(Essex) l f)

HED TITLE:

i g)

ITEMS INVOLVED:

h)

PR08LEM DESCRIPTION AND 070C PARAGRAPH NLSSER:

DATA COLLECTION DESCRIPTION AND DUQUESNE LIGHT CON 1)

NLM8ER:

l l

i i

j)

SPECIFIC HUMAN ERRORS (s) OR E3JIPMENT DESIGN PR08LEM:

Figure IV.09-1 p3cg 7 og gf, l

REVISION: 1

TITLE: CRJR:

INSTRUCTION NO. R 409 a)

REVIEa AND RECO* ENDATIONS:

HED RIPCRT l

i l

l ESSEX HLMAN FACTOR $ PROJECT MANAGER DumlESNE LIGHT C W ANY REVIEW TEAM LEADER WESTINGHOUSE PROGRAM COORDINATOR

1) REVIEW AND DISPOSITION:

1 DUG 25NE LIGHT COMPANY ENGINEERING MANAGER

\\

I DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY REG. AFFAIRS MANAGER DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY OPERATIONS MANAGER Figure R409-1 (Side 2)

PAGE 8 0F 14 REVISION: 1

INSTRUCTION NO. R 409 TITLE:

CONTROL ROOM DESIGN REVIEW:

HUMAN ENG.

DISCREPANCY (HED) REPORT HED NUMBER PHYSICAL LOCATION _

I.

MAIN CONTROL ROOM A.

MAIN CONTROL BOARD 1.

Section A Description Short Abbreviation Bench Section Al BA1 M

BM M

BM All Section A Bench Sections BA*

Vertical Section M

VM A6 VA6 i

A7 VA7 a

Vu A9 VA9 All Section A Vertical Sections VA*

Other All of Section A

A*

2.

Section B Bench Section B1 581 82 BB2 83 883 84 884 All Section B Bench Sections BB*

Figure R409-2 (Sheet 1 of 5)

REV1510N: 2 PAGE 9 0F 14

_ - _ _ _ _ - _ _ ~ _. _. _ _.. _ _ _

INSTRUCTION NO. R 409 TITLE:

CONTROL ROOM DESIGN REfftEW:

HUMAN ENG.

DISCREPANCY (HED) REPORT Description Short Abbreviation Vertical Section B5 VB5 86 VB6 All Section B Vertical Sections VB*

Other All of Section B

B*

3.

Section C Bench Section C1 BC1 C2 BC2 C3 BC3 C4 BC4 All Section C Bench Sections BC*

Vertical Section C5 VC5 C6 VC6 C7 VC7 C8 VC8 C9 VC9 All Section C Vertical Sections VC*

Other All of Section C

C*

4.

Other All of the Main control Board FISure R409-2 (Sheet 2 of 5)

REVISION: 2 PAGE 10 0F 14

INSTRUCTION NO. R 409 IITLE:

CONTROL ROOM DESIGN REVZEW:

HUMAN ENG.

DISCREPANCY (HED) REPORT B.

NUCLEAR INSTRUMENTATION RACKS Channel Short Abbreviation I

nil II NI2 III NI3 IV NI4 All Instrumentation Racks NI*

C.

INCORE INSTRUhENTATION RACKS Channel Short Abbreviation I

IC1 II IC2 III IC3 IV IC4 All Instrumentation Racks IC*

D.

RADIATION MONITORING PANELS Cabinet Short Abbreviation 1

RM1 2

RM2 3

RM3 4

RM4 5

RMS 6

RM6 7

RM7 8

RM8 All Monitoring Panele RM*

E.

AXIAL POWER MONITORING CABINRTS Cabinet Short Abbreviation 1

MM Figure R409-2 (Sheet 3 of 5)

REVISION: 2 PACE 11 0F 14

INSTRUCTION NO R 409 TZTLE:

CONTROL ROOM DESIGN REVIEW:

HUMAN ENG.

DISCREPANCY (HED) REPORT F.

BUILDING SERVICES PANEL Cabinet Short Abbreviation 1

BSP G.

LOOSE PARTS MONITORING PANEL Cabinet Short Abbreviation 1

LPM H.

FAULT RRCORDER PANEL Cabinet Short Abbreviation 1

FR1 1.

LOAD PROGRAM CONTROL CASINRT Cabinet Short Abbreviation 1

LPC J.

CENTER ISLAND CONSOLE CIC K.

SHIFT'S SUPERVISOR'S DESK SSD L.

MAIN CONTROL ROOM, IN GENERAL MCR Figure R409-2 (Sheet 4 of 5)

REVISION 2 PAGE 12 0F 14

INSTRUCTION NO. R 409 T8TLE:

CONTROL ROOM DESIGN REVIEW:

HUMAN ENG.

DISCREPANCY (RED) REPORT 11.

EMERGENCY SHUTDOWN PANEL i

Section Short Abbreviation 1

ESL 2

ES2 3

ES3 4

ES4 All of the Emergency Shutdown Panet ES*

III. ALTERNATE SHUTDOWN PANEL Bench Section Short Abbreviation A

ABA B

ABB All of the Alternate Shutdown Panel AB*

Figure R409-2 (Sheet 5 of 5)

REVISION: 2 PAGE 13 0F 14

INSTRUCTION NO. R 409 TZTLE:

CONTROL ROOM DESICM REVTEW: HUMAN ENG, DISCREPANCY (HED) REPORT l

HED NUMBER COMPONENT TYPE OR DESIGN FEATURE 00 - General (Leg, Noise, Etc.)

38 - Blade Switches 01 - Layout (Furnishings) 39 - Key Pads 02 - Communications 40 - Procedures, General 03 - Computer Related 41 - Maintenance Test Procedures 04 - Staffing and Personnel 42 - Administrative Procedures 05 - Protective /Sofety Equipment 43 - Design Documents 06 -

44 -

07 -

45 -

08 -

46 -

09 -

47 -

10 - Panel, General 48 -

11. Labels 49 -

12 - C/D Arrangement 50 - Systems, General 13 - Conventions 51 -

14 - Anthropoestrics 52 -

15 -

53 -

16 -

54 -

17 - Maintainability 55 -

18 -

56 -

19 -

57 -

20 - Displays, General 58 -

21 - Annunciators 59 -

22 - Meters 60 - Fuses, General 23 - Lights (Light boxes, simple indicator 61 - Indicator Light Fuses lights, legend lights, etc.)

62 - Circuit Breakers 24 - Strip Chart Recorders 63 -

25 - Counters (Mechanical) 64 -

26 - Mimics 65 - Relays 27 - Digital Type Displays 66 - Relay Groups (Electronic, Projection,etc.)

67 -

28 - CRTs, Plassa Panels, etc.

68 - Timers 29 - Auditory Displays / Signals 69 -

30 - Controls, General 70 - Connectors, General 31 - Process Controllers 71 - Phone Jacks 32 - Discrete Rotary Switches 72 - Coax connectors (BNC)

(J-Handles. T-Handles, etc.)

73 - Banana Jacks 33 - Toggle / Levers / Joysticks 74 - Binding Posts 34 - Pushbuttons 75 - Multi-Fin Connectors 35 - Thumbwheels 76 - Probe Jacks 36 - Continuous Rotaries 77 - Patch Panels (not Process Controllers) 78 -

37 - Slide Switches 79 -

80 - Tape Recorders Figure R409-3 REVISION 2 PAGE 14 0F 14

l APPENDIX C UNIT 1 OPERATOR INTERVIEWS AND QUESTIONNAIRES METHODOLOGY (Extracted from a draft of the Unit 1 CRDR Summary Report) i I

1

2.4.2 Operator Questionnaires As part of the DCRDR, a survey of operating personnel was performed through the administration of a questionnaire and an interview of operating personnel.

The intent of the survey was to gain as much firsthand information as possible regarding problem areas in the control room.

i The following subsections describe the methods, instrument, and analysis employed in this part of the CRDR.

2.4.2.1 Method The operator questionnaire part of.the survey of operating personnel was conducted in three steps as follows:

1.

Questionnaire construction 2.

Questionnaire distribution 3.

Compilation and analysis of responses.

Questionnaire Construction An open-ended, confidential, self-administered questionnaire approach was adopted.

By employing this method, the majority of the operating personnel could be questioned.

The survey covered 10 content-topics.

Specifically the areas covered were as follows:

1 i

1.

Workscope layout and environment 2.

Panel design 3.

Annunciator warning system 4.

Communications 5.

Process computers 6.

Corrective and preventive maintenance 7.

Procedures

8.

Staffing and job design 9.

Training 10.

Other areas for operator comment l

The questions for each area were evaluated for inclusion in the j

questionnaire using the following criteria I

simplicity - Questions were direct, employed common everyday language, and were as brief as possible.

un' ambiguous so that the response Clarity Questions were received would be unbiased and accurate.

Objectivity Questions were free of emotionally charged words such as good / bad, strong / weak, etc.

Error Free - Surveys are susceptible to social desirability,

1eniency, central

tendency, and halo-type errors.

The questions selected were those that have'the minimum tendency toward these error types.

The Safety and Licensing Department assembled questions for each 4

topic area of the questionnaire so that each area was well represented in ites content.

Each topic area contained items soliciting suggestions for improvements.

A cover letter attached to each questionnaire was prepared.

The cover letter (1) explained the purpose and gave background information, (2) described the questionnaire and provided j

instructions, (3) ensured respondent confidentiality, (4) conveyed what will be done with the results, and (5) requested biographical information.

l

l Questionnaire Distribution Questionnaires were administered to the control room shift supervisors, foremen, and licensed onshift operations personnel.

l Compilation and Analysis of Responses As each questionnaire was retrieved, it was assigned a code number.

These code numbers were used to trace item responses to individual respondents in the event it became necessary to do followup inter-viewing.

After the responses were completed, retrieved, and logged in, they were compiled by ites. This was done by members of the Review Team.

Then the responses were submitted to the human f actors consultant for a human engineering review.

The purposes of that review were tot 1.

Assess responses to determine if violations of human engineering principles may be incurred.

2.

Eliminate redundancies among responses (a count of res-pondees who made a particular response was maintained).

3.

Eliminate responses that were not relevant to the goals and objectives of the CRDR.

4.

Identify and organize responses that were expressions of preference for a type of component, a procedure, etc., rather than a description of a potential problem area that may contribute to operator error.

Upon completion of the human factors review, the HFC presented a compilation of the responses to the Review Team for final evaluation and disposition.

The objectives of the Review Team evaluation and disposition were as follows:

1.

To verify the existence of any problems that were identified (i.e., identify HEDs).

2.

For those problems that were cited to:

o Determine if any corrective action had been taken or was planned that would eliminate the problem.

o Determine if proposed corrective action posed additional human factor problems and/or increased the potential for human error.

3.

To determine if more information was needed and to identify the appropriate CRDR activity (e.g., operator interview,

survey, or task analysis) for further investigation of the problem.

2.4.3 operator Interviews 1

The purpose of the structured interviews was to clarify issues or potential problem areas that were identified in (1) the operator questionnaire or (2) the historical document review.

The structured interview items specifically addressed problem areas previously defined.

The operators were interviewed by the HFC.

No DLC personnel, other than the operators, were present during the interviews.

This ensured an objective approach towards the interviews and established a situation where the interviewee should have felt at liberty to comprehensively discuss the issues.

The HFC interviewer was experienced in conducting structured interviews for CRDRs.

The interviewer also was knowledgeable of the prior Beaver Valley-1 CRDR activities and had participated in the reviews of the historical documents and the operator ques-tionnaire responses.

I 2.4.3.1 Method I'

Interview Development The RFC was responsible for developing the structured interview.

The interview addressed each item identified in the operator ques-tionnaire and the historical document review that needed clarification or additional information.

The RFC structured an initial interview question and outlined subsequent points to be l

probed in greater detail.

i i

Interview Implementation The HFC conducted 12 interviews resulting in comprehensive responses to each iten.

The interviews were conducted in an area where there was direct access to the control room.

In addition, a layout drawing oJ the control. :oom was provided for reference.

Interviews lasted approximately 90 minutes.

l l'

Evaluation and Disposition by CRDR Team The HFC presented the summary of interview responses to other CRDR team members for final evaluation and disposition.

The objectives of the CRDR team evaluation and disposition were as follows:

o To ensure that adequate information has been obtained and all unresolved issues have been addressed.

j l

o To verify that any new problem (s) identified actually exist and that it is CRDR related.

o For those new problems where there is a CRDR-related problem or discrepancy, to identify if corrective actions have been planned and to:

1.

Verify that the corrective action has been completed, and 2.

Determine if the corrective action poses additional human factors problems and/or increases the potential l

for human error.

The CRDR team reviewed the interview summaries with the HFC.

All problems and their implication for operators in the control room were discussed and evaluated.

For each of the problems, one of the i

following conclusions was reached:

1.

There are no implications for the CRDR (no control room operator errors attributable to design deficiencies, including procedures and

training, were involved),

however, there is a problem.

In this case, the proper personnel (e.g., maintenance) will be notified.

n

---~,-w

-,,,----,-e

2.

There is no problem.

3.

The cause of the problem had been adequately corrected.

4.

An HED exists.

l In the event an HED was identified, the HFC completed the appropriate documentation.

2.4.3.2 Results During the interviews, 30 specific questions were asked to each interviewee, and each interviewee was asked to identify any other problem that he may encounter when performing his job.

In response to these items, 57 problems or pro.blem areas were identified.

There were four categories of outcomes from the Review Team disposition of the 57 items.

These included the following:

1.

No Action Required - When it was clear that the problem (1) was not related to operator job performance in the control room or (2) had been corrected.

)

2.

Referral to Previous HED Writeup - When the problem had been previously reported and written up as a HED, the only action required was to ensure that the HED Form included the operator interview as another source for identifying the HED.

3.

Preparation of a HED form - When the problem was a HED and had not been previously reported.

4.

Miscellaneous Action - When a action other than a HED was required (e.g., review survey data or check item in more detail during another part of the CRDR).

The following chart summarizes the results.

Action Category Number of Problems No Action 14 l'

Referral to Previous HED 17 l

Prepare New HED 17 I

Miscellaneous Action 9

i 57

--,---n-.

l t

I OPERATOR QUESTIONNAIRE DOCUMENTATION AND FORMS

COVER LETTER TO OPERATOR QUESTIONNAIRE M

eu 6

\\ ~

e

PURPOSE AND IMPORTANCE The purpose of this questionnaire is to provide operational data to be used for the Control Room Design Review (CRDR) by the CRDR team. Some topics to be addressed in the upcoming CRDR will not be evident to an outsider's examina-tion of the control room.

They require direct experience in operating the equipment.

The attached questions cover areas in which your experience is essential for an adequate review.

Background

Following the Three Mile Island (THI) incident, the Nuclear Regulatory Commis-sion issued recommendations to utilities in order to avoid these types of things which collectively caused or contributed to the THI incident. By re-cent letter, No. 82-33, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, utilities re-ceived further directives on the performance of a CRDR. The objective is to

" improve the ability of nuclear power plant control room operators to prevent accidents or cope with accidents if they occur by bgaroving the information provided to them." One element of the CRDR is the use of Human Engineering principles to evaluate human factors in the control room, i.e., the man-machine interface. Therefore, the control room will be evaluated for light-ing, noise, control characteristics, instruments, displays, procedures, systems and other items that could inpact on operator performance.

Description and Instructions The questionnaire is open ended and self administered. The questions cover basic topics from workspace layout to training. They are designed to solicit most of your answers and comments. However, space is provided for any addi-tional comments that you may have. Feel free to use it for pertinent informa-tion to this ef fort.

Please be as specific as possible in answering the questions by listing par-ticular components, types of components, systems or panels, operating status, sequence of events or whatever information might be applicable to a particular question. No answers should be left as a sinple "yes" or "no" but should include as much pertinent detail as you can provide. Qualify your answers whenever they need be.

Read over the complete questionnaire before you start answering the ques-tions.

This will give you a better idea as to where certain answers fit since some of the questions may seem identical at first glance. Doing this will also help to control the specific content of a question-answer pair and to maintain the question groupings.

It is suggested that the questions be com-pleted in the control room or with the aid of a training mock-up (at Johnson Street) for the benefit of recall and improved responses.

Please return your completed questionnaire in the envelope provided within eight (8) weeks of the issuance date given at the top of the cover letter.

Fill in your name, date of completion and biographical information on the Personnel Information and Biographical Data Sheet (PIBD), only.

1 l

l

l I

t Confidentiality Confidentiality will be maintained for you and the information you supply.

This will be accomplished in the following way. Upon receipt of an envelope containing a completed questionnaire, a code number will be assigned to the PIBD sheet and the questionnaire. The PIBD sheet and the questionnaire will then be separated.

If additional information or clarification of a particular response is required by the review team, the code number will be used to trace back to individual respondents. A follow-up interview may be required. Code numbers will be used only for this purpose and only by the review team. We will not identify the writer of any responses without your consent.

After the questionnaires have been completed, received and logged in, they will be examined and reviewed on an item for item basis. Responses will then be summarized on a Questionnaire Item Summary Form. Biographical data will be handled in a similar way, being summed and averaged.

If you have any questions about the questionnaire, please feel free to contact Ed Coholich on Pax 5224 or 643-5010/5304.

Thank you for your consideration and help.

o OPERATOR QUESTIONNAIRE ITEMS P

m

i OPERATOR QUESTIONNAIRE ITEMS Workspace and Environment 0Q-1 What equipment or equipment arrangement has hindered your move-ment about.the control room in the course of normal or emergency operations?

0Q-2 What peripheral console / cabinet arrangements are ineffective and/or obstruct your movement about the control room?

00-3 Does your specific work location station provide adequate access to storage or desk facilities?

OQ-4 Are you required to leave the primary control boards for instruments / displays in other areas? (How often, how long?)

OQ-5 What do you dislike about the arrangement of restrooms, kitchen, place to est and break area?

0Q-6 Is the furniture arrangement adequate and/or convenient for your use?

0Q-7 How adequate is the control room lighting and illumination control?

0Q-8 Do you have problems with glare and/or reflections in the control room?

00-9 Were there incidents where lighting has been ineffective and/or interfered with job performance?

0Q-10 What specific times is the noise level in the control room at an unreasonable level and the cause of annoying distractions?

OQ-11 What particular sources (equipment and/or people) of noise cause annoyance and/or distraction in the control room?

0Q-12 What problems do you have with the heating / air conditioning system, humidity, and ventilation system in the control room?

0Q-13 Has static electricity caused you any particular problems in the control room?

0Q-14 Do you have any problems controlling the number of people in the control room during normal or emergency operations?

0Q-15 Do you feel there is a need for additional policies or actions to limit traffic and distractions in the control room? Identify what they could be.

0Q-16 Are there any operations in the control room where the actions of another operator interfere with your tasks?

0Q-17 What problems do you have in reaching any of the controls on the control board?

0Q-18 What important controls or displays are not easily visible to you?

0Q-19 Is the overall layout and shape of the control board / console ade-quate for effective monitoring and operations?

0Q-20 Is it significantly difficult to move back and forth between the vertical boards and the bench board?

0Q-21 hhich major systems are not organized properly around the control boards for both normal and emergency operation?

0Q-22 Have there been incidents where you had to be in two places at once because of board layout to control and monitor a specific plant evolution?

OQ-23 Did you or would you have any problems in the operation of the emer-gency shutdown panel? Consider location, design, and controls at the shutdown panel.

0Q-24 Describe features about the control board layout which have assisted you in job performance, i.e., color codes, etc.

0Q-25 Describe other features about the control room environment which have interfered with job performance.

Panel Design 0Q-26 What do you consider to be the three easiest systems to operate?

Include system / panel location, why you feel they are easiest to use and any inadvertent activation of these systems.

OQ-27 What do you consider to be the three most confusing or difficult systems to operate and why? Give examples of incidents in which there was difficulty in operating the systems.

0Q-28 What systems do you operate that give you problems with a particular panel arrangement? Describe what you think is wrong with the arrangement.

0Q-28a Are there any problems in the operation, location, or design of the emergency shutdown panel?

0Q-29 Which controls and indications are difficult for you to recognize as a related group?

i

l l

i 1

j 0Q-29a It has been proposed to establish a " green is normal" convention for

'all control lights associated with pumps, valves, and breakers. The normal arrangement would be based on 100*. power operation.

The intent is to provide prompt operator recognition of a change in com-ponent status.

This means, however, that you will not be able to tell a component's status until you view these status lights asso-ciated with the switch, for exanple, if the left side is green and lit then the valve switch is closed or the punp is on.

Do you con-sider this proposal an advantage or disadvantage to operations?

Consider any problems with particular switches, status of switches, difficulty in the thought process of green being normal, red is not, etc.

0Q-30 Which types of modifications (mimics, color codes, etc.) to the boards would you consider the most useful to you?

0Q-31 Which types of modifications to the boards have created a hindrance for you?

0Q-32 Describe panel design characteristics and/or panel locations not discussed abov,e which create particular problems for you as an operator.

0Q-33 What controls and displays of particular systems are toc far away from each other for proper operation?

0Q-34 Are there any controls that are difficult to adjust as precisely as they need to be adjusted?

0Q-35 Are there any switches that are operated differently but physically are identical to other switches?

0Q-36 Are there switches that are difficult to turh?

0Q-37 Which controls do you find too large or too small to operate easily?

0Q-38 Are there meters that are scaled in different units than the pro-cedures you have to use with them? For example, do you have to use nomographs or conversion factors other than powers of 107 0Q-38a Are there instrument indicators that are pegged low or high chring normal operation making it impossible to monitor the steady state performance of a process?

00-39 Are there controls and displays that work together in unusual ways (i.e., containment temperature affecting seal leak off indication)?

0Q-40 Are there instruments that arr difficult to conpare with backups because of differences in scale units, relevated zeros, etc.?

O

l 0Q-41 Are there instruments that are hard to use because they have to be read more precisely than the scale allows?

0Q-42 Do you have any difficulties with Itmp replacement such as shock, accidental activation, or need to replace from behind panel?

0Q-43 Are there imoortant instruments on back panels that do not have either an alarm you can hear in the control room or their own annunciator?

0Q-44 Are there labels (on controls or displays) that are unclear about what is actually being controlled or displayed, what the control does, what position a control is in, or which could cause a mistaken identity with another control?

0Q-45 Are there key switches where the key can be removed when the switch is not in its "Off" or " Safe" position?

OQ-46 Has there been any interference, to instrumentation by radio or walkie-talkie signals?

0Q-47 Are there any control devices which you find confusing or difficult to operate?

0Q-48 When operating controls, do you use any of the existing coding and how important is it to you as an operating aid, i.e., color, sound, shape, location, etc.? What coding schemes are most useful to you?

What types of color coding would you like to see on controls or indicators (i.e., power supply coding on instruments)?

0Q-49 Are there any occurrences where the wrong control has been activated or where a control was activated inadvertently or incorrectly? Do you know what caused this to happen and how and when the error was discovered?

0Q-50 What were the consequences of the occurrences asked about in the previous question?

0Q-51 Have there been recurring instances where the wrong control has been activated, or a control was activated inadvertently or incorrectly?

What would you recommend to prevent recurrence of any of these problema?

0Q-52 Are there controls where it is not always apparent as to what posi-tion they are turned to (i.e., pointer indicators are not obvious because of poor contrast due to design, location, level or glare)?

0Q-53 Are there emergency or other critical controls which are neither 1

coded nor guarded (e.g., turbine trip push buttons, rod control startup push button)?

i l

0Q-54 Are there controllers with inconsistent relationship between control effects and indicator (e.g., open is indicated by 0% and close by 100%)?

0Q-55 Are there multiple-position controls or speed changer controls which do not follow conventional use for right-center-left positions or clockwise movement (i.e., diesel generator ground switch deviates from normal convention)?

0Q-56 Are there positive means to determine indicator light failure?

0Q-57 Are display scales adequately marked for normal operating ranges or setpoints?

0Q-58 Is it always apparent to the operator when a vital indicator fails or becomes inoperative?

OQ-58a Are there recorders that cannot be viewed from several locations on the board where equipment is routinely controlled that heavily influence changes to the recorded parameters (i.e., pressurizer level, pressure, and T Recorders, etc.)?

0Q-58b Do you have significant operational problems with chart recorders?

OQ-58c Are there times when chart recorders are not operational? What probleme does this cause for you?00-58d What additional comments do you have on controls and displays?

Annunciator Warning System 0Q-59 Are nuisance alarms a significant problem? Please describe.

0Q-60 Do you get particular recurring invalid alarms? Please describe.

0Q-61 What alarms are insignificant from an operational point of view?

0Q-62 What significant problems has the existing annunciator system design caused you?

0Q-63 Are there any problems with identifying new alarms when they come in?

0Q-64 Are there features of the annunciator warning system that have resulted in inefficient or erroneous fault identification?

0Q-65 Does the annunciator system provide an adequate amount of informa-tion to you during a major transient?

OQ-66 Are visual and auditory alarms satisfactory?

00-67 Are auditory signals annoying? Can you easily differentiate between different auditory signals?

00-68 Are any important annunciators missing or located where they should not be?

0Q-69 Do you have problems reading or identifying annunciators while you are conducting normal or emergency operations?

OQ-69a What additional comments do you have on annunciators?

Procedures 0Q-70 Do you have any problems finding or retrieving procedures that you need during emergency situations?

0Q-71 Are there adequate props for using procedures while you operate?

What would be useful to you in this respect?

0Q-72 Are procedures maintained in good physical condition (e.g., are pages properly and securely inserted, are updates and changes 2

handled properly, etc.)?

0Q-73 Do you feel there are too many procedures that operators are re-quired to memorize? How does it affect operator performance during emergency operations?

0Q-74 Are operator comments or requested changes to written procedures satisfactorily considered and processed?

0Q-75 What plant procedures (i.e., startup, shutdown) have insufficient detail or are not clearly written to the point that errors could be introduced?

0Q-76 Are there incidents whereby following procedures resulted in inef-fective or erroneous performance by the operator? What was the origin of the deficiency in the procedures and how was the defi-ciency corrected?

0Q-77 What specific problems have you found with following routine pro-cedures and how could they be corrected most effectively?

4 0Q-77a What additional comments do you have on procedures?

Communicationa OQ-78 Are there nuisance problems with unauthorized communications to the control room?

0Q-79 What problema do you have with the page phones, loudspeakers, and radios? Consider equipment condition, availability of the system to the operator and outside interference (noise level, people, etc.).

0Q-80 Are the page phones and loudspeakers serviceable to you for effec-tive communication with auxiliary operators, maintenance personnel, etc.?

i

)

OQ-81 Are there instances where control room phones have prevented or interfered with your ability to communicate with other personnel?

Consider for example, delays, interference, availability of a phone, etc.

0Q-82 Are there situations where the lack of proper communications caused operational problems?

0Q-83 What characteristics of the control room communications systems do you find most ineffective in providing you timely, intelligible j

contact with other personnel?

l Process Center 0Q-84 Does the process computer provide inaccurate data at any time? Con-sider operating conditions, inportant system parameters, etc.

0Q-85 Is the process computer data timely? Are there emergency situ-ations in which you would be reluctant or hesitant to use the computer for information because of its response time?

0Q-86 Is there data on the computer which you do not find useful?

0Q-87 What computer program do you feel could be better utilized or i

eliminated?

0Q-88 Is there data on the computer which you find difficult to use? Con-sider format of printout, type of paratreter trending, etc.

0Q-89 What percentage of computer printout is useful to the operator during operation? Consider normal, abnormal, and emergency l

operations.

1

~

0Q-90 Are there other specific computer difficulties on which you would like to comment? Consider especially emergency operations but do not limit yourself to emergency operations only.

1 Staffing 1

0Q-91 Are there incidents in which the number of personnel on duty impeded your prompt response to an operational situation?

0Q-92 Are there incidents where workload requirements restricted your response to any operational situation?

0Q-92a Is the control room adequately staffed during normal, abnormal, and emergency periode and during all shifts?

0Q-93 Are job responsibilities clearly defined such that a response to a 4

trar.sient or an emergency situation proceeds smoothly?

0Q-94 List the three most desirable characteristics of the staffing program and job assignments which provide for smooth, continuous, system operation.

l i

l 0Q-95 Do your procedures provide adequate coverage for turning over a shift to incoming personnel? Consider the amount of time allowed for shift turnover, information exchange, etc.

0Q-96 Are there incidents where you were given incorrect and/or insuffi-l cient information during shift turnover?

00-97 Are there incidents where your efficiency was significantly degraded because of shift work or overtime?

0Q-97a Is the control room sufficiently staffed to allow for vacations and other justified reliefs?

0Q-98 To what degree does shift work impact on your homelife, social life, and/or work attitudes?

0Q-99 In what ways can your job be made more interesting and your time more productively spent? Consider ways that would increase operator alertryees, combat monotony, make backshifts more admissible, etc.

0Q-100 Are your duties explained to you such that you clearly understand what they are?

0Q-101 Are there incidents where it was unclear or confusing as to who was in charge and/or who should be reporting what to whom? What was the cause and was the problem corrected or did it recur?

0Q-102 Are there enough avenues open to you for resolving a personal or job related problem? Are they effective?

0Q-103 Are there other problems with staffing and/or job design on which you would like to comment?

Corrective and Preventive Maintenance 0Q-104 Are there incidents where en operator surveillance test caused an operational problem? Consider the cause, operational status, effect on operation and/or the operator, corrective action, etc.

0Q-105 Are there incidents where maintenance actions affected the safe operation of the plant? Consider the cause, operational status, effect on operation and/or the operator, corrective action, etc.

0Q-106 Are there control room preventive maintenance procedures and/or characteristics which are ineffective?

0Q-107 What is the most effective characteristic of the maintenance program?

0Q-108 What maintenance or surveillance test procedures would you like to see changed because of their negative impact on operations?

0Q-109 Are there other things in the maintenance and/or surveillance test programs on which you would like to comment?

-~

l Training 0Q-110 Are there plant control, protection, electrical, or mechanical systems on which you would like more intensive training and in what respect (simulator, class, discussion, lecture)?00-111 Has your training provided you with the confidence that you could perform successfully during an emergency situation? Are there sit-uations about which you feel inadequately prepared?

0Q-112 Are you adequately trained in the operation of the emergency shut-down panel?

0Q-113 What characteristics of your classroom training have been most ef-factive in preparing you for control room operation?

0Q-114 Have you received training on offective communications techniques?

0Q-115 Is the use of protective gear and equipment included in your train-ing program?

0Q-116 Are you adequately trained in using the process computer to full advantage?

0Q-117 What characteristics of your requalification training or practice sessions have been most effective in preparing you for control room operations?

0Q-118 What aspects of your training do you feel were especially ineffec-tive or need improvement?

0Q-119 Are there other comments which you would like to make on the quality of your training?

0Q-120 What characteristics of simulator training have you found and/or do you think will be most effective in preparing you for control room operations?

Simulator Training 0Q-121 What aspects of simulator training do you feel should be eliminated or modified?

0Q-122 Are there specific operations on which more enphasis should be placed during simulator training?

0Q-123 What amount of time do you feel would be adequate for simulator training?

0Q-124 What situations, transients, etc. which have or could arise would you like to see run on the simulator?00-125 Are there other aspects of simulator training and use on which you

-would like to comment?

Use the space below for additional comments on any of the topics covered herein or others that you may consider pertinent to this effort.

r o

I

'f J

i 4

9 I

i i

4 l

D OPERATOR INTERVIEW DOCUMENTATION AND FORMS

l l

INTERVIEW ITEMS A.

CONTROLS 1.

Are there switches that do not " snap" into position or that can be lef t halfway between switch positions or, where appropriate, do not have spring return?

(NUTAC 0Q-3) 2.

Are there switches that are difficult to turn? (NUTAC 0Q-3) 3.

Are there control knobs or handles that slip or move loosely on their shaf t? (NUTAC 0Q-7) 4.

Are there any problens with switch desipations stop, off, PTL -

are they clearly understood? (IR 75-21) 5.

Is there a convention for use of stop, off, PTL7 (IR75-21) 6.

There have been several instances where P-10 setpoints have been violated, attributed frequently to operator inattentiveness, is there an instrumentation, TS, or procedure problen? ( 76-8 0) 7.

There have been several instances where there has been a loss of an inverter, not attributed to operator, but is there a need for more instrunentation? (79-57, 58) 8.

There have been several instances where the RWST level is below TS, a.

Is instrunentation adequate? (80-100) b.

Is OST procedure a problan? (80-100) 9.

There was an instance of inadvertent operation of boronometer relief valve (RV-CH-103), is there a problem with control guard-ing or identification? ( 83 -19) 10.

There was a problem of loss of IA SYS STA Service Transformer due to problem with tap changers.

Is there a problem with instru-mentation? ( 83 -27)

11. When bringing down load, is BASE ADJUST difficult to manipulate?

(78 -33)

12. What are the control and instrunentation problens associated with feedwater during startup? (76-50) i B.

DISPLAYS 13.

Do you have to use nomographs while performing operations? Do you have any trouble with any of the nanographs? Which ones specif-ically? (0Q-9)

- ~ - -

B.

DISPLAYS (Cont'd)

14. Are there indicator lights where equipment status is indicated by a light being off (for example, punp is off when light is off)?

(0Q-19) 3

15. Which indicators or groups of indicators show that a control signal has been sent rather than the resultant systen condition?

(EQ-4; 0Q-20) a.

What are the back-up displays for these indicators?

16.

Do chart recorders operate at a high speed when f ast tracking rates or trending is required? (0Q-21) a.

If no, what do you use to get information?

17. Which displays would f ail in nomal operating range on loss of power or input signal? (EQ-5)

18. There have been problens with Boron Concentration being out of spec, is there adequate instrtmentation to perfom jobs associat-ed with Boron Concentration? ( 76-27)

19. There have been several problens with discharge of liquid waste tanks, is instrtmentation adequate for jobs? (76-39)

20. Occasionally there are problens with dual indication of indicator and a need for limit switch adjustments. Has this ever created a problen for you? ( 82-95)

C.

ANNIMCIATORS 21.

In the event of flasher f ailure to an alamed annunciator tile, is it obvious to the operator?

If yes, describe how the flasher malfunction is identified.

(EQ-1)

22. How are other failed annunciator lights and indicator lights identified? (EQ-6)

23. For multipoint annunciators, is the alamed point printed out or otherwise indicated in the CR7 (EQ-9)

Identify any exceptions that you can think of.

24. After acknowledgement of a multipoint annunciator, will the an-nunciator respond if another of its setpoints is exceeded? (EQ-10) a.

Describe how multipoint annunciators work. (EQ-10)

D.

MISCELLAEOUS

25. Are there any problens with communications in the CR?

(80-122)

t l

D.

MISCELLANE0US (Cont'd) a.

PA Systen b.

Phones c.

Interoperator Canm d.

During Emergency

26. Campare daytime and other shifts in tenns of the following. (81-108, 79-78) a.

Workload b.

Noise c.

Interference / interruptions from other people in CR

27. When the computer printer is being reloaded, are data and infor-mation that nonnally would be printed lost? (0Q-42) 28.

Has siytificant degradation of the computer or plant systems been caused by inadvertent actions at keyboard? (0Q-43) 29 Can you think of any control actions that you must take where you do not have a display indicating the result of your action?

30. What important and f requently used controls and displays can not be seen from in front of the B8's.

APPENDIX D NUREG-0700, SECTION 6 CUIDELINE/BVPS-2 CONTROL ROOM DESIGN REVIEW FINDING CROSS REFERENCE I

l l

t 4

e

.~

APPENDIX D NUREG-0700, SECTION.6 GUIDELINE /BVPS-2 CONTROL ROOM DESIGN REVIEW FINDING CROSS RFEERENCE l

These notes are applicable where referenced in the table that follows.

1.

Introductory Section 6 paragraph that does not require a specific guideline check.

2.

Section 6 guideline that could not be accomplished due to the construction status of the control room.

3.

There are no control device applications requiring shape coding.

4.

Legend pushbuttons are distinguishable from legend lights in the BVPS-2 control room.

5.

HED's from guidelines 6.5.1.3.c(2) are recorded under guideline 6.5.1.3.c(1) in Table 3.5.

6.

The contro?. room complies with guideline 6.8.2.3.a & b.

7.

HED's from guideline 6.8.2.2.a are recorded under guideline 6.8.2.2.b in Table 4.5.

4

APPENDD

l APPENDIX D l

NUREG-0700, SECTION 6 GUIDELINE /BVPS-2 CONTROL R00f1 DESIGN REVIEW FINDING CROSS REFERENCE FINAL SUfftARY REPORT TABLE SECTION 6 PARA. NO.

NOTE 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.8 4.3 4.4 4.5 6.1-WORKSPACE I

6.1.1 l

l 6.1.1.1 A

6.1.1.la A

6.1.1.lb 6.1.1.2 l

A 6.1.1.2a A

6.1.1.2b 6.1.1.3 I

6.1.1.3a 2

6.1.1.3b 2

6.1.1.3c 2

6.1.1.3c(1) 2 6.1.1.3c(2) 2.

6.1.1.3d 2.

6.1.1.3d(1) 2 6.1.1.3d(2) 2 6.1.1.3e 2.

l 6.1.1.3e(1) 2 6.1.1.3e(2) 2.

6.1.1.3f 2

6.1.1.3f(1) 2 6.1.1.3f(2) 2 6.1.1.3f(3) 2 6.1.1.3g 2

6.1.1.4 I

6.1.1.4a 2

6.1.1.4a(1) 2.

6.1.1.4a(2) 2 6.1.1.4b d

6.1.1.4b(1) 2 6.1.1.4b(2) 2

APPEllDIX D NUREG-0700, SECTI0li 6 GUIDELINE /BVPS-2 C0flTROL R00ft DESIGN REVIEW FINDING CROSS REFERENCE FINAL Suff1ARY REPORT TABLE SECTION 6 PARA. NO.

NOTE 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.8 4.3 4.4 4.5 6.1.1.4b(3)

A 6.1.1.4c 2.

6.1.1.4c(1) 2.

6.1.1.4c(2) 2.

6.1.1.4d E

6.1.1.4e 2

l 6.1.1.5 l

6.1.1.5a 2

6.1.1.5b 2

6.1.1.5c 6.1.1.5d 2

6.1.1.5e 2

6.1.1.5f 2

6.1.1.6 l

6.1.1.6a 4

6.1.1.6b 2.

6.1.1.7 2.

6.1.2 l

6.1.2.1 l

6.1.2.2 I

a 6.1.2.2a 6.1.2.2b J

6.1.2.2b(1) 6.1.2.2 b(2) 6.1.2.2c 6.1.2.2d i

6.1.2.2d(1) 6.1.2.2d(2) 6.1.2.2e l

6.1.2.2e(1)

/

6.1.2.2e(1)(a) 6.1.2.2e(1)(b) a

APPENDIX D NUREG-0700, SECTI0rl 6 GUIDELINE /BVPS-2 CONTROL R00ft DESIGN REVIEW FINDING CROSS REFERENCE FINAL Sult1ARY REPORT TABLE SECTION 6 PARA. NO.

NOTE 3.2 3.3 3.4 4 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.8 4.3 4.4 4.5

'6.1.2.2e(2)

^

6.1.2.2 f 6.1.2.2g 6.1.2.3 l

(

6.1.2.3a f

6.1.2.3a(1) 6.1.2.3a(2)

(

6.1.2.3b 6.1.2.3c 6.1.2.3d l

6.1.2.3d(1) 6.1.2.3d(2) 6.1.2.3e l

6.1.2.3e(1) 6.1.2.3e(2) 6.1.2.3f l

6.1.2.3f(1) 6.1.2.3f(2) 6.1.2.3g 6.1.2.3h l

6.1.2.3 h(1) 6.1.2.3h(2) 6.1.2.3h(3 )

6.1. 2. 4 l

6.1.2.4a 6.1.2.4 b 6.1.2.4c 6.1.2.5 I

6.1.2.5a l

6.1.2.Sa(1) 6.1.2.Sa(2) 6.1.2.5b A

APPENDIX D NUREG-0700, SECTI0ft 6 GUIDELINE /8VPS-2 CONTROL R00t1 DESIGN REVIEW FINDING CROSS REFERENCE FINAL SUtt1ARY REPORT TABLE SECTION 6 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.8 4.3 4.4 4.5 PARA. NO.

NOTE 3.2 3.3 3.4 6.1.2.5b(1)

A 6.1.2.5b(2)

A 6.1.2.6 2.

6.1.2.7 2

6.1.2.7a 2.

6.1.2.7b 6.1.2.7c L

6.1.2.7d E

6.1.2.7d(1)

E 6.1.2.7d(2) 2.

6.1.2.7d(3) 2.

6.1.2.7d(4) 1 6.1.2.7d( 5) 2 6.1.2.7d(6) 1 6.1.2.7d(7) 2.

6.1. 2. 8 1

6.1.2.8a L

6.1.2.8b E

6.1.2.8c 2

6.1.2.8d 4

6.1.2.8e 2.

6.1.2.8f 2.

6.1.2.8g 2

6.1. 3

/

6.1.3.1

/

6.1.3.la a

6.1.3.lb a

6.1.3.lc A

6.1.3.1d 6.1.3.le f

6.1.3.le(1) 6.1.3.le(2) 3

(

NUREG-0700, SECTI0li 6 GUIDELIt4E/BVPS-2 C0f4 TROL R00ft DESIGN REVIEW FINDING CROSS REFERENCE FINAL Sutt1ARY REPORT TABLE SECTION 6 PARA. NO.

NOTE 3.2 3.3 3.4 < 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.8 4.3 4.4 4.5 A

6.1.3.le(3) 6.1.3.le(4) di 6.1.3.le(5) 4 6.1.3.2 f

6.1.3.2a A

6.1.3.2b 6.1.4 l

6.1.4.1 l

6.1.4.la 2.

6.1.4.l b 2.

6.1.4.1c 2.

6.1.4.1d 2

6.1.4.le 2.

6.1.4.lf 2.

6.1.4.lg 2.

6.1.4.1 h 2.

6.1.4.11 2.

6.1.4.2 l

6.1.4.2a 2.

6.1.4.2 b 2.

6.1.4.2c 2.

6.1.4.2d 2.

6.1.4.2e 2.

6.1.4.3 l

6.1.4.3a E

6.1.4.3b 2.

I 6.1.5 l

6.1.5.1 l

6.1.5.la f

6.1.5.lb 2

6.1.5.2 l

6.1.5.2a.

2.

APPEf4 DIX D NUREG-0700, SECTI0fl 6 GUIDELINE /BVPS-2 CONTROL R00ft DESIGN REVIEW FINDING CROSS REFERENCE FINAL SUtif1ARY REPORT TABLE SECTION 6 PARA. NO.

NOTE 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.8 4.3 4.4 4.5 6.1.5.2b 2.

6.1.5.3 l

6.1.5.3a 2

6.1.5.3b d

l 6.1.5.3c 2.

6.1.5.3d 2.

6.1.5.3e 6.1.5.3e(1)

E 6.1.5.3e(2) 2.

6.1.5.3f 2.

6.1.5.3g 2.

6.1.5.3h 2

6.1.5.4 l

6.1.5.4a 2.

6.1.5.4 b 2

6.1.5.4c 2

6.1.5.5 l

6.1.5.5a 2

6.1.5.5b 2

6.1.5.5c 2

6.1.5.5d 2

6.1.5.5e 2

6.1.5.6 l

6.1.5.6a 2

6.1.5.6b 2.

6.1.5.7

(

6.1.5.7a l

6.1.5.7a(1) 2.

6.1.5.7a (2 )

2 6.1.5.7a (3) 2.

6.1.5.7a (4 )

2 6.1.5.7a(5) 2.

APPEllDIX D NUREG-0700, SECTIOri 6 GUIDELINE /BVPS-2 CONTROL R00t1 DESIGN REVIEW FINDING CROSS REFERENCE FINAL Sulf 1ARY REPORT TABLE SECTION 6 l

PARA. NO.

NOTE 3.2 3.3 3.4 4 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.8 4.3 4.4 4.5 6.1.5.7 b 6.1.5.7 b(1) 2 6.1.5.7 b(2 )

2 6.1.5.7 b( 3) 2 6.1.5.7c 2.

6.2 COMMUNICAT l

6.2.1 l

6.2.1.1 l

6.2.1.la 2

6.2.1.lb 2

6.2.1.lc l

6.2.1.lc(1) 2 6.2.1.1c( 2) 2.

4 6.2.1.2 l

6.2.1.2a 2

6.2.1.2b 2

6.2.1.2b(1) 2.

6.2.1.2b(2)

-2 6.2.1.2b(3) 2 6.2.1.2b(4 )

2 6.2.1.2b(5) 2.

6.2.1.2b(6) 2 6.2.1.2b(7) 2 6.2.1.2b(8) 2 6.2.1.2c 2.

6.2.1.2c(1)

E 6.2.1.2c(2) 2 6.2.1.2d 2

6.2.1.2e 2.

6.2.1.3 l

'l-6.2.1.3a 2

1 6.2.1.3a (1) 2

APPENDIX D NUREG-0700, SECTIO!1 6 GUIDELINE /BVPS-2 CONTROL R00tt DESIGN REVIEW FINDING CROSS REFERENCE FINAL SUtif1ARY REPORT TABLE SECTION 6 PARA. NO.

NOTE 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.8 4.3 4.4 4.5

)

6.2.1.3a (2) 2 6.2.1.3b 2

6.2.1.3b(1) 2 6.2.1.3b(2) 2 6.2.1.3b(3 )

2 6.2.1.3b(4 )

2 6.2.1.3b(5) 2 6.2.1.3b(6) 2 6.2.1. 3c 2

6.2.1.3c(1) 2 6.2.1.3c(2) 2 6.2.1.3d E

6.2.1.3d(1) 2 6.2.1.3d( 2 )

2 6.2.1.3d(3 )

2 6.2.1. 3 e 2

6.2.1.3e(1) 2.

6.2.1.3e( 2) 2-6.2.1.3e(3) 2.

6. 2.1. 4 l

6.2.1.4a 2

6.2.1.4a(1) 2 6.2.1.4a ( 2) 2

6. 2.1.4 b 2

6.2.1.4b(1)

P.

6.2.1.4b(2) 2 6.2.1.4c 2

6.2.1.4c(1) 2 6.2.1.4c(2) 2 6.2.1.4c(3 )

2 6.2.1.4d 2

6.2.1.4 e 2

6.2.1.4e(1) 2

APPEflDlX D NUREG-0700, SECTION 6 GUIDELINE /BVPS-2 CONTROL R00f1 DESIGN REVIEW FINDING CROSS REFERENCE l

FINAL SUtttARY REPORT TABLE SECTION 6 PARA. NO.

NOTE 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.8 4.3 4.4 4.5 6.2.1.4 e(2 )

2

6. 2.1. 5 l

6.2.1. 5a 2

'6.2.1.5b 2

4 6.2.1.5c 2

6. 2.1. 6' l

6.2.i.6a 2

6.2.1.6a (1) 2 4

6.2.1.6a(2) 2 6.2.1.6b 2

6.2.1.6b(1) d 6.2.1.6b(2 )

2.

