ML20083M597
| ML20083M597 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | South Texas  |
| Issue date: | 03/31/1983 |
| From: | HOUSTON LIGHTING & POWER CO. |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20083M504 | List: |
| References | |
| PROC-830331, NUDOCS 8404180216 | |
| Download: ML20083M597 (152) | |
Text
~
REV.1 MARCH 31,1983
{
[
[
ControlRoom Design Review
[
[
[ Program Plan
[ .
[ l
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[ [88*A!8!A'J888jjg
[ The SouthTexas Project
[ HOUSTON LIGHTING & POWER COMPANY L - - - - -
k l
[ HOUSTON CONTROL ROOM LIGHTING
& DESIGN REVIEW
_ _ _ POWER CO.
REVISION LOG Revision No. Date Description Pages Affected 1 3-31-83 1.1 3rd Paragraph 1-1 1 3-31-83 1.4 2nd Line 1-3 1 3-31-83 1.5 1st Line 1-3 l 3-31-83 1.5 Added 2nd paragraph 1-3
{
1 3-31-83 1.5 Added 3rd paragraph 1-4
[ l 3-31-83 Figure 1-3 1-7 1 3-31-83 2.3.1.2.1 Deleted part of 4th line 2-7
[ l 3-31-83 2.3.1.3.2 Added paragraph 2-13 1 3-31-83 2.3.1.5.3 Added paragraph 2-15 1 3-31-83 2.3.1.9 Added paragraph 2-16
( l 3-31-83 Figure 2-17 2-41 1 3-31-83 Figure 2-18 2-42 1 3-31-83 5.2.1 Para. completely revised 5-1 & 5-2 1 3-31-83 App. A. Added A. P. Caine A-1 1 3-31-83 App.B. Added Raymond Sabeh B-24 l 3-31-83 App. C Complete C C-33
{
[
[
[
[ 2.2.11/03173 0433h/0044h
L
[ houston CONTROL ROOM
'G"*'"*
DESIGN REVIEW
_ __ POWER CD.
CRDR PROGRAM PLAN
[ TABLE OF CONTENTS 1
Section Title Page TABLE OF CONTENTS i LET OF TABLES 111
{
- LITF OF FIGURES ly s
LET OF APPENDICES y ACRONYMS AND ABBREVATIONS vi l PREFACE vili
[ 1.0 INTRODUCTIO N 1-1 1.1
GENERAL COMMENT
S 1-1 1.2 OBJECTIVES 1-2 1.3 PLANT DESCRIFPION 1-3 1.4 DEFINITION OF CONTROL ROOM l-3 1.5 CONTROL ROOM STATUS AND MILESTONES 1-3
[
[
i
( 2.2.11/03173 0433h/0044h
l HOUSTON lGHTING CONTROL ROOM g gggg y gg ygg y l,
E POWER CD.
Title Page Section 2.0 CONTROL ROOM DESIGN REVIEW PLAN 2-1 2.1 OENERAL cOMMEN.ls 2-1 l
2.2 PLANNING 2-2 2.3 REVIEW 2-4 l
2.3.1 METHODOLOGY 2-5 1
2.3.1.1 CRITERIA 2-5 2-7 1
2.3.1.2 OPERATING EXPERIENCE REVIEW 1
2.3.1.3 SYSTEMS FUNCTION AND TASK ANALYSIS 2-9 I
CONTROL ROOM INVENTORY 2-13 2.3.1.4 CONTROL ROOM SURVEY 2-14 2.3.1.5 2.3.1.6 VERIFICATION OF CONTROL ROOM FUNCTION 2-15 2.3.1.7 VALIDATION OF CONTROL ROOM FUNCTION 2-15 1
2.3.1.8 ANNUNCIATOR REVIEW 2-16 2-16 l
2.3.1.9 SPECIAL STUDIES l
J 11 2.2.11/03173 -
0433h/0044h s
w..
L F
houston CONTROL ROOM lGHTING gggggy ggyggy
[ _ POWER CO.
Section Title g 3.0 MANAGEMENT AND STAFFING 3-1 3.1 CONTROL ROOM DESIGN REVIEW MANAGEMENT 3-1 PROCEDURE 3.2 INTEGRATION OF CRDR WITH OTIIER HUMAN FACTORS 3-1
{ PROJECTS
, 3.3 CRDR TEAM STRUCTURE AND PERSONNEL 3-1 4.0 CRDR ASSESSMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION 4-1 5.0 DOCUMENTATION AND DOCUMENT CONTROL
{ 5-1 5.1 DOCUMENTATION USED TO SUPPORT THE CRDR 5-1
[-
5.2 DOCUMENTATION GENERATED BY Tile CRDR PROCESS 5-1
[
5.3 DOCUMENTATION SYSTEM AND CONTROL 5-2 6.0
SUMMARY
6-1 LIST OF TABLES Table Title M
[ 2-1 QUESTIONNAIRE AND INTERVIEW SilEET REFERENCE 2-10 TOPICS
{
[
111
( 2.2.11/03173 0433h/0044h i
I
l HOUSTON CONTROL ROOM l
' * "*'N G DESIGN REVIEW E
. __... POWE R CO.
LIST OF FIGURES e,- m. P-. l l-1 RELATIONSillP OF NUREG 0660 TASK ACTION ITEMS 1-5 1-2 ARTST'S RENDITION OF SOUTil TEXAS PROJECT PLANT l-6 1-3 CON 1ROL ROOM 1.AYOUT 1-2 2-1 OVERVIEW OF CRDR PROCESSES 2-18 2-2 OVERVIEW OF CRDR ORGANIZATION 2-19 2-3 PROGRAM TASK ORGANIZATION 2-20 2-4 CONTROL PANEL FLOW DIAGRAM 2-21 2-5 PRIMARY COOLANT SYSTEM CONTROL PANEL FLOW DIAGRAM 2-22 2-6 REACTOR COOLANT PUMP SYSTEM 2-23 2-7 SYSTEM BREAKDOWN TABULATIONS 2-24 2-8 EMERGENCY EVENT SEQUENCES 2-25 1
2-9 BACKGROUND SYSTEM INFORM ATION 2-26-31 1
2-10 BASIC ELEMENTS INVOLVED IN REVIEW OF A SELECTED j OPERATIONAL EVENT 2-32 2-11 FUNCTIONAL (DECISION-ACTION) FLOW DIAGRAM 2-33 iv f 2.2.11/03173 L 0433h/0044h s
m._. _ _ . _
L HOUSTON CONTROL ROOM g gggg y gg ygg y
( lGHMG L _ POWER CO.
LIST OF FIGURES Figure Title Page L
2-12 FUNCTIONAL SEQUENCE PER SELECTED OPERATIONAL EVENT 2-34-35 2-13 OPERATOR TASK IDENTIFICATION AND ANALYSIS 2-36 2-14 DETAILED TASK (S) DECISION-ACTION DIAGRAM 2-37
, 2-15 TASK DETAILS 2-38-39
( 2-16 PANEL INTERFACE EQUIPMENT REQUIRED FOR TASKS 2-40 2-17 OPERATIONAL SEQUENCE DIAGRAM 2-41
{
2-18 TRAFFIC LINK DIAGRAM 2-42 4-1 ASSESSMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION METHODOLOGY 4-3
[
4-2 SELECTION OF HEDS TO BE ANALYZED FOR CORRECTION 4-4 4-3 SELECTION OF DESIGN IMPROVEMENTS 4-5 LIST OF APPENDICES
[
A QUALIFICATION OF MANAGEMENT TEAM MEMBERS B QUALIFICATION OF PROJECT REVIEW TEAM, AND DESIGN REVIEW AND TECHNICAL TASK TEAM MEMBERS C TYPICAL REVIEW FORMS
~
2.2.11/03173
- 0433h/0044h
houston CONTROL ROOM
'""* DESIGN REVIEW i
.. _. POWER CO.
ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS ARO Auxiliary Reactor Operator ASSOC Associated ASST Assistant AUX Auxiliary CAT Category CLO Checklist Observation CONT Control CR Control Room CRDR Control Room Design Review CRT Cathode Ray Tube C VCS Chemical Volume Control System EES Emergency Event Sequences EOF Emergency Operating Facility EPRI Electric Power Research Institute ESF Engineered Safety Feature (s)
EST Estimate (d)
EXPER Experience FW Feedwater llE iluman Engineering IIED Iluman Engineering Discrepancy llHSI Iligh Ilead Safety injection IIL&P 11ouston Lighting and Power Company H PSI High Pressure Safety Injection I&C Instruments and Controls E IN PO Institute of Nuclear Power Operators INSTR Instrument LDR Ioader LHS! Low IIcad Safety Injection LOCA loss of Coolant Accident LOSP Loss of Offsite (AC) Power L PSI low Pressure Safety injection vt 1 2.11/03173 0433h/0044h
+ j / '
F HOUSTON CONTROL ROOM LIGHTING '
F & - ~ DESIGN REVIEW L _ _._. POWE R CO. '
ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS (Cont.)
LR01 Ilcensed Reactor Operator #1 LR02 Licensed Reactor Operator #2 M/M Man / Machine MCP Main Control Panel l MON Monitor
{ MSR MT Moisture Separator Reheater Management Team M W(e) Megawatts (electric)
NOS Numbers NRC Nuclear Regulatory Commission OERT Operating Experience Review hsk Group j OSC Operational Support Center
( PORY PRT Power Operated Relief Valve Project Review Team PSAR Preliminary Safety Analysis Report RAS Recirculation Actuation Signal PZR Pressurizer RCB Reactor Containment Building RCP Reactor Coolant Pump
( RCS Reactor Coolant System RECIRC Recimulating REQ'D Required
{ RG Regulatory Guide RilR Residuallleat Removal
[ RO Reactor Operator RWST Refueling Water Storage Tank
[ RX Reactor SBCS Standby Cooling System
( SFTA SG System Fbnction and %sk Analysis Steam Generator SIS Safety Injection System 2.2.11/03173 0433h/0044h
i HOUSTON CONTROL ROOM LIGHT lNG DESIGN REVIEW
_.._ POWER CO.
ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS (Cont.)
SOE Selected Operational Event (s)
SPDS Safety Parameter Display System SRO Senior Reactor Operator SS Subsystem STAT Systems 'Ihsk Analyds Team SUPVR Supervisor SW Switch SYS System TMI Three-Mile Island TSC Technical Support Center I
I i
I i
I 1
vill 2.2.11/03173 0433h/0044h m
HOUSTON CONTROL ROOM LIGHTING DESIGN REVIEW l L __ _ . POWER CO.
l E' PREFACE 1
The control room design review (CRDR) of the South Texas Project (STP) Nuclear Generating Station was started in September 1982. This review is being performed by i Torrey Pines Technology for Houston Lighting & Power Company (HL&P) with Bechtel J
Energy Corporation (Bechtel) acting as agent.
I Prior to completion of the CRDR, a decision was made by HL&P to redesign six of the ten main control panels. This redesign effort is required to accommodate design changes resulting from plant design evolution and Reg. Guide 1.97 requirements. Human engineering discrepancies determined in the CRDR for the six panels will be corrected in I the redesign effort.
The CRDR is described in the Program Plan document. It contains a detailed description of the tasks to be performed and the reports documenting the overall results. Due to the control room redesign effort, a modified approach is required to complete and document the CRDR program. The following changes have been made in the CRDR: ,
A. The documentation program described in the Program Plan was changed to allow reporting of results on the individual CRDR tasks.
B. An Implementation Plan Report, was written to describe the background and reasons for the redesign effort. It outlines the approach to be used for implementing panellayout changes.
I C. The tasks described in the Program Plan will be completed for the original design. The SFTA and the control room survey will be updated to validate I any design revisions.
I I
I m 2.2.11/03173 g 0433h/0044h
HOUSTON CONTROL ROOM LIGHTING gggggy ggyjgy
. M POWER CD.
This report is one of several documents (See Figure 1) that describe the CRDR and the associated redesign effort on the STP control panels. The following is a description of these documents:
A. Program Plan - Defines the plan for performing the CRDR.
B. Criteria Report - Provides the basis for the CRDR and describes the interface between the control room and plant systems.
C. Operating Experience Review Report - Describes the review process I
results, conclusions and recommendations of the operating experience review (OER) task defined in the Program Plan.
D. System Function and Task Analysis Report - Describes the methodology, results, conclusions and recommendations for the SFTA effort defined in the Program Plan.
E. Control Room Survey Report - Describes the review process, results, conclusions and recommendations of the control room survey task defined in the Program Plan. This report also includes the final results and dispositions for the human factor observations obtained from the OER and the SFTA.
I F. Annunciator Report - Describes the review process, results, conclusions and recommendation of the annunciator review task defined in the Program Plan.
G. Special Studies Report - Describes details of any miscellaneous studies performed as part of the CRDR. This will include t'he anthropometric g
study, the hierarchiallabeling study and the demarcation study. 5 I
X I
2.2.11/03173 0433h/0044h
)
F HOUSTON CONTROL ROOM lGHTlNG g yggg y g g ygg y
__ _ POWER CO.
H. Implementation Plan Report - Summarizes the CRDR, the control room -
design changes, and the proposed methods of implementing the design l changes. ,
L Executive Summary - Summarizes the CRDR, results, conclusions and recommendations. Technical details are in the Operating Experience I Review Report, the Eystem Function and 'Ihsk Analysis Report, the Control Room Survey Report, the Special Studies Report, and the Annunciator Report.
I I
I I
I l
I i
xi 2.2.11/03173 0433h/0044h
I l HOUSTON CONTROL ROOM q LIGHTING gggggy ggyggy g
?!Lo!W POWER CD.
I I
I PROGRAM PLAN l
REPORT u I
CRITERIA REPORT l
u OPERATING SYSTEM FUNCTION &
I EXPERIENCE REVIEW TASK ANALYSIS REPORT REPORT CONTROL ROOM SURVEY ANNUNCIATOR STUOY SPECIAL STUDIES l
l I
- l REPORT REPORT REPORT I
IMPLEMENTATION I
PLAN g REPORT g i
EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY
REPORT I
STP - MAJOR REPORTS .
9 Figure 1 )
xil
?
i HOUSTON CONTROL ROOM LIGHT lNG gggggy ggyjg y F &
I
_ __ _ POWER CD.
1.0 INTRODUCTION
l 1.1
GENERAL COMMENT
S 1
This report describes the Houston Lighting & Power Company (HL&P) plan to perform a control room design review (CRDR) of its South Texas Project Nuclear Power Generation Station.
The purpose of this CRDR is to identify and implement control room design improvements that offer high probability for meeting plant safety and availability objectives.
This is part of an integrated plan covering TM1-related actions referenced in the TMI-2 Action Plan, NUREG-0660 and will consider the relationship of the CRDR with supplement ,
I to NUREG-0737 SECY 82-111 Requirements for Emergency Response Capability, I (Generic Letter No. 82-33) including:
o Verification of the SPDS parameter selection, data display and function.
o Design control room modifications that correct conditions adverse to safety (reduce significant contributions to risk), and add instrumentation necessary to implement Regulatory Guide 1.97.
o The use of Westinghouse Owners group produced symptom-based emergency operating procedures.
o Training to enhance coping with emergencies, o Design considerations for the Technical Support Center, Emergency Operations Facilities and Operations Support Center.
Figure 1-1 is a block diagram showing the relationship of the NUREG-0660 Task Action items HL&P will address.
1-1 4 2.2.11/03173 -
g0433h/0044h
HOUSTON CONTROL ROOM LIGHT lNG DESIGN REVIEW 7 OWER CO.
The Houston Lighting & Power Company is committed to this program for identifying and implementing changes to the plant man / machine (M/M) interfaces that can reduce the probability of operator error thus resulting in an overall improvement in plant safety and reliability. To this end, HL&P has committed the necessary resources, including knowledgeable HL&P management and technical personnel, and technical specialists from Bechtel and its human factors consultant, Torrey Pines Technology, and Westinghouse, to effect the program defined herein.
1.2 OBJECTIVES The Houston Lighting & Power Company intends to complete this review in a timely and cost-effective manner to:
o Determine whether the control room provides the system status information, control capabilities, feedback, and analytical aids necessary for control room operators to accomplish their functions effectively.
o Identify characteristics of the existing control room instrumentation, controls, other equipment, and physical arrangements that may impact optimum operator performance.
o Analyze and evaluate potential problems that could arise from this review.
o Define and put into effect a plan of action that applies additional human factors principles to enhance operator effectiveness. Particular emphasis will be placed on improvements affecting control room design and operator performance under abnormal or emergency conditions.
o Integrate the CRDR review with other areas of human factors inquiries I
identified in the NRC Task Action Plan.
I l-2 2.2.11/03173 0'4 33h/0044h
~
w
~
HOUSTON CONTROL ROOM LIGHTING gggggy ggyjgy e .&
_.._.EI POWER CD.
l.3 PLANT DESCRIPTION I
The South Texas Project (STP) is currently under construction in south-central Matagorda )
l County on a site 89 miles southwest of Houston (see Fig 1-2). Bechtel is the I architect / engineer and Ebasco is the constructor. Tne station will consist of two 1250 -
MW(e) (nominal) units. Each unit is powered by a Westinghouse Electric Corporation )
nuclear steam supply system consisting of a four-loop, pressurized water reactor and I supporting auxiliary systems. The basic power conversion unit is also furnished by Westinghouse. Each turbine generator is an 1800 rpm - tandem compound unit and is I furnished with electrohydraulic controls. Commercial operation for Units 1 and 2 is scheduled for June 1987 and June 1989, respectively. !
I l.4 DEFINITION OF CONTROL ROOM I The STP Control Room is defined as area panels CP-001 through CP-010 in the central control room including the SPDS displays and new panels CP-018 and CP-022 located I behind panels CP-001, CP-002 and CP-003, and the remote shutdown facilities. The 1 CRDR will extend to other M/M interfaces identified as a result of the analysis of selected events during the Systems Function and Task Analysis activity. Figure 1-3 l illustrates the layout in the central control room. The Unit I and 2 control rooms are essentially identical.
1.5 CONTROL ROOM STATUS AND MILESTONES At the start of the CRDR control panel sections CP-001 through CP-005 were complete l1 through metal fabrication only. Panel sections CP-006 through CP-010 were completed and ready to ship when the entire oMer was placed on hold for implementation of post-TMI modifications. The auxiliary shutdown panel design was complete with no fabrication activities prior to the order being placed on hold.
I A major panellayout redesign effort was initiated in January 1933 to accommodate design changes resulting from design evolution, addition of equipment per Req. Guide 1.97 1 requirements, and to correct for HEDs.
1-3 2.2.11/03173 0433h/0044h simmmme ermum ii ..a -
1 I
"*U'T0N CONTROL ROOM g gng,yg DESIGN REVIEW E
,_ s C POWER CO.
In February 1983, Bechtel transferred the original control panels to a new fabricator to I
begin modification of the panel front face layouts based on revised layouts by Bechtel, with Human Factors review support by Torrey Pines Technology.
All control panels are scheduled to recommence fabrication in July 1983 to support Unit 1 3
=
installation beginning the first quarter 1984.
I I
I I
I I
I I
l-4 2.2.11/03173 0433h/0044h Y
' EEN END suu WEB W L_J U i
O l
3FCg WESTINGHOUSE SYMPTOM-BASED OPERATING AND CHANGESIN M SE OWNERS GROUP GENERIC PROCEDURES EMERGENCY PROCEDURES REQUIREMENTS FOR TRAINING AND STAFFING y
p
($
c) z NUREG 0799 NU REG-0899 NUREG 0660,l.C.1 (3),l.C.8. AND LC.9) NUREG 0660, l.A.1 & l.A.2
, I I I C
kO PROGRAM PL AN REPORT TMl ' '
r- ACTION NUREG 0700 m > PLAN CONTROL ROOM DESIGN REVIEW
- j' d NUREG 0700 NUREG 0801
, O NUREG 0660 CRDR 0 $X$ NUREG 0737
SUMMARY
.: $ I_
_ REPORT
-4 N 5O Z'
5 h
A INSTRUMENTATION TO BYPASSED AND INOPERABLE EMERGENCY ASSESS PLANT STATUS PREPARE 0 NESS CONDITION (ACCIDENTS) INDICATION NUREG 0654 REG. G UID E 1.97 REG. GUID E 1.47 REG. GUIDE 1.23 OO SAFETY PARAMETER EMERGENCY RESPONSE IMPROVED CONTROL mO DISPLAY SYSTEM FACILITY ROOM INSTRUMENTATION DE NUREG 0660,Ill, A.1.2 NUREG 0696 NUREG 0835 NUREG 0814 NUREb 0660, l.D.5 EO
- D r-5:0D
%O E it
=
T F./IVEt?]7 iT~l/FFL . ,
'5M}2;gpl
- f , h r h,a wm3 w3 c t44.gn.; .
9 x - /
a
.4,. . hWg{ GN " j 4 ., 3, m .
, c./ p.; ;
,.f. 3dit .! ; .,....fi, V.A 2
'2 ;'
m.. my;
- s. . Tj rp/<: q e j :..e!;
.g >4'e $1 +
m ~^ .
,F- % i c ,)q? ' , t my / p \ 2+ . A 9
t i
14 s-o n - ;. tq. - mna i , a e
5 . m. '
- j. .
Qe rl3 o @ 3:L : ' A
.,4, ..- . ;- t -
.:,J. i e'w
. -i l . : ' ; h "c .e a-J .-
n '
f '; M;W;
., '; q ,; 3 -
3- - - .- -. . es , 5. . ,
e' g W3 ;; }b:g ;. ;{ ; , l 5 - .. , y">-
s .,p- ; 'j ' <
} :
- . - #y
. , . . , ' . ,' ,;,0, ..
. .4 3 m.
, . y e g-
.x;;;; I. ~ $
? f >==
u,- s- : ' ', . 9,57, 4 l <
}.*,'., ' f ,. -
w.
t z
, ,. de
,7j 7 . g 4 e.s , c;.f .e - - <
/ '. ;' *C y;7'. -
.J K
.[
f,o,r ; ,4 n ..l. -$ 2-. , 0- =
f w
< s .
f . gr: f._ a - ' y. w
{
Q. F 8 a G
. y_ ' , t[. . C .Jc
+
U ':i Q;; cc a.
E o .1, ,,, . % :.
.,e
- , , f.
- G, ra.*
r Q \ 54l.f"..R' y a ;Mw x l
'fi:T:
->p.
in
>~
,Ri Q b & fi: ' %; ^
, 3 74 s ,,, j , u i-y . lw?
a =
,. > y g .5,s .m
,. .- 4 om 5* 's t ': [;; *r *, '? g(. 'l g&- U
- m i e r af'
')pk[;,' , ..c *%
U ,o<
- 72 p
- f %g .
- u. a_
O'
-ggCp z e ' 9 i
.. l,,f ! 7 ;
m ,
1 f..gWe i .,
?
') ,
O U n m' y t (, >
.(
t.
s 4 g f,s:a " d:',;
.V y,g a ec m
w g, u .
-~ n cm.y,gfgp,
~.
. >g -
,' , a , , N,h j.I[_h ?. .mW,Je . i #
U $_ _
e
- l== g
> :f y
% * ...b,f[';OO?
&%.c AE j)#
i i a
._ , g Jg. '
.c
} ./ %g%Ngg .m
,y%w &, =
.,$ ?l
(-
4
- $ .. . [,7
,)
y I 'Y#!"dA",g ' l '
i4
=
n ,.d--;.:f' , &o . gfjy. >.$
~
f, ltl
~'
.Y f an;- W.
7., z.. c -
% Q; - -
x
,i _t i d-m$ _, I}
,'f,e r
w w- ,
u .m
\f 't.- -
F
, 1,i t;g'-
gA Ly {:: a; . f'~yy ~~' . lg , ) ,[_
..n,.
y ,
- x . .;pb : b,l<u.
=
1.6 __
mu umm-mm m ummumm imimmmm
1
+ l I
l
- l l
$ HOUSTON CONTROL ROOM LIGHTING DESIGN REVIEW
.P_ROJE9 POWER CD.
1 n A l n
. us b l
unif AviSORS CMit Cat 2 CM13 RE,CO,R,0E.
A A A A II II PEATURES I g. _ _
l =- - = CCS21 5 E j j: ME'j:]
n-CP919 RATOR N 7
=::
ee mvAC ETEAM m' -
GEtERATOR
--/
CP905 I RE ACT8A C0mTROL CPete C8 TR L S E CPt14 I I ,
CM11 - buCLEAR INSTR PANEL $f- CROR EV ALUATION AREA I CPS 12 - PLUM MAPPING CPS 13 - IISTION SEISimt MONITORtRS CPS 14 - VISRAfl04 It0mfTORIR6 CPtil- LOOSE PARTS MORITORitt CPtit - PIRE PROTECTl04 PA4EL A. COMPUTER TYPERS CONTROL ROOM LAYOUT Figure 1-3 1-7
t,
[ houston CONTROL ROOM UGHMG g gggg y g g yjg y
[- ___ POWER CO.
2.0 CONTROL ROOM DESIGN REVIEW PLAN 2.1
GENERAL COMMENT
S 2.1.1 The CRDR will be conducted principally as recommended by NUREG-0700 and
{ SECY-82-111 and will consider the integration of related project requirements that may affect control room human factors discrepancies. The following related activities and documents will be coordinated with the CRDR:
o Development of emergency operating procedures (reference Item I.C.l(3),
( I.C.8, and I.C.9 of NUREG-0660).
o Development of a safety parameter display system (SPDS), (reference
{
Item I.D.2 of NUREG-0660; also NUREG-0696, Functional Criteria for Emergency Response Facilities).
o Upgrading of emergency support facilities (reference Item III.A.I.2 of NUREG-0660 and NUREG-0696, Functional Criteria for Emergency Response Facilities).
o Development of improved control room instrumentation (reference Item I.D.5 of NUREG-0660).
o Changes in requirements for training and staffing (reference Items I.A.1 and I.A.2 of NUREG-0660).
( o Implementation of Regulatory Guide 1.97, Revision 2.
o Evaluation criteria for CRDRs (NUREG-0801).
{
o Methodology for evaluation of emergency response facilities
[ (NUREG-0814).
( o Human factors acceptance criteria for SPDS (NUREG-0835).
2.2.11/03173 6308P/0044h
1 i
houston CONTROL ROOM
' UGHTING g g ggg y gg ygg y KT POWER CO.
2.1.2 The overview of the CRDR processes is shown in Figure 2-1 which is a copy of I
Exhibit 3-1 of NUREG-0700.
The program describes the following:
I o Planning (Section 2.2) o Review (Section 2.3) o Management and Staffing (Section 3.0) o Assessment and Implementation (Section 4.0) o Documentation and Document Control (Section 5.0) 2.2 PLANNING The planning phase covers relevant actions completed to date or planned as noted herein.
I Houston Lighting & Power organized a management team to guide, monitor and implement this program. Membership on this team is shown in Figure 2-2 and qualification of the members is shown in Appendix A. The management team has made provisions for designated alternates to key positions. The functions of this team correspond to those recommended for Management in NUREG-0700. They are to:
. o Assure proper relationships and awareness between this project and other NUREG-0660 efforts.
I o Assign key management and Project Review Team personnel (see Figure 2-2).
i o Approve detail program plan.
- l l
2-2 2.2.11/03173 6308P/0044h
~ _ . _ _ _
b HOUSTON CONTROL ROOM lGHMG g gggg y g g ygg y L ___ . POWER CO.
o Provide resources required to carry out the program plan.
o Identify and assure that plant operational constraints and project
( requirements are properly coordinated.
o Monitor CRDR progress.
{
o Review and approve control room improvement recommendations.
[
o Establish and initiate the control room improvement program.
The management team has analyzed NUREG-0700 in relation to this plant facility and l resources and has defined the program described herein. The major activities are shown in
{
Figure 2-3. The planning activity includes, in addition to the above items, the following:
[ o Definition of all man / machine interfaces and related activities to be reviewed.
o Definition of objectives, o Definition of management team role.
[ o Formulation of the task structure for the program and corresponding personnel assignment (see Figure 2-3).
o Development of administrative procedures to govern this review.
[
The management team, gave considerations to the advantages and disadvantages of performing the CRDR prior to completion of operating procedures, training, and
{
construction of the control room complex. The decision to proceed with the review was based on the advantage of identifying major departures from HEDs, if any, of the control
[ panel design prior to completion of manufacture. This will minimize
[ 2-3 2.2.11/03173 6308P/0044h
{
HOUSTON CONTROL ROOM LIGHTING DESIGN REVIEW
_ El POWER CD.
negative transfer and retraining problems. To facilitate this review, project management authorized the construction of a full scale, realistic mock-up and provided facilities for an extensive review by human factors and systems specialists at the Bechtel-Houston engineering offices with the reviewers performing all phases of their tasks in the vicinity of the mockup, Bechtel is charged with the responsibility of implementing the technical scope. With HL&P concurrence, they awarded the human factors consulting services contract to Torrey Pines Technology following its established competitive bidding procedures. They are currently performing their work scope, primarily at the Bechtel-Houston offices.
2.3 REVIEW ,
The review phase is basically the investigative phase. This effort is organized into specialty task groups per Figure 2-3. Specialized personnel are selected as required for each task group from HL&P, Bechtel, Westinghouse, and Torrey Pines Technology.
Approximately 25 engineers and key operations personnel will participate in the detailed reviews and evaluations of the task groups.
The following types of personnel are included:
o System designers and analysts o Human factors consultants o Control board designers o Instrumentation and control engineers 2-4 2.2.11/03173 6308P/0044h l 1
HOUSTON CONTROL ROOM LIGHTING g gggg y g g ygg y L _. _ . POWER CO.
o Computer and data management engineer 7
L o Plant operators o Licensing engineer 2.3.1 Methodology 2.3.1.1 Criteria l
s The Design Review and Technical Task Team will prepare control room design and review criteria which will be included in the Criteria Report. This effort will stress the human
( factors considerations and requirements for the control room design. This document will describe the function of the control room and plant systems related to external communications. It will also address one of the major post-TMI concerns: the systems and human factors features for Annunciator / Computer / Safety Equipment interfaces relative to prioritization, consistency, and overall integration.
The following topics will be included in this document.
o Introduction
[ o General o Control Room Layout and Features o Main Control Panels Layouts and Features
( o Human Engineering Guidelines (plant specific adaptations of NUREG-0700, Section 6, guidelines not covered in other major topics)
[
~
[ 2-5 2.2.11/03173 6308P/0044h
{
( ---
l HOUSTON CO$ TROL ROOM lGHTING g gggg y gg ygg y
_ _E POWER CD.
o Communications o General Control Room Annunciation Features o Post-Accident Monitoring Features o Bypass and Inoperable Status Features 1
o Safety Parameter Display o Auxiliary Shutdown Panel o References 2.3.1.1.1 Criteria will be developed considering:
o Those human factors engineering practices that have general industry acceptance and have resulted in proven performance.
I o Pertinent NUREG documents and Regulatory Guides.
I o Established criteria from general industry, EPRI, INPO, government sources, HL&P, Westinghouse, and Bechtel standards and practices.
o Current plant systems and operations requirements.
o Firm human factors-related criteria stated by suppliers of major equipment and systems.
I
, 2-6 2.2.11/03173 6308P/0044h
( l
HOUSTON CONTROL ROOM g g ggg y g g ygg y lGHTING L __ _._ POWE R CD. -
g 2.3.1.2 Operating Experience Review L
2.3.1.2.1 The operating experience review task group (OERT) will review pertinent
[ operating experience documents and conduct a survey of control room operations ;
personnel In addition to typical human factors operator concerns, the OERT will emphasize systems -operability. It is anticipated that valuable input will be developed for l 1 use by the other task group, particularly the Systems Task Analysis Team (STAT). Specific attention will be placed on those of normal plant procedures that experienced operators identify as having the greatest potential for human factors engineering enhancements.
This information will be used in the selection process for those events to be analyzed by the STAT.
Consideration will be given to include in the operator experience review one or two operators from related Westinghouse PWRs. These operators will be used in the mock-up area for one to two weeks.
2.3.1.2.2 The OERT will perform the following:
A special meeting will be held to review the methodology used in the preparation of
( operating procedures. Sample procedures will be reviewed and comments submitted to the operations department.
[ A. Meet with key operations and training personnel to determine pertinent information on training, assigned duties, anticipated work scheduling, and
[ the availability of the various classes of cperations personnel. l l
l B. Prepare questionnaires and interview forms. (See Table 2-1.) l C. Review by Project Review Team.
D. Completion of questionnaires by operations personnel.
[
[ 2-7 2.2.11/03173 6308P/0044h
{
- m. . _ - _ _ _______.---- -
r l
t HOUSTON CONTROL ROOM LIGHTING DESIGN REVIEW
_ _ POWER CO.
E. Evaluate the data oi>tained.
F. Interview plant personnel.
G. Evaluate and summarize observations. >
2.3.1.2.3 Interview sheets and questionnaires will be prepared considering the special knowledge the control room operating personnel have concerning potential control room problems and positive features as determined by their experience.
A. Interviews will identify those aspects of the control room equipment layout and general design which are considered by the operators to provide opportunities for improvement relative to their decision making processes.
B. Questions will be focused on those details of the control room environment which are projected to indicate notable success, failure, and near-miss situations based on past experiences.
C. Respondents will be advised that the information obtained will not be used for performance evaluation purposes. ]
D. The following NUREG-0700 will be included in this operator review:
- 1. Workspace layout and environment
- 2. Panel design
- 3. Annunciator warning system
- 4. Communications
- 5. Process computers
- 6. Corrective and preventive maintenance
- 7. Procedures
- 8. Staffing and job design
- 9. Training
]
2-8 2.2.11/03173 6308P/0044h
\
- HOUSTON CONTROL ROOM 1 g g ggg y g g yyy y fGHMG L ___ POWER CD. l E. The respondents will be encouraged to speak openly about problems from their past experience or perceived potential problems and suggested solutions.
F. Other kinds of human factors concerns such as those related to employee programs.
{
G. Other questionnaires developed by industry and research groups in previous projects. l H. The interviews will be structured to allow for additions of material developed during the interview.
I. Table 2-1 covers the general toples that will be considered in development of operating personnel questionnaires.
2.3.1.2.4 Data evaluation will be done immediately following completion of the interview
[ period to assure maximum benefit from the interview. The data evaluation results will be forwarded to the project review team for review. The results of this work will be evaluated and summarized.
{
2.3.1.2.5 A re-review of areas of significant changes may be required.
2.3.1.3 Systems Function and Task Analysis 2.3.1.3.1 The Systems Task Analysis Team (STAT) will perform a structural review and
( analysis of the control room complex to determine the adequacy of its design, and documentation to facilitate safe plant operations. This work will be done considering the following:
{
A. Attend a series of plant design and plant systems lectures conducted by
[ Bechtel.
[ 2-9 2.2.11/03173 6308P/0044h
I HOUSTON CONTROL ROOM lGHTING gggggy ggyjgy
._ __K3 POWER CO.
TABLE 2-1 QUESTIONNAIRE AND INTERVIEW SHEET REFERENCE TOPICS l The following will be covered in the interview sheets and questionnaires to determine positive and negative features and suggestions for improvements:
o The role of the operations personnel in emergency situations.
o The use of an SPDS and other facilities in emergency situations.
o Those normal functions and tasks that the respondents consider should.be included in the systems function and task analysis.
o Major concerns and strengths of related plant operations.
o Techniques for maintenance of high vigilance. How boredom will be prevented. How proficiency will be maintained.
I o Views of engineering and engineered product necessary for plant operation.
I o Overall management policies - how perceived by interviewees, o Views of projected job assignments (work loading - too much, too little?).
o Views of job satisfaction or dissatisfaction (long-range job objectives).
o Views of personal training received to date - adequate? Suggestions for improvements.
I I
2-10 2.2.11/03173 6308P/0044h ;
s
houston CONTROL ROOM g g ggg y g g yjg y 7 lGHMG L _ _ _ POWER CO. ,
TABLE 2-1 (Cont.)
o Views of the control center complex - strengths and weaknesses.
o Views of the control room complex in the general areas noted in
~
NUREG-0700 Appendix C and Section 3.3.2.2 for normal and abnormal
{ situations.
o Discussion of emergencies.
~
i o Discussion to determine special techniques useful in plant control.
o Views of the engineering of the products required for plant operations.
o Views of external elements - NRC and press.
o Views of projected shift staffing.
o Relationship with fellow workers, maintenance, and other associates.
[
o Discussion of main concerns, major strengths or weaknesses, and improvements that are most sought for.
o View of projected workload and difficulties in performing assignments.
o Views of projected relationship with other groups that effect overall plant
( operations.
o Views of training.
{
o Views of administrative procedures.
[
[ 2-11 2.2.11/03173 6308P/0044h
{
A _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ . _
I HOUSTON CONTROL ROOM lGHTING g gggg y g g ygg y KT POWER CO.
B. Review pertinent plant documents such as: configurations, PSAR, systems descriptions, operating procedures (Westinghouse Owners Group Emergency Response Guidelines)*.
C. Prepare system and subsystem diagrams, Figures 2-4, 2-5 and 2-6, and Tabulation Figure 2-7. Key systems identified in NUREG-0700 Section 3.4.2.1 will be included.
D. Prepare tabulation of all emergency event sequences, Figure 2-8, and background system information, Figure 2-9.
E. Review results of operating experience. Review task group to help identify those functions and tasks that are judged to be candidates for review.
F. Prepare selection criteria. Select events to be analyzed in a series of STAT meetings. Such events are defined as selected operational events g (SO E).
G. Perform system function and task analysis for each SOE considering the following:
- 1. Prepare basic elements diagram, Figure 2-10.
I
- 2. Modify Westinghouse Owners Group-produced ERG functional (decision-action) flow diagrams as necessary, Figure 2-11.
- 3. Complete functional sequences tabulation, Figure 2-12, in STAT meetings.
I
- These generic procedures are considered to be an excellent source material to meet the objectives of the NUREG-0700 defined system function and task analysis.
2-12 -
2.2.11/03173 6308P/0044h 7
houston CONTROL ROOM LIGHTING ggSlgy ggylEW L _.._ _ POWER CO.
- 4. Continue the heirarchial review process of identifying tasks associated with each function, Figure 2-13, including equipment required.
- 5. List details about input, action / decisions (throughputs and outputs).
l
{
Task oriented decision-action diagrams that may be required for some tasks are shown in Figure 2.4. The NUREG-0700 recommendation for paying particular attention to the decision
{ making tasks is covered in Figures 2-14 and 2-15. Figure 2-15 also covers recommendations for other needed task and subtask data such as: type of attention needed for control actions (discrete or continuous), expected results, performance criteria, consideration
( for errors, and the consequences thereof.
H. Prepare panel interface equipment tabulation with the full complement of )
data requirements suitable for use in the verification process, Figure 2-16.
l I. Prepare operational sequence diagrams, Figure 2-17, and traffic link diagrams, Figure 2-18.
J. Evaluate data and summarize observations.
[ 2.3.1.3.2 A Systems Function Task Analysis update will be performed to permit comparison of the operational sequence diagrams and the traffic link diagrams, before and 1
[ af ter the control panel layout revisions.
( 2.3.1.4 Control Room Inventory
{ An inventory of controls, instrumentation, displays, and other equipment on the control room man / machine interfaces will be performed. This inventory will establish a reference data base for comparison with the requirements established by operator task analysis.
[ 2-13 2.2.11/03173 6308P/0044h
{
l HOUSTON CONTROL ROOM LIGHTING gggggy ggyggy Touts
__ E POWER CO.
The inventory will include component use and characteristics, and will serve as a support l
base for assessment of review observations. A plant specific computerized format similar g to NUREG 0700, Exhibit 3-6, will be used. E.
2.3.1.5 Control Room Survey 2.3.1.5.1 A survey of the full scale mock-up located in the Bechtel-Houston engineering offices will be performed to document compliance with the human factors enteria document. The use of a realistic mock-up, including sample control panel hardware will permit completion of the bulk of the checklist items developed. Those items that cannot be checked, such as voice-assisting communication devices, control room noise, illumination, use of protective clothing and other environmental considerations, will be deferred and completed using the simulator or control room in actual service conditions.
2.3.1.5.2 The Control Room Survey Task Group will perform the following tasks.
A. Prepare plant specific checklists for the following:
- 1. Control room workspace
- 2. Communications
- 3. Annunciator warning system
- 4. Controls
- 5. Visual displays
- 6. Labels and location aids
- 7. Process computers g Panel layouts E 8.
- 9. Control-display integration I
B. Submit checklists for Project Review Team review.
I l
1 l
2-14 2.2.11/03173 6308P/0044h
1
, \
- HOUSTON CONTROL ROOM LIGHTING gggggy ggyggy
- _. _E POWER CO.
7 C. Finalize checklists.
I D. Perform control room survey. 1 E. Evaluate data, summarize observations.
F. Recheck any significant modifications resulting from above work, if necessary.
G. Prepare a special report on the results of this review which may be beneficial in operator training.
2.3.1.5.3 The Control Room Survey Task Group will perform a representative survey of l 3
(
the revised panellayouts to verify compliance with the criteria document. l
[ 2.3.1.6 Verification of Control Room Function The verification task group will verify the availability of instruments and equipment needed to implement each task. This verification will be made by comparing the
( requirements identified by the STAT to the Control Room Inventory list. An adequacy determination of operator-equipment interfaces for task accomplishment will be made and the observations will be recorded. Formatted information developed during the inventory
{ and system function task analysis activities will be used.
[ 2.3.1.7 Validation of Control Room Functions
[ The validation task group will determine whether the control room operating crew can perform allocated functions within defined procedures. The bulk of this effort will be performed on the mock-up using walk-through/ talk-through techniques. In this effort,
{
identification will be made of the time-dependent SOE and plans will be made for their real time reviews on the plant simulator when this facility can be made available.
[ 2-15 2.2.11/03173 6308P/0044h
{
HOUSTON CONTROL ROOM LIGHTING DESIGN REVIEW KT POWER CO.
2.3.1.8 Annunciator Review o The annunciator review task group will perform a design review of all alarms of the main plant annunciator, plant computer, and ESF bypass and
. inoperable status system.
o The task group will perform a functional integration of the identified annunciators.
o The task group will review the results of NRC and EPRI annunciator studies as available, o The task group will develop review criteria, and recommend rearrangement of displays accordingly. They will also develop prioritization criteria and categorize annunciator cisplays accordingly.
o A review of window engravings, computer printouts, displays, and documents showing planned or actual signal inputs for each window, CRT display or printout will be performed, as will a review of abbreviations, colors, arrangements, and locations based on human factors principles.
Finally, the task force will evaluate and summarize the observations of the review.
