ML20011E025
| ML20011E025 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 01/30/1990 |
| From: | Lainas G Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Defline L SACM DIESEL |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20011E026 | List: |
| References | |
| REF-QA-99901173 NUDOCS 9002070038 | |
| Download: ML20011E025 (2) | |
Text
I l
t.c j
((s:!bito,
s j
'k UNITED STATES v
g NUCLE AR REGULATORY COMMISSION L
L t
ws.sHiNoTow, p. c, rout, j
e...+.
January 30, 1990 j
i k
Docket No. 99901173/89-01 l
Mr. L. Defline, GentP.1 Manager f'
SACM Diesel 1, rue de la Fonderie i
68054 Mulhouse France
Dear Mr. Defline:
j This letter addresses the inspection of your facility in Mulhouse, France conducted by Messrs. Uldis Potapovs and Edward Baker on October 2-3, 1989, and the discussions of their findings with members of your staff at the conclusion of the inspection.
The purpose of the inspection was to review selected portions of your Quality Assurance (QA) program related to the production and supply of diesel emergency I
generating sets for the Prairie Island Nuclear Generating Plant. During the i
inspection we found that some of your activities were not conducted in accordance l
with NRC requirements (10 CFR 50, Appendix B) imposed on you by the Northern States Power Company's (NSP) contract and comitted to in your QA manual.
Specifically, problems were identified in your control of procurement of safety-related equipment from subcontractors and vendors. We identified at l:
least two, instances where major procurement activities were initiated with compantes which either did not have SACM approved QA programs or did not have the capability to
)erform the work in accordance with the technical requirements at the time that t1e procurement was initiated. Additional weaknesses were identified in your controls for translating the equipment technical requirements to the appropriate quality documents and in the area of receiving inspections.
These issues are discussed in more detail in the enclosed report.
Please provide us within 30 days of your receipt of this letter a written i
statement containing:
(1) a description of steps that have been or will be l
'taken to correct these items; (2) a description of steps that have been or wt11 be taken to prevent recurrence; and (3) the dates your corrective actions and preventive measures were or will be completed. We will consider extending l
the response time if you can show good cause for us to do so.
The response requested by this letter is not subject to the clearance procedures of the Office of Management and Budget as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980, PL 96-511.
In accordance with 10 CFR 2.790 of the Comission's regulations, a copy of this letter and the enclosed inspection report will be pieced in the NRC's Public Document Room.
90020700as 9oo33o Mod 9399 msggp M:
._~
y
' f:.
-~
t
' 'Mr.LL. Defline'
- 21. -
January 30 1990 il Should you haveL any questions concerning this inspection, we will be pleased -
to discuss them with you.
F Sincerely, t
7
. Orit.iro! S!;ned by Gus C. Lainas, Acting Director
.i Division of Reactor Inspection and Safeguards j
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Enclosures:
1.
Appendix A-Notice of Nonconfornance 2.
Appendix B. Inspection Report 99901173/89-01
_cc: ~ F. W. Donnelly Jr., Vice President SACM Diesel Incorporated 1939-West Gray Post Office Box'13647 Houston, Texas 77019
.R. W. Sitek Power Supply Quality Assurance Department Northern States Power Company 1717 Wakonade Drive E Welch, Minnesota 55089 DISTRIBUTION:
RIDSxCodeelE:09xr4 VIB Reading 4
DRIS Reading-BKGrimes EWBrach
.UPotapovs
'EBaker HMiller, Rill RHauber, IP i
i
- Previously concurred OFC
- C:R15-2:VIB*
- BC:VIB:DR15:* :A R:DRI5:NRR :
~NAME;~:UPotapovs:jh
- EWBrach
- CLainas
,......:................:..............:.p.,,3........:..............:..............:..............
DATE' :01/16/90
- 01/22/90
- J /jy90
~
OFFICIAL RECORD COPY Document Name: LETTER FOR DEFLINE 4'
Y
>