ML19317G101
| ML19317G101 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Rancho Seco |
| Issue date: | 09/15/1970 |
| From: | Rich Smith US ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION (AEC) |
| To: | Mattimoe J SACRAMENTO MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT |
| Shared Package | |
| ML17198A040 | List: |
| References | |
| 03464, 3464, NUDOCS 8002210791 | |
| Download: ML19317G101 (5) | |
Text
.
$,2 3f.ik R
~~
.s.
[
UNITED STATES i
l.{
.q -
ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION' OlVislON OF COMPLIANCE 4
[
REGION V j' '
G Un
~
BERKEI.EY, CALIFORNIA 94704 veu m m.eu.aias
' 2151 BANCMOFr WAY st sn. ess September 15, 1970 l
Sacramento Municipal Utility District i
P. O. Box 15830 i
~
j Sacremento, California 95813 l
j Attention:.Mr. John J. Mattimos
/
j Assistant Chief Engineer Gentlemen:
1 This letter relates to the discussion Mr. R. T. Dodds of this office held l
with you and other members of your staff at the conclusion of the inspection conducted on July 15 through July 17, 1970, of the construction activities i
authorized by AEC Construction Permit No. CPPR-56.
,As noted during the discussion, apparent deficiencies were identified involving items not in conformance with statements in the, Preliminary Safety Analysis Report or which may otherwise raise questions concerning the adequacy of the construction. These items are as follows:
1.
The Preliminary Safety Analysis Report, Appendix 5 C, Section 5.0.b.
and c. states, with respec,t to splicos in concrete reinforcing steel, that production splices or " sister" splices shall be 'ested for each position, size and grade of bar in accordance with a specified schedule.
+
The test sampling for the specific work in question is ".. 3 out of the next and subsequent units of 100 eplic,es."
/
Review by our inspector of-your test records indicated that on February 3,1970 fif teen consecutive test splices were made. The record indicates that production splices were not being made on that day, or f
during the several days preceding and following. Further, during the period from May 5, 1970 through July 15, 1970 when production splicing was intensive, few test splices were made. For example, 150 splices were-made in #18 horizontal bar, but only one test splice was made, rather than the four to five which the test program required. This type of testing appears to defeat the intent of the quality assurance program described in the PSAR.
-2.
_Section 8.4.2 of the Chicago Bridge and Iron Company quality Assurance Program relating to the welding of the containment vessel liner states, with regard to the care and control of Class E7010 electrode, that
"... Class E7010 electrodes must not be stored in holding ovens...".
Contrary to this requirement, our inspector observed that E6010 electrodes (same class electrode as E7010) were stored in a heated holding oven on July 15, 1970.
$Nkd
~
G.
0:u M X K scoa no 29/
i l
.~
.r>
s c
'~
2-j i
3.
The spacing of the vertical reinforcing steel bars in the exterior face of the containment vessel wall in the area of the second concrete 3
j placenerc lift is specified in the design drawings to be 13% inches.
Our inrp ator observed spacing varying up to 36 inches.
i Thf r-situation was already known to the field inspector and engineering 4
sea.lf but had not been documented for design office review and concurrence as required by SMUD Quality Assurance Procedure Number 17.
/
i:-
The Division of Reactor Licensing, staff has been advised of your intent to j
resolve the technical aspect of Item 3 with them during the licensing process; i
therefore a reply on this subject to the Division of Compliance is not required.
{
These occurrences do, however, raise concern as to the adequacy of your quality assurance program. Please provide us within 30 days with your comments on this subject, and the steps which you have taken or will take to prevent recurrence of such events during the continuing constructica program.
Should you have any questions concerning the matters discussed in this letter you may coussunicate directly with this office.
Very truly yours,
.e WC j
- h R. W-. Smith Director Mr. Dowell Raasch, Project cc Engineer, SMUD Mr. John Jackson, Quality Assurance, SMUD I
I e
o
. -.._,. _. -,_.~._ _
..... a s,--,.-
Q 4
e i
Sacramento Municipal Utility District
.P. 0..Bcx 15830
. ~ 956' 3 Sacramento,' California Attention:
Mr. John' J. Matti=ce Assistant Chief Engineer Gentlemen:
.R.
This-letter relates to the discussion Mr./T. Dodds of thic office
. held with you sud other members of your staff at the conci.sion of
.j the inspecticn conaucted'on July 15 thrcush July 17, 1970. of the
. construction activities authorized by AEC Construction Pe2 -it No. CPPR-50.
l As noted during the discussion, apparent deficiencies werc identified involving items not ir/conformance with statements in the F eliminary
' Safety' Analysis Report, or which.:ay ctherwise raise quest ons concerning
[\\
the adequacy of the ec,nstruction. These itecs are as foll..ws:
~
[. The PSAR, Appendix 5 c, sections 5 0 'c. and c. states, eith respect to splices in concrete reinfcrcing steel, that selecte production splices or " sister" splices shall be tested, for each osition, siza cf and grade /bar. After an initial frequent testing prcE mm, three
' out' of each 100 succeeding splices shall be testec.
Review by cur inspector of your test records indicated nat cn February 3, 1970, 15-consecutive test splices were cad The recor.:s indicate that-production splices were not being =ade c that day, or during the.several days preceding and' follcwind. F..-ther, during
- the period frc= May 5,1970 thru July'15,1970, when pcaduction
' splicing was extensive,'few test splices were = ace.
For example,
~
150pilicesweremade.in118horizo 1 bar, but only.one test
~~
L
splice was.=ade, ratner than the 4 39 ry9 5'which the, test program requires.-.This type of testin6' appears to defeat the intent of the n
e
. u.
A -.4 b.-... W <.
- .e-
~~.w--
+-
t
'M m'a -
r.
- S
/(
,)
QA program describet in the PSAR.
.d
} Section 8.4.2 of the Chicago Bridge and Iron Company quality control-procedures ' relating to the velding of the containment vessel liner states', with regard to the care and control of Class ff70lO electrode, that "... Class E7010 electrode cust not be stored in
-holding cvens...".
Contrary tc this requirement, our inspector observed that E60lO electrodes (same class cf electrc e as E70lO) were stored in a heated holding cven on July 15, 1970.
/1r. L The spacing 'of the vertical reinforcing steel bars in the exterior face of the contain=ent structure in the area of the second concreti i
. placement lift is specified in the adesign drawingr. to be 13-1/4 w \\ '- --r Our inspectcr observed spacing varying up to 3o-1/d inches.
37 This situation vad already knovnto the field inspection and engineering
~
I v'-
staff but--hac not been documented 2or design office review anc concurren;e as required by the SMUD quality Assurance Procedure pl7
<g' The Division.f Reactor Licensing staff ! as oeen advised of your intent
-i to,, resolve the technical aspects of ite
- c. with thec during the licens ng process; therefore a reply on~this subject to the Division of Complianus is not required.
These occurrences do,_ however, raise concern as to the adequacy of your quality assurance program.
Please provide us within 30 days with your co==ents on this subject, and the steps which y;u have taken or will take to prevent recurrence of such <. vents durin s the continuing
-construction program.
)'
%),
,.._.~_.W...
rg
- - - -,. ~ -. _ __,_. _ ____ _ __ _ ____ _ _. _ _ _ _.
n w _.
s n-m.
x 2,
,.,~
v' e
-~.
i' i
y
., p,
9,
- p..
Should you have any questicas.concerning the sat '
o.i.l '
letter, you =ay. coc=unicate directly.'vith this o:
t: -
s g
[.
Very truly yo1 I
.1 1
i-g -
i-j; R. W. S.ith, L
cc: Do ell Raasch, Freject Engineer, SMUD -
Jcha Jackson Rality Assurance, SMUD d g C*o) 2CDI W (3) bec: J 4 + Re111 7 7
l( _,.Jc m.,,
c'e Z
m.
1 f/. w z-*..
J,
- /-
- N l
4 9
I k
t I ^
h t
l.
s ta Y
1 1[
t a.
q l
I
.tf.
~
n-y;
~
W:
, :: i L. - ~
~
' ~s:.
~
- p'),
pa s o_..
~,,:w,
_:_-.;,...,,, z a, _,;._, _ _._ ~
u.,,
,