ML20082F763
| ML20082F763 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Arkansas Nuclear  |
| Issue date: | 11/25/1983 |
| From: | ARKANSAS POWER & LIGHT CO. |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20082F759 | List: |
| References | |
| RTR-NUREG-0737, RTR-NUREG-737 PROC-831125, NUDOCS 8311290237 | |
| Download: ML20082F763 (59) | |
Text
- - - - - -
[ .
[( ARKANSAS POWER & LIGHT COMPANY 3 I ARKANSAS NUCLEAR ONE
[ UNITS 1 & 2
[
CONTROL ROOM DESIGN REVIEW PROGRAM PLAN NOVEMBER 25,1983
[
[
f
$7
[ -
x i pt _
- x.
t ,sq ~a . L-t . .~ .- a,,,, - g 7. :.
x N g%g's
[ -
w 4 S
M
[ af,. .'
. 5:=--
?
w i-
- s.
[ .g 0,0
[ --,e p I ano-2
[ _ __
[
[
~
HP F
388R7=a PDR
[: .
==
P him CONTROL ROOM DESIGN REVIEW PROGRAM PLAN huur FOR e
_ ' ARKANSAS NUCLEAR ONE
~ ~
UNITS 1 & 2 '
W ARKANSAS POWER & LIGHT COMPANY
[
h-n mer M
P h==
une N
w
__ -.___m_ _ _ . _ _ - - - - - - - - - -
1 m
. TABLE OF CONTENTS
[ 9 Pa.ge
- I. OVERVIEW A.
B.
Introduction........................................... 1 Objective..............................................2 C. Definition of Physiral Review Area..................... 4 D. Description of the Control Room Design Review.......... 4 II. MANAGEMENT AND STAFFING A. Management Approach.................................... 7 B. Steering Committee.................................... 12
{ C. CRDR Team Composition and Qualifications.............. 13 D. Reporting Relationships. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 E. Review Team Orientation and Training. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 III. DOCUMENTATION AND CONTROLS A. Introduction.......................................... 16
( B. R e f e r e n c e s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 C. Correspondence and Document Control................... 17 D. , Documents Generated by the CRDR Team.................. 17 IV. REVIEW PHASE A. O b j e c t i v e . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .~19
[-. B. Activity Descriptions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 V. ASSESSMENT PHASE
[ A. Objectives............................ ............... 26 B. Description........................................... 26 C. F i nal S umma ry Repo rt. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
{
VI. IMPLEMENTATION PHASE
_ A. Objective.............................................29 B. Modifications......................................... 29 Future Control Room Modifications..................... 29 C.
[ VII. PROGRAM INTERFACES......................................... 30 FIGURES
{
APPENDIX A APPENDIX B
[
L .
I. OVERVIEW F
L g . A. Introduction L .
{
The Control Room Design Review (CRDR) is a part of a larger effort within Arkansas Power & Light Company (AP&L) to upgrade control I rooms, emergency facilities, and procedures. While the scope of this plan for the CRDR is directed toward a human factors review
[ of the design adequacy and operability of the existing control rooms, AP&L reco9.'izes' and intends that other areas of concern,
{
such as upgraded emergency procedures, the design of an SPDS, and
( the inclusion of post accident monitoring instrumentation will be coordinated with the CRDR to ensure that an iiitegrated operable
[ control reem will result (see Figure 1 and the AP&L response to Supplement 1 to NUREG 0737 dated April 15, 1983, sections"2.0 and 4.0).
[ ?
Guidance for the CRDR has been under development by the NRC and other industry groups. We concur with the b'asic objectives of these activities and will continue communicating with other utilities and indust'ry groups on CRDR. 'As a result, this review
{ plan is structured to fulfill the basic objectives and guidance determined by these efforts. /
This plan shall be applicable to the CRDRs performed for Arkansas Nuclear One - Units 1 and 2. A separate review will be performed r
{ for each unit. However, ger.eric portions will be performed 1
L wherever applicable. Full advantage will be taken of previous work in such areas.
[
B. Objective
[
The primary objective of the CRDR is to enhance operator effectiveness by identifying appropriate improvements which strengthen the man-machine interface. Although primary emphasis will be placed on improving emergency response capability, problem areas in other operations will also be examined.
{
The objective will be accomplished by identifying Human Engineering Di3crepancies (HEDs) in the man-machine interfaces in
[.
the control room, determining the extent and importance of the HEDs, developing and implementing modifications and training as
{
necessary to resolve significant discrepancic:, and establishing a b working interface with the SPDS, emergency procedure upgrade and post accident monitoring instrumentation efforts.
Within this document there are terms used which apply to the CRDR.
Since there are differences in usage of terms (even among practitioners), the following definitions apply:
Control Room Design Review - The control room design review as required by NUREG-0737, Supplement 1, Item I.D.l.
[ 2
[ - _ - - - - - - - -
Control Room E.nhancements - Surface modifications that do not involve major physical changes; for example, demarcation, labeling changes and painting.
[
Final Summary Report - Report of the results of the CRDR (as described by NUREG-0737, Supplement 1).
Human Engineering Discrepancy (HED) - A departure from some
[ benchmark of system design suitability for the roles and capabilities of the human operator.
{
[ Human Factors Engineering - The science of optimizing the performance of human beings, especially in industry. Also,
[' the science of design and equipment for efficient use by human beings.
{
( Operator (Licensed) - Any NRC licensed individual in a
, nuclear power fa::ility who manipulates a control or directs another to manipulate a control.
[
Validation - The process of determining whether the physical and organizational design for operations is adequate to L support effective integrated performance of the functions of the control room operating crew.
[ 3 T - - - - - -
L f
L Verification - The process of determining whether r
L instrumentation, controls and other equipment meet the p specific requirements of the tasks performed by operators.
L C. Definition of the Physical Review Area The physical area for control room review activities will be as shown in Figures 2 and 3, and will include all of the illustrated control panels.
D. Description of the CRDR The CRDR will be conducted in three distinct phases:
- 1. Review Phase
- 2. Assessment Phase
- 3. Implementation Phase
- 1. Review Phase
)
The Review Phase will constitute the investigative portion of the CRDR. During this phase, an examination of operating experience, both generic and specific to each plant, will be conducted by a review of operating history and by an operator survey. This review will include a description and 4
( _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
documentation of control room improvements incorporated to
% date. In several instances when making plant design changes, AP&L considered the can-machine interfaces by making appropriate improvements, e.g., emergency feedwater panel, annunciators, replaced SIGMA indicators, etc. A description of these improvements will be discussed in the Final Summary Report.
Also, the review of operating history will consider plant records, LER experience, etc., and a survey of operating personnel through structured interviews and other techniques.
Task analysis will focus on the important actions to be taken by the operator during emergency conditions as well as tasks from other selected procedures. This will result in identification of system ctatus information, contral capabilities, feedback and analytical aids necessary for control room operators to accomplish their function effectively. A control room inventory will be taken to document controls, instruments, and equipment in the control room. A survey of the control room components and environmer.t will also be performed to determine conformance with applicable human factors guidelines and identify characteristics of the control room instrumentation, controls, other equipment and the physical arrangement that may impact operator nerformance. Then, verification will evaluate the availability and human engineering suitability of controls and displays to support operator action.
5
L
[
Finally, validation will consist of control room F
L walk-throughs using selected procedural scenarios to evaluate the effectiveness of controls and di:, plays. Tiierefore, six (6) review processes will be used to identify HEDs within the control room:
- Operator Experience Review
- Task Analysis Control Room Inventory Control Room Survey Verification r
L
- Validation The first three are foundation processes in which frames of reference and benchmarks for discrepancy identification will be established. The last three are investigative processes in which the benchmarks will be applied and HEDs identified.
Figure 4 illustrates the processes proposed.
- 2. Assessment Phase During the Assessment Phase, all discrepancies identified in the Review Phase will be analyzed and the importance of each discrepancy to plant operation from the control room will be determined. Discrepancies will be prioritized according to importance. Significant discrepancies will be selected for resolution through modifications, additional training, etc.
6
b
[
The proposed actions to resolve discrepancies will be analyzed for impact and effect upon plant operation.
[
- 3. Implementation Phase Approved modifications will be integrated with other enhancement programs. These changes will be scheduled
- nsistent with AP&L's existing modification and control processes and in concert with plant operating status.
[
During the CRDR, close coordination for technical interchange
( will be maintained with simultaneous programs for the development of an SPDS, the upgrade of emergency procedures,
[ and the inclusion of post accident monitoring instruaentation assessment.
II. MANAGEMENT AND STAFFING A. Management Approach
- 1. AP&L's organizational approach to managing the CRDR is
( outlined in Figure 5. The primary organizational elements include the Steering Committee, the NUREG-0737 Supplement 1
[. Program Coordinator, the CRDR Review Team, AP&L support organizations, and a human factors specialist.
[
[ 7
( ..
L
[
The primary responsibility of the Steering Committee is to provide a broad management contribution to assure integration of all objectives to meet the intent of NUREG-0737, Supplement 1 - Requirements for Emergency Response Capability.
Tiie CRDR Team Leader reports to the Steering Coamittee through the NUREG-0737 Supplement 1 Program Coordinator. The CRDR Team Leader is responsible for planning, scheduling, and
{ coordinating the CRDR which includes the assignment of particular activities to AP&L support organizations or obtaining the assistance of consultants, as necessary.
- 2. Responsibilities
- a. The Steering Committee provides a critical link between
, major AP&L organizations, such as nuclear operations,
, engineering, and licensing. Its primary responsibility is to provide broad management assistance to assure
~
integration of major project objectives in a cost effective manner. The Steering Committee is responsible for assembling the required expertise to execute emergency response capability activities (NUREG-0737 Supplement 1), the formulation of the overall program and its scope, and assuring coordination to accomplish
~
the job on a timely basis. The Steering Committee will J
also review the Final Summary Report and its 8
( _ _ _ _ _ _ _
(
recommendations. The NUREG-0737 Supplement 1 Program
[. Coordinator is responsible for planning and coordinating activities on a continuous basis to assure an integration of all objectives to meet the intent of NUREG-0737 Supplement 1 - Requirements for Emergency Response Capability.
- b. The CRDR Team is responsible for planning, scheduling,
[' '
and coordinating the total integrated CRDR. Work
{ activities will be carried out by three primary groups:
AP&L support organizations, consultants, and the CRDR Team.
CRDR Team activities include developing the methods for the review, assessment of discrepancies, establishing an overall plan and schedule for the CRDR, and serving as a
( resource for support organizations to integrate all action items. Human factors specialists will be used, as necessary, to develop, review, and otherwise support CRDR activities. In addition, the CRDR Team will develop or have developed all reports relating to the CRDR and assure that appropriate reports are submitted for review and approval.
(
- c. AP&L organizations are responsible for performing portions of the CRDR that are related to their normal
( activities.
9
( - - - - - - - - -
- d. In addition, human factors specialists w!'l be utilized
[ throughout the CRDR to develop, review, or otherwise support CRDR activitics when necessary. For example,
[
human factors specialists will be used to support i operator interviews, control room surveys, and task analysis. In some activities, the human factors
( specialist will have the lead responsibility. In other activities, the human factors specialist will provide )
support to another lead organization.
[
- 3. Interfaces
[
In order to perform the CRDR expeditiously while at the same time utilizing and broadening experience in our existing organization, specific tasks within the course of'the CRDR will be assigned to AP&L support organizations and human
( factors specialists, as necessary. The relationship between the CRDR Team and these technical lead organizations will be established as follows:
[
Based upon the objectives defined by the CRDR Team, the
( lead organizations will conduct formal meetings with the CRDR Team prior to the commencement of any major activity. The CRDR Team will review and approve the plan and schedule of activities associated with the CRDR to be assured of the proper coordination and support of
{ the overall CRDR effort. This review will address the 10 f - - - - -
L I
major steps required to perform assigned activities as well as interfaces with other emergency response capability projects. Thus, these reviews will stress coordination as well as the level of detailed
{ information required.
- The lead organizations will be responsible for conducting activities in accordance with approved plans.
[
In addition, the lead organizations will provide a final
{ report or necessary documentation in a format approved by the CRDR Team.
- The CRDR Team Leader will have the authority to contact
( the appropriate level of management in lead organizations to establish a cooperative working
{
relationship with all support groups.
To ensure the continuity of the total project, the CRDR Team Leader will
[
- Clearly communicate to the technical lead organizations
( the relationship of each task product to the total project
- Establish a specific CRDR Team member to serve as the technical liaison with the lead organization
(
11
(. .
[
- Review with the technical lead organizations the integration of individual test products, as appropriate, to resolve questions, seek clarification, etc.
(
Qualified human factors specialists will work with the CRDR Team and the AP&L support organizations to meet the objectives of the CRDR. The human factors specialists will 1
play a key role in the review and will be given an !
{
opportunity to express independent judgements.
B. Steering Committee
{
The Steering is composed of six members representing the
[
following areas:
(
- Arkansas Nuclear One
[
- AND Operations Manager
- ANO-1 Operations Superintendent
(
- ANO-2 Operations Superintendent
(
- Arkansas Power & Light Company General Office
(
o General Manager, Energy Supply Engineering Services
(
12
[
- Manager, Licensing
{ .
I
- Manager, Nuclear Services
{. ,
( C. CRDR Team Composition and Qualifications AP&L recognizes the need for a multidisciplined management approach in order to provide a meaningful CRDR. Thus, AP&L is dedicating experienced engineers and licensed operators to every
( aspect of the CRDR. In addition, experienced human factors specialists will be involved in an advisory capacity as well as be directly responsible for performing predetermined tasks in the review. The CRDR Team, including human factors specialists, will review, evaluate and approve design changes resulting from the
( CRDR.
The CRDR Team is composed of the following members:
(
- 2 Senior Reactor Operators (ANO-1 and ANO-2)
(
- 3 Design Engineers
(
- 1 Nuclear Systems Engineer
- 1 Operations Assessment Superintendent
(
f
- Human Factors Specialist
{
13 f.
k
[
The CRDR Team Leader is responsible for the overall administrative
{ 1eadership of the CRDR program. As a result, the team members will functionally report to one CRDR Team Leader. The CRDR Team Leader will direct the resources to accomplish the overall program
( objectives. Also, the CRDR Team Leader will recommend additional resources if it is necessary to vary the composition of the CRDR Team. Relevant qualifications of the current CRDR Team Members are provided in Appendix A. Additionally, non-member support personnel may be called upon from time to time, as appropriate.
(
D. Reporting Relationships
[
The CRDR Team Leader will functionally report to the NUREG-0737 Supplement 1 Program Coordinator. NUREG-0737 Supplement 1 Program Coordinator is then responsible to the Steering Committee.
( CRDR Team members, both full and part time, and consultants will
( functionally report to the CRDR Team Leader. Liaisons will be established with AP&L support organizations for each major activity. Although these relationships are important for effective management of the review, recourse for unresolved
(
differences or other concerns is through the CRDR Team Leader. If
( a matter cannot be resolved, it will be referred to the NUREG-0737 Supplement 1 Program Coordinator and to the Chairman of the
( Steering Committee. Higher levels of management will be contacted to the extent necessary to resolve differences. Differences and
{-
concerns will be appropriately documented.
(' 14
[ _ _ _ _ - -
[ ,
E. Review Team Orientation and Training
- 1. Huinan Factors
{
( Training provided for the review team will familiarize the team with principles of human factors engineering and their
[. application to the CRDR. In addition, specific activities associated with the review may warrant additional training for the Review Team and others. The importance of proper
( preparation and training for all activities is recognized.
- 2. Simulator / Procedure Familiarization
(- Training will consist of basic plant operation fundamentals and the use of operating and emargency procedures.'
{
r-( 3. Other Training During the course of the review, other areas requiring training will be identified and appropriate training or
{
orientation obtained to meet the needs.
(
(
(
(:
( 15
III. DOCUMENTATION AND CONTROLS
[
A. Introduction
{ It is recognized that maintaining an efficient means of documenting all phases of the review effort is necessary to b support a meaningful CRDR. The CRDR Team's approach to documentation is further discussed under the headings of
[
References, Correspondence, and Documents Generated by the CRDR Review Team.
{
( B. References
[-
During the CRDR, a substantial amount of reference material will be used for guidance. Following is a list of the types of material that will be necessary as the CRDR Review Team begins its
( review process. Additional reference material will be identified as the detailed work plan is developed and tasks are undertaken.
- Final Safety Analysis Report (FSAR)
- Regulatory Guides
(
- Transient Reports
- Design Drawings
- NUTAC Generated Documents
- Panel Photographs
[
16 r - - - ---
[
- List of Acronyms and Abbreviations Used in the Control Room.
- Descriptions of Coding Conventions Used in the Control
[ i l
Room. 1
[
- Procedures (Emergency and Other Selected)
- Guidelines for Procedure Development
- Results of Previous Control Room Enhancement Activities
[ C. Correspondence and Document Control
[ l CRDR document control is required for traceability,
[ retrievability, and assurance of quality. Arkansas Power and Light Company recognizes that a data collection / analysis effort,
[
suuil as that inherent in a CRDR, can generate volumes of paperwork which, if managed imp cperly, could result in loss of time and money. Arkansas Power and Light Company will implement a document
( control system to collect, update, analyze and provide the information, as necessary, to conduct an effective CRDR.
D. Documents Generated by the CRDR Team
{
( Various forms, reports, and other documents will be generated as necessary to:
- Document control room improvements made prior to the CRDR.
- Human factor design criteria.
[
17
b
(
- Document the basis or criteria used for each review activity. (
- Record the results of the Operating Experience Review, Task Analyses, Control Room Inventory, Control Room Survey,
( Verification and Validation
- Compile and assemble HEDs and associated data for review j and assessment.
- Record the results of the HED assessment phase (Final k
Summary Report).
{
- Provide Final Summary Report per NRC guidelines.
f In order to facilitate systematizing and recording the CRDRs, a series of standard forms will be developed. The fcllowing is a
( preliminary list of the types of forms to be used.
- Historical Report Review f
- Questionnaire Item Summary
- Operator Survey Summary
( !
- Task Analysis Form
- Validation Review Worksheet
- Air Velocity Survey Record
[
- Humidity / Temperature Record
- Lighting Survey - Luminance and Reflectance Record
(-
- Lighting Survey - Illuminance Record
- Sound Survey Record
- Photographic Log g
18
- h. _ - - _ _ _ _ -
L i
[
A representative sample of the forms under consideration for the control room survey are included in Appendix B.
[
IV. REVIEW PHASE
(
A. Objective
[
The primary objective of the Review Phase is to identify HEDs in the man-machine interface in the control room. The Review Phase
{ will provide an examination of the design of the control room and the characteristics of the man-machine interface to determine whether operator tasks can be accomplished effectively. The examination will be conducted by six major processes (see
(' Figure 4).
[
- 1. Operating Experience Review
( 2. Task Analysis
- 3. Control Room Inventory
( 4. Control Room Survey
- 5. Verification
{
- 6. Validation
[
[
[
[
[ 19
L
[
B. Activity Descriptions
[
- 1. Operating Experience Review
[ The objective of the Operating Experience Review is to identify areas in control room operation or design which could impact effective control of the plant. The review will focus on two primary areas: (1) an ANO operator survey, and
[
(2) a review of the operating history at ANO and elsewhere in
{ the industry. l The objective of the operator survey is to obtain special, pertinent knowledge that operating personnel possess regarding both positive and negative control room system features which they have experienced ano/or observed in the
{
course of preparing for op? rations or in the operations
( themselves.
( The operator survey will therefore provide the CRDR Review Team with practical information on problems in control room
{
operation and design which may not be exposed during the
( other review activities. The operator survey will consist of a structured questionnaire survey and interviews conducted by
[
the human factors specialists from a representative sample of licensed operators and those operators in license training.
{
HEDs will document the problem areas identified in this
( survey, as appropriate.
[ 20
[
It is anticipated that both positive and negative control room features will be identified by the respondents. Further investigation by the CRDR Team will therefore be carried out
[
for selected items on the response to determine whether they
{ are in accordance with sound human engineering principles and practices.
