ML19351A248
| ML19351A248 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 10/13/1989 |
| From: | Taylor J NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR OPERATIONS (EDO) |
| To: | Mcmillan A HOUSE OF REP. |
| References | |
| CCS, NUDOCS 8910170256 | |
| Download: ML19351A248 (6) | |
Text
)
o s
October 13, 1989 j
J The Honorable Alex McMillan United States House of Representatives Wasiington. DC 20515
Dear Ccngressman McMillan:
I am responding to your letter dated August 31, 1989, regarding your inquiry into the adaptation of a " process of 100 percent testing of all eiectronic components" by the NRC as referenced in Mr. James B. Griffith's letter dated July 7, 1989.
The U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission has the responsibility to review, evaluate and inspect the design and operation of commercial nuclear power plants to ensure the public health and safety. We do not specify any particular product or testing process. This allows a licensee the flexibility to develop designs that are best suited to its particular needs without giving any one company or individual unoue commercial advantage. Any product or process that is used, or proposed for use, in a safety-related application at a commercial nuclear plant is evaluated against our regulatory criteria to ensure safe plant operation.
After some effort by the ctaff, it was concluded that the referenced process of 100 percent testing of electronic components is not endorsed in any regulatory criteria used to evaluate safety systems.
The referenced process would have been evaluated only to the extent required to ensure that it si.tisfied the applicable regulatory criteria.
A staff concur.
rence that the product or process meets regulatory requirements does not constitute an NRC recomendation for that product or process.
Furthermore, NRC has not obtained the rights of standardization for this process from Camco, Inc. or any other organization.
If we can be of further help please advise.
Sincerely.
Original Signed By:
James M. Taylor Janes M. Taylor Acting Executive Director for Operaticas DISTRIBUTION OMossburg (12G18) )
Central Files 0Crutchfield (7024 SICB RF 7
NRC PDR HThompson (17G21) local PDR JPartlow (12G18)
E00 (f0004749)
JBlaha (17G21)
ED0 RF JScinto, OGC (15B18) ll TMurley/JSniezek AThadani (BE2) n/
FMiraglia (12G18)
SNewberry (7E12) 4 L/
FGillespie(12G18)
JJoyce (7E12) p
/-l SECY (CRC-89-1014)
C00utt (7E12) yoj
,l fg y ACRS (10)
CA l
- SEE PREVIOUS CONCURRENCE
\\*
SICB: DST SICB: DST SICB: DST ARM /RPB 0: DST ADT DD:NRR D:NRR lor (C00utt
- JJoyce
- SNewberry
- Tech Editor *AThadani *FMiraglia *JSneizek *TMurley (
l9/20/89 9/21/89 9/21/89 9/21/89 9/21/89 9/25/89 9/26/89 9/27/89
// /89 h/4/74a?S62 EC Rt.E CENTER CG!Wgy-
s i
l i
The Honorable Alex McMillan United States House of Representatives Wasiington, DC 20515 l
Dear Congressa.an McMillan:
Thank you for your letter dated August 31, 1989, regarding your inquiry into j
the adaptation of a " process of 100 percent testing of all electronic components
by the NRC as referenced in Mr. James B. Griff)th' letter dated July 7,1989.
The U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission has,the responsibility to review, evaluate and inspect the design and operation of commercial nuclear power plants to ensure the public health and safety. ye do not specify any particular product or testing process. This allows a licer)see the flexibility to develop designs that are best suited to its particula /r,needs without giving any one company or individual undue comercial advantage Any product or process that is used or ptoposed for use, in a safety-related application at a comercial nuclear plant i
is evaluated against our regulatory' criteria to ensure safe plant operation.
Therefore, a process for testing electronic components would be evaluated only to the extent required to ensure <that the process provides a product meeting the applicable regulatory criteria.' A staff concurrence that the product or process meets regulatory requirements does not constitute an NRC recomendation for that product or process.
If we can be of further help please advise.
Sincerely, James M. Taylor Acting Executive Director for Operations DISTRIBUTION.
Gentral F Ues h DMossburg (12G18)
SICB Rf (7E12)
DCrutchfield (7D24)
NRC PDR HThompson (17G21)
Local PDR JPartlow (12G18)
EDO(f0004749)
JBlaha (17G21)
EDO RF JScinto, 0GC (15B18)
TMurley/JSnie2ek AThadani (8E2)
FMiraglia (12G18)
SNewberry (7E12)
FGillespie (12G18)
JJoyce (7E12)
SECY(CRC-89-1014)
CDoutt (7E12)
ACRS(10)
(l[4
- RR AEDO CCDoutt
- JJoyce
- SNewberry
- Tech Editor *AThadani *FMiraglia ize
{4/(pey Mup JTaylor i
9/20/89 9/21/69 9/21/89 9/21/89 9/21/89 9/25/89 t
/89
/89
/ /89
7 I
i The Honorable Alex McMillan United States House of l
f Representatives Washington, DC 20515 l
c2 C l
Dear Congressman McMillan:
regar/in$ your inquiry into Thank you for your letter dated Aubust 31, 1969, the adaptation of a " process of 10 percent testin al electronic components' by the NRC as referenced in Mr. James B. Griffith'g etter dated July 7, 1989.
l f
s L
The U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Copinission has the sponsibility to review, evaluate and inspect the design and operation o commercial nuclear power plants to ensure the public health and safety We do not specify or certify I
any particular cesign, product, or testing p cess. This policy allows a i
licensee the flexibility to develop designs est suited to its particular l
needs without giving any one company or individual undue comunercial advantage.
Any product or process that is used, or proposed for us in a safety-related I
application at a comunercial nuclear plant is evaluated inst our regulatory criteria to ensure safe plant operation. Therefore, a process for testing electronic components would be evaluated only to the extent required to ensure i
that the process provides a product.or design meeting the applicable regulatory criteria. A staff concurrence that the design or process meets regulatory I
requirements does not constitute an NRC recommendation for that product or process.
If we can be of further help please advise.
[
I I
Janes H. Taylor Acting Executive Director for Operations l
DISTRIBUTION
/
Central files
/
DMossburg i
SICB RF
/
DCrutchfield NRC PDR
/
HThompson Local PDR JPartlow i
EDO(f0004749)/
JBlaha EDO RF
/
JScinto, OGC TMurley/JSniezek AThadani FMiraglia /
SNewberry FG111espie/
JJoyce SECY (CRC-89-1014)
CDoutt ACRS(10) t
[,
-y
- SEE PREVIOUS C0hCURRENCE
'W
[
SICB: DST SICB: DST SICB: DST ARM /RPB D: DST DD:NRR D:NRR AEDO cCDoutt
- JJoyce
- SNewberry
- Tech Editor AThadani lia.!SnMzek TMurley Jiaylor T A4'89 f /2//89 9/21/89 f/A//89 9/4//89 f
9
/ /89
/ /89
/ /89 Di
?
s
/
l p
i i
/
The Honorable Alex McMillan
/
I United States Houst of
/'
Rearesentatives Wasgington. DC 20515 i
l
Dear Congressman McMillan:
I Thank you for your letter dated August 31,1989, regarding yobr inquiry into i
the adaptation of a " Process of 100% Testing of All Electronic Components" by the NRC as referenced in Mr. James B. Griffith's letter dated July 7,1989, i
The U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission has the responsibility to review, evaluate and inspect the design and operation of consnercial nuclear power plants to ensure the public health and safety. We do'not specify or certify any particular design, product or testing process. <This policy allows a licensee the flexibility to develop designs best suited to their particular needs without giving any one company or individual undue commercial advantage. Any product or process that is utilized or proposed for use in a safety related application at a commercial nuclear plant is evaluated against i
our regulatory criteria to ensure safe plant operation. Therefore, a process i
for testing electronic components would be evaluated only to the extent i
required to ensure that the process provides a product or design meeting the applicable regulatory criteria. A staff concurrence that the design or process seets regulatory requirements does not constitute an NRC recomendation for that t
product or process.
If we can be of further help please advise.
