ML20049H899
| ML20049H899 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Brunswick  |
| Issue date: | 03/01/1982 |
| From: | Utley E CAROLINA POWER & LIGHT CO. |
| To: | Eisenhut D Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| IEB-79-01B, IEB-79-1B, NUDOCS 8203040453 | |
| Download: ML20049H899 (2) | |
Text
(
Carolina Power & Light Company D
o MAR 011982 RECElym 1
,g.
MAR 04pggg,,7 9
Mr. Darrell G. Eisenhut, Director ttam Division of Licensing United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
20555 I ::
BRUNSWICK STEAM ELECfRIC PLANT, UNIT NOS. 1 AND 2 DOCKET NOS. 50-325 AND 50-324 LICENSE NOS. DPR-71 AND DPR-62 REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION -
I ENVIRONMENTAL QUALIFICATION i
Dear Mr. Eisenhut:
By letter dated January 15, 1982, the NRC requested that Carolina Power & Light Company (CP&L) provide to the Franklin Research Center (FRC) certain documents for review from CP&L's central file for Environmental Qualification of Electrical Equipment.
For the reasons listed below, CP&L believes that a more cost effective review could be conducted by the NRC and FRC at CP&L's central file site in Philadelphia.
1.
The Technical Specifications imposed by NRC's Order of October 24, 1980 require that CP&L maintain control of the Brunswick central file.
Sending the central file to FRC would violate that NRC Order.
l 2.
The material requested is available for audit and review in CP&L's central file in Philadelphia.
In addition to the documents requested, the central file contains supporting information used by CP&L in determining the qualification of individual pieces of equipment.
The test reports are only a part of the processes involved, and a review of only the test reports by FRC would provide 'an incomplete and out-of-context picture.
4 3.
There appears to have been no attempt by FRC to consolidate the requested information.
It is quite possible that they have requested the same document from several licensees.
FRC has requested over 50 documents from the Brunswick file, including some with FRC numbers.
By not consolidating and comparing the requests, a needless duplication of effort and waste of resources would occur.
s 8203040453 820301 PDR ADOCK 05000325 P
PDR rj okf ff g 411 Fayetteville Street e P. O. Box 1551 e Raleigh, N. C. 27602
6 l
l l
Our action in this matter stems from our concern that an issue l
of the importance of Environmental Qualification receive a comprehensive and thorough review and evaluation. As has been previously discussed with your staff, CP6L believes that the most efficient and productive i
j way to deal with this issue is to have an audit / meeting with the NRC and l
FRC at the central file site to discuss these documents. Our staff will be made available to review and discuss the processes that were used to analyze various pieces of equipment.
In this manner, the entire process i
can be reviewed and avoid an isolated piece of information leading to an
]
erroneous conclusion. We believe this proposal to be particularly J
viable since the central file is presently in Philadelphia, where FRC is located.
If you have any further questions on this matter, please contact our staf f.
We stand ready to arrange the proposed meeting upon your approval of this proposal.
Yours very truly, L
E. E. Utley Executive Vice President Power Supply and Engineering & Construction JJS/WRM/lr (1309) cc:
Mr. 11. R. Denton Mr. J. P. O' Reilly (NRC-II)
-Mr. J. Van Vliet
_ _ _ _