ML20246J549

Requests That Augmented Insp Team Insp Rept Be Revised to Include Encl Addl Info

ML20246J549
Person / Time
Site:	Seabrook
Issue date:	08/22/1989
From:	George Thomas AFFILIATION NOT ASSIGNED
To:	Russell W NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I)
References
NUDOCS 8909050190
Download: ML20246J549 (4)

Text

w;, . . . .

R m> 3 y ..

p

,4 13L Nobles Island

- 500 Market Street Portsmouth, NH 03801 August 22, 1939 Mr. William T. Russell Regional Administrator USNRC; Region I 476 Allendale Road King of Prussia, PA 19408

Dear Mr. Russell:

This letter is written'in reference to.the USNRC Region I Augmented. Inspection Team (AIT) Inspection. Report of the 1 Natural Circulation' Test at Seabrook Station Unit 1 which was forwarde'd to.Mr. Edward A. Brown, President and Chief Executive Officer of the New Hampshire Yankee Division of Publicl Service Company of New Hampshire (PSNH), by your.

letter dated. August 17, 1989.

During the conduct of.the Natural Circulation' Test at

~Seabrook. Station, I was employed by the New Hampshire Yankee

' Division of PSNH as the Vice President-Nuclear' Production.

~

However, I was not interviewed by the AIT~ Inspection Team, .The Attachment to this letter provides statements of additional information regarding management actions taken subsequent to the Natural Circulation Test. These brief statements.are provided to indicate that there is additional information which may not have been provided to the Team.

It is requested that the AIT Report be revised as appropriate to reflect ' the: additional information provided herein.

If you wish to interview me or have further ques-i tions regarding the above, please feel freeEto contact me at (603) 436-4498.

Very truly yours,

+ Oeorge Thomas ec: A. C. Cerne - USNRC.

T. C. Feigenbaum - PSNH gOI 8909050190 890822 s

\

PDR ADOCK 05000443 Q PDC

_____i__.__.__i_____._.________._.______ ___.________.m____________._____________.m_-.__ _ _ . . _ . . _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ . . _ _ _ _ . . _ _ _ . _ . _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

t 1 .

ATTACHMENT Statements of Additional Information Regarding. Management' Actions'Taken Following the Natural. Circulation Tests 1.,The Chronology of Communications provided in' Appendix-B .

to the Augmented Inspection Team (AIT) Report states' -

that atL1:00 PM on June 22,.1989, licensee' management

' set a tentative schedule for restart on the morning of June 123.

-It is important that it be. recognized that the tenta-tive restart schedule'which was established at that time was for1the: sole. purpose of insuring that the numerous' personnel.which would be required to, perform and observe'the' Natural Circulation Test would be

~

available if the plant conditions were ready to conduct.

the-test. In support of the above, it was emphasized during the 1:00 PM management meeting on June 22 that there was no intent to restart the reactor until a thorough assessment of the event was complete and the NRC was in' agreement with that assessment. It was also stated by' myself at the same meeting that restart of the reactor for performance of the test would be subject to the following conditions:

1). the post-trip assessment was complete,

' :2 ) . any corrective actions identified in the post-trip assessment as " required for-restart" were complete, and 3). a management decision was made to restart the reactor and repeat the test.

j.

These conditions for restart were also stated durang the 6:00 PM conference call with the NRC Region I Branch Chief on June 22.

l page 1 of 2 h-

L. . . . .,

. s h

L ATTACHMENT.

(continued).

i 2..The~ Chronology.of Communication provided in Appendix'B to'the AIT Report states that at 2:00 PM on June 22, 1989, the licensee's' Incident Investigation Team, Post-Trip.

Review Team and Self-Assessment Team were established.

Although not mentioned in the Report,11t should be noted~that, in addition to the above-mentioned activities,'

interviews were, initiated.with the operators who were on-shift during the test to determine why they did not' trip the reactor in accordance with the 1-ST-22 test

' criteria. The results of;these' interviews were discussed

'in detail at the 4:30 PM management meeting. The preliminary conclusions which were reached at that meeting with regard to: operator actions were very.similar to the conclusions reached by the AIT in Report Section 5.1.4 and the~ corresponding portions of. Report Section 2.2.

These preliminary conclusions provided the basis for the discussion of operator response with the Region I -

Branch Chief during the 6:00 PM conference call on June 22.

i

~

l i

- - _ _ - - _ - _ . __ _. - .i