ML19289E792
| ML19289E792 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 02/26/1979 |
| From: | Brown R, Costello J, Hale C NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19289E764 | List: |
| References | |
| REF-QA-99900403 NUDOCS 7905290113 | |
| Download: ML19289E792 (22) | |
Text
U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT REGION IV Report No.
99900403/79-01 Program No.
51100 Company:
General Electric Company Nuclear Energy Business Group 175 Curtner Avenue San Jose, California 95125 Inspection at:
San Jose, California Inspection Conducued:
February 5-9, 1979 Inspectors:
b k. b//.
M23/79 J. f.ICostello, Principal Inspector, Vendor Date~
IMpection Branch
' WL 0 i L/
D'N59 R. L gWn,' Princi'pa[ Enspector, Vendor Date In pection Branch NTW
-A
~% L h g W. E. Foster, Contractor Inspector, Vendor Date Inspection Branch i
Approved by:
\\ Eb OdbT C. J. HQq), Chief, Vendor Program Evaluation Date Section, Vendor Inspection Branch Summary Inspection on February 5-9, 1979 (99900403/79-01).
Areas Inspected:
Implementation of 10 CFR 50, Appendix B, and Topical Report NE00-11209-04A in the areas of Audits, Design Document Control, Procurement Document Control, Nonconforming Material Parts or Components, and follow-up on previour inspection findings.
The inspection involved ninety (90) inspector-hours on site by three (3) NRC inspectors.
2048 028 790520011s
. Results:
In the five (5) areas inspected five (5) deviations were identified in four (4) areas and twe (2) unresolved items were identified in two (2) areas.
Deviations:
(1) Audits - some Audit Summary Reports did not mention audit team meeting, did not identify checklists used, and did not list persons contacted during the audit (See Notice of Devidtion, Enclosure Item A).
(2) Follow-up on Previous Inspection Findings - procedures do not exist describing the method by which changes to the evaluation model are reported in amendments submitted to the f1RC, as required by paragraph 1.b of Section II of 10 CFR 50, Appendix K (Sce Notice of Deviation, Enclosure Item B).
(3) Procurement Document Control - contrary to GE Topical Report NEDO-11209-04A and the Nuclear QAM: (a) Material Request for safety-related hardware exhibited seven (7) revisions which had not been properly signed; (b) Purchase Order for safety-related hardware had been issued to a company not included in the Qualified Suppliers List nor had the supplier qualifica-tion procedure been implemented (See Notice of Deviation, Enclosure C).
(4) Procurement Document Control - contrary to GE Topical Report NED0-11209-04A and the Nuclear QAM: (a) Reporting requirements concerning Corrective Action Requests (CARS) are r:ot in accordance with commitments; (b) vendors are not responding to CAR within the times specified 'See Notice of Deviation, Enclosure Item D).
(5) Nonconforming Materials, Parts, or Components - contrary to GE Topical Report NED0-11209-04A and the Nuclear QAM nonct nformances are not being properly coded; QA stamping and dating on Individual Deviation Letters are not being consistently used to show product acceptance and release; Manufacturing Inspection Reports contained no indication of QA activity; A Manufacturing Inspection Report (IR) contained a repair disposition trovided by the Material Review Board; however, it contained no statement of justification, and an IR reviewed by MRB had no approval signatures of the MRB (See Notice of Deviation, Enclosure Item E).
Unresolved Items:
(1) Audits - It is not apparent how revisions to the Quality Assurance Audit Status Report are controlled (DetailsSection I, paragraph C.3.b. ).
(2) Design Document Control - The engineering and/or procurement procedures do not state when a Material Request Change is required authorizing a purchase order revision, or what purchase order revision, if any, can be made by the buyer without a Material Request Change (DetailsSection II, paragraph B.3.b. ).
2048 029
. DETAILS SECTION I (Prepared by J. R. Costello)
A.
Persons Contacted J. M. Anderson, Quality Engineering Analyst W. C. Cohn, Manager, Quality Control Engineering
- K.
I. Curry, Specialist, Quality Notification and Audits D. R. Erie, Senior Engineer J. J. Fox, Principal Engineer
- G. R. Hosack, Manager, Quality Audits A. I. Kaznoff, Manager, Product Assurance
- D. E. Lee, Manager, Quality Control K. S. Manrao, Quality Control Engineer
- J. L. Murray, Manager, Quality Assurance P. E. Novak, Manager, Engineering Systems Audits
- J. E. Food, Manager, Nuclear Core Technology
- Denotes those present at exit meeting.
