NRC Generic Letter 1989-06

NRC Generic Letter 1989-006: Task Action Plan Item I.D.2 - Safety Parameter Display System - 10 CFR 50.54(f)

ML031200729
Person / Time
Site:	Beaver Valley, Millstone, Hatch, Monticello, Calvert Cliffs, Dresden, Davis Besse, Peach Bottom, Browns Ferry, Salem, Oconee, Mcguire, Nine Mile Point, Palisades, Palo Verde, Perry, Indian Point, Fermi, Kewaunee, Catawba, Harris, Wolf Creek, Saint Lucie, Point Beach, Oyster Creek, Watts Bar, Hope Creek, Grand Gulf, Cooper, Sequoyah, Byron, Pilgrim, Arkansas Nuclear, Three Mile Island, Braidwood, Susquehanna, Summer, Prairie Island, Columbia, Seabrook, Brunswick, Surry, Limerick, North Anna, Turkey Point, River Bend, Vermont Yankee, Crystal River, Haddam Neck, Ginna, Diablo Canyon, Callaway, Vogtle, Waterford, Duane Arnold, Farley, Robinson, Clinton, South Texas, San Onofre, Cook, Comanche Peak, Yankee Rowe, Maine Yankee, Quad Cities, Humboldt Bay, La Crosse, Big Rock Point, Rancho Seco, Zion, Midland, Bellefonte, Fort Calhoun, FitzPatrick, McGuire, LaSalle, 05000000, Zimmer, Fort Saint Vrain, Washington Public Power Supply System, Shoreham, Satsop, Trojan, Atlantic Nuclear Power Plant, Clinch River
Issue date:	04/12/1989
From:	Partlow J G Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:
References
GL-89-006, NUDOCS 8904120042
Download: ML031200729 (28)

.4 °^UNITED STATESNUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSIONWASHINGTON, D. C. 205554-f April 12, 1989TO: ALL LICENSEES OF OPERATING PLANTS, APPLICANTS FOR OPERATING LICENSES,AND HOLDERS OF CONSTRUCTION PERMITSSUBJECT: TASK ACTION PLAN ITEM I.D.2 -SAFETY PARAMETER DISPLAY SYSTEM -10 CFR §50.54(f) -(GENERIC LETTER NO. 89-06)On October 31, 1980, the NRC staff issued NUREG-0737 which provided guidancefor implementing Three Mile Island (TM1) action items. On December 17, 1982,Generic Letter No. 82-33 transmitted Supplement 1 to NUREG-0737 to alllicensees and applicants to clarify the TMI action items related to EmergencyResponse Capability, including item I.D.2, Safety Parameter Display System.Supplement 1 extracted the fundamental requirements for emergency responsecapability from the wide range of regulatory documents issued on the subject.It was written at the conceptual level to allow for a high degree of flexibilityin scheduling and design. In recognition of the interrelationships among theaction items addressed in Supplement 1, the staff made allowance for eachlicensee to negotiate a reasonable, achievable schedule for implementing itsemergency response capability. However, the staff stated that because theSPDS can provide an important contribution to plant safety, it should beimplemented promptly.The staff evaluated licensee/applicant implementation of the safety parameterdisplay system (SPDS) requirements at 57 units and found that a large percentageof designs do not fulfill the requirements identified in Supplement 1 toNUREG-0737. Enclosed with this letter is NUREG-1342 which provides to alllicensees, applicants, and construction permit holders the benefit of thestaff's experience to aid them in implementing SPDS requirements. NUREG-1342describes methods used by some licensees/applicants to implement SPDSrequirements in a manner found acceptable by the staff. NUREG-1342 alsodocuments design features that the staff found unacceptable and gives thestaff's reasons for finding them unacceptable. The information in NUREG-1342does not constitute new requirements. Supplement 1 to NUREG-0737 establishesthe legal requirements for SPDS. These requirements can be met with arelatively simple SPDS as well as with a more elaborate system.Also enclosed is a checklist concerning SPDS implementation. The purpose ofthe checklist is to provide licensees with a guide to assist them indetermining the status of their SPDS with respect to NRC requirements.8904120042

..<-2 -The checklist, when completed and used in conjunction with NUREG-1342 andphotographs of the SPDS layout, will provide licensees with comprehensiveinformation that will facilitate establishing the implementation status oftheir SPDS. Accordingly, pursuant to 10 CFR 50.54(f), operating reactorlicensees and holders of construction permits are requested to furnish within90 days of the date of this letter, one of the following:1. Certification that the SPDS fully meets the requirements of NUREG-0737,Supplement 1, taking into account the information provided in NUREG-1342.Licensees should maintain supporting documentation for three years, includingthe completed checklist and photographs used to establish SPDS implementationstatus.2. Certification that the SPDS will be modified to fully meet the requirementsof NUREG-0737, Supplement 1, taking into account the information provided inNUREG-1342. The implementation schedule for the modifications shall be provided.Licensees should maintain supporting documentation for three years, includingthe completed checklist and photographs used to establish SPDS implementationstatus.3. If a certification cannot be provided, the licensee shall provide adiscussion of the reasons for that finding and a discussion of the compensatoryaction the licensee intends to take or has taken.Staff review has verified that the following nuclear units have a fullysatisfactory SPDS: Catawba 1 and 2, Clinton, Hatch 1 and 2, McGuire 1 and 2,Millstone 3, River Bend, Susquehanna 1 and 2, and Yankee Rowe. No response isrequired for these units. Because of the very recent full power licensereviews conducted for these units, South Texas Project 2 and Vogtle 2 will notbe required to respond to this generic letter. Big Rock Point will not berequired to respond to this generic letter because of the staff's ongoingreview of their proposal for SPDS.This request is covered by Office of Management and Budget Clearance Number3150-0011 which expires December 31, 1989. The estimated average burden hoursis 25 person hours per owner response, including searching data sources,gathering and analyzing the data, and preparing the required letters. Theseestimated average burden hours pertain only to these identified response-related matters and do not include the time for actual implementation of therequested actions. Comieints on the accuracy-of this estimate and suggestionsto reduce the burden may be directed to the Paperwork Reduction Project(3150-0011), Office of Management and Budget, Washington, D.C. 20503, and tothe U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Records and Reports Management Branch,Division of Information Support Sources, Office of Information ResourcesManagement, Washington, D.C. 20555.

-3 -If you have any questions about this matter, please contact Richard J. Eckenrode,Section Chief of the Human Factors Engineering Section, Human Factors AssessmentBranch, at (301) 492-1105.Sincerely,Janes G. PartlowAs ociate Director for ProjectsOffice of Nuclear Reactor RegulationEnclosures:1. NUREG-1342 -A StatusReport Regarding IndustryImplementation of SafetyParameter Display System2. Licensee Checklist forSafety ParameterDisplay System Status3. Listing of Recently IssuedGeneric Letters

-4 -Distribution:Central FilesTEHurFey IRR (NUREG-1342 will be sent out by Publications)CERossi, NRR Enclosure 1JHSniezekCHBerlinger, NRRFMiraglia, HRRJRoe, HRRFGillespie, NRRJZwolinski, NRRJConran, AEODSTreby, OGCKCyr, OGCBGrimes, NRRWRegan, NRRREckenrode, NRRGLapinsky, NRRRCorreia, NRRCGoodman, NRRMPA Project Manager, NRRSVarga, NRRCRGR StaffBSheron, RESW4inners, RESGBurdick, RESFKoffman, RES

ENCLOSURE 2LICENSEE CHECKLISTFORSAFETY PARAMETER DISPLAY SYSTEMSTATUS

PURPOSE

The purpose of this checklist is to provide all licensees with a guide thatwill facilitate a comprehensive and consistent means for determining statusof their safety parameter display system (SPDS) implementation.ORGANIZATION AND FORMAT INSTRUCTIONSEach licensee should maintain supporting documentation including the completedchecklist and any photographs used to determine safety parameter display systemimplementation status. Recommended photography instructions are on the nextpage. With regard to format, each licensee should use the enclosed checklistto document the SPDS implementation information. If more space is needed, simplyadd pages to the applicable checklist section. For multi-unit plants, if theSPDS' are not identical in design, implementation and/or location across units,all differences should then be reflected appropriately in the checklist. If youhave any questions about this checklist contact Richard J. Eckenrode, SectionChief of the Human Factors Engineering Section, Human Factors Assessment Branch,at (301) 492-1105.

PHOTOGRAPHY INSTRUCTIONSPhotographs, should be taken in the actual control room include the following:a. Control room overview depicting the SPDS workspaces.b. All parts of the SPDS and their workspace locations.c. All individual SPDS display pages taken during power operations.d. The SPDS keyboard.e. Any hard-wired displays that are part of the SPDS.Simulator photographs are not recommended. A record of plant conditions at thetime the photograph is taken should be maintained. At least one of thephotographs should be taken from the location where the primary user of SPDSwould most likely be stationed during a transient. For a multi-unit plant withdifferences in SPDS design, implementation and/or location, photographs shouldreflect the differences. If modifications or changes to the SPDS are planned,current photographs are acceptable but should be noted to indicate that changesare planned. It is not necessary to provide details of the planned changes onthe photographs.The photographs should be in color, 8"x1O" in size, and labeled to include adescription of the display. Photographs should have sufficient resolution toensure that CRT and hard-wired displays are readable. In addition, thephotographs of the CRT display pages should be sufficiently detailed to allowidentification of all of the selected parameters.2/

