ML20236D858

Forwards Response to NRC Request for Addl Info on Dcrdr. Human Engineering Discrepancy 250 Cancelled & Removed from PGE-1041 by Amend 1

ML20236D858
Person / Time
Site:	Trojan File:Portland General Electric icon.png
Issue date:	07/27/1987
From:	Cockfield D PORTLAND GENERAL ELECTRIC CO.
To:	NRC OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATION & RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (ARM)
References
TAC-56176, NUDOCS 8707310088
Download: ML20236D858 (4)

Text

F s

y

" M Portland Celeral ElectricCorpraiy David. W. Cockfield Vice President, Nuclear July 27, 1987 Trojan Nuclear Plant Docket 50-344 License NPF-1 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission ATTN: Document Control Desk Washington DC 20555

Dear Sir:

Response to Request for Additional Information on the Detailed Control Room Design Review Attached for your review is Portland Conoral Electric Company's response to the Nucicar Regulatory Commission's request for additional information relative to the Detailed Control Room Design Review for the Trojan Nuclear  !

Plant.

We would be pleased to discuss any questions or comments you may have regarding these responses.

Sincerely, 4

Attachment c: Mr. John B. Martin Regional Administrator, Region V U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Cc.nmission Mr. R. C. Barr NRC Residcot Inspector Trojan Nucicar Plant Mr. David Kish, Director State of Oregon Department of Energy I

I

~

B707310080 87072 ,),

DR ADOCK 0500

{~ d1 J l

l 121 S W Salmon Strect, Port land. Oregon 97?04

e Trojan Nuclear Plant Document Control Desk Docket 50-344 July 27, 1987 License NPF-1 Attachment Page 1 of 3 1

RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION CONCERNING THE DETAILED CONTROL R00H DESICN REVIEW Reference 1. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) to Portland General Electric Company (PGE), " Meeting Summary Regarding the March 17-18, 1987 Meeting on the Safety Parameter Display 4 System (SPDS) and Detailed Control Room Design Review (DCRDR)", Dated June 25, 1987.

2. PGE to NRC Letter, " Detailed Control Room Design Review",

Dated March 2, 1987.

3. Topical Report PGE-1041, " Detailed Control Room Design 1 Review Summary Report", Volumes 1 and 2. )

l 1

)

Reference 1 provides a summary of a meeting held between PCE and NRC {

staff members on the DCRDR and SPDS. Reference 1 requested clarification l of several Human Engineering Discrepancy (HED) corrective actions. The j following provides the requested clarifications: )

l HED 250 .

HED 250 noted the tachometer for the diesel auxiliary feedwater (AFW) is labeled as inaccurate. It also noted that the diesel water temperature and oil pressure meters were missing.

~

This HED was cancelled and was removed from PGE-1041 by Amendment 1 once l PCE determined the remote shutdown panel was beyond the scope of the DCRDR.

HED 403 HED 403 noted operator complaints that during day shift the Assistant Control Operator had the responsibility of taking care of equipment tagouts. At times, this created a heavy work load and detracted from other operational duties.

To resolve this HED, a member of Trojan Operations has been assigned full time to the day shift or other heavy maintenance periods to process clearance (tagout) requests. This work is performed outside of the control room by an operator who has no other on-shift responsibilities.

7 Trojan Fuclear Plant Document Control Desk Docket 50-344 July 27, 1987 License NPF-1 Attachment Pago 2 of 3 HED 410 HED 410 noted the steam generator main feedwater bypass controls are manual. The operation of the valves is difficult and has resulted in numerous reactor trips.

PGE is participating in the Westinghouse Owners Group (WOG) Trip Reduc-tion and Assessment Program (TRAP). Several portions of the WOG-TRAP are directly associated with relaxing steam generator level trip setpoints during the critical part of reactor startup when the main feedwater bypass controls are in use.

The WOG and NRC are currently working to jointly resolve generic issues related to these programs. Upon completion, PGE intends to evaluate all recommendations and implement those most beneficial to Trojan. As previ-ously discussed with the NRC reviewer, it is expected that the exact nature of the modifications and completion dates will not be known for quite some time. The NRC will be notified once final resolution is determined.

Training The NRC staff expecased concern during the March 1987 meeting that classroom lectures were the only means used to train operators on Plant changes related to HED resolution.

It was explained at that time that several methods are utilized in familiarizing operational crews with all Plant changes. The exact methods used depend upon whether the change is physical or procedural, and the degree of theoretical understanding or practical application required. Examples of various training methods are:

1. SPDS - Initial indoctrination was performed with classroom lectures by vendor personnel followed by hands-on-performance at an SPDS station in the Technical Support Center. This included stepping through a workbook requiring the operator to perform those SPDS functions applicable to the operator's needs. In addition, the annual simulator training program was altered to provide for use of a SPDS similar to Trojan's.

2. Upgraded Emergency Operating Procedures (EOPs) - Initial implementa-tion.of EOPs based upon Revision 1 to the Westinghouse Emergency Responso Guidelines included classroom training by vendor personnel, validation of Plant-specific E0Ps at the simulator, walk-throughs of EOPs in the control room, and use by the operating crews at the simulator prior to EOP approval. Current knowledge of the EOPs, including recent changes, is assured by their use during annual simulator training, and onsite instruction pcovided by the Licensed Operator Requalification Program.

3 Trojan Nuclear Plant Document Control Desk Docket 50-344 July 27, 1987 License NPF-1 Attachment Page 3 of 3

3. On-Shift Training .h erating crews perform walk-throughs on various procedures. For exampis, HED 434 indicated some operators had diffi-culty paralleling acrocs breakers. The use of incoming versus running voltage indication on Panel C-11 was noted as especially confusing. This issue was resolved by on-shift operating crews simulating various synchronizing evolutions on Panel C-11.

Schedule The implementation daces for HED corrective actions remain as stated in References 2 and 3. With the exception of HED 51 (noted below), commit-ment dates have been met. PGE will submit an amendment to Reference 3 detailing final corrective actions taken for all HEDs once the annuncia-tor system upgrade is complete.

HED 51 requires replacement of the handwritten scale on the Containment Purge Vent Flow recorder with a printed scale. The printed scale is on order from the vendor, but has not been received. Therefore, the imple-mentation date of June 1, 1987 was not met. PGE expects to receive this scale in the near future and install it as soon as practicable.

DJM/mc i 1511P

,