ML20195G495: Difference between revisions

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(StriderTol Bot insert)
 
(StriderTol Bot change)
 
Line 18: Line 18:


=Text=
=Text=
{{#Wiki_filter:}}
{{#Wiki_filter:-  _ _ _ - _ _ _                          --      - - - - - - - - - __                      _                    - - - - - - - - - _ _      _
s                                                                                                                                              '
we.,9                                      UNITEJ 87ATes                                                                [U NUCLEAR RE'lVLATORY COMMISSION
[                    f;                      w AaH** TON. 6. c. aones s
m_.u,_
a r %.
                                                                                          ..,  pg
      '****                        w s.
g-                                            SEP is g37 Victor Stallo, Jr.
MEMORANDUM FOR:
Executive Director for Operations FRON:
Jases G. Keppler, Director Office of Special Projects
 
==SUBJECT:==
SCHEDULE FOR CPRRG RECO M ENDATIONS In response to your memorandum dated September 8, 1987, we have enclosed a schedule for the Category I CPRRG recorsnendations assigned to OSP. The schedules are provided for principal subject areas, with each of the These schedules are estimated associated recocirandations listed thereaf ter.
1 based on our current projection for related technical review and inspection activities. We will keep you informed, particularly if there are substantial                                                  -
changes in these plans.
C1 Gs        w y JamesG.KeblerDirector Office of Special Projects
 
==Enclosure:==
 
CPRRG Reconsnendations for Comanche Peak cc w/enclosurg:
T. Rehm C. Grimes                                                  Inis memorandum is being reissued to P. McKee                                                    incorporate five actions inadvertently J. Lyons                                                    enitted from the group "Unit 2 RPV R. Wartlick                                                in stallation."
1                                    @
        $ w' gc6A' f l.                                                                                                                      (
e h
 
CPRRG RECOMMENDATIONS FOR COMANCHE PEAK EST! MATED COMPLET!ON DATE GROUP December 1987 CONSTRUCTION QA ISSUES m,..
IDi  A  ''    ACTION 23      14    Verify that an adequate quality          Gh.A(ts 01 control procedure exists for QA inspectors to witness the trans-fer of marking for material that would otherwise lose its trace.
ability when cut into smaller sections.
24  -l'        Review NEO procedures for ade, acy    We M (D Ph
                                                                                                        *4 cy of records system.                          %
Review NEO procedures for acequacy
                                                                                                }W/En-w ms/tss-u.es n
25 -B            of ANSI N45.2.9 requirements.                o v W -u-os 26 - 9          Review NEO procedures for adequacy of records shipments to contractors.
WM
                                                                                                    'i '* W "
* i 27 - 10          Review NEO procedures for adequacy      ,
of records shipping containers.
28 - 11          Review NE0 procedures for adequacy of backup records.
i 29 - 1 A        Review NE0 procedures for adequacy of records shipment accounting.
30 - 1 3        Review NEO procedures for adequacy of records shipmer.ts to contractors. l Review NE0 p.'ocedures for adequacy        % 5/'214 01 31 - W          of backup records.                          Sw/Mu -o -ot 32 - 1 3          Review NEO procedures for adequacy        ms/%N u-c4*
of records shipment accounting.            4% /851n -M-0**
Review NEO procedures for adequacy        M/S5M *' 07 33 - 7 0                                                    uwv nu-u-o7 of records storage, 34 . il          Review NEO procedures for adequacy        p'N"C#
* W O3 Vini-4-oi of records filing.
 
i
* t f'
2 ESTIMATED COMPLETION DATE  !
GROUP                                                                                                                                                          :
CONSTRUCTIONQAISSUES(continued) j IDf            ACTION i
47    -        Monitor applicants' response to                                                '/J s
* ok.                                                l staff concerns raised in SSER 11                                              quo /gsc3,9.,7                                            !
regarding their audit program,                                                                                                            l particularly with respect to RPV                                                                                                          l surveillance.                                                                                                                            (
l 59  -
Review Operations Traveler criteria, W w.k Cur es/"4 control and effectiveness.                                                                                                                :
                --        Verify adequate material identi-                                              ts..en'< (CCWS                                            l 63 fication and traceability program                                                                                                        '
for earlier work or review procure-ment and control program for the                                                                                                          l l                                                                                                                                                                    i bulk piping stock at CPSES.                                                                                                              ,
1 66 Determine if the Regulatory Guide                                            Lse e e .k f f' CT j
1.97 QA commitments have been properl; implemented at CPSES.                                                                                                            >
67 -            Review the adequacy of the                                                  L+'at\C'*4[                                                !
Ilcansee's program to update                                                                                                            i
                                                                                                                                                                    ~
permanent installation documen-                                                                                                          i tation when components are changed or replaced.                                                                                                                            !
69              Emphasize safety significance in                                            fratau                                                      !
[
all pertinent aspects of the licensee's QA Program.                                                                                                                  [
3 t
i i
I r
I i
i
[
 
  .t
                                                  -3*                                                    ,
ESTIMATED COMPLETION DATE GROUP                                                                                              .
January 1988 CDR AND 50.55e REPORTING 10f          ACTION 5*M 35
                    -  Audit the CDR p ogram to verify its          CrJ g/g',    o M N '**f,Q adequacy. (Applicant should revise                                                ;
Procedure NE0 CS-1.)
in 36    -      Resolve conflicting TUEC procedures                  /
for 50.55e reporting.                                        /                    <
r l
                                                                          /                u            l 37 Evaluation condition of TUEC 50.55e files.                                            l
                                                                        /                  'l 38 -        Evaluate TUEC for reporting 50.55e corrective actions.                            fi 4
39    - .,  Evaluation condition of TUEC 50.55e        9 files.
l June 1988 l      OISPOSITION OF hRC BULLETINS l          10f        ACTION          ,
i 40    -    Provide applicant with clear and concise        L..    '                        l written evaluation of actions taken to                ' gj s,g g ,, , 3 . o **
l date and specify additicnol actions.                                            !
required to close IEB 79-14.
                  -    Evaluate TUEC program for hRC Bulletin        %t              f.p g n . ,2      l 41 handling.                                                % f g .o.g            j Evaluate TUEC procedures and process for    IA> " U                            i 42 -
NRC Bulletins.                                                /;j,[g.ct b - 0 5- f 1
Evaluate TUEC tracking and' assignment for  (Ae. e s's                          I 43    -
NRC Bulletine.
44      -    Evaluate TUEC resolution of IE8 79-14.        L 3. 4 7?    -    Inspect TUEC resolution of IEb '9-14.          Lga. a l
l l                                                                                                        ,
l
 
