ML20141E621

From kanterella
Revision as of 20:05, 26 June 2020 by StriderTol (talk | contribs) (StriderTol Bot insert)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Notice of Nonconformance from Insp on 961118-20 & 970106-09. Nonconformance Noted:Lucent Failed to Ensure That Design Bases Requirements Were Translated Into Instructions for C&D Battery Cell Mfg,Charging & Conditioning Process Controls
ML20141E621
Person / Time
Issue date: 03/28/1997
From:
NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned)
To:
Shared Package
ML20141E582 List:
References
REF-QA-99901309 99901309-96-01, 99901309-96-1, NUDOCS 9705210064
Download: ML20141E621 (2)


Text

-.. , - - - - . - _ . - - - . .. . _ - - .~. - . - . . .- - - - . - - - -

, e NOTICE OF NONCONFORMANCE ..l ,

Lucent Technologies, Incorporated Docket 99901309 I Microelectronics Group l Mesquite, Texas '

l Based on the results of an inspection conducted at Lucent's facility on l November 18-20,.1996, and an inspection at Lucent's manufacturer of-round cells on January 6-9, 1997, it appears that certain of your activities were

j. not conducted in accordance with 10 CFR part 50, Appendix B,.that was l contractually imposed upon AT&T, currently known as Lucent Technologies, in i Duke Power Company purchase order W39267-33, dated August 31, 1990.

t A. Criterion III, " Design Control," of 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix B requires

! that, measures shall be~ established to assure that the design basis _for 1 those components that Appendix B applies are correctly translated into

, specifications, drawings, procedures, and instructions. These measures i shall include provisions to assure that appropriate quality standards I are specified and included in design doce.c.ts and that deviations from j such standards are controlled.

Contrary to the.above, as of January 6, 1997, Lucent did not take adequate measures to ensure that its design bases requirements contained  :)

in specification KS-20472 were appropriately and completely translated into instructions for.C&D's battery cell-manufacturing, charging and conditioning process controls. Additionally, Lucent did not adequately l control. differences between the applicable section of specification KS-20472 regarding preparation and mixture verification of epoxy used to seal the round cell jars around the terminal posts and the epoxy

, titration procedure and practices that were employed at the round cell manufacturer. (99901309/96-01-01) l B. Criterion VII, " Control of Purchased Material,' Equipment, .and Services,"

of 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix B requires that measures shall be established to assure that services conform to the procurement documents,:and that the effectiveness of the control of quality by contractors shall be assessed at intervals consistent with the

! importance and complexity of the product or services.

Criterion XVI, " Corrective Action," of 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix B requires that conditions adverse to quality are promptly corrected.

Contrary to the above, Lucent did not assure that contracted manufacturing services performed by a sub-tier vendor'for fabricating its round cells for the McGuire station conformed to the procurement '

document specifications and requirements during charging and conditioning activities. Additionally, Lucent did not take prompt

action to correct the ineffectiveness of its round cell

[

Enclosure 1 9705210064 970515 PDR GA999 EMV*****

99901309 PDR

manufacturer's control of product quality. .Although Lucent identified l numerous examples of conditions adverse to quality over a three year i period at its round cell sub-tier manufacturer's facifity, Lucent did l not assure that the cause of the conditions adverse to quality were i

determined or assure that the sub-tier manufacturer took effective l corrective action to preclude repetition.

! (99901309/96-01-02) l Please provide a written statement or explanation to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, ATTN: Document Control Desk, Washington,.D.C. 20555-0001, with a copy to the Chief, Special Inspection Branch, Division of

, Inspection and Support Programs, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, within '

i 30 days of the date of the letter transmit'ing this Notice of Nonconformance.

This reply should be clearly marked as a " Reply to a Notice of Nonconformance" l- and should include the following for each nonconformance: (1) a description of steps that have been or will be taken to correct these items; (2) a

-description of steps that have been or will be taken to prevent recurrence of these items; and (3) tha dates your corrective actions and preventive measures were or will be completed.

l j

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 28th day of March, 1997