ML12038A253

Email from R. Stattel, NRR to D. Rahn, NRR Et Al. North Anna Seismic Event - Questions Which Would Need to Be Responded to and Evaluated by the NRC Hq Staff

ML12038A253
Person / Time
Site:	North Anna
Issue date:	09/16/2011
From:	Richard Stattel Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:	Kemper W, David Rahn Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
FOIA/PA-2011-0357
Download: ML12038A253 (3)

Text

From: Stattel, Richard Sent: Friday, September 16, 2011 1:38 PM To: Rahn, David; Kemper, William Cc: Wilson, George; Carte, Norbert; Dittman, Bernard

Subject:

RE: North Anna Seismic Event-Questions Which Would need to be responded to and evaluated by the NRC HQ Staff Bill, Dave, I don't necessarily entirely agree with your recommendation. If the seismic limits for the sensing components have not been exceeded, then is there really reason to question the calibration integrity of these components?

In some cases, like for Rosemount transmitters, there is a significant margin that could be considered.

I agree with the recommendation only if the licensee cannot show that these individual component limits have not been exceeded. Otherwise, we need to consider that there were also several other plants (Surry, Calvert Cliffs) which shook during that same event. Why wouldn't we require those plants to go in and calibrate their sensors as well?

Richard Stattel Sr. E[ectrorics Engineer US Nuclear Retory Commission Pbon: (301) 415-8472-Cd(: (b)(6)

From: Rahn, David Sent: Thursday, September 15, 2011 1:06 PM To: Kemper, William Cc: Wilson, George; Stattel, Richard; Carte, Norbert; Dittman, Bernard Subj-ct RE: NofLh Anna Seismic Event--Questions Which Would need to be responded to ano tvaiuatzGr *t*<C iQ('-

Staff Great idea-thanks!

From: Kemper, William Sent: Thursday, September 15, 2011 1:05 PM To: Rahn, David Cc: Wilson, George; Stattel, Richard; Carte, Norbert

Subject:

RE: North Anna Seismic Event--Questions Which Would need to be responded to and evaluated by the NRC HQ Staff H C.ave, I have been out of the office for a few days and just saw this message. My recommendation would be to have the licensee verify the RPS and ESFAS channel calibration is within acceptable limits, in addition to a functional checks. This would be equivalent to their refueling calibration surveillance, and perhaps they could satisfy this action by performing calibrations on at least two channels, and if necessary, based on the results of the channels calibrated, calibrate the other two channels of RPS and ESFAS-only if needed. Hope this helps.

,Miorrnatioinin this record was deleted in accordance with the Freedom of IM11-ft A04 .....

FI._.-90./L-e,3,5- 7_"/

Thanks, Bill Kemper, EICB/DE/NRR 30-1502(office)

L*'° JIceWl From: Rahn, David Sent: Tuesday, September 13, 2011 2:08 PM To: Alvarado, Rossnyev; Chung, Pong; Darbali, Samir; Dittman, Bernard; Mossman, Timothy; Singh, Gursharan; Stattel, Richard; Wyman, Stephen Cc: Carte, Norbert; Kemper, William; Wilson, George

Subject:

North Anna Seismic Event--Questions Which Would need to be responded to and evaluated by the NRC HQ Staff Hi EICB Team:

Per our conversation this morning at the branch meeting, please provide a list of questions you believe we would need to follow up on with the licensee from a long-term I&C Design standpoint in order to arrive at a reasonable assurance determination that itis OK to restart one of the units at North Anna. Please keep in mind that there is already an Augmented Inspection Team at North Anna site composed of personnel from our Region IIOffice, who are looking at issues related to the actions taken by the licensee immediately upon experiencing the earthquake. Also keep in mind that the Licensee has already informed us that they intend to perform functional testing of all Reactor Trip system and ESFAS system initiation channels prior to start-up.

In addition to understanding the earthquake's impact on IC equipment functionality, there are issues we discussed this morning pertaining to the operability of the seismic monitoring equipment, which need to be addressed.

From Meena Khanna's meeting announcement for a meeting to be held on Wednesday, Sept 14, 2011 from 1:30 pm until 2:00 pm.

"I request that all of you please try to attend this meeting, as we need to meet to address path forward with regards to this issue. I will bring a copy of the draft action plan and will lay out expectations, guidance, schedules, etc. PIs note that this is a high priority initiative, in that it involves plant restart.

We are looking to issue questions starting this week, so I really would like for each branch, if not already done, to pls develop questions regarding short term (prior to plant restart) and long term (post restart) licensee's actions."

Thanks, Dave David L.Rahn, P.E.

Senior Electronics Engineer, Instrumentation and Controls Branch Mail Stop 09-E3 Division of Engineering Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation 2

-b U. S., Nuclear Regulatory Commission

• Washington, D.C. 20555-0001 Office: (301)415-1315 Fax: (301) 415-2444

. ... .- -,-,,..."-,t -r*.'

m .. ,..,- .... r.,-' --- t4--.:;'r#

• 3