ML20055D812
| ML20055D812 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 07/02/1990 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20055D805 | List: |
| References | |
| REF-QA-99901180 99901180-90-01, 99901180-90-1, NUDOCS 9007100041 | |
| Download: ML20055D812 (1) | |
Text
Y Mock Manufacturing,- Incorporated Docket No. 99901180/90-01 Greak Neck, New York APPENDIX B l
NOTICE OF NONCONFORMANCE I
Based on the remly d -en NRC inspection conducted May 10 and 11,1990, it appears that cer7Ma of your activities were not conducted in accordance with HRC requirements, s
1.
. Criterion 111 of Appendix B' to 10 CFR Part 50 states, in part, that necsures shall be established for the selection and review for suitability of application of materials, parts, equipment, and processes that are essential to the safety-related functions of the structures, systems and components.
l Contrary to the above, MMI's program to assure design control and equiva-L lency to the original part r.upplied, for safety-related spare and replace-ment part orders, was inadequate.
The President of MMI (Mr. Arie Kepets) indicated that each order for safety-related replacement parts must be re-engineered since MMI's drawings lacked sufficient detail to identify those characteristics-necessary to manufacture the replacement parts.
In addition,)this dedication process was not documented in MMI's files.
(90-01-03 i
2.
Criterion V11 of Appendix B to 10 CFR Part 50 states, in part, that measures be established to assure that purchased material, equipment, and services conform to the procurement documents and include provisions for source evaluation.and selection, objective evidence of quality furnished by the contractor or subcontractor, inspection at the contractor or subcontractor source, and examination of products upon delivery.
Contrary to the above, MMI performed only a survey of New York Testing L
Laboratory, Incorporated (NYTL) on April 6,1989. The survey was per-formed by using a checklist entitled, " Quality Survey of Candidate's i
Suppliers." Although this survey appeared adequate for placing NYTL on MMI's approved vendors list, it did not provide sufficient objective evidence to demonstrate that the supplier's QA program had been effec-p tively implemented.
Such method of audit does not meet the requirements of 10 CFR Part 50, Ap)pendix B, for suppliers furnishing safety-related material.
(90-01-04 l-l I
9007100041 900702 l
paa oA999EMV*g*'*
99901180
-