SPDS CHECKLISTThis checklist is intended to aid licensees in determining the status of theirSPDS. Bracketed, [ ], information refers to the section in NUREG-1342 wherediscussions on the specific question(s) may be found.1.0 GENERAL DESCRIPTION1.1 Plant Name:_1.2 Who/What organization developed the original version of the SPDS softwareimplemented at your site?Utility (in-house)_ Utility Owner's Group; which?Contractor; which?__ Other; who?3

1.3 If the SPDS software has undergone significant modification (i.e., morethan 25 percent of software replaced or modified) since originalimplementation, list the organization performing the modification:Utility (in-house)Utility Owner's GroupContractorOther1.4 What is the hardware host on which the current SPDS software isimplemented?Westinghouse P250Westinghouse P250UGould/SEL, Model NumberDigital (DEC), Model NumberIBM, Model NumberMODCOMP, Model NumberBabcock & Wilcox (Recall)Honeywell, Model NumberBurroughs, Model NumberOther: Manufacturer, Model4

1.5 How many total CPUs are accessible by SPDS software on the computer systemdescribed in the previous question?1.6 What is the approximate MIPS rating of all the CPUs counted above?MIPS NOTE: Use a decimal fraction if less than 1.0If SPDS does not run on a single computer system, provide the followinginformation for the minority parameter set provided by a second computersystem. For example, a frequent occurrence of this case is where a separatebut adjacent computer terminal provides radiological parameters.1.7 Manufacturer1.8 Model Number1.9 List parameters provided:(on the second system) _1.10 Are significant changesyears? __YES __NO.in hardware or software planned in the next twoIf YES, briefly describe planned changesand list a schedule of major milestones.5

2.0 PARAMETER SELECTIONThis section is divided into two parts: the safety functions, and the parametersused to depict each safety function.2.1 Plant-Specific Safety Functions [III.F.JList the title of the plant-specific safety function(s) displayed on yourSPDS that is (are) equivalent to the safety function in Supplement 1 to NUREG-0737.Supplement 1 To NUREG-0737Safety FunctionsPlant-Specific Safety Functions2.1.1. Reactivity Control2.1.2Core Cooling and HeatRemoval2.1.3. RCS Integrity2.1.4. Radioactivity Control2.1.5. Containment Conditions6

2.2 Parameters Selected to Display Each Safety FunctionThe purpose of this section is to specify a list of parameters used to depicteach of the five safety functions identifed in Supplement 1 to NUREG-0737.Lists of parameters that have been found acceptable to NRC through previous SPDSpost-implementation reviews have been provided. One list of parameters applies topressurized water reactors in general, and the other list applies to boilingwater reactors.NOTE:Check any parameters that have been selected as an SPDS parameter.List any additional parameters under the relevant "Others" category.Include additional safety functions and parameters that are a part ofyour SPDS.PRESSURIZED WATER REACTOR SPDS PARAMETER SELECTION CHECKLIST [III.F.1]Supplement 1 To NUREG-0737Safety Functions Parameters2.2.1 Reactivity Control2.2.2 Reactor Core Cooling andHeat Removal from thePrimary SystemNeutron FluxSource RangeIntermediate RangePower RangeOther: (List)RCS LevelSubcooling MarginHot Leg TemperatureCold Leg TemperatureCore Exit ThermocouplesSteam Generator LevelSteam Generator PressureRHR FlowOther: (List).7

2.2.3 RCS Integrity2.2.4 Radioactivity Control2.2.5 Containment ConditionsRCS PressureCold Leg TemperatureContainment Sump LevelSteam Generator (Pressure, Level,Radiation)Other: (List)Stack MonitorSteamline RadiationContainment RadiationOther: (List)Containment PressureContainment IsolationContainment Hydrogen ConcentrationOther: (List)2.2.6 Other Safety FunctionsYes __NoIf yes, list functions and parameters.8 BOILING WATER REACTOR SPDS PARAMETER SELECTION CHECKLIST [III.F.2JSupplement 1 To NUREG-0737Safety FunctionsParameters2.2.6 Reactivity Control2.2.7 Reactor Core Cooling andRemoval2.2.8 Pressure Vessel IntegrityAPRMSRMOther: (List)RPV Water LevelDrywell TemperatureOther: (List)RPV PressureOther: (List)-2.2.9 Radioactivity ControlMain Stack or Offgas (Pretreatment)MonitorContainment Radiation Monitor__ Other: (List) _2.2.10 Containment IntegrityDrywell PressureDrywell Temperature_ Suppression Pool Temperature_ Suppression Pool LevelContainment Isolation Valve StatusDrywell Hydrogen ConcentrationDrywell Oxygen Concentration__ Other: (List)9

2.2.11 Other Safety Functions Yes _ NoIf yes, list functions and parameters.2.3 Detailed Parameter Questions [III.F.1.e and III.F.2.e]2.3.1 Are containment isolation demand signals input to SPDS (e.g., PWR -Phase A/B Isolation Demand Signal or BWR -Group Isolation DemandSignals)?YES NO2.3.2 Does the SPDS use actual containment isolation valve position asan input to monitor successful isolation? YES _ NO3.0 DISPLAY OF SAFETY FUNCTIONS [III.F.]3.1 Does the SPDS provide the status of all five safety functions onone display page? _ YES _ NO3.2 Are the individual parameters that support the safety functionsgrouped by safety function? _ YES NO3.3 Is the status of all five safety functions always displayedon the SPDS? [III.B.2J _ YES NO4.0 RELIABLE DISPLAY [III.A.3 except as noted]4.1 Is the SPDS hosted on the same computer system as the plant processcomputer? YES _ NOIf NO, does the SPDS computer receive some of the computer point inputsfrom the process computer? YES _ NO10

4.2 List location of accessible (e.g., keyboards) devices capable ofchanging SPDS data. [III.A.3.a]4.3 Are SPDS hardware availability data documented? YES NOIF YES, what is the documented percent availability of the SPDS hardwareover the past 12 months? NOTE: Availability should be based on poweroperation, startup, hot standby, and hot shutdown only and not includeother plant modes. % Available4.4 Are the SPDS computer points included in routine instrument loopsurveillances? LIII.A.3.a] _ YES No.4.5 What percentage of software verification and validation has been completed?__ 100%Approximately halfPlanned in the futureOther, describe _4.6 Have changes to the SPDS host computer and software been maintained undera formal Software/Hardware Change Request (or equivalent) system? Checkall that apply below:Yes; For how long? _ _ years__ NoHave plans to in the future11

4.7 How frequently does the SPDS display invalid or erroneous information?[III.A.3.a]frequent (above 5 percent)infrequent (1-5 percent)rare (less than 1 percent of the time)4.8 How frequently have any of the critical safety functions been in a falsealarm condition? [III.A.3.a]frequent (above 5 percent)infrequent (1-5 percent)rare (less than 1 percent of the time)4.9 Does the SPDS display valid parameter information during adversecontainment conditions? YES NO5.0 HUMAN FACTORS [III.E except as noted]Human factors in the context of SPDS design includes the usefulness of thetechnical information displayed on the screen to users and their performanceduring emergency operations. Human factors also includes display designtechniques, such as labeling, display layout, and control/display integration.Ihis section provides a sample of the kinds of questions to be asked to helpdetermine the degree to which the SPDS'design incorporates accepted humanfactors principles.5.1 Who is the prime user of the SPDS? Shift Supervisor[III.B.1] Shift Technical AdvisorBoard OperatorsOther (specify)_12

5.2 Are all SPDS controls located at the SPDS workstation? _ YES NO[III.B.1]If NO, where are the controls located? _5.3 Is all SPDS-related information physically displayed such that theinformation can clearly be read from the SPDS user's typicalposition? [III.A.1 and III.B.1]_ YES NOIf NO, what specific information is available at other locations?5.4 How are SPDS displays accessed? [III.A.2]Continuous display, no interaction possible.Keyboard, one or two keystroke function key.Keyboard, greater than 2 keystrokes._ Touchscreen.Cursor/menu (mouse, joystick, up/down key).5.5 Does the SPDS consistently respond to user commands in less than10 seconds? [III.A.2]_ YES NOIf NO, is feedback provided to the user regarding delays in response?_ YES NO5.6 Does the SPDS sampling rate for parameters match the display update ratefor those parameters? [III.A.2]YES NO13 If NO, what specific parameters do not match?5.7 Are all parameter units of measure displayed on the SPDS consistent withthe units of measure included in the emergency operating procedures?YES NO5.8 Are all parameter labels and abbreviations consistent with the labels andabbreviations included in the emergency operating procedures?YES NO5.9 Is any of the displayed information in a form that requirestransformation or calculation?'YES NOIF YES, what types of transformations or calculations are necessary?5.10 Are the high-and low-level setpoints consistent with hard-wiredparameter instrumentation and reactor protection system setpoints?YES NO5.11 Does SPOS display high-and low-level setpoints?_ YES NO5.12 Are the SPDS calculated values such as subcooling margin, consistentwith calculated values on the plant process computer?YES _ NO14

