ML20235U058
| ML20235U058 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Rancho Seco |
| Issue date: | 08/18/1987 |
| From: | SACRAMENTO MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20235U032 | List: |
| References | |
| AP.2.07, TAC-44335, NUDOCS 8710130341 | |
| Download: ML20235U058 (17) | |
Text
,
?)
~
EFFECTIVE DATE 08-18-87 Original WP3795P D-0025P AP.2.07 VERIFICATION OF EMERGENCY OPERATING PROCEDURE 1.0 PURPOSE 1.1 The purpose of AP 2.07 is to verify the written correctness of the Emergency Operating Procedures as provided by AP 2.24, the Emergency Operating Procedure Description and Format.
1.2 To verify the technical accuracy of the Emergency Operating Procedures when compared to Technical Bases Documents.
2.0 REFERENCES
2.1 NUREG 0737, Supplement 1 to Requirements for Emergency Response Capabilities 2.2 Emergency Operating Procedures Verification Guideline (INPO 83-004),
March 1983 2.3 E0P Description and Format AP 2.24 2.4 Technical Bases Documents 3.0 DEFINITIONS s 3.1 E0P Verification - The evaluation performed to confirm the written correctness of E0Ps and to ensure that the generic and/or plant specific technical aspects have been properly incorporated.
3.2 E0P Source Documents - Documents or records upon which E0Ps are based.
3.3 E0P Written Correctness - A characteristic of E0Ps that indicates the degree to which proper incorporation of information f rom the plant -
specific writers guide for E0Ps and other appropriate administrative policies has been made.
3.4 E0P Technical Accuracy - A characteristic of E0Ps that indicates the degree to which proper incorporation of generic and/or plant-specific technical information from E0P source documents and plant hardware has been made.
1 0710130341 871(XM2 ADOCK 0500g2 AP.2.07-1 PDR P
2 05FINITIONS (Continued)'
3.5 Emergency Operating Procedure Guidelines (EPGs) - Guidelines ~that provide technical bases for the development of E0Ps.
3.6 Human Factor Team - Group responsible for insuring that the human factors principles are adhered to.
3.7 Human Factors - Multiple inputs relating to the man-machine interface in the plant and how the interface affects the operators response in operating the plant safely.
4.0 PREREQUISITES None l
5.0 PRECAUTIONS None 6.0 PROCEDURE 6.1 Verification Process 6.1
.1 The E0P writer or originator shall not accomplish the verification process, but will be responsible to resolve any discrepancies.
6.1
.2 The person conducting the verification should:
6.1
.2.1 Have operating experience and an Operating License or previous Operating License at Rancho Seco.
6.1
.2.2 Have an understanding of the Technical Bases Documents.
6.1
.2.3 Have an understanding of plant systems.
6.1
.2.4 Be familiar with AP 2.24 E0P Description and Format.
6.1
.3 PRC & Nuclear Operations Manager review and approval shall be after the final approval of the verification process by the Projects / Procedures Nuclear Operating Superintendent.
'6.2 E0P Source Documents 6.2
.1 The E0P Source Documents in Enclosure 8.1 shall be used '.n the verification process and-shall be the current revisions, t
9 AP.2.07-2
W-
_m sens-ow
O O
PROCEDURE (Continued) 6.3 Verification Steps 6.3
.1 The verification will be conducted in 4 separate steps.
6.3
.1.1 Written correctness 6.3
.1.2 Technical accuracy q
6.3
.l.3 Task Analysis 6.3
.l.4 Overall assessment and final approval 6.4 Written Correctness 6.4
.1 Written correctness verification shall be conducted by the Nuclear Training Superintendent of Operations, or his responsible designee.
6.4
.2 Verification of written correctness will be-accomplished by completing Record 7.1 which is divided into (5) areas.
6.4
.3 l
Each of the (5) areas shall be evaluated IAW Enclosure 8.2.
l 6.4
.4 Each discrepancy.will be numbered and documented on Record 7 5 and listed on Record 7.1.
l 6.4
.5 All discrepancies shall be resolved and documented on-Record 7.5 and listed on 7.1 before written correctness is' acceptable.
