ML20235S770

Summary of 890118 Meeting W/Util at Site Re Certain Human Engineering Deficiencies Identified During Dcrdrs & Not Implemented.Attendees Listed in Encl 1 & Presentation Aids Listed in Encl 2

ML20235S770
Person / Time
Site:	McGuire, Mcguire
Issue date:	02/21/1989
From:	Hood D Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:	Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
TAC-64843, TAC-64844, NUDOCS 8903080003
Download: ML20235S770 (24)

Text

@

far LQg,.<$;ti

[ 9,.[ '1 h ok g-UNITED STATES .

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION e J *- wassmorow, o.c. aoses

[' ,,

February 21, 1989

!' 1 . . .

L.

h Docket Nos'.: 50-369

.50-370 FACILITY: MCGUIRE NUCLEAR STATION, UNITS 1 AND 2 l i

LICENSEE: DUKE POWER COMPANY

SUMMARY

OF JANUARY 18, 1989 MEETING ON CONTROL ROOM HUMAN ENGINEERINGDEFICIENCIES(TACS 64843/64844)

.. I On January 18, 1989 the NRC met with Duke Power Company (Duke)'at the McGuire Nuclear Station to discuss certain human engineering deficiencies (HEDs) identified during, detailed control room design rev.iews and not implemented. Attendees are listed in Enclosure 1. Presentation' aids are shown in Enclosure 2.

1. . ; Engineered Safety Features (ESF) Monitor Light Panel (HED) M-10018 Duke reviewed the design of this panel which is used to provide the operator wi$h a quick indication that over 69 ESF v.omponents 'have actuated properly

~

' during a safety injection. For each McGuire unit, the panel is grouped into seven sets of light displays representing five ECCS phases:.(1) injection for large break (phase B signal generated),'(2) injection for small break (no phase B signal generated), (3) cold leg recirculation, (4) hot leg recir-culation, and (5) upper head injection ~ (UHI). The two lower sets of displays-are for UHI and are blanked out because the UHI system has been physically '

removed. All lights within-a set.are.on (lit) or off (dark) for a specific ECCS phase; the single exception is that one set is mixed during the injection phase for a pipe break sufficiently small .that containment pressure does not reach 3 psig and thus, no phase B signd'. is generated.

Duke discussed the concern;of lighted verses dark panels used as indication (i.e., lighted panels are preferred because dark panels do I not differentiate between a burned out bulb and an intentional off display).. In addition to weekly inspections of bulbs, Duke is considering addition of a single status light which would indicate that all system components are properly aligned and cperating for the ECCS phase. Du ke also stated that the design for the new plant simulator incorporated previously planned changes and, therefore, is inconsistent with the existing panel design.

Duke will respond to the positions in the NRC's letter cf November 2,1988 by describing corrective actions or by further justifying that no corrective -

action is needed. The response will be submitted in 30 days of the meeting and will also address requests during the meeting. These include:

89o3080003 8o0221 ": i

,0 PDR ADOCK 05000369 p PDC <. I

( \

t

___ _u.___ _ _ _ . . . . _ _ _ _ _ _

i i

o Indicate how burned out bulbs on this panel will be identified and replaced.

o Indicate Duke's decision regarding whether the contemplated " single status' light" will be added to this panel.

P.  %

o ~ De' scribe how' inconsistencies regarding all dark or all lighted panels are responded to by control room operators.

ocu Discuss Duke's plans regarding the inconsistencies between this panel 2'the ne(plant- sinsTator.

o Specify Duke's schedule to resolve this HED, including any hardware implementation.

2. Annunicator System and Related HEDs (HED K-1-004A)

Duke addressed changes since its original 1983 decision regarding control room annunciators. Of 51 related HEDs, 31 are completed, 14 were dismissed ds non-deficiencies of insignificant benefit, 5 are scheduled for implemen-tation during the next refueling outage and one (regarding low RC pump oil level)isunderreview. Duke will provide an updated written response within 60 days of the meeting which will:

o Discuss corrective action and/or justification for no corrective action to resolve the 51 annunicator-related HEDs.

o Document justification for resolving the 51 annunicator related HEDs in lieu of implementing HED M-1-004A in its entirely, as discussed in Duke's letter of April 5,1988.

o Specify the schedule to resolve and implerant these remaining HEDs.