B.
Follow-up on previous Inspection Findings 1.
(Closed) Deviation (Report No. 78-03):
Neither the verification statement nor other evidence of appropriate design verification was in the Design Record File for CHAST 06.
Additionally, the file did not contain the results of a design review on September 23, 1977, of the gamma smearing model.
GE placed a verification statement and the results of the design review of the gamma smearing model in the CHAST Design Record File on November 20, 1978.
2.
(Closed) Deviation (Report No. 78-03): The Design Deviation Report (DDR) for the September 1, 1976, review of CHAST 05, Swelling and Rupture Model, did not indicate the type of review nor provide a discussion of the design review presentation.
GE has prepared a statement for attachment to the DRR which ir.cludes the purpose, type of review, and describes the information that was considered.
This statement was put in the CHAST Design Record File on November 21, 1978.
3.
(Closed) Deviation (Report No. 78-03):
The Design Review / Cover Sheet for the CHAST 05 Swelling and Rupture Model Design Review of September 1,1976, did not have a stat ment of design adequacy.
GE has prepared a statement containing the findings of the design review team and their conclusion as to the adequacy of the design.
This statement was prepared and signed by the chairman of tne design review team which performed the review in question. This statement was put in the CHAST Design Record File as an attachment to the Design Review Report on November 21, 1978.
2048 030
- NOTE:
In the items listed above (B.1, B.2, B.3) which are three examples of a single deviation, the following steps are being taken to prevent recurrence:
(a) Within the first quarter of 1979 a formal evaluation of the computer programs in t.1e ECCS i ad Transient areas of licensing will be conducted.
If this evaluation demonstrates a need for corrective action, an action plan with scheduled completion dates will be established.
(b) A training class will be conducted within the first quarter of 1979 for methods committee members and responsible engineers of engineering computer programs used for licensing analyses in the ECCS and Transient areas.
4.
(Closed) Deviation (Report No. 78-04):
Revision 10 to P.O.
205-AJ430 was prepared and issued by the buyer incorporating MRAJ430, Revision 14, which was not properly authorized. Also, MRAF430 was never released or distributed by Engineering Services I and it was not in the permanent MR files: CE Engineering Services I distributed Material Request AJ430, Revision 14, with the correct signatures on November 2, 1978, and this is now in the appropriate record files.
P.O. 205-AJ430, Revision 10, was properly reviewed and issued on November 2, 1978.
To prevent recurrence, personnel in Engineering and Procurement have been instructed by memos to follow procedures more carefully. Memo to Procurement was-issued November 8,1978, and to Engineering on November 30, 1973.
5.
(0 pen) Unresolved Items (Report No. 78-04): The adequacy and implementation of GE's cleaning procedures for it process fabrication of the reactor vessel with installed internals and the adequacy of the reactor vessel seismic pin keeper welds are not apparent.
GE's preliminary investigation indicates that implementation of GE's cleaning procedure for Reactor Pressure Vessel shipped to Perry Site was inadequate.
No information is available on seismic pin keeper welds.
This item will remain open for further review during a subsequent inspection.
6.
(Closed) Other Outstanding Items (Report No. 78-03): Apparent deficiencies were identified in NEED procedures E0P 40-3.00 (Computer Programs), E0P42-6.00 (Independent Design Verification),
E0P 40-7.00 (Design Review Program), and E0P 42-10.00 (Design Record Files), in paragraph C.1.b of the 78-03 Inspection Report.
GE has completed their review of these findings in the 78-03 Inspection Report and has incorporated the following procedural changes:
2048 331
. a.
E0P 40-3.00 revised February 2, 1979:
(1) Provides for definition of originator and verifier.
(2) Provides for check to ascertain that equations used for computer program are appropriate for intended application.
(3) Requires that an Engineering Computer Program be removed from the program library within 30 days of the assignment of a level 4 status.
(4) Requires the cignature of the responsible engineer who generates the computer program abstract.
(5) Requires documentation of all computer program errors in the design record file, along with the resultant action taken, b.
E0P 42-6.00 revised October 3, 1978:
(1) Requires formal documentation of contents of Design Review Package and its submittal to each of the reviewers.
