ML20198F911
| ML20198F911 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 08/07/1997 |
| From: | Richards S NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned) |
| To: | Reda R GENERAL ELECTRIC CO. |
| References | |
| REF-QA-99900003 99900003-97-01, 99900003-97-1, NUDOCS 9708130189 | |
| Download: ML20198F911 (1) | |
Text
~
aupa i, w Mr. Ralph J. Reda, Manager Fuels and facility Licensing General Electric Nuclear Energy P.O. Box 780 Wilmington, NC 28402-0780-
SUBJECT:
-GENERAL ELECTRIC NUCLEAR ENERGY JUNE 18, 1997, REPLY TO NRC NOTICE OF NONCONFORMANCE (NRC INSPECTION REPORT NO. 99900003/97-01)
Dear Mr. Kipp:
We have reviewed General Electric's (GE's) June 18, 1997, letter in response to our May 20, 1997, Notice of Nonconformance.
In-the response to nonconformance 99900003/97-01-01, GE addressed steps taken to inform licensee design organizations of the need to consider the fuel cladding plastic strain limits and the associated mechanical overpower (M0P) limits in addition to the minimum critical power ratio limits when considering rod block monitor (RBM) operability for potential rod withdrawal error (RWE) events.
Specifically, GE has (1) informed its customers by letter about the M0P/RBM issue, (2) performed plant and cycle-specific analysis to assure that strain limits F
were not exceeded in applicable plants (e.g., Fermi, Hatch, Brunswick, and Duane Arnold) by the M0P/RBM issue, and (3) revised procedures (e.g., RWE technical design procedure for supplemental reload licensing reports) to improve communication with licensees. We consider the response to this nonconformance adequate.
Regarding nonconformance 99900003/97-01-02, concerning GE modifying and revising design factors without prescribed instructions and procedures, the letter stated that GE has revised technical design procedures to include, in part, additional guidance on design changes and documentation.
We consider the response to this nonconformance adequate.
4 Regarding nonconformance 99900003/97-01-03, in the letter of June 18, 1997, to the NRC, GE did not confirm whether GE would conduct followup internal audits to review specific design contrcl deficiencies identified by Detroit Edison Company in its 1992 and 1993 audits of GE.
Subsequently, in a letter of July 31, 1997, and later telephone discussion with the NRC, GE confirmed that it plans to audit its design control process by January 1998.
We consider the j
response to this nonconformance adequate, i
In accordance-with 10 CFR 2.790 of the NRC's " Rules of Practice," a copy of this letter will be placed in the NRC's Public Document Room (PDR).
]
1
/2-f3 LWstdhg
{
ORIGINAL SIGNED BY:
//
/)'
9708130189 970807 Stuart A. Richards, Chief PDR GA999 ENVGENE Special Inspection Branch 99900003 PDR Division of Inspection and Support Prognms Docket No. 99900003 Distribution:
120063 l,I(l(l(I,,,.
p //
LPhillips Central Files / Docket File No. 99900003 DOCUMENT NAME:
C:\\GAUTAM\\GE.RES To r:ceive a copy of this document, indicate in the boa: *C" = Copy without enclosures *E* = Copy with enclosures "N" = No copy
- See previous concurrence 0FFICE PSIB: DISP PSIB: DISP PSIB: DISP lQ-l NAME ASGautam:smp*
GCCwalina*
SARichards* % % F' DATE 08/05/97 08/05/97 08/0]/97 0FFICIAL RECORD COPY a,
4 -
gqq Cf'C4 9 0000 b M M MKEn mea' =