ML20027E221
| ML20027E221 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | 05000000, San Onofre |
| Issue date: | 05/17/1977 |
| From: | Book H, North H NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION V) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20027A625 | List:
|
| References | |
| FOIA-82-394 PNO-770517, NUDOCS 8211120274 | |
| Download: ML20027E221 (2) | |
Text
'
10s L u'm L.d'udTS Of NO:;-iWsil:it LVLNTS t
(MC I'rocedt.
. 907126 and 92700B) g Mc.
j;.
IDE!1TlflCAT10N NameTFacT1itf or Licensee):
6/93 brJ 0 FrIE.
1 Docket No.: R - M License ilo.: 3P R-13 Event Date:
S /er/ 7 7 Event
Description:
Yg3 4 c. o (cm%;m.G, Enny & der.M CA.R -ha hdrit,Ja.,, (ftM A'AC -!B 1 cnc.
/4'V. ? 10 1/ : if, 9 5c c'i v // N C &
4 Notification Date: 5/ez/7 7 Time: / 9 35 ' f'
~ Method: Ms/'sc ut Notified By: 6<.4/2Gi Notification Received By: //,A./c.raf Regulation Requiring the Report.
f o 09/ 2c,z o C (4 )(z)
PRELIMINARY RESPONSE 1.
Incident Severity Level per MC 1300:
I
, II
, III
, Other V 2.
Immediate Site Insp/ Invest Required:
A,/e
_ -Report No.:
3.
Immediate Notifications:
Individual Date & Time Notified NRC:HQ State.
r Radiologjcal Team Other _/ 6. 7
~~
4.
Press Reliase:
Issued by liRC (Date) -
1ssued by Licensee (Date)
SCREEilING 1.
Have reporting requirements been met?
YC=
If an LER was the initial report, is the forg complete and do the responses 2.
appear to be appropriate?
/{/[/ f /_ d A 3.
Is the description adequate to assess the event?
\\/ M 3
-o 4.
Have corrective actions been identified? 6/PC,C Eb e6 6FF44/M6 mig
//
5.
Do proposed corrective actions sppear appropriate?
V#J 6.
Is enforceiaent action by IE appropriate?
,/ld' 7.
Should the event be classified as an Abnormal Occurrence?
A /o If so, has the Regional Ccordinator beqn notified by telephone?
8.
Is a written report due from Licensee?/' f If so, when? WX #2<' B.4[2 '77
[
7 EVALUATION 1.
Date wri tten report received?__[,Md' O/'2/7
2.
Has the cause been identified?
A/c;.S 3.
If not, has an investigation progfam been identifi d?
A. c 9
4.
Have the safety implications been identified?
dwC 5.
Has the generic applicability within the facility been considered? //e/4/f ug f
6.
Do generic aspects warrant IE action? /M-7.
Do the facts warrcnt other actions by'f-the licensee?
/W 8.
Evaluation assistance requested:
A No.
9.
Recomaended followup actions:
/N4/Mn u,- r7/ 4 44w ifd n ('
/ 4 % ? /A. W Gd S,t' REFERENCES CLOSURE Resolution of IE concerns identified above:
Completed By:-
/ / Q '. %.e _ F __ - ~~
~
Date: b
- 2 t,
Reviewed By:
Date:Tr,//fj77 IE:V Form 601 hgNg g74 820928
,q
,,.j g 9
RAPKINO2-394 FDR
- .:.it
~
3
.s.... L 2
.~.
.;.. v e,,. ys..
.. 1.t.. /......
.u
- 9..
~ i. " i
- !
- T
- T. : : / 4 9 g g,_ f_
/$co s..:
.. 3 :.....:
v......
.c..,
.o
, s.
r.s....
...as
..e s
...o.s
- r.. s. r..... v.
- t. )..
- f. :.. r.>
. 3 ;
.-~..y....e
.t,. p. *. y, y.y
..g...
es.
w...
... rt
.e.....-J....
- 7. 1,.
L. r...v..
.. p...u. :.
uf f.
t.-.,...--.
.r r'
_=
s,. t. o v. T...
y.
l.<.= 9 p g r.
a c
C s.,,..,... v. e v r.... t. g es-
- g.... a g
.r 4..
..-r.
r g..
.e
. - I *... t.
e.. ;
.un i
7,. A f
/p y.j g.....,.
as.. g,s c o
, g...,
- u. o,,..
..r.
i.s.. v.
v...,.,.g....-
s.
..s -
.e.s. p s,, e,e..s..
C CC/N : '; A~ 2 0l:
P.. A C 2 rJ G E.
G Fi;/,T EP. T H /3 22, L C O DPt'./ 2 0 0 C)* ?
9
._ o..., 2 v...,
.u c,0_., Av. 1,..,.,T 1 L..J
- m...s.
1 (. t /...
Y*
_.*Y[ U2 eWY h10$ ((
+O
- E
&#~ JT/2 iM/C//.
W&M$' w $ W N
W
_,. fO g
r.
uw:
_.g S
- L f 5.S.
/
. r. M,.=,/. c.2.. '
22: L..-.
7..,
.*p...
.s
..es p
i...
..\\.
/
f
..r-
.s.
,/.'
.'*..s
.... _..:....:. o
..s
.s l
~...
~
o...
. r =.
M'Y L &k
- 1
-)
g
- _