(2) Requires signature of authorized personnel on documentation and defines extent and depth of verification.
c.
E0P 40-7.00 revised October 3, 1978:
Requires the Methods Review Committee / Design Review Team document close-out of actions taken on open items.
d.
E0P 42-10.00 revised November 13, 1978:
Requires that the Design Records File for a computer program contain a cross reference to other Design Record Files that contain documentation of activities performed as part of the review process.
During the review of these outstanding items, it was found that procedures had not been developed for reporting evaluation model changes to the NRC.
(See Notice of Deviation enclosure, item B).
C.
Audits 1.
Objectives The objectives of this area of the inspection were to verify that:
2048 J32
.. a.
Audit system is established which has organizational independence, aJthority, and is documented in procedures and/or instructions in accordance with commitments.
b.
Audit records include a written audit p'an, team selecticn, audit schedule, and audit notification to the person or organization to be audited.
c.
Members of the audit team are independent of any direct responsibility for the activities being audited.
d.
Provisions exist for the reporting of the effectiveness of the Quality Assurance program to responsible management.
e.
The audit includes the use of checklists or procedures, detailed audit reports, and timely identification, acknow-ledgement, documentation of nonconformances, and subsequent corrective action and verification.
f.
Audit reports contain the audit scope: identification of auditors, persons or organizations contacted, summary of the results of tha audit, the details of any nonconformances noted, the re.ommendations for correction, and distribution of the report to responsible management.
2.
Method of Accomplishment The preceding objectives were accomplished by an examination of:
Applicable portions of GE Topical Report fled 0-11209-04A a.
which establishes QA program commitments.
b.
Implementing procedures to assure that procedural controls had been provided to satisfy QA program commitments and to satisfy items (a) through (f) of the Objectives section above.
(1) BWR Engineering Operation Procedures (EOPs)
E0P 75-3.00 - Engineering Audits E0P 75-4.00 - Product Quality (2) QA Engineered Equipment and Installation Procedures QCSI 7.2.12 - Pre-award Evaluation of Vendors EEPP&P 3.04 - Established and Potential Suppliers List 2048 J33
s
/ QCSI 7.2.17 - Supplier Quality System Audits, Records and Corrective Action QCSI 7.2.37 - Training Evaluation and Certification of Personnel (3) fluclear Energy Business Group Procedure 70 Quality Assurance, fluclear Safety, and iluclear liaterials Safeguards Audits.
(4) flunlear Energy Systems Instruction 70 Standard Quality Systems Requirements.
(5) fluclear Energy Product and Quality Assurance (P&QA0)
Procedure 3.4 - Auditor Qualification and Lead Auditor Certification.
c.
Documents to verify imgementation of topical commitments and procedural requirements and to satisfy the intent of item (a) through (f) of the Objectives section above. These documents are as follows:
(1) Quality Assurance Supplier Audit Reports - published monthly - last Report January 8, 1979.
(2)
Established and Potential Supplier List for Engineered Equipment Procurement - published quarterly - last list published December 29, 1978.
(3) 1978 and 1979 Internal Audit Plan for Engineering Components - last plan January 26, 1979.
(4) 1978, Audit Plan and Schedule for Product Assurance Section - issued February 9, 1979.
(5) Quality Assurance Section Audit Plan and Schedule -
1979 Revision 0, December 29, 1978.
(6) Vendor Approval Status Forms for Alpha Tool Engineering, fluclear Energy Services, and Combustion Engineering, Inc.
(7) Bimonthly Correction Action Commitment (CAC) Status Report of Internal Audits - period from flovember 1, through December 31, 1978 - published January 2. 1979.
(8) fline (9) lead Auditor Certifications for auditors in Product and Quality Assurance Operation.
2048 034
e-(9) (ualification records of six (6) lead auditors in the (uality Assurance Engineered Equipment and Installation (rganization.
(10) tample examination questions for certification of auditors.
(11)
External Audits:
(a) Pullman Power QA System Audit conducted October 11-12, 1978. This was a delegated audit conducted by United States Testing Company, Inc., for GE.
(b) Target Rock Corporation QA System Audit conducted June 7-9, 1978.
(c) Dikkers QA System Audit conducted June 20-22, 1978.