5.13 Are all parameter units of measure displayed on SPDS consistent with thehard wired instrumentation?YES _ NO5.14 Are all parameter labels and abbreviations consistent with hard-wiredinstrument labels and abbreviations?_ YES NO5.15 Were the technical basis for software specifications verified withplant-specific data (for example, heat-up and cool-down limits, variablesteam generator setpoints and high and low level alarm setpoints)?_ YES NO5.16 List LERs written as a result of SPDS software problems.6.0 TRAINING [III.C.2 all questions]6.1 Does simulator training include training in the use of the SPDS7YES NO6.2 How long is formal classroom training for SPDS users?No formal classroom trainingLess than 2 hour2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br />s__ 2-4 hoursMore than 4 hour4.62963e-5 days <br />0.00111 hours <br />6.613757e-6 weeks <br />1.522e-6 months <br />s6.3 Is there periodic requalification training for SPDS? _ YES _ NOIf YES, how often?15

6.4 When are SPDS users given training regarding the relationship of theparameters to the plant safety functions? Check all that apply below:Not trainedOn the job or required readingDuring requalification trainingDuring an initial SPDS trainingprogram7.0 ELECTRICAL ISOLATION [III.C.1 all questions]7.1 What isolation devices are currently used?7.2 Are these devices the same ones that were originally installed andapproved by NRC? YES NO16 ENCLOSURE 3LIST OF RECENTLY ISSUED GENERIC LETTERSGenericLetter No.Date ofSubject IssuanceIssued To89-0689-05TASK ACTION PLAN ITEM I.D.2 -4/12/89SAFETY PARAMETER DISPLAYSYSTEM -10 CFR §50.54(f)89-0489-0389-02PILOT TESTING OF THEFUNDAMENTALS EXAMINATIONGUIDANCE ON DEVELOPINGACCEPTABLE INSERVICETESTING PROGRAMSOPERATOR LICENSING NATIONALEXAMINATION SCHEDULEACTIONS TO IMPROVE THEDETECTION OF COUNTERFEITAND FRAUDULENTLY MARKETEDPRODUCTSIMPLEMENTATION OFPROGRAMMATIC CONTROLSFOR RADIOLOGICAL EFFLUENTTECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONSIN THE ADMINISTRATIVECONTROLS SECTION OF THETECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONSAND THE RELOCATION OFPROCEDURAL DETAILS OFRETS TO THE OFFSITE DOSECALCULATION MANUAL OR TOTHE PROCESS CONTROL PROGRAM.INDIVIDUAL PLANTEXAMINATION FOR SEVEREACCIDENT VULNERABILITIES -10 CFR 50.54(f)4/4/894/3/893/24/893/21/891/31/8911/23/88LICENSEES OF ALLPOWER REACTORS,BWRS, PWRS, HTGR,AND NSSS VENDORSIN ADDITION TOGENERAL CODESAPPLICABLE TOGENERIC LETTERSLICENSSES OF ALLPOWER REACTORS ANDAPPLICANTS FOR AREACTOR OPERATOR'SLICENSE UNDER10 CFR PART 55ALL HOLDERS OF LIGHTWATER REACTOR OPERATINGLICENSES AND CONSTRUCTIONPERMITSALL POWER REACTORLICENSEES ANDAPPLICANTS FOR ANOPERATING LICENSEALL HOLDERS OFOPERATING LICENSESAND CONSTRUCTIONPERMITS FOR NUCLEARPOWER REACTORSALL LICENSEES HOLDINGOPERATING LICENSESAND CONSTRUCTIONPERMITS FOR NUCLEARPOWER REACTOR FACILITIES.ALL LICENSEES HOLDINGOPERATING LICENSESAND CONSTRUCTIONPERMITS FOR NUCLEARPOWER REACTOR FACILITIES89-0188-20

-3 -If you have any questions about this matter, please contact Richard J. Eckenrode,Section Chief of the Human Factors Engineering Section, Human Factors AssessmentBranch, at (301) 492-1105.Sincerely,/s/James G. PartlowJames G. PartlowAssociate Director for ProjectsOffice of Nuclear Reactor RegulationEnclosures:1. NUREG-1342 -A StatusReport Regarding IndustryImplementation of SafetyParameter Display System2. Licensee Checklist forSafety ParameterDisplay System Status3. Listing of Recently IssuedGeneric LettersDistribution:Central FilesHFAB RFTEMurley, NRRCERossi, NRRJHSniezekCHBerlinger, NRRFMiraglia, NRRJRoe, NRRFGillespie, NRRJZwolinski, NRRJConran, AEODSTreby, OGCKCyr, OGCJGPartlow, NRRLETTER -NUREG/1BGrimes, NRRWRegan, NRRREckenrode, NRRGLapinsky, NRRRCorreia, NRRCGoodman, NRRMPA Project Manager, NRRDCrutchfield, NRRCRGR StaffBSheron, RESWMinners, RESGBurdick, RESFCoffmdn, RESJRHall, NRR*See previous concurrenceOFC :*HFAB:DLPQ :*HFAB:DLPQ :*HFAB:DLPQ :*HFAB:DLPQ :*D:DLPQ :*NRR:DUEANAME :RCorreia:jn :GLapinsky :REckenrode :WRegan :JWRoe :CHBerlingerDATE :01/09/89 :01/09/89 :01/09/89 :01/10/89 : 03/31/8 :01/27/89______ ________________-:--------------- .________ --- --- -- ________---__-________NAME :STreby :JRHall :F a la :JH zek :JGParDATE :03/23/89 :03/26/89 :i/(/89 : / 89 : / I)/8941 ;AIAy