[
The operating history review will examine selected documents
[
(e.g., Plant Transient Reports, INP0 SEE-IN Program, etc.) to determine control room design problem areas which are
{
applicable to Arkansas Nuclear One. The documents obtained
[ will be screened by human factors specialists with the assistance of the Operations staff to determine if the
[ reports describe and document a control room problem. The applicability to the specific unit being reviewed will also
{
be determined. Appropriate problem areas will be documented
( by HEDs.
[ 2. Task Analysis
[
The objective of these analyses is to identify the system
( performance requirements that must be met by combinations of the instrumentation, equipment, software and personnel and to establish the information flow requirements as well as the manner in which information needs to flow between man and machine.
[
21
[ - - - - - - - - - - -
[
The elements of the tasks considered for this review include:
[
- The stimulus to the operator, which triggers performance of the task;
{
- The required response to that stimulus (i.e., the performance criterion);
[
- The procedure for performing this response (which l includes the equipment to be used for performing the
[ task); and
- A goal or purpose that organized the whole task.
{
- b. The tasks exercised by the plant emergency procedures and other selected procedures will be analyzed. The data resulting from this analysis will provide the information necessary for conducting the human factors engineering review
{
of the control boards.
- 3. Control Room Inventory A complete inventory of the control room instrumentation,
{
controls, and equipment will be compiled to assist the CRDR.
(f Schematic drawings and equipment lists and specifications may be used as well, if and when their use would facilitate the
[- inventory data collection process. The inventory will be accomplished in an organized manner to facilitate retrieval
{
and processing. Operator remote shutdown instrumentation,
( work stations, such as control board, peripheral consoles,
[ 22
( .
L b .
back panels, desks, etc., will be included in the inventory.
b Each nuclear station will have a unit-specific inventory compiled.
- 4. Control Room Survey
{
b A survey of each control room will be conducted to consider the extent to which human performance characteristics are considered within the control room.
[
A comparison of the instrument and control features to
[ applicable human engineering guidelines will be conducted using data yielded from the task analysis and visual examination.
Human factors specialists, in concert with experienced
[ utility personnel knowledgeable of plant systems and control room instruments and equipment, and operations personnel, will observe and measure the control room features. In addition, individuals skilled in lighting, HVAC, and communications systems will be used for special measurements.
[- The human factor engineering guidelines, as specified by NUREG 0700, will be addressed for the nine topic areas below:
[
[
[
23 r . ---- --
r L
- Control Room Workspace j
- Communications
- Annunciator Warning Systems l
- Controls l
- Visual Displays
- Label and Location Aids
- Process Computers
- Panel Layout
- Control Display Integration Discrepancies will be noted for each non-compliant item and a photographic log will be developed for reference.
- 5. Verification The objective of the task verification process is to assure that operation tasks can be performed in the existing control room with minimum potential for human error. To ensure that every task has the necessary equipment, a comparison of inventory data with task analysis will be completed. In addition to verifying the availability of control room equipment a verification of human engineering suitability will be conducted to identify interface problems that may affect tasks performance but may not be evident when the control room equipment is examined.
24
~
[
Personnel knowledgeable in plant systems, instrumentation,
[ control engineering, human factors engineering, and operations will participate in the verification process.
The information needed for this process will come primarily from task analysis, the control room inventory and the
( checklist survey guidelines. The HEDs will be recorded on the same HED form used during the control room survey,
- 6. Validation
( Control room walk-throughs will be used to validate the man-machine interfaces provided under an integrated control room concept. Selected scenarios will be used to orchestrate the walk-through. These scenarios will be chosen to maximize the extent to which the control room emergency instrumentation and equipment is exercised. This process I will evaluate the effectiveness of the controls and displays as they work in concert with each other and the operator to provide the multiple information required in a prescribed format necessary to successfully accomplish identified tasks.
[
A number of methods will be used to analyze and process the information obtained during the validation process. The methods will vary according to the type of data collected and
[
the manner in which it is collected. The CRDR Team will
{ cross-check the comments recorded with HEDs documented in
[ 25 c - - _ - - - - - - -
[
previous review processes. If a comment has not been
- previously addressed by one or more existing HEDs, it represents a new discrepancy which will be reported as such.
[.
( V. ASSESSMENT PHASE A. Objectives
[
The objectives of the CRDR Assessment Phase are to evaluate the
{ significance of the HEDs which represent the end products of the Review Phase, to identify those discrepancies which should be corrected, and to evaluate the extent of any proposed control room modifications.
B. Description
{
( In general, it is expected that three broad classes of HEDs will be identified during the review phase. These broad
[
classifications are HEDs with a safety significance to emergency response, HEDs whose correction would contribute to improved
{
non-emergency operation, and HEDs whose correction would
( contribute an overall imorovement to the control room other than those identified by the previously mentioned classes.
In addition, assessment criteria and guidelines will be developed to aid the CRDR Team in the analysis and prioritization of HEDs.
( The guidelines will be designed to assess the potential for 26
(. ..
I causing or contributing to operating crew error, operator performance and efficiency, overall plant operation, costs, and feasibility among other areas of concern. The significance of the l
HED will be defined by a combined assessment of the CRDR Team resulting from evaluations in these areas. Human factor consultants will participate in this phase.
Some HEDs may be corrected by simple surface enhancement techniques, such as changing labels, adding demarcation lines or mimic lines, or reorganizing procedures, etc. Correction of other HEDs may require more extensive measures. If it is determined that the correction must involve movement, modification, or addition / deletion of controls and/or displays, then these corrections will be evaluated with other alternatives and with consideration of how the corrections will impact the existing control room (consistency and capability), plant availability, and operator training, performance, and procedures. In some cases, training may be the only technique needed to resolve HEDs.
Experienced operators will be used to evaluate alternative approaches. Established human factors guidelines will also be used to review proposed modifications.
C. Final Summary Report Upon completion of each CRDR, a summary of the results for each unit will be prepared and submitted to the NRC for review. This report will summarize the review process, provide descriptions of 27 I
l
L t
f, the identified HEDs, described proposed corrective actions and present implementation schedules for each action. Details of the
- CRDR, along with complete documentation, will be available for NRC
{
evaluation and review.
7 The Final Summary Report wiil specify the personnel who
( participated in the CRDR for each unit and delineate their qualifications. It will also indicate any modifications or
( revisions to the Program Plan submitted to the NRC.
[ .
The summary of the Operating Experience Review process and results
( will be contained in the Final Summary Report. The types of historical reports reviewed and the period of time they covered
( will be provided. The experience levels of the surveyed operators as well as the procedures used to conduct the survey will be summarized. In addition, the Final Summary Report will describe
( control room improvements by AP&l. prior to commencing the CRDR.
( The Final Summary Report for each unit's CRDR will provide a 1 summary'of processes involved in task analysis.
( Document management techniques used to record review data and provide a data base for the review will be described. Samples of control room inventory forms and forms used in the control room survey will be provided. Methods used for verification of task performance capabilities and validation of control room functions
( will be summarized.
28
{. .
Further discussion will be directed to review findings and
- solutions identified during the opercting experience review, task analysis,verjfication,andvalidation. A copy of the personnel questionnaire used to collect data, as well as copies of other l pertinent forms will be provided. Also, implemented or proposed l
design solations and schedules will be described. '
l VI. IMPLEMENTATION PHASE A. C61ective s
The primary objective of the Implementation Phase is to implement system modifications, procedural changes, and training as necessary to resolve HEDs which were previously identified for correction in the Assessment Phase.
B. Modifications 5
Mocifications required to resolve HEDs identified for correction will be implemented through AP&L's existing plant design change process. The CRDR Team will initiate the design change or other process for every HED requiring corrective action.
C. Future Control Room Modifications 7
In order to ensure adequate human factors consideration for all modificatt ns -after the CRER Team has completed its activities,
' 29 e
!^
[
applicable humar: factors criteria will be incorporated into design documents for use in evaluating future control room changes.
[
VII. PROGRAM INTERFACES
[
The CRDR is one of several integrated programs within AP&L to upgrade
[ control rooms, emergency facilities and procedures. The programs include the following:
l F.
L
- Regulatory Guide 1.97 (Post Accident Monitoring Instrumentation)
(
- Upgrade Emergency Operating Procedures
[ The programs are all a part of the AP&L NUREG 0737 Supplement 1 Program.
{
( Coordination of these programs is necessary because individual program activities or results may affect the other programs. To ensure overall
[ program synthesis, AP&L developed an integrated implementation in response to NUREG 0737 Supplement 1. This plan (See Figure 1) identifies major relationships between the programs and establishes
( dates for completion of various program milestones.
[
[
[
[ 30
(. .
E E
E E
[
FIGURES
{
[
[
l
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
t" 1 I
,1 h
- k I : I i j L RtO w a
- s .
- __._
1 e i 3
! E " oREEm
. y
> e > J I 8 0 p I O:E- g gay - > =
a E:t--
- - - -a -
g 1 E ; - g a
=g
! < = YELLOW 2 4
- E s
.. .a : -s <
- a e es " <
eLuE t s u to d TSI
~
II; 4
Casi c ,c,, ogg * *
,y,,
(0 EJ 3sq ,, .
.. < g TFTT g 2C23 (CEJ y % , 'e'. .
' E' .
E-H e #< d
- i.".C
~' cam"ET = y 5 .
J S g W *t'.*,
o CSS
- w a 8.*t.- a
- 0EJ s 2C20A a; > u ** p, e w
e -
(C EJ g
s.
a x
f J E-H O k a ut k o c^*'"ET 3 CST 5
a
- 'o E 5a e eC2se 5 m (C.EJ E E
a ia%"
C
" (e El m {
6-6 i MST a e E- H 4 w l "
CApsaET 2 2C2TA 6- J $ea f (C E 3 jy i-EJw 0 of
" Nu
.f 8c58 d = 251."
actTo .
3 (#E1 (CE.)
. ;.+:: .
~
- .. .; ..;.. .e:.,.
E L E CTRICAL TU R 8t N E FEEDwATER ENGINEERED SAFETY FEATURES ANO PLANT
.. AUXILI ARY GENERATOR AND CONDENSATE PROTECTIVE SYSTEM PANELS SYSTEM PANEL PANEL PANEL GRIEN RE D 2CIO ECis ECit ECi6 tCi1 \
l ANO-UNIT 2 CONTROL ROOM J _ COMPUTER TURB11gE AND F E E D W ATE R R d ACTdR RE ACTIVtf Y OPERATOR GENERATOR AND CONDENSATE iSYSTEM CONSOLE CONSOLE CONSOLE CONSOLE l l 1 - l I.N. LIE 18.L..
l "
l 2ClOO 2 cot 2CO2 l 2COS
- ,O, i* \
CAPS OPERATOR CONSOLE RED 8
.__._J D ELACKS
[ 2C69 ----d GREEN l l OPE R atoR (APS LihE LI NE PRIN TER PRIN TER PC 8 0 2C57
.I
I L _
3 N
4#
> EMERGENCY A/C UNIT gf' IVUC+27A I"
r as
) J AID" r1 r-Li j jI -
eERus L CARD W y "
2C"s'a-.
. y t I 2CEN 3
w
=::
J u o h YELLOW q n ,
- W E 2C336-5 g
~
N BLUE 5 MYDROGEN
- et 2C356-4 " RECOM91NER d 3 NO 1 CONTROL y E PANEL 2 CIS2
.J 3 b d 2Ci. g w
vi.R Ar ON S LOOSE PART HYDROGEN MONITORIN3 RECOMBINER PANEL NO2
!ibff.
.:c; .ty.,
g' POWER Also Available On
/
c/
sur Lv PANE L Anerture Card a
- t tC21 4
m SLACK 5 ?
-4
> RED e<@ , E 2C2Pt
') e t
E 59 o GREEN 3 -40 2 2C2F2 h E FIGURE 3 8311290237-O(
64 NUREG 0737 SUPPLEMENT I IN
.l r 4
le ,
A mo-t C 04 0UCT P C0=Y P P00as P mVE DRV VSW
+i -
k r j
- Ase0-0 rN*r'T Amo-1
- e i
r WER. EIPUL PERFORM e CON
,, - REveEW 'ASK ANALYSIS S 6
- CRDR _
PREPARE CRDft SEseD OUT SELECT CONSULTANT SUsurT CROR E ORAFT --
ItFP FOR MFE -
MFE -Review DRAFT --PREPmE rimal +- pWOGRAAs PLAN Is0V. 25,949 Cops PROGRAls PLAN CONSULTANT CONSULTANT PROGRAas PLAh PROGRAAA PLAh TO WRC '-
iN j AMO-t 00M3r! ANO-t 6 WEIL EXPER. PE RFOR M -
r P
- IEEVIEW TASK ANALYSIS V4V
~
~ r AN0*I faNo-I LEVELOP g [
-m h ,Q DEFeht TYPE == C0esTROL R00ns A WRIASLES MVENTORY l& VARIABLES 1
e ANO-I K6 ANO-t ,","gk'R'g (( E 'Nef '
R TA[E PE PROPOSE ---
ESTiM ATE a 9- R 6. I ST POSITION Junt 2 RESOLUTIONS SCMEgyL E TO NRC g g.E VARae POSfitON 1
^
Ape 0
- t ANO t CEVELM DEFINE TYPE --
gpNCE VARIAgLYS 9 ,
. A WRi&BLES A r r
gun.2 KVEW ANO 2 ANO-2 Aff0-2 AND-2 SU9asIT PROPOSE --- L D~ APft tS. I
', y Et"TMA e e i N COMPLETE ,,D, ,,'yMg3 RESOLUTIONS S CME DUL E POSITION TO NRC f9TM
- REFutLese OUTAGE S i
A NO . g AH0-1 SU9MIT ,A40-2 D
AN0*2 ANO-t SuttarT Sign PgMoe auPLEMEnf M PROC.GEhER LPfitL19.1995 gn"P TECH ---ASSEMBLE Petut- PRoa GENER- TO 4TH. IIEFUELets4 EOPS PACKAGE TO W Gul0 E LINES 2NER Parwaa PACK. 70 hAC. OUTAGE
'~
. 4TM PEFUEUNO ANO . 2 PEv e a Am0 2 AND-2 WLIDATE ANO-t OUTAGE Asso-PRE PA RE C- tsODIFT -EOPS, Cat mALK. gesPLEMENT JUI .
