ML20154F390

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Forwards Insp Rept 50-275/70-04 on 700915-16.No Nonconformance Noted.Major Areas Inspected:Nde Testing Procedures & Techniques,Capability of NDT Inspectors & Evaluation of Welding of Containment Liner
ML20154F390
Person / Time
Site: Diablo Canyon, 05000000
Issue date: 10/16/1970
From: Spencer G
US ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION (AEC)
To: James O'Reilly
US ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION (AEC)
Shared Package
ML20154C370 List:
References
FOIA-88-156 NUDOCS 8805230217
Download: ML20154F390 (2)


Text

-. -.

._=

  • (

l

/

\\

UNITED STATES -

, d 7

l.

i ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION l

j g+,

g oivielON OF COWLIANCE 4

REGION V 4r allt SANCROFT WAY BERMELEY, CAR.lFORNIA 94704 vet

. m.sia s.st. m i

October 16, 1970 i

4 J. P. O'Reilly, Chief Reactor Inspection and Enforcement Branch i

Division of Compliance Headquarters PACIFIC GAS AND E1.ECTRIC COMPANY - DIABLO CANYON UNIT NO.1

[

DOCKET NO. 50-275 l

3 I

l The attached report contains the details of our recent inspection of construction act.tvities at the site of the subject facility.

No items l

of nonconformance were noted during the visit. The inspection was conducted on September 15 and 16,1970 pursuant to PI 3800/2 in accordanca with the master inspection schedule for the project.

W. Kelley (C0:11) j accompanied Johnson to specifically review nondestructive testing proce-dures and techniques utilized, capabilities of NDT Inspectors, and evaluate i

the welding of the containment liner and the liquid holdup tanks as an l

independent check on activities previously reviewed by Region V.

In visw of the licensees' response to the issues raised during our l

previous inspections, we are confident that the onsite QA group will thoroughly investigate and evaluate the circumstances surrounding Kelley's l

observation of the dye penetrate test in question. Since we have been assured that the licensee's evaluation will be directed toward the adverse

]

implications of the QA-QC program and since the test is not a PSAR requirement 4

we propose no further action concerning the item at this time. However, we

)

plan to review the licensee's investigation of the adequacy of the dye i

penetrant test in question, to determine its scope and depth.

If the investigation is found to be superficial or concurs with Kelley's obser-vation the item will then be a subject for discussion with PG&E in that i

the QA-QC program may not be functioning effectively in this area of activity.

4 Mr. Kelley's report has been attached to the report as Appendix A.

i You will note, as discussed in the management interview, that the licensee i

j believes the concrete sampling and test procedures are proper and does not 1

intend to change them unless directed by us to do otherwise.

Therefore, if i

l 1

1 t

]

0005230217 080510 i

PDR FOIA l

j MCM I LL,A00-156 PDR

~

.._(

._.._.._(._...

the tocation of testing is not considered to be consistent with.CO:HQ policies, and we desire sampling to be donc at point of placement rather than at the batch plant, it will require DRL correspondence with the i

licensee because the code (ASTM-C172), is permissive in this respect.

awab O. S. Spencer Senior Reactor Inspector

Attachment:

CO Rpt No 50-275/70-4 by A D. Johnson & W. D. Kelley dtd 10/16/70 cc E. G. Case, DRS (3)

P. A. Morris, DRL R. S. Boyd, DRL (2)

R. C. DeYoung DRL /,2)

D. J. Skovholt, DRL (3)

P. W. Howe, DRL (2)

L. Kornblith, Jr., CO Regional Directors, 00 Reg files

.