(d) Chicago Bridge and Iron Nuclear QA System Audit conducted June 13-15, 1978.
(e)
Ingersoll-Rand Company Cameron Pump Division, QA System Audit conducted November 8-9, 1978.
(f) Vickery - Simms, Inc., QA Syr. tem Audit conducted June 28-29, 1978.
S (g) Bingham Willamette Company QA System Audit qk '
conducted October 24-26, 1978.
(12)
Internal Audits:
(a)
Engineering Audits Audit Report 78-05, October 1978 - Design and Release Controls to Wilmington Manufacturing Department.
(b) P&QA0 Audits 1.
Audit Report P7806, July 6, through October 23, 1978 - Control of Design Changes on NSS and Stride Requisition Plants.
2.
Audit Report Q-92, April 11-22, 1977 - Internal and External Interfaces of Engineered Equipment Procurement Section of Bolling Water Reactor Projects Department.
2048 135
, 3.
Audit Report 7802, May 8, through August 1, 1978 - Engineered Equipment Procurement Operation.
3.
Findings a.
Deviation See flotice of Deviation, Enclosure, Item A.
b.
Unresolved Item Engineered Equipment Procurement Practices and Procedures flo. 3.04 (Established and Potential Suppliers List) speci-fies the use of a Vendor Approval Status Form.
Quality Control Standing Instructions (QCSI) flo. 7.2.17 (Supplier Quality System Audits, Records and Corrective Action) specifies when circumstances require a delay in the annual audit of more than 12 months a brief explanation will be placed in the suppliers file.
This is normally done with a Vendor Approval Status Form.
QCSI flo. 7.2.17 also specifies that when a new date for an audit is e;tablished this new date should be provided to the Quality Systems Documentation clerk who is responsible for updating the Quality Assurance Supplier Audit Status Report.
A review of the suppliers files on fluclear Engineering Services and Combustion Engineering Inc. showed changes made by Vendor Approval Status Forms during 1978, but these changes were not reflected in the Quality Assurance Status Reports.
It is not apparent how revisions to the Quality Assurance Supplier Audit Status Report are controlled.
This item will be further inspected during the next inspection.
D.
Exit Meeting A meeting was conducted with man..gement representatives at the conclusion of the inspection on February 9,1979.
In addition to the individuals indicated by an asterisk in the Details Sections, those in attendance were:
W. A. Anders, Vice President and General Manager, fluclear En.rgy Products Division J. Barnard, Manager, Product and Quality Assurance Operation R. C. Boesser, Manager, Quality Assurance and Operating Methoas, Project Division 2048 036
., A. Breed, Manager, Quality Assurance, P&QA0 D. H. Ferguson, Manager, Quality Assurance, C&ID H. H. Hendon, Manager, Engineering, C&ID J. Jacobson, Manager, Reactor Design, NEED J. A. Kahermanes, Senior Engineer, Quality Assurance and Operating Methods, Projects Division C. Kent, Acting Manager, Mechanical Engineering Design, NEED H. H. Klepfer, General Manager, Nuclear Technology Department, NEED D. F. Long, Manager Engineering Services Operation, NEED B. A. Podberesky, Manager, Engineering Equipment Procurement Operation, NEED J. K. Powledge, Manager, Quality Assurance Engineered Equipment and Installation, NEED W. J. Roths, Manager, Reliability Engineering Operations, NEED The inspector with the assistance of the inspection team members sunmarized the scope and findings of the inspection for those present at the meeting. Management representatives acknowledged the state-ments of fi:; dings, and made the following commerit relative to the deviation presented as item B in the Notice of Deviation enclosure.
GE is following the intent of the reporting requirements required by paragraph 1.b of Section I: of 10 CFR 50, Appendix K and feels that if procedures were required in their QA program for describing the method used in reporting these, they should have been advised earlier by the NRC.
Tne GE management representatives were advised that their comments would be further reviewed before documentation of the findings.
2048 037
. 2ET.'.'L5 JECTION II (Prepared by Ross L. Brown)
A.
Persons Contacted
- C. L. Buckner, Specialist, Quality Systems F. E. Funk, Responsible Engineer (MSIV)
A. Gofstein, QA Engineer J. C. Kelso, Responsible Design Engineer (RCIC Turbine)
B. L. Sheppard, Manager, Quality System and Record unit.
- R. J. Valencia, Audit Coordinator
- Attended exit meeting.
