ML20011E435

Requests That Recipient Conduct Independent Review of Difference Between Draft & Final Insp & SALP Repts. Guidelines for Conduct of Review Listed

ML20011E435
Person / Time
Site:	Comanche Peak
Issue date:	11/02/1989
From:	Sniezek J Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:	Travers W Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Shared Package
ML20011D121	List: ML20011D120 ML20011D122 ML20011E336 ML20011E429 ML20011E435 ML20011E437 ML20011E438 ML20011E439 ML20011E440 ML20011E441 ML20011E442 ML20011E444 ML20011E445 ML20011E446 ML20011E447 ML20011E448 ML20011E449 ML20011E450 ML20011E451 ML20011E452 ML20011E454 ML20011E455 ML20011E456 ML20011E457 ML20011E458 ML20011E459 ML20011E460 ML20011E461 ML20011E462 ML20011E463 ML20011E468 ML20011E469 ML20011E470 ML20011F392 ML20011F393 ML20011F394 ML20011F395 ML20011F400 ML20011F401 ML20011F404
References
NUDOCS 9002140032
Download: ML20011E435 (2)

Text

p'

~

g6* NCp.

I

[.

j-

.. J,' 1

' UNITED STATES c;.

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION D...h. E -

V wasmNotoN.o c.20m Ev 0 21989

+-

?$'

1 MEMORANDUM FOR:-

-William D. Travers, Assistant Director 1

for Special Projects Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Ralph Architzel Plant Systems Branch Office of Nuclear. Reactor Regulation FROM:

James H. Sniezek, Deputy Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

SUBJECT:

SPECIAL REVIEW ASSIGNMENT r

You are hereby assigned the responsibility to conduct an independent review of-the difference between certain draft and final inspection and SALP reports.

Your primary mission is to. identify any issues of safety significance that

. could affect the decision on plant licensing. Bill Travers is in charge of

-the review process.. Your guidelines for conduct of the review are as follows:

1. _ 'Make no attempt to identify the NRC personnel who reported the i

differences between the draft and final reports.,

2.

-If. in the conduct of your. review, you identify the NRC personnel who reported the difference between the draft and final reports, treat-the identities'as. privileged information'and do not divulge the identities to any persons in or outside the NRC.

l

3. -

Determine the issues which' differ between the draft and final ' reports.

4.

Determine, based on your experience and knowledge of NRC requirements and programs, whether there is a reasonable basis for such differences and whether the' differences have any practical safety significance.

i_

.5.

For those diffe.wnces that are not explainable and that based on your experience and knowledge of NRC requirements and programs raise safety

-questions, determine and recommend an appropriate mechanism for resolving the safety question.

6.

Your recomraendations for resolving the safety questions.if Dy, should be discussed with me prior to finalization.

e.

7.

In conducting your review, you should not discuss any findings or issues with NRC staff associated with the subject licensee. 4!n addition, do not discuss the matter with any other persons inside or outside the NRC without igy specific authorization.

l

(:

E N UO3 q

l.

A~,

.E

p;,

G

~

~

NOV 021;i3 8.

In carrying out this assignment you will report directly to me.

9.

Upon completion of your review, provide a report of your 'indings and recommendations to the Director, NRR.

The need for additional distri-bution of your report, if any, will be made by the Director, NRR.

/

441tl4 Y

'1 '

a s H. Sniezek, Deputy Di ector Qf ice of Nuclear Reactor Regulation cc:

J. M. Taylor T. E. Murley l

i

-l

)

i

.I I

=_

t e

,1 i