-3 -If you have any questions about this matter, please contact Richard J. Eckenrode,Section Chief of the Human Factors Engineering Section, Human Factors AssessmentBranch, at (301) 492-1105.Sincerely,Enclosures:As statedDistribution:Central FilesHFAB RFTEMurley, NRRCERossi, NRRJHSniezekCHBerlinger, NRRFMiraglia, NRRJRoe, NRRFGillespie, NRRJZwolinski, NRRJConran, AEODSTreby, OGCKCyr, OGCJGPartlow, NRRJames G rtlow, Associate Directorfor Pr jectsOffice Nuclea actor RegulationBGrimes, NRRWRegan, NRRREckenrode, NRPGLapinsky, N13,RCorreia, NKRCGoodman,ARRMPA Projeit Manager, NRRDCrutch'ikld, NRRCRGR StaffBSheron RESWMinnfers, RESGBurdick, RESFqdffian, RESJRH'all1, NRR// ILETTER -NUREG/1/*See previous concurrenceOFC :*HFAB:DLPQ :*HFAB:DLPQ :*HFAB:DLPQ :*HFAB:DLPQ :D:DLPQ :*NRR:DOEANAME :RCorreia:jn :GLapinsky :REckenrode :WRegan :JW e :CHBerlingerDATE :01/09/89 :01/09/89 :01/09/89 :01/10/89 :S /SI / aq :01/27/89OFC :*OGC :*MPA-PM:NRR :ADT:NRR :DD:NRR :ADP:NRRNAME :STreby :JRHall :FMiraglia :JHSniezek :JGPartlowDATE :03/23/89 :03/26/89 : / /89 : / /89 : / /89 If you have any questions about this matter, please contact Ri ard J. Eckenrode,Section Chief of the Human Factors Engineering Section, Human actors AssessmentBranch, at (301) 492-1105.Sincerely,Steven A. Varga, Acting Associate Directorfor ProjectsOffice of Nucl ar Reactor RegulationEnclosures:As statedDistribution:Central Files BGrimes, NRRHFAB RF WRegan, NRRTEMurley, NRR REckenrode, NRRCERossi, NRR GLapinsky, NRRJHSniezek RCorreia, NRRCHBerlinger, NRR CGoodman, NRRFMiraglia, NRR MPA Project Manager, RRJRoe, NRR DCrutchfield, NRRFGillespie, NRR CRGR StaffJZwolinski, NRR BSheron, RESJConran, AEOD WMinners, RESSTreby, OGC GBurdick, RESKCyr, OGC FCoffman, RES9 Qe .U-tLETTER -NUREG/1*See previous concurrenceOFC :*HFAB:DLPQ :*HFAB:DLPQ,/ :*HFAB:DLPQ :*HFAB:DLPQ :D:DLPQ :*NRR:DOEANAME :RCorreia:jn :GLapins :REckenrode :WRegan :JV!Roe :CHBerlingerDATE :01/09/89 :01/09/ 9 :01/09/89 :01/10/89 : / / :01/27/89OFC :*OGC ::*M 7A-PM:NRR :ADT:NRR :DD:NRR :ADP:NRgNAME :STreby ::JRHall :FMiraglia :JHSniezekDATE :03/23/89 : :03/26/89 : / / : / / : / /89

