Comparative Analysis of Qa Systems

Commission of the European Communities
nuclear science and technology
COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS
OF QUALITY ASSURANCE SYSTEMS
WHICH EFFECTIVELY CONTROL,
REVIEW AND VERIFY THE QUALITY
OF COMPONENTS MANUFACTURED
FOR LIQUID METAL COOLED
FAST BREEDER REACTORS WITHIN THE
Report
EUR 10123 EN
Blow-up from microfiche original

Commission of the European Communities
nuclear science and technology
COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS
OF QUALITY ASSURANCE SYSTEMS
WHICH EFFECTIVELY CONTROL,
REVIEW AND VERIFY THE QUALITY
OF COMPONENTS MANUFACTURED
FOR LIQUID METAL COOLED
FAST BREEDER REACTORS WITHIN THE EEC
L.A. BENN1), H. VAN WEELDEREN2)

1
) United Kingdom Atomic Energy Authority
Risley Nuclear Power Development Establishment
UK-Risley, Warrington WA3 6AT
2) NERATOOM
NL-Den Haag
FINAL REPORT
This work was performed under the Commission of the European Communities study
contract RAP-014-81-UK for the Working Group Codes and Standards and for the
Activity Group 1 "Manufacturing Standards" within the Fast Reactor Coordinating
Committee.
Directorate-General Science, Research and Development
1985 EUR 10123 EN

Published by the
COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES
Directorate-General
Information Market and innovation
Btiment Jean Monnet
LUXEMBOURG
LEGAL NOTICE
Neither the Commission of the European Communities nor any person acting on behalf
of the Commission is responsible for the use which might be made of the following
information
ECSCEEGEAEC Brussels - Luxembourg, 1986

Quality Assurance Analysis
Final Report between
The European Atomic Energy Community
and
The United Kingdom Atomic Energy Authority
SYNOPSIS
A comparative analysis of quality assurance systems which effectively control, review and
verify the quality of components manufactured for liquid metal cooled fast breeder reactors within
the EEC.
It also includes an examination of the classification of component parts, destructive and non-
destructive controls applied to components and typical records produced at the delivery of a
component.
Issued for the CEC by:

Risley Nuclear Power Development Establishment
United Kingdom Atomic Energy Authority
Risley
Warrington WA3 6AT
United Kingdom
Authors: L A. Benn, UKAEA and H. van Weelderen, NERA TOOM
Reviewed by: A. Barker, UKAEA
Approved by: J. Brion, (Chairman) - Activity Group No. 1 "Manufacturing Standards"

for the Working Group Codes and Standards within the
Fast Reactor Co-ordinating Committee.
Dato: October 1983

Revision
SUMMARY
Comparative analyses are made of Quality Assurance Systems, by techniques and the
methodology used, foi the manufacture of component parts fur the Liquid Metal Cooled Kisl Breedei
Reactor (LMFBR) within the EEC.
Two differing alternative systems arc presented in the analysis.
First, a tabulated analytical treatment which analyses 14 codes and standards relating to Quali
ty Assurance which can be applied to LMFBR's The comparison equates equivalent clauses bet
ween codes and standards on Table 3, followed by an analysis of individual clauses in tabular form,
Tables No. 4 to 2 1 . the International Standard ISO 6215 1980(E) entitled "Nuclear Power Plant
Quality Assurance" being used as a reference base using 18 criteria.
A statistical summary and recommendations conclude this analysis.
The second alternative system used in the comparison is a descriptive analytical method applied
to 9 selected codes and standards relating to Quality Assurance based on the 13 criteria of the
International IAEA Code of Practice No. 50 C Q A entitled "Quality Assurance for Safety in Nuclear
Power Plants". This alternative system is contributed by NERATOOM.
An investigation is then made of the state of the art on the subject of classification of com
ponent parts bearing generally on Quality Assurance. The method of classification is segregated
into General, Safety and Inspection categories.
A summary of destructive and non destructive controls that may be applied during the
manufacture of LMFBR components is given, together with tests that may be applied to selected
components, namely Primary Tank, Secondary Sodium Pump and the Primary Cold Trap allocated
to Safety Classes, 1, 2 and 3 respectively.
The report concludes with a summary of typical records produced at the delivery of a
component.
The Study is carried out in conjunction with NERATOOM to Agreement No. 4R 54446B bet
ween the UKAEA and NERATOOM.
CONTENTS
Page
PART 1
SECTION A - GENERAL
Introduction 7
Scope 7
General Preamble 7
SECTION - SUMMARY OF CODES AND STANDARDS
List of Codes, and Standards by Countries 9
Status of Codes and Standards, Table No. 1 13

Classification of Codes and Standards according to Nuclear Application, 15
Table No. 2
Identification of clauses between codes and standards. Table No. 3 16, 17
SECTION C - STATISTICAL ANALYSIS OF CODES AND STANDARDS
Analysis of clauses between codes and standards 19
Table No. 4 Quality Assurance Programme 21

No. 5 Organisation 23
No. 6 Design control 25
No. 7 Procurement document control 27
No. 8 Instructions, procedures and drawings 29
No. 9 Document control 31
No. 10 Control of purchased material equipment and services 33
No. 11 Identification and control of materials, parts and components 35
No. 12 Control of special processes 37
No. 13 Inspection 39
No. 14 Test control 41
No. 15 Control of measuring and test equipment 43
No. 16 Handling, storage and shipping 45
No. 17 Inspection, best and operating status 47
No. 18 Non-confirming items 49
No. 19 Corrective actions 50
No. 20 Quality assurance records 52
No. 21 Audits 54
SECTION D - GENERAL SUMMARY OF TABULATED ANALYSES OF CODES 55, 56

AND STANDARDS, TABLE NO. 22
Summary of criteria designed to standards. Table No. 23 57
Analysis of major detail deficiencies in the criteria 58
Recommendations 59
Page
SECTION E ALTERNATIVE DESCRIPTIVE ANALYTICAL METHOD OF

ANALYSING CODES AND STANDARDS (CONTRIBUTED BY
NERATOOM)
Objectives and evaluation 60

Scope of evaluation 60
Methodology 60
Comparative analysis 61
Criterion 1 Introduction * 62
2 Quality assurance programmes 64
3 Organisation 68
4 Document control 72
5 Design control 74
6 Procurement control 79
7 Material control 82
8 Process control 83
9 Inspection and test control 84
10 Non-conformance control 90
11 Corrective actions 92
12 Records 93
13 Audits 95
Summary of analysis 97
Conclusions 97
Recommendations for further work 99
APPENDIX A: IAEA SAFETY GUIDES SUPPORTING 5 0 C-QA 100
B: NRC REGULATORY GUIDES SUPPORTING 10CFR50 101
APPENDIX
C: ANSI QUALITY ASSURANCE STANDRDS 102
SUPPORTING ANSI 45.2
D: CSA N286 SERIES OF STANDARDS 103
PART 2
SECTION F - CLASSIFICATION OF QUALITY ASSURANCE SYSTEMS 105
SECTION G - DESTRUCTIVE AND NON-DESTRUCTIVE CONTROLS 110
SECTION H - TESTS APPLIED TO THE MANUFACTURE OF LMFBR COMPONENTS 114
SECTION J - RECORDS PRODUCED AT THE DELIVERY OF A COMPONENT 119

PART 1
SECTION A - GENERAL
Introduction
1. A study entitled "Qualitative Comparison of National Standards (Manufacture, Test and Quality
Standards) which are used for the construction of Fast Reactors in Belgium, France, Germany, Great
Britain, Italy and the Netherlands" Report No. INTAT-77.73 was made by "Internationale
Atomreaktorban GMBH of Bergish - Gladback 1 (Bensberg) in June 1977 for the commission of
the European Communities, Fast Reactor Co-ordinating Committee, Working Group, Codes and Stan-
dards, activity Group No. 1, Manufacturing Standards, Reference No. X11/1105/79.
2. Subject No. 1 of the above study, subtitled "Qualification of Manufacturer's Works" was
sub-divided into sections, one of which No. 1.4, "Quality Assurance System", forms the subject
of this study.
3. The codes and standards for Quality Assurance Systems itemised and analysed under Sec-
tion 1.4 are minimal in number. This study purports to analyse the subject of Quality Assurance
Systems applied to LMFBR components over a much broader spectrum and in greater detail, cover-
ing practices in all the countries which are signatories to the CEC and other relevant countries.
Scope
4. The following description of this study scheme is extracted from the contract document bet-
ween the European Atomic Energy Community and the UKAEA.
"The subject selected for the study is to compare, where possible, Quality Assurance
Systems, which effectively control, review and verify the quality of the components
manufactured for fast reactors within the EEC.
A comparison will be made by reference to the various Quality Assurance Systems
in use within the manufacturing organisation of the EEC for carrying out Quality Con-
trol of LMFBR Components. It will include a comparison of the types and frequency
of destructive and non-destructive controls'during manufacture of the constitutive parts
of FBR Components. The study will also cover a comparison of records produced at
the delivery of the components.
The comparison will cover those structures, systems and components that are specific
to LMFBRs, namely those in contact with sodium, sodium varour or blanket gases.
The replaceable in-core components such as fuel elements and control rods will be
excluded.
Differences between various QA systems will be identified and evaluated."
5. The study is in 2 parts. The first analyses the multiplicity of codes and standards published
internationally and for committees of the CEO Cpdes and standards originating from the USA and
Canada are also included where these are either used in the CEC countries, referred to in the national
specifications or are being considered for use in the future.
6. The second part studies Quality Assurance Systems applied to selected structures, systems
and components that are specific to LMFBR's which are in contact with sodium, sodium vapour
or blanket gases. This will include a comparison of the types and frequency of destructive and non-
destructive testing and a comparison of records produced at the delivery of the components.
General preamble
7. This study is stated to be specifically for the study of Quality Assurance Systems applied
to the manufacture of LMFBR components. No national or international codes or standards are publish-
ed relating solely to the construction of LMFBR's. Numerous codes and standards are published,
however, relating to Quality Assurance applied to nuclear reactors in general, and also specifically
to thermal neutron reactors. These codes and standards are analysed in the following paragraphs
since they can be applied directly to LMFBR components or could form the basis for national stan-
dards that will be produced in the future.
8. A standard closely allied to Quality Assurance for LMFBR's has been published by the American
Nuclear Society in draft form No. ANS 54.6, published in October 1979 entitled "Proposed American
National Standard, LMFBR Safety Classification and Related Requirements", comments on which
will be made in Section F.
9. The emphasis in all quality assurance documents is that of safety of the reactor. Various stan
dards on quality assurance state that different levels of quality assurance may be applied to com-
ponents depending upon the safety and economic implications on the reactor in the event of failure
of the component. Details of these levels are not spelt out in the majority of specifications w i t h
the one exception of the Canadian Standard - CSA Standard Z2991 - 1978 entitled "Quality
Assurance Programme Requirements" which is the most comprehensive of 4 quality assurance pro-
gramme standards.
10. There is a subtle difference in the meaning and application of quality assurance between the
USA and Europe. The American definition of quality assurance is " a l l planned and systematic ac
tions to give sufficient assurance that plant and equipment will be reliable in use. The European
tendency is to define it, as "all activities taken together w i t h the aim of supplying assurance and
proof that the whole quality control process has been carried out efficiently".
Section A
SECTION
1. Summary of codes and standards
A list of codes and standards by countries used in this analysis is given below together with
a brief note of their use and limitations.
(a) International standards and codes

(i) International Standard ISO 6 2 1 5 1980(E) Nuclear Power Plant - Quality
Assurance.
Approved by Belgium, Italy, Netherlands and the United Kingdom of the CEC coun
tries. This specification was disapproved of on technical grounds by Canada, France
and USSR. The Federal Republic of Germany was not a signatory. Covers quality
assurance from design through to decommissioning of nuclear power plants.
This standard should be applied to all safety related items, and it may be desirable
to apply it to items which could affect successful plant operation. It includes eigh
teen system functions from scope to audits.
(ii) IAEA 50 C-QA - Quality assurance for safety in nuclear power plants - a code
of practice
This code of practice was approved by all the member states of the CEC.
It is limited to land based stationary plant with thermal neutron reactors.
It covers quality assurance from design through to operation.
It includes thirteen system functions from general scope to audits.
This code of practice is supported by various safety guides which are issued to
describe acceptable methods of implementing specific parts of the relevant codes.
A list of these Safety Guides is given in Section E.
(b) National standards within the CEC

United Kingdom standards
(iii) BS 5882 - 1980 Standard for a total quality assurance programme for nuclear
power plants
Based on ISO 6 2 1 5 - 1980(E) it covers nuclear power plants in general. It covers
quality assurance from design through to decommissioning.
It includes eighteen system functions from scope to audits.
This standard specifies quality assurance for constituent areas of activity relevant
to a safe and successfully operating plant
v..') BS 5 7 5 0 - 1970 - Quality Systems
Part 1 Specification for design, manufacture and installation.
Part 2 - Specification for manufacture and installation
Part 3 - Specification for final inspection and test.
This specification is referred to in BS 5882. It is a General Standard which covers
the minimum quality system requirements for application to material and/or ser
vices, depending upon which pai t no is specified.
It includes twenty system functions from introduction to training.
Part 2 of this specification is the reference standard referred to in the manual of
policy and procedures of the recently established British Pressure Vessel Quality
Assurance Board.
Part 1 of this specification is analysed in detail in this report.
() NII/R/38/78 A guide to the quality assurance programme for nuclear power plants
Issued by HM Nuclear Installations Inspectorate.
It covers Nuclear Power Plants in general for quality assurance from design through
to operation and maintenance.
It includes fourteen system functions from fundamental principles to audit.
It gives the minimum licencing requirements in the UK for quality assurance con
sidered necessary to achieve safe plant operation.
German Standards
(vi) KTA 1401 General Quality Requirements (Allgemeine Anforderungen a die
Qualitaltssichering), produced by: Nuclear Safety Standards Commission (Kern
technischer Ausschuss KTA)
This safety standard covers the application ol quality assurance from planning and
design through all stages to decommissioning for components in permanent nuclear
power stations associated with safety.
The criteria of quality is to achieve the protective aims laid d o w n in the relevant
acts (e.g. the Atomgesetz Nuclear Act) or orders (e.g. Strahlenschutzverord
nung Radiation Safety Order).
It includes thirteen system functions from scope and organisation to documenta
tion and checking the quality assurance system.
Italian Standards
(vii) CNEN Technical Guide No. 8 produced by: Comitato Nazionale per L 'Energia
Nucleare
This standard covers quality assurance from design through to manufacturing and
operation. It covers the criteria and methodologies to be applied by CNEN to satisfy
nuclear safety and/or health protection specified in statutory article 8, letters a,
c, d, e, f, of DPR No. 185.
It includes 18 system functions from Quality Assurance Programme to Measuring
and Test equipment and audits.
(viii) GQ 7 Draft Standard No. 4 0 UNI booklet 4 2 2 2 Criteria, requirements and recom
mendations for a Quality Assurance Programme for Nuclear Facilities Produced
by UNI Nuclear Energy Commission (UNICEN) Rome
This standard covers quality assurance from design through to operating and finally
dismantling the plant. Quality Assurance contributes to the achievement of quality
objectives through analysis of tasks which have to be performed.
It includes 18 system functions and an introduction from Organisation to Audit.
French Standards
(ix) A / 4 4 CPQ Cahier des Prescriptions Qualit applicables aux Fabricants et aux
SousCommandiers. (Quality Specification applicable to manufacturers and sub
contractors)
This document was produced by la Socit ECHNICATOME for Project Super
Phenix, and is specific for Fast Reactors.
It covers Quality Assurance levels 1, 2 and 3 with reference to the Specification
for the manufacture and inspection of Breeder Reactor Nuclear Boilers (CPFC)
reference 91.C018.01 and Quality QC Standards Quality, to the Technical
Specification for the manufacture of plant to standards quality (CPTQC) Reference
A/38.
This standard covers quality assurance from design through procurement and
manufacture to precommissioning tests for main and subcontractors. It includes
12 system functions from generalities, organisation, inspection to ways in which
the specification is to be applied for ensuring standard quality.
10 Section
It also includes 5 appendices dealing in turn with ways of applying this document
to the manufacture of mechanical products, ways in which the Inspector's task
is performed, inspection documents, departure (MUTI specification mu\ a quality
.is,in,mi : | ' , < ' loi by :.ub u n i t i l i . l o i s
(x) EDF "L'annex a la Convention Assurance de la Qualit" used by EDF as an appen

dix to their contract with nuclear power plant equipment suppliers
This annexe attempts to define general rules which the constructor must respect
with a view to ensuring that his scope of supply (design, procurement, manufac
turing, erecting, testing, commissioning ... and associated inspections) meets the
required quality and that, in particular, the corresponding equipments or services
of the constructor are apt to fulfill the use for which they are intended.
This document has five sections, but is not structured along any particular QA pro
gramme lines.
(c) Other Sta nda rds

USA Standards
(xi) 10CFR50 Appendix US Nuclear Regulatory Commission Quality Assurance
Criteria for Nuclear Power Plants and Fuel Reprocessing Plants
Enforced by statutory law in USA.
Every applicant for a construction permit or operating licence of a nuclear power
plant is required to provide a quality assurance programme in its safety analysis.
It applies to all activities affecting the safety related functions of those structures,
systems and components that prevent accidents that could cause undue risk to
the public.
It covers quality assurance from design through to operating, refuelling and
modifying.
It includes eighteen system functions from organisation to audit.
The Regulation is supported by various Regulatory Guides which simplify the various
criteria and in some cases refer to ANSI Standards.
(xii) ANSI/ASME N45.2 1977 Quality Assurance programme Requirements for
Nuclear Facilities
This standard is issued by The American Society of Mechanical Engineers and
approved by the American National Standards Institute.
This standard was prepared for use in general industry that would satisfy the in
tent and simplify the requirements of 10CFR50 Appendix issued by the AEC.
It covers quality assurance from design, through to operation, maintenance, repair
ing and refuelling, covers nuclear power plant, fuel reprocessing plants, including
those for plutonium and spent fuel storage facilities.
It includes nineteen system functions from scope to audits.
This standard is supplemented by various daughter standards in the N45.2XX series,
a list of which is appended in Section E.
(xiii) ANSI/ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, Section III 1980 Subsection NCA,
Article NCA 4 0 0 0 Quality Assurance
This standard is issued by the American Society of Mechanical Engineers
It is applicable to Nuclear Power Components designed to provide a pressure con
taining barrier and their supports. It is also applicable to containment systems, con
crete reactor vessels and concrete containment.
It gives the requirements of quality assurance programmes to be met prior to the
issuance of certificates of authorisation for the construction fabrication, manufac
ture and installation of Class 1, 2, 3, CS, MC, CB and CC items.
11 Section
It covers quality assurance from scope and applicability to audits and particularly
for the construction, fabrication, manufacture and installation of the aforementioned
classes of items.
It includes eighteen system functions from organisation to audits.
(xiv) ANS 54.6 - Proposed American National Standard (Draft) LMFBR Safety Classifica
tion and related requirements
The pertinent requirement of Appendix to 10CFR Part 50, "Quality Criteria for
Nuclear Power Plants" and ANSI N 4 5 . 2 1 9 7 1 , "Quality Assurance Programme
Requirement for Nuclear Power Plants" are applicable to all activities affecting the
safety related functions of structures, systems, components or parts thereof, which
fall within the scope of this standard which is written specifically for loop type
LMFBRs, but may be interpreted to include pool type LMFBRs.
This standard gives four safety classes for mechanical components in ascendine)
order of relaxation, the classes based on ASME BPVC Section III and associated
code cases for higher temperatures.
(xv) RDT-F2 2 Quality Assurance Programme Requirements
This Standard is issued by the US Energy Research and Development Administra
tion, Division of Reactor Research and Development. The Standard sets forth
general requirements for planning, managing, conducting and evaluating QA pro
grammes for reactor development and test facility projects and systems.
The Standard is divided into eight sections covering Design through Operation. It
is being applied in the US to fast reactor technology.
This Standard is not on general publication.
Canadian Standards
(xvi) CSA Preliminary Standards
N286.0 - 1978 Quality Assurance Program Requirements for Nuclear Power
Plants (first tier)
N286.1 1979 - Procurement Quality Assurance for Nuclear Power Plants
(second tier)
N286.2 - 1979 Design Quality Assurance for Nuclear Power Plants (second
tier).
This series of standards covers Quality Assurance requirements for Nuclear Power
Plants from design and procurement through to decommissioning. Only the first
3 standards are referred to here since this study is limited to the manufacture of
LMFBR Components.
Second tier Quality Assurance of the actual making of the components is covered
in the CSA Standard Z299 series.
These standards include 8 general system functions from scope to quality assurance
records. The design standards include non mandatory appendices covering design
quality assurance processes model, design input and procedures lists and a design
review list.
These standards cover Nuclear Power Plant in general.
All three standards quoted above are analysed in this report.
(xvii) CSA Standard Z299.1 1978 Quality Assurance Program Requirements.
Quality Program Category No. 1 analysed
in this report.
CSA Standard Z299.2 1978 Quality Assurance Program Requirements.
Quality Program Category No. 2.
Quality program Category No. 3.
12 Section
Quality Program Category No. 4 .
This standard covers four quality programme standards of ascending order of
simplicity. The programme is selected by applying six evaluation factors from
design, manufacturing complexity, safety and economies to the component or plant.
It covers quality assurance from design through to construction.
It includes eighteen system functions lioin contract review to corrective action.
It also includes scope of general applicability, audit and quality programme
document.
This is a general standard, based on the requirements of the electrical power genera
tion industry.
Standard No. Z299.1 is analysed in detail in this report.
Status of codes and standards
(a) A summary of the legal status of the codes and standards related to quality assurance
analysed in this report, referred t o the country of origin, is given in Table 1 , which is
correct at the time of writing.
TABLE 1
Status of codes and standards relating to quality assurance
in the country of origin
COMPARISON
COUNTRIES CRITERIA NATIONAL STATUTORY NATIONAL INTERNATIONAL
GUIDE BY CODE CODE OR
CODE OR LAW OR STANDARD
STANDARD STANDARD
International IS06215
IAEA 50-C-QA
UK BS5882 /
BS5750 Pt 1 /
NII/R/38/78 /
USA ANSI/ASME NA5.2

OCFR 50 APP B /
NCA4000 /
ASME-BPV-III
CANADA CSA STANDARD /

Z299.1
CSA PREL /
STANDARD
N286.0/1/2
FED REPUBLIC KTAl401 /

OF GERMANY
FRANCE A/44 /
CPQ
CNEN TECHNICAL
ITALY GUIDE NO 8
GQ-7 /
13 Section B
Definite meanings of status columns of Table 1
(b) National Guide
A National Guide is a guide of information produced by the licencing authority of the
country concerned which identifies guide lines around which the requirements to satisfy
the licencing authority are based.
(c) Statutory by-law
Documents classified as statutory by law must be complied w i t h as legal requirements
in the country concerned. These legal requirements, enacted by legislation, are man
datory and enforced by government appointed inspectors or surveyors without whose
approval the specified work or operations are not allowed to proceed.
(d) National Code or Standard
A National Code or Standard is a document usually produced by a central standardisa
tion organisation of the country concerned, which specifies standard requirements to
be met by plant, components or services as called for by a contractor or other deman
ding organisation. The aim of the document is to foster standardisation of nominated
items or services throughout the country.
(e) International Code or Standard
An International Code or Standard is a document produced by a consortium of nations
which specifies standard requirements to be met by plant, components or services as
called for by a contractor or other demanding organisation. The aim of the document
is to foster standardisation of nominated items or services internationally between na
tions. It cannot be modified except by international agreement.
14 Section
3. a
Cl ssific
a tion of codes a nd sta nda rds a ccording to nuclea r a pplica tion
The classification of the codes and standards relating to quality assurance used in this analysis
according to the characteristic application or not to nuclear components is given in Table 2. No codes
or standard are available that deal w i t h quality assurance applied to L MFBR components only.'
TABLE 2
Classification of codes and standards
relating to quality assurance according to nuclear application
(i) () (iii)
COUNTRIES CATEGORIES APPLICATION TO APPLICATION TO APPLICATION TO
SPECIFIC LMFBR NUCLEAR NON-NUCLEAR
CODE OR COMPONENTS COMPONENTS COMPONENTS
STANDARD GENERALLY
International IS06215 / / XX
IAEA50-C-QA X / X
UK BS5882 / / X
BS5750 Pt I XX XX /
NII/R/38/78 / / X
USA ANSI/ASME N45.2 / / X

10CFR50 APP / / X
NCA4000 / / X
ASME-BPV-III t
CANADA CSA STANDARD / J /

Z299.1
CSA PREL / / X
STANDARD
FED REPUBLIC KTAl 401 / / X

OF GERMANY
FRANCE A/44 / XX X
CPQ
ITALY CNEN TECHNICAL

GUIDE NO 8 / / X
GQ-7 / / /
v applicable X not applicable XX partially applicable
1b Section B
4. Identification of clauses between codes and standards
Table 3 has been ili.iwn up to show the coiielation ol simil.ii named clauses between the
codes and standards relating to quality assurance used in this analysis.
The description and order of the clauses is based on ISO 6 2 1 5.
16 Section
SECTION
TABLE 3
Comparative ta ble of similar na med cla uses between codes a nd sta nda rds
relating to quality a ssura nce
PRELIMINARY
00 M
GUIDE NO 8
SECTION
NIIMIIKR
r~ M
TECHNICAL
.
STANDARD
STANDARD

m v.

ITALIAN
S \IM 3 5
N286.1
S-
286.0
Z299.1
286.2
( co

l
CNEN
m * t a. H in
8 <
CSA
CSA

in u
u
M *
S
S3
M
3z sa EC
1 Introduction 0 1 Foreword 0 Page 3 1 Intro Preface Preface Introduction 1-1 0
2 op 1 1.2 0.1 1 1 1.1 4110 1. 1 1 1-3 0.1 1
3 Applicability 1.2 4110 1.2 1-2 0.3 1.3
; <*-iponslblllty 3 1.3 0.3 1.3 3.1 1.3 3 1-4 0.2 2.
5 Uflnltiona 4 0.4 3 2.2 1.4 4120 2. 2 2 0.5 0.
6 ifereaced DocuunC* 2 1.5
7 Language 2 2.1 0.2 g
8 0-^allty Assurance Programe 5.1 2.1 1 4.1/4.3/4.4 2.3 2.0 2 4134.2 S 3.1 3 II-l.l 2
9 Organisation 3.2 3 2 4.2/4.19 2.1 3 1 4134.1 3.3 3.2 4 11-1.2 1 3

10
10.1
design Control
Cenerai
3.3
5.3.1
5
5.1
3
3.1
4.8 2.5
2.5.1
4
4.1
3 4134.3 prfi 4 . 01286.2)
4.1
3.5.2 5
5.1
II-2.2
II-2.2(a)
3 4
10.2 Interface Control 5.3.2 5.2 3.2 4.8(d) 4.2 4.6.5 4.3 II-2.2(b)
10.3
10.4
Design V e r i f i c a t i o n
Cr.ang Control
5.3.3
5.3.4
5.3
5.4
3.3
3.4
*-8(J)
4.9
2.5.5
2.5.6
4.3
4.4 * 5.
4.9
5.4
5.5
II-3.1 2.2(c)
II-2.2(d)
4.1.2
4.4
11 Procurement Document Control 5.4 6.1 4 4.11.2 2.6.2/5 5 4 4134.4
P
M
4.2(1286.1) 3.5.5(b) 5.2 II-2.3 4 3.
12 Instructions, Procaduraa e Drawinga 5.5 2.2 5 4.5 6 5 4134.5 n S 4.8(H286.2) 3.4.3 5.3/7 5
13 Document Control 5.6 4 6 4.9 2.4 7 6 4134.6 SS 4.2(H286.1) 3.5.3 5.4/3.5/5.6 I1-1.4 6 3.
14 Control of Purchaaed Material II-2.3(b) 7
Equipment & Service 5.7 6.3 7 4.11 8 7 4134.7 a
>* 4.3(N286.1) 6.1/6.2/6.3 2.4(d)
15 I d e n t i f i c a t i o n and Control of
Materiale, Parta & Components 5.8 7.1 4.17 2.7 9 8 4134.8
16 Control of S p a d a i Process 5.9 8 9 4.12.2 2.8 10 9 4134.9
iy 4.4(11286.0) 3.5.10 5.6
6.4
II-2.1 8 7.8
3.5.13 I1-2.4(b) 9
17 Inspection and Surveillance 5.10 9.1 10 4.14/4.15 2.9 11 10 4134.10 3.4.2 5.3/6.4/7 II-3.2 10 6.
18 Test Control 5.11 9.2 11 4.14 12 11 4134.11 3.4.2 7 II-2.5 11 8.
19 Control of Measuring 4 Teat Equipment 5.12 9.3 12 4.10 2.10 13 12 4134.12 4.5(N286.0) 3.5.4 10 II-6 12
20 Handling, Storage t Teat Equipment 5.13 7.2 13 4.18 2.12 14 13 4134.13 4.6(W286.0) 3.5.11 6.3 II-2.4(c) 13
3.5.14
21 Inspection, Teat 4 Operating Statua 5.14 9.4 14 4.17 15 14 4134.14 3.5.9 II-5 14 7.
22 on-ConformIng Items 5.15 10 15 4.16 2.11 16 15 4134.15 7.KN286.1) 3.5.16 11 II-4 15 7.2
23 Corrective Action 5.16 11 16 4.7 17 16 4134.16 7.2(N286.1) 3.5.18 11 II-1.3 16 7.3
24 Quality Assurance Records 5.17 12 17 4.6 2.13 18 17 4134.17 8. (N286.0) 3.5.15 12 II-1.4(b) 17 9/10
23 Audita 5.18 13 18 4.3 2.14 19 18 4134.18 6. (H286.0) 3.3 13 II-1.5 18
17 Section
SECTION C - STATISTICAL ANALYSIS OF CODES AND STANDARDS
The following tables purport to examine the individual clauses of the selected codes and stan
dards of quality assurance used in Ibis analysis by dividing each clause into selected criteria and
I . I I M I I . H I I I I I lb complin.on I lie la ir., ha ve been scic l;l to In lite m.ijoiity ol Ib.: sta nda rds, a nd
for then Itinciloiil nnpoi lanci: in lomiini) the specifica tion A bnel description ol lhe criteria is given,
followed by a tabulated analysis of each clause applied to each code or standard.
I In I.ni..:, .imi .men. selected lm th; foundation ol this analysis are in general, based on
the International Standard ISO 6215 which is sub divided into 18 system functions or clauses, ex
cluding the preamble of introduction, scope etc. Each system function represents a separate activity
pertaining to quality assurance. The majority of specifications dealing with quality assurance are
based on these 18 functions, which if not specifically itemised, are included or inferred in the majority
of specifications. The International Standard is used since it cannot be changed or modified unilaterally
nor without adequate notice. It is also fully compatible with the International Atomic Energy Agency
Code of Practice of Quality Assurance for Safety in Nuclear Power Plants IAEA No. 50CQA which
is subdivided into 13 named system functions that include the 18 system functions used in this
analysis.
Symbols used in the following tables in this analysis are as follows:

, Criteria met by standard or code.
t Reference made to a related standard.
0 Equivalent statement.
0 Criteria partially met by standard or code.
Criteria not met.
The Table Section Numbers below refer to sections in Table 3.
The number alongside each criteria listed below refers to the relevant paragraph number in
International Standard ISO 6 2 1 5 , unless otherwise qualified
Table Section No. 8 Quality Assurance Programme
Nu it) t iiiii| .in:.mi cuten, wen IIII analysis in Un:, MM linn lm li n It' I lii-lnw aie Intel
notes which explain the meaning ot the terms. I able shows how the nteiia aie coven! hy
individual standanls.
1. Establishment of programmi; 5.1.1.1

2. Implementation of various activities 5.1.1.1
3. Organisational structure 5.1.1.2
4. Language 5.1.1.3
b. Factors considered in assigning levels of quality assurance 5.1.1.4
6. Provision of documentation 5.1.2.1
/. Tiaining 5.1.2.2
8. Controlled conditions 5.1.2.3
9. Review of adequacy of organisations and quality assurance programme 5.1.2.4
1. Establishment of programme
A quality assurance programme shall be established at the earliest practicable time consis
tent w i t h the schedule for implementing the activities associated with a specific project or consti
tuent activity.
2. Implementation of various activities
The programme shall ensure the implementation of the various activities associated with a
specific project and shall include the methods of assuring that the plant items and services are sup
plied in accordance with the specified requirement.
19
3. Organisational structure
The programme shall define responsibility, levels of authority and the internal and/or external
interface arrangements of the personnel and organisations involved.
4. Language
The programme shall be in a language agreed to by the purchaser and supplier.
5. Factors considered in assigning levels of quality assurance
The programme shall identify the items and services to which the standard applies. Since
items and services will differ in regard to relative safety, reliability and performance, importance,
various methods or levels of control and verification may be used to assure adequate quality.
Factors to be considered are as follows:
(a) Consequences of failure of the item
(b) Design complexity of the item
(c) Special surveillance over processes and equipment
(d) Degree that functional compliance can be demonstrated by inspection or test
(e) Quality history and standardisation of the item
(f) Difficulty of repair or in-service inspection.
6. Provision of documentation
The programme shall provide for documents such as plans, procedures and instructions and
compliance with standards codes and practices.
7. Training
The programme shall provide for training and qualification for personnel performing activities
affecting quality.
8. Controlled conditions
The programme shall provide for activities affecting quality to be carried out under suitably
controlled conditions which include the use of appropriate equipment, such as processes, best equip-
ment or tools.
9. Review of adequacy of organisations and quality assurance programme
The programme shall provide for the regular review of the Quality Assurance programme by
management of organisations participating.
20 Section C
TABLE 4
Table Section No. 8 Quality Assurance Programme
COMPARISON
COUNTRIES CRITERIA 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
CODE OR
STANDARD
International ISO 6215 / / / / / /

IAEA 50-C-QA / / / / 0 / / 0
UK RS5882 / / / / / / / / /
BS5750 PTI / 0 0 / 0
NII/R/38/78 / / / / - 0
USA ANSI/ASME N45.2 / / - / / / / /

10CFR50 APP / / 0 - / / /
NCA4000 / 0 / / / /
ASME-BPV-III
CANADA CSA STANDARD / - 0

Z299.1
CSA PREL / / / / - /
STANDARD
N286.0/1/2
FED REPUBLIC KTA 1401 / 0 0 - 0 0 0 0 0

OF GERMANY
FRANCE A/44 CPQ / / / / 0 - /
CNEN TECHNICAL
ITALY GUIDE NO 8 / - / / / / /
GQ-7 / / / - / / / /
21 Section C
Table Section No. 9 - Organisation
Nine comparison criteria were selected for analysis in this section. Included below are brief
notes which explain the meaning of the terms. Table 5 shows how the criteria are covered by
individual standards.
1. Organisational structure 5.2.1.1

2. Quality assurance as interdisciplinary function 5.2.1.2
3. Assignment of responsibility 5.2.1.3(a)
4. Verification of conformance 5.2.1.3(b)
5. Delineation of authority 5.2.1.4
6. Authority of organisations performing quality assurance 5.2.1.4
functions
7. Levels of management to which personnel report 5.2.1.4
8. Organisational interfaces 5.2.2.1/5.2.2.2
9. Staffing and training 5.2.3.1/5.2.3.2
1. Organisational structure
Should be documented with clearly defined functional responsibilities and lines of communica-
tion for management.
2. Quality assurance as interdisciplinary function
Quality assurance should be recognised as an interdisciplinary function, and not as a single

quality assurance group.
3. Assignment of responsibility
Quality objectives are attained by those w h o have been assigned responsibility for perform-
ing work (for example, the designer, welder etc.).
4. Verification of conformance
Is accomplished by those who do not have direct responsibility for performing the work (for
example, design reviewer, inspector etc.).
5. Delineation of authority
The authority and duties of persons and organisations responsible for quality shall be delineated
in writing.
6. Authority of organisations performing quality assurance function
Persons performing the quality assurance functions of ensuring that the programme is
established and effectively executed, and verifying that activities have ben correctly performed shall
have authority and organisational freedom to implement solutions to quality problems. They shall
control non-conforming items until proper dispositioning has occurred.
7. Levels of management to which personnel report
Persons performing quality assurance functions shall report to a management level of required
authority and organisational freedom from cost and schedule considerations.
8. Organisational interfaces
Where multiple organisations are involved, the responsibility to each organisation shall be
clearly documented. Communications between organisations shall be by means of appropriate
documents.
22 Section C
9. Staffing and training
Personnel performing activities affecting quality shall have the appropriate education and/or
training and/or experience for performing the assigned tasks.
Where training is applied, it shall ensure that suitable proficiency is achieved and maintained.
TABLE 5
Table Section No. 9 - Organisation
COMPARISON
COUNTRIES CRITERIA 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
CODE OR
STANDARD

IAEA 50-C-QA / / / / / / / /
UK BS5882 / / / / / / / / /
BS5750 PT 1 / 0 0 0 - - 0
NII/R/38/78 - / / - 0 0
USA ANSI/ASME N45.2 / / 0 0 / 0

10CFR50 APP / / /
NCA4000 / /
ASME-BPV-III
CANADA CSA STANDARD 0 / 0 /o 0 -

Z299.1
CSA PREL
STANDARD
N286.0/1/2
FED REPUBLIC KTA 1401 0 / / / - / 0 / /

OF GERMANY
FRANCE A/44 CPQ / / / / 0

GUIDE NO 8 / 0 / 0-
GQ-7 / / / / / / / /
23 Section C
Table Section No. 1 0 - Design Control
Ten comparison criteria were selected for analysis in this section. Included below are brief
notes which explain the meaning of the terms. Table 6 shows how the criteria are covered by in-
dividual standards.
1. Specified design requirements 5.3.1.1

2. Specification of quality requirements in design 5.3.1.1
document
3. Design analysis and acceptance criteria for inspection 5.3.1.2
and tests
4. Compatibility of items 5.3.1.2
5. Documentation of design activities to permit re- 5.3.1.3
assessment
6. Design interface control 5.3.2
7. Design verification 5.3.3.1
8. Test programme for design verification 5.3.3.2
9. Documentation of design changes 5.3.4.1
10. Approval of design changes 5.3.4.1/5.3.4.2/5.3.4.3
1. Specified design requirements
Control measures shall be established to ensure that specified design requirement such as
regulatory requirements, codes and standards are correctly translated into specifications, drawings
or written instructions.
2. Specification of quality requirements in design documents
Shall be included in design documents.
3. Design analysis and acceptance criteria for inspection and test
The design control measures shall provide for design analysis; evaluation of accessibility for
in-service inspection, maintenance and repair and delineation of acceptance criteria for inspections
and tests.
4. Comptability of items
A review for the suitability of application and compatibility of items for the essential func-
tioning of the plant shall be established.
5. Documentation of design activities to permit re-assessment
To facilitate assessment by technical personnel other than those executing the original design.
6. Design interface control
Design control measures to control design interfaces and for co-ordination among participating
design organisations. These measures will also include procedures for controlling documents involving
design interfaces.
7. Design verification
Measures for verifying the adequacy of design such as by design reviews, alternative
calculating methods or by a testing programme. This shall be carried out by persons other than those
who executed the original design, but who may be from the same organisation.
24 Section C
8. Test progra mme for design verifica tion
This shall include suitable testing under the most adverse design conditions or under condi
tions that can be extrapolated. If the testing shows that modifications are necessary, the item shall
be retested to assure satisfactory performance.
9. Document
a tion of design cha nges
Procedures shall be provided for effecting design changes including onsite changes.
10. Approv
a l of design cha nges
Design changes shall be subjected to the original design control measures, and shall be
reviewed and approved in the same manner as the original design documents. Where this is not
piai tical other responsible design oiganisalions may bo designated, provided that they have access
to peilinent background inloinialiun, have demonstrated competence in the specific design aiea
and have adequate understanding of the original design.
TABLE 6
Table Section No. 10 Design Control
COMPARISON
COUNTRIES CRITERIA 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
CODE OR
STANDARD
International ISO 6215 / / / / /

IAEA 50-C-QA / / / / / / / .
UK BS5882 / / / / / / /
BS5750 Pt 1 0 / - 0 - 0 0
NII/R/38/78 / -/ - /
USA ANS/ASME N45.2 / / / / 0 / / /

10CFR50 APP / / / / - / / - /
NCA4000 / / - / - / / /
ASME-BPV-III
CANADA CSA STANDARD - - / 0- 0

Z299.1
CSA PREL /0 - / 0/ /
STANDARD
N286.0/1/2
FED REPUBLIC KTA 1401 / / / 0 0 0 0 - 0 0

OF GERMANY
FRANCE A/44 CPQ / / / - 0 - / 0-

ITALY NEN TECHNICAL
GUIDE NO 8 / / / - / - 00 /
GQ-7 / / / / / / /
/ /
25 Section C
Table Section No. 1 1 - Procurement Document Control
Eleven comparison criteria were selected for anlaysis in this section. Included below are brief
notes which explain the meaning of the terms. Table 7 shows how the criteria are covered by in
dividual standards.
1. Establishment of requirements in procurement documents 5.4.1

2. Extent of work by supplier 5.4.2(a)
3. Technical specification details 5.4.2(b)
4. Test and inspection requirements 5.4.2(c)
5. Access to plant for audit purposes 5.4.2(d)
6. Identification of quality assurance requirements 5.4.2(e)
7. Documentation required by the purchaser 5.4.2(f)
8. Timing of submittal of documentation 5.4.2(g)
9. Distribution and disposition of quality assurance records 5.4.2(h)
10. Reporting of nonconformances 5.4.2(j)
11. Procurement documents to lower tier suppliers 5.4.2(k)
1. Establishment of requirements in procurement details
Measures shall be established and documented to ensure that design bases, standards and
other requirements necessary to assure adequate quality are clearly specified in the procurement
documents.
Procurement requirements for assuring quality shall include the following:
2. Extent of work by supplier
Specification of the scope of work to be performed by the supplier shall be included.
3. Technical specification details
Technical requirements specified by reference to standards, drawings or similar technical

documents, including revision number.
4. Test and inspection requirements
Includes special instructions for such activities.
5. Access to plant for audit purposes
Provisions for access to plant facilities for source inspection surveillance and audit purposes
when required.
6. Identification of quality assurance requirement
Includes programme elements applicable to the item.
7. Documentation required by the purchaser
Identification of specifications, manufacturing and inspection plans, instructions, procedures,

inspection and test records are to be submitted or made available for approval by the purchaser.
8. Timing of submittal
9 Provisions are to be made for the timing of the submittal of documentation.
9. Distribution and disposition of quality assurance records
Provisions shall be made for the controlled distribution, retention, maintenance and disposi-
tion of quality assurance records.
26 Section C
10. Itopoiting ol non t m l o i n u n i >>
Requirements for reporting non confoimances that reiluin pumhnsei s approvai knowledge
1 I. F I O C H I ju lei it du :ui nui lis lo I U W I M OOI uppliuis
Provisions for extending procurement documents to lower tier suppliers, including purchaser's
access to facilities and records.
TABLE 7
Table Section N o . 11 - Procurement Document Control
COMPARISON
COUNTRIES CRITERIA 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
CODE OR
STANDARD
International ISO 6215 / / / / / / /

IAEA 50-C-QA / / / / / / /
UK BS5882 / / / / / / / / /
BS5750 Ptl 0 / / - / -
Nil/R/38/78 0 - 0 0 - -0 - 0
USA ANSI/ASME N45.2 / - / / / 0 - - / / /
10CFR50 APP / 0 -
NCA4000 0 0 0 0 0
ASME-BPV-III
CANADA CSA STANDARD 0 0- 0 - / - - / - /

Z299.1
CSA PREL / / / / 0 - / / /
STANDARD
N286.0/1/2
FED REPUBLIC KTA 1401 0 - - 0 0 0/ - -

OR GERMANY
FRANCE A/44 CPQ / 0 / / - / / - -

GUIDE NO 8 / - / / - / / / 0
GQ-7 / / / / / / / / - / -
27 Section C
Table Section No. 1 2 - Instruction, Procedure and Drawings
Five comparison criteria were selected for analysis in this section. Included below are brief
notes which explain the meaning of the terms. Table 8 shows how the criteria are covered by in-
dividual standards.
1. Instruction affecting quality 5.5

2. Quantitative criteria in instructions 5.5
3. Comparative samples 5.5
4. Procedures for implementing the quality assurance programme 2.2-IAEA 50-C-QA
5. Revision of procedures 2.2 IAEA 50-C QA
1. Instructions affecting quality
Activities affecting quality shall be given in appropriate instructions, drawings or other

documents, and they shall be accomplished in accordance w i t h these documents.
2. Quantitative criteria instructions
Where applicable, instructions or drawings shall include appropriate quantitative criteria such
as dimensions, tolerances or operating limits for determining quality compliance.
3. Comparative samples
Where appropraite, instructions may include comparative workmanship samples for deter-
mining satisfactory work performance and quality compliance.
4. Procedures for implementing the quality assurance programme
Procedures for implementing the quality assurance programme on a planned and systematic
basis for different phases of the nuclear power project shall be developed and documented by the
organisation performing the constituent activities.
5. Revision of procedures
The procedure shall periodically be reviewed and updated as necessary to ensure adequate
coverage of those activities.
28 Section C
TABLE 8
I able Section No. 12 Instructions, procedutes and drawings
COMPARISON
COUNTRIES CRITERIA 1 2 3 4 5
CODE OR
STANDARD
International ISO 6 2 1 5 / / /
IAEA 50-C-QA / 0 0 /
UK BS5882 / / /
BS57 5 0 0 0 / 0 -
NII/R/38/78
USA ANSI/ASME N45.2 / / / / -

10CFR50 APP / 0 -
NCA4000 / 0 -
ASME-BPV-III
CANADA CSA STANDARD 0 - /

Z299.1
CSA PREL
STANDARD / / -
N286.0/1/2
FED REPUBLIC KTA 1401 0 0 - 0 0

OF GERMANY
FRANCE A/44 CPQ + + - - +

CNEN TECHNICAL
ITALY GUIDE NO 8
GQ-7 / / - / -
29 Section C
Table Section No. 1 3 - Document Control
Six comparison ciiteria were selected for analysis in this section. Included below are brief
1. Document preparation 5.6.1.1

2. Document review and approval 5.6.1.2
3. Document release and distribution 5.6.2
4. Control of interface document 5.6.2
5. Document change control 5.6.3.1/5.6.3.2
6. Control of non-applicable document 5.6.3.3
1. Document preparation
The preparation and issue of documents for performing and verifying the work shall be con-
trolled. This includes the identification of individuals or organisations responsible for reviewing and
issuing documents related to activities affecting quality.
2. Document review and approval
The reviewing and approving organisation or individuals shall have access to pertinent
background information upon which to base their review or approval.
3. Document release and distribution
Documents shall be released through an established system, which shall ensure that those
participating in an activity use appropriate and correct documents.
4. Control of interface documents
These shall be controlled and co ordinated by the established system.
5. Document change control
Changes to documents shall be approved according to documented procedures. They shall

be reviewed and approved by the same organisation that performed the original review unless other
organisations are specifically designated. These organisations shall have access to pertinent
background information upon which to base their review and approval.
6. Control of non-applicable documents
Information on the revision of documents shall be relayed to all affected persons and organisa-
tions to control and preclude the use of non-applicable documents. The change shall be identified
on the document and when more than one item is affected they shall be clearly identified.
30 Section C
TABLE 9
Table Section No. 13 - Document Control
COMPARISON
COUNTRIES CRITERIA 1 2 3 4 5 6
CODE OR
STANDARD

IAEA 50-C-QA / / / 0 / /
UK BS5882 / / / / /
BS5750 Pt 1 0 - 0 -0 0
NII/R/38/78 0 -0
USA ANSI/ASME N45.2 / / / /
10CFR50 APP / 0- -0
NCA4000 0 -0
ASME-BPV-III
CANADA CSA STANDARD 0 0 - -0 0

Z299.1
CSA PREL / 0 /
STANDARD
N286.0/1/2
FED REPUBLIC KTA 1401 0 0 0 - / 0

OF GERMANY
FRANCE A/44 CPQ / - -

GUIDE NO 8 / / / - /
GQ-7 / / / - /
31 Section C
Table Section N o . 1 4 - Control of Purchased Material Equipment and Services
Six comparison criteria were selected for analysis in this section. Included below are brief
notes which explain the meaning of the terms. Table 10 s h o w s how the criteria are covered by
1. Conformance to procurement documents 5.7.1.1

2. Access by supplier for purpose of control 5.7.1.1
3. Assessment of the suppliers control of quality by the purchaser 5.7.1.2
4. Supplier evaluation by the purchaser 5.7.2
5. Documentary evidence that purchased material conforms t o procure- 5.7.3.1
ment requirement
6. Archive samples 5.7.3.2
1. Conformance to procurement documents
Controls shall be effected to ensure that purchased items conform to the requirements set
d o w n in the procurement documents. These controls include supplier evaluation, inspection during
manufacture and upon delivery, audit etc.
2. Access by supplier for purpose of control
Access shall be provided by the supplier to enable the above controls to be implemented.
3. Assessment of the suppliers control of quality by the purchaser
The effectiveness of the suppliers control of quality activities shall be assessed by the pur-
chaser at intervals consistent w i t h the importance, complexity and quality of the product.
4. Supplier evaluation by the purchaser
This shall include the suppliers technical capability and documented quality system, use of
past quality performance data or previous evaluation, the suppliers current quality records, or evalua-
tion of selective product sample.
5. Documentary evidence that purchased material conforms to procurement requirements
This shall be available at the nuclear plant site prior to installation. The evidence shall identify
all requirements met by the purchased material and equipment.
6. Archive samples
These shall be retained at an agreed location for an agreed retention time t o provide means
for further examination as necessary.
32 Section C
TABLE 10
Table Section No. 14 - Control of Purchased Material Equipment and Services
COMPARISON
CODE OR
STANDARD

IAEA 50-C-QA / /0 / /
UK BS5882 / / / /
BS57 59 PT 1 0 00 00
NII/R/38/78 / -
USA ANSI/ASME N45.2 / / /

10CFR50 APP / - 0 / -
NCA4000 0 00
ASME-BPV-III
CANADA CSA STANDARD - 0 0-

Z299.1
CSA PREL 0 - / / - -
STANDARD
N286.0/1/2
FED REPUBLIC KTA 1401 0 00 0 0 0

OF GERMANY
FRANCE A/44 CPQ - - - / - -

GUIDE NO 8 0 - /
GQ-7 / 0 / / / _
33 Section C
Table Section No. 1 5 - Identification and Control of Materials, Parts and Components
Four comparison criteria were selected for analysis in this section. Included below are brief
notes which explain the meaning of lhe terms. Table 11 shows how the criteria ate covered by
1. Measures for the identification of items 5.8.1

2. Physical identification of items 5.8.2
3. Identification markings of items 5.8.3
4. Characteristics on material specifications NCA 4 1 3 4 . 8 (C)
1. Measures for the identification of items
These shall be established for the identification and control of items throughout fabrication,
erection, installation and use. Identification shall be maintained by heat number, part number, serial
number, supplier's name or other appropriate means, either on the item or on records throughout
manufacture and use. Documents shall be available throughout these stages.
2. Physical identification of items
This shall be used to the maximum extent possible. Where it is impracticable, physical separa-
tion, procedural control or other means shall be used. Identification measures shall be used to pre
vent the use of incorrect or defective items.
3. Identification markings of items
Where these are employed, they shall be clear and indelible and will not affect the function
of the item. They shall not be hidden by surface treatment or coatings, and shall be transferred to
each part of an item when it is sub-divided.
4. Characteristics of material specifications
All characteristics required to be reported by material specifications shall appear on check

lists. Characteristics included on certified material test reports need not be duplicated on the check
lists which shall provide a record that the certified material test reports and certificates of com-
pliance have been received and found acceptable. The required range of values obtained from tests
on the material made by the customer when necessary to show compliance w i t h the material
specification, shall be shown on the check lists, which shall be signed by the Inspector.
34 Section C
TABLE 11
Table Section No. 15 Identification and control of materials, parts and components
COMPARISON
COUNTRIES CRITERIA 1 2 3 4
CODE OR
STANDARD
International ISO 6215 / / -

IAEA 50-C-QA / / /
UK BS5882 / / / "
BS5750 PT 1 0
NII/R/38/78 / 00
USA ANSI/ASME N45.2 / /
10CFR50 APP / 0-
NCA4000 / 00 /
ASME-BPV-III
CANADA CSA STANDARD

Z299.1
CSA PREL 0 / -
STANDARD
N286.0/1/2
FED REPUBLIC KTA 1401 0

OF GERMANY
FRANCE A/44 CPQ - / - /

GUIDE NO 8 / -
GQ-7 / /
35 Section C
Table Section No. 1 6 - Control of Special Processes
Four comparison criteria were selected for analysis in this section. Included below are brief
1. Process control for items that cannot be inspected 5.9.1.1

2. Examples of processes 5.9.1.1
3. Processes accomplished by qualified personnel 5.9.2.1
4. Definition of qualifications for personnel, or procedures for non- 5.9.2.2
standardised processes
1. Process control for items that cannot be inspected
Controls shall be implemented for processes used in manufacture, commissioning, operation

and decommissioning which cannot be checked for quality by inspection alone.
2. Examples of processes
Such processes include, for example, joining, forging, heat treatment, electroplating, corro-
sion protection, non-destructive testing, chemical analysis and mechanical tests.
3. Processes accomplished by qualified personnel
Where required by regulations, codes, standards or other criteria the above processes shall
be documented to ensure that they are accomplished by qualified personnel using qualified procedures
and equipment.
4. Definitions of qualifications for personnel or procedures for non-standardised processes
The requirements of equipment and qualifications of personnel engaged in processes where

quality requirements are not covered by available standards shall be defined.
36 Section C
TABLE 12
Table Section No 10 Contini ol Special Pioussv
COMPARISON
CODE OR
STANDARD
International ISO 6215 / / / /

IAEA 50-C-QA / 0 / /
UK BS5882 / / / /
BS5750 PT 1 0 - /
NII/R/38/78 - / 0

IOCFR50 APP / 0 /
NCA 4000 0 00
ASME-BPV-III
CANADA CSA STANDARD / - / /

Z299.1
CSA PREL
STANDARD
N286.0/1/2
FED REPUBLIC KTA 1401 0 - 0 0

OF GERMANY
FRANCE A/44 CPQ 0 / - -

GUIDE NO 8 / / / /
GQ-7 / - / /
37 Section C
Table Section No. 1 7 - Inspection and Surveillance
Seven comparison criteria were selected for analysis in this section. Included below are brief
1. Inspection schedule 5.10.1

2. Individuals performing inspection 5.10.1
3. Indirect control by surveillance if inspection is impossible 5.10.2.1
4. Combined inspection and process monitoring when necessary 5.10.2.2
5. Hold points 5.10.3
6. In-service inspection 5.10.4
7. Sampling to verify acceptability of a group of items 5.10.5
1. Inspection schedule
An inspection schedule for items and activities affecting quality shall be established and ex-
ecuted by or for the organisation performing the activity to verify conformance w i t h instructions.
Inspections shall be performed, where necessary for work operations and during storage, to assure
quality.
2. Individuals performing inspection
Such inspection shall be carried out by individuals other than those performing the activity
being inspected in order to assure quality.
3. Indirect control by surveillance if inspection is impossible
Shall be provided if inspection of items is impossible, or if additional monitoring is required.
4. Combined inspection and process monitoring when necessary
Shall be provided when control is inadequate without both.
5. Hold points
Appropriate documents shall indicate that work shall not proceed beyond hold points without
documented approval of designated individuals or organisations who shall witness the inspection.
6. In-service inspection
Shall be planned and executed.
7. Sampling to verify acceptability of a group of items
The sampling procedure shall be based on recognised practice for both sample size and selec-
tion process.
38 Section C
I AHI t 13
Table Section No. 17 Inspection
COMPARISON
COUNTRIES CRITERIA 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
CODE OR
STANDARD

IAEA 50-C-QA / / / / /0
UK BS5882 / / /
BS5750 PT 1 0 - / - -
NII/R/38/78 / / / / / / -
USA ANSI/ASME N45.2 / / / / / / /

10CFR50 APP B / / / / /
NCA4000 / - - /
ASME-BPV-III
CANADA CSA STANDARD / - / -0

Z299.1
CSA PREL
STANDARD
N286.0/1/2
FED REPUBLIC KTA 1401 / 0 0 -* 0 -

OF GERMANY
FRANCE A/44 CPQ / 0- - / -0

GUIDE NO 8 / / / / / - /
GQ-7 / / / / / /
39 Section C
Table Section No. 1 8 - Test Control
Three comparison criteria were selected for analysis in this section. Included below are brief
1. Test programme 5.11.1

2. Test performance 5.11.2
3. Test results 5.11.2
1. Test programme
A performance test programme! shall be established to ensure that items are tested to prove
that they will perform satisfactorily in service. The programme shall cover all required tests and shall
include procedures, prototype and equipment qualification tests, proof tests prior to installation,
start-up and operational tests.
2. Test performance
Tests shall be performed in accordance w i t h written test procedures which incorporate ac

ceptance limits specified in design documents and carried out under suitable environmental condi-
tions by appropriately trained personnel using properly calibrated instrumentation.
3. Test results
Shall be documented and evaluated to assure that the specified requirements have been
satisfied.
40 Section C
TABLE 14
Table Section No. 18 Test ( ' n n l m l
COMPARISON
COUNTRIES CRITERIA 1 2 3
CODE OR
STANDARD
International ISO 6215 / / /

IAEA 50-C-QA / / /
UK BS5882 / /
BS5750 PT 1 0 0 -
NIl/R/38/78

10CFR50 APP / / /
NCA4000 / / /
ASME-BPV-III
CANADA CSA STANDARD 0

Z299.1
CSA PREL 0 0 -
STANDARD
N286.0/1/2
FED REPUBLIC KTA 1401 0 0

OF GERMANY
FRANCE A/44 CPQ 0 - /

GUIDE NO 8 / / /
GQ-7 /
41 Section C
Table Section No. 1 9 - Control of Measuring and Test Equipment
Seven comparison entena were selected toi analysis in this section. Included below are brief
1. Provision of measuring and test equipment 5.12.1

2. Calibration of measuring equipment 5.12.2
3. Calibration against nationally recognised standards 5.12.2
4. Calibration against non-national standards 5.12.2
5. Detection of deviations out of prescribed limits 5.12.2
6. Handling of calibrated equipment 5.12.3
7. Records of calibration status 5.12.4
1. Provisions of measuring and test equipment
Steps shall be taken to ensure that tools, gauges, measuring and testing equipment used in
determining conformance criteria are of the proper range, type and precision.
2. Calibration of measuring equipment
Testing and measuring devices affecting quality shall be controlled, calibrated and adjusted
at specified intervals or prior to use to maintain accuracy within necessary limits.
3. Calibration against nationally recognised standards
Testing and measuring devices shall be calibrated against certified equipment having k n o w n
valid relationship to nationally recognised standards.
4. Calibration against non-national standards
Where no national standard exists, the bases for calibration shall be documented.
5. Detections of deviations out of prescribed limit
When this occurs, previous measurements shall be checked for validity and the tested items
re-assessed.
6. Handling of calibrated equipment
Controls shall be established t o ensure proper handling, storage and use of calibrated
equipment.
7. Records of calibration status
Records shall be maintained and equipment suitably marked.
42 Section C
TABLE 15
Table Section No. 19 Control of Measuring and Test Equipment
COMPARISON
CODE OR
STANDARD

IAEA 50-C-QA / /0 0/ /0
UK BS5882 / / / / /
BS5750 PT 1 / /0 - /
NI I/R/38/78 / / - - - /
USA ANSI/ASME N45.2 / / / / / 0/

10CFR50 APP / -
NCA4000 / / - / - /
ASME-BPV-III
CANADA CSA STANDARD 0 / / - - /

Z299.1
CSA PREL / 0-
STANDARD
N286.0/1/2
FED REPUBLIC KTA 1401 0 / - - /

OF GERMANY
FRANCE A/44 CPQ - 00 - /

GUIDE NO 8 / 0 / / / - /
GQ-7 / / / / / / /
43 Section C
Table Section No. 2 0 - Handling, Storage and Shipping
Seven comparison criteria were selected for analysis in this section. Included below are brief
1. Control of handling, storage and shipping 5.13.1

2. Sensitive items 5.13.2
3. Handling tools 5.13.2
4. Disturbed packaging 5.13.3
5. Marking and labelling of package ANSI/ASME 45.2-14
6. Protective environments ANSI/ASME 45.2-14
7. Storing of rejected items NII/R/38/78 - 2.12.5
1. Control of handling, storage and shipping
Handling, storage and shipping of items shall be controlled and documented in accordance
with established instructions, procedures or drawings to prevent damage, deterioration or loss. This
shall include cleaning, packing and preservation.
2. Sensitive items
Specific written procedures shall be used for critical, sensitive, perishable or high value items.
3. Handling tools
Shall be provided and controlled to ensure safe and adequate handling.
4. Disturbed packaging
Shall be restored to its original condition unless acceptable alternative storage arrangements
have been made.
5. Marking and labelling of package
Adequate instructions shall be given for marking and labelling for packaging, shipment and
storage of items. Marking shall identify special environments or the need for special control.
6. Protective environments
When necessary, special covering and protective environments such as inert gas atmosphere
specific moisture content levels and temperature levels shall be specified and their existence verified.
7. Storing of rejected items
Storage arrangements should ensure the identification, segregation and control of items re-
jected, non-conforming, awaiting modification or quarantined. All items should be stored to minimise
deterioration.
44 Section C
TABLE 16
Table Section No. 20 - Handling, Storage and Shipping
COMPARISON
CODE OR
STANDARD
International ISO 6215 / / / / -

IAEA 50-C-QA / - 0 0 -
UK BS5882 / / / / -
BS5750 PT 1 0 - / -0 -0
NII/R/38/78 / - / - -
USA ANSI/ASME N45.2 / / - / / -
10CFR50 APP / -
NCA4000 / / -
ASME-BPV-III
CANADA CSA STANDARD - /

Z299.1
CSA PREL - / / -
STANDARD
N286.0/1/2
FED REPUBLIC KTA 1401 0

OF GERMANY
FRANCE A/44 CPQ -

GUIDE NO 8 / / / - / / -
GQ-7 / / / - / -
45 Section C
Table Section No. 2 1 - Inspection, Test and Operating Status
Four comparison criteria were selected for analysis in this section. Included below are bnef
1. Identification of test and inspection status of items 5.14.1

2. Use of identification items 5.14.1
3. Operating status of nuclear power plant components 5.14.2
4. Control of status indicators ANSI/ASME N45.2-15
1. Identification of test and inspection status of items
Items shall be identified by markings, tags, routing cards, inspection records, physical loca-
tion or other suitable means which can indicate the acceptability or non-conformance of items to
inspections performed.
2. Use of identified items
The identification of inspection and test status shall be maintained throughout manufacture,
installation and operation to ensure that only certified items are used.
3. Operating status of nuclear power plant components
The operating status of systems and components of nuclear power plant shall be indicated
by tagging valves and switches to prevent inadvertent operation.
4. Control of status indicators
Procedures shall be layed down for the authority for application and removal of status in-
dicators such as tags, labels and stamps.
46 Section C
TABLE 17
Table Section No. 21 - Inspection, Test and Operating Status
COMPARISON
CODE OR
STANDARD
International ISO 6215 / /

IAEA 50-C-QA / / -
UK BS5882 / /
BS5750 PT 1 0 / -
NU/R/38/78 _

10CFR50 APP 0 /
NCA4000 /
ASME-BPV-III
CANADA CSA STANDARD / /

Z299.1
CSA PREL 0 / - 0
STANDARD
N286.0/1/2
FED REPUBLIC KTA 1401 - -

OF GERMANY
FRANCE A/44 CPQ / 0 - -

GUIDE NO 8 / 0 - /
GQ-7 / 0 / /
47 Section C
Table Section No. 2 2 - Non conforroincAtems
1. Control of non-conforming items 5.15.1.1

2. Marking of non-conforming items 5.15.1.1
3. Control of further processing of non-conforming items 5.15.1.2
4. Review of non-conforming items 5.15.2.1
5. Use or repair of non-conforming items 5.15.2.1
6. Re-inspection of repaired and re-worked items 5.15.2.2
1. Control of non-conforming items
Non-conforming items shall be controlled to prevent their inadvertent use.
2. Marking of non-conforming items
Non-conforming items shall be identified by marking, taggings or physical segregation where

practical.
3. Control of further processing of non-conforming items
The control of further processing or installation of non-conforming items shall be documented

and implemented.
4. Review of non-conforming items
Non-conforming items shall be reviewed and either accepted, rejected, repaired or re-worked
in accordance with documented procedures. Authority for review and disposition shall be defined.
5. Use or repair of non-conforming items
The disposition of non-conforming items shall be reported to the designated authority. When
these have been accepted, or repaired, the description shall be documented to denote the "as-built"
condition.
6. Re-inspection of repaired and re-worked items
Shall be carried out in accordance with applicable procedures.
48 Section C
TABLE 18
Table Section No. 22 - Non-conforming Items
COMPARISON
CODE OR
STANDARD

IAEA 50-C-QA / / / /
UK BS5882 / / / / / /
BS5750 PT 1 / / / 0
NII/R/38/78 0- - /

10CFR50 APP / - / -
NCA4000 / 0 0 /0
CANADA CSA STANDARD / / - /
Z299.1
CSA PREL / 0 0 / -
STANDARD
N286.0/1/2
FED REPUBLIC KTA 1401 - 0 0 0 0 -

OF GERMANY
FRANCE A/44 CPQ / / / / /

GUIDE NO 8 / / 0 / / /
GQ-7 / / / /0 /
49 Section C
Table Section No. 23 - Corrective Action
Three comparison criteria were selected for analysis in this section. Included below are brief
1. Identification of adverse conditions to achieve quality 5.16.1

2. Determination of cause of such conditions 5.16.1
3. Cause of conditions to be documented 5.16.2
1. Identification of adverse conditions to achieve quality
These shall be provided for in the programme, and shall be identified and corrected. They
include conditions such as equipment malfunctions, deviations and nonconformances.
2. Determination of cause of such conditions
The cause of such conditions shall be determined and corrective actions taken to prevent
repetition.
3. Cause of conditions to be documented
Includes the corrective actions taken. The cause of the conditions shall be reported to
management.
TABLE 19
Table Section No. 23 Corrective Actions
COMPARISON
COUNTRIES CRITERIA 1 2 3
CODE OR
STANDARD

IAEA 50-C-QA / / /
UK BS5882 / /
BS57 50 PT 1 0 / 0
NII/R/38/78 / / /
USA ANSI/ASME N45.2 / /

10CFR50 APP / / /
NCA4000 / /
ASME-BPV-III
CANADA CSA STANDARD 0 /

Z299.1
CSA PREL / /
STANDARD
N286.0/1/2
FED REPUBLIC KTA 1401 / - /

OF GERMANY
FRANCE A/44 CPQ -

GUIDE NO 8 / / /
GQ-7 / / /
50 Section C
Table Section No. 2 4 - Quality Assurance Records
1. Preparation of quality assurance records 5.17.1.1

2. ' Identification of records to activity involved 5.17.1.2
3. Quality assurance record system 5.17.2.1
4. Storage of records 5.17.2.1
5. Retention of records 5.17.2.2
6. Disposition of records 5.17.2.2
1. Preparation of quality assurance records
Adequate records for use in management of the quality assurance programme shall be prepared
and shall represent objective evidence of quality. They shall include the results of reviews, inspec-
tions, audits, materials analysis and power plant operation logs as well as associated data such as
personnel qualifications, procedures and equipment, repairs required and other appropriate
documents.
2. Identification of records to activity involved
All records shall be legible and identifiable to the item or activity involved.
3. Quality assurance records system
A record system shall be established and executed in accordance with written procedures.
It shall furnish evidence of activities affecting quality.
4. Storage of records
Records shall be identified, stored, and readily retrievable in facilities that minimise deteriora-
tion and prevent loss.
5. Retention of records
Retention times of quality assurance records and specimens shall be established in writing.
" A s b u i l t " records shall be maintained by the owner for the life of the plant.
6. Disposition of records
Shall be in accordance with written procedures.
51 Section C
TABLE 2 0
Table Section No. 24 - Quality Assurance Records
COMPARISON
CODE OR
STANDARD

IAEA 50-C-QA / / / / / /
UK BS5882 / / / / / /
BS5750 PT 1 0 - / -0
NII/R/38/78 / / 0/
USA ANSI/ASME N45.2 / / / / / 0
10CFR50 APP / /0 00
NCA4000 / 0 0 / /
ASME-BPV-III
CANADA CSA STANDARD / / 0 /0

Z299.1
CSA PREL / / / / 0 -
STANDARD
N286.0/1/2
FED REPUBLIC KTA 1401 0 - 0 - / -

OF GERMANY
FRANCE A/44 CPQ / / / 0/ -

GUIDE NO 8 0 / / /0 /
GQ-7 / / / / / /
52 Section C
Table Section No. 2 5 - Audits
1. Planned audits 5.18.1

2. Performance of audits 5.18.2
3. Auditing organisations 5.18.2
4. Results of audits 5.18.3
5. Scheduling of audits 5.18.4
6. Conditions of audit ANSI/ASME N45.2-19
1. Planning of audits
Internal and external audits shall be planned as necessary to verify compliance with the quality
assurance programme and its effectiveness.
2. Performance of audits
Audits.shall be performed in accordance w i t h written instructions and shall cover all work
areas and review of documents and records.
3. Auditing organisations
The responsible auditing organisations shall assign qualified auditors who shall be indepen-
dent of the activities which they audit. For internal audits, persons having direct responsiblity for
activities being audited shall not be involved in the selection of the audit team.
4. Results of audits
The results of the audits shall be reviewed by the responsible organisations in the area audited,
and management shall take the necessary corrective action on deficiencies found. Follow-up action
shall be taken to verify that noted deficiencies, and where practical, the causes have been corrected.
5. Scheduling of audits
This will depend upon the status and importance of the activity, and may be supplemented
by random audits when necessary.
6. Conditions for audit
It is desirable to conduct audits when some of the following conditions exist:

(a) To determine the capability of a sub-contractors quality assurance programme prior
to awarding a contract.
(b) After the award of a contract to check the performance of a sub-contractor.
(c) When changes are made in the quality assurance programme.
(d) When it is suspected that safety, performance or reliability of the item is in jeopardy
due to deficiencies and non-conformances in the quality assurance programme.
(e) When independent assessment of programme effectiveness or item quality is considered
necessary.
(f) When it is considered necessary to verify implementation of required corrective action.
53 Section C
TABLE 21
Table Section No. 25 Audits
COMPARISON
CODE OR
STANDARD

IAEA 50-C-QA 0 / /
UK BS5882 / / / / / "*
BS5750 PT 1 0
NII/R/38/78 / 0 / / -
USA ANSI/ASME N45.2 / / / / / /

10CFR50 APP / 0 0 / 0
NCA4000 / 0 0 0
ASME-BPV-III
CANADA CSA STANDARD / / / 0 0

Z299.1
CSA PREL / 0 0 / /
STANDARD
N286.0/1/2
FED REPUBLIC KTA 1401 0 - 0 0 - -

OF GERMANY
FRANCE A/44 CPQ - - - -

GUIDE NO 8 / / 0 0 - 0
GQ-7 / / / / /
54 Section C
SECTION D - S U M M A R Y OF CODES A N D S T A N D A R D S ANALYSED
QA Standards applied to LMFBR
1. There are no codes or standards for Quality Assurance written specifically for Liquid Metal
Cooled Fast Breeder Reactor (LMFBR) Components.
2. All the codes and standards analysed can be applied in some measure to all types of reactors
except one, IAEA 50-C-QA, which specifically applies to land based stationary thermal neutron power
plants.
3. The classification of codes and standards relating to Quality Assurance according to Nuclear
Application, analysed in this report is given in Table 2.
Statutory status of QA standards
4. The status of Quality Assurane Codes and Standards analysed by this report are tabulated
in Table 1.
5. No Quality Assurance Standard analysed has a statutory status in law in the EEC countries.
6. Two Quality Assurance Standards of the United States of America have a statutory status
in law. The first is 10CFR50, Appendix of the Code of Federal Regulations, Chapter 1, Nuclear
Regulatory Commission, entitled Quality Assurance Criteria for Nuclear Power Plant and Fuel
Reprocessing Plants, which gives a description of the Quality Assurance Programme to be submit
ted by the applicant for a construction permit or operating license.
7. The second standard is Article NCA 4000, Quality Assurance of Section III of the ASME Boiler
and Pressure Vessel Code, Nuclear Power Plant Component. The licensing authority for this is the
American Society of Mechanical Engineers. This standard covers Quality Assurance for various sub
sections on classes of pressurised components and relevant support structures for Nuclear Power
Plants.
General summary of tabulated analyses
8. The foregoing analytical tables of the varying criteria and sub-sections for the examination
of codes and standards relating to Quality Assurance are summarised by documents in tabular form
below in Table 22. The percentage of sub-sections covered is the sum of the markings relating to
the individual standards expressed as a percentage of the total possible. No account is taken of
the relative importance that may be assigned to the individual sub-sections.
Summary of criteria assigned to standards
9. Three standards cover less than 50% of the criteria selected. They are BS 5750 Part 1,
NII/R/38/78, and A/44 CPQ, the first two being UK standards and the remaining one being a French
Standard.
10. An analysis of the detailed criteria by sub-sections is given below in Paragraph 1 1 .
55
TABLE 22
Summary of comparison of codes an d stan dards
COMPARISON
CRITERIA PERCENTAGE
COUNTRIES OF S UB-S ECTIONS
CODE OR COVERED
STANDARD
International ISO 6215 92Z

IAEA 50-C-QA - 93Z
UK BS5882 92Z
BS5750 PT 1 0 71Z
NII/R/38/78 0 50Z
USA ANSI/ASME N45.2 91Z

10CFR50 APP 0 56Z
NCA4000 0 60Z
ASME-BPV-III
CANADA CSA S TANDARD 0 54Z

Z299.1
CSA PREL 0 67
STANDARD
N286.0/1/2
FED REPUBLIC KTA 1401 0 50Z

OF GERMANY
FRANCE A/44 CPQ - 49Z
ITALY CNEN TECHNICAL 0 71Z

GUIDE NO 8
GQ-7 90Z

= more than 90% of sub-section s covered or partially covered.

between 75% an d 90% covered or partially covered
0 between 75% an d 50% covered or partially covered
- less than 50% covered or partially covered.
Summary of criteria assigned to standards
11. A summary analysis of the criteria of each clause pertaining to each standard is given in the
following Table 23.
56 Section D
TABLE 23
Summary of criteria assigned to standards by tables
Number of c r i t e r i a covered
Table No
4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21
IS06215 9 9 10 11 3 6 6 3 4 7 3 7 4 3 6 3 6 5
IAEA 50-C-QA 9 9 10 11 5 6 6 3 4 7 3 7 3 3 5 3 6 6
BS 5882 9 9 10 11 3 6 6 3 4 7 3 7 4 3 6 3 6 5
BS 5750 Pt 1 7 5 5 5 4 4 5 1 2 4 2 4 4 2 5 3 3 1
NII/R/38/78 6 4 3 7 - 3 1 3 2 6 - 4 4 4 3 5 4
ANSI/ASME N45.2 8 9 10 8 4 6 5 3 4 7 3 7 5 4 6 3 6 6
10CFR50 App 6 3 8 2 2 3 4 2 3 5 3 1 2 3 3 3 5 5
NCA 4000 7 3 6 5 2 2 3 4 3 3 3 5 2 2 5 3 5 5
ASME-BPV-III
CSA Standard
Z299.1 2 6 5 6 2 4 2 1 3 3 1 5 2 2 5 3 5 6
CSA P r e l Standard
N286.0/1/2 6 7 9 8 4 6 3 2 2 2 2 3 3 4 3 5 6
KTA 1401 8 8 9 5 4 4 6 1 3 4 3 3 1 1_
4 2 3 3
A/44 CPQ 6 5 7 6 3 2 1 2 2 4 2 3 - 2 6 - 5 -
CNEN Technical t
Guide No 8 6 7 8 7 - 5 2 1 4 6 3 6 5 3 6 3 6 5
GQ-7 8 9 10 9 3 5 5 3 3 7 3 7 5 4 6 3 6 6
T o t a l Number of
C r i t e r i a per t a b l e 9 9 10 11 5 6 6 4 4 7 3 7 7 4 6 3 6 6
12. Examination of the table shows that five of the standards analysed were totally deficient of
at least one clause up to a maximum of three. These deficient standards are tabulated below:-
UK NII/R/38/78 - 3 deficiencies
France A/44 CPQ - 3
German KTA 1401 - 1 deficiency
Canada N286.0/1/2 - 1
Italy Tech Guide No. 8 - 1
13. Each of the following two standards are deficient in the clause corresponding to the quoted
table number. These are as follows:-
(a) Table 8 - Instructions, Procedures and Drawings
The following standards are deficient in this clause.
UK NII/R/38/78
Italy Tech Guide No. 8
57 Section D
(b) Table 17 - Inspection, Test and Operating Status
The following standards are deficient in this clause.
UK NII/R/38/78
Germany KTA 1401
14. Each of the following nominated standards are deficient in one clause corresponding to the
quoted table numbers. These standards are identified below.
UK NII/R/38/78 deficient in clause. Table 14 - Test Control.

(b) France A/44 CPQ deficient in clause, Table 16 - Handling, Storage
and Shipping.
(c) Canada N286.0/1/2 deficient in clause. Table 12 - Control of Special
Processes.
(d) Germany KTA 1401 deficient in clause. Table 19 - Corrective Actions.
Analysis of major detail deficiencies in the criteria
15. The following analysis examines detail deficiencies in the more important criteria.
16. The following criteria have been omitted from seven or more standards.
Table No. Column No.

4 4 - Language.
In a multi-language community such as the EEC, it is
essential that the language used in the Quality
Assurance Programme should be clearly delineated.
4 5 - Factors considered in Assigning Levels of Quality
Assurance
These should be included, since the present course of
development is to consider the level of Quality
Assurance assigned to individual components. This
topic is further expanded in Section F.
8 4 - Procedures for Implementing the Quality Asurance

Programme
This criteria is omitted from 9 standrds, including
notably ISO 6215, BS 5882, NII/R/38/78, 10CFR50
App. B, NCA 4000, 2299.1, N286.0/1/2, A/44 CPQ
and CNEN Technical Guide No. 8.
8 5 - Revision of Procedures
This criteria is omitted from ten standards namely ISO
6215, BS 5882, BS 5750, NII/R/38/78, ANSI/ASME
N45.2, 10CFR50 App. B, NCA 4000, N286.0/1/2,
CNEN Technical Guide No. 8, GQ-7
11 3 - Identification Marking of Items

This criteria is omitted from seven standards which are
mainly in the lower section of the table.
58 Section D
Table No. Column No.
11 4 Characteristics of Material Specifications
The essence of this criteria is that all characteristics on
material specifications should be referred to or shown
on the check lists and signed by the Inspector. This is
omitted from all the standards analysed except t w o ,
namely NCA 4 0 0 0 , the ASME-BPV-III Pressure Vessel
Code and the French A / 4 4 CPQ.
13 6 - In-service inspection
No reference is made to planning in-service inspection
in the lower 5 standards in the table and BS 5 7 5 0 Part
1.
16 2 to 7 - Handling, Storage and Shipping
This clause has the greatest number of deficiencies of
all the standards for the detailed criteria except Column
1, the control of handling, storage and shipping.
21 6 - Conditions for Audits
No details are given as to when to conduct an audit of
Quality Assurance measures in eight standards, namely
ISO 6 2 1 5 , the UK standards, 10CFR50 App. and
NCA 4 0 0 0 of the USA, KTA 1401 of Germany and
A/44 CPQ of France.
Recommendations
17. It is recommended that the International Standard ISO 6 2 1 5 - 1 9 8 0 - 1 2 - 0 1 . Nuclear Power

Plants - Quality Assurance, which is also issued as BS 5 8 8 2 - 1 9 8 0 - Standard for a total quality
assurance programme for nuclear power plants in the UK, should be adopted as a basis for a stan
dard for CEC countries at the present time, with the exception of the Federal Republic of Germany,
w h o were a non-signatory to ISO 6 2 1 5 and who have issued their standard KTA 1401 which is
tabulated and analysed in this report.
It is recommended that the following additions be made to ISO 6 2 1 5 .
Table No. Column No Criteria

8 4 Procedures for Implementing the Quality Assurance
Programme
8 5 Revisions of Procedures
11 4 Characteristics of Material Specification
16 5 Marking and Labelling of Package
16 6 Protective Environments
16 7 Storing of Rejected Items

17 4 Control of Status Indicators
21 6 Conditions for Audit.
59 Section D
SECTION E - ALTERNATIVE DESCRIPTIVE ANALYTICAL METHOD
OF A N A L Y S I N G CODES A N D S T A N D A R D S
Contributed by NERATOOM
Introduction
1. The primary objective of this study was to evaluate and select those elements of the various
Quality Assurance Codes and Standards (which have, over the past fifteen or t w e n t y years, been
established (nationally and internationally)) that are considered best representing necessary criteria
and sound practice in a comprehensive nuclear QA programme adequate for application to Fast Reac
tor programmes. It was not the intent of this study to write or propose yet another standard on
QA, but in comparing the elements of the basic criteria in various similar Codes and Standards, to
illustrate the similarities and yet highlight the differences which have appeared, even though Codes
and Standards were written with the same basic objectives and scope in mind. Therefore, with these
differences and similarities identified, subjective judgement were to be utilised in selecting which
Code or Standard best expressed the necessary criteria.
2. The ultimate goal was to select and recommend that Code or Standard which overall best
contained and adequately described the majority of those necessary and sufficient criteria and to
suggest as an addendum any elements or criteria not covered, but which are considered in the light
of today's practices to be desirable. The scope of the evaluation and the methodology used in mak
ing the comparisons and selections are described in the sections following.
Scope of Evaluation
3. Since the objective of this study was a comparison of Quality Assurance Programme re
quirements appertaining, or potentially applicable to Fast Reactor construction, a selection of cur
rent national and international QA codes and standards was established for analysis. A listing of
these codes and standards is given in Section B, together w i t h a brief note on their origin. Although
some of these codes and standards are supplemented by other codes and standards or supporting
guides the analysis was confined to the top level code of standard in any series evaluated. Further
discussion on the impact of the lower level guides and standards is given in the conclusions to this
section, paragraphs 26 to 4 0 .
Methodology
4. The preceding section of this report (SCOPE) describes the scope of this study and identified
the QA Codes and Standards utilised in the comparative evaluations. For the comparative analysis,
the IAEA Code of Practice 50-C-QA was selected as the reference standard against which the other
Codes and Standards were compared. This Code was chosen because of its international basis,
its degree of adaptability and its current acceptance level in the nuclear industry. In addition, the
criteria was presented in a logical and sequential order.
5. The structure of this Code into twelve sections (thirteen when the " I n t r o d u c t i o n " is included)
was used to generate the basic " C r i t e r i a " selected to form the basis of the comparative evaluation.
Each of the criteria was then broken down into sub-criteria whenever a specific QA programme
related requirement standards evaluated. Because of the obvious mis-match between the number
of sections (criteria) in each QA standard a straight comparison between the contents in each sec
tion of each standard was not sufficient. It was necessary many times to refer to sections other
than the one directly under evaluation in order to obtain a true comparison of the coverage given
to any particular sub-criteria in each standard evaluated. In some caes, the sub-criteria under evalua
tion in one section was found to be non-existent, but covered completely adequate in other sec
tions of the standard. Although the comparative analysis initially commenced w i t h all the Codes
and Standards noted in Section of this report the following standards were subsequently dropped
for the reasons stated below:
(i) BS 5882 1980: "Total Quality Assurance Programme for Nuclear Power Plants." This
standard is essentially the same in format and content as ISO 6 2 1 5 "Nuclear Power
'Plants - Quality Assurance."
60
(ii) EDF: "L'Annex a la Convention Assurance de la Qualit" (annexe to the Contract,
Quality Assurance). This standard was dropped from the detailed evaluation because
it now requires compliance to IAEA 50-C-QA and, as an annexe to a contract, is not
a stand-alone document.
(iii) ASME III NCA 4 0 0 0 : This code unlike the others, is primarily limited in its application
to the pressure boundaries of nuclear equipment and their supports. There are many
safety related components and systems to which this standard does not apply, conse-
quently, it cannot be selected on its o w n for fast reactor projects. In addition, it has,
except for its requirements on "Authorised Inspection Agencies", essentially been made
compatible with 10CFR50 App B.
6. During the detailed comparison analysis an attempt was made to select the code or standard
which was considered in the light of today's requirements to best describe or cover that sub-criterion
being evaluated.
Comparative Analysis
7. As stated earlier, the thirteen criteria of the IAEA code have been chosen as the basic criteria
to be compared because it is our opinion that these criteria cover all necessary elements of a full
QA programme in the most logical and sequential order.
IAEA QA programme criteria:
(1) Introduction
(2) Quality Assurance Programmes
(3) Organisation
(4) Document Control
(5) Design Control
(6) Procurement Control
(7) Material Control
(8) Process Control
(9) Inspection and Test Control
(10) Non-Conformance Control
(11) Corrective Actions
(12) Records
(13) Audits
Each of the above 13 basic criteria are sub-divided into sub-criteria for the comparison analysis
between the applicable codes/standards.
In this comparison analysis of applicable codes and standards the following abbreviations are
used to facilitate the write-up. Also the sequence of codes/standards for which the sub-criteria are
compared has been fixed as below. However, the code/standard giving the best description for a
sub-criteria has been described first.
IAEA - IAEA Code of Practice No. 50-C-QA. "Quality Assurance for Safety
in Nuclear Power Plants." (International)
ISO - International Standard ISO/DIS 6 2 1 5 . "Nuclear Power Plants Quality
Assurance." (International)
ASME-ANSI - ASME N45.2. "Quality Assurance Programme Requirements for
Nuclear Facilities." (USA)
CFR* - 10CFR50 App. B. "Quality Assurance Criteria for Nuclear Power
Plants and Reprocessing Plants." (USA)
61 Section E
Nil - NII/R/38/78. " A Guide to the Quality Assurance Programme for
Nuclear Power Plants." (UK)
RDI RUI 1-2 2. "Quality Assurance Programmo Requit erneut s . " (USA)
KTA - K T A - 1 4 0 1 . "Allgemeine Anforderungen an die Qualitats-Sicherung."

(German)
CSA - CSA Z 2 9 9 . 1 . "Quality Assurance Programme Requirements."
(Canada)
CNEN - CNEN Technical Guide No. 8. (Italian)
Criterion 1 : Introduction
8. Sub-criteria: 1. Principles and Objectives

2. Scope
3. Applicability
4. Responsibility
Sub-Criterion 1 : Principles and Objectives

IAEA para 1.1 best description
"This Code of Practice provides the principles and objectives to be adopted as regards safety
when establishing both a satisfactory overall quality assurance programme for a nuclear power
plant and also separate quality assurance programmes for each of the constituent areas of
activity (e.g. design, manufacturing, construction, commissioning, operation). The principles
to be followed in each case, for each type of programme, are the same. The establishment
and implementation of a quality assurance programme for a nuclear power plant are essen-
tial. However, it shall always be recognised that the basic responsibility for achieving quality
in performing a particular task (e.g. in design, in manufacturing, in commissioning, in opera-
tion) rests with those assigned the task and not with those seeking to ensure by means of
verification that it has been achieved.
Quality assurance is an essential aspect of " g o o d management". Good management con-
tributes to the achievement of quality through thorough analysis of the tasks to be perform
ed, identification of the skills required, the selection and training of appropriate personnel,
the use of appropriate equipment, the creation of a satisfactory environment in which activi-
ty can be performed and as already noted, a recognition of the responsibility of the individual
who is to perform the task. Briefly stated then a quality assurance programme shall provide
for a disciplined approach to all activities affecting quality including, where appropriate, verifica-
tion that each task has been satisfactorily performed and that necessary corrective actions
have been implemented. It shall also provide production of documentary evidence to
demonstrate that the required quality has been achieved. The manner in which the principles
described in this document are implemented, both at the overall plant level and at the consti-
tuent activity levels, will vary from country to country and organisation to organisation. These
variations will be due to such consideration as regulatory requirements, the general organisa-
tion of industry, and the degree of sophistication and experience of the technical organisa-
tions involved in providing and operating the nuclear power plant. In any event, the basic
intent of the principles shall be kept in mind at all times and the detailed implementational
procedures shall be arranged accordingly."
ISO - Comparable description

ANSI No comparable description
CFR - No description
Nil - No description
62 Section E
RDT - No description
KTA - No description
CSA - No description
CNEN - No comparable description
Sub-Criterion 2: Scope
ANSI - para 1.1 best description
(a) " T h i s standard provides general requirements and guidance for the establishment and
execution of Quality Assurance Programmes for the design, construction and operation
of structures, systems, and components of the following nuclear facilities: nuclear power
plants, fuel processing plants, plutonium processing plants, plutonium fuel fabrication
plants, and spent fuel storage facilities.
(b) The requirements and guidance pertain to activities including designing, procuring,
fabricating, handling, shipping, storing, cleaning, erecting, installing, inspecting, testing,
operating, maintaining, repairing, refuelling and modifying, which affect the quality of
structures, systems and components."
IAEA - Comparable description for part (b) only.
ISO - See IAEA. Comparable description.
CFR - See ANSI. Comparable description but too much detail on individual activities
comprising the total scope (design, procuring, manufacturing etc.).
KTA - Somewhat comparable description for part (a) only.
CSA - No comparable description.
CNEN - Somewhat comparable description for part (a) only but not as detailed.
Sub-Criterion 3: Applicability
ANSI - para 1.2 - best description
(a) " T h i s standard is intended to apply to the facility owner, major contractors, such as
the nuclear steam supply system designer or suppliers, process equipment designer or
suppliers, the architect-engineer or facility designer, the constructor, and other organisa-
tions participating in activities affecting quality.
(b) The extent to which the individual sections and elements of this standard are applied
will depend upon factors such as the nature and scope of activities to be performed
and the required quality of items and services."
IAEA - Comparable description for part (a) only.
ISO - Comparable description for part (b) only.
CFR No comparable description.
Nil - No comparable description.
RDT - No comparable description.
KTA - Somewhat comparable description for part (a) only.
CSA - No comparable description.
CNEN - No comparable description.
Sub-Criterion 4: Responsibility
(a) " I t is the responsibility of the facility owner to provide for the establishment and execu-
tion of a quality assurance programme for the facility consistent w i t h the provisions of
this standard.
63 Section E
(b) The facility owner or his designated representative and other organisations invoking this
standard are responsible for identifying the structures, systems and components for
specifying the extent to which the provision of this standard apply.
(c) The facility owner or his designated representative and other organisations are also
responsible for assuring that the necessary arid appropriate requirements of this stan-
dard are invoked.
(d) The facility owner may delegate to other organisations the work of establishing and ex-
ecuting the quality assurance programme, or any part thereof, but shall retain respon-
sibility for overall programme effectiveness.
(e) In no way shall the programme operate to diminish the responsibility of any contractor
for the quality of items or services furnished or for execution of the contractor's
designated portion of the quality assurance programme."
IAEA - Comparable description for parts (d) and (e) only.
ISO - Comparable description for parts (c), (d) and (e) only.
CFR - No comparable description.
Nil - Comparable description for parts (a), (c) and (d) only.
RDT - Comparable description for parts (a) and (d) only.
KTA - Comparable description for parts (a) and (d) only.
CSA - Comparable description for parts (a) only.
CNEN - Comparable description for parts (c) and (d) only.
Criterion 2 : Quality Assurance Programmes
9. Sub-criteria: 1 . Timely establishment of QA Programme

2. Management Commitment to the QA Programme Implementation
3. Compliance to recognised Codes/Standards/Practices
4. Programme Structure
5. Control of Activities affecting Quality
6. Control of Conditions affecting Quality
7. Indoctrination and Training
8. Management Review
9. Language
10. Procedures, Instructions and Drawings
Sub-Criterion 1 : Timely Establishment of QA Programme

ISO - para 5.1.1.1 - best description
" A QA programme which complies with the applicable clauses and elements of this standard
shall be established at the earliest practical time consistent with the schedule for accomplishing
the activities for the nuclear power plant."
IAEA - Does not ask for the timely establishment of the QA programme although this
code does ask for the timely implementation of the programme.
ANSI - Same description
CFR - Comparable description
RDT - This standard states that a QA programme should be developed and implemented
" i n consonance with other project activities" which is ill defined.
64 Section E
KTA No description
CNEN - Comparable description
Sub-Criterion 2: Management Commitment to the QA Programme Implementation
IAEA - para 2.1 best description
"Management in the overall and constituent areas of activity shall provide for effective im-
plementation of the QA programmes consistent with the time schedule for accomplishing
project activities, including the procurement of materials for long delivery i t e m s . "
ISO - No comparable description
ANSI - No comparable description
CFR - No comparable description
RDT - No comparable description
Sub-Criterion 3: Compliance to Recognised Codes/Standards/Practices
IAEA - para 2.1 - best description
" T h e programme shall contain provisions to assure identification of and compliance w i t h re-
quirements of appropriate recognised engineering codes, standards, specifications and
practices."
ISO - Similar description; however, no clear statement on identification of applicable

codes, standards etc.
Nil No comparable description
RDT - Comparable description of ISO
KTA - No comparable description
CSA - Comparable description
Sub-Criterion 4: Programme Structure
IAEA - best programme structure
Thirteen programme criteria (including introduction).
From the comparison evaluation we consider that the IAEA programme structure with its thir-
teen criteria does cover the substance given in the eight to twenty t w o criteria of the other
codes/standards while the sequencing of the criteria follows a more logical approach.
The comparison of the different programme structures are described in detail in Section B,
Table 3.
65 Section E
Sub-Criterion 5: Control of Activities affecting Quality
ANSI - para 2 best description
" T h e programme shall provide assurance that activities affecting quality are documented
within a document control system and accomplished in accordance with written instructions,
procedures or drawings."
IAEA Calls for "all programmes shall provide control and verification over activities
affecting quality".
ISO - No comparable description
CFR - Call for " T h e Quality Assurance Programme shall provide control over activities
affecting quality". No verification is called for.
Nil - Comparable description, but not as well defined
RDT - Comparable description
CSA - Comparable description, but not as well defined
Sub-Criterion 6: Control of Conditions affecting Quality
" T h e programme shall provide for the accomplishment of activities affecting quality under
suitable controlled conditions. Controlled conditions inlcude the use of appropriate equipment,
suitable environmental conditions for accomplishing the activity, and assurance that pre-
requisites for the given activity have been satisfied.
IAEA - Comparable description but not as complete
CFR - Same description
Sub-Criterion 7: Indoctrination and Training
RDT - best description
(a) "Training and indoctrination"

As part of ther quality assurance programme, the contractor shall determine the extent
to which formal training and indoctrination programmes are needed and shall conduct
these programmes accordingly.
These programmes shall be conducted for project managers, quality assurance engineers,
designers, manufacturing personnel, construction personnel; and others whose work
may have an effect upon, or who are responsible for verifying quality. Training and in-
doctrination programmes shall involve familiarisation of personnel w i t h technical objects
of the project, codes and standards to be used, and engineering and quality assurance
practices to be employed, with guidance regarding limitations and capabilities.
66 Section E
(b) Qualifications
Personnel, procedures and equipment shall be qualified in accordance w i t h specified re-
quirements. For special processes not covered by existing codes or standards, or where
item quality requirements exceed the requirements of established codes and standards,
or equipment for processes such as welding, heat treating, cleaning, non-destructive
examination, coating and concrete platement shall be defined. Only qualified personnel
shall be authorised to accept items for services by required inspection and tests. This
applies also to manufacturing or other personnel w h o perform inspections and tests that
are not independently verified by qualified personnel.
Qualification requirements shall be stated in writing, and shall include periodic requalifica
tion to assure continued proficiency and understanding of technical requirements.
Qualification of personnel shall be based on demonstration of proficiency, skill, or
knowledge. If it is found through subsequent examination or inspection that work has
been improperly performed or accepted, management action shall be initiated to deter-
mine the cause of deficient work practices and the corrective action required to prevent
recurrence. When appropriate, corrective action shall include revoking the authority of
the individual responsible for performing or accepting work and removing the individual
from the work activity until he is requalified.
The contractor shall maintain records of personnel qualification status, including train-
ing and experience, results of examinations or tests to demonstrate proficiency or skill,
and evidence of familiarity w i t h applicable codes, standards, specifications and
procedures."
IAEA - Has a limited statement, " A l l programmes shall provide for training of personnel
performing activities affecting quality". Training however is more detailed in Sub-
Criterion 7 "Staffing and Training" of Criterion 3 "Organisation".
ISO - "The program shall provide for indoctrination and training and/or qualifications of
personnel performing activities affecting quality as necessary to ensure that suitable
proficiency is achieved and maintained.
ANSI - See ISO, same description
CFR - See ISO, same description
Nil - See ISO, similar description but not well defined.
KTA - Short description on indoctrination and training only.
CNEN - See ISO. Comparable description; however, does not call for qualification of
personnel.
Sub-Criterion 8: Management Review

"The program shall provide for the regular review by management of organisations participating
in the programmes of the status, adequacy and effectiveness of that part of the Q A programme
for which they have designated responsibility."
Although the descriptions given IAEA, ANSI and CFR are very much alike, the
inclusion of the requirement to evaluate the effectiveness in addition to status
and adequacy gives preference to the description in ISO.
- No description
- Comparable description
- No comparable description
- No description
67 Section E
Sub-Criterion 9: Language
IAEA para 2.1 - best description
" A l l programmes shall state the languages used for documentation. Measures shall be
established to ensure that persons performing the QA function have adequate knowledge
of the langauge in which the documentation is written. Translations of the documentation
shall be reviewed by competent persons. Verification of conformance to the original is
necessary."
ISO Same description
All other codes and standards have no descriptions on this Sub Criterion.
Sub-Criterion 10: Procedures, Instructions and Drawings

ANSI - para 6 - best description
"(a) Activities affecting quality shall be prescribed by documented instructions, procedures,
or drawings of a type appropriate to the circumstances and shall be accomplished in
accordance with these instructions, procedures, or drawings. Instructions, procedures,
or drawings shall include appropriate quantitative or qualitative criteria for determining
that important activities have been satisfactorily accomplished.
(b) The activity may be prescribed in job specifications, work instructions, shop construc-
tion drawings, job tickets, planning sheets, operating or procedure manuals, test pro-
cedures, or any other type of written form, provided that the activity is adequately
described. Quantitative criteria, such as dimensions, tolerances and operating limits, and
qualitative criteria, such as comparative workmanship samples, shall be specified, as
appropriate for determining satisfactory work performance and quality compliance."
IAEA - Same description for part (a) only. Gives an additional paragraph on the development
and documentation of the QA programme implementation procedures.
CFR - Same description for part (a) only
Nil - No comparable description
RDT - Comparable description for part (a) only
KTA - Somewhat comparable description for part (a) only
CSA - No comparable description
CNEN - Comparable description for part (a) only.
Criterion 3: Organisation
10. Sub-criteria: 1. Documented Organisational Structure with Clearly Defined Responsibilities,

Levels of Authority, Lines of Communications
2. QA as Interdisciplinary Function
3. Organisational Freedom, Authority and Duties of the QA Function
4. QA Reporting Level
5. Direct Access to Management
6. Organisational Interfaces
7. Staffing and Training
Sub-Criterion 1 : Documented Organisational Structure with Clearly Defined Responsibilities,

Levels of Authority, Lines of Communications
" A documented organisational structure, with clearly defined functional responsibilities, levels
of authority, and lines of internal and external communication for management, direction and
execution of the QA Programme shall be established."
68 Section E
NNI - Comparable description but not as well defined
KTA - Comparable description
Sub-Criterion 2: QA as Interdisciplinary Function

ANSI para 3 - best description
"The organisational structure and the functional responsibility assignments shall be such that:
(a) Attainment of quality objectives is accomplished by those who have been assigned
responsibility for performing work: e.g. the designer, the welder, or the nuclear facility
operator. This may include interim examinations, checks, and inspections of the work
by the individual performing the work.
(b) Verification of conformance to established quality requirements is accomplished by those
w h o do not have direct responsibility for performing the work: e.g. the design reviewer,
the checker, the inspector, or the tester.
In structuring the organisation and assigning responsibility, quality assurance should be
recognised as an interdisciplinary function involving many organisational components and
therefore, should not' be regarded as the sole domain of a single quality assurance group.
For example, it may be more appropriate for design engineers to perform design reviews other
than quality assurance engineers because of the special competence required to perform these
reviews.
Quality assurance encompasses many functions and activities and extends to various levels
in participating organisations, from the top executive to all workers whose activities may in-
fluence quality."
IAEA - Comparable description but not as detailed
ISO - See IAEA. Comparable description
NNI - Comparable description but not as detailed
KTA - Comparable description for part (b) only
CSA No description
CNEN - Comparable description but not as specific
Sub-Criterion 3: Organisational Freedom, Authority and Duties of the QA Function

IAEA - para 3 . 1 - best description
" T h e Authority and duties of persons and organisations responsible for quality assurance per-
formance and verification shall be deliniated in writing.
The persons and organisation performing the quality assurance functions of
(a) ensuring that an appropriate quality assurance programme is established and effective-
ly executed, and
(b) verifying that activities have been correctly performed
69 Section E
shall have sufficient authority mcl oiganisatioual lieedoin to iilenlilv quality problems; to in
itiate, recommend or piovide solutions; and where necoss.iiy, to initiate actions to control
further processing, delivery or installation of an item which is non conforming, deficient or
unsatisfactory, until proper disposition has boen achieved.
ISO - Same description
ANSI - Comparable description. Does not include the QA management function of estab
lishment, effective execution and verification of an appropriate QA program.
CFR - Comparable description. Does not include the description " T o initiate actions to
control further processing, delivery, e t c . "
Nil - Comparable description but not as detailed
KTA - Comparable description but very limited
CNEN - Comparable description, but not as detailed.
Sub-Criterion 4 : QA Reporting Level

"Persons and organisations performing quality assurance functions shall report to a manage-
ment of high enough level to ensure that this required authority and organisational freedom,
including sufficient independence from cost and schedule considerations, are provided.
Because of the many variables involved, such as the number of personnel, the type of activity
being performed, and the location or the locations where activities are being performed, the
organisational structure for executing the quality assurance programme may take various
forms, provided that the persons and organisations assigned the quality assurance functions
have this required authority and organisational freedom."
ANSI - Comparable description
Sub-Criterion 5: Direct Access to Management

"Irrespective of the organisational structure, the individual or individuals assigned the respon
sibility for ensuring effective execution of any portion of the quality assurance programme
at any location where activities affecting quality are being performed shall have direct access
to such high levels of management as may be necessary to achieve effective implementation
of the quality assurance programme."

Nil - Comparable description but not as specific
70 Section E
Sub-Criterion 6: Organisational Interfaces

"(a) Where multiple organisational arrangements exist, the responsibility of each organisa-
tion shall be clearly established, and
(b) interfaces and co-ordination among organisations ensured by appropriate measures.
(c) Provisions shall be made for communication among organisations and organisational
groups participating inactivities affecting quality. The communication of essential infor-
mation shall be by means of appropriate documentation. The type of documents shall
be identified and a distribution list should be p r o v i d e d . "
ANSI - Comparable description but not detailed
Nil - Comparable description for part (a) only
KTA - Comparable description for part (a) and (b) only
CNEN - Comparable description for part (a) only
Sub-Criterion 7: Staffing and Training

"Plans shall be developed for selecting staff and training personnel to perform activities
affecting quality. Plans shall reflect the schedule of activity so as to allow adequate time for
assigning or selecting, and training required personnel.
All personnel responsible for performing activities affecting quality shall be qualified on the
basis of general education, experience and proficiency required for performing the specific
assigned tasks. Training programmes and procedures shall be established to ensure that
suitable proficiency is achieved and maintained. As appropriate, the accomplishment and
maintenance of proficiency shall be marked by the issue of a written statement such as a
certificate.
ISO - Comparable description, but does not include timely planning for selection, training
and certification of personnel.
ANSI - Short description of indoctrination and training (see Sub-Criterion 7, of Criterion 2
" Q A Programmes")
CFR - See ANSI. Same description
Nil - Short description on training only
RDT - Has a very detailed section on training, indoctrination and qualification but does
not include the timely planning for selecting and training of personnel. (See Sub-
Criterion 7 of Criterion 2 " Q A Programmes".)
KTA - Short description on personnel qualifications only
CSA - Short description on indoctrination and training only
CNEN - Short description on training only.
71 Section E
Criterion 4 : Document Control
11. Sub-criteria: 1. Control Generation of Documents

2. Identify Responsibilities
3. Make Background Data Available to Reviewers
4. Establish Distribution Systems
5. Assure Use of Correct Documents
6. Document Procedures for Change Control
7. Use Originators or Designee for Approving Changes
8. Timely Preclude Use of Out-Dated Documents
Sub-Criterion 1 : Control Generation of Documents

"The preparation, review, approval and issue of documents essential to the performing and
verification of the work such as instructions, procedures and drawings shall be subject to
control."
ISO .- Same description
Nil - Comparable description but limited
RDT - Comparable description but emphasis on design documentation
CSA - Description limited to design documents
CNEN - Comparable description but limited.
Sub-Criterion 2 : Identify Responsibilities

"The control measures shall include the identification of all individuals or organisations respon-
sible for preparing, reviewing, approving and issuing documents related to activities affec-
ting quality."
ANSI - Similar description
CFR - No specific description
Nil - No specific description
RDT - Comparable description but limited
KTA - No specific description
CSA - No specific description
CNEN - Comparable description but limited
Sub-Criterion 3: Make Background Data available to Reviewers
" T h e reviewing organisations shall have access to pertinent background information upon
which to base its approval and shall have adequate understanding of the requirements and
intent of the original document."
72 Section E
IAEA - Good description
ISO Same description as IAEA

Nil No specific description
RDT - No specific description
Sub-Criterion 4: Establish Distribution Systems

" T h e document release and distribution system shall be established using up-to-date distribu-
tion l i s t s . "
ANSI ' - Similar description
RDT - No specific description
CNEN - No specific description
Sub-Criterion 5: Assure Use of Correct Documents

"Measures shall be provided for assuring that those participating in an activity are aware of
and use appropriate and correct documents for performing the a c t i v i t y . "
CFR - Similar description
CSA - Comparable description but limited

Sub-Criterion 6: Document Procedures for Change Control

"Change to documents shall be subject to review and approval in accordance with documented
procedure."
ANSI - Does not specifically call for procedure for review/approval
73 Section E
Cl M finnin in ,

KTA - Somewhat comparable description
CSA - Calls for obsolete documents to be promptly removed
Criterion 5: Design Control
12. Sub-criteria 1. Assure Requirements Correctly Translated

2. Assure Quality Standards Specified
3. Establish Selection and Review Process
4 . Specify Applicability
5. Document Design Process
6. Identify Interfaces
7. Define Responsibilities
8. Interface Communications
9. Provide for Design Verification
10. Independent Verifiers
11. Identify Verification Methods
12. Document Change Control
13. Control Changes
14. Transmit Change Information
Sub-Criterion 1 : Assure Requirements Correctly Translated

"Control measures shall be established and documented to assure that applicable specified
design requirements such as regulatory requirements, design bases, codes and standards are
correctly translated into specifications, drawing procedures or instructions."
ISO - See IAEA, same description
ANSI - See IAEA, same description
CFR - See IAEA, same description
CSA - Similar description
Sub-Criterion 2: Assure Quality Standards Specified

"They shall include provisions to assure that applicable quality standards are specified and
stated in design documents."
ISO - Comparable to IAEA, but allows standards to be included or referenced
74 Section E
Nil - Comparable descriptions, but limited
KTA - Somewhat comparable description
Sub-Criterion 3: Establish Selection and Review Process

"Measures shall also be established for the selection and review for suitability of application
of materials, parts, equipment and processes that are essential to the function of the struc-
ture system or component."
ANSI - See IAEA, same description
CFR - Similar description, but limited to safety related functions
CNEN - See IAEA, same description
Sub-Criterion 4: Specify Applicability

"Design control measures shall be applied to items such as the following, radiation protec-
tion, physics, stress, thermal, hydraulic, seismic and accident analysis, compatability of
materials, accessibility for in-service inspection, maintenance and repair and delineation of
acceptance criteria for inspection and t e s t s . "
ISO - Similar description
Sub-Criterion 5: Document Design Process

"Design activities shall be documented to permit adequate evaluation by technical personnel
other than those performing the original design."
ANSI - No comparable description
75 Section E
Sub-Criterion 6: Identify Interfaces

"External and internal interfaces between organisations and organisational units performing
the designs shall be identified in w r i t i n g . "
ISO - Comparable description but does not call for identification in writing
ANSI - See ISO, similar description
CFR - See ISO, similar description
Nil - Comparable description
RDT Comparable description but limited
Sub-Criterion 7: Define Responsibilities

"Responsibility for each organisation and organisational unit shall be defined in sufficient detail
to cover the preparation, review, approval, release, distribution and revision of documents
involving interfaces."
Sub-Criterion 8: Interface Communications

"Methods shall be established for communicating design information including changes across
the design interfaces. The information communication shall be documented and controlled.
CFR - See ISO, same description
76 Section E
Sub-Criterion 9: Provide for Design Verification

"Design control measures shall provide for verifying the adequacy of designs such as by the
performance of design reviews, by the use of alternative calculational methods, or by the
performance of a suitable testing programme."
RDT - Heavy emphasis on design review
CSA - Calls for "all aspects of the design and analysis to be reviewed"
Sub-Criterion 10: Independent Verifiers

"Design verification shall be performed and documented by persons other than those who
performed the original design but may be from the same organisation."
IAEA - Similar description, but does not refer to independent verifiers as being allowed
to come from same organisation as original designers, and for verification to be -
documented.
ANSI - Similar description, but does not specifically call for verification to be documented
CFR - See ANSI, same description
Nil - Similar description
CSA - Comparable description but less specific
Sub-Criterion 11 : Identify Verification Methods

"Verifying or checking should consist of, as a minimum, reviewing the design, spot-checking
the calculations or analysis, and assessing the results against the original design bases and
functional requirements. The responsible design organisation shall identify the particular design
verification methods utilised.
There are many ways of performing design review, and various depths of review may be
required depending upon the importance and complexity of the design being reviewed, the
degree of standardisation, the state-of-the-art, and the similarity with previously proven
designs. Regardless of the degree of standardisation or similarity to previously proven designs,
the applicability of standardised or previously proven designs w i t h respect to meeting perti-
nent design requirements shall be verified for each application. The methods for design review
77 Section E
can range from a formalised multi-organisation review to an informal single person review.
The depth of review can range from a detailed check of the complete design to a limited check
of such things as the design approach and the results obtained in the original degree.
In those cases where the adequacy of a design is to be verified by tests, the testing shall
be identified.
Testing shall demonstrate adequacy of performance under the most adverse design condi-
tions. Operating modes and environmental conditions in which the item must perform satisfac
torily shall be considered in determining the most adverse conditions. If testing indicates that
modifications to the item are necessary to obtain acceptable performance, the item shall be
modified and retested as necessary to assure satisfactory performance."
IAEA - Good description, but less guidance than ANSI on design review
ISO - See IAEA, similar description
CFR - Similar to ISO
RDT - Emphasis on design review
Sub-Criterion 12: Document Change Control

"Documented procedures shall be provided for effecting design changes including field
changes. The technical impact of changes shall be carefully considered and required actions
documented."
Sub-Criterion 13: Control Changes

"Design changes, including field changes, shall be governed by design control measures com
mensrate with those applied to the original design. It is the intent of this standard that design
changes be reviewed and approved by the organisations that performed the original design,
review, and approval. In the event that it is not practical for the original organisations to per-
form the required review or approval, other responsible design organisations may be
designated, provided the designated organisations have access to pertinent background in-
formation, have demonstrated competence in the specific design area of interest, and have
adequate understanding of the requirements and intent of the original design."
IAEA - Comparable description

78 Section E
CFR - Comparable description but limited
Sub-Criterion 14: Transmit Change Information

"Information concerning the changes shall be transmitted to all affected persons and
organisations."
ISO - No specific description
ANSI - No specific description
CFR - No specific description
CNEN - No specific description
Criterion 6. Procurement Control '

13. Sub-criteria 1 . Assure all requirements included in Procurement Documents
2. Specify Requirements for Assuring Quality
3. Establish Supplier Evaluation Requirements
4 . Assure Conformance to Procurement Documents
5. Provide Documentation on Conformance prior to Use
Sub-Criterion 1: Assure all requirements included in Procurement Details

"Measures shall be established and documented to assure that applicable regulatory re-
quirements, design bases, and other requirements which are necessary to assure adequate
quality are included or referenced in the documents for procurement of items and services.
Changes in procurement documents shall be subject to the same degree of control as was
utilised in the preparation of the original document. To the extent necessary, procurement
documents shall require contractors to provide a Quality Assurance programme consistent
with the pertinent requirements of this standard."

ISO - See IAEA,same description
CFR Similar description
CSA - Description refers to other 2.299 series standards
79 Section E
Sub-Criterion 2: Specify Requirements for Assuring Quality
ANSI - para 5(1 )(2)(3)(4)(5) - best description
"Procurement documents shall include provisions for the following, as applicable:

(a) Supplier Quality Assurance Programme. Identification of quality assurance requirements
and the elements of the programme applicable to the items or services procured. This
may be accomplished in various ways, such as the following:
(i) invoking this standard by reference, or
(ii) invoking applicable sections or elements of this standard, or
(iii) invoking other specific requirements which meet the intent of this standard.
(b) Basic Technical Requirements. Drawings, specifications, codes and industrial standards
with applicable revision data, test and inspection requirements, such as for designing,
fabricating, cleaning, erecting, packaging, handling, shipping and if applicable, extended
storage in the field and for test equipment.
(c) Source Inspection and Audit. Provisions for access to the plant facilities and records
for source inspection and audit when the need for such inspection or audit has been
determined.
(d) Documentation Requirements. Records to be prepared, maintained, submitted, or made
available for review such as drawings, specifications, procedures, procurement
documents, inspection and test records, personnel and procedure qualifications, and
material, chemical and physical test results. Instruction on record retention and disposi-
tion shall be provided.
(e) Lower Tier Procurements. Provisions for extending applicable requirements for procure-
ment documents to lower tier sub-contractors and suppliers, including purchaser's access
to facilities and records."
IAEA - Comparable description, but not structured as well as ANSI
RDT Comparable description but limited
CSA - Good description on passing through requirements to sub-contractors
Sub-Criterion 3: Establish Supplier Evaluation Requirements

" A basic consideration in the selection of suppliers shall be the supplier's evaluated capability
to provide items or services in accordance with the requirements of the procurement
documents.
Supplier evaluation includes, as appropriate:
(a) The use of historical quality performance data of similar procurement actions.
(b) The use of supplier's current quality assurance records supported by documented
quantitative or qualitative information than can be objectively evaluated.
(c) Source evaluation of supplier's technical capability and a quality system.
(d) Evaluation by selective product samples."
80 Section E
ANSI Comparable description
CFR See ANSI, sumu description
Sub-Criterion 4: Assure Conformance to Procurement Requirements

"Control of Purchased Items and Services. Purchased items and services shall be subject
to control to assure the conformance to procurement documents. The control consists of
measures such as objective evidence of quality furnished by the contractors, inspection and
audit at the source, and examination of the product upon delivery.
If necessary, samples of material as specified shall be retained for a specific time at an agreed
location and controlled to provide means for further examination."
ISO - Comparable description, but does not include need for sample retention
ANSI - See ISO, similar description
CFR - Similar to ANSI
Sub-Criterion 5: Provide Documentation on Conformance prior to use

"Where required by code, regulation, or contract requirements, documentary evidence that
items conform to procurement requirements shall be available at the nuclear facility site prior
to installation or use of such items. This documentary evidence shall be retained at the nuclear
facility site and shall be sufficient to identify the specific requirements such as codes, stan-
dards, and specifications met by the purchased item. Where not precluded by other re-
quirements, such documentary evidence may take the form of written certifications of con-
formance which identify the requirements met by the items, provided means are available
to verify the validity of such certification."
RDT - Comparable description but no specific requirement on "prior to u s e "
81 Section E
Criterion 7: Material Control
14. Sub-criteria: 1. Establish Measures for Identification and Control

2. Establish Measures to Control Handling, Storage and Shipping
Sub-Criterion 1 : Establish Measures for Identification and Control

"Measures shall be established and documented for the identification and control of materials,
parts,, and components including partially fabricated sub-assemblies. These measures shall
provide for assuring that only correct and accepted items are used and installed, and relating
an item of production (batch, lot, component, part) at any stage, from initial receipt through
fabrication, installation, repair or modification, to an applicable drawing, specification, or other
pertinent technical document. Physical identification shall be used to the maximum extent
possible. Where physical separation, procedural control or other appropriate means shall be
employed. Identification may be either on the item or on records traceable to the item, as
appropriate.
Where identification marking is employed, the marking shall be clear, unambiguous, and in-
delible, and shall be applied in such a manner as not to affect the function of the item. Mark-
ings shall be transferred to each part of an item when sub-divided and shall not be obliterated
or hidden by surface treatment or coatings unless other means of identification are substituted.
When codes, standards, or specifications require traceability of materials, parts, or components
to specific inspection or test records, the programme shall be designed to provide such
traceability."
KTA - Comparable description but very limited
Sub-Criterion 2: Establish Measures to Control Handling, Storage and Shipping

"Measures shall be established and documented to control handling, storage, and shipping,
including cleaning, packaging, and preservation of material and equipment in accordance w i t h
established instructions, procedures, or drawings to prevent damage, deterioration, and loss.
When necessary for particular items, special coverings, special equipment, and special pro-
tective environments such as inert gas atmosphere, specific moisture content levels, and their
existence verified.
For critical, sensitive, perishable, or high-value articles specific written procedures for handl-
ing, storage, packaging, shipping and preservation should be used. Special handling tools and
equipment should be provided and controlled as necessary to ensure safe and adequate
handling.
Special handling tools and equipment shall be inspected and tested, in accordance w i t h writ
ten procedures and at specified times, to verify that the tools and equipment are adequately
maintained.
Special attention shall be given to providing adequate instructions for marking and labelling
for packaging, shipment and stores of items. Marking shall be adequate to identify, maintain,
82 Section E
and preserve the shipment, including indication of the presence of special environments or
the need for special c o n t r o l . "
IAEA Comparable description but limited
Criterion 8 : Process Control
15. Sub-criteria: 1. Processes to be controlled in accordance with specified requirements

2. Procedures to be accomplished by qualified personnel, procedures and
equipment
3. Definition of necessary qualifications of personnel, procedures and equip-
ment for non-standard processes
Sub-Criterion 1: Processes to be controlled in accordance with specified requirements

"Measures shall be established and documented to assure that special processes, including
welding, heat-treating, cleaning, and non-destructive examination, are accomplished under
controlled conditions in accordance w i t h applicable codes, standards, specifications, criteria
and other special requirements, using qualified personnel and procedures."

ISO - Comparable description but does not call for processes to be accomplished in
accordance with applicable codes etc.
Sub-Criterion 2: Processes to be accomplished by qualified personnel, procedures and

equipment
IAEA - para 8 - best description
" W h e r e required by applicable codes, standards, specifications, criteria or other special re-
quirements, measures shall be established and documented to ensure that these processes
are accomplished by qualified personnel, using qualified procedures and equipment."
CFR - Similar description but does not call for equipment to be qualified
83 Section E
CSA Comparable description
Sub-Criterion 3: Definition of necessary qualifications of personnel, procedures and equipment

for non-standard processes
"For processes not covered by available standards, or where the quality requirements of the
existing standards are exceeded, the necessary qualification of personnel, procedures or equip
ment shall be defined."
ANSI Same description
CNEN - Same description
Criterion 9: Inspection and Test Control
16. Sub-criteria
Inspection
1. Establishment of Inspection Programme

2. Independent Inspection
3. Inspection of each Work Operation
4. Indirect Control
5. Hold Points
6. Inservice Inspection
Testing
7. Establishment of Testing Programme

8. Written Test Procedures and Evaluation of Documented Test Restults
Measuring and Test Equipment
9. Control of Measuring and Test Equipment

10. Calibration Intervals, Calibration Standards
1 1 . Equipment out of Calibration
12. Handling of Calibrated Equipment
13. Records and Marking of Calibration Status
Test, Inspection and Operating Status
14. Identification of Inspection and Test Status

1 5. Status Indicators
16. Operating Status Indication
84 Section E
Sub-Criterion 1 : Establishment of Inspection Programme
" A programme for inspection of activities affecting quality shall be established and executed
by or for the organisation performing the activity to verify conformance to the documented
instructions, procedures and drawings for accomplishing the a c t i v i t y . "
IAEA - Same description
RDT - Comparable description but not as well defined
Sub-Criterion 2: Independent Inspection

"Inspection activities to verify the quality of work shall be performed by appropriately trained
persons other than those who performed the activity being inspected. Such persons shall
not report directly to the immediate supervisors who are responsible for the work being
inspected."
IAEA - Comparable description but calls for "individuals" instead of "appropriately trained
persons" and does not call for " s u c h persons e t c . "
Sub-Criterion 3: Inspection of each work Operation

ANSI para 11 - best description
"(a) Examinations, measurements, or tests of items processed shall be performed for each
work operation where necessary to assure quality.
(b) Where a sample is used to verify acceptability of a group of items, the sampling pro-
cedure shall be based on recognised standard practices and shall provide adequate
justification for the sample size and selection process."
IAEA - Same description for part (a) only
Nil - Same description for part (a) only
85 Section E
Sub-Criterion 4: Indirect Control

" I f inspection of processed items is impossible or disadvantageous, indirect control by monitor-
ing of processing methods, equipment and personnel shall be provided. Both inspection and
process monitoring shall be provided when control is inadequate without b o t h . "
IAEA - Same description
Nil - Same description
Sub-Criterion 5: Hold Points

"(a) If mandatory inspection hold points, which require witnessing or inspection by the pur-
chaser's designated representative and beyond which work shall not proceed without
the consent of the purchaser's designated representative, are required, the specific hold
points shall be indicated in appropriate documents.
(b) Such consent shall be documented prior to the continuaiton of work beyond the
designated hold point."
CFR - Same description for part (a) only
CSA - Comparable description for part (a) only
Sub-Criterion 6: Inservice Inspection

"(a) A programme for required in-service inspection of completed systems, structures and
components shall be planned and executed, and
(b) The results shall be evaluated against base-line d a t a . "
ISO - Same description for part (a) only
86 Section E
CNEN - No description
Sub-Criterion 7: Establishment of Testing Programme

" A test programme shall be established to ensure the identification, performance and
documentation of all testing required to demonstrate that the structures, systems and com
ponents will perform satisfactorily in service. The test programme shall cover all required tests,
and include, as appropriate, procedure and equipment qualification tests, prototype qualifica
tion tests, proof tests before installation, pre-operational and start-up and operational t e s t s . "

Sub-Criterion 8: Written Test Procedures and Evaluation of Documented Test Results


"Testing shall be performed in accordance w i t h test procedures which incorporate the re
quirements and acceptance limits specified in design documents and include provisions for
assuring that pre-requisites for a given test have been met and that the test is performed
under suitable environmental conditions by appropriately trained personnel using properly
calibrated instrumentation.
Test results shall be documented and evaluated to assure that test requirements have been
satisfied."
Sub-Criterion 9: Control of Measuring and Test Equipment

"Measures shall be established and documented to assure that tools, gauges, instruments,
and other inspection, measuring and testing equipment and devices used in activities affec
ting quality are of the proper range, type, and accuracy to verify conformance to established
requirements."
87 Section E
IAEA Same description

CFR - Comparable description but not as specific
CNEN Same description
Sub-Criterion 10: Calibration Intervals, Calibration Standards

"(a) To assure accuracy, inspection, measuring and test equipment shall be controlled,
calibrated, adjusted and maintained at prescribed intervals or prior to use against cer-
tified equipment having known valid relationships to nationally recognised standards.
If no national standards exist, the basis for calibration shall be documented.
(b) This requirement is not intended to imply a need for special calibration and control
measures or rulers, tape measures, levels and such other devices, if normal commercial
practices provide adequate accuracy."
IAEA - Comparable description but does not call for calibration against standards
CFR - No comparable description, however calls for control at specified intervals
RDT - Reference to RDT-F3-2
Sub-Criterion 11 : Equipment out of Calibration

"(a) When inspection, measuring and test equipment are found to be out of calibration, an
evaluation shall be made and documented of the validity of previous inspection or test
results and of the acceptability of items previously inspected or tested.
(b) If any inspection, measuring, or test equipment is consistently found to be out of calibra-
tion, it shall be repaired or replaced."
IAEA - Similar description for part (a) only
ISO - See IAEA
CFR No description
88 Section E
Sub-Criterion 12: Handling of Calibrated Equipment
"Controls shall be established to assure proper handling storage, and use of calibrated
equipment."
ANSI - No description

Sub-Criterion 13: Records and Marking of Calibration Status

ISO - para 5.12.4 - best description
"Records shall be maintained and equipment suitably marked to indicate calibration s t a t u s . "
IAEA - No description
Nil - Same description

Sub-Criterion 14: Identification of Inspection and Test Status

"(a) Measures shall be established and documeted to identify inspection and test status.
(b) Such measures shall provide means for assuring that required inspections and tests are
performed and that the acceptability of items with regard to inspecitons and tests per-
formed is known throughout manufacturing, installation and operation. Non-conforming
items shall be clearly identified."
IAEA - Comparable description but not as specific

CSA - Comparable description for part (b) only
CNEN - Same description for part (b) only
89 Section E
Sub-Criterion 15: Status Indicators
ANSI para 1 5 best description
"(a) The inspection and test status of items shall be maintained through the use of status
indicators such as physical location and tags, markings, shop travellers, stamps or in
spection records.
(b) The measures shall provide for assuring that only items that have passed the required
inspections and tests are used, installed or operated.
(c) These measures shall include procedures for control of status and removal of tags, mark
ings, laneis and s t a m p s . "
IAEA - Comparable description for parts (a) and (b) only but not as specific
CFR - See IAEA, comparable description

KTA - Comparable description for part (a) only
CSA - Comparable description for parts (a) and (b) only but not as specific
CNEN - Comparable description but not as specific
Sub-Criterion 16: Operating Status Indication

"Measures shall also be established for indicating the operating status of systems and com
ponents of the nuclear power plant, such as by tagging valves and switches to prevent in
advertent operation."
CSA - Comparable description but not as specific
Criterion 1 0 : Non-Conformance Control
17. Sub-criteria: 1. Control of -Conforming Items

2. Identification and Control of Further Processing
3. Review and Disposition, Responsibility and Authority
4. Deviations, " A s Built" Condition
Sub-Criterion 1 : Control of Non-Conformance Items
"Measures shall be established to control items which do not conform to requirements in

order to prevent their inadvertent use of installation."
90 Section E
ISO - Same description but calls for "Items and Processes" instead of " I t e m s "
ANSI - Same description but calls for " I t e m s , Services or Activities" and it does not
describe " I n order to e t c . "
CFR - Similar description but uses instead of " I t e m s " the denominations "Materials,
Parts of Components" which does not cover systems of processes. " I t e m s " is
general and covers all.
Nil - See ANSI
CSA - Similar description
Sub-Criterion 2: Identification and Control of Further Processing

"(a) As a guideline, control of non-conforming items by tagging marking, or other means of
identification is acceptable where physical segregation is not practical although physical
segregation and marking are preferred.
(b) Measures which control further processing, delivery or installation of a non-conforming
or defective item pending a decision on its disposition shall be established and maintained.
Conforming items may be disposed of by acceptance " a s i s " , by scrapping or repairing
the defective item, or by rework to complete or correct to a drawing or specification.
Such measures shall provide assurance that the item is identified as non-conforming
and controlled. The measures shall require documentation verifying the acceptability of
non-conforming items which have the disposition of repair or use " a s i s " . "
CSA - Comparable description only for part (a)
Sub-Criterion 3: Review and Disposition, Responsibility and Authority

"(a) Non-conforming items shall be reviewed and accepted without modification, rejected,
repairs or reworked in accordance with documented procedures.
(b) The responsibility for review and authority for disposition of non-conformances shall
be defined."
CFR - Comparable description for part (a) only. No description for responsibility and
authority
Nil - Comparable description for part (b) only
RDT - Comparable description for part (a) only
91 Section E
CSA - Comparable description for part (b) only
Sub-Criterion 4: Deviations, "As Built" Condition

IAEA para 10.2 best description
"Accepted non-conforming items involving a deviation from procurement requirements shall
be reported to the purchaser, and when necessary, to the designated authority. The descrip
tion of changes, waiver or deviation that has been accepted shall be documented to denote
the " a s built" condition."
CFR No comparable description
Nil No comparable description
Criterion 11 : Corrective Actions
18. Sub-criteria: 1. Identification and Correction of Conditions adverse to Quality

2. Determination of causes of significant conditions adverse to Quality and
Corrective Action to prevent Repetition
3. Report documented results to appropriate Management
Sub-Criterion 1 : Identification and Correction of Conditions adverse to Quality

"Measures shall be established and documented to assure that conditions adverse to quality,
such as failures, malfunctions, deficiencies, deviations, defective material and equipment,
and nonconformances, are promptly identified and corrected as soon as practicable."
IAEA - Same description but does not call for measures to be " d o c u m e n t e d "
ISO - See IAEA
CFR - See IAEA

RDT - Comparison description
KTA - No comparable description but calls for identification of conditions adverse to quality
CSA No comparable description
CNEN Comparable description
Sub-Criterion 2: Determination of causes of significant conditions adverse to Quality and

Corrective Action to prevent Repetition
IAEA para 17 best description
" I n the case of significant conditions adverse to quality, the measures shall ensure that the
cause of the condition is determined and corrective action taken to preclude repetition."
92 Section E
Nil - Comparable description. Applies to "all conditions" and not only to significant
conditions.
CNEN - Comparable description. See Nil.
Sub-Criterion 3: Report documented to appropriate Management

" T h e identification of significant conditions adverse to quality, the cause of the condition,
and the corrective action taken shall be documented and reported to appropriate levels of
management."
CNEN - Same description except the work " S i g n i f i c a n t " is left out.
Criterion 1 2 : Records
19. Sub-criteria: 1. Preparation of Quality Assurance Records

2. Minimum Record Contents Requirements
3. Legibility, Identifiability, Retrievability
4. Collection, Storage and Preservation
Sub-Criterion 1: Preparation of Quality Assurance Reports

"Sufficient records shall be prepared as work is performed to furnish documentary evidence
of the quality of items and of activities affecting quality. Records shall be consistent with
applicable codes, standards, specifications, and contracts and shall be adequate for use in
management of the programme."
IAEA - Comparable description, but does not state that records should be consistent
w i t h applicable codes, standards, specifications and contract requirements.
CFR - See IAEA, comparable description, but not well defined. Uses the word "Maintained"
instead of " p r e p a r e d " , " s u f f i c i e n t " instead of " a d e q u a t e " , etc.
Nil - See IAEA, comparable description
RDT - See IAEA, comparable description
93 Section E
CSA Comparable description but not as well defined
CNEN Comparable description
Sub-Criterion 2: Minimum Records Contents Requirements

"(a) The records shall include the results of reviews, inspection, tests, audits, monitoring
of work performance, materials analyses, and facility operating logs. The records shall
also include, as appropriate, closely related data such as qualifications of personnel, pro
cedures and equipment and other documentation required by the applicable parts of this
standard.
(b) Inspection and test records shall, as a minimum, identify the date of inspection or test,
the inspector or data recorder, the type of observation, the results, the acceptability
and the action taken in connection w i t h any deficiencies n o t e d . "
IAEA - See ANSI, almost same description for part (a) only.
CFR - See ANSI, same description
Nil - Comparable description for part (a) only but not as specific
RDT - No comparable description as far as part (a) is concerned and not as specific to what
the records shall include as far as part (b) is concerned
CNEN - Comparable description for part (a) only
Sub-Criterion 3: Legibility, Identifiability, Retrievability

" A l l quality assurance records shall be legible, complete and identifiable w i t h respect to the
item involved."
ANSI - See IAEA, comparable description
CFR - See ANSI. Does not call for legibility of records
Nil - See CFR, same description
RDT - See CFR, comparable description
KTA No comparable description
CSA - See CFR, comparable description
CNEN - See ANSI, comparable description
Sub-Criterion 4: Collection, Storage and preservation

"(a) A quality assurance record system shall be established and executed in accordance with
written procedures and instructions. The system shall require that sufficient records be
maintained to furnish evidence of activities affecting quality and to describe baseline
pre-operation conditions. The system shall provide for identification, collection, index-
ing, filing, storing, maintenance and disposal of records.
(b) Records shall be stored in such a way that they are readily retrievable and maintained
in a suitable environment to minimise deterioration or damage and to prevent loss.
94 Section E
(c) Retention times of quality assurance records and associated test material and specimen
shall be established in writing.
(d) In general, records which correctly identify the " a s b u i l t " condition of items in the plant
shall be maintained by or for the responsible organisation for the useful life of the item
from manufacture through storage, installation and operation.
(e) Periods of retention for records other than lifetime records shall be assigned retention
times consistent w i t h the type of record involved.
Disposal of records shall be in accordane with written procedures."
ISO - See IAEA, identical description
Nil - Comparable description for part (d) only
KTA - No comparable description, does call for retention times of records to be established
in writing
CSA - See IAEA, comparable description but not as detailed
CNEN - Comparable description for part (b) only
Criterion 1 3 : Audits
20. Sub-criteria: 1. System of Planned and Documented Audits

2. Qualified Independent Auditors
3. Documented Audit Results and Follow-up Acrtion
4. Scheduling of Audits
Sub-Criterion 1: System of Planned and Documented Audits

" A s necessary, a system of planned and documented internal and external audits be carried
out to verify compliance with all aspects of the quality assurance programme and to deter-
mine the programme's effectiveness. The audits shall be performed in accordance with writ-
ten procedures or check lists."
ISO - Same description, but does call for programme effectiveness
Nil - See ISO
CSA Comparable description
Sub-Criterion 2: Qualified Independent Auditors

" T h e responsible auditing organisations shall select and assign qualified auditors. They shall
be independent of any direct responsibility for the activities which they audit. In the case
of internal audits, the persons having the direct responsibility for performance of the activities
being audited shall not be involved in the selection of the audit t e a m . "
95 Section E
ANSI - Similar description, but does not call for "Qualified A u d i t o r s " , but for "Appropriate
Trained Personnel".
CFR See ANSI, same description
Nil - See ANSI, comparable description
RDT Comparable description, calls for "Experienced personnel" instead of qualified
auditors
KTA Does call for personnel who are independent of any responsibility for the activities
which they audit, but no qualification requirement.
CSA - See ANSI, comparable description
CNEN - See ANSI, same description
Sub-Criterion 3: Documented Audit Results and Follow-up Action
ISO para 5.18.3 best description
"The results of the audits shall be documented by the auditors and reviewed by organisa
tions having responsibility in the area audited. Responsible management shall take necessary
corrective action on the deficiencies found by the audit. Follow-up action shall continue to
be taken to verify that deficiencies noted in the audit, and, where practicable, the causes
have been corrected."
IAEA - See ISO, but it does not call for correction of causes of deficiencies
CFR - See IAEA, comparable description
Nil - See IAEA, comparable description
RDT See IAEA, comparable description
KTA - See IAEA, comparable description
CSA - See IAEA, comparable description
CNEN - See IAEA, comparable description
Sub-Criterion 4: Scheduling of Audits

"(a) An audit plan should be developed to provide information about the audit, such as the
functional areas to be audited, the names and assignments of those w h o will perform
the audit, the scheduling arrangements and the method of reporting findings and
recommendations.
(b) Audits should be conducted periodically or on a random unscheduled basis, or both. It
is desirable to conduct audits when one or more of the following conditions exist:
(i) When it is necessary to determine the capability of a sub-contractor's Quality
Assurance Programme prior to awarding of contract or purchase order.
(ii) When, after award of contract, sufficient timo has elapsed for the implementation
of the Quality Assurance Programme, and it is appropriate to determine that the
organisation is performing the functions as defined in the Quality Assurance Pro-
gramme description, codes, standards, and other contract documents.
(iii) When significant changes are made in functional areas of the Quality Assurance
Programme, including significant reorganisations and procedure revisions.
(iv) When it is suspected that safety, performance and reliability of the item is in jeopar-
dy due to the deficiencies and nonconformances in the Quality Assurance
Programme.
96 Section E
() When a systematic, independent assessment of programme effectiveness or item
quality or both is considered necessary.
(vi) When it is considered necessary to verify implementation of required corrective
actions.
IAEA - See ANSI, however, less specific. It does not call for the development of an audit plan
ISO - Very brief description

Nil - Similar description for part (a) only
RDT - See ANSI, comparable description. Does not indicate when to conduct audits.
KTA - No comparable description, does call for audit time schedule
CSA - See ANSI, comparable description, does not indicate when to conduct audits
Summary of Analyses
21. The scope of the analyses in Section E initially commenced with twelve codes and standards,
but three were subsequently eliminated for the reasons given earlier. The codes and standards
evaluated represented national and international requirements and, w i t h the exception of the Cana
dian Standard Z.299, are specifically limited to the nuclear industry.
22. Using the IAEA Code 50-C QA as a reference base, its structure of thirteen chapters (including
the Introduction) was utilised to establish the basic " C r i t e r i a " against which the eight other stan
dards were evaluated. These criteria were in turn reduced to between t w o and fourteen "Sub-criteria"
given a total of approximately eighty five quality system elements. Each of the other standards were
then analysed to evaluate the adequacy with which they reflected or described the sub-criteria under
review. In total, in the order of seven hundred and fifty description were evaluated on this basis.
23. The results of the analyses indicated that the IAEA code most frequently (55%) provided
the " b e s t description" reflecting the sub-criteria under evaluation followed by the ANSI 45.2 stan
dard (36%).
However, the ISO Standard followed closely the ANSI Standard, both in format and content.
It was interesting to note how often the same description (verbatum) was used in so many different
standards. It is obvious that each standard, during its evolution commencing with 10CFR50 App. B,
acknowledged the existence of a previous standard and utilised the same verbage.
24. Thus the comparative analysis indicated the IAEA code as the most preferable, but it recognised
that the selection of this code as the reference standard could be considered as possibly biasing
the analysis in its favour. It is the opinion of the authors that except for the language requirement
there is no significant difference between the IAEA code and ANSI 45.2 in their requirements on
Quality Assurance Programme requirements.
25. This comparative analysis can be used as the basis for further work or reference when
evaluating any one particular standard (from those anlaysed) for use on a specific project. However,
for the reasons stated in the following section, no code or standard should be considered in isola
tion from the total system to which it belongs.
Conclusions
26. The comparative analysis indicated that IAEA 50 C QA, ISO 6 2 1 5 , ANSI 45.2 or
10CFR50 App. B are all relatively equivalent in stipulating the necessary QA programme criteria
for nuclear power plants. However, a note of caution on the methodology used should be given
at this stage.
97 Section E
27. It is not completely valid to compare each of these codes or standards in isolation from the
systems to which they now belong. Some of the codes and standards evaluated are relatively brief
on their criteria statements, but it must be remembered that they are now, in many cases, sup
ported by further supplementary guides or daughter standards.
28. The particular systems to which the IAEA, CFR, ANSI and CSA codes and standards belong
are summarised below:
IAEA Codes/Safety Guides
29. The IAEA Codes of Practice and Safety Guides are recommendations issued by the agency
for use by member states in the context of their o w n nuclear safety requirements. These codes
and guides are written in such a form as would enable a member state, should it so decide, to make
the contents of such documents directly applicable to activities under its jurisdiction.
30. The IAEA have issued five Codes of Practice to cover the following topics:
50-C G - Governmental Organisation for the Regulation of Nuclear Power Plants
50 C S Safety in Nuclear Power Plant Sitting
50-C D - Design for Safety of Nuclear Power Plants
50-C O - Safety in Nuclear Power Plant Operation
50-C-QA - Quality Assurance for Safety in Nuclear Power Plants.
31. These five codes are considered to establish the objectives and minimum requirements that
should be fulfilled to provide adequate safety in the operation of nuclear power plants.
The safety guides are issued to describe and make available to member states accepting
methods of implementing specific parts of the relevant Codes of Practice. Methods and solutions
varying from those set out in these guides may be acceptable, if they provide at least comparable
assurance that nuclear power plants can be operated without undue risk to the health and safety
of the general public and site personnel. Although these codes of practice and safety guides are
considered to establish an essential basis for safety, it is also noted that they may not be sufficient
or entirely applicable and that other safety documents published by the Agency should be consultod
as necessary.
32. A listing of the supplementary safety guides to 50-C QA is given in Appendix A.
10 CFR 5 0 App. B/Regulatory Guides
33. As noted in Section 3, every applicant, in the United States, for a nuclear plant construction
permit has to establish a quality assurance programme which meets the requirements of 10CFR 50
App. B. For this and other Federal Regulations the NRC have issued a series of regulatory guides.
These regulatory guides are issued to describe, and make available to the public, methods accep
table to the NRC staff of implementing specific parts of the Commission's regulations, to delineate
techniques used by the staff in evaluating specific problems or postulated accidents, or to provide
guidance to applicants.
Regulatory guides are not substitutes for regulations, and compliance with them is not required.
Methods and solutions different from those set out in the guides can be considered as acceptable.
34. A listing of the regulatory guides supporting 10CFR 50 App. and the associated ANSI Stan
dards that they refer to, are given in Appendix of this report. It can be seen that this Federal Regula
tion is supported by seventeen regulatory guides, fourteen of which make reference to ANSI
standards.
ANSI 4 5 . 2 Series
35. This Standard was developed as a general industry standard to satisfy the intent and amplify
the requirements of 10CFR50 App. B. This Standard, in turn, is now supplemented by various
" d a u g h t e r " standards which directly expand on some of the various criteria (such as Packing,
Housekeeping, Installation, Design Control etc.) given in ANSI 4 5 . 2 . A listing of the daughter stan
dards supplementing ANSI 45.2 is given in Appendix C.
98 Section E
CSA Series
36. Although the comparative analyses in Section E utilised CSA Z299.1 including its guidelines
, and C, this standard is now considered as an integral part of the N286 series which have been
written specifically for nuclear power plants. A summary of the integration of the Z299 and the
N286 series is given in Appendix D.
37. In conclusion and in the light of today's practices, no one particular code or standard should
be considered in isolation. The selection for application of any QA code or standard can only be
made w i t h an awareness and understanding of the total system to which it belongs.
38. The integrated system within which 10CFR50 App. opertes (i.e. US Federal Regulations
and the NRC Regulatory Guides) is probably the most proven. It has been under continual develop
ment since 1970 and applied during the design, construction, and operation of over 100 reactors
in the US and throughout the world.
39. Today, it is equally applicable to Fuels Reprocessing Plants as it is to the various reactor con
cepts (PWR, BWR, GCR) under the jurisdiction of the NRC. However, it is rigidly tied to US Law,
can be modified unilaterally by the US, and requires significant transposition for application outside
of the USA.
40. The IAEA Code of Practice 50-C-QA and its current and planned series of safety guides, may
be considered to form a more suitable integrated QA system for use outside the US. As an alter
native, consideration could be given to selecting the ANSI Standard 45.2 together w i t h its daughter
standard in the 45.2XX Series without reference to the US Regulatory Guides.
Recommendation for Further Work
41. It is recommended that a qualitative analysis can be conducted to evaluate and compare:
(i) the IAEA Code 50-C-QA with its associated Safety Guides; and
(ii) the ANSI Standard 45.2 with its daughter standards.
42. The object of this evaluation would be to select one complete integrated QA system and recom
mend its application to Fast Reactor Programmes within the CEC.
99 Section E
APPENDIX A T O SECTION E
IAEA S a f e t y Guides Supporting 5 0 - C - Q A
Codes of Practice
50-C-QA Q u a l i t y assurance for s a f e t y in nuclear p o w e r p l a n t s
Safety Guides
50-SG-QA1 Preparation of the quality assurance programme for nuclear power plants
50-SG-QA2 Quality assurance records system for nuclear power plants
50-SG-QA3 Quality assurance in the procurement of items and services for nuclear power
plants
50-SG-QA4 Quality assurance during site construction of nuclear power plants
50-SG-QA5 Quality assurance during operation of nuclear power plants
50-SG QA6 Quality assurance in the design of nuclear power plants
50-SG-QA7 Quality assurance organisation for nuclear power plants
50-SG-QA8 Quality assurance in the manufacture of items for nuclear power plants
50-SG-QA10 Quality assurance auditing for nuclear power plants
50-SG-QA11 Quality assurance in the design and manufacture of fuel and fuel cladding for
nuclear power plants.
100
APPENDIX TO SECTION E
NRC Regulatory Guides supporting 10CFR 50 Appendix
Regulatory Guide Associated Standard

1.26 Quality group classifications and standards for
water -, steam-, and radioactive waste contain
ing components for nuclear power plants
1.28 Quality assurance orogramme requirements ANSI N45.2

(Design and Construction)
1.29 Seismic design classification
1.30 Quality assurance requirements for the installa ANSI N45.2.4
tion, inspection and testing of instrumentation
and electrical equipment
1.37 Quality assurance requirements for cleaning of ANSI N45.2.1
fluid systems and associated components of
water-cooled nuclear power plants
1.38 Quality assurance requirements for packaging ANSI N45.2.2
shipping, storage and handling of items for water-
cooled nuclear power plants
1.39 Housekeeping requirements for water-cooled ANSI N45.2.3
nuclear power plants
1.58 Qualification of nuclear power plant inspection, ANSI N45.2.6

examination and testing personnel
1.64 Quality assurance requirements for the design of ANSI N45.2.11

nuclear power plants
1.70 Standard format and content of safety analysis

reports for nuclear power plants
1.74 Quality assurance terms and definitions ANSI N45.2.10
1.88 Collection, storage, and maintenance of nuclear ANSI N45.2.9
power plant quality assurance records
Quality assurance requirements for installation,
1.94 inspection and testing of structural steel during ANSI N45.2.5
the construction phase of nuclear power plants
Quality assurance requirements for installation,
1.116 inspection and testing of mechanical equipment ANSI N45.2.8
and systems
Quality assurance requirements for the control
1.123 of procurement of items and services for nuclear ANSI N45.2.13
power plants
1.144 Requirements for auditing and quality assurance ANSI N45.2.12
programmes for nuclear power plants
1.146 Qualification of quality programme audit person ANSI N45.2.23
nel for nuclear power plants
101
APPENDIX C TO SECTION E
ANSI Quality assurance standards supporting ANSI 4 5 . 2
N45.2/N46.2 - 1977 Quality assurance programme requirements for nuclear facilities

(Incorporated into NQA 1 1979)
N45.2.1-1980 Cleaning of fluid systems and associated components for nuclear power
plants
N45.2.2 - 1978 Packaging, shipping, receiving, storage and handling of items for nuclear
power plants
N45.2.3 - 1978 Housekeeping during the construction phase of nuclear power plants
N45.2.5 - 1978 Supplementary quality assurance requirements for installation, inspection
and testing of structural concrete and structural steel, soils and founda-
tion during the construction phase of nuclear power plants
N45.2.6 - 1978 Qualifications of inspection, examination and testing personnel for the con-
struction phase of nuclear power plants
(Incorporated into NQA-1 1979)
N45.2.8 - 1975 Supplementary quality assurance requirements for installation, inspection
(R 1980) and testing of mechanical equipment and systems for the construction
phase of nuclear power plants
N45.2.9 - 1979 Requirements for collection, storage and maintenance of quality assurance
records for nuclear power plants
(Incorporated into NQA-1 - 1979)
N45.2.10 - 1973 Quality assurance terms and definitions

(Inforporated into NQA-1 - 1979)
N45.2.11 - 1974 Quality assurance requirements for the design of nuclear power plants
N45.2.12 - 1977 Requirements for auditing of quality assurance programmes for nuclear
power plants.
N45.2.13 - 1976 Quality assurance requirements for control of procurement of items and
services for nuclear power plants
N45.2.15 - 1981 Hoisting, rigging and transporting of items for nuclear power plants
N45.2.20 - 1979 Supplementary quality assurance requirements f or sub-surface investiga-
tion prior to the construction phase of nuclear power plants
N45.2.23 - 1978 Qualification of quality assurance programme audit personnel for nuclear
facilities
NQA-1 - 1979 Quality assurance programme requirements for nuclear power plants
102
APPENDIX D TO SECTION E
CSA N286 Series of Standards
The serius, us now published and in use, consists o l :

(a) CSA N286.0 QA programme requirements tor nuclear power plants.
This standard is addressed to the Owner and contains quality assurance requirements
related to his activities and responsibilities as overall director and coordinator of the
nuclear project.
(b) Separate standards, covering each of the constituent phases of the plant life cycle, which
develop in greater detail the principles expressed in N286.0 as appropriate to each phase.
These are:
N286.1 Procurement QA
N286.2 Design QA
N286.3 Construction QA
N286.4 Commissioning QA
N286.5 Operation QA
(e) CSA Z299.1 - 4 Quality programme requirements
This series, introduced earlier for the manufacturing and fabrication of components,
although not numbered in it, is now considered to be an integral part of the N286 series.
The CSA Z 2 9 9 series provides for several types of programmes and they are comprised
of four individual fixed-step, graded documents, beginning w i t h CSA Z 2 9 9 . 1 , which is
the most demanding standard, and ranging d o w n to CSA Z 2 9 9 . 4 , which is the least
demanding.
103
PART 2
SECTION F CLASSIFICATION OF QUALITY ASSURANCE SYSTEMS
1. The following analysis deals w i t h the mechanical systems of nuclear reactors only.
2. There is no system of general classification of component parts associated with Quality

Assurance applied to liquid metal cooled fast breeder reactors (LMFBR). Indeed there is no classifica
tion system associated with Quality Assurance applied to any type of nuclear reactor.
3. The following analysis purports to show the references to classification in the various Quality
Assurance Codes and Standards, and to the details of classification in the safety codes.
4. The classification of component parts of a nuclear reactor at the present state of the art,
based on various diverse principles, three concepts of which, in use at present, are given below :-
(a) General Statement of Classification in a Quality Assurance Standard
(b) Safety Criteria
(c) Level of Assurance or Inspection in the Quality Assurance Standard.
Exposition of Concepts
5. General statement
A general statement for classification is given in the following standards :-
(a) ISO 6215 - Nuclear Power Plants Quality Assurance Section 5.1.1.4, and
BS 5882 - Total Quality Assurance Programme for Nuclear Power Plants -
Section 1.1.4.
The following is the relevant extract from the above standards:-
"Since items and services will differ in regard to relative safety, reliability
and performance importance, various methods on levels of control, and ver
i f i c a t i o n may be used to assure adequate quality."
(b) IAEA 50-C-QA - Quality Assurance for Safety in Nuclear Power Plants - A Code of
Practice. Section 2 . 1 .
" I t e m s , services and processes to which the quality assurance will apply
shall be identified. Appropriate methods or levels of control and verification
shall be assigned to those items, services and processes."
(c) USA - 50CFR 10 Appendix - Quality Assurance Criteria for Nuclear Power Plants
and Fuel Reprocessing Plants - Introduction.
" T h e pertinent requirements of this Appendix apply to all activities affec
ting the safety related functions of those structures, systems and com
ponents; these activities include designing, purchasing, fabricating, handl
ing, shipping, storing, cleaning, erecting, installing, inspecting, testing,
operating, maintaining, repairing, refuelling and modifying.
... quality assurance comprises all those planned and systematic actions
necessary to provide adequate confidence that a structure, system or com
ponent will perform satisfactorily in service."
(d) USA ANSI/ASME N45.2 - Quality Assurance Program Requirements for Nuclear
Facilities. Section 2 .
"Since items and services will differ in regard to relative safety, reliability
and performance importance, various methods on levels of control and
verification may be used to assure adequate quality."
105
Safety Criteria
6. bxtracts from IAEA 50 SG D I "Safely Functions and Component Classification for BWR, PWR
and PTR A Safety Guide."
It is recognised that some systems, components and structures are more important to safety
than others. Two methods of assigning graded requirements to safety related systems, components
and structures are given below:-'
(i) Deterministic Method - Requirements placed on those safety-related systems, com
ponents and structures whose failure could result in significant radioactive releases. These
requirements are imposed without explicit consideration of the probability of such failures
or mitigating effects.
(ii) Probability Method Utilises the probability of 2 factors, that a safety function would
be required, and the consequences of failure of that safety function, in order to assess
the safety importance. The safety classification is arrived at by using a combination of
the following criteria:-
(a) the consequence of failure of that safety function;
(b) the probability that the safety function would be required;
(c) the probability that the safety function would not be accomplished when required.
The product of these three factors must be acceptably low.
The resultant classification is based on the function and the corresponding design code.
Classification according to IAEA 50-SG-D1
7. This safety guide for light water moderated thermal neutron reactors is included in this analysis
since this type of reactor is well established for power generation and comparable documents deal-
ing with LMFBRs are sparse.
8. The safety guide deals with radiological safety, and the need to limit radiation exposure of
the public and site personnel for all operational states and accident conditions of a nuclear power
plant. It categorises components into four descending safety classes, depending upon the conse-
quences and probability of failure, based on the probabilistic method.
9. The actual design code associated with each safety class will depend upon the individual
member states.
10. Safety Classes according to IAEA 50-SG-D1.
(i) Safety Class 1 - Safety functions necessary to prevent the release of fission products
to the environment in the absence of appropriate safety system action.
Suggesting Design Code ASME-BPV-III-1-NB, Class 1.
(ii) Safety Class 2 Safety functions necessary to mitigate the consequences of an ac-
cident which would otherwise cause the release of fission products to the environment.
Need only be considered after the initial failure of another safety function.
Includes functions in which the combination of the consequences and probability
associated with the safety function is high.
Suggested Design Code - ASME-BPV III-1-NC, Class 2, MC and Division 2.
(iii) Safety Class 3 - Safety functions in a support role to Safety Classes 1, 2 and 3. Failure
would not lead to a direct increase in radiation exposure.
Suggested Design Code ASME BPV III-1 ND, Class 3.
(iv Safety Class 4 Safety functions that do not fall within Safety Classes 1, 2 or 3.
It includes functions to limit the release of radioactive waste below prescribed units
which, if they fall, would not result in the exposure of the public or site personnel in
excess of prescribed limits.
Suggested Design Code ASME VIII.
106 Section F
A N S 5 4 . 6 - Proposed American National Standards LMFBR Safety Classification and
Related Requirements - Draft
1 1. l h e following safety classes ol LMFBR Components aie based on the safety 11 met ions to
be performed, consequences of failure and quality standards commensurate w i t h the importance
of the safety functions to be performed.
12. A "deterministic" approach to Safety Classification is used in this standard, the design base
for the various classes being ASME BPV-lll-1 w i t h its various sub-sections for low temperature ap
plications and its associated variants for the high temperature applications. Quality Assurance Criteria
for these classifications are covered by pertinent requirements of 10CFR 50 Appendix and AN
SI/ASME N 4 5 . 2 .
13. Criteria for the various classes are given below:

(i) Safety Class 1M - Components that have the following nuclear safety related
characteristics:-
Reactor coolant boundary
Reactor trip functions under any plant conditions
Fittings inside the reactor vessel whose failure would result in exceeding the safety design
bases
Design base - Low temperature - ASME BPV-lll-1-ND
- High temperature - ASME-BPV-Code Cases N-47 through N51
(ii) Safety Class 2M - Components that are not Safety Class 1M, and have the following
nuclear safety related characteristics:
Are part of the reactor coolant boundary, and are required to maintain an adequate coolant
inventory following a leak (i.e. guard vessels or make-up systems).
Reactor containment boundary - to prevent release of radioactive materials to the
environment.
Reactor residual heat removal.
Design base - Low temperature - ASME-BPV-III-1-NC
- High temperature - ASME-BPV-Code Case N19
(iii) Safety Class 3M - Components that have the following nuclear safety related
characteristics:-
Balance of systems to control post accident release of radioactive materials to the
environment.
Systems connected to the reactor coolant boundary and capable of being isolated
therefrom.
Systems to contain radioactive material which would give off side doses greater than
0 5 rem t o the whole body if released.
Cooling systems for other safety class equipment to meet its nuclear safety function.
Design base - Low temperature - ASME-BPV-III-1-ND
- High temperature - ASME-BPV-Code Case N-19
(iv) Non-Nuclear Safety (NNS) - applies to:-
All mechanical systems and components that are designed to contain radioactive material
except those in SC-1M, SC-2M or SC-3M.
Design base - ASME-BPV-VIII-I.
Quality Assurance or Inspection Level
14. This concept classifies the level of components by the application of varying degrees of Quality
Assurance or Inspection. It can be applied in t w o forms, namely:
(i) System oriented
(ii) Product oriented
107 Section F
15. The system oriented approach places the emphasis on a prescribed Quality Assurance
methodology, which obligates the nuclear power plant owner and its contractors to plan, conduct,
control and document their work in a systematic way. It programmes work from conceptual design
through controlled performance of all activities and quality verification to commissioning and may
be extended to the final decommissioning. Various levels of On.ihly Assurance and Inspection may
be established in the programme depending upon safety, economic or other applicable (actors.
16. The product oriented approach accepts the inspection programme laid down from the design
and process layouts, and places emphasis on extensive verification of the pre-established quality
characteristics of a component by inspections and tests. These are performed in a redundant way
by the manufacturers or purchasers of the plant and verified by an independent inspection
organisation.
CSA Z 2 9 9 - Quality Assurance Programme Requirements - Canadian Standards

Association
1 7. This is a product oriented system. Classification of components is based on the level of Quality
Assurance and Inspection applied to them.
Class 1 - CSA 299.1 - Full Quality Assurance
Class 2 - CSA 299.2 - Quality Control only
Class 3 - CSA 299.3 - Quality Verification
Class 4 - CSA 299.4 Final Inspection only
18. The classes are determined by summing marks over the range 0 to 4 in ascending order of
importance for each of the following categories:
Design Process Complexity
Design Maturity
Item or Service Characteristics
Manufacturing Complexity
Safety
Economic
19. The Quality Assurance standard to be used is selected from the following ranges:-
Value Range QA Standard
18-24 CSA Z299.1
13 - 17 Z299.2
8 12 Z299.3
4 7 Z299.4
0 3 -
French 9 1 . C 0 1 8 . 0 1 CPFC (Cahier des prescriptions de fabrication et de controle) by EdF

(referred to in IAEA 5 0 - S G - D 1 )
20. This standard is based on a product oriented system.

21. Classification of components is determined by the level of inspection of welds in fabrications
and materials by non-destructive methods:
Standard 1 100% radiographic and ultrasonic inspection of all welds
Standard 2 - Non-destructive testing only required where specifically called for and
especially for the following:
Castings
Valves for diameter greater than 100 mm
Longitudinally welded tubes
Plates of thickness greater than 30 mm
Exchanger tubes
108 Section F
Ultrasonic testing is not required, except where it is difficult to apply
radiography.
Standard 3 - Non-destructive testing is not required except where specifically called for,
and for the following:-
Stub ends of valves of diameter greater than 100 mm
Longitudinally welded tube
Materials are classified as follows:
Safety Class 1
Safety Class 2
Safety Class 3
22. The class depends upon the operating conditions, dimensions, safety factors, conditions of
operation (intermittent functioning, etc.) and the effect of a fault on the availability of the plant.
109 Section F
SECTION G - COMPARISON AND SUMMARY OF THE
TYPES AND FREQUENCY OF DESTRUCTIVE AND
NON-DESTRUCTIVE CONTROLS DURING THE MANUFACTURE
OF THE CONSTITUENT PARTS OF THE LMFBR COMPONENTS
Introduction
1. Details of destructive and non destructive controls enunciated below will vary between the
countries manufacturing the components and the codes and standards used. They will also vary
with the individual design of the components. However, it is considered that the controls given below
represent a more than average state of the art.
Destructive Controls
2. All the following tests are required in some measures by all applicable Pressure Vessel Codes
and relevant National Codes of Practice and Standards.
3. Destructive controls pertaining to the manufacture of constituent parts of LMFBR Components

fall into three clear categories:
(i) Material Tests
(ii) Weld Procedure
(ii) Welder Approval Tests.
(i) Material Tests
4. (A) Chemical Analysis

This is carried out in t w o stages. Firstly, when the material is poured at the
steelmakers, called the "as c a s t " or ladle analysis, and secondly, a sample is taken
from the finished raw material such as plates, tubes and forgings.
In both cases, the analysis is usually made by the rapid automated spectrograph^
method, or by longer and more laborious laboratory chemical analysis method.
The analysis so determined are compared with the specified requirements, due note
being taken of the tolerance bands specified for the individual constituents. It should
be noted that there may be variations in the specified analysis for the t w o stages.
5. (B) Mechanical Tests on Material

Representative samples are cut from the material from which the constituent parts
of LMFBR Components are manufactured such as plates, tubes and forgings, before
processing starts.
The following mechanical strength tests are made on prepared test specimens
machined from the samples. Samples from forgings are taken from the highly stressed
parts or at an abrupt change in section. They are usually taken from the radial,
transverse, longitudinal positions or tangentially near to the surface.
(a) Tensile tests, either longitudinal or transverse to the direction of drawing or
rolling to give the yield stress, or proof stress for materials without a pronounced
yield point, and the ultimate tensile stress. These tests are made at room
temperature, and sometimes at a specified elevated temperature.
(b) Elongation - from test (a)
(c) Reduction of area - from test (a)
(d) Hardness test either Vickers Pyramid, Rockwell or Brinell
(e) Impact test - either Izod or Charpy
(f) Bend tests
(g) Intercrystalline corrosion test
110
The results of the above tests are compared w i t h the properties quoted in the rele-
vant specifications called for in the design, procurement and manufacturing
documents. The material is accepted for further processing if the properties fall within
the acceptance band given on the specification.
In addition to the above the following destructive tests may be made on pipes and
tubes:
Flattening test
Reverse flattening test for welded tubes
Flaring test
Flange test
6. (ii) Weld Procedure Tests

The following tests refer to butt welds between plates and between pipes only since
these will be practically the only types of weld used in the manufacture of classified
components for LMFBRs. Special test pieces will be produced for configurations not
covered by the standard arrangement.
Before welding proceeds during the manufacture or fabrication of a component, the
welding procedure must be established in a written specification, test pieces welded
according to the procedure and specimens produced therefrom and submitted to destruc-
tive and non-destructive tests to prove the strength and consistency of the weld.
These welding procedure tests may be repeated at selected intervals during the pro-
gress of manufacture to ensure that there is no deterioration in the welding technique.
Specimens will be cut from the test pieces to carry out transverse tensile tests on the
w e l d , tensile tests on an all-weld specimen for the purpose of testing the welding elec-
trodes or filler wire or for testing the quality of the deposited metal in a welded joint.
The following results will be reported from these tensile tests which are usually made
at ambient temperature, but may be made at higher temperatures when specified.
(a) Yield stress or nominated proof stress
(b) Ultimate tensile strength
(c) Percentage elongation
(d) Percentage reduction of area
(e) The type and location of any faults present in the fracture surfaces.
*
Specimens will also be cut from the test piece for transverse and longitudinal bend tests,
side bend tests and nick-break bend test in which a saw cut is made across the weld
to promote fracture through the weld to permit examination of the weld metal when
fractured.
The following additional tests are made on specimens cut from the test plates in order
t o substantiate the weld procedure validation.
(a) charpy impact tests on a notched specimen
(b) micro and/or macro examination of sectioned weld to check the soundness of the
weld
(c) delta ferrite determination in austenitic stainless steels
(d) hardness survey
(e) non-destructive examination of the weld before destructive tests are made, i.e.
radiograph
ultrasonic
dye penetrant
._? { where applicable according to the type of steel being welded

eddy current )
(f) Chemical analysis of the weld metal when required.
111 Section G
The weld procedure and the results of the testing programme are recorded on pre-
arranged forms.
Any deviation or change in procedure to the welding practice will necessitate re-proving
or testing of the revised procedure.
7. (iii) Welder Approval Tests

Each welder employed on the manufacture of component parts for LMFBRs must satisfac-
torily pass a welding approval test, working to an approved welding procedure.
The welder being tested will weld test pieces of the appropriate material to the specified
welding procedure in the positions demanded by the test to suit the component being
manufactured. Specimens will be cut from the test piece and examined and tested as
follows:-
(a) Visual inspection
(b) Radiograph and/or ultrasonic nondestructive examination
(c) Dye penetrant examination for surface cracks
(d) Macro examination of section of weld
(e) Root bend
(f) Face bend
(g) Side bend
The number of test specimens tested and the specific bend tests specified will depend
upon the thickness of the material being welded and the standard used.
The results of the tests will be recorded on a pre-arranged form.
A welder will require to be re-approved if any of the following conditions apply:-
(a) Welder is employed on work outside the extent of his current approval
(b) Welder changes his employer without the transfer of his test records
(c) Six months have elapsed since the welder last did work within the extent of his
approval.
(d) Welders work not up to standard.
Non-destructive Controls
8. Component parts of a LMFBR will be subjected to non-destructive controls at intervals during

the course of manufacture as laid down in the Quality Assurance Programme up to the time of com-
pletion of that part. These controls will take the forms itemised below:-
(i) A goods inwards insection on receipt of raw material into the factory
(ii) Check that the material used has been strength and chemically tested and test
certificates issued
(iii) Ultrasonic tests of plates and forgings to check internal soundness
(iv) Visual inspection at stages during manufacture
(v) Dimensional inspection and vertification to drawing, specification and instruction at
stages during manufacture and at completion of manufacture
(vi) Hardness testing before and after cold work of austenitic steel, i.e. pipe bending. Heat
treat if necessary, indicated by a higher than specified hardness figure
(vii) Inspection during welding preparations, check that weld preparations are machined
to drawing and that they are crack detected. The alignment of detail parts to be welded
is to be checked after tacking to ensure a uniform thickness of component when welding
is completed.
(viii) Inspection of previously approved weld procedures and welders approval tests
before working on the component, and check that procedure is adhered to during welding.
112 Section G
(ix) Check welding electrodes for the correct type, size and that they are correctly stored.
(x) The heat treatment procedure is to be monitored to ensure that the component under-
goes the correct process, and that all parameters are recorded.
(xi) Carry out non-destructive tests, examinations and inspection of welds according to the
Quality Assurance Programme by the following methods:-
(a) Radiograph
(b) Ultrasonic tests
(c) Dye penetrant
(d) Magnetic particle tests where applicable for ferritic materials
(e) Eddy current tests where approved
All welds are to be clearly identified and sentenced to the specific procedure.
(xii) All nonconformances arc to be logged and corrective actions clearly recorded.
(xiii) Proving or performance tests on completed components are to be made according
to a predetermined programmo
(xiv) Cleaning process to be used on the completed component to be checked to specification
Clean conditions for working in to be checked where specified
(xv) Component to be checked for cleanliness by testing the surface
(xvi) The packing of the component to be checked to specification and environmental
conditions established
9. All controls executed during manufacture must be fully documented, since this information
provides a reference for later inspection during the life of the component in order to monitor its con-
tinued performance or for investigative purposes in the event of mal-operation.
113 Section G
SECTION H - TESTS AND CONTROLS APPLIED TO
LMFBR COMPONENTS DURING MANUFACTURE
1. The components chosen for this section are from a pool type of liquid metal cooled fast breeder
reactor. The pool type is chosen since it is the design that is gaining predominance in EEC countries.
2. Three components are selected. They are as follows:

(i) Primary reactor tank Safety Class 1
(ii) Secondary sodium pump - Safety Class 2
(iii) Primary circuit cold trap - Safety Class 3
3. The classification system used is that according to the International Atomic Energy Agency
(IAEA) Safety Guide No. 50-Sg-D1. This is very similar to the American ANS 54.6 issued in draft
form, which is specifically written for loop type LMFBRs. No safety class number is specifically
assigned to individual component parts of a LMFBR, in any standard, due, no doubt, to the present
state of the art of varying designs. The classification given above is made by the author.
Primary Reactor Tank - Safety Class 1
4. The primary reactor tank constitutes the main pressure circuit boundary for the primary ac-
tive sodium in a pool type of liquid metal cooled fast breeder reactor.
5. - It is essentially a pressure vessel designed and constructed to the highest standards of integrity,
characterised by its low design pressure and medium temperature. The design code would be based
on ASME Section III - sub-section NB Class 1 : Components or Code Cases N-47 through N-51
depending upon temperature.
6. The primary reactor tank has the following major characteristics:

(i) large diameter (greater than 12 metres) w i t h a fabricated torispherical bottom built up
from sectional pressings;
(ii) relatively thin material, with a very low thickness to diameter ratio, giving it a propensity
to buckle during fabrication and on the knuckle or toroidal section when under internal
pressure;
(iii) the material from which it is fabricated is austenitic stainless steel;
(iv) it is built up on site from a series of sectional pressings due to difficulties in handling
caused by its large size and low thickness to diameter ratio;
(v) it is constructed with an open top during manufacture;
(vi) it is of all butt welded construction w i t h all welds non destructively tested;
(vii) it is finally fitted into a leak jacket;
(viii) must be capable of being non-destructively examined at intervals during the life of the
plant.
7. The following controls are made on the vessel during manufacture, which is mainly carried
out on site from pre-formed sections made in a factory.
Destructive Tests
8. Carried out at commencement of manufacture.

(i) Material tests - chemical composition and mechanical
(ii) Weld procedure
(iii) Welder approval
114
Non-Destructive Tests a nd Inspections
9. Carry out the undermentioned inspections on the following unit components made from plate:
Dome pressing
Pressed petal sections forming the toroidal knuckle
Cylindrical sections
Inspections
10. (i) Check that material agrees with that for which the mechanical test certificates apply,
(ii) Check dimensions and profile to drawings.
(iii) Check the surface of the plates for irregularities visually.
(iv) Check the pressed profiles for cracks by visual, dye penetrant and ultrasonic tests.
(v) Check the machined edge weld preparations for accuracy to drawing and for cracks by
dye penetrant and ultrasonic tests.
(vi) Check that the welding procedure is correct for the job and that the welders have all
been approval tested, particularly for the position of welding on the job.
(vii) Check that the electrodes to be used are correct and that they are stored correctly and
are in the correct condition.
(viii) Check that the alignment of all weld seams is correct after tacking or jigging on initial
assembly.
(ix) Check that all weld seams are in correct alignment after completion of welding.
(x) Measure the thickness of all weld seams after grinding level in preparation for radiography
to ensure that no undercutting of the plate thickness has taken place.
(xi) Check the sizes and contour profile of the finished welded vessel. Particular attention
will be paid to the contour of the bottom torispherical end, contraction due to weld
shrinkage and overall dimensions.
(xii) Mark all weld seams for detailed identification purposes during nondestructive testing.
(xiii) Carry out nondestructive testing of all weld seams according to the Quality Assurance
Programme. The testing may take the form of:
Radiography
Ultrasonic
Dye penetrant for surface cracks.
(xiv) Record the sentencing of all welds together with the history of all weld repairs.
11. The vessel is next pressure tested and tested for leak tightness. In view of the geometry of
the vessel and the low design pressure of the cover gas, most of the pressure in the vessel is
developed by the static head of fluid, namely sodium. The pressure test is therefore carried out by
building an extension on to the top of the vessel and filling it with chloride free water.
12. The following is the procedure carried out to pressure test the vessel:
(i) L ower the vessel into the leak jacket, which is fitted with facilities to detect water leakage
from the vessel in a sump in the bottom.
(ii) Fit temporary head section at the top of the vessel to give the required over pressure
at the bottom.
(iii) Fit strain gauges both internally and externally at pre determined positions.
(v) Fit mechanical movement gauges to the inside of the vessel.
(v) Fill vessel w i t h demineralised chloride free water to the specified height, to which is
added a fluorescent dye to detect any leaks on the outside.
(vi) Measure the strains on the internal and external strain gauges and mechanical move
ment gauges and carry out an underwater inspection of the profile of the vessel by means
of profile gauges. Particular attention being paid to the knuckle radius of the torispherical
end for signs of wrinkling and buckling.
115 Section H
(vii) Check for permanent set on strain gauges and mechanical movement gauges upon release
of pressure by emptying the vessel.
(viii) Carry out an ultra-violet light scan on the outside of all welds when the vessel is
withdrawn from the leak jacket to check for leaks from the dyed water inside.
(ix) Check the inside and outside surfaces of the vessel for distortion.
13. After pressure testing the vessel, it should be cleaned to an approved procedure and the
cleanliness inspected by monitoring the liquid effluent and by surface inspection after drying out.
Secondary Sodium Pump - Safety Class 2
14. The function of the secondary sodium pump is to maintain a flow of sodium in the secondary
hoat transport circuit from the intermediate heat exchanger situated in the primary sodium pool to
the steam raising plant situated externally to the main containment building.
1 5. The design is characterised by the following features:-
(i) Vertical pump shaft mounted in a vertical tank electrically driven.
(ii) Pumping sodium at medium temperature.
(iii) large temperature gradient along shaft.
(iv) Lower bearing immersed in medium temperature sodium.
(v) Long periods of constant running.
(vi) Provision made for draining sodium from the pump tank and from the impeller system.
(vii) Shaft gland and seal at top end to seal against inert cover gas and to provide a free
sodium surface.
(viii) Pump tank and rotating impeller system usually made from austenitic stainless steel.
16. The following tests and controls are made on the pump during manufacture up to despatch
from the manufacturer's works. They deal with the mechanical pump only, manufacturing and per-
formance tests on the electric motor are conducted separately.
Destructive Tests
17. Carried out at commencement of manufacture.

(i) Material tests on plates and forgings - chemical composition and mechanical,
(ii) Weld procedure,
(iii) Welder approval.
Non-Destructive Tests and Inspections
18. (a) Pump Tank

(i) Check that material agrees w i t h that for which the mechanical test certificates
apply.
(ii) Check the dished end for profile, surface imperfections and dimensions, check the
formed areas for surface cracks by dye-penetrant and ultrasonic tests.
(iii) Check the rolled sections for profile and the machined weld preparation edges for
dimensional accuracy to drawing and for cracks by dye penetrant methods when
necessary.
(iv) Check that the welding procedure is correct for the job and that the welders have
all been approval tested.
(v) Check that the electrodes to be used are correct and that they are stored correctly
and are in the correct condition.
(vi) Check that the alignment of all weld seams is correct after tacking or jigging on
initial assembly.
116 Section H
(vii) Check that all weld seams are in correct alignment after completion of welding.
(viii) Supervise any specified heat treatment of the completed vessel.
(ix) Chuck that no undercutting of the welds has occurred after grinding of welds, where
necessary, in preparation for radiographing.
(x) Check the size of the vessel dimensionally and the profile for any irregularities.
(xi) Mark all weld seams for detailed identification purposes during non-destructive
testing.
(xii) Carry out non-destructive testing of all weld seams according to the Quality
Assurance Programme. The testing may take the form of:-
Radiography
Ultrasonic Testing
Dye Penetrant for surface cracks.
(xiii) Record the sentencing of all welds, together with the history of all weld repairs.
(xiv) Pressure test the vessel by the specified medium and to the specified conditions
of pressure, temperature and time.
(xv) Test the vessel for leak tightness. Usually carried out by a vacuum test and measur-
ing the in leakage. Locate leaks and repair as necessary.
(xvi) Clean the vessel to the approved procedure and check for cleanliness by the method
laid down.
(b) Impeller System

(i) Check that the rought machined shaft forging corresponds to the material test cer-
tificates and check the heat treatment process of the shaft.
(ii) Check the thermal stability of the shaft by running it at temperature.
(iii) Check the finished shaft dimensionally and for surface finish to drawing.
(iv) Check that the impeller has been subjected to the approved heat treatment
procedure.
(v) Check the impeller dimensionally.
(vi) Check all the components of the impeller system dimensionally and all the com-
ponents associated with the upper bearing and gland seal.
(vii) Check the balance of the impeller system.
(viii) Check the overspeeding of the impeller system where called for.
(ix) Check the final assembly of the pump system.
(x) Check the oil supply and cooling system for the upper bearing and gland seal.
(xi) Observe the running performance tests of the pump when run in a test loop with
water as the pumped fluid. Observations will include:
measuring pump characteristics of head against flow and power input at
various speeds (where a variable speed pump is tested);
measure vibration amplitude at various stations and at various speeds;
measure cavitation characteristics at various speeds and flows.
(xii) Make the necessary corrections to the cold water figures to predict the pump per-
formance at the design conditions of sodium at temperature.
(xiii) Carry out a detailed examination of the relevant parts of the pump when it is
dismantled.
Packing for Despatch
19. (i) Check that the constituent parts of the pump are clean and treated according to specifica-
tion before packing.
117 Section H
(ii) Check that the method of packing and the fixing of lifting points are according to
specification.
(iii) Check that any specified lifting gear despatched w i t h the pump is correct to drawing
and that it has been tested and that test certificates accompany the gear.
(iv) Check that the environment of the constituent parts of the pump in the packing is correct.
Primary Circuit Cold Trap - Safety Class 3

20. The primary circuit cold trap is essentially a relatively small austenitic stainless steel pressure
vessel of all-welded construction containing baskets full of extended surface elements, over which
the sodium to be cleaned flows. The sodium is cooled d o w n to the precipitation temperature by
passing through heat exchanger passages, usually cooled by air blown over extended fins on the
outside.
21. Active sodium from the primary tank is pumped through the cold trap through appropriately
valved connections, the trap being located behind adequate shielding to mitigate the radiation emitted
from the sodium.
Tests
22. Destructive and non-destructive tests carried out during the manufacture of the cold trap are
similar to the tests made on the secondary sodium pump tank.
118 Section H
SECTION J - RECORDS PROVIDED AT THE DELIVERY OF A COMPONENT
1. The number and form of records produced during the manufacture of a component and subse-
quently delivered with the component will depend upon the design, type, configuration, material,
method of manufacture and duty of the component. They will conform with the Quality Assurance
Programme, which will incorporate the requirements of the code or standard to which the compo-
nent is being made, the requirement of the statutory regulations of the country in which it will be
operated, built or manufactured and the customer.
2. They will also include certificates and documents produced by independent inspection organisa-
tions where these are required by the contract.
3. The following list purports to show, typically, the number and type of documents and records
produced during the manufacture of a medium sized pressure vessel with forged machined flanges
and a number of machined nozzles spaced round the vessel for a specified matrix. The records are
subsequently despatched with the vessel in a suitable collated form.
Material Test Certificates
(i) Chemical analysis certificates of all materials used.
(ii) Mechanical test certificates.
(iii) Certificate of examination of plate.
(iv) Radiographs of forgings and certificates of ultrasonic inspection.
(v) Certificates of heat treatment of forgings, plates and pipes where specified, giving
temperature charts and positions of temperature measurements.
Certified Weld Procedure
(vi) Record of welds and names of welders identified against welds.
(vii) Drawing showing identification marks of welds.
(viii) Radiographs of welds together with the technique used in taking the radiographs and
identification of welds.
(ix) Certificates of sentencing of radiographs of welds.
(x) Certificates of ultrasonic tests of welds where relevant.
(xi) Certificates of dye-penetrant tests of welds where relevant.
(xii) List of faulty welds, areas cut out and re-welded.
(xiii) Certificates of heat treatment of completed vessel, where specified giving temperature
charts and positions of temperature measurements.
(xiv) Dimensional survey of vessel, flanges, supports and nozzles.
(xv) Concessions to original drawings.
(xvi) Certificate of pressure test of vessel.
Positions of strain gauges if used.
Records of movements of vessel during test and of permanent set upon release of
pressure.
(xvii) Certificate of vacuum test of vessel and record of leak rate and methods used to detect
and positions thereof. Corrective action taken to correct leaks.
(xviii) Certificate of calibration of instruments used for pressure test and vacuum test.
(xix) Record of cleaning and certificate of final cleanliness.
(xx) List of non-conformities agreed with purchaser.
(xxi) Drawing list of as-made drawings.
(xxii) Copy of the as-made drawings.
(xxiii) Set of design calculations of the vessel.
(xxiv) Photographs of vessel during various stages in construction - if specifically requested
in the contract.
119
4. The following documents and records are typical of those produced during the manufacture
ol ii mechanical centrifugal pump, electrically driven. I he documents lor the pump .ink will be similar
to those described above for a medium size pressure vessel. In addition, the following documents
will be produced during the manufacture, inspection and test of the mechanical part of the pump.
b. I In:, si n nm. n y only includes inspections inni It.:.I:, pei Liming in the mechanical components
of the pump. Similar inspections and performance tests on the electric drive motor and control gear
are not included.
Material Test Certificates of Rotating Parts
(i) Chemical analysis certificates of all materials used.
(ii) Mechanical Test Certificates.
(iii) Certificates of heat treatments of shaft and impeller, giving temperature charts and
positions of temperature measurements.
(iv) Inspection measurements of the build-up of the pump.
(v) Certificate of balancing of impeller system including details of balance weights or weight
removal.
(vi) Certificate of overspeed test of impeller system.
6. The following tests refer to performance tests w i t h water w i t h the pump erected in a
demineralised water loop.
(i) Certificate of detailed readings of tests to measure the performance characteristics of
the pump of head against flow at various speeds and the calculation of the pump
efficiency.
(ii) Certificate of amplitude and phase of vibration readings at pre determined stations.
(iii) Plotted curves of the measured pump characteristics of head against flow and efficiency
in cold water.
(iv) Corrected curves of pump characteristics to specified sodium conditions of pump of
temperature and density.
(v) Certificate of cavitation measurements.
(vi) Log of endurance run of pump in cold water loop.
(vii) Certificate of inspection of components of pump when stripped d o w n after test.
(viii) Certificate of limiting dimensions of pumps for subsequent build-up on site.
(ix) Drawing list of as-made drawings.
(x) Copy of as-made drawings.
(xi) List of nonconformances agreed with the purchaser.
(xii) Calibration certificate of instruments used during characteristics tests in water.
(xiii) Certificate of performance of oil supply and cooler system.
(xiv) Maintenance manual and assembly instruction.
120 Section J
CDNA10123ENC

Comparative Analysis of Qa Systems

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Comparative Analysis of Qa Systems

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Commission of the European Communities

nuclear science and technology

Blow-up from microfiche original

nuclear science and technology

L.A. BENN1), H. VAN WEELDEREN2)

Directorate-General Science, Research and Development

1985 EUR 10123 EN

ECSCEEGEAEC Brussels - Luxembourg, 1986

Final Report between

The European Atomic Energy Community

The United Kingdom Atomic Energy Authority

Issued for the CEC by:

Authors: L A. Benn, UKAEA and H. van Weelderen, NERA TOOM

Reviewed by: A. Barker, UKAEA

Approved by: J. Brion, (Chairman) - Activity Group No. 1 "Manufacturing Standards"

Dato: October 1983

Two differing alternative systems arc presented in the analysis.

SECTION - SUMMARY OF CODES AND STANDARDS

List of Codes, and Standards by Countries 9

Status of Codes and Standards, Table No. 1 13

SECTION C - STATISTICAL ANALYSIS OF CODES AND STANDARDS

Analysis of clauses between codes and standards 19

Table No. 4 Quality Assurance Programme 21

SECTION D - GENERAL SUMMARY OF TABULATED ANALYSES OF CODES 55, 56

Summary of criteria designed to standards. Table No. 23 57

Analysis of major detail deficiencies in the criteria 58

SECTION E ALTERNATIVE DESCRIPTIVE ANALYTICAL METHOD OF

Objectives and evaluation 60

SECTION F - CLASSIFICATION OF QUALITY ASSURANCE SYSTEMS 105

SECTION G - DESTRUCTIVE AND NON-DESTRUCTIVE CONTROLS 110

SECTION H - TESTS APPLIED TO THE MANUFACTURE OF LMFBR COMPONENTS 114

SECTION J - RECORDS PRODUCED AT THE DELIVERY OF A COMPONENT 119

1. Summary of codes and standards

(a) International standards and codes

(b) National standards within the CEC

(x) EDF "L'annex a la Convention Assurance de la Qualit" used by EDF as an appen

(c) Other Sta nda rds

Status of codes and standards

USA ANSI/ASME NA5.2

CANADA CSA STANDARD /

FED REPUBLIC KTAl401 /

USA ANSI/ASME N45.2 / / X

CANADA CSA STANDARD / J /

FED REPUBLIC KTAl 401 / / X

ITALY CNEN TECHNICAL

v applicable X not applicable XX partially applicable

Symbols used in the following tables in this analysis are as follows:

Table Section No. 8 Quality Assurance Programme

1. Establishment of programmi; 5.1.1.1

2. Implementation of various activities

The programme shall be in a language agreed to by the purchaser and supplier.

5. Factors considered in assigning levels of quality assurance

9. Review of adequacy of organisations and quality assurance programme

International ISO 6215 / / / / / /

USA ANSI/ASME N45.2 / / - / / / / /

CANADA CSA STANDARD / - 0

FED REPUBLIC KTA 1401 / 0 0 - 0 0 0 0 0

FRANCE A/44 CPQ / / / / 0 - /

1. Organisational structure 5.2.1.1

2. Quality assurance as interdisciplinary function

Quality assurance should be recognised as an interdisciplinary function, and not as a single

6. Authority of organisations performing quality assurance function

7. Levels of management to which personnel report

International ISO 6215 / / / / / /