ML20197G319

Forwards Human Factors Engineering Branch SALP Input Re Detailed Control Room Design Review Preliminary Design Assessment Rept.Category 1 Assigned in Areas of Resolution of Technical Issues & Responsiveness to NRC Initiatives

ML20197G319
Person / Time
Site:	Columbia
Issue date:	03/20/1984
From:	Russell W Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:	Novak T Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
CON-WNP-0743, CON-WNP-743 NUDOCS 8404050203
Download: ML20197G319 (5)

Text

s

• , / vb MAR 2 01984 DISTRIBUTION:

Central Files HFEB Files DHFS R/F VMoore HFEB Members MEMORAt1DUA FOR: Thomas M. tiovak, Assistant Director for Licensing Division of Licensing ,

FRGH: William T. Russell, Deputy Director Division of Human Factors Safety

SUBJECT:

SALP IrlPUT FOR WriP-2 The DHFS/liFEB'SALP input for the Washington Public Power Supply System Uuclear Unit flo. 2 (WitP-c) is provided for your usa. HFED has had one review iten up to this tice; tne detailed control roon design review preliuinary design assessment report. Our ratings at this tiue are as folicws:

1. ilanagement Involvement and Contrul in Assuring Quality Categorf 2.

2. Approach to Resolution of Technical Issues from a Safety Standpoint Catsgorf 1.

3. Responsiveness to URC Initiatives Category 1.

Copies of the reviewer's evaluation sheets are enclosed.

Direct any questions you may have concerning this SALP report to Richard J. Froelich (x24383) of the itFEB.

_N

%.t eg. liy-

! Willian T. Russell, ucputy Director Division of Human Factors Sciety

Enclosure:

As Stated

! 1 cc: A. Schwencer l

R, Auiucii

~

^+

p'p1 B404050203 840320 er ADOCK05000g7 j

}

h _-

Contact:

x. W. Froelich 1.w , j - .A JA /

a,N g V

.....M.E.Bh,,, ,, ,,,,y,@, , g ,j.g[d-j ,y, ,,, g s,; hy,,,,,,

Ha*

pwx)

RWFroelich:me c

.................. ...... ............. . . . . .D. . . .To. .n. d.i.. .. .V

. . AM . o. r. e. .. W.T.

. . . o.

. . . . . .R. .u s. .s. e... .1 .1.~. .... .......

! cm) l ..................

3../. ./.. /p. ... . . /.0. 4. .. .. . 3.

. ./. . ./. 6. . . /.8.

. . 3. ./.4. . ./.. ./..

. . . ./. .8.. 3./.

4. . .. .W.

. . . . . . ./. 8 4. . . .

...................i 2 F8rM OtOnStCos NR3M 0840  %" U.S. GPO 1983400-247 j

s

<1

,y'~

l?"I IABLE 1 EVALUAll0N CR11ERIA Willl ATTRIBUIES FOR ASSESSMENI 0F LICENSEL PLRIORMANCE g't tr1

_. .u " '

'"g

o Category 1 Category 2 .

Category 3 h 50

. a

1. Management involvement and Control in Assuring Quality consistent evidence of prior evidence of prior lanning and little evidence of prior I ,

assignment Bf prio ities; planning and assignment of planning and assignment of priorities; poorly stated or priorities; well stated, stated defined procedures for controlled and explicit controlofactivities ill understood procedures for '

procedures for control of control of activities -

activities ,

well stated, disseminated, and adequately stated and poorly stated, poorly j, understood policies undcrstood or nonexistent .

understandable policies policies hcisionmakingusuallyata decisionmaking seldom at a decisionmaking consistently at level that ensures adequate a level that ensures adequate level that ensures adequate

( management review management review management review corporate management usually corporate management seldom 2 J.\a corporate management irequently involved in site activities N p# involved in site activities involved in cite activities 4u ..r audits generally complete, audits frequently not timely, . G <> g audits complete, timely, and incomplete, or not thorough thorough timely, and thorough M. o* a M

- o,

3.:u Category 2 Category 1 . Category 3  !'I[

.x.

v,: .

o

1. Management involvement and Control in Assuring Quality (Continued) W 8

connittees properly staf fed and connittees usually properly committees not properly staffed functioning in almost all cases staffed and functioning or functioning reviews timely, thorough, and reviews generally timely, reviews not timely, thorough,

. technically sound thorough, and technically sound or technically sound records complete, well records generally complete, records not complete not well maintained, and available well maintained, and available maintained,orunavaIlable

• procedures and policies procedures and polic'ies rarely procedures and policies strictly adhered to violated . occasionalpviolated corrective action systems corrective action systems corrective action systems dab promptly and consistently generally recognize and athlress rarely recognize and address recognize and address nonreportable concerns nonreportable concerns nonreportable concerns M procurement well controlled and procurement generally well repetitive breakilown in $

l la/d c

documented controlled and documented procurement. control rm l

Ob design well controlled and rare breakdowns of minor repetitive breakdown in design 5 F; erified _ _ significance in design control control or verification Ng AM

. NN

. Si?!

5%

b%

c ,,

l l

)

J _

OQ: A. M;d* ,.,A"i j'4 ?>

2Ng'sU0$ _

I , h ': g"f0W k

! i t :, -

' E4 _

s s n e t

o u u i s s br s s t o d n i n  ; e e ye e

s e ss y t e m es a x rs u e he l e on s r cn e s t e ac s i ah d ig u og e li n q ru n r ul po e g fi e pr i

u '

eo ok . r t q rt c ao f e

ga a h o r ge nl t et nl i s l s l dy i bn n y i b j nl n ai o l t

da nt y at i i vg i

ne au r t n m n t

u em tb o se ui si g ru eq s nih l o qt gr e t ekt t de e t cp s e nt a t nr e f ae e rf ot m r f o l a C i n uf old o

p l

i n e a d e t n s S . a s n n ye y d o s rc t n i e oi e u t s tl f s o u n a

, o a e y s l o l S u l o p ut y s s g s l e ee a s a l s e r rl it r l e r n e ah b m rc y y ga o f e n ea nt r or e g no l

e l

e iu f a m db gp er gp m ni s np m s p ,,

i t

i t ar e i a tt 2 u d ny i

td da n y y st s ga y s al ae ah g

l l l l

n r i tl vt a a os o sa ri eu r r l e g l rr eb l o e u e a ee si br e n ws t c d n nh ao n s a i ne ox ih e e e es ce g v g fi C n ug vt i

_ h t c a  ; "

e i I l

j t f s i

_ o s ge n e r us t I s

n u o oa s o s f s rc o C e i s t o m R u t i l s hl l H s u ai tl a s l f yi x a o i o o l t e d n ,

t f

s en nt i s o e g nee as s R n it c o s

_ t on dm n e n i

o

_ h t

o d t

n a

u pa o

rni ef c

nl ua o

sn i

t l

o u

n e

v i

s h i n

i t

l u

c sd hi i o

a re wng y o n l bdi l s s d s 1 o et l e es o_

i a e r re j

e r y

r o A p

i t - da' nr ut s

vt ri y es ia ah cc ya s

s H

e l a

s y

g rn ebt no l e

c t l

e e ao sie hr l eme nhf cp ml e m oxa ep i h

il a . l a

t t 2 cd ces t t a 3 n

% :5 Category 1 Category 2 Category 3 M L ,%

3. Responsiveness to NRC Initiatives (Continued) g R

technically sound and thorough viable and generally sound and often viable responses, but g responses in almost all cases thorough responses lacking in thoroughness or g depth acceptable resolutions proposed acceptable resolutions considerable NRC effort or initially in most cases generally proposed repeated submittals needed to obtain acceptable resolutions Dx[nforcement llistory n .

majorviolationsar r re and majorviolationsarerareand multiplemajorviolationsor are not indicative of may indicate minor programmatic programmatic breakdown progranunatic breakdown breakdown indicated minor violations are not multiple mino vjplations or minor violations are repetitive '

repetitive and not indicative minor programmaticl rea down and indicative of programmatic of programmatic breakdown indicated breakdown corrective action is prompt and corrective action is timely and correc vem ction is delayed or 6; effective effective in most cases not effective Eg 9 -<

EM DI ,

mi2 91 0 21W i

- SO

. .