ML20206S889
| ML20206S889 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Comanche Peak  |
| Issue date: | 09/17/1986 |
| From: | Johnson E NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV) |
| To: | Counsil W TEXAS UTILITIES ELECTRIC CO. (TU ELECTRIC) |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8609230019 | |
| Download: ML20206S889 (2) | |
See also: IR 05000445/1985016
Text
-.
-
-
...,
SEP ll N
In Reply Refer To:
Dockets:
50-445/85-16
50-446/85-13
Texas Utilities Generating Company
ATTN: Mr. W. G. Counsil
Executive Vice President
400 North Olive, L.B. 81
Dallas, Texas 75201
Gentlemen:
Thank you for your letters dated June 16, 1986, and September 5, 1986, in
response to our letters dated April 4,1986, and August 12, 1986. We have no
further questions at this time and will review your corrective action during a
future inspection.
Sincerely,
c .inni signed BY.
E. H. Johnson.,
E. H. Johnson, Director
Division of Reactor Safety
and Projects
cc:
Texas Utilities Electric. Company
,
l
ATTN:
G. S. Keeley, Manager
l
Licensing
'
Skyway Tower
400 North Olive Street
Lock Box 81
Dallas, Texas
75201
Juanita Ellis
President - CASE
1426 South Polk Street
Dallas, Texas 75224
RIV: CPG
RSB
DRSPTQi
c/// /86
y /ff/86
Epl/p/86
Johnson
IBar s:gb
TFWesterman
/EO/
8609230019 860917
1\\
ADOCK 05000445
G
_ . . ,
..
. - . . .
- - . . - -
V
'
.; . .
Texas Utilities Generating Company
2
Renea Hicks
Assistant Attorney General
Environmental Protection Division
P. O. Box 12548
Administrative Judge Peter Elech
U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Washington, D. C.
20555
Elizabeth B. Johnson
Administrative Judge
Oak Ridge National Laboratory
P. 0. Box X, Building 3500
Oak Ridge. Tennessee 37830
Dr. Kenneth A. McCollom
1107 West Knapp
Stillwater, Oklahoma 74075
Dr. Walter H. Jordan
881 Outer Drive
Oak Ridge, Tennessee 37830
Anthony Roisman, Esq.
Executive Director
Trial Lawyers for Public Justice
2000 P. Street, N.W., Suite 611
Washington, D. C. 20036
Texas Radiation Control Program Director
bec to DMB (IE01)
bec distrib by RIV:
- RFB
- MIS System
- RRI-OPS
- RSTS Operator
- RRi-CONST
- R&SPB
- T. F. Westerman, RSB
DRSP
V. Noonan, NRR
R. Martin, RA
S. Treby, ELD
- RSB
.
- RIV File
J. Taylor, IE
- D. Weiss,LFMB(AR-2015)
J. Konklin, IE
'
i
- I. Barr.es, CPTG
- w/766
.
_ , _ . - . . . . _ , -
_ _ , _ . _ _ , _ _ , - - . , , . _ _ _ , . . . _ - . , _ , , - _ , . .
- . . _ . - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ . _ _ _ _ - _ . _ - _ . _ - - . , _ - . _ - - - - _ _ - - -
5 '86 16:18
LICENSE TUGCO
PAGE.02
. <.
,
i
i
0
Log # TXX-4992
File # 10130
IR 85-16
o
85 13
TEXAS UTILITIES GENERATING COMPANY
7
'
EKYW AY TOWER . 400 MoaTN 01JVB STREET. L.B. 91. DAIJ,,AS. TRE.As 7s3o1
September 5, 1986
_:-
-
T m@ W :W W W
a===
'
'
'
Mr. Eric H. Johnson, Director
-
Division of Reactor Safety and Projects
i.
1
U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
j
611 Ryan Plaza Drive, Suite 1000
Arlington, TX 76012
'
i
SUBJECT: COMANCHE PEAK S' TEAM ELECTRIC STATION (CPSES)
,
DOCKET NOS. 50-445 AND 50-446
'
!
RESPONSE TO NRC NOTICE OF VIOLATION
e
f
l
INSPECTION REPORT NOS.: 50-445/85-16 AND 50-446/85-13
,
Dear Mr. Johnson:
We have reviewed your letter of August 12, 1986 and have provided the
additional information you requested regarding Notice of Violation
445/8516-V-03(ItemA)intheattachmenttothisletter. We requested and
received a two week extension in providing this information in a phone
discussion with Mr. I. Barnes on September 2, 1986.
You also requested that we confirm that all references .to training sessions,
meetings, and discussions are appropriately documented and available for
audit. Our responses have indicated when these items are formally documented.
In those cases where we have not indicated formal documentation, such as
l
meetings and discussions, key personnel are available to confirm that these
meetings and discussions took place as stated. We consider that training
sessions should be documented and the confirming documents are available for
'
your review.
We believe that our approach is consistent with 20CFR50 Appendix B and meets
l
all applicable regulations.
l
Very truly yours,
-
.
W. G. Counsil
'
JWA/amb
,
Attachments
@]j
'
.
" N 'H# E3 7 h
c-NRCRegionIV(0+1 copy)
~
Director, Inspection & Enforcement (15 copies)
U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
'
Washington, D.C.
20555
Mr. V.S. Noonan
Mr. D.L. Kolley
[C
/
.
.. ._
-.
.. .
.
-
-
.
_
'
a asvraron or ruxaa t/vitriiss mLECTRIC COMPANT
.
5 '86 16:19
LICENSE TUGCO
PAGE.03
,
,
)
Additional Information
to
NOV 445/8516-V-08
g
1.
RC Concern
-
... [Y]our response failed to provide any action taken with respect to
"
the failure of tie design review process to identify the technical
inadequacy of Design Change Authorization 13,349."
Response
A. corrective Action IAkta add Results Achieved
As stated in our original response, the DCA was re-reviewed and
additional calculations were done to show that the design change was
acceptable. This re-review of the DCA was performed in accordance with
project procedures which insure that the design change receives the
same design control measures as those applicable to the original
design.
B. Action la Prevent Recurrence
As stated in the response to Concern No. 2, we believe the instance
noted in this Violation is an isolated occurance. However, the
engineering personnel involved in the review and processing of DCA
13349 will be counseled regarding the applicable design control
measures.
In the event that the engineering review delineated in Part B of the
response to Concern No. 2 determines this violation is widespread,
additional corrective action will be formulated.
, PAG
b4
S '86 16:19
LICENSE TUGC0
i
,
.
.
.s
~
-
9
.
,
,
,
Additional Infofwaticn
- l
' ' '
5
l
'
-
1
!
'a
.'
to
-
s
'J
N3V 445/8515-V OS
.
i
-
.,
e
,
-
,
,
i
4
2.
MG Concarn
'
y
s
3
- r
"...,[W]edonotconsiderthatreliancesolelyonpersonnIi1 discussion's
'
providas and adequate basis for determining that the irientified use cf a
'
'
grouted Richmond Insert was a single case. Accordingly, please describe
'
made from discussions with aken, which will substantiate the ccnclusions
those actions, planced or t
,
perstennel . "-
'
'
,
.
,
Reseense
i
A. Corrective Action Ighgfl And Besults &c.bfered
In our previous response, the cbnclusio.n this issue "is not generic"
was based upon extensive discussions with txperienced engineering
personnel who have been involved in the structural design of CPSES fc-
several years. The calculat8ons noted previously have confirmed the
i
installation is acceptable.
'
'
,
'
8. Action in Frevent Racurranra
/l
1 ,
H
'
'
s>
To provide additional assurance tte int.tance,roted in the Violation was
'-
an isolated case, an engineering review will t,e conducted involving all
i
.
design changes originated within the civil engineering disciplinet ')
f
!
This review will provide an assessment of 'the review process, verify *
the technical adequacy of information provided by the originator of the
,
design change, and support our position the instance cited was
,1
isolated.
This review is scheduled for comoletion by Novamber 7,1986.
'
l
.
s
,
I
'
i
-'
,
'
$q
'g
s
e
f
'
.
!
+
,
\\
+
a
b
'4
,
}
,
t
5
?
'.
I
i
~
.
E .5ba5fAlt Mh