ML20237K695
Text
_ _ - _ _ _ _ - _
ucvision *-
@ ate 6 '
PACIFIC CAS AMO ELECTRIC CCIT/iMY
)
'~
STATIO C0 ;57RUCTION DiT/iRT 'ENT j
O!ACLO CANY0: PROJ' cT FQR' INFORMATICS c
N %MX9 -\\
CNLY si DIABLO CA:h'ON RUPTURE RESTRAINT GENERAL.'RCP/,lR P %CEDURE 5"
^
7 t
1.0 SCOP,E, This procedure outlines the requirements for weld repairino of the defective-i
.ructure re t nints._ All welding repairs shaii ce mace in accorcance with AWS 01.1-79, Structural Weldino Code. - Steel.
2.0 BASE MATERIAL 1
The Base Material shall conform to any one, or any combination, of the follcw ASTM A-36, A-441, A-572, A-515, A-516 and A-5:.:3.
For.,hapes, A-bl5 snall not.
used.
3.0 FILLER METAL The Filler Metal shall confonn to ASME Filler Metal Specifi, cation SFA 5.T, T;.
J E-7018
. [
4.0 POSITION
)
Welding shall be done in all positions.
5.0. PREHEAT AND INTERPASS TEMPERATURE
)
h 5.'l The minimum preheat temperature sha11 be as specified below.
The minir interpass temperature shall be the minimum specified preheat temperatur and the maximum interpass, and. preheat temperature shall be 800?F..
~
~
Metal Thicknest Temoirbae Up to 3'/4"'
' 5 0
- F " "~' " ~ '. ' - "," -~
Over 3/4", thrbugh 1-1/2".
150*F g
Over 1-1/2" through 2-1/2" 225'F 4
Over 2-1/2" 300*F 5.2 The specified preh' eat and interpass temperature shall be maintained un the completion of each weld. Suitable preheat equipment and/or personr shall be provided to assure compliance with requirements during period:
i of inactivity.
j 8708190372 870814 PDR FOIA DEVINEB4-743 PDR
'" 5J.
,.. m
_.,a. I." '
- P1ates:. to. be fl ame driedr whans beTow.70,*IEL '.'.c
- ~u~..'.'.."
-M
. v
.... -..:, z
._.. C.'M -
L s_.m_.s._...,_-..._
.._...; w
m.,n hupGr2 Rsit~idd.
i fRepairProcedure Procedure tio.
8 Page:
?.
c:
}
POST !! ELD h' EAT TREAI,'31[I, FOR INFORMAM:
.0
(
{
The ccmpleted welds shall not be given a post wcld heat trNtmn t
1 7.0
. ELDING PROCESS W
l AIT weiding shall be done with the manual shielded metal arc wel ng process.
8'. C
. PREPARATION OF BASE l1ETAL OR CAVITY FOR WELDI!!G h
8.1 The edges or surface of the parts to be repaired shall be p flame cutting, air arc gouging,. machining, drilling, grindi'ng y
' combination of these methods.
any B. 2.
All flame cutting and are gouging of weld pr:parstions sh using the preheat temperatures specified for welding.
r orm 8.3 All flame cut and/or air are gauged surfaces shall be grou
.., ~..
metal.
g h
- 8. 4 After surface preparation,.~ alt repair areas shall be magn{
~
examined using Department.of Engineering Research Procedure ce~
" Magnetic Particle. Examination of Welds in Pipe Rupture R
., 4 _ __
. 3212',.
9.0 ELECTRICAL CHARACTERISTICS' The current used shall be DC Reverse. Polarity.
{
10.0 WELDING TECHNIOUE
~-
)
1 10.1
\\
A Welding Technique Sheet shal'1 be prepared for each repair Technique Sheet shall be submitted to P G and E for ' app The include,. asl a. minimurrr,. tha? fellcwing information:
- 10. T.1 I
The configuration of the repair cavity or groove.
1
- ".10. T. 2'
~
The sequence of' weiding,. including the electrida sizes to be used,. along. with. the voltage and amperage to be j
used with each, electrode size.
to sequence a.11 wald, repairs so that residual stressesE j
and distortion are minimized.
not to be filled with weld metal. Coped corner-holes are 10.1.3 The preheat. requirements for the repair.
10.1.4 Peening requirements. if desi red.
k((
10.T.E A1.1 special instructions concerning cleaning,. weaxing l
or appearance. of the weidt
)
._[G.':st,;.
~
, m..y..
, m -. w =. - ' ~ ' ~m ~ ~. ->-~ y-..
t
.---__.,.-:.".w-
.....~gj,3.-
~ ' ' ~ ~ ~ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ -_ _-____ -
~~-
[p a.. e,. w., a DD-WEl. DING TECHN10UE - Continued ONT.Y f
10.1 (continued)
/s m
+ ' T0*. t.6 ' The Nondestructive-Test r equi rerents for the ra;.oi r...
)l j
+
10.2 Revision to the Technique Sheets shall be made only with the approva.1,
- i of P G and E.
l'i.0 NONDESTRUCTIVE TESTING g
The 'comoleted weld recairs are to be nondae*-" *4volv avamined in accordance-with the reovirpments of Enoineerino Soecificatian 8833XR.
The reaut red examinations shall be cerrortaec at least 48 hours5.555556e-4 days <br />0.0133 hours <br />7.936508e-5 weeks <br />1.8264e-5 months <br /> after coinolecion of aIT
{
ru n i penetration and eartlai cenetrat,on waine wn,rh
=ra
- hickar tnan
/2 in The examination or otner wel_ds may take place at any time after compietion o the weia.
p, Department of Engineering Researen
?
i j
0 j
I k
g g,
F-4 L
~--'i
.+
[
'i
~
~^
_w'
.~--
- : ~. :. :..:. -, _, -.._ _,_ _
~
' ~ '
Aw.
igr!R0fflCE MEMORANDUM -
?
Diablo CanyonProject
%dtc_>V
<t PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY BECHTEL POWER CORPORATION T*cHarold Karner
"""" U
l' Pullman Power Products s,.,,, D. A. R o c k w e l l
% No.
o, General Construction so.,
Wald Procedures for Rupture Restraints t
Diablo Canyon,,,,,,,,,
y' Reference Pullman Letter y
s
(
Dated January 14, 1983 Wald procedure specification code 7/8'has been approved for the process and joint configurations itemized on the weld procedure s: specification (WPS).
These itemized parameters are considered prequalified by AWS or i
are supported by, tests and procedura qualification records (PQR).
If Pullman wishes to use WPS code 7/8 for processes or joint configurations
-not itemized a new WPS and PQR's are required.
Since the square groove welds shown-in your letter are not considered prequalified by_AWS for SMAW in.the material sizes shown and are not supported by tests and PQR's these welds are not allowed.
. h*
D. A.
oc well As'sistant Project Superintend:
RTorstromsfgm cc:
HBFriend JBHoch JRManning JWShryock RDEtzler
'\\ b 14 h
$ p/l efe'
!T*... '. @;;_'.' iMS
,,,,7
. =,
' g pccT Tc2M 7L70-213 2
=
',st ar.:cA3a Pullman Power Products m. N 3-34 2 x w;
/* r"'Cg To 3E 3E7EuD m
v=< C,r, e-9~
l Q.a.
LES 3.s 2 S/ AcA
' ??? ~;G. 2.5/ RR - WA c-~~~' :TC l fyun ygg PACK 8 If, CAT *CI T'U48/N8 C?. SC'"3 b
'*? 8 1 f&$
$77', N -82 Y l %5$idr l
3 S0 ?cn M M l
F W 4X477" i MAT ' I, FJ,.44.
a
///
?.D 'lQ** f
'a ~r, 3 f
/
xxa e W/f f 6 EX/$7'/Ns f
A
$MC1, f
.M-'
60
/
U a
iurM.
Q'Q" p
- AC C.A.
- 37.
, _ _.. m;p M,..??.CC. C?r..
no.
cr -
r m.
cae
- ?.
- A=
Im+.r -,wtecmen N
l I si lW< f4%We/19: ML 1
= sza.exe. eeswsur wr I.hi?.n!. I Ri l*7;/\\WhkRi \\Wm c.ng
.s.u a m< ne w so 3 7 car:.
s s:3 lw c.e,: wj/ l ;m
~
3
.sms e cI VA N DT2 PASS 800 "?.
3ACI
$hl l
l l
l u I rr-a cuanzs nem I
l
- I si l'MtIW4 au ecee.e mx.ws au,o a.m.c w.<.Mfal h/d
/
5 I SPECTU., wuauw.:.CNS 7"O #4 u,$M W7,504A00f d* SAse ME7.stw e.,a l
l Ca MADTAs **
7""
l l'
W N ~'
b/ 'I I s i sd"!Et M HFfd'%#.F5x s I i
i si I i
l i
I n120 swumm I
q.i '
.m
- a:
U. ~12%
d2' 7/0' i 7 l 20 caeu=-am:1 r aucua -=:cis:QU%/a 7/s I l
l
.i i'
muu no rea = vmxu ces=a l
I si % IM ##L%si I
9 I M.T. TCE UFCRMATICN CNLT i
.wo, i,,, i,,i
~/f.' i t / e i y#. C.;
I 3212i
- M, i
' 2-F.E.D
'C
@ S T D C73 U DICAI*CUS 's ~r.t 7 A M.
l2h3 f1.,lu l l
l l.,
u
/
1 l
l b l -73 h'ILkI'Ibk/Np 3,
i I
a.
~ U. T. n... u,.. a.ew
.ao e =e-s v -
l7,*d2I up i
. = =.
re w
e nci i
,j
!13 rna nsuu a anssIcnn I
F'*-lsiIM f/O W ID/I?<
.A (, I cau (ew/ww the sess-)u mygg l
l l
}
l l
asna xesowa asexia I
I I
I au, oce waso,raea ssee l
l I
n a s u W s m e m a r a..l*
l' l
l l
l mo I
I I
1 I
I I
\\
. '. r.
m3 **.0 CESS SE!3"w" TCK SCTGII 3ETC. TUT.I.-ww.A'"*CN TECS
.u.-~....! ?.IS"").A2'"*
I i
l 1
,.,;x
.a ns.s a.,s ns. w - " r w z m j zusDAnO k
NF o
dl d e
wP ro t arail fhk s enms 3
2 7
l
.l P
l enod ei eeeeos 8
1 ub anca veot a ut 6
0 e
5 A ol i
aom i
s w
m smca 3
W 2
d t y f oest s gt s
re 3
- ens ojhd rd gnee rd eb s t
8 o
R b o
- Tl al uieh aet Q
D C
Q R cd nT epel cmt bt et wr A
S D
1 o
r o
w wP a sd o E
d 5 t xak i r.
d ptd gi nt P
l 2
ed n t o5 g e gf soe nl s E
, e D
T 3
W A
evni i
4 upuo nv i
ad h
W s nas npxl pl r
o k ehi A
4 h
oot r i a8P aP ged r ch d
D 2
R cpcS e fl 1 l
nti p at r C
R t p t
e We si nd p b
ed e D
S e uhf n d a hf ace a
f gnd 1
VS I
5 k st ou aT o a cg XE A
r o a a 2
s o
ef ep - nd i
e n
s wnc d of gd s oia peat n s e 8.
h i
g o
o
.na t ch pnMi 04 1
h t
dif C r Ci mr - a oo s
56 i
c 5l so eeSl e r pE c
C oi R2 1
t w3 ee Sb gI k st es&
t Qp F
e 3 wD e W mnA cd nt G
eo/en ie CO S
k eQ l
A ea ul eneP h nAd o e 0S W N
S eD eS g ml fb eceh t
Q 1E A
O r
vW n e
f o w
cT s
dt groA a h e t
o I
riel e
a eo t nesnI t e t
o h
T 1
9 A
R pr t e oht eR h. n f gT w
7 t
G eh t
t nv rT" e
n 3
V 1
6 o
et en eeee l
T R
n oe m einmrht e
nk
.h m
si eq 1
1 1
E b r d
m e pT n.
G' er o c gt R n
,i
, o ma t n e
r eeri i a n S
I d yuoa tl eio
.cl eu tbih ek r D
B 1
1 s
t 6
s qn ood ut a
U O
owq kt sc i
c C
- )
S d
nh a q smh e
s rci uat SW d
sl merru sr i ea wob O
A
,kl aee s a R oemer u pb u
T D
e ow e
e bih em qp d
1 R
u S
wrd oh ret mnt t u eoreret D 9
0 o
g d geS nei em RC os a p I
I' u
T L
C 6(t sfd u uwl 6
el d r l immf mi f uM p I
o oan e
f K
l 0
g V.
C 1
t sel sP l os ejpt n
s.
ii c
I l el u ehdh uard mo us t n t
I 1
0 oh a e
wtl t p - h e t
I E
O P
l otd o OP i
I E
D 6 b scl h e
at t t eet h nnn I
I m
ot gewtl I
Y C
R P
l el l a
eia J
4 R E
I W
s sst mf S
ysob ud e
it mooc r, a s
NE T
T P
A
'M aeea unahh o a
l raait t e
yo P mh m b ei l
^
Cl I
I Wt2 wt d c ss T
n md1 e s0 O
D R
F l
or e
at ti f e Rh s d e1 gl h rs OP U
C eradz o
o ore t i l R nl wpel L
A rn
. nr i h e h
e 9i a i
1 pes o
r as uthf t i
R T
5 sepw f eeset q T o F r - csop l
e6kt f l
l AA Y
I 2
th a e
rh eh res n
u 0. b a
a E
T D
eT gh t at osa re ri ot I
d DI t
e h ut u
od p
m I
U
. e n pI i
n h cl os C
L A
n t
ci t s uD a d i t ( t 8" r
l i s
.t P e d
l ed sR en A
a
) e v
l l l
i i
mn1
/ml a
S pes t
N I
t t
r k ei l eoes e2 r5 a e wI W pnnm u
Q 5
t sh g awt wnn u
i w A oai s
t c
a o9 o3d es c m f
e c e
~
N
,t e r g r p6 f g
rs y R
o h
o eh eut m -
seu eab eea t
E r
.T nn hT bl o 0. beahl hl h p N
e P(
o T
mP oc wt P TCdt 0
r l
id e
t 1
e P
u o
.ti
. ma t 0l sse ewehd M
t bdid d
d n l
d es
.s oct ew O
p ml d
.l ereiS al me I el n C
u yedt I en os oWh eih I hl if it R
I s wai wof ujA s wt t
I t as om I
RO n
y S
ti e
t ap T
u f e h
c uu e
ma R
od oh t
.i l
rrh l
A yi t
n s
Ph ot s
f P
aaf e
dt w 0 a t
d aoo L
o z o eoo 1
B po l
i n
it d nh eat engm 7'
S d an s
u s C I dl win l
o n
l n a
r
,i
/
L T
esi ew cee x 1
x mae grl 9
A l
l i at h o.
nhb b
uak nr 3
I i
i R
E F
a Thl I w d e ddf m ecie
/
d c so l
n r rl oe Ph uob l
E 3
T E
- ei b *-
,l e u ee m
sb j A
R sf em k a p g pwr A. u i
- 2. b y 3. thh p i p
et t t M
I v
U 3 en s
t s A F A rb a 2i nt
- 5. l 5
l s
a mh me e
G 1
r N
Q
.b e
d r,,
,l et
.s v
E
- 2. l d 9 al 9 ed 9 9 9 um 7 nen I
i 7h e 7t r 1
7 7 c g
1 a r at M
R
- s w - na -
-. - ren
- 5. l rp Y
R ad
- 4. d 4 ud 4
- 4. ls 1 i ni I t T
O l
3h n e
on i
.cos o
F I
i 4 sa 2l h 2 c a 2 2 o I
u V ot r N
t 2
A et A t
A Ab D anf t
V O
I s n
- w f s m
I C
G i
C r
D go S
f S o S
S y S s t
Sd o r
N 0
S n W go W s W W s Wi en I
e C
O Ei A u A e, A A A
'1 ir A st es l
A N
P w
l t l
r d ooe u,
np
.a
.Pf ge hjh
.l ro e
$r s
.e e
t
.eoa 1 Dl 2 al 3 a u 4
5 w 6 waT o /b Jl p
=
l
e9
.rt 2
/
Rl cei d cal p it ah
.h ee n
3 2
7 N p vrT a a m t
ntdt 9. t d g 2
8 meoeMh amuo nd o e
enn 1
soc mt es c eeinmf3l ui
~
6 0
e acneiessl dt soro4 p p
i 2
d arrhdtbVt en o
2 mt m i
8 o
d et ctl co u
3 l edf e ooa D C eh po eerl o gpmergD cnt S
nt et eywl pa nmimedS s
E d
g c
cb f
nd i
oD rpeEd s it cgn eeein pc o
l ae l
E saa naeh rhF u m
df serewh
. e D
T 3
W h
i t dt t
o ad nnah ew T
A 4
t tl d pa n
er t nai wt P g
n a nemt odh g sa d n D
2 guic aiet "
i C
l et n ni. s ons rctht t epario D
S apel pii gart act s vuued s
m gi VS I
t v.
o mead a - s wudl pa nc XE A
d a fl perr hti aeiut an l
l cd oaet or" e
iVt pc - sl e 8.
oin nraf ot w of npmnt f t 04 1
hd at o cncr t
l euaei1 56 n
l i tii ot ead t t fR e R2 1
Ti sused rpa th nn wss h
F M
t snent oeh ot i eo eet o CD S
t d neehi et R t n
Ft srhh 0S W l
t 1E A
O eeermS ec" d
nl a ot T f a h nm i
oh e t
d ed owt or i
I t ge aDtt sph e nk a rf ah T
i r n
st e uch e
i rt
.mp 9
A d si sd ensnih oa paseos oo 7
S V
a u
anmosI wS f t d u s pbt t h sq amie nS2uo nt e T
R 1
a e d ot cCt t eoa 8r reot I
E wr el C aoQen rh n -
f omb e E'
1
)
S 6
va t r ee ew2 o6 of e D
B
- t pouC np d
.h m
w 8i -.
rep T
U O
nimsQe s m r - t8 wtl ih m i
S dih ei mel o
2 e9 c eeiut o c
C W
nos rV ouh osC 8d2 uniscq O
A apn ncT rs
- l
- dO v nen u
T D
a nl o
t eC 3 e7 o eeerod d
S 0d measd.ncQ
- w r
rnt 9
6l k eni oo 8
nP I
E os3 ye o
T L
C 6
- orbi rrC re eo nr 4l w I
h o F eei ph nh d ooys2 e r
K H
- 0. _
V 3
wd rh a y t
ot d nirl r
)
t d C
N E
P t
L E
O R
I l
aeet pt e eat nol a n
'W a e h h h l
oeih n df t ceot S ra OP H
I E
D F nh t T rl t o eoenAi aE a r
Y C
R P
ot s r
a t
l a
bd r pp E
NB 1 R S
ri dt od ugg i l pmeinereu E
C N
os gl e.
eQnn d omd vsapes -
T T
R A
f nnee1 rr ii ub oais op Cf I
I eiwm oiok t amcet er di O"
D R
smt
- 4. t ut ra y
L cceat ef OP U
C ti eet cq at.
,se ecb oc P
L A
eDeh o3 e e e m s "s 1
rC ra mnnae e
mt n1 prc 6 eeQrnue l
R T
hd l
l h
. s nyd n
- h w oines pt n
AA Y
I snf td3 nd ab no t
eC b a I E T
D aoui4I nt ai d
sh sH wt d a
DI I
U s
Bd2 apg t
n
,dT t aF e ua m
C L
A sl d C
enpa asl nw v gbh eae
.dDQd ciec re e
ea n U
A l
I cur nS ecdt 0 ew m gh h i ge i
U os u3 aE evansd 6b 2 ent pnl lu Q
S ris4 h o i
n
- mh8l d mib i
pV s2 s yt mdfl ut - pphl a pi T
i a
nb el a
sno2 mmt ut ms P
N E
el D o rret nT B - i ai os a s h asSid o wioH
'W d 8
t wh t e N
T nae t e y
di Fl os sI sc O
w a rnl d us o e
i nt e
R P
F f cial ea nt ws o 0 ge1 M
1 k oiuiat e
d e6 nr66 O
er d qct eeme el f t l ae# # s C
Vh oaneiol hi u
.h ef aul hWN a I T wiirnt pt Dd Vt wodrf t F I w RO m
m s
s pe S
u a
sl y C s
.i c T
m gi aa ngea Qe
.h n
R ud c
r onem i
cd s a A
nl i
o iit s d oent P
iPe f
/
sk s)l l
rra p m
h i
d nc ae e pi me C
ft cn n
ea y( e i uk c.
