ML20247N285
| ML20247N285 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Fermi  |
| Issue date: | 05/31/1989 |
| From: | Greenman E NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| To: | Sylvia B DETROIT EDISON CO. |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20247N291 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8906050306 | |
| Download: ML20247N285 (2) | |
See also: IR 05000341/1989015
Text
-
_ , - _ .
~s;
?h
,
..
'
%
.,3,
.
.;
y
i4
MAY 31 1999
,
i-
r
E
. Docket.No. 50-341'
The Detroit Edison Company.
- ' ATTN:
.B. Ralph Sylvia ~
Senior Vice President
Nuclear Operations
6400 brth Dixie Highway
F
- Newport, MI: 48166
Gentlemen:
l
This. refers;to the special safety inspection-conducted by
i
. Mr. J. W. McCormick-Barger of'this office on May 15-19, 1989, of activities
!
. at Fermi Nuclear Power Plant, Unit 2, authorized by NRC Operating License
No. NPF-43 and to the discussion of our. findings with Mr. S. Catola and
.
.
- others of your staff at the. conclusion 'of the inspection on May 19,1989.
'
The enclosed' copy of our inspection report identifies areas ' examined during
the. inspection. Within these areas, the inspection consisted'of a selective
'
examination of procedures and representative records, observations, and
interviews with personnel.
'
-
l
During this inspection, certain 'of your activities appeared to be in
violation of NRC requirements, as described-in the enclosed' Notice.
A written response is-required.
)
The NRC has concerns about your use of Potential Design Changes (PDCs) to
correct deficiencies identified in lead design documents. Please respond
to this concern within thirty (30) days of receipt of this letter.
Your
response should include:
(1) a discussion of how your PDC program determines
root cause and trending and performs additional reviews and actions if lead
l
design document deficiencies are found to be pervasive, (2) a discussion of
how your management directive and implementing procedures are not~in conflict
i
with each other concerning the use of a PDC instead of a Deviation Event
Report, and (*>) a discussion of how your PDC program assures that design
- document discrepancies are receiving adequate engineering and QA reviews for
considerations such as seismic and environmental qualification, and other
!
design related analyses that may be necessary when components originally
j
thought to be installed are later found not to be,
i
'l
\\
4t-
.2
i
$
s
'
e906050306 890531
ADOCK0500g1
Q
- .
_
._.
__
__
_ . _ .
_
_.)
_
, _
_
_
_-
- - _ - _ _ - - _ _ -
- - _ _ -
S ..
..
.
,
,
I
The Detroit Edison Company.
.2
gh I i 1989
f
. In accordance with 10 CFR 2.790 of the Commission's regulations, a copy of
this letter, the enclosures, and your responses to this letter will be placed-
in the NRC Public Document Room.
. We will gladly _ discuss any questions you have'concerning this inspection.
Sincerely,
ORIGINAL SIGNED BY W. L. FORNEY
i
Edward G. Greenman, Director
,
Division of Reactor Projects
i
Enclosures:
1.
l
'
2.
Inspection Report
No.50-341/89015(DRP)
,
i
- cc w/ enclosures *
I
Patricia' Anthony, Licensing
'
P. A. Marquardt, Corporate
Legal-Department
DCD/DCB (RIDS)
Licensing Fee Management Branch
.t
Resident Inspector, RIII
Ronald' Cal bn, Michigan
Public Smice Conmissign
Harry 11. Voight, Esq.
!
Michigan Department of
'Public Health
Monroe County Office of
' Civil Preparedness
bcc w/ enclosures.
l
C. Weil
.
\\/ej,
Qal
4t5
RIII
RIII
RIII
RIII
i
Q&
VOAU
W
$k
!
. McCB/jp
n
Kqop _
Grepnma
6 1N
5fbel0
S/Sofy
0
-
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
_ _
_ _
_
.