6.5 Technical Accuracy 6.5
.1 Technical accuracy verification shall be conducted by the STA Supervisor or his responsible designee.
t 6.5
.2 Verification of technical accuracy will be accomplished by l
completing Record 7.2 which is divided into (4) areas.
l 6.5
.3 Each of the (4) areas shall be evaluated IAW Enclosure 8.3 6.5
.4 Each discrepancy will be numbered and documented on Record 7.5 and listed on Record 7.2.
6.5
.5 All discrepancies shall be resolved and documented on Record 7.5 and listed on 7.2 before technical accuracy is acceptable.
6.6 Human Factors Correctness 6.6
.1 The Human Factors Team will verify that instruments and controls are available to carry out the procedure and that the procedure /
hardware interface is acceptable.
AP.2.07-3
O PROCEDURE (Continued)
I 6.6
.2 Human Factors Correctness Verification will be accomplished by completing Record 7.3.
l I
6.6
.3 Each discrepancy will be numbered and documented on Record 7.5 and listed on Record 7.3.
6.6
.4 All discrepancies shall be resolved and documented on Record 7.5 and listed on 7.3 before task analysis and verification is acceptable.
6.7 Overall Verification 6.7
.1 An overall verification shall be performed by the Projects /
Procedures Operations Superintendent or designee.
The overall E0P shall be assessed, with comments made in any area of the verification process or criteria.
6.7
.2 Overall verification will be documented on the top section of l
Record 7.4.
j i
6.7
.3 Discrepancies and comments will be numbered and documented on i
Record 7.5 and listed on Record 7.4.
6.7
.4 All discrepancies and comments shall be resolved and documented on-Record 7.5 and listed on 7.4 before overall verification is acceptable.
6.8 Documen' tation of Verification Completion 6.8
.1 The Projects / Procedures Operations Superintendent shall check that the verification process is complete and documented on Records 7.1 i
through,7.4 and shall sign the bottom portion of Record 7.4 indicating that all portions of verification are complete.
6.9 Development Documentation l
6.9 1
The E0P writer will compare each step of the E0P with the Technical Bases Documents and will explain any differences on Record 7.6.
l l
7.0 RECORDS 7.1 E0P Verification of Written Correctness 7.2 E0P Verification of Technical Accuracy 7.3 E0P Task Analysis and Verification j
7.4 Overall Verification Assessment and Final Verific'ation Approval i
e AP.2.07-4 L!
L
- o, - 4.
.. _ _ _ - _ _ - _ = _ _.
- - - - _,)__
~><
s y>
3.
y
/
g '.
,s o-m-
s
+ y, y
^
RECORDS -(Cdntinued) if '
i h
(.
7.!I E0P Verification Dip,.repancy Sheet i
y 'y 7,. 6 E0P/ Technical., Bases Documents' Deviation s
t u.
l j
s 8.0 ENCLOSINES f't A
?
8.1 E0P Source. Dot.uments
(\\
- v 8.2' Verification Criter,ia Checklist for Written Correctness o
i i
l 8.3' Verification Criteria Checklist
- for. Technical Accuracy y
'e I
s t,
. +.
3 F
h 1,
t
)
c j
/
(
s
- r
\\
s
-a t
k
/,
i
.)
l h
lt e
f=
,e y'
{pV
/\\'
h 8
a 1
1 I
s c
i 1
i
?
1
..t i
f
(-
)
b l
b
/.
.{
s L
0 3
J Y
j,\\
s I
jl i
"\\
i n W
.>q
)
f
(
\\
'g 4
f v[:.
p A
,h
{
]
s 3
l A.P.2.07-5
. e...,
l L3
(
~
'\\
e.
- \\,
- ..s q
c f-.
j
,.o l
a.
4-4 i
i
[. 'r
,(
he I
ta
i]
.]
RECORD 7.1 E0P VERIFICATION OF WRITTEN CORRECTNESS E0P Title, i
E0P Number IRevision EVALUATOR (print)
Discrepancy Sheet (s)
No.
OK No.
OK No.
OK No.
OK No.
OK No.
OK No.
OK No.
OK The Acceptable shall be initialed after all discrepancies for Area have been resolved.
Area Acceptable Areas (Initial)
Legibility Format Consistency Information Presentation l
Referencing and Branching Plant Specific Nomenclature Written Correctness discrepancies resolved:
' Signature Date (Evaluator)
AP.2.07-6
]
g q>-
s
\\
l RECORD 7.2 E0P VERIFICATION OF TECHNICAL ACCURACY E0P Title E0P Number Revision EVALUATOR (print)
Discrepancy Sheet (s)
No.
OK No.
OK No.
OK No.
OK No.
OK No.
OK No.
OK No.
OK 4
1 The Acceptable shall be initialed after all discrepancies for Area have been resolved.
Area Acceptable l
Areas Initial Entry Conditions
)
1 1
Instructional Steps, Cautions Notes, Information Quantitative Information Plant Hardware Information Technical Accuracy discrepancies resolved:
l Signature Date (Evaluator) e AP.2.07-7
RECORD 7.3 HUMAN FACTORS CORRECTNESS VERIFICATION E0P Title E0P Number Revision EVALUATOR (print)
Discrepancy Sheet (s)
No.
OK No.
OK No.
OK No.
OK No.
OK No.
OK No.
OK No.
OK l
The Acceptable shall be initialed after all discrepancies for Area have been resolved.
- Area Acceptable Initial Task Analysis and Verification i
l Human Factors discrepancies resolved:
Signature Date (Evaluator)
S t
AP.2.07-8
p p>
RECORD 7.4 t
OVERALL VERIFICATION ASSESSMENT AND FINAL VERIFICATION COMPLETION E0P Title E0P Number Revision EVALUATOR (print)
Overall Assessment Acceptable shall be initialed after all comments and discrepancies have been resolved.
Assessment Acceptable (Initial)
No.
OK No.
OK No.
OK No.
OK (Acceptable shall be initialed etc. as on record 7.1)
Acceptable Date VERIFICATION Each step must be signed by the Projects / Procedures l
COMPLETION Nuclear Operating Superintendent indicating each verification has been completed by the responsible personnel.
1.
Verification of written correctness (Record 7.1) 2.
Verification of technical accuracy (Record 7.2) 3.
Task Analysis and Verification (Record 7.3) 4.
Overall Verification assessment (Record 7.4)
All actions required by the verification have been completed.
Nuclear Operations Superintendent Date Projects / Procedures AP.2.07-9 b
1 G
t'3 1
a
...)
j RECORD 7.5
)
E0P VERIFICATION DISCREPANCY SHEET i
Discrepancy No. _
E0P:
Rev.
Step No.
i i
Discrepancy:
1
)
i 1
1 l
i i
1 i
Evaluator:
Date.
1
}
Resolution:
I s
i Resolution Acceptable By Date (Evaluator)
Resolution Incorporated By Date (EOP Writer) 4 AP.2.07-10
.i );.
RECORD'7.6 E0P/ TECHNICAL' BASES DOCUMENT DEVIATION -
E0P:
.Rev.
Step No.
E0P Statement:'
Technical Bases Documents Statement:
Explain Deviation:
s 1
1 1
l E0P Writer:
Date i
.g AP.2.07-11 N:
l 7
s ENCLOSURE 8.1 E0P SOURCE DOCUMENTS NOTE:
The evaluating personnel are'not restricted.to only these documents, and may use any' additional documents they feel
.necessary as long as they are. current revisions.:
.1 E0P Description & Format AP 2.24
.2 Technical Bases Documents.
.3 USAR
.4 Technical Specifications
.5 Existing Operating Procedures 6
Task & Verification Documents from Human Factors Program.
e e
i
\\
- ENCLOSURE 8.1 PAGE 10F 1 A P. 2. 07.-12
g q
ENCLOSURE-8.2~
VERIFICATI0F. CRITERIA CHECKLIST FOR WRITTEN CORRECTNESS Area f.
I
.1 Legibility
.1 Are the straight and proper dimensions on all procedure pages?.
.2 Are the text, tables, graphs, figures, and charts legible to the-evaluator.
.2 E0P Format Consistency
.1 Do the following sections exist in each E0P:
Section 1 - TITLE
~
sction 2 - OPERATOR ACTIONS
.2
- is the operator actions section presented in a single column format?
.3 Identification Information-
.1 Is the procedure title descriptive.of the purpose of the procedure?
.2 Does the first page. correctly provide the following:
.1 procedure title
.2 procedure number N
.3 revision number
.3 Does each page correctly provide the following.
.1 procedure designator l
.2 revision number
.3 page numbers
.4 Does the procedure have all its pages in the correct order.
