ML17272A887

Slide Presentation Entitled Sacrificial Shield Wall: Analysis,Design,Const of Sacrificial Shield Wall.

ML17272A887
Person / Time
Site:	Columbia
Issue date:	02/06/1980
From:	WASHINGTON PUBLIC POWER SUPPLY SYSTEM
To:
Shared Package
ML17272A885	List: ML17272A886 ML17272A887
References
NUDOCS 8003310021
Download: ML17272A887 (120)

Text

,~ 'c ~

QQgtffot g'

~-3~7 .

g I+

+ ~ ET of Oooomeoh RECDLKTDRY DOCKET. FILE

~keuruW 8 000 S1 0

~~i

rt p

~j

,6, nq rgggif '~

eJ '. Lt 414

~ ~

E "L

I .

5 r ~O

APPROYk~ DEU'86 o ~<< ih. EPPES-7LI-2-R2-B o A~pzo~ B( L8iRC t ~ca, (hr, 35, 1975 EPHOR'O'KE NTH lB/RC STNH%) R-VIEH PLY 3.8;3 o LoADs 0 LGAD GNBLJNTIONs .

0 A"CEPTANCE TRITER lA BQIS 0; DHIEN o ELAsTrc maI'ter. mass ww~ PARY 1, MSC 1%9

I ~

' e 0 s' I

il p lF gl i ap f I

4i r ~ e

~ ~

A%LYSIS 0- S9i'S SPAZ FRAN

$%LYTICkt KBZ ~JJSH Y SIt'DtJTES ACTU,kl STRUCTUE, S~~~Z We COur"~S: famS 0; SPaZ e~~ ~(ITH CONTINUI I Y AT INTER<i JOINS f'DD~ EXTBH: FU'1 RW PC~MAL TO'COi<JAIi&KT YM"t IhiCLUDIIS STYLIZE TRUSS.

S1:IN PLATES; FINI I t. EELS 'r,V&l NOPE AT THE

~

FRVeam< JOINS A",@LYSIS: VIA CD'PUTER Pl9ii%'I 'STRUDL'

K'JiSfRY COiSITIO'6 AT PKWtA~ 2~'JOINERS: O,"K AT EAR COLU't) o FMiiVLDP'CTI(M IS ZEK) o R3 KFIMIf~~l 5< R~BIAt I'DVBKV o HOIZO,"flAL MCTION IS CIRCL'~r- BTIAL o iG f"D'HK

- AT JLNCTIO'i'0,- STkBIUZR TRUSS A',6 COmAIN'BA

)~SSB 8 JOINTS, t

o 0')l Y':REACTIKI, IS TAiaBG'IAL

nPES -O;- LOfQS o 0"'i) (0) ~"',0 1 IVE (L)

S-= S.~IC: O-;.-.-; (E) A'.n SSE.( )

o r;,-"S:-itP.I7:T>>:~ ~-; r "t ~ttt t!S (P.~)

-'C IO,"lS )LlE TA I>E 'O'""lk (Yp)

ANNULUS P.'-."=SSURIZATIO."I HUE TO BREAK Vi 0 RECIPCULATIO!) OLt 1=I LIHES o RECIRCULATION I~l} -7 LI!lES o .F=BNTER LINES

,o RH>ia CI LIt'~ES P PE 3;,EAK R'0C IO,'lS BLATE. P, HRBK I':l o LIt'DIES LISTB ~AVE I l AH.'8fLI!S o CDi)TROLLIHG LIll=S I."l GR%'<ELL

I' rt

CP~ITLC .1 CD"":Bi'Rl IR;"lS .~.'."=

0 "s6S~mD  :

L -: jo -: Pxo {5) o L,6S>~0  :

L  :

TA -'. 14 -: P" E (0)

.o t.6S~~D + L

't I A: RA PA + Ya -'a -'M '

(5) .

.o ~,:7S>~ D .:.1 Pa " YJ Ya + Yx F' (6)'IR:")

I,"It:A",lT L04l~S o S~IS"..<r..(E oR E')

o k)."lOLltS PP.ESSl~RE (PA)

PIPE wHIP >ERIC~ i0",lS (Y~)

~ ~

D;SIr-H OF SACRI-;-ICi;-".L S<I=tZ"NLL D"-SIGH N~)HOD Et ~S TC MO~'<IN"- S'~-'SS i't"t'-"3 P-'~T t 0- """9 AISL~t ERI~~L

'o PLATES 'HO t"t-:tHE';,S =.ÃCt=PT TOP RIIiG A."o ST.=.=..I o TOP RING A588 St"=L o M-L3 N='iAL E70ÃN OR EUUIVnI ".HT.

.f'iB'iB'-R ""SIG'I: P.l'IG 2=',l/S AND COLLt)~<lS o COI'tPUTEPi OUTPUT - 3 CDYPQi( "<TtS E'C I OF FORC= Pa~a

)'lOitEhT AT EIGIS BF ALL f'jEYBERS o . IHii=PPlKIAi." VALIIES OF SiR=SS RESULi~tIiS OBiAINE~

- AS RERIRc3 o 3~ SIGH OF &Cia NEf'ABER TYP" - COHTROLL}NG Stp.;.SS.

R""-tjLTAt)TS USER o END CONN".CiIQNS FULL STtREHGTH H'-LDH~ CD"!,tFCTtIPf'IS Sl<IH PLATE G'SIGH o COf'tPUTE;, OUTPUT fBIHPAHE STRESSES (HOB~PL pHD SHOp)

. DESIGN - PtDTE THI.CK~~." 'AND A> tACHi("lT '~=LI.S. D=tFPJ!IHB BY .CQHTRQLLIHG STRESSES IH t YPICAL AR:-AS 0 BS'A

CONCERN NO. 1 NARRATIVE

{SSW) RING 3 AND RING 4 OF THE SSM ARE NOT WELDED TOGFTHER AS SHOWN ON THE DESIGN DRAWINGS. NUMEROUS WELDS WERE MADE TO SHINS BETWEEN THE RINGS, IN LIEU OF ACTUALLY WELDING THE RINGS TOGETHER. THE A/E, TENTATIVELY, INTENDS TO INSTALL A 2 INCH PARTIAL PENETRATION MELD AROUND THE CIRCUMFERENCE OF THE SSM TO STRUCTURALLY JOIN RING 3 TO RING 4.

INTRODUCTION I MILL BE TALKING ON CONCERN NO. 1 WHICH INVOLVES WORK AT ELEVATION 541'5" IN THE SHIELD MALL. LET US PROCEiD TO THE TRANSPARENCIES AND A SECTION OF THE WALL AT THIS LEVEL; (SEE TRANSPARENCY NO. 2)

TRANSPARENCY NO. 1 NARRATIVE

~

STRUCTURAL REPAIR AT INTERFACE EL. 541'5" THIS TALK ADDRESSES THE METHOD OF TRANSNISSION OF HORIZONTAL SHEAR ACROSS THE INTERFACE AT ELEVATION 541'5" IN THE SHIELD MALL. THE PROBLEM HERE IS THAT RINGS 2 AND 3, ABOVE AND BELOW THE INTERFACE, HAVE NOT BFEN WELDED TOGETHER AS SHOWN ON THE CONTRACT DRAWINGS. IT IS NO!ED THAT I-HAVE USED THE TEiNINOLOGY OF THE CONTRACT DRAWINGS. THE NRC tlEMO REFiRS TO THiSE RINGS AS 3 AND 4.

THE PROPOSED CORRECTION MEASURE INVOLVES THE INSTAI LATION OF A PARTIAL PENETRATION MELD ALONG THE EXTERIOR CIRCUMFERENCE BETWEiN THE TMO RINGS.

THIS REPRESENTS A CHANGE, FROM THE ORIGINAL DESIGN At<D AS SUCH IS OF CONCERN TO USNRC.

THIS TALK WILI FIRST DESCRIBE THE CONTRACT REQUIREMENTS AND THE PROPOSED CORRECTION WELD. THEN THE DESIGN CONCEPT FOR THE CORRECTION WILL BE DISCUSSED AND FINALI Y THE CONTROLLING FiATURES OF THE CORRECTION MILL BE STATED. THESE FEATURES ARE THE CONTROLLING LOADING, LOAD COYiBINATION AND DESIGN MARGIN.

1

~ ~

STRLlCTUPAL 'H'AIR AT"IfGERFACE 'L;- 5Q'-5" CO"ItjITIG) AT INHPFACE EL. 5Q'-5" o TR48<ISSIQ'l O,= 83RIZKKAL S';M ACKL~S INTERFACE o RIHCS 2 +to 3 AR. )GT NKDH) TORCHER AS S}Q H OS (DHi%CT BRIINN)GS.

CQ'lCER,'I fENP <t. TO PRi3RXE 00fKCTIO"I o PKLRXF0 CORKCTIOi) IWOLYES PARTIAL PBKIIIATIOI<

ED AURA I- RIOR CIRQJ'RBtCE E7NB'1 THE RINGS,,I o THIS PPRESBGS A CMICE FKN ORIGINL D=S! GtI SCtK OF TALK CDGRCCt fKQIIPPBITS o COIIECTIO'I 5KB IFSCRIPTIG) .

o D-SIG,"I CAPT FOR tK: CORRECTIO")

o . CMKILLING NATURES 0= CORRECTIO!< LCKI IG, LQZ CO'BIISTIOi'I, 0=SIGN NRCIH,

,TRANSPARENCY NO. 2 NARRATIVE CONTRACT REOUIREHENT - PROVISION FOR SHEAR AT INTERFACE EL. 541'5" THE SPECIAL REgUIREt<ENTS FOR SHEAR TRANSMISSION AT THE INTERFACE AT EL. 541'5" FOLLOW FROM THE METHOD OF ERECTION OF THE SHIELD MALL. AS MAS NOTED IN THE PREVIOUS TALK, THE SHIELD MALL MAS ERECTED IN TWO PHASES WITH THE INTERFACE AT EL. 541 '5" SEPARATING THE UPPER AND LOWER PORTIONS.

o AS SEEN IN THE CROSS SECTION, THE INTERFACE LIES BETWEEN UPPER CHAi'i'NEL 2 AND THE LOWER BOX SEAM 3.

o THE CONTRACT PROVIDED FOR TRANSMISSION OF HORIZONTAL.SHEAR. BY SLOT MELDS IN CHANNEL WEB JOINING THE BOX BEAM.

o AS INDICATED IN THE PLAih, 4 SLOT MELDS MERE PROVIDED IN THE VICINITY OF EACH OF THE 24 WF COLUMNS WHICH JOIN THE CHANNEL--

FRON ABOVE.

o IN ORDER TO PLUMB THE UPPER PORTiON OF THE MAlL ABOVE EL. 541 '5" ~

SHINS MERE PLACED BETWEEN MEMBERS 2.AND 3. THEN, IN MANY CASES THE SLOT MELDS THROUGH THE CHANNEL MEB MERE MADE TO THE SHIMS INSTEAD

~

OF TO MEMBER 3. THUS, THE CONTRACT RE(UIREt1ENT WAS VITIATED.

i~

L. ~

y0 0 0

0 ~O

>27SPAR:"NCY NO. 3 M AP. f I >tdK PROPOS D 'AT:-3"AC " CORK>CTlOH

"~ZVATiQN r ND S" CTiON

'T AND G~" RAL:"~=T~S OP'~ CQR~-"C ZQN

%~M Z9- S."OWN iN T:-"S- Vi"b~.

SE~ iQH A-A, TZ~T ACROSS ' SFi" LD N~, S2QWS:

Y~HER 2 ~OV- THE ih~Z~ZACE AND BOX S ZM ~LATES ~V- 3:"" N iNSTA~ =D:E ~ "EN 2 TWO UP TO A I"'~i~vH TFiCZh:"SS OP 1/2 ZNCZ.

CORHCTiOH br.~M iS A PENT>DZ PMTRATiON GROG'tI  %~M,BETE r N x'" - TWO M:-MZEBS .

T."- UP~" R Vi"8 iS AN 2'~RiOR ZL-VATiON OP TE" WALL~

SFOWS,

~i.

UPPER CQLUMS TO ROC Z

~

iNST>~ED COLE'PLiC:" P~~T BOX S H.".i'OIN.

DMS BELOW 'F" T~

FQR

~~

PROPOSED COH~CTiQN WELD 4 .ZCH Wi~ EX~iD FULL WiD'ZE B~HZEN SPLiC" PLATES ZN ~CS

.24 PANELS AROUbD TFE. WALL

'P

lj S

0

HORIZONTAL SH:<RS AR- TRAtlSllITTH) BEt '~i.'-"l RltlG CHAtmEL Q2 A,"IB Ritz BOX QS; HORIZONTAL SHEARS F.',ON CHAlttlEL ~2 ARE ltttE TO o )',OPEZO ~ >AL RE<CTIOtlS B~" ) SKI.".'t ( t ~S .A Qt .CHAt]"~EL o HQRIZOI)TAL EACH At)S 8&i",= ') 'P2> COLl~~t'.S A".(0 CHPPI"EL

~ DIP~~TIA><S OF SPEgoS gag p TM)GF'<TI<L {CIRCllt'<F~PQQIAL) .FRON SKI.") P) ATES.

o TA )6B)TI<.L 3;!6 PPBIAL FPAff COLll"<".lS E

'I ANALYSIS IS BASi3 O'.l OtlE Wi PA".,EL (B&i<EBI H2t-'OLlJNtS) o LWPGFST CA~SIf)EB SPBR Il) A")Y 0<!F. PAHEL IS USEO o H.aE COR~ECTIOH IS .% PLEB TO ALL PA')ELS NELG O<aIB o HEIDI.")6 PROCEDURES HILL HE AtlhLIFIEO I.'j ACCDRDAi)CE HIll REQ)'IRB"tWS ~F 0!tS BI.~'.,

o ALLO>%BLE STRESSES ASSOCIATE ':tITH PARTiAL PB)ETRATIOi<

j,P,OOV: ~~~US <;,. ~~Sr Ft < CnV~CTIO"t >F.Sre:).

k

'I I II

C0-.1~~: 01 t I;16'PA:"GAEL SHEAR o DOE TG.BF"0, LI~!E, S'IS".IC (OHE), Al)D O',"NJ1 US'.

PRESS/lI',IZATIA,'t A.'8 PIPE REACTIAfI BATH CAllSED BY

, rr~>hL~.i ~R BR=<.K.

o P<HEL Tk'IGBITI.<L SHE~.R: 327,0 KIPS o P4;"IEL RU~I.<t . SHE<.R: 27.~ KIPS

~

f r CO,')TROLLI;"I6 LOU COt'.BI~IATIOtI!AITIIACC::-'TABI I= STRESS L~B .

o SRP COi'SIHATIOH 5: t,6 S D + L :

PA+ YR + E COHTRQLLI,'I6 DES I6;"I AJRRG IH o PEPSI SS ISLE STRESS/ACTUAL STRESS = 2,3

PROBLEh 3

'(SSlf) NUVEROUS DEFICIENCIES IN STRUCTURAL klELD EQUALITY HAYE BEEN IDENtIFIED ON THE SSi~ STRUCTURE. THE D FICIEtiCIES k'ERE IDENTIFIED IN hELDS WHICH MERE SUPPOSEDLY It!SPECTED At!D ACCEPTED- DEF CIENCIES INCLUD CRACKS, bliDEPCL~>, OYERLAP AND SLAG ON FIELDS (:tlDICATIHG INSPECTIONS COULD NOT HAYE B N PROPERLY PERFORMED) o ~

COHCERtl tl0. '3 WNP-2 ACTiON PLAtl o ISSUED A "STOP WORK ORDER" OH SS!3 IHYESTI GATIOH R VIEl 'OF ItlSPECTIOH RECORDS ON SSh SItiCE HALL hAS COMPLETED ESTABLISHED A REINSPECTION PROGRAt1 PERFORMED SAt1PLE U.T. EXAMIHATIOHS e , PROBLEM STATUS

I SSW IHSPECTION PECORDS (SINCE WALL WAS COMPL" iED)

APPROXIMATELY 500 ATTACHt'iEffTS/IHSPECTIONS REVIEW OF INSPECTION REPORTS (IR) AflD NOf<CONFORYiING REPORTS (NCR) ON SSW IDENT FIED 31 DEFECTS:

~

3 POROSITY AND SLAG 2 COCKS Itl BASE MATERIAL 18 CRACYS IH WELDYiEHTS 2 UNDERCUT 6 LACK OF FUSION (COLD LAP) tIAGt'lETIC PARTICLE EXR'11tlATIONS.

WP-84 APPLIED (1/78)

(A) EXAMINATION OF BASE t'lATERIAL (B) MItlIMUH OF FOUR tel'XAMINATIONS Off EACH WELDED JOINT HT REPORTS BEING REVIEWED

II REItiSPECTEor< PROGRAtl a 100~ REIHSPECTIOH OF ALL ACCESSIBLE WELDS BY AN AMS MELD INSPECTOR AiND A MELDING ENGINEER IDEHTIFICATIOH OF TYPE AHD EXTENT OF DEFICIENCIES o CURRENT STATUS-ESTit~iATED NUMBER OF ACCESSIBLE MELDS OH SSW 1500 t>UMBER INSPECTED AS OF JANUARY 31, '0 '014 NUtiBER OF MELDS COHFORf~)IHG TO Ah)S D1.1 509 HUHBER OF NONCONFORHING TO AMS D1.1 505 a TYPE OF DEFICIENCIES:

POROSITY

.INCOYiPLETE FUSIOH ("OYERLAP", "COLD LAP")

IMPROPER PROFILE EXCESS CONYEXI) Y, UNDERSIZED, CRATERS HOT CRACKED ARC STRIKES

III SAMPLE U.T. EXAt'.INATIOliS ~

o PERFORt'iED UT EXAMINATIONS OF ELEYEN El ECTPOSLAG GROOYE WELDS o ALL WELDS WERE ACCEPTABLE III PROBLEM STATUS e THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THE RESPECTABLE IttDICATIOHS MILL BE AHALYSED.

At<Y DEFECT THAT IS DETER!iINED TO BE STRUCTURALLY SIGNIFICANT MILL BE EVALUATED YERSUS THE ORIGINAL DESIGN LOADING o OVERALL INYESTIGATIOH OF SSM IS NOT COMPLETE, INDIYIDUAL DEFECT EVALUATION HAVE HOT BEEN PERFOPJ<ED, AHD WE HAVE tlOT REACHED A FINAL CONCLUSION.

SSM/PMR (SSW) Voids in the concrete have been identi'=ied in the SSM. The voids rec ntly identi=ied may eTTecv the previously accepted correc ive action plan, due to the potential increase in magnitude o7 the voiding probl en. This plan may involve use o7 the operating plant to detect additional voids.

Voids also axis betwe n rings 3 and 4 o~ the SSM (se item .1)

RESPONSE by J. CELNiK:

SHIELDING DESIGN ASPECTS OF SSW o FUNCTION SHIELD SAFETY-REI ATED EQUIPMENT IN DRYWELL

- PROTECT PERSONNEL DURING SHUTDOWN o DESIGN CONCEPT (GE) 2'RDINARY CONCRETE (BETWEEN 3." STEEL PLATES)

AND 2" STEEL PLATE FOR SHIELDING METHOD OF ANALYSIS

- NRN (l-D REMOVAL - DIFFUSION) + QAD (POINT-KERNEL)

VERIFIED WITH ANISN (1-0 DISCRETE ORDINATES)

COMPARISON WITH OTHER ANALYTICAL RESULTS AND EXPERIMENTAL DATA (ANS, EPRI, NRC)

SHIELDING BENCHMARKS OPERATING DATA o CONCLUSION SSW SHIELD DESIGN IS ADEQUATE DRYWELI DOSE RATES COMPARABLE TO THOSE IN OPERATING PLANTS

SHIELDING CONCERNS A: SHIM GAPS SSW CONSTRUCTION JOINING OF UPPER AND LOWER PORTIONS AT EL. 541'-5" SHIM INSERTS FOR CONSTRUCTION. TOLERANCES DISCOVERY OF GAPS DURING INVESTIGATION OF PLUG WELD OF RINGS- TO SHIMS o SURVEY AND DOCUMENTATION 100~~ CIRCUMFERENTIAL INSPECTION PERFORMED RESULTS "40 SHIM GAPS (25 EXTEND FULL RADICAL WIDTH}

- LARGEST GAP AREA IS 3/8" X 2>"

o CONCERNS RADIATION STREAMING

o RESOLUTION FIX METHODOLOGY TO BE CONFIRMED BY. PROTOTYPE TESTING o PROTOTYPE TESTING CONSTRUCT CHANNELS EXEMPLIFYING GAPS INSERT STEEl WOOL BACKING, POUR SHIELD MATERIAL (NOTE: SHIELD MATERIAL EXCEEDS SHIELDING EFFECTIVENESS" OF SSW)

VERIFY FILL ADEQUACY o VERIFICATION PROTOTYPE TESTING PROGRAM IN-SERVICE RADIATION SCAN PROGRAM TO DETECT MINOR GAPS IN SSW AT SHIM LEVEL

'NY MINOR STREAMING TO BE CORRECTED

B: SSW CONCRETE VOIDS POUR TECHNIQUE FROM TOP WITH WEEP HOLES (TYPE A}

FOR 24 COMPARTMENTS ABOVE EL: 541'-5" FROM WINDOW ON SIDE (TYPE B}

VOID DISCOVERY OH TOP OF SSW, BUT OF NO CONCFRH BECAUSE SIGNIFICANTLY REDUCED RADI'ATION LEVELS COMPARTMENT HAS BAFFLES WHICH MAY RESTRICT

'LOW (TYPE C)

UPON INVESTIGATION OF PLUG WELD AND REMOVAL OF SYIH PLATE, DISCOVERY OF CORNER VOIDS VOID DUE TO POUR TECHNIQUE (TYPE B}

COHCERHS

- RADIATIOH STREAMING SUSPECT REGION 24 COMPARTMENTS ABOVE EL. 541'-5" (TYPE B)

POSSIBLY IN TYPE C COMPARTMENTS IMPORTANT CONCERN PRIMARILY IH CORE REGION

o INSPECTION PROGRAM 100io OF COMPARTMENTS TYPE B 100'~ OF TYPE C IN CORE REGION RANDOM SAMPLING OF OTHER NUMBER ST BE DETERMINED BY VOIDS LOCATED 7o o RESOLUTION FIX METHODOLOGY TO BE CONFIRMED BY PROTOTYPE TESTING o PROTOTYPE TESTING TEST ADEQUACY OF METHOD OF DETECT HOLES

" DRILL HOLE IN UPPER CORNERS OF COMPARTMENT BOROSCOPE IF VOID IS FOUND, DETERMINE EXTENT

- REMOVE SKIN PLATE COMPARE VISUAL EXAMINATION WITH PREVIOUS RESULT TEST FiLL PROCEDURE DRILL HOLE, BOROSCOPE, LOCATE VOID (IF ANY)

FILL HOLE WITH COMPENSATORY SHIELD MATERIAL

~

REMOVE SKIN PLATE

. VERIFY FILL IN-SERVICE RADIATION SCAN PROGRAM LOCATE AND FIX ANY MINOR VOIDS STILL PRESENT

r l.

~

~~ s i~  ;,c

),I~

i I I

f ~

<I

'll ii ~

)W )I O

'l NIO< D 1 I~

~J E I

~ I l . ~ ~ r a a i A.P"= 4 l

r.

ip j

4 Ci t

~l z old I

~p ,'>dc.. (0 I

lI rg (

I l / c lil

~

Sg Ii I C p

ds

('d ~~r il~= 0 ~G P c)

@A

,g CHl.v:=.-.R L~~f~i-s

~cavATio~ '.

Lo~v.a, '~ Qur~ol-pi'.l-c-0=. ~/.C - ~rHI"-: D ~/~(L' CA EQQRY Qsqe.~

~ ~

g ~l .

~ +

l p~ll gal ~ g I tg 0

gfg o- ~

r 4 e ~

a r k

~ ~

,~

~II I IA ~ ~

0' gl ~g ~

~-

l r e ~

P k II

Cl

~ Ci I t

.C

• c" Pg l~ 1>>

l

( l I~. )I il I

'I I i~oio

~

k I

I :~ 7=-'UOLV

~ I Ap=h P

~ + P 4 g l~~

C ~p S'r I

I

) Co.'".. <u K~'l Q-;4'c.. i 5

/

~]'d I

I E

LID I

C3'4C.. tQ l

II I P 0

1 I:

I

/ g

'l'

('0 r i'l"-" 0,;.iG Py) 3

~~i I

@A 6HT.Q gg f 5QX.9.

C<A,td.'"-.R Light-5 L~VA+lOF .

~

0'3Yl<'~ ~+ 6'f ~Ol'-'p( l-'C"-

CA ~QQRY I

1

ITEH 4 (SSM) NDE records associated with the SSll contain photocopied inspector's UT/PT acceptance signatures. (See Item g for a related item on pipe

~

whip restraints.) (See also 85.)

Re uirement

, The specification required ultrasonic testing for checking electroslag welded tee joints for lamellar tearing and was limited to base metal thickness of 1~-"

and greater.

There was no specification requirement for performing PT. PT used by Leckenby for informational purposes in "chasing out" defects.

Ne rejection of 4 welds which were repaired and re-examined by UT.

PT was performed for. these-welds for information purposes only.

t.urther investiga tion will be made to verify that all weld repairs were re-.examined by UT.

ITEH J: (SSM) NDE qualification records cannot be located for one individual who

~

performed ultrasonic testing on the SSW, Individual is no longer employed by subcontractor ..

lictfon Complete documentation review of SSW NDE records performed, All UT was performed by Hr. G. flamilton. gualification records for llamil ton are available and under review for acceptabil ity.

Hr. C. Baldinger performed UT on 3 weld procedure qualifications. HDE certification is not available. UT for weld procedure qualifications not required by code or specification and requir ed tensile and bend tests were performed and were acceptable.

Corr ective Rction o Continued investigation to assure Hr. ltamilton's certifications are acceptable.

~ Continued investigation of records and. reports to assure any additional concerns.

are identified and resolved.

ITEH 6: (SSH) t(o procedures were generat r records. maintained on forming of the curved plates used in the SSll.

Ho req<<Irement in specification for procedure or records on forming of plate.

Comment r

Leckenby subcontracted work to Seattle Ooiler l<orks. Leckenby states that common industry practice is to'eat and/or cold forp> A-36 material. AE metallurgist statement confirms that this is industry-accepted practice and with no detrimental effects.

Supply System's position is that forming of plate was not a special process as defined in Appendix 8 of 10CFR50.

Corrective Action Ho additional action required .

EH 15: (SSl]) Interviews with Leckenby 3D, and 3C.were heat p:.1 straighte

.establ ished that SSll segments 2R, without the benefit of controlling 'R, procedures or maintenance of quality records. Ileat straightening (application of heat and mechanical force) was applied to correct weld distortion.

Re uirements No requirement in specification for procedure or records on forming of plate.

Comment lleating, straightening and cold forming is standard industry practice with no detrimental effects per'metallurgist statement. Leckenby confirms that this is standard practice and that procedures are not required. Leckenby's documentation will confirm this i.nformation.

The Welding Institute, Cambride, England, 19GO paper "Control of Distortion in llelded Fabrications", states:

o lleat wedge - shaped zones to straighten rolled steel sections o lleat local zones to correct out-of-flatness or buckles o lleat in-straight lines to correct angular distortion. Sometimes use water-jet cooling on reverse side.

Corrective Rction t/o additional action required.

ITCH 16: {SS'll) 215 quality review of Lecl e y program di<l not inclu<le yeri fj<Atiqn that all required UT examinations were performed, qs required by spec, an(l Leckenby procedure.

Re ulrement Spec 215 requires sample UT inspection as follows:

Ilo. fields To Examine 2 - 0 9-15

')6 - 25 6 If no indication of lamellar tearing is found after 24 UT examinations, the shall be reduced to 2 per 100.

Ul'xam Commen t Leckenby made 1,270 electroslag welds. >Jithout regard to size limitrqtions (platerial greater 1>-"), the required number of areas to exam would be 06. Leckenby performed ultrasonic tests on 83 welds. Test results are contained in 27 UT reports, This is in excess of the specification requirement, In addition, Leckenby examined an additional 2X of other type welds. In total, about 200 weld areas wel e examine~] 'by UT.

Corrective Rction Records available to verify proper inspection. Additional inyestigation is continuing to assure all associated certi fication records are in order;

~ ~

EH 17:~ (A) (SSH) Procedure deficiencies:;:enby used liquid penetrant testing to examine SSH structures .at Leckenb ps. Leckenby representatives reported .

that there approved Lp procedur~ at the time inspections were performed,

~

was no (0) The Leckenby procedure which provides for weld sequence control (entitled "Sacrificial Shield Hall Assembly Procedure" ) has no procedure number, no revision number, no date, no evidence of ever being approved. AHS 01.1, para-graph 3.4.3 required suhaittal to the engineer of. weld sequence and distortion control progr am.

Results o Liquid penetrant examinations are not required by code or specification.

~ Leckenby does have an approved liquid penetrant procedure.

~ Only 3 liquid penetrants reports were submitted for record purposes.

At least 4 examined by liquid penetrant were subsequently examined and accepted by UT. (UT did not have photocopied signature).

~ Leckenby's fab and erection procedure shows the general sequence of fabrication.

~ Leckenby has a commercial= document which depicts sequence of restrained joints.

This document was n>ade available (1/29/00) and is under review by Engineering.

Corrective Action A. Additional investigation to determine that all repaired areas were re-examined by UT.

B. Completion of weld sequencing review by Engineering.

(A) CONC="RN NO. 18 (SSM) Leckenby, as SSM fabricator, hired a consultant to deter ine the cause of an unusual crack in the SSM, BSR rejected the consultant's-

'etemination. According to Leckenby, their t consultant's opinion was misunderstood by BRR. BSR has not had an opportunity to review the con-sultant's last lett r (dated June 21, 1977).

(B) BACKGROUND During initial ins allation of radial beams at eleva ion 541 , a crack was discovered in the SSM at the point o attachment. Leckenby, through their consult nt, proposed a cause for the cracking to the Owner/AE.

Burns and Roe reviewed and disagreed with the consultant's proposal. A response was forwarded to Leckenby at that time.

Subsequently, the HRC was informed oi the existence of a second letter rom the consultant to Leckenby, in which the consultant clarified his ti ini ti al posi on.

The NRC questions whether Burns and Roe reco'ived, reviewed and responded to the letter.

(C) R"=SOLUTION No ac.ion is required.

(0) DISCUSSIOH This itemt should not be cause for concern,. because the cracksandin thethe adequacy SSM where the radial beams a are attached have all been repaired, of the repairs has been confirmed by ultrasonic examination. All 24 radial beams have be n disassembled and rewelded to the SSM and the adequacy of

.he attachments has been confirmed by ultrasonic examination. Thus, the explanation now of the cause'of the cracking is academic, except for its possible comnercial importance.

At the time the subject crack was discovered in the SSM where a radial beam was welded to it, three radial beams had'een attached and the install-ation of the fourth was in progress. Examination of these attachments revealed that two of the three were cracked.

Corrective action consisted of the following:

l. The radial beams were all removed from he SSM.

2. The cracks were weld repaired and the repairs were determined to be.

sound by U-T.

3. The attachment areas for all ranaining radial beams were examined by U-T and found o be sound.

(SSM) Fre water in the SSM structure - NRC RY previously unders ood that the exis ence of free water in the SSM was ono isolated case. However review of 16 contract 215 IR's shows seven (7) cases (IR2525 (2 welds), IR 3069, IR 1703, 1464 ( wo 'locations), and IR 2915) where free water or moisture emanated rom he SSM. It is not clear, consider-ing the compar~nted structure of the SSM, how water rom an external source (i.e. weather) could be the source of all leaking welds. Heed to assure water is not/wax not detri-mental (not preseni on back side of joint during weTding).

I PRoeLzyl

~~~as +~~~~c~ mzou<s jr g,q

~ TOTAL 7 ~QOQQ -g.Q qg~g ~gag

<~~>~ ~>~ P@OR TQ PLACtdg codc~~p

<<<~~~ <AVE AFTER Mc~z~uj.

- <~RECT~V~ hzrioQ

~ Y @Elm Raeo~pzz)

.~res iQeeacyzo g,gg REPACK.Q %HERE. QEczggggy

~

~

r

a~ k' c

v'

(SSM) Leckenby, as SSM fabricator, hired a consultant- to determine the cause of an unusual crack in the SSM, BER rejec¹d the consultants determination. According to Leckenby, their consultants opinion was misunderstood by B&R BER has not had an opportunity to review the consult-

ants las letter (dated June 21, 1977).

Pagan.~u 78 A~SM.~APKs'Z Zz-r ~-zA'~- B~aA'~v/~&ED Zz~mVzs: r~ mes~ a~ e~cA'wzs~u~~

.-B~cfh,'a. A Tz<Taa Kzea ccePEC~~D

~~CPS'EQG'E'A'+

- RZAVD Y/E~EEZD~D

==GG~V~LY ~~~ hzv.~ED w-~la~

-EQUGVCE g FEOCHDURE .

~ MUE~P~ AC778Af A'GA'E REQUlR'EZ7

O~~~ ~<c~

gD o+o C--v C,i MleM I; s ~

f

~+G i

~,'+

~<iiOHg 'MyroA

..DAM (GAL.~~

s A

() g 7YP

L w-TvP. &=~~A caw~.e, ~wc, <Hi= o w LL rOP HI@ xL2~ Al 8 CGV~P PL T~~

) i e

R-

~EL; &A l- '2~'

1 wgp QchJER, >~.

&=C'Tio H

~

(SSM) BSR Dwg. S-802 no e 3 refers to the spec. for PMHT reouirements of the stabilizer assemblies on the SSM. The spec. does not appear to specifically address PMHT of stab-ilizers. It" is, therefore, not clear whether designers intended to have PMET. Material involved is A514, A588, and SA537, 1 3/4" E 2" thick, full penetra ion welds. The SSM 9 stabilizer level is also A588 Grade A Steel 24" 5. 2~~"

thick with full penetration welds (0 channel S783.).

~ BKR dwg.

Dphil PE >lg m~Wa HVT TPZST ~Em (P:.HT)

o. DRAB'IflG S-SQZ (STABILIZEF. TRllSS) REFERS TO MCIPICATI~.'lS

o. INQUIRE>>B/TS FOR P%T IH SECTION) M> FOR CQ.'fTPACT 215 NOPTS A<2 SllPPLETHTS AMS Dl.l o ~d~TERIAL I!SOLVED .

CQK n.

i o STABILIZE A SD (~MS nl,l) coNT. 215 7UJSS o YESSEL r':~ C')T,E) rR l (CiX)T. ~~

CTTACEG' SAC MAJ - A 588 (4'5 "'l.l) - C~:F. 215 P.I"5 BEN

'o HSPOSITIn."f o A LQ - NtBtCHE ~, TE'KP& P%T HOT PZCFiNBSED Ef AHS R1.X V m~ - FmT SEe Im rr .~.SSE CnX a CmLIED XITH A 588 AMS 01,1 SILE7t' ] PHHT - YESTER AUALIFIK PP~CaU~E!<r~ P m.

SUBJECT:

PBOOLEt1S RSSOCIRTED llITll gUALI TY RSSUttNICE. BECOBDS FOB PIPE 1llllP BESTBAltlT COll l BACT I llFOBl1AT I Otl:

tNDE UtlDEB 2000-90 / t.ECKEttOY COllPRllY IflSTRLLED 0Y 2000-2) 5 / 1JSll DOECOll/GEBI llllEBE USED; ItlSIOE PBIt<ABY CotlTRItltlEttT - ATTACllrO TO SRCBIFICIRL Sill ELD HALL. Rttt> BELATED STttUCTUttRt. STEEL FUtlCTIOtt: TO PllOVIDE WllIP BESTBRltlT FBOH Bl:SVLTAttT PIPE DBLRK Or tlRItl STERti On FEEDWRTEB LIttES

tNnTITY Of'fARnlNAE IffVOLVEO

l. IflSTALLEU Rffn ACCEPTEn

2. InSTALLEO- InSPECTIOff COWVLETE 21

3. flOT I flSTAL1.ED 120 TOTAL TYPES/ UR!ITITIES OF Pll'E WIIIP flESTftRIffTS

1. TYPE 1 41

2. TYPE 2

3. TYPE 3 TYPE 3A 25

5. TYPE 3D 13

6. TYPE 3C

7. TYPE 3D

'2" '

0. TYPE 4

9. TYPE RA TO mt.

r e

P ~ a ~ r P e 0

0

/

k

)A r

+P '

0 e

rp 2

r I

r

0 PRODLEH CIIROHOLOGY

1. MID 1979 - EHPttASIS WAS PLACED OH COtlTRACT 2008-90 CLOSE OUT.

Z. SAMPLE OC DOCUl]EHTATIOH REVIEWED AHD FOUr>D utmCCWPTAOLE.

3. 100'X REVIEW REVEALED HISSIHG DOCUMEttTATIOH AHD MATERIAL SUBSTITUTION.

4. SUPPLIER CONTACTED - AGREED TO SEND DOCUMENTS.

5. OCTOOER 1979 - SUPPLIER PROVIDED OALAHCE OF DOCUMENTATION.

6. EARLY NOVEMBER - DOCUMENTATION REVIEW REVEALED NUMEROUS DEFICIENCIES.

tloTI I ICnTIOtl TCLCPllOtlC ChLL TO RCGIOH V Otl HOVCtluctt 2O,,1979.

orcntl EvhLunTIotl ns poTEHTInL so.55(e) tlOTE: hLTllOIJOH TllIS ITEH IS DElttG TRhCKED hS h so.s5(e), TttE COHSEqucttcES or rnrLuAr: or ocrECTIvc ttnRowhRE tins YET To oc coH;,l.UDED.

(FlttnL RCPORT To HAC PEHD1'ttG.)

3., STOP ilORK ISSUED To SITE CotlTRnCTORS OH tlovL'tlllER 21, 1979.

RrCElvED tlRC LElTcR DnTED ttovEtatEA 21, 1979 RrqUESTIttt'ttnT PROPoscD coRRcCTIvE hCTIou Dc PAovIDcD oEroRE IttsThLLnTlot< Is hcloltED To PRocFcD.

I

5. suPPLY SYSTEtt RESPONDED TO tlAC IIITlt CORRECTIVE hcTIOH PLhtl OY LrTTER t)hTED DECEHOEA 10, 1979.

PROBLBI SUl'IHARY NutiOER Or.

I DOCUt1FNTATION PRODLEHS PHR S Al.l ECTED

1. UT report does not specify area of examination 145

2. Transducer angle not shown

3. Wo evidence of. straight beam UT prior to angle beam No evidence of angle beam UT examination

5. Date of stress relief on strip chart not same as on cer t. 32

6. NDT for welds back dated without justification

7. Welder's ID numbers on reports corrected to same as we1d map wi thout explana Lion

0. Hrong year on UT report

9. No traceability to strip chart

10. Helder's 1D missing from UT report

11. Dates indicate UT was performed before stress relief

12. No evidence weld procedure submi tted

13. Held map does not.show repair

14. No weld procedure identified for rework

Problem Summary Page 2 LIIJHIjcf3 I. DOI;UHENTRTION PBODLEHS OJ'WB'S Al'FECTED

15. Weld map shows repair, no reject tag

16. Welds added to report and back dated without explanation

17. Physical properties not shown on HTR

10. Weld no. 17 listed as weld no. 27

19. HT report for repair not in file

20. No weld numbers on UT report

21. l>y" diameter. nuts; bolts.and washers trace to 1 1/0"

22. Welder's ID on UT report not same as 1D on weld map

23. No weld no. 17 on UT report E

20. Welds listed as PWS 32-2 should be 36-2

25. Traceability of plate to wrong HTR

26. Legibility of HTA

27. Drawing calls for full penetration, weld symbol is for fillet weld

20. Dates on NDE reports, manufacturing orders and weld map do not match

29. Host signatures on UT reports were from a xerox master

30. Procedures dispositioned "hs Noted" not resubmitted

31. PED's incorporated into drawings without resubmitting drawings

DOCUHEHTATIOH PROIII.EBS IDEHTIF IED HUIIOL'n OF II DOCUfIEHTATIOH PRODLEtiS I!IIICII AFFECT IIARDllARE (HON-COHFORHIHG) PIIR S AFf'ECTED

l. 'sed wrong weld rod 70

2. Data sliows impact t:est results do not comply

3. Charpy fmpact-done at -100 , S/0 -150" In ilrong ciiemfcal composition on NTR for bolts 2

5. Cannot verify HT & UT performed

6. Cannot verify UT performed

7. Ho evidence weld repaired per reject tag

0. Ho evfdence weld no. 16 HDE fnspected

9. Ilo evidence of MT

10. Plate -'gx6 fs A516, should be A-36

11. llrong weld procedure used

12. klrong cliemfcal composition on HTR

13. Pl~ysfcal properties now shown on HTR & wrong grqcle A2 ld. Cannot determine ff stress relief done after rework

15. Welding operators n'ot qualified for electro slag welding 16.. ES>l procedure not qualified for material over 3.3 inches or under 1.5 inches

17. Iield procedures not qualified in Pl<IIT conditio<> 50

10. Ho evidence of stress relief after slrafglitenfng

Pll'K ta)IP ILFSTRAINf IX)R))ECTIVE ACFION PIP)l (EFFORTS RF)CAN 12/19)

RCFIF)t ruR DATA tSSue CARn I42A, l)CRn Fi)R ut)ACCK)'T-EVAIA)ATK I'Kl'S (IW)ctalrulhTIOII) hol,e FF5POIISFS 142S, nnd l429 Resrnusr I:Ot )PI.KTK I 2/19 R)5nlvr u>>NIN c/A STSTITI tneuflrr ueen Nin ooctaleuf nisi:Rephucles ISSug t)CRn FOR tinr. Oerlctrticlrv ACA II)ST l)NACCKI'TADI.F. I)AKIN)ARK CARn l 426 one 1429 utililue ResTRAINTs Ct)t)PI.KTK I2/19 RKI,FASE ht:CEI'Th ALE hta)

RFM)RKKD I)hi)DNARE F'5TADI.ISO tine SNII'l.e tlhtt Cot)PI KTE I 2/19 Sel.rt:T AND CotlTRhi:T uttr-2 SITE Arrhovh1 II)PI.DIE)tf tine SNII'l.F, Inox vorhaiefalc FXNIIt)ATIO)i T)IIRO I'ARTT lit)K Vfo NTa ~Co CIIIII'I.FZE I 1/19 .

CONPt.rfl' 2/19 Cntlrt.ETE I/80 Ael. I)F I.n'I Devel')p lait rill)cel)ORF5 FRO)l sul'PI.IKR FRO CO)t) R F~

0 ltt)E SAI1I'I.E I'WCifthtl I'ltt' I'Itl"s (IIT) IIEI.I)S (uT) IIEt.nS AIH's IIISI'ECTEO IIEatECTED ACC/IlL' hCC/ltE J 17/19 23/1 5 13/15 10/2 5/19 63/14 3h 25 0/12 7/1 13 0/2 0 3C 0 0 3t) 10/1 0/1 0/11 3/G 0 0 4/0.

179 22 53/02 100/20 nzp nod gnI~ino fiOX tteJ. 21% Aoj.

ITEN 7: (PllR) Pipe llhip Restraints of, the same or simi'lar design were provided under two contracts. One contract (890) required HDE and Pk!!lT oi'elds, the other (i'I215) required only visual inspection of welds. (215 PHRs may not have been PHllT'd).

. o PHR - tlDE and PHllT requirements Con tract,Scope Pl!R - All were provided by Contract 90 PWR Support Steel - Contract 215

~ Specification Requirements Contract 90 (Nat'1 A516, h537)

RHS '01.1 + PHllT, HDE Contract 215 (Hat'1 h36)

N<S Dl.l o Rationale for Different Requirements tiDE (VT 8 NT) was specified on the PMR because a rigid weld inspection would provide assurance that the PHR weldments would withstand a pipe whip.

PHllT of the PHRs was specified to assure retention of dimensional tolerances between the.PHR and the pipe.

PWllT not required on support steel because design of supports allows flexibility.

y&

Q e

a 0 k

(PllR) USE records associated with pipe whip restraints (PHRs) contain photocopied inspector's acceptance signatures for ultrasonic and magnetic particle testing.

(See Item 0 for a related item on the SMll),

hc ti on Review of UT and HT inspection reports indicate that virtually al'I of the reports have photocopied signatures, (IOH J Bean to J Steldl, dated 1/7/00).

This has been verified to be a common practice by Leckenby. (see sworn statements by Hessrs. P. D. Hoore and E. D. jjamilton). This concern affects basically all 179 restraints.

Corrective hction The reinspection of all restraints will generate new HDE records which will become the final inspection records.

(PllR) NDE qualification records cannot be found for one, or possibly two, individuals wlro performed UT and HT on the PHRs, Contractor's qrralification procedure is not in frrll accord with SHT-TC-lA.

Action e Review o.f UT and HT inspection reports indicated questionable training and qualification of'evel II inspectors and of Level III exarrriners, Both NRC and llPPSS visited Leckenby to eva1uate cer tification adequacy, Certi-fication records for"Hr. Baldinger could not be found.

e In a sworn statement to the NRC on December 6, 1979, Hr, Phillip D. Hoore, Leckenby gA Hanager, attested that Hr. Baldinger had the experience, training, and was properly certified to SHT-TC-lA.Level II, o BM Source Surveillance Report, 10-26-76, indicated Baldinger's certification records were reviewed for UT and l1T and were adequate,

~ A review of the personnel qualification procedure revealed that specific requirements of SNT-TC-lA were not properly specified in the areas of training, education, and re-examinations.

Corrective Action The reinspection records which will .include qualified/certified personnel and procedures will become the final inspection records.

. ITEN 10: (Pl<B) The electroslag welding procedure used in the welding of PIRswas not qualified using post weld heat treatment as required by the code (RWS Pl.l),

Res onse/St,atus

1. This deficiency was identified as Item IY of CAR 1426.

2. Leckenby responded to this item by agreeing to requalify the electroslag welding procedure.

3. An Engineering evaluation qualification is necessary.

will be made to determine if Pl]ilT for procedure

(PWR) hpproxfmately 90 typical gofnt conffguratfons specil'fed on desfgn drawings for the PWR use fillets whfch are smaller than the mfnfnl(<m ff]let weld size specfffed fn the appl lcable code.

Results o Hajorfty of welds reviewed - Contract 215 rather than Contract 90.

~ Concern involves Engineer rationale for acceptance.

Structura'i need fs not prime concern; providing inspection indicates good quality.

o Review of design indicates not needed for strength.

o Subsequent inspection of veld records fndfcate confidence fn olfginal weld inspection.

~ Ho weld undersfzed by more than 1/16".

Corrective Actfon e Welds installed to date - accept as fs. (Ho.7) e Weld not installed - PED will be issued. (Ho.7}

ITFN 12: (PHR) Humerous record irregulari t es 'and inconsistencies exist between weld maps manufacturing orders (l'1.0. ), welder and inspection recor ds associated wi th PllRs. Incons1stencies include: conflicting inspection dates; changes in inspector I.D. numbers without clarifying Information; records indicate some inspections were performed by an individual at a time he was not working for the company; inspections following stress relieving are dated wt th dates y<liich precede stress relieving; welder I.D. numbers and electrode I.D. numbers have been changed without clarifying 1nformation; HDE records list wrong AHS UT legend number; weld procedure numbers have been changed with no explanation; different signatures for one welder qualifier; missing inspection resul ts, Action 100K record review completed with deficiencies identified by restraint number.

10th dated I/7/00.

Corrective Action o HDE reinspection program will resolve many HDE and personnel qualification deficiencies.

o Balance of deficiencies will be identified on HCRs.

o Hew welding deficiencies'dentified by reinspection will be identified on HCRs.

Resolution of problems, administered through standard program, which will entail engineering evaluation and rework as required.

ITEM 21: (PHR) Specification calls out th of high strength (h325 or Q90) bolt and use of the high strength bolting speci fication (AISC). Drawings cil11 out h320 and h540 bolt. These bolts are installed, but are not installed .

in accordance with high strength bolting specification - i.e., plate or bar washers have not been used over long slotted holes.

Action o Contract 9g specifies 5325 and AA90 bolts and specifies use iligh Strength Bolting Specification.

of'ISC o Installation drawings speci fied h32Q and 5540 bolts.

o Existing h320 bolts not.installed per AISC.

Corrective Action

~ Contractor will de instructed to use strip washers.

~ Spec will be revised to require strip washers although this was not required in previous RISC code.

ITE: (PHR) Pipe Whip Restraints of contracts.

q i 6 I One contract (890)

I I I ti the same o f . (215 Ptlll ~l imilar design were provided under two required HDE and PBIIT of welds, the other (f/215) l 11 t PiltlT'.Ij, o PHR - HDE and PHIIT requirements Contract Scope PWR - All were provided by Contract 90 PHR Support Steel - Contract 215 o Specification Requirements Contract 90 (IIat'1 h516, h537)

N>) on Lhe SSlf RCLion: Review of VT and lfT inspection reports fn<f fcafe tfiat virtiia11y al1 of the ref~orts have photocopfe~f sfgnatnres, (10H .1 I/ran Io 1 Stef(fl, date(f 1/7/00).

Tliis lias been verified to be a co>>>>>>on practice by f.eckenf>y (see sworn statements by Hessrs. f', 0. ffoore and f;, tl, If>>>>f1ton). 'ftifs concern aff'ects baslca11y all 179 restraints, Corrective Rction: The comp1etion of tlute sa>>defile VT and HT.program now estab1ishes the need for a 1001 reinspection of a11 restraints. These re-inspection records will become the fl>>a1 inspection records and tlute problem of pho tocopied signatures wf11 be negated,

ITI'.Il 9: (I'I(I)) tII3E qualif'ication records cannot be found I'r one, or possibly two) indivi~luals who performed UT and HT on the PIIRs, Contraclor's qualification procedure is not in full accord with SHT-TC-lR.

ACTI OII:

o Review of UT and HT inspection renorts indicated questionable training and qualification of Level II inspectors and of. Level III rxaminers, Doth tlRC and llPPSS visited Leckenby to evaluate certil'ication adequacy, Certi fication records for Hr. I3aldingor could not be foi)nd, 0 In a sworn statement to the HRC on December 6, 1979, Hr, Phil 1 ip D, Hoore, Leckenby gR Hanager, attested that llr. I3aldinger had the'xperience, terai>>i>>g, and was properly certified to SNT-TC-1R.Level II.

o .13oR Source Surveillance Report, 10-26-76, indicated f3aldinger's cer ti fication recoi ds were reviewed for UT and h1T and were arlequate, o R review of the personnel qualification proce~iure revealul tlat specif'ic requirements of'HT-TC-1R were not properly specified in thr. arras ining, education, and re-examinations.

of'ra CORRrCTIVE RCTIOH:

Thr. completion of the sample IIT and HT program now establishes the need I'or 100K reinspection. These reinspection recor~ls including qualified/certifiecl personnel will IIecome the final inspection records.

HRC COHCERHS PIPE llHIP RESTRAIHTS PROOLEH: (ITEt1 10 OF 21)

(PlfB) Tbe electroslag Melding procedure used in tbe welding of'llBs vsas not qualified using post

. Meld beat treatment as required by tlute code (AllS l)l,l).

BESPOHSE/STATIJS:

1. Tbis deficiency was identified as iteni IV of CAB 102G.

2. Leckenby responded to tl>is item by agreeing to requalify tlute electroslag welding procedure.

3. An Engineering evaluation Mill be made to determine if PHIIT for procedure qualification is necessary.

PROBL~?2 1 ~

(PnR) UPROXZi<~T:"LY 90 TYP iC>Z "OZN C i:-ZGU.. ZONS SP" CZ::"D ON DESIGN DBAN NGS "OR T:":" PNR US" "ZLL:" S 7'<." 'C.":

AH" S:-'~L~>R T.": 'i Ti.:" HZNZHUiM FELL:"T b:"LD Sl Z:" S:-:-CZ - I:-D N TE" Z ~PLZCP~L" CODE.

PROBLEM NO. 11 FILLET HELDS '- MINIMUM SIZE o Yajority of welds reviewed - Contract 215 rather than Contract 90.

o Concern involves Engineer rationale for acceptance.

Structural need is not prime concern; providing inspection indic tes eood quality.

e Review of design indicates not needed for strength.

Subsequent inspection of weld records indicate confidence in original weld inspection.

Rationale presently reflected in present AHS Code-t'~>ximum required 5/16".

o No weld undersized by trore than 1/16".

Corrective Action o Helds installed to date - accept as is.

o Held not installed - PED will be issued.

(P'iR) Numerous record irregularities and inconsistencies

nisi bet';ieen weld 7~ps, manufacturing orders (iM.O.),

-. welder and insoe tion records associa d with the PMR's.

Incor.sis encies include: Con=iiciing inspection dai s; chaflges in '.nspector I.D. nu.i,bers without ciari<ying

'raorna ion; records indicate sc'e inspe .ions were p'eriori.ed by an individua,l at a time ':se v.as not working ror the company; inspeciions following stress relieving a", e da.ed with dates which precede str ss relieving; '..

',welder I.D. Nos. and elecirode I.D. f4s. have been change~

"i<; "".out ci ari Tying in or,gati on; i'IDi records i s i wl Qng

~ 1

~.~S UT legend nur;;her; weld procedure,'los have been ci angel With no e pianatic1; di fe. eni ignatu. es =or one weicer quaii=ier; missin", inspec:ion r suits.

~ ~

ITf't} 12: . ffumerous record frre ular) ties and fnconslstencies exfst Actfon: e 100$ record review comf~leteil wf tlat deffcfe>>cfes )de>>tf fied by restraint number. ION dated 1/7/00.

Cor rect] ve /let)on:

o HDE reinspection program vtill resolve many deffcfencles.

e Balance of'ef'fc)encles nfll be )de>>t3f'fed on tlClts.

o Hew weldfng deficiencies ident)f'ferf by reinspection vi)11 be )dent] fied on lfCRs..

o Resolution of problems,. adminf s tered l.l>rourjl> standard program.

PROB L:":~ 2 >

( .fsR) SP~C. MALS OUT TH" USE O- P.ZGH S >:-NG (A325 OR, A49 0) BOLT AND USZ OP TH~ HIGH STP~NGTH BOLT 'aacG SP:"C:-ZCATZON (A SC) ~ DRA'r'hiNGS CALL OUT A320 AND A540 BOLT. THZS-- BOL S ARZ:NSTALL"=D, BUT .."-= . OT I'..lS "-.LL=-D Z?'CCOPZZ-RC" NE H H G" STR:NGTH BOLT"NG S:"CZ:"ZC EON i.:". PLAT" OR BAR NASH:"RS V~V" NOT B"KN US:"D OV:-R 'ONG S" O'OL"S.

PROWL"-'l HO 21 o Contract 215 do'es not add. ess A320 end A=40 bolts.

o nould b installed to high s rength boltina specs, including s .rip ushers in slotted holes.-

Co. rect1ve Action o C"n rector F11 bo instruct d to use strip vreshers.

e Spec will be revised to require strip weshers el hough

\ n i s was not requi r ed i n previ ous A>SC .,Code.

STRUCTURAL STEEL I'RY!i'ELL TOPIC CRACKS FOUND IN F I ELD FIELDS DUR ING ERECTION 0 100'~ YiT OF ALL FIELD HELDS C ALL DEFECTS REPAIRED AND FIELDS RF EXAMINED C ALL NEH F I ELD NELDS HADE US I NG CONSERVATIVES

. COls TROLLED PROCEDURES s

'I I> ) ~ ~

~ )

~ 4 Y

I ~ ' ~ 'L I I 1

I ~ ~

g I

C.

~ '

~L

(RS) The generic procedure used to repair laminations in the weld zone of SSh'elated struc.ures (RS) requires grinding of the laminations to a maximum depth of 3/8",

Tollow d by rew lding. This falls short of the ASS code, which requires grinding to depths of 1" with supplem nt-ary ultrasonic tests as required (if laminations are longer than 1 inch.)

0 0

lh

,, le PROBL Yi DURING WELDING ON STRUCTURAL STEEL ALL SURFACES REQUIRED Yiii DEFECTS TO BE CROUND TO 3/8 REQUIRES LANINATIONS GROUND TO 1

~

~

C'.

coiiccus I ox D" FECTS IN QUESTION NOT LANINATIONS DEFECTS 'HERE SURFACE ROLLING D" FECTS CR I NDING DEPTH ADEQUATE FOR NON-LAYiINAR DEFECTS ALL INDICAT,IONS EVALUATED PER ANS Dl.l

DISCUSSIOI' DEFECTS NOT ON EDGE OF MEMBER BUT ON FACEs 0 TYPICAL OF ROLLING DEFECTS MATERIAL CONFORMS TO APPLICABLE MiILL SPECIFICATIONS DEFECTS NOT LAMiINAR 0 95/. PEMOVED WITHIN 3/8"

~

I OTHERS EVALUATED ON CASE BY CASE BASIS PER CRITERIA OF AgS D1., j'

~ ~

~

(RS) Steel structures bridging from the SS'4'o th~. con-ainm nt wall have undergone significant weld repairs in .he past two years. Lic nsee consultants have deter-mined a need to maintain somo minimum temperature of weld joints to ensure adequate nilductility transition temp-erature characteristics of .he structural welds.

L FRACTUR SAFE DESI Gii OF DRYWELL STRUCTURAL STEEL PRQBLEtl DEFECTS FOUND IN FIELD FIELDS t;- ALL FIELDS INSPECT'rD (f~iT) AND REPAIRED CONSULTANT RECOMMENDED YilHIMUM TEMPERATURE OF "40 DURING OPERATION 140 ABOVE YiAXIMUM DESIGN TEMPERATURE

~,

~ ~

CON CLUS I 0>'lS:

OK IF NININUN DRYNELL TENP" RATURE IS ABOVE 100 Fi r 4'rlEli LOCA POSTULATED'

FRACTURE MECHANICS EVALUATION F IND t'MINIMUM TEt'iPERATURE FOR ADEQUATE SAFETY MARGIN STRESS ANALYSIS AND FLAW MiODELLING MATERIAL PROPERTIES TEMPERATURE DEFINITION IN DRYWELL FIND EFFECT OF TEMPERATURE ON CRITICAL FLAW SIZE

~

p

~ ~~ ~~~

,J I

3-29

~. ~ I 2

.p 2 7 lg 1

"2 =11-T >:

2 a ) Edge Crack in Cheek Pl aie- to-Mal 1 ! el dmenz.

1-"

tp= 2-1 8 2

~2a(Dia) -l>:)

T.

I T

~

I 2a t 2 =ll-"

4 t>= 6.875 "+

b) Buried Circular Crack in Ch ek Plate-to-!'all Heldment.

C Figure 3.11 - Schematic Sho~"ing '>ostulated Cracks in Cheek "'iate Plate Connection.

~ ~

r II

~ I II I

I I ~

3-37 Nor>>dualized Crack Diameter, 2a/t P

0 0.2 0.4 0.5 Q. 8 17yo 1. Q 140 2

2a 120 tB' (Y-') i 52'i50'0 100 f(J EO II P

O Zt( L,'.1P' 60 id'S~XiA~E gg<~

an 4Q 7p CP 5

20 0

0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 Crack Diameter, 2a, (Inches)

Figure 3.15 - Total Stress'ntensity Factor as a Function of Crack Diameter For a Buried Circular Crack ir.

the Cheek Plate-to-'Wall I.'eld Connection (With Residuals).

0

~ ~

FLIRTH R ACTIONS:

~

VERIFY PREDICTIONS OF DRYNELL TEYiPERATURE DURING TEST, STARTUP AND OPERATION LOOK AT EFFECT OF TEYiPERATURE LIf'!ITATION ON PLANT STARTUP

i