ML073470813
| ML073470813 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Oconee  |
| Issue date: | 12/12/2007 |
| From: | Duke Energy Carolinas |
| To: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| Download: ML073470813 (30) | |
Text
P Duke SEnergy December 12, 2007 Oconee Nuclear Station luke , rnergy.Objective*:. Reaffirm Duke commitment for upgrading RPS/ESPS S:o Communicate status of planned RPS/ESPS LAR submittal and provide LAR submittal date*:. Discuss alternatives for docketing information, propose RAI process and post submittal communication plan 2 Duke SEn ergy Agend_**:* LAR Format & Content Overview*:- LAR Status S:. Technical Document Status o:. Alternative Approach to Technical Document Docketing*:. Conformance with Interim Staff Guidance S:. Proposed RAI Process*:- Post-Submittal Review Management
- . Post-Submittal Licensing Communications Plan*:. Coordination of Review*:- Factory Acceptance Test Update*:* Action Items 3
!Duke LAR Format-& Content SWEnergy Overview:o _Follows NEI 06-02: Technical information format consistent with ISG #6 S:. Separate Cyber Security submittal incorporated by reference consistent with RG 1. 152, Revision 2* TXS SE Plant Specific Action Items Table*:o Technical Document Table 4 Duke rWVEnergy LAR Stats*:. Final Duke/Project Staff Level Reviews in progress S:. LAR submittal delayed due to supporting Technical Documents*:- PORC /NSRB meetings scheduled in January 2008*:- Submit by January 31, 2008 5 Duke Energy Technical Document Status o:o TDs listed in Table Will be available for staff -review at time of submittal as previously planned, except where otherwise noted*:o Duke would like. to propose an alternative approach to docketing TDs 6 Duke Energy Alternative Approach to, TD Docketing*:o Only need information used to support the Safety Evaluation (SE) on the docket**: Duke> Submits License Amendment Request (LAR) on the docket SMakes TDs available off-docket (timing question still open)S:.NRC> Reviews LAR and begins drafting the SE> Identifies specific information that is needed to complete the SE-Requests via RAIs any specific information that needs to be docketed 7 Wuke ,nergy Alternative Approach to TD Docketing (cont.)Ob-I-IL
-o:. Duke submits this specific information on the docket in one or more supplements to the initial LAR and prior to SE being completed;* 'NRC completes SE referencing docketed information
- . This approach SAvoids unnecessary docketing of TDs, and> Supports overall schedule for issuance of the SE> Consistent with long-established regulatory practices 8 Duke Conformance with Energy Interim Staff Guidance*:* ISG #1 -Cyber Security-ISG currently in draft form> Duke cannot address in the initial submittals SDuke is using RG 1.152, Rev. 2, to develop cyber security submittal> .Once final, Duke will discuss with NRC additional information that may. be needed*:o ISG #2 -D3> Final issued 09/26/2007
> LAR addresses this ISG appropriately
> LAR addresses data communication between safety and non-safety divisions> LAR addresses this ISG appropriately o:o ISG #5- Human Factors SFinal issued 09/28/2007
> Due to the limited changes being made, in the Control Room, this ISG is not applicable to the ONS RPS/ES digital upgrade*:* ISG #6 -Licensing Process> Revision to previous draft ISG under development
> Address appropriately once finalized 10 kDuke Wnergy Proposed RAI Process*:o Duke proposal: 1. Duke reviews draft RAIs prior to NRC issuance 2. Review to consider e RAI acceptability as written* RAI clarifications and revisions needed* RAI asks for information already docketed e RAI asks for information that does not appear to be needed to support the finding 3. Schedule meetings/teleconferences to discuss draft RAIs* Some RAIs may be answered verbally without the need for docketing 4. Schedule meetings/teleconferences to review responses post-submittal 11 I Duke Post-Submittal Review Energy Management
- Acceptance Review*:. Technical Documents available to staff*:. Post-Submittal Initial Meeting -LAR Overview*:. LAR Review Plan / Milestones Issued>Subsequent Technical Meetings>Onsite Audit/Technical Visit>RAls issuedýWritten responses>SE issuance*:. Duke is committed to supporting the timely review-and approval of the LAR 12 Duke PostoSubmittal Review ergy Communiation Plan*:* Overall objective is to resolve concerns in a timely and appropriate manner*:. Staff Level>Several phone calls each week)>Periodic technical level meetings as needed>Written submittals made as scheduled by the LAR review plan o:o Management Level SPhone calls as needed.Drop-in visits monthly) Status review meetings as needed following submittal o:o Executive Level meetings>At least one during the licensing review 13
~Duke ,Dukergy Coordina tion of Review* -ONRR is the lead .review office for the Oconee LAR o:. Teleperm XS being reviewed by NRO as part of EPR licensing*:. Cyber security issues are also being reviewed by NSIR*:- Need to manage these reviews to ensure that they are complete and not duplicative
