ML16342B846
| ML16342B846 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 01/15/1992 |
| From: | Norrholm L Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Politi R NEI PEEBLES-ELECTRIC PRODUCTS, INC. (FORMERLY PARSONS |
| Shared Package | |
| ML16342B847 | List: |
| References | |
| REF-QA-99900772 NUDOCS 9202030042 | |
| Download: ML16342B846 (6) | |
Text
~ply RKCy P
~4 0
~~i 0
I X
Vl
/~
+a*++
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 January 15, 1992 Docket No. 99900772 Mr. Ron B. Politi Vice President and General Manager NEI Peebles Electric Products, Inc.
17045 Euclid Avenue Cleveland, Ohio 44112
Dear Mr. Politi:
SUBJECT:
INSPECTION OF A SAFETY-RELATED POWER GENERATOR SUPPLIED TO DIABLO CANYON NUCLEAR POWER PLANT UNIT 2 (NOTICE OF NONCONFORMANCE AND INSPECTION REPORT NO. 99900772/91-01)
We are transmitting the report of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) inspection conducted August 5 through 9,'1991, at the facility of NEI Peebles Electric Products, Inc.
(P-EP) in Cleveland, Ohio.
Messrs.
Steven M. Matthews, Walter P. Haass,,
and Michael R. Snodderly of the NRC's Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation evaluated P-EP's production of a power generator for an NRC licensee, Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E).
At the conclusion of this inspection, the NRC s inspection team discussed the inspection findings with you and other members of your staff.
The NRC's team conducted this inspection to assess P-EP's compliance with the NRC requirements imposed in PG&E's purchase order for a power generator.
The power generator was for PG&E's new (No. 2-3) emergency diesel generator (EDG) set for the Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant Unit 2 (DCNPP2).
P-EP 'certified that the generator supplied to DCNPP2 was produced in compliance with the NRC's requirements in Appendix B to Title 10, of the Code of ederal Re ulations, Part 50 (10 CFR Part 50),
and the reporting requirements of 10 CFR Part 21.
During the timeframe of this inspection, P-EP was also performing the design and procurement activities for a safety-related power generator for Washington Public Power Supply SystemIs Nuclear Project 2
(WNP2).
Although the team focused its inspection activities on the completed power generator for PG&E's DCNPP2, the concerns discussed in this report may have generic implications for WNP2 '
power generator and any other power generator, or spare and replacement parts, purchased by other licensees.
The inspection was conducted to
I I
'L
~
O J/ f 1
Mr. Ron B. Politi evaluate P-EP's quality program and its implementation in selected areas,'uch as the control of (1) design processes and interfaces, (2)'urchased materials and equipment, and (3) instructions, procedures, and drawings.
As a result of this inspection, a Notice of Nonconformance has been issued to P-EP as Enclosure 1.
The inspection report, Enclosure 2, includes a discussion of the areas examined during the inspection and our findings.
This inspection consisted of an examination of procedures and representative
- records, interviews with P-EP's staff, and observations by the team.
h The most significant inspection finding was P-EP's failure to demonstrate reasonable assurance (1) that the items specified as critical by PG&E met the quality and reliability requirements of Appendix B to 10 CFR Part 50 and (2) that the critical characteristics of such items have been adequately verified and that the items are capable of performing their design and safety-related functions.
Specifically, P-EP "failed to demonstrate an adequate" verification of the critical characteristics (1) of the items specified as critical that Peebles Electrical Machines (PEM) procured as commercial grade and (2) of the stator coil's resistance temperature detectors, slip rings, adhesives, and the mounting sleeve insulator for the slip rings that P-EP procured as commercial grade.
The team also identified as nonconformances other elements of P-EP's quality program and its implementation that failed to meet NRC requirements.
For example, P-EP failed to establish adequate measures for, and to implement adequate control of, its external design interface with its sister organization, PEM of Edinburgh, Scotland.
Please provide a written statement or explanation within 30 days from the date of this letter for the items in the Notice of Nonconformance containing (1) a description of steps that have been or will be taken to correct these
- items, (2) a description of steps that have been or will be taken to prevent recurrence, and (3) the dates your corrective-actions and preventive measures were or will be completed.
This reply should be clearly marked as a "Reply to Notice of Nonconformance" and submitted to the U.S. Nuclear-Regulatory Commission, ATTN:
Document Control Desk, Washington, DC 20555, with a copy to the Chi'ef,'endor Inspection Branch, Division of Reactor Inspection and Safeguards, Office of
,Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
We will consider extending the response time if you can show good cause.
~A
Mr. Ron B. Politi 3
The response requested by this letter is not subject to the clearance procedures of the Office of Management-and Budget as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act 'of 1980, PL 96-511.
In accordance with 10 CFR 2.790(a),
a copy of this letter and its enclos'ures will be placed in the NRC's Public Document Room.
Should you have any questions concerning this inspection, we will be pleased to discuss them with you.
We thank you for your cooperation during this inspection.
Sincerely, eif J. Norrholm, hief Vendor Inspection Branch Division of Reactor Inspection and Safeguards Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Enclosures:
- 1. Notice of Nonconformance
- 2. Inspection Report No. 99900772/91-01 cc w/enclosures:
Mr. Peter R. Holroyd, Managing Director NEI Peebles Limited Peebles Electrical Machines East Pilton Edinburgh, Scotland EH5 2XT United Kingdom
I
~A