ML17308A521

Vols 1-3 of St Lucie Simulator Initial Certification.

ML17308A521
Person / Time
Site:	Saint Lucie
Issue date:	02/21/1991
From:	FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT CO.
To:
Shared Package
ML17308A520	List: ML17308A519 ML17308A521
References
NUDOCS 9103050337
Download: ML17308A521 (209)

Text

FLORIDA POWER 5 LIGHT COMPANY ST.LUCIE SIMULATOR INITIAL CERTIFICATION VOLUME I SECTION I-ST.LUCIE UNIT 2 SECTION II-ST.LUCIE UNIT 1 q 1 p 3050337~5000335 10~1 pDR.AQOCK 05 pDR P RC FORM 474 140 l 0 CFR 55.45(aI, 55.4 end 552I U.S.NUCLEAR REGULATORY COBByiISSION 8IMULATION FACILITY CERTIRCATION APPROVED BY OMBr NO.31504138 EXPIRES: 83082 ESTIMATED BURDEN PER RESPONSE TO COMPLY WITH THIS INFORMATION COLLECTION REQUEST: 120 HRS.FORWARD COMMENTS REGARDING BURDEN ESTIMATE TO THE INFOR.MATION AND RECORDS MANAGEMENT BRANCH IMNBB 77141.UA.NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION.

WASHINGTON.

OC 20555, AND TO THE PAPERWORK REDUCTION PROJECT l3150 0138).OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET, WASHINGTON.

DC 20503.NSTRUCTIONS.

This form is to be filed for initial certification.

recartilication

{if requited), and for any change to a simulation facility performance testing plan made after initial submittal of such a plan.Provide the following information, and check the appropriate box to indicate reason for submittal.

FACILITY LICENSEE St.Lucie Unit 2 Florida Power 85 Light Company DOCKE NUMB M.389 DATE February 15, 1991 This is to certify that: 1.The above named facility licensee is using~simulation facility consisting solely of a plant4efarenoed simulator that meets the requirements of 10 CFR 65.45, 2.Documentation is availabl~for NRC review in accordance with 10 CFR 55.45{b).3.This simulation facility meets the guidance contained in ANSI/ANS 35, 1965, as endoiaad by NRC Regulatory Guide 1.149.If there are anyexceptionsto the certification of this item, check here{>j and describe fully on additional pages as necessary.

NAME (or orheridenrificsrionl AND LOCATION OF SIMULATION FACILITY St.Lucie Simulator, Nuclear Training Center, St Lucie Plant, Hutchinson Island, Fl.SIMULATION FACILITY PERFORMANCE TEST ABSTRACTS ATTACHED.(For p<<fonnance rests condvcredin the Period<<xfinp wnh the dare of rh(a carr Jf(car(onJ DESCRIPTION OF PERFORMANCE TESTING COMPLETED (Arrachaddirional page(s J ee eosaasry,<<xf identify the/rem description being cominvedl SEE ATTACHED DOCUMENT SIMULATION FACILITY PERFORMANCE TESTING SCHEDULE ATTACHED.(For the condvct of approximate(y 25%of p<<formance tears P<<'ear for the fovr year period commencing with the dare of th(s cwti ficarion.J R IPTION OF PERFORMANCE TESTING TO BE CONDUCTED.(Arrach additional page(sl aa necessary,<<xf ident Jfy the nem d<<cr(Prion being conrhxiedJ SEE ATI'ACHED DOCUMENT PERFORMANCE TESTING PLAN CHANGE.(For any modification roe perfonnance rearing plan submitted on 4 previbvs c<<r(((car loni DEscRIpTION 0F pERFDRMANGE TEsTING pLAN GHANGE (Attach addir iona/page(sJ as necessary, end idemily the*em descrip Jon being conrinvedJ INITIAL CERTIFICATON

-NOT APPLICABLE RECERTIFICATION (Descnbeconecriveecrionsahen,arrachresvhsofcompleredp<<fonnancetesrinpinaccoirfancewith f(JCFR$5545(bl(5llvJ.

A rrach additional parle(sJ as necessary,<<xf Id<<rrlfy the Iran description beinrr continued J INITIAL CERIFICATION

-NOT APPLICABLE Any false statement or omission in this document, i luding attachments, may be subject to civil and criminal sanctions.

I certify under penalty ol perjury that the information in document and attachments is true and corr.A.Sa Vice President-St.Lucie Plant February 15, 1991 In accordance with 10 CFR{j 66, Co munications, this form shall be submitted to the NRC as follows: BY MAIL ADDRESSED TO:,OfRce of Nusaeer Reactor Reguiatbn BY DELIVERY IN PERSON One White Flint North US, Nusseer Reguleaosy Commhalon Wahhlsgton, DC 2IEI66 wtc FDRss 474 I1401 TO THE NRC OFF ICE AT: 11666 Rockvale Pare Rockvgie, MO FLORIDA POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY ST.LUCIE UNIT 1 AND 2 INITIAL CERTIFICATION SUBMITTAL PACKAGE TABLE OF CONTENTS VOLUME 1 UNIT 2 Introduction General Information Exceptions to ANSI/ANS 3.5 Standard Unit 2 1.0 Simulator Information 1.1 General Information 1.2 Control Room Information 1.2.1 Physical Arrangement 1.2.2 Panels/Equipment 1.2.3 Plant Display/Computer 1.2.4 Simulated Systems 1.2.5 Control Room Environment 1.3 Instructor Interface 1.3.1 Initial Conditions 1.3.2 Malfunctions 1.3.3 Local Operator Controls 1.3.4 Instructor Station Features 1.4 Operating Procedures 1.5 Changes Since Last Report 2.0 Simulator Design Data Base 3.0 Simulator Tests 3.1 Certification Test Development and Format 3.2 Future Year Test Plans 4.0 Simulator Discrepancy and Upgrade Program 4.1 Simulator Configuration Management System 4.2 Simulator Discrepancy Reporting Instructions 4.3 Simulator Work Order Status I'

FLORIDA POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY ST.LUCIE UNIT 2 INITIAL CERTIFICATION SUBMITTAL PACKAGE TABLE OF CONTENTS VOLUME 1~U IT (Continued:

)Appendix A: gualifications of the Certification Team, SCRB and SCRB Alternates.

Appendix B: Administrative Procedure No.0010524,"Simulator Configuration Control", Rev.1, Jan.29, 1991.Appendix C: Administrative Procedure No.0005761,"Simulator Certification", Rev.'2, Jan.29, 1991.Appendix D: Administrative Procedure No.0005764,"Simulator Discrepancy Reports", Rev.1, Jan.29, 1991.VOLUME 2 SIMULATOR CERTIFICATION TEST ABSTRACTS 1.0 Computer Real Time Test (CRT)2.0 Steady State Tests (SST)3.0 Normal Plant Evolutions (NPE)4.0 Safety Related Surveillances (SUR)5.0 Plant Malfunctions (MAL)6.0 Transients (TRN)VOLUME 3 SAMPLE CERTIFICATION TEST PROCEDURE AND EVALUATION FLORIDA POWER AND LIGHT COHPANY ST.LUCIE UNIT 2 INITIAL CERTIFICATION SUBHITTAL PACKAGE TABLE OF CONTENTS List of Figures O-l 0-2 1-1 3-1 3-2 4-1 Simulator Configuration Review Board Initial Certification Organization Plant and Simulator Control Room Floor Plan"ANSI/ANS" 3.5 Requirements and guality Assurance for"Simulator Certification Program".Safety Related Surveillance Testing Logic Simulator Configuration Hanagement Information Flow Diagram.List of Tables O-l 3-1 3-2 3-3 3-4 3-5 4-1 4-2 ANSI/ANS 3.5 Cross Reference Summary of Initial Conditions 1-15 Summary of Halfunctions Instructor Stations Hain Keypad Functions ANSI/ANS 3.5 Certification Test Hatrix St.Lucie Certification Test Hatrix Certification Tests Compared to FSAR Accident Analysis Comprehensive List of Objectives Comprehensive List of Honitored Parameters Certification Discrepancies by DR Number PCHs Installed in St.Lucie Unit 2 which have not been reviewed

'T.LUCIE INITIAL SIMULATOR CERTIFICATION REPORT INTRODUCTION GENERAL INFORMATION The enclosed information supporting the Certification of the St.Lucie Unit 2 Simulator is an abstract of the information developed to demonstrate compliance with ANSI/ANS 3.5-1985[Reference 0-1]and Regulatory Guide 1.149, Rev.1, April 1987[Reference 0-2].Backup references are included in each Section./The Certification submittal is organized into three volumes.Volume I contains the Certification submittals,for St.Lucie Units 1 and 2.The Unit 2 section of Volume I is organized in a manner similar to ANSI/ANS 3.5 Appendix A, Guide for Documenting Simulator Performance.

The Unit 1 section of Volume I references the Unit 2 Certification submittal and analyzes the.differences between the two units.Volume II contains the abstracts of the Simulator Certification Tests which were performed to verify that the St.Lucie Simulator operates in accordance with the above references.

Volume III contains one complete test package as an example of the completed tests.This submittal will reference the Simulator Configuration Review Board (SCRB).The St.Lucie SCRB was established by Administrative Procedure No.0010524, Simulator Configuration Control[Reference 0-3].The latest revision of this procedure is included in Appendix B.The SCRB provides overall control and direction with respect to changes to the Simulator.

It also provided overall review and approval of the Certification test program and test results.The membership on the SCRB was selected per the guidelines of=the Institute of Nuclear Power Operations,"Simulator Configuration Management System," INPO 87-016, August 1987[Reference 0-4].The SCRB comprises individuals with significant experience in St.Lucie operations, simulator engineering, and operations training.The current SCRB includes the Operations Supervisor, Simulator System Coordinator,'nd License Training Coordinator.

Figure 0-1 identifies the line organization responsible for the Simulator, the relationship of the SCRB to that organization, and the present composition of the SCRB.Page 0.-1 ST.LUCIE INITIAL SIMULATOR CERTIFICATION REPORT GENERAL INFORMATION (Continued):

The Simulator Certification was performed according to Administrative Procedure No.0005761,"Simulator Certification"[Reference 0-5].The latest revision of this procedure is included in Appendix C.This administrative procedure requires the development of the necessary documents and simulator tests required for certification.

This administrative procedure includes a checklist which must be signed by the Operations Training Supervisor and the Training Superintendent to verify the completion of the certification program.In addition, this administrative procedure provides the requirements for the annual performance of testing and the renewal of certification.

The preparation of certification test procedures, performance of the tests, and documentation of the results were performed by an independent, dedicated certification team.Each test procedure was approved by the SCRB prior to the final test run on the Simulator.

Current licensed operators were used in all of the final certification tests.The test results were evaluated by the Certification Team and reviewed by representatives from Operations, Operations Training, and Simulator Engineering Groups.The SCRB then approved the evaluation of each test.Figure 0-2 identifies this section of the organization and the composition of the Certification team.Future testing will be the responsibility of permanent St.Lucie Simulator engineering staff.EXCEPTIONS TO ANSI ANS 3.5 STANDARD FOR UNIT 2 The St.Lucie Simulator meets all of the applicable requirements of ANSI/ANS 3.5.The following non-applicable certification testing requirements are taken as exceptions to ANSI/ANS 3.5.Page 0.-2 ST.LUCIE INITIAL SIMULATOR CERTIFICATION REPORT NON-APPLICABLE RE UIREMENTS The items in this section are identified as exceptions because they are not applicable to this facility.ANSI ANS 3.5 Section 3.1,1 7"3.1 Simulator Capabilities,.3.1.

1 Normal Plant Evolutions, (7)Startup, shutdown, and power operations with less than full reactor coolant flow" Technical Specifications at the St.Lucie Plant preclude normal power operation unless all four reactor coolant pumps are operating.

Therefore, none of the simulator certification tests involving startup or power operation were performed with partial RCP operating conditions.

Transient tests did involve tripping one and four RC pumps and cooldown operations tests were performed with partial flow operations in accordance with the applicable plant procedures.

There are no limitations in the St.Lucie Simulator regarding the number of RC pumps that can be operating or disabled at any plant operating mode or during any malfunction.

ANSI ANS 3.5 Section 3.1.2 12" 3.1 Simulator Capabilities, 3.1.2 Plant Malfunctions, (12)Control rod failure including stuck rods, uncoupled rods, drifting rods, rod drops, and misaligned rods" Drifting Rod malfunctions are not relevant to the St.Lucie Control Rod Drive design.All the other listed rod malfunctions were included in the test program.ANSI ANS 3.5 Section 3.1.2 25" 3.1 Simulator Capabilities, 3.1.2 Plant Malfunctions, (25)Reactor pressure control system failure including turbine bypass failure (BWR)" This item is specifically related to BWRs.Page 0.-3

ST.LUCIE INITIAL SIMULATOR CERTIFICATION REPORT ANSI ANS 3.5 A endix B Section B2.1 2"B2 PWR Simulator Operability Test, B2.1 Steady State Performance, (2)Secondary Plant, Steam Generator Secondary side temperature." This temperature is not monitored in Combustion Engineering vertical Steam Generators.

OTHER EXCEPTIONS The items in this section are identified as exceptions for reasons other than their applicability to this facility.The specific reasons are identified in the justification for each exception.

ANSI ANS 3.5 Section 4.1 3"4.Performance Criteria, 4.1 Steady State Operation, (3)The simulator computed values of critical parameters shall agree within+2%of the reference plant parameters and shall not detract from training."The St.Lucie Simulator Steady State certification tests used+2%of the reference instrument loop range as the acceptance criteria for critical parameters and+10%of the instrument loop range as the acceptance criteria for non-critical parameters.

This criteria is based on the operator's ability to observe such differences on the control room indicators and realistically meets the training requirements for parameter accuracy.This approach is consistent with that of other facilities in the industry and was reviewed and approved by the SCRB.For the actual performance and analysis of the Steady State Tests, data was taken from plant control room indicators and compared to the computer outputs to the same indicators in the simulator.

To obtain the matching set of conditions, the simulator was operated using approved plant procedures until it was in the same condition as the plant.The data from the two sets of data was input to a series of calculations which compared the difference between the simulator and plant readings to the 2%(10%)of the loop range criteria.In addition,.

instrument accuracies, where available, were taken into account by adding them to the computed values.All parameters were examined for errors which could detract from training in addition to the 2%(10%)criteria.No errors were found which would detract from training.Page 0.-4 ST.LUCIE INITIAL SIMULATOR CERTIFICATION REPORT ANSI ANS 3.5 Section 4.1 3 (Continued):

However, if the simulator was in error by more than the 2%(10%)criteria, a Discrepancy Report was written.Those parameters which deviated by more than 10%were reviewed by the Simulator Engineering Group and an Operations Representative.

All of these parameters were determined to be non-critical parameters and reasons were found for the deviations.

NSI ANS 3.5 A endix 8 Section 82.2 7"82 PWR Simulator Operability Test, 82.2 Transient Performance, (7)maximum rate power ramp (100%down to approximately 75%and back to 100%)".At St.Lucie there is no automatic return to 100%power, the escalation back to 100%power would be in Normal Manual Control.Since this is tested in other tests, it was not repeated in this test.ANSI ANS 3.5 Section 3.1.1.10 The requirement to test"safety-related equipment or systems" was interpreted to be all the equipment and/or systems required by Technical Specifications.

However, all of the safety related surveillance tests were not performed on the simulator.

The decision not to explicitly test all of the safety related surveillance tests was based on an extensive review of the safety related surveillance tests.This review determined that, for any surveillance which was not tested, the intent of the safety related testing was covered in other certification tests.See Section 3.3, Scope of tests, for a detailed explanation of this review process.An exception is taken based on this review.ANSI ANS 3.5 Section 3.2.3.Located in the simulated control room lighting panels are three cameras used to record various training sessions.These cameras are not installed in the St.Lucie Unit 2 Control Room.The basis for this exception is that the cameras are necessary for training.Page 0.-5 ST.LUCIK INITIAL SIMULATOR CERTIFICATION REPORT ANSI ANS 3.5 A endix A Section A1.4 This"exception" is an explanation of why no differences between the Simulator Procedures and the reference plant procedures are reported.The current revision of the referenced plant procedures is always maintained in the simulator control room area.No differences between the plant and the simulator configuration are noted in the simulator procedures.

Any differences in the operation of the simulator as a result of Plant Change Modifications (PCN's)are covered by the instructor on a case by case basis.Maintaining the current revision of the plant procedures always insures that the current operating philosophy of the reference plant is provided in the simulator..-

ANSI ANS 3.5 A endix A Section A2.4 A number of plant change/modifications (PCHs)were installed in Unit 2 during the latest refueling outage which ended in December 1990.These PCN's will be reviewed and incorporated in accordance with Administrative Procedure No.0010524,"Simulator Configuration Control"[Reference 0-3].See Section 4.3, Simulator Work Order Status and Table 4-2 for a complete listing of PCN's installed in the referenced plant which have not been reviewed for Simulator impact.Page 0.-6 SIMULATOR CONFIGURATION REVIEW BOARD VICE PRES IDEHT ST LUCIE PLAHT PLAHT HAHAGER OPERATIONS SUPERIHTEHDENT TRAIHING SUPERIHTEHDENT OPERATIOHS SUPERVISOR OPERATIOHS TRHG SUPERVISOR LICEHSED OPERATIONS STAFF SIHULATOR ENGINEERIKG STAFF SIHULATOR IHSTRUCTOR STAFFSIMULATOR CONFIGURATION REVIEW BOARD FIQllE B-i PAGE 9.-7 INITIAL CERTIF ICATION ORGANIZATION SIMULATOR ENGINEERING COORDINATOR PERMANENT ENGINEERING STAFF INITIAL CERTIFICATION TEAM CERT ENGINEER OTHER ORGANIZATIONS (OPS, QA, CORP.STAFF)INITIAL CERT IF'ICA TI ON SUBMITTAL REV-1/31/91 ST.LUCIE INITIAL SIMULATOR CERTIFICATION REPORT TABLE 0-1 ANSI ANS 3.5 CROSS-REFERENCE ANSI ANS 3.5 SECTION REPORT SECTION Gener al Requirements 1.2.4 Table 3-4 3.1 3.1.1 Simul ator Capabilities Normal Plant Evolutions Table 3-4 1.2.2 1.2.3 1.2.4 Table 3-2 Table 3-4 3.1.2 Pl ant Mal functions 1.3.2 1.4 Table 1-2 3.4 3.7 Table 3-2 Table 3-4 3.2.1 Degree of Panel Simulation 1.2.1 1.2.2 1.2.3 3.2.3 Control on Panels 1.2.1 1.2.2 1.2.3 3.2.3 Control Room Environment 1.2.5 3.3.1 3.3.2 Systems Controlled From the Control Room Systems Operation of Functions Controlled from Outside of the Control Room 1.2.4 Table 3-4 1.2.4 1.3.3 Table 3-4 Page 0.-9

ST.LUCIE INITIAL SIMULATOR CERTIFICATION REPORT TABLE 0-1 ANSI ANS 3.5 CROSS-REFERENCE ANSI ANS 3.5 SECTION EPORT SECTION 3.4.1 Initial Conditions 1.3.1 3.4.2 Malfunctions 1.3.2 1.3.4 Table 1-2 Table 3-4 3.4.3 3.4.4 Other Control Features Instructor Interface 1.3.4 1.3.3 1.3.4 4.1 Steady State Operation Transient Operation Table 3-4 Table 3-4 3.4.G 4.3 Simulator Operating Limits 1.3.4 Table 3-4 4,4 5.1 Monitoring Capabilities Simulator Design Data 3.6 2.0 4.0 5.2 Simulator Update Design Data 2.0 4.0 5.3 Simulator Modification 2.0 4.0 5.4.1 Simulator Performance Testing 3.0 Page 0.-10 i ST.LUCIE INITIAL SIMULATOR CERTIFICATION REPORT TABLE 0-1 ANSI ANS 3.5 CROSS-REFERENCE Continued: ANSI ANS 3.5 SECTION EPORT SECTION 5.4.2 Al.l Al.2 Simulator Operability Testing General Control Room 3.4 1.2 A1.3 Instructor Interface 1.3 A1.4 Operating Procedures for Reference Plant 1.4 A1.5 Changes Since Last Report 1.5 A3.1 A3.2 A3.3 A3.4 A4 B2.1'imulator Design Data Computer Real Time Test Steady State and Normal Operations Tests Trans'ient Tests Malfunction Tests Simulator Discrepancy Resolution and Upgrade Program Steady State Performance 2.0 Table 3-2 Volume II, Section 1 Table 3-2 Volume II, Section 2 Volume II, Section 3 Volume II, Section 4 Table 3-2 Volume II, Section 5 Table 3-2 Volume II, Section 6 4.0 Table 3-2 Volume II.Section 2 Page 0.-11 ST.LUCIE INITIAL SIHULATOR CERTIFICATION REPORT TABLE 0-1 ANSI ANS 3.5 CROSS-REFERENCE ANSI ANS 3.5 SECTION REPORT SECTION B2.2 Transient Performance Table 3-2 Volume II, Section 5 Page 0.-12 ST.LUCIE INITIAL SIMULATOR CERTIFICATION REPORT REFERENCES O-l ANSI/ANS 3.5-1985,"Nuclear Power Simulators for use in Operator Training", 1985.0-2 NRC Regulatory Guide 1.149,"Nuclear Power Plant Simulator Facilities for use in Operator License Examinations", April, 1987.0-3 St.Lucie Administrative Procedure No-0010524,"Simulator Configuration

'ontrol", November 5, 1990.0-4 Institute of Nuclear Power Operations,"Simulator Configuration Management System," INPO 87-016, August 1987.0-5 St.Lucie Admininstrative Procedure No-0005761,"Simulator Certification", Rev.2, August 1990.Page 0.-13 ST.LUCIE INITIAL SIHULATOR CERTIFICATION REPORT 1.0 SIHULATOR INFORHATION 1.1 GENERAL INFORHAT ION Owner: Florida Power and Light Co.(FPL), St.Lucie Plant.~0 erator: The conduct of training programs is the responsibility of the Nuclear Training, Operations Training Department.

Simulator maintenance is the responsibility of the Operations Training Department's Simulator System Coordinator and his staff.Manufacturer:

CAE Electronics of Montreal, quebec, Canada.Reference Plant T e Ratin: St.Lucie Unit 2, is a two loop Combustion Engineering PWR licensed for 2700 MWT.The plant began commercial operation in 1983 under docket 50-389.The NSSS was supplied by Combustion Engineering, the turbine was supplied by Westinghouse, with Ebasco as the A/E.Date Available for Trainin: Training of students began in April 1988.~TfR:lhi i h iiti1 tiFi ti p t..1.2 CONTROL ROOH INFORHATION 1.2.1 PHYSICAL ARRANGEHENT FLOOR PLAN COHPARISO The Simulator control room panels are oriented and arranged to duplicate the St.Lucie Unit 2 Control Room Panels.Minor dimensional differences between the simulator and the plant control rooms exist due to the training buil.ding arrangement.

These differences in room dimensions cause slight variances in panel layout distances.

The maximum deviation in layout dimensions in the control room surveillance area is 2.5 inches.The typical deviation is significantly less than 2.5 inches[Reference 1-1].See Figure 1-1 for specific dimensional deviations.

Page 1.-1 ST.LUCIE INITIAL SIMULATOR CERTIFICATION REPORT FLOOR PLAN COMP RISON (Continued:

)II'abinets in the Unit 2 Control Room that contain support equipment but have no external indicators or controls (such, as Sequence of Events Computer, Digital Data Processing Computer, and In'adequate Core.Cooling Cabinets)are cosmetically included in the simulator floor arrangement.

The fire detection system is included in the simulator floor plan but is cosmetically simulated.

There are no simulator training requirements for this equipment.

'(Note I, Figure l-l)All control.panels within the surveillance area are functionally simulated.

Panels outside the surveillance area are functionally simulated where operator interaction is required.These panels include: Reactor Regulating System Nuclear Instrumentation Start-up Channels Reactor Coolant Pump Vibration Monitoring System Feedwater regulating Control Panels Control Room Area Radiation Monitoring Panels (RMBO's)Engineering Safeguards Panels (ESFAS)A E 8 Hydrogen Recombiner s A L B Hydrogen Analyzers Auxiliary Feedwater Actuation Panels (AFAS)Loose Part Monitoring System Plant Auxiliary Cabinet (PAP2)Reactivity Unit Computer Page l.-2 ST.LUCIE INITIAL SIMULATOR CERTIFICATION REPORT The followin are deviations in the simulator floor lan.a)b)One set of non-training required cabinets (Foxboro Instrument Cabinet)have been replaced by the St.Lucie Unit 2 Alternate Shutdown Control Panel.(Note 2, on Figure 1-1).One panel outside the surveillance area, the generator protection auxiliary relay cabinets~(GPARC)has been omitted from the simulator control room to allow required visibility fr om the instructor facility to the simulated Alternate Shutdown Control Panel.The GPARC has no operator training requirements.(Note 3, on Figure 1-1).c)The area that includes the plant Watch Engineer's office, the Shift Supervisor's office and the restroom is replaced in the simulator control room by the instructor facility.d)The metal door leading from the plant control room to the control room air conditioning equipment is not'included in the simulator control room, however, the primary entry door to the control room and the door leading to the plant control room kitchen is duplicated.

1.2.2 Control Room Panels and Equipment Simulator control room panels were originally fabricated to replicate the existing St.Lucie Unit 2 control room as of February 1985.Data collection, as defined in NUREG 1258, was conducted on all simulated control room panels/equipment and placed in either a database (Ref 1-2)or on Autocad drawings which ever is applicable.

A comparison was then made in order to establish the current status of the simulator control room physical fidelity.All discrepancies found were flagged in the databases and entered into the configuration management system, and work orders were issued for disposition.

The databases are to be used for future periodic control room verification of panels and equipment.

Those discrepancies that are outstanding as of January 23, 1991 are included in Figure 4-2.Page 1.-3 ST.LUCIE INITIAL SIMULATOR CERTIFICATION REPORT 1.2.3 PLANT DISPLAY COMPUTER Simulator plant CRT displays/computers consists of the following:

The Analog Display System (ADS)for Control Rod Position, the Qualified Safety Parameter Display System (QSPDS), Sequence of Events (SOE), Emergency Response Data Acquisition and Display System (ERDADS), Digital Data Processing System (DDPS), and the Radiation Monitoring System (RH-11).These components replicate the plant in appearance and operation with the following exceptions:

a)The CRT Bezels are slightly different in appearance.

The Bezel colors are the same and their overall size is similar.The differences are due to the different manufacturer of the display units.No impact on training.b)The Simulator control room CRT displays (RH-ll, ERDADS, and ADS)are all made by the same manufacturer, therefore all have the same CRT.resolution.

The reference plant control room displays are all of different manufacturers and have different resolution.

This has a~~minimal impact on the readability of these displays.1.2.4 SIMULATED SYSTEMS The St.Lucie Unit 2 Simulator includes the simulation of all systems necessary for training/examinations in plant normal, off normal, and emergency modes of operation.

The simulator accommodates all related panel controls, indications and alarms found in the control room.Provisions for interactions between systems and system remote functions are included.The simulator procurement specification provided the initial definition of the scope of systems to be simulated[Reference 1-3].A comprehensive"Scope of Simulation" document[Reference 1-4]has been created to describe the physical extent and the range of normal and off-normal operating conditions possible for each emulated system.The final detailed definition of the scope of simulation for each system is included in the"Scope of Simulation" section of each model report.Complete listings of the model reports are included in Reference 1-5.Page 1.-4 ST.LUCIE INITIAL SIMULATOR CERTIFICATION REPORT 1.2.5 SIMULATOR CONTROL ROO ENVIRONMENT The Simulator environment comprises five systems: lighting, sound, audio, communications, and furnishings.

Each system and the differences between the Plant and Simulator control rooms will be briefly discussed.

The software documentation on these systems (excluding furnishings) includes a complete description of the simulated scope.~LIGIITING gtgi-Th gi I t I tghtt g 11 t I t I th same as those in the reference plant.The illumination levels are approximately the same as that in the plant control room surveillance area and does not have visible impact on the readability of displays.The Simulator lighting system is programmed to swap normal florescent lighting to emergency incandescent lighting upon simulated loss of vol.tage to control room lighting busses.VIDEO CAHERAS-Located in the Simulated Control Room lighting panels are three cameras used to record various training sessions.These cameras are not installed in the St.Lucie Unit 2 Control Room (See Section 1.3.4 for the'pecific exception).

SOUND SYSTEM-The Simulator sound system consists of replication of the Source Range Audio Count Rate (ACR), the Loose Parts Honitoring system (LPH), and unique steam sounds.Each sound is driven by it's initiating model software with the capability to disable individual sounds or the entire sound system from the instructor facility.Simulated steam sounds include steam line break, moisture separator/reheater relief valves lifting, main steam safety valves lifting, and operation of atmospheric steam dump valves.Page 1.-5 ST.LUCIE INITIAL SIMULATOR CERTIFICATION REPORT 1.2.5 SIMULATOR CONTROL ROOM ENVIRONMENT (Continued):

ALARM SYSTEM-The alarm system consists of the site evacuation alarm, the containment evacuation alarm, and fire alarm.The site evacuation alarm is activated by its respective pushbutton on the operators communication console.The fire alarm can be activated by either its respective pushbutton or wil.l auto initiate when the system is in auto and.a simulated fire report is.phoned to the control room.The containment evacuation alarm is activated by either its respective pushbutton or will auto initiate on a high containment radiation signal.Any or all of the alarms may be initiated or disabled from the instructor facility.~UOI iill-Th i 1t di yt i fthm room Audible Annunciator System.These components replicate the plant equipment in appearance and operation.

COMMUNICATION SYSTEM-The Simulator Communication system consists of the Gaitronics page system, the plant radio system, and the control room telephone system.All of these components duplicate their plant control room counterparts in appearance and operation.

The telephone system is constructed so that all numbers dialed from the control room are answerable in the instructor facility.The Gaitronics system includes a four (4)hour background tape recording of normal plant paging'Traffic'.

This tape can be used by the instructor at any time.FURNISHINGS

-Major plant control room furnishings such as cabinets, chairs, desks and carpeting have been replicate in the simulator in both model and color.The carpeting in the plant control room has been replaced therefore at present time the simulator carpet color is different.

The impact of the different color carpet is minimal and will be replaced when worn to replicate the plant.Small furnishings such as stationary supplies, waste baskets, etc., are supplied, although no attempt has been made to duplicate plant materials.

The Plant Work Order (PWO)computerized system terminal located at the operators console has not been replicated.

Page 1.-6

ST.LUCIE INITIAL SIHULATOR CERTIFICATION REPORT 1.3 INSTRUCTOR INTERFACE 1.3.1 INITIAL CONDITIONS The St.Lucie Simulator has the storage capacity for 60 initialization condition (IC)points.The number containing valid active conditions at any given time depends upon training needs.IC points 1 through 20 are protected and are the basis for development of all other points.Points 21 through 30 are also password protected and are under the control of the Simulator Training Coordinator.

These are generally points created for specific training scenarios which have continuing use.IC points 31 through 60 are unprotected and are used for specific training needs or for the storage of conditions for use in discrepancy clearance.

Table 1-1 presents a summary of the first 15 IC points.All IC points are created from a Full Power Steady State Middle of Life condition.

This plant condition is stored in Initial Condition l.Initial Conditions 14 and 12 are full power steady state conditions for beginning of core life and end of core life.These points are created using utilities to modify core life dependent constants to produce the proper operating characteristics.

