ML19281D945
| ML19281D945 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 12/18/1981 |
| From: | Ted Carter Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Funches J Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19270A750 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8201190083 | |
| Download: ML19281D945 (2) | |
Text
s DISTRIDUTION gF g
Central Files g
TSE R/F P
q JCarter D E C 1 ~ 1981 8 r.ECEtVED
~:y DEC 311981 > [8 ME"Det?D7t FOR: Jesse L. F. inches, Actinq Director urgg g y u
\\A mc 3
Planning and Procram Analysis Staff, URR
\\ A
/ h.
FRT:
T. J. Carter, Actin" Chief Y[7 g O
~~
Technical Support Branch Plenning and Prnaran Analysis Staf f, NFP SRJECT:
DIFFERING PJDFESSID'!Am GPI" ION OF D. BASDEKAS As you requested, we reviewed the procedure to be followed for DPGs and in particular the status of the concern expressed by Demetrios Basdekas.
WC laqual Chapter 4125 Differina Professional Opinons requires, if a DP0 is not resolved within 4 months of its submission, tnat the reasons for the delay and a proposed plan and schedule for cc,pletina its resolution be provided to the Executive Director for Operations. Therefore, we have prepared the followin ;
summary for tha lasdrus OPO involviv " Safety Implicaticas of Control Eystens".
9t te mn
'r.
De etrios L. 33sMas bas on nr.crious cccasions expressed his concern a5 nut the adequacy of revices regarding reactor and plant control syste' failures
@ich could lead to accident secuences not previously anticipated-One specific exa" ole cited i s the over-coolini thermi shock problen.
He first expressed concern in 1n76, 5efore the "aqual Chapter on Differina Professional Opinions was approved.
In a Sente,ber 3, 1979 nemoraniu to John F. Ahearne, Mr. Basdekas identified a numer nf concerns related to control syste, desiens and plant dyn ami c s.
".r. Denton in a me torandum dated October 22, 1979 to John F. Ahearne
-n c)
Wressed tbme concerns and discussed related work that was planned or already (U$
u n 4 ray.
Msequently, in a "3y ER,19RO letter to the Honerable Horris K. Udall, "r.
3asdebs cresented that inforu tion enerally associated with current I ~
TE~o TDs sus l eni uV er 'C 4125.
He identified his' letter as being su5nitted M
under the provisions of 10 CFP Pa rt 3.735-5E, Awx A.
Therefore, the May 28,
- 8 IW letter is believed to be the formi initiation of the T,PO.
3 Si nce ' lay IMO, nrerous related events have occurred. The Office of Duclear y
?eetter pseerch forcrded the DPD to the Of fice of Eucipar Reactor Requlation, the offi.'o with tm b6 sic resnensibility for the concern.
Daards were notified n -
3-
/ [h T U of thn DPD and the relevance of the DPn to the T"l-1 ASLP Hearing was presented to the 70ard.
Gert activities related to the ceneric concern proceeded and
" safety I-lications of Cor,trni Systo s" was approvM as a Unresolved Safety b
Issue (t ^7) "y the Commission in December 1%0.
A draft Task Action Plan for s
151 t s7 has been developed and fcmal ar. proval of tha USI i s expected v! Lhi n tro
-inths. The ef fort on the F51 woul d, anonq other thinns, require an evaluation t7 he perfor-M on a plants, one for each of the USS venicrs.
"r. Basdeka s is the Lead rovieer for '.ES and as wth will be contributini comannts t,n the oro';r&%
cmco sun,om q..
og t
OFFICIAL RECORD COPY unc rom aw o>sa sneu ma uwm e._-
~2~
DEC 3 B31 i.ESOLUTIO" I r. P ussed the substance of the DP0 and USI A-47 with Mr. Rasdekas.
It is my und rst3nding that the completion of the USI, as planned, in conjunction with on-aoinq RES proqrams " Evaluation of Electric Power Systems" and " Safety Italications of Control Systams" (in four operating reactor facilities), would provide an adoption of 'tr. Casdelas' concern for the 4 plants being re-tiewed in detail. The above prograns would provide an understanding of the problen and would provide assurance that any oeneric deficiencies associated with the 4 n1,.nt revies would be identified and addressed as necessary. My understandino is that ".r. Basdekas believes that during the period when the USl is being worked upon, the industry (omrs groups and individual utilities) should nove ahaad on performing their o'.in Failure Mode Effects Analysis.
He believes this is necessary because deficiencies are likely to be uncovered at cach plant and the deficiencies will be dif ferent because of plant specific design variations. The staf f, however, plans to evaluate some plants conpletely and then apply the results of these evaluations to deteraine what, if anything, needs to be done at the other plants. Definitive auidance would be developed and the current revies process modi fied.
Of course, should a deficiency be identified as generic and significant, as a result of the USI review, immediate corrective action can and will bo taken with appropriate utilities. At oresent the staff does not know cf c.pecific doficiences that are not beinq considered.
Tha preliminwy schedule for co pletion of the last portion of USI A-47 is late 1055. This i s too l an.1 in keep a DP0 opon.
I believe the DP0 must be considered resolve when the Task f.ction Plan for resolution of USI A-47 is apprccred (expected within tuo nonths). GC will have initiated a pr viram that both will alve the major concerns exnrossod be "r.
Basdekas and, in the staff's view, provi.ie for tinel v action on the othar plants, i f necessarv.
The difference in view be tween t'ut of Mr. Casdetn and the staff renarding whether a review of all plants
<.hould be initiated in,ediately was adaqua tely addressed in Harold P. Denton's Octoher 77, 1979 me,o to John F. thearne.
Staf f views regardinq tin < liness have not Chan"ed.
T. J. Carter, /.cting Chief Tachnical Support 3 ranch Pl anni n7 and Program Analysi, st? ff, fG?.
T I
{RDv?'SB co ice,
r' suu~ tut >
a r.tetuLL'.l b?.ll.fU.
van y tx ww m ma ro.
.o OFFICI AL RECORD COPY uma w-r-