ML19253A195
| ML19253A195 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 06/06/1979 |
| From: | Agee J, Hunnicutt D NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19253A189 | List: |
| References | |
| REF-QA-99900339 99900339-79-1, NUDOCS 7908200045 | |
| Download: ML19253A195 (8) | |
Text
U. S. NUCI. EAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT REGION IV Report No.
99900339/79-01 Program No.
51400 Company:
General Electric Company Small A/C Motor Products Department 2155 South First Street San Jose, California 95111 Inspection Conducted: May 7-11, 1979 Inspecto k
d d/d/77
'uJ. R. Agee, Contractor Inspector, Vendor
/ D' ate Inspection Branch Approved by:
^#j M
d///77 D. M. Hunni' cutt, Chief, ComponentsSection II
/ D4te Vendor Inspection Branch Summary Inspection on May 7-11, 1979 (99900339/79-01)
Areas Inspected:
Implemen'tation of 10 CFR 50, Appendix B including action on previous inspection findings, QA manual / program, design control, and control of measuring and test equipment. The inspection involved thirty-two (32) inspector-hours on site.
Results:
In the four (4) areas inspected, no unresolved items were identified and no deviations were identified in three (3) areas. The ' llowing were identified in the remaining area.
Deviations: Control of Measuring and Test Equipment - (1) Several gages and instruments had not been calibrated within the specified calibration schedule (Notice of Deviation, Item A); - (2) Several gages and instruments were not in the recall cycle for calibration (Notice of Deviation, Item B).
790sg 9994(
B03 356
2
/
Details Section A.
Persons Contacted S. E. Carvalho, Gage Room Technician
- G. L. Gaspary, Plant Manager
- H. D. Haug, Manager Quality Assurance D. A. Leshinsky, Designer M. W. Sheets, Project Engineer C. L. Taggart, Manager Product Engineering W. R. Williams, Quality Control Supervisor
- Attended exit interview.
B.
Action on Previous Inspection Findings 1.
(Closed) Deviation (Inspection Report No. 78-01):
The Quality Assurance Manual had not previously been reviewed annually. The inspector verified the manual has been reviewed and revised.
2.
(Closed) Deviation (Inspection Report No. 78-01): Audit records revealed that audits had been conducted by personnel, who had responsibility for the areas audited.
The inspector verified that additional personnel have been designated as auditors to preclude the need for the quality functions from.aditing icself.
3.
(Closed) Deviation (Inspection Report No. 78-01): Certain companies had not been audited prior to placement of orders with them. The inspector verified that the companies have since been audited or removed from the list of suppliers. Also, purchasing is currently required to buy critical items from vendors on the approved vendors list.
4.
(Closed) Deviation (Inspection Report No. 78-01): Calibration 3 were not maintained on certain instruments. The inspector verified that these inst.ruments had been added to the calibration record card files for periodic verification of calibration.
5.
(Closed) De.viatier (Inspectica Report No. 78-01):
IR (Inspection Reports) had not been written against certain instruments that were identified as defective. The inspector verified tLst tte Company had rechecked the suspect defective instruments and found that they had not been used in measurement of parts affecting quality.
Notations had been made on the suspect instrument calibration cards reflecting the above information. Certain of the instruments had, at that time been removed from service and now have been submitted to an outside calibration facility for repair.
6.
(Closed) Deviation (Inspection Report No. 78-01): Records indicated that quality assurance training had not been provided in some departments B03 357
3 such as marketing, engineering, and purchasing. The inspector verified that current records indicate that quality training had been provided for key personnel in the engineering department, namely: manager, product engineering; supervisor, engineering documentation; project engineer, materials; and others. Henceforth, all personnel will receive an annual evaluation by using a checklist which includes questions and coverage of personal knowledge of quality assurance programs such as the QA Manual, Appendix B criteria, ANSI, and company procedures relative to each individuals position and responsibilities affecting quality.
7.
(Closed) Deviation (Inspection Report No. 78-01): Hold Tags attached to parts randomly selected throughout the manufacturing area had not been filled out on the reverse side. The inspector verified that the affected areas had been policed, storage bins had been more efficiently arranged and scrap bins had been more effectively located and identified. Personnel in the affected areas responsible for completing Hold Tags for partially fabricated assemblies have been further u.structed on the procedures for completing data on the Hold Tags.
