ML19259C625
| ML19259C625 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 02/13/1979 |
| From: | Ellershaw L, Hunnicutt D NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19259C616 | List: |
| References | |
| REF-QA-99900248 99900248-79-1, NUDOCS 7908070195 | |
| Download: ML19259C625 (9) | |
Text
VENDOR INSPECTION REPORT U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT REGION IV Report No. 99900248/79-01 Program No. 51300 Company:
Union Pump Company 87 Capital Avenue Battle Creek, Michigan 49016 Inspection Conducted: January 29 - February 2,1979 Inspectors 9 )P' )
f
.tf/3Il L. E. Ellershaw, Contractor Inspector, Vendor
' Datie
(
Inspection Branch 4
Approved by:. ? h j
- dd
-2//S/77 EM. Hu6nicutt, Chief, ComponFti 3ection II,
' Date Vendor Inspection Branch Summary Inspection conducted January 29 - February 2, 1979 (99900248/79-01)
Areas Ins gcted:
Implementation of 10 CFR 50, Appendix B Criteria, and applicable coces and standards including: previous inspection findings; nonconformances and corrective action; nondestructive examination (liquid penetrant); weld material control; weld heat treatment, and review of weld procedure specifications. The inspection involved twenty-nine (29) inspecter hours on site.
Resul's:
In the six (6) areas inspected, two (2) deviations from comitment were identified.
Deviations : Review of Weld Procedure Specifications - Certain weld procedure specifications did not list all applicable nonessential variables and the specific postweld heat treatment time at temperature was not defined on certain procedure qualification records, which is contrary to Criterion IX of Appendix B to 10 CFR 50 (Enclosure, Item A.1.,
and A.2.); Weld Heat Treatment - procedure qualification welds were not heat treated for 80", of the maximum time applied to the component weld material, which is contrary to Criterion IX of Appendix B to 10 CFR 50 (Enclosure, Item B.).
2100 312 7908070 M U"8N
. Details Section (Prepared by L. E. Ellershaw)
A.
Persons Contacted W. Bakkila, Quality Control Coordinator W. Bramble, Inspection Supervisor J. Fick, Project Engineer T. J. Joy, Project Engineer P. Kivin, Quality Control Coordinator R. Wheeler, Quality Control Coordinator P. D. Woods, Quality Control Manager B.
Action on Previous Inspection Findings 1.
(Closed) Deviation A. (Report No. 78-02): This item dealt with nonconformity report (NCR) numbers not be g noted on hold tags and hold tag numbers not being noted on NCRs.
Union Pump Company (UPC) has implemented their committed corrective action in that a review of fifteen (15) NCRs and their corresponding hold tags revealed that all were cross referenced, as required.
2.
(Closed) Deviation B. (Report No. 78-02): This item dealt with dye penetrant examinations not being performed on crane hooks.
UPC has implemented their committed corrective action in that the records now show that examinations have been perfonned.
3.
(Closed) Deviation C. (Report No. 78-02): This item dealt with the failure to translate certain customer requirements to engineering order forms for incorporation into design documents.
WPC has implemented their committed corrective action in that the specific Bills of Material has been corrected, and a review of additional customer oders and design specifications revealed that all quality related requirements have been incorporated.
4.
(Closed) Deviation D. (Report No. 78-02):
This item dealt with certain drawings for nuclear, pressure boundary parts, that had not been reviewed by the Quality Control Manager.
UPC has implemented their committed corrective actions in that the affected drawings have been reviewed. A futher review by 2100 513 the inspector revealed that drawings are being reviewed by the responsible personnel.
5.
(Closed) Deviation E. (Report No. 78-02): This item dealt with the failure to identify material in the Nuclear Hold Area.
UPC has implemented their committed corrective actions in that the Nuclear Hold Area has been expanded, housekeeping his baen improved, and all material was properly identified and a7;ed.
6.
(Closed) Deviation F. (Report No. 78-02): This item dealt with material identification, as noted on process sheets, that did not agree with the material identification noted on the Bill of Material.
UPC has implemented their committed corrective action in that the process sheets were corrected, and a further review by the inspector revealed no additional discrepancies.
C.
Nonconformances and Corrective Action 1.
Objectives The objectives of this area of the inspection were to verify that UPC had implemented the requirements for the control of nonconformances and corrective actions in accordance with the QA Manual and applicable NRC and ASME Code requirements.
2.
Method of Accomplishmqnt The preceding objectives e e accomplished by:
a.
Review of QA Manual Section 10, "Non-Conformities and Corrective Action," Revision 0.
b.
Review of Non-Conformity Report (NCR) Log.
c.
Observation of nonconforming parts, as identified by the NCR Log, to verify identification.
d.
Observation of Nuclear Hold Area and verification of identity of parts located therein.
e.
Review of Material Review Board (MRB) activities and verification of disposition submittal to the Authorized and Nuclear Inspector (ANI) for concurrence, when required.
f.
Discussions with cognizant personnel.
2100
$14
. 3.
Findings a.
Deviation from Commitments None.
b.
Urresolved Item None.
D.
Nondestructive Examination (liquid penetrant) 1.
Objectives The objectives of this area of the inspection were to verify that UPC had implemented the requirements for the control of liquid penetrant examinations in accordance with the QA Manual and applicable NRC and ASME Code requirements.
- 2.. Method of Accomplishment The preceding objectives were tccomplished by:
a.
Review of QA Manual Secti. n 15. "Non-Destructive Examina-tion," Revision 0.
b.
Observation of liquid penetrant examination being performed on an ASME NF pedestal, which had been weld repaired (Order No. 753555).
c.
Review of Liquid Penetrant procedure NDT-0301-14, being used in b. above.
d.
Review certifications of penetrant materials (penetrant, developer, and remover) being used in b. above.
e.
Discussions with cognizant personnel.
3.
Findings a.
Deviation from Commitment None.
b.
_ Unresolved Item None.
.. - -. E.
Weld Material Control 1.
Objectives The objectives of this area of the inspection were to verify that UPC had implemented the requirements for the control of weld materials in accordance with the QA Manual and applicable NRC and ASME Code requirements.
2.
Method of Accomplishment The preceding objectives were accomplished by:
a.
Review of QA Manual Section 13, " Identification ar.d Control of Filler Metal," Revision 0.
b.
Observation of weld material storage areas.
c.
Observation of the Nuclear Hold Oven to verify the identity of the filler metal contained therein.
d.
Verification of filler metal heat and lot number by comparing against Certified Material Test Reports.
e.
Discussions with cognizant personnel.
3.
Findings a.
Deviation from Commitment None.
b.
Unresolved Item None.
F.
Review of Weld Procedure Soecifications (WPS) 1.
Objectives The objectives of this area of the inspection were to verify that UPC had implemented the requirements for the use and qualification of WPSs in accordance with the QA Manual and applicable NRC and ASME Code requirements.
2100 s16 2.
Method of Accomplishment The preceding objectives were accomplished by:
a.
Review of QA Manual Section 14, " Welding," Revision 0.
b.
Review of WPSs and the applicable Procedure Qualification Records (PQRs).
c.
Discussions with cognizant personnel.
3.
Ligny a.
Deviation from Commitment (1) See Enclosure, Item A.1.
It was observed during WPS review that not all variables defined by ASME Section IX for the shielded metal arc welding (SMAW) process were listed in WPS 4100-0, dated April 7,1978.
Omitted variables incl"ded: size of fille metal and electrical characteristics such as amperage and voltage.
(2) See Enclosure, Item A.2.
It was further noted that all PQRs for SMAW WPSs requiring postweld heat treatment (PWHT) did not define the required time at temperature (an e5sential g
variable), in that all PQRs state; 1100 -1200 F, one (1) hour / inch with a two (2) ho"' ainimum.
Additionally, there were no heat treat charts available to determine the actual PWHT time used for the qualifica-tions.
b.
Unresolved Item None.
G.
Weld Heat Treatment 1.
0_bjectives The objectives of this area of the inspection were to verify that UPC had implemented the requirements for the qualification and ccatrol of weld heat treatment in accordance with the QA Manual and applicable NRC and ASME Code requirements.
2100 517
. 2.
Method of Accomplishment The preceding objectives were accomplished by:
a.
Review of QA Manual Section 8, "Special Processes,"
Revision O.
b.
Review documentation relative to postweld heat treatment (PWHT) of pump case S/N A201, Order No. N753810, and pump cases, S/N 8203 and 8204, Order No. N764600.
c.
Review of the subcontractor's (foundry and heat treatment) weld procedure specifications (WPS) and procedure qualifica-tion records (PQR).
d.
Review of UPCs, WPSs, and PQRs used for repair welding the pump cases noted in b. above.
e.
Discussions with cognizant personnel.
3.
Findings a.
Deviation from Commitment See Enclosure, Item B.
(1) Regarding pump case, S/N A201:
A review of documentation revealed that the foundry performed repair welding and PWHT for four and one forth (4h) hours, using WPS A725, Revision 2, which was qualified for ten (10) hours. The Certified Material Test Repor* provided to UFC stated, "Any additional PWHT pe formed on ferritic P-1 material which results in the total time at temperature exceeding twelve (12) hours, shall void the certified material test report.
(Reference ASME Section III, Paragraph NB-2211)."
Subsequently, UPC performed an additional repair weld per WPS WLD-13-3-2, which was qualified for two (2) hours minimum.
PWHT was performed by a subcontractor and a review of their heat charts revealed a PWHT time of nine and one forth (9k) hours.
Thus, the accumulated PWHT time relative to the foundry's repair weld is thirteen and one half (13 ) hours, which exceeds the foundry's 2100 518
.g_
WPS qualification by one and one half (1h) hours.
There were no heat treat charts available to define the actual qualification time for UPCs PQR. Discussion with the Quality Control Manager indicated that the qualifying time was two (2) hours, which would allow a maximum of two and one half (2h) hours PWHT on the pump case. Therefore, UPCs qualificatign time has been exceeded by six and three forth (6 /4) hours.
(2) Regarding pump cases, S/W B203 and B204:
A similar situation exists in that the foundry perfomed a weld repair using procedure QCP 200, Revision 1, which was qualified for one and one half (1 ) hours PWHT.
PWHT was perfomed for two (2) hours.
Subsequently, UPC performed a repair weld per WLD-1303-2, which was qualified for two (2) hours, and a PWHT for four (4) hours.
This' exceeds the fo0ndry's qualification by four (4) hours, and their own qualification by one and one half (1h) hours, b.
Unresolved Item None.
H.
Exit _ Interview A meeting was held at the conclusion of this inspection on February 2,1979, with the following managewnt representatives and the Authorized Nuclear Inspector (ANI):
M. Anderson, Quality Assurance Engineer W. Bakkila, Quality Control Coordinator J. R. Berry, Assistant Sales Manager T. Blanke, Quality Control Coordinator E. Bolz, General Foreman W. Bramble, Ir.spection Supervisor R. J. Craig, ANI, Hartford Steam Boiler Inspection and Insurance Co.
J. Fick, Project Engineer, Centrifugab P. M. Flach, Manager, Product Enginer ring J. B. Freed, President T. Gossard, Assistant Production Control Manager H. Graglia, Manager, Engineering, Reciprocating Pumps G. Iverson, Shop Superintendant J. Johnson, Manager, Purchasing J. J. Joy, Project Engineer, Reciprocating Pumps P. Kivin, Quality Control Coordinator G. Law, Manager, Nuclear Projects 2100 319
~
.g_
D. C. McHolme, Assistant to the President and Quality Assurance Manager R. Rautmann, Secretary, Quality Control M. Shook, Production Scheduler H. Tobiasz, Manager, Engineering E. R. Tuit, Vice President and Treasurer R. Wheeler, Quality Control Coordinator R. A. White, Manager, Production Control The scope and findings of this inspection were summarized. Manage-ment acknowledged the statements relative to the findings.
2l00 320