ML19351F161
| ML19351F161 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Grand Gulf  |
| Issue date: | 12/18/1980 |
| From: | Haass W, Martore J Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Bosnak R, Schauer F, Speis T Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8101100020 | |
| Download: ML19351F161 (3) | |
Text
-
1 l
DEC 181980 I
l Docket tios. 50-416 50-467 /
!!E!!ORANDU t FOR:
Assigned Reviewers for Grand Gulf FR0!!:
ilalter P. Haass, Chief, Quality Assurance Branch, Division of Engineering Joseph A. Martore, Project !!anager, Licensing Branch flo. 3 Division of Licensing
SUBJECT:
DETERf1IrlATI0ft 0F ACCEPTABILITY OF Q-LIST FOR GRAtlD GULF flVCLEAR STATI0fi, UNITS 1 AflD 2 In a menorandum dated February 8,1979 (D. Skovholt to R. DeYoung and R. Ihttson),
recommendations were nade regarding the fomal documentati.on of the staff review of the applicant's Q-list which identifies those safety-related structures, systens, and components (SSC) that fall under the control of their QA program (QAP) described in Section 17 of the SAR. The February 8 memorandum also recoamended an interim procedure for accomplishing such reviews for projects currently under review. Based on oral agreement by DSS and DSE to adopt this interim procedure, a memorandum was
~
issued (dated flarch 16, 1979) to the Midland 1 & 2 reviewers requesting their assistance in detemining the acceptability of the Q-list given in the SAR. Suffi-cient responses have been received that indicate the interin procedure is function-ing well.
Therefore, we have decided to proceed with similar reviews on other pro-jects. This memorandum is written to request that all reviewers assigned to the Grand Gulf application review the' list given in Table 3.2-1 as it applies to your areas of review responsibility to detemine if there is an adequate listing of those SSC that should fall under the QAP.
l l
The criterion that you should use in detemining whether SSC fall under the require-ments of the Appendix B OAP is as follows:
SSC that prevent or mitigate the' consequences of postulated accidents that could cause undue risk to the health and safety of the public. Additional guidance in this regard is provided in the regulatory position of Regulatory Guide 1.29 " Seismic Design Classification."
It is our intent 'to arrive at a safety-related Q. list for the Grand Gulf application that is generally consistent, both in scope and level of detail, to safety-related Q-lists shown in the past applications. Therefore, it is expected that the Q-list i
t
<.m 4g m ectej 7
..,y 4,y ;; ; g 7 ;;, y c; 3; g;3;; (;,3,, ;3c c ;3 ao nc3 ;3 4
c Howe)yer,idqp ;j,f,y and list everj safety-related component o structure wi thin a system).
Yf"6"E6H;Y6666Y"E66siEE5"6Y"C"E6fififHEEf663T"EEfEEj"fE1 TEED"aiid"h6HE3V6Ey"""""""
l rehrteW motions..(e.g. v.. reactor-coo 4nt-ptrap);-yo r shottid-ascertain-that-the sefety-- -
l mc room m p.m mau one
- u...--'-an=*=='""-*""'
810110 0m x l
l related portions of that component arc included in the 0-list.
It is requested that adequate justification be provided for substantive additions, deletions, or expansion in le' vel of detail should such situations arise.
In conducting your review, you should use the applicant's Table 3.2-1 as a starting i
point and other parts of Section 3.2 of the SAR as appropriate. You are requested l
to:
1.
Provide a listing of those SSC that fall within your areas of review responsibility.
l l
2.
Identify those safety-related SSC that should be added to Section 3.2 and l
provide the justification for these additions based on the above criterion.
l Included in your considerations should be the need to expand the level of detail of specific SSC on ~ the list for clarity.
3.
Additions and/or deletions to the.Q-list resulting from consideration of the Tl11-2 accident should not be made at this time. Changes to the Q-list I
of this type will be made at a subsequent time as results from the,TMI f
Action Plan become available.
t.
4.
You are requested to confer with your counterparts in other branches, as necessary, to assure that those SSC whose responsibility for review you may question, are indeed addressed by at least one reviewer.
Your response should be transmitted by menorandum to the QAB by no later than April 30,1981.
If you have any questions, contact Jack Spraul.
C DISTRIBUTI0ft:
llalter P. Haass, Chief vDocket File (2)
Quality Assurance Branch l
QAB Projects Division of Engineering QAB Chron. File Vtioonan, DE j'
JSpraul, QAB j
E/
JConway, QAB
/
I Jfiartore, LB3 FMiraglia, LB3 Joseph A. !!artore, Project Manager RTedesco, DL Licensing Branch fio. 3 Division of Licensing i
t A -
f
..D E,;,QA,B,,,,,
,,,,D,(,: (. f,,,,
.mc. *-
.,,{a u],3,c,g s,,,
,,,,JAJ1,a,r,,,,th,,,
JSp 121n.L.80........ 12d
,8D..
.12/2L%.....
f nac roca ns o.m NRW ONS 8 u * * * * * * *" s a ? P a '" "a * ** * " " 8 "," * " ' * " '
a n
w w-
Wk M
=
8 H
=>
[
r2 DISTRIBUTION
~
E; (R.Bosnak))
MEB (F.Schauer fu v.
SEB RSB (T.Speis) 23;;>
r 6ud
~~
?!
CSB (W. Butler)
N H
ASB (O.Parr)
U O
i 'd ICSB (R. Satterfield)
~
PSB (F. Rosa)
AEB (R. Houston)
RAB (T. Murphy)
HGEB (G. Lear) f l
4
__