ESTIMATED        l COMPLETION DATE      t GROUP                                                                                                                      !
Hay 1988          [
COMPLETION OF CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION t
10f                  ACTION                                                                                          !
5?
Inspecticus included in the 1986 inspection                            M'bdlNa.-)
program, but not completed at Unit 1. should                                                    t I
be reviewed, and thoso determined to be necessary to confirm plant quality, should be accomplished.
U8'*'*\ @ ***'#'
I 73                    Inspections included in the 1986 inspection                                                    !
program, but not completed at Unit 1. Should                                                    i be reviewed, and those determined to be                                                        !
necessary to confirm plant quality, should be accomplished.                                                                                l November 1987      l FIRC SEALS IDi                  ACTION es .w g,.g.p.:,e;.o  ,
45                    Verify adequacy of BISCO seal replacements.                          (W'e s . h)sjj/Qj'$    i Evaluation qualification and documentation                          M
* V ** .      n i                                    50 l
for 815C0 seal replacenents.
I l                                                                                                                                                          l l                                                                                                                                                          l UNIT ? RPV INSTALLATION Jarmary 1989      ,
10f                  ACTION i
l 70 Perform a detailed review of Westinghouse's                          l-y n4 % M '# *
* C4    r l
engineering evaluation regarding translation                                                  t l
of design criteria into installation specift-                                                  '
!                                                          cations, procedures and drawings and failure to control devtations regarding Unit ?.                                                      j Perform a visual inspection of the accessible                        W e' a '*L              !
                                      ?!
reactor vessel surroundings during or after W*N S ' * " ~ "  i hot functional test.                                                                          f i
                                      ??
Perform a detailed review of Westinghouse's                        hu s ( w6 /es:,s
: 4. C..M)% .ow l engineering evaluation of the failure to maintain tolerance for RV support brackets                                                    [
and shoes.                                                                                  ;
t k
l 1
I f
 
l i
L ESTU!ATED                  ,
COMPLr fl0N DATE              ;
GROUP                                                                                            L f
j    UNIT 2RPVINSTALLATION(continued)
IDf '      ACTION 46          Evaluate traveler and NCR procedures with respect    L-*** b f 0'E* -      .
l to the Unit 2 RV support brackets and shoes.            %/g x - u we s as( "
3 4
60          Verify the adequacy of Level ! QC inspection of      Ls 2
RPV installation.                                                                ,
                                                                                      "      )
Review the completet sss of QC coverage and              .4(                      !
4        61                                                                                          !
technical acceptability of the actual inspection
* j' criteria for the installation of all the rajor NSSS components.                                                                [
j                                                                                                    !
!                                                                          March 1988 SPOOL PIECE COPPONENTS 10f        ACTION If spool CVCS spool piece was not marked            We'"*' bu d*N                f 51                                                                                          ;
et the time of inspection, then additional                                      1 review would be warranted. Resolve                                              ;
uncertainty associated with when the spool
:                    piece was marked.
Inspect other field-fabricated spool pieces.      %'eisk (Cevelill)            (
t 62                                                                                        )
February 1988 l    NAMC0 SWITCHES (IEB79-28) 10f        ACTION
                ^
hotify TUEC of recosenended actions and          Wsee-skfday.,'
49                                                              M/*2t w M *1 1                    monitor resolution in EQ CA'.                      W/8.s c-u -cy i
1                                                                        December 1987
. C0hCRETE RECORDS 10f        ACTION l
48          Review statistical data regarding              I-ye*(C"O M 3 Q                i uniformity )f concrete and review                    etys,/ggo'; . cy I
larger samp.e of concrete compression              yd/ tSc -n.
,I tests.                                                  4 U el '*.a
 
,Q                                      ,
l
                                                                                                                                            ;i                                                                                                                                        !
ESTIMATED COMPLET!0N DATE ,
GROUP                                                                                                          (
COMPLETE      ;
PROGRAMMATIC !$$UES i
10f                                        ACTION 02                                          Reinspection of hardware and design                            !
during current Comanche Peak re review.
(Expiteit recomendations in sequence                        I l/                                                                                          number 22 through 50.)                                        !
I I                                                18                                            Establish clear lines of responsibility                      ;
between the Comanche Peak augmented I
inspection program and the established                      j liccasing, and inspection and enforcemert processes.                                                  f 53                                            The status of the inspection programs for                    ;
Unit 2 should be scrittered with respect                    !
to all NRC inspection activities to assure f
i                                                                                              that inspections keep pace with construction and "windows of opportunity" are not lost.                  [
i l
1                                                                                                                                                          r l                                                                                                                                                          ?
I l
t h
8
[
i t
(
                                                                                                                              \                            ;
I
                                                                                                                    \                                      l I
4 f
,                                                                                                                                                          r i                                                                                                                                                          i i                                                                                                                                                          !
l                                                                                                                N                                        !
l                                                                                                                                                          >
1 i
 
M/Y)            .
J
            -                                                                        f      .
UNITtJ STATE 8                              b'
[.        \'          Ni/ CLEAR HEGULATCRY COMMIS$10N
    !                                wm avo.e. o. c. vas
    ;            }
wes
    \...../            -
4'      -
                                              ==m ::
SEP 13 .!!7 l
l Jr Stello, Jr.                                                    ;
NEMORANDUM FOR        ,cutive Director for Operations                                      1 j
James G. Xeppler, Director FROM:                Office of Special Projects SUBJEC7:
SCHEDULE FOR CPRRG RECOMENDATIONS Ir .esponso to your memorandum dated September 8,1987, weThehave enclosed schedule for the Category 1 CPRRG recorrnendations assigned to OSP.
schedulas are provided for principal subject areas, with each of theThese schedu associated recocrendations listed thereafter.
based activities.
on our current projection for related technical revie changes in these plans.
CT        nin>      k James G. Keppler, Director Office of Special Projects
 
==Enclosure:==
 
CPRRG Recocinendations for Cananche Peak cc w/enclosurg.
T. Reben I          C. Grimes                                This memorandum is being reissued to P. McKee                                incorporate five actions inadvertently J. 1.yons                                omitted from the group "Unit 2 RPV R. Warnick                              Installation."
l                          .
l l
[
orM %FC8  tY~                                                                  -
                                                                                                  \q
            'Tv(J                    ef-
 
CPRRG RECOMMENDA710NS FOR COMANCHE FEAK
                                                                  'EST! PATED COMPLETION DATE GROUP December 1987 CONSTRUCTION QA ISSUES 10f              ACTION 23 Verify that an edequate quality control procedure exists for QA inspectors to 'vitaess the trans-fer of marking for material that would otherw',;c lose its trace-abi?'.i:y wher cut into smaller sections.
Review NEO procedures for adequacy 24 of recor6s system.
Review NE0 procedures for acequacy 25                of ANSI N45.2.9 requirements.
Review NE0 procedures for adequacy 26 of records shipments to contractors.
Review NE0 procedures for adequacy 27 of records shipping containers.
Review NE0 procedures for adequacy 28 of backup records.
Review NEO procedures for adequacy 29                'f records shipment accountfeg.
                            ;,aview NE0 procedures for adequacy 30 of records shipments to contractcrs.
Review NE0 procedures for adequacy 31 of backup records.
Review NE0 procedures for adequacy 32 of records shipment accounting.
Review NE0 procedures for adequacy 33 of records storage.
Review NEO procedures for adequacy 34 of reccrds filing.
 
2 ESTIMATED COMPLETION DATE GROUP CONSTRUCTION QA ISSUES (continued)
IDr          ACTION 47 Monitor applicants' responso to staff concerns raised in SSER 11 regarding their audit program, particularly with respect to RPV surveillance.
59 Review Operations Traveler criteria, control and effectiveness.
63 Verify adequate material identi-fication and tiaceability program for earlier work or review procure-ment and control program for the bulk piping stock at CPSES.
66 Determine if the Regulatory Guide 1.97 QA connitments have been properly implemented at CPSES.
67 Review the adequacy of the licensee's program to update permanent installation documen-tation when components are changed or replaced.
69            Emphasize safety significance in all pertinent aspects of the licensee's QA Program.
i
 
                                                                                  \
i 3-ESTIMATED COMPLETION DATE 1 GROUP                                                                        l January 1988 CDR AND 50.55e REPORTING ID#        ACTION 3b Audit the CDR program to verify its idequacy. (Applicant should revise Procedure NE0 CS-1.)
36 Resolve conflicting TUEC procedures            ''
for 50.55e reporting.
37          Evaluation ' condition of TUEC 50.55e
                      'iles.
38 Evaluate TUEC for reporting 50.55e corrective actions.
39        Evaluation condition of TUEC 50.55e files.
June 1988 DISPOSITION OF NRC BULLETINS 10#        ACTION 40          Provide applicant with clear and concise written evaluation of actions taken to date and specify adoitional actions required to close IEB 79-14 41 Evaluate TUEC program for NRC Bulletin handling.
42 Evaluate TUEC procedures and process for NRC Bulletins.
43 Evaluate TUEC tracking and assignment for NP.C Bulletins.
44          Evaluate TUEC resolution of IEd 79-14.
72        Inspect TUEC resolution of ICB 79-14.
1 4
i
 
4 ESTIMATED
                                                                    .0MPLETION DA..
GROUP May 1988 COMPLETION OF CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION                              _
10#        ACTION 5?        Inspections included in the 1986 inspection program, but not completed at Unit 1, should be reviewed, and those determined to be necessary to confirm plant quality, should be accomplished.
73        Inspections included in the 1986 inspection program, but not completed at Unit 1, should be reviewed, and those determined to be-necessary to confirm plant quality, should be accomplished.
November 1987 FIRE SEALS IDf        ACTION 45        Verify adequacy of BISCO seal replacements.
50 Evaluation qualification and documentation for 815C0 seal replacements.
UNIT 2 RPV INSTALLATION January 1989 10#      ACTION
                ~
20 Perfonn a detailed review of Westinghouse's engineering evaluation regarding translation of design criteria into installation speciff-cations, procedures and drawings and failure to control deviations regarding Unit 2, 21 Per'orm a visual inspection of the accessible reactor vessel surroundings during or after hot functional test.
22 Perform a detailed review of Westinghouse's engineering evaluation of the failure to maintain tolerance for RV support brackets and shoes.
 
ESilMATED COMPLETION DATE E
UNIT 2 RPV INSTALLATION (continued)                                  ..
10#        ACTION 46 Evaluate traveler and NCR procedures with respect to the Unit 2 RV support brackets and shoes.
60        Verify the adequacy of Level ! QC inspection of RPV installation.
61 Review the completeness of QC coverage and technical acceptability of the actual inspection criteria for the installation of all the major NSSS components.
March 1988 SPOOL PIECE COMPONENTS IDi        ACTION 51 If spool CVCS spool piece was not marked dt the time of Inspection, then additional review would be warranted. Resolve uncertainty associated with wher the spool piece was marked.
62 Inspect other field-fabricated spool pieces.
February 1988 NANC0 SWITCHES (IEB 79-28) 10#      ACTION 49        Notify TUEC of recommended actions and r.ionitor resolution in EQ CAP.
December 1987 CONCRETE RECORDS                                                                          i ids        ACTION 48          Review statistical data regarding uniformity of concrete and review larger sample of concrete compression tests.
r i
_--a
 
6-ESTIMATED COMPLETION DATE GR000 COMPLEfE PROGRAMMATIC ISSUES IDi          ACTION 02          Reinspection of hardware and design during current Comanche Peak re-review.
(Explicit recommendations in sequence number 22 through 50.)
18 Establish clear lines of responsibility between the Comanche Peak augmented inspection program and the established                        '
licensing, and inspection and enforcement processes.
53 The status of the inspection programs for
                        ' unit 2 should be monitored with respect to all NRC inspection activities to assure that inspections keep pace with construction and "windows of opportunity" are not lost.
r n
0
 
gy
[                                    UkiTED s'(ate 8                                  g g"    l
      /                          NUCLEAR RECULATCRY COMMIS$10N WASHtNGTON O. C. 20005 g
                                                                                                        )
* 2ptabr ::, 1007 4'        -                  SEP 13 G57 Victor Stello, Jr.
MEMORMOUM FOR:
Executive Director for Operations FROM:
James G. Keppler, Director Office of Special Projects
 
==SUBJECT:==
SCHEDULE FOR CPRRG RECOMMENDATIONS In response to your memorandum dated September 8,1987, we have enclosed a schedule for the Category I CPRRG recomendations assigned to OSP. The schedules are provided for principal subject areas, with each of the associated recomendations listed thertaf ter. These schedules are estimated based on our current projection for related technical review and inspection activities. We will keep you informed, particularly if there are substantial -
changes in these plans.
C_T-ler, Director James G. Ke Office of Special Projects
 
==Enclosure:==
 
CPRRG Recomendations for Cceanche Peak cc w/enclosurg:                                                                          ,
T. Rehm                                                                                  t C. Grimes                                This mer .andum is being reissued to P. McKee                                  incor porate five actions inadvertantly J. Lyons                                  omitted from the group "Unit 2 RP R. Warnick                                Installation."
i ta
                                      ~  '
          .        I
                                                                                              /
 
i'u/were '
j, ; .
                                                    ,,...j      ' *
                                                                      'i'fe.t CPRRG RE10MMEN0ATIONS,3
                                            '~f0R COMANCHE PEAX ESTIMATED GRQUP COMPLETION DATE .
                                                                              , December'1987tc,=.
CONSTRUCTIO,N_QA ISJ1LEjL 1Di 1.e a A Imc4 .A_CILON D);m        Verify that an adequate quality              5,-o,def l777 23 control procedure exists for QA inspectors to witness the trans-fer of marking for material that would otherw he lose its trace-ability when cut into smaller sections.
24 H a .e Review NE0 procedures for adequacy' of records system.
25      Ha lc      Review NE0 procedures for adequacy of ANSI N45.2.9 requirements.
26    H a Ie      Review NE0 r,rocedures for adequacy of records snipments to contractors.
27    H, .e Review NEO procedures for adequacy of records shipping containers.
28      Hae        Review'NE0 procedures for adequacy of backup records.
29      H, e      Review NEO procedures for adequacy of records shipment accounting.
30      Hele      Review NEO procedures for adequacy of records shipments to contractors.
31      H,le      Review NE0 procedures for adequacy of backup records.
32      Hale      Review NE0 procedures for adequacy of records shipment accounting.
l 33      Hele      Review NE0 procedures for adequacy of records storage.                                l 34 Review NEO procedures for adequacy                ,
Halc                                                        9 of records filing.
(
 
2 ESTIMAkEO COMPLEr10N DATE
      . , GR0d_P_
CONSJ80CTIONQA. ISSUES (continued)                                                  ,
JO L u nd lif. ACIl0 L 47    H,)e    Monitor applicants' response to            D~- a W "? ? 'i staff concerns raised in SSER 11                                  ,
regarding their audit program.
particularly with respect to RPY surveillance.
59    Vai!,g Review Operations Traveler criteria,                              ,
control and effectiveness.
63    'O<:    Verify adequate material identi-fication and traceability program for earlier work or review procure-ment and control program for the bulk piping stock at CPSES.
66  N'ev0    Determine if the Regulatory Guide 1.97 QA connitments have been properly implemented at CPSES.
67  V. : , ,  Review the adequacy of the C  licensce's program to update permanent installation documen-tation when components are changed or replaced.
69  Me ree    Emphasize safety significance in all pertinent aspects of the                  Y licensee's QA Program.
4
 
3-ESTIMATED COMPLETION DATE
_ 0UP                                                                ~    ~
CDR ANO 50.55e REPORTING                                        January @ 2 -
_IOf L.,g y , ACTION 35    Hale Audit the CDR program to verify its                  s' adequacy. (Applict it should revise Procedure NE0 CS-1.)
( 36 Hele    Resolve conflicting TUEC prv.edures for 50.55e reporting, 37    H s .',        tion conditiots of TUEC 50.55e r ..-
"E            38    Hi'e    Evaluate TUEC for reporting 50.55e corrective actions.
39    HJe    Evaluation condition of TUEC 50.55e                /
files.
June 1988
_ DISP 0_S!JION_Of_NEC BULLE1115 W            J)C3]NN'V s'
40    Lg es Provide applicant with clear and concise c
written evaluation of actions taken to date and specify additional actions required to close IEB 79-14.
41    'd-n Evaluate TUEC prograin for NRC Bulletin handling.
42 !O *c ie    Evaluate 1UEC procedures and process for NRC Bulletins.
43  'A'se-    Evaluate TUEC tracking and assignment for NRC Bulletins.
44  L .,:
f Evaluate TUEC resolution of IEB 79-14.
72 Ly :        Inspect TUEC resolution of IEB 79-14.            .j
 
ESTIMATED
_ COMPLETION DATE ,
A00f "
May.19,88' COMPLET!0N OF CONSTRUCTLON_lhSEECTION 7
10i l*ol:*:t .AC11DL 52      lum                        Inspections included in the 1986 inspection                                e~
program, but not completed at Unit 1, should be reviewed, and those determined to be necessary to confirm plant quality, should be accomplished.
73 1 /<r. ~ Inspections included in the 1986 inspection program, but not completed at Unit 1, should be reviewed, and those determined to be necessary to confirm plant qt.311ty, should                                      /
be accomplished.
November 1987.~
FIRE SEALS
          .$'                              }$YhK' Verify adequacy of BISCO seal replacements.
45
                            '. .N                                    s              N 50                                Evaluation qualification and documen'tation s
N for BISCO seal replacements.
UNIT 2 RPV (NSTALLALION.                                                                                                                '
January 1989
          .jpIP'                        MIIQ'N 9                                                                                              ~
20      L co;                      Perform a detailed review of Westingnouse's 7                          engineering evaluation regarding translation of design criteria into installation specift-cations, procedures and drawings and failure to control deviations regarding Unit 2.
I 21 l/'Ick/ Perform a visual inspection of the accessible Wi"s "' reactor vessel surroundings during or after hot functional test.
22    1 ~ if                        Perform a detailed review of Westinghouse's
                    '7                            engineering evaluation of the failure to maintain tolerance for RV support brackets                                  y'                  ,
and shoes.
I
 
        ~
ESTIMATED          m COMPLET!0N DATE
      ,GR011%
_ UNIT 2 RPV INSTALLATION (continued),
R / r,il, ACTIOL                                                      c .._ .
46    ts.">n'    Evaluate traveler and NCR procedures with respect    ; ~, , , ,, .f - ) ,!
                                                                                                    ~
to the Unit 2 RV support brackets and shoes.                    v 60 ., ,, ,me      Verify the adequacy of Level ! QC inspection of RPV installation.
61  1,'m .. . Review the completeness of QC coverage and technical acceptability of the actual inspection criteria for the installation of all the major            y NSSS components.
March 1988 ^
SP0OL PIECE CONPONENTS-
[OV          >ACTIW 51    %N../ If spool CVCS spool piece was not marked                    ~ ~ ~          -
dt the time of inspection, then additional review would be warranted. Resolve uncertainty associated with when the spool piece was A -d.
62 #1G.c Inspect other rield-fabricated spool pieces.                        ;y Februaryli8'87
      .NANCO 5WITCHEj_UEB J9-28)
            ,I4) '          . AC idf 49    uhy *< Notify TUEC of recomended actions and g "' '                    ;
monitor resolution in EQ CAP.
0ecember 1987 '      7
      , CONCRETE RECORDS                                                          ,
          /JW'            . Agi(OW 48  Lgn:/ Review        statistical data regarding              4 g, ,p,s    uniformity of concrete and review larger sample of concrete compression tests.
l
 
ESTIMATED COMPLETION DATE GROUP COMPLETE PROGRAMMATIC ISSUES 10f        ACTION 02          Reinspection of hardware and design during current Comanche Peak re-review.
(Explicitrecommendationsinsequence number 22 through 50.)
18          Establish clear lines of responsibility between the Comanche Peak augmented inspection program and the established licensing, and inspection and enforcement processes.
53          The status'of the inspection p'rograms for Unit 2 should,be monitored with' respect to all NRC insp'ection activities to assure that inspectiont eep k  pace with construction and "windows of 0    rtunity" are not lost.}}

Latest revision as of 11:05, 16 December 2020

Corrects 870911 Memo Forwarding Schedule for Category I Cprrg Recommendations Assigned to Ofc of Special Projects. Memo Being Reissued to Incorporate Five Actions Inadvertently Omitted from Group Unit 2 RPV Installation
ML20195G495
Person / Time
Site: Comanche Peak  Luminant icon.png
Issue date: 09/18/1987
From: James Keppler
NRC OFFICE OF SPECIAL PROJECTS
To: Stello V
NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR OPERATIONS (EDO)
Shared Package
ML20195G199 List:
References
FOIA-88-322 NUDOCS 8709290532
Download: ML20195G495 (7)
v • d • e


Text

- _ _ _ - _ _ _ -- - - - - - - - - - __ _ - - - - - - - - - _ _ _

s '

we.,9 UNITEJ 87ATes [U NUCLEAR RE'lVLATORY COMMISSION

[ f; w AaH** TON. 6. c. aones s

m_.u,_

a r %.

.., pg

'**** w s.

g- SEP is g37 Victor Stallo, Jr.

MEMORANDUM FOR:

Executive Director for Operations FRON:

Jases G. Keppler, Director Office of Special Projects

SUBJECT:

SCHEDULE FOR CPRRG RECO M ENDATIONS In response to your memorandum dated September 8, 1987, we have enclosed a schedule for the Category I CPRRG recorsnendations assigned to OSP. The schedules are provided for principal subject areas, with each of the These schedules are estimated associated recocirandations listed thereaf ter.

1 based on our current projection for related technical review and inspection activities. We will keep you informed, particularly if there are substantial -

changes in these plans.

C1 Gs w y JamesG.KeblerDirector Office of Special Projects

Enclosure:

CPRRG Reconsnendations for Comanche Peak cc w/enclosurg:

T. Rehm C. Grimes Inis memorandum is being reissued to P. McKee incorporate five actions inadvertently J. Lyons enitted from the group "Unit 2 RPV R. Wartlick in stallation."

1 @

$ w' gc6A' f l. (

e h

CPRRG RECOMMENDATIONS FOR COMANCHE PEAK EST! MATED COMPLET!ON DATE GROUP December 1987 CONSTRUCTION QA ISSUES m,..

IDi A ACTION 23 14 Verify that an adequate quality Gh.A(ts 01 control procedure exists for QA inspectors to witness the trans-fer of marking for material that would otherwise lose its trace.

ability when cut into smaller sections.

24 -l' Review NEO procedures for ade, acy We M (D Ph

  • 4 cy of records system.  %

Review NEO procedures for acequacy

}W/En-w ms/tss-u.es n

25 -B of ANSI N45.2.9 requirements. o v W -u-os 26 - 9 Review NEO procedures for adequacy of records shipments to contractors.

WM

'i '* W "

  • i 27 - 10 Review NEO procedures for adequacy ,

of records shipping containers.

28 - 11 Review NE0 procedures for adequacy of backup records.

i 29 - 1 A Review NE0 procedures for adequacy of records shipment accounting.

30 - 1 3 Review NEO procedures for adequacy of records shipmer.ts to contractors. l Review NE0 p.'ocedures for adequacy  % 5/'214 01 31 - W of backup records. Sw/Mu -o -ot 32 - 1 3 Review NEO procedures for adequacy ms/%N u-c4*

of records shipment accounting. 4% /851n -M-0**

Review NEO procedures for adequacy M/S5M *' 07 33 - 7 0 uwv nu-u-o7 of records storage, 34 . il Review NEO procedures for adequacy p'N"C#

  • W O3 Vini-4-oi of records filing.

i

  • t f'

2 ESTIMATED COMPLETION DATE  !

GROUP  :

CONSTRUCTIONQAISSUES(continued) j IDf ACTION i

47 - Monitor applicants' response to '/J s

  • ok. l staff concerns raised in SSER 11 quo /gsc3,9.,7  !

regarding their audit program, l particularly with respect to RPV l surveillance. (

l 59 -

Review Operations Traveler criteria, W w.k Cur es/"4 control and effectiveness.  :

-- Verify adequate material identi- ts..en'< (CCWS l 63 fication and traceability program '

for earlier work or review procure-ment and control program for the l l i bulk piping stock at CPSES. ,

1 66 Determine if the Regulatory Guide Lse e e .k f f' CT j

1.97 QA commitments have been properl; implemented at CPSES. >

67 - Review the adequacy of the L+'at\C'*4[  !

Ilcansee's program to update i

~

permanent installation documen- i tation when components are changed or replaced.  !

69 Emphasize safety significance in fratau  !

[

all pertinent aspects of the licensee's QA Program. [

3 t

i i

I r

I i

i

[

.t

-3* ,

ESTIMATED COMPLETION DATE GROUP .

January 1988 CDR AND 50.55e REPORTING 10f ACTION 5*M 35

- Audit the CDR p ogram to verify its CrJ g/g', o M N '**f,Q adequacy. (Applicant should revise  ;

Procedure NE0 CS-1.)

in 36 - Resolve conflicting TUEC procedures /

for 50.55e reporting. / <

r l

/ u l 37 Evaluation condition of TUEC 50.55e files. l

/ 'l 38 - Evaluate TUEC for reporting 50.55e corrective actions. fi 4

39 - ., Evaluation condition of TUEC 50.55e 9 files.

l June 1988 l OISPOSITION OF hRC BULLETINS l 10f ACTION ,

i 40 - Provide applicant with clear and concise L.. ' l written evaluation of actions taken to ' gj s,g g ,, , 3 . o **

l date and specify additicnol actions.  !

required to close IEB 79-14.

