ML21105A024
| ML21105A024 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 04/12/2021 |
| From: | NRC/OCIO |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML21105A022 | List: |
| References | |
| FOIA, NRC-2021-000055 | |
| Download: ML21105A024 (2) | |
Text
From:
l(b)(?)(C)
Sent:
Friday, June 17, 2011 3:41 PM To:
!(b)(?)(C)
I Cc:
Armstrong, Aaron; NRC Allegation; Crutchley, Julie; Petrosino, Joseph; Crane, Samantha; Rasmussen, Richard
Subject:
Attachments:
Hello (b)(?)(C)
Third email l(b)(?)(C)
Fw: Inspection Issues DWG043203_SHT _ 1_REV _A_FPD _Eng_326E.tif
Forwarded Messa e -----
From: (b)(?)(C)
To: (b}(7)(C)
Sent: ues ay, une
Subject:
Fw: Inspection Issues 1-page attachment is being withheld in its entirety under FOIA exemption 4/proprietary information This part is a good example of the failure of Flowserve's QA/QC system. This part was inspected and accepted as meeting print. Some issues were written up on NCR 12384.
The truth of the matter per NRC irules the part should have lhad an NCR written against the drawing because MANY of the engineering requirements CANNOT be inspected and/or verified. This condition REQUIRES rejection. Yet Flowserve accepted the part without identifying the engineering requirements that were not met or verified. This is not allowed.
(b)(4)