ML17261A642
| ML17261A642 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Ginna  |
| Issue date: | 10/23/1987 |
| From: | Kober R ROCHESTER GAS & ELECTRIC CORP. |
| To: | Stahle C NRC OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATION & RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (ARM) |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8710280222 | |
| Download: ML17261A642 (7) | |
Text
- REGULATORY ORMATION DISTRIBUTION SY M <RIDS)
'ACCESSION NBR: 8710280222 DOC. DATE: 87/10/23 NOTARIZED:
NO DOCKET FACIL: 50-244 Robert Emmet Ginna Nuclear Planti Unit ii Rochester Q
05000244 AUTH. NAME
, AUTHOR AFFILIATION KOBERe R. Q.
Rochester Gas h Electric Corp.
RECIP. NAME RECIPIENT AFFILIATION STAHLEi C.
NRC No Detailed Affiliation Given
SUBJECT:
Responds to 870824 request for addi info re quality of spent fuel racks fabricated bg US Tool 5 predecessor.
DISTRIBUTION CODE:
A048D COPIES RECEIVED: LTR ENCL SIZE:
TITLE: OR/Licensing Submittal:
Equipment Gualification NOTES: License Exp date in accordance with 10CFR2> 2. 109(9/1'P/72).
05000244 RECIPIENT ID CODE/NAME PD1-3 L*
STAHLEi C INTERNAL: ARM/DAF/LFMB NRR/DEBT/ADE NRR/
SQB FILE 01 EXTERNAL:
LPDR NSIC COPIES LTTR ENCL 1
0 1
1 1
0 1
0 1
1 1
1 REC IP IENT ID CODE/NAME PD1-3 PD QC NRR/DEST/MEB OGC/HDS2 RES/DE/EIB NRC PDR COPIES LTTR ENCL 1
0 1
1 1
1
~
1 1
1 1
TOTAL NUMBER OF COPIES REQUIRED:
LTTR 14 ENCL 10
IIIIIIIII S!8 szzzz azazel rued ROCHESTER GAS AND ELECTRIC CORPORATION o 89 EAST AVENUE, ROCHESTER, N.Y. 1484g-PPP1 ROGER W. KOBER VICE PRCSIDCNT ELECTRIC PRODVCTlOM TCLKPHONC ARC* CODf 1ld 546-2700 October 23I 1987 U. S. Nuclear Regula tory Commission Document Control Desk Attn:
Mr. Carl Stahle PWR Project Directorate No.
1 Washingtoni D.C.
20555
Subject:
Quality of Spent Fuel Racks Fabricated by U.S. Tool 6 Die and Predecessor R. E. Ginna Nuclear Power Plant Docket No. 50-244 cf, CD
Dear Mr. Stahle:
This letter is in response to the request for additional information dated August 24I 1987.
The information requested is attached.
RGSE QA/QC personnel conducted several surveillance inspections during the fabrication of the components used for modification of the Ginna spent fuel storage racks.
These inspectionsi in addition to our normal surveillance programs upon receipt and installation of componentsi provide assurance that the racks satisfy design and regulatory requirements.
Very truly yours>
~ d~
Roger W. Kober Attachment
- --8710280222 gOOO244 'jI 87j023 pDR, ADOCK o pD p
c
(
Pc 1
S 0
I lt j
QUALITY OF SPENT FUEL RACKS FABRICATED BY U S.
TOOL AND ITS PREDECESSOR RGSE Response to USNRC Letter Dated August 24, 1987 This response addresses the work performed by U.S. Tool and Die for Rochester Gas and Electric referenced in the Inspection Report of Nay 12>
1987.
U.S. Tool and Die was contracted during 1984 to design>
fabricate and install 'inserts for the Ginna spent fuel racks.
These inserts contained neutron absorbing materials and were used to modify the existing storage racks to increase storage capacity.
Earlier work completed in 1976 is not addressed as the inspection findings would not be relevant to U.S. Tool and Die prior to 1981 when it was under completely different ownership.
The information you requested is delineated following each of the five items of interest.
- l. Please describe the extent to which the U.S. Tool and Die QA/QC program was relied upon to assure rack quality.
RESPONSE
a
~ For the design phase<
the U.S. Tool'nd Die QA program was relied upon.
Consistent with established engineering inter-face pract'icesr a review of drawings and calculations was performed by RG&E engineers.
Resulting minor comments to the design documents were incorporated in accordance with the U.S.
Tool and Die design change control procedures.
In addition<
mechanical calculations<
seismic calculations and a description of modifications were provided for NRC review as a part of the Technical Specification change approval process.
- b. For the fabrication phase~
the U.S. Tool and Die QA/QC program was relied upon to a limited extent to assure quality fabrica-tion.
However> in-factory verification of these QA/QC controls was performed by RGGE personnel due to> in part< recognition of a reorganization at that time.
c ~ For the installation phase<
the U.S. Tool and Die QA/QC program was only relied upon to select and place a contract for work with NPS.
procedures and personnel were used to execute the work.
In addition to program and procedure reviews by RG6E> onsite contract oversight of NPS was provided by RGSE construction>
plant and quality control personnel in accordance with established procedures for the control of modifications.
Since direct services were not furnished by U.S. Tool and Die for the onsite installation<
the concerns of the August 24 letter are not applicable to the installation portion of the purchase order with U.S. Tool and Die.
4 4
4 f
4 gl I
II 4
3 u'4 t'
it t'I
- 2. Please describe your in-factory and/or the receipt inspection of the racks.
RESPONSE
Four in-factory inspections were conducted during the fabrica-tion of the rack components.
These inspections were performed by qualified RG&E QA and QC personnel and started with receipt of raw material and continued up through final inspection prior to shipment.
Each shipment of components was inspected.
In-spections for shipping damage were also performed upon receipt at Ginna Station.
The in-factory inspections were performed on 08/03/84, 09/18/84, 09/28/84, and 10/25/84.
The inspections included verifications of material traceability, sources of purchased material, material identification, shop fabrication controls, weld procedures, welder qualifications, QA documentation, dimensional inspections, and weld inspections.
- 3. What findings were made during your receipt inspection of the racks?
RESPONSE
No dimensional, physical or weld problems were found with the rack components during the in-factory inspections or receipt inspections at Ginna Station.
Some QA documentation for the material was not available during some of the in-factory in-spections,
- however, the documents were obtained from the material sub-vendors by U.S. Tool and Die prior to receipt of the rack components at Ginna Station.
- 4. If your receipt inspections found deficiencies in the racks, what corrective actions were taken?
RESPONSE
.As stated above no physical deficiencies were found.
Missing documents were obtained prior to acceptance of the rack compo-nents at Ginna Station.
- 5. Please describe any additional actions or examinations you plan to undertake to assure that your racks meet the original design and regulatory requirements.
RESPONSE
Based on the verifications performed by our QA/QC organization during fabrication of the rack components, no further actions are deemed necessary.
V
~ '
1 I
W Jl
- W W
If