Text

Submits Clarification of Agreement Between NRC & Util Re Notification of Util Investigations Conducted by Quality First Program.Nrc Will Recognize Confidentiality of Identity Only If Recognized by Util.Related Info Encl
	ML20198B818
Person / Time
Site:	Wolf Creek
Issue date:	10/26/1984
From:	William Ward; NRC OFFICE OF INVESTIGATIONS (OI)
To:	Foster R; KANSAS GAS & ELECTRIC CO.
Shared Package
ML20198B650	List: ML20198B645; ML20198B658; ML20198B665; ML20198B673; ML20198B682; ML20198B760; ML20198B775; ML20198B781; ML20198B794; ML20198B806; ML20198B818; ML20198B832; ML20198D229;
References
	FOIA-85-101 NUDOCS 8511070269
	Download: ML20198B818 (112)
	v • d • e

{{#Wiki_filter:, .....,jo, UNITED STATES { 7, NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION g E WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 October 26, 1984 %...+/ Mr. Ralph B. Foster Vice President & General Cecrsel Kensas Gas & Electric Company P. O. Box 208 Vichita, Kansas 67201

Dear Mr. Foster:

I would like to express my appreciation to you and the other rembers of the KG&E ccrport.te staff for the courtesy and coopercticn extended me during my October 16, 1984 visit. The degree of access that I was afforded to infor-mation relating to my evaluation of the KG8E investigctive program was of great value to re. At cre point during our conversation, it became evident that there was scrc cerfusicn as to what sort of agreen.ent had been struck between the NRC Office of Investigations (01) and KG&E or its retained counsel regarding retification of certain KG1F ir.vcstigations conducted by the Quality First Program. I think it pruder.t to describe again 01's position. Cuite simply, 01 has agreed only to treat as confidertici the identities of those persons granted con-fidentiality by KG&E (i.e. they have executed a signed Confidentiality Agree-ment [Forn KriF-12]) for an interir pericd pending a final determination of eligibility for an NRC Confidentiality grant. The latter would be granteo if

1) the indivioual quclifies for confidentiality in accordance with NRC policy,

2) still desires corfidentiality, and, 3) executes a written Confidentiality Agreement with the NRC. This is the extent of any accormodation agrecd to by 0.

0! hes not agreed to being the recipient of notifications, although we are prescntly accepting such notifications f rcn the Quality First Program ard treating them as any other allegations received by 01. Until we crrive et an agreerert regarding this matter - which will be grectly influenced by the evaluations that I have undertaken - it might be more prudcnt for KG&E to use the existing reportirg channels set forth elsewhere in the Comission's Rules and Regulations such as 10 CFR 50.55e. Lastly, O! ct rc time has agreed to stay its own activities during the pendency of c KG&E investigation. Wc will continue to exercise our right of accest. to ary KG8E documents within the scope of NRC authority - to include the rigtt te retain copies when desirable. 8511070269 851015 PDR FOIA VARRICC85-101 PDR ~

2..-

Ralph B. Foster 2 In closing, I hope you find the foregoing clarifications of value to you. Please feel free to give me a call (301/492-7246) if I can further clarify any of it, or better yet, stop by the next time you are in this area. Sincerely, William J. Ward Assistant to Director Office of Investigations cc:. Field Office Directors liq Distribution /0I:s/f. Wolf Creek' OI:c/f OI:r/f WJWARD C (j) U l 01 WJWardYjh El yes I 10/26/84 - I' 4/84 DW: BILL /Ltr/kG&E/jh (, 5 W

a 9 pi 36&fc/s 'f /Of W,/ / /f n b /. -m a M. y m :eey d A

?-

f /

wdh mo 3 uw/ a s+-a de 4'- /fa:1 $ c,/ree A K& r f & Eedf ,9 Y N O 1/ec /< SuyA /6s n ik//- Age in.sf. + dupay Finrl ll Av puest 2. /(f/f N We-h JUWf %51rswrw& mre.r.ouc /lec. r nec in,a r 7. casa p /7,,,n> , rec.

3. Ass. Q J S &. egy /Afrp/r sp@'"

L

2 '/ f-/f Q4-84-053 MISSING WELD RECORDS NRC Inspection 84-22 Page 5, para 2 identifies problem DIC CAR 31 identified 16.4% of "Q" weld records MISSING BreakdownPg66[(oh Public Meeting Feb 27, 85 KGSE admitted QA program retrievability problems (Pg 65)1E5 um( F _ Records _ No requirement to Maintain records (pg 71) Inadquate implementation of our (KG&E) Procedures (p.E Less than 100% retrievability Berra admitted Missing records (Pg 124) issued CAR 29 in Mar 83 High turn over of g While working on 026 learned possibility of missing records location / Explain Room gone (dismantled) two weeks prior. John Flecher DIC let Lee EllershaW NRC ////Alledger(s) related careless disregard for records //// 100% of available records re-inspected lors1

11. ctesg 6

Id*E RotdetG 16eus c. Li<eii, ott 4y27 ^ + & c 77-73 ,tlb A p (l, 3 \\ ' / / f l l

r s 4 t STRUCTURAL STEEL WELDING PRESENTATION i i } 3 e i l KANSAS GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY f,6 'E WOLF CREEK GENERATING STATION s j FEBRUARY 27, 1985

KG&E1NRC MEETING l AWS STRUCTURAL STEEL WELDING PHILLIPS BUILD:NG

BETHESDA, MARYLAND
FEBRUARY 27,1985 l

INTRODUCTION

NRC l
KG&E - Gene Rathbun; Manager Licensing and Radiological l

l Services GENERAL DESIGI'd PHILOSOPHY l James Ivany; Civil Engineering Supervisor, Bechtel l O.UALITY ASSURANCE PROGRAM AND HISTORY OF CORRECTIVE ACTION REPORT NO.19 William Rudolph; Manager O.uality Assurance (WCGS) WELDING HISTORY AND MANAGEMENT PLAN I John Berra; Vice President - Operations, Daniel International l Corporation ENGINEERING EVALUATION i Jerry Brown; Civil Engineering Group Leader, Bechtel 1 INDEPENDENT REVIEWS Glenn L. Koester; Vice President - Nuclear

Roger Reedy; Professional Engineer, Reedy Associates'
Dr. John Fisher; Professor of Civil Engineering, Lehigh University l
Dr. Geoffrey Egan; President, APTECH I

SUMMARY

Glenn L. Koester t

m l I

STRUCTUR/'i STEEL WELDING IS DONE TO AWS D1.1 - 1975
AWS IS NOT CODIFIED.
CODE APPLICATION BY OWNER -

i ARCHITECT /ENGiNEEP. l i ), j l I j i h }

~ KG&E SUBMil rALS TO NER: COIN GERNING AWS STRUCTURAL STEEL WELDING I I 10CFR59.554e> REPORTS

October 17, 1984 - KMLNRC 84-187 l
January 18, 1985 - KMLNRC 85-025 l

FINAL REPORT

December 31, 1984 - KM LN RC 84-238
January 21, 1985 - KMLNRC 85-037 l

SUPPLEMEl\\l,TAL INFORMATION l

February 14, 1985 - KMLNRC 85-054
February 15, 1985 - KMLNRC 85-057
February 18,1S85 - KMLNRC 85-058 i

~ j i l \\

]U E S O H 2 + S P W M. + SU EP s ~ a ^ S E r RU TA EF E T b S I D [] 1 ~ c TN tTr A 4 L ~ P k O I ( + ~ .~ RcE E R K .GR AR U E C WA T WO H C OL CC PB UR RS T I ICDS i I

T l POWER BLOCK GENERAL ARRANGEMENT N f DIESEL GEN. DLDG. AUXILIARY BLDG. [/ // N COMMUNICATION CORRIDOR STORA E 1 BLDG. s y/ RADWASTE BLDG. L. - ___-s MACHINE SHOP TURBINE BLDG. FUEL BLDG. REACTOR BLDG. TURBINE PsDESTAL i l i I 4 -- e - em... -. +.. wa y .p ww w .c. - 9-.g,,gy,w,v-y,,,%w,-

i EXTERIOR CONCRETiE WALL EMBEDDED PLATE - ,q T*' - ? '.. . = *.*. [ ' :f '. s. 50K GOK 60K l f 35K STEEL COLUMNS .;.H.': - '. '. : >f** l,. / - 35 K STEEL rLwa se- \\~ / R 25 K j .'*.h.'.. b ~ 25 K 7 a o = l-25 K c _ X s. \\ CO? CRETE SLAB INTERIOR CONCRETE WALL MAXIMUM BEAM REACTION h E FLOOR PLAN ' ) i

The design, fabrication, erection, and inspection of welded connections in struc-tural steel for buildings are governed by 1 the following stancards:

Structural Welding Code AWS D1.1, developed by the Structural Welding Committee of the American Welding Society I:AWSD 3

= Specification for the Design, Fabrication, and Erection of Structural Steel for Buildings, developed by the American Institute of. Steel Construction I:AISC) I ~ l l l l ..1 i

h Allowabh shear stresses for fillet welds l are set ef: 30 percent of the weld metal ultimate tensile strength, whereas the ultimate shear strength is in the range of 65 to 75 percent of ultimate tensile strength. e, e r g O

E7018 WELD METAL 80-(MINIMUM) 60- .__u, X-v ASTM A36 BASE MATERIAL w 40-(MINIMUM) w tu(r F-W 20-1 BASIC ALLOWABLE STRESS \\ 0i i i i i i i O O.04 0.08 0.12 0.16 0.20 0.24 STRAIN (infin) \\ ~ 4 sum

4 Allowable stresses are specified at a level below ultimate capacity for several reasons, ir:c!uding the fo!Iowing:

Load Definition
Variations in Materials and Construction t

l l 'O 1

SU M MARY BA3DC DES!GN MARGINS OTRUCTU RAL STEEL WELDED CONNECTIONS l

CONSEPiVATCVE CODE ALLOWABLES
CONSERVAE~ EVE DEFINITION OF LOADS

\\

CONSERVATWE USE OF MINIMUM MATERIAL j

STRENGTI-13

MINIMlZED VARIATIONS IN MATERIALS AND i

CONSTPiUCT:ON l PLUS

CONSERVAT2VE ENVELOPING OF MULTISITE EARTHQUAKES,

~' I

CONSERVAT3VE DESIGN METHODOLOGY L
CONSEQUENCE' CONSIDERATIONS j

i EQUALS l ~ LARGE FACTORS OF SAFETY AGAINST FAILURE ~ l

AWS D1.1 STRUCTU RAL STEEL WELDING CONCERNS BACE~G. OUND IIN FORMATION R DiC CORRECTIVE ACTION REPORTS

WELD DEVIATIONS RECORD RETRIEVABILITY NRC TASK FORCE CONCERNS WITH DIC CAR RESOLUTION KG&E RE-EVALUATION OF DiC CAR RESOLUTION ADDITIONAL NRC INPUTS DOCUMENT RECONCILIATION LIMITED WELD RE-INSPEC rlONS POTENTIAL 50.55(e) i KG&E QA CORRECTIVE ACTION REQUEST NO.19 4

j KG&E CAR NO.19 MANAGEMENT ACTION PLAN ^

KG&E QUAUTY ASSURANCE PROGRAM i OVCRVIEW l ~~ 10 CFR 50, APPENDIX B I;G&E QUALITY ASSURANCE PROGRAM FOR DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION INDEPENDENT AUDIT / SURVEILLANCE i PROGRAM x IDENTIFICATION, CONTROL, AND RESOLUTION 4 OF 1IARDWARE AND PROGRAMMATIC DEVIATIONS l CORRECTIVE ACTION PROGRAM

NONCOblFORMANCE REPORTS
CORRECTIVE ACTION REQUESTS / REPORTS
OTHER CORRECTIVE ACTION VEHICLES I

~1

'\\ KGDE CAR NO.19 MANAGEMENT ~ ACT!ON PLAN OA VERIFICATION PROCESS i TWO EXPERfENCED O.A AUDITORS ASSIGNED ~ ON l ) A FULL-TIME BASIS l IN-PROCESS SURVEILLANCES WERE PERFORMED"r l A THOROUGM AUDIT.OF EACH CORRECTIVE l ACTION STEP WAS PERFORMED RESULTS OF THE AUDIT AND SURVEILLANCES:.

CAR No.19 IVlanagement Action Plan.was 1

Effective

CAR No.19 Findings were Satisfactorily Resolved l

..o

KGaE GA COfiRECT:VE ACTION .l R3QU ES~ NO.19 SUM MARY

KG&E QA CAR 19 RECOMMENDED CORRECTIVE ACTIONS - READILY ADOPTED
KG&E MANT.GEMENT ACTION PLAN - EXCEEDED CAR 19 RECOMMENDATIONS THUS PROVIDING A MORE COMPnEHENSIVE TREATMENT OF AWS D1.1 WELDING CONCERNS
RE-INSPECTION OF VIRTUALLY ALL SIGNIFICANT SAFETY-RELATED STRUCTURAL STEEL WELDING -

WITH AND WITHOUT RECORDS i

EVALUATION OF OTI-lER AWS D1.1 SAFETY-RELATED WELDING PROGRAMS
EVALUATION OF DTHER SAFETY-RELATED PROGRAMS BEYOND AWS D1.1

=~

t 4 Ei lE 1

jjd p>

i' i 9 ilj]h !!H @ in 115 iti. i

p3 i.2 n i

si v., h-f I 'I 3O>0 If! ~ n= r c a:., e i, ..ii, i!!'I $b -- !L', f[ !!!]! 'i' j lly h i n.; il, ti c. n. 9 i;;; @- 'I I i! n !I Be I k / gj.g gj

y 4

c3 ~ill 50

V e 6 4 I q w M 4 4 4 m N 00

=1 EO

_W l W M C i 1 ,m, O .e O e CO rs

=1 w

W 6 C i O sn m g. N i W Y A E O WW >> o ao << a N 6# C:2C:2 m ? a y;5 <ro >= C E k b UU 3 r o a s w-- A m to lll3 m LAJ LaJ CG

=1 00<]

G e 9 95 8 D' hk E N. =s. =.

=

E E E = W w w = l l 1

AWS D.1.1 r DESIGN OF WELDED CONNECTIONS WORKMANSHIP FILLER M ETAL REQUIREMENTS c l' o WELD PROCEDURE QUALI FICATION l WELDER QUALIFICATIONS INSPECTION c e 4

V SCELLAN EOUS STRUCTU RAL STEEL WELD RECORDS J' MSSWR y r o DRAWING NUMBER o JOINT NUMBER ARE A / LOCATION e ' BASE MATERIAL PIECE 'OR HEAT NUMBER i c ROD WITH DRAWAL DATA o FILLER MATERIAL HEAT NUMBER / LOT / NUMBER i WELD PROCEDURE o i l l WELDER IDENTIFICATION NUMBER o OUALITY INSPECTOR

W3i,D ATTRIBUTES TO BE INSNCTED PER AWS D1.1-75

PRECENCE
FUSION I
LOCATION
PROFILE OVERLAP
LENGTH o

i

SIZE POROSITY o

i ARC STRIKES i

UNDERCUT l

SLAG. {

CRACKS SPATTER
CRATERS l

7 c

0 s G&E QA CORRECTIVE ACTDON REQUEST NO.19 FD!!\\! DINGS - OVERVIEW e c

MISSING VI.' ELD RECORD DOCUMENTATION
WELD DEV[ATIONS

]

WELDS NOC' MADE/ MISSING MATERIAL L
PRESENCE OF WELD ]NSPECTION DOCUMEN-TATION W!T-LOUT PRESENCE OF WELD
VERIFICAT ON OF COMPLETED CORRECTIVE ACTION TC KG&E SURVEILLANCE REPORT S-372 o

t

T.99E O,A COR RECTIVE ACTON REQU EST NO.19 PVJGRAM OBJECTIVES

DOCUMEE' A CONSOLIDATED PROJECT PLAN
ASSURE EJ'J CBJECT VE EVIDENCE THAT AWS D1.13%FETY-RELATED STRUCTURAL STEEL WELDING COMPL;ES WITH ALL O.UALITY CRITERIA ~
ASSURE Ti:AT INSPECTION DOCUMENTATION REFLECTS /2.PPROPR5 ATE INFORMATION AND IS:

6 AVAIL?,3LE COMP? ETE o o TRACEABLE

EVALUATE OTHER AWS D1.1 SAFETY-R. ELATED WELDING ACTIVITIES e

a

m i CAR 13 MAP 1AGEMENT PLAN WELE",NG HARDWARE REVIEW

DEVELOPMENT OF SECONDARY INSPECTION PROCEDURES
CERTIFICAT:3N OF INSPECTORS
IDENTIFICATION OF STRUCTURALLY SIGNIFI-CANT JOINTS BY ENGINEER
VALIDITY 05 HNSPECTION IN PRESENCE OF j

i PAINT

FIREPROOFv1G REMOVAL.
INSPECTIOP OF STRUCTURALLY SIGNIFICANT JOINTS

~

e CAR 79 MANAGEM,r:NT PLAN 1 s WELDri'iG ' HARDWARE REVIEW (Continued) INVESTIGA' CON OF MISSING WELDS WITH PRIMARY E'.3 CORDS l

DOCUMENT [NG CONSTRUCTED CONFIGURATION OF JOINTS EVALUATICF1 OF CONSTRUCTED CONFIGURA-TION BY Tmi ENGINEER REWORKIN'!.?OINTS ISSUANCE OF

SUMMARY

REPORT O d D

WELL BIG HlSTORY

SUMMARY

ERECTION / WELDING PERFORMED IN 1977-1981
WELDING ?ROGRAM W'AS IN ACCORDANCE WITH AWS D.1.1-1975
O e

0 e o O

CAR 'i9 MANAGEMENT PLAN 1 l PROGRAM MA"lO REVIEW

WELDERS O."1ALIFIED IN ACCORDANCE WITH AWS D.1.1-7
WELDING F~~OCEDURES IN ACCORDANCE WITH l

AWS D.1.1 ~5

FILLER MAT"iRIAL PURCHASE AND CONTROL IN

] ACCORDAl'NE WITH AWS D.1.1-75

INSPECTIO.D CRITERIA COMPLIED WITH AWS l

D.1.1-75 l

INSPECTOES CERTIFIED TO ANSI 45.2.6 i

l

DOCUMENTATION IN ACCORDANCE WITH AWS D.1.1 AND ANSI 45.2
KG&E SURVEILLANCE REPORT S-372 CLOSURE-l VERIFICAT[ON

/ I' 45 a p a j b Lll < 3 b ld~,,d* ^ / 0

l. --

v s ,,,.i 2 tw (MIN.) tw ,tw

= = = 1" (MAX.) ACCEPTABLE RETURN WELD ACCEPTABLE PROFILES /, ',,> f- ......,, e 2 t w (M IN.) tw 1" (M AX.) e OVERRUN UNDERSIZE l / tw = REQUIRED WELD LEG ss ..,, + 2 tw (M I N.) = 1" (M AX.) l UNDERRUN l

CA3 9 MANAGEMENT PLAN CONOLUS'ONS

QA PROGR.:' "C DEFOClENCIES CONFINED TO l

CAR 19 ISST '33

PRESENCE OF WELD [NSPECTION DOCUMENTA-l TION WITHOUT PRESENCE OF WELDING WAS i

CAUSED BY HUl91AN ERROR

WELD RECORD RETRIEVABILITY PROBLEMS DID

[ NOT CARR',.' OVER TO OTHER PROGRAMS L

WELDING FROGRAM IS IN ACCORDANCE WITH

) AWS D.1.1-73

ALL QUALITI CRITERHA AS SPECIFIED IN THE RELATED DESIGN DOCUMENTS ARE MET g
ALL STRUCTURAL STEEL ERECTION COM.MIT-MENTS IN THE WOL? CREEK FSAR ARE.

SATISFIED b lc =

Structurally dgnificant AWS field welded joints are jc.ints whf ch: 1D support c. potentially support safety-related equipmem.and bul: ding components, 2D are loca':si in the Reactor Building, Auxiliary 1 Building Jontrol Building, Diesel Generator i Building, '. uel Building, or Essential Service Water Sretent Pumphouse, 1 1 3D were inr":alled under the structural steel erection contract [Bechtel Specification 10466-C120 or the miscellaneous steel erection l contract (3echtel Specification 10466-C132D, and 4D were originally inspected under the Daniel International Corporation (DICD " Miscellaneous / Structuras Steel Weld Records" (MSSWRD. Inspection Program. ~ 1 ? ~ i l e,

O WE' D ATTIBUTES TO BE INSP.EigTED PER AWS D1.1-75

PRE 0ENCE
FUSION
LOCc':; TION
PROFILE
LEN.'6TH
OVERLAP
SIZE
POROSITY l
UNDERCUT
ARC STRIKES j

i

CRACKS
SLAG
CRATERS
SPATTER i

l l l I I i i 7 '~ =

F3NS P EG R ON DATA ~ AW3 STRLP.,TURAL STEEL WELDONG AT WOLF CREEK Structurally Sipificant Joints 2,670 Totally inaccemible Joints 119 Reinspected Joints 2,551 Unpainted Joinf:s 1,043 Joints Requiring Rewo&"' 82 Additional Joints Rewoded 67 Significantly Dsficient Joints (10CFR50.554e3 0 (1) DESIGN ALLOWABLE STRESSES ARE EXCEEDED IN THE AS-BUILT CONDITION. (2) DESIGN ALLOWABLE STRESSES ARE NOT EXCEEDED IN THE AS-DUILT' CONDITION. THESE JOINTS ARE BEING REWORKED PER KG&E MANAGEMENT DIRECTION TO INSTALL MISSING AND UNDERLENGTH WELDS UNLESS PROHIBITED BY FIELD CONDITIONS.

if " Flaira A t a 0 Valuas of messgr:d Icg. ,cf f111ct e IIO" weld f rom "AWS-AISC Fillet Weld 5t'udy" 0 weld l for the American Institute of Steel . GO f Construction tested by Testing Engineers, ' n 432 Inc., Oakland, CA, May 31, 1968 R =.2977 r [ N s..Or '

-so t

s i' r s av q i. k M } i veld l q., k U I 13 id F 4 : w,,. 336 i s r i. y.0:. ( ). lt . 4286 s ( e. 0493 -30 s e 4 i ,a , w.,A N,, h 1/2n F '1 , * ~ n gi P ]y,s v f 4 h! U W. 2ss h P n I !e -mo .s \\ <4 \\ g-9 k-- r. 526o e V (N 0625 D c\\-._ ,f (s ~ s-s r :%4... ~ pt.s. N ~ f 4.. m,A 4 s L 4 4 a n 1 .e -r 1Q p F N-lc d R.'.S,[hg.cql %p 4.:\\ .k A l ~ hQ \\ ey,';-) Q s ~ i 2[ 24' n J m cb. W \\ a i t 1- .22 'as' .'2 d.'ao' .'32' .'34' bd.'as .'4 0 .'4 2 '.<i 4' .4 s' .'4 8'.td .'s2'.h'.bs' 'ss'.'ed 'sa' 's4 :ss'.'sef.37d '.73 ' l 4 ...Hessured te d za el Fillet veld (u) g w

FIGURE D a = 432 e ' : 'ii d 'n = 336 weld I A x =.02 I = 1.143 36 o s=.m ^ lD Ax =.02 ,- 26 ( ( ,4 s e s a = 288 , 22 E = 1.053 s =.134 h $ l 20 A x =.02 I n 3, r 'd u 16 o 14 Er$ 12 22 au = 10 c 8 6 4 2 .7 3 '.7 7 '.81 '.S S '.8 9 '.9 3 '.9 7 ' 101 ' 105' 10 9' 1.13 ' 1.17 ' 121 '12 5'12 9 ' 133'13 7 '1 A1 '14 5'1/.9 '153 ' i [Wactual) . ratio (W desired / FIGURE E Cerrespondence frc: Mr. W. C. Cadwell, Asst. Ch. EnE. of Caterpillar Tractor Co. Feoria, IL Dec. 22, 1964 of 925 fillet welds checked from 1/8" to 1/2" i 688 (74.4%) from nominal (1.0) to 25% oversize (1.25) From this data: r l 96 (10.4%) exceeded 25% oversize (1.25) 15.2% corresponds to l 141 (15.2%) under nominal, size (1.0) 10.4% corresponds to 1.02 n = 925 p l x = 1.112 =.10;

* ~ _ "

E 7s ly: g 1.0 = r - 1.02Er 5, g ,m = c2 60 (1,ogg3}

(1.2595
2 ". x 7

KS "" E. 50 h ,q' 1.25 = x + 1.259s s '2 4 / 'f From this we get l {comparethis Uo 40 ~ \\ x = 1.11 p g, g l 3 with AISC data \\ s =.10 E 30 I. ) ( \\ ~ ' 15.2% / 10.4% below nominal / N above.25 10 g size N oversize i ex x%- N 3 2 .73'.77'.81

8 5 '.8 9 '.-.9 3 '.9 7 ' t01 '1.0 5'10 9'1.13 ' 1.17 '121 '12 5 '12 9' 1.33'1.37 1.41'1 A 5

[1?cetual (L' cccirtd}f ratio ~ i ~..

