ML20149L498
| ML20149L498 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | San Onofre, Yankee Rowe, Big Rock Point, Midland, 05000000, Fort Saint Vrain, 05000668 |
| Issue date: | 02/12/1988 |
| From: | NRC |
| To: | NRC |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20149L501 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8802240255 | |
| Download: ML20149L498 (7) | |
Text
.. _ _ _ _ _ _ _.. _. _ _._
t j
SUMMARY
OF SECOND MEETING OF NRC WITH FOUR FACILITY LICENSEES l
PROPOSING TO APPLY FOR NRC AFPROVAL FOR SIMULATION FACILITIES
}
A public' setting was held between the NRC staff, contractors, and utility 4
I representatives to discuss the revised proposal subattted by four facility I
licensees to comply with NRC's reoutrement for simulation facilities under 10 i
CFR 55.45(b). The f our f ac211ty licensees have combined their ef f orts under an r
informal organi:ation called the ' Utility Staulation Facility Group" (USFG).
j The meeting was held from B:30 as to 11:30 se on December 7, 1987, in Roon 2242, Air Rights Building, 4550 Montgomery Avenue, Bethesda, Maryland. The i
setting was conducted by the staff of the Operator Licensing Branen (0LB),
j Division of Licensee Perf ormance and Quality Evalua': ion (DLPQE) for the Commission, and by Larry Bennett and R. Michael Kirby of 50uthern California i
Ectson Company for the USFG. An attendance list is provided at Enclosure 1.
The revised proposal subaatted by the USFG responded to the statement of "Conclusions and Agreements Reached" which had been prepared by the NRC as a result of an earlier meeting, and which had been includad as Enclosure 5 to the minutes of that meeting. That statement is included for reference as to these minutes. The revised USFS proposal, known as Revision i to the cocument titled: ' Guidance for Development of a Simulation Facility to j
Meet the Requireeents of 10CFR55.45," and dated October 1997, is provaded at Enclosure '
I i
Opening remarks were made by Leonard Wiens, a Section Leader with the Oparator j
i Licensing Branch. He expressed his appreciation to the USFG serbers for the attention they had given to the stated NRC concerns as reflected in their j
revised document. He stated his expectation that this meeting would clarify j
any remaining differences between NRC and the USFG, and that, at the l
conclusion of the meeting, the USFG would know exactly what additional effort l
was required of them.
l Open discussions then took place during which the USFG's resconses to NRC's j
statement of ' Conclusions and Agreements Reached
- were addressed. The hRC's l
l remaining concerns were expressed, and one new assue raised by the revised
[
j proposal, was also addressed. A sutaary of these discussions, together with i
j ites-by-s ten statements of resolution or open concern, is provided at I.
i The setting was concluded with an agreement that the USFG would further revise the guidance occument to reflect the NRC's ressining concerns (except f or i
j those concerns which, it was agreed, could only be resolved in plant-specific 1
plans). Further, it was agreed that, if these revisions were acceptable to the i
Staff, the NRC would issue an informal endorsenent of the document. Such an
(
9 endorsement would enable each of the four member utilities to proceed with l
development of its plant-specific plan for compliance with the regulation, using the generic plan as a starting-point. It was also concluded that l
additional formal meetings were probably unnecessary, but that working l
meetings between the M C and each of the four individual utilities should take l
place from time-to-tise during staulation facility development.
1
)
5 8802240255 800212 j
DR ADOCK O 9
l
ENCLOSURE i LIST OF ATTENDEES NAME OFJANIZATION Len Wiens NRC/hPR/DLPQ/0LB Shelley Spilberg NRC/NRR/DLPQ/0LB Jerry Wachtel NRC/NRR/DLPQ/0LB Dennis Lacroix Big Rock Point David A.
Mandrand Yankee Atomic Ralph R. Frisch Consumers Power Company Kathy P.
Owens Public Service of Colorado Robert D. Hagerean Westinghouse David White Yankee Atomic Tim Henderson Yankee Atomic Mary Faysend Puclic Service Co. of Colorado Jose S.
Ibarra Southern California Edison Tony Llorens Southern California Edison Larry Eennett Southern California Edison Chris Flott Micro Analysis and Design Ken Heitner NRC/NRR/PD-!V (FM - FSV)
Michael J. Larby Southern California Edison
[
ESCLOSURE 2 ENCLOSURE 5
- ,s CONCLUSIONS AND AGREEMENTS REACHED t
1.
USE OF FLANT PROCECURES, AND DEMCNETRATION OF THE
' ABILITY TO FERFORM' Agreetent mas reached on the use of controlled ccpart of the ref ererte plant pectedures. Fen and ink eark-ups of the pectedures will be considered deviatiens f ree the recutreserts and shal De cnly made as a last resort. Such changes mill be made cily af ter the f ollowing sters have been takens a.
DeterP nation has been made that the p*ocedure g
cannet te perfereed on entsting sleLlation de<1ces.
b.
Upgrades to entsting si2ulation devices, or the i
develcose9t of nem strulatten devices for the procedure (s) or part of the procedure (s) which ca9not
[
be conducted require an excessive effort or burden in a
relata ci to the benefit gained.
y e--
c.