2.3.1.9 Special Studies o A Demarcation Study will be performed based on the control panel design released for fabrication. Criteria will be developed for this study. This 3 study will probably affect the methodology used in the final finish of the control boards. A special team will ecnduct this study with the application of several selected demarcation schemes on the mockup, l
l 2-16 g 2.2.11/03173 l 6308P/0044h
]
L____._________._______ .
",*f*,N CONTROL ROOM g g DESIGN REVIEW
(
s
--_ POWER CO.
o A Labeling Study will be made based on the design information available at the time the control panels are released for faorication. Criteria will 3 be developed for this study which will include hierachial labeling. The study will cover all control panel engravings. (
[
[
[
[
[
[
~
[
5
[
[
[ 2-17 2.2.11/03173 6308P/0044h
{
HOUSTON CONTROL ROOM LIGHT lNG g gggg y gg ygg y i&
_ __.E POWER CO.
r i
- 3 1 i!:r =
!.! is l!!si s
- a :re =
aggy e! I.! E' {
a.
a . 3.! i si es -t
- 5s s.
s:
- 1
- s i! .' .i -s s Ei is!
sa:
!! !! !! [!g sars: . .
6 I .
m*s s !
!= .s a
!= [.s- z :' ~i g
vs .s: :
-5 a. s s r.
.:: e. : .ns.:
3 3 l =i !:g Ea gg, l l t *83Ii. :.
ss:
.is
- =
3 r.
mes
.g- ..s s 1 s.:s a.- . ..*
a . !.e-
. a u.s.
- c. s
- 3 ,
! !!! t e i g ins 6
I i 1
3 t ',
I .: .
- !. s:=
I ;i; d'-
.. s is -3 is-s i. is :: Ii:=I
- si :12:s
- .eg.c)
- . g e.i :a
.s 5 I I si !:!sEis it!
- m: as se
. si se
- ss ::an se!
RE==
.ma :::
3, i e i Etg OJ
-e.
sse I
a:5
= t
.i s:
.s
. m.
a:l tt EE 95:
1 I si .e 3
!!! rit :5s-s:
s - es 2:1 isi i
I, i.:r.2
< s s .,
n 1
0 OVERVIEW OF CRDR PROCESSES 7
Figure 2-1 2-18 s
L l
r i HOUSTON CONTROL ROOM UGHMG g gggg y gg yjg y r- ,, a L - ._. E POWER CO.
MAN AGEME NT TE AM REVIEW AND APPROVE MAN AGE R, ENGIN EE RING e PROGRAMPLAN l VICE PRES., OPERATIONS e CRITERIA e FINAL REPORTS l BECHTEL e DESIGN IMPLEMENTATIONS PROJECT ENGINEER- SYSTEMS t i PROJECT REVIEW TE AM HL&P RF V'EW PRELIMIN ARY AND t INAL LEAD ENGINEER INSTRUMENTATION & CONTROLS
- PROGRAM PLAN OPERATING GENERAL SUPERVISOR e CRITERIA e DESIGN REVIEW FINDINGS BECHTEL e REPORTS
[ CONTROL SYSTEM DEPUTY GROUP SUPVR.
t i DESIGN REVIEW Ald0 TECHNICAL TASK TEAM HL&P ENGINEERING,0PERATIONS AND LICENSING PERSONNEL AS REQUIRE 0 DEVELOP AND EVALUATE BECHTEL
- PROGRAM PLAN e CRITERIA PRINCIPAL INVESTIG ATOR e CHECK LISTS ENGINEERING AS REQUIRED e SYSTEM FUNCTION
[ WESTINGHOUSE AND TASK ANALYSIS e SURVEYS e INVENTORY ENGINEERING AND TRAINING e WALK THROUGH/
AS REQUIRED TALK THROUGH e PROCEDURES CONSULTANTS e OBSERVAT10NS PROJECT ENGINEER PREPARE ASST. PROJECT ENGINEER e DESIGN IMPLEMENTATION TASK ANALYSIS LEADER OMMENDAT10NS OPERATING EXPERIENCE REVIEW LDR f SYSTEMS SPECIALIST L ANNUNCIATOR REVIEW LEADER INVENTORY HUMAN F ACTORS SPECIALIST OVERVIEW OF CONTROL ROOM DESIGN REVIEW ORGANIZATION Figure 2-2
{ ]
2-19 l
{iI ;/!
= cm4o2 - gO% Op2OOR
=$daC 1 mC]E
/) g 5ME
%u ' j Im23 sec T
N O E T N EM L A O R
A G N P S A T I E F
R N R O A M
A S T NS A OE S
. D N I I N S O TD O E I AU I Z T OT T I
R A N S A T EL O O N MA H E MN TS M MN AE U E E O 0 EM A NG TM l
Ci ME El R0 TO T A NH g MS 0 NC EE E C I A M A A i
g DH I 6 MR I M T NP ED E L E O N G E E
A TN GA AN M
S )
T N
WA E S A N NI F
NN AA I N A S
E 1
(
V O MSE MPL S N EI V Y S O RTC T A I O I T TE R LI
. A C E
R P T T R P J
A U N OO E RC M P l E L
P M M M M A D A I A E NE E T AT T W WK E S T E I A N I VT E V E l E l6 M R R LA E
G T NC A C GI I N R E
N J SH O)
A O EC T1 M R OE P T A (W M IC N
E l l O Y I O R U EV e
. )
N R 1
(
R O N LT K ON A SI S RE AS TV TY NNI L O M A C E
T N a S A m Y
S u s
E S
A H
P D
W m N) E A (1 V I
m
)
NN O0 E a 1
( I 1 R TT M AA
. W O
O Y C0l I
e m
l R VE FI a R A
- 1) IE
( V L R V G E OU E V
m N
I E R R T
S T N A C O R N E C EI PR OE P
X E
u N g O3>E -4>m3omQ>bN> OZ
- T{,e 9W a YN 1 4
llllI Il!! , \j j1 lli ltll lI il lfll
L
~ -
1 C HOUSTON CONTROL ROOM UGHTING g gggg y g g ygg y h _ . POWER CO.
=
- s.
$U
- 5
. = ,
3 ..
S
[ !
S
- II i
.s EE
[ af an 'e n
[ .
II E I
[ .n3 .
t
[ s $s 3-Eg 2.
> >' >E j" CE
$3 R j
=
N Is is E6 II J En $a
~
e 3
EzI CONTROL PANEL FLOW DIAGRAM !
1 Figure 2-4
[- 2 21 l
- 1
I HOUSTON CONTROL ROOM LIGHT lNG DESIGN REVIEW l
.NE OWER CD.
I 1
\n /
V STEAM STEAM I
GENERATOR GENERATOR p
CONTROL j g j g C d l COOLANT COOLANT I PUMP PUMP IRPI POWER LEVEL lq COMPARISON J L REACTOR REACTOR I
COOLANT ! I COOLANT C l I REACTIVITY Y")
1 I CONTROL STEAM STEAM GENERATOR GENERATOR I
i 1
PRIMARY COOLANT SYSTEM CONTROL PANEL FLOW DIAGRAM .
~
Figure 2-5
~
2-22 9
1 HOUSTON CONTROL ROOM g gggg y gg yyy y l klGHTING
___E POWER CO.
[
[
I m L.O. RES. l
' L T AND COOLER) UMP l RCP
- MOTOR I L.O. R ES.
m
~
(AND C00LERj l
( ) '
4 : RMW
{ L SEAL NO. 3 J
f T SEAL NO.2 ; RCOT
[ ( )
f T CVCS ? SEAL NO.1 '
l' ' I
( )
{ O "
- THERMAL C OL NG O A RI R WATER ( j b )
q ""'
c p\
RX COOLANT LOOP
[
[
[
REACTOR COOLANT PUMP SYSTEM Figure 2-6
( 2-23
^
NO
. y ON I
TL AE CN OA LP g F R f O M O E T TA S i Y N SG BI S U E S D R
y E
O R T
A U U T L A E E A N T G F y
V IG A AE E S D P R E
L y
T I ~
T M
E T f_
S Y t S
B U
S j D
E t
I V
E 7- ;
R N 2 _
NW E t
GOD I
R S K U E A G DE N O
O
. I F
R I N n
L Y OS R R T O N MT EA O TN C S YI G SS E
D mi t
E t L
T I
. T NG O M C E 1_
OC T T R T S t S E Y U H W S O G I O HL &P
- o
- I t
=
1_ -
! l lIi ,: '\ lll lf l l
ll1 7
eD 3
mE iV L
f r. 0 r
sVm
- n. i q _
f _
F #
O o -
m R O
T E
R A U o U TA E E e
L v t
m A N T G F a #
V E ISG A OP AE R v n
i n
o r
n a m
s s #
i r
o n m e
t s
y s #
u m W E S c
s I u VEC c a
E N 8-RE
'm NU G
I Q
E 2
E R
S S
- U ET G -
DNE I n MV F
O E #
OYC R N n LE OGR R E TM NE #
O M C M
M t
y M r NG O O N C T T I
R M S U H E OG I W
O HL &P M -
M '
Y3 _
fl lll l ll \
l l
L 1
L J
t F
O u
J t
R E O R T
A TU U
L A E E 1_
A GN T G F L VI A AE E S D P R J
t i
s_
WN E O S
E 1 u
I I
T D 9-VA E
M E
2 R M R T E R
i_
S t NOF Y U G S I N G I
DET t MSY O S O D R N s_
LU t OOR R G T K S NC OA CB N
O I
T u
C N
U F
G N
s_
r I
W O
L 1 L
O F ,
E H
T M
R O
F R
u E
. P NG O O
/
ON T
S I
T C
R E
T D
E S
u U H W U OG I O S HL &P E I
L M
E
- T I
T S
T Y
- M S S ,
E I T
S H
T u ,
Y S
0 1
?M l !fll <ll
l lll1l T
E l R O
~ C J R O
F S
1 P I
R
/ T T
S F O P
O R n O F
D N
A S
P n R O E I
R T
T R T A TU N U A A E E L n L A N T G F V IG A AE P
T N
E S DP R E V
E R
n P O
T D
E i D E
E i N S
L O
R T
E O
C N
I I
T D L V A 2 E A M U 9-E R M T N 2 n NOF R S Y
A M E R
G I N S E D
l Y
F Y
OS T OD E F
RN A m LU OO S
T N
R GR A L
T K P NC O m OA CB T
M E
T S
Y S
m F O
E C
N A
T m R O
P M
I D
N m E A
L O _
R t
NG O F ON C O
-r I R
T S T E O N
U H W I OG I O P T
HL &P E I
R m . L
._T I
C S
EG T DN
_M F E
I O I
L E
. T RO 1 m S Y
S 0
2 BC 2 Y0 1
lll1lll1 l l l
l 11Ii F
O U
R U O E R T
A TU J U A E E -
L A N T G F L V IG A AE E S D P R 1
L I
I WN S t-EO E I I D 3 V AT M 9-E E 2 >
R M R T E -
S '
NO Y R GFN S U I
MSY O S O D 1 R N LU t OO RR G E T K R N C U
OA CB L
IA F
a M
E T
S Y
S s._
t E
S U
A C t_
Y _
A t M
H C
IH i_
W t S
E R
U NG O L ;
C I ON A T T I
R F t S E E U H W L O G I O B i
H L &P E D
E L
T R
C .
o TI F
- M O
T E S 1 . _
T I 1_
S L 3 -
Y 0 t
. S 3 r__
l lflI ,f' ' i
l l l I
\
I D
E N
I
\
F
- E F D N
F D
D E
O S m A B
Y T
I L
I B
m R O E L
I A
A R V T
A TU A N
U A E E U m L A N T G F V GI A AE M
E E S D P R T S
Y S
m F O
N O
I T
r A
R U
j D
D N
A A
m WN EO S
E T
A D
I I D 4 VT E A M E
D 9-E U 2 R M L m NO R T S
Y C
N E
R GFN I
S I.
D U SI E V
G EM L I
F m DET O V
MS N O SY I S
O D T N
RN m LU OO E
N O
P RR G M T K O C
N C m OA CB D
N A
S E
C N
m E D
I C
N I
E R
m U L
I A _
F M _
E _
m T S
Y S
T _
N NG O A C
m ON T
S T I
R E
L P
T U H N O G I W
O E
N HL &P E I
T m - L T
I R
E PA.
T
- F '.l I
M OE E TT S
- I RI m T S LC u M Y 0 S 4 I I l lll 1l
=
i
=
)
F U - )
lE W cc
- & 1
< j k
e 12 z
E w .
E
<? E 34
<~ Z
> 9 >< <
mw e w u.,
o
= ]
wmQ c6 m a 2
5 )
=
r E '
c< -
w a
z
-p o $
> = 9 W< 3 lE w
o w
N y
EE $ 2 g zo >*
e a Ox U O m- 2 -
WE h 1 0% w j
z =5 s=
8a E E O l
- => J O@ E E3 zu 5 1
04 w j OE 3 '
E
=
1 o J E
48 ,
3 oo J =d
. La g E<
.-=
, >$ o 3g O 22 OE u go E
$5 UU
- 5 I E5 EsaE= j a
=E w m E
o_
I >- MN M e##
2 3
l E >= w w ES R m a >= m :
> q 2-30 s e e s
i 1
1 r
m I
F m
i O
m R E O R T
A U T m U L A E E A GN T G F V I E S D P R A AE n
1 1
i .
n
-t .
WN S E
EO I I D
n VT M 6 E A E 9-
- R M r R T 2 S
NO Y E G FN I
S R t
SI U
- EM G r DET S M
I F
MS Y E
T O S S Y
m O D S r RN E I
LU S OO R S
A t
R G L
- T K C-r NC N OA O N
CB O
T M
m r
E T
S Y
S H
C
- A r E F
O N
O m
I T
e C E
N -
N O
. C -
NG O R r O N C E T
T I
R S T N
E I U H W F O G I O O HL &P E E
E r L R
- T I
G E
T D
- M E E 1 T 0 r N S
Y 0 S 6 lllll lll' l
CONTROL ROOM HOUSTON LIGHTING DESIGN REVIEW
}
_ . 5I POWER CO.
]
]
PLANT CONTROLS MCP AND SUPPORT EQUIP.
]
STATION
- i AUXILIARIES
]
' f HEALTH -
PHYSICS A0 R0 ,
J L f CHEMISTRY
' SRO ] .
]
RAD WASTE 1 r
]
TSC PLANT SHIFT ENGINEER SUPERVISOR
]
]
]
]
]
BASIC ELEMENTS INVOLVED q IN REVIEW OF ;
A SELECTED OPERATIONAL EVENT - .
Figure 2-10 ,
2 32 ,
" HOUSTON CONTROL ROOM g gggg y gg ygg y fGHMG I
u K"T POWER CO.
[
FROM PAGE C3 15 \
AUXILIARY , \YES
[ FEE 0 WATER /
FUNCTIONAL 7[
NO 1 P VERIFY MAIN FEE 0 WATER -
SYSTEM FUNCTION
[
IN VES _
FEEDWATER / -
FUNCTIONAL 7 MAINTAIN FLOW &
,, LEVEL OF NON FAULTED STM GENERATORS VERIFY CONDENSATE
[ SYSTEM FUNCTION DEPHESSURIZE NON F AULTED STEAM
,, GENERATORS
[ GO TO PLANT C00LOOWN l OPERATING
,, INSTRUCTION
[ 13 k CONDENSATE \ YES SYSTEM /
FUNCTIONAlf /
NO GO TO PACE
[ C-5
[
(
FUNCTIONAL (DECISION ACTION)
FLOW DIAGRAM Figure 211
( 2-33
]
]
=
]
== ]
5=
=4 4 w s"W m . mm m a m. ]
)
sm EC
=
nC WP 5E -
a
=r ea -
2o N 9N $
l0 S o 9
o s d. u. -
8E m.
Ju 1 0$
x= J
>- c3 Zw
]
O u "g g n
b
=
=.
u
]
b e 'l e- J E
E O
=o
- W a= u a s W
== .
E E etl S E$ ! ]
I5 a s.
i= $
$ 5 l 2-34
l 1
\
- L .
AN 1 PU I
CM INM O m
R C P -
r L
F A L C O O O m R L
- T T
N L O A C U L N A A m
r R E P
I C
M _
O R N O T I A U R T P U U T A E E A L
m A N T G F V G A A E I
E S D P R E
/MD MO C m
r D E
R T OY T
r N I B E N V O i E M L
A D t
N O
E M _-
- JI R Y OB r E AT I
F R
VR E 2 E PE P 2
RO 1 m
r ND 2 GET I
E SC S R EE M U L E D E T G S
MS I
r Y F S
OR E B OP U S
RE /
S m L C M r O EN E T
RU S Y
TQ S NE m OS r C AL N
O I
T C
- N r
U E F C N
E
, U
- Q -
r E S
N I
S N
-r OI T
C N
O U N G C F
O N T T
I R S S T
- I r E L U H G W O I O HL &P :
E m
e .* L E
T mT I CR _
NE . _
T E B N UM E QU EN r V S E +
e f(! l
]
e ,
S. )
5 t' 55 :
$E )
ye
-5 '
a=
- J E W M o e s SE
- mmuo ]
mmom.
11 ]
Q
~
"g .
1a R5 s E E
n w a 4
>o wa o n
e
']
E4 I N j ZZ E> W G C. 2" CC D
m >- a W8 c-E O
- u. J
.s :- ]
8s
=
u 5:
E= Ni:
}
oE o< 54 ec I
a I
5 E_
== .
)
W= -
EE
.=
k N ]
o CE
. E EE wea oz od 1 um g j E
3 l ~t *E M
>=
d eG m 1 J
ge M
- 5. 5 =
" $i 53 1 m = ;
s
- 2 38 ,
I L
[
DETAILED TASKIS:
[ DECISIDN-ACTIDN DIAGRAM
[ (START
[
{,) (i) MONiTORR.STLEvEL
[
"a(2 (2) R.ST LEVELS LESS18AN oR EoVAL 10 3 PT.
YES 3 (3) RASINITIATED AND REQUIRED AUTO ACTIONS HAVE
{ \ OCCURRED NO 4 (4) MANUALLY ACTUATE RAS
[
5 (5) LPSI PUMPS TRIP
\
( NO 6 (6) STOP LPSI PUMPS
{
=
[ YES !7 (7) VERIFY MINIFLOW REClRC VALVES CLOSED
[ NO 8 (8) CLOSE MINIFLOW VALVES l
[ Figure 214 ;
2-37
l S
U T
A T
S g
L F E O N A
P g S
E C
I V
y R E E O R D T
A U U T L A E E N TG F R
N y
A G O VI A AE E S D P R C L
A o
TL I
"A h
1 t
S E
I C
A W
E I
V E
R R
U C
C A
1 5
1 2
mi N -
E GS I L S R
A I
. o O O N
R L T E N N O
C A
P w
D 1 E
V L
S O
O t
- N N V E 0 N I C l I i S V F
I R
C I
R E
T S
E D u S Y E S :
D B D E U E I
T C
V S D
N R
IU S
R E
u A Q T "
E E E J S B
. B A R A NG O O I S A ON T
S T I
C R
E K
S A
E T
S Y
T U
P N
R A
P o
UH S T s 1 2 OC W O
I 1
2 3 4 s 7 5 9 0 1 1 1 NL &P o
l l I ll l( l ll 1 ll1l lll
HOUSTON CONTROL ROOM DEIGN REVIE~] EVALUATOR LIGHTING TASK DETAILS SIGNATURE
& DATE
- POWER CO. PAGE OF REF l
TASK AC Vl Y TASK OBJECTIVE DESCRIPTION:
, gER SYSTEMS AND SUBSYSTEMSINVOLVED:
LIST ACTION REQUIRED.EQUIPMENTTO BE MONITORED AND/OR CONTROLLED.NEED FOR CONTINUGUS OR DISCRETE SETTINGS, DEGREE OF PRECISION REQUIRED, DECISIONS TO BE MADE.lNPUTS REQUIRED FOR DECISIONS, RESULTS EXPECTED, AND PERFORMANCE CRITERIA IF APPLICABLE TO ACTIVITY.
COMPLETE CR EQUIPMENT REQUIREMENT SHEETS, LIST POTENTIAL ERROR OR OMISSION, CONSEQUENCE THEREOF AND CORRECTIVE ACTION:
STEPNO.
Y 3
l l
1 l
l l
l l
I FIGURE 2-15.2 .
l _.
SO TN .
N A )S ESN S
E M NO C E RI OIT I
D EI QC T E RNR U PO C
A R E MP F
O F
R H MU E T COS T O(
N I
L E -
N O AN A EO1 Q'C0 R
O E P.
C O
RLT "
T R S A T U S U A A E T CE L
A V
N G
I E E T
A G
AE F SI L
I P VY E
O T
E S DP R AN CO OI LT E
W R E'
I V D D
E E Y 6 R E R C L 1 I
U A -
N T I Q R
U 2
GS I L T E R
C E SI C A
MD F OK E G
OSA N R T . A O R L
O N V N
R O T I T S N C T O
I N N O C U U F
F O .
S S K
S L
O HO T N O A R I G T T N
WA
' R O T O C
/
F D o R A E T -
R N MR e
s AE I
U s RT a AE Q
E R
P w
. P.
NG O I ON C U T T S
I RE E
Q O G
All w
0 GH WC E R0 0I O A ET 1
NL &P F BP SI .
- R
- E
- T IR NC NS w
E
-N I L
K D S
A E T 1_
N .
A _
t P
e e
1 jl :
4 f
HOUSTON CONTROL ROOM 1 LIGHTING gggggy ggyjgy '
_ _ iN' OWER CO.
l
(
l i
M
- . gj e c - o h b, c - - -
n E Ee 4t3u w't ,
[ " zu E 48 :
Lm a@ Ep m n r. -
0 NN g 8 );=? ## g' l
[
8 D e ,,
,t ,m .. n. ~
's >
( tVi
@s0 0 S 0
{
(
OPERATIONAL SEQUENCE DIAGRhM Figure 217
( 2-41 f - - - - - - _ - - - . - . - - - -
]
l houston CONTROL ROOM LIGHTING g g ggg y gg ygg y Et3 OWER CO.
i I
1 I 3 I NO.0F OCCURRENCES 5s e l FOR EACH PATH I
i l (TYPICAL) 1
' I 003 i
010 1 l
/@ l 3
- 9 00 ,
1 N I i
E l
" i l
i
)
5 I
l j@ \
i h l 002 )
- j I
M8 l
n e
oN$'
- i! "
g l i
007 g l
!! 'x \
l -
\
\ l
\ l 001
\
3 \
s is N 006 jj yyo'N
- i; g _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
2! as !) 2 : NUMBER REFER TO STEPS l
se as IN THE OPERATOR TASK SEQUENCE, FORM E (TYP) J 8}
005 004 2: NUMBER OF STEPS AT.( ACH PANE L (TYPI TRAFFIC LINK DIAGRAM s Figure 2-18 -
2-42 s
s
~
HOUSTON CONTROL ROOM LIGHTING
< DESIGN REVIEW 1
L _ ._ POWER CO.
[ 3.0 M ANAGEMENT AND SPAFFING 3.1 CONTROL ROOM DESIGN REVIEW MANAGEMENT PROCEDURE
( o The management planning activity is described in Section 2.2.
o The basic organization and functions are shown in Figuae 2.2.
o The management team will meet throughout the program, as required, to perform its basic functions. Meetings will be called by the Principal Investigator and directed by the HL&P Project Engineering Manager. In
( addition, it may be necessary to hold special meetings to meet scheduled requirements.
[
o The CRDR consultant will be available for these meetings, as needed, to facilitate completion of meeting agenda items.
i o Minutes of all meetings will be taken and recorded.
3.2 INTEGRATION OF CRDR WirH OTHER HUM AN FACTORS PROJECTS The overall relationship of NUREG 0660 task action items are shown in Figure 1.1. The human factors aspect of the basic activities shown in Figure 1.1 will be reviewed by the Project Review Team working with the HL&P and Bechtellicensing groups. l 3.3 CRDR TEAM STRUCTURE AND PERSONNEL
( The basic CRDR team structure and personnel are defined in Figures 2-2 and 2-3.
Resumes of assigned personnel are included in Appendices A and B and are consistent with the review criteria of NUREG-0801.
(
3-1 2.2.11/03173 631IP/0044h
( ------- - --
s
/
HOUSTON CONTROL ROOM
, LIGHTING gggggy ggypyy
_ ___._ POWER CO.
4.0
( CRDR ASSESSJ1ENT AND IMPLEMENTATION All observations identified during the review phase will be processed according to the assessment and implementation methodology presented in Figures 4.1 through 4.3. The Design Review and Technical Task Team will document these observations and recommendations on Checklist Observation forms (CLOS) which are then submitted to the Project Review Team for assessment.
[
The initial step by the Project Review Team will be to accept or reject the formatted I information where, in the latter case, they returned the CLO to the Design Review and Technical Task Team for further evaluation and resubmittal. Accepted CLOS will be categorized according to the Assessment Factor Criteria (Figure 4.2). The criteria chosen provides for a simple, but effective, relationship between assessment factor and implementation requirements commensurate with the significance of the observation.
( This approach greatly reduces the need to consider various levels of safety while still accomplishing the assessment objectives of NUREGs 0700 and 0801. To aid the Project Review Team in selecting the appropriate assessment factor for each finding, a set of
{
statements or questions will be developed to the extent that the affected guideline (s) is inadequate in this respect.
l All observations assigned Categories A, B or C will be identified as Human Engineering
( Discrepancies (HEDs) and will be analyzed for correction (Figure 4-3). Correction of Category D results are optional The first step in this process will be to identify those,
( IIEDs which can be corrected by enhancement. The remair!ng IIEDs will be analyzed to identify design improvement alternatives and to select solutions. In addition, some IIEDs may be corrected through training. An integral part of this step will be a reapplication of the control room review process as appropriate to ensure thats l 4-1 -
2.2.11/03173
( 631lb/0044h
houston CONTROL ROOM t.lGHTING g gggg y gg ygg y
___ __ POWE R CO.
o Other guidelines are not violated o Other corrections are not invalidated o Any resulting increase in significance of other findings is identified and accommodated Solutions which do not bring the discrepancies into full compliance with the guidelines will be identified and justified accordingly.
The Project Review Team will submit the pro. cessed CLO and their recommended solutions to the management team for approval. Rejected CLOS and/or solutions will be returned to the Project Review Team for additional assessment. Approved solutions will be returned to the Design Review and Technical Task Team for implementation planning.
J
)
)
4-2 2.2.11/03173 631 th/0044h ;
s s P
HOUSTON CONTROL ROOM IGHTING gggggy ggyggy
_ _N POWER CO. ,
L
[
DESIGN REVIEW AND
[ _______, TECHNICAL TASK TEAM ,________,
l e PR PARES CLO ORMS I I I I I l OBSERVATIONS I I I g o I g PROJECT REVIEW TEAM I
( g - - - ~ ~~'- -
- ASSESS OBSERVATIONS l
l CLO e CATEGORIZE ASSESSMENT I f REJECTED OBSERVATIONS -
I L
- DIRECTS ANALYSIS PROCESS g
_ _ _ _ _ , FOR CORRECTIONS l
e RECOMMENDS l
(. l DISPOSITION g i I l H E D'S l
[ l g
I I
l
( l__ --
- REVIEW HED'S -------- d I
ASSESSMENT
- REVIEW RECOMMENDATIONS ASSESSMENT
(. REJECTED APPROVED r LEGEND:
( CLO - CHECKLIST OBSERVATIONS HED - HUMAN ENGINEERING DISCREPANCY I
ASSESSMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION METHODOLOGY
( Ficure 4-1 ,
43
HOUSTON CONTROL ROOM UGHTING gggggy ggyjgy
. _ __E POWER CO.
l REVIEWPROCESS OBSERVATIONS l ASSESSMENT FACTOR CRITERIA ASSESSMENT IMPLEMENTATION
]
CATEGORY FACTOR (RATING) y A SAFETY (1) PRIOR CCNSEQUENCES TO FUEL LOADING (MANDATORY)
B AVAILABILITY AT EARLIEST ENHANCEMENT OPPORTUNITY (HIGH PRIO RITY)
C RELIABILITY- CONVENIENT ENHANCEMENT GUTAGE (ACCEPTED)
O MINOR MAY OR MAY NOT BE REQUIRED (NON MANDATORY)
- l ASSESS 0BTERVATIONS CAT 0 (1) EXAMPLE: RESULTS IN UNSAFE OPER ATION, VIOLATION OF . ANALYSIS TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS FOR CORRECTION o
RECOMMEND YES CORRECTIONS NO l DOCUMENT l SELECTION OF HED'S TO BE ANALYZED FOR CORRECTION Figure 4-2 44
HOUSTON CONTROL ROOM LIGHTING g gggg y g g ygg y
._N POWER CO.
HUMAN ENGINE ERING OlSCREPANCIES TO BE ANALYZE 0 FOR CORRECTION (F ROM THE HED SELECTION PROCESS)
/
AN ALYSIS FOR CORRECTION
[ BY ENHANCEMENT CORRECT WITH YES E NHANCEME NT7 NO
[ ANALYSIS TO 10ENTIFY DESIGN IMPROVEMENT ALTERNATIVES AND SELECT RECOMMENDED SOLUTION DESIGN
- IMPLEMENT DOCUMENT
[
- FUNCTION ANALYSIS
{+----- - l ._ ,
- ALLOCATION i MAN l MACHINE l
[ v
- VERIFY ALLOCATION -- -- -- 4
- SEL CT PREFERRED )
DESIGN ALTERNATIVE !
6 l
- VALIDATE DESIGN -- -- - -- >J FULLY SCHEDULE >
[ NOT CORRECTED IMPLEMENTATION J $ 8' ASSESS EXTENT OF CORRECTION 0C0 ENT g PARTIALLY CORRECTED JUSTIFY AND SCH EDULE
~
IMPLEMENTATION
- DOCUMENT j DOCUMENT
(
SELECTION OF DESIGN IMPROVEMENTS
( Figure 4-3 4-5
1 HOUSTON CONTROL ROOM g g ggg y g g ygg y lGHMG
_ POWER CD.
5.0 DOCUMENTATION AND DOCUMENT CONTROL 5.1 DOCUMENI'ATION USEDTO SUPPORT THE CRDR o Bechtel has established a library in the mock-up facilities at the Houston ,
engineerirg offices to assist the Design Review and TechnicalTask Team.
The documents contained therein are the latest plant construction documents consistent with Section 2.4.1 of NUREG 0700. Houston Lighting & Power is partic!pating in the Westinghouse owners group meetings that are producing generic reference material that will be used ,
in this review.
1 o The consultant has also established a reference library of pertinent human factors documents including many of those listed in NUREG 0700, as well as relevant documents generated in other CRDRs and relevant EPRI and INPO documents.
5.2 DOCUMENTATION GENERATED BY THE CRDR PROCESS 5.2.1 The following is taken from Preface Sheets 11, ill and IV and more accurately describes the documentation for this program.
, A. Program Plan - Defines the plan for performing the CRDR.
B. Criteria Report - Provides the basis for the CRDR and describes the 1 interface between the control room and plant systems.
C. Operating Experience Review Report - Describes the review process results, conclusions and recommendations of the operating experience review (OER) task defined in the Program Plan.
5-1 2.2.11/03173 6312P/0044h
HOUSTON CONTROL ROOM LIGHTING gggggy ggyggy
. _ POWER CO.
D. System Function and Task Analysis Report - Describes the methodology, -
results, conclusions and recommendations for the SFTA effort defined in the Program Plan.
]
E. Control Room Survey Report - Describes the review process, results, conclusions and recommendations of the control room survey task defined in the Program Plan. This report also includes the final results and _
dispositions for the human factor observations obtained from the OER and the SFTA.
F. Annunciator Report - Describes the review process, results, conclusions and recommendation of the annunciator review task defined in the Program Plan.
1 t
G. Special Studies Report - Describes details of any miscellaneous studies performed as part of the CRDR. This will include the anthropometric -
~
study, the hierarchial labeling study and the demarcation study.
II. Implementation Plan Report - Summarizes the CRDR, the control room design changes, and the proposed methods of implementing the design changes.
I. Executive Summary - Summarizes the CRDR, results, conclusions and g recommendations. Technical details are in the Operating Experience Review Report, the System Function and Task Analysis Report, the Control Room Survey Report, the Special Studies Report, and the Annunciator Report.
5.3 DOCUMENTATION SYSTEM AND CONTROL The Design Review and Technical Task Team will develop a data base which will be reviewed by the Project Review Team. This data base will consist of 5-2 2.2.11/03173 6312P/0044h
s I
HOUSTON CONTROL ROOM lGHMG g gggg y g g yjg y
._ _ _ POWER CO.
computerized printouts and hard copy files of cross referenced information including:
o Listings of reference plant documents used o Listing of human factors referenced documents used l
o The Program Plan Report (this document) o Pertinent Bechtel documents defining requirements for the CRDR o The control room criteria report o The outputs of the individual task groups (see Fig. 2-4) o Minutes of meetings o All findings, HEDs, and dispositions as processed o Executive Summary Report o Detailed CRDR Report o Pertinent correspondence 5-3 2.2.11/03173
~
6312P/0044h
a s
houston CONTROL ROOM lGHTING
(
g gggg y gg ygg y L _ . .___ .._ POWE R C D.
p 6.0
SUMMARY
L The liouston Lighting & Power Compary considers that the program planned for the L review of the South Texas Project is exte isive, complete and consistent with the pertinent document noted herein.
I L
The program is in progress and it is our intention to comply with the content of this Program Plan Report.11ouston Lighting & Power reserves the right to make changes in its best interest and will notify the NRC of all planned or executed deviations.
(
(
[
{
(
r
(
r
{
( 2.2.11/03173
~
6312 P/0044h r
L
I HOUSTON LIGHT 1NG CONTROL ROOM r & DESIGN REVIEW L __ ___ POWER CO.
I L
F L
f f
APPENDIX A p Qualifications of Management Team Members L
e L
2.2.11/03173 l 6313P/00044h l
L
[
HOUSTON CONTROL ROOnt LIGHTING gggggy ggyggy
_. __ POWER CD.
ALLEN P. CAINE Chief Controls Engineer Bechtel Power Corporation Educatiom B.S., Physics, John Carroll University, Cleveland, Ohio
( Graduate Studies, School of Business Administration, University of California at Berkeley
( Summary: Present: Chief Control Systems Engineer / Project Engineer South Texas Nuclear Project 3 Years: Chief Control Systems Engineer 1/2 Year: Control Systems Staff Engineer, Houston Area
{ Office 2 Years: Control Systems Staff - Bechtel Espana, Madrid, Support of Four, Two-Unit Nuclear Power projects 4 Years: Control Systems Engineering, Group Supervisor, Asco Nuclear Project,
( 5 Years:
Madrid, Spain Control Systems Engineering Group Supervisor, San Francisco Office, Palisades and Arkansas
[ Nuclear Projects
( 4 Years: Development Engineer, Real Time Digital Computer Control Applications 7 Years: Engineering and Development of Safety and
( Control Systems for Both Nuclear and Fossil Fueled Power Plants
( Experience: Mr. Caine has 21 years experience in the instrumentation and i controls field as applied to nuclear and fossil-fueled power plants.
As Chief Control Systems Engineer he has responsibility for the technical adequacy of all project instrumentation. His Houston staff assignment has included technical review of several fossil projects.
[ His staff assignment in Madrid included responsibility for technical I
stpport of four, two-unit pressurized water reactor power plants.
The Engineering Group Supervisors asssignmerit consisted of directing Spanish national engineers in the planning, design, specification, procurement, and execution of design of twe 940MWE PWR units. In San Francisco, he had duties similar to those in his Spanish assignment.
The development of real-time digital computer programs related to
- the X-15 test-bed navigational system while at Honeywell in St.
Petersburg, Florida.
A1 2.2.11/03173 6313P/0044h
~ -
l I
C0NTROL ROOM
",**'T*N gg7,,g DESIGN REVIEW l
. . - ._ . POW E R C O.
ALLEN P. CAINE
'Ihe development and design of controls systems for both nuclear and fossil plants, utilizing analog computer techniques, was his assignment at the Bailey Meter Company.
Professional Affiliations: Senior Member, Instrument Society of America 1 Member, Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers J Registered Professional Engineer, California
]
[
]
l i
A-2 2.0.11/03173
$313P/0044h lI
L r
HOUSTON CONTROL ROOM MHTmG gggggy ggyggy L
_ _ POWER CO.
T' STEPIIEN M. DEW L Engineering Manager, STP Houston Lighting & Power
[
Education: BSCE, University of Missouri at Columbia Summary: 1 Year : Assistant Engineering Project Manager,
{ Brown & Root 6 Years: Assistant Project Engineer, Stone & Webster 6 Years: Startup Engineer, Babcock & Wilcox Experience: Mr. Dew joined flouston Lighting & Power (HL&P) in 1981 and is presently the Engineering Manager for the South Texas Nuclear
( Project. IIIs responsibilities include providing direction, coordination and administration of the project engineering effort to r ensure that it is accomplished in an effective, timely, economical
( and technically competent manner. He is specifically responsible for: directing the project engineering team in their daily coordination with the architect-engineer; directing the development
( of specific HL&P procedures necessary to accomplish the work; directing HL&P's review of engineering and pertinent licensing documents; assuring the preparation of technical specifications and
[ provisions of engineering input to bidder's lists for the procurement
( of equipment, systems, materials and engineering services. Other responsibilities include resolution of critical problems; interfacing with various project management members and A-E Project
( Engineering Manager for the purpose of administering the project; and interfacing with representatives from vendors.
As an Assistant Engineering Project Manager with Brown & Root, Mr. Dew was assigned to the South Texas Project. He was in charge of the Systems Engineering Group and his responsibilities included:
managing a group of mechanical, civil, electrical, instrument and controls, licensing, materials engineering, heavy civil, architectural and nuclear analysis personnel. Within his group, he was responsible for establishing the basic design criteria for his area of responsibility; controlled a budget in excess of three million manhours; provided design information for other portions of the i project and construction; had technical responsibility, through the l desciplines, for subcontracts totaling several million dollars; I monitored cost and schedules for the group; and coordinated with other personnel on the project.
Mr. Dew was an Assistant Project Engineer for Stone & Webster and was assigned to the Beaver Valley Power Station, two 888 MW PWR units, in charge of the site engineering office. His responsibilities A-3 2.2.11/03173 6313P/0044h
)
HOUSTON CONTROL ROOM DESIGN REVIEW
_ ('GHT'NG
_ _ _... POWER CO.
STEPHEN M. DEW included: managing a staff of professional and semi-professional personnel; coordinating detailed engineering activities; establishing and controlling the site budget of over one million manhours; resolved items of nonconformance; supervised the maintenance of
)
the model; and was responsible for coordinating the engineering efforts of all site agencies to ensure a quality product. Mr. Dew performed various startup activities while with Babcock & Wilcox ]
(B&W) as both a fossil and nuclear startup engineer. He was instrumental in the development of B&W's PWR test program, supervised the shipment and receipt of B&W's first nuclear fuel shipment to the Oconee Nuclear Station. Also, Mr. Dew had considerable involvement with the testing program on fossil and nuclear plants totaling 4300 MWe.
Professional Affiliations: Professional Engineer, Texas ]
Member, American Nuclear Society, South Texas Section j l
A-4 2.2.11/03173 6313P/0044h
HOUSTON CONTROL ROOM LIGHTING DESIGN REVIEW
( ___ POWER CO.
JERROLD G. DEWEASE
{ Vice President, Nuclear Plant Operations Houston Lighting & Power Educatiom BSEE, Christian Brothers College Summary: 13 Years: Various positions with Tennessee Valley Authority 8 Years: Electrical Engineer, Memphis Light, Gas and Water Experience: Mr. Dewease joined Houston Lighting & Power in 1981 as Vice President, Nuclear Plant Operations and has direct responsibility for operation of the South Texas Project, Allens Creek and other nuclear operations support activities, j
j Mr. Dewease joined the Tennessee Valley Authority in 1968 as an
{
l Instrument Engineer at the Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant. He initially worked on establishing the instrument program and technical {
specifications.
f In 1971 he became the Assistant Engineering Supervisor at the Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant and had supervisory responsibility over the reactor engineering, radio-chemistry, testing and
[ instrumentation and control groups. In this position, Mr. Dewease l
supervised the establishment of the initial surveillance program which implemented the technical specifications and participated in the initial startup of units 1 and 2.
Mr. Dewease became the Quality Assurance (QA) Supervisor in 1974 at the Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant. He was responsible for plant QA during the recovery from the March 1975 fire, the restart of units 1 and 2 after the fire and the initial startup of unit 3. During 1976, Mr. Dewease became the Assistant Plant Superintendent. In 1977, he became the Plant Superintendent at the Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant.
In 1979, Mr. Dewease was promoted to Assistant Director of Nuclear Operations, with responsibility for the plant operations staffs of four TVA nuclear plants: Browns Ferry, Sequoyah, Watts Bar, and Bellefonte.
For Memphis Light, Gas and Water as an Electrical Engineer and later as Assistant Electrical Maintenance Supervisor at the T.H.
Allen Electric Generating Station, Mr. Dewease was involved in
{' providing engineering support and technical guidance to the electrical maintenance section.
A-5
- .2.11/03173 -
t 313P/0044h
)
]
HOUSTON CONTROL ROOM LIGHTING g gggg y g g ygg y
]
. ._ -. POWE R CO.
JAMES L. HURLEY Systems Project Engineer, STP Bechtel Power Corporation Education: BA, Physics, St. Mary's College, Minnesota U.S. Navy Nuclear Power School, Mare Island, California U.S. Navy Nuclear Power Training Unit, S3G Prototype, West Milton, New York MS, Nuclear Engineering, Oregon State University
)
Summary: 1/2 Year: Project Manager 3-1/2 Years: Project Engineer ]
4-1/2 Years: Assistant Project Engineer 1 Year: Mechanical Design Group Supervisor 1-1/2 Years: Reactor Plant Group Leader 1 Year: Nuclear Engineer 2-1/2 Years: Naval Nuclear Power Officer Experience: Mr. Hurley has fifteen years experience in nuclear power plant engineering and management and is currently Bechtel Power Corporation's Systems Project Engineer on the South Texas Project.
In this position, he is responsible for mechanical, electrical, controls, and nuclear design; procurement, licensing, and engineering quality. Prior to this, Mr. Hurley was Project Manager for the Duane Arnold Energy Center, a 544 MWe nuclear power ]
plant operated by Iowa Electric Light and Power Company. His responsibilities included generation of IELP's responses to NUREG's 0578, 0612, and 0737, and to NRC Bulletins79-01B, 79-02, 79-14, ]
80-06, and 80-11. He also collaborated with the utility in the J generation of their emergency response plan.
He was the initial Project Engineer for Bechtel's onsite support ]
work at Three Mile Island (TMI), and served as the Ann Arbor Power Division coordinator of all TMI related work. He was also the Project Engineer for the Midland Nuclear Plant Studies Group which, together with Consumers Power Company and Babcock &
Wilcox personnel, reviewed 30 safety-related issues for their potentialimpact on Midland Units 1 and 2, a nuclear project with a total output of 1,375 MWe and 4 million pounds per hour of process steam, being built for Consumers Power Company. He also worked with EDS Nuclear preparing safety and operational sequence diagrams for Midland Units 1 and 2. As the assistant project engineer on Midland Units 1 and 2 he was responsible, at various times, for mechanical design and procurement, engineering cost and scheduling, plant layout, electrical and control systems design and procurement, engineering quality, project administration, engineering aspects of plant startup, and plant licensing, including responsibility for initial submittal of the Midland FSAR. He was the resident project engineer at the jobsite for the last four months of )
this assignment.
A-6 6313P/0044h
L f
HOUSTON CONTROL ROOM l g g ggg y g g ygg y (lGHTING _
__ _ POWER CO.
JAMES L. HURLEY He acted as a consultant for the Detroit Edison Company on the Greenwood 2 and 3 nuclear project and for Consumers Power Company on the Palisades nuclear project. He was the project
[ engineer for the American Electric Power nuclear plant studies project. This was a year long effort to assist the utility in selecting a nuclear power plant to duplicate at a site within its system.
Prior assignments with Bechtel include mechanical design group supervisor on the Midland project; reactor plant group leader on Arkansas Nuclear One, Unit 2, a 950 MWe plant for Arkansas Power
[ and Light Company; and evaluator of the Westinghouse and KWU-Siemens bids (including balance-of-plant designs) for the Jervis Bay 600 MWe unit for the Australian Atomic Energy Commission.
Prior to joining Bechtel, and while obtaining his advanced degree at
[ Oregon State University, he collaborated in the design of a deep t ocean nuclear rooisture meter for the U.S. Navy Civil Engineering Corps. This work is described in U.S. Naval Civil Engineering Laboratory Report CR 70.016, which he co-authored.
He was the reactor control division officer on the USS Long Beach (CG N -9). In this capacity, he was in charge of the operation,
[ maintenance, and testing of all reactor control and radiation i monitoring equipment for two shipboard reactor plants. He also supervised the training of all reactor operators and technicians.
f Proffesional Affiliations: Registered Professional Engineer, Michigan Member, American Nuclear Society
?
l 6313P/0044h A7
HOUSTON CONTROL ROOM UGHTING DESIGN REVIEW
___ POWER CO.
WARREN HUGH KINSEY, JR.
Assistant Plant Superintendent Houston Lighting & Power Education: BSME, University of Missouri U.S. Navy Nuclear Power Training Program Summary: 7 years: Mechanical Engineer / Engineering Supervisor, Tennessee Valley Authority 4 years: Senior Reactor Operator, University of Missouri 6 years: Senior Reactor Operator, U.S. Navy Experience: Mr. Kinsey joined Houston Lighting & Power Company in 1982 as Assistant Plant Superintendent, Acting Plant Superintendent and is responsible for plant staffing and preparation for startup for operational phase.
Mr. Kinsey joined the Tennessee Valley Authority in 1975 as a mechanical Engineer (Equipment Performance Group). He was responsible for re-start of numerous BWR systems following a major fire at the Brown Ferry Nuclear plant. He was responsible for initial startup of BWR systems on a new unit and was instrumental in developing the first TVA ASME Section XI program. He also prepared procedures for startup and performance tests of mechanical equipment.
As an engineering Section Supervisor on the Sequoyah Nuclear project, he was responsible for the nuclear startup test program for the two ]
unit PWR reactor, including water chemistry, radio-chemistry and environmental regulations (NPDES). He also had responsibility for the ]
ASME Section XI and Appendix J testing and equipment testing, (e.g. J llEPA and charcoal filter tests, heat exchanger and pump performance tests, water treatment plant performance and condensate full flow demineralizer performance).
Prior to joining TVA, Mr. Kinsey was a Senior Reactor Operator at the University of Missouri. He was a licensed Senior Reactor Operator on a 10MW research reactor which was operated for experimental and industrial uses. He performed maintenance and modifications on the equipment and participated in upgrade work on a 5 to 10 MW conversion.
From 1965 to 1971, Mr. Kinsey was a Senior Reactor Operator (Technician and Instructor) in the U.S. Navy. He operated the reactor and performed maintenance on reactor control instrumentation. He also instructed other Navy personnel in reactor operations maintenance. As an instructor, he was responsible for shift crew of reactor operators and technicians and participated in inplant and classroom training of Navy and civilian employees. He also l participated in refueling activities. 1 Professional Affiliations: Member, American Society of Mechanical Engineers Member, American Nuclear Society A4 2.2.11/03.'73 6313P/004 th
s r ,
HOUSTON CONTROL ROOM LIGHTING gggggy ggyjgy I &
L _. .___ _ POW E R C O.
M. G. (JIMM Y) ZAALOUK Principal Engineer - Nuclear, Houston Lighting & Power Educatiom BSEE, Cairo University, Egypt MSNE, North Carolina State University -
PHD NE, North Carolina State University i
Summary: 9 Years: Principal Engineer, Carolina Power & Light j 3 Years: Assistant Professor, North Carolina State l Year: Visiting Engineer, Norwegian Institute for {
l Atomic Energy {
2 Years: Engineering Unit Supervisor, !
Egyptian Atomic Energy i 3 Years: Reactor Engineer, Egyptian Atomic Energy Experience: Mr. Zaalouk joined Houston Lighting & Power in 1981 as a Principal )
( Engineer-Nuclear, responsible for providing the nuclear engineering discipline technical support for the South Texas Project and Allans Creek Nuclear Generating Station.
Prior to joining HL&P, Mr. Zaalouk was with Carolina Power and Light Company as a Senior nuclear engineer. He was promoted in 1974 to Project Engineer-Nuclear and in 1977 to Principal Engineer Mechanical / Nuclear. He was involved in Nuclear Systems design review and construction support of the Shearon Harris Nuclear Power plant,4 PWR units,900 MWe each. This included the review and timely implementation of regulatory and code requirements and assured design compliance including safety analyses and ALARA requirements. He gave startup and operations support for the Brunswick Steam Electric plant, a 2 unit BWR, 820 MWe each. He later became responsible for the engineering management of all mechanical and nuclear plant design modifications for the H.B.
Robinson Nuclear Power plant, 700 MWe PWR and the Brunswick plant. He headed the company TMI-2 Corporate Investigative Team PWR following the Three Mile Island incident. Mr. Zaalouk served on the task force to develop the corporate emergency plan for the company's three nuclear power plants. He also directed development of the in-house ALARA design review program.
While an Assistant Professor for power systems at North Carolina State University, Mr. Zaalouk taught undergraduate courses in power systems engineering and analysis. He co-directed an NSF and NRC (AEC) funded research program to develop a temperature control system to prevent burn-out of heating elements when exceeding critical heat flux values under severe conditions such as LOCA.
Results were published in 22 technical papers.
A-8 2.2.11/03173 6313P/0044h l
l l
HOUSTON CONTROL ROOM LlGHTING DESIGN REVIEW
_ _ __ . POWE R CO.
M.G. (JIMMY) ZAALOUK As a nuclear engineering unit supervisor for the Egyptian Atomic Energy Establishment, he directed R&D in the areas of reactor systems, core design and safety analysis. Developed and implemented a reactor training program and directed the reactor power uprating engineering effort.
Mr Zaalouk spent a year at the Norwegian Institute for Atomic Energy where- he developed an advanced computer code now in use by the industry in light water reactors core design and analysis.
As a Reactor Engineer for the Egyptian Atomic Energy Commission he was responsible for nuclear systems design review and construction and startup support of a 2 MWt research reactor.
Professional American Nuclear Society: Member (Since 1972); Co-chairman Affiliations: of Reactor Operations Division Technical Program Committee (1979-1981); and appointed to the ANS National Program Committee in 1982.
North Carolina State University, School of Engineering:
Adjunct Associate Professor (1972-1981).
ANS Standards Committee: Member of ANS Standards Committee ANS-19, " Reactor Core Design"(1973-1981).
IEEE: Technical Reviewer - Journal of Instrumentation and Control (1972-present)
{
A 10 2.2.11/03173 6313 P/0044h
c- .
L
~
HOUSTON CONTROL ROOM
HT' * *
( DESIGN REVIEW L
_... POWER CO.
L r
L r
L
[
{
'A PPENDIX B Qualifications of F.oject Repw Team and Design Review and Technical Task Team ?.1:rabers
[
[
f L
r r
L 2.2.11/03173 5768P/0044h
l t
( HOUSTON CONTROL ROOM f" ""
_ . POWER CO.
DESIGN REVIEW f
WILLIAM R. ARNOLD Task Analysis Leader, l Torrey Pines Technology
( Education: BSEE, University of Texas Graduate Courses, Electrical and Nuclear Engineering Experience: Review of qualification data for safety-related equipment for PWR
{ projects. Responsible for assuring that the data packages met the general requirements of NUREG-0588 and the specific requirements referenced and that the equipment represented is satisfactory for use in a harsh environment.
Review of safety-related plant control and protection system logic and operation to confirm that components important to safety are properly classified for PWR projects at Bechtel.
Field investigation and solution of reactor protection system trips and transients during startup of Fort St. Vrain station. Liaison on operational and licensing aspects with utility operations and with NRC.
Field engineer in successful construction and startup of all internal and adjacent external reactor instruments, pressure test and hot flow test support, and control rod drive checkout for Fort St. Vrain station.
Completed design and documentation for licensing of reactor plant protection systems. Accomplishments included logie design, cabling, customer liaison and review of specifications and layout for compliance with applicable NRC design criteria.
Electrical design of aerospace launch control hardware and systems.
Professional Affiliations: Registered Control Systems Engineer, California B-1 2.2.11/03173 .
5768P/0044h
HOUSTON CONTROL ROOM g gggg y g g ygg y lGHMG
.. _.. POWE R CO.
DANNA M. BEITH Human Factors Specialist, Canyon Research Group
]
Educatiom B.A., Psychology, University of California, Santa Barbara, California Summary: 2 Years: Research Scientist Project Manager 2 Years: Associate Human Factors Designer ]
1 Year: Assistant Researcher 2 Years: Field Investigator 1 Year: General Assistant ]
1 Year: Counselor J Experience: Mrs. Beith is presently a Human Factors Specialist with Canyon Research Group, Inc. and is participating in the N UREG-0700 evaluation of the South Texas Project.
)
As a Research Scientist / Project Manager for Essex Corporation, she was a project manager for the development and production of approximately 300 nuclear power plant surveillance test procedures for South Carolina Electric and Gas Company. Work involved technical review and editing of developed procedures, technical direction of all project staff, and coordination of the production of j the procedures from initial writing through final word processing. (
Responsible for the technical work and personnel affairs of a staff composed of technical writers, editors, nuclear plant operations specialists, and word processors.
During this time, Mrs. Beith organized and planned the Electric ]
Power Research Institute Seminar which introduced the EPRI guidebook," Humans Factors Design of Nuclear Power Plants" to the nuclear industry. Duties included speech preparation for major speakers, workbook preparation, and mock-up design and implementation.
She was the on-site supervisor for the rewriting and formatting of nuclear power plant emergency, general and system operating procedures at South Carolina Electric and Cas Company's Virgil C.
Summer Nuclear Station. Procedure formats were reviewed using criteria concerned with readability, legibility, and consistency.
)
She directed the Human Factors evaluation of the on-site data collection for the Comanche Peak 1 Nuclear Power Plant control room. This evaluation included criteria specified in NUREG/CR-1580 and N UREG-0700. Duties also included documenting and identifying Human Engineering discrepancies and f backfits.
B-2 ,
2.2.11/03173 5768P/0044h
l C HOUSTON CONTROL RGOM LIGHTING gggggy ggyggy
& I
( __. POWER CO.
DANNA M. BEITH As a Research Associate, Mrs. Belth participated in the Human Factors evaluation of three nuclear power plants for Carolina Power
& Light. One plant evaluation included a control board assessment
( of engineering drawings for a plant under construction.
consisted of procedures development for control room evaluation and Duties identifying, reporting and suggesting suitable backfits for Human Engineering Discrepancies found in the control room. Duties also
{ include the establishment of permanent records for all data and report writing.
f S* . nas prepared checklists and surveys to meet evaluation requirements specified in NUREG/CR-1580. Also conducted an analysis of NUREG-0700 to assess new human factors criteria.
Validated checklist items from first sources references.
During Mrs. Beith's two years with Xerox as an Associate Human j Factors Designer, she gave support to the Human Factors
( Department in the Business Machine and Copies / Duplication Division. Duties included control system design, behavioral testing and new product assessments. She also wrote machine operating procedures and developed dialogues used for operator assistance.
At Canyon Research Group, Inc., Mrs. Beith was an Assistant r Researcher as a contract research assistant to Xerox Corporation,
[ Industrial Design / Human Factors Department. Support to the Human Factors Department in the Business Machines Division.
Duties consisted of control system design and behavioral testing.
As a Field Investigator for Bio Technology, Inc. she conducted a "Large Truck Accident Study" for the Federal Highway
( Administration of the Department of Transportation. Supervised i Field Investigators conducting interview with truck owners, drivers and California Highway Patrol officers and analyzed accident sites and accident reports. Conducted highway surveys involving road characteristics, traffic density and speed data using remote control cameras and radar equipment.
Other experience included General Assistant - Office of the Dean, ,
Graduate School of Education, University of California where she l conducted a study of Professor-Student contact hours and performed l general office duties. She was a Counselor for the Arnold Homes for Children, Inc. and a behaviorist for emotionally disturbed childern.
Acted as an Assistant to the Administrative Counselor as a Project Research to refine and update Behavior Modificaton Programs.
Professional Affiliations: Member, National Human Factors Society B-3 2.2.11/03173 5768P/0044h
HOUSTON CONTROL ROOM LIGHTING DESIGN REVIEW
& ]
_ _ _ POWER CO. )
FRANK C. BURSIC Education: B. S., Electrical Engineering, University of Pittsburgh Graduate Courses: Electrical-Industrial Engineering Specialty Courses: Human Factors - University of Pittsburgh and Westinghouse Electric Corporation.
Experience: Mr. Bursic is with Westinghouse Electric Corporation in the Instrumentation and Control Department, Electrical Power Systems and Control Board Group. His work experience has been in the area of main control board / panel layout and design. He is also the cognizant engineer for annunciator systems.
He participated in the Westinghouse support to Georgia Power, (
Caroline Power and Light, and Commonwealth Edison Control Room [
Design Reviews. These design review efforts required the involvement of Westinghouse design engineers to evaluate the control panel layout and annuciator system for system information/arrangment (flow & functional) and human factor concerns. In addition, recommendations were provided for resolution of identified HEDs.
He also participated in the design of a modular operation console which can act as an information gathering / diagnostic center and integrate requirements of Reg. Guide 1.97 and NUREG-0696 into existing control rooms.
Mr. Bursic assisted in the design of the advanced control rooin layout and control consoles which included integration of the modular consoles, human factors engineering, and a full scale simulator.
Directed the development of a computerized procedures retrieval system.
Assisted in the development of an internal training program which addresses human factors involvement in control room design reviews.
Professional Affiliations: Member, IEEE B-4 2.2.11/03173 .
5768P/0044h
s houston CONTROL ROOM gggggy ggyyyy
( fHMG L .__ _ POWER CO.
JERRY M. CHILDS Human Factors Specialist
(
[ Education: Ph.D., Engineering Psychology, Texas Tech University i B.A., Psychology, Texas Tech University
~
Summary: Present: Project Director, Seville Research Corporation !
Staff Scientist, Canyon Research Group, Inc.
( 2 Years:
3 Years: Asst. Professor, Wayland College l
l 2 Years: Instructor, Texas Tech University !
Experience: Mr. Childs is presently a Project Director for Seville Research Corporation and is responsible for management and conduct of human factors re w arch and development in the areas of control-display evaluation, training, operator and system
) performance measurement, and simulation. Activities include the f conduct of mission, function, and task analyses, development of ,
performance evaluation techniques, development of techniques for evaluating the use of advanced displays and controls, and-development of training programs.
As a Staff Scientist, Principal Investigator for Canyon Research l Group, Inc. he was responsible for the identification, analysis, and I evaluation of critical training elements, and the design and development of objective performance measurement procedures.
Specific activities included the conduct of task, function and mission analyses, the development of concepts and procedures for assessing j operator performance, and the generation and evaluation of system
[ performance criteria and procedures for sampling system performance.
While at Wayland College, Mr. Childs was an Assistant Professor to Associate Professor and Head, Behavioral Science Department and was responsible for the general administration of undergraduate psychology programs, including the development, scheduling, and instruction of courses, assignment of personnel, and budgeting.
Activities included organization of behavioral science symposia, development and management of internship programs and supervision of strudent research projects. Major teaching emphases were experimental / quantitative (experimental psychology, statistics, learning, perception, motivation); also taught courses in psychological systems and theories, and in psychopathology.
Mr. Childs was an Instructor at Texas Tech University and was responsible for instructing experimental psychology laboratories.
Activities included instrumentation, writing and administering exams, and instructing concepts of experimental design, statistical and experimental control, and descriptive and basic inferential statistles, correlational methods, graphing, and scientific writing and referencing.
B-5 2.2.11/03173 5768P/0044h
HOUSTON CONTROL ROOM LIGHTING g gggg y g g ygg y
- 5I POWER CO.
JERRY M. CHILDS Professional Affiliations: Member, Human Factors Society Member, Amerien Psychological Association Member, Southwestern Psychological Association Recipient of Southwestern Psychological Association's Publishers Award,1975, Houston, TX; 1976, Albuquerque, NM Licensed Psychologist Publications: Childs, J. M. & Halcomb, C. G. Effects of noise and response complexity upon vigilance performance, Perceptual and Motor Skills,1972, a35 735-741. (Also presented at the Southwestern Psychological Association Conference, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, April 1972.)
Childs, J. M. Signal complexity, response complexity, and signal specification in vigilance, Human Factors,1976, 18,149-159. (Also presented at the Southwestern Psychological Association Conference, Houston, Texas, April 1975; received SWPA's 1975 Publisher's Award 'from Brooks-Cole Publishing Co.),
Childs, J. M. Caffeine consumption and target scanning performance, Human Factors, 1978,20(1),91-96. (Also presented at the Southwestern Psychiifogical Association Conference, Albuquerque, New Mexico, April 1976; received SWPA's 1976 Publishcr's Award from Brooks-Cole Publishing Co.)
Childs, J. M. The identification and measurement of criticalIERW performance variables (Contract No.
DAllC19-77-C-0008, Research Memo). Westlake Village, CA:
Canyon Research Group,Inc., March 1979.
Childs, J. M. Development of procedures and techniques for inflight performance assessment (Research Memorandum ,
FTR-07-79). Westlake Village, CA: Canyoun Research Group, Inc., April 1979. ,
Childs, J. M. An analytic technique for identifying inflight performance criteria (Contract No.
DAHC19-77-C-0008). Westlake Village, CA: Canyon Research Group, Inc., April 1979.
Childs, J. M., Hennessy, R. T., Hockenberger, R. L.,
Barneby, S. F., Vreuls, D., Siering, G. D., & Van Loo, J.
A. Human factors reseathi n aircrew training performance enhancement: Summary Report No.1 (Technical Report).
Westlake Village, CA: Canyon Research Group, Inc., April 1979.
B-6 2.2.11/03173 5768P/0044h
L f
HOUSTON CONTROL ROOM g gggg y g g ygg y lGHMG
[ ___ POWER CD.
JERRY M. CHILDS Childs, J. M. Development of an objective grading system along with procedures and aids for its effective j implementation in flight (ARI Research Note 70-18).
t Alexandria, VA: U.S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences, May 1979.
Childs, J. M., Siering, G. D., Smith, B. A., &
( Hockenberger, R. L. Human factors research in aircrew training performance enhancement: Summary Report No. 2 (Contract No. DAHC19-77-C-0008). Westlake Village, CA:
Canyon Research Group,Inc., June 1979.
Childs, J. M. The development of objective inflight performance assessment procedures. In Proceedings of the Human Factors Society-23rd Annual Meeting, 1979, 329-333.
Childs, J. M. Time and error measures of human performance-A note on Bradley's optimal-pessimal paradox, Human Factors, 1980, 22(1), 113-117.
Siering, G. D., Ruffner, J. W., & Childs, J. M.
Identification of key elements and procedures for inflight performance assessment (WP FR/FU-80-4). Westlake Village, CA: Canyon Research Group,Inc., March 1980.
Roscoe, S. N., & Childs, J. M. Reliable, objective flight checks. In S. N. Roscoe, Aviation Psychology. Ames, IA:
Iowa University Press,1980.
Ilockenberger, R. L., & Childs, J. M. An integrated approach to pilot performance assessment. In Proceedings of the Human Factors Society-24th Annual Meeting,1980, 462-465.
Shelnutt, J. B., Childs, J. M., Prophet, W. W., & Spears, W. D. Human factors problems in general aviation (Technical Report FAA-CT-80-194). Washington, DC:
Federal Aviation Administation, April 1980.
Childs, J. M., Prophet, W. W., & Spears, W. D. The effects of pilot experience on acquiring instrument flight skills - Phase I (Technical Report FAA-CT-81-38).
Washington, DC: Federal Aviation Administration, March 1981.
Holmes, C. W., & Childs, J. M. The effects of pilot experience of acquiring instrument flight skills - Phase II(Technical Report FAA-CT-82/35. Washington, DC:
Federal Aviation Administration, January 1982.
. B-7 2.2.11/03173 5768P/0044h
HOUSTON CONTROL ROOM LIGHTING DESIGN REVIEW
_ __ ... POWE R CO.
JERRY M. ClllLDS Sheinutt, J. B., Childs, J. M., Prophet, W. W., Smith, J.
P., & Strauch B. Development of guidance for evaluatin(
the use of elect!onic flia% instrument systems in general aviation aircraf t (Draf t Final Report). Pensacola, FL:
Seville Research Corporation, February 1982.
{
l B-8 2.2.11/03173 .
5768P/0044h -
r s
L i
t H0usTON CONTR6L ROOM lGHTMG gggggyggggy
( _ __ POWER CO.
JOEL L. COLSTON
[ Training General Supervisor, i Houston Lighting & Power
( Education: Naval Enlisted Scientific Education Program (NESEP),
80 quarter hours toward a Mechanical Engineering Degree
[ Summary: 1 Year: Operating General Supervisor, t Houston Lighting & Power 2 Years: Operations and Training, f Houston Lighting & Power 20 Years: U. S. Navy, Reactor Controls and Operations Experience: Mr. Colston joined Houston Lighting & Power in 1978 as a Training Instructor on the South Texas Project staff responsible for j developing training programs for reactor operators. During this time he completed a five week systems training course and a two week simulator training course at the Westinghouse Nuclear Training center in Zion, Illinois. In July 1978, he was assigned the additional duties of Operating Coordinator and was responsible for both the
{ Operating Section and the Training Group. In this capacity Mr.
Colston also coordinated the Three Mile Island (TMI) Operations Task Force responsible for reviewing and studying the impact of the TMI incident on STP operations in the areas of staffing, training, and procedures. In October 1979 he assumed responsibility for procurement of the STP training simulator. He was promoted to Training General Supervisor in 1981.
Mr. Colston joined the Navy in 1958 and during his 20 year's service he was assigned many duties. He served as a Training Instructor teachirg Reacior Control and Instrumentation theory. He was the Reactor Cont-ols Division, Leading Petty Officer on the USS Bainbridge and USS Enterprise responsible for maintenance of reactor control and instrumentation systems. In this capacity he qualified as Reactor Technician and Reactor Operator aboard both ships. He also qualified as Propulsion Plant Watch Supervisor and Propulsion Plant Officer aboard the USS Enterprise. In January 1969 he was assigned to 'Glynco Naval Air Station in Brunswich, Georgia as the Ground Electronics Maintenance Supervisor. There he supervised Navy electronic technicians and civilian electronic mechanics in the repair of various electronic gear. He was reassigned to the USS Bainbridge in as Reactor Controls Division Chief Petty Officer. In that capacity he supervised reactor l operators and technicians involved in the operation, mairtenance, I I
and repair of reactor controls and instrumentation systems.
B-9 2.2.11/03173 5768P/0044h
HGUSTON CONTROL ROOM lGHTING g gggg y gg ygg y
__. POWER CO.
JOEL L. COLSTON During his assignment on the Bainbridge, Mr. Colston also held the Reactor Controls Division Officer and the Engineering Controls Divi'sion Officer positions. In February 1978 Mr. Colston was assigned to the Staff, Commander Naval Surface Force, Pacific Fleet. In, this capacity he was responsible for the support of operation of the Naval Nuclear Surface Ships in the Pacific Fleet.
{
l 7
B-10 f
2.2.11/03173 ,
5768P/0044h
HOUSTON CONTROL ROOM fHMG g gggg y gg ygg y
( ._ POWER CO.
E. L. (RETT) CONSIDINE Principal Investigator
{
Education: U.S. Naval Schools f Electronic Technician "A", Treasure Island, California Enlisted Submarine School, New London, Connecticut Basic Nuclear Power School, Mare Island, California '
Nuclear Power Training Unit, Idaho Falls, Idaho
(
Undergraduate Engineering Courses, El Camino College f Summary: Present: Engineering Group Supervisor, Control Systems, Bechtel 4 Years: Engineering Group Supervisor on a major coal fired power project 1 Year: Engineering Group Leader on a major international power project in Spain 1/2 Year: Control Systems Supervisor on a seawater
, injection pipeline 5 Years: Engineering Group Leader on several major power plant projects with responsibility for control room and control systems design 1/2 Year: Field liaison during computer modifications at f' Southern California Edison's Alamitos and lluntington Beach Generating Stations 8 Years: Power plant operation and maintenance, pressurized water reactors Experience: Mr. Considine has over 19 years experience in the design, operation, t.nd maintenance of power plants and is presently an Engineering Staff Specialist responsible to the South Texas Project for development and implementation of the Control Room Design Review per NUREG 0700. He was a supervising engineer on the Gulf States Utilities' Roy S. Nelson Station where, for three years, he was responsible for Control Systems. Prior to this, he was assigned to the Sayago project in Spain with supervisory responsibilities for Bechtel and the client organization. He was directly responsible for the analog controls, computer, annunciator, and control room designs.
I As a Staff Engineer he was instrumental in the Control Systems design concept for a three-boiler, two-turbine cogeneration unit.
B-ll 2.2.11/03173 5768P/0044h
)
houston CONTROL ROOM IGHTING g g ggg y g g ygg y
- __ POWER CD.
E. L. (RETT) CONSIDIN E Previously, he was Control Systems Supervisor on the Seawater project, responsible for the design of 16 interacting control systems.
Other Bechtel experience includes Control Systems Staff responsibilities in the areas of chemical laboratories, nuclear controls, and control rooms for fossil and nuclear projects; proposal and Preliminary Safety Analysis Report Technical support for domestic and international efforts; and conceptual design of several nuclear unit control rooms.
Prior to joining Bechtel, Mr. Considine qualified as Senior Reactor Operator on Naval reactors, and supervised reactor operators and technicians. He also served as Senior Reactor Control Instructor and was a member of a reactor operator qualification board.
Professional Affiliations: Member, American Nuclear Society, South Texas Station i
i B-12 2.2.11/03173 5768P/0044h
l HOUSTON CONTROL ROOM lGHMG g gggg y g g ygg y
._ __ POWER CO.
ERROL P. GAGNON f Systems and Licensing Specialist Education: B.S., San Diego State University Summary: Present: Assistarit Project Engineer, Torrey Pines Technology 13 Years: General Atomic Company 4 Years: Dynamic analyses of missile control systems,
(- General Dynamics Corp.
Experience: Assistant Project Engineer, Torrey Pines Technology Experience at General Atomic Company includes: Chairman of the Results Review Committee of the Human Factors Evaluation program for the Palo Verde Nuclear Power Generating Station control room and responsible for coordination of the program tasks.
Developed safety / licensing positions and criteria for various applications of nuclear power plants; evaluated nuclear power plant
{ systems and components to identify and prioritize technical, safety
) and licensing issues; developed nuclear power plant transient performance specifications.
Mr. Gagnon was a senior Technical Representative at Fort St. Vrain responsible for technical coordination and guidance on the conduct and evaluation of the startup test program.
lie was Manager of the French Licensee Program responsible for the administrative and techincal-transfer aspects of the nuclear power plant licensing agreements and contracts.
Mr. Gagnon performed simulation studies and evaluations of nuclear power plant transient performance / safety analyses, control systems, control room configurations and plant startup procedures and performed dynamic analyses of missile control systems.
Professional Affiliations: Member, American Nuclear Society B-13 2.2.11/03173 -
5768P/0044h
)
HOUSTON CONTROL ROOM IGHMG g gggg y g g ygg y
_ . . POWER CO.
M. R. GROSS Engineering Supervisor, Control Systems Bechtel Power Corporation Education: BSME, University of Illinois MBA, University of San Francisco Summary: 1 Year: Control Systems Lead Resident Engineer 2 Years: Control Systems Deputy Group Supervisor and Licensing Coordinator 6 Years: Control Systems Group Supervisor
! Year: FSAR Administrator 10 lears: Mechanical Design Engineer and Lead Instrument Engineer 20 years: Controls Systems, Nuclear Projects f Experience: Mr. Gross is presently the Control Systems Deputy Group Supervisor for Bechtel Power Corporation and is assigned to the South Texas Project, where he is responsible for supervising the NSSS and Control s Room /TMI Groups including main control boards and control room design review.
As the Control Systems Lead Resident Engineer assigned to the Midland Plant, Units 1 and 2, he was responsible for organizing and directing C.S. construction support activities at the Midland jobsite (
including approval of instrument isometric drawings and support (
designs. Acted as deputy to resident Project Engineer. As the ControlSystems Deputy Group Supervisor and Licensing Coordinator he was responsible for C.S. group management and licensing review and FSAR update.
As Control Systems Group Supervisor while assigned to the {
Greenwood Units 2 and 3 Project he was responsible for the C.S. t portion of project planning, scheduling, design criteria, PSAR preparation, and process system development. He directed engineering design of an advanced control room and supporting computer system.
As Control Systems Group Supervisor for the Monroe Fuels and Emissions Modification Project, he was responsible for new instrumentation, development of test instruments, and addition of the Stack Gas Analysis System.
B-14 2.2.11/03173 5768P/0044h
L
",**',',*N gg ,g CONTROL ROOM
& DESIGN REVIEW
_ _ POWER CO.
, M. R. GROSS Mr. Gross'second assignment on the Midland project was as FSAR Administrator responsible for organizing and directing a multi-discipline engineering team for writing the Midland FSAR.
During a short assignment on Vandalia Project as Control Systems Group Supervisor, he was responsible for project planning, C.S.
design criteria, and preparation of the PSAR.
[
As Control Systems Group Supervisor, on Mr. Gross' first Midland f Plant assignment he was responsible for defining control systems l design criteria, control room design, plant computer, and equipment specifications.
For a period of ten years, Mr. Gross was a Mechanical Design l
} Engineer and Lead Instrument Engineer on various power projects j and was responsible for C.S. design and procurement for the Monticello and Trojan Nuclear Plants, including control room design. j l
B-15 2.2.11/03173 5768P/0044h
houston CONTROL ROOM lGHTING g gggg y g g ygg y
_ ___.._ POWE R CO.
GARY R. HELGESON Operating General Supervisor, Project Review Team Houston Lighting & Power Education: Completed 110 credit hours toward a degree in Industrial Nuclear Operations at Glendale Community College and Memphis State
)
University Completed U. S. Navy technical training Courses Summary: 11 Years: Reactor Operator / Training Supervisor, Wisconsin Electric Power 2 Years: Shift Supervisor, Arizona Public Service 3 Years: Reactor Operator, U.S. Navy Experience: Mr. Helgesen joined Houston Lighting and Power in 1982 and is presently the Operating General Supervisor at the South Texas Nuclear Project.
For two years, Mr. Helgeson was a shift supervisor, assigned to the Palo Verde Nuclear Generation Station. Responsibilities included .
construction follow-up, startup testing, procedure writing, shift administrative duties, and system qualification.
For Wisconsin Electric Power he was a Reactor Operator and Operating Supervisor assigned to the Point Beach Nuclear Plant. He participated in construction surveillance, startup testing, procedure writing and power escalation. Acquired Reactor Operator License for Point Beach Units 1 and 2 in 1970 and Senior Reactor Operator License for both units in 1972. He later became the training supervisor assigned to Point Beach Nuclear Plant. He established and conducted formal training programs for the operation, {
maintenance, instrumentation and controls, and health physics (
departments. Also he was assigned responsibilities of refueling core loading supervisor, security supervisor, health physics supervisor and <
fire brigade chief at various times during this period.
Attended the Naval Nuclear Power Training Program and qualified as a reactor operator. He was assigned to the U.S.S. James Monroe and was qualified on all engineering space watch stations. He supervised all reactor startups, shutdowns, tests and special operations; ensured safe and proper operation of the reactor at all times; and was responsible for the maintenance and preventive maintenance of all reactor control, protection and radiation monitoring equipment.
B-16 2.2.11/03173 ,
5768P/0044h
L HOUSTON CONTROL ROOM f,
f** DESIGN REVIEW
_ _.._ POWE R CO.
SAL F. LUNA Project Engineer Educatiom B.S., Chemistry, Magna Cum Laude, Niagara University Specialty courses: Seismic - Wyle Labs, Human Factors -
University of Tennessee and Electric Power Research Institute. ,
Summary: Present: Manager, Human Factors Evaluation, Torrey Pines Technology f Experience: Mr. Luna has been involved in a variety of projects such as:
Technical director, human factors engineering, management of Iluman Factors review of Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station.
Performed Annunciator Prioritization Study for same.
Design of a wide variety of systems for advanced HTGR plants. ,
Special studies for application of all technology for modernizing existing nuclear power plants featuring a " Diagnostic Console."
Directed development of in-core and ex-core instrumentation to study Fort St. Vrain core fluctuation phenomena. Directed site 1 engineering and craft effort to provide fire protection of critical Fort St. Vrain cabling.
}
Prepared specifications, designed special testing equipment conducted qualification tests, evaluated results and prepared reports for cabling and instrumentation for Fort St. Vrain equipment qualification program.
Directed design of advanced control room control consoles and unitized cabinets including: human factors engineering, full scale mockups, modular construction and seismic qualification.
Managed a wide variety of instrumentational control and development groups at Westinghouse Electric Corp. for the nuclear navy and commercial nuclear programs. Cognizant engineer for Annunciator Systems for same.
Directed the design and development of a wide variety of processing plant instrumentation systems for Catalytic Construction Co.
Publications: Editor of Cassette Control Valve Training Program Author of chapter on Maintenance -ISA control Valve Handbook Author of chapter on Liquid Level Measurement -ISA publication B-17 2.2.11/03173 5768P/0044h
" CONTROL ROOM
)
",*ggTING U' DESIGN REVIEW s
. _ _ _... POWE R CO.
SAL F. LUNA Professional Affiliations: llegistered Professional Engineer, California Fellow Grade Member, ISA Vice President Long Range Planning Department,ISA ,
Nuclear Power Plant Standards Committee, ISA Member, iluman Factors Society
)
{
l
{
l B-18 2.2.11/03173 {
(
5768P/0044h
k 4
L HOUSTON CONTROL ROOnt UGHTING g gggg y gg ygg y f _ - . POWER CO.
GEORGE J. MALEK Systems Specialist, Torrey Pines Technology Education: B.S., Mechanical Engineering, Case Institute of Technology M.S., Engineering Science, UCLA Experience: Mr. Malek was responsible for the auxiliary feedwater system on
( assignment to Bechtel Power Corporation, SONGS 2 and 3 Project.
This involved coordination with the client, construction, startup testing, and engineering disciplines; resolved startup problems from the field on various plant systems; reviewed test procedures for safety class equipment.
lie coordinated in-plant activities of technical support team during
) startup tests at Fort St. Vrain site. The areas of involvement were l primary system performance, steam system performance and overall plant control system. Mr. Malek performed preliminary "on the spot" evaluation of plant performance during startup tests.
Prepared test procedures for portions of the plant startup tests and for special tests to investigate unexpected plant performance phenomena, l
Performed optimization studies on the major design parameters for nuclear reactor power plants. Formulated analytical models for design and cost of systems, developed a major computer program and prepared a comprehensive report. Coordinated with the architect-engineer on the interfaces between NSS systems and the balance of the plant. The interfaces i. .luded schedules, system specifications, overall plant performance, safeguards and licensing.
Mr. Malek directed the design activities on various reactor heat transfer and fluid flow systems. These activities included reactor safety analyses, turbulent mixing and diffusion analyses, flow stability in once-through boilers, flow distribution studies in the reactor core, and design analyses of the core auxiliary cooling system (CACS). Made numerous presentations to the customers, the NRC and the ACRS on the performance of the CACS.
Also, Mr. Malek has performed design analysis on nuclear reactor heat transfer and fluid flow systems.. Major accomplishments were lead engineer on the development of fuel element concepts for a BeO moderated reactor, development of computer codes to analyze core performance characteristics, and principal investigator of an analytical and experimental investigation to study flow induced vibrations in a reactor core.
B-19 2.2.11/03173 .
5768P/0044h
HOUSTON CONTROL ROOM lGHTING g gggg y gg ygg y
. _ POWER CD.
GEORGE J. M ALEK s Professional Affiliations: Registered Mechanical Engineer, California Associate Fellow, AIAA Member, American Nuclear Society Member, American Society Mechanical Engineers
)
1
{
B-20 2.2.11/03173 f y 5768P/0044h
HOUSTON CONTROL ROOM LIGHTING gggggy ggyggy POWER CO.
MARY B. MORETON Chairman, Project Review Team
{ ;
Education: BS, Systems Engineering, University of Arizona Summary: Present: Control Systems Group Leader 3 Years: Control Systems Group Leader
{
5-1/2 Years: Bechtel Control Systems Engineer engaged in design of nuclear steam power stations Experience: Ms. Moreton is currently a Control Systems Group Leader on the South Texas Project responsible for all Control Systems post-TMI design activities and main control panel. Previously, she was a Control Systems Group Leader on the Palo Verde Nuclear Power Project, a three unit 3900-MW generating station. She was reponsible for the System 80 (2 loop) Nuclear Steam Supply System controls and instrumentation, control systems licensing, specifications, and development of post-TMI control systems design changes. Earlier, Ms. Moreton was responsible for reviewing and approving vendor documents for the Training Simulator to ensure correct simulation of the power plant process. She also reviewed various control systems to provide comprehensive training for power station operators.
Earlier design responsibilities for a nuclear power station included developing Preliminary Safety Analysis Reports, Design Criteria, f Piping and Instrument Diagrams, Logic Diagrams, Loop Diagrams, Specifications and Bid Evaluations for the Control Systems discipline. She has a thorough knowledge of NRC Regulatory Guides, IEEE Standards, and requirements for their implementation. Ms.
Moreton has also worked on tne integration of the NSSS safety and control systems into the plant design, as well as design of the plant annunciator, computer and safety features actuation systems. She has also been involved with the instrumentation and control of safety-related and radwaste process systems.
Professional s Affiliations: Member, Instrument Society of America j Member, Society of Women Engineers Registered Professional Engineer, California
)
B-21 2.2.11/03173 5768P/0044h l
)
HOUSTON CONTROL ROOM LIGHTING DESIGN REVIEW
... POWE R CO. ,
ROBERT D. NEIL Unit Supervisor, llouston Lighting & Power
)
Education: Associate of Science, Mohegan College, Norwich, CN Summary: 1 Year: Unit Supervisor, liouston Lighting & Power 20 Years: U.S. Navy Experience: Mr. Neil joined IIL&P in 1978 as a control room operator. During 1979 and 1980 he participated in various workshops conducted by EPRI, O.E. and Sandia Laboratories on liuman Factors Engineering in the Control Room and participated in evaluating South Texas Project and Allens Creek main control boards. In 1981 M r. Neil was promoted to Unit Supervisor. '
Completed U.S. Navy Nuclear Power School in 1963 and served as Operator / Instructor and engineroom supervisor at AlW Prototype until 1966. Served on USS Bainbridge as Engineroom Leading Petty Officer and inport Engineering Duty Officer from 1966 to 1968. lie ]
completed the EOOW Water Chemistry School in 1969. At DIG J Prototype from 1968 to 1971, he qualified as an Engineering Officer of the Watch, lie assisted the plant Material Manager in scheduling maintenance activities during core depletion tests. While in )
Bainbridge as Leading 'M' Division Petty Officer in 1972, he qualified as Engincroom Supervisor.
Mr. Neil was assigned to USS Enterprise as an Assistant Reactor Division Officer from 1972 to 1976. As such he coordinated and directed the efforts of mechanics, electricians and electronics technicians in the operation and maintenance of two reactor plants.
lie qualified as a propulsion Plant Watch Officer and at various times acted as Division Officer in the absence of a commissioned officer. Prior to his transfer to the U.S. Navy Fleet Reserve in 1978, he was the Repair Department Leading Petty Officer and Senior Enlisted Advisor for the Trident Refit Facility at Submarine Base, Bangor, Washington. In 1978, he concluded the Westinghouse Reactor Operator Training, Phase II, Option III.
B-22 2.2.11/03173 -
5768P/0044h ,
l
(' HOUSTON CONTROL ROOM f""' DESIGN REVIEW
.- POWER CD.
r RICIIARD C. POTTER
( Systems Specialist, Torrey Pines Technology Educatiom B.S., Mechanical Engineering, University of Minnesota M.S., Mechanical Engineering, University of Southern California Experience: Mr. Potter was recently responsible for a fire vulnerability study of three Northeast Utilities nuclear power plants. Study involved the use of probabilistic risk assessment techniques.
( lie participated in a probabilistic risk assessment of the Fort St.
Vrain plant to determine clean up costs versus probability for on-site contamination due to an interruption of cooling event.
Mr. Potter was assigned to the Fort St. Vrain Nuclear Generating Station project responsible for: modifying and maintaining computer -
models for the simulation of steady-state and transient plant.
performance; overall performance review which included data monitoring and analysis as required to ensure proper plant operations; and performing steady-state and dynamic analysis to support the plant startup testing program.
Another project involved a conceptual analysis of a natural convection, drum-type and condenser-type shutdown cooling system.
On the llTGR nuclear project he was responsible for the following:
modifying and maintaining the steady-state plant performance program, the pipe rupture analysis program and the core afterheat analysis program; predicting power plant nominal, shutdown and i refueling performance for use by design and analysis groups within
( the company and for use by the customers; and performing parametric and application studies relating to the overall plant design and performance.
Prior to joining Torry Pines Technology, he was a design engineer re@onsible for design and detailing of ground support equipment for rockets. Performed propulsion analyses, application studies and computer simulation work on large liquid rocket engines.
Professional Affiliations: Professional Mechanical Engineer, California l Member, American Society of Mechanical Engineers Member, Pi Tau Sigma B-23 l
2.2.11/03173 '
l 5768P/0044h l 1
)
)
HOUSTON CONTROL ROOM UGHTING gggggy ggyggy
.. _ .. P OW E R C O.
]
RAYMOND SABEli Consultant )
Torry Pines Technology Education: Ph.D.,(candidate), Experimental Psychology, Ohio State University M.S., Industrial Psychology, Ohio University B.A., General Psychology, Davis and Elkins College Experience: Iluman Factors Engineering and Operations Research Analysis.
Responsible for preparing and implementing the human factors ]
portion of the NUREG-0700 plan for three NU nuclear operating plants and a fourth NTOL plant. Served as the human factors team member on the NU Safety Parameter Display System (SPDS) '
program that will be designed, developed, and implemented for as consortium of some 10 separate utility plants. Prepared Iluman Factors Engineering Orientation Course material used for instructing nuclear engineers and reactor operators.
Northeast Utilities - served as project leader and carried out nuclear operations analysis assignments concerning nuclear regulatory requirements to conduct human factors study, analysis and review of all activities affecting man-machine power plant design and operation. In this capacity was appointed as subcommittee chairman 1
to technically monitor and direct the Westinghouse Corporation's efforts for developing a generic system function and task snalysis on their PWR plants under contract to Westinghouse Owner's Group.
Consultant - responsible for human factors design of a control center for the storage and retrieval of nuclear waste. Currently compiling a handbook of human factors engineering design criteria.
Manager / man-machine analysis branch -
performed human engineering analysis of the Automated Record Data System for the E4A Aircraft. Also performed a man-machine analysis of the FFGX-CIC space and work place design for SEAMOD, a ship-shore communications effectiveness study. Designed the operator interface for the Minimum Essential Emergency Communications Network Message Processing Mode including the development of computer simulation techniques to assess alternate operator [
interface designs. (
Engineering Psychologist - initiated and coordinated research in development of methods and techniques used in human factors ergineering system design and development. Technical leader of a communications effectiveness study effort and shipboard habitability programs.
l' B-24 2.2.11/03173 5768P/0044h
1 L
HOUSTON CONTROL ROOM
, UGHTlNG gggggy ggyjgy
[
. _ . POWER CO.
RAYMOND SABEII Planned and technically directed the National Military Command System and Emergency Action Room study for the Defense
( Communications Agency and World-Wide airborne command posts.
Professional Affiliations: Member, iluman Factor Society Member, Operations Research Society of America Member, National Academy of Sciences Armed Forces-NTD Committee on Vision f Southeast Regional Director, Society for Information Displays Publications: lluman Factors Design Considerations for the Monitored Retrievable Storage System. Path Research Technical Document PR81001. June 1981.
Single-Threat Scenario for a CG Type Naval Vessel. SEI Technical Document. August 1980.
Evaluation on JPA's for Digital Systems. SEI Technical Document.
April 1980.
MMPM Operator Interface Design (OID) Final Report. SEI Technical 3 Document. December 1979.
Iluman Engineering Analysis of the Automated Record Data System for the E4A Aircraft. SEI Technical Document 0279-1. January 1978.
{ ,
Conceptual Design of a Distributed Combat Direction System for a Modular Frigate (SEAMOD FFGX), VOLUME III. NOSC Technical Note 356. February 1978.
Evaluation Study of the NMCC Audio-Visual Subsystem. NOSC Technical Document 114. August 1977.
Iluman Engineering Analysis and Evaluation of the Integrated Record Data System for the EC-135 Aircraf t. NOSC Technical Document 113. August 1977.
Profile for Open Ocean Crane Operators. NELC Technical Note 3209. August 1976.
Message Reproduction Requirements (USMC). NELC Technical Document 461. December 1975.
, B-25 2.2.11/03173 5768P/0044h
)
)
HOUSTON CONTROL ROOM t.lGHTING DESIGN REVIEW 1
& )
. _ . POWER CO.
RAYMON D SABEll fiuman Factors Analysis of the National Military Command System's Emergency Action Rooms. NELC Technical Note 3109. December 1975.
Anthropometry of Law Enforcement Officers. NELC Technical Document 442. (U),10 September 1975.
Fleet Tactical Communications Environment Aboard USS DALE (DLG 19) during N ATO Exercise Safe Passage '74. NELC Technical '
Document 329. (U),12 June 1974. )
Anthwartship Berthing. NELC Technical Document 302. (U),
February 1974.
Ship-to-Shore Communications Effectiveness during Beagle Danger
'73,. NELC Technical Document 272. September 1973.
Communications Practices during Southeast Asia Operations Aboard (
USS llORNE (DLG 30) and USS CHANDLER (D D-717). NELC (
Technical Document 276. September 1973.
Women Aboard Ship: liabitability Design Considerations. NELC Technical Note 2418. June 1973.
1 USS ENTERPRISE (CVAN 65) and USS OKLAHOMA CITY (CLG 5)
Messege Processing and Distribution Systems. NELC Technical Document 242. April 1973.
DLG/DLGN Communications Effectiveness Study. NELC Technical .
Document 227. (U), January 1973.
Preliminary lluman Engineering Analysis of the Signal Intelligence Analysis System (SIAS). NELC Technical Note 2252. (U), January 1973.
Evaluation of Circuit-Control Aid of USS BLUE RIDGE (LCC 19).
NELC Technical Document 176. (U), May 1972.
Voice Traffic Analysis of LANTFLEX 66, Racer Run 68, and ROPEV AL 3-71 Exercises. NELC Technical Document 175. May 1972. )
Evaluation of a Proposed Digital Messege Entry Device (DMED).
NELC Technical Note 2035. May 1972.
Tactical Scenario for DLG/DLGN Ships. NELC Technical Document 161. (U), February 1972.
B-26 2.2.11/03173 5768P/0044h
1 i L
{
HOUSTON CONTROL ROOM LIGHTING DESIGN REVIEW
( __ _ _
I POWER CO.
R AYMOND SABEli Mission and Task Analysis for DLG/DLGN Ships. NELC Technical 158. (U), January 1972.
1 USS BLUE RIDGE (LCC 19) Communications Effectiveness Evaluation. NELC Technical Document 146. (U), October 1971.
( A Suggested Procedure for Study and Analysis of Information j I
Requirements. ESD Technical Note No. 61-58. June 1961.
f State-of-the-Art in Technical Discrimination. National Academy of Sciences pp. 230-237, 1960.
> Operator Fatigue and Fighter Range Extension. W ADC Technical l Report No.53-380. October 1953.
Comparison of a Single Operator's Performance with Team Performance on a Tracking Task. W ADC Technical Note 55-362.
July 1955.
Shape Discrimination as a Function of Area and Luminance. AROC g Technical Report No. 56-8. pp. 236-243.
Shape Coding of Instrument Zone Markings. WADC Technical Report No.57-232.
l B-27 2.2.11/03173 5768P/0044h
)
HOUSTON CONTROL ROOM LIGHT lNG DESIGN REVIEW
._ _ POWER CO.
ROBERT II. STURTEVANT Inventory Education: San Diego State University, Physics Experience: Mr. Sturtevant is with Torrey Pines Technology and his area of specialty is process plant system layout and uulgn, specializing in structural / piping and electrical system layouts, pressure vessel
)
design and layout, and massive concrete / steel design. lie is currently identifying safety-related components that appear on P&I diagrams and one-line electrical diagrams, and providing technical ]
support for seismic analysis of nuclear core and core support elements, including design studies, and reports.
lie has participated in design of pilot plant for nuclear fuel recycling [
from mechanical and structural considerations to solvent extraction l processes.
lie has designed an environmentally compatible tertiary waste treatment facility including equipment and material specifications f and applications.
Earlier, he conducted design studies of core support systems including thermal growth and gap analysis of both metallic and graphite materials, with dimensional and tolerance analysis, lie has performed sizing and stress calculations and layout drawings )
of prestressed concrete reactor vessels. Determined optimum )
routing and space requirements of steam and feedwater piping, and designed power distribution layouts and operator consoles for stage lighting systems.
B-28 .
2.2.11/03173 5768P/0044h 1
L
( HOUSTON i.lGHTING CONTROL ROOM gggggy ggyjgy
__ POWER CO.
FREDERICK W. TODT
[ Annunciator Review Leader, l Torrey Pines Technology Educatiom B.S., Physics, Wayne State University
{
Experience: Mr.- Todt has coordinated proposal efforts to supply computer hardware and software for emergency response facilities for nuclear
- plants and implemented computer demonstration of plant disturbance detection concept.
f lie has developed real time application programs to support startup testing and reactor operation; monitored system behavior during startup, located deficiencies and made modifications as needed; and trained plant personnel to use computer facilities.
Mr. Todt was a section leader for a large plant computer system application software development and has written specifications for
- plant computer hardware and software and participated in the.
vendor evaluation process.
lie has performed nuclear design and analysis calculations associated with reactor power shaping, fuel cycles, control poison worth, and safety evaluations of IITGR and PWR reactors.
In the past, Mr. Todt has developed methods and computer programs for nuclear fuel cycle studies, fuel cost analysis, and automation of reactor design parametric studies; performed nuclear design studies on small power, research, and space reactor concepts using a variety of fuels, moderators, and coolants; evaluated nuclear design calculation programs (computer codes) by comparison with critical experiments; and performed laboratory work with radicactive isotopes including sample counting, dosage preparation, standardization. Calibrated x-ray machines and radiation measurement equipment. Performed radiation shielding surveys.
Professional Affiliations: Member, American Nuclear Society 1
B-29 2.2.11/03173 5768P/0044h ,
houston CONTROL ROOM DESIGN REVIEW f**
POWER CO.
PETER VANDEVISSE Lead Engineer,I&C, Project Review Team flouston Lighting & Power Education: BSME, San Jose State University Summary: 1 Year: Consultant, Brown & Root 8 Years: Various Positions, Quadrex Corporation 6 Years: Reactor Operator, U.S. Navy 4 Years: Control Systems Engineer, General Motors Experience: Mr. VandeVisse joined flouston Lighting & Power in 1982 as the South Texas Project Lead Engineer for intruments and controls. lie is responsible for review of instrumentation and control systems and component analysis, cesign, procurement, fabrication, installation and construction, testing, start-up and operational support. Ilis duties also include development and maintenance of the I&C engineering budget, review of A/E activities, supervision of the I&C engineering group, support of STP project management, quality assurance, licensing, and other engineering and technical activities.
During Mr. VandeVisse's tenure with Brown & Root, he was the consultant to the I&C department for the implementation of TMI requirements. lie also assisted in project transition when Bechtel Power Corporation was named as Architect-Engineer for the South Texas Nuclear project.
During the eight yt.ars that Mr. VandeVisse was employed by Quadrex he had various assignments and responsibilities. lie was the
)
site manager for Quadrex personnel at the Grand Gulf Nuclear Station, where he provided technical assistance to the utility during construction and plant startup. lie was also responsible for the surveillance programs used to comply with the plant technical specifications. During his assignment at Commanche Peak Steam Electric Station he assisted in FSAR review, utility response to TMI, preparation of engineering QA procedures and other technical programs. As a project leader, Mr. VandeVisse designed and supervised the fabrication end implementation of the process sensor time response test equipment and response time test surveillance programs on several nuclear power plants. IIe also supervised the development of I&C maintenance and surveillance programs for several utilities. As project leader at the Farley Nuclear Plant in Alabama, he assisted the I&C department in startup and operation. l This included responsibility for startup and operational test, I maintenance, calibration and surveillance procedure programs, the development of instrument scaling and the response time test program.
B 30 2.2.11/03173 3 1
5768P/0044h
[
HOU5 TON CONTROL ROOM f""' DESIGN REVIEW
_ POWER CD.
PETER VANDEVISSE Prior to joining Quadrex, he was a reactor operator and electronics technician in the U.S. Navy where he scheduled and supervised
{ reactor control division plant maintenance, qualification programs {
and operational activities. During a major overhaul he coordinated naval and civilian personnel in repair and maintenance of nuclear and -
electronic systems. !
While attending college, he was a control system engineer and co-op student at General Motors Institute.
B-31 2.2.11/03173 5768P/0044h
1 HOUSTON CONTROL ROOnt b
LIGHTING DESIGN REVIEW
_ _ . . . . POWER CO.
Y. M. YUFIK Process Computers Leader, Torrey Pines Technology
[
Educatiom M.S., Electronics, Odessa Polytechnic Institute, Odessa, USSR Ph.D., Experimental Physics, Kalinin University, Kalinin, USSR Postdoctoral Training, Experimental Psychology, Leningrad University, Leningrad, USSR Postdoctoral Training, Cognitive Psychology, University of California, San Diego Man-machine Interaction in Nuclear Industry, Massachusetts Institute of Technology Experience: M r. Yufik is a Process Computers Leader for Torrey Pines Technology and is responsible for analysis of decision support for power plant operators.
Other experience includes: research in mathematical modeling and analysis of decision making processes; researched and supervised development of computer based systems for pyschological testing and evaluation; supervising and/or performing analysis of human reliability and decision making strategies,and developing programs for training in problem solving and rational decision making.
Mr. Yufik supervised and/or performed systems analysis and development in computer assisted design, developed mathematical models for a variety of engineering and scientific problems, and reduced engineering problems to computer processible form.
Publications: Authored 13 papers in Experimental Physics, Computer Assisted Instruction and Evaluation, Simulation of Cognitive Strategies Professional Affiliations: Member, Human Factors Society Member, Cognitive Science Society Member, National Society for Performance and Instruction B-32 2.2.11/03173 5768P/0044h
{
fraffgu CONTROL ROOM a DESIGN REVIEW
--... POWE R CO.
APPENDIX C Typical Review Forms 2.2.11/03173 0433h/0044h
00TE 032283 PAGE 1
.DATE 22 MAR C3 14:07:03 CEPORT GENE CTION 256C17-c38 OATE 032283 PAGt 2
. SOUIH TEMAS NUCLEAR PROJECT ( 14926-001 )
+ CONTROL ROOM DESIGN REVIEW REPORT 3 TOTAL DATA BASE
- NO .NO. TITLE .P#1 NO.NO NFERENC5 0700 REF 0799 05 DISPLAVS 07 007 5.3.1.5 6.5.1.2
- CRIIERION TITLE VISUAL DISPtAYS-USABILITV 0F OISPLA'i ED VAL UES LRITERION NO. 007 SCALES ARE CONSISTENT WITH THE CEGREE OF RECISION #ND ACCURACT NEEDED BY THE OPERATOR.
- HUMAN ERROR CATEGORY NO. B MISINTERPRETATION OF DISPLAVED INFGRMATION INACCURATE DISPLAY READING 0ESCRIPTION OF OBSERVATION SCALES ARE NOT CONSISIENT WITH THE DEGREE OF PRECISION NEECED BY THE OPERA 102 0ESIGN REVIEW TEAM - RECCMMENDEO ACTION PRIORITY:
0055: REVISE SCALES Q + PROJECT REVIEW TEAM - DISPOSITION ACCEPT 7: YES NO j
- REMARMS
. ..._s............. ..........__..............__....................___..__.__.
. MANAGEMENT REVIEW TEAM - DISPOSITION ACCEPT 7: YES NO
- REMARKS NO. DEVICE TAG NO. . DEVICE CODE. OEVICE TYPE 9 NtO7-TIXXX--6207A 07-C17-201 VEREICAL METERS 2 N107-PIXXX--0505 07-C16-201 VERTICAL MEIERS 3 NtO7-PIXXX--0506 07-C:6-201 VERTICAL METERS
. e.
1 I .
i
)
- I E
2 y
5 7
0 Y
B G
0
?
5 .
3 9
(
j C2
w
- .ai gay -
, e e
g e ~
e e
O e e
e e
e O e -
w G
e o o o g
e e
m 2 2 a e e a e o e e e 2 w w a > .s
- e 5 > > ..
= a - r ~
e a o = w.
o M e w a a e e > w o ,
a M w e = > = ( Q C e a 4 a t s; M e U U . y
- o e a
4 w a
> e G e o e e
e e
e o
e e
e a
e e
e l
e I e
e o w
- 8 e a e e o e e e e , e i e e e 4 e e e e e e e da e
e e e e e e e e i e e e e o e e e e e e
- + o, e o e e e e e e e e e e e e aw e e e e e e e e e e e i e ae to a e e e e e e , e e e a we Im e i e o. e e o e w
omen w e +
w3 e
e e e e e
a e e e e e e e e e e e e
a
- e e i e o 5 e e e aos- a> e e e e e..
i e e e 30s - om4 e e e e
e e e e e i e e e e
e e
e e
e e
e 26 em e' e s e e e e e e o e e e e Co == s s e e e e s e e e e e e s
- ee- ma e e e e e i e s e e e e e a= e e o e i e a e e o
= a wx e e e e e e o e e i e e i e e e t
a We3 e e e 8 we
- e. wwg e
e e i a a e e o e i e e e e e i e e e e e e
o e
3X - e e e e e t's e a e ee e- a W ve sq>
qum p e e e e e e g g e e o e e g Nw me 28 we a e e e e e e o e e e e e e o vgame
>< w e e o e e e e e e e e e i ao > e e o e f
e .e e e e e o e e e m wwe = w e e. a w w
- e i e o e o e
e e e e i e wg wJe
>ga X e i e s e s e e i e. e e e wa we* e e i e e e eae.
> me . 420 '9 i e e e e e e a e e e e e ae
>< em aca i . . e e a e >e vo . - ama =
e
, e i e e e e e re w ee e>3 3 -
e e i s e e e e a e e # .e e e emowen 7J - age o e
o e o e i e e a e e e e wsamama og>oe omww a e
e i e e e
e e
e e
a e
. i e e e e e e e e s uswwwww m e>>>=e.
a a e e a 10w a. 2. e. e e e e e e e
was N o e e e- e e e e e e, Dewwwwho e
e e e
>>oso a agew oog u
=
a e e e e e o e e e e e ,
e i e weXXXXX ce e i e e e a e a e o e e e v + - eO >wa > ke
- e ' s * * * * *
- eJJJJa e<<<<<
w
- koo g 1 e e e o e e e e e
- i e I J Zoeb = 2 >
e s e e e e e e e e o e
e e
e e
e euuuuu e=====
U D M 4 2. e. O=Ow awe a o e e e e e o e e e e e e e>>>>>
2>
o 2 2 e i e e e e e e e e e e e samaan e m23 w o o= e e e e I e e e e a e e e awwwww a e ago 2 e
'i e a e. e i e a e e 00 ga e
e eum 3
= w
> v
> i ;
e e i e e e e a e e o e 2
o e
e o
e e
e e
e e
e e
. . e.>>>>>
wa*****
Mw wa e
9 e
>wu o {. o w =
4 e . . s. e , e e s = i s .
e i e e a e ceococo
- 2 v i e i e i > a e o e e a 3
n e
<>w Juw q
aa w o e e
o
=
e e e a e e e
e e
e s
e
=
e a
e e
a e
e e s e onNNnnn.
um e i e em Zw e aw ag J o q. e > e e o e e e o e e e e i s e e e eN>c we== e .