B.
Design Document Control 1.
Objectives To determine that approved procedures have been established and are being implemented for the control and distribution of design documents that provide for:
a.
Identification of personnel positions or organizations responsible for preparing, reviewing, approving, and issuing design documents.
b.
Identification of the proper documents to be used in performing the design, c.
Coordination and control of design (internal and external) interface documents.
d.
Ascertaining that proper documents, and revisions thereto, are accessible and are being used.
2.
Methoa of Accomplishment The preceding objectives were accomplished by:
a.
Review of the following portions of the General Electric Nuclear Energy Business Group (NEBG) Topical Report NEDO-11209-04A, dated March 1978: Section 1 - Subsections 1.2 and 1.3; Section 3 - Subsections 3.1, 3.2, 3.3, 3.5, 3.6, 3.7, 3.10, 3.11, 3.12, and 3.13; Section 4; Section 6; Section 15 - Subsection 15.1; Section 16; and Section 17, 2048 J38
, to verify that NFBG is required to establish procedures /
instructions that describe the responsibilities a1d authority for the planning, implementing and controlling the functions identified in B.1.
b.
Review of the following Engineering Operating Procedures (EOP) to determine that a method has been established for the control of design documents.
(1) E0P 25-4.00 issued November 8, 1978, Engineering Work Authorization (EWA), defines responsibilities and requirements for requesting and authorizing engineering work including: Engineering input, data referenced or attached, definition of objectives, scope, special requirements and work description.
Each revision to the EUA requires the same procedure as the initial EWA.
(2) E0P 35-3.00 issued December 18, 1978, Engineering Tests, defines the procedures and responsibility for this function.
(3) E0P 40-7.00 issued October 3, 1978, Design Review Program and E0P 42-6.00 issued February 13, 1978, Independent Design Verification, provides for an independent review / verification to be performed on all des,ign documents prepared by engineering.
(4) E0P 40-9.00 issued November 8,1977, Design Certifica-tion, defines the responsibility and describes the procedure for certification of design specification, stress reports, etc. as required by contract or code.
(5) EOP 40-11.00 issued February 26, 1977, Field Failure Reporting and Analysis, defines the responsibility and procedural requirements for the collection, analysis and dissemination of operating plant outages and equipment failure data.
(6) E0P 42-1.00 issued December 22, 1978, Introduction -
Technology and Design Control and Supplement A issued December 5,1978, General '.nformation Guidelines for Design Performance, presents the responsibility and procedural requirements for: design performance, document release, design verification, performing calculations within the scope of design control program and alternate methods of processing calculation 2048 339
' documentation, control the issue of engineering controlled documents, providing traceable and retrieval documentation for design verification.
(7)
E0 42-5.00 issued July 7, '1977, Engineering Document Release, describes the prccedures and defines the responsibilities for the release of engineering docu-ments to procurement or manufacturing components.
(8) E0P 42-10.00 issued November 13, 1978, Design Record Files (DRF), defines the responsibilities and proce-dures to provide traceable and retrievable documentation related to a specific design activity, engineering analysis or test.
(9)
E0P 45-6.00 issued February 13, 1978, Supplier Noncon-formance, defines the engineering responsibilities and describes the procedure for acceptance of a Deviation Disposition Request (DDR) relative to determining the.
appropriate disposition of purchased engineered equip-ment nonconformities and any supplier requested release from GE technical requirements.
(10) E0P 55-2.00 issued December 19, 1978, Engineering Change Control, describes the authorization and implementation system used to control changes to engineering controlled documents to: assure the impact of the change is considered, provide authority for the change, provide accurate and traceable records and assure implementation of the change.
(11)
E0P 55-3.00 issued March 29, 1978, Field Deviation Disposition, provides the responsibility and procedure for the controls and authorization of Field Deviation Disposition Requests (FDDR) initiated by GE site personnel.
(12)
E0P 55-4.00 issued May 8, 1978, Change Control Board, defines the responsibilities and requirements to satisfy the document change requirements established by E0P 55-2.00 and E0P 55-3.00 above.
(13)
E0P 60-2.00 issued November 18, 1977, Document Distribution, assigns the responsibility and describes activities necessary to implement the control of engineering issued documents and changes thereto.
2048 04.0
, c.
Review of the following Engineered Equipment Procurement Practices and Procedures to verify that control of exter-nal design interface is required.
(1) No. 3.01 issued January 9, 1978, Material Request, (2) No. 4.01 issued September 7, 1976, Purchase Order Preparation and Distribution, (3) No. 5.02 issued November 2, 1976, Purchase Order Revisions, and (4) No. 5.10 issued May 10, 1977, Deviation Disposition Requests.
These four (4) procedures describe the objectives, respon-sib 51ities and function of the Engineered Equipment Pro-curement Operation regarding purchases of engineered equipment including the external interface.
d.
Revieu of the following documents and records to verify implementation of the requirements described in B.2.a, B.2.b and B.2.c above.
(1) Purchase Order No. 205-AG 744, original issue through Revision 5 for Reactor Core Isolation Cooling system steam turbines for two (2) sites GE account Nos. 198-D8611-L62 and 198-D8616-L62 and those associated /ref-erenced documents.
(a)
Engineering Work Authorization (EWA) No. K-789J-07, Revision 2 that identifies the design and performance data from which it was detennined that a GE standard plant design could be used with the included contract options which was included in the Data Sheets to the Purchase Specification.
(b) Design Record File (DRF) No. 150-E51C002-JB0 includes justification and verification r# the use of the standard plant design and the se (3) Engineering Change Notices (ECN) rela ad to the purchase specification and Jata she'ts.
(c) Material Request (MR) No. AG 744, original issue through Revision 6 which ir.cludes or references the applicable technical and quality requirements any changes thereto to be included in the pur-chase order No. 205-AG744.
2048 041
(d)
Purchase Specification No. 21A9526, Revision 2 and Data Sheet No. 21A9526AD, Revision 1.
(e) Turbine Outline Drawing No. 96553, Sheet 1 and 2, Revision G has been reviewed and approved by GE Responsible Engineer.
(f) Seismic test procedure, seismic test results, vendor evaluation of test results and GE approval of test procedure and test results.
(g) Vendor repair welding procedure and procedure qualification both have been approved by GE.
2.
Purchase Order No. 205-AF775 for 28 inch Main Steam Insolation Valves (MSIV) for two (2). construction sites GE account Nos. 198-D8611-L62 and 198-D8616-L62 and these referenced / associated documents.
(a) Material Request, original issue through Revi-sion 20.
(b) Vendor Drawing No. 13561-01-H, Sheet 1, Revision 6, approved by GE.
(c) Vendor Design Report for 28 inch MSIV certified by Professional Engineer, reviewed and approved by GE Responsible Engineer.
(d) General Electric Design Certification, stated to be in accordance with ASME Section III, Division 1, Subsection NA-3250.
(e) Six (6) Deviati]n Desposition Requests (DDRs) including DDR No. 11311.
3.
F_indings a.
DDR No. 11311 indicates that GE had checked box marked "other" in Block 14, requiring certain vendor documents to be revised or supplemented prior to acceptance of the dis-crepant material.
There was no formal documentation (by either signature or reference) presented to the inspector signifying satisfactory completion of the additional re-quirements.
GE management stated that, when the required fix has been accomplished by the supplier the assigned GE-QC Represen-tative is responsible to assure that the fix has been 2048 142
. satisfactorily completed prior his signing the Pro. duct Quality Certification (PQC) to release the item, however the PQC does not reference any DDR that has been checked in the box marked "other" in Block 14.
The inspector reviewed procedures [0P45-6.00 (Supplier Noncon-formance) and QCI 7.2.19 (Deviation Disposition Request Proce-
'ure) and determined that these procedures do not require any d
formal documentation stating these additional requirements have been satisfactorily completed.
No deviation or unresolved item appears to erist concerning this matter.
b.
No deviatior.s from commitments were identified, but one unresolved item was identified as follows:
The Engineering Operating Procedures and the Engineered Equipment Procurement Practices and Procedures are very general in defining the authority and requirements related to making purchase order revisions.
The procedures do not state when a Material Request Change is requird authorizing a purchase order ch3nge, or what purchase order changes if any, can be made by the buytr without a Material Request Change.
GE management stated that the buyer can make revisions to the purchase order without a Material Request Change if the changes are not of a technical nature (e.g. terms and conditions, price, delivery, editoral corrections, etc.) but a Material Request Change is required to change any technical of quality requirements.
This authorization description does not appear to be included in any of procedures / instructions reviewed. This item will be considered further during future inspections.
2048 343
. DetailsSection III (Prepared by W. E. Foster)
A.
Persons Contacted I. S. Bhandal, Supervisor, Process Control Engineering, PGCC W. C. Brady, Engineer, Quality Control, Standard Products L. E. Chambers, Engineer, Process Control, PGCC
- D. H. Currie, Engineer, Senior Quality Control E. M. Duke, Engineer, Quality Control, PQA C. S. Eason, Manager, Quality Control Engineering, PQA B. P. Grim, Manager, Reactor Instrumentation and Protection Design M. Othon, Clerk, Quality Control
- L. D. Test, Principal Engineer, Reliability Engineering
- Attended exit meeting.
B.
Action on Previous Inspection Findings 1.
(Closed) Deviation (Inspection Report No. 78-04):
Manufacturing documentation had not been revised to assure switches are installed with a lock ring. The inspector verified t! at Manufacturing Standard Practice (MSP) 17.002, Revision 6 addressed installation of lock rings on switches; it was also verified that MSP17.002, Pevision 7 continued to address this requirement.
2.
(Closed) Deviation (Inspection Report No. 78-04):
Switch G41A-S1B had not been identified in accordance with Connection Diagram No. 865E575 and three (3) Material identification tags had not been stamped for S1 Switch and Resistor Switch Box of Wide Range Monitors.
The inspector verified audits had been conducted; Inspectors and Quality Controllers had reviewed the letter detailing NRC Audit findings, and roundtable discussions which included the audit findings had occurred.
3.
(Closed) Deviation (Inspection Report No. 78-04):
Rework record entries had not been rnade on the traveler or supporting documentation for Wide Range Monitors nor had serial numbers of affected hardware been identified on rework records and the screw / nut / washer assembly had not been tightened sufficiently to compress the spring lock washer.
The inspector verified that Quality Assurance Procedure 15.2 had been revised (issued January 2, 1979) to allow the use of the original rework record as the Quality Record and also provided clarification of usage of serial numbers.
It was also verified that integrity of mechanical fasteners had been added to the internal surveillance schedule.
2048 044
. 4.
(Closed) Deviation (Inspection Report No. 78-04): Test Instruc-tion No. 2101, latest revision, had not been distributed to the individual conducting the test; changes at operation No.155 of Traveler 'T' Number TFCF8 had not been lined out, ilitialed, signed or stamped and dated; emergency Engineering Change Notice NJ06567, dated October 19, 1978, had not been issued immediately following receipt of appropriate approvals. The inspector verified that inspectors and Quality Controllers had signed an acknowledgement of the importance of using only correct instruc-tions and proper procedures for making changes. Also, it was verified that Manufacturing Procedure 3.13 had been revised and issued oa December 4, 1978.
5.
(Closed) Deviation (Inspection Report No. 78-04): Modules had not been inspected subsequent to assembly on Travelers 'T' Number TFCF8 and TDCK7; Traveler 'T' Number TFCF8 indicates inspection had been conducted utilizing Inspection Instruction No. El-022, Revision 3 while the latest document is Revision 4.
The inspector verified that the original planning was revised to include inspection of module insertion.
Also, it was verified that Inspectors and Quality Controllers had signed an acknowl-edgement of the importance of using and recording only correct instructions.
C.
Procurement Document Control 1.
The objectives of this area of the inspection were to verify that:
a.
Measures had been established and documented to assure that applicable regulatory requirements, design bases, and other requirements necessary to assure adequate quality had been included or referenced in the documents for procurement of items and services.
b.
Changes in procurement documents had been subjected to the same degree of control utilized in origination.
c.
Procurement documents required contractors to provide a quality assurance program consistent with the pertinent requirements of Appendix B to 10 CFR 50 or ANSI N45.2-1971, as necessary.
d.
Procurement documents included provisions for the following, as applicable:
(1) Supplier Quality Assurance Program, (2) Basic Technical Requirements, 2048 045
_1g_
(3) Source Inspection and Audit, (4) Documentation Requirements, (5) Lower Tier Procurements.
2.
Methods of Accomplishment The preceding objectives were accomplished by:
a.