Each of the three hot full power conditions are maneuvered using plant operating procedures to produce hot standby for each point in core life.Page 1.-7 ST.LUCIE INITIAL SIMULATOR CERTIFICATION REPORT 1.3.2 MALFUNCTIONS The St.Lucie Simulator is capable of performing all required Malfunctions for PWR's as specified in ANSI/ANS-3.5

-1985.The malfunctions which the Simulator is capable of producing are all based on specifi,c component failures.Specific failure mechanisms are represented for each component.

Therefore, a particular failure to a specific component affects the interfacing components and systems in the same manner as it would in the plant.In other words, there are no programmed"causes and effects." This approach provides many thousands of'ailures and allows for a wide range of combinations of failures without the danger of utilizing pre-conceived ideas of how failures proceed.Where the operator actions are a function of the degree of severity of malfunction (eg., loss of condenser vacuum, steam lin'e break, loss.of coolant, degraded feed water flow, etc.)the simulator has variable severity capability for the malfunction of such range to represent plant capabilities.

Malfunction insertion and termination are easily controlled through the instructor facility.The simulator can be programmed for 130 active malfunctions/failures.

The introduction of a malfunction does not alert the operator in any manner other than that which would occur in the reference Plant Control Room.Table 1-2 illustrates the component specific failure approach and summarizes most of the major malfunctions.

A complete list'of failures that may be imposed on the Simulator by the instructor is included in Reference 1-7.The failures are also addressed in each applicable software model report.Reference 1-5 provides a complete list of the simulator software model reports.Page 1.-8 ST.LUCIE INITIAL SIMULATOR CERTIFICATION REPORT 1.3.3 LOCAL OPERATOR CONTROLS Local Operator Actions (LOA's)are provided to allow the instructor to simulate actions which would be performed by field equipment operators in the Plant.Simulation is included for systems that are operated outside the control room, that provide input to the simulation models, or are necessary for the performance of the plant normal or off-normal evolutions or plant malfunctions.

These actions are controlled from the Instructor Facility and'he trainee interfaces with the instructor in the same manner as he would address the field operators within the Plant.A number of LOA's are modelled via generic modules called"handlers." Using handlers provides a standardized approach for all similar hardware.The following list includes the LOA's that are accessed via the Valve and Breaker handlers.BREAKERS-LOCAL OPERATOR ACTIONS-Local close/trip mechanical, local close/norm/trip electrical, rackout, alarm reset, breaker position, manual spring charging, isolate switch (isolate/normal), selector switch (remote/local), transfer switch (normal/isolate).

VALVES-LOCAL OPERATOR ACTION-Local Handswitch/Local Pushbutton Position BREAKER LOCAL OPERATOR ACTIONS-Local Close/Trip (Mechanical), Rackout, Isolation Switch Page 1.-9 ST.LUCIE INITIAL SIMULATOR CERTIFICATION REPORT 1.3.3 LOCAL OPERATOR CONT OLS (Continued):

Note: Not all Failures or LOA's are applicable to all breakers or valves.The complete list of available LOA's is included in Reference 1-7.They are also addressed in each applicable software model report.Reference 1-5 provides a complete list of the Simulator software model reports.1.3.4 INSTRUCTOR STATION FEATURES The instructor faci 1 i ty (I/F)control s, moni tors, and presents information about the status of the simulator, its simulated plant systems and equipment.

The instructor station has three displays (CRT's)with touch sensitive screens and associated keyboards, three keypads, and communications equipment.

The complete description of instructor station features and its operation can be found in Reference 1-6.\The touch screen CRT's are the primary vehicle the instructor uses to monitor and control the simulator training activities.

The CRT's display the following:

1)2)3)4)5)6)Menus of items for selection via the touch screen.Piping and instrumentation diagrams (PAID'S)of simulated systems, showing status and key parameter values.These include electrical wiring diagrams.Plots of up to eight variables at a time.Text or numerical data pages.Bar chart diagrams.Stylized instrument pages.These are diagrams of control panels which dynamically display device status and provide the instructor with access to main control panel interface overrides, described later in this section.Page 1.-10

'ST.LUCIE INITIAL SIMULATOR CERTIFICATION REPORT 1.3.4 INSTRUCTOR STATION FEATURES (Continued):

Many of the featur es of the Simulator are activated from the keypads at the I/F.Table 1-3 summarizes most of the instructor station functions that are activated from these keypads.There are three video cameras hanging from the overhead inside the Simulator.

These provide input to three television screens in the I/F.The instructor has the ability to move the cameras and zoom in for a closeup look at an individual instrument or control.The cameras can provide an overview of the control room or an individual instrument can be read when a camera is zoomed in.Also, a training session can be video recorded for playback.Fore round Real Time Features The instructor is responsible for the operation and control of the simulator during training sessions in such a way that it provides adequate and complete training for control room personnel.

The instructor controls the operation of the training activities via the following foreground features: 1)2)3)4)5)6)7)8)Initial conditions, snapshots, and backtrack points Performance monitoring, review and replay Failure activation Task speed up or slow down Sound effects Parameter controller Main control panel interface overrides Simulator status alarms The instructor may also develop a scenario that will drive the training sessions with a pre-programmed sequence of events.Individual events may be set to actuate by the instructor, at a given time in the scenario, or be conditional on other events or operator actions.Page l.-11 ST.LUCIE INITIAL SIMULATOR CERTIFICATION REPORT Initial Cond tions Sna shots and Backtrack Points Initial conditions (ICs)and backtrack points are recordings of the simulator common data base stored on disc.The instructor has the capability of initializing the simulator to any of 60 IC points.Backtrack points are made at preset intervals and can be recalled during a training session for review or to re-perform a portion of the scenario.An IC can be saved at any time by utilizing the SNAP key on the instructor's keypad.Performance Monitorin Review and Re la There are five features which allow the instructor to review data which has been stored during an exercise:~Re la allows the instructor to play back a training exercise.It'tarts from a backtrack point and will replay all inputs made from the time the point was stored until the present.It is also possible to replay an earlier training session saved to tape.It should be emphasized that this function records inputs rather than outputs and is actually a re-run of the simulation.

This capability makes the function a valuable tool for testing the simulator in addition to its training uses.Performance Review allows the instructor to enter data about a lesson (students'ames, date, etc.)and have this data, along with all inputs made during an exercise, stored on tape for later review or printed on the line printer.Review Re orts allows an instructor to review data which has been stored on a Performance Review tape.Monitored Parameters allows the user to monitor the values of up to twenty variables.

The Gra hic Recorder allows the instructor to create scenario specific plotting menus.There, can be a total of twelve menus of four parameters each plotted against time.Page 1.-12 ST.LUCIE INITIAL SIMULATOR CERTIFICATION REPORT Failure Activation Failures may be set up from any workstation of the I/F by selecting the PAID display with the target component and then selecting the failure from the menu for the particular device (e.g.valve, pump, etc.).Failuref can also be setup via a Scenario and be activated via the Control Parameters page.Task S eed U or Slow Down The simulation may be slowed or speeded if necessary for training on certain transients.

Speed up is possible only for certain systems, and by a factor of up to 10 maximum.The speedup factors cause the simulation to appear to be running faster than real time.Speedup factors are included for the following systems: 1)Reactor System')Boration and Dilution 3)Condenser Vacuum Time can also be slowed by any factor from 1 to 10.In this case all simulated systems are slowed.Sound Effects Certain sounds that impart a large or great degree of realism to the control room environment are available.

Any or all of these may be enabled or disabled by the instructor (See Section 1.2.5).1 This is limited to the production and decay of iodine, Xenon, Promethiun, and Samariun.Also, speed up can be utilized for the Fuel Burn.Up and Decay Heat.Page 1.-13 ST.LUCIE INITIAL SIMULATOR CERTIFICATION REPORT Parameter Controller The parameter controller permits the instructor to manipulate any parameter in the common data base.The parameter controller works via SINGLE and COMPOSITE EVENT entries.An EVENT consists of a parameter, a trigger and possibly a ramp time or delay time.A TRIGGER is the criteria for an EVENT to be inserted into the system.The instructor can TRIGGER the event himself or have the system do ,it via an expression.

A COMPOSITE is a single event which can consist of up to ten parameter changes.Each parameter change in turn has its own TRIGGER.Main Control Panel Interface Overrides The stylized instrument feature provides CRT displays of all the control and alarm panels.A feature of the stylized instrument displays is that they permit the instructor to override the status of any panel component, alarm, switch, meter, fuse, etc.If this is done, that component will show the value or status entered by the instructor if it is an output device;i.e., one that supplies information to the operators.

If the device overridden is an input device such as a switch or controller, the simulation will respond.as if the device were in the position to which it is overridden.

Simulator Status Alarms The'purpose of the simulator status monitor is to satisfy the requirements of ANSI/ANS 3.5 Section 4.3 by detecting when modules are operating at or beyond physical or simulation limits, and to signal the discrepancy to the instructor.

Parameters were evaluated and, where appropriate, assigned a minimum and maximum value.There are approximately 250 active values that when exceeded will cause an out of limits alarm.When an out of limits condition is detected, an audible alarm is sounded in the Instructor Facility and the SOS button on the keypad will be lit.Pressing the keypad button will silence the instructor facility alarm and will display the STATUS page.Training may continue or be terminated at the instructor's discretion.

Page l.-14 ST.LUCIE INITIAL SIMULATOR CERTIFICATION REPORT Simulator Status Alarms (Continued):

If the simulator is not operating in real time, the SOS Alarm will activate and the simulation will give the instructor an appropriate message.A certification test was performed to demonstrate that the simulator will operate in real time under all conditions and that it would activate the SOS Alarm if simulation did not remain in real time.The abstracts of this test, CRT-001 is included in Volume II of this submittal.

Back round Features Scenario Develo ment This utility allows the instructor to develop a scenario for use in a future training session.The instructor may input some or all of the following information:

2)3)4)5)Initial Conditions, and modifications on a label by label basis.Speed-up or slow-down of Time.Parameter controller.

Monitored parameters and performance indicators.

Graphic recorder parameters.

Instructor Data Book The Instructor Data Book (IDB)provides on-line access to documents and utilities which will aid an instructor in preparing a lesson or scenario.IDB will allow the instructor to list files, print files and locate variables required for scenarios.

1)2)3)4)5)6)Disk file menus Longword/shortword dictionary Abstracts menu Data base manager Scratchpad Scenario abstracts Page 1.-15, ST.LUCIE INITIAL SIMULATOR CERTIFICATION REPORT Instructor Data Book (Continued):

Of these features, the longword/shortword dictionary is the primary feature used by instructors in the development of scenarios or lessons.It will search for common data base labels given a longword description (maximum 45 characters).

When prompted for a longword, enter parts of a longword or the whole longword and the dictionary will be searched.If any of the words entered appear in valid longwords, the associated labels will be returned.The scenario abstracts option permits any abstract to be read but not modified.OPERATING PROCEDURES All certification testing and all training utilizes the actual current plant procedures.

A controlled set of all normal, off-normal, and emergency procedures is maintained in the simulator control room.No differences between the plant and the simulator configuration are noted in the simulator procedures.

Any differences in the oper ation of the simulator as a result of Plant Change Modifications (PCM's)are covered by the instructor on a case by case basis.Maintaining the current revision of the plant procedures always insures that the current operating philosophy of the reference plant is provided in the simulator.

For this reason, an exception has been taken to the recommendation to report any differences between the simulator procedures and the reference plant procedures.

CHANGES SINCE LAST REPORT This is the initial Simulator Certification Report;therefore there are no changes to report.Page 1.-16 CR Q'iC C-~CC C CC ATE I E DETECTI44 SYSTEH~CC CC'R sr SDI I'mr or~R S I'H A aTE TDL I C 4 SI APERY'URE p CARD fp Also AvaiiaMe On Aperture Card~" FK~sxsas~Ca sr ib gC TR CR r ae'SCI C'CC'HAS al'OT%5 El CIEtKTIC SDRAATIIN at%Ye n rmaRxa aeDR:Ts Q HIT TEIL RESTE swTDavM p~INSThLLED RR Cl&VENIENCE iQ 3~5'g/~$CI CPACC CICIIKT ICCICC PAGE 1;17 F'IGURE 1-1 1 I ST.LUCIE INITIAL SIMULATOR CERTIFICATION REPORT'ABLE 1-1 SUHHARY OF INITIAL CONDITIONS 1-15 CO E GE DESCRIP IO MOL HOL MOL 100%FPSS, Equilibrium Xenon, Steady State.50%Power, Xenon Increasing.

Hot Standby, 4 Hours Post Trip.HOL HOL HOL Ready for Reactor Startup, Post Trip.Plant Start-Up, 2%Power, Ready to Roll Turbine.Plant Start-Up, 10%Power, Ready to Sync Hain Generator.

HOL HOL Plant Cooldown, Ready to Place on Shutdown Cooling.Plant Mode 5, on Shutdown Cooling.MOL HOL Ready for Reactor Start-Up with no Xenon Plant Heat-Up, on Shutdown Cooling, Ready to.Draw Pressurizer Bubble HOL EOL EOL BOL BOL Plant Heat-Up, Ready to come off Shutdown Cooling 100%FPSS, Equilibrium Xenon.Ready for Reactor Start-Up, Shutdown CEA's out.100%FPSS, Equilibr'ium Xenon.Ready for Reactor Start-Up, Shutdown CEA's out, with positive MTC Page 1.-18 ST.LUCIE INITIAL SIMULATOR CERTIFICATION REPORT TABLE 1-2

SUMMARY

OF MALFUNCTIONS SYSTEM LEAKS-Variable to Double Ended Guillotine RCS-Cold Legs and Hot Legs CVCS-Charging and Letdown Line-Multiple Locations SIS-Suction and Discharge Line-Inside&Outside Containment PRESSURIZER

-Spray and Surge Line COMPONENT COOLING-Header Leaks, Heat Exchanger Leaks MAIN STEAM-Main Steam Line-Inside Containment Main Steam Line-Outside Containment/Upstream of MSIV Main Steam Line-Between MSIV&NRV Main Steam Header Downstream of MSIV CONDENSER-Vacuum Leak and Tube Leak CONDENSATE

-Pump Seal Leaks, Header Leak FEEDWATER-Header, Individual Lines Inside&Outside Containment AUXILIARY FEEDWATER-Pump Discharge, Each Header STEAM GENERATOR TUBE LEAKS-Variable Single to Multi-Tube ACCUMULATOR CHECK VALVE LEAKAGE-Variable to 100%HEAT EXCHANGER TUBE LEAKS-Variable Single to Multi-Tube RCP Thermal Barrier CVCS Non-Regenerative Heat Exchanger REACTOR COOLANT PUMP SEAL FAILURES-Variable to 100%, Seals 1/2/3 TANK LEAKS-All Simulated Tanks FUEL FAILURE/RCS ACTIVITY INCREASE-Variable FILTER BLOCKAGE-Variable to 100%, Filters, Strainers, and Screens NUCLEAR INSTRUMENTATION FAILURES Power Range-Detector Failures-High&Low Bistable Failures Intermediate Range-Detector Failures-High&Low Incorrect Compensation

-Variable Over&Under Bistable Failures Source Range-Detector Failures-High&Low Incorrect Discrimination

-Variable High&Low Excessive Noise Bistable Failures Page l.-19 ST.LUCIE INITIAL SIMULATOR CERTIFICATION REPORT TABLE 1-2

SUMMARY

OF MALFUNCTIONS (Continued):

TURBINE RUNBACK FAILURES-Fail to Actuate, Spurious Actuation ROD STOP FAILURES-Fail to Actuate, Spurious Actuation REACTOR TRIP RELAY FAILURES-Fail to Actuate, Spurious Actuation PROTECTION RELAY-Fail to Actuate, Delayed or Spurious Actuation SI RELAY FAILURES-Train A/Train B-Manual/Auto Fail to Actuate, Spurious Actuation REACTOR TRIP BREAKERS FAILURES-Fail Open, Fail Closed, Fail As-Is CONTROL ROD FAILURES-(All Rods)Ejection, Slip to Any Position-Variable to Fully Inserted, Dropped Rod, Dropped Group , Mechanically Stuck, Blown Fuses, Uncoupled Rod, Rods Fail to Move or Continuous Motion-Auto or Manual TURBINE FAILS TO TRIP GENERATOR VOLTAGE REGULATOR FAILURE DIESEL GENERATOR FAIL TO START-A and/or B ELECTRICAL BUS FAILURES-Ground Fault, Phase to Phase Short-Variable~BREAK RS GENERIC FAILURES-Fail Close, Fail Open, Fail As Is, Fail to Reset, Ground Fault (Load Side)Note: Not all Failures are applicable to all breakers.VALVES GENERIC FAILURES-Fail Open, Fail Closed, Fail As Is, Leak By, Mechanical Overload, Loss of Electric Power, Loss of Pneumatic Power, Loss of Control or Conditioning Signal BREAKER FAILURES-Fail Closed, Fail Open, Fail As Is, Ground Fault Note: Not all Failures are applicable to all valves.Page l.-20 ST.LUCIE INITIAL SIMULATOR CERTIFICATION REPORT STRUMENTATION GENERIC FAILURES INDICATOR-Power Loss, Signal Loss, Fail High, Fail Low, Fail As Is, Drift ALARM RELAY-Energized, De-energized, As Is 8/S TRIP UNIT-Loss of Power, Loss of Signal, Alarm Relay Fail Energized, De-energized, As Is DIFFERENTIAL COHP-Loss of Power, Loss of Signal 1, 2, or Both, Alarm 81/82-Relay Fail Energized, De-energized, As Is, Spurious On SIGNAL CONDITIONER

-Power Loss TRANSNITTERS

-Loss of Power, Loss of Air, Fail High, Fail Low, Fail As Is, Drift Coefficient, Lag Coefficient SENSORS-Noise Amplitude, Fail Coefficient Multiplier, Offset in Output CONTROLLERS

-Fail High, Low, or As Is, Loss of Power, Loss of Air, Loss of Input Signal Note: Not all Failures are applicable to all instrumentation.

Page l.-21 ST.LUCIE INITIAL SIMULATOR CERTIFICATION REPORT TABLE 1-3 INSTRUCTOR STATIONS NIN KEYPAD FUNCTIONS PUSHBUTTON FUNCTION F/R ANN DIS RESET STEP PG PRT COPY SNAP OVR CHX DEA SCE REC PWR MAST FAIL GLB CLR SYS MAT BAK TRK INI SCE IC SEL SOS Freeze/run.

This switch resumes simulation software, if it is pressed when the switch is lit.'f lit no real time simulation software is active., To disable/re-enable the audible alarms.If depressed while the simulation is frozen, flashing annunciator windows will be lit.Causes the simulator to be restored to the selected initial condition.

When the operation is in step mode, pressing this key causes the-simulation software to cycle through one"ste'p".Page Forward/Page Backward Schematics are displayed successively in numerical order of their occurrence.

In data book mode, these keys scroll through the document being displayed Print current contents of the CRT screen at the line printer, The key remains lit and the CRT locked during the memory read cycle.The light goes off when the CRT unlocks again.Calls up the page which allows for the creation of initial conditions.

Override switch check.Permits the instructor to accept any mispositioned device on the menu during switch check.Places all parameter controls which are not yet active on hold and stops any controls that are ramping or in time delays.Power shutdown of all control room chart recorders.

Activates all armed failures.Global clear of all active failures.To call up the overall Master System Matrix.Calls up a menu page that enables the instructor to: a)Set backtrack time (interval between backtrack points), b)Initialize the simulator to any backtrack point, c)Initiate replay from any backtrack point, d)Restore to the autostore point.Brings up a menu of scenarios on to the CRT.Instructor then makes a selection using the touch sensitive screen.Brings up a summary of existing initial conditions.

The instructor can restore the simulator to any point.If li,t displays the simulator system status of all out of tolerance parameters.

If not lit, there is nothing to display.Must be depressed to silence IF alarm when out of bounds status alarm occurs.Page 1.-22 ST.LUCIE INITIAL SIMULATOR CERTIFICATION REPORT PUSHBUTTON TABLE 1-3 INSTRUCTOR STATIONS MAIN KEYPAD FUNCTIONS (Continued):

FUNCTION MON PAR CON PAR SIM CTRL REPLAY HOOP PERF REV SOUND STYL INST IDB DEV SCE TIME PERF IND ANN ACK BYP CHX Parameters being monitored are displayed on the screen.The instructor can add and delete parameters being monitored to a maximum of 20.Brings up the control parameter page onto the screen.Parameter controller values may be entered.Calls up the Level 0 simulator control menu.Functions include level 1 pages: a)Armed failure summary, b)Environmental effects, c)Switch check messages, d)Local Operator Actions'Index e)Plant performance factors, f)Environmental factors, g)Timed failure, h)Part task, j)Function Keyboard Control.Brings up a menu from which to start a replay.Brings up a menu so that the instructor may disable one or more real time software modules.Brings up a menu of performance review function so that the instructor can make a selection, using the touch sensitive screen.Brings up the tableau allowing the instructor to enable/disable sound effects.Stylized instruments.

Brings up the index, so that selected panel sections can be displayed on the touch sensitive screen.The status of all devices, or the indicated reading of an instrument can be read, or overridden.

Sets CRT to Instructor Data Book mode.Instructor data book files are only open if this button is lit.Enter scenario development mode.This enables the instructor to build scenarios for use in future training sessions.Time control mode.Brings up a menu of modules that can be sped up~by a factor of between 1 and 10.The menu includes the possibility of the initiation of the step mode or of slowing the simulation down by a factor of between 1 and 10.Brings up a display of Performance indicators.

Selections are made by means of the touch sensitive screen.Acknowledges annunciators as if from the control room.Bypasses Switch Check mode following IC reset.Page 1.-23 ST.LUCIE INITIAL SIMULATOR CERTIFICATION REPORT REFERENCES l-l Plant and Simulator Control Room Floor Plan Drawing, Rev.1, Jan.1991.1-2 1990 Simulator Physical Fidelity Validation Report, Rev.1, Jan.1991.1-3 Simulator Procurement Specification, Rev.4, Mar.1985.1-4 Scope of Simulation Document, Rev.1, Jan.1991.1-5 Index of Process Model Documentation, Rev.1, Jan.1991.1-6 Instructor Station Manual, Aug.1990.1-7 Listing of Common Data Base Global Partitions for Instructor Controls, Rev.4, Dec.1990.Page l.-24 ST.LUCIE INITIAL SIMULATOR CERTIFICATION REPORT 2.0 SIMULATOR DESIGN DATA BASE Each module of the St.Lucie Simulator is fully described in its associated model report published by the simulator vendor.The model reports describe the methodology used to develop the individual module and explain the FORTRAN code used to implement this methodology.

These model reports are kept in the nuclear tr aining center simulator library.One complete set is maintained as a library design reference document and one set is kept current for a working reference.

The model reports list references from which St.Lucie specific technical information was obtained.These references include technical manuals, piping and instrumentation drawings, plant operating data, control wiring diagrams, computer software listings, recorder strip charts, design calculations, plant modification documentation, supporting test data, and other relevant material.A Database[Reference 2-2]has been built to include these references plus all of the design references used to build the panels.The references listed in this Database are available for use in the Simulator Library or are obtainable from the FPL Document Center.Plant Administrative Procedure Number 0010524, Simulator Configuration Control requires design changes to be tracked.These changes are reviewed for impact on the Simulator and when a change impacts the Simulator, it is scheduled for implementation by the Simulator Engineering Coordinator and entered into the Simulator Configuration Management System.The SCRB meets at least once per quarter.This board reviews all Simulator modification packages.REFERENCES 2-1 Simulator Configuration Control, Plant Administrative Procedure Number 0010524, Rev.1, Jan.29, 1991 2-2 Design Database Listing, Rev.1, Jan.1991 Page 2.-1 ST.LUCIE INITIAL SIMULATOR CERTIFICATION REPORT 3.0 Simulator Tests 3.1 Summar y SECTION 3.0 SIMULATOR TESTS The Simulator Certification Testing was performed according to the requirements and recommendations of ANSI/ANS 3.5-1985[Reference 3-1]and NUREG 1258 draft-March 1987[Reference 3-2].A total of one hundred tests were developed to meet the requirements of ANSI/ANS 3.5-1985.(See Table 3-1).These tests were performed on the simulator and evaluated by comparison to Best Estimate Analyses, existing reference plant and industry data, and/or expert judgement.

The result of these tests are summarized in Volume 2 of this submittal.

These summaries contain all of the information recommended in the"Simulation Facility Evaluation Program", by Neal K.Hunemuller, USNRC[Reference 3-3].The summaries in Volume 2 contain the first five sections of each test procedure and the test team review and evaluation summary.One complete test package is contained in volume 3 as an example of the completed tests.This test was developed from the requirement of ANSI/ANS 3.5, Section 3.1.2.(4)Loss of forced coolant flow due to single or multiple pump failure.As part of this test, a reactor vessel head bubble was formed so that comparison could be made with the St Lucie Unit 1 event of June ll, 1980 (which involved the formation of a Reactor Vessel Head Bubble).The following sections of this report explain the testing program in detail.The first section is an explanation of how testing quality was maintained throughout the program.This is followed by a section which explains how the scope of testing was determined.

The remaining sections discuss the development of the test procedures, the performance of the tests, and the test evaluations.

Page 3.-1 ST.LUCIE INITIAL SIMULATOR CERTIFICATION REPORT 3.2 guality Assurance for Certification Testing The Certification Simulator Test Program required a 7 man-year commitment over 16 months.The Simulator Test program was developed and accomplished in stages (see Figure 3-1,"ANSI/ANS 3.5 Requirements and guality Assurance for Simulator Certification Program").At each stage, the quality assur ance was performed by utilizing the ANSI/ANS 3.5 recommendations to develop the program and obtaining Simulator Configuration Review Board (SCRB)review and approval.The SCRB consisted of a Nuclear Plant Supervisor (a current SRO), the Licensed Training Program Coordinator (a previously licensed SRO), and the Simulator System Coordinator (Simulator Engineer).

The SCRB is chaired by the Operations Training Program Supervisor (a current SRO).One of the main goals for the Certification Testing Program was to establish and maintain the highest possible quality.This was insured by the following methods: A Certification Test Team was established to write the test procedures, perform the preliminary simulator tests, assist in the final simulator tests, and perform the initial evaluations.

This test team included current St.Lucie Senior Reactor Operators, a representative from guality Assurance, and formerly licensed representatives from the corporate staff.2.The participation of each of the three groups involved with Operator Training was maintained throughout the test program.This included Operations, Operations Training, and Simulator Engineering.

3.The scope of the testing was developed by using a systematic approach based on the requirements of ANSI/ANS 3.5 (See Section 3.3, Scope oF Tests-Determination of the 100%Certification Test List).This resulted in many more tests than simply the 25 malfunctions listed in ANSI/ANS 3.5, Section 3.1.2.4.The SCRB reviewed and approved the 100%Certification Test List prior to the start of the test program.Page 3.-2

'ST.LUG IE INITIAL SIMULATOR CERTIFICATION REPORT 3.2 guality Assurance for Certification Testing (Continued):

5.The tests were written according to an Approved Training Department Instruction, TDI¹38,"Test Development and Evaluation Procedure",[Reference 3-4].See Section 3.4,"Test Development".

6.The"Test Development and Evaluation Procedure" included a comprehensive list of objectives which was developed from ANSI/ANS 3.5.The applicable objectives from this list were included in each test procedure to insure that the ANSI/ANS 3.5 guidelines were followed for each test.7.A test procedure checklist was included in TDI¹38, Revision 1.This checklist was required to be completed prior to the Simulator Configuration Review Board (SCRB)approval of the test procedure.

The checklist included the requirement to review the comprehensive list of objectives.

Written explanations were required to show either how the test procedure met the objective, or why the objective was not required for the test.The checklist also required the signatures of representatives of each of the reviewing groups, Operations, Simulator Engineering, and Training.(See Volume 3 of this submittal, Tab: "Test Procedure", for a completed copy of the checklist along with the justification for the list of objectives).

8.The preliminary Simulator Tests were performed with the assistance of Operations Training Instructors who were currently licensed Senior Reactor Operators.

9 The SCRB reviewed and approved each test procedure prior to its performance on the simulator as a final test.A total of 29 SCRB meetings were held to approve all of the test procedures.

These were formal meetings where minutes were recorded for each meeting.SCRB recommendations were incorporated into the test procedures prior to their approval.Page 3.-3 ST.LUCIE INITIAL SIMULATOR CERTIFICATION REPORT 3.2 Quality Assurance for Certification Testing (Continued):

10.Each of the final tests on the simulator was performed with at least one currently licensed SRO present.In many cases two licensed SRO's were present.Each of the reviewing groups, Operations, Simulator Engineering, and Training, had a representative present during the final test.This was in addition to a member of the Certification Team.This insured that knowledgeable people observed the actual response of the simulator throughout the test.ll.Some method of recording the Critical and Test Specific Parameters was used for each final test.For most of the tests, the parameters were recorded by a simulator recording program during the final simulator test and were later graphed to allow detailed evaluation.

Also, all of the alarm window annunciators were recorded by a simulator recording program.This provided a method for later review to insure that the ANSI/ANS 3..5, section 4.2.1 (c)requirement was met ("...the simulator shall not fail to cause an alarm...if the reference plant would have caused an alarm...and...shall not cause an alarm if the reference plant would not cause an alarm...").For those cases where another method of recording the parameters and alarms was used, the actual method used has been identified in the Evaluation Summaries for the tests (See volume 2 for a complete copy of all of the Evaluation Summaries).

12.Each of the recorded graphs were annotated with explanations for the response of each parameters.

Also, the alarm annunciator printouts were reviewed for erroneous and/or missing alarms.A discrepancy report was written for each problem found.13.A checklist was required for the evaluation of each test.This checkli'st included the signature of a SRO for the review of the alarm recorder summary.(See Volume 3 of this submittal, Tab: "Appendix A, Evaluation", for a completed copy of the checklist).

14.The Test Team Evaluation Summary required a signature from members of each of the reviewing groups-Operations, Simulator Engineering, and Training prior to approval by the SCRB.Page 3.-4 ST.LUCIE INITIAL SIMULATOR CERTIFICATION REPORT 3.2 guality Assurance for Certification Testing (Continued):

15.The Test Team Evaluation Summary and Test Package for each test was reviewed and approved by the SCRB.A total of 15 formal SCRB meetings were held to approve all of the evaluations.

guestions from the SCRB were resolved prior to the final acceptance of the Evaluations.

In some cases, simulator tests were re-run to obtain additional data for the SCRB.These cases are identified in the minutes of the SCRB meetings.3.3 Scope of Tests (Determination of the 100%Certification Test List)Individual Tests were developed by using the General Requirements contained in ANSI/ANS 3.5, Section 3.1.1 and 3.1.2, along with the Simulator Operability Tests of ANSI/ANS 3.5, Appendix B.References 3-2 and 3-3 were also reviewed to insure compliance with all of the available guidance from the NRC, in addition to ANSI/ANS 3.5.There were two primary considerations in generating a 100%test list.First, the 100%test list included all of the ANSI/ANS 3.5~re uired tests.And, second, the 100%test list included additional tests which were not specifically required by ANSI/ANS 3.5 to insure a complete test program (as a result of this, we included tests of the Hot Shutdown Control Panel and the St Lucie Head Bubble event).A preliminary review of ANSI/ANS 3.5 revealed several areas which were subjective and did not completely define the scope of tests which must be performed in these areas.Consequently, it was necessary to develop a reasoning process for determining which tests would be performed.

In general, we started with the major test categories provided by the list of Normal Plant Evolutions in ANSI/ANS 3.5 Section 3.1.1 and the list of Plant Malfunctions in ANSI/ANS 3.5, Section 3.1.2.We then examined the additional information of ANSI/ANS 3.5 to determine the number of individual tests which would be needed within each category.For example, we determined that it would be necessary to have two separate tests for SG Tube Rupture based on the following examination:

Page 3.-5 ST.LUCIE INITIAL SIMULATOR CERTIFICATION REPORT 3.3 Scope of Tests (Determination of the 100%%u Certification Test List)(Continued):

Section 3.1.2 of ANSI/ANS 3.5 requires that"Where the operator actions are a function of the degree of severity of the malfunction

...the simulator shall have adjustable rates for the malfunction of such a range to represent the plant malfunction conditions." To insure that this requirement was met for SG Tube Ruptures, we reviewed the reference plant procedures:

ONOP-2-0830030, SG Tube Leak[Reference 3-5], and 2-EOP-04, SG Tube Rupture[Reference 3-6].Based on these reference plant procedures, it was necessary to create two tests for the malfunction"significant PWR steam generator leaks".The first test was for-that of a single tube rupture and the second test started with a small tube leak which escalated to a multiple tube rupture (with a break area equivalent to approximately 10 tubes).Choosing these two tests insured that most of the procedure steps in the reference plant procedures on SG Tube Ruptures would be performed on the simulator.

These tests checked the entire range of operator actions for steam generator tube leaks.Certain test categories required special consideration to insure that all of the necessary tests were identified.

One area in particular was that of Safety Related Surveill'ance Testing.The surveillance testing was reviewed according to the methodology shown in Figure 3-2.Figure 3-2 begins with the requirement to review the Administrative Procedure 2-0010125,"Schedule of Periodic Tests, Checks, and Calibrations"[Reference 3-8].This procedure contains both Safety related and Non Safety related surveillance tests and checks, which are performed by the Operations Department.

The first test question determines if the surveillance is safety related.The requirement to test"safety-related equipment or systems" was interpreted as all the equipment and/or systems required by Technical Specifications.

Even if the equipment/systems were found not to be safety related, it was further required that the surveillance test could not lead to a plant transient or unsafe condition.

This requirement resulted in performing a test of the Turbine Control Valves, Certification Test SUR-014.While this particular surveillance test is required by Technical Specifications, the turbine itself is not considered safety related.If either of the criteria were met, then the surveillance was checked to be within the scope of the simulator.

If within the scope of the simulator, the surveillance was then checked to be within the PSL Simulator Training Program or if it was likely to be added to the training program.The basis for these questions was that there was no reason to certify surveillance tests which are not used in simulator training.-~Page 3.-6 ST.;LUCIE INITIAL SIMULATOR CERTIFICATION REPORT 3.3 Scope of Tests (Determination of the 100/Certification Test List)(Continued):

However, it was later recognized that this was not an exception specifically allowed by ANSI 3.5 and that it was possible that certain surveillance tests eliminated by this question could reveal important deficiencies with the simulator.

Consequently, the surveillance tests which were initially eliminated by this question were reviewed again to insure that no important surveillance tests had been eliminated.

All of these tests initially eliminated were found to be in one of the following categories:

1.The test responses were not visible to the operators in the simulator control room.These included tests of Gas Analyzer (functional tests), Main Steam and Main Feedwater Isolation Valve Partial Stroke Periodic tests, and other tests done from remote locations outside the control room.2.The criteria tested by the surveillance test was already implicitly tested in other certification tests.This included AFW, HPSI, LPSI, and other pump Head and Capacity tests, Valve Stroke.Tests, and Heating Ventilation and Air Conditioning tests which were already verified in the malfunction tests which required operation of the systems which included these pumps, valves and fans.For example, a problem with the HPSI Head curves used by Fuel Engineering in their RETRAN analysis of a main steam line break was found during the evaluation of Certification Test MAL-041.3.Individual readings required by 2-0010125,"Schedule of Periodic Tests, Checks, and Calibrations" were all verified in the Steady State Tests, SST-001 and SST-002.Surveillance Tests which only check the initial readiness of equipment or systems were covered by the initial condition verifications of the malfunction tests.The valve alignment surveillance for safety systems is an example of this.Page 3.-7 ST.LUCIE INITIAL SIMULATOR CERTIFICATION REPORT 3.3 Scope of Tests (Determination of the 100%Certification Test List)(Continued):

5.Certain surveillance tests were incorporated in the performance of the Normal Plant Evolutions of Startup and Shutdown.For example, the Turbine Trip Test is performed in NPE-003, Turbine Startup and Generator Synchronization.

The Safety Related Surveillance Tests which were not explicitly tested, were verified to be in at least one of the above categories.

As a result of these processes, an initial 100%Certification Test List was developed (See Table 3-2).This test list is comprised of six (6)categories:

l.2.3.4.5.6.Normal Plant Evolutions Safety Related Surveillances Plant Halfunctions Steady State Transient Computer Real Time Tests During the writing of the tests it was decided that six (6)of the initially identified tests would either be deleted or incorporated into other tests.Table 3-2 shows these as"Deleted".

The following indicates the disposition of these tests.SUR-001-Shutdown Hargin Verification

-Test was deleted based on SUR-003 already verifying the only acceptance criteria (Rod Worth+/-10%Deviation).

SUR-007-Nuclear and Delta T Power Calibration

-Test was incorporated into SST-002, Steady State at Power Level Hold Points.SUR-016-CEA Block Circuit Check-Test was incorporated in NPE-002, Nuclear startup from hot standby to rated power.Page 3.-8 ST.LUCIE INITIAL SIMULATOR CERTIFICATION REPORT 3.3 Scope of Tests (Determination of the 10%Certification Test List)(Continued):

SUR-017-SDC Auto Isolation-It was determined that the referenced procedure for this test is entirely an I&C procedure.

The test was deleted based on no operator actions being required.SUR-019-RCGVS Vent Path Test-This test was deleted based on no simulator training planned in this area.MAL-063-Automatic Control System Failures-Test was deleted based on all Automatic Control Systems Failures having already been tested in other malfunction tests (MAL-064 through HAL-067).This test number and title had been included on the original 100%Certification Test List in case any automatic control systems were determined to require additional testing.To insure that each type of accident analyzed in the reference plant safety analysis report was included in the certification test program,,the test list was compared to the St.Lucie FUSAR[Reference 3-8].The St.Lucie FUSAR Chapter 15, Accident Analysis, contains a comprehensive listing of all of the accident analyses which were performed in the FUSAR.These accident analyses are listed according to category.The certification tests were examined with regard to each of these categories.

We reviewed the FUSAR to insure that each category was thoroughly tested in the Certification Test Program.Table 3-3, Certification Tests by FUSAR Accident Analysis Category, is a listing of the certification tests according to the FUSAR accident analysis categories.

Page 3.-9 ST.LUCIE INITIAL SIHULATOR CERTIFICATION REPORT 3.4 Test Development A Training Department Instruction (TDI)838,"Simulator Certification Test Development and Evaluation Procedure" was written to control the writing of each of the test procedures.

This procedure provided a guideline for the writing of each individual test which insured that all of the individual objectives were met and that consistency among the tests was maintained.

The"Simulator Certification Test Development and Evaluation Procedure" contains instructions on how to write each section of a test procedure and what material should be included in it.The following explains the basis for each section of the test procedure.

See Volume 3 of this submittal, Tabbed Section"Test Procedure", for an example of a completed test procedure.

Note: The first 5 (five)sections of each test procedure are included in Volume 2 of this submittal for all of the tests.This part of the test procedure, along with the Appendix A, Test Team Review and Evaluation, incorporate all of the recommended items of Reference 3-3.a.Section 1.0 Title This section has the title of the Test Procedure.

b.Section 2.0 Review and A royal Signature blanks were provided for the review by the SCRB and the approval of the Training Department Superintendent.

Page 3.-10 ST.LUCIE INITIAL SIMULATOR CERTIFICATION REPORT Test Development (Continued):

Section 3.0 References This section contains all of the references used in writing this test.The specific reference from ANSI/ANS 3.5 is stated.This reference section also includes the FUSAR Sections which have information pertaining to the systems being tested.However, because the Safety Analysis is based on conservative initial conditions and assumptions, it was not used for data comparison except for a couple of tests.In these tests, where other data was got available, the FUSAR was'used to determine transient"Boundaries".

The applicable reference plant procedures are also listed in this section.The referenced Industry Experience and the St Lucie Plant In-House Event/License Event Report were used as part of the Baseline Data.Section 4.0 Re uired Records The completed test procedure is required to be kept in the plant files in accordance with QI 17-PR/PSL-1,"Quality Assurance Records"[Reference 3-9].Section 5.0 A roach A brief description of the test is included in this section.In addition, the Initial and Final Conditions, Options, and Limitations and Assumptions, are included as recommended in Reference 3-3.Section 6: Ob'ectives ANSI/ANS 3.5 contains many statements in the paragraphs preceding and following the list of recommended tests (Section 3.0, General Requirements).

These statements explain the extent to which the tests should be performed.

For example, ANSI/ANS 3.5, Section 3.1.2 has the statement that"The simulation shall be capable of continuing until such time that a stable, controllable and safe condition is attained These statements were identified as"objectives" which must be met for each test.A comprehensive list of objectives was developed from ANSI/ANS 3.5 (see Table 3-4, Comprehensive List of Objectives).

Only those objectives which apply to each particular test were included.This was seen as a crucial part of the test procedure since it would be the controlling factor in insuring that all of the applicable guidance of ANSI/ANS 3.5, was followed.Page 3.-11 ST.LUCIE INITIAL SIMULATOR CERTIFICATION REPORT 3.4 Test Development (Continued):

g.Section 7: Evaluation Basis The method of evaluation was either Best Estimate Analysis (RETRAN),[Reference 3-10]comparison with plant acceptance criteria, comparison with plant/Industry data, and/or exper t judgement.

There were a total of five RETRAN Analyses which were performed (see section 3.7.b.1 for a detailed discussion on the RETRAN analyses).

The RETRAN analyses were performed for the following tests: MAL-001 One Complete Steam Generator Tube Rupture MAL-005 One Small Break LOCA which Repressurizes in a Saturated ConditionMAL-041 Double-Ended Main Steam Line Break Inside Containment MAL-068 Anticipated Transient without Scram (ATWS)TRN-010 One Failed Open PZR Safety Valve which Depressurizes to a Saturated Condition Without HPSI All of the Safety Related'urveillance Tests (SURs)were evaluated by comparison to the plant acceptance criteria.Since all of the reference plant equipment has already had to meet all of the acceptance criteria within the plant test procedures, this provides an indirect comparison with the actual results in the reference plant.In addition, the Normal Plant evolutions of Plant Startup and Plant Shutdown (NPE-001, NPE-002, NPE-003, and NPE-005)were evaluated in part by the inherent acceptance criteria provided by the step by step instructions in the reference plant procedures.

Wherever possible, actual plant transients were used as comparison data.This included plant data for the Core Performance Testing.In addition to the plant transients which occurred on the reference plant, industry data and NUREG reports were used to insure as accurate a testing program as possible.The industry events included the North Anna'Tube Rupture (VEPCO North Anna Unit 1, July 15, 1987 Steam Generator Tube Rupture Event Report, August 17, 1987[Re'ference 3-11], RE Ginna Steam Generator Tube Rupture (NUREG-0909)

[Reference 3-12], Vogtle Loss of Shutdown Cooling, (NUREG-1410)

[Reference 3-13], and selected information from'the TMI II Transient.

Page 3.-12 ST.LUCIE INITIAL SIMULATOR CERTIFICATION REPORT 3.4 Test Developm'ent (Continued):

g.Section 7: Evaluation Basis (Continued):

These events provided some basis'or comparison because of their significant overall impact on the plants.However, while other industry events have occurred in areas such as electric power losses and auxiliary system losses/problems, comparisons were not attempted due to significant plant design differences and/or relatively simple plant responses (compared to LOCAs, Steam Line Breaks, or SG Tube Ruptures).

Because of the small number of transients which have occurred at the St.Lucie Power Plant, many of the tests were identified as requiring expert judgement to complete the evaluation (see section 3.7.b.4 for a detailed discussion on the methods and quality assurance for tests examined using expert judgement).

