ML19211A601
| ML19211A601 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 11/05/1979 |
| From: | Brown R, Whitesell D NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19211A600 | List: |
| References | |
| REF-QA-99900389 99900389-79-1, NUDOCS 7912200196 | |
| Download: ML19211A601 (8) | |
Text
_
U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY C021ISSION OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT REGION IV Report No.
99900389/79-01 Program No.
51300 Company:
W. J. Woolley Company Subsidiary of Bishopric Ccmpany 7425 W. Lake Street River Forest, Illinois Inspection Conducted: October 1 & 2, 1979
/
//
79 Inspector:
Ross.L. Brown, Contractor Inspector Date ComponentsSection I Vendor Inspection Branch 4
)
Approved by
[
/fd' 9 D. E. Whitesell, Chief Date ComponentsSection I Vendor Inspection Branch Summarv Inspection en October I and 2, 1979 (99900389/79-01)
Areas Inspected:
Initial management meeting and implementation of Title 10 CFR 50, Appendix B, including design control and procurement document control as related to field reported deficiencies in air locks designed by W. J. Woolley Company. The inspection involved fourteen (14) inspector-5.:urs on site by one (1) NRC inspector.
Results:
In the three (3) areas inspected there were no deviations identified in any of the areas, no unresolved items were identified in two (2) of the areas, and the following unresolved item was identified in the remaining area.
Unresolved Item:
There appears to be conflict in the W. J. Woolley Company Quality Assurance Manual, related to the handling of technical and/or quality requirement changes to the procurement documents (See Detail Section Paragraph E.1).
1633 019 q91220014 5
=
2 DETAIL SECTION A.
Persons Contacted
- G. H. Bartholomees, Senior QA Engineer D. A. Godfry, Vice President of Engineering
- E. A. Harwart, QA Manager S. C. Khamamkar, Project Coordinator R. Krajewski, Project Engineer
- Denotes those present at the exit meeting.
B.
Initial Management Meeting 1.
Objectives The objectives of this meeting were to accomplish the following:
a.
To meet with the W. J. Woolley Company (WJW) management and those persons responsible for administration of the quality program and to establish channels of communications.
b.
To determine the extent of company's involvement in the commercial nuclear business.
c.
To explain NRC direct inspection program including LCVIP organization, VIB inspection methods and documentation.
d.
To describe the NRC evaluation of the ASME inspection system.
2.
Methods of Accomplishment The preceding objectives were accomplished by a meeting on October 1, 1979. The following is a summary of the meeting, a.
Attendees were:
- G. H. Bartholomees, Senior QA Engineer D. A. Godfry, Vice President of Engineering
- E. A. Harwart, QA Manager
- K.
L. Hladek, Manager of Marketing
- C.
A. Kuehl, Vice President
- Denotes those present at the exit meeting.
1633 020
3 b.
The VIB organization was described oad its relationship to NRC Region IV and the NRC Headquarters component of the Office of Inspecticn and Enforcement.
c.
Tue conduct of VIB inspections was described and how our inspections are documented including the report, responses to reports, how proprietary information is handled, the Public Docu=ent Room, and the White Book.
d.
The purpose, scope, and status of the NRC's program for evaluation of the ASME inspection system as an acceptable independent third party was discussed.
e.
The company's contribution to the nuclear industry was discussed including current and projected activity, status of ASME certificates of authorization and third party inspection arrangements.
3.
Findings The inspector was provided the following information:
W. J. Woolley Company is an engineering organization capable of a.
performing final design and design verification (including calculations) to verify that the design has been properly and effectively performed.
b.
W. J. Woolley Company holds ASME Certificate No. N-1733, to use the "N" symbol for, construction of Section III, Division 1 items for which overall responsibility is retained, and for which fabrication and installation of Section III, Division 1 items is subcontracted to appropriate certificate of authorization holders.
This authorization expires on May 3, 1980.
c.
The W. J. Woolley Company (WJW) commitment to commercial nuclear industry is 95%. The company presently has in house, thirty (30) active and twelve (12) inactive (on hold or not released) contracts to design and supply airlocks, equipment hatches, etc., for commercial nuclear use.
d.
The inspector was conducted on an orientation tour of the facility.
1633 02l
4 C.
Design Control 1.
Objectives a.
One objective of this area of the inspection was to verify:
(1) That procedures have been prepared and approved to prescribe a system for design document control which is consistent with the quality requirements.
(2) That che design document control procedures are being properly and effectively implemented.
b.
Another objective of this area of the inspection was to determine if the cause of the following deficiencies was a result of a quality breakdown in design engineering and thus affecting all airlocks designed by this company. The deficiencies reported were:
(1) Undersize fillet welds in the Shearon Harris Unit 1 emergency airlock.
(2) A number of the threaded bolt holes (partial penetration) i used to attach the two (2) inflatable seals were drilled j
completely through the plate in the McGuire Units 1 and 2 upper personnel air locks.
I 2.
Method of Accomplishment The preceding objectives were accomplished by a review of the following documents:
a.
The WJW Quality Assurance Manual (QAM) Section 3, Design Control, describes the method to be used and assigns the responsibilities to assure that applicable codes, standards, regulatory requirements and customer specification are correctly translated into specifications, procedures, drawings and instructions. This also includes the review, approval, release and distribution of these docu.nents and changes thereto.
b.
The general arrangement and detail drawings related to the Emergency Air Lock and Upper Personnel Air Lock.
