IR 05000528/1993028

Enforcement Conference Repts 50-528/93-28,50-529/93-28 & 50-530/93-28 on 930603.Violations Noted.Major Areas Inspected:Licensee Analyses of Several Apparent Violations of NRC Requirements Re Emergency Classification

ML20056C846
Person / Time
Site:	Palo Verde
Issue date:	06/30/1993
From:	Pate R, Qualls P NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION V)
To:
Shared Package
ML20056C844	List: IR 05000528/1993028 ML20056C843 ML20056C845
References
50-528-93-28-EC, 50-529-93-28, 50-530-93-28, NUDOCS 9307260018
Download: ML20056C846 (29)

Text

- - .

,3.-

l

~

.

.

U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY: COMMISSION .,

i REGIO ]

i Report No /93-28, 50-529/93-28, and 50-530/93-28 License No NPF-41, NPF-51, and NPF-74 Licensee: Arizona Public Service Company P. O. Box 53999, Station 9082 Phoenix, Arizona 85837

,

Facility Name: Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station Units 1, 2, and 3 Meeting Location: Region V Office, Walnut Creek, California - ,

Meeting Date: June 3, 1993 Prepared By: "'

.

b

. QudlYs,' Reactor Mspector

<- [ d f5 Date Signed Approved By: *

d R.J. Pate, CKief,' Safeguards, f/50/ Da'te Signed Emergency Preparedness, and Non-power Reactor Branch Summar_y:

Areas Reviewed: Enforcement conference on June 3, 1993, to discuss the licensee's analyses of several apparent violations of NRC requirements related-to emergency classification and personnel assembly and accountability during the March 14, 1993, steam generator tube rupture (SGTR) event, as described in-NRC Inspection Report 50-529/93-2 ~

Results: The licensee presented its analyses of the event', corrective actions taken, causes of the apparent violations and weaknesses identified, and

'

overall safety significance. A copy of the licensee's enforcement conference presentation material is included as Attachment A_to this repor The licensee demonstrated a good understanding of the_ issues involved with [

this event. Corrective actions presented appeared to be thorough and  !

technically sound. No additional violations of NRC requirements were identifie ;

l J

?

. D a

ADD f .

,

-

- . . . - v

- - . .

.-

,

1

.

.

DETAILS ,

1. Persons Attendinq  !

Licensee  !

W. Conway, Executive Vice President Nuclear J. Levine, Vice President Nuclear Production .

=

P. Caudill, Director, Site Services H. Bieling, Manager, Emergency Planning T. Bradish, Manager, Nuclear Regulatory Affairs R. Fuller, Manager, Quality Audits and Monitoring ~  ;

~

P. Wiley, Operations Manager, Unit 2-F. Kroll, Security Manager R. Henry, Site Representative, Salt River Project M. Benac, Manager, EL Paso Electric < t a

NRC

'

B. Faulkenberry, Regional Administrator R. Scarano, Director, Division of Radiation Safety and Safeguards (DRSS)-

K. Perkins, Director, Division of Reactor Safety and Projects l F. Wenslawski, Deputy Director, DRSS i R. Pate, Chief, Safeguards, Emergency Planning, and Non-Power Reactor Branch L. Miller, Chief, Reactor Safety Branch P. Morrill, Chief, Operations Section L. Tran, Palo Verde Project Manager D. Schaefer, Inspector '

A. McQueen, Emergency Planning Analyst T. Sundsmo, Inspector i P. Qualls, Inspector '

M. Blume, Regional Attorney R. Huey, Regional Enforcement Officer *

• D. Barss, NRR Emergency Planning Specialist

• J. O'Brien, NRR Emergency Planning Specialist ,

• Participated by telephone 2. Enforcement Conference Details ,

Mr. Pate summarized the five- apparent violations, described in- Inspection' ';

Report 50-529/93-22 involving failure to: (1) classify the March 14,1993 .i steam generator tube rupture (SGTR) event in accordance with Emergency Plan Implementing Procedures (EPIPs), (2)' activate the Emergency. Response Data System (ERDS) within sixty minutes, (3) conduct accountability- 1 within thirty minutes, (4) conduct a check of areas outside of the

'

_

.

