ML20056F564

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Forwards Questions Discussed During 930608 Conversation
ML20056F564
Person / Time
Issue date: 06/08/1993
From: Thadani A
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To: Walsh L
AFFILIATION NOT ASSIGNED
References
NUDOCS 9308300080
Download: ML20056F564 (2)


Text

p.c g

o

)

i June 8, 1993 j

'l Lawrence Walsh

Dear Mr. Walsh:

P Enclosed are the questions which we discussed with you during our conversation this morning, June 8, 1993.

It was agreed that the Regulatory Response Group

~;.

will be activated and that the Ownwes Group will get back to us today with a date for.a meeting which will be held within a week.

"h Division / hadini, Director Ashok C.

of Systems Safety and Analysis-l

(:_

cc.

< Central.- Filei SRXB R/F-NRC PDR TMurley/FMiraglia (12G-18)

WRussell:(12G-18)

Achaffee (11A-1)

EGoodwin (llD-23)

BGrimes (11E-4)

CMiller (14E-21)

JStone-(14E-21)

TMartin (RGN-1/0RA)

WHodges (RGN-1/DRS)

WRuland'(RGN-1/EB) q JWermiel (8H-3)

JCalvo (14A-2) 1

.BBoger_(10H-5)

I.

JPartlow- (12G-18)

RJones.(8E-23)

)

TCollins (8E-23)

O<

MChatterton (8E-23)

AdW C 4 O #)

y

-pW7 fpd

-e-mpNd505E,eme 7

f

?.tD2 3 N ih * (1f gg&Y 4rt J

16000G' P

9308300080 930608 P RLa X /Y"

,, _ r

(

o o

QUESTIONS FOR REGULATORY RESPONSE GROUP 1.

How many plants and which plants have a rod control system similar to that at Salem?

2.

Are these plants susceptible to the single failure experienced at Salem which results in uncontrolled rod withdrawals?

l l

3.

What are the consequences of rod withdrawals caused by such failures.

Is there a potential for common cause failures which can cause multiple rod withdrawals because of this system?

4.

What interim actions or operating restrictions are necessary to ensure the plants remain within their design bases?

5.

What longar term actions are contemplated to resolve this issue?

i.

- _ - -__-_-