ML062850249
| ML062850249 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Vermont Yankee File:NorthStar Vermont Yankee icon.png |
| Issue date: | 09/07/2006 |
| From: | Hamer M Entergy Nuclear Vermont Yankee |
| To: | Rowley J NRC/NRR/ADRO |
| References | |
| %dam200611, TAC MD2297 | |
| Download: ML062850249 (89) | |
Text
,R9ichard Emch -VernonHydro Station Safety Reports
,- Page 1
-t From:
"Hamer, Mike".<mhamer @entergy.com>
To:
"Jonathan Rowley" <JGR@nrc.gov>
Date:
Thu, Sep 7, 2006 12:01 PM
Subject:
Vernon Hydro Station Safety Reports Here's another report. Please see attached.
c:\\temp\\GW)00001.TMP Page 1]i c:\\temp\\GW}QQOO1.TMP Pag~ 1 1 Mail Envelope Properties (4500424E.7CD:19:1997)
Subject:
Creation Date From:
Created By:
Vernon Hydro Station Safety Reports Thu, Sep 7, 2006 12:00 PM "Hamer, Mike" <mhamer@entergy.com>
mhamer@entergy.com Recipients nrc.gov TWGWPO03.HQGWDOO1 JGR (Jonathan Rowley)
Post Office TWGWPO03.HQGWDOOI Files MESSAGE TEXT.htm Mail HYDCT-OPS-002.8.2.1.pdf Mime.822 Options Expiration Date:
Priority:
ReplyRequested:
Return Notification:
Concealed
Subject:
Security:
Route nrc.gov Size 46 1214 Date & Time Thursday, September 7, 2006 12:00 PM 3333217 1
None Standard No None No Standard Junk Mail Handling Evaluation Results Message is eligible for Junk Mail handling This message was not classified as Junk Mail Junk Mail settings when this message was delivered Junk Mail handling disabled by User Junk Mail handling disabled by Administrator Junk List is not enabled Junk Mail using personal address books is not enabled Block List is not enabled
Richard Emch-HYDCT-OPS-002.8.2.1.pdf Page I-II r
GE I Consultants, Inc.
[
[
SIXTH QUINQUENNIAL SAFETY INSPECTION VERNON PROJECT FERC PROJECT NO. 1904 Prepared for New England Power Company 25 Research Drive Westborough, Massachusetts 01582 t
1.
I...
[.
II II GEl Consultants, Inc.
.1021 Main Street Winchester, Massachusetts 01890-1943 Project 92067 October 19, 1992
ýýard Em'ch - HYDCT-0PS-002.8.2.1:W Ir Richar Emch.
pdfPacie 2 i I
.Lc r
SIXTH QUINQUENNIAL SAFETY INSPECTION VERNON PROJECT FERC PROJECT NO. 1904 October 19, 1992 Prepard for New England Power Company 25 Research Drive Westborough, Massachusetts 01582 by GEI Consultants, Inc.
1021 Main Street Winchester, Massachusetts 01890-1943 (617) 721-4000 Project 92067
)Richard Emch'- HYDCT-OPS-002:8.2.1.pdf
.Page311 TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF FIGURES LIST OF APPENDICES Pane No.
- 1.
SUMMARY
- 2.
DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT 3
2.1 General 3
2.2 Project Data 3
2.3 Powerhouse 3
2.4 Trash Sluice 4
2.5 Spillway 4
2.6 Vernon Neck 4
2.7 Spillway Safety Devices 4
2.8 Standard Operational Procedures 4
- 3.
CONSTRUCTION HISTORY AND DEVELOPMENT 5
- 4.
GEOLOGY 6
- 5.
INSTRUMENTATION 7
5.1 Powerhouse 7
5.2 Vernon Neck 7
5.3 Adequacy 7
- 6.
FIELD INSPECTION 8
6.1 General 8
6.2 Powerhouse and Intake 8
6.3 Trash Sluice 9
6.4 Spillway 9
6.5 Fish Ladder 10 6.6 Vernon Neck 10 6.7 Emergency Action Plan 10 6.8 Miscellaneous Items 10
Richard Emch" HYDCT-OPS-002.8.2.1.