ML19276E813
| ML19276E813 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 10/26/1978 |
| From: | Kelley W, Whitesell D NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19276E807 | List: |
| References | |
| REF-QA-99900262 NUDOCS 7903210174 | |
| Download: ML19276E813 (12) | |
Text
VEMDCR I:;5?ECTIO:1 REPORT U. S. ?;UCLEAR REGULATORY CC:^!I5510:1 CFFICE OF I';5PECTIO:i n:;D ENFORCEME.;T REGIO 1 IV Report No. 999C0252/73-01 P rog ram '.o.
2--06 J Comoany:
Babcock and Wilcox Control Components International 2562 S. E. Main Street Inspection at:
Irvine, California 92714 Inspection Conducted: October 4, 1978
- s.. '
I
/
Inspectors:
/ ' / / ][. ' -
Ed h /YM W. D. Kelley, Contractor f yspector, Vencor Date f
Inspection Branch V
k' 4 ). W k N b W ~
Cel ZA, /?N
'D. E. Whitesell, Chief, CcmponentsSection I, Date Vendor Inspecticn Branch
/
/)
Approved yi /&s x2 cel CL /"N n
D. E. Whitesell, Cnief, CcmponentsSection I, Date Vendor Inspection Branch Su:anary Inspection on October 4, 1973 (99900252/73-01)
Areas Insaected:
Implementation of 10 CFR 50, Appendix B, and applicable codes and standards, including design verification, manufacturing proces's control, control of 50ecial processes-magnetic particle exanination, and training-welder cualification, also, action on previously icentified items.
the inspection involved sixteen (16) inscector-hours on site by tao (E)
TiRC inspectors.
Results:
In tne five (5) areas inspected, no apparent deviations or urresoived items were identified in two (2) areas.
The folicwing were identified in the remaining three (3) areas.
790321o rb{
_2_
Deviations:
Action on ;:reviously identified it= ras (:etailsSection I, paragrapn 3.1), Design Verification (DetailsSection I, caragra:h C.3.5),
Welder qualification Training (DetailsSection I, cac2grano E.3.b).
Unresolve Items:
None identified.
DETAILS SECTICN I (Prepared b/
- a. D. Kelley)
A.
Persons Contacted Babcock and Wilcox - Co.nconent Controls International
- K. M. Gibson, Vice President, Manufacturing
- T. G. Gorden, Quality Control Supervisor
- A. Riggle, QA Supervisor F. Seger, Director of Engineering
- L.
W. Smith, President J. Stupecky, Project Engineer
- R. E. Topping, Director of QA
- D. A. Wheeler, Vice President, Engineering
- Denotes those persons who attended Exit Interview (See paragraph F.).
B.
Action on Previous Insoection Findings 1.
(0 pen) Deviation (Report No. 77-02, Item A):
Contrary to Criterion IV of Appendix B to 10 CFR 50 and paragraoh NA 4133.7 of Section III to the ASME Code, SW-CC Audit No. OEA-1 indicates that the vendor's quality control system was not consistent with ASME Code or Appendix B of 10 CFR 50.
BW-CC's letter of February 15, 1978, to NRC Region IV, states in part,
... CCI will reaudit this vendor.
This reaudit will be completed by March 10, 1978." The inspector verified that the reaudit had not been acccmplished.
Deviation See Enclosure, Item A.
2.
(Closed) Deviation (Report No. 77-02, Item B):
Contrary to Criterion VII of Appendix 3 to 10 CFR 50 and BW-CC Procecure 1708-03, the annual audit of the Radiographic Subcontractor expired November 22, 1977, and a date had not been established for the required reaudit.
The inspector verified the subcontractor for radiography was reaudited and apcroved, subject to all radiography beir.g cerformed under the direct supervision of 5'.9-CC's NCE personnel.
Sutsequently, B',1-CC secured radicactive sources and hired and qualified NDE personnel.
3.
(Closed) Deviation (Report No. 77-02, ! tem C)-
Contrary ta Criterico XVII of Apcendix 3 of 10 CFR 50 and 3W-CC Procedure 1718-02, all cuality assurance records and documents e,ere stared in metal file cacinets located in the QA/QC Departmens's Of fice.
