ML19276E767
| ML19276E767 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 01/08/1979 |
| From: | Foster W, Hunnicutt D NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19276E762 | List: |
| References | |
| REF-QA-99900230 NUDOCS 7903200586 | |
| Download: ML19276E767 (9) | |
Text
h U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY CO:@tISSION OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT REGICN IV Report?b.
99900230/78-01 Program No.
51400 Compa.ny:
The Anaconda Company Wire and Cable Division Greenwich Office Park 3 Greenwich, Connecticut 06830 Inspection at: Marion, Indiana Inspection Conducted:
December 11-14, 1978 a
Inspector:
M/ I N Ev.'.
1/ /,9 3
W. E. Foster, Contractor Inspector, Vendor Date Inspection 3 ranch 7 ' ',
Approved by:
/-
L'f
,7 D. M. Hunnicutt, Chief, ComponentsSection II Date Vendor Inspection Branch Sumary:
Inspection on December 11-14, 1978 (99900230/78-01).
Areas Irisoected: Action on nine (9) previously identified inspection findings.
Implementation of Topical Report AWC-75-A, Revision 1, dated November 1,1976, including corrective action,; quality assurance records; and audits. The inspection involved twenty-seven (27) inspector-hours on site.
Results:
In the four (4) areas inspected, no apparent deviations or unresolved items were identified in two (2) areas; the following deviations were identified in the remaining two (2) areas.
Deviations: Action on Previous Inspection Findings - Failure to take comitted corrective actions / preventive measures relative to deviations at paragraphs C.3.a.(1) and E.3.a. in Inspection Report No. 77-02 (Enclosure, Items A. and C.).
An additional deviation was identified during evaluation of the corrective action response letter dated December 16, 1977 (Enclosure Item B.).
Audits - Had not been conducted and reported.as required by paragraph 18.3.1 of the Topical Report, and paragraphs 3.4 and 3.5 of Inspection Manual Procedure No. 700 (Enclosure, Item D.).
7903200560 Performar.ce not consistent with Criterion XVIII of Appendix B to 10 CFR 50 (Enclosure, Item E.).
Unresch=d Items:
ilone.
DETAILS SECTIO'l A.
Pers:ns Contacted R. F. Bonnett, Engineer - Quality Assurance S. C:ople, Administrative Manager - Quality Assurance L. Floyd, Analyst - Quality Assurance
- J. Esaton, Manager - Planning and Systems B. Nffaker, Supervisor - Technical Sales Service
- H. i untsinger, Technician - Power Cable Quality Assurance D. lessop, Engineer - Chief Process
- B. J:nes, Manager - Engineering A. C. Oradat, Chief Inspector
- A. E. Rosen, Manager - Power Cable Quality Assurance
- H. A. Shaw, Manager - Operations
- G. F. Somers, Manager - Plant Quality Assurance
- R. C. Wolf, Plant Manager
- D. M. Wyatt, Manager - Sales Service
- Attended exit interview.
B.
Action on Previous Insoection Findings 1.
(0 pen) Deviation (Inspection Report No. 77-02):
Results of verification point calibration had not been reviewed and instrument being checked and the resistor used had not been identified. The inspector found that contrary to the corrective action response letter dated December 16, 1977, a schedule of reviews had not been established and point calibrations had not been reviewed and signed off on a daily schedule.
(See Enclosure, Item A.).
During evaluation of the corrective action response letter, it was deter.ined that the individual performing verification of calibration had not annotated the necessary forms as required by various procedures.
(See Enclosure, Item B.).
2.
(Closed) Deviation (Inspection Report No. 77-02): A system had not been implemented fN the periodic calibration of timers used in detennining specified times of acceptance tests.
The inspector verified that timers are calibrated by an independent laboratory on an annual schedule; also, timers were observed to exhibit current calibration labels.
3.
(Closed) Deviation (Inspection Report No. 77-02):
A system had not been implemented for scheduled inspection maintenance, and
_4 calibration of speed measuring devices, temperature controllers and dial thermcmeters. The inspector observed that "For Reference Only" labels had been attached to instrumentation not being used for process control.
4.
(Closed) Deviation (Inspection Report flo. 77-02): The Quality Assurance Department had not performed secondary calibrations on Temperature Recorders and Controllers, Bridges, and Megohmeters.
The inspector verified that individuals performing secondary calibrations report functionally to the Plant QA Manager for this activity.
5.
(Closed) Deviation (Inspection Report No. 77-02):
Calibration labels for large scales did not have provisions for a due date nor had the information been placed on the labels. The inspector observed that calibration labels on large scales displayed due dates.
6.
(Closed) Deviation (Inspection Report flo. 77-02): Data he.ng transcribed from an improvised fonn. The inspector %.: 4 U.3t improvised forms were not in use and an Avoid Ve? ai Orders notice prohibiting the practice had been postm 7.
(Closed) Deviation (Inspection Report No. /
- .)
Preliminary test squares of Process Tags had not been annotated N/A and initialed when preliminary test was not applicable. The inspector verified the applicable Inspection Notice, and all others, had been deleted from the QA Program.
8.
(0 pen) Deviation (Inspection Report No. 77-02): Rework Tag did not shaw that inspection and test after rework had been performed.
The inspector found that contrary to the corrective action response letter dated December 16, 1977, a written instruction had not been issued to Quality Assurance personnel to review each Rework Tag to verify it had been completed properly and to sign in the appropriate place after the required specification inspections and tests had been performed.
(See Enclosure, Item C.).
9.
