ML20024F077
| ML20024F077 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Mcguire, Catawba, McGuire, 05000000 |
| Issue date: | 08/29/1983 |
| From: | Adensam E Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Tucker H DUKE POWER CO. |
| References | |
| REF-PT21-83 NUDOCS 8309080191 | |
| Download: ML20024F077 (6) | |
Text
!
7 DISTRIBUTION:._ _ _
August 29, 1983
.UDCKet.Nos.:30-369/370/4LV"414,.
1B'#4 r/f NRC PDR Docket Nos: 50-369/370 Local PDR and 50-413/414 PRC System EAdensam MDuncan RBirkel Mr. H. B. Tucker Vice President KJabbour Nuclear Production Department JKlucsik Duke Power Company W0lmstead
-422 South Church Street BJones, RII Charlotte, NC 28242 WBrown, RIV JLeiberman
Dear Mr. Tucker:
Attorney, OELD JMTaylor, I&E
Subject:
Duke Proposal to Undertake helson Electric DutieplJordan, I&E Under Part 21 ACRS (16)
As a result of a refusal by the Nelson Electric Division of General Signal Co.
to accept purcitase orders involving 10 CFR Part 21, in your letter of July 20, 1983, to Harold Denton you proposed:
1.
That Duke will not reference Part 21 in safety related orders placed with Nelson Electric; 2.
That Duke will continue to perform audits to assure that Nelson's
-QA program meets purchase specifications; and 3.
That Duke will assurae Nelson's Part 21 reporting reg!irements.
We need a better understanding of how Nelson and Duke would interact and how that interaction would relate to the specific requirements of Part 21 and Part 50, Appendix B before we can respond to your proposal. Your response to the following questions and comments would be very helpful in understanding and evaluating youf' proposal.
Part 21 i
1.
Would Nelson continue to post documents as required by 5 21.67 2.
Would Nelson continue to maintain procedures to A.
evaluate deviations from purchase documents; 8.
notify Duke of deviations; and B309080191 830829 PDR ADOCK 05000369 S
pgp emCe >
. ~.. - ~. ~. ~..
. - ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ -
-. ~. - ~ ~ ~ ~. ~.
suaume)
......... ~..... ~....
.. - -..... ~. -. ~.
-. - ~ ~... - - -
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ - - -
are >
OFF1ClAL RECORO COPY usom im-m-m NRC FORM M 00% NRCM Om
9.C.
assure that Nelson officers and directors are informed of defects or failures to comply as required by 5 21.21(a)?
We understand your proposal to be that Nelson's directors and officers would not report to the Commission defects or failures to comply as required by 5 21.21(b). Any such reports would be made by Duke personnel.
3.
We understand that Duke would not specify in its procurement documents for Nelson components that Part 21 applies as is required by G 21.31.
4.
Would Nelson prepare records in connection with its fabrication, manufacture, inspection or testing of components supplied to Duke, as required by 6 21.51(b)?
5.
How would Duke comply with the record maintenance requirement of 921.51(a)?
Part 50, Appendix B 1.
We understand that Duke would continue to be responsible for the establishment and execution of the quality assurance program as provided by Section I, Organization. Would the proposal end Duke's delegation to Nelson of the work of establishing and executing a quality assurance program with respect to components supplied by Nelson to Duke?
2.
Would Nelson still follow a quality assurance program sufficient to permit Duke's compliance with Section II, Quality Assurance Program?
3.
Would Duke maintain.the measures required by Section IV, Procurement Document Control and would the procurement documents require Nelson to provide a quality assurance program?
4.
Would Duke or Nelson maintain the document control measures required by Section VI, Document Control?
5.
Under the proposal, would Duke still have available the documentary evidence that material and equipment conform to the procurement documents as required by Section VII, Control of Purchased Material, Equipment and Services?
6.
Would Duke still be able to assure identification of Nelson components through the period of their use as required by Section VIII, Identification and Control of Materials, Parts, and Components?
~
. 7.
Would Duke or fielson establish and execute the inspection program required by Section X, Inspection? What level of inspection is -
proposed (audit, random sample or 1007, of production)?
8.
Would Duke still be able to maintain records sufficient to furnish evidence of activities affecting quality as provided by Section XVII, Quality Assurance Records?
One point must be made with respect to the obligation of officers and directors to report to the Commission defects and failures to comply. Section 206 of the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974 directly imposes a duty to report. The Com-mission could exempt officers and directors of Nelson Electric from the duty to report which is imposed by the regulations. Whether the Commission could exempt the Nelson officers and directors from their statutory duty to report is another question. fielson's directors and officers would be relieved of the duty to report in any case if they had actual knowledge that the Commission had been adequately informed (e.g., by Duke) of a defect or failure to comply.
Sincerely,
/
linor G. Adensam, Chief Licensing Branch No. 4 Division of Licensing cc: See next page
- NOTE: SEE PREVIOUS WHITE FOR CONCURRENCE A
orrecep.0ELil..................DELD..
....... lag;.LB. f.4....QL.;LB.. A.4 (S..f.4..
i.L.M sunwas)..*JKl.ucsik/.s'...*WD.lmstaac...MDunt.an/.bmc....*.RBirk el......EAdensam....
Ah.L 8L2 3183............ 9L2.319.3....... 9Ldle.3.......
.. 9f.24L9.3....... 9f)p'9.3..........sj1.cf.1.3...
amy NRC FORM 318 (1040) NRCM 0240 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY usoeo: imi-mao
. /
a 7
7.
Would Duke or Nelson ~ establish and execute the inspection program proposed (y Section X, Inspection?- Whaofproduction)?
required b level of inspection is audit, random sample or 100 Would Duke still be able to maintai, lity as provided by Section records sufficient to furnish 8.
. evidence of activities affecting a
XVII, Quality Assurance Records?
~
One point must be made.with respect to.the obligation of officers and directors to report to the Commission ~ %fects and failures to comply.
Section 206 of the Energy Reorganizatjon Act of 1974 directly imposes a -
- duty to report. The Comission coulp exempt officers and directors of Nelson. Electric from the duty to re ort which is imposed by the regulations.
Whether the Commission could exemp the Nelson officers and directors from their statutory duty to -report is another question. Nelson's directors and officers would be relieved o the duty to report -in any case'if they had actual knowledge that-the Commission had been adequately informed (e.g., by Duke) of a defect or ' ailure to comply.
Elinor G. Adensam Chief, Licensing Branch No. 4 Division of Licensing cc:
.A. Carr, Duke Power Company R. Birkel, NRR H. Denton, NRR B. Jones, R-II W. Brown, R-IV J. Leiberman, E D W. Olmstead, 0 D DISTRIBUTION:
i i
e 1
- 0 ELD
- LB-4 3
- LB-4 OFC ucsik:sl:bdimstead_______:___g)______:RBirkel
,NAME :
- EAdensam t _____:____________:.L__________:____________:-___________:____________:-___________:___________
DATE :8/23/83
- 8/ d /83
- 8/28/83
- 8/
/83 i
l-
~
g r
.7 4
e g
~
~ CATAWBA x
N LMr. H. B. Tucker, Vice President i
Huclear Production Dept.
Duke Power Company "422 South Church Street
~
Charlotte, Nortih Carolina 28242
~
cc: William L. Porter, Esq.
North Carolina Electric Membersh'ip-
Duke Power Company Co rp.
P.O. Box 33189 3333 North Boulevard
?-
Charlotte, North Carolina 28242 P.O. Box 27306 s
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611 ',
J. Michael McGarry, III, Esq.
'i Debevoise & Libennan Saluda River Electric Cooperative;~
1200 Seventeenth Street, N.W.
Inc.
,, N' Washington, D. C.
20036
+
207 Sherwood Drive' m
Laurens,- South Catalina 29360 3.
North Carolina MPA-1
< P.O. Box 95162 Mr. Peter K. VanDoorn
~
v Raleigh, North Carolina 27625 Route 2, Box 17.9tl
- F Mr. Fed.'Twbgood J -
~ York, South Csfolina ~29745
\\
Powyr Systems Division
'f J'ames P. O'Reilly, Regional Administrator Westinghouse ~ Electric Corp.
> U.S. Nuglear-Regulatory Commission, P.O. Box 355-Region II
~
' Pittsburgh,k' Pennsylvania _ 15230 101 Ma'rietta' Street,4uite 3100 Atlanta, Georgia 30303
~
Mr.' J. C. Pliinkett,' J r.
NUSCorporation Robe'rt Guil d, Jsq.-
2539 Countryside Boulevard Pf0. Box 12097 Clears 1ter, Florida 33515 r
Charleston,. South Carolina 29412 Mr. Je'sse L. Riley, President' Pa'metto Alliance Car.oiina Environmental Study Group 2135 1/2 Devir.t Street 854 Henley Place
" Columbia, ' South' Carolina 29,205,
Charlotte, North Carolina 28208'
,v-Carol F. Ka'gan, Attorney s
Richard P. Wilson, Esq.
Atomic SafetA and Licensing Board" Panel Assistant Attorney General U.S. Nuclear ~ Regulatory Comn;ission, S.C. Attorney General's Office -
Washington, D. C.
20555 i
> - P.O. Box 11549 iN Columbia, South Carolina 29211.
N k'
Mr. Pierce K. Skinner
-*T
~
-w Route 2bSox179N
~
York,. South Carolina 29745 l
/
3 N
N T'
s
.~
s.
m N.
-~~
3.,,
-f
~
~
a
.p,.
3.4 e
4 McGui re
~
Mr.- H. B. Tucker, Vice President Nuclear Production Department Duke Power ' Company 422 South Church Street Charlotte, North Carolina 28242 cc: Mr. A. Carr Duke Power Company
'P.O. Box-33189
.c? '
422 South Church Street Charlotte, North Carolina 28242 Mr. F. J.' Twogood Power Systems Division Westinghouse Electric Corp.
P.O. Box 355-Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15230 y
Mr. G. A. Copp 9 ~
Duke Power Company T
D Ul \\-
Nuclear Production Department
'Ni P.O. Box 33189 Charlotte, North Carolina 28242
?'
J. Michael McGarry, III, Esq.
s
( gg t ebevoise & Liberman h
D
~L1200' Sever.teenth Street, N.W.
7 Washington, D, C.
20036 g
YI."N.. Orders.
Senior Resident Inspector c/o'U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Route 4; Boxs529 Hunterville, J! orth _ Carolina 28078 James P. O'Reilly, Regional Administrator U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Region II 101 Marietta Street, Suite 3100 Atlanta, Georgia :30303
'R. S. Howard Operating Plants Projects Regional Manager
. Westinghouse Electric Corporation - R&D 701 P.O. Box 2728
.Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15230
- L
- \\,
- s -
x
\\
. _.