ML20154E431
Text
_ ___ _-
(
I U. S. ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION
)
DIVISION OF COMPLIANCE REGION V l
Report o'f Inspection l
4 CO Report No. 50-275/70-2 1
l Licensee:
Pacific Gas & Electric Company Construction Permit No. CPPR-39 Category A f
Date of Inspection:
June 23-26, 1970 i
Date of Previous Inspection:
March 2-5, 1970 Inopected by:
&# 5 '
,7 f 4 A. D. J insen
/
Princi 1 Reactor Inspector
(',Y '.j frews bww $V F F// f b
J. L
/~
/ /
Reactfr Inspector 14wo u 7!/7!7 #
Reviewed by:
C'.' S. S p cer Senior Reactor Inspector Proprietary Information:
None SCOPE Type of Fseility:
Pressurized Water Reactor Power Level 3250 Fwt Location:
Diablo Canyon, San Luis Obispo County, California Type of Inspection:
Routine - Announced Accompanying Personnel None 0805200213 080510 PDR FDIA MCMILL ANDO-156 PD9
(,
2-j Scope of Inspection: Pursuant to 3800/2 and the master inspection schedule, the requirements prescribed in Attachment C (Containment) were completed with the exception of the containment proof test.
Inspection of Other Class I f,
Structures was initiated.
The steam generator supports, liquid holdup tanks and the gas decay tanks were selected for review.
Also, the procedures were reviewed for receiving and storage of the reactor vessel at Alameda, California where the vessel will be stored until August 1970. In addition to the scheduled inspection items, the status of the deficiencies identified in CO Report No. 50-275/70-1 was determined.
i
\\
l r
i
)
G
(
3
SUMMARY
t Safety Items - None i
Items of Nonconformance - The thickness of the reinforcement on several containment building liner plate welds was observed to be greater than that permitted for radiography by the governing code, ASME,Section VIII, Paragraph UW-51.
A cons:ruction Deficiency Notification is to be issued by CO:V covering this deficiency.
(Section 11.)
Status of Previounty Reported Problems i
1.
containment Buildinn Liner Material Certification Following the last inspection, a Construction Deficiency Notification,
was issued by CO:V regarding a deficiency in the testing of the liner plate materials.
The deficiency resulted f rom the fact that the test specimens for the liner materials had been heat treated (normalized),
whereas the plate materials had been supplied by the mill in the as-rolled condition.
Prior to the current inspection, approximatey 120 liner plates were returned to the mill for normalizing heat treatment.
Re-tests were conducted for the balance of the material, using test specimens which were obtained either f rom plate tricmings or from the plates themselves.
All test results showed satisf actory material properties.
(Section H.I.)
2.
Weld Rod Control Weaknesses were observed at the time of the last inspection, in the care and control of low hydrogen electrodes.
At the time of the current inspection no deficiencies were observed with regard to weld rod control.. 31gns have been posted warning operators of electrode control procedures.
Ikated holding ovens, equipped with temperature measuring devices, have been installed within the welding area.
(Section I.)
Other Sinnificant Items -
1.
Overall completion of construction activities was estimated to be 13.77.
on June 25, 1970.
The Construction schedule has slipped by approximately four months from the original schedule.
4.
(Section B.)
2.
Mr. Carr, Site Quality Assuranco Engineer plars to terminate his full time employment with PG&E on August 1,1970 and return to his duties as Professor of Pkchanical Enginecting at California State Polytechnic College located in San Luis Obispo, California.
Mr. R. H. Baulig, the Westinghouse Sito Manager has moved to the site.
(Section C.)
i
(
4 3.
Ihe inspection requirements were completed as prescribed by 3000/2 concerning containment concrete and installation of the liner.
(Section i
D., G., H., & I.)
4.
The licensee plans further evaluation of the conditions and circumstances associated with the placement of concrete in the area between the 20 foot long wide beam flanges and the containment liner located at the l
base section of the containment building wall.
(Section D. 3.)
t 5.
Inspection of other Class I structures was initiated pursuant to PI 3800/2, Attachment E.
Items selected for review were:
(1)
The Steam Generator Supports, (2)
The Liquid holdup Tanks, and (3) The Gas Decay Tanks.
(Section E.)
I 6.
The reactor vessel has been received and stored at the Murphy Pacific,'s yard in Alameda, California.
Plans were to transfer the vessel to the site during August.
Confirmation was made that the vessel was being.
handled and stored in accordance with approved procedures.
(Section F.)
7.
The official QA procedure for on site discrepancy control was published on June 5, 1970.
The new procedure has clarified the ambiguity identi-fied during the previous inspection.
(Section L.)
8.
Receiv&l, storage and routine survillance of materials at the licensec's storage yard at Pismo Beach ware found to be governed by approved procedures.
Ilowever the licensee plans to review the procedures in view of the following observations:
a.
Protection of Stainless Steel Components f rom Salt-Air Environment l
The inspectors observed the storage of main loop (stainless steel) j piping in the yard at Pismo Beach.
In responae ta the inspectors' expressed concern for stainicss steel materials in a potentially i
salt-air environment, PG&E project personnel are considering inside storage or other suitable protection (plastic covering, etc.) for these materials.
b.
Low Stress Stampinn of Class 1 Pipinn Tools were not available at the site to determine if indentation stamping observed on main loop piping was of a low stress type.
Tools for making such measurements will be procured by the project staff.
(Section J.)
4 9.
The installed containment liner anchor studs were observed to be L shaped as described in the PSAR and not straight as planned and as reported in CO Report No. 50-275/69-4.
(Section M.)
Mananement Interview - The inspectors met with Messrs. liersey, Friedrichs, Carr and other members of the site staf f on June 26 to review the significant findings of the inspection.
The following items were discussed.
1
=
i i
i
(
f
?
\\
5-
\\
l i
1.
Radionraphy of Containment Liner IJolds (Section H.2.)
a J
l i
The inspector stated that the reinforcement on several welds which had i
been radiographed was of greater thickness than that permitted by the
- governing code, ASME,Section VIII, W-51.
(1/18-inch, verses 1/16-inch) l Mr. Hersey stated that all welds would be reinspected, with particular J
attention to reinforcement, and that where necessary the welds would be re-radiographed after grinding.
I The inspectors stated that PCE should expect correspondence from CO:V l
relating to this deficiency.
2.
Indentation Stampinn of Class 1 Pipinn (Section J.)
I
'Ihe inspector statedthat PCE representatives were unable to satisf act-
+
orily answer the question of whether stamping observed on the main loop piping was of a low stress type.
l Mr. Carr stated that tools are to be procured for making such a determin-ation, and that this information would be available at the time of the 1
next CO inspection.
j i
3.
