ML20199C891
| ML20199C891 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Clinton  |
| Issue date: | 06/13/1986 |
| From: | Paperiello C NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| To: | Gerstner W ILLINOIS POWER CO. |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8606180303 | |
| Download: ML20199C891 (3) | |
Text
{
UN 1319:;g Docket No. 50-461 Illinois Power Company ATTN: Mr. W. C. Gerstner Executive Vice President 500 South 27th Street Decatur, IL 62525 Gentlemen:
This letter is to document our receipt of your June 6,1986 letter from Mr. F. A. Spangenberg to Mr. James G. Keppler, regarding the Preoperational Integrated Leak Rate Test at.Clinton Power Station. During our review of this response, we find we need further information. These informational needs are identified below. Your prompt response to these questions which were discussed with Mr. Spangenberg by phone on June 11, 1986, is necessary for our timely review of these issues and our subsequent decision as to the acceptability of your January 1986 Preoperational Integrated Leak Rate Test.
The following questions address specific statements in your June 6,1986 letter:
1.
When did NSED implement their control over the installation and removal of attachments to the containment liner?
2.
When did NSED begin reviewing Baldwin Associates work on the liner?
3.
When did NSED begin reviewing all non-Baldwin work on the liner?
4.
When did the Vice President begin providing written approval for all j
liner work?
i l
5.
Access control to containment:
Please specify any time periods when access control has not been a.
maintained.
b.
Were work activities inside containment controlled by the access control system; if not, how were they controlled?
I
?
y ADO K O h1 p
n S
M/
[
-Illinois Power Company 2
ijyN 3 313 c.
Please provide an outline of what your containment access control consists of following the Preoperational Type A ILRT. Specifically:
(1) Were people's names written down for accountability only?
(2) Was access limited to people responsible for work in containment?
(3) Were people ever prevented from entering containment because they had no work responsibility in containment?
(4) Have access records been maintained?
d.
What is the present entry and egress rate from containment (people / hour)? What was the rate for the two months following completion of the CILRT, if known?
6.
For Items 1 through 5.c(4) above, please answer the following as applicable:
a.
Has there been any' lapse in these controls?
b.
Are all the controls still in effect?
c.
Has there been an audit of the controls' effectiveness? If so, please provide the result of the audit (s).
7.
How do you define major and minor liner modifications (i.e., what size hole is considered major)?
8.
If the containment was complete and ready for ope _rati_on at the time
~
of the CILRT why was work on the containment liner cont'inued following completion of the. CILRT?
The following questions address areas which we intended you to address in your response, but which were not:
i 1.
Of the 30 areas of work on the liner identified by the inspector in Inspection Report No. 50-461/85060(DRS), you were unable to document six of these areas. Please supply documentation for these areas or L
explain your lack of accountability.
2.
How many examples of hanger removal via cutting torch have been identified since the ILRT7 i.
L i
Illinois Power Company 3
jyN 131956 3.
What was the scope of the five safety related travelers issued for work on the containment liner?
We will gladly discuss any questions you may have concerning this matter.
Sincerely,
~
Carl J. Pap iello, Director Division of Reactor Safety cc: DCS/RSB (RIDS)
Licensing Fee Management Branch Resident Inspector, RIII Richard Hubbard Gary N. Wright, Manager
~ Nuclear Facility Safety Jean Foy,' Prairie Alliance Mark Jason, Assistant Attorney General, Environmental Control Division H. S. Taylor, Quality Assurance Division David Rosenblatt, Office of Consumer Services III I
R R I RII g
p are7rr Ring P
lips Knop ehr' Pa -
ello G 13 f&
i..
. _ _