TNAG-1658-FCO40-2306-Daya-Bay-nuclear-power-station-project-safety-concerns-in-Ho-1987 — Page 68

2.

NOV 18 '87 12:09 TIBCOOL) HK GOVT

The JVC's QA Department subsequently verified the rebar delivery orders to confirm that all bars had been prepared and delivered for construction. They checked the verification records of HCCM and the JVC-CM about the vertical bars protruding from the first layer. In addition, they examined the photographs taken by HCCM and the JVC-CM during the placing of reinforcement and concluded that those sections of protruding and embedded reinforcement reflected by the photographs were in line with the construction drawings.

The EdF design team had also reviewed the verification methods adopted by HCCM and the JVC-CM and were satisfied that they were effective in proving that both protruding and embedded rebars were correctly installed. As result they reconfirmed their technical solution on the basis of their satisfaction that apart from the omitted rebars, the other reinforcement in the first layer was complete.

Conditions 2 and 3:

The JVC and NNSA's Reviews of EdF Design Team's Technical Solution

EdF

design te am

Following detailed design analysis, the recomended a technical solution which was to place the cmitted starter rebars in the second layer and add further reinforcement of about 10 tonne in that a rea such that the reba rs were effective as in the original design. Ed concluded that this technical solution provided a structure which would be equivalent to the original design and provided the same confidence in the integrity of the reactor building containment. They also confirmed that they maintain their technical responsibility on the design of this structure.

MIPA

The technical solution provided by the

design team wa s further endorsed by the General Manager of Ed's Engineering and Construction Division on October 29, 1987.

The JVC organised its PRC and expatriate experts to examine the technical solution proposed by the EdF design te am and the related design information and analyses from the designer, and it

established that the technical solution of the EdF design team met the design criteria and was equivalent in structural strength, margins and quality to the original design.

The technical solution was issued to NNSA for review. NNSA confirmed verbally on October 8, 1987, and then in writing on October 16, 1987 that they had no objection to this technical solution.

- 6

P.24