Sincerely, t
I James M. Taylor Acting Executive Director for Operations j
t DISTRIBUTION Central Files
,DMossburg SICB RF DCrutchfield l
NRC PDR HThompson Local PDR JPartlow EDO(#0004749)
JBlaha EDO RF
/
JScinto, OGC TMurley/JSniezek '
AThadani FMiraglia SNewberry FGillespie JJoyce SECY CRC-89-1014)
CDoutt ACRS 10)
Thad[ani
- DST ADT DD:NRR D:NRR AEDO SICB: DST
- DST S1
. DST ARM /RpBjW FMiraglia JSneizek TMurley JTaylor CDouttOC oyce S ewberry Tech Editor 9 l489 f
'f #1/89
- )/s/89 9/)f/89 g/0/89
/ /89
/ /89
/ /89
/ /89
/
. s. :..,,'g
/
UNITED $ TATE $
~,
8 NUCLE AR REGULATORY COMMIS$10N g
n EDOPrincIoaYC$"r*res$$danceContr FROMs DUE: 09/27/09 EDO CONTROL: 0004'749 DOC DT 08/31/09 FINAL REPLY:
REP. ALEX McMILLAl4
- 10s, NRC' FOR SIGNATURE OF 4t GRN 4a CRC NO:.09-1014 o
r l
EXECUTIVE. DIRECTOR DESC:
ROUTING:
ENCL. LETTER FM JAMES B. GRIFFITH, SR.,
CONCERNING TAYLOR RECOGNITION FOR HIS CONTRIBUTION IN THE THOMPSON DEVELOPMENT OF A PATENTADLE PROCESS OF 100*/.
DLAHA TECTING OF ELECTRONIC COMPONENTS FDR USE IN SCINTO, OGC l
IJUCLEAR POWER PLANTS l-DATE: 09/3G/89
[
ASSIGNED TO:
CONTACT:
IJRR MURL.EY SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS OR REMARKS:
L NRR RECEIVED: SEPTDRER 13d989h ACTInN:-
1NT NRR' ROUTING:
MURLEY/SNIEZEK MIRAGLIA c.
PARTLOW CRUTCHFIELD GILLESPIE MOSSBURG i
ACTION DlJg TO NRR DIRECTOR'S n
@Y,bcpfh m R b R M TT_
..i
(:- __
i OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY CORRESPONDENCE CON'liROL TICKET PAPER NUMBER CRC-89-1014 IDGGING DATE: Sep 16 89 ACTION OFFICE EDO AUTHOR:
Alex McMillan--Const Ref AFFILIATION:
U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES LETTER DATE:
Aug 31 89 FILE CODE: ID&-6 Standarization i
SUBJECT:
Const feels the Comm should recognize his i
contribution in the development of a patentable process of 100% testing of electronic components i
for use in the nue gen industry I
ACTION:
Direct Reply j
1 DISTRIBUTION:
OCA to Ack i
(
SPECIAL HANDLING: None NOTES:
James Griffith DATE DUET Sep 29 89 i
SIGNATURE:
DATE SIGNED:
(
AFFILIATION:
?
i l
i f
i l'
c o
l nec'd O!!. ED0 ~g Dete Time O.. c-v
)
- ~-
7 " },-
y -t C e @g g mam.
m nier. ct,
k twinov me couutact som caou a gFA couwmi i
r.:_CEIVED a,
CongreWW of tfje Ginitch 8I5l5ff U Souse of Representatibts masWngton. DC 20515 August 31, 1989 Mr. Ilarold Denton Director of Covernmental and public Affairs Nuclear Regulatory Comission 1717 H Street,NW g
Washington, D.C. 20555
Dear Mr. Denton:
I am writing on behalf of Mr. James B. Griffith, Sr, who contacted ne with regard to some concerns he has for a possible recent action by the i
Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
I have enclosed a copy of :is le tter to me.
According to his letter, Mr. Criffith feels that he deserved recognition for hio contribution in the development of a patentable process of 1004 testing of all electronic components for use in the Nuclear Power Generation Industry. lie has heard that the rights of stantardization he developed and sold to Duke power have been obtained by the NRC from Camco, Inc., Houston, Texas. He is interested in verifying this infornation and obtaining some sort of recognition from the NRC for the development of the process.
Any information you can offer is greatly appreciated.
Sincerely, AL. i Alex McMillan Member of Congress AM/pfh Enclosure i
t 200---004749 r.~,o.,
w.
... m.
.cm
.,3,< 7.wm"#,"..
#%',,T, J...',..".#,.,'"
.'!',it,"t."#,..f "..,
"Of#*e3."..Y.',7
?,"E.T. ",??r t.t.,'
a w.
