ML20129A378
| ML20129A378 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Brunswick  |
| Issue date: | 06/28/1985 |
| From: | Zimmerman S CAROLINA POWER & LIGHT CO. |
| To: | Vassallo D Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| GL-83-28, NLS-85-236, NUDOCS 8507150284 | |
| Download: ML20129A378 (2) | |
Text
-
y..
gpgg Carolina Power & Light Company SERIAL: NLS-85-236 JUN 2 81985
' Director of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Attention:
Mr. D. B. Vassallo, Chief Operating Reactors Branch No. 2 Division of Licensing United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555 BRUNSWICK STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT, UNIT NOS.1 AND 2 DOCKET NOS. 50-325 & 50-324/ LICENSE NOS. DPR-71 & DPR-62 ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REGARDING GENERIC LETTER 83-28, ITEM 2.2.2
Dear Mr. Vassallo:
Your letter of April 23,1985 requested additional information necessary to complete your review with regard to Generic Letter 83-28, item 2.2.2. Carolina Power & Light Company's response to your request is enclosed.
Questions _ your staff may have regarding this matter may be referred to Mr. Steve Chaplin at (919) 836-6623.
Yours very truly, ja > > m _.
S. R. Zir imerman nager Nuclear Licensing Section SDC/crs (1666SDC)
Enclosure I
cc:
Mr. W. H. Ruland (NRC-BNP)
Dr. J. Nelson Grace (NRC-RII)
Mr. M. Grotenhuis (NRC) gfI l M ! 8 8 M g g g,e Tg PDR-411 Fayetteville Street
- P. O. Box 1551
- Raleigh. N C. 27602
e:,g ITEM 2.2.2 The staff found that the NUTAC program fails to address the concern about establishing and mjintaining an interface between all vendors of safety-related equipment and the utility. Accordingly, the licensee will need to supplement his response to address this-concern. This additional information should describe how current procedures will be
' modified and new ones initiated to meet the elements of this concern.
RESPONSE
CP&L has reviewed the NUTAC Vendor Equipment TechnicalInformation Program (VETIP) and considers that the NUTAC ef fort provides effective guidelines in establishing a vendor interface program.
The VETIP as defined in the March 1984 NUTAC document is considered a valid response
'to Section 2.2.2 of the NRC Generic Letter 83-28. Accordingly, it is requested that the NRC reanalyze and reconsider your request for additional information.
(1666SDC/ccs )
i L
j