ML19296F579
| ML19296F579 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Callaway  |
| Issue date: | 05/23/1978 |
| From: | NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19296F572 | List: |
| References | |
| REF-QA-99900519 NUDOCS 8010210838 | |
| Download: ML19296F579 (2) | |
Text
+
M 1
Bechtel Power Corporation Gaithersburg Power Division Docket No.
99900519/78-02 NOTICE OF DEVIATION Based on the results of an NRC inspection conducted on May 8-12, 1978, it appears that certain of your activities were not conducted in full compliance with NRC requirements as indicated below:
10 CFR 50 Appendix B, Criteria V states in part " Activities affecting quality... shall be accomplished in accordance with these instructions, procedures, or drawings." Contrary to the above the following three examples were found in which activities affecting quality were not acccmplished in accordance with the prescribed pro-cedures.
1.
Section 4.0 of Engineering Department Project Instruction (EDPI) 4.46-01 (Project Drawings) states in part:
"That under no circum-stances shall the requirement for checking and reviewing the design drawings be waived, and that a copy of each drawir.g to be checked shall be marked ' Check Print' and shall be used for checking purposes only."
Further, Section 4.2 states, "Each discipline group shall maintain completed drawing check-prints for a minimum of forty-five calendar days after issue of the involved drawing revision."
Contrary to the above, the " Check Print" was not used for the-purpose of checking Revision 6 to drawing C-0C2316 issued on April 4,1978, nor was the " Check Print" for the revision of this drawing retained.
2.
Engineering Department Project Instruction, EDPI 5.12-01, Supplier Document Control Procedure, Paragraph 6.6.b states in part, "The responsible engineer enters his last name in block E on copy No. 3 of the processing / transmittal form, retains copy f;o. 5 and 1 print of each drawing, and returns the reproducible and copies No. 3 and 4 of the form to SDCC within three (3) days of receipt."
Contrary to the above the inspector observed on May 11, 1978, that processing / transmittal forms did not have the responsible engineers last name in block E on copy number three for many of the forms.
Two examples are, processing / transmittal form number 12034 and number 12192.
3.
Engineering Department Project Instruction, EDPI 4.46-01
" Project Engineering Drawings", Paragraph 6.3.b states in part,
" Superceded Prints will be stamped superseded and left loose in the stick file for disposition by the group supervisor /
group leader."
10l2 3 0 $Q
. Contrary to the above on May 11, 1978, the inspector observed that drawing flo.10466-M-02EF01, Revision tio. 3 (Revision 4 was the current revision) was on a mechcnical stick file, controlled book fio. 2823, in the civil engineering file without being stamped superseded.
Revision No. 4 was also in the same stick file.
i i
.