ML20246A052
| ML20246A052 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | River Bend  |
| Issue date: | 06/27/1989 |
| From: | Milhoan J NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV) |
| To: | Deddens J GULF STATES UTILITIES CO. |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8907060128 | |
| Download: ML20246A052 (2) | |
See also: IR 05000458/1989016
Text
_
__
. - _ _ - _ - _ _ _ _
1
.
,
.
~ :
JUN 2 71989
'
In Reply Refer To:
Docket:- 50-458/89-16
Gulf States Utilities
ATTN: Mr. James C. Deddens
Senior Vice President (RBNG)~
P.O. Box 220
St.'Francisville, Louisiana 70775
Gentlenen:
Thank youifor your letter of June 2,1989, in response to our letter and
l
Notice of Violation dated May 2, 1989. Based on our review of the information
-
!
contained in your response and clarification obtained during a telephone call
09 June 26, 1989- with Messrs. L. A. England and V. Bacansaas of your staff,
we agree that your procurement actions for Okonite tape and cement were
technically consistent with the requirements of Method 3 of EPRI NP-5652,
" Guideline for the Utilization of Commercial Grade Items in Nuclear Safety
'
Related Applications (NCIG-07)." Accordingly, we are deleting Violation 8916-01.
Sincerely,
pridnal Signed By,
J. L. Milhoan
.
,
James L. Milhoan,' Director
Division of Reactor Projects
cc:
Gulf States' Utilities
ATTN:
J. E. Booker, Manager-
River Bend Oversight
P.O. Box 2951
Beaumont, Texas 77704
D:DRS .jf
RIV:C:MQPS*
LJCal an 6lygg D:
.
J Milhoan
IBarnes/cjg
/ /89
6/f489
Q @89
- previously concurred
'\\
8907060128 890627
ADOCK 05000458
w
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
_ _ _ . . _ _
___-
'I
(
L
L .,
-
Gulf States Utilities
-2-
A
'
.
Gulf States Utilities
ATTN: Les England, Director
Nuclear Licensing - RBNG
P.O. Box 220
.St. Francisville, Louisiana' 70775
Louisiana State University.
- Government Documents Department
Louisiana Radiation Control Program Director
bec to DMB (IE01)
p
bcc distrib. by RIV:
RRI~
R. D. Martin, RA
Section Chief (DRP/C)
Lisa Shea,sRM/ALF
MIS System
RSTS Operator
RPB-DRSS
.
,
Project Engineer (DRP/C)
RIV File
W.Paulson,NRRProjectManager(MS:
13-D-18)
1. Barnes
.
..
,
_o
h
--
m_______._____-___.__-_______.___..m_
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ . _ . _ . _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _
_ _ . _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
..
_ _ _ _ - _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _
.
..
.
'i
r
, . *
GULF STATES
UTILITIES
COMPANY
RIVER BEND STA7 TON
POST OFFICE BOX 220
ST FRANCISVILLE.LOUIStANA 70775
AREA CODE 504
635 6094
346-8851
June
2, 1989
RBG- 31024
File Nos. G9.5, G15.4.1
,i
Nl
.: ,
c.; , - . .
p
im
U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission
{Li
',i.-
- '
f
Document Control Desk
O!
JiJti - 8 89
Washington, D.C.
20555
\\
,, y q
.
l
emen:
L_, .
-
_ _ , , , ,
, , -
River Bend Station - Unit 1
Refer to: Region IV
Docket No. 50-458/89-16
Pursuant to 10CFR2.201, this letter provides Gulf States Utilities
Company's (GSU) response to the Notice of Violation for NRC Inspection
Report No. 50-458/89-16. The inspection was perforned by Messrs. R.
C. Stewart and I. Barnes during the period of March 27-31,
1989 of
activities authorized by NRC Operating License NPF-47 for River Bend
Station - Unit 1.
GSU's response to the violation is provided in the
attachment. This empletes GSU's response to this iten.
Should you have any questions, please contact Mr. L. A. England at
(504) 381-4145.