1.00 - W o O O.80 1 ~. x w .i* i g x _.I e: g g O O.60 Z b. W O m H. I M H m O 5 { b O.40' - I $ W m ALLOWABLE SHEAR STRESS w J y 0.20 u; H i I o BASE METAL: A36 A441 A514 ELECTRODE: E60 E70 E70 E110 SHEAR STRENGTH OF LONGITUDINAL FILLET WELDS WITH MATCHED BASE MATERIAL _ _ _ _ _ _ _. _ _ _ _ ~. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _,

.0, t 1.6 - ~ r-k ~ A f 1.4 - a sa ~ a..f.' a d W ^ O A b6 O 1.2 - m F A A A A k w A I J 6 A A W ^ y 1.0 - as z tt W O e i-I w .g e.80-g< ZW W I b W wg.60- _.i Cf) i

W I

.4 O ' 1/4 SPECIM ENS A-EAST COAST A-WEST COAST .20-O ELECTRODE: E70 E70 E90 E70 E90 E110 BASE METAL: A36 A441 A514 SHEAR STRENGTH OF TRANSVERSE FILLET l wpl hR WITM AA ATriJFD QACC A A CTo t

h WELDS F"BJECTED TO BENDING AND SHEAR (rYM!RTESY CIVIL ENGINEERING ni!D PUBLEC WORKS REVIEW) e h 1 1 ~ ' ' q = gfl + fl - a 4 o j ji j'; ,L -r i - o = g/l+ 0.2 /[ -* i 150 Resultant ? i stress at

ultimate, a

to o* f 1% A / A e ^ A a t n, 50 C I' b a. 4 i 0 1 1 I i 1 0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 e I T a

~ L n = 133', (r )m = 0.84 u ~ 2.7 Fr = 0.09 u ~ FREQUENCY l [q I'_ 0.6 0.8 1.0 FILLET WELD r ' ~ u l __ WELD ELECTRODE Fu .3

s l 'O BJ ECTIVE TO INDEPENDENTLY EVALUATE KG&E's APPROACH TO THE RESOLUTION OF CORRECTIVE ACTION REO.UEST CCAR) NUMBER 19 AND MAKE l RECOMMENDATIONS FOR A TIMELY CLOSEOUT OF CAR 19 i f l 1

f% ACTIVITIES 1D FINAL REPORT REVIEW (KG&E REPORT;l l 2) SITE VISIT { FEBRUARY 15-17;l 3;l REVIEW CF SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS l o Weld. Procedures i

Filler D/Fotal l
DIC Inspection Criteria l
Reinspection Validation (Painted;l 4;l WELD INSFECTION. OF PAINTED AND UNPAINTED TNELDS IN THE AUXILIARY AND '

i REACTOR BUILDINGS l 5;l DISCUSSIONS WITH KG&E, DIC, AND.BECHTEL l PERSONNEL l 6) PREPARATION OF REPORT ~ l 4 D.

9 R ESULTS

RELATED WET.. DING ACTIVITIES ARE SOUND AND DOCUMENTED
REINSPECTIOR PROGFIAM HAS BEEN EXTENSIVE, PROPERLY FR3 FORMED, AND DOCUMENTED l
VALIDATION OF INSPECTION WITH PAINT HAS BEEN COMPLETED
IMPERFECTIONS NOTED IN REINSPECTION ARE l

TYPICAL'FOR C/Mn STRUCTURAL WELDING i

NO SAFETY SlGNIFICANCE OF THE IMPERFEC-l TIONS l

i

rs .~' ( CONC:_USIONS REINSPECTPN PROGRAM IS SOUND AND EFFEC-TIVE, AND ENSURES AWS D1.1 QUALITY WELDS IMPERFECTIONS ARE MINOR AND STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY f 3 ASSURED 9 rm

SUMMARY

BY GLENN L. K0 ESTER 2/27/85 KG8E HAS ALWAYS HAD, AND CONTINUES TO HAVE'A FIRM (7-t )( COMMITMENT TO PROTECT THE HEALTH AND SAFETY OF THE PUBLIC AS WELL AS OUR OWN EMPLOYEES. THAT JS WHY WE UNDERTO0K SUCH AN ~ EXTENSIVE PROGRAM TO EVALUATE THE ACCEPTABILITY OF THE STRUCTURAL STEEL WELDING AT WOLF CREEK. AS YOU HEARD EARLIER, OUR REINSPECTION EFFORTS FOUND SEVERAL MINOR DEVIATIONS THAT GAVE THE APPEARANCE OF A HIGHER THAfi EXPECTED REJECT RATE. HOWEVER, THE PRIMARY REASON FOR THESE REJECTS RESULTED FROM THE "No TOLERANCE" INSPECTION PHILOSOPHY DISCUSSED BY MR. REEDY. THE VAST MAJORITY OF THESE DEVIATIONS WOULD fiOT BE REJECTED BY A QUA21FIED AWS INSPECTOR AT ANOTHER FACILITY UNLESS THEY WERE mal:IfiG THE SA!*E TYPE SEC0i'DARY INSPECTIOfi THAT WE MADE. THE FACT THAT KGEE TOOK A MOPE CoriSERVATIVE APPROACH DURItiG THE REINSPECTION EFFORTS DOES NOT IN AfiY WAY INVALIDATE THE INITIAL WELD INSPECTIONS. i l l _1-

AS DISCUSSED EARLIER, THE REINSPECTIONS DID IDENTIFY A FEW JOINTS IN WHICH SOME WELDS HAD NOT BEEN MADE. THESE PRIMARILY ( (7 \\ \\ RESULTED FROM A MISINTERPRETATION OF THE WELD DETAIL AND NOT, FROM GROSS INADEQUACIES IN THE INSPECTION PROGRAM. WHITE WE STRIVE FOR PERFECTION, WE MUST RECOGNIZE THAT HUMAN ERRORS CAN AND DO OCCUR. THAT IS ONE REASON WHY WE DESIGN AND BUILD THESE PLANTS WITH SO MUCH CONSERVATISM. THIS IS DEMONSTRATED BY THE FACT THAT NONE OF THE JOINTS WITH MISSING WELDS WOULD HAVE FAILED. A POINT THAT NEEDS TO BE EMPHASIZED IS THAT WE MEAN IT i' WOULD NOT HAVE FAILED UNDER THE WORST POSTULATED LOADING CONDITIONS. THIS WOULD INCLUDE NORMAL LOADING PLUS ANY LOADS RESULTING.""0M A POSTULATED WORST CASE ACCIDENT. l l OUR PRIMARY 0BJECTIVE IN THE OVERALL CORRECTIVE ACTION PROGRAM DISCUSSED EARLIER WAS TO ASSURE THAT WOLF CREEK IS l STRUCTURALLY SOUND AND WILL NOT FAIL UNDER THE WORST POSTULATED ACCIDENT CONDITIONS. WE HAVE DONE THAT. l l L O s e IN DOING So, WE ALSO REAFFIRMED THAT THE AWS WELDING WAS DONE IN ACCORDANCE WITH lHE APPLICABLE CODES. ( /". .c WE DID NOT LIMIT OUR REVIEW OF THIS MATTER TO WELDING ALONE. WE ALSO LOOKED AT OTHER AREAS TO ASSURE THEY WE-RE COMPLETED sN ACCORDANCE WITH APPLICABLE REQUIREMENTS AND IN A MANNER THAT PROVIDES ADEQUATE PROTECTION OF THE HEALTH AND SAFETY OF THE PUBLIC. WE ALSO HAD THREE OF THE LEADING AUTHORITIES IN STRUCTURAL STEEL WELDING INDEPENDENTLY REVIEW OUR PROGRAM TO ASSURE THAT WE WERE NOT TAKING A BIASED LOOK AT OURSELVES. AS YOU HEARD FROM THEIR DISCUSSIONS TODAY, FROM THEIR REVIEW OF THE VARIOUS ASPECTS OF QUR PROGRAM, WE DID A VERY THOROUGH, CONSERVATIVE, 6 ASSESSMENT OF OUP, AWS WELDING PROGRAM AND THEY FOUND NOTHING TO QUESTION OR INVALIDATE THE CONCLUSIONS WE HAVE MADE. I SINCERELY BELIEVE THAT ANYONE KNOWLEDGEABLE IN ENGINEERING AND CONSTRUCTION PRACTICES WOULD HAVE TO AGREE THAT KG8E'S CORRECTIVE ACTION PROGRAM VERIFIED THAT THE STRUCTURAL STEEL AT WOLF CREEK GENERATING STATION IS SAFE AND SOUND. [,

..( THIS COMPLETES OUR PRESENTATION ON AWS STRUCTURAL STEEL WELDING AT. WOLF CREEK. WE FIRMLY BELIEVE THE RECORD IS CLEAR (~ \\ ~. AND E ARE READY TO RECEIVE OUR OPERATING LICENSE AND COMMENQE LOADING FUEL AND PROCEED THROUGH POWER ASCENSION. l _4

Y UNITED STATES g i NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION s WADelNGTON, OL 2m05 OPPN:S OF TM wvssTIGATONS 1-28-85 3385 fEB -1 ft 1: 58

Bill,

,' g y This is the third rep 6rt. Driginaf a1 nee { $gs 9 WicLn/ Jt'. JC.,, ), Dick r b b i + l l i t b [ i f e r h t I o l l M

.8 h,, k(" .e

7, r..

left SEPTEMrtr 1*TS ST9 g40tF SEPTEMBER 1979 373 ^

7. Johnsase. R. P.. "Rneerch e.i Sint-Cc-nte Oc'r**ise Snens." /e=* ef c/ #4e

.r Jerwerersi Diefedese. ASCF Vol. 96. No. *. fl. I'vec. Paper 7,22. Mar. 1970. pp. ., m se ..,.,*... P. e, it remi. u. C..,.c,me., of m, e Pie,mnne JOURNAL OF THE n Co... esCo i e.,e,,eem.. n.,,e.,-.. ,*,*,,.,s. e er C,. t..~,. r.

2.. e.

.,e. STRUCTURAf DIVISION L .. o,tes...,......,e.eer. . n. in.. o..... n,... v. ssee. so of s. i Ce,,-- c . O.. s 4e t seh'*eighe med Heeniel We she Coaceese." beerke= fossermee e(5seef Ceserseversen C. r ne*.e se et, voi. s. v,. 2. Apr.. :-7s. rn. 5,u. r-le. nov adie. M. K.. ead cetembos. T. V., "t_ - i end nesiseence receae D ='r.a for LOAD AND RESISTANCE FAcroR Disson f Sons." 1,neer of sne Stewer. ret fwwea. A",CE. Vol.104. No. STS. Pere. Peper sanns.Sepe..t*7s.pp.eso-i4 n. CnrTERIA FOR CONNECTOR 5* f-f l. SI= tier, R. O.,==4 Drinceti. O. C.. Jr.. "nrem-l :t***vh of Steelfspesete Cettroede some." Jeme=et of she Ste-crenei Dreic~. ECE Vol. 90. No. ST2. I rec. Perer By Jahr W. Flohee.' needere V. Celesehse.' Femone. ASCE, fi. 4"C.'".}, T2';":r~e en e-~~ er re.v.,,reew.e c r.

-"ar ' "** '

~r-se*e R. R-h*s.- ASCE Assences lastitute of Segel Ca**erweisne. 81TF.

23. "5seet seroceeres for Sei'br-e-tJamie Str " De=':." CSA 38mee'rd Jiti IMd.

Cenedine 3:eedoede Associet4a. Reedele. C'tene. Comede. Dec.. IM4 hrtsoevence l l ,l j. Design criterie beoed on the teed and Resiesence Feetoe Design (LRFD) p. j spproach snest inclode a tresteneet of connections. This report wdl feews we development of the eviterie necessary for the principal festesting elevisesste (weide. 4 hinh. strength holte. and ordinary bohe) and will inchsde illustratises of the applicetion of these eleesente le commese types of jointe. Ceesportsee wW be j sonde with resulte achieved seing working stress desige. E 1 As developed le Ref. II, the LRFD seethod ces he syntheelsed as s s. e y,,e go................................. m n. e-o De left-hand side of F. I le the resistence of the enember er structeve (N. 4 i - le the corninal resistance and 4 is a "resistenes factor"). while the right. bend side gives the effects of the Boed on the meesnbee se streetere, c'- "4 (. ! for esemple. only dead lead end live leed. P. I would be weides n 4 \\ + n.e,ee + n ee............................. m q. le which Q,. and 9,,, are the seesa deed and, live leed effects. vespectively; f e' and y,. and w are the correspondi*a loed factore. The principal purpose of J P this paper is le develop empressione for the perameters 4 and R. in F. I. 4 N j' N Nose.-tw,cwu:ee opea eneet re6every I.1979. Sepersee descoessees steeld be sehseneed k I Fee the iediesdeel papers in this sysopossess. Te estead the eteeses dose see seenes. p e wnisen aquest seems be filed wish the Ed. nee of Teetestel Petiscoesses. A5CE. The 6. paper se part of the copyrinMed Peevoel of eSe Severteral Deviesse. P:eeseeings of she 3., Amer 4ceg Society of Cesil Enesseers. Vol.10s. 'de. 579. " c ^ _. 1978. M esseertpt f-- =yr.

es sehmissed for veview for posesMe pobhemesse se taiey IS 1978.

%f I E e 'To be presessed et the Octeter 16-20.197e. ASCE Asemel,Casesnelon a 3.y.mam. .1 l heid e. Ch, esse, is. r-i f\\ g 'J'ref. of Cie. Enges.. Petes Fasts. Lab.. IAbish Unie DeeMehsen. pm. 51 ' Pref, sed Cheen Cle. Eages. Dept.. Woohington Unte,6 Se. Laele. Me. 'l, ' Prof. of Cie. P.oses.. Univ. of Alheste. Edsesseen. Casede. ') ee. e.. e e e.. en f - ' ~ ~ ' - - - - - - - - - - - - -

r I 1828 "trif MDfn *.'."' sig sig tcAD.nfs;STAptCE FACTOR 1429 - '[ De dev:forment s,d be ime-1 re the use c' firt-order probabilistic rut *+fe wetos.-%e weld types teed for structreil purposes are primarily the genov2 . A{ De fund:meettirageiremcets for e well-dY d cc,nection ese be ce~iNeed weM end the fillet weld. In the case of groove welds, the' forces acting see ~, [l lo be: ,,nelly sen,ile or compressive. Tests have shows that complete penettetine - groove wekte ofIhe some shichness ee el.e connect ed part are capable of developing

1. Adequate Strength-It is generetly c'm ;'ered good prectice th-t the the full cepecity of thei pers. Since it is normal to one weld metal that is '

erenections be somewhat strm-,cr then 11 - r'i'* t ins joined, nos, ir r iture et least en Strong es the base metal, this meers that tee properties of the bene should occur, it wil! tane ptere m the mem' >

- 'h-e them in it:e cen,ecienne snetal will govern the design. nus, when complete penettet6ese groove welds y/,

therchy ensuring that emg,;c w-n n3 te n., t - Jef1 ctions) will precce ("fure, are used, design can he based on the properties and behavior of the enepibet (

2. Adequate Ib tility-Cree riust t=e 7 in proportioning the elemenen le which the connection is being made.

5 /l ef the connectieve to ensure th t stuctile Ic W tr ' ell result. Of course, mch ne ultimate sesength of fillet welds subjected to sheer (the escal ceae) le Endes;reble phenomene as imcht.ng of pista al-merits, brittle fracture, lameller dependent upon the strength of the we?d metal sad the direction of the applied h tearinn, and eiice=ive local afiatortion mu t ? - avoi.ted. Provision of edeq este load. De weld may be parallel to the direction of the load (a "longiledinal" f,', ' ductahty will men's thee :Sie structure contain%- l'ie cannection will have capscity fillet weld), transverse to the direction of ISe load (a "Iransverse" fillet weld), g for distortion before failure and -;il ellow fre f%c redistrihelion of in-h. De or et say engle in-between. Regardiess of the onentatioe, the welds feil ie (, provision of adeqi ete ductility is a require " acacrolly less we!M-fi- ! or sheer, etthough the plane of rupture varies. All esperimental studies have shows ? enders:ood thee thet of edequate strength. ILet lonritudmal fillet welds provide lower strength best higher ductility thee d;

3. Ecceceny-As Ior et' e--et iral compc~--t,it is desireb6e that cw-etfons transverse fillet welds (1,2,7). Since is compten joints it is not always possible C

lie ecocoercai of :paterial and Ic as imple e, r :*iNe le fabrication. to define the direction of loeding on the weld and since the longitudieel fillet N welde provide the lower bound to weld strength, sleey will be used inere to h' ' le working stre-a design, sp cifications (11) erstemerily specify rUn-nNe provi.fe the beeis for design recommesdations, ne resul;s ces shee he appised stresses and give r ites resenhn buckli"A Pr-P m end the line. Altho ~r,* not in general to fillet avelds without reference to the directice ofloeding. necesterily obvices, most alto veble stresse-fer festening elemente r~f movt Early teste ce low carbosi eteels connected Iry meneet see losesitudieel fiGet ~ k. rules for proportienir,g conn etions are, i-f**?, t esed on ultienets etr~gth wekte showed ebet the ultimate sheer strength on the saisimene throat eree I' considerations. " Traditional" de i n of conentbe is much efoser to sto I.P.FD was 65%-R5% of the tensile serength of the deposited meterial (4,6,12). These I: t Cpproech thee roost osers of the*e specifierNi per' ires veelire. early stu fies also showed that sheer yielding wee not critical is fillet welds 7 bees use the meterial stroie-herdened without large overelldeformotions occurring. F f*===anos er C w Dreee thouseecree Thus, the yield point of fillet welds is not considered a significant peresneter. L'$ More secent tests os a wkle range of steels connected with "mesching" ( The lood factoes. r., and the resistance factor,.fi. in F. I depend vpon electro tes have provided dets os sirength and lie variability (2,3,5,9). (For meey h, 4 o " safety indes," ft, t! et is o* ini,cd by celih m'ico to esisting standard de qns of these tests, date were not obtained on the tensile strength of the deposited y' (II). Dus. it is intended that successful peat prettiec will be the eterting point weld metal; only the sheer strengths were obtained.) Blodgett gives reselte fee e for I.RFD. For besmo end columns. it has t e-n found that a value of 11 - 127 semples of weld snetal for which the minimese specified tensile strength 3 0 provides a good estimore of the reliebitity an5crent in twrrent desi,-n. This

1. 62 kni (onpublished). The asese eennile strength value, (,,)., was 64.0 toi.

'g esloe has been tenen also es tha hesis for I.itFD cr serie fee all other types the standard deviation, e., wee 2.56 hei, and the esefficient of varielion. V,,, J of structural merobers. le view of the desitetely that conneetkwta have e I:i 'ier was 0.039. For a semple of 138 specimens of E70 electrode weld meetal (minimum f degrec of reliability then the members eheyjoia. tf-rnfetyisodes p for tvicaections opecified tensile strength 72 kni). RIodsett determined (e.). - 7e.9 hei, e., 4 should be entnewn.d targer then this value of 1.0 - 2.67 hei, and V,, = 0.014. Unpublished studies by Nesh med Holtz for the b, The cobbestice p+oceou.* vsed here is itm s r e se that followed fer t~,e same category gave (e ). - 86.5 hei. e,, = 9.88 kei, med V,, = 0.247 with ( '; i and colueens (ll). It will be ca.3 4 out for emcvg cembinatioes of de,d end a semple sire of 40. Blodgett siso obtened date frees teste so weld metal p I live loed and will osver welds, H3-trength toha, eed ordleery tioits. siede with ERO. E90, and Ell 0 electrodes. Table I summarices o!! of the date {g De safety inder; p is defined (II) es from Illoafgell's report. It is worth noting that Blodgett slee obtained results I for E70 electrode weld metal that were higher thee those listed and comperable

r i

g,.- to the values found by Nash med Holtz. For e sample of 128 specemese made t, p. using E7024 and E702 electrodes (minimum specified tessile strength 72 kei), [qJ $=

+I,',................................O) tilodgets obtained vehses (e,). = 85.4 kei, e., = 4.77 kel, and V,, = 0.056.

j-Until recee date see eveitable, it seems reasseeble to ese the lower bound bi, le which R., and 0,, are the mes i velees of if e resistecce and the loed erre-t; results listed le Table I es the basis of the forseeleties herene. Tbs value of Z end V, end V, ore I!>= ccerespoedi 3 ccefrscients ef variation. dieteiled definitions . the re:lo of the actual tensile strength of weld seetal to its minimes specified d e of these apsentities ces be obeeined fross Ref.11 teesIIe strength will be tekee es 1.05 with a coefficieel of variation of M. (, J.

si . Ug te30 ';rritMnta 1 D STI STg LCA0.ftfSISTA8tCE FACTOR 14Jf. Thia will be cor.sioued to app *y to til elect"

c'e-rificesions beina centie'ered.

T1e coefficie:t of e:rietion of the resistence, V,, required for the solution ,r[ i.e., Em throcyh Ell 0. of Eq. 3 is defined se (11) h' Iig. I shov.e e distrib.stic i t f the ratio e f fi!!et weld slieer stre.t's a weld afectrode leasile ctrength lor e +-mple ar I31 ?;--eirneos. The weld shear rternsth. Is s

" ' ' + '+ * ***************************** N e., le that for the appropriata e votehinn d"'" de using the values te-evihed in which the coefficients of variation on the right. bend side of the equation.

