ML20207D691
| ML20207D691 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | South Texas  |
| Issue date: | 12/22/1986 |
| From: | HOUSTON LIGHTING & POWER CO. |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20207D664 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8612310170 | |
| Download: ML20207D691 (33) | |
Text
{{#Wiki_filter:- I g Addendum 2 J, GontrolBoomDesign-Reviem
- I
'I
, Executive Summary I .
I I ' I ; I ll I I ; I ,I [eA" 186Li !!!!!;,, l PDR lI The SouthTexas Project l HOUSTON LIGHTING & POWER COMPANY
I Addendum 2 y I Gantrol:RaamDesign-Review I I I Executive Summary I I I 'I I I I I I I I The SouthTexas Project _ g HOUSTON LIGHTING & POWER COMPANY
I HOUSTON CONTROL ROOM lGHTING g gggg y gg yjg y _ ._ POWER CO. EXECUTIVE S UM M AR Y REVEION LOG Revision Pages No Date Description Affected 0 1/30/84 Initial hsue I Addendum 4/15/85 Provided Current 5-1,2,3 No. I Schedule Section 5.0 Addendum 12/22/86 Addendum Describing N/A No.2 Results of Activities Between 4/1/85 and 12/22/86 I I . I I I I I i I 12/22/86 8666c/0327c
I y HOUSTON CONTROL ROOM lGHTlNG gggggy ggyggy i _ _ POWER CO. EXECUTIVE SUMM ARY ADDENDUM 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS I Section Title Page i REVISION LOG i _ TABLE OF CONTENTS 11 LST OF TABLES 11 1 LET OF FIGURFS iv
SUMMARY
v PREFACE vi
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1-1 2.0 METHODOLOGY AND RESULTS 2-1 2.1 METHODOLOGY 2-1 2.2 RESULTS 2-2 5.0 SCHEl}ULE 5-1 1 I I i I I I 12/22/86 8666c/0327c
I HOUSTON CONTROL ROOM UGHTING DESIGN REVIEW l _-_ POWER CO. EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY
ADDENDUM 2 TABLE OF CONTEN'IS ! LET OF TABLES Table No. 'Iltle Page 2-1 SUMM ARY OF RESULTS 2-4 2-2 NEW HED's 2-5 2-3 DEFERRED CRITERIA ITEMS - WORKSPACE 2-6 2-4 DEFERRED CRITERIA ITEMS - COMPUTER 2-9 l 2-5 DEFERRED CRITERIA ITEMS - VEUAL DEPLAYS 2-10 I I 1 I I i I I 12/22/86 l 5 8666c/0327c
'I HOUSTON CONTROL ROOM lGHTtNG gggggy ggyggy E _ POWER CO. EXECUTIVE SUMM ARY ADDENDUM 2 I TABLE OF CONTENTS 18 l LIST OF FIGURES I . Figure No. Title Page P-1 STP CRDR MAJOR REPORTS x 2-1 REFEitENCE/COMM ENT FORM 2-11 2-2 HEO FORM 2-12 I i W 8 I I I I I I 12/22/86 8666e/0327c
HOUSTON CONTROL ROOnt LIGHTING DESIGN REVIEW _ POWER CO.
SUMMARY
This addendum summarizes the results of the South Texas Project (STP) Control Room Design Review (CRDR) activities since issuance of Addendum 1 (dated April 15,1985) to the Executive Summary. The activities during this time period have been the following: A. Completion of the Emergency Operating Procedures (EOP) validation. 3 B. Partial completion of evaluations against the Category "E" deferred _ edteda. C. Miscellaneous CRDR human factors work. . . :
%e Emergency Operating Procedures Validation effort was performed during May 1986, r with evaluation of observations and resolutions following the validation exercise.
Extensive effort was spent the week of December 8,1986 on items (B) and (C) above.
%is addendum summarizes the methodology and results of these efforts and provides an updated schedule for completion of the remaining STP CRDR activities.
As this report is an addendum to the Executive Summary, section numbers of this (['.I [
.# e addendum correspond generally to the section numbers used in the Executive Summary. ['.Q' .y. .;
fi .. q 1.- A.i s,. . h, M_h' $ ' OftfF
, % .t; Vb
..[T?.]%
v 12/22/86 8666c/0327c
E 8 HOUSTON CONTROL ROOM UGHTinG DESIGN REVIEW E ._ ._ POWER CO. PREFACE The control room design review (CRDR) of the South Texas Project (STP) Nuclear Generating Station was started in September 1982. Bis review is being performed by Torrey Pines Technology for Houston Lighting & Power Company (HL&P) with Bechtel I Energy Comoration (Bechtel) acting as agent. ne program plan was presented to the NRC at the STP mock-up in October 1982. The basic review wcHc for operator experience review, system function and task analysis and control room survey was completed in October 1982. In November 1982 the management team put a hold on CRDR activities, and authorized a design study to correct mounting I evolutionary engineering changes and discrepancies with the NUREG-0700 guidelines. In November 1982, a decision was made by HIAP to completely relayout six panels and upgrade the four remaining main control room panels based on the design study. his redesign effort was required to accomodate design changes resulting from plant design evolution and Regulatory Guide 1.97 requirements and to correct discrepancies with NUREG-0700. In December 1982 the management team selected one of five alternatives studied for design implementation. The mock-up was revised considering the 441 identified HEDs and evolutionary I engineering changes. As the Bechtel layout engineers advanced the layouts of the 10 panels, Torrey Pines Technology engineers reviewed the rework for correction of known discrepancies and compliance with good human factors principles. The redesign effort on the main control panels was completed in April 1983. %e NRC performed an in-progress audit in May 1983, after which the panel vendor was provided with firm layout drawings. I I I I 12/22/86 8666c/0327c
HOUSTON CONTROL ROOM UGHTING gggggy ggyjgy _ _ POWER CO. The NRC audit comments required the addition of several special studies to those already in progress, i.e., demarcation and hierarchical labeling. %c most significant addition was l the evaluation of specified parameters which resulted in a net reduction of 51 panel meters. he extensive relayout required a repeat of the System Function and Task Analysis with verification eed walk-through/ talk-through validation. Likewise a specially structured control room review and human factors review of the corrective measures for , all Category "A" and representative Category "B" discrepancies were performed. De g demarcation and hierarchicel labeling studies resulted in continued upgrading of the 3 mock-up. De completion of the panel relayout allowed the design of the annunciator . system consistent with the relocations of many systems and subsystems, and a reduction of active windows from 1055 to 642. De documentation for this program was necessarily extensive in view of its design development nature. Documentation describing the work performed during the CRDR is g summarized below and in Figure P-1: R
- 1. Program Plan - Defines the plan for performing the CRDR.
- 2. Criteria Report - Provides the detailed guidelines and basis for the CRDR and describes the interface between the control room and plant systems.
his report also includes review procedures, plant conventions and Human g Factors data developed during the CRDR that will facilitate future E control room modifications. I
- 3. Operating Experience Review (OER) Report - Describes the operations personnel review process results, conclusions and recommendations of this
! task defined in the Program Plan. I vii l l 12/22/86 l l 8666c/0327c E 1 1 - - - _ . - _-
u wi p pg "I
'Ia 4 F:
I"'l '
'm M P4 '4'I F' W I u "i M P ' "
l 'l' "I ' K' "Ei b_ E 4 m houston CONTROL ROOM - I.lGHTING gggggy ggyggy 2
" 3
_ POWER CO.
