ML19338G336
| ML19338G336 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 07/28/1980 |
| From: | Brown R, Whitesell D NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19338G331 | List: |
| References | |
| REF-QA-99900718 NUDOCS 8010290108 | |
| Download: ML19338G336 (8) | |
Text
.
l h
U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT REGION IV Report No.
99900718/80-01 Program No. 51400 Company: AFC0 Steel Litcle Rock, Arkansas 72203 Inspection Conducted: July 10 and 11, 1980 Inspector:
,//
4//.28/#O r
Ross L. Brown, Contra'ctor Inspector Date ComponentsSection I Vendor Inspection Branch Approved Md
^
D. E. Whitesell, Chief Date ComponentsSection I Vendor Inspection Branch Summary Inspection on July 10 and 11, 1980 (99900718/80-01)
Areas Inspectad:
Initial management meeting and inspection of the vendor's quality progra.a activities related to the field reported deficiencies in the manufacture of embedments for Shearon Harris Unit 2.
The inspection involved fourteen (14) inspector-hours on-site by one (1) NRC inspector, Results:
In the areas inspected there were no unresolved items identified, no deviations were identified in one (1) of the areas, and the following deviation was identified in the remaining area.
Deviation:
The required nondestructive examination of the full penetration tee weld joining the anchor bolts to the base plates of the embedments was not performed (See Notice of Deviation enclosure).
8010290 10 3
2 DETAILS SECTION A.
P_ersons Contacted R. A. Bendigo, Works Manager J. W. Nagel, Chief Product Engineer R. F. Oates, Quality Assurance Manager J. R. Simmon, Squad Supervisor Engineering B.
Initial Management Meeting 1
Objectives The objectives of this meeting were to accomplish the following:
To meet with the company management and those persons responsible a.
for administrative of the AFC0 QA program and to establish chan-nels of communication.
b.
To determine the extent of the company's involvement in the commercial nuclear business.
To explain NRC direct inspection program including LCVIP organi-c.
zation VIB inspection methods and documentation.
d.
To describe the scope of the inspection relative to the field reported deficiencies in the embedments for Shearon Harris Unit 2.
(See details in Paragraph C).
2.
Method of Accomplishment The preceding objectives were accomplished:
The AFC0 management personnel in attendance were:
- E. J. Binz, Nuclear Auditor
- W.
E. Lenon III, QA Specialist
- R. B. Nelson, Manager of Contracts and Technical Operations J. W. Nagel, Chief Product Engineer
- R. F. Oates, Quality Assurance Manager i
D. T. Wallace, Manager of Purchases j
- Attended the exit meeting.
The following is a summary of the meeting:
The VIB organization was described and its relationship to a.
NRC Region IV and the NRC Headquarters component of the Office of Inspection and Enforcement.
3 of Inspection and Enforcement.
b.
The LCVIP.was described including the reasons for its estab-lishment, its objectives, its implementation structure.
c.
The conduct of VIB inspections was described and how our inspections are documented including the report, responses to reports, how proprietary information is handled, the Public Document Room, and the White Book.
d.
The company's contribution to the nuclear industry was dis-cussed including current and projected activity.
The company quality assurance program was discussed.
e.
3.
Finding The inspector was provided the following information:
AFC0 Steel is a structural steel fabrication shop.
a.
b.
AFC0 Steel is a member of American Institute of Steel Construction, Inc. (AISC).
c.
The AFC0 Stee.1 (AFCO) Quality Assurance Program, Revision 4 (QAP) was developed and implemented to comply with 10 CFR 50, Appendix B, ANSI N45.2 and meet the intent of N45.2.2, N45.2.6, N45.2.9, N45.2.11, N45.2.12, N45.2.13 and N101.4.
AFC0 is not normally responsible for design or performance testings, therefore the quality program doea not include the following criteria:
III Design Control and XI Test Control.
d.
The AFC0 commitment to the commercial nuclear industry is 15%
of manhours.
The company has in house, three (3) active and one inactive (on hold) contracts for fabricated structural steel and plain material (unfabricated), for commercial nuclear use.
e.
AFC0 has an ASME certificate for Section VIII Unfired Pressure Vessels.
f.
The majority of the AFC0 plant activities are in compliance with American Welding Society (AWS) codes and standards, g.
The inspector was conducted on an orientation tour of the facility.
d
4 No deviations or un'.esolved items were identified in this area.
C.
Inspection of Vendor Quality Program Activities Related to Field Reported Deficiencies
===1.
Background===
a.
The NRC Region II office received a notification from Carolina Power and Light Company of deficient embedment plate fillet welds in the embedments for the Shearon Harris Unit 2 facility (Paragraph C.4.c.(3)).
b.
During the inspection, AFC0 management informed the inspectors of the following three (3) addition deficiencies identified by the utility company at the Shearon Harris facility:
(1) One hole was not drilled in two (2) embedment plates.
(Paragraph C.4.c.(2)).
(2) Wrong identification number was stamped on fifty-one (51) embedment plates (Paragraph C.4.c.(1)).
(3) Unacceptable ultrasonic examination technique used on full penetration tee weld.
(Paragraph C.4.b.).
2.
Objectives The objectives of this inspection were to verify that:
The cause has been determined, action to correct the deficiency has been taken, preventative measures have been established and implemented and generic possibilities have been evaluated.
3.
Method of Accomplishment The preceding objectives were accomplished by the following discus-sions with cognizant personnel and documentation review:
QAP - Section VI, " Document Control" and Section X, " Inspection."
a.
b.
Quality Assurance Procedure No. QAI-1, Revision 2 Inspection Traveler Procedure."
Customer Specification No. CAR-SH-AS-7, Revision 10, " Structural c.
Steel - Seismic Class 1 - Non-Seismic Class 1."
d.
Customer Purchase Order No. H-18556, dated September 27, 1979, thru Change Order No. 8, date February 7, 1980.
(Applicable to AFC0 Contract No.79-148).
.~
N 5
Customer Drawing No's.. CAR-2168 G-219, CAR-2168 G222 S01, i
e.
MPS-C-593.and MPS-C-600.
f.
AFC0 Detail Drawing for Contract 79-148, Drawing No. 1, for referer.ce Drawing No. 2168-G222S01(R2).
1 g.
AFC0 Drawing No. GN-1, " General Notes" for Contract 79-148.
j h.
Customer generated Deficiency and Disposition Reports.
i i.
AFCO's Corrective Action to Resolve Nonconformances and
~
Corrective Action to Prevent Recurrence statements.
4 j.
Three (3)LAFC0 internal memoranda and one training session report.
k.
Inspection Travelers 4.
Findings a.
Unresolved Items No unresolved items were identified.
b.
Deviation i
One deviation from commitment was identified (See Notice of Deviation, enclosure).
J AFC0 management stated that; the NDE personnel inadvertently used the straight beam method thinking this method was approved for this contract, because it was approved for other jobs and the results of the angle beam method would be extremely hard to interpret because of the weld ' configuration and. restrictions built in during' fabrications, j
The corrective action taken to resolve the nonconformance was accomplished in the field by adding a fillet weld to the anchor bolts'of sufficient size to satisfy the design requirements in
. place of the ultrosonic examination. ~This resolution was approved i
by the customer.
The following actions to prevent recurrence were-taken:
i (1)f Drafting departmentEto review NDE requirements with NDE
= Specialist to verify correctness'of NDE Procedures' refer-enced for each application, and advise Quality Assurance Manager and Chief Structural Products Engineer on any 4
additional ' procedures or approval needed.
a
.-4
_-,..,,,,,.,-,4,~,4
... +, -
6 (2) Quality Assurance Manager to initial and date the General Note Sheet which accompanies shop drawings showing NDE Requirements.
(3) Instruct Q.A. personnel to use General Note Sheet in pre-paring Inspection Traveler, and see that NDE reports are included in document package.
(4) Reviewed the requirements of Inspection Traveler Procedure QAI-1 Revision 2 the Q.C. Inspectors shall verify that NDE performed.