[ berein. Thee. data provide t? - following r"4 : (v.)., = 0.84. e, e. Or?. and represent the uncertainties in material ettength, fabrication. sed e professional" h V = 0.10. g factor. respectively. l The variation in the professional assumptions reflect the accerocy with which (. ,, TA*t'* 1.-fries r' " ":c, ith the forces acting on the festeners are estimated. The atomet determination of these forces is highly comples and they are esual;y assigned according to a t distril,ution that fulfills the static equilibrium requiremente only. However, for 6 epacificet6 n Teca.te e ductile structure, the principles of the lower hooral sAcotem of plasticity are ven... M.e, Coettic6ent t' e val'd. Thus as no error is made in statics and weld malerial le provided to o-strees.in t en..',

* - n.' w't et

/

r, e.t.e e.

remt she forces assigned. the joint will he sefe. There is, therefore. so veristnlity tiectreete eies pee

Iemrde stre**.

e cetion variotion. tien em-of she professional assumptions: the enigned. statically correct forces will be geovp oggvees4pch eg t v, ),, e., V,, e'1 Ceste reiitted. Accordingly, the term V,in Eg. 5 is set at eero. lll ill t?l 14) l'a It) til Variatiori in fabrication reflects the variatioa of the weld length med throet ENilo. Dott. thickness from Ihose assumed in the desige. At the present finie, there are i i ur27 62 827 66 0 2.M 0 019 I r% not enough date available to otMein V, geantitatively. A value V, = 0.15 wiu E7014. F7018 72 l'4 74 9 Je7 0 086 I t be assumed for fillel welds. This implies that fliere is a 30% prohobility that I solo X PO IM 8 7., 4.34 0049 e IG she actuel sheer stee will be withis i10% of the aree assommed. Tbio le believed Es01 o-M 90 14 100 2 4.12 0 04) e ei g, gg, con,,,,,g g,,,,,,,pq;,,, Eliot t.X l!O 72 l16.9 V 't 0 040 1 01 The coefficient of variation of Ilie megetiel strength fece the motisfied date available for fillet treld strength le 3 pt y*s V'.-

- +-

= (0.10)' + (0.04)' = 0.0I 16............... (6) e-** <r. r,,, J-se .e<> Alm needed for the calibestion le the weld sier required by the 1978 Americes f { Specification. the design criterios for a loed cesubinaties e( deed med Eve load Institute of Steel Constructice (AISC) Specification (13). Usens Port 2 of the E 'g

s is t

u 2 l.7 A. x 0.3 r,,, = I.7 c (D, + L,,).....................(7) 't L,. le which A, = the cross-sectio,al area through ebe throet of the weld; D, = the code value of deed load; L,, = code live.loed telee se reduced for eres; and c is en lefluence coefficient treneforming load inteemity to smensher i r--f-I -e. e __,r .. ___ se se t force. (Note that the load factor (l.7) appears ce both sides of Eq. 7; she ee e, e. e. / result obtained here usina Part 2 of the Specifiestion are identical so thee which ,,,,g g,g5,,,,.,. g would have been obtained using Part I, allownede seremo deelse, of that sense specifiestice.l The mean resistance of a fille 1' weld desigeod seeerding to the I Ft0.1.--steset:3nehl, of tve'4 thee, stre-

te Ete-toede Tenesse ste nm 1778 AISC Specification le therefore L

I s. T, e e,,e. e.<e to,en,m streng,, r 8, e,d its e.em+et of veri,t-l a - e.> - (D, + L )(e.). - 2 a e + u e 0.,,,,, sei:1 he used to evelvete the safety indes, p. T1 e meest ebeer streacth of fillet [ e: Ids esa be esprested so I and abs corresponding coefficient of veristlos le g, (,,). = {f,* i f i V, - V V', + V' = V0.0116 + 0.0223 = 0.185............... (9) E l {

r.,, - 0 s4 x I.c3 r.,,............. (4)

F ( / (r,,, ) i sob,titution of A.(Eg. e). Ve(F 9 4 ). g., med V,(Ref. II)lato the espremelee y y O

1434

tritfActn 177 '

STS S79 LOA 3."ESISTAtsCE FAC70P ^ 1431

f '.

f i A* f, i f ) fr i ' pU e, R. - l( e*,J, \\ F,)l. \\ F, )I c ( D, + L )................. ( 191 i a* j l l D. = I - l -- - -- - c ( D, + f )............Q........ (14) ( F. J. A, F, As noted for the case of high. strength bolts in tension. the speciGed minimem j,' De safety inden p (Eq. 3) con now 19 i' terrnined for high.strere.sh bolts tensile strength will be taken as 120 ksi for A325 bohs and 150 kai for A490 ecting is tension. The values of 0., and t*,. cre defined in Ref. II, while R., hohs. The pumissible sheer stresses according to the 1976 Research Council i is given by Eq.13 or le se 1 V, by DI. fl. T h-apecified minirrmm e-nsile co Itiveted and Rotted Structural Joints Specification and the 1978 AISC 1 strenath. T., for A325 botts "P to I in. i i < i-meter is 120 ksi en ! 150 ksi Specification are 30 ksi and 21 ksi for A325 bolts (no threads in a sheer piene f.c for A490 t olts op to I.I/2 i, ist diame

r. 'I!:e e!!owable tensile stre-1 r,.

and threads intercepting a sheer plane, respectively), with the corresponding is 44 ksi for A325 bolte and 34 'ni for A491 M*i. Table 2 lists the vetees of p determined rer this eese sad they are riso eSows figures of 40 ksi and 2R ksi for A490 bolts, ne ratios pf these sheer stresses le Fig. 2 for the perticular cr re of D, .'.. ~ 5's per. For A325 bo'en, the '" *rrensimetely the same es the ratio between the groes bolt eres and one taken through the root of the threaded portion of a belt. Dee, the safety isoden, s oefety inden varies frone 4.!!! to 6.42 era f" A?O bolts it ranges from 4.74

p. for the two cases will be nearly the same.

to 6.95, l SAcer.-De e,een re-istev e of a hW mr~;t*: bolt acting en/:r a force The values of p for high-strength bolts loeded in sheet are gives le Table tending to sheer it through a Mt cross e7.. ;, 2 and are shown in Fig. 2 for the case of D, = L,, = 50 psf. Over the reage i enemined. p varies from 5.56 to 7.5B for A325 bohs and frose 3.23 to 7.21 for A490 bohs. It is wonh noting that the safety indes for high. strength behe (' A.r,,,..................g...... (IS) R. = g, g g,,, g

g Fedesten.-High strength bolts may be used le joints where k le desirable L

in which v, = the sheer stre--th; er, - t!- tenaile strength of t! e telt; F, that slip not occur ender the working leeds. De contribution pegreided by ese - the specified esinimum tec Fe strength cT e e t'ntt material; m e. t! e n' mber imit to the total slip resistance is p of sheer pieces in the joint; rnd A. - t'- eremi. sectional eres cf t! e bolt, j I. " "II I II I=

* = = * * *
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * *. (20)

De sineistical dete eveilable fer the reti, -f

1: sheer strength to telt tensile e

e strength are (5): (e,/e.). - GA25 sad I'., h, - it.053. Dese are er;liemble in which m = the number of slip planes; A,is a slip esefficient reflecting the p for both A325 er.d A490 bolts. The date to 1 e 1 for the ratio of Icle tensile type end condition of the faying surfece; snd T,== the elesapag force provided I strength to specified minime-s tenete str--- 7 ere the scene as given Treviousl F by the holt. A good deel of information is knows about the slip coefficient il for botto in sees:en and are.Nffer+nt fer '!- two credes of fasteners. Hus, and the clamping force and their distributions (3). for A325 bolts: The mean value of the clamping force med its distribution depend epos the swnath of the bok and upon the method end for insteuetion (cehhnted wwweb i R. - 0.623 x 1.2 A.r,m = 0.75 A r,m; ',, - 0.10.......... (Ita) or turn-of. net). le either seethod. the clamping force le to be a soimiseese of and for A490 bolts: 0.70 times the specified mielmuse tessile strength of the belt easteriel. F., tismos 1 I[ i . the tessile eres of the bolt. A,. Using the dets for bolts lesselled by the sero ef.est N., = 0 625 x 1.07 x A r,m - 0.67 A.r rt; l', - 0.07........ (16A) reethod (5): o p le e fashic. sir,iler to the e'evelopment er rq.12. the bolt sheer eres r~;nited 1.20 by the 1978 AISC Specifiestien een be de+. -d es (Tel. - 1.20 x 0.70 r, x

~ 0'98 'F"* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * (2f}

4[ 03 in which I.20/l.03 is the ratio of the mean tensile strength of all A325 bolts f 4. r, m ( D, + L )............................ ( 17) to the mean tensile strength of the particoter lot of boite used in these tests (both as compared to F.). The coeftecient of variation corresponding to Eq. Io which F* - the ellowable st:-sr strens given in ti e Specification. The rest. tence 21 is 0.12 which is obtemed by esing 0.08 as the veristion in the reteo of the terms of Eq.16 can now be e titlen es. For AUS bolis: a suit clamping force to that specified (1.20). 0.07 as the variation la the estio k l.20/1.03. and 0.05 as the assumed varieties des to fabrication sacertainties. y R. = 0.73 - *- c(D, + L ) Foe A490 bolts installed by the tern'of eet asethod, the espression equivaleet F. in meaning to Eq. 21 is (5) ..............() r 1.07 or for A490 bolts: R. = 0.67 ; c (D, + f,,) (T,)., = 1.26 x 0.70 F. x A, = 0.86 A, F,................ (22) 1.10 le genersi teres. Eq. Ig cm be empres -I I, the forse with a coe'ficient of variatios equel to 0.10. e l = O

.e,e sf rTEMt"1 1WI S'" sig LOAD. RESISTANCE FACTO 183F s. The clip ece .nl obtri'm! from o r--* of 112 specirness of A7. Ah, czes, fillet welds and high strerath bolts. Ahhoesh it would be more eedel. AC40. cnd FE >e exd Fe 32 (Eutrpeen) m-Is is 0.336 with a cceIGeient of in terms e,f metrrill treed, two values of p would increase abc desess esmplexity. Q veri: tion of 0.07 (5). Simitre etten cre m "' 'l-Icr o numf er ef etter cases. For thz service:biliay state p = 1.5 will be used. gesed en the esses caeanised.- y For esemple. reit.hlested MI4 steel I-9 e sfiri coefficient of 0.331 with a this represente e reasosieble valee. coefficient of variation of 0.01 L The value of the slip re+b ence esg : - - ? f'y T'q. 20 can now fac further prisrwineriose er flesevesses Ferree t steentified. Con +1erlea belts i,*te!!cd by t'e t un-ci. net seethod and ste:ts such as A36 with clen, mill scale, for A323 be* : The resistence factor,4 (Eq. I), con be espressed as (II) F, = 0.33 m A,F,; V,, = 0.21.............. ?........ (23e ) R, i 4 = - e s p (-e p F )..................... i.... * *

07) and for A470 bolts:

'r, = 0.27 m A,F,; f *, D.21.........., p36) R. The 1978 AI.;C Specifkrtica prese *- t'. retpitements for fricti"1-type in which R., = the mean resistence; R - the nominal resisteses es espressed I connectices le terms of e, c'*owshfe s'"r *'re o (even though tf:e t c!ss are by the design criteria; and e is a numerical feetor equel to 0.55 (II). The terms ( set actually acting is shear): p and V, have been defined previously. The sections following will establish a the values of the resistence factor for the varices fastener conditions. [ F. A, m = c (D, + ()........................... (24) F111et Welds.-The nominal resistence of a fillet weld in sheer is costoseerily [' f Solving for m r*4 selet a v '9e of 0.7.* I r el retle of tenePe rtrna eres tenen as 0.6 times st e specified minimem tensile strength of the deposited weld '[ to gross bott eres A,/A,. t* e streact!' *- s I, Eq. 23 trecer,e, for A325 metet. This is based on en assumption thet the fillet weld le in pere sheer behs: and that the distortion energy theory describes the condition of pimetic flow. { l F trhe "e e ect" sme ber le I /(3 er0.577.) Caning the threat eres of the weld, A..the P, = E23 { (D, + () g c seminal reslotence is thee .............. (23) R,= 0.6 Fund............................... 08) ( or for A490 bolts: P, - 0.22 c (D, + f ) The mean resistence of the webt is [ In general terms. Eq. 23 cs t N written r5

"dI'I *********************************N'I

( F. - (a,),(r,).,g 7* As described in the development of the safety inden for flSet welds. p = -- - c (D, + ( ).......,,,.,,,,,,,,, ps) 4.5. (,,). - 0.se Fu,, and y, = 0.19. sebetitesion of these values and the d F. espressions given by Eqs. 25 and 29 lato the espression for the resistenes e The specified minimum ten ile strent,tf.. r.. are ageln 120 ksi for A323 factor (Eq. 27) gives a vetoe 4 = 0.93. bolts and ISO ksi for A4'M) IWts. The vt* . -iven by the AISC Srmification fligbstrength Behs: Teestes.-The meanimal :==A=e==== ef a bigbetrength bolt for F, are 17.3 bi for A325 'vlts and 2' ' *i for A490 bolts. The vob+es of in tension le (3) ( the safety inden. D. for joints of A36 (r-n il rl steel with clean r,itt sesle feying surfaces amt usina esti r A323 or A"M imits installed by the turn.cf-nut 3,,, A, r,,,,,,,,,.,,,.........,,,,,,,,,,..., (30) f, method are tehufsted in Tah'- 2. A plot rf - bres for the case of I*, = L, and the mean resistence, se given earlier, is A. = 1.20 A,F, for A32$ bohn = 50 p*f is shown in Fig. 2. Over the rer, - ~* mined abe safety inden varies and R = 1.07 A,F, for A490 bolts. For these two resteners, it wee found from 1.44 to I.7A for A325 IW'* snel from t.32 to I.M for A490 bolts. that V, = 0.09 for A325 bolte and V, = 0.0$ for A490 boks. Assie using As espected. Elie values of t'a safety irt' s re low for bolted, fri-lir'n. type p = 4.5. It ces be determined freen Eq. 27 that 4 em 0.97 for A323 behs le + + conneessons es compared to t r other ce--s ene.i tered. This is t ec,u*e the tension and 4 - 0.94 for A490 boite in tension. .J. consequences of reilure of a inction-tyg - l're 1 connection ere le*s vere lif bStreogth Boles: Shese.-The moeileelW==== ef a bigbeerength belt t then the failure of high-strer..th bolts in ' e-r nr tension or of fillet e cids in sheer is ($) j in sheer. A separate value of the safety in.les should be established for each + of the serviceability limit sistes (bolts an inction-type connections) and strength R* = 0.62 5 A. F*............'................. 0 3 ) I limit sietes (holis in tension or ahear and fift:t welds). and the mean reslotence. as developed in Eq.14 le R. se 0.75 A.F,m for L) { The velee of S== 4.3 willin elected for the rtrenath limit state. 'llis reflects A325 bolts med R. = 0 67 Aar,m for A490 bolts. The veines of r, were quite occurately the values c')trined for fiftet wel.fe, escept for entne cases found to be 0.10 for A325 bolts and 0.07 for A490 belle. Using a votes of of high live. to (esd-loed rn'i91, and will 1 e conservative for hip.h-strenzth p = 4.3, the resistence factor (Eq. 27) le 4 = 0.94 for A325 boks and e = ( bolts. It would le in order to relect two 6fferent vetees of p for these two 0.89 for A490 bolts. 7 -u us- =- e.m m a.u.n,;. m net g i Mi d

'l' Y l top

tf'TEMrr'

17.1 ST7 ST8 LOA'i. RESISTANCE FAC7O*'

to 8 4[ g titgh.Strv -th s.e: Crw 1 FNsr e ' T. - '-. -For o fairrer er* i cted For herms, colum:s, and other male tructuren osmponente Q = 3). the ta both tration cod ehese, il-Io!!awir, t.tnion-hip hee bee: recended t*e EI r, = 3.1, y, = 1.1. and vt = 1.4 hee been recommended for use li

- j the I.ItFD format (II). While y,== f,== 1.8 would till be cppropriet2 for

,D ; (3): tioth categories of festeners. e velve of y, = 1.2 should probebly be chosee [p{ l 5e + (0.6 F), = 4 (0.6 A. F ),......... ...........02) g gg,, gg og,g ,, Le M k m d fw au / , in which S is et e rectored A-ar faree; T i. tb f.ctored ten,ife fme.; and other festeners. Ilowever, rather then seing different leed factors for these f ce9es the effect of the different p factors een be imposed oe the votes ik j A. represents either the 14: area theor-b v' - e'.*nk or threwgh i ? rent of t 4 to be need. For the category described la Table 3 as "Commeettoes-As the threads. stepending v :.e, t' ? octual loc % cf the fellere surf,ce. 4,! The resistance factor,4, em be estehti *--a Irrn Others." this seeses that gr i l{. f f 1.09 (1.09 c.D., + I.39 c L ) - = l R 'l lv.il .............. 133) 4 R. I.13 (1.14 c. D. + 1.59 c L.,) e R. a 1.l (l.1 c,D., + l.4 cgDg)..... (40) e 4 R. ( R. / ( F. j The ratio on the left. hand side of thle inequality varies only frose 0.86 to V.'* + V,' + V ',................... 0 4) 0 90 as the live.loed to dead-loed effect (c L./c,0.) goes freen 2 to 0.25. i. V' and V '. = -+ The corresponding variation for the category ** Connections-Frictice" is from in which R.,/R.le the ratio cf the esperi --taleterr:ttb IIthe nomir'l ritength I Ill lo 112 over the same range. Since the variation is not large la either k case. it is recesamended that the resistence factor,4, be needified for esseettiene , i according to the interaction e'Ivetion (IM.11 with 4 = 1.0). The s'uicical es follows: 4 = 0.88 4 when p = 4.5 med 4 - I.15 4 when S = 1.5. j date for the ratio are (R,/It.) - 1.0*> ra 1 V,.,,, /R, = 0.10. Ue:n these j date and the previoeely deveirped inforr-*, V, = 0, V, = 0.03. (r./F.), TAett 3.--Leod Feeeere for Vestems Seteoy hides Votese [ = 1.20 or 1.07 for A323 or A t'0 bolte. r 1 (:'s /F ) = 0.07 or o c1 fer A325

0. 27 es 0.91 for A323 ba'ts and g

or A49G bcles. 4 ces be determined esie: 1 0.85 for A4?O botta. had Factere r, litgh-Stre,*gth F%Its: Frfet'n.-The eor N-1 frictional reelstence trovifed by r. T* T* T* i the clernping actico of one h% strength tr't li (Il (Il (3) (4) .y R. = m A,( A,' x 0.7 F.)........................... 0 5) p. 3.o g,,,,.6,,3 g,,, g,,, g,3 P

l I I'***

'idies) 1.04 IAS 1.20 and the secos resistances rei coefficients er variation ere as given by Pq. p - 4.S (e-a.14ees--on ethere) 1.13 1.14 1.39

23. The value of V, was ferrw! to be 0.71 for both festeners. Usir t these date and the ve!ae p l.S. the resist ~re frctnr is found fror, D. 27 to I

be 4 - I.13 for A325 batte and 4 - I.Pl Fw A490 bolts, le bot's c~es, it The modified resistence factors for the verices cases considered are therefore, L~ hee been essereed that the bfte are inst *!t~1 by the fore.cf. nut ret! e I and go, r;;ge,,,gg,; 4, g,gg g g,93 - 0.82. For high-strength bolte: .y-that the feying surfaces are i, the clean rT1 r-nft condition. Modtfted Reveere=ce Feeter.-The see rr t-o different valses of the refety

1. Teesloe: A323 4== 0.88 x 0.77 - 0.85 and A490 4 = 0.88 x 0.94 -

leden (ft - 3 for members e-4 0 = 4.5 t r I.S for festeners) intro < feces some 0.f13. operational diffrifties that r se be ree+ '. Writing F4 2 in terr e cf the

2. Shear: A323 4 - 0.88 x 0.94 = 0.83 and A490 4 = 0.88 x 0.89 = 0.78.

f-deed. and live-lo-d intensitier. D., and L :

3. Tension and ebear: A323 4 = 0.88 x 0.91== 0.00 and A490 4 - 0.88 I.

x 0.83 - 0.73.. h.' 4 R,2 Te(c.7,D. + egTg f ) ......'................06)

4. Frictice joints: A325 4 = 1.15 x 1.15 = 1.32 and A490 4 = 1.15 x i

I 7. la which y, - the feed facter representi-ertertainties lie the misslyrls. f '** 1.01 - 1.14, Ref. II: Clearly, it le desirable to nduce the member of values to be used for the y, - esp (e S V,) .............................07) resistsace factor to e minimum. It le recommended that 4 - 0.80 be esed 2, y, = 1 +. p V s ' ', + 6......................... 0 8) for all cases involving the strength limit state. i.e., fillet welds, and high.etremath I.. 8' bolte le tensioe, sheer, or combined tensioe and ebeer med that 4 = l.15 he v - I + e p V V5 + V' .........................09) esent for the serviceability lisait state. i.e., elip.resisteet joints seing high-otrength ' h' bolts. The valee eclected for the streogth lisoit state le ooseewbet uneceservative p Using the vslees V, = 0.ra. V, = 0.O*. V, = 0.20, Fa== 0.13. e~1 V, = for A490 higlwrength boite le sheer and for A490 boite le soebined seassee 3 3 [7 0.05 (Ref. 5), s'e lood fr *e s y ces be emb!!s%ed for the three vs6es of and sheer. It abould be recolled, however, that thei value of the safety ledee r j

p. These are tabatened is Te"- 3.

8 b ___--__n.. t

148tp StritMtif t1 tatt sig ST9 LOAD. RESISTANCE FACTC 184I g fl = 4.3 eres cons. ive for ett c:Ses invel in-hi.-h strength bolts. T7 e vs19e infrrm: tion accessary for the developmeel is else presensed. The work shows p .in = 1.l3 selected for the eerrieerbility li rit ts'- is coeser=ctivr. reft eting that c:rriet design veloes for diffevest=== actors provide sateleetioWy diffneet y the fact that bolts will not always be instelbl Sy the tiers.ef-est method, lesele of reliability. f7etates t Peostros Ac.moeseeeeware ' m-SN -Re,Isteore Cv sertlees: CF ch toe Stre--1N.-Whes it le considere I neces. The week that resulted in this paper was openseved by the Amedene lese P sery thet ecanected perte not slip ento bearic1 "n<5e eervice loeds, the coe.cesion and Steel lastitute (AISI)-Committees of Streeteral Steel Fredecers and Steel will l'e desigacd as e friction-type joint o 5 the criterie already developed Plate Producers as AISI Project 163 " Lead Facter Design of Steel Beildings." for that case, la ciott be recognized. bowe cr. th. such a design does not The members of the Advisory Task Force. I. M. Viest (Cheirenes). W. C. estomatically ensure that the criterie estehti-* -4 for a bearing. type ccnnection liensell (Engineering Supervisor). L. S. Deedle C. A. Coveen. F H. Oeyler. will else be met. Therefore. if the servierebd :. fiHt mee (elipp is being ee nrri,ed. J. A. Gilligen. I. M. Hooper. W. A. Milek. Jr.. C. W. Fiskbes, and G. Winter, the strength limit state (both s' ear strength r:-1 l-ering cepecity) mu t riso have been most helpfel with their encouragemeel and advice. - be checked. Oedleery Bette.-It hee been c i tomary in the pest to apply the some de?ign Arreetwir.-Reveereces rules to oedinary Eolls [Americari Society rm Testise, and Meterials (ASTM) A307] es those specified for high-strength IW (A*;TH A325 and A490). Very I. reader. L l.. sad r. t t. O. L. "Streesth of Fillet Weide es e Feemise of Deertise little date sheet the strength of ordinary t#ts r e mesilable and it is at -refore L**d " "#8 #*"'** "'W"8 "'*" C""*d' V*I' 3 N 3' M *I' t 9T t * .w wr.ded that the same precedure be fe"n-+f i.e., the LRFD r'"ctd"rea

2. E

r. l J Pol. 5.. and Kotet. O. L. "L - - ", leaded welded Casseetiene."

o developed for high strength bolts be consid - t vr'ed also foe ordinery t-tes, f,,,,t,r,g, s,,se,e,ef Dtwsdee. ASCE Vol. 90. No. ST3. Proc. Paper 8874. Mey. l Of course, ordinary l$olte shoofd rot be pres ri". I fnr fricties. type cc. cettines 1s72, pp.199-100$. eince the level of their clamping force is I 's r-certain es to magnitele rnd 3 thee, J. L. med Kalen. O. L. "Weided Ceesseelsen ander Combined Sheer med probebly highly varieble. M " " *' " J"* M '"' #"""."'*# i O Betre-Besirks Ceynetry of Ct-ented Mate-t-7.-The hearing carecify cf the tod 17. Apr. 1974, pp. 727-741

4. tw. rs. I., P., "servey of Eslaties Published lefoemetime, Appeedle D." Repast connected meterial immediately adjacent to e We is e desise problean ewelly or weld penet of the steel Sersetores Reneerch Cesemetoes. G -

~ *f Seirees creeciated with tbc fastener. Strictly openY u. it should be seeigned to the me d indeserial Research. Leedos. Essleed.1938. e,esnber bot it will coetinee bere to be related e., t5 resteser. S I bu. J. w and sired. J. H. A.. GmMe se Destre CHeerdefoe Sobed and Af*esed r /esars, Jebe wiley sed Sees, lac New York. N.Y. 1974. The nominal rese. teoce le beerr.g bss bee, e ':lis'ied es,(S)

s. Freessee. F. R., "The Strensth of Are WeWed Joiets.".h ~.. leashesime of M - e a F. s 3 t 4 T...................... ~........ (d i )

Civil resineeve. leedes. Paci.=4. Vol. 231.1930, pp. 322-323. e

7. Ilisains. T. R med Preae. F. R " Proposed Stresses for FiBet Weise le Be5 ding le which F - Ibe specified m'nirnene tens?* *trerm.th of the plate meteriel*-

Ca"struction." pref 4ses femenet. Vol 47. No.10. Oct. 19es, p. 429 3. p st = the bolt diameter; e - the end distence n I' l' alt; and a = the governing O Itohn N. M., med Ketsh. O. L. **Hieb.5eremeth Behe and weeds is Land.Shortog G piste thicknees (the shineet of the two thic' ir-s in a lap joint or the lee'8 Sy.tems." Seedoes le Structovet s' C w No. 8. News Seesse Techassel Comese. ts.firse. Ceeede. Sept.. I??0 of the sene of the thicknesses of the two ca ' rI're or the thicknees of the

9. Khanne. C. K., "Sireesth of Lees FIBet WeWo." theels pressesed to Mwe. Snete enclosed ply in a b.sti joint). Eil. 41 is sprtMe" es long es e/d is cet less Ta hnical Conese. ei llebres. Comeds. is 1969. im postial felflament ef ebe segenente L

thee 1.3* fo' 8he de8'ee of M**8e' 'I '--- "'- - l-

10. Reemdre. M. K. and Galesehee. T."'Y"Teesselve land med Resiseesee Facter The following statistical date relate to th. 4I ($): Nember of teste = 27; g3,;,,i ter Comentioine.

Reseeree Rerer' #fe. J3. Dermetaset of Cies Enesseerteg.

re:io of meen test to predicted values = 0.T*; and coeff'ecient of verirticri we h.egtee Univereity. St. Leone. Me.. May.1975. = O.II. With respect to F, the fo!!nwing data eri avaitet4e (II): Ratio of r, css II. Re-indre. M. K.. and Galesabne. T. Y.. "lAed and Reelueemse Perest Demise for g ta specified altimate testeile stree-th - 3.30 ra t en-fficient of veristloei = 0.11. secel." Jearwat of she Jerecre'ef DN8sese. ASCE. Vol.198. No. ST9. proc. Paper Froes these date. V - 0.I6. Uet Erl. 27 r-4 t'ie valse p = 4.3. 4 - 0.*J ,7.'. Me, co,e,3 , goes,see, wessing Berese.1938. 8 j[ X l.10 esp (-0.55 x 4.3 x 0.If) = 0.73. g3, 3,,,,,ic,,i,e re, the pesies. Febr6cet6ee, and Esectise of Seresserad seest fee Modifyira thle to acceent fee t'nt use of t'e F'frer eefety inden. 4. - 0.r1 s.ad.nse." Amer 6ce. Inesissie of Se*el Conserocesse. New Yest. M.Y 1978. x 0.73 = 0.64*

14. "specirsecties for Strectoral Jetmee Using ASTM A325 or A498 Sehe" Rommet y

cosects Re,eeed med Behad Seresteralp of the Engimertes W N L Cvesses, ese Co,caer-- e e This peper devele; s the no-1"I reslotswe* te re sad resistenes factor for u each of the cowly weed c* mectors h rar~tteral seest. The statistic tl ) e r h =

..;y.g -, - - ~ i ~ = m Mis Mid*;4L.%,}id,..it34 %'.p4. *ff,...p, pry &.: m..Q 5' ~. s...... 5,.e~-y .. g

.)

6 I mi. Art.19.3J RESULT 5 OF TESTS OF WELDS M3 .s [..a The increased use of high. strength steels and the need to refer to them in w 'M speciScation provisions resulted in further studies on 511et welded conrico-S tions.5" Since hilet welds may be made with electrodes whose mechanical properties are not equal to those of the base metal, the study evaluated the 5 M influence of type of electrode, size of $11et w:!d, type of steel, and type of Mj weld. All test specimens were designed to failin the welds, even though the d mechanical properties of the weld metal exceeded those of the base metal. P.1 The study indicated that when longitudinal Atlet welds were made with S electrodes that " matched" the connected steel, the weld strength vaned from 60 to 85 per cent of the electrode tensile strength as illustrated in Fig. 19.3. The study indicated that the failure plane generally was at an angle, L F, o.no ~W n i.:n oso g M 4 T~ T (, p:.:: oso shtSe stryeg*h b It*5'89 Stetag n C'tectfDOe or.- ~~ r.3.- oso >.r ano.ae e s*.ese s? ess ..v .' ~.;h. t ~ M om L. ,.g m o-Baseereta' A36 a441 A514 e~f., tectmee E6o E7o E7o filo

]

Fig.17.3 Shear strent-h cf 1: gitudinal fi!!et welds with rnatched base =t b. rn:::!. .7-. M less than 45' to the plane of a leg. Thus, use of the minimum throat thick. ' T., ness is conservative. Since weld metal may be deposited on base metal with different mechanical g properties, combinations of strong base metat uith wealer seld rnetals and y.5 t;; sice.sersa v er: r!:o ev:'. :::d."

The r:su!ts are suminarized in Fig.19.4 l

This r:s: 1:d th:t th: e"::: ertile:!ca upos v eld t:renph v:.: n:t pt.t. 'l.i.u:;t:: b:. fin;is r.:. : r :t::m, tests ef w::!: sge:ted to c:.sb.'n:d F b.. din; tr.d : ::r !.as: it.!.med :. v:.rying fa:ter cf saf::y a;; air.st we!d .M 3! l failure. The results of tes:s on sertical weld groups are plotted in Fig.19.5. As the ratio of eccentricity to w eld length (c/L) varies from 0.06 to 2.4, the glG l l

W

..u:ra, v-i i -p r we - 4 h@.y .y.p.. w.u,_.. m.. . j A: ,_m__.._-... k M(f.y.'C *[iG M G M,i'.sf 9Gf%%w WW Mge9fes se W* 7,M*NY@49W#r##MM@Ax5h W4 h s LiW5 .:2.::si:.f.3EqWs6%'9W '%A5 Tin M'*H:.$. T.= M y b w vf 5 -s t F Q:g d k. ? ~n %n;g g, dihMUi%~- W.bd.c: .t ' o-3 e

u. w-4~L@u*, t.i* 'X?!...3 -(*.'. w.w,. k.*!.%&%m

.t.....:. +..m ncn

n'
' y....~--

+G is,',.9".4" :L = W-

p*2e-Q..~,[h' **~.m.: ?- s ~ * * <::',

= t f=**

.~

v. 7~ %yL h)--

.. ~ g) M.;. % n-p o.,, J 4.* h*g'*W'j, Mor -- dtL,*.:f* *~~ r s ::.

A---* W.'/

=* - ;' g.a.._._egr a o

t 4L.

i ---

-,r t n.m n .n-n n. -- m nm-~

Sect. J2. Walds Tabla J2.3 i Desion Strength of Welds Types Material Resistance Nominal Required Wald I Stress,of weld and Factor $ strength strengtj f Fy or F, level 4 Complete Penetration ' Groove Weld ( Tansion normal to " Matching" weld '6e effcetive area used Compression normal to Weld metal with a I % cffcetive area Base 0.90 F strength level l J equal to or less ^(Tsnsion or compression than " matching" harallel to axis of weld remy be used p Shaar on effective area Base 0.90 0.60F N Weld elect. 0.80 V) 0.60F{XX l } Partial Penetration Groove Welds .t Compression normal to ,ffsetive area Weld metal with a A strength level equali Base' 0.90 F to or less than i " Tension or compression Y parallel to axis of weld " matching" weld metal may be used ! Nhear parallel to axis Base' O.75 0.60F if weld Weld elect. 0.75

0. 60F"XX i

Tension normal to Base' O.90 F l f.cffective arec weld Electrede 0.80 0.Y60F EXX i Fillet Welds ~#Stress on effective area Base' O.75 0.60F Weld metal with a I G 6 Weld elect. 0.75

0. 60F"XX strength level equal N

i Tension er c mpression B as e' O.90 F to or less than l ' are!!el to axis of wcld Y " matching" weld m:!21 m:y t:e used ! Plug or Slot Wclds Shear parallel to faying Base' 'O.75 0.60F Weld metal with a surfaces (on effective Weld elect. 0.75 0.60F strength level equal Orct) to or less thsn " matching" weld i metal may be used ter definition of effective area, see Section J2. For " matching" weld metal, see Table 4.1.1, AWS D1.1. ' Weld metal one strength level stronger.than " matching" will be permitted Fillst welds and partial penetration grc~ove welds joining component elements of built-up members, such as flange to web connections, may be designed without regard to the tsnsile or compressive stress in these elements parallel to the axis of the welds. g The design of connected material is governed by J4 _

~ s l P. .'.s ;". . 7 + L I

f. M

=

p :. N... ,.d N. S. g fl s e'. 'g'*. 'r,*a.,. ~/~ ~'.$ g*** .w s-L -.*.. f. ( Y.. i i ~ . t* t%. s , 'J s J.. ~ 4 . 6 r. , f.,, 8$ j* N g3 an,4 m ^ q,.".' [: R G% $. q) G U *E /'.- E G. J l~N J' ) n. o..,. -

)

C s e se 7,

t. k %,gg 5:na es * -- -J I

.e /.,. c e .s ~ i c

g. 8.......

[.~i * ~ ' W.M E s.',. e. Y, C y. n ,l ~- s k ~. w I -- J .w- ? .# d M. :EW T% > 32." % l 3 h , ~..m O( s.. I. - i k* / 3J;jjj.g r ~.m.. y....* .~e

'~~-

-.-, \\ ::. e n w 8.:. r- % c e -- ...*:e,.- i 1 . y :r QI-.m.C ,e....',' .g C l? O .,s' &l y .. > r., 7,.......,.v.. s.y 4,. -.. t- - o -m \\ t 2 y

v. s.~... :.......~.. -. : p.:i.;...:.,.

t _s. z. )-m n ~, 1. \\ ). 2 T s. Q <a v. L ?.*.,,mer.,. 5 D. Tt*:.% ofer,, m - /' a /(' a s m '*wN. d R N.. o --4._ ,...x es t,., en .sv NN -- - - u.. s t g y..=. N. O. .y ~

p. %

$ $ g", l-i'.'. W.* v j__ t.'tr . J, .,.s... s. ;'s s, k

z *.

.~ ' 'Z:.:32: N:,,.. y~ N f.,,, sy%. D':sf.ag . _g - - e ,.s,. ~. wx ' ~ _ _. O__. ; s. g,,, s \\

r

,ss 2 2 8 f ~f y ? '# I E ! K # I :: A ?. 2 E 4 e, e. r. r ? y * ~ }'.* :: f f ' 1 I 1 # I I ! ! ! 1 ? : ; K **.* 5.***! ' 'C 5 CE */ ;* 5 ?q:.*:x:/./0 (t)j hpuvnoa33

or.pa! va:aes or c eo : arec' /ea s:i o;.C:lle( ne Ial irom' kn's -MC FoI e! ';eti Stap':, f e the I ._.';e.-ics.s In::itate & Cf:2/ C.sr::C.~ac'dris:&i).s /- cshq E.m. men -c; &7.>.-:...a. : - Tl\\ oui. May 31 l%8 ?.

., eld n.ic n,

-h .,. 3.,3, '...,,,t.,.',. [ 8B !./ "L aon.31 v. V / ,c u? y, .v q .-yz. u ,s 'Y 1

- E C t

. i, y,n v .~ =u './. -.e /, \\,:, / / / u f. e ~ s. r / y s -. /,: ., /.. y /,. j,. g / s s eu ...i .,y- .. ;/ p..; e !.N-0 >uu. /. e~ .g l,. ,.4/,/ / *,. , ': * ', ',{/y. _ .- :w t-f/'.._. _N /, / /. -e

X/ O' ~yf /95'::',f..

-Q ,,C. 7,,/l ./ . r.i.i..r,rx- ::,r..r f.i.,.,. -... " ..... r.t. ...i r .........~.._.,.,....s,.,2 -s,,<~ i,~. e :.s F.2 ~ : ' iL * ' ', c r: :, s'ae:.d I 4 n = 1076 i

1..' i i

=.5 h *x g m. =

s 41.*

.~ -l us u n .. / ' o r.:, / y.- -h'M - N .a!d ce e-p. sam-i,. y nL V. i l .f . !/ .i.s i ,- s.- g.,. a... s q_.

p. is... /

r /. ..,,/ /h. 's..

'f,...

vs 57 s 5*y '!/s, ', ~ u-7 .,/t a y u- ' / y /./.... //,/../. /. s., rg a 's.r p se--

//

,/ ,!.,.;p..... N. .e. ., c .. /,,.,.,. <.,7;,...,,. u v-e /s -..r. < ;....., /.. so-- .j. y' y '/'. * ~:.p-.:;,.:.,. " y,'

p/s':, /,..,

a., m. '.!A '.*l3.E. 5l '.55 '.5! '.:!) 8?'l ' f,Ja 1.:r';,g g,S Ja1 '. s ' 1.*.! '., g ;.33' ;.1-8 1.M.MWtW.i. b) s s"* u s ! ) rata b' desi.ed J ~

f($ / no 432 Q i =l.191 n = 1 ~3 fe st% ) :=.12 U }{ I, I O .Q (_,,,,,/ * * *

E W

4

s--

5'.131 a n. *. 0 2 "'I5 # . g,. v-8- - n- - .n.283 '[ p '~ i -1.053 /V*2, e u o s.nu waa o y.** g e,9z ~ ~ , g 3I ?.) e :9-- i + c.* g y. 12 - u-e c o 1* t g u B- - g4 i 4, - Ia E, st - - w e C g. I ~ '3

I '. f I '.t i '. 31 '.% '.M ' e.s ' ' s: I 8. Si J 'I ' f.'1 ' l :' ' I;1 ',.g '.)) ' :,y-
.; ' f.N 5 1.0 IJi' l,J.) e, d.g,1 I

\\ CG c es!.-ri) C:eeep.cc.-:e Irw Mr W C Cc:., ell, A-.- :.4. E ; & Cate.# i//oe T2:fo.- Ca Fe: is. Is 6 D: 2 2. J C & 't . C f

25 % sle t.ve.'is che:k t o', Eom N' " is }'E fram thts dato
6 6 & 2 ("I".'i'4) f-sv. nominal (t O) f a.25% c er:u's: (1.20 j:,2 q y,,

. g, y,:,

N * **
p, ** *
90 {/0.4 Ts) CACt!ded ES", eversist (I,t$)

0 h,925' =-l (15.Xc):,7iggy_,lgf$,jgg,g) 7, y, y g 3. ,, f, *y, V. 5 K* l'lI s .uv or l c 3.. 3 2 l l.2 r *iMs3 4* e(v C.,. '" ; to -- x + f.:So s m (i. 2s= 5 b tra we. Set 7.ts:- g, q.g ) - g.,g, s> -u is. 2 2. ~ < is.y y, n 2_ u. betous ocm>1r i r A b: ='f 0 e,I $ ' CCmysrL ihtt \\ ts Sg 7 C / NIfh dl$C da,fo \\ O U d ** $ l l f* p, _ Co N u .N s nn - m: 4;/. _ 's s ~ ,s LE in .y s g-s \\e 'of,.,,' .n.u.. i.,.n.u.n,..,,.<,.,,,,,,,.n.,..,.,.. c.. c,.,,. y.,.,,,,,,, ,.q. $ e-f mtto W aetual% M eesirce ]

f. m% wt;cg ISAPPLIEDTECHNOLOGY t mN Es. k 1.IW l l C February 17, 1985 Mr. John Bailey [, Kansas Cas and Electric Company Wolf Creek Generating Station Post Office Box 309 Burlington, Kansas 66839

Dear Mr. Bailey:

RE: Evaluation of Structural Steel Welding at Wolf Creek - CAR No.19 At your request I have reviewed the approach developed by KG&E and ieplemented by Eechtel and DIC to evaluate welds on safety related structural steel at the Wolf Creek Generating Station. This review has concentrated on KG&E's final report on corrective action request (CAR) nu=ber 19 (1)* and documents (2) through (6). My evaluation of the approach developed by KG&E was for convenience divided into the following areas:

1) Icpact on FS!.R Cc:mitzent

2) Icpact on Structural Integrity Some specific comments arising out of my review, and relating to these areas are su==arized below:

4 Impact on the FSAR Comitment In view of the ESAr. ccr.riteer.t by KGLE to work to the requirements of AWS DI.1-75 inter:::: tin: (2), (?) a;C (5), it is ( tircly apprcpriate for EG2 as ovner to hvtlep : r e cc rifi:: tic in::;cticr 7:::::: te prcvid; :. :urance th.t the provisions of AWS DI.175 are cet and to generate the docu:entation tc support that position. In addition, your review of related activities and their control has shown that this is not a generic problem but is confined to the structural steel verk, velded to AUS DI.1 and cevered by the 1:iscellarecus Stru:tural Steel veld records. These related activities include: 1) Assurance that all welders and welding procedures were qualified to AVS DI.l. 2) Detereination that only acceptable filler metal (in this case E7018) was used.

Support References are included at the end of this letter.

M dlX 7ES SAfi Af'TO!!!O rot.D O P/.LO /.LTO O CALIFOR!!!A S4303 O (415) C50- CC3 1 L

J.,A. Bailey Page 2 2-17-85 3) Evaluation of DIC inspection criteria. 4) Validation of inspections performed with paint on the weld. t 5) Qualification and training for reinspection personnel. All of these contribute to the conclusion that poor original documentation. procedures do not lead to poor welds. This was also confirmed by my examination of relevant velds in the Auxiliary Building and the Reactor Building. I was able to examine both painted and unpainted welds and in all cases the welds appear to be good with a generally uniform appearance, indicative of skilled crafts people. With regard to the ability to reinspect welds after painting, I have already stated that this is the proper approach for XG&E to pursue for the following reasons: The discontinuities that are being examined for (i.e. porosity, lack of fusion, etc.) are rather gross icperfections and are readily detected by visual examination. A coating of a few cils thick would not obscure imperfections in the size ranges of 1/16 to 1/8 inch. Even these imperfection sizes are small compared to the size that would compromise structural integrity. Carbon manganese steel welded with E7018 weld rod is probably one of the easiest combinations to produce high quality velds. Carbon Mangenese steels are readily weldable and do not harden significantly with welding ther=al cycles as vould alloy steels. With prcper rod control (which is demonstrated in your review) the likelihood of weld cracking is low. This is confirmed by the results of the inspection of the uncoated steel in which few cracks and lack of fusion imper-fections were discovered. 4 The detection of size variances (either over or under) will not be irp cted by the presence of pcint or coatings. Uis:frg uld chre::ts verld be r tl er olvier: even chere ce: tings tre present. I understand frcm discussions with KGLE that USNRC Region 1 made a site visit and perforced a scrpling inspection on c. ore than 60 relev:ot jointr. This inspection included exacinatica by UT and MT, before and af ter paint recoval and the results were positive. These data should be requested fro: Region 1 and used to support your position. In view of the fact that we are now using twenty - twenty hindsit,ht and are sensitized to the need to perform detailed inspections the defect rates are relatively low in those categories of attributes that were classed as defects (about 37, on a joint basis which would be much less on a total weld basis). l

J.'A. Bailey Page 3 2-17-85 Normal reinspection detection rates come in at around 21 on a weld basis. We

recently performed a review of previously accepted welds in Class I piping and established a reinspection call rate at about 11 S

The focus of your program on structurally significant details has enabled you'- to evaluate those situations that are most important. It is worth emphasizing that the extent of CAR No.19 is limited to about 21% of these structural details. The other details are either shop welded or bolted.- I believe that with your re-examination program, the related activities referred to earlier and the confirmation that examination under paint is effective, you have met the extent of (4) and complied with your commitment in (7). Structural Integrity Since we have concluded that defective paper work does not necessarily indicate a defective weld, the real question is, "What is the impact on structural integrity of the imperfections discovered in the reinspection?". Bechtel has evaluated those situations where the stresses could exceed the design stress because of geometry indications (missing welds, undersize, underrun) and in all cases the calculated stress are less than those that would be required to fail a weld (i.e. the weld capacities are in no way approached under the design loads). I concur with Bechtel's approach, but would point out that it is conservative (i.e. greater cargins will be available in the actual joint than indicated by the Eechtel analysis). The first factor contributing to the ccuservatism is that for the governing allowable stresses, the specified minicum properties are used whereas actual properties of as deposited welds will usually run 20-25% higher than the specified minimums. This means that based on actual properties deviations from allowable stresses at up to 20-25% would not violate design criteria based on actual properties. The second factor reltter to the ceasecuences of exceeding the design allowable stre:r in ene veld, er fer thtt ::tter t11 veld:, in a connectien that centains sever:1 telds as c:ny ci th:Le jeinte do. There tre of course none. In the joint one veld may be overstressed, however, the structural integrity of the joint is not iepaired at all. It is important to re-eephasize this fact. The integrity of a structural detail is not affected b,y the icperfections detected in the reinspection protrz=. If this was core generally reccgnized, we would be faced with far fewer reverification exercises in nuclear facilities. l A further fact that contributer to the conservatism in the Bechtel analysis is j that where undersize has been ceasured to be intertittent in the actual detail, in the analysis it has been attributed to the complete weld length. Le ...,s.

.~~~~~mm

J. A. Bailey Page 4 2-17-85 A questiin may arise about the integrity of those welds that are: 1) uninspectable (because of access) and k 2) could not be evaluated for alternate load paths There are 83 joints in this category and the approach chosen by Bechtel is to demonstrate that the expectation is that in only one joint would the design' stress be exceeded. This is derived from the frequency of those structural joints that exceed the design stress. Remembering, as noted above, that small amounts of undersize are attributed to the complete weld it may be instructive to consider this on a weld basis. Assuming an average number of welds per joint of 4 and the same liklihood of exceeding the design stress in a weld as in a joint, the following table provides the probability that 1, 2, 3 and 4 welds would exceed the design stress: Number of Welds In a 4 Weld Joint Probability Detail That Exceed Design Stress A B* 1 3.17X10-2 8.7X10-3 2 1.0X10-3 7.6X10-5 3 3.2 X 10-5 6.6X10-7 4 1.0X10-6 5,7x10-9 This column is based on a 0.87% rate which excludes the polar crane radial stops. These nunters illustrate the very re=cte liklihood of all welds in a joint exceeding the design allowable riress zt the r:re tire and further ccafir= that

tru:tural integrity it tstured. 0; this btrir, I veuld expect a titely clot-cut of CAF.19 hecau:e therc is no stf ety icpact cad hcnce it is not reportable under 10 CFR 50.55(e).

In the foregoing, I have tried to e=phasize the irportant facts related to the clorecut of CAR 19. I think you would agree that there is no safety issue end the documentation problem did not spill over to other related areas. There are, however, a few points that may be worthwhile caking, particularly if yau have to present all of the work that has been done to date, to the manageesi.t of I:G&E. Tirst the question of cracks may be raised. What is the liklihood of having cracks in uninspectable areas? The only cracks that have been observed vere from construction leading of beam seats and not attributable to welding (1). The review of weld procedures, m.

J. A. Bailey' Pa'ge 5 2-17-85 ~ filler metal control, and welder records indicate that the welding was not out of control. Usually when something goes wrong with the welding process to n cause cracking, the cracking is quite extensive and obvious at the toes of welds. Moreover, the A36 structural steel and A536 embed plates are easy-to-weld carbon manganese steels not prone to cracking. These steels are' widely used in other industries in which the rigorous quality assurance requirements of our commercial nuclear program are not adopted. These industries include bridges, multi-story buildings, offshore platforms apd pressure vessels. Our record in these industries would confirm ~that integrity margins are available in welded structural steels. On this basis I would conclude that there is no potential for structural degradation due to the presence of cracks. Further confirmation of this fact is provided by the good inherent toughness of these materials at the minimum operating temperature of the steel. This would preclude crack initiation and propagation from pre-existing cracks. The thoroughness and detail of the reinspection progra= undertaken by KG&E attests to the con =iteent that you have already made to safety at the Wolf Creek Nuclear Generating Station. In the rather short period that I have had to review your approach to the resolution of CAR 19, I have probably not done justice to the extensive work already done by KG&E, Bechtel, DIC and other consultants on this catter. I hope, however, that I have been able to grasp the main points of this issue and if you would like to discuss any of the comments I have cade, please feel free to contact ce. Kind Regards, kt Geo rey . Era / GRE/nv 6

f ? l LEHICH UNIVERSITY Bethlehem, Pennsylvania 18015 Fritz Engineering Laboratory February 14, 1985 Mr..hohnA. Bailey Wolf Creek Generating Station ( Kansas Cas and Electric Company P. O. Box 309 Burlington, Kansas 66839 Re: Visual Inspection of Painted Fillet Welds

Dear Mr. Bailey:

Dr. Fisher and I have reviewed the paper prepared by Bechtel Power Corporation regarding their position on the " Visual Inspection of Painted Fillet Welds". Dr. Yen of our staff has also reviewed this and provided consents on the paper. We all agree that the important characteristics of the welds can be evaluated with the paint thickness of 14 cils (+) on the cembers. The evaluation cust be made on the basis that certain problems that could occur in velding can be ruled out because they do not exist or are not important for the type of welds and caterials involved. We are concerned only about inspection items that night reduce the strength of connections. Tests cade on velds fro: the Eepe Creek riant (Trit: Engineering Lateratory Report 200.81.2!.0.3) revealed that even very large acounts of porosity in the welds reduced the strength of connections by only a s=all amount. Large porosity of the type present in vejds fro = the Hope Creek Plant could be detected through paint. Fine porosity of a size thzt ceuld not be cbserved through paint is of no intertence in evaluating the etrcntth cf th:ce entre:tiene. h feel c.:nfident that the inspection results to date dec.cnstrate that the quality of veldinE on the buildinEs was core than adequate to provide the strength required in the building connections. If there tre inspection ite=s such as fine porosity, cinor undercutting or cracking in velds produced by joint restraint that can not be detected through paint, there ite=s are not apt to reduce the strength of cennectiens suf ficiently to be of concern. The redundancy in the completed structure is also avail-able to provide alternate load paths if necessary in the event that a [h connection of lower than expected strength exists. 'C'*k'RK' W f EOS/df Re(cr C. Slutter cc: Richcrd Ivy ,,esearch in civil Engineering and Fletated hetds John W. Fisher

l o., ,.l-L E HIG H U N I V E R $ 17 Y sethiehem. Pennsyt. ente 16015 Frita Engineering Laboratory

a. w u December 10, 1984 Mr. Richard Ivy Kansas Cas*and Electric Company P.O. Box 208 Wichita, Kansas 67201

Dear Mr. Ivy:

Re: Structural Steel Velds at Wolf Creek Generating Station We have reviewed the proble=s associated with the structural velds in the structures at the Volf Creek Generating Station. Dr. Slutter was on the site on November 1 and 2,1964 to observe firsthand so=e of the veld deviations, the s method of inspection, inspection records, and problems encountered in cocpletion of the inspection program. The problems encountered at this site are not unlike structural velding problems that we have seen at other nuclear power plants. The proble=s at Volf Creek are perhaps more frustrating but less serious than si=ilar proble:s at other sites. The approach being used by techtel as su==.a-rized in "'** eld Deviation Evaluation Methodology" dated Nove:ber 26, 1964 has also been reviewed. The exacination of the velds in this reinspection progra: is very thorough, as evidenced by the docu=entation on every connection. The thoroughness of the inspection has revealed so=e problems that require evaluation fro: a structural analysis point of view and a cuch larger nu=ber of instances where deviations I fre AV5 D 1.1 - 1975 are reported that do not constitute structural deficien-cies. It appears from the latest suc.ary of inspection and evaluation received fro: Bechtel (dated Nove:ber 27, 1964) that no significantly deficient joincs have been found. We hale the following con =ents on the various categories of prob 1' ems that have been found in the reinspection: 1. Missing Velds .t Obviously the tissing velds should be replaced if they are needed to resist design. leads. Some of these velds such as the beam to bea: seat velds may not be required, and replacerent should not be necessary. Where they are inaccessible and cannet be replaced, an appropriate analysis of the other lead paths sheuld be provided. ~ > m - E p'p yew x ${U

7 9 Pr. Richard Ivy December 10, 1984

Page 2 2.

Undersize. Unequal Lea, and Underlength Welds 0 The approach that is being used to evaluate these types of condi-tions using the smallest veld dimension is very conservative. Welds that are no more. than 1/16 in. undersite will have adequate strength on the basis of the latest code recommendations. The allevable stresses being used by Bechtel from the Seventh' Edit' ion AISC provide a conservative basis for evaluation. 3. Oversize and overlength Velds These deviations are not generally a problem to be concerned about. There.are some instances where the additional amount of wild causes the connection to provide tore restraint than in-tended. The original design actually specified this additional velding. In these structures the additional veld metal should not cause proble=s. End rotation and the resulting connection defor:ation can result in cracking of the velds if the additional veld increases the bending stiffness of the connection and decreases ductility. 4 Cracked Velds Between Bea: and Beam Seat These cracks resulted from rotation of the end of the bea: as concrete slabs were poured and additional dead load was placed. The cracking does not indicate a deficiency in the connection since the veld is not needed. The cracked velds that were detected were probably undersize because of the rolled edges of the te=bers being joined. 4 5. Return Velds That Are overleneth Eut Understre The purpose of this veld is to produce a prcper tereinstion for the vertical veld. It is not necessary that it eeets AWS 1.1 - 1975 size requirements, since it is not needed structurally. The added length can increase capacity in some instances. The pri-mary objective of end returns is to minimize prying and distortion -at the root of the pricary veld. 6. Lack of Tusion and Undercut These problems are very few in number and are being satisf actorily handled in the' analysis.

Mr. Richard Ivy December 10, 1984 Page 3 7. Seas Seat Missing These may not be needed but an analysis of each one is being made. N It is assumed that seats will be provided if needed. 8. Tit-Up Cap with Undersite k' eld This is a rare occurrence considering structures involved. Proper analysis of this is being made by Bechtel. 9. Inaccessible Welds Since there are no significant structural deficiencies among the exposed welds inspected, it is reasonable to assume that the inac-cessible welds are similar. The general proble: of weld size should be considered in terus of the expected statistical variation of weld dimensions in typical structural welding where the AISC allowable stresses are applicable. Enclosed are Tig. a through Tig. e showing the statistical variation of the 1/4 in., 3/8 in., and 1/2 in, welds'used to develop the AVS and A15C specification provisions. These curves show the deviation in veld sizes that are to be expected with production welds. The variation of weld capacity that resulted from the AVS-AISC fillet veld study in 1966 was in part due to the variation in veld size that existed with the test sa:ple. These were norra1 production welds, and similar deviations will exist with all welds. Tigure 19.3 in structural steel Desian shows the shear strength based on noeinal veld size. It is clear that part of the reason for the variation in capacity is based on,the weld size variation. When a weld is found to be undersine by reasurement, it is not significant unless it falls below the range indicated by the curves. The AVS Specification does not address the pretice of deviations, and disposition of undersize welds must be done uring the type of snt. lysis that Bechtel has proposed. The fact that they are using actual veld si:es in calculations is conservative, since the specifications used the lower bound of the test data which included weld undersize. Weld size deviations en the return welds does not require analysis. These welds are not intended to increase the strength of the connection, although some additional strength does result from the addition of these welds. The main function of return welds is to increase the ultimate strength of the struc-ture by delaying and tearing of the veld and improving the ductility of the connection. - These velds netd not be held to exact disensions but should be large enough to provide a satisfactory weld tereinstion.

r_ Mr. Richard Ivy December 10, 1984 Page 4 The analysis work being done by Bechtel is based on elastic desian with reference to the Seventh Edition of the AISC Manual of Steel Construction. p This approach is conservative compared to the ultimate strength method avail,- able in the Eighth Edition and the current approach used in LRTV design as' given in Load and Resistance Factor Design Criteria for Connectors % One of the provisions of the earlier specification that is very conservative and not applicable to veld capacity is the allevable stress for base metal in ehear given as F = 0.4 F. This limit state was arbitrarily adopted in 1969 and is y y not related in any way to veld capacity. This is only now being corrected in the AISC Specifications. The attached copy of Table J2.3 shows the proper limit state conditions that are used in the LRTD Specification. Steps are now underway to change the allowable stress provisions for shear on the veld leg to 0.3 F in place of the value 0.4 F. Typical increases in allowable loads u y for eccentric connections that one can expect to result from using the ultimate strength analysis outlined in the Eighth Edition of the AISC Manual can be seen by comparing the results given in Table III on page 4-31. With a weld length of 11.5 in., the C-shaped weld and the outstanding angle vertical velds are similar to the velded exacple shown on page 661 of the second edition of Structural Steel Design. The ulti= ate strength analysis of the clip angle to plate velds provides an 8% increase in load. The C-shaped welds of the clip angles to bea: veb are permitted to carry 22% more load using the ultimate strength method. This can also be seen by comparing the standard angle connec-tion loads in the Seventh and Eighth Editions of the AISC Manual. The AISC previsions for the design of this type of connection are very conse tvative even when one uses the ultitate strength method. The einicus factor of safety for a connection designed by the ultimate strength method is given es 3.33 on page 4-74 of the Eighth Edition of the AISC Manual. The usual factor of safety in veld design for single load vectors is 2.33. The more conservative design for this type of connection recognizes t' hat minor deviations such as found in the connections at Wolf Creek Cenerating Station will occur. These deviations are not u.:or=en, and this is recognized by the AISC provisions. In particular, the veld size variations are typical where fillet velds are used. The higher factor of rafety in use for eccentric joints reccgnizes that other deviations are likely. Ve do not believe" that a structural problem exists with the Wolf Creek velds once the obvious problem of missing velds has been corrected. In the November 27, 1954 sur=ary, Bechtel reports enly 17 joints requiring rework due to overstress of 1620 joints evaluated. This is a very low percentage in view of the conservative approach being used in the analysis. A less conserva-- tive approach might result in an even smaller number of' joints requiring rework.-

Lead end dsistance Tactor Desf rn Criteria for Connectors, by J. W. Fisher, T. V. Cala:bos, C. L. Kulak, and M. K. Fhindra, Journal of the Structural Division ASCE, Vol.104, No. ST9, September 1978.

N a.. ~. Mr. Richard Ivy December 10, 1984 Page 5 In any event we feel that Bechtel's approach in considering the inspection re-(S ports and their subsequent analysis is adequate and sufficiently conservative for the type of structures and the type of connections involved. The overall, quality of the velds based on the inspection data and observations that we have made exceeds the requirements for structural welding for this type of construction. We would be pleased to examine other Bechtel dispositions when they are available. We agree with the procedure being used. Sincerely yo % 1 ~ 1 \\ t Joh W. Fisher / Pro essor of Civil Engineering Co-dsa,ircan, Fritz Engineering 1.aboratory i '/} ft L*l ~ [,> '/ \\ .C. Roger 'G. Slutter Professor of Civil Engineering Director - Operations Division J.;T:RCS: rag Enclosures 4 J. A. Bailey # ec: i i

. XERO' TELECoPIER 495 325-2-853 1:< BPM 3 0 3012589829;9 2 .,i I} Resume of R.F. Reedy Page 1 of 4 RDGER F. REEDY, P.E. 1 Mr. Reedy has worked in the pressure vesset and nuclear power Industries since 1956. His experience includes the design analy-sis, fabrication, and erection of nuclear power plant com,ponents and implementation of the applic6ble quality systems. -His back-ground encompasses boiling water, pressurized water,d storage. and HTGR nuclear power plants as well as pressure vessels an tanks for petroleum,, chemical,in the design of pressure vessels and other energy industries. Mr. Reedy is an acknowledged expert and nuclear components meeting the requirements of the ASME j ~Boller and Pressure Vessel Code. i He has been involved in licensing, engineering review, project coordination, and training of personnel. He has testified as an expert witness in litigations and before regulatory groups,teria inclu-ding USNRC, ASt.B and ACRS on topics such as design cri applications, fabrication techniques, and material applications., Mr. Reedy has bagn an active participant for the past 15 years as a member and as chairman of major nuclear Codes and Standards Committees in the development of design, construction and quality criteria for nuclear power plant components. He has served utili-ties, architect / engineers, and manuf acturers as a consultant on all aspects of nuclear power plant licensing, design, quality constcerations, and construction. F,ocer F. Reedy is currently chairmt.n of.the ASME Section !!! Code for Nuclear Power Fitnt Components. He is also a member of the N 625.3 Committee which developed the rules concerning duties and responsibilities of engineers designing ASME Code components f or nuclear plants. This gtandard specifies minimum qualifications and details the engineer s responsibilities with regard to coor-dinating material application, fabrication details, quality assur-en:c enc non-destructive examinettons of the compentnt. He ht: ';c rL c d Uith ibc T,c;uilic Of Chin? Atcmic Erercy Council to s:t up in i n d : p ( b c t n '. qu?lity t s t u r u. c c cnd tr,spection pro for all nuclear components installed in Taiwan. In addition, gram for about the pas t ten ye ars, Mr. Reedy has given lectures on the ASME Code and quality assurance to NRC I & E inspectors in each of the Ec; tons. Mr. Reedy was one of the initial members of the Pressure Yessel and Piping Divis ton of ASME and helped start the ASME Training Progrens for engineers. The program was so successful that other l engineering groups have developed similar programs. l p s. I. I l ~ h kW 2/04 l I A

y,arets. LL

w. ea wa 44u g-std; 13bOPN 3

0 3012589829:0 Q '*. ( Resume of R.F. Reedy Page 2 of 4 Profess}{onal Background ( American Society of Mechanical Engineers Soller and Pressure vessel Committee Chairman, Subcommittee on Nuclear Power (Section III) Executive Committee, member In 1980 by the P,olicy Board for Codes and Standards inhe was awarde recount-tion of his decades-long contribution to the develop-ment of the Boiler and Pressure Yessel Code. Subgroup on Containment, past chairman Subgroup on Fabrication and Examination, former member a ASHE Pressure Yessel and Piping Division Past Chairman Nuclear Codes and Standards Committee, member ANSI /ASME NG26,3 Speciclized Professfor. 1 Engin-GErr CcamitteE, memDer Profissional Reatstration Professional Structural Engine Illinois Professional Civil Engineer gr -California

Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, t'i s t o n s i n P r o f e t t l e t. 1 ErLer{thet 19C1 - present REEDY ASSOCIATES l

Los Gatos, California President Currently consulting with utilities, manuf acturers and architect /enginocrs. i i hN?. 2/84

.,- - -_, n Resume of R.F. Reedy Page 3 of 4 1976 - 1981 NUCLEAR TECHNOLOGY, INCORPORATED 5an Jose, California successively Manager, Special Projects and Chief Consultant As Manager Special Projects, he was responsible for coordinating hutech's quality assurance pro-gram and their role as Monitor of the. Mark 1 Con tainment Modification Project. His CBI experience and ASME Code (Section 111) expertise was a key element in working with the utt11tites and General Electric to define and exe-cute a modification program acceptable to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Was then advanced to Chief Consultant, serving as ex-offleic advisor to all in-house projects and all clients on design quality and construction questions concerning app,lication of the A5ME Code. During his term at MUTECH, Mr. Reedy developed and wrote Code Capsule, a biennial commentary on the changes to the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code. s 1950 - 1976 CHICAGO EF.IDGE AliD IRON COMPANY Det Brock, Illinois succ es sively Designer, Staf f Engineer, Project Engineer, Design Nanager and Senior Engineer. 8 Duttes Included design of pressure vessels and st6 rage tanks, including cryogenic vessels, vacuum chambcrs, multi-leycr vess els, environmental cham-bers, cnd h t ch-pr e s ! u re charbers. His dutics recutre

1d: l i t. l ur. i. i t h t h c p t.d f i t i f p e r t e n -

l u.1, pi o r 1 C t r. ; i;r. hccdy i.ith tn intint.c know-ledge of practical shop and field construction techniques including the appilcable quality requirements. He has designed more than 50 containtent vessels and was the responsible Design Nanager for most of the nuclear containment vessels fabricated by C81. He also designed the first field-orected nuclear retetor. i Gh-gy, 2/84 - - - - - - - + - - ' "

, xEnJf. Tn ECOPIER 495 325-2-853 1:53PN 3 0 3012589829:# Q i Resume of R.F. Reedy Page 4 of 4 As Senior Engineer, he consulted with the design 6: ( staff and other departments concerning A5ME Code requirements and special projects. Education B. 5.. Civil Engineering, Illinois Institute of Technol ogy, 1956 Qualified Lead Auditor, ANSI N 45.2.23 R 4 l 5 l l 2/84 I t

! I 4 l(. ' ((.. Dr. John W. Fisher has been a member of the Lehigh University faculty since 1964 and was promoted to Professor of Civil Engineering in 1969. In August 1971, he was named Associate Director of Fritz Engineering Laboratory at Lehigh University. Prior to joining the Lehigh staff, he was Assistant Bridge I Research Engineer with the National Academy of Sciences at the - AASHO Road Test for three years. A native of Scott City, Missouri, Dr. Fisher graduated from washington University in St. Louis, Missouri, in 1956 with the Bachelor of Science degree in Civil Engineering, and received his Master of Science and Doctor of Philosophy degrees from i Lehigh University in 1958 and 1964, respectively. A structural engineer, he is a specialist in structural connections, fatigue and fracture resistance of riveted, bolted and welded connections, and the behavior and design of copposite '~ steel-concrete members. He has been engaged in some forty research projects in these areas sinc.e 1961, supervising about fifty (50) graduate research assistants on these projects. He is currently director of the following or.-going research projects: (- 1. Steel Bridge Members under Variable Amplitude {t Long Life Leading, National Academy of Sciences. 2. Fatigue Studies of Sudan Railroad Bridges, Sudan Railways Corporation. 3. Development of Guidelines for Investigation of Localized Failures, U. S. Dep;rtment of Trans-portatien, Federal Hig'.1way Administratien (FEWA). 4. Corrosion Fatigue Characteristics of Bridge Steels, U. S. Department of Transportation (FEWA). 5. D.etermination of Cracking in Electroslag Welds' 8 at Meadville, Pennsylvania Department of Trans-portation - FEWA. 6. Et;Ey cf I* u-T.:utt Erid c Dcfoct Lnd Structural i ~/.r

nrc, ?cnn lv ni: C;p t r t..c n t of Tr:r.:p:rtt-tion - THUA.

7. Evaluation of the Electrogas Weldrents in Kittan-ning Bridge, Pennsylvania Department of Transporta-tion. Dr. Fisher received the Walter L. Huber Research Prize from American Society of Civil Engineers in 1969 for research on high ctrength bolts, compo:ite design of continuouc bean:, fatigue behavior of welded steel beams, field performance of bridces and behavior of rigid frame connections. Ql ~ sk .M ~

Dr. Fisher received the American Welding Society Adams ' Memorial Membership Award in 1974 for recognition of advancing the knowledge of welding for undergraduate and graduate students.

In 1977, Dr. Fisher received the T. R. Higgins Lectureship

' Award for outstanding contribution to engineering knowledge of fabricated structural steel as author of the paper " Fatigue q Strength of Steel Beams with Welded Stiffeners and Atthchments",, In 1979, Dr. Fisher received the American Society of Civil i Engineering Ernest E. Howard Award for outstanding contributions to structural engineering through added understanding and. design criteria in the area of fatigue, connections and composite action. In February 1980, Dr. Fisher was named Engineer of the Year by the Lehigh valley Chapter of the Pennsylvania Society of Professional Engineers, receiving his award from thirteen different Lehigh Valley engineering and technical societies. In October 1981, Dr. Fisher received the American Society of Civil Engineers Raymond C. Reese Research Prize for the paper " Fatigue Strength of Fillet Welded Cruciform Joints" co-authored with K. H. Frank. Dr. Fisher was featured in Highway Research Profiles of )kI' Transportation Research News in 1975 for his outstanding contri-I butions to highway research. In 1974, Dr. Fisher assisted with rewriting the Swiss Steel Specifications in Zurich, Swit:erland, from May through August, for Easler and Hofmann Consulting Engineers, Zurich, Switzerland. Dr. Fisher is the author of the American Institute of Steel Construction Booklet Bridge Fatigue Guide - Design of Details, 1977. He is the principal author of the Guide for ~ Design Criteric for Solted and_ Riveted Joints, published by Haley In:crscience in 1974, anc is a co-author of the book, StructurO C:::1 11:icn, publichti by n ntld Press C:mptny in ITil r-i 1;'..

c.. nu publichef ever enc hund ;f (100)

{ reports and tr:icics which have appeared in scientific journals. Dr. Fisher, upcn their request, developed and presented j short crurses en fatigue and fracture of bridge structures i and inspection of bridges for the Federal. Highway Administration, U. S. Department of Transportation, and P,cnnsylvania Department of Transportation. Dr. Fisher has given over one hundred (100) lextures and ir talks on the design and behavior of welded and bolted con- 'l nections, composite members and fatigue and fracture of steel L-structures. This includes special seminars in Chicago (1975), (1980), New York (1976) and Pittsburgh (1981) on the design of connections and fatigue resistance of structures for the local chapters of ASCE. r - - - - -, - - .,----n--

n,

.---------,n...---------,---r-,

i ) Dr. Fisher is listed in Who's Who in the East, Who's Who I in America, Who's Who in American Education, American Men and Women of Science, and Engineers of Distinction. He is a member 1 of Tau Beta Pi, National Engineering Honor Society' Chi Epsilon National Civil Engineering Honor Society' and Society'of Ej Sigma Xi, Honorary Scientific Research Society. i He is a member of the International Association of Bridge and Structural Engineers; member of Commission II, International Association of Bridge and Structural Engineers; American Society of Civil Engineers; the Pennsylvania Society of Professional Engineers; the National Society of Professional Eng'ineers; the ~ American Society for Engineering Education; American Railroad. Engineering Association; and the American Welding Society. He was Chairman of the Steel Bridge Committee of the Trans-portation Research Board, National Academy of Sciences'(1974-1980). He is a member of the American Society of Civil Engineers Task Committee on Bridge Safety. He is a member of the Research Council on Structural Joints; American Railway Engineering Association Committee 15 - Steel Structures; and the American Institute of Steel Construction Specification Committee. Dr. Fisher was licensed to practice by the State of (, Illinois, Department of Registration and Education, February 6, 1961. Since 1965, Dr. Fisher has been a censultant to many ccmpanies and organizations, including the following: 1. Nelson Stud Welding Company, A United-Carr Division of TRW, (1965- ); Structural Con-sultant on miscellangous composite design problems. 2. Sethlehem Steel Corporation (1965, 1967, 1968, 1971, 1976); preparation of article and design exampics en high-strength bolted connections; development of design precedure fer ccaposite beams with slabform. 3. CAVA Industries (1967); evaluation of bolted crane rail system.' 4. American Iron and Steel Institute (1966, 1967, 1970); develop load factor design criteria for welded and bolted connections; subsequently adopted as interim specificatiens by AASHO Committee on Bridges and Structures. 5. Air Products and Chemical Corporation.(1968); ' (_ review of bolted field connections for lifting j ring for Esso Heat Exchangers in Libya. Recom-l mended modifications for a fail-safe erection. l L

t g-6. Delaware River Port Authority (1968,1969,1970); determination of cause of fatigue cracking in floor I beam stringers of Welt Whitman Bridge, and development of corrective measures to, prevent further cracking and failure. 7. Hewitt-Robbins Division of Litton Industries'.(1969); review of bolted and welded shear connection design C (' Lakes. for rotary elevator of large ore carrier for Great 8. Galloway and Guthrey, Architects and Engineers, Knox-ville (1970-71); determination of cause of collapse of high school gymnasiums. 9. Connecticut Department of Transportation (1970-71); determine cause of fatigue cracking of bridge stringers on Connecticut Turnpike and recommend corrective measures as necessary. 10. Texas Department of Highways (January, 1971); provided instruction on the design and behavior of welded con-nections under static and cyclic load conditions to bridge design personnel in Austin, Texas. 11. Distasio and Van Buren, Inc., Consulting Engineers, (February-April, 1971) ; assisted with field testing of composite steel-concrete building in New York City to determine adequacy with understrength concrete slab. i(g 12. Other miscellaneous consultations during the period 1966 to 1971 on the behavior and design of welded and bolted joints for such firms as R. C. Reese and Associates, Consulting Engineers; Parsons,.Brinker-hoff, Quade and Douglas, Consulting Engineers; Zorah Vosganian and Associates. 13. Modjeski and Masters Consulting Engineers (January-June, 1972); assisted with the evaluation of dynamic deformations of the steel" support bents'of the Summit F Bridge. and the determination of whether or not the induced vibrations would lead to fatigue crack growth. 14. Page Communication Engineers, Inc. (February-March, 1972); developed installation procedure for galvanized high strength bolts for use in microwave towers in Iran. s 15. Paul Weidlinger and. Associates (September, 1972-76); i field studies on vibrations of rock crushing plant and l. fracture evaluation of cracked girders for Con Edison Astoria Plant. i 16. Chicago Heights Steel Company, Al' lied Structural Steel Company, C. E. Morris Company, and Fort Pitt Bridge Works (March-July, 1973); determinatidn of the cause of '4 cracking of welded built-up girders at end of cut-short 'I transverse stiffeners, during handling and transportation 4' to site.