h.'ection 8.1 Critical Parameters

~~~~~The Critical Parameters were determined by examining Reg.Guide 1.97[Reference 3-14].A comprehensive listing of all of the Reg Guide 1.97 Category 1&2 variables was developed (see Table 3-5, Comprehensive list of Monitored Parameters).

The Critical Parameters for each test procedure were selected from this list.Those parameters which would be affected by the test and which were important to the operator's response and control of the transient, were selected from this list and included in the test procedure.

The first 15 parameters of the comprehensive list were required to be recorded for each test.For those tests which had no impact on the major heat transfer parameters (eg.Surveillances), these first 15 parameters demonstrated that the simulator was at steady state during the performance of the test.Page 3.-13

ST.LUCIE INITIAL SIMULATOR CERTIFICATION REPORT 3.4 Test Development (Continued):

i.Section 8.2 Test S ecific Parameters This list included the additional parameters (control room instruments), which were necessary for operator diagnosis and control of the event.In some cases, additional parameters were added which were needed to complete the evaluation of the test.As a starting point, the Test Development procedure included a list of the most frequently used test specific parameters.

Other test specific parameters were added by the writers of the individual tests as needed.j.Section 9.0 Test Instructions This section contains the actual test instructions.

In most of the tests, where a reference plant procedure existed, the test instructions simply require the completion of the applicable plant procedure step.Additional information is provided in the test procedure as necessary to clarify the action required.In certain certification tests, there were no specific plant procedures which applied.For example, the transient tests of ANSI/ANS 3.5, Appendix B did not use reference plant procedures since the Appendix B instructions recommended limited operator action.k.Attachment I Simulator Scenario The Scenario Description contains the listing of the program which, is actuated on the simulator to initiate the transient.

These instructions are contained in the section of the scenario labeled"Composite Malfunction Selection".

In addition to initiating the transient, the composites are used for certain operator actions which are required during the test.Including these operator actions as part of the scenario provided for repeatability of the.test during the initial test program and also for comparison in the re-certification tests.All of the actions which are included in the scenario as operator actions were performed during the preliminary tests on the control panels, verifying that all of the operator'actions are performable in the simulator.

Page 3.-14 ST.LUCIE INITIAL SIMULATOR CERTIFICATION REPORT 3.4 Test Development (Continued):

k.Attachment 1 Simulator Scenar'o (Continued):

The scenario description also contains a monitored parameter section which can be used to observe up to 20 parameters on the screens in the Instructor Facility.In addition, the"Graphic Recorder Entry" could be used to obtain graphs from the simulator.

This feature was almost never used, since another simulator recorder program was available with better graphing capabilities.

A endix A Evaluation This Appendix contains the evaluation summary which is included in Volume 2 for each test.Volume 2 contains the evaluation summaries for each of the Certification Tests.In Volume 3, this is located at the Tab,"Appendix A Evaluation".

This Appendix also contains the Evaluation Checklist which was completed by the evaluators to insure that all of the necessary parts of the evaluation had been performed (the basis for this is discussed in section 3.7, Evaluation).

m.A endix B Gra hs This Appendix was provided to allow for the addition of the graphs after the final simulator test was completed.

Alarms The alarms were included in each test package as a separate tabbed section.n.A endix C SIMEX Com arison Listin This Appendix was provided to preserve a listing of the revisions of each of the simulator models at the time the final test was performed.

This is essential for determining the reason for differences observed during the subsequent Re-Certifications every four years.o.A endix D Notes This appendix provided for the recording of the test team members present at the time of the final simulator test, a chronological log of the operator actions, as well as any problems which were seen during the test.Page 3.-15 ST.LUCIE INITIAL SIHULATOR CERTIFICATION REPORT 3.5 Preliminary Simulator Tests Preliminary Simulator tests were performed for all of the identified tests to discover any major discrepancies.

Hany of these discrepancies were resolved prior to the final simulator test.Only those discrepancies which were outstanding at the time of the final simulator test were recorded in the Test Team Review and Evaluation which is included in Volume II for each test.These preliminary tests also provided initial checkouts of the test procedures.

3.6 Performance of the Test Representatives from each of the three Departments affected by operator training were present during'each of the final tests.These departments consisted of Operations, Training, and the Simulator Engineering Group.These three test team members, along with a member of the Certification Team, carefully observed the simulator response during the test.Each test was run strictly according to the test procedure which has blanks for initials beside each important step of the test procedure.

See Volume 3 of this submittal, Tab: "Test Procedure", for an example of a completed test procedure.

The parameters identified in Section 8.0 of each test procedure were recorded on a simulator recording program.These parameters were recorded at the following frequencies:

Normal Plant Evolutions (Which required several hours to complete 1 minute Physics Tests and Surveillances Halfunctions Transients (ANSI/ANS 3.5, Appendix B)5 Seconds 5 Seconds 0.5 Seconds Graphs were developed from the simulator recording program (see Volume 3, Tab: "Appendix B, Graphs").This was necessary to satisfy the criteria of ANSI/ANS 3.5 Section 4.2.1 (b).Page 3.-16 ST.LUCIE INITIAL SIMULATOR CERTIFICATION REPORT 3.6 Performance of the Test (Continued):

In addition, a simulator recording program the time that it occurred during the test This was necessary to satisfy the criteria (c)..This was also used to help annotate recorded each alarm along with (see Volume 3,'Tab: "Alarms").of ANSI/ANS 3.5, Section 4.2.1 the graphs.3.7 Evaluation

\The evaluations were performed according to instructions which were incorporated in the TDI¹38,"Simulator Certification Test Development and'Evaluation Procedure"[Reference 3-4].The results of each evaluation were recorded in the Appendix A,"Test Team Review and Evaluation", of the test procedure.

A copy of all of the evaluations are in Volume 2 of this submittal.

All of the graphs which were listed in Section 8.1 and 8.2 of the Test Procedure were annotated with information on the major trend changes (see Volume 3, Tab"Appendix B, Graphs").The annotations were determined from a review of the Best Estimate Analysis, In-House Events, Industry Data, and/or expert judgement.

The exact cause of changes in the trend of each graph was determined by knowing the initiating cause of the transient, examining the interactions of the parameters, alarm recorder data, and notes which were taken during the test run.Where either plant or industry data was available, comparisons were made to the individual graphs.For those tests which had Best Estimate Analyses performed, each simulator test graph was compared with the corresponding analysis graph.All of the graph annotations were reviewed by Operations, Training, and the Simulator Engineering Group.All of the alarm recorder listings were reviewed.These alarm listings were reviewed by a currently licensed SRO.The evaluation checklist included a sign-off for the SRO concurrence that all of the alarms were valid and that no alarms were omitted which would have occurred in the reference plant.Any problems found were noted in Section 9 of the Test Team Review and Evaluation.

After the graphs and alarms were reviewed, the Test Team Review and Evaluation was written.Copies of these Test Team Review and Evaluations for all of the tests are in volume 2 of this submittal.

The following explains each section of the Test Team Review and Evaluation along with the reason for including this-information.

Page 3.-17 ST.LUCIE INITIAL SIMULATOR CERTIFICATION REPORT 3.7 Evaluation (Continued):

a.Section 1.Summar This summary of the evaluation is a brief paragraph which contains the date when the test was performed, what type of evaluation was performed, number of deficiencies discovered, and any dissenting opinions on the test results.The test date and dissenting opinions were information recommended by the"Simulation Facility Evaluation Program", by Neal K.Hunemuller, USNRC.The number of discrepancies identified in this summary will agree with the number of DRs listed in Section 3,"Discrepancies".

Almost all of the test evaluations were identified as having no dissenting opinions.This reflects the eventual agreement between the reviewers's as to the final evaluation of the test results.Only one test required the final decision of the SCRB to resolve dissenting opinions.This test was HAL-OO2, Rapid Gross Failure of Multiple Steam Generator Tubes.In this test, the resolution to the dissenting opinions is stated in Section 3,"Deficiencies Found".b.Section 2.Baseline Data This is a description of the baseline data which was used to determine fidelity to the reference plant (recommended by Reference 3-3).This section will provide information as to whether or not plant event strip charts were available, if RETRAN analysis was performed, or other information was available.

If expert judgement was used, then the information concerning how this was performed and documented was stated here.Page 3.-18 ST.LUCIE INITIAL SIMULATOR CERTIFICATION REPORT 3.7 Evaluation (Continued):

b.Section 2.Baseline Data (Continued):

Best Estimate Anal ses Five Best Estimate Analyses (RETRAN)were performed.

These RETRAN analyses were performed by using the RETRAN-02 code[Reference 3-10]and the St.Lucie Unit 2 RETRAN Base Model.Preliminary Simulator tests were performed to determine the boundary conditions for the RETRAN analysis.Since RETRAN only calculates the RCS response, it was necessary to determine the boundary conditions of Charging and HPSI flow, Letdown, Main and Aux Feedwater, and Steam Flow.The Charging, HPSI, and Aux Feedwater Flows were supplied in the form of flow versus RCS or Steam Generator pressure data.In addition, any operator actions were necessary inputs to the RETRAN analysis (eg.tripping RCPs at RCS pressure less than 1300 PSIG).These boundary conditions were supplied to the Fuels Engineering group which performed the RETRAN analyses.No additional data was given to the Fuels Engineering Group to insure an independent analysis.The final simulator test was performed and comparisons between the simulator and RETRAN data were made.The comparisons between the simulator data and the results of the RETRAN analysis were first made by the St.Lucie Simulator Engineering Group and the Certification Team.Any discrepancies found were then discussed with the Fuels Engineering Group.Additional RETRAN runs were performed as needed to correct specific problems with the RETRAN analysis (incorrect initial conditions or boundary condition discrepancies).

Any problems found with the simulator were identified as DRs.Page 3.-19

ST.LUCIE INITIAL SIMULATOR CERTIFICATION REPORT 3.7 Evaluation (Continued):

b.Section 2.Baseline Data (Continued):

Best Estimate Anal ses (Continued):

Overall the comparisons between the simulator data and the RETRAN analysis were very good.Almost all of the differences were easily explainable with no major differences being identified which would invalidate training.Only a few DRs were required as a result of problems found by comparing the simulator to the RETRAN analyses.These DRs are listed in the Test Team Review and Evaluation Summaries in volume 2 for the following tests: I HAL-001 One Complete Steam Generator Tube Rupture HAL-005 One Small Break LOCA which Repressurizes in a Saturated Condition MAL-041 Double-Ended Hain Steam Line Break Inside Containment MAL-068 Anticipated Transient without Scram (ATWS)TRN-010 One Failed Open PZR Safety Valve which Depressurizes to a Saturated Condition Without HPSI 2.Plant Data Com arisons Wherever possible, actual plant data was used as comparison data.This included transient as well as normal testing (eg.core performance test)data.In addition to the transients which occurred on the reference plant, industry data and NUREG reports were used to insure as accurate a testing program as possible.'n several of the core performance tests, specific numbers were available for comparison.

Any specific numbers are listed in Section 8 of the Test Team Review and Evaluation (see Volume 2 of this submittal, SUR-001 through SUR-004, and SUR-006).This allowed a direct comparison between the simulator test results and the reference plant measurements.

Page 3.-20 ST.LUCIE INITIAL SIHULATOR CERTIFICATION REPORT 3.7 Evaluation (Continued):

b.Section 2.Baseline Data (Continued):

2.Plant Data Com arisons (Continued):

When strip chart data was available, the results of the comparison were recorded in Section'.Comparison with Industry/Plant Data.In some cases, the plant event reports did not have any strip chart data with the report.These reports did contain some detail as to which alarms occurred, which valves were opened/closed,'and.operator actions.Therefore, some comparisons could be made.However, since there were no strip charts, the response of the individual parameters was evaluated by expert judgement.

3.Plant Acce tance Criteria The Normal Plant evolutions of Plant Startup and Plant Shutdown (NPE-001, NPE-002, NPE-003, and NPE-005).were evaluated in part by the inherent acceptance criteria provided by the step by step instructions in the reference plant procedures.

The reference plant shutdown and cooldown procedures are quite detailed and provide step by step instructions.

The reference plant shutdowns, cooldowns, heatups, and power change evolutions are all different with respect to change of power rates, Hold Points, and heat transfer rates.Therefore, there was no attempt to replicate a specific plant event.All of the Safety Related Surveillance Tests (SURs)were evaluated by comparison to the plant acceptance criteria.This includes the Core Performance Tests which were also compared to the available plant data.Page 3.-21 ST.LUCIE INITIAL SIMULATOR CERTIFICATION REPORT 3.7 Evaluation (Continued):

b.Section 2.Baseline Data (Continued):

Ex ert Jud ement Because of the small number of transients which have occurred at the St.Lucie Power Plant, many of the tests required using expert judgement for the evaluation.

In performing the expert judgement analyses, the annotation of the graphs of the Critical and Test Specific parameters were crucial to achieve an accurate an evaluation as possible.This is because each one of the graphed parameters were identified as being important to the trainee's determination of the plant condition.

While the overall response of the simulator was verified on the floor of the simulator during the performance of the test, this is not sufficient for evaluation of the individual parameters.

The"real time" evaluation during the simulator test has the inherent problem of depending on one of the test team operator's to be observing each particular instrument throughout the test to insure that its response was correct.Continual observation of each and every indication is not possible.By obtaining graphs of each of the parameters, a careful analysis of the response of each parameter could be performed.

A member of the Certification Team performed the initial analysis of each test in most cases.This involved writing explanations on each of the graphs as to why points of inflection and rate of change occurred (annotations).

In most tests, the initial evaluator was either a current SRO licensed operator or had held a license at either St.Lucie or Turkey Point facility.The other initial evaluators were either SRO Certified"at St.Lucie or had held a SRO license at another plant.In all cases, at least one of the reviewer's for Operations or Training, held a current SRO License for the St.Lucie Plant.Representatives from Operations, Training, and Simulator Engineering reviewed each of the graphs after they were annotated.

Any differences of opinion were resolved between the evaluator and the reviewer's with the exception of HAL-002 where the final decision was rendered by the SCRB.Page 3.-22 ST.LUG'IE INITIAL SIMULATOR CERTIFICATION REPORT 3.7 Evaluation (Continued):

c.Section 3.Deficiencies Found This section contains the number and brief description of the deficiencies found as a result of the test.The current status of each deficiency is listed in Figure 4-2, Outstanding Discrepancies by Priority.This status indicates whether the deficiency has been corrected or if it is still open.If it is still open, then the estimated date of its completion is given (recommended by Reference 3-3).d.Section 4.Exce tions taken to ANSI ANS 3.5 This section describes.

the exceptions taken to ANSI/ANS 3.5 as a result of the test.The justification for each exception is also included here.Three exceptions were taken in the Simulator Certification Testing.One of these exceptions was the at power operation with less than 4 RCPs.Neither startup nor power operations with less than full reactor coolant flow is allowed at St.Lucie Unit 2.An immediate reactor trip is required upon loss of one or more RCPs.Post trip operation with the loss of one or more RCPs was covered in MAL-015, TRN-004 and TRN-005.Another exception was the recommended return to 100%power in the ANSI/ANS 3.5 Appendix B.2.2 (7).Because there is no automatic return to 100%power at St.Lucie, the escalation back to 100%power would be in normal manual control.Since this is tested in NPE-003 and NPE-004, it was not repeated in this test.The third exception taken in the Simulator test program was the decision not to test the Safety Related Surveillance for those evolutions which are not performed as training on the simulator and were implicitly tested in other certification tests.See Section 3.3, Scope of Tests (Determination of the 100%Certification Test List), for a complete discussion of this exception.

Page 3.-23 ST.LUCIE INITIAL SIHULATOR CERTIFICATION REPORT 3.7 Evaluation (Continued):

e.Section 5.Simulator 0 eratin Limits The simulator has the capability of notifying the instructors whenever an operating limit has been exceeded.The purpose of this alarm is to alert the instructor that the response of the simulator is suspect since a calculational limit was exceeded.This alarm occurred on a couple of the final tests.The alarm was the result of exceeding the reactor vessel head enthalpy limit, but this had no impact on the test (occurred in HAL-068 and HAL-004).In addition, the simulator operating limit occurred in HAL-068 as a result of the RB Containment Pressure exceeding design limits.This occurred because of a problem with the model and was identified as a DR.f.Section 6.Additional Justification for the Test Results This section includes any justification for acceptance of" the transient which is not included in the comparison of the graphs and/or alarms.For example, engineering calculations were performed for the HAL-007, Loss of Instrument Air, as comparison data for the simulator response.These calculations included determining the critical flow values for the line sizes at the point of the breaks.This was used to determine the total system initial response to the maximum leak area.Reference to this was made in this section in the Evaluation for HAL-007.A copy of the calculations were added to the HAL-007 test package.g.Section 7.Evaluation of the Trainin Im act of Differences Seen In some instances there were differences noticed between the comparison data and the response of the simulator which did not impact training.This section identifies any of these differences with an explanation why changes to the simulator model is not required.Page 3.-24 ST.LUCIE INITIAL SIMULATOR CERTIFICATION REPORT 3.7 Evaluation (Continued):

h.Section 8.Com arison with Industr Plant Data This section identifies any Industry/Plant Data which was used for comparison.

This will include some specifics as to what was available for comparison.

If only a report was available, then specific alarms, automatic actions, and/or operator actions may have been listed.If strip charts were available, these will be mentioned in this section and the results of the comparison will be given.Section 9.Comments on Gra hs and Alarms be different from the 3.8 Future Year Test Plans Comments will include any specific deviations from the baseline data or expert judgement which were noted on the graphs.In a few instances it was necessary to re-run the test to obtain additional graphs or the alarm recorder summary.In this case the times on these graphs or alarms will initial final test.This will be noted herc'he future year test plans include testing all of the ANSI 3.5, Appendix B Tests each year and 25%(+5%)of all other tests which are listed in table 3-1, St.Lucie Certification Test Matrix.The specific requirements are listed in Administrative Procedure-0005761, Simulator Certification, Appendix C[Reference 3-15].The latest revision of this procedure is included in Appendix C, Volume I, of this submittal.

A preliminary test plan is provided in Table 3-6.This test plan may be modified to integrate with current and future maintenance, modification and training requirements.

Page 3.-25 ANSI 3.5 REQUIREMENTS AND QUALITY ASSURANCE FOR SIMULATOR CERTIFICA TION PROGRAM ANSI LS REQUIREMENTS RECOMMENDED TESTS TEST OBJECllVES EVALUAllON GUIDEUNES TEST STAGES DEVELOP 100%CERTIFICATION TEST UST TEST DEVELOPMENT PROCEDURE CHECKLIST WRITE CERTIFICATION, TEST PROCEDURES PERFORM TESTS I I EVALUAllON CRITERIA I I CHECKUST I I EVALUATE TESTS aVAUTV ASSURANCE CHECKLIST COMPLETED CHECKUST COMPLETED SCRB APPROVAL SCRB APPROVAL SCRB APPROVAL SCRB APPROVAL SCRB APPROVAL f ILE: MARLO1.DRW START SIMULATOR CERTIFICATION SAFETY RELATED SURVEILLANCE TESTING LOGIC REVIEW ADMN PROCEDUREOOI OI 25 SCHEDULE OF TESTS AND PERODIC SURV.N THE SURVBL-LAHCE SAFElY N p RElATED2 YES WOULD INCORRECT PERFORMANCE LEAD TO PLANT TRAHSIENTNHSAFE NP COHDmON, ETC.2 YES END IS SURVBLlANCE WITIN SCOPE OF OPERATOR INTERACTION WllH ULATOR2 ND YES IS SURVBLlANC USED DI PSL SBIULATORTRNNHO NP PROGRAM2 WOULD THE SURVBL.lANCE UKELY BE ADDED TO SIMULATOR TRANINO P PROD RAM2 END YES YES IS THS SURVBLLAHCE COVERED N OTHER CERTIRCATION TESTS2 YES IDENIIFY AND DOCINENT TEST END ARE THERE MORE TEST/SURVBLlANCES TOBE REVIEWED2 NP WRITE, APPROVE AND PERFORM TEST SUBMIT LIST TO SCRB END Page 3.-27 FILE: MARL02,DAW FIGURE 3-2 ST.LUCIE INITIAL SIMULATOR CERTIFICATION REPORT TABLE 3-1 NSI ANS 3.5 CERTIFICATION EST MATRIX ANSI ANS 3.5 TEST CERTIFICATION EST 3.1.1 (1)(2)(5)(6)3.1.1 (3)3.1.1 (4)(6)3.1.1 (5)(6)(8)NPE-001"Reactor Plant Heat up-cold to hot standby" NPE-002"Nuclear startup from hot standby to rated power." NPE-003"Turbine startup and generator synchronization" NPE-004"Reactor trip and recovery to rated power" NPE-005"Plant shutdown from rated power to cold shutdown conditions" 3.1.1 (9)~~SUR-002"Isothermal temperature coefficient determination" 3.1.1 (9)3.1.1 (9)3.1.1 (9)3.1.1 (9)3.1.1 (9)3.1.1 (10)3.1.1 (10)SUR-003"Rod Worth Measurement" SUR-004"ARO Critical Baron Determination" SUR-005"Plant heat balance" SUR-006 Moderator coefficient at power" SUR-008"Surveillance requirements for shutdown margin, Modes 3, 4, and 5 (sub-critical)" SUR-009"RCS Inventory Balance" SUR-010"Wide Range Nuclear Instrumentation channel functional test" 3.1.1 (10)3.1.1 (10)SUR-011"Diesel Generator monthly Test" SUR-012"RPS Logic Matrix Relay Test" Page 3.-28 ST.LUCIE INITIAL SIMULATOR CERTIFICATION REPORT TABLE 3-1 ANSI ANS 3.5 CERTIFICATION TEST MATRIX ANSI ANS 3.5 EST CERTIFICATION TEST 3.1.1 (10)3.1.1 (10)3.1.1 (10)3.1.1 (10)3.1.2 (1)(a)3.1.2 (1)(a)~~3.1.2 (1)(b)3.1.2 (l)(b,c)3.1.2 (1)(c)3.1.2 (1)(d)3.1.2 (2)3.1.2 (2)3.1.2 (3)3.1.2 (3)SUR-013"CEA Periodic Test" SUR-014"Turbine Valve Test" SUR-015"Hydrogen Recombiner" SUR-018"Boron Flow Test" MAL-001"1 Complete Steam Generator Tube Rupture" MAL-002"Rapid Gross Failure of Multiple Steam Generator Tubes" MAL-003"LOCA Outside Containment in the Letdown System" MAL-004"Large Break LOCA with a LOOP" MAL-005"Small Break LOCA" MAL-006"Failed Open PORV with Loss of Offsite Power" MAL-007"Loss of Instrument Air: Air Header Rupture" MAL-008"Loss of Instrument Air Compressors" MAL-009"Loss of Offsite Power" MAL-010"Loss of Offsite Power with both Diesel Generators Failing" 3.1.2 (3)3.1.2 (3)~~3.1.2 (3)MAL-011"Loss of a Safety Related A.C.Buss" MAL-012"Loss of the M.A.Instrument Bus" HAL-013"Loss of Non-Safety Vital Buss" Page 3.-29 ST.LUCIE INITIAL SIMULATOR CERTIFICATION REPORT TABLE 3-1 ANSI ANS 3.5 CERTIFICATION TEST H T I NSI ANS 3.5 TEST CERTIFIC ION TEST 3.1.2 (3)3.1.2 (4), 3.1.2 (5)A 3.1.2 (5)3.1.2 (6)3.1.2 (6)3.1.2 (7)3.1.2 (7)HAL-014"Loss of 2B/2BB D.C.Buss" HAL-015"Loss of all RCP's, Natural Circulation Cooldown" HAL-016"Slow Condenser Vacuum Leak from 100%Power" HAL-017"Loss of Condenser Level Control" HAL-018"Loss of all ICW Pumps" MAL-019"Rupture of One ICW Header" HAL-020"Loss of Shutdown Cooling" HAL-021"Loss of Shutdown Cooling from Suction Valve Closure" 3.1.2.(8)3.1.2 (8)3.1.2 (8)3.1.2 (9)3.1.2 (10)3.1.2 (11)3.1.2 (12)3.1.2 (12)3.1.2 (12)3.1.2 (12)MAL-022"Total Loss of CCW Flow" MAL-023"Rupture of B CCW Header" MAL-024"RCS to CCW Leak in the RCP Seal Cooler" MAL-025"Loss of Both Hain Feedwater Pumps" HAL-026"Loss of All Feedwater Pumps from 100%Power" HAL-027"Fail Power Supply to one RPS Channel" HAL-028"One Stuck Rod" MAL-029"One Uncoupled Rod During Startup" HAL-030"One Dropped Rod" MAL-031"One Dropped Bank of CEA's".Page 3.-30 ST.LUCIE INITIAL SIMULATOR CERTIFICATION REPORT TABLE 3-1 ANSI ANS 3.5 CERTIFICA IO EST ATRIX ANSI ANS 3.5 TEST 3.1.2 (13)3.1.2 (14)3.1.2 (15)3.1.2 (16)3.1.2 (17)3.1.2 (17)3.1.2 (18).3.1.2 (18)3.1.2 (19)3.1.2 (20)3.1.2 (20)3.1.2 (20)3.1.2 (20)3.1.2 (20)3.1.2 (21)3.1.2 (21)3.1.2 (22)CERTIFICATION TEST HAL-'032"Freeze Control Rod Drive System" HAL-033"Excessive Reactor Coolant System Activity" MAL-034"Turbine Trip from<15%Power" HAL-035"Trip Generator from 100%Power" MAL-036"Inadvertent Dilution at Power" HAL-037"Steam Bypass Control Valve Fails Open" HAL-038"Pressurizer Pressure and Level Control Failures" HAL-039"Reactor Coolant Volume Control Failures" 1 HAL-040"Reactor Trip Initiated by a Low SG Level" MAL-041"Double Ended HSLB Inside Containment" HAL-042"Hain Steam Line Break Outside Containment".MAL-043"Failed Open Hain Steam Safety Valve" MAL-044"Small Feedwater Line Break (Outside Containment)" HAL-045"Large Feedwater Line Break (Inside Containment)" MAL-046"Wide Range NI Failed High" HAL-047"Linear Power Range Channel Failed High" MAL-048"SG Level Instrument Failure (Input to LPFWC, 3 Element Level Controller, and RPS)" Page 3.-31

ST.LUCIE INITIAL SIMULATOR CERTIFICATION REPORT TABLE 3-1 NSI ANS 3.5 GER IF ICA ION ES MATRIX ANSI ANS 3.5 TEST CERTIFICATION TES 3.1.2 (23)3.1.2 (22)3.1.2 (22)3.1.2 (22)3.1.2 (22)~~3.1.2 (22)HAL-049"Containment Pressure Transmitter Failure (RPS/ESFAS)" MAL-050"TCold (Input to RPS)Failed High" HAL-051"TCold (RRS)Failed High" HAL-052"RCS Hot Leg Temperature Monitor (Control Channel)Failure" HAL-053"RCS Hot Leg Temperature Monitor (Safety Channel)Failure" MAL-054"RCS Flow (SG Differential Pressure)Instrument Failure" 3.1.2 (22)3.1.2 (22)3.1.2 (22)MAL-055"Feedwater Flow (Input to 3 Element Controller)" HAL-056"Steam Flow (Input to 3 Element Controller)" HAL-057"Steam Generator Pressure Transmitter Failed Low" 3.1.2 (22)3.1.2 (22)3.1.2 (22)3.1.2 (22)3.1.2 (22)3.1.2 (23)3.1.2 (23)MAL-058"Containment Radiation Monitor Failure (ESFAS)" HAL-059"RWT Level Instrument Failure" HAL-060"Annunciator Panel Failures" HAL-061"Alarm Window Fails to Actuate" HAL-062"Alarm Window Incorrectly Actuates"'I HAL-064"ESFAS Failure with Small Break LOCA" HAL-065"RAS Fails to Actuate" Page 3.-32 ST.LUCIE , INITIAL SIHULATOR CERTIFICATION REPORT TABLE 3-1 ANSI ANS 3.5 CERTIFICATION TEST HATRIX NSI ANS 3.5 TEST CERTIFICATION TEST 3.1.2 (23)3.1.2 (23)3.1.2 (24)3.3.2 APP B 2.'1 APP B 2.1 A PP B 2.2 (1)APP B 2.2 (2)APP B 2.2 (3)HAL-066"HSIS Fails to Actuate" HAL-067"AFAS Fails to Actuate" HAL-068"Anticipated Transient without Scram{ATWS)" HAL-069"Hot Shutdown Control Panel Cooldown" SST-001"Steady State Test at 100%Rated Thermal Power" SST-002"Steady State at Power Level Hold Points" TRN-001"Reactor Trip" E TRN-002"Loss of Hain Feedwater Pumps from 100%Power with Failure of all Emergency Feedwater" TRN-003"Simultaneous Closure of All Hain Steam Isolation Valves" APP B 2.2 (4)APP B 2.2 (5)APP B 2.2 (6)APP B 2.2 (7)APP B 2.2 (8)APP B 2.2 (9)APP B 2.2 (10)TRN-004"Loss of all RCP's from 100%Full Power" TRN-005"Loss of 1 RCP from 100%Power" TRN-006"Turbine Trip from<15%Power" TRN-007"Haximum Rate Power Ramp (100%down to approximately 75%)" TRN-008"Large Break LOCA With a Loss of Offsite Power" TRN-009"Double Ended HSLB Inside Containment" TRN-010"1 Failed Open PZR Safety Valve which Depressurizes to a Saturated Condition Wi.thout HPSI" Page 3.-33 ST.LUCIE INITIAL SIHULATOR CERTIFICATION REPORT TABLE 3-2 ST.LUCIE CERTIFICATIO TEST HATRI EST NUHBER EST NAHE COHPUTER REAL TIHE (CRT)CRT-001 STEADY STATE (SST).SST-001 SST-002 Computer Real Time Test Steady State Test at 100%Rated Thermal Power Steady State at Power Level Hold Points NPE-001 NPE-002 Nuclear startup from hot standby to rated power.Turbine startup and generator synchronization Reactor trip and recovery to rated power NPE-003 NPE-004 NPE-005 Plant shutdown from rated power to cold shutdown conditions NORHAL PLANT ELEVATIONS (NPE)Reactor Plant Heat up-cold to hot standby SAFETY RELATED SURVEILLANCES (SUR)SUR-001 SUR-002 SUR-003 SUR-004 SUR-005 SUR-006 Deleted Isothermal temperature coefficient determination Rod Worth Measurement ARO Critical Baron Determination Plant heat balance Hoderator coefficient at power Page 3.-34 ST.LUCIE INITIAL SIMULATOR CERTIFICATION REPORT TEST NUMBER TABLE 3-2 ST.LUCIE CERTI ICA ION ES AT (Continued):

~EST NAME SAFETY RELATED SURVEILLANCES (SUR)(Continued):

SUR-007 SUR-008 SUR-009 SUR-010 Deleted Surveillance requirements for shutdown margin, Modes 3, 4, and 5 (sub-critical)

RCS Inventory Balance Wide Range Nuclear Instrumentation channel functional test SUR-011 SUR-012 SUR-013 SUR-014 SUR-015 , SUR-016 SUR-017 SUR-018 SUR-019 PLANT MALFUNCTION (MAL)MAL-001 MAL-002 Diesel Generator monthly Test RPS Logic Matrix Relay Test CEA Periodic Test Turbine Valve Test Hydrogen Recombiner Deleted Deleted Boron Flow Test Deleted 1 Complete Steam Generator Tube Rupture Rapid Gross Failure of Multiple Steam Generator Tubes Page 3.-35 ST.LUCIE INITIAL SIMULATOR CERTIFICATION REPORT TEST NUMBER TABLE 3-2 ST.LUCIE CERTIFICATION EST MATRIX (Continued):

TEST NAME PLANT MALFUNCTION (MAL)(Continued):

MAL-003 MAL-004 MAL-005 MAL-006 MAL-007 MAL-008 MAL-009 MAL-010 MAL-011 MAL-012 MAL-013 MAL-014 MAL-015 MAL-016 MAL-017 MAL-018 a MAL-019 LOCA Outside Containment in the Letdown System Large Break LOCA with a LOOP Small Break LOCA Failed Open PORV with Loss of Offsite Power Loss of Instrument Air: Air Header Rupture Loss of Instrument Air Compressors Loss of Offsite Power Loss of Offsite Power with both Diesel Generators Failing Loss of a Safety Related A.C.Buss Loss of the M.A.Instrument Bus Loss of Non-Safety Vital Buss Loss of 2B/2BB D.C.Buss Loss of all RCP's, Natural Circulation Cooldown Slow Condenser Vacuum Leak from 100%Power Loss of Condenser Level Control Loss of all ICW Pumps Rupture of One ICW Header Page 3.-36 ST.LUCIE INITIAL SIHULATOR CERTIFICATION REPORT TABLE 3-2 ST.LUCIE CERTIFICATiON TES ATRI (Continued):

EST NUHBER TEST NAHE PLANT HALFUNGTION (HAL)(Continued):

HAL-020 HAL-021 HAL-022 HAL-023 MAL-024 HAL-025 HAL-026 HAL-027 HAL-028 HAL-029 HAL-030 HAL-031 HAL-032 HAL-033 HAL-034 HAL-035 HAL-036 Loss of Shutdown Cooling Loss of Shutdown Cooling from Suction Valve Closure Total Loss of CCW Flow Rupture of B CCW Header RCS to CCW Leak in the RCP Seal Cooler Loss of Both Hain Feedwater Pumps Loss of All Feedwater Pumps from 100%Power Fail Power Supply to one RPS Channel One Stuck Rod One Uncoupled Rod During Startup One Dropped Rod One Dropped Bank of CEA's Freeze Control Rod Drive System Excessive Reactor Coolant System Activity Turbine Trip from<15%Power Trip Generator from 100%Power Inadvertent Dilution at Power Page 3.-37 ST.LUCIE INITIAL SIMULATOR CERTIFICATION REPORT TEST NUMBER TABLE 3-2 ST.LUCIE CERTIFICATION EST MA RI (Continued):

~EST NANE PLANT MALFUNCTION (HAL)(Continued):

HAL-037 HAL-038 MAL-039 HAL-040 MAL-041 HAL-042 HAL-043 HAL-044 HAL-045 MAL-046 MAL-047 MAL-048 MAL-049 HAL-050 MAL-051 HAL-052 Steam Bypass Control Valve Fails Open Pressurizer Pressure and Level Control Failures Reactor Coolant Volume Control Failures Reactor Trip Initiated by a Low SG Level Double Ended HSLB Inside Containment Main Steam Line Break Outside Containment Failed Open Hain Steam Safety Valve Small Feedwater Line Break (Outside Containment)

Large Feedwater Line Break (Inside Containment)

Wide Range NI Failed High Linear Power Range Channel Failed High SG Level Instrument Failure (Input to LPFWC, 3 Element Level Controller, and RPS)Containment Pressure Transmitter Failure (RPS/ESFAS)

TCold (Input to RPS)Failed High TCold (RRS)Failed High RCS Hot Leg Temperature Monitor (Control Channel)Failure Page 3.-38 ST.LUCIE INITIAL SIMULATOR CERTIFICATION REPORT TABLE 3-2 ST.LUG I E CERTIFICATION EST MATRI (Conti nued): TEST UMBER TEST NAME PLANT MALFUNCTION (MAL)(Continued):

MAL-053 MAL-054 MAL-055 HAL-056 MAL-057 MAL-058 HAL-059 HAL-060 HAL-061 MAL-062 HAL-063 HAL-064 HAL-065 HAL-066 MAL-067 HAL-068 HAL-069 RCS Hot Leg Temperature Monitor (Safety Channel)Failure RCS Flow (SG Differential Pressure)Instrument Failure Feedwater Flow (Input to 3 Element Controller)

Steam Flow (Input to 3 Element Controller)

Steam Generator Pressure Transmitter Failed Low Containment Radiation Monitor Failure (ESFAS)RWT Level Instrument Failure Annunciator Panel Failures Alarm Window Fails to Actuate Alarm Window Incorrectly Actuates Deleted ESFAS Failure with Small Break LOCA RAS Fails to Actuate HSIS Fails to Actuate AFAS Fails to Actuate Anticipated Transient without Scram (ATWS)Hot Shutdown Control Panel Cooldown Page 3.-39 ST.LUCIE INITIAL SIMULATOR CERTIFICATION REPORT TEST NUMBER TABLE 3-2 ST.LUG I E CERTIFICATIO TEST ATRI (Continued):

EST NAME TRANSIENT (TRN)TRN-001 TRN-002 TRN-003 TRN-004 TRN-005 TRN-006 TRN-007 TRN-008 TRN-009 TRN-010 Reactor Trip Loss of Hain Feedwater Pumps from 100%Power with Failure of all Emergency Feedwater Simultaneous Closure of All Hain Steam Isolation Valves Loss of all RCP's from 100%Full Power Loss of 1 RCP from 100%Power Turbine Trip from<15%Power Maximum Rate Power Ramp (100%down to approximately 75%)Large Break LOCA With a Loss of Offsite Power Double Ended HSLB Insi'de Containment 1 Failed Open PZR Safety Valve which Depressurizes to a Saturated Condition Without HPSI Page 3.-40 ST.LUCIE INITIAL SIMULATOR CERTIFICATION REPORT TABLE 3-3 CERTIFICATION TESTS BY FUSAR ACCIDENT ANALYSIS CATEGORY THE ACCIDENT ANALYSIS, CHAPTER 15, OF THE FINAL U D ED SA ETY ANALYSIS REPORT HAS TEN (10)CATEGORIES BY WHICH ACCIDENT TYPES ARE LISTED.THE SIMULATOR CERTIFICATION TESTS HAVE BEEN LISTED ACCORDING TO.THE APPLICABLE ACCIDENT ANALYSIS CATEGORY.THIS DOCUMENTS THAT ALL OF THE ACCIDENT ANALYSIS CATEGORIES OF THE FUSAR HAVE BEEN THOROUGHLY TESTED IN THE SIMULATOR CERTIFICATION PROGRAM.15.1 TRN-009, MAL-037, HAL-041, MAL-042, MAL-043, MAL-045, HAL-066, 15.2 MAL-016, HAL-025, HAL-026, MAL-034, HAL-035, HAL-040, MAL-067)INCREASE HEAT REMOVAL BY THE SECONDARY SYSTEM DOUBLE-ENDED HAIN STEAN LINE BREAK INSIDE CONTAINMENT STEAM BYPASS CONTROL VALVE FAILS OPEN HAIN STEAN LINE BREAK INSIDE CONTAINMENT MAIN STEAM LINE BREAK OUTSIDE CONTAINMENT FAILED OPEN HAIN STEAN SAFETY VALVE LARGE FEED BREAK INSIDE CONTAINMENT HSIS FAILS TO ACTUATE DECREASE HEAT REMOVAL BY THE SECONDARY SYSTEM SLOW CONDENSOR VACUUM LEAK FROM 100%POWER LOSS OF BOTH HFW PUMPS LOSS OF ALL FEEDWATER PUMPS FROM 100/o POWER TURBINE TRIP FROM<15%POWER TRIP GENERATOR FROM 100%POWER RX TRIP INITIATED BY A LOW S/G LEVEL AFAS FAILS TO ACTUATE Page 3.-41

ST.LUCIE INITIAL SIMULATOR CERTIFICATION REPORT TABLE 3-3 CERTIFICATION TESTS BY FUSAR ACCIDENT ANALYSIS CATEGORY (Continued):

15.2 MAL-044, TRN-002, DECREASE HEAT REMOVAL BY THE SECONDARY SYSTEM (Continued):

SMALL FEED WATER LINE BREAK (OUTSIDE CONTAINMENT)

LOSS OF MAIN FEEDWATER PUMPS FROM 100%POWER WITH FAILURE OF ALL EMERGENCY FEEDWATER 15.3 MAL-015, TRN-004, TRN-005, MAL-009, MAL-010, MAL-014)15.4 DECREASE IN REACTOR COOLANT FLOW RATE LOSS OF ALL RCP's, NATURAL CIRCULATION COOLDOWN LOSS OF ALL RCP's FROM 100%FULL POWER LOSS OF ONE RCP FROM 100%FULL POWER LOSS OF OFF-SITE POWER LOSS OF OFF-SITE POWER WITH BOTH DIESEL GENERATORS FAILING LOSS OF 2B/2BB D.C.BUS REACTIVITY 8L POWER DISTRIBUTION ABNORMALITIES MAL-028, MAL-029, MAL-030, MAL-031, MAL-032, MAL-036, ONE STUCK ROD ONE UNCOUPLED ROD DURING STARTUP ONE DROPPED ROD ONE DROPPED BANK OF CEAs FREEZE CONTROL ROD DRIVE SYSTEM INADVERTENT DILUTION AT POWER Page 3.-42 ST.LUCIE INITIAL SIMULATOR CERTIFICATION REPORT TABLE 3-3 CERTIFICATION TESTS BY FUSAR ACCIDENT ANALYSIS CATEGORY (Continued):

15.5 MAL-039, MAL-038, 15.6 MAL-001, MAL-002, MAL-003, MAL-004, MAL-005, MAL-006)MAL-020, MAL-033)TRN-008)TRN-010, 15.7 MAL-003, NOTE: INCREASE IN REACTOR COOLANT SYSTEM INVENTORY REACTOR COOLANT VOLUME CONTROL FAILURES PRESSURIZER PRESSURE AND LEVEL CONTROL FAILURES DECREASE IN REACTOR COOLANT SYSTEM INVENTORY ONE COMPLETE STEAM GENERATOR TUBE RUPTURE RAPID GROSS FAILURE OF MULTIPLE STEAM GENERATOR TUBES LOCA OUTSIDE CONTAINMENT IN LETDOWN SYSTEM LARGE BREAK LOCA WITH LOOP SMALL BREAK LOCA FAILED OPEN PORV WITH LOSS OF OFF-SITE POWER LOSS OF SHUTDOWN COOLING FAILED FUEL WITH 1 GPM STEAM GENERATOR TUBE LEAK LARGE BREAK LOCA WITH LOSS OF OFF-SITE POWER.ONE FAILED OPEN PRESSURIZER SAFETY VALVE WHICH DEPRESSURIZES TO A SATURATED CONDITION WITHOUT HPSI RADIOACTIVE RELEASES FROM A SUBSYSTEM OR COMPONENT LOCA OUTSIDE CONTAINMENT IN LETDOWN SYSTEM THE ACCIDENT TYPES REFERENCED IN SECTION 15.7 (GAS DECAY, TANK RUPTURE, FUEL HANDLING ACCIDENT AND ETC.,)WOULD NOT HAVE MANY OBSERVABLE INDICATIONS ON CONTROL ROOM INSTRUMENTATION.