.w n
I l
~
538 Wingrava Drivs i
Charlotte, N. C.
28226 July 7,1989 Congressman Alsx M:Millan Congress of the tmited States House of Representatives Wasnington, D. C. 20515 Dear Congressman McMillant I would likr to call to your attention circumstances whereby I feel ! made a worthwhile contribution to our nation and due to the gigantic magnitude of red tape involved with any federal agency my efforts were ignored or inadvertantly not recognized.
Permit me to give a brief background of how this contribution was made by me: In early 1968, I formed my own business under the name of J & P Associates, Inc. My company name was derived by using the initials of my two children, James, Jr. and Patrick. My wife and I were the sole owners of the business.
It was incorporated in February 1968 in Columbia, South Carolina and J & P Associates, Inc. was domesticated under the laws of North Carolina when I became a resident of North Carolina. The purpose of my business was to market process control instrtenentation and systems as an Independent Manufiacturers' Sales Representative for several manuf acturers of non-conflicting products receiving monetary compensation solely on conynission from my sales in the states of North Carolina and South Carolina.
In ear.ly 1969 in pursuit of manuf acturers to represent as a sales representative, I con.
tacted Camco, Incorprcted, 7010 Ardmore, Houston, Texas, regarding representation in North Carolina and South Carolina and was granted the right to market Camco Products in North Carolina and South Carolina. At that time, Camco manuf actured equipment and sys-tems exclusively for the oil field production industry and the natural gas distribution industry. In my work process of introducing Camco's Products to industries in my area,
! DISCOVERED A PROCESS OF 100% TESTING OF ALL ELECTRONIC COMPONENTS which Camco was a.
dapting to their oil field equipment. When I DISCOVERED THIS PROCESS OF 100% TESTING OF ALL ELECTRONIC COMPONENTS, ! felt confident that this discovery would be of great value to the Nuclear Power Generating Industry. At that time the Nuclear Power Gener-ation Industry was in its inf ancy and Duke Power's First Nuclear Generating Plant, Oconee Nuclear Plant in South Carolina was on the drawing board.
I iwnediately con-tacted Mr. H. J. Lark, Chief Instrument Engineer at Duke Power's Charlotte, N. C.
Office regarding possible application of Camco equipment at the Oconee Nuclear Plant.
Af ter many hours of preliminary work, I was able to obtain an order from Duke Power for two Supervisory Control and Monitoring Systems to be used by Duke Power Company between its Oconee Nuclear Station (Masters) and the Keowee Hydro Station (Remotes).
These systems I sold to Duk'e Power introduced my DISCOVERED PROCESS OF 100% TESTING OF ALL ELECTRONIC COMPONENTS to the Nuclear Powet Generation Industry.
The Atomic Energy Commission Agents (AEC changed to Nuclear Regulartory Commission 1974) l&
working with Duke Power's Engineers at Oconee learned of my PROCESS OF 100% TESTING OF 1-ALL ELECTRONIC COMPONENTS that were incorporated into the manufacturing process of the supervisory control and monitoring systems that I sold Duke Power.
I have heard by word of mouth that the AEC Agents contacted Camco Inc., Houston, Texas and obtained the rights of standardization of this PROCESS OF 100% TESTING OF ALL ELECTRONIC COMPONENTS 1
i 1
i (2) j i
for use by the AEC as basic standardized quality control specification requirements l
for all electronic components used in Nuclear Power Generation. Facilities throughout i
the United States, j
If this above mentioned PROCESS was indeed adapted as a basic quality control specifie
)
cation, I feel that I deserve recogni tion for my ef forts in introducing a patentable
{
PROCESS OF 100% TESTING OF ALL ELECTRONIC COMPONENTS for use in the Nuclear Power Generation Industry.
(This was a patentable PROCESS. a new PROCESS for a new industry.)
Your assistance in the verification of the adaptation of the above mentioned PROCESS standardization along with the effective date of the adaptation of the above mentioned PROCESS by the Atomic Energy Consnission, now the Nuclear Regulartory Commission, will be greatly appreciated.
Sincerely,
+y7uJ /3.< 8
- N 5 5 anies B. Gri f fi th, Sr.
4 5