= .', s, I g g 17. i ~ Ohio Department of Transportation (Spring,1973); determined cause of cracking in cut-short stiffeners, developed repair procedures and design modifications. 18. Delaware River Port Authority (March, 1973-76); to provide an evaluation of the causes-for the cracks forming in the vertical members of the Chester-0 Bridgeport Bridge; determine whether or not other vertical members are susceptible to cracking; and to. i provide recommendations for correcting the existing l undesirable conditions and preventing their occurrence ~ elsewhere. 19. Basler and Hofmann Consulting Engineers, Zurich, Switzerland (May-August, 1974)1 assisting with rewriting j of Swiss Steel Specifications. 20. Ammann and Whitney, Consulting Engineers (1974-76); j assisting with evaluation of Jamaica Elevated for j fatigue and fracture damage. i 21. American Institbte of Steel Construction (1974); l preparation of Design Guide on AASHTO Fatigue ~ i specifications. 21a. Lukens Steel Corporation (1974-76); consultation on the failure of Bryte Bend Bridge. 22. ontario Ministry of Transportation and Communications I (1974); consultation on fatigue damage. J 1 23. Tippetts, Abbett, McCarthy and Stratton, Consulting Engineers (1975); evaluation of cause of fracture of l Tehran Airport Structure. 24. Paul Weidlinger and Associates, Consulting Engineers (1975); aasisted with evaluation of the fatigue and i fracture resistance of a welded crane girder. i Hansen, Holley and Biggs, Consulting Engineers (1975); 25. assisted with evaluation of the performance of various bolted and welded joints. 26. Canadian National Railways (1975-76); investigated the estimated fatigue damage in components of the Fraser River Bridge, New Westminister, B. D. l 27. Minnesota Department of Highways (1975); investigated i the causer of cracking of the Lafayette Street Bridge in St. Paul and recommended repair procedures. I 28. H. C. Lochner, Inc., Consulting Engineers (1975); . investigated the causes of cracki'ng of the Poplar Street Complex approach ramps in East St. Louis and recommended repair and retrofit procedures. 1 {(t Richardson, Gordon and Asaociates, Consulting Engineers 29. i (1975); evaluated effect of fire damaged material in steel bridge structure. I i .S ( )

30. Acres Consulting Services, Ltd., Niagara Falls, Canada (1975); investigated connections used on Whitelake l 1 Bridge to ascertain fatigue strength. 31. Ontario Department of Transportation (1976); assisting with preparation of Specification for Design of Highway Bridges. ( 32. Bethlehem Steel Corporation (1976); revised article in ~- 4 Bolt Booklet. 33. Washington State Highway Commission (1976); investigated 5 the fatigue and fracture resistance of Broadway Inter-change Bridge in Everett, Washington. 34. Richardson, Gordon and Associates, Consulting Engineers (1976-77); evaluation of fracture resistance of the Sewickley Bridge eyebars. 35. Scott Paper Company (1975-76); assisted with assessment of fatigue failure of welded machinery. 36. American Institute of Steel Construction (1976-77); preparation of booklet on " Bridge Fatigue Guide". 37. Esso Research Corporation (1977); assessment of fatigue 4 and fracture resistance of welded details for offshore platform. 33. f-The Lummus Company, Division-Combustion Engineering (1977); assessed strength of welded beam-to-column connections. 39. Louisville ~ and Nashville Railroad (1977); evaluation of fatigue and fracture resistance of electroslag weld-ments in railroad bridge. i 40. Fuller Company - GATX (1977);' assessed fatigue strength of welded connections on large dryers. 41. Bethlehem Steel Corporation (1f78- ); failure of Hartford Coliseum. l 42. Regional Transit Authority - Chi.cago (A. Tedesko) (1978); l assisted in assessment of failure of Dan Ryan Elevated Structure. 43. CONRAIL (1978); investigated the cause of the failure j of a Hulett Walking Beam at Astabula, Ohio. 44. Allied Structural Steel (1977- ); Consultant on the defects found on New Silver Bridge at Point Pleasant, West Virginia. 45. Ontario Hydro (1978- ); ConsultInt on fatigue failured in bolts and weldment of intake cover structure in Lake Ontario. / 46. Vermont Public Service Board (1978- ); Consultant on ( cracks that formed in torus of Vermont Yankee Nuclear Reactor. ,----r- ,_,,_,,,,,,----e, , - - - -, ~ ,,,,--.,-,--n--.--,n..,,---,wm..,,,-

C. 47. Kaiser Transit Group (1978)'; developed leading spectrum for laboratory fatigue test of prestressed concrete T-beam for Dade County, Florida Rapid Transit System. I 48. Bechtel Power Corporati,on (1978); supervised and evaluated influence of bent anchors on capacity ( of anchor plates. i 49. Buckland and Taylor (1978- ); assisted with fatigue design criteria for Lions Gate Bridge, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada. ~ 50. Aetna Insurance (1978- ); evaluati'on'of causes of failure of Cargill Grain Elevator - Shiloh Tank Company. 51. Sealand Services (1978- ); assisted with lawsuit on failure of SL7 type crane; provided consultation on retrofitting fatigue damaged crane structures. 52. Wiss, Janney & Elstner (1979'81); assisted with evalua-tion of crack problems on Fremont Bridge. 53. Illinois Central Gulf Railroad (1979); evaluated poten-tial fatigue damage in southern pine stringers of Blu-ford District. 54. Louisiana Department of Transportation (1979-81); evaluated cracking in Gulf Outlet Bridge, New Orleans. ( 55. Deleuw, Cather and Company (1979- ); evaluation of fatigue critical details on aerial structures of Washington, D. C. Metro System. 56. Illinois DepaJtment of Transportation (1979); provided instruction on the fatigue and fracture concepts and their application to bridge design. 57. Bethlehem Steel Corporation (1979-- ); failure of Kemper Arena. 58. Iowa Department of Transportation (1979); assisted with-recc=mendations for retrofitting fatigue ~ damaged structures. 59. Illinois Department of Transportation (1979- ); providing services on significance of cracking in I24 i Bridge at Paducah, Kentucky. 1 60. General Electric Company (1977-78); provided'consulta-tion on the fatigue design of the mod-1 1500 KW Wind Turbine. Generator. 51. DiStasio and Van Buren Inc. (1980); provided consulta-tion on the capacity of Type 3 semirigid connections. 62. Maryland Department of Transportation (1980); provided l evaluation on causes of failure of aerial inspection crane and the cracking of curved box girder bridge. 63. Lukens Steel Corporation (1977-80); consultant on failure and litigation of Raccoon Mountain Stay Rings.

- ~ 1 l [ 64. Richardson, Gordon and Associates (1980- ); assisting

A with evaluation of Susquehanna River Bridge, Northeast Corridor.

65. Cumberland Bridge Company (1974-80); assisted'with i litigation on I274 and 175 Bridges in Kenton County, Kentucky. , r 1 66. Burlington Northern (1980-81); evaluatedthereasonh j for failure of Sandpoint, Idaho Bridge. 67. Dravo Corporation (1980- ); assisting with arbitration, i of failure of unloaded at Solmar, France', ) 68. Catapillar Tractor Company (1980); provided consultation on fatigue design of welded details. l 69. Zaladastani Associates (1980); provided consultation on improperly installed bolts at Worcester Civic Center. 70. Envirodyne Engineers (1980); provided consultation on i fatigue damage in Illinois Toll Road structures. l 71. Bechtel Power Corporation (1980); assisted with evalua-tion of embedded anchor plates at the calloway site. j 72. Modjeski and Masters Consulting Engineers (1980- ); assisted with evtluation of cracking in girder webs of Luling Bridge near New Orleans, ![' 4 75. Canadian N'ational Railways (1979- ); providing consul-tation on fatigue cracking in steel pier caps and in riveted bridges. 4 74. New Jersey Transit (1981- );-providina consultation on f atigue design of frame of Grumman Buses that they ordered. 75. Modjeski and Masters Consulting Engineers (1981); ~ i assisted with evaluation of cracking of I470 hanger e l cables in West Virginia. 76. United States Steel (1981- ); consultant on cracking j cnd litigarion of the Praire due Chien Bridge, Wisconsin, Icwa. i 77. Bechtel Power Corporation (1981); assisted with evalua-l tion of welded joint capacity of embedded plates with porosity in welds at Salem site; assisted with evaluation of weld penetration at the Limerick site. 78. Ammann and Whitney Consulting Engi~neers (1981- ); { assisting with evaluation of the Willets Point Elevated j structures. 79. Sherman and Jackson, Attorneys at Law (1981- ); Hyatt Regency Pedestrian Walkway Failure in Kansas City. e 4

r' {L 1. Fisher, J. W., Driscoll, C. C., Jr. and Schutz, T. W., Jr BEHAVIOR OF WELDED CORNER CONNECTIONS, Weldin~g Journal, Vol. 37, No. 5, p. 217-s, 1958 o Q Fisher, J. W., Driscoll, G. C., Jr. and Beedle, L. S. 2. i PIASTIC ANALYSIS AND DESIGN OF SQUARE RIGID TRAME KNEES, Welding-Research Council Bulletin Series No. 39, April 1958 3.' Fisher, J. W. and Driscoll, C. C., Jr. CORNER CONNECTIONS LOADED IN TDiSION, Welding Journal, 'Vol.' 38, No. 11, p. 425-s, 1959 4. htingha:n, I., Fisher, J. W. and Viest, I. M. CREEP AND SERDG. AGE OF CONCRETE Di OUTDOOR EXPOSUF2 AND FIIAXATION OF PRESTRESSING STEEL, Highway Research Board Special Report No. 66, 1961 5. Fisher, J. W. and Vies't, I. M. FATIGUE TEST OF BRIDGE MATERIALS OF THE AASHO ROAD TEST, Highway Research Board Special Report No,' 66, 1961 6. Fisher, J. W. and Viest, I. M. Discussion, BASIC COIlfMS STFINGTE, by L. S. Beedle and L. Tall, f Journal of the Structural Division, ASCE, Vol. 87, No. ST2, Proc. Paper 2555, 1961; Transactions, ASCE, Vol. 127, Part II, 1962 7. Fisher, J. W. AN D;VISTICATION OF HIGh".!AY BEIDOES SUBJECTED TO CONTROLLID TEATTIC, Proceedings, Second Annual Bridge Engineering Conference, Colorado State University,1961 8. Fisher, J. W. STRUCTURAL STEEL DESIGN, Chapter 6 " Tension Members", Chapter 19 "relded Connt::icas", Renald Press Co., New Yerk,196.'.; Second Edition, 1974 9. Fish:r, J. L*. BEEAVIOR OF AASHO ROAD TEST PRESTFISSED CONCRT.TE BRIDGE STRUCTUPIS, PCI Journal, vol. 8, No. 1, p. 14, February 1963

10. Fish e, J. W. cnd Vies t, I. M.

BRUCEENTORSCHUNG BEIM AASHO-STRASSENVERSUCR, Schweiz Bau:eitung 81, Jahrgang Hef t, Vol.18, Nos. 2 and 9, May 1963

11. Fisher, J. W. end Viest, I. M.

BEHAVIOR OF AASHO ROAD TEST BRIDGE STRUCTURES UNDER REPEATED OVER-STRESS, Eighway Research Board Special Report No. 73, 1963

12. Fisher, J. W.* and Buckins, B. C.

MEASURD;G DYNAMIC VEHICLE 10 ADS, Highway Research Board Special Report No. 73, 1963 i l L

13. Fisher, J. W. I Discussion, ANALYSIS OF MULTISPAN BRIDGES SUBJICTED TO MOVING IDADS, k by 1. X. Wen and T. Toridis, Proceedings, Symposium on the Use of Computers in Civil Engineering, Vol.1 Lisboa, p. 93, 1962

14. hisher, J. W., lae, C. C., Yura, J. A. and Driscoll, G. C., Jr.

PIASTIC ANALYSIS AND TESTS OF HAUNCHED CORNER CONNECTIONS, Welding t; l Research Council Bulletin No. 91, October 1963

15. Fisher, J. W. and viest, I. M.

OLTIMATE STRENGTH CONCEPIS FOR DESIGN OF STEEL BRIDGES, Pror.eedings, AASHO, 1963

16. Staff, AASHO Road Test BRIDGE RESEARCH, AASHO Road Test Report No. 4, Highway Research Board Special Report L. 61D, 1962 17.

Ru=pf, J. L. and Fisher, J. W. CALIBRATION OF A325 BOLTS, Journal of the structural Division, ASCE, Vol. 89, No. SI6, December 1963

18. Fisher, J. W., Ra:seier, P. O. and Beedle, L. S.

STRENGTH OF A41.0 STEEL JOINTS FASTENID WITH A325 EOLTS, rublications, IAESI, Vol. 23, 1963

19. Fisher, J. W. and Viest,1. M.

((. FATIGUE LIFE OF BRIDGE BT)&.S SUBJECTED TO CONTROLLED TRUCR TFAFFIC, Preliminary Publications, Seventh Congress, IAESE, pp. 614-627, 1964

20. Fisher, J. W. and Yen B. T.

Discussion, FLE7.UTAL FA!!GTI TESTS OF FEISTRESSED STIEL I-EDF.S by W. D. Renekc: cnd C. E. Ekberg, Journal of the Structural Division, ASCE, Vol. 90, No. ST4, Au' gust 1964 '21. Wa11aert, J. J. and Fisher, J. W. l - SHEAR STRENGTH OF HIGH STRENGTH BO'LTS, Journal of the Structural l Division, ASCE, Vol. 91, Ne. ST3, June 1965, pp. 99-125 l 22. Fisher, J. W. rnd It t fic, L. S. CRITERIA FOT DES!SN~2M I?>.F.ING-TYPE IO* TED JDi'i!S, Jeurnal cf the Structurcl Divisien, ASCE, Vol. 91, No. SIS, October 1965, pp.129-154 l

23. Fisher, J. W. and E==pf, J. L.

l ANALYSIS OF EOLTED EUTT J0D;TS, Journal of the Structural Division, ASCE, Vol. 91, No. ST5, October 1965, pp. 181-203 24 Sterling, G. H., Troup, E. W. J., Ches son, E. and Fisher, J. W. CALIBRATION TESTS OF A490 HIGE-STRD;3TH EDLTS, Journal of the Struc-tural Division, ASCE, Vol. 91, No. ST5, October 1965, pp. 279-298 L

, 25. Fisher, J. W. BEHAVIOR OF FASTENERS AND PIATES WITE HOLES, Journal of the Strue-tural Division, ASCE, Vol. 91, No. ST6, Dece:nbar 1965, pp. 265-286

26. Wa11aert, J.

J., Sterling, G. B. and Fisher, J. W. WHAT HAPPENS TO BOLT TENSION IN IARGE JOINTS 7, Fasteners,.Vol. 20 l, No. 3. Winter 1965 h 8 27. Christopher, R. J., Kulak, G. L. and Fisher, J. W. CALIBRATION OF ALTAY STEIL BOLTS, Journal of the Structural Division, ~ ASCE, Vol. 92, No. ST2, April 1966

28. Fisher, J. W.

HIGH-STRENGTH BOLTING FOR STRUCTURAL JOINTS, Bethlehe:n Steel Corporation Booklet No. 2190,1965,1967,1969 and 1972

29. Fisher, J. W. and Beedle, I.. S.

HIGH STRENGTH BOLTING IN TEE U.S.A., Final Report, Seventh Congress, IABSE, 1966 30. Fisher, J. W. and Viest, I. M. FATIGUE LIFE OF STRUCTURAL MEMBERS, Final Report, Seventh Congress, IAESE, 1966

31. Fisher, J. W., Kulak, G. L. and Teedle, L. S.

EEEAVIOR OF IARGE BOLTED JOINTS, Highway Research Record No.147 f-Highway Research Board, pp. 52-64, 1966 i 32. Slutter, R. G. and Fisher, J. W. FATIGUE STRENGTH OF SF.IAR CONNECT 0ES, Eighucy Research Record No. 147, Eighvey Ecsc rch I ard, pp. 65-EE,1566 4

33. Fisher, J. W. and Kulak, G. L.

Discussion, BRITTLENESS IN EIGEER STRENGTE B3LTS, by F. L. Gill and R. M. Hansen, Journal of the Structural Division, ASCE, Vol. 92, g No. ST4, August 1966 34. Kultk, G. L. cnd Fisher, J. W'. Discusrien, PL*.STIC PESIG'? 0F EOCENTRIC!.EEY 1CADD FASTENERS, by A. Abolit:, Engineerin; Journt1, AISC, Vol. 4, No. 2, April 1967 35. Fisher, J. W., Chairman, Task Co==ittee on Flexural Me=bers i COMENTARY ON WELDED COVERP1ATED BEAMS,. Journal of the Structural Division, ASCE, Vol. 93, No.. ST4, August 1967

36. Korranik, R.'and Fisher, J. W.

EEARING-TYPE BOLTED HY3 RID JOINTS, Journal of the Structural Divi-s' ion, ASCE, Vol. 93, No. STS, October 1967 37. Slutter, R. G. and Fisher, J. W. FATIGUE STRENGTH OF SHEAR CONNECTORS, AISI Bulletin No. 5, October 1967 L l ,,.n.

38. Fisher, J. W. cod Baadle,1. S. BIBLIOGRAPHY ON BOLTED AND RIVETED JOINTS, ASCE Manual No. 48, 19,67

39..Reemsnyder, R. S. and Fisher, J. W.

~ SERVICE HISTORIES AND IABORATORY TESTING, Journal of the Structural Division, ASCE, Vol. 94, No. ST12, December 1968 p 1

40. Allan, R. N. and Fisher, J. W.,

BOLTED JOINTS WITH OVERSIZE OR SISTTED BOIIS, Journal of the. Structural Division, ASCE, Vol. 94, No. ST9, September 1968

41. Kulak, C. L. and Fisher, J. W.

A514 STEEL JOINTS FASTENED BY A490 BOLTS, Journal of the Structural - Division, ASCE, Vol. 94, No. ST10, October 1968 42. Fisher, J. W. and Kulak, C. L. TESTS OF BOLTED BUTT SPLICES, Journal of the Structural Division, ASCE, Vol. 94, No. STil, November 1968

43. Daniels, J. H. se.d Fisher, J. W.

FATIGUE BEHAVIOR OF CONTINUOUS COMPOSITE BEAMS, Highway Research Record No. 253, Highway Research Board,1968 44 Fisher, J. W. E::c,CT OF WELDMENTS ON THE FATIGUE STCGTH OF STEEL EEA'iS, EXPERI- [ MENT DESICi AND PPILIMINARY FISULTS, Appendix t'o Proceedings, Third Conference on Dimensioning and Streng'th Calculations, Hungarian Acade=y of Sciences, ' Budapest, 1969

45. Kulak, C. L. and Fisher, J. W.

EE.!.VIOF. OF I).T.GE A514 STIEL IDLTED J02CS, J:urt.:1 cf the Struc-tural Divisien, ASCE, Vol. c5, no. SI9, Scptenb:: 1969 46. Lee, J. H.,"O'Connor, C. and Fisher, J. W. " EFFECT OF SUFJACE COATDiGS AND EXPOSURE ON SLIP, Journal of the. Structural Division, ASCE, Vol. 95, No. STil, November 1969 47. D:r.iels, J. E., Kroll, G. D. end Fishcr, J. W. IEr.AVIO?. OF CC".?CSITI-!F.i.M TO COLY.G J03CS, Jrur:c1 ef the Strue-tur-1 Livi:icn,.'. ICE, Vol. f 6, ro. ST3, Mr.rch 15 70 48. Fisher, J. W. and Yoshida, N. IJ.RGE BOLTED AND RIVETED SHING1I SPLICES, Journal of the Structural Division, ASCE, Vol. 96, No. ST9, Septe=ber 1970

49. Fisher, J. W.

FATIGUE STF.INGTH OF WELDED A514 STEEL BEAMS, Preli=inary Publication, Conference on Fatigue of Welded Structures, Brighton, England, July 1970 50. Fisher, J. W.' j DESIGN OF COMPOSITE BEAMS WITH FORMID METAL DECE, Engineering Journal, AISC, Vol. 7. No. 3, July 1970 l

51. Fisher, J. W., Frank, K. B., Hirt, M. A. and McNamee, B. M. EFFECT OF WEL2iENTS ON THE FATIGUE STRENGIH OF STEEL BEAMS, NCHRP ' Report 102, Highway Research Board, National Academy of Sciences. 1970

52. 011gaard, J.

G., Slutter, R. C. and Fisher, J. W. SHEAR STRENGTH OF STUD CONNECTORS IN LIGHIVEIGHT AND NORMAIr WEIchT CONCRETE, Engineering Journal. AISC, Vol. 8, No. 2, April 1971

53. Birt, M. A., Ten B. T. and Fisher, J. W.

~ FATIGUE STRENGIH OF ROLLED AND WEDED STEEL BEAMS, Journal of the Structural Division, ASCE, vol. 97 No. ST7, July 1971-r 54. Subco==ittee on Inspection of Steel Bridges for Fatigue INSPECTION OF STEEL BRIDGES FOR FATIGUE DAMAGE, Journal of the Structural Division, ASCE, Vol. 97, No. ST8, August 1971

55. Fisher, J. W.

PIASTIC DESIGN IN STEEL, Chapter 8, " Connections", ASCE Manual 41, 1971

56. Fisher, J. W.

FATIGUE STRE;GTE OF WELDED STEEL BEAM DETAILS AND DESIGN CONSIDERA-TIONS, Proceedings, Canadian Structural Engineering Conference, March 1972

57. Fisher, J. W., Daniels, J. H. and Slutter, R. G.

CONTDiVOUS COMPOSITE BEAMS FOR ERIDGES, Preli=inary Report, Ninth Congress, IABSE, May 1972 SS. Eirt, M. A. and Fisher, J. W. FATIGUE EIHAVIOR OF WELDED STEEL EEAMS, Highway Research Record No. 400, 1972 o

59. Power, E. H. and Fisher, J. W.

IEEAVICR AND DESIGN OF SEU;0 2 JOE'TS, J: urn:1 cf the Structural Division, ASCE, Vol. 96, No. STF, Septe=ber 1972 60. Fi:hcr, J. W. cnd Gurney, T. T.. EIGE-CYCLE FATIGUE OF CONNECTIONS AND DETAILS, SDA Report 4, Technical Co==ittee 18, Proceedings, ASCE-IABSE International l Conference on Tall Buildings,. June 1973.

61. Fisher, J. W. and Yen, B. T.

DESIGN, STRUNRAL DETAILS, AND DISCONTINUITIES IN STEEL, Proceed-ings, ASCE Specialty Conference on the Safety and Reliability of l M'etal Structures, Nove=ber 1972 i j

62. Struik, J. H. A., Oyeledu=, A. O. and Fisher, J. k.

BOLT TD;SION CONTROL WITH A DIRECT TENSION INDICATOR, AISC Journal, Vol. 10, No. 1, 1973 I .,--,n

\\ 1 63. Fra'ak K. H. and Fisher, J. W. Didcus,sion, FATIGUE OF COVER PIATED BEAMS, by Murad and Heins. ( Journal of the Structural Division ASCE, Vol. 99, No. ST1, Proc. i.c. Paper 8855, January 1973

64. EcMackin,P.J.,Slutter,R.G.andFisher,J.W.

HEADED STEEL ANCHORS UNDER COMBINED ICADING, Engineering Journal. ( AISC, Vol. 10, No. 2,1973

65. Birt, M. A. and Fisher, J. W.

FATIGUE CRACK GROWTH IN WELDED BEAMS, Journal of Engineering Fracture Mechanies, Vol. 5,1973

66. Fisher, J. W.

CLASSIFICATION OF TYPICAL WELDED BRIDGE DETAILS FOR FATIGUE IDADING, Research Results Digest No. 59. Transportation Research Board,1974 67. Fisher, J. W. and Struik, J. H. A. GUDE TO DESIGN CRITERIA FOR BOLTED AND RIVETED JOINTS, Wiley Interscience, 1974

68. Fisher, J. W., Albrecht, P. A., Yen, B. T., Klingerman, D. J. and M cNa:e e, B. M.

FATIGUE STRE;GTE OF STEEL EEAMS WITE TFR;SVERSE STI ::.SERS AND ATTACEIENTS, NC~na'P Report No.147. Transportation Research Board, 1974

69. Fisher, J. W. and Irwin, C. R.

FRACTURE ANALYSIS OF FLAWS IN WELDED BRIDGE STRUCTURES, Proceedings, United States-Japan Se=inar on Significance of Defects in Welded Structures, University of Tokyo Press, 1974

70. Fisher, J. W.

GUIDE TO 1974 AASHTO FATIGUE SPECIFICATION, American Institute of Steel Construction,1974

71. Albrecht, P., A. and Fisher, J. W.

AN D;0I2*EERING A';ALYSIS OF CF. ACE GROW 2 AT IFR;SVIRSE STIFFD;I?.S, Publictrions, IAESE, Vol. 35-I,1975 l 72. Fisher, J. W. j FATIGUE PROPERTIES OF VT.DED STRUCTURAL JOINTS, Section 5.4, Welding Handbook, AWS, 1976 i 73. Grant, J. A., Fisher, J. W. and Slutter, R. G. HIG'd STRENGIT STEEL COMPOSITE BTRiS WITH F0FF.ED STEEL DECK, Pre-l liminary Report, Tenth Congress, IABSE,1976 74 Demo, D. A. and Fisher, J. W. ANALYSIS CF FATIGUE OF WELDED CFR?I RU:;WAY GIRDERS, Journal of the i Structural Division, ASCE, Vol.102, No. ST5, May 1976 l l 8-l

75. King, J. P. C.,,Csagoly, P. F. and Fisher, J. W.

f-- FIELD TESTING OF AGUASABON RIVER BRIDGE IN ONTARIO, Transportation Research Record 579, TRB, 1976. k'.

