ML19340B654
| ML19340B654 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | LaSalle  |
| Issue date: | 10/30/1980 |
| From: | Tedesco R Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Abel J COMMONWEALTH EDISON CO. |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8011110571 | |
| Download: ML19340B654 (32) | |
Text
E'UOM DBCdH M WY oist 48m14 _
^
(03cket Files 60-3[
a LS*1 Rdg NRR Rdg PDR L/PUR OCT 3 01980 DEisenhut w/o enclosure RPurple w/o enclosure RTedesco w/o enclosure JYoungblood w/o enclosure ABournia Mr. J. S. Abel MRushbrook Of rector of Nuclear Licensing SHanauer w/o enclosure Cannonwealth Edison Company VMoore w/o enclosure Post Office Box 767 Chicago Illinois 60690 RWFreelule
Dear Mr. Abei:
SUBJECT:
CONTRCL R001 DESIGN REVIEW REPORT, LA SALLE COUNTY STATION, UNIT NO. 1 Enclosed is our Human Factors Engineering Control Review report for La Salle County Station, Unit No.1 as a result of the site visit on the week of September 15, 1980. A meeting has been set for Noventer 6,1980, and the purpose of the meeting will be to discuss the content of this report.
Therefore, we are transmitting this report for your review and will cbtain your coments at this meeting.
Sincerely, y.=:c v -~.'. :-
?.or. L. -
R. L. Tedesco, Assistant Director for Licensing Division of Licensing Enclosure.
D D
- D 3
TI o
o S b.
\\y a
l emCed01,;L3.il..O.. 0LlL5V.1.J..
... 0LJ %1.
suaNauck.A8ourniaQsSJYouncylocd
, j RLied so carsk.10j:/480-
-(
!- 80 10/y/80 QUS.GOVEANMENT9 NTING CFF3CE.1979-289 369 NZC FC AM 318 (9 76) N ACM C240 18~011110'57 /4 g
Mr. J. S Abel Director of Nuclear Licensing Commonwealth Edison Company Post Office Box 767 Chicago, Illinois 60690 ces:
Mr. William Xortier Mr. Edward R. Crass Atomic Pcwer Distribution Nuclear Safeguards and Licensing Division Westinghouse Electric Corporation Sargent & Lundy Engineers P. O. Box 355 55 East Monroe Street Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15230 Chicago, Illinois 60603 Paul M. Murphy, Esq.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission, gion III Isham, Lincoln & Beal'e Office of Inspection and Enfor 4 ment One First National Plaza 799 Roosevelt Road 42nd Floor Glen Ellyn, Illinoi; 60137 Chicago, Illinois 60603 Myron Cherry, Esq.
Mrs. Phillip B. Johnson Cherry, Flynn and.<anter 1907 Stratford Lane 1 IBM Plaza, Suite 4501
.Rockford, Illinois 61137 Chicago, Illinois 60611 Ms. Julianne Mahler Marshall E. Miller, Esq., Chairman Center for Governmental Studies Atomic Safety and Licensing Northern Illinois University
- Board' Panel DeKalb, Illinois 60115 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C.
20555 C. Allen Bock, Esq.
P. O. Box 3a2 Or. A. Dixon Callihan Urbanan, Illinois 61820 Union Carbide Corporation P. O. Box Y Thomas J. Gordon, Esq.
Oak Ridge, Tennessee 37320 I
Waaler, Evans & Gordon 2S03 S. Neil Dr. Richard F. Cole Champaign, Illinois 61820 Atomic Safety and Licensing.
Board Panel Ms. Bridget Little Rorem U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Appleseed Coordinator Washington, D. C.
20555 117 North Linden Street Essex, Illinois 60935 Kenneth F. Levin, Esq.
Beatty, Levin, Holland, Basofin & Sarsany 11 South LaSalle Street Suite 2200 Chicago, Illinois 60603
/
HUMAN FACTORS ENGINEERING CONTROL ROCM REVIEW LASALLE CCUNTY STATION UNIT 1 A numan factors engineering cesign review of the Ccamenwealth Edison Compar.y LaSalle County Station Unit 1 coritrol rocm was conducted during the week of Septemoer 15-19, 1930. The review was conducted by the Human Factors Engineering Branch, Division of Human Factors Safety.
The review team was assisted by human factors Consultants H. E. Price of SioTecnnalogy, Inc., and V. Petoldt, National Bureau of Standards.
~
The objective of this review was to identify those control room design factors which could contribuce to or induce operator error under abnormal or emergency operating conditions. This involved observations of (1) control roco design, layout and 'inctional operation; and (2) control / display use in selected emergency oper. ting procedures under simulated emergency conditions.
The staff also reviewed and commented on the preliminary human factors assess-ment review prepared by the Commonwealth Edison Company in comoliance with Task 1.0.1 of NUREG-0660, the NRC Action Plan.
The document reviewed by the staff was a draft version of this assessment, dated September 15, 1980.
r A.
STAFF CBSERVATICNS
?
The following section summarizes the staff's observations of control room design and layout, and of the control room operator interfaces with that environment. Observed design deficiencies were given a rating based on tne s
possible consequences of the operator error or errors that could be caused by that particular deficiency.
The staff's ratings are as follows:
i Category 1:
Major concern for potential operator errors that could affect plant safety.
Category 2:
Moderate concern for potential operator errors that could affect plant safety.
Categcry 3:
Minor ccncern for potential caerator errors t1at should not affect' plant safety.
2-The staff was unable to cceplete scce reviews, where major design accifica:icns of c:ntrol rocn panels were inccmplete, er where licensee-identified enhancecent of panels or consoles had not been accerplished.
In general, the staff nas r'ted these items as Categcry 1 until they are cccoleted and reviewec.
In general, the staff's selection of design deficiency categories in the following analysis has attempted to factor in the cumulative effects of stress, fatigue, increased sounc levels, etc., that could accompany an emergency s i tuati on.
1.
Annunciators and Alarms a.
Positive Factors (1) "91ack Panel" concept. Annunciator tiles will not be usec as indicators.
i (2) Annunciator response setuence.
Silence while retaining flashing tile; acknowledge and retain illuminated tile; sicw flash and audio signal for cleared alarms; test capability.
(3) Annunciators must be ackncwledged at their respective panel locations.
l l
(4) "First cut" capability.
(5) Reflash capacility.
(Not demonstrated, however.
See item A.1.b(10).)
(5) Lamp test capability.
(7) Separated audio signals, both tone and location.
(However, improvement is possible.
See item A.1.b(7).)
b.
Desica Deficienctes (1) Scme annunciator tiles are not located above the affected system or control / display.
Category (3) i
3-(2) Poor organization of annunciator tiles within panels.
Category (2)
(3) Lack of distinction betsen serious alarms with direct piant s,fety implication and alarms not having a direct ef fect on piant'sr..ty.
Category (1)
(4) Tile readability is impaired by use of too many worcs and small character si:e and weignt.
Category (2)
(5) Inconsistent arrangement of annunciator response controls.
Horizontal rows, vertical rows, 2 x 2 square arrangement.
Category (3)
(6) Panel 1?M03J (Feedwater and Condensate) does not have a set of annunciator response controls. Alarms on these two 5 x 12 annunciator panels must be acknowledged at adjacent Panel I?M02J (Turbine Control). Category (2)
(7) Aucible alarms are not s;:ecific by panel. Although general directional cueing (lef t, right, front, back) is presented to
~
an operator stationed at the reactor control panel, additional i
j discreet panel alarms would speed up location of alarms and
[
avoid the possibility of overlooking alarmed tiles when a multiple-alarms condition exists.
Example:
only one audible alarm for all of panel 1H13P501 plus panel 1HDF502, which two panels have a total of three annunciator controls two for P501 and one for PG02. Category (2)
(S) Audible signals vary in intensity and should ba adjusted to result in equal detection levels for all alarms.
Category (1)
(9) Intensity / frequency comoination for the reactor control panel
~
(
(lH13P503) alarm could render this alarm undetectable under stress /high ambient noise level conditions to operators with moderate hearing deficiencies.
Category (1)
TN
_4 (10) Annunciator tile reflash cacability not demonstrated.
Category-(1) until evaluated.
2.
Controls a.
Positive Factors (1) Controls are generally well laid out and are within easy reacn of most operators.
(2) Pump, valve, motor and breaker multiple position controls follow the conventional use of rignt-center-left positions.
(3) Level and flow controllers follow design convention.
Up for high/ increase, down for low / decrease.
(4) Switches have adequate displacement for indication of position
~
and have adequate resistance to motion.
b.
Desica Deficiencies (1) Some J-handle controls (e.g., IPM03J Feedwater and Condensate Panel) are spaced too close to each other.,The crowding can lead to excessive operator search time for specific controls and accidental actuation of adjacent controls. Category (2)
[
(2) J-nandle controls are. located too close to benchboard edges.
r Without protection (e.g., a guardrail), there is a high potential I
for accidental actuation of these controls.
Category (1) r (3) J-hancles obscure some control labels. Category (2)
(4) The Feedwater Turbine speed changer control' coves counterclockwise to increase speed (violation of design convention).
Category (2) i e
1
4
, (5) Rod insert and withdraw pushoutton resistance-to motion is great enough t0 require use of a temporary operator 3id to avoid fatigue during startup or snutdcwn normal operation.
Category (3)
(6) There is no consistent guide or plan for coding controls.
Icentical J-hancies are used for switches, pumos, shutoff valves, and throttling valves.
This can result in excessive operator search time or selection of the wrong control.
Category.(1)
(7) Covers on centrol indicator lights are interchangeable.
Category (2)
(8) Lamp replacement for indicator lignts is difficult.
Tools for
~
lamp replacement are not availaa'le in the control room.
Category (2)
(S) No positive neans to deternine indicater lignt failbre er de-gradation.
Indicator. linnts are single filacent. Cateocry (1) f (10) Pushoutton trip switches ce not provide a posi..ve armed / disarmed indication at the switch location. Category (2) t 3.
Displays a.
Positive Factors (1) Visual displays are generally adequate with respect to meaning and interpretation, viewing distance and lccation, legibility, scale design, illumination and luminance contrast.
P (2) The " green board" c ncept is good.
(3) Use of bar and circle indicators for valve positions minimi:es confusion as to valve conditions.
4 1
I 6-b.
Desicn Deficiencies
'(1) Vertical inoicators located directly oelow annunciator panels are aoout.78 inches above floor level, and are dif ficult to reac at this heignt.
There is some glare on these indicators at this time, and this problem may become more severe as acditional workspace lignting is provided.
Category (2)
(2) There are strings of more than 5 meters, wnich interferes with prompt identification of specific indicators.
Category (3)
~
(3) Normal operating ranges or setpoints are not markea on scales.
Category (1) l (4) Meter failure is not always'aoparent.
Category (1)
(5) The large array of meters on the electrical panel (lFM01J) has no apparent organization.
Category (2)
(6) There are some hand-made scales in the. control room: Category (1) i 1
j _
(7) Positive association of some legend lights Eith their associatec l a$els.
is not readily apparent. Category (2) i (8) Status light mirror-imaging on the Reactor Control panel (lH13P503) is not good human engineering practice.
Category (3)
(9) Luminance contrast for some blue indicator lights is low.
Lamps are too dim.
Category (2)
(10) Backlighted indicatorss are not always readable when not illuminated.
This is part.cularly true for the blue indicators (e.g., " live bus" on IPM01J). and some red and green indicators (e.g., barometric condenser pump on 1H13P501). Category (2)
~'
4.
Control /Disolay Relationsnics a,
. Positive Factors 4
(1) Use of mimics enhances control / display relationships.
(2) Controls and displays are generally well organi:ed on a system-by-system basis.
(3) Functional and sequential arrangement of controis and displays is generally good.
D.
Design Deficiencies (1). ADS System and Safety Relief Valves:
All valve indications on-panel 1H13P601 are demand position and do not provide positive indication of valve status.
Operators must leave the immediate control room area and note SRV cutlet temperatures on a recorder 1
(on panel 1H13P614) to identify / confirm open 53Vs.
This recorder requires about 4 minutes to cycle through all recorder poi'tions (24 positions, 19 SRVs).
The control room annunciator mus. ce reset from 1H13PS14. Annunciator tile is not directly over the valvt controls on 1H13P601.
Category (1)
't (2) Outboard Isolation Valves, Div. I: Main Steam Line meter groups are labeled ABCO.
The mimic lines relating to these v
valves are labeled AEJN'.
This creatas potential for operator confusion. Category (2)
(3) Isolation valve pressure displays are not positively identified (by labels)-as inboard or outboard.
Category.(2)
-(4) High Pressure Core Spray System, Div. I: The HPCS pump flow anc pressure displays are labeled " pump." Positive identification suggests that they be labeled HPCS pump.
Category (2)
V
_g.
(5) HPCS System, Div. II: The HPC3 motor ammeter is located in the array of meters for the diesel generator en the HPCS System Div. I Panel. Association of this display with the pump centrol (on the Div. II panel) should be more obvious.
Category (1).
(6) RHR System, Loop B Oiv. II:
(a) Pump B meters' are arranged pressure-flow-amps, while pumo A meters are arranged aces-ficw pressure. A pctential for operator confusion is caused by this arrangement.
i Category (2)
(b) Penetration Pressuri:ation 2/C Duct and 3/C Recm Temperature meters are physically side-by-side but have slightly different scales (0-250* F and 0-300 F).
Temeerature comparisons would be facilitated if both scales were identical. Category (2)
(c) Some labels are partially obscured by the indicator lights
' located at the base of the vertical portion of 1H13P601 (e.g.,
Contair. ment Spray, RHR injection).
Category (2)
(d) White indicator lights are used on some valves to incicate a not-normal condition (e.g., containment spray and RHR injection). However, white indicator lights are used to indicate normal conditions on other compenents (e.g.,
Turbine Oil Lift Pump).
Category (2)
(7) LPCS System, Div. I:
LPCS pe== cooler valve (a) is not labeled, (b) can be mistakenly considered as part of the LPCS mimic.
Category (1).
(3)--RCIC Div. I: Water leg pumo is not included in the mimic.
Category (3)
(9) Containment isola; ion and Leak Detection:
Panel and console (1PM13J and 16J) appear generally satisfactory, but major l
l l
l
. modifications new underway prevent any findings at this time.
Further assessment, including review of ccecleted panels, is necessary.
Category (1) until completten of assessment.
(10) Stancby Gas Treatment:
(a) This panel (1PM07J) is generally mirror-imaged with the integral Unit 2 canel (2FM07J).
Category (3)
(b) Indicator lens caos are missing.
Category ('.)
(c) Strip chart recorders are not labeled.
Incorrecc chart paper may be installed.
Category (1).
(d) Panel mimic-is inccmplete.
Category (2)
(e) Centrol/ Annunciator labels are inconsistent.
(Demister/
Moisture Separator).
Category (2)
(f) Controls are set up to require manual (ccerator) initiation of the deluge system, but there are no direct alarms or displays to oirect the operator to take this action.
Category (1)
(11) Feedwater and Condensate Panel 1PM03J:
(a) Other than use of mimics (which were consicered goed operator aids), other coding methods (c0 lor, demarcation) to enhance system / subsystem /gr0up/ subgroup discrimination were not used to any great extent.
Category (3)
(b) The relationship between similar control / display components and layouts of unrelated groups and subgroups may introduce confusion or hesitation in identifying and selecting particular controls or in relating controls to their associated displays.
Category (2)
(c) Nonrelated groups of controls and displays are located too close to each other.
This affected the control / display relationship of specific canel groups. Category (2)
(d) location of valve position indicaters is suen that there is more space between a given control's indicators than i
i
___--g-
~
there is betveen the left/right indicators of adjacent 2
controls.
This problem exis'ts on several panels (e.g.,
1PM02J).
Category (2)
(e) The turbine speed control turns counter:1cckwise to increase speed. The related dial indicator rotates clockwise to l
show increased speed. Category (2)
(f) Motor-driven feecwater pump C control is located to the left of controls for turbine-driven pumps A and 3.
Category (2) 4 (12) Auxillcry Systems Panel / Console IPM09J/10J (a) Control /disolay relationships can be improved by relocation of displays (e.g., interchange the station air comoressor and turbine building CCW pump meters).
Category (3)
(b) Other than limited use of mimics, littla use is made of other coding techniques (color, demarcation) to enhance discrimination of systems, subsystems, etc.
There are many subsystems on this panel / console, and some form of demarcation is needed. Category (3)
~
(c) Console-to panel control / display arrangement layouts could 1
4 be improved to minimize control selection errors.
Category (3) l, (13) Electrical Control Panel IPM01J (a) Poor control /cisplay relationships. There are many meters on this panel, with no significant ~ demarcation or other coding to relate them to their associated controls.
Category (3).
(b) Some annunciator tiles acpear inacpropriate for this panei (e.g., Misc. Auto Control System Power Failure).
Category (3)
(c) Dial indicators located above related controis are not installed in tne same sequence as the controls.
Category (3) n
(14) Turbine Control Panel - IMP 02J (a) Physical relationsnips between controls, displays, and annunciaters are deficient.
Examples include:
Emergency bearing oil pump - Annucciator on panel A, control located beneath panel B.
Category (3)
=
Feedwater Pump Turbine Vibration - Annunciator on e
Panel A of IPM02J, associated strip cnart recorder located below and to right of this panel, associated control located on left side of IPM03J.
Category (3) 5 (b) Labeling errors Main sta to MSR 1A - 2d stage shutoff should be 2d stage drain.
Category (2)
Stm Packing - El and E2 designations reversed.
Category (2)
(c) Control / Display Grouping Main Stop Valve -2 is located in a string of other valves:
IV-1, MSV-2, IV-2, IV-3., Category (2)
Turbine Bearing Lift Pump status indicators are 3
off-on-autotrip-normal, while most other acplications are off-autotrip-on.
Category (3)
(d) Panel incluces instrumentation (e.g., Turbine Vibration Phase Selector) not used by control room operators.
Category (3)
(15) Reactor Water Cleanoo and Recirculation Panei - 1H13PS02 I
(a) Filter Cemineralizer status light secuence (on benchboard) does not matcn panel indicator sequence on vertical panel.
Category (3)
(b) RWCU and Recirc graphics (on CRT display) do not coincide with control boaro mimics.
Category (3)
J v
.. h (c)
Jet pump ficw inaicators for Loops A and 3 are intermixed.
Category (2)
(d) Labels are missing on some voltage and current meters.
Categorj (1)
(16) Reactor Control Panel - 1H13P603 (a) Status indicators (Train A, Train 3) are mirror imaged.
However, placement and overall board arrangement is such c
that operator canfusica is pr baciy not expected.
2 Category (3)
(b) location of some displays (e.g., Rod Sequence Control) appears to require unnecessary operator motion to read the display. Category (3)
(c) SRM bypass controls and indicators are not consistent.
Category (3)>
(d) Heat Flux Detector vertical sequence is not consistent with standarc dasign convention.
Category (3)
(e) Range Switch A label is missing.
Category (1)
(;f) Color coding of IRM controis (A, black, 3,' red) does not appear to be needed, and may overemphasize the importance of train 3.
Category (2)
(17) HVAC Console and Panel - 1PM05J/06J (a) Control / Display' relationships are unclear.
The principal HVAC systems controlled and monitored frem this workstation (control room, reactor building, turbine building, offgas building) are not segregated or otherwise well-distinguished as systems.
Centrol associated with particular displays i
are not always readily apparent.
Category (1)
(b) Subsystem controls / displays are nct identified by labels, demarcation, or other coding metheds for rapid and accurate operator access.
Categorf (1) s
~ _.
~
. t (c) A & 9 trains of the containment builcing controls located on panel IPM06J are not grouped tcgether (they'are located at opposite ends of the panel) and are arranged as mirror i= cages. Category (2) 5.
Labels a.
Positive Factors (1) The general approach to labeling is good.
A hierarchial scheme.
is used which identifies areas of the main control.bcards, and proceeds through major systems, subsystems, scme smaller groups, and individual components.
~
(2) Labeling is generally black-on-white, readable from normal viewing distances, and generally consistently located.
(3) Labeling is reasonably descriptive, and uses standard abbreviations and descriptions.
b.
Desion Oeficiencies (1) System or major funct. ion labels should be more readily detected /
located on the main panels'(e.g., use larger lettering).
Category (2)
(2) Temporary labels are in use thicughout the control room, and I
should be replaced with permanent labels.
Category (1) 4 (3) Annunciator panel designations for panel 1H13P601 proceed from A to 0, then F, then E.
Category (2)
I (4) Labeling of Auxiliary Systems incicator lights in 10 x 11 matrix could be improved. Matrix is too crowded and labeling is repetitious. Category (2)
_(5) Lacels having wnita legends on red backgrounds are very difficult to read and should be replaced with black legenos on nite backgrouncs.
Category (1)
(6) Note:
Specific labeling ciscrepancies identified in the draft 4
LaSalle Preliminary Assessment of 5 Septemcer 1980 (items Id, 2-5 and 31, 1-6)'were observed and the proposed changes appear to be necessary and adecuate.
Category (1) 6.
Recorders a.
positive Factors (1) Recorders are provided for most essential plant systems.
4 (2) Most recorders were well labeled as to the parameters recorded, and scales were readable from reasonacle distances.
~
(3) Most recorders were located directly above or adjacent to' the controls for.that system.
b.
Design Deficiencies (1) Note:
Recorcers were not operating.
An assessment of recorder.
~
operability / maintenance (inking, paper supplies, general recorder performance) could not be made. Category (1) until assessed.
(2) Color selection for dual pen recorders is inconsistent. Althougn 4
n red and blue have been selected for pen colors, there is no consistent selection of color for the upper / lower pens.
Potential problems in parameter identification, chart maintenance (inking).
Category (2)
_(3) Pen positions and labels on dual pen recorders are-inconsistent.
Upper label eften corresponds to lower pen.
Category (2) i w
i 4
f
. l
-(4) Pen ' color. does not always match indicated label color (e.g.,
condenser normal makeup pen colcr'was red, label indicated black; condenser emergency makeuo pen color was clue, latel indicated red). Category (1)
(5) Scme dual pen recorcers had no labels indicating which pen recorded what function.
(Panel 1PM07J) Category (1).
1 (6) Recorder scales and chart paper scales-do not always correscond.
Category (1)
(7) Several dual pen recorders used dual-scale chart paper to acc mmodate the dissimilar pen scales.
Potential Operator confusion in matching ink (or pen) colces to sequential-sections of chart paper with different scales could lead to erronecus
~
conclusions.
Categcry (2)
(3) Th(
-.mperature recorder (Panel 1H13PS14) chan.. : inc. c ar shows portions of two channels (SRVs) simultaneously.
It is possible to be confused as to which channel is being displayed.
Category (2) 7.
Werkscace. Laycut and Environment t
a.
Positive Factors (1) Control Room layout is goed. No significant problems with access to controls, physical or visual obstructions, panel dimensions, reach envelopes, or traffic patterns.
Control room access is adequately controlled.
. (2) In general, the use of color bas been well considered.and consistently carried cut.
(3) Gcoc use of functional mimics.
Good mimic techniques include varying line widths, calor-coded flow caths, directional arrows, anc. origin /destinatien labels.
1
=
y e
am-f e'
,--y%>-
m 4-w
'y r--
1 (4) Approach to demarcation (where used) is good.
(5) Background sound level is acceptably 10w.
(6) Adecuate ccmmunication systems are availacle to the coerator.
A well-laid-out communication system has been provided at the i
remote shutdown panel.
Provisions have been made for communica-tions centrol during emergency conditions.
j b.
Desion Deficiencies (1) Layout and Workspace (a) Shift sucervisor's office is physically and visually remote fecm the control rocm.
Supervisory access to the centrol room under emergency conditions (i.e., centrol rocm isolation) recuires additional ocerational procedures to gain access to the control room.
Supervisor's office does not have the same degree of environmental protection as the control r:cm. Category (2)
(b) Potential parallax problems exist in reading vertical meters located mors than 6 f t frcm the floor (e.g.,
panels 1H13P501, 1H13P503).
Category (')
3 (c) Minimal clearance (27 inches) between high cesk and computer console creates operator traffic pecblems.
Category (3)
(c) Large numbers of manuals, procedures, etc., stored at center desk.
Identification and selection of emergency operating procedures is difficult.
Category (1)
(e) Specific E0Ps within a particular precedure are difficult to access.
For example, there are more than 100 tabbed precedures within LOA #25.
Category (1)
(f) Distance and orientation of center desk presents accurate visual observation of all control rcom disclays/ annunciators.
Category (2)
(g) There are no provisions for installing CRT status monitor panels at the canter desk.
Category (3) j 1
F L
~
(h) Console / Panels IPM13J/16J, 1PM9J/10J, INS 2P600/P501, and 1PM05J/06J are mirror-imaged with the Unit 2 control rocm.
Category (2)
(i) Meteoroicgical data is displayed only on panel IPM10J and recorded meteorological data is not available in the control room. Cperators must leave the reactor control panel area or the center desk area to determine meteore-logical conditions.
Category (2)
(2) Use of Color t
(a)
'4 nite (indicator lights) is used for both normal and abnormal cperating conditions.
Category (2)
(b) Some emergency trip pushbuttons are black (instead of red). Category (1)
(c) _ No use of color (except for red "first out" tiles) in the -
annunciator panels.
Color should be used to categorize the degree of severity or potential safety consequences of individual alarms.
See item A.1.b(3).
Category (1)
(d) Note: Additional control rocm coding is p'lanned but has not been evaluated.
Catego y (1) until evaluated.
(3) Use of Mimics No deficiencies in mimics presently used.
The general techniques now in use should be extended to other systems.
The descriptions of additional mimics to be added to the c:ntrol panels appear to represent the additional improvement, but this improvement cannot be assessed at this time.
Category (1) until evaluated.
.(4) Oemarcation No deficiencies in demarcation tecnnicues used. Additi0nal cemarcation is needea (and planned), but cannot be evaluated at this time.
Category (1) until evaluated.'
t
I 1 3
(5) Illumination (a) Workspace illumination levels are below minimum illuminance t
standards. Measurements (in low-illumination level areas, but with all control room lights On) at the front of benchboards ranged from 11 to 13.5 ft candles, at rear of benchboards from 3.6 to 10.2 ft candles, and at 6-ft elevation on vertical panels frem 3.5 to 7.5 ft candles.
Category (1)
(b) Luminance contrast is inadequate, particularly for blue status monitor lights. Category (2)
(c) Some glare problems exist along front portions of benchboards, upper portions of vertical panels, and on computer console.
These problems may be increased as a result of increasing j
illumination levels at these surfaces, and must be reevaluated.
Category (1) until reevaluated.
t (d) Note:
Illumination problems have been identified in other items throughcut Section A.
(6) Noise Background sound levels under normal cperating conditions are expected to be in the 40-50 dbA range, which is good.
- However, sound levels for scme alarms will be in the 55-30 dbA range.
At this high differential sound level, these alarms can (a) cause operator irritation and (b) interfere with verbal communi-cations under circumstances of multiple alarm conditions.
Category (2)
(7) Heating, Ventilating, and Air Conditioning (a) The " effective temperature" (69 F) is outside the recommended comfort zone.
This must be reevaluated after completion of construction.
Category (3) until reevaluated.
(b) Air velocities at the center desk appeared to be greater than normal acceptance limits.
This must be reevaluated after co=cletion of construction.
Category (3) uncil reevaluated.
_,..,_._____r--
.,.m
- ~
(8) Communications (a) Visual access to phone jacks or rear controi reem panels is peor, and should be improved by some form of coding.
3 Category (2) l (b) "Accress" labels and an appropriate index are lacking on i
i the control rocm sound ;cwered phene patch panel.
Patch cords and one sound powered phone should be stored at the patch panel location.
Category (2)
(c) Communications equipment located at the center desk is i
adequate, but Jisorgani:ed.
Improved layout is needed to assist operators in identifying and selecting appropriate e
level / priority of communications equipment.
Ex::osed line should be concealed or protected.
Category (2)
(9) Emergency Equipment 1
(a) Provisions for portable fire extinguishers are inadequate.
Additional extingaishers and permanent, easily accessible mountings are needed.
Category (1)
(0) Accessibility of operator protective equipment is poor.
Equipment should be stowed in a readily accessible and well-identified location.
Category (1) 4 (c) Current control room operator protective equipment is deficient in the following areas: Vision, provisions for use of corrective lenses, air supply, and ccmmunications.
New equipment on order is expected to resolve these problems, but evaluation at this time is not possible.
Category (1) until evaluated.
3.
Remote Shutdcwn panel a.
Dositive Facters (1) Panel area is acpeceriately secured, and within reasonable cistance (about 2-minutes' walking time) # rem the control room.
4 i
~-
- '~
' ~ ' ~ ' ' '
2r.
s (2) Panel Area is vell equi pec with comunications systems.
b.
Cesign Ceficient'es (1) Par.el lacks mimics anc demarcation. Category (1)
(2) Basic ;cwer is available fr:m Division I.
There is no sec:nc (isola ed) panel wita Division II pcwer.
Category (1)
(3) Emergency lignting is nct pecvided in t.Se pan'el area.
Category (1) g.
C:rcuters a.
Positive Fact:rs
~
(1) The process c0mputer system has the potential for a hign avaii-abi'.ity via the redundant computer architecture and nultiple pcwer su: ply configurations.
(2) Colce coding is used on the CRT displays.
(3) P&ID mimics are used at tne system and sub-system level.
(4) There is a dedicated mini-c:mputer for logging annunciatcr alar s.
(5) Gecd f0rmating is used on the ceriodic log nuclear printouts frc the stand ;cint of readability of critical information.
(5) The control rocm operator has no access to stored alg ri:M s in the process, ccm: uter.
(7) Functional menu selection on the ::erator's censcie is structured fcr rapic access and use.
i I
I 3 !
l (8)~ Display of ESFS cperability status is structured for rapid status identift:ation.
)
i b.
Desien Ceficiencies i
(1) _ Trending ca: ability limited to a cperator :electacle parameters On two pen s: rip chart recorders ahich do not provide para-l meter identift:ation or the units of the trended carameters.
4 Category (2)
(2) Glare On the CRT display affects readibility.
Categcry (2) i j
(3) Poor readibility (narr:w strokewidth) of specific color
~
4 characters on the CRT (dark blue on black and red on black).
4 4
Category (2)
(4) There are no operating procacures for operator acticn folicwing total loss of the process ccmputer system. Category (1)
~
i (5) 'liolation of stereotype on cperators censole.
(e.g., labeling of point I.D. display is misleading to the operator and incon-sistent with thr. thumbwheel centrol),
Category (3)
(5) 'liolaticn of stereotype on locatico of number thumbwheel switen and the function :numbwheel switch.
(Category 3)
(7) Poor organ::ation of the point I.O. incex. This could be 1
1= proved by grouping of systems / subsystems.
(Ca:egory (1)
~
f' I
i 5
., ~
3.
REV!EW 0F EDISCN ASSESSMENT The following section provides the staf f's analysis and comments en the Common-wealtn Edison draf t Preliminary Assessment of the Human factors Review of the LaSalle County Station Control Room.
In general, the review and findings to date show an understanding and ccncern for human factors engineering impravement.
The comoosition of the review team, including professional human factors personnel, and the conduct of empirical studies succorts the apparent under-standing and importance of human factors.
t The staff has been able to review a majority of those findings and suggested improvements provided in the draf t assessment where an inspecticn cf the affected control reem panel or environmental parameter was pcssible and the suggested improvement readily acparent.
Hcwever, scoe of the imorovements which were less specific and more conceptual in nature coulc not be readily assessed in the control roem or eva!uated on the casis of the descriptions provided in the draft assessment.
These imorovements included Extensive demarcation Calor coding and shacing Extensive new or revised mimics Extensive control of display relocation.
Pre-implementation assessment of tnese imorovements would require precaration and review of mcckups, full-sized crawings, or temporary simulation of the control room panels with colored pacer, tape, simulated meters, etc.
The following staff comments are directed to Section E of the draft Assessment, Control Rcco Imorovement and Imolementation Schedule.
The numcering system folicws that of Section E.
1.a. CONTROLS - Arrangement and Grouping 1.
Finding. We concur.
Improvement. The seggested imorovement should reduce ccerator search time. Hcwever, as notec in staff ccmment A.1.b(5), the
. s inconsistent arrangement of these annunciator centrols may contribute I
to a major portion of the operator search time.
Other solutions, such as consistent 2x2 arrangement, or a hori:ontal arrangement just below the front edge of tne benchboard, should also be considered.
2.
Finding. We concur.
Improvement. We concur, but note that additional demarcation should be acplied to panels in tne main control reem as well (e.g.,
i Turbine Control Panel 1PM02J).
l.b. CCi4TRCL3 Coding 1.
Finding. We concur.
Imp rovement. The suggested improvement will enhance discrimination, but does not' take advantage of the further enhancement that could be provided by shace discrimination.
Considering the large number of J-handle controls in tne control ream, the use of other types of control handles (e.g., star handies) should be consicered.
2.
Finding. We concur.
Imorovement. We concur. Will the one guardec trip button be treated similarly?
3.
Finding. We concur.
Improvement. We concur, but wish to be advised of the procesed meth0d of coding prior to implementation.
(See comment on item 1.5.1.)
1.c. CONTROLS - Accidental Activation 1.
Finding. We concur.
Improvement. We concur.
1.d. CONTROLS - Lateling 1.
Finaing. We concur.
Imcroven.ent. We concur.
Mote that this imcrovement must extend to all " collared" arm / disarm switches.
Accectaoie imcravements would include an indicator lignt at the switen posi-ions, or a readily visible projection on :ne. arming collar, e
i 4 l'
~
2.
Finding. We Concur Improvement. We concur.
3.
Fincing. We concur.
Improvement
- We Concur.
4 Finding. We concur.
Imorovement. We concur.
?
5.
Finding. We concur.
Improvement.
We' concur.
1.e. CCNTRGLS - Knobs, Dials, and Switches 1.
Finding. We concur, with the understanding that this is principally a concern during startup or shutdown.
Improvement. We do not concur.
Providing additional J-handles in the LaSalle control rocm is not rec 0mmened. We would suggest that other cptions be considerec. We request that a preccsed improvement be identified.
l 2.
Finding. No comment.
Imcrovement. We do nto concur.
Pr0viding additional J-handics in the LaSalle centrol room is not reccamened. We request that a proposed improvement, if desired, be identified.
3 2.
ANNLNCIATCRS/ALAretS 1.
Finding. We concur.
Improvement. We concur, cut question if any annunciator windcws will be identified for relacation at a time after fuel leading.
3.a. VISUAL DISPLAYS Arrangement and Grou:ing 1.
Fincing. We concur.
Imp rovement.- We concur. We request furcher details of the pecposed demarcation plan (crawings, photograph, of mccktes, etc.) by October-15, 1980. Consideration snoui be given-to previcing functicral la:els
.. ~
.~_..-
e !
~
for-these systems and to.ninimizing redundant wording on present lacels on this panel.
2.
1 Finding. We concur.
Improvement. We concar.
3.
Finding. We concur.
Improvement. We concur.
r 4
Finding. We concur.
Improvement. We concur. We note that attachment 3 shows that 5 different major systems that will use color for control / display association.
The' proposal appears reascnable and does not suggest that excessive color use or mixing of colors will occur. A valid 4
assessment of this improvement cannot be made on the basis of this i
written description, however. As noted, use of a mockup to check results would be useful.
This is recommended, since indiscriminate use of color can lead to visual distraction. We request further information on plans for color shading.
5.
Finding. We concur.
Imorovement. Further information is necessary. We will require identification of those controls and displays to be moved, and a proposed schedule for *. heir relocation.
We recognize that scme l
relocation information will be obtained as a result of startup testing and initial operation, but believe that some changes may be needed prior to fuel loading or startuo.
Preliminary identifications 4
l and scnedules are requestad by October 15, 1980.
6.
Finding. Not evaluated.
Incrovement. We concur.
4 i
,_~
.. ~.
. 4 7.
Finding. We concur Improvement. We concur.
i 3.b. VISUAL DISPLAYS - Peters e
1.
Finding. We concur.
Improvement. We concur.
3.c. VISUAL DISPLAY! - Scale Design 1.
Finding. We concur.
Tne described study aopears to have eeen a good one, with credible results.
Imorovement. We do not concur.
Recommend that pointer color be changed from black to orange and that green normal operating range markers be applied to external surfaces of meters before fuel loading.
We further recommend tnat use of range markers to indicate abnormal (warning) operating ranges also be considered.
Transfer of range markers to the meter facas should be done shortly after intial startup.
Identification of meters to be provided with range markers should be provided.
3.d. VISUAL DISPLAYS - Indicators anc Counters 1.
Findings. We concur.
i Improvement. We concur.
3.e. VISUAL DISPLAYS - Chart Recorders 1.
Finding. We concur.
Improvement. We concur.
It is also important that all recorders be properly' labeled and identified and that cuel pen recorders be organized in a consistent manner. Scale multipliers (wnen needed) a are to be clearly identified.
See item A.S.b.
i l
3.f. VISUAL DISPLAYS ' Plotters and Printers.
No findings. We concur.
i
3.g. VISUAL DISPLAYS - CR!S No findings.
The fo11cwing cautions are nc'ted.
Glare on CRis may beccme cojectionable after workspace lignting a.
levels are increased to acove mininum acceptable levels.
b.
The use of CRTs to provide graphic displays should consider that any such graphics should correlate with mimics displayed en the control 5
Ocarcs.
3.h. VISUAL OISPLAY - Flashing Lights.
No fincings.
We concur.
Comment. We concur.
3.i. V!SUAL DISPLAYS - Labeling l.
Finding. We concur.
Improvement. We concur 2.
Finding. We concur.
Imcrovement. We concur.
~
3.
Finding. We concur.
Imorovement. We concur.
4 Finding. We concur.
Improvement. We concur.
5.
Finding.
We concur.
Improvement. We concur. As a general note, ali mimics should be reviewed to identify and/cr clarify flow origins and cestinations.
3.j VISUAL DISPLAYS - Mimics 1.
Fincing. We concur.
Imp rove. ment. We concur, out note that a valid assessment of tne proposec ieprovement cannot be made on the basis of the information proviced.
Full-scale crawings, mocktes, etc., seculd be used to l
evaluate these improvements prior to their incorporation On the control beards.
l
.. 4 2.
Fincings. We. concur.
Attempts to standardize colors throughout the t
control room would be difficult.
However, where it is possible to j
apply dedicated colors to specific control panel functions (e.g.,
yellow / blue for Division !/II), taese colors should not be repeateo in tne mimics. We also :encur that a number of improvements in incomplete and inconsistant mimics must be made.
Improvement. We concur, but cannot assess the imorovements on the basis of the information supplied.
A samoling Of tne 21 proposed imorovements confirms our opinion that they will enhance the mimics.
)
However, the improvements will need to be reviewed after they have been implemented.
i 4.a. CONTROL RCCM INVIRCNMENT - Layout No fincings. Refer to Section A.7.b(1) for staff comments.
4.b. CONTROL RCCM ENVIRONMENT - Sound Levels 1.
Finding. We concur.
Improvement. We concur.
4.c. CCNTROL ROCM ENVIRCNMENT - Ventilation i
j No finding.
Refer to Section A.7.b(7) for staff comments.
l 4.d. CCNTROL RCCM ENVIRONMENT - Protective Equipment
}
1.
Finding. We concur.
Improvement. We do not concur. Operator protective equipment, j
satisfactorily stewed and identified in the control room, and with satisfactory, tested communications provisions, must be available-
)
in tne control room prior to fuel loading.
1 4.e. CCNTROL RCCM ENVIRCNMENT - Ccmmunication Systems 1.
Cinding. Not evaluated.
Imorovement. Satis facto ry.
..~
v i
i
_29
~
2.
Finding. We ccccur.
Improvement. We concur.
i 3.
Finding.
We concur.
Improvement.
See staf f ccmment, item 3.4.d.1.
I i
4.f. CCNTROL RCCM ENVIRCNMENI - Lighting j
1.
Finding. We concur, but have identified significant problems with
{
workspace lighting.
See item A.7.b(5).
Improvement. We concur.
Improved lighting must be reevaluated and approved prior to fuel-1 casing.
l
{
5.
MAINTENANCE
)
1.
Finding We concur.
Improvement. We d'-
.t concur.
The staff is c0ncerned that the proposed improver
.c could result in no significant changes in control room labeling until after plant startup.
It would a;cear that a majority of permanent labels could be in place by fuel icading t
and all permanent labels in place by plant startup. We request that a preliminary plan for centrolling the use and replacement of non-permanent labels be provided by Octcbar 15, 1980.
W 4
2.
Finding. We Concur.
Improvement. Conditional concurrence, based on staff review of the pecposed administrative procedure for verifying indicator light operacility.
9 3.
Finding. We concur.
Improvement. We concur, based on the-understanding that the lame i
replacement tool or tcols will be availaole in the control recm and successfully tested and adapted by Station operators.
4 4
I t
]
(
,o
. i S.
CIIPUTERS fio findinas.
(See staff analysis of cc cuters in Secticn A.9).
7.
E"EME'!CY PCCCECURES ';RITIf;G GUIDE flot evaluated by the HFE3 staff.
D**0
- ]D
~
T][f ooJ o Ju 3. kL l
l l
l l