- - For example -RAIs that ask for the same information that AREVA has previously provided to NRO for new plants can be applied to the ONS application 14 luke vnergy Factory Acceptance Test_ Update F" el _7 -I -11 ý1:. Unit 1 RPS/ESPS Cabinets are being sent back to Erlangen, Germany for FAT S:. Possible impact on scheduled date for performance
- Duke will provide NRC advance notice of FAT performance date 15
~Duke Energy Action Items*:. NRC provides LAR review plan with milestones
- . NRC agreement on>Alternate approach for docketing TD information Proposed RAI Process SPost-Submittal Review Management
ý Post-Submittal Licensing Communications Plan*:- Determine need for another meeting just prior to submittal*:. Duke to provide NRC advance notice of FAT date 16 luke nergy Closing Remarks 17 Enclosure 2 -Evaluation of Proposed Change License Amendment Request No. 2007-09 January xx, 2008 Table of Contents 1. Summ ary Description
...................................................................................................
1-1 2. Detailed Description
.....................................................................................................
2-1 2.1 Introduction
...........................................................................................................
2-1 2.2 Reactor Protective System ........................................
2-4 2.2.1 RPS Channels A, B, C, and D ......................................................................................
2-5 2.2. 1. 1 RCPPM Design Change Description
..............................................................................
2-6 2.2.1.2 Process Input Signal Selection
............
...........................................................................
2-7 2.2.1.3 Analog Process Signal Selection Using 2.MIN/2.M AX ..................................................
2-7 2.2.1.4 Binary Contact Process Signal Logic ...............................................................................
2-7 2.2.2 Reactor Trip Relay Circuits Description
..................................
2-7 2.2.3 M anual Reactor Trip .....................................................................................................
2-9 2.2.4 RPS Channel E (Non-Safety Related Functions)
.........................................................
2-9 2.3 Engineered Safeguards Protective System ...........................................................
2-9 2.3.1 ESPS Channels A, B, and C ...............................................
2-10 2.3.2 Odd & Even Voters and Actuation Channels 1 Through 8 ........................................
2-13 2.3.3 M anual Channel Trip and Reset .................................................................................
2-15 2.3.4 Auto/M anual Pushbuttons
..........................................................................................
2-16 2.3.5 ESPS Emergency Override ........................................................................................
2-20 2.3.6 ES Odd and Even Device Status Panels .................................
2-21 2.4 Diverse Instrum entation & Control (I&C) System s ...........................................
2-24 2.4.1 Existing Diverse Systems ..........................................................................................
2-24 2.4.1.1 Plant Control Systems .....................................................................................................
2-24-2 .4 .1.2 M anual C ontro ls ............................................................................................................
2-2 4 2.4.1.3 Anticipated Transient without Scram (ATW S) Mitigation System ...............................
2-25 2.4.2 New Diverse Systems ...............................................................................................
2-26 2.4.2.1 Diverse Low Pressure Injection Actuation System ........................................................
2-26.2.4.2.2 Diverse High Pressure Injection Actuation System .......................................................
2-31 2.5 Other Digital RPS/ESPS Related Components and Features .............................
2-36 2.5.1 M onitoring and Service Interface
...............................................................................
2-36 2.5.2 TXS Gateway Computer ............................................................................................
2-37 2.5.3 TXS Service Unit .......................................................................................................
2-37 2.5.4 TXS Test M achine .....................................................................................................
2-38 2.5.5 Graphical Service M onitor .........................................................................................
2-38 2.5.6 Lead/Lag Filters ..........................................................................................................
2-39 2.5.7 ESPS Variable Time Delay Function .........................................................................
2-40 2.5.8 Power Distribution to RPS/ESPS Cabinets ..................................