VERIFT E0PS O DRAFT EOPS DRAFT EOPS ShmA.CMK0UT E0PS
~
i -
i 3
PTSC PTK ANO*1 d PTSC ev- PERF0fMI -p CON DUCT --* OPE R ATIC hA L & FlhALIZE -PP E F' e/ E xiS T.% s PA RAME Test !
VSW 0 00 SPCS NR A esETERS M I.IS84 LIST AP PARAMETERS -
A40 1 ANO-1 ANO.4 M *I " W N
's INSTALL SPOS A AsPLEMENT -H- PE RFORM TR q g uCT E __ W""'
e L
JafL 34 tS$4 Nw
,Ig ,
r3
c_
- JUE l e IS84 4 pagguN ga MARDeARE SPOS OtSPLAT VSV Ole SPOS PAR AMETE=S LIS T PA R A M E T ERS J
i SYSC S1SC ' AN0*t c O yg,I g ~TRA eve !S*
~
118 5 44 #UNE l e '984 P AtsE R
~"~'
[
PAR A METEng Pf RateETERS LIST Ag 4
A
,uRMS NST.LL __
RMS
.u.S Ta m
,g;A,
,,AN,.P uAin
-Vm0P -
u=
PE R.M M S _
uRMS
_E SO. .S..
[
MAPDe4WE SOF re A RE TE STmG PROCEDURES TRaminG OPERA N AL
!p .
b,
,I
t
} GRATED IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
>$ ANO-e PREPeRE Amo-e PRttsRE ANO-r oRu m eSCecouLE FOR v-- CRom -iustE uEuT Csos ,
)GilNI MOO 4FICATION DEEGN PaQLAGE uCDIFICATIONS Als0-6 KENT ANO-O ASSESS Asso1 PREPARE �-1 P8EftPE ANO-I SU'est?
f(p Roow CONTROL ROOld-Q)IsTROL ROOu AJUST FOR *ED5h SuuuaRT - SuwesARY JY MEDS MEDS ggDT MING Mt2 REPORT REPORT TO NRC ANC .m.mpeRE Aseg-g PREPARE Ale 0
- t y
RO0es
" r 53es,uLE FOR -v-. DESEbit C R DR PACKAGE-msPL EnstN* Depi g - es00iFICAfl0N 400 FICA 110NS
>2 ANO-t IDENT. ANO-2a m An0-2 PPDtfit ANO-t PIIEPafE ANO-2 Sulesif ACONTROL 2001s-coNTRtt Ronel AJUST FOR NEOS SubswARy - SubaEAMT CRCR MEDS MEOS NOT BEBI41800 REPORT EPORT T0 0sRC
]
L y il .v ,
AN01 MM ANO-I IlsPL[3sE NT
%m R 4.1.97 DESIGN 84CRaf E N g ggy uCDIFICATp00$$
- W 9
4%$*2 P8EEP4ft gy R. ST - ggA I . ST ,
Dt33GN PACEAGE RAODIFICAT DDII1 A40-1 REVISE ANO-1 UPGRADE
'7 EOPS AFTER -OPER. TRA80P404 ts00iF IC A TIOIC ON E0PS lesDLCT ' '
ANO-t REVISE ANO-2 tJPGil ADE AfMING r EOPS AFTER -OPUL TRANetNG DPS M001FIC ATIchfJ ON ECPS i AN0*l SUEBelf PTSC PERFORM PTSC CONDUCT PTSC I $' dusE IS,1984 y, P LNALv'S JUNE 29. 384 MVSV r/A00'L. """"TRAst W/A00'L -
ContPLITE TS To esRC PPu uf TERS PA RA ME TE R S Aho Ava,dable &-
a*eO-l PRE ANO*I aggg I PERFOftd Afe0-t CONDUCT Aps0*I $99 A erture Card H-VSV W/A301 M-train W/4001 - 8 *
- g S OS CouPMTE PARikETERS ts001F ICAf f0NS PARA ufTERS PARAME TERS S N EWEg7 AWM ANM 00NOUCT AW'S "=M .
- FOR A C 0 st -
SPOS -
4r-VSV W/ A00'L ^ TRAIN W/ ADO *L -
WCgS,1995 PARAMETERS WGHFICATDONS PARAM ETERS PA R A M E TERS COM M E M
- t Afe0*2 Suetsif SYSC PERF0fts STSC CD' EDUCT STSC SPOS & *, SAFETY gpgs( gg, gg gg uVSV W/ADifL. -
TR AIN. W/AD01 -
JU RE IS,IS&S g g,IhI PAR AME TERS P&RAu tTERS COMPLE TE AM-. ,,... A7 0.. Sa R E VISE - REVISE REV. SAFETY m
,rA =S S '
FIGURE 1 !
NUREG 0737 SUPPLEMENT!!
INTEGRATED IMPLEMENTATION PLAN REVISED IO*tS-85 f I
i 8311290237-;!O2_
liI: ')
A-
. E L S 1
M-n 0 I 0
D Y 2
$ RS j S
E BL *~ AY8 IS ?
C O L g t M~ YC C
- C I A NA U
'- W N L 0 C O' AE 8
~ it A S
T' I
A" R t
t D"
I R
S Y
8 0
8 e
n A
R ^~ . A 0 0
- M 6 y L 0 E 4 E
- o M
E C
i ss T C S
Y
. R E
S S
E gS gS R o O S
F R S 0
1 8
8ll _.
V I
T C
E 2
C E
A E
L gC o
C C M T A T s S
- E E C . O n T E 2 R T w S T 4 E P N o D s N.RN A
Y S -
O C R
P T
N O
R F
a e
R 9
T A Y
R N
O e L A ll P R e I
F 0 IL T 1
X A U T 5 S A Y N 4 E A MC L E
R O
- L , fe -
R n o s S T u / 8 2 R C
. Sl P.
N I
F-a S
C F
0 N 8 R 4 IR R
A AU .