Qd S
eo eo a
t b n2t F nqrc e J
L T
h s
pi x
a0 s i
eoar d T ge st e
Ed 1
e rw u l A
H T
nm i
s nf d h e l d eup I
R E
ii s
u
- aoh e T nssae i q L
ct i
o pt i
E F
at uc F eee T
E ca h
h csgas
- m eso A
R 5 pr T
e 2 enri a, eir 1 s u
. e r
0t M
I i gl 1 xk mvp 2
U 2
o.
- r a
1 ad a
.er 2 r rf e w
.l l
G re otd s Q
9 e l
1 9 peah
- 4. l N
wini 4.
E 6t eo
. t s
6 w pt 3l ah I
M R
- nbh 1
t
- f 1 adt t
4 0
e
- 0. f eyf
.h ea s
. s ca Y
R cl e 1
ue ohb o 3 st ht f 4
T O
f F
I
- l h 0 d r I
t 4
et no 6 saiii f
I N
A D oat 2 oa D n d y 2 rl ee 2 r V
P t h p
r uren opr ma O
I C
G S - sf D p P e S rot a Dt muei Ut s'
r N
0 W r o S a g W f t S cos rr S c
~
A es E
ra A,
if E eC si e E e C
O 1
P' t d r er sd mo p
aut A
N nl e wo rer
. eet
.I ot
.a s ee
. sd qi nnoer 7 cwe 8 P s 9b upb 0I 1
at rc 1 i 1
b cIf
na n pi g yi d d w e
h 2
/
u0 nv ah2 n k nbh e l
wst t 3
2 7
n2 e
- i
, eaa wt es a
ha 3
8 h
2t l
Eh mh a a wa ewnh6 1
nrt
- od n DT c
f g e
v i
D_
6 0
e ooct
,nna N
l ef e rr o8 E
2 d
if eo R
g ae aevon aa o/I i 8
o s
pn l o l
r. uh a l
r7I G
D C
i ss id1 c otdthd n ul g#
A S
vt nd R
f f ei ee ca t
E d
eeI i P
M sR r evf4 ne rr eeio1 l
re d
Mo nhi o# gb B 'R B f E
i e rd n
, e hE D
T 3
W esD s
,M osd i
cv a oU h
nnd st e
uC i
A 4
v N e TB n
t sion o nS q
f D
2 as( g R
3 o as i at n o sd os C
h s n
1 e3i reet o
i l
D S
e8 a 1
s1 t a ch a3 ns t
8 e a VS I
t c#h
/eR a pot n#
a ad 5W ee XE A oo c
0hR r er a
sh re nrd 1 T a
r pf l si t n y
pne p
P 8
6 en o p 'R E l
04 1
o as 6
. e e
x no eI W
56 dd e
4
. s r dhl eHD p ef t I C
0dt p nt a BN e pr aI n7h.
R2 1
F 4 a#Tk 2 ee a
i o t
e m
CD S
r med nt nrrS l
p it h
0S W
N s,
o R rhl l oi oo l
xit 1E A
O dt1 w
R os e a
nsff us on ne# w f
w udii I
f a rU nr ae e e d rs se sn s
w p
T h si h
nese ih oet oi i
9 pf A
3 spv t
apeh Vs nr ei 58 a os qt 1
7 S
V f
ee ct i
eet t 2/
d T
R st r h
, s o
- nshh an R7 eal N
1
,sS t
4 a rf rit s ri R#
k ee E
2 e Ai
- wpo 6 u a o a rw E
S
- crQw f eospp ge ma I
D B
s
,oo dk en p
rs se nr e
F t
U O
rfd g nrh o eeel erd iu oW vt S
c C
l p en aoti t ghA cpl nd t G osj W
i sti w
t S nt o
o re O
A u
T D
R et nd 3
na a
rdh ec d erl r
M snee
- eon dht pn co eig d
S B eime
,h i
a c ue al nr st I
E 9
h ouc t d m h
b ge a oP o
T L
C
,T pco 2
ea e
nhl n c s
nrh u
e 6
I 3
or
- rh x l hd aT ao et siacl r
K I
0 L
t 3
dd p es e f t eh ui sdl a
P f
h E
O R
I R3 oro C
N E
1
.l
,t i
R t c ss gou wl qt f
l f nl ra
.in nC s ast 1
Op I
E D
R3h et f ara R ogetV e l
r lC R
F e
8i i
Y 1
t R
uu
,f eh e m d d*r
/r5 s
n E
I W
o6 a ao B e i
3 n h
D S
r0df r Mdf s 4
nt e i
nl 7 e3 ep Ng T
T P
A f4 h i
d s v 3 o6f s6 f Hn a y eg # t i
Ci I
I rr
,d e
1 i o
d r
i eml (
r O
D R
s 3 ep 3 a gC Rt o spn ef w r e
OP U
C t g# e 3
nQ R a eesea h oo uk t l P
L A
en nl 1 t a nt t et t
l d caaf l R T
eidi a R nhd ras acSl nl eimio l
h wngv Ri ce ol d o a
f oo chi r n
AA Y
I saano o
t f pd r
u oif ot x e I E T
D r
a DI
,E r
rpen x aep
. s t
r o
I U
sD p
o h e t ehh t i t ae Ph ra o m
ltC L
A s
2d p fdt m e
t enV l gh cpm A
eE#l A l
u eo2 hi uit enp c8 e
sof c h nfdt ol st di a s l
3 l
2 U
oG
,iA th oo s
R n pa esh o u
O S
rPl FQ e
d sM an n
ret C eee T
p i
enn sib odi vi nk P
N rR yd h a oa s
e l F anw d oak i E
eoMb e sei e e r gd o i
l m
N hfB t
l t e croneh -
s d
en O
T
,d n sC a v oef ah A re Wioh a
.hi P
d ee s
na rh h sd9 en t
M eTt m eaah pt t cie O
t R a u c
l e
nsp m
d t
. s1 gc od pt et eers e I
ra e
C I i1 eo ra x o h uhh uat ux s
I R
Vl /nd Ph en T b st f pS Vf e A u
O l
1 l
R c
S a
d e
T e
h l s a
e pt s R
ge s
e h
s e l
A b nc d w f rt 6 ne P
ii o sl oe
?
i h
C smr d ee d rlABDI E C
Qnrp l wh el eWX YBRX Qd H7 S
oo e
t p sedF es
/
/
L T d pf r we awn d rs e
/ 9 A
H l sne hf c
u.
l i
>3 I
eeoh l t ot r
o euc R
E f
i rct l
ni l N qo
//
i E
I F
no A h 1,f I a o F ere 73 T
E eo t o pbd rpc A
R h ny
- ib e
- eml s
M I
t b
wmh rye s e mea f
v U
3 1
yt r
2 sW at 0 rht G
eod
. d s e
pP er ot p ee Q
N
- 4. i e
9 e s
9h sd u l i s
- 4. f rr E
pek
.t i l
- t pa s r rnc I
M R
vni 9 mh c 9
- 4. d
,h et omp 4 egch ou Y
R
. at a ooe pi a i i l
4 as q 3t t
3d effRCR 4
T O
F 6
re 4 sd 4l c 6 s I
N A
2 rer 2
no 2 ea 2 rd n I
V P
op l
at wl O
oni I
C G
Dt /s D e D
pE Dt at r
N O
S cna.
S er S r L
S c 1
E eo s
Et e Eil P E es c C
O psk e sb s d
al M pnie t'
A N
P srrr m
paA s o l
neou eu e
.ehX M'
nin 2I pwd 3b n s
1 1
w 4 rsE 5I ti 1
1 j
~
rd c 5
n el 2
a D r it gd v eeeoS1
/
ymeod 3
2 7
udSt w
ia r w pi rW2 d aewr i
4 8
qeE n adt me pt PA mr sd o
res p
roi 1
l e
it 6
0 e
l oC D s eeu acl a y4 w9 uae ret uvrs 2
d T
l a
b1 6 qhh ow t
ne uaue 2
r - et 8
o f
e2 usiwg c
qvd o0 r D C A
S ec oa n
rh eaes d rn7 ywssi s
P E
d it rh re
,1 et rea1 a
idr cip i l s0h cio E
owm L8hl l
. e i
w t uc e
t uw D
T 3
W c
rI
/T eu n
t o qi sS r
U A
4 el o.
d7 wq oeonet sWht ec A
D 2
R afV l #
- e id n rr eat sca i n e
.e r
t a s
A c
innf C
i nroC icsh amees of wia D S oecS F rdt n r
roay ro VS I
it nI ul r
t sad b
p e
r XE A t aoA nd ef e ed s
sc e
amn oewic nl m8dd gnn h cs 8.
c c
n eea/l e noa t
04 1
ik a2 d ogeo pwe7 eb iid r
56 f c 0
ernnc b# wi d s r u
R2 1
ii s5 iPii F
l r r
io f n l hi f
nmf l
CD S at d
i aaerc evc l
eiro ul pras woc 0S W N
u sn td ae f ua ul e r a 2 1E A
O Qhi a
nomt m chd ur
,p 7
I ch eC eee erse cp s
n1 T
enT 1
d rdt hi c
r 9
l ei. u A
ri 0
id i
t cWo ie ih 1
7 u
5 l et rcs atd S
V d e.
on enaP o
t eh x neh T
R end eWt na k o nh eripe 1
i E
col 1
e aif eot d ef a G
S o
e
.. b nd s mt odi I
b D
B rnwb3
,iii I
a ot m
,di r
FU Pi 66 es d
oreC ao s uaai nl gl a O
S f
c C W aso23 azedi eudt f rd qat ec 1
ved s
t t g rr m
ura O
A d
hit nh d nal e oe p
u T
D el e
,d scat eeienr fi n d
S vep) n s e
spf Nee f e I
E 9
a wy
. a dnps u
pf ti eytd s
T L
C 6
h t c l
wsd l e f
nl b rne e
61 eoul e sl h
.l i
i a a
r I
V K
H C
N E 0 t ve1 6
wns er aut al d ouet oi P
r L
E O
P I
not ooh 2 k
wu wF 3 u jqv njv t
3 ens d
n1 f s eae OP r
I E
D
- r l
vuise 8
i
.o2 l
t rh md y
C R
F sgrb, o ec
/
e ri ap m
a R S
e o
4 ofd s o 71 )9 oa h
l o
E U W oefd2 roner
- 5 p6ft s
A' M T
T R
t el C Cf A
d r n
g ah p 2i e
s a I
I ad a1 l
t eRl O
D R
8 ue 0.d d s ohCl e
(
eas g
rR c OP U
C
/ qi a2 ridh n u
I r
eh sS es P
L A
ot t t I
7 sf3 a rl ti d n gD cn. a yA nR T
eli1 n ueeid eon ei9 t ne
- 2. io qt wwl c
iSR o1 sah eab n
AA Y
I es a sa e
o1 nW j2 ht hh I E T
D reu9t mel w r6iA n 2t T
c DI I
U uh q6 c f
sa P# a ond m
C L
A d
dT
- e oneed t fi en 7 re U
A t 0. S ihd e ed eoth a 1 ed ec o
r t
i l
U o.
d nr aw
.hi9h9 nI, ee yf oa( sc 8
1 t v6t 6 lu Q
S rs DR bdfl C
i b1 l i oo - o Pd e X
maol T
l 0 rif 32 5 P
N r 0.
l rS3 um ua.
d6 a ai1 s
p eeuW3 n ef un l #bt E
- 2. 7 t e d wdA8 gm qo e ea l
l N
rrdbrel o
e 8 A not Ws gd u91 a ue O
C E c; i s oat i
P n
n62 Pd y5dS u1
'N i t vo1 e
n n
M d or c
b e h e Fk eo1 N n e 0. 6 O
, C cl o p1 e kdt t l
C er cir S op p
. saiit
.r a oul 1
I r mf Wga9S 8 amd wa C objdD2 A peopoaA RO
- , il rt e
e v
S ee -
s
.h e
n o
T eenn ns et e r
d noo r
R nhi o ot yg h
o egt it p s
A i s i
i eb nft vi t np sc P
g ys t e ao
. s os rcia e
nsbi chdh ns nt reoea cd i
h E s v
esecnot o n pd i rrE on S
ed e r
t o
n ii p rrt &
ra j
L T ecer rsaeid e t aasposG P
M h or osdht em cr i
C eP A
l l
T rir ce t ah m et eh r r
dd I
R E
pue cd ns o rsb o
e l i qb l ongaic re
,t
.er eu E
l T
E d em l rgnl n orl rck ri i g 1
l ru Ap iprr C l
A R
1 e n. - oeaef d
- rh as wpe eeruu f
2 M
I dk x ue eagpot q 1 it U
. f ng m
n usnn ur N
Q 2 en
- t l G
2 a
neu
- 3. t aI h r 0.
emi E
6t d w si l ab psH t
s I
7 et a t
M P
7 ut Ci ot 8
.al a gi u
,l e
Y R
reCQwt e 4i er 4 nnd nl e 4
eQ e
4 T
O 6t wd 6 aii oah 6 oh/d gsh 6 e t
t F
I A
2i 2h vih s 2t sal nes 2 r N
V R
nh g ceit s Qeig O
I C
G Di cn.
O bdi s D ss id ns D
S ai r S r nd es S esef eas S s P
N 0
El et e E ol id ge E geh eh e E t C
O 9
l ab
/l anc nct accc A
N P
a rcm
.d ae ao a o o
o *
.h oiu nhh nh r
.h ryrrrr
.h 6 sfd n 7 ast I cp 8 c pb opop* 9 st f 1
1 1
1 2
}l
iHrsrseS3i ec b
p rtd e 881 t(i nt ub h r e
1 snc ne/8 i
S 0
e a
aoe oewediA u
/
2 d
,ao o p7 1
rl pcnset l
w q
r i
y# n.
t ae ed p cr q
o u
D C eed p tt o5 eiR epoamie1 R se a
ei nr b
hh rtb6 rw A
S Uh g rsrtt ee)
E d
l t sorm# o l
cn ti uar ptl ol e fA e E
al ni ehd ca aat umWn md l
. e D
T 3
W raed nT eiP l
Mt f
o,
n erul e
cf l
es eac3 raofd A
4 nuQe p
oiC ueMd sh o
D 2
et w
.rcS f s(l stf l n 0
C G cn l mP eI a
ee ol oe6 ao D
S uad l a pA eBl wrs aic#f n VS I
rrh e ueeS h
a d eeht e XE A ott t fbd t aiedt gscisi o fS n
ot2 rh aan e p 'W 8.
re rdC c0 t set t a) 04 1
S nrem oe a5 aat t sl d aF s 56 ooh u f pd r h
aeo f e R2 1
ift c al td t dMl n6 F
n l
t oo eh enn e
t el 9i CD S
as d
rsWoa t t eis3hi6 p
0S W
N crs u
C i ast e 2. t r -
gi a 1E A
O i al w dWf 1
d nano d 0.inh I
fB eo e
oE0 u gB ed1 n s
T i
el d ca
&5 ai
.i e1 d nh 9
A cdtl e o eG sf t95 bDl a c 7
S V ens o d rf sP,
seoo6 s
emi pa f l pou b
d n - t ens wkh r T
R i
N 1
S r
e h
n 0
rl aW r
E god w gee 1.d t eod a ocA s o E
1 S d nf n n gh n
b il I Ph ewg 0
B ri a
g i nT1 a f
t uD sf s s
f al g n d a t
U O
o) ao Ct eos rioi S
di nhi l l 9
nwSSl a
1 c
C W
nPi se ef
,eod l
3 e5 g WI oo ri O
A a
dib w
931 s2i nAAbh ed reae u
T D
t tl l e642 rR so ud ew d
S S eebl dh 2
uR ei
.dt qaf I
C 9
eWaa e t 0. D 6 9
o dt el i n
o T
L C
6
- h ti t
cn a9 yl o n yi o n i S ysr nnI S -.
oen6l l hhl r
I t
l P
k.
iC N
R 6
0
,b ee e o D E 0. )2 i
e h g - si cns A
t m
h1 T i 0. o d urweoe NI E
O P
I srl a usS o1 8 t6 s
eT t
OP I
C D
Mei m crNt D9 eI I
l sn t ae r
i I
I Y
C R
P T paa oaA 1
g
.dD vi
.i cl e
iR, S
S a ph e db eS( n d 's emo4 E
R W Ah esh rcU i
i nd sS r( g t dh n
As T
T P
A SR t
rgenA2 ral iW p nun H
Cr I
I t
r onpa u
ehA k goBith aur O
D R
a
,,or i
i
- 1 d0 wt d rni OP U
C h s2 so dkdl 3 6
reoit
.h P
L A
t e sf ecl p65 d# gget wd c c
.e h aem e
unpa t1 BR T
d a l
esi ce sb wo39 t sl i t eeS nhd pi r n
AA Y
I el 5 ot i
c P sssvw owei s 'W I R T
D t P r a l rd nd6 e
ut a
DI i
di o
9 pi b eeonA gFf nst ynt rl s eg I.
U nl r a pl na g( oti acb acoinrnn m
C A
eh ep t pf M u uo e
e U
M e e ph o s oia1 T ssdBjsf r p r yd modi e.
l N
U bt at r ecl
- 6. A S
d a d eiirrsk Cl t l
S r p
a s u
Q S
sl e
.dl d ah o ee psCt mo o
gt p ogui3 aet T
sd aaa nnq
.d wwseiwgen c
P N
l erh ied2 n nl f nrasaf E
al at e ssrl a
t ribi ri mef o N
p r i upen I a al at ek s s l
O no
,a wo) l rt al c rrsit irf p P
aR rd esa i3 uipuueioetl rei M
c eet rd st 7 caeqcruW r a uet l l O
rd ra el ti c9 rpcerrq d s C
t neh h eoh e1
.iecrioe
.d n
I f upt T wnt S(
D cR a pcc r3 a uricqf t RO l
e g
- d g S
- l nr ny n
n9orn T
i a n
ou ol i
onroi R
nh na id S
i pf l
ii pcd soe t edW t mo l
t d cl A
i P
. m i l ccnA co eo cl ga e k
st c eoa ecs rr een L
r at a S r h
S t
t S win S
o nnr pd t nen.
di r l
w seio ei J
L T
l el oS
,l Ammf R grw R ambCW R s edf.