>= a ead . m e
- e i e e e e a e e a e e e 3> =x2 m= a un ow> e e
ow= =O a w
2 e e
o e e e
e e
e a
e e
e e
e e
o
=
e i s e e e e e e =e'Jouuu e *
- e e mam o g og 24 2 e a e e e e e e o e e e e e e DeM5665
=we Jw. w o o e- e e e e e i e e e i e e e e e we00000 Zaae WIe wa => u o a e e e e e e e e e c. e.
cxp o 3*a o -Q w e o e e e a e e i e e e mume w > 42 a e e e e i
a e e 2 e e e e e e e e i s
e 4 Mwho =2W 24 % d. e I e e f e e e g e e e wI e ><a os aw aw e e e n e<WMOW Qu e 44 =h wm a e
e I e e o e e e
e e
a a
e w
e e
e e
e e
e e e e.
oscODCC Zeanocm e av we og Im e e' e e e e .' y
- e. e e e e e e e e 3 e eo e
== m Ho om wo gu e w e e e e e e e e e w
A e e e e a e caec.coOc
- e 8 > wwwm w w e e
e a e e
e e
e a
e e
e e
e a
e e e e 3wr
=<=w 42 a>
as w3 o
a w=
w zo .
e w
e
- e. .
e e
o e
e e
e e
w e
e e
e i e e i e e exxxxx wexxxxx E
e o se pang awa 2a =>
e e
=
a e i e i e
e i e e e e e a e e e e e e ue===== -
i e e e e e a e= A3 O=3 o >w e w e e e e e s > e e e o e e
= strata De e e e e e i
2
. . e. c Zwon a2O -w wa s e
-a eae ee 2 e e e e e a wa&&mmm ogoeO osaw os e a m weg ag a=O wa a e e e e e e i w e e i e e e os00000 j
> g 2d - .e g e e e.' .d e e e I e e e e e e e e-----
v u z. e o sua2 == -u u e e e x e e e w e e , g eo
>=
weg= 2X=
me GM u =g i
i ,
w e
- e. e.
a g
e e
e e
e e
0 e
e e
e e
e
,a5 e
e e e
e e . e.22222
>QeO e e
< i e e . e-nnec T. ne a 2
g w M e, w
e e
o a
e e s e e e I
w e
e e
e e
e 2
4 e
e e
e e
a I
w i e e e e e ce 2e G eo u e e ee e e
oe o e a e o e a e e e y e e e a e e e e l.
es e e e e e e e a e e e C3 s
(
_ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ . - . . _ _ ..a -
- )eum f c'=
gf g3 e t '
e i e a
e 4 e a
e e
e @
e M w e e
o g C 2
0 CD a.
=2 e a e e e e O e W e 2 w w e > >
a 2 .
e O > > - .-
e . a e= e- &
a a O == - >
f"1 e w 0 m 4 CL 00 e > w O *** eas N e == e- ** U U N e CE at a U U M e U V CL < <
O e a
w e
- e. e at e Q P e
e e
e e
a e
e e
e e.
e e
e 2 e -
e . e a e e e , e e e e < e e e e e e e e
- e. e e ,- e . e e e e 2 e . e. e e e e e a e e e e e e
< !!! 11: !!! !!! I
..s .e =
we a e e e e e e e e e e e . e s . .
e e
we e e i e e e e . e e . e O e e o e o
w me a n. e e. . i e e . I e e. . e e . e
. . e e e . e e e e . e a a8en. Ow o .
e e
e e
e e
e e e e
- e. e e e e e e e
e e
e .
e e e
3>eeOe e. == Cr e
- e e e e e e. e e e e i e i
. e e e
e
- se >- e e
. e e e e
e e e e e e. e e e e
. . < a i e, ee e e . e e a
- e Ex 3 e e e e e m w e e i . e e, ei e . e e. e e e 8e we e
> C e i
e e e e .,
e-e e e e
e e
e
. e. .
e e e
e e . e e e i i e e dpe JZ e e e e
. i e e e e e e e ., e e e nw CL O e e e e . . e e i e e e, 4n CL we m- e i e u e -m e e . . e. . e e e . . e o ne e e e e e e. . s e e e e e
-OW owe w a n. su e e e e e e i e e e we
-4 wan aw .i e .i e e e e o e o e e ae Cr o . Ou i e e e e . e. e e e e e >e e
ma - e o e e e e e e e e e e e. re UO e e n. > Q e e e , e e e e e e,
e e e e e ,
e m m v. o I w a@ 26 w e e e a e i e e # w a CE CE CE C1 7 .
OO CE e e e e e e e e e e e o Uewwww O .J > U - e e. e e e e s . . e e e -spr>>
Ca > m. g ae. e J o e e, e e e e e e e a e e
e e
e a
>ewwww CL O - 2w 2 O e e e e e a e e a e wee 222
>>0eW O> 0 w e e o e e . s e e . e e
e e
e o e. A .J Cr Cr 2 e m == w == CE a s e e e e e o e e m .J .J
< eO e .J > e e e e e e e e e e e i e e se < as at w U. . - < < Z e e o e e e e a e e e e eUUu r
.J 2&a> aw 2 O .e I e e e e e e e e e a a e m. m. em u. i Cr - e e i i e e e e e e e e e s > e- > e.-
Ug m CL 2. e. O oa >I 0 un 2 6 e o
e e
e e
e a e, e e e e e e e e a e s, a CE CE E m awwww
.>Cr e a
20 w
2
- O U e=
e s e o e e e e e e e e
e i e e>>>>
eO e e= w - w > a e e e e e e 2 e e o e e . .
<A 6 2 w Cr U e e a e e s e O i e i * .e e wa----
u( w eO >U Q r. < e e e e e e s ==
- e a e e e OeOOOO P t s Cr a s= at x w e 2 e e e e e * > e a e e e Oennnn se e em aw > w Q e Q e B e e o e me e e e. e I I Qe e e e e 3 e *C c. . as O w e e= e e s e e e e e e e e e e enoee Iw e2 e>@ 40 > e e e e e e O e a e e e e wa ----
> - e0 -Ow a2 J Q
. e t
-
- e, e a ee e a e e e e e e o> ew o2> o- m w e e e e e e o e e i e o e U e U U. U. U*
-e e a> N == c > 2 O e o e i e e e= e e i e e e >e5e6&
O w e= 4 e e e e e e e o . ee. ee e e a weOOOO a2 AO> Q< Zw X e CL oe v Cr e w a -
e Ooe w O .a O U
e e
==
e e e e e e e e i e e s e s e e e
e e
s e
2JA= Cx 64 == e Og>e> >eI O >w w e o e e e e e a e
e e
e e
e E o e e o s e e
e e
e e
a e
e as
== 0 re e at 2Aw > at I CE e m w > e _J OO> 2< >> e e i e e e e e e er, e e a e o e .ev>cc wI ea Une DJ m e s e e e e i e e w e e e e
e e
e e
gacOOO
.e -NOO
.3 U eM >> == CL wQ J e E e e e e e e > e .
e e e I
o e e se @ g Q Q e ma 2@ >V @W X a( B < s e e . e 5 R eQ O at == CD w at U e w e e
- e e e 3 e . e e i ce e e e .
O e UO >c QU we * > e e e *
- e w i e e e e e at e e a e e O eJ w w w x > e e e e i e a == e e e e e e >exxxx a eO asa aw ww w e 3 e e i e i e > e e e e a e e xxxx eM > - au Q 3 W e e 8 e e e W e i e o We x X U e .x. o .x. m.
e
.J e> s= e o a< W w Me s == e o e a a e a e e e .e .ee O eZ >>0 Qwa 2> ee> e > * *ee ee e s
- e e e e e
- e. 8 e s=
>a a CL > CL CL eO =E w O>3 O at >w e W e e s e e 8 e e e 2
e e e e e e e e we5556 e e e e C.d a2U ** J w CE e
g . .eU OgOee 2 .J CE O CL
. ew w M at CE == U > CL CL e CE e
4 e
Cg e
e e e e e e e e
e a
e a
e w
3 e e e o e e,
e e
e e
e e
e oeOOOOe----
-2 = = - *c.. e U e a M e e
- w e e
- x e e e
. e.2 2 2 2 U U 2. e. O Cr wow ** I 23= uO 30 e w e e. e a e e . O e o e a e e e e- > at U ea O e *) e e e at e a e at e a e =t e e e.
.e*NMv hoe 0 ea X e WO e O e e s xw e e e 2 e e e x w
e e
e e ge
.e 22ee a p w w e a e e a e o e e e i e e
- e e a e eo u
.e e e e e Q
. O.
C.L e e e a.
s e
e s
2 C.g e e e e
e j m
t
- ~
C-4 x
x_
,M-e -
Pg (m
DATE 032233 PAGE 5 MHitN15
. SOUTH TEXAS NUCLEAR PROJECT ( 14923-COf )
- CONTROL ROOM DESIGN REVIEW EFPORT 3 TOTAL DATA BASE ..R OE<.T
'SHT .CK. CHECKLIST .PN.CRT.RV STP NUREG
- NO .NO. TITLE .HO. NO.NO REFERENCE 0700 REF 0806 09 CONTROL DISPLAY INTEGRATION 08 037 5.7.3.2 6.9.3.2
- CRITERION TITLE CONTROL / DISPLAY INTEGRATION-CONTROL / DISPLAY RATIC CRITERION NO. 037 FEEDBACK FROM A DISPLAY SHALL BE DETECTABLE AND APPARENT FOR ANY DILIBERATE I
CONTROL MOVEMENT.
- HUMtN ERROR CATEGORY NO.
MISINTERPRETATTON OF DISPLAYED INFORMATION
- DESCRIPTION OF DBSERVATION FEEDBACK FROM A CONTROL MOVEMENT IS NOT APPARENT ON THE CONTROLLER.
- DESIGl4 REVIEW TEAM - RECOMMEtOED ACTION PRIORITY:
0000: INVALID ACTION CODE 0145 HAS BEEN ISSUED
- PROJECT REVIEW TEAM - DISPOSITION ACCEPT 7: VES NO 4
- REMARKS de
..........___..........................._.__ ...___..............____........... 1
- MANAGEMENT REVIEW TEAM - DISPOSIT*0N ACCEPT?: VES NO 1 .........__...... .............. .................. .....................___...
- REMARKS l
..._______..........................._......................__..............__.. l
.___....._. .....___......__..........___._-................... ___.......______ l 1
ts.. DEVICE TAG NO. . DEVICE CODE. DEVICE TYPE e................................... . ...........................................
1 NtOS-FKXXX--7402 08-C13-311 PROCESS CONTROLLER I
N Oh, k I
- _ - _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - -- ~__- -_ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - _ - - - _ _ _.
e r ~- ... -- . . . .
2 DATE 032283 Paut 9 #h !
TOUTH1mfl5 SOUTH TEXAS NUCLEAR PROJECT ( 1492G-OO1 ) .P.R..C.
.. LIE.CT.
.SHT .CK.
- NO .NO. TITLE .NO. NO.NO REFERENCE . 0700 REF
.......................s....................................................
0808 05 DISPLAYS 09 010 S.3.1.5 6.5.1.2 i
CRITERION NO. 010
CATEGORY NO. B
- HUMAN ERROR MISINTERPRETATION OF DISPLAYED INFORMATION INACCURATE DISPLAY READING
- DESCRIPTION OF OBSERVATION SCALE RANGES ARE NOT APPROPRIATE ON THE FOLLCWING METERS.
PRIORI'Y:
- DESIGtJ REVIEW TEAM - RECOMMENDED ACTION 0055: REVISE SCALES ACCEPT 7- YES NO
- PROJECT EW TEAM - DISPOSITION
....... --.........---.-...--.----- ...--.. --...--------------.--------...... 1 O
A
- REMARKS ACCEPT 7: YES NO
- MANAGEMENT REVIEW TEAM - DISPOSITION
- REMARKS t
t .....--.- ............--....----------- .-----....---------.---.---.-- --------.
NO. DEVICE TAG NO. . DEVICE CODE. DEVICE TYPE
. ...........==..............................
09-804-201 VERTICAL METERS 1 N109-XIXXX--8226 2 N109-XIXXX--8225 09-805-201 VERTICAL METERS 3 N109-LIXXX--6670 09-808-201 VERTICAL ME1ERS 4 N109-PIXXX--6059A 09-CO2-7C "ERTICAL METERS l
NMIMh@%$Migh)
{
HOUSTON CONTROL ROOM LIGHTING DESIGN REVIEW P10)E.CT POWER CO.
STP horkspace Considerations
- 1. Does the projected control room contain all the instrumentation and equipment needed to detect and arrest abnormal plant conditions?
YES (Instrumentation / Equipment is Sufficient) l I l
NO (Insufficient Instrumentation / Equipment)
! l 1
l l
(
3 -
C7 6804P/0659P
HOUSTON CONTROL ROOM LIGHTING DESIGN REVIEW m ,, , . &
.PRoJE,CI POWER CO.
STP horkspace Considerations
- 2. Do you think it will be possible to bring the plant to a safe and undelayed shutdown given the projected instrumentation and equipment?
YES (Shutdown Safe And O'ndelayed) i i NO (Potential Unsafe Or Delayed Shutdown)
I i 1
i 1
C4 ,
1 6804P/0659P l
)
H0USl,0lg CONTROL ROOM gg
)_ g DESIGN REVIEW PROJKT POWER CD.
) STP horkspace Considerations I
- 3. hillit be possible to make all plant-critical decisions and responses within the projected primary operating area?
YES (Decisions / Responses Can Be blade)
, I l I
r
) NO (Some Decisions / Responses May Have To Be Alade Outside Primary Operating Area) l l 1
\
1 l
)
)
) l C4-6804P/0659P
m HOUSTON CONTROL ROOM LIGHTING DESIGN REVIEW {
& t
, PRO)tc! POWER CO.
STP horkspace Considerations
- 4. Is the shift supervisor's office conveniently located to the primary operating area?
YES (Conveniently Imcated)
I i NO (Inconveniently Located) f r
r
(
(
C-10 6804P/0659P
l l
HOUSTON CONTROL ROOM l LlGHTING DESIGN REVIEW l
.P.R_oJ!,9 POWER CO.
STP Controls
- 7. Do you feel that controls are arranged to facilitate operator responses?
YES (Good Arrangement) l l I
I NO (Undesirable Arrangement)
I i 1
l
)
)
c-ii l
1 6804P/0659P j i
_ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - J
HOUSTON CONTROL ROOM LIGHTING DESIGN REVIEW
.PROJECI POWER CD.
STP Controls
- 8. Are contro's easy to identify?
YES (Easily Identified) i i 4
NO (Hard To Identity) .
I i 1
(
(
C-12 '
6804P/0659P
t I
L HOUSTON CONTROL ROOM LIGHTING DESIGN REVIEW
- ,-s r
,PR,ojt,q POWER CO.
[
STP horkmace Considerations l
- 9. Do you feel that all controls will be easy to reach and manipulate by both small and large operators?
f YES (All Controls Reachable And Easy To Manipulate)
I i NO (Some Controls Difficult To Reach Or Manipulate) l I 3
i C 13 6804P/0659P
HOUSTON CONTROL ROOM LIGHTING DESIGN REVIEW
[n3jt3 OWER CD.
STP Controls
- 10. Do you feel that controls are well-arranged with respect to plant systems?
YES (Optimal Arrangement For Systems)
I i NO (Undesirable Systems Arrangement)
I i 1 C 14-6804P/0659P l
l l HOUSTON CONTROL ROOM l
LIGHTING DESIGN REVIEW m,,-s &
l PROjt.q POWER CD.
l STP Controls l
(
l 11. Within a given system (steam generator, e.g.), do you feel that controls are well-arranged for subsystems (feedwater turbine pump, e.g.)?
YES (Optimal System Arrangement) l I NO (Undesirable Subsystem Arrargement) 1 l l l
l l
l C 6804P/0659P 1
l HOUSTON CONTROL ROOM LIGHTING DESIGN REVIEW 1
.a,,- S
. pro)E.9 POWER CO.
STP Annunciator Warning Systems
- 20. Do you like the design and overalllayout of the annunciators?
YES (Good Design And Layout) i I NO (Undesirable Design Or LLyout)
, i l 1
l l
l C 16-6804P/0659P
m, a HOUSTON CONTROL ROOM LIGHTING g gggg y gg ygg y
.h)M OWER CO.
l STP Annunciator harning Systems I
l 21. Based on your knowledge of the STP annunicators, do you feel that the number of false or insignificant alarms will be minimal?
YES (Acceptable Number Of False Or Insignificant Alarms) l I NO ('Ioo Many False Or Insignificant Alarms)
I i 1 i
l i
l I
1 I
l l
l c.17-
! 6804P/0659P l
HOUSTON CONTROL ROOM LIGHTING DESIGN REVIEW oc.1.m
.P ROJ ECT POWER CO.
STP Annunciator Warning Systems
- 22. Will each annunciator be dedicated to only one plant parameter set point?
YES (Only One Set Point Per Annunciator) l l 1
NO (More Than One Set Point Per Annunciator) 1 I I
~ C 18 -
6804P/0659P .
1
)
HOUSTON CONTROL ROOM
. LIGHTING DESIGN REVIEW
.P10)$ OWER CO.
STP Annunciator barning Systems
- 23. Do you feel that it will be possible to rapidly identify the initiating event (first-out) for automatic plant shutdowns? -
l YES (Rapid Identification Of First-Out is Possible) i I NO (First-out liard To Identify)
I i 1 i
l l
l
-C 6804P/0659P
HOUSTON CONTROL ROOM LIGHTING DESIGN REVIEW o,. . . & l PROJECT POWER CO.
i i
STP Visual Displays
- 32. Do you feel that control room displays will present complete and accurate information concerning plant status?
YES (Complete And Accurate Information Displayed) l I
)
l NO (Incomplete Or Inaccurate Information) l i 1 l
I C l 6804P/0659P
HOUSTON CONTROL ROOM LIGHTING DESIGN REVIEW o, ms &
Plo3,0 POWER CD.
STP Visual Displays
- 33. Do you feel that it will be possible to easily differentiate between displayed demand r
and status information?
YES (Demana And Status Information Easily Differentiated) l I NO (Hard To Differentiate Demand From Status Information) l l 1
-C 6804P/0659P l
HOUSTON CONTROL ROOM LIGHTING DESIGN REVIEW m..,-, &
,PROJE9 POWER CO.
i STP Visual Displays
- 34. Willit be possible to easily icentify failed displays?
YES (Failed Displays Easily Identified)
I i NO (Difficult To Identify Failed Displays) 1 I 1
l
.c-22 !
6804P/0659P ,
i
m HOUSTON CONTROL ROOM LIGHTING DESIGN REVIEW 1
. pro,K,9 POWER CO.
STP Visual Displays
- 35. Do you feel that display scale graduations and numbers will permit operators to make readings of the precision required?
YES(Scale Graduations And Numbers Permit Sufficiently Precise Readings)
I i NO (Scale Graduations Or Numbers Do Not Permit Sufficiently Precise Readings) ! l 1
-C 23 6804P/0659P
HOUSTON CONTROL ROOM UGHTING DESIGN REVIEW
-.,-s &
.P8ong POWER CD.
o .
STP IAbels and Location Aids
- 41. Are controls, displays, and other equipment clearly and accurately labeled?
YES (Labeling Is Oear And Accurate) l I l
I NO (Labeling Is Unclear Or Inaccurate) l i 1
C 4-6804P/0659P
HOUSTON CONTROL ROOM LIGHTING DESIGN REVIEW o.,., &
. P,R.o.y.9 POWER CO.
STP Labels and location Aids I 42. Are labels for major systems and components clearly distinguished from all other labels? -
t YES (Major Labels Are Distinctive) l l NO (Major Labels Are Not Distinctive)
I i 1-l l
1 C 25- ,
l 6804P/0659P
l HOUSTON CONTROL ROOM LIGHTING DESIGN REVIEW
.oo.. , ..&
. P R,OJ EET POWER CD.
STP Labels and location Aids
- 43. Are subordinate labels used to identify subsystems?
YES (Subordinate Imbels Used) l i NO (Subordinate Labels Not Used) j i l ca- l 6804P/0659P
HOUSTON CONTROL ROOM LIGHTING DESIGN REVIEW m,. ..s &
lIl P R O,J E_CT POWER CD.
I STP labels and Locations Aids I
- 44. Are allletters and numbers used in the lhbels distinct, clearly visible, and easy to read?
YES (label Characters Are Clear And Easy 'Io Read) l l NO (Label Characters Are Hard To Read) 3 l l
.-L .
l l
l C27-6804P/0659P
HOUSTON CONTROL ROOM LIGHTING DESIGN REVIEW o,...,
8' PJ!.0)E.CT POWER CO.
L .
STP Process Computers
- 58. Do you feel that the data entry keyboards are well-designed and will they be easy to use?
YES (Keyboards Well-Designed And Easy 'Io Use) l l NO (Keyboards Poorly Designed Or Hard To Use) 3
. }
c.n. l 6804P/0659P
l i
l HOUSTON CONTROL ROOM l UGHTING DESIGN REVIEW
._PRoJEq POWER CO.
STP Process Computers
- 59. Do you feel that the CRTs are located in comfortable and convenient viewing locations on the panels?
YES (CRTs Are Well Located) l I NO (CRTs Are Not Well Located) 1 l I C 29.
6804P/0659P
HOUSTON CONTROL ROOM LIGHTING DESIGN REVIEW ,
& I
. P R,OJ E,CT POWER CO.
STP Panel Layout and Integration
- 60. Do you feel that the panels are effectively designed with respect to the overall layout of controls, displays and other equipment?
l YES (Overall Panel Layout is Effective) l l l NO (Overall Panel Layout Could Be Improved) 1 I i C 30-6804P/0659P
l HOUSTON CONTROL ROOM l .
LIGHTING DESIGN REVIEW
,PRoJEg POWER CD.
STP Panel Layout and Integration
- 61. Are controls and displays that are used together grouped together er otherwise logically arranged?
YES (Ingical Grouping Or Arrangement) l l 4
NO (Blogical Grouping Or' Arrangement) 3 i
.=[,
3 k
\
d %
% ,k j g._
h N
'\ t 5 2 -g
(
) , s
. < k i C s .-- .
s 6804P/0659P ,
b t
. 1
- _, k. . \ 4,
HOUSTON CONTROL ROOM LlGHTlNG DESIGN REVIEW
-o.,. , _ s
.PR,o)ECT POWER CO.
STP Panel Layout and Integration
- 62. Are frequently used controls (and displays) located such that they are easy to cperate and monitor?
YES (Optimal Locations For Frequently Used Controls And Displays) l I NO (Some Frequently Used Controls Or Displays Poorly '
Located) l l t1 C 32 6804P/0659P
L HGilSTON CONTROL ROOM
[ L .GHTING DESIGN REVIEW m,. ..,. s &
PAoJE.g POWER CO. .
I
[ STP Panel Layout and Integration
- 63. Are functional groups of panel components arranged consistently from one panel to another )
YES (Consistent Arrangement Of Functional Groups) l l I 4
[
1 NO (inconsistent Arrangement Of Functional Groups) f i i
( . ,
l 1
1
{
f' -,i .
1
,' Y,
/,
[ .
. C43.
6804P/0659P i . ,1
\ GontralERoomDesignReview 1 Operating Experience Review Validation Report i
i The SouthTexas Project HOUSTON LIGHTING & POWER COMPANY