E 4 L C MT Pro S Cr i S C RN I
- S U oC
- C' N M
- l 4
Y
-- C N
E G C R
E d A . M T E A
~- OD
~ _
RL 9 '
OA 2 EC TI C EG
~
MOL yE .
h 2 - M 9 g2$F E b -
C .n T S .2as goeB Y
M E
T t
e s7w S C
.5 , gls
- S Y C :2gr I e=
,S ll 0*
F E
o c
- . N 9 0 .f'N
= O a'$
s.%,"r I
m T C s
e A
,U l >zo.c=2 T
C 9 A 9 :7m mE" c
nozw:uor s S C D
,R T A S m U e G e E
F C
N O
R
= f-
=8 L
E N
A
=
,5 ,:B
.a c,
l F
,A P S T D S
- = T N
E C T sj E R N O M k l E A P I p, :"
N 6 G 8 I
F
- " U Q
.- E N C Y e*,
E
~ R H # A YS C 4 a R_ R T 3 M TAIE w tw S
C sk- =
^
LT 9 WlxS C PuY 3
Y S - '
/ l s
. ERS LES I
- P UY A S pCM
, l l f
~ i' 1
~-
's t
l- - - - - -
9 g 4
r-AI,D- 6i
,I m j j -
I-CARD .
nunmats ener Access ooons(TrR or e enans FEEDWATER TUR$1NE ELECTRICAL 180 Available On Ag sENERATOR AuxluARY SYSTEMS fppp{gpg (ggd C l2 C II C eo l
OM IC S, FEE 0 WATER TUR 81N E E2 ED GENERATOR COMPUTER CONDENSATE OPERATORS CE2 C OI C100 I
SAFETY PARAMETER 0tSPLAY SYSTEls C93 CSS FIGURE 2 J
8811290237 - ! .
C)3
L, OPERATING PERSONNEL CONTROL SURVEY / HISTORICAL TASK ANALYSIS ROOM REPORT REVIEW '
INVENTORY t 1) Y
[ CONTROL ROOM SURVEY
[ v VERIFICATION OF AVAIL- '
ABILITY / SUITABILITY
[
V VALIDATION OF CONTROL
[ ROOM FUNCTION
~-
V
^
ASSESS DISCREPANCY FINDINGS l
V e ' ~
DETERMINE CORRECTIVE u ACTIONS V
{
SCHEDULE & IMPLEMENT DESIGN CHANGES
[
V
SUMMARY
REPORT
[
[
[ .
Generic Activity Flow Chart for the CRDR FIGURE 4
i rm r r r r i r r rm r r, r i rm r w 1 w rm FR r l
CONTROL ROOM DESIGN REVIEW TEAM ORGANIZATION NUREG 0737 SUPPLEMENT I PROGRAM CO ORDINATOR i
l P. F. FI LI P E K CRDR TEAM LEADER S.L. MC KISSACK CRDR CO N SU LT A NT G.O. NUCLEAR DESIGN ANO - l ANO - 2 ANO SERVICES PLANT PLANT O P ERATIONS ENGINEERING (SYSTEMS ENGRJ O P E R ATIO N S ,
O PER ATION S ASSESSMENT D. H. WILL I A M S G.T. MARSHALL W.L.NICHOLS R.S. H AMILTON B. A.TERWILLIGER FIGURE 5 i
L E
E
[
m
[
( APPENDIX A O
[
5 m
M
{
N uni Y
4 se muu
(
[
APPENDIX A CRDR TEAM QUALIFICATIONS Patricia Fitzgerald Filipek NUREG-0737 Supplement 1 Program Coordinator i
- Experience
- Arkansas Power & Light Company - 4 years
{-
- Nuclear Power Plant Design - Majcr Projects f
- Design of NUREG-0578 Response Projects
- Appendix R Licensing Response Involvement
[
- Critical Applications Program Computer Replacement
~
- RG 1.97 Response Program
{
- E. I. DuPont, Inc. - 6 years f
- Chemical Plant Design - Major Projects
- Solid State Logic Control System Design and Installation
- Process Control Computers - Programming and Installation
- Programmable Controller Applications
- Education
- EBASCO Environmental-Qualification Training (in-house)
- CE Mini-Simulator Training (in-house)
(
l
[
Stephen L. McKissack Instrumentation and Control Engineering Supervisor
( * . Experience
(
- Arkansas Power & Light Company,10 years
- Project Engineering Supervisor, White Bluff Steam Electric Station, Construction of two 750MW Coal Fired Generating Units, 3 years
[-
Instrumentation and Control Engineering Superviour since May 1983
{
(-
- Education B.S. in Electrical Engineering from the University of Arkansas at
[ Fayetteville B.S. in Accounting from the University of Arkansas at i.ittle Rock
{
Masters in Business Administration from the University of Arkansas
( ut Little Rock General Physics, Applied Human Factors in Power Plant Design and
[ Operations Course
[
[
[
[-
[
[-
[
Randy Scott Hamilton Senior Reactor Operator, ANO 2
(
- Experience
- Arkansas Power & Light Company, 5 years
{
- Licensed Senior Reactor Operator for ANO-2 since June,1983
- Licensed Reactor Operator for ANO-2 since February,1981 l i
- U.S. Nuclear Navy Program
(
- Nuclear Reactor Mechanical Operator, 6 years '
(
- Education
(
- AP&L Senior Reactor Operator and Reactor Operator training courses
- Combustion Engineering Pressurized Water Reactor Simulator Course
[.
- U.S. Nuclear Navy Power School
[
[
[
[
(-
[
[
{
William Leon Nichols
( Senior Reactor Operator, ANO-1
(
- Experience
(
- Arkansas Power & Light Company, 10 years
- Licensed Senior Reactor Operator for ANO-1 since July, 1980
- Licensed Reactor Operator for ANO-1 since March,1977
- ANO-1 Shift Supervisor, 3 years Member SPDS Validation and Verification Task Force
(
- U.S. Nuclear Navy Progra:a
- Nuclear Reactor Mechanical Operator, 6 years
(
- Education
(
- General Physics, Applied Human Factors in Power Plant Design and
~
Operations Course
(
- AP&L Senior Reactor Operator and Reactor Operator Training Courses f
- Babcock and Wilcox Simulator Courses
- U.S. Nuclear Navy Power School
(
(
l l
l
{
[ .
Bobby Allen Terwilliger Operations Assessment Superintendent
[
- Experience
(
- Arkansas Power & Light Company, 15 years
- Operations Assessment Superintendent since April,1980 (ANO-1 and ANO-2)
- Assigned to INPO to develop initial inspection criteria -
[
January, 1980 for 3 months
- Operations and Maintenance Manager and Chairman of the Plant
{
Safety Committee - December, 1978 - January, 1980 (ANO-1 and k ANO-2)
- Operations Supervisor / Superintendent - December, 1971 -
[
December, 1978 (ANO-1 and ANO-2)
~
- Shift Supervisor Initial Operating Group January,1971 -
{
December, 1971 (ANO-1)
(
- Licensed Senior Reactor Operator for ANO-1 since April, 1974
- Licensed Senior Reactor Operator for ANO-2 since March, 1978
[
- U.S. Navy, 20 years
- U.S. Nuclear Navy Program, 10 years
{
- Qualified E00W/PPWO at three locations A1W, A2W, and D2G
[
[
[
[
[. ,
l
[
Daniel H. Williams, P.E.
[ Nuclear Services Project Coordinator I
- Experience
(
[
- Involved in Early Human Factors Related Aspects of the CE
( Owners Group Emergency Operating Procedures Development
- Served on Technical Advisory Group for the EPRI and DOE Scoping and Feasibility Studies for the Disturbance Analysis and Surveillance Systems
- Spoke at the International Conference on Computerized
( Operator Support Systems in Tampa, Floria on " Integration with Plant Training and Procedures"
- Charter Member and Former Chairman of the B&W Owners Group Operator Support Committee whose Charter Includes Control
[
Room Procedures, Displays, and Operator Training and Their
( Integration
- Participant in a Panel Assembled by EG&G Idaho, Inc., under a Task Assigned by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to Develop a Forecast of Concepts for Future Reactor Control Rooms
[
- Presented Paper Entitled " Abnormal Transient Operating Procedures" in Jackson, Wyoming at the ANS Topical Meeting on Anticipated and Abnormal Plant Transient in Light Water Reactors
[
[
Session Chairman at 1980 Conference on Simulation and
[ Training Technology for Nuclear Power Plant Safety Safety in Arlington, Virginia
[
- Member SPDS Validation and Verification Task Force
[
- Education
[
- 8.S. in Metallurgical Engineering - Nuclear Option from the University of Missouri, Rolla
[
- Received Training on B&W and CE Generic Simulators Member of Human Factors Division of the American Nuclear Society
(
- Affiliations
. Member of American Nuclear Society Training Group for Human Factors Systems
- -Member NSPE
[
[
[
{
[
[
[
[
___ _ __ _ _ __m_ . _ _ - - - - - - -
[
Gary T. Marshall b Electrical Engineer - Engineering Services t
[
- Experience
- Arkansas Power & Light Company - 3 years
{
- Nuclear Power Plant Design - Major Projects
(
- United States Air Force - 4 years
[
- Titan II ICBM Combat Crew Member (Strategic Air Command)
- Top Secret Clearance
{
- Architect - Engineering Firm (Commercial)
[
- Summer Student - Energy Study - Little Rock AFB & AP&L District Offices; Lighting design for new pharmacy at Memorial Hospital - N. Little Rock
[
- Education
[
- B.S.E.E. Memphis State University - Menpr:is, Tennessee M.S. Op Mgmt - University of Arkansas Fayetteville - currently in progress
- Environmental Qualification of Class 1E Safety-Related Electrical Equipment training:
(
- Wyle Laboratories Seminar (Huntsville, Alabama)
- EBASCO EQ Trainirig (in-house)
- Wyle Laboratories Seminar (in-house)
- NRC/ Utilities Seminar (Washington, DC)
- EQ Utilities Advisory Group Workshops
(
[
[ . . . . ..
E Human Factors Specialist Lead
- Experience
- Minimum of Five Years Experience in Human Factors Engineering, One
[ of which is in Nuclear Control Room Design Review
- Education
-
- Minimum of an M.A. or M.S. in Human Engineering or Related Discipline W
6
[
[
[
V w'
[
[
[
L
[
t
[
d neu
[
APPENDIX B
{
se b
suW
[
-W m
W sus 6
[
f -
b
[
AIR YELOCITY SURVEY RECORD
[
Plant: -
Date: Time:
[ K r urements o made by: Sheet i of Equipment / Instrument used:
Serial f: Calibration date:
Location 6 ft. 4 ft.
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
~
[ - - - - - - - -
k
[
HUNIDIT7/ TEMPERATURE RECORO Plant:
- Date: igme:
[ Measurements made by: Sheet i of Equipment / Instrument used:
- ' * # Calibration date:
[ Time Height Tegerature Humidity Remarks
[ Floor 6 ft.
Floor 6 ft.
Floor 6 ft.
{
Floor
{L 6 ft.
Floor C ft.
[ Floor 6 ft.
Floor 6 ft.
n oe, ;X ,
6 ft.
Floor 6 ft.
[ ;';;: X
[
[
i e
m r
d P
a e
r a
l G
y o o a /
w m
r i
t a
l p
s R f O
e / '
c r n e a t m
r f t
c M e e r
o e a l l _
f G _
e /
R w _
m r s n
o i
t a
l :
m r
u c
l ed i l n a a aP t C P e
e h
m r
S e
r l a e l on G m.
r D
R i a t P a /
o O R : w C y E ea R cl E
n p e a s r m
r C
N A
nf i D l a
T m G C
uf /
E L o w L :
F d m.
r E
R D
e e
s u
N m e i t r A T n ea e cl E m : aG C u e f m
r N
A N
t s
r t d
a y
a r o u/
I n l
p S w M I n s U / o i L t i D e e
- n t / c r Y e a r a a m
r E
V : p m
b r
t e f l rG R e i i e u/
U t u l H S w S a q a D E C G
N t m
e I
T I
c ed G l a I
f P L
e d R r
o c
m e R e
d l - n ek u n c o a a r P B g mr t
c l e e l d n f a a eP m
r P R m
r :
y i
s l e b ed c .
e n n a af a
d P r a u m m S
- r. t s
n e :
m f n e o
- r l i .
mr t
n u
s i a t f a e a a r cR i l e e o P M S L i )
- lll
[
[ LIGHTING SURVEY ILLUMINANCE RECORD
( Plant: Date: Time:
Measurements made by: Sheet i of Equipment / Instrument used:
Serial f: Calibration date:
{
Location Other
( Ref. Panel Full AC Full Conditions No. I.D. No. Anbient E=ergency (Specify)
[
[
[
[
{
{
{
(
( 1
[
[
s-
[
SOUND SURVEY RECORD
[
Plant: Date: -
Time: Sheet i of
[ Measurements made by:
Equipment / Instrument used:
[ Serial #: Calibration date:
[ Octave Eand Center Frequency Operator Work Station db(A) 250 500 1K 2X 4K Remarks
[
[
[
9
[
[
[
[
[ - -
[
[
[
[
' ~
T - - - - - -
x PHOTOCRAPHIC LOG Station: Photographer:
Uni t: Date:
51ide HED Photo Sequence F Shutter } Index Location Caption Descrip tion Number Step Speed Number Code Code Cap tion i
I I .
I I
I I
I I
i ee *