ML20212M572

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Forwards Const Reinsp/Documentation Review.Related Info Encl
ML20212M572
Person / Time
Site: Comanche Peak  Luminant icon.png
Issue date: 12/16/1985
From: Saffell B
Battelle Memorial Institute, COLUMBUS LABORATORIES
To: Tomlinson E
NRC
Shared Package
ML20212M513 List:
References
FOIA-86-272, FOIA-86-454, FOIA-86-A-203, FOIA-86-A-204 NUDOCS 8703120079
Download: ML20212M572 (23)
v • d • e


Text

.

1385 32-16 13:30 LATTELLE C C'llin eus 1409111 0.

@ columbus Balielle Umuon FACSIMILE TRANSMISSION Panafax PX 200 --614-424-5263 Posafax HV 3000 . 614-424 7895 Ve ification --614 424-5059 T0 t_ J . 1 "2'- .$ . DATE. h -lbf$V TOTAL

-, . _ , , , PAGES (excluding lead)

FROM _

S010 yg.g4g3333, 6E I led gl030g5g Elv $0$N.Tf...., ,_ ,.

. m 0703120079 070310 PDH FOIA PDR

~7 CARDE06-A-203

., ,. 0 ..

g ^ 1s65--12 -:6 a3: 3J 'bfUIEU A X 15505 ^^ 140$lil'~ '02 ^^

-.J , ..

('/,)

C00nNCHE PEAK CON 51ROCIION llE-INSPECTION /00CtmENTATION REVIEW

~

Progransna_ tic Concerg,t,o,be_

o fddressed by ERC

1. The staff expre sed a concern regarding the revhion of Quality

, Instructions (QI) during the implementation phase of the process. ,

, ERC agreed to develop a procedure for addressing this concern. I i

2. In light of recent R-IV findings concerning the implementation by ERC of this coistruction adequacy review program, the staff is concerned about the need for overview or QA of the re-inspection
activity. ERC is in the process of retain 4g three senior inspections and of preparing a procedure describing the oversite activity.

In essence, each ERC inspector will be audi6ed.

3. The documentation linkir.g the work process development with the l

population description was deficient. ERC frdicated the SRT had identified this problem and committad to resolve it by modifying the work process description documentation.

l 4. ERC agreed to document this criteria for treating inaccessible

, items. In summary, the ground rules are set before an inspection begins. A definition of what is and is not inaccessible is agreed

! to before the initiation of a re-inspection effort. Also, guidance l 1s provided concerning the treatment of petectially inaccessible

! items.

i

5. A single instance of incompatibility between the design and con-struction process with the QI was noted in the electrical area.

While this is not a generic concern, ERC was informed of this finding.

6. The staff notea one instance in a QI regarding incompatibility between tne date of a reference document with the time the work was performed. At this point. this is an isolated incident but was called to ERC's attention.

.. . les5-12 16 13 31 kATTEl.Lt D.LJhSUE .403111 03

.L Heihag_ical_Populatio3,

1. HVAC Ducts and Plenums
2. IfVAC All the documentation was in-place Populat.on descriptions, work process descriptions, quality instructions checklists, and

, typical re-inspection packages were reviewed for both populations.

Sample selection had progressoa to completion of the random sampling and the engineered sampling was still in process.

3. Field Fabricated Tanks This population was initially reviewed in a qualitative manner.

Eight tanks are ir. the population and all will be examined. QIs for re-inspection now exist and some were reviewed at the last i audit.

4. Mechanical Equipment Installation Documentation relevant to this population has been reviewed.

Component install tion packages were reviewed to compare specific installation procedures with the population work processes and attributes. The work processes and their attributes are considered to be appropriate to the installation of mechanical equipment.

Further, the appropriate attributes were reflected in the re-inspection  !

checklist. One recent revision is the addition of Brown and Root

- installed HVAC equipment within this population and not within the HVAC equipment installation population.

i 5. Large Bore Piping Configuration

6. Small Bore Piping Configuration These populations were reviewed in a cursory manner as part of the audit of the Construction Re-Inspection / Documentation Review
Program and thoroughly by those reviewing and auditing the Stone and Webster (SWEC) piping re-analysis effort. Review of the ERC program will continue in conjunction with future piping and pipe support audits.

,.--% , -,,--.w-----_.---. mm~.,yr__,.,,,. , , , . _ ,,.___._,_...,_-.,-,.%,__ . . - , _ m-,,_,,.,,, . ,, ._,m._ . , , . . _ ,

13 s i-l' d- 16 13 31 SMTELt.E COL.Jr15US 14091 1 04

7. Pipe - Welds and Material Based upon the fact that both large bore ano small bore pipe welds

'were fabricated to the same procedure and by the same craft, ERC Iumped the populations together. The staff roviewed the (L8WM and SSWM) population basis, description memorandum, population description, populations item list and work process definition.

ERC indicated that basically two welding metn9as were used at CPSES: Gas Tungsten ARC Welding (GTAW) and Satelded Metal ARC Welding (SMAW). ERC has connitted to two ranlom semples of 60 welds for each wolding method. ERC noted that separate samples will be drawn to reflect the different weldin; methods.

8. Piping System Bolteo Joints Two work processes comprise the piping system bolted joint category.

They are installation preparation and final bolt fitup. The work processes and their attributes appear to adequately represent.

the botting of piping joints based on a review of the work process definition, the population items If st, and the relevant QI. Several sarnple packages were reviewed with all containing appropriate documentation.

9. Instrument Tubing Welds / Material This is a new population. Documentation was not available for review.

Structural Populations

1. Concrete Placement This population has been addressed at each of the three audits of ERC's construction adequacy program. The re-inspection Ql-043 has been issued while the documentation review QI has not been issued as of the last audit. The only open item at this time is a review by ERC to determine if embedded sleeves were used as anchors for piping passing through these sleeves and, if this situation does entst, ERC should consider establishing a new attribute.

. 1512-12-16 13s32 B A T T E u L E i. ;,Llart Bl .S 1403:11 e3

. g

2. Structural Steel The last audit sodressed this population in detail by reviewing documentation related to homogeneity of the work processes.

During this review, there was some confusion regarding the minimum number of samples to be reinspected. ERC agreed to revise the work process flowchart to be more descriptive and this was com.

pleted before the end of the audit. From the documentation review it appeared that adequate information existed for the inspector to perform the re-inspections. One open item existed regarding seismic cables. They are not addressed in this population.

ERC agreed to review these cables to determino ff they should be included in this population.

3. Liners
4. Fuel Pool Liner These two populations were reviewed together. Nsmerous documents were examined te determine if homogeneity exists at the work process level. Further, ERC's QI instructions were reviewed for compatibility with the original G A H construction specf fica-tions. The re-inspection packages reviewed contained all approprfase documentation.
5. Fill and Backft11 Placement This population consists only uf a documentation review and the work processes and attributes appear to be homogeneous.
6. Grout . Coment
7. Grout - Epoxy These populations are new and not ready for revfew at this time.
8. Large tore Pipe $Jpports - Rfgfd
g. Large tore Pipe Supports - Non Rigid
10. small Bore Pipe Supports All populations were addressed during the second audit with follow up performed at the audit just completed. Documentation was reviewed

Iscb-Id-It 143JJ tHiit Lt Li t c;'ic u s 14431Ia tJ t:

to establish the ex stence of an auditable trail. A result of this effort was agreement on the part of ERC to include base metal defects as an attribute and to be reflected on the Inspection Checklists. Alsc, " inspection" will not be included as a work process but is reflected as an attribute under each of the other three work processes. The staff reviewed and accepted this.

11. Large Bore Pipe Whip Restraints The population consists of moment restraints, pipe whip restraints, and support structures. Because of the existence of multiple restraints on a single support structure and of restraint assemblies, special sampling ground rules were established. We reviewed them in detail and found them to be acceptable. All documentation related to re-intpection was reviewed and found acceptable.

The QI for the document review was still in preparation and not reviewed at this time.

