ML19263B395

From kanterella
Revision as of 20:54, 1 February 2020 by StriderTol (talk | contribs) (Created page by program invented by StriderTol)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Updates Previous Response to Deviations Noted in IE Insp Rept 50-341/78-05.After Detailed Insp,Lk Comstock Co Evaluated Previously Indeterminate Welds to Be Acceptable
ML19263B395
Person / Time
Site: Fermi DTE Energy icon.png
Issue date: 12/26/1978
From: Hines E
DETROIT EDISON CO.
To: James Keppler
NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III)
References
NUDOCS 7901180203
Download: ML19263B395 (1)


Text

,

/ A T

Edward Hines A:: int sice F rescort 1i [-f a f.' a n a r-Oaa' ty Assurance Detroit Edison Edi-December 26, 1978 EF2-45,021 Mr. James G. Keppler, Director U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Region ill 799 Roosevelt Road Glen Ellyn, IL 60137

Dear Mr. Keppler:

Infractions at Enrico Fermi Unit 2 Construction Site This letter is a follow-up response to the infractions contained in your IE Investigation Report No. 50-341/78-05 and Updates our initial response This is the Project's (EF2-43,496 dated July 31,19'8) to your office.

final response to your invest'.gation.

The L. K. Comstock Company completed a detailed inspection of all raceway hangers, per the appropriate inspection parameters identified in DCN 984, Edison Engineering for review. Edison and forwarded the results to Detroit Engineering evaluated the inspection results, magnetic particle tests of inspection welds, Sargent and Lundy analysis of specific samples and visual results obtained from components stripped of galvanization.

It is Detroit Edison Engineering's opinion that sufficient evidence exists to refute the intent of the allegations made and allow previously indeter-minate welds to be deemed acceptable. All records relevant to the corrective action taken by Edison on this matter are available at our site offices for your perusal, We trust this letter satisfactorily answers the concerns raised in inspections. your initial report and those your inspectors raised during subsequent We shall be glad to discuss any further points that you may have on this s u t>J ec t .

Very truly yours, wA%' , /

/mb . . .

Tio//p26 &