1 These drawings appear to include the specified technical and quality requirements including the weld sizes and bolt hole depths.
s 1633 022
5 c.
The Ebasco Specification No. CAR-SH-AS-1, Revision 10, dateu July 19, 1979, and preceding Revisions 3 through 9.
d.
Six (6) document transmittal and receipt acknowledgment records, e.
Drawing Control Record Book.
f.
Specification Control Record Book.
3.
Findings a.
Deviations No deviations were identified in this area of the inspection.
b.
Unresolved Items It appears that the responsibilities assigned in Section 3 of the QAM are in conflict with those in Section 4 see paragraph E.1 for details.
c.
It appears that the design control commitment in the QAM is in conformance with the code requirements, and the documents reviewed by the inspector indicated that the program is being satisfactorily implemented.
D.
Procurement Document Control 1.
Objectives The objectives of this area of the inspection were to verify:
a.
That procedures have been prepared and approved to prescribe a system for procurement document control which is consistent with the codes and standards.
b.
That the procurement document control procedures are being properly implemented.
2.
Methods of Accomplishment The preceding objectives were accomplished by a detailed review of the following:
The QAM, Section 4 Procurement Document Control, that a.
describes the methods to be used and assigns the responsiblities for initiating, approving and distribution of purchase requisitions, purchase orders, applicable referenced documents, and changes thereto.
1633 023-moom e
=e-****=*=.
y
6 b.
The QAM, Section 18, Fabrication Intetface, describes the method used by WJW to assure and verify compliance by the fabricator with the specified requirements.
c.
The WJW, Purchase Order No. 1365, dated October 2, 1973, to Irwin Steel Fabricators for two (2) 5 ft. Dia X 30 in. opening, Escape Air Lock and Change Order No. 1, dated April 22, 1977.
d.
WJW, Drawing No. 31458, Revision 8 that specified the size of the weld joining the anchor studs to shell.
e.
The Irwin Steel Fabricators document package submitted to WJW for review and approval, included is the process sheets for Shop Order No. 20104-N-543 applicable to PO No. 1365, nondestructive examination reports, approved welding procedures and qualification reports, and approved nondestructive examination procedures. The process sheet required all welds, including all stud welds, to be magnetic particle examined and Examination Report No. 7 stated the examinations had been performed and no unacceptable indications were noted.
3.
Finding a.
Deviations No deviations were identified in this area of the inspection.
b.
Unresolved Items It appears that the responsibilities assigned in Section 4 of the QAM are in conflict with those in Section 3, see paragraph E.1 for details.
E.
General The following are the inspector's observations and conclusions relative to this company:
1.
Unresolved Item l
There appears to be a conflict in the QAM, Section 3, Paragraph 3.6.4.1, that states in part, "The project coordinator is responsible for transmitting the required Design Documents to the Fabricator," and Section 4, Paragraph 4.5.1, sates in part, "Any change in scope, technical or quality requirements for Code items shall require the issuance of a Purchase Requisition by the Manager of Engineering.
The Purchasing Manager shall prepare a Change Order including all information supplied by the Purchase Requisition."
1633 024
7 WJW use both methods, but generally they use the method and responsibility described in Section 3 of the QAM.
This apparent conflict will be reviewed by WJW management and the necessary clarification or corrections will be made to the QAM.
This area will be inspected during a subsequent NRC inspection.
2.
Conclusions The two (2) reported deficiencies appears to be the results of poor workmanship and manufacturing error in the fabricator's plant, and not a breakdcun in the WJW quality program.
During the manufacture of the air locks, the reported fabrication discrepancies were not inspected by WJWl however, during this time WJW did conduct audits of the vendor plants.
WJW also received and reviewed the qual.ity document package submitted by the vendor.
These documents did not specifically state that the questionable areas were inspected, but the process sheet did require final dimensional inspection. This operation was initialed and dated signifying acceptance.
3.
Generic Possibilities It appears that the possibility does exist for leaks through the drilled and tapped holes for the attachment of the inflatable seals to the doors of air locks using the WJW design, uuless necessary precautions are taken during manufacture and necessary inspections are made to assure conformance with the WJW drawing.
WJW management stated that, they do not know if Part 21 has been con-sidered asfapplicable by the architect engineering companies or utility companies.
The inspector was informed by WJW management that a letter to the appropriate utility ccompanies informing them of the potential problem will be transmitted by October 5,1979.
The WJW management further stated that they will have an inspection and rework (if required) procedure developed and issued by November 1, 1979, but in the interim they have transmitted a letter to their fabricators making them aware of the potential problem and requesting them to take necessary steps during the manufacture and to perform the proper inspections to be sure that these bolt holes are in accordance with the WJW drawing. This action should help prevent recurrence.
1633 025
8 The letter also states that WJW will inspect these holes prior to their acceptance of the air locks and release for shipment.
F.
Exit Meeting The inspector conducted an exit meeting with management personnel at the conclusion of the inspection. Those individuals indicated by an asterisk in Paragraph A and B of the Details Sections of this report were in attendance.
In addition, the following persons were present:
V. A. Bicicchi, President G. T. Plue, Production Manger The inspector discussed the scope of this inspection and the details of the findings identified during the inspection. Management representatives acknowledged the statements by the inspector with respect to the an.e unresolved item discussed.
f The inspector also discussed the NRC method of reporting and informed those present that they will receive a copy of the inspection report for their l
review for any proprietory information, they were also informed how to transmit any information they wish deleted.
I l
The White Book information and distribution was also discussed.
l l
9