A N t ea X na X h ea A
X rwe T
I R
E n - rxn 3i pe 3 s rc 3 e i
L eo 3d ec 3
ii
.e 3ddfdi e
i E
I 0
u u
i 8l rn 8 gul Sh 8l nl ot T
R q
ql t 8 epa 8 n q pW t 8 eaaC c A
P e
4 eaa w
d epa w
u M
I s
i
'J rur c
er2 cd ra e c
,q U b sd el b o7 el eb el s 7
G 4
1[
N Q u rip pl c -
p e gl h pl reW s E s 3 ove sal c1 SWnl t l SA obA n I
t r
l a
- M R
1 i a l
t o
ct p t - a I
t d
f a t - al eC Y
R t
3 ec c
h nD c l d oh c rl h T
O 4 pud a4 si a1 en s
a3 eat g F
/
N A r 2 sdl I
r 2. d d r r6 was r6 ph P o nne t
o t
t y t
oshi t
O DI ow n1 ee eC nt n3 i
n 3.h S I
C G
r S c
. o
.t i9 o
ei o
esil r
N O
p EC es C2t f6 C2t mr C2 newi I
c O
Qoh s ii -
A eo t
A N
P' i r t t e ml 0 h
rh h ueB
.m n
b a t eit cd c 9 0 uef e 1
uu1 2 h uu 3 a en i
1 2 mb ol 2 s q0 2 wt qa 2 mc a pM{
il
0 f
1 e
edl t o 5
o h e p
I r h c nh eai t i
2 3
Si t o oivt s s
/
Wf i rndi t c nra 3
t 7
A
. wP ont
.s ged oeom r9 ent c
p e
.d e mmpr g7 t i i
aa aaenl
. e eo
- a rt 1
eueet S
0 e
ot qcd a
,ir s
n 7
.sa ceredf 21 t d u ouo W-
/
2 d
N oinorsf isnn a
ul aao 51 p,i o
nnaCtdid ab c
,ept u
D C
n t
hd el cet d
A S
oecrd neeceent s ricl s e
E E
d ib eol ewpomh ao
,S e
h ub r E
l t
T cep s r t
n 4A unnot ao 1 W rd sd ai D
T e
ad cW e
pe g
3 W
cl 1 a l ve sf ns Ah c 4
t aa rpp A
4 i u -
el oh saoie mpees D
2 f o1 ncuot ib k o
,i t u gk crt C
i hSi nf r D S csW e
g rnrec
,h d cd 6 wti oh a d t el a 3
S nWt n
VS I
e Ad rs E
h eb s Ae e
s a XE A
pt eesd ft w SI esf enh o ah Mnnt i
c gh
,n e
8.
cuerap f n T
T ai g.
s3 1 i s) 04 e
n rd as oos Sdt n1 1
56 u.
ee dt rt e
qsrbsaegcnt e Arse
.d c 2.
i R2 1
e F
r.
id e
t l
CD S
nl f aeoai oir3 v o
l f cxt r r3 e l etl rpi ru a ocE sne p( r 0S W
N h eel eoiast t qt 1E A
O c wrih nf pa reee a
os e
ws W
geib es I T rt s r
,l pe i
onrms A nnht oh e T
aoeseoel p
Miit 9
c t g pt eu S
r ee d
A gl nusof uaa 7
S V n u
qed q
nioSbfE I s -
T R
coic si n yl i
l at roat o
1
.bl oip d rd no1 l ni l u I
E s
D1 i
f t ey
.l t
l i h r - ih nf pe u aRl nanC yus S ec1 c p1 acmo uhb nn l
0 B W 6 e St er A - t t
ru oh a l
O n# t eW eT oh t
c oid ais ea S
c so hAd f t l f a t
l ib nut yt W
u o
A
'n tid sT maqcnb gni.i ot ao eeo T
D ni
,t now" u e ccg sidP a
d S
a aah nnic db sm l
I mr t
.oid i
ny t e o
T e
9 l e s
f ei t0 ti ol l arl e e i l n pi l
L c
6 sccf s l
r euoe e6t etjel I
l P
t K
t ians cb e ph un# aei Wieutk i
E 0
t sd C
P e hhdl wmqecb pct i
a eah at os L
t r
OP E
O R
pst sd ar emi Si genipi t
srr
)
I t
al J aceper h r I
I E
D Y
a ss id us et o epeo t
C R
F hl n d i,h a
c C1 l
Desnpn 1 R uprcd reo
- ass f
ep NE E
n S
t u t eI yUt b aal W
f r ac t
qat ef uR T
T n
A d
ot o bl n
l o
O1 I
I I
i S si ot i ap u -
ny D
R eef s r. s
.u uaf i f OP cs s th p1 esb e -
S ca9t P
L U
C st s1
- vp t t t eW e 7
I h n
,hi s uee dhhs A
e t - sI i s
HR ul al shA T n - f mas e op n
AA T
gee 1 tS g-ariut gk eS cW t t t uj f
a Y
I i 1 o
r r
I a
E T
D uahl uAtl esb r o 6I s g d
DI s msAd l
saaMd I
U mu" no t 1 D n rd a I i m
C L
A nosoro ot u
af s i S ot a l
I
.b el t h A
et sNP n t
l i
ASi pp 3)I l
gi nt l i t
W s e l
U e
e sl a e
aa adAi ce n
u Q
bd cnrdd ab s met t h n vx f o S
eooen t
P T
os riwaeeti mree t af oe oi l
oomd or a
t N
s u pt o wmaacm sS ps E
l aP8 ht rt eI 7 e
ncs N
aeec
/ ret e e s e.i e
O bhi n7 as n
t S l
rl S
dh e"o P
s t f a# l as t
aA nl up r
M ad t
m ub et oat p i
O hl t cl ec t nh i U.j s,i cae u
8t t u pee C
uael rrr ait q e S8 ca rl sd t oh puu ot oieI O
cf 9j wr"h WS ehtl no R
ctSPd I
t AASt s aica 1'
S l
b -
r t
8 T
l al ne nc g -
t h
2hi i
a 1
R a - co im gu na s
t d t
A h eirS A
ire n P
srl t W g
i n n
e,i q st h o t g I
83 ipnA ne eStC si7 we gupo si ih
.D es s
t f1 7f S
nqaC e t
ffl T e d
ni2d i e h
/3 L
T drl eooe D
r oe
,dh
)
c e
i 63 A
t ef Sh e
r H
l l
WoWt n gt od d
s1 e I
a j p6l t 4
/f R
E egaS e A
onS f r n
2 wh 73 Wn Wb r
,(
rii E
t T
E idA a
a s
n*
otdf yd t
- d n l
f oyf cl o t n S
3i5 rw A
R al
,eia l ael vy M
I i t ei ea 1 e h a et enrue eo U
1 a1 a wCt h d cioEBt G
i t s
2 1
S s
ouci
.cS e
- 2. t rr N
Q e
u) o t
9d
,h E
eI f C rotd rt CS -
a 6
4i I
9hA oy cn M
R tS anoiS
. t t
d s caf t I ns
.S Y
R 3
esi r n gi t
- e1 hd T
O 0.h 2 w f
4hht r a onf nl n( caMd) sA al )
F f
t V
N A 2t t no dCii oeI I
sd I
O R
eh n
d cie nrrSt S t l a
i iiT eI D oencS D wf mt gl et t P
I C
G S
oeu nepaS noeeAiS r
N O E y ra SiWS c ctA a U( A nt1 noa S
c ai mt( nU W ni9 c
O it l si A
N P'
d pt ug i l i c Ms i
l n raru n
e f A W
or2 mnqn O
ia b rer D'
M :o n e i mr e o c t t
dm B
e E 0 B
d e eu4 1
l e
e sS eb e
.z 2
S 0
e h
sWv Whi g
/
2 d
T iAon t snD a
o m
ra t griS A
u D C A
S mepc anenE oh p h ed r U
E d
n Ct al tl net s E
l o
a ucat D
T e
i gmsi dd nh e 3
W t
noar el yot e I
A 4
a i
rh e t enc h
D 2
c df t
owa d s C
l E a n
t e i
D S f
. is& m f nnt s VS I
i2 unG sooeos XE A l
B oPh a
i mne a5 i
c w%t e c
B u
et t n 0 neeo 04 1
q9 h aai t1 erb r 56 7
tih i
mg p
R2 1
m-vt e r
ad F
o1 t e n
, ot l n CD S r.
ad eo 0f onuo 0S W N f 1
h t
8 nio 1E A
O D
t ean I
vci 2 6" t
t is st sd pS soi T mW erd s
- / ont e eo 1 1 l
9 A eA t p nd 91 d 7
S V x a pi l e
w I
T R en t a e
d h r 1
i s ow
'e y c a
.f I
E o
d C
1 S
nt t bi s
s nd ea e
a h3d s 0
B t
ru ae d ce v dd w4 l n t
O t
o l o c
c S
l 2 eo W
d a C) i o 5 e1 wi u
o A
et rf r w
.D t
T D
is ge g
n d
S nen oe 7. E St a f
en I
E 9
is inoee z 9. d l o
T L
C 6
i l i l a di rr si m
a l
r gea u i s3 nia M
K N
ue encud vr4 af x P
C N
E 0
qs WE nqe ee2 e
L t
eu esc Rd et E
O P
I tOP r
S ed o
nD unl I
r I
E D
I c
W C
R P
po dl id r
,uS qi a R
S t
Ab vnp 1
Ei a u N
E U
d iea
- w nrs w
CW T
T R
er es g
I W
A of hti I
I mo h nd sn Sl ocs v O
D R
ei t oedi Wl ee OP U
C d p t snel er pt l d A asT rr L
A t
o R
aeewe f s ngef l
n AA T
en hR m w
od enr l
Y I
b o t
ur l
ni ue I E T
D a
DI t t d8 ol e ewrl pu i
E cad weedt r I
U m
ItC L
A nc tP cf vt uW re oa eGd ul i
i eud A
ni o
ori eeq c
l N
U af neni l rl e1 r o l
P
. Q ci h
ca u
l r - or S
l et s u
gi 1 f p T
sa b
,inq nf eS N
d u o
hW sd i
E l q d eeia rrt A ee N
e l srt uo cc O
we uaeat Df s nn P
r och ru d. ae M
ei h t t o ses rr O
s u ss eh eeeee C
eq it nt l
ccl f h e th uei
.i x noe R
T r I t B pw Ef eat r O
e : -
n e -
h se c0 t
S th n5 o o
o,
ii T
e6 - nt a
r r
ec psf i
R r1 ni
- d ep p
tiii a och rl i l
A p2 ooonrl echhl u fi wgst A P
,C jt ooce grest aq t
n t e mcil n
S n u
t rsier ns5 ed s ectb
. i l af qr pA et d S_
io1 h eed ara 4 dl f moeo e
ruo T
oi 2t s r Ac l aok r
cnucC r l
M A
Jb n
H o u d,i f lid e
r
,ps xid e E
I
,f pd n n Wnsoe t
E ex R
E
- m4i oea opa nWuss d ceid i
E F
o1 rc y
p o
qae
- eo T
E b r2 yporcsa3 mi
.i t
t rnE A
R 3f l
reat 1 rs3 nd 2 ppi O,
M I
snspnunos 0 oi h em 0 m 1
U 2 reoi
.oqet n 5 f vncmo el h gi em o
- nooeer 5 e gd el G
N Q 9f c9 nsd emi9 oriT ef 9 eiynu xned ap E
6fi 1 sisarrt 6 cpt I
.d 6
d ouq
- M R
- it2tdi oc c
i t
- sl l
- 0. d Y
R r
i l nruf e
- 0. h ee4 ep T O
- 0. e e p Ad meni qnS l
chS b m rwmrl l
1 y nb woeeo F
I A D anau Ch rcf Dh 1 i t n
e 1
u e
N V
R mi st t
o wonil e.
, ol x Ddt O
ene I
C G S 8
ng ey S
t gt a n S cibt r
N O Wsd1 rinsh es W s ich eo W oo Al e2 ooieth n A esses ri A rjoaey c
O i b A
N P
,t jdt t o rt eS at p
,t ai c
l ah i
ucD e
a
.t r7 adi rt d s
.d e
ni 8ep,ddd c
. e1 en 7 ec1 rnut i
noni 9h0 roes 2d s2 t aB s wa v 2 cs2 a caf 2t 5 a gq
1, 8
2 t
/
3 p
D e
S 1
/
0 e
g 2
d u
o A
D C S
E d
l E
. e D
T 3
W A
4 D
2 C
D S
VS I
XE A B.
04 1
56 R2 1
F CD S
1 0S W
1E A
O I
T 9
A 7
S V
T R
1 M
E r
1 S
0 B
a t
t U
O S
c C
W O
A u
T D
d S
9 I
E o
T L
C 6
I r
K I
P k.
C N
R 0
t t
r I
E O
P l
OP r
I E
O l
i Y
C R
F e
4 R S
NE T
T n
A E
n W
Cl I
I t.
O D
R OP U
C P
L A
BR T
n AA Y
I I E T
D a
DI I
U m
C L
A H
A l
1 U
lu Q
S T
P N
E NO P
M O
C RO e
n e
y S
t od h
l T
e et i n
. et n
,l yb n
, a t a R
l a. v o
A pb i n2 rea ti one l
P m
yoo0 a st) t r.
oos) f a oeaji5 peia ue. r oc on Cd m t
h m(
btk G nh(
3, i
N S
a e a e gT i 6 ac et 6 s m
- mhh cl n l 1 nmi
- v 1
s od L
T cti ci 2
i h
i m2 ene A
U T
)
si fi w e
nt
)
go n
s )
I R
E
.dh gi t o)h s si rh k mu 3 L
- c. l wnl rl 2th d
h b.d f g
cu E
I e
,iaAl 1. p l sc e
a i
me 9 T
E 6 w mu o( oa et n 6 ner hib A
R s r q 'y f t r wni 1
1 ot g t x M
I
[' ;
U 2 eso
.b h
g i
- 2. i aa a y vef e e gt a eo4 si r d ma G
I N
Q 9 ocrrdh ucr vj/ 9 nva e
m
[
6 ooeuet oea o
1 6 eep E
i e I
- r r pd b rjp or
- md fht
- M R
0 gp einhb ren
- 0. d n
it a i
Y R
t crit un gna yi c
h T
O n
nW uoc si rh I
a
- est l
I aD oA orsd) eot Dt md s pi F
N V
P iHh pee 1 ed rc n
ews s
O 9 tSt rt( r e a
e Si sb o l
s C I
C G
W a i
gps ai ud r W o gi l eae r
N O
A rl wn i s f
qno Ajnrl hi n C
O R
t a i s
- l. h si S a m icoT rk A vt it A
N P
euddt pd c d wsf ec 01 ss2 a a c g m g (b
.e@ 3 mecs nnel seaI e) et
.l ae
.t i
1 o (b
9 p
7 e
S
'P
/
e G
0 g
?
l c 1
u o
1 A
A D C U
T S
E d I
E l
D T
e U
A 3 W A
D 4
2 C
D S
S I
E A
~
4 1
1 S
I W
A O
I T
9 A
S 7
V T
R M
1 E
S s
9 1
0 B
t t
U O
c C
S u
O W
T D
A d
S c
T L
c 6
I ts 9
r I
K i
P i T
'k r
C i
C 0
l C
O' R
OP r
I s
I Y
i D
C R
'I i
1 R w
Ns E
C S
H T
T R
W C'
I I
A o
O D
R OP P
L U
C A
l R
l n
AA T
Y I
E T
D I
a DI I
U m
l L
A C
l A
t N
l l
t u
}'.
S P
T N
E N
O p
P M
O C
R O
l l
S s
ae0 r
l o
w T
en h c e
l r
era R
t sagsn1 h
ad p zd e A
nsh n aD t
h ep P
ieti yd b
i o
st a g se
?
oc oerS n
n hl J o r gh oW 0
S.
T ph r c
8 ees uab enh
)
s) reei dtl reet cA 2l d omre l
l I
a A
t od af 9 ersc wos F;
t I
E ngof e o
1 t eeotl R
on d n (S pcd aa t d e t
E iiseiis T
2 mo hi eez A
P tdeh v t
2 erwt r al rt od n l t i M
I ceu r
e 1 g : T po e
l as U
wd n pt m l st i nr i
. nd rl ea F ge G
Q f
ei f e 5i noor m N
i
,c di r E
v i
da f u
- s o I
sodel l
9l r
d e e
M P
i al reyau Y
ed od eh T
O R
u i pd ouq 6 Wet nct
.d m 1
l qa ul qe A
h cao 7 s m r
u I
F a
t gl p r
yca rr V
N P
eencmn Mb nfh po 9
x" ai I
O G
rdi neee I
eus f
C u
di eh S runig T
0
.ea8 N
d
,l 3bM/
C O
7 ebt AiQal ned 4
1 eseeb A
N P
cmws eh pn ad ad a
mbit e 2l or oyvt l
.s eaet rorh aai9 3Rhh s ere Sh nl l i l D a gu pf ot mh w6 3( t T ewpw E si p
)
p,
7e:
33 r.
& : WM&--
d J: & d h ' A J & T.
- / ~ sJ~
n WIc/bu }LXJ -ss.
- W L, O a fffAe a D J AA yr.,L.
A eLAA.A. O A
^A-0A
/ MS e
c?/ ce. -rMnpn A M p
pso
-x7 fx.
- 7. 3.
3 4M. MA d
emf [b/
t J b dmD
, f, n
a s'
o d*r r>d J,& J em JLt-aC.-.
~7 M
+M,~
(0kV" 9 041-
'I
' ~ j~ g g,4.r/av
% ud b tb. g-h le.W
% q o.,:4.n 52t 4w 4L w
& W m) w kQ Kd-6~
% a%
Lana %
wh/
iL cMac mmP.
e wq
_n
~
A a l-a o:
m m -
f.
q/ Nilnian Power Products p.125 rev. 7/G/78 p
re v.
3/30/ 70 DIADLO-CANYON
/'
NUCIEAR POWER PLAN; PACE 2
OF 2
J AUDIT ACTION REQUEST r
UNsunwUI.ID FILE.No.,
I7 AUDIT NO.:
32 A. A. R. NO. :
2 OBSERVATION CODE: 1&2 ACTIVITY AUDIT D Nonconforming Welds
' AUDIT DATE:
8-3 to 8-6-82 REFERCNCE DoctmENTS:
ESD 201. AWS D1.0-60 FANDING: CONTINUED FROM PAGE 1:
~2.
The copper backing materials-used on the welds are not one of the listed steels allowed by AWS 01.0-69.102a and 01.0-69.102b for backing.
This is a noncompliance to AUS 01.0-69.
102a and 01.0-69.102b.
SUSPECTED CAUSE:
2.
The copper backing bars were used because they would absorb heat and not fuse With the' Q we1d deposit and be easily removed so that another item could be bolted to the flange.
1 l-FOLLOW UP:
AcilVITY CO!TLIES WITil APPROVED CORR 3CTIVE ACTION IF NO - PLEASE EXPLAIN :
~
YES NO DATE:
.A.R.
CLOSED BY:
DATE:
APPROVCD BY:
DATE :
I p
-m
.e A 4
emme.
/
f"2 '" 3 pw go
/
rma -~.wumizsa--
257pp Ftr.m mac es wem
,/^..g W:
._____ _ ___. ] nenr.: ar _
l
' 7-/9-82 Ext.sr/M1 Ness to es oespro up I
SA WW$N e85A00 YO Aid.C4's,) &
wszo seem.
l l
fcy,2;.) /C.2 f,,;,l.!!.,,WA.A$
Y Y
l t
i
/ma-1 A
s af CF W/es 4f C
Y h
[
i
'd l
~.
&4 1 N.
w,c j
i l
4 g
M*%
-rp&s is sto izar l
PMS /W '7?$$ Cd 2HCC/kG
\\
\\
/3RX 70 8f 967'!!VfD, uv6w l
/
50 bhI,lN$ $ V$
fgl %
'W l'
(
l l
e===
6
~*
'a s
,e s...
(
~~
J.e i
o
/
r
/
/
ser 3 c93 FW foC i
77tt.n n.c. tusenernn 25'/pg j
l Cfro'!"! r0 fr DNTE maa nm.wm:
I.
..)
1 3c gy. )1)T* /Ai @ ll ) 1,/e V4 " /C 6$-0 hRE 6&
l' i
\\
J.-
L
./
J Q%.
L.
r.
riu '
J l-
- u. %
j, L 0 )L.I,W ' *%?*'4-% -
f
\\vd-.-c;ES-
[ds:Ik # L wl Id*W N.es!.,b-~$
Yb
- d
/
(McN w J n Y,',, s cNs, 9N ln $ $.< % hw.
u 1
s Y fin &nNobYCrnEn4 Oh fo ~ [b 0$n$
1 l
r Y
h er& bhcN'as.br}f WACL4 OAaI a
.' ~ ~C 2 AA.T. I h)Fe
- M (A.T. 7 /, / *, To T4[ I/j M C.c 7 ~2 4' _. "
C RACh',lllec q
me.
s u C. k h i
'l
(
r, A1 T l 60 -5 uNri u l.
YerLwmocB" ii
).
E.e. Acc rM9e9 be Y def c.
!n ggr g
g e
g U
5jr Mr S.felc-w 4.J 8S d g
g t
e a
f 6
. i 1
s I
~
(
i l
i.
I 'l I !I
,A 3. pour.e*v.%'.. u.,. h. i
- h f., 'k.,i
,i 4
If
'I.:
!I j
,,.,m.
s.
i
,3 j j
)
y e. F. ig s.
, c..,,er2 1,f 1.,
a a 'a.4 v r' '
i
}.,
t j
)
i s:
I 1 3
i l s
I t
..;;-m.
__f____
____L2__ro___.____
SOURCE DOCUMENT NO. #6025/, 400252 UNIT-E jKR.'s & M.V.R.'s: on secs m-2337. m. ssa, m-2s 9e AREA-ruRS/N E~
< (TELECON'S & OTHERS %~N.Yi.'E* jew 2kf"*z. ':%' '% eIs? '5E s-ve i
2 i
(
cc-ae s.ns - 2ac -i 1xarck %c 2S2 *f
's g/\\\\
3.stoss a
a
~2=\\ #,6 I
\\
- '\\ I
., -,?
31' %V
/ %V 3 stess
. ?.3 r:
79
,m m N'
I e
XQ.
M. \\s, '.
i 2
.e A
Ar r.w. - J L.,-
I
~-
- r. a,. '
e j
t
-Tri
= - T-- p !
r i
'. ;.g :-
a na 4:s f
si
'? '\\
- V (s.*
mj C E ria n b
4
-/
b
[
y %~ v 2, 2
q;\\,
2.sicas ?
3 i\\ v -
i l m 37\\ i\\ V
) { FZ 28 /yg l
,1
~
Q; j
/:.:
J.s/ cts
/
i j
f y'
lh4 5)h* /
"y U ip u ' ",,, t u,,o,,[
\\ 'p I
O f7A' iL D i
W 4
tjg \\
y
', % V W '21.0 FCP2" ~'";7 w
so) u m
V z
+ (W',
v g-m P
\\ w._.1
+ )} 7 Q(
p u iw es
+
i E.' E V.
L MG.
4/ E,t r
$/'\\
sacriou $~ g, k
u vx m
4N DUPUCAE COPY SEC7/CN I
CONSTRUCTION
. v_g
!)
l Jii LNFCRMARCH om.1 g(3. &=>
m
\\
n,....
l 1
t-
_- 'q"c:r :;,4 F ! FIELD WED SKETCH-l l
~
FIELD LAYOUT ORAWING
]
"9'7"
=
OATE INITIATED: // - /9 -6/
SY: 44 LAST REV.
Q.A. PACKAGE: 25/_ MR l) i
/
'h125 gay.
f' mGn % w Pmd m 7/G/70
' re v. 3/30/ 70 fr j
I
~!
DIADLO CANYON 1,-
NUCLEAR PotER PLAN; PAGC 1 OF 3
4
)
AUDIT ACTION REQUEST l
~
UNSCHEDULED-TII2 NO.,3 XV AUDIT NO.
32 A. A. R. NO.
1 OBSERVAT. ION CODE :
1&2 ACTIVITY ADDIT::D: Nonconforming '.4 elds
- AUDIT DN$E:
8-3 to 8-6-82
)
RIFORENC": DOCU?EM*S : ESO 243, AUS Welding Code, ATSC SUSPECTED CAUSE CONTINUED:
4 The original holes welded had a diameter of 7/8".
The original welds had to be removed due to MT indications.
The welds were ground out to a diameter of 1" in preparation for the '
repair welding.
5.details and capable of being welded with Code d7/3.The welds as originally called out a But as full penetration circular welds (actual field condition) they are not prequalified welds.
i V
. RECOMMENDED CORRECTIVE ACTION CONTINUED:
3.
Review all Rupture Restraint drawings and identify for Corrective Action all full oene-tration circular welds classified as Plug welds which do not fuse one member of a lap or T-joint to the other member.
l FOLLC;f UP s.
ACTIVITY CO!TLIES 17I'n! APPROVED CORR::CTIV : ACTION IF NO - PLEASE E;2 LAIN :
yrs no I
DA*a *
- A. A. R.
CLOSED BY:
DATE:
APPROVED BY:
DATE :
i xx-
-,-r
t
/
i cg PuHnlan Power Preducts
- 'p125 rev. 7/G/70 re v. 3/30/70 f
DIADLO CANYON f-NUCIEAR PotlER PLAN; PACE 2
OF 3
j AUDIT ACTION RCOtTEST UNSCHEDULED FIIE NO.'s XV AUDIT NO.
32 A. A. R. NO.
1 CBSEItVATION CODE :
1&2 ACTIVITY AUDIT D: NONCO'lMDMING WELDS
' AUDIT DATE : 8-3 to 8-6-82
- =.5 RENC
- DCCM*EUTS:
ESO 243, AWS Welding Ccde, AISC FINDING: CONTINUED FROM PAGE 1:
2.
The Plug weld symbol used on the process sheets does r.ot meet AWS Design of Standard Symbols and they do not give the size of the Plug weld and the angle of countersink cer the requiremen+.. of AWS A.2.4 - 79.5.2, 5.3, Figure I and Aapendix C.
This is an item of concern requiring supervisory attention.
2.
The process sheet call out for a Plug weld does not meet the AWS definition of a olug e,e l d.
The welds are not made through a hole in one member of a lao or T-joint #using one l
member to another.
The welds were made in the flange of a W13x45 with a copoer backing bar.
"Se call for a Plug weld does not meet the USE Requirements of AISC.
The Plug welds are not
- ad to transmit shear in a lap joint or to prevent buckling of lapped parts or to joint con-ent parts of built up members.
uctural Welding Code and AISC V.l.17.12.This is a noncompliance to the American Welding Society 4
FW's #60R1 and #61R1, made as Plug welds, violate the requirement that minimum center-t:-
' center spacing of Plug welds shall be four times the diameter of the hole.
The center-to-center spacing of the welds is 3-5/8".
The R1 hole diameters were 1".
The required soacing 3
should have been 4".
This is a nor. compliance to AWS 01. 0-6 9. 215c.
5.
Weld Procedure Code #7/8 was used to make the full penetration circular welds of Al*60 and 461.
Full penetration circular weldi; made with copper backing bars on the flange of a W shape beam are not prequalified joint details of AWS DI.0-69.213a.
Weld Procedure Code
=7/8 does not have a Procedure Quali#ication Record for full penetration circular welds as required by AWS 01.0-69.213b when joint details differ from those prescribed by a ticles 21 ',
215, 216, 217, 218 and 219.
r There is no established or documented welding procedure 'or full penetration circular. welds.
The use of Weld Procedure Code =7/8 to make these welds is a non-conformance to ESD 243.9.1.1; PG&E Contract Specification BS33XR, Section 2.3.61 anc 3.63; 1
AWS Dl.0-69.213a and b, 501 and 502; AISC Part 5.1.17.2 and ASIM A6.9.5.1.2.
i FOLLOW UP:
ACTIVITY CO!TLIES ifI'ni APPROVED CORR".CTIVC ACTION IF NO - PLEASE EXPLAIN :
ygs no DATE:
. E. A. R. CLO.9E D BY :
DATE:
APPROVED BY:
DATE:
_.m
)
s December 7, 1982 i
AUDIT #32-AAR #1 s
CORRECTIVE ACTION TAKEN:
Response to findings 1, 4 & 5.
}
l These items were addressed to the pullman Corporate Weld Engineering staff.
I The following is their response in part:
j l.
The actual welds made are not properly described by either weld symbol.
The actual weld made is a base metal repair, as filler metal is being added to a single piece of base metal.
i base metal repairs.
No welding symbols exist for describes the actual weld than the square groove synbol.It should be n
]
f 4
Since the actual welds made are not plug welds (base metal repairs) the acceptance criteria of AWS DI.0-Ti~does not apply.
l 5.
Base metal repairs are not addressed in AWS 01.0-69.
AWS only addresses
}
weld joints between two or more pieces of base metal.
Therefore, these welds do not violate AWS 01.0 69 or any of the other referenced documents.
l ESD 243.1.1, 2.1 and 3.0
~
f l
u Joe Watson QC Leadman 1
O ATT07
./
p. y 12 5 n v. 7/6/7g Pudman Poww p-m rz v.
3/31/ 76 e-DIABLO CANYON NUCLEAR PONER PLANT P? T I
F 3
j AUDIT ACTION PEQUEST a'
UNSCHEDULED __
l TILE '70.:
XV AUDIT NO.I 12 A.A.2.
10.: _ 1 03SERVATION CODE:
1&2 ACTI'7ITY PUDITCD: NONCONFORMING WELOS AUf>IT DME :.
8-3 to 8-6-82 REF::RENCE DOCUPENTS:
ESO 243. AWS Heldino Code. AISC FI 1Dntr,:
RUPTURE RESTRAINT 251, FW#60, #60R1, #61, d61RI, Unit #2 1.
Proc 9s sheets have weld symbols ([ldu-) which do not agree with sketch The ske(ten appears to call for a square groove weld wit
,cg-).. The process sheets we symbol noncompliance with ESO 2d3.5.2.3. A. --Continued on page 2--
This is a
.,j g sgr a,
W PT4DI'm BY: H. Hudson PATE : 8-13-82 ACT D 2Y: [n OATt's/*[4f[V, SUSP3 1 &.2. usD CAUSE : --Continued on page 3--
Unknown 3.
to Plug weld the holes and PG&E agreed. Pullman Engineering submitted acl e Field Engineer 0.0. indicated that the actual field conditions should have been called a base material repair instead~of a P t
.CCO rCNDED CORROCTIVE ACTIO !:
{
j 1.
being made with full penetration circular welds instead of w s. 2.
! prequalified welds and were made with a procedure not i
--Continued on page 3--
l CUE DAT2:
( ) - l 1 2 2.
j CORRECnVE ACTIO'i T?JC:N:
See atta'ched sheet
_I i
i TAKEN BY:
APPROVED BY:
w ST::PG TO P!CVONT ILECURRENCE:
gp a- ' w. [2 =s.aa K
. m
- h - z u.t m. ' y W h mg&
TAKEN B MX M,/p u FOLLOW OPi APPROVED BY: /[de IF NO - PLEASE EXPLAIN: ACTIVITY cot' PLIES WIT.'I APP *. OVID CORP s
ACTI YCS
'M 3*.' s 0%
'DATE:
3-ll.33 A.A.R. CLOSED BY:
\\1 M dA A DATE:
'2. - 8 ~1 G APPROVED BY:
/
DATE:
.t 3
-~
i Pullman Power Products Mr. J. Arnold Pacific Gas & Electr:.c Co.
January 14, 1983 PG&E has reviewed and accepted our welding procedures for use on Rupture Restraints.
Is it mandatory that Pullman Power Products qualify a Procedure Qualification Racord for this joint detail and every joint detail not considered a prequalified joint by A.W.S.?
Thank you for your prompt attention.
Harold W. Karner QA/QC Manager HWK/dd I
e l
l l
J l
u-
- J
gevis3cn o
)
@ ate:
6-07 '
s g.
PAClFfC CAS AND ELECTRIC CCMi'f.NY STAT 10" CC:;5TRUCTIO" Di'i' ART"ENT I
O!ACLO CA::YO" PP.0 JECT FOR' INFORMATION I
N %BWR -\\
CNI.Y 6.i DIABLO Cdf0N RUPTURE RESTRAINT GENERAL. RCPAIR PRDCEDURE i" (1
. j 1.0 SCOPE I
This procedure outlines the requirements for weld repairino of the defective-i i
rupture rattnints.. All welding repairs shall oe mace in accorcance with AWS D1.1-79, Structural Weldino Code - Steel.
2.0 BASE MATERIAL i
The Base Material shall conform to any one, or any combination, of the folicw ASTM A-36, A-441, A-572, A-515, A-516 and A-500.
for hapes, A-i15 snali nct used.
I 3.0 FILLER METAL The Filler Metal shall confonn to ASME Filler Metal Specifi, cation SFA 5.T. T; E-7018 s
4.0
' POSITION Welding shall be done in all positions.
5.0 PREHEAT AND INTERPASS TEMPERATURE h
5.1 The minimum preheat temperature shall be as specified below.
The minir interpass temperature shall be the minimum specified preheat temperatur and the maximum interpass and. preheat temperature shall be 500*F.
Metal Thickness TemoerDae Up to 3/4"
' 5 0
- F " " '" ' ' " " -*
Over 3/4", thr' ugh 1-1/2".
150*F o
t Over 1-1/?" through 2-1/2" 225'F Over 2-1/2" 300*F 5.2 The specified preh'est and interpass temperature shall be maintained un-the completion of each weld.
Suitable preheat equipment and/or person:
shall be provided to assure compliance with requirements d. ring period:
of inactivity.
~
~
- P1ates, to be f1ame driedt whensbeTom70?E1 l.7. p..: '. a.',I."..; f:?. m~21.Q
-- v' ~;
-. < ~. ~ ~ < - - - -
e-,
, n m
, aibr,,
I
- * ' AT b' *.
O* 3.**m.
- - - ~ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
P
' { g..j... Repair Procedure Procedure No.
8852.'
n u p s c i m G r i l n t.
Paga:
2 c:
FOR INFORMATICM'
.0 POST !.' ELD PEAT T'<EA?"E :7 DU 1
The ccmpleted welds shall not be given a post wold heat trNtmnt 7.0 WELDING PROCESS All welding shall be done with the manual shielded metal are w i
i ess.
84 PREPARATION OF BASE METAL OR CAVITY FOR WELOIMG 8.1 The edges or surface of the parts to be repaired shall be p flame cutting, air are gouging,. machining, drilling, grindi'ng
- combination of these methods.
- 8. 2.
All flame cutting and are gouging of usid ;r ;arstions shili ce p using the preheat temperatures specified for welding.
1 8.3 All flame cut and/or air are gouged surfaces shall be ground
~
metal.
b
- 8. 4 After surface preparation, lait repair areas shall be magnetic p examined using Department.of Engineering Research Proc'ed
" Magnetic Particle. Examination of Welds in Pipe Rupture Restra 4_
t t
- 9. 0.
ELECTRICAL CHARACTERISTICS The current used shall be DC Reverse Polarity.
10.0 WELDING TECHNIOUE 4.
10.1 A Welding Technique Sheet shall be prepared for each repair.
Technique Sheet shall be submitted to P G and E for ' approval a The include,. as{ a minimum,. the' folicwing information:
l'O. T.1 The configuration of the repair cavity or groove.
1
'.10. T.2' The sequence of'weTding,. including the electride sizes to-be used,. along. with. the voltage and amperage to be used with each. electrode. size.
Extra care is required to sequence a.11 weld. repairs so that residual stresses L
and distortion are minimized.
not to be filled with weld metal. Coped corner holes are u
10.1.3 The preheat requirements for the repair.
i 10.1.4 Peening requirements. if desired.
kU 10 1.5 All special instructions concerning cleaning, wea.ving.
or appearance of the 7g, ias.. :
-Q.7
.,.......-e--.-=-
=. - - -
= - - - - -_
3.-
[' '
O INFORMA%.
WELDING TECHN10UE - Continued CNLY
~
10.1 (continued)
I i t.
The Nondestructive-Test rea,virerents for the rapoir..
~ T0.15. 6
/
1
+
..e ;.r 10.2-Revision to the Technique. Sheets shall be made only with the approval i
of P G and E.
11.0 NONDESTRUCTIVE TESTING g
The ~comoleted weld reoairs are __to be nondae'-"-Hvalv avamined in accordance:
. ith the requirements of Enaineerina Specification 8833XR.
The recu1 red w
examinations shall be oerrormed at least 48 hours5.555556e-4 days <br />0.0133 hours <br />7.936508e-5 weeks <br />1.8264e-5 months <br /> af ter comoletion of aTT ara thicker tnan ii2 in runi penetration and cartial penetration waim wnsch The examination or otner welds may take place at any time after completion o~
the weic.
J h
@^
Department of Engineering Researc.C
(
~
I
)
e
\\
L i
~~ s
s.f i e
r C0 H TRt)LLEU LU P I i
saa m s 2. n 0
(
\\
f.
T.'12 Items Not Subject to Ouality Assurance:
Ize addicion ter the requirements of Paragraph 7.1,. inspection and testing shall be performed for these items. in accordance with: Paragraph 7.2 chrougir T.4 following.
7.13: Ultrasonic Test:
Where-indicated. on drawings,. ultrasonic tests.
shall be. performed on all steel places. and accepced. in Accordance witte ASTK A578 wich 31, 52',. S.T,. and 54 The acceptance level of SI-should be in accordance with. Level 1, excepe that in. Paragraph 6.1, Condition (3) should read "ennnoe be encompassed by a 1 (one) inch diameter circle;" Paragrap'h 6.2, Condicica (2) should read " individually can be encompassed by a.1 (one) inch diamatar circle", and Condicice (4) should read." collectively cannot be encompassed by a 1 (one); inch diameter circle".
1 7.14 Overlayed Areas:
Uelded.jointa so specifiad on the design drawings. shall' be prepared. fbe fi :ing: as follows:
7.141 Ulcrasoni: ally examine ths. area per Paragraph 7.12 above
~
7'.141 Overlay the. area with.one: layec of weld metal,by one..of.,
the-Pacific Cas an'd. Elec=ric approved. procedures Overlay I
only the. area cor be covered. by the'complaced weld s
T.14.T' Crind-or m' china the arer smooth and repeac ultrasonic a
examinafici~5 atrtrve..
't-7.144. Fi:: the attaching pisca to che, overlayed. ares and.. proceed.
with fabricacs.on
- 7.1, Welding Inseaction:
Welding inspec ico shall be performed and. welds.~
approved in accordance wich the provisions of the Code for Welding in Building Construction, of the American. Welding Society, DL.0-69, by a.,
. quali.fied. ' welding inspector as. followe= (1) Fillac welda other chan.
multi.ple pass fillac welds, shalf be.gisually inspecsed; upo:r completion;;..
e auIcipler pass. f.i.LIac welds shall be vi.aua.lry ins'pected for Zipp,. after roce pass and after weld hae been: complaced;- (1): f t11 penetration, welds, sha.it bee inspected as. follower.
- T.11:. Comole'ee ultrasente inseect=c:r sh'aIt be made on alb connecchu utilizine full penetration welds In the evene of. doubtful idaned.- -
{
fication. of the type of defece reveale'd by ulcrssonic methods, radiographic or other means: may be employed to defi=e che type or estene of the defect.
Weld. defectsJ revealed by inspection according-te acceptance crice'ria specified. in: AWT Code D1.0 shall be cut out and repaired or replaced in e manner approved by the Engineer.
a Radiographic. or other neana may be. amployed. in. connections not suitable for inspection by ultrasonic means Ultrasonic. inspection-shelt be made ir accordance witin tire peinefpler outlined: i.:n a section:
~
encitl'ed' "UItrasonic Wel+ Inrpee:.~en!",. C!rapcer G, Page F 54. of Welding-Eendboolc Fundamentals' ef Welding,..Section. t,. AWS; 19684. Above shaLL
.. s l
1 otherwise specified E:n Isragsspis T $
e w. %.PF r **cepe._
m
... I f
o
~
g I
GINEERlHG ggg
.SPEOP1 CAT 10N '
SPEC.WC.
8831 r. 88"XR i
(
ENGlHEERING DEPARTEENT U
~
4 1.
The greatest dimension of the defect is larger than 2/3 o f
/
the effective throat. thickness or weld size or 3/4".
1 The defect is clorar than three times its greetese dimensic to tha end of a groove wald subject to primary tens.lle stre 3
A group. of such: defects, tw a.1Ine when; a.
The sun-of the greatest dimension of all such defects i larger than the effective joint thickness, or weld: size any length are six elmes the effective joint thicknessj e weld sizu.. When the length-of' the weld 'bein'g exasrined-less than six times the effective throat thickness. or.-
size, the permissible stan.of the greatest dimensions, si-be proportionally 'less than the effective throat thickr or weld size.
b' The space between two' such defects which are adjacent less than three times the greatest dimension of the lar of the defects in the pie being c:nsidered.
8.
Individual defects. having. a greatest dimension of less. tharr 3/~
if:
1.
The sum of their greatest dimension exceed 3/8" in any f ini inch of weld
(
2'. 5' Welding Inspection and Documentapic'ri
. /
pT. !
We Iding inspectiorr sh'al1 'be performed irr accordance wi th Americarri
'We 1.d I ng Soc i e ty,. 01. h-69 by a, qua.I i f i ed wel d i n g. i ns pect o r a ss 8
foi Iows :-
(1)
Verify noterial, eleen. and fit-usr.
(2)
Veri fy.
pre-hear temperature.
(3)
Inspect root pass. (30tL*'@Wgatsa i ist and paztia.1. penat=atica. g=ocms).
(4) Delatad (5) inspect we l d comp l et e.
(6)
Final visual wH 1 I
I ncl ude clean-up for U T".'
(7)
All full penetration welds shall be
.U.T.
I nspected. All operations. will be documented on restraint process sheet.
(Actabhment B
- 2. 6. Corrections.
~2~.$F-- A pieca or member cohtaining welding which is unsatisfactory cr wn-Indicates inferior = workmanship may be corrected by measures; 1istee I
hereunder whom an: apyiwei 31'screpancy Report (OR) is received Oz.2.
Defective or unsound welds. or base metal shalI be correctes either by removing and. replacing the entire weld, or as follows:
A Overlap or excessive convext tyr.reduca by removal of excass wald meta. l m
., PREFARtB2 BY'.K Flak DATE0Prissuse '
1/7M4
' AGE 3 ai,i. m l',,n F_ 7-j
. s.m n nu.
.,s
i 1
~ p, $.
f(
To:
Hon. Victor Gilinsky, Commissioner s
United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission 1717 H Street Washington, D.C.
20555 From:
Harold Hudson - Former Pullman Power Products Quality Assurance Inspector, Quality Control Inspector, Quality
)
Assurance Program Internal Auditor and Lead Auditor.
let6 GL YDoRD AVE (f o C).5 ;t.t-5970
, Date:
11-14-83 43 03cs, cA. 9 suot
Subject:
Deviations From Pullman Power Products' Weld Procedure Codes and h 4f4e GM A Tlectric's Centract Specifi::atien
- 8711a6OB83 FIRM ty surance and Welding Require-ments:At.The Diablo Canyon 2 clear Plant Project, Uniu
- 1 andNR.
)
This report ident ieNaWrTNakdownsinthePG&EContract Specifications #8711 and #8833XR Quality Assurance Programs for the welding of Pipe Supports and Pipe Rupture Restraints by Pull =an Power Products at the Diablo Canyon Nuclear Plant Project, Units
- 1 and #2.
There have been deviations from the PG&2 approved Weld Proced-ure Specifications.
Welding has been performed using Weld 2roced-ure Specifications that were not qualified for, and did not provide welding specifications for, the base metals, structural steel shapes, and joint configurations used. These deviations have spanned
~
the whole construction program for Pipe Supports and Pipe Rupture Restraints and includes the current Design Modification constructi:n program for Pipe Supports.
The Weld Procedure Codes referenced in this report have been approved by PG&E but it is alleged that there is no documented authorization from PG&3 allowing Pullman to devists from the approved Weld Procedure Specifications.
Weld Procedure Specifications have been prepared and used by Pullman, and approved by PG&E that were not properly cualified ner the A.W.S. Code as required by C.S. #8833XR.
Welding has been performed which did not comply with the Weld hocedure Codes and processes specified on Process Sheets and approved by the proper authorities.
Pullman Q A/QC Management has attempted to justify / cover up this breach of Quality Assurance by implying that Production had the authority to disregard the Proces:
Sheet instructions.
i There have been deviations from PG&E's C.S. #8711 and #8833XR 2
welding requirements for which there are no PG&E Contract Specifi-cation Change notices and/or proper Management authorization.
Qu lity As ance/ Quality Contr 1 d4screpancies are as follows.
f if 7" 'spW
% ) A }p. pRffgr
~
g
,g,
2 I.
Deviations from PG&E approved Weld Procedure Code '7 Weld Procedure Specifications, see attachment #lA. /8
(
A.
Pipe Supports - FG&E Contract Specification #8711 Tne deviations listed below apply to the current Design Modification construction program and.to the original construction ro.am.
Wh eP& $459 **
l.
Code 7/8 used to weld structural steel shapes in addition to piping and plate.
The following structural shapes deviate fro,m the PG&E approved W.P.S.:
a.
W shapes - wide flange.
b.
S,M,H and I beam.
I c.
Channel iron - C and MC.
d.
Angle iron - equal and unequal.
e.
T section.
1 2.
Code 7/8 used to weld Tube Steel (ASTM A500 grade B), square and rectangular, in addition to pipe and plate.
The welding of Tub Steel viate.s from the PG&E approved W.P.S. J/Alk/
V/M i
3.
Code 7/8 used to weld Threaded Weld Studs (used to bolt plates to civil steel) in addition to pipe and plate.
The welding of Threaded Weld boof)-k Studs deviates from the PG&E approved W.P.S.
These studs ar'e welded using double bevel groove welds.
Double bevel groove weld is not ene of Code 7/8's page 2 joint configuration details.
The welding of a double bevel groove weld with Code 7/8 deviates from the PG&E approved W.P.S.
0ggdubl Process Sheets for welding Threaded Weld Studs
/
fy /)?hy$,
with double bevel groove welds require back I
grinding of the root pass.
Back grinding of a l
groove weld root pass is not included in the PG&E approved W.P.S. and is a deviation from Code 7/8.
Code 7/8 requires the use of a backing strip for the groove welds detailed.
See Hanger #78-282SL, Dwg. #2-sk-78-282SL-RO, DCN#10775, and Pipe Support Design Tolerance Clarification Form #QP-2-2055.
This Hanger is on Line S6-63-IV, a Design Class I, Code Class A line, Unit #2.
j l
l i
i i
'\\ Y h
3 4
4.
b.,k Code 7/8 used to weld steel other than ASIE Section II,)P1 materials.
ASTM A500 grade 3
/
g.
(tube steel is not an ASIG Section IX, 21 L'
material and the welding of it deviates from the l
PG&E approved W.P.S.
This steel is not refer-d enced in the 1968 Edition of the ASIG Code or any subsequent edition.
I<
f S
" 5.
Code 7/8 used to weld joint configurations not detailed on page 2 sketches of the W.P.S.
The t
j following joint configurations deviate from the PG&E approved W.P.S.
i a.
Flare bevel groove welds (used on ASTM A500
'[
grade B tube steel).
o
[
Pipe Support Process Sheets have a QC hold lI ['
point for Groove and Full Penetration welds f
to verify the fit up for pro er bevel and ph[(p [g#'#
t st gap as required b Process and Planning Control)y ESD #264 h
But the process sheets a
for many Flare bevel groove weld do not p5'[
include the QC inspection for fit up.
In these cases, Engineering has not included g
y Flare bevel groove welds under the special instructions to have a QC hold point inspect-9.i ion for fit up.
These Flare bevel poo.ve t
welds have not had the required ESD #264 E d process sheet QC inspection for pro ~pe_
w
~Dey_el and gaps Some Flare beve.L groove e
welds have been welded as open butt joints without backing as required by the Code 7/8 W.. P. S.
Some process cheets do have the required QC hold point inspection.
The fit uL inspection has not been consistently g d mplemented in the current Design Modification construction program.
b.
Partial penetration groove welds.
c.
Partial penetration groove welds in skewed T joints.
j d.
Full penetration groove welds in skewed joints.
e.
Fillet welds in skewed T joints.
/
h f.
Double bevel groove welds (no backi_ng strip "8'd)-
fhin14%
y g.
Groove welds without backing strips.
h.
Partial penetration square groove welds (also called seal welds or butt welds).
l 4
3.
Pipe Rupture Restraints - PG&E Contract Specification wbo)%K.
1.
Code 7/8 used to weld steels other than ASME Section II, P1 materials.
The following steels deviate from the PG&E approved W.P.S. (see attach-ment #2, Pullman Unscheduled Internal Audit #32, and attachment #3, Pullman Unscheduled Internal Audit # 35).
These steels are not referenced in the 1968 Edition of the ASME Code or any subsequent editions.
a.
ASTM A441.
b.
ASTM A572 grade 42 and 50, c.
ASTM A500 grade B.
d.
ASTM A588.
2.
Code 7/8 used to weld structural steel shapes in addition to pipe and plate.
The following structural shapes deviate from the PG&E approved W.P.S. (see attachment #3, Pullnan Unscheduled Internal Audit #35).
a.
W shapes - wide flange.
b.
Tube steel (ASTM A500 grade 3).
h4C 3.
Code 7/8 used to weld joint configurations not A
k prequalifieda er A.W.S Dl.0-69 or without Proced-U'M ure Qilalification~ Records or not detailed on page
~~
2 sketches of the W.P.S.
The following joint gp configurations deviate from the PG&E approved W.P.S. (see attachments #1 and #3, Pullman Un-scheduled Internal Audits #32 and #35).
I t/g a.
Full penetration square groove welds in one inch thick material WJZ -
g L
b.
Full penetration circular welds (called plug l
h g, welds by Pullman) in the flange or web of J
W shape beams.
c.
Full penetration, single bevel groove welds v
in skeved T joints, in 1 1/4 inch thick g
b Qlmaterialwiththeflangesofthebeambeveled f
from the top side and coped on the bottom side
' 'y to facilitate a backing bar it up, with a 1/2 inch root gap. p tf Y l
(p
@g.tllug V4 l
T"Y l
t
1 1
5
{
l i
d.
Unspecified size fillet weld using a 3/16 inch diameter weld rod as filler in the joint j
of the rounded section of tube-steel where it "I
joints.a flat surface (flare bevel groove weld). ]
4.
Code.7/8 used'to weld' joint configurations not detailed. on page 2. sketches of the W.P.S.
The-following joint confi n ations'deviata from the PG&E approved W.P.S.. (see attachment *3,. Pullman Unscheduled Internal Audit #35).
a.
Double bevel' groove welds'(no backing strip used).
b.
Flare bevel groove welds (used on ASTM A500 grade B tube. steel),
c.
Partial penetration groove welds, d.
Full penetration groove welds in skewed T joints.
1 e.
Square groove welds, f,
Fillet welds in skewed T joints.
I" S22 POCTMOTES *
'h C:! ?AG2 32, 5.
Welding Technique Specification No. AWS 1-1 specifies that this. document has been rormulated to clarify the technique for applications of Weld Code 7/8 as applied to AWS welding only.
It also.
specifies that this technique will be used in accordance with Pullman Power Products' Process Sheet. See attachment #4.
I interpret this to mean that when-AWS 1-1 is referenced on a Pullman Process Sheet it will be used to clarify the technique for application of Weld Code 7/8 for AWS welding.
If AWS 1-1 is not referenced on a Process Sheet its teen-niques will not be applicable.to the welding being performed.
If the Process Sheet references Weld. Code 7/8, then the Weld Procedure Specifi-cations of Code 7/8 apply to the welding being performed and AWS 1-1 will not be used to clarify the application or Weld Code 7/8.
AWS 1-1 has basically been referenced on Process sheets used by Pullman in its Pipe Rupture Re-L straint: Crack Repair Program.
It is not refer-i enced on every Pipe Rupture Restraint welding i
Process Sheet.
Weld Code 7/8 without any refer-1 ence to AWS 1-1 is referenced on most Process Sheets used in Pullman's Pipe Rupture Restraint construction program.
P
m 6
Pipe Rupture Restraint welding performed to Weld Code 7/8 becomes subject to the deviations from Code 7/8 listed above.
AWS 1-1 was formulated in 1979 as a result of the inent111 cation of a major cracking problem in restraints and was to be used to clarif welding (y the application of Code 7/8 for AWS Pipe Rupture Restraints). But AWS 1-1 was not implemented in the general Pipe Rupture Restraint construction program.
This is a serious deficiency in the Quality Assurance of Pipe Rupture Restraint welding.
6.
Welding Technique specification No. AWS 1-1 states It Is A Specification For Shielded Metal Arc Welding Of ASTM A515 In Accordance With AWS D1.1-79.
This is not a valid statement (see attachment # 3
, Unscheduled Internal Audit #35).
a.
ASTM A515 is not listed as a steel base metal to be welded in AWS Dl.1-79.8.2, 9.2 or 10.2.
b.
AWS 1-1 states that the supporting Procedure Qualification Records are prequalified.
This is not a valid statement.
Since ASTM A515 steel is not one of the listed specifications of steel base metal to be welded under AWS Dl.1-79, it cannot be included as part of a prequalified i.
pr' 9 dure qualification of AWS Dl.1-79.
t c.
T2 4 is no evidence that the procedure for e
we. ding ASTM A515 has been established by qualif-ication in accordance with AWS Dl 1-79 5 2 as required by AWS Dl.1-79.8.2.3 when a steel other than those listed in AWS D1.1-79.8.2.1 is proposed l
for welded construction.
It is Pullman's respon-( d <<
sibility per AWS Dl.1-79.8.2.3 to establish the
,4U welding procedure by qualification.
AD l
. h p,Q, d.
This raises the following questions.
Why did j
h)
Pullman's Cognizant Welding Engineer prepare U ; Tg h
AWS 1-1 stating the P.Q.R.s were prequalified
{
[11,.
wnen ASTM A515 clearly is not?
Why was AWS 1-1
{ h fy' Management without this discrepancy being iden-
- 7 approved by Pullman's QA/QC Manager and iGde
,, p tified.
1rf 7.
AWS 1-1, revision 4, dated 12-20-79, was prepared b
'pf '
by V.J. Casey acting as the Cognizant Welding Eng-ineer (see attachment #4 ).
Mr. Casey was never a l
member of the Pullman Engineering staff.
A Pullman Interoffice Correspondence, dated 12-4-79, states i
that Mr. Casey "is hereby appointed assistant QA/QC l
Manager" (see attachment #5 ). Yet 16 days later
)
he prepares a revision to the Weld Procedure Specif-ication as the Cognizant Welding Engineer.
Mr Casey i
l 1
l i
I l
.__________L
i I
'h l
0L r
worked for Pullman as a QC Inspector, QC Lead =an, j
Assistant QA/QC Manager, and on occasions as act-t h][
l f ing QA/QC Manager.
Mr. Casey was never listed on l-the Pullman Organization Chart as a Cognizant i
h.,(
Welding Engineer.
f V, Casey, as a member of the Field Quality Assur-
[Y'J Welding Engineer) performed a function (Cognizant ance Organization that was outside the quality i
responsibility, i.e., preparing a Weld Procedure 8i Specification and performing welding engineer functions.
This raises the question of the I
qualificati on of QA personnel (V. Casey) to perform this function and the problem of" requiring the Field QA Organization to audit its own per-formance.
II.
Structural Steel Pipe Supports not designed. fabricated and erectea to the American viel' ding Society Code per TG&E Contract Specification #8711 requirements._
A.
Pullman's ESD #223 (Installation and Inspection of Pipe Supports) does not require Pipe Supports to be designed, fabricated or erected in compliance with the A.W.S. Structural Welding Code.
Structural Steel Pipe Supports are not required to comply with any national standard or code.
Pipe Support Engineering i
Specifications are per Pullman and PG&E (Project Team) Management and reviewed and approved by PG&E's Resident Mechanical Engineer and/or Project Manage-ment.
B.
PG&E Contract Specification #8711, Section 3, Pab-ricating and Erection Requirements, paragraph 2.1 (Code Requirements) specifies that all piping furn-ished hereunder shall be designed and fabricated to comply with applicable standards of the ASTM, ANSI, ASME, MSS, AWS, and PPI.
The reference to "AWS" is to the American Welding Society's Structural Welding Code.
The applicable portion of piping that would require compliance to the AWS Code would be Structural Steel Pipe Supports.
ESD 223. 5.2.1 specifies that Pipe Supports material consists of structural steel shapes, plates and bars.
It is alleged that Contract Specification #8711 requires Structural Steel Pipe Supports to be designed, fabricated and erected to the AWS Code.
It is alleged that this requirement has not been incorporated into Pullman Power Products' and PG&E's Engineering Specifications.
It is alleged that fabrication and erection of Structural Steel Pipe Supports have not been done in compliance to the AWS Code.
C.S. #8711, Section 1, Scope of Work, paragraph 1.1 states this Specification covers erecting the main systems piping and furnishing, fabricating, and
~
.i
- l J.
8D erecting the balance of.theEpow,er plant Piping, including;valvesi, hangers, and' supports.
Section t
3 2, Description of Work, paragraph 2.129' specifies' that work included involves..ftu nishing and install f
}
inglof supports for all systems erected? hereunder.
1
. Paragraph.3.12, Work Excluded, deletes furnishing.
and' installing. of ~ all structural steel ezesyt as'
- 4 noted in paragraph 2.129 above.
~
Q a}
Pipe Supports-are:" covered" 17.and "includsd""in.'
the Contract Specification Scepe of.Werk and & :
Description of. Work.- Pipe Supports are;the only i
structural steel items'which are not excluded from the work of the Specification.
Structural-Steel Pipe Supports:should-be designed, fabricated and erected to the AWS Code as referenced in the Code Requirements of C.S. #8711.
C.S. #8711, Section 1, paragraph 2.1 specifies that work'shall comply with the requirements of.the Spec-ific and General Conditions of this Specification.
.It also states all work shall be: performed in accordance.'ith this Specification.and the.accomp-anying drawings.
Section-3, paragraph 1.1 specifies that this section (Fabricating and. Erection Retiuire-ments) covers the material, fabrication, and erect-ion requirements for power p ping-(piping includes
'[
valves, hangers and supports.
Paragrauh 1.h of~.
.Section 3 specifies that all work shall~be installed in strict conformance with this Specification and no deviations from.these requirements shall b=
permitted without approval of Company (PG&E).
Struetural Steel Pipe. Supports, there design, fab-rication, and erection, are covered by the Scope of Work and included' in the Description of Work which requires compliance to the Specific Conditions of this Specification.
The Specific Conditions of Section 3.2.1 (Code Requirements) requires all piping (piping includes valves, hangers, and supports per Section 1.1.1) shall be designed and fabricated to comply with all applicable standards of the AWS Ccde and other referenced Codes.
But Pullman and PG&E have deviated from strict conformance with the 9 Specification by not. implementing all applicable Code Requirements.
Structural Steel Pipe Supports, included as part of piping, are not designed and fabricated per the AWS Code.
There is no documented
, authorization from PG&E to deviate from this Code Requirement.
i C.
C.S. #8711, Section 4, Contractor's Quality Assurance Requirements, paragraph 2.3 defines Material to
q 9
include material, structures (structural-steel pipe supports-) and other. items furnished by the Contractor to complete the requirements of this Specification.
Paragraph 2.41 defines Work to 3
include-all activities by the Contractor to com-i Plete the requirements of this Specification.
d D.
C.S. #8711,.Section'4, Contractor's Quality Assur-ance_ Requirements, paragraph 1.1, specifies that-this section establishes the re Contractor's quality assurance quirements for progre n for the:
control of quality of material suppied.and work performed.under this Specification.
Paragraph 1.2
{
goes on to specify that QA requirements shall apply j
to all material and work included in systems or portions _of systems designated in. Table I of Section 1
3.
Pipe Supports that are included in. systems.
designated in Table I require compliance to Section j
i 4 QA requirements.
]
i Section 4, paragra curement'Ccntrol,.ph 3.24,-_ Material and Work Pro-specifies that Contractor shall assure that Material and Work furnished under this' l
-Specification (this includes Structural Steel Pipe Supports) conform to the applicable specifications, 1 -
drawings,' codes, and other requirements,necessary to j
provide the quality _' desired.
~
j The applicable Code' for the design,- fabrication and erection of Structural Steel Pipe Supports is the AWS Code.
i 1
E.
C.S. #8711 requires Structural Stee;LL Pipe Supports to be designed, fabricated and erected _to the applicable Code..That Code as referenced under Specification Section 3' Code Requirements is the AWS Code.
Pullman-1 Power. Products.and PG&E have not implemented the requirement to design,' fabricate, and erect Structural Lteel Pipe Supports to the AWS Code and are in non-conformance to Contract Specification #8711 and AWS Code requirements.
There is no PG&E approved Contract Specification Change Notice authorizing this deviation.
III.
There are deviations from PG&E Contract Specification I
- 8833IR (Pipe Rupture Restraints) for which there are no Contract Specification Change Notices and/or the Contract Specification has not been revised to reflect t
the actual practice being. implemented.
This raises
' the question of whether these deviations from the Contract }
Specification requirements have been properly authorized, and reviewed and approved by the appropriate PG&E Manage-ment. individuals.
t
n 10 Contract Specification #8833IR, General Conditions, y
paragraphs 5.5 and 5.6 give instructions for changing
'the Contract requirements when requested by the Con-tractor (Pullman Power Products).
The Contractor e
- @{p must submitt "a written statement clearly indicating the requested changes and obtain Constructors (per-4 General Conditions defination, Constructor is the yI h.1 Company's Vice President'- General Construction or t
N*
his authorized representative) written prior approval
(
~thereof".
This." written prior approval" must-be had N (,1, (.
before Contractor can incorporate the Specification change into his own Engineering Specifications which V
{
are also sub;!ect to approval of Constructor.
In addition, " Request by Contractor for any changes in the q
~ tg (y -
requirements of the. Specification shall be brought to t
the attention of Constructor for written approval of j
\\
ri y
Engineer"(per General Conditions defination, Engineer
{
l
\\
is the Company 8a Vice President - Engineering or his
>g[{h, authorized representative). Request by the Contractor (Pullman) for changes to C.S. #8833IR must have the written approval of both the Vice President - General
-)
\\d 4
Construction and the Vice President - Engineering or
\\
their authorized representatives, i
s e
\\h.
C.S. #8833IR does not'give any information on procedure j
i ih to be followed when PG&E initiates a change / deviation j
from Contract Specification requirements.- There are J
'l'
. h no Contract instructions sp/ deviations from the Centract ecifying who has tho authority to order changes
)
\\/ these changes / deviations. This deficiency has resulted Specification requirements and who has to approve f,
1 i
)l.
j in questionate deviations from the Specification 5
welding requirements.
h r h[h It is alleged that the following deviations from C.S.
'f
- 8833IR have been directed.by a questionable authority v
\\
N
]4 or have not followed C.S.#8833IR General Condition
'h
/
requirementsandhavenothadtheapprokriateap[royalby PG&E Ma 1
Commission should determine if these deviations were a
Contractor (Pullman) requested or at the direction of
\\
g PG&E and if they have been reviewed and a
%)
appropriate PG&E Management individuals. pproved by the A.
Pipe Rupture Restraint welders, qualified prior to 7-10-79,-were not qualified to the AWS code for
-f ()
Welding-In Building Construction per C.S. #8833IR Section 2.3.63 (see attachment #3, unscheduled M
Internal Audit # 35).
These welders were qualifed
/
/
to ASME Section II Code per Pullman's ESD 216 G
requirements.
Y f
EST) 216 (Welders Performance Qualifications), prior
.i ph to 7-10-79, specified that all welders performance 1
qualification shall be carried out in strict 3
l a
W 11 i
'l PG&Edidnotissue!r g.
accordance with'ASME Section II.
a Contract Specification Change Notice authorizing this deviation from the C.S. #8833IR requirement.
Pipe Rupture Restraint welders not qualified to the /
]
AWS Code is a nonconformance to the AWS Code and 1
Contract Specification #8833XR Section 2.3.63.
/L ESD. 243: (Pipe Rupture Restraints), from the 10-15-74 issue to the 6-9-81 revision,. stated 11n paragraph-2.8 that all welders shall be qualified in accordance with AWS Dl.0-69.
But a note was added to the procedure contradicting this requirement..The= note stated-that welder. qualification in accordance with-ASME Section II may be used in lieu of; AWS Dl.0-69 1
(see attachment #3, for copy of ESD 243 note). This.
up to 6ph through the various revisions of ESD 243 paragra 9-81 was approved first by PG&E's J. Holley L
and then later revisions approved by M. Tresler.
]
The 6-9-81 revision to ESD 243 specified welders j
shall be qualified per ISD 216.
ESD 216-was revised on 7-10-79 to require welders'to be qualified.to AWS Dl.1-79 where applicable (Pipe Rupture Restraints)'.
This change in procedure resulted from the welding deficiencies identified.on PG&E Nonconformance Reports
- DCl-79-RM-010 and #DC2-79-RM-011.(see. attachment #6,
i Unscheduled Internal Audit # 29 for copies)which resulted in the Pipe Rupture Restraint Crack Repai-L Program.
Since 7-10-79 Pipe Rupture Restraint
]
welders are required to qualified to AWS D1.1-79.
J It is alleged that the use of welders' qualified to ASME Code Section II (not qualified to the AWS Code as required by C;S. #88332 ) contributed to the causing of rejectable welds identified in PG&E's Nonconformance Reports.
Several questions ~should be addressed by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission concerning this issue.
1.
Was the " Note" that was added to ESD 243 allcaing use of ASME Code Section II to qualify Pipe
)
Rupture Restraint welders initiated by Pullman j
or PG&E7 j
2.
If the " Note" was initiated by Pullman, does this j
deviation comply with the General Condition re-J quirements?
Was there a written statement clearly indicating the requested change and did it have prior written approval of the V.P. - General Construction or his authorized representative?
It is alleged that there was no such statement.
Was the " Note" approved by both the V.P. -
General Construction and V.P. - Engineering or their authorized representatives?
It is alleged i
1
e 12 that"J. Holley andc subsequently M. Tresler were:
' A, not the authorized representatives of both the-Vice President General' Construction anct Vice.
President - Engineering and did not have the-authority to approve use of: ASIG Code Section II for qualifying Pipe Rupture Restraint welders, in. violation of C.S. #8833IR Section 2.3.63-requirement.
3.-
If PG&E initated the " Note", is the approval signature of J. Holley and' subsequently M..Tresier the appropriate level of approval for a deviation
,from the C.S. requirement?
If sop is there doc mented evidence of their authority?
It is alleged.
-that the use of ASME Code Section IX-to qualify
' Pipe Rupture Restraint welders in violation of.
C.S. #8833XR Section.2.3.63 did not have the proper authorized PG&E approval. signatures.
4.-
Did PG&E's J. Holley and subsequently M. Tresler use the-AWS,Dl.0-69.503 Building Commissioner-authority to, at his discretion, accept properly i
documented evidence of previous qualification tests?
If so, were J. Holley and M. Tresler qualified to act as the Building Commissioner?
Where is it documented that they had this authority
.g to act as the Building Commissioner?
Why was just a PG&E approval added to the ESD 243.2.8-t (10-15-74 to 6-9-81 revisions) note and not a Contract Specification Change Notice issued?-
Does not.the PG&E Contract Specification require-ment have precedent over Pullman Engineering Specifications?
If the Building Commissioner authority'to accept previous qualification tests was used, would AS:G Section II qualification test (piping and boiler) be an acceptable substitute for an AWS qualification test (structural steel) or does the AWS mean a previous AWS qualification test?
C.S. #8833XR specifically references the AWS Code for qualify-ing welders.
Can the AWS Building Commissioner authority be used, in direct violation of C.S.
- 8833XR, to authorize use of ASME Se tion IX c
to qualify welders and supersede the Contract Specification?
B.
Weld Procedure Code 7/8 and other welding trocedures do.not have provisions for. testing the hea't affected d
zone of selds for notch impact strength as required by C.S. #8833IR Section 2.3.6 (see attachmant#3,
Unscheduled Internal Audit # 35).
There.is no PG&E Contract Specification Change Notice or any other
'I offical PG&E notification authorizing this deviation from the Contract requirement.
There is an M.W. Kellogg (Pullman) Interoffice Correspondence dated 1-22-74, from R. Fink, Field QA/QC Manager,, addressed to PG&E's J. Holley, asking
+
13 1
if weld procedures used on rupture restraints j
require charpy impact tests.
There is a response, H
but it is not on PG&E letterhead or any. type of PG&E Correspondence.
The response by "JAH" on 1-23-74 is in pencil on the M.W. Kellogg Interoffice Corres t
pondence and states "no"(see attachment #3,' for a I
copy of the Kellogg IOC).
4 k
[
i Does a statement by an PG&E official on an M.W.
Kellogg Interoffice Correspondence have the authority to authorize a deviation from the C.S.
(
requirement?
g 4
.It is alleged that this deviation from C.S. #8833XR.
Section 2.3.6 as authorized by "JAH" is of question-able authority and does not have the appropriate approval by PG&E Management individuals.
C.
' Full penetration welds less than 9/16" effective throat have not been subjected to ultrasonic exam-ination since July 1979..
C.S. #8833XR Section 2.7.21 specifies that complete ultrasonic inspection shall be made on all connections utilizing full penetration welds.
There is no Contract Specification Change Notice authorizing the deletion of full penetration welds less than 9/16" effective throat from ultra-sonic examination.and the C.S. has not been revised i
to reflect the current practice of ultrasonic exa=-
ing only full penetration welds greater than 9/16" effective throat (see attachment # 48,. Unscheduled Internal Audit # 29, AAR #4).
' It is alleged that the deletion of full penetration welds less than 9/16" effective throat from UT l
inspection has not been properly authorized, and l
reviewed and approved by the appropriate PG&E Management individuals.
)
I As a result of the identification of rejectable defe ts
(
in Pipe Rupture Restraint field welds on PG&E Non-j conformance Reports #DCl-79-RM-010 and #DC2-79-RM-011
~
l and the implementation of PG&E's Diablo Canyon Rupture
(\\
Restraint General Repair Procedure 4663 MR-1 (see j
i attachment # 6, Unscheduled Internal Audity 29, fer
)
ies) PG&E instructed Pullman (verbally per Pullman
{ ( Ql QC Management) to utilize PG&E Ultrasonic Procedure,'
23 for ultrasonic examination of all rupture
>l straint welds.
Pu11= m incorporated the use of i
G&E UT Procedure #3523 into its QA Instruction #
51 143 (see attachment #fe) which was approved for
/
3 V
construction by PG&E Resident Engineer V.I,. Killpack-n.Y and C.A. Hemstock on 7-11-79.
/
- 3523 did not address full penetration welds less
)j l
J p,
than 9/16" in thickness. ESD 234 - Ultrasonic i
j4 9(
J l
l i
J b
d L
14 Inspection AWS D1.0-69, which was used to UT all lz l
full. penetration rupture restraint welds prior to l
i 7-11-79, was deleted from use at this time.
Because PG&E UT Procedure.#3523 addressed only full penetrat-ion welds greater than 9/16" in-thickness referenced PG&E #3523. and' also-only address (QAI #143 ed full penetration welds greated than 9/16" in thickness) and no other.UT procedure was utilized.which addressed i
-full penetration welds less than 9/16" in thickness, these welds were deleted from UT inspection.. QAI
- 143 was incorporated into ESD 243 --Pipe Rupture Restraints, on the 6-9-81 revision and was. approved by PG&E Resident Mechanical Engineer.J.A. Ammon.
No Contract Specification Change Notice was issued
'{
deleting full penetration welds less than 9/16" t
effective throat from ultrasonic inspection as required by C.S. #8833XR Section 2.7.21. C.S..#8833XR was not revised to reflect the actual practice of ultrasonic inspection of only full penetration welds i
greater than 9/~16" effective throat.
Of special note is that neither Diablo Canyon Rutture Restraint General Repair 2rocedure ?dd W R-1 nor NCR's #DCl-79-RM-VlO and #DCZ-79-El-Oll directed.the deletion of full'penetraion welds less that 9/16" effective throat from UT-ins *pection.
To the contra ~/,
(
Procedure #8833XR-1.11 specified that " completed weld repairs are to be nondestructively exanined in accordance with the requirements of Engineering i
Specification 8833XR"..The two N'onconformance Reports required under Corrective Action to Prevent Recurrence that "all Pipe Rupture Restraint welding, except for fillet welds smaller than 1/2", accomplished under Specification 8833XR will be examined by Magnetic Particle Inspection in addition to the presently required ultrasonic inspection?
The " presently required ultrasonic inspection" per C.S. #8833XR Section 2.7.21 was that all full penetraion welds required complete ultrasonic inspection.
The following questions should be addrammad hv m -
]clearRegulatoryCommission.
l.
N WhoinitiatedthedeletionofUTinskectionoffull penetration w i
throat?
Is there any documented evidence of the origin of this deviation?
'(
2.
Was this deletion from C.S. requirement properly authorized,and reviewed and approved by FG&E Management individuals? Why was no Contract Specification Change Notice issued or the C.S
(
revised to reflect the actual practice implemented? !
l I
_____________-___O
d 15 i..
I p
'1 3.
Why was this deletion incorporated'into Pullman's'
..0 QAI #143 and ESD 243 and. approved by PG&E onsite Engineering, when PG&E Procedure 8833XR-1 spec-
'ified: that complete weld repairs. were to be.
nondestructively examined ~in.accordance with C.S. #8833XR which required all full penetration welds to be UT examined and when the two'NCR's s
required-welding to be examined to the presently
,j required ultrasonic inspection?
IV.
ESD 234-Ultrasonic Inspection Groove Welds AWS D1.0-69, was used prior to July 1979 to ultrasonic inspect Pipe l
Rupture Restraint. full penetraion groove welds made by ASME Code Section II qualified welders.
During the time period ESD 234 was in use, Pullman did not have a documented Procedure Qualification Record.
Pullman-used tho' procedure without performing a procedure
,)
qualification test.
There was no documented evidence of a proven demonstration that ESD 234 would identify.
)
rejectable defects.
1 A P.Q.R. was not established until 1982 (after the fact) L' I
when this discrepancy was identified on Pullman Internal h
Audit #101 (see attachment # "J ).-
b L
[
g i
Subsequently PG&E issued Nonconformance Reports
/'
{
RM-NOO1;and #DC2-82-RM-N002 (see attachment #$ )#DCl,.
.which identified that full penetraton field velds which were
? completed and ultrasonically accepted by Pullman using
/
ESD 234 had rejectable indications.. PG&E proposed an f
hm investigationof a 10% samp g of full penetraion field
/rj
- 1d'
- id'ntif7 th' ****
u,0
- trend exists. The offical out com'f th' Pr bl*= *nd if *
-is not known by this person.
s of this investigation,E' 4
( {V But sources have informed me that approximately 236 Unit
- 1 welds were examined and a large number of rejectable
(,
indications were identified. These sources also stated that at the direction of PG&E/Bechtel the ultrasonic i
(% (h*,
testing frequency was changed to reduce the number of 11 identified rejectable indications and that subsequently j/
these welds were accepted as is.
Magnafluz Corporation
[ employ, ees, who performed these UT. examinations, also 4
/
t S *f>
Lj stated to me that they were finding ~large numbers of o
rejectable indications and that the mechanics of the fl!
testing was being changed by.Bechtel to reduce the L
number of rejactable indications found.
d-The Nuclear Regulatory Commission should review and in-
/
vestigate the PG&E Nonconformance Reports' full penet-i ration groove weld UT examination program for irregul I
ities and/or' the basis for accepting weldsgith repor1 1
/
able indications
[
Q W" M i d
' y4 p 4 p, ft f f F
16
~
I
-f_
h g
V.
Deviations from'PG&E Approved Weld Procedure Code 88/89 Weld Procedure Specifications.
See attachment # 9 '.
A.
\\
Pipe Supports - PG&E Contract S edification 58711.
l Ine aeviations listed below app y to the current 6
Design Modification construction program and.to the original construction program.
\\
1.
Code 88/89 used to weld carbon steel plate and L[
structural steel shapes.
This deviates from the h
>I approved PG&E Weld Procedure Specification for
\\
p carbon steel piping, GTAW (root), and SMAW (built up).
i 2.
Code 88/89 is. suspected to have other deviations as listed under Code 7/8 findings.
B.
Pite Rupture Restraints - PG&E Contract Specification
- 503 MR.
l.. Code 88/89 used to weld carbon steel plate and structural steel shapes.
This deviates from the approved'PG&E Weld Procedure Specification for.
j carbon steel piping, GTAW (root), and SMAW~'(built i
. up).
2.; Code 88/89 is. suspected to have other deviations' as listed under Code 7/8 findings.
3.
Code 88/89 was not prepared and qualified in.
accordance with AWS Dl.0-69, Code for Welding in Building Construction, as required in C.S.~#8833XR Section 2.1.24.
Code 88/89 process of Gas Tunsten Arc Welding the root pass and Shielded Metal Arc Welding the remainer of the weld is not addressed in the AWS Dl.0-69 Code.
The procedure was qual-ified in accordance with ASME Code Section IX and approved for use by PG&E.
There is no Contract Specification Change Notice authorizing this.
i deviation from the Contract Specification requir-ment to qualify the welding procedure per the AWS Code.
4.
Welding Technique Specification No. AWS 1-3 states this document has been formulated to clar-if the technique for applications of Weld Code 88 89 procedures as applied to AWS welding only.
{
3 See attachment #to. This W.P.S. was issued on 8-9-79
{
a.
AWS 1-3 states it is a Technique Specification I
ror GTAW root, SMAW fill of A-36, A-441, A-572, A-515 and A-516 in any
' 11 cable combination 1.
i
- f. k accor ance with AWS Dl.1-This is not a valid statement.
The Gas Tunsten Arc Welding process is not addressed in AWS Dl.1-79, t
L Therefore AWS 1-3 cannot be used to weld in j
accordance with AWS Dl.1-79.
L
-l 1
^
y
.a 17 U
-l
- b. AWS-1-3 states it'is a Technique Specification-ror. CrTAW root and SMAW fill of A-515 in accord-ance with AWS D1.1-79 Code.
This-is not a valid statement.
.A-515 is not listed as a-j steel base metal to be welded in AWS Dl.1-79.
i 8.2, 9.2, or 10 2.
Therefor 6 AWS 1-3_.cannot
{
be used'to weld A-515 steel in accoraance with i
AWS Dl.1-79 Code.
c,. AWS 1-3 states this technique is ' qualified for l
p welaing of material of unlimited thickness in l
,, y
&ccordance with AWS Dl.1-79.
Again AWS Dl.1-79
\\
does not address the GTAW process and therefore
}
cannot be.used to weld material of unlimited thickness in accordance with AWS Dl.1-79 Code.
5.
Weld Procedure Code 88/89, prior to 8-9-79, was
[
used by Pullman to weld Pipe Rupture Restraints.
)
(, j n (4
PG&E allowed Pullman to use a-welding procedure hy g which was not repared and qualified to the AWS 1
s Code.
On 8-9 9 AWS 1-3 was issued to clarify d't the techniques for application of Weld Code 88/89 t
k as applied to AWS welding only.
But AWS 1-3 i
'q was not prepared and qualified per AWs D1.1-79 Q
Code as stated by Pullman in the W.P.S.
These discrepancies raise several questions.
- L 3
- a. - Did PG&E use the power of the AWS Code-i
.[C Building Commissioner (Building Commissioner b
refers to the offical or bureau who'is W@17 delegated to enforce the. local building law or specification or other construction regul-i ations) as referenced in AWS D1.0-69, para-I graph 101.c and 502, to authorize the use J\\
of Code 88/89 and subsequently AWS 1-3 for Pipe _ Rupture Restraint welding even through
(
'S the procedures were not prepared and qualified in accordance with the applicable AWS Code.
l it Pullman's QA/QC Manager, H. Karner 3
1 t
in a letter dated 2-5-82 (see attachment #{(),
1 indicates that PG&E acting as the AWS Code t
Building Commissioner approved Code 88/89 j
\\
based on evidence of previous qualification
( ASME Section II) of the joint welding proc-()pi AWS' cedures to be employed. If this is true, how y
could PG&E. approve a welding procedure for 1
~f welding when the welding process is not D
, even addressed in the AWS Code?
If PG&E
%( y L
l used theAWS's Building Commissioner authority h0 Q
yto approve use of these specifications, why t
was a Contract Specification Change Notice a
not issued?
\\
(
N j
1
J 18
- y l
l b,
PG&E's Rupture Restraint Group Supervisor.
R. Torstrom, in a letter to Pullman, dated -
4-14-82, directed Pullman to discontinue-use of Code 88/89 and AWS 1-3 for Rupture i
Restraint weldin the procedures (g pending a FG&E review of see attachment #11).
The results of this PG&E review should be ident-ified to and reviewed by the-NRC.
If PG&E found the procedures acceptable, what was the basis for-this decision?
If the pro-cedures were found unacceptable, what cor-i rective action has been taken for welds made using these procedures?
Is this corrective action adequate?
c.
AWS 1-3 was prepared-by: Pullman's Cognizant Welc11ng Engineer K. Freed and approved by the Field QA/QC Manager D. Geske.
It should be i
determined why these individuals prepared and approved a welding specification for I
the GTAW process claiming it was qualified for welding of materials in accordance with AWS Dl.1-79 when this was clearly not the case.
It should be determined why PG&E approved AWS 1-3 when it was not qualified
{
'per AWS D1.1-7y as stated in the Specification.
1
{
It is alleged that there has been a breakdown in'the j
Quality Assurance Program for Welding Procedure Qualification as related To Weld Procedure Code 88/89 and AWS 1-3.
1 VI.
Pullman Power Products has used Weld Proc'edure Code 92/93 to weld Pipe Rupture Restraints when Process Sheets suec-i ified Weld Procedure Code 7/8.
Per a 8-15-78 Pullman 7 Interoffice Correspondence by/93 was accepted as athe Assistant Q1 (see attachment # 4), Code 92 suitable substitute without change to the process sheets.
This has resulted in serious Quality Assurance Program i
deficiencies.
(
j t-A.
The Interoffice Correspondence states that Weld Codes
]
L 7/8 and 92/93 are qualified to allow welding of un-1 limited thickness on structural members under AWS requirements and that technical aspects of both procedures are the same.
These are not valid state-ments.
1.
Code 92/93' Weld Procedure Specification - Pre-paration of Base Material - states the edges or j-surfaces of the parts to be jointed by welding shall essentially form the geometry of the weld
{
shown on Page 2 as detailed on the attached l
i 19 '
u q.
sketches.
The page 2 sketches show two types of ll structural steel joint details: Pillet weld, which a
is included in the Procedure Specification, and 1
'f; Partial Joint Penetraion Square Groove Weld.
The fillet weld is a prequalified joint of AWS D1.0-69 j
and can be welded in unlimited thickness when done per AWS requirements.. Per AWS D1.0-69.217.
c.1,
.2, and.3, Partial Penetration Square Groove welds which are prequalified joint details can only be made in = material 1/4 inch thick or less.
I
-It is alleged that there is no. Procedure Qualif--
1 ication Record documenting the performance of a joint welding procedure qualification test for Partial Penetration S
.erial greater than 1/quare Groove welds in' mat-.
E 4 inch in thickness as re-J quired by AWS Dl.0-69.213.b.
Without a Procedure Qualification Record, Code 92/93 would not be qualified to weld Partial Penetration Square Groove welds in material of unlimited thickness as stated in Code 92/93 W.P.S.- Base Metal
.)
Thickness.
.j Code'7/8 is qualified per AWS to make fillet welds and single bevel Groove welds in plate of unlimited thickness.
'2. -Code 92/93 W.P.S. states it is a Procedure Spec-ification for: Carbon steel piping, SMAW.(root and built up), for' socket welds, fillet welds, sand for the welding on of couplings.
The only structural steel related item in the W.P.S. is fillet. welds.. Page 2 sketches. detail a fillet weld in structural steel plate.- But structural steel plate ( as a general item to be welded) is j
not listed in the Proc,edure Specification.
The structural steel Partial Penetration. Square Groove weld shown on Page 2. sketches and any other AWS groove welds would have to be made in plate or shapes.
Structural steel plate and shapes are not specified in the Procedure Specification.
Any/~93 would be in nonconformance to Code 92/93 structural steel groove welds made with Code 92 Weld Procedure Specification.
It is alleged that Code 92/93 was used to weld Pipe Rupture Restraint Groove welds in plate or shapes in nonconformance to the W.P.S.
Code 7/8 is a Procedure Specification for welding l
carbon steel plate with fillet and single bevel l
full penetration groove welds as detailed on j
Page 2 Sketches.
l
?
3.
The Tack Weld For Set Up is not the same for Code I
92/93 and Code 7/8 Code 92/93 W.P.S. for Tack l
l!'-
Weld For Set Up states the GTAW process using j
l 1
20 a
filler metal. type listed on Page 2 ma with or.without. backup. purge in 1/16"y be used, 3/32",or 1/8" diameter and that the filler metal type is E70S-2 or -6.
Code 7/8 W.P.S. requires tack' welds shall be.made using the SMAW process and does not specify the GTAW process La any part
.of the W.P.S.
Code 7/8 Page 2 filler metal type is E7015,16 or,18, 4.
Gas For. Torch Shield requirements are not the same for Code 92/93 and. Code 7/8.
Code 92/93 W.P.S. for Gas Torch Shield states nominal composition of argon, 99.995% minimum purity (for GTAW process).
Code 7/8 W.P.S. for Gas For Torch Shield states none (Code 7/8 does not use GTAW process which requires a gas for torch' shield).
5.
Code 92/93 specifies an additional welding process which is not addressed in Code 7/8 or the AWS Dl.0-69 Code.
Code 92/93 W.P.S. for Welding-1 Process states welding shall.be done by the SMAW process and that GTAW tack welding shall be done'using a nonconsumable electrode of 2%
Thoriated Tungsten, EWTH 2.
Code 7/8 W.P.S.
for Welding Process states welding shall be done by the SMAW process with a backing strip (this includes tack welds).
6.
Wald backing requirements - are not the same' for Code 92/93 and Code 7/8 Code 92/93 Spec. No, is Pl-0B-F4-SMAW-2G-5G.
Code: 7/8 Spec. No. is F1-BR-F4-SMAW-2G-5G.
OB stands for Open Butt.
BR stands for Backing Ring (piping terminlogy).
j OB.and BR are two different methods of fitting.
(setting up) the joint to be welded.
Code
.up/93 W.P.S. for Backing Strip states none (open 92Butt).
Code.7/8 W.P.S. for Backing Strip states the welded joints shall utilize a backing strip.
AWS Dl.0-69.409.g specifies that complete penet -
ration groove' welds made without the use of backing shall have the root of the inital weld gouged, chipped or otherwise removed to sound metal before welding is started from the second side.
Code 92/93 does not require this action.
7.
Weld joint details zee not the same except for
- tillet welds for Code 92/93 and Code 7/8.
Code 92/93 W.P.S Page 2 Sketch-Joint Details specify piping socket and coupling welda, and structural I
steel fillet and parital joint penetration square i
groove welds.
Code 7/8 W.P.S. Page 2 Sketch Joint i
Details specify pipe full penetration single vee A?.
groove welds, and full penetration single bevel groove welds and. fillet welds in plate.
m 21 l
8.
Welding Techniques are-not'the same for Code j
92/93 and Code 7/8 There are differences in AMPS and maximum volta allowed for various sizes of filler metal.
See attachment #13, for for copies of the W.P.S.s.
)
The 8-15-78 Interoffice-Correspondence-statement that l
technical aspects of Code 92/93 and Code 7/8.are the.
(
l same is not valid.
There are differences between
-)
l the two W.P.S.'s involving joint details,-tacking the. joints, welding processes to be used, backing requirements and welding techniques.
The. Interoffice Correspondence and Code 92/93_(Base Metal Thickness) statement that it is quali.fied to-
'\\
allow welding of unlimited thickness on structural f
members under AWS requirement is not valid.
Structural steel plate and shapes of any thickness are not j
included in the Procedure Specification.
The only (pY. j g AWS groove weld detailed in the W..P.S. is not pre-
-i qualified by AWS Dl.0-69 for welding in unlimited j
thickness and it is alleged that there is no Proced-l y
%n ure,Quali.fication Record documenting that the weld g
V-g joint detail is qualified for im14mi ted material.
O thickness.
The use of Code 92/93'to weld Pipe Ru I
\\
when process sheets specified Code 7/pture Restraints 8 and-the a i
$\\
ed : justification of it by Pullman -QA/QC Management
///
Y is.a major breach in the Quality Assurance Program f(
for welding.
(
B.
There are additional Quality Assurance deficiencies.
in the use of Code 92/93 to weld Pipe Rupture Restraints per'AWS Dl.0-69 and PG&E Contract' Specification #8833ZR requirements.
1.
Per the 8-15-78 Interoffice Correspondence, Welders were transfered from piping functions to Pipe Rupture Restraint work because work load require-ment in fabrication and erection of restraints required an increase in welder population.
Per the l
I.O.C. the welders qualifications were based on i
Weld Code 92/93.
These welders are not qualified to weld structural steel Pipe Rupture Restraints based on Code 92/93.
t-a.
Welders qualified to Weld Code 92/93 were qualified per ASME Code Section II.
C.S.
- 8833IR section 2.3.63 specifies all welders shall be qualified in accordance with the i
AWS Code for Welding in Building Construction.
l t__ =_ _-- _ _ - - - -
1
.j Code 92/93 welders were not qualified in
,/
j' ac0Cdance with the AWS Code.
There is no 1/
j Contract Specification Change Notice; author-(
izing a deviation from the Contract require-j ment ( see'section III.A. of this' report concerning welder qualifications deviating '
from Contract-requirements).-
(
- 2..Per the 8-15-78 Interoffice Correspondence,the' wolder's weld rod was requisitioned using Code 92/93 and the Process Sheets specified Code 7/8 as the required weld procedure.. The I.O.C.
j goes onto state the use of Code 92/93 and welders i
qualified to Code 92/93 was accepted without changing the Process Sheets to reflect the actual 4 'j welding conditions.- This situation is a noncon-
-l formance to Contract Specification#8833IR Section 3-Quality Assurance requirements and' indicates
[
a breakdown in the assurance of quality welding-t of Pipe Rupture Restraints.
( Tl 1
- a.. Pullman has not complied with C.S. #8833IR Section 3.4.1211 Records requirement to use, collect, and maintain records and data essent-q H
1al to document the quality of work performed.
Per this section Records are considered one of the principal forms.of objective evidence of quality, and procedures shall assure that.
records are complete'and reliable.
Field welds have been made using Code 92/93' and the welder's weld rod requisition records indicated Code 92/93 as the required weld procedure.
But the work performance records (Process Sheets) specified the welding. pro-cess should be done by Code 7/8.
These Pro-cess, Sheets were prepared by Pullman Engin-eering and approved by Pullman QA/QC Depart-ment and the Engineering Department.
The' l
welding records are not complete nor reliable and do not adquately document the quality of i
work performed.
The records do not agree on the welding procedure used to make these welds,{s l
'\\\\
b.
The failure to change Process Sheets to re-flect the actual welding procedure used is a nonconfermance to C.S. #8833XR Section 3.4.122 i
Document Control which requireb records and documentation which involves activities affect-ing quality be current, adequate, complete and available for use in work performed under this specification.
These Process Sheets, which are suppose to control field welding, i
are not current, adequate or complete,and do not i
- -__---_-- -_--- - _ - a
23 l
1 assure quality welding with the referenced weld procedure, Of equal im personnel (portance is the fact that field d.
Production, Engineering and Quality Control) disregarded the ' Process welding)(the controlling document for field Sheets' instructions to use Code 7/8 to make these welds and substituted their own unauthorized and unapproved weld procedure (Code 92/93) to perform the welding.
This raises the question of how much control there was over field personnel compliance to Qualtiy Assurance requirements. It is evid-ent that there was very little control, Another aspect of this breach of Qualit e.
Assurance is the attempt by Pullman QA/yQC Management to justify the above discrepancies, after the fact, by issuing an Interoffice Correspondence stating Code 92/93 was accept-ed as a suitable substitute for Code 7/8 Who determined that Code 92/93 was a suitable substitute?
Who approved this substitute after the fact?
Is there any documented evidence that PG&E approved this substitution?
It is alleged that PG&E has not approved of this substitution.
This report has shown that Code 7/8 and Code 92/93 technical aspects are not the same.
This report has shown that Code 92/93 is not qualified to allow welding on unlimited i
chickness on structural members under AWS requirements.
Code 92/93 is not a suitable I
substitute for Code 7/8.
It is alleged that
/
Pullman QA/QC Management has attempted to I
('
cover up a serious breach in the Quality Assurance Program for welding Pipe Rupture
! Restraints by merely issuing an Interoffice
' Correspondence to File.which stated,after the fact,that the substitution of one weld i
procedure for another was acceptable.
1 The records used to document these Pipe Rupture i
Restraint welds do not provide a means to determine,(
'i control,.and. assure the quality of work performed 1
to predetermined requirements. This is a major breach in the Quality Assurance Program for welding Pipe Rupture Restraints.
((
l I
i 1
24 R
VII.
'During Pipe Support Design ' Modification construction work, Pullman Power Products discovered that welding done in 1972 of Pipe Attachments to.the Unit #1 Containment Dome,
- Spray Ring Piping System, had not been performed to 1
welding procedures specified on Process Sheets and Weld Rod Requisitions.
1 1
Pullman Discrepancy Report #4713, dated 4-14-83, (see
]
attachment # \\W stated the Discrepant Item to be '"Incor-i rect Reference-To WPS On Process Sheet And Rod Requisit -
ions.- Pipe Attachment Welds Various Hangers.. Code Class i
3".
Under Explanation of Discrepancy, DR#4713 stated j
, welds were identified as having,the wrong weld proced-ure referenced on. the Process Sheet.and the rod requis-1 ition".
DR#4713 also stated."further investigation f.j.
identified additonal differences between process sheets and' rod requisitions".
Three conditions were identified!
p by DR #4713.-
l
'L'[
Condition 1.. The process sheets and1 rod requisitions
'[-
referenced-WPS 128, which is for the GTAW l
process and uses ER-308 bare: wire.
CoatedL l
electrodes E-308-16 were issued per-the weld rod requisition.
Visual examination cof the attachment welds confirmed that'the SMAW process was used.
The correct weld-procedure reference should have been 15/16.-
' i-L Welders were all qualified for SMAW welding j
of stainless steel.
Condition 2. The process sheets reference WPS 128 (GTAW process using ER-308 bare wire).
The rod-requisitions reference WPS 140, which uses a combination of processes, both GTAW (ER-308 bare wire) and SMAW (E-308 coated elect-rodes). Coated electrodes were issued per the weld rod requisitions.
The correct weld procedure reference should have been 15/16.
Welders were all qualified for SMAW welding l
of stainless steel.
I Condition 3.. The process sheets reference WPS 128 (GTAW process using IR-308 bare wire).
The rod requisitions reference WPS 140, which uses a combination of processes, both GTAW (ER-308 bare wire) and SMAW (E-308 coated elect-rodes).
Bare wire was issued per the weld rod requisitions.
The correct weld procedure reference should be 128.
The DR#4713 Recommended Disposition to Accept As Is was approved by the Pullman Pield QA/QC Manager H. Karner, i.
PG&E/Bechtel Management individuals and PG&E General Construction Quality Control.
I 25 l
g
-It'is alleged that DR#4713 misrepresents'the discrepancies identified inorder to cover up more significant Quality 1
Assurance / Quality Control discrepancies.
It is alleged:
I that the. discrepancies as ' addressed by DR#4713 do not identify the fact that the Production Dept. disregarded the Weld-Procedure Code and subsequently the Welding-Process'specified on.the approved Process. Sheets:(the controlling field document for welding) and substituted their own-unauthorized and unapproved Weld Procedure Code resulting in the use of a different Welding-Process /.
to perform Pipe Attachment welding.
DR#4713 does not I
address-the breakdown in the Quality _ Assurance / Quality Control Program of welding to predetermined (specified) and preapproved procedures.and processes during the 1972 period.
H(
A.
DR#4713 states the' Discrepant-Item to be " Incorrect
' Reference To WPS On Process Sheet and Rod Requisition" and under Explanation of. Discrepancy states " welds were identified as having the' wrong weld procedure referenced on the Process Sheet and rod requisition".
DR#4713 also states under Conditions 1 and 2 that "the correct weld procedure reference should'have been 15/16", These are not valid statements and are ansattempt-to misrepresent / cover up the breakdown in the Quality Assurance / Quality Control Program of welding to predetermined and preapproved procedures 1
and processes during the 1972 period.
r l
DR#4713, Conditions 1 and 2 identified that the Process Sheets specified WPS 128 (GTAW Process using j
ER-308 bare wire).
These Process Sheets (see attach-
{
ment #lq) were prepared by Engineering (attached i
process sheets do not reference who' prepared them 1
but normally it is an Engineering function to prepare process sheets), and approved by the AI ( Authorized QA/QC Manager (R.F.)y - State of California), the(Chief Field
]
Inspector Third Part j
and the Eng. Dept.
Engineer).
Weld Procedure Code 128 is the correct reference for the welding of the Pipe Attachments because it was specified by Engineering and approved by the' Third Party Inspector.and the appropriate 1
M.W.Kellogg(Pullman) Management authorities.
Product-ion disregarded the approved _ process sheet specified Weld Procedure Code and substituted their own unauth-orized and unapproved Weld Procedure Code (Code 15/16) which resulted in the welds being made by a different welding process (SMAW) than originally intended and approved.'The DR#4713 statements of " wrong weld pro-cedure referenced on the Process Sheet" and "the correct weld procedure reference should have been.15/
16" cannot be substantiated.
Production Dept. does not have the authority to disregard approved Process Sheet specified welding procedures and use welding procedures that they choose.
1
26
]=
DR#4713 Condition 1 identified that the Rod Requis-I tions referenced WPS 128.
This means that the Pro-'
I duction Foreman who filled out the Weld-Rod Requis-1 itions referenced Code 128 as.the proper procedure
]
to be used for the welding.
But when the Rod Requis-ition was filled in the Rod Room, the QA Inspector.
issued coated electrodes ~E-308-16 and so marked the requisition and initialed it. The wrong rod was L
issued from the Rod Room.and inorder for the rod to be used,a-different welding process (SMAW) and a
'j different Weld Procedure Code (Code 15/16) had'to t
be used and was used. A compound error had been made.
3 The QA Inspector issued the wrong rod and Production accepted the wrong rod and proceeded to substitute I
l an unauthorized and unapproved Weld Procedure and y
Weld Process so that they could weld ~the rod issued to them. This illustrates a breakdown in the QA/QC Program of welding to. predetermined (specified) and preapproved procedures and processes.
DR#4713 Condition 2 identified that Process Sheets j
referenced WPS 128.
But when_the Production Foreman 1
filled out the Weld Rod Requisitions he referenced WPS 140.
Production deviated from the predetermined (specified) and preapuroved weld procedure (WPS128-GTAW-ER-308 bare wire) and selected his-own unauther-(
ized and unapproved weld procedure (WPS140,'combin-l ation of processes, both GTAW -ER-308 bare wire and.
SMAW-E-308 coated electrodes). In this case adding another welding process.