76..Fisherg J. W. and Daniels, J. B.

AN INVESTICATION OF TE ESTIMATED FATIGUE DAMAGE IN MEMBERS OF TE 380 FT. MAIN SPAN, FRASER RIVER BRIDGE, AREA Bulletin 658,' C ,~ Proceedings Vol. 77 June-July 1976.

77. Fisher, J. W.

CONNECTIONS FOR STEEL STRUCTURES, Preprint 2748, ASCE Annual Convention, Philadelphia, 1976.

78. Fisher, J. W. and Grant, J. A.

.FURIHER STUDIES ON COMPOSITE BEAMS WITH FORMED STEEL DECE, IABSE loth Congress, Final Report Tokyo, Japan,1977.

79. Grant, J. A., Fisher, J. W. and Slutter, R. G.

COMPOSITE BEAMS WITH FORMED STEEL DECK, AISC Engineering Journal, Vol. 14, No. 1, 1977..

80. Fisher, J. ii., Pense, A. W. and Roberts, R.

EVALUATION OF FRACTURE OF LAFAYEnt. STREET BRIDGE, Journti of the Structural Division, ASCE, Vol. 103, No. ST7, July 1977.

81. Daniels, J. H., Ten, B. T. and Fisher, J. W.

STPISSES IN ORTH 0 TROPIC DECK OF RIO-NITEROI BRIDGE UNDER TRAFFIC, Transportation Research Record 607, Transportation Resecrch Board, 1977. E2. Fisher, J. W., Yen, B. T. and Daniels, J. E. FATIGUI DAMAGE ri TEE LEEIGH CANAL ERIDGE FROM DISFIACEMINT-INDUCED SECONDARY STRESSES, Transportation Research Record 607, Transportation Research Board,1977.

83. Fisher, J. W. and Pense, A. W.

FATIGUE FIQUIF__. INTS FOR BRIDOES AC MIDIODS TO IMPROVE FATIG'I J S!?I';GTE, Freccedings, Ninth National SAMPE Technical Co.ference, Society fer the Advancenent of Materiel ced Precess Engineering, 1977. 84 Fisher, J. W. ERIDGE FATIG'JE GUIDE - DESIGN AND DETAILS, American Institute of Steel Construction, 1977.

85. Tisher, J. W. and Yen, B. T.

FATIGUE STRENGTH OF STEEL MEM3ERS WITE WELDED DETAILS, Engineering Journal, AISC, Vol.14, No. 4,1977.

86. Zettle= oyer, N. and Fisher, J. W.

STRESS GRADIENT CORPICTION FACTOR FOR STFISS D.ix::SITY AT WELDED STIri:.NERS ASD COVER PLATES, Welding Journal, vol. 56, Nn.12, December 1977, pp. 393s-39Bs. L

. 87. Zettlemoyer, N. and Fisher, J. W. STRESS GRADIENT CORRECTION FACTOR FOR STRESS INTENSITT AT kTLDED i-GUSSET PLATES, Welding Journal, Vol. 57 No. 2. February 1978, pp. 57s-62s + I

88. ' Fisher, J. W., Pense, A. W., 51ockbover, R. E. and Baus= = nn, R.

l RETROFITTING FATIGUE DAMAGED BRIDGES, Transportation Research 6 l/ Record No. 664, 1978, pp. 102-109

89. Fisher, J. W., Galambos, T. V., Kulak, C. L., Ravindra, M. K.

LOAD AND RESISTANCE FACTOR DESIGN CRITERIA FOR CONNECTORS, Journal of the Structural Division, ASCE, Vol.104, No. ST9, Septer.ber 1978, pp. 1427-1441 i

90. Zettlemoyer, N. and Fisher, J. W.

STRESS GRADIENT AND CRACK SHAPE EFFECTS ON STRESS INTENSITY AT WELDED DETAILS, Welding Journal, Vol 57, No. 8. August 1978, pp. 246s-250s

91. Fisher, J. W.

FATIGUE CRACKING IN BRIDGES FROM OUT-CF-PIANE DISFLACEMENTS. The Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering, Vol. 5, No. 4,1978 92. Fisher, J. W., Hanson, J. M., Lally, A., Scheffey, C. and Salgo, M. N. l FRACTUFIS - PROBLEM FOR WELDED STEEL BRIDGES, Civil Engineering - l ASCE, Vol. 48, No. 4, April 1978, p. 70-73 93. Fisher, J. W. RITROFITTING PROCEDURES FOR FATIGUE-DAMAGED IL7.L-SCALE WELDED i ERIDGI ST).MS, Research Results Digest No. 101, Transpertation l Research Estrd, 1978. i

94. Fisher, J. W., Pense, A. W. and Roberts, R.

THE FAILUFI OF TEI LAFAYETTE STREET BRIDGE - IhTLUENCE OF DESIGN DETAILS, Proceeding of Forum on Prevention of Structural Failures, American Society for Metals, 1978

95. Tisher, J. W., F.cto.

E., Wood.rd, E. M. and Frank, K. E. 711r I':!I/iL5. TION CF EIC~.-ETE.EFG-~d E LTE II }:0R.E fy:.RICA 1.ND J/5/", IllEI Eu ver: S-F/7c, Int e nr.ti:n:.1 /.::::ict'en f er Erid;;e t.nd Structural Engineering, Periodical 1/1979. February 1979

96. Fisher, J. W., Eausa== ann, E., Sullivan, M. D. and Pe se, A. W.

DITECTION A';D FI?AIF. OF FATIGUE D/?J.GE IN WELDED EIGEVAY ERIDGES, I NCEFJ Report 206, Transportation Research Board, June 1979 t

97. Fisher, J. W., Fisher, T. A. and Koste=, C.N.

DISPLACEMENT lh'JUCED FATIGUE CRACKS, Engineering Structures, Vol. 1 No. 5. October 1979, pp. 252-257 j ((.

98. Frank, K. B. and Fisher, J. W.

!\\ FATIGUE STFINCTE OF FILLET WELDED CRUCIFORM JOINTS, Journal of the Structural Division, ASCE, Vol.105, No. ST9, September 1979, pp. 1727-1740 ? _y,,, -yy.,.,w- ,a-ia were.--------=-Twi'iwse'ese a- Y W w"'-~e*8" ' * ' ' " '"N*'"*

s

99. Fi:her, J. W., Ten, B. T. and Frank, K. B.

MINIMIZING FATIGUE AND IRACTURE IN STEEL BRIDGIS, Journal of Engineering Materials and Technology. Transactions ASME, Vol.102, January 1980, pp. 20-25. 100. ' Fisher, J. W., Pense, A. W., Bausa= ann, R. and Irvin, G. R. QUINNIPIAC RIVER BRIDGE CRACKING, Journal of the Structural Division, ( ASCE, vol.106, No. ST4, April 1980, pp. 773-789. 101. Fisher, J. W. and Hertz D. 1. FATIGUE CRACKING IN LONGER SPAN BRIDGES The. Transactions of the New York Acade=y of Sciences, Vol. 352, pp.193-219. 102. Fisher, J. W., Bartheleny, B. M., Hertz D. R. and Edinger, J. A. , FATIGUE BEHAVIOR OF FULL SCALE WELDED BRIDGE ATTACEMEh7S, NCERP Report 227, December 1980. 103. Fisher, J. W., Hanson, J. M.. Hausa= ann, E. and Osborn, A. E. 5t., FRACTURE AND RETROFIT OF DAN RTAN RAPID TRANSIT STRUCIURE, Final Report, lith Congress of IABSE, Vienna,1980. 104. Roberts, R., Fisher, J. W., Irvin, G. R., Boyer D. D., Eausa= ann, E., Krishna, G. V., Morf, D., Slockbower, R. I and Nishanian, J. FATIGUE AND TEACTURE RISISTANCE OF A WELDED BRIDGE DETAIL, Advances in Fracture'Research, Perga=en Press, Oxford and New York, 1980, pp. 2101-210,8. 105. Koste=, C. N., Fisher, J. W., Reese R. T. and Kealey, T. R. VIBRATION OF A STEEL TRUSS HIGWAY BRIDGE, Proceedings 2nd Specialty Conf., Dynamic Response of Structures, ASCE, January 15-16, 1981, pp. 61-71. 106. Norris, S. N. and Fisher, J. W. THE FATIGUE BEHAVIOUR OF WELDED WEB ATTACEMEh7S Journal of Constructional Steel Research, Vol. No. 2,.5anuary 1981, pp. 27-38. 107. Fisher, J. V. and Mertz, D. R. DESIGNING S~ E:.' EEIDGES TO FREVEh7 FATIGUE DA". AGE, The Metallurgical Society of AIME, IMS Paper AS1-33, 1981. 108. Fisher, J. W., Slockbover, R. E., Rausa= ann,.B. and Pense, A. W. LONG TIME OBSERVATION OF A FATIGUE DAMAGED BRIDGE, Proceedings ASCE, Vol. 107, No. TCl, April 1981, pp. 55-71. 109. Fisher, J. W., Mertz, D. an'd Edinger, J. FATIGUE RESISTANCE AND REPAIR OF FULL-SCALE WELDED WEB ATTACEMENTS, International Conf. on Inspection, Maintena'nce, and Repair of Road and Railway Iridges, Brussels-Paris, April 13-17, 1981, Vol. II, pp. 435-440. e

~).L i 47 C' Dr. Roger G. Slutter has been a member of the Lehigh University faculty since 1966 and was promoted to Professor of Civil Engineering in 1975. Prior to joining the staff of Lehigh University he was Design Engineer for the Concrete S Products of Martin Marietta Company. Dr. Slutter graduated from Lehigh University in 1953 with a Bachelor of Science degree in Civil Engineering and received his Master of Science and Doctor of Philosophy degrees from Lehigh University in 1956 and 1966, respectively. A structural engineer with extensive experience in materials and testing, he is currently Chairman of the ~ Operations Division of Fritz Engineering Laboratory. This position entails general supervision of all laboratory facilities and testing equipment. Prior to joining the staff of Lehigh University, Dr. Slutter eas involved in the de, sign and manufacture of pre-cast and prestressed concrete products ranging from concrete pipe to bridge beams. Since joining the Lehigh staff his experience has been largely in the area of experimental research and testing of structural components and materials. (' The research projects on which he has worked include pre-stressed concrete members', composite steel and concrete members, concrete anchors, relaxation of prestressing materials, fatigue of structures and materials, connections and polymer concrete systems. He has assisted in most structural research programs and supervised all industrial testing programs at Frit'z Engineering Laboratory since 1962. He is a member of American Society of Engineers, American O Concrete Institute, American Society for Testing and Materials, Society for Experimental Stress Analysis and American Society for Metals. He has participated in Code writing efforts of American Society of Mechanical Engineers, American Institute of Steel Construction, Association of American Railroads and American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials. A list of papers and publications is provided as follows: 4 \\ .eit hlb Of lasv3 W TW L )

1s

7l-Publications of Dr. Roger G. Slutter il-

1..,Slutter, R.

G., Ekberg, C. E., Jr. and Wather, R. E. FATIGUE RESISTANCE OF PRESTRESSED CONCRETE BEAMS IN BENDING, Proceedings, Ame'rican Society of Civil Engineers, p l (^ Journal of the Structural Division, Vol.123, No. ST4, July 1958. 2. Slutter, R. G., et al STRUCTURAL STEEL DESIGN, Chapter 13, The Ronald Presh, 1964. 3. Slutter, R. G. and Driscoll, G. C. COMPOSITE DESIGN FOR BUILDINGS, Progress Report No. 3, j Report No. 279.10, Lehigh University, Bethlehem, PA., January 1962. 4. Slutter, R. G. and Driscoll, G. C. THE FLEXURAL STRENGTH OF STEEL AND CONCRETE COMPOSITE BEAMS, Report No. 279.15, Lehigh University, Bethlehem, PA., March 1963. l 5. Slutter, R. G. PUSHOUT TESTS OF WELDED STUD SHEAR CONNECTIONS IN SOLITE CONCRETE, Report No. 200.63.409.1, Lehigh University, C Bethlehem, PA., June 1963. 6.

Slutter, R.

G., Driscoll, G. C. and King, D. C. FATIGUE OF COMPOSITE EEAMS: FATIGUE STRENGTE OF 1/2 INCH DIAMETER STUD SHEAR CONNECTORS, Report No. 285.6, Lehigh University, Bethlehem, PA., March 1964. 7. Slutter,,R. G. and Adams, R. C. i TESTS %F COMPOSITE BEAMS WITH HOLORIB COMPOSITE SLABS, l Report No. 200.63.408.2, Lehigh University, Bethlehem, PA., July 1964. l 8. Slutter, R. G. and Fisher, J. W. PAOPOSAL FOR STUDIES OF THE STATIC AND FATIGUE EEEAVIOR OF SIMPLE AND CONTINUOUS COMPOSITE BEAMS USING STUD CONNECTORS, Report No. R6-96, Lehigh University,, Bethlehem, PA., July 1965. 9. Slutter, R. G. and Fisher, J. W. TENTATIVE DESIGN PROCEDURE FOR SHEAR CONNECTIONS IN COMPOSITE BEAMS, Report No. 316.1, Lehigh University, Bethlehem, PA., March 1965.- 10. Slutter, R. G. and Driscoll, G. C. FLEXURAL STRENGTH OF STEEL CONCRETE COMPOSITE BEAv.S, Journal of the Structural Division, ASCE, Vol. 91, ST2, Proceedings Paper 4924, April 1965.

I ~., '.. T ~ 11. Slutter, R. G. and Fisher, J. W.

gr -

p FATIGUE STRENGTH OF SHEAR CONNECTORS, Highway Research Board Record No. 127, 1966. L Slutter, R. G. and Driscoll, G. C. 12. CLOSURE: FLEXURAL STRENGTH OF STEEL CONCRETE COMPOSITE k BEAMS, Journal of Structural Division, ASCE, Vol. 92, / STS, October 1965. 13. Slutter, R. G. and Fisher, J. W. TESTS OF LIGHTWEIGHT CONCRETE PUSHOUT SPECIMENS i CONTAINING STUD SHEAR CONNECTORS AND METAL DECK FORMS, Report No. 200.66.438.1, Lehigh University, Bethlehem, PA., March 1966. 14. Slutter, R. G. and Fisher, J. W. FINAL REPORT - $ TEEL RESEARCH FOR CONSTRUCTION BULLETIN No. 5, AISI, October 1967. 15. Slutter, R. G. TESTS OF CINCINNATI CENTER COMPOSITE BEAMS, Report No. 200.67.458.2,, Lehigh University, Bethlehem, PA., January 1968. ) ,('. 16. Slutter, R. G. and Rivera, U. C. TESTS OF LIGHTWEIGHT CONCRETE COMPOSITE BEAMS WITH METAL DECKING, Report No. 200.67.458.1, Lehigh Unive'rsity, l Bethlehem, PA., January 1968 and Report No. 200.69.458.2, l Lehigh University, Bethlehem, PA., August 1969. l 17.

Slutter, R.

G., Fisher, J. W. and Ollgaard, J. G. SHEAR STP.ENGTH OF STUD CONNECTORS IN LIGHTWEIGHT AhT NORMAL WEIGHT CONCRETE, AISC, Vol. 8, No. 2, April 1971. 4 ~ 8 e 4.c 1 e

i OTON 009 nce(Ing /EfUICE/,IOC I ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS v. 5 795 SAN ANTONIO ROAD. PALO ALTO CALIFORNIA 94303 (415)858 2863 ' g.. ' 'I C a GEOFFREY R. EGAN d SPECIALIZED PROFESSIONAL COhfPETENCE Fatigue, fracture and stress analysis of welded structures including pressure vesselk offshore k ( platforms, bridges and steel framed buildings; fracture control procedures for nuclear pressure vessels; design procedures for nuclear fuel transport containers; integration of fracture mechan-Ics., stress analysis and NDI for fracture safe design; materials selection procedures, welding' methods and procedures, and properties of welded joints. Recent work includes elastio plastic finite element analysis, the effect of Imperfections'on structuralintegrity, significance and effect of residual and restraint stresses on structuril perfor-mance, measurement of residual stresses; selection of welding procedures for avoiding hydrogen cracking; analyses of defects in containments, repair welds and procedures; analyses of reheat treatment cracking; prediction of stress corrosion crack growth in BWR piping; analyses of safe end failures in BWR vessels; evaluation of corrosion fatigue performance of deep water platforms-fracture analyses of steam generator support components; evaluation of defects in main stearr, piping; fracture controls for chi!!ed natural gas pipelinet BACKGROUND AND PROFESSIONAL HONORS e B.E.(Mech.), University of Canterbury, New Zealand e DIC,imperhl College of Science and Technology e PitD., London Univert,ity

Member, American Society of Mechanical Engineers e Member, American Welding Society e Member, Institution of Mechanical Engineers (Chartered Engineer) 1 Member, Welding Inctitute o EPRI Corrosion Advisory Committee e EPRI Pressure Vessel Study Group e Chairman, Condenser Availability and Inte@ity Workshop, Miami, Florida,1979 e Member, Fatigue Program Adviso yCommittee of the MaritimeTransportation Research Board SELECTED REPORTS, PUELICf.TIONS, AND INVITED LECTURES A Fiscturc Contrc!Procccure tcr Nuclear Pressure Vessels, Conference on Practical Appli-I cation of Fracture Mechanics to Pressure Vessel Technology,I. Mech. E., London, England (May 1971).

l Designing to Prevent Fracture in 5at! Evildingc, ASCEllASSE Joint Committee, Technical Committee 18, State of the-Art Report (January 1972)(with S. T. Rolfe). Th e Significance ot Defecis in Butt Welds in C/Mn Steels With specialReference to fitness for Purpose, Welding Research Abroad (March 1972). if J-A Path Independent Integral for Characterizing Fracture Behavior, Weldin: Institute lN-Research Bulletin (March 1973). fp Compatibility of Linear Elastic (K,c) and General Yielding (COD) Fracture Wechanic h Engineering Fracture Mechanics, Vol 5 (1973), Pp.167. gp Services in t.techanicaland Meta!!urgica! Engineering, Welding, Corrosion Fracture Mechanics, Stress Analysis d I

p l g. 7* 4 + b,pff,ay R. Eg:n . P;go Two SELECTND REPORTS, PUBLICATIONS, AND INVITED LECTURES (continued) A Comparison of Deformation Parameters for Work Hardening and Nor> Work Hardening 8ehavior, International Journal of Fracture (1973). f Techniques for Assessing Fracture Toughness, Conference on Mechanics and Phys 1.ca et I 1 Fracture, Cambridge University, Ep9 and (1975), Repair Welds Without Post-Weld Heat Treatment, international institute of Welding, Sydney, Australia (1976). Stress Corrosion Crack Growth and Fracture Predictions for SWR Piping,1978 ASMh/CSME Pressure Vessels and Piping Conference, Montreal, Canada (1978) (with R. C. Cipolfa). NATO Lecture Tour: Belgium, The Netherlands, Germany, Denmark, Norway, Swedeg Portugal (1971). Third International Congress on Fracture, Munich, Germany (April 1973). Finite' Element Techniques in Fracture Mechanics, Stuttgart University, Gerkany (Apr5 1973). Damage Tolerance Requirements for Pressure Vessels, ASM Structural Design Forum, San Franciseo, California (1975). Failures in Welded Structures, ASME, WAM, At!'anta, Georgia (1977). Residual Stresses in Welded Construction and Their Effects, Welding Institute, London, England (1977). The First US/ Japan Joint Symposium on Corrosion Problems in Light Water Reactors, Japan (1978). The Application of Fracture Toughness Data to the Assessment of Pressure VesselIntegrity, Second international Conference on Pressure Vessel Technofogy, San Antonio, Texas (October 1973)., ~ Steej Castings for Structural Use, Proceedings of Offshore Technology Conference, New. castle, England (February 1974) (with S. J. H. Still. Tebniques icrAssessing fracture Toughness, Conference on the Mechanics and Fhysics o~t j Fracture, Churchill College, Cambridge, England (January 1975). Damage Tolerance Requirements for Heavy Wall Pressure Vesse!s, Third Annunt ASM l Materials / Design Forum Prevention of Structural Failure Through Quantitative NDE and Fracture Mechanics (July 1975). i The Application et Elastic Plastic Fracture Mechanics in Fracture Safe Desigrt Nuclear Engineering and Design, Vol 45, No.1 (January 1978). [ The Application of SmallScale Tests to the Prediction of Structu'ra! Integrity, Seminar on Small Scale Testing, Milan, Italy (May 1979). The Significance of Defects in Welded Long Span Bridge Structures, New York Academy of Sciences, O.H. Amman Centennial Conference, New York (November 1979) On Line Monitoring of CriticalComponents to improve Reliability, Symposium on Critical Materials and Fabrication issues, ASME, San Francisco (August 1980) 1 -______v. .am

'",$307 ALLE?ATISN DATA FORM ' S. NUCLEAfl REGULATORY COMMISSION Instructions on reverse saae RECEIVING OFFICE Docket Number (if applicable) 1

1. F3:ility(les) Involved:

(Namel WoAF Off f A' D 8 O O O V 8 2 (H more m 3. or if genenc. wnte GENERICI

2. Functional Area (s) Involved:

(Chect soproonste boutest i operations onsite health and safety 1 construction offsite health and safety safeguards emergency preparedness other (specitvl 3.

Description:

@l6 l#lS l i k i /11/I E) l l l l l I I I I I I I I I I I II IIIIIII IIIII II II II III III II I III!I II IIII II II II II I II I Id 41-lFl51-lololi l I l !IIIIIIIIIIIII

4. Source of Allegation:

tChect soproonste nomi contractor employee security guard licensee employee news media NRC employee private citizen organization tspecity) other (specityl f8A nr +M Psh,d/nvsrP {l t te'% 3 te ) MM DD YY

5. D:ta Allegation Received:

MA

6. N;me of Individual trirst two initseie and test namel Ceceiving Allegation:

7. Office:

g ACTION OFFICE

8. A:ti:n Office

Contact:

triest two initisie and test names

9. FTS Telephone Number:

i I

10. Status:

i Open, if followup actpns are pending or in progress <C*,eck one, l Closed, if followup aqtions are completed MM DD YY

11. D:t3 Closed:

h-b m =-- i i, i >, i i ii,,i, i i ,,, i i i,,i, f Limit to 50 enerectorsi l l l l l l l l !!!!!!!!!I I l ! I l l ~

13. Allegation Number:

-A-l l l 1 l

1 l -.w nomrr rmattatsin exci roan tro e 'e -_ ( p._[ x il(g l /p -Q, t a,j d i _r 3: -? / = n e_ /< I I i ,, ;,pm 1,,,_. _...! _ l.L.J _, N W t __ 2/ f (1fj/g ~ L( -d h !,8 llk $ T R Q ^ _lU V'hg ei 4 j w r I. ) Jc Q Ty 2 'I ~ Y~ ~' .s tr 1 / K t \\ r' $}e- ~i i p]; %' \\ @/ ll / f 3 1 %\\ e a \\ 3 e t H W [,r il 2.dyl h( 'd., _, @#.h ' ~ N) ll r (\\ 1 i ,I I if s wMh k~,i t '~~d ~ 3""g]. E4' = s l " '"g4f Mf: d( / cj J -{ ( f Y$ a p g[k r s ) - ? t i g(H ML 9 ,[F w q t 'gj Qr NNr- . i figwd t g fN @Y < fw m 4

? - y ~}i f N = m. e 1 42' e Y

A { Q,r T f A 7/ . ra (7 i j OY C i i ~"' pC

N e

&o w+wp;..

Jgg[h,_M.-qqL d i IT l M [. 3_,

I ^ y M M 4 .n , 4. _P.. nu ~ 4~, h i .. w & G ~)( h( % Q J

== y\\ 4, i _ % Q, 5 ~ ?Q Y _--~~Ir~ { k 4 ; &_. S-y %,ig k} b" i F Q =7Q+7 <- E?. i*h D--2 i cCi y.-g-g-'g g m,_r=.gl g g' ~ il i' i 9 !. i w wr r,. rri i 1 1-4lkd'k,Ki lE hs . man (4 f m2) @' M i ,'i /l ~l EM i-i 4 1 1_ & q, I e s A,m. y,,:l l i. E-x. - gr_ (1 *&'_ +- i:f.fL - = wy av a .iw,p e.% C u, = r-8D H &'-~ )Kl' ,p..f s 3:-(: a. g.enio. Ii e, m 3.,.3,, ij .c J h r _"_ E, h%d.q6 f ~- ' I a D4./ R f_ =, i rf .i4 G J.a ' D ~R T i ye r y-~'s :,_efp[l e r y$., 7, -- y y) tj' n ,s 1 f C U ._ju K - $. ZJ ) D f ~[ i .~.' ~~-,f,), I J, %=- i r*

r f

y ,4 g \\&pq KANSAS CITY

uf o

1 / i i Y ] L. I MISSOURI Q-* _I 4 ,. Mh / j ANO VICINITY , LeAqvyw '- \\ o L-a i Y CU - 5 s i.g j

==...- . L,. I,m rt= -.r 3 I ( Q,,,3,, f, la l ', - - 4

- ~. :-

w c._ _8 i q ( g ,",f,f \\ g B*i2E/0EJ?5P -:: - gg I ,_g Agr% M-/3 L ~

i .6, wu ? ._.,n. w- _, - ^^'"" *" y * = [j p) { g r @4, %%j'\\ x../g/Q,,, KANSAS CITY -~ CENTRAL KANSAS CITY y8/ INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT Y i m m Roaocum o,,s,s cin. isso, ye g. TO AND FROM AIRPORT ..',e Mr%. W\\ 8, y*Q;Q .., hkEr.M.a.

* " " ~.

.c .., - b'l& ' j WW &4'At j ' - be = o* *c r M

eds._-

)~~)n, ...... ~

9, l 4

L

w4H, z

k[~%g__g ~ <s3 m m.a +s y s Nf jy yo l g ee 6adu \\ a i g g g.n a. 8 ;C .. 'EM., M MHa ,".e w; t',," ./ s i s J.,. t- . uv; a.._H"---' - "..d.J "_ a-r L-g= = l q a. 97[h % e, _ h, 2 s ,_ a a T-Q4 -h._. h. _ u p 3 QU mM Q l -,a, e., _w ,f - m ' $0[. s q, b N,' '22T~},7 '~' j l h,-Rib ~- ~f 'h?sh Pyuq/u,,9_ N 4 y, p n 1 / -* ",-) i t !, /,l1 ;.y a.X*'y.n -_.p g y% q

/

s 8 omw; , //& [~g-w g 4 w -1 x.x J .m'1 6. i p f ,1 7 /j/ A l ll '- -Wh _3\\' h g49 i t am -* v.4...n .in y g b e,t,,p,/((j :, g; .- - s i h.3, *.. 5f a Hum *AL a i l ([ o1 7 J > a .tm j i pi L~m. m _s d M - v, ,_y m x w 4 I [j m} 4, g,, 4 j y g g g p :, ia.a i

n.

o_ t.,

.. n 1

ph,d, _.3.] }.! _*. p/ /h - ' ( 3 : G "' 2 4_)t l

{

i )' $, 2. ~ Wgy-[ } g_ fah@:. JJ ~ ~ clff, ~-~'u':)

8 Y 121 f

-,r.. m j ["- h "" S .m ag m 1 4y .o. ~ % g) a -1 y a li: ^

~

UL.t ( .m ..=r i

~nn'&

'y us. / ,J w QB %.- - mLk i e."*.%.***'C \\ s N L / 4 r, J ,,,"r _... r n:. p w j + _2- , f. ^v 5*- p. k ( N -..X . q., .._ 4 ma o...<. w- - r. >.

T-I; gm, a.as wv torarson,s w<

. _ + a-n.-- /. de, >i~j j = g . = Q-f N_ ; N 1X > ~ / 1 i /**

i. l i '3 2

<=- 3 m 9!. '.~.~_' s 'e N ,I jL .k i= f ! f !j h [ ~

D*' "**** a.s amee a

,; d_,p_m u n. e g m 2 y ]y [ ,,fif<'f f. =U

h. ;/ N, ! #,t D

,s + y N f t neesniat c .= 11m,.zAm M GY.dlill I / sa w g 5 E l m t h. / ~. a- ,om,,m ms m,xan-m.oun

i t II *C 7 m T %) T Q T 4 W T 4,, 9 4 q) U C g' i I

]

[Ii &#1d 2 i, e !..g.7 -- g w M.. y>.1_,. ra,mt F ritr7Fg'%.' f.4 Lt1 = r t Qi ;4,,y i r}{pd li 2 %'.3._ i ,g.t, 7l J .L.. ,i !oe m ,I 3 m a @j. lpi r' Tjj O D y MElf!sM3 ~ ':hr '[4,, s $..., ,iii ,N r,"4 -i s '4 i 4..j $ m,. t. e s ', +t. <._o u illI Q t"14 i ..i - Jlu;, a m:e,. mi.*( e,j i 'l.n jp c i ip. n.4.i -.4 % b8thu.hp,: ;', i' . ' hi 1% 1 3' ' I ! i s; , y' 4 M.igl h - i, a oh_.i

7. 4 r i-id ilWiP;a)l

= D 'I O 7,P i i!u A L'j$.L-( --p2:,if.y' qu');I j .l i d ;n', u. up ;. 1__ J.. .i.J Pt i .2 l g e c.y .u(yp,,, -. - W '.t!!,s _;g;P; : i, ; ,s,. j 't, .i.i,; ? + f,\\p^.I, pinf f,(t i i w - w: i . i., 1. irr. i, 'l ti L_. L_: l ~- ll C ,y n u n a n, j l/f. y[k,j pk '.i "%d!,f'~!,t,If-y:M di,i ? 3_. g.J , y __ L 4_ .m ,.O e h.,.. A 'a _i, 4 ti d., / f',1,: p., L n,, y.a %yhi !,, gi... t,, o e, g e.I l 64- ,p _3 4g i.b z '>g-

.b x P

w r-t tt, i-ii >~. B S.~il -~'r i

i r' r i.m r E

~ ki N. JM.'.S M -[ d@db.D., % $M,- s Il,1l', ' 114 l> r F,'Y - [_'l,V, $, 'I f ;b ' td 33.h' e '+- t 3r 4,I l '.' i pm , !,;r. 49a ri p e l.f{jh/ i_ g! is pj -k j b i .rE r ._;.J- 't " ' N~c, M c.4,_,.J }.'.l' f g,L y w '. _ _ ur_,j b

I;li ' c

h,. J /y wel g_ __

. j /

~~ F I'. L >a %' i 2 t 2_ / l l'.M]ip: j-f iN ,U r OM, y .s a-x ( i , *...;' I,T, -*", / u..!!_...,f !l l l ', 2/ ~.1: _j2 j

i,

i>j t

p. - ---- h - - ~~ ,*r o, 9 -hJ pJ J 's!, '- ha p-..__ .._7- - y p.__

q. -~a

'r + i: i, e l. - t ,( !e f. f' Il if j 31 i t, ,f' l \\ l ,.. __I M, 4 _,, y _ _, 7 s _ __ _. _hr_ '# _. k i i h.1,.l .+y .i l t r , t,lf ft .l e ,'r 32 n. 8 1 T.,. .-,{. ,1 ll' -.,l -e r ll 1 - + g j j W' l;l, _~ 'I i i n' -2 1 '?hr-l'.i- - I S'b-3-- 6 d._i~ k' i_. l b__4, I a -- -- - - d N-1.._! a

W:Icome National Car Rental g %l' WICHITA! \\ h e.g#"'.8.s v l l m'- i l .y I l '.'J I M OETA -+ r - t \\ r i f.Lw .a w l m h!{fj!*g.y q1Mi Y t' ) += x s- / ..\\M, -m4 tr. 3.,T_5_1[E. m s. r-1

.... e.

.i h a7m.. .~] o .- 1 1 < .y / 5, w,..-J(J.%-- s ,J -v I 1:I 1 e 3w 3 N i i t .r-/p; 4 i, ' /l J s a e j m_e ' e' g g h,,, i I, i 3, i i 4, g } li,. j e,,,, l 4-fl. sf, f. t '!: I l j E"E ( 1 [' h !( P s' / /Ih 4 L.1Ls / 'G "J-- 1 / h\\ / s & L.. l \\ \\ W l' s N, { 'h E .e i if W r.ew \\ s g.,

' I*~ ' ' X

=Tfi k1$[,i.T, Y, -ml" f e,. we. r _w, , 1.Wn a,-- we g .+ o% jh W' 3 rM 7' =1A 1!V& [#1 lf h, l k 1 'i h/.i e r-8 / I j / i ] tl i / g w i i..,_ s"'N= N.e w sk ..i m. I! T "l I ) l j i i [ t f. ,r-- t s i . }*/ l Y ~ /. l\\ / 4, { T ~j t 9 Q** ?f . D 9.-m g s.. v h'*F ~~ j j f7 I \\ g[ i 8350 W. Kellogg (Hwy 541

. 4410 5. Broadway ng Towfie East Square 7 522 4584 u set 1041

' 642 2791 '*"S****' A " E "* ) Drive Sa/eI<v*' A '*= "g "' $*** e 267 2333

$414852 3-942 369 FREE COFFEE a=am-

..=a=~~., ~c-i.'m - '6 3 722 5371 s 2674 701 fe, 454 S. West A 1830 S. MlHs6de n, 917 N Baltimore. Derby

945s4ii
ee+9es2

= res 3344 Wichita Mcdonald's, t :;$,;l2* i ;;'l,a,,,a'"a-2 r...._. = = = ~ .0,,,.,,W.o.,..., 24,..,21 .e.,s.. u4 f 1

w h u.; t m <. _ ~ 9,

t u a.

u.-.,p s Ed.\\ - tts o,3 l u t1L Iko dswrl tA;s d.d t1C Ed.s th 1L.;s L, 3 Len t du h,a, L:tt:. s,) a l:. % s:. t.m- -1) xt www '. u 1. u c n eI's t. m. '! j,.T ik s t ((i t (

4. auw

..w 3 -u.: ,n... a o-m _,,! d!- c, x L ya9 w. 1.1 ..: m n o (e3 n c) u <fua~.r J J t n".u..; y u u.J-:.. > td(l.t:n L s.L' sc.....,,.) i-t b il s d? JJ [ t !,.Li ~ nl..); d-ka La 'r T - d~ - D:4 .y : y-w op t -c.-< s O -le f"ali dc,2 ( ()) / k. J,._gj,,.J4 g ,gi ..w ., J yq. i 4:u ,D t<w O I Ph aL.u o a i seo a $8 W 1

s b '. h February 15, 1985 Glenn Koester Vice President-Nuclear Kansas Gas & Electric Company P.O. Box 208 g Wichita, KS 67201

Dear Mr. Koester,

\\ ~ It is my opinion, based on the studies I have made on the Wolf Creek site, that the structural welding meets the visual acceptance criteria of AWS D1.1. BACKGROUND One of the major reasons for the controversy concerning adequacy of welding at the Wolf Creek site is directly related to the use of two different welding inspection philosophies in two different time frames at the site. In this regard, I am only referring to the visual inspection of the physical attributes each veld after completion. though structural welding About mid-1981, even was 99-100% com-plete, a new inspection philosophy evolved for the re-inspection of completed welds. This new philosophy, a "no tolerance" philosophy, by its very nature, guaranteed that many welds which had previously been accepted, would be considered to be " inadequate". The "no tolerance" philosophy is contrary to what is taught by AWS (American Welding Society) to candidates for their Certified Welder Inspector (CVI) test. (If this "no tolerance" philosophy were applied to the inspection of steel bridges and buildings welded in acprdance with the AWS DI.1 Structural Code, these structures would be found to have many " inadequate" welds.) e The difference in inspection philosophies is as followst 1: AWS philosophy - Welds should be measured and evaluated using good judgement. Weld sizes are designated to the nearest 1/16 inch. Deviations of 1/32 inch or less are irrelevant. Weld lengths are measured with a tolerance of about 1/4 inch. Tolerances are allowed for all evaluations of attributes, including undercut. Visually detected cracks are not allowed, but it is recognized that not all " crack-like" linear indications can be found by visual examination. If the Engineer is concerned because of design consideration about minute linear indications which can not always be found by visual examination, more critical exa=ination methods, such as magnetic particle (MT) or liquid penetrant (PT) will be specified. [ h %#71

.h. 2. "No tolerance" philosophy-All visual evaluations of welds will be made on strict (no 1 Judgement allowed) literal interpretation of acceptance triteria. That is, any weld which is undersized, even by less than 1/64 inch is unacceptable. The most. critical interpretation is applied for each criteria. Each acceptance ( is on a "go-no go"

basis, with no tolerance.

This philosophy is contrary to AWS requirements and, will automatically result in the rejection of AWS acceptable welds. The advantage of this philosophy is that any weld accepted this way will always be acceptable, no matter who performs the inspection, and what

the, inspector's.

qualifications are. When inspecting any item, judgement cust be used. For example, the inspector must choose the proper measuring tools for the condition to be examined, he must judge whether or not lighticg is adequate, determine areas most likely to cause concern, and must judge how and where to make measurements. These judge-ments are taught in AVS Inspector Training courses. Engineers design structural welds to the nearest 1/16 inch. Therefore weld size measurements should be to the nearest 1/16 inch in accordance with " Rules for Eeunding Off Numerical Values" (ANSI Z25.1). This standard provides that a weld 1/32 inch undersized would be rounded off to the next 1/16 inch and therefore accepted as adequate. As discussed above, the "no tolerance" inspection philosophy which evolved at the Wolf Creek site in does not allow rounding-off, and any deviation in size, no catter how insignificant, is documented as inadequate. The "no tolerance" philosophy was used on the site in order to demonstrate that by "any criteria" the structural welds at Wolf Creek are adequate. INSPECTION OF PAINTED WELDS o At the . time the "no-tolerance" philosophy evolved almost all structural welds had been co:pleted, inspected, accepted and painted. Because of an inspection record control problem (some inspection records were lost or mis placed), it was decided that a large number of structural weld joints (each joint may contain a number of welds) would be reviewed. This type of review is consistent with the requirements of 10CFR50 Appendix B which provides that the applicant take ceasure "to provide adequate confidence that a structure, syste=, or coeponent will perform satisfactorily in service." The question then becomes whether or not painted welds can reviewed to provide adequate confidence. This reinspection or review is a verification that inspections were l performed and not a first time acceptance inspection, and not a requirement of AWS D1.1. L

Mr. Moss V. Davis' letter of February 13, 1985 to Mr. John G. Berra points out that secondary inspections of welds are outside the scope of D1.1. The letter further states that secondary inspection of welds should be agreed upon by the owner or the Engineer and the contractor. Obviously the techniques used for the. secondary inspection techniques should not be more severe than the original ( inspection techniques. It is known and understood in all welding Codes and Standard's that magnetic particle inspections are far aore severe,than visual inspection. (The ASME and AWS Codes make this an obvious conclusion by classification of inspection criteria.) The inspections. required, of the structural welding in question on site are all visual inspections. VISUAL INSPECTION OF WELDS The weld attributes usually required to be visually inspected are: Weld location (including existence) o o Length o Size o Undercut o Cracks o Craters o Fusion o Concavity o Convexity o Overlap o Porosity o Arc Strikes (with regard to cracks) o Slag and spatter Obviously, some weld attributes are more important than others. The most important attributes are those related to veld strength or Joss of load carrying capability. In this category, I would place the following attributes as most important. o Weld location (and existence) o Length o Size o Cracks o Craters o Undercut o Fusion o Concavity The other attributes do not generally affect veld strength and are therefore of less consequence. l l l

a i P. With regard. to painted welds, the only attributes which the paint may mask are some tight cracks, some tight undercut (a rare occurrence), fine porosity, some arc strikes and some slag and spatter. Arc strikes without cracks can be readily evaluated through paint and slag and spatter on accepted welds is immaterial. AWS DI.1 address slag and spatter as issue only with rega'rd to weld q cleanliness in the chapter on Workmanship (raragraph 3.10). Porosity less than 1/16 inch is not even considered relevant by ASME Codes, and larger porosity can be evaluated through paint. 'If it were ever considered necessary or desirable, tight undercut and cracks could readily be evaluated by a magnetic particle examina-tion through the paint, but this is not a requirement of AWS D1.1. The MT examination will find cracks which are undetectable by the naked eye and is therefore a more severe inspection. A demonstration was made at the Wolf Creek site to assure that a magnetic particle (MT) examination would detect cracks through a painted weld surface. Even with a heavy paint layer of 10-11 mils, all cracks visually detected in the weld sample prior to painting were detected with NT after painting. The NRC inspection team reviewed more than 70 random weld joints using both visual and magnetic particle examination methods and found no welds which did not meet the AWS D1.1 acceptance criteria. l This sample size, assures with at least a 95/95 confidence level i that the welds meet the AWS D1.1 acceptance criteria. I In sumary, I feel that based on my review of welds, documentation and reports, the reinspection programs used at the Wolf Creek site adequately demonstrate that the structural welding meets the i acceptance criteria of AWS D1.1 and provides adequate evidence that i the welds are structurally sound and meet the design parameters specified. i O Ao. s RegyteredF. Reedy, PE i F.eg.s Structu al Engineer (Illinois) Member AWS Me:ber ASCE Tellow ASME l l

l U.S. NUCLE A;'t F tEULAT%Y CoMMISito4 tkC PoRM 30s INVESTIGATION STATUS RECORD INST;UCTeoNS-This brm o to be compaeted whenever s'emt.caat activity has occurred reist w to a come or at 6eest every 30 cars it no chsege hos ocruered owring the 30 os, report ng period, end cate No Cheage'* in the statws bioch. Keep the orgine' with the case f 6e and esad one copy to Headavertees o+t.cs of invest pst.ons CASIhWM9(. ggTggO.y oe e eCE 01 FIELD OFFICE o.o,...,.G...Cro. .. i~omov t t.Ce~isi REGION IV Q4-84-052 c g.ggo,<a ....v....t..eu.c w wt=Do. m OTath '~ ASS GmED TO SuestCT EMERSON WOLF CREEK GENERATING STATION: srATus is,ec,$ oere. m,/siW4bj i i co t iun vi o h id ing isecord - On November 19, 1984, the NRC Region IV Administrator requested appropriate investigation / inquiry after Region IV inspectors learned that a weld which Kansas Gas & Electric (KG&E) inspection records clearly indicate exists was found not to exist, therefore causing the record to be false. An inquiry will be conducted to determine why an individual signed off on an inspection document that was not conducted and the circumstances surrounding how this incident occurred. I ECD: Unknown DATE: December 31, 1984 - This investigation will be initiated during the February 1985 time frame. ECD: Unknown DATE: January 31, 1985 - This investigation will be initiated during the latter part of February 1985 time frame. ECD: Unknown 4 DATE: February 28, 1985 - This investigation will be initiated during the latter part of March 1985 time frame. ECD: Unknown DATE: March 31, 1985 - This inquiry has been completed. Review of final report in progress. ECD: 4/85 DATE: April 30, 1985 - Report of Inquiry completed. Forwarded to OI:HQ for final review 1-29-85. ECD: 5/85 Y l' ]Nb MsM i\\ I L

_w. - NRC PORM 305 y ( U.S. NUCLE *3 CE EULATLEY CoMMIS&loh 4 INVESind ATION Fif TUS, RECORD in sT;Ucrious: Th.. som. to n. comi.d =aea.,.,, '.c.ai.ci..itv n. occur,.o.ist. to c. o,.i 6.. <v ao e.v. i' no ca. nee n. occu,,.o a,.as ia. ao a.,,.co,s.n,.

o. i,o.c.t.

8. en.a, i,

.t io.

x o in, o,

<..in is.. v.i..no no on. coo, io w..oo.,i.,. I oev.c. o, io i.,i.. c.se uvuesa cavesomv on.ca 01 FIELD OFFICE o.o...,. ao.cro. .. =oiv.ov.t t.c i ~,,, REGION IV Q4-84-053 L e ggaga .re...os,,vis w vthDon a ovata AS5sG%tD To SvestcT EMERSON WOL,F CREEK GENERATING STATION: ., ___; m __:__ ,,m nm, ""'* '""'~' status tspec,4 sere. a a a&ic6'iW anAJrfo#'W 19, 1984, the NRC Region IV Administrator requested appropriate On November investigation / inquiry after Region IV inspectors learned that a substantial number An inquiry will be of missing weld records could not be located or accounted for. initially conducted to determine the circumstances surrounding the missing records. i ECD: Unknown DATE: December 31, 1984 - This investigation will be initiated during the February 1985 time frame. ECD: Unknown DATE: January 31, 1985 - This investigation will be initiated during the latter part of February 1985 time frame. ECD: Unknown DATE: February 28, 1985 - This investigation will be initiated during the latter part of March 1985 time frame. ECD: Unknown DATE: March 31, 1985 - Ir. 'nquiry has been completed. Review of final report in progress. 4/85 f DATE: April 30, 1985 - The Report of Inquiry requires additional information to be included. Anticipate completion on May 6, 1985 and will forward to 01:HQ g yl for final review. ECD: 5/85 ke l J

~ T' } 7 ALLE2ATlIN DATA FORM s.1 NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMfSSION "NE Instructions on riverse Sade RECEIVING OFFICE Docket Number (if applicsble)

1. Facility (ies) Involved:

(Namel (tf more than 3. or if {j)f)L D f O({ $ h b D D D k $ 0 genenc, wnte GENERIC) t)2Ltn.>trrold. A A)S A S

2. Functional Areats) Involved:

(Check appropnate bontes) I operations onsite health and safety N construction offsite health and safety sisfeguards emergency preparedness other (specifyl 3.

Description:

I S I C l //I S I / I d fl V I ( 4 III I l l l l l l l l l lI I g gggg'gggggggggjggl l l l l l l l (Limit to 100 characters) l l l l l l l l l l l l l l 1IIIII III III IM yl-19141-I d 6!31 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I

4. Source of Allegation:

(Check approonate box) contractor employee security guard licensee employee news media NRC employee private citizen organization (specifyl other tspecity) MM DD YY

5. Date Allegation Received:

6. Name of Individual triest two initials and last namel Receiving Allegation:

7. Office:

g ACTION OFFICE

8. Action Office

Contact:

trirst two initiais end inst namen

9. FTS Telephone Number:

b hlN [

10. Status:

Open, if followup actions are pending or in progress (Check one) Closed, if followup' actions are completed I MM DD YY

11. Date Closed:

1

12. Remsrus:
; ; ; j j j l ; ;
i i j l l ; i ij (Lwnit to 50 characters) 1IIIIIII!IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII Office Year Number: 13. Allegation Number:

PCam stPP etty 1 47 INTEROFFICE CORRESPONDENCE To: R. M. Grant FROM: G. L. Fouts KWCLKQ-84-010 DATE: December 27, 1984 $UBJECT: Wolf Creek Generating Station Corrective Action Request No. 19 Final Report Attached is the Corrective Action Request (CAR) No. 19 - Final Report which provides documented evidence of implementation of the KG&E Management Plan for the Resolution of CAR 19. Please note that Management Plan Item la3 concerning welder qualification, remains as an open item. ry L T Cons uction Manager GU/Wp

Attachment:

Corrective Action Request No. 19 - Final Report cc: J. Berra w/a J. H. Smith w/a O. Maynard w/a p$" ) b! L_.}}

ML20198B818

Contents

Text

Dear Mr. Foster:

SUMMARY

=

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

=

Dear Mr. Bailey:

Dear Mr. Bailey:

Dear Mr. Ivy:

Description:

Contact:

Dear Mr. Koester,

Description:

Contact:

Attachment:

Navigation menu

ML20198B818

Text

Dear Mr. Foster:

SUMMARY

=

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

=

Dear Mr. Bailey:

Dear Mr. Bailey:

Dear Mr. Ivy:

Description:

Contact:

Dear Mr. Koester,

Description:

Contact:

Attachment:

Navigation menu

Search