ML20154E684
Text
..
U. S . ATOMIC ENERGY C010 FISSION
, DIVISION OF C0YJLIANCE REGION V I
Report of Inspection I
. CO Report No. 50-275/70-1 Licensee: Pacific Cas & Electric Company Construction Permit No. CPPR-39 Category A Date of Inspection: March 2-5 and 12, 1970 Date of Previous Inspection: September 16, 1969 Inspected by: 'k
- /!? 70 ;
A. D. Jo' nson * '
Reactor Inspector (In-charge) kE' 'b 14vf sy' /hp
~
J. L/ Crews Rocctor Inspector Reviewed by: .
\1 C % G % 8 /70 G. S. Spcheer Senior Reactor Inspector i
Proprictory Information: None l i
SCOPE l l
Type of Facility: Pressurized Water Reactor -
Pnuer Level: 3250 Mac Lnention: Diablo Canyon, San Luis Obispo County, California Type of Inspection: Routine - Announced
]
Acenmpanytnet Personnel: , G. S. Spencer, March 5, 1970 8005250290080510 IL 8-156 PDR.
Senne af Inspection: Pursuant to PI-3800/2; Attachment C-Containment, followup record review and observation of work pertaining to concrete, rebar and liner of the containment building was performed. Also the review included information concerning the installed concrete of the auxiliary building.
SinTARY Safetv Tecms - None Mnnennfntmance Item - Contrary to the requirements of Section 5.1.2.3.(c) of the P3AR, the test specimens used to determine the physical character-istics of the liner plate material were normalized whereas the plate material being installed was found to be in the as rolled condition (not normalised).
Section 9.1 of ASTM A-516, the PSAR referenced requirement, prescribes that "for plates 1% inches and under in thickness not requiring heat treat-monts, the test specimens shall be prepared for testing from the material in its rolled candition." A construction deficiency notice will be sent to the licensee concerning the nonconformance item. (Section H)
Status af Previnusiv Rennrted Prnhiems
- 1. The weakness noted in the contractor's quality control procedure for documentation confirming that adequate personnel and equipment are availabic before concrete placement operations are performed has been remedied by adding an appropriate provision to the QC inspector's checklist. Similarly, provisions have also been added to the inspector's checklist to show that proper curing procedures are used by the contrac-tor. (Section C.1)
- 2. The procedures concerning nonconforming components and/or materials have been revised to cicarly delineate responsibilitics and approval authority for final disposition. This approval authority now rests with the Engineering Department of PG&E. However, the wording of the I procedure concerning minor discicpancies handled by ordinary QC I procedures was not cicarly de/ Aned. (Section Z.)
l other Sinnificant Tecms l l
- 1. The overall status of construction was reported to be 4.57 completc ' tith !
157 completion of the auxiliary building and 107. completion of the - !
containment building. I i
2 The quality assurance control progran as it relates to construction activities appeared to be comprehensive and effectivo in detectine, ennstruction variations from prescribed requirements. However, the system of documenting corrective action was found to lack ready retrieving capability. Also a system to assure that audits of activitics are performed on a timely basis had not been foruulated.
Since the inspection, both of these observctions have been remedied as discussed in the canagement interview on March 12, 1970. (Soction 3.2)
3
- 3. The records concerning concretc were found to be complete and adequate to show that the concrete placed in the Class I structures to date has conformed to the applicablo PSAR and contract requirements. (Section-C.2) 4 A procedure has been implenented to assure that all construction variations from design are appropriately resolved and reported to the Engineering Department. (Section E.) ,
S. According to the licensec, aluminum pipes are not used in connection with concrete placement.
- 6. Two heats of reinforcing steel were found to be of low strength and rejected from use in the containment building base mat. The low strength ,
condition was revealed during testing of Cadweld splices after the steel had been installed in the concreto forms. Subsequent investigation by.
PG&E revealed that the mill had rolled the bar under nominal size. A change in the mill process increased the size of the steci subsequently supplied to the project. (Section-F.2)
- 7. The records concerning reinforcing steel were found to be complete and adequate to show that the reinforcing steel placed in the contain-ment base not conformed to the applicabic PSAR and contract specifica-tion. (S ec tion-F. )
4
- 8. Our inspector observed two open cans of electrodes unattended in the weld area. This practice is contrary to the contractor's procedure i covering the use and care of low hydrogen c1ccerodes. t.s a result of this observation, PG&E has increased the frequency of their QC audit in this area (containment building liner) to twice weekly. (S ec t ion-I . )
tbnanenent Interview - m - M ee Subsequent to the inspection on Ibrch 5 the Inspectors met with Messrs.
Hersey and Richards and other members of both the QA and General Construction nrganizations. The items discussed were the same as detailed below under the
, corporate of fice meeting held on >bech 12, 1970 i
bbnagement Interview - Corporate Of fice l
The inspectors act at the PG&E corporato of fices with PG&E Vice Presidents Worthington and Sedom, Messrs. Kelly, Richards, Chandler, Bettinger end several other members of the PG&E Engineering and General Construction Departments on March 12, 1970 to review the results of the inspection. The following items were discussed:
- 1. Reinfarcinn Steci Quality The inspectors stated that the manner and timing by which sub-quality rebar was detected and subsequently rejected (Cadweld testing af ter the secci uns placed in the concreto forms) was significant, and in-quired as to whether there might be additional heats of rutorial of similar quality within the structurc.
I
F The response by PG&E personnel was that neither the tests of reinforcin:;
steel, some of which (on robar si cs #14 and GIS) were conducted by the PG6E testing lab at the site, nor Cadweld testing, also conducted by the PG&E testing lab at the site, had revealed evidence of the sub-quality of additional heats of steel. The fact that a change was made in the_ mill process, such that the cross sectional arca of the reinforcing steel was increased, was also af fered by ?G&2 representa-tives as additional assurance of greater strength of the seccl.
- 2. Validity nf Physient Test Recultn - Cantainrent Buf 1dinc T,inor The inspectors stated that heat treatment of the test specimens of the liner material in a manner differently than the plate material itself.
was contrary to the requirements of the material specification, ASTH A-516, and inquired as to the correctivo action planned by PG52.
Several alternatives were discussed by ?C&2 representatives, including the preparation of test specimens from plate trimmings, preparation of test specimens from the material circady installed, heat treating (normalizing) which the test specimens had been subjected to, or a combination of the above alternatives. In response to the inspectors specific inquiry, Mr. Bettinr,cr stated that the material would be ecsted in accordance with the governing material specification (ASTM r A-516). -
It was revealed in tae above discussion that the total number of heats of material involved is approximately sixty. Some of the material is still at the mill and other portions are at the PDM shop, in addition to that which has been shipped to the Diablo Canyon site.
The inspectors informed the PG&O representatives that they should expect written correspondence from CO:V on this subject.
- 3. Wcld Rnd Contrni The inspectors stated that observations at the time of the inspection ,
showed apparent weaknesses in the impicmontation of procedurcs covering the care and control of low hydrogen wcld electrodes. Mr. Richards stated that, as a result of these observo: inns, audits of the welding area by the PG&E QC staf f are to be increased from weekly to twice ucckly.
De said, also, that thermometers are to be installed in the ucid rod holding ovens to permit closer monitoring of oven temperatures, a 4, cadweld operator Ao-ouali fic.-t inn 1
In response to the inspector's question regarding re-qualification of inactive Cadweld operators Pr. Richards stated chat the qualificacions of a Cadveld operator are to be re-enamined if he has not been engaged in welding operations for a period of time prcater than 90 days, l,
( -
Re-qualification vill include the tensile testing of the first Cadweld made by the operator upon his return. to welding activity.
- 5. D,enmentatian of Fn11nvue Actinn nn OA Audit Deficicneios In reply to the inspoetors' comment that documentation related to resolution of deficiencien observed during PG&E QA oudies was not readily retrievabic, Mr. Richard stated that a policy has been impicmented whereby the department charged with resolving a noted discrepancy will respond in writing to the QA Section in a timely manner and that the written response will then be filed with the original audit report.
6 Schedulinn of Periodic OA Audits i
Mr. Richards provided a tentative schedule of PC&E's planned QA audit program in response to the inspectors' comment that although the frequency of QA audits appeared to have been timely in the past, no apparent effort had been made to develop a schedule to assure that audits continue to be made on a timely basis.
[
Mr. Richards stated that the audit plan had been developed shortly after the current onsite inspection.
A. Persons Cnntacted J. D. Worthington -
Vice-President, Engineering Department r C. H. Sedam -
Vice President. General Construction Department D. V. Kelly -
Project Engineer l M. H. Chandler -
Manor.cr, Scotion Construction W. R. Ilersey -
Project Superintendent R. R. Friedrichs -
Resident Civil Engineer W. R. Forbes -
Supervising Inspection Engineer R. V. Dettinger -
Civil Engineer l G. V. Richards -
Director, Quality Engineering L. G Carr -
Quality Assurance Engineer J. L. Murin -
Quality Assurance Engineer
- F. W; Brady -
Quality Assurance Engineer L. J. Garvin -
Quality Assurance Engineer P. L. Bussolini -
Quality Control Engineer (Civil)
D. ?bxwell -
Civil Engineer (concrete Testina Laboratory) ~
W. N. Harris -
Qualicy Assurance Enc,incer, G. F. Atkinson Co.