This QA/QC discrepancy is i
further complicated by the QA Inspector in the Rod Room issuing just coated electrodes (3-308), only part of the Rod Requaition required material.'This caused Production to-have to select a third-weld procedure (Code 15/16) inorder to use just the coated-electrodes issued.
The resulting SMAW process, actuall;- l used to perform the welding, deviated from the orig-i inally specified and approved Process Sheet Weld Procedure Code and Welding Process and the Weld' Pro--
cedure and Welding Processes referenced on the Weld Rod-1 Requisition.
Again this illustrates a breakdown in the QA/QC Program of welding to predetermined (specified) and preapproved procedures and processes.
i DR#4713 Condition 3 identified the Process Sheets referenced WPS 128.
As in Condition 2 the Production Foreman referenced WPS 140 on his Weld Rod Requisitions.
Only in this case the QA Inspector in the Rod Room issued bare wire resulting in welding being performed to WPS 128 as specified on the Process Sheets.
To further complicate the breakdown in Quality Assur-
]
ance/ Quality Control is the fact the Process Sheets j
had a hold point for Visual Inspection.
The Quality i
1
27
)
Control Visual Inspections were signed'off on the J~
. Process Sheets as acceptable without any of the various discrepancies being identified.
A visual inspection was made of the welds in 1972 by the Quality Control Dept. assuring that the welds eom-
-plied to Code 128 (GTAW Process):as specified on-the Process Sheets.But DR#4713 states that a current
. visual examination'of the attachment welds confirmed that_ the SMAW process was used 'at these locations.
This raises the question, did QC Inspectors in 1972 know the difference in the visual appearance of-GTAW and-SMAW welding?
Of special note is the fact that many of the Process Sheet inspections'were.made by-R.F.,_the'QA/QC Manager'at that time.
L B.
The above listed discrepancies pose a number of ques-tions that should be addressed by the Nuclear Reg-ulatory Commission.
1.
Why did the Rod Room QA Inspector under Condition 1 issue weld rod that deviated from the Code-128 bare wire specified on the Process Sheets and i
the Weld Rod Requisitions?
WhyLdid he deviate j
ffrom.the Rod Requisitions requirements for both types of electrodes under Condition 2 and 37 k
~2.
Was the QA Inspector ' verbally ordered to deviate i
from the Process Sheets and Rod Requisitions and if so by whom and by what authority?
3.
Are there other areas of welding (Piping,. Pipe -
Attachments Pipe Supports or Pipe. Rupture Restraints),where :the QA Inspector issued rod 3
that deviated from Process Sheet or' Rod Requis-ition requirements?
i 4.
Did-Pullman investigate any other areas of weld-ing done in 1972 for the same or similar problems?
5.
Why did the Production Foreman allow his welders l
to use different welding procedures and processes than the one specified on the Process Sheets and Rod Requisitions?
6.
Why, under Conditions 2 and 3, did the Production Foreman issue a Weld Rod Requisition that listed a Weld Procedure Specification that deviated from the approved Process Sheet specification?
7.
When was Code 15/16 initiated?
Was code 15/16 available for use in 19727
(
8.
Why did the QC Inspectors not identify that a I
SMAW process was used instead of the specified GTAW process referenced on the Process Sheets?
28 x
< (;
9.
Was: QA/QC Manager:Ron Fink'(who.-performed'.
many-of the visual inspections) qualified to perform welding Visual Inspections?
'10.
Did QA/QC Manager R.. Fink'know about the discrepancies'and sign off the Visual Inspect-ions indicating approval of the changes? -If so, why waan't the Process Sheets and Rod Requisitions changedito reflect the actual welding procea.1re used?
11.
Is there'a conflict of interest for the QA/
QC Manager who approved the Process Sheets to perform the Quality Control function of final visual: inspection of welds?.
12.
Why was the QA/QC Manager performing'a.QC Inspector's. job?
13.
Why has the current Pullman QA/QC Manager..
misrepresented the' discrepancies. identified on DR#4713?
Why didn't DR#4713* address the fallurelof-Pipe Attachments.to be_ welded to-the predetermined and preapproved procedure and process as specified on the Process
' Sheets?
The current'QA/QC. Manager, in his Q
approval of.DRf4713, is saying that the Weld Procedure Specification (Code 128-GTX1)
I specified and approved by three-Management-
]
authorities on'the Process Sheets (the con-
]
trolling document for field welding),is -
incorrect.
The QA/QC Manager's. approval'of DR#4713 is saying that a welding procedure and process (Code 15/16-SMAW), unauthorized and unapproved in'1972 by the AI-(State of-1 California), the QA/QC Manager and the Eng-q insering Dept, and not: documented anywhere i
at the time of welding is the correct welding f
procedure and process.
j 14e DR#4713 was submitted to PG&E/Bechtel.on at
)
three occasions.
The DR was returned to Pullman unapproved on at least two occasions
- )
(2-15-83 and 4-20-83).
The 4-14-83 version j
of DR#4713 was approved on 4-25-83 by three.
PG&E/Bechtel Management individuals and by
)
PG&E General Construction Quality Control.
1 Why has PG&E/Bechtel Management approved-DR#4713 when it misrepresents the discrepancies identified and'does not address the more ser-ious-QA/QC discrepancy of welding not being performed to predetermined and preapproved
{
}
3rocedures and processes as specified on the 3rocess Sheets?
,v 15.
Is there a conspiracy by Pullman and PG&E/
3echtel to cover up a condition adverse to l
quality concerning welding not being done j
i I
29
(
to a predetermined and preapproved procedure and process as specified on Process Sheets (the controlling document for field welding)?-
C.
DR#4713 states under Condition 1 and 2 that welders were all qualified for'SMAW welding of stainless steel.
It is alleged that at least one welder's qual-ification status cannot be assured for the time l
period involved (October and November 1972).
l An attachment to DR#4713 list a Welder, stencil N, jd4LUj ' in DR#4713.
These welds were made on 10-25-72, hat # 26,as making 10 of the field welds involved i
p
\\
10-26 and 31-72 and 11-1-72 The attachment indicates that Welder N's qualification date for Code 15/16 (SMAW) was 12-17-71.
The 1977 Nuclear Services Corporation Internal Audit af Pullman Power Products states in Criterion II.10 that "the Ninety Day Welder's Log was not maintained from August 1972 to December 1972" and that "there is no Weekly Qualified Welders List for that time period to substantiate that welders were actually qualified".
Pullmans offical respons'e to PG&E concerning the NSC l
Audit, dated 4-11-78, states under_ Criterion IX.10b J
_s i
that "there is a void in the 90 day weld log from ff jg,Lk'j
'ugust. 1972 to December. 1972.
By reviewine weld-
/'
A T' i .lp ',M ~1ng records. a qualification status for thi.a.jieriod..
i nas been reconstructed.
All welders were found to be within the 90 day requalification period.
Records i
i i
are available for review".
l A Pullman unsigned, undated, rought draft response states under Criterion IX.10b that a "90 Day Welders' l
3 Log will be maintained from August 1972 to December 1972.
We are investigating this particular area and attempting to make an update of the log by checking weld rod requisitions during the missing period.
A log will be reconstructed from this information"..
A Pullman Interoffice Correspondence, dated 10-13-77 to E.F. Gerwin from W. Mitchell/J.P. Runyan, concern, Lag N.S.C. Audit Comments states under Section IX.4.I that "further investigation in process - Log can be up dated by checking rod requisitions during void period".
Welder #N, per DR#4713, was originally qualified for Code 15/16 on 12-17-71.
Welder #N made the DR#4713 welds in October and November of 1972 which was dur-ing the time period when the "Ninety Day Welders' Log" was not maintained and there was no " Weekly
i l
30 i
i Qualified Welders List".
The absence of the "Ninety Day Welders Log" means that Welder #N cannot be assured to be qualified for the SMAW process by virtue of documented evidence of use of the SMAW process within a 90 day period. Pultnan's -procedure required a welder to requalify for a welding procets in the event he hadn't worked with a process during l
a 90 day period. There are no original records to i
determined that Welder #N was qualified or had re-1 qualified for the SMAW process (Code 15/16) during i
the' August to December 1972 period.
l Pullman has stated that by reviewing welding records (rod requisitions) a qualification status for this period had been reconstructed.
But DR#4713 identified that welding records (both process sheets and rod requisitions) are not accurate because of " incorrect reference to Weld Procedure Specification in Process j
Sheet and Rod Requisition".
Pullman's reconstructed i
qualification status is based on documents that l
cannot be assured of having correct information.
j h
Therefore the DRf4713 statement that welders were
)
all qualified for SMAW welding of stainless steel
)
is questionable.
Any qualification records for i
Welder #N for the October - November 1972 period
(
would be based on the reconstructed qualification j
status which inturn is based on welding records i
assuredtobavebeenqualifiedforSMAW(Code 15/16)[I now known not to be correct.
Welder #N cannot be
/
as stated on DR#4713.
A D.
Contract. Specification #8711 Section 4 (Contractors Quality Assurance Requirements), paragraph 2.2 1
states Quality Assurance comprises all those planned.
l and systematic activities necessary to establish I
confidence that material (component or system) will perform satisfactory in service.
Paragraph 2.3 states Quality Control comprises those quality assurance actions which provide a means to control the quality of the material to predetermined require-I ments. The Containment #1 Spray Ring Pipe Attach-ment' welding as identified in DR#4713 and this report do not fall under Quality Assurance " planned and systematic activities" establishing confidence that material will perform satisfactory or under Quality Control actions providing a "means to control the l
l quality of the material to predetermined requirements
l C.S. #8711 Section 4.3.23 states Contractor shall assure that, special processes such as welding are controlled in accordance with applicable codes, a
standards, specifications, etc., and that special i
processes are accomplished by qualified personnel.
l 1
I
l
+
1 31-
- s.. '
1
]
The Containment #1 Spray Ring Pipe Attachment. weld-l ing was not controlled in accordknee with the approved
..V, Process Sheet Weld Procedure Specification and at least one welder's qualification statca is in quest-ion.
O.S. #8711 Section~4.3.24 states Contractor. sus 11
.j assure that material and work furnished under this Specification conform to the applicable-specifications, I
drawings, codes, and other re I
provide the quality. desired. quirements necessary to
. Containment #1 Spray Ring Pipe Attachment welding does not conform.to the.
a approved Process Sheet Weld Procedure Specification.
C.S. #8711 Section 4.3.28 states Contractor procedures shall assure that all conditions adverse to: qualit such as deficiencies, deviations, nonconformances,y, etc., are promptly identified, reported and corrected.
l DR#4713, as written, misrepresents / cover,s up the-j more significant breakdown in the QA/QC Program of not
-i welding.to predetermined and-preapproved procedures i
u and processes.
DR#4713 states that the Process Sheets' predetermined (specified) and'preapproved j
welding procedure was wrong and that Production's unauthorized and' unapproved welding procedure was cor-q rect.. This is Bull Shit generated by. Pullman to keep 1972 welding (all areas) from become suspect.
DR#4713 l.
i has not identified all conditions adverse to quality.
1 C.S. #8711 Section 4.3.29 states Contractor shall i
prepare, use, and maintain a records procedure-f adequate to document and assure quality of material and work.. Records collected shall include workmanship.
reports.and procedures.
The-Containment #1 Spray Ring Pipe Attachment process Sheets and Weld. Rod 4
Requisitions (workmanship reports and: procedures),
-i prepared, used, and maintained by M.W. Kellogg (Pullman: !
do not assure the quality of material and work.
4 l
l-The 1972 welding of Pipe Attachments to the Contain-ment #1 Dome Spray Ring Piping System does not comply with C.S. #8711 Section 4 Quality Assurance requirements and cannot be assured of being qualit/
welding.
E.
The 1977 Nuclear Services Corporation Internal Audit I
of Pullman Power Products concludes under Criterion II that "there is no confidence that welding done prior to' early 1974 was performed in accordance with i
welding specification requirements".
The Nuclear
(
)
Services Corporation Audit Summary found that " Prior j
to early 1974, there is little evidence available to
)
verify the adequacy of the work performed.
The avail-able evidence indicates that only a rudimentary qualit-I
~
f control program existed and that control over the l
production organization was minimal".
v l
.c 32 The discrepancies. identified in'DR#4713 and this
'/
report verify the Nuclear Services. Corporation con-
/
'n~
clusions.
There was no control over the Production
{
Organization during the installation of Pipe Attach-(
ments to the Containment #1 Spray Ring Piping System
-and there is no assurance that welding was performed
-in accordance with welding specification requirements.l What is'of paramount importance is the possibilty of other. welding (Piping, Pipe Attachments, Pipe Supports'and Pipe Rupture Restraints) hay 1ng the same or similar discrepancies as identified in DR#-
4713 and this report or other conditions adverse to
-quality.
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission should concern itself with reviewing all pre 1974 welding to assure that conditions adverse to quality do not' exist.
The Nuclear Regulatroy Commission should address whether Pullman Power Products and PG&E/Bechtel'have misrepresented the discrepancies identified in
.DR#4713 in an attempt to cover up a significant
. breakdown in the implementation of C.S. #8711 Quality Assurance requirements during the 1972 construction period.
y This report has identified. areas where Qualit 1~
welding. requirements'have not been implemented and/y Assurance or deviated.
from and/or there are unresolved questions. The purpose of this report is to identify to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission these i
areas of questionable Quality Assurance / Quality Control.
The NRC~should review these findings and-allegations to determine their validity and/or the seriousness of the discrepancies and/or:
the adequacy of corrective action and investigate the unresolved questions raised.
There have been and there. continues to be serious breaches in the PG&E and Pullman Power Products Quality Assurance Program at the Diablo Canyon Nuclear. Plant.
A thorough review of this Quality Assurance Program should be performed to provide the citizens of' San luis Obispo County and the State of California the assurance that construction is of the highest' quality.
0^4 Q4 haro.La suason 1
805-528-5970 Phone 5W aA.c
,fN L
l p
I
l 33 FOOTNOTES i
'l..
From Page 5 Section I.
Per a 10-13-83 Pullman Interoffice Correspondence, the current revision date referenced on Process Sheets for Weld Procedure Code 7/8 is 8-31-77 (see attachment # 1A). Attachment # 1C' shows a similar Interoffice correspondence dated 10-25-82 which specifies.the current revision date for Code-7/8 to be 8-31-77.
The deviations listed in this report are against the 1977 revision' and earlier revisions of Code 7/8.
As a result of the findings of Unscheduled Internal Audit # 35, Pullman is currently qualifying Code 7/8 to include the listed deviations in the Weld Procedure Specification, Code 7/8 was originally qualified'on 11-25-69 and has been used by Pullman up to the present time._ Welding that deviates.from Code 7/8 has been-going on since the start of, construction at Diablo Canyon.
Pullman is now qualifying Code 7/8 to weld these deviations.
in an "after the fact" manner.
Where is there Quality Assur-ance in' qualifying welding specifications after the welding has'been performed?
Both PG&E C.S. #8711 Section 4.2.1 and #8833XR Section 3.2.1 define Quality Assurance as those planned and systematic actions necessary to establish confidence that material (equipment and systems) will perform satisfactoq in. service.
Over a decade of unqualified welding without welding specifications does not establish confidence that material will perform. satisfactory-f in service.
1 C.S. - #8711.4.2.2 and #8833IR.3.2.2 define Quality Control as those Quality Assurance actions which provide a means to control-the quality of material supplied (and work performed).to predetermined requirements.
Over a decade of welding has not been performed;to predetermined welding specifications.
There has been no Quality Control over welding that was done.to Code 7/8 but which actually deviated from the Weld Procedure Specifications.
j C.S. #8711.4.3.21 and #8833XR.3.4.121 (Document Review) specifies
\\
that Contractor prepared documents such as specifications, i
procedures and instructions shall be reviewed for completeness 3 design adequacy and conformance to codes.
It appears that in over a decade of' use, Code 7/8 was never reviewed to deternine if welding being performed complied with the Code 7/8 Weld Procedure Specifications.
Not-until Unscheduled Internal Audit
- 35 in March of 1983 was a review performed that identified deviations from the Weld Procedure Code.
This is a serious i
breakdown in the Quality Assurance Program.
)
0.S. #8711.4.3.22 and #8833IR.3.4,122 (Document Control) specifies that Contractor shall assure that specifications, procedures and instructions which involve activities affecting I
quality are current, adequate, complete and available for use c
in work performed under these specifications.
For over a i
'M t
q I
34
, FOOTNOTES 1.(continued) decade Pullman has not provicad a Weld Procedure Specification that was current, adequate or complete for the type of welding required by PG&E design drawings.
Pullman did not make available to the Production Dept. a welding specification capable of weld-ing all the PG&E design drawing requirements. This is a serious breakdown in the Quality Assurance Program.
C.S.#8711.4.3.23 and #8833XR.3.4.128 (Qualification of Processes and Personnel) specifies that Contractor shall assure that spec-ial processes such as welding are controlled in accordance with applicable codes, standards, specifications, etc..
For over a decade Puliman has welded Pipe Supports and Pipe Rupture Restraines in an uncontrolled manner.
Welding was performed which deviated from Code 7/8 specification requirements.
Welding was performed for which there were no welding specifications.
This is a most significant breach in the Quality Assurance Program for welding.
1 C.S.#8711.4.3.24 (Material and Work Procurement Control) specifies that Contractor shall assure that material and work furnished under this Specification conform to the applicable specifications, I
drawings, codes, and other requirements necessary to provide the quality desired.
Much of the Pipe Support material and work does not conform to Code 7/8 Weld Procedure Specifications and cannot be assured of providing the quality desired.,
The use of Weld Procedure Code 7/8 (the primary Pullman carbon f
steel welding procedure) to weld base metals, structural steel shapes, and joint configurations not specified in the Weld Procedure Specification is a si PG&E Quality Assurance Program.gnificant breach of the Pullman /
l
'The Nuclear Regulatory Commission must decide the ultimate effect of this breach; and whether after the fact qualifying of the procedure is acceptable; and whether the corrective action taken by Pullman /PG&E is really adequate to assure a. sound Quality Assurance Program.
i l
h.
y i
g) 35 LIST OF ATTACHMENTS Attachment Number 1.
A. Weld Procedure Code 7/8.
B. Carbon Steel Shapes and Tube Steel.
C. Pullman Interoffice Correspondence, 10-25-82, Subject -
Current Revision Levels.
2.
Pullman Unscheduled Internal Audit #32.
'3.
' Pullman Unscheduled Internal Audit #35
- ESD 243 Note
- M.W. Kellogg(Pullman) Interoffice Correspondence, 1-22-74, Subject - Rupture Restraints.
4.
Welding Technique. Specification No. AWS 1-1, Rev. 4, 12-20-79.
5.
Pullman Interoffice Correspondence,12-4-79, Subject - Assistant QA/QC Manager.
6.
Pullman Unscheduled Internal Audit $29.
- PG&E Nonconformance Report #DCl-79-RM-010
- PG&E Nonconformance Report #DC2-79-RM-011.
- PG&E Diablo Canyon Rupture Restraint General Repair Procedure
- 8833XR-1.
- Pullman Quhlity Assurance Instruction #143.
7.
Pullman Internal Audit #101, 8.
PG&E Nonconformance Reports #DCl-82-RM-N001 and #DC2-82-RM-NOO2.
9.
Weld Procedure Code 88/89,
- 10. Welding Technique Specification No. AWS 1-3.
- 11. Pullman Letter to PG&E's John Ammon/R.Torstorm 2-5-82, Subject-Weld Procedure 88/89 and AWS 1-3,
- 12. PG&E Field Memorandum to John Ryan, 4-4-82,
- 13. Pullman Interoffice Correspondence, 9-15-78, Subject -
Authorized Weld Procedures - AWS.
- Weld Procedure Code 92/93.
- Weld Procedure Code 7/8.
- 14. Discrepancy Report #4713.
- DR#4712
- DR#4715 1
- DR#4716 s.
l