Protected Area (PA), and (5) fully integrate- Emergency Plan requirements -

into the EPIP The licensee agreed with the facts in the inspection report. Mr. Conway -

'

stated that they had reviewed our reports and that they wanted to look .

more deeply than just at the potential Violations. Mr. Wiley summarized 'I

4

, , , . - . - - - - - ~ , . - - g

. -_ . _ _ .._ ._

.

.

i

.

.

'

the licensee's position concerning the classification of the March 14 event and the activation of the ERDS. During this discussion, M Scarano questioned the licensee about the appropriate classification for ,

a SGTR event with no other complications such as occurred on March 1 '

He also noted that the NRC guidance given in NUREG-0654, Criteria for Preparation and Evaluation of Radiological Emergency Response Plans and Preparedness in Support of Nuclear Power Plants, would classify a SGTR with no complications as an Alert and asked the licensee if Palo Verde was unique in that a SGTR should be a Site Area Emergency. The licensee ;

'

stated that their review indicated that an Alert was the proper level of classification for the March 14 SGTR event; however, they would like to make an additional review and would reply to the question during the i following week. On June 10, 1993, Harry Bieling, APS, advised Robert Pate, NRC, by telephone that the correct classification for a SGTR . event at Palo Verde is an Alert. The licensee agreed to revise EPIP-02, Emergency Classification, to reflect the proper classification leve t Mr. Bieling summarized the licensee's position concerning the time to conduct accountsbility, the checking of the PA, and the EPIP adequac The licensee acknowledged all of the apparent violations except for two of the three examples listed in Inspection Report 50-529/93-22 for the failure to fully implement the Emergency Plan in the EPIPs. The licensee believed that although the one hour time expectation is not mentioned in the EPIPs for a check of the Owner Controlled Area (OCA) the guidance of ]

"as soon as possible" in a table in an appendix attached to EPIP-20,  ;

Personnel Assembly and Accountability, was satisfactory. The licensee  !

also believed that the references to search and rescue teams mentioned in EPIPs-11 and 12 were sufficient to implement the Emergency Plan ,

requirement that a search and rescue team be sent for unaccounted I personnel. The licensee stated that during the March 14 event station security personnel searched for unaccounted personnel. Mr Bieling also summarized the training activities, procedural changes, and unannounced accountability drills, which had already been completed or scheduled as corrective actions for the accountability issu During the course of the conference, Mr Bieling presented a summary of the licensee's EPIP-02, Event Classification, revision which was being developed. Mr. Levine also discussed the Emergency Response Facility (ERF) activation times. Mr. Bradish presented the licensee's position on mitigating factors for the potential violations. Mr. Conway concluded-that it is management expectations that people follow procedures and that they were taking an in depth look at the NRC's AIT (Augmented Inspection Team) and APS's IIT (Incident Investigation Team) investigations. M Faulkenberry acknowledged the licensee's efforts and stated that the NRC was most concerned about the assembly and accountability violations since it has been a recurring issue for some years. Mr. Faulkenberry stated that we appreciated the opportunity for open communicatio I i

.

-

.

.

.

Attachment A Licensee Slides and Handouts

.

h f

i

,

l'

.

.

.

.

ENFORCEMENT CONFERENCE EMERGENCY PLANNING JUNE 3, 1993

,

'

AGENDA e OPENING REMARKS B. H. FAULKENBERRY-W. F. CONWAY e REVIEW 0F APPARENT VIOLATIONS NRC e EVENT' CLASSIFICATION P. J. WILEY e EMERGENCY RESPONSE DATA SYSTEM P. J. WILEY e ASSEMBLY AND H. F. BIELING ACCOUNTABILITY e IMPLEMENTATION OF EMERGENCY PLAN H. F. BIELING e REVIEW 0F SAFETY SIGNIFICANCE T. R. BRADISH e EMERGENCY PLAN IMPROVEMENTS

-

EPIP-02

-

FACILITIES ACTIVATION H. F. BIELING e CLOSING REMARKS W. F. CONWAY B. H. FAULKENBERRY i

l

.

l

.  :

.

