ML19317F024
| ML19317F024 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Oconee  |
| Issue date: | 06/19/1973 |
| From: | Tedesco R US ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION (AEC) |
| To: | Deyoung R US ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION (AEC) |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8001080726 | |
| Download: ML19317F024 (4) | |
Text
_ _ _
q,o f
JUN 191373 Docket No. 50-269 R. C. DeYoung, Assistant Director for Pressurized Water Reactors, L REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INF0PJtATION: OCONEE NUCLEAR STATION, UNIT 1 Plant Name:
Oconee Nuclear Station, Unit 1 m
Licensing Stage:
~
Docket Number:
50-269 Responsible Branch &
Project Manager:
PWR #4, I. A. Peltier Requested Completion Date:
June 15,1973 Description of Response:
Additional Information Review Status:
Awaiting Information A request for additional information is enclosed relative to Quality Assurance for Operation for the Oconee Nuclear Station, Unit 1.
This request is based cn our review of the Quality Assurance Program description enclosed with a letter, from Mr. A. C. Thies of Duke Power Company (DPC) to R. C. DeYoung dated April 27, 1973, in response to your letter of March 27, 1973, requesting DPC to submit its description of the Quality Assurance Program for Operation for Oconee 1.
DPC states that it has detemined that the content of the Oconee Unit 1 i
program is in agreement with Safety Guide 33. However, despite this
(
statement by DPC, the description of the QA Program enclosed with DPC's April 27,1973 letter is inadequate because clarification is needed in i
several creas.
We require additional description of the QA Program policies, additional y
infomation on organizational arrangements, and expansion of the
's discussion of the inspection and audit program.
We reau ke DPC's response to this request for additional information be received by July 15, 1973 in order for us to evaluate the response.
c f-and to complete the Safety Evaluation Report by July 23, 1973.
W inal Signed b G
\\
w
' w.
bert k Tedesco j
5 p' k...
Robert L. Tedesco, Assistant Director s
'D 3-for Containment Safety
\\
p.: ;. @ S Directorate of Licensing
\\
s hShice D closure:..
kd$
~
As stated 3
t~.
p SURN AMF
- A "
- i DATE'$$i'.See Page 2_
" - b.h F.em AE.C-31R tNew 9 53) AECM 0240 80010807 M
i,.c.
s R. C. DeYoung JUN 191973 cc: w/o enclosure A. Giambusso W. Mcdonald cc: w/encloesse J. Glynn S. H. Hanauer J. M. Hendrie I. Peltier A. Schwencer F. Liederbach R. Tedesco
)
R. Vollmer 81STRIBUTION:
L: QA Reading s
s
- L:CS..
.l:
L:QA orrice.
FJ 1eddrbach;gmc.grollmet.
. R_..Ted esco...
suw..
06//..d. /73........
06/18/73 06/18/73
- e.
.L Form AEC-3 th tRev. 9 53) AEcu 0240
'D'
- 7. sus
. REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL-QUALITY ASSURA? ICE IrlFORMATION
]
OCONEE NUCLEAR STATION, UtilT 1 v
Duke Power Company (DPC) has not demonstrated an acceptable Quality i
Assurance Program for Operation, based on our review of the description of the Oconee Nuclear Station, Unit 1 Quality Assurance Program for Operations enclosed in a letter to R. C. DeYoung from A. C. Thies of Duke Power Company dated April 27, 1973.
We require a more indepth description of the QA program policies, organizational arrangements, and expansion of the discussion of DPC's inspection and audit' program.
The following additional information is required from DPC:
1.
Clear description of the specific responsibilities, authorities, and day-to-day duties of those responsible for formulating, establishing, approving, and implementing the QA policies, documented procedures, QA Manuals, and instructions and changes thereto relative to operation, maintenance, repair, modification, and refueling.
2.
Provide a listing or tabulation of the titles of the more typical 4
QA procedures that respond to each of the 18 QA requirements of Appendix B to 10 CFR 50.
Provide a brief abstract denoting the scope and purpose of each such procedure.
3.
Identify those positions or groups responsible for reviewing and approving the QA programs for vendors and contractors relative to the activities of maintenance, modification, repair, refueling.
r i
s gy f
?
_2_
4.
Describe the responsibilities and auth.orities of the Station Review Committee and fluclear Safety Review Committee relative to the implementation of the requirements and reconmendations of AEC Safety Guide 33.
Describe the interaction or role, if any, of these Committees relative to QA staff and its activities.
5.
Provide a more indepth description of DPC's inspection and audit program, including specific delineation of the onsite and offsite activities to be audited, and provisions for assuring independent acceptance inspection.
Provide a specific list of the duties of those responsible for independent review, inspection, and internal and external audit.
6.
We require DPC's clear commitment with respect to implementation of the requirements of AEC Safety Guide 33.
For any items of DPC's QA Program that do not satisfy Safety Guide 33, describe and justify the proposed alternatives.
i I
4 p
I i
- -