ML20129F333
| ML20129F333 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 10/13/1992 |
| From: | Cwalina G, Robert Pettis Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20129F211 | List: |
| References | |
| REF-QA-99901252 99901252-92-01, 99901252-92-1, NUDOCS 9610010310 | |
| Download: ML20129F333 (5) | |
Text
.
- 4 Attacnment 3 ORGANIZATION:
Five Star Products, Incorporated Fairfield, Connecticut 06430 REPORT NO.:
99901252/92-01 CORRESPONDEN[E A00RESS:
Mr. William N. Babcock, President Five Star Products, Incorporated 425 Stillson Road Fairfield, Connecticut 06430
- ORGANIZATIONAL CONTACT:
Richard Grabowski, Quality Assurance Manager (203) 336-7900 NUCLEAR INDUSTRY ACTIVITY:
Structural Concrete and Grout Products INSPECTION CONDUCTED:
August 18 and 19, 1992 TEAM LEADER:
N f' I5 h /d// 3/b Robert L. Pettis, Jr., P.E.
Vendor Inspection Section Date I
- OTHER INSPECTORS:
Stewart L. Magruder John S. Ma
- APPROVED
Gregoryf. Cwalina, Chief 'fd L'i.2 Vendor Inspection Section Date INSPECTION mi4ES:
10 CFR Part 21 and, Appendix B to 10 CFR Part 50 INSPECTION SCOPE:
This unannounced inspection was performed to assess the adequacy of Five Star Products' quality assurance program and the extent to which Five Star Products supplies, tests, and certifies grout and structural concrete products for use in nuclear safety-related applications.
PLANT SITE APPLICABILITY:
Numerous I 9610010310 951201
.oDR GA999 EMVFIVES 99900152 PDR
}
l I
I INSPECTION SUMMAgy ;
1.1 !
Violation 99901252/92-01-01 !
Contrary to the requirements of Sections 21.41 and 21.51 of Titl Code of Federal Reculations (10 CFR Part 21), Mr. H. eNash Ba inspectors Five full and unfettered Star Product:'(FSP's access necessary to conduct an inspect on of Products Research (CPR), a)nd of test data associated sold to commercial nuclear power plants. asic components with bcon 19, 1992,the NRC inspectors further access to FSP's records and person nel and on August President of FSP and President of CPR. suspended all further Mr. Babcock is Viceinspection i 1.2 Nonconformances nonconformances were identified during this limited on, no 2
STATUS OF PREVIOUS INSPECTION FINDINGS There were no previous NRC inspections of this facility.
3 INSPECTION FINDINGS AND OTHER COMMENTS 3.1. Backoround On Tuesday, August 18, 1992, i known as U.S. Grout Corporation, and its laboratory , contractorthe
, CPR, to formerly N determine the extent to which FSP supplied material or services es, to li the adequacy adequacy of its quality assurance (QA) and testing, programs of its products. and the King, Incorporated, located in Fairfield, Connecticut.Both FSP and CPR An entrance August 18, 1992, meeting was held with the FSP quality assurance and the records that would be required to conduct nspection the inspe Shortly after, Mr. H. Nash Sabcock joined the inspection and questioned the N authority to conduct an unannounced inspection.
with two identical letters from the NRC dated August 13Mr. Babcock was presented each addressed separately to FSP and CPR. , 1992 (Enclosure 1),
The letters outlined the NRC's Act of 1954, as amended (AEA), and Section 206(d Act of 1974, as amended rganization -
question the NRC's author (ERA). Despite this, Mr. Babcock continued to ity and also denied the inspectors free and unfettered basement access of FSP's to inspect CPR's testing laboratory which is located headquarters.
to licensees that its products are manufactured and controll6d in with Part 21 the requirements (Part 21). of Appendix 8 to 10 CFR Part 50 (Appendix 8) a his decision.
Mr. Sabcock stated that access was being denie involvement in a joint research agreement with a Japanese concrete 2
which would agreement. require the inspectors to sign a confidentialuredisclos to its laboratory in over 20 years.Mr.-Babcock also stated that CP allowed to interview the laboratory staff. agreement, o The inspection team refused to adequate protection under current NRC regula of proprietary. information. e to facilities licensed pursuant to the AEA and the ERAFurthermore, sin 21.41 of Part 21. basic components, both FSP and CPR .
are
, 21.3 andsubject to S Mr. Babcock still refused to allow NRC access to CPR The inspection team asked to review licensee purchase orders to Five Star in order to determine the scope of fSP's nuclear (P0s) submitted The team was provided with P0s for the period 1988 to involvement. 1992.