3. Heating Ventilation and Air Conditioning (HVAC) Panel and Thirteen Related HEDs, Duke summarized information in its letter of November 20, 1987 to explain why modification of the HVAC Control Panel in accordance with HEDs M-1-004B,

-188, and -520 was deemed unnecessary and had been cancelled. Within 90 days of the meeting, Duke will provide addi?ional information regarding its planned corrective actions, or justification for no corrective action, to resolve these HEDs. The additional information will also:

o Describe any LERs that were written concerning this panel over the last five years, o Discuss Duke's survey of operational personnel to assess operational i problems related to this panel and suggestions for enhancing this panel, i

1

_ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ i

f: i

[ . .-

l*

v u .

13-o Justify resolving the 13 HVAC-related HEDs in lieu of "the complete

+ ' rearrangement" of this panel as discussed in Duke's letter dated November 20, 1987, o State Duke's intentions to identify and complete needed enhancements on this panel; for example, lighting, painting, taping, labeling, and demarcating.

o Specify the schedule to resolve and implement these HEDs.-

4. Rearranging Value Switches and Indication on Control Room Board MC-13 (HED' F1-517)

Duke has recently completed re-examination of this HED and has decided to  ;

. implement it during the 1989 refueling outages. This will be reflected in  !

an updated commitment Original Signed By:

Darl S. Hood, Project Manager.

Project Directorate 11-3 Division of Reactor Projects -I/II ,

Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation j

Enclosures:

As stated >

cc w/ encl:

See next page i

DISTRIBUTION '

Dochet* File NRC PDR

! m l PDR PDII-3 Reading G. Lainas 14-E-4 E. Adensam 14-H-3 D. Matthews 14-H-25 M. Rood 14-H-25 D. Hood 14-H-25 OGC (For inform. Only) 15-B-18 E. Jordan MNBB-3302 B. Grimes 9-A-2 ACRS(10) P-315 MCGUIRE PLANT FILE G. Went .

R. Correa l

%\i PDII-3

(

-3 - 4 DHood:sw atthews j 2/}9/89 2/d/89

o Justify resolving the 13 HVAC-related HEDs in lies of "the complete rearrangement" of this panel as discussed in Duke's letter ' dated November 20, 1987, c o State Duke's intentions to identify and complete needed enhancements on this panel; for example, . lighting, painting, taping, labeling, and demarcating. 4 g 'o Specify the schedule to resolve and implement these HEDs..

4.. , Rearranging Value Switet- md Indication on Control Room Board MC-13 (HED.'-

' a+a7 P; - N Duke has recently completed re-examination of this HED and has decided to implement it during the 1989 refueling outages. This will be reflected in an updated commitment l se OC Darl S. Ho , Project Manager Project Directorate II-3 Division of Reactor Projects -I/II Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

Enclosures:

As stated cc w/ encl:

See next page 4

t

- Mr. H. B. Tucker Duke Power Company McGuire Nuclear Station cc:

Mr. A.V. Carr, Esq. ,, ..u.g Dr. John M. Barry -

- Du ke Power Company '" ' ~ e '- Department of Environmental Health P. O. Box 33189 Mecklenburg County 422 South Church Street 1200 Blythe Boulevard Charlotte, North Carolina 28242 Charlotte, North Carolina 28203 County Manager of Mecklenburg County Mr. Dayne H. Brown, Chief 720 East Fourth Street Radiation Protection Branch Charlotte, North Carolina 28202 Division of Facility Services Department of Human Resources 701 Barbour Drive Mr. J. S. Warren. Raleigh, North Carolina 27603-2008 Duke Power Company . ,

w Nuclear Production Department P. O. Box 33189 Charlotte, North Caroline 28242-J. Michael McGarry, III, Esq.

Bishop, Liberman, Cook, Purcell and Reynolds 1200 Seventeenth Street, N.W.

Washington, D. C. 20036 Senior Resident Inspector c/o U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Route 4, Box 529 Hunterville, North Carolina 28078 Regional Administrator, Region II U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 101 Marietta Street, N.W., Suite 2900 Atlanta, Georgia 30323' i

S. S. Kilborn Area Manager, Mid-South Area ESSD Projects Westinghouse Electric Corporation MNC West Tower - Bay 239 i P. O. Box'355 i Pittsburgh, Pennsyl(ania 15230 l

L

e r .

