ML19340B108
| ML19340B108 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | 07109011, 07109016 |
| Issue date: | 07/30/1980 |
| From: | Mcneill W, Whitesell D NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19340B102 | List: |
| References | |
| REF-QA-99900092 71009016-80-01, 71009016-80-1, NUDOCS 8010210258 | |
| Download: ML19340B108 (5) | |
Text
. - u.
m U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT REGION IV l
Report No. 71009016/80-01; 99900092/80-01 Program No. 51300 Company: Robatel-SLPI Boite Postale 20 Genas, France 69740 Inspection Conducted: July 7-11, 1980 Inspector:
l W. M. McNeill, Contractor Inspectdr Date Vendor Inspection Branch Approved
- 4 7/ Mvb l
D. E. Whitesell, Chief D' ate Component Section T Vendor Inspection dranch Summary Inspection on.'.tly 7-11, 1980 (72009016/80-01; 99900092/80-01)
Areas Inspected:
Implementation of 10 CFR 71 Appendix E; Certificate of Compliance, Safety Analysis Report including testing of completed products; l
nonconformances and corrective action; and action on previous inspection l
findings. The inspectinn involved thirty-two (32) inspector-hours on site i
by one (1) NRC inspector.
Results:
In the four (4) areas inspected no apparent deviation or unresolved 1
items were identified in two (2) areas the following one deviation was identified.
Deviation: Testing of Completed Products - some documents did not address the specification as required by the QA Manual and Appendix E.
(See Notice of l
Deviation).
l i
I i
I l
8010210 358
+,.
2 DETAIL SECTION A.
Persons Contacted
- H.
Bruel, Assistant Director General
- M. Lanotte, Project Manager
- M.'Robatel, Director General
- D. Sanchette, QA Manager
- D. Tanner, Production Engineer
- d. Bernard, Project Manager, Transnucleaire
- P. LeNalbaut, Project Engineer, Transnucleaire
- P. Morin, QA Engineer, Transnucleaire
- K. Goldmann, Chief Engineer, Transnuclear
- Denotes those attending the exit interview.
B.
Action on Previous Inspection Findings 1.
(Closed) Deviation (Report No. 77-01):
Welding was performed which was not detailed in the fabrication plan.
The particular parts were documented on a nonconformance report which was approved.
A general training meeting was held as a measure to prevent reoccurance.
2.
(Closed) Deviation (Report No. 77-01):
Quality Assurance was limited in its scope. A reorganization was effected at Robatel which has brought the inspection unit into the QA Department.
3.
(Closed) Deviation (Report No. 77-01):
Several examples of the lack of cleanliness were found.
The specific parts were cleaned and a general training meeting held as a measure to prevent reoccurance.
4.
(Closed) Deviation-(Report No. 77-01):
Nonconforming parts were not-properly identified with status, report number etc.
A new procedure has been issued and implemented.
5.
(Closed) Deviation (Report No. 77-01):
Testing was not documented with sufficient detail.
Testing activities are now performed by Robatel and not a vendor. Test: ng procedures were written and im-plemented..They included the requirements for documentation.
C.
Testing Completed Products 1.
Objectives
.The objectives of this area of the inspection were to verify that these activities were controlled in accordance with the QA Manual and applicable NRC and ASME requirements:
.+
3 a.
To verify that products are assembled in accordance with approved procedures and that all auxiliary materials comply with approved specifications.
b.
To verify that leak, hydraulic and.other tests of products are performed in accordance with approved test documents.
2.
Method of Accomplishment The preceding objectives were accomplished by:
Review of the Quality Assurance Manual, Revision 4, Chapter XI, a.
Test Control, which establishs the general requirements.
b.
Review of the following procedures which established the specific requirements:
Calibration of Test and Measurement Instruments, NGI 1, Revision 3; l
Cleanning Instructions, NPG 9.08, Revision 3; Instructions on the Bolt and Nut Tighting, NPG_9.31, Revision 6; Test Plan, NPH 2.23, Revision 1; Acceptance Load Testing of Trunnions, NPH 3.20.1, Revision 0; Acceptance Load Testing of the Lid Lift Lugs, NPH 3.20.2, Revision 1; Hydralic Testing, NPH 3.21.1, and General Procedure on Leak Testing, NPH 4.09, Revision 9.
c.
Review of the following specifications which establish the design requirements:
i Testing of Cask Cavity, 9317-1-4-2, Revision 5, and Specification of TN8/TN9 Cask Fabrication, 9317-A-1, Revision 6.
t d.
Witness of the leak testing of the TN9-3 cask including the cavity,;Hanson coupling, Hanson flange, cover, and_the l
shield plug flange.
Review of the test. reports calibration records, and qualification l
e.
reports of the load testing of supports and hydrostatic testing.
4 3.
' Findings a.
Deviation See Notice of Deviation.
b.
Unresolved Item None.
c.
Comments The design requirements for the TN8 and TN9 models have been identified to the US NRC in the Transnuclear (TNP) Application.
In particular that part of the Application identified as the
. Safety Analysis Report (SAR).
Transnuclear (TNY)'has pass on to Transnucleaire (TNP) the design and engineering responsibility for the cacks. Transnucleaire (TNP) has subvended the fabrication to Robatel.
The SAR requirements for hydrostatic test are to pressurize the cask and isolate it for a six (6) hour test. The specification 9317-A-1 passed on the same requirement.
However the test procedure allowed the cask to be repressurized whenever the pressure fell below a given minimum. Test records show this was the case at least six (6) times during a recent six (6) hour
~hydrotest of cask TN9-3.
The Specification stated an acceptance criteria of "no defor-mation" and required the test system to have an accuracy of.01 mm in measurement.
The trunnion lead test procedure allowed deformation of.05 mm.
During a recent test deformation of
.015 mm was observed.
D.
Nonconformances and Corrective Actions 1.
Objectives The objectives of this area of the inspection were to verify that these activities were controlled in accordance.with the QA Manual and applicable NRC and ASME Code requirements:
a.
_To ascertain that a system for control of-nonconformances and for assuring effective sorrective actions has been established and is consistent with the QA Program.
b.
To_ ascertain that the system is properly implemented.
7 t
5 2.
Method of' Accomplishment The preceding objectives were accomplished by:
Review of the Quality Assurance Manual, Revision 4, Chapters XV, a.
L Control of Nonconforming Materials, Parts or Components, and XVI, Corrective Action which establishes the general requirements.
b.
Review of Nonconformances and Corrective Actions, NGG 15, l
Revision 5, which establishs the specific requirements.
l c.
Inspection of fourteen (14) parts selected at random and their fabrication plans and shop travelers to verify their inspection and acceptance status.
Inspection of all the nonconformance reports issued to date on TN9-3, TN8-3 and TN8-4 l
Casks and the necessary changes to fabrication plans and shop travelers.
3.
Findings a.
Deviation None.
l b.
Unresolved Item l
None.
E.
Exit Interview The inspector met with management representatives (listed in Paragraph A) at the conclusion of the inspection on July 11, 1980.
The inspector summarized the scope and findings of the inspection.
The management l
respesentatives had no comment in response to each item discussed by the inspector.
e