Putting Gonuke Into Practice: Considerations for Human Factors Evaluations

Author(s):  
Ronald L. Boring ◽  
Thomas A. Ulrich ◽  
Roger Lew

The Guideline for Operational Nuclear Usability and Knowledge Elicitation (GONUKE) framework was introduced in 2015 to support human factors evaluations needed for control room upgrades at nuclear power plants. NUREG-0711, the Human Factors Engineering Program Review Model, is used by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission to review human factors activities associated with human-system interfaces at nuclear power plants, and GONUKE is anchored to the phases of development and design in NUREG-0711. This paper addresses five considerations to help users of GONUKE better apply the framework to evaluations for NUREG-0711 and beyond. These five considerations are: (1) GONUKE only specifies evaluation, not design; (2) GONUKE is a framework, not a method or process; (3) GONUKE goes beyond NUREG-0711 requirements; (4) GONUKE application shouldfollow a graded approach; (5) different evaluations are required fo r formative vs. summative phases.

Author(s):  
John O’Hara ◽  
Stephen Fleger

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) evaluates the human factors engineering (HFE) of nuclear power plant design and operations to protect public health and safety. The HFE safety reviews encompass both the design process and its products. The NRC staff performs the reviews using the detailed guidance contained in two key documents: the HFE Program Review Model (NUREG-0711) and the Human-System Interface Design Review Guidelines (NUREG-0700). This paper will describe these two documents and the method used to develop them. As the NRC is committed to the periodic update and improvement of the guidance to ensure that they remain state-of-the-art design evaluation tools, we will discuss the topics being addressed in support of future updates as well.


2009 ◽  
Vol 47 (7) ◽  
pp. 1016-1025 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yung-Tsan Jou ◽  
Chiuhsiang Joe Lin ◽  
Tzu-Chung Yenn ◽  
Chih-Wei Yang ◽  
Li-Chen Yang ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Ronald C. Lippy

The nuclear industry is preparing for the licensing and construction of new nuclear power plants in the United States. Several new designs have been developed and approved, including the “traditional” reactor designs, the passive safe shutdown designs and the small modular reactors (SMRs). The American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) provides specific Codes used to perform preservice inspection/testing and inservice inspection/testing for many of the components used in the new reactor designs. The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) reviews information provided by applicants related to inservice testing (IST) programs for Design Certifications and Combined Licenses (COLs) under Part 52, “Licenses, Certifications, and Approvals for Nuclear Power Plants,” in Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR Part 52) (Reference 1). The 2012 Edition of the ASME OM Code defines a post-2000 plant as a nuclear power plant that was issued (or will be issued) its construction permit, or combined license for construction and operation, by the applicable regulatory authority on or following January 1, 2000. The New Reactors OM Code (NROMC) Task Group (TG) of the ASME Code for Operation and Maintenance of Nuclear Power Plants (NROMC TG) is assigned the task of ensuring that the preservice testing (PST) and IST provisions in the ASME OM Code to address pumps, valves, and dynamic restraints (snubbers) in post-2000 nuclear power plants are adequate to provide reasonable assurance that the components will operate as needed when called upon. Currently, the NROMC TG is preparing proposed guidance for the treatment of active pumps, valves, and dynamic restraints with high safety significance in non-safety systems in passive post-2000 reactors including SMRs.


Author(s):  
Thomas G. Scarbrough

In a series of Commission papers, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) described its policy for inservice testing (IST) programs to be developed and implemented at nuclear power plants licensed under 10 CFR Part 52. This paper discusses the expectations for IST programs based on those Commission policy papers as applied in the NRC staff review of combined license (COL) applications for new reactors. For example, the design and qualification of pumps, valves, and dynamic restraints through implementation of American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) Standard QME-1-2007, “Qualification of Active Mechanical Equipment Used in Nuclear Power Plants,” as accepted in NRC Regulatory Guide (RG) 1.100 (Revision 3), “Seismic Qualification of Electrical and Active Mechanical Equipment and Functional Qualification of Active Mechanical Equipment for Nuclear Power Plants,” will enable IST activities to assess the operational readiness of those components to perform their intended functions. ASME has updated the Operation and Maintenance of Nuclear Power Plants (OM Code) to improve the IST provisions for pumps, valves, and dynamic restraints that are incorporated by reference in the NRC regulations with applicable conditions. In addition, lessons learned from performance experience and testing of motor-operated valves (MOVs) will be implemented as part of the IST programs together with application of those lessons learned to other power-operated valves (POVs). Licensee programs for the Regulatory Treatment of Non-Safety Systems (RTNSS) will be implemented for components in active nonsafety-related systems that are the first line of defense in new reactors that rely on passive systems to provide reactor core and containment cooling in the event of a plant transient. This paper also discusses the overlapping testing provisions specified in ASME Standard QME-1-2007; plant-specific inspections, tests, analyses, and acceptance criteria; the applicable ASME OM Code as incorporated by reference in the NRC regulations; specific license conditions; and Initial Test Programs as described in the final safety analysis report and applicable RGs. Paper published with permission.


Author(s):  
Eugene Imbro ◽  
Thomas G. Scarbrough

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has established an initiative to risk-inform the requirements in Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) for the regulatory treatment of structures, systems, and components (SSCs) used in commercial nuclear power plants. As discussed in several Commission papers (e.g., SECY-99-256 and SECY-00-0194), Option 2 of this initiative involves categorizing plant SSCs based on their safety significance, and specifying treatment that would provide an appropriate level of confidence in the capability of those SSCs to perform their design functions in accordance with their risk categorization. The NRC has initiated a rulemaking effort to allow licensees of nuclear power plants in the United States to implement the Option 2 approach in lieu of the “special treatment requirements” of the NRC regulations. In a proof-of-concept effort, the NRC recently granted exemptions from the special treatment requirements for safety-related SSCs categorized as having low risk significance by the licensee of the South Texas Project (STP) Units 1 and 2 nuclear power plant, based on a review of the licensee’s high-level objectives of the planned treatment for safety-related and high-risk nonsafety-related SSCs. This paper discusses the NRC staff’s views regarding the treatment of SSCs at STP described by the licensee in its updated Final Safety Analysis Report (FSAR) in support of the exemption request, and provides the status of rulemaking that would incorporate risk insights into the treatment of SSCs at nuclear power plants.


Author(s):  
David Alley

This paper provides a historical perspective on the need for, and development of, buried and underground piping tanks programs at nuclear power plants. Nuclear power plant license renewal activities, Nuclear Regulatory Commission Buried Piping Action Plan, and the rationale for addressing the issue of buried pipe through an industry initiative as opposed to regulation are discussed. The paper also addresses current NRC activities including the results of Nuclear Regulatory Commission inspections of buried piping programs at nuclear power plants as well as Nuclear Regulatory Commission involvement in industry and standards development organizations. Finally, the paper outlines the Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s future plans concerning the issue of buried piping at US nuclear power plants.


Author(s):  
Gurjendra S. Bedi

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff issued Revision 2 to NUREG-1482, “Guidelines for Inservice Testing at Nuclear Power Plant,” to assist the nuclear power plant licensees in establishing a basic understanding of the regulatory basis for pump and valve inservice testing (IST) programs and dynamic restraints (snubbers) inservice examination and testing programs. Since the Revision 1 issuance of NUREG-1482, certain tests and measurements required by earlier editions and addenda of the American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) Code for Operation and Maintenance of Nuclear Power Plants (OM Code) have been clarified, updated, revised or eliminated. The revision to NUREG-1482 incorporates and addresses those changes, and includes the IST programs guidelines related to new reactors. The revised guidance incorporates lessons learned and experience gained since the last issue. This paper provides an overview of the contents of the NUREG-1482 and those changes and discusses how they affect NRC guidance on implementing pump and valve inservice testing (IST) programs. For the first time, this revision added dynamic restraint (snubber) inservice examination and testing program guidelines along with pump and valve IST programs. This paper highlights important changes to NUREG-1482, but is not intended to provide a complete record of all changes to the document. The NRC intends to continue to develop and improve its guidance on IST methods through active participation in the ASME OM Code consensus process, interactions with various technical organizations, user groups, and through periodic updates of NRC-published guidance and issuance of generic communications as the need arises. Revision 2 to NUREG-1482 incorporates regulatory guidance applicable to the 2004 Edition including 2005 and 2006 Addenda to the ASME OM Code. Revision 0 and Revision 1 to NUREG-1482 are still valid and may continue to be used by those licensees who have not been required to update their IST program to the 2004 Edition including the 2005 and 2006 Addenda (or later Edition) of the ASME OM Code. The guidance provided in many sections herein may be used for requesting relief from or alternatives to ASME OM Code requirements. However, licensees may also request relief or authorization of an alternative that is not in conformance with the guidance. In evaluating such requested relief or alternatives, the NRC uses the guidelines/recommendations of the NUREG, where applicable. The guidelines and recommendations provided in this NUREG and its Appendix A do not supersede the regulatory requirements specified in Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) 10 CFR 50.55a, “Codes and standards”. Further, this NUREG does not authorize the use of alternatives to, grant relief from, the ASME OM Code requirements for inservice testing of pumps and valves, or inservice examination and testing of dynamic restraints (snubbers), incorporated by reference in 10 CFR 50.55a. Paper published with permission.


Author(s):  
John M. O'Hara

The purpose of this paper is to discuss the role of human factors engineering (HFE) guidelines in the evaluation of complex human-machine systems, such as advanced nuclear power plants. Advanced control rooms will utilize human-system interface (HSI) technologies that can have significant implications for plant safety in that they will affect the ways in which plant personnel interact with the system. In order to protect public health and safety, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission reviews the HFE aspects of plant HSIs to ensure that they are designed to HFE principles and that operator performance and reliability are appropriately supported. Evaluations using HFE guidelines are an important part of the overall review methodology. The Advanced HSI Design Review Guideline (DRG) was developed to provide these review criteria. This paper will address (1) the issues associated with guideline-based evaluations, (2) DRG development and validation, and (3) the DRG review procedures.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document