ML20246E546
| ML20246E546 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 08/23/1989 |
| From: | Miller H NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| To: | Roe J Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8908290178 | |
| Download: ML20246E546 (2) | |
Text
r AUG " 3 ES9 J
MEMORANDUM FOR:
Jack W. Roe, Director, Division of Licensee Performance and Quality Evaluation, NRR FROM:
H. J. Miller, Director, Division of Reactor Safety, Region III
SUBJECT:
QUESTIONS AND PROPOSED RESPONSES REGARDING THE POLICY STATEMENT ON THE CONDUCT OF NUCLEAR POWER PLANT OPERATIONS Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the proposed classifications to the Policy Statement on the Conduct of Nuclear Power Plant Operations.
In general we agree with the positions set forth in your memo; however, in regard to question number 2 we do not believe that the clarification goes far enough.
In regard to question number 1, we believe that a restructuring of the response would result in a more positive stance on tours of the control room.
Specific recommendations on each questions response are provided below for your consideration.
Question 1: Would the policy statement preclude providing tours of the control room to groups of individuals?
Proposed staff response: The policy statement points out that access to the
. control room should be strictly controlled by a designated authority and that only " authorized personnel" should be permitted in the control room. As used in the policy statement the term " authorized personnel" was to mean personnel who had a valid work-related need requiring access to the control room. The policy was intended to discourage access to the control room for non-work-related activities. The NRC expects that control room " tours" are not necessary at facilities that have readily accessible control room mockups or a simulator.
For plants which either do not have " simulator" facilities or, where those facilities are not readily accessible tourt of the control room should be strictly controlled to insure that they do not impede safe control room operations.
Further such tours should only be authorized for good cause.
Question 2: Would the policy stateme'st preclude operators reading certain materials on shift (e.g., school-related materials)?
Proposed staff response: The policy statement indicates that plant management I
should act to remove distractions that would interfere with the operator's I
ability to monitor the plant either audibly or visually. Further, the policy statement specifies that planc operators should use all of their senses to prevent or mitigate any operational problems. Thus, the intent of the guidance is to discourage reading o' any material which is not directly related to the immediate safe operations. Licensee management is expected to determine, bearing in mind that all reading material will interfere to some extent, which n.aterial is of such importance as to require reading en shift and which material is more appropriately filed for reading during non-control room watch time.
8908290176 890823 PDR ORG NRRE PDC I'
([
/E
/
Vj ;,.
c+
m Jack W. Roe 2
AUG :3-;ggg i
We hope that the above comments will be useful to you in attempting to clarify these.very difficult questions.
If you have any questions, please contact Geoffrey Wright of my staff, at FTS 388-5695.
' "~m'
- EED BY !!UDERT J. fcilLLER H. J. Miller, Director Division of Reactor Safety cc:
B. A. Boger, RI A. F. Gibson, R:.
L. J. Callan, RIV R. P. Zimmerman, RV j
i RIII RIII RIII 1
RIII P!p ello r
t/lc 6e an Ma in til 8/M/89 h 8/>v/89_ 8/2L/89 8/
9 8/23/89