(Closed) Unresolved Item (Inspection Report No. 77-02):
Process Tags with " Final Inspection" blocks punched out almost completely; no documented instructions existed for voiding a punch. The inspector verified a memorandum had been initiated which prohibits voiding a punch by additional punching and detailing steps for preparing new tags should the need occur.
C.
Corrective Action 1.
Objectives The objectives of this area of the inspection were to verify that:
a.
Measures had been established to assure that conditions adverse to quality, such as failures, malfunctions, deficiencies, deviations, defective material and equipment, and nonconformances had been promptly identified and corrected.
b.
Established measures assured that the cause of the condition had been determined and corrective action taken to preclude repetition in the case of significant conditions adverse to quality.
c.
The identification of the significant condition adverse to quality, the cause of the condition and the corrective action taken had been documented and reported to appropriate levels of management.
d.
Established measures had been implemented.
2.
Method of Accomolishment The preceding objecti.as were accomplished by:
a.
Review of the following Customer Purchase Orders (PO) to verify corrective action had been invoked:
(1) Arizona Public Service Company P.O. flo. 10407-13-EM-029, dated February 14, 1977.
(2) United Engineers and Constructors P.O. fio. 9763.006-113-1, dated May 5, 1978.
b.
Review of Topical Report AWC-75-A, Revision 1, Sections 15, and 16, dated Tiovember 1,1976, to verify measures had been established for objectives a, b, and c.
c.
Review of the following documents to verify that established measures had been implemented:
(1) Twelve (12) fictice of fionconforming Material Reports dated tiovember 3, 1977 to July 3, 1978, and
-6 (2) Seven (7) Corrective Action Frojects with completion dates of May 27, 1977 to May 16, 1978 with two (2) not completed.
3.
Findings Within this area of the inspection, no deviations or unresolved items were identifi.ed.
The identified customer P.O.s invoked Corr :ctive Action.
D.
Quality Assurance Records 1.
Objectives The objectives of this area of the inspection were to verify that:
a.
Sufficient records had been maintained to furnish evidence of activities affecting quality.
b.
Records included the foliowing, at least:
(1) Operating logs and results of reviews, inspections, tests, audits, monitoring of work performance, and material analyses, and (2) Qualification of personnel, procedures, and equipment.
c.
Inspection and test records, as a minimum:
(1)
Identified the inspector or data recorder, (2) Type of observation, results, acceptability, and (3) Action taken in connection with any deficiencies noted.
d.
Records were identifiable and retrievable, e.
Requirements had been established concerning retention; such as, duration, location, and assigned responsibility.
2.
Method of Accomplishment The preceding objectives were accomplished by:
a.
Review of the following Customer Purchase Orders (P.O.) to verify quality assurance records had been invoked:
(1) Arizona Public Service Company P.O. No. 10407-13-EM-029, dated February 14, 1977.
(2) United Engineers and Constructors P0 No. 9763.006-113-1, dated May 5, 1978.
b.
' uiew of the following documents to verify the QA Program addressed quality assurance record initiation and retention:
(1) Tojical Report AWC-75-A, Revision 1, Section 17, dated November 1, 1976.
(2) Maintenance of QA Files, dated June 25, 1976.
c.
Review of various files in the QA Department to verify the records were in accordance with objectives a. through d.
d.
Review of the record storage area to verify records were retrievable and maintained in an environment that impeded deterioration.
3.
Findings Within this area of the inspection, no deviations or unresolved items were identified.
The identified customer P0s invoked Quality Assurance Records.
E.
Audits 1.
Objectives The object.ves of this area of the inspection were to verify that:
a.
A comprehensive system of planned and periodic audits had been carried out to verify ty ?liance with all aspects of the quality assurance prograc. and to determine the effectiveness of the program.
b.
Audits had been performed in accordance with the written procedures or checklists oy appropriately trained personnel not having direct respcat.ibilities in the areas being audited.
c.
Audit results had been documented and reviewed by management having responsibility in the area audited.
. d.
Followup action, including re-audit of deficient areas, had been taken.
2.
Method of Accomolishment The precedinc objectives were accomplished by:
Review of the following Customer Purchase Orders (P.O.) to a.
verify audits had been invoked:
(1) Arizona Public Service Company P.O. No. 10407-13-EM-0?),
dated February 14, 1977.
(2) United Engineers and Constructors P.O. No. 9763.006-113-1, dated May 5, 1978.
b.
Review of the following documents to verify the QA Program a.idressed audits:
(1) Topical Report AWC-75-A, Revision 1, Section 18, dated November 1, 1976.
(2)
Inspection Manual Procedure No. 589, dated February 19, 1975, entitled Power Cable luality Assurance System Audit and Checklist.
(3)
Inspection Manual Procedure No. 700, dated November 10, 1976, entitled Procedure for Conducting Internal Plant Quality Audits.
c.
Review of completed audit checklists to verify periodic audits had been conducted and results documented.
^
d.
Review of Audit Report No. 5-78 and related memoranda to verify results had been documenced and followup action had been taken.
e.
Review of two (2) Corrective Action Projects and related memoranda to verify followup action had been taken.
3.
Findings a.
Deviations From Commitment (1) See Enclosure, Item D.
(2) See Enclosure, Item E.
_g.
The identified customer P.O.s invoked Audits.
b.
Unresolved Items None.
F.
Exi: Interview 1.
The inspector met with management representatives denoted in paragraph A. at the conclusion of the inspection on December 14, 1978.
2.
The following subjects were discussed:
a.
Areas inspected.
b.
Deviations identified.
c.
Centractor response to the report.
Management was requested to structure their response under headings of corrective actions, preventive measures, and dates for each deviation.
3.
Management representatives acknowledged the comments of the inspector.
-