12. Instrument Pipe / Tube Supports Populations description, work process definition, and the relevant QI were all reviewed. Random and engineered camples drawn.

Many more supports examined than required because of support identification scheme for instrument supports. Review of Work Process Definition specifically checked correspondence of work process attributes with the re-inspection checklist. All documentation was found to be in order.

13. Category I Condutt Supports Work, processes and attributes for this population were reviewed to establish compatibility with the governing G & H specifications.

The re-inspection checklist was compared with sample packages. .

Documentation appeared complete.

14. HVAC Ouct supports This population was reviewed. The Q! for re-inspection was revieweds the one for documentation review is yet to be issued.

isce c-se 10: 4J bHIitLtE CeLU1E05 s 1-103111 27 g)

Six re-inspectici, peckages were examined. All packages appeared complete and the documented process is being pursued.

15. Equipment Supports This populat-ion was recently established and had completed the Populations Description and Work Process Definition. A draft of the QI was reviewed as it is still in preparation. Sampling was in process. An initial sample had been selected and support accessibility and completeness were being assessed.

e I

i .

e 9

Fn ~ : Su:e D e h ll '

s a y : rs o y,>. m as be= aA M '

L gm: (f) b ' '

6 0 S Jld z~4/s,E -

% Y '

GJ<&

cd ~ -m p- J

/h &

f~ 4 A ~/a A 4 &

a A na aa~d a 2)

As a #c_y/a6sa'&n ,w

%e ,

r -

e  ? $/ l n.

9 9 e 4 9 4 g g g 9 4 e 3 4 4

i-. k s f( A0%

s- .-v t

M m, M i g f A YT O9 J,x 9

e

((

e== m m me ee@ e w &6- OM@M N @ +

>ep &= a

m- i

/. /4 .

n: r;4 r d - n/s/8s Fnde fd [An/d ~

.>s 7 w . a n y A n suc 9,,J2= ;

M F M C ,a A >

94 i) suc cp +s* A21tk ppsin a.:

4 svu p~A. aJ PL py,. o & . zM -

AAM p AL' M(my.-s .4) 2 ,

m n[ , k s q;; g aa e M su .d tam 4 i n4 v.a n ,,,1,s in - s a

.. ap Q a w , 3) pr % -

'4

, A ,dk, A 4 ~A. 4. ,Q .4 / L ,+)

j . ?L $ - Q 4 M L 4 a .r) s n.;&-

.iy~ - 4 a .,-p tp p.c

. 4.o.e. 4 es me - - - -

.m 4.pp~.A m ,,stw-. ,

_ __ _ . M &, A~4 h_ 4 a,-Je

- . . . . .TA .~ ,L f..Att' y;Ah . J..

W pwl --- 2 .4. 6n *

.._...-. A A J .. m ~ .A d d n. L L ,:)p.

.. p A p ua.-..rA y

- - ma (r

- .. 3. oc PL,

~ s

... Jf 2 4 3 . X A w i Amo J = ~e .& . .

224 t A~ p.

Ae y h. g a 0

74 .4 Aeyg.

+ 7 a

Z 7~ ; J )' A A.s p A &. 9%..

M .&f 24 n r 4. ~

4m nA c< A. rA. ur n .4.0 t .Le .

A /~- A- 4 ,L~- a4 4,2./

  • m n% .av

-t4 .p4.1 4.>J %

7%.4 y

  1. y W a W M

=m-w am*-.-*##- * * *e te - *

  • 4 8 es* ^- - -- em
  • 48 ** 4> ' *meer 4 es#he emSpe et W 94 Gee 9 m es e+e e m ew e m .

as e. ( 4

  • s ue e e

. as e+ e 0 N b4p 4. e .mus9mme && % we W hWG>M-N MD 8'85 ee

  • W 4 WU ** * * * * "** *'

= -__ _-gg mh, . .w.

l e 4 .sn . .s e *e , e. -

eam eme e eeee mes _ e= ame am .e s .

.e , e . ., - --....wm , ess -ey % .ea

,,,ungumainese pe,m _ . - mami emh sses***ser*4> =mumse* r e* **emen es eew edesume _-- C *o *m _ see s*

  • d ees e .**usman dmeneew esed> - esse e m'es e,es e . e ~

8 -- essa ass e e - aseme-m upen.eeaee- WW ea S.h * - '-9'*

^^M- - ame ^- -- - -- &-ohemse

-.= hemead 9.h w es.es. =msed$ em e. e e see+ - - -

e...u--_ - mee emm. e==a-.-. . . . . . -.e Ge me. - . . . . - wees aw en. - * -

w e= . , .-

wm.. - e e

  • n e - . - + -,. . . . - , . . - - . .a *

-e

  • ad dW b# **O "

e6*5* 'M"' M 88I MO4 # 48'4 he e+

  • N UWW O O W(FM Yh h RMJ h h .W $ $@&I bd '. - 8
  • =b---YeD*.* e4 #m -- I'b*a O ^ I .I -

+r*****-e+ e

$h %%h.mS 4 he e e6m. w - ~. ee e- - = = 4e

.a*,., - e6 44 +=s . .-

c MEMORANDUM FOR: V. Noonan, Director, Comanche Peak Group FROM: E. H. Johnson, Director, Division of Reactor Safety and

,,,,. Projects, Region IV

SUBJECT:

EVAL.UATION REPORT Attached is the Region IV Evaluation Report for the ISAP !!!.d., "Preoperational Testing" Results Report submitted on April 4,1986, by TUGCo.

With regard to Region IV's evaluation of the Results Reports for ISAPs I.a.4.,

" Agreement 9etween Drawings and Field Terminations" and VII.b.2, " Valve Disassembly " Region IV is awaiting TUGCo's revision to the Results Report for ISAP !.a.4. and TUGCo's reply to the staff's request for additional information concerning the Results Report for ISAP VII.b.2.

E. P. Johnson, Ofrector Division of Reactor Safety and Pro.jects Attachment

cC!

R. Martin T. Westerman I. Barnes W. Smith L. Ellershaw C. Pale P. Wagner

! C. Trammell A. Cook L. Chandler ELD R. Peishman, IE

+

l

' RIV:R$8 ORSP TFWesterman:gb EHJohnson

/ /86 / /86 l

+

+

7"8e we. UNITED STATES

  • a !4 ,. h NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION waswiNo ton,0. c. aosss

's,;..)!

  • 0.*

i MEMORANDUM FOR: V. Noonan, Ofrector, Comanche Peak Group ,

FROM: E. H. Johnson, Director, Division of Reactor Safety and Projects, Region IV

SUBJECT:

EVAI.UATION REPORT Attached is the Region IV Evaluation Report for the ISAP III.d., "Preoperational Testing" Results Report submitted on April 4, 1986, by TUGCo.

With regard to Region IV's evaluation of the Results Reports for !$APs !.a.4.,

" Agreement Between Drawings and Field Terminations" and V!l.b.2, " Valve . [

Oisassembly," Region IV is awaiting TUGCo's revision to the Results Report for ISAP !.a.4. and TUGCo's reply to the staff's request for additional information concerning the Results Report for ! SAP VII.b.2.

i E. H. Johnson, Director-Division of Reactor Safety and Projects Attachment cc:

R. Martin  ;

T. Westerwan I. Barnes W. Smith I.. Ellershaw C. Pale P. Wagner C. Trannell A. Cook I.. Chandler. El.0 R. Petshman, IE l

13

e O

MEMORANDUM FOR: V. Noonan, Director, Comanche Peak GrouD FROM: E. P.-Johnson, Director, Division of Reactor Safety and

,,,,. Projects, Region IV

SUBJECT:

EVAL.UATION REPORT Attached is the Region IV Evaluation Report for the ISAP !!!.d., "Preoperational Testing" Results Report submitted on April 4, 1986, by TUGCo.