The use of centrolle's er ste.11ar secha91ses aculd result is a degradation to the esaminatio3 process.
.a lt =4s agreec that it is necessar;. 19 order to cetply = th
- !?CU!!.45, for the stralation facility to provide the carat;11ty to a.lca license candidates to demenstrate their l
' ability to pe* fore' the cperations recuared by the cectedures. This capatility say include, if se deterrined by the facility licensee, the use of the refererce plant for the perf orsance of normal plant operattens.
r I-2.
FHySICAL AND FUNCTIONAL FIDELITY It was agreed that both physical and functional fidelity should be included in the simulation facility. There was
- cuever, a distarct difference between the approaches for setting this goal proposed by the U$F6 and the NRC staff, it was the USF6*s position that this Ocal could be set by using separate simulation devices to provide physical and functienal fidelity. It was the staff's position that both should be included in a single device f or a given procedure or event.
4 Siven this point of contention, the NRC staf f requests that
'?
the USF6 perfore the research and/or analysis to support or ref ute its position, and present these findings to the NRC.
The staff espects that this analysis, if performed adequately, would detorstrate a requirement for some degree of sleut taiecus physical and f unctional fidelity.
(,..
i
i.
3.
EXISTING VS NEW SIMULATION DEVICES The USFG will include, in their plan, the consideration of obtaining or developing new simulation devices as a higher priority than the use of controllers or procedure changes.
4 HARDWARE ALTERNATIVES AND INTEGRATI0h The USFS mill include a general discussion of the overall integration of the simulation facilityles in the current plan. Specific discussions for each facilty licensee will be included in that f acility licensee's plant-specific plan to te submitted no later than May 26, 1995.
5.
BEST EST FATE ANALYSIS AND BASELINE D4TA Referer.ce plant eperating histery data will be applied to f
simulation devices as apprcpriate.
t V
Reference plant operatin; history data will not be applied
?
to n:n-plant referenced sirulators (NFRS) because they, by defin2 tion, are not referenced to the facility licensee's p,,_
reference plant. Instead, best esttoate data will be utilized to initially valleate the NPRS eccels.
6.
REAL-TIME SIMULATION Criteria and evaluation procedures t'or determining real tire f
fidelity in both the pragmatic sens* and the "corputer
{
simulation" sense will be developed and applied to staulation devaces, as appropriato, by the USFG, 7.
SKILLS AND KNOWLiDSES 6
The use of the skills and knowledges as a basis for the development of the simulation f acility.will be more clearly defired and described in the USFG plan. Pethods for showing the relationships between the skills and knowledges, the analyses to be conducted, and the regulation, will also be
- explored, j
l 1
S e
\\
w
. - ~........
i;.
l 8.
USE OF CONTROLLERS o
The role, f unctions, and limitations of the controllers will be more clearly delineated by the USF6. Mechanisms for ensuring the integrity of exatinations when using centrollers will also be sxplored. Controller qualifications ~
will be detersined by the specific utilities and included in their plant-specific plans.
9.
HUMAN FACTORS ISSUES The USFS will core clearly delineate the criteria and evaluation procedures fcr the huean factors issues.
- 10. OPERATIC'NAL CUE ANALYSIS The USF6 will provide more detail on the information and
+
f reference plant characteristics to be included an the f
cperational cue analysis.
6-
- 11. MULTI-CISCIFLINARY TEAM ine US 6 will provide information about the guidance and criteria to be usec by this team, and its overall role in the developeent of the steulation facility. Team eake-;p will be addressed by the individual utilities and included
, in their plant-specific plans.
L t
- 12. CONFIGURATION MANAGEMENT The USF6 will provide acre inf ormation on plans for configuration management. This will include consideration of such changes ande to NFRS as a result of changes made to the NFRS's reference plant.
- 13. MISCELLANEOUS The USF6 plan will be changed to delete references to the utility review and approval of NRC examinations on the simulation facility, and to the repeated use of examiners.
14.
WORKING REALTIONSHIP It was agreed that the USF6 and the staff would aanntain close working relationships during the development of the simulation facilities.
t
.I
.g Distribution and Concurrence' for memo to Inez' K. Bailcy dated FEB 1 2 1088 DISTRIBUTION:
JCentral Files M OLB RF
.JWachtel
'LWiens s
JHannon f
,(d OL)B:DLPQ LB:DLPQ
.L J
.rh LWiens JHannon 2Ag /88 2/v/88 2//L/88 L
i d
fo UNITED STATES g
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION n
g E
WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 FEB 121968 MEMORANDUM FOR:
Inez K. Bailey, Chief Records Services Branch FROM:
John N. Hannon, Chief Operator Licensing Branch Division of Licensee Performance and Quality Evaluation
SUBJECT:
MINUTES OF FOLLOWUP MEETING BETWEEN NRC AND UTILITIES PROPOSING NON-ANS 3.5 SIMULATORS HELD DECEMBER 7, 1987 Please place the enclosed minutes in the Public Document Room (PDR).
~
W
==-
John N. Hann
, Chief f
Operator Licensing Branch Division of Licensee Performance and Quality Evaluation
Enclosure:
As stated 4
...