ML20028A038
| ML20028A038 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 10/15/1982 |
| From: | Barnes I, Sutton J NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20028A033 | List: |
| References | |
| REF-QA-99900325 NUDOCS 8211160297 | |
| Download: ML20028A038 (8) | |
Text
.
ORGANIZATION: BRAND-REX COMPANY WILLIMANTIC, CONNNECTICUT
~
REPCPT INSPECTION INSPECTION NO.-
99900325/82-01 DATES:
8/9-13/82 ON-SITE HOURS: 26 CORRESPONDENCE ADDRESS: Brand-Rex Cc:npany Electronic and Industrial Cable Division ATTN: Mr. G. Graeber, Vice President and General Manager Main Street Willimantic, Connecticut 06226 ORGANIZATION CONTACT:
Mr. L. B. Roberts, Quality Assurance Manager TELEP0NE NUMBER:
(203) 423-7771 PRINCIPAL PRODUCT: Wire and cable manufacturer.
NUCLEAR INDUSTRY ACTIVITIY:
Commercial Nuclear production of Brand-Rex Company totals 14% of the a..pany's production.
bw"
/o-/r-Pa.
ASSIGNED INSPECTOR:
Date p J. W. Sutton, Reactive and Component Program Section (R& CPS)
OTHER INSPECTORS:
Ib+
e -/r-s2_
APPROVED BY:
I. Barnes, Chief, R& CPS Date INSPECTION BASES AND SCOPE:
A.
BASES: 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix B, anci 10 CFR Part 21.
B.
SCOPE: This inspection was performed to review the status of previous inspection findings, followup of a 10 CFR Part 21 report, manufacturing j
process centrol-armor cable repair and audits.
l l
l PLANT SITE APPLICABILITY: 50-312 Q
l certifioi l
8211160297 821025 O
R
ORGANi2ATI0': BRAND-REX COMPANY N
WILLIMANTIC, CONNECTICUT REPORT INSPECTION NO.:
99900325/82-01 RESULTS:
PAGE 2 of 5 A.
VIOLATIONS:
None B.
NONCONFORMANCES:
1.
Contrary to Criterion V of Appendix B to 10 CFR Part 50 and paragraph 4.0 of Brand-Rex (BRC) Procedure QA 822, a review was not performed by the QA Manager with respect to material which had been identified as defective by Sacramento Municipal Utility District (SMUD). This review was not performed as a result of the apparent failure of BRC personnel to inform the QA Manager of the condition, in order for the requirements of Procedure QA 822 to be implemented.
2.
Contrary to Criterion V of Appenix B to 10 CFR Part 50 and paragraphs 1.0 and 3.0 of BRC OA Procedure 823:
a.
Records do not exist that would enable the foreman to determine if the brazing operator had been trained and qualified prior to performing the brazing function.
b.
The requalification schedule and schedule of qualified operators were not available within the Quality Control area and foreman station.
c.
Records do not exist to indicate that operators had completed the established training program.
d.
Records do not exist that would indicate that Quality Control examined and tested the qualification braze for bond strength.
3.
Contrary to Criterion IX of Appendix B to 10 CFR Part 50, a brazing procedure had not been generated, approved, or qualified prior to the performance of brazing repair operations on armor cable.
C.
UNRESOLVED ITEMS:
None D.
STATUS OF PREVIOUS INSPECTION FINDINGS:
1.
(Closed) Violation A (81-01):
Implementation of 10 CFR Part 21 -
practice was not consistent with paragraph 21.6 of 10 CFR Part 21.
The NRC inspector reviewed the corrective action taken by BRC as outlined in their letter of March 27, 1981.
The insoector verified that posting of Section 206 in conspicuous areas has been accomplished.
. ORGANIZATIdN: BRAND-REX COMPANY WILLIMANTIC, CONNECTICUT REPORT INSPECTION NO.:
99900325/82-01 RESULTS:
PAGE 3 of 5 2.
(Closed) Violation B (81-01): The vendor did not provide for evaluating deviations or informing (a)censee of defects as required li by 10 CFR Part 21, paragraph 21.21 The NRC inspector reviewed the revised BRC QA Procedure 822, dated May 1981, for content and determined that the revised procedure complied with the provisions of 10 CFR Part 21, paragraph 21.21(a).
3.
(Closed) Nonconformance A (81-01):
a.
Temperature of solder pot at Inspection Station No. 5 was not being maintained between 500-6000 F.
The NRC inspector verified that all solder pots throughout the plant were being maintained at the temperatures as outlined in QC Procedure 146. The solder pots have been relocated and protected from varying plant tem-peratures.
b.
Solder pot test results had not been recorded in the Irradiation Daily Log. The NRC inspector reviewed the Irradiation Daily Log Book for qualifying entries and found that the entries were up-to-date and being monitored and stamped off by QC/QA personnel.
4.
(Closed) Nonconformance B (81-01): Material had been moved to the interlock armor repair area without the signature of the foreman on the repair request.
The NRC inspector verified by review of documentation, revised manufacturing procedures, and Operating Instruction 023 that the corrective action stated in BRC's letter of May 26, 1982, has been complied with as stated.
5.
(Closed) Nonconformance C (81-01):
Guideline missing from extruding guideline book.
The NRC inspector reviewed the revised manufacturing procedure and Operating Instruction 01-020, " Extrusion Operating Guide," and observed the extrusion operation in the plant for compliance. The l
NRC inspector found that the new instruction is being adhered as required by the procedure.
6.
(Resolved) Unresolved Item (81-01): Solder pot test and testing procedures in irradiation area differ regarding the samples to be subjected to the solder pot test.
The vendor has issued a revised procedure,01-075, Revision 0, dated February 1982 titled, " Quality Checks - Irradation." This procedure indicates the sampling procedure and testing criteria to be followed.
ORGANIZATION: BRAND-REX COMPANY WILLIMANTIC, CONNECTICUT REPORT INSPECTION N0.:
99900325/82-01 RESULTS:
PAGE 4 of 5 7.
(Resolved) Unresolved Item (81-01): Unable to ascertain the validity of criteria used to conclude nonnotification of all purchasers was required with respect to testing deficiencies in irradiated amor clad cable.
The inspector reviewed documentation consisting of a computer run of all interlock armor cable manufactured during the period of May 25, 1979, to present. The computer run indicated that Duke Power Company was the only customer for this type of cable.
E.
OTHER FINDINGS OR COMMENTS:
1.
Followup on 10 CFR Part 21 Report:
SMUD filed a 10 CFR Part 21 report regarding a potential problem with one cable reel, K25, a two conductor, shielded #16 AWG cable. The potential problem was identified as a white powder covering the cable.
The insulation appeared to be deteriorating due to being subjected to adverse environmental conditions.
The NRC inspector requested to review BRC's in-house activities pertaining to this identified problem. He was informed by the QA Manager that BRC's QA Department had not been notified of this condition. Further investigation and discussion indicated that the West Coast Sales Department of BRC had been contacted by SMUD, and that a sample of the cable was taken and forwarded to the Willimantic, Connecticut, BRC Engineering Department for evaluation. At this point, it was evident that a breakdown of BRC's internal reporting requirements, as stated in QA Procedure 822, had occurred.
The NRC inspector was informed that the cable was being tested and that the results would be forwarded to all parties as soon as they are received from the testing laboratory. As a rJ3 ult of the breakdown of BRC's internal reporting procedure, a ncnconfomance was identifed (see paragraph B.1 of Inspection Results).
2.
Manufacturing Process Control - Armor Cable Repair:
l During the review of BRC's corrective action pertaining to repair of armor cable, the NRC inspector witnesssed the repair of some armor cable. A request was made to see the qualified procedure being used for the brazing operation of the cable repair. The NRC inspector was informed that a written, qualified procedure was not available.
One nonconformance was identified (see paragraph B.3 of Inspection Results).
Armor Cable Repair Procedure QA 823, dated October 1981, clearly delineates that qualification of both the operator and procedure
ORGAN,1ZATION: BRAND-REX COMPANY WILLIMANTIC, CONNECTICUTT REPORT INSPECTION NO.:
99900325/82-01 RESULTS:
PAGE 5 of 5 is required.
As a result of the absence of operator qualification and training records a further nonconformance was identified (see paragraph B.2 of Inspection Results).
3.
Audits:
The NRC inspector reviewed BRC's QA Manual Section XVIII, " Audits,"
Revision 4, April 1979, and detailed audit procedures and instructions used for system audits.
The NRC inspector reviewed management audits for 1981-1982 and 15 internal audits that had been conducted. Also reviewed was the corrective action taken as a result of the above audits. As a result of this review, the NRC inspector determined that internal and management audits were being performed in accordance with QA program requirements.
t
PERSONS CONTACTED Company -
- Al
/ ex Dates 8-19-/3rgb Docket / Report No.Wfoo32f Inspector J. D/W Page l of I
NAEE(Please P d t)
TITLE (Please Drint)
ORGANIZATION (Please Drint)
\\' w'/WA>lda)
SA L3 dJWK Narr Ansmnaa se. Bavee '
Bs>se-fex Co.
Loui.s 3. % d.s
% 0.auw hsawet %
3 ewb-ray C%.
d414 >, /dkb-1 o n A ? x m <a.ce &,.
