ML20039F344
| ML20039F344 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | LaSalle  |
| Issue date: | 12/14/1981 |
| From: | Delgeorge L COMMONWEALTH EDISON CO. |
| To: | James Keppler NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20039F341 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8201120365 | |
| Download: ML20039F344 (2) | |
Text
!
,.,f^ 'x Commonwealth Edison
[
Ont First Natiopal Pt;2a. Chicago, tainoja
' ' Address Reply to:. Post Offe::e Box 767 t
j Chicago. Illmc;s 60690 N
December 14, 1981 Mr. James G. Keppler, Director Directorate of Inspection and Enforce' ment - Region III U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
'799 Roosevelt Road Glen Ellyn, IL 60137
Subject:
LaSalle County Station Unit 1 Response to Inspection Report No. 50-373/81-36 (CLARIFICATION)
NRC Docket No. 373 Reference (a):
C. Reed letter to J. G.
Keppler dated November 3, 1981
Dear Mr. Kappler:
Tae purpose of this letter is to clarify information provided in Reference (a) relative to the conduct of construction tests at LaSalle County Station.
In order to prevent a possible misinterpret'ation of the information provided in that letter, we are resubmitting the section of Reference (a) which addressed Corrective Action Taken to Avoid Further Non-Compliance" related to the noncan.pliance reported in IE Report 50-373/81-36.
The clarification provided in the attachment to this letter has been reviewed-witn and found acceptable by the LaSulle County Resident Inspector (R. Walker).
If there should be any further questions in this regard, please dire.ct them to this office.
Very truly yours, 2)
L. O. De1 George Director o f Nuclear Licensing cc:
NRC Resident Inspector - LSCS SUBSCRIBED and SWOR 0
re,ta"E."iulor1981 Notary Pu s
3038F B201'120365' 820102
~
PDR ADGCK 05000373 0
@@ 1
e-a t'z Attachment (Clarification of Response to IE Rpt. 50-373/81-36)
CORRECTIVE ACTION TO AVOID FURTHER NONCOMPLIANCE
. It is felt that the timing between the September 2J test
.(
and the October 30, 1981 response to the item of noncompliance which resulted in the performance of the proof test with a procedure that was approved by the Startup Coordinator was an insolated case.
However, management has placed increased emphasis on insuring commitments are promptly relayed to the responsible test personnel.
All construction tests, as defined in the CECO. QA Manual Quality Requirement 11.2, will be conducted using approved i
procedures in accordance with Quality Procedure (Q.P) 11.1.
Any construction activities on Units 1 and 2 systems which can be construed to be " construction tests", as defined in the paragraph below, will be conducted in accordance with an approved procedure.
The approved procedure will be implemented only a f ter review and concurrence by a senior member of the Station Operating
- Staf f, -and a shif t -briefing by the individual in charge o f conducting the. test.
The construction tests requiring Station Operating Staff review 'are major evolutions such as Secondary Containment leak testing; and other evolutions wherein equipment is required to be operated outside the limitations of normal operating procedures and/or interlocl<s or other protective devices are to be defeated.
3038N y
i.
l 6
I r
s
~L.
s.
l L
s
,