ML19291A478

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Responds to 761223 Memo.Details Reasons for Not Concurring W/Content of Rept on Proposed Description of Abnormal Occurrences for Third Quarter CY76
ML19291A478
Person / Time
Issue date: 12/29/1976
From: Hanauer S
NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR OPERATIONS (EDO)
To: Mcdonald W
NRC OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND PROGRAM ANALYSIS (MPA)
References
FOIA-79-109 NUDOCS 7905160287
Download: ML19291A478 (2)


Text

4 4, b UNITED STATES e

j

  • ~

4

,UCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION f.

.Q j

WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 h./

DEC 2J 3 3 MEMORANDUM FOR:

W. G. Mcdonald, Director. Office of Management Information ar.d Prcgram Control FROM:

Stephen H. Hanauer, Technical Advisor to Executive Director for Operations PROPOSED ABNORMAL OCCURRENCES FOR THIRD QUARTER CY 19

SUBJECT:

Reference your memorandum dated December 23, 1976.

I do not corcur in the~ proposed memorandum referenced above.

The reasons are:

1.

Omission of the St. Lucie event is not satisfactory. The reasons given - the controls applied and the early detection of the anomaly - are not convincing.

Fuel frcm a major supplier was found to have a major defect that required an entire reactor loading to be wit.arawn frcm the core, reconstituted in half its fuel elements,.nd the reactor to be down for a considerable period of time while this was acccmplishJ. Moreover, the same defect is believed to exist on other reactors and other fuel had to be remanufactured in part to cope with the difficulty as discovered. The symptcms - increased axico flux peaking and increased r_ activity - are both in the unsafe direction.

Unexplained reactivity increase was part of the scenario of the destruction of SL 1.

It is interesting to observe that that too was caused by physical and chemical degradation of the instal 16d? burnable poison. This event shculd be restored g

to the AOR roster.

It includes plenty of o'her events which a

were caught early and which if not caught could have had serious consequences as could this event.

The discretion of event 76-9 (pages 1-3) is unsatisfactory' in 2.

several respects. First, the failures on July 5 which are important in themselves and also in setting up the failures on July 21, are apparently dismissed from consideration except as background material. Thus the cause on page 3 is given only for the later event of July 21.

I think this is wrong.

Second, the whole evant is written up in inccmprehensible jargon which can be understood only by a few people in the whole world. Examples:

7 90516 0;Le g g

W 2:S5 2HOS J

W. G. Mcdonald 2

r;;C 2 9 1373 "These controllers receive control power through 480 v/120 y transformers within the controller", who cares.

"Which was insufficient to actuate the main line controller contractors", how many readers know what that is?

"Emercency power system (dual) operation", what kind of operation is that?

"Causes the emergency buses to be de-energized and a load shed signal to strip the emergency buses" as in burlesque?

" Reported that the earlier corrective action taken was no longer considered appropriate",

is that like "no longer operational"?

Why do we have to use such gobbled),eek? The earlier action was wrong.

This whole paragraph is beyond the comprehension of any one but its author.

"By design, there was no consequence from plant st utdown without AC emergency power", this senter.ce is true, but it sounds as though we design these plants so that they shut down without power.

"The coincident occurrence of a postulated design basis accident together with inability of AC powered safeguards equipment to automatically energize and function successfully is not theorized",

it's not any good either.

W

" Millstone Unit No. 2 had insufficient capability to cope with all postulated credible design basis accident conditions", so the system was designed wrong, right? It's more than "an undesirable.

condition" right?

What about the action of the NRC. Did we approve the licensee's incorrect actions after the July 5th incident? We should either take the rap or get out of it depending on the facts.

~

==

Conclusion:==

An nsatisfactory writeup in many respects.

Ofigiril -

___;;r Stephen H. Hanauer Technical Advisor to Executive Director for Ocerations cc:

B. Rusche E. Volgenau 4