With regard to Region IV's evaluation of the Results Reports for ISAPs I.a.4.,

" Agreement Between Drawings and Field Terminations" and VII,b 2, " Valve Disassembly," Region IV is awaiting TUGCo's revision to the Results Report for ISAP !.a.4. and TUGCo's reply to the staff's reouest for additional infornution concerning the Results Report for ISAP Y!!.b.2. ,

E. P. Johnson, Ofrector Division of Reactor Safety and Pro.jects Attachment cc:  ;

R. Martin l T. Westerman ,

I. Barnes W. Smith L. E11ershaw C. Pale P. Wagner C. Trammell A. Cook L. Chandler, ELD R. Peishman, IE RIV:R$8 ORSP TFWestermantgb EPJohnson

/ /86 / /86

F ,

Document Namet EVAL.UATION RESUI. S REPORT 5/16 Requestor's 10:

STAI.EY Author's - Name:

WESTERMAN

, s'.-

Document Comments:

EVAL.UATION REPORT Destination Name: -

r STAl.EY Olstribution Name: -

NRCRIV,0P3,0026 Addressee:

Edna Staley 110 x27425 Date Sent: s 06/17/86 Time Sent:

13:19 Message:

del.IVER 70: C. TRAMMEL.l.

FROM: WESTERMAN /GRACIE, REGION IV cx n ,

y\ t - x&

d

,. ,c

\

  • \  % ,

,.p

\

a e, g ,

  • I#

L_ , . . _ . _ - . ,

U.S. > E AR REGULATORY COMMisslON N~C LuiLip 9 LaEns(Megwtst #romi imC8_mb 3e l-4 01 im C 0370 FACSIMILE TRANSMITTAL REQUEST oat aarvae. omia:N Au ro i Noc.

l v.8 ll l No l MESSAGE TO I P ACSIMiLE PHONE NO. VERIP:CArlON PHONE NO. No. oP PAQtsI/nclud,eg Treas4 sagg l

l l

, MESSAGE PROM F ACSiMiLE FHONE No. vtRiFiC ArioN

  • HONE No.

eAus ( f p g g y [ g J. gg Hith epeed (up to 2 mon.) Low noeed (44 min)

NkA Yk0Y l ivicoi~a orrica ,HoNa No.

mag vo, g ...C.o.~C.

'"::;' N '~~

i%w b foro w ,:n ,, 7c:'::'

( fiM e /0 A t .

r escalvto inANSMstrso ,

72 J 8 EZ: 1d 8- W'A 99. r\(Jqb Ae f

O 4

e a ,i . . . 3 ,}, ,,

]-

, ~

, $-dig og;g

~,

,A '

g Rockwelllnternettonal Energy Systems Group ,

,7 - ,

TELEPHONE CONVERSATION R /

DA : 3 /r/ A TO: D** b *tk FROM: 'Th e -pow I COMPANY: NRC .

COMPANY: ETCC DEPT: . DEPT: d t.4

  • ADDRESS: ADDRESS: 55 .
j. PHONE: 000992-4941 PHONE: was , . -.i /

DATE: J I,s-l 46 TIME:

SUBJECT:

SkWh's \ 49 .th .4 C,9 RT l%e.b'. M.,,,(hh? Q 9Q Wasks ( hv!sso'n D .

b$ 4C. 4 4 gg g

?mW 1

j 4\tes.nt. g. w , u. . h, , Lww.g'4 , [4. %g 4, ( , , , ,

j k e-c. L oi .. d\smssiA 3 kl.A 'i 4M.shi.L\ sq\,g \.

'A J'k ww.keeww.w.\d g\3 x\\1 .w w \. be. ko5.&tew g s<y\,.

l c av g\.- A w.4 \<ss %+w 6 o p\ 3 x\te d\s b f _% w, w.4 w c C. 4.o* s u.g p., 4r g L .a.c b.'w g N l

is W

! ww Lo c%wa y\ $ sus c4 M a j a bwl 'it-r w W. cowh 6.VL.W 4gHu*4

g 1.m\,Q , R4 w. uA4vw
c .. h9 ss*l,  ?. e. S A J h . A

'ia %$,te.A in 4 6 *- b \*'h b l uw A.eu%4 L), Moe3 4-k4 4-c e b ow ( Nt' l i4,.A.g \\ ,\ $ sur A'.k e.v.M.

w i, . 4 p\ % A 'm kSV 1 \^b2 cad q'g 4 Lou N u s u u ' d s ,'t* 3 u t[ m.

d g( ,,t . w c. .,x,. e% -sis Lk ~a 9 - a t b .\ A c' ! W $ 6 i k e e b W h^V'N l m ,., "* Sb "~

l w,g m,i (g _ ei db}3 hN P** o'#* b

\ Mh8 "*b I

Vic\ biM.IS,**Ykaob O Pwt mi p y., oW Wa.k. b k w m c.wi'4.w.1. \k w b 4 A L u b .w L .L A. co ti k < % k ,,

cc: ta e c.w, ,

r4 l e o ~ n.u . v. .... p, ,a ,, .

gp

4 .

g G-ENT rarEAWEM d

. Ne/Non s4 6/ /2/svo/ac nevx : &?4/a habieafrew-~ y ' /Ja dvsthAsn fedgwee p/07; f Me e st dopraw M n. 7As<Sa<,wie&irin4a%

&as //epAnlaws/nehwr wss ir/Ac/&/&> /Je rem.yahm Auwe,i&. Th/s rewn enwi-w'sle d /ow

  • Zndnd h:s y s,s 6 h- d u

,d h d4 oris j d d ,A fe a sx.s

/

=

    1. n;/ods ces>f(si eveh aerd,pessess Q Il u d' & Als 4.

REWE4/scops//28' V7Ms:

26 fopolxkb~ris rew' e sd, f i)L*wp,ewbkLvis /A2lfer/etrlgh reWM afswssei?siya,dy yo ha awcerss

- 4eassas nyardng a/gan dawn /

pp/a hws - 63 pre shews /hrsyx ars whodare coed e.s enA 06esd c6) amia#/ye saa ares' s symns A W Ge?na m aMess#S

_p - S l

  • nv&wis A QZi dArbrpi /w_Ami&&wzo

,, x -

u e m

-$ / ~ WW a eC77S/5k/?0 //5 ke amspec7&n e/h7M

- ore earprogram A rie minspec4n c4conen,46 Ac, ding de dveAp-a,,/

cJamh,ameesses'sua de pp, s4dm

.l -

$ ave Aeen es/aAbkd.

accoraag re/eeense.y de 911 w/Aap,d dassend - emeoro a iAr4 Y

' p>4wI4 dehler~phcahg anaind y

'^

m,A,/aaeiss/mos,ep,dfwe pan ase

. 6&a,pdAdf. Gef. gr-o/i) p u n ess a /c ~ s

'  ; . s,e,e cp sc an A p ,,w s,ch-j ,

&coineas 7 pzs.

x -

i

$ 0 y

mm unfhe aisAaendd'-

. - an overviaspry/xs kenprovde's'rd ok#dwinen/ i ve rev/ ear /eaneoA apioeedore A evadahy ersypAmeid/

mesuns ane' dei >- a,iwc6 >%

, der 7siisAs7ey 7Ne. /e/7?sfec/Yo77 ehfa>///

~ <

Ae dve/0 2and%,ah/si Ad.

. k d w d a ),o eppwa' 4&?,mehages e

rewsea' 4 sia&de a. otsenphors f Avar 1% aiard /seessa em dvefeas'-/%wp

+

, &b,d4de popasAw?.s-a =

a c4 sap 4n //xw saaessd/e ss-sAs are ofJoas'ad now th areo6#aaa as ,audy de resspesle

~

m er% fax #Je pieprred'ana'hesous; as,ce,da &

ainhpeAsp.

- a <ev,w ws/A mda' As' A snd,nme //

de,e a aypopdahon a %fe arms f ppe s/eeves 7kuggA m/s aeo/'a ceJbs l an yp y//iz 4 og cvp / m # 'aea so,qow/g#/easx<%/

repas'ar pip ha e m er iss ,

.a A&hn adkg,sdeo'jd ik 9o-es Haasw ofasa ezs de adasep,dda' den oSn-esb /

97- o/o.