6.[il.6b(3) 2 6.2.1.6b(4) 2 6.2.1.6b(5) 2

^1 6 2 1 6c 2

6.2.I'.6c(1) 2-6.2.1.6c(2) 2.

6.2.1.6d 2-6.2.1.6e 2.

6.2.1.6e(1) 2.

6.2.1.6e(2) 2.

6.2.1.6f E

6.2.1.7 l

6.2.1.7a 2

6.2.1.7 b 2

.6.2.1.8 l

' - i~6.2.1.8a 2.

6.2.1.8b 2.

6.2.1.8c 2.

6.2.1.8c(1) 2 6.2.1.8c(2) 2 6.2.1.8c(3) 2.

APPENDIX D NUREG-0700. SECTI0f1 6 GUIDELINE /BVPS-2 CONTROL R00ft DESIGN l

REVIEW FINDING CROSS REFERENCE FINAL SUff1ARY REPORT TABLE SECTION 6 PARA. NO.

NOTE 3.2 3.3 3.4 < 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.8 4.3 4.4 4.5 4

6.2.2 l

6.2.2.1 l

6.2.2.la 2

6.2.2.lb 2.

6.2.2.1c 2.

6.2.2.1c(1) 2 6.2.2.1c(2) 2 6.2.2.2 l

6.2.2.2a 2.

6.2.2.2b 2

6.2.2.2c 2

6.2.2.3 1

6.2.2.3a 2.

6.2.2.3b 2-2 6.2.2.3c 6.2.2.3d 2-6.2.2.3e 2

6.2.2.4 l

6.2.2.4a 2

6.2.2.4b 2

6.2.2.5 l

6.2.2.5a 2

6.2.2.5b 2

6.2.2.6 l

6.2.2.6a 2

6.2.2.6b 2

6.2.2.6c 2

6.2.2.7 j

6.2.2.7a

'2 6.2.2.7 b 2

6.2.2.7c 2

APPENDIX D NUREG-0700, SECTION 6 GUIDELINE /BVPS-2 CONTROL R0011 DESIGN REVIEW FINDING CROSS REFERENCE FINAL SUtttARY REPORT TABLE SECTION 6 PARA. NO.__

NOTE 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.8 4.3 4.4 4.5

6.3 ANNUNCIAT01

l 6.3.1 I

6.3.1.1 I

A I

f-6.3.1.2 6.3.1.2a 6.3.1.2a(1) 6.3.1.2a(2) 6.3.1.2 b I

6.3.1.2b(1) 6.3.1.2b( 2) 6.3.1.2c l

6.3.1.2c(1) 6.3.1.2c (2) 6.3.1.2c (3) 6.3.1.2d I

6.3.1.2d(1) 6.3.1.2d (2 )

I 6.3.1.3 6.3.1.3a I

6.3.1.3a(1) 6.3.1.3a (2 )

6.3.1.3a (3 )

6.3.1.3 b 6.3.1.3c 6.3.1.3d 6.3.1.4 6.3.1.4a l

6.3.1.4a(1) 6.3.1.4a(2) 6.3.1.4 b

/

6.3.1.4b(1) 6.3.1.4 b(2) a

APPENDIX 0 l

l NUREG-0700, SECTION 6 GUIDELINE /BVPS-2 CONTROL R00t1 DESIGN REVIEW FINDING CROSS REFERENCE FINAL SUff1ARY REPORT TABLE SECTION 6 PARA. NO.

NOTE 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.8 4.3 4.4 4.5 6.3.1.5 l

^

6.3.1.5a 6.3.1.5b l

6.3.1.5b(1) 6.3.1.5b(2) 6.3.1.5b(3 )

f 6.3.2

6. 3. 2.1 I

6.3.2.la 6.3.2.lb 6.3.2.lc 6.3.2.1d 6.3.2.le 6.3.2.lf l

6.3.2.2 I

6.3.2.2a 6.3.2.2a(1) 6.3.2.2a(2) 6.3.2.2b I

6.3.3 6.3.3.1 l

6.3.3.la 6.3.3.lb l

6.3.3.lb(1) d 6.3.3.lb(2) 6.3.3.lc l

6.3.3.1c(1) 2.

6.3.3.lc(2) 2 6.3.3.1c(3) 2.

6.3.3.2 l

A 6.3.3.2a

6. 3. 3.2 b a

APPENDIX D NUREG-0700, SECTI0li 6 GUIDELINE /BVPS-2 CONTROL R00ft DESIGN REVIEW FINDING CROSS REFERENCE FINAL Sult1ARY REPORT TABLE SECTION 6 PARA. NO.

NOTE 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.8 4.3 4.4 4.5

^

6.3.3.2c 6.3.3.2d i

6.3.3.2e I

6.3.3.2f i

6.3.3.2f(1) 6.3.3.2f(2) sk 6.3.3.3 I

sk 6.3.3. 3a 6.3.3.3b

-^ -

6.3.3.3c l

6.3.3.3c(1) 6.3.3.3c ( 2) 6.3.3.3c(3) a 6.3.3.3d I

6.3.3.3d(1) 6.3.3.3d (2 )

, 6.3.3.3e 6.3.3.3f si 6.3.3.4 l

<k 6.3.3.4a 6.3.3.4b a

6.3.3.4c A

6.3.3.4d I

A 6.3.3.5 I

6.3.3.5a 6.3.3.Sa(1) 6.3.3.5a(2) 6.3.3.5b l

6.3.3.5b(1) l 6.3.3.5b(2) l 6.3.3.5b(3) 6.3.3.5c

/

41

NUREG-07'00, SECTI0il 6 GUIDELINE /BVPS-2 CONTROL R00t1 DESIGN REVIEW FINDING CROSS REFERENCE FINAL SUtt1ARY REPORT TABLE SECTION 6 PARA. NO.

NOTE 3.2 3.3 3.4 '

3.5 3.6 3.7 3.8 4.3 4.4 4.5 ii.3.3.5c(1) 6.3.3.5c(2) l 6.3.3.5d 6.3.3.5d(1) 6.3.3.5d(2) 6.3.3.5d(3) 6.3.3.5d(4) 6.3.3.5d(5) 4 6.3.3.5d(6) 4 6.3.4 I

^

6.3.4.1 6.3.4.la l

6.3.4.la(1) 6.3.4.la(2) 6.3.4.lb f

6.3.4.Ib(1) 6.3.4.lb(2) f 6.3.4.1c 6.3.4.1c(1) 6.3.4.1c(2) 6.3.4.Ic(3) 6.3.4.1d l

6.3.4.1d(1) 6.3.4.1d( 2 )

6.3.4.2 l

6.3.4.2a r

6.3.4.2b l

6.3.4.2b(1) 6.3.4.2b(2) 6.3.4.2b(3) 6.3.4.2b(4) 6.3.4.2c 6.3.4.3 a

4

APPENDIX D NUREG-0700, SECTI0il 6 GUIDELINE /BVPS-2 C0fiTROL R00f1 DESIGN REVIEW FINDING CROSS REFERENCE FINAL SUff1ARY REPORT TABLE SECTION 6 PARA. NO.

NOTE 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.8 4.3 4.4 4.5 A

A 6.3.4.3a A

A

6. 3.4. 3 b 6.4 CONTROLS f

6.4.1 6.4.1.1 l

A 6.4.1.la l

l 6.4.1.la(1) 6.4.1.la (2 )

6.4.1.ib l

6.4.1.lb(1) 6.4.1.lb(2) 6.4.1.lb(3) 6.4.1.1b(4 )

l 6.4.1.lc 6.4.1.1c(1) 6.4.1.1c(2) a 6.4.1.1d a

6.4.1.1d(1) 2.

6.4.1.1d( 2) 2 6.4.1.le I

A 6.4.1.le(1) 6.4.1.le(2) 6.4.1.l e(3) 6.4.1.2 l

6.4.1.2a I

6.4.1.2b l

6.4.1.2b(1) 6.4.1.2b(2) 6.4.1.2c I

6.4.1.2c(1) 6.4.1.2c(2) 6.4.1.2c(3)

6. 4.1. 2 d I

d 4

.,,.-..,,..,n

~

APPEflDIX D NUREG-0700, SECTI0fl 6 GUIDELINE /BVPS-2 C0flTROL R00ft DESIGN REVIEW FINDING CROSS REFERENCE FINAL SufftARY REPORT TABLE SECTION 6 PARA. NO.

NOTE 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.8 4.3 4.4 4.5 6.4.1.2d(1)

A 6.4.1.2d(2) 6.4.1.2e 6.4.1.2 f a

6.4.1.2g 6.4.2 f

6.4.2.1 Q-4)

A l

6.4.2.2 l

6.4.2.2a 6.4.2.2b a

6.4.2.2c A

6.4.2.2c(1) 6.4.2.2c(2) 6.4.2.2c(3) 6.4.2.2c(4) a 6.4.2.2d l

6.4.2.2d(1) 3 6.4. 2.2d( 2 )

,3 6.4.2.2e A

A 6.4.2.2f g

A 6.4.2.2f(1) a A

6.4.2.2f(2)

A 6.4.2.2f(3) 6.4.3 l

6.4.3.1 l

A 6.4.3.la 6.4.3.lb A

6.4.3.lc l

6.4.3.2 0

6.4.3.2a 6.4.3.2a(1) 6.4.3.2a(2) a

APPENDIX D NUREG-0700. SECTION 6 GUIDELINE /BVPS-2 CONTROL R00ft DESIGN REVIEW FINDING CROSS REFERENCE FINAL SUtit1ARY REPORT TABLE SECTION 6 PARA. NO.

NOTE 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.8 4.3 4.4 4.5

' 6.4.3.2b sk 6.4.3.2c da 6.4. 3. 2d 6.4.3.3 l

6.4.3.3a 4

sk 6.4.3.3b 6.4.3.3b(1) 6.4.3.3b(2) 6.4.3.3b(3) 6.4.3.3b(4) 6.4.3.3b(5) si 6.4.3.3c 2

6.4.3.3c(1) 2.

i 6.4.3.3c(2)

P.

6.4.3.3c(3) 2.

6.4.3.3c(4)

'2 6.4. 3. 3d I

sk 1

6.4.3.3d(1) 6.4.3.3d(2) 6.4.3.3e j

6.4.3.3e(1) 6.4.3.3e(2) 6.4.3.3e(3) 6.4.3.3e(4) di 6.4.3.3e(5) 6.4.4 6.4.4.1 6.4.4.la

--A 6.4.4.lb 6.4.4.1c l

6.4.4.1c(1) 3 6.4.4.1c(2)

J

APPENDIX D NUREG-0700, SECTION 6 GUIDELINE /BVPS-2 CONTROL R00ft DESIGN REVIEW FINDING CROSS REFERENCE FINAL SUft1ARY REPORT TABLE SECTION 6 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.8 4.3 4.4 4.5 l

PARA. NO.

NOTE 3.2 3.3 3.4 6.4.4.2 l

A 6.4.4.2a 6.4.4.2a(1) j 6.4.4.2a(2) 6.4.4.2b I

6.4.4.3 6.4.4.3a 6.4.4.3b 6.4.4.3c 6.4.4.3d 6.4.4.3e 6.4.4.3f 6.4.4.3g l

6.4.4.3g(1) 6.4.4.3g(2) 6.4.4.3g(3 )

6.4.4.4

/

6.4.4.4a 6.4.4.4b 6.4.4.4c

/

6.4.4.4c(1) l 6.4.4.4c(1)(a) 6.4.4.4c(1)(b) 6.4.4.4c(2) 6.4.4.4d 6.4.4.4e

/

6.4.4.4e(1) 6.4.4.4e(2) 6.4.4.4e(3) 6.4.4.4e(4) 6.4.4.4 a(5) 6.4.4. 5

/

6. 4. 4. 5a a

APPENDIX D NUREG-0700, SECTI0!i 6 GUIDELIf4E/BVPS-2 C0flTROL R00ft DESIGN REVIEW FINDING CROSS REFERENCE

'RY REPORT TABLE SECTION 6 PARA. NO.

NOTE 3.2 3.?

I 3.6 3.7 3.8 4.3 4.4 4.5 I

6.4.4.5b 6.4.4.5b(1) 6.4.4.5b(2) 6.4.4.5b(3) 6.4.4.5b(4) 6.4.4.5c 6.4. 4. 5d I

6.4.4.5d(1) l 6.4.4.5d (1)(a )

6.4.4.5d(1)(b) 6.4.4.5d(1)(c) 6.4.4.5d (2 )

6.4.4.5e

/

6.4.4.5e(1) 6.4.4.5e(2) 6.4.4.5e(3) 6.4.4.5e(4) 6.4.4.5e(5) 6.4.4. 5f 6.4.5

/

6. 4. 5.1 l

4 6.4.5.la 6.4.5.lb 6.4.5.1c f

6.4.5.lc(1) 6.4.5.1c(2) 6.4.5.1c(3) 6.4.5.1d

[

6.4.5.1d(1) 6.4.5.1d( 2 )

/

6.4.5.1d(2)(a) 6.4.5.1d(2)(b) 6.4.5.1d(2)(c) a

APPEf4 DIX D NUREG-0700, SECTI0fl 6 GUIDELINE /BVPS-2 C0flTROL R00f1 DESIGil REVIEW FINDING CROSS REFERENCE FIf4AL SUtt1ARY REPORT TABLE SECTION 6 PARA. NO.

NOTE 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.8 4.3 4.4 4.5 6

l 6.4.5.1d(2)(d) 6.4.5.1d(2)(e) l 6.4.5.2 6.4.5.2a I

6.4.5.2b 6.4.5.2b(1) 6.4.5.2b(2) 6.4.5.3 6.4.5.3a 6.4.5.3b 6.4.5.3c l

6.4.5.3c(1) 6.4.5.3c(2) 6.4.5.3c(3) 6.4.5.3c(4) 6.4.5.3c(5) 6.4.5.3c(6) j 6.4.5.4 I

6.4.5.4a 6.4.5.4a (1) 6.4.5.4a (2 )

6.4.5.4b l

6.4.5.4b(1) 6.4.5.4b(2) 6.4.5.4c l

6.4.5.4c(1) 6.4. 5.4c (2) 6.4.5.4d 6.4.5.4e

/

6.4.5.4e(1) 6.4.5.4e(2) 6.4.5.4e(3) 3 f

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

APPENDIX D j

NUREG-0700, SECTI0fl 6 GUIDELINE /BVPS-2 CONTROL R00f1 DESIGN REVIEW FINDING CROSS REFERENCE FINAL Sutt1ARY REPORT TABLE SECTION 6 PARA. NO.

NOTE 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.8 4.3 4.4 4.5 A

6.4.5.4e(4) 6.5 VISUAL DISI l

l 6.5.1 l

6.5.1.1 A

A l

6.5.1.la l

6.5.1.lb 6.5.1.1c 6.5.1.1d 6.5.1.l e l

6.5.1.le(1) a 6.5.1.le(2)

A 6.5.1.1 f A

6.5.1.2 I

6.5.1.2a a

^

6.5.1.2 b 6.5.1.2c 6.5.1.2d l

a 6.5.1.2d(1) 6.5.1.2d(2) a 6.5.1.2d(3) a A

6.5.1.2e A

6.5.1.2 f 6.5.1.3 l

6.5.1.3a a

6.5.1.3b l

6.5.1.3b(1) 6.5.1.3b(2) -

6.5.1.3b(3) 6.5.1.3c l

a 6.5.1.3c(1 )

6.5.1.3c(2) g 6.5.1.3d l

A 6.5.1.3d(1)

~, _ - _ _ _ _. _ _ _..-

APPENDIX 0 NUREG-0700, SECTI0ll 6 GUIDELINE /BVPS-2 CONTROL R00ft DESIGN REVIEW FINDING CROSS REFERENCE FINAL SUtif1ARY REPORT TABLE SECTION 6 PARA. NO.

NOTE 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.8 4.3 4.4 4.5.

A 6.5.1.3d(2) 6.5.1.3d(3) 6.5.1.3d(4) 6.5.1.3d(5)

A 6.5.1.3d(6) 6.5.1.3e f_

A 6.5.1.4 l

I 6.5.1.4a 6.5.1.4a(1) 6.5.1.4a(2) 6.5.1.4b 6.5.1.4c 6.5.1.4d 6.5.1.4e A

6.5.1.4f 6.5.1.5 l

6.5.1.Sa I

A 6.5.1.Sa(1) 6.5.1.Sa(2) 6.5.1.Sa(3) 6.5.1.5b 6.5.1.Sc a

a 6.5.1.5d A

6.5.1.5e 6.5.1.5f A

a 6.5.1.6 I

6.5.1. 6a A

n 4

A 6.5.1.6b 6.5.1.6b(1)

A 6.5.1.6b(2) 6.5.1.6c 6.5.1.6c(1) a a

a 3

APPENDIX D l

NUREG-0700 SECTI0ft 6 GUIDELIf4E/BVPS-2 CONTROL R00ft DESIGN REVIEW FINDING CROSS REFERENCE FINAL SUff1ARY REPORT TABLE SECTION 6 PARA. NO.

NOTE 3.2 3.3 3.4 < 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.8 4.3 4.4 4.5 -

4 A

A A

A 6.5.1.6c(2) 6.5.1.6d l

6.5.1.6d(1)

A 6.5.1.6d(2) 4 A

A 6.5.1.6d(3)

^

6.5.1.6e 6.5.1.6e(1) 6.5.1.6e(2)

^

a 4

6.5.1.6e(3) 6.5.2 I

A 6.5.2.1 6.5.2.la 6.5.2.lb A

6.5.2.lc I

a 6.5.2.2 I

6.5.2.2a 6.5.2.2a(1) 6.5.2.2a(2) 6.5.2.2b

/

6.5.2.2b(1) 6.5.2.2b(2) u 6.5.2.2c 6.5.2.3 l

A 6.5.2.3a 6.5.2.3b a

6.5.2.3c 6.5.2.4 l

n 6.5.2.4a 6.5.2.4b l

6.5.2.4b(1) 6.5.2.4b(2)

A 6.5.2.4c

/

APPENDIX D NUREG-0700, SECTION 6 GUIDELINE /BVPS-2 CONTROL R00t1 DESIGN REVIEW FINDING CROSS REFERENCE FINAL SUttt1ARY REPORT TABLE l

SECTION 6 PARA. NO.

NOTE 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.8 4.3 4.4 4.5-

^

6.5.2.4c(1) t 6.5.2.4c(2) i A

!6.5.2.4c(3)

A j

6.5.2.5 6.5.3 l

6.5.3.1 l

6.5.3.la l

i 6.5.3.la(1) 2.

6.5.3.la(2) 2 6.5.3.la(3)

/_

A 6.5.3.lb 6.5.3.lc l

A 6.5.3.1c(1) 6.5.3.1c(2) 2 A

6.5.3.1d

'6.5.3.2 6.5.3.2a l

A 6.5.3.2a(1)

A 6.5.3.2a(2)

A

'.6.5.3.2a(3)

A 6.5.3. 2 b l

6.5.3.3 i

6.5.3.3a l

A 6.5.3.3a(1) 6.5.3.3a(2) 6.5.3.3a(3) 6.5.3.3b l

6.5.3.3b(1) 6.5.3.3b(2) 6.5.3.3b(3) 6.5.3.3b(4) 6.5.3.3b(5) a

APPENDIX D NUREG-0700, SECTI0fl 6 GUIDELINE /BVPS-2 CONTROL R00ft DESIGN REVIEW FINDING CROSS REFERENCE FINAL Sutt1ARY REPORT TABLE SECTION 6 PARA. NO.

NOTE 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.8 4.3 4.4 4.5.

A l6.5.3.3b(6)

A l6.5.3.3b(7)

6.5.3.3c 4

6.5.3.3d 4

l 6.5.4 l

A 6.5.4.1 6.5.4.la

6. 5.4.1 b -

'6.5.4.1c 6.5.4.1d a

6.5.4.le 2

,6.5.4.lf 2

(6.5.4.1g a

f6.5.4.1h l6.5.4.11 6.5.4.1j 6.5.4.1k a

6.5.4.2

/

A l6.5.4.2a l

6.5.4.2a(1)

.6.5.4.2a(2)

?6.5.4.2b l

6.5.4.2b(1) 6.5.4.2b(2) 6.5.4.2b(3) 6.5.4.2b(4) a 6.5.5 l

6.5.5.1 l

A 6.5.5.la

(

6.5.5.la(1) 6.5.5.la(2) a 6.5.5.la(3)

APPENDIX D NUREG-0700, SECTIO!! 6 GUIDELINE /BVPS-2 CONTROL R00t1 DESIGN I

REVIEW FINDING CROSS REFERENCE FINAL Suff1ARY REPORT TABLE SECTION 6 PARA. NO.

NOTE 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.8 4.3 4.4 4.5

^

6.5.5.la(4) 6.5.5.la(5) 6.5.5.lb l

6.5.5.lb(1) 6.5.5.lb(2) 6.5.5.lb(3) l 6.5.5.1c 6.5.5.1c(1) 6.5.5.1c(2) a l

A 6.5.5.2 I

6.5.5.2a 6.5.5.2a(1) 1 6.5.5.2a(2) 6.5.5.2a(3) 6.5.5.2a(4) 6.5.5.2a(5) 6.5.5.2b 6.5.5.2c a

6.6 LABELS I

I 6.6.1 A

6.6.1.1

^

6.6.1.2 I

6.6.1.2a I

6.6.1.2a(1) 6.6.1.2a(2) 6.6.1.2a(3) 6.6.1.2a(4) 6.6.1.2b l

6.6.1.2b(1) 6.6.1.2b(2) 6.6.1.2b(3) a 6.6.1.2b(4)

APPENDIX D NUREG-0700, SECTION 6 GUIDELINE /BVPS-2 CONTROL R00t1 DESIGN REVIEW FINDING CROSS REFERENCE FINAL Suff1ARY REPORT TABLE SECTION 6 PARA. NO.

NOTE 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.8 4.3 4.4 4.5 I

6.6.2 A

6.6.2.1

, 6.6.2.la l 6.6.2.lb 6.6.2.lc 6.6.2.1d 6.6.2.le A

6.6.2.lf I

A 6.6.2.2 6.6.2.2a a

6.6.2.2b I

6.6.2.3 A

I 6.6.2.3a 6.6.2.3a(1) 6.6.2.3a (2) i d

6.6.2.3b A

6.6.2.4 6.6.2.4a 6.6.2.4b 6.6.2.4c 6.6.2.4d a

6.6.3 f

a 6.6.3.1 6.6.3.la 6.6.3.lb 6.6.3.2 l

6.6.3.2a 6.6.3.2b 6.6.3.2c i

6.6.3.2d 6.6.3.2e a

APPENDIX D NUREG-0700, SECTI0li 6 GUIDELINE /BVPS-2 CONTROL R00ft DESIGN REVIEW FINDING CROSS REFERENCE FINAL SUtt1ARY REPORT TABLE PARA. NO.

NOTE 3.2 3.3 3.4 < 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.8 4.3 4.4 4.5-SECTION 6 A

6.6.3.2f l

6.6.3.3 A

6.6.3.3a A

6.6.3.3b A

6.6.3.3c A

6.6.3.4 6.6.3.4a 6.6.3.4b -

6.6.3.4c 6.6.3.4d a

i 6.6.3.4e A

6.6.3.5 A

6.6.3.6 A

6.6.3.7 I

6.6.3.7a d

6.6.3.7b I

A 6.6.3.8 6.6.3.8a 6.6.3.8 b a

6.6.3.8c I

A 6.6.3.9 6.6.3.9a a

6.6.3.9b 6.6.4 l

A l

6.6.4.1 l

6.6.4.la 6.6.4.la(1) 6.6.4.la(2) l 6.6.4.lb l

6.6.4.lb(1)

A 6.6.4.lb(2)

\\

l

i APPENDIX 0 NUREG-0700, SECTION 6 GUIDELIf4E/BVPS-2 CONTROL R00ft DESIGN REVIEW FINDING CROSS REFERENCE FINAL SUlt1ARY REPORT TABLE SECTION 6 PARA. NO.

NOTE 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.8 4.3 4.4 4.5 l

A

6. 6. 4. 2 l

6.6.4.2a 6.6.4.2a(1) 6.6.4.2a(2) 6.6.4.2b l

t.6.4.2b(1) 6.6.4.2b(2) 6.6.4.2c 6.6.4.2d l

6.6.4.2d(1) 6.6.4.2d(2) 6.6.4.2d(3)

A 6.6.5 6.6.5.1 A

' 6.6.5.la 6.6. 5.I b i

6.6.5.lc 6.6.5.1d 6.6.5.le 6.6.5.lf 6.6.5.lg 6.6. 5.1h a

6.6.5.2 l

A 6.6.5.2a 6.6.5.2b l

6.6.5.2b(1) 6.6.5.2b(2) 6.6.5.2b(3) 6.6.5.2b(4) i 6.6.5.2b(5) 6.6.5.2b(6) 6.6.5.2b(7)

A 6.6.5.2b(8)

APPENDIX D NUREG-0700, SECTI0li 6 GUIDELINE /BVPS-2 C0flTROL R00t1 DESIGN REVIEW FINDING CROSS REFERENCE FINAL Sult1ARY REPORT TABLE SECTION 6 PARA. NO.

NOTE 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.8 4.3 4.4 4.5.

A 6.6.5.2b(9)

)

l 6.6.6 6.6.6.1 l

i A

A 6.6.6.2 6.6.6.2a 6.6.6.2a(1) 6.6.6.2a(2) 6.6.6.2a(3) 6.6.6.2b a

a 6.6.6.2c A

6.6.6.3

'A 6.6.6.4

/

6.6.6.4a

/

6.6.6.4a(1) 6.6.6.4a(2) 6.6.6.4a(3) 6.6.6.4a(4) 6.6.6.4a(5) f 6.6.6.4b 6.6.6.4b(1) 6.6.6.4b(2) 6.6.6.4b(3) 6.6.6.4b(4) 6.6.6.4b(5) 6.6.6.4b(6)

A 6.6.6.4c l

6.6.6.4c(1) n a

6.6.6.4c(2) j 6.7 COMPUTERS l

6.7.1 l

l A

6.7.1.1

.A 6.7.1. la

APPENDIX D NUREG-0700, SECTION 6 GUIDELINE /BVPS-2 CONTROL R00t1 DESIGN REVIEW FINDING CROSS REFERENCE FINAL Sutt1ARY REPORT TABLE SECTION 6 PARA. NO.

NOTE 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.8 4.3 4.4 4.5

^

6.7.1.1b 6.7.1.1c a

6.7.1.1d 6.7.1.2 I

A l

6.7.1.2a 6.7.1.2a(1) 6.7.1.2a (2 )

6.7.1.2a(3) 6.7.1.2a (4 )

l 6.7.1.2a(5) 6.7.1.2a (6) 6.7.1.2 b 6.7.1.2c l

6.7.1.2c(1) 6.7.1.2c( 2) 6.7.1.2c(3) a 6.7.1.2d A

6.7.1. 3 6.7.1.3a 6.7.1.3 b 6.7.1.3c 6.7.1.3d a

6.7.1.3 e

^

6.7.1.4 6.7.1.4a 6.7.1.4 b 6.7.1.4c 6.7.1.4d 6.7.1.4 e l

6.7.1.4e(1) 4 6.7.1.4e( 2) 6.7.1.4 f a

6.7.1.4g

APPENDIX D NUREG-0700. SECTION 6 GUIDELINE /BVPS-2 CONTROL R00ft DESIGN REVIEW FINDING CROSS REFERENCE FINAL SUtt1ARY REPORT TABLE SECTION 6 PARA. NO.

NOTE 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.8 4.3 4.4 4.5 A

6.7.1.4 h 6.7.1.41 A

6.7.1. 5 I

a 6.7.1.5a 6.7.1.5 b 6.7.1.5c

/

I 6.7.1.5c(1) 6.7.1.5c(2) f 6.7.1.5d 6.7.1.5d (1) 6.7.1.5d (2 )

6.7.1.5d (3 )

6.7.1.5d (4 )

(

a 6.7.1.5d ( 5) 6.7.1. 6

/

a 6.7.1.6a 6.7.1.6b 6.7.1.6c a

6.7.1.6d 6.7.1.7

/

a 6.7.1.7a a

6.7.1.7b i

f A

6.7.1.8 6.7.1.8a l

6.7.1.8a(1) 6.7.1.8a(2)

I 6.7.1.8a (3) 6.7.1.8a (4)

[

6.7.1.8a(4)(a) 6.7.1.8a(4)(b) 6.7.1.8a(4)(c) a 6.7.1.8a ( 5)

/

_ = -- - _ -. _

APPENDIX 0 NUREG-0700, SECTION 6 GUIDELINE /BVPS-2 CONTROL ROOM DESIGN REVIEW FINDING CROSS REFERENCE FINAL SutttARY REPORT TABLE SECTION 6 PARA. NO.

NOTE 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.8 4.3 4.4 4.5 A

6.7.1.8a(5)(a )

6.7.1.8a(5)(b) 6.7.1.8b l

6.7.1.8b(1) l 6.7.1.8b(1)(a) 6.7.1.8b(1)(b) 6.7.1.8b(1)(c) 6.7.1.8b(1)(d)

A 6.7.1.8b(2 )

l 6.7.2 l

a 6.7. 2.1 6.7.2.la 6.7.2.1 b l

6.7.2.1c

! 6.7.2.1c(1) 6.7.2.1c(2 )

6.7.2.1c(3) i l

I 6.7.2.1c(4) 6.7.2.1d l

6.7.2.1d(1)

6.7.2.1d(2) 6.7. 2.1,e l 6.7.2.l f l

6.7.2.1f(1) 6.7.2.1f(2 )

6.7.2.lf(3) i 6.7.2.lf(4) l 6.7.2.lg i

6.7.2.1 h

/

6.7.2.1h(1) a l

6.7.2.1h(2) f 6.7.2.2 l

A A

6.7.2.2a

APPENDIX 0 NUREG-0700, SECTI0li 6 GUIDELINE /BVPS-2 CONTROL R00ft DESIGN REVIEW FINDING CROSS REFERENCE FINAL SUtt1ARY REPORT TABLE SECTION 6 PARA. NO.

NOTE 3.2 3.3 3.4 4 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.8 4.3 4.4 4.5 6.7.2.2 b l

A 6.7.2.2b(1) 6.7.2.2b(2) 6.7.2.2c 6.7.2.2d 6.7.2.2e 6.7.2.2 f l

6.7.2.2f(1) 6.7.2.2f(2) l 6.7.2.2f(2)(a) 6.7.2.2f(2)(b) 6.7.2.2f(2)(c) 6.7.2.2f(2)(d) 6.7.2.2f(2)(e) 6.7.2.2f(2)(f) 6.7.2.2g

(

6.7.2.2g(1) 6.7.2.2g(2)

A l

6.7.2.2g(3)

A 6.7.2.3 l

A 6.7.2.3a 6.7.2.3b 6.7.2.3c l

6.7.2.3c(1) l 6.7.2.3c(1)(a) 6.7.2.3c(1)(b) 6.7.2.3c(2)

/

6.7.2.3c(2)(a) 6.7.2.3c(2)(b) 6.7.2.3d

/

6.7.2.3d(1)

/

6.7.2.3d(1)(a )

6.7.2.3d(1)(b) 6.7.2.3d ( 2 )

/

A A

APPENDIX D NUREG-0700 SECTI0ft 6 GUIDELINE /BVPS-2 CONTROL R00ft DESIGN REVIEW FINDING CROSS REFERENCE '-

I FINAL SUfftARY REPORT T@tF SECTION 6 PARA. NO.

NOTE 3'

3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.8 4.3 4.4 4.5 6.7.2.3d (2 )(a )

A A

6.7.2.3d(2)(b) 6.7.2.3e 6.7.2.3f 4

a

~

6.7.2.4

'l A

l 6.7.2.4a

,[-

6.7.2.4a(1) s I

6.7.2.4a(2) 6.7.2.4b-6.7.2.4c l

6.7.2.4c (1 ) -

6.7.2.4c(2) n 6.7.2.4d 6.7.2.4e

'l 6.7.2.4e(1)

- " c-

~

6.7.2.4e(2) 6.7.2.4f f

6.7.2.4f(1) 6.7.2.4f(2)

N 6.7.2.4f(3) 6.7.2.4f(4) 6.7.2.4g f

6.7.2.4g(1) x 6.7.2.4g(2) 6.7.2.4h 6.7.2.41 6.7.2.4j l'

6.7.2.4j(1) 3, 6.7.2.4j(2) 6.7.2.4k 6.7.2.41 l.

6.7.2.41(1) 6.7.2.41(2)

/

6.7.2.41(3) s 6'

l l

APPENDIX D NUREG-0700, SECTI0ft 6 GUIDELINE /BVPS-2 CONTROL R00ft DESIGN REVIEW FINDING CROSS REFERENCE FINAL Sult1ARY REPORT TABLE SECTION 6 PARA. NO.

NOTE 3.2 3.3 3.4 < 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.8 4.3 4.4 4.5 A

6.7. 2.4m i

6.7.2.4m(1) 6.7.2.4m(2) 6.7.2.4n 6.7.2.4o 6.7.2.4p-l 6.7.2.4p(1) 6.7.2.4p(2)

^

6.7.2.4q I

A 6.7.2.5 6.7. 2. 5a 6.7.2.Sa (1) 6.7.2.Sa(2) 6.7.2.5b 6.7.2.5c 6.7.2.5d 6.7.2.5e 6.7.2.5f 6.7.2.5g 6.7.2.Sh 6.7.2.51 6.7.2.5j f

6.7.2.5k 6.7.2.5k(1) 6.7.2.5k(2) 6.7.2.51 6.7.2. 5m a

6.7.2.5n 6.7. 2. 6 l

A 6.7.2.6a f

6.7.2.6a(1) 6.7.2.6a(2)

A 6.7.2.6b

APPENDIX D NUREG-0700, SECTI0ft 6 GUIDELINE /BVPS-2 CONTROL R00t1 DESIGN REVIEW FINDING CROSS REFERENCE FINAL SufftARY REPORT TABLE SECTION 6 PARA. NO.

NOTE 3.2 3.3 3.4 ' 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.8 4.3 4.4 4.5 A

6.7.2.6c 6.7.2.6d 6.7.2.6e 6.7.2.6f 6.7.2.6g 6.7.2.6h 6.7.2.61 1 6.7.2.6j 6.7.2.6k a

6.7.2.61 6.7.2.7 A

6.7.2.7a 6.7.2.7 b l

6.7.2.7 b(1) 6.7.2.7b(2) 6.7.2.7c 6.7.2.7d 6.7.2.7e

/

6.7.2.7e(1) 6.7.2.7e(2)

- 6.7.2.7 e( 3 )

6.7.2.7e(4) 6.7.2.7e(5) 6.7.2.7 f 6.7.2.79 6.7.2.7h 6.7.2.71 6.7.2.7j

/

6.7.2.7j (1) 6.7.2.7j(2) 6.7.2.7j (3 )

6.7.2.7j(4) 6.7.2.7 k a

?

APPENDIX D NUREG-0700 SECTION 6 GUIDELINE /BVPS-2 CONTROL R00ft DESIGN REVIEW FINDING CROSS REFERENCE FINAL Sutt1ARY REPORT TABLE SECTION 6 PARA. NO.

NOTE 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.8 4.3 4.4 4.5 A

6.7.2.7k(1) 6.7.2.7 k(2) 6.7.2.71 l

6.7.2.71(1) 6.7.2.71(2) 6.7.2.71(3) 6.'7.2.7m I

6.7.2.7m(1&2) a I

A 6.7. 2.8 I

6.7.2.8a 6.7.2.8a(1) 6.7.2.8a (2 )

6.7.2.8b 6.7.2.8c l

6.7.2.8c(1) 6.7.2.8c(2 )

6.7.2.8d 6.7.2.8 e a

6.7.3 6.7.3.1 l

A 6.7.3.la I

6.7.3.la(1) 6.7.3.la(2) 6.7.3.l b I

6.7.3.lb(1) 6.7.3.lb(2) 6.7.3.lb(3) 6.7.3.lc

. 6.7.3.1d 6.7.3.le l

6.7.3.le(1) 6.7.3.le(2) a l

4 APPENDIX D NUREG-0700, SECTI0li 6 GUIDELINE /BVPS-2 CONTROL R00ft DESIGN REVIEW FINDING CROSS REFERENCE FINAL SUtttARY REPORT TABLE SECTION 6 PARA. NO.

NOTE 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.8 4.3 4.4 4.5 6.7.3.le(3)

A 6.7.3.le(4) 6.7.3.le(5) 6.7.3.l f l

6.7.3.lf(1) 6.7.3.l f( 2) 6.7.3.lf(3)

A 6.7.3.lf(4) 6.7.3.2 l

A 6.7.3.2a I

6.7.3.2a (1) 6.7.3.2a(2) 6.7.3.2b 6.7.3.2c 6.7.3.2d 6.7.3.2e 6.7.3.2f I

6.7.3.2f(1) 6.7.3.2f(2) 6.7.3.2f(3) a 6.7.3.3 l

A 6.7.3.3a 6.7.3.3b 6.7.3.3c l

6.7.3.3c(1) 6.7.3.3c(2) 6.7.3.3d l

6.7.3.3d(1) 6.7.3.3d (2 )

6.7.3.3d(3) a 6.8 PANEL LAYOUT l 6.8.1 g

APPENDIX D 1

NUREG-0700, SECTI0ft 6 GUIDELINE /8VPS-2 CONTROL R00H DESIGN REVIEW FINDING CROSS REFERENCE FINAL Sutt1ARY REPORT TABLE SECTION 6 PARA. NO.

NOTE 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.8 4.3 4.4 4.5 A

6.8.1.1 I

6.8.1.la 6.8.1.l b a

6.8.1.1c A

6.8.1.2 6.8.1. 3 I

A 6.8.1.3a A

6.8.1.3 b A

6.8.1.3c 6.8.1.3d l

6.8.2 6.8. 2.1 I

a 6.8.2.la i

6.8.2.la(1) 6.8.2.la(2) 6.8.2.la(3) l 6.8.2.lb 6.8.2.lb(1) 6.8.2.lb(2) 6.8.2.lc l

6.8.2.lc(1) a 6.8.2.1c(2) l 6.8.2.2 6.8.2.2a 7

A 6.8.2.2b 6.8.2.3 l

6.8.2.3a

(

6.8.2.3b

(

6.8.2.4 I

a 6.8.2.4a a

6.8.2.4b

i NUREG-0700, SECTI0ft 6 GUIDELINE /BVPS-2 CONTROL R00t1 DESIGN REVIEW FINDING CROSS REFERENCE SECTION 6 FINAL Sult1ARY REPORT TABLE PARA. NO.

NOTE 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.8 4.3 4.4 4.5 l

6.8.3 6.8. 3.1 l

A 6.8.3.la 6.8. 3. l b 6.8.3.lc a

6.8.3.2 l

6.8.3.2a A

6.8. 3.2 b 6.8.3.2c l

6.8.3.2c(1) 6.8.3.2c(2) a 6.8.3.2d I

A 6.8.3.2d(1) 6.8.3.2d(2) a 6.8.3.3 A

6.9 C/D INT l

6.9.1 1

6.9.1.1 l

A 6.9.1.la 6.9.1.lb 6.9.1.lc l

6.9.1.1c(1) 6.9.1.lc(2) 6.9.1.1c(3)

A i

6.9.1.2 l

6.9.1.2a l

A 6.9.1.2a(1) l6.9.1.2a(2) 6.9.1.2a(3) 6.9.1.2a(4) 6.9.1.2a(5) 6.9.1.2a(6) a

APPENDIX D NUREG-0700, SECTIO!! 6 GUIDELINE /BVPS-2 CONTROL R00f1 DESIGN REVIEW FINDING CROSS REFERENCE FINAL SUtttARY REPORT TABLE SECTION 6 PARA. NO.

NOTE 3.2 3.3 3.4 < 3.6 3.6 3.7 3.8

. 4.3 4.4 4.5 I

A 6.9.1.2b 6.9.1.2b(1) 6.9.1.2b(2) 6.9.1.2b(3) 6.9.1.2b(4) 6.9.1.2b(5) 6.9.1.2b(6) 6.9.1.2b(7) 6.9.1.2c j

6.9.1'2c(1) 6.9.1.2c(2) a 6.9.1.2c(3)

A 6.9.1.2c(4) 6.9.2 l

6.9.2.1

.l A

6.9.2.la 6.9.2.lb l

6.9.2.lb(1) 6.9.2.lb(2) 6.9.2.lb(3) a 6.9.2.2 l

A 6.9.2.2a l

6.9.2.2a(1) 6.9.2.2a(2) 6.9.2.2b

/

6.9.2.2b(1) 6.9.2.2b(2) 6.9.2.2c I

6.9.2.2c(1)

A' 6.9.2.2c(2)

APPENDIX D NUREG-0700 SECTION 6 GUIDELINE /BVPS-2 CONTROL R00ft DESIGN REVIEW FINDING CROSS REFERENCE FINAL SUtt1ARY REPORT TABLE SECTION 6 PARA. NO.

NOTE 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.8 4.3 4.4 4.5 A

6.9.2.2d a

6.9.2.2e 6.9.2.3 I

A 6.9.2.3a a

6.9.2.3b I

6.9.3 6.9.3.1 l

A 6.9.3.la f

6.9.3.la(1) 6.9.3.la(2) 6.9.3.la(3) 6.9.3.la(4) 6.9.3.lb l

6.9.3.lb(1) 6.9.3.lb(2) 6.9.3.lb(3) 6.9.3.lc

[

6.9.3.lc(1) a 6.9.3.1c(2) 6.9.3.2 I

A 6.9.3.2a

6. 9. 3.2 b 6.9.3.2c 6.9.3.2d a

1 APPENDIX E NRC CLARIFICATION OF TASK-ANALYSIS REQUIREMENTS

APPENDIX E NRC CLARIFICATION OF TASK ANALYSIS REQUIREMENTS General Section 5 (Detailed Control Roan Design Review) of Supplement 1 to NUREG-0737 requires the use of function review and task analysis techniques to identify control roon operator information and control needs during. energency opera-tions.

Section 7 (Upgrade Energency Operating Procedures) of Supplanent 1 to NUREG-0737 states that the reanalysis of transients and accidents required in Iten I.C.1 of NUREG-0737 will identify operator infonnation and control needs for energency operations.

In their review of utility procedure generation package (PGP) submittals and CROR program plan submittals (including the WOG Systen Review and Task Analysis docunentation referenced in a nunber of pro-gram plans), the NRC saw instrumentation and control (equipnent) requirenents identified but did not see infonnation and control needs identified.

This resulted in a nunber of NRC canments on utility PGPs and progran plans in the area of task analysis, requesting the identification of operator infonnation and control needs.

To support utilities in addressing these NRC canments on task analysis, the WOG participated in a March 29 meeting with the NRC to clarify this topic and describe how operators infonnation and control needs were addressed in the Energency Response Guideline Development Program.

At the March 29 meeting, the WOG representatives told the NRC that the opera-tors' needs (information and control) were identified and evaluated as part of the development program for the ERGS. The process for ERG developnent was a multidisciplined and iterative process wherein operator response strategies and technical guidance were developed to address operator needs in response to energency transients.

The technical guidance (guidelines) defines the actual generic tasks (guideline steps and actions) and generic instrunenta-tion and control requirenents necessary to implenent these response strate-gies. Consequently, operator infonnation and control needs are not explicitly identified in the guidelines.

Although not specifically required per NUREG-0737,- Iten I.C.1, these infonnation and control needs that were identified during the developnent program for the ERGS are contained in the ERG back-ground documentation (the background documentation for the Revision 1 ERGS was subsequently transmitted to the NRC in early May 1984).

To put the ERG SRTA progran in perspective, the WOG representatives told the NRC that this progran was developed to provide a task analysis methodology and exanple documentation based on the ERGS (Dasic version). The progran was structured to canpile operator tasks and instrunentation and control require-inents as an input to the CRDR process.

It was not intended to identify oper-ator infonnation and control needs.

Following the WOG presentation and subsequent NRC caucus, the NRC provided the following conments:

i E-1

- 1.

Based on the presentations by Mr. McKinney and Mr. Surman, it appears that Revision 1 of the ERG and background documents do provide an adequate basis for generically identifying infonnation and control needs.

2.

Each licensee and applicant, on a plant-specific basis, must describe the process for using the generic guidelines and background documenta-tion to identify the characteristics of needed instrumentation and controls. For the infonnation of this type that is not available fran the ERG and background docunentation, licensees and applicants inust describe the process to be used to generate this infonnation (e.g.,

fran transient and accident analyses) to derive instrunentation and control characteristics.

This process can be described in either the PGP or CRDR Progran Plan with appropriate cross-referencing.

3.

For potentially safety-significant plant-specific deviations fran the ERG instrunentation and controls, each licensee and applicant must provide in the PGP a list of the deviations and their justification.

These should be submitted in the plant-specific technical guideline portion of the PGP, along with other technical deviations.

4.

For each instrunent and control used to implenent the energency oper-ating procedures, there should be an auditable record of how the needed characteristics of the instrunents and controls were deter-j mined. These needed characteristics should be derived fran the infor-j m'ation and control needs identified in the background documentation of Revision 1 of the ERG or fran plant-specific infonnation.

5.

It appears that the basic version of the ERG and background documenta-tion provides an adequate basis for generically deriving infonnation and control needs. However, because of the differences in the organi-zation of the material in the background documents between Basic and -

Revision 1, it is apparent that it would be easier to extract the

)

needed infonnation fran the Revision 1 background documents.

)

In sunmary, the March 29 meeting served to clarify the subject of task analy-sis. The NRC conments identified and discussed above further clarify (at the prograa level) tneir requirenents.

These conments recognized the ERG back-ground documentation as the generic documentation which identifies operator infonnation and control needs.

Utilities must develop a process and actual documentation which identifies instrumentation and control characteristics based on the infonnation and control needs identified in the ERG background docunentation and other plant-specific documentation.

Definition and clari-i fication as to this process and tne resultant documentation was not discussed at the March 29 meeting.

E-2

ML20137N496

Contents

Text

1.0 PURPOSE

5.0 SCIEDULE

8.0 RECORDS

10.0 ASSESSMENT

SUMMARY

3.0 REFERENCES

3.0 REFERENCES

RESPONSE

SUMMARY

3.0 REFERENCES

Description:

3.0 REFERENCES

3.0 REFERENCES

3.0 REFERENCES

3.0 REFERENCES

3.0 REFERENCES

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

3.0 REFERENCES

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

3.0 REFERENCES

Background

6.3 ANNUNCIAT01

Navigation menu

ML20137N496

Text

1.0 PURPOSE

5.0 SCIEDULE

8.0 RECORDS

10.0 ASSESSMENT

SUMMARY

3.0 REFERENCES

3.0 REFERENCES

RESPONSE

SUMMARY

3.0 REFERENCES

Description:

3.0 REFERENCES

3.0 REFERENCES

3.0 REFERENCES

3.0 REFERENCES

3.0 REFERENCES

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

3.0 REFERENCES

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

3.0 REFERENCES

Background

6.3 ANNUNCIAT01

Navigation menu

Search