ML20059F100

Forwards Responses to H Myers 900607 & 0706 Requests Re Plant Welds

ML20059F100
Person / Time
Site:	Seabrook
Issue date:	08/02/1990
From:	Rathbun D NRC OFFICE OF GOVERNMENTAL & PUBLIC AFFAIRS (GPA)
To:	Udall M HOUSE OF REP., INTERIOR & INSULAR AFFAIRS
References
CCS, NUDOCS 9009110090
Download: ML20059F100 (5)

Text

-- =.- - - - . . - . . _ . , _ - -. -- - -

l..

1. k, UNITE 3 STATES

. [ ,, NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION '

5 WASHINGTON, D. C. 20H6 i

• e

• • "* August 2. 1990 ,

i i

6 The Honorable Morris K. Udall, Chairman l Comittee on Interior and Insular Affairs  ;

l United States House of Representatives i Washington, DC 20515 '

Dear Mr. Chairman:

! Enclosed, at the request of Dr. Henry Myers of your staff, are responses to his requests of June 7 and July 6, 1990, concerning Seabrook welds.

l l Sincerely,

[ ), <-

Dennis K. Rathbun, Director Congressional Affairs '

Office of Governmental and Public Affairs

Enclosures:

As Stated ,

cc: The Honorable Don Young i

FULLTEXT ASCll SCAN l 900911009o 9oogog j-": \\\\

PDR ADOCK 05000443 tu U PDR $ '

i

e .

9

. f

',.- i s' -

r

+

RESPONSE TO'DR. MYERS REQUEST OF JUNE 7, 1990 (SEABROOK XIx)  !

t i

ITEM i.ft During the course of . the inspection conducted by the special independent review team, various Yankee audit +

reports, surveillance reports and associated 6 documentation, including OAR's were reviewed. This [

review, as well as any Questions raised by the team and I the resulting conclusions will be occumented in the  ;

Although the specific i forthcoming inspection Report.

issues raised in Dr. Myers request may not be' addressed. [

the review was conducted to the degree necessary for the team members to reach and support tnelr Conclusions. [

t i

e

(

V L

T

)

. 1 4

1. 8 w n - . - - - , , _ ,

ATTACHMENT RESPONSE TO OR. MYER$' REQUEST OF JULY 6. 1990 item 1:

(paraphrased) Provide documents containing the data that the staff used to determine the number of film packages reviewed by YAEC in the period 1979 through 1986.

Response

The data relating to the number of film packages reviewed by YAEC in the period 1979 through 1986 was provided to the NRC by the licensee and will be discussed in the NRC independent review' team inspection report. -

Item 2: ,

(paraphrased) What YAEC surveillance reports, if any, issued prior to 1984 identified weld package document deficiencies other than reader sheets? ,

Response

The NRC independent review team performed an assessment of YAEC surveillance activities involving pipe welding and NDE activities for the period in question (prior to May 1984). The results of this assessment will be discussed in the NRC independent review team inspection report.

Item 3:

(paraphrased)WhywasYAECunawareofthePullman-Higginsradiographybacklog until 19837

Response

Your question implies YAEC was >erforming an ongoing 100% audit of Pullman-Higgins radiography. Ttis is an incorrect characterization of ,

information provided by NRC staff during the meetings referred to. The YAEC l 1005 film review of P-H finished pipe welds as well as'YAEC's surveillance activitiesofP-HpipeweldingandNDEprocesses(whichincludedin-process i radiography) will be discussed in the NRC independent review team inspection report.

Item 4:

(paraphrased) It is assumed that the NRC staff will verify the authenticity of final weld radiographs, and include this information in the staff's report.

t , .

l l

{

! Response: '

l The NRC independent review team's evaluation of pipe weld radiographs and  !

associated documentation included an evaluation for 6uthenticity and did not identify any discrepancies. This topic will be discussed in the NRC l independent review team inspection report. ]

l Item 5:  :

It is assumed that the staff's report will describe the manner in which f j ' documentation deficiencies constituted, or led to, violations of NRC i regulations. ,.

Response:  !

i The independent review team inspection report will identify items which the team believes to be a violation of NRC requirements. Other items of lesser  ;

safety significance, which may possibly have been in violation of NRC 1

requirements during the construction period, will also be identified in the 4

report.

+

h i

b

= 4 4

.._,--.....,_,e ,, . . . . . - . .. .,_.. . . . .. . . _ _ . _ . , , . . . _ . . . _ . _ , , . . . _ _ . . , ,,,.... _ .. ...... ., . .

l ....

! . i i

l CONGRESS!0NRL CORRESPONDENCE SYSTEM

, DOCUMENT PAEPARAT!0N CNECRLIST ,

1 This shocklist is to be submitted with each document (or group of l i Os/As) sent for entering into the CCS. . i

1. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF DOCUMENT (0) k b o- M/ d M

8. TYPE OF DOCUMENT Correspondense Beariage (Qs/As)

3. DOCUMENT 00NTROL Sensitive (WRC Only) -Sensitive l 4. CONGRESSIONAL COMMITTEE and SUSCOMMITTERS (if applicable) 1

! Congressional Committee Subcommittee l S. SUBJECT CODES i

(a)

(b) 3 l (e) ,

)

S. SOURCE OF DOCUMENTS i

(a) 5580 (document anse ,

(b) # can.

8 (e) Attea . ate (4) Rakey (e) Oth

7. SYSTEM LC DAT 8 l

(a) G # 7 O Dat. Den sent do.uaent to CCs (m)

Date CCS resetves document l  !

l (e) Date returned to OCA for additional information (4) Date resubmitted by OCA to CCS ,

(e) Date entered into CCS by (f) Date OCA motified that document is in CCS  ;

8. COMMENTS

)

1

- . . - . - - . . - . . - . - - - - - - - - .. - .- _. - -..- -.. -_-.- - - . - . - . . - - - .