ML20062H116
| ML20062H116 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | LaSalle  |
| Issue date: | 08/04/1982 |
| From: | Delgeorge L COMMONWEALTH EDISON CO. |
| To: | Gilinsky V NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20062H110 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8208130311 | |
| Download: ML20062H116 (115) | |
Text
. . - . . , - . . . - - - . - . - . . . _ . . - _ . - _ . . . - . . - . . - . . - . . - - _ . . .
'~
C:mm:nwaalth Edison One Farst N,tional Ptare. Chicago. Ithnois ,
5 Address Reply to: Post Office Box 767 Chicago, Illinois 60690 i
l August 4, 1982 )
l i
The Honorable Victor Gilinsky Comissioner U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission
' Washington, D.C. 20555 .
Reference (1) L.O. De1 George letter to Hon. V. Gilinsky; dated
~
August 2, 1982
Dear Comissioner Gilinsky:
The purpose of this submittal is to' correct typographical errors identified in Reference (1). Those errors are delineated below.
- 1. Cover letter -
(a) Paragraph 1, line 3: change July 29 to July 28.
(b) Paragraph 1, line 5: change Hearing to Heating
- 2. Response to Question i - ,
(a)Page1, Paragraph 3,line6: change inspections to inspectors.
(b) Page 2, Paragraph 2, line 1: change contractural to contractual.
- 3. Response to Question 3 -
(a) Page 1. Paragraph 1, line 8: add coma after acceptance.
(b) Page 1, Pcragraph 2, line 8: change accepability to acceptability.
, (c) Page 2 Paragraph 1, line 3: change #1 to #4, part 1.
r -- (d) Page 2, Paragraph 4, line 6: change meterial to material.
- 4. Response to Question 4, Part 1 -
(a) Page 1. Paragraph 1 Line 3: change NRCs to NCRs.
(b) Page 2, Paragraph 1, line 3: change orgianization to organization.
(c) Page 3, line 3: delete were not after purchase orders.
i
- Very truly yours.
L j;
.dA/
L.O. De1 George Director of Nuclear Licensing
?
1 l
~
h f5A*AS88420!!8gy, -
PDR ,
Mr. A. Schwencer Augus t 12, 1982 o
ENCLOSURE 3 Sub'mittal from Commonwealth Edison r
e t
l l
l-i 1
p I
e.
4743N f/
i
- AW M W'N 2* "'2Y
_ _ _ _ _ ,, m -
CF 0
COMMONWEALTH EDISON COMPANY CHRONOLOGY ON RESOLUTION
. OF ZACK COMPANY 50.S5(e) - DOCUMENTATION DEFICIENCIES Introduction Throughout the July 26, 1982 Government Accountability Project (GAP) letter to Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC)
Chairman Nunzio J. Palladino and the attached affidavits and exhibits, statements are made that Commonwealth Edison Company (CECO) exerted pressure on the Zack Company to meet unrealistic time demands to resolve material documentation deficiencies in l order to avoid licensing delays at LaSalle County Station. This
- chronology details CECO Project Construction Department's actions during the September 25, 1981 to April 15, 1982 time period as they relate to the issue at hand. The record shows that the Zack progress was monitored, communication with Zack Company was frequent, quality control procedures were followed,
~ and Zack Company was allowed to slip their resolution of documentation deficiencies as the fuel load was delayed.
Chronology A September 25, 1981, Zack Company letter informed CECO of a possible reportable event under 10 CFR 50.55(e) on documentation inconsistencips. Zack had not yet. completed its investigation as to the extent and validity of the documentation inconsistencies. They anticipated being complete by October 31, 1981. CECO was not pleased with the discrepancy information but
, the completion date given did not appear to adversely affect the December 15, 1981 scheduled fuel load date. Zack was requested to inform CECO on their progress. NRC Region III was notified of a potential 50.55(e) construction deficiency on September 30, 1981.
(= Reports from Zack in October, 1981 indicated the progress on the documentation review as going well. On October 9, 1981 4
and October 23, 1981, Zack issued reports with findings of their l review. These reports indicated categories of deficient items,
! quantities and corrective actions planned and taken to that L time. An interim report on the 50.55(e) was submitted to NRC l
Region III based on the above Zack report on October 30, 1981.
l On November 2, 1981, CECO wrote to Zack Company requesting that I
specific Zack nonconformance reports (NCRs) which would require Owner /A-E dispositioning (i.e., engineering basis) be submitted to CECO. These Zack NCRs were to detail material certifications I
that were not in accordance with S&L specification and/or ASTM standards. Zack NCRs which did not require Owner /A-E disposi-l tioning were not required to be submitted to CECO. The Zack i NCRs were to be submitted no later than November 13, 1981. Zack u l Company was in agreement with our requests.
/ On November 13, 1981, fifteen (15) Zack Company NCRs were "
,n submitted. These Zack NCRs were then categorized and put on O three (3) CECO NCRs (#556, #557 and #558). These were sent to b CECO Project Engineering /Sargent & Lundy Engineers for disposition.
}
x
- -. .= 2. : . .: - u==. ==
3 Based on these 3 NCRs, a final report was issued to the NRC Region III in early December 1981. The disposition of all 3 CECO NCRs was completed on December 31, 1981. However, another CECO NCR (#566) was opened on December 31, 1981 to address a remaining open item on one of the original 15 Zack Company NCRs. The disposition of this NCR was completed on February 18,'
1982.
In late January, 1982, based on CECO Quality Assurance Department audits and conversations with Zack, many additional Zack NCRs were reported still open, plus a few purchase orders needed to be reviewed. At this point, the scheduled fuel load date was March 15, 1982. CECO requested that Zack expedite its review and corrective action program. Mr. Albert T. Howard, Zack Quality Assurance Documentation Supervisor, issued a report
. on February 12, 1982 to CECO. Fir. Howard reported as of January
~'
15, 1982, that a significant increase in the number of corrected purchase orders packages had been accomplished and a number of the remaining purchase orders indicated as still discrepant had only one or two items to be corrected. A copy of this report and attachments,is included. (Note': This re ort is not referenced in the GAP letter and attachments.
Zack was informed that all NCRs still open on March 1, '
1982, should be submitted to CECO for engineering disposition.
Zack was contacted frequently prior to March 1 to monitor progress and emphasize the importance of March 1 date.
On March 1, 1982, Zack submitted 69 open NCRs. In reviewing these NCRs with Project Engineering /Sargent & Lundy Engineers was felt that many of the NCRs were of such a nature that Zack should be able to close them without Ceco imput. A
- review by Project Engineering /Sargent & Lundy Engineers of the y specifications, purchase orders and Zack Q.A. Program revealed that Zack was being overly conservative in classifying documen-i~ tation deficiencies as nonc~nforming..
o Zack was advised of this finding on March 9, 1982, and all 69 nonconformances reports I were returned. Over the next three weeks Zack continued its corrective action program in an effort to resolve the remaining 69 nonconformances. During this period, the CECO fuel load date L continued to slip a week or two at a time.
l On April 1, 1982, Zack returned 21 open NCRs. All 21 Zack NCRs were placed on a CECO NCR (#594) and sent to Project Engineering /Sargent & Lundy Engineers for disposition. On April
[ 7, 1982, CECO requested additional information on five (5) Zack h NCRs. The information was available at Zack and would be sent immediately.
On April 9, 1982, Zack had completed its review and "
- supplied the necessary information. Ceco then closed NCR #594.
It was CECO's understanding that all Zack NCRs relating to document deficiencies had been resolved and the matter was closed.
F .- -. .. - . . ., .n.x -
3_
Summary The Zack Company progress towards resolving the 50.55(e) was continually monitored. The goal of this monitoring was to provide direction and engineering support to the Zack disposi-tioning effort as well as address corrective action. At no time were unrealistic target completion dates and undue pressure put on Zack Company. As the fuel load date slipped, Zack was allowed additional time to resolve the 50.55(e). Correspr,ndence from Zack indicates they met CECO requests and correctly dispositioned the discovered material documentation discrepancies.
t
[
t 4638N 55 l
F l
~
't w_ _ -- =
_ _ . . . . . _ _ . . , . _ _ . _ _ . . ... _.. . . _ __ , , - - - _ . _ . - - . --.y.. ,
OERO)IL1,60650
- 312/242 3434 -
!M600 W.12TH PLACE e CHICAGO (* -
~
4401 WECTERN 2 FLINT MICHIGAN C506
- 313/732 204D
.s D ' * *
. . . l y, . - .
CUSTOM METAL FAB.RICATION February 12, 1982 ,
l
LaSalle County Nuclear Station Rural Route #1, Box 240 Marseilles, IL 61341 '
Attn: Mr. F.ichard Cosaro !
Project Manager ,
The Zack Company letter dated October 23, 1981
~
_ Reft
Subject:
Potential 10CFR50.55'(e)
Material Deficiency Report - l j
Gentlemen; .
Attached is an updated (3anuary 15, 1962) report on the' status of the material certifications identified in the above referenced letter. As indicated by the N, report, a significant increase in the number of corrected purchase order packages I has been accomplished and a number of the remaining purchase orders indicated as Therefore, the .l otill dise,repant have only one or two items to be corrected. '
number of actual material certifications acceptable is in excess of the percent indicated in the report. ,
. i s
It is The Zack Company's opinion at this time that all problems still existing could be corrected with further vendor / subcontractor persuance and those items p not resolved through this,same endeavor might be resolve'd with engineering disposition. ,
- With this interim report The Zack Company' would likp to assure you of its con- '
tinued ef[ forts in the above direction.
J Should you have any questions or, problems, please contact me.
p -
Most Sincerely, .
p '
l i
J.Q.
ert T. Howard Quality Assurance Documentation Supervisor .
~
ATH/dm
~
_~ :
C_ .
.. . l q
Y ~
- FOUNDED TO SOLVE THE UNIOUE METAL FABRICATION NEEDS OF INDUSTRY
- I '
1
- DEDICATED TO CLEANING AND CUSTOM 121NG THE AIR OF THE WORLD *
~ ;~ - - . . - _ - _ . _ . .
_ _ ^ -* ' ' * *+g . :w~
_ r _m e ow.e3 g. ,
hkhbNh$NkNNIb I' .I[hb$NINN{b[kkhbIh hIkkhf;Ih$kb?NYNNb5II'Yb5[
Page Two August 4, 1982 In the event this verification program identifies any si deficiencies which would prevent the effected portion of the(s)gnificant HVAC system from fulfilling its safety-function, remedial action will be taken imediately in satisfaction of applicable technical specification requirements to restore adequate margin and assure the system is operable.
Operation beyond 50% power will not proceed until this assessment and any required remedial action has been completed.
To the extent deficiencies of lesser significance are identified, they will be documented and reviewed with the NRC Staff and remedial action.
if necessary, completed on a schedule agreed upon with the NRC Staff.
If there are any questions in this matter, please contact this office.
Very truly yours.
C. Rom Cordell Reed '
Vice President cc: Mr. James G. Keppler .
O
% b 6
N C i
1 e .
I n-w E - . _ . .
mggygmerr?~caa r,_r- m e - -og- :.,cr~~ ~ . a- ;
. ~ _ - . . _ - .. . _ . _ .
s . . ' '
~ '
q , u. .
. Paga 2 Mrs. C. DeZutel cc Mssrs. J.C. DeZutel
- L.J. Burke, Site Project Mgr.
T. Quaka, QA CECO ,
B. Wood, QA CECO - .
J.
Dearbeck,
CECO C.L. Eichstaedt, Jr. ,
D.E. Calkins .
D. Malzahn -
M.L. Skates C. Baumgardner Q.A. Chicago o
- +
Q.A. LaSalle ,
0 0
4 0 9
,w,.* ,
O 4
8 4
e e 5 O
e oem O
S e
a 0 ,
e W
e 6
e 9
4 s . . , . .
e' * ~
[jm .
e ,
9 l '
's e
, 9 l
I r.
1 1 -
.
- e
. O
- e e e 1
1
( . .
'. . 6
_e b.
e k m-w 4 9 M.--.'
e b o e4 e e e e
a O v.< , . ,
-w.-
O s
a y t.- uu.meww-a-e**ww+-vwew.a r . - - . . . . . .
'4000 W.12TH PLACE
- CHICAGO ., :ERollLL 60250
- 312/242 3434 [. .
4401 WESTERN e FUNTMICHIGAN'48506
- E13/732 2040 ,.
. s. -
3 the M&@X*) co. CUSTOM METAL FABRICATION
--} .
January 15, 198'2 1
\
4 l
}
I
'. ADDENDUM P.EPORT TO LaSALLE POWER STATION'
' ~
SHOWING CORRECTED P.O./CMTR PKGS. .
FROM FIRST TO SECOND REPORT
.Q.A. Engineer, Commo'nwealth Edison Prepared for: Bruce Wood .
Prepored by: Terry Howard, Q.A.' Engineer ~ Document Control Ronald A. Perry, Q.A. Enginee'r .
~~ .
- \
p
(- .
- FOUNDED TO SOLVE THE UNIQUC METAt= FABRICATION NEEDS OF INDUSTRY * *
- DEDICATED TO CLEANING AND CUSTOMlZING THE AIR OF THE WOPTLD
- s
u ,---_..l..____.... . _ .
i- _
.(0RRECTIVEACTION 1st REPORT - DISCREPANC. LISTING .
P.O.# ,
None 1127 None .
None .
1046 None - -
None
. 952 None l CofClocatedo'ndincluded '
582 C of C not on file ' '
None 4016 None
. None .
tiO77 None -
' None 4104 None None 4165 None C of C only C of C to correct Standard - cdvise
- 13207 consulting S&L engineering revision tentatively ppfLn.
. Vendor supplied A.S.T.M.
913 No A.S.T.M.' -
None 565 None .
None ~
4036 None :
. A!S.T.M'. A307 acceptoble for nuts A.S.T.M. A307 for nuts 4424 None..
470 None ,
Reference to Zack NCR L-147 12/28 474 No Certs' Vendor re', solution .
No A.S.T.M.
@- 605 ,
Vendor resolution '~'~'
636 No A.S.T.M. .
Vendor resolution 637 No A.S.T.M. -
, ~
Vendor resolution .
'645 No A.S.T.M. .
Vendor resolution 658 No A.S.T.M. .
' None .
666 None' 690 designation on invoice .
No galv.'rgference' 790' '
' None 793 ,
None * .
~
No A.S.T.M.
2 813 '
' None- .
4014 None .
- None ..
4044 None -
None 4092 Norte
- -- L . . . ._. , ; . . , . ,
u 7
- ..:~ :; : .-
- - ^
~~ ~
(.,r1RECTIVEACTION
' LISTING
. 1st REPORT - DISCREPANC P.O.# _
None 4044 None ,
None ,
None
- 4092 Reviewed P.O. and found accep' table 4108 P.O. reflects no ' .
reautrement Hone None 4143 ,
None 4337 - None
~
Material on hold (partial) 4455 None Vendor resolution '
9441 No A.S.T.M.' -
[ None .
' None ,
9447 Mtl. certs - material on hold wi-12346 No Material certs .
NCR L-157 4 Zack Co. engineers to review '
563 No CMTR/C of C Certs not avallot See NCR L-159 .
a a 583 No Certs a a I- .
a L 584
' No certs Sal spec. revision to accept A3f 773 A36 Material not -
acceptgble at LaSalle Sal spec. revision to accept A3 A36 not for LaSalle L '
775 , Spec. change Oct. 7,1981
~
MTL.A240 not acceptable '
676 at LaSalle ,
- . Addendum to Sal spec. render's.t Mtl. not acceptable to - acceptable [ note NCR L-1641 801 - 'S & L. spec. '
Ias above] ,
807 -[some as abovel M
Ias above] ,
826 [same as abovel ~
Ias abovel & vendor resolutior 1094 [some as abovel.- -
- + .
Vendor resolution 1102 Isome as' abovel , - -
[samel .
4470' [same as abovel Engineering resolution being ,
w-D h - >
~
( .,.
.' All 'of the'following were listed on However, the first report submitted by the 2ack Company on October 23, 1982. u)on cursory examination itemized one will find that these same listed P.O. num>ers were withoutI would l descrepancies.
planation of" Vendor' correction" to be added to the foregoing as accept-able P.O./CMTR Pkgs. .
~
' P.O.# ,.
4021 .
552 ~
559 3 '
~ - ,
gggj 526.
535 .
r- 13207 739 ,
641 6'43 .
743 .
914 .
~
938 .
940 .' .
(. 947 -
1029 .
1274 . .
- g. .
[.. -
l l
g
[
l ll ' '
f t- .--
_ . ~ . ,
(.- ~"~
.j' 4600 W.12TH PLACE'e CHICAGO ( ERO)ILL 60650
- 312/242+3434
- 4401, WESTERN e FLINT MICHIGAt[4 506
- E13/736 2040, .
the4 M@K) co. . CUSTOM METAL FABRICATION February 10, 1982 EQAD-234
~
iTTENTION: Tom Quaka .
Q.A. Superintendent -
LaSalle County Station ,
REFERENCEi QAL #5361 dated 1/29/82 .
SUBJECT:
Corrective action on open Pos Atteched is an updated status report on purchase orders listed as open on QAL #5361 datGd 1/29/82. Those identified as still discrepant have corrective action in progress as noted.
i Yours Truly, Tha Zack Company -
&oc./A h.' 'm Ronald A. Perry [
- Q.A. Engineer RAP /dm .
cc: Q.A. files s.
- l. -
I .-
L .
i L . ,
- - u e .
- ' FOUNDED TO SOLVE THE UN!QUE METAL FABRICATIOfU NEEDS OFINDUSTRY *
- DEDICATED TO CLEAN' I NG AND CUSTOMIZING THE AIR OF THE WORLD *
- _ _ . . ,. - __ , _. _ , _ __ _ , _ gg,= _;=;_. ,. .; ;; , . . _ .
(.
u -
a . . :
g ,
\.
~- -
3 . .
ATTACHMDy I ,
DISCREPANCY LISTING CORRECTIVE ACTION ,
C508 Wrong standard referenced on C of C . Reference EQAD-203 letter to vendor dated 2/1/82. No response received as of 2/10/82 .
P C572'hocerts .
Engineering disposition required .
C586 No certs ,
Specification sheet received (acceptable)
C914 Alteration on re-reveiw - no alteration of Zack PO4
~
.(acceptable)
~
. On re-review - Heatt identic.al on cart C947 . Alteration and cover letter (acceptable)
C4105 Wrong standard referenced on C of C Reference 2QAD-181 letter to vendor ilated 1/28/82. No response received as of 2/10/82 e
- e O
W e
e 9
q . .
e 4
E O
.ne ~ p . q nv. 7.
+
e 4
9 e .
e e
e e
t e
r .
e e e
4 e
?
Q : .
I. =
(A *
- k' e ,
g e
- ...* . . , , * ..e. * . e %
- _s_,.*..~_~yy--*. _ _ _ y _ y ~.; , 3~;_, -. 3.~.y 3 335.y, , , , . - - _ y mm 7. g , -
r~+ n *.n --.* v _
.4600 W.12TH PLACE,e CHICAGO (NERO)ILL 60650 e 312/242 3434 .
44D1 WESTERN e FLINT MICHIGAN., J506
- 313/730 2040 .
v . * - .
N .
the . Pl&@K) co. ,
CUSTOM METAL FABRICATION
=
February 10, 1982
, 2QAD-235 ATTENTI6N: Tom Quaka ,
Q.A. Superintendent *
> LaSalle County Station ,
REFERE?CCE: QAL #5376 dated 2/3/82 * . .
'Attcchid is an updated status report of purchase orders that were identified on QAL #5376 na rsquiring resolution. The Zack Chicago Document Control Center has reviewed these F.O.c with the r.tti.ched (attachment II) cornen,t(s) .
Ycurs Truly, .
, Th3 Zack Cor:pany ,
$hY '
/- ,
Howard, Documentation Supervisor Tar Ronald A. Perry, Q.A. Engineer
- TH ,
f.c~c/Q.A.
s NAP files /dm .
p
~.. -
L F
- FOUNDED TO SOLVE THE UN1QUE METAL FABRICATION NEEDS OF INDUSTRY * -
M = DEDICATE;D TO CLEANl NG AND CUSTOMlZING THE AIR OF THE WOR,LD !
~ -
- ~
. . . ~ . . _ . _ . . _ . _ . . ~ _ ... .
. .--....l-
- .-- - - .. -- --~+ .. -~-.~ -. ~ ~ -
.m. ~
., . . . . . - . . . - . . . . . . . . . . . . _ . . . . . . . _ _ . . ._ ....___=..: # w. s j
. , ,. 1
. - , -- , 'd.
.(.
i *.. 1 i
A'rIACHMfNT II DISCREPANCY LISTING .
CORRECTIVE' ACTION C9504 No Certs Vendor supplied C of C C9509 No Certs Engineering disposition required O
e
'.y, e-
- O e
D
- 5 t
e
- p. .
O e
P g
}.'
I' 6
5 8 e e
'ske+
t 0
0
~ +- s.
h t '
e
- e O
o 4 e ,
e e
G
., V$ ' S I
e 9
. . . -e e * 'a '
%g O b
o
..l.
D -
9
.i- , g g
F . .
,F. , . .
t r O M e __
S . ,
T e v 4 h .n naa r %.m enos eno wme me nne em* e 'y,,s .g gy q ,-,**; *p f
. 'g-fr y% yr (J ,p.'p p gV p f Mp h{.*W ~9MpM8 7* F'F ** #* 6 Q t* *Sw ."#.4 ** ei t=# * **" " ' * ' - F*- *"
~"
f
- 4tbo W.12TH PLACE
- CHICAGO * ";ERO)ILL 60650
- 312/242+3434 4401 WESTERN e FLINT MICHIGAk 40506
- 313/732 2043 .
.. p '
., ~
the ZACK co. .
CUSTOM METAL FAB.RICATION' February 12, 1982 ,
, HVAC Contract #J-2590 "Cosmonwealth Edison Co.
LaSalle County Nuclear Station *
',, " Rural Route $1, Box 240 Marseilles, IL 61341 -
4 .
~
Attna Mr. Richard Cosaro Project Manager ,
I. Ref The Zack Company letter dated October 23, 1981
Subject:
Potential 10CFR50.55(e)
Hateri'al Deficiency Report
[
bentlement .
( -
Attached is an updated (3anuary 15, 1982) report on the status of the material f certifications identified in the above referenced letter. As indicated by the
- j L
report, a significant increase in the number of corrected purchase order packages F s been accomplished and a number of the remaining purchase orders indicated as Therefore, the
' still discrepant have oply one or two items to be corrected.
number of actual material certifications acceptable is in excess of the percent i -
o indicated in the report. , .
It is The Zack Company's opinion at this time that all problems-still existing l-could be corrected with further vendor / subcontractor persuan.. and those items i not resolved through this, same endeavor might be resolv$d wi.a engineering y disposition. ,
b with this interim report The Zack Company'would likp to assure you of its con- ~
tinued ef[ forts in. the above direction.
Should you'have any questions or. problems, please contact me.
Mpst Sincerely, ,
.). Q *.
ert T. Howard Quality Assurance. Documentation Supervisor t, .,. . .
f ATH/dm ,
~
" FOUNDED TO SOLVE THE UNIQUE METAL FABRICATION NEEDS
- OF INDUSTRY *
- DEDICA.TED TO CLEANING AND CUSTOMlZING. THE AIR OF THE W
. ~
.e ;- ~- v- m , . - .- . -. .. . . . ,.
(=
- * * , Pag 3 2 * .
' . J ces Mrs. C. DeZutel
- 1 Mssrs. J.C. DeZutel -
L.J. Burke, Site Project Mgr. ,
I T. Quaka, QA CECO -
B. Wood, QA CECO - ,
J.
Dearbeck,
CECO C.L. Eichstaedt, Jr. , ,
D.E. Calkins .
D. Malzahn .
~
M.L. Skates C. Baumgardner Q.A. Chicago g.A. r.acmile
(- * -
I 9
=
4 4
9 e
O O
3 o b
e
- O O
e
- 9 , e o
e
- e e
9 G
e O
WB , . .
- l- -.
t ~-
l 1
O l
? , e e
e e
- O 9 e 8 4
9
)
.
- i
<
- um.
1 .
f . .
N .
g- .
f* ~~*)_
, , " Y'# ~*H WW, '.T f _, ' f,*. g" $ 1 , ; ?. i',*. T,M .QQf, (nT F,T "
% sfe T* *dTo*QG$ O* ? C ' ** T &% o'
- - . . - - - ~.-.- .... ... .
' 4000 W.12TH PLACE
- CHICAGO g !ERO)ILL 60650
- 312/242 3434
.. .( , .
.1401WERTERN
- FLINT MICHIGAN'48506
- 313/732-204D .
, s. .
the M@K) co. '
CUSTOM METAL FABRICATION January 15, 1982 r.- .
ADDENDUM P.EPORT TO LaSALLE POWER STATION SHOWING CORRECTED P.O./CMTR PKGS.
L' FROM FIRST TO SECOND REPO?T L Prepared for: .Q.A. Engineer, Commo'nwealth Edison Bruce Wood .
Prepared by: Terry Howard, Q.A.' Engineer- Document Control l.
Ronald A. Perry, Q.A. Enginee'r .
\ . .
l . .
r * . .
l I e a.
, . +
I' g
-
- FOUNDED TO SOLVE THE UNIQUE METAL FABRICATION NEEDS OF INDUSTRY * -
- DEDICATED TO CLEANING AND CUSTOMlZING THE AIR OF THE WORLD .*
= . - - - _ . . . _
G W4esDs.;,3f.,
.lst REPORT - DISC
[ ,
i."'_.llii'.i
~
a P.O.# 6 CO.
. 1127 No' ~~ j '
- DAMAf 1046 NI I . ~
N- January lf 952 ' .
582 C'
- I -
4016 4077 ;-
. 41 4 f .
4165 ADDENDUM
~ --
- 13207 P.EPORT TO LaSALLE POWER STAT 913 ,
SHOWING CORRECTED P.O./CMTR P Y
[ FROM FIRST TO SECOND REPORT 565 \ .
4036 i -
- r. 4424 . ,
470 1
L 474 Prepared for:
Bruce Wood - 0.A. Engineer,nCommo' wea
~
605 #. Prepared by:
636 .
Terry Howard, 0.A. Engineer- Document Co Ronald A. Perry, Q.A. Enginee'r 637
'5 64 658 3 .
666 l ,
790' .
'793 , . ,
813 1 -
40}L .-
! ~
I,_ ,
4Q4I
- u.
- FOUNDED TO SOLVE THE UNIQUE METAL 8
p n.e
- DEDICATED m-TO - CLEANtNG AND CUSTOMlZ r....,r~,c.'.rf?~~5'"^'...*W.E ~
2'?S ' =~" .;_ -
^ ' ~ ~ ' ' a. ,g,r,
~
=k:= + - -----_ --
..u . . . . .._
(.,r1RECTIVEACTION LISTING
.' .,st
. 1 REPORT - DISCREPANC ..
P.O.# .
None 4044 None . ,
. None ,
4092 None Reviewed P.O. and found a'ccep' table 4108 P.0'. reflects no -
requirement .
4143 ,
None. -
None 4337 Material on hold (partial) 4455 None Vendor resolution '
No A.S.T.M.'
( 9441 None ,
None 9447 Mtl. certs - material on hold wi-12346 No Material certs NCR L-157
. Zack Co. engineers to review '
563 No CMTR/C of C Certs not availat See NCR L-159 a .
.,. 583 No certs a ,, a a 584
' No certs S&L spec, revision to accept A3f
~ '
773 A36 Material not 6cceptable at LaSalle S&L spec. revision to accept A3 775 ,
A36 not for LaSalle ,
Spec. change Oct. 7, 1981 MTL. A240 not acceptable '
b 676 at LaSalle p . Addendum to S8L spec. render's.t Mtl. not acceptable to - acceptable (note NCR L-164) 801 - S & L. spec.
[as abovel 807 Isome as above]
Ias above]
826 [same as above)
[as~above] & vendor resolutior
[same as abovel, ,
1094 Vendor resolution l
1 (so,me as' above'] , ' -
l . 1102 . .
[same] -
I 4470' [same as abovel .
Engineering resolution being ,
,p. '* .
O e . .
v= m=-mma , , . f -. .. .. .
x.__..,.,...,.,,,,, _
(_ _ ,
{. ' All Zack'of the' following Company on October were 23, 1982. listed on However, the first u)onreport submitted cursory examination by the one will find that Ithese wouldsame like to listedsubmit P.O.those numaers with the were without itemized generalized ex-descrepancies.
planation of" Vendor' correction" to be added to the foregoing as accept-able P.O./CMTR PKgs. -
O P.O.# .
4021 .
552 ~
559 t' * -
524' 526.
.. 535 .
13207 739 .
641 643 .
743 .
91',
~
938 ,
940 . .
947 . -
1029 ,
1274 *
- g. - -
e
~e l . .
e o ,
e e
. 9 O S .
- e -
.- e 4e S
' -*%P -
7.* f W h **y g. e.y , = y_, ;. y s_ g s_
,9.,
..=,..--...a.....- .. -.-
4600 W.12TH PLACE'e CHICAGO ( ERO)ILL 60650
- 312/242 3434 (,.
- 4 501, WESTERN FLINT MICHIGAN'4C503
- C13/737,204D, .
thel 2fd@X) co. . CUSTOM METAL FABRICATION February 10, 1982 EQAD-234 hTTENTION: Tom Quaka Q.A. Superintendent -
' LaSalle County Station ,
REFERENCE:
QAL #5361 dated 1/29/82
SUBJECT:
Corrective action on open POs Attached is an updated status report on purchase orders listed as open on QAL #5361 datcd 1/29/82. Those identified as still discrepant have corrective action in progress as vioted.
Yours Truly, Th2 Zack Co:npany -
So G:
Ronald A. Per ,
Q.A. Engineer RAP /d:n ,
cc: Q.A. files
~
b L .
I i
4 ' . , ,
g
~
p- ,,
H -
- FOUNDED TO SOLVE THE UNIQUE METAL FABRICATION NEEDS CF INDUSTRY = *
.. , .
- DEDICATED TC) CLEANING AND CUSTOMIZING THE AIR OFTHE WORLD * ,
- , . . ' ' . . . . . ~ ' ~ ~ ' ~ ~---
- ~ ~ ~
- w. --
. u. - :::,. . .. ._r ;.L.. uz. . . .
- ~, -
- e . .
~ .
- y. .. . . ,
-a ATTACHMDCr I ,
DISCREPANCY LISTING CORRECTIVE ACTION .
C508 Wrong standard referenced on C of C_ . Reference EQAD-203 letter to vendor dated 2/1/82. No response received as of 2/10/82 O
C572 No certs .
Engineering disposition required .
C586 No Certs ,
Specification sheet received (aeceptable)
..: .~. -
On re-reveiw - no alteration of Zack POS
~C914 Alteration (acceptable)
C947 Alteration . On re-review.- Heat # identical on cert and cover letter (acceptable)
- C4105 Wrong standard referenced on C of C Reference 2QAD-181 letter to vendor dated 1/28/82. No response received as of 2/10/82 o
w.
r .
I. .
e l
y .. .
i-
- l. -
n e
(-** .
l . e V .
8 4
w.m.s .Ma,ame. s..e.g_ m 3 .y y g .g m_ q g
- . . . - . u. -- . .. :_._. . . . .. _ .... :
.4600 W.12TH PLACE y CHICAGO tr9ERO)ILL 60650
- 312/242 3434 4401 WESTERN
- FLINT MICHIGAN, J506
- 313/736 2040
(\ . <
. 1
., . 1 g ,
thet 7_2.A@K) co.
CUSTOM METAL FABRICATION Fe.bruary 10, 1982
, 2(aD-235 ATfENTI6N: Tom Quaka' Q.-A. Superintendent .
LaSalle County Station .
REFERENCE:
QAL $5376 dated 2/3/82 * ,
%tt_ chid is an updated status report of purchr.se orders that were identified on QAL 45376
) c3 requiring resolution. The Zack Chicago Document Control Center has reviewed thes.e t P.O.s with the t.tte.ch.ed (attachment II) comrnen,t(s) .
I = -
l Ycurs Truly, .
,Thz Ecck Company ,
d
/*
- l _ Tcrri Howard, Documentation Supervisor l Ronald A. Perry, Q.A. Engineer .
l TH ,
I-- c~c/Q.A. s RAP files/d:n .
e .
e e
4 .
4 a..v.
. g e go
' FOUNDED TO SOLVE THE UN!QUE METAL FABRICATION NEEDS OF INDUSTRY * -
- DEDICATED TO-CLEAN.NG l AND CUSTOM! ZING THE AIR OFTHE WOR,LD !
..-................:__ pgT
]T 9, g,_.n. , , , ,, , gg g .q g e,g ,
$ ._S 'h 1 $* 2_a [ _ \ f_._rF. U ,I,~.
Y** I **.
. f, fy*"**T'. . .g,
v&e w -
)
. --.. ~ .._.._ ,____ . __ _. __ _ __ _,____,_ __. ,, . _, _
{
- s. .
. i . . , ,
ATTACHMfNT II e .
( DISCREPANCY LISTING ,
CORRECTIVE' ACTION C9504 No Certs Vendor supplied C of C C950'9 No Certs Engineering disposition required -
e S
O e
9 I.
I e
S e
9 e e O
=
4a f- ,
O g 9 ,
e 4 4 9
4 e
6 N O ,
n_. * "
- 9 1 q, y e ,
6
+
A I
4 e
8 G
I i
I 9 9 9
9 e G 3 D D' e S e
O 9
9 S is ,.: O O
- l. _ _ _
a rb e-P4-p . .
f l 5 - .
- 6; .
lb j . .
- w=**
- toAn- _ 2^'.,- ---P-
2 .. a...~. .. __ _ ._
DEFINITIQB 0F SWMUtY LISTDC *
- 1. Packages Reviews ' mis itsa lists the total ruber of packages that were reviewed for this report only. It; includes the raber of purchase orders that the site have. It does not however, include those Mess ceders genecated after, Novunbar 10, 1981.
- 2. Packages correct aEl arreptable 'Ihis includes the tcrtal nunbar of P.O./ .
Otms that the Docmunt 'mam deem correct / acceptable
. ttrough .,
January 15, 1982.
- 3. Discrepant Packages - Inclu$as the total number of P.O./CMPRs not acceptable -
~
for the reasons listed in rartbers four (4) through nine (9). .
- 4. 1b Paterial Certs 'this includes those Inckages that have to certificatica data, i.e., certified test material / certificate of con-formance (ccepliance).
- 5. Ib #rfs/c5.m test data ' mis nmber indicates the total of packages tFat 4 are missing part or all of OfrR data.
- 6. img starx5ard referenced 'Ihis ' includes the nmber of packages where the standard referenced in the certification is crntra:y to the ccntract'rpecification/procurernant docmenE.
- 7. 16 standard referenced 'this incluSes the nwber of packages in which there was no standard referenced in the p--.t and docu-t
- went/ material certification.
- 8. g.aterial does rot weet Spec. 'this b-Wa= those P.O. packages that naterial does ret meet the standard specified.
- 9. Clerical errors 'Ihis group inclu$es a variety of discrepencies (minor) that ,
are clerica) in reture; i.e., no AS'Df, so AS'D&'yr.,1b
~
ASna/yr. designa* tion, typographical errors, etc.
1 .
t g
' i
- 4
- i. 1
. .. . . . . - . .. ~ - r - -.--..~.-..n._.u.2 .. . . ... .
I i
. i l
i REStHES/MMM T REVIEN (HXRCH IMRIM)
I. Increase in Ib. of correct ykgs. .
3rd to 4th (Reprt) Increase A. Midland 145 374 229 B. Yah11e 109 237 128
. C. Clintcn 159 268 10S II. Increase of percent (t) of ccuplete 3 kgs.
A. Midlard 26 68.0 B. Tah11e 37 58.52 C. Clinton 42 67.34 III. No. of discrepancies requiring engirmering disposition.
A. Midlard 23 3
B. Ya h11e 14 .
,, C Clinton 14 IV. No,of, discrepincies requiring possible engineering dispositicn. .
. . =
A., Midland - 42 B. IaSalle 27 l ~ C. Clinten . 23 l
i V. No. of dis rescies requiririg {cth pssible and definite engineering dispositicn. ,,
Percent (%)
. A. Midland
- 65 11.71 ,
B. IaSalle -
41 10.21 37 10.26 C. Clint.en ..
r l
- e
~
.n-. . . . . . . . . . - . . , . _ . . . . . . . . . - . . . . .
1A SALIE STATION CHLY .
- 1. Packages reviewed. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 405
- 2. Packages cctrect and W hle. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 237 -
- 3. Discrepent packages. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 8 -
- 4. No material arts. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .'. . . . . . 33 S. No phys / chem test data. . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
- 6. Wrcrwir standard referenced. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . 19
- 7. No standard referenced. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 -
' 8. Materic.1 dcK.s rot meet spec. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ,3 ,
- 9. Clerical errors...... ....................... 67
- 10. Listed by site - ret located. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 O
S I .
e
+
IA SALIE DISCREPANT - (CFEN) . .
b 451 668 4205 9417 '17103' 452 683 4216 . 9419 4 54 696 4268 3420
. 455 704 4270 9421* Sbtal: 103
- 465 714 4285 9422 .
472 722 4286 9427 508 736 4289 9429 519 764 4294 9442
~
520 798 4312 9444 522 804 4348 9450 542 852 5759' 9455 549 893 5776 9501 566 SD9 6813 9505
- SC7 954 9242 9506' 572.
- 956 9244 9762 597 1329 9251 9636 .
599' G3111 -
9401 10784 602 4004 9402 11237 .
603 4023 9403 11271',
616 4048 ' 9411 11544 617 4052 9412 , 12206
'627 4080 9413 12285 .
6'30 4081 9414 13246 ,
639 4105 9415 13912 651 4137 9416 16429 .
652 4157
~
. ee
'o
. g O .
S
c.. -- . . . - - . . _ . . . - . . . . . . .._..... . .....
i
- 4
~
AIL sins - DISOEPMF (300
- C#
456 762 , 1255 770 G3114 464 797 4055 468 802 9247 586 803 11503 601 806 12281 i 604 820 12303 .
606 821
- 12304 609 822 12434 611 823 13238-
- - 632 827 13255 633 830 13268
~
642 839 13293 644 851 662 855 sbtal: 65 663 888 665 912
~
. 684 917 .
- 701 ,955 711 987
-717 1048 724 . 107D I 738 1076 i
742 1089 ..
. 746 1133 .
752 1195 1238
(
l
.. t e
t O
l .
s
. . p PAGE. 3 OF *
- . 15
...., ,,., gg DISCREPANCY COMMENTS / PROPOSED RESOI,UTION
. . . :fo . ITENDESCRIPT[ON, REQ'D. DOC.
Chils $215 - 216 - 217 - N3 AS'IWyear desigration Eack to obtaih revised OGRs
.i , t ,.
218 - 219 Ot!R Chils #220 - 221 - 222 - .
Zack to obtain rirvised Ot!Rs 1,2 223 - 224 OttR m AS1 T year designation .
.. i
.; i Chils ' Of!R lt) certs .
Eack to obtain OCRs . .
}
9
(
- 6 Opils 8229 -.230 - . *
.. ,5 231 - 232 Of!R Ms ASTM .,year. Eack to obtain twised OtrRs .
g i
, j 1
Colls #233 - 234 - . .
Zack to obtain revised Of!Rs i
..... 235 - 236 CMrR No AS'IM year .
, . r Missing W .
- Eack Nill attempt to locate . ,
i.s s .
, .. 3 l
, i ,
. . . ji
. Structural nuts C of C Material does not incet Engineering dispositich required -
- i l bolts . spec. -
J.
. i i .
l, r ,
l
. ( .
. . r .
. PAGE OP
- i.l::
gg .
-2 15
<, . 16. ITEN DESCRIPTION REQ'D. DOC. DISCREPANCY COMMENTS / PROPOSED RESOLUTIdN . ,
i
- 1>
- Angles OtrR No galvanizing a rt Zack to obtain galvanizing cart
- l i
io Angle OttR N3 galvanizing cert Zack to obtain galvanizing Cert
~
Hex nuts .
. I .- mshers C of C Wrong standard referenced Possible engineering M a P ition p screws (m Zack P.O.) -
A> "J" bolts and wahors C of C 2 certs .
Eack to obtain certs *
- L6
. Bolts C of C -
Wrong standard referenced Possible engineering disposition required mshars
.- . l
... t Elcan welded beam C of C
- Material.does not meet Pbssible engineering Mernaition required l-attachments ! spec. .
![
i ,
- i i'
.* Pipe couplings OffR m certs Zack to obtain OtrRs , ,
. 6
. 6 e
w
x
' s , . . .
PAGF. OP 15 .
a t,1. : gg , ,
3 l .s.. No. '
ITEM DESCRIPTION REQ'D. DOC. DISCREPANCY . COMMENTS / PROPOSED RESOLUTIOlt a// Ilm; heed screw ' C of C m ASTM year Eack will attempt to locate P.O. '!'
(No.Zack P.O.)
\ --- .
l
.O Miising pkg. 2ack will attempt to locate l (Possible engineering disposition required) , . ;'
, - ,. t ,
Cbils 8252 - 253 - 254 -
i.ir 255 - 256 OGR m ASDVyear desicpation Zack to obtain revised OtrR' k
. Q>ils 8248 r 249 - . ;
(.03 250 - 251 CMrR 'Its ASDVyear designation ,
Zack to obtain revised.OnR ,
l.
- . I
- i. I / StructurU bar stock OnR No ASTM year ,
Zack to ob uin revised O ER . ,
4 . _ . . _ _
. I 2 Angle OnR No ASDVyear deslepation ZWc to obtain revised OGR
. f:
t
. - g
.g .' .
h
.. s . .
. r .
PAGE 4 OP -
- IA SA122 .s . 15
[uts:
rs. !!a. ITEM DESCRIPTION REQ'D. DOC. DISCREPANCY . COMMENTS / PROPOSED RESOLUTIdW ,
37.! Sheets,* OUR No' ASTM year Zack to obtain revised Of!R ,
ff f
, i, b .is . Angles OCR . 2 ASTM Zack to obtain revised OCR .
s
.. '.9 kngles OCR No AS'DVyear designation Zack to obtain revised OER - *
(. . _ _ _ -
. . I.
, I
' i. .I SS Sheet OER .No ASTM yr.
Zack to obtain correct OER' . .
i 1
. . j e
! i, J Angles, Bars OER No ASityyr. designation Zack to obtain correct OCR .
{
i i *
- . l*
1 4 .t Angles, chamel C of C Different count on gal- Zack will attempt to obtain corrected cart (galvanizing) vanizing certs ,
. . . i
.f l
. Plats OER ib physicals, 102,'103, 304 DwJineering disposition required e..<
e
. .e. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
s l
l l - -
I . .
.s . 12 . IA satzz PAGE 5 OF 15 .
~~
l . ,
to . b . I:o . :: TEM DESCRIPTION REQ'D.. DOC. DISCREPANCY COMMENTS / PROPOSED RESOLUTION .
Omils H05 - 506 - 507 .
(. s6 408 - 409 OCR lb ASDVyr. designation Zack (b. will obtain unasted Of!R i.n Angle rings OER M3 mrts - 3x3xl/4 . Ibssible engineering dispEltim required s :-i Angle rings oftR M2 certs ,
- Zack will attcupt to acquire OffR . l
,Possible mgineering disposition required ,
j 4 _. .
(,
M2 certs - 722 - 722 * .
Angle rings OER ^ 722 722-4 Possible engineering.,Hapnmition required
- 1.* *J f I
- i. i Bars'and angles OCR . Wrong standard referenced Engineering disposition required I
i .. f2Icets - *
- OCR No certs Ehgineerir9 disposition required -
wrong standard referenced .
i !. i i
.. , Squa m w iled tubing OfrR Wrong standard"refermced Engineering disposition required l!
. . k 4 .
4
. 7 '
PAGE 6 OF 15 -'
JOL am . ., ;
, DISCREPANCY COMMENTS / PROPOSED RESOLUT'ON I ;
- 0. t!o . ITEM DESCRIPTION REQ'D. DOC.I ,
= . .
t,'A SS Shsets On Wrong type references Ehgineering disposition required . .!
T-309-2B . ;
e
\.
Js3 Angle rings On Macerts Zack to attempt acquisition of OUR :
1
'e;rs Angle rings On M) ASDVyr. .
- Zack to attempti acquisition of conn
.'GR
%1
- Angle rings OER No AS1M Zack to obtain mrrected On ,
f I
'. .:. Angle rings OCR . M) ASDVyr. Zack to obtain wubbia OCR
. .I
- i, Angle rings OCR No. of itonis galvanized does Ibssible engineering disposition required -
i 2.rP ,
not match no. of noterial items i
e
. .. ,g
- .?
ti1 Angle rings OGR Ib ASTWyr. -
7x:k to obtain.mrrected OUR .
. i J
i:
. . 3 t
l
4 3; IA SMIE PAGE 7 OF 15 -
. No. ITEM DESCRIPTION REQ'D.. DOC. DISCREPANCY . COMMENTS / PROPOSED RESOLiffION l
.:.u I Hex cap scre;s and C of C Wrong' standard referenced Ehgineering MPition required
- washers
- for washers i i'
- i.. 1 Inck washers C of C Wrong standard referenced Possible engineering disposition required ,- -
i
.' f
- I
'u.id
, ' Itk screws C of C N2 standard referenced .Eack to obtain revised C of C .
(Possible engineering disposition required)
. l
,4b58 Pop itivets C of C Pb standard referenced
- Zack to obtain ruEised C of C .
- }
- - (Possible engineering di'aposition required)
- l . .
,4*, as Hax head cap screws C of C . Wrong standard referenced Possible engineer.ing disposition required 46,1 'ItSt screws - C of C No standard referc ccxl Eack to obt'a in' revised C of C -
(Possibic engineering disposition required)
. i .
,' Studs ,
.: . Nuts C of C r Wrong standard refe'enced Possible engineering disposition re, quired '
Wa:dxtrs .
a i
l . .
f
4 1
. . t.
. r PAGE 8 OF 15 ,
Gia & IA SAI2E .
. Ib. ' ITEM DESCRIPTIM REQ'D. DOC. DISCREPANCY -
COMMENTS / PROPOSED RES,OLUTION ,
' Hex Head bolts .
Possible engineering diurnaition' req-ired !
.t i n Hex head nuts C of C Wrong standard referenced .
}
Hex head washers . ,
i Zack to obtain revised C of C
~
1 :tb Huck pine C of C Cert not signed ,
Huck, collars
'* Hex head cap screws l 1.:16 Hex head nuts C of C Wrmg standard referenced , Possible engineering disposition requiped Hex head washers *
.t.t63 Carbon are sticks OtrR *No carts 2ack to obtain OGR . .
l l I
, Material certs not reviewed Zack ta reviewcerts f
4 flo mar +deaft despers !
OGR - -
e-Ilex head, cap
- screws Engineeriiur diurnaition rW
. 16 Hex head cap nuts C of'C Wrong standard referenced , . .
(A164)' . .
l....__ j t
. .es Air Mxtitors C of C certs not reviewed Zack to review certs -
l
(
- 4:
e
- s t
. [ ;
f t
t e
x PAGE g OF I:
y$ . ,
LA SALT 2 .,
.. ?!o . ITEM DESCRIPTION REQ'D. DOC. DISCREPAW'Y . COMMENTS / PROPOSED RESOLUTION e . 1 I
Han head cap screws
.s *: . .;i. - Hex nuts C of C Wrong standard referenced Bu[ineering disposition required ;
.. . : . . t t.:il Pop rivets C of C Wrong standard referenced Possible engineering disposition required {
. I, 9
1:u . Missing phg. ,
- zack will attaipt to locata, '
4316 'Popirivets
- C of C' .
Possible engineeEing dispositicat m'i-t -
( . . .
mils 97 9 - . . No certs for 22 & 24 t.1.> ,
10 - 13 OCR gage mtl. Eadt to obtain certs
. I
, --- , g
- . n 0511 123 -
OCR -
No certs for.22 & 24 2ack .to obtain carts .
gage atl. .
. . . t [
. n mil 36 OCR No AS'DVyear disposition Zack to obtain revissid OCR f i'
. t t
. e l,;
- t, :
e *_
lI
\
t ;f . 1 . ! .'1 >*,.1g,;!,silg.1I*f ,l .1s 4 .
\
!- .'fI; ,f
. ~ .
*3 .-
7 . * - p . o
- 0 .
1 . E G * , A P N. O . R I tr
- C T a O U c R R L R R r r O g f G t t S
E %n O f O O O M. R i d e d e d e d es i.s . D r s s i s 'i e R i - v w E v i E v v e . S l a w ir e r n . O g r O r i P n n a O n n n i n i i , b t R i i i a a m o
/
P
= a t t a
- b t * . l b b 4 o M S t o o o c l T o o o o i
' N o t o t t t t w .
E t k M
- k k kc k kc c M c
- c a a d- a .
O a a z i z C Z w E {. ' n n n n n o o o i o c i i i t i t t t a t a a n a n ar n n g g t g g g i r i i i s . s e c i s . s s e e e o, e e d d d Y g d d C n r r a r a - ar r a N i z a e e e e A i e y y y y P n W V E R a v W D s t r D D W l' n s l S S S C a S e A A A S g A c A. o I 6 b b N b D b l b i 1 l I l O C _ O , . D . R R . RC R . D R R R r r r r f r r .t t
'Q f t O
t O O O O O E O R
. 7
_ 7 4 _ 4 1 N 2 O
- I 60 T 68 68 80 6 00 22 12 45 P 4 11 11 11 11 I 2 R - -- - - - --
C 79 59 S 5 57 57 11 44 E *
- 00 22 11
. 4 11 11 11 D 2 -
$ 8 3 $ $
M = s s s s s E a s l e l l l l i l i i T I Ea i o . g n i b ( - , c o o C 5 0 E D. C A I M S
's.
I - _. . . = . i
- b. . .
!. : . . 1, s. o i
. s. 4 i : .
l, 9
. 01 9 s .
< j;i 4 l
l ' h gg PAGE g OF 15 -
- 4
- 1.s a. Ib. ITEM DESCRIPTION REQ'D. DOC. DISCREPANCY COMMENTS / PROPOSED RESOLUTION *
! Ja t.: mils 9148 - 151 - 152. OCR W ASDVyr. designation ,
Zack will obtain corrected Ot!R. . i m ils 6156 - 157 - .
. ,.11 158 - 159 OCR m AS'DVyr. designation Zack will obtain cxtracted OttR ,
. .i mils 9174 - 175 - 176 -
- elei 177 - 178 OCR 2 ASDVyr, designatica 2ack will obtain coacrected OCR . .
i
. r s
coils 5129 - 120 - . . 1 s.:i 5 ' 164 - 163 OER 2 ASDVyr.
- Zack will obtain corrected OUR , l
, .- . t g ! . r m ils flil - 132 -
; l t r. 155 - 182 - OCR . . 2 ASTM yr. Zack will obtain, corrected OCR l
. i.
, , g m ils 1101 - 102 -
- sis t *103 104 OftR W ASDVyr. designation Zack will obtain corrected OCR
- l
,l 4
.
- m ils 8166 - 170 -
~
. . . l ,'
;. i 171 - 172 Of!R m AS1M year
- Zack to obtain revised Cd!R ,
l ,I , I i , t e s 6 9
l l
~
l i l l l i l
, .g . ,
,. , ' f- *. p
,1 mw ,
.Nh : 1A SAI2E .
PAGE 12 OF 1$ . 1.O. Ilo . ITEM DESCRIPTION REQ'D. DOC. DISCREPANCY COMMENTS / PROPOSED RESOLtr5 ION , i, I rhtig $167 - 168 - " . -
'>4 20 t . 169 - 173 OCR lb AS1M year Zack to obtain revised OGR e f' *i
. i.
, > l21'
- Colls 9183 - 184 - 185 OCR ib AS1M year Zack to obtain revised OCR ,
i 4 [
*. - r el2] Fans C of C . )b C of C -
2ack to obtainC of.C
- I u
. i
. . 5 a., Irt Angles -
OGR , Pb AS'I:% ear designation Zack to obtain revised OCTs ,j
- channels - ,
t i
* * . .?) - Sheets OGR -
Ib AS'DVyear designation Zack to obtain xevised'ORRs , l
. t
[ i41.! Angles OCR No ASTM year 2ack to obtain revised OCRs .
* ,[
Osils #210 - 211 - 212 , i, . lb AS'DVycar des'ignation Zack to obtain revised OCR 9:;4 213 - 214 OCR ,
- e l.
ll
mp., .,
...q..-~.. .
s.- I A SAIZE
.. PAGE.13 OP 15 .
.. . IIE. ITEM DESCRIPTION REQ'D. DOC. DISCREPANCY .
COMMENTS /PhtOPOSED RESOLUTION *
. . t
, .. .o Angles- Of!R .(A575 mtl.) - 2 ASDVyear 7.ack to.cbtain zwvised OCR ! ,
designation I
. . - . t
'. Angles - OCR 2 ASD % ear Zack to obtain revised OGR' ,r !
+ .
-. r 1
.- l
.1,, .i .
' Registers
.La Material - OCR 2 certs -
Zack to obtain certs * ' Diffusers (eminaic analysis) *
' g s
- ..r l g
* . .. i .
r i minne. ten, n-pers ~ Mua Ff.re Dunpers m terial m Zack P.O. Zack will attssyt to obtain P.O. l- . i Gravity danger OCR - *
.i
. . -ti, i !
- . . 6 Air Ptmitors C of C .
certs rot reviewed' Zack toreview certs
* , fl 6
.. 8. ,
~
, l:
- ,ll:
, Stainless Steel coil . Of!R Ib AS'!M year Zack to'obtain a vised OCR
[7
; i g*
, (No Zack P.O.) (Zack will attempt to Iconta P.O.) ..
- l
, i
, < , ? i .t
- t ~ ' ,
) Missing
- Zack,will attoipt to fir'd i *
?. ,
l l t , '!
. . . (
l . . -
. 1
. . c.
. g
- I
s
---w-- -- ~ ~ y , , . r, y . . . . . .; . . rAgLtz .
PAGE 14 OF 15 *
..l. W. ITEM DESCRIPTION REQ'D. DOC. DISCREPANCY COMMENTS /PltOPOSED RESOLUTION
- 30'/81 Ang1M Ot!R ~ lb ASWyr. Zack will obtain corTected Ot!R ' * *
~~
j
-.. t.
t
*
- 9
. . 1 a
' ' I 112ri solts, Itts, Washers Of!R Wrong standard referenced I!hgineering d!==i*im zequired [i* , ., l (washers) *
- 5
- 1..: !i 1 i -
. e 1M1 Missing .
Zack will attmpt to find
.t'.I l
l l
..L s
. i ; I I i i r. Angths -
oen .ie certs . zack will attopt to obtain OeR .i
-I -
Ibssible engineering disimition i
- .**t
. . 8
- - - ~
t
- 'f
, 1.% Screws, imahers, rivets - C of C . Wrong standard reference Eack will attsyt tio attain OtrR' l *-
1 ,t t en washers Possible engineering diagnsition ~l
- [l ;
.i- -
, . t .
i > . a. . 2x2(l'/2) wire mesh C of C le standard referenced Zack will'attept to obtain OttR .
'. . t _
- e. . *
'! * !(
h
. I .: l'.. Missing Zack will attempt 'ecatri !
1
. i
- I, l
y , . , ' *
, 1- e , . 'mv', _
- PACE 15 OF 13 ~ ,
- i. ::n IA SAI22 .
REQ'D.- DOC. DISCREPANCY COMMENTS / PROPOSED RESOLUTION >. n . N.> . ITtM DESCRIPTION .. . 1
'Missirq zack will attept to locate -
- 81 2 ,
h
- zack will attept to lacets
.. er - Missiry * . - .
,h
*9 12 ;
. t . '
.zack.will attept to locate , . l ..
'. iis s Missirs .
t
! e.
1
. (* ,i
.. J-
*i g ingb rings OCR M3 certs for 736, 736-3, 736-4 g, hg *
.e... . ~.
l g- ,
. It
, . . j .
4 . t
}i.
i . ,i I. +
- - j
. t t
I 6
* . 4
, . i g
e i
. t
l lj;1l1I' .( s
' ; g ,*4 l{I I9lt l' ;, .'.f ;i ' ;fij,6I : i i
, :! f:!
.o t*
,* i
,'f ' (' ,
0
- 1 .
F . O : ' a
- a a t.
O. . .t g' *g ! t-a IL
! * !l .
a a P d d 1 d ' t - ts t e t s s E k n e e t e t G a t
~
A . l b 1 l i m l P . N = a e a O f a e l i I o i m R l
= =r ye T y C - y U R
! a hp ht t
kIat L t i c R O m
- O O s ! ~
n n S u n t O n i i n E f n i
=
i a a = o R
#t
. t t
. o c
- c t b - s D na t
o e t o o E h e oL
. r r o o oer S
O - t tm . o c t t tc tg P O t c 4,3 O , n t g e. - pn n mi R i e r i m n e
- ez P a t ti r
'w-tn
/
S hc o c t a # t a i a aa v T . o o ol N o o o t t ta g E M t k . t kc t k om t k k kc M c cd c c
- O C Z a E a an Za Z a a Z E a
Mdna . 1 ' . l
. 8
/
1 x n ce ir ta au nq
, . gs s s i
. t t Y
s s s" C d. ' e 4 e d e1 N e t / 't s
,- r . 1 )
e A c l . . x t ra
,l P .
O. ar 6 a 1 yc E i l P cy x c 1 . R a i 6 i
=c
= Vis C f t
e sM yI t Dg ya Dy s hr S'h
.SI t k
n h S' pA S' n hib t r t n Ap D a a iu e H e l B mm t IT 0* m(o mm
, e C'
., O' D
~. ,
. D .
' t .
R R R R R Q m A r r t f I t I t E V t
-* R O P O O O O O
- 4T6 l
1 2i C
. 5 80 N 4 s 45 -
O t e - 0 I - T . e 30 0 5 P 01 h s 56 S 60 ' A I r 44 45 R a , M C b '. -- s r
- .T S
S E d . O.9-0 92 a B 292 A D n . P38 45 690 a . t' $ 44 , 6 445 s e s s g M e h- s e t s n E l n9 l l e l i T g a3 i g e i h
- I n l8 ,h n h S . b T A C
. '> B8 C
~
g , 3
- g. !
j' . . .. w , i o . w t u > 5 , Z-I. . l
.iM fl,,Ie . . ?. . b '> _
Ill1 i
i l , , y ,. ,,
- y ;- . ..
. . r- .
PAGE 2 OF 10 . j
. nit. : At!. cnss ,
IT'E'M DESCRIPTEON REQ'D. DOC. DISCREPANCY . COMMENTS / PROPOSED RESOLUTION , f
- .t.. I!s . r Angles ) m naterial certs .
.- j i
*rubiruj
)Galvartizing OCR , . (Galvanizing order certs only) Eack to attg to obtai:t CMrR on antarial LJ"j:
i Angle Rings ). ,
, . i s
. .- .. I
. S
- 3. :es ; , . Sheets OtrR m ASTM yr. , Zack to obtain%aK^2 OCR .
i
, t I;.
g
- e .g
't*I, Sheets OER m physical testi Zack to obtain ghysical tests and corrected *
- te ASTM yr. OtrR g
~ '
Zack to obtain physical' tests and correcte8'
!! !+
No physical' tests , OCR .- .
.8.! > #iheets OCR lb AS1H yr. ,
- 1 s.
* :s
" ,17 i .
Wrong standard referenad .';
*g .
.' - Ib physical 869350 , ,.
1
- t. sl Sheets,. OCR ,No AM M yr. hgineering dis [osition requirsd .
- . . ,g
. . . .L
~. . .
i (bils" 5445 d 446 - . - h
.. 'i
.' / : ; 447 - 448 .OCR tb ASTM yr. Zack.to obtain correctul DER f 8
. . . .t l ,
7. I * * .. -
C'bils t393 -. 394 - te ASTM yr.
395 - 396 OcR , tb shysical test Zack to obtain physical test. OCR t , {
' , I I
,.. r , - '
., s a I ;
i e I s e
- t t *.
.* - ti ww: ,
, i
. t
. PAGE 3 0F 10 *
.:r.!i: AgL symg .
I REQ'D., DOC. DISCREl'ANCY , COMMENTS / PROPOSED RESOLdTION, ' I.o. No. ITEM DESCRIPTIOlt ] Coils $372 .373 - 374 m physir-als for I Zack to obtain Ifrysical tests I* !
't-l .: .. 375 - 376 OCR I372, 373, 374 ! }
I
- Heat 8J74278 '
i
.. r
.i
- Coils $38" - 396 - l'
%16 . . .. 387 - 388 OCR m piysical tests ,
Zack to obtain If rysical tests , s 0(
. , b I.
* ?
N.! g Angle rings OCR m m rts for 2x2x3/16 Zack to attenet to obtain DER for 2x2x3/16 , l i
- angles stock
- g
; - .t .
162 Angle ring 2 OCR NoASDVyr.. Zack to obtain corrected OCR .J I, I . .i i g
. s No physicals on 20 and 22 ga. -}
' 7 /q i
Sheets OCR shects (OK for fahlle) Zack tp obtain yttysical tests . ,
.j
* *
- No physical tests .
n/ Coils f426 - 427 - 428 OCR (OK for LaSalle).. Zack to obtain W ?:ical tests i Discretunt counb cri l
... Angles OCR galvanizing ,
Zack to obtain' corrected O CR i. l , t e . i . I
- m -
y- ,. . . 1:
* *'s.* +,
,o a l.
_R T . _ . . PAGE 4 0F 10 .
.I.u.: , AII,SI1ES ..
DISCREPANCY COMMENTS / PROPOSED RESOI,UTION f ' l . h . I!a . IT2M DESCRIPT' ION REQ'D. DOC. . , s (thizirq A500 mtl.) Zade tre obtain doErected OE1ts ; .I
'Iblitig. Digi.neerirq disposition required (Clinton, fatalle) *l OGR lb ASDWear designation L.' *,
. Bars j,
Material does not meet Clinton, % * . t iasalle specs. (material certi- .!,* t, GI ' Angles ' ~ Tubing OCR fled to A500 1974 - Midlarx1 Engineering atmgnaition required ,.- ,
* ' spec. 1977) . . , ,
- i. . :
- 2.' lt' ! .i ,
'[).;
; Opils $359 - 360 - 361 No physirai tests . . '
',.s e ; 362 - 363 OGR (OK Ia Salle) Zack to obtain O CR physi a l" tests {. ., .[s, ,
f, a
.. t t
No physical tests .
- A ll t', Bars, Angles OUR Itan 5 (1/2x10" bar) ,
Zadc to obtain OCR l'orf I iysical tests d . s s .
' I No ASIWyr. designation *
' i Sheets Sheets - 14 ga. . .
b/ Bar - Angles 2x2x1/4 tack to attaipt to acquire proper OE1t. c .. !;
- j tb tiysicals - 14 ga. sheets Angles OCR t
( . SS SMets .- .
.' t s.i 14 ga. OcR te AS1Wyr. desitysation Eack to obtain corrected OER j 16 ga. *
. .. [t r
1
' tb Itiysical tests '
CMrR (OK - LaSalle) Zath to obtain I fiysical test results Sheets .
,.* % g
,. 0
, . , 7 . - - --
M Tr>, ., .;;,: I.IL Sr!ES " s . PACE $ OP 10 ' . 1.i . 16 . ITEM DESCRIPTION REQ'D. DOC. DISCREPANCY COMMENTS / PROPOSED RESOLUTION ,
, i Q)ils $271 - 272 - 273 - . m gliysical tests *. .
i u> 274 - 275 - 276 - OGR (GC - Tara11a) Zack to obtain 3diysical test results ' j t
- 277 .
--- . i a i g l' Coils 8280 - 281 - 282 - m'phy'sical tests j' +
t
.. 1 283 - 284 - 285 - ORR (OK - Ta. mite) e . Zadt to obtain physical test results ,
t
. -286 - 287 - 304 -
a -
' 4' l
, { g Coils 8351 - 352 - 353 -
354 OGR Its AS'1Wyear designation Ma physicals Zack to obtain miwM OG1ts
, 8 i .'.t)
I
- d * .
, , 3, i Cbils 8115 - 316 - 14) ASIM year
- L 11 317 - 318 OGR m physical tests Zadt to obtain corrected OcRs f-
..,' ,. .i'j:
* .J [
t
. L - 1
! ! t'
~
. Coils 8338 - 3}9 - .. . 3 l .[ i ,
Zack to obtain revised OGR * '
.3: 340 - 341 OCR No AS1Wyoar dcisignation i.
. .. , i 3 !
. l ..
- - i '
~ Osils 8355 - 356 - { ,
If
- i. ;l 357 - 358 OGR, Its AS1M year Zack to obtain revised O CR *
}f.
i I e; , r .. sheets OnR re certs ,Zack to obtain Orms .. i
- f f
e l
_7 , q , 7 T- * - . , ,s . l ,. seh: AI.t. SITES .. PACE g OF 10 ' = ; l. F . o . 16. ITEM DESCRIPTION REQ'D. DOC. DISCREPANCY COMMENTS / PROPOSED RESOLtPFION *f !
. ,l
. t il '
mils #237 - 23s - Iti ASm year Za4 to obtain zwised o@Rs
-la. I -
239 - 240 . oGR lb physir-a1 tests
- Zack'to obtain plyntr at test results
- l, ,
- r f*
s i
'g..
- l m physical tests -% ,-* .
- 3. . i Sheet ,
OCR - (OK - Ta h11e) Zack to obtain ,ptysical test results , .
- -j ,
i
- c i -
s .. Duet amatar C of C ' Eack to obtain C of C
* - t, ' '
'.a .
m certs
- 1 '.
b .* _ . . t .
, ; t' ,
milm 0267 - 269 - . i r! 'l .! ' las t . 259 - 270 oGR m ASTM year . , Zack to cbtain zwised omts .. 'f ;{
- . . ; i i
t F,
'1 a l-mils 8107 - 308 - .
. J' .
j -.'I
.... . . j 309 - 310- ocR Ib ASTWyear designaticus Zack to obtain zwised Omts .
'l ;.fIl "
i
? .
.. 6 _
, . 2 I
m ils 8495 .496 - . . 4
. r, 497 - 49 onR m AS2x yr. zack to obeain correcesa onR !
e 's g
- f
. Sacets - onR ' m ASm yr. zack to obe in _.ca oar n' '
1
.- ~ .
. t, I., .
,~~-- -- y -
. a p
. my, grgs PAGE 7 OF 10 l'
. . t
. . I:o . ITEM DESCRIPTION REQ'D'.~ DOC. DISCREPANCY COMMENTS / PROPOSED RESOLUTION ,
t
. i
)oIu *
,'Bar ,, OtrR lb mtl. .certs Zack to obtain OCR for 1046-1 !
1048-1'3x8 Bar . m physicals ' Disio Sheets OGR 2 ASIM yr. . Zack to atteipt to obtain physical test data . '-
. >1 I .
Zack to atteipt to obtain th sical ta'st data l u . e. i Sheets OGR 2 charnical data- 6
-(_
i l -
- j. ,' I '
16J9- Square ttf>ing 1 OCR Na certs .1095-5 Zack will attempt to obtain Otms . -l 8 t .. h-m t hysical tests l' Ki: - Sheets - 12 ga. O CR- (OK IaSalle) Zack to attengt to obtain Ihysical data ,,
..l..
. . m physical data'on coil 1576 zack to attengt to obtain hI ysical dad i i@. Chils 9575.- 576 OnR (OK,Insalle) .
h
.$ e
. Angics OcR h3 ASIM '
Zack to obtain corrected OCR ,j Owe o e l
'l~
,7 , . .
,. *s .
'R F - - -
r- ,
- ,s..;
- AII,SrfES .
PAGE.3 OF 10 ' - t* . O . No. ITEM DESCRIPTION ' REQ'D. DOC. DISCREPANCY COMMENTS / PROPOSED RESOLUTION . i
- I
. .1'
...eII, 't@lnf . Ot!R lb 1SDVyr. Zadc to obtain cdrzected CMIR .
. . , t
. .3
' Hex bolts Jb ASIM yr. , .Zack will attmupt to obtain corrected OGR ;
;4 g
.i s ' , Hex rants . OCR Ho referen z to zinc spec. Possible engineering disposition required ,. ..
1. k
'Oo11s $257 - 258 - 259 , m physical test data .
tu;i 260 - 261 - 262 - Ot!R No ASDVyr. designation fadt will attengt to obtain I Walcal I test OttR ?.;i 263 - 264 - 278 - 279 * *
-- b a 1 .. .i .
s 1 *.o s Pop rliets ** CMIR lb certs *Zadt will attengt to obtain O'!R i . g Possible engineering,diephsition required ,, ; i ,<. !
- i. .! :.: Hallamhia$1ang, 3/8" OER lb certs -
Zack will attempt to obtain'OffR Possible engineering disposition required ,.
'h l!J '
. a.
- . .. Wrongplatkhgstandard. Zack will atM t[ebtain correct Ot!R '
l .* *.: 1 Hex nuts and bolta OCR referenmd - C of C only Possible engineering disFosition required **
;g
. . g. -
* [
- i
.. t Wrong plating standard refe- Zack will attsspt to ati*tain correct OGR l
.* > lbd (threaded) OUP .
renced - C of C only Possible enginoey,ing disposition required
~
e l.
, _ ._- - - - - - - - - _ _ . - - - ----.---------------~--- -
4
.p . . ..,3 .
MY . G ,
.,':. 1I.1, S$'ITS ..
Pact 3 OF 10 .
.sa. ::,, . ITEM DESCRIPTION REQ'D. DOC. DISCREPANCY COMMENTS / PROPOSED RESOLUTIO'N l.
t . 1
- . i .
Eack will attempt to obtain correct OftR 6 i; us.1 .hte ** Ot!R - m plating standard referenced Ibssible engineering dispositien required 1 e . (, 1: .. i '. i
, lii:1 ,* Butt hinge OttR m certs ,
Zack will attaupt to obtain OGR ; .: . 3 . 6. is 1 * - j g, . * {
! I t :d. l vant clas ,(12") c of C- m certs .
Zack will attengt to obtain OttR .
- II g
[ f - ll l . , t . . . I ; . s. I
.[
i s t.s C of C 2 standard refereced Tek Screws Zack to obtain corrected c of C j .. , i: l r .. . , l ...._. . .t <;1 i
^
~j '
*!h' ,
s i:. a , Tak screws c or c .. m standard referencea zoek to obtain correctea e of c .j? .; l
..; ._t 6
' i' li l , j l
r' I f. * : i Hex nuts and bolts Ot!R 2 plating standard referscal Ibssible engineering Mapnaition repire8,h l I
, , -' i coils 4347 - 348 - m physical tests , ;
... . 349 - 350 Of!R (OK Ia Salle) Zack to attempt to obtain Ihysical test data '
l "o .b d .* a r i
4
..-.m . . ,
m v ,. :' - , o .
' OF in .' . . -l. : Au. 3rnlS PAGE 10 I.G. No. ITEN DESCRIPTION REQ'D. DOC. DISCREPANCY .COMtENTS/ PROPOSED RESOLUTICII ,
i
.. Ntong standard referenced . .
a..o Square tubing C of C (803, 803-1) Ehgineeriruy d4=tmition required '
,.,: JWuyle rinqs OttR 2 AS98 2ack to obtain corrected OEIR -
- l- .f. i i b
. .i . -
o , . ,. .
. r i:; tJ it I
. . .
- t.
..s..
b .. i ,
'I ! '
t .'
.. s
.l g-
. s. ,
e,.
., ~,. ,
, I
,.. .- L-.
.. ; j, '
. . . - i1-
- i. .
i. t . . .
- i. '. t -
l l ,
* , O
- .l --
{.. ** 't g t 1 < t.
- e. g I $ l .
g d 9
1 Mr. A. Schwencer Augus t 12, 1982 ENCLOSURE 4 Submittal from Commonwealth Edison 4743N Y
. 8/10/82 Zack Company-Commonwealth Edison Quality Assurance Department Review of Government Accountability Project Submittal of 7/27/82 l- Commonwealth. Edison was advised by the Nuclear Regulatory i
Commission (NRC) Staff on July 27, 1982, oof allegations relating to improper handling of documentation by_ the Zack Company. These allegations were transmitted to NRC by the Government Accountability. Project (GAP) on July 26, 1982. The allegations deal specifically with certification documents for materials supplied by Zack in the fabrication and installation of the heating, ventilating and air conditioning (HVAC) system at the LaSalle County Nuclear Station. This memorandum deals with the review of the GAP submitted document I' package to determine if the Commonwealth Edison (CECO) Quality Assurance Department position regarding the acceptability of Zack documentation and the HVAC installation is altered in'any way as a [ result of the information included in the GAP submittal. , CECO Q.A. Review of GAP Document Package t i The CECO Corporate Q. A. staff read and reviewed' the entire GAP document package. In addition independently performed the same re,'the CECO Site Q.A. staff view. As a result of these
~ reviews, it was determined that certain concerns highlighted in the GAP package, although not new to Q. A. , merit additional comments and, as such, are addressed in another section of this memorandum. In total, however, the Quality Assurance Department concluded the following:
- 1) Certain information internal to Zack, dealing with l- subjects such as wages, working hours, harassment, and Zack audits was deemed to be new information by CECO Q. A. ; however, this information does not directly impact on the quality of the duct system materials supplied by .
Zack for the LaSalle County Station. The HVAC equipment and components were procured from other vendors by CECO.
- 2) The 50.55(e) report made by CECO to the- NRC properly described and adequately addressed the document problems for material supplied by.Zack for the LaSalle County Station.
- 3) The information in the GAP document package does not L negate the CECO Q. A. position regarding the -
l ' acceptability of the duct system materials supplied and installed by Zack for LaSalle County Station. Basis For CECO ~ Q. A. Position - Disposition of Allegations i A) ' Audits The CECO Q. A. Department performed extensive audits of Zack activities to assure conformance t:o specification and design L requirements throughout the term of the Zack contract. At the t
. LaSalle Site, Q. A. performed 33 formal audits during the period of 9/31/76 to 5/19/82. Attachment "A" lists the audits by Commonwealth Edison which were corrected to ensure proper quality was provided.
When it was found that deficiencies were sufficiently significant to have an adverse impact on the HVAC installation, work at the site was s t opp ed . Attachment "B" lists the four occasions where it was necessary to stop work on the HVAC system installation at the LaSalle site until full corrective action was achieved by Zack. In addition, during the period June 1979 through June 1981 CECO instituted an independent inspection of 100% of the hanger welding performed by Zack. This inspection was performed by Conam, an Independent Testing Agency. Also, CECO Q. A. performed five audits of the Zack corporate office, one in 1977, 1980 and 1981 and two in 1982. B) Surveillances Regularly scheduled surveillances were also performed of Zack's activities by CECO Q. A. During the period 11/19/76 to 6/30/82, 305 surveillances were conducted at the LaSalle Site and 7 at the Zack corporate office. This broad coverage, in addition to audits, adds to the CECO confidence level that proper quality has been achieved. C) 50.55(e) Investigation The documentation problems related to Zack in the CECO 50.55(e) report issued on 9/30/81 was a formalization of the concerns which were identified by CECO Q.A. as early as 8/25/80. Although the magnitude of the documentation problem was not fully identified until September 1981, CECO Q. A. had been identifying documentation problems and obtaining resolution on a case by case basis since August 1980. This 50.55(e) report and investigation further demonstrates that the problems which CECO Q. A. had been working on were prcperly and fully reviewed and resolved. Moreover, the third party review by the NRC adds to the CECO confidence level that quality has been achieved. D) Information from Ron Perry On February 15, 1982 Mr. Ron Perry, an ex Commonwealth l Edison employee, working for Zack in their documentation group, called the CECO Manager of Quality Assurance to give him a "first hand" report of concerns he observed. He felt that the major problems were in the areas of: lead auditors not qualified, material paperwork inadequate, purchases from unapproved vendors and the document vault not meeting ANSI N-45.2.9 requirements. The Manager Quality Assurance did not report Mr. Perry's call to Zack's management but, as is appropriate and mandatory, investigated Mr. . Perry's concerns by directing that a special audit of the Zack l corporate activities be performed to determine if there were any other deficiencies that sere not known as part of the 50.55(e) report CECO had previously filed
, with NRC. On February 18, 1982, a CECO Q. A. Supervisor and cognizant Q. A. engineer from the LaSalle Site conducted an audit of the Zack Coqporate office to specifically evaluate the concerns reported by Mr. Perry. During the audit, the lead auditor spoke to Mr. Perry, showed him the audit checklist and the audit results and asked if he had any concerns other than those in the audit. He indicated that he had no additional concerns (See CECO Audit Report //1-62-45) . -He was invited to attend the audit exit meeting but he chose not to attend.
Two deficiencies were identified in the audit, one in the area of annual auditor evaluation and auditor qualification records and one involving material traceability for a section of HVAC duct. Both items were resolved. The audit team concluded that no new serious concerns existed and that the document deficiencies previously identified were adequately and completely covered in the 50.55(e). On March 22, 1982, CECO Q.A. conducted another audit at Zacks corporate office to determine if the other Q. A. Program requirements were being implemented. Two deficiencies were identified, one in the area of control of revised documentation and the second in the area of protection of quality assurance records. As a result of the personal contact with Mr. Perry, CECO-QA was aware of the details of his allegations prior to the submittal of the GAP document package. All of the concerns reported by Mr. Perry,
._ who had first hand information, were examined by Edison auditors and were found to be either minor, being resolved or adequately dispositioned. Furthermore, it was concluded from the CECO investigation that, notwithstanding the document deficiencies, Mr.
t Perry's allegations do not directly affect the quality of materials l supplied by Zack for LaSalle County Station. Comments on Specific Allegations Certain concerns which were highlighted in the GAP submittal appear to merit further comment. Although these concerns do not present new information for CECO Q. A. , explanation as to the actions taken by Edison regarding the concerns should help explain why Edison feels these concerns have been adequately addressed. I a) Insdequate Training On October 9,1981, a surveillance was performed by CECO Q. A. at Zack's corporate headquarters to review personnel qualifications for those individuals involved in document review. Mr. Howard McGrane of the Midland Project Quality Assurance Department, who has 15 years of documentation experience, was in I charge of the document group. In addition, three people on short term contract from Quan Tech were also working in the group. The qualifications of these individuals included resumes listing extensive experience and attendance sheets for informal training sessions held at Zack. Two additional Zack employees were also being l
. trained at that time. It was indicated that the two Zack individuals were brought in to eventually take over the documentation review once the initial evaluation was completed.
The work activity in the documentation group consisted of matching material certification documents to purchase orders and assembling purchase order packets. In addition, the people were required to match certification data to established standards. For the most part, personnel with good clerical skills and a reasonable amount of on-the-job training should be able to perform the dutie s in the documentation group. The qualifications of the people in the documentation group were vie wed to be sufficLa nt for the work being performed. b) Purchases from Unapproved Vendors In Mr. Ron Perry's statement to David Crow it is stated that "Mr. Perry compiled a list of P.O. 's reviewed by Delta Screw Co. while Delta was not on the list." Revia w of Exhibit 25 from the Government Accountability Project's information indicates that 38 hardware items involving ten purchase orders were let to Delta screw as follows: 12/22/81 34 entriss (8 Purchase Orders:.#1589, 1590, 1591, 1592, 1593, 1594, 1595, 1596) 1/06/82 1 entry (P.O. #1029) 2/01/82 3 entrias (P. O. #1717) Total 3E entries (10 Purchase Orders) Review of Commonwealth Edison objective evidence gathered during Q. A. Audit 82-45 conducted on 2/18-19/82 indicates that Delta screw was suspended from the Zack Approved Vendors List (AVL) on 10/20/81. Further, the objective evidence indicates that on 12/17/81 Zack documented, in a Memo-to-File conversation with NRC Region III, l the position that fastener suppliers like Delta Screw are not I required to supply material certifications for safety-related, commercial grade material. On 12/22/81 eight of the ten purchase orders were issued. Review of the Zack records during this audit revealed no issuance of purchase orders after 10/20/81 and prior to 12/17/81. This was the period during which release of the purchase orders would have been unacceptable per the Zack Q. A. Program as Delta Screw was not deemed an approved vendor until the NRC position was received. Delta Screw was not officially placed back on the AVL until 2/10/82 due to business related reasons. As attested by Mr. Perry, the Zack AVL was inaccurate but Zack appeared to be making a concerted effort to correct inaccuracie s at the time of the audit which has since been achieved. Judgement at the time of the audit was that Zack could purchase from Delta Screw on or after 12/17/82 upon receiving direction from NRC and be in compliance utth their Q. A. Program and 10CFR50, Appendix B.
i i
~ Two specific clarifications of Terry Howard's affidavit are
, in order at this point since on page 18 of his testimony he states 1 that approximately 38 P.O.'s were issued when in f act Exhibit 25 indicates that 38.P.O. line entries were listed, but only ten purchase orders were released. CECO Audit 82-45 reviewed the first - t eight of these ten documents and found them acceptable. Also, the audit referred to in Mr. Howard's and Mr. Perry's affidavits as being conducted on October 9, 1981,.was a surveillance strictly to evaulate the steps taken concerning Zack's notification of a possible 10CFR50.55(e) relating to documentation deficiencies. It was not an audit of the implementation of the Quality Assurance Program. l ..
- c) LaSalle Documentation Review Completed Based on Commonwealth Edison surveillances, it was determined that Zack's documentation review associated with the j 50.55(e) report was being conducted in an orderly manner, using logs i
to document all purchase orders and associated certifications as the review was being performed. These logs showed all purchase orders used at the three nuclear sites plus those used to order stock material. The logs reflected the current status of each purchase order - that is, whether it was acceptable or not and the problems found. To further. control this review effort, Zack placed in the
~
front of each purchase order packet a log sheet identifying the purchase the specific orderproblems number,found.the reviewer's' conclusion (accept / reject) and 3
~
On October 9,1981, the first interim report was I submitted by Zack identifying the results of their review to date. CECO Q.A.'s surveillance #81-661 dated 10-9-81 was conducted at the Zack Corporats office and the interim report was reviewed. During the surveillance both acceptable and rejectable purchase orders were - , reviewed using both the logs and interim report to obtain the ! necessary . purchase order information. The interim report was found to be accurate - that is, it reflected the same information as provided within the logs. Only the problem purchase orders were , identified within the surveillance, but many additional purchase orders were reviewed and found acceptable, as was . the case for Zack's j review. The surveillance was an attempt to acquire background on the types of deficiencies being identified by Zack. Many deficiencie s were written for clerical errors where certifications failed to identify the year for the applicable ASTM Standard. Also, Zack was concerned about certifications failing to identify the term " ASTM" , although A36 was provided on the certification. The A36 designation, per the ASME Code, also applies to ASTM specifications. Many of the problems identified under missing certification were actually 4 purchase orders written with requirements in excess of specification I requirements for non-safety related/ commercial grade items.
. - .. . _ . _ _ _ __ _ _ - - _ . _. . =
Deficiencies for altered reports included cases of highlighted heat numbers, although an unaltered heat number was also on the certification. Finally, many-cases.were observed that identified certifications not per the SLL Specification. These certifications were reviewed and found to cover better. quality steel than.was originally required by the Specification-(that is, A36 instead. of A575 grade M-1020 commercial grade) . The use of higher . grade materials would not create a safety deficiency. Based. on this surveillance and Zack's many tracking systems, ' CECO Q. A. felt that the spectrum of LaSalle purchase orders was being reviewed and properly dispositioned. After Zack's review was finally completed, all problem purchase orders were transformed into Zack nonconformances and dispositioned. These were subsequently reviewed to assure proper disposition, also on a documented CECO Surveillance # 82-225 dated 4-15-82. d) Zack Document Control Non-existant Prior to Fall 1981 As pert of Sharon L. More11o's affidavit contained in the GAP submittal, Ms. Morello states:
" Prior to my. arrival there had not been a formal Quality Assurance Documentation Control function. I was tcid for years Zack had one person handling
, Quality Assurance, but it did not have a documentation control department.
Ms. Morello states, in part, that records at Zack were in disarray and that it took several weeks of effort before organization of the documents could begin. She also saw no control of nuclear purchase orders beyond that imposed by Zack for commercial orders. Review of the Q. A. audits performed at the Zack Corporate office, from 1980 through 1982 (4 audits total) indicates that of the 1 66 questions contained in the checklists, 17 questions addressed the areas of procurement documents, and procurement and document-control. Two deficiencia s were identifie d as the result of these . reviews. In addition, review of the objective evidence contained in these audits indicates that even though La well organized and expertly implemented program of document control did not exist, the
-implementation of quality related activitie s with respect to document 4
control at the Zack corporate. headquarters was sufficiently adequate , to implement the Zack Q. A. Program requirements. It was evident that Zack, during 1980 and 1981 was attempting to upgrade their program
-with varying degrees of success. But - the judgement made, based on the objective evidence at the time of auditing, was that the Zack
, Program, from the standpoint of document control, was sufficie nt for
.the type of materials and -assemblies supplied to the LaSalle Project.
l
. e) Welder Qualification Deficiencies The concerns with documentation and discrepancie s in welder qualification records covered in the GAP submittal had been identified by Commonwealth Edison Co. and corrective actions which relate to the disposition of these deficiencies have been taken to ensure the HVAC system installation is acceptable.
As a result of the various discrepancies identified through inspections, surveillances and audits in connection with the HVAC system, a complete independent recheck of the quality of the installation was performed. In addition to Commonwealth Edison Company Quality Assurance surveillance and audit involvement with Zack Company, specific surveillance and inspection tasks involving Zack construction were assigned to the Conam Independent Testing Agency by LaSalle Site Quality Assurance. Conam performs inspection and testing under the direction of CECO QA at LaSalle. The intent of these inspections or re-inspections of the Zack work, as well as other contractors, is to independently assure that contractor field activities are properly performed in accordance with applicable procedures, standards and design requirements and that the final installation is acceptable. The basic approach is that each site contractor has e total entity in that each contract includes ~ responsibility for installation, quality control inspection and quality assurance with quality control over - inspections and quality assurance checks, surveillances and audits being done by, or for, Commonwealth Edison Company. For most cases, an over - inspection of from 5 to 10% of the various contractor's activitie s requiring inspection is performed. Where problems are identified, corrective actions are required of a contractor and the re-inspection activitie s by Commonwealth Edison are increased to as much as a complete re-inspection where the circumstances warrant. After it is confirmed that the contractor has undertaken the necessary corrective steps such as developing and implementing procedures, training and qualifying involved personnel and verifying the Quality Control inspection functions are performed acceptably to the satisfaction of CECO Site Quality Assurance, then the re-inspection performed by the Independent Testing Agency is reduced in step fashion as the results of the re-inspection justify as was done with Conam following the two year period of 100% re-inspection of Zack. In the case of Zack, the quality control inspections for accepting Zack welding at the site betweeen June 1979 and June 1981 were performed by Conam no matter whether Zack was or was not released from our "stop work" order to perform its own Quality Control inspections under its contract. i.e. the installed hangers were inspected, and repaired as required and then reinspected by Conam. Also, duct work was required to be inspected by Conam prior to being released for installation in the building between April 1980 and May 1982. Deficiencie s identified through inspections were covered by contractor non-conformance reports (NCR) for each affected hanger and otherwise for each other
. deficient case. All seismic and safety-related hangers were treated as suspect and were inspected. Zack Quality Control (QC) inspected each hanger and af ter Zack QC's acceptance, Conam repeated the complete inspection for acceptability which included inspection of all welds of the hangers. Any deficient welds identified by Conam were reported to Zack, corrected by Zack, inspected by Zack QC and then inspected by Conam. Conam's 100% re-inspection included inspection of welds for placement and quality and for location of the hanger. Also, configuration checks on a random basis were made. In this period, most of the control room HVAC system was fully inspected by Conam af ter being inspected by Zack. Finally, system walkdown inspections were initiated by Zack in early 1982 to check final acceptibility.
Thus, work that may involve missing documents or discrepancies in welder qualification records, even though such deficiencies are not acceptable, was inspected and ensured to be accep table . As for other HVAC equipment supplied by Commonwealth Edison, it was receipt inspected by Commonwealth Edison and again inspected by Zack when issued to them for installation and then inspected af ter installation by Conam. Attachment C is included to detail, in a summary f ashion, Conam coverage of the Zack on-site installation activities. Upon notification by the Zack Company on September 25, 1981 of the possible 10CFR50.55(e) report with respect to supplier material certification, surveillance and monitoring activitie s by Quality Assurance (CECO) were intensified and directed toward this specific concern at the Zack corporate headquarters. Between 9/25/81 and 4/15/82 three surveillances and two audits were performed by CECO Quality Assurance to assess the nature and scope of the problem. In February 1982, at the direction of the Commonwealth Edison Quality Assurance Manager, a Special Audit was performed to investigate the conditions verbally reported to him by phone by Ron Perry, a Zack employee, as well as audit other aspects of the Zack Program. In summary, Commonwealth Edison Company has maintained continuous and comprehensive involvement with the Zack work activities and the implementation of its Quality Assurance Program to ensure the work was being done correctly for the LaSalle Site. Special actions were taken to correct work deficiencie s, disposition acceptably identified documentation deficienicies and ensure the heating, ventilating, and air conditioning (HVAC) system was provided and installed as required. Furthermore, upon identification of problems at the Zack Corporate Headquarters in late 1981, additional i 1 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . l
. monitoring of Zack was performed to search for any other possible problems and to ensure corrective actions were completed. Finally, the use of Conam Quality Control Inspectors to augment the on-site Edison Quality Assurance inspection, surveillance and audit activities to independently inspect the HilAC installation including the associated equipment and components provided by others further assures that the HVAC system is installed as required by the design.
f) Seas, Inc. - Cannot meet standards An audit performed by Zack at the Seas Inc. plant on February 10, 1982 stated that Seas "cannot verify any product furnished." In order to fully understand the meaning of the Zack finding, the GAP documentation was reviewed and was found to contain the following information. On February 6,1981, Zack wrote identical letters to Seas Inc., Key Crest Inc., Thiele and Delta Screw Co. stating that the hex nuts be supplied and certified to ASTM-A307 and as a result, these manufacturers supplied the hex nuts with certification to ASTM-A307. Zack then discovered that the hex nuts should have been certified to ASTM A-563 and requested the manufecturers to supply the new certifications. One manufacturer repliad on 2-13-81 and stated that the hex nuts are certified for use with grade ASTM A-307 steel bolts but the nuts are made to ASTM . A-563. In a practical sense the original certification was correct but " technically" conformance to ASTM A-563 should also have been stated. A review of the LaSalle County Station purchase order discrepancy log showed that all of the document probleas with Seas were of this nature i.e. " incorrect standard referenced" or "no standard referenced". In all cases, Zack prepared a non-conformance rep ort . The product document verificaton problem was minor in significance. Conclusion Based on the above, CECO Q.A. concludes that the Zack documentation problems have been adequately investigated and addressed and the information included in the document package submitted by GAP does not change this position. It is our position that Edison is aware of the details of these allegations and has investigated them sufficiently to be assured that the materials provided by Zack for the LaSalle County Station are of proper quality and the LaSalle Unit #1 facilities are safe to operate. 0386Q
Attachment A 4-4 Commonwealth Edison Company Q.A. Audits and Surveillances of the Zack Company a Surveillances Year Audits Performed Performed 1976 1 1 1977 5 18 1978 5 35 1979 8 35 1980 9 82 1981 6 83 1 1982 (6 months) 4 57 f
1 Attachment B "Stop Work" Actions Imposed on Zack Company LaSalle County Station Date Initiated Date Removed Program Deficiency 7/22/77 9/27/77 (all activitte s Welder Qualification, Q.C. except Welding) training 10/11/77 (Welding) Program design control. Q.C.
' inspection & inspection documentation, and misc.
program deficiencies. 6/25/79 7/25/79 (Partial) Unacceptable Q.C. inspection 8/06/79 at LaSalle '. 4/02/80 6/21/80 Unqualified Q.C. inspectors at Fab Shop in Chicago. On-site hold point established for receipt inspection of HVAC assemblies. 8/06/80 10/20/80 Design Control, Q.C. Inspections, and
" Safety-Related Welding l
l l l
Attachment C CONAM INSPECTION AGENCY COVERAGE OF ZACK COMPANY INSTALLATION ACTIVITIES AT THE LASALLE SITE ACTIVITY DURATION General Inspection of Zack Field 2/24/78 - 6/24/79 Activities (17 reports on file) 100% Re-inspection of future 6/25/79 - 6/07/81 and past Zack " Safety-Related welding on-site. (Hangers) 50% re-inspection of Zack 6/08/81 - 6/21/81 on-site welding. 25% re-inspection of Zack 6/22/81 - 7/05/81 on-site welding 10% re-inspection of Zack 7/06/81 - Present on-site welding-100% inspection of Zack 4/02/80 - 5/10/82 ductwork entering the building and being erected at LaSalle i
Mr. A. Schwencer Augus t 12, 1982 ENCLOSURE 5 Submittal from Commonwealth Edison
/
4743N
f 01N0t%TALTH EDISON C}fPANY SIRVFTTJAICE REKRT RR REVIBJ OF THE ZACK O}iPANY FIANI F2 SHOP IRAVHMS 7/29/82 of a "Part 21" notification beirg made to the IRC significant discrepancies relating to welder qualifications at their of Zack Quality related records. Fabrication Shcp in Chicago, Ch Q.A. initiat Bach:round: The Zack Cocpany, on July 27, 1982, These records were in the form of Xerox ccpies of shop travelers fordiscover assemblies 1978 to early manufactured 1982. at their Plant #2 which was in operation from late l During this period, Zack's stpervision at Plant #2 their plant for use by their welders and others.adcpted the general p back to the original traveler.on each traveler ccpy, the information from th in the process of being discarded on July1982, 27Upon detectiona of the xerox ccpies w Zack performed concluded that some travelers involved unqualified welders. cross . Further the date t research by Zack established a list of all qualified welders and established qualified for each procedure (see Exhibit #1). This list was (PTL) . PTL performs the " Bend Tests" for Zack and attests to thev acceptability of the test weld. the Zack records, Zack identified only one welder as not qualified b
'Ihe assucption that he performed as a welder was based on Zack's review of the l
Plant #2 xerox ccpies. (The earliest CECO as a part of this surveillance.) qualfication of welders was verified by
#2 records by Project; Prior to CD initiatirg their review, Zack was able to sepa ie. IaSalle, Clinton, Midland.
l the review of the Zack Plant #2 records was limited to only the IaSalleCECo involveme Project. CECO Review Scope: i During the period of 7/30/82 to 8/2/82, a seven-mar. team of CECO and Sargent & Iundy personnel Plant #2 discrepant conducted an extensive review and evaluation of the shcp travelers. In addition, a sacple of other LaSalle to substantiate the secpe of problems detected. travelers not involved The CECO review team was supervised by the LaSalle County Station Quality Assurance Stperintendent. Exhibit general #2 identifies make-tp. those individuals involved in this review and t
Page 2 Methodology: Initially, the total population of Plant #2 shcp travelers identified to be for the laSalle Project was reviewed and coapared to the original file (yellw) copy. This effort resulted in the tabulation included in Behibit #3 which segregates the total pcpulation of 541 copies of travelers into three types: Ty>e A - tiose travelers identified as beir Type B - tx>se travelers that do not affect Unit 1;g, and applicable Wpe C -tothose Unit 1; records which had no apparent discrepant informationa ' s h following section of this report will detail the'results of the indgth review and evaluation of each type indicated above. In addition to these results, activities sumary conclusions are drawn and additional follow-up described. Type A - Travelers Applicable to Unit I Category I - no differences Category II ,
- more initials @ pear on the xerox copy than on Category III yellow (welders, cleaners, or inspectors)
- welder identified on the yellow was not Category IV the welder appearirg on xerox copy
- more welders on yellow than on the xerox ccpy (or any other mise. information)
After dividing Type A travelers into the above categories, they were reviewed by Sargent & Lundy personnel to determine whether the welded material was safety-related or non-safety-related. Following se into safety-related and non-safety-related groups,the paration safety-related of all travelers travelers were reviewed by CECO QA personnel to determine the qualifications status was of the welder, ie, qualified or not qualified at the time the welding done. Since it was not possible to precisely identify the date when the weldirg was performed, it was assumed that welding could have occurred any time between material was shippedthe date to the the traveler site. The was initiated and the date that the detail in Bchibit #4. results of the analysis are shown in For the 214 Type A travelers reviewed, 63 were determined to be non-safety-related. The rmaining 151 safety-related travelers were found to l have 31 cases where the welder appeared to h3 unqualified. Type B - Travelers Which Do Not Affect upt, r The 276 travelers which conpose r a p. 9 were reviewed by Sargent & lundy for Unit personnel 1 operation. to verify that they involve valy Unit 2 systems not required l design drawings were consulted.For travelers havirg equipment in common areas, the personnel. This activity was monitored by CECO QA: S s i
, Page 3 Type C - Travelers Havirg No Apparent Discrepant Information On the Xerox Copy A detailed review of these travelers was conductea on the basis that there may have been a second xerox ccpy of the traveler. (a situation encountered wien reviewing Type A travelers)
'Ibe initial step in the review process was to note the xerax copy with the yellow file ccpy. 'Ihe 51 travelers were then reviewed by Sargent & Iundy personnel who determined that 27 were non-safety-related and 3 others had no welding associated with the work on the traveler. Review of the remaining 21 safety-related travelers identified 4 cases where the welder qualification was questionable.
Sam le of Other Travelers A saple of 187 safety-related travelers (yellow copy) were selected from the Imaining lasalle Travelers (approximately 3500). No instances were found where a welder was noted as performing work for which he was not qualified. Review of Zack Welder Qualification CECO QA review of welder qualification records confirmed the accuracy of Zack's welder qualification list (Exhibit #1). For the four (4) procedures used on laSalle work in the shcp. Fifteen (15) of the 30 welders listed were identified as welding on the laSalle project work during review of the 359 safety-related shop travelers. For a detailed discussion of the welder qualifications, see Exhibit #5. Follow-Up Reviews on the 'Ihirty-five (35) Suspect Travelers
, 'Ibe thrity-five (35) travelers (31 from Type A and 4 frm Type C) were Jentified for further review in the field. Eleven (11) of the thirty-five (35) travelers identified as being welded by unqualified welders were for hangers. 'Ihe remaining 24 travelers were for ductwork. 'Ibe following is a stomary of the results of subsequent review of these travelers.
(A) Hargers Due to previous stcp work actions at the LaSalle site, all seismic hangers in Unit I and Unit 2 were coupletely reinspected by qualified Zack QC personnel. 'Ihe reinspection incitxled both shco and field welding and was over-inspected by Conam, CECO's Independent Testing Agency at the site. A review of construction site inspection records was conducted for 78 hangers contained on the 11 travelers in question. Two (2) of the hangers were deleted from the design by Sargent & Inndy after fabrication and were therefore not reviewed. Records for the ramainirg 76 hangers indicated that all had been reinspected and accepted by Zack QC after the Atgust 1980 Stop Work at the site. Further, eleven (11) of the 76 hangers had been subjected to an independent inspection by Conam. Based on this information it is felt that any questionable welds which may have existed when the hangers left the shop would have been repaired at the site prior to final acceptance.
Page 4 (B) Ductwork The twenty-four (24) suspect travelers addressirg ductuork were subjected to a sacple inspection in the field at 14Salle on 8/1/82. The 24 travelers involved 194 pieces of ductwork or duct fittirgs. The inspection represented partial or couplete inspection of 69 pieces. The approved procedure for inspection of HVAC welds was used as the guideline for determining unsound welds. The inspectors examined approximately 2270 welds of which 2100 were determined by the Conam inspectors to be sound welds. A total of approximately
- 170 welds or 7.47. of the welds were rejected. These welds were examined by Sargent & Inndy and those requiring repair were identified.
In parallel with this effort, inspection records for ductwork being moved into the laSalle plant were reviewed. A hold point had been established by Site QA in 1980 which required Conam concurrance of Zack's ductwork inspection (including welding inspection). The racords review is discussed in detail in Fxhibit #6. It did how-ever, indicate that 2 pieces which were a part of the 8/1/82
- reinspection were properly inspected before beinb moved into the building.
Ebrther Action on the 35 Suspect Travelers Present plans are to reinspect all of the accessible 76 hangers to further verify the adequacy of site inspections. In the case of ductwork, all uninsulated and accessible pieces will be inspected and r@ aired as necessary. The inspection results will be evaluated by Sargent & Inndy to identify any welds which must be re aired. A decision on the need for action to be taken for inaccessible items will be based on the results of these inspections and evaluations. I Sumary of Review at Zack's Corporate Office l l Review of 738 travelers identified 35 travelers which appeared to have been welded by unqualified welders. Althc.gh records of welder qualification were not always consistent, the earliest qualification dates established by Zack were verified to be correct. Inspections conducted in the field on 8/1/82 to determine the soundness of welds on the ductwork identified 7.47, of the welds to be questionable. This was based on inspecting pieces from 14 of the 24 travelers considered suspect. Beamination of hanger installation records demonstrated that 11 of the 76 hargers or 14.57. of the suspect hangers had been independently inspected by Conam. FMning areas which require further review are Unit 2 travelers, and the welder qualification area. Neither cf these is expected to inpact on the results of reviews cocpleted relative to Unit 1. Reinspection of accessible
- portions of the 76 hangers and detailed inspection of remaining accessible l
uninsulated ductwork on the 35 travelers will be given priority. l
- Revised 8/10/82 I
0127L
lu w d "fkiceum r.co care ,W nsto osat, ru noa wr hee ee I t,.31 r,,oItoo!raf /,,s o,.. , la , o., , L,,i I , la o> t,. %inm em as ~ I shk: l l- l l ih m w 7/d SAU 4 61 h ,- > ' i,uxl - l 1344, I l 3M) I i
%ns a 1 .
i i
%. ._,e s n %d '
le i t l-okers e lsW l l
,%im :1 A!,. \ss 'J4 , lob, k% l l c.a w!& s,I 19MJ l I.
!"t.m te n i i_
[bu .n ,:pl . I I l I l I i l I
%eo ?
44.uJi/A ib.6l l' Ibeo a kW- A vhA h/4 d.4 A 4 544h!d IIe,2,m
%kle'4 I44 %4 We%Ll40!d&> l se I I b .o i dA calddJ .I Id4 I I i ! I I l
%.a s te AfJ l Idle (
l>Ibl sh!d l l%a s\ l i Js l -l3!,4 l- \ b J,ir &!nuas!kisidol V I ids l:A!c I \
%.,;o t MJ l l I (3%I 7&vl kAW ! . ! boro ,:
L1/nl ! .I
! l I ! ! .
! ' ,. m.. - e. l - 14d I L&Iel -
i l 2 I' c, , <.-t ni 1 I i lan l ' leM<l l' 14/:. I l I isAle'dle l I '
'rewos ' x
' 1 i AU' l I k%' I I I I !
'rm e r: I 31 4I i- 1 I I I I i lb.no ss I Abl I l I JAl V4 HkW lim) I 1
k ha 8 l
!76hrI' I?h,N lik4,I '
j' yew t3 l ld.fsel I I I I l%,w a les 46 I I
! ! I i I I l
!%m 3i , b'.
I I F ,.v e yc . & I '4
, I !
l I i" o s a aL I v bl.= boc*u. LL Jhclo 3bsb l
#, ~a l re '
ibk v% 4/u tAlo 1 i
- bm a rM t i .
3
- Exhibit i1 !
.I -
l ,
- i. l ._.1 _ - . . - . . - .
i
Exhibit #2 Personnel Involved In Zack Record Review J/30/62-6/2/62 Personnel:' of the Zack Cocpany performed July 30th throtgh Atgus NAME (IJMPANY lf." A. Braun (1) TITLE Ceco QA Stpervisor W. L. Hartig (4) CECO T. E. Quaka (5) QA Inspector CECO S. J. Reutche (2) QA Stperintendent CECO R. D. Vine (2) QA Ergineer Ceco QA I:rgineer B. L. Wood (2) CECO W. J. Shewski (1) CECO Start-lp _ Engineer S. C. Ornberg (1) Manager of QA S&L E. P. Ricohermoso (3) Head, HVAC Division S&L HVAC Proj. Eng. J. Veluz (3) S&L LaSalle Project Sectirn leader Mech. Decign and Drafting Division
' (1)
'Ibese individuals were present at various times during the review and their participation was primarily as management observers.
~ (2)
These individuals were full-time participants in the review. Two of the three individuals were past or present cognizant engineers on the Zack contract and, as such, were fa=iliar with most, if not all, Zack weldirg and QC procedures. all were ANSI qualified auditors in the area of structural andAdditionally mechanical installations. of the dgartment but was called in to assist in the reviewMr. Wood because of his knowledge of Zack's activities. (3) These individuals were full-time participants in the review. They have been involved with the LaSalle project for from 41/2 to 8 years, specifically in the area of HVAC design and analysis. l l at laSalle station includirg which HVAC systems and/orBot couponents are safety-related. (4) < This individual was a full-time participant in the review. He l has 4 years of experience in CECO QA, and is-an ANSI qualified { lead auditor in the area of structural and mechanical installation. Additionally, he currently coordinates the site receiviry inspectioras for laSalle site Quality Assurance. As such, he has a great deal of experience in the area of documentation review. (5) This' individual was a full-time participant in the review. He has 4 years of experience in CECO QA and is presently the laSalle Site Quality Assurance Superintendent. He is an ANSI
- qualified lead auditor in the area of structural and mechanical installation and is cognizant of the scope of Zack activities as well as, many of the past proble
- r.s that Zack has experienced at the site.
. - . . . -. - ~ . . . . - .
Behibit I/3' Zack Record Review 7/30/S2-8/2/81 1 i Segregation of Zack Coupany Plant I/2 Suspect Records for laSalle. ' 214 Type A - travelers applicable to laSalle County, Unit 1 Operation 276 Type B -travelers not applicable to laSalle County, Unit 1 Operation 51 Type C - travelers which had no apparent discrepant information existed on the ccpy F Total l 0427Q c 0110A b l I l t I 1 I , , ,- .,.. .- - - - , , . -. . - , - -
EXHIBIT f/4 RESULE OF REVIEMING TYPE A 'IRAVEIIRS Category 1 - No differences Category II - More initials appear on the xerar c@y than on yellow (welders, cleaners or inspectors) Category III - Welder identified on the yellow was not the welder appearing on the xerox copy Category IV - More welders on the yellow than on the xerar copy (or any other misc. information) Category Total Pop. Safety-Related Non-Safety-Related 1 12 7* 5 II 50 38** 12 III 95 58*** 37 IV 57 48**** 9
- Totals
- 214 151 63
- All 7 travelers had qualified welders
** Of the 38: 25 cleaners initials on xerox c @ y 9 had qualified welders initials 4 had unqualified welders initials
*** Of the 58: 27 were welded by unqualified welders 31 were welded by qualified welders i **** All 48 travelers were found to have been welded by qualified welders.
As indicated above, only Category II and III travelers have unqualified welders. A total of 31 travelers were identified as being welded by unqualified personnel. 0126L i l'
EXHIBIT #5 : CEE0 REVIER OF WELDER QUALIFICATICN On Aqgust 2,1982 a review was made at the Zack Corporate Office of the Zack Welder qualifications by B. L. Wood and W. L. Hartig. Only those welders who were welding at the Zack Fabrication facilities were reviewed. Although the review was perfomed on all (30) Zack welders listed on Attachment A: Zack Welder Quaification Review , it was detemined that only (15) of these welders actually performed work on the suspect safety related travelers examined by CECO Q.A. 'Ibe additional sacple of 187 travelers contained only (3) additional welders which did not appear on the aforementioned suspect travelers. 'Ihus a total of 18 welders performed work on the 359 safety-related travelers reviewed. Of the (17) welding procedures used by Zack, the wider qualifications of four (4) procedures were reviewed: PS-CS, P9-CS, P13-CS/SS and WPS-1. The remaining thirteen were not utilized for the laSalle project accordig to Zack personnel. 'Ihe sccpe was narrowed to these (4) procedures because only G4AW welding was performed at the shcp for the laSalle Project. 'Ihis would eliminate (6) SMAW procedures: P4-G, P7-CS, P8-CS, P12-G, WPS-2 and WPS-4 and (2) Brazing procedures: P1-G and P6-G. The remaining (5) procedures were developed for specific applications and not used on the LaSalle project. 'Ihese were P3-G, P10-CS, P11-G, P14-G, and WPS-3. It was detemined that the (4) subject procedures had been submitted to CECO and given proper approval for use at the Zack shop facility. All of the Zack Welder Qualification documentation was reviewed to obtain the earliest possible qualification date to each of the (4) procedures in question. If there was no Zack qualification document available certifying the welder then the date of the Pittsburgh Testing Imb (PTL) Test Report was used to indicate the welder had at least satisfactorily passed the bend tests. Again the earliest date was recorded. Zack was usirg either Zack's own qualification fom or PTL's to qualify the welders but Zack was generally not properly ccmpleting either fom. In some cases when the Zack fom was on file their portion of the form was not filled out. This is the portion of the fom that actually certifies the welder. When the PIL fom was on file there generally was a Zack signature on it but this only signified Zack witnessed the test and did not state Zack was certifying the man. The dates given on Attachment "A" urder the individual procedures indicates the earliest date found on a fom not necessarily which form the date was found on. A syncpsis of the qualifications for the 18 welders specifically identified on the safety-related travelers reviewed for the laSalle project is as follows:
bd11 bit 65 P%e2 P5CS Qualified (with FIL dates) 15 Certified (with Zack dates) 2 P9CS Qaalified (with FIL dates) 15 Certified (with Zack dates) 6 P13CS/SS Qualified (with PIL dates) 9 Certified (with Zack dates) 8 WPSI Qualified (with FIL dates) 11 Certified (with Zack dates) 10 A synopsis of the qualifications for all 30 welders identified as sbcp welders for Zack is as follows: P5CS Qualified (with PIL dates) 25 Certified (with Zack dates) 7 P9CS Qualified (with FIL dates) 22 Certified (with Zack dates) 4 P13CS/SS Qualified (with FIL dates) 14 Certified (with Zack dates) 13 One of the 18 welders (K. Gibson) had no qualification documentation on file, hre were indications, however, on a number of travelers which was interpretted to indicate that he had performed welding on them. h refore, he should have been qualified in at least one of the above procedures. CECO's review of the Zack qualification summary sheet (Schibit #1) indicated Zacks tabulation to be correct. 0112A
,+ v-- + -
Exhibit f5 ATTACHMENT A ZACK WELDER yuAtaticATION REVIEW Welder -I.D. P5CS P9CS P13CS/SS WPS1 Hire Name No. Zack / PTL Zack /-PTL Zack / PTL 2ack /PTL Date H. Bartolino ** 14 2-3-78* -- -- -- -- -- -- 2-1-78 T. Boyle ** 20
- 12-10-76 3-2-79* 8-3-81 7-13-81* 9-24-80 9-19-80* 1976 C. Byers 61 3-25-80 3-25-80 -- -- -- -- -- --
1-31-80 W. Collins 67 3-25-80 3-2 5-80 -- 4-3-80* -- -- -- -- 3-12-80 J. Dianis *** 9 -- -- -- 3-2-79* -- -- -- -- 12-23-74 7-31-78
- 1. Dickey ** 21 2-3-78* 4-18-80 3-2-79* 8-3-81 7-13-81* 9-24-80 9-19-80* 9-12 V. Genova 43' 10-29-79 -- -- -- -- -- 9-11-79 K. Gibson **
7-7-78 ', Z. Golon ** 49 4-27-76 9-14-78* 9-2-80 10-7-80 9-30-80* 4-25-57 6-1-65 T. Gonzales ** 34 4-22-76 8-31-78* 8-3-81 7-13-81* 9-3-80 8-27-80* 9-30-69 C. Hoffman ** 1 6 22-76 3-2-79* -- -- -- -- 6-9-76 J. Jacobs 64 3-25-80 3-2 5-80 4-3-80* -- -- -- -- 2-18-80 W. Jordan ** 5 10-29-79 3-2-79* 8-3-81 7-13-81* 9-24-80 9-19-80* 4-3 72 L. Kuzmin 6 10-29-79 -- -- -- -- 5-15-81 5-14-81* 1976 H. Matkowich ** 12 2-3-78 3-2-79* 8-3-81 7-13-81* 9-24-80 9-19-80* 1-10-78 R. Mech ** 59 3-25-80 3-25-80 3-25-80 3-25-80* -- -- -- -- l-13-80 D. Parker 11 -- -- 3-2-79* -- -- 9-30-80 11-14-80 12-7-78 l s i l i
% //5 Age 2 Widr LD. P5G IVS F13G/SS M51 IEte Nne 2. Zack / g Zack / g Za* / g Zack / g h G. Ibths ** 26 10-29-79 3-2-79k - -
9-24@ 9-LNDk 7-10-78 G. Pla:e ** 52 3-25-80 3-25-80 3-25 @ 3-25 & - - 10-23 @ 11-4-79 A. Rdrgten 60 3-25 @ 3-2%0 - - - - - - 1-31-80 l R. Q2im 9 - - 6-10e 9-13-818-28 61* 9-24@ 9-19& 5-27@ R. Sectt ** 63 - - 6-10 & 8-3-81 7-13-81* 9-24 @ 9-19 & 2- & 80 W. bith 39 10-29-79 4-3 & - - - - 5-79 C. Sccha 30 1-22@ - - - - - - 9 & 78 U. Scm 56 4-17 @ 4-17-@ - - - - 3-31-80 D. mf *** 48 10-29-79 4-3 & - - - - 7-19-79 R. Wiss 66 3-25 @ 3-25 @ 3-25 @ 3-25 6 - - - - 3-12 @ T. Wyer ** 54 1-22-80 4-3-80k 8-3-81 7-13-81* 10-7@ 9-1HD612-5-79 R. 7egea *** 29 12-10 - - - - - 5-19-69 E Ihxdek** 23 10-29-79 4-3 & 8-3-81 7-13 81* 9-24 @ 9-19 9 5-29-79
- h aces q; tee with tie es cagirn11y applied ty Za*.
(15) ** - h m1&rs wm idreiffei cn tie awa:t hiers as twirg passibly w.1aed l cn TsAn119 rws-Mnic. (3) *** - In aMrHm to the aine 15 w1h (**) these 3 w1h wre taken from an srHfHers1187 tzmelets iMffM as cadrg fran 9xp //1. 0113A
o DOIIBIT #6 REVIST OF DUCT INSFh0N REO:RDS 4 ' On Atgust 1,1982, CECO and Conam performed field weld inspections on 24 Zack travelers involvirg ductwork which were identified as havirg been worked on by unqualified welders. As a result of this inspection, 14 travelers were found to have duct pieces which had rejectable welding perfomed. To determine 4 ether these travelers had been previously inspected by Conam prior to their installation, a review of Zack " duct piece" reports was performed by CECO Q.A.. The following methodology was used: 1 The identified traveler listed all piece numbers and these were noted. 2 By reviewirg the traveler a determination of drawirg number was made.
- 3. Based on this drawirg number, Zack QC assembled all duct piece rgorts which Conam personnel had signed off on (accept or reject).
- 4. These reports were then cocpared with duct piece numbers identified
. on the travelers in question to determine whether or not Conam had performed a previous inspection.
- 5. All data was tabulated and is attached.
Results of the above review indicated that of the 14 travelers found to have rejectable welds, two were previously inspected by Conam personnel. These are listed below: Conam Insp. Date/ CH:o/Conam Traveler # Duct Piece F Status Insp. 8/1/82 F-1215 5a 5/19/81/kegt keept 5b --- Reject F-1217 4 --- Reject 6 6/12/81/kcept keept As indicated above, welds found rejectable by CECO /Conam durirg the 8/1/82 inspection had not been previously inspected while welds found acceptable had been previously ingected and found acceptable by Conam.
- 0109L l
Mr. A. Schwencer August 12, 1982 ENCLOSUiiE 6 Submittal from Commonwealth Edison l I i 4743N
COMMONWEALTH EDISON HVAC SYSTEM TESTING AT LASALLE COUNTY STATION At the request of the staff, a presentation.was made on August 4, 1982, describing typical HVAC testing at LaSalle County Station. 1 An outline of this presentation is included as Attachment Questions were addressed with respect to problems or deficiencies discovered during the test program which could be attributable to the Zack Co. Examples of the problems encountered during testing and the manner in which they were resolved were provided. Also discussed was the review of test results by station, corporate engineering, architect-engineer and NRC Region III personnel. It was concluded that no generic problems were encountered during testing attributable to the Zack Co. One example cited was a damper that was found installed backwards. This was not believed to be unusual nor was it thought to be an indication of major problems because it was the only damper experiencing this problem. Also discussed were a small number of dampers that experienced binding during testing. These were repaired and successfully retested. As can be seen from Attachment 1. the LaSalle County test program was very comprehensive and merits a high degree of confidence intended that the design systems are capable of accomplishing their function. Also discussed was the Startup Test schedule. Attachment 2 is a table of the dates when it is expected that selected power levels will just be achieved and the dates it is projected that these power levels will just be exceeded. f 4
+
] 4724N
ATTACHMENT 1 TYPICAL LSCS HVAC TESTING A. Construction Testing
- 1. Duct and housing leakage'( Air cleaning systems onJy)
- 2. Test and balancing data
- a. Fan vibration, running current, voltage and RPM
- b. System, branch and terminal air flows
! c. Fan inlet and outlet pressure and temperature
- d. Filter dif ferential pressure
- 3. Refrigeration system startup supervised by Carrier.
- 4. Leakage test of isolation dampers (factory).
B. Preoperational Testing
- 1. Component Tests.
- a. Fan / compressor vibration and running current
- b. Damper operability verification (all types)
- c. Compressor suction / discharge pressure and oil temperature
- d. Humidifier / steam generator / heater operability
- 2. Logic Tests
! a. Fan / compressor start /stop/ trip logic and interlocks "b. Alarm logic and setpoints
- c. Heater staging
- d. Isolation and auto transfer to emergency mode logic
i
- 3. Integrated Tests
- a. Flow measurement in all modes of system operation
- b. Building and/or room differential pressure
- c. Filter efficiency and air flow distribution
- d. Heat capacity verification (temperatures / pressures / air flow directions)
- 4. Operating / Surveillance Procedure Demonstration C. Systems have successfully passed their Technical Specification surveillances D. Systems have been in operation for several months, and in some cases as much as three years. In particular, control room HVAC, Aux. Electrical Equipment Room HVAC, and switchgear heat removal HVAC have been regularly operated during the past 1 1/2 to 3 years.
4724N T
ATTACHMENT 2 SCHEDULE OF LSCS POWER LEVELS -8/4/82 FIRST DATE FIRST DATE POWER LEVEL . ACHIEVED _ EXCEEDED 5% JULY 23 AUG. 12 10% AUG. 12 AUG. 13 20% AUG. 16 SEPT. 2 30% SEPT. 2 SEPT. 3 40% SEPT'.' 3 SEPT. 6 50% SEPT. 6 SEPT. 13 58% SEPT. 13 SEPT. 25 70% SEPT. 25 0CT. 21 95% OCT. 23 NOV. 14 i
~100% NOV. 14 -----
l. l l i l l
ATTACHMENT 3 3 .__ .-._.. _ ._ - _.. _ ..._.... . _ - - . 1 ~Q' -M " 2' .'k='l -' p "'Q Q l^ f' & '. C..._ =.T.:
" - - - - - - * - ~ ~ ' - - - - ~
(= ::C_--. .!-. _;, ' ...;'._-__-..---7
-';; :- :'_.-'. _ J. . . . . . . . _ . . . _ . _ . _ _ . _ . _ _ - _ _ -} y"- -=.--:~.---.1'':==.= g _ ;- ; ; ; , ,_ ;; -
=.=.: 2 : .
n: = = : =.- ." .;= ---- :2:= = =:==. _==.=c..=.=====- - =. _. - --nc- --- r = == : = = = == . . . . . -
= . A r= =_ -_. = t== === ' u' :T :. :' = . . T :. ~ ..
. ... . . =- . _ .~ -.- . . .-. . . . . . _ _ . . _ _ . . . ~ - . . *
* ~ ~ ~ -
~ -
I.=.
- p. . " L .*:.:Z. .?"._ T. :_" . % . _2. ~AJ . " L_. : * .~._ ' .. .'-. .g"
- _~~_~' th".- '. - * ~ ~
":.L'_J 1.-'.L~ =. . g~ ? ~~~ .O..'~.~".. - _' . . ~ T::..---.--..~.j
__-. _ q - - _ _ . -- - r .= ._3=._: . :.O=_ . .:=_. .L - =_ .,.y
- . .- g. _ o. _. . ._..g... O ::=.:. O, .=_:. __ 4. ..0- . _
4 _
= .
= = ;. : =.. - ,
g- .__..;p_ o :-- --. . . h ..:7__=-=7.=-= = ,;. _ c--- O . ._..._..g
=: = = = =-. ._ : =. : ;_.= = = =:a =:-.--.._.: -._._... _ _ _ _ _ _ .i_- .. .-_... = = = - . . . -
~::,
%}!" - - -
- _=-'---
=~= ..=: = - - - u = =. . : : _ ; == - ------------+-~~'======:-
*.-.-:..=!.---*----~----- l ~~ * ' -- -- ' ' 7_ C.- _ ;I. .= ! . . . L J. ~_ _ " :
- f. == . ~ ' 7*-- . : J * -- T . _ - - - . .? = . : = C. :_= *- - C J"-' [
1 :1._ .= ~ -- = = r Ou' . . . . n T;2J.Z_2f =f--~52r-~~-i._.==rn 22 2228 = fE '
"~
k.2 9 .. : = E ; = ;= r_:::. . :_= -- -
== ;=- - .--
2 :_ :_.=. - :. = _ - --'== -==. r% p -, . : =. - . - - o
. =.. _. . := =:.z
-:=-- . --.=.===--::=.=-..
o-: =
- =...
.. _ -z
.mCM
.: Ms n
- .- = . . . =_ z :- _ y- y_ =_ _ :_ = =: = = _ :. 2 = =. . . . _ - - - - . .
' . :_- 7
__.. _ _ _ _ , , _,m. __ __ f*
~ -
*_.uo W '
. . . = = ..e e - - - - . . _ +
= . = . = = . _ . . .
e.$
..e .
. .e .
-.. L . _. - - _ _ . .___..: . ... .._ _.
_ z-....._.... ...-=.:=
- . . u: ,
. . . . - - . _ _'.: 1._ . . :ll' . . . _ . . _ _ -
E . _ . ' /. . . 1..
- =. _ . = =. = :.: = : . . .._'.,_
7 _ _ .
. :.: = . _:==-_-
- O.
.=.
- .. ._. _. 2_ .
.; .T _- . .
..... -J .,~ .
. 2 --;
T > ---
.. - =_._:__. -- --- - - . =_ -
%.- _ . . . . r_ .- =. - - - - - = . - 7: ...__- = _ = = - . _ - _.._ u_.. _ :. _; . -.._ . . ._ = = Q y . . :. . == z ;. --
-= .: = - - = = = = = _ . . _ = =. .-- AUGK._.. 3 4- g
.m. . . I*" g g...
0 -g -
. 4_ '_ : 5.e_z. O..
n= -
. = . - ._.:= =; = 2. ::: : = r_ = ._ -- ---.:: = : : :z ~ z .:- %(
P_ .: i~.---- . _ . .:g - ' 1 = =_- :. _ - 7. - r. =- = " - ygg j
=----_- - r
~a ~<=._= :=_=_==_=_. ..:. . _ :: _.
- - - = =..
._..--____.==.=_
.. = = = = = = : - _==.._.._=.
O i: Es . .={.3 - -
= .. __ = =_ , ._-._...__.- . ._..;_.._.- L g-. _p.. ' ' ~ = 4 - Sc R A._n..=______-===.._=.__=.__ : .=.. = =..= =_.=_
2 _ 9 W4 O-
- . . 2
. . '. == = = = = = = = = = - . = = . _ . __, _
= L ;.... == - =: ; ---
.~...._.-
- 2. : - -- z. . : . _ : - _. ;-.-- : _ - - 7-- - - - 7' .
9 O : h ..
-: 2.=-- .
= = = = -
.....,_..=====._
m .._. _=-. = . =.. . _ .. . =-se.n _2. .=_ Y [~~ : .' = T. . .
---- g ::
. - -- S EPT&::=- ~~ -- :--'-'~
- .. .._.:;z ; =-$ Chb N:--~~---. =
~ - - -- - - - - - - - - - -
- - :- = ==. . . . . _ - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
~ : ~~~. . _. = :: -'-' . - .: = ; : . --
1
!: 5 1 ' h:.= - .- ~- . '" $ERO:
~
i ..'--._.'.-
.: '; ~ . '_
_ ' - . - ._.'=. -:*- -=. . _ _ . _ . ,~. . _. - l =_--._;-..-_.;--'.._=.:_=_7.;*--_-~_._-*-_Z+--..._a l_-_.==_- x. ;__...._.._....._. _.
- . .._-- . . _- . ;._ ~ ., -
! : .T = . .J . .-" =!=:Z- .- . ~ ; 12 ' - - =.;; _ ..
~ - ~ . _ .. g ;--*~ :.: --- .r_. r-- ; 7- ;= = ~ ...=;.
. ~ . '. _ . ~
.-_..w...... -'_ _._ -._ _ . -*~ =--- ;
'_ !=- =U = = 1 . . __ __ J = : ;.- = -- '- .2... _ :T TJ : =~.
-.. _'~~-l-
. . ;g4"g 6) 0_
_ . _ . - . . . . . _ . _ - . _ . _ .. . . . . . - = _ = .
'..._t..__..._:.=.===.=..
. _ _ . . _ = . _ = . = _ = - - _ . _ . . . .. ._. .. ._. _ . . _ . ._:. =_=
. . .. . _ . = -
[,,, **[
^
,, g '
~_'__..[._....__...[. _
7
.. * --- ---- ~~ * * - " - "
- .=~ ~==1_ - ... . =;; ....._ .. . rr_C-- --
;;;- - ~ =--, _ . . -
I
= = = = :_= _ :._ =.
- -2 .n - - -
= ... .
' _: . : u _ = - .=- :; . . . - _ . . . . . . . . . . _
4 ;-Jcg A m: . .
-=
-- .O
.:=..::- : = 17_lE . '- [' ~ ~~
- ~ - - - - ~--
. .=: . .:
4:- 3:4 1 L :. .=:='. =.: : .:==-+--
= _ .: :._==
e
=uz - _
-oct23 g
[
.I D
~. &
--- e-- -
.s -- St.a A M
., = = . = :...
_J.C;;j .=......:=. :. . . h - = : . . ; .=. . . . . - - -
-.=.: .-~ :_ - r_= T :. .. . ;;. = .n _ - = = -- x = _ __.=._.u=.._.._ 1: .. . . ,
53- - -
...Z. . 1: : ;;.= , :g : .j ;}}:' g._ y , $C R $ hj .._
..... . . . . . . . . . _ . . =. :... . . .
c-... n k . h 5hdl. b.i $ $_5Cby_ . 3.hbk 7-- '" = r=. _ ~~r 3-*.. [d h :!
- - = . ;_ . = _ . , g .. ..__ - ... _ .
. . ._ . . . . .-. 30 . - -
i- 3m=-
- . = =.: =.; = =. .; =.: .. ; =u _= ... . . g r_= - - . . _ . . ==. =:=.
.._..a 0
.i
Mr. A. Schwencer Augus t 12, 1982 ENCLOSURE 7 Submittal from Commonwealth Edison i l l 1 4743N
Commonwealth Edison Field Sampiing And Material Testing Program HVAC MATERIALS INTRODUCTION: This report describes the methods and results of the HVAC material testing program conducted at the LaSalle County Nuclear Power Station. This-program resulted from allegations made against the Zack Company concerning material documentation falsification for the HVAC work done under Sargent & Lundy Specification J-2590. SCOPE: The test program consisted of the following:
- 1) Identification of steel using a Spectro Test L Machine.
- 2) Verification of steel chemical and physical properties. (Note-This is also to be used as a check of Item 1 accuracy).
- 3) Verification of. Structural bolts used through visual inspection of markings. (Note: Structural bolts were designated as
( special material supplied by Zack Company). 4)' Verification of Physical Properties of bolts having no ident-ification markings.
- 5) Verification of E-6011 & E-7018 Weld Rods Physical Properties.
- 6) Verification of the type of refrigeration valves supplied by RMC.
Sampling & Test Result Details: l
- 1) Identification of steel using a Spectro Test L Machine.
l The Spectro Test L Machine is a mobile spectrometer utilized to I l identify metals. I
l (2) Sampling is done by striking an arc between a steel member and a hand held pistol electrode. A plasma is generated that is diffracted into spectral lines or wavelengths. Carbon, one of the main elements in steel, emits a specific spectral line. Based on the intensity of the spectral line the Spectro Test L Machine can identify the percent of carbon in a sample piece when ccmpared against a known sample. The type of steel can then be identified once the percent of carbon is known. To test the performance of the Spectro Test L Machine, the carbon con-tent of several known samples was determined. The results are tabulated below: Spectro Test L Machine Performance Test Done Prior To Field Testing Sample # Actual Known % Carbon Deviation from Actual % Deviation Known % Carbon 1 .17 .16 94% 2 .20 .06 30% 3 .23 .01 4% 3 .23 .06 26%
- 3 .23 .04 17%
l 4 .23 .01 4% l 5 .42 .02 5% l 5 .42 .00 0% i 6 .42 .05 12% l 6 .42 .07 17% l 7 .20 .09 45% 8 .21 .08 38" ! Approximately 50% of the readings are within 15% of known actual, 75% of 1 the readings are within 30% cf known actual and if sample #1 is eliminated, all readings fall within 45% of known actual . When test data performed by the manufacturer (See Attachment 1) is added to the Performance Test results it l l can be concluded that the Spectro Test L Machine is capable of reading % car-bon with 20% accuracy, approximately 60% to 70% of the time. Tests to determine the % carbon of A-36 type materials supplied by the Zack Company were performed using Sample #3 with a known carbon content of
.23%, as the calibration sample. A range of + 15% was established.
(3) Thus, when the Spectro Test L Machine reads the % carbon of sample of #3 at .23%, all other samples compared with sample #3 that read between .1955% to .2645% carbon would be found acceptable. Test groups I thru VIII, X and XIII, all consist of ASTM - A36 type material results, ( Attachment 2,3,4,5,6,7,8,11 and 14). Of the 77 checks made only 2 wrong readings were indicated. Be<h of these were read again after the surfaces had been regr ound and were foundcacceptable. Checks were also made on ASTM A575 M1020 steel . Test Groups XIV and XV ( Attachments 15 & 16) show the results of this type of materials. Thirteen (13) checks were made with only 1 wrong reading. This item was rechecked and found acceptable. Test Groups IX, XI, XII, and XVI (Attachments 10,12,13 & 17) consisting of ASTM A527 type materials were also checked. Of the 31 checks performed all were found acceptable. Based on the results of this type of test program it can be concluded with reasonable confidence that the materials supplied by Zack Company are within or very near the ranges specified by Sargent & Lundy Engineers. These materials would all have minimum tensile strengths necessary to meet design stress levels. 2.) Verification of Steel Chemical and Physical Properties. As additional validity data for the tests performed in Section 1, three (3) test samples checked by the spectrometer were tested for chemical and physical properties. The results are tabulated below: Sample #1 1x1x Angl e ASTM A575 M1020 Sample #2 4x4x Steel Tube ASTM A500 Sample #3 3 x3hxh Angle ASTM A36
~
(4) Sampl e Tensile Strenth %C _%Mn Acceptable 1 62,-851 psi .18 .53 Yes 2 64, 683 psi .23- .75 Yes 2 (side with weld) 60, 288 psi 3 65, 370 psi .21 .62 Yes
- 3) Verification of Structural Bolts through Visual Inspectiod 6f-Markings.
Visual inspections made of high strength bolting on 11 hangers found in the Containment. All bolting had 6 hash marks on their bolt head. These markings correspond to A3TM-A354 Grade BD bolts. This high strength bolting is an acceptable alternate in lieu of specified ASTM-A325 Type 1 bolts. Sargent & Lundy Engineers approved the alternate high strength bolts on October 27, 1981.
- 4) Verification of E6011 and E7018 Weld Rod Physical Properties.
The physical properties of E6011 and E7018 weld rod, which was in stock was tested. The results are tabulated below:
*E6011 3/32" diameter supplied by Weldstar Tensile Strength Acceptable Test 1 145,137 yes 2 145,137 yes 3 116,110 yes
*E7018 3/32" diameter supplied by Weldstar Tensile Strength Accepta ble Test 1 116,110 yes 2 145,137 yes 3 116,110 yes
*E6011 1/8" diameter supplied by Hobart l Tensile Strength Acceptabl e Test 1 114,145 yes 2 97,839 yes 3 114,145 yes
*E7018 1/8"_ diameter supplied by Hobart Tensile Strength Acceptable Test 1 81,532 yes 2 81,532 yes 3 97,839 yes
(5)
- 5) Verification of Physical Properties of Bolts Having No Identification Markings.
The most comon bolt used in HVAC work is ASTM-A307 Grade A Bolts. Tensile tests were perfonned with the nut engaged on the bolt. The results are tabulated below: 1/4" Diameter Bolts and Nuts Sampl e Tensile Load Acceptabl e Remarks 1 2600# yes 2 2200# yes 3 1000# .no Test Lab tried welding an attachment to the bolt 4 2400# yes 5 2800# yes 6 2200# yes 3/8" Diameter Bolts and Nuts Sampl e Tensile Load Accepta ble Remarks 7 4200# yes Nut failed 8 6200# yes 9 6200# yes 10 6200# yes 11 7800# yes 12 6600# yes Nut failed Eleven (11) of the 12 samples were found accepteble. The only sample that failed was damaged when a testing lab attachment was welded to the bolt. This sample should be deleted. l 6) Verification of the Type of Refrigeration Valves Supplied by RMC. A visual inspection was conducted of valve name plates to verify if the correct model type had been supplied by RMC. Attachment 18 shows the l results of this inspection. All valves inspected have been approved by Sargent & Lundy for use at LaSalle County Station.
(6) i
SUMMARY
In each of the areas addresed above no problems were encountered. Chemical and physical properties were as they thould have been. Visual inspections revealed correct markings and model numbers. The spectrometer test of steel showed correct % carbon content ranges, similar to the ASTM standards. The results indicate that materials supplied by the Zack Company meet the requirements of Sargent & Lundy's Specification. The allegation that the Zack Company has supplied bad or poor quality material appears to have no substance based on the findings of this report, f i
~_ -. Attachment 1 SPECTRO TEST L MACRITE MANU?ACTURER'S DATA' j l DATA SIE2f CARBON-TEST 7/5/82 1.o sec preburn 2.0 sec exposure DC-Arc, 3 AMP, Sample ?'E Intensity 'Stnd. Stnd. %- (DIG) Deviation Deviation Error (DIG) (% c) cim 162 .o3 ?51 17 .oh3 1hr! cim 163 1 3' 990 21 .o53 hM-ctD 16h .3h 389 19 .oh8 ilts CKD 165 16 ?91 90 .o23 1W crD 166 .8h 5hh 33 .033 10% cKD 167 .52 h50 ,17 .oh3 $f cim 168 .39 373 1h .035 9a4 crD 169 .23 36? 18 .oh5 Oc' cKD 170 19- 3h1 13 .033 17M crD 171 10 301 15 .o38 3W cED hot 1.06 580 22 .055 9l4 cKD h02 1.20 70h 47 .118' -10% ce ho3 88 579 36 ..o90 1a% cKD hoh .7h 521 19' .oh8 6% CKD h05 .03 300 5 .013 by4 CKD ho6 23 388 15 . 038 17%- crD 407 .h7 h77 25 .063 13% cKD h03 .29 366 19 .048 17, cKD ho9 08 318 1h .o35 h!ff CED hio .39 h27 18.7 .oh8 17l'>
Reference:
" carbon Application Report" by Spectro USA, Inc.
k
Attachment f2 TEST GROUPING RESULTS SPECTRO TEST L MACHINE GROUP I (ASTM-A36 .2695 an. carbon) System: VR a) 3 - 3 X 3 X 1A angle rings 7P" dia. -ASTM A-36 b) 14 - ich S 10h X h anchor plates ASTM A-36 c) 1 - C5 X 6.7 channel ASTM A-36 d) 2 - h X 1; X 1/)4 'ang]es ASTM A-36 No. Checked 1 14 No. 'Jrong 2 l Renarks: i
- 1) Error read on channel and one anchor plate. Item rechecked i
again after surface reground and found acceptabic. Paint residue was believed to have caused the initial error readingc.
- Notes
I
- 1) Sample #3 used to calibrate.
- 2) Range setting for % carbon is 115%.
- 3) All surface ground free of coatings before testing.
l l f I-L l l
Attachtent 43
' TEST GROUPDIG RESULTS SPECTRO TEST L PJLCHDTE Group II (ASTMA-36andASTMA-500 - .26cs max. carbon)
Systems: VC, VE-a) 1 - 3 x 3 x 1/1; angle- ASTM A-36 b) 1 - 101 x 10) x 6" Anchor plate ASTM A-36 c) 19 x 2 x 1/h Steel tube ASTH A-500 d) 1 - 3 x 3 x 1/h Steel tube ASTM A-500 Ho. Checked 14 No. '.lrong 0 Notes:
- 1) Sample #3 used to calibrate.
- 2) Range settinC for '4 carbon is 1194.
- 3) All surface ground free of coatings before testing.
I l A
, , . _ _ir-- - __
i AtQachnenQ #b Si TEST GROUPITIG PESULTS SPECTRO T"I? L l'>sCHITC (. Group III (ASTMA-36andASTMA-500 - 126N rax. carbon) Syctens: -VC, VE, VP. e- \ " a) 1 - 3 X 3 X 1/h angle '
, , ASEi-A36 ,'
b) 1 - 14 X h X 1/14 Steel tube $, ASTNA500 c) h - 10h X 101 X f Anchor pintes AST%A36 d) ? - 3 X 3 X 1/h Angle ringe 38" dia. ASTNA36 e) 3 - 3 X 3 X 1/h Angle rings 72" dia. ASTGA36 y f) 1 - 2 X 2 X 1/l; Steel tube ASTN ATOO g) 1-3{Z33X1/14 Ang1c; AS*WA36 , y -,, No. Checked 13 i No. Vrong 0
's Note
- 1) Sample /'3 used to calibrate.
- 2) Range setting for 95 carbon is 115%.
~
- 3) All surface ground free of coatings before testing. \ ,, ,
/'
s-:' e s 5( l' I t t U ;i t
Attachment #5 TEST GROUPD:G RESULTS SPECTRO TEST L MAC9INE Group IV (AS%A36andAS%A500 - 26;$ max. carbon) Systeno: VC, VE a) 1 - 3 X 3 X 1/h Angle AS E A36 b) 1 - h X h X 1/h Steel tube ASTEA500 c) 1 - 3 X 3 X 1/h Steel tube ASTWA500 d) 1-9X9X1/2 Anchor plate AST!!-A36 17o. Checked h Io. Vrong 0 I?otec:
- 1) Sanple #3 used to calibrate.
1-2).RangesettingforMcarbonis1195.
- 3) All pur* aces ground free of coatings before testing.
l i I i L :t
Attachnent 56 TEST GROUPIEG Hr.SULTS. SPECTRO TEST L IMCHI!!E Group V (AST!! A 26)$ max. carbon) Syntoms: VC, VE a) 5 - 3 X 3 X 1A Angle AST!bA36 ~ , b) 3-9X9X1/2 Anchor plates ASTILA36 c) 2 - 13 X i Bara AST!bA36 d) 2 - h X 6 X h Shim plates ASTILA36 e) 1-16X12X5/8 Anchor plates AST!bA36
!!o. Checked 13 No. '.frong 0
!!otect
- 1) Sample #3 used to calibrate.
( 2) Range setting for if carbon is !15?!. l
- 3) All surfaces ground free of coatings before testing.
l l l l l I i i
Attachment /*7 TEST GROUPING RESTETS SPECTRO TEST L VJLCHINE Group VI (AS'Hi A-36 and ASTM A-500 -
. 26)$nax, carbon)
Systens: VC, VE a) 1 - 3 X 3 X 1A Steel tube ASTWA500 b) 2 - h X h X 1A Anglen ASTWA36 c) 2 - 13 X t Bars ASTII-A36 d) 1-2X?X3/8 Angle AST!!-A36 No. Checked 6 No. ifrong O 4 Notes:
- 1) Sanple #3 used to calibrate.
- 9) Range setting for % carbon is 1195.
- 3) All- surfacen ground free of coatings before tenting, t
1 i i
Attachment Z@ TEST GROUPING RESULTS L SPEC 1'R0 TEST L. MACHINE Group VII (AST!!A-36'- .26% max. carbon) Systen: VR a) 2-1A"Plateductwork 4. No. Checked 2 No. Vrong O Uotes:
- 1) Sample #3 used to calibrate.
- 2) Tange setting for % carbon is 115$
'3) Ali surfaces ground free of coatings before testing.
l s l~ 1 l q
-- e , n e ,- -
Attachment #9 TEST GROUPING F[3ULTS SPECTRO TEST L MACHII'E Group VIII (ASTMA-36andASE!A-500 - 2695 rax. carbon) Systen: VR a) 3 - 3 X 3 X 1A Angle ASEi-A36 b) 2 - 3 X 3 X 1/Is Angle rings $h" dia. ASTIi-A36 c) 2 - Ch X 6.7 Channel ASTII-A36 d) 1 - 3 X 3 X 1/14 Steel tube ASTII-A500 No. Checked 9 ITo. Urong 0 Renarks:
- 1) One of the channels was checked twice.
- ITotes:
- 1) Sanple #3 used to calibrate.
- 2) Range setting for is carbon is 1151
- 3) All surfaces Cround free of coatings before testing.
AQtachmenQ #10 TEST GROUPI?7G RESULT 3 SPECTRO TEST L FACHI?TE Group I% .(ASTMA-527 - 1676 max. carbon) System: VX a) 13 - 18 & 20 Gauce duct ASTGA527 No.. Checked 13 No. 1/rong 0 fiotes:
- 1) Sample with a carbon content or .ilfs carbon uned.
- 2) Range setting for ?$ carbon is +1$ and -30.
- 3) All surfaces cround free or coatings before testing.-
Attachment !!11 TEST GROUPII!G RESULTS SPECTRO TEST L MACHTfE Group X (ASTII A-36 and ACTII A-500 -
.26%nax. carbon)
. S/' stem: VG a) 3-1/8" Flat rinC 20" dia. ASTSA36 b)'1-2X2X1/13 Steel tube '
ASTGA500 c) 1-18X10[X7/8 Anchor plate ACTI",-A36 No. Checl:ed 6 No. '<!rong O Recarl:n
- 1) Tect sa ple included in the results above.
I l Notes:
- 1) Sanple f23 used to calibrate.
- 2) Range setting for secarbon is 115%.
- 3) All surfaces ground free of coa. tings before tenting.
L l I I I i i i
, _ . ._ . - . -- - ~
' Attachment #19 TEST GROUPING ICSULTC SPTI'R0 TEST L MACHUM Group XI (ASTMA-527 -
.1695 max. carbon)
Systen: VG a) 3 - 20 Gauge duct AST!%A527 i l No. Checked la No. Vrong 0 Renarks:- l
- 1) Test saaple included in the results above.
Notes: f 1) Sanple with a carbon content of .0 5 carbon used. j I 2) Range setting for 95 carbon -2@$ and +335. I I
- 3) All su-faces ground free'of coatings before testing.-
i l i
ettachment //13 - TEST GROUPING RESULTS SPECTRO TEST T,V.ACRI?TE Group XII (AS E A-527 - 16! max. carbon) System: VY ASTGA527 a)!6-10 Gauce duct
-ASTGA5??
b) 2 - 16 .Gauce duct No. Checked: 8 No. Urong: O Hotes:
- 1) Sa=ple with a carbon content of .0%s carbon used.
- 2) Rance setting for 95 carben -20?$ and +3575.
- 3) All surfaces ground free or coatince before te= ting.
I'
Attachnent #1h TEST GROUPII!G REOULT3 SPECTRO TECT L !!ACHT!TS Group XIII (ASTMA-36andASEiA500 - 26?$ mx. carbon) (ASTMA-575M1020.17?!to.2h75. carbon) Systen: YY a) 1 '- 3 X 3 X 1A Steel tube AST!bA500 b) 1 - 3 X 3 X 1/h Angle ASTGA36 c) 1 - 3 X 3 X 1A Guccet plate AST:1-A36 d) 3-2X2X1/8 Angle ASTII-A575 M10?0 No.. Checked 7 f No. '.!rong 0 Eccarho:
- 1) Test sanple included in the results above.
Notes:
- 1) Sa ple #3 used to calibrate.
- 2) Range setting for % carbon 115%.
- 3) All sudaces ground free of coatings before testing.
f
-- , , - -~-
Attachn*nt (15 TEST GROUPD!G RESULTS SPECTRO TEST L TMCHDIE Group XIV (ASTI: A-575 M1020 - 17:s to .2ffs carbon) System: VY f a) 2-2X2X3/16 Angle AST4A575 M1020 b) 3-2x2X1/8 Angle ASS:-,A575 M1020 No. Checked: 6 No. '.irorg: 0 Remrkn: l 1) Test scrple included in the results above. t-f Notes: f l 1) Sacple with a carbon content of .2175 carbon used. l
- 2) Range setting for % carbon -20% and +195.
- 3) All surfaces ground free of coatings before testing.
g _. Attachment #16 TEST GROUPD!G RESULTS SPECTRO TEST L PACRDO Group .W (AST!!A-575M1020 -
.17l6to.2h7scarbon)
Systen: VD a) 5-1x1x1/8 Angle ACT!"-A575 M1020 No. Checked: 7 P0. Vrong: 1 d Renarks:
- 1) Test sample included in the resulto above.
- 2) Drrored iten rechecked again and found acceptable.
Iiotes:
- 1) Sanple with a carbon content of .21% carbon used.
- 2) Rance setting for % carbon -2005 and +1595.
- 3) All surfaces ground free of coatings before testing.
i l
Attachment #17 TEST GROUPD?G PJ:3ULTS SPECTRO TEST L MACHDIE Group .WI (AST!! A-527 .16% max. carbon) Systen: ~VD a) 22 Gauge duct AST!!-A5?7 i
-!Io. Checked 6
!!o. Vrong 0 t
i Renarkc:
- 1) Test sa=ple included in the recults above.
!!otes:
- 1) Sanple with a carbon content of .0$4 carbon used.-
1 ! 2) Range setting for % carbon -20% and +3 d. t l 3) All surfaces ground free of coatings before testing. I l.
& L 3< )"' 1- 2 o 'c
/
vvv*'+ is
\J ' l ^ " " o' n vt < .9 3 p lIl{j WD i l' V S d c y / 'b v, 7 S- c v, t, a ,
S O 0 2 / 0 v,j y S' Z*/p
'5 g ' + ' " r3D I ]* 9 0390ILV Sd03jv 1, 75 c v. i, p 03901 4g 5 8 o y / V vt B 5' Z / p G39O'SJV S dcy/ v pi gJ,xiob, " 1,sey.p-
.~. . A , lj o s' 9 0 5 5.g 5S dcy/
&cw/vv 3rdw.,.iev. 1/ .jn2 3,/ajy y r p ,.p ( 0 3 9 o g jo y i 3xdw.sice.
039oE0g S& v v, c y i, ib v gxdepcv. 3,aju i ]jV/?^5 W P'/ V*' / W AJ - Ef-f d*/vv go p p iz o ( oy9olby /:/ o - p c v/ y - b S 8 ) pow p o v /t - b s"v 3f"H/'P y'"* fY X V' ? ' 01$o/b8 d/* S GN$oE2y d./0- QcN V - hS? 3 lP* cy0oEgg 0 o v- V - 6 S ' 2*flvM
)=A's-/'iF * "! s / o y ,. ;,7 ,y ( d. / 0 - ][ V/V^6 1,v j<.2- ' ( ^ "' 37 w-1 oy9 o 3h V 5 a o iz / VP q_>dv ssia v O'"' ON 6 0 5h.9 S doN o v/v/ vvi gydv ssio v. Aeji.3-Sd p pvin2-E-]!'liG Sb'/;'" 03 $ O fS V so co /v vi y'>du v s. os i
1,v j<.a - C W D O SS 8 1 xdvitsiov. 1,v j 1.p -
.Sd c 9 jit tA
~
):' :v ;- oy9oigy yxdnestc+.
;v j<.2-
+
y;,. ;?. y > y( Oth9Ot2@ S cv;/V P fooY; fv vj gydu nsicvi 1,vj1,>- gkdu v: sic?n 0 3 9 0 L k. V 03 9 o .l. ,I- 9 ydor; /vvj J-'>J.ms iov. (,vl1,2-l 5_d xl"*' liv)^'5 Vil"Pl '^ ** /M AJ 'E+- yh )* 3')-"~- 08OOJ/V d/o -Q'c*' V >l %- )V W \ 02 O o9L 9 dlo -P N V-b 33 H*S*9 h"/P*M y** \ 3 n!d
- 8'u ' a y 9 c .t 9 V dlo-Dc" V -b 59-lHf'/toSfu d o y o o .L )* 9 Jk*-0cs /l-b SF /2 )P 3 I
hs*d'9,d'l't 'd'to - pcv/ y-f
/(1-/p2b-/ p jh ~Z ' 1C' li' /* *5thayanM d' d'PLv$dryn
/t// k p] m E
\ 4b>v yru.y% - f""' DY""7* / -ro-2E
%fve tilo. T 7PE. Wo-Oondnol Sm. $bo)G-A Sdeno'd Ls.ste+ 016As3a WrA6 Gp MQwe Gdeard R.catet meprsa l 286, tea 198&A Solensid RsDid m e MSa (C' -M/ DKGo34-6 Saleno't d L.GLifm 6;cs2 2 .e ic.l <c!~)
(b.Blec. ORC 43-A Soknod Rs19 pus aCsa. Ezs ,p. Sn. DR(AGB So Icood Ls.3 L+ m3 pcsa Hvnc 5ys. OR60 3-A SoItnoid 25 &/d /ne assa 226'/4A oxG012-6 Solenoid L.SSH m.6 aG A 5C.cl[Lz a ,
.4H 8 g & abus udts cw Q& L%.
L Olulw r. F}-8A Oftw,e m- / vs? /va fe %D . all & y d $ggd g M L en sx b- b.4 8 - l-FA
. . . - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -}}