ENFORCEMENT CONFERENCE l EMERGENCY PLANNING JUNE 3, 1993-AGENDA e OPENING REMARKS B. H. FAULKENBERRY W. F. CONWAY-e REVIEW 0F APPARENT VIOLATIONS NRC e EVENT CLASSIFICATION P. J. WILEY

-

e EMERGENCY RESPONSE DATA SYSTEM P. J. WILEY e ASSEMBLY AND H. F. BIELING ACCOUNTABILITY e IMPLEMENTATION OF EMERGENCY PLAN H. F. BIELING e REVIEW 0F SAFETY SIGNIFICANCE T. R. BRADISH e EMERGENCY PLAN IMPROVEMENTS

-

EPIP-02

-

FACILITIES ACTIVATION H. F. BIELING e CLOSING REMARKS W. F. CONWAY B. H. FAULKENBERRY

.

. . .. . . -. . .- . ..- .

.

.

l

'

.

EVENT CLASSIFICATION '

.

i PLANT CONDITIONS  :

,

INITIAL

>

e i

.. $ VENT INDICATIONS

-

DECREASING PRESSURIZER LEVEL

-

DECREASING PRESSURIZER PRESSURE  :

-

UNANTICIPATED RADIATION MONITORING SYSTEM ALARMS

.

OPERATOR RESPONS .!

.

• INITIAL OPERATOR RESPONSES APPROPRIATE--  !

i AND CONSERVATIVE

• CREW BRIEFING

• MANUAL REACTOR-TRI "

-

EQUIPMENT OPERATED PER DESIGN-l

~!

!

PJW-1 ;

6/3/93 -!

-

-. . . . .. . . _ _ .

. . . - . . .

. . ;

.

'

EVENT ' CLASSIFICATION- (CONTINUED) j y

l CLASSIFICATION OF EVENT

,

• NUE CLASSIFICATION

-

BASIS

• ALERT CLASSIFICATION-l

,

-

BASIS

.

-

CLASSIFICATION APPROPRIATE TO NUREG 0654 ,

j CAUSE OF INCORRECT CLASSIFICATION ,

e .EPIP-02 CLASSIFICATION REQUIREMENTS

• E0P vs :EPIP METHODOLOGY-  !

!

!

-

e CONTROL BOARD INDICATION  :

!

..

!

I PJW- /3/93 :

i

-

. = - . .- _

, . . .

.

.. .

t 4

.

EVENT CLASSIFICATION (CONTINUED)  ;

CORRECTIVE ACTIONS

'

• EPIP-02 REVISION

• TRAINING

-

EPIP METHODOLOGY

-

SIMULATOR INDICATION

, PdW-3 6/3/93

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

.. - - .- - . . . .

'

-

l

EMERGENCY RESPONSE DATA SYSTEM (ERDS1 !

l

!

DISCUSSIO e EMERGENCY C0ORDINATOR DIRECTED ERDS !

ACTIVATION >

,

-l e AFFECTED STA:DID NOT RECEIVE ERDS j ACTIVATION TRAINING e RECHECK 0F PROCEDURE BY EMERGENCY-C0ORDINATOR CAUGHT DISCREPANCY- ]

I CAUSE

!

e COMMUNICATION BETWEEN EC AND STA- .J

.

i e NEW REQUIREMENT T0. ACTIVATE ERDS (FEB 13, 19931 j e NOTEUSING EPIP-11 ,

!

• NO DIRECT REFERENCE BETWEEN EPIP-04 AND EPIP-11 l

.

.

PJW-4 .

6/3/93 ;

!

,!

_ _ - - --- - - - - - -

_

.

EMERGERCY RESPONSE DATA SYSTEM (ERDS)

(CONTINUED 1

.C0RRECTIVE ACTION e STAS BRIEFED ON REQUIREMENT e ACTIVATION PROCESS ADDED'TO SIMULATOR TRAINING e EPIP-04-REVISED e STA C0 ACHED ON PROCEDURE US '

• SELF-IDENTIFIED AND CORRECTED WITHIN 10 MINUTES BEYOND NOTIFICATION REQUIREMENT l

l

'6 l

- - - - - - - - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

.

m ASSEMBLY AND ACCOUNTABILITY

!

PROCESS:

. EMERGENCY C0ORDINATOR (EC) DIRECTS ASSEMBLY e PERSONNEL REPORT TO DESIGNATED ASSEMBLY AREAS e CONTROL OF PROTECTED AREA ACCESS e SUMMARY REPORT GENERATED e SITE-WIDE SWEEPS INITIATED e EC REQUESTS SECURITY TO PERFORM ACCOUNTABILITY e DETAILED REPORT GENERATED

'

e ELIMINATION OF TEST ACADS, FIRE FIGHTERS, CR STAFF, SECURITY, ET ,

e REPORT OF UNACCOUNTED FOR INDIVIDUALS ;

SENT TO EC e PA ANN 0UNCEMENT/ SEARCH AND RESCUE ,

'

.

