ML20133K752
| ML20133K752 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Comanche Peak  |
| Issue date: | 10/16/1985 |
| From: | Denise R NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV) |
| To: | Counsil W TEXAS UTILITIES ELECTRIC CO. (TU ELECTRIC) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20133K755 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8510220286 | |
| Download: ML20133K752 (2) | |
See also: IR 05000445/1984034
Text
'
.
In Reply Refer To:
Dockets: 50-445/84-34
00T 161985
50-446/84-13
Texas Utilities Generating Company-
ATTN: Mr. W. G. Counsil
Executive Vice President
I
400 North Olive, L.B. 81
Dallas, Texas 75201
Gentlemen:
We have reviewed your letter of January 29, 1985, in response to our letter and
Notice of Violation dated December 31, 1984. Your reply adequately addressed
l
the specific concerns raised regarding-Item A.
We have reviewed the procedure
changes delineated in your response and the requirements for sway strut and
snubber installation and find them acceptable. The generic aspects of the
findings were not adequately addressed in your response to our Notice of
'
Violation Item A, as required by 10 CFR 2.201; however, we understand that the
generic' aspects of sway strut and snubber installation will be addressed by the
Comanche Peak Response Team (CPRT) Program Plan.
With respect to Item B, we find that you have taken adequate corrective action
to assure reporting items to the NRC as required by 10 CFR 50.55(e). We will
review the implementation of your corrective actions for Item B during a-
future inspection to determine that full compliance has been achieved. and will
be maintained.
However, with regard to Item B.-1, specifically, additional information is
required because at the time the Notice of Violation was written, the associated
1
nonconformance report (NCR) had been closed without reference made to action
being taken to determine how the apparent falsification of records had occurred
-
and to determine if this apparent falsification was an isolated occurrence.
Your additional response should discuss the following matters:
Basis' for the statement that the apparent falsification was determined to
be an isolated instance
l
basis for the statement that the inspection had, in fact, been performed
by another inspector;
[
i
basis for the statement that corrective measures were taken to prevent
j
recurrence; and
j
!
NRR /" h . M
RPB2/
RPB^
DMHu rnc
- gb
DRHu er
RPDe i
VNoonan I
1/t,/85
4/th85
10Ab /85
0 / 4 /85
g , fi3p/a
1
8510220286 851016
ADOCK 05000445
G
8
,
'
.
Texas Utilities Generating Station
2
measures completed or planned to ensure this apparent falsification was
not an attempt to deliberately mislead.
Please provide the additional information requested regarding the apparent
falsification of records within 30 days of the date of this letter.
Further, with regard to your response to the Notice of Violation, Item B.2,
the fact the design oversight (revision to instrument ranges and setpoints)
would likely be detected during subsequent testing or operations, does not
alter the reporting requirements of 10 CFR 50.55(e).
Sincerely,
.gs-grd signed Br.
D. R. KUNIEII'*
R. P. Denise, Director
Division of Reactor Safety
ar.d Projects
cc:
Texas Utilities Electric Company
ATTN:
J. W. Beck, Manage ,
Licensing
Skyway Tower
400 Nort? Olive Street
Lock Box 81
Dallas, Texas
75201
Texas Radiation Control Program Director
bcc to DMB (IE01)
bec distrib. by RIV:
- RPB
- MIS System
- RRI-0PS
- RSTS Operator
- RRI-CONST
- R&SPB
- T. F. Westerman, CPTG
R. Denise, D/DRSP
V. Noonan, NRR
R. Martin, RA
S. Treby, ELD
Juanita Ellis, Pres.- CASE
- RIV File
Renea Hicks, A/ Atty General, EP Div.-TX
- D. Weiss, LFMB (AR-2015)
RSB