A04582, Clarifies Commitment in 850225 Response to Insp Rept 50-213/84-26.All Components Listed in Mepl Will Have Production Maint Mgt Sys QA Indicators Verified as Properly Reflecting QA Status

From kanterella
(Redirected from ML20137S434)
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Clarifies Commitment in 850225 Response to Insp Rept 50-213/84-26.All Components Listed in Mepl Will Have Production Maint Mgt Sys QA Indicators Verified as Properly Reflecting QA Status
ML20137S434
Person / Time
Site: Haddam Neck File:Connecticut Yankee Atomic Power Co icon.png
Issue date: 11/21/1985
From: Opeka J, Sears C
CONNECTICUT YANKEE ATOMIC POWER CO.
To: Martin T
NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I)
References
A04582, A4582, NUDOCS 8512060239
Download: ML20137S434 (3)


Text

, . I l

CONNECTICUT YANKEE ATOMIC POWER COMPANY B E R L I N. CONNECTICUT P O BOX 270 HARTFORD, CONNECTICUT 06141-0270 TELEPHONE 203-665-5000 November 21, 1985 Docket No. 50-213 A04582 Mr. Thomas T. Martin, Director Division of Engineering and Technical Programs U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Region 1 631 Park Avenue King of Prussia, Pennsylvania 19406 References : (1) T. T. Martin letter to W. G. Counsil dated December 28, 1984 (2) W. G. Counsil letter to T. T. Martin dated February 25, 1985 (3) S.D. Ebneter letter to J. F. Opeka dated August 26, 1985 Gentlemen:

Haddam Neck Plant Follow-up to Inspection Report No. 50-213/84-26 MEPL Reference (1) transmitted the results of Inspection Report 50-213/84-26. Reference (2), which responded to that inspection report, delineated several commitments. Reference (3), which transmitted the results of Inspection Report 50-213/85-17 f avorably addressed the status of most of the Reference (2) commitments. 'Ihe Connecticut Yankee Atomic Power Company (CYAPCO) is in agreement with the conclusions of Reference (3) .

The purpose of this letter is to clarify the one Reference (2) commitment not addressed in Reference (3) .

Reference (2) stated, in part: "By January 1, 1986, the majority of the information currently in the MEPL (excluding certain items such as consumables, pipe supports , etc.) will be incorporated 8512060239 851121 gDR ADOCK 05000213 PDR

. 0 - 0\

ID

( /

.e , e.

i into the automated Production Maintenance Management System (PMMS)." Since the MEPL is a somewhat complex document and the PMMS system's ability to replace it is limited, some clarifi-cation is in order.

The PMMS System is a component-based automated maintenance management system. To access information from PMMS for a given component, the component identification number must be used.

This ' allows several "pages" of data on that component to be displayed. Part of that data is information on the QA Category of that component. This system lends itself well to aid in the storage and retrieval of QA Category (and, therefore, supports the MEPL) for certain components such as pumps , valves , motors ,

etc.

The MEPL has several parts. It includes guidance on determining the QA status of components, blanket statements to cover broad areas of QA applicability, (e.g., " All equipment within the fire protection program shall meet fire protection quality assurance requirements"), descriptions of structures which are QA and component by component listings of Category 1 equipment. This last area is compatible with the PMMS data base and it is this portion of the MEPL which we were addressing in the commitment quoted above. To rephrase that commitment: " All components (excluding certain items such as consumables, pipe supports, etc.

and some minor subcomponents of electrical equipment) which are individually listed in the MEPL will have their PMMS QA indicators verified as properly reflecting their QA status by January 1, 1986." It should be noted that, currently, this commitment has been virtually completed.

Other components in the PMMS system which are indicated as not QA have an evaluation referenced which is the basis for that status. Many components have their PMHS QA indicators

" undefined," which according to our procedure (NEO 6.01, Material, Equipment and Parts Lists for In-Service Nuclear Generation Facilities) will require a QA evaluation prior to commencement of any work on the component. Any components which are not in the - MMS data base are entered as the need arises with their QA indicators " undefined" and are evaluated as above.

In summary, the program we have established is one that will simplify quality assurance determinations while making them more rigorous and conservative. This will ensure that the proper controls will be utilized for each activity.

l

We do not believe that this letter changes the intent of any previous commitment and is provided for information only. My ,

staff is available to answer any questions you may have on this.  ;

Very truly yours, CONNECTICUT YANKEE ATOMIC POWER COMPANY i

J. F. Opeka Senior Vice President  ;

By: C. F. Sears Vice President 9