/Mo/M6s  :

54s rewmr am dlris preh>namg ambsAms afaam a/4 p/rwaas aviews; se, de pVan, // pro,oerg ans/nmiW, ar#p' rowde' an aawrab nm?- /overadp' da/

i awsduaiGrx aof oy. Men inp/Anendhon, dsexe,,

honever o/p,emosip.

aos/a&pless xhepayraark a~nceras 1

W8M7Das : 46ne d w a ro w : ese//ed

- l

y g O

f Vl

  • t sAmn A ,Vos f L srdn/q Z f /a A e r /

Z Aivar

$ Sa fe//

A Mashsm Exi//ydfypeed&

Es. /o,24nsm

^VA/'fr l

b

M 8)/ O/9//.c,.Sf4-ff.C PM f Nf3 W/l Jots

?!< f If ' / $ / // */s t #/p o b/) ffgs Afy A///) s r- dr.s $7/'-r"/L 77eg /4-JU Y.45 y A/Y /u &y/.s . s 2.s., ZM6 c pse S.w w / <s -s'i n o DA6 d /6s.cc SwAu 5  % xa ,-

5 disz c. /dj A c /W/c : ps c /s / n 7f h[ -Q2 f , 6 7 ) /* m G/ 7 c.c. e/s :r' //fy/f/, m  %.

/)/ / d /s #4 % n *d /1 T'7/ / /3y fa./ f d.s.7494 /Aff '& A ' ~

W 7/ fr[ et'N Aff'V/Mrs /"M e /4/ 7/' f' f5 b /7M 7/rd / // f L /64 0 f.ss" bet k d'/' Y/2 5 r.'/l . f' 'sec lJ'f //4 /)C Nf** /t* r /7% A '77s' / 6 V f f J '4"4 77 -

l f///).

l l

l fj//0 V M lf/*t Sf ~C/  ?!J eg, b .***f-C s?',,*d' d 2 2 8 /Co#9#w A1f/J N c/ M 7/M,, ds w/.<. rf // ft//M/J @ /n '!srC NC W/NVff/r/A,o / /4 C,c'1J f~lJ /3 f'" PAN 6 /J ?>c'~W cv/ 17- /> c G D. A cc//f5</xy . 8?s. s.?&.s/

.-ins mis uw+m ni scra -n .s .+w<a z-

. 6f s+rb /k) cs 7,wxo ce o 7 4 .r.o r s x */y

_ _ . /+fs) // $/f 3 /~s C SdA'vJ/M S T-f

.s ,k ,

p' =. #'7

l. 9tr- i n '; J.

9 Document Name:

65982 Requestor's ID:

STAI.EY

, Author's Name:

WESTERMAN Document Comments:

DRAFT QUESTION ON THE VII.b,2 RESUI.TS REPORT ,

Destination Name:

STAl.EY Distribution Name:

NRCRIV,0P3_0032 Addressee:

Edna Staley 110 x27425 Date Sent:

06/27/86 Time Sent:

08:19 Message:

DEt.IVER TO: CHARI.IE TRAMMEL.I.

FROM: TOM WESTERMAN, REGION IV

s. ee .- -m a v 9  !

~

\

c , .

O O  !

i i

Billie Pirner Garde, Esquire '

Government Accountability Project Midwest Office IN RESP 0 SE IEFER i 3424 Marcos Lane OCT 3 1986T0 F01 -272 0 '

Appleton, WI 54911 FOIA

Dear Ms. Garde:

This is the final response to your letters dated April 9,1986, and June 16, 1986, in which you requested, pursuant to the Freedom of Infomation Act (FOIA), copies of records related to the evaluation of ISAP's regarding the Comanche Peak plant.

The records identified on the enclosed Appendix E are already available for public inspection and copying at the NRC Public Document Room (PDR). The PDR accession numbers are identified beside the record descriptions.

The records identified on the enclosed Appendixes F, G, and H are being placed d in the PDR. You may obtain access to these records by referring to PDR folder {

F0!A-86-272 under your name.

The records identified on the enclosed Appendixes I and J are being withheld pursuant to Exemption (5) of the FOIA (5 U.S.C. 552(b)(5)) and 10 CFR 9.5(a)(5))

of the Comission's regulations. These records contain predecisional information consisting of advice, opinions, and recommendations of the staff.

Release of these records would tend to inhibit the open and frank exchange of ideas essential to the deliberative process. There are no reasonably segregable factual portions because release of the facts would permit an indirect inquiry into the predecisional process of the agency.

Pursuant to 10 CFR 9.9 of the Commission's regulations, it has been determined that the information withheld is exempt from production or disclosure, and that its production or disclosure is contrary to the public interest. The persons responsible for the denial of the records identified on Appendix I are the undersigned and Mr. Harold R. Denton, Director, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation. The persons responsible for the denial of the records identified on Appendix J are the undersigned and Mr. Robert D. Martin, Regional Administrator, Region IV.

l O

nu u7 -Q 7

0 0 r

Ms. Garde .

This denial may be apmaled to the NRC's Executive Director for Operations within 30 days from tie receipt of this letter. As provided in 10 CFR 9.11, any such appeal must be in writing, addressed to the Executive Director for Operations, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission Washington, DC 20555, and should clearly state on the envelope and in the letter that it is an " Appeal from an Initial FOTA Decision."

This completes NRC action on these two FOIA requests. In light of this response '

to these requests, we are taking no further action on your letters dated May 15, 1986, and July 16, 1986, in which you appealed NRC's lack of response.

Sincerely,

?

_( W2 : K 1 Donnie H. Grimsley, Director Division of Rules and Records

.. Office of Administration

Enclosures:

As stated S

e 6

e 9

w, , - - - - - - -

Re: F01A-86-272 & 86-454 (Final Response)

APPENDIX E Records Available in PDR

1. 05/07/86 Case Response to Board Questions - Accession No. 8605080296 -

Enclosure is the same as for May 5,1986 letter from B. Garde to V. Noonan: Results Report I.a.4

2. 05/23/86 TUGC0 Letter to: Vince Noonan from W. G. Counsil

Subject:

Response to NRC Questions transmitted by Letter dated May 15, 1986 (5 pages) Accession number 8605280142

3. 06/05/86 Application for an Operating License - Answers to Board's 14 questions (Memo; Proposed Memo of April 14,1986) Regarding Action Plan Results Report I.a.4 Accession number 8606110361 (25pages)

I

4. 06/05/86- Application for an Operating License - Answers to Case document Requests and Interrogatories on Results Report I.a.4 -

Accession number 8606110355 (33 pages)

5. Undated CPRS Results Report, ISAP iib, Concrete Compression Strength Revision 1. PDR #8604100266
6. Undated CPRT Action Plan, ISAP iib, Concrete Compression Strength Revision 3. PDR #6601300154 l

l 7. 10/06/85 CYGNA Comments on CPRT program plan Revision 2 Accession No. 851017022 l

l 8. 10/11/85 RIV inspection report 50-445/84-11 and 50-446/85-06 l Accession No. 8510280217 l

l

9. 11/11/85 Transcript of monthly status meeting for CPRT Progress (openmeeting)AccessionNo. 8601220150 l 10. 11/22/85 SCPRT Response to NRC letters on 9/30 and 8/9 on CPRT program plan Accession No. 8511250079
11. 12/02/85 U.S. NRC Sununary of Meeting held on November 5-6, 1985. First monthly status meeting to discuss the activities described in the Applicants Program Plan Accession No. 8601030157 l PDR AD0CK/50-445T
12. 12/17/85 Letter from TUGC0 to RIV concerning seismic gap of concrete l structures Accession No. 8512260138

'Re: F01A-86-272 & 86-454 APPENDIX E (cont'd)-

- 13. 03/20/86 ISAP VII'- b~2 results report for valve disassembly .

Accession No. 8604100275

14. 04/04/86 . U.S. NRC - ASLB .NRR staff's further .consnents on the Statistical Inference. Memorandum Accession No.;8604090218 and 8604090221
15. 04/09/86 Consnent by B. Garde on Revision 3 of CPRT Plan Accession No. 8604080120 f

I i  !

t r

4

^.

i l

1 i i

+

R2: FOIA 86-454 4 .; (Final R2spose)

Appendix F Records Being Placed in PDR.

1. 1-24-86 CPRT - Action Plan - ISAP I.b.3

Title:

Conduit to Cable Tray' Separation (6 pages) 2, 1-24-86 CPRT - Action Plan - ISAP VII.b.2

Title:

Valve Disassembly (8 pages)

3. 1-24-86 CPRT - Action Plan ISAP I.a.4

Title:

Agreement Between Drawings and Field Tenninations (9 pages) 4 1-24-86. CPRT - Action Plan - ISAP II.b

Title:

Concrete Compression Strength (12 pages) 5, 2-27-86 CPRT - Action Plan - III d

Title:

Preoperational Testing (12 pages) i l 6. 2-28-86 CPRT - Results Report - ISAP II.b

Title:

Concrete Compression Strength Revision 1

. (32pages) l

7. 3-13-86 CPRT - Results Report ISAP I.a.4

Title:

Agreement Between Drawings and Field Terminations - Revision 1 (16 pages) i-s -**8 -- *.-----yes---.

l

8. 3-20-86 CPRT- Results Report ISAP VII.b.2

Title:

Valve Disassembly - Revision 1 (21pages)

9. 3-26-86 .CPRT - Results Report ISAP I.b.3

Title:

Conduit to Cable Tray Separation Revision 1 (14 pages)

10. 4-4-86 US NRC - ASI.B - Notice of Availability of Results Reports and Working Files - Accession No. 8604090225 (4 pages)
11. 4-4-86 TUGC0 1.etter. to: V. Noonan from: W. G. Counsil

Subject:

Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station (CPRT) Results Reports - Accession No. 8604100236 -

with attachment (109 pages)

12. 4-14-86 US NRC Memo to: B. Grimes, E. Johnson, R. Ballard, F. Rosa, from: V. Noonan

Subject:

Evaluation of Comanche Peak ISAP ISAP No. I.b.3 -

Title:

Conduit to Cable Tray Separation (2pages) 13, 4-14-86 US NRC Memo to: B. Grimes, E. Johnson, R. Ballard, F. Rosa, from: V. Noonan

Subject:

Evaluation of Comanche Peak ISAP ISAP No. II b .

Title:

Concrete Compression Strength (2 pages)

O 13a. 4-14-86 US NRC Memo for B. Grimes, E. Johnson, R.-Ballard F. Rosa from: V. Noonan,

Subject:

Evaluation of Comanche Peak ISAP No. II,b (46 pages)

14. '4-14-86 US NRC Memo to: B. Grimes, E. Johnson, R. Ballard, F. Rosa, from: V. Noonan

Subject:

Evaluation of Comanche Peak ISAP ISAP No. VII,b 2

Title:

Valve Disassembly-(2 pages) 15, 4-14-86 US NRC Memo to: B. Grimes, E. Johnson, R. Ballard, F. Rosa, from: V. Noonan

Subject:

Evaluation of Comanche Peak ISAP ISAP No. III.d

Title:

Preoperational Testing (2 pages) 16, 4-14-86 US NRC Memo to: B. Grimes, E. Johnson, R. Ballard, F. ' Rosa , from: V. Noonan

Subject:

Evaluation of Comanche Peak ISAP ISAP No. I.a.4

Title:

Agreement Between Drawings & Field Terminations (2 pages) l 17. 4-24-86 Routing and transmittal slip for W. Pleca, C. Hofmayer l From: A. Vietti, Re: telecopy from Region IV (1page) l l 18. 4-28-86 US NRC letter to: W. G. Counsil

! from: V. Noonan -

Subject:

CPSES CPRT Results, dated April 4, 1986.

With enclosure (9 pages) l l

. ;~

19. 5-86 NRC - Assignment for Comanche Peak (1 page)

~20. 5-86 NRC - Assignment for Coma'nche Peak

-(1page)

21. 5-86 NRC - Assignment for Comanche Peak (1 page) 22, 5-2-86 TUGC0 letter to: V. Noonan - from: W. G. Counsil

Subject:

NRC Staff Request for Additional Information.

i- . on Comanche Peak Response Results for ISAPs (I.a.4, I,b.3, II,b,'III d and VII.b.2) dated April 28,.1986.

With enclosure (50 pages)

23. 5-2-86 TUGC0 1.etter to: V. Noonan - from: W. G. Counsil

Subject:

NRC Staff Request for Addhional Infonnation on Comanche Peak Response Results fcr ISAPs (I a.4, I b.3, J

II,b, III.d and VII b.2) dated April 28, 1986.

With enclosure (84 pages)

24. 5-2-86 TUGC0 1.etter to: V. Noonan - from: W. G. Counsil

Subject:

NRC Staff Request for Additional-Information on Comanche Peak Response Results for ISAPs (I.a.4, I,b.3, II.b, III.d and VII.b.21 dated April 28, 1986.

(4pages) l 25, 5-2-86 TUGC0 letter to: V. Noonan - from: W. G. Counsil I

Subject:

NRC Staff Request for Additional Information on Comanche Peak Response Results for ISAPs (I.a.4, I.b.3 II.b, III.d and VII,b.2) dated April 28, 1986.

(5pages)

e. e

26, 5-2-86 TUGC0 1.etter to: V. Noonan - from: W. G. Counsil

Subject:

NRC Staff Reques' for Additional Information on Comanche Peak Response Results for ISAPs (I.a.4, I,b.3, II b. III.d and VII,b.2) dated April 28, 1986.

(8 pages) 27, 5-5-86 GAP letter to Vince Noonan from: B. Garde Re: First Analysis by CASE of the Implementation of the Results Reports I.a.4 which address the " Argument Between Cable Terminations and Current Design Drawings - Enclosure is the same as for May 7,1986.

CASE response to Board Questions (App. C #1)-

(1 page)

28. No date Evaluation of ISAP II.b Concrete Compression Strength

- With comments (5pages)

29. 4 86 Memo from Noonan to Grimes - Evaluation of Comanche Peak ISAP No.11.b, Concrete Compression Strength (2 pages)

FOIA 86-272 (Final R;sponse)

Appendix G Records Being Placed in PDR

1. 1-15-85 Statistical Evaluation for CPRT on CPRT SSER on the 00l program (ISAP VII.C)

(7 pages)

2. 10-2-85 Description Memorandum for Documentation Review of large Bore Pipe Supports Non Rigid 01-030 Rev 0 #001 (ISAP VII.C)

(2 pages)

3. 10-2-85 Description Memorandum for Reinspection of large Bore Pipe Supports Non-Rigid QI-029 Rev.1 CH #2 (ISAP VII.C)

(1 page)

4. 10-2-85 Description Memomorandum for Documentation Review of large Bore Pipe Supports Rigid,01-028 Rev. O CH #001 (ISAP VII.C)

(2 pages)

5. 10-7-85 CPRT First Random Sample Identification CPP-006.1, Revision 0 (3 pages)
6. 10-7-85 Description Memorandum for Reinspection of large Bore Pipe Supports - Rigid Code: 1.85R QI-027, Rev. 1. Ch 001 (1 page)
7. 10-8-85 Facsimile Request to : H. Shannon Phillips from:

R. Lipinski,

Subject:

Agenda NRC Inspection Audit CPRT Civil / Structural Review (Preliminary)

(5 pages)

8, 10-12 US NRC Note to: Jim Taylor Harold Denton, Bob Martin, Darrell Eisenhut, Dick Vollmer, Hugh Thompson, Brian Grimes, Jane Axelrad, Dick Denise, Ed Christenbury, Ed Jordan from:

Vince Noonan,

Subject:

CPRT Status (10 Pages) 9, 10-14-85 CPRT Quality Instruction for Issue Specific Action Plan ISAP-VIII.C - Procedure No.: QI-049 Revision No.: 0 - Reinspection of 1.arge Bore Pipe - Welds / Material (17pages)

10. 10-16-65 Description Memorandum for Reinspection of I.arge Bore Pipe Supports - Rigid - 1.BSR 027, Rev. 1, CH 002 (1 page)
11. 10-16-85 NRC Audits of Comanche Peak Response Team Construction Reinspection / Documentation Review Program (ISAP VII.C)

(19 pages)

12. 10-22-85 Comanche Peak Response Team Construction Adequacy Program Audit.

(8 pages)

13. 10-22-85 US NRC Note to: Harold Denton, Jim Taylor, Bob Martin Darrell Eisenhut, Dick Vollmer, Hugh Thompson, Brian Grimes, Jane Axeirad, Dick Denise, Ed Christenbury, Ed Jordan from: Vince Noonan,

Subject:

CPRT Status (11pages)

14. 10-23-85 Meeting on Sampling Populations Comanche Peak -

October 16-17, 1985 (2pages) 2

15. 10-25-85 US NRC Memo for: J. A. Calvo, from: E. B.

Tomlinson,

Subject:

Trip report - Comanche Peak Site Visit (4 pages)

16. 10-28-85 Verification Package Status Report Construction Evaluation Program (1 page)
17. 10-29-85 Facsimile Request to: B. Saffel from: R.- Philleo

Subject:

Comanche Peak Construction Adequacy Program Populations (3 pages)

18. 10-30-85 CPRT - Construction Adequacy Program Audit' Electrical and Instrumentation and Control Instrumentation Equipment (5 pages)
19. 10-30-85 US NRC Memo to J. P. Knight from: V. Noonan,

Subject:

Safety Evaluation Report on the Visual Inspection of Welds Through Paint at the Comanche Peak Site (10 pages) 20, 10-31-85 NRC Staff Review of CPRT Construction Adequacy Review Program (26 pages) 21, 11-85 Region IV CPSES Inspection Program (4 pages)

22. 11-5-85 TUGC0 Meeting with NRC CPRT Monthly Status (1 page) 3
23. 11-I2-85 TRT Issue: IC Conduit Supports (21pages)
24. 11-21-85 Teledyne Engineering services letter to:

Vince Noonan from: Donald F.1.anders re:

preliminary trip report for activities conducted at CPSES related to the Construction Adequacy Program.

(8pages)

25. 11-25-85 U.S. NRC Memo for: V. Noonan through: E. H. Johnson from T. F. Westerman

Subject:

Visual Inspection Painted ASME Section III Pipe Welds (1 page)

26. 11-25-85 NRC Audits of Comanche Peak Response Team Construction Reinspection / Documentation Review Program (ISAP VII.C)

(20 pages) 27, 11-26-85 US NRC Memo for: L. Shao, J., Calvo, J. Milhoan-from: A. Vietti-Cook,

Subject:

Trip Reports (2pages) 28, 11-28-85 US NRC Memo Related to CPRT Program Plan Revision 3 (13pages) 29, 12-02-85 Work Process Definition for I.arge Bore Pipe Support

- Non-Rigid Population Group (LBSN)

(12 pages)

30. 12-03-85 Work Process Definition for Small Bore Pipe Support Population Group (SBPS)

(12 pages) 4

y.

i

31. '12-11-85 Memo for: I.. C. Shao from: David Terao

Subject:

Audit Sumary of CPRT Construction Evaluation Program

, (Piping / Pipe Supports)

D -

(4 pages)

32. 12-12-85 Mark up Version of Inspection Report from Initial Two CPRT Audits (20 pages)
33. 13-85 Lawrence livermore letter to: E. B. Tomlinson from:

Paul Chan,

Subject:

Inspection Report for CPSES October 1985 (Draft)

(23 pages) 34, 12-18-85 Memo for: L. Shao from: Shou Fou,.

Subject:

Trip Report - Audit of SWEC Non-Seismic Piping Effects on Seismic Design Piping (19pages)

35. 12-18-85 U.S. NRC Memo for: L. C. Shao from: Shou Hou,

Subject:

Trip Report - Audit of SWEC Non-Seismic

. Piping Effects on Seismic Design Piping (19 pages) 35a. 1-3-86 U.S. NRC Memo for: I. Shao and J. Calvo from: D.

I Terao,

Subject:

Input to SSER to Comanche Peak CPRT L Program Plan (3pages)

36. 1-6-86 ASLB NRC staff coments on Statistical Inference Memorandum (8 pages) l 37. 8-86 CPRT Coments (17pages) 38, 1-8-86 CPRT SSER Draft Revision with coments by staff personnel (42 pages) i 5

a l

39. 1-8-85 :SSER on CPRT Program Plan - ADpendix I '

(73 pages) 1 39a 1-9-86 U.S. NRC Memo for V. Noonan from: I.. Shao,

Subject:

Comments on IE' inspection of DAP.

(2pages) 396. 1-15-86 U.S. NRC Memo for: V. Noonan from: B. Grimes',

Subject:

- QA Review Comanche Peak (11pages)

40. 1-16-86 CPRT SSER for Rev. 3 Draft 2 for Sections I, II, and IV (163 pages)-

41, 1-16-86 Staff Evaluation of CPRT SSER for ISAP V.a through V.e with modification (17~ pages)

42. 1-29-86 Appe'ndix B - Staff Evaluation of the CPRT Construction Adequacy Program Plan (18 pages)
43. 1-30-86 Section IV - Staff Evaluation of Construction Adequacy Plan - Draft-1 (8 pages)

[ 44, 2-6-86 U.S. NRC Memo for: I. Shao from: Shou Hou

Subject:

Audit of Mechanical TRT Issues (15 pages) 45, 2-10-86 Memo to: Bob Masterson from: Ernie Thompson re:

! Staff Evaluation of CPRT SSER for ISAP V.d with l modifications (7 pages) 46, 2-11-86 Engineering Analyses Services Inc. Memo to: D. Jeng from: V.P. Ferrarini

Subject:

Review Rev. 3 of CPRT Program Plan in the Areas of Civil / Structural Concerns l (8pages) i j 47. 2-18-86 Safety Evaluation Report Related to CPRT Program l Plan, Revision 3 (266 pages) l 6

--,r, - . - - , , , , . ,. - -

,--- - .--.,----.,,r. . - . , - - - , - - - , - - , , , , , , , , . - -

~

48. 2-18-86 Safety Evaluation Report related to CPRT Program Plan with comments (225 pages) 49, 2-19-86 Coments on the SSER/or CPRT Program Plan (108 pages)
50. 2-25-86 U.S. NRC Telefax to: Robert Masterson c/o I.arry Shou from: F. Shannon Phillips

Subject:

Comments by RIV for CPRT SSER for ISAPS V1.a and V1.b (7 pages)

51. 3-3-86 U.S. NRC Memo to: 1.arry Shao from: Shou Fou

Subject:

Audit CPRT on Safety Significant Evaluation and Appendix P Issues (3 pages)

52. 3-11-86 Battelle letter to: Charlie Hofmayer from: Bernard Saffell

Subject:

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant Technical Assistance ONL Contract No. 216529-S. With Attachment (120 pages)

53. 3-19-86 Note to: D. Jeng from: C. Hofmayer

Subject:

SER related to Comanche Peak Response Team (CPRT) Program Plan, Revision 3. SER attached. (43 pages)

54. 3-25-86 U.S. NRC l.etter to: William Counsil from: Vince Noonan re: Comments regarding several ISAPS contained in the CPRT Program Plan (5 pages)
55. 3-27-86 CP SSER 13 (90pages)
56. 4-1-86 Memo for: Jose Calvo from: E.B. Tomlinson

Subject:

Report of Site Audit of CPRT Self Initiated Construction Adequacy Program - October 1985.(19 pages) 57, 4-2-86 CP SSER 13 Sec. 2 (10 pages) 7

58, 4-3-86 U.S. NRC Note to: J. Calvo, l. Sheo from: C. Trammell

Subject:

Remaining Work for Comanche Peak Program Plan SSER (#13) (2 pages)

59. 4-8-86 Rockwell International letter to: Vince Noonan from:

F.W. Poucher

Subject:

Review of Issue Specific Action Plan V.d of Comanche Peak Review Team Program Pl.an, Revision 3 (6 pages)

60. 4-9-86 Brookhaven National lab letter to: Dr. Harold Berkson from: Anthony Romano

Subject:

Status of funding on FIN A-3803. (9 pages)

61. 4-9-86 U.S. NRC Note to: J. . Calvo, I., Shao from: C. Trammell

Subject:

Remaining Work for Comanche Peak Program Plan (SSER #13) Update #2 (1 page)

62. 4-9-86 CP SSER 13 (29 pages)
63. 4-9-86 CP SSER 13 - Rev. 4 (94 pages)
64. 4-9-86 CP SSER 13 (89 pages)
65. 4-12-86 CP SSER 13 - Rev. 6 (104pages)
66. 4-16-86 Facsimile to: David Jeng from: C. Hofmayer re:

Tentative Agenda NRC Comanche Peak Site Audit Meeting Civil / Structural Area May 5-7, 1986 - Agenda attached (3pages) t 8

Y 66 a 4-21-86 Memo to Brian Grires from V. Noonan re: Procedure for review of CPRT Results Reports

67. 5-15 U.S. NRC Memo for: Jose Calvo from: E.B..Tomlinson

Subject:

Report of Site Audit of CPRT Self-Initiated Construction Adequacy Program - October 1985 (24

, - pages)

68. No date CPRT Construction Adequacy Program Audit 1

(2pagesi 3 69. No date Chart of categories, or populations of hardware containing similar safety-related work activities. '

a

70. No date CPSES - CPRT - Homogeneous Construction Activities (3 pages)
71. No date QA/QC Review Team Organization Chart (26pages)
72. No date Discussion of Technical Issues in CPRT Sampling Process (5 pages) 1
73. No date Appendix 8 - Staff Evaluation of the CPRT Construction Adequacy Program Plan (CAPP) (6 pages) j 74. No date 5.3.3 Staff Evaluations (5pages) 3 75. No date Appendix 8 - Staff Evaluation of the CPRT Construction Adequacy Program Plan (CAPP) 5.0 (5 pages) 1
76. No date Appendix 8 - Staff Evaluation of the CPRT Construction Adequacy Program Plan (CAPP) 4.0 (5 pages)
77. No date Section IV 2.4 - Staff Evaluation of Construction -

Adequacy Plan - Rev. 3 (11 pages) 9

78. No date SSER on Comanche Peak Response Team Program Plan -

Appendix 8 (4 pages)

79. No date Work Process Definition for large Bore Pipe Support -

Rigid Population Group (l.BSR) (11 pages) 80.. No date large Bore Pipe Supports - Rigid (3 pages)

E1. No date Definition of Work Processes for Population large Bore Pipe Supports - Non-Rigid (5 pages)

62. No date Definition of Work Process for Small Bore Pipe Supports (6 pages)

E3, No date CPRT Second Random Sample Identification (19 pages)

84. No date Section IV - Page IV-83, Paragraph 2.5 (2 pages)
85. No date SSER Status (3 pages)
86. No date Work Process Definition for Pipe Welds / Material Population Group (PIWM) (8 pages)
87. No date Comments on Train C Conduit Criteria Document
88. No date References Used by C. Fofmayer CPRT Program Plan - Rev. 3 (3 pages)
89. No date Pandwritten Notes re: FIN A-3803 (3 pages)
90. 4-14-86 Evaluation of ISAP II.b - Concrete Compression Strength (5pages) 10
91. 10-22-85_ Battelle Draft - Comanche Peak Response Team Construction Adequacy Program Audit. (8 pages)

,. 92. 4-10-86 Brookhaven National t ab letter to: D. Jeng from: Guiliano DeGrassi subject: CP Conduit Support Program Audit Meeting Trip Report. (22 pages)

93. 3-11-86 Section 2.5.7 Preoperational Testing (III.d) (2 pages) 11

~ ..

FOIA 86-454 Appendix H Records Being Placed in PDR

1. Undated Handwritten note. Files for ISAP No. I.b.3 (1 page)
2. Undated Handwritten note Files for ISAP No. I.a.4 (1 Page) t
3. 1/2/5/85 Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station Design Change Authorization po. 19948 Rev. 2 (5 pages) ,
4. 6/28/85 CPSES Nonconformance Report No. E-85-100486S (8 pages)
5. 2/12/85 CPSES Nonconformance Report No. E-85-100054S (1 page)
6. 4/24/86 CPSES'Nonconformance Report No. E-86-101727 (1 page) s
7. 4/30/86 CPSES Nonconformance Report No. E-86-101777 (1 page)
8. 5/2/86 CPSES Nonconformance Report No. E-86-101833S (1 Page)

, 7,; ,

., t; ,

t FOIA 86-454

,e Page 2 j[

9. 5/2/86 CPSES Nonconformance Report No. E-86-101834S

-(1 page) - ,.

10. 5/2/86 CPSES Nonconformance Report No.-E-86-101835S

. (1 page) < c-

't t

g

11. 1/18/85 CPSES Construction Operation Traveler No. EE85-11,268-3101, - (2 pages)

~

.s s.

12. 1/18/85 CPSES Construction Operation Travele:s No. EE85-11,264-2003 (1 page)
13. 5/1/86 CPSES Field Design Change & Review Status log I Dwg 2323-El-0172 (1 page) '

.tl

/ , s<

- . . .- t r

14. 4/29/83 TUCCo drawings 2323-El-0139-CP3 2323-El-0156 CP6 '

, 2323-El-0107-CP1 2323-El-0156 CY7- ~

2323-El-0171-CP6 -

2323-El-0172-CP4 -

2323-El-0172-CP3, ,

2323-El-0112-CP4 '

2323-El-0172-CP4

,^

t

  • e

, e1

_ , - . , . , . , , -- - -n-- , - - . - - ,

m.-I-V Re: F0IA 86-272 and 86-454' APPENDIX I Records Denied in Entirety Exemption (5)

'1. - 05/29/86. Memo to Annette Vietti-Cook from C6arles Rossi Re: ISAP I,b.3, Conduit to Cable Tray Separation, Comanche Peak Steam -

Electric Station, Units 1 & 2 (2pages) w/ enclosure L a. Technical Evaluation.of the ISAP I.b.3 Results Report .

, Revision 1, Regarding Conduit to. Cable Tray Se

~

Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station (6 pages)paration at-2.- 05/08/86 Facsimile Transmittal Re and J. Malonson (1 page) w/ quest to Ward Smith from C.- Trammell enclosures

a. Results Report Revision -1, 3/13/86-~ISAP III.d Preoperational Testing (4pages)
b. Comanche Peak Response Team Results Report - Preoperational i

'TestingRevision1(24pages) .

3. 04/24/86 Draft Evaluation of ISAP II.b - Concrete Compression Strength
(5pages)
4. 04/24/86 Draft Evaluation of ISAP II.b - Concrete Compression Strength (5 pages)

. 5. 04/14/86 Draft Evaluation of ISAP II.b - Concrete Compression Strength  ;

(5 pages)

6. 03/05/86 Handwritten Telephone Conversation Record to Dan' Lurie from E. Thompson Re: Statistical Aspects of CPRT Action Plan, ISAP V.D., Plug Welds (Revision 3) (1 page) 4
7. 12/16/85 Facsimile Transmission to Ed Tomlinson from E. Saffell

()page)w/ enclosure

a. Comanche Peak - Construction Re-Inspection / Documentation Review (6pages)
8. 12/10/85 Handwritten Exit Interview for NRC/NRR Site Visit (4 pages) i- 9. Undated Handwritten Memo to Ed Tomlinson from P. Mansterson Re:

ConstructionAdequacyAuditonStructuralAreas(1page) w/ enclosures

a. 12/5/85 Handwritten Memo to Ed Tomlinson from Bernie Sathell Re: ISAPVII.(c) Audit (2pages)

, b. 12/5/85 Handwritten Memo to Ed Tomlinson from John Hashenal  !

Re: Audit of the Two HVAC Populations in the Mechanical Discipline (2pages)

, 10: Undated II,bConcreteCompressionStrength(5pages)

,I, -- v --, , , ,y-. _ . ' _ ,f . . , , , ,.y.,,,,_._.,-,-p

7 g .

,p<o

'i .i!

.s v. +-

s,,

[ 4: Re: F01A-86-272 and 86-454 n s f 11. Undated ' Draft Additional RAI on ISAP II.6 (1 page) tv s

_ 12. lindated "

Draft Question on the VII.b.2 Results Report (1 page) w/ enclosures-

a. 5510 Control Sheet (1 page) 13.. Undated Draft Version I.a.3 - Introduction Re: Comanche Peak (5 pages)

[

'i

14. 'l Undated Safety Eva10ation by the.0ffice of NRR Re: the ISAP III.d Results Report for Texas Utilities Electric Company, et al.
g. Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station Units 1 and 2 (4 pages)

, t

e. , g 6

t.

\

g-o f

' h.

i eb n

5 g ,k t

j ,,

.~,,

  • f f

I l

6 i; } .

5/

  • ,.\

q'.

/

l-Q -- - . . - . _ _

p F01A-86-454 (Final Response)

Appendix J Danied Records - Exemption 5

1. 04/24/86 Memo for T. Westerman from L. Ellershaw re: Review of Results Reports VII.B.2 and II.b. w/ handwritten notations (2 pages)
2. 05/13/86 Memo for V. Noonan from E. Johnson re: Staff Questions Re:

ISAPNo.VII.b.2ResultsReport(1page)

3. Undated Draft Memo for V. Noonan from E. Johnson re: Evaluation Report and concurrence page (2 pages) w/ attachments:
a. Evaluation Report, ISAP III.d (4 pages) b.Typingcoverpage(1page)
4. 05/16/86 Memo for V. Noonan from E. Johnson re: Evaluation Report (1page)w/ attachment:

a.EvaluationReport,(ISAPIII.d)(4pages) l

~

GOVERNMENT ACCOUNT DILITY PROJECT 1555 Connechcut Avenue. N.W., Suite 202 Washingron. D.C. 20036 (202)232-8550 April 9, 1986 FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT REQUEST Director FREEDOW OF INR)RMATION office of Administration ACT REQUEST Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 h[f g g 7th To Whom It May Concern:

Y Pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act ("FOIA"), 5 USC 552, the Government Accountability Project (GAP) requests copies of any and all agency records and information, including but not limited to notes, letters, memoranda, drafts, minutes, diaries, logs, calendars, tapes, transcripts, summaries, interview reports, procedures, instructions, engineering analyses, drawings, files, graphs, charts, maps, photographs, agreements, handwritten notes, studies, data sheets, notebooks, books, telephone messages, computations, voice recordings, computer runoffs, reports, and any and all other records or reports relevant to and/or generated in connection with all information developed since October 1, 1985 regarding the evaluation of individual ISAP's at Comanche Peak, by all staff, including consultants.

This request includes all agency records as defined in 10 C.F.R. 9.3a(b) and the NRC Manual, Appendix 0211, Parts 1.A.2 and A.3 (approved October 8, 1980) whether they currently exist in the NRC official, " working," investigative or other files, or at any other location, including private residences.

If any records as defined in 10 C.F.R. 9.3a(b) and the NRC manual, and covered by this request have been destroyed and/or removed after this request, please provide all surrounding I

records, including but not limited to a list of all records which have been or are destroyed and/or removed, a description of the action (s) taken relevant to, generated in connection with, and/or issued in order to implement the action (s) .

GAP requests that fees be waived, because " finding the information can be considered as primarily benefitting the general public," 5 USC section 552 (a) (4) (a) . GAP is a non-profit, non-partisan public interest organization concerned with honest and open government. Through public outreach, the Project promotes whistleblowers as agents of government accountability.

Through its Environmental Whistleblower Clinic, GAP offers assistance to local publ',c interest and citizens groups seeking to ens.are the health and safety of their communities. The Environmental adstleblower Clinic is currently assisting several v fh6 "hOf0 m

-u

Director,-Office of. Administration Page Two citizens groups, local governments, and intervenors in Texas concerning the construction of the Comanche Peak nuclear' power plant.

We are requesting the above information as part of an ongoing monitoring project on the adequacy of Region IV and the NRC's efforts to protect public safety and health at nuclear power plants.

For any documents or portions that you deny due to a specific FOIA exemption, please provide an index itemizing and-derscribing the documents or portions 'of documents withheld. Tha lindex should provide a detailed justification of your grounds for claiming each exemption, explaining why each exemption is relevant to the document or portion of.the. document withheld.

~

This index is required under Vaughn v. Rosen (I), 484 F.2d.

section 820'(D.C. Cir. 1973), cert. denied, 415 U.S. section 977 (1974).

~

ewe look forward to your response to this request within ten working days.

Sincerely, Billie Pirner Garde Director, Environmental Whistleblower Clinic BPG:41909C 3

~

,2 Gr t'kANMENT ACCOUNT BluTY PROJECT 1555 Comever Awnue, N.W., Suite 202 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202)232-8550 June 16, 1986 TE I Director office of Administration' U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission /

4-@

Washington, D.C. 20555 Yf-[f Re: FOIA Request To whom it may concern:

Pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), 5 U.S.C.

552, as amended, the Government Accountability Project (GAP) requests copies of any and all agency records and information, including but not limited to notes, letters, memoranda, drafts, minutes, diaries, logs, calendars, tapes, transcripts, summaries, interview reports, procedures, instructions, engineering analyses, drawings, files, graphs, charts, maps, photographs, agreements, handwritten notes, studies, data sheets, notebooks, books, telephone messages, computations, voice recordings, computer runoffs, any other data compilations, interim and/or final reports, status reports, and any and all other records relevant to and/or generated in connection with the following:

The NRC's review of ISAP's I.a.4, I.b.3, II.b., III.de, and VII.b.2, released by Texas Utilities on April 14, 1986.

This request includeN all agency records as defined in 10 C.F.R. 9.3a(b) and the NRC Manual, Appendix 0211, Parts 1.A.2 and l A.3 (approved October 8, 1980), whether they currently exist in the NRC official, " working", investigative, or other files, or at any other location, including private residences.

If any records as defined in 10 C.F.R. 9.3a(b) and the NRC Manual, supra, and covered by this request have been destroyed and/or removed, or are destroyed and/or removed after receipt of this request, please provide all surrounding records, including but not limited to a list of all records which have been or are destroyed and/or removed, a description of the action (s) taken relevant to, generated in connection with, and/or issued in order to implement the action (s). -

GAP requests that fees be waived, because " finding the j information can be considered as primarily benefitting the gene-ral public. " 5 U.S.C. 552(a) (4) (A). GAP is a non-profit, nonpartisan public interest organization concerned with honest and open government. Through its Citizens Clinic, GAP offers assistance to local public interest and citizens groups seeking to ensure the health and safety of their communities.

f 1

- Q (f Qv"<

n CU su i'./

d[ -; i gff I

e FOIA Request June 16, 1986 Page Two GAP is requesting the above . information as part of an ongoing monitoring project on the adequacy of-the NRC's efforts to protect public safety and health at nuclear power plants.

For any documents or portions of documents that you deny due to a specific FOIA exemption, please provide an index itemizing-and describing the documents or portions of documents withheld.

The'index shou,1d provide a detailed justification of your grounds-for claiming each exemption, explaining why each exemption is relevant to the document or portion of the document withheld.

This index_is required under Vaughn v. Rosen M ,~484 F. 2d 820 (D.C. Cir. 1973), cert. denied, 415 U.S. 977 (1974).

We look forward to your response to this request within ten Respectfully, d

Billie Pirner Garde Citizens Clinic Director.

4 42113 I

l l

l I . - _ - . - - - - _ - - - _ _ - . . _ - - . . _ _ _ __ _ ..

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML20212M572&oldid=3245150"