ML20042F285

Supplemental Response to Generic Ltr 90-01, Request for Voluntary Participation in NRC Regulatory Impact Survey.

ML20042F285
Person / Time
Site:	Comanche Peak
Issue date:	05/03/1990
From:	William Cahill, Walker R TEXAS UTILITIES ELECTRIC CO. (TU ELECTRIC)
To:	NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM)
References
GL-90-01, GL-90-1, TXX-90154, NUDOCS 9005080106
Download: ML20042F285 (4)

Text

_.

-c ,

V. ,,

N FE Log # TXX 90154 File # 10035 Generic Letter 90-01 nlELECTRIC Wulism J. Cahill. Jr.

E.serwitvr l'in treskke U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Attn: Document Control Desk Washington, D. C. 20555

SUBJECT:

COMANCHE PEAK STEAM ELECTRIC STATION (CPSES)

DOCKET NOS. 50-445 AND S0-446 SUPPLEMENTAL RESPONSE TO GENERIC LETTER 90-01:

"RE0 VEST FOR VOLUNTARY PARTICIPATION IN NRC REGULATORY IMPACT SURVEY" Gentlemen:

1 In Generic Letter (GL) 90-01, the NRC surveyed utilities regarding the impact of NRC imposed- Inspections, audits and evaluations on utility operations and resources. In a letter, TXX-90082, dated March 1,1990, TU Electric submitted to the NRC the enclosed surveys of GL 90-01. The purpose of this supplemental response is to provide revised statistics as a result of further evaluation of the Generic Letter survey response.

Attached are revised surveys for NRC Team Inspections,-other NRC Resident, Regional and Headquarters inspections / audits and NRC ASME inspections / audits.

Time estimates were revised as a result of the supplemental reviews. The attached surveys are to replace sheets 1, 2 and 4. respectively, of the

-Attachment to TXX-90082. The original sheets can be discarded.

Sincerely,

'l Y hteth Y -

William J. Cahill, Jr.

By: (@ h, M Roger"D. Walker Manager of Nuclear Licensing VPC/vid Attachment c - Mr. R. D. Martin, Region IV Resident Inspectors, CPSES (3) 9005000106 900503 PDR ADOCK 05000440 FDC P fg eo North olive street LB. 81 Dallas, Texas 75201 /

,gl T Attechinent to TXX-90154

., , *cge.1 o f. 3 NRC Regulatory impact Survrg y -; Questionn_ aire,5heet

1. Type of inspection, audit or evaluation: NRC Team Inspection (NTOL's)

Information based on inspections conducted within 1 year prior to 0L (2/89-2/90)

_2.

' Based on actual experience over the past several years..about how often is this activity conducted? annroximatol v ?? team insnections and a<f sociated followup insoections

3. Operations / Construction areas covered: Corrective Action Program (CAP),

Emeroencv Ooeratino Procram (EOP). Operational Readiness Assessment Team (OPAT). Security. Radioloaical Controls, Cheniistry/ Radio chemistry, Fire Protection, Equipment Quali fication, Structural, Emergency Preparedness, Augmented Inservice Team and Preservice Inspection

4. Extent of the activity (how many people, for how long)

CAP - A ins nectors fn r I week on 3 seoarate inspections FnD R insnectors for 2 weeks onsite review and 2 weeks offsite review nonT 19 insnoctnrs for 2 weeks on 2 separate inspections Balance - 4 inspectors for 1 week

5. Approximata percentage of total time (on an annual basis) which the following managers must spend in direct involvement before, during, and in response to the activity described in Item fl.*

a. Plant Department Heads 4-8% (numberinvolved) 5

b. Plant Manager 4-8%

c. Corporate Department Heads 3-8% (numberinvolved) 1

d. Corporate Vice Presidents 1-3% (numberinvolved) 4

e. Chief Nuclear Officer 1-3%

• Time estimates are limited to face-to-face interfaces with inspectors during the course of inspection activities, but do not include time expended or resources spent on follow up or implementation issues.

i:1 Atta'chment' to TXX-90154' NRC Regulatory Imoact Survey

,f 4 : Page' 2 o f 3 Questiontaire sheet ,

1. Type of -inspection, audit or_ evaluation: npr Office _ cf Snecial Proiects (OSP) and Region IV -Inspections for Design, Construction, Test and Operations I

2. Based on actual experience over the past several years, about how often 2 is this activ;ty conducted? ? - 5 day (s) inspection per approximately 1 every two months i

3._ Operations / Construction arets covered: 2517, 2513, 2514, 2515 Programs-recre enrrnctien Actinn prnoram. Extensive A11ecation Followup (s).

l l

t.

4. Extent of the activity (how many people, for how long) OSP over oost l 3 years 13 inspectors; continueus RTV - over past 2 years 3 inspectors 1-5 day (s) inspection l

l

5. Approximate percentage of total time (on an annual basis) which the following managers must spend in direct involvement before,- during, and-in response to the activity described in Item fl. *

a. Pldnt Department Heads 4-8% 5 (numberinvolved) _

b. Plant Manager 4 8%

c. Corporate Department. Reads _] 5% (numberinvolved) 1 I

d. Corporate Vice Presidents A U (number involved) _ 4 e.

Chief Nuclear Officer a L

• Time estimates are limited to face-to-face interfaces with inspectors during the course of inspectiors activities, but do not include time expended or resources spent an follow up or implementation issues.

l

~

1

Attachmen? to TXX-90154 NRC Regulatory Impact Survey '

(Page 3 of 3 '

, Questionnaire Sheet l- - 1. Type of ins; action, audit or evaluation: NRC/NRR Inspection on ASME l

related activities i

2. Based on actual experience over the past several years,.about how often l is this activity conducted? ' 2-3 inspections per year with 2-3 visits l l

for each subject inspection

3. Operations / Construction areas covered: ASME Section XI design, repair / -

replacement, welding, pressure testing and examinations / inspections

4. Extent of the a.:tivity (how many people, for how long) Tvnicallv one NRC inspector per visit, lasting from a minimum of two days to a maximum of seven working days.

5. Approximate percentage of total tir.4 (on an annual basis) which the following managers must spend in direct involvement before, during, and in response to the activity describ2d in Item fl.*

a. Plant Department Heads 3-8f _ (nunber involved) 2

b. Plant Manager 3-8%

c. Corporate Department Beads 3-8% (numberinvolved) 1

d. Corporate Vice Presidents 1-2% (numberinvolved) 2

e. Chief Nuclear Officer }-2,%_

• Time estimates are linited to face-to-face interfaces with inspectors during the course of inspection activities, but do not include time expended or resources spent on follow up or implementation issues.

/

4 3 s-u