- Evaluate TUEC program for hRC Bulletin %t f.p g n . ,2 l 41 handling.  % f g .o.g j Evaluate TUEC procedures and process for IA> " U i 42 -

NRC Bulletins. /;j,[g.ct b - 0 5- f 1

Evaluate TUEC tracking and' assignment for (Ae. e s's I 43 -

NRC Bulletine.

44 - Evaluate TUEC resolution of IE8 79-14. L 3. 4 7? - Inspect TUEC resolution of IEb '9-14. Lga. a l

l l ,

l

ESTIMATED l COMPLETION DATE t GROUP  !

Hay 1988 [

COMPLETION OF CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION t

10f ACTION  !

5?

Inspecticus included in the 1986 inspection M'bdlNa.-)

program, but not completed at Unit 1. should t I

be reviewed, and thoso determined to be necessary to confirm plant quality, should be accomplished.

U8'*'*\ @ ***'#'

I 73 Inspections included in the 1986 inspection  !

program, but not completed at Unit 1. Should i be reviewed, and those determined to be  !

necessary to confirm plant quality, should be accomplished. l November 1987 l FIRC SEALS IDi ACTION es .w g,.g.p.:,e;.o ,

45 Verify adequacy of BISCO seal replacements. (W'e s . h)sjj/Qj'$ i Evaluation qualification and documentation M

  • V ** . n i 50 l

for 815C0 seal replacenents.

I l l l l UNIT ? RPV INSTALLATION Jarmary 1989 ,

10f ACTION i

l 70 Perform a detailed review of Westinghouse's l-y n4 % M '# *

  • C4 r l

engineering evaluation regarding translation t l

of design criteria into installation specift- '

! cations, procedures and drawings and failure to control devtations regarding Unit ?. j Perform a visual inspection of the accessible W e' a '*L  !

?!

reactor vessel surroundings during or after W*N S ' * " ~ " i hot functional test. f i

??

Perform a detailed review of Westinghouse's hu s ( w6 /es:,s

4. C..M)% .ow l engineering evaluation of the failure to maintain tolerance for RV support brackets [

and shoes.  ;

t k

l 1

I f

l i

L ESTU!ATED ,

COMPLr fl0N DATE  ;

GROUP L f

j UNIT 2RPVINSTALLATION(continued)

IDf ' ACTION 46 Evaluate traveler and NCR procedures with respect L-*** b f 0'E* - .

l to the Unit 2 RV support brackets and shoes.  %/g x - u we s as( "

3 4

60 Verify the adequacy of Level ! QC inspection of Ls 2

RPV installation. ,

" )

Review the completet sss of QC coverage and .4(  !

4 61  !

technical acceptability of the actual inspection

  • j' criteria for the installation of all the rajor NSSS components. [

j  !

! March 1988 SPOOL PIECE COPPONENTS 10f ACTION If spool CVCS spool piece was not marked We'"*' bu d*N f 51  ;

et the time of inspection, then additional 1 review would be warranted. Resolve  ;

uncertainty associated with when the spool

piece was marked.

Inspect other field-fabricated spool pieces.  %'eisk (Cevelill) (

t 62 )

February 1988 l NAMC0 SWITCHES (IEB79-28) 10f ACTION

^

hotify TUEC of recosenended actions and Wsee-skfday.,'

49 M/*2t w M *1 1 monitor resolution in EQ CA'. W/8.s c-u -cy i

1 December 1987

. C0hCRETE RECORDS 10f ACTION l

48 Review statistical data regarding I-ye*(C"O M 3 Q i uniformity )f concrete and review etys,/ggo'; . cy I

larger samp.e of concrete compression yd/ tSc -n.

,I tests. 4 U el '*.a

,Q ,

l

i  !

ESTIMATED COMPLET!0N DATE ,

GROUP (

COMPLETE  ;

PROGRAMMATIC !$$UES i

10f ACTION 02 Reinspection of hardware and design  !

during current Comanche Peak re review.

(Expiteit recomendations in sequence I l/ number 22 through 50.)  !

I I 18 Establish clear lines of responsibility  ;

between the Comanche Peak augmented I

inspection program and the established j liccasing, and inspection and enforcemert processes. f 53 The status of the inspection programs for  ;

Unit 2 should be scrittered with respect  !

to all NRC inspection activities to assure f

i that inspections keep pace with construction and "windows of opportunity" are not lost. [

i l

1 r l  ?

I l

t h

8

[

i t

(

\  ;

I

\ l I

4 f

, r i i i  !

l N  !

l >

1 i

M/Y) .

J

- f .

UNITtJ STATE 8 b'

[. \' Ni/ CLEAR HEGULATCRY COMMIS$10N

! wm avo.e. o. c. vas

}

wes

\...../ -

4' -

==m ::

SEP 13 .!!7 l

l Jr Stello, Jr.  ;

NEMORANDUM FOR ,cutive Director for Operations 1 j

James G. Xeppler, Director FROM: Office of Special Projects SUBJEC7:

SCHEDULE FOR CPRRG RECOMENDATIONS Ir .esponso to your memorandum dated September 8,1987, weThehave enclosed schedule for the Category 1 CPRRG recorrnendations assigned to OSP.

schedulas are provided for principal subject areas, with each of theThese schedu associated recocrendations listed thereafter.

based activities.

on our current projection for related technical revie changes in these plans.

CT nin> k James G. Keppler, Director Office of Special Projects

Enclosure:

CPRRG Recocinendations for Cananche Peak cc w/enclosurg.

T. Reben I C. Grimes This memorandum is being reissued to P. McKee incorporate five actions inadvertently J. 1.yons omitted from the group "Unit 2 RPV R. Warnick Installation."

l .

l l

[

orM %FC8 tY~ -

\q

'Tv(J ef-

CPRRG RECOMMENDA710NS FOR COMANCHE FEAK

'EST! PATED COMPLETION DATE GROUP December 1987 CONSTRUCTION QA ISSUES 10f ACTION 23 Verify that an edequate quality control procedure exists for QA inspectors to 'vitaess the trans-fer of marking for material that would otherw',;c lose its trace-abi?'.i:y wher cut into smaller sections.

Review NEO procedures for adequacy 24 of recor6s system.

Review NE0 procedures for acequacy 25 of ANSI N45.2.9 requirements.

