VALVES IN NUCLEAR
Modern supply chain tools learned from UK nuclear
As Europe’ s nuclear sector enters a new generation of projects, robust quality control is becoming increasingly important. This article explores how contractual tools, process controls and supply-chain oversight can improve visibility, communication and project outcomes.
By Eric Hanson and Kevin Glime, P. E. Flowserve, Inc; Raleigh, NC
The new nuclear power generation has arrived in Europe, and the new EPR projects work to try and modernise quality control. As a new generation of nuclear reactor design may be on the horizon for the US nuclear industry, it is important to learn the lessons and use the tools that work well in this new generation. None of these tools are new concepts, just old concepts that are being practically contractualised, building tools to give better production controls, and better customer visibility. These innovations in contract tools can be applied to other industries to improve contract execution.
Process control
The US nuclear industry has a strong history of building documentation of classifying components of a vessel by their relevance to safety. In this way, the mark of quality on this system serves as a foundation for many such quality mechanisms around the world. ASME BPVC III for example provides the framework to classify assemblies as a classification 1 through 3, and the combination of those standards with 10CFR50, produces different jurisdictional labels for components, marking them ASME, associated with radiation exposure safety specifically, or safety related material, associated with other nuclear plant safety mechanisms. See Fig. 1 for standard component safety classifications. RCC-M builds both quality and design importance levels to make clear that a given process or procurement relates to safety
provides a closer relationship between design intent and the quality mechanism used to address and enforce customer expectations. Currently some projects are extending this classification of processes multiple levels down the supply chain, asking that each vendor classify their ITP / FUD to show such safety sensitive processes for regulatory and customer involvement and approval( see Fig. 2). Quality Related Activities( QRAs / ACQs) may occur at the third level vendor. Such activities could include mechanical testing of base metal of a valve metal casting to verify that material has appropriate strength to meet minimum expectations of the system to endure design loads. Therefore, this process control must be controlled and monitored down to the testing vendor, and each vendor must classify and communicate their part to provide visibility to the customer. This means that the laboratory has an ITP with ACQs and the casting vendor has an ITP with an ACQ sub-contracted step for its safety related part which is classified in their PO by safety classification.
Figure 2: ITP / FUD steps with highlighted steps such as ACQ to instigate formalized monitoring
As a framework for this quality classification system, some customers require a contract specific quality plan( CQAP) for how to address and handle all classification levels of quality requirements. This tool generates a dialogue for communicating quality emphasis and drives a thoughtful approach to the supply chain to analyse vendor quality understanding and compliance.
Figure 1: Colorized cross-section of a valve component classification( red, yellow and green, safety level 1, 2, and 3 respectively)
Technical evaluation
A newer concept observed in the European market is the concept of“ Intelligent Client”, which has been formalised as a policy in
24 Valve World October 2026 www. valve-world. net