H. Nunes -
Quality Assurance Engineer, G. F. Atkinson Co.
G. Mendez -
Quality Control supervisor, Pittsburgh-Dec Moines Steel Co. (PDM)
J. Vouri -
Quality Control Supervisor, Pittsburgh Testing Laboratory (PTL)
I I
l B. prnicet Adminiserntinn (nn-site)
In addition to the general information concerning pC&E's on-site project ;
administration contained . in CO Report No. 50-275/69-7, the following, raore detailed information concerning the development of PG&E's on-site mcanacment staff was obtained during the current visit.
i
- 1. cencral Construction Doncrerwnr The Project Superintendent is the senior representative ,
of the Cencral Construction Department at the plant site ,
and exercises general supervision of on-site activities. l He supervises the progress of work through Resident j Engineers, Field Engineers, and Field Inspectors, j l
There are three Resident Engineers employed at the plant site to supervise civil, mechanical, and electrical engineer-ing activitics, respectively. At a later date other Resident Engineers may be assigned for startup or other special tasks.
With respect to quality assurance, the responsibilitics of a Resident Engineer include:
- a. Supervision of preparction of quality control plans for site related activitics.
- b. Direction of quality control activitics.
- c. Review and approval as required of quality control plans prepared by others.
- d. Supervision of Field Engineers and Inspectors, l
" Along with the individual construction inspectors, individual field engineers have been currently assigned to follow the civil construction activitics of each of the major structures which include the containment, auxiliary, and turbine buildin0s.
1 Also on the Project Superindendent's staf 2 and reporting ;
directly en him is the Coordinating quality Control Engineer.
His designated principal responsibility is to advise the Project Superintendent on quality control matters and to coordinate quality control accivitics at the site. This latter responsibility he exercises through Quality Control Enginecru assigned to and workina uith the ncsident Engincors. Conaidered together, the responsibilitics of the Coordinating Quality Control Engineer and The Quality Control Engineers include:
4
( (
- a. Coordination of all quality control activities at the plant site.
l
- b. Preparation of quality control plans and review of l quality control matters,
- c. Participating in activitics associated with disposition of nonconforming materials.
PGGE's total compicment of personnel attached to the site ;
organization was reportedly to be approximately 120. Personnel t directly involved in quality control activitics related to ,
monitoring the individual contractors performing the actual '
construction work vos-stated to be about o0. This nudber of ,
personnel vos further classified as 30 civil, 20 mechanical, l and 10 electrical, Figure 1, attached, shows the on-site organizaticn of the PG&E Construction Department.
2 Ounlity Ennincerinn Scetinn .
A group of three engineers attached to the Quality Engineer-ing Section reside at the site. This aroup, under the dirce- l 3
tion of Pe. L. Carr, reports directly to the Director of Quality Engineering in San Francisco California uho in turn is respon-sibic to the Vice President. Engineering for the development and impicmentation of the Quality Ascurance pronram. The Section is responsibic for continually reviewinn the Quality Assurance program and reports directly to the Vice President on its adequacy i and the extent to which it is being implemented. The organiaccion and functions have been pattorned af ter the QA proaram described in the PSAR for the construction of Unit No. 2 (Docket No. 50-323) ;
and will be the same used for the construction of Unit No. 2 '
According to the policy instructions, the Section is also (
organizationally independent of project design and construction * -
and has the authority and freedom to invest 1 Sate any activity l vithin the Engineering or General Construction Departments !
- af fecting quality of work. The Section performs its function largely by performing periodic audits and reporting the findings to the appropriate department management personnel. 3 The inspector reviewed the file of audit procedures which have been developed and impicmented. These procedures included audits t
L i I
( (
. g.
titica as follows. (The number in parentheses following each item designates the number of audits performed to date for the particular activity.)
- a. Concrecc: (3)
Receivinn inspection and storage Batch plant Placinr,and finishing of concrete Laboratory operation
- b. Records of materials in containment base slab (Special) ,
Reinforcing steel
,i Concrete ~
- c. Production and control of aggregate (1) ,-
- d. Laboratory apparatus and test equipment (1)
- e. N Reinforcing stec1: rocciving and storage, placement and testing (3) [
]
f.
Containment structure lincr: (1) '
Drawinr, distribution and control Construction planning and procedure.
Material shipment, receipt, identification and storage -i Erection, ficup and welding control Welding materials
- g. Inspectors work (1)
- h. Receiving and storage of :echanical equip.ent (1) 1 Tank fabrication (1)
- j. PG&E's Resident Engineers (1) ~
- k. ?G&E's Construction ruperintendent (1)
From a review of the audit pronrom reports, the following observations were nade by the inspector,
- s. Where deficiencies vere indicated by the auditor, the d'cumentation concerninr, the folicwup action required by the department concerned was nat readily availabic, linwever, in cach case questioned by the inspector, Mr.
Carr was abic to obtain documentation showing the corrective action initiated to remedy the deficiency.
l
9 (See management interview section of this report for the proposed procedure to improve retrievability of documentation showing the disposition of reported deficiencies.)
- b. Although frequency of audits appeared to be adequate, a tentative schedule had not been developed to casure that periodic audits of activitica are performed in c timely manner. (See management intervicw section of this report for the proposed action concerning the scheduling of future audits.)'
- c. Audit procedures appeared to be comprehensive and included all pertinent contract and PSAR requirements.
The procedures concerning the audits of concretc and reinforcing steel are attached as Appendicies A & 3, respectively and show the throughness of the audit procedures currently developed and impicmented.
C. Cnnerete (PI 3800/2)
- 1. Review of OC Sveten.
During the previnus revicu of the QC System, as reported in CO Report No. 50-275/69-7, provisions were lacking concerning documenta-tian to show that adequate personnel and equipment were availabic for concrete placement operation.
The inspector uas shnun that the checklist, which must be completed i and approved by both pCSE cnd Atkinson, had been revised to include '
a provision for documenting the availability of adequate personnel and equipment prior to commencement of placing concrete for any <
niven nnur. Also the inspectors checklist includen verification !
that the contractor has implemented the proper caring procedurca after completion of the pour. l 1
- 2. Polinwup Reenrd nevIcu
- a. Cancrete Strennth Tests The inspector revicued the records related to all of the On-crete installed ei date for the containment and auxiliary l buildin:;. The recorded information showed that the frequcacy of concrete stren;;th testa varied from 90 to 120 cubic yards produced. Additional randou samples were taken uhen-ever the batch plant operator suspected improper operation.
The vant najority of ntrength tests were for each 96 yards of concrete produced. The contract specificationa requirca such tests to be performed for each 100 cubic yards of con-crete produced,
s
(
The recorded strength results for Class A concreto, (5000 psi -
60 days) used for the containment building and the main columns in the auxiliary building ranged from a low of 5999 psi to upper value of 7251 psi. The results recorded for the Class B concretc (3000 psi - 28 days) used for the auxiliary building, except for the main colurc.ns, was found to ranne from a lov of 3027 psi to a high of 4700 psi with a weighted overage strength of approximately 3900 psi.
- b. Concrete Slumn Tesen The information contained in the records showed that slump tests have been taken on the same frequency as the cylinders for strength tests.
Fbxwell stated that normally additional slump tests are performed whenever the batch plant operator or inspector notes a change in the amperage required to drive the plant mixer. 11e said that a 10 cap. change from normal for a particular mix indicates that the slump is probably being affected. Therefore, a slump test, necessary checks and adjustments are all made to immediately return the plant to proper operations. He said howcycr that thene additional slump checks are not normally recorded in the of ficial records which show that the product meets the required specifications.
The results of the clump tests ranged from a lov of two to a ;
high of five. (Specification stipulates 3 1 1). However a l check of the strengths of the cylinders formed from the cement l which was recorded to be out of slump specification showed that the strengths were well above the specified limits,
- c. Mfx Desinns Adhered To On several occasions the inspector checked the hatch plant tape which shows the concrete ingredients along with the mix design designation. The reviewed tapes chowed that the pro-duct produced conformed to the mix design prescribed for the given pour. In addition to the mix designs prepared by PC&E, Atkinson employed on independent Laboratory to develop decian mixes. The approved mix designs currently being used at -he site are shown in Aprendix C.
- d. natch Plant Equirnent Calibrations The inspector reviewed a certificate supplied to PG&O by the scalcr of weight and measurce.:ents of San Luis Obispo County showing the calibration of the batch plant scales on 9ctober 1, 1969 In addition to the yectly calibration by the County,
C
(
PG6E checks the calibration of the equipment with a standard weight calibrated to the county's weights. The records showed that this additioral check of the scales had been performed on a weekly schedule in accordance with PG6E's pro- l cedures.
l
- e. Tmpicnenention of 4605.04h (Recordn and Cnntrol)
, The inspector reviewed the checklist described in CO Report 50-275/69-7 to verify that (1) the location is ready for concrete placement, (2) the proper mix design is requested and mixed. (3) the proper mix is delivered to the proper location l in the time required, and (4) proper placement crews are ,
availabic with proper equipment. The review included all of the checklist concerning placement of concrete to dato in i the auxiliary and contain=ent buildings. No deficiencies were observed.
