ML20245L721

Supplemental Deficiency Rept CP-85-52 Re Cable Tray Hanger Reverification Program.Initially Reported on 851220.Field Verification & Insp Program Initiated.Info Collected Will Be Utilized for Analysis Required to Validate Tray Hanger

ML20245L721
Person / Time
Site:	Comanche Peak
Issue date:	06/29/1989
From:	William Cahill TEXAS UTILITIES ELECTRIC CO. (TU ELECTRIC)
To:	NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM)
References
CP-85-52, TXX-89358, NUDOCS 8907060057
Download: ML20245L721 (2)

Text

. .

,m .

~

M F %'

Log # TXX-89358, File # 10110

,, l CP-85-35 CP-85-52 1UELECTRIC 903.9 Ref, # 10CFR50.55(e)'

{$(aJg, Cji$Jl, June 29, 1989 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Attn: Document Control Desk Washington, D. C. 20555

SUBJECT:

COMANCHE PEAK STEAM ELECTRIC STATION (CPSES)

DOCKET NO. 50-445 CABLE TRAY HANGER REVERIFICATION PROGRAM

.SDAR: CP-85-52 (SUPPLEMENTAL REPORT)

Gentlemen:

On December 20,~1985, TV Electric notified the NRC vie report TXX-4657 of a reportable deficiency regarding the Cable Tray Hanger Reverification Program.

The last report submitted on this issue was logged TXX-89107, dated March 1, 1989. The purpose of.this report is to explain how the corrective action for this issue is encompassed by the corrective actions for Significant Deficiency Analysis Report (SDAR) CP-85-35 (Cable Tray Hanger Design).

In order to resolve design and construction deficiencies identified by SDAR CP-85-35, a field verification and inspection program was initiated.

Information collected by this program was to be utilized for an-analysis required to validate the integrity of cable tray hangers. -Discrepancies and inconsistencies were identified in the conduct and methodology for these field verifications and inspections. These problems were subsequently ~ reported as SDAR CP-85-52.

As previously discussed in the report on SDAR CP-85-52, TXX-88546 dated July 26,1988, applicable procedures / field verification methods were revised and personnel were retrained to.the. revised criteria. Cable tray hangers that had been validated / inspected up to that time were reinspected in accordance with the revised criteria.

During reinspection of the previou:1y inspected work, no attempt was made to segregate and evaluate any' additional hardware deficiencies not identified during the first inspections. Instead we conservatively assumed that had f these additional hardware problems not been identified, the results of subsequent engineering evaluations would have been invalid. .This issue was conservatively deemed reportable and any hardware deficiencies are being' handled in the came manner as other-. hardware deficiencies identified during resolution of SDAR CP-85-35.

'8907060057 890629 }

PDR ADOCK 05000445 g. TE>l S.. PNV k 400 North Olive Street LB81 Dallas, Texas 75201

?

,.. r* .

i l

TXX 89358 June 29, 1989 Page 2 0: 2

As discussed above SDAR CP-85-35 envelopes the remaini,79 corrective action for SDAR CP-85-52 and SDAR CP-85-52 is considered complete. .l Sincerely, r

I William J. ahill, Jr.

CBC/ddm {

c - Mr. R. D. Martin, Region IV '

Resident Inspectors, CPSES (3) i i

i .. . . . . , . . .

_ _ _ _ J