ML19308D600
| ML19308D600 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Oconee, Crystal River  |
| Issue date: | 01/09/1970 |
| From: | Oller R, Sutton J, Thornburg H US ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION (AEC) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19308D595 | List: |
| References | |
| B&W-69-09, B&W-69-9, NUDOCS 8003041001 | |
| Download: ML19308D600 (16) | |
Text
a U. S. ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION g
)
REGION III s
DIVISION OF COMPLIANCE Verdor Inspection Report PWR Steam Generators j
~\\
Vendor:
Babcock & Wilcox Company Barberton, Ohio Report No:
B&W 69/9 Components Inspected For:
Oconee 1 (50-269)
Crystal River 3 (50-302)
Dates of Inspection:
December 16 - 18, 1969 W (. WEk Inspectors:
R. E. 01 r Metallurgical Engineer (Responsible) January 8,1970 Lw
(
W.
utton Reactor Inspector (Construction)
January 8,1970
)
I Licensee Representatives:
J. M. Curtis - Duke Power Company R. Bourn
- Florida Power Corporation t.kM Reviewed By:
. D. Thornburg Se or Reactor Inspector January 9,1970 Proprietary Information:
Entire Report i
Licensee Application Requirements:
)
Oconee 1 FSAR - Section III, ASME Code plus Sununer Addendum, 1969, per CO:II Crystal River 3 - Section III, ASME Code - 1965, per CO:I
SUMMARY
Initial CO review of Barberton Works' QA and OC organization (attached Exhibits 1 and 2) showed separation of authority and responsibility in relation to activities of QA, QC, and production. All of the above groups are audited on a continuous basis by the Nuclear Power Generating Department, Lynchburg.
In-process OC is maintained by a system of process control sheets showing inspection and NDT hold points, inspection tickets, upgrading sheets, and final inspection checkoff lists.
Nonconforming material is not physically segregated but is tagged and held at respective areas until cleared or scrapped.
Subvendors are inspected on a periodic basis and at specified inspection hold points.
O V
i 800304ojcop
S The Babcock & Wilcox (B&W) QC manual was found to contain all elements of
.QC organization, planning, control, process specifications, and record keeping, but the included welding specifications were only typical of those used.
(Section II-A-1.)
Duke Power Company purchase specification 'or the nuclear steam supply system, NSSS-201, and B&W standard specification for once through steam generators designated ASME Code Sections II, III, VIII, and IX as controlling documents, where applicable, and appeared to be in accordance with these codes.
(Section II-A-2.)
MTR's covering forgings and plate material for both Oconee l and Crystal River 3 steam generators were in accordance with ASTM A-508, C1. 2, and A-212, Gr. B, requirements and applicable ASME Codes, However, Barberton's Material Record Control Division had considerable difficulty in finding the Oconee records which indicated a poor record traceability system.
(Sections II-A-3-a and II-B-2.)
Welding records for selected circle welds on both Oconee 1 and Crystal River 3 steam generators showed welder operators were qualified to Navships 250-1500-1 instead of ASME Section IX as required.
Welding procedures WG-58 and WG-8 (for Oconee and Crystal River, respec-tively) were noted to be qualified for the two selected circle welds.
However, a Navy Procedure QC-W-21 was actually used in qualifying the operators and making.the welds.
B&W stated the procedures were equivalent.
However, the CD inspectors considered the substitution a contractual and code violation.
A deficiency w.
noted in the qualification of Procedure WG-58 in that it was stated to be qualified for base materials P-3, SA-508 Class 2. and P B.
However, the test data sheet omitted P-12-B material.
B&W stated this was an oversight.
Welder operators for Crystal River work we*e not requalified according to Section IX, Essential Variable W-1, " Change in Filler Metal." Operators had been qualified for stainless and Inconel cladding but not for Mn-Mo-Ni filler metal in Vee groove welds.
B&W position was that Essential Variables did not apply to welder operators.
No hot ovens were provided in the shop for low hydrogen weld rod used in repairs.
(Sections II-A-4 and II-B-3.)
Final stress relief of Oconee 1, Nos.1 and 2 steam generators was in accordance with Section III.
Stress relief was performed in a special furnace, using computer controlled electric resistance elements and forced circulated hot helium gas.
Required temperature holding times for various i
weld thicknesses were monitored by approximately 100 selectively placed
(
thermocouples.
(Section II-A-5.)
I
~
Review of final radiograph films on a selected circle weld for Oconee 1 showed the technique met Section III Code requirements. No unacceptable defects were noted.
(Section II-A-6.)
. All nondestructive testing personnel were qualified to SNT-TC-IA Standard.
The number of personnel and equipment appeared adequate for the shop work-load.
(Section II-A-7.)
N-1 Manufacturers Data Reports for both Oconee 1 steam generators were complete and signed by National Board of B&PV inspectors.
(Section II-A-8.)
Manufacturing relocations of steam system components were reviewed.
Barberton has been ASNE surveyed and issued ASNE stamps for nuclear vessels, parts, and piping. Canton and Madison Works may require resurvey to secure nuclear vessel stamps.. (Section II-A-9.)
DETAILS I.
Scope of Inspection i
On December 16 - 18, 1969, an announced vendor inspection was made of B&W, Barberton, Ohio, by R. E. Ollar, Metallurgical Engineer, and J. W.
['~'}
Sutton, Reactor Inspector (Construction), Region III.
The purpose of the inspection was to audit the Barberton plant facili-ties and QC performance in regard to the manufacture of steam generators for Oconee 1 and Crystal River 3 nuclear steam supply systems (NSSS).
The following persons were contacted during this inspection:
Babcock & Wilcox Company (B&W). Barberton C. Barksdale - QA Engineer, NPGD - Lynchburg J. C. Quinn - Manager of QA C. Bourman
- QC Inspector G. Domalaski - Project Engineer, Steam Generators H. C. Graber - Section Manager NDT E. Hicks
- Assistant Manage'r Commercial Nuclear Components C. E. Jessen - Chief Inspector D. Kinsala
- QA Coordinator R. Manoll
- QA Engineer, NPGD - Lynchburg E. Snicer
- Assistant Specialist, Reactor Vessels Duke Power Company (Duke)
J. M. Curtis - OA Engineer Florida Power Corporation (FPC)
R. Bourn
- Maintenance Engineer - Crystal River 3 e
w
r (m)
- v II.
Results of Inspection A.
Oconee 1 Steam Generators
~
- 1.,Barberton OA/QC Organization and Program The Barberton Works' OA Group and QC Group are shown on the attached Exhibits 1 and 2.
Mr. J. C. Quinn, QA Manager, reports to the Manager of Manufacturing and is responsible -
for the research and engineering aspects of QA.
Mr. W. A.
Hansen, QC Manager, reports separately to the Barberton Works Manager and is responsible for performance of inspection, nondestructive testing, and CC engineering.
The performance of all QA/OC activities, related to B6W Nuclear System contracts at Barberton and other works loca-tions (shown on Exhibit 1), are audited by Mr. R. Mano11, QA Engineer, Nuclear Power Generating Department, Lynchburg.
NPGD is the direct supplier of the system to the licensee.
In-process OC at Barberton is maintained through process contro1' sheets accompanying each component detailing each manufacturing sequence with required inspection and NDT hold points, inspection tickets, upgrading sheets, and
- (
checkoff lists.
1 Provisions are made for initial and periodic inspection of material suppliers. Many large material pieces requiring 6 - 12 months' manufacturing tLae have hold points at which B&W witness the tests. Shell and ring forgings are normally purchased in a final heat treated condition with all chemical, physical, and Charpy-V tests complete.
Plate material to be hot formed by B&W is purchased on a chemistry basis.
B&W performs the balance of tests.
The B&W QC Manual, which covered the Barberton and Mt. Vernon Works, was found to be comprehensive and contained the elements of drawing control, QC planning, base material control, procedure and welder qualification, welding process control, heat treatment, nondestructive testing, gage control and calibration, and cleaning and shipping. Welding pro-cedures contained in the manual were of a general inscruction type and did not include actual shop procedures used.
2.
Specifications 4
-s O a.
Duke Specification NSSS-201, daced January 1, 1966,
" Nuclear Steam Generating Equipment and Nuclear Fuel" Review of the above contractual specification showed it to be a performance specification for the entire system.
All components of the Oconee 1, 2, and 3 NSSS were required to be in accordance with the latest ASME Codes and interpretations. ASNE Codes designated were Sections II, III, VIII, and IX.
b.
B&W Specification CS-3-33, dated November 26, 1968,
" Standard Equipment Specification For Once Through Steam Generators" This specification was standard for the steam generators.
Duke requirements were added as supplements.
The CS-3-33 specification included an Equipment Specification, Functional Specification CS(F)-3-33, and General Cleaning Specification CS(F)-3-92.
Specification CS-3-33 contained the following categories:
(1) Scope (2) Reference Documents: ASME Code Sections II, III, l
O IX, and Applicable Code Cases m
(3) Services and Equipment to be Supplied (4) Design Requirements (5) Materials (6) Fabrication (7) Tests and Inspections (8) Cleaning (9) Preservation, Packaging, and Shipping (10) Documents to be Supplied GD Record of Revisions General Cleaning Specification CS-3-33, Paragraph 8.1.2.1 specified that the primary and secondary side of the steam generators would be cleaned
'.n accordance with B&W Class C conditions.
B&W's General Specification CS-5-92, dated May 29, 1968, listed four conditions of cleaning, i.e:
Class A - Components inserted into the system without further cleaning are cleaned under clean room conditions.
Class B - Surfaces of components exposed to reactor coolant, which cannot be cleaned effectively after assembly, are cleaned under near-clean room conditions.
O m
- e i
. Class C - Surface of components in contact with reactor coolant and which are capable of being cleaned after assembly or installation in a system are cleaned oy standard methods as solvents, flushing, etc.
Class D - External surface not exposed to process
. fluids are cleaned by standard methods as grit blasting and then painted.
Mr. D. Kinsala stated that, although contractual cammitments are for Class C cleaning, B&W performs a cleaning equivalent to Class B.
The CO inspectors reviewed the actual shop procedure used which confirmed Mr. Kinsala's statement.
3.
Test Records Material Test Reports (MTR's)
MTR's for Oconee 1 Steam Generator #1 were selected at random for the upper head forging, Heat #C-25961, tube sheet forging, Heat #122T-127-VA1, and shell course #3 (2 plates), Heats A-1773-1 and A-1951-1.
Records were filed in the Material Record Control Hection.
Test reports for both forgi'ngs, supplied by Bethlehem Steel, were complete and met the requirements of ASTM A-508, Class 2, as specified for chemistry, physical properties, Charpy-V impact properties, UT, MT, and heat treatment.
Test reports for two shell plates consisted of Mill Test Reports for chemistry and UT data furnished by Lukens Steel Company (basis of plate purchase) and B&W test reports on physical properties, impact tests, bend tests, and heat treatment. - After considerable confusion and delay experienced by B&W's Nbterial Record Control in finding B&W test records, the test data, when produced, was in pencil form and uncertified.
Both Lukens' and B&W's test reports met the requirements of SA-212, Grade B material, i
as specified. The apparent lack of ready record traceability was discussed by the CO inspectors in the exit interview.
a
5
, O V
^
- 4.. Welding Welding records related to the circle weld joining the upper head.to tube sheet of the No. I steam generator were reviewed.
i The sampling consisted of Welding Procedures, Weld Control
-)
, Record, and Welding Operator Oualifications as follows.
l
~
B&W Proc 4 ure W-51, dated January 23, 1969, " General a.
Specificacion for Subnerged Arc Welding of Vessels for Several Products on Nuclear Applications."
j 1
b.
B&W Welding Data Sheet WG-58 (Supplement to W-51).
c.
Welder Operator Qualification Test Records for three operators.
l Several discrepancies and nonconformities were noted as j
follows:
)
a.
Procedure W-51 was general for numerous types of welding and was not qualified as such for the selected circle we ld'.
1
- b. ' Weld Data Sheet Procedure WG-58, directly applicable J
K to the selected weld, was stated to be qualified for base, materials P-3, SA-508, Class 2, and P12-B.
However, the Qualification Test Sheet for WG-58 did not include P12-B base material.
B&W personnel stated this was an oversight, and the qualification tests did include P12-B base material.
The CO inspectors accepted the explanation but stated it indicated a need for closer review of documents by B&W.
c.
The three welding operators who worked on the selected weld were qualified to a Navy Welding-Procedure OC-W-21 instead of WG-58, and, in addition, were qualified to Navships 250-1500-1 instead of ASME Section IX.
B&W stated that the QC-W-21 was a Navy procedure equivalent j
to WG-58 and that Navships 250-1500-1 qualification was equivalent to Section IX.
'Ihe CO inspectors stated in the presence of Duke's OA Engineer that equivalent procedures and qualification standards were not in accordance with ASME Codes required by the applicant's FSAR and by contractual documents.
B&W has constructed a separate new welding school building.
Mr. Walker, Welding School Supervisor, stated that B&W was in the process of requalifying all procedures, welders, and welding operations to ASNE Section IX and would provide p) separate ASME qualification test papers.
He stated
(
v l
l
l 1
further that all qualification records, including a
~
checkof f sheet for updating welders and welding operators, would be centralized in the school for ready review.
5.
Final Stress Relief of Steam Generators Facilities and verification records covering the final stress relief of the two steam generators for Oconee 1 were examined '
by the CO inspectors.
B&W had constructed a, special-heat treating railcar furnace building equipped with zone controlled multiple electric resistance heaters in the ceiling and floor and a forced circulation duct system for recirculating hot helium gas through both primary and secondary sides of the steam generators.
Required temperature holding time for the varying component weld metal thicknesses in the vessel was achieved by computer control, utilizing approximately 100 thermocouples (TC), selectively placed on and in the vessel.
All TC point readings were recorded on strip charts.
The steam generators were stress relieved in their completed assembly with the operation being run by qualified heat treating' specialists.
Mr. Curtis, Duke, stated he had witnessed final SR of both vessels.
e Since examination of the many rolls of strip charts would have been a lengthy process, the CO inspectors examined an internal'B&W memorandum dated June 2, 1969, "QA to Inspection,"
verifying the successful stress relief of the No. I steam generator.
The inspectors noted that the following welds were monitored:
a.
Inlet Nozzle and Lugs to Top Head b.
Top Head to Tubesheet c.
Top Tubesheet to Shell d.
Shell to Bottom Tubesheet I
e.
Tubesheet to Bottom Head f.
Botton Head to Skirt Transition g.
Skirt Transition to Support Skirt h.
Ouclet Nozzles and Pad Buildups to Bottom Head J
. Location of thermocouples and hold times were verified as having been in accordance with marked-up engineering drawings.
A tabulation showed holding times for each of the above welds.
All welds were verified to have been stress relieved at 11000F to 11500F. Other points monitored but not requiring SR on the
, vessel did not get below 1050 F.
Structual limitations on tube temperatures to average shell temperature and allowable temperature thickness gradients of welds, tubesheets, and heads were verified as having never been exceeded, Engineering diametrical limits were controlled by step heating and cooling.
The memorandum concluded that all code requirements had been met, and the original tabulations would be filed in the contract file. Based on the above document, the CO inspectors conclude that the SR of both steam generators was performed in accordance with ASNE 0)de requirements.
6.
Radicaraphy To provide consistency of audit, the CO inspectors reviewed final x-ray films on the top head to tubesheet weld of the No. I steam generator.
Weld # MK8-51 Oy Weld thickness 8" Source C0/60 36 positions - double film Benet' ameter.80 r
- Ihirty-six films were reviewed by the CO inspectors. Wrap around technique with source in center was used.
Sensitivity was good as shown by a clear penetrameter.
No unacceptable defects were noted in the weld. All RT techniques and procedures were found to be in accordance with ASME Code Section III, Appendix IX.
7.
Nondestructive Testing Personnel and Facilities The CO inspectors held a brief discussion with Mr. H. C.
Graber, Section Manager, NDT.
Mr. Graber is qualified to Level III (examiner) SNT-TC-IA Standard. A list of person-nel, dated September 1969, qualified to SNT-TC-IA Standards showed the following:
RT Level I - 29 people Level II - 12 people O
O
a
. 's_ /
ZI Level I - 37 people Level II - 9 people y
Level I - 37 people Level II - 10 people EI Level I - 11 petM.e Level II - 12 people Mr. Graber stated that the list is updated every six months.
He stated further that Barberton has a full-time instructor qualified in all the above NDT techniques.
The CO inspectors also examined a list of NDT equipment which showed modern and adequate equipment for all types of'NDT.
"s 8.
N-1 NWnufacturer's Data Rep 6rts
\\
The CO inspectors examined the completed N-1 forms for both Oconee Unit 1 steam generators and found them to be completed and certified by B&W and the National Board of Boiler and Pressure Vessel inspectors.
9.
Other Items Discussed a.
Manufacturing Relocation Further 'nformation was obtained in regard to manufac-turing locations of B&W nuclear steam systems (NSSS) change).gp as of December componen 16,1969 (but subject to B&W, at present, has 11 NSSS under contract.
Locations of manufacture are as follows:
(1) Primary Piping Fabrication All. projects
- Mt. Vernon, Indiana (2) Reactor Vessels All projects
- Mt. Vernon, Indiana 1!CO Report B&W 69/6.
uf
-~
11 -
3 (3) Steam Generators All projects
- Barberton, Ohio (4) Pressurizers Oconee #1 and Three Mile Island #1
- Madison, Indiana Oconee #2, Crystal River
- 2, and Russelville #1 - Canten, Ohio Jersey Central #2, Oconee 3 SMUD #1, Midland 1 and 2, and Toledo Edison #1
- Mt. Vernon, Indiana (5) Reactor Internals Oconee 1, Three Mile Island #1, Midland 1 & 2, and Toledo Edison
- Barberton, Ohio Oconee #2 and 3, Jersey Central #2, Crystal River #3, Russelville #1, and SMUD #1
- Allis Chalmers, York, Pennsylvania (6) Core Flooding Tanks Oconee #1 Barberton, Ohio Balance of projects
- Stearns Roger, Denver, Colorado (7) Reactor Vessel Nozzle Machining and Cladding All projects
- Mt. Vernon, Indians (8) Surge Piping 2 " & 10" All projects
- Barberton, Ohio (9) Pressurizer Heaters All projects
- Weigand Company Pictaburgh, Pennsylvania b.
ASME N Stamp Survey Mr. Quinn, QA Manager, stated that Barberton Works had been ASME surveyed in October 1969 and had received three stamps, viz., N (Nuclear Vessels), NPT (Nuclear Parts),
and NPP (Nuclear Piping).
The Madison and Canton Works were also surveyed but had not been issued stamps.
The survey of these two locations covered issuance for Nuclear Parts only, and B&W stated they may require a resurvey g
for the Nuclear Vessel authorization due to current plans
\\~
for completion of vessels at these locations.
l
\\
i e
-~
1 J
12 -
V 10.
Shop Inspection Tours of the shop were made on December 17 and 18 to observe Oconee 1 and Crystal River 3 work, respectively.
The inspec-tors noted that portable hot ovens were not located at weld
-l
, repair areas in the shop, and nonconforming materials were not segregated but identified only by a reject tag.
The following areas were visited:
a.
Seamless Pipe Extrusion and Plate Pfpe Welding, Pipe Machining and Straightening b.
Vessel Head and Shell Pressing c.
Tube Sheet Automated Gun Drills and Support Plate Broaching d..
Vessel Head and Shell Weld Cladding (Single wire and six-wire cladding) e.
Main Vessel Assembly Shop i
f.
Gage and Tool Room
('s
\\
g.
Steam Generator Stress Relieving Furnace h.
Vari'ous Radiograph Rooms and Portable Shields (both x-ray and gamma ray) 11.
Exit Interview on Oconee 1 An exit interview was held on December 17, 1969, with Messrs.
E. Hicks, D. Kinsala, and J. M. Curtis in regard to Oconee 1.
The C0 inspectors explained the current Compliance practice of assigning specific inspectors to audit manufacturers of nuclear components on a representative basis to gain famil-iarity with facilities and performance to determine their level of performance in regard to specific licensee's work.
The inspectors also noted the following items in regard to this audit of Oconee 1:
a.
It appeared tc the inspectors that considarable confusion existed in locating material records, and this indicated poor record traceability in the Material Records Division, b.
The lack of provisions for physical segregating of non-conforming material, other than tagging, could lead to their inadvertent use. B&W stated their system of reject (p) tickets and clearance tickots prevented this happening.
v 4
_t
)
~ N~
~
c.
The lack of hot ovens at weld repair areas for care of tne predominately used low hydrogen electrodes was considered poor practice by the inspectors.
B&W stated they would give this consideration.
,d.
Sampling of welding records showed that welder operators were not qualified to Section IX.
This was in nonconformance with the applicant's contractual requirements. In addition, the procedure used, QC-W-21, was not the procedure qualified for the specific weld and operators audited.
B&W acknowledged this situation existed and stated they were in the process of requali-fying welders to Section IX in addition to their present Navships 250-1500-1 qualifications.
Mr. Curtis stated he would take action to resolve this problem as it applied to finished and in-process Oconee work.
B.
Crystal River Unit 3 Steam Generators 1.
General On December 18, 1969, an audit was made of Crystal River #3 steam generators in the presence of Mr. R. Bourn, FPC.
Material records and welder operator qualifications were reviewed and in-process shop work was observed, as previously noted.
Mr. Bourn stated on all B&W work, FPC performs ~their own QA surveillance.
I l
2.
MTR's i
1
- MIR's were selected for the lower tubesheet, the #5 shell course, and the nozzle course of the #1 steam generator.
All MTR's appeared complete and in accordance with ASTM and ASME Code requirements.
3.
Weldina Welding procedures, weld data sheets, and welding operator qualifications were selected in connection with the circle seam between the Mk 1 top shell course and the Mk 2 shell nozzle course of the No.1 cteam generator for Crystal River No. 1 generator in a manner similar to the Oconee 1 selection. Welding Procedure W-51, supplemented by Procedure WG-8, were designated as qualified and used on the selected weld. Again, it was noted by the CO inspectors that Navy procedure QC-W-21 was actually used.
The performance qualification papers for four welding operators showed j
qualification to Navships 250-1500-1, instead of Section IX, ASME Code.
o
- i In addition, the welding operators were found to have been qualified for stainless and Inconel clad welding on low alloy and carbon steel but not for butt welding.
It was B&W's position that Essential Variables in ASME Section IX did not apply in the case of welding operators. However,
.the CO inspectors did not interpret the code in this manner and stated that this aspect would require further study by Compliance.
This item was discussed in the exit interview.
During this audit, B&W stated that longitudinal seams in the shells of all steam generators were electroslag welded at Mt. Vernon. All electroslag welding records and procedures were at Mr. Vernon and, therefore, unavailable during this inspection.
4.
Exit Interview on Crystal River A brief exit interview was held with B&W and FPC representa-tives at which the CO inspectors again explained the reason for CO's audit of vendors.
In addition, they noted that welder operators and procedures used on the Crystal River steam generators did not appear to be in accordance with O
ASNE Section IX requirements. The FPC representative had e
no cannents to make on this item. The inspectors stated that Cogpliance would follow up on this item.
Attachments:
Exhibits 1 and 2 9
N
\\(
O-t 1
\\
i
\\
POWER GENb.JION DIVISION
%s MANUFACTURING DEPARTMENT QUAllT'( ASSURANCE 04, G b S'$.> y V,1'J C h tJ> f Mf G.A. Pro Fo t.2 j,
( --
1
.:r RA1SCin
'W J. C. Caian I
~
g
?g
)
A3MistsIRailCN J. C. Crebb
{-
TB50 b-Py l
l i
l g
I
[M Cualeir assut2sct I
vtLD - Quatsiv kCs.ctsinXil%E CuattTT assatA4CE vifaLLURGY OF SPECIALI2t0 3
AS$unasCE ICSitNG '
t4G sttal:ng I
'D-seeis'i. nr.ef G. M
--a as 8 "
'*"e "t J t=as a
8 '
5"*"
a I
,W,;A'[strees Sectioi M a Sectise Stead 3
, p,g y
Section head 1
- c. E. Toe's I
R. t assisa'.
J c. u isey A. t. neeisa
,, (,
s y
s 3
I s
8 s
T********"'*******"""L"7~*********'**'""********f*'""""******"**7"*I*"'***"**"**"~**"1*"****"**""******"**
g I
I I
I I
I I
(
f a
3 a
f a
9 t
BaratitCg v02tS 8 tut!wtC4 hoaxs C4'sT01 b0ans EFtCit03 CCPT.
vf. vtRx01 W PRS l paq;g gyggg ht1T PCist hosts h't LM i *.Gi:1OP C'JAtiff CC412ut Cuttlif C0'4!ROL CutLIIT C0%IROL Ov4Litt CCcTROL CUAllit C01190L CUALIIT CC'i123L CUALITT CONTRA C'Jaltit C41T7h W. A. Massee G. L. Reed M. R. Wile
- 1. M. Hopklas W. C. 8. sher g, g, g,,,,,,,
?4 A. Leag A. S. Pene ngee e
1 I
T 1
.l t
9 18 l
cretes r... tic..,.....u sists EXIITBTT 1 ORGANIZATION CHART NO. P 8.
THE BADCOCK f. WILCOX COWA*
N
)
.t v v/
n POWER GENERATION DIVISION M ANUFACTURING. DEPARTMENT BARBERTON WORKS s
~
QUAUTY CONTROL
~
i3pr!.;e !co' ' h v i s l'? f
?
&clic.h
.g HanaGtt
=
- u. s. m...e.
I
.0 0
6
)
23 8)
L3 1
1__
- h hua-CESTRU*Ilbt C*JALITY CCETML f
sk5PECit04 itstem3 thGlattatsG C. f. Jessen
- u. C. Graner 6
J. 5. Gesshse W
9tCOR05 & UPG2ADlhG I taf 914 C$4 PALFARAllCN h
N. 5. Kester
~
- 0. E. Phoesis
~
J. P. Peresek f
AJ3lT & haff
%'JCLE A% SNSPECIlC1 Hi PI CO2&t0fCut,thCE
~
C. A. Nilschn e A. C. $ti th -
N. E. Se! ten
- 8 804tta sh5 PECTIC 2 Uttaa00riC5
<thC0A suayttttasCC M. C. Rochel E. A. pa.tean F. G. Ferry
%[g((A GAGC F00tt'
[MPt0ft! Tua NihG
~
3, rig g G. 14. Hu r g an J. 5. Gershoe 10.7 6:
ORGANIZATION CilART NO. P 4.5:
E.E.II.T,Py {}
7gg yggggg g yggg,y ggggg
-