Page 3.-43 ST.LUCIE INITIAL SIMULATOR CERTIFICATION REPORT TABLE 3-3 CERTIFICATION TESTS BY FUSAR ACCIDENT ANALYSIS CATEGORY (Continued):

15.8 HAL-038, TRN-002, TRN-0037 15.9 MAL-068, 15.10 HAL-009, HAL-.010, HAL-Oll, HAL-014, PRIMARY SYSTEM PRESSURE DEVIATION (OVERPRESSURE)

PRESSURIZER PRESSURE AND LEVEL CONTROL FAILURES LOSS OF MAIN FEEDWATER PUMPS FROM 1001o POWER WITH FAILURE OF ALL EMERGENCY FEEDWATER I'IMULTANEOUS CLOSURE OF ALL MAIN STEAM ISOLATION VALVES A.T.W.S.ANTICIPATED TRANSIENT WITHOUT SCRAM (ATWS)STATION BLACKOUT LOSS OF OFF-SITE POWER LOSS OF OFF-SITE POWER WITH BOTH DIESEL GENERATORS FAILING LOSS OF A SAFETY RELATED A;C.BUS LOSS OF 2B/2BB D.C.BUS Page 3.-44 ST.LUCIE INITIAL SIMULATOR CERTIFICATION REPORT TABLE 3-4 COMPREHENSIVE LIST OF OBJECTIVES Verify the proper response of the simulator to a (name of transient) failure.(ANSI 3.5, Section 3.1.2)Ensure that the operator was required to take the same action on the simulator to mitigate the consequences of a (name of transient) failure as would have been required on the reference plant using the plant procedures.(Reference ANSI 3.5, Section 3.1)Verify that the operator/instructors did not observe a difference between the response of the simulator control room instrumentation and the reference plant.(Reference ANSI 3.5, Section 3.1)Ensure that the transient showed plant operations of the reference plant which occurred continuously, and in real time.(Reference ANSI 3.5, Section 3.1.1 and 3.1.2)Verify that the critical parameters and other parameters which were important to the successful completion of these evolution were displayed on the appropriate instrumentation, and provided proper alarm or protective system action, or both.(Reference ANSI 3.5, Section 3.1.1)Verify that the (name of transient) failure interaction with the other simulated system provides total system integrated response.(Reference ANSI 3.5, Section 3.1.1)Verify that the simulator provides the trainee capability to interface, in a similar manner as in the reference plant, with the necessary, remote (outside control room)activities.(Reference ANSI 3.5, Section 3.3.2), Page 3.-45 ST.LUCIE INITIAL SIMULATOR CERTIFICATION REPORT TABLE 3-4 COMPREHENSIVE LIST OF OBJECTIVES Continued:

Verify that the simulator does not fail to cause an alarm or automatic action that would occur in the reference plant and, conversely, does not cause an alarm or automatic action that would got toccur in the reference plant for this malfunction.(Reference ANSI 3.5;Section 4.2.1 (c))Verify that the operator was able to control the transient to a steady state condition, provided that the simulator operating limits were not exceeded.(Reference ANSI 3.5, Section 4.2.1 (c))Determine the necessary data (Boundary Conditions) for a Best Estimate Analysis (RETRAN)which will be used for comparison to the final results of the simulator test.(Reference ANSI 3.5, Section 4.2.1 (b))Page 3.-46 ST.LUCIE INITIAL SIMULATOR CERTIFICATION REPORT TABLE 3-5 MONITORED ARAMETERS Reactor Power (RPS)Pressurizer Level (PSIA)Pressurizer Level (%)2A Hot Leg Temperature

('F)2B Hot Leg Temperature

('F)Charging Flow (GPM)Letdown Flow 2A1 Cold Leg Temperature

('F)2A2 Cold Leg Temperature

('F)2B1 Cold Leg Temperature

('F)2B2 Cold Leg Temperature

('F)2A Steam Generator Level (%W.R.)2B Steam Generator Level (%W.R.)2A Steam Generator Pressure (PSIA)2B Steam Generator Pressure Psia)NOTE: These first 15 parameters (above)should be included all of the tests on the graphic recorder to demonstrate plant control (or plant stability, if the test should not affect the overall plant).CEA POSITION (Individual or Group)HPSI/LPS I A14 HPSI/LPSI A22 HPSI/LPSI B22 HPSI/LPSI B16 RPV HEAD LIQUID LEVEL SUBCOOLED MARGIN"A" QSPDS (F)SUBCOOLED MARGIN"8" QSPDS (F)Page 3.-47 ST.LUCIE INITIAL SIMULATOR CERTIFICATION REPORT TABLE 3-5 ONITORED PARAMETERS (Continued):

AFW FLOW A AFW FLOW B AFW FLOW C Additional 1.97 Variables infrequently used: Boron Concentration Condensate Storage Tank Level Containment Hydrogen Conc.Containment Sump Level (ft)Containment Sump Level (ft)Containment pressure (psig)RCS Radioactivity (Medium 1/2 life)RCS Radioactivity (Long 1/2 life)Plant Stack Radioactivity SL Plant Stack Radioactivity HL Plant Stack Radioactivity LL Radiation Monitors for Determining Releases (Determine for each individual test)2A CONTAINMENT SPRAY FLOW (GPH)2B CONTAINMENT SPRAY FLOW (GPH)Containment Fan Heat Removal Containment Sump Water Temperature Emergency Vent Damper, DPR-25-23, Position Emergency Vent Damper, DPR-25-24, Position Boric Acid Flow (GPH)SIT Outlet Valve Position, V-3614 SIT Outlet Valve Position, V-3624 SIT Outlet Valve Position, V-3634 SIT Outlet Valve Position, V-3644 Page 3.-48 ST.LUCIE INITIAL SIMULATOR CERTIFICATION REPORT TABLE 3-5 ONITORED PARAMETERS (Continued):

SIT Level 2Al SIT Level 2A2 SIT Level 2Bl SIT Level 2Al SDC System Flow (FRC-3301 Output)SDC System Flow (FRC-3306 Output)SDC Heat Ex Out Temp (TR-3303Z Output)SDC Heat Ex Out Temp (TR-3352 Output)RWSt Level PZR Safety Valve Position (V-1200)PZR Safety Valve Position (V-1201)PZR Safety Valve Position (V-1202)PORV Valve Position (V-1474)PORV Valve Position (V-1475)TOTAL PZR HEATER OUTPUT VCT Level CCW Temperature (TE-14-3A) to ESFAS System CCW Temperature (TE-14-38) to ESFAS System CCW Flow (FT-14-lA) to ESFAS System CCW Flow (FT-14-1B) to ESFAS System SAFETY VALVE 2A PORT AREA SAFETY VALVE 2B PORT AREA DG 2A AMMETER DG 2A VOLT HETER DG 28 AMMETER DG 2B VOLT METER BATT 2A AMMETER BUS 2A VOLT HETER BATT 2A AMMETER BUS 2A VOLT METER Page 3.-49 ST.LUCIE INITIAL SIMULATOR CERTIFICATION REPORT TEST NUMBER HAL-002 HAL-005 MAL-006 MAL-008 HAL-010 HAL-015 HAI-017 MAL-031 AL-035 MAL-045 HAL-046 MAL-050 MAL-054 MAL-058 HAL-062 HAL-068 NPE-002 NPE-003 TABLE 3-6 PRELIMINARY SCHEDULE FO E IODIC CERTIFICA ION TESTING 1991 ES S EST NAME Rapid Gross Failure of Multiple Steam Generator Tubes Small Break LOCA Failed Open PORV with Loss of Offsite Power Loss of Instrument Air Compressors I oss of Offsite Power with both Diesel Generators Failing Loss of all RCP's, Natural Circulation Cooldown Loss of Condenser Level Control One Dropped Bank of CEA's Trip Generator from 100%Power Large Feedwater Line Break (Inside Containment)

Wide Range NI Failed High TCold (Input to RPS)Failed High RCS Flow (SG Differential Pressure)Instrument Failure Containment Radiation Monitor Failure (ESFAS)Alarm Window Incorrectly Actuates Anticipated Transient without Scram (ATWS)Nuclear Startup from Hot Standby to Rated Power Turbine Startup and Generator Synchronization Page 3.-50 ST.LUCIE INITIAL SIHULATOR CERTIFICATION REPORT TABLE 3-6 RELIHINARY SCHEDULE FO PERIODIC CERTI ICATION TESTING (Continued):

~191 ET TEST NUMBER TEST NAME SUR-002 SUR-003 SUR-004 SUR-006 SUR-014 Isothermal Temperature Coefficient Determination Rod Worth Measurement ARO Critical Boron Determination Moderator Coefficient at Power Turbine Valve Test Note: All of the ANSI 3.5 Appendix B Tests will be performed during 1991.EST NUHBER'HAL-003 HAL-009 MAL-012 HAL-013 MAL-021 HAL-026 HAL-030 MAL-032 MAL-038 MAL-042 HAL-047 1992 TESTS TEST NAME LOCA Outside Containment in the Letdown System Loss of Offsite Power Loss of the M.A.Instrument Bus Loss of Non-Safety Vital Buss 9 Loss of Shutdown Cooling from Suction Valve Closure Loss of All Feedwater Pumps from 100%Power One Dropped Rod Freeze Control Rod Drive System Pressurizer Pressure and Level Control Failures Main Steam Line Break Outside Containment Linear Power Range Channel Failed High Page 3.-51 ST.LUCIE INITIAL SIMULATOR CERTIFICATION REPORT TABLE 3-6 RELIHINARY SCHEDULE FOR PE IODIC CERTIFICATION TESTING (Continued):

1992 TESTS TEST NUMBER TEST NAME MAL-051 MAL-055 NAL-059 MAL-064 MAL-066 MAL-067 NPE-001 PE-004 SST-002 SUR-005 SUR-008 SUR-011 TCold (RRS)Failed High Feedwater Flow (Input to 3 Element Controller) h RWT Level Instrument Failure ESFAS Failure with Small Break LOCA NSIS Fails to Actuate AFAS Fails to Actuate Reactor Plant Heat up-Cold to Hot Standby Reactor Trip and Recovery to Rated Power Steady State at Power Level Hold Points Plant Heat Balance Surveillance Requirements for Shutdown Margin, Diesel Generator Monthly Test Note: All of the ANSI 3.5 Appendix B Tests will be performed during 1992.TEST NUNBER TEST NAME 1993 TESTS C RT-001 HAL-001 MAL-004 MAL-007 Computer Real Time Test 1 Complete Steam Generator Tube Rupture Large Break LOCA with a LOOP Loss of Instrument Air: Air Header Rupture Page 3.-52 ST.LUCIE INITIAL SIMULATOR CERTIFICATION REPORT TABLE 3-6 PRELIMINARY SCHEDULE FOR PERIODIC CERTIFICATION TESTING (Continued):

1993 TESTS TEST NUMBER TEST NAME MAL-011 HAL-022 MAL-024 MAL-028 MAL-029 MAL-034 MAL-039 MAL-040 MAL-041 MAL-043 MAL-048 MAL-052 MAL-056 MAL-060 MAL-065 NPE-005 SST-001 SUR-009 Loss of a Safety Related A.C.Buss Total Loss of CCW Flow RCS to CCW Leak in the RCP Seal Cooler One Stuck Rod One Uncoupled Rod During Startup Turbine Trip from<15%Power Reactor Coolant Volume Control Failures Reactor Trip Initiated by a Low SG Level Double Ended MSLB Inside Containment Failed Open Hain Steam Safety Valve SG Level Instrument Failure (Input to LPFWC, 3 Element Level Controller, and RPS)RCS Hot Leg Temperature Monitor (Control Channel)Failure Steam Flow (Input to 3 Element Controller)

Annunciator Panel Failures RAS Fails to Actuate Plant Shutdown from Rated Power to Cold Shutdown Conditions Steady State Test at 100%Rated Thermal Power RCS Inventory Balance Page 3.-53 ST.LUCIE INITIAL SIMULATOR CERTIFICATION REPORT TABLE 3-6 RELIHINARY SCHEDULE FOR PERIODIC CERTIFICATION TESTING (Continued):

1993 TESTS M~ET IIII I TEST EAM SUR-012 RPS Logic Hatrix Relay Test Note: 'All of the ANSI 3.5 Appendix B Tests will be performed during 1993.TEST NUMBER TEST NAME 1994 TESTS HAL-014 HAL-016 H AL-018 L-019 HAL-020 HAL-023 MAL-025 MAL-027 HAL-033 MAL-036 MAL-037 HAL-044 MAL-049 HAL-053 Loss of 2B/2BB D.C.Buss Slow Condenser Vacuum Leak from 100%Power Loss of All ICW Pumps Rupture of One ICW Header Loss of Shutdown Cooling Rupture of B CCW Header Loss of Both Hain Feedwater Pumps Fail Power Supply to One RPS Channel Excessive Reactor Coolant System Activity Inadvertent Dilution at Power Steam Bypass Control Valve Fails'pen Small Feedwater Line Break (Outside Containment)

Containment Pressure Transmitter Failure (RPS/ESFAS)

RCS Hot Leg Temperature Monitor (Safety Channel)Failure Page 3.-54

ST.LUCIE INITIAL SIMULATOR CERTIFICATION REPORT EST NUNBE MAL-057 MAL-061 MAL-069 SUR-010 SUR-013 TABLE 3-6 PRELIMINARY SCHEDULE FOR PERIODIC CERTIFICATION TESTING (Continued):

1994 TESTS 7 TEST NAME Steam Generator Pressure Transmitter Failed Low Alarm Window Fails to Actuate Hot Shutdown Control Panel Cooldown Wide Range Nuclear Instrumentation Channel CEA Periodic Test Functional Test Modes 3, 4, and 5 (sub-critical)SUR-015 Hydrogen Recombiner SUR-018 Boron Flow Test ote: All of the ANSI 3.5 Appendix B Tests will be performed duting 1994.Page 3.-55 ST.LUCIE INITIAL SIMULATOR CERTIFICATION REPORT REFERENCES 3-1 3-2 3-3 3-4 3-5 3-6 i,;3-8 3-9 3-10 3-11 3-12 ANSI/ANS 3.5-1985, American National Standard,"Nuclear Power Plant Simulators for use in Operator Training".

NUREG 1258, Draft, March 1987-Evaluation procedure for Simulator Facilities Certified under 10CFR55", Division of Human Factor Technology, Office of NRR, USNRC, Washington, D.C."Simulator Facility Evaluation Program", by Neal K, Hunemuller, USNRC Training Department Instruction (TDI¹-38)"Test Development and Evaluation Procedure", Rev.1, February 12, 1991.Off Normal Operating Procedure, ONOP-2-0830030,"Steam Generator Tube Leak", Rev.3, December 14, 1989.Emergency Operating Procedure, 2-EOP-04,"Steam Generator Tube Rupture", Rev.5, September 19, 1989.Administrative Procedure 2-0010125,"Schedule of Periodic Tests, Checks and Calibrations", Rev.34, September 21, 1990.St.Lucie (FUSAR)Unit 2 Final Updated Safety Analysis Report.gI 17-PR/PSL-1"guality Assurance Records", Rev.15, Dated July, 1990.RETRAN-02-A Program for Transient Thermal-Hydraulic Analysis of Complex Fluid Flow Systems, EPRI NP-1850-CCHA, Vol.1, Rev.2, Computer Code Manual, November, 1984.VEPCO North Anna Unit 1, July 15, 1987 Steam Generator Tube Rupture Event Report, August 17, 1987.RE Ginna Steam Generator Tube Rupture (NUREG-0909).

3-13 Vogtle Loss of Shutdown Cooling, (NUREG-1410).

3-14 3-15 Reg.Guide 1.97, Instrumentation for Light-Water-Cooled Nuclear Power Plants to Assess Plant and Environs Conditions During and Following an Accident, Rev.3.Administrative Procedure 0005761,"Simulator Certification", Appendix C, Rev.2, January 29, 1991.Page 3.-56 l q ST.LUCIE INITIAL SIMULATOR CERTIFICATION REPORT 4.0 SIMULATOR DISCREPANCY AND UPGRADE PROGRAM 4.1 SIMULATOR CONFIGURATION HANAGEHE T SYSTEM The Simulator Configuration Management System is defined and controlled by Administrative Procedure No.0010524, Simulator Configuration Control[Reference 4-1].The latest revision of this procedure is included in Appendix D.This procedure describes simulator configuration management and further details the steps and procedures to be used for identification and collection of potential modifications; evaluation of possible simulator modifications; implementation, testing, and documentation of simulator modi'fications; certification testing and documentation; simulator records management; and simulator status monitoring.'igure 4-1 is a flow chart illustrating the process implemented by this procedure.

4.2 SIMULATOR DISCREPANCY REPORTING INSTRUCTIONS The procedure that describes the complete handling of a simulator deficiency report (DR)is Plant Administrative Procedure No.0005764[Reference 4-2].4.3 SIMULATOR WORK ORDER STATUS" Table 4-1 presents a snapshot of the simulator work order status for Certification DR's as of January 11, 1991.The summary was prepared from the Simulator Configuration Management System, a PC based database system that serves as a repository for information on all requests for modification to the Simulator.

[Reference 4-1].Table 4-1 contains all of the DR's found during the preliminary testing and final testing.Only the DR's found during the final testing are referenced in the evaluation summaries in Volume 2.A Simulator Work Order Number (SWO)is a unique work order number assigned to a simulator discrepancy or other potential modification.

A Plant Change/Modification (PCH)is a plant change document.Some PCH's require a simulator modification and are entered into the Simulator Configuration Management System.There are currently no outstanding simulator work items for PCM's.However, a number of PCH's were installed in Unit 2 during the Outage which ended in December 1990.Table 4-2 contains the PCH's installed in the plant and not reviewed for simulator impact.These will be reviewed by the SCRB and installed on the simulator as necessary according to Reference 4-1.Page 4.-1 ST.LUCIE INITIAL SIMULATOR CERTIFICATION REPORT 4.3 SINULATOR WORK ORDER STATUS (Continued):

The system used to prioritize the various Simulator Work Orders is described in Plant Administrative Procedure No.0005764, Simulator Discrepancy Reports,[Reference 4-2]and Plant Administrative Procedure No.10052, Simulator Configuration Control[Reference 4-.1].211 DR's were discovered during the certification process, 144 have been corrected and tested.None of the outstanding 67 DR's would adversely impact Operator Exam.Page 4.-2 POIEHT IALODIF IC4T ION IDEHT IF IED S I}IULATOR CONFIGURATION }}AHAGE}IEHT IHF ORMAT ION FLOW DIAGRAM REV EN B REJECTED S lllULAIOR CONFIG RATIOH SRO IHNORX PLANHED PERFORH CERT IF I CAT IOH TESTING REVIEN BY SINVL4IOR EHGIHEERING GROUP UPDATE CONFIGUR4TION llAHAGEHENT SYSTEH UPDATE CONF INR All ON HAHAGENENT SYSTEH FILE PREPARE CERTIFICATION DOCUHEHTATION R VIEN BY S ULATOR NO IHPLEHENIAIION COH GVR4TIOH R VIQ SUB}1II CERTIFICATIOH DOCU}}EHTATIOH IHPLEI}EHI GENERATE S IHUL4TOR NORX REQUEST INPLEHEH'I TEST AHD DOCUHENI UPDATE COHFIGURATIOH NAHAGEHEHI SYSIEH FILE FIQJRE 4-i PAGE 4.-3 Page No.02/08/91 h ST.LUCIE INITIAL SIMULATOR CERTIFICATION REPORT 1*PSL SIMULATOR DISCREPANCY REPORT*TABLE 4-1 DR¹STATUS I INWORK C=CLOSED X REJECT 0459 C 0460 C 0465 C'466 C 0469 C 0485 C" 0487 C DESCRIPTION CERT/RCP SEAL COOLER OUTLET VALVE SETPOINT.CERT/LETDOWN RELIEF ALARM (HI-TEMP).CERT/REACTOR REG-LOW INSERT/WDRAW. CERT/T1111Y SIGMA INDICATES LOW.CERT/STA BATT 2B BREAKER CONTROL VIA I/F.CERT/REACTOR CAVITY LEVEL&FLOW INDICATION. CERT/INSTRUMENT AIR PROCESS CALIBRATION. OPEN CLOSED/DATE SCHEDULE DATE 12/18/89 04/10/90 01/02/90 01/10/90 01/08/90 01/17/90 01/08/90 01/10/90 01/12/90 07/02/90 01/31/90 03/06/90 01/31/90 03/06/90 0488 C 0489 C 0490 C CERT/2C&2D INST AIR COMPRESSOR 01/31/90 06/20/90 I/F SCRATCH PADS.CERT/C&D INST A/CS I/F"LOCAL" 01/31/90 04/19/90 CONTROLS.CERT/INCORRECT I/F LABELS C&D 01/31/90 02/13/90 COMPRESSORS (LOA PAGE).0491 C 0492 C 0493 C 0506 C CERT/"D" CHANNEL NI CAL TEST POT CAUSES"TROUBLE" ALARM CERT/2C&2D INSTRUMENT AIR COMPRESSOR I/F OVERLOAD FAILURE CERT/UNABLE TO ESTABLISH SIGNIGICANT C/D (SON).CERT/SCREEN WASH PUMPS AUTO OPERATION. 01/31/90 02/13/90 Ol/31/90 04/19/90 01/31/90 03/06/90 02/13/90 03/06/90 Page 4.-4 Page No.02/08/91 ST.LUCIE INITIAL SIMULATOR CERTIFICATION REPORT 2*PSL SIMULATOR DISCREPANCY REPORT*TABLE 4-1 DR¹STATUS I=INWORK C CLOSED X REJECT 0507 C 0508 C 0509 C 0510 I 0511 C 0512 C 0517 C DESCRIPTION CERT/"D" (2B2)INTAKE WELL CLOG FACTOR.CERT/CIRC WATER PUMPS NEVER LOOSE SUCTION/RUN DRY.CERT/PDIL RESPONSE TO WIDE RANGE FAILURE.CERT/INTAKE SCREEN COLUMN CHANNELLING? CERT/INSTRUCTOR CONTROL OF SCREEN DIFFERENTIAL. CERT/ICW SYSTEM PSEUDO VALVE ADEQUACY.CERT/CIRC WATER I/F PAGE CONNECTOR. OPEN CLOSED/DATE SCHEDULE DATE 02/13/90 04/10/90 02/13/90 03/06/90 02/13/90 04/26/90 02/13/90 07/31/91 02/13/90 01/08/91 02/13/90 03/06/90 02/13/90 04/10/90 0518 C 0519 C 0524 C 0525 C 0526 C CERT/ICW I/F CONTROL PAGE 515.02/13/90 01/08/91 CERT/PZR LEVEL INSTRUMENT LABLES.CERT/QSPDS SAT.MAR.MONITOR DOESN'T FLAG SUSPECTED DATA CERT/RRS¹1 INSERT HIGH RATE NOT WORKING.02/14/90 03/06/90 02/21/90 01/10/91 02/21/90 06/26/90 CERT/TEMP RCDR TR-1120E SHOWED 02/21/90 04/26/90 NO RESPONSE.0528 C 0530 C 0531 C CERT/CCW SURGE TANK I/F PAGE NOT CORRECT.CERT/TURBINE VALVE TEST, GV DIDN'T CLOSE FULLY CERT/TURBINE VALVE TEST,SEQ/SINGLE LITE DID'T SHOW DUAL INDC 02/22/90 06/20/90 02/26/90 08/16/90 02/26/90 03/06/90 Page 4.-5 ST.LUCIE INITIAL SIMULATOR CERTIFICATION REPORT Page No.3 02/08/91*PSL SIMULATOR DISCREPANCY REPORT*TABLE 4-1 DR¹STATUS I INWORK C CLOSED X REJECT DESCRIPTION OPEN CLOSED/DATE SCHEDULE DATE 0532 C 0533 C 0534 C 0536 C 0538 C 0539 C 0540 C CERT/TURBINE VALVE TEST, VALVE 02/26/90 03/06/90 STATUS LIGHT DIDN'T LITE CERT/TURBINE VALVE TEST, INP IN 02/26/90 03/06/90 LIGHT DIDN'T LITE CERT/TURBINE VALVE TEST, COULD 02/26/90 01/10/91 NOT EXIT FROM TEST PROPER.CERT/CVCS LETDOWN ISOLATION, TEMPERATURE WITH TO 32 DEGREES.03/06/90 07/09/90 CERT/SGBD ISOL (IC)VLVS 03/06/90 04/10/90 (FCV-23-4, FCV-23-6)IMPROPER AIR SUPPLY.CERT/RDT VENT (V6300)IMPROPER 03/06/90 04/10/90 FAILED POSITION.CERT/PZR SPRAY VLVS 03/06/90 04/10/90 (PCV-1100E, 1100F)IMPROPER AIR SUPPLY 0541 C CERT/SIT N2 SUPPLY VLVS (V3612j3622~3632>3642) IMPROPER AIR SUPPLY.03/06/90 04/10/90 0542 C 0543 C CERT/RCP SEAL BLEEDOFF RLF 03/06/90 04/10/90 STOP VLV (V2507)IMPROPER AIR SUPPLY CERT/CCW-SDC HX ISOL VLVS 03/06/90 04/10/90 (HCV-14-3A &3B)IMPROPER AIR SUPPLY.0544 C 0545 C CERT/CCW-SDC HX VLVS (HCV-14-3A &3B)IMPROPER ACTUATOR RANGE.CERT/RM-11 SGBD MONITORS (PLP-121,122) FAIL TO INDICATE LOSS OF PROCESS FLOW.03/06/90 04/10/90 03/07/90 04/10/90 Page 4.-6 Page No.02/08/91 ST.LUCIE INITIAL SIMULATOR CERTIFICATION REPORT*PSL SIMULATOR DISCREPANCY REPORT*TABLE 4-1 DR¹STATUS I INWORK C CLOSED X REJECT 0546 C DESCRIPTION CERT/BORIC ACID FLOW CNTRL (FCV-2210Y) IMPROPER AIR SUPPLY.OPEN CLOSED/DATE SCHEDULE DATE 03/07/90 04/10/90 0547 C 0548 C 0549 C CERT/CCW TO/FROM RCP ISOL VLVS 03/07/90 04/10/90 (HCV-14-1,2,6,7) IMPROPER ACTUATOR RANGE.CERT/BAM TANK 2A, 2B LEVEL IND 03/07/90 04/10/90 (LIA-2206, 2208)RESPONSE.CERT/AUX STM HDR PRESS CONTROL 03/07/90 04/10/90 ROOM INDICATION &ALARM.0550 C 0551 C CERT/RCB INTR.AIR ISOLATION VLV (HCV-18-1) IMPROPER AIR SUPPLY.CERT/NO IDLE RELEASE ON DIES ELS.03/07/90 04/10/90 03/08/90 04/10/90 0552 C 0553 C CERT/ISOLATE SWITCH LOGIC FOR 03/08/90 06/19/90 IDLE START NOT CORRECT.CERT/ICW/TCW HX VLVS 03/08/90 04/10/90 (TCV-13-2A &2B)IMPROPER AIR SUPPLY&FAILURE MODE.0555 C 0556 C CERT/ICW LUBE WTR BACKUP (PCV-21-26) RESPONSE TO REDUCED INSTRUMENT AIR PRESSURE.CERT/ICW/OBD-HX VLVS (TCV-34-3A &3B)RESPONSE TO LOSS OF INSTRUMENT AIR.03/08/90 04/10/90 03/08/90 04/10/90 0557 C CERT/ICW/CCW HX VLVS 03/08/90 04/10/90 (TCV-14-4A &4B)IMPROPER AIR SUPPLY&RANGE.0568 C CERT/WR LOG NI/RPS-HSUR TRIP BISTABLE/RELAY. 03/19/90 04/26/90 Page 4.-7 Page No.02/08/91 ST.LUCIE INITIAL SIMULATOR CERTIFICATION REPORT 5*PSL SIMULATOR DISCREPANCY REPORT*TABLE 4-1 DR¹STATUS I INWORK C CLOSED X REJECT 0574 I 0589 C DESCRIPTION CERT/PZR SRV DISCHARGE TEMPERATURE NOT CORRECT.CERT/TURBINE COAST DOWN TIME NOT CORRECT.OPEN CLOSED/DATE SCHEDULE DATE 03/30/90 10/31/91 04/19/90 Ol/09/91 0590 C CERT/NET MW METER READS GROSS 04/19/90 01/09/91 MW.0591 C 0592 I 0593 C 0594 C 0599 C CERT/SIT VENT VS CONT PRESSURE.CERT/PRESSURIZER LEVEL INSTRUMENT NOT INDICATIVE OF SOLID CONDITIONS. CERT/PRESSURIZER 5 STEAM GENERATOR LEVEL OSCILLATIONS DURING RCS COOLDOWN EXPERIENCED. CERT/QUENCH TANK VALVES ARE OPERTIONAL ON LOSS OF INST.AIR.'I CERT/2B-H2 RECOMBINER TEMPERATURE INDICATOR NEEDS CAL/REPAI R 04/19/90 01/09/91 04/19/90 12/31/91 04/19/90 04/30/90 04/19/90 04/26/90 04/24/90 05/23/90 0600 I CERT/PZR PRESSURE OSCILLATIONS 04/24/90 12/31/91 WHEN GOING SOLID.0602 C 0603 C 0604 I 0605 C CERT/SOER PRINT-OUTS ON RX TRIP-MANUAL.CERT/(HIC-1110) THE LETDOWN LCV CONTROLLER NOT SWITCH-CHECKING. CERT TEST/ASYMMETRIC ICW HEADER PRESSURES. CERT/ICW TO CIRC LUBE WTR VALUES DO NOT CLOSE ON SIAS.04/24/90 04/26/90 04/24/90 01/08/91 04/24/90 03/31/91 04/24/90 04/26/90 Page 4.-8 Page No.02/08/91 ST.LUCIE INITIAL SIMULATOR CERTIFICATION REPORT 6*PSL SIMULATOR DISCREPANCY REPORT*TABLE 4-1 DR¹STATUS I=INWORK C=CLOSED X REJECT DESCRIPTION OPEN CLOSED/DATE SCHEDULE DATE 0606 I 0607 I CERT/STEAN BYPASS DEMAND 5 04/26/90 12/31/91 AUTO WITHDRAWAL PROHIBIT.CERT/SYSTEM RESPONSE SHOW STEP 04/26/90 12/31/91 CHANGE WHEN GV¹1 CLOSES.0613 C'616 C CERT/INTRUMENT AIR (RCB)PSEUDO LV1 CALIBRATION. CERT/REACTOR VESSEL HEAD RESPONSE TO NAT.CIRC.COOLDOWN.05/02/90 01/09/91 05/08/90 01/09/91 0617 C 0624 C 0635 C 0636 C CERT/RPS CHANNELS"B"5."D" T HOT HIGH CERT/PZR CODE SAFETY VALVES IMPROPER SETPOINTS. 05/15/90 10/17/90'5/22/90 06/26/90 CERT/SPRAY LINE TEMP RESPONSE 05/25/90 01/10/91 IS NOT CORRECT DURING SPRAY FLOW.CERT/CIS RAD MONITOR RESPONSE.05/08/90 08/16/90 0641 C CERT/PORV (V1474 L V1475)FAILED OPEN FLOWRATE NOT CORRECT.05/23/90 11/30/90 0647 C 0648 I CERT/2C&2D I.A.COOLER TCW 06/04/90 06/19/90 VALVES NOT POSITION CORRECT IN FPSS STORE POINT.CERT/ANNUNCIATOR K28 LOGIC NOT 06/04/90 12/31/91 CORRECT.0650 C 0653 C, 0664 X CERT/IC¹8 CAVITY LEAKAGE RECORDER INCREASING CERT/V-3517 INDICATION OFF WHEN 2B3 FAILED CERT/PHANTOM RWT SUCTION TO LPSI PUMPS 06/04/90 01/09/91 06/04/90 06/19/90 06/13/90 01/11/91 Page 4.-9 Page No.02/08/91 ST.LUCIE INITIAL SIMULATOR CERTIFICATION REPORT 7*PSL SIMULATOR DISCREPANCY REPORT*TABLE 4-1 DR¹STATUS I=INWORK C=CLOSED X=REJECT 0668 I 0672 C 0673 C 0678 C DESCRIPTION CERT/TEMP.EFFECT ON ION EXCHANGER CERT/AFAS LOCKOUT RELAY STATUS LTS.CERT/'B'SPDS PAGE 211.NOT LINKED TO LATEST OSPDS PAGE 211 CERT/CIRC WATER PUMPS FLICKERING INDICATION DURING SDC LOSS OPEN CLOSED/DATE SCHEDULE DATE 06/18/90 10/31'/91 06/18/90 06/26/90 06/18/90 06/25/90 06/18/90 09/13/90 0680 C 0681 X 0683 C 0685 C 0686 C 0687 C'0689 C 0690 C 0691 C CERT/TURBINE DIDN'T TRIP ON LOSS OF"A" BATTERY BUSS.CERT/OSPDS POWER SOURCES NOT CORRECT.06/25/90 08/09/90 06/25/90 06/21/90 CERT/480V 282 BKR POWER LIGHT 06/25/90 06/25/90 STAYED LITE DURING A LOSS OF POWER.CERT/NON-SELECTED RRS CONTROLS 06/20/90 06/26/90 CEDMCS CERT/NO ACCESS TO"B" BATTERY 06/17/90 06/20/90 BANK BREAKER CERT/EXCITATION SWITCH DID NOT 06/20/90 06/25/90 TRIP CERT/RCP BEARING TEMPERATURES 06/20/90 07/02/90 DURING ESDE CERT/PCV'-18-6 CLOSED ON UNIT 2 06/25/90 01/09/91 I.A.PRESSURE CERT/IMPROPER PORV ACTUATION 06/25/90 07/09/90 0692 C CERT/ANNUNCIATORS HVAC POWER SOURCE IS NOT CORRECT.06/25/90 06/25/90 Page 4.-10 Page No.02/08/91 ST.LUCIE INITIAL SIMULATOR CERTIFICATION REPORT 8*PSL SIMULATOR DISCREPANCY REPORT*TABLE 4-1 DR8 STATUS I INWORK C=CLOSED X REJECT 0707 C 0708 C DESCRIPTION CERT/SERVICE AIR DOES NOT MAINTAIN I.A.PRESSURE CERT/F5"INST AIR PRESSURE HI/LO" RESET EARLY OPEN CLOSED/DATE SCHEDULE DATE 07/13/90 01/09/91 07/13/90 08/06/90.0709 C 0712 C 0713,C 0717 I 0718 C 0719 C 0720 C 0721 C 0728 C 0729 I 0730 I 0731 X 0732 C CERT/CONDENSER BACKPRESSURE 07/13/90 08/16/90 RESPONSE TO REMOVAL OF 1 SJAE.CERT/ANN.E-37 DID NOT ALARM.07/19/90 08/09/90 CERT/STBY INS AIR COMP TRIPS TOO SOON ON HIGH TEMP CERT/REG GROUP ROD WORTH NOT CORRECT.CERT/PRESSURIZER CONTROLLER BANDS 07/19/90 Ol/09/91 07/19/90 12/31/91 07/19/90 01/10/91 CERT/CCW TEMP DID NOT INCREASE 07/19/90 09/25/90 ON LOSS OF ICW CERT/ERRATIC T HOT ON IRSPDS 07/30/90 08/06/90 CERT/DDPS DID NOT RESPOND TO TE-1111Y FAILURE.CERT/FCV 23-7 AND FCV 23-9 CYCLE CERT/RM-11 TREND BAR CHARTS ARE NOT UPDATING.07/30/90 08/16/90 08/03/90 08/16/90 08/03/90 12/31/91 CERT/CONDENSER AIR EJECTOR 08/03/90 12/31/91 RM-11 RESPONSE IS NOT CORRECT DURING A SGTR.CERT/INDICATED HPSI FLOW BELOW 08/06/90 01/11/91 EOP-99 FIG.2 VALUES AT LOW PRESSURE.CERT/LABELS DHTSA 5 DHTSB NOT 08/06/90 08/08/90 ACCURATELY RECORDING TEMPS.Page 4.-11 Page No.02/08/91 ST.LUCIE INITIAL SIMULATOR CERTIFICATION REPORT 9*PSL SIMULATOR DISCREPANCY REPORT*TABLE 4-1 DR¹STATUS I=INWORK C=CLOSED X=REJECT DESCRIPTION OPEN CLOSED/DATE SCHEDULE DATE 0749 C CERT/LETDOWN TEMPERATURE 08/09/90 09/13/90 INDICATION ABNORMALLY LOW FOR INTRASYSTEM LOCA.0750 C 0751 I 0752 I 0753 I 0754 I CERT/RM-23 CHECKSOURCE P/B INOPERATIVE FOR CH.A&CH.C CIS M CERT/RCS/PRZR LEVEL RELATIONSHIP. CERT/SJAE RADIATION MONITOR-IMPROPER TREND FOR SGTR CERT/MN STEAM LINE RADIATION MONITORS-IMPROPER TREND FOR SGTR.CERT/QSPDS/RVLMS AXIAL LOCATION INCONSISTENT WITH PLANT DATA.08/09/90 08/21/90 08/15/90 12/31/91 08/15/90 12/31/91 08/15/90 12/31/91 08/15/90 12/31/91 0755 I CERT/HPSI FLOW XIENT WITH RCS 08/15/90 12/31/91)PUMP SHUTOFF HEAD.0756 I 0758 C CERT/TURBINE LOADING IS NOT CORRECT/LIMITED TO 940 MW.CERT/CHANNEL"C" CONTAINMENT PRESS I/F FAILURE IS NOT CORRECT.08/15/90 12/31/91 08/15/90 08/16/90 0759 X CERT/LACK OF RCS HEAT-UP AFTER 08/15/90 01/11/91 SDC LOST.0764 X 0765 I CERT/PZR LEVEL COLD CAL CERT/PRZ PRESS.SPIKE WHILE DRAWING A BUBBLE.08/21/90 01/11/91 08/21/90 12/31/91 0766 I CERT/S/G LEVEL SWINGS DURING 08/21/90 12/31/91 COOLDOWN.Page 4.-12 Page No.02/08/91 ST.LUCIE INITIAL SIMULATOR CERTIFICATION REPORT 10*PSL SIMULATOR DISCREPANCY REPORT.*TABLE 4-1 DR¹STATUS I INWORK C CLOSED X REJECT 0767 C 0768 C 0769 I 0770 C DESCRIPTION CERT/BISTABLE BA111 TRIP LIGHT BURNED OUT.CERT/PZR SPRAY LINE TEMP RESPONSE NOT CORRECT.CERT/CAN NOT RACK OUT MFP BREAKERS.CERT/TURBINE THROTTLE VALVE STROKE TIMES OPEN CLOSED/DATE SCHEDULE DATE 08/21/90 08/29/90 08/21/90 01/10/91 08/21/90 07/31/91 08/21/90 01/09/91 0771 C CERT/LABELS FOR MV-07-38L4 08/21/90 09/25/90 0785 C 0786 C 0788 C 0790 I CERT/OPC TEST LOGIC IS NOT CORRECT.CERT/VALVE POSITION LIMIT LOGIC IS NOT CORRECT.CERT/DDPS PT 835 CAN NOT BE DELETED.CERT/TURBINE ROLLED OFF TURING GEAR.08/27/90 01/09/91 08/27/90 01/09/91 08/27/90 01/09/91 08/27/90 12/31/91 0791 C CERT/GEN GROUND TEST LOGIC IS 08/27/90 09/25/90 NOT CORRECT.0792 C 0793 I 0794 C 0795 C 0800 I CERT/TURBINE WILL NOT LATCH WITH NO VACUUM.CERT/FEEDWATER HEATER DELTA T RESPONSE IS NOT CORRECT.CERT/MSIV'S OPEN TOO FAST CERT/CWP OVERLOAD ALARM OCCURS DURING PUMP START.CERT/POWER LOSS TO INST.BUS 2MA W/0 LOSS OF INDICATION TE-1122HA 8L CA,AND TE-1112HA 5 CA.08/27/90 01/10/91 08/27/90 12/31/91 08/27/90 01/09/91 08/27/90 01/10/91 08/29/90 07/31/91 Page 4.-13 Page No.02/08/91 ST.LUCIE INITIAL SIMULATOR CERTIFICATION REPORT ll*PSL SIMULATOR DISCREPANCY REPORT*TABLE 4-1 DR¹STATUS I INWORK C=CLOSED X=REJECT 0804 X 0807 X 0812 I 0814 C DESCRIPTION CERT/FAULTED SG PRESSURE RESPONSE AT DRYOUT.CERT/LOW FW INLET TEMP AT FPSS.CERT/QUENCH TANK TEMP DECREASING ON ADDITION OF STEAM.CERT/LOSS OF CH, A RPS-TMLP(PIA-1102A) STILL READING 2100 OPEN CLOSED/DATE SCHEDULE DATE 09/07/90 01/ll/91 09/07/90 01/11/91 09/12/90 07/31/91 09/12/90 01/10/91 0817 I CERT/RCS SECONDARY LEAK FLOW 09/13/90 07/31/91 IMPROPER FOR SGTR 0818 I 0819 X CERT/FEEDWATER REG.VALVE (FCV-9011), IMPROPER TRANIENT RESPONSE (SG2A)CERT/RCB INCREASING TEMP/PRESS RELATION FOR FW LINE BREAK I.C.09/13/90 12/31/91 09/13/90 01/11/91 0820 X CERT/CHANNEL C&D CIS RAD 09/13/90 01/11/91 MONITOR C/S PUSHBUTTON DO NOT WORK FROM THE RM23 PANEL 0821 X CERT/CEDMCS MOTION INHIBIT LIGHTS 09/13/90 Ol/ll/91 0822 X 0826-C CERT/ANN L-43 DID NOT LIGHT 09/13/90 01/11/91 CERT/RCS/PZR INTEGRATED XIENT 09/13/90 01/10/91 RESPONSE: FW LINE BREAK 0827 C 0828 I CERT/LARGE FW LINE BREAK DISCHARGE FLOWRATE EXCESSIVE CERT/ISOLATED, INTACT SG RESPONSE 09/13/90 Ol/10/91 09/13/90 12/31/91 Page 4.-14 Page No.02/08/91 ST.LUCIE INITIAL SIMULATOR CERTIFICATION REPORT 12*PSL SIMULATOR DISCREPANCY REPORT*TABLE 4-1 DR¹STATUS I INWORK C=CLOSED X=REJECT 0829 C DESCRIPTION CERT/TOTAL CORE D/P (CH.D)IMPROPER TREND FOR FW LINE BREAK (H2'32SO)OPEN CLOSED/DATE SCHEDULE DATE 09/13/90 Ol/10/91 0830 I 0833 I CERT/RCS/FAULTED SG HT.TRF.09/13/90 12/31/91 FOR LOSS OF SECONDARY COOLANT CERT/PRESSURIZER HEATER POWER 09/18/90 12/31/91 DROPS OUT 0848 C CERT/ANNUNCIATORS J-41/J-45 RESPONSE (OPDS)09/26/90 01/10/91 0852 C 0853 X 0856 I CERT/HSCP ADV'S CONTROLLERS. 09/26/90 10/17/90 CERT/TURBINE VIBRATION ALARMS 10/08/90 Ol/11/91 CERT/SIGMA POWER LIGHT DID'N 10/08/90 07/31/91 GO OUT DURING LOSS OFF POWER.0857 C CERT/WRONG LABELS ON T COLD CHANNELS 10/08/90 01/08/91 0858 I CERT/TOTAL REACTOR CORE FLOW 10/08/90 12/31/91 APPEARS TO BE ERRONEOUS 0859 C CERT/STATION AIR PRESS<0 DURING LOSS OF COMPRESSOR. 10/08/90 01/05/91 0860 I CERT/2A2 OIL LIFT PUMP ALARM 10/08/90 08/31/91 INCORRECT 0861 I 0875 I CERT/HOTWELL LI(UID TEMP DROPS TOO MUCH CERT/RECORDER SCALES-HVAC/PAP1/HSCP 10/08/90 12/31/91 10/17/90 12/31/91 0876 C 0877 C CERT/NEW INST.TAGS-PANELS A2/A9 10/17/90 12/14/90 CERT/NEW INST TAGS-PANEL A3 10/17/90 12/18/90 Page 4.-15 Page No.02/08/91 ST.LUCIE INITIAL SIMULATOR CERTIFICATION REPORT 13*PSL SIMULATOR DISCREPANCY REPORT*TABLE 4-1 DR¹STATUS I INWORK C=CLOSED X REJECT DESCRIPTION OPEN CLOSED/DATE SCHEDULE DATE 0878 C CERT/NEW INST.TAGS-A201AB 10/17/90 12/18/90 0879 C.0880 I 0882 C 0884 I 0886 I 0889 I 0890 I 0891 I CERT/NEW INST.TAGS-PANEL A9 CERT/S/G PRESSURE DROP-OFF TOO FAST DURING LBLOCA.CERT./PRESSURIZER LEVEL INCREASE DURING MSLB.CERT./FEEDWATER BREAK ON A HDR/PRESSURE DROPS TO ZERO CERT/TURBINE RUNBACK ALARM (D-27)CERT/CHG PUMP RE-CIRC VALVE STROKE LOGIC CERT/CONTAINMENT RESPONSE DURING ATWS.CERT/RV HEAD LIFT PRESSURE DURING ATWS NOT CORRECT.10/17/90 12/18/90 10/17/90.12/31/91 10/17/90 ll/13/90 10/17/90 12/31/91 10/29/90 08/31/91 10/29/90 08/31/91 10/29/90 10/31/91 10/29/90 10/31/91 0894 C 0895 C 0896 C 0897 C CERT/NEW LABELS-A9 CERT/NEW INST TAGS A206 10/29/90 12/18/90 10/29/90 12/18/90 CERT/NEW INST TAGS A204/A205 10/29/90 12/18/90 CERT/NEW LABELS-MTR CERT 10/29/90 12/18/90 0898 C 0899 C 0901 I CERT/NEW INST TAG A203 CERT/NEW INST TAGS A201 CERT/CCW HEAT EXCHANGER RESPONSE DURING LOSS OF ICW.10/29/90 12/18/90 10/29/90 12/18/90 11/06/90 12/31/91 0903 I CERT/TM/LP SETPOINT GOES HIGH 11/06/90 03T31/91 ON RX TRIP Page 4.-16 Page No.02/08/91 ST.LUCIE INITIAL SIMULATOR CERTIFICATION REPORT 14*PSL SIMULATOR DISCREPANCY REPORT*TABLE 4-1 DRP STATUS I=INWORK C CLOSED X REJECT 0904 C 0905 I 0906 I DESCRIPTION CERT/SUBCOOLED MARGIN CHANNEL A (QSPDS)ANN J-41 CERT/LETDOWN FLOW RESPONSE DURING LOOP.CERT/CST AUTO LEVEL CONTROL NOT CORRECT.OPEN CLOSED/DATE SCHEDULE DATE 11/06/90 01/10/91 11/06/90 12/31/91 11/06/90 12/31/91 0907 I CERT/RCB PRESSURE RESPONSE TO 11/13/90 10/31/91 FAILED OPEN PORV 0908 I CERT/PZR SURGE LINE TEMP.RESPONSE 11/13/90 12/31/91 0910 X 0911 X CERT/TOTAL CORE FLOW ll/13/90 Ol/19/91 UNEXPLAINED TRANSIENT RESPONSE CERT/SG LEVEL INDICATION FOR 11/13/90 01/11/91 FAULTED/ISOLATED CONDITION 0912 X CERT/D/G 2A VOLTAGE DIDN'CHANGE 11/13/90 Ol/ll/91 0914 X CERT/NARROW RANGE S/G LEVELS 11/13/90 01/11/91 ISN'T CORRECT 0915 X 0923 I 0929 I 0932 I 0956 I 0957 I CERT/B SIDE FEED FLOW APPEARS TO BE IN ERROR CERT/S/G MASS INCREASE FOLLOWING SBLOCA CERT/INST.AIR X TI E LOGIC IS NOT CORRECT CERT/RCP BLEEDOFF TO QUENCH TANK-PRESSURE NOT CORRECT CERT/OUTSIDE AIR FLOW TO CONTROL ROOM NOT CORRECT CERT/SIS HDR PRESS HIGH ll/13/90 Ol/ll/91 11/21/90 12/31/91 ll/30/90 03/31/91 11/30/90 12/31/91 12/13/90 12/31/91 12/13/90 12T31/91 Page 4.-17 Page No.02/08/91 ST.LUCIE INITIAL SIMULATOR CERTIFICATION REPORT 15*PSL SIMULATOR DISCREPANCY REPORT*TABLE 4-1 DR8 STATUS I INWORK C=CLOSED X REJECT 0958 I 0959 I DESCRIPTION CERT/RCP AMPS LOW CERT/SECONDARY STEAM/FEED FLOW 5.STEAM PRESS LOW OPEN CLOSED/DATE SCHEDULE DATE 12/13/90 12/31/91 12/13/90 12/31/91 0960 I 0961 I CERT/GEN KILOAMP PHASE A TOO 12/13/90 12/31/91 HIGH CERT/CCW SYSTEN FLOW, PRESS, 12/13/90 12/31/91 AMPS LOW 0962 I 0963 I 0964 I 0965 I 0966 C 0967 I 0968 I 0970 C 0973 I 0974 I 0975 I CERT/RCP RLEEDOFF PRESSURE TOO LOW CERT/RCS SYSTEM FLOW D/P TOO HIGH CERT/CWP PP AMPS TOO LOW, DOESN'T MATCH PLANT DATA CERT/ICW PP AMPS TOO LOW, DOESN'T MATCH PLANT DATA CERT/AIR PRESSURE TO UHS DOESN'T MATCH PLANT DATA CERT/CEDM FAN AMPS DOESN'MATCH PLANT DATA CERT/PZR SAFETY LINE TEMPERATURES ARE REVERSED CERT/A201/A202 NEW TAGS CERT/ANNULUS PRESSURE PERTUBATION DURING STEADY STATE OPS.CERT/RCS 2A2 COLD LEG TEMPERATURE TRANSIENTS FOR FEED WATER LEAK CERT/CONTAINMENT SUMP LEVEL RESPONSE TO FEED WATER LEAK 12/13/90 12/31/91 12/13/90 12/31/91 12/13/90 12/31/91 12/13/90 12/31/91 12/13/90 01/10/91 12/13/90 12/31/91 12/13/90 10/31/91 12/17/90 01/08/91 12/18/90 12/31/91 12/18/90 12/31/91 12/18/90 12131/91 Page 4.-18 Page No.02/08/91 ST.LUCIE INITIAL SIMULATOR CERTIFICATION REPORT 16*PSL SIMULATOR DISCREPANCY REPORT*TABLE 4-1 DRP STATUS I INWORK C CLOSED X REJECT DESCRIPTION OPEN CLOSED/DATE SCHEDULE DATE 0976 I 0977 I 0978 I 0980 I 0981 I CERT/RCB TEMP/PRESS/HEAT LOAD 12/18/90 12/31/91 RESPONSE AFTER ESF RESET CERT/2B FW/AFW HEADER-12/18/90 12/31/91 PRESSURE INCREASE WHILE PUMPS ARE OFF CERT/CONTAINMENT TEMP RESPONSE 12/19/90 12/31/91 FOR ESDE 12/31/90 12/31/91 CERT/C.A.S.S. RESPONSE TO SMALL RCS LEAK CERT/TRINISTAT POWER AMPS DOES 01/08/91 12/31/91 NOT TRACK UNIT 2 Page 4.-19 Page No.02/08/91 ST.LUCIE INITIAL SIMULATOR CERTIFICATION PCMs INSTALLED IN ST.LUCIE¹2 WHICH HAVE NOT BEEN REVIEWED.TABLE 4-2 PCM¹87095-2 88085-2 88339-2 88345-2 88355-2 88373-2 88393-2 89022-2 89103-2 89145-2 89183-2 89230-2 89235-2 89238-2 89244-2 89260-2 89272-2 89317-2 89333-2 89338-2 89343-2 89351-2 89353-2 89372-2 89377-2 90009-2 90052-2 90077-2 90083-2 90130-2 90132-2 90142-2 90145-2 90151-2 DESCRIPTION D/G FAN DRIVE SHAFT GUARD MOD WESTINGHOUSE PRESSURE TRANSMITTER OBSOLE VAILEY VALVE POSITIONER &.REPLACEMENT SIGMA INSTRUMENT TEMPERATURE IND SWITCH FISCHER 5.PORTER INTEGRATOR OBSOLESCENCE FUEL HANDLING BLDG L-SHAPED DOOR UNITED ELECTRIC PRESS SWITCH REPLACEMENT SAS TIES TO AMMETERS AND VOLTMETERS ATWAS-DIVERSE SCRAM SYSTEM HEATER DRAIN PUMP PEDESTAL RESTORATION MISCELLANEOUS DRAWING CHANGES PUL-FUSE SWITCHES REPLCMT FAILURE OF AIR OPERATED VALVES SGBD CONDUCTIVITY AND PH ANALYZERS REPLC SG BLOWDOWN ISOL VLV CONTROL SWITCH OVER ICW SYSTEM ISOLATION VALVE RELINING MFP RECIRCULATION VALVE CONTROL MOD FCV-9021&FCV 9011 FLEX AIR HOSE REPLCM HOLDUP TANK N2 SUPPLY REGULATOR REPLCMT AFAS RELAY CARD REPLACEMENT CEDM GENERATOR RHEOSTAT CHANGE CL1E 4K2 BREAKER AND CUBICLE MOD VOLTAGE REGULATOR TRANSFER SWITCH GE HFA RELAY REPLACEMENT WASTE GAS DISCHARGE FLOW TRANSMITTER REP RELOCATE METAL BUILDING FOR RCA ACCESS P P-10 GAS SUPPLY MOD MODLED CIRCUIT BREAKERS BULLETIN 88-10 RCS AVERAGE TEMP TO SAS/ERDADS MFIV CONTROL SWITCH OVERRIDE BARTON TRANSMITTER REPLACEMENT RCB ATMOS PT-07-2C REPLACEMENT DEGASSIFIER CONDUIT AND BOX SUPPORT UPGR WASTE FILTER 2A FILTER CARTRIDGE REPLCMT-PLANT IMPLEMENTED DATE 11/06/90 11/29/90 10/16/90 12/28/90 10/26/90 11/30/89 11/19/90 12/05/90 11/26/90 11/20/90 10/26/90 11/06/90 10/31/90 11/21/90 ll/15/90 11/21/90 11/15/90 12/05/90 ll/15/90 12/27/90 11/26/90 ll/14/90 11/07/90 12/31/90 ll/14/90 10/16/90 10/03/90 12/12/90 12/19/90 ll/15/90 ll/19/90 11/16/90 11/19/90 10/23/90 Page 4.-20 Page No.02/08/91 ST.LUCIE INITIAL SIMULATOR CERTIFICATION PCMs INSTALLED IN'ST.LUCIE¹2 WHICH HAVE NOT BEEN REVIEWED.TABLE 4-2 PCM¹DESCRIPTION PLANT IMPLEMENTED DATE 90158-2 90162-2 90169-2 9%71-2 90172-2 90181-2 90184-2 90189-9 90194-2 90197-2 90203-2 90205-2 90206-2 90208-2 90215-2 90217-2 90218-2 90219-2 90221-2 90244-2 90246-2 90257-2 90258-2 90260-2 90261-2 90268-2 90272-2 90275-2 90282-2 90286-2 90289-9 90292-2 90293-9 90298-2 LOSS OF FIELD RELAY REPLACEMENT CORRECTIVE ACTION FOR QA AUDIT RPS CABINET~FAN RELOCATION/NOISE REDUCTI HSCP STEAM GEN PRESS RANGE CHANGE HVAC LOUVER SCREEN MATERIAL CHANGE (L-8)FISCHER PORTER SQUARE ROOT EXTRACTOR REP FUEL CASK CRANE BRIDGE INCHING MOTOR REP SEFMENTED REED SWITCHES LETDOWN HEAT EXCHANGER CABLE SPLICE 4.16&6.9KV SU&AUX XFORMER GROUND DET REPLACE MG SET AMMETER 2A&2B CEDM MG S 480V LOAD CENTER GROUND DET RELAY SETPOI CONDENSER HOTWELL PEDESTAL REPAIR REPL OF POLAR CRANE DIGITAL WEIGHT IND RCB TELESCOPING JIB BOOM CRANE ANTICORR FCV-25-13 MOTOR REPLACEMENT POLAR CRANE MAGNATORQUE INDICATION 480V LOAD CENTERS 2A5&2B5 GROUND DET R INSTRUMENT COMPRESSOR LOADING LOGIC MOD SHIELD BLDG FAN ANNUNCIATOR CABLE REROUTE CP BYPASS FLOW RANGE MISMATCH/FT-12-1 HVS-6&7 BIRD SCREEN MATERIAL CHANGE NITROGEN HEADER LOW PRESS ALARM SETPOINT INST AIR COMPRESSORS 2C&2D GASKET CHAN CEDM C5 US RELAY SETPOINTS BORIC ACID MAKEUP TANK SELECTION SWITCH 480V UNDERVOLTAGE RELAY SETPOINT MOD LOW ALARM AND ADV MANUAL ANNUNCIATOR DEL CCW PUMP 2C MOTOR AIR BOX MOUNTING GE MAGNETIC MOTOR STARTER REPLACEMENT CRANE-GASKET MATERIAL PART NO.CHANE GOULDS PUMP SHAFT SLEEVE ROLL LPIN MOD GOULDS PUMP SHAFT SLEEVE ROLL PIN MOD ANNUNCIATOR NUISANCE ALARM N-45 CORRECTI" Page 4.