NUREG-0659, Forwards IEEE Comments on NUREG-0659.Response to Comments Should Be Received by 810421

From kanterella
(Redirected from NUREG-0659)
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Forwards IEEE Comments on NUREG-0659.Response to Comments Should Be Received by 810421
ML20126J297
Person / Time
Issue date: 04/16/1981
From: Tondi D, Wiess S
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
RTR-NUREG-0659, RTR-NUREG-659 NUDOCS 8104240265
Download: ML20126J297 (1)
v • d • e


Text

_.

. _.. ~

.f' g

. pa ctog,

[o UNITED STATES g

[4 q

f g

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 7

g y

r,,

2y WASHING TON, D. C. 20555 jg

\\*****,1 APR.zgIO8 4 j;

'Y 2

)

April 16, 1981 6 9 8.a, qN=D% f/

)

it'%

MEMORANDUM FOR: HFEB Members N

o FROM:

D. Tondi, Section Leader, Human Factors Engineering Branch,-

i Division of Human Factors Safety i

S.H. Weiss, Section Leader, Human Factors Engineering Branch, Division of Human Factors Safety

SUBJECT:

NUREG-0659 COMMENTS The attached comments from the IEEE (Working Group 5.5, Human Factors) l have been received and are to be addressed at the April 22 and 24 meetings.

t Responsibility for preparing staff responses is as follows:

}

' Comment Responsibility Support

^

1.

Beltracchi

,w 2.

Pezoldt Eckenr' ode 3.

Froelich v-Draft responses to these comments should be available for DHFSAiFEB review by 9:00 AM, Tuesday, April 21st a e latest.

l ih 3

/

' D. Tondi, Section Leader

, 2. ;

../

Human Factors Engineering Branch.

/.

Division of Human Factors Safety

,,j'L-

,py

~,

ll\\ %

A g.

N, Mm('c '

-w<,m w w;,

,/

S.H. Weiss, Section' Leader O,

~

/

Human Factors Engineering Branch' n

.\\

j' Division of Human Factors Safety ~H u

WM 2

Attachment:

Letter frain IEEE WG 4.5

d. m m *

' ; dated April 15, 1981 7

C

.M ' cc?M ;i

'y

^

b.' / p g ;'* i

cc:

S. Hanauer P-a.

" L' J s

/

MIM '

J. Kraner

-f

Q.-j",N V. Moore DHFS Branch Chiefs D

4 ilFEB Members

'W s.

s<@gM d[ (.

'E. Hill, LLNL H. Price, BTI

  1. v 4;bjg F

?

,l:

n TERA f

W 4

+

w y

e my "e'

.swN

.,r

-m W;t

,W

G
p q L;; G {j % g ;iN,9 y %

y g % k;

- $ _7.',. l!;.? m u( b b ?bfyhh. h;

,lY;

?

k

-;Y W l I'

n.. w a,. -. p.

Tp

... ~ -.. - - -

a m ewe p;*

, M N y %.. v

  • k(

I a

8, i*s,{', ',

',c7 48tlNS7ffUTEOI n

Etr erasc,.t. Ano

-li.

Eucraouecs f>

E uoms t ns.mc.

1

.[;.{r I

  • Q,>

.M bli ATd 51Rtt7, wea v0Po' AE' 1 '/.1 '

[.

'} ? ;'..i g *

  • g

(.

e g

STANDARD 5 OFFICt t et:T wvtre

{

'6 II" (.4 4.* M l

prkkk5,1981 b

r%

g ;;-). h A

j NO A

.n.,,

r

%\\(O S

i

,V.f ~ e,'

Dlvisdon of fluran factor Safety l$

f Vi Office cf Nuclent ReactorP.cgulatkon li APS.I J

)

. U.S., Nuclear Regulat ory Cominnton i-h E* *Y' g' g y 3

i Washington, b.C..

20555 kTIEN!!ON:

k.N.}'rockkeb j

( '. -'

. A o..?

e o

s,/s< ?.7 g, '

Yl - L g s \\,<

' ff '

Dear Dic

? +
.

t ;j,..

The IEEE Working Group (FU) 5.5 Ilunan Teef ors Itas revleved on Advance

)

j'YM "t

p Copy of N1' REG-0659, Staf f Supplenent to the Itursan Enginocring Guide to Control Room Evaluation Draft P.eport.

Due to the short tice I

f d.'

available for review, the va is providing general co: cents.

sufficient i

tisse was not ava!!able to review, analvte and synthenf te detnited 1:

j

[

coscents developed by individual WG cechcrn.

It in anticipated; however, that. nost of thene detailed coenents will be submit ted by x

s WC secebers individually or an part of their organization's response.

.i s-j,'

The consensus of WC 5.5 le that changes presented in NI' REC-Of'50 g

j, reflect a imajor f erprovertent in Itt' REG /EP.-1580.

!!any of the problems a

.y,-

oE 1580 were addressed and tviny of the proposed changes appear

,1 i/:

reasonable.

.. ;,n The UG believes; however, ihot certain sec.tionn within hTp,EG-0059

..i

{ ji.,.[:

require attention. Appendix B is considered to contain pnregraphs j :, '

that are too vague. The workload analysis (pnge B-24, paracrnph 4.3.2.6),

j '.k

%.L for exsuple, would be difficult to trele emt based on the description I ~ 7' ' '

provided. The functional analysis (p.hge B-14, paragraph 4.1) of thei l'

nuclear plant also would be difficult to acceep1tsh based on the I

usaterial contained on 0659.

l i. h.5 c 1

the WC suggests that the introduction in the checklist section o

(page 711-1, paragraph 1) ermtnin a paragraph addressing the ir portance K

of considering both systens and hunan inctorn knowle dge in surve)ing and measuring central roen designs,,

As an cr.neple, an adequate evaluation of niele boards and graphic panels (page 111-25, I'

paragraph 6.5.6.1) requires an underntandinc of t.be pinnt. proce9nen e

bl.

.1B

'l'

'. * * *...... : [~. u...m ~.

~ ~: e.~

.s

.....z#

^ -+ d 6 K q' %.,,,y g..- o. y cc - n]' *-

C " *.t.. m,-

,7

,q

~ '

.E g.,,,

' l,q.. h.,$,4.,,,,,

't * *.i

,f,?;;.

  • -I9

-,. s... &, [ ;

N' '

s.:w msw.uom

-l 4

g 4

v.-

' ' " " ~ ~ ' '

m

, p

, 7..

..m t

,q r,. 4,y.

y r *.. m r, d i'r[,8 '. t. '

THE sl43T8YUTE OF I*

r,- }(p,y e f,.,

l' l'g ;>& * ; g E tr cinica suo

' 7 ' *~

Etrcrnonics

' g; dig (

E ncin g a n s.mc.

..h' 385 E 8 5T A fsh $ f PI f f, *tE > T OR r.. '.E is V CDF I!C t ?

  • / t w,

1 o,,

N i h,[;g,a; hdNDARD5 OFFICk c etct weta l r..

.:tr w. m y e :..

. k.N.Froeitch j ', M fi.: "

2e 'm,

Arril 15, 1981

? 1.E rage z p:r. b a '..-

n. 9, 9. 0, r.n a l't&Qf I

nndtisairrelationsisips,togetherwithknavledgeofhui.anfactors f

r ;*

ffg !-

considerations.

If the systen's knavledge is not included in the l.

mesessment, the renuit will be a control board with a reasonshic p

{.;'

f,.

" cosmetic" oppearance, but not necessarily with the best porcible

,g' rresentation of process relationships.

(t_..,

NC comuments submitted to tkie NRC du review od' NURT*G/CR-1580 were not

,y f

> *. included in NVREG-0659.

It is recornmended that thes.c careents be

,,' y; f-},,d inddressed prior to issuing NURf'C-0700.

The MG will resubnit the 4.['M.

1580 coeuments, if requested.

. ' i l', 0 4:.!.

The WG feels strongly that NUREG-0700, when icplerented, vill have s *=ajor in act on the nuclear industry. Because of the tire involved l l iy,@l

/L in performing the actions required, and the cont, it is 1Jhely that o

f, the industry will ressat repenting or extending analyren and actions

,.1J. %.w, that might be added to 0700 following its issue.

The WC believes J

'.l (.,'.

that the NRC has a responsibility to provide t.he nucicar industry

. M $ >"- srith as couplete and val (d a docunent as possible in hTREC-0700.

.;". 1, '

Therefore, the VG recotrends that adequate time be providr.d for the

. :{t O;[,< -

industry and interested parties to review and con: ent upon draf t l '.. k'y.N M FUltEG-0700 before it in forna11y issued. We realize that adequate

,' ' d..

time for review and to e.ake modifications that aft,ht result from much f ; g*[,$.',

G) a review siay delay 0700. But the WG is of the opinion that it is more Isrportant to have the bent ponnibic document than to cret a July 5:

deadline for is. suing 0700.

w

... m,' i '

9; ).

co N additional inf orcation ds required f ron the VO.

g,

.i:,fG

,..,.,.3;*/,'j Please contact ne rn D

of.

r' w

o r' '.

i Sincerely yours, rn

-r-i

  • t
  • g F

g

($,e..

f..

1 c.,

l 4

. 'i.

f.

.e; co g

o-I. F. Ranes, Cha ruan

o y,

I

.f

'i UC 5.5 Ilunan Factors 3

C0

.,, '}... * '

m o

h.,.

N f.

dp

,i l

Il '

cc:

R. Allen hhh g

J. Peniend WC 5.5 Herbers BUUn

, ' I' *

!r

e O.G...'

4

  • 8 ' i
  • t $ $ t 1 i t t,*

1l(tie 6aet,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,g,,,,,,,,,,,.,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,g3,,,,,,,,,,,

.s e

g.

g

' I 3

_

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=NUREG-0659,_Forwards_IEEE_Comments_on_NUREG-0659.Response_to_Comments_Should_Be_Received_by_810421&oldid=5495060"