ML19269D954
| ML19269D954 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 02/15/1979 |
| From: | Hunter V, Kelley W, Whitesell D NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19269D939 | List: |
| References | |
| REF-QA-99900047 99900047-79-1, NUDOCS 7906210322 | |
| Download: ML19269D954 (12) | |
Text
-
U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT REGION IV Report No.
99900047/79-01 Program N. 51300 Company:
Westinghouse Electric Corporation Tampa Division Post Office Box 19218 Tampa, Florida 33616 Inspection Conducted: January 8-12, 1979 Inspectors:
/W(s D h-l35f V. H. Hunter, Contralitor Inspector, Vendor Date Inspection Branch
/
2 4-k Wm. D. Kelley, Contractor Ins ctor, Vendor
'Date' Inspection Branch Approved
- /5-79 D. E. Whitesell, Chief, ComponentsSection I, Date Vendor Inspection Branch Summary Inspection on January 8-12, 1979 (99900047/79-01)
Areas Inspected:
Implementation of 10 CFR 50, Appendix B, criteria and applicable codes and standards, including inspections and tests, weld material control, procurement, and design document control. The inspection involved sixty-two (62) inspector hours on site by two (2) inspectors.
Results:
In the four (4) areas inspected, no apparent deviations or unresolved items were identified in two (2) areas. The following were identified in the two (2) remaining areas.
2263 288 7 906210MA
. Deviations: Weld material control - (1) Weld electrodes issued to welders could not be accounted for as required by Technical Quality Assurance Instruction 1.5.2. (Enclosure, Item A.)
(2) Weld electrodes were exposed to ambient temperature and humidity for longer time periods taan permitted by process specification 83050 RM (Enclosure, Item B.)
(3) Welder was not welding within the specified amperage range.
(Enclo-sure, Item C.)
Unresolved Items - Design Verification - W-PSD Tampa Division issued their letter dated December 1,1978, as an interim procedure during final stage of implementation of the feeder-traveler system which includes G-letters until the Standard Division Procedures 'and the Quality Assurance Program Manual have been revised.
The inspector will review the revised Quality Assurance Program Manual and implementing procedures that address tne feeder-traveler system and the G-letters on a subsequent inspection.
2263 289 DETAILS SECTION I (Prepared by V. H. Hunter)
A.
Persons Contacted
- J. E. Turner, Division Manager
- D. J. Bates, Quality Assurance Engineer
- T. V. Doyle, Purchasing Manager
- C. M. Ericson, Manufacturing Manager
- J. A. Krul, Design Engineering Manager
- J. P. Mortara, Quality Assurance Manager
- J. A. Tortorice, Component Design Manager
- T. D. Miller, Product Assurance Manager A. N. Frevold, Senior NDE Technician C. L. Brown, NDT Supervisor A. J. Graham, Senior Buyer H. W. Kerch, Quality Engineer
- Denotef those in attendance at the Exit Interview Meeting.
B.
General Information 1.
Initial discussions with management representatives disclosed the following information:
a.
Due to a recent reorganization certain key management positions have been changed. The following changes of current personnel / positions were noted.
Division General Manager - J. E. Turner Programs Control Manager - H. A. Vedner Programs Planning Manager - C. R. Madonti Traffic Manager - A. H. Bandman Production Cost and Stratigic Planning Manager - W. N. Byerly Special Projects Manager - D. A. Shambaugh Special Projects Manager - J. J. Wallace Product Assurance Manager - T. D. Miller Manufacturing Operations Manager - J. M. Divens Special Engineering Manager - P. F. Derosa Design Engineering Manager - J. A. Krul Quality Assurance Manager - J. P. Mortara b.
Effective January,1979, a second resident Authorized Nuclear Inspector has been assigned to the Tampa facility.
2263 290
. C.
Inspections and Tests 1.
Objectives The objectives of this area of the inspection were to verify that the nondestructive testing procedures used by the vendor meets ASME Code requirements, applicable NRC regulations, and contractual requirements.
Further, to verify these procedures were being utilized by qualified personnel in accordance with the vendors approved Quality Assurance Program.
2.
Method of Accomplishment The preceding objectives were accomplished by:
a.
Review of Section 10.0 of the ASME accepted QA Manual titled, " Nondestructive Examination, Non NDE Examination and Special Processes."
b.
Review of the following procedures:
(1) 84350LA, Sub. 7, titled, " Ultrasonic Test of Weld Deposited Cladding."
(2) 84350LL, Sub. 2, titled, " Ultrasonic Test of Welds."
(3) Magnetic Particle procedure 84350NM, Revision 8.
(4) 84350 RT, Sub. 8, titled, " Radiographic Inspection."
(5) 84350JA, Sub.10, titled, " Dye Penetrant Inspection."
c.
Review of personnel qualifications for fourteen non-destructive test personnel to the requirements of SNT-TC-1A.
d.
Observed the following in-process nondestructive tests including procedure review, performance, and documented results.
(1) Magnetic Particle test of post stressed feedwater nozzle weld for steam generator identified on shop order 2271.
(2) Radiography of the manway to shell weld of the upper assembly for steam generator identified on shop order 2274.
2263 291
- (3)
Liquid penetrant test of closure rings for steam generator identified on shop order 2991.
It was verified that the above tests were performed by qualified personnel in accordance with approved procedures.
3.
Inspection Findings a.
Deviations None were identified.
b.
Unresolved Items None were identified.
D.
Welding Material Control 1.
Objective The objective of this area of the inspection was to verify that weld material was identified and controlled until it is consumed in-process in accordance with applicable ASME Codes and NRC regulations.
2.
Method of Accomplishment The preceding objective was accomplished by:
a.
Review of Section 9.0 of the ASME accepted QA Manual, titled, " Welding Qualification and Control."
b.
Review of Material Specification 82148R, Revision B, dated July 7,1976.
c.
Review of Purchase Order 545-500172-22.
d.
Review of Process Specification 83050RM, Sub.1, titled,
" Welding Electrode Baking for Nuclear Power Components."
e.
Review of Standard Division Procedure PQ3-006.0.
f.
Observed the following in-process welding to verify imple-mentation of the above procedures:
2263 292
. (1) Welding of long seam of pressurizer identified '
on shop order 2591C.
(2) The circumferential weld of pressurizer shell segment 2161BL to that cf 2161DL.
(3) Repair weld of H seam of pressurizer identified on shop order 2551.
(4) Safe end to nozzle welds of a lower pressurizer head identified on shop order 1827.
g.
Review of Material Requiremcats Drawing dated September 24, 1977, Change 1.
h.
Review of Technical Quality Assurance Instruction (TQAI) 1.5.2, Revision D.
i.
Review of welder's check out log form QCWC-1, Revision C of Weld Station B-800.
j.
Visual observation of in-process material receiving to verify that permanent identification of materials were established and maintained.
3.
Inspection Findings a.
Deviations (1) Technical Quality Assurance Instruction (TQAI) 1.5.2, Revision D, states in part, "Will maintain a log of welders to whom electrodes are issued and from whom electrodes are received."
The inspector observed that the welders check out log form QCWC-1, Revision C, being used at weld station B-800, could not account for 110 weld rods issued to three (3) welders on the previous shift.
In-process welding in station B-800 was identified as a shipping cover for shop order 2973.
The inspector further observed that this condition was typical of the total of fourteen welder check out logs reviewed in station B-800.
(Refer to Item A of Enclosure).
(2) Paragraph 2, Part 1, of Process Specification 83050RM states, " Electrodes shall not be exposed to ambient temperature and humidity for longer than two (2) 2263 293
. hours without being rebaked in the above cycle, providing identity is maintained." The above reference is specifically addressed to low hydrogen electrodes only, e.g. 9018.
However, the welders check-out log form QCWC-1 (referenced in paragraph 3.a.(1) of this report) imposes the same restrictions on both inconel and stainless steel electrodes. As a result of the above, the inspector observed the following:
(a) The welder in station B-100 had checked out 26 inconel electrodes at 12 noon to be used in safe end to nozzle welds for lower pressurizer head identified in shop order 1827. At 3 pm it was noted that this welder was still welding with 8 of the 26 electrodes checked out at noon.
(b) Two (2) welders in station D-200 had checked out 9018 electrodes (low hydrogen) at start of shift (7:30 am) and were still welding with these electrodes when the inspector checked the welders check out log at 10:15 am.
(Refer to Item B of Enclosure).
(3)
(Refer to Item C of Enclosure.)
b.
Unresolved Items None were identified.
E.
Exit Interview The inspector met with management representatives (denoted in paragraph A) at the conclusion of the inspection on January 12, 1979. The inspector summarized the scope and findings of the inspection. The management representatives agreed with the inspection findings and advised the inspector that due to the recent reorganization and on-going changes in the Quality Assurance system, an in-depth review of the Tampa facility will be conducted during the first calender quarter of 1979.
2263 294
. DETAILS SECTION II (Prepared by Wm. D. Kelley)
A.
Persons Contacted Westinghouse Electric Corp. - Power Systems Co. - Tanpa Division D. J. Bates, QA Engineer K. Clinton, Senior Structural Engineer W. Courtney, Senior Quality Assurance Engineer W. Jacobs, Senior Contract Administrator A. Rudolph, Associate Contract Administrator J. Tortorice, Component Design Manager L. Van Duzer, Manager of Facilities and Services Purchasing R. Wedler, Cognizant Design Engineer B.
Design Verification 1.
Objectives The objectives of this area of the inspection were to verify that:
a.
Procedures had been prepared and approved by the vendor to prescribe a system for design verification which is consistent with NRC rules and regulations, ASME Code requirements, and the vendor's commitments in the ASME accepted Quality Assurance Program.
b.
The design verification procedures are 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 1 (1) Section 3.0, Contract Control (2) Section 4.0, Control of Design Functions (3) Section 12.0, Nonconformance Control (4) Section 13.0, Corrective Action g3
-9 to verify the vendor had established procedures to prescribe a system for design verification.
b.
Reviewed the following documents to verify procedures had been prepared by the designated authority, approved by management, and reviewed by QA.
(1) SDP Number PQ3-003.0, effective date October 25, 1977, Preparation of Emergency Manufacturing Information.
(2) SDP Number PQ3-002.1, effective date, November 9, 1978, G-Letter procedure-(3) W-Tampa Division letter dated December 1, 1978, Removal of IPP's from the shop.
(4) SDP Number PQ2-004.0, effective date, October 20, 1977, Release and Control of Design Specifications.
(5) SDP Number PQ2-006.0, effective date, February 14, 1977, Manufacturer's Data Report for Nuclear Vessels and Data Plates.
c.
Reviewed to verify it contained measures to verify adequacy of design verification, required the design verification to consider importance to safety, identify method of performing design verification, identify items to be addressed during design review, and prescribes the requirements for performing verification by alternate calculations or by qualification test.
(1) W-PWR Systems Div. General Order Number MI-25310AR6/AR5 dated May 5, 1977.
(2) W-PWRSD, Equipment Specification 953362, Revision 0, Replacement Steam Generators.
(3) W-NSGD, Engineering Change Notices (a) 22932 1447E53 Top TSP (b) 22932 1447E52 Lower TSP (c) 22932 1446E85 FDB b
. d.
Reviewed one (1) design verification to verify implementa-tion of design verification procedures.
e.
Interviews with personnel to verify ~ they were knowledgeable in the standard applicable to design verification.
3.
Findings a.
Deviations None were identified.
b.
Unresolved Item W-PSD Tampa Division issued their letter dated December 1, 1978, as an interim procedure during the final stage of implementation for the Feeder-Traveler system which includes the G-letter until the Standard Division Procedures and the Quality Assurance Manual has been revised and submitted to the Authorized Inspection Agency's Specialist for acceptance. The Authorized Inspection Agency's Specialist is cognizant of the revisions.
The G-letter is an approved engineering document which conveys Engineering or Manufacturing specifications for changes due to emergency condition, special conditions of a customer's order or development work.
The inspector will review the revised Quality Assurance Manual and implementing procedures that address Feeder-Traveler System and the G-letter on a subsequent inspection.
C.
Procurement Source Selection 1.
Objectives The objectives of this area of the inspection were to verify:
a.
Procedures had been prepared and approved by the vendor to prescribe a system for procurement source selections, bid evaluation, and contract award which is consistent with NRC rules and regulations, ASME Code requirements, and the vendor's commitments in the ASME accepted Quality Assurance Program.
2263 297
. b.
The procurement source selection, bid evaluation, and contract award procedures are 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 1.
(1) Section 3.0, Contract Control (2) Section 5.0, Control of Purchases & Services (3) Section 12.0, Nonconformance Control (4) Section 14.0, Quality Audits to verify that the vendor had established procedures for procurement source selection, bid evaluation, and award of contract.
b.
Review of:
(1) WTD SDP 1-007.1, Bid Proposal Procedure (2) WTD SDP 4-003.2, Material Supplier Acceptance & Audit (3) WTD Approved Supplier List - Part A, Revision 27 (4) WTD SDP 1-009.3, Field Deficiency Report (5) WTO SDP 4-001.3, Purchase 0rder Procedure (6) WTD SDP 4-007.2, Changes to Purchase Order Information (7) Six (6) WRD-100-A, Forms Supplier Quality Assurance System Evaluation (8) WTD Purchase Orders 545-5974-F400 545-6520-253M 2263 298 545-6365-002MI 545-5743-F259 545-S00061-31 545-5742-F253
. to verify that procurement source selection, bid evaluation, and contract award procedures were prepared by the designated authority, approved by management, and reviewed by QA.
c.
Review of the procurement source selection procedure and verified that it provided for integrated action and evalu-ation of supplier's history.
d.
Review of the bid evaluation and contract award procedure and verified that it provided for (1) measures to assure the supplier's bid conforms to the procurement document, (2) bid evaluations were made by designated individual, (3) resolution of unacceptable conditions.
e.
Review of six sets of procurement documents for source selection, bid evaluation and contract award documents to determine that the procedures and procurement documents were available to the person responsible for the quality activity and that the vendor procedures are being properly and effectively implemented.
3.
Findings Within this area of the inspection no deviations or unresolved items were identified.
2263 299
-