ML20236M229
| ML20236M229 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 10/29/1987 |
| From: | Conway J, Stone J Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20236M218 | List: |
| References | |
| REF-QA-99900064 NUDOCS 8711130009 | |
| Download: ML20236M229 (16) | |
Text
{{#Wiki_filter:- _. . i ORGANIZATION: INGERSOLL-RAND ENGINEERED PUMP DIVISION ouni7econer ygg m :y REPORT INSPECTION ;NSPECTION. NO.: 99900064/87-01 DATES? nQ/1d 1R/A7 'lM etyr gningg: gg - CORRESPONDENCE ADDRESS: Ingersoll-Rand -
. Engineered Pump Division ATTN: W. J. Schmidt, Vice President :
Pump Gtoup World Wide Operations j 942 Memorial Parkway j Phillipsburg, New Jersey 08865 ORGANIZATIONAL CONTACT: M. F. Hagerstrom, Manager QA TELEPHONE NUMBERt 7n1 rAQ 77a'4 NUCLEAR INDUSTRY ACTIVITY: Since 1983, only component parts for nuclear pumps. . j ASSIGNED INSPECTOR: \ (b\Mhk
. T. Conway, Progra s
velopment and Reactive
/O-NdI Date spection Section RIS)
OTHERINSPECTOR(S): T. Tinkle (consultant j APPROVED BY: . z <k+
- 0. C. Stone, Chief PDR S,
>4 endor A [ Inspection Branch 8'SN7 Date i
INSPECTION BASES AND SCOPE: A. B_ASES: 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix B and 10 CFR Part 21. B. SCOPE: The inspection was conducted as a resul't of a notification of mechanical seal leakage on three low pressure, safety injection (LPSI) pumps at the Palo Verde nuclear facility and to perform a programmatic evaluation of the implementation of the QA program in the areas of training / qualifications, control of purchased material and services procurement document contrn1. enntrni nf (enntinnad nn navt nnnoi PLANT SITE APPLICABILITY: Mechanical seal problem - Palo Verde 1/2/3 (50-528/529/530), St. Lucie 1/2(50-335/389), and WNP 3/5(50-508/509). 8711130009 871110 l PDR GA999 EMVINGE 99900064 PDR I 1
ORGANIZAT10N: INGERSOLL-RAND
, ENGINEERED PUMP DIVISION PHILLIPSBURG. 4EW JERSEY REPORT INSPECTION -
NO.: 99900064/87-01 pESULTS: PAGE 2 of 16 B. SCOPE: (corttinued from previous page) measuring and test equipment, audits (internal / external), control of special processes, and reporting of defects. A. VIOLATIONS:
- 1. Contrary to Section 21.21 of 10 CFR Part 21, -Ingersoll-Rand's (IR) 10 CFR Part 21 procedures do not ensure that a responsible officer shall be notified in all cases when a defect is found in a safety-related basic component. (87-01-01)
- 2. Contrary to Section 21.31 of 10 CFR Part 21, a review of purchase orders (PO) to vendors revealed that while 10 CFR Part'21 was imposed upon IR, IR did not impose 10 CFR Part 21 requirements on
. P0s 571639 (March 21, 1986) to Accutrex Products, 503428 (March 2, 1987) to Micro Speciality Systems, 546431 (March 18, 1983) to Page Wilson Corporation, 503413 (November 7, 1986) to Nutley Equipment Repair Company, 502326 (January 29,1986) to Grumman i Aerospace Corporation, and 500051 (July 22, 1987) to Blanchette i Tool and Gage Company. (87-01-02)
B. NONCONFORMANCES: j
- 1. Contrary to Criterion VII of Appendix B to 10 CFR Part 50 and Subsection 5.4.3 of Section N-10 of the Quality Assurance Manual (QAM), P0s were placed with Accutrex Products (571639), Tinius Olsen
(.500052), and Nutley Equipment Repair Company (503413); but the three sup liers were not on the Approved Vendor List (AVL). (87-01-03
- 2. Contrary to Criterion XVII of Appendix B to 10 CFR Part 50, Subsection 4134.17 of Section III of the ASME Code, Subsection 5.5.3 of Section N-10 of the QAM, and Subsection 4.9 of Section N-24 of the QAM, a copy of the following P0s could not be retrieved by IR:
500052 (Tinius Olsen), 575538 (Vitco Nuclear Products), 579777 (Durametallic), 527545 (Carpenter Technology), 570857 and 575426 (IR - Foundry Division), and 548915 (Precision Heat Treatment). " (87-01-04)
- 3. Contrary to Criterion II of Appendix B to 10 CFR Part 50, Subsection NCA-4134.2 of Section III of the ASME Code, and Subsection 3.0' of Section Na25 of the QAM, it was noted: (87-01-05) f
___.___..__.______._____m.__.___m-_mm_
ORGANIZATION: INGERSOLL-RAND ENGINEERED PUMP DIVISION PHff1TPRRURG. WW MRRFY REPORT INSPECTION - NO.: 99900064/87-01 RESULTS: PAGE-3 of 16
- a. I.R did not have records to show that welding personnel had been indoctrinated and trained regarding applicable code requirements, l company policies, QA Program requirements and quality procedures.
b.. A review of records in the QC Inspection Department revealed ) that the formal training scheduled for this department for j calendar year 1987 had not been accomplished as of the date of the inspection. ] z l
- 4. Contrary to Criterion XII of Appendix B to 10 CFR Part 50, Subsection 1
. NCA-4134.12 of Section III of the ASME Code, and Section 4.5.2.1 of Procedure No. GXQ-1, the QC Department did not have the listing of !
calibration standards. (87-01-06) i i 1 l
. 5. Contrary to Criterion XVIII of Appendix B to 10 CFR Part 50, j Subsection NCA-4134.18 of Section III of the ASME Code, and Subsection 4.2.1 of Section N-10 of the QAM, external audits were ,
overdue for John Crane-Hondaille and Durametallic who were both j , last audited in July 1986. (87-01-07) ]
- 6. Contrary to Criterion VII of Appendix B to 10 CFR Part 50, Subsection <
NCA-4134.7 of Section III of the ASME Code, Subsection 5.3 of Section N-12 of the QAM, and Vermont Yankee P0 25165, and although IR's Certificate of Conformance (C of C) dated April 10, 1986 stated that the items furnished on P0 25165 conformed to the contract requirements including quality requirements, two items were purchased as stock material from Livingston Wilbar (P0 571638) and Accutrex Products (P0 571639), but there was no documented evidence that the items had been upgraded per the conditions noted in Section N-12 of the QAM. (87-01-08)
- 7. Contrary to Criterion IV of Appendix B to 10 CFR Part 50, Subsection NCA-4134.4 of pection III of the ASME Code,' and Subsections 5.3.1 and 5.4.2 of Section N-10 of the QAM, the requirement for a vendor to have an approved QA program was not stated on P0s 502326 (January 29,1986) to Grumman Aerospace, 571639(March 21,1985) to Accutrex Products, 500051 (July 22, 1987) to Blanchette-Tool _
& Gage. (87-01-09)
- 8. Contrary to Criterion IV of Appendix B to 10 CFR Part 50, Subsection NCA-4134.4 of Section III of the ASME Code, and Subsections 3.1.3, 5.3.1, 5.4.F, and 5.5.1.2 of Section N-10 of the QAM, it was noted.
that the Manager QA and/or the QC department did not review and , approve the following documents: prs and P0s to Accutrex Products __u-.-____-
~
ORGANIZATION: INGERSOLL-RAND
. ENGINEERED PUMP DIVISION PHit i TP9Rf!RG. MFW .1FRRFY REPORT INSPECTION -
N0.: 99900064/87-01 RESULTS: PAGE 4 of 16 L (571634), Grummate Aerospace (502326) and Blanchette Tool & Gage (500051); and P0s to Nutley Equipment Repair (503413), and Vitco NuclearProducts(575055,575657,575427,575422,and575420). ~i (87-01-10) ! C. UNRESOLVED ITEMS: s None. D. STATUS OF PREVIOUS INSPECTION FINDINGS: None. E. OTHER FINDINGS AND COMMENTS:
- 1. IR - Engineered Pump Division (EPD)
IR - EPD manufacturers nuclear pumps,. vessels and associated component supports, parts and appurtenances to the requirements of l Section III, Division 1 Class 1, 2, and 3 of the ASME Code. IR - EPD renewed in May 1987 their Certificates of Authorization for "N" and "NPT" stamps at their_ Phillipsburg, New Jersey . facility. IR ~ EPD also manufactures commercial pumps and components to their standard QA program and military pumps and components to the requirements of Standard MIL-Q-9858. l i The last order for a nuclear pump was from Baltimore Gas & Electric, and two auxiliary feedwater pumps were delivered to Calvert Cliffs nuclear facility in 1982. The current nuclear work is for component parts which amounts to approximately 1.5 percent of the sales in
~
1986.
- 2. Palo Verde 1 Low Pressure Safety Injection (LPSI) Pump Mechanical '
Seal Leakage The mechanical shaft seals on both 1A and IB LPSI pumps at Palo Verde 1 experienced excessive leaking during pump operation on July 3-4, 1987. These pumps were manufactured by IR to Combustion Engineering (CE) specifications. 'The mechanical shaft seals used in these pumps were purchased from Durametallic by IR. Leakage rates of I gpm for the IB pump and 2-3 gpm for the 1A pump _were reported. /
ORGANIZATION: INGERS0LL-RAND ENGINEERED PUMP DIVISION PHil i TP9RlfpG GW MR9FY REPORT . INSPECTION - NO.: 99900064/87-01 RESULTS: PAGE 5'of 16
~
The Instruction Manual documents that the LPSI pumps are IR type 8X20 VDF which is a vertical, single stage centrifugal pump 'with a bottom suction, 8-inch discharge, and a 20-inch impeller.~ The' 8X20 WDF pump was designed in accordance with ASME Section III, Class II, 74 Summer Addenda for a temperature of 400*F and a pressure of 710 psig. The pump has a rated capacity of 4300 gpm for borated water ranging in temperature from 40-400*F. Six LPSI pumps were provided for the Palo Verde site and'were identified as follows: Unit 1 - pump S/N 0876-36, -37; Unit 2 - pump S/N 0876-40, -41; and Unit 3 - pump S/N 0876-44, -45. The LPSI pumps are equipped with a Durametallic mechanical seal' (ref. Durametallic Drawing 2D-151340, Revision 2) to prevent shaft leakage. The sealing surface for this mechanical seal is formed.by
- . a tungsten carbide seal ring in contact with a carbon. insert. The insert is stationary, and an 0-ring is used to prevent leakage '
between the insert and the adjacent stationary. gland ring. .The seal ring rotates with the s' haft sleeve, and packing is used to prevent leakage between the ring and sleeve. The shaft packing and 0-ring-are made from an EPT material. A spring assembly holds the seal ring against the insert. This arrangement maintains contact between the sliding seal surfaces and accommodates wear and pump shaft movement. The instruction manual indicates seal leakage is not visible to the naked eye during pump standby or operation. The seal drawing states that the maximum normal seal leak rate is 50 cc/hr, and the maximum accident seal leak rate is 100 cc/hr for the LPSI pump. The instruction manual indicates that some flow is required through the pump to prevent overheating during low flow operation.. The pump installation is to include a recireplation line'to provide l required minimum flow. A general drawing note.in the manual states i for start-up and in-service testing periods not exceeding one hour of pump operation, the minimum flow for safe operation is 100 gpm I and the customer should install a 2-inch by-pass line from the-I discharge to the source of suction to provide this flow. In the maintenance section of the manual as well as on the seal drawing a note states: " Caution - do not lubricate EPT 0-ring with petroleum base lubricants. Use glycerine, ethylene glycol, ,
- silicone oil, or silicone grease. This pertains to 0-ring (6), !
gasket (G),andshaftpacking(P)." l l l l
l l l ORGANIZATION: INGERSOLL-RAND ENGINEERED PUMP DIVISION. PHil 1 T P9RflDn . 4FW .1FDRFY REPORT . INSPECTION NO.: 99900064/87--01 RESULTS: PAGE 6 of 16 Table 1 identifies IR 8X20 WDF and 8X23 WDF pumps. supplied for commercial nuclear service. The QA Mana j recent listing (dated December 8,1977) ger that stated had been this was by compiled theIR. most Table 1 a
'I l
Site Pump Type Service l Beaver Valley 8X20WDF RHR l Braidwood 1 8X20WDF RHR j Braidwood 1 8X23WDF CS q Braidwood 2 8X23WDF CS ; Braidwood 2 8X20WDF RHR 1
~
Byron l' 8X20WDF RHR I Byron 1 8X23NDF CS l Byron 2 8X23WDF CS Byron 2 8X20WDF RHR I Callaway 1 8X23WDF CS ) Callaway 2 8X23WDF CS Catawba 1 8X20WDF RHR
)
l Catawba 2 8X20WDF RHR j Cherokee 1 8X23WDF CS l Cherokee 1 8X20WDF- LPSI Comanche 1 8X20WDF RHR Comanche 2 8X20WDF RHR Forked River 1 8X23WDF CS. Forked River 1 8X20WDF LPSI Harris 1 8X20WDF RHR l Harris 1 8X23WDF CS-6 Harris 2 8X23WDF CS Harris 2 8X20WDF RHR ; Harris 3 8X20WDF RHR Harris 3 8X23WDF CS Harris 4 8X23WDF CS Harris 4 8X20WDF RHR Jamesport 1 8X20WDF RHR Jamesport 2, 8X20WDF' RHR 1 Parble Hill 1 8X20RDF RHR Marble Hill 2 8X20WDF RHR Millstone 3 8X20WDF DHR North Anna 3 8X20WDF DHR North Anna 4 8X20WDF DHR l i i
ORGANIZATION: .INGERSOLL-RAND i ENGINEERED PUMP DIVISION 1 PHit t TP9RllRr,. 4FW MRSFY 'I
)
REPORT INSPECTION - 1 NO.: 99900064/87-01 RESULTS: PAGE 7 of 16 a l PaloV$rde1 8X20WDF LPSI ) Palo Verde 1 8X23WDF CS j Palo Verde 2 8X23WDF CS Palo Verde 2 8X20WDF LPSI Palo Verde 3 8X20WDF LPSI-Palo Verde 3 8X23WDF CS Perkins 1 8X23WDF CS Perkins 1 8X20WDF LPSI San Onofre 2 8X23WDF CS San Onofre 2 8X20WDF LPSI 8 San Onofre 3 8X20WDF LPSI
. San Onofre 3 8X23WDF HPSI I Seabrook 1 8X20WDF RHR Seabrook 2 8X20WDF RHR St. Lucie 1 8X20WDF LPSI St. Lucie 2 8X20WDF- LPSI
) St. Lucie 2 8X23WDF CS Sterling 1 8X23WDF CS i Summer 1 8X20WDF RHR Surry 3 8X20WDF DHR Surry 4 8X20WDF DHR Tyrone 1 8X23WDF CS Yogtle 1 8X20WDF RHR Vogtle 2 8X20WDF RHR Watts Bar 1 8X20WDF RHR Watts Bar 2 8X20WDF RHR Wolf Creek 8X23WDF CS WPPSS 3 8X20WDF LPSI WPPSS 5 8X20WDF LPSI For each line item, the quantity of pumps is two. It was noted that most IR 8X20WDF and 8X23WDF pumps supplied- ) for nuclear service were designed to operate with an external heat 4 exchanger to provide seal cooling and flushing for the shaft mechanical seal and gland area. The pumps supplied to Palo Verde as well as some other nuclear sites do not use an external heat ] . exchanger for seal cooling (see Table 2),
-{ ,
For pumps designed to operate with an external heat exchanger, a small amou,nt of water is diverted from the pump discharge.to a 3 heat exchanger cooled by external cooling water. f,f ter cooling, - ; the water re-enters the pump through a pipe connection in the {' mechanical seal gland ring. The water cools and flushes the mechanical seal and other gland area parts as it flows to the l i Ll
ORGANIZATION: INGERSOLL-RAND ENGINEERED PUMP DIVISION D MTfI TD9RifRA . NFW .1FR9FY REPORT INSPECTION - N0.:. 999D0064/87-01 RESULTS: PAGE 8 of 16 1 low pressure region in the casing above the imptller. A' character- l istic 'of this design is that in the event of pump operation with a I loss of heat exchanger external cooling wateri the temperature of l the raechanical seal and gland area parts can approach the water l
' temperature at the. pump. discharge. The mechanical seal with' seal !
water cooling is depicted in Durametallic Drawing 2D-134815. ;
)
For pumps designed to operate without an external heat exchanger, water is not bypassed from the pump discharge to the gland ring. l Instead, water in the ' internal gland area remains essentially stagnant and helps to maintain a barrier to reduce heat flow from tne casing to the gland area. This design is not dependent on a source of external cooling water to prevent gland area overheating. l 1 However, in the' event that water in' the oland area leaks from the- i l . pump for some reason (e.g.,' mechanical seal leakage), the temperature l of the mechanical seal and gland area. parts can approach the water temperature in the casing. The rate of temperature change depends upon the magnitude of the leakage rate-(i.e., the' higher the leak i rate, the faster the gland area temperature will approach the casing watertemperature). ! Table 2 l Pumps Without Seal Cooling Heat Exchangers ; Site Pump Type St. Lucie 2 8.Y.20WDF St. Lucie 2 8X23WDF Palo Verde 1 8X20WDF Palo Verde 1 8X23WDF Palo Verde 2 8X20WDF Palo Verde 2 8X23WDF Palo Verde 3 8X20WDF Palo Verde 3 8X23WDF WPPS 3 8X20WDF WPPS 3 8X23WDF WPPS 5 8X20WDF WPPS 5 8X23WDF Wolf Creek 8X23WDF Callaway 1 8X23WDF Callaway 2 8X23WDF l Tyrone 1 8X23WDF ! Sterling 1 8X23WDF I i l l i I
- ~
+ . *l ,.
ORGANIZATION: INGERSOLL-RAND ENGINEERED PUMP DIVISION l PHTli IPAntlRn. 4FU 1FR9FY REPORT INSPECTION - N0.: 99900064/87-01 RESULTS: PAGE 9 of 16 i { 1 Site Pump Type j i Byron 1 8X23WDF ' Byron 2 8X23WDF { Braidwood 1 8X23WDF ! Braidwood 2 8X23WDF ! Harris 1 8X23WDF l Harris 2 8X23WDF j
\
For each item, the quantity of pumps'is two, and the'8X20WDF and j 8X23WDF are LPSI and CS pumps, respectively. Section 4.2.14 of CE's design specification SYS80-PE-410,-Revision 3, j states: "It shall be a' design _. objective that a loss of externally ) l supplied coo!ing water, for at least two (2) hours, shall not cause l l a loss of operability of the pump nor leakage of the seals in excess i j of 100 cc/hr per seal. Supplier shall state minimum time, if less i than two (2) hours, pump assembly can withstand loss of cooling water." This resulted in IR's decision to eliminate external gland cooling on the Palo Verde pumps. , i
- Durametallic performed the technical evaluation to determine that {
l the LPSI pump mechanical seal would operate satisfactorily without ! l external seal cooling water. This evaluation was based on certain i assumptions provided by CE about the time-temperature profile and transients of the water being pumped. At this time, capability of the mechanical seal to operate properly under more severe water temperature conditions is not known by IR. The IR representatives ! stated they did not have any available service life data for ' I mechanical seals in IR pumps installed in operating nuclear power i plants. The same mechanical seal is used for both the IR 8X20WDF LPSI and 8X23WDF CS pumps, in addition,-the electric motors on the. 1 LPSI pumps had been changed during a modification, and both the LPSI and CS pumps currently have the same size electric motors installed. The reported _ swelling of EPT parts in the Palo~ Verde:1A and IB LPSI pumps was briefly discussed. It was stated that this material ~ l- can swell if contaminated by oil based lubricants. The question l addressed related to the was whether failure of theswelling of thefound carbon insert 0-ringin(in-the 1A unit was two pieces). Based on a r,eview of their notes .and recollections at the July 28, 1987 meeting at Palo Verde to discuss the mechanical seal problem, - l two IR representatives agreed on the following concerning-the 1A LPSI l pump: a) the 0-ring between the shaft and shaft sleeve (part not-l l
ORGANf2AT10N: INGERSOLL-RAND
. ENGINEERED PUMP DIVISION 4 putttinunoc grw arouy REPORT INSPECTION -
NO.: 99900064/87-01 RESULTS: PAGE 10 of Il shown 4n drawing) was reported to be heat set, b) the shaft packing between the sleeve and seal ring was swollen, c) there was no information on the condition of 0-ring between the carbon insert and gland ring. ;
.1
- 3. Control of Purchased Material and Services The inspector reviewed Section N-10 " Control of Procurement Documents
& Purchase Materials, Items and Services" of the QAM, procurement j
documents, and external audit reports to assure that items and l - services conform to the procurement documents and are purchased
- from approved vendors.
l Procurement documents to six vendors of services were selected to l
- determine if technical and quality requirements were included in prs I and P0s. P0 503428'(March 2,1987)' to Micro Specialty Systems (MSS) covered semi-annual calibration services for four temperature records ,
and one zone survey of the Sonder furnace. Page Wilson Corporation 'l l performed maintenance and calibration of two hardness testers under j P0546431(March 18,1983). The magnetic particle testing equipment 4 was serviced and calibrated by Nutley Equipment Repair Company from I l April 1986 through December 1987 under P0 503413 (November 7, 1986). l P0s 500051 (July 22, 1987) to Blanchette Tool & Gage Company, 500052 i to Tinius Olsen, and 502326 to Gruman Aerospace were for calibration services of other M&TE. l Approximately 20 P0s to'nine vendorss for material / items used on nuclear orders were also reviewed. The vendors included American Alloys, Vitco Nuclear Products, John Crane - Houidaille, Durametallic, l Cann & Saul Steel, Livingston Wilbar, Accutrex Products Carpenter / Technology, and IR-foundry. For nuclear material a PR had a " Controlled Pump Program" approval stamp which was signed and dated by a representative from the QA department. Each P0 was signed and dated.by a QA representative indicating that QA had compared the P0 with the.PR. For five l vendors, it was noted that prs and/or P0s were not signed by QA (See - l Nonconformance 87-01-10). Three P0s to Grumman Aerospace, Accutrex Products, and Blanchette Tool & Gage did not contain a requirement for the vendor to have a QA program which was approved by IR (See Nonconformance'87-01-09). Six P0s to one material vendor and five service vend 6rs did not impose the requirements of 10 CFR Part 21 l upon the vendor (See Violation 87-01-02). J l L- _. - - . _ -
a
- , j
- .. j ORGANIZATION: INGERSOLL-RAND-ENGINEERED PUMP DIVISION- :
PHILLIPSBURG. NEW JERSEY-REPORT INSPECTION = . NO.: 99900064/87-01 RESULTS: PAGE 11 of th )
~
1 Procur6 ment documents for services performed by IR-Central Material - Services Laboratory and weld material purchased from E. R._ Joseph . ) were reauested, but copies of prs and/or P0s could not be _ retrieved ! by IR. In addition, a copy of IR's P0s which were referenced
~
on certified material test reports or C of C's from Tinius Olsen, i Vitco Nuclear Products..Durametallic, Carpenter / Technology, ... 1 i IR-Foundry located. . See (Division,.and NonconformancePrecision 87-01-04) Heat Treatment could not be H Five AVLs from April.1985 through April 1987 were reviewed.. The '
- AVL is updated semiannually by the QC Engineer. It was noted.that orders were placed with Accutrex Products, Tinius Olsen, and Nutley i Equipment Repair (NER) but the three suppliers were not on the AVL- !
l l (See Nonconformance 87-01-03). A Vermont Yankee P0 25165 dated August 30, 1985 was for an. impeller nut modification for a reactor. water cleanup pump. The licensee imposed nuclear and 10 CFR Part'21 requirements upon 1R who . : assigned it order No. 001-41849. IRP0s571638(March 20,1986)to l Livingston Wilbar Corporation and 571639(March-21,'1986).to Accutrex Products were for stock material. IR C of C (April.10, 1986) certified that the items furnished on.PO-25165 conformed to the q contract requirements including quality requirements. Documented ' evidence was not available to indicate that IR had upgraded the i' stock material per the requirements documented .in Section N-12 of the QAM which are similar to those contained in Subsection NCA- t 3867.4(e) of Section III of the ASME Code. (See Nonconformance ! 87-01-08)
- 4. Control of Measuring and Test Equipment (N&TE)
The inspector reviewed Section'N-16 " Control of. Measuring and Test Equipment," of the QAM, Procedure GXQ-1 " Gage Control Program," and calibration records to assure that M&TE is properly controlled and calibrated. It was noted that the QC Department did not have a listing of the j l calibration standards (See Nonconformance 87-01-06). A calibration ! check of randomly selected instruments found in various departments ! in the manufacturing facility was made. The instruments included eight micrometers, four verniers, one protractor, two hardness i testers, one magncflux unit, and two U/V meters. The calibration i sticker noted the calibration frequency and the calibration due l date. , 1 l o _ _ ___
I ORGANIZATION: INGERSOLL-RAND ENGINEERED PUMP DIVISION i PHILLIPSBURG. 4EW JERSEY REPORT INSPECTION - N0.: 99900064/87-01 RESULTS: PAGE 12'of 1h A call'bration check of randomly selected gauges found in the test area was also made. The four gauges were identified with control l numbers 33-0042, -0065, -0029, and 40027; and the gauges were last < calibrated in July or August 1987 and were due for calibration 1 in October 1987. During the calibration check of. gauges and < l instruments, the following items were found with calibration stickers from outside vendors. The items included a Rockwell hardness tester calibrated by.Page-Wilson, two Magnaflux units, y and.two U/V Meters calibrated by NER, and one dead weight' tester j
. calibrated by Grumman Aerospace. MTE control-cords in_the Gage' Rovin masterdeck for 14 items were also reviewed.
The certification standards for Starrett End Standards S/N 9196 to
. 9201 and S/N 9190 to 9195 were reviewed. The certification _was I issued by Blanchette on July 31, 1987, and the calibration' service !
was requested on IR P0 M500051E. Tinius Olsen Field Service Report dated July 1, 1987 indicated services wera provided to repair and , calibrate the Tinius Olsen Hardness tester.- IR's P0 500052 dated ' June 25, 1987 was referenced on'the report. ) 1
- 5. Control of Special Processes The inspector reviewed Section N-15 " Welding, Heat Treatment, NDE and Other Special Processes" of the QAM. The covered welding s electrode holding ovens were inspected. Each oven was labelled l for a particular type of covered welding electrode. A thermometer with a serial number was installed in each oven. Information' l obtained from the calibration stickers for a few randomly selected 1 oven thermometers indicated that five thermometers (Nos. 39-0005, !
-0006, -0020. -0021, and -0031) were on a 12 month frequency and 'l were due for calibration in December 1987.
The heat treat oven control panel was inspected. Calibration stickers on the temperature controller (No. 39-0027) and the temperature indicating recorder (No. 39-0052) indicated that both , instruments were calibrated by MSS in May 1987 and were due for H calibration in November 1987. l The Welding Foreman records for the welding machine voltmeter and ammeter calibration checks were reviewed. The records that were inspected showed that calibration checks had been performed every six months as required.. The calibration stickers on two randomly selected welding machines (Nos.17 and 33) indicated that both _were calibrated in May 1987 and were due for calibration in November 1987.
i
. i
~; .. ; ORGANIZATION: I'NGERSOLL-RAND . ! , ENGINEERED PUMP DIVISION PHilI f pSHURG.1FW MREFY I i REPORT INSPECTION - NO.: 99900064/87-01 RESULTS: PAGE 13 of-10 The inspector reviewed the Welder Continuity - Monthly Weld Report for nine current welders who.were qualified to the requirements of I Section IX of the ASME Code. The report was signed by the weld 1 I foreman and QA Engineer and documented the welder and the weld l procedure specification -(WPS) that was used on a monthly basis from j January 1983 to the present. The Section IX Welder' Qualification l Records for six welders (Nos. 343, 108, 14,>872,-63, and 210).were- l reviewed. It was noted that all'six welders were qualified.to a. ;
.particular WPS which was used on a nuclear order. The records- )
included the applicable Procedure Qualification Record and: . 1 Radiography Reports for. test, coupons which were radiographer by a - .i Level III- examiner at the IR-Foundry Division. - 1 The nondestructive examination (NDE) records were reviewed. Iris a ! written practice for NDE is Procedure No. ESQ-3 " Certification of ; Nondestructive Test Personnel." Revisien 3 dated May 21, 198G. The 1 procedure prepared in accordance with SNT-TC-1A was written by .l IR's Level III and approved by the Chief Inspector and'Hanager QA.. '! The qualification records of four Level II and one Level III j examiner were reviewed in detail. The records were consistent-with the requirements of SNT-TC-1A. , 1
- 6. Documentation Packages (DP) !
4 Theinspectorreviewed21DPs(2-1984,3-1985,4-1986,and12-1987) j for nuclear spare part orders. A DP nonnally consisted of a j Quality Control Inspection.and Package Coiltrol Form (QCIPCF), 1 Factor Order Page (F0P), IR C of C, CMTRs/C of Cs from vendors, Hydrostatic Test Report, NPT Data Reports, Final Documentation. I Checklist, Receiving Inspection Record, Manufacturing a QC Plan (HQCP), and Production Routing Sheets (i.e., travelers). The QCIPCF identifies the item by'S/N (vibratooled on item) and the-shipping. foreman who does the processing and packing, the QC representative who reviews the software and order requirements, and the inspector who checks the item before shipment. The F0P describes the item and the vendor and IR shop requirements, and it is signed by a Contracts Administrator and a QA representative. ~ IR's C of C was signed by a QC technician and contained:a statement , that the item (s) confonn to contract requirements. Section III of the ASME Code, and IR's " Nuclear ontrolled Pump Program Quality Assurance Manual." The HQCP was generated by. a Project Engineer and approved 'by a Product Engineer and a -QA Representative.
ORGANIZAT10N: INGERSOLL-RAND , ENGINEERED PUMP DIVISION PHil1TPSRl!RR. 1FN MRSFY REPORT INSPECTION - NO.: 99900064/87-01 RESULTS: PAGE 14 of 10 The 1987 orders were from Alabama Power Company, Texas Utilities Generating Company (TUGCO). Arizona Public Service Company, Commonwealth Edison, Public Service Electric & Gas, Virginia Power, Florida Power & Light, and Bechtel. . Vermont Yankee and Commonwealth Edison ordered replacement parts for nuclear pumps in 1986. The three orders in 1985 were from Duke Power, Southern California Edison, and General Electric; and the 1984 orders were from Carolina Power _& Light and TUGCO.
- 7. Indoctrination and Training ,
)
4 The inspector reviewed Section N-25 " Training.and Indoctrination," of the QAM and indoctrination and training records for the QC Inspection Department. The 1987 training session schedule for the . QC Inspection Department was approved by the QA' Manager on March 8, ] 1987 and identified nine training sessions that were scheduled from 1 April to November 1987. Reports were not found for training during calendar year 1987 (See Nonconformance 87-01-05). This matter was brought to the attention ! of the QC Inspection Manager who stated formal training had not been conducted this calendar year. He indicated he is performing some indoctrination and on-the-job training.and occasional posting of various items he wants to bring to the attention of department j personnel. . Eight training files for QC inspection personnel were selected ; for review. Typical information found in the files included: ? Certificate of Minimum Required Training, Inspection Qualification Resume and Progress Report, training session reports, Inspector Qualification Progress, and vision test. Four training files were j reviewed in detail and included three Level II Inspectors (Nos. 4 1014, 707, and 138), one Level II Hydrotester (No.1172), and one j level III Inspector (7030). The Welding Department Foreman did not have any records to show that. Welding Department personnel had been indoctrinated and trained 1 regarding applicable code requirements, company policies, quality : I assurance program requirements av ,uality procedures (See i Nonconfomance 87-01-05). j
-- - -_ o
c ORGANIZATION: INGERSOLL-RAND ENGINEERED PUMP DIVISION PHill IPRRIIRG. NEW JERSEY REPORT INSPECTION N0.: 99900064/87-01 RESULTS: PAGE 15 of 10
- 8. 10 CFR / Part y The inspector reviewed Section N-19 "Nonconformance Control" of the QAM. Subsection 7.2 addresses the reporting of defects and stated it is the responsibility of all employees to report to the Manager, Quality Assurance deviations which may result in substantial safety hazards (10 CFR Part 21).
Procedure No. NSQ-1 " Control of Nonconforming Material," Revision 1 was reviewed. The procedure states that it is the responsibility of all employees to report to the Manager, Quality Assurance deviations which may result in substantial safety hazards. It was I noted that neither procedure ensures ~ that a responsible officer ; higher on the organizational chart that the Manager Quality ' Assurance will be notified when a defect is identified. (See 1 Violation 87-01-01.) Section 21.3(j) of 10 CFR Part 21 requires that a " Responsible Officer" be an individual who is vested with ; executive authority over activities subject to this part, and a QA i Manager is not ordinarily vested with executive authority.
- 9. Audits ;
i The inspector reviewed Section N-23, " Audit of QA Program," of the I QAM and Procedure ASQ-1, " Internal Audits." The internal Audit Schedule, QCM-511, is completed and controlled by the QC Department. The schedule of audits to be completed, revisions to the schedule, I and individuals responsible for conducting the audits are approved by the Manager QA. The Quality Audit Report Log, QCM-158, is maintained by QC. The Auditor or Lead Auditor prepares the Internal Audit Checklist, QCM-286, securing a Quality Audit Report Number from the Quality Audit Report Log Sheet, QCM-158, indicetes the scope and purpose of the audit, and prepares a checklist from the manual sections, exhibits, procedures, and applicable documents to be covered by the audit. The checklist is approved by the Manager QA. Internal Audit schedules for 1987 were reviewed. The schedules reviewed were distributed by four memos from the QC Engineer dated February, March, June and September 1987. The following audits had not been performed by the scheduled date: GXQ-36, PNM-3, and INQ-12. The following internal audit reports were briefly reviewed. Check-lists signed by the Manager QA were used for the audits. Audit Report AR-879 was for Training and Indoctrination (N-25, S-22) and
}i
, .I, ,
. ORGANIZATION: INGERSOLL-RAND ,
ENGINEERED' PUMP DIVISION i PHil I IPSRtlRG. '6W ' MREFY ! . I l REPORT -INSPECTION .
. i NO.: 99900064/87-01 RESULTS: PAGE 16 of 10 l
, . i ! included three audit dates (November 1, December 6, and December 8, 1986).' Audit Report AR-885 was for Document Control-(N-9 S-8) and included two audit dates (March 5, and March 31,1987). The,QA record files for the external audits of 12 vendors were t i reviewed. The audits took place from November 1985 through- j l May 1987 and were conducted by one of three auditors'. For each . audit, documentation in the file consisted.of: a) memo from the lead l auditor to the Manager QA~ sumarizing the audit results with a recommendation regarding placement of the vendor on the AYL, b) letter to vendor signed by the auditor and Manager QA, c) Vendor Survey Report, and d) checklist signed by the auditor and Manager QA. It was noted that the audits for John Crane-Houdaille and Durametallic were last conducted in July 1986 and were overdue by
. two months (See Nonconformance 87-01-07).
A memo dated April 10,'1987 from the QC Engineer to t'enManager QA-documented a list of nine people (3 in training) who are currently qualified to perform internal and vendor audits / surveys in accordance with Section N-25 of the QAM. The records for the three individuals who performed the external audits were reviewed in detail. The l records consisted of: a) certification as lead auditor signed by. the Manager QA, b) Record of Lead Auditor Qualification per'the re d)quirements of ANSI resume,andf)leadauditorexamination. trainingclasses,e) N45.2.23, c) auditor qualification record, l F. PERSONNEL CONTACTED: i
*M. Hagerstrom, Manager QA K. Schumann, Manager Customer Service P. Nagengest, Manager Engineering. Analysis
*G. Young, QC Engineer
*P. Kasztejna, QA Engineer-l D. Gobbi, QC Manager D. Keisgi, Foreman Welding i
*D. Jean, Manager Manufacturing H. Walters, QC Technician ;
I I
- Attended exit meeting.
I w---____-_____-________--_____-----}}