ML19350C383
| ML19350C383 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 02/23/1981 |
| From: | Hunter V, Whitesell D NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19350C379 | List: |
| References | |
| REF-QA-99900089 NUDOCS 8104010226 | |
| Download: ML19350C383 (6) | |
Text
.
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 0FFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT 9
REGION IV Report No. 99900089/81-01 Program No. 51300 ccmpany:
Huico Incorporated 724 Taylor Road Meridian, Idaho 83642 Inspection Conducted:
January 26-29, 1981 Inspectors:
A
)-/98/
~
V. H. Hunter, Coiitractor Inspector Date ComponentsSection I Vendor Inspection Branch
/
Approved by:
d lb M8/f/
D. E. Whitesell, Chief Date ComponentsSection I Vendor Inspection Branch Summary Inspection January 26-29, 1981 (99900089/81-01)
Areas Inspected:
Implementation of 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix B criteria including action on previous findings, design control, procurement control, and manufactur-ing control.
The inspection involved twenty (20) inspector hours on site.
Results:
In the four (4) areas inspected, there were no apparent nonconformances or unresolved items identified in three (3) areas.
The fcilowing apparent non-conformance was identified in the remaining area.
Nonconformance:
Contrary to Criterion V of 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix B and Contract Nos. 348 and 389, the vendor did not meet the requirements for temocrary and permanent storage of quality records as specified in ANSI-N45.2.9.
(See Notice of Nonconformance).
l l
B10.4010 }1
j, 2
DETAILS SECTION A.
Principal Persons Contacted D. E. Church, President K. Han, Vica President and Technical Director D. D. Volkman, Quality Assurance Manager W. Seid, Senior Welding Engineer R. V. Olson, Director of Engineering J. L. Harper, Procurement Manager M. L. Lyons, Superintendant All of the above personnel attended the Exit Meeting.
B.
General Information Huico presently employs 174 craftsmen with 43 staff personnel.
The facilities include 50,000 square feet of covered manufacturing and approximately 10,000 square feet of administrative area.
The facility is self-contained in that all major services such as machining, welding, NDE, and hydrostatic testing are provided.
Hoico maintains ASME certifications for both "N" and "NPT" stamps which expire on June 11, 1982.
Huico fabricates such nuclear components as:
1.
Primary loop piping 2.
Component and pipe supports 3.
Pressure vessels 4.
Storage tanks 5.
'Both mechanical and electrical penetration sleeves.
i Huico's current nuclear workload ts approximately 50% of the ility's capacity.
Huico has supplied nuclear components to numerous auclear facilities.
i The Authorized Inspection Agency is the Kemper Insurance Companies with an Authorized Inspector provided on a full time basis.
[_
C.
Actions On Previous-Findings (Closed) Nonconformance'(Report No. 99900089/80-01):
Audit by QA Supervisor -
It was verified that Huico has trained and certified internal auditors to ANSI standards.
l l
3 (Closed) Nonconformance (Report No. 99900089/80-01):
Audit report log - It was verified that the QA manual has been revised to delete the require-ments for the audit report log.
(Closed) Nonconformance (Report No. 99900089/80-01):
Probable cause and correction date not included in audit responses - it was verified that the audit form was revised to include the cause and date of corrective actions.
D.
Design Document Control 1.
Objectives The objectives of this area of the inspection were to ascertain whether procedures had been developed and properly implemented to control the review, approval, release and issuance, of design documents in a manner consistent with NRC rules and regulations, ASME Code requirements, and the vendor's QA program commitments.
2.
Method of Accomplishment The objectives of this area of the inspection were accomplished by:
a.
Review of the ASME accepted QA Manual, Revision 0, Section 3.0 to verify that the vendor had established procedures to prescribe a system for design document control.
b.
Review of design specifications 9779-123 and 3240-263 to verify that they had been prepared by the designated authority, approved by management, and reviewed by QA.
c.
Review of Six (6) design document requests to verify that they provided for identification of personnel responsible for pre-paring, reviewing, approving, and issuing design documents; and that the review and approval of significant changes were performed by the same personnel.
Also to ascertain whether minor changes to design documents, that do not require review and approval, are identified.
d.
Review of Ten (10) design drawings, to verify that the distri-bution lists are current and that the proper documents are identified, accessible, and are being used.
e.
Interview of personnel to verify whether they were knowledgeable in the peccedures applicable to desig* ucument control.
3.
' Findings a.
Nonconformance -
4 Contracts 9779-123 and 3240-263 specify that the storage of design and other required QA/QC documents and records were to be accomplished in accordance with ANSI N45.2.9.
Contrary to the above requirements, the storage of required documentation failed to comply with ANSI N45.2.9 in the following areas:
1.
Procedure for record storage was not provided.
2.
Door is firerated as 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br /> versus the required 2 hour2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br />.
3.
No floor vapor barrier or surface sealant provided, 4.
No filtered forced-air circulation system provided.
5.
Audit of document stcrage not being performed.
(See Notice of Nonconformance) b.
There were no unresolved items.
E.
Procurement Document Control 1.
Objectives The objectives of this area of the inspection were to verify that:
a.
Procedures had been prepared and approved by the vendor that prescribes a system for procurement document control which is consistent with NRC rules and regulations, ASME Code, and the vendor's commitments in the ASME accepted Quality Assurance Program.
b.
The procurement document control procedures are properly and effectively implemented by the vendor.
2.
Method of Accomplishment The objectives of this area of the inspection were accomplished by:
l a.
Review of the ASME accepted Quality Assurance Manual, Sections 4 titled " Procurement Document Control," 5 titled " Instruction, procedures; and drawings" and 7 titled " Control of purche. sed Materials, Items and Services,"
to verify that the vendor had established procedures that prescribed a system for controlling procurement documents.
b.
Review of the following purchase orders:
5 (1) No. 389-276 (2) No. 389-1.15 (3) No. 389-282 to verify they have been prepared by the designated authority, approved by responsible management, and reviewed by QA.
c.
Review of the folicwing documents:
(1) 3 each change notices (2) Approved vendors list (3) 6 each material receiving documents
-(4) 6 each weld material requisitions d.
Interviews with personnel to verify that they are knowledgeable in the procedures applicable to procurement document control.
3.
Findings There were no apparent Nonconformances or unresolved items identified.
F.
banufacturing Process Control 1.
Objectives The objectives of this area of the inspection were to verify that the vendor's manufacturing processes were performed under a controlled system which meets the NRC rules and regulations, ASME Code require-ments, the vendor's commitments in his ASME accepted Quality Assurance Program, and contract requirements.
2.
Method of Accomplishment The objectives of this area'of the inspection were accomplished by:
a.
Review of the ASME accepted Quality Assurance Manual, Section 9.0 titled " Control of Shop Processes" to verify tnat the control system requires shop travelers or process control check lists to be prepared which identifies the document numbers and revi-sions to which the process must conform.
Also to verify that all processes and tests are to be performed by qualified personnel using qualified procedures.
b.
Review of the shop traveler, or process control check lists, to verify that spaces are provided for reporting the results
6 of specific operations, or reference to other documents where the results are maintained.
Also that it includes space for the signoff by the vendor, indicating the date on which the operation or test was performed, and space for signoff and date, by the authorized nuclear inspector, to document his acceptance of activitics that F1 has selected as mandatory hold points.
c.
Review of selected shop travelers 389-276, 389-1.15, and 389-282 to verify their compliance with the above referenced procedures, and the overall QA program documentation require-ments, including the establishment of mandatory hold points by the authorized nuclear inspector.
d.
Observation of magnetic particle (MT) test of 8 each 4" welded tubes in accordance with fabrication drawing RCS-1543-SG-103 and MT procedure 389-100-6.
Observation of welding of 4 X 4" tubes in accordance with drawing e.
4-ST-182 and weld procedure 389-500-A-72.
3.
Inspection Findings There were no apparent nonconformances or unresolved items identified.
G.
Exit Interview The inspector met with management representatives (denoted in paragraph A.) at the conclusion of the inspection on January 29, 1981.
The manage-ment representative acknowledged the statements by the inspector concern-ing the Nonconformance identified in this inspection.
I
-..