ML20031F652
| ML20031F652 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 09/16/1981 |
| From: | NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20031F646 | List: |
| References | |
| REF-QA-99900330 NUDOCS 8110200264 | |
| Download: ML20031F652 (3) | |
Text
______ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
1 i
Westinghouse Electric Corp.
Docket No. 99900330/81-01 NOTICE OF NONCONFORMANCE I
Based on the results of an NRC inspection conducted on August 4-7, 1981, it appears that certain of your activities were not conducted in accordance with NRC requirements as indicated below:
i Criterion V of Appendix B to 10 CFR Part 50 states:
" Activities affecting quality shall be prescribed by documented instructions, procedures, or drawings, of a type appropriate to the circumstances and shall be accom-
)
plished in accordance with these instructions, procedures, or drawings.
Instructions, procedures, or drawings shall include appropriate quantita-tive or qualitative acceptance criteria for determining that important activities have been satisfactorily accomplished."
1 Nonconformances with these requirements are as follows:
A.
The Quality Assurance Manual, dated August 1978, Section 1.2, states, in part:
"1. 2 Quality Assurance Program
- 1. 2.1 Objective:
The objective of the Switchgear Quality Assurance Program is to implement the Division Quality Assurance Policy and to assure that the products of the Switchgear Division are designed and manufactured with a high level of quality to meet generally recognized industry standards and to comply with applicable specific contract requirements."
Contrary to the above, the records system established by the QA Program 4
does not comply with applicable specific contract requirements.
For example, the Westinghouse Nuclear Technology Division purchase order 546GLS400421BE imposes Quality Procurement Specification 386-2, Revision 1, which requires design control records, calibration records, etc., to be maintained.
Westinghouse Switchgear did not comply with this specification and had taken objection to it, however, the purchase order had never been changed.
B.
The Quality Assurance Manual, dated August 1978, Section 6.1, states, in part:
1 8110200264 81091P, PDR GA999 EMWEST ' '
99900330 PDR
2 "6.1.1.2 Revision of Drawings:
Manufacturing policy is that fabrication and assembly will be done according to the drawing and revision called for on the work order or shop order information and any applicable change notices or G-letters.
Quality Control and production personnel are responsible to assure that the work is accom-plished to the revision required as stated above"; and "6.1.2.1 Switchgear Assemblies:
For switchgear assemblies, the final assembly section maintains a folder of the information issued by the Production Planning Section for each shop order.
The information includes the general assembly drawing numbers with the applicable revision number and listing of all the required sub-assemblies and parts identified by drawing number, purchase order and requisition as applicable."
Contrary to the above, drawing control was not in compliance with the QA Manual in that:
1.
Drawings were found in inspection stations which were not the revision detailed in the shop order information.
Of nine drawings checked, drawings 568F568 on taping connections and 6896064 on visual standards were not current.
2.
The Master Drawing List in the folder for Shop Order 29Y2074 had two drawing entries which were not the corrent and applicable revisions. Although the current revisions of drawings 800A502 on main bus installation and 371A80A on breaker test cabinet were used for fabrication and inspection, the Master Drawing List did not reflect the current revisions.
C.
The Quality Assuranca Manual, dated August 1978, Section 7.2.2.1.b.
states, in part:
"The drawing and work order provide the Inspector with the information needed for inspection and acceptance."
Contrary to the above, it was found that sampling inspection was performed, however, the work order and drawings did not define the inspection level, AQL, etc., necessary for acceptance of lots of material.
~ ~
. _...- ~
3 I
4 D.
The Quality Control Instruction, Number 10, Gage Control Program, dated
$hvember 6,1978, requires that when out-of-calibration tools are found, then an evaluation is to be made of previous inspections to determine if any corrective action is required.
Contrary to the above, the sequence of calibration operations as detailed in the Quality Control Instruction would preclude the identification of I
many out-of-calibration tools in that dismantling, cleaning, resurfac-ing, and reassembly was to be done before checking for accuracy.
The performance of these operations before checking for accuracy could result in out-of-calibration tools not being identified.
i 1
u 4
J 4
't
-