(5) Memorandum of meeting to discuss the deficiency and actions to prevent recurrence.
The above actions were completed prior to the inspection, there-fore the deviation is considered closed and no response to this item is necessary.
The inspectors obtained the following information relative to c.
the remaining three (3) reported deficiencies:
(1) The fifty-one (51) embedment plates that were marked in error with identification no. 2168-222501 instead of 2168-222S01.
This error was corrected at the site by stamping the items with the correct number.
The following action to prevent recurrence has been implemented.
(a) Drafting room instructed to shape letters and numbers precisely, to prevent mis-interpretation in identifi-cation markings, particularly when letters are mixed with numbers.
(b) Reviewed importance of correct marking with production personnel.
(c)
Instructed Q.C. Inspectors to carefully verify all marking identifications.
(d) Memorandum of meeting with detailers to discuss the problem and preventative actions.
(2) The AFC0 detail drawing for the embedment plate did show the location of all twelve (12) holes, however, one hole location was not " darkened in" as the remaining eleven (11)
7 were, therefore one hole was not drilled.
The nonconfor-mance was corrected by returning the two (2) items to the AFC0 shop, revising and re-issuing the shop drawing to indicate the hole, drill the hole ans <stnspect the finished plate.
The corrective action to prevent recurrence was as follows; AFC0 engineering management meet with the drawing detailers and drawing checkers.
The problem was pointed out, and the action to prevent recurrence was discussed and its importance was emphasized.
This item is considered to be closed.
(3) The weld discrepancies identified in the field reported deficiencies were described in the Carolina Power & Light Company's deficiency and Disposition Report as approximately fifty (50) unacceptable conditions in the tee welds of thirteen (13) embedments.
The deficiencies in the tee welds were identified as; over-laps, porosity, undercuts, insufficient fillet weld size (legs and throat), slag and are strikes. Majority of these condition were in the anchor bolt to base plate welds.
The vendor stated that he believes the weld preparation (punch type) as required by the Shearon Harris contract for the anchor bolt welds could be the cause for some of the problems, because the more commonly used configutation is the chisel type weld prep that allows the placement of the weld metal in a linear direction, rather than a cir-cular direction as required for the punch type weld prep.
The corrective action to resolve the nonconformance was accomplished at the Shearon Harris construction site by Carolina Power and Light Company.
The corrective action to prevent recurrence was as follows:
(a)
Reviewed weld problem with Q.C. Inspectors and Shop Supervision.
(b)
Re-instructed Q.C. Inspectors in acceptance require-ments of Structural Welding Code AWS D1.1, 1975 Edition.
(c)
Re-instructed Q.C. Inspectors in requirements of Procedure for Welding Filler Metal Control-FMC-1 Rev. 6.
r
8 (d)
Q.C. Inspectors will be oriented in use of Visual Inspection Procedure for welds VIS-2 Revision 0 upon approval and release for use.
The inspector reviewed the minutes of a QC Inspectors meeting when these items were covered.
The Inspection Travelers for these items indicates the welds were inspected and accepted, and the responsible inspector was of the opinion that the subject welds were in conformance with the requirements of AWS D1.1., 1975 Edition, however, the above meeting was to reemphize the requirements and to insist on the conformance with those requirements.
This does not appear to be a generic condition because AFC0 management made an evaluation of the other contracts and the Shearon Harris embedments are the only ones with the punch type weld prep causing the more difficult weld metal placement.
This item is considered to be closed.
D.
Exit Interview The inspectors conducted an exit meeting with the AFC0 Steel management representatives at the conclusion of the inspection.
Those persons indicated by an asterisk in Paragraph B, were in attendance.
The inspector discussed the scope of the inspection and the details of the finding identified during the inspection.
The inspector contacted Mr. R. F. Oates by telephone of July 16, 1980, to inform him of the deviation identified in the Notice of Deviation enclosure.
The inspector also stated that the identified deviation will not require a response, because the corrective action and preventative measure were taken prior to the inspection.
The AFC0 managements' comments were for clarification only.
-_