ML20062J188

Forwards Response to NRC Ltr Re Violations Noted in IE Insp Repts 50-413/82-10 & 50-414/82-04.Corrective Actions:All Unmarked Copies of Controlled Documents Discarded & Training Given to QC Inspectors in Requirements,Per QAP-G-1

ML20062J188
Person / Time
Site:	Catawba
Issue date:	06/11/1982
From:	Parker W DUKE POWER CO.
To:	James O'Reilly NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II)
Shared Package
ML20062J162	List: IR 05000413/1982010 ML20062J159 ML20062J188 ML20062J212 ML20062J358
References
NUDOCS 8208160290
Download: ML20062J188 (2)

Text

. _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _

E v. . .

e

,2J, Rok. .V_KE,[OWER COMPANY

. , 3 $;Tp,[.L,,.Powsu UU wswo 422 Sourn Cnuncu STREET, CHAumTTz, N. C. 28242 WI LLI AM O. PA R M E R, J R, .

ViCr PetSiDEN, fttgenoNc:Anta 704 s t. peoovCeio" June 11, 1982 373-*o83

! Mr. James P. O'Reilly, Regional Administrator U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Region II 101 Marietta Street, Suite 3100 Atlanta, Georgia 30303 Re: Catawba Nuclear Station RII:PKV IE Report 50-413/82-10 50-414/82-04

Dear Mr. O'Reilly:

Please find attached a response to Violation No. 413/82-10-03, 414/82-04-03.

All of the necessary information needed to adequately respond to Violation

! No. 413/82-10-02, 414/82-04-02 has not been assimilated. A response to this violation will be submitted by August 20, 1982. Duke Power Company does not consider any information contained in the subject IE Inspection Report to be proprietary.

l Ver truly yours, Mu _ . Q. J William O. Parker, Jr.

RWO/php cc: Mr. Robert Guild, Esq.

! Attorney-at-Law l 314 Pall Mall

Columbia, South Carolina 29201 Palmetto Alliance 2135 Devine Street Columbia, South Carolina 29205 t

r208160;290 820802 PDR ADOCK 05000413 O PDR

A .. . .

e DUKE POWER COMPANY CATAWBA NUCLEAR STATION Violation:

10 CFR 50, Appendix B, Criterion V, as implemented by Topical Report Duke 1-A, Section 17, paragraph 17 1.5 requires that activities affecting quality be accomplished in accordance with established procedures. Duke Power Company procedure CQ G-1, Rev. 16 requires uncontrolled documents to be marked " Uncontrolled Not for Construction."

Contrary to the above, an activity affecting quality was not accomplished in accordance with established procedures on April 8, 1982 in that electrical QC inspectors possessed copies of pages of Duke Specification CNS 1390.01-00-0083 which were not marked " Uncontrolled Not for Construction."

Response

1. Duke Power Company admits this violation.

2. The reason for this violation is as follows: Electrical QC Inspectors had a copy of the tolerances page from Duke Spec. CNS 1390.01-00-0083 on the outside front of their inspection documents notebook as a quick reference during hanger inspection.

3 A review was made to determine if any other unmarked copies of controlled documents were being used by Electrical inspectors. No other documents were found and the tolerances page f rom Spec. CNS 1390.

01-00-0083 was the current revision; there by,not affecting any previous inspections. Further review in all other inspection areas revealed that Mechanical Hanger QC Inspectors did have in their possession some unmarked documents which they received during inspector training sessions.

j All of these documents were, also, current revision.

l 4. All unmarked copies of controlled documents were discarded and training l conducted to responsible Q C Inspectors in the requirements of controlled I documents per QAP-G-1.

l l S. Full compliance has been achieved as of this date, June 10, 1982.

I t

I m