ML19296B133
| ML19296B133 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 08/20/1979 |
| From: | Foster W, Hunnicutt D NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19296B109 | List: |
| References | |
| REF-QA-99900373 NUDOCS 8002200126 | |
| Download: ML19296B133 (9) | |
Text
U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT REGION IV Report No.
99900373/79-01 Program No.
51400 Company.
Cooper Industries, Incorporated Cooper Energy Services En-Tronic Controls North Sandusky Street Mt. Vernon, Ohio 43050 Inspectica at:
North Norton Street - Mt. Vernon, Ohio Inspection Conducted: July 23-26, 1979 W.E. Foster, Cont [ractorInspector
/!2 # 7f
((
Inspector:
'4 Dats ComponentsSection II Vendor Inspection Branch Approved by:
[ (/ h /_,9 d'
8 D. M. Hunnicut, Chiel Date ComponentsSection II Vendor Inspection Branch Summary Inspection on July 23-26, 1979 (99900373/79-01).
Areas Inspected:
Implementation of 10 CFR 50, Appendix B criteria, and applicable codes and standards, including organization; quality assurance program; manu-facturing process control; and change control. The initial management meeting was also conducted.
The inspection involved twenty-seven (27) inspector-hours on site.
Results:
In the four (4) areas inspected, no deviations or unresolved items were identified in one area. The following deviations and unresolved item were identified in the remaining three (3) areas:
Manufacturing Process Control practices were not consistent with Criterion V of Appendix B to 10 CFR 50, paragraphs 3.6 and 5.2 of the Quality Assurance Manual and Engineering Procedure No. EE-163 (Notice of Deviation, Items A, and B.).
2 Change Control practices were not consistent with Criterion V of Appendix B to 10 CFR 50, paragraph 6.1 of the Quality Assurance Manual, and Engineering Procedure No. EE-132 (Notice of Deviation, Items C. and D.).
Quality Assurance Program - Provisions made by QA Program for review and approval of documents prescribing retivities affecting quality are not in accordance with Criterian VI of 10 CFR 50, Appendix B (Notice of Deviation, Item El.
Unresolvel Item:
Manufacturing Process Control - The NRC inspector could not deteraire whether or not persons correcting deficiencies were also inspecting, testing, and evaluating these same corrected deficiencies (Details Section, paragraph E.3.b.).
3 DETAILS SECTION A.
Persons Contacted T. Blank, Systems Engineer vH. A. Dekker, General Manager C. A. Diehl, Planner W
L. Fawcett, Supervisor - Manufacturing
- G.
W. Mizer, Manager - Technical Services and Quality Assurance
- Attended initial management meeting and 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 them of certain responsibilities imposed on vendors by the " Energy Reorganization Act of 1974" (Public Law 93-438).
Those in attendance are denoted in paragraph A.
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 con-ducted.
c.
Describing how inspection results are documented and how proprie-tary items are handled, including the vendor's opportunity to review the report for the purpose of identifying items considered to be proprietary.
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 will be implemented or completed.
4 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 En-Tronic Controls is responsible for supplying engine / generator cabinets, high voltage and ground cubicles, and control panels to its parent organization, Cooper Energy Services.
En-Tronic is considered to be a subcontractor and is currently involved with four (4) purchase orders which accounts for twenty (20) to twenty-five (25) percent of their activity. Suppliers include General Electric; International Control and Switchgear, Inc. ; and Westinghouse Corporation.
To date, no problems have been encountered with the hardware supplied by En-Tronic Controls. A proposal for enlargement of the facility has been submitted to the Corporate Office.
C.
Organization 1.
Objectives The objectives of this area of the inspection wr.re to verify that authority an~ duties of persons and organizatioas performing activities affecting saiety-related functions (achievers and verifiers) had been clearly established and delineated in writing. Also, to verify that performers of the quality assurance functions had sufficiene authority and freedom to identify quality problems; to initiate, recommend or provide solutions; and to verify implementction of solutions.
Further, the individuals responsible for assuring effective execution of any portion of the quality assurance program had direct access to such levels of management necessary to perform this function.
2.
Methods of Accomplishment Review of the following documents to verify authority and duties of persons and organizations had been clearly established and delineated in writine:
(1) Quality Assurance Manual, Revision 2, dated November 30, 1978; Section 1.
(2) Job Descriptions for:
Engineering Manager; Chief Draftsman; Manufacturing hanager; Technical Services and Quality Assurance Manager; and Drafting Supervisor.
5 3.
Findings Within this area of the inspection, no deviations or unresolved items were identified.
D.
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 pro-gram had been implemented.
2.
Methods of Accomplishment The preceding objectives were accomplished by:
a.
Review of the following documents to verify the program had been documented by written policies, procedures, or instructions:
(1) Quality Assurance Manual, Revision 2, dated Navember 30, 1978; Sections 4.0, 6.0, and 16.0.
(2) Memorandum dated April 21, 1977, from the General Manager to the Department IIcads, entitled:
En-Tronic Procedures.
b.
Review of hardware covered by the program to verify identifica-tion had been established.
c.
Review of the following activitics to verify the program had been implemented:
Procurement Document Control; Document Control; and Corrective Action.
3.
Findings a.
Deviation From Commitment See Notice of Deviation, Item E.
b.
Unresolved Items None.
E.
Manufacturitig Process Control 1.