Sincerely,
v
J. C. Deddens
Senior Vice President
l
D/
/
/
/ns
Attachment
cc: U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Camission
Region IV
611 Ryan Plaza Drive, Suite 1000
Arlington, TX 76011
Senior Resident Inspector
P.O. Box 1051
St. Francisville, IA 70775
./
ggfP 1gh
N9dTMJZ 9 L
q.
___
-- -
- - - - - - - - -
- - - _ _
- ---__ __
__
_
,
e
n
.
j
-
,.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
STATE OF LOUISIANA
)
-PARISH OF WEST FELICIANA
)
In the Matter of
)
Docket No. 50-458
50-459
GULF STATES UTILITIES COMPANY
)
(River Bend Station,
Unit 1)
<
.
J. C. Deddens,
being
duly
sworn,
states that he is a
Senior Vice President of Gulf States Utilities Company; that
he
is
authorized
on
the part of said company to sign and
file with the Nuclear Regulatory
Commission
the
documents
attached
hereto;
and
that all such documents are true and
correct to
the
best
of
his
knowledge,
information
and
belief.
&&
J. C.# eddens
D
Subscribed
and
sworn
to before me, a Notary Public in
and for the State and Parish above named, this c b d day of
N()112_
19 k
.
,
l
s
ktw
11
-
- NotaryPublicinandfor
oan W. Middltbrtoks
l
West Feliciana Parish,
]
,
I
My Commission is for Life.
l
l
)
.
-
.
d
m
a
.
RESKNSE 'IO NOTICE OF VIGATICN 50-458/8916-01
marxuCE:
Notice of Violation - Ietter frm L. J. Callan to
J.
C.
Deddens, dated
May 2, 1989.
FAIIURE 'IO IMPOSE 10 CPR PART 21:
Section 21.31 of 10 CFR Part 21 requires the licensee to specify on each
procuremnt document that the provisions of 10 CPR Part 21 apply.
Contrary to the above, Purchase Order 8-10-72689 was placed with the
Okonite Cmpany for the supply of a basic cmponent without specifying that
the provisions of 10 CFR Part 21 were applicable.
,
RESPONSE:
NRC Inspection Report 50-458/89-16 which accmpanied the Notice
of
violation,
amplifies
the
basis
for
issuance
of the violation.
Specifically, page 4 states: "The NRC Inspector identified to licensee
personnel that invoking environmental qualification requirements in the PO
classified the item as a basic cmponent (as defined by 10 CFR Part 21),
and for which the regulation required that the provisions of 10 CFR Part 21
be imposed in the PO."
The Inspection Report further states on page
4,
"The NRC inspector considered that the procurement approach had technical
merit for the particular circumstances, if appraisal of traceability of
materials to batches subjected to environmental qualification type testing
had been performed prior to procurement and appropriate procurement
requirements invoked. The procurement in question invoked, however, unique
nuclear specification requirements without imposing 10 CFR Part 21 which is
an apparent violation of Section 21.31 of 10 CFR Part 21."
The following sequence of events preceded the placcnent of Purchase Order
8-10-72689 with Okonite:
On June 24, 1988, the GSU Purchasing Departmnt was informed by Okonite
that they would not accept the requirement for a 10 CFR 50 Appendix B
Quality Assurance (OA) program if this requirement was applied to the
purchase of jacketing tape or splicing cement;
On July 13, 1988, the GSU Engineering Department contacted Okonite's OA
manager, to confirm the information contained in the June transmittal;
On July 14, 1988, the GSU Materials Department wrote requisition AMC56652
for T95 and No.
35 jacketing tape and splicing cement.
The GSU
Engineering Department evaluated the technical and quality requirements
and justified the procurement of the item as ccrmercial grade. Purchase
order 8-10-72689 was issued to the Okonite Co. on July 15,
1988.
The
purchase order required that the vendor supply a statement that the
materials are "ccrrercial grade" and
"a
certification stating that
Page 1 of 4
.____ ________________ _ _
. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
- _ _ - - - _ - _ _ _ _ - _ - - _ _ _
-
- _ -
_ _ _ _ __
- ___.
-
m
4
.
.