The inspector verified that the microfilming of all permanent records was 95% comolete and the original documents and nicro-film are stored in accordance with the SW Corporate document control procedure.
4.
(Closed) Unresolved Item (Report No. 77-02):
BW-CC was using a minimum design gasket seating factor of 4500 psi and the ASME Code, 1977 Edition, specifies 10,C00 psi.
The inspector verified that BW-CC will use in the future the edition of the ASME Code in effect at the time of order acceotance unless otherwise specified in the design specfication or purchase order.
5.
(Closed) Unresolved Item (Report No. 77-02):
BU-CC Procurement Quality Assurance Surveys of the heat treating subcontractors did not verify that the subcontractors had measured the temperature profile of their furnaces and made provisions to assure that materials of different thicknesses were not heat treated at the same time.
The inspector verified that BW-CC had reaudited the heat treating subcontractors and verified that temperature profiles had been determined on all furnaces.
C.
Desicn Verifications 1.
Objectives The cbjectives of this area of the inspection were to ascartain whether procedures had been developed, approved, and properly implemented by the vendor to prescribe a system for design verification that is consistent with NRC rules and regulations, ASME Code requirements, and the vendor's QA Program commitments.
2.
Method of Accomolishment The objective of this area of the insoection was accomplished by:
a.
Review of the ASME accepted Quality Assurance Manual, OAM-100, Revision dated April 2,
1978, Section 1704-01, Design Centrol to verify the vendor nad established procedures to prescribe a system for design verification.
b.
Reviewed the follo,ving aracedures:
(1)
Engineering Standards, and (2) Calculational Procedure and Design Standard to verify they had been prepared by the designated authority, approved by management, and reviewed by QA.
c.
Reviewed the procedures listed in paragraph b, to verify that they contained measures to verify tne adequacy of the design, document the results of the design verification, and required the design verification to consider imoortance to safety. Also to verify that measures to identify the method of performing the design verification is provided, items to be addressed during the design review are identified, and prescribes the requirements for performing verification by alternate calculations or by qualification test.
d.
Reviewed design verification of Work Orders 15940-3 and 16941-3 for 1-1/2" - 15005 Self Drag Valve Model No.
B9G5-05-15SW-15SW-14AA44 to verify the implementation of design verification procedures.
e.
Interviews with personnel to verify they were knowledgeable in the procedures applicable to design verification.
3.
Findincs a.
It was determined that the system prescribed for the design verification is consistent with NRC rules and regulations and Code requirements.
However, the evidence demonstrated that the CA system ',sas not implacented in 3 Tanner consisten:
with the vendor's QA commitments.
b.
Deviation See Enclosure, Item B, C & D.
c.
Within tnis area of the inspection no unresolved items were identified.
D.
Control of Scecial Processes Macnetic Particle Examination 1.
Objective
. The objective of tnis area of the inspection was to verify that the magnetic particle examination procedures used by the vendor neets the apolicable NRC rules and regulations,A5ME Cada require-ments, the vendor's OA Program commitments, and contractual requirements, also, verify tnat tne magnetic particle examinaticns are Performed by properly qualified personnel in accordance with the procedures.
2.
Method of Acccmolishment The objective of this area of the inspection was accomplished by:
a.
Review of the ASME accepted Quality Assurance Manual, GAM-100 Revision dated June 1,1973, Section 9, Control of Special Processes to verify that procedures had been established for magnetic particle examination.
b.
Review of procedure NDE-105, Revision C, Magnetic Particle Inspection Procedure to verify that it had been approved and qualified in accordance with the quality assurance program commitments and the ASME Code requirements, and accepted by the Authorized Inspector.
c.
Observe the performance of magnetic particle examination and verify:
(1)
The appl'icable traveler identifies the test procedure to be used and that a copy is availiable at the inspection station.
(2)
Personnel performing the examination are properly qualified.
(3) The test equipment are in a satisfactory condition and are properly calibrated.
(4) The test parameters are as specified in the examination procedure, and (5) The indications are evaluated in accordance with the acceptance criteria established by the procedures, and the results are reported in the prescribed manner.
d.
