ML20099H125

Applicant Exhibit A-103,consisting of Forwarding Response to Violations Noted in Insp Repts 50-352/78-12 & 50-352/78-03 on 781226-29 & 790102,respectively.Violation Should Be Reclassified as Unresolved Item

ML20099H125
Person / Time
Site:	Limerick
Issue date:	05/07/1984
From:	Boyer V PECO ENERGY CO., (FORMERLY PHILADELPHIA ELECTRIC
To:	Grier B NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I)
References
OL-A-103, NUDOCS 8411280033
Download: ML20099H125 (3)

Text

• .

,. ; .2

$^-

I@ j 4

- gy h, lOS -

s cCY

,,~ .

Q

.L Qq,. G n .

e', $3 7 U ,e t, #% ,

.es x - . -. .

q% ,

Q ~ ,\k)=

. . to e as m 1

)/,g. T{

n . , ge u i:, f

~

.. 3:7ce Grier , Diro c:o r Unt:ed 5:s:es l'ucles: 7.e s ula:e rv Ccarission -

office of Inspe::1on and Inforcemen:, Region I 631 is h Avenue Kin of ?:us412 ?A 19106

.Subjec:: US!i?.C II; I La::a: dated January 31, 1979

?.E: S1:e Inspection of Decenbe: 26-29, 1973 and Janunty 2, 1979 Inspection 7.epor: tio . 50-352/73-12 & 50-352/78-03 Lincrick Centrating Sta:1on - tinits 1& 2 File: qCAL 1-2-2 (352/75-12 and 353/75-06)

Oca: !!; ., C ri s :

In respt'nse to the subject le::a: rega rdin;: an 1:en identified in,spac:1on of construe:1 n ac:1ti:1es au:horised gjm{.duria;thecutjcc:

t')

by ::..C License :*os. CT7?.-100 and -1C7, va ::ansni: herevi:h the f:ll: vin :

A::acd=en: I - Re s p o r.s e :o Ap p end t:: A ,

Should you ha se any ques:%ss concerning this 1:en, va L4ould be pleased to discuss than with you.

el' i

/.. tv,1\,* .ti k , *.

g! .}p */ [t .ifU Sinceraly, kN'5 1. ./ j Qm V. S. 3cya .

] .

. !*,J *. / g ,

A::achasu: .

bee R. H. Elins, 3ech: 1 2. R. Klossir., 3ach: 41

• J. 3. Kaspar I. J. 3:sdiay G. Whi:a

!. C. Kistne H. R . k*s t : a r s / *.e c a l T il a ()

. J.'J. Clarev ~

l. )- K.A. !! a l ! c d

( v i W. 11. Car:oran Projec: Tila (2)

. . T.

N hah [oh[h O P

s .- g ,u.-

4

-.;-- _ . . . s. . . . . . . . . . . .

4 . ,, . ' . .;.

(#. .

n... . c . a. s. . _ .i .n , .. _

u n .;-

a

i. :. :. w. . 5 =_ . o n. .., .. r... v. . ..

.L. ) . .s m

. (~ -

!:e= ef ':ene: elian:a

. 10'CF?. 50, A;pendia 3 Criterien 7, s:a:es, in part, tha::

~,

" A::ivi:ies affecting quali:y shall be prescribed by docunented-

' ins::uctions , p roc edures , .o drawings ... and shall be a::c=plished-in accordance vi:h these instrue: ions. precedures, or drawings." .

The L1= trick ? SAP., A;;endix D, Quality-Assurance ?:ogra=, Para-graph D.6.4, s:a:es, in part, tha:: "(Zachtel) quali:y con::el

, engineers... are. responsible fc _ preparing.inspec:1on plans in accordance.vi:h the Field Inspec: ion Manual, (and),Perforcing Quality con::cl Insp,eccions." Each:e1 ?:oj ect Special ? rov'isions

? ocedure G-6.1 s:ates in See:1on 3.1.5 :ha: "an inspeccion ?cin:

(I)Lin :he Quality Control Ins::ue: ion (QCI) is a =andatory inspection point beyond which vork shall no proceed past the poin: where the designated ac:1vi y is no longer inspec:able".

Con::ary :o the above, on Dece=ber'2, 1978, the velding of a two

~

inch nippl'a onto pipe spool. piece FSK-I33-129-3/9 had proceeded

-beyond the point where so=a of the designa:ed =andatory inspec:icns could not be perfor=ed.

I Re'sooese to-Ita= cf Nonec=cliance

. ,$ The required inspe c tions have . b e er. -p erf or=e d and do cunen:ed .

A review of c:her open inspec:ica plans indica:es that no c:her Quality C.on::al hold points'have been bypassed. In any,even:, if hold points areL=1ssed they : e iden:ified prior to the s:ar: of final'inspecticas as a =atter of routine, since in-process =c the star: of inspections are reviewed for co=pleteness prio:

final ~1nspections. In order to avoid fur:her 1:e=s of.ncacem-pliance, the Field S:aff Engineering and Area Supervision vere re-ins::ue:ed a: a =ee:ing on January 2, 1979, on : heir cuali:y related re,spensibili:tes concerning-hold poin:s.

4 Discussion

:is reques:ed tha: :his item of noncompliance be-re:lassified

.as-an unresolved i:e= since the Quali:y Con::clmissed iden:ify Ins: rue:1casien inspec: ions

,the Limerick projec: are designed :o

• idep. ify-or hold pBints. We do'no: consider 1: appropria:e :o this as an 1.:e= of nonco=pliance since-reviews of the in-process inspec:icas and final inspec:1ons v'hich follow veuld h:ve iden:ified the condition.

t I-1/1 y

( o 50-352/73 ,. .

. 50-353/7S-0S

' '-i ' . k

-w

.L i

. - - - . . . . . . . . . - ~ - . . . . - . - . . . - - . , ,. ,_.a._., ,,---,,,n. ,,--,..n-,~,, - - , .