Issue Date: 12/22/14 1 65001.23

ATTACHMENT 65001.23

INSPECTION OF HUMAN FACTORS ENGINEERING VERIFICATION AND 

VALIDATION ITAAC

PROGRAM APPLICABILITY: 2503

65001.23-01 INSPECTION OBJECTIVES

01.01 To confirm by inspection that the combined license (COL) holder (licensee) has 

implemented Human Factors Engineering (HFE) verification and validation (V&V) activities in 

accordance with NRC approved implementation plans. The inspection results will be used to 

support an NRC finding as to whether the V&V activities meet the acceptance criteria as 

stated in the AP1000 HFE Inspections, Tests, Analyses and Acceptance Criteria (ITAAC) 

Design Commitments 3.2.01a, b, c and d.

65001.23-02 INSPECTION REQUIREMENTS AND GUIDANCE

02.01 Background. 

Inspection of ITAAC associated with a COL is intended to support the Commission finding 

stipulated in 10 CFR Part 52.103(g), specifically that the ITAAC acceptance criteria have 

been met, and that the facility has been designed and built to conform to the licensing basis. 

The Commission policy for Design Acceptance Criteria (DAC), as defined in SECY-92-053,

“Use of Design Acceptance Criteria during 10 CFR Part 52 Design Certification Reviews,”

allows licensees the option to provide HFE design process milestones as ITAAC. In these

instances the HFE DAC-related ITAAC are inspected as the HFE design activity is 

completed.

An HFE program, such as that described in NUREG-0711 (Reference 3), provides the 

structure for ensuring that the HFE aspects of a plant are developed, designed, and evaluated 

on the basis of a structured, disciplined analysis using accepted HFE principles. V&V

evaluations are that part of an HFE program which comprehensively determine whether the 

design conforms to HFE design principles and if it enables plant personnel to successfully

perform their tasks to achieve plant safety and other operational goals. 

The integrated system validation (ISV) is the most important element of the V&V process and 

should receive the majority of inspection time. ISV is that part of the V&V process which

evaluates an integrated system design (i.e., hardware, software, and personnel elements) 

using performance-based tests to determine whether the integrated system design acceptably

supports safe operation of the plant. It is intended to evaluate the acceptability of those 

aspects of the design that cannot be determined through analytical means such as humansystem interface (HSI) task-support verification and HFE design verification. The ISV 

process is comprised of several important activities, including but not limited to, establishing 

an appropriate test facility, specifying test objectives, developing test scenarios, specifying 

performance measures, developing and implementing a test design (including pilot testing), 

and analyzing and interpreting the data. 
Issue Date: 12/22/14 2 65001.23

The ISV provides an opportune time to sample elements of the verification and corrective 

action activities. Appendix 1 integrates the inspection of verification and corrective action 

activities into the ISV inspection to provide for an efficient ITAAC inspection. 

02.02 Inspection Requirements and Guidance

For each NUREG-0711 element applicants/licensees typically submit information in two 

parts: an implementation plan describing the process/method to be followed and a results 

summary report describing the design product. The objective of this inspection is to verify

that the licensee has completed V&V activities in accordance with the commitments contained 

in the approved implementation plan.

The actual planning and scheduling of this ITAAC inspection is dependent on:

a. Completion of the ISV inspection outlined in Appendix 1. This inspection addresses 

completion of the HFE design and is typically conducted by Headquarters Vendor 

Inspection Branches because the work is conducted by a vendor. 

b. Receipt of the Results Summary Reports

02.03 Specific Inspection Criteria

a. Verify the inspection outlined in Appendix 1, Part 1 is complete and any issues 

identified have been resolved.

b. Complete the inspection outline in Appendix 1, Part 2

Guidance: The team completing Appendix 1, Part 1 may have provided input 

on Appendix 1, Part 2 if sufficient testing data was available. To complete 

Appendix 1, Part 2, additional inspection can be performed to supplement the 

results of the Part 1 inspection or a determination can be made that the 

information already obtained is sufficient. 

