ML19207B777
| ML19207B777 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Crane  |
| Issue date: | 08/31/1976 |
| From: | Danielle Sullivan NRC OFFICE OF STANDARDS DEVELOPMENT |
| To: | Spurgin A GENERAL ATOMICS (FORMERLY GA TECHNOLOGIES, INC./GENER |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19207B778 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 7909050257 | |
| Download: ML19207B777 (2) | |
Text
t UNITED STATES J'*.
NUCLEAR REGULATORY CCMMISSION j
WASHINGTON, D. C. 2o555 m y/
i
%, D
< {, n -
(
,\\j W _Q Y
AUG 31 1976 Mr. A. J. Spurgin, Chairman, IEEE NPPC&P WG & SC 1.2 General Atomic Company P. O. Box 81608 San Diego, California 92138
Dear Mr. Spurgin:
In accordance with IEEE/NPEC procedures, I am writing to set forth the reasons for =y final " negative" ballot on the proposed IEEE 566, " Guide for the Design of Display and Control Facilities for Central Control Roc =s of "uclear Generating Stations," Draft 3C.
As I indicated during final consideration and ballot at the recent NPEC meeting in San Diego (NPEC 76-2), the docu=ent is lacking in specific and enforceable require =ents essential to =ake it suitable for use in the regulatory process.
This was also stated as principal co= ment A 1 of my December 1975 letter ballot:
"The proposed guide includes a multiplicity of general considera-tions, principally items which the designer should consider in the design of display and centrol facilities. What is needed is specific guidance on how displays should be arranged, what kind of displays, alarms, recordings, etc., should be provided for various parcmeters in each type of reactor, at least a minimum set of displays, alarms and recordings. Additional optional dis-plays should also be specified with criteria for determining whether or not they should be included in a particular design."
Exa=ples of non-specific, non-enforceable provisions of the document include Sec tions 7.1, 7.2*.1 ("as appropriate..."), 7.3.1, 7.3.2 ("shall be considered..."), 7.6.1, 7.10.
There are other unresolved principal co==ents as follows:
a) The relatienchip between controls located in the central control room and controls for the same equipment located else-where in the plant should be addressed (Con =ent A2).
Implicit in the cc==cnt is the issue of criteria for determining which controls can override the others.
C1
- )w t J (J l 909060 E
[.
Mr. A. J. Spurgin -
ggg 31 jg73 b) Requireeents unique to =ulti-unit stations should be addressed (Coc=ent A5),
c) Criteria should be included to deter =ine which manual controls should be in the central control roo= (Cc==ents 38 and B27).
d) More practical and specific criteria on what conditions must be alarmed should be provided. Other =atters such as whether the alar = should be audible or visual, or both, flashing or steady, should be included (Co==ent Bil).
e) The provisions of Regulatory Guide 1.47 should be included as require =ents for bypass indication.
f) The control roo= design basis should include a listing of all parameters which require indicators, all parameters which require recording, all para =eters which require alar:s and all equip =ent which requires =anual control in the control roo= (Co==ent B1).
g) Criteria should be included for determining which test facilities cust be located within the control roo=.
Those not required should be kept out (B29).
I trust that I have satisfactorily explained the reasons for =y negative ballot. Please contact =e if you have any questions.
Sincerely, e
' c.. -
ip.#
D. F. Sullivan, Me=ber IEEE/NPEC CC:
T. J. Martin L. M. Johnson C. Chiappetta 91,
')L 7 cJ, 2
T -