The review issued P0s to FSP for safety-related grout and c specified compliance to Appendix 8 and Part 21.
The licensees and the plants Power and Light (Susquehanna); New York and Powe Fitzpatrick); Niagara Mohawk (Nine Mile Point 2); Carolina Pow (Brunswick);
Operating Company Nebraska Public (Wolf Creek). Power District (Cooper); and Wolf Creek uclear Bechtel Power Corporation, Athens, Alabama, which acted for TVA.
On Wednesday, August 19, 1992, P0s and requested additional documentsthe inspection team resumed its review of the organizational charts, external licensee (e.g., FSP and CPR QA manuals, company of CPR) necessary to continue the inspection. audits of both companies, FSP audits The team's request for such Mr. Babcock who stated that the inspectionat ywas in this was a bad time of the month to conduct such an inspection s due to F president, Mr. William N. Babcock (son of Mr. H. Nash Babcock) being vacation.
Mr. Babcock, after consulting with his attorney, stated that the
( inspectors should end their inspection by day's end and return after Labo Day.
However, it was further stated by Mr. Babcock that access to CPR's te i
laboratory would not be allowed until December when CPR's new l (presently under construction) would be operational.
i Mr. Babcock stated that research.
{ separation would then exist between FSP's QA testi i
complete the inspection, however, they would leave by day's end as orde i ,
i Later from NRC. that afternoon, headquarters Mr.
dated Babcock was presented with a copy of a letter f August y
3 NRC's aythority to conduct the inspection; stated that there is no requirement limi' ting inspections to announced inspections, and that continu refusal to permit inspection of FSP and CPR is a violation of 10 CFR 21.4 is subject to treatment as a criminal violation and to criminal penalties in accordance with Sections 161 and 221 of the After AEA.he read the letter, Mr. Babcock remained firm and told the inspectors .
3
5:00 p.m.
i violation of NRC requirements is identified as ViolationThe 92-01-01 .
This i:
3.2 OA Manual Review ._
\
would document the historical evolution of their pro !
provide the basis to support FSP's certifications to licensees that its !
products are manufactured under an Appendix B QA program. During the NRC's references were noted: review of licensee P0s as discussed previously, ti January 20, 1989; August 1985, Revision 1; November 20, 1988; !
1992. It was also noted that a JuneFebruary 2, 1990; Julyand 2, June 1990; 8 . July 23, 11 10, 1992, QA manual existed for CPR. j Copies of these documents were requested by the inspection team but wi furnished due to FSP's request to suspend further inspection efforts . The FSP Five Star's contracted packaging plants, the Sham Shamokin, orders for FivePennsylvania, Star. which just started processing and filling Appen from either the Watta-Crete facility, located in Canaan, , or the Connect L.W. Osborne facility located in La Mirada, California.
Fairfield, Connecticut headquarters. stated that the manuals o~nly cov
, unable to perform an implementation review of licens particular QA manual to determine compliance.
As a result, the team could not
! determine the adequacy of the products produced b , and adequate for use in safety-related applications in nuclear power plants.
3.3 4
Review of licensee Audits of FSP and CPR The NRC inspection team requested that FSP produce copies of all licensee
'l safety-related P0s with FSP. audit reports of FSP and CPR to determine!
The Five Star QA manager stated that the i
following organizations audited FSP's QA program since 1989: '
Bechtel Power CorporationNiagara Mohawk, Carolina Power and Light, Ne ,
l Nuclear Utility Procuremen,t Issues Council member audit.and Omaha Pub Several audit t CPR's test laboratory and records were also denied by FSP '
Several audits, including the NUPIC audit, documented that in addition to being denied meet certain access toofCPR, requirements FSP's Appendix B. QA program was not acceptable and did n also identified that certain licensees have accepted FSP's QA program as meeting all applicable Appendix B requirements.
all licensees purchasing implementation audits. Appendix B items from FSP had performedIt was also note 4
3.4 ESP audits of CPR determine compliance with the provisions of Appendix 8 audit condu e-external audits of CPR to by the FSP QA manager.cted of CPR was dated Julyendix 8 and Part 21.The only June 10, 1992, The July 31, 1992, 15, 1992, and was performed QA program was satisfactory audit report concluded that CPR
's 4
PERSONNEL CONTACTED ESP. Incoroorated H. Nash Babcock, Vice President H. Allen, Technical Service SpecialistR. Grabowski, Construction Products Research H. Nash Babcock, President 4
e 5
l
_ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ . .