IR 05000482/1979012
| ML19247A470 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Wolf Creek  |
| Issue date: | 06/13/1979 |
| From: | Crossman W, Randy Hall, Oberg C NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19247A466 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-482-79-12, NUDOCS 7907310603 | |
| Download: ML19247A470 (18) | |
Text
,
i U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY CO3!MTSSION OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND EN70Rf91ENT
REGION IV
Report No. STN 50-482/79-12 Docket No. STN 50-482 Category A2 Licensee: Kansas Gas & Electric Company Post Office Box 208 Wichita, Kansas 67201 Facility Name: Wolf Creek, Unit No. 1 Inspection at: Wolf Creek Site, Coffey County, Burlington, Kansas Inspection conducted: May 14-17, 1979 d//.I/79 Inspectors:
.
.
,
C. R. Oberg, React Inspector, Projects Section
,
Date (Paragraphs 1, 2, g 11, 12 and 13)
W, e f. 9 %
6Mn J. F. Suermann, R/ Actor Inspector, RIII Date (Paragraphs 4 and 5)
Y S
7f
'
/
[J. P. Tomlinson, Reacto/ Inspector, Engineering Support Da'te '
'
/
Section (Paragraphs 6, 7, 8, 9 and 10)
Approved:
[
J 2f
. A.
Crossman, Chief, Projects Section Dat/e /
.
-
/
/[
G A 6k;/77 s
R. E. Hall, Chie f, Engineering Support Section Dale /
5Fo2M
7907aloggy;pg.
,
Inspection Summary:
Inspection on May 14-17, 1979 (Report Nc. STN 50-482/79-12)
Areas Inspected:
Licensee actica on previous inspection findings; Essential Service k'ater System earthwork; welding program; welding of saf ety related piping; and KG&E site QA organization.
The inspection involved sixty-seven inspector-hours on site by three tiRC inspectors.
Results: No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
-2-585292
DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted Principal Licensee Personnel
- G.
L. Koester, Vice President, Operations
- J. O. Arterburn, Superintendent, Nuclear Development M. L. Johnson, Director Plant Engineering
- M.
E. Clark, Manager, Quality Assurance, Site
- S.
J. Walmsley, Quality Assurance Technician
- D. W. Prigel, Assistant QA Manager, Site
- G. W. Reeves, QA Engineer
- J.
Stokes, Engineer
- L.
Sippel, Nuclear Engineer (KCPL)
- T.
Newman, QA Auditor
^
.
Dames & Moore
- T. Baker, Acting Resident Geotechnical Engineer (RGE)
Daniel International
- W.
E. Hitt, Proj ect bbnager
- V.
J. Turnec, Project QA Manager
- P.
Sturgill, QA Engineer
- I. Hussain, Assistant to Project Manager
- A. Harper, Engineering Manager
- R.
D. Brown, Site Representative Bechtel F. Wilks, Site Liaison, Site Engineer
- Denotes those present at the exit inte rview.
2.
Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Findings (Closed) Unresolved Item (No. 5)1/ (STN 50-482/78-13):
Aggregate Properties.
The below information was obtained through review of quality records and by discussion of these matters with licensee personnel:
1/ Item No. refers to list of unresolved items in Inspection Report STN 50-482/78-13-3-585;i93
a.
Coarse Aggregate The source of coarse aggregate for the base mat concrete was the Christie Quarry in Lamont, Kansas.
The A/E (Bechtel) reviewed the test results for aggregate source selection (Bechtel letter, BLKE 153, file 4210, to KG&E, dated November 8,1974) and found that the soundness of the aggregate was satisfactory based on the results of a " Soundness Loss Ratio Test" performed by the Kansas State Highway Commission.
This test subjects the aggregate to 25 cycles of severe freezing and thawing when frozen in a saturated condition.
The sequence of source qualification for coarse aggregate was deter-mined to have been as follows:
9/25/74 - Recommendations made to KG&E by Daniel for selection of source.
1/28/75 - Preliminary evaluation and source selection by Daniel.
4/15/75 - Report on testing and certification of concrete materials by Soil Testing Services, Inc.
10/21/75 - QC evaluation of source.
3/11/76 - Approval by owner.
3/20/76 - Purchase order issued.
4/20/76 - Contract signed by Hayworth (Christie Quarry).
Samples of coarse aggregate were tested as required by technical speci-fications.
All results were within requirements for the intended use.
The evaluation of the coarse aggregate source was made by Daniel as delegated by KG&E.
The source preference by Bechtel, as indicated in their letter of November 8, 1974, appears to have been based on the overall ratings given to the sample characteristics.
Results of individual ASTM tests run showed that Christic Quarry meets or exceeds the minimum requirements in specific gravity, absorption, soundness, L. A. abrasion, and the Kansas f reeze thaw (25 cycles) tests.
The IE inspector had no further questions regarding the source qualification for coarse aggregate.
This item is considered closed.
b.
Fine Aggregate The source of fine aggregate used in the containment base mat was the Holiday Sand and Gravel Company of Bonner Springs, Kansas.
The IE inspector determined the following information by review of records and by discussion with licensee representatives.
The sequence of source qualification for fine aggregate was as follows:
t"g$.M
_4-o
8/17-22/77 - Petrographic and chemical analysis by Law Engineering Testing Company 9/06/77
- QC supplier qualification certificate issued 9/06/77
- Source approved by Daniel Project Civil Engineer 9/06/77
- Owner approval of P.O.
9/07/77
-
P.O. issued (P.O. # 7158-SR-15019) to Holiday Sand & Cravel 10/03/77
- Source inspection by Daniel QC Petrographic analysis of the fine aggregate indicates that the materials are clean, hard, dense, durable, and free from significant amounts of deleterious reactive materials.
The ASTM C289-71 test indicates aggre-gate to be innocuous.
The IE inspector had no more questions regarding this matter and it is considered closed.
(Closed) Noncompliance (STN 50-482/78-13):
Failure to Conduct 3-Day Cement Compression Tests.
The IE inspector verified the issuance of NCR No. ISN0812C and RCI (Request for Clarification of Information) Request No. 1-0133-C, which identified the lack of 3-day compression strength.
Three-day compression tests are now being conducted.
This was verified by reviewing Cement User Tests (CUT) # 21 through 33.
This item is considered closed.
(Closed) Nonccmpliance (STN 50-482/78-13):
Failure to Follow Specifications in Regard to Statistical Analysis of Concrete Cylinder Tests.
Through dis-cussion with the Daniel Project Civil Engineer, the IE inspector determined that he has been instructed to use only cylinders tested on the specified day in the computations for coefficient of variation.
This item is con-sidered closed.
(Closed) Noncompliance (STN 50-482/78-13):
Failure to Provide Complete Inf ormation in NCR l-0229-C.
The IE inspector determined that all infor-mation had been submitted to the A/E (Bechtel).
Through discussions with the responsible Daniel Construction Engineering Fbnager, the IE inspector also determined that he has been directed by Daniel Project Ebnager to check all NCPa for accuracy and completeness prior to approving NCRs and forwarding them to the A/E, Bechtel.
This item is considered closed.
(Closed) Noncompliance (STN 50-482/78-13):
Failure to Establish Mix Design 42-C-LA-N (Rev. 1) According to Specifications and Procedures.
The lE inspector verified that the Project Civil Engineer has been directed to follow ACI 301, Method 1 for all new mix designs.
In addition, AP-I-03,
" Preparation and Adjustment and Control of Concrete FUx Designs," has been 58s;95-5-
revised by the issuance of ICP (Interim Change to Procedure) 97.
This procedure revision requires, prior to Project Civil Engineer's approval of new mix designs, that complete documentation of all new mix designs (and significant adjustments to approved mis designs) be sent to Daniel's corporate headquarters for review and approval by Technical Services.
This will be done prior to use of the mix design at Wolf Creek.
This item is considered closed.
(Closed) Unresolved Item (STN 30-482/77-09):
Receipt Inspection Activities.
The condition of structural steel received on site has improved since the licensee reviewed this item with Bechtel.
However, the site 1007. receipt inspection has continued in order to identify all discrepancies from a contractural standpoint as well as quality assurance.
After review of this item with the licensee, the IE inspector determined that the receipt of nonconf orming steel is no longer a significant problem.
This item is con-sidered closed.
(Closed) Unresolved Item (STN 50-482/77-10):
Essential Service Water (ESU)
System Yard Piping.
Purchase of all ESW piping is now specififed for a minimum wall thickness (0.365 taches).
For purposes of clearing this item, this action is considered satisfactory.
However, see paragraph 9 for a related p roblem.
This item is considered closed.
(Closed) Unresolved Item (STN 50-482/78-11):
Component Cooling Water Pump.
The component cooling water pump has been returned to Wolf Creek after being checked by the manufacturer for damage.
No internal damage was found.
The manufacturer's QA checklist was reviewed by the IE inspector.
This item is considered closed.
(Closed) Unresolved Item (STN 50-482/78-11):
Stop-Work Order.
The KGSE procedure and Dcniel procedure for stop work are now compatable and distri-bution of stop-work orders to the QC Manager and other responsible managers is being made properly. This item is considered closed.
(Closed) Unresolved Item (No. 3) ! (STN 50-482/78-13):4)2/ eview of Selected R
Cement >bnuf ac turer's Test and Unresolved Item (No.
(STN 30-482/78-13):
Tests by PCA on Additional Samples of Cement.
The following information was obtained:
WoJf Creek Cement Supplier (Ash Grove Cement Co.)
On March 7, 1979, the IE inspector, in company with a KGSE representative, visited the Chanute, Kansas, facility of the Ash Grove Cement Company. Ash Grove is under contract to Daniel International for supplying Type II cement
~2/This refers to the list of unresolved items in Inspection Report STN 50-482/78-13-6-585296
for the Wolf Creek project.
The IE inspector reviewed various parts of the QA program and its implementation.
Discursions were held with the plant superintendent and the chief chemist.
Th following areas were examined:
a.
QA Manual The QA Manual required by Dar.iel Furchase Order No. 7158-SR-15000 was reviewed.
The manual was approved by Daniel on April 10, 1975.
Required periodic vendor inspections have been performed by Daniel QC.
Reference Sanple Program 3/
b.
Cement The reports of Cement Reference Samples No. 43 through No. 50 (January 1977 to July 1978) were examined by the IE inspector.
Ash Grove has participated in the reference sample program for several years.
Results of the tests indicate that the Ash Grove results were approxi-mately 8-10% higher than the national average considering tests conducted on Reference Samples No. 43 through 48.
This is not considered signifi-cant by the IE inspector in that the tests were consistently in the positive direction and within two standard deviations of the national median values.
See Table No. 3.
c.
Cement Test Data Physical Compressive Strength Tests (ASTM C-109)
Table 1 contains information on the cement manufactured by Ash Grove for the specific certification tests shown and identifies the compressive strengths at 3, 7, and 28-days.
During the review of data, it was noted that physical tests appeared not to have been conducted by Ash Grove or that data were not available for testing done on Fby 27 & 28, 1977, and en August 27, 1977.
The Ash Grove QA program requires physical and chemical tests to be conducted daily during production.
This matter was discussed with the licensee.
An audit was conducted on Ash Grove by Daniel QA on Bby 14, 1979.
The audit determined that complete physical tests are now being conducted by Ash Grove in compliance with the QA program.
The audit also deter-mined that the missed tests are not significant it, that the chemical tests were all within specification limits.
(This informat? A. was given to the IE inspector prior to the written report being completed.)
Table No. 2 contains information regarding the 32a sieve test data (ASIM C-430-75) obtained from Ash Grove.
This test is an indication of cement grinding fineness and thus indicates a degree of the rate of the 3/The Cement Reference Sample Program is conducted by the Cement and Concrete Reference Laboratory (CCRL), National Bureau of Standards, Washington, D.C.
-7-585Z97
cement hydration.
While this is not a test required by the Wolf Creek specification, it is an indication of the consistency of the cement production from the facility.
Cement Tests by PCA (Portland Cement Association)
The PCA conducted additional tests for compressive strength (ASTM C-109)
on four cement samples.
The results of all cement tests are given in Table B (Revised).
The most reccat test information was reported to the NRC in KGSE letters to Region IV dated February 28, 1979, and April 11, 1979. These tests indicate that the cement representing User Tests 15, 18, 20 and 21 all meet and exceed the minimum requirements of ASTM C-150.
This also verifies the results of the site User Tests and manuf acturer's tests.
These items are considered closed.
3.
Site Tour The IE inspectors made a general tour of the site to observe construction activities, and to inspect general state of cleanliness.
No items of noncempliance or deviations were identified.
4.
Lakes, Dans and Canals - Observation of Work (ESWS)
The IE inspector reviewed Daniel Work Procedure WP-lI-100, " Excavation,"
Rev. 3, dated July 14, 1978, and witnessed the excavation of the Essential Service Water System (ESWS) pipeline trench by Clarkson Construction Company craftsmen at the juncture of the intake and discharge pipes.
The sideslopes of the excavation were being maintained ct a 1:'. slope as required.
Five foot offset stakes were placed at the surface grade elevation and the excavated material was being spoiled to a designated waste araa outside the south gate.
The Clarkson craftsman questioned by the IE inspector appeared to be knowledgeable in the sideslope requirements for the excavation as well as the procedures to follow in the event a noncon-forming situation is encountered while excavating.
The craftsman had in his possession Daniel Excavation Permit No. 374, dated May 16, 1979, and Pipe Rerouting Permit No. 3 71, dated April 14, 1979.
Both permits were properly signed by the Daniel Underground Coordinator.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
5.
Lakes, Dans and Canals - Quality Records (ESWS)
There was no work in progress on backfilling the bedding material for the ESWS pipeline, but the IE inspector reviewed a sample of the sieve analysis work sheets for the bedding material placed to date.
Sargent and Lundy Specification A-3852, Amendment 5, dated February 21, 1979, covers the ES'JS bedding material.
Paragraph 301.5.cl.1 of Specification A-3852 585'298-a-
requires that not less than 95% of the bedding material pass the 1/2" sieve and not less than 95% be retained on a No. 4 sieve.
Paragraph 301.5.c2.1 further specifies six allowable alternate gradations for the bedding material.
The IE inspector reviewed fourteen sieve analysis quality records prepared by Daniel QC testing personnel covering a period f rom February to May 1979.
All fourteen records indicated the bedding material failed to meet the allowable specification gradations, but the material was approved for use by the Dames and Moore consulting engineering staff.
Discussion with the Dames and Moore field geologist produced the explanation that as long as the sieve analysis results fell within the envelope of values formed by the six alternate gradations considered collectively, the material, in the opinion of the consulting staf f, was acceptable.
Further questioning of Daniel, Dames and Moore, and Kansas Gas and Electric personnel revealed that obtaining bedding material that was within speci-fications has been a problem since the inception of backfilling operations.
An extensive search for a suitable source of material failed to produce a vendor that could meet the originally specified gradations.
A meeting was held at the site among all the major project participants on Fbrch 29, 1978, to discuss the backfill material problem.
The meeting resulted in the proposal of the six alternate gradations (as compared to the single gradation allowed in the original specification) which were incorporated into the Specification in Amendment 4 and 5.
Bechtel Corporation informed KGEE via a letter (# BLKE-449, dated June 7, 1978) that all six gradations would be acceptable provided the adequacy of all the gradations for minimum relative density and liquefaction potential was verified by Sargent and Lundy and/or Dames and Moore.
The IE inspector requested to see the documentation on the verification of the two parameters.
The Dames and Moore consultant called the home office in Chicago to request whatever documentation was available.
Until the verification of the relative density and liquefaction potential and the method of accepting the gradation analyses on a collective basis is reviewed, the adequacy of the bedding material is in question.
This matter is considered unresolved.
6.
Implementation of Welding Procedures The IE inspector reviewed Daniel International Procedures CUP-501, " Welding Frocedure Qualification," CWP-502, " Qualification of Welders," and CUP-510
" Maintenance of Welder Qualifications."
A tour was made of the welder testing facility on site and a check was made of four in-process testing data sheets.
The welder testing and qualification programs for new welders were examined along with the contin-uing program for the upgrading of the qualifications of currently employed welders.
r g%N-9-
In conjunction v
the review, twenty-one completed weld joint records were randomly e.ccted from storage and the qualifications of the welders performing the work were cross checked by dates to verify that personnel qualifications were valid at the time the welds were produced.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
7.
Control of Welding Consumables The lE inspector reviewed Daniel International Procedures CWP-503 and CWP-525 for contcol of welding consumables and for control of welding consumables at off-site testing facilities for welder qualification.
No inspection was performed at the off-site facility. However, on-site rod issue rooms No. 1, 2 and 3 were toured.
Rod issue records, current welder qualification sheets, oven temperatures, calibration stickers and rod-handling techniques were examined.
Attendants at each rod issue station were interviewed to assure each had a thorough understanding of the rod issue and handling procedures.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
8.
Welding of Safety-Related Piping (Repairs)
At the time of the inspection, there was only one weld repair in progress on safety related piping. Weld joint No. F009 on Drawing IM-03EJ01-(Q)
had been rejected by in-process radiography of the root pass cad the entire root pass was removed.
A second weld record sheet, form F-101 was issued by QC and entered on the supplementary log sheet.
Both piping ends were prepared, a new and complete weld made, and the joint radiographed Radio-graphy of the completed weld again revealed an unacceptable condition and tnree areas were ground-out in preparation for repair welding.
Two of these three defects were at such a depth in the weld that their complete removal necessitiated penetration of the pipe wall in the weld root area.
A third new weld record sheet, form F-101. was issued and stapled to the paper traveler package.
This third forn F-101 was not issued by QC and was, therefore, not recorded on the supplementary log sheet.
Further questioning revealed that this form was erroneously issued by the welding supervisor.
The welding supervisor has been instructed in proper procedures, the third weld record was destroyed and all blank F-101 forms were placed under the strict control of QC personnel.
Additional review of twenty traveler packages for welds awaiting repair and twenty completed repair packages indicated that this noted instance appeared to be an isolated case.
Since it was discovered jointly by the IE inspector and KG&E personnel, with corrective action taken immediately, no further action is required at this time.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
However, this area of welding repairs on safety-related piping is considered unresolved pending review of additional weld repair items to determine the ef fectiveness of the procedures.
5853C0-10-
9.
Welding of Safety Related Piping The IE inspector perf ormed a review of completed welding records for the Essential Service Water System.
It was noted that on Drawing No. I-C-K206, weld j oint No. F067-003 repairs were accomplished that appear to conflict with Bechtel Specification No. 10466-M-204, Revision 8, and Bechtel/SNUPPS Drawinb MS-2, Revision 22.
During the fabrication of weld joint No. F067-003, several alignment lugs were welded to the pipe to assure proper pre-weld fit-up.
After completion of the root pass, the welding supervisor removed these lugs by hitting them with a hammer until the welds broke.
This resulted in a torn metal surface condition of the pipe that extended to varying depths into the base material.
QC was notified and depth dimensions taken at the damaged locations.
Prior to disposition of this data by engineering and the issuance of a repair welding authorization, the welding supervisor began undocumented repair of six of these areas.
The engineering evaluation (DR-079) called for the repair of only four damaged spots.
As the six repairs were accomplished without proper documentation and instruction, DR-098 was issued authorizing the complete grind-out and re-weld of all six repair areas rather than the original four.
Bechtel/SNUPPS Drawing MS-3, Revision 22 states that piping 26" through 42" diameter will be 0.365" minimum wall thickness as opposed to a nominal wall thickness or schedule designation.
Bechtel Specification No. 10466-M-204, Revision 8, paragraph 7.10.1 defines " injurious surface damage" and provides guidance in the repair of both piping ordered to a ninimum wall thickness and piping ordered to a nominal wall thickness.
DR-079 called for the repair of each damaged spot whose depth exceeded 0.047" or 12.5% of the nominal pipe wall.
Defect depths, therefore, were recorded only for the four original areas that exceeded this dimension.
It appears from the 0.047" (12.5%) allowance that an error was made during the evaluation as'the rejectable limit for anomalies in piping ordered to a minimum wall thickness.
In this case anything that violates the basic ordering dimension should be rejected.
Six damaged areas were repaired, insps eted and accepted per the instructions of DR-098.
There are no records shou;ng the total number of damaged areas at this pipe joint or how many other joints incurred similar damage but were not repaired because the defects did not exceed the erroneous 0.047" depth dimension.
As this was discovered only two hours prior to the end of the inspection, there was not sufficient time for IE, KG&E and Daniel to fully investigate the sicuation.
This will, therefore, be considered an unresolved item for follow up during a subsequent inspection.
10.
Review of Quality Records (Welding)
Through record review and interviews, one IE inspector ascertained that welded pipe joints in various systems have been radiographed in the final welded condition and the film considered to be for "information only" if rejectable indications were noted.
The IE inspector was told that all radiographs deemed rejectable were discarded once repairs had been performed and an acceptable
$$N1-11-
set of radiographs produced.
Repair welds have been made, the welds re-radiographed and the acceptable film 09 ); included in the final record package.
Further questioning disclosed that the " info only" radiographs were not dis-carded but were, in f act, separately filed by the on-site Level II film int e rp rete r. This was done so that he would have a comparison set of radio-graphs to guarantee defect removal prior to final acceptance.
Conversations with Daniel QC personnel and the Daniel Project Manager led to the commitment that these and all future radiographs will be retained and stored as part of the final quality data package for each welded joint.
The Project Manager also stated that the practice of radiographing final condition welds for
" info only" had been stopped and would be used in the future only with specific prior approval when unusual circumstances warranted it.
He added that a concerted program is presently under way to upgrade the quality of welding and will drastically reduce the reject percentage of welds.
Surveillance by IE will be performed in this area on subsequent inspections.
Pending verification of the proper filing and retention of the radiographs, ti.is will be considered an unresolved item.
11.
KG&E Site Quality Assurance Organization The IE inspector determine that the following changes in the site QA
organization had occurred:
a.
The site QA staf f has been increased to five permanent staff members and two temporary staff.
Interviews are continuing in order to hire another contractor QA auditor.
A secretary has been hired for the QA group. A summer engineering student has also been obtained.
The staf f is expected to increase to nine technical and one secretary by approximately September 1, 1979.
Two temporary engineers have been assigned from Operations Department.
b.
An Assistant QA Manager, Site, has been appointed.
Duties include office coordination, research, scheduling and training.
c.
KG&E QA personnel specialists areas are as follows:
QA Welding Technician QA Engineer - Welding and Electrical QA Auditor - Piping and Welding Summer Engineer Trainee - Electrical and Civil QA Engineer - NDE and QA Program (also assigned as an Assistant QA Manager)
4/ References: (a) USNRC (RIV) letter to KGSE (Koester) dated >brch 22, 1979; (b) KG&E letter to USNRC (RIV) dated February 16, 1979-12-585302
12.
Unresolved Items Unresolved items are matters about which more information is required in order to ascertain whether they are acceptable items, items of noncompliance, or deviations.
Unresolved items disclosed during the inspection are dis-cussed in the following paragraphs:
-
ESW Bedding lbterial
-
Repairs to Safety Related Piping
-
Welding of Saf ety Related Piping
-
Welding Records - Radiographs 13.
Exit Inte rview The IE inspector met with the licensee representatives (denoted in paragraph 1) at the conclusion of the inspection on Fby 17, 1979.
The IE inspector summarized the purpose and scope of the inspectica.
The findings were discussed.
The unresolved items were acknowledged by the licensee represen-tative.
-13-
<85303
TABLE NO. 1 ASH GROVE CEMErlT COMPAtlY Cert. Test No.
Date 3-day _
7-day 28-day
(1977) 7/6 2417 3625 5030 7/7 2425 4600 5210 7/8 2533 4675 4840 1/
2442 4025 5208 7/9 & 10 8a (same as 7/6-8)
8b 5/26 2380 3610 5309 9a 5/26 2380 3610 5309 5/27 (no physical tests conducted)
5/28 (no physical tests conducted)
5/29 2310 3400 5308 9b 8/26 2390 3580 4980 8/27 (no data available)
8/28 2420 3533 5083 10a (same as 9b)
11/22 2140 3080 4660 11/23 2000 2830 4880 11/24 1897 2530 4660
11/21 2340 3260 4880 11/22 2140 3080 4660 11/23 2000 2830 4880 11/24 1897 2530 4660 11/25 1951 2690 4880 11/26 2220 3150 5000 11/27 2250 3425 4967
(1978) 3/17 2160 3280 4940 1/ Sample combined 585304
TABLE NO. 2 ASH GROVE CEMENT COMPANY 325 SIEVE TEST DATA Certification No.
% Passing
88.5 8a 88.5 8b 91.4
90.0 9a 91.4 9b 89.4
97.7 10a 89.4
89.1
90.7 flote : The availability of this information was made known to the licensee.
585305
'
.
TABLE NO. 3 CEMENTREFERENCESAMPLEPROGRAM1/
Lab. No. 125 Nat.
Nat.
Sample No.
Date 3-day _
Avg.
Rating 7-day Avg.
Rating 2/
1/77 3760 3105
4660 4163
44 3/77 3750 3253
4780 1269
45 7/77 2780 2766
3800 3661
46 7/77 3020 2906
4230 3964
47 1/78 3740 3579
4700 4466
48 1/78 2940 2697
3E00 3463
49 7/78 Data excluded >3SD --------------- -----------------
7/78 Data exculded >350 ---------------------------------
5 85 high 1/ Cement and Concrete Reference Laboratory National Bureau of Standards, Washington, D.C.
20234 2/ Rating Standard Deviation
<1
1-1.5
1.5-2
2-2.5
> 2. 5 5833E6
.
TABLE B (REVISED)
THIS TABLE UPDATES THE IldORMATIO:4 C0:lTAlflED Ift TABLE B, If1SPECTI0ft REPORT STil 50-482/78-13 (This table shows that all cement used in Wolf Creek base mat meets the minimum specification requirements.)
5853I7
TABIE B (Revised)
(Ref: STN 50-482/78-13)
COMPARISON OF CEt1ErlT TESTS
,
,
DATE DATE 141LL SILO DATE SILO USER TESTS TGNUF. IESTS PCA TESTS UT NO.
sat 1 PLED TESTED TEST fi0.
NO.
FI'_ L E D 3/7/28-DAY 3/7/28-DAY 3/7/28-DAY UT-10 9/12/77 9/26/77
36 8/23-25/77 NA/2990/5033 2492/3563/5379 UT-il 9/20/77 9/26/77
tiA/3110/5267 UT-12 9/28/77 10/04/77
34 7/06-10/77 flA/2075/5321 2516/3878/5072 UT-13 10/06/77 10/11/77
t;A/3133/5196 UT-14 10/19/77
34 10/10-14/77 flA/3950/5790 2438/3652/5044 (XFR from cl1 S1.0 #9)
CD UT-15GT 11/10/77 11/16/77 t!A/3350/5140 2460/3565/53C5 CO UT-16]
11/21/77 11/21/77
36 9/23-10/5/77 t;A/3260/5180 2403/3531/5317
/3625/5525 UT-17 12/12/77 12/20/77 fiA/3570/3370
/3720/5600 t1A/2'60/ 3680*
UT-18 12/19/77 12/27/77
34 11/22-27/77 flA,2550/4110 2076/2950/4841 2485/3390/5340 UT-19 1/23/78 2/06/78
36 1/10-18/78 t!A/3590/4800 2114/2995/4847 UT-20 3/20/78 3/28/78
34 2150/2940/4890 2076/2950/4811 2035/2885/5015 UT-21 4/21/78 4/26/78
36 2280/3260/4710 2060/3232/
2290/3315/5400 UT-22 5/03/78 5/04/78
34 2130/3270/5430 UT-23 6/02/78 6/09/78
34 2000/3070/4580 UT-24 6/27/78 6/29/78
36 2150/3310/5340
- Retest - flCR l-0146-C