ML20206U465

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Summary of Telcon Interview W/Allegers Re Technical Review Team Disposition of Allegations AC-22 & AC-23 Concerning Category 2 of Civil/Structure Sser
ML20206U465
Person / Time
Site: Comanche Peak  Luminant icon.png
Issue date: 07/07/1986
From: Jeng D
NRC
To:
NRC
Shared Package
ML19284C882 List: ... further results
References
FOIA-85-59 NUDOCS 8607100496
Download: ML20206U465 (2)


Text

-

qq 23 ,c MEMORANDUM FOR: File FROM: D. C. Jeng

SUBJECT:

m uov oc ELEPHONE INTERVIEW WITH ALLEGER 5 s

~

~ _

1. Interview ,

At ~-

a telephone interview was held.

The attencees were:

D. Jeng, R. Philleo, R. C. Tang, and the recorder.

Upon introduction of participants' names, title, responsibilities and work experience, the TRT reviewer Mr. Philleo explained in great detail the basis for TRT's disposition of Allegations AC-22 and AC-23 (Category 2 of Civil / Structure SSER). Basic approach used by TRT was to randomly pick 23 packages of concrete placement records and examine any irregularities or non-conformance reports. Fifteen non-conformance reports were identified and disposed of adequately according to established procedures. The alleger was also informed that TRT staff's field inspection trip showed no degradation of concrete. Two QC inspectors interviewed also confirmed that necessary procedures were followed in placing concrete during the period they were directly involved.

The alleger felt that TRT has correctly interpretedWdoncern and has ~

adequately resolved the concern. A copy of SSER wiTl be sent te as a basis for closing the allegations. M agreed to have the

~

transcript of the interview made available to the public.

2. Interview with _

A a telephone interview was held withh

_In attendance were:

D. Jeng, R. Phillio, C. Hofmayer, R. C. Tang, W. P. Chen, R. Masterson, V. Ferrarini and i

the reporter.

With reaard to AQC-13, AOC-14, AC-18 and AC-40, C. Hofmayer explained to the steps' taken by TRT to resolve M concerns. It appears that the concerns were clearly and correctly interpreted by the TRT.

However, the alleger did not agree to the bases and conclusions drawn by TRT on the number of unauthorized holes drilled and number of unauthorized rebars cut. E suggested some other approach to the TRT. Upon review of g suggelition, TRT reviewer will propose needed followup actions.

With regard to AC-31 related to hanger inserts, Mr. Philleo (TRT reviewer) explained the basis for TRT resolutions. The phone communication was rather difficult at times to carry on an effective dialogue. In essence, did not agreet to TRT resolution at the end of the interview.

Parties agfa d that the item will be f3110wed up further, possibly in a direct neeting. ,

,, s 8607100496 860624 PDR FOIA GARDE 85-59 PDR s

i

/

)

O I. ,

i

, indicated that AC-36 (Trash dumped in the bottcm of a form and covered by concrete) concern was not originated byllEEEE TRT retracted the item from the discussion. The item will be follows'd up elsewhere.

AC-43 was not idised because of the agreement that a second meeting will be scheduled to handle all unresolved issues.

Based on the phone conversation, the Civil / Structural staff came to a con-clusion that the next meeting should be a direct meeting and should involve an option of a joint plant trip between TRT reviewers and the alleger. This point was conveyed to R. C. Tang for her followup.

Another impression obtained through the interview is that the closure of issues with allegers will be a tedious, time consuming effort and one should not underestimate both the time and resources needed for this task.

C. Hofmayer and R. Philleo will work with D. Jeng by 11/5/84 to define specific steps to be taken on the above issues.

D. C. Jeng cc: L. Shar

,