ML20209B195

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Submits Comments Re Preliminary Cloud Rept & PG&E Biweekly Status Repts 1 & 2.Rept Does Not Address Adequacy of QA Controls Governing Info Flow or Verification of Correctness
ML20209B195
Person / Time
Site: 05000000, Diablo Canyon
Issue date: 12/03/1981
From: Haass W
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To: Vollmer R
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Shared Package
ML20209B094 List: ... further results
References
NUDOCS 8201140203
Download: ML20209B195 (1)


Text

m

_gcaap p'o, UNITED STATES 3'

..f g

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION g

/y E WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 DEC 0 31981 MEMORANDUM FOR:

Richard H. Vollmer, Director Division of Engineering FROM:

Walter P. Haass, Chief, Quality Assurance Branch, Division of Engineering

SUBJECT:

QAB COMMENTS ON THE PRELIMINARY CLOUD REPORT AND PG&E BI-WEEKLY STATUS REPORTS #1 & #2 As discussed in the meeting in your office on December 2,1981, QAB has the fol-lowing major corments on the subject reports:

1.

The basic objective of the preliminary Cloud report (November 12,1981) is to review the trail of engineering information flow from organization to organization for applicability.

It does not address the adequacy of QA controls governing this information flow or the verification of its.

correctness.

2.

The PG&E Bi-Weekly (Semi-Monthly) Status Reports (dated November 13,.

'1981 and November 25,1981) 'do not address the work progress achieved in the area of quality assurance.

PG&E should be requested to include such information in future status reports consistent with the directions specified in the Commission Order and the related staff letter.

At a minimum, progress achieved with regard to reviewing the QA controls applied to the original design work by PG&E and by service-related con-tractors, and the QA controls established for the current seismic re-design effort and_the_ reverification program should be. described.

3.

The Cloud progress reports that accompany the PG&E status reports pro-vide little information regarding the QA controls established for the current Cloud work.

These controls should be described in greater de-tail.

4.

To assist the staff in assessing the adequacy and completeness of the PG&E response to the Commission Order and related staff letter, it is essential that the Program Plan (Item 5 of the staff letter) be pro-vided as soon as possible.

~

Walter P. Haass, Chief Quality Assurance Branch tvision of Engineering cc:

J. Knight F. Miraglia.

E. Sullivan J. Spraul

-R Bee R y

)

}y 8kJll'fr%By

_