IR 05000261/1992013

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Discusses Alleged Discrimination for Reporting Erosion/ Corrosion Problems to NRC & Forwards Insp Repts 50-261/92-13 & 50-261/93-20 Excerpts
ML20149K060
Person / Time
Site: Robinson Duke Energy icon.png
Issue date: 01/11/1994
From: Julian C
NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II)
To: Demiranda O
NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II)
Shared Package
ML20149K047 List:
References
FOIA-96-32 NUDOCS 9602210118
Download: ML20149K060 (1)


Text

.

.

UNITEo STATES

.[t**880%"$ NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

',

."

  • q REGION 11 M

7 ': *01 MARIETTA STREET N.W. SUITE 2900 N.- f'! f

'

Laus

~

l ATLANT A. GEORGIA 3032H199

"-m January 11, *.994 L k..C/4/... "

MEMORANDUM FOR: 0. DEMIRANDA. REGIONAL ALLEGATION COORDINATOR h

\

FROM: C. JULIAN CHIEF ENGINEERING BRANCH. DRS VIA: A. GIBSON. DIRECTOR DIVISION OF REACTOR SAFETY SUBJECT: ALLEGED DISCRIMINATION FOR REFORTING EROSION / CORROSION PROBLEMS TO THE NRC - ROBINSON - (CASE No. RII-93-A-0125)

The DRS assignment for the subject case consisted of performing a technical inspection of the Erosion / Corrosion (a.k.a. Flow Accelerated Corrosion)

program and comparing the results of the inspection with the results of the inspection that was used to provide the input for the last SALP repor The Erosion / Corrosion program was inspected by Mr. N. Economos during an

,,spection on April 27 througn May 1.1992, as ren-*:0 ii. Inspection Report No. 50-261/92-1 The NRC assessment at that time was that licensee's program was not functioning well. This is the assessment that was reflected in the SALP repor The Flow Acclerated Corros1on program was again inspected, this time by Mr. Crowley, during an inspection on September 13-17 and September 27 thru October 1.1993 as reported in Inspection Report No. 50-261/93-2 The inspector who conducted the 1992 inspection. Mr. Economos, made the critical assessment of the program caseo on his evaluation of the ongoing activities at the site during that particular outage. His inspection did involve discussions with the engineer that was assigned to the program, but it is clear that his assessment would have Deen just as critical without input from the enginee The 1993 inspection report noted that significant improvements had been .aada in the area of Flow Accelerateo Corrosion. These sionificant 1morovements were caused by the amount of management attention Deing directed toward this area. The significant differences were that the site assignment apparently went from a part-time assignment for one engineer to a full-time position with l an assigned back-up; and there is now evidence that management has been providing technical support from contractors and corporate engineerin DRS considers the Robinson Flow Accelerated Corrosion program to be acceptable at this tim This completes DRS action on this allegatio ~

ID

. Julian, n i Chief Engineering Branch. DRS enc 1: Report 50-261/92-13 excerpts i

'

Report 50-261/93-20 excerpts EXHIBIT b-0F_ " PAGE(S)

PAGE 1 l F,M *

'

ge)*h,ko nI 9602210118 960201 FOlA fr# yV j PDR 8 LATIMER96-32

-

PDR

,l% s a .3 4f