ML20213F480
| ML20213F480 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | San Onofre  |
| Issue date: | 02/03/1986 |
| From: | Taylor J NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE) |
| To: | Murley T NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20213F483 | List: |
| References | |
| FOIA-97-177, RTR-NUREG-0845, RTR-NUREG-845 NUDOCS 8602100506 | |
| Download: ML20213F480 (3) | |
Text
FLU v :' 1+6 l
' HEHORANDUM FOR:
Thomas E. Murley, Regional Administrator R1 J. Nelson Grace, Regional Administrator, Ril James G. Keppler, Regional Administrator, Rll!
Robert D. Martin, Regional Administrator, RIV John B. Martin, Regional Administrator, RV FROM:
James H. Taylor Director Office of Inspection and Enforcement SUBJECT-RESIDENT INSPECTOR'S ROLE DURING LICENSEE LVINIS One of the findings resulting from the investigation of the San Onofre 1 event on November 21, 1985, was "NRC resident inspectors relieved more knawledgeabic plant operators as ENS communicators and reestablished communications at a location remote from the real time plant information."
During an event the resident inspector is considered the agency's eyes and cars in the control room or other locations as appropriate to the incident.
The resident inspector is expected to provide periodic assessments based t.non hi'.
observations; therefore, we expect the licensee to maintain a communic.' tor on the ENS line to NP.C Headquarters.
The resident inspector is not to rrlieve the licensee of the communicator's responsibility, and thus preclude the perf or-mance of his assigned job.
The procedures relevant to the Resident inspector.
role during events are set forth in NUREG-0845, " Agency Procedures for the NRC Incident Response Plan," Chapter 111, pages W-1 through W-9.
I would appreciate your communicating this policy to all resident inspector *.,
Orit r21 Sir.nt d tr.
i James M. la#r James M. Taylor, Director Office of Inspection and inforcement Distribution:
OCS J. Brown R. Smith B. Grimes IRB R/f J. Glitter K. Wolley J. Partlow DEPER R/F B. Hansen R. Young D. Allison R."Priebe' W. Burton R. Jolliffe R. lleishman K. Perkins C. Could L. Spessard D. Matthews E. Jordan D. Marksberry L. Cobb
- 5. Schwartz S. Schwartz
- 5. Long G. Zech L. Jordan R. Vollmer D. Powell R. Baer I. Antrum J. Taylor B. Jones P. McKee L. Brach 4'M 00.19)h/
"See previous concurrence T'
"lRB:DEPER:lE
- 1RB:0!PER:lE
- 00: DE Pl R
'D: Di l'I R: ll 1
RFPriebe:ams KEPerkins SASchwart LtJordan Ril' o l lmor 1/24/86 1/29/86 1/30/86 1/30/86 f/ )/86 3
0:
JM a or
/
/86
- \\s' t
f
T J
~
~.'
p,,j g
Nb
~
f " *.%,*.
% h.%&
p UNatso st Af s:
f *' 3, $ 'g
{, '
NUCLE AR REGULATORY COMMIS$10N gF[
(
wumo t o=. o. c to***
j y,
s,,.f;)*
M 04 Y
(
M) }Nl j &
.f.,,8f._- /.
P!kORANDVH FOR:
Harold R. Denton, Director, NRR James M. Taylor. Director. IE John B. Hertin. Regional Administrator. Region V g
O [j FROW Victor Stello, Jr.
Actin Executive Director 7A of pera tions tunJECT:
$1 AFF ACTIONS Rt5VI.TillG fr~
'd[ INVESTIGAfl0N o
h) 0F THE fl0VEMBER 21 5AN O. NE Nutt.FAR GENERATING 5
STATION, UNIT 1 EVENT (NUMEG-1190) d f
e g,
An ' advance copy of the subject report was trarsritted to you tiy rumorandurn d6ted hnuary 20. 1986 from the San Onofre Team I,cader. Thomas T. Martin. The
. I;.t.
report decurents the Team's efforts in identifying tf f circumstances and M. causes of the Nove'nber 21, 1905 ovent, togethe with findings and conclustons which fom the basis for identifying folhw-ba actions.
ggg You will note frem the report that the licensee has not completed
[ g.9 troubleshooting and the deterinination of root causes for all equipment 314 failures or malfunctions.
Conse Ip l h r or analysis activitit 5 may f6FFI,quently._the_risultt_of f ture. troub.lejh19 ting k
th t_.ba s J s_1g r_,ggi t,1p o tL.f o 119w.on a c t i on s.
TKf TdiTtTTicifTF6f'tb~esEiralltorull_AC LjQ%._1La_foilcwup fiid ~re responH5 TITTY ~o~( tfie V
nomal program of fice.
The responsibility for the the licensFf~ continued troubleshonting and detemination of root cause for V equipment failures is Region V.
The purpose of this memorandum is to identify and assign tesponsibility for generic and pisnt specific actions resu' ting fro.n the investigatton of the San Onofre event (documented in NUREG 1150).
In this regard you are requested to review the enclosure which specifies staff actions resulting from the investipation of the San Onofre event.
You are requested to detemke the actions necessary tn resolve each of the items in your area of responsibility and, where appropriate, identify additional staff actions or revisions as our review and understanding of this event are refined.
Plant specific actions required for plant restart should receive priority attention.
In view of the importance of this subject. I intend to closely monitor the resolution of these items.
By March 1. 1986 nf the schedule and status of each item wfth'In,please provide a written sumarl Four resognsibility listed in
}ne enclosure or t6aT you nave scentTrico v
rurU er a wnnen status report on the disposition of your. I request that you prepare 2
items (and anticipattd actions for uncompleted items) within three to s ta months.
Every effort should be made to dispose of these items protnptly.
, ggkO N
gr ApoCK O NOO f c
O L %b
(
2
\\aU l'LL\\$
er...p.
the esclosure is based on the Teep's report and its presentation to the Comitston on January 22, 1936. Accocdtngly it does not include all Itcensee actions, nor does it cover NRC staff activities associated with normal event followp such as authorization for restart, plant inspections, or possible enforcement items. These items are expected to be deffned and iepicmented in a reut,ine manner. Qverall lead rtsyonsiht11ty for staff actJons. relating.to.
facility r m t sts effort and rests with_RtRILV.
- k. Additional.yttart is_sep3ratt fr.p, lor coordihatTrig _and promptly
.ly,7.V is responstEIe stKff's requirements which Pwst be resolved before operations at San Onofre may be relumed.
...?
AM n
V ctor Stello, Jr Acting Executive irector
~
for Operations Enclosures e,
As stated cc w/ enclosure:
J. Davis, NNSS T. Furley, RI J. N. Grace. Rf!
J. Keppler, Rl!!
R. Martin P!v
~~'
l en f
N-
ps9w f
~
staff ACTIONS PE$ATING FADM THE INVEST! RATION OF THE R0VtMBER 23 SONGS.) tytNT I
(Referenee WUREG.1190) 1.
Ites: Adequacy of feedwater check velves to perform safdy function.
(Referencent Comission briefing, Sections 6.2.4. 6.4, 6.'t, end Principal finding)
Action gesionsibleOffice Ca tenery t
!setement and coordinate It Plant speciff e 4
the staf f and industry actions Generic 4
of safety related check valves.necessary to assure the relfability [>
[,/ f W.r..,
. 0ther offices to assist as e
j requested. Areas to be fjd d, evaluated (nc19det t
Itcensee's engineering report on root cause i
analysts and proposed corrective actions 2
adequacy of check valve l
design for this applica-i tion i
adequacy (ofInserviceIST) Program and i
Testing procedures to detect degraded and failed valves adequacy of chJck valves (anC related testing progrees) in otr e systems i
such as RHR s)4tes 2.
Item: Completeness of rescIved US! A-1. ' Water Hammer'.
l (Referencer.: finding avebers 1, 2, 3, 8 and 9)
Action Responsible Offfee Ca tegory Assess the need to re.
NRR Generic i
evaluate USI A-1 to specifically addre$s the potential for stad prevention p g'g d of condensation-induced water 4
hamers in feedwater pipity.
(assume the issue concertaing j
check valve'integ ty will be (dMe
/%
4 resolved in item g.,,
m 7
7 w
..g,,y,,
,m
,.,,,,.y,,.
y.
h,.. *..
f4 g 6
.t.
3.
Itest Adequac: of 5sn Onofre Unit 3 design.
(Commission br'.sfing. Finding nur6ers 11 and 13)
Action _
, Responsible Office Catkory
!spleeent and coordinate NRR Plant specific the staff's actions to re evaluate the following
$an Onofre design features manus 1 loading of the diesel generators follow.
Ing a loss of power event
~
asnval actuation of steam Itne isolation valves and assurance of steam generator availability to remove decay heat 1sch of steam generator blowdown status in control room adequacy of the Itcensee's design change to eliminate spurious 51 indication on loss of power 4
Iteet Adequacy of post-trip review.
(
References:
Sections 6.6 and 7.2.2.4 and finding nurber 17)
Action Responsible Office Ca tegory tys1vateNncredire.
wnn Cenerte a.
ments for ensur*ng that sufftctent event data are retrievable to accurately reconstrvet the event following a loss of offsite power.
b.
Evalvete the Itcansee's Region Y Plant specific process for post-trip review and evaluation.
including the thoroughness of review and oversight provided by the onsite and off site nuclear safety review groups.
f(
V 3
5.
Item: Adequacy of Itcensee's recordkeeping practices.
(Re ferences :
Sestion 6.5 and finding nutter 20)
Action Respnnsible Office Ca t'e nery Evaluate the adequacy of Region y Plant specific the licensee's maintenance records.
6.
Item: Adequacy of operator t'aining and/or procedures.
(
References:
Section 7 and finding ntsnbers 14,16 and 16)
Responsible Offiet Category Action Review the implementation Region Y Plant specific of the training program regarding operator under-standing and actions in the I
area of electrical systems, and invoking technical s action statements. ' pecification 7
Item: Adequacy of energency notifications and NRC response.
(
References:
Section 7.3 and Finding nuinber 22)
Action Responsible Office Ca_tejter2 a.
Verify the adequacy of Region Y Plant speqpc the Itcensee's proctdures and training for reporting
~
of events to NRC Operations Center.
b.
Evaluate the need for IC Generic
,s..., s; '
chchges in NRC policy or g i e u,y, i,;,6,,
. 3,,,., u,,,,
guidance regarding:
the
- e.,,
3,,
,4 gs use of the [NS linen the N (.,:*,,,.; ' ', 'm.t. s.. $ a's mi.1....s
/ [< ("]-
Use of NRC personnel as ENS conrnunicatorst and s.o.
A i-i.
i possible approaches to
\\-
improve the ability to
^ *,.
determine the overall plant status.
i e
f.'
I n '*
l * ';..
\\'
,,h
,g.,A i ',
i
..'*",t,
.' hgilk g
i.,
\\
t.
WN '
r o
j l, 8 ' I.
P-4 g6 e
t
.4.
8.
Itemt Significance of backlog of license amentnents.
(Reference t Comission brfefing)
Action Responsible Office Catehory tysluste whether a backlog NRR Plant specific of license etwndments and technical specification changes contributed to delays in approving the licensee's
!$7 program.
O enam e
b e
. _ _ _ - _ _ - _ _.