Review of the following documents to verify measures had been established to assure that applicable regulatory requirements, design bases and other requirements necessary to assure adequate quality had been included or referenced in the documents for procurement of items and services:
(1) Topical Report, NEDO-11209-04A, dated March 1978, Section 4.
(2)
-ianufacturing Procedures Number:
(a) 3.05, dated June 21, 1978; (b) 5.01, dated June 21, 1978; and (c) 5.10, dated June 21, 1978.
(3) Quality Assurance Procedures:
(a) 4.1, Revision 5, dated March 31, 1978, and (b) 4.4, Revision 3, dated March 31, 1978.
(4) Nuclear Quality Assurance Manual,Section IV, Revi-sion 9, dated February 10, 1978.
b.
Review of the following documents to verify objectives b.,
c., and d.:
(1)
Purchase Order Numbers:
(a) 282-KE999 Revision 00, dated November 2, 1978, related Material Request No. 399284 dated November 2, 1978, and attendant drawings, speci-fications, and corrective action requests SJ34213 and SJ34214; 2048 046
. (b) 282-KE475 Revision 00, dated April 24, 1978, related Material Request No. 426804, attendant drawings, specifications, Trip Report No. 78T-109 dated July 17, 1978, and Corrective Action Requests SJ34217 and SJ34218; and (c) 282-KE533 Revision 00, dated May 18, 1978, attendant drawings and specifications and Supplier Quality Assurance Program Evaluation Report No. 76T-042 dated April 15, 1976.
(2) Material Quality Plan No. 30.123 Revision 0, dated December 20, 1977, and Revision 1, dated May 23, 1978.
d.
Review of Outstanding CAR reports dated November 1978 and January 12, 1979, to verify implementation of measures regarding Supplier Corrective Action Requests.
3.
Findings a.
Deviations From Commitment See Notice of Deviation Enclosure, Items C and D.
b.
Unresolved Items None.
D.
Nonconforming Materials, Parts, or Components 1.
Objectives The objectives of this area of the inspection were to verify that:
a.
Measures had been established to ccatrol materials, parts, or components which did not conform to requirements in order to prevent their inadvertent use or installation, b.
Established measures included, as appropriate:
(1) Procedures for identification, documentation, segre-gation, and 2048 J47
, (?)
Procedures for disposition, and notification to affected organizations.
c.
Nonconforming items had been reviewed and accepted, rejected, repaired or reworked in accordance with documented procedures.
d.
Repaired and/or reworked items had been reinspected.
c.
Records of nonconforming materials, parts, or components had been completed properly and maintained.
2.
Method of Accomplishment The preceding objectives were accomplished by:
a.
Review of the following documents to verify measures had been established to control nonconforming materials, parts, or components and measures provided for identification, documentation, segregation and disposition:
(1) Topical Report, NEDO-11209-04A, dated March 1978, Section 15; (2) Manufacturing Procedures:
(a) 3.04, dated May 23, 1978, (b) 5.03, dated July 24, 1978, and (c) 5.07, dated August 23, 1977; (3) Quality Assurance Procedures:
(a) 15.2, Revision 3, dated January 2, 1979, and (b) 15.3, Revision 2, dated April 28, 1978; (4) Engineering Operating Procedure No. 50-3.00, dated December 15, 1977; and (5) Nuclear Quality Assurance Manual,Section XV, Revision 7, dated August 31, 1977.
2048 048 d
s b.
Observation of five (5) electrical cables identified as nonconforming on the following Inspection Reports to verify objectives c. and d.
(1) Number R324W, dated February 1, 1979.
(2) Number R323W, dated January 31, 1979.
(3) Number R142W, dated April 13, 1978.
c.
Review of the following closed Inspection Reports to verify they had been completed properly and maintained:
(1) Number R802T, dated Januery 12, 1979, (2) Number R805T, dated January 15, 1979, (3) Number R821T, dated January 18, 1979, (4) Number R822T, dated January 18, 1979, (5) Number R501T, dated August 24, 1978..
(6) Number R506T, dated August 24, 1978, (7) Number-R508T, dated August 24, 1978, (8) Number R672T, dated November 10, 1978, (9) Number R689T, dated November 17, 1978, and (10) Number R748T, dated December 12, 1978.
3.
, Findings a.
Deviations From Commitment See Notice of Deviation Enclosure, Item E.
b.
Unresolved Items None.
i>048 149