ML20217H967
| ML20217H967 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | 07100102 |
| Issue date: | 08/04/1997 |
| From: | Dicharry R, Frizell M, Weber P SOURCE PRODUCTION & EQUIPMENT CO., INC. |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20217H946 | List: |
| References | |
| 97-01, 97-1, NUDOCS 9708130360 | |
| Download: ML20217H967 (8) | |
Text
. _.. ~. _ _.. - _. - _ _
-_q v
t MATRIX OF AE&lCNMENTS AND CORIECTIVE ACI'l0NS. PHASE 11 I
Rnlelos (1), J!ly 31,1997 l
Corrntite Attlea lasplementation Plan
&PEC QA Preredure 97 41, Rev (g) j p.. y Cortwti$e Act6ees to EPEC Audit Findings Ref.
Aulga Date Date Rank and NRC loope< tion Oboen ations.
To auigned cosaplete Olli 1.inut rate of falvianmn of erw Jackages to maximum fiw (5) packages Qa 97 01, Pete 07/l4/97 07/10/97 l
ler wwk -
41.6 l
0 211 Apicint Dr. Parker to serve as memter of Materials kniew Ikiard Qa 97 01, IXeny 07/14/97 07/10/97 l
(MR!l)-
4.3.5 i
0311 Corxiuct wwkly Team mtrtings with untica agendas A minutes.
Qa 97 01, Pete 07/14/97 j
4.1.2 0411 Audit fatricathm personnel first hand on a random basis.
Qa 97 01, Dr.
07/23/97 4.3.1 Pasker j
0 511 Ataht QA Inspection persmnel fitit haral on a random basis, Qa 97 01, Dr.
07/23/97 l
4.3.2 Parker 0 614 Report directly to the President on random obserwtions and mvrall Qa 97 01, Dr.
07/23/97 status of the Plan semi.wwkly.
43.4 Parker i
0 711 leam spd atklits.
P1 07/23/97 Team 0811 Report wwkly to NRC on status of the Plan, number of dnices Qu 97 01, Dr.
07/23/97 fabncated, aml ouwt relnunt information requested by the NRC.
4.36 Parker 0 911 Roiew and appmv all new package fabrication records for Qa 97 01, Dr.
07/23/97 completeness as part of final inspection.
43.3 Parker 1011 SPl!C procedure 7.23, para 7.1.2.3 requires drawing number and Audit 07/30/97 i
rouim for jigs and lis1ures.1he working copy of the cahtention log Reput l'
does rad ponde this.1he working copy of Ow cahbration log was not Fmding #1 dnrhip4 in accordance with SitC pnicedure 7.23 What happened? 1he wwLing c7y of the calittation log was not devehipsi m accordance with SPil pocedure 7,23 Cause? 1he author of the list did not comply with the written procedure. The creation of the document was not iniewed or approwd as required by the QA manual.
1' What will be done to correct the pniblem? Procedure 7 23 sm(l)
Mike will be tevised to delete para 7,1.2.3 1he list will be reviewed and approwd by the President 1 111 SPl!C procedtuc 7.23 para 7.l.2.4 is not complied with Atklit 07/30/97 What happened? 1he procedure requires that the fixture, jig, and Report gauge list contain inspection and/or cabbratior, instructions, and Finding #2 critical dimensions with to!crances. The list does not contain these.
They are pesent in the folder as a rabbrationfinspection reput for fisttura jigs, and gauges, but this report is not asmriated with the hat.
Also, the reputs are not completely filled out.
Cause? The audwr of the list did not comply with the wntten procedure. 1he creation of the document wn not rniewed or apprmed as required by the QA manual.
Mike a
What will be done to correct the pniblemi? A folder will tw created ist each fbetse and jig. 'Ihr folder will condain a cahtestien shoot for the Rieme orjigo A calibration shoot will be Alled out and as esait entibeatica and placed in the Ibider.1he Antwe, jig, and puuss list will he kept in a separate fulfer and will seiw as the ms aer list. Ptooedwo 7.2J wel be revised to incorporate theno changes..
What will he done to prneat the conditian froni recurring? All Mike nel.will be tetrained in procedwo 7.23 and QA manual 9706130360 970804 PDR-ADOCK 07100102 i
C PDR a
Assignnwnts A Correcti
- Action Matrix. Phase !!.
Page I of 8 -
Filename: CA!!(1).
l
-Roumn(I), July 31,19 7 ~
t Corre<the Acekee to $PEC A!dit Findings Nif.
Assigli Inte Date Raik and NitC 1:spe<tke Oh ent86ent.
To assigned remplete 1211 QAM 12.0, control of nwasuring and test equipment, requires hsting Audit 07/30/97 caliper serial numter and cal date cm Imns QA 10,3 arxl QA 10 4.
Reput form 10.3 complies, fmn 10 4 d(es not have an area to rmed Otis IindingW4 mfmnation What happened? 11e required infismation was not recosued.
Cause? 1he author of the fmn did not include the required prmision for recording caliper information.
What will be done to correct the problem? QAM will be sched Mike 12.0 to delete the last seuleac 1 311 A surwy iratnanmt cahtvation certificate is uwd to rmvd the results Audit 07/30/97 of an instnuncrd " check" performed befive cach lot of DU castings is Report inspected.1he fmn should only be uwd for true cahtwations.
Finding 45 What beppened? An actual cahbration fmn was used to rmvd the results of a "chnk" cahbration.
1his fann is not readily disunguinhable than u true cabbration certificate. QA manual 12.l.c li requires the serial numters of the items surwyed to le rmvded on a copy of the last cahtvation fmn. Instead, a new cahbration fonn was used to wrify calittation and to record the serial numters.
Cause? Ccedlicting QA documentation. QA procedure 7.49 conflicts wah QA tranual 12.1.c it lhe inspwr followed QA prmedure 7.49 What will he ihme to correct the problem? The two QA procedures Mike will tw reiewed and smuhlbi as temsary to reormeile.
1411 In gennal, trawlers do rut list the rnision letters or ofter blanks to fill Audit 07/30/97 in rnision letters for referenced documents.
Repvt What happened? 1he trawlers were created wphout prmision to Fmding W6 record asmriated drawing rnision letters. Whereas this does not siolate Oc QA manual, it makes it diflicult to audit the documentation used to fatwicate a particular package.
t Cause? lack of consideration of the " big picture" when creating trawlers Insufliciced management rniew, Absence of a link tetween trawlers and engineering drawings Trawlers created t y QA instead of praluction or engineering.
What ulH he shee to pment the candition from recurring? Assign Pete/
the cronhan of trawlers to Engineeriiv. Audit trawlers periodiceiry, Ken 4
Assignments A Correctiw Action Matrio Phaw 11 Page 2 of 8 Filename: CAII.(1)
Revrston(I), July 31,1997 i
l
/
Cerretthe Attions in Spi'C Ardit Fl: dings Re f.
Anilgn Ikte Date Re:L and NRC lispettion Ohsenetions.
To esalg:cd complete 1hc sugt er evahiation twords weic not on file for all supphers of C.
Audit 07/M/97 1511 h
1,21, aux! SPl;C-l 50 components Report What happened? QAM 4 0 Section D7 w as not complini with 1he Findmg #9 QA Manager (Mike I riiell) was aware of the requirement Mile l'riiell rmule a wndor hst and felt hie we could evahuite wrahir's psfienwuu.c based on anept/rejert rat:s (In fact, some vendors have been deleted Inun the Auerted Vendor's 1.ist due to this method of evalu-tion). Mike had intentions of sendmg Form 43 to the "new vinkes" Outt remarrni m die list, primanly the SpF.C.I $0 component supphers (if documentation of the suppber evahiation did not already cust) This was m4 considered a high priority item by Mike l'ritell Patd Oucu lpirdumngL Mike Wilhams (QA) and Tonuny Ruir (QA) were unaware that the document edsted Tommy cormnented that he was trained as a "pirt inspector" atid less focuwd on the details of the sections of the QAM that did not pertam to mspxtion instructiont Cause? Not (msidsf al high enough priority in cornparison with other outstanding QA tasks.
What will be done to corrett the problem? Redew the wndor files, Mike determine what vendors have not teen evaluated and perform the evaluation in accordance with QAM 4.0 Section D.7.
What will be done to present reotturrente?
l} 1rmin ut (re-train) all QA pernormel in all aspects of the QAP and Mike QAM.
- 2) livaluate the "cornpleioty and critical nature"(descrited in QAM Pete 40, Section D.7)of tachput of the Type 11 packages (msed on safety concerns (i c. source lock wrses source tag screw).
- 3) Delormine the level of the " evaluation" reqtrittsi tesed on safety Mike emocrnt (Fot example, depleted LIranium suppliers uvuld sequire a (lonce ev1duation than the Wrh!Pr that supplies quick disconnects for siftty plugs).
- 4) Consider mahlying QAM 4.0 to require the evaluation to apply Mtic/
only to thoac vendors that supply Q-A and Q B items, not necessanly Pete Illiaupplict
- 5) Plan an extensive evahiation of depleted Uranium sideld supplier Mike (paibly a viiut. This is based on comments by Tom Matula).
Mike
- 6) 6 umth re evaluation of mklors and emnponent lists to ensure that each wndor of a Type B pacLage compinent has teen evaluated as apphrable Put on QA mamtenance ralendar.
Mike 71 listablish a requirement and metto.1 that prnrnts a Q-A or Q41 j
wndor to le used twfore the evaluation is completed.
16l1 SPl?C C.I drum fabrication / tracking and insgwction log Audit 07/30/97 3
Fonn does not have a fonn numtwr.
Report Several completed drums were not insgwcted.
Findmg a
b No drawings are referenced
- 12 c,
Not enorded on form 10.11 d
No quali:ications for lim Penin What happened? Violation of QAM 10 0, Form QA 1011 was not used to em rd the inspection of 21' and C.1 dntms Cause7 lhe log that wan used to record the inspxtion was created by Jake Kreunty(pnmtwe 416) %e Fonn QA 10 II (from the QAM) was not inehkksiin Omt proecdure Indniduals were instructed to use the pnwedure for the manufacturing and the log for documenting the mspection Tommy Rmi and Mike Frtiell weic aware that Fonn QA 10 t I existed Tommy did not question Jake's inspection instructions (to uw the hig in Procedure 4.16) Mike Frizell didn't relate the Fonn QA 1011 to dnun manufacturing since it doesn't state " Shipping Dnim"(or something similar) Mike Wdhams was unaware that the form esided. These were drums that were not inspwtal since they were not brought to QA's attention for inspection (per Tommy).
Note: One of the findmps was umt the log used in Proenlure 4 16 does not have a fonn number. This may not be a fmdmg smce that log is part of the appunul pnienture aid the procedure is an extension of die snanual. Another Imdmg is that there are no drawings or inspection entma referenen! on de hy 'lhe inspxtion eriteria is inchaled in the proenture as well, so this may not be a true findmp What will be done to correct the pniblem? Revise QA manual 4 0 Mike to require distribution of drawmgs to fabrication workers with dkip orders, arkt the distribution of drawings to wndors with purchase ordatt Create a tihop order fann and procedure, Qualify Tim Perrin pet precalure 4.16.
As:ignments & Conective Action Matriu Phase il Page 3 of R Fdenaine: Call-(l) knuson (1), July 31,1997
T I
Corretthe Actions is $PEC Aydit Flidings Ref.
Assiga
!) ate Ilate Ruk a:d NRC 1:spertion Ohsentlions.
To tssigned complete 1 711 SPEC C l lousing plates reccinng records, Ptuchase order i1250 Audit 07/30/97 No msgection recorda for 20 ca lop d or, Sides /Itottom Frmt door, Repirt inner pancis and Itack Panels.
Fmdmg What happened? Violatim of QAM 7 0, Form QA 7 2.1he material 813 was rut d(cumented as icing recciwd or ingated after recci;4 Note. This nay rut te a fmdmg 1he retention of Fonn 7.2 is only Iwo years lhe material was puchased around 10/14/91.
Cause? Unntam liidict the reccising inspdion was tut perftvined or de imgation report was misplaced. (1here are plates in stock that appear to haw teen instected since Gwy are marked green)
What will be done to torrett the problem? The C.I plates la plock hhke (the no painted green) but do not how skcumentation astilable, will be =
M to curmit deswings and itsspntion docterwedation w1U be gener,ated lefore une of any of die material, What ulH be done to pre ent the condition from recurring?
- 1) Re-trainc Rueising 'wedions will te gerfiwered in scantarxe Ahle with QAM 7.0., etc.
M4e: 1he plates are cturnedy rud in a condsollal area. This olwelvation is a&lrense I in a noperate aucht rep rt.
2)Proce&se 1.14 and QAM 7.0 have conflietmg forms for Recching inspection Repsts 'lhete diusnents will te renewed and reconeded.
IH!!
4PI;C C.l compmerit procurnnent Audit 07/.10/97 What happened? 1here was a Violation of QAM 4 0 Section D1 Repet
'Ihe apprmed drawing shows th part (C.I outlet lon) to le %" in Findmg length (drawing dated 10/20/H9) When the part was ordered a copy
- 14 of the am..-ved drawing was nwked showing a length of.3HO" +.
Only. Not a QA Document'g was identified as,"Prmhsetion Drawing m5*. We nwkal up drawin and the drawing number was scratched out 1 hat tempprmtd and marked up drawing was the one attached to the purchase order and pwking slip It was otwerm! Omt the matmp part (the outlet rupple Its the C.I) has a thrtad Ic.igth of.3R5' +. 015,
indicating Omt die.3M0" length loss is the corteet length in addition, amic of Ur 2tH adies C.I's homen were measured and confinned to le approximately 3/M".
1he appromi drawing shows the lengt!-
dmietisim at %" 4.000,..I 25", Although the part is at the low end of Oc tolaarwe, it remains in tolerance when the part is.3 HO' +dio$' r6:
ordered froin the marled up drawing Cause? 1he drawing did not go through an 1 CR and revision gwecu prior to ordering the compment.
What will be done to correct the problem?
1)1he drawing will go Owough the 1,CR process leftoc re ordering Ow Pete cronoment,
- 2) Any remaining compoients in. house will tw re impected and M4Lc
~
documented using the rewmed (amt anmned) drawing.
- 3) Reuse lesedure 3 01 to impure pachnee ordets for 8PEC designed parts to incitale a copy of the current, appromt engirwering drswing.
1911 SPl?C C 1 lbtubes, Show inspecting 34 lbtubes, no material or Audit 07/30/97 fabrication imiwctims.
Report What happened? Violation of QAM 4 0.
Fonn QA 41.
No Firuhng p ocurnuent infonnation was available.
416 r
Note:
1his may not le a fmding Retention of Fonn 4.1 is dirce years lhe inspection repirts on the u-tubes une all in 1992.
Cause? Uncertain. liither the purchasing documentation (P.0 ) was not generated or it was misplaced aller completion WI.at will be done to prnent the condulon from rrcurring?
Retrair Purchass'ng and QA departnwins twt QA Manual chapter 4.0.
Mike i
Establish a teocoding method that ties purchasing infamation of materials (rud, pisas, bar, etc.) to the Receiving inspection Repost when SPEC is the ier, (Fur example: We purchase titanium tube to make s tuhen! '
i we tid the matenal amt make the a-tubesJ 1 hen we inspect 'd e a-tubes but there is no P.O. W. Pecking Slip, etc. since that type of information is rud amhcable. Therefore, the purchasing information of the raw material ht was usal is nct is not able to te retry,d [7/16. review QAP for Q il items This might not te a m
findmg l l
As.:Fnments A Corrediw Action Matris. Phase !!
Page 4 of H hierwne: CA!!(1)
Reumon (I), July 31,1197 I
6-I Correcthe Actions toIsPEC Aidit Fl: dings Mif.
Anots D:le D:te Rxk andfC C I:3pection oheen st6 ens.
To testeed complete 2 011 SPlic C.1 drawing 621W(2), door bracket drawing 322002(0),
Audit N/A N/A N/A -
N/A nameplate does not haw QA classification in accordance with QA Reput
^
mamal 3.0 !!.l.
Finding What happened? Violation of QAM 3.0, Secthm 11.1.1he QA
- 17 clannincaixei was rd added to Ow drawings.1he dcxv Ivacket drawing was rnised en 7/15/92.1he nameplate drawiag was created on 1/27/97. The QAM 3 0 Section ILI requires that, "All drawings initiated or revised aner 1/1/92 will include classification on uw drawing" Cou e7 nknown 1.ikely an owtsight.
What will be done to pmeat the condition from recurring? See Joe Fr)er's drawns control corrautive action.
2 ll1 -
!)esign activity record form QA 3.3,Iksign methily records are rot Audit 07/30/97 available for C l.
Repet what happened? QAM 3.0 requires the une of Form QA 3.3, Design Finding Actmty Rtcord for package designs to wnfy conformance to 10 CFR
- 1N Part 71, There are no Iksign Activity Records available for Ow C-1, Ilowewr, this is not a true nnding since the C.1 was designed before nic tequirenwnt was established.
Cause? N/A. Not a lin&g What will he done to pment the condillon from recurring? 11w Pete QA manaster will be trained in QA Manual chspier 3.0, 2211 Tungsten electimics and Titanium filter rmi and Argon, receiving Audit 07/30/97 iragection repwts and purchase order fivm QA 4 i Report What happened? 1here was a siolation of QAM 7.0, Form QA 7.2.,
Finding SPEC Receiving tr.spection Reput.
- 19 Cause? QA inspttors were instructed by the prnious QA manager (Jake Kenruly) to nic Om doctunent after the rocciving inspection was pcsformed and not to pass the doctunent to him for the QA Manager's review. Although this was contrary to prnious instructions (by Jim Mmee), the impdors conducted the inspection as instructed by Jake.
Additionally, QAM 7.0 is twtan that Ow QA Manager must sign 0 e Hewiving Inspection Reput. Sectmn C.I only states,"1he receiving insprtion shall giw careful consideration to...
and complete dutunentation." Also, Section C.ll states diat the reputs "shall be
[
find and maintained by the QA manager", not actually signed Also, Proc slure 7.36, Section 7,2.24 states that the QA Manager shall sign the e put after re%ing. Note: The inspection (brm in the procedure is idi utirm! as EC Fonn 1.12A (which is identical to Fonn QA. 7.2) 4 t
What will tw alone to correct the problem? 1he QA managar will Mike revisw and sign past teosiving inspection reports.
W'est will be done to rnent the condit6on from recurring?
11He-train QA staff Manual 7.0:
Mike
') All dnemmentatinn wi be revwwed by the QA manager and signed Mike off before niing.
3 Precedwe 7.36 and1the QAM 7,0Jwill'beireviewal (br Mike in)coWeies and revised appropriately, 2311 SPl!C 150 DU shield, drawing i 511008 rev 2, drawing 150008 rev 2, Audit 07/30/97 trawler 15008 tev 1,1C1 149 in process survey inspection, receiving Repyt inspection repwts.
Finding What happened? 1here are two drawings, proprietary and non.
- 20a 4
pr ictary for certain items that require a drawmg for a package as scathn The non-proprietary drawmg is denoted by the letter il m th drawing number. A rnision was made to the non-proprietary drawing that did not alTect the proprietary drawing so no ECE was originated.
Cause? Originals of rmpopietary drawing for package applications are filed in a ditTerent location than proprietary drawings.
What will be dame to prevent the readition froan recurri
- 7. File Joc/Pete hon $roprieter) a$acent to proprietary drawingsJ when revisions to one drawing the othat drawmg snust be tevised simuhanoeusly, t
Assigrunents A correctiw netwn Matrix. Phase Il Page 5 of 8_
.. Filename: Call.(1) 4
- Revision (I), July 31.1997 i
4
. L..L.
...;.-.,+-.,....--... _ -. - -. - _ - - -
Corresthe Attions to hPI'C Audit rinfings R;f.
Assig2 Itte lhte Re:k nad NHC 1:spestion Ohien:tions.
To coilgned complete 2411 SPILL 50 lotk tap auembly, drawing 150916, tnneler 150910, Audit 07/30/97 recching inspectum repots Repirt What happened? Ihumg the dntlopment of the SPILL 50 a 1 inding substantial numlet of drswings wcre produced Prior to apphcation
- 26a approval developnent drawings were signed for apprmed widiout completing the !!Cl! (QA from $ 1). Wien the application was approved !!Cl!(QA from $ 1) was completed for the drawings lhe drawing n;qvoval signature line on the hem is oric hne away funn the cluvige audusvatxo sipiattre Inc. It appears sorne forms were signal on the wwng line or Uie whole form uas accidentally skipg4 Cause? (Artsight What will be done tu cortw1 the problem? Procedural problem to be hiike corrected, What will be done to Mike the IIT(QA foam $ proent the aondition from retuning? Rnise
- 1) to climinate the approval signature line. The
!!Cl? ahould tv done lefore a revisum is stu*1e and approval Frunint to inake the diange (change authonintion).1he drawing is apprmtd by algrurag the diamng not the liClk 2 511 SPl:C C.!
NRC 07/30/97 What happened?
07/10/97 1hc outlet ruiple boss is listed as I/2' on the certificate of compliarwe.
42 1he part actually is 0 3R0'.
1he part is within the minus 1/it" tolerance, but the part was ordered using a drawing that did not necify 1/2". SPl:C should check with Ross Chapel to determine if a drawing rnision is requiral Cause? Sl'l?C maintains drawings for Apphcation and drawings for fatocation 1he Iwo sets of drawings are not hnknl What will be done to correct the prohlon? A link will be c( iblidnxl Joc/Pete ldween the two acts of drawinga. 1ho drawings will be reewwl and syncluontred hit. Ross Chapel of NRC will be contacted to discuss further remedial action.
What will be done to prnent the condition from recurring? 1)pe he/pete II A lication drawings will be linked to falrication drawings. A we fer application drawings will te created, Engineering, and A will te tramed.
2 611 Calittation.
NRC 07/30/97 What happened?
07/lp!97 1hc cahper tracking list is not up to date.
- 3 1here is no proccJure to remove caliper: from use.
One cab er had an " acceptable" tag after it was taken out of riemce.
l There w us a consistent enor in one caliper by 0 009.
Class I calyers were cahtvated improperly.
One cahper was out of cahbration by 0 005"?
1here is no anwent safety significance to the cableatitm problems escept pertuips he tM slicct on Jigs and listures (We need to evaluate the safety significarne of the cabbration enors onjign and fistures).
There is no procedure to cabbrate the rabbration standard (lilock).
Cause? Impnger urAlerstanding and use of the cahtvation procedure.
What will he thee io corrett the pniblem? We need to evaluato the Petc/
safety 43nificance of the calibration errors on jigs and fixtures.1here Mike is no Ivocedure to cahttate the calittation standard (131ock).
What will be done to prnent the condition from recurring?
Ptriodic analits will assure compliance with the calibtation procedure, Pete 2711 Weldmg traveler Process:
NRC 07/30/97 What happened?
07/10/97 1he process is burdensome.
- 4 Some records have open blanks.(We should re-evahiate the process)
Cause? The trawlers were not drafted by the department fabricating parts in accordance with them. This resulted in a lack of ownership What will be done to prevent the condition from recurring?
Drafting of travelers will be assigral to the Productioa department, Pete 2Ril QA Classification System NRC 07/30/97 A graded approach is needal 07/10/97 Resp <mic: Spec has a predal classification system procalute as part of
- 5 httke QA nuuwial 3.0 lksign Centrol; 1he clamfication system will be mieuwl and supplemented to clearly define the grading systeut Auignments & Conectiw Action hiatrix Phase 11 Page 6 of 8 Filename: CA!!(1)
Rnisson (1), July 31,1997
Corresthe Aallons toliPI:C Audit Itdings Re f.
Assign D:te D:le Hrk and NRC inspection Obsen ations.
To essigned complete 2 918 Nontmforming Material Control:
NRC 07/30/97 What happened?
07/10/97 Nonucionning material is exit omt olkd
- 6 i
Mome parts are punt red taggn! or not segregated Cmtrol areas should te locLed i
Some rum <onforrning material is mingled with c mforming matenal NCR Iktunwntation is rust current.
1he noncohenung material tracking repet is not able to detennine t Ime out status (no rperVclose dates on the repirt)
Many NCR's should te updated or completed 11cre are multiple agiirs of the same Nonconforming material report at various stayes of unnpletmn A procahue is nmicd to control inn-conforming matenal.
Add " ogen and clomi columns NCR truc king reput. Add date aral ttrne.
Report forms twat to te controlled Making copies can cause poblems.
Cause? liene are sytnphens of the sptemic poblem with SPEC's QA system arul the cortenpmdmg la(L of owne: Ship of Ow NCR s stein What wit. be done to tormt the problem? NCR documentatj>on will Mike lie oisignetal and filed. Open armi tkiscout dates will te addal to die NCR s',atus ieport.
What will be done to pment the condition from recurring 7 lhis is Mike an area where the iruleperpletit audit will be focusoJ to perfotrn a not cause analysis.
3 011 Audits-NRC 07/30/97 What happened?
07/10/97 1here is currently no atxht uhedukd for 1997.
- R Ihe last intemal audit was in 1991 MSC has not been audited An athht should te pe fortiied Eir veridtes of all Q-A iterns Cause? 1.ack of upper management suppirt for the QA prognun What will be done to corretI the problem? An independent mixht is George schedulal. A rint cause armlysis is schedulal, see item 1511 3Iil Quahlication of personnel NRC 07/30/97 What happened 7 lie insortor found no rmnds to inihcate diat Mr.
06/19/97 Ilob 1.nwtason was certifini to perhum sunry meter cahbrations
- 2 Almi, his trmining file was practically empty.
Cause? QA manual sectmn 2.1 is not explicit in the control and admmistrathm of emplovec training Proenture 2.1 overlaps and cmfhets with QA manual section 2.1. Administration and rmeds of training have leen infonnal.
What will be done to prnent the condition from recurring? A Pete training umrdinator will le apininted. Duties to include the painteruvice of a training matrix,h employce.sclaxiuling of training, and pen hxlic iniew ofiniining tweoids for eac 3211 SPEC 150 prototype insgretal to unapprmed drawings. I ack of QA NRC 07/30/97 procalutes hv prototype.
06/19/97 What happennt? 1he pre poductmn SPF.C.I $0 protot>1es used for
- 3 testmg wrre not built to a complete package of appnwrd drawings Prelumrwy drawing were umi for many parts lhese drawings were lata a;gmwal, tmt m many cases there wrie no formal change control documents assriated with Ow cawrrsion from prehminary to praluction drawing status.
Cause? 1he situatum was caumi by an attitude that pc.puduction prototype units neal not be doemnented to the same lori of detail as praluctum units.
What will be done to correct the problem? '1he QA manager will Mike tyview the peliminary drawinp umi to fabricate the caly protot31es and create a loput documenting eny differences from the equindent apprmtd drawmys
% het will be done to prnent the condition from recurring? The Kerv ob deciplian fa pachashig nyent, machinist, and QA innpoctor are Mike wing misal to include statements not to punhane, fatwicate, or
[
inspect to unapprtal diawings.
Assiganwnts & Cortcetive Action Matrn Phase 11 Page 7 of H rilename: CA!!(1)
Rounm (1), July 31,1997
f Corrective Actions CD SPEC Audit Medings Ref.
Aulga Date Date Rank
/
tad NftC leapeetten Obwerations.
To auigned complete 3311 QA signoffs, mining signatures. Materials Receiving Reputs nct NRC 07/30/97 signed off or signed by name indhidual.
06/19/97 documen;ts.What P ; 27 The inspect (e found missing final signatures on QA
- 5 1he final signatures indicate the QA rnanager has rniewed um dccuments for completeness. The irspector also found cases where the same indhidual signed as in.tector and iniewer.
Comoe? There was tot a good hand off dunng recent changes in QA managers. Dunng the current QA manager's administration, QA inspectors ut out of the habit of tnngmg documents to the QA maragw to a gn, and the QA managet did not seek out the documents to sign.
What will he done to correct the problem? The Qual ~ Assurance Mike
' soviewaN rete '
suports, traw ISO and SPEC 2 T, other QA doranents endow and signatuse dated January, itM to peasnt and sign oisvesa date for reviewof feem.
3411 No apparent pocess whereby " preliminary" status is remmed fiorn NRC 07/30/97 drawmgs?
06/19/97 What ha W6 matked "ppened? An inspector found versions of SPEC drawings Feliminary" and versions of the same drawings widi Ow peliminary marking remmed. There ed to te no pnwess used to raram this martmg. Procedure 1.1 swing Control allows the use of peliminary drawings, which by dermition are rot approwd.
The pocedure states that peliminary drawings will not te used for faleication or QA.11e both of thcae purposes.peluninary drawings in this case were used for Causef See stem 3 of this report.
What will be done to corrret the problem? No remedial action is required.
What *lli be done t irnent the condition from recurring? All Pete blastgesin dnnving son will be controlled by this system. A change avvlow bnerd will monitor all changes to drawings and component c4minguration.
M Date:
Reglewed By:
sn Mg. @ Manager
//
Rniewed By' b
/ A Date:
9 Pete Weter, General Manager Reviewed B :L CD 4 DLL** _
r)ste:
Y Approved By:
Date:
R D. (DonngDicharry, President Ansignmmts & Cortective Action Matrix. Phase Il PaSe 8 of 8 Filename: Call.(l)
Rensmn (1), July 31,1997