A04547, Informs of Status of Commitments in Response to Facility Proposed Design Change Task Group Final Rept,Per . All Commitments Fulfilled.Original Intent of Improvement Plans Unaltered
| ML20211P355 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Haddam Neck File:Connecticut Yankee Atomic Power Co icon.png |
| Issue date: | 06/26/1986 |
| From: | Opeka J CONNECTICUT YANKEE ATOMIC POWER CO. |
| To: | Murley T NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| References | |
| A04547, A4547, NUDOCS 8607230119 | |
| Download: ML20211P355 (3) | |
Text
CONNECTICUT YANKEE ATOMIC POWER COMPANY B E R L I N.
CO N N ECTICUT P o Box 270 HARTFORD, CONNECTICUT 06141-0270 TELEPHONE 203-665-5000 June 26,1986 Docket No. 50-213 A04547 Dr. Thomas E. Murley Regional Administrator Region i U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 631 Park Avenue King of Prussia, Pennsylvania 29406 Gentlemen:
Haddam Neck Plant Response to December 13, 1984 Order Modifying License - Status Update In our November 6, 1985(1) letter, we outlined various commitments in response to the Connegticut Yankee Proposed Design Change Task Group (CYPDCTG)
Final Report (21. The purpose of this letter is to inform the NRC of the status of our efforts.
To date, we have fulfilled all commitments. Four commitments were recently completed and are hereby clarified as stated below. The original intent of our improvement plans is not being altered, but minor changes to the November 6, 1985 letter have been determined to be appropriate.
- 1., Table 5, Deficiency 10 of our November 6,1985 letter provided a commitment to revise surveillance proceduceu to verify actual plug movement for the reactor coolant system venting valves. However, the valves are sealed and, therefore, plug movement cannot be verified visually. Inability to veriff actual plug movement in surveillance tests has been determined to be acceptable since the valves are able to function effectively with water. Test valves were successfully opened and close against water at full differential pressure by the manufacturer.(
(1)
J. F. Opeka letter to T. E. Murley, dated November 6,1985,
Subject:
Response to December 13,1984 Order Modifying License.
(2)
D. E. Vandenburgh letter to T. E. Murley, dated September 6,1985,
Subject:
Connecticut Yankee Proposed Design Change Task Group Final Report.
(3)
Manufacturers Qualification Test Report No. QR 52600-5940-2 and supporting documentation confirmed that the valves (Valcor Model number V526-6042-3A) are qualified for gas or water service and the valves opened and closed against water at differential pressures of 2500 and 3735 psig, respectively.
These pressures envelope the Haddam Neck Plant design
[
hg require ments.
72g PDR I
i
, The valves are periodically tested during cold shutdown or refueling to determine if the valves open and close on command. Testing the valves during plant operation against full differential pressure is not warranted as reactor coolant would be sprayed into containment.
2.
Attachment.1, Table 6, Recommendation 13 of our November 6,1985 letter provided a commitment to develop and implement a new NE&O procedure on " Interface Controls."
This procedure would provide the mechanism for guidance on interface needs or reviews on technical documents. Af ter due consideration, it was decided to resolve this concern by revising NE&O procedure 5.03, " Controlled Distribution of Design Documents for Interface Review and Transmittal", instead of developing a new procedure.
- 3., Table 7, Recommendation 2.2 of our November 6,1985 letter noted an inconsistency between NE&O procedure 7.02 and 3.03 on specifying walkdown criteria.
Our response to Recommendation 2.2 provided a commitment to revise NE&O procedure 3.03 to specify walkdown criteria. After due consideration, it was decided to resolve this issue by revising NE&O procedure 7.02 instead. This action is consistent with Attachment 1, Table 7, Recommendation 6.2 which commits to revise NE&O procedure 7.02 for the same issue.
- 4., Recommendation 4.d of the Connecticut Yankee PDCR 713 Special Report of our November 6,1985 letter provided a commitment to revise NE&O procedure 5.12 t, include a Generation Fire Protection Engineering (GFPE) PDCR review check-off list.
The PDCR fire protection review check list was designed by GFPE to assist in streamlining fire protection reviews. The check list provides key phrases, which during the review process, assure all pertinent fire protection topics are reviewed and properly addressed.
The check list form was not included in NE&O 5.12 due to the fact that a form cannot be used in cases where detailed written summaries are required for some PDCR reviews. However, the language found in the check list form has been written into Section 6.5 of NE&O 5.12 as procedural steps.
Recommendation 4.d also provided a commitment to revise NE&O procedure 5.05 to permit use of the GFPE check-off list during PDCR verification activities. The GFPE check-off list was not added to NE&O 5.05. Instead, a note was added to Figure 7.1 of NE&O 5.05 to allow GFPE to use NE&O 5.12 in addition to or to supplement Figure 7.1.
4
s
_3 We trust you find this information satisfactory.
Very truly yours, CONNECTICUT YANKEE ATOMIC POWER COMPANY
.F.GA J. F. %
V Senior Vice President STATE OF CONNECTICUT )
) ss. Berlin COUNTY OF HARTFORD
)
Then personally appeared before me 3. F. Opeka, who being duly sworn, did state that he is Senior Vice President of Connecticut Yankee Atomic Power Company, Licensee herein, that he is authorized to execute and file the foregoing information in the name and on behalf of the Licensee herein and that the l
statements contained in said information are true and correct to the best of his i
knowledge and belief.
k1( hmei W
'JNotary Pu My Commissica Expires March 31,1988
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _