-. .

,

O13.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

./FICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENTREGION IV

Report No. 99900340/80-01 Program No. 51300.

Company: Yarway CorporationBlue Bell, Pennsylvania 19422

Inspection Conducted: April 22-24, 1980

7 /Inspecto v%duid. f.b es/co/gom

Wilflam D. Kelley, Cohtractor Inspector DateComponents Section IVendor Inspection Branch

I

d n t'.Approved .' (gera o%/oo/6a

D. E. Witesell, Chief DateComponents Section IVendor Inspection Branch

Summary

Inspection on April 22-24, 1980, (99900340/80-01)

Areas Inspected: Implementation of 10 CFR 50, Appendix 3 and applicablecodes and standards including, design and document control - design verifi-cation, manufacturing process control - machining and material identificationand control, inspection and test - magnetic particle examination, and training -welder qualification. Also performed review of vendor activities and conductedan exit interview.

The inspection involved twenty (20) inspector-hours on site by one (1) NRCinspector.

Results: In the five (5) areas inspected, no deviations or unresolved itemswere identified in four (4) areas. The following were identified in theremaining area.

Deviation: Inspection and Test - Magnetic Particle Examination; 'ontra ryto criterion V of Appendix B to 10 CFR 50, and Article T-732 of c ction Vof the ASME codes; the vendors QA inatructions to control magnetic particleexaminations did not contain all of the information specified by thecode. (See Details paragraph F).

8007010 *

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

'. *-

,

2

.

DETAILS SECTION

.

A. Persons Contacted

Yarway Corporation (YC)

*W. D. Clinton, Vice President of ManufacturingH. I. Gregg - Senior Development EngineerJ. Hynam - Quality Assurance EngineerR. D. Schmitt - Manager, Power Plant Technology

*W. A. Volger, Manager, Quality Assurance

* Denotes those persons who attended the Exit Interview (See paragraph H).

B. General Review of Vendor's Activitiesj

1. There has been no change in the status of the ASME Certificates ofAuthorization, the authorized inspection agency, or the authorizednuclear inspector as reported in IE RIV Report 99900340/79-01 .

2. YC's contribution to the nuclear industry represents approximatelyfive percent (5%) of its total workload.

3. Three ASME "N" stamped valves had been returned to YC by a customer,

because the border around the "N" symbol had not been imprinted on !

the name plate on one side, due to the curvature of the valve body.

C. Design and Document Control Design Verification

1. Objectives

The objectives of this area of the inspection were to verify that:

a. Procedures had been prepared and approved by the vendor whichprescribes a system for controlling design verification in amanner consistent with NRC rules and regulations, and the-vendor's commitments.

b. The design verification procedures are properly and effectivelyimplemented by the vendor.

2. Method of Accomplishment *

The objectives of this area of the inspection were accomplished by:

iI

|

|

|!

!

|,

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ - _ - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

~

.

*

.

|

3

Review of the ASME accepted Quality-Assurance Manual, Reviseda.11/15/79,

J(1) Section 2, " Design, Specification and Document Ccatrol" and

(2) Section 3,." Customer Order Control,"

to verify that the vendor had established procedures to pre-scribe a system for design verification.

b. Reviewed the documents referenced in paragraph a. to verifythat they contained measures to verify the adequacy of design,require that the results of the design verification to bedocumented, require that the design verification consider theimportance to safety, identify the method of performing thedesign verification, identify items to be ~ addressed during thedesign review, and prescribes the requirements for performingverification by alternate calculations, or by qualification test.

Reviewed the following documents:c.

(1) Nuclear Control Plan (Class 1) 016-952221,

(2) Minutes of Task Force Meeting 2/11/80,

(3) Seismic Analysis of Yarway Corporation . . Manual Valve.

Figure 5515B-SA105,

(4) Seismic Analysis of Yarway Corporation . . Piston Check.

Valve Figure 5561-SA105, and

(5) Design Reports 948880 and 949325

' to verify that the design verification procedures are being;

implemented.

d. Interviews with personnel to verify that they are knowledgeablein the procedures applicable to design verification.

3. Findings

a. The inspector verified that:e

(1) Procedures have been prepared, 1b* ap;, roved by the_ vendor3

prescribing a system for desist v w:' cat on which isconsistent with NRC rules anu :egu.,.49ns, and the vendor'scommitments, and

.

i

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

. _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ - - _ _

* -, m. .

,

4

(2) The design verification procedures are properly andeffectively implemented.

b. Follow-up Item

The project engineer does maintain a log of the transmittal and'approval of documents from receipt of the invitation to bid tothe development of the nuclear control plan for an order; however,the ASME accepted Quality Assurance Manual does not address orrequire the log to be maintained. YC will review the need ofdescribing the method of maintaining the logs in their qualityassurance manual and the inspector will review YC action cn asubsequent inspection.

D. Manufacturing Process Control Material Identification and Control

1. Objective

The objective of this area of the inspection was to verify thatmaterial identification and control during manufacturing is inaccordance with NRC rules and regulation, and the vendor'scommitments.

2. Method of Accomplishment

The objective of this area of the inspection was accomplished by:

a. Review of the ASME accepted Quality Assurance Manual,Revised 11/15/79

i

(1) Section 4, " Procurement Control" and

(2) Section 5, " Process Control;"

to verify that procedures had been established for material I

identification and control during manufacturing.

1ib. Review of the following Quality Assurance Instructions:

(1) QAl-051, Issued 1/3/75, " Receiving Inspection Procedure forIncoming Material for Raw Storage,"

(2) QAl-057, Revision 1, " Material Check Analysis Procedure," and i

(3) QAl-027, Revision 2, " Flange Dimensions and Casting PressureMarkings;"

l

, - , ,

_

*

., .

5 |

to verify that they provided for the identification and control ofpurchased materials, requires the identification of materials tobe maintained throughout the manufacturing process, and providesfor the segregation and disposition of nonconforming materials. ,

Examined representative material in various stages of manu-c.

facturing and verified that the identification, and traceabilityto the certified mill test report, was being maintained.

d.Interviews with personnel to verify they are knowledgeable inthe procedures applicable to material identification andcontrol.

3. Findings

The inspector verified that the material identification anda.

control during manufacturing was being implemented in a mannerconsistent with NRC rules and regulation, and the vendor's commit-ments.

b.Within this area of the inspection no deviations or unresolveditems were identified.

E. Manufacturing Process Control - Machining1. Objectives

The objectives of this area of the inspection were to verify that:

The machining operations were performed under a controlleda.

system of manufacturing which meete NRC rules and regulationsand the vendor's commitments in the ASME accepted QualityAssurance Program.

b. The controlled system of manufacturing was effective inassuring product quality.

2. Method of AccomplishmentI(

The objectives of this area of the inspection were accomplished by:

Review of the ASME accepted Quality Assurance Manual, Reviseda.

11/15/79,

l|

|

__ _ - _ - _ _ _ _ - - - - - - - - - -

_. _ _ _ . - - _

* D .

6

(1) Section 5, " Process Control,"

(2) Section 6, " Welding / Brazing Quality, Assurance" and .

(3) Section 8, " Control of Measuring and Test Equipment;"

to verify that procedures had been established to prescribea control system of operation.

b. Review these selective f:uality Assurance Instructions:,

(1) QAl-053, Revision 2, " Standard Minimum Wall Thickness Veri-fication Procedure for Figure 5500 Series Nuclear Wel-bond Valves,"

(2) QAl-069, Issued 5/31/77, " Standard Manufacturing Practicesand Tolerances," and

(3) QAl-14, Issued 2/8/71, " Drawing Interpretation;"

to verify that they had been prepared by the designatedI authority, approved by management, and reviewed by QA, and

are consistent with NRC regulation, and the vendor's commitments.

Review of the following documents for three in-process orders:c.

(1) Production Order Route,!

(2) Drawings,

(3) Receiving Logs,

(4) Certified Material Test Reports, and

(5) Nuclear Control Plan.i

to verify that they provide drawing / document control in the shop, |and also provides for part identification and traceability, in-process and final inspections, identification and segregationof defective items, the resolving of nonconforming items, andthat the gages and measuring devices are under a controlledcalibration system.

Yd. Examine three (3) representative samples of finished machined '

parts to verify that they were properly identified and machinedto conform to the drawings and specifications.

3. Findings

a. The inspector verified that:

- .-.

'' e :-.

,

.7

(1) The machining operations were performed under a controlledsystem of manufacturing which meets NRC rules and regulationsand the vendor's commitments in the ASME accepted QualityAssurance Program.

,

(2) The controlled system of manufacturing was effective inassuring product quality.

b. Within this area of the inspection no deviations or unresolveditems were identified.

F. Inspection and Test - Magnetic Particle Examination

1. Objectives

The objectives of this area of the inspection were to verify that:

a. The magnetic particle examination procedures used by the i

vendor meets the applicable NRC rules and regulations, and !the vendor's commitments in the ASME accepted Quality Assurance !Program. '

1

b. The magnetic particle examinations are performed by properlyqualified personnel in accordance with the procedures.

2. Method of Accomplishment '

The objectives of this area of the inspection were accomplished by:

a. Review of the ASME accepted Quality Assurance Manual, Revised11/15/79

(1) Section 5, " Process Control" and

(2) Section 7, "Non-Destructive Examination;"

to verify that procedures had been established for magnetic |'

particle examination.

b. Review of YC NDE procedure numbers j

(1) 100-021-002, and 100-021-008 " Procedure for Dry PowderMagnetic Particle Inspection" and

to verify that they had been reviewed, approved, and qualified,in accordance with the quality assurance program and Code require-ments, and accepted by the Authorized Nuclear Inspector.

c. Verified that:

(1) The applicable traveler specified the appropriate testprocedure,-and that a copy of the procedure is available

' at the work station.

*

* .,. .

8'

(2) The personnel' performing the examinations are properlyqualified.

- (3) .The test equipment has been calibrated and materialssurfaces to be examined had been properly prepared.

(4) The test parameters are specified in the examination !

procedure.;

(5) The indications are evaluated in accordance with theprocurement requirements, and the results reported in the

j

. prescribed manner. ji

d. Interviews with personnel to verify they are knowledgeable in l'the procedures applicable to magnetic particle examination.

3. Findings

a. The inspector verified that for the direct magnetization method

(1) The magnetic particle examination procedures used by thevendor meets the applicable NRC rules and regulations, Coderequirements, and the vendor's commitments in the ASMEaccepted Quality Assurance Program.

(2) The magnetic particle examinations are performed by properlyqualified personnel in accordance with the procedures.

b. Deviation

See Notice of Deviation.

G. Training - Welder Qualification

1. Objective

i

The objectives of this area of the inspection were to verify thatthe welders and welding operators are qualified in accordance withNRC rules and regulations, and the vendor's commitments in the ASMEaccepted Quality Assurance Program.

#2. Method of Accomplishment

The objectives of the inspection were accomplished by:

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

. . , ,1 ^ . -

9

4

a. Review of' the ASME accepted' Quality Assurance Manual, Revised11/15/79:

(1)' Section 1, " General,"~and ~

(2) Section-15, " Training and Certification of Personnel;"

to verify that procedures had been established requiring thequalification of welders and welding operators.

b. Review of the Record of Performance Qualification tests of-welders.and welding operators, to verify that they are in- ;

conformance with ASME Code requirements. '

c. Review of welders qualification log, to verify that the vendor' has provided a system for maintaining a continuous record of

the welder qualifications; and that the welders have been,and are currently, qualified to weld under the prescribed pro-cedures.

1

d. Interviews with personnel to verify they are knowledgeable in' I

the procedures applicable to welder qualification.

3. Findings

The inspector verified that the welders.and welding operatorsa.were qualified in accordance with NRC rules and regulations,and the vendor's commitments.

b. The inspector verified the welders receive "on-the-job" training.Personnel applying for the position as a welder receive a formalperformance evaluation of past experiences before acceptanceand periodic formal review during training. After performanceof the qualification test the coupons are tested and a formal.performance evaluation made of the welder and recorded.

|c. Within this area of the_ inspection no deviations or unresolveditems were identified.

.

H. Exit Interview

At the conclusion of the inspection on April 24, 1980, the inspector met.with the company's-management, identified in paragraph A, for the pur- qpose'of informing them as-to the results of the inspection. During this 1

: ' meeting the identified deviation was discussed and the evidence whichi supported the finding was identified.

~

The company's management acknowledged the findings and supporting evidenceas_being understood, but had no additional comments.

o

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