ML20247N285

Forwards Safety Insp Rept 50-341/89-15 on 890515-19 & Notice of Violation

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: IR 05000341/1989015 ML20247N285 ML20247N296
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

PDR 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. Notice of Violation l

'

2. Inspection Report

No.50-341/89015(DRP) ,

i

I

- cc w/ enclosures * '

Patricia' Anthony, Licensing

P. A. Marquardt, Corporate

Legal-Department

DCD/DCB (RIDS)

.t Licensing Fee Management Branch

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

W $k

i

. McCB/jp

Q& VOAU

n

!

Kqop _ Grepnma

S/Sofy 601N 5fbel0

- _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

.