ML20213E382
| ML20213E382 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Columbia  |
| Issue date: | 03/23/1983 |
| From: | Novak T Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Crews J, Taylor J, Vollmer R NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION V), NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE), Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| CON-WNP-0577, CON-WNP-577 NUDOCS 8303300184 | |
| Download: ML20213E382 (3) | |
Text
'
._ y$W MAR 2 3 1983 DISTRIB UTI0ff-3 RAul uck EGEisenhut TMNovak WHaass SBlack JMartin, R-V 13Et' ora!7Jt; FOR:
Richard H. Vollmer Director RDodds, R-V Division of Engineering,1:RR Janes t!. Taylor, Director Division of Quality Assurance, Safecuards and Inspection Prograns, IE Jesse L. Crews, Director Division of Pesident Reactor Projects and Engineerinr; Inspection, Recion V F?.0'!:
Thonas l'.
!!cvak, Assistant Director for l'icensinc Division of Licensing,tiRR SURJECT:
WI'P-2 IllDEPEi! dei!T DESIGli VERIFICATI0tl PROGRAM At the neetina held in Bethesda, MD on I:ovecer 10, 1982 and in their letters of October 23, 19P2 and Novenber 24, 1982, Washincton Public Power Supnly Systen (UPPSS) described their oncoing design verification crocran for UUP-2 facility and outlined the proposed Independent Desian Verification Program (IDVP).
UPPSS has selected three systens as part of their IDVP to reverify that the VifP-2 desinn conrlies with the comitments of the safety analysis rescrt and the applicable reculatory renuirener.ts. The three systens are the biqh pressure core spray, residual heat rer. oval and the reactor feedwater systen. The actual desien reverification of these three syste.s is being carried out usino UPPSS personnel who have not been directly involved in 9e W!!P-2 project. The independent nanacement assessment and the adequacy of the program is being done by Technical Audit Associates (TAA).
In our response of Decerher ?S,1982 ( Attachment A), we supported the actions taken by UPPSS and reouested the resunes of the members involved with the progran to assess their independence and technical competence as related to the Wl'P-2 IDVP effort which is now well underway.
At the flP.C staff nectino held in Bethesda, i4D on !' arch 3,1983, it was decided that t2R will take the lead in reviewina the IDVP for WP-2 with inputs from IE and Recion V.
Accordingly, in order to proceed in a tinely manner, we reouest the following:
1.
Division of Engineerino is asked to review the technical conpetence of tt'e ucrsonnel perforninc the reverification oregran and also of the contractors involved with the audit functions.
~ ~ d......Z....1E, Div.ision..o.f.. dud.i.ty.. Aisu.r mcc....S.afenu.e hh..and.. Ins.ne
- ti on..P.r.cnr.cm..
is asked for its conrents on Lhe applicant s procram in area.s of the ir
~ ~~ ~ g = y,.e g,
eso is 830323
% FE )"
CV h uGG3+1
- ~ ~ - - -
(
't
-2_
3.
Depion V is asked to reviev' the independence of the eersonnel per-fornina the IDVP and also assist in nonitorina the irplenentation of crocedures and guidelines developed for the WP-2 reverification procrari on the three selected systens.
A meeting with 1:PPSS bas been arranced for nid-April to discuss the status of the procran. Please provide your coments by April 7,19E3.
Origin?.1 cisned by:
rnecas n.1;;vak Thom.as M. I!cvak, Assistant Director for Licensing Division of Licensing,1:RR
Attachment:
As stated
- SEE PREVIOUS CONCURRENCES f
omec>.D(;.(?,M/.PM..
.D(,:(y,2,/,B,C,,,, D(((hg[
su.wwe >.RAul.uc.t.:kw*.
ASc hw eac.er*.....TMio.va.B......
om>
. 31.1.81.6.3...
. 3/.16/.8 3........... 31.2.2.8.3...
g,
-.. mg -
q
-*=.e m
m.
es m -*
u9
-?-
3.
Recion V is asked to assist in nc/;itoring the inplementation of the prograr..
Your coments are recuested by COB Thursdry, March 24,19D3.
Thomas f t. !!ovak, Assistant Director for Licensina Division of Licensing
Attachment:
As stated
\\
...DL...:.l.8.W.3/.B C D
....L.:.AD/..L.......
omen >
...M.c..,../n.c.er...T.t.i.9.y. A h..........
sun ~wa >
..../....../.. 8 3 3
...../... /.8 3
..../..In' './.8 3 3
om>
e pm f-m 'c, UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
" g',';-fcl j y*
.,.. J
.w,
. c wAsecton. o. c. 20s.ss
% MQ f f
'd ',',j DEC 2 81932 Docket No. 50-397 Mr. Robert L. Ferguson Managing Director Washington Public Power Supply System 300 George Washington Way Richland, Washington 99352
Dear Mr. Ferguson:
Subject:
Design Verification Program for WNP-2 Reference (1)
Letter dated October 22, 1982 from G. D. Bouchey to H. R. Denton, " Nuclear Project No. 2 - Verification of Design and Construction Adequacy."
(2)
Letter dated November 24, 1982 from R. L. Ferguson to W. J. Dircks, "WNP-2 Plant Veri fication Program."
This letter is in response to your. letter dated October 22, 1982 addressed to myself and a letter dated November 24, 1982 addressed to W. J. Dircks.
On November 10, 1982, the NRC staff met with the Washington Public Power Supply System staff to hear and discuss the Supply Systems quality assurance program and to determine whether additional assurance is needed in light of recent design deficiencies found at other facilities.
In that meeting your staff described the quality assurance and quality control program and organizations that have been used in the WNP-2 design and construction.
From your presentation it appears that you have developed and are executing a comprehensive WNP-2 plant verification program.
To identify the areas of technical competency represented by the members of your staff, involved with the re-verification program as well as the extension of efforts intended to satisfy the objectives of your proposed Independent Design Yerification Program (as outlined in your November 10, 1982 document), we have requested resumes of the individuals performing'these tasks.
We also understand that, in order to provide a high level of independent management assessment of this program, you contracted for the services of Technical Audit Associates Incorporated (TAA), which is a group of well qualified senior technical and mansgement personnel.
Their responsibility to you is to review the adequacy of the overall plant verification program.
The NRC staff is receptive to new initiatives by the industry and will evaluate them objectively based on their merits.
There is no position or requirement for all applicants to conduct an independent design or construction verification program.
Each prbgram is evaluated on a case-by-case basis.
1 n~ M ?=
n i
e Fr. Icbert L. Ferguson -
Because of the major problems which precipitated your work stoppage from July 1980 through June 1981 and the need to assure yourself that the quality of pre-July 1980 work was adequate, a comprehensive plant re-verification program appears to be appropriate and necessary.
You stated during the November 10, 1982 meeting that, as a part of the WHP-2 plant verification
~
program, you intend to perform an independent design verification of three You further indicated that the actual design safety-related systems.
reverification on these three systems would be carried out using WPPSS personnel who have not been and would not be directly involved in the WNP-2 project.
Therefore, their review would provide a degree of independence.
You also 1
indicated that outside perspective on the WPPSS execution of this program would be accomplished by having TAA audit the program for senior WPPSS management. We understand that, at TAA's suggestion, you are adding j
more personnel to your review team to streng.then some of the review areas.
We support the actions beino taken by you and would be agreeable to a meeting f
o discuss resumes received as well as the with members of yot su, technical qualifict -icns c' any additional members added to the review group.
Sincerely, l/
a Harold R. Denton, Director Office of Nuclear Reactor R'egulation cc:
See next page
(
l l
l i
i I
f
,