8.
(Closed) Deviation (Inspection Report No. 78-01): Parts and materials in the receiving inspection area had not been identified with adequate stamps, stickers or other identification. The inspector verified that incoming critical materials had been adequately identified, segregated cad /or stored as required. Reject and nonconforming materials had been adequately identified, segregated and stored in the reject material bin for disposition.
~
9.
(Closed) Deviation (Inspection Report No. 78-01): With the exception of the receiving inspection area, no requirements had been made for the segregation of nonconforming materials, parts and components throughout the manufacturing area. The inspector verified that documented instructions had been issued requiring manufacturing to discontinue the usa of Red Hold Tags and use IR (Inspection Report) cards with each to be marked " nuclear". With such a marking the product cannot be moved until approved by Quality Control.
C.
QA Manual / Program 1.
Objectives The objectives of this area of the inspection were to verify that.
a.
Tae QA Manual had been maintained current.
b.
The QA Manual had been implemented in the area of auditing.
c.
Feasures had been established to indicate the status of incoming aaterials and that the materials have been inspected and/or designated for storage or disposition.
803 358
4 2.
Method of Accomplishment The preceding objectives were accomplished by:
Review of the QA Manual, Revision 6, dated August 1,1978.
a.
b.
Verifying that the facility audit program had been revised to prevent departments from being audited by personnel responsible for the function being audited.
Verifying that key management personnel have received training c.
concerning quality control, the quality assurance program and 10 CFR 50 Appendix B, (example: engineering department).
d.
Verifying that an overall audit program based on the criteria of 10 CFR, Appendix B has been implerented and performed by a crossfuctional audit team. Results are reported directly to the plant manager.
Inspection of receiving inspection area activities and practices e.
including identification of materials stored in the area.
f.
Inspection of recaiving inspection practices for a typical critical material and verifying that the inspector cor.pleted the inspection in compliance with QCR IV, Incoming Material Control, by comparing the incoming material with the related purchase order and drawing, making required dimensional and electrical checks and by contacting the design engineer and the quality control supervisor regarding anomalies to this specific item, an encapsulated temperature detector.
3.
Findings a.
Deviations Nane.
b.
Unresolved Items None.
c.
Comments: While inspecting receiving inspections activities and practices, two (2) electrical measuring instruments were identified tt tt were overdue for the required periodic c,libration cycle ar.d were in use by the receiving inspection personnel. Although t.'.e calibration responsibilities are those of the calibration laboratory, the receiving inspection depart =ent had not reported 803 359
,7
5 the condition to the responsible calibration group. This represents a breakdown in the purpoc.e of a quality assurance program, specifically adequate crai: ting, and was discussed with responsible quality assurance and management personnel. This area was identified as an inspection item for a future inspection.
(Notice of Deviation, Item B).
D.
Design Control 1.
Objectives The objectives of this area of the inspection were to verify that:
Criteria from customer contracts (purchase orders) and specifications a.
had been adequately addressed including quality assurance require-ments and applicable electrical codes and standards.
b.
Design concepts had been adequetely reviewed and approved in compliance with approved and established procedures.
Motors designed for Class lE applications had been functionally c.
tested and qualification tested to meet customer specifications and referenced codes and standards.
2.
Method of Accomplishment The preceding objectives were accomplished by:
Review of customer purchase order No. 205-AJ580, dated May 23, a.
1977 for HPCS Pump Motor, Vertical Solid Snaf t.
Accompanying this P.O. was Base Specification 21A3504, Revision 0, General Require-ments, Vertically Mounted Electrical Motors.
This specification required specific hold points for customer inspection, such as, assembly inspection and final test / runout inspection.
In addition, it required that specific documents be submitted for customer approval before acceptance of the final product (motor). A partial list of these documents includes:
(1) Speed Torque Curves (456 HA 714) (August 24, 1978)*
(2) Time Current Curves (456 HA 723) (August 24, 1978)*
(3) Effeciency and Power Factor Curves (456 HA 722) (August 24, 1978)*
(4) Maximum K'4 Curves (456 HA 718) (August 24. 1978)*
(5) Bearing Temperature Rise 7h Bn7aJ
6 (6) Routine Test Reports (7) Reed Critical Frequency Report (8) Seismic Report (456 HA 988) (August 23, 1978)*
- Theu are actual certified curves submitted by GE Small A/C Motor Products Department to the customer, shown by di cument number, and the dates the documents were approved by the customer "
for a specific motor, No. K6357XC22A, manufactured ior the PO No. 205-AJ580.
b.
Discussions with Engineering Department engineers re.ponsible for motor designs and qualifications, which revealed that the Company quotes motor data from "similar to" models for customer require-ments for Class 1E motors. Differences between customer require-ments, per referenced codes and standards and Company "similar to" model are negotiated. Special materials, qualification testing, certifications and other special customer requirements are tailored to the Ccmpany's nearest "similar to" models. Wherever possible qualification by anlysis, referenced to previous designs and data, is performed; however qualification by analysis does not preclude product qualification testing when required by the customer. Each production Class IE motor is tested in final testing to specific pertinent criteria from national electric codes for motors, such as, IEEE, ANSI and NEMA Standards.
c.
Review of customer letter dated Junuary 9, 1978 and GE Small A/C Motor Products Department document transmittal form dated November 29, 1977 with customer notation stating "... all drawings have been approved and motors are released for manu-facturing" for P0 No. 205-AJ580.
d.
Review of the Nuclear Design Control and Verification Data sheets and verified that verifying or checking of engineering design data had been performed by individuals other than those who performed the original design.
e.
Review of the seismic qualification cercification for motor uodel SK 6357XC22A. This motor was built per customer specifications 21A3504 BN. Revision 0, and 21A3504, Revision 1 and was analytically qualified for seismic conditions by Seismic Analysis Report No. 455 HA 988.
This report (455 HA 988) is based on Seismic Analysis Report No. 455 HA 326 and Seismic Analysis Report No. 455 HA 678 which is partially supported by physical test data. The above analysis reports are for similar type motors that have been developed based on customer ECCS Motor Qualification Program 22A4722, Revision 0, in conjunction with the customer ECCS Motor Data comparison with customer test motor dat'. 455 HA 938, Revision.+.
803 361
7 f.
Review of the facility motor final test area and test data forms:
No Class 1E motors were in production at this time, so witnessing of final testing of such motors was not accomplished.
3.
Findings Within this area of the inspection, no deviations or unresolved items were identified.
E.
Control of Measuring and Test Equipment 1.
Objectives The objectives of this area of the inspection were to verify that:
a.
Gage laboratory records and calibrations had been maintained current.
b.
Electrical measuring instrumentation record cards and calibrations had been maintained current.
2.
Method of Accomplishment The preceding objectives were accomplished by:
a.
Review of QA Manual Section XII Control of Measuring and Test Equipment.
b.
Inspection af gage calibration laboratory records. A review was made of a random selection of approximately one 'aundred (100) calibration cards.
c.
Review of electrical measuring instrumentation calibration cards.
3.
Findings a.
Deviations (1) See Notice of Deviation, Item A.
(2) See Notice of Deviation, Item B.
b.
Unresolved Item None.
803 3f'2
8 c.
Comments: The records and calibration program for mechanical and electrical measuring devices were in disorder and in obvious need of management attention., The gage room periodic calibrations were running one (1) to three (3) seeks behind schedule for instruments whose cards had been tlled for calibration. Several calibration record cards had no t..ated recall cards; therefore, many gages were, in effect, not in a periodic calibration schedule. Calibration record cards for electrical meters had been removed from the gage room files to the custody of a quality control supervisor who had been in this capacity for only one (1)..
week prior to this NRC inspection. According to the calibration record cards, several instruments could not be located.
Contributing to the ineffeciency of the calibration labcratory has been unexpected turnover of quality inspection personnel and lack of full time involvement of personnel in the calibration room.
F.
Exit Interview The inspector met with management representives (denoted in paragraph A) at the conclusion of the inspection on May 11, 1979.
The inspector summarized the scope and findings of the inspection relating to the following functions:
1.
Action on previous inspection findings.
2.
QA Manual / Program.
3.
Design Control.
4.
Control of Measuring and Test Equipment.
Management acknowledged the statements made by the inspector.
_ Ril
-)
-~
-~* ~ ~-*