- 3. Follnu-up nhnervat inn o f Work I
j Proplacement OC Inspection l
The following observations of the inspector were made during the !
visit concerning placement of the 5-inch concretc slab on top of the containment base slab in preparation for installation of the floor of the steel liner. 1
- a. Prcolacceent In c.p ec t i nn 5
i The arca was cicar of extraneous material and the placement i inspection card had been signed by both PG&E and Atkinson's representatives,
- b. Placement of the Concrete l
The concrete appeared to be properly placed with an adequ. e crew size, equipment and techniques. The concrete was be.';
dropped from o bucket from a distance of between 2 to 3 feet.
The crew included the forer.on, two men operating vibrators, two men using shovcis to trancfer excess concrete from one area to another (the vibrators ucre not used to move the concretc), two men screeding the area and two men finishing
- the concrete with vonden trowels. Also the work vos being ;
were present to assure the 1cvel was proper.
i
C (
-U-
- c. Prnner Delivery of Concrcre An examination of a batch plant ticket, which the truck
'. driver presented to an Atkinson laborer upon delivery of the concrete, showed the concrete was the proper mix requested for the pour and that the truck had delivered the concrete and departed from the area within 25 minutes from the timo shown on the ticket representing the time the concrete was manufactured. The contract specification limits such time to 45 minutes, ,
D. Atkinsnn OA-OC Prntran The QA-QC system of the Atkinson Cons truction Co. , the prime contractor far constructis.3 the civil structurc, was reviewed and discussed with Messrs.
Harris and Nunes nf Atkinson. The inspector observed that Atkinson has developed schedules and review procedures to oscure that all concrete activi-ty related materials delivered to the site meet the requirements of the contract which in turn has been determined to satisfy the requirements con-
- toined in the PSAR.
The records vero noted to be in a readily retrievabic filing syste.n.
Upon request, the records concerning tent results of angregates and ccwent certifications were shown to the inspector. The inspector observed that certain figures were circled in red. Mr. Nunes explained that the circled values were out of contract specification and were transmitted to PCSE os a variation fron specification which needed resolution before use of the material in Class I structuren. The Inspector was told that any deviation outside of the specifications, no matter how small, was circicd. To demon-1
! strate that the results of the tests ucre reviewed to assure consistency with the specification, either Mr. Nunes or l'J . Morris now initials the documents as requested by a PG&E QA audit of their program. The various contract specifications concerning the material and frequency of testing required ;
were observed to be posted next to the QC engineers desk for ready refer-ence purposes.
E. Discreponey Control t i 1 l
PG&E has developed on on-site discroponey control procedure. The procedure appears to be enmplete in that it requires all significant varia- j tions from specification to be documented and reported to PC&E's dcaign I engineering department either inmediately or at a later dato depending upon the significance of the variation. If judged by sito persannel to be a i
i deviation. Engineering is immediately contacted for resolution. If judged as only a minor variation it pay then he resolved by atte engineers. Mowever, the design personnel are still apprised of the variation and resolution and are free to take exception with the site personnels' handling of the situation, i
2' i J
( (
Unwever the wording of the portion of the procedure exempting certain iteno from the formal reporting procedure may be of concern and will be a subjcet for review during the followup QA inspection scheduled for Diablo No. 2 on
. March 26 and 27, 1970 The following information was obtained from concrete discrepancy reports and shows how the oystem operates.
- 1. During a pour of Class A concretc in the containment base mat, the ice handling equipment at the batch plant became disabled due to failure of onc of the motors which drives the ice conveyor of the plant. Therefore, the concrete could not be maintained at a temperature of less than 55 F as spcatfied by the contract.
Upon contacting }k. Bottinger of the PG&E civil engineering department in San Francisco, permission was obtained to substitute on upper temperature limit of 70 F. Mr. Bettinger's basis was that since only approximately a foot in height remained to be installed for the pour, the 55 F temperature was no longer the critical factor that it would have been had many feet remained for completion of the concrete pour. }bximum concrete temperature measured for the concrete in question was 65"F. The investigation of the equipment failure by the licensee and the plant vendor concluded that the particular motor that failed was undersized.
To preclude recurronec, a larger size motor was secured and installed.
2 Cement was delivered to the site prior to completion of 7 day and 23 day strength reports.
Based on availabic 3 day test reports and chenical analysis of
' the cement, PG&E engineering research department reconmended proceeding with use of the cement with the understanding that in the unlikely event the manufactured concreto failed to meet the required specifications, consideration would be given to the implication of failure to racet specification and il necessary the placef concrete would be removed.
The required subsequent tests demonstrated that the cement and manufactured concrete conformed to the required specifications.
Southwest Portland Coment Company (SWPCO) who furnished the et -at for the project was requented to provide on increase in their 1 cad time sn that 28 day strength results would be availabic on all future cement set aside for the Diablo project. Mr. Harrin indicated that since the problem occurred SWPCO has been very cooperative end has been maintaining two to three silo's ahead of the one currently being emptied. Also, harris said that to assure that delivery
from the silos are proper, the bins at the site are loched and the batch plant supervisor has instructirns not to accept delivery and unlock the bins until he has verified that the information on the truck driver's certif :ces conforms to the schedule provided by SWPCO and Atkinsons QA aection.
F, Cnnerete Roinforcinc Steel The records relating to the reinforcing steci used in the concretc foundation of the containment building were reviewed, and discussions relating to these records were held with Messrs. Carr, Murin and Carvin.
The review was limited to the steel which had been supplied to ASti Standard Specification A-615, Grade 60. The PC&E contract specifications 1/
relating to reinforcing steel impose the following requirements in addition to those of the ASTM standard specification given above for Grade 60 bar:
Carbon Content, percent . . . . . . 0.45, maximum Mangancsc Content, percent... 1.30, maximum Tensile tests specimen size... full section All matert >l was supplied by the Pacific States Steel Corporation (PSSCC),
Union City, Ca.ffornia. According to Mt. Murin, PSSCo hos coneracted with the Pittsburgh Testing Laboratory (PTL) to provide independent quality control over the manuf acture and field f abrication of reinforcing stect. The PTL inspectors witnens the tensile tenting of steel both at the PSSCo mill (No.11 and smaller size bar) and at the PG&E testing lab at the Diablo Canyon cite (No. 14 and 18 uite bar).
The quality control records were observed to contain material tests reports, including chemical and nochanical proporties, for a total of 65 heats of Grade 60 rebar. The records of 16 heats of Grade 60 material were selected at random for detailed review by tbc inspector. The following information and observations resulted from this review.
- 1. Chemical Cowansition of Mc':ar The range of chemical properties were as shown in Table I.
Tabic 1 - Gende 60 Rebar Chemient C3rpnsitinn Renuired Connositinn.E Range of Reported Chemical Elcrent PCnr. % cc ASW Como s i t i nn , ?
Carbnn 0.43, max. none 0.37 to 0.44 lbnganese 1.30. max. none 0.81 to 1.12 Phosphorus -
0.050. max. 0.002 to 0.007 Sulfur -
none 0.030 to 0.053 17Contract 8831, PGSE to G. 7. Atkinson Co. , Section 4.)
I C C No discrepancies were revealed insofar as the chemical composition
, of those heats reviewed.
l i 2 Tensile Pronerties of Rehar I
i 1
The records revealed that two hoots of No. 18 size rebar were rejected by PG&E for failure to meet the minimum censile and yield ,
i stress requirements of 90,000 psi and 60,000 psi, respectively. ;
In the case of each of these hoots of secc1 I.Nos. 17525 and 36446), l
! the discrepant (low strength) condition was revealed by the testing ['
of Cadweld splices, af ter the steel was installed in the concretc forms. The origonal material tests reports by PSSCo in cach case showed strengths well in excess of the minimum strength specified.
. (See Table 2.)
i Tab 1c 2 - Orininal Mstorint Test Report l 4 Results by PSSCo - Rebar Heat Mon. 17525 and 36446 l
\ \
l Heat Un, Yield Stress (psi) Tensile Stress (nni) .
, 17525 68,000 109,690 36446 70.220 98,740 The origins 1 test reports for cach of the above heats of steel were dated September 12, 1969. A cadwold testing report dated .
September 17, 1969 showed a failure of the rebar, from heat No. l 17525, at a strength of 83,500 psi. A subsequent Cadweld testing :
report dated September 30, 1969 showed a failure of the rebar, ;
from heat No. 36445, at a strength of 89,750 psi, i i
I
, The records showed that during the period September 11 through ;
netober 1, 1969 several additional sampics of stec1(12 sampics :
4
' from heat No.17525 and 25 namples from heat No. 36446) were I subjected to tenulle testing. Some of these tests were conducted I at the site, and others were tested by a consultcne laboratory {
(Signet Testing Laboratories, Inc. Hayward, California) at the direction of PSSCo. The results of these testo showed that in the case of heat No.17525, seven specimens failed at below the mininns specified yield and/or tensile strength. A typical yic1d i stress for those specimens which fai* cd below the specified strentth was approximately 58,500 psi. A typical value for those specimens which f ailed to meet the tensile stress requirement was
, approximately 88,000 psi.