Protection of Stainless Steel Matericis from Salt-Air Environment (Section J.;
Considering the close proximity of the Diablo Canyon site and the ? ismo Beach storage yard to the ocean; the inspector asked to what extent potential contamination of staGiless steel materials by a salt-air environ-ment had been evaluated.
Specific reference was made to such item as core internals, etc.
Mr. Hersey stated that stainless steel materials at the Diablo Canyon i
site are to be stored either inside a warehouse or covered with plastic j
1 or other suitable materials.
4.
Effect of Structural Steel Channels on Operation of Containment Spray System (Section K.)
Mr. Hersey stated that the inspector's observation regarding the covering of the containment building seam welds with structural steel channels would be referred to the Engineering Department for evaluation.
4 5.
Special Concrete For Area Betwcon tilde Benm Finnnes and Containment Liner j
Mr. Fredricks indicated that the plan to install a special design mix of concrete in the area between the wide beam flanges and the containment i
liner at the base of the containment sides will receive further evaluation.
i A determination will be made as to whether a mockup section of the area shoult
[
be poured to demonstrate that the resulting concrete meets the design j
requirements.
1
.l
6-6.
Verification of Quality Control Information on certification Document s The inspector informed the group that he had attempted to determine whether anyone within PG&E had reviewed the information contained in all of the documents related to the fabrication of the gas decay tanks for completeness and consistency with the appropriate code requirements.
The finding was that although several people assure that the proper documents are available and that random audits were made of the contained information, no one had c.hecked all of the information to assure that it was consistent with the pertinent code requirements.
The inspector added the comment that PG&E's procedure requires a review of the documents and that possibly assuring the certifications are present is what is meant by the requirement. The inspector stressed the fact that ho was not implying that all the information had to be reviewed by a PC&E employee; but rather that the finding was being pointed out to assure that PG&E's management was aware of the extent of their reviews.
DETAILS A.
Persons Contacted W. R. Hersey Project Superintendent R. R. Friedrichs Resident Civil Engineer L. G. Rasmussen Field Engine 6r G. V. Richards Director, Quality Assurance l
M. W. Mayer Field Engineer C. Erwin Assistant Resident Mcchanical Engineer F. W. Brady Quality Assurance Engineer L. J. Garvin Quality Control En3incer J. Arnold Inspector (Pismo Beach Warehouse)
L. G. Carr Quality Assurance Engineer J. L. Murin Quality Assurance Engineer D. Maxwell l
Civil Engineer (Concrete Testing Labora; J. Muller Assistant Ouality Content F.n ninc e r, l
Pittsburgh-Des Moines Steel Co. (PDM)
R. H. Baulig Site hanager, Westinghouse Corporation 4
)
7 B.
Construction Status Overall completion of construction activities was estimated by PC&E's construction department to be 13.7% on June 25, 1970.
Const ruc tion of the containment building was estimated to be 35.1% complete.
The Auxiliary building completion was 46.67..
Mr. Ikrsey indicated that construction delays have resulted in a slippage of approximately four months from their original schedule.
C.
Administration i
1.
Quality Ennineerinn Section i
Mr. L. Carr, Site Quality Assurance Engineer, plans to return to California State Polytechnic College located in San Luis Obispo,,
California and resume his duties as Professor of 1kchanical Engineering.
He plans to terminate his full time employment with PG&E on August 1,1970.
Mr. Carr has been on a leave of absence f rom the College during the past year.
Mr. Richards indicated that Carr would be available in the future for consultation.
Richards also stated that at least during the immediate future the responsibilities of the site Quality Engineering Section will be discharged by the remaining two Quality Assurance Engineers, Messrs. Brtdy and Marin.
2.
Westinghouse Mr. Beulig, the Westinghouse Site Fbnager, established an office at the construction site on March 23, 1970.
Mr. Baulig indicated additional Westinghouse personnel will join his staff as needed.
D.
Containment - PI 3800/2 Attachment C - Concrete During the current visit the inspector completed the inspection requirciaents prescribed by PI-3800/2 concerning manufacture, testing and placement of concrete for the containment building.
1.
Revie# of QC System a.
Location of Testinn Section 5.1.2.3.a of the PSAR provides that sampling of concrete shall be performed pursuant to ASTM C172. ' Therefore, in accordance with Ocetion 3 of ASTM C172, the concrete is sampled as it is dumped from the batch plant to th9 conveying vehicle.
Mr. Maxwell showed the inspector the results of tests performed during October 1969 and January 1970 where duplicate samples were taken from the batch plant and from the truck when the concrete was transferred to the placement bucket.
Generally, the results showed the slump values to be less (up to 1 inch) the pour site from that measured at the batch plant.
- Also, at when the samples were taken from the first part of the concrete discharged from the truck the slump values were generally higher than that measured at the batch plant.
A typical set of welues from samples obtained at the batch plant and then aga in
4
(
-o.
at the pour site is as follows:
Location Slump Stronnth-psi (60 day)
Batch plant 3h" 6420 6509 Pour site 4"
6385 6632 (First portion of batch)
According to Maxwell the procedure of sampling at batch plant
- provides a better method to assure consistency in the maufgt-uring of the concrete and provides a truer indication of the water cement ratio than if the procedure required sampling
'from the conveying vehicle at the pour site.
IIe stated that since the concrete is normally placed within 15 minutes from the time of manufacture, problems involved with segregation are corrected when the load is placed and vibrated in the forms.
b.
Piping Used For Pumped Conerote According to Mr. Carr, Atkinson uses transfer buckets for piscing concrete in the containment building.
lie stated that the construction peraonnel were aware of the problems involved with pumping concrete through aluminum pipe and that if in the future concretc were to be placed by pumping, aluminum pipe would not be used.
2.
Followup Observation of Vork a.
Slump. Strennth and Entrainment Tests During witnessing of concreto sampling, measurement of slump j
and air content and the ocking of the compressive test specimens, l
the inspector confirmed that the activities were performed in accordance with the following standards as prescribed in the i
PSAR and required by the contract specifications.
Standard Method ASTM Standard 1.
Sampling fresh concrete C-172 2.
Test for slump C-143 3.
Test for air content C-321 4.
Making and curing concrete compressive test specimens C 31 In addition to the above observ'tions the inspector confirmed a
through discussions with Mr. Maxwell that the "Standard Method for Compressive Strength of Molded Concrete Cylinders" ASTM-C39 is used to deteruine the strength of the manufactured
{
(
9 concrete.
During a previous visit, the inspector had j
witnessed actual operation of the testing apparatus.
Based j
on the previous operation and the current discussions with Mr.
I Maxwell, it appeared that the compressives strer.gths have l
been determined in accordance with the prescribed standard.
l b.
Proper QC Inspections In addition to the contractor inspectors, PC&2 maintains a staf f of inspectors who continually monitor the activities.of the contractors.
The inspectors are responsible to witnoss i
and confirm that the activities of the contractor conform to the contract specifications.
PG&E inspectors were observed to be witnessing activitics related to manufacture of concroce at the batch plant, and to placement at the pour site.
Also PG&E inspectors were observed witnessing the preparation an'd splicing of rebar to assure that the cadwelds were made properly.
3.
Special Concrete Manuf acture and Placement The first section of the vertical side walls of the containment are to be constructed by installing 12 inch wide flange beams (20 feet long) circumferentially around the containment liner.
The beams are positioned vertically and rest on the base mat. (Figu rc 5 shows the beams) The edge of the beams are to be located a distance of 12 inches f rom the liner place.
The concreto to be installed between the liner wall and the beams will be reinforced circumferential1y with steel hoop and diagonally by helicoidal bars (No. 18 reinforcing steel).
The licensee has approved a special concrete mix to be placed in the space between the flangos and the containment liner.
The mix was designed for a strength of 3000 psi; with the slump specified as 5 inches. The maximum aggregate size was specified to be 3/4 inch.
Mr. R. R. Friedrichs, Resident Civil Engineer, explained that the conditions of the pour had been reviewed with Design Engineering and contractor (G. F. Atkinson Co.) personnel.
According to Mr.
Friedrichs, all interested parties had concluded that the use of the special design mix, along with careful placement and vibration j
of the concrete, should result in quality concrete.
He stated I
that, since the pour space is limited to approximately 12 inches, the segregation that would occur should not be significant and that careful vibration should assure proper consistency of the Friedrichs indicated the increase in slump and vibration concrete.
should eliminate any significant voids.
However, as a crude check to assure against gross voids,. the quantity of concrete placed will be compared to the calculated volume of the space to be filled.
Subsequent to the discussionn and during the management interview, Friedrichs stated that consideration would be given as to whether or not to build a mockup section of the area and make a pour so j
that the resulting concrete could be analyzed.
4
(
l
.v.
E.
Other Class I Structures Pursuant to PI 3800/2, Attachment E, the liquid holdup tanks, gas decay.
canks and the steam generator supports were selected for review.
1.
Liquid Holdup Tanks Pittsburgh Des Moines Company (?Dh)is field fabricating the five liquid holdup canks described in Section IX of the PSAR.
The contract specifications for the tanks are attached as Appendix A.
a.
Review of QC Syste,m PDM's quality control ptagram was reviewed in depth in conjuction with installation of the containment liner.
From a discussion with Mr. tbiler, Assistant Quality Assurance Engineer, PDM, and a general review of PDM's procedures the inspector ascertained that applicable procedures were in effect to control the f abrication of the tanks.
Verification was made that the procedures covered the applicable inspection items concerning welding requirements listed in PI 3800/2 Attachment E (4805.04). Also, the inspector confirmed that appropriate QC procedures had been formulated and implemented and were consistent with the applicable inspection items under PI 5405.04 as shown in PI 3800/2.
b.
Followup Record Review PDM maintains construction wcld maps of the tanks.
The maps identify each picco of of material used in the construction of the tank, each weld and the weldor, and the NDT inspections (liquid penc trant of root pass and final, and the radiographic examination).
In addition, the map shows all areas which required repabr. The inspector chose at random on identified section of the shc11 plate and requested the backup records.
Mr. Muller was able from the information on the wcld map to retrieve with ease from the record files the following documents as requested by the inspector.
(1)
Overall stepwise construction procedure (2)
Approved weld procedures and weldor qualifications (3) Approved NDT procedure and qualifications of the NDT technicians i
(4)
Material certifications
~
f During the review of the records, the inspector confirmed that the recorded information uns sufficient to demonstrate that the tanks were being constructed in accordance with the specified requirement s.
For exampic, the inspector compared both the 1
chemical composition and physical characteristics of valves shown i
on several material certification reports with those proceribed in the code.
The valves were found to be within those specified in ASTM A-240.
The signature of a member of the PG&E quality control group was on the bottom of each certification.
l Mr. Carr indicated that the signature 1
l 1
indicated that the individual had reviewed the documents and that the content of the document was consi' stent with the s
prescribed specifications.
2.
Cas Decay Tank The six gas decay tanks for uso by both Units 1 and 2 were fabricated in Berkeley, California by the "orkeley Steel Construction Co.
The tanks nave been delivered to the site and stored in the area of the auxiliary building where they will later be installed.
A review of the contract specifications and the data package supplied by Berkeley Stect confirmed that the tanks had been construc-ted in accordance with the requirements prescribed in Section XI of the PSAR. The fabrication records showed that All materials were certified to comply with the specification a.
requirements. The shcIl plate material was certified to conform to the requirements of ASTM-285C F3.
An independent check by the inspector of the chemical and physical values shown on several certification reports confirmed that the material composition and characteristics conformed to the ASTM standards.
b.
The vessel was inspected by the stato code inspector and stamped.
A picture of the code stamp showed that the tank had been radiographed and heat treated.
The record of the heat treat-showed that the vessel had been treated at approximately ment 12000 F.
The root pass of all wolds was magnetic particlo tested c.
followed by a full radiograph examination of the completed i
Radiographic inspection was performed in accordance with the requirements of the ASME Loiler and Pressure Vessel Code,Section VIII subsection UW-51.
The magnetic particle examination was performed in accordance with ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section VIII Appendix VI.
d.
Weldors and weld procedures were qualified as required by the provisions of ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section IX.
t The tanks were hydrostatically tested at a pressure of 225 psi.
e.
(150% of design).
While in storage at the site, 5 psi. of nitrogen is being maintained in the tanks.
In addition to the above information confirmed by the inspector i
from the data package, the PC&E vendor inspection reports showed that the tanks had been fabricated under an approved Quality Assurance program and that the tanks had been constructed in accordance with the contract specifications.
The reports indicated that PG&E's inspector had visited the vendor's shop on approximately 10 occassions.
( In response to the inspector's query as to whether someone within PG&E had reviewed the entire data package to assure that the information in the documents were consistent with the various contract and code requirement, Mr. Carr checked with EnCineering, Inspectiori and Construction personnel and concluded that although several individuals had performed independent audits of random documents, no one had reviewed the entire package to assure the completeness and accuracy of the infor-ma tion conta ined therein.
3.
Steam Cencrator Sunnorts Guy F. Atkinson Company has installed the anchorage system for the steam generator supports. The Murphy Pacific Corpora tion has bec'n awarded the contract to fabricato and crect the supports.
Detailed information concerning Murphy Pacific 's procedures were unavailabic at the site during this inspection since Murphy Pacific personnel had not yet moved onto the site.
The anchorage system consists of a secc1 plato (ASTM-516) 4" x 8" x 1S" embedded two feet in the base r.at concrete and Caducided to the reinforcing steel.
This plato is joined by two-inch bolts (ASTM-490) to a plate 1" x 30" x 32" (ASTM-516) which forms a portion of the containment liner. The bolts do not pass through the plate, but are coupled to the plate by fittings welded to each side of the plato.
The noterial certification for both the plates and the bolts were reviewed by the inspector. A check of the inforcotion contained on the certifications confirmed that the material conformed to the specification prescribed by the pertinent ASTM Standards.
F.
Reactor Vessel The reactor vessel arrived in Alameda, California, during the week of June 22,1970. The vessel was unloaded at the Murphy Pacific dock where it will be stored until August, then transferred to the site.
Mr. Richards stated that the vessel is stored in a fenced arca and that a guard has been posted for security considerations.
he also stated that a temporary shed will be constructed over the vessel to protect it from adverse environment conditions and that fire protection provisioa-will be provided.
The Bigge Cranc and Rigging Company of San Leandro, Californis, has the responsibility for the handling of the vessel.
Mr. Erwin showed the inspector a dra f t of the procedure to be used by Bigge along with several commenta cade by the Construction Department.
Erwin stated the dra f t, along with the comments, had been forwarded to the responsible engineer in San l'rancisco, California, a nd tha t Bigge, Westing-house, Murphy Pacific personnel. and the responsibic engineering and construction personnel of PG6C not aad discussed the procedures in depth on June 22, 1970 prior to PG&E 's fori.11 approval of their use.
According to Richards, PG&E naintains surveillance of all activity concerning handling of the vessel. The inspector observed from the draf t that
13 although much of the procedure was general in nature, it appeared to be comprehensive in scope.
The comments made by the Construction Department personnel generally called for more detail concerning specific items.
C.
Cadweld Splicing, Inspection and Testinn The records of Cadweld splice testing were reviewed and the aplicing procedures were witnessed by the inspectors.
The records revicwed and the splicing operation witnessed were those involving the No.
18 size diagonal reinforcing steel in the cylindrical walls of the containment building.
(See Figuro 1)
The records revealed that 5 Cadweld operators had been qualified for splicing the No. 18 rebar in the diagonal (60 f rom horizonal) position.
The results of tensile tests conducted on qualification toit splices by each of the five operators showed that the splices developed a strength of a least 100,000 psi, which is in excess of the specified tensile strength (90,000 psi) for the bar being spliced.
The project records contained the results of the tensile testing of one production and one sister Cadweld splice which were made in the diagonal position using No. 18 robar.
The test results showed that these splices developed stress icvels of 100,000 psi and 95,750 psi, respectively, prior to failure of reicxation of the test load.
Tne inspectors witnessed the production of a Cadweld splice in the diagonal reinforcing steel for the reactor containment building.
The splicing procedure included the following steps:
1.
The bar ends were precleaned by sandblasting 2.
Tne bar ends were preheated tok 250 F with a gas torch 3.
The bar ends were cicaned to a rather bright surface appearance using a wire brush.
i 4.
Marks were applied 12 inches f ro:n the ends of the bars
~
to provide a reference for centering the splice sleeve.
- 5.
A square stock spacer was used to seperate the ends of the bar within the sleevo by approximately 3/16-inch. (The bars had been supplied by the mill with square-cut ends) 6.
The Cadweld powder was cgitated by the operator by rotating and shaking the plastic bag in which it was contained, to eliminate possible segregation or the powder material.
I 7.
A Pittsburgh Testing 7Aboratory inspector witnessed portions of the splicing operations.
i
a '
No deficiencies were observed while witnessing the splicing procedure or during a subsequent visual inspection of the finished splice by the inspectors.
I H.
Containment Building Steel Liner l
1.
Material Certification 1
During the previous inspection in March, 1970, the inspectors learned that the test coupons for the containment building liner plate material had been normalized, whereas the plate material 4
had been supplied in the "as rolled" (not normalized) condition.
This deficiency was contained in a Construction Doliciency Notification (CDN) issued to PG&E by CO:V on April 7,1970.
In response to the CDN, PG&E proposed, in a letter dated May 7, 1970, a program of corrective action which' involved the retesting of some plate materials and the heat treatment of other plato materials in 3
order to have representative tests for all place materials.
)
J Erection of the steel liner had progressed to include installation of the reactor pit, floor and five cylindrical wall rings.
The plates for cylincrical rings 1 throuLh 4, plus the floor and i
reactor pit liner are of material supplied by the mill in the "as rolled" condition.
The platos for cylindrical rings 5 through 14 are of material which ind been returned to the mill and undergone normalising heat treatment. The records showed that a total of
{
119 plates were normalized by the U. S. Steel, Provo, Utah mill 1
on April 6-7, 1970.
For those plates which were normalized, the original tests results have been accepted by PC&E sinco this material was heat treated j
in a manner similar to the origional test specimens. The results
'of an audit of the origional mill tests reports by our inspector 1
were contained in the report of our inspection in March,1970.
In 3
a letter dated May 14, 1970, the U. S. Steel Corporation confirmed 1
that the 119 plates of steel were heat treated in a continous norm-i
- alizing furnace at the temperature specified for the origional test coupons (1650*F) for 30 minutes per inch of stack height.
For those plates of material which were not normalized by the mill, the following retesting program had been completed, according to 1
i the records.
For all material in the floor plates, test coupom, were prepared from mill trimaings which were traceable to the heats
]j involved.
For cylindrical rings 1 through 4, test coupons were obtained from the finished plates (See Figure 2). According to i
the records, coupons were prepared and retested for all of the l
above materials at the U. S. Steel, Provo, Utah mill during March and April, 1970.
i CO Report 50-275/70-1, dated April 3, 1970, pages 20-22
(
(,
5-The material in Cylindrical ring No. I was selected for detail review of the retesting results by the inspector.
The plates for this ring had been prepared frca 5 heats of material, for which a ' summary of the test results are given in Table 1.
