ML19264A268
| ML19264A268 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 06/18/1980 |
| From: | Bryan S NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE) |
| To: | Moseley N NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19264A269 | List: |
| References | |
| FOIA-82-93, REF-SSINS-6910 NUDOCS 8007180239 | |
| Download: ML19264A268 (2) | |
Text
1 8 1980 SSINS 6910 g;>r f;ECORANDUM FOR: f.'ornan C. Moseley, Director, Division of Reactor Operations Inspection FRO 1:
Samuel E. Bryan, Assistant Director for Field Coordination, Division of Reactor Operations Inspection SUUJECT:
OPTIMIZED SURVEILLAf:CE TEST If;TERVALS AND 110MN' ERRORS DURI!!G TESTS During the past year I have noticed nunerous occasions where a reactor trip or an unneeded activation of an engineered safety feature has occurred as a direct result of an irproperly conducted survcillance test. Usually, these situations occur because of operator or instrir.ent technician error. Such hunan errors will continue to be rade; ell we can do is to try to minin12e thea.
Equally 1,portant as reducing human errors is the need to optimize the test intervals. ITe need to understand what the collective experience of the survcillance testing has been. Ifou many plant trips and safety system actuations have occurred as a result of surveillance tests? Ilou nany tests have revealed a " failed condition" and how does this data' conpare with the assu ed basis for the test intervals? Are frequent tests causing unnecessary equirrent wear or subjecting the plan's to unwarranted risks and evolutions?
Are the tests so frequent that syster unavailability while in " test" is excessively ~high?
We now have nany reactor years of operational test experience.
I believe we should analyze this experience to see what it can tell us. One objective is to lengthen test intervals if.the analysis will support such a change in order to reduce u mecessary plant evolutions or challenges to the safety systems caused by hu an errors? These challenges are statistically linked to safety, llence, we et.y infact be on the down side of safety if the test intervals are too short (Jr too long).
I would like to sponsor a request to AE00.for then to conduct an analysis of surveillance test experience toward achieving a goal of optinized test intervals and reducing human errors during tests.
Sanuel E. Bryan Assistant Director for Field Coordination, Division of Reactor 8 0 0 718 0 D3c)
Operations Inspection cc: See Page 2 OFFICE SUANAP*Ek DOO-D A T E,..
_,f) 6/18/80..
NRC FORM 318 (9 76) NRCM C240 U.S. GO V E R Nt/ENT PRINTING OF FICE: 1979 239-369
2-JUN 181980 cc:
E. L. Jordan, IE T. H. t' oval:, I;nR G. C. Lainas, l'RR V. A. f:oore, i:RR l
OFFICE,
SURNAMr.
DATE,
NRC FORM 31P 6 rcs
.e c '. -
9
-,.,re-
- + o u s a. r e a, c r e t C E. 1979 289 369
-~