ML19254D424
| ML19254D424 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Mcguire |
| Issue date: | 09/24/1979 |
| From: | Parker W DUKE POWER CO. |
| To: | James O'Reilly NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19254D419 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 7910250479 | |
| Download: ML19254D424 (2) | |
Text
'f Duke' POWElf COMPANY Powra IlUILDING w.: SorTai Curucis STurr.T. CHAH1DTTE. N. C. anate c
tc
, e.
sl u WIL LI AM O PA A M E R. J R.
v.c r e c.
c ~,
September 24, 1979
's c -:s: " " ':-
seu-e :
.c o~
3'3-e Mr. J. P. O'Reilly, Director U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Region II 101 Marietta Street, Suite 3100 Atlanta, GA 30303 Re:
RII:TDG 50-370/79-15
Dear Mr. O'Reilly:
Attached is our response to Deficiency 79-15-01 which was identified in IE Inspection Report 50-370/79-11 Duke Power Company does not consider any informatica contained in this inspeccion report to be proprietary.
.'T Ve y truly yours, /
I w -.:
Lb.
LL.--
William O. Parker, Jr.
THH/sch Attachment SPROGeg
/
'a 7910250 d i f
- os z,
Anniversa
%,/
1209 310 omnu con
APPENDIX A NOTICE OF VIOLATION Duke Power Company License No. CPPR-84 McGuire duclear Station, Unit No. 2 Based on the NRC inspection August 10, 1979, certain of your activities were apparently not conducted in full compliance with NRC requirements as indicated below.
These items have been categorized as described in correspondence to you dated December 31, 1974.
As required by 10 CFR 50, Appendix B, Criterion V, and as impler?ented
'y DPC Topical Report, paragraph 17.1.5, activities affecting quality shall be prescribed by documented instructions, procedures and drawings...and shall be accomplished in accordance with these instructions, procedures or drawings.
DPC Procedure P-1 requires iu paragraph 4.1 that prior to unloading nuclear safety-related material the warehouseman shall notify the QC receiving inspector to perform receiving inspection.
Contrary to the aaove, a PIA Receiving Inspection Information Report dated July 7, 1978 notes the fact that four instruments were installed prior to receipt inspection.
This is a deficiency.
Response
During the UllI testing program conducted jointly by Duke and Westinghouse, it was discovered that the UH1 level sensors were not the correct range for the test application. Modified level sensors were shipped directly to Westinghouse, who subsequently released them for installation to accomodate the test.
The Westinghouse personnel who released the sensors inadvertently overlooked Duke Power Company's receiving requirements as set forth in Procedure P-1.
The proper receipt inspection was conducted a week later and yielded acceptable results.
We feel that this error is an isolated case which has been corrected and should not happen again because of the subsequent instructions given to Westinghcuse personnel on the receipt inspection requirements of Duke Power Company.
1209 311