$ 4. System Function and Task Analysis (SFTA) Report - De cribes the _j J
methodology, results, conclusions and recommendations for this SFTA - effort defined in the Program Plan. t
- 5. Control Room Survey (CRS) Report - Describes the review process, [
results, conclusions and recommendations of this task defined in the j Program Plan. This report also includes the final results and dispositions _q
= for the human factors observations obtained from the OER and the SFTA. _4 d
S. Annunciator Report - Describes the review process, results, conclusions and recommendations of the annunciator review task defined in the } Program Plan, and the annunciator study guide. 5
- 7. Special Studies Report - Describes details of miscellaneous studies q d
performed as part of the CRDR. 'This includes the anthropometric study, a the hierarchical labeling study, the demarcation study, evaluation of j j specified parameters and many minor studies to resolve NRC audit 3 comments. i
- =
E=- b
- 8. Implementation Plan Report - Summarizes the control panel design j
; changes resulting from the implementation of Reg. Guide 1.97 requirements, engineering design requirements and preliminary observations of the CRDR design review team. It describes the reasons .(
for major changes to the control panellayouts. A
=
- 9. SFTA Validation Report -Summarizes the second review required because of the extensive revisions made to the control panel layouts and also includes walk-through/ talk-through exercises performed in the mock-up {!
area. m 4 i 4 i J ! j s viii j 12/22/86 N 8666c/0327c d
I HOUSTON CONTROL ROOM UGHTING g gggg y gg ygg y
. _ POWER CO.
- 10. OER Validation Report - Summarizes the review made by operators to determine if tne redesigned panels corrected reported operator concerns and evaluate if any new problems were created as a result of the corrective measures taken.
- 11. CRS Validation Report -Summarizes the review made to determine if the Category A and representative samples of the Category B HEDs were satisfactorily corrected and if any new problems were created.
- 12. Executive Summary - Summarizes the CRDR resu1ts, conclusions and recommendations. Technical details are in the Operating Experience Review Report, the System Function and Task Analysis Report, the Annunciator Report, the Control Room Survey Report, the Special Studies Report, the Implementation Plan Report and various validation reports.
- 13. Human Engineering Discrepancy Resolution Report - Summarizes all Category A, B, C and D HED resolutions.
- 14. Executive Summary Addenda - Summarize the results of the CRDR g program following the submittal of the Executive Summary Report. "
- Addendum I showed progress as of April 15, 1985. Addendum 2 showed g progress as of December 22,1986. E
- 15. Emergency Operating Procedures (EOP) Validation Report - Summarizes the validation process used for the Emergency Operating Procedures and the results as they involve the control panels. This validation was conducted on the STP simulator during May 1986 using the draft EO Ps.
I ix I 12/22/86 8666c/0327c l
l i I I HOUSTON CONTROL ROOM LIGHTING DESIGN REVIEW i _ _ POWER CO. 1
- 16. Human Engineering Discrepancy Resolution Report Addendum -
l Summarizes all Category A, B, C and D HED resolutions for HEDs identified after January 1,1986. l l l I lI !I I 'I l I I I I I I 12/22/86 8666c/0327c x
HOUSTON CONTROL ROOM kHT'N' DESIGN REVIEW
.@M POWEH CO. -
p E PLANNING l I
~
! f REVIEW & e gi lg DESIGN SUPPORT -
, g e
{ jg i !!! ils: l! !! !! I j p__ i i M /d I ASSESSMENT lM EC !E h! $ 5 IMPLEMENTATION EFFECTIVENESS
=k 8
33 g5 Ez [f hh5 >! 23
=g fik {
E 85 53 yE 55 !!! 8-{! !! ! !! 8
!: i 5
55 c. 5g
': / ="
5 l _ /_/* S1Pcnon u man aEroaTS Figure P-1 I I
l HOUSTON CONTROL ROOM LIGHTING g g ggg y g g ygg y a E _ _ _ POWER CO.