-21 11/29/90 10/23/90 ll/14/90 ll/14/90 12/14/90 ll/19/90 11/23/90 ll/15/90 ll/07/90 10/31/90 11/29/90 11/21/90 12/12/90 12/26/90 ll/15/90 10/02/90 11/06/90 11/06/90 10/23/90 11/06/90 12/19/90 10/03/90 12/12/90 Ol/17/91 12/11/90 11/15/90 11/06/90 ll/15/90 01/02/91 ll/14/90 12/11/90 11/16/90 11/16J90 11/15/90 Page No.02/08/91 ST.LUCIE INITIAL SIMULATOR CERTIFICATION PCMs INSTALLED IN,ST.LUCIE¹2 WHICH HAVE NOT BEEN REVIEWED.TABLE 4-2 PCM¹90302-2 90305-2 90307-2 90309-2 90316-2 90318-2 90320-2 90321-2 90325-2 90340-2 90349-2 90352-9 90355-2 90356-2 90367-2 90371-2 90382-2 90385-2 90387-2 90388-2 90391-2 90392-2 90393-2 90394-2 90398-2 90417-2 DESCRIPTION ACCESS TO AUX TRANSFORMERS CAPACITANCE C PACIFIC VALVE GASKET CHANGES ANNUN NUISANCE ALARMS F45,G22,N6 &N23 REGENERATIVE HEAT EXCHANGER CUBICLE DOOR V6341 SOLENOID VALVE VENT DWG UPDATE OF 2998-8-327 SHT 608 AIR COMPRESSORS 2A&2B FUSE'SIZE CORREC SNUBBER SUBSTITUTIONS GASKET SEALING COMPOUND IN ICW APPLICATI MISC SNUBBER LIST CHANGES CEDM CABLE JACKET REPAIR ANCHOR/DARLING GASKET MATERIAL PART NO.ICW PUMP MOTOR LEAD TERMINAL LUGS STANDARD ROSEMOUNT TRANSMITTER MOUNT DET HVS-2A MOTOR END BELL REPAIR SUPPORT MS-4101-305 MOD GRATING FASTENERS 2B CCW HX INTERIOR SEAL WELD MAIN STEAM SAFETY VALVE RING SETTINGS MAIN GEN NEUTRAL GROUNDING XFORMERS SECO APPENDIX I COMPUTER REMOVAL 2B CCW HX SUPPORT BASE PLATE MODIFICATIO INSTALLATION OF SHIMS ON SUPPORT CC-2075 INSTRUMENT ISOLATION VALVE (VPT-3331) RE FEED REG VALVES TEST TAP ADDITION MOD OF RESTRAINT VCS-7-Rl PLANT IMPLEMENTED DATE ll/15/90 12/19/90 ll/19/90 ll/19/90 11/26/90 10/31/90 12/31/90 ll/19/90 01/08/91 ll/19/90 11/21/90 12/31/90 01/23/91 12/17/90 01/23/91 11/26/90 11/26/90 11/27/90 11/26/90 12/31/90 Ol/17/91 11/26/90 11/26/90 12/19/90 11/21/90 01/18/91 Page 4.-22 ST.LUCIE INITIAL SIMULATOR CERTIFICATION REPORT REFERENCES 4-1 Simulator Configuration Control, St.Lucie Plant Administrative Procedure No.0010524 4-2 Simulator Discrepancy Reports, Plant Administrative Procedure No.0005764.Page 4.-23 ST~LUCIE INITIAL SIMULATOR CERTIFICATION REPORT APPENDIX A: UALIFICATIONS OF THE CERTIFICATION TEAM AND SCRB This Appendix consists of abstracts from the resumes of the members of the Certification Team and the SCRB.Many other St.Lucie licensed Operators assisted in the performance of the tests on the Simulator. Since this certification submittal is a public document, the names have been deleted.The names are available on request.CERTIFICATION TEAM Simulator Certification Engineer Planned and directed the Florida Power&Light St.Lucie Simulator Certification Test Program.He has a BS degree in Nuclear Engineering and has been certified as a SRO Simulator Instructor. As a consultant, he was responsible for achieving the initial operation of the Safety Parameter Display System at the North Anna Nuclear Plant.He was also responsible for primary systems operation and procedure modification as an Operations Engineer at the Davis Besse Nuclear Plant.In addition, he was responsible for preparations for the special NRC EOP Audit at the Rancho Seco Nuclear Plant.As an engineer at Babcock and Wilcox, he accomplished onsite Transient Assessment for 14 transients at five (5)different plants;provided advice and consultation on Startup Physics Testing on 12 reload startups and initial startup of the Muelheim-Kaerlich Plant, Germany;and assisted in the development of the Post'TMI-II Emergency Operating Procedure Specifications. In addition, he developed and taught simulator and classroom courses for reactor operators and engineers. Page 1 ST~LUCIE INITIAL SIMULATOR CERTIFICATION REPORT Simulator Certification Test Team Member Is an Operations Specialist with.the Nuclear Energy Corporate Staff currently involved with special projects in support of the St.Lucie and Turkey Point Nuclear Power Plants.He was extensively involved in the Certification Project, writing test procedures, performing preliminary and final tests, and evaluating the test results.He has previously been in operations at St.Lucie for a total of 14 years where he was a shift supervisor. He has held a Senior Reactor Operator License for six (6)years and a St.Lucie Plant Reactor Operator License for four (4)years.During this time he was responsible for all operations shift activities. He was also involved with the St.Lucie Plant Simulator factory and site acceptance testing for the Operations Department during initial simulator startup.Simulator Certification Test Team Member Has been the Shift Technical Advisor (STA)Mad Instructor at St.Lucie for the last four (4)years and currently holds a St.Lucie STA Certification. He was extensively involved in the Certification Project, writing test procedures, performing preliminary and final tests, and evaluating test results.He was the Reactor Supervisor and Operations Supervisor for Nuclear Related Activities at Memphis State University Center for Nuclear Studies for nine (9)years.He was licensed (NRC)Senior Reactor Operator, AGN-201 Nuclear Reactor, and was a Certified Safety and License Compliance Inspector for 14-Mev Neutron Generator and X-Ray Facilities, State of Tennessee. In addition, he was an Assistant Professor, Biomedical Engineering (Electronics) Technology, State Technical Institute at Memphis.Page 2 ST.LUCIE INITIAL SIMULATOR CERTIFICATION REPORT Simulator Certification Test Team Member (Continued): He was in the U.S.Navy Submarine Nuclear Propulsion Program for 16 years.He was a Master Chief Electronics Technician, Qualified Engineering Officer of the Watch (Nuclear)and he was also Assistant to the Coordinator, U.S.Navy Enlisted Nuclear Training Activities, Division of Naval'Nuclear Reactors, USAEC.In addition, he was a Reactor Operator Instructor and Shift Training Coordinator at a U.S.Navy Nuclear Prototype Facility.BS Degree, Magna Cum Laude, Memphis State University (Physics major, Mathematics minor)Simulator Certification Test Team Member Is currently the Systems Engineer for the St.Lucie Simulator Engineering Group.He currently is responsible for modifying simulator software to implement plant modifications and fix discrepancies and reviewing software documentation. He was extensively involved in the Certification Project, performing preliminary and final tests and evaluating the test results, especially in the tests which were compared with Best Estimate Analyses.He has nine (9)years of Nuclear Power experience and is a Registered Professional Engineer in the State of Florida since 1987.He has been with the St.Lucie Simulator Engineering Group for five (5)years-throughout the factory and site acceptance tests of the simulator. Previously, he was a Nuclear Fuels Engineer for three (3)years where responsibilities included providing St.Lucie Reactor Engineering Department with startup and operations support.Also, used reactor physics codes to evaluate core operating characteristics and upgraded power shape monitoring software.In addition, he performed reviews of plant operations and design with the St.Lucie Independent Safety Engineering Group for one (1)year.BS Nuclear Engineering, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute Page 3 ST~LUCZB INITIAL SIMULATOR CERTIFICATION REPORT Simulator Certification Test Team Member Is currently a Nuclear Watch Engineer as a Licensed St.Lucie Senior Reactor Operator.He is the Shift Operating Foreman and Supervisor of licensed and non-licensed operators. As an experienced SRO he was extensively involved in the evaluation phase of Certification Testing.He has held a St.Lucie Senior Reactor Operator License for the last one and a half (1 1/2)years and a Reactor Operator License for the previous three and a half (3 1/2)years.In addition, he was a non-licensed operator for two (2)years and had spent another three (3)years as a power plant operator at fossil fuel plants.BS Degree, Lincoln University. Simulator Certification Test Team Member Is the St.Lucie Quality Assurance lead auditor for compliance with Nuclear Plant Technical Specifications. He was involved in the evaluation phase of the Certification Project performing final tests and evaluating the test results.He also provided valuable input to the Certification Test Program to insure that Quality Assurance standards were achieved.He was a Nuclear Plant Shift Supervisor for one (1)year and is licensed as a Senior Reactor Operator on four (4)nuclear power plants whose designs represent the four (4)U.S.NSSS suppliers. He had previously performed engineering evaluations of the fidelity of a nuclear plant full scope simulator. Also, he has been an instructor for Reactor Operator and Senior Reactor Operators and other utility staff.In addition, he was an Assistant Nuclear Plant Shift Supervisor for a dual unit nuclear site and was a Shift Technical Advisor for two (2)dual units.Page i

ST LUCIB INITIAL SIMULATOR CERTZPICATZON REPORT Simulator Certification Test Team Member (Continued): He was a Reactor Operator in the U.S..Navy for four (4)years.BS in Applied Physics and Mathematics, State University of New York at Albany.BS Candidate in Electrical and Mechanical Engineering, Senior Class Status, Florida Institute of Technology at Melbourne, Fl.Simulator Certification Test Team Member Is an Operations Specialist with the Nuclear Energy Corporate Staff currently involved with special projects in support of the St.Lucie and Turkey Point Nuclear-Power Plants.He is responsible for project management of generic industry issues and plant operations enhancement programs.He was involved in the evaluation phase of the Certification Project performing final tests and evaluating the test results.He has over twenty years Nuclear Power Plant experience. He was a Shift Supervisor at Turkey Point Nuclear Plant and held a Senior Reactor Operator License for 12 years.Previously, he held a Control Room Reactor Operator License for two (2)years and had been in various plant operator positions for three (3)years.Page 5 ST.LUCIE INITIAL SIMULATOR CERTIFICATION REPORT SIMULATOR CONFIGURATION REVIEW BOARD Operations Training Supervisor, SCRB Chairman The current Operations Training Supervisor has held this position for the last five (5)years.Previously, was a Control Room Supervisor at St.Lucie for two (2)years and was also a training instructor at St.Lucie for four (4)years.He has a total of 17 years Nuclear experience. He has held a St.Lucie Senior Reactor Operator's License for ten (10)years.Previously, he was in the U.S.Navy Nuclear Program for.four (4)years.BA Professional Studies, Memphis State University. SRO licensed on AGN-201 research reactor.License Training Program Coordinator, Training Department SCRB member License Training Program Coordinator for the last four (4)years.Currently responsible for the maintenance and implementation of all licensed training programs including: Reactor Operator, Senior Reactor Operator, Licensed Operator Requalification, and Shift Technical Advisor.He has a total of 20 years Nuclear experience. He held an active SRO license for 12 years until March 1989 and is currently St.Lucie SRO certified. He has been in the St.Lucie Training Department for the last 13 years.Previously, he was a Control Room Reactor Operator for two (2)years.He was also an Electronics Technician in the U.S.Navy and was a Qualified Reactor Operator.AA Degree in General Education, Palm Beach Junior College.Page 6 ST~LUCIE INITIAL SIMULATOR CERTIFICATION REPORT Nuclear Plant Supervisor, Operations Department SCRB Member Nuclear Plant Supervisor for the last three (3)years.Senior Supervisor on his operating crew, responsible for planning, scheduling, coordinating, and supervising the operation of the St.Lucie Plant on his shift.He has a total of 17 years Nuclear experience. He has held an active license for the past eight (8)years.Previous licensed positions include: Control Room Supervisor four (4)years, Nuclear Watch Engineer and Reactor Control Operator (one year each).He was also a nuclear trained Machinist Mate in the U.S.Navy (eight (8)years).Simulator System Coordinator, Simulator System Coordinator SCRB Member Simulator Engineering Coordinator for the last year.Responsible for all software and hardware maintenance and upgrades.Responsible for the Simulator Certification. Simulator Lead Software Engineer for six (6)years.Participated in the development of procurement specifications, design reviews, software and documentation quality control, acceptance testing and other tasks associated with the procurement of the St.Lucie Simulator. Instrument and Control Startup Engineer for five (5)years on the startup of St.Lucie Unit 2.U.S.Navy for 20 years, qualified as Reactor Operator, Engineering Watch Supervisor and Engineering Officer of the Watch on several Nuclear Power Submarines. Instructor at U.S.Naval Nuclear Propulsion School for four (4)years.Page 7 ST+LUCIE INITIAL SIMULATOR CERTIFICATION REPORT Simulator Lead Engineer, Simulator System SCRB alternate Simulator Lead Engineer for last year.Responsible'or simulator software configuration control, software maintenance coordination, and coordination of software and hardware change implementation. Performs Simulator System Administrator duties.Simulator.Lead Hardware Engineer for five (5)years.Participated in Simulator design reviews, hardware quality control, acceptance testing and other tasks associated with procurement of the St.Lucie Simulator. Instrument and Control Specialist for four (4)years.During this period was made responsible for the initial startup of the St.Lucie Unit 2 Reactor.Protective System and its associated instrumentation. U.S.Air Force for 10 years, as a precision measurement equipment specialist. Configuration SRO, License Training SCRB Alternate Has been the Simulator Configuration SRO for the last nine (9)months.He was extensively involved in the final testing and review of the evaluation of test results.He is currently responsible for reviewing PCM's for applicability to the simulator and subsequent testing upon installation. He.reviews discrepancy reports for applicability and tests changes/modifications to the simulator. Previously, he was a Requalification instructor and Non-Licensed Training coordinator. He has a total of 18 years Nuclear experience. He has held an active SRO license for four (4)years and a Control Room Reactor Operator license for the previous four (4)years.He has been in the St.Lucie Training Department for ten (10)years.Previously, he was a machinist mate in the U.S.Navy for eight (8)years and was an instructor at a U.S.Navy Nuclear Prototype Facility.Page 8 Page 1 of 16 1.0 TITLE: FLORIDA POWER 8c LIGHT COMPANY ST.LUCIE PLANT ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE NO.0010524 REVISION 1 FOR INFORSNTIGN ONLY SIMULATOR CONFIGURATION CONTROL vertfy Information with a controHed document.2.0 REVIEW AND APPROVAL: Reviewed by Facility Review Group Approved by G.J.Boiss October 2 1990 Plant Manager November 5 1990 Revision 1 Reviewed by F R G Approved by G.J.Boiss 3.0 SCOPE: Plant Manager 19~19~/3.1 Purpose 1.The purpose of this procedure is to provide guidance for the identification, evaluation, and implementation of changes to the St.Lucie Unit 2 Control Room simulator. 2.The purpose of this procedure is to provide instructions on the operation, responsibility and composition of a Simulator Configuration Review Board (SCRB)at the St.Lucie Plant.3.2 Discussion In order to have a Certified Simulator, a program must be established to handle modifications to the Simulator. The SCRB provides a multi-disciplinary oversight and approval function to the process.3.3 Authority ANS 3.5 1985.2.Regulator Guide 1.149.3.QI 3-P R/PSL-3.S OPS DATE DOCT PROCEDuRE DOCN 0010524 sYs COMP COMPLETED ITM 1 -Page 2 of 16ST.LUCIE PLANT ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE NO.0010524, REVISION 1 SIMULATOR CONFIGURATION CONTROL 3.0 SCOPE: (continued) 3.4 Definitions 1.Applications Software and Hardware-That software and hardware which duplicates plant systems of the St.Lucie Unit 2 and common Unit 1/Unit 2 services.(e.g.Software for RCS, CVCS, Main Steam, Electric Grid, etc, Hardware for simulated control boards).2.Instructor Facility Hardware and Software-That hardware and software which is used by instructors and/or simulator engineering staff to interact with the simulation to alter and/or monitor the flow of simulated plant operations, (e.g.Software for plant specific I/F touch screens, instructor features, etc, Hardware for graphic I/F displays in the I/F).3.Computer Facility Software and Hardware-That software and hardware on which the simulation runs and which is necessary for routine house keeping activities of a large computer system (e.g.Software including MPX operating system, SIMEX, etc.Hardware of the main computer complex and attached peripherals. 4.Existing Simulator Scope of Simulation for Training-The domain which defines what the simulator is capable of doing from a training standpoint, which includes: A.All applications software and hardware which replicate existing systems in the actual power plant.P B.Plant Specific Instructor Facility Software such as the"Touch Screens" used for instructor control of exercises. C.Other I/F Software features normally used by instructors in providing instruction to students in the simulator. 5.Simulator Engineering Scope-The domain which defines items capabilities, etc.included in the simulator in some manner from a software and/or hardware standpoint but which is not directly related to or used for training.The includes: A.All computer complex hardware and software.B.I/F software used by engineering staff for maintenance functions. Page 3 of 16 ST.LUCIE PLANT ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE NO.0010524, REVISION 1 SIMULATOR CONFIGURATION CONTROL 3.0 SCOPE: (continued) 3.4 (continued) 5.(continued) C, I/F hardware.D.Software utilities and systems used solely by engineering staff for software maintenance and modifications. 6.Simulator Deficiency -An error, malfunction, breakage or other fault in some item of hardware and/or software which is already in the existing scope of simulation or the engineering scope of simulation. 7.Simulator Modification -A change to hardware and/or software which alters (adds to/deletes from/alters) the existing scope of simulation or the engineering scope.8.Simulator Change Request Evaluation (SCRE)-(Similar to fig.1)The form which identifies a proposed change to the scope of simulation. 9.Simulator Work Order (SWO)-.(Similar to fig.2 or fig.3)The document internal to the simulator engineering staff which is used to document work performed in the correction of valid simulator deficiencies and/or approved simulator change requests and/or permanent changes to engineering scope.10.Simulator Configuration Review Board (SCRB)-A board comprised of the Licensed Operator Training Coordinator, the Simulator System Coordinator, and a representative from the Operations Department, The function of the board is to: A.Review and recommend changes to the existing scope of simulation for training.B.Review and approve all Simulator Certification activities. 11;Simulator Configuration Management System-A PC based system which contains the necessary data bases to track, review and evaluate plant-design changes, to incorporate and account for Simulator Modification and to verify the Simulator Configuration.

Page 4 of 16 ST.LUCIE PLANT ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE NO.0010524, REVISION 1 SIMULATOR CONFIGURATION CONTROL 4.0 PRECAUTIONS: Appropriate installed plant modifications shall be reviewed at least once per year.The Simulator shall be modified as required within 12 months of the review.5.0 RESPONSIBILITIES: 5.1 Simulator Engineering Group Maintaining an accurate list of current issues that must be reviewed by the SCRB.2.Scheduling SCRB meetings, preparing meeting agendas and recording meeting results.3.Reviewing information on plant changes in advance of the meetings so that technical recommendation can be made at the meeting.Simulator work request evaluations forms shall be issued to key Simulator Engineering personnel initiate this work.4.Participate in SCRB meetings.5.2 Licensed Training Group 1.Reviewing, as necessary, information on plant changes so that the effects of a change to training can be considered when making the evaluation. 2.Participation in SCRB meetings.5.3 Operations 1.Reviewing, as necessary, information on plant changes so that the effects of a change on operators'kills and competency can be considered when making the evaluation. 2.Participating in SCRB meetings. ST.LUCIE PLANT ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE NO.0010524, REVISION 1 SIMULATOR CONFIGURATION CONTROL

6.0 REFERENCES

Page 5 of 16 6.1 Ql 3-PR/PSL-3 Simulator Design Management and Operation, Configuration Control.6,2 10 CFR 55.6.3 ANS 3.5 1988 6.4 REG-GUIDE 1~149 6.5 NUREG 1258.6.6 NUREG 1262.7.0 RECORDS AND NOTIFICATION: 7.1 The following record shall be maintained in the plant files in accordance with Ql-1 7-PR/PSL-1,"Quality Assurance Records".Minutes of SCRB actions. Page 6 of 16 ST.LUCIE PLANT ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE NO.0010524, REVISION 1 SIMULATOR CONFIGURATION CONTROL 8.0 INSTRUCTIONS: 8.1 Composition of the Simulator Configuration Review Board.1.The SCRB shall be composed of: A.Operations Training Supervisor (Non-voting). Signs for the SCRB actions.B.Simulator System Coordinator. C.Licensed Operator Training Coordinator. D.Operations Representative. 8.2 SCRB Meeting Frequency and Quorum.1.SCRB Meeting should normally be held monthly.2;Special Meetings may be held as needed to accomplish backlogged work with a minimum of three days written notice in the form of a SCRB agenda.3.Quorum for a meeting shall be all three of the of regular designated voting SCRB members or their alternates for that meeting.4.Meetings shall normally be chaired by the Operations Training Supervisor. In the absence of the Operations Training Supervisor the meeting shall be chaired by the Simulator System Coordinator. 8.3 Meeting Agenda and Minutes 1.The Simulator System Coordinator shall act as secretary for the SCRB hand shall be responsible for agenda and minutes and all necessary administrative support. Page 7 of 16 ST.LUCIE PLANT ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE NO.0010524, REVISION 1 SIMULATOR CONFIGURATION CONTROL 8.0 INSTRUCTIONS: (continued) 8.3 (continued) 2.An agenda of items to be discussed at each meeting shall be prepared and forwarded to the members a minimum of three days ahead of time.No item shall be discussed which is not on the agenda, This allows all parties adequate opportunity for preparation. NOTE The tracking for PCMs will start after approval by the Facility Review Group.The time clock for review starts when the PCM has been tumed over to QC Vault..8.4 The Simulator Engineering Staff shall review and track formal changes brought about through the Plant Change Modification (PCM)process and other formally documented plant change processes to determine if:1.The plant change describes a potential change to the simulator. 2.The plant change will not obviously change the existing scope of Simulation. I.e..Pipe hangers, Unit one changes, etc.Figure 1 provides a flow chart to be used in this determination. 3.The information is sufficient to determine the impact to the Simulator. 8.5 When a proposed change is identified, an entry shall be made in Simulator Configuration Management System.1.If the change is a potential change to the Simulator, assign the Status to Review and generate a Simulator Change Request Evaluation form.2.If the change is obviously not a change to the Simulator as determined by Fig.4, assign the Status to a Closed and DO NOT generate a Simulator Change Request form.3.If the change doesn't provide sufficient information, assign the Status to Deferred and DO NOT generate a Simulator Change Request Evaluation form. Page 8 of 16 ST.LUCIE PLANT ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE NO.0010524, REVISION 1 SIMULATOR CONFIGURATION CONTROL 8.0 INSTRUCTIONS: (continued) 8.6 Any of the three members of the SCRB may sponsor a change which is an enhancement to or deletion from the existing scope of simulation. The sponsoring member shall submit the proposed change in writing to the Simulator Engineering Staff and a Simulator Change Request Evaluation form shall be generated. 8.7 The Simulator Engineering Group has one year to complete its review and submit the results to the SCRB.The time clock for review starts when the PCM has been turned over to the Q.G.Vault.Once sufficient data is available and the Simulator Engineering Staff has completed it's review per the Simulator Change Request Evaluation form, an SCRB agenda shall be prepared and distributed to each member prior to the meeting.As necessary, board members shall obtain supporting data in each item to aid in their reviews./R1 8.8 All SCRB members or alternates should be present at each meeting.When all members or alternates cannot make a meeting, it should be rescheduled. 8.9-The Simulator Configuration Review Board shall: 1.Determine if the plant change is within the scope of Simulator. 2.Determine if the change affects operator training.3.Determine what modifications must be made to the Simulator. This may include: A.Hardware B.Software G.Certification test procedure D.Acceptance test Page 9 of 16 ST.LUCIE PLANT ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE NO.0010524, REVISION 1 SIMULATOR CONFIGURATION CONTROL 8.0 INSTRUCTIONS: (continued) 8.10 The SCRB should also determine the priority of the approved change based on an assessment of difficulty, training value, upcoming training schedule, etc.These priorities will be: Priority A.To be started immediately even at the expense of other modification activities in progress and Deficiency Correction in progress.Priority B.To be started as soon as possible after vital Deficiency Corrections are completed. Priority C.Routine prioritlzatlon. Work to be scheduled by the simulator engineer to accomplish the modification within the one year regulatory time frame for plant PCMs, Priority D.Low Priority.Work to be accomplished whenever resources'become available. 8.11 Old items shall be carried on the SCRB Agenda until fully closed out, either by formal acceptance and incorporation into the simulator scope, or, alternatively by a well documented decision not fo.pursue the proposed change.8.12 AII SCRB approved PCM's shall-be installed within one year.PCM installation may precede reference plant modifications based on training value or other valid justification. /R1 8.13 SCRB-Approved changes shall indicate if they are changes brought about through replication of a plant PCM or whether they are an addition to the existing scope of simulation, i.e.an enhancement to the scope of simulation for instructor convenience or desire.8.14 SCRB shall review and approve the final change packages under which modifications to scope were achieved in order to assess it the intent of the package has been met.8.15 Minutes for the SCRB meetings will be completed as specified in this procedure and forward to the Training Superintendent via the Operations Training Supervisor for final review and approval prior to archiving. Page 10 of 16 ST.LUCIE PLANT ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE NO.0010524, REVISION 1 SIMULATOR CONFIGURATION CONTROL 8.0 INSTRUCTIONS: (continued) 8.16 An entry shall be made in the Simulator Configuration Management System.1.Change the Status to Inwork if the change has been approved.2.Change the Status to Deferred if the change has been deferred.3.Change the Status to Closed if the change has NOT been approved.8.17 Implementation of approved changes, 1.Simulator work orders shall be issued for each approved simulator change.A separate work order shall be issued for each aspect of the change, e.g.software, hardware, etc., but the work order numbering system shall be such as to tie together all work orders associated with the same plant PCM, change, etc.8.18 Requirements for a Formal System Design for Major Changes.1.Internal to the Simulator Engineering Staff a formal system design wilt be done for all modifications which require resources as follows.A.Software man-hours in excess of 40.B.Hardware man-hours in excess of 40.C.Extreme technical difficulty as determined by the Simulator System Coordinator. 2.The formal system design shall be written and shall reflect the following: A.Clear statement of goal and scope.B.Measurable progress milestones. C.Diagrammatic definition appropriate to problem as determined by the simulator engineer.D.Documentation of at least two structured walk-throughs, one at the beginning of the modification when initial design is complete but prior to the start of coding, and a second one at the completion of design, code and test, but prior to final acceptance test by the customer.E.Copies of the final (customer) e.g.Instructors, etc.acceptance test. Page 11 of 16 ST.LUCIE PLANT ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE NO.0010S24, REVISION 1 SIMULATOR CONFIGURATION CONTROL 8.0 INSTRUCTIONS: (continued) 8.19 Modifications to the Simulator Not Falling Under SCRB Cognizance. 1.Modifications to the Simulator which are strictly internal to the simulator engineering group, e.g.utilities, hardware diagnostics, computer system configuration, etc.shall not fall under the cognizance of the SCRB.2.The Simulator System Coordinator shall be responsible to approve all changes to the simulator both hardware and software not falling under the SCRB.He shall retain responsibility for all changes of this nature in all regards from design, implementation, and test.3.All work accomplished outside of the cognizance of the.SCRB shall still be documented on a Simulator Work Order which shall be retained with other SWO's.The Operations Training Supervisor should be advised of this work.8.20 When the Simulator Engineering Staff completes all software and hardware work and informal testing has been completed on the Simulator Changes, a.formal Acceptance Test shall be performed. The test team shall include a simulator engineer and an instructor. 8,21 When the formal test is completed satisfactorily, the change package will be forwarded to the SCRB for review and approval for training.8.22 An entry shall be made in the Simulator Configuration Management System.1.Change the status to indicate that the plant change has been turned over to training.2.When all final documentation for the Simulator Change as been completed, change the status to close out the simulator change. Page 12 of 16 ST.LUCIE PLANT ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE NO.0010524, REVISION 1 SIMULATOR CONFIGURATION CONTROL FIGURE 1 SIMULATOR CHANGE REQUEST EVALUATION FORM (Page 1 of 2)Simulator Change Request¹: Date Initiated: Date Due: This simulator change request is based on the following reference plant change/addition. Document ID: Title: Simulator Hardware Change Evaluation Responsibility: Simulator Hardware Change Req'd Yes No (circle one)Est Man Hrs: Est Cost: Parts Lead Time: Simulator Downtime:.Affected Panel(s): Plant Equipment Number: Comments: Reviewed by: Date//Simulator Software Change Evaluation Responsibility: Simulator Software Change Req'd Yes No (circle one)Est Man Hrs: Est Cost: Simulator Down Time: Daily Readiness Test Program Change Req'd Yes No (circle one)Comments: Reviewed by: Date// Page 13 of 16 ST.LUCIE PLANT ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE NO.0010524, REVISION 1 SIMULATOR CONFIGURATION CONTROL FIGURE 1 SIMULATOR CHANGE REQUEST EVALUATION FORM (Page 2 of 2).Simulator Change Request 0: Date Initiated: Date Due: Simulator CTP Change Evaluation Responsibility: CTP Change Req'd Yes No (circle one)Est Man Hrs: Comments: Est Cost: Reviewed by: Date//Simulator Database Change Evaluation Responsibility: Database Change Req'd Yes No (circle one)Est Man Hrs: Comments: Est Cost: Reviewed by: Date//Approved by SCRB: Date//

Page 14 of 16 ST.LUCIE PLANT ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE NO.0010524, REVISION 1 SIMULATOR CONFIGURATION CONTROL FiGURE 2 SIMULATOR WORK ORDER (SOFTWARE) SWO: SCRN: SYSTEM: WORK REQUESTED: ORIGINATOR: MODULE: DATE: START DATE: ASSIGN TO'OMPLETED DATE: PRIORITY: DESCRIPTION OF THE PROBLEM: MAN HRS'PL CONTRACT ACTION TAKEN: MAN HRS'PL CONTRACT REQUIREMENTS: APPLICATION: MODULES MODEL REPORT INSTRUCTOR FACILITY: PIED STYLIZED PAGES FAILURES IC CDB CONFIGURATION MENUS SSS ALARM LOA COMPLETED BY'ESTING REQUIREMENTS: DATE: MAN HRS: FPL CONTRACT COMPLETED BY: DOCUMENTATION: SOURCE SCOPE DWGS DATE MAN HRS: FPL CONTRACT MRGEN INTERFACE DWGS SIMULATION DWGS DESIGN DATA BASE COMPLETED BY: TOTAL MAN HOURS'PL COMMENTS: DATE: CONTRACT: TOTAL'IMULATOR DOWN TIME'UPERVISOR: TRAINING DOWN TIME: DATE:

Page 15 of 16 ST.LUCIE PLANT ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE NO.0010524, REVISION 1 SIMULATOR CONFIGURATION CONTROL FIGURE 3 SIMULATOR WORK ORDER SWO: SCRN: EQUIPMENT NAME: WORK REQUESTED: KEY PLANS: ORIGINATOR'ATE: JOB STARTED DATE: AM/PM JOB COMPLETED DATE: DESCRIBED THE TROUBLE FOUND AND YOUR ANALYSIS OF THE CAUSE OR REASON AM/DESCRIBE WORK OR REPAIRS AS PERFORMED QIP: POTENTIAL REWORK JOB Y WHY IS THIS JOB A REWORK JOB N PARTS QUAN MANUF.SER.NUMBER PART NUMBER MRS NUMBER JOURNEYMAN SIGNATURE: DATE: JOURNEYMAN HOURS DATE INDEPENDENT VERIFICATION: DATE: SUGGESTIONS OR RECOMMENDATIONS: COMMENT DELAYS: LOST HRS PROCEDURES

• • ill TOOLS OTHER SUB-SYSTEM DOWN TIME: SIMULATOR DOWN TIME: TRAINING DOWN TIME: DATA ENTRY COMPLETED DATE: SUPERVISOR:

DATE: Page 16 of 16 ST.LUCIE PLANT ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE NO.0010524, REVISION 1 SIMULATOR CONFIGURATION CONTROL FIGURE 4 PLANT CHANGE Unit 2 or Common No Tracking ls NOT Required Yes CWD's ln Package Yes No PID's ln Package No Yes Requires SCRB Review Assign Status"R" ls Change Obviously Y NO Impact Yes No Assign Status In PCM Tracking System to ncn (0010524.WPG) Page 1 of 15 FLORIDA POWER 8.LIGHT COMPANY ST.LUCIE PLANT ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE NO.0005761 REVISION 2 1.0 TITLE: SIMULATOR CERTIFICATION 2.0 REVIEW AND APPROVAL: FOR INFORAIATION ONLY This document Is not controlled. Before use verify information with a controlled document.Reviewed by Facility Review Group Approved by J.H.Barrow for Au ust 9 1990 Pl 1 M 2~A22 1992 Approved by 3.0 SCOPE: 3.1 PURPOSE: G.J.Boiss Revision 2 Reviewed by F R G Plant Manager 19~19~This procedure provides instructions on how to Certify the simulator to the NRC and how to maintain that certification.

3.2 DISCUSSION

Certification of the simulator is required by 10 CFR 55 in order for the NRC to conduct license examinations.

3.3 AUTHORITY

The Simulator Configuration Review Board (SCRB)is authorized to approve all Certification activities as described herein.4.0 P RECAUTIONS'uring the conduct of Performance Tests pen and ink changes may be made to the Simulator Test Procedures on the spot.However, these changes must subsequently be approved by the SCRB.5.0 RESPONSIBILITIES: 5.1 Operation's Training Supervisor is responsible for implementing this procedure. 5.2 Operation's Supervisor is responsible for supporting, as appropriate, certification activities. S OPS DATE DOCT PROCEDURE DOC N 0005761 SYS COMP COMPLETED ITM 2 p~s~i H ST.LUCIE PLANT ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE NO, 0005761, REVISION 2 SIMULATOR CERTIFICATION

6.0 REFERENCES