Table 1 - Physien1 Pronerties Reported, by USS - Containment Liner Plates Rinn 1 Heat No.
Yield Point, poi Tensile Strennth, psi Elonn. in 8-in % Innact. Ft-Lbs*
91E668 42,900-47,500 70,700-77,700 23-30 29-99 99E360 44,300-48,000 73,000-78,600 19-28 40-140 97E441 46,100-47,400 78,200-78,800 22-23 17 93E427 46,500 75,700 24 38 94E352 44,200-45,900 72,700-74,800 19-26 16-38
- - Average of 3 tests at +20'F.
The summary of physical properties shown in table 1 are within the limits required by the governing specification, ASTM A516, Grado 70, with impact properties of at least 15 foot-pounds average at a test temperature of + 20 F.
. 2.
Liner Plate b'eldinn and Nondestructive Testinn The quality control records relatt ng to the erection, welding and nondestructive testing of the containment building liner were reviewed, tours of the velding area were made and discussions relat-ing to these activities were held with Messrs. Rasmussen, Brady, Carvin and Maher.
The following information and observations resulted.
The reactor pit liner was selected by the inspector for review of the nondestructive testing of weld seams.
The records which were reviewed included the following:
a) Magnetic particle test reports b)
Radiographic inspection reports
)
c) Vacuum box testing reports,
d)
Checklists for veld joint fit-up.
e) PC&E Field Engincer's daily logbooks f) Working field drawings (p'.climinary weld maps)
. Collectively, the records showed that the required quantity of nondestructive testing had been conducted during erection and welding of that portion of the steel liner (reactor pit) reviewed.
l The contract requires 107. radiography or, for those weld seams where radiography is not possible,107. augnetic particle or dye penetrant inspection of the weld seams in the steel liner. All seams are also required to be 1007. vacuum box tested at a vacuum i
of 5 psi and Icak chase teated at b47 psi.
i l
The records revealed that the weld joints in the reactor pit liner had been subjected to a 1007. magnetic particle inspection. Also, l
according to the records, the vertical and horizontal seams in the i
l first two cylindrical rings of the liner had been 1007. radiographed.
j Approximately 507. of the horizontal weld scam which joins rings 3' and 4 had been radiographed.
In response to the inspector's inquiry, Messrs. Brady and Maher stated that PG6E had required 1007. magnetic particle or radiographic inspection of these veld joints because the contractor (PDM) had failed to maintain adequate records and i
checklists regarding joint fit-up.
While touring the containment building area, the inspector observed an excessive amount of reinforcement on some weld joints which had been radiographed. Measurements by the inspector revealed that at several locations on scam welds 2H and 3H (the second and third horizontal weld joints in the cylindrical portions of the liner) the reinforcement was as much as 1/8-inch.
(See Figure 3).
These measurements were made in the presence of Mr. Brady.
The plate thickness at each of the scam welds was 3/8-inch. The governing
- code for radiographic inspection of the lind_e.r, AS12,Section VIII, Paragraph IM-51, limits the thickness of reinforcement to 1/16-inch for plate thickness up to 1/2-inch. This deficiency was discussed at the time of the Management Interview. At this time Mr. Hersey stated that all seam welds which had been radiographed would be reinspected by PG&E, and that those which had an excessive reinforce-ment thickness would be ground and re-radiographed.
I.
Weld Rod Control
~
During the previous inspection in March,1970, apparent weaknesses were observed in the impicmentation of procedures for the care and control of low hydrogen veld electrodes,
2C0 Report 50-275/70-1, dated April 4, 1970, pages 22-23.
i
(
c,
?
Observations during the current inspection revealed no deficiencies with i
regard to the care and control of theso materials.
Signs had been l
posted within the welding area which cautioned operators in the carc of weld rod (see Figure 2).
It was also observed that holding ovens for the electrodes had been repositioned such that they are now within the welding ares. The ovens had been equipped with thermometers, which was not the case at the time of the previous inspection.
J.
Material Storage and Identification I
The inspectors, together with Messrs. Carr, Murin, Erwin and Garvin, visited the PG&E warehouse and storage arca in Pismo Beach, approximat.cly 10 miles south of the Diablo Canyon site.
The warehouse and storage yard at this location is being operated by the Biggo Cranc and Rigging Company under contract to PC&E. A PC4.E inspector (Mr. Arnold) is assigned to the area, and when questioned by the inspectors stated hc performs receiving and routine surveillance inspections. Such inspections are aimed principally at determining any damage to equipment during shipment and proper maintenance of equipment in storage, according to Mr. Erwin. The inspector confirmed froc. the inspection records that the approved receiving and storage procedures were being impicmented.
Two observations by the inopectors were the subject of particular discussion with PC&E representatives.
It was observed that the Westinghouso-supplied primary loop piping was stored in the yard. Although the ends of the pi ing were covered and taped, no protective covering was otherwise P
provided. The inspectors inquired of Messre. Carr and Garvin as to what consideration had been given to the inside storage or other protection of these or other stainless steel materials at both Pismo i
Beach and the Diablo Canyon site.
Specific reference was made to the "salt air" environment at both locations and their proximity to the t
ocean (see Figure 4).
Mr. Garvin said that he had inquired of the PG&E i
Engineering Department about this matter, and was informed that no i
special environmental protection measures were necessary for this material.
At the time of the Management Interview, Mr. horsey informed the inspectors that stainicas steel components at the Diablo Canyon site are to be either stored in a warehouse or covered with plastic or other suitable packaging materials.
He said that similar provisions would 1:3 i
considered for the components at the Pismo Beach storage area.
The inspectors also observed that indentation stamping had been employed I
in identifying the main loop piping.
Some of the interrupted-dot stamps were observed to penetrate rather deeply into the surface of the pipe.
The inspectors inquired as to whether these stamps were of a low stress j
type. De PG&E representatives stated that they were ill prepared to i
answer the inquiry because they had no tools for determining this fact, At the time of the Management Interview, Mr. Garvin stated that tools J
were to be ordered so that measurements could be made to determine if the stampings were of a low stress type.
i
(
(
(
, t i
K.
Possible Compromise of Containment Spray System Effectiveness i
While touring the containment building. the inspector. observed that the interior surfaces of all liner seam welds are to be covered with : 2-inch structural steel channel (see Figure 2).
The inspector inquired as to the possible effect these channels might have in impairing the effective-ness of the containment spray system in washing the walls of fission products or other radioactive contaminants following an accident.
In-this regard, the following statement from the PSAR for Disblo Canyon, Unit No. 2 Paragraph 6.33, was called to the attention of the PG&E j
representative.
"...In addition to depressurization, the spray system will be effective in scrubbing fission products from the containment atmosphere. Also, condensation and spray striking the surface -
of the steel liner will generate a liquid film which will act as a barrier to leakage....However quantitative credit is taken i
only for absorption of reactive and/or soluble forms of iodine in the analysis of the hypothetical accident..."
At the time of the Management Interview, Mr. Hersey stated that the inspector's observation would be called to the attention of the design engineers for their evaluation.
L.
Discrepancy Control I
3 During the previous inspection, the licensee indicated that the wording ambiguity in the discrepancy report procedure concerning itema exempt l
from the formal reporting requirements would be clarified. On June 5, 1970, the official PG&E Quality Assurance procedure was published. The procedure is 15 pages in length and appeared to comprehensively and clearly express the current practices in use. The ambiguity discussed previously was eliminated by the following provision in the procedure, "Departures from requirements which are minor ir. nature and can be g
t corrected in the normal course of work are not to be considered as discrepancies. Such departures require no special action beyond satis-faction of the inspector....In case of doubt, a departure from require-
)
i nents should be classified as a discrepancy and resolved in accordance with this procedure." Attached as Appendix B of this report is a diagram
)
showing the route of reports for resolution of discre'pancies.
3 M.
In Section 3 of CO Report No. 50-275/69-4 the inspector reported that contrary to the general description of the containment building provided in Section 5.1.2 of the PSAR, the. containment liner anchor studs would be straight rather than the described L shape. The L-shaped studs were i
designed to hook around the reinforcing steel. At a later date the inspector learned that the design had been changed to include the L-shaped J
During the current inspection the inspector observed that the stude.
L. shaped stude were being installed as described in the PSAR.
f
(
~
VOZZlf $t:
'b'n,;f#hr$'),s t. sr; l'Y !r...ul[
- Il 0 f# VI##
(.W M h ) 1 N.l! / l [ h$ld4')$ O W i
4, TANY OL/7L f 7 N.?l /
4'$5H453 BW pb "a}l.f TANK /NL f7 N3
/
3' SCN 40$ BW
\\
_,, Cflo'ff VAL Vf N.4
/
t' 3000* }f[
",g,*y TA Mr /Nif 7
\\
[29,2771T7tTsi~GWie us i
e 3000~ gt, vcur l
MS
/
)* 3000* } s.w usas e
ei u$s.g r<m ~ r g,7 g
y.
yggy a j $W 4
N/O U M L M
4W.UB MMJtFMfM usa s low L *WL l
n'8 E
3000 a l(*s w
- n e
\\g"l[],.8URM GGWNI-1 aid.st
}'3000*flhs N.9
/.
SAMPLZ fifMfMT l
'I I
\\
u.ii a is iso".vna yM*1"W" ""~
i 880m j
i g
..I
_ i_ t.8 __-
> 2 N
I
', jl r
~"
h--
[
1, i-. ->- J i
4 t
al 4
i l
D f.jl,%
j_
e; p,-
ca e
,, u,,
e k
A.
.'O
.'e.
E* i.r) t~
Ls i
w,
'4 kW)
}
m,.,
- f. o *
\\\\em
' 's N
l%
\\ \\,
43*
D i'\\\\
'l l
\\
u.s N
a
/$ *
'i.
l
?
15
- e --
}
l
'n A
8 I
o, y
'i
'.o i\\
i
D
'nj-- A-q_'.,-t.4.d.
I N0ZZLC OR/CNTATION (T/P/ Cal) q y
er sl-. %,,
.r;w
,Y
'S ;;
$.h*
l
, a o n w.o*
02's'o It vu v
ro s,iir msict r.
t
/
re ccouroue sit }
.seier supocar a
[, etre w DCTAlt. "A.
\\
e ro c(nn fte)th.4S;4' i
- ,... n,'
SITE $DlX A ( ll l
,,o,'
m p,:
~ -
l
. r:,t.-
.. -. -..., ~..
_$v v av _ i r. **w-
'^*
UNJTS i A 2
?"""" "
- ,"; [ggfyg[
- e.
~~~-
REQUIREMENTS FOR LIQUID HOLD UP TANK y"aunriv I'
DIABLO CANYON g..".."..."..'**.m, o,
3 3.'69 PACWICT$bAYD bLibb!b. d'DMPANY f %%*%
o* s
==4 NONE e. = e...c w o s.. e n. =.
L
( APPENDIX A) 2 1.0 CENFRAL SPFCI FICATIONS
1.1 Service
Liquid Hold-Up Tank l
1.2 Arrangement
In accordance with inn. No.
049025, Sh. 1 1.3 capacit;:
83,220 gal - Nominal Cross
1.4 Contents
Radioactive hora ted reac tor coolant ls 1.5 !.oca tion : Indoors - Ambient temperature 110*F Maximum. 50*F Minimum l
1.6 De s i gn, fabrica te, test, and inspect in aes.ordance with ASX:: Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code. latest edition.Section III. Class C.
Compliance with i N-2113 in required. Tank may contain lethal fluid. Code stamp required.
(
2.0 DESIGN CONDITIONS 2.1 Design Pressure: Internal 15 psig, External atmospheric l
2.2 Design Temperature: 200*F
(
2.3 Hydrostatic Test Pressure:
Code 2.4 Seismic Design: Class I y
Seismic Detign Accelerations:
Horizontal 0.20 n, Vertical 0.13 g j
)
3.0 MATERIAL REQUIREMENTS t
3.1 Shell n
3.2 Support Skirt ASDI A-240 Type 304, hot rolled,.nneated and j
3.3 Heads pickled 3,4 Manway Necks
- e 3.5 Manway Flanne 3.6 Manway' Blind Flanne.
- ASDf A-181 F304 l
1 3.7 Nozzles
)t 4.0 WE1. DING AND WELD FAMINATION
,d 4.1 All tank welds shall be full penetration butt uelds.
)
4.2 Welders and Welding Procedures shall be qualified in accoriance with the g
latest edition of the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code,Section IX.
4.3 full radiographic examination of welds is required.
Radionaphic exaraination }
procedure and acceptance shall be in accordance with the latest edition of the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, Section Vill. Ap?cndix IV and paragraph UW 51.
j 4.4 All root passes, a f ter backgrindin;;. and all :inal held sur.'.eces on aus teni-i i
i tic stainleu steel cmponents shall be liquid penetrant exa nined. Liquid penetrant examination precedure and.neceptance shall be in accordance with l
)
the latest edition of the ASME Loller and Pressure Vessel r. de, Section \\ aI, l
)
Appendix VIII.
