ML20138D192
| ML20138D192 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Peach Bottom  |
| Issue date: | 02/08/1993 |
| From: | Beck G PECO ENERGY CO., (FORMERLY PHILADELPHIA ELECTRIC |
| To: | NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM) |
| References | |
| RTR-NUREG-0737, RTR-NUREG-737 NUDOCS 9302120199 | |
| Download: ML20138D192 (2) | |
Text
_ _ _ _
=.- %
.PIIILADELPIIIA ELECTRIC COMPANY n-NUCLEAR GROUP HEADQUARTERS q
955-65 CHESTERBROOK BLVD.
. February 8, 1993 WAYNE, PA 19087 5691 Docket Nos. 50-277,
- (215) so-6000 50-278 License Nos. DPR-44
.DPR-56 NUCLEAR SE1YlCES DEPARIMENT U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission ATTN: Document Control Desk Washington, DC-20555 y
SUBJECT:
Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station, Units 2 and 3 Elimination of Annual Progress Report for Implementation of Control Room Enhancements Pursuant'to NUREG-0737, i
REFERENCES:
- 1) letter dated 2/26/86 from.S. L. Daltrof f.. (PECo)-
to D. R. Muller (NRC)
- 2) letter dated 6/30/89 from E.
P.
Fogarty-(PECo) to (NRC)
- 3) letter dated 2/15/90 from G. A.
Hunger (PECo) to NRC
- 4) letter dated 7/12/90 from G. A. Hunger to'dRC
- 5) letter dated 2/28/91 from G. J. Beck (PECo)-.to o
NRC
- 6) letter dated 2/28/92 from G. J. Beck to NRC
Dear Sir:
In accordance with the requirements of NUREG-0737, Supplement 1, Section 5, Reference--l-submitted.the-Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station (PBAPS), Units 2 and 3, Control' Room Design Review (CRDR) final-report.
The report identified human factor.
enhancements planned for PBAPS. -Areas requiring enhancement were.
- 1dentified on Human-Engineering Discrepsncy.(HED)' Assessments which were included in the report.
In Reference 1, Philadelphia Electric Company;(PECo) stated that we would koop the NRC. informed of the implementation status of the enhancements through the submittal of annual progress reports, the most recent being submitted 2/28/92 (Reference 6).
9302120199 930208-f 0'
., Q [g PDR ADOCK 05000277 3
p PDR
.a
e 4--
g%
U.
S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission February 8, 1993 Control. Room Enhancement Report Page 2 PBAPS Units 2 and 3 Because all Priority 1 HEDs (High Safety Significance), and the majority of Priority 2 HEDs (Low Safety. Significance).have been completed, PEco has concluded that the continued submittal of annual progress reports would provide no significant information to the NRC while creating an administrative ~ burden.
Therefore,-this letter is to inform you that-we will no longer be submitting an annual progress report for the implementation of control room enhancements as committed to in Reference 1.
The type of information previously provided in the annual progress reports will still be available for your inspection upon request.
Additionally, as discussed with the NRC Project Manager for PBAPS, it is expected that the status of the remaining open HED's will be updated at future NRC/PECo licensing activity meetings.
We will continue to address the remaining open HEDs via equipment modifications, equipment relocation, labelling changes.
etc.
If you have any questions concerning t'ae elimination of the annual progress reports, or require information concerning the remaining opera HEDs, please contact me.
Sincerely,
, Y sa
/
G. J<' heck, Manager Licensing Section cca T. T.-Martin, Administrator, Region I, USNRC J.
J. Lyash, USNRC Senior Resident Inspector, PBAPS I
i 1
- l