ML20151T392

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Ack Receipt of Informing NRC of Steps Taken to Correct Violations Noted in Insp Repts 50-454/88-07 & 50-455/88-07.Violation 1.B Withdrawn Based on Addl Info
ML20151T392
Person / Time
Site: Byron  Constellation icon.png
Issue date: 08/08/1988
From: Forney W
NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III)
To: Reed C
COMMONWEALTH EDISON CO.
Shared Package
ML20151T396 List:
References
NUDOCS 8808160346
Download: ML20151T392 (2)


See also: IR 05000454/1988007

Text

r.

l*J

p o

'

6- -.

AUB 4 1999

Docket No. 50-454

Docket No. 50-455

Cornronwealth Edison Company

ATTN: Mr. Cordell Reed

Senior Vice President

Post Office Box 767

Chicago, IL 60690

Gentlemen:

Thank you for your letter dated July 5,1988, informing us of the steps you

have taken to correct the violations which we brought to your attention in our

letter dated June 1, 1988 (Report Nos. 454/88007(DRP);455/88007(DRP)). We

will examine the effectiveness of your corrective actions during a future

inspection.

Your letter stated that contrary to violation statement 1.8, safety valves

1/2RYO30A/B do not provide overpressure protection for PORV accumulators

1/2RY32MA/B, but that the accumulators have been desi;'ied for the maximum

overpressure :endition that could occur as the result of a design basis

accident inside containment. Therefore, the need for the safety valves to

protect the accumulators is obviated.

.

The NRC staff has reviewed the supplemental information which you have

provided(DesignSpecificationforPORVAccumulators,DS-IA-01-BB)andSection

III, Article ND-7110 of the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code (Code),1974

edition, and agrees with your position that the PORV accumulators are designed  ;

in accordance with the overpressure protection requirements of the Code. i

Based on this infomation, we are withdrawing violation 1.B.

With regard to violation 2, it was never the NRC's contention that the piping  ;

upstream of check valves 1RY085A/B and 1RY086A/B had not actually been

depressurized when the check valves were tested, but that the test procedure .

was inadequately written. The test procedure did not require that a system

valve lineup be perfomed as a prerequisite, nor were any positive

verifications of the positions of valves 1RYO92A/B made in the body of the test

,

procedure.

I

,

g[O

\\ l

~n

8800160346 000008

PDR ADOCK 0b000454

PNU I

0

4

" .

. .

'

. .

Comonwealth Edison Co. -2- AUG I NEI

The fiRC is concerned with the adequacy and completeness of your

post-modification test procedures, not with the ability of your test engineers

to successfully test a component or system.

We will gladly discuss any questions you have concerning this inspection.

Sincerely,

W. L. Forney, Chief,

Reactor Projects Branch 1

Enclosure: Ceco ltr dtd 7/5/88

cc w/o enclosure:

T. Mairan, Vice President,

PWR Operations

H. Bliss, fiuclear Licensing

Manager

R. Pleniewicz, Station Manager

Resident Inspector, RIII Byron

cc w/ enclosure:

DCD/DCB (RIDS)

Licensing Fee Management Branch

Resident Inspector, RIII Braidwood

L. 01shan,f1RR PM

J. McCaffrey, Chief, Public

Utilities Division

H. Taylor, Quality Assurance

Divisien

D. Cassel, Jr. , Esq.

Diane Chavez, DAARE/ SAFE

Richard Hubbard

III RIII RIII Rill

A htJ ./ W4(L.Q.n

mBrochman/bs Vansickle linds Forney

r/r/M S/F/U g.b 96 g/ >/11

_ _ - _ _