ML20046D387
| ML20046D387 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 06/28/1993 |
| From: | NRC |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20046D385 | List: |
| References | |
| REF-QA-99901264 99901264-93-01, 99901264-93-1, NUDOCS 9308190083 | |
| Download: ML20046D387 (1) | |
Text
.
{}
g v
NOTICE OF NONCONFORMANCE Fluid Components, Incorporated Docket No.:
99901264/93-01 San Marcos, California Based on the results of an inspection conducted on April 13 through 15, 1993, it appears that certain of your activities were not conducted in accordance with NRC requirements.
Criterion V of Appendix B to 10 CFR Part 50, " Instructions, Procedures, and Drawings," requires, in part, that activities affecting quality shall be prescribed by, and accomplished in accordance with, documented instructions, procedures, or drawings.
Section 2,
" Quality Assurance Program," of Fluid Components, Incorporated's (FCI's) Quality Assurance Manual No. 8003, Revision K, dated January 10, 1991, states that the quality assurance prnaram set forth in the manual complies with the quality system requirements of Appendix B to 10 CFR 50.
' Contrary to the above, the NRC inspectors found numerous examples of failure to adequately prescribe or accomplish calibration activities necessary to support accuracy certifications for safety-related type LT81A flowmeters.
Specific examples include the following for flowmeters shipped to the Virginia Electric Power Company on September 30, 1991, and March 11, 1992:
1.
The accuracy of flowmeters certified to 3% of full scale was not actually determined or documented, and not all of the error sources affecting accuracy were identified.
2.
The procedure for calibration activities was not properly controlled, was not always followed in practice, and did not address all calibration activities.
(99901264/93-01-03)
Please provide a written statement or explanation to the U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission, ATTN:
Document Control Desk, Washington, D.C.
20555, with a copy to the Chief, Vendor Inspection Branch, Division of Reactor Inspection and Licensee Performance, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, within 30 days of the date of the letter transmitting this Notice of Nonconformance.
This reply should be clearly marked as a " Reply to a Notice of Nonconformance" and should include for each nonconformance: (1) a description of steps that have been or will be taken to correct these items; (2) a description of steps that have been or will be taken to prevent recurrence; and (3) the dates your corrective actions and preven-tive measures were or will be completed.
Dated at Rockville, aryland this j fri day of u.te 1993.
/
9308190083 930628 P