ML20044D910
| ML20044D910 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 05/04/1993 |
| From: | Taylor J NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR OPERATIONS (EDO) |
| To: | Colvin J NUCLEAR ENERGY INSTITUTE (FORMERLY NUCLEAR MGMT & |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19342B254 | List: |
| References | |
| GL-92-08, GL-92-8, NUDOCS 9305210090 | |
| Download: ML20044D910 (2) | |
Text
... _.. _ _ _ _ _ __
- .m.
d i,,.-
l l o
UNITED STATES g
8 NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION j
g g
E WASHINGTON, D. C. 20655 l
\\......
May 4, 1993 I
h Mr. Joseph F. Colvin President and Chief Executive Officer L
Nuclear Management and Resources Council l
1776 Eye Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D.C.
20006-3706
Dear Mr. Colvin:
It has been reported that in response to the Federal grand jury investigation i
into the Thermo-Lag issues, utility licensees are withdrawing their direct 5
participation in the NUMARC-sponsored fire barrier testing program. This is prolonging final resolution of the Thermo-Lag problem.
I am concerned that individual utilities are not sufficiently sensitive to the importance of timely resolution of concerns relating to the use of Thermo-Lag fire barriers in licensed facilities.
I want to learn more about the scope of the test program now envisioned by NUMARC. Specifically, I am interested in 7
what types and percentage of existing configurations at affected plants will I
be tested and how utilities will address those configurations particular to their facilities that are not tested under the NUMARC program.
In addition, I 4
want to know more about the course NUMARC and the utilities have charted to attain final resolution of the problem and when final resolution will be 3
achieved.
g As you know, the NRC recently testified before Congress on the Thermo-Lag i
issues.
In its testimony, the NRC made commitments to Congress that the Thermo-Lag fire barriers would be compensated for, in the short term, by the (l5 use of firewatches and, in the longer term, by development of corrective
{
actions and permanent solutions that would result from, in large part, the y
outcome of testing to be conducted by NUMARC in concert with the affected i
utilities. Thus, it is essential that we understand the scope and timing of the industry testing program in order to assess the adequacy of the program to develop long-term corrective actions.
p Although NUMARC took the lead for developing an overall industry response, I must emphasize that it is the individual responsibility of each reactor p
licensee to ensure that its facility fully conforms to NRC requirements.- Our M
review of licensee responses to Generic Letter 92-08, "Thermo-Lag 330-1 Fire
- 1 Barriers," will focus on the individual resolution plans and the timeliness of F
the completion schedules.
[
s:
&t i
010031 c, 4
'7)y2'
{
I e
LN. Gvl.
i 3
G? so5 2 looWD v4 M. ME ###
//
/
f Mr. Joseph Colvin May 4, 1993 I suggest we meet at the management level in the very near future to discuss how NUMARC intends to ensure that this generic issue is promptly resolved.
If NUMARC is not able to promptly resolve this matter, the NRC will be forced to take more direct action with the affected utilities.
Sincerely, MSI md by G
Jeless M. Taylor James M. Taylor Executive Director for Operations DISTRIBUTION Central File SPLB File JTaylor JScinto TMurley FMiraglia WRussell AThadani CMcCracken
- See pretious concurrences.
DD:
[lo'r FMi ley JScinto ay 4/g/93 4/ /93 4/;tv/93 4//
3 6
SPLB:DSSA Tec Ed.
SPLB:DSSA SPLB:DSSA T:NRR SWest;cf*
RSanders*
CMcCracken*
AThadani*
WRussell 4/13/93 4/14/93 4/14/93 4/14/93 4/[/93
[G:\\1trcolvi.ksw]
Y n = w w v. m 4
fiUCt. EAR MANAGEMENT AND RESOURCES COUNCIL
(
T776 Eye Street. N W.. Suite 300. Washington. DC 20006-3706 (202)872-1280 m
May 14,1993
- 31. Taylor.
Director Operations the Executive Director rttions 1:arRegulatory Commission n,DC 20555 Taylor:
is letter is in response to your May 4,1993, letter expressing concerns that ay be withdrawing direct participation in the NUMARC fire barrier testing and that utilities may not be sensitive to the importance of timely resolution of cerns with Thermo Lag fire barriers. I want to assure you that the industry ommitted to the satisfactory resolution of this issue. Utilities are incurring i O&M costs for the interim measures in place in response to NRC 2-01 and are every bit as anxious for the final resolution as the NRC.
ith regard to press reports of utilities withdrawing support, the current grand tigation did cause concern with direct utility participation in a near-term testing were planning to conduct in conjunction with TSI, Inc., the manufacturer of ag. These concerns were based upon advice from individual utility legal owever, the concerns have in no way reduced the financial support for the effort nor significantly delayed the development ofour overall test program.
sve scheduled a management level meeting, as you suggested, for June 3,1993, you of the scope and status ofourprogram. I am confident that you will find has been no lessening of efforts to bring this important issue to timely Sincerely, et $.kL Jo F.Colvin 1"
EDo 008917 ANRC j
lPDR
.