ML082320170
| ML082320170 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Browns Ferry, Watts Bar, Sequoyah, 05000000 |
| Issue date: | 10/04/1985 |
| From: | Harold Denton Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Stello V NRC/EDO |
| Shared Package | |
| ML082320099 | List: |
| References | |
| NRC-2017-000292 NUDOCS 8510090340 | |
| Download: ML082320170 (5) | |
Text
Ar I~
M4EMORANPUM FOR:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Reference:
Victor Stello, Jr., Deputy Executive Director Regional Operations and Generic Requirements Harold R. Denton, Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation BACKFIT DETERMINATION6fV )CLAIM RECEIVED JUNE 4, 1985 Memo, Stello to Denton, August 28, 1985, Same Subject In response to your concern over our following procedures as outlined in Draft Manual Chapter-0514, we believe that we have been responsive to the intent Of these procedures. In the case of answering TVA's claim of backfit received by us on June 4, 1985, wte set the target date of June 20, 1985 (i.e. 12 working days),
for completion of the determination and subsequent issuance. This target date was intended to allow margin to assure completion by June 26, 1985 (i.e. the three weeks called for in Draft Manual Chapter 0514).
The NRR staff completed the required actions and returned the proposed response to my office on June 26, 1985. At that point we determined that it would be appropriate to obtain IF concurrence in the proposed response to TVA. This additional action which was not contemplated in the original schedule, nor ini the scheduling guidance established in the Manual Chapter, resulted in a delay in completing the action. A detailed chronology of events is presented in the Enclosure. I continue to believe that requesting IE concurrence was a prudent action in this case and that it reflects the kind of thoughtful management involvement that is needed in dealing with backfitting issues.
In addition, we entered the appropriate information on this issue into both the Division of Licensing's tracking system and the agency-wide tracking system.
This information is currently included in our monthly status reports.
We are sensitive to the need to manage plant-specific backfitting activities in a controlled and timely manner. Therefore, we will continue to make every effort to be consistent with the Draft Manual Chapter.
Qqidm ined by
& R.D0800 Harold R-. Denton, Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Enclosure:
As stated
- Previously concurre ORAB/DL DRAB/
- PTremblay:mk *JHan 09/18/85/1 DW ield HThoni 9/41/85
/e DISTRIBUTION YELLOW TICKET 859222 Central File wf incoming PTrremblay PPAS NRC PDR w/incoming VJHannon HThompson/FMiraglia NSIC w/incoming GHolahan DCrutchfield ORAB Reading HSmith (w/incoming HRDenton/DEisenhut yellow folder) d DL non
/ 85 ipson 85 ORAB/DL/BC
- GHolahan 09/20/85 01F NR R DE F~ nhut 9/4 5 AD~ AD GL a s 0 /85 H fon 0914/85 85'0090340 851004 PDR ADOCK 05000259 P
MEMORANDUM FOR:
Victor Stello, Jr., Deputy Executive Director Regional Operations and Generic Requirements FROM:
Harold R. Denton. Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
SUBJECT:
BACKFIT DETERMINATION-TVA CLAIM RECEIVED ~JUNE 4, 1985
Reference:
Memo, Stello to Denton, August 28, 1985, Same Subject In response to your concern over our following procedures as outlined in Draft Manual Chapter-0514, we believe that we have been responsive to the intent of these procedures. In the case of answering TVA's claim of backfit received by us on June 4, 1985, we set the target date of June 20, 1985(i.e. 12 working days),
for completion of the determination and subsequent issuance. This target date was intended to allow margin to assure completion by June 26, 1985 (i.e. the three weeks called for in Draft Manual Chapter 0514).
The NRR staff completed the required actions and returned the proposed response to my office on June 26, 1985.
At that point we determined that it would be appropriate to obtain IE concurrence in the proposed response to TVA. This additional action which was not contemplated in the original schedule, nor in the scheduling guidance established in the Manual Cha~iter, resulted in a delay in completing the action.
A detailed chronology of event is presented in the Enclosure. I continue to believe that requesting IE cincurrence was a prudent action in this case and that it reflects the kind of thoughtful management involvement that is needed in dealing with backfitting issues, In addition, we entered the appropriate information on this i;sue into both the Division of Licensing's tracking system and the agency-wide tracking system.
This information is currently included in our monthly status reports.
We are sensitive to the need to manage plant-specific backfitting activities in a controlled and timely manner. Therefore, we will continue to make every effort to be consistent with the Draft Manual Chapter.
Harold R. Denton, Director Office of Nuclear Reactor RegulationVictor Stello
-2 DISTRIBUTION:
tentaTFI~FTTF NRC POR NSIC ORAB Reading HRDenton/DEisenhut PPAS HThompson/FMi ragl ia DCrutchfield/Crhum HSmlth,PPAS
- Previously concurred ORAB/DL ORAB/OL OAD/1C AD/SA/0L DL NRR
- PTremblay:mk *JHannon GHolahan DCrutchfield Hlhompson H~enton 09/M/8 09/18/85 09/10/85 09/
/85 09/ /85 09/ /85
Victor Stello-In addition, we entered the appropriate information on this issue into both the Division of Licensing's tracking system and the agency-wide tracking system.
This information is currently included in our monthly status reports.
We are sensitive to the need to manage plant-specific backfitting activities in a controlled manner. Therefore, we will continue to perform these activities consistent with the Draft Manual Chapter.
Harold R. Denton, Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation O:STRIBUTION (YELLOW TICKET #85922)
Centrl i~e NRC PDO NSF C DRAB Reading HPDenton/DGEi senhut PPAS HThompson/FMiragl ia DCrutchfiel d/CS chum HSmith,PPAS OR4 ORABA OR4 PT red4b.*4mk JHannon 09//11/85 09/1 ?/85 ORA3U/DL/BC GHolahan 09/ /85 AD/SA:DL DCrutchfiel d 9/ /85 DL HThompson 9/ /85 NRR HRDen ton 9/ /85 10 UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASNIPJOTON. D. C. 20566 OCT 4 19dS MEMORANDUM FOR:
Victor Stello, Jr.. Deputy Executive Director Regional Operations and Generic Requirements FROM:
Harold R. Denton, Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
SUBJECT:
BACKFIT DETERMINATION-TVA CLAIM RECEIVED JUNE 4, 1985
Reference:
Memo, Stello to Denton. August 28, 1985, Same Subject In response to your concern over our following procedures as outlined in Draft Manual Chapter-0514, we believe that we have been responsive to the intent of these procedures. In the case of answering TVA's claim of backf it received by us on June 4, 1985, we set the target date of June 20, 1985 (i.e. 12 working days),
for completion of the determination and subsequent issuance. This target date was intended to allow margin to assure completion b? June 26, 1985 (i.e. the three weeks called for in Draft Manual Chapter 05141 The NAR staff completed the required actions and returned the proposed response to my office on June 26, 1985. At that point we determined that it would be appropriate to obtain IE concurrence in the proposed response to TVA. This additional action which was not contemplated in the original schedule. nor in the scheduling guidance established in the Manual Chapterf, resulted in a delay in completing the action. A detailed chronology of events is presented in the Enclosure. I continue to believe that requesting 1E concurrence was a prudent action in this case and that it reflects the kind of thoughtful management involvement that is needed in eealirng with backfitting issues.
In addition, we entered the appropri~te information on this issue into botn the Division of Licensing's tracking system and the agency-wide tracking system.
This information is currently included in our monthly status reports.
We are sensitive to the need to manage plant-specific backfitting activities in a controlled and timaly man ner. Therefore, we will continue to make every effort to be consistent with the Draft Manual Chapter.
Harold At.
Denton. Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Rlegulation
Enclosure:
As stated
CHRONOLOGY OF STAFF ACTIONS
, June 5 June June a June 17 June June
- June 27
- July 31 August Auut Responsible staff completed the determination which was concurred on by his Branch Chief and the Acting Branch Chief of the appropriate licensing branch.
Branch Chief of the appropriate operating branch concurred.
Appropriate Assistant Director in the Division of Licensing conct-red.
Appropriate technical review Branch Chief and Deputy Director of the technical division concurred.
Director. Division of Licensing concurred.
-The office of the Deputy Director, NPR, received the determination.
Determination was returned to the author with conern that the Vendor Program Branch should also concur.
- Branch Chief of the Vendor Program Branch and Director of IE concurred.
-Deputy Director concurred.
-Director, NRR, concurred.
- Determination issued to the license* and the EDO.