'

.

'

-ASSEMBLY AND ACCOUNTABILITY (CONTINUED 1 l

!

!

UNIT 2 EVENT:

• ALERT DECLARED AT 0502 l

• ONSHIFT EC DIRECTED ASSEMBLY AT 0520

-

PLANT CONDITIONS AND E-PLAN DID'NOT REQUIRE ASSEMBLY AND ACCOUNTABILITY e CONTROL 0F PROTECTED AREA ACCESS INITIATED AT 0540

• ACCOUNTABILITY REPORT REQUESTED AT 0551

• SUMMARY REPORT GENERATED AT 0601

• RELAXED ACCESS CONTROL AT 0630

'

e TSC ACTIVATION AT 0645

• ACCOUNTABILITY PER NUREG 0654 COMPLETED AT 0910 l

e ACCOUNTABILITY PER EPIP COMPLETED AT ,

1204

6 93

._ . . - . _ . _ _

.

l ASSEMBLY AND ACCOUNTABILITY (CONTINUED 1

,

FINDINGS:

= ACCOUNTABILITY NOT COMPLETED IN 30 MINUTES e OCA SWEEPS NOT CONDUCTED CAUSE: ,

e AS TO ACCOUNTABILITY, LACK l0F PRACTICAL-FULL PARTICIPATION DRILLS-

• AS TO OCA SWEEPS, SECURITY DID NOT FOLLOW PROCEDURE l

i

.

~

u i

HFB-3 6/3/93

, _ . . _ _ _ _ _ __ . . _ _ , ., _ . _ . _ . .

. . .. .

.

-

.

.

ASSEMBLY AND ACCOUhTABILITY (CONTINUED)

CORRECTIVE ACTIONS:

i j

-* UNANN0UNCED DRILLS CONDUCTED ON BOTH~

DAYSHIFT AND BACKSHIFT  ;

• SECURITY PERSONNEL WERE RETRAINED 1Xt l SECURITY. ACTIONS FOR ASSEMBLY AND  ;

ACCOUNTABILITY AND REQUIREMENTS.FOR  !

F0LLOWING PROCEDURE ,

!

'

-

i

,

HFB-4-

' 6/3/93 .

,

I y w --

n e-,- , ,w,.- . , , a- ->, . , , , , _

. ---_ . _- .

.- . .-.

-

.

.

ASSEMBLY AND ACCOUNTABILITY- <

(CONTINUED)-

'

ADDITIONAL ACTIONS TO ENSURE MANAGEMENT EXPECTATIONS ARE FULLY UNDERST0OD AND IMPLEMENTED:

~

• SAFETY NEWSLETTER - MARCH 22, 1993

'

o UNIT PLANT STATUS BRIEFINGS - WEEK 0F APRIL 19, 1993 e SAFETY STAND-DOWN - MAY 10, 1993 e MEM0 FROM VP NUCLEAR PRODUCTION T0 1993 MANAGERS AND SUPERVISORS - MAY 17, e PVNGS-EMPLOYEE NEWSLETTER WEEK 0F MAY 17, 1993

.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - -

. .

.

.

ASSEMBLY AND ACCOUNTABILITY (CONTINUED)

ADDITIONAL TRAINING:

e GENERAL EMPLOYEE TRAINING e SECURITY TRAINING / DRILL. UPGRADES

-

SIMULATE SITE EVACUATION

.

-

TSC ACTIVATION

.

-

LOCKDOWN

-

ROAD BLOCKS / FACILITY ACCESS

.

i

.6/

.

'

~

ASSEMBLY AND ACCOUNTABILITY (CONTINUED)

.

CORRECTIVE ACTIONS HAVE BEEN EFFECTIVE DEMONSTRATED BY THE ABILITY T0:

e ALERT / NOTIFY ASSEMBLY PERSONNEL FOR ACCOUNTABILITY e PROVIDE DETAILED ACCOUNTABILITY LISTING TO EC e PERFORM BUILDING SWEEPS e ACCOUNT FOR ALL PERSONNEL IN ACCORDANC WITH PVNGS G0ALS

!

l l

l l

HFB-7 6/3/93 l

,

.. .. ..