-2 -2. If the SPDS incorporates features other than those described in NUREG-1342to meet one or more requirements outlined in NUREG-0737, Supplement 1, a detaileddescription of the alternative features along with justification as to how thesefeatures satisfy the requirements. A copy of the completed questionnaire, in-cluding photographs should be included with the submittal.3. If the SPDS does not fully satisfy the requirements ot NUREG-073 , Supple-ment 1, a description of proposed actions which the licensee intends to take toattain compliance, including a schedule for these actions. Includ with thesubmittal a copy of the completed questionnaire, including photog phs.Staff review has verified that the following nuclear units have a fully satis-factory SPDS: Catawba 1 and 2, Clinton, Hatch 1 and 2, McGuir 1 and 2,Millstone 3, River Bend, Susquehanna 1 and 2, and Yankee Rowe No response isrequired for these units.This request is covered by Office Management and Budget Cl rance Number 3150-0011 which expires December 31, 1989. The estimated aver e burden hours is 25person hours per owner response, including searching dat/ sources, gathering <and analyzing the data, and preparing the required lettes. These estimatedaverage burden hours pertain only to these identified rsponse-related mattersftComments on the accuracy of this estimate and suggesti ns to reduce the burdenmay be directed to the Office of Management and Budg , Room 3208, New ExecutiveOffice Building, Washington, D.C. 20503, and to th U.S. Nuclear RegulatoryCommission, Records and Reports Management Branch, ffice of Administration andResource Management, Washington, D.C. 20555.If you have any questions about this matter, pl se contact Richard J. Eckenrode,Section Chief of the Human Factors Engineering ection, Human Factors Assess-ment Branch, at (301) 492-1105.Since ely,ennis Crutchfield, Acting Associate Directorfor ProjectsOftice of Nuclear Reactor RegulationDistribution: See next pageLETTER -NUREG*See previous concurrenceUFC :*HFAB:DLPQ :*HFAB:DLPQ :* AB:DLPQ :*HFAB:DLPQ :D:DLPQ :NRR:DUEA-_____ -__ _ ------________ -_ -_____________ ----------------------------NAME :RCorreia:jn :GLapinsky Eckenrode :WRegan :JWRoe :CHBerlingerDATE :01/09/89 :01/09/89 :01/09/89 :01/10/89 / : 1/47/897 N__ ..-. --_ .- --_OFC :tOGC :LKEK :wNKK:MFA-FM :NKK:AUI :DD:NKK :NKK:AUPNAME :STreby :JConran :JRHall :FMiraglia :JHSniezek :SAYargaDATE :U1/23/89 : / i :01/26/89 : / / : / / : / /89

-2 -2. If the SPDS incorporates features other than those described in NUREG-1342to meet one or more requirements outlined in NUREG-0737, Supplement 1, a detailIdescription of the alternative features along with justification as to how thenefeatures satisfy the requirements. A copy of the completed questionnaire, icluding photographs should be included with the submittal.3. If the SPDS does not fully satisfy the requirements of NUREG-0737, S ple-ment 1, a description of proposed actions which the licensee intends to ke toattain compliance, including a schedule for these actions. Include wi thesubmittal a copy of the completed questionnaire, including photograph .Staff review has verified that the following nuclear units have a liy satis-factory SPDS: Catawba 1 and 2, Clinton, Hatch 1 and 2, McGuire and 2,Millstone 3, River Bend, Susquehanna 1 and 2, and Yankee Rowe. o response isrequired for these units.This request is covered by Office Management and Budget C arance Number 3150-0011 which expires December 31, 1989. The estimated av age burden hours is 25person hours per owner response, including searching daa sources, gatheringand analyzing the data, and preparing the required 1 ters. These estimatedaverage burden hours pertain only to these identif d response-related matters.Comments on the accuracy of this estimate and su estions to reduce the burdenmay be directed to the Office of Management an udget, Room 3208, New ExecutiveOffice Building, Washington, D.C. 20503, an o the U.S. Nuclear RegulatoryCommission, Records and Reports Management anch, Office of Administration andResource Management, Washington, D.C. 20 5.If you have any questions about this tter, please contact Richard J. Eckenrode,Section Chief of the Human Factors gineering Section, Human Factors Assess-ment Branch, at (301) 492-1614 //IolsSincerely,Dennis Crutchfield, Acting Associate Directorfor ProjectsOftice of Nuclear Reactor RegulationDistribution: Se next pageLETTER -NUR*See previ concurrenceUFC :*HFAB:DLPQ/ :*HFAB:DLPQ :*HFAB:DLPQ :*HFA:DLPQ :D:DLPQ :NRR:DUEANAME :RCorreia:jn :GLapinsky :REckenrode :WRegan :JWRoe :CHBerlingerDATE :01/09/89 :01/09/89 :01/09/89 :01/10/89 : / / : / /89OFC :*OGC :CRGR :NRR:MPA-PH1 :NRR:ADT :DD:NRR :NRR:ADPNAME :STreby :JConran :JRHall -4 :FMiraglia :JHSniezek :SAVarga------ :---------------- -------------------- ------ --------------: --------------: -------------DATE :01/23/89 :/ I /Z / :4 / /: / /89