2-41 2.6 Overview of RPS/ESPS Cabinets, Location and Layout ...................................
2-44 2.7 Differences Between Topical Report TXS and ONS TXS .................................
2-45 2.7.1 Hardware Changes ....... .....................
...................................................................
2-45 2.7.2 Software Changes .......................................................................................................
2-45 2.7.3 TXS Development Procedure Changes ......................................................................
2-46 3. Technical Evaluation
...............................................................................................
3-1 3 .1 In tro d u ctio n .................................
- .........................................................................
3 -1 3.2 Digital Instrumentation and Control Systems General Description
......................
3-2 3 .2 .1 D e sig n C riteria .............................................................................................................
3 -2 3.2.1.1 Generic TXS Design Criteria ...........................................................................................
3-3 i Enclosure 2 -Evaluation of Proposed Change License Amendment Request No. 2007-09 January xx, 2008 3.2.1.2 Duke Design Criteria ......................................................................................................
3-4 3.2.1.3 Design Criteria for Digital RPS/ESPS Ancillary Equipment.........
... ....... ............
3-6 3 .2 .1.4 C onclu sio n .......................................................................................................................
3 -7 3.2.2 Identification of the I & C Design ...............................................................................
3-7 3.2.2.1 Reactor Protective System .............................................................................................
3-7 3.2.3 Defense-in-Depth and Diversity
................................................................................
3-11 3.2.4 Functional Requirements
.........................................
..................................................
3-16 3.3 Conform ance with IEEE Std 603........................................................
..............
3-17 3.3.1 Single-Failure Criterion
..............................................................................................
3-18 3.3.2 Completion of Protective Action ................................................................................
3-19 3 .3 .3 Q u ality ........................................................................................................................
3 -2 0 3.3.3.1 Duke Energy Quality Assurance Program .....................................................................
3-20 3.3.3.2 AREVA NP Quality Assurance Program ......................................................................
3-25 3 .3 .3 .3 C onclu sio n .....................................................................................................................
3-2 7 3.3.4 Equipment Qualification
............................................................................................
3-27 3.3.5 System Integrity
........................................................................................................
3-29 3.3.6 Independence
..............................................................................................
..............
3-31 3.3.7 Capability for Test and Calibration
...........................................................................
3-37 3.3.8 Information Displays .............
..................................
3-41 3'3.9 Control of Access ................................
..................
3-45 3.3.10 Repair .........................................................................................
3-45 3.3.11 Identification
..............................................................................................................
3-48 3.3.12 Auxiliary Features ......................................................................................................
3-52 3.3.13 Multi-unit Stations .................................................
3-52 3.3.14 Human Factors Considerations
.............................................................................
- ..... 3-52 3.3.14.1 Initial Operations Panel Review ....................................................................................
3-53 3.3.14.2 Operating Experience Review (OER)....
.......................................................................
3-55 3.3.14.3 Integrated Design Review -HFE Review .........................................................
3-55 3.3.14.4 , Operations Task Analysis Review ........................
...... .........
3-56 3.3.14.5 Conclusion
.............................................................
........ 3-56 3 .3 .15 R eliab ility ...................................................................................................................
3 -5 6 3.3.16 Sense and Command Features -Functional and Design Requirements
..........
3-58 3.3.16.1 Automatic Control .............................................................
.................
...... 3-58 3.3.16.2 M anual Control ...............................................................................................................
3-59 3.3.16.3 interaction between the Sense and Command Features and Other Systems ..................
3-62 3.3.16.4 Derivation of System Inputs ..........................................................................................
3-64 3.3.16.5 Capability for Testing and Calibration of System Inputs ...............................................
3-66 3.3.16.6 Operating Bypasses ..............................................
3-68 3.3.16.7 M aintenance Bypass ......................................................................................................
3-69 3 .3 .16 .8 S etp o in ts ......................................................................
............................................
,... 3 -7 4 3.3.17 Execute Features -Functional and Design Requirements
..................
.......................
3-78 3.3.18 Power Source Requirements
.......................................................................................
3-78 3.3.18.1 Electrical Power Sources ...............................................................................................
3-78 3.3.18.2 Non-electrical Power Sources ........................................................................................
3-82 3.3.18.3 M aintenance Bypasses ..................................................................................................
3-82 3.4 Conform ance with IEEE Std 7-4.3.2 ..................................
- ..............................
3-82 3.4.1 Single-Failure Criterion
..............................................................................................
3-83 3.4.2 Completion of Protective Action ................................................................................
3-83 3 .4 .3 Q u ality .........................
..............................................................................................
3 -8 3 3.4.4 Equipment Qualification
.....................
....................................................................
3-100 ii Enclosure 2 -Evaluation of Proposed Change License Amendment Request No. 2007-09 January xx, 2008 3.4.5 System Integrity
....... .......................
3-10 1 3.4.5.1 Design for computer integrity
....................................................
I.........3-101 3.4.5.2 Design For Test And Calibration
....................................
.............
.......3-102 3.4.5.3 Fault Detection And Self-Diagnostics....................................................
3-102 3.4.6 Independence
..............................................................................
3-104 3.4.7 Capabil~ity for Test and Calibration......................................................
3-110 3.4.8 Information Displays .....................................................................
3-110 3.4.9 Control of Access.........................
................................................
3-110 3.4.10 Repair......................................................................................
3-110 3.4.11 Identification
..............................................................................
3-111 3.4.12 Auxiliary Features ............................................................-
1 3.4.13 Multi-unit Stations ........................................................................
3-112 3.4.14 Human Factors Considerations
..........................................................
3-112 3.4.15 Reliability..................................................................................
3-113'3.4.16 Sense and Command Features -Functional and Design Requirements..............
3-113 3.4.17 Execute Features -Functional and Design Requirements
............................
3-113 3.4.18 Power Source Requirements
.............................................................
3-114 3.5 Pre-Installation Testing, Installation, Post-In stall ation Testing .................
3-114 3.5.1 Governing Test Standards................................................................
3-114 3.5.2 Pre-FAT Testing ..........................................................................
3-116 3.5.3 Factory Acceptance Testing..............................................................
3-116 3.5.4 Site Acceptance Tests.....................................................................
3-117 3.5.5 Installation Testing .......................................................................
3-117 3.5.6 Post-Installation Tresting..................................................................
3-118 3.6 Operation, Maintenance, and Support ..............................................
3-119 3.6.1 Procedures.................................................................................
3-119 3.6.2 Training....................................................................................
3120 3.6.2.1 Maintenance Procedure Writer Training .................................................
3-12 1 3.6.2.2 User's Overview Training for System Engineers, I&C Technicians and Operators
.... 3-12 1 3.6.2.3 Hardware Maintenance Training for System Engineers and I&C Technicians.......3-12 1 3.6.2.4 Software Engineering Training ...........................................................
3-122 3.6.3 Simulator
..................................................................................
3-123 3.6.4 Configuration Management
..............................................................
3-123 3.6.4.1 Project Related Configuration Management
.............................................
3-124 3.6.4.2 Hardware Related Configuration Management
..........
- .....;.................
I.........3-124 3.6.4.3 Software Related Configuration Management
........................................
V....3-125
3.6.5 Periodic
Surveillance
................................................................
..... 3-125 3.7 Failure Modes and Effects Analysis ................................................
3-126 3.8 Cyber Security Considerations.......................................................
3-131 3.9 Conclusion
.......................................................................
311 4. Regulatory Evaluation.........................................................................
4-1 4.1 Significant Hazards Considerations
.....................................................
4-1 4.2 Applicable Regulatory Requirements/Criteria........................................
4-3 4.2.1 Regulatory Requirements
...................................................................
4-3 4.2.2 Regulatory Guidance ........................................................................
4-5 4.3 Precedent..............................................................
....... I.............
4-7 4.3.1 Generic ..................
....*"** .... .......:........................................
4-8 4.3.2 Plant Specific .................................................................................
4-8 ii i Enclosure 2 -Evaluation of Proposed Change License Amendment Request No. 2007-09 January xx, 2008 4.4 Conclusions
...........................................................................................................
4-9 5. Environm ental Considerations
......................................................................................
5-1 6. References
.....................................................................................................................
6-1 iv Enclosure 2 -Evaluation of Proposed Change License Amendment Request No. 2007-09 January xx, 2008 List of Tables Table 1-1 TXS SER Plant-Specific Action Item s .................................................................
1-3 T able 1-2 T echnical D ocum ents ..........................................................................................