Interviews with personnel to verify that they were kncwl-edgeable in the procedures apclicable to magnetic particle examination.
3.
Findincs a.
It was determined tha: :he system crescribed far contro! ;f special processes (magnetic particle examina:i;n) is consistant with tne NRC rules 2nd regulations and the ASME Ccce requirements.
b.
'litnin tnis area of tne inspection no ceviations or unresolved items were identified.
E.
Training
'.lelder Cualification 1.
Oojectives The objectives of tnis area of the inspection were to verify that the welders and welding operator are qualified in accordance with the applicable NRC rules and regulation, ASME Code requirements, and the vendor's QA Program Comnitments.
2.
Method of Accomolishment The objectives of the inspection were accomplished by:
a.
Review of the ASME accepted QA Manual, QAM-100, Revision dated April 1,1978:
(1) Section 2, Quality Assurance Program, and (2) Section 9, Control of Soecial Processes to verify that procedures had been established for the qualification of welders and welding operators.
b.
Review of the Record of Performance Qualification tests of welders and welding operators to verify accuracy and conferm-ance with ASME Code requirements.
c.
Review of welders qualification log to verify tne vendor has a system for maintaining a continuous record of the welder qualifications and the welders have been and are currendy qualified to weld under the resoective procedures.
d.
Interviews with personnel to verify they were knowledgeable in the procedures applicable to welder qualification.
3.
Findincs a.
It was verified that the system prescribed for welder
_g_
qualification is consistent with NRC rules and regulations and ASME Code requirements.
However, the evidence demonstrated that toe system was rot implemented in nanner consistent with the vencor QA Program commitments.
b.
Deviation See Enclosure, Item E.
c.
Within tnis area of the inspection no unresolved items were identified.
F.
Exit Interview At the conclusion of the inspection on October 4,1973, the insoector met with the company's management, identified in paragraph A, for the purpose of informing them as to the results of the inspection.
During this meeting each identified deviation was discussed and the evidence which supported the findings were identified.
The company's management acknowledged the findings and supporting evidence as being understood, but had no additional comments.
DETAILS SECTION II (Prepared by D. E. '..'nitesell)
A.
Persons Ccntacted Babcock and Wilcox - Comoorent Controls International (Eh-CC)
T. G. Garden, Quality Control Supervisor R. E. Topping, Director of Quality Assurance State of California - Department of Consumer Affairs Division of Industrial Safety T. F. Fleming, Authorized Nuclear Inspector B.
Manufacturing Process 1.
Objectives The objectives of this area of the inspection were to verify whether the manufacturing process is being controlled in accord-ance with the NRC regulations, code, and contract requirements.
Also to verify that the controls are being implemented and are effective.
2.
Method of Accomolishment The above objectives were accomplished as follows:
a.
Review of Section 5 of the BW-CC - Quality Assurance Manual (QAM), and procedures 1706-1 dated June 1, 1977, and proce-dures 1705-2 dated April 1,1976, to verify that the system prescribed for controlling code items during the manufacturing operations utilizes cravelers and shop ?rscadures as 2;orcarilta.
(1)
Findings:
The foregoing dccuments requires travelers to be prepared which provides for the following:
(a)
The document numbers and revisions to which the inspections, examination, and/or tests are to be performed.
(b)
The results of tne inspections, examinations, or tests.
. (c) Marking each code part with the material tjpe, heat number, P.O. numcer, and W.O. number.
(d)
The sign-off and date by tne operator, inspector, or ANI.
It was observed that the travelers also identifies the part, material type and grade, the applicable code edition and addenda, and the code class of the part.
The travelers also provides traceability to the material procurement specification, and traceability to the customer's Purchase Order and Design Specification.
b.
Review of Section 9 of the QAM and Procedure 1710-0 through 1710-04, all dated April 1,1976; and 1710-05 dated March 28, 1977, to verify that the manufacturing systea recuires special processes to be performed by qualified personnel using qualified procedures.
(1)
Findinas (a) Special process procedures are reference on drawings, Job Quality Requirement (JQR) Sheets, and Travelers, and the appropriate procedures are available at the work stations where the activitiy is performed.