Objectives The objectives of this area of the inspection were to verify that measures had been established and documented to control manufacturing,
6 inspection and test activities. Also, to verify these activities had been accocplished in accordance with the established and docu-cented measures. Additionally, verification of indication of mandatory hold points in appropriate documents.
2.
Method of Accomplishment The preceding objectives were accomplished by:
a.
Review of the following documents to verify measures had been established and documented to control manufacturing, inspection and test activities:
(1) Quality Assurance Manual, Revision 2, dated November 30, 1978; Sections 5, 9, 10, 11 and 14.
(2) Engineering Procedures Nos.:
EE-149, Revision 3, dated November 1, 1976 - Wire Color Code and Terminal Designations; EE-157, Revision 1, dated August 16, 1976 - Terminals and Wire Termination Practices.
.; EE-163, Revision 0, dated October 20, 1977 - Test Requirements (Project),
Quality Requirements (Components); and Manufacturing Pro-cedure No. EM-112, Revision 0, dated March 30, 1977 -
Surface Preparation and Painting - Ali Panels.
(3) Test Procedure No. 59-7183-88, Revision 3, dated June 11, 1979.
(4) Haster Work Schedule for Engine / Generator Cabinet Assembly, Part No. G5-262-994, Serial No. 7177.
b.
Observed wiring of Engine Cabinet Assembly, Part No. G5-262-1017, Serial No. 59-7195 to Wiring List No. GS-278-229, Revision 2, dated April 6, 1979.
c.
Review of Memoranda dated March 27, 1979 and June 14, 1979, which referenced Part Nos. 59-7193 and 59-7185, respectively, to verify accomplishment of inspection and tcst activities.
3.
Findings a.
Deviation From Contmitment (1) See Notice of Deviation, Item A.
(2) See Notice of Deviation, Item B.
7 b.
Unresolved Item Memoranda initiated at the conclusion of testing identify functional, engineering, and workmanship problems encountered during testing.
Also, the memoranda attests to the correction of observed deficiencies. However, there was no apparent indication of reinspection, retesting, and reevaluation of the affected area as required by paragraph 11.2 of the Quality Assurance Manual, Revision 2, dated November 30, 1978.
As a result of the foregoing, the NRC inspector could not determine whether or not persons correcting deficiencies were also irepecting, testing, and evaluating those same corrected
, iencies.
F.
Ehynge Control 1.
Objectives The objectives of this area of the inspection were to verify that measures had been established to control changes to software and hardware.
Also, to verify the measures for software changes included provisions for review, approval, and distribution to and usage at the location where the prescribed activity is performed. An additional phase was to verify the measures had been implemented.
2.
Methods of Accomplishment The preceding objectives were accomplished by:
Review of the following documents to verify measures had been a.
established to control changes to software and hardware:
(1) Quality Assurance Manual, Revision 2, dated November 30, 1978; Sections 6.0 and 15.0; and paragraphs 3.5; 3.7; 4.6; and 14.4.
(2) Engineering Procedures Nos. EE-116, dated November 1, 1976 -
Product Drawings; EE-132, Revision 1, dated November 1,
/6 - Shop - Initiated Changes (Form 35); EE-164, dated 17, 1977 - En-Tronic Field and Shop Change Order; and
-t
-137, Revision 2, dated November 1,1976 - Project Engineering Responsibilities on Sales Orders or Projects.
b.
Review of the following to verify the procedures had been implemented:
8 (1) Consonwealth Edison project Change Nos. 19, 20, and 21, issued on November 18, 1978, December 29, 1978, and April 3, 1979, respectively; and the revised sheets of Drawing No. G5-553-124; and Bill of Material G5-262-994, Revision 1, dated January 25, 1979.
(2) Houston Lighting and Power project Change No. 10, issued on December 19, 1978, and the revised sheets of Drawing Nos. G5-553-137, G5-262-1017 and Bill of Material G5-262-1017 Change No. 15, issued on February 9, 1979, and the revised sheet of Bill of Material G5-262-1017; Change No. 19, issued on May 2, 1979, and the revised sheets of Drawing Nos. G5-262-1017 and G5-553-137.
(3) Arizona Pu'slic Service project Change No. 32, issued December 19, 1978, and revised Bill of Material G5-262-1020; Change No. 36A, issued May 4,1979, and revised sheets of Drawings Nor.. G5-253-200, and G5-262-1009; the revised sheet of Bill of Material GS-262-1009; and the revised sheets of Wire List G5-278-228.
(4) Change notification Form 35S serial numbers, 2007, dated May 30, 1979; 2009, dated June 1, 1979; 2013, dated June 6, 1979; and 2014, dated June 10, 1979.
(5) Change No. 1, dated February 20, 1979, to Purchase Order No. 3609J5694; Change No. 1, dated April 20, 1979, to Purchase Order No. 3609J6191; and Change No. 2, dated March 16, 1978, to Purchase Order No. 3609K5209.
3.
Findings a.
Deviations From Connitment (1) See Notice of Deviation, Item C.
(2) See Notice of Deviation, Item D.
b.
Unresolved itemg None.
G.
Exit Interview 1.
The inspector met with management representatives denoted in paragraph A.
at the conclusion of the inspection on July 26, 1979.
9 2.
The following subjects were discussed:
a.
Areas inspected.
b.
Deviations identified.
c.
Unresolved Item identified.
d.
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.
Additionally, management representatives were requested to notify the Commission in writing if dates require adjustment, commitments require modification, etc.
3.
Management representatives acknowledged the comments made by the in-spector.
9