The retest results for heat No. 36440 were similar to those for 3
heat No.17525, with 14 of the 25 specimens failing to meet the specified strength. In this case, the yield stress for those j
4
t i
i specimens failing to meet the specified strength ranged from '
56.750 psi to 59,500 psi. The tensile stress for those specimens which failed to meet the specified strength ranged from 69,000 psi
- to 89,500 psi. The deficiencies with regard to th. steel from ,
l heat Uns.17525 and 36446 were the subject of a Deviation Report !
- (No. 2), initiated by the PG&E QA staff, and dated October 23, 1969 L i This report indicated that the deficiencies were reviewed by a Material Review Board (MD), consisting of Messrs. Carr and Friedrichs of PG&2 and Mr. W. N. Ilarris of G. F. Mkinson Company, t
, The following is quoted from Deviation Report No. 2, regarding the ;
, disposition of the material:
"All bars of these two heats were removed from the contain-ment structure, cut-up, and returned to Pacific States Steel" i
j With the exception of the two heats of steci discussed above, the j j
, recneds showed the tensilo properties of the steel to be in ,
a accordance with ASTM standard Specification A-615, Crade 60. The :
I records showed that in the case of 3 of 65 heats of steel, retests ;
were conducted in accordance with paragraph 11.3 of ASTM A-615, i beccuse the test specimen developed a flaw. In a letter dated October 22, 1969, Mr. Vourt of PTL scoted that all specimens which ;
fail to meet the specified strength during test shall be "visually ;
l! inspected, cocracnts recorded, test samples identified and forwarded r to PG&E, Diablo Canyon Site. . ."
l According to Mr. Carr, investigation by PCLE revealed that PSSCo had, during manufacture of the robar from hcot Nos.17525 and 36446, !
4
' rolled the bar to approximately 1.57,below the nominni cross section- !
al area (4.00 square inchen for No. 18 bar) specified by ASTM A-615 !
The specification permits under weight, or cross sectional, vario- l tien (for a bar int) of 3.57.. Mr. Carr stated that the rollins ;
process was adjusted by PSSCo to provide a cross sectionni arco of
{ {
I spproximately 1.5% larger than that specified by ASTM A-615 on sub- '
sequent bars manufactured for the Diablo Canyon project. Mr. Garvin 4
stated that dimensional checks of the rebar were conducted by t' o l PTL, and that the records of these inspections would be include *
) in the site project reenrds.
1 G. Cadweld Inspecti,n end Testine i The records ,f Cadwold innpcetions and testing vere reviewed. and discussinns relating to them were held with Messrs. Youri, Murin and Bussolini. The following information resulted from the review, i 1. Ounlificatinn nf ticidinf- Operatorn i
The records showed that a total of 20 Codwcld operators had been j qualified. All were employces of P05Co. The ciuoMfication examination of these operators uas conducted by a representative i
i f
(' C of Erico Products. Inc. (Crico). For cach operator qualifted, a to: splice was visually innpoceed and tensile tested, and che fleat 20 production splices were witnessed by on Erico reprocento-tive. Among the 20 operators qualified throur;h Felruary 3,1970, were three Cadweld Foremen, one General Foreman and the Project Superintendent.
Each qualified welder had been assigned on identifying code (Iceter and number combination) from which the position (s) for which he was qualified could be readily determined.
2, Inspection nnd Testinn Frequency The PG&E contract 2
/ requires a visual inspection of r e, t .cs in accordance with the locost Erico inspection procedurs . nu tensile testing of the splicos made on No.18, Grade 60 bara (o..ly) in accordance with the following schedule:
. ..one out of the first ten splices.
...Three out of the next 90 splicco. ,
...Two out of the second and subsequent 100 splice units.
At 1 cast 25 percent of the total number of splices tested are ,
required to be troduction splices, with the balance consisting o( sister splices.
- 3. Inspection and Testina Resultn The pSSCo has contracted with the 171. to provide quality control !
for the Cadweld splice program. PTL inspectors, onder the direc-tion of Mr. Vouri. witnese the preparation and production of each splice and conduct a post-vold visual inspection of each splice. ,
They also witness the tensile testing of splicos.
The records of Cadweld spitecs mado durina construction of the )
containment building foundation mat vero sc1ceted for review. 1 Summary reports by ITL, showed that a total of 3648 Cadueld splices had been completed throuth January 27, 1970 Of this nuraber, a ;
total of 48 splices had been rejected on the basis of visual in- ,
spections. One splico, as discussed below, was rejected becau.c j it failed under tensile test below the specified strength.
The inspector selected at random the records of four welding operators for in-depth review. Theno welders had welded a total of $14 spitect. Tbc records for each of the four uciders showed that the numbers of sister and production splices had been selected for test in accordance with the schedule given previously in this section.
2/lbid, Paragraphs 4.33 and 4.34
( (
The single splice which failed under test to develope the required tensile strength (90,000 psi for No. 18 siac bur) was tested on January 13, 1970 The records showed that it was a sister splico, ucided in the horizonal position by wolder "P" (W. Griffin). The splice was designated P-1-100, and was the mating splice to a production splico designated P-1-102. The splice desinnations indicate that nister splico P-1-100 was the approximately 100th horizonal splice made by tk. Grif fin. The splice failed at a strength of 63,250 pai. An entry in the test record stated that the splice had failed by pulling of the bar from the s1covo. The following notation had been entered on the inspection sheet for this splice -
"This Cadweld failed physical test due to moisture.
Before Cadvold vos made, voter got into crucibic causing failure of sister Cadweld."
In response to the inspector's inquiry 12. Vouri explained the above notation as in11ows. A canvas covering had been constructed to protect the velding area. Water had co11ceted on the canvas during a rain. ?bvement of the canvas covering caused the spillage of some water into the crucibic whtic splico l'-1-100 was being prepared for velding. Mr. Vouri stated that inexperience on the part of the PTL inspector resulted in the splice being "passed" for tent.
Investination and evaluation of the splice f ailure consisted of l the following actions. The mating production splice (p-1-102) was cut from the reinforcing structure and subjected to test. It showed a strength of 99,000 psi, well above that specified for
. the bar.
Five batches of Cadweld powder wore identified as possibly suspect, since material had been used from cach during the pcriod spitec P-1-100 was made. Sampics of each batch of material ucro sent to
, Erico, along with the parts from the f ailed splico. Erico prepared splices using material from cach suspect batch of powder and sub-jected them to censile test. The results of these tests are given
] in Tabic 3, and show in cach case a failure strength well above I the specified strength (90,000 psi) of the bar spiteed. ,
l l
1
i Table 3 - Test Results For Snitees M_ade With Sunnece Cadweld Povdcr ,
Powder Date Cnde Strength nf Splice, nei*
FK - BX - 7 107,250 FK - BX - 6 107,150 FK - DX - 5 107,900 FK - DX - 4 106,750
- FM - BY - 11 ' 107,250
- - All splices failed by fracture of the bar.
- - Powder from this batch was found in the robar splice area, umking it highly suspect on the batch from which splice P-1-100 was made. This. splice was made using the same rebar pieces which were joined by splice P-1-100 Erien in a letter, R. E. Rylander to P:. J. Vouri, dated February 1970 concluded the following with regard to their evaluation of the failure of splice P-1-100.
". . .We f eel tha t the rebar was not part of the cause of the
' splice failure.
i
"...from the evidence of nur examinations and tests, we '
believe the low pull of splice P-1-100 resulted from m)isture present in the slecyc and possibly the graphite t pouring basin.
"This moisture resulted in a porous, low strength filler metal condition.
l "As there is no subotantiating evidence for suspecting causes other than discussed above and in view of the test 1 data accumulated both in this report and in actual fictd '
use, we conclude that the (fatture of -cd) P-1-100 is a .
sinnie occurrence type of event" In addition to the above evaluations, corrective action by PG&E '
I and PTL included the reinspectinn of all availabic (nore than 150) splices inspected by the P7L inspector who inspected and pasned l splice P-1-100, and a similar reinspection of approximately 45 :
splices made by the operator who welded splice P-1-100 All of the splices were found to be catisfactory.
e 4
( (
, -2 0 -
A review of the PGSE contract specifications and discussions with project personnel revealed that the ends of rebar to be joined by Cadwald splices must be square cut. Sheoring of the rebar enda is prohibited. The splicing procedures require the use of a square stock spacer to provide a spacing of approximately 3/16-inch between bars within the Cadweld sleeve.
As mentioned previously in this report (Section F.), the testing of Cadweld splices revealed two heats of reinforcing steci uith Inw strent;th characteristics. Uith the exception of these two splices and sister splice p-1-100 discussed above, the strength of those splices for which testing results were revicwed ranged between 92,250 psi and 114,250 psi.
In reviewing the Cadwold records, it was observed that one welding nperatnr had been inactive (prcduced no splices) for a period of time approaching 90 days, from mid-September to carly-December.
In response to the inspoetor's inquiry, Messrs. Vnuri and Murin stated that no limit had been set on the period of inactivity of a welding operator, such that his weld qualifications would have en be re-examined. This observation was discussed at the time of the management intervicu, at which time PG/2 perennnel stated a tine limit of 90 days is to be established, beyond uhich a welder's qualification would be re-examined. The re-examination will include the tensile testing of the first Cadweld produced by the welder af ter his return to activity. ,
11 . C,ntainment Bu i l d i n t,' 1,iner Material While touring the enntainment building area, the crection of steel plate to form the lower (approximately 3-foot high) ring of the cylindrical wall and the floor liner of the containment building was observed to be in progress. The material for the 3-foot shell ring was observed to be apprnximately 3/4-inch in thickncas and that for the floor plates was approximately 1/4-inch in thick, css. The work was being performed I by the Pittsburgh-Des Fbines S teel Company (PDM) .
The material test reports (; Tnt's) for the liner material were reviewed and discussions relating to them were held with Messrs. Carr and Brady.
According to Mr. Brady. !CR's envering the first portion of the liner material to he crocted had been provided to the pCl2 QA staf f by 11 ' I en March 9, the day that cur:ent inspection co w.cnced. The Irm's which i Pa. Erody provided for review covered 10 heats of steel which had been supplied by the United States Steel Corporation (USS), Geneva Wntks, Provo. L't ah.
The MTR's covering 4 of the 10 heats of steel were selected for detailed review by the inspector. The materist was. identified as plato conforming to ASTM Standard Specification A-516 with Charpy V-Notch inipact pro-perites of at least.15 foot pounds average at a test temperature of
+2 0"F . The ASTM Stand.
describedinthePSARh;rdSpecificationgivenabovediffersfromthat which is ASZ4 A-442. This change in material designation is to be covered in the FSAR submission, according to Mr.
Bettinger.
The following notation had been stamped on.cach of the M?R's supplied i by USS.
"Test specimens were normalized at-1650 F for 30 minutes per inch of stack, cooled in still air" 4
The material description on the MTR's did not indicate that the plates had been normalized. In response to the inspector's inquiry, Pe.
Brady stated that PG&E had "taken exception" to the notation ^on the 1ER's, since it was their understanding that the plates had not been normalized either at the USS mill or the PDM shop. The inspector called to the attention of Mr. Drady paragraph 9.1 of ASTM A-516, which states "For plates li-inch and under in thickness not requiring. heat ,
treatment, the test specimens shall be prepared for testing from the material in its rolled condition." Mr. Brady stated that the diacre-
- pancy had been detceted by Mr. Carr only two days prior, and that the matter was currently being evaluated by the PG&E Engineering Department.
Subsequent discussions with Messrs. Carr, Brady and others revealed that the discrepancy had gono unnoticed by both the PDM QC department and the PG&E vendor inspection group, both of which groups had conducted inspections at the USS mill, t
Additional information relatin;; to the corrective action being consi- ,
' dered by PG&E in regard to physical testing of the liner plate materials was obtained at the time of the Management Interview on March 12, and is included in that section of this report. ,
Tabics 4 and 5 show the chemical and physical properties reported by USS on the FER's which were reviewed by the inspector.
] Table 4 - Chemient Properties Reported l by USS - Containment Lince Plates i 1 1
- Heat No. Q Un P S Si 4
93E448 0.20 0.90 0.013 0.017 0.21 93E324 0.21 1.04 0.012 0.019 0.22 93E352 0.20 0.04 0.017 0.017 0.22 99E360 0.24 1.03 0.025 0.023 0.21
- h discrepancies were identified between the cheutcal composition
, reported and that required by'/.STM Standard Specification A-516
)
( (
Tabic 5 - Physical Pronerties Ronnrted hv USS - Containment T,iner Plates
- Ilcat No. Yicld Paint. psi Tennile Strennth,pni Elonnation_in R in.,7. Teoact, Ft-T.Ss 93E448 48,000 to 52,400 70,700 to 73,000 26 to 30 41.1 to 41.6 93E324 50,400 to 53,000 75,500 to 76,700 25 34.3 to 40.6 93E352 49,600 to 52,000 72,300 to 76,000 21 to 28 25.0 to 94.6 99E360 51,400 to 52.400 77,400 to 81,700 25 to 27 62.6 to 94.6
- These physical properties are recorded here for reference only, since the data apparently have been invalidated by improper heat treatment (norcalizing) of the test specimens.
I. Ucid Rod Cnntrol The PDM procedure for the care and control of weld electrodes was reviewed with Messrs. Brady, Bussolini and Mendez. According to Mr.
Mendez, the only weld cicetrodes being used to wcld the containment building liner are of type E7018. low hydrogen rods. The PDM procc-dures limit the time during which these type c1ccerodes may be exposed to the atmosphere to a maximum of 4 hours4.62963e-5 days <br />0.00111 hours <br />6.613757e-6 weeks <br />1.522e-6 months <br />. Mr . 1:ende: stated that all electrodes for use at the Diablo Canyon project are purchased in 10 pound cans, and that cicetrodes which are exposed for greater than 4 hours4.62963e-5 days <br />0.00111 hours <br />6.613757e-6 weeks <br />1.522e-6 months <br /> are to be wasted and not rebaked. Records are maintained by PDM which show the date, time and cuantity of rods returned. >k . Mende:
explained that all unused rods are returned to the holding oven during the lunch hour and at the end of each shift, and that no rods are Icf t unattended in the welding area. The procedures require that the holding ovens be maintained at a temperature between 250"F and 3500F.
The inspector and le. Murin toured the welding area et approximately 10:00 a.m. on March 12 At this time it was observed that the veld rod holding oven was at a sufficiently low temperature such that the storage shelves were only warm to the touch of the hand. No weld cicctrodes were in the oven, however. The oven was not equipped with a tempera-ture indicator.
Later at approximately 12:30 p.m. on March 12, the inspector and }'s.
Brady tnored the uciding area. Welding operatorn had icft the area l far their lunch period. Two open cans. opproxinately half filled s'th !
type E7018 cicctrodes ucre observed unattended in the area. Inspection I nf the wcld rod storage area revealed that the holdin; oven was locked l closed. The inspector and Mr. Brady met with >k. Mende: at approxinate-l ly 2:00 p.m. to review the previous obnervationn. ::endez said that I there appeared to have been a breach of the wcld rod control procedures.
l 1
]
I
(
~
(.
and that he would investigate. Mendez. Sk. Drody and the inspector returned to the welding arco, where discussions were held with two volding operat,rs and a welding inspector, These discussions revcoled the following information. The welding operator ottempted to return the veld rids to the oven at the beninninn of his lunch period. 11e found the nven locked. however, end the velding inspector was not availabic to unlock it. The welding operctor, repartedly, then returned the unused rods to the volding arco, a dintance of opproximately 150 feet. The rods were, reportedly, returned to the weld;un inspector after the lunch period. Subsequent inopcetion of the holdiun oven revealed that it contained several open cans of type 1:7018 cicctrodes.
At this time the holding oven was observed to be quite hot to the touch of tl:c hand. Mr.. Mendez showed our inspector records of wcld rod issuance, which showed that the electrodes in question had been issued to o velding operator at 10:00 a.m. that dr.y and returned to the oven at approximately 1:00 p.m. From these records it was determined that the rods had not been exposed for o period of time in excess of that permitted (4 llours) by the' PDM procedures, toth Mesnrs. Brody and Mendez stated, however, that there had been a violation of the procedures which require that veld rods be returned to the holding oven when not in use, and that rods not he Icf t in the uciding orco unottended.
- 12. nussolini showed the inspector the results of QC oudits conducted of the PDM welding orco during each of the three vecka prior to the current inspection, licither of these cudits had revcoled deficiencies, tihen asked if observations such as that made by our inspector would have been identified as a deficiency, Mr. Dussolini said yes. At the time af the Management Interview, Mr. Richards stated that the QC oudits by PG&E were to be increased from once weekly to twice weekly.
This frequency of oudit is to continue until PG&E is satisfied that the use and care of weld electrodes is satisfactory. Mr..Richards alsn stated that thermometers were to be placed in the veld rod holding ovens.
l 1
l l
I l
l 1
(, ,
FIGURE 1 PG&E ORGANIZATION (ON - SITE)
CONSTRUCTION DEPARTMENT DIABLO CANYnN SITE - UNIT I PROJECT CO3RDINATING SUPERINTENDENT QUALITY CONTROL ENGINEER O
RESIDENT RESIDENT RESIDENT ENGINEER, CIVIL ENGINEER, ELECT, ENGINEER, MECH.
I l
Ia l ! ! i t I i
{ j d m d m E m 5 ' : W~ 5 - W R E W 8 1-iM- .
l8' G
e l2-g 5
e W
- G t3 e
s o a ie o .> s ,
e d
o, i s~
- ~
S A
Gi l e W
& ~, 1 W
6:i l ,
.! I e i I i ! ! 2 f : ,'
i k
TICURE I
i e._.
y
( APPENDtK A l PACIFIC CAS A:D ELEC'.'P!C CO:PA::Y l .
DIA1!LO Cli;YOU CIIS I. QUALITY ACCURI::CE E;;01:.F.IES J'JDIT C0!;CTCD:: KATERI/LS, !!IXIEG /:iD TL/CFEliT 1.0 APPLIC A1'IC', '
This plen is e plied to ell concrete work prwided undct Specification No. 833), includinc the reactor contein.ent and other critieel prie.ary rystte suroort structurer, which tust be of spe:ified high quelity.
2.0 FIFIi', ?C ES 2.1 Soecificatior.s , Dravir.3s , Code:, Fe:;ulations Quality cor. trol of concrete work, is tesed on applicetion of the -
follo; ins criterie.
Spec 8831 Doevrent .Titic Authority / Source Reference 8331
- S;ccification fer Construction of PGE -
Buildincs er.3 Releted Ctructures Sectinn 2 - F:r:s Section 2 Section 5 - Concrete Section 5 Inspectors Instructions for Opere- FGE -
ting Concrcte Le'entatory Inseectors In:tructions far Plece- PCE -
ment of Concrete '
Quelity A s turence t'er.un1 GFA -
8Bh9 Srecifier.ti,ns for Concrete FG " e Betch Ile nt eetion 5 pere. 6.31 ACI 21h Fccorr.cedei Frect'.ce for Evi'.ue- ACI Section 5 t i't. of Co .eression Test Petults of part, k.2 Tic 1d C:neqe.e ACI,hN Cxcifier
- tons f'r Et.vtum'. ACI Section 3 Cor.cre'.e f 3r lui' dirar tere. l. 1 gr-2 (lo_1 cc) APPE.N DIX A
TITLE !'./TERIALS, ?" C'G I::D HJC:2:'T OF CO::CIC-:n g page e or 5 f
QUAI.11Y /SSN .'C? F;;GI:9 F3 /UDIT
( _
= - _
Spec 8831 Docunent Title Authority /Cource EcTerer.M ACI 613 Eee:rrended Fractice for Selectinc ACI Sectior. 5 Proportions of Concrete CF9' Test for Unit Weicht of Aggrecate ASL: Section 5 1 -
pere. 5.h C33 Specification for Concrete AC ;re- / SD: Section 5 gates pare. 2.3L C39 Test for Co:oressive Strength of ASB! Section 5 Concrete Cylinders Cho Test for Inorgtnic Ir. purities in ASDI Section 5 Sanis for Concrete parc. 2.351 Ch? Obteining er.d Testing Drilled Cores ASD! Section 5 and Sa :ed Ecer.s of Concrete pera. 5.EE CS7 Test for Effect of Crganic.I:7uri- ASL1 Section 5 ties in Fine Accregate on Strength pera. 5.L of Morter
- Cc3 Test for Soundr.ess of Accrecate by ASn! Section 5 use of Sodium Sulfete or ::ecnesium pero 2 3:2 Sulfate C9h Specification for 'Feedy-::ixed Cor. crete ASO! Section 5 pera. 6.1
, C109 Test for C::?ressive Stren;th of 'ASCI Section 5 liydraulie Cemen; Mortars pera . 5.211 C11b Che=icel Anelysis of Fydraulie AS31 Cement Sect.on 5 pera. 5.2 C117 Test for Meteriels Finer Tnen ASD! Sect!9 5 No. 200 Sieve in Minero) Accrecates para.'5.L by k'eshing Cl?3 Test for LichtveiS ht Ficces in ASD! Section 5 Aggreccte pera. 5.L C195 Darinition of Terms Relatir.3 to ASL: Section 5 Concrete Actre 20tes C127 Test for Srecific Gravity er.d ASLI Section 5 Absorption :f Coorse /c;rt r te pere. 2 353 CIEE Test for Sticific GTEvit; E r.0 ASCI Section 5 Absorption 9f Fine CI ;te:t'c pare. 5.L GE-2 (17-1-09)
I
TITLE' l'ATERI ALS, !:"Ii:G A!iD FUCTEI;T OF C01; CPS.TF
(
^
' Pece 3 of 5
.' OyALITY ASST .C2 EliGE;EERS AUDIT --. >
Spee, 8831 l
! . Document
- Title Authority / Source Reference
! I C131 Test for Resistence to Abrasion of ASU4 Section 5 i
, Small Size Coerse A6Crecete by use para. 2 361 :
of the Los Angeles !!achine I
C136 Test for Sieve or Screen Analysis AS24 Section 5 of Fine erid Coerse Accrecetes para. 5.h '
C1h2 Test for Friable Ferticles in AS34 Section 5 Aggregates para. 5.h ,
'l C1h3 Test for Slump of Portland .
ASD4 Section 5 i Cement Concrete pera. 5 3 ,
I Specifiestion for Portland Cement ,
C150 ASn4 Section 5 pare. 5.21 C151 Test for Auteeleve Expension of -
Ast4 Section 5 i Portland Cement para. 5.213 7
t C173 Test for Air Content of Freshly ASD4 Section 5 Mixed Concrete by the Volumetric pera. 2.51 Method i 4
C190 Test for Tensile Strength of ASE4 Section 5 '
Eydraulic Cement Morters i C191 Test for Time of Setting of AS24 Section 5 -
Eydreulie Cement by Vicat Needle pare. 5.214 4
C192 Making er.d Curing Concrete Con- ASD4 Section 5 !
pression end Flexure Test Speciten para, b.7 in the Laboratory '
l C204 Test for Fineness of Portland ASDi Section 5 i
Cement by Air Perteability '
pera. 5.215 ;
Apperatus ~
C231 Test for' Air Content of Freshly AST4 Section 5 Mixed Concrete by the Pressure pere. 2.51 Method 1
. l 1 C235 Test for Scratch Heraness of Coarse /Sn4 Section 5 Accregete Perticles pare. 5.h i
I
, C260 Specification for Air Fntraining ASE! Section 5 Adolxtures for Can: rete j pers. 2.5 :
i C293 Recoraende1 Prectice for Fetro- /SD! Section 5 granhie Exminction of Ac;regetes pere. 5.h
{ for Concrete i .
I
, QE-2 (ic-1-69) 1
TITLE Fece h of 5 lOTERZiLG, QU/ LIT! ASSU l'I[";:0 /J D PLFC?.:2::P GF COGC.c.ETE
(
.E E!;G1:IERG /UDIT
_ m ._
. Spet 8331 Docunent Title Authority /3ource Feference C309 Specificetion for Liquid I'cebranc- ASn! Section 5 Forming Compounds for Curing Con- para. 12.22 crete C360 Test for Pell Penetration in ASIM Section 5 Fresh Portlend Cement Concrete pare. 5 3 CL9h Specificetion for Chemicel Ad- AST Section 5 ciixture for Concrete para. 2.6 C618 Fly Ash end Ecu or Celeited ASTM Section 5 Naturel F0330/ans for use in para. 2.22 Portland Cement Concrete ,
Celif. Send Equivelent Test l'ethod Calif. Div. of Section 5 217 Eighveys para. 2 353 Calif. Cleenne:s Value Test Method Calif. Div. of Section 5 PP7-B Highveys pere. P.36k CRD.C572 Polyvinyl 'Je'ter Stop: US Arey Corps Section-5 of Engineers para. Ih.3
- Generel Industry Sefety Criers Stete o'r Calif. Ceterel Conditions pera. 7.2 As Constructi'n Drsvings IME Section 1 Issued pera. 15 0 As Shop Drevings Contrector Section 1 Issued pere. 8.0 3.o A? TACE 2n"3 3.1 Check Lists Check lists, es atteched, ere listed below:
Check List A - Receiving and Storage Check List B - Botch Plant Check List C - Placinc and Finishing theck list D - Laboratory l
QE-2 (10-1-69)
igrLE l'oce 3 of 5 l'./TERI Q,UAI.Irl ASSTATS:CE,1:["TG IND 1::GII EAR 3 AUDX2FlJ.CE."E! T OF CO:: CRETE (
gote to the Quelity /srurence Enginee r i
i The check listr ere guides designed to essist the IME Qaelity Issurance Engineer in monitoring the activities of the supplier / contractor. Sur-veillence should be besed on the *equirenents of the contreet doeur.cnts which specify the eppliceble technical end regulatory criterie.
To echieve uniforn understanding of word mecnings used in the Check List, the follouing definitions vill apply for cetions specified.
Eyenine - An action of reviewinC some form of paperwork such es certificate of inspection, leboratory test result or reterial certificetion.
Obser/e - The continuous cresence of a IGE representetive thr, ugh ell theses of e single operation to visuelly con-firra tessu*ctents, resdin s , recordings, teth:1, procedures, or processes being perforced by a supplier /contreeter.
Insnect - The ectual perforr.ence by a FGE recresentative of teesuring, seuging, testing, or similar operation to detercine e cherecteristie.
l Verifv - The ection of e 7GE representative b;; observation, j
inspection, or e combinetion of both. .