1 l
l ENCLOSURE 8.2 PAGE 1 of'3 AP.2.07-13 i
[
- ,)
J. -
ENCLOSURE 8.2 (Continued)
VERIFICATI~0N CRITERIA CHECKLIST FOR WRITTEN CORRECTNESS:,
.3
.5 Are instruction steps numbered correctly?
.6 Are operator-optional sequence steps identified?
.7 Are instruction steps constructed to comply with the following:
.1-Steps deal.with only one idea.
.2 Sentences'are short and simple.
.3 Operator actions are specifically stated.
.4 Objects of operator actions are specifically stated.
.5 Objects of operator actions are adequately stated.
.6 If there are three.or more objects, they are listed (and l
space if provided for operator checkoff).
l
.7 Punctuation and capitalization are proper, i
.8 Abbreviations-are correct and understandable to the operator.
{
.8 Do instruction steps make proper use of logic structure?-
.9 When an action instruction is based on receipt of an annunciator-
)
alarm, is the setpoint of the alarm identified?
.10 Are precautions and cautions used appropriately?
I j
.11 Are precautions and cautions placed properly?
.12 Are precautions and cautions constructed to comply with the i
following:
1 I
.1 They do not contain operator actions.
.2 They do not use extensive punctuation for clarity.
l
.3 They make proper use of emphasis.
.13 Are notes properly used?
.14 Are notes properly placed?
.15 Are notes worded so that they do not contain operator actions?
1 ENCLOSURE 8.2 PAGE 2 of 3 I
AP. 2. 07-14
F o
l
\\
ENCLOSURE 8.2 (Continued) i VERIFICATION CRITERIA CHECKLIST FOR WRITTEN CORRECTNESS i
3
.16 Are numerical values properly written?
l i
.17 Are values specified in such a way that mathematical operations are j
not required of the user?
1
.18 Is a chart or graph provided in the procedure for necessary operator calculations.
j
.19 Are units of measurement in the E0P the same as those used on j
equipment?
I
.4 Procedure Referencing and Branching
.1 Do the referenced and branched procedures identified in the E0Ps exist for operator use?.
l
.2 Is the use of referencing minimized?
.3 Are referencing and branching instructions correctly worded?
.1 "go to" (branching) i
.2
" refer to" (referencing)
.4 Do the instructions avoid routing users past important information such as cautions preceding steps?
.5 Are the exit conditions compatible with the entry conditions of the referenced or branched procedure?
\\
.5 Plant Specific Nomenclature
.1 Are the acronyms used standard and understood by the operators?
.2 Is the name of the equipment the name usually used by the operator.
.3 Does the equipment named actually exist?
.4 Components, are they identified by the noun name and equipment number?
ENCLOSURE 8.2 PAGE 3 of 3 '
A P. 2. 07-15
"~
q g,,
ENCLOSURE 8.3 VERIFICATION CRITERIA CHECKLIST FOR TECHNICAL ACCURACY Area Technical Accuracy
.1 Instructional Step, Caution, and Note Information
.1 Are E0P/EPG differences:
.1 documented
.2 explained
.2 Is the EPG technical foundation (strategy) changed by the following changes in E0P steps, cautions, or notes:
.1 elimination
.2 addition
.3 sequence
.4 alteration
.3 Are correct, plant-specific adaptations incorporated per EPG:
.1 systems
.2 instrumentation
.3 limits
.4 controls
.5 indications j
.4 Have licensing commitments relative to Tech. Specs and USAR that are applicable to E0Ps been addressed?
I l
i i
ENCLOSURE 8.3 PAGE 1 of 2 '
AP. 2. 07-16 i
i s
fl
,n 3
ENCLOSURE 8.3 (Continued)
-VERIFICATION CRITERIA CHECKLIST FOR TECHNICAL ACCURACY
.1
.5 Are differences between the licensing commitments and th'e'EOPs'or EPGs documented?
.2 Quantitative Information
.1 Do.the quantitative values,. including tolerance bands,-used in the E0P comply with applicable E0P source document?.
.2 Where the EPG. values are not used in the E0P, are the E0P values computed accurately?
.3
'When calculations are required by the E0P, are equations presented with sufficient information for operator use?
.3 Plant Hardware Information
.1 Is the following plant hardware specified in the E0P available for operator use and accurately named:
.1 equipment
.2 controls
.3 indicators
.4 instrumentation s
I ENCLOSURE 8.3 PAGE 2 of 2 END-AP.2.07-17
_)
3 l
~,
t