ML20062N657
| ML20062N657 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Catawba  |
| Issue date: | 01/06/1994 |
| From: | Rehn D DUKE POWER CO. |
| To: | NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM) |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9401190009 | |
| Download: ML20062N657 (2) | |
Text
_
W' Duke Mer Company '
& L Rtus ^
Cataw+a Nuclear Genemtion Departmtnt Vtcc hesiderd.
4800QmcurdRoad.
(803 83132050!hce
,. York SC29743 (803)R31-342G Tax y
DUKEPOWER January 6, 1994 i
U.
S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission
.r' ATTN:
Document Control Desk Washington, D. C.
20555 i
Subject:
Catawba Nuclear Station Dockets Nos. 50-413 and 50-414 Supplemental Response Notice of Violation No. 50-413, 414/93-26 Attached is supplemental information concerning our Reply to Notice of Violation 50-413, 414/93-26.
In' a telephone conversation on December 15, 1993, between M.
Lesser of your i
staff and Z.
- Taylor, Catawba Nuclear Station agreed to supplement the response regarding Catawba's policy. for 1
scheduling work activities on an operable train of- 'saf ety.
related equipment while the opposite train is inoperable, provided the work does not effect operability.
This verbal agreement was documented in your letter dated December -16, 1993.
If there are any additional concerns or. questions regarding this matter, please feel free to contact Zach Taylor at (803) 831-3212.
Very truly yours,
'l D.
L.
Rehn
\\ KEN:SUP#293.26 xc:
S.
D.
Ebneter
[
Regional Administrator, Region II R.
E. Martin, NRR R.
J.
Freudenberger Senior Resident Inapector i
9401190009 940106 3
/ hb j
/p ADOCK 0500 3
gDR mwyyy,,
e
~
e
~
DUKE POWER COMPANY CATAWBA NUCLEAR STATION SUPPLEMENTAL RESPONSE TO VIOLATION 413,414/93-26-02 WORK SCHEDULING PHILOSOPHY It would-be under very unusual circumstances that tasks would be scheduled on the operable train of a system while.Its redundant l
train is inoperable. Catawba's Work Control group typically rotates l
"same-train" tasks on a weekly basis when these trains are f
scheduled to be removed from service.
In other words, weeks-are categorized by "A
Train",
"B Train", and "No Train" -(Example:
Auxiliary Feedwater Turbine-Driven Pump related tasks; usually only:
a iew days at the end of an "A" or "B" train week).
- However, while Technical Specifications requires a particular system's train to be operable as well as - its related support equipment available of performing their ~ f unctions, it does not prevent the removal f rom service of unrelated same train equipment.
In this case, work was permitted in cabinets which contained components associated with various systems (cabinet components are same train).
For example, it is possible that the Waste Liquid System (WL)
"A Train" components might share a common electrical cabinet with the operable Control Room Ventilation System _(VC)
"A Train" components, along with components from several other "A.
Train" systems.
The scheduling of work on WL System "A
Train" equipment not required for operability in the common electrical cabinet is permissible, provided it does not impact VC "A Train" operability.
It is felt that the corrective actions outlined in the initial response relative to proper self-checking / independent verification will avoid recurrence, as opposed to additional restrictions on the scheduling of work activities.
1