6.1 ANS 3.5, 1985 6.2 Regulatory Guide 1.149 Rev 1 6.3 NUREG 1258 Page 2 of 15 6.4 FPL Letter, C.G.Woody to USNRC,"St.Lucie Unit 1 Plan for Simulation Facility Development Application," August 31, 1989, L-89-322, 6.5 Ql 3-PR/PSL-3. 7.0 RECORDS AND NOTiFICATIONS: All signed records generated by this procedure shall be maintained in the plant files in accordance with Ql 17-PR/PSL-1,"Quality Assurance Records." All products that back up the signed records may be stored in the simulator library. ST.LUCIE PLANT ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE NO.0005761, REVISION 2 SIMULATOR CERTIFICATION Page 3 of 15 8.0 INSTRUCTIONS: 8.1 Develop initial certification backup documents to demonstrate the simulator's conformance to the requirements of ANS 3.5.Develop or assemble documents which provide familiarization with the simulator and its general applicability as an operator training vehicle.The specific products are listed in Appendix A Simulator Information. Each item in this section should be reviewed by the Simulator Engineering Group (SEG)and the entire section approved by the SCRB, 2.Develop or assemble documents which provide identification of the data used by the simulator manufacturer in building the simulator and identification of the data used by the SEG in post-delivery modification. The specific products are listed in Appendix B Simulator Design Data, Each item in this section should be reviewed by the SEG and the entire section approved by the SCRB.A.After initial certification the reference data base should be continuously updated to reflect the current simulator configuration. 3.Develop tests which provide documentation of simulator performance as compared to the response of St, Lucie Unit 1 or 2, Best Estimate Analysis (RETRAN), industry events or the Judgement of a panel of experts.The specific products are listed in Appendix C Simulator Tests.The evaluation of the test results shall be approved by the SCRB.4.Products of this section ensure a program exists for the correction of simulator discrepancies and modification/upgrades due to changes in St.Lucie Unit 2.Simulator Configuration Control is addressed in AP 0010524, and Simulator Discrepancies are addressed in AP 0005764.This section is also used to report the status of open discrepancies and modifications that could impact NRC Operating Tests.The specific products are listed in Appendix D Simulator Discrepancy and Modification Program.Each item in this section should be reviewed by the SEG and the entire section approved by the SCRB./R2 5.Develop the documentation required by RG 1.149 since the simulator will be certified for St.Lucie Unit 1 the specific products are listed in Appendix E Unit Differences Analysis.Each item in this section should be approved by the SCRB. ST.LUCIE PLANT ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE NO.0005761, REVISION 2 SIMULATOR CERTIFiCATION Page 4 of 15 8.0 INSTRUCTIONS: (continued) 8,2 Initial certification submittal shall be made via NRC Form 474 for each St.Lucie Unit.The products in this section will include abstracts for all Simulator Tests, the status of all open discrepancies and modifications that could impact Operating Tests and a plan for their resolution, a preliminary performance testing schedule for the conduct of approximately 25%of the performance tests per year for the four year period commencing with the date of this certification, a summary of the Unit Differences Analysis, and a listing of any exceptions to ANS 3.5 with description. The submittal package contents should be reviewed and documented on a form similar to Checksheet 1./R2 8.3 Annual Performance Testing 1.Annual performance testing should be conducted in accordahce with Appendix C./R2 2.Prior to running the performance test, it should be reviewed to the current revision of the referenced plant procedure(s) and modified as appropriate. 3.Performance testing schedule changes for any modification to the'schedule (annual or 25%per year)shall be conveyed to the NRC via NRC Form 474.4.The evaluated results of the annual performance tests should be approved by the SCRB,/R2 8.4 Renewal of Certification -The annual performance testing regimen should commence with the date of the initial certification and culminate with a report to the NRC which is due every four years, on the anniversary date of the certification. There is no requirement for an annual report.Certification is made to the NRC via NRC Form 474 and should include a description of any uncorrected performance test failures and a schedule for correction of such performance test failures, if any.8.5 Recertification -Should the simulator fail to meet NRC standards after initial certification a recertiflcatlon may be made to the NRC via NRC Form 474.The recertification must include a description of con'ective actions taken, including results of completed performance testing as required. ST.LUCIE PLANT ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE NO.0005761, REVISION 2 SIMULATOR CERTIFICATION APPENDIX A SIMULATOR INFORMATION Page 5 of 15 Control Room Physical Arrangement Drawing Panel/Equipment Comparison Control Room Environment Description Initial Conditions Capability Description Malfunctions Capability Description LOA/IDA Capability Description Instructor Station Manual Inventory of Model ReportsEach product listed has been generated, reviewed, and stored.SEG Date-//Approved by: SCRB Date// ST.LUCIE PLANT ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE NO.0005761, REVISION 2 SIMULATOR CERTIFICATION APPENDIX B SIMULATOR DESIGN DATA Page 6 of 15 Inventory of Reference Data Base Inventory of Updated Reference Data Base Each product'listed has been generated, reviewed, and stored.SEG Date-//Approved by SCRB Date//

ST.LUCIE PLANT ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE NO.0005761, REVISION 2 SIMULATOR CERTIFICATION APPENDIX C SIMULATOR TESTS (Page 1 of 6)Page 7 of 15 NPE-001¹Plant Start-up Cold to Hot NPE-002¹Nuclear Start-up NPE-003*Turbine.Start-up NPE-004¹Reactor Trip and Recovery NPE-005¹Plant Shutdown SUR-002¹Isothermal Temperature Coefficient SUR-003¹Rod Worth Measurements SUR-004¹All Rods Out Critical Boron SUR-005¹Plant Heat Balance SUR-006¹Moderator Coefficient at Power.SUR-008¹Shutdown Margin Modes 3, 4, 5 SUR-009¹RCS Inventory Balance SUR410¹WIde Range Log Periodic SUR-011¹Diesel Generator Monthly Test SUR-012¹RPS Logic Matrix Test SUR-013¹CEA Periodic Test SUR-014¹Turbine Valve Test SUR-015¹Hydrogen Recombiner Test ST.LUCIE PLANT ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE NO.0005761, REVISION 2 SIMULATOR CERTIFICATION APPENDIX C SIMULATOR TESTS (Page 2 of 6)Page 8 of 15 SUR-018¹Boron Flow to RCS SST-001 Steady State Test at 100%SST-002*Steady State Hold Points TRN-001 Reactor Trip TRN-002 Loss of Main Feedwater Pumps TRN-003*Inadvertent MSIS TRN-004'oss of All RCP's TRN-005 Loss of One RCP TRN-006*Turbine Trip from Less than 15%TRN-007*Maximum Power Rate Ramp from 100%to 75%TRN-008 Large Break LOCA with LOOP TRN-009 MSLB Inside Containment TRN410 Failed Open PZR Safety Valve MAL-001¹SGTR 1 Tube MAL-002¹Rapid Gross Failure of Multiple S/G Tubes MAL-003¹LOCA Outside Containment MAL-004¹.Cold Leg LOCA with LOOP MAL-005¹Small Break LOCA Hot Leg MAL-006¹Failed Open PORV with Only 1 DG ST.LUCIE PLANT ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE NO.0005761, REVISION 2 SIMULATOR CERTIFICATION APPENDIX C SIMULATOR TESTS (Page 3 of 6)Page 9 of 15 MAL-007¹Rupture Instrument Air Receiver MAL-008¹Loss of Instrument Air Compressors MAL-009¹Loss of Offsite Power MAL-010¹Station Blackout MAL-011¹Loss of Safety Related 4160V Bus MAL-012¹Loss of MA Instrument Bus MAL-013¹Loss of Non-Safety Vital AC MAL-014¹Loss of 2B/2BB DC Bus MAL-015¹,Loss of All RCP's with NC Cooldown MAL-016¹Condenser Vacuum Leak MAL-017¹Loss of Condenser Level MAL-018¹Loss of All ICW Pumps MAL-019¹Rupture One ICW Header MAL-020¹RCS Leak While on Shutdown Cooling MAL-021¹Loss of Both LPSI Pumps in a Drained Condition MAL-022¹Loss of All CCW Pumps MAL-023¹Rupture of"A" CCW Header MAL-024¹RCS to CCW Leak in the RCP Seal Cooler MAL-025'Loss of Both Main Feedwater Pumps From 100%Power Page 10 of 15 ST.LUCIE PLANT ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE NO.0005761, REVISION 2.SIMULATOR CERTIFICATION APPENDIX C SIMULATOR TESTS (Page 4 of 6)MAL-026¹Loss of Main Feedwater and Emergency Feedwater Pumps from 100%Power MAL-027¹Fail Power Supply to One RPS Channel MAL-028¹One Stuck Rod MAL-029¹One Uncoupled Rod During Startup MAL-030¹One Slipped Rod MAL-031¹One Dropped Bank of Rods MAL-032¹Freeze Control Rod Drive System MAL-033¹Insert Failed Fuel Along with a 1 GPM SG Tube Leak MAL-034¹Turbine Trip From<15%Power MAL-035¹Trip Generator From 100%Full Power MAL-036¹Leak From RCS Makeup into the Charging Portion of the CVCS MAL-037¹Steam Bypass Control (SBC)Valve Fails Open MAI-038¹Pressurizer Pressure Control Failures MAL-039¹Reactor Coolant Volume Control Failures MAL-040¹Reactor Trip Initiated by a Low SG Level MAL-041¹Double Ended MSLB Inside Containment MAL-042¹Steam Line Break Downstream of the MSIV MAL-043¹Failed Open MSSV MAL-044¹Small Feedwater Line Break (Outside Containment)

Page 11 of 15 ST.LUCIE PLANT ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE NO.0005761, REVISION 2 SIMULATOR CERTIFICATION APPENDIX C SIMULATOR TESTS (Page 5 of 6)MAL-045¹Large Feedwater Line Break (Inside Containment) MAL-046¹WIde Range Nl Failed High MAL-047¹Linear Power Range Channel Failed High MAL-048¹SG Level Instr.Failure MAL-049¹Containment Pressure Failure MAL-050¹-Tcold Failed High MAL-051¹Tcold Failed High MAL-052¹Thot Failed High or Low MAL-053¹Thot Failed High MAL-054¹RCS Flow Failure MAL-055¹FW Flow Failure MAL-056¹Steam Flow Failure MAL-.057¹SG Pressure Failure MAL-058¹Containment Radiation Failure MAL-059¹RWT Level Failure MAL-060¹Annunciator Panel Failures MAL-061¹Alarm Window Fails to Actuate MAL-062¹Alarm Window Incorrectly Actuates MAL-064¹ESFAS Fails to Actuate on a LOCA MAL-065¹RAS Fails to Actuate Page 12 of 15 ST.LUCIE PLANT ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE NO.0005761, REVISION 2 SIMULATOR CERTIFICATION APPENDIX C SIMULATOR TESTS (Page 6 of 6)MAL-066¹MSIS Fails to Actuate MAL-067¹AFAS Fails to Actuate MAL-068¹Anticipated Transient Without Scram (ATWS)MAL-069¹HSCP Cooldown CRT-001 Computer Real Time Test (during TRN series testing)PLANT TRANSIENTS 'erformance Testing of actual plant transients for which data is available SIMULATOR DESIGN CHANGES'*Performance Testing of affected systems and components when design changes result in significant changes in configuration or significant changes in response.PERFORMANCE TESTING SCHEDULE Annual¹-25%&%per year Each product listed has been generated, reviewed, and stored./R2 As they occur SEG Date//Approved by: SCRB Date/ Page 13 of 15 ST.LUCIE PLANT ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE NO, 0005761, REVISION 2 SIMULATOR CERTIFICATION APPENDIX D SIMULATOR DISCREPANCY AND UPGRADE Inventory of open DR's that could impact NRC Operating Tests Inventory of approved modifications not installed that could impact NRC Operating tests Schedule for resolution of open DR's Schedule for resolution of modifications Each product listed has been generated and reviewed.SEG Date//Approved by: SCRB Date// Page 14 of 15 ST.LUCIE PLANT ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE NO.0005761, REVISION 2 SIMULATOR CERTIFICATION APPENDIX E UNIT DIFFERENCES ANALYSIS Facility design and systems relevant to control room personnel Technical Specifications Procedures, primarily abnormal and emergency operating procedures Control room design and instrument/control location Operational characteristics Each product listed has been generated and reviewed.SEG Date//Approved by: SCRB Date// Page 15 of 15 ST.LUCIE PLANT ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE NO.0005761, REVISiON 2 SIMULATOR CERTIFICATION CHECKSHEET 1 ST.LUCIE UNIT1&UNIT 2, Abstracts for all Appendix C Simulator Tests 2.Inventories and schedules for Appendix D Simulator Discrepancy and Upgrade 3.Performance Testing Schedule 4.Summary of Appendix E Unit Differences Analysis 5.Exceptions as per FPL Letter L-89-322 6.NRC Form 474 Unit 1 and Unit 2 Reviewed by: OPS Training Supervisor Date//Approved by;Training Superintendent Date// Page 1 of 10 FLORIDA POWER&LIGHT COMPANY ST.LUCIE PLANT ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE NO.0005764 REVISION 0 FOR INFORViATION ONLY 1.0 TITLE: This document is not controlled. Before use SIMULATOR DISCREPANCY REPORTS verify infprmsti0n yjtfI a corItrpiied doctIment 2.0 REVIEW AND APPROVAL: Reviewed by Facility Review Group Approved by G.J.Boiss Revision Reviewed by F R G Approved by Plant Manager Plant Manager 19~/19~19 19 3.0 SCOPE: 3.1 Purpose: This instruction provides guidance and instructions for the proper initialization, disposition, and close out of a St.Lucie Simulator Discrepancy Report.3.2 Discussion: During normal operation of the St.Lucie Simulator, including but not limited to, exercise guide validation, scenario validation, certification and operations training, apparent errors in simulator response and control room replication may be observed.These observations are addressed by the Simulator Discrepancy Reporting System.This system captures the apparent discrepancy, assigns an operational priority, issues a Simulator Work Order, assigns a work priority, and defines the disposition and close out.3.3 Authority: 1.Ql 3-PR/PSL-3. S OPS DATE DOCT PROCEDURE DOC N 0005764 sYs COMP COMPLETED ITM 0 1 Page 2 of 10 ST.LUCIE PLANT ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE NO.0005764, REVISION 0 SIMULATOR DISCREPANCY REPORTS 3.0 SCOPE: (continued) '.4 Definitions: 1.Applications Software and Hardware-that software and hardware which duplicates plant systems of the St.Lucie Plant Unit 2 and common Unit 1/Unit 2 services, (e.g., software for simulated control boards).2.Instructor Facility.Hardware and Software-that hardware and software which is used by instructors and/or simulator engineering staff to interact with the simulation to alter and/or monitor the flow of simulated plant operations, (e,g., software for plant specific I/F touch screens, instructor features, etc., hardware for graphics I/F displays in the I/F), 3.Computer Facility Software and Hardware-that software and hardware on which the simulation runs and which is necessary for routine housekeeping activities of a large computer system (e.g., software including MPX Operating System, Simex, etc., hardware of the main computer complex and attached peripherals). 4.Existing Simulator Scope of Simulation for Training-the domain which defines what the simulator is capable of doing from a training standpoint, which includes: A.All applications software and hardware which replicates existing systems in the actual plant.B.Plant specific instructor facility software such as the"touch screens" used for instructor control of exercises. C.Other I/F software features normally used by the instructors in providing instruction to students in the simulator. 5.Simulator Engineering Scope-the domain which defines items, capabilities, etc.included in the simulator in some manner from a software and/or hardware standpoint but which is not directly related to or used for training.This includes: A.All computer complex hardware and software.B.I/F software used by Engineering staff for maintenance functions. Page 3 of 10 ST.LUCIE PLANT ADMINISTRATiVE PROCEDURE NO.0005764, REVISION 0 SIMULATOR DISCREPANCY REPORTS 3.0 SCOPE: (continued) 3.4 (continued) 5.(continued) C.I/F hardware.D.Software utilities and systems used solely by Engineering staff for software maintenance and modifications. 6.Simulator Deficiency -an error, malfunction, breakage or other fault in some item of hardware and/or software which is already in existing scope.of simulation or engineering scope of simulation, 7.Simulator Software"Father" Configuration -a controlled configuration used by the simulator instructor staff for the purpose of training and examinations. It includes only application software that has been accepted by the Simulator Configuration Control SRO and the Simulator System Administrator (or their designee), and approved by the Simulator Engineering Group Coordinator and the Operations Training Supervisor. 8.Simulator Software"Son" Configuration -a controlled configuration used for testing by the simulator engineering staff.It includes software that is being tested for deficiency clearance. It is maintained by the System Administrator. 9.Simulator Work Order (SWO)-The document internal to the simulator engineering staff which is used to document work performed in the correction of valid simulator deficiencies and/or permanent changes to engineering scope.10.Simulator Configuration Review Board (SCRB)-a board comprised of the Licensed Operator Training Coordinator, the Simulator System Coordinator, and a representative from the Operations Department. The function of the board is to: A.Review and recommend changes to the existing scope of simulation for training.B.Review and approve all simulator certification activities. ST.LUCIE PLANT ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE NO.0005764, REVISION 0 SIMULATOR DISCREPANCY REPORTS 3.0 SCOPE: (continued) 3,4 (continued) Page 4 of 10 11.Simulator Configuration Management System-a PC based system which contains the necessary data base to track, review, and evaluate simulator discrepancies. 4.0 P RECAUTIONS: None 5.0 RESPONSIBILITIES; 5.1 Simulator users including but not limited to Simulator Instructional Staff, Simulator Engineering Group, Simulator Configuration SRO, and Licensed Operator Trainees can initiate a discrepancy report if an apparent error in simulator fidelity is observed.It should also be used to identify items needing corrective maintenance.

6.0 REFERENCES

6.1 Ql 3-PR/PSL-3"Simulator Design Management and Operation, Configuration Control".6,2 ANS 3.5 1988 6.3 EPRI NP-5746,"Evaluation of Simulator Discrepancies on the Basis of Operational Impact".7.0 RECORDS AND NOTIFICATIONS: 7.1 Completed Simulator Discrepancy Reports, completed Simulator Work Orders.and associated documents. shall be maintained in the simulator library from certification cycle to certification cycle.7.2 Simulator Discrepancy Report originator shall be notified of discrepancy disposition.

Page 5 of 10 ST.LUCIE PLANT ADMINISTRATiVE PROCEDURE NO.0005764, REVISION 0 SIMULATOR DISCREPANCY REPORTS 8.0 INSTRUCTIONS: 8.1 If an apparent error in simulator fidelity or performance is observed by the user, a Discrepancy Report should be filled out.1.Obtain a blank Simulator Discrepancy Report similar to Figure 1 (FPL Form 3994).2.'hort title-make a brief entry defining the discrepancy. 3.Details: What was observed?Explain in more specific text the apparent problem in simulator fidelity.What did you expect to observe?Be very specific in your expectations. Terms as faster, slower, higher, etc.may not be accepted.Actual plant data when applicable is desired.Any other comments?Additional data that may be helpful to the Simulator Engineer.4.Type: Performance Testing-indicate if the simulator"plant" response was affected.Physical Fidelity-indicate if discrepancy is physical in nature.The simulator looks different either hardware or software, Instructor Control-indicate if discrepancy inhibits simulator control by the instructor. Other-discrepancies not included above.5.Location: Fill out as applicable. Page 6 of 10ST.LUCIE PLANT ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE NO.0005764, REVISION 0 SIMULATOR DISCREPANCY REPORTS 8.0 INSTRUCTIONS: (continued) 8.1 (continued) 6.Retest: Indicate the retest that you feel would be applicable to insure the discrepancy is corrected. This will be included in the Simulator Configuration Control SRO retest session.Results-to be filled out by the Simulator Configuration Control SRO and the Simulator System Administrator during retest session.7.Priorities: A.Using the EPRI Operational Flow Chart, assign the operational priority (Figure 2).B.Assign a suggested training priority as indicated below: '1.Training cannot be completed. Negative training could be taking place.2.Training'can be completed only with significant explanation from instructor. 3.Training is impacted by the discrepancy, training can be completed with instructor explanation. 4..Simulator training can continue with instructor overriding or modifying system response.5.Time available, DR is transparent to floor operations, C.Final Simulator Work Order priorities are established with regard to availability of personnel, materials, feasibility of alternative training, and number and/or age of deficiency.

Page 7 of 10ST.LUCIE PLANT ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE NO.0005764, REVISION 0 SIMULATOR DISCREPANCY REPORTS 8.0 INSTRUCTIONS: (continued) 8.1 (continued) 8.FilI out the next block as applicable. Originator, date observed, simulator engineer, initial condition set in use, scenario in use, and evolution in progress.9.Leave the remainder of the Discrepancy Report blank.10.Submit the completed Discrepancy Report by placing it in a designated place.8.2 Approval of the Discrepancy Report will be made by the Simulator Configuration Control SRO and the Simulator System Administrator as follows: 1.Verify that all applicable entries are made on the report.2.Verify that the report is not a duplicate of an existing report.3.Verify that the submitted discrepancy is valid.4.Verify that the submitted discrepancy is not an increase in simulator scope, An increase in simulator scope is defined as requesting a change in the simulator outside its established design base, Any DR that is determined to be a change in scope of simulation should be submitted to the SCRB.8.3 The results of the Discrepancy Report approval process will be reflected on the originators copy (goldenrod) and will be sent to the originator. 8.4 If the Discrepancy Report is rejected, the originator may: Agree with the disposition The original (white)copy will be retained in the simulator library.2.Disagree The originator may re-submit the report with additional information or-submit the report to the Simulator Configuration Review Board for disposition. Re-submittal should follow the same flow path as the original DR. Page 8 of 10 ST.LUCIE PLANT ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE NO.0005764, REVISION 0 SIMULATOR DISCREPANCY REPORTS 8.0 INSTRUCTIONS: (continued) 8.5 If the Discrepancy Report is approved: The Simulator Configuration Control SRO and the Simulator System Administrator will review and approve the suggested Simulator Work Order priority.A.If the suggested Simulator Work Order priority is not accepted, the Simulator Configuration SRO and the System Administrator and the originator cannot come up with an acceptable work priority, the Operations Training Coordinator and the Simulator System Coordinator will assign the priority.2.A Simulator Work Order will then be issued to the Simulator Engineering Group.8.6 After modifications have been made to correct the simulator. discrepancy, the Discrepancy Report is submitted to the Simulator System Administrator and Simulator Configuration SRO for retest and acceptance. Those discrepancies that do not result in application software modifications, such as computer and RTGB hardware maintenance, instructor facility hardware maintenance, etc., will be approved by the Simulator Lead Hardware Engineer and the System Administrator. All testing of software changes will be conducted using the"son" configuration. 8.7 Completed discrepancies and work orders are then reviewed by the Operations Training Supervisor and the Simulator Systems Coordinator for approval to be included into the simulator father configuration. 8.8 lf the originator desires to be notified when a DR has been completed, the originators copy (goldenrod) should be returned to the Simulator System Administrator. The System Administrator will attach the originators copy to the Simulator Work Order.After the completed discrepancy has been included in the father configuration, the originators copy will be returned to the originator marked as being completed.

Page 9 of 10 ST.LUCIE PLANT ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE NO.0005764, REVISION 0 SIMULATOR DISCREPANCY REPORTS tr Simulator Discrepancy Report (Please Print, Use Black Ball Point Pen.)OR No.Short Title Oetails What was Observed?What did you expect to observe?Any other comments?Additonal pages attached Y/N Type Check: Q Pert.Tesdng Q Physical Fidelity Q Inst.Control Q Other Lncatfon p Control Board: specify Tag No., Meter, etc.Q Intr.Facility Crt's Specify CRT page/Oescription Additional pages attached Y/N Results SAT Q UNSAT Q Oate SEG Staff (if applicable) INSTR/OPS (if applicable) OPS TRNG SUP (if applicable) Operational Priority See supplementary flowchart if required (I-IO)Originator On-Outy SEG Scenario in Use orN/A p ICSetinuse No or N/A Q Evolution in Progress Oate Observed orN/A Q or N/A Q I e e sa et System Type Q HW Q SW Q Both Disposition OR Accepted.OR No, as shown in upper right corner.OttRejented. grates is pending, mere details needed.gee nnmments.More than 3 working days since observed.Out of scope.Refer to SCRB.Ouplicate or equivalent of OR No.Comments Plant Oesign Feedback Yes Q NoQ Date Part I (White)-SEG File Part 2 (Canary)-I/F Part 3 IPinkl-SWO Part 4 IGoldeniodl -Originator Form 3994 INon.aiocigodl Rov.t?0 ST.L PLANT ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE NO.0005764, REVISION 0 SIMULATOR DISCREPANCY REPORTS Page 1 FIGURE 2 ASSIGNMENT OF DISCREPANCY OPERATIONAL PRIORITY (BASED ON EPRI NP~46)DISCREPANCY IM PEDES CREW PERFORMANCE OF REQUIAED FUNCTIONS Il'ES NO IMPEDE S INSTRUCTOR PERFOAMANCE NO OF REQUIRED FUNCTIONS YES CRITICAL TO SAFETY INVOLVE CREW TASKS ASSOCIATED WITH ACCIDENT MITIGATION RESTORING PLANT TO SAFE CONDITION, MINIMIZING INJUAY OR DAMAGE NO NOT CRITICAL TO SAFETY NO OPERATIONAL IMPACT CAN THE LEAST EXPERIENCED CREW MEMBER SEE IT CAN THE LEAST EXPERIENCED CREW MEM SEA SEE IT'Ir 4 5 (OR57848PG)

NRC FORM 474 I140)10 C FR 55.45(b), 55.4 snd 55JI US.NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 8llNULATION FACILITY CERTIRCATION APPROVED SY OMSr NO.31500135 EXPIRES: 03042 ESTIMATED SUROEN PER RESPONSE TO COMPLY WITH THIS INFORMATION COLLECTION REQUEST: 120 HRS.FORWARD COMMENTS REGARDINO BURDEN ESTIMATE TO THE INFOR.MATION AND RECORDS MANAGEMENT SRANCH (MNSS 2714), U*NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION, WASHINGTON, DC 20555, AND TO THE PAPERWORK REDUCTION PROJECT 13150-0135), OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET, WASHINGTON, DC 20503.INSTRUCTIONS. This form is to bs filed for Initial cert)rest)o, recsrtlficstlon Ilf required), snd for sny change to a simulation facility performance tasting plan made after Init4I submittal of such a plan.Prov)de the following Informsthn, snd check the appropriate box to Indicate reason for submittal. FACILITY LICENSEE St.Lucie Unit 1 Florida Power&Light ComPany DOCK T NUMB Et).335 DATE February 15, 1991 This is to certlfy that: 1.The above nsmal facility licensee is In)ng a s)mu)atkxt fasll)ty consisting solely of s plantmferenced simulator that meets the requirements Of 10 CFR 55.45.2.Documentat)on h svailsbls for NRC review In accordance with 10 CFR 5545(b).3.This simulathn facility meets tha guidance contained in ANSI/ANS35, 1965, ss endorsed by NRC Regulatory Gukle 1.149.If there ars any exceptions to the certiiicstlon of this Item, check here[x)and describe fully on additional pages as nscss>>ry.NAME (or other identification J AND LOCATION OF SIMULATION FACILITY St.Lucie Simulator, Nuclear Training Center, St Lucie Plant, Hutchinson Island, Fl.SIMULATION FACILITY PERFORMANCE TEST ABSTRACTS ATTACHED.(For perfonnance rests conducraf ln rhe pen'cd ending with rhs dsra of this cert((/ca(onJ DESCRIPTION OF PERFORMANCE TESTING COMPLETED (Attach additional page(s J as necessary,<<xi id<<nify the/ran descript Jon bslnP comlnual/SEE ATI'ACHED DOCUMENT$IMULATIDN FAGILITY pERFORMANGE TEsTING scHEDULE ATTAGHED.(For the conduct of approximately 25)5 of perfonnance terra per year for rhr four yasr oommanclnp with the drre of this c<<r if/car/on./ PTION OF PERFORMANCE TESTING TO BE CONDUCTED.(Arrach addklonsl psps(s/as necessary, and kfenr/(y rhs kern descript(on belnpconr(nued/ SEE ATI'ACHED DOCUMENT pERFORMANCE TESTING pLAN CHANGE.(For any modification ro e performance resrlnp plan submirrsd on 4 previous carr lfksr Jon/DESCRIPTION OF PERFORMANCE TESTING PLAN CHANGE (Arrsch addklonsl psps(s J ss necessary, snd ld<<nlly rhs lrsm descrlPrlon bsinP continual/ INITIAL CERTIFICATON -NOT APPLICABLE R E CERTIFICATION (Describe conacr(reactions taken, attach reruks of complsraf perfonnance rsrrinp in accordance with f 0 CFR g 5545(b/(SJ Jv/.Arrsch afdirlonsl psps(r J as necessary,<<xf Identify rhe Iran dsscr(prlon bslnp conrlnuafJ INITIAL CERIFICATION -NOT APPLICABLE Any fal>>statement or omission in this document, including attachments, may be sub)act to c)vll and criminal sanctions. I certify under penalty of perjury that ths Information in thi document and attachments Is true and correct.Vice President-St.Lucie Plant February 15, 1991 In accordance with 10 CFR))55Ai,)cat)ons, this form shall be submitted to tha NRC es follows: BY MAIL ADDRESSED TO: D,ofnce of Nudser Reactor Regulation BY DELIVERY IN PERSON Ug.Regu)saory Comndsshn TO THE NRC OFF ICE AT: Wshhlagton, DC 20666 Mtc FORM 474 I140)Ons White Flint North 11666 Rockvil)a Pa>>Rockvale, MD FLORIDA POMER AND LIGHT COMPANY ST.LUG I E UNIT 1 AND 2 INITIAL CERTIFICATION SUBMITTAL PACKAGE TABLE OF CONTENTS UNIT 1 1.0 Introduction 2.0 3.0 Unit 1/Unit 2 Differences Analysis (Reg.Guide 1.149)2.1 Technical Specifications 2.2 Facility Design and Systems Relevant to control room personnel. 2.3 Operational Characteristics 2.4 Procedures, Primary Abnormal and Emergency Operating Procedures. 2.5 Control Room Design and Instrument/Control Locations Human Factors Review: St.Lucie Plant Simulator Unit 1-Differences 4.0 Unit 1 Exceptions

ST.LUCIE INITIAL SIMULATOR CERTIFICATION REPORT

1.0 INTRODUCTION

S In 1983 FPL requested NRC's approval to issue a dual license to St.Lucie Plant Reactor Operators and Senior Reactor Operators. This letter of request was based on a review of plant procedures, response characteristics, techn'ical specifications, control room design and system differences. The NRC, based upon FPL's justification for dual licensing of St.Lucie personnel, concluded that"operators and senior operators may be issued licenses to operate or to direct the activities of licensed operators on St.Lucie Units 1 and 2".Since 1983 efforts have been taken to address the potential for growth of unit differences. In 1989 and 1990 a systematic review of the Regulatory Guide 1.149 items was conducted. The results of the analysis are summarized below.2.0 UNIT 1 UNIT 2 DIFFERENCE ANALYSIS~~2.1 TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS The assessment of the Technical Specifications with regard to unit differences has not changed from that provided for dual license.The plant reviewed the differences in Technical Specifications between the Units and determined that they do not represent an obstacle to the issuance of a dual license.Most differences involve systems unique to a particular Unit, not differences between specifications on like equipment. 2.2 FACILITY DESIGN AND SYSTEMS RELEVANT TO CONTROL ROOM PERSONNEL St.Lucie Units 1 and 2 operations systems differences report[Reference 2-1], maintained by the St.Lucie Training Department, was developed in 1981, with a revision in 1990.The intent of this report was to identify system differences by briefly describing Unit 1 and Unit 2 arrangements. St.Lucie Plant Licensing reviewed this report and determined that it appears to adequately address unit differences with regard to system design and performance. ST.LUCIE INITIAL SIMULATOR CERTIFICATION REPORT 2.3 OPERATIONAL CHARACTERISTICS FPL originally determined that only minor differences existed in the operating and transient response characteristics between Unit 1 and 2.Additionally, FPL concluded that these differences should have minimal impact on the actions required of an operator, or the issuance of a dual license.The NRC concurred with FPL's assessment of the response characteristics. FPL's efforts to minimize unit differences has resulted in no significant plant modifications or reload fuel designs that would contradict this original assessment. 2.4 PROCEDURES All Unit 1 and 2 Administrative, Operating, Off-Normal, and Emergency Procedures have been reviewed and revised as necessary in order to make them as similar and consistent as possible.In addition, both Unit's Emergency Operating Procedure have been revised into the same upg'raded (two-column) format.2.5 CONTROL ROON Extensive major physical changes to the control boards on Unit 1 have been made in order to make them as functionally close as possible to those of Unit 2.In addition, Unit 2 control boards have been"human-factored" in the areas of demarcation, labeling, color coding, etc,.A similar effort has been completed on the Unit 1 control boards.Reference 2-1 Florida Power 5 Light Company, St.Lucie Units 1 and 2, Operations/Systems Differences Analysis Report, Rev.2, December 1990.

ST.LUCIE INITIAL SIMULATOR CERTIFICATION REPORT 3.0 HUMAN FACTORS REVIEM PLANT ST.LUCIE SIMULATOR-UNIT I DIFFERENCES A team consisting of human factors, training and nuclear power plant subject matter experts assessed the configuration differences -and operational consequences -between Florida Power and Light's St.Lucie Unit 1 and the recently installed control room Simulator. The review was based on the ability requirements across the full range of operating conditions (Duty Areas A through E)derived from the Plant St.Lucie Reactor Operator/Senior Reactor Operator Task Analysis.The ability requirements were determined by use of specific Ability Statements and their referenced procedures in the Task Analysis.The Ability Statements selected for this human factors review were those which:Are rated Z 3.0 for importance to health and safety of the public.Require positioning of control room controls.Require use of information from control room indicators. The focus of this human factors review was on detection of those differences which would increase the likelihood of an error by Simulator-trained operators in performance of Unit 1 tasks.Two kinds of errors were of primary concern.-mode errors which are"...a joint consequence of relatively automated performance --when the operator fails to be aware of which mode is in operation--and of improperly conceived system design in which such mode confusions can have major consequences"[Reference 3-1]; ST.LUCIE INITIAL SIHULATOR CERTIFICATION REPORT 3.0 HUNAN FACTORS REVIEW (Continued): -capture errors (or slips)which may occur when the tendency to perform a particular action is high, when existing conditions are similar to those which normally trigger this action, and when the operator is functioning at a skill-based, automatic level which requires little self-monitoring of performance. This review focused on error potentials resulting from circumstances in which an operator has learned and practiced on the Simulator certain actions appropriate for the operation of Unit 2, but which may, at least in part, be inappropriate for the operation in Unit l.As suggested above, the incidence of mode errors and capture errors is expected to be greater in areas where the Simulator and Unit 1 control room configurations are nearly identical because obvious differences between the Simulator and Unit 1 configurations will continually alert the operator to the fact that he is operating Unit 1 and not the Simulator or Unit 2.Further, while novice operators may make more operating errors overall, they are less susceptible to the mode and capture errors of concern here because they are more likely to be performing at a knowledge-based or rule-based level and, therefore, not performing their control room tasks"automatically" at a skill-based level.Under these conditions, it may be seen that Unit 1-Simulator differences are of concern only if: a)operators are insufficiently trained on tasks peculiar to Unit 1, or b)if an operator mistakenly employs a (presumably well learned)simulator behavior or schema while operating Unit 1.

ST.LUCIE INITIAL SIMULATOR CERTIFICATION REPORT 3.0 UMAN CTORS REVIEM (Continued): Further, as depicted by the attached decision tree (and as supported by EPRI NP-5746-Evaluation of Simulator Discrepancies on the Basis of Operational Impact)[Reference 3-2], the likelihood of error and severity of error consequence vary in response to the"recoverability" of such errors, the use of written procedures in performing a task, and the extent to which Unit 1 and the Simulator are obviously versus non-obviously different. By grouping these variables into their various combinations, seven classifications were established: ~Cl-U, the tasks controls/indications are unique to Unit 1 or to the simulator. ~Cl-OD, the tasks controls/indications are obviously different between Unit 1 and the Simulator and therefore, it is unlikely that an operator would/could mistakenly employ a Simulator ,response while operating Unit l.C2/Pl, Unit 1-Simulator differences are non-obvious, the task is to be done from memory, and errors are non-recoverable (i.e., would result in a reactor trip or would endanger the safety and health of the public);C2/P2, Unit 1-Simulator differences are non-obvious, the task is to be done with the aid of written procedures, and errors are non-recoverable; C2/P3, Unit 1-Simulator differences are non-obvious, the task is to be done from memory, and errors are recoverable; C2/P4, Unit 1-Simulator differences are non-obvious, the task is to be done with the aid of written procedures, and errors are recoverable; ~Fl, relevant features of Unit 1 and the Simulator are functionally identical; ST.LUCIE INITIAL SIMULATOR CERTIFICATION REPORT 3.0 HUMAN FACTORS REVIEW (Continued): Clearly, controls/indicators categorized Fl require no further consideration. Those judged Cl-U and Cl-OD may be addressed through training strategies ranging from special classroom emphasis through development of special Job Performance Measures.Handling of the C2 differences (i.e., these involving non-obvious differences) is prioritized by category (Pl through P4), depending on the likelihood and consequences of error.These differences may be addressed through a variety of training strategies or other interventions, as appropriate. Although identical Ability Statements may appear in each Duty Area, each was reviewed for stability re-categorization based on changes associated with each Duty Area, and the results reflect only Duty Area-unique occurrences. That is, repeat categorizations are not included in the tabulation. The final assessment includes evaluation of the controls/indications/operations. associated with 153 Ability Statements. Appendix A is a listing of the Ability Statements by category, and the following is a tabulation of the review process and a listing of specific examples for each of the categories: ~Cate oe Cl-U (" Unique")Cl-OD (" Obviously Different")C2-Pl (" Priority 1")C2-P2 (" Priority 2")C2-P3 (" Priority 3")C2-P4 (" Priority 4")Fl (" Functionally Identical")Number 7 65 0 4 29 21 27~Exam le A.08.01.089 A.01.01.001 A.03.05.148 A.01.02.006 A.01.01.004 A.01.02.017 Appendix A which contains these examples is available on request.Additionally, some Ability Statements refer to other Ability Statements for categorization either in addition to or in lieu of a listed category.Examples of these are A.01.03.069 and A.03.01.066, respectively. Appendix B shows the Ability Statements evaluated by this study and Appendix C is a copy of the original Human Factors worksheets. These appendices are also available on request.

HUMAN FACTORS REVIEW Review Task Analysis for K/A's rated~3.0 Importance to Health and Safety of Public Is it Unit1 Yes unique?No Category 1 U OD ifference between Unlt1&lmulator?Yes End Yes Is Difference obvious?s same knowledge required?No Category 2 Yes Is task done from memory?Is an error No recoverable ?No Is an error recoverable Yes PRIORITY 1 PRIORITY 2 Yes PRIORITY 3 PRIORITY 4 Rationale: Simulator-Unit 1 differences are only a problem if: a)Operators are untrained or unfamiliar with Unit 1 specific tasks, or b)An operator mistakenly employs a (well-learned) Simulator schema/behavior while operating Unit 1. ST.LUCIE INITIAL SIMULATOR CERTIFICATION REPORT 3.0 HUMAN FACTORS REVIEW (Continued): Although these results indicate minimal error potential induced by St.Lucie Unit 1 Simulator differences, and none associated with Priority 1 situations, wor k is currently in progress to mitigate the impact of those differences which do exist.3.1 RESPONSE TO THE HUMAN FACTOR REVIEW As a result of the Human Factors review, Job Performance Heasures (JPM)are being developed for incorporation into the Licensed Operator Training program to address those areas of concern with regard to the health and safety of the public that are unique to Unit 1.

References:

