ML20082B746

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Notifies That Design Effort for Plant Essentially Completed & Some Unique Physical Installation Drawings for Unit 2 Still in Progress.Fsar & SER (NUREG-0519) Requirements Will Be Met
ML20082B746
Person / Time
Site: LaSalle  Constellation icon.png
Issue date: 11/15/1983
From: Reed C
COMMONWEALTH EDISON CO.
To: Harold Denton
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
RTR-NUREG-0519, RTR-NUREG-519 83115, NUDOCS 8311210311
Download: ML20082B746 (1)


Text

h Commonwealth Edison

[ { ) one First Nationit Pitzt. Chictgo !!hnois v Address Reply to: Post Othee Box 767 Chicago, Illinois 60690 November 15, 1983 Mr. Harold R. Denton Office of Nuclear Reactor. Regulation U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555

References:

1) Commonwealth Edison Letter of January 4, 1982 from C. Reed to H. R. Denton on LaSalle County Station Design Control Practices.
2) Commonwealth Edison Letter of January 15, 1982 from C. Reed to H. R. Denton on the same subject.

Dear Mr. Denton:

In the Reference No. 1 letter, I provided a summary of the significant features of the design contrnl practices utilized on the LaSalle County Station project. It highlighted not only Edison's design control procedures and practices, but also those of the principal Architect Engineer (Sargent & Lundy) and the NSSS vendor (General Electric) and supportive technical consultants (Quadrex and Reactor Controls, Inc.). The contributory role of quality assurance audits and enroute independent engineering reviews were also described. Managerial responsibilities were discussed and statements from contractor's managers responsible for the LaSalle Station were appended to my letter.

The Reference No. 2 letter was provided to identify the officially docketed references in which Edison's design requirements for LaSalle Station could be found. At the time this summary was written the design effort for LaSalle was essentially completed; some unique physical installation drawings were still in work for Unit #2, but the design process and the managerial controls were clearly established and thoroughly-practiced at that time.

The intent of the referenced submittals was to describe the design control practices for LaSalle Station. These practices were applicable to both LaSalle Unit #1 and LaSalle Unit #2. No significant-design control change has been made since that time. Therefore the statement made at that time is confirmed and is currently applicable:."the Company believes LaSalle county Station has been designed and constructed in.

a way that will assure its' meeting the requirements of the Final Safety Analysis Report (FSAR) and the Safety Evaluation Report (SER) (NUREG-0519-and Supplements)".

Sincerely, C-n~,W %

Cordell Reed Vice-President-GRC:mep:0082p .

}

8311210311 831115 PDR ADOCK 05000373 ,fi0 l P PDR , ,

l

.