.

,

-

.

.

IMPLEMENTATION OF EMERGENCY PLAN-

.

ACCESS CONTROL .i

-;

,

'

e REQUIREMENT

-

EMERGENCY PLAN (E-PLAN)

-

RESPONSE r

- PERSONNEL

-

EMERGENCY PLAN IMPLEMENTING - AN VALID ACAD PROCEDURES (EPIPs). ]

-

• CAUSE

-

l

-

INCOMPLETE IMPLEMENTATION OF E-PLAN l

. REQUIREMENT IN EPIP

• CORRECTIVE ACTION

-

EPIP~ REVISED AND IN APPROVAL PROCESS

..

.

HFB-1-

-

6/3/93 1

. - - . ,,

. . n

...

IFPLEMENTATION OF EMERGENCY PLAN  !

.

'

(CONTINUED)

,

'

-!

SEARCH AND RESCUE  :

,

• REQUIREMENT

.

-

E-PLAN - DEPLOY FOR UNACCOUNTED-PERSONNEL-j

-

IMPLEMENTED VIA EPIP-11 AND 12

'

.

• POSITION

-

REQUIREMENT IN E-PLAN ADEQUATELY IMPLEMENTED IN EPIP- 1

-?

?

-.

,

t

.

HFB-2' ,

.6/3/93 i

! .

-

.

IMPLEMENTATION OF EMERGENCY PLAN (CONTINUED)

OWNER CONTROLLED AREA (0CA) ACCOUNTABILITY e STATED G0AL

-

E-PLAN - AS S00N AS-PRACTICABLE (GENERALLY WITHIN ONE HOUR)

-

IMPLEMENTED VIA EPIP-20 - AS S00N AS PRACTICABLE e POSITION

-

REQUIREMENT IN E-PLAN ADEQUATELY IMPLEMENTED

!

l l

HFB-3 6/3/93 i

.

IMPLEMENTATION OF EMERGENCY PLAN (CONTINUEDl OWNER CONTROLLED AREA (0CA)

ACCOUNTABILITY (CONTINUED)

e ACTIONS

-

CLARIFY REQUIREMENT IN E-PLAN TO REQUIRE ASSEMBLY VS ACCOUNTABILITY

-

EVALUATE REGULATORY GUIDANCE TO ESTABLISH TIME LIMIT FOR ASSEMBLY e ADDITIONAL ACTIONS

-

COMPARATIVE REVIEW 0F E-PLAN VS EPIPS DURING ANNUAL PLAN REVIEW s$i$

- - - - _-

. . . . - - . - . - - .. -- - . . - . - . - . -

.-

.

o

^

REVIEW 0F SAFETY SIGNIFICANCE f

!

!

e GOOD PRIOR PERFORMANCE IN THE AREA 0F '

EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS  :

-

SALP CATEGORY 1 FOR THE PAST TWO ASSESSMENT PERIODS ,

,

f e APPARENT VIOLATIONS NEITHER

.

INDIVIDUALLY NOR COLLECTIVELY DIRECTLYc l VENT. ASSESSMENT O .

-

EVENT CLASSIFICATION CONSISTENT WITH NUREG 0654, INCONSISTENT WITH

-

MORE CONSERVATIVE SITE EPIP- j u

-

ASSEMBLY AND ACCOUNTABILITY NOT REQUIRED BY ACTUAL PLANT CONDITIONS- D

.

OR-NUREG 0654, BUT DIRECTED AS AN EARLY, DISCRETIONARY.AND u CONSERVATIVE DECISION i

'

3TRB-1-6/3/93

'l

,, a . ' ]

1 . s -

. . .. - _ - . . -. ._ _ .. ... . . . . _ . _.

.

-

,

. j REVIEW 0F SAFETYESIGNIFICANCE (C0bTINUEDF q

.

!

,

e

..

.i

• APS RESPONSE TO JULY 1992z QA AUDIT FINDINGS WAS-REASONABLE UNDER THE j CIRCUMSTANCES

'

l e LATE ERDS ACTIVATION MEETS CRITERIA'FOR- .!

NON-CITED VIOLATIONS E

e N0 SYSTEMIC PROBLEM IDENTIFIED BETWEEN E-PLAN REQUIREMENTS AND' IMPLEMENTING:  ;

j

.

PROCEDURES-i

\

e PROMPT-EXTENSIVE CORRECTIVE-ACTION q

!

!

!

-i TRB-2- !

6/3/9 ,

$

, , , . , - - . - . , , _ . .

._ .__ _ _

,_ _ _ _ _ _

-

, u

..

.

EMERGENCY PLAN IMPLEMENTING PROCEDURE (EPIP)-02 REVISION

EMERGENCY: ACTION LEVEL STEERING COMMITTEE ESTABLISHED DECEMBER 199 EAL STEERING COMMITTEE COMPOSED 0F THE- ,

FOLLOWING GROUPS: j e OPERATIONS u e LICENSED OPERATOR TRAINING e SHIFT-TECHNICAL ADVISOR e EMERGENCY PLANNING EAL STEERING COMMITTEE: CHARTER:

• REVIEW AND RESOLVE COMMENTS RECEIVED FROM OPERATOR TRAINING-(CONSISTENT:

.

APPLICATION:0F EPIP-02)

'

e EVALUATE AND REVISE EPIP-02 g1 o . . . . . _ .- ._ .

,

E

-

.

l EPIP-02 REVISION  :

(CONTINUED)  ;

i

.

CONSIDERATIONS.AFFECTING THE'EPIP-02 i 0RIGINAL REVISION SCHEDULE .(0CTOBER 1993): 3 e SUPPORT MAY 1993 STATE /PVNGS EXERCISE (COMMENCED DECEMBER 1992)

e IMPACT TO OPERATOR REQUALIFICATION EXAMS (MARCH 1993)

e IMPACT TO NRC INITIAL LICENSING EXAMS  ;

(SEPTEMBER 1993)

SCHEDULE REVISED TO JULY 1993 BASED 0N UNIT 2 EVENT UTILIZING THE-FOLLOWING 1 ACTION PLAN:

GATHER. BACKGROUND INFORMATION

• SOLICIT INPUT FROM PLANT MANAGERS, l 0PERATIONS SHIFT SUPERVISORS AND STAS l i

e EVALUATE AND INCORPORATE APPLICABLE l IIT/AIT FINDINGS  !

e EVALUATE EPIP-02 HISTORY FILE q

-

REVIEW PAST EPIP-02 REVISIONS HFB-2

. 6/3/93 4 * p- +=w's ee m

-

,

-

i

!

"

. l

~

'

^

EPIP-02 REVISION

.

(CONTINUED)-  ;

L

-

REVIEW.RCTS/ CATS ITEMS ..1

,

o e REVIEW OTHER UTILITIES' EMERGENCY "

CLASSIFICATION PROCEDURES FORMAT AND-CONTENT: j

,

-

SAN'ON0FRE *

l

-

DIABLO CANYON j

-

WATERFORD *

-

ANO *

-

ST. LUCIE * 1

,

-

MILLSTONE ~* t

-

' FORT CALHOUN *

-

MAINE YANKEE l

• CE SITES

.

SCOPE / FORMAT

• ELIMINATE THE REDUNDANCY BETWEEN APPENDIX A-AND APPENDIX B-

-

e ELIMINATE MECHANIZED " CHECK MARK" PROCESS

.

e EASE OF OPERATIONAL USE ,

e ALLOW SM0OTH : TRANSITION TO NUMARC EAL l

l HFB-3 6/3/93

l l $

~

.:-

,..-

, 3

.

EPIP-02 REVISION i-(CONTINUED) ,

-

ADDITIONAL CONSIDERATIONS

,

L e CONFORMANCE WITH NUREG-0654 e APPROPRIATE CLASSIFICATION BASED ON l

. SYMPT 0MS/ EVENTS

.i e INCORPORATE BARRIER CHALLENGE CRITERIA j

,

,

REVIEW AND APPROVAL  :

.

"

• PERFORM VERIFICATION AND VALIDATION ON SIMULATOR-  :

i e BRIEF STATE AND RECEIVE' CONCURRENCE j e NRC REGION BRIEFING: (JULY 1993)  !

i l

-

.

B t

'

HFB-4 6/3/93 u

.- . - _ - _ _ _ _ _ - -