ML19275A736
| ML19275A736 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 08/06/1979 |
| From: | NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19275A729 | List: |
| References | |
| REF-QA-99900004 99900004-79-2, NUDOCS 7910190056 | |
| Download: ML19275A736 (2) | |
Text
General Atomic Company Docket No.
99900004/79-02 NOTICE OF DEVIATION Based on the results of an NRC inspection conducted on July 16-19, 1979, it appears that certain of your activities were not conducted in accordance with h3C requirements.
Criterion " of Appendix B to 10 CFR 50 states:
" Activities affecting quality shall be prescribed by documented instru-ctions, procedures, or drawings, of a type appropriate to the circum-stances and shall be accomplished in accordance with these instructions, procedures, or drawings.
Instructions, procedures, or drawings shall include appropriate quantitative or qualitative acceptance criteria for determining that important activities have been satisfactorily accomplished."
Deviations from these requirements are as follows:
A.
In the area of Document Control, Section 6 of the Quality Assurance Manual provides the requirements to be followed.
Eumples of deviations from section 6 requirements are:
1.
Paragraph 2.2.1(c) requires documents be " identified by a unique number...
Contrary to the above, wall charts, considered to be documents, were found at the carbonization and heat treat furnaces which had parameters listed (some of which were apparently out-of-date), but were not identified with a unique number.
2.
Paragraph 2.2.1(c) requires documents that have a unique " issue letter or number.
Contrary to the above, two (2) parameter sheets, considered to be documents, were found at the heat treat furnace with the same issue number, and no Ictter, but each sheet listed different parameters.
3.
Paragraph 3.3 requires that, "Each product document shall be re-viewed prior to release to assure that all requirements are.
accurately stated."
Contrary to the above, although procedure FPD 401, Carbonizing Fuel Rods, had been revised on May 30, 1979, and reviewed and released, it did not accurately incorporate the current firing parameters.
1179 076 076 7920390
2 4.
Paragraph 2.2.1(d) requires prompt. distribution of documents to the location where the activity is to be performed.
Contrarytotheabove,thecurrentRevisionG,$fprocedureFPD-403, final heat treat furnaces, dated April 30, 1979, was not in the area where the activity is performed.
5.
Paragraph 2.2 1(e) requires procedures be "used at the location where the activity is performed."
Contrary to '.he above, the firing parameters of procedure FPD-412, Carbonization Furnace Calibration, Revision C, were not used for the March 29, 1979, calibration of the carbonization furnace.
B.
The General Atomic Quality Assurance Manual, Section 6, paragraph 2.3, states that, "The inspection planning document shall be prepared...."
Contrary to the above, an inspection plan..ing document was not prepared for the control of contamination levels of the cooling and firing gases of the heat treat furnace, based on approved fuel specification GA10600, section 5.2.5.1, paragraph 3.4.
1179 077