ML19296C606
| ML19296C606 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | North Anna  |
| Issue date: | 02/25/1980 |
| From: | Brown S VIRGINIA POWER (VIRGINIA ELECTRIC & POWER CO.) |
| To: | Harold Denton, Parr O Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| 152, NUDOCS 8002260696 | |
| Download: ML19296C606 (3) | |
Text
.
VlwGINI A E L E CT RIC AND PO mE R CCud AN Y. 41CHMONO. VIRGINI A 23261 February 25, 1980 Mr. Harold R. Denton, Director Serial No.152 Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation PSE&C/GLP:adw:mc Attn:
Mr. O. D. Parr, Chief Light Water Reactors Branch No. 3 Docket No. 50-339 Division of Project Management U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C.
20555
Dear Mr. Denton:
CONTROL ROOM EVALUATION NORTH ANNA UNIT 2 During the week of February 18-22, everal members of Vepco's Operations and Engineering Departments performed a brief review of the North Anna Unit 2 Control Room.
The documents which were used for guidance in performing the evaluation were the EPRI study 1118 and the Essex report Nureg CR-1270.
The basic criteria against which various aspects of the control room were judged were those used by Essex at Three Mile Island, as presented in their report.
Further assistance in this effort was provided by Mr. C. L. Werner, Westing-house WNTD, who was present during the NRC/Essex review of the Sequoyah Power Station Control Room.
It is most appropriate at this point that the scope of the evaluation be ex-plained. The basic undertaking was to look at the areas of concern which seem to be the most repetitive as far as being lacking in good Human Factors Design.
Therefore, no extensive time and motion studies were undertaken, nor was any time spent at the simulator.
To summarize, it was a hardware review and evaluation only.
The following is an outline of the items which were identified as needing attention either in the short term or the long term. The short term action items are those which were felt to be practical to accomplish in less than six months with a minimum of negative operator training.
Therefore, each item listed will have the notation S.T. (Short Term) or L. T. (Long Term) preceeding it.
Q 8002260
Mr. Harold R. Denton 2
A.
Alarm Systems
~1.
Prioritization:
(L T.) a.
By Color - Alarms at North Anna are color coded; hoever, some improvement is needed in organization and color contrast.
(L.T.) b.
By Sound - North Anna alarm system does not differentiate alarms by distinctive sounds.
-2.
Or (L T.) a.ganization:
Reevaluate grouping of alarms for better clarity and priori ty.
B.
Displays
-1.
Readability:
(S T.) a.
Highlite Normal Operating Band and "Out of Limits" on analog meters.
(S.T.) b.
Improve labeling - refurbish or relabel indicators.
(S.T.) c.
Show lines of demarcation and hiearchial labeling, where practical, around groups of related indications in a system.
(S.f.) d.
Improve scaling on meters and charts, and eliminate the need to perform computation - 20X10, 2X100, etc.
(L.T.) e.
Reduce the distance between the operator and the device to be monitored, or replace the device with one more appropriate for the existing distance.
C.
Operating Controls
-1.
Inadvertent Operation:
(S T.) a.
Several switches need protective covers due to the type and location of the switch.
2.
Labeling and Grouping:
(S J.) a.
Switch labels need to be refurbished or restructured; contrast and clarity need to be improved.
(S.T.) b.
Show lines of demarcation by system where practical.
Mr. Harold R. Denton 3
(L.T.)c.
Remove Controls that:
1.
Are not being used 2.
Are of such a priority that they should b'e located on an auxiliary panel versus on the Main Control Board.
D.
Communications 1.
Emergency Dress:
(S.T.) a.
Improve communication between personnel wearing Emergency Breathing Apparatus.
(S.T.) b.
Insure that warning signals can be seen or heard in high noise environments while wearing emergency clothira, 2.
General -
(UT.)a.
Insure that good coranunications exist in all plant areas.
Following the control roc.n evaluation considerable discussion took place con-cerning the overall considerations that must be evaluated for each and every possible change that might be contemplated at this time or in the near future.
We should not ignore the experience and expertise that the near term 0.L. operators have obtained in their training and operation of North Anna Unit 1 from startup testing through commercial operation.
For this reason the items which have the short term notation only enhance the existing control room as it is presently configured; we do not want to move anything without a more gradual phasing-in approach, and we do not in-tend to do so at this time.
Vepco has established a Task Group which is responsible for the overall effort of meshing the long tem control room evaluation with TMI Lessons Learned, Technical Support Center Design, Regulatory Guide 1.97 requirements, and with our own concern for general plant improvements.
f' Y
/
./
j, Ui15m C. Brown, Jr.
Seni'or Vice President Power Station Engineering and Construction