ML19275A551
| ML19275A551 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 06/27/1979 |
| From: | Foster W NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19275A539 | List: |
| References | |
| REF-QA-99900360 99900360-79-1, NUDOCS 7910040633 | |
| Download: ML19275A551 (6) | |
Text
U. S. NUCI. EAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT REGION IV Report No. 99900360/79-01 Program No. 51400 Company:
ESB Incorporated Exide Industrail Battery Division 101 Gibraltar Road Horsham, Pennsylvania Inspection at: Highway 15 South Samter, South Carolina 29150 Inspection Conducted: May 30 - June 1, 1979 Inspector:
-(0 h,
)/
~~f
-~
57.
. F ster",'6nfracpop n'spector Date Vendo nspection Brdnch 1
T
//
h 7'7k Approved by:
/
D. MOnfcutt, Ch (
, ComponentsSection II Date Vendor Inspection ranch Summary:
Inspection on May 30 - June 1, 1979 (99900360/79-01)
Areas Inspected:
Implementation of 10 CFR 50, Appendix B criteria, and applicable codes and standards, including quality assurance program; instructions, procedures, and drawings; and change control.
The initial management meeting was also conducted.
The inspection involved eighteen (18) inspector-hours on site.
Resuly :
In the three (3) arcas inspected, no unresolved items were identified.
The following deviations were identified:
Deviations: Quality Assurance Program - Practices were not consistent with Appendix B to 10 CFR 50; and QA Manual commitments (Notice of Deviation, Item A).
Instructions, Procedures, and Drawings - Practices were not consistent with Appendix B to 10 CFR 50; QC Procedures; and Purchase Requirements commitments (Notice of Deviation, Item B).
Change Control - Practices were not consistent with, Appendix B to 10 CFR 50; and QC Procedure commitments (Notice of Deviation, Item C).
The inspector lacked sufficient time to complete this area of the inspection.
1101 141 (T910 0 4e[3.3
2 DETAILS SECTION A.
Persons Contacted
- A. P. Bracalente, Plant Manager K. S. Brown, Supervisor, Purchasing
- L. R. Brown, Manager, Material
- T. Frye, Manager, Quality Control
- D. P. Gibson, Jr., Manager, Employee Relations
- J. Hansell, Manager, Manufacturing (SE Region)
J. McCord, Technician, Laboratory D. A. Racey, Area Controller
- D. Redmond, Manager, Production
- H. C. Williams, Manager, Engineering
- Attended Exit Interview.
B.
Initial Management Meeting 1.
Objectives An initial management meeting was conducted to acquaint the vendor's management with the NRC responsibility to protect the health and safety of the public and to inform the.: of certain responsibilities imposed on vendors by the " Energy Reorganization Act of 1974" (Public Law 93-438).
Those in attendance were:
A. P. Bracalente, Plant Manager L. R. Brown, Manager, Material T. Frye, Manager, Quality Control J. Hansell, Manager, Manufacturing (SE Region)
D. Redmond, Manager, Production H. C. Williams, Manager, Engineering 2.
Method of Accomplishment The preceding objectives were accomplished by:
a.
Describing the historical events that indicated the need for the Vendor Inspection Program (VIP).
b.
Explaining the inspection base and how the inspections are conducted.
c.
Describing how inspection results are documented and how proprietary items are handled, including the vendor's opportunity to review the report for the purpose of identifying items considered to be proprietary.
I101 142
3 d.
Describing the vendor's responsibility in responding to identified enforcement items relating to:
(1) Correction of the identified deviation.
(2) Action to be implemented to prevent recurrence.
(3) The dates when (1) and (2) above are planned, will be implemented or completed.
Explaining that all reports and communications are placed in the c.
Public Document Room (PDR).
f.
Explaining the publication and function of the " White Book."
3.
Findings Management summarized the history of this facility and identified the particular batteries supplied for safety-related applications in nuclear generating stations.
C.
Quality Assurance Program 1.
Objectives The objectives of this area of the inspection were to verify that the program had been documented, controls had been established, and the program had been implemented.
2.
Methods of Accomplishment The preceding objectives were accomplished by:
Review of the following documents to verify the program had been a.
documented by written policies, procedures, or instructions:
(1) Quality Assurance Manual, Revision 8, dated January 27, 1979; Section 8, 12, 15, 16, 17, and 18.
(2) Quality Control Procedures, Numbers 58.0, dated May 19, 1975; 30.4.7, dated May 19, 1975; 56.0, dated May 16, 1975; and 57.0, dated August 24, 1976.
b.
Review of hardware covered by the program to verify identification had been established.
c.
Review of the following activities to verify the program had been implemented:
Identification and Control of Materials, Parts, and Components; Control of Measuring and Test Equipment; Nonconforming Materials, Parts, or Components; Corrective Action; Quality Assurance Records; and Audits.
4 3.
Findings a.
Deviations From Commitment See Notice of Deviation, Item A.
b.
Unresolved Items None.
D.
Instructions, Procedures, and Drawings 1.
Objectives The objectives of this area of the inspection were to verify that activities affecting quality had been prescribed by documented instruc-tions, procedures, or drawings which included quantitative or qualitative acceptance criteria.
Also, to verify that tasks had been accomplished in accordance with those documented instructions: procedures, or drawings.
2.
Methods of Accomplishment The preceding objectives were accomplished by:
Review of the following to verify that activities affecting quality a.
had been prescribed by documented instructions, procedures, or drawings which included quantitative or qualitative acceptance criteria: Quality Assurance Manual, Revision 8, dated January 27, 1979, Section 5; Quality Control Procedures, Numbers 50.0(S), dated May 14, 1979; 86.1.1(S), dated December 30, 1977; 101.0(S), dated April 17, 1979; 102.3(S), dated February 13, 1978, and April 9, 1979; 102.4(S), dated December 28, 1977; Manufacturing Requirements, Numbers 2, Section 3(S)(R), dated May 4, 1977; 86, Section 1, dated September 27, 1977; 101(P)(S)(R), Section 20.1, dated May 19, 1976; Purchase Requirements No. 2, Section 2, dated September 29, 1977; Quality Characteristics List No. 86.1.1, dated September 22, 1975; and Materials Testing Procedure No. 15, dated March 2, 1976.
b.
Review of the following to verify tasks had been accomplished in accordance with documented instructions, procedures, or drawings:
Red Lead Analysis Record dated December 6, 1977, through April 25, 1979; Manufacturers Certificate of Compliance to Materials Specifica-tion dated December 6, 1977, January 14, 1978, and March 17, 1978; Small Parts Inspection Record for Veek Ending May 11, 1979; Station-ary Inspection and Process Verification Records for Week Ending Februa ry 17, 24, 1978; March 3, 10, 17, 24, 1978; October 6, 13, 20, 1978; and March 2, 9, 16, 23, 1979; and Control Charts for Small Parts Casting Pot No. 3, dated January 8 - May 30, 1979.
1i0l 144
5 3.
Findings a.
Deviation From Commitment See Notice of Deviation, Item B.
Referencing the Notice Of Deviation:
Item C.1. - Quality Control Procedure No. 50.0(S) is dated May 14, 1979; however, the Red Lead Analysis Records indicated analysis had been accomplished since December 6, 1977, but the inspector could not identify the requirement which predated May 14, 1979.
Purchase Requirements No. 2, Section 2, is dated September 29, 1977, which correlates with the Red Lead Analysis Records.
While the records indication of numerous (twenty-three (23)) readings of Apparent Density which exceeded the requirement are an area of concern, of equal concern is the lack of acceptance or comparison criteria for in-house (Exide) analysis of red lead.
b.
Unresolved Items None.
E.
Change Control 1.
Objectives The objectives of this area of the inspection were to verify that changes to procurement documents had been subjected to the same degree of control as that utilized in the origination; chantes to instructions and procedures had been reviewed for adequacy and approved for release by authorized personnel, distributed to and used at the location where the prescribed activity is performed; and measures had been established to control materials, parts, or components which did not conform to requirements.
2.
Methods of Accomplishment The preceding objectives were accomplished by:
Review of the following to verify procurement documents and their changes required controls and had been controlled: Quality Assurance Manual, Revision 8, dated January 27, 1979, Section 4; Quality Control Procedure No. 30.7, dated November 1, 1978; Division Purchasing Manual, dated January 9, 1978; Purchase Orders, Numbers 42324, dated March 16, 1979; 42400, dated March 26, 1979; 42381, dated March 23, 1979; 42387, dated March 23, 1979; and 42386, dated March 25, 1979.
The' inspector lacked sufficient time to complete this area of the inspection.
I101 145
6 3.
Findings a.
Deviation From Commitment See Fotice of Deviation, Item C.
b.
Unresolved Items None.
G.
Exit Interview 1.
The inspector met with management representatives denoted in paragraph A. at the conclusion of the inspection on June 1,1979.
2.
The following subjects were discussed:
a.
Areas inspected.
b.
Deviations identified.
c.
Contractor response to the report.
The contractor was requested to structure his response under headings of corrective action, preventive measures, and dates for each deviation.
3.
Management expressed a desire that Stationary and Process Verification Records more current than 1978 be evaluated.
The inspector reviewed his notes and provided the information and stated that additional, current information would be included in the rcport.
110I i46