1-6 Table 2-1 Channel Protective Function(s) initiated and Plant Variables Monitored.
2-15 Table 2-2 RPS/ESPS Cabinets, Location and Layout ........................................................
2-44 Table 2-3 Summary of TXS Hardware Changes Since TXS SER Issued ..........................
2-47 Table 2-4 Summary of TXS Software Changes Since TXS SER Issued ...........................
2-52 Table 2-5 Summary of TXS Development Procedure Changes Since TXS SER Issued...
2-56 T able 3-1 T otal L oop U ncertainty
......................................................................................
3-76 V Enclosure 2 -Evaluation of Proposed Change License Amendment Request No. 2007-09 January xx, 2008 List of Figures Figure 2.1-1 Typical ONS Digital RPS/ESPS Network Architecture
..................................
2-2 Figure 2.1-2 Typical ONS Digital RPS/ESPS Interchannel Communication Architecture.
2-3 Figure 2.2-1 Typical Digital RPS Protection Channel and Reactor Trip Relay Logic ......................................
2-8 Figure 2.3-1 Typical New ESPS Channel Interconnections
...............................................
2-13 Figure 2.3-2 Typical Actuation Channel Trip Pushbuttons
................................................
2-16 Figure 2.3-3 Typical ESPS Related Devices ...............................
2-19 Figure 2.3-4 Typical Emergency Override Pushbuttons
....................................................
2-20 Figure 2.3-5 Typical Device Status Panel Arrangements on 1VB2 ...................................
2-23 Figure 2.4-1 Typical Diverse LPI Actuation System .........................
2-27 Figure 2.4-2 Typical Diverse HPI Actuation System .........................................................
2-32 Figure 2.5-1 Typical TX S Power D istribution
...................................................................
2-43 Figure 3.3-1 Typical Statalarm Panel ISAM .................................................................
3742 vi Enclosure 2 -Evaluation of Proposed Change License Amendment Request No. 2007-09 January xx, 2008 startup from the fall 2009 outage. Duke plans to implement this design change on Units 3 and 1 in the fall 2010 and 2011 refueling outages respectively.
The term ESPS is primarily used at ONS, however, because ESFAS is the industry generic term for this system, the majority of AREVA documents generated for the digital upgrade project use ESFAS. Either term is considered acceptable.
Table 1-1 TXS SER Plant-Specific Action Items SER Plant-Specific Action Item Location of Response 1. The licensee must demonstrate that the generic qualification Section 3.3.4 bounds the plant specific condition (i.e., temperature, humidity, Section 3.4.4 seismic, and electromagnetic compatibility) for the locations(s) in which the TXS equipment is to be installed.
The generic qualification data must comply with EPRI qualification requirements specified in EPRI TR-107330 and TR-102323-R1 (see SER Sections 2.1.2.1, 2.1.2.2, and 2.1.2.3).2. The licensee's plant-specific software development V&V activities Section 3.4.3 and configuration management procedures must be equivalent to industry standards and practices endorsed by the NRC (as referenced in SRP BTP HICB-14, "Guidance on Software Reviews for Digital Computer-Based Instrumentation and Control Systems")(see SER Sections 4.4, 2.2.3, 2.2.4).3. If the licensee develops a TXS auxiliary feedwater control system, The ONS Digital RPS/ESPS does not the licensee must include automatic initiation and flow indication replace the existing auxiliary feedwater (TMI Action Plan Item II.E.1.2).
The licensee needs to confirm that control system; therefore this SER action the plant-specific application conforms to the requirements of item is not applicable.
10 CFR 50.34 (f)g(2)(xii) (see Section 5.0).4. If the licensee replaces existing accident monitoring instrumentation The ONS Digital RPS/ESPS provides (TMI Action Plan Item II.F.1) display capabilities with a TXS system, equivalent cabinet mounting and physical including the bypass and inoperable status information, the licensee location for the Wide Range (WR) Nuclear needs to confirm that the new system provides equivalent sampling Instrumentation (NI) Monitoring Equipment and analyzing features, and meets the requirements of 10 CFR required to meet RG 1.97, Rev 2 as was 50.34 (f)(2)(xvii) (see Section 5.0). provided by the original ONS Analog RPS/ESPS.
Seismic qualification is maintained for the WR NI Monitoring Equipment.
Power source independence and breaker coordination is maintained.
The ONS Digital RPS/ESPS equipment qualification is maintained with the inclusion of the WR NI Monitoring Equipment in the cabinetry.
Likewise, the WR NI Monitoring Equipment is not adversely impacted by the location of RPS/ESPS equipment.
1-3 Enclosure 2 -Evaluation of Proposed Change License Amendment Request No. 2007-09 January xx, 2008 Table 1-1 TXS SER Plant-Specific Action Items (continued)
SER Applicant Action Item Location of Response 5. If the licensee installs a TXS inadequate core cooling detection The ONS Digital RPS/ESPS does not system, the licensee needs to confirm that the new system replace the existing inadequate core cooling conforms to the requirements of 10 CFR 50.34 (f)(2)(xviii) (see detection system; therefore this SER action Section 5.0). item is not applicable.
- 6. If the licensee installs a TXS containment isolation system (TMI The ONS Digital RPS/ESPS performs and Action Plan Item II.E.4.2), the licensee must verify that the plant- provides equivalent functions and specific application conforms to the requirement of 10 CFR 50.34 functionality to the previous ONS Analog (f)(2)(xiv) (see Section 5.0). RPS/ES and continues to meet Duke's commitments under the NUREG-0737, TMI Action Plan Item -II.E.4.2.7. For monitoring plant conditions following core damage, the licensee The ONS Digital RPS/ESPS does not must verify that the TXS system meets the processing and display replace existing systems for monitoring portions of the requirements of 10 CFR 50.34(f)(2)(xix)(see Section plant conditions following core damage;5.0). therefore this SER action item is not applicable.
- 8. If the licensee installs a TXS system for monitoring reactor vessel The ONS Digital RPS/ESPS does not water level during post-accident conditions, the licensee must replace existing systems for monitoring provide plant-specific verification of the ranges, and confirm that reactor vessel water level during post-human factors issues have been addressed, as required by 10 CFR accident conditions; therefore this SER 50.34 (f)(2)(xxiv)(see Section 5.0). action item is not applicable.
- 9. If the licensee installs a TXS reactor protection system, the licensee Section 2.4 must provide confirmation that the TXS is diverse from the system for reducing the risk from anticipated transients without scram (ATWS), as required by 10 CFR 50.62. If the licensee installs a TXS ESFAS, the licensee must provide confirmation that the diversity requirements for plant systems (feedwater, auxiliary feedwater, turbine controls, etc.) are maintained (see SER Section 5.0)10. Setpoints will be evaluated on a plant-specific basis. The licensee Section 3.3.16.8 must ensure that, when the TXS system is installed, overly conservative setpoints that may occur due to the elimination of analog system drift are not retained, as this would increase the possibility that the TXS equipment may be performing outside the vendor specifications.
The licensee must provide the staff with a revised setpoint analysis that is applicable to the installed TXS system(s) (see SER Section 4.0).1-4 Enclosure 2 -Evaluation of Proposed Change License Amendment Request No. 2007-09 January xx, 2008 Table 1-1 TXS SER Plant-Specific Action Items (continued)
SER Applicant Action Item Location of Response 11. The licensee must evaluate plant-specific accident analyses to Section 3.3.16.8, 3.5.3, 3.5.4 confirm that a TXS reactor trip system (RTS) includes the provision to detect accident conditions and anticipated operational occurrences in order to initiate reactor shutdown (safety analysis confirmation for accuracy and time response) consistent with the accident analysis presented in Chapter 15 of the plant safety analysis report (see SER Section 4.3).12. The staff requires that each licensee ensure that the plant-specilic Section 3.2.3 TXS application complies with the criteria of defense against common-mode failures in digital instrumentation and control systems (see SER Section 4.1).13. The licensee should propose plant-specific Technical Specifications Section 3.6.5 including periodic test intervals (see SER Section 4.2) Enclosure 3 14. The licensee should demonstrate that the power supply to the TXS Section 3.3.18 system complies with EPRI TR-107330 requirements (see SER Section 2.1.2.4)15. The licensee should demonstrate that the qualification of the Section 3.3.4 isolation devices was performed in accordance with EPRI TR-107330 requirements (see SER Section 2.1.3).16. The licensee should demonstrate that Siemens (AREVA system) Section 2.4.TXP (control systems) or other manufacturer's control systems satisfy the acceptance guidance set forth in Section 4.1 of this safety evaluation (see SER Section 4.1).17. The licensee should address the need for a requirement traceability See Table 1-2, Item 2 matrix (RTM) for enumerating and tracking each system The RTM is a living document which will be requirement throughout its life cycle, particularly as part of making maintained throughout the life cycle of the future modifications (see SER Section 4.4). ONS TXS software development process and will be turned over to Duke, as part of the engineering design change documentation process. At that point ONS will control the requirements utilizing the Duke design change and configuration control processes.