'
'
'
material supplied is identical to that in Okonite Qual. Report #NORN-3,-
{
.Rev. 2";
L
Source vendor surveillance number ES-88-07-36 was performed on July 20
,'
L
and 21, 1988- at the. vendor's facilities to determine whether the OA,
l-
design, and process controls were adequate to assure that the quality of
the splicing materials
(cement and tape). is equivalent (sufficient to
'
4
ensure quality equal) to that of the same matniale previously qualified
i
and purchased.
We vendor's OA progrma, design control, procurment,
-
manufacturing processes, inspection and cest (included hardness, tensile,
g
elongation, thickness, dielectric, fveion, water absorption,' and width),
'
handling and storage, control of nonconformances, and control
of
measuring and test were areas whirt were surveilled and determined to be
satisfactory. Based on thic surveillance it was determined that the
vendor's controls were adequate to assure "like.for like" replacement.
We procurement methodology is in empliance - with the requirements of
' 10 CFR 21 for purchase of ccamercial grade cmponents
subsequently
dedicated for .um as basic cmponents. The procurement followed guidance
-
provided by the NRC and industry groups. Okonite T95 and No.
35 splice
tape, and splicing cement are: 1) not subject to design or specification
requirements unique to nuclear facilities; 2) used in other than nuclear
. facilities; and 3) purchased on the basis of the Okonite cm mercial
catalogue description. W e catalog description includes as one of its
" product features" that the T95 tape is " Nuclear qualified to IEEE 383."
This feature applies to the. tape, regardless, of the purchaser and its
subsequent application..
The dedication. process utilized by GSU assured that "like for like"
- replacement was. received. Wis dedication method complies with guidance
provided from as early as 1984 through the present. In a docketed letter
to_ Nebraska Public Power District frm E. H. Johnson (Chief Reactor Project
Branch 1)- dated 1984, states in paragraph 1, " Design Control of Camercial
Grade Spare Parts":
" Verification must be performed to insure that the part utilized for'
safety-related applications are functionally the same as the part
originally qualified. W is verification may consist of qualification by
testing and analysis, such as by lot qualification test, or other
definitive, auditable, documented, qualification.
This qualification
must "be performed at the time the 'ec mercial grade' part is dedicated
for safety-related use (basic mesant), and before return to service
(operability) . "
GSU utilized guidance provided in a technical paper presented at the
American Society of Quality Control'c Fifteenth Annual Eastern Energy
Quality Assurance Conference (March 2-4, 1987), George Napuda, lead Reactor
Engineer, Quality Assurance Section, USNRC, which stated:
"A 'Ommercial Grade' its is not part of a ' Basic Cmponent'
for the
purpose of 10 CPR 21 until after ' Dedication'. Also, the appropriate
orality assurance program, seismic, and environmental qualification
requirements still apply if the equipnent or parts will be required to
perform any safety related function."
Page 2 of 4
. . ,
_ - - _
_ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - _ _ _ _
_ _ _ _ .
_
_ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
l
l
^
!
.
.
Later the same year, this position was reinforced in a technical paper
presented at an American Nuclear Society conference
(Novmber 10,
1987)
prepared by Brian
K.
Grimes, et al, Director, Division of Reactor
,
!
Inspection and Safeguards, USNRC, which stated:
"In order to assure that equignent will continue to perform its intended
function and to satisfy regulatory requirements there are several things
that utilities must consider:
1) Does the equipnent perform a safety
function, 2) Does the replacment part affect the safety function, and 3)
Does the replaarnent part affect
the
seismic
or
environmental
qualification.
If the answer to any of these questions is yes, the
purchaser has two alternatives.
He
may
procure
the
item
as
safety-related and require the supplier or manufacturer to cmply with
all the applicable technical and quality requirements or he may purchase
the item comercial grade and perform the necessary inspections and tests
to assure the item meets the requirements, i.e.,
' dedicate' the item."
