ML20203E289
| ML20203E289 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 10/23/1997 |
| From: | Thomas K NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned) |
| To: | NRC |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9712170001 | |
| Download: ML20203E289 (5) | |
Text
bEM PM ?pr u. n* o a,
p* ** cu
,y
- UNITED STATES j
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
,p waswiwotow. o.c. souwoot
\\{e'...+,/
October 23, 1997 MEMORANDUM T0:
Project Managers Project Directo W (YN_rJThANM FROM:
Kristine M. Thomas, Project Manager Project Directorate IV 2 Division of Reactor Projects III/lV THRU:
Frederick D. Hebdon. Project Dir ctor Project Directorate 11 3 addh.O.N, DivisionofReactorProjectsIliIV V
SUBJECT:
CLOSE0VT OF TACS FOR OCTOBER 9. 1996 REQUEST FOR INFORMATION PURSUANT TO 10 CFR 50.54(f) REGARDING ADEOUACY AND AVAILABILITY OF DESIGN BASES INFORMATION On October 9. 1996, the Executive Director for Operations requested information pursuant to 10 CFR 50.54(f) from operating plants (see attachment for list of plants) regarding the adequacy and availability of design bases information.
The purpose of the request was to provide the NRC added confidence and assurance that operating plants were being operated and maintained within the design bases and any deviations were reconciled in a timely manner.
The following information was requested within 120 days of receipt of the request:
1.
Description of engineering design and configuration control processes, including those that implement 10 CFR 50.59, 10 CFR 50.71(e), and Appendix B to 10 CFR Part 50; 2.
Rationale for concluding that design bases requirements are translated into operating, maintenance, and testing procedures:
3.
Rationale for concluding that system, structure, and component configuration and performance are consistent with the design bases; 4
Processes for identification of problems and implementation of corrective actions, including actions to determine the extent of problems, action to prevent recurrence, and reporting to NRC: and 5.
The overall effectiveness of current processes and programs in concluding that the configuration of the plant (s) is consistent with the design bases.
[. L{ 1 PTsc l<un q /
}Q}
r (p)n ' x
,, ;,n 9712170001 971023 PDR ORG NRRA
h 2
l l
in responding to items 1 through 5. licensees were requested to indicate-whether they had undertaken any design review or reconstitution programs, and i
if not. a rationale for not implementing such d program.
If design review or reconstitution programs had been completed or were being conducted. licensees were asked to provide 3 description of the review programs including identification of the systems. structures. and components (SSCs). and plant-level design attributes (e.g., seismic, high energy line break, moderate-energy line break).
The description was to include how the program ensures the correctness and accessibility of the design bases information for the plant and that th? design bases remains current.
If the program was being conducted but was not complete. licensees were to provide an implementation-schedule for SSCs and plant-level design attribute reviews, the expected a
completion date, and method of SSC prioritization used for the review.
in February 1997, 120 day resporses were submitted by the licensees for the
. operating plants listed in the attachmer.t. Acknowledgement letters were sent by the Project Managers to the licensees, and the licensee's submittals were reviewed by the applicable regional and NkR staff.
On July 24,1997. SECY 97160 was issued to inform the Commission of the results of the staff's review of the licensee responses to the 10 CFR 50.54(f) request and planned follow up activities.
The staff informed the Commission that for instances where concerns remained regarding a licensee's design performance, focused inspections, to review ) articular aspects of a licensee's design control programs or processes, would >e tracked through the regional inspection planning systems and implemented by regional personnel.
On September 29, 1997, it was determined that the Commission did not have any comments regarding the staff's plans delineated in SECY 97 160 for resolving
^
this issue.
Since NRR effort in-the review of the submittals is complete, and plant specific followup activities are being performed and tracked by the ap)licable regions, the plant specific TACs for this issJe can be closed.
As sucl. this memorandum serves as the means to close out the TACs and has been placed on the docket for the plants listed on the attachment.
Project Managers should use the date of this memorandum and the accession number to close the plant specific TAC on the Project Manager Report.
Attachment:
List of Plants t
o L
L
1 Attac.hment '
LIST OF PLANTS i
)
AN01 50 313.-
AN02 50 368 Beaver Valley 1 50 334.
i
' Beaver Valley 2 50 412 Big Rock Point 50 155-l Braidwood 1 50 456 Braidwood 2-50 457 Browns Ferry 1 50 259 Browns Ferry 2 50 260 Browns Ferry 3' 50 29f Brunswick 1 50 325 i
Brunswick 2 50 324 Byron 1 50 454 Byron'2 50 455 i
Callaway 50 483 Calvert Cliffs 1 50 317 i
Celvert Cliffs 2
~50 318
- Catawta 1 50 413 Catasta 2 50 414 Clinton 50 461 l
Comanche Peak 1
-50 445
-l Comanche Peak 2 50 446 Cooper 50 298 Crystal River 50 302
- DC Cook 1 50 315 DC Cook 2 50 316
- Davis Besse 50 346 Diablo Canyon.1 50 275 Diablo-Canyon 2 50 323
~
Dresden 2 50 237 Dresden 3 50 249 Duane Arnold 50-331 Farley 1 50-348 Farley 2 50 364 i
- Fermi 2 50 341
~ Fitzpatrick 50-333 Fort Calhoun 50 285 i
l Ginna 50 244 Grand Gulf 50 416 Haddam Neck 50-213 Harris 1-50 400 Hatch 1 50-321
. Hatch 2_
50-366 Hope Creek 50 354
. Indian Point 2-50 147 Indian Point 3 50 286-Kewaunee 50-305 LaSalle 1 50 373 LaSalle 2' 50 374
- Limer_ick 1-50 352 v
i y
- -,.-,.--..,..-...._,,u.-...-
}
)
2 i
Limerick 2 50 353
. Maine Yankee,
50 309-McGuire 1
-50 369 i
McGuire 2 50 370
-Monticello.
- 50 263 Nine Mile 1 50-220
+
Nire Mile 21 50 410 North Anna 1:
50 338 i
North Anna 2 50e339 Oconee 1-50 269
-Oconee 2 50 270 a
econee 3..
-50 287 l
Oyster Creek-50 219 i
Palisades-Palo Verde 1-50-255 50 528 Palo Verde 2 50 529
.Palo Verde 3 50 530
-Peach Bottom-2 50 277 Peach Bottom 3' 50 278-Per 50 440
~!
4 Pil im' 50 293
-Poi t Beach:1 50 266-
. Point Beach 2 50 301 Prairie Island 1 50 282 Prairie Island 2 50 306 Ouad Cities 1 50-254' t
50 265 Quad Cities 2
- 50 458 l
e River Bend-Robinson 2 50 261 Salem 1 50-272 Salem 2-50 311 San Onofre 2 50 361 San Onofre 3 '
50 362 Seabrook 50 443 Sequoyah 1-50 327 Sequoyah 2 50 328
. South Texas 1 50 498 South Texas 2 50-499
.St. Lucie 1 50 355 l
St.-Lucie 2-50 389
-~ Summer 50a395 Surry 1-50 280 Surry 2=
50 281 Susquehanna 1 50 387
- Susquehanna 2 50 388 TMI.-
-50 289 Turkey Point 3-50 250 r
Turkey Point 4 150 251 Vermont Yankee-50 271 Vogtle l' 50 424
-, _. - - - - ~ _.. - _
.._,m.--
3 Vogtle 2 50 425 Waterford 50 382 Watts Bar 50-390 WNP 2 50 397 Wolf Creek 50 482 Zion 1 50 295 Zion 2 50 304 1
__,