ML19242C254
| ML19242C254 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 04/20/1979 |
| From: | Barnes I, Hunnicutt D NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19242C204 | List: |
| References | |
| REF-QA-99900021 NUDOCS 7908100125 | |
| Download: ML19242C254 (8) | |
Text
U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT REGION IV Report No. 99900021/79-01 Program No. 51300 Company:
Puilman Power Products Division of Pullman, Inc.
Post Office Box 3308, Reach Road Williamsport, Pennsylvania 17701 Inspection Conducted: March 27-20, 1979
<f o
Inspector:
v cae 6-2o-77
- 1. Barnes, Contractor Inspector, Vendor
-' Date Inspection Branch k&d8 f20 7f Approved by:
D. M. Hunnicutt, Chief, Ccmpcr;entsSection II,
Date' Vendor Inspection Branch Summary Inspection on March 27-30, 1979 (99900021/79-01)
Areas Insoected:
Impler.entation of 10 CFR 50, Appendix B, criteria and applicable Codes and standards, including action cn previous inspection findings; prccedure, document and draw'.ng control; manufacturing peccess control; and equipment calibraticn.
The inspection involved twenty-eight (25) inspector-ncurs en site.
Results:
In the four (2) area inspected, nc acparent deviaticns or unresolved items were identified in t'.c (2) areas; the folicwing deviations being identified in the remaining areas:
Ceviations:
Equipment Calibration - QA Program provisicns, relative to catemination of required corrective acticn for discrepancies found during calibration of welding equipment reters and setting devices are not consistent with Criterien XII of 10 CFR 50, Apper. dix B, and NCA-4134.12 in the ASME Code (Enclosure, Item A).
Manufacturing Process Ccntrol - Selecti:n of inappropriate WPS and failure to utilize drawing required preheat te cerature not consistent with Criterion V of 10 CFR 50, Appendix B, and Section IX of the QA Manual (Enclosure, Item B).
1 ' ".., '
7908100 1
_2_
DETAILS SECTION A.
Persons Contacted
- R. E. Howard, Vice President and General Manager
- E. F. Gerwin, Vice President, Quality Assurance
- E. L. Baker, Plant Manager
- T. Daniels, Director of Quality Assurance
- A. Bair, QA Manager
- J. A. Koch, Manager, Engineering L. A. Christ, Administrative Assistant
- W. L. Cox, Senior Auditor, Quality Engineering Group
- D. Gehr, Field QA Enginecr J. Johns, Project Engineer
- T. C. Myers, Welding Engineer
- F. A. Richards, Welding Engineer
- L. A. Ryan, Acting Production Manager
- R. A. Stryker, QA/QC Supervisor
- K. A. Swisher, Senior QA Engineer J. R. Weaver, Project Engineer
- H. J. Donlin, Authorized Nuclear Inspection Specialist, Hartford Steam Boiler Inspection and Insurance Company
- R. H. Wertz, Authorized Nuclear Inspector, Hartford Steam Boiler Inspection and Insurance Company
- Attended Exit Interview.
B.
Acticn en Previcus Inscecticn Findincs 1.
(Closed) Ceviation (Item A, Enclosure, Inspecticn Report No. 78-01): Use of unidentified temporary attachments, without evidence en the Weld History Record of the identity of the welder, welding precedure cr welding materials used to weld the attachments.
The inspector verified that the additional commitments for resolutica of this item, c:ntained in the Pullman Pcwer Products (PPPA) letter of Novemcer 13, 1978, had been implemented with respect to revisicn of Procedure X-9 and audit respcnsibilities.
Specific clarification relative to audit checklists addressing control of temporary attachments was agreed upon and accomplished during the inspection.
2.
(Closed) Ceviation (Item B, Enclosure, Inspection Report No. 73-01):
Certain production welding cperations were cbserved being performed that were not in full conformance with the requirements of the relevant welding procedure specification.
a e e, u ~ r. 21 ~
.. The inspector verified that the additional ccamitments for resolution of this item, contained in the PPPA letter of November 13, 1978, had been imolemented relative to welding procedure revision, correct PQR reference, performa1ce of welding training sessions and revision of the Quality Control Welding Inspection Surveillance Report to include a reference to workmanship and submerged arc welding travel speed. Specific clarification relative tn inclusion of production welding compliance with WPS requirements in the audit chec%1ists was agreed upon and acccmolished during the inspection.