GSU utilized additional guidance on procurment of camercial grade items
for use in safety-related application which was provided in NRC Bulletin 88-10 (November 22, 1988) which states:
"In order to properly dedicate electrical items procured as ccnmercial
grade for subsequent use in safety-related applications, the dedication
process should build frun the ccrmercial grade quality, include a proper
evaluation at seismic and environmental qualification, confirm critical
i
parameters, and include testing as appropriate."
l
In addition, as stated in Generic Ietter 89-02,
" Actions to Improve the
Detection of Counterfeit and Fraudulently Marketed Products", dated March
21, 1989:
"It should be noted that the staff conditionally endorses the guidelines
contained in EPRI
NP-5652,... that was issued by EPRI in June 1988 for
evaluating cmmercial-grade products for suitability
for
use
in
safety-related applications."
The conditions of endorsement do not relate to the concerns at hand. As
stated in EPRI NP-5652 (page 2-7):
"Ccrmercial grade items intended for installation in seismically or
environmentally qualified applications require critical characteristics
necessary to assure that the original qualification of the parent
cmponent is maintained."
The GSU procurement of the Okonite material as ccmmercial grade items meets
the requirements of EPRI NP-5652. Generic Ietter 89-02 states:
"The NRC Staff believes that licensees who use methods similar to those
described
in
NP-5652,
' Guidelines for the Utilization of
Ccnnercial-Grade Items,' intended for safety-related applications have
the basis for e.ffective dedication programs."
GSU purchase order No. 8-10-72689, Attachment I states:
" Vendor to supply
a certification stating that material supplied is identical to that in
Okonite Qual Report #NORN-3, Rev.
2."
Reference to previous test data to
ensure that e mponents procured to be dedicated for use as a basic
Page 3 of 4
_
_______
_ -
-
-.
=-
-
-
.
. ;.
.
,
i
as
,f /
'
'
cmponent are .like-for-like' is established as an acceptable practice in
various documents. Additionally, GSU references the NRC Inspection Manual,
"Comnercial Grade Procurement Inspection,"
which in section 03.02.d states:
I
'"The sample should also include reclassifications or classification
>
changes,. 'like-for-like'
(equivalent)
replacements, and substitutions
I
'
(the replacement of an item or emponent that differs in physical or
performance characteristics fr m 'the originally specified or currently
installed)
for safety-related equipnent covered by
the
following
guidelines:
1.
Safety-related electrical equipnent (Class 1E)
2.
Environmental qualification Regulatory Guide (R.G.I.89)
3.
Seismic qualification Regulatory Guide (R.G.l.100) ."
The inclusion of . inspection attributes for cmmercial grade itens which
,
were subject to environmental or seismic qualification indicates that
qualification of a cmponent does not preclude its being procured as a
-
,
p
comercial grade item.
!
k
In summary, GSU utilized guidance provided in various documents that
'
cuupcisits subject .to seismic or environmental qualification requiranents
can be purchased as comnercial grade cuue iients and subsequently dedicated
c
as a basic m uponent.
Hence, equipnent which has been subjected to
environmental or seismic qualification does not by virtue
of
the
qualification alone becme basic components as defined in 10 CFR Part 21.
Okonite T95 and No. 35 splicing tapes have been determined to be comercial
l
grade items procured from the Okonite catalogue description.
The GSU
Surveillance
derronstrated that the Okonite tape was
manufactured under a ccanercial grade quality control program. The p:oduct
description included facts that the tape was " Nuclear Qualified to IEEE 383".
The intent of the additional language of the purchase order was to
assist in the later dedication of the tape and not the specification of any
unique requirements which would require procurement of this item as a basic
cmponent.
While perhaps inartfully drafted, as we believe recognized by
the NBC inspector, the intent of Part 21 was met in this instance.
River
Bend's dedication process was deemed to be adequate to assure that the
cmrnercial grade items were "like-for-like" with those previously procured.
As
a
result
of the NRC endorsement of EPRI NP-5652, and GSU's
interpretation of the various (and consistent) guidance from the NRC that
equipnent subject to qualification requirements could be procured as
ccmnercial grade items, GSU believes that the procurement cited within the
Notice of Violation was in accordance with NRC requirem nts and does not
constitute a violation of 10 CPR 21.
In any event, should the NRC find a violation, GSU submits that it should
be reclassified as 1svel V in that it has minor safty significance.
Page 4 of 4
_
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _