ML20247N996

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Ack Receipt of Informing NRC of Clarification to Commitment Made in Ltr ,in Response to Issues Identified in Insp Repts 50-373/96-11 & 50-374/96-11 Re Sys Engineering Assignments & Engineering Assurance Group
ML20247N996
Person / Time
Site: U.S. Geological Survey, LaSalle
Issue date: 05/15/1998
From: Grobe J
NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III)
To: Kingsley O
COMMONWEALTH EDISON CO.
References
50-373-96-11, 50-374-96-11, NUDOCS 9805270293
Download: ML20247N996 (3)


See also: IR 05000373/1996011

Text

R

gggxe

+

4

May 15, 1998

i

i

Mr. Oliver D. Kingsley

.

'

President, Nuclear. Generation Group .

Commonwealth Edison Company

ATTN. Regulatory Services

Executive Towers West til

1400 Opus Place, Suite 500

,

- Downers Grove, IL 60515

1

SUBJECT:

CLARIFICATION OF RESPONSE TO INSPECTION REPORT NO.

50-373/96011(DRS); 50-374/96011(DRS) REGARDING SYSTEM

_

ENGINEERING ASSIGNMENTS AND ENGINEERING ASSURANCE GROUP

(EAG) FUNCTIONS

i

i

Dear Mr. Kingsley:

This acknowledges receipt of your letter dated April 10,1998, notifying us of a clarification to a

commitment made in your letter dated January 10,1997, in response to issues identified in'

I

NRC inspection report 50-373/96011(DRS); 50-374/96011(DRS).

r

In your original response, bullet 1 discussed " system qualifications for all System Engineering

personnel for assigned systems in accordance with plant procedures (all systems will be

,

assigned)." Your clarification to this response was that the intent of this action was to have a

i

system engineer assigned to all systems that have a Maintenance Rule function, are

i

safety-related, or are PRA significant.

j

in addition, bullet 2 discussed the Engineering Assurance Group (EAG) functions and identified

'

that EAG reviews would be "in-line for the following engineering products: safety evaluations,

operability evaluations, technical specification clarifications, root cause reports, selected design

.

packages, selected material evaluations, LERs, and regulatory submittals." Your clarification to

,

this response was that some of the reviews identified above were not in the EAG charter as

,

in-line, but rather final product reviews; and that some reviews were assigned to other

,

L

organizations and therefore would not be reviewed by the EAG.

1

'

l

i

1

i

l

i

'

i

'9805270293'990515

i

5

PDR

ADOCK 05000373

f

G

PDR

l

j

!

.

h .,

-

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

.

O. Kingsley

2

We have reviewed your clarification to the response originally submitted and have no further

questions at this time. This change will be examined during future inspections.

Sincerely,

original /s/ J. A. Grobe

John A. Grobe, Director

Division of Reactor Safety

Docket Nos.: 50-373; 50-374

License Nos.: NPF-11; NPF-18

Enclosure: Lir dtd 4/10/98 from F. Dacimo,

Comed to USNRC

cc w/o encl:

M. Wallace, Senior Vice President

D. Helwig, Senior Vice President

G. Stanley, PWR Vice President

J. Perry, BWR Vice President

D. Farrar, Regulatory

Services Manager

1. Johnson, Licensing Director

DCD - Licensing

F. Dacimo, Site Vice President

T. O'Connor, Station Manager

P. Bames, Regulatory Assurance

oupervisor

cc w/ encl:

Richard Hubbard

Nathan Schloss, Economist

Ottice of the Attorney General

~

State Liaison Officer

Chairman, Illinois Commerce

Commission

DOCUMENT NAME: G:DRS\\LAS05196.TY

v.

e.~. . py .,ih

ooeumont, inoic.i. In the bor' 'C's Copy wthout attachment / enclosure T e Copy Wth attachmenuenciosore "N" a No copy

OFFICE

Rill

lC/ Rlli

A

JiHfl

yJ

l

Rlli

l

s

NAME

Duncan:sd 4,

Jacobsor/ % W GrobeLK

~

DATE

05/d /98

05AN98 x 3

054f/9$

OFFICIAL ret 0RD COPY

l

- ___ _ _ - __ _ _ _ __ - - _-____ - _____ - ______ _ _ _ _ __ - __-__

- _ _ _ _

_ _ _ - _ - _ - _ _ -

.

,

l

l

O. Kingsley _

3

Distnbution:

Project Mgr., NRR w/enct

A. Beach w/enci

J. Caldwell w/enct

B, Clayton w/ encl .

,

SRI LaSalle w/enci

!

'

DRP w/enci

TSS w/enci

DRS w/enct

Rlli PRR w/ encl

PUBLIC IE-01 w/enci

Docke'. File w/enci

GREENS

!

!

o

'

!

l.

l-

1

l

,,

,.

e

,

I '4 HilHis tHu r,ellil l ail %4 HI I 4'lllftlU

1.1%.ille (.cncr.ituig %t.iiton

Just %rtli 21 1 Rail

ilar t i lt . ll ol4e1 '~i-

imim n m

April 10,1998

United Gtates Nuclear Regulatory Commission

Attention: Document Control Desk

Washington, D.C. 20555

Subject:

Supplemental Response to NRC INSPECTION

REPORT NO. 50-373/96011; 50-374/96011 (DRS)

LaSalle County Station, Units 1 and 2

,

Facility Operating License NPF-11 and NPF-18

NRC Docket Nos. 50-373 and 50-374

References:

(1)

G.E. Grant Letter to W.T. Subalusky, dated

November 15,1996, Transmitting NRC

Inspection Report 373/374/-96011

(2)

W.T. Subalusky letter to USNRC, dated

January 10,1997, Transmitting Response to

NRC Inspection Report 373/374/-96011

The Reference 2 letter responded to a number of violations identified in the

Reference 1 Inspection Report. The purpose of this letter is to clarify a

number of the actions that were descr! bed as being developed for

implementation in January 1997.

Specifically, on page 7 of the Reference 2 letter, LaSalle summarized the

most important of the improvement efforts that would be implemented prior

to restart of Unit 1. LaSalle indicated that detailed action steps for each of

these areas was being prepared. These action steps were included in the

LaSalle County Restart Plan.

Based on the implementation of the Restart Plan, LaSalle must clarify the

intent of two actions listed on page 7 of the Reference 2 letter.

Bullet 1 discusses " system qualifications for all System Engineering

.

personnel for assigned systems in accordance with plant procedures

(all systems will be assigned)."

l

  • H G

l Moyte rt+ .yp.

a,

,

,e

<.

The intent of this action was to have a System Engineer

-

assigned to all systems that have a Maintenance Rule function,

are safety-related or are PRA significant. Systems have been

assigned based on this criteria.

Bullet 2 discusses the Engineering Assurance Group (EAG) functions.

.

It identified that reviews would be "in-line for the following engineering

products: Safety Evaluations, Operability Evaluations, Technical

Specification Clarifications, Root Cause Reports, selected design

packages, selected material evaluations, LERs,. regulatory

submittals."

As the EAG Charter was developed in early 1997, some of the

reviews indicated above were not included in the EAG Charter or

were assigned to be completed by another organization.

The Corrective Action Review Board is responsible for in-line

-

reviews of root cause reports. As such, the EAG does not

perform these reviews.

" Selected design packages" and " selected material

-

evaluations" are not reviewed in-line. Per the EAG Charter,

selected reviews of final design packages and material

evaluations are completed by the EAG.

i

The EAG Charter was not clear on the scope of " regulatory

-

submittals". This has been defined as License Amendment

-

Requests.

If there are any questions or comments conceming this letter, please refer

them to Harry Pontious, Regulatory Assurance Manager, at (815) 357-6761,

extension 2383.

Res

ully,

V

,

Fred R. Dacimo

Site Vice President

LaSalle County Station

cc: VA. B. Beach, NRC Region 111 Administrator

M. P. Huber, NRC Senior Resident inspector - LaSalle

D. M. Skay, Project Manager - NRR - LaSalle

.

4