-2 -2. If the SPDS incorporates features other than those described in NU G-1342to meet one or more requirements outlined in NUREG-0737, Supplement 1, detaileddescription of the alternative features along with justification as to how thesefeatures satisfy the requirements. A copy of the completed questionn ire, in-cluding photographs should be included with the submittal.3. If the SPDS does not fully satisfy the requirements of NUREG- 737, Supple-ment 1, a description of proposed actions which the licensee inte ds to take toattain compliance, including a schedule for these actions. Inclde with thesubmittal a copy of the completed questionnaire, including pho graphs.Staff review has verified that the following nuclear units h e a fully satis-factory SPDS: Catawba 1 and 2, Clinton, Hatch 1 and 2, McG re 1 and 2,Millstone 3, River Bend, Susquehanna 1 and 2, and Yankee R e. No response isrequired for these units.This request is covered by Office Management and Budge Clearance Number 3150-0011 which expires December 31, 1989. The estimated erage burden hours is 25person hours per owner response, including searching ata sources, gatheringand analyzing the data, and preparing the required etters. These estimatedaverage burden hours pertain only to these identif ed response-related matters.Comments on the accuracy of this estimate and su estions to reduce the burdenmay be directed to the Office of Management and udget, Room 3208, New ExecutiveOffice Building, Washington, D.C. 20503, and o the U.S. Nuclear RegulatoryCommission, Records and Reports Management Br ;nch, Office of Administration andResource Management, Washington, D.C. 2055If you have any questions about this mat r, please contact Richard J. Eckenrode,Section Chief of the Human Factors Engi ering Section, Human Factors Assess-ment Branch, at (301) 492-1014.Sincerely,Dennis Crutchfield, Acting Associate Directfor ProjectsOffice of Nuclear Reactor RegulationDistribution: See next ageLETTER -NUREG / 4 A*See previous concu enceor-OFC :HF :DQ : : :H :LHA Q :D:DLPQ -NRR:DOEANAME :RCorreia:jn Lapinsky :REckenrode :WRegan :JWRoe :CHBerlingerDATE :01/09/89 :01/09/89 :01/09/89 :01/10/89 : / : / /89:CRGR :NRR:MPA-PM :NRR:ADT :DD:NRR :NRR:ALWNAME::O§i <D~g/ : CRGR -:NRR:MPA-PM :NRR7:ADTr -:DD:NRR :NRR:ADP:- ^V---e-,r---:-------------- :-------------- :----------------_-------_____ _____________-,' :JConran :JRHall :FMiraglia :JHSniezek :DCrutchfieldDATE :/ /,Z/ t5 : / / : / / : / / : / / : / /89

-2 -2. If the SPDS incorporates features other than those described in NUREG-1342to meet one or more requirements outlined in NUREG-0737, Supplement 1, a detaileddescription of the alternative features along with justification as to how thesefeatures satisfy the requirements. A copy of the completed questionnair4 in-cluding photographs should be included with the submittal.3. If the SPDS does not fully satisfy the requirements of NUREG-077, Supple-ment 1, a description of proposed actions which the licensee intens to take toattain compliance, including a schedule for these actions. Inclde with thesubmittal a copy of the completed questionnaire, including pho graphs.Staff review has verified that the following nuclear units yee a fully satis-factory SPDS: Catawba 1 and 2, Clinton, Hatch 1 and 2, M4 uire 1 and 2,Millstone 3, River Bend, Susquehanna 1 and 2, and Yankee owe. No response isrequired for these units.This request is covered by Office Management and Bud t Clearance Number 3150-0011 which expires December 31, 1989. The estimate average burden hours is 25person hours per owner response, including searchig data sources, gatheringand analyzing the data, and preparing the requir letters. These estimatedaverage burden hours pertain only to these iden ifled response-related matters.Cofmments on the accuracy of this estimate and uggestions to reduce the burdenmay be directed to the Office of Management d Budget, Room 3208, New ExecutiveOffice Building, Washington, D.C. 20503, d to the U.S. Nuclear RegulatoryCommission, Records and Reports Managemen Branch, Office of Administration andResource Management, Washington, D.C. 555.If you have any questions about this atter please contact Richard J. Eckenrode,Section Chief of the Human Factors gineering Section, Human Factors Assess-ment Branch, at (301) 492-1014.Sincerely,Dennis Crutchfield, Acting Associate Directorfor ProjectsOffice of Nuclear Reactor RegulationDistribution: See net pageLETTER -NUREGe_OFC :HFAB:DLPQ :yFAINAME :RCorv& /:GLaIDATE : / I / 5 , : l/W> .WRe'iXg>:JWRoe :CHBerlingeri f :/ //,o/If : / / -: / /89l---__ -_ -1 ME, K lb wrOFC ::OGC:CRGiR: NKK: MA-FM:NKK:A1I:UU: NKK:14KK:.Aur______: ------- --________________ --------------_ ______________ --------------___ __--__ __ __ _NAME ::STreby :JConran :JRHall :FMiraglia :JHSniezek :DCrutchfieldDATE : / / : / I : / I : / I : / I : / /89