ML20129J529: Difference between revisions

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(StriderTol Bot insert)
 
(StriderTol Bot change)
 
Line 13: Line 13:
| document type = CORRESPONDENCE-LETTERS, INCOMING CORRESPONDENCE, UTILITY TO NRC
| document type = CORRESPONDENCE-LETTERS, INCOMING CORRESPONDENCE, UTILITY TO NRC
| page count = 2
| page count = 2
| project = TAC:51292
| stage = Request
}}
}}


Line 37: Line 39:
: 2. Not distracting during normal plant conditions.
: 2. Not distracting during normal plant conditions.
: 3. Easily readable during abnormal and emergency conditions.
: 3. Easily readable during abnormal and emergency conditions.
PGE Response The color coding of the SPDS was developed by the system vendce as part of the man-machine interface design basis. The vendor applied accepted human engineering principles in the color selection process. It is our intent to review the color coding as part of our own human factors review of the installed system. Our review will evaluate the colors for con-sistency with Plant conventions, readability, brightness, detectability, resolution, etc. Our human factors review is discussed in our July 3, 1985 letter and is due to be complete by December 1, 1985.
PGE Response The color coding of the SPDS was developed by the system vendce as part of the man-machine interface design basis. The vendor applied accepted human engineering principles in the color selection process. It is our intent to review the color coding as part of our own human factors review of the installed system. Our review will evaluate the colors for con-sistency with Plant conventions, readability, brightness, detectability, resolution, etc. Our human factors review is discussed in our {{letter dated|date=July 3, 1985|text=July 3, 1985 letter}} and is due to be complete by December 1, 1985.
SAB/3kal 1098G.785}}
SAB/3kal 1098G.785}}

Latest revision as of 07:17, 10 August 2022

Forwards Response to 850613 Request for Addl Info Re SPDS, Identified in Safety Evaluation.Spds Color Coding Sys Will Be Evaluated
ML20129J529
Person / Time
Site: Trojan File:Portland General Electric icon.png
Issue date: 07/19/1985
From: Withers B
PORTLAND GENERAL ELECTRIC CO.
To: Butcher E
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
TAC-51292, NUDOCS 8507230112
Download: ML20129J529 (2)


Text

t 0

M r-Illll Bart D Wens Vce PresdM July 19, 1985 Trojan Nuclear Plant Docket 50-344 License NPF-1 Director of Nuclear Reactor Regulation ATTN: Mr. E. J. Butcher, Jr., Acting Chief Operating Reactors Branch No. 3 Division of Licensing U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington DC 20555

Dear Mr. Butcher:

Safety Parameter Display System Your Safety Evaluation of June 13, 1985 for the Trojan Safety Parameter Display System identified additional information which was required by the NRC staff in order to complete their review. The additional information is attached.

Sincerely, ,

Bart D. Withers Vice President Nuclear Attachment et Mr. Lynn Frank, Director State of Oregon Department of Energy Mr. John B. Martin Regional Administrator, Region V U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 8507230112 850719 gDR ADOCK 05000344 PDR

,m u mo ma nm,u%, m tfo*f

,I

1 l

Trojan Nuclear Plant Mr. E. J. Butcher, Jr.

Docket 50-344 July 19, 1985 License NPF-1 Attachment Page 1 of 1 ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ON TROJAN SAFETY PARAMETER DISPLAY SYSTEM (SPDS)

NRC Request satisfactory justification was not provided for the omission of the steam generator liquid sample parameter. The licensee should indicate how radiation status (Radioactivity Control Critical Safety Function) of the secondary system (steam generators and steam lines) can be rapidly assessed when the steam generators and/or steam lines are isolated.

PGE Response The radiation status of the secondary system is normally assessed by the SPDS by monitoring PRM-10 (designated STM GEN BLDN on the SPDS). PRM-10 is located on the steam generator blowdown piping just downstream of the steam generator sample connections. During accident conditions, valves in the steam generator sample system which receive automatic closure signals would have to be realigned to monitor the present activity levels.

NRC Request The Trojan SPDS appears to use a nonstandard color coding convention.

The licensee should change the color coding convention to agree with plant and/or stereotypical color codes. If the licensee decides to leave the color code as it is now proposed, further justification should be provided to assure the staff that the present color coding scheme is:

1. Consistent with plant conventions and is not confusing.
2. Not distracting during normal plant conditions.
3. Easily readable during abnormal and emergency conditions.

PGE Response The color coding of the SPDS was developed by the system vendce as part of the man-machine interface design basis. The vendor applied accepted human engineering principles in the color selection process. It is our intent to review the color coding as part of our own human factors review of the installed system. Our review will evaluate the colors for con-sistency with Plant conventions, readability, brightness, detectability, resolution, etc. Our human factors review is discussed in our July 3, 1985 letter and is due to be complete by December 1, 1985.

SAB/3kal 1098G.785