(b)
It was verified that the welding procedures are properly qualified in accordance with Section IX of the ASME Codes and that the NDE procedures comply witn code requirements and have been qualified in accordance with Section V of the ASME Code, and has been demonstrated to the ANI's satisfaction that code rejectable defects can be identified.
(c)
Examination of the welder's perfor ance cualifica-tion records, and performance continuity records, indicates that the welders are properly cualified in the various processes established by the several welding procedures.
(d)
Review of the education, training, and experience histories for the NDE technicians (level I, II, and III) demonstrates that they are qualfied in accord-ance with the code requirements.
c.
Review of Section 6 of the QAM and Procedures No. 1707-02, through 1707-03, all dated April 1, 1976; 1707-09 dated April 1,1973; 17]7-10 dated November 5, 1975; and 1707-12 dated April 1,
1973; to verify tnat check lists are preparad, including d;cument num:ers and revisi;ns, to,qi:1 i -pron ss and final examinations mJst be perforTed.
(1)
Findings (a) The owner's certified design specifications are critical working documents that affect the design, procurement, manufacture, inspections, and tests to verify whether the specified quality has been successfully achieved.
To ensure that tne concerned groups are working to the latest revision of this document, a work order (WO) package which includes a Nuclear Order Entry Check List is prepared by the Contract Administrator and distributed to the various concerned groups, including quality assurance.
Quality Assurance reviews the WO package, Design Specification and Purchase Order and prepares a Job Quality Requirement Sheet which is a document that identifies the individual parts of the items covered by the DS, by name and numoer, the material type and grade, the procurement specification number and paragraph number, the process procedure numbers, including tne weld and NDE procedures, and provides space for both the customer and ANI to select and initial off their hold points.
Any special instructions are also noted cn the JCRs.
(b) Manufacturing Enginee-
'1 in preparing the travelers for the manufacture of the varicus component parts, references the procedure, and paragraph identified on the JQR as being acceptable; ie:
- 00. #35 -
" Liquid Penetrant Examination per PS-605, Paragraph E-2."
The coolicable JQR indicates that Procecures PS 605, paragra;n E-2 is an accep:able procacure for LP examination for the type and grade of material being used to manufacture the part.
(c)
It was observed that the JQR sheets also identified the Traveler's coeration number which has been selected by the ANI, and/or the customer, as a hold point.
Space is also provide for signing-off and dating the hold points.
d.
Review of Section la of the CAM to verify that tne control system prescribed for the manufacturing system provides a method for identifying the inspectico, examination, and test status.
. (1)
Findings (a)
The system prescribed for identificasian of tne inspection and test status is provided in the traveler control on the shop floor by requiring the inspector to identify his findings of acceptable inspection or tests by placing his stamp in the ACCEPT column on the traveler.
(b) When the inspections or tests are found to be unacceptable, the inspector initiates a tionconforming Material Report (NCMR), and records the liCMR numoer in the REJECT column of the traveler, and places the " Pink Hold Copy" face up in the traveler package, and afixes " HOLD" tags to the item, and forewards the NCMR to the Material Review Board (MRS) via the chief inspector.
(c) To test the effectiveness of the system, it was cbserved that 50 No. 18739-3-300, Part No. 320601323, (Plug) at operation 90, " Final Inspection," had NCMR No. 37844 recorded in the REJECT column of the traveler, and the " Pink Hold Copy" was in the traveler package, and a " HOLD" tag had been attached to the item.
The NCMR was backtracked through the MRS who had dispositioned it by rework, and the Manufacuring Engineers who had reissued information on the Rework Route Sheet (on the back of one of the NCMR copies) and had foreward it to the ANI, where it was found awaiting tne AtlI review, concurrence and sign-off.
Findings Frcm the documents reviewed and the observations and inspections made in the shop and discussions with cognizant personnel, it.vas deter-ined that the system prescribed for controlling the manufacturing processes are in accordance with the NRC regulation, code, and contract require-ments. Review of the documentation and work in progress it was determined that the manufacturing control system is being effectively implemented as prescribed in the QA Manual commitments.
No deviations or unresolved items were identified.