ML20204G724
| ML20204G724 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 08/13/1984 |
| From: | Eisenhut D Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Bernero R, Thompson H, Vollmer R Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| Shared Package | |
| ML18150A013 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8408220199 | |
| Download: ML20204G724 (6) | |
Text
.p pn necu
/
'o UNITED STATES
-! ' c. g,j NUCLEAR REGULATQRY COMMISSION fl WASHINGTON. O C. 20555 5 9r j
y s
AUG 131984 MEMORANDUM FOR:
Robert M. Bernero,. Director Division of Systems Integration Richard H. Vollmer, Director Division of Engineering Hugh L. Thompson, Director Division of Human Factors Safety Themis P. Speis, Director Division of Safety Technology
~
FROM:
Darrell G. Eisenhut, Director 4
g Division of Licensing
SUBJECT:
TRANSMITTAL OF AEOD ENGINEERING AND TECHNICAL EVALUATION REPORTS Enclosed for your information is a July 17, 1984 memorandum from C. J. Heltemes containing copies of 18 recently completed AE00 Engineering and Technical Evaluation Reports.
You will note that some of these reports were also submitted through the AEOD memorandum of June 5, 1984 In accordance with our agreement with AE0D to consider the results of their Engineering Evaluations as suggestions as opposed to recommendations which would flow from AE00 Case Studies, the enclosed reports should be given to your cognizant branches for their information. The cognizant branch (es) for each report is identified in Enclosure 1.
For the purpose of assuring that AE00 Engineering and Technical Evaluation Reports are given appropriate attention and that NRR disposition of these reports is properly documented, I request that Enclosure 2 be filled in by the cognizant Branch Chief (s). Copies of the complete forms should then be forwarded to both Gary Holahan, Chief, Operating Reactors Assessment Branch, and Warren Minners, Chief, Safety Program Evaluation Branch.
In the event that any of the enclosed Engineering or Technical Evaluation Reports are considered to have generic implications, the cognizant Branch Chief (s) is requested to complete Enclosure 3 (taken from NRR Office Letter No. 40, " Management of Proposed Generic Issues"), and forward it to SPEB for their use in prioritizing the issue, hd3EM M
...t
\\-
s
- s. z AUG 131984 Any technical questions or comments that you may have regarding these reports may be referred directly to Karl Seyfrit (reactor studies) or Kathleen Black (non-reactor studies).
C C -., ^ ~
EfA.
A D rrell G. Eisenhu irector Division of Licensing
Enclosures:
1.
List of Cognizant Branches 2.
Disposition of AE00 Reports 3.
Generic Issue Information l
4.
AEOD Engineering and Technical Eval. Reports
?
cc w/ enclosures:
A. Thadani B. Liaw C. Thomas V. Benaroya J
W. Minners B. Sheron
- 0. Parr R. Bosnak K. Kniel M. Srinivasan F. Rosa W. Gamill W. Butler DISTRIBUTION w/o enclosures
- Central File
- ORAB Rdg GHolahan*
DPickett*
EButcher*
DCrutchfield*
DEisenhut*
DPickett:dm E
her GHolahan D
chfiell ut 8/ /84 8 'o/84 8/. - /84 8/p/84 8/ /84
.,6, ENCLOSURE 1 COGNIZANT REVIEW BRANCHES Report Branch P.
1.
AE0D/E409 Operating Experience Involving ASB Air in Instrument Sensing Lines 2.
AE00/E410 Operational Experience Involving METB/ASB/CSB Standby Gas Treatment Systems Which Iliustrate Potential Common Cause Failure on Degradation Mechanisms 3.
AEOD/E411 Failure of Anti-Cavitation RSB/ASB Device in Residual Heat Removal Service Water (RHRSW)
Heat Exchanger Outlet Valve 4
AE00/E412 Adverse System Interaction GIB/ASB With Domestic Water Systems 5.
AEOD/E413 Natural Circulation in RSB Pressurized Water Reactors 6.
AE00/E414 Stuck Open Isolation Check MEB/RSB/RRAB Valve on the Residual Heat Removal Systems at Hatch Unit 2 7.
AE00/E415 Overcooling Transient RSB 8.
AE0D/E416 Erosion in Nuclear Power Plants MTEB/MEB/ASB 9.
AEOD/E417 Loosening of Flange Bolts on MEB/RSB i
RHR Heat Exchanger Leading to i
Primary to Secondary Side Leakage
- 10. AE00/T408 Diesel Generator Inoperability PSB Due to Overheating of Ventilation Cowling
- 11. AEOD/T409 Multiple Failures of Bell and ICSB Howell Dual Potentiometer Modules Which Occurred at the Fort Calhoun Nuclear Station
- 12. AEOD/T410 Injection Valve for the High RSB Pressure Coolant Injection (HPCI) System Failure to Open During a Surveillance Test
4:
.,,,, l a
Report Branch I
- 13. AE0D/T411 Contamination of the Nitrogen ASB System at Sacramento Municipal Utility District (SMUD) i 14 AE00/T412 Failure of an Access Door CSB l
Between the Drywell and the Wetwell
- 15. AEOD/T413 Failure of the Fire Damper in CHEB/ASB Safeguards Ventilation System
- 16. AEOD/N204D Medical Misadministration for RAB
~
January 1983 through June 1983 I
- 17. AE0D/N401 Non-Reactor Event Report Database SSPB 1
for the Period July-December 1983 18 AEOD/N402 Events Involving Undetected ASB 1
Unavailability of the Turbine Driven AFW Train d
+
1 1
l l
i 4
-~.
e
..ie ENCLOSURE 2 DISPOSITIOil 0F AE0D ENGINEERING OR TECHNICAL EVAdOATION REP Report Number:
'Date:
Author:
Subject:
CognizantBranch(es):
r i
Cognizant Branch Chief (s):
Date Report was Received:
f Disposition (Check as Appropriate):
Retained for General Information Forwarded to SPEB (DST) for Generic Issue Prioritization*
Other:
t t
- If an AEOD Engineering or Technical Evaluation Report is considered to have generic implications, the forwarded branch should com to assist SPEB in the prioritization process plete p.-
cc: DST /SPEB t
- ) ~
's
..si
.x s
ENCLOSURE 3 GENERIC ~ ISSUE INFORMATION The following information should be provided in sufficient detail so that the safety significance and secpe of the proposed generic issue can be determined.
If related to issues identified to NUREG-0410, reference for description of' deficiency:
(i.e., section number and page, NUREG-0410, 0510, etc. )
1.
Suggested Title of Proposed Generic Issue or new requirement.
2.
What is the known, suspected, or potential deficiency in the technical basis of existing staff guides or requirements?
3.
What present specific safety requirements (e.g., SRP, Regulatory Guide, Rule) appear to be inadequate or in. doubt?
4 If a new requirement is proposed, what is the proposed requirement?.
Provide, to the extent possible, a value-impact assessment.
5.
What new information must be developed either to confirm the adequacy of the current technical bases or to define new s
requirements that should restore adequate protection?
s 6.
What actions are being taken (if any) or should be taken on operating plants to correct the suggested deficiency?
By whom (organization and individual) are these actions being taken?
7.
If the issue is related to another generic issue, (e.g., TMI Action Plan Item) identify the generic issue and the area of issue overlap.
8.
Is anyone currently working on this issue?
If so, name and organization.
9.
Name of person supplying information:
Date provided.
10.
Provide references as appropriate (Memoranda, NUREGs, SRPs, etc.)
11.
The concurrence of the responsible organization, if possible.
This is not necessary, since all issues eventually be reviewed by the responsible organization.
.\\
A J
_m
,