1.0 INTRODUCTION
his addendum reports the results of activities performed towards the completion of the I CRDR of the South Texas Project since the Executive Summary, Addendum I, dated 4/15/85. The principal activities during this period were: I A. Completion of the Emergency Operating Procedures (EOP) validation. I B. Partial completion of evaluations against the Category E deferred criteria. C. Miscellaneous CRDR human factors work. The validation of the STP Emergency Operating Procedures took place in May 1986. The methodology and results of this validation are presented in the EOP Validation Report; the Human Engineering Discrepancies (HEDs) arising from this effort are presented in the HED Resolution Report, Addendum 1. I Evaluation of the control room against the Category E deferred generic guidelines took ph.ce during the week of December 8,1986 and proceeded using the criteria listed in the Control Room Survey Report, Volume IV. 'Ihese criteria are summarized in the Executive Summarf, Section 3.2 Item 16. Other CRDR activities, such as those listed in the Executive Summary, Section 3.2, were I also performed during the week of December 8,1986. 'Ihe methodology used for Category E evaluations and miscellaneous activities is described in Section 2. I I I l-1 12/22/86 I - 86G7c/0327c
L / HOUSTON CONTROL ROOM lGHTING gggggy ggyggy _ __. POWER Cd. 2.0 METHODOLOGY AND RESULTS 2.1 METHODOLOGY I L The methodology used for the Category E evaluations and other miscellaneous CRDR activities varied from that used previously, since the tasks involved evaluations deferred from earlier phases in the CRDR and verification of appropriate resolution of previous HEDs. E The remaining " planned activities" (identified in Section 5, Executive Summary, Addendum 1) may be categorized as follows: J A. Activities required by HEDs previously identified. B. Activities previously documented as HEDs, but deferred and called Category E. C. Activities deferred or identified by other means. To proceed with these CRDR activities in an orderly fashion, each activity or HED was tabulated separately and a reference / comment iorm provided for it. 'Ihis form is shown as Figure 2-1. During the review process, each activity or HED reference / comment form was annotated by human factors consultants regarding compliance, using one of the following: o N/A - Not applicable (not used for Category E HEDs). o YES - In compliance. o NO - Not in compliance. 2-1
- 12/22/86 8667e/0327e
HOUSTON CON TROL ROOM lGHTING g gggg y gg ygg y ___ POWER CD. If the item was identified as not in compliance, a Human Ergineering Observation (HEO) form was filled out for disposition of the observation. ('lhe HEO form is shown as Figure 2-2.) In some instances, the item was again deferred, since it could not be evaluated due to the current control room status. In this case, no compliance status was indicated; the item identification and the reference / comment form were retained for later evaluation. I l l Soma additional observations were generated via operator comments made during the course of the evaluation. Other observations were generated by Engineering Personnel. These observations were also documented on HEO forms. The HEOs generated were then submitted for project assessment in the same :nanner as during the previous CRDR phases. Resulting HEDs were then documented in the HED Resolution Report, Addendum 1. E 2.2 RESUL'IS The results of the EOP validation are presented in the EOP Validation Report.
'Ihe HEDs generated during the EOP validation phase are included in Table 2-2.
The results of the other evaluations are summarized in Table 2-1. Of the 409 outstanding items, 65 percent have been resolved and meet criteria, 26 percent have been deferred and 9 percent have been identified as HEDs, not in compliance with criteria. Table 2-2 shows the categorization of the recently identified HEDs. 'Ihese HEDs are I shown in more detailin the CRDR HED Resolution Report, Addendum 1. I l l I 12/22/86
l l L c houston CONTROL ROOM \ lGHTING gggggy ggyggy _ . _ _ POWER CO. L While a majority of the Category E items could be evaluated at this time, many had to be ' again deferred. The entire communication criteria evaluation was deferred, constituting 48 of the 86 deferred Category E items. 'Ihe deferred Category E items are shown in p Table 2-3 (workspace) and Table 2-4 (computer). In addition, there are 16 deferred items L in visual display criteria which were previously categorized and therefore not included as Category E items (Refer to Table 2-5). The schedule for the remaining work is addressed in Section 5. s I L I [ [ r s [ [ 2-3 _ 12/22/86 8667e/0327c
E I HOUSTON CONTROL ROOnt LIGHTING DESIGN REVIEW I ._ _ POWER CO. TABLE 2-1 I SUMM ARY OF RESULTS ORIGINnL NUMBER OF NUMBER NUMBER ACTIVITY NUMBER CRITERIA OF IIEDs OF ITEMS OF ITEMS MET REPORTED DEFERRED I HEDs to be resolved 86 69 0 17 Criteria to be evaluated 277 179 12 86 (Category E) Other evaluation Itemsl 40 17 181 5 Operator comments 6 0 6 0 TOTAL 409 265 36 108 I I
- 1. Rese items include other tasks from Section 5 which were not previously identified I as HEDs and Engineering comments. Items identified during the EOP validation are excluded.
I I I I I 12/22/86 8667e/0327c 2-4
lI l HOUSTON CONTROL ROOM lGHTING g g gqq y gg yjg y
._ _ POWER CO.
TABLE 2-2 NEW HEDs CATEGORY ACTIVITY A B C D TOTAL EOP Validation 8 5 6 1 20 Other Items 1 17 13 5 36 included in Table 2-1 I " ^ ' ' " " '" I I I I I I I I 12/22/86 occae/A90*a
I I HOUSTON LIGHTING CONTROL ROOM DESIGN REVIEW E _ _. _ POWER CO. I TABLE 2-0 DEFERRED CRITERIA ITEMS ! HF AREA: WORKSPACE I STP SHEET CRITERIA TITLE CRITERIA NUMBER REMARKS ,I Documents, 6.1.1.4 097 Deferred until documents 'I Organization and Storage 824 098 099 are in Control Room. I 100 101 Expendables 6.1.1.5 102 Deferred until stocking of I 103 expendables in Control Room has been yet done. I Personnel Access 6.1.1.6 108 Deferred until Control Room is operational. Emergency Equipment Appendix 158 Deferred until equipment I C.I.B is installed in Control Room. Emergency Equipment Appendix 1 61 Deferred until operators I C.I.E have had training. Emergency Equipment Appendix 162 Deferred until procedures I C.I.F are written. Emergency Equipment Appendix 163 Deferred until equipment C. I.G is installed in Control Room. Emergency Equipment Appendix 164 Deferred until storage area C. I.I exists. Emergency Equipment Appendix 165 Deferred until storage area C. I.H exists. Environment / Appendix 166 Deferred until plant is Ventilation D.I.1 operating. 2-6 I 12/22/86 8667e/0327c
I HOUSTON CONTROL ROOM DESIGN REVIEW g lGH"* . _ F0WER CD. E TABLE 2-3 DEFERRED CRITERIA ITEMS HF AREA: WORKSPACE I STP SHEET CRITERIA TITLE CRITERIA NUMBER REMARKS Environment / Appendix 167 Deferred until plant is a Ventilation D.I.l A operating. g Environment / Appendix 168 Deferred until plant is Ventilation D.1.1.B operating. Environment / Appendix 169 Deferred until plant is Ventilation D. I . l.C operating. Environment / Appendix 170 Deferred until Illumination D.I.2 - construction work is completed in Control Room. Environment / Appendix 179 Deferred until emergency Emergency Lighting D.l.3 lighting is availam 3 to perform demoratration. 3 Environment / Appendix 180 Deferred until emergency Emergency Lighting D.I.3 lighting is available to perform demonstration. Environment / Appendix 181 Deferred until emergency l Emergency Lighting D.I.3. A lighting is available 5 to perform demonstration. Environment / Appendix 182 Deferred until emergency Emergency Lighting D. I .3.B lighting is available to perform demonstration. Environment / Auditory Appendix 183 Deferred until Control Room D. I .4. A attains normal operating environment. Environment / Auditory Appendix 184 Deferred until Control Room D.I.4.B attains normal operating environment. 2-7 l 12/22/86 5 8667e/0327c
I HOUSTON CONTROL ROOM LIGHTING gggggy ggyggy I _ ___ POWER CD. TABLE 2-3 DEFERRED CRITERIA ITEMS HF AREA: WORKSPACE I i STP SHEET CRITERIA TITLE CRITERIA NUMBER REM ARKS Environment / Auditory Appendix 185 Deferred until Control Room I D.I.4.C attains normal operating environment. I Environment / Auditory Appendix D. I.4. D 186 Deferred until Control Room attains normal operating environment. Environment / Auditory Appendix 187 Deferred until Control Room D.1.4.E attains normal operating environment. Environment / Auditory Appendix 188 Deferred until Control Room D.I.4.F attains normal operating environment. Environment / Ambiance Appendix 190 Deferred until restroom/ and Comfort D.I.5.2 193 kitchen facilities are completed. Expendables 6.1.1. 5 105 Deferred until permanent storage area exists. Environment / D.I.2 177 Deferred pending com-Blumination pletion of Control Room I lighting survey and es-tablishment of optimum lighting levels. I I I I 12/22/86 8667c/0327c 2-8
F HOUST3N CONTROL ROOM Q LIGHTING gggggy ggyggy
. _ POWER CO.
TABLE 2-4 { DEFERRED CRITERIA ITEMS HF AREA: COMPUTER ? l STP SHEET CRITERIA TITLE CRITERIA NUMBER REMARKS ERFD ADS - Appeadix O 0822 Deferred until final Speed and Accuracy software configuration is in place. u Proteus and ERFDADS Appendix Q, 0826 Deferred pending com-Glare Q.1 pletion of Control Room lighting survey and establishment of optimum lighting levels. Control / Display 6. 6.3.2. A 425 Deferred until operators Ratio have operating experience. Control / Display 6.6.3.2.B 50 Deferred until operators l have operating experience. Ratio l l B 1 I I I 12/22/86 8667c/0327c 2-9
i I E
~
HOUSTON CONTROL ROOM Y LIGHTING DESIGN REVIEW e & - IN l _ __. POWER CO. F T TABLE 2-5 - i J DEFERRED CRITERIA ITEMS g _ W HF AREA: VEUAL DEPLAYS i .-- r E STP SHEET h E CRITERIA TITLE CRITERIA NUMBER REMARKS - g _ q= s g Visual Displays I.3 296 Deferred until expendables ;ff?;Q E 3 307 for chart recorders are ? J* go~ n 318 in the Control Room. .b._ . 375 % -s p -s. . 488 l.jl'- 685 .-.' a
%,:;> m.i,
- 770
' t, 2
- g 793
h. D j;'
g -
~;.'S.9 E Visual Displays - Appendix F 3 31 Deferred for I Scale Marking 362 evaluation during first I j /. .
477 operating cycle. .! :;' .: '.- - 652 k. ::tl
.i .-. --;
qgg D...a . E*y l I 745 761 784 A E' _ 4
.h-! fz!.' -
g ., . . 4 _ f .-
, . . . . . . 9 f ll_$hff
. w :.u:.y
^
. ~.i,
- f.',[
$. W5-Q: 3.S.
i v., 7..E*
.n , , . .
s :.; <ep.;. r B ?g 23.p.
,e ;8
=r s ag..s
~ Ei{ S.' l_ sYPA =
. .x. : .
E 5 l 2-10 m 12/22/86 @ A667c /0327c m
I FIGURE 2-1 I DETAILED CONTROL ROOM DESIGN REVIEW I CONTROL ROOM SURVEY REFERENCE / COMMENT F0RM PAGE J F I OBSERVER: DATE: LOCATION: GUIDELINE CRITERIA ITEM NO.: HED REFERENCE NO.: C0tGLIANCE: N/A YES NO SUBPANEL REFERENCE / COMMENT ELEM 0. C0 E NO. I I I J I I I l I
.;. . N._ . . N ...
I DETAILED CONTROL ROOM DESIGN REVIEW CONTROL ROOM SURVEY l REFERENCE / COMMENT FORM 2-11 I
I I FIGURE 2-2 I I SOUTH TEXAS PROJECT HLMM DGINEERING OBSERVATION ASSESSENT HED NO REV TECMICAL REVIEW 3 TITLE REF ITm - m HED CATEGORY g l CONCUR WITH COMENTS ORIGIMTOR , REEVALUATE AND.RESLBMIT FOR THE FOLLOWING REASON DATE CON O T / REASON: " HE0 DESCRIPTION I CHAIRMM DATE MANAGD O T REVIEW ' , , CONCUR
' ' CONCUR WITH CON O TS REEVALUATE AND RESUBNIT FOR THE FOLLOWING REASON ggg g CONOT / REASON:
I RECON O DEO REVISION CHAIRMAN DATE I RECOMUDED IWLDUTATION
' PRIOR TO FUEL LOAD E
, l PRIOR TO OR AT NEXT REFUELING AT EARLIEST OPPORTUNITY
, l AT EARLIEST CONVEN!ENT OUTAGE
, , NON-MANDATORY OTHER HUMAN ENGINEERING OBSERVATION ASSESSMENT FORM l I
2-12 I
I I n0usTON CONTROL ROOM
*"* DESIGN REVIEW
_ _ POWER CO. 5.0 SCHEDULE
'Ihis section lists the activities planned for completion as part of this CRDR. HL&P will submit a supplementary executive summary report within a period of three months following the completion of fuel load and, if required, within a period of three months following the completion of any remaining activities.
These activities are those initially listed in Section 5 of Addendum 1. For clarity, no items have been deleted from the list. As items become resolved, the resolution will be shown rather than the schedule for completion. Planned Activity Resolution or Completion 'Umeframe
- 1. Check visibility of green Completed 12-86.
rototellite indicating lights Meets criteria.
- (Category A HEDs S-367, 484, Refer to HED Resolution Report, 679, 725, and 748) Addendum 1, Pages A-7 and A-8.
I 2. Correct poor readability of Completed 04-85. Refer to HED Resolution Report, bypass inoperable status lights (Category A HEDs S-726, Page A-5 732, 749, and 767) !I 3. Completion of meter zone coding Completed 12-86. (Category B HEDs S-006,288, Meets Cdteria. I 676, 299, 310, 764, 787, 480, 364, 060, 912, 961, 998) Refer to HED Resolution Report, Addendum 1, Page B-7.
- 4. Random sample label checkout to Completed 12-86.
verify readability Meets Criteria. I 5-1 l 12/22/86 l 8656c/0332c
I I HOUSTON CONTROL ROOAf ) lGHTING gggggy ggyggy _ POWER CO. Planned Activity Completion 'llmeframe
- 5. Review of QDPS plasma displays Completed 12-86.
as replacement for panel meters Meets Criteria.
- 6. Check effectiveness of annunciator Completed 12-86.
horns (Category A HED S-510) Meets Criteria. E Refer to HED Resolution Report, 5 Addendum 1, Page A-5.
- 7. Random sample annunciator tile Completed 12-86.
I checkout to verify readability Meets Criteria.
- 8. Random sample review of Completed 12-86.
demarcation painting Resulted in new HEDs. Refer to HED Resolution Report, - Addendum 1, page A-13.
- 9. Implementation of use of lever Completed 12-86.
handles for " select" functions Meets intent of Criteria. and review to confirm correction Refer to HED Resolution of switch position readability Report Addendum 1, page B-5. (Category B HEDs S-711, 734, 695, 705, 699 and 459)
- 10. Review corrective action to Completed 04-85.
address live zero indication Refer to HED Resolution (Category B HEDs S-715, 665, 738 Report, page B-14. 646,754,777,469,356,332,328, 891, 941, and 977) 5-2 12/22/86 8656c/0332e
I HOUSTON CONTROL ROOM I _ _ UGHTING POWER CO. gggggy ggyjgy I Planned Activity Completion Timeframe
- 11. Complete corrective action to Completed 12-12-86. Resulted in replace meter scales and random new HEDs. Refer to HED Resolution sample checkout to verify reada- Report Addendum 1, pages B-8 bility (Category B HEDs S-878, through B-16.
879, 881, 870, 874, 883, 799, 803, 807, 892, 71 4 66 % 739, 776, 470,877,880,882,87% 873,884, 800, 804, 808, 718, 668, 741, 757,
'78, 471, 404, 406, 719, 670, 742, 649,759,781,475,359,334,329, 671, 743, 650, 782, 360, 392, 721, 673, 745, 652, 761, 784, 477, 362, I 331,871 and 885) 4
- 12. Ramdom sample legend light Completed in 12-86.
' I engraving checkout to verify readability Meets Criteria. ! 13. Complete corrective action After completion of recorder chart on recorder chart paper and random paper replacement and control room sample checkout to verify lighting (second quarter 1987). readability and accessibility Refer to HED Resolution Report, of supplies (Category B HED S-376) Page B-21. l 5-3 12/22/86 8656c/0332c
I HOUSTON CONTROL ROOM I LIGHTING DESIGN REVIEW E
& 3
_ _. POWER CO. Planned Activity Completion 'llmeframe
- 14. Implementation of corrective Painting pointers leads to instrument action to paint all meter inaccuracies. Meters without red pointers red and random sample pointers are to be replaced by the checkout (Category B HEDs S-724, first refueling outage. (Refer to' 675, 747, 655, 763, 786, 479, HED Resolution Report page B-19 for '
408, 911, 960, and 997) original HED disposition). W
- 15. Operator review of status light Completed 12-86.
interpretation on SGFP Turbine Meets Criteria. Control Panel
- 16. Completion of Category E Criteria g reviews: E A. Workspace criteria Partial completion 12-86. See including: Table 2-3 for remaining open items scheduled for completion during the second quarter 1987.
- o Furniture and equipment layout o Document organization and storage o Spare parts, operating expendables and tools g o Nonessential personnel e access o Reference material placement o Desk dimensions 5-4 12/22/86 8656c/0332c
I I NOUSTON CONTROL ROOM LIGHTING gggggy ggyggy POWER CO. Planned Activity Completion 11meframe o Chair dimensions o Emergency equipment I o o Ventilation illumination o Emergency lighting I o o Auditory Ambience and comfort I Workspace criteria reviews for the sit-down consoles and work stations and for the vertical panels Random sample check of accessibility to controls and inadvertant actuation B. Communications criteria After system testing and operation including: (first quarter 1987). o Information exchange Note: Preliminary sound studies o Convenience of use will be performed during January 1987 o Reliability o Interference o Allocation of function o Voice communication links o Conventional powered telephone system l o Sound powered telephone system o Radio transceivers 5-5 12/22/86 8656c/0332c
I HOUSTON CONTROL ROOM I gggggy ggyggy lGHMG _ POWER 00. Planned Activity Completion Timeframe o Walkie-Talkie radio , transceivers o Fixed-base UHF transceivers o Announcing system g o Background noise 5 o Emergency face masks C. Annunciation criteria for: Completed 12-12-86. I j o Auxiliary shutdown panel Meets Criteria. l o Computer display / annunciation / printer features D. Controls criteria for Af ter completion of control room compatability with and operator training (second emergency gear quarter 1987). E. Visual display criteria for: o Meters Partial completion 12-86. See o Ambient light sources / Table 2-4 for remaining open items. light intensity Note: Preliminary I!ghting studies o interchangiag of will be performed during January indicator lenses 1987. o expendable materials I l 5-6 12/22/86 8656c/0332c
I HOUSTON CONTROL ROOM I LIGHTING DESIGN REVIEW POWER CO. F. Labels criteria Completed 12-86. Refer to item 4. I G. Computer criteria for: Completed 12-86 I o o plant computer ERFDADS including Resulted in new IIEDs refer to HED Resolution Report Addendum 1, SPDS pages B-27 through B-35, o QDPS . C-14 through C-19, and j D-4 through D-5. r t 7, EOP Validation Completed 5-86. (including confirmation of Refer to EOP validation instrumentation and control Report. functions) 3 I ' , I JI l I l l l ,= 12/22/86 5-7 l 8056c/0332c 1 _. .. .. _- -- --}}