ML19309H619
| ML19309H619 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Marble Hill |
| Issue date: | 05/06/1980 |
| From: | Shields S PSI ENERGY, INC. A/K/A PUBLIC SERVICE CO. OF INDIANA |
| To: | Harold Denton Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19309H620 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8005130566 | |
| Download: ML19309H619 (2) | |
Text
_
0507804000 77 80 0513 OSGG
/
4
,j l
l PUBLIC SERVICE INDIANA May 6, 1980 S. W. Shields Vice Pres. dent Electric System Mr. Harold R. Denton, Director Docket Nos.: STN 50-546 Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation STN 50-547 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Construction Permit Nos.-
Washington, D. C.
20555 CPPR-170 CPPR-171 Marble Hill Nuclear Generating Station Units 1 and 2
Dear Mr. Denton:
Confirming telephone conversations between Mr. Belke of NRR and Mr. Norris of PS1 on May 2, and between Messr's Haass and Wilson of the NRC and Mr. Brewer of PS1 on May 6, enclosed are copies of documents to clarify, amplify or correct our April 28, 1980 submittal to you of the " Consolidated Description of the PSI Quality Assurance Program for Marble Hill".
These corrections address the three areas of concern outlined in the telephone conversations as follows:
1.
Attachment A clarifies the basis for not separately itemizing the responsibilities of the Superintendent-Procurement Quality Assurance, and for using the word " verification" instead of the word " inspection" in paragraph 1.1.1.3.3c of the consolidated document.
2.
Attachment B revises wording of the consolidated document to provide clarity as to PSI's commitment to certain ANSI standards, to amplify the responsibility of the Quality Engineering Section as to approving checklists, and to correct the issue date of one ANSI standard.
3.
Messr's Haass and Wilson indicated on May 6 that apparent discrepancies existed between what was known in the PSAR as the "Q" List (Table 17.1-3) and the classification criteria (CC-ME-01-MH) that was provided with the consolidated QA Report. Attachments C, D, and E clarify the apparent specific technical discrepancies. The paragraph that follows outlines why these discrepancies occurred.
Bool THIS DOCUMENT C0nTAINS
.5 POOR QUALITY PAGES
/
U/
1000 Eas: Mam S:rw. cWW1 !,ciana 46'68 3r. 529. 9611
a PUBUC SERVICE INDIANA Mr. H. Denton May 6, 1980 The Project "Q" List was developed early in the Project and was intended to summarize the types of systems that the Quality Assurance Program was applied to.
However, it was not intended to be the definitive classification for the plant. The classification document that requires Sargent & Lundy, PSI Quality Assurance and PS1 Engineering approval, and serves as the definitive classification list, is CC-ME-01-MH
" Classification Criteria of Structures, Systems and Components". As can be seen in the PSAR, Table 17.1-3 ("Q" List) has not been amended since the PSAR was filed while Section 3.2 of the PSAR concerning classification has been amended several times along with the technical description sections of the PSAR. Additionally, Section 3.2 of the Marble Hill FSAR (which incorporates CC-ME-01-MH Tables) also reflects changes from the "Q" List.
It should also be noted that for non-site specific systems, Section 3.2 of both SARs as well as CC-ME-01-MH are replicate classifications of the base plant. These classifications were accepted by the NRC in the base plant SER (Section 3.2.2).
The Base plant SER is incorporated by reference into the Marble Hill SER.
We believe these enclosures resolve the expressed concerns.
If there are any further questions, please contact me.
Sincerely, A.
S.W. Shields JMN/jk cc:
- v. Stello J. G. Keppler E. R. Schweibinz, P. E.
)
J. J. Harrison i
N_,
,