ML20005G875
| ML20005G875 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 01/17/1990 |
| From: | Brach E Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Rebecca Stone BECHTEL CORP. |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20005G876 | List: |
| References | |
| REF-QA-99900519 NUDOCS 9001230229 | |
| Download: ML20005G875 (2) | |
Text
.
DISTRIBUTION:
Docket No.': 99900519/89 01 J M 2 7 1990 GEER tgliggs/?
RIDS Code IE:09 1
. Mr. R. H. Stone, Senior Vice President VIB Reading i
Gaithersburg Regional Office DRIS Reading BKGrimes Bechtel Corporation EWBrach 15740 Shady Grove Road Gaithersburg, Maryland 20877 1454 ETBaker JJPetrosino(3)
Dear Mr. Stone:
This letter addresses the inspection of your facility et Gaithersburg, Maryland, led by Mr. ~J. J. Petrosino of this office on October 23 26, 1989 and the discus.
sions of his findings with Mr. Sid Bernsen and other members of your staff at the conclusion of the inspection.
The unannounced inspection was conducted to follow-up an NRC concern regarding piping systems at D.C. Cook and Prairie Island that were found to exceed their Safety Analysis Report design limits due in part to a Copes. Vulcan valve weight and center of gravity problem. Areas examined during the NRC inspection and our findings are discussed in the enclosed report. This inspection consisted l
of an examination of procedures and representative records, interviews with personnel, and observations by the inspectors.
Within the scope of this inspection, we found no instance where you failed to meet NRC Requirements; however, one unresolved item was identified where Bechtel may not be meeting the intent of 10 CFR Part 21.
It appears that Bechtel is using an engineering procedure to disposition generic deficiencies that could be potentially reportable pursuant to 10 CFR Part 21. This issue is identified as an unresolved issue and will be followed up during a subsequent NRC inspection. We request that Bechtel review the unresolved issue and determine whether any of the items discussed should have been either:
(1) evaluated by Bechtel, (2) reported to all applicable Bechtel customers so that or (3) reported to the NRC they could cause an evaluation to be performed, firms that an item requires pursuant to 10 CFR Part 21.
If your review con an evaluation or is reportable to an NRC licensee, we also request that Bechtel initiate appropriate evaluation and/or notification corrective actions.
In accordance with 10 CFR 2.790 of the Commission's regulations, a copy of this letter and the enclosed inspection report will be placed in the NRC's Public Document Room.
Should you have any questions concerning this inspection, we will be pleased to discuss them with you.
Sincerely, f
/$
90012so E. William Brach, Chief fi l hygg.229[Q17 Division of Reactor Inspection and Safeguards I;
Vendor Inspection Branch
<2 pp QT Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation p
i F
fM Enclosure-9 Ol 1.
Appendix A. Inspection Report 99900519/89 01 i
- RIS.1:VIB*
- C:R15 1:VIB*
- VIB RES:NRR*:D:,I./......::T f........:7 NAME :JPetrosino:cp
- ETBaker
- EW h
is
......:................:..............:......) M.:. r DATE
- 11/24/89
- 11/24/89
- 12/2 /8
- 1//l./90
- 12/. /89
DISTRIBUTION:
)
Docket No.: 99900519/89 01 g j.7 %
Docket control /
RIDS Code IE:09
- Mr. R. H. Stone, Senior Vice President VIB Reading Gaithersburg Regional Office DRIS Reading Bechtel Corporation BKGrimes 15740 Shady Grove Road EWBrach Gaithersburg, Maryland 20877 1454 ETBaker JJPetrosino(3)
Dear Hr. Stone:
This letter addresses the inspection of your facility at Gaithersburg, Maryland, led by Mr. J. J. Petrosino of this office on October 23 26, 1989 and the discus.
{
sions of his findings with Mr. Sid Bernsen and other members of your staff at the conclusion of the inspection, j
F The unannounced inspection was conducted to follow.up an NRC concern regarding piping systems at D.C. Cook and Prairie Island that were found to exceed their i
Safety Analysis Report design limits _ due in part to a Copes. Vulcan valve weight and center of gravity problem. Areas examined during the NRC inspection and our findings are discussed in the enclosed report. This inspection consisted of an examination of procedures and representative records, interviews with personnel, and observations by the inspectors.
Within the scope of this inspection, we found no instance where you failed to meet NRC Requirements; however, one unresolved item was identified where Bechtel may not be meeting the intent of 10 CFR Part 21.
It appears that Bechtel is using an engineering procedure to disposition generic deficiencies that could be potentially reportable pursuant to 10 CFR Part 21. This issue is identified as an unresolved issue and will be followed up during a subsequent l
NRC inspection. We request that Bechtel review the unresolved issue and determine whether any of the items discussed should have been either:
(1) evaluated by Bechtel, (2) reported to all applicable Bechtel customers so that they could cause an evaluation to be performed, or (3) reported to the NRC c
l pursuant to 10 CFR Part 21.
If your review confirms that an item requires i
an evaluation or is reportable to an NRC licensee, we also request that Bechtel initiate appropriate evaluation and/or notification corrective actions.
In accordance with 10 CFR 2.790 of the Commission's regulations, a copy of this letter and the enclosed inspection report will be placed in the NRC's Public Document Room.
Should you have any questions concerning this inspection, we will be pleased to discuss them with you.
.l Sincerely.
3/
E. William Brach, Chief Vendor Inspection Branch Division of Reactor Inspection and Safeguards e
i Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Enclosure:
1.
Appendix A. Inspection Report 99900519/89 01
- Previously concurred Document Name: STONE 1.ETTER gr
't iTC
- RIS.1:YIB*
- c:RIS.1:VIB*
- VI 5:NRR*:D:
- T ED h) $.:....i s
4AME :JPetrosino:cp
- ETBaker
- EW 2.....:.........'.......:..............:....
TATE :11/24/89-
- 11/24/89
- 12/2 /8
- 1//l./90
- 12/ /89
_ _.