ML19308C147
| ML19308C147 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Crane  |
| Issue date: | 05/26/1976 |
| From: | Rusche B Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Volgenau E NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| References | |
| TASK-TF, TASK-TMR NUDOCS 8001210455 | |
| Download: ML19308C147 (5) | |
Text
...
[
A
(, 5 4
8 I
UNITED STATES
[,,122[ t NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
~
j WASmNGToN. D. C. 20Gs5 k***hE
- /
May 26, 1976 Note to:
Ernest Volgenau f
[
From:
Ben C. Rusche
/
Subj ec t:
INCIDENT MANAGEMENT I thought our meeting this morning got right to the point.
right group on the right subject.
It was the rough thoughts for your consideration and use in developing a moreAs ;qre cogent statement.
What we need is a statement that:
(1) identifies our (NRC) role in incident management in a broad context; (2) who and what levels of our offices and other parties should be involved and to what degree; (3) steps we should consider:
(weeks); (b) for longer term improvement (a) for short term improvemen (months).
Attached Table I in the context of response time and time after incident.is a simplified li cicarly focused at the site and is the major responsibility of theActivity 1 is licensee.
We kid ourselves to think we can do much in less than one or a few hours.
the progress of the planned program.Nevertheless we did full awareness on a r Activity 2 may well see direct a time when we need full access to current, accurate information and a capability to synthesize, evaluate information and develop action proposals.
Activity 3 will see extensive involvement d NRC including possible 1Icense modifications.
period.
This becomes both an audit period and an action Table 2 ? ?sts performances that occur as we discussed this morning.
is clearly an NRC mode.
Mode 3
{
entire course of the event.We agreed that we should be in Mode 2 for the To act in these modes we must be at least
,eoa uo 9r57
.c 4
E. '!olgenau 2-
~does one have ava;1able the facilitiespartially equipped if in Mode 1.
capability to develop the basis for the activiti, information and managemen must' avoid the idea that we can substitute for thes described be capable of-confirming that he has done his j be licensee but we m We local governments, etc.) have done them.
We must be in a position toand that oth o
detect obvious deficiencies and suggest corr ective actions.
I hope this stuff will help you and I'll look f Iteration.
Our tour at SRP is 0.K. -- time looks like we korward to your nex of June 21st.
e M
f Ben C. Rusche, Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation t
e I
s e
hW-m-
gg A
\\
Table 1 incident Management _ Activities t
Reactive:
I.
Immediate response in real time Time interval -- few minutes to. few hours Principal activities Character of event Magnitude of event i
Acute potential Actuate short term emergency procedures Establish basis for assessing Intermediate and long term potential 2.
Post Initiation response Time interval -- few hours to few days Anticipatory:
Principal activities Confirm character and magnitude of event Evaluate potential for degeneration of i
circumstances and determine intermediate and long term prospects Begin post event corrective actions initiate indicative or consequences i
lmiting steps (Lord use, people access, etc.)
N 3.
Post event recovery Time interval - greater than a few days
- Evaluational:
Principal activities Evaluate full effect of event Public Facility w== ems ve,
+
- W
_cm J
I v.
s' A :
1 i
Evaluate and initiate improve:nents in i
procedures and process Consolidate consequence 1ImitIng program and begin' cleanup and recovery Evaluation of potential for other sites or i
other situatlens-i 4
4 i
I t
i i
i i
+
i a
,i 4
1
)
1 1
4 a
E e
i i ~
O 4
O 4
J
s
_ Table 17
_P_erformance Modes 1.
Immediate response - last public safety and health line of defense for assuring 2.
Active monitor of licensee, NRC regional office in executing document dlocal regio e plans.
3.
Evaluation of system and procedural adequac performance in an event.
y based on in real time.
Very limited oversight of events Mostly af ter the fact.
l.