ML20199F343: Difference between revisions

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(StriderTol Bot insert)
 
(StriderTol Bot change)
 
Line 24: Line 24:
DOCKET NO. 50-416                          i l
DOCKET NO. 50-416                          i l
1 1.0 INTRODUQLQN                                                                ]
1 1.0 INTRODUQLQN                                                                ]
By letter dated May 28, 1997, Entergy Operations, Inc. (the licensee)            )
By {{letter dated|date=May 28, 1997|text=letter dated May 28, 1997}}, Entergy Operations, Inc. (the licensee)            )
requested that the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) approve certain changes  !
requested that the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) approve certain changes  !
to the Operational Quality Assurance Manual (0QAM) fo. the Grand Gulf Nuclear Station, Unit 1 (GGNS). 0QAM Revision 15 included several administrative        !
to the Operational Quality Assurance Manual (0QAM) fo. the Grand Gulf Nuclear Station, Unit 1 (GGNS). 0QAM Revision 15 included several administrative        !
Line 35: Line 35:
==2.0 BACKGROUND==
==2.0 BACKGROUND==


In a letter dated January 30, 1996, the Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI)
In a {{letter dated|date=January 30, 1996|text=letter dated January 30, 1996}}, the Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI)
   .          proposed that the NRC modify its requirement concerning the annual evaluation of suppliers of components and services to nuclear power plant licensees. By letter dated October 24, 1996, the NRC accepted the NEI proposal with certain modifications. The acceptable alternative for conducting annual evaluations of suppliers is:
   .          proposed that the NRC modify its requirement concerning the annual evaluation of suppliers of components and services to nuclear power plant licensees. By {{letter dated|date=October 24, 1996|text=letter dated October 24, 1996}}, the NRC accepted the NEI proposal with certain modifications. The acceptable alternative for conducting annual evaluations of suppliers is:
                     "A documented ongoing evaluation of the supplier should be performed.
                     "A documented ongoing evaluation of the supplier should be performed.
Where applicable, this evaluation should take into account (1) review of supplier furnished documents such as certificates of conformance,
Where applicable, this evaluation should take into account (1) review of supplier furnished documents such as certificates of conformance,

Latest revision as of 02:49, 8 December 2021

SER Accepting Rev 15 of Operational Quality Assurance Manual for Grand Gulf Nuclear Station,Unit 1
ML20199F343
Person / Time
Site: Grand Gulf Entergy icon.png
Issue date: 11/18/1997
From:
NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned)
To:
Shared Package
ML20199F334 List:
References
NUDOCS 9711240189
Download: ML20199F343 (3)


Text

l .

[ t UNITE 3 STATES l

3* j 2

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON. D.C. 30eeH001 i SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO REVISION 15 0F OPERATIONAL OVALITY ASSURANCE MANUAL ENTERLY OPERATIONS. INC.. ET AL. ]

GRAND GULF NUCLEAR STATION. UNIT 1 l l

DOCKET NO. 50-416 i l

1 1.0 INTRODUQLQN ]

By letter dated May 28, 1997, Entergy Operations, Inc. (the licensee) )

requested that the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) approve certain changes  !

to the Operational Quality Assurance Manual (0QAM) fo. the Grand Gulf Nuclear Station, Unit 1 (GGNS). 0QAM Revision 15 included several administrative  !

changes that the licensee stated did not reduce commitments in the 0QAM, and two other changes of a more significant na+ure that the licensee stated may  ;

reduce commitments. The latter two 00AM changes are as follows: '

  • use of an ongoing evaluation of suppliers in lieu of the current annual evaluation of suppliers; and

.- a shift in responsibility for the appointment of Level III receipt inspectors from the Director, Quality to the Vice-President, Operations Support.

This safety evaluation addresses only the above two changes that may reduct commitments in the 0QAM. The other changes are primarily organizational and title changes, and mostly administrative in nature. The staff agrees that they do not reduce comitments in the 0QAM and do not require staff review and approval prior to implementation.

2.0 BACKGROUND

In a letter dated January 30, 1996, the Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI)

. proposed that the NRC modify its requirement concerning the annual evaluation of suppliers of components and services to nuclear power plant licensees. By letter dated October 24, 1996, the NRC accepted the NEI proposal with certain modifications. The acceptable alternative for conducting annual evaluations of suppliers is:

"A documented ongoing evaluation of the supplier should be performed.

Where applicable, this evaluation should take into account (1) review of supplier furnished documents such as certificates of conformance,

-9711240189 971118 PDR ADOCK 05000416 P PM .

nonconformance notices, and corrective actions, (2) results of previous source verifications, audits, and receiving inspections, (3) operating experience of identical or similar products furnished by the same supplier, and (4) results of audits from other sources (e.g., customer, ASME, or NRC audits). The results of the evaluations should be reviewed and appropriate corrective action should be taken. Adverse findings resulting from these evaluations should be periodically reviewed in order to determine if, as a whole, they result in a significant condition adverse to quality and to provide input to support supplier audit activities conducted by the licensee or a third party auditing entity."

3.0 EVALUATION

( In a clarifying note regarding the licensee's compliance with RG 1.144 and its endorsement of ANSI N45.2.12-1977, the licensee indicated its comitment to l performing documented ongoing evaluations of suppliers in accordance with the NRC accepted alternative as stated above in lieu of annual evaluations.

Further, the licensee has indicated that the following additional sources of information will be utilized in performing the ongoing evaluations:

NUREG-0040, "Liceree Contractor and Vendor Inspection Status Report,"

issued quarterly by the NRC; notifications of supplier deficiencies from the sites via the Condition Reporting process; notifications of supplier-related industry events requiring action by Materials Requirements; Nuclear Procurement Issues Committee's (NUPIC's) program for immediate notification of significant findings; the on-line NUPIC database; and Nuclear Network information.

Based on this, the staff concludes that the licensee's proposed alternative to the current nrocess for annual eva'.uation of suppliers is acceptable.

With regard to the appointment of Level III receipt inspectors, the licensee l proposed to shift responsibility for this task from the Director, Quality to the Vice-President, Operations Support. Under the current organizational arrangement, the Vice-President, Operational Support is responsible for assuring that headquarters source, receipt, warehouse, and shipout inspections are accomplished in accordance with the requirements of approved policies.

Consistent with these responsibilities, the staff concludes that the Vice-President, Operational Support should also be responsible for the appointment of the Level III inspectors who perform receipt inspections. The performance of inspection activities by these personnel and their qualification requirements remain unchanged. Therefore, the staff concludes that the shift in responsibility for the appointment of Level III receipt inspectors from the Director, Quality to the Vice-President, Operations Support is acceptable, n

4.0 CONCLUS10NS Based on the above evaluation, the staff concludes that the licensee's two proposed changes to the OQAM regarding the use of ongoing rather than annual supplier evaluations and the shifting of the responsibility for the appointsent of Level III receipt inspectors from the Director, Quality to the Vice-President, Operational Support are acceptable and continue to meet the requirements of 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix B.

The other changes in Revision 15 of the 0QAM are primarily organizational and title changes, and mostly administrative in nature. They do not reduce 4 commitments in the OQAM and do not require staff review and approval. The staff agrees that the licensee's characterization of these 0QAM changes is correct, and that these changes constitute an update of your OQAM in accordarce with 10 CFR 50.71(e).

Principal Contributor: W. Haass Date: November 18, 1997 E

- _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ - - _ _ _ _ - _ _