ML20040B787
| ML20040B787 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 01/06/1982 |
| From: | NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20040B781 | List: |
| References | |
| REF-QA-99900217 NUDOCS 8201260410 | |
| Download: ML20040B787 (3) | |
Text
..
APPENDIX A Westinghouse Electric Corporation Instrumentation Department Docket No. 99900217/81-02 NOTICE OF NONCONFORMANCE Based on the results of an NRC inspection conducted on November 16-19, 1981, it appears that certain of your activities were not conducted in accordance with NRC requirements as indicated below:
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 accomplished in accordance with these instructions, procedures, or drawings.
Instructions, procedures, or drawings shall include appropriate quantitative or qualitative acceptance criteria for determining that important activities have been satisfactorily accomplished."
Nonconformances with these requirements are as follows:
A.
Quality Assurance Procedure 14.1, Inspection Control Tag, Revision A, states in part:
"3.1.1.3.9 Revision - Enter latest revision letter / number incorporated in assembly drawing released with job. When drawing is dash revision, draw a dash in block.
"3.1.1.3.10 Wiring Diagram No. - Enter wiring document required by manufacturing to wire assembly (e.g., Wiring Tabulation, Running List, Schematic, Wiring Diagram).
"3.1.1.3.10.1 When wiring information is included in assembly drawing, enter 'Same' in Wiring Diagram No. and Revision blocks."
Contrary to the above, an Inspection Control Tag was found without the latest revision letter / number and another Tag was found with "Same" but the assembly drawing did include the Wiring Diagram.
Specifically a Standard Detector Assembly Tag had drawing 1468F53 Revision C referenced although Revision F had been issued December 1, 1980.
A logic Test Panel Tag referenced drawing 1469F32 as the assembly drawing and "Same" in the wiring diagram block.
Drawing 1469F32 did not reference the Wiring Diagram to be used.
B.
Quality Assurance Procedure 7.1, Nonconformance Material Review, Revision l
A, states in part:
"3.3.1.2 Assure that effective corrective action is taken to remedy i
causes contributing to production of material with repetitive l
nonconformances requiring MRB action.
$f0820106 I
EMyuggy 99900227 PDR
I I
Westinghouse Electric Corporation 2
"3.1.2.5.3.1 Corrective action must be requested from the vendor using
(
the Corrective Action Request (Form QC-34)."
Contrary to the above, a review of the Material Review Board (MRB) f activities for the past six months found that the corrective action on vendor identified problems had not been initiated in one case and been voided in another.
Specifically Material Rejection Notice (MRN) 431958 had been reviewed by the MRB and a Corrective Action Request (CAR) identified in the disposition.
However, no CAR had been issued against i
that vendor.
MRN 430439 had been reviewed by the MRB and a CAR issued.
However, this CAR (81"16P) was later voided.
l
~
C.
Quality Assurance Procedure 8.2, Product Defect Reporting System, in i
regard to the Inspection Submittal and Discrepancy Record form, states in
(
part:
1 "3.1.2 Defects entered on the form include all those found at any point in the product history and during the course of any inspection."
Contrary to the above, a review of parts in the shop found several cases l
where defects were found, however, the defects were not entered on the form, Inspection Submittal and Discrepancy Record:
i (1) PC board drawing 108H40G01, serial number 36 had defects identified 1
on its Inspection Control Tag and there was no record of this board on the Inspection Submittal and Discrepancy Records.
(2) Cabinet Assembly 1065E52G02, serial number 0001 had defects recorded i
for circuit check and testing, however, the Inspection Submittal and Discrepancy Record showed this assembly to be acceptab'3.
(3) Cabinet Assembly 1065E15603, serial number 0001 showed six defects i
recorded on its Inspection Control Tag, however, the Inspection i
Submittal and Discrepancy Record showed only five defects.
j i
D.
Quality Assurance Procedure 3.6, Vendor Qualification and Control, Revision A, states in part:
l "3.3 Procurement Quality Assurance "3.3.1 Each month, select an example of electrical test data, or a certificate of compliance to be verified for conformance to purchase order l
requirements by one of the followirig methods:
i l
r l
l
l i
Westinghouse Electric Corporation 3
"3.3.1.1 Request incoming test technician to perform or to arrange for j
performance of tests necessary for test data verification.
i "3.3.1.2 Generate t/ie required purchase document sending material to an l
{
independent laboratory,as a means to verify chemical / physical data.
4 "3.3.1.3 Request Purchasing Department to o'btain supplier test data l
supporting Certificates of Compliance previously received.
i "3.3.1.4 Ensure that the results of each verification are documented 4
j in the Test Report Log."
a I
Contrary to the above, a review of the Test Report Log found this activity had not been done for the past four months although material had been received.
j i
}
I i
t i
i i
k i
e i
l I
i i
h
. _., _ _, - _ _ _, _ _ _ _ _