ML20210P789

Reiterates 850814 Request for Review & Comments on Ssers 7-11 Prior to ACRS 305th Meeting on 850912-14.C Seiss Response Encl

ML20210P789
Person / Time
Site:	Comanche Peak
Issue date:	09/04/1985
From:	Merrill O Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards
To:	Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards
Shared Package
ML20210P722	List: ML20210P716 ML20210P769 ML20210P789 ML20210P810 ML20210P827 ML20210P840
References
FOIA-85-699 ACRS-GENERAL, NUDOCS 8605130504
Download: ML20210P789 (2)

Text

. J. , OSM

[ 'g UNITED STATES 8

o NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

, f ,E ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON REACTOR SAFEGUARDS

-

• WASHINGTON, D. C. 20655

..... NpI. Aegest 4, 1985 MEMORANDUM FOR: ACRS Me s FROM: / . . Merrill, Staff Engin eer

SUBJECT:

YOUR COMMENTS ON COMANCHE PEAK SSERs 7 THROUGH 11

REFERENCE:

August 14, 1985 Memorandum for D. Okrent, C.

Michelson and All Other ACRS Members from.0. S.

Merrill Ray Fraley has asked that I remind each of you of the request made in the second paragraph of the referenced memorandum regarding you review of the subject SSERs 7 through 11 prior to the 305th ACRS meeting, September 12-14, 1985. He further requested that you be prepared to comment on the results of your review during that meeting.

Although a written response was not requested, we have received one such response to date from C. Siess. A copy is attached for your informa-tion.

Attachment:

As stated cc: ACRS Technical Staff ACRS Fellows l

~

hSI A 860417 GARDE 85-699 PDR

. ]

e !.e '  ;

1.,

~~~ ' ' ' ~ ~

'1, >OkY bOMM!SM. :N j

' :t e_ . < c a w ' < ,

w . .~s j r'

t To:

From: STAN SCHOFER CHET SIESS Message #: 643

Subject:

' EOR O. S. Submitted:

Received: MERRTLL Sun B/25/85 - 15:31 No Status: Private

~

Group: Open Re Comanche

'Nos. O and 10. Peak St.3ERs relating to all egations.

In SSER 8,

' Piping Ci vi l and areaStructural and Group. I reviewed in some detailI have reviewed the items in the SSER In SSER 10 I ,

detail as the Civilin the Hanger and Support areaslooked at the it' ems -in the fby the NRC Staff *s efforts And Structural areas in SSER S. ,

but not in as much

, I am impressed judgements and conclusions. and am completely satisfied with their were unsubstantiated, tri vi al With very few exceptions, the allegations to safety.

concern, In just plain incorrect or nor related of the Staff which seem reasonable.

has required the utility ta very few case,s wher safety in the Staff's hands and I believe that this mattero do various things, all concerned or i n vol ved. that there is no reason for the should be left ACRS to be

• e + s me. m- ,

O

/

6