Review NE0 procedures for adequacy 26 of records shipments to contractors.

Review NE0 procedures for adequacy 27 of records shipping containers.

Review NE0 procedures for adequacy 28 of backup records.

Review NEO procedures for adequacy 29 'f records shipment accountfeg.

,aview NE0 procedures for adequacy 30 of records shipments to contractcrs.

Review NE0 procedures for adequacy 31 of backup records.

Review NE0 procedures for adequacy 32 of records shipment accounting.

Review NE0 procedures for adequacy 33 of records storage.

Review NEO procedures for adequacy 34 of reccrds filing.

2 ESTIMATED COMPLETION DATE GROUP CONSTRUCTION QA ISSUES (continued)

IDr ACTION 47 Monitor applicants' responso to staff concerns raised in SSER 11 regarding their audit program, particularly with respect to RPV surveillance.

59 Review Operations Traveler criteria, control and effectiveness.

63 Verify adequate material identi-fication and tiaceability program for earlier work or review procure-ment and control program for the bulk piping stock at CPSES.

66 Determine if the Regulatory Guide 1.97 QA connitments have been properly implemented at CPSES.

67 Review the adequacy of the licensee's program to update permanent installation documen-tation when components are changed or replaced.

69 Emphasize safety significance in all pertinent aspects of the licensee's QA Program.

i

\

i 3-ESTIMATED COMPLETION DATE 1 GROUP l January 1988 CDR AND 50.55e REPORTING ID# ACTION 3b Audit the CDR program to verify its idequacy. (Applicant should revise Procedure NE0 CS-1.)

36 Resolve conflicting TUEC procedures

for 50.55e reporting.

37 Evaluation ' condition of TUEC 50.55e

'iles.

38 Evaluate TUEC for reporting 50.55e corrective actions.

39 Evaluation condition of TUEC 50.55e files.

June 1988 DISPOSITION OF NRC BULLETINS 10# ACTION 40 Provide applicant with clear and concise written evaluation of actions taken to date and specify adoitional actions required to close IEB 79-14 41 Evaluate TUEC program for NRC Bulletin handling.

42 Evaluate TUEC procedures and process for NRC Bulletins.

43 Evaluate TUEC tracking and assignment for NP.C Bulletins.

44 Evaluate TUEC resolution of IEd 79-14.

72 Inspect TUEC resolution of ICB 79-14.

1 4

i

4 ESTIMATED

.0MPLETION DA..

GROUP May 1988 COMPLETION OF CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION _

10# ACTION 5? Inspections included in the 1986 inspection program, but not completed at Unit 1, should be reviewed, and those determined to be necessary to confirm plant quality, should be accomplished.

73 Inspections included in the 1986 inspection program, but not completed at Unit 1, should be reviewed, and those determined to be-necessary to confirm plant quality, should be accomplished.

November 1987 FIRE SEALS IDf ACTION 45 Verify adequacy of BISCO seal replacements.

50 Evaluation qualification and documentation for 815C0 seal replacements.

UNIT 2 RPV INSTALLATION January 1989 10# ACTION

~

20 Perfonn a detailed review of Westinghouse's engineering evaluation regarding translation of design criteria into installation speciff-cations, procedures and drawings and failure to control deviations regarding Unit 2, 21 Per'orm a visual inspection of the accessible reactor vessel surroundings during or after hot functional test.

22 Perform a detailed review of Westinghouse's engineering evaluation of the failure to maintain tolerance for RV support brackets and shoes.

ESilMATED COMPLETION DATE E

UNIT 2 RPV INSTALLATION (continued) ..

10# ACTION 46 Evaluate traveler and NCR procedures with respect to the Unit 2 RV support brackets and shoes.

60 Verify the adequacy of Level ! QC inspection of RPV installation.

61 Review the completeness of QC coverage and technical acceptability of the actual inspection criteria for the installation of all the major NSSS components.

March 1988 SPOOL PIECE COMPONENTS IDi ACTION 51 If spool CVCS spool piece was not marked dt the time of Inspection, then additional review would be warranted. Resolve uncertainty associated with wher the spool piece was marked.

62 Inspect other field-fabricated spool pieces.

February 1988 NANC0 SWITCHES (IEB 79-28) 10# ACTION 49 Notify TUEC of recommended actions and r.ionitor resolution in EQ CAP.

December 1987 CONCRETE RECORDS i ids ACTION 48 Review statistical data regarding uniformity of concrete and review larger sample of concrete compression tests.

r i

_--a

6-ESTIMATED COMPLETION DATE GR000 COMPLEfE PROGRAMMATIC ISSUES IDi ACTION 02 Reinspection of hardware and design during current Comanche Peak re-review.

(Explicit recommendations in sequence number 22 through 50.)

18 Establish clear lines of responsibility between the Comanche Peak augmented inspection program and the established '

licensing, and inspection and enforcement processes.

53 The status of the inspection programs for

' unit 2 should be monitored with respect to all NRC inspection activities to assure that inspections keep pace with construction and "windows of opportunity" are not lost.

r n

0

gy

[ UkiTED s'(ate 8 g g" l

/ NUCLEAR RECULATCRY COMMIS$10N WASHtNGTON O. C. 20005 g

)

  • 2ptabr ::, 1007 4' - SEP 13 G57 Victor Stello, Jr.

MEMORMOUM FOR:

Executive Director for Operations FROM:

James G. Keppler, Director Office of Special Projects

SUBJECT:

SCHEDULE FOR CPRRG RECOMMENDATIONS In response to your memorandum dated September 8,1987, we have enclosed a schedule for the Category I CPRRG recomendations assigned to OSP. The schedules are provided for principal subject areas, with each of the associated recomendations listed thertaf ter. These schedules are estimated based on our current projection for related technical review and inspection activities. We will keep you informed, particularly if there are substantial -

changes in these plans.

C_T-ler, Director James G. Ke Office of Special Projects

Enclosure:

CPRRG Recomendations for Cceanche Peak cc w/enclosurg: ,

T. Rehm t C. Grimes This mer .andum is being reissued to P. McKee incor porate five actions inadvertantly J. Lyons omitted from the group "Unit 2 RP R. Warnick Installation."

i ta

~ '

. I

/

i'u/were '

j, ; .

,,...j ' *

'i'fe.t CPRRG RE10MMEN0ATIONS,3

'~f0R COMANCHE PEAX ESTIMATED GRQUP COMPLETION DATE .

, December'1987tc,=.

