ML19257B730
| ML19257B730 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 12/05/1979 |
| From: | Kelley W, Whitesell D NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19257B725 | List: |
| References | |
| REF-QA-99900118 99900118-79-2, NUDOCS 8001180213 | |
| Download: ML19257B730 (14) | |
Text
.
U. S. NUCLEAR REGUI.ATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT REGION IV Report No.
99900118/79-02 Program 51300 Company:
Walworth Company Post Office Box 1103 Greensburg, Pennsylvania 15601 Inspection Conducted:
November 5-8, 1979 Inspector:
u //
/2-I~' 7f Wm.D.Kelley,Contracto[ Inspector Date ComponentsSection I
'V Vendor Inspection Branch Approved by:
k )mecA
/f-5 f/
D. E. Whitesell, Chief Date ComponentsSection I Vendor Inspection Branch Summary Inspection on November 5-8, 1979 (99900118/79-02)
Areas Incpected:
Implementation of 10 CFR 50, Appendix B and applicable codes and standards including, quality assurance program review, procurement control-procedure, document and drawing control, control of other special processes and training and audits; also reviewed vendor's activities and conducted manage-ment meeting and uit interview and performed a follow-up on reported deficiency.
The inspection involved twenty-four (24) inspector-hours on site by one (1)
NRC inspector.
Results:
In the seven (7) areas inspected, no deviations or unresolved items were identified in six (6) areas. The following was identified in the remaining one (1) area.
Unresolved Item:
Procurement Control-Procedures, Documents, and Drawing Control (Details, paragraph D.3.c).
The engineering functions of the corporate offices have been transferred to WC-G and the corporate procedures affecting engineering are to be integrated into the WC-G. Nuclear Quality Assurance Manual.
e 1769 203'-
8001180 2h
2 DETAILS A.
Persons Contacted Walworth Company - Corporate Office (WC-C)
- K. B. Eacott - Vice President of Special Projects
- R. O. Hunt - Corporate Director of Quality Assurance Walworth Company - Greensburg Plant (WC-G)
J. A. Fabian - Quality Assurance Engineer
- G. J. M. Hill - Manager of Quality Assurance R. G. Knopf - Quality Assurance Engineer E. M. Petrosky - Nuclear Products Manager S. N. Shields - Manager of Engineering
- Denotes those persons who attended the Exit Interview (See paragraph I)
B.
General Review of Vendor's Activities 1.
There has been no change in the status of the WC Certificates of Authorization, the authorized inspection agency, the authorized nuclear inspector, or the company's contribution to the nuclear industry as reported in NRC Report 99900118/79-01.
2.
The plant manager resigned effective October 31, 1979. The vice president of special projects is acting as plant manager until a replacement plant manager is selected and reports to the Greensburg plant.
3.
The stock of the Walworth Company, a Delaware Corporation, is now jointly owned by Anaconda and Empresas Lanzagorta, Mexico, DF.
The effective date of the Empresas Lanzagorta stock acquisition was August 15, 1979.
C.
Management Meeting 1.
Objectives The objectives of this meeting were to accomplish the following:
a.
To meet with the Walworth Company (WC) management and those persons responsible for the administration of the ASME accepted Quality Assurance program, and to establish' channels of communication.
1769" 204
3' b.
To determine the extent of the company's involvement in the commercial nuclear business.
c.
To explain NRC direct inspection program including the LCVIP organization, VIB inspection method and documentation.
d.
To describe the NRC evaluation of the ASME inspection system.
2.
Method of Accomplishment The preceding objectives were accomplished by a meeting on November 6, 1979. The following is a summary of the meeting:
a.
Attendees were:
The Walworth Company Corporate Office (WC-C)
K. B. Eacott - Vice President of Special Projects R. O. Hunt - Corporate Director of Quality Assurance The Walworth Company - Greensburg Plant (WC-G)
J. A. Fabian - Quality Assurance Engineer G. J. M. Hill - Manager of Quality Assurance b.
The VIB Organization was described and its relationship to NRC Region IV and the NRC Headquarters component of the Office of Inspection and Enforcement.
c.
The LCVIP function was described including the reasons for its establishment, its objectives, its implementation structure, and the more significant program changes.
d.
The conduct of VIB inspections was described and how the inspections results are documented and reported, and what the responses to reports, should include. How proprietary informa-tion is handled, the Public Document Room, and the White Book were also explained.
e.
The purpose, scope, and status of the NRC's two year program to evaluate the ASME inspection system as an acceptable independent third party was discussed.
f.
The company's contribution to the nuclear industry was discussed including current and projected a'ctivities, the status of the ASME certification of authorization, and the third party inspection services.
jg.9 205' 3.
Results Management acknowledged the NRC presentation as being understood by them, and provided the inspector with the information concerning the company's activitics and products contained in paragraph B.
4 D.
QA Program Review 1.
Objectives The objectives of this inspection were to accertain whether the QA program has been documented in writing, and if properly implemented, will ensure that the specified quality of completed components has been achieved in compliance with NRC rules and regulations, code and contract requirements and the commitments in the Quality Assurance Manual. Also, ascertain whether the program provides for the following:
a.
Management's policy statements concerning QA.
b.
Delineates how the QA organization is structured, to achieve appropriate independence from scheduling costs, the freedom and independence to identify quality problems, initiate appropriate resolutions, and verify corrective action.
Whether the duties and authority of the QA staff is clearly delin-c.
eated in writing, and that they have access to a level of manage-ment that can ensure effective implementation of the QA program elements, and to enforce positive and timely corrective action.
d.
Detailed written procedures are properly reviewed, approved, i
released, and issued to control quality activities, as appropriate.
A training and indoctrination program to improve or maintain the e.
proficiency of personnel performing quality activities, and per-sonnel verifying that quality activities have been correctly performed.
2.
Method of Accomplishment The preceding objectives were accomplished by:
a.
Review of the ASME accepted Quality Assurance Manual.
b.
Review of appropriate organization charts.
c.
Review of the documents concerning the authority duties, independ-ence and freedom of the Quality Assurance staff.
i d.
Review of Policy Statement, Revision 6, dated December.'28,1978, f
signed by the President.
l e.
Review of documents to verify that they had been reviewed and approved by authorized personnel.
1769.-206-I e.
S f.
Review of the training and indoctrination program requirements and documentation.
g.
Interviews with cognizant personnel.
h.
Observation of work and test in progress.
3.
Findings The evidence demonstrates that the QA program has been documented in writing and clearly defines the duties, authority, and organizational independence and freedom of the QA staff. Detailed written implement-ing documents are appropriately reviewed, approved, released, and issued by authorized personnel. The QA staff has access to a level of management to ensure effective implementation of the program and timely and positive corrective action of enforcement items. A viable training and indoctrination program has been provided for upgrading, and maintaining, the proficiencies of personnel involved in quality activities.
Within this area of the inspection no deviations or unresolved items were identified.
E.
Procurement Control - Procedure, Document, and Drawing Control i
1.
Objectives The objectives of this area of the inspection were to ascertain whether procedures had been developed and properly implemented to control the review, approval, release and issuance, of procedures, documents and drawings in a manner consistent with NRC rules and regulations, and the vendor's commitments.
2.
Method of Accomplishment The objectives of this area of the inspection were accomplished by:
a.
Review of the ASME accepted Quality Assurance Manual, Revision 7:
(1) Section G-8, Order Review.
(2) Section G-6, Procedures Control.
(3) Section G-11, Drawings and Print Distribution and Control.
(4) Section G-12, Control of Purchased Materials, Equipment and Services to verify that the vendor has established procedures which prescribes a system for procedure, document and drawing control.
1769 207
6 b.
Review of the following procedures:
(1) 2-GPT, Revision 4, Water Washable Liquid Penetrant.
(2) 85-GWP, Revision 1, Manual Shield Metal Arc Welding Procedure.
(3) 1-GCP, Revision 5, Cleaning Procedure for Nuclear Valve Pieces to verify that they had been prepared by the designated authority, approved by management and reviewed
~
by QA.
c.
Review of the documents referenced in paragraphs a and b to verify that they provide for the identification of personnel responsible for preparing, reviewing, approving, and issuing procedures, documents, and drawings; and that the review and approval of significant changes were performed by the same personnel. Also to ascertain whether minor changes to design drawings, that do not require design approval, are identified.
d.
Review of the following documents:
(1) Engineering Instructions to Quality.
(2)' Engineering Instructions to Engineering.
(3) QCS Check List to verify that the distribution lists are current and that the proper documents are identified, accessible, and are being used.
3.
Findings a.
The inspector verified that procedures had been developed and properly implemented to control the review approval, release and issuance of procedures, documents and drawings in a manner consistent with NRC rules and regulations and the vendor's commitments.
b.
Within this area of the inspection no deviations were identified.
c.
Unresolved Item:
The engineering functions of the corporate offices at Valley Forge, PA are in the process of being transferred to the WC Greensburg plant. The corporate engineering and design procedures will be integrated into the WC-G quality assurance program, and the necessary revisions to the Nuclear Quality Assurance Manual will be made and presented to the authorized inspection agency's specialist for review and acceptance, in compliance with code requirements.
)7hh
7 The inspector will review the implementation of the design phase of the quality assurance program on the next inspection to verify that the revision of the quality assurance manual has been accomplished, and/or are being implemented.
F.
Control of Special Processes 1.
Objectives The objectives of this area of the inspection were to verify that:
a.
Procedures have been prepared and approved by the vendor which prescribes a system for the control of special processes (other than welding, nondestructive testing and heat treating) which is consistent with NRC rules and regulations, and the vendor's commitments in the ASME accepted Quality Assurance Manual.
b.
These special processes are accomplished in accordance with the approved procedures by qualified personnel.
2.
Method of Accomplishment The objective of this area of the inspection was accomplished by:
a.
Review of the ASME accepted Quality Assurance Manual, Revision 7:
(1) Section G-6, Procedure Control.
(2) Section G-8, Order Review.
(3) Section G-7, Training to verify that the vendor has estab-lished procedures which prescribes a system for the control of special processes.
b.
Review of the following procedures:
(1) 1-GFT-Revision 0, Functional Test Procedure for Motor Operated Valves.
(2) 1-GTP-Revision 7, Hydrostatic Test Procedure (3) Training Records of Testing Personnel to verify that require-ments have been established for identifying special processes, qualifying the implementing procedure, training and/or certification of personnel performing special processes, and documentation of work performance when special processes are used.
17k209
8 Review of the special process procedures referenced in paragraph c.
b to verify that the special process procedures are followed and the work is performed by trained, qualified, and certified is accordance with the NRC regulations and the vendors commitments.
d.
Interviews with personnel to verify they are knowledgeable in the procedures applicable to their assigned duties and responsibilities.
3.
Findings a.
The inspector verified that:
(1) Procedures have been prepared and approved by the vendor to prescribe a system for the control of special processes (other than welding, nondestructive testing and heat treating), in a manner consistent with NRC rules and regulations, and the vendor's commitments.
(2) These special processes are accomplished in accordance with the applicable procedure by qualified personnel.
b.
Within this area of the inspection no deviations or unresolved items were identified.
G.
Training 1.
Objectives The objectives of this area of the inspection were to ascertain:
Whether a program had been developed and approved by the vendor a.
for training personnel performing quality related activities, and whether the training program is consistent with NRC rules and regulations, and the vendor's QA Program commitments.
b.
That the training procedures are being properly and effectively implemented by the vendor.
2.
Method of Accomplishment The objectives of this area of the inspection were accomplished by:
a.
Review of the ASME accepted Quality Assurance Manual, Revision 7:
(1) Section G-7, Training.
1769 2 W
9 (2) Section G-23, " Audits," to verify that the vendor had provided procedures for training and qualifying personnel conducting internal and external audits.
b.
Review of the following documents:
(1) WGOC-11, Revision 6, Instruction for Internal Audit of Quality Programs.
(2) Corporate Quality Instruction CQ1-1, Revision 0, Instruction for Conduct of Vendor Quality Survey and Audits, to verify that they had been prepared by the designated authority, approved by management, and reviewed by QA. Also that pro-visions are made for the formal training and retraining of new employees, inspection and testing personnel, personnel performing special processes, audit personnel, and personnel involved in quality related design and procurement activities.
Review of the documents referenced in paragraphs a and b to verify c.
that the indoctrination and training program includes the technical requirements, the Codes and standards to be used, and the quality assurance / control elements that are applicable to the employee's assignment. Also, to verify that they provided for the testing of the capability and proficiency of nondestructive testing personnel, and the retraining and recertification if the evaluation of the individual performance does not meet the acceptance criteria.
d.
Review of the training records of inspectors, nondestructive testing personnel, auditors, designers and the quality assurance and procurement personnel, to verify that the procedures and the necessary training documents are available to the personnel performing the training, and that the training procedures are being effectively implemented and appropriately documented.
e.
Interviewed personnel to verify whether the training performed was commensurate with the persons assigned quality related activities.
3.
Findings a.
The inspector verified that the vendor has developed and approved appropriate procedures which prescribes a system for the training and indoctrination of personnel which is consistent with the NRC rules and regulations, and the vendor's commitments.
b.
The inspector verified that the training procedures are being effectively implemented.
1769 211-
10 c.
Within this area of the inspection, no deviations or unresolved items were identified.
H.
Audits - Internal Management 1.
Objectives The objectives of this area of the inspection were to verify that:
a.
Procedures have been prepared and approved by the vendor which prescribes a system for auditing (Internal Management), which is consistent with the NRC rules and regulations, and the vendor's commitments.
b.
The audit procedures are being effectively implemented by the vendor.
2.
Method of Accomplishment The objectives of this area of the inspection were accomplished by:
Review of the ASME accepted Quality Assurance Manual, Revision 7:
a.
(1) Section G-4, Organization.
(2) Section G-12, Control of Purchased Material, Equipment and Services.
(3) Section G-23, Audits, to verify that procedures._ had been established to prescribe a system for auditing.
b.
Review of procedure WGQC-11, Revision 6, Instruction for Internal Audit of Quality Programs, to verify that it had been prepared by the designated authority, approved by management, and reviewed by QA.
c.
Review of the documents referenced in paragraphs a and b to verify that the organizations responsible for auditing are identified and the audit personnel are qualified and appropriately trained. Also, to verify that the essential elements of the audit system is established, and that the audits are conducted in accordance with approved procedures and/or the use of check lists.
d.
Review of the audit schedules to assure that the audits of quality activities of the design, procurement and manufacturing activities are planned, documented, and conducted in the prescribed manner, and assures coverage of all elements of the QA program.
=
11 Review of audit reports to verify that they include ptwvisions e.
for written plans, team selection, team orientation, audit notifications, pre-audit conferences, and post-audit oma-ferences.
f.
Review of audit reports to verify that they are properly distributed to management and the audited organization; and that follow-up audits are conducted to verify that corrective action is accomplished.
g.
Review of both internal and external audit reports, to verify that the applicable procedures, were available to the audit team personnel, and that the audit procedures were adequate and effectively implemented.
3.
Findings a.
The inspector verified that:
(1) Procedures have been prepared and approved by the vendor, which prescribes a system for auditing consistent with NRC rules and regulation, ASME Code and contract requirements, and the vendor's commitments.
(2) The audit procedures are being properly and effectively implemented by the vendor.
b.
Within this area of the inspection no deviation or unresolved items were identified.
I.
Follow-up of Reported Deficiency - Pin Failure on Valve Disc 1.
Background Information NRC RII received a telegram from the Georgia Power Company dated June 4,1979 reporting that the disc of a ten (10) inch check valve (2E51-f040) had come loose from the disc hanger, and blocked approximately ninety (90) percent of the valve outlet, and the high backpressure due to restricted flow ruptured the turbine exhaust diaphram, at the E.I. Hatch Nuclear Station Unit 2.
Walworth Company (WC) dispatched a design engineer, and service repre-sentative, to E.I. Hatch Nuclear Plant on June 5,1979, to determine the cause of the failure and proper corrective action. A new disc was installed in the valve on the morning of June 6,1979, after which it pa.: sed a 60 psig air test. The service represencative remained on site during plant startup and reported that for approximately five (5) minutes during the startup pe'riodi D69 213
12 excessive noise was heard which was caused by the flutter of the disc against its stop (estimated to be 120 impacts per minute).
When the turbine reached approximately 3300 rpm the valve noise was reported to have stopped.
2.
Objective The objective of this area of the inspection was to ascertain:
Whether the vendor had evaluated the cause of the pin failure a.
on the valve disc and had evaluated the safety significance of the problem in conformance with their procedure for evataating the reportability of defects in accordance with 10 CFR 11.
b.
The generic implication of this problem and Whether the corrective action that was taken, or to be taken, c.
is appropriate.
3.
Method of Accomplishment The foregoing objectives were accomplished by a discussion with man-ager of engineering at the WC Greensburg plant.
4.
Findings From the discussion with the manager of engineering, the following a.
was detarmined:
(1) The failure of the pin which is part of the disc was due to repeated impacts of the swing check valve disc agaLa:st its cover stop at a rate of 120 cycles per minute for approximately 5 minutes during startup operations.
(2) Startup procedure occurs once or twice a month under normal operations; however, during plant construction five (5) to fifteen (15) startups may occur each day throughout a month.
(3) The disc is fastened to the disc arm which is secuoed after assembly by drilling a hole and inserting a cotter pin.
The broken parts of the disc pin were not available for WC-G's examination, since GPC had made a weld build-up and re-machined the existing disc pin to its original configuration; however, the nut, part of the pin, and the cotter pin, could not be located and was presumed to be lost within the piping system.
]f hh
13 (4) The WC-G personnel concluded that the cause was the failure of the cotter pin, which allowed the nut to be backed off, due to the cyclic impacts, which also caused fatigue fracture of the disc pin. The disc did not appear to have been spinning, and the pin wear appeared to be the result of the cyclic impacts with the cover stop. WC-G personnel have requested information concerning the system flow rates, and corresponding pressures, and temperatures to assist in their evaluation of the valve failure. GPC informed WC-G that they did not have this information, but would secure it from Bechtel Corporation.
GPC informed WC-G that they were experiencing similar pro-blems with other swing check valves in similar operating conditions.
(5)
WC-G's position is that the valve was designed and manufactured in compliance with thm customers purchase order and design specifications.
b.
Within this area of the inspection no deviations or unresolved items were identified.
5.
Generic Impact It appears that this problem could be generic with other swing check valves which were not specifically designed to withstand severe fluctuating flow conditions.
IE-VIB intends to follow-up this possibility by reviewing the purchase documents of the A-E firms and the NSSS contractors, to ascertain whether they include all of the necessary design requirements concerning the intended service conditions.
Also to ascertain whether the safety significance concerning this pin failure is being or has been evaluated in compliance with 10 CFR 21.
WC-G informed the inspector that they did not know whether this was being or had been done by its customer.
6.
Corrective Action WC-G has offered the following possible solutions to solve the problem of value failure due to the high cyclic impact loading.
a.
Install a smaller valve, b.
Modify the existing valve by installing an outside lever and weight, to dampen excessive flutter duringifluctuating flow operation.
)
f)Y
14' Extend the cover stop on existing valve to limit the disc swing.
c.
d.
Install a tilting disc check valve; or e.
A combination of a, b, or e above.
J.
Exit Interview At the conclusion of the inspection November 8,1979, the inspector met with the company's management, identified in paragraph A, for the purpose of informing them as to the results of the inspection. During this meeting management was informed no deviations were identified, and the one unresolved item and the evidence which supported the finding was identified.
The company's management acknowledged the inspector's statement and had no additional comments.
176h216
'