ML032400348

Email, Passehl to C. Lipa/J. Grobe/ L. Dudes, Dated August 4, 2003, Regarding Question: Dwight Cates

ML032400348
Person / Time
Site:	Davis Besse
Issue date:	08/04/2003
From:	Passehl D Division of Nuclear Materials Safety III
To:	Laura Dudes, Grobe J, Christine Lipa Division of Nuclear Materials Safety III
References
FOIA/PA-2003-0376
Download: ML032400348 (1)

Text

I Christine Upa - Re: Question: Dwicht Cates Pagie Page 11 I Chnstine Lipa Re: Question: Dwight Cates From: Dave Passehl I To: Christine Upa; John Grobe; Laura Dudes Date: 8/4/03 2:41 PM

Subject:

Re: Question: Dwight Cates Laura et. al.,

I spoke with the licensee today and got the following info:

According to Messrs. Dave Gudger (reg affairs manager) and Ken Byrd (engineering) and John Grabnar (manager design engineering) of the licensee's staff, the licensee completed a design basis validation review back in 1999 to address the 10 CFR 50.54(f) letter. A total of 85 condition reports (CRs) were initiated as a result of the licensee's review. Of the 85 CRs, 67 CRs have been evaluated for corrective actions (CAs) and 18 CRs have not been evaluated for CAs. Of the 18 CRs that have not been evaluted for CAs, 17 CRs were categorized as non-restart required and 1 CR was categorized as restart required.

A total of 116 corrective actions (CAs) remain open from the 67 CRs that were already evaluated. Of the 116 CAs, 96 are categorized as non-restart required and 20 are required for restart. The 96 non-restart CAs consist of system description updates (about 30) and revising the status of historical calculations (about 20) that no longer support the current licensing basis of the plant. The remainder 40 or so CAs are miscellaneous documentation discrepancies.

Regarding the 20 CAs required for restart, 14 of these 20 are associated with the ongoing electrical distribution work and the remaining 6 are miscellaneous mechanical system calculations (e.g., relief valve sizing, control room emergency ventilation system, etc.) The mechanical calculations have been prepared and reviewed by the licensee's contractor and are awaiting final owner acceptance review by Davis-Besse.

The licensee stated that they have prioritized the open condition reports and corrective actions to concentrate first on those involving restart required modifications.

Thanks, David Passehl 630.829.9872

>>> John Grobe 08/04/03 08:03AM >>>

NOt right now. We'll try to get the answers.

>>> Laura Dudes 08/01/03 11:06AM >>>

Jack, I received a question from Dwight Case (through OCA) regarding the number (and nature if possible) of open items remaining in response to the NRC's 1996 50.54(f) letter.

The question arises from a newspaper article (Cleveland Plain Dealer) dated June 23,2003. Page 2 of the article references the 1996 design basis letter and indicates that as of February 2003, there were 200 remaining deficiencies that had not been resolved.

Questions:

1. How many of these items remain open?

2. If possible can you describe the nature of the Items?

Thank you, Laura A. Dudes ROPMS Phone: (301) 415-1730