c. Verify the Results Summary Report content conforms to the ISV 

implementation plan. (See attachment 1 for ML number for this document.)

d. Using the information provided in the previous three criteria, verify the following 

objectives were met:

1. The role of plant personnel, i.e., that the allocation of functions to human 

and automatic aspects of the integrated system are appropriate and takes 

advantage of human strengths and avoid allocating functions that would be 

negatively affected by human limitations.
Issue Date: 12/22/14 3 65001.23

2. Shift staffing, assignment of tasks to crew members, and crew coordination 

(both within the control room as well as between the control room and local 

control stations and support centers) are acceptable. This should include 

validation of the nominal shift levels, minimal shift levels, and shift turnover.

3. For each human function, the design provides adequate alerting, 

information, control, and feedback capability for human functions to be 

performed under normal plant evolutions, transients, design basis 

accidents, and selected risk significant events that are beyond design basis.

4. Specific personnel tasks can be accomplished within the time and 

performance criteria, with a high degree of operating crew situational

awareness, and within acceptable workload levels that provide a balance 

between vigilance and operator burden. 

5. The operator interfaces minimize operator error and provide for error 

detection and recovery capability when errors occur.

6. The functional requirements are met for the major HSI features, e.g., groupview display, alarm system, safety parameter display system (SPDS) 

function, general display system, procedures, controls, communication 

systems, and emergency operating procedure (EOP)-related local control 

stations.

7. The crew can make effective transitions between the HSI features in the 

accomplishments of their tasks and that interface management tasks such 

as display configuration and navigation are not a distraction or undue 

burden.

8. The integrated system performance is tolerant of failures of individual HSI 

features.

9. Aspects of the integrated system (including staffing, communications, and 

training) that may negatively impact integrated system performance are 

identified.

02.04 Requirements for Performance of Inspection. 

The inspection will be performed in accordance with the inspection plan. Adjustments to the

inspection plan will be communicated to Region II Construction Inspection Staff and Operations

Branches 1 and 2 to minimize impact to the licensee and to assist in revising inspection 

planning efforts accordingly.
Issue Date: 12/22/14 4 65001.23

02.05 Requirements for Inspection Reporting. 

An inspection report and any findings will be prepared and approved in accordance with 

Inspection Manual Chapter 0617.

65001.23-03 RESOURCE ESTIMATE

The total estimated hours to complete this inspection for one COL licensee is 300 staff hours

for completion of the Appendix 1 inspection and 80 hours for the ITAAC closure inspection.

65001.23-04 REFERENCES

1. 10 CFR Part 52, “Licenses, Certifications, and Approvals for Nuclear Power Plants”

2. Regulatory Guide 1.206, C.II.1.2.9, “Human Factors Engineering” and C.III.5, “Design

Acceptance Criteria”

3. NUREG-0711, Rev 2, “Human Factors Engineering Program Review Model,” February,

2004

4. NUREG-0800, Section 14.3.9, “Human Factors Engineering - Inspections, Tests, 

Analyses, and Acceptance Criteria”

5. NUREG-0800, Section 18, “Human Factors Engineering”

6. NUREG-1793, Supplement 2, “Final Safety Evaluation Report Related to Certification

of the AP1000 Standard Design,” 2011 

7. NUREG/CR-6393, “Integrated System Validation: Methodology and Review Criteria,”

(O'Hara et al., 1997)

8. Inspection Manual Chapter 0613, “Documenting 10 CFR Part 52 Construction and Test

Inspections” 

9. ANSI/ANS 3.5 – 1998, “Nuclear Power Plant Simulators for Use in Operator 

Training and Examination,” (American National Standards Institute, 1998)

10. ANSI/ANS 3.5 – 2009, “Nuclear Power Plant Simulators for Use in Operator 

Training and Examination,” (American National Standards Institute, 2009)

11. SECY-92-053, “Use of Design Acceptance Criteria during 10 CFR Part 52 Design 

Certification Reviews,” February 19, 2002

12. IEC 1771, “Nuclear Power Plants Main Control Rooms Verification and Validation of

Design,” (International Electro technical Commission, 1995)
Issue Date: 12/22/14 5 65001.23

65001.23-05 PROCEDURE COMPLETION

Implementation of this IP is complete when the planned sample of attributes for the 

specified appendices has been completed.

END

Appendix A: “Inspection Guide for AP1000 Human Factors Engineering Verification and 

Validation Activities”

Revision History Table for IP 65001.23
Issue Date: 12/22/14 AppA-1 65001.23

IP 65001.23 Appendix A

Inspection Guide for AP1000 Human Factors Engineering Verification and Validation

Activities

A.01 INSPECTION OBJECTIVE

To confirm by inspection that the combined license (COL) holder (licensee) has 

implemented Human Factors Engineering (HFE) verification and validation (V&V) activities 

in accordance with NRC approved implementation plans. The inspection results will be 

used to support an NRC finding as to whether the V&V activities meet the acceptance 

criteria as stated in the AP1000 HFE Inspections, Tests, Analyses and Acceptance Criteria 

(ITAAC) Design Commitments 3.2.01a, b, c and d

A.02 SAMPLE SIZE

The sample sizes are defined for each inspection activity in the following sections of this 

procedure. 

A.03 INSPECTION REQUIREMENTS AND GUIDANCE

General Guidance

The ITAAC listed above track completion of the HFE design in accordance with DAC 

guidance in SECY 092-53. Rather than verifying the as-built HFE design configuration 

conforms to the approved design (as a typical ITAAC inspection would) this inspection 

verifies the final design is derived in accordance with the implementation plans the staff 

approved as part of the design certification. The implementation plans describe the design 

process to be used and served as the basis for the staff’s safety evaluation in lieu of a final 

design. 

The Integrated System Validation (ISV), addressed in ITAAC 3.2.01.c, is a performance 

based test of the HFE design that demonstrates its effectiveness and is the primary focus of 

this inspection. Design and corrective action verification activities are also addressed in this 

inspection because ISV provides an efficient opportunity to independently assess the 

adequacy of these activities. In all cases the licensee submits a results summary report 

documenting the design results and submits that information to support ITAAC closure. The 

results of this inspection and the results summary report should be used together to support 

verification of ITAAC closure. 

The following table provides references to the documents needed to support this inspection.

APP-OCS-GEH-120 AP1000 HFE Design Verification Plan ML13270A073

APP-OCS-GEH-220 AP1000 HFE Task Support Verification Plan ML13087A355

APP-OCS-GEH-320 AP1000 HFE Integrated System Validation Plan ML13281A373

APP-OCS-GEH-420 AP1000 HFE Discrepancy Resolution Process, ML13283A164

APP-OCS-J1-002 AP1000 Human System Interface Design 

Guidelines

ML092380362
Issue Date: 12/22/14 AppA-2 65001.23

These documents are proprietary so the inspection requirements identified in the following 

sections are generalized with references to the proprietary documents where the specific 

acceptance criteria are described. This inspection procedure does not contain proprietary 

information. 

The general methodology for this inspection activity is to directly observe and inspect 

samples of activities throughout the ISV process in order to obtain reasonable assurance 

that the licensee conducts the ISV in accordance with the commitments in the 

implementation plan. It is expected that this inspection will: 

 assess the adequacy of the scope and fidelity of the ISV facility,

 verify that the test crews are representative of AP1000 operating crews,

 verify test crew and observer training has been completed,

 verify the test scenarios meet the implementation plan criteria, 

 verify pilot testing has been completed, and

 observe the ISV performance tests and licensee identification of human error 

deficiencies (HEDs). 

The ISV is the primary focus of this inspection. Its secondary purpose is to verify licensee’s 

actions on the following supporting ITAAC:

 verify Design specifications are implemented (3.2.01a),

 verify Task Analysis specifications are implemented (3.2.01b), and

 review corrective action documentation for closed deficiency reports (3.2.01d).

The composition of inspection teams for each of these elements may vary according to the 

element’s focus but collectively should include individuals with the following technical 

competencies: human factors engineering, licensed operator training, and operator 

licensing. It is recommended that the inspection team include individuals with integrated 

nuclear power plant operations experience.

PART 1: Inspection Requirements

A.03.01 ISV Facility

a. Verify that the ISV facility meets the main control room (MCR) scope, fidelity, and 

capabilities described in APP-OCS-GEH-320, Sections 2.1 through 2.3.

b. Verify significant differences between the ISV facility and AP1000 reference design 

documents are documented (APP-OCS-GEH-320, Section 2.1).

c. Verify that Remote Shutdown Workstation (RSW) simulation meets the scope, 

fidelity, and capabilities criteria stated in APP-OCS-GEH-320, Section 2.1.

d. Verify the ISV facility satisfies general requirements of Section 3 and 4 of ANSI/ANS3.5 (1998 or 2009, as applicable) "Nuclear Power Plant Simulators for Use in 

Operator Training and Examination" (APP-OCS-GEH-320, Section 2). These 
Issue Date: 12/22/14 AppA-3 65001.23

requirements generally verify the simulator accurately models the control room 

design. The control room design is reflected in design specifications and it is the 

design specification documented in APP-OCS-J1-002 that are used to provide 

specific criteria for this step in the inspection in accordance with the following table. 

The findings from this activity contribute to the staff’s conclusion on task support and 

design verification ITAAC.

Guidance: Each section listed below contains mandatory guidelines and 

recommendations. The inspection sample is drawn only from the mandatory 

guidelines and should be limited to those guidelines that can be inspected under 

static conditions. Guidelines that are better demonstrated during simulator operation 

are embedded in the acceptance criteria for each scenario and are better evaluated 

by observing how the licensee evaluates the acceptance criteria. For example: 

“R1.360: The VDU hardware and software should be reliable.” If any HSI locks-up or 

crashes occur during the scenario it should cause the scenario to fail. The licensee 

would document and resolve the failure.

APP-OCS-J1-002 Section - Title Sample size

5 – Visual Display Hardware 13 of 26 criteria with at least 1 criterion from 

each subsection

6 – System Design features 4 of 16 criteria which includes the 2 “Event Log” 

criteria. The event log output may be used in the 

evaluation of ISV results

7 – Controls and User Interaction 10 of 30 criteria

8 – Display Organization, Navigation, 

and Windows

10 of 37 criteria

9 – Information Presentation 30 of 113 criteria distributed roughly equally 

across the 11 subsections. 

11 – Color and VDU displays Criteria R1.250, 251

12 – Display of Safety Parameters Criteria R1.256, 258

13 – Computerized Alarm 

Presentation Systems

12 of 57 criteria – two from each subsection

15 – Large Screen Displays 4 of 14 criteria

19 – Controls 5 of 22 criteria

20 – Displays 5 of 29 criteria

23 – Labeling 5 of 20 criteria

26 – The Working Environment Criteria R2.172 - 177

Guidance: Inspection of the ISV facility should be conducted in advance of observation of 

the ISV performance tests to allow for resolution of any findings prior to the licensee’s 

conduct of the ISV performance tests. The objective for inspecting the ISV facility is to verify 

that the ISV facility is a valid representation of the AP1000 MCR and RSW designs (i.e., any 

differences between the ISV facility and the AP1000 MCR and RSW designs will not 

prevent, either individually or collectively, a reasonable assurance determination that 

performance observed in the ISV facility is predictive of future integrated system 

performance of an AP1000 MCR or AP1000 RSW).
Issue Date: 12/22/14 AppA-4 65001.23

A.03.02 ISV Test Design, Test Procedures, and Performance Measures

a. Verify a detailed trial assignment and trial order has been established and that it 

addresses the scheduling factors stated in APP-OCS-GEH-320, Section 3.2. 

b. Verify an ISV procedure (Scenario Package) exists for each scenario and contains

the information stated in APP-OCS-GEH-320, Section 5.2.1.

c. Verify Questionnaires are available and contain the information described in APPOCS-GEH-320, Section 6.2. 

d. Verify Observer Guides are available and contain the information described in APPOCS-GEH-320, Section 6.2. Key milestones should be identified to provide 

observers with preview and context information and to support the identification of 

errors of omission.

e. Verify acceptance criteria are specified for each scenario and address the guidance 

in APP-OCS-GEH-320, Sections 6.1 and 6.3.

Guidance: For test materials and performance measures that are scenario-specific (e.g., 

observer checklists), it is not necessary to inspect each scenario-specific instance. Rather, 

the inspector may inspect a sample of approximating 20 percent of each scenario-specific 

item. The inspector should examine the rationale for any decisions to relax acceptance 

criteria based on pilot test results to verify that the decisions are consistent with the 

objectives of the ISV.

A.03.03 Selection and Training of Test Crew Members

a. Verify that the individuals who will participate as test crew members in the ISV test 

trials meet the training and experience criteria stated in APP-OCS-GEH-320, 

Section 4.1. 

b. Verify the ISV test scenarios differ from the scenarios used in crew training (e.g., the 

initial plant conditions or the timing, magnitude, or combination of failures differ from 

those of the training scenarios).

A.03.04 ISV Scenario Test Set 

a. Verify that all operational conditions identified in the Operational Condition sample 

(APP-OCS-GEH-320, Section 5.1.1) are addressed within the test scenarios.

b. Verify that the test scenarios include complications as stated in APP-OCS-GEH-320, 

Section 5.1.3, and that these complications achieve the goals outlined in this section. 

Guidance: These activities may be conducted as an in-office inspection of

documentation as part of preparation for an on-site inspection of the ISV facility or during 

the onsite inspection.
Issue Date: 12/22/14 AppA-5 65001.23

A.03.05 Pilot Testing

a. Verify pilot testing was completed and confirmed the items listed in APP-OCS-GEH320, Section 3.3. Verify deficiencies were documented and resolved. 

A.03.06 ISV Performance Tests

a. Verify a minimum of four test crews participate in the test trials and the crews are 

used to accomplish the objectives listed in APP-OCS-GEH-320, Section 4.1.2 (last 

paragraph).

b. Verify the observation teams conform to the guidance in APP-OCS-GEH-320, 

Section 4.2.

c. Verify the ISV staff conforms to the guidance in APP-OCS-GEH-320, Section 4.3.

d. Verify the ISV coordinator produces a trial log for each trial and that the trial log 

conforms to APP-OCS-GEH-320, Section 5.2.4 (last paragraph). 

e. Through inspector observation of a sample of 8 or more ISV test trials, verify the 

following:

1. Test personnel follow the test protocol.

2. Test crews respond to the test scenarios similarly to how a crew at an operating 

plant would respond. No scenario is performed twice by a single crew. 

3. Observers provide a critical review and complete observation checklists 

completely and accurately.

4. Debriefings are conducted at the end of each trial and week of testing.

5. Workload rating scales are administered.

6. Questionnaires are administered.

7. Plant performance recording is implemented and provides a time-stamped record 

of plant behavior and operating performance over the course of each observed 

scenario.

8. Video and audio recordings are implemented and capture the operators’ primary 

and secondary task inputs.

9. Any problems with implementation of the test protocol or data collection are 

identified and resolved.

10. The data technician evaluates trial results daily. 

Guidance: The inspector should select a sample of ISV test trials that allow 

observation of multiple test crews and data collection personnel. The sample should 

also include ISV test scenarios that represent a range of operational conditions and 

require operator interaction with a range of personnel, procedures, interfaces, and 

plant systems. Careful consideration should be given to the number and 

competencies of the inspectors conducting the observations so as to ensure 

adequate observation of the performance of each member of the test crew and to 

assess appropriate licensee identification and prioritization of any HEDs. The 

inspectors should independently apply the observer checklists for performance test 

trials included in the inspection sample.

f. Trial replications are performed in accordance with APP-OCS-GEH-320, Section 3.1

Based on the above activities verify the following objectives were met:
Issue Date: 12/22/14 AppA-6 65001.23

1. The role of plant personnel, i.e., that the allocation of functions to human and 

automatic aspects of the integrated system are appropriate and takes advantage 

of human strengths and avoid allocating functions that would be negatively 

affected by human limitations.

2. Shift staffing, assignment of tasks to crew members and crew coordination (both 

within the control room as well as between the control room and local control 

stations and support centers) is acceptable. This should include validation of the 

nominal shift levels, minimal shift levels, and shift turnover.

3. For each human function, the design provides adequate alerting, information, 

control, and feedback capability for human functions to be performed under 

normal plant evolutions, transients, design basis accidents, and selected risksignificant events that are beyond design basis.

4. Specific personnel tasks can be accomplished within the time and performance 

criteria, with a high degree of operating crew situation awareness, and within 

acceptable workload levels that provide a balance between vigilance and 

operator burden. 

5. The operator interfaces minimize operator error and provide for error detection 

and recovery capability when errors occur.

6. The functional requirements are met for the major HSI features, e.g., group-view 

display, alarm system, safety parameter display system (SPDS) function, general 

display system, procedures, controls, communication systems, and emergency 

operating procedure (EOP)-related local control stations.

7. The crew can make effective transitions between the HSI features in the 

accomplishment of their tasks and that interface management tasks such as 

display configuration and navigation are not a distraction or undue burden.

8. The integrated system performance is tolerant of failures of individual HSI 

features.

9. Aspects of the integrated system (including staffing, communications, and 

training) that may negatively impact integrated system performance are 

identified.

Guidance: This list constitutes the ISV objectives. The sample of test trials may not be 

sufficiently large to reach a conclusion on all the objectives. If this is the case,

document where information was insufficient.

A.03.07 Processing of Results and Resolving HEDs

a. Verify that any observed test trials not meeting pass/fail acceptance criteria are 

identified and documented in a priority 1 deficiency report.

b. Verify that any observed test trials not meeting diagnostic acceptance criteria are 

identified in a deficiency report of the proper priority in accordance with APP-OCSGEH-420, Section 2.2.

c. Verify all deficiency reports are tracked in the HFE Tracking System.

d. The findings from this activity contribute to the staff’s conclusion on the discrepancy 

resolution ITAAC. Through a sample of 10-20 closed deficiency reports, verify the 

following:
Issue Date: 12/22/14 AppA-7 65001.23

1. Priority assignment is appropriate. (APP-OCS-GEH-420, Section 2.2)

2. Trend codes are appropriate. (APP-OCS-GEH-420, Section 2.3)

3. Verify the resolution appropriately addresses the problem. If a deficiency is 

justified rather than resolved, verify the justification provides an acceptable 

basis for accepting the deficiency. 

PART 2: Inspection Requirements

Part 2 of this inspection is dependent on the compilation and analysis of data from the test 

trials which will not be available until the test trials are completed. If interim results are 

available the inspection team completing Part 1 should verify these results are consistent 

with the inspection guidance below. Otherwise, Part 2 of this inspection is completed as 

part of ITAAC closure.