1-5 Enclosure 2 -Evaluation of Proposed Change License Amendment Request No. 2007-09 January xx, 2008 Table 1-2 Technical Documents Document Name Document Number Comment 1. Detailed System Architecture AREVA NP Document No. Available for NRC review 51-5045374
- 2. Oconee 1 RPS&ESFAS Requirements AREVA NP Document No. Pre-FAT version available for NRC Traceability Matrix 51-9002060 review approximately 2 months after submittal Post-FAT version available approximately 2 months after FAT 3. TELEPERM XS Product Information on 2005/26 Available for NRC review Release 3.0.7A of TXS Software 4. Oconee Nuclear Station TXS RPS/ESPS AREVA NP Document No. Available for NRC review Replacement System Cabinet Design: 38-5069821 1 PPSCA0005 5. Oconee Nuclear Station TXS RPS/ESPS AREVA NP Document No. Available for NRC review Replacement System Cabinet Design: 38-5069822 1 PPSCA0006 6. FMEA AREVA NP Document No. Available for NRC review 51-5023886
- 7. ONS 1, 2, & 3 RPS/ESF Controls AREVA NP Document No. Available for NRC review Upgrade Design Specification for Key 51-5045379 Locks and Key Switches 8. Software Requirements Specification, AREVA NP Document No. Available for NRC review ONS-1 RPS/ESF Software Requirements 51-9054435 Specification (QA1)9. ONS Unit 1: RPS and ESFAS Not applicable Open Item closed -necessary Replacement Project Open Item Form, changes incorporated into"HW Typicals for CRD (Control Rod appropriate documents Drive) UV (under voltage) Test Jacks, Doc Step 3.12 10. ONS 1, 2, & 3 RPS/ESF Controls AREVA NP Document No. Available for NRC review Upgrade Hardware Design Solutions 51-5052833 1-6 Enclosure 2 -Evaluation of Proposed Change License Amendment Request No. 2007-09 January xx, 2008 Table 1-2, Technical Documents (continued)
Document Name Document Number Comment 11. ONS Unit 1 -RPS & ESFAS AREVA NP Document No. Available for NRC review Configuration Management Plan 51-51-9006444
- 12. Oconee Nuclear Station, Units 1, 2, & 3 AREVA NP Document No. Available for NRC review RPS/ESF Controls Upgrade ID Coding 51-5058134 Concept 13. ONS Units 1, 2, & 3 RPS/ESFAS AREVA NP Document No. Available for NRC review Controls Upgrade Verification and 51-9010419 Validation Plan 14. ONS Unit 1 RPS/ESFAS Controls AREVA NP Document No. Available for NRC review Upgrade Software Design Description 51-5065423
- 15. ONS Unit 1 RPS/ESFAS Controls AREVA NP Document No. Available for NRC review Upgrade Software Requirements Review. 51-5066516 Report 16. ONS Unit 1 -RPS & ESFAS Factory AREVA NP Document No. Available for NRC review Acceptance Test Plan 51-9052960
- b. Factory Acceptance Test Results b. TBD b. TBD Report 17. Dedication Package for Absopulse Power Supply a. Procodure AREVA NP Document No. Available for NRC review 51-5055058
- b. Report AREVA NP Document No. Available for NRC review 51-9062468
&51-9062071
- 18. ONS Units 1, 2, & 3 RPS/ESFAS AREVA NP Document No. Available for NRC review Controls Upgrade Software Safety Plan 51-9005043
- 19. ONS Units 1, 2, & 3 RPS/ESFAS AREVA NP Document No. No longer exists as a separate Controls Upgrade Software Installation 51-9008803 document.
This document was Plan incorporated into the AREVA NP Software Program Manual (Reference
- 11) that was submitted to the NRC for review and approval on 12/21/2006.