4,-../ xes G.
fay' lfh/4st c-
$ $1(C. foc. [ e r M0rz l Ru ekiwi) IG,s (% LT) MMn
'n' Ween Lnue s % &Ax un
^
G'76UE SA N D DEk G f IlTiH 7y Pfopuer sj>ApAsrs Y A A A f h C )'f d.
1 $ ant /$dAA)199 W-H GsceG $4rern k
//'# &As ves n9m Gn'
~
s F M L M EC& ~ 4s3 t
l l
l L
l l
l ll!
)
~
e r
l e
b
~..
b a
z m
c u
i N
l 2 9,y 0d ttp
~
mnnp f
4 r
9 L
eeea o
tmm I uuf ccI r
l oo(
h ADD cp i
n e
tffo g
i 1
/
. / 2 nooi a
f
/
P
/
l L
+ #-
P- /- f 1
e s
r P
f-P
- ueei sqptv 3
--s.3 2
9 t
/
2 S-C-neyae 2
o o mSTDR u
l r
o....
v C1234 w
l a
n 3
a 1
d 3
t y
t.
B a
L 3
/
a A
l G
g w
A o
0
/s h
9 4g
-1 3 0
h 2
L t
,A
>6 3
3 n
~
D 0
le lo 7
d E
N T
/
4 2
t-e o
I C
1 A-f c
M E
u O
~ 0 L 3
b A
J
~
X B
l.
~
z E
U o
S
/
P T
- ' lA S
/
N L
- k T
E 2
C i
4'~ o'6 0 7/
{
A U
T A
E T
O r
u M
)
M I
4 r.
y s
r 2
/
i C
s t-7 d*
a
- L O
B c
2 s
0 r-n o f A
D P.
c s
d 2
e
/
_ a b
c o
9 o
2 z J L
& Ir e
r M.4-n 2
~
d A
A L-P D a f
s y 2
o L
i 2
z-s-P F L n N
Y A
o y
s-V ro f
Q
'/
I em i
A u
lD D E M u
~. n-rM e
de c
o a
rr-L O
p t
a
-lLA'l n
l S
t w
sa
(
i e
~m*+
5 anr A
a u
t-
[r hrer Lh f
s b
cete n
r J
V b
- /
s PA A rtth U
unet o
c r
J C % %
h L/
h u
d b
- rr s
d>/
h n k 6 LE
/
b u
a Q f Od 5678 tO f
n h
f t
Om 60 n
Lu i0 o
i On o9 s
t
?e f't s
e ael
?" 3
- l 3 r 3
4 A a 3~ 3 9 3 ygi uu p
cra
?
i 2o 20 2
3 1
Tnfdn fe4ef iiea t wccM e
naeo l
erprA u
mDSPQ r
d u
i 2 8 45 c
o o
V o
f @
t M
1 3 o
9 l
t t
1 c
/
1 I
1 I
1 D1 234 l
e e
h p
s o
n c
I S
.l ji' l'
V/
)e o
r l
Ny2 e
b b
a m
c u
i f
N l
ttp o
4 3
mnnp "N
eeea tmm tt I uuf
- r ccI k o l oo(
0 ADD Cp e i
n UR
?
t-tffo nooi f
m 7 r-e s
7 ueei 3
6 sqpt v 1
neyae r
P2 mSTDR u
lo C1234 L
~
/
3-Y P
/
M W$Mlb f
o
/
u l
f
~
j A V s
&1<
D E
A N
T H &
I C
M
'a M
E A-A J
2 h
7 L
X B
- f-
?
m A /.
y f A
/
Z E
U
/
/
S
'N S
/
T E
/ 9 y
L N
L
/ f u
/
E T
P /
B ANM $ A
~
)
P M
I y
i O
U T
r M 0 A
C a
O 2
s D
s b
/
o e
r L
c AY l
s e
&Y d',
n A
k Y
/
P t f
i 0
i S >.
s P
-s y
f ro f
E{
d em i
L N
de c
F-wh 2
a rM e
Q 2-v f
O p
l S
/
s L
+
sa
(
o anr h
/
Y hrer E
cet e l1.
r 2
}
rtth
]ih m
a b a n A
H }
r A
O
&5$
A 5678 n
l 66 no o
i
@/
t s
t e
ael f
~
p cra J
k W 3 V 4 /b ). 2 Tnfdn 2 0 2
1 y gi u u 7
.r
/4 L
i iea
/.
t wccM e
naeo l
erprA u
mDSPQ r
d u
o o
1 9 o f
2 3 9 '
c L
t M
I-o...
'V J
e t
/
1 l
I 1
1 Z O
- 3
?c J H 3 O D1234 7
e e
p p
s o
n c
J S
- 1
- l i
1 i
i