ML20138A157
| ML20138A157 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Fermi  |
| Issue date: | 09/05/1985 |
| From: | Jens W DETROIT EDISON CO. |
| To: | James Keppler NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| References | |
| RG-LG-85-0015, RG-LG-85-15, NUDOCS 8510080473 | |
| Download: ML20138A157 (6) | |
Text
.
c-Y i
- 'l E..,
- ();
't[
f i
Detroit y,
Edison n~ r -
September 5, 1985 RC-LG-85-0015
!!r. James G. Kcppler Regional Administrator Pac, ion III U. S.
!!uclear Regulatory Commission 799 Roosevelt Road Glen Ellyn, Illinois 60137
Dear fir. Keppler:
Reference:
Ferni 2
!!RC Doci:et !!o. 50-341 flRC License I:o. tiPF-4.3
Subject:
Detroit Edison Response Inspection Herort 50-9U1/360;1 This letter responds to four of the proJran, wenknesses described i n your Inspection Report !!o. 50-S41/85031.
A response to the re:cainin; procram weaknesses 1: 111 be provided by Septe;nber 16, 1985, tu, agreed during c telephone conversation between lir.
R.
Land sman of your office nnd l'r.
J.
Conan of Detroit Edison, i!e trust this letter ratisfactorily respond 5 to the itecknesses identified in the inspection report.
If you have questions re;,arding this matter, please contact 11r. Joseph Conen, (313) 586-5083.
Sincerely, l
ec:
P. 11. Byron G.
C. F r i r. h t U:i N R C, Document Control Dcch Uashinr, ton, D.C.
20555 I
B520000473 850905 DR O
ADOCK 05000343
$EP 1 a 1885 PDR
/
o
/
THE DETROIT EDIS0!! COMPANY FER!!I 2 NUCLEAR OPERATIONS ORGAtlIZATIOfi RESPO!1SE TO NRC INSPECTIO!! REPORT No. 50-341/85031 DOCKET NO. 50-341 LICEllSE NO. NPF-43 INSPECTIoll AT:
FERMI 2, NEWPORT, MICHIGAN INSPECTI0ll C0!! DUCTED:
JUNE 17 THROUGH 21, 1985 t
w... -
RESPONSE TO NRC INSPECTION REPORT N0. 50-341/65031 Weakness 85091A Licensee does not maintain the out-of-specification log for a system outage.
Resoonse Procedure 21.000.18, "Out-of-Specificationc Log," is currently under revision.
Section 5.6 of this procedure is being revised to formally require a system to be entered in the Out-of-Specification Log (OSL) when a system outage is declared.
After the system is declared to be out of the system i
outage, any item which has not been returned to operability will be documented in the OSL.
It should be noted that even though Section 5.6 of this procedure has not required documentation of system outages in the OSL, this documentation has been provided in the past.
l l
r i
l i
1 w
- _ = _
3 l
l r
RESPO!!SE TO !!RC INSPECTIO!! REPORT fl0. 50-341/85031 Weakness 85031B Independent verification is excluded if the expected dose would exceed 100 mrem.
Resoonse As noted in Paragraph 3 of flRC Inspection Report 50-341/85031, a temporary procedure change addressing this concern was l
expeditiously issued.
This change, which became permanent with i
Revision 2 of Procedure 12.000.43 on July 3, 1985, provides for evaluation of the alternate methods of independent verification for applicability to situations where independent verification l
would result in estimated personnel exposure in excess of 0.1 man-rem.
i i
l i
I i
1 l
E I
l l
2
[
l i
.r..'
RESPONSE TO NRC INSPECTION REPORT 50-341/85031 Weaknens 86011D Development of a maintenance work package may require an excessive amount of time to support urgent work.
Resoonst Coverage is provided around the clock to process urgent work promptly.
When urgent handling is required, the work request is presented directly to the Maintenance Technical Coordinator (MTC) for package preparation.
The MTC works these items ahead of lower priority work.
A pink Work Order Processing and Status / Inventory (WOPPSI) Sheet and a QA priority slip are then used to highlight the package for expedited review.
After review is completed, the priority work is automatically added to the Authorized Work List.
This process allows urgent work to be expedited from the time it is identified until it is completed.
In addition, generic work packages are prepared for work of a recurring nature.
This further streamlines the preparation and review of work packages for urgent work of this nature.
3
RESPONSE TO NRC INSPECTION REPORT No. 50-341/85031 Weakness 85011G Establishing communications during the performance of surveillance testing is sometimes inconvenient.
Renoonse As acknowledged in Paragraph 5 of HRC Inspection Report 50-341/85031, good communication was found to be a strong point of the surveillance program, even though it was considered inconvenient to establish the communications in some areas.
As the surveillance program evolves, steps are being taken to identify and correct problems encountered when establishing communications between the individuals performing the surveillances.
For example, Surveillance 44.030.69, one of the surveillances observed by the NRC, requires that communications be established between relay room panels, the control room, and the testability cabinets on the fourth floor of the auxiliary building.
The need for permanent communications at the testability cabinets was identified and Engineering Evaluation Request (EER)85-027 was generated on January 15, 1985 documenting this situation.
Since that time, Engineering Design Package EDP-1670 has been issued to provide the requested communications.
4