)
s Clessificatinn of vord teenings ebove shall in no way restrict the l PG5E reprcsentetive fron nerforrir.c other retsontble surveillance he shal? l 1
decr.necesstry f,r the equi-.ent/cateriel. 1 1
l 9
E-2 (10-1-G)
-- _- - -. - . . - ~ . . _ _ _ _
( (. Chsek List A P;g31 of 1 L
( -
QUALITY ASSURA!!CE AUDIT _CHr.CK SHEET FOR RECEIVIt:G, INS?ECTICt: ASD STOU.GZ 0,? C51lC3ETr; MAT?u! A LS Date ,
A RECEIVING INS?ECTION AND STORAGE ha Fg Face On each of the following items, verify that: '
f A.1 The Contractor's approved receiving inspection and
- storage procedures are being implenented satisfactSrily. () () t A.2 The cenent mill test results have been checked to see
- that they meet the specification requirenents and then t signed by a GFA and a PO&E representative. () () t A.3 The cenent, pozzolan, aggreEates, air entreining agent, I 4
vater reducing agent, and retcrders, ceot the require-ments of 2.0 "Material For Concrete" in section 5 ef 1
, spec. 8831. Also, that each has been approved by i Constructer. Thst a certificate of conpliance with '
appropriate ASTM standards acconpanies each load of pozzolan, air entraining agent, vater reducing agent, and retarders delivered to the proj ect. () () _
- A4 The aggregate reports fren the quarry have bee'n checked
.i (,' for conpliance to the specification requirenents and have been signed by a GFA and PG&E representative. () ()
A. 5 The Contractor is sending copies of all quality 1
assurance reports to PG&E Resident Engineer. () ()
I 1
l l
I 1
I s
I J
I 1
1 1
- E-2 (11-4-69)
(
I Chsch List B P 601 of 2 i I QUALITY AS3t2A.','CE AUDIT CH3CF SIEET FOR CONCP.ETE BATCH PLANT Date On each of the following items, verify that: Tes E2 faE B.1 The Contractor's aperoved quality assurance nrocedures
't are being implemented satisfactorily. () ()
B.2 Cecent from different cement plant silos are not mixed in concrete plant siles.
() ()
B.3 Cenent and pozzolan are not placed in batch plant silos until accepted by Constructor. () () r l
B.4 All aggregates are dried or drained at time of batching to obtain a stable toisture content per paragraph 6.3 in section 5 of Spec. 8831. () ()
B.5 Contractor does not nix any concrete until prior ap-proval of the proportions and ingredients has been obtained from the Constructor. () () ,
B.6 All concrete caterial is ceasured for each batch by !
(.
direct veiching. () () l t
B.7 The weight and liquid ceasuring equipment is operating !
and the print-out tape is recording what really goes into each batch. () () l B.8 Manual additions to the cenerete batch are being noted on the print-out tape. () ()
B.9 A copy of concrete batch prin+-out tape is being sent with the concrete load to the pour site. () () ;
B.10 A copy of the concrete batch print-out tape is on file 1 in the Contractor's office. () ()
P,.11 Prior to "start up" all veighing and censuring equip.
ment is tested, sealed and certified by local authori-tics, and that the certificate (s) have been transmitted to Constructor. .
() () _ :
B,12 The weekly check of veighing equipment by absolute weight has been cade. Record varie.tlens between ,
veighing equipment and standard veights and verify that the percentage of variation is within the tolerances specified in para. 6./.2 of Spec. 8831. () () I t
u-: (n-i-69)
. . - _ - . . . . . -. . -.. _= - _. . . . . .
Chsek List B Page 2 of 2 00';0 RETE PATCH PLE.' (Continued) i
- Date j ltf. Eg Ea. mag i
3,13 Concrete is mixed until there is a uniform distribution -
of esterial, and for a period of not less than it minutes after all ingredients are in the drum, or for the number 4
of revolutions specified by the manufacturer. () ()
B.14 The mixer is conpletely discharged and that it is kept clean and in good working order. () ()
t B.15 Tenperatu-e, slump, percent air entrainad and cylinder i semples are being taken at the rate of one set per 100 cubic yards. For placements less than 100 cubic yards, one set shall be taken. () ()
B.16 The Contractor has documented all quality assurance activities.
() () __
.* l 1
=
)
)
l 1
J l
i -
1 i
I j '
i n-2 (11-4-t9)
FINISHIN1_ OF CO'iCWrTE l
Date _
On each of the following items, verify that: Tes E2 h ;
C.1 The Contractor's approved quality assurance procedures are being inplencnted satisfacterily. () ()
C.2 The Contractor's forenan and the PG!I inspector are present as the lift is being placed. () ()
C.3 The lift has been checked against the latest revisien of the drawing. () ()
C.4 Prior to placing concrete the line and grade have been checked and adequate equipment such as vibrators, chutes, buckets, cranes and conveyors are sveilable. () ()
C.5 Prior to placing cenerete, forms and reinforcenent are '
free of hardened concrete, dirt, chips, savdus t, frost l and ice, and other foreign matter. () () ;
C.6 Surfaces of hardened concrete against which new cenerete
()
is to be placed, have been ecde rough with coarse aggre-gate exposed, and that such surfaces have been thoroughly !
cleaned of all icose aggreCate, foreign tatter, and f laitance that vould impair bond. () ()
C.7 Iraediately prior to placing the next lift of concrete, the surfa:e of the hardened concrete has been vetted and given a t inch coat of tonding rorter on all hori-sontal joints, and that vertical joints are vetted and i
I slushed with a coat of neat ce .ent grout. () ()
C.8 Tenperature for classes of concrete at a time of placing meets the requirenents of para. 7.3 in Spec. 8331. () ()
C.9 Prior to placing cenerete, Contractor has installed,
] secured, accurately located, and firaly anchored in i place with templates, all items to be embedded in or 4
i extended throvgh concrete. () ()
C.10 Placenent of cenerete does not commenen until Constructor's approval has been obtained. () ()
C.11 Concrete is placed vithin 45 minutes after introduction
, of water to the mix, and that concrete which shows evidence of initial set prier to placenent is discarded. () () __
j C.12 Concreting is carried on as a continuous operaticn vithout pinnes on separation until the approved pour unit is cenpleted. *
() ()
j n-2 (11-1-09) i
{ Chock List C Par:c 2 of 3 PUCING AND FI"ISMIZ 0? CONCETE (Continued) Date Yes Eq NP e C.13 Concrete fron transit mixers is not discharced directly from the mixer into the forts unless speci-fically allowed by Constructor. () ()
C.11 Concrete is placed in a nanner that vill prevent the segregation of esterial and displacement of reinforcement. () ()
0.15 When pleeing operatiens involve dropping of concrete 5 feet or more, concrete is deposited through* pipes, chutes, or elephant trunks. () ()
C.16 Concrete is worked into all places around reinforce ent, into all corners and recesses and is thoroughly ec= pact with all voids filled. () ()
C.17 The type and design of vitrt2 tors has been approved by Constructor. () ()
C.18 The intensity of vibration visibly affects e cass of cencrete of one inch slunp over a radius of at leest 18 inches. () () _
C.19 Vibrater methods of use meet with Constructor's approval.
() ()
0.20 Constructicn joints occur only where shown on drawings, and that vertical joints are staggered by at least 6 in6hes. () ()
C.21 PGE cenerete placement fem C-18 is being filled out. () ()
C.22 Final clearance for placement has been given by Construc-ter and the Contractors Placement Card has been signed by Contractor and FCE inspector.
the Place =ent Card is signed by the Contractor.Af ter ( placement
() is ec=plet C.23 Concrete surfaces do not contain voids or strata of segregated, poreus concrete, honeyecmb, or fractures.
Exposed surfaces are free frem fins, projectiens, ex- ~
cessive a:ounts of air bubble, Iaitance, crazing, and other defects.
() ()
- 0. 2/. Unforced surfaecs are co .pacted, struck-off to grade and wood floated to an even dense surface. () ()
f C.25 All unsound and dersc(d concrete hts been chipped to a depth of three inches or more, and the excavated area is undercut slightly to r. eke patch secure. () () ;
E-2 (11-4-!9) l l
- * ( (
- Chnek Ligt C PaEe 3 et 3 kIj.?, Ai?D FIllISHit?G OF CC;;0 RETE (Continued)
_ Date 111 li2 f.1FA C.26 Cavities are filled with mortar or concrete, as directed, which shall be deposited in thin layers not more than one inch in thickness. () ( ),
C.27 All patches are th6 roughly bonded, free frem shrinkage, cracks, ar.d other defects. () () _ __
C.28 Concrete is maintained in a toist condition for a minimu:s of seven days, cc.mencing as soon as possible af ter concrete is placed. () ()
C.29 Uncured concrete is protected against injun due to adverse weather conditions. () () _
u-2 (11-4-69) l
/ r Check List D
\ \ Pac,e 1.of 1
' QUALITJ ASSUpANCf._CMECT SPDT FtR CONCRETE 1AFORATO?Y O?F?.ATIn :S Da te ,, _
On each of the folleving itens, verify that: 11A E2 ESta D.1 The testing machines have all been calibrated against appropriate standards.
() ()
D.2 The inspectors training and experience records are on file in the quality acsurance files. () () ,
D.) Vritten instructiens for laboratory personnc1 are available and are beir.g followed. () () _____
D.4 Tests and record forns 0-2 through C-17 are being conpleted and filed in accordance with Specification 8831.
() () _
D.5 The concrete caring roon is operating properly. () ()
D.6 Screen analysis and fineness modulus is being perforned upon the concrete aggregate at least once per ICO tens, but not cere thrn 10, nor fever than one per day. () ()
I 1
l i
6 4
h
- I-2 (11-4-69)
AsPF1st4 DIX ES
. Faciffe Gaa nra Flcetric Cr:nory Diablo Canyoa Sito Quality Asturonec :nrir.ecre 'udit Reinforcing Stecl: R*cciving an] 3tarace, Pir.ccrent snd Testing *
/.udit Dste :
1.0 Rec 31ving Inspection and Stor3Ce of Reinforcing Steci Yes t'o Innrection On cach of th: follouing itcro, check th t:
1.1 Contractor's r:cciving in:pectior. and ctorace procedurc era tcing imp 2 enented satisf,etorily.
1.2 Contr,eter ic aanuring that c11 ctoci received fren the r.anufteturer or fabricator is tarced/
narked / identified by heat number, sino, grade, oricin.
1.3 Any untacced tu .dles received at cito are not used until identified and retacced.
- 1. /, Centractor's 3 hop iutlity Centrol docuncnt:,
fer.r: TC:-6 and DC-1 have toen rcccived and are en file fer each heat.
1.5 Contreet:r's received doeur.ents, forns :-? .
1603, ?C-2 and shop drawincs detsilinc heat nunters h;ve been re:eived end are on file for each shiprent received.
1.6 Splice sleaves, c.xotheri: ;3Jder and crtphits tolds for C dveld splices, are st: red in a l proper ranner.
1.7 '.11 ratt.-ial is inspreted f r c' e:r.linest to standsrls e:tniliched by Csnstructor. !
h
~,_~?,, -p P 7 T ' ' " ' 's s- < g.- ,
( 2 of 4 h3 I.I9. .I.D GE'2_e, ti.o a 1.8 !Storial de,ced in tranait is rejecte;1, and discrepancies totucen chippira papors and '
shi;:ent, cro doeutented sstisfactorily. _ _ _
1.9 Rejected estorini is pisced in a ecgragated ster:ge c.rca for dicpe:ition. _ _ _ _ , , ,
1.10 Conteneter submits the rcecipt e,nd ins;cetion records co Con:tructor within five d1yc af ter caterint has arrived at the sito. __
1.11 All veldin; cicetrodos, viro nnd flux are in spected when received for compliance to purchsco order ir.eludin; identity type and class. -- -
1.12 All retar is stered en edeque,to supports atovo creu*.d. - - -- __
e i
4 4
- I-? (1
- c)
( { 3 of 2.0 ( . . U. ' .a. h.t"..L e n.t. ton. e -d.,Pl" c e. '.?
~ - . ..t. of. o.i nf.t' c ir. . . St e el
. Yen 'o .I n..a
- - n.e c t i o..n.
Cr. c ch cf the folic'/.1:2 itcr.:, ch:ch that 2.1 Ce n trac tor; ,uslit; '.srurainec or; ani ation 13 adequate fcr performin; .-crk cc cet forth in the J,uality A:.surance P:-ec rr '. -
2.2 Centr;ctor's que. lit:. accurance perconnel are observing e .d checkir.~ that cll verk is in cecordnnec with drnvir.gs cr.d s.:ccificatienc. -
2.3 All cr'valeir; precedures, o;crators and inspecticn pc.sonr.cl have baan e,ualified by Catecid re.;:urneturer's represcnuti' e and Contractor'c forn 8 is on file for each velder.
- 2. /. All tutt and lap velding cperations are carried cut in confc.'=.nce with &ction /. cf Spccification E331 and f.,'O 12.1 I.5 centracter's insp ter ir vi ually in:ccetir.s evo:/ veld. ' .
2.6 F1:eenent of reirfer:ing steel is teing curied cut in accordance with the trproved drawin s, and specifiestions with re:ard to nsteritl, bar size, een#1guratic'n, n ter c ." 'm . s , .* *. s.~ 4.
. . ... , a . . .d. ...'.ia..'..'.
2.7 Contractcr'
'larittion and Deviatica Eeports, are en
.cile *ec. . ..,13
.. s .4. . . a. . 4. e... _. . .a.. c..4c+..,..s .# . .-2 d.- . ..'.
ar.d sic:ifLcttiens. _ -
Qg@ * . c,p.l. ..
.9 34 ..rP. n..t.m ;~ fsn
.t =. s. a. ). 4. .e . . .m
.P w w J $ *v , *?mm 4.
'. .e n. w+ l
. .g s0 alt, c0nCritt, Ol'., gr( t sc c r any othcr nitCrill ,
1
- k. u.4. . c'4 4. . y m. . ,. ..
', ..c .' e. - . th tend with concrete,
.. ~-
-Q . . .. . .. 1.,
A....g..b. . *.. **
- g 8 4 e3 de, wa . . . w ,1,, 4
.. .... ._ g e.
. . . , . . . .w ..e [
.# .t . ,. .*..
. .. t . *, .. . . ' , . ...
.w _m
]b")
- 6 /. *%
% g.**I /
4 of 4 Yes Mo
~- Incroction use ani 2.10 Contractor's fcre ; r.d ;-
,4 .
ic on filo for all 31 cach working day. _
3.0 Trnti n- of_ Snlic_en On each of the following itens, check that:
3.1 Contractor prepares the proper nunter of tcat splices in accord r.cc with paracrnphs 4.342, 4.344 and 4.43 in Scotion 4 of Sp:cific3 tion 8331.
3.2 Sister splices are teinc perforned in the ccr.e position and at the se.ne time and with identical heats cs the production splicca of the crew boinC test:d.
33 Additional randon splices are rer.oved from the job for testinc in accordirce with psrecraph 4.6 in Section 4 of Specification E331.
3.4 Contractor docun:nt: the testing of all test specirons by Cor.strs: tor's test inboratory at the site, and co,.ies of c:..structor's forn 206 are en file for all specir. ens tested.
3.5 In the event a Ord eld splice fails the ter.sile ttst, 1
1 Contr:ctor his the speciten ex111ned and corrective .
i action is taken biscd en the rcrults of this exanir.?. tion.
Refer paragrtph 4.352 in 2pecifiesti:n 3331. --- _..
3.6 Contrsetor records the leestion of all test splices (both sis :r end cut-out splice:.) '
W .h 4
"-- " h-- "N** - -
- ' *H * - - -
e wwwmm_ _
- I-3 (1; ;9)
4 -:- A}'l'ENDlX (
.. .a., .... .
f s .. . -* * ,.,*,,**,'*.,g . - . ..
.. *g4 j-.
- l * '* *' , . f. .q * *
,g
- +. ((-,**
-l.. . +f .,,,. l*,, : ~, ; % .. +". : - * -.
- ..h;;*
- ' ~
- e_ i I .
- ~. 2: : .
~
- T - - -
.~ . . ;. . ?.? t. .,. . . / .'</ Gt-?.O.1. DIAELO CAhTON CONCRETE MIXES
,. ~, . . . .
- ..TE: February 13. 1970
.-...3.. .
.y
.,.,o.,. . . . .. .. ..
.7 ., , . .
- . I . , . ,
L*L*GER KIK SLUMP BATCH TEICHTS FOR ONE CUBIC YARD ~ * ~
REFERENCE INCIIES . .
,"
- 1%TER CEMENT P0ZZOLAN '
l 1
'
=
, Oz Oz
, r3 10 52 1042 --
2280 t
2* O 3/4 3 31.8 540 --
1359 1661 34.5 2 3* n 1 1/2 3 30.0 517 --
1154 1029 937 i 34.5 2
!' 4 L? 3/4 3" 46 517 '78 1203 1470 8 35 g 3.2
- 5. 37 1 1/2 3" 42 4S9 73 1048 935 850 34 3.0 l 6 2 10" 52 1332 --
201'8 - -
, -- -- I --
l 7* A 3/4 3" 36 618 111 1252 t
l 1531 --
47 i 3.9 f
- r.
- A 1 1/2 3"
- 33.7 5751 127 1055 940 855* 47.0 2.5 y- ,
c J
~
, s
\
I l
. - 10 <
l
- ~ * *
- 5 ,.. '. - 1.
~ . .,. r ';. ;*y"'. ,. *.. , -l .
.[' ~~- **
~
' 1.YREnD .s - . .
. . . r
.G .
..L.p s;*< .4 ;i.. M :. ': .. y . .e
- i. .c' .s ' * . ..
4 , A - 5000 PSI Mix ~
~
- * * ~ *
- '. .i.*. .. .
- g. . . -
-. ~~ .
g
.. . 3 - 2000 PSI Mix. .- 4 -
.. .s -
. - .s .-
- m- .
Po o1an d, - nc.=rtar . . .. . . -. . .. .
W':f.q,' . . .,
z
..'.jf;}*_,.......~ : ~:. .. J. : . APPh NDI1. C
. S ' tevised February 19, 1970 , (, ; J .. ~ ~. ;. ' *; , ,
. ,i :.. . #
6 '.f 2 La Slump Mix #8 February 13, 1970
. . . _. ; . .. . . , [, , .
... +
.