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 Richard Grabowski, Quality Assurance Manager CONTACT:
(203) 336-7900 NUCLEAR INDUSTRY ACTIVITY:
Structural Concrete and Grout Products INSPECTION CONDUCTED:
August 18 and 19, 1992 N
' I5 h
/d// 3/b f
TEAM LEADER:
Robert L. Pettis, Jr., P.E.
Vendor Inspection Section Date 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 9610010310 951201
.oDR GA999 EMVFIVES 99900152 PDR
}
l 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. Nash Ba e
inspectors full and unfettered access necessary to conduct an inspect Five Star Product:'(FSP's Products Research (CPR), a)nd of test data associated with bcon on of sold to commercial nuclear power plants.
asic components 19, 1992,the NRC inspectors further access to FSP's records and person President of FSP and President of CPR. suspended all further inspection nel and on August Mr. Babcock is Vice 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 N
, formerly determine the extent to which FSP supplied material or services to li
, CPR, to the adequacy of its quality assurance (QA) and testing programs es, adequacy of its products.
, and the King, Incorporated, located in Fairfield, Connecticut.Both FSP and CP An entrance meeting was held with the FSP quality assurance August 18, 1992, and the records that would be required to conduct the inspe nspection after, Mr. H. Nash Sabcock joined the inspection and questioned the Shortly 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 question the NRC's author (ERA). Despite this, Mr. Babcock continued to rganization ity and also denied the inspectors free and unfettered access to inspect CPR's testing laboratory which is located basement of FSP's headquarters.
to licensees that its products are manufactured and controll6d in with the requirements of Appendix 8 to 10 CFR Part 50 (Appendix 8) a Part 21 (Part 21).
Mr. Sabcock stated that access was being denie his decision.
involvement in a joint research agreement with a Japanese concrete 2
which would require the inspectors to sign a confidential disclos agreement.
to its laboratory in over 20 years.Mr.-Babcock also stated that CP ure allowed to interview the laboratory staff. agreement, o The inspection team refused to adequate protection under current NRC regula of proprietary. information.
to facilities licensed pursuant to the AEA and the ERAFurthermore, sin e
21.41 of Part 21. basic components, both FSP and CPR are subject to S Mr. Babcock still refused to allow NRC access to CPR
, 21.3 and 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 1992.
involvement.
issued P0s to FSP for safety-related grout and c The review specified compliance to Appendix 8 and Part 21.
Power and Light (Susquehanna); New York Powe The licensees and the plants Fitzpatrick); Niagara Mohawk (Nine Mile Point 2); Carolina Pow and (Brunswick); Nebraska Public Power District (Cooper); and Wolf Creek Operating Company (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 Mr. Babcock who stated that the inspection was in The team's request for such y
this was a bad time of the month to conduct such an inspection due to F at president, Mr. William N. Babcock (son of Mr. H. Nash Babcock) being s
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 laboratory would not be allowed until December when CPR's new i
(presently under construction) would be operational.
separation would then exist between FSP's QA testi Mr. Babcock stated that i
research.
{
complete the inspection, however, they would leave by day's end as orde i
i Later that afternoon, Mr. Babcock was presented with a copy of a letter f i
from NRC. headquarters dated August NRC's aythority to conduct the inspection; stated that there is no y
requirement limi' ting inspections to announced inspections, and that continu 3
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 AEA.
Mr. Babcock remained firm and told the inspectors After he read the letter, 3
5:00 p.m.
violation of NRC requirements is identified as ViolationThe i i
This 92-01-01 3.2 OA Manual Review would document the historical evolution of their pr
\\
provide the basis to support FSP's certifications to licensees that its products are manufactured under an Appendix B QA program.
references were noted: review of licensee P0s as discussed previously, t During the NRC's August 1985, Revision 1; November January 20, 1989; 20, 1988; It was also noted that a JuneFebruary 2, 1990; July 2, 1990; July 23, 1 1992.
and June 8 10, 1992, QA manual existed for CPR.
j Copies of these documents were requested by the inspection team but w furnished due to FSP's request to suspend further inspection efforts i
Five Star's contracted packaging plants, the Sham The FSP Shamokin, Pennsylvania, which just started processing and filling Appe orders for Five Star.
from either the Watta-Crete facility, located in Canaan, Connect L.W. Osborne facility located in La Mirada, California.
, or the 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 Review of licensee Audits of FSP and CPR 4
The NRC inspection team requested that FSP produce copies of all licensee safety-related P0s with FSP. audit reports of FSP and CPR to determine
'l The Five Star QA manager stated that the following organizations audited FSP's QA program since 1989:
i Bechtel Power CorporationNiagara Mohawk, Carolina Power and Light, Ne Nuclear Utility Procuremen,t Issues Council member audit.and Omaha Pub l
CPR's test laboratory and records were also denied by FSP Several audit t
Several audits, including the NUPIC audit, documented that in addition to being denied access to CPR, FSP's QA program was not acceptable and did n meet certain requirements of Appendix B.
also identified that certain licensees have accepted FSP's QA program as meeting all applicable Appendix B requirements.
all licensees purchasing Appendix B items from FSP had performedIt was also note implementation audits.
4
3.4 ESP audits of CPR determine compliance with the provisions o e-external audits of CPR to Appendix 8 audit condu by the FSP QA manager.cted of CPR was dated Julyendix 8 and Part 21.The only The July 31, 1992, 15, 1992, and was perfor June 10, 1992, QA program was satisfactory audit report concluded that CPR med
'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
.