ML19309C223
| ML19309C223 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 02/06/1980 |
| From: | Foster W, Hunnicutt D NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19309C201 | List: |
| References | |
| REF-QA-99900300 NUDOCS 8004080316 | |
| Download: ML19309C223 (12) | |
Text
.
O U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT REGION IV Report No. 99900300/80-01 Program Nos. 51300/
51400 Company:
Colt Industries Fairbanks Morse Engine Division 701 Lawton Avenue Beloit, Wisconsin 53511 Inspection Conducted: January 21-25, 1980.
Inspect r:
AY n$-a-k
.2/f/80
/s W. E. Foster, Contractor Inspector
/ Date jf ComponentsSection II Vendor Inspection Branch Approved by:
f/i' wMuf 2./l/d'O D. M. Hunnicutt, Chief
' Date ComponentsSection II Vendor Inspection Branch Summary:
Inspection on January 21-25, 1980 (99900300/80-01)
Areas Inspected:
Implementation of 10 CFR 50, Appendix B oriteria, and appli-cable codes and standards, including follow-up on inspector identified problems and unresolved items; follow-up on inspector identified deviations; manufactur-ing process control; and 10 CFR Part 21 reports. The inspection involved twenty-eight and one-half (28.5) inspector-hours on site and four'(4) inspector-hours at the motel.
Results:
In the four (4) areas inspected, the following three (3) deviations, two (2) unresolved items and seven (7) follow-up items were identified:
Deviations: Manufacturing Process Control practices were not consistent with Criterion V of Appendix B to 10 CFR 50; paragraph 8.0 of Manufacturing Engi-neering Standard No. 00:01:02, dated February 10, 1978 (page 2 is dated February 27,1978) (See Notice of Deviation Item A); paragraph 5.4.1.2 of Section 5, Revision 2, dated January 1978, of the Quality Assurance Manual, and Operation Sheet, Data Process (D/P) date of May 24, 1979, Part No. P12602841, Serial No. 9060, Order No. 418740 (See Notice of Deviation, Item B); paragraph 10.4.4.2 of Section 10, Revision 0, dated April 1976, of the Quality Assurance Manual, Operation Sheet, D/P dates of December 14, 1978, and March 3,_1979, Part No. P12609673, Order No. 418720 (See Notice of Deviation, Item C).
0004080 h
2 Unresolved Items: Manufacturing Process Control - Addenda-(Form 4984) are used to revise Manufacturing Engineering Standards (MES) for customer specific requirements; however, the Addenda do not consistently identify the revision level of the MES to which it applies (Details Section, paragraph F.3.b.(1));
paragraph 5.1 of NES No. 00:01:02, dateo February 27, 1978 (page 2), requires a list of the contract numbers and applicable addenda approvals be posted at each welding and/or operator station;'however, the information has been com-bined in customer specific Procedure Control Manuals which are located at each welder station as required by MES No. 00:02:00, dated September 12, 1979 (Details Section, paragraph F.3.b. (2)).
Follow-up Items:
Rework of fuel injection pumps; non-destructive examination of exhaust rocker arms; testing of redesigned lube oil header and flushing operation; pressure test of one and one quarter (1-k) inch fuel lines (Details Section, paragraph B.4); thrust bearing corrective actions and preventive meas-ures (Details Section, paragraph D.4); heat exchanger corrective actions and preventive measures (Details Section, paragraph E.4).
s 1
3 DETAILS SECTION A.
Persons Contacted
- C. A. Ankrum, Manager - Quality Assurance
- M. J. Armfield, Technician - Quality Assurance F. Backhaus, Supervisor -Draf ting
- R. H. Beadle, Vice President - Engineering W. E. Bliss, Tool Setter - Numerical Control
- E. L. Fay, Vice President - Contracts E. Greene, Area Supervisor - Customer Service H. R. Hartshorn, Engineer - Quality Assurance
- J. M. Moriarty, Manager - Utility Sales K. Palermo, Writer - Specification W. F. Petzrick, Engineer - Welding
- K. A. Robison, Vice President - Manufacturing
- W. A. Schlagenhaf t, Manager - Quality Assurance Engineering (Nuclear)
B. M. Schoenike, Chief Inspector - Test and Erection C. W. Shockley, Supervisor - Industrial Engineering N. L. Stiener, Supervisor - Engineering Services R. L. Stuck, Engineer - Senior Welding J. Zahn, Chief Inspector - Large Engine Area
- Attended Exit Interview.
B.
Follow-up on Inspector Identified Problems and Unresolved Items 1.
Objectives The objectives of this area of the inspection were to verify that inspector identified problems and unresolved items, during previous inspections, had been corrected and resolved satisfactorily.
2.
Methods of Accomplishment The preceding objectives were accomplished by:
Reviewing contractor documentation of efforts undertaken to correct and resolve problems identified by the inspector during previous inspections.
3.
Findings a.
(Closed) Unresolved Item (Inspection Report No. 79-01): The 10 CFR 21 file maintained in the Utility Sales Department had been amended, by an Interoffice Memorandum, to agree with the Quality Assurance Records which indicated that one fuel injection
4 pump, for the Northeast Utilities contract, had been rerun for forty-eight (48) hours, b.
(Closed) Unresolved Item (Inspection Report No. 79-01): The inspector verified that inspection records had been initiated for nondestructive examination of the exhaust rocker arms of both diesel generators on the Duquesne Light Company contract.
The inspection records were dated November 1979, and January 4, 1980.
Nondestructive examination of the exhaust rocker arms of both diesel generators on the Northeast Utilities contract will be accomplished prior to shipment of the units which is scheduled for the end of June 1980. As a result, this portion of the unresolved item will remain open (Details Section B.4.(2)).
(Closed) Unresolved Item (Inspection Report No. 79-01):
While c.
there were no records to indicate replacement of the one and one-quarter (1k) inch fuel lines on diesel generators No. I for Northeast Utilities and No. 2 for Duquesne Light Company, the inspector closed this item based upon certification that replace-ment did occur and documented evidence that the lines had been satisfactorily pressure tested.
4.
Follcw-up Items During a subsequent inspection, the NRC inspector will verify that:
(1) Documentatian exists for installation and testing of Fuel Injection Pumps Barrel and Plunger Assembly (manufactured by L' Orange) on the diesel generators for Northeast Utilities (2) and Duquesne Light Company (2). Also, documentation for timing adjustment will be reviewed for these units as well as the units located at Summer Station.
(2) Documentation exists for non-destructive examination of exhaust rocker arms; also, valve clearance adjustment of the diesel generators for Northeast Utilities, and Duquesne Light Company.
(3) Documentation exists for testing of the redesigned lube oil header and flushing of the units for Duquesne Light Company (2) and Northeast Utilities (1), unit No. 2.
(4) Documentation exists for pressure test of one and one quarter (1-k) inch fuel lines on the units at Summer Station.
C.
Follow-up on Items of Noncompliances/ Deviations 1.
Objectives
5 The objectives of this area of the inspection were to verify that the vendor had taken the corrective actions and preventive measures stated in their correrpvadence to IE regarding items of noncompliances/
deviations.
2.
Methods of Accomplishment The preceding objectives were accomplished by:
Reviewing contractor documentation and efforts taken for corrective actions, and preventive measures of deviations identified by the inspector during previous inspections.
3.
Findings (Closed) Deviation (Inspection Report No. 78-01):
The inspector a.
verified that additional audits of December 1978, March and June 1979, had been documented on Internal Audit Summary Forms BF4876.
b.
(Closed) Deviation (Inspection Report No. 78-01):
The inspector verified that an Interoffice Memo had been initiated by Quality Assurance and sent to Manufacturing supervision regarding correct revision of drawings in manufacturing packets.
The inspector also verified that special audits of selected machining areas had been documented on Internal Audit Summary Forms BF4876.
(Closed) Deviation (Inspection Report No. 78-01):
The inspector c.
accedes that the Description of Change section of Engineering Change Orders is not intended to itemize all detailed changes of the referenced drawing.
d.
(Closed) Deviation (Inspection Report No. 78-01):
The inspector randomly selected fourteen (14), of approximately one-hundred-twenty-five (125) Engineering Change Orders initiated from 1976 to 1978 for Millstone and verified design review had been docu-mented on Quality Assurance Design Review Documentation Form BF4863.
D.
Follow-up of Region II Daily Report Item 1.
Objectives The objectives of this area of the inspection were to verify that the vendor had submitted a 10 CFR Part 21 report, and determine if a pro-posed course of action had been established.
6 2.
Methods of Accomplishment The preceding objectives were accomplished by:
Discussions with cognizant personnel to determine the status a.
of a 10 CFR Part 21 report and the planned course of action, b.
Reviewing 10 CFR Part 21 report, dated January 14, 1980, from Colt Industries - Fairbanks Morse Engine Division to the U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission at Glen Ellyn, Illinois, c.
Observation of a diesel generator for familiarization with the discrepant area and, d.
Reviewing Procedure for Checking Oil Plugs in Thrust Bearing, No. P12 611 620, dated January, 1980 (not released); and Daily Progress Report, dated January 24, 1980, from E. D. Greene to M. Moriarty regarding activity on the diesel generators (A and B) at V.C. Summer Nuclear Station.
3.
Findings a.
The 10 CFR Part 21 report indicates:
(1) The failure of the crankshaft thrust bearing, on a Summer Station diesel generator, was a result of omission of diver-sion plugs in the thrust bearing oil supply system, (2) The following diesel generators are also affected:
(a) An additional unit installed at Summer Station, (b) Two (2) units shipped to Seabrook Station, Unit 1, (c) Two (2) inits shipped for Callaway Station, Unit 1, (d) Two (2) units in storage at the Colt plant (Beloit) for Beaver Valley Station, Unit 2 and (e) Two (2) units in storage at the Colt plant (Beloit) for Millstone Station, Unit 3 and, (3) Copies of the report had been sent to responsible individuals of other similarly affected diesel generators.
b.
The Daily Progress Report (paragraph D.2.d. above) indicates that the "A" diesel generator at Summer Station had been inspected and the Diversion plugs were in place.
7 4.
Follow-up Items During a subsequent inspection, the NRC inspector will verify that:
(1) Documentation exists for accomplished of the procedure (para-graph D.2.d. above) for each of the affected units and, (2) Corrective actions and preventive measures have been documented, implemented and are adequate.
E.
Follow-up of Region III Daily Report Item 1.
Objectives The objectives of this area of the inspection were to verify that the vendor had submitted a 10 CFR Part 21 report, and determine if a proposed course of action had been established.
2.
Methods of Accomplishment The preceding objectives were accomplished by:
i Discussions with cognizant personnel to determine the status a.
of a 10 CFR Part 21 report and the planned course of action.
b.
Reviewing 10 CFR Part 21 report, dated January 1, 1980, from Colt Industries - Fairbanks Morse Engine Division to the U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission at Glen Ellyn, Illinois.
c.
Observation of a diesel generator skid for familiarization with the discrepant ares, and, d.
Reviewing sketches of the affected area and a Memo, dated January 21, 1980, from H. Stauffer to M. Moriatry,
Subject:
Heat Exchanger Mounting Problems - OP Nuclear Contracts.
3.
Findings The 10 CFR Part 21 report identifies the problem as failure a.
to seismically analyze the actual configuration of the mounting interface between the heat exchanger feet and the diesel gener-ator skid.
The configuration analyzed was complete metal to metal contact of the exchanger feet and the diesel generator skid while the actual configuration exhibits gaps (of varying dimensions) between the edges of the exchanger feet and the skid.
This condition is limited to the diesel generators for the Lim-erick Station.
I 1
5
8 b.
No conclusions have been reached regarding corrective actions.
Colt had proposed a repair the customer found acceptable but Colt is re-evaluating the proposed repair.
4.
Follow-up Items During a subsequent inspection, the NRC inspector will verify that corrective actions and preventive measures have been documented, implemented and are adequate.
F.
Manufacturing 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, inspection and test activities.
Also, to verify these activities had been accomplished in accordance with the established and docu-mented measures.
Additionally, verification of indication of mandatory hold points in appropriate documents.
2.
Methods of Accomplishment The preceding objectives were accomplished by:
Review of the following documents to verify measures had been a.
established and documented to control manufacturing, inspection and test activities:
(1) Quality Assurance Manual, Sections -
(a) 5, Revision 2, dated January 1978 - Instructions, Procedures and Drawings, (b) 9, Revision 0, dated April 1976 - Control of Special Processes, (c) 10, Revision 0, dated April 1976 - Inspection, (d) 11, Revision 0, dated April 1976 - Test Control, and (e) 14, Revision 0, dated April 1976 - Inspection, Test and Operating Status.
(2) Quality Assurance Manual - ASME, Sections -
(a) 5', Revision 0, dated April 18, 1979 - Instructions, Procedures and Drawings,
9 (b) 9, Revision 1, dated November 27, 1979 - Control of Construction Processes, (c) 10, Revision 0, dated April 18, 1979 - Examination, Tests and Inspection, (d) 11, Revision 0, dated April 18, 1979 - Test Control, and (e) 14, Revision 0, dated April 18, 1979 - Examination or Test Status.
(3) Standard Practice, Numbers -
(a) 340.30, dated December 1977 - Engineering Instructions, (b) 525.20A, dated May 1979 - Process Operation Sheet Procedure - Section A, and (c) 525.20B, dated May 1979 - Process Operation Sheet Procedure - Section B.
(4) Manufacturing Engineering Standard, Numbers -
(a) 00:00:01, dated March 22, 1977, (b) 00:02:00, dated September 12, 1979, (c) 00:01:02, dated February 10, 1978, (Page 2 is dated February 27, 1978),
(d) 03:24:06, dated February 10, 1978, and (e) 03:53:00, dated December 5,1977.
(5) Manufacturing Engineering Standard Addenda, Numbers -
(a) C03:24, dated September 12, 1979, (b) D03:24, dated September 12, 1979, e
(c) E24-A-Revision 1, dated August 8, 1978, (d) E24-B-Revision 1, dated August 8, 1978, and (e) B15-A, dated June 9, 1979.
(6) Quality Control Instructions, Numbers -
(a) 2000QC-E, dated April 5, 1977 - General Inspection Instructions,
10 (b) 2005 QCI-E, dated October 17, 1977 - Nondestructive Magnetic Particle - Dry Method, (c) 2005 QC3-H, dated January 26, 1979 - Nondestructive Testing - Liquid Penetrant Inspection, (d) 2005 QC6-C, dated October 13, 1977 - Radiographic
- Testing, (e) 2018, dated January 15, 1979 - Welding Inspection -
Visual Method ASME Section III Class 3, and (f) 2018 QC2, dated October 18, 1979 - Welding Inspection -
General Requirements ASME Section III Class 3 Piping.
b.
Observation of the following tasks and review of records for completed tasks to verify that accomplishment had been in accordance with documented manufacturing, inspection, and test requirements:
(1) Completed main bearing stud holes of the Universal 16 Cylinder Frame, Part No. P12602841, Serial No. 9060, Order No. 418740 ia accordance with Operation Sheets with Data Processing (D/P) dates of May 24, 1979 and December 10, 1979, (2) Machining of main bearing cap, Part No. P12609673, Order No. 418720, in accordance with Operation Sheets with D/P dates of December 14, 1978 and March 3, 1979, (3) Review of Operation Sheet, D/P date of February 14, 1979 for Weldment 16 Cylinder Frame, Part No. P12603978, Serial No. 9352, Order No. 920793, (4) Welding of 12 Cylinder Frame, Part No. P12603976, Serial No. 9609, Order No. 920226 in accordance with Operation Sheet, D/P date of March 1, 1979, and Welding Procedure Specification No. 16:11:01: dated February 28, 1977, and (5) Review of Operation Sheets, D/P dates of October 29, 1979 and January 3, 1980 for PC 2.5 Skid Welded Piping, Part No. 11872000, Order No. 983362.
3.
Findings a.
Deviations From Commitment (1)
Sea Notice of Deviation, Item A.
l (2)
See Notice of Deviation, Item B.
(3)
See Notice of Deviation, Item C.
11 b.
Unresolved Items (1) Addenda (Form 4984) are used to revise Manufacturing Engineering Standards (MES) for customer specific require-ments.
Manufacturing Engineering Standards always incor-porate the revision level in the identifying number; e.g.
03:24:06 indicates the document is revision level 6.
How-ever, Addenda do not consistently reflect the revision level which it applies; consequently, coorelation of Addenda to MES can become a problem.
The contractor should develop and employ a method of identifying Addenda to the proper revision of the partic-ular MES.
(2) Paragraph 5.1 of MES No. 00:01:02, dated February 27, 1978 (page 2), requires a list of contract numbers and appli-cable addenda approvals be posted at each welding and/or operator station, to assure customers of Colt that Colt is following customer approved procedures (paragraph 5.0).
The inspector observed that Welding Procedures and appli-cable Addenda, Procedure Qualification Records and appli-cable Addenda, Customer / Agent Approvals / Waivers had been combined in customer specific Procedure Control Manuals (PCM) as required by MES No. 00:02:00, dated September 12, 1979. The PCMs had been distributed and were located at each welder station.
The contractor should take the steps necessary to resolve the apparent conflict between paragraph 5.1 of MES No.
00:01:02 dated February 27, 1978, and the Issuing instruc-tions of MES No. 00:02:00 dated September 12, 1979.
G.
Exit Interview 1.
The inspector met with management representatives denoted in para-graph A at the conclusion of the inspection on January 25, 1980.
2.
The'following subjects were discussed:
a.
Areas inspected.
Management representatives were informed that final statements l
regarding Inspection Report No. 79-01 would be withheld because submission of close-out data had been presented to the NRC 1
l
12 inspector too late (between 2 PM and 3:30 PM on January 24, 1980) to permit adequate evaluation.
The inspector called Mr.-J. M.
Moriarty on January 29, 1980 and informed him that Inspection Report No. 79-01 would be closed-out; however, follow-up items would be identified in the current Inspection Report.
It was pointed out that follow-up items had not yet been written which made revelation impractical.
He voiced no opposition.
b.
Deviations identified.
c.
Unresolved Items 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 devi-ntion.
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 inspector.
!