ML20246A052

Ack Receipt of Informing NRC of Steps Taken to Correct Violations Noted in Insp Rept 50-458/89-16.Agrees That Procurement Actions for Okonite Tape & Cement Consistent W/Requirements of Method 3 of EPRI NP-5652

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

RIV:C:MQPS* D:DRS .jf .

IBarnes/cjg LJCal an 6lygg D:

J Milhoan

/ /89 6/f489 Q @89

• previously concurred

'\

8907060128 890627

PDR ADOCK 05000458

w PDC

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . _ _

___-

( '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:

DRP RRI~

R. D. Martin, RA Section Chief (DRP/C)

Lisa Shea,sRM/ALF MIS System

RPB-DRSS .

,

RSTS Operator

Project Engineer (DRP/C) RIV File

W.Paulson,NRRProjectManager(MS: 13-D-18)

DRS

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

.: ,

im

,i Nl

c.; , - . . p

U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission {Lif

'

',i.-

Document Control Desk O! JiJti - 8 89

Washington, D.C. 20555 \ ,, y q .

emen: l

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)

<

.

AFFIDAVIT

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.# Deddens

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

oan W. Middltbrtoks

1. NotaryPublicinandfor l

West Feliciana Parish,

Louisiana

]

,

I

My Commission is for Life. l

l

)

.

-

.

d

a .

m

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, -

g manufacturing processes, inspection and cest (included hardness, tensile,

'

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 EPRI 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,

Inspection Procedure 38703, "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 cuuec iients and subsequently dedicated

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 (ES-88-07-36) 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

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _