ML19270H150
| ML19270H150 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 03/29/1979 |
| From: | Sutton J, Whitesell D NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19270H147 | List: |
| References | |
| REF-QA-99900114 99900114-79-1, NUDOCS 7906230073 | |
| Download: ML19270H150 (10) | |
Text
.
U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT REGION IV Report No.
99900114/79-01 Program No.
51300 Company:
Lamco Industries Incorporated El Cajon, California 92020 Inspection Conducted:
February 26 - March 3, 1979 Inspector:
h // &
5/29/19 J. W. Sutton, Contractor Inspector, Vendor Date Inspection Branch Approved by:
I J/29 /79 D. E. Whitesell, Chief, ComponentsSection I, Date Vendor Inspection Branch Summary Inspection on February 26 - March 3, 1979 (99900114/79-01).
Areas Inspected:
Implementation of 10 CFR 50, Appendix B, and applicable codes and standards including nondestructive examination personnel quali-fications, penetrant examination, magnetic particle examination, radio-graphic examination, ultrasonic examination, audits, review of vendors activities, and action on previous inspection findings. The inspection involved thirty-four (34) inspector-hours on site.
Results:
In the eight (8) areas inspected, no apparent deviations or unresolved items were identified in six (6) areas.
The following was identified an the remaining two (2) areas.
Deviations: MT Examinations - Calibrations Documentation for MT Equipment not available (Enclosure, Notice of Deviation).
Unresolved Items: UT Examination-clarification concerning the documentation of the results of NDE examinations performed prior to Heat Treat Process, required.
(Details Section, Paragraph G.3.b) 2247 278 790 S ~u.2 og
. Detail Section A.
Persons Contacted P
- R. R. Laser, President
- L. Logan, Director, Manufacturing
- L.
L. Lindahl, Director, Material Control
- R. N. Mathias, Director, Quality Assurance
- L. MacFaddin, Director, Contracts
- R. E. Smith, Director, Engineering S. Eggleston, Supervisor, NDE, Level III K. Anderson, Weld Foreman R. Sutton, Weld Engineer Hartford Steam Boiler Inspection and Insurance Company
- H. L. Robison, Authorized Nuclear Inspector
- J. M. Stark, Authorized Nuclear Inspector Supervisor
- Denotes those persons who attended the exit interview. (See Paragraph J.)
B.
Action on Previous Inspection Findings 1.
(Closed) Deviation Item A (Inspection Report 78-02):
Nonconforming material designated as scrap not disposed of as specified. The inspector verified that the control area does not contain any scrap items. The area is now controlled by one person.
The written instructions issued on August 8,1978 and the Internal Audit performed on October 28, 1978, were reviewed for content.
2.
(Closed) Deviation Item B (Inspection Report 78-02):
Control of production flux core arc welding not consistent with Criterion IX, and the amperage and gas flow rate requirements of the applicable welding procedure specification.
The inspector verified that written instructions were generated on August 8,1978, for the NDE inspectors to perform 100 percent surveillance of welds. A log for the inspector's surveillance signoffs was reviewed.
Complete (100 percent) surveillance of weld activities is being performed.
3.
(Closed) Deviation Item C (Inspection Report 78-02): The qualifica-tion of flux core welding materials was not implemented in a manner consistent with the ASME Code,Section III, concerning the interpass temperature selection.
2247 279 9
. The inspector verified that Weld Wire Heat Na. 950982 had been requalified consistent with Code requirements. The inspector reviewed the internal audit conducted on October 27, 1978, imple-mented to prevent recurrence.
4.
(Closed) Deviation Item D (Inspection Report 78-02): The qual-ification records of two (2) welding procedure specifications was not in compliance with the essential variables of Section IX of the ASME Code.
The inspector reviewed the revised PQR test data for WPS Nos.
6881-4 and 6881-5, to verify that the PQR complied with the code.
The internal audit, implemented to prevent recurrence conducted on October 27, 1978, was reviewed for content.
It was verified that the welding engineer is in the process of reviewing all PQR's and WPS's for conformance with applicable requirements.
5.
(Closed) Deviation Item E (Inspection Report 78-02): The qualifica-tion of welding procedure specification was not consistent with the requirements of the ASME Code; Sections III and IX, relative to the impact properties of the material.
The inspector reviewed the revised PQR and WPS 6881-5 and verified that the required mechanical tests had been performed on August 15, 1978. The internai audit performed on October 27, 1978, was reviewed for content. The audits are conducted as part of the ongoing cor-rective action to prevent recurrence.
6.
(Closed) Deviation Item F (Inspection Report 78-02):
Control of temporary attachments not accomplished in accordance with the requirements of the ASME Code.
The inspector reviewed the new procedure M781 to verify that it contains instructions for the welding and removal of temporary attachments.
The QA manual has been revised to indicate the use of the procedure, and it was verified that the procedure is in place and is being properly implemented.
7.
(Closed) Deviation Item G (Inspection Report 78-02):
Control of the accumulated postweld heat treatment time of component weld metal relative to procedure qualification is not in accordance with the ASME Code.
The inspector reviewed the documentation to verify that the weld material had been tested and qualified, after 8 hours9.259259e-5 days <br />0.00222 hours <br />1.322751e-5 weeks <br />3.044e-6 months <br /> at temperature.
In addition all weld materials will be ordered to be at least twice the accumulated time at temperature of the component. The audit report was reviewed to verify that this commitment is properly performed.
2247 280 8.
(Closed) Unresolved Item (Inspection Report 78-02): A component had been fabricated, inspected, accepted and stamped which did not meet design tolerance limits and a nonconformance report had been generated as a result of the buyers rejection.
The inspector verified that a meeting of all QC inspectors had been held and this item discussed.
In addition it was verified that the production traveler has been revised to provide for an added inspec-tion point to verify the design tolerance, and document the activity, by the inspector's sign off and date.
In addition, inspections will also be conducted for alignment after welding.
C.
Nondestructive Examination (NDE) Personnel Qualifications 1.
Objective The objective of this area of the inspection was to verify that Lamco haa implemented the requirements for the qualification and certification of NDE personnel in accordance with the QA Manual and applicable NRC and ASME Code requirements.
2.
Method of Accomplishment The preceding objective was accomplished by:
a.
Review of QA Manual Section N-10, " Control of Special Process and Tests." Paragraphs 3.3.4.2.5 - 4.2.5.1, 4.2.5.2, 4.2.5.3, 4.2.5.4, 4.2.5.5, and 4.2.5.6 to verify that special processes are performed by qualified personnel using qualified procedures.
b.
Review of NDE personnel qualification records.
c.
Review of SNT-TC-1A,1975, " Personnel Qualification and Certification in Nondestructive Testing."
d.
Review of Procedure, " Training and Certification of NDE Personnel," Revision 3, dated July 20, 1976.
e.
Discussion with the Level III Examiners.
3.
Findings a.
Deviation y47 None.
b.
Unresolved Item None.
. c.
General The evidence reviewed demonstrated that special processes are being perfonned by qualified personnel, using qualified proce-dures, consistent with the regulations, Code, and contract commitments.
D.
Penetrant Examination (PT) 1.
Objectives The objectives of this area of the inspection were to verify that:
a.
Nondestructive examination is performed in accordance with approved qualified procedures.
b.
The nondestructive examination procedures meet the requirements of Section V of the ASME Code, c.
The test results are interpreted by qualified personnel.
2.
Method of Accomplishment The preceding objectives were accomplished by:
a.
Review of section N-10 of the QA Manual.
b.
Review of Procedure QIP-PT, dated July,1978 Attachment A, Type I and Attachment B, Type II.
c.
Review of Procedure 16P, Revision 5, dated March 1, 1976.
d.
Review of inspection logs maintained to document the results of penetrant testing.
e.
Review of Certification and Calibration Records of the penetrant examination equipment.
f.
Review of Certifications for Pentrant developer and remover for the following; P300A, K410A, D495A, C183, C132, 303A, SKC-NF, and SKO-NF.
g.
Observation of work in progress.
h.
Discussion with inspection personnel to verify that they are knowledgeable of NDE procedures, requirements, and the acceptance limits.
2247 282
. 3.
Findings Within this area of t' inspection, no deviations or unresolved items were identified.
E.
Iiagnetic Particle Examination (MT) 1.
Objectives The objectives of this area of the inspection were:
a.
To verify that magnetic particle examination procedures used by the manufacturer meet the ASME Code and contract require-
- ments, b.
To verify that magnetic particle examination is being conductea by properly qualified personnel, in accordance with the above procedures and the manufacturers overail QA plan.
2.
Method of Accomplishment The preceding objectives were accomplished by:
a.
Review of Section N-10 of the QA Manual, b.
Review of Procedure QIP-MT, dated July,1978 and 16M, Revision 6, dated March 10, 1976.
Review of the certification and calibration records of c.
testing equipment being used for final inspection.
d.
Observation of the inspections of work in progress, i.e:
Part 688-1-1 (WO-6882RPI) to verify proper implementation of the inspection procedure Discussion with inspection personnel to verify that they e.
are knowledgeable of Procedure requirements and acceptance criteria.
3.
Finding a.
Deviation (See Enclosure, Notice of Deviation.)
During the inspection of MT Testing Units Nos. L11192 and L11290, which had calibration labels attached, it was found that. calibration redords for the equipment were not available.
The inspector was informed that the machines had been cali-brated, but the technician failed to document the calibration 2247 283
. as required.
The two (2) machines were red tcgged and taken out of service.
Both machines were calibrated and the inspector verified the results.
Neither of the n:achines were found to be out of calibration.
Instructions were given to the technicians to prevent recurrence.
No reply to this deviation is required.
b.
Unresolved Item None.
F.
Radiographic Examination (RT) 1.
Objectives The objectives of this area of the inspection were:
To verify that radiographic examination procedures used by a.
the manufacturer meet the requirements of the Code, and contract.
b.
To verify that radiographic examination is being performed by properly qualified personnel, in accordance with the above procedures and the manufacturers QA comnitments.
2.
Method of Accomplishment The preceding objectives were accomplished by:
a.
Review of Section N-10 of the QA Manual.
b.
Review of Procedure QIP-RT.
Review of certification and calibration records of testing c.
equipment.
d.
Observation of work in progress, WO-A8203 AG-DI-820304-03, 820306-06, and 8328J00231-001.
e.
Review of Radiographic film for the above.
f Discussion with inspection personnel.
22k7
. 3.
Findings Within this area of the inspection, no deviations or unresolved items were identified.
G.
Ultrasonic Examination (UT) 1.
Objectives The objectives of this area of the inspection were:
a.
To verify that Ultrasonic Examination procedures used by the manufacturer meet the requirements of the Code, and contract.
b.
To verify that ultrasonic examination is being conducted by properly qualified personnel in accordance with qualified procedures and the manufacturers QA commitments.
2.
Method of Accomplishment The preceding were accomplished by:
a.
Review of Section N-10 of the QA Manual.
b.
Review of Procedurn QIP-UT, dated June 4,1978 and 16UT-1 issued November 8, 1976.
c.
Review of certification and calibration records of testing equipment.
d.
Observation of work in progress, WO-688210 - Part No.
6882-1-1.
e.
Review of the Calibration Sensitivity Block Control Log.
f.
Discussions with inspection personnel.
3.
Findings a.
Deviations None.
b.
Unresolved Items During review of the UT procedures QIP-UT, and 16UT-1, it was noted that the paragraph titled " Records" did not identify 2247 285
_g_
the type of documentation that should be used when NDE examinations are performed prior to the Heat Treat Process.
The vendor presently is examining the components before and after heat treat.
The inspector makes personnel notes of his findings, but the procedures are not clear as to how the results of his NDE examinations, made prior to heat treat are to be documented.
The vendor indicated that this area would be clarified.
H.
Audits 1.
Objective The objective of this area of the inspectinn was to review the audit activities of the company to determine that the audit procedures and schedules are being properly and effectively implemented by the company.
2.
Method of Accomplishment The preceding objective was accomplished by:
a.
Review of the 1978, 1979 internal and management audits.
b.
Review of twelve (12) audit reports conducted during 1978.
Review of impiementation of corrective action taken as a c.
result of the audits.
d.
Discussic 3 th audit personnel.
3.
Findings Within this area of the inspection, no deviations or unresolved items were identified.
I.
Review of Vendors Activities 1.
Objectives The objectives of this area of the inspection were:
a.
To review the Vendors Activities to assess their impact on future IE inspections.
2247 286
- b.
Review of fabrication / manufacturing techniques and equipment.
c.
Review of current work loads.
2.
Method of Accomplishment The foregoing objectives were accomplished by observing the manufacturing / fabrication processes implemented by the vendor.
3.
Results This manufacturer has machining capabilities, and operates primarily as a job shop. A design engineer is available for design work, but most of the nuclear code contracts are for the fabrication of items to the customer's drawings, design specifications, and technical data sheets.
The welding capabilities include manual, semi automatic and automatic processes. Weldments up to 6" can be fabricated.
A new welding facility is being activated.
The new facility provides for twenty-seven (27) welding stations.
The vendor holds current ASME Certificates of Authorization N-1580 and NPT 1581 for class 1, 2, 3, and MC Vessels and Class 2 and 3 tanks, parts, appurtenances and component supports, CS core support structures.
Hartford Steam Boiler Inspection and Insurance Company provides the authorized inspector on a full time basis.
Presently there are fifteen (15) nuclear contracts in house for the manufacture of equipment and personnel air locks and component supports, and constitutes approximately sixty percent (60%) of his work load.
J.
Exit Interview The inspector met with management representatives (denoted in para-graph A.) at the conclusion of the inspection.
The inspector sum-marized the scope and findings of the inspection. The management representatives had no comment in response to the items discussed by the inspector.
2247 287