CONSTRUCTIO,N_QA ISJ1LEjL 1Di 1.e a A Imc4 .A_CILON D);m Verify that an adequate quality 5,-o,def l777 23 control procedure exists for QA inspectors to witness the trans-fer of marking for material that would otherw he lose its trace-ability when cut into smaller sections.

24 H a .e Review NE0 procedures for adequacy' of records system.

25 Ha lc Review NE0 procedures for adequacy of ANSI N45.2.9 requirements.

26 H a Ie Review NE0 r,rocedures for adequacy of records snipments to contractors.

27 H, .e Review NEO procedures for adequacy of records shipping containers.

28 Hae Review'NE0 procedures for adequacy of backup records.

29 H, e Review NEO procedures for adequacy of records shipment accounting.

30 Hele Review NEO procedures for adequacy of records shipments to contractors.

31 H,le Review NE0 procedures for adequacy of backup records.

32 Hale Review NE0 procedures for adequacy of records shipment accounting.

l 33 Hele Review NE0 procedures for adequacy of records storage. l 34 Review NEO procedures for adequacy ,

Halc 9 of records filing.

(

2 ESTIMAkEO COMPLEr10N DATE

. , GR0d_P_

CONSJ80CTIONQA. ISSUES (continued) ,

JO L u nd lif. ACIl0 L 47 H,)e Monitor applicants' response to D~- a W "? ? 'i staff concerns raised in SSER 11 ,

regarding their audit program.

particularly with respect to RPY surveillance.

59 Vai!,g Review Operations Traveler criteria, ,

control and effectiveness.

63 'O<: Verify adequate material identi-fication and traceability program for earlier work or review procure-ment and control program for the bulk piping stock at CPSES.

66 N'ev0 Determine if the Regulatory Guide 1.97 QA connitments have been properly implemented at CPSES.

67 V. : , , Review the adequacy of the C licensce's program to update permanent installation documen-tation when components are changed or replaced.

69 Me ree Emphasize safety significance in all pertinent aspects of the Y licensee's QA Program.

4

3-ESTIMATED COMPLETION DATE

_ 0UP ~ ~

CDR ANO 50.55e REPORTING January @ 2 -

_IOf L.,g y , ACTION 35 Hale Audit the CDR program to verify its s' adequacy. (Applict it should revise Procedure NE0 CS-1.)

( 36 Hele Resolve conflicting TUEC prv.edures for 50.55e reporting, 37 H s .', tion conditiots of TUEC 50.55e r ..-

"E 38 Hi'e Evaluate TUEC for reporting 50.55e corrective actions.

39 HJe Evaluation condition of TUEC 50.55e /

files.

June 1988

_ DISP 0_S!JION_Of_NEC BULLE1115 W J)C3]NN'V s'

40 Lg es Provide applicant with clear and concise c

written evaluation of actions taken to date and specify additional actions required to close IEB 79-14.

41 'd-n Evaluate TUEC prograin for NRC Bulletin handling.

42 !O *c ie Evaluate 1UEC procedures and process for NRC Bulletins.

43 'A'se- Evaluate TUEC tracking and assignment for NRC Bulletins.

44 L .,:

f Evaluate TUEC resolution of IEB 79-14.

72 Ly : Inspect TUEC resolution of IEB 79-14. .j

ESTIMATED

_ COMPLETION DATE ,

A00f "

May.19,88' COMPLET!0N OF CONSTRUCTLON_lhSEECTION 7

10i l*ol:*:t .AC11DL 52 lum Inspections included in the 1986 inspection e~

program, but not completed at Unit 1, should be reviewed, and those determined to be necessary to confirm plant quality, should be accomplished.

73 1 /<r. ~ Inspections included in the 1986 inspection program, but not completed at Unit 1, should be reviewed, and those determined to be necessary to confirm plant qt.311ty, should /

be accomplished.

November 1987.~

FIRE SEALS

.$' }$YhK' Verify adequacy of BISCO seal replacements.

45

'. .N s N 50 Evaluation qualification and documen'tation s

N for BISCO seal replacements.

UNIT 2 RPV (NSTALLALION. '

January 1989

.jpIP' MIIQ'N 9 ~

20 L co; Perform a detailed review of Westingnouse's 7 engineering evaluation regarding translation of design criteria into installation specift-cations, procedures and drawings and failure to control deviations regarding Unit 2.

I 21 l/'Ick/ Perform a visual inspection of the accessible Wi"s "' reactor vessel surroundings during or after hot functional test.

22 1 ~ if Perform a detailed review of Westinghouse's

'7 engineering evaluation of the failure to maintain tolerance for RV support brackets y' ,

and shoes.

I

~

ESTIMATED m COMPLET!0N DATE

,GR011%

_ UNIT 2 RPV INSTALLATION (continued),

R / r,il, ACTIOL c .._ .

46 ts.">n' Evaluate traveler and NCR procedures with respect  ; ~, , , ,, .f - ) ,!

~

to the Unit 2 RV support brackets and shoes. v 60 ., ,, ,me Verify the adequacy of Level ! QC inspection of RPV installation.

61 1,'m .. . Review the completeness of QC coverage and technical acceptability of the actual inspection criteria for the installation of all the major y NSSS components.

March 1988 ^

SP0OL PIECE CONPONENTS-

[OV >ACTIW 51 %N../ If spool CVCS spool piece was not marked ~ ~ ~ -

dt the time of inspection, then additional review would be warranted. Resolve uncertainty associated with when the spool piece was A -d.

62 #1G.c Inspect other rield-fabricated spool pieces. ;y Februaryli8'87

.NANCO 5WITCHEj_UEB J9-28)

,I4) ' . AC idf 49 uhy *< Notify TUEC of recomended actions and g "' '  ;

monitor resolution in EQ CAP.

0ecember 1987 ' 7

, CONCRETE RECORDS ,

/JW' . Agi(OW 48 Lgn:/ Review statistical data regarding 4 g, ,p,s uniformity of concrete and review larger sample of concrete compression tests.

l

ESTIMATED COMPLETION DATE GROUP COMPLETE PROGRAMMATIC ISSUES 10f ACTION 02 Reinspection of hardware and design during current Comanche Peak re-review.

(Explicitrecommendationsinsequence number 22 through 50.)

18 Establish clear lines of responsibility between the Comanche Peak augmented inspection program and the established licensing, and inspection and enforcement processes.

53 The status'of the inspection p'rograms for Unit 2 should,be monitored with' respect to all NRC insp'ection activities to assure that inspectiont eep k pace with construction and "windows of 0 rtunity" are not lost.

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML20195G495&oldid=3040000"