- 20. TXS Supplemental EQ (Equipment AREVA NP Document No. Available for NRC review Qualification)
Summary Test Report 66-5015893 1-7 Enclosure 2 -Evaluation of Proposed Change License Amendment Request No. 2007-09 January xx, 2008 Table 1-2, Technical Documents (continued)
Document Name Document Number Comment 21. ONS RPS/ESFAS Replacement Project AREVA NP Document No. Available for NRC review Equipment Qualification Report 66-5065212
- 22. TUV Certificate on Communication 968/K 110/02 Available for NRC review Processor 23. TUV Documentation on SCP2 Testing 968*K 110.01/02 Available for NRC review 24. TUV Certificate on Processing Module 968/K 109/02 Available for NRC review 25. FANP (Framatome ANP) Report, NGLP/2004/en/0094 Available for NRC review"TELEPERM XS Simulation
-Concept of Validation and Verification
- 26. Configuration Management NSD 106 & NSD 800 Available for NRC review 27. Software and Data Quality Assurance NSD 800 Available for NRC review (SDQA) Program 28. Reactor Building Narrow Range Pressure OSC-2495 Available for NRC review Instrument Loop Accuracy Calculation (ESFAS)29. Wide Range RCS Pressure Uncertainty, OSC-8829 (formerly OSC- Available for NRC review (ESFAS HPI & LPI setpoints) 2759)30. RPS Main Feedwater Pump Pressure OSC-3395 Not changed as a result of this Instrument Loop Accuracy Calculation design change.31. RPS Flux/Flow Ratio Uncertainty OSC-8857 (formerly OSC- Available for NRC review Evaluation 3416)32. Reactor Building (RB) Pressure OSC-3446 Not changed as a result of this Instrument Loop Accuracy Calculation design change.(ESFAS & RPS)33. RPS RCS Pressure & Temperature Trip OSC-8828 (formerly OSC- Available for NRC review Function Uncertainty Analysis and 4048)Variable Low Pressure Safety Limit 34. Power-Imbalance Safety Limits and OSC-5604 (to be revised Only change to this document is due Tech. Spec. Setpoints Using Error- prior to 03C24) to changes in the other calculations.
Adjusted Flux/Flow Ratio of 1.094 Available for NRC review -July 2009 1-8 Enclosure 2 -Evaluation of Proposed Change License Amendment Request No. 2007-09 January xx, 2008 Table 1-2, Technical Documents (continued)
Document Name Document Number Comment 35. RPS High Flux and Pump/Power Monitor OSC-8856 (formerly OSC- Available for NRC review Trip Function Uncertainty Analysis 7237)36. ONS Unit 1 -RPS & ESFAS System OSC-8623 Available for NRC review Functional Description
- 37. Engineered Safeguard Feature Actuation OSS-0311.00-00-0012 Available for NRC review System (ESFAS) Replacement Project Specification
- 38. Reactor Protection System (RPS) OSS-0311.00-00-0013 Available for NRC review Replacement Project Specification
- 39. Duke Power Company, Oconee Nuclear Procedure No. Available for NRC review in Station, "Nuclear Instrumentation RPS IP/O/A/0305/015 (to be October 2009 Removal from and Return to Service for superseded by several Channels A, B, C and D, Rev. 031, new procedures)
ETOS No. RPS-Q-ENTRY
- 40. Documentation of Software SDQA-10143-ONS Available for NRC review Requirements and SDQA for RPS/ESFAS System Replacement
- 41. SIVAT LSELS Specifications, Job Various Available for NRC review 4310002, Outputs: EFHV0037 Instead of a test case, Duke will make the SIVAT test procedures available for NRC review.42. TELEPERM XS Function Blocks, Version TXS-1003-76-V1O.0/01.04 Available for NRC review 2.60 FB-ADDON, Version 1.2 43. SIVAT-TXS Simulation Based Validation TXS-1047-76-V2.0/01.04 Available for NRC. review Tool, Version 1.4.0 (now rev. 1.5.1)44. Site Acceptance Test (SAT) Plan TBD Available for NRC review in March 2008 a. SAT Procedures TBD a. TBD b. SAT Results Report TBD b. TBD 45. Ul Parameter Calc OSC-8695 Available for NRC review.J 1-9