~~~~~~3-1 Wickens, C.D.(1984).Engineering Psychology and Human Performance. Columbus, OH: Charles E.Merrill.3-2 EPRI NP-5746-Evaluation of Simulator Discrepancies on the Basis of Operational Impact

ST.LUCIE INITIAL SIMULATOR CERTIFICATION REPORT PLANT ST.LUGIE SIMULATOR-UNIT 1 DIFFERENCES (Continued): 4.0 EXCEPTIONS Regulatory Guide 1.149, Rev.1, April 1987, C.6, makes appendix A&B to the Standard integrated parts of the standard.The Unit 1 Certification takes exception to the following: 1)A.1.2 Control Room and A.2 Simulator Design Data-The configuration differences between Unit 1 and 2 are reviewed and incorporated as appropriate in the St.Lucie Unit 1 and 2 Operations/Systems Differences Analysis Report (0800006). 2)A.1.4 Operating Procedures for Reference Plant-St.Lucie Unit 2 procedures are used to operate the simulator. This is necessary because at the component level;switch, valve and breaker, the two units are not identical thus making the Unit 1 procedures inappropriate. 3)A.3 Simulator Tests-Only minor differences exist in the operating and transient response characteristics between Unit 1 and 2, therefore the Simulator Tests for St.Lucie Unit 2 are referenced for the response of Unit 1.

Reference:

FPL Letter C.O.Woody (FPL)to USNRC"St.Lucie Unit-l, Plan for Simulator Facility Development and Application", L-89-322, dated August 31, 1989.}}