A.03.07 Data Analysis and Interpretation

a. By reviewing deficiency reports identifying crosscutting and/or generic issues, verify 

that the analysis and interpretation of test results conforms to APP-OCS-GEH-320, 

Section 7.2

b. Verify retest requirements have been applied in accordance with direction in

accordance with APP-OCS-GEH-320, Section 7.3 and APP-OCS-GEH-420, 

Section 2.8.

REFERENCES

1. APP-OCS-GEH-320, “AP1000 Human Factors Engineering Integrated System 

Validation Plan,” Westinghouse Electric Company LLC.

2. APP-OCS-GEH-321, “AP1000 Human Factors Engineering Integrated System 

Validation Scenario Information,” Westinghouse Electric Company LLC.

3. ANSI/ANS 3.5 – 1998: Nuclear Power Plant Simulators for Use in Operator Training 

and Examination (American National Standards Institute, 1998)

4. ANSI/ANS 3.5 – 2009: Nuclear Power Plant Simulators for Use in Operator Training 

and Examination (American National Standards Institute, 2009)

5. APP-OCS-GEH-420, “AP1000 Human Engineering Discrepancy Resolution 

Process,” Westinghouse Electric Company LLC.

6. APP-OCS-J1-002, “AP1000 Human System Interface Design Guidelines,” 

Westinghouse Electric Company LLC. 
Issue Date: 12/22/14 Att1-1 65001.23

Attachment 1 - Revision History Table for IP 65001.23 – Appendix 1

INSPECTION OF HUMAN FACTORS ENGINEERING INTEGRATED SYSTEM VALIDATION ITAAC

Commitment 

Tracking 

Number

Accession Number

Issue Date

Change Notice

Description of Change Description of 

Training 

Required 

and Completion 

Date

Comment and 

Feedback Resolution 

Accession Number

(Pre-Decisional, NonPublic)

ML12191A252

08/30/12

CN 12-019

IP 65001.23: Initial Issuance - To confirm by 

inspection that the combined license (COL) holder 

(licensee) has implemented a Human Factors

Engineering (HFE) integrated system validation 

(ISV) for the main control room (MCR) and remote

shutdown workstation (RSW) designs in accordance 

with the NRC approved ISV implementation plan. 

The inspection will be used to support an NRC

finding as to whether the ISV implementation and 

results meet the acceptance criteria as stated in the 

HFE ISV Inspections, Tests, Analyses and

Acceptance Criteria (ITAAC).

N/A ML120930581

N/A ML12195A145

08/30/12

CN 12-019

IP 65001.23 App A: Initial Issuance - To confirm by 

inspection that the combined license (COL) holder 

(licensee) has implemented a Human Factors Engineering 

(HFE) integrated system validation (ISV) for the main 

control room (MCR) and remote shutdown workstation 

(RSW) designs in accordance with the NRC approved ISV 

implementation plan. The inspection will be used to 

support an NRC finding as to whether the ISV 

implementation and results meet the acceptance criteria 

as stated in the HFE ISV Inspections, Tests, Analyses and 

Acceptance Criteria (ITAAC).

N/A ML120930581
Issue Date: 12/22/14 Att1-2 65001.23

Commitment 

Tracking 

Number

Accession Number

Issue Date

Change Notice

Description of Change Description of 

Training 

Required 

and Completion 

Date

Comment and 

Feedback Resolution 

Accession Number

(Pre-Decisional, NonPublic)

ML13002A2710

01/03/13

CN 13-001

IP 65001.23: Revised to include a reference to

Appendix 1.

N/A N/A

N/A ML14279A071

12/22/14

CN 14-031

IP 65001.23 and IP 65001.23 Appendix A have been 

revised to combine IP 65001.23 with IP 65001.23 

Appendix A. Proprietary information was removed from 

Appendix A, and all V&V inspection activities were 

consolidated into one inspection which addressed all four 

targeted HFE ITAAC. Appendix A was also updated to 

reflect changes based on LAR 13-001.

N/A ML14279A070