3.
(Closed) Deviation (Item C, Enclosure, Inspection Report No. 78-01): Failure to perform a required magnetic particle or liquid penetrant examination of a cavity to assure complete weld defect removal.
The inspector verified that the additional clarification for resolution of this item, contained in the PPPA letter of November 13, 1979, had been implemented relative to definition of audit responsibilities and performance of audits.
4.
(Closed) Ceviation (Item D, Enclosure, Inspection Report No. 78-01): Failure to fully qualify a certain welding proce-dure specification with respect to amperage supplementary essential variables.
The inspector verified that the ccamitted review and requalifica-tion of welding procedure specifications, utilized in notch toughness applications, had been performed.
It was also established that a procedure had been written relative to definition of testing requirements to testing la:cratcries.
5.
(Closed) Ceviaticn (Icem E, Enclosure, Inspection Repcrt No. 78-01).
Failure to notify the ANI in advance of hold point established for an operation on a process sheet.
The inspector verified that the additional clarification for resolution of this item, contained in the PPPA letter of November 13, 1973, had been implemented relative to definition of audit responsibilities and inclusion in the audit program.
6.
(Closed) Ceviation (Item F, Enclosure, Inspection Report No. 73-01): Weld procedure selected for c weld repair was not recorded on the appropriate document in the traveler package.
The inspector verified that the additional clarification for resolution of this item, contained in the PPPA letter of y ;-
4,o um.,<.
November 13, 1978, had been implemented relative to definition of audit respcnsibilities and performance of audits.
7.
(Closed) Deviation (Item A, Enclosure, Inspection Report No. 78-02):
Failure to implement committed corrective actions relative to item B in Inspection Report No. 78-01.
The inspector verified that cc nitted actions had been implemented relative to WPS revision for argon purge deletion, institution of a welder training program and revision of the Quality Control Welding Inspection Surveillance Report to include reference to workmanship and WPS requirements.
8.
(Closed) Deviation (Item B, Enclosure, Inspection Report No. 78-02):
Selecticn of a certain pipe not made so as to preclude thinning below minimum wall requirements in subsequent fabrication.
The inspector verified that the committed QA Manual revisions relative to materials selection and control in bending applica-tions had been performed and that the designer had been approached relative to the adequacy of schedule numbers in terms of allowance for thinning in bending.
9.
(Closed) Deviation (Item C, Enclosure, Inspection Report No. 78-02):
Improper approval of process sheets and failure to use for control of nondestructive examinations.
The inspector verified that the ccnmitted training activities had been perfor ed for relevant NDE and CA perscnnel.
C.
Ecuiccent Calibration 1.
Objectives The ubjectives of this area of the inspection were to ascertain that a system has been established, documented, and maintained to assure that tcols, gages, instruments, and other measuring devices used in activities affecting quality are properly controlled, calibrated, and adjusted at specified periods to maintain accuracy within specified limits.
2.
Method of Acccmolishment The preceding objectives were accceplished by:
a.
Review of Section XII of the QA Manual, revision dated February 15,1979, '" Control of Measuring and Test Equipment."
4qq w
O 2. ns '.-
. b.
Review of Procedure XII-2W, revision dated December 4, 1978,
" Procedure For The Calibration Of Tools, Measurement And Test Equipment."
c.
Review of Procedure XII-3W, revision dated November 20, 1978, " Calibration Procedure For Hydro-Static Test Pressure Gages."
d.
Examination of calibration status and records for twelve (12) gages in three (3) machinists possession.
a.
Verification of issue control of gages to machinists.
f.
Examination of calibration status and records for heat treatment furnace.
g.
Examination of calibration status and records for two (2) manual welding power sources and meters on one (1) sub-merged arc machine, h.
Examination of calibration records from sub-contractor for an infra-red optical pyremeter.
i.
Review of calibration controls for hydrostatic test pressure gages.
j.
Review of master gage calibration and control program.
3.
Findincs a.
Deviaticn frca Commicmenq Paragraph (c) in Sub-Article NCA-1134.12 of the ASME Ccde states, "When discrepancias in measuring or testing equip-ment are found at calibratica, the Certificate Holder shall determine what corrective action is required.
Materials and items previously checked (since the previous valid calibraticn) with equipment which is cut of calibration shall be considered unaccettable until the Certificate Holder can determine that all applicable requirements have been met."
Contrary to the abcVe:
(1) Calibration Procedure XII-2W requires adjustment of meters and output indicating devices on welding equipment when fcund at calibration to be in excess
,, - 4 o f g _ w...
of a one (1) scale or setting division accuracy limit, without any requirement for consideration of either corrective action need, or, effects of discrepancy en items fabricated with the equipment since the previous valid calibration.
(2) The QA Manual (Paragraph 12.5,Section XII) addresses this Code requirement only in the context of dimensional measurement equipment.
(See Enclosure, Item A.)
b.
Unresolved Items None.
D.
Manufacturing Process Control 1.
Objectives The objective of this area of the inspection was to verify that the manufacturing process is controlled in accordance with applicable regulatory and Code requirements.
2.
Method of Acccmolishment The preceding objective was accomplished by:
a.
Review of Section XIV of the QA Manual, revision dated September 12, 1978, " Inspection, Test, And Operating Status."
b.
Review of Secticn X of the QA Manual, revision dated Feb rua ry 14,1979, " Manufacturing Control And Inspection."
c.
Review of Section IX of the QA Manual, revision dated Feb rua ry 15,1979, "Concrol Cf Special processes. "
d.
Observation of manufacturing operations and status en six (6) piping assemblies, which were selected frca four (a) centracts, relative to:
(1)
Ccmpleteness of operaticn sign off in terms of cbserved visual status.
(2) Methods and practices used being censi:
(3) Utilization of procedures approved for the applicable contract and appropriate for specific application.
( _ v i t. b :.
_ (4)
Compliance with inspection and hold point requirements.
(5)
Personnel being qualified as required by the ASME Code.
3.
Findincs a.
Deviation frca Ccemitment See Enclosure, Item B.
b.
Unresolved Items None.
E.
Procedure, Occument, and Drawino Control 1.
Objectives The objectives of this area of the inspection were to:
a.
Ascertain that a system has been established for the control of precedures, documents, and drawings which is consistent with the QA Program and custcmer design require-cents.
b.
The system has been established and is operating effectively.
2.
Method of Acccmolishment The preceding objectives were 1cccmplished by:
a.
Oeview of Section III of the QA vanual, revision dated February 15, 1979, "Cesign Ocntrol."
b.
Review of Section V of the QA Manual, revision dated February 15,1979, " Instructions, Precedures And Crawings."
c.
Review of Secticn VI of the QA Manual, revision dated Feb ruary 14, 1979, "Cocument Control."
d.
Review of custccer approved precedures for Job No. 80015.
e.
Verification that custccer approved procedures for Jcb No. EC015 and QA Program required procedures were at work stations.
aon
(, v i s.1'.'
. f.
Review of traveler packages for seven (7) assemblies from the referenced contract in terms of specification of use of approved procedures.
g.
Examination of shop drawings in traveler packages for review and approval status.
h.
Verification that drawings in shop use were correct revisions required by the Engineering Department, i.
Verification that drawings had been submitted and approved in accordance with customer requirements.
3.
Findings Within this area of the inspection, no deviations or unresolved items were identified.
F.
Exit Interview The inspector met with the management and Authorized Inspection Agency representatives denoted in paragraph A above on March 30, 1979, at the conclusion of the inspection.
The scope of the inspection and the findings were discussed with the representatives present.
Management acknowledged the statements of the inspector and had no specific questions relative to the findings.
a ti. d35 g a v.u..
~
. - _.... - - -