Enclosure 1 ATTENDEES January 18, 1989 ATTENDEES .

-- A;k . , . .. g R. Kent Davis McGuire Operations Mik'e Rains McGuire Engineering Staff (Projects)

Roland H. White Design Energ. - Energ. Support Div.

Alvin L. Kinley Design Energ. - Energ. McGuire Elect. Support Bruce Travis McGuire Operations Gary D. Gilbert McGuire - NPD - Tech. Services Tony L. McConnel McGuire - NPW - Station Mgr.

Ken D. Thomas y- Design Energ. - McGuire Elect. Energ. Ser.

P. K. VanDoorn NRC/ SRI J. C. Mumford Design Energ.

Robert 0. Sharpe McGuire Compliance J. S. Warren Regulatory Compliance - Duke G.O.

J. J. Womack Design Energ. - McGuire Site Office Dan M. Houser McGuire Energ. Staff (Projects)

Jerry B. Day McGuire Compliance Garmon West NRC/NRR/ Human Factors Assessment Branch Rick Correra NRC/NRR/ Human Factors Assessment Branch Darl Hood NRC/NRR/PDII-3/ Project Manager O

Enclosura 2 McGL RE NLC_ EAR c .

S..A.

0\ -

-~

ES MO N ~ ~~0 R

~ -

_ G 3ANE_

t UMT Y

G 0

• 4 I

1 p - m g

.. s - I \

.. 3 v< t.,- . v ,

1 D _

o

.,7 4 k

I \

=A 9

A l

4 e e um se i eimuu m m um -m

S $

0

, (

l l

m .. m eW N _

e IB

'y

~

3 AS- ..

L. SMALL BREAK )

NO PHASE 8 N

9 e4 #

O l'

F l'#

h B

g t e

• e e

. 4 I

e t

6 F -

,;- sk....

w

~

%4s M B e

9

> memes e.

m .. _ m e

• V .. W .

O 4 ,

SO e

5. 1 i (

+

. - l 4

l l

i i

c___. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ . . _ _ _ _ _ _ . , _ _ _ - _ _ . _ _ . . . _ _ _ _ _ , _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ , _ _ _ , _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ . . _ __. _ _ , _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ , . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ , _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - . _ _ _ -

y e .

t 4 '

8

-e v __ _ J b

O ** O

- ' ep g

. e-

• ... g ' 4 , 60..

eeem 9 .

- f P

mm-

)

4 h a e

t

l l

Control Room Review #^

! - Review Phase

. Assessment Phase I e

. Implementation Phase

. ~5 .:

am REVIEW PHASE Task Analysis (T/A)

Operator Experience Review (OER)

Control Room Survey (CRS) e*

13 m

ASSESSMENT PHASE  ;

Evaluate HEDs Develop Solutions I

Develop Cost Estimates Select Cost-effective Solutions Select Alternate Solutions e*

y m

b IMPLEMENTATION PHASE .

Detailed Design

~

Installation (NSM Process) e a

me

. l i

1

)

Review Phase Results -

M 24 HEDs from T/A 7 HEDs from OER 20 HEDs from HFS 51 HEDs Total (A" 1 M"N l

l

t

. I ASSESSMENT PHASE RESULTS Decision to perform Special Study Team with McGuire SRO

" Clean Sheet" Approach Expansive Modification (more than HEDs)

Enveloped HEDs Solutions Cost Estimate Developed Benefits i ntangible e

. . S STATUS OF MODIFICATIONS  !

9 Plant Environment Different Underestimated Impact on" Operating Station Many HEDs Resolved by other HED Solutions, >

other. Changes, etc. -

m +

Inconclusive Benefits (Rearrangement)

Decision to Return to Original HED Scope

.;, .v I

e

l ANNUNCIATOR HED STATUSp.

17 HEDs - Solution Implementation Complete 2 HEDs - Resolved by Plant" Procedure Changes 12 HEDs - Resolved by Another HED Solution 5 HEDs - To be implemented 14 HEDs - Non-deficiencies 1 HED - Under Review .

< ~.',j-M*.

i

ANNUNCIATOR HED STATUS 1

1

- 31 HED Solutions Completed 1 5 HED Solutions to be-Implemented 14 HEDs that are Non-deficiencies i

1 HED under Review g

! l}

m REVIEW OF HEDs )

Team Selected i

Evaluation in . Progress

. J

'l 0

fb.

HED -RELATIVE (9U*< A

.M SIGNIFICANCE EVALUATION FORM HED NO'-

1. POTENTIAL FOR ERROR _ DATE:

)

e EVENT (S) IN WHICH COMPONENT IS USED NORMAL TRANSIENT EMERGENCY

>ONCE/ ONCE/ ONCE/ ONCE/

e FREQUENCY OF USE SHIFT SHIFT WEEK CYCLE

-. \

. i

, o BETWEF.N UNIT CONSISTENCY IDENTICAL APPROXIMATE NONE l

e WITHIN UNIT CONSISTENCY IDENTICAL APPROXIMATE NONE ,

l

\ ..

e COMPONENT F' UNCTION

^

%7 ,$,, 'M^$d,8la E$sy,gg g gms i EASE OF: ,

l e COMPONENT LOCATION 0000 Fain POOg gAO-1 o COMPONENT IDENTIFICATION 0000 FAIR POOR sAa e COMPONENT USE GOOD FAIR POOR 8AD COMPOSITE EVALUATION (P.E.) 1 2 3 4 s a 7 s 's to

!1. POTENTIAL FOR, RECOVERY

" O e METHO RROR CTION $PECIFIED A R ED yER Fl INFERRED FROM DIRECT e FORM OF INFORMATION OTHER PARAMETER DISPLAY NOT e PROXIMITY OF IN ORMATION ACC ACCE I E e ERROR RECOVERABILITY OlFFICULT MODERATE EASY I

COMPOSITE EVALOATION (P.R.) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 to

J@NSEGUENCE OF ERROR HED NO:-

DATE:

Indicats allrelated appropriately functions, to. main systems, and subsystems the component (s) in the HE MAINTAINfNO FUE L INTE GM ITY . . ... ....... ... .. ... ...... ...................

Main Systems (to pts. each) :I I ......

Subsystems (40 pts each) identi'y 0 High Pressure Safety injection O' --

O Low Pressure Safety injection C O Accumulator Safety injection O Control Rod System C D Emereeney soretion C O Other O O .

i MAINTAIK!NG Main Systems (70 pts. R EACTO R COO LANT SYSTEM INTEGRITY....................

eachi .............I I O Reactor Coolant Pumps Subsystems (35 pts each) identify .-

O PORV, O Pressurizer Spray .O-O Letdown System 0-O Auxillary Feedwater O O Main Steam O

O Other O O

MAINTAINING R E ACTO R SUILDING INTE G R ITY........................

Main Systems (60 pts. each) ............................... .... ......... I

. I G Spray SubsystemsT30 pts. each) identify O Cooling Fans O O les System 0-O O Hydrogen Monitorine/ Control O O Containment isolation C O Other - m O

PREVENTING Main Systems (50 pts. UNMONITOR each) ED R ADIOACTIVE R ELEASES ...................... . . . I Subsystems (25 pts. each)

O R8 Purge O

O Weste Gas O Sumpsystems O O Other O 0-PRMainEVSystems EN (40 TING A FO R C E D O UTAGE .. ... ........................... .... ................

pts. eachi I O Subsystems (20 pts. each) identify j O O '

!- O PREVENTING REACTOR /TURRINE TRIP OR REACTOR RUNSACK

...............................................I I Mein Systems (30 pts, eachi Subsystems (15 pts. each) identify OTurbine Feedweter/Condenseenr1*p9 O-O cenerek '% O O Reactor Caneseev , V O

O Plant Conest Messer .. O O Other ~i -

O PRMainEVENTING LildrTING CONDITOONS O F OPER ATlON .......... .. .. ......................

Systems'(20 pts. each), identify I

Subsystems (10 pts. each) identify 0 '

O O

O PRMain EVSystems E NTING L OSS O F PE R rO RMAN CE .. .... .... ........ .... . ... ............. . .. ....

(10 pts. eacht identify 0 Subsystems (5 pts. each) identsfy 0 0 0

TOTAL CONSEQUE NCE POINTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

h

-g 9

HED NO-DATE:

< sVI CALCULATION OF RELATIVE SIGNIFICANCE 1 i

4 Potential for Error - x Consequence of Error Signif.icance = P to entialfor Recovery

( )

= x( )

( )

. *a 4 ',

se 4

i

- ,._ ; .t

~*

4

.F e

1

-