{
t All final weld surfacer on ferromar,netic comaenents shall ':e magn 4.5 ticle exainined.
be in accordance with the latest edition of the ASMC Boiler and Pressure vessel Code,Section VIII. Appendix VI.
APPEN3'.X A (2) i
(
FNITS 1 f. 2
}
s m..cmo av <
i l
i i
s ce.e, Dats e t
T o
g g gn
-a.
h'N "
_F_Ha'l REQUIRDIENTS FOR LIQUID C01D-l'P TANK M
" '" S m." * " " 2 s,cre..
s_
1 m-c p;,
i-l
.at m.arAnto.7y new DIABID CANYON C'm. m
..r...'
)~ox f
9n
.L..P o ' - a rJ.w/J,y PACS,%dr,cEk',,0
/.
J....' ; G I S /* a o r* ;
wais
.ca6s
I i
k,
~
TlILE ON-SITE DISCREPANCIES NO PRC-12 I
' Page 'll of 15 DIAGRAM SHOWING ROUTE OF REPORTS FOR' RESOLUTION OF DISCREPANCIES Inspector Rejects an item i
of equipment, a l
procons, etc.
I Inspection lCoord _ Qual. Cont. Encr.
Ro p,or t l
(Supplies report numbers _
- 1 9
Resident Engineer i
a_nd Innnector(jointly)
Field Engincors 4
Decide whether Ucviation Rooponsible Engineer or Minor Variation, abEObMaterialReviewBoard Preparo Inspection Section J0thces of appropriate report j
s Minor Variation Report) Deviation Report u
e Residenf Annineer
' Material Review Board Determines disposition Recommends disnosition Co
- "py to lCoord. Qual.
y " 1Contr. Ener.
C
{Coord. Qual.'
If rev rk
- -- <= Contr. En cr.
inspector Responsib1'c Engincer Accepts Otherwise
,Approvce recoscendation new work of Material Review Md.
s
'1 Tf rework Coordinating Quali ty Control Ener.
F Fosts log of Minor Variation Rep.'
Inspector
, Distributes copies & files report Acceptu _
Otherwise new work
,l, 1
92~5roinatinn Quaiity control 'nor.i Adds steps to prevent recurrence Posts log of Deviation Reports
, Distributes copics & files report APPENDIX D i
(,
i
.7 m
3*
~....
s..-- :
, q' l
m.
,f i
'l
\\
t h.
i 1
l l
r.
}
i f~%
j l
.4.
t 6
1
+ a.
1 g g,,....
~.. _. 2..e
...m.u..
,d
_~,s-1.e..
1
-.m A
...-.-.,~2..
l
,, 1,,,,...
I 5
i w
FICURE 1 = Diar,onal Reinforcing Stcul for Diablo Canyon Unic No.1 Containment Building i
ry q,
i
!I,
! \\.
l
?
t t
t I
l
.~,.....,,4
....,..e~o**
,,.. m.,.x
.i 1.
i i
t l
1 i
l r
L i
1 i
i i
i 4
l
- ~...... = =.e w w..
1_.
i FICUtte 2 Contaiwacnt Duilding Luiec, Diablo Canyou, L;att
.c.1 (;;oto in Center of l'hotograph Wru Coupons woro Nwoved for Ntcos of the Liner &corial 4
I
(
(
t
/
\\-
l i
i 1
e L
N
}
f i
i f
g 4
J l.
t 1
1 4
i 1
f t
t
- i f
1 i
i 1
(
/
j*
{
weed FICURE 3 - Liner Plate Sena Woldo, Disblo Canyon, Unic No.1.
i Tao l
Rainforcement Tnicknes.s was I:xcessivo in Somo Locationc l
1 1,
.l t
j
'./
' (~1 l
/
('
' j I
\\/
4
, L,g,;.
.t l
?'.
_ g '.
l 4.
I (.Ul. l' I
e; "I-i,.
'~
j
- ,y
- j'y
.3
- J '
4
,6 ' '...
y,,,,
N "., _.
s i
.,;s i
t..
.t.
. t <},yt.:.,-.. :, m...a ;
t
'?,
- y 4..-
i t
';.. l, t i ' $ 1/l'.
--Q
' d.
.e.:.. :s.4..~, 'd. h a ~ '
- ,ph
- b' o.
1 p., *.1.. n' '
~t.
n s-s 1
I r-i
.\\
,1 4,
- k. 3 g
e 2
1 i
%.....e I
TICURE 4 = Diablo Canyon Construction Sitg.
(Note Close Proxiuity to Ocean)
.f O
e i
4
=
{
i J
e t
j g.-.,
s,,,,
la\\/s
.t.
.f
..,- l i
t
, ~... _. - - -
i
.....~.
y Y.
g p ~,, f+* 7'.;;. ','. *,
. -+ - _-. :,; _,.,.c,.., 7 {
1. s..N.,.
e. ~,,,,,,, ',. n ; -
~ ;!
h,.
e.%
l
,....~. (
/
.C_
r
(,r p.,.,~.
. s
+..
~~
.w c
t
.~====*e f.Q f
f L1 1
t
}.
t TICURE 5. Wide Flont,o Deams to be Installed in the Base Section of the vertical walls of the Couu.in:acac Luilding.
e 4
e 9
4 t.
e 9
g 9
0
I l
\\
l h
1
\\
- ~.,
~
,9,.
i
~6 t
l i
w*
i j
2
" 'l w
t
. s.-
n l
I 4,.,
I g
FICURE 3 - Liner Plate Sea:n Welds, Diablo Canyon, Unit No.1.
The Reinforcement Thickness was Excessive in Some Locations
?'
V
~
i
- L5 h.
- ,.T...
G,.; JSi l^
' k. ' "*
N FICURE _4 Diablo Canyon Construction site.
(Note Close Proximity to Ocean)
)
i
I s
\\
y,Y'yg
r j d..
g v.
i
.V V V Y g' N' \\ ', '. '
i d
VVVVY V\\\\ \\
g ( \\ V V \\, Y N y '. \\
s,
\\ '
syv-g y
i 5 ) \\. ) )
- i 5
i \\fs '
,s l
syv5s\\\\ f ss\\\\
l s
4
,.is s,
\\\\
', \\
l
..Is
,s'
.N.
~'
y e
N 3
we 2
i4
~.
l I
)
FICUltE 1 - Diagonal Reinforcing Steel for Diablo Canyon Unic No.1 i
j Containment Building 1
l 8
i i
j
.m n e.u w e
.a v,,mo se
. - < = = =
\\
i J
J FICURE 2 - Containment Building Liner. Diablo Canyon, Unit No.1 (Note in Center of Photograph Where Coupons were Removed for Retest of the Liner Material
,,,__nn_
.(f f
I l
i I
l I
l M
~ a.. a
? r:
I
~
?
C
~
i l
)
FICURE 5. Wide Flange Beams to be Installed in the Base Section of the j
j vertical valls of the Containment Building.
I I
i i
c, i
i l
i I
i i
L..
7,
.m. "-.; r.-.-.
_..c.
. ~~.
.., ~ - : e sa s.
-. ~ ~
~. ~..
--*-~s.-..~.
,,s..,
e
.n.
.1 g
1 '
-- s U.
i2
- 1
- 3. ;.
w.J.=
t-g w
C I
'l a 2 1
e g
I
- I
.i 1
r, ;j
- a, i
. =
,s y 2:
b
..i
[
W 8r
',(
I 1:
e 3:
3 Q9e
_e n _ --".
g
. se i f],
4
!i r
I 1 I a:
I
- e ~
I g
q g
3 i
i A
I l
i t
i
{
I i
5$
f.
jl-
- V y
i x i
=
i
}
O W
[
(
i
. a y
5 8>
i o
4 1
u D
l l
f I
4 I. ;.
t
-m.
- g e
g
{
i i a
3 w
9 M
ee em 72.5 I
i.
s.
a d 5..
}
e*
t.
1
.a W
==
- 1. 5 1 "2
I d.
- ~~\\
5 i i
-i E
1 2
2 1 1
~
4' l
ii 1 A
h
N'g Q
wg ywy g
&MNM m=
1M1Mgygq_
e l
.t g
i "l
1 I
m 1
. 3 I
0 1
I i
i l
I e
I t u L
}
i b
i O
I I
a t
s.
7 I
g
.m g
y 3., : _q_
.i 2 4 1
3 3
~
h s
w O
e e
d e
)
l I
I :
1 W
g t
I
{
=
w 1 :
e4 I
t 1
l i
/
(
4
- "A 9
.a y
2 n,
13 a
1 s
n3 "
J g ~ *1 4
at
(? 4 a1
=
s.
th
'i l
d f
e.
4
~
.s.i.l; 7 I
k a
- 6 '
o.;
6 a.
f, 44 g
6 e~.
d t
[
r
(
\\
s I
i
[ ',
Fig. lA l
QC Organization i
~
for Nondestructive Examination j
QUALITY C0h'rROL Floyd Sewell, Mgr i
i
~
t
-=
~
BADIOGRAPilIC DYE PE!ETRAlif
!%GNETIC PARTICII ULTRASONIC EXA!!IISTION EXAMINATION 1'
EXA!!ItaTION EXAMI!MTION I
Potcuan i
J. Martin f.evel TI:
Level II:
ifval II:
Lovel II:
J. Stainocher J. Hartin J. Ilartin J. Martin i
V. Votaw J. Steinocher J. Steinocher S. Sewell C. 1(hito V. Votsw l
B. Malik B. Sitka S. Scwo11 A. Fried
!B.Malik J. faci III; F. Sewell l
J. 1:a'it ir.
s
~~l 1
1 l
J 1
II 4
i Il e
a as if Exhibit C Par,e 1 er 1
t i.
n r-v q
e-
-=
q
- y i
g
<_e i<.
,i a
i 3
3 3_ J I'l01 t
~
=
=-
i 3
l i
i t
I 4
3 I
i 1
. h.F ',
i y,
o 3
p i
vc e
I i l, a_
5 l
[
j
[
2,,,
g 3
l
[
l l i
i-
- g,; ;
i 3
}"
.i
.s : i
~
i i
i 3
i "I,
t-- ', '
' - - "'"*i ;
j-
- 1
. }
'ar
o i
ry e, ii:
I l, l. l i i i.: i 1
- !i t
_ _u
. 7.
2,-1,
,I i.
I 4
i
.. +
n, 2
i 3
-l I
j--
i 1
! i i _,
i y'
a gax l
_ j )._
i, _ j
.iij!
x i
a 1 7,_.d.
i i.
i s$ <
1
.,t.r..
i I
i j
j p__{..,__
{
j
}-
[_ j j l;. l
^
s l
I i
l l
i 4
.}
}
.p..{ : ;
g
- ki
,t l
l t
(.',., l l
g g
j l gl-s-
D j
y e
1
,l i
I 1
i
.i.r. 3.[ ti.:
i :
i ; I
- ! 1
's
..E.._
i q
4 t
o". $.
1 l !
I t I
v 9
I
! i L
, i.i a
i l
l
+ -.
1
]
P $.s
.s l
ll l l l
1 y
J
- .....ai i
i 1
e i
-l:l-
=
... s... ;
4i.
,x i
i 1
....i,ng r g ~7 71},f 1 ij li M i M,i aus a en[ ll U 't7 f ~i i
T TT
--f"7 3 }
yi
- p;
-L1 4."e 'dini h p F.\\Iu g ii li II rHa.i e,i
- e,_c i _i..e_a s,_
li i iy u,
n.m_q_,.rf,.gr p,1
,ij 3
g b
,3
)
)
- 3. _-T rF ;
n m_-
4 e
A r
.ri l
.r rt i
G i
d4 ed i
j!
f i
a,, M.
o o
d i
! i 4
i ;
l s
a L
1 y
1
.? <.
t
. t e_
.3 i,3 p:
t t ?.
t i
C I
-I t
i i, ; *.
i
- d
'J
.I O}i:
1::;
- l. r : + 12 i
e.
J li. i!i.,
i g
t A;v : :
i p,
[
[
pi p
l p.!'
! (t :
- 1. ; I E : I!..!Jl p ::-
i 3,
t
- t;
,1 a e
~.1
...3 4 r, *1
- u..
1 j
1 J. 1 s. J.
3 1
i:
a 2
.c
- e..,
i._..
4, i
o r
i :.;
c r.
y t
' i :* v '.' *.$.
[~.d.
I' }. ';
- *lg *k 1
.2
,i t
I,' *i
- L '..J..
I t
N.
a
~
g
- L ;
i 4;3 d. ; ;t *-
eg,
.v
- -.. 14
- 1 ( E? 4 l A i' b.4 ih i
t-
- 4 g fit -. ry ti i
- ; ;
3 ~*
1 '.: :
'N 1
g, gt -
s!g" '5E 1
I I
g 1 i
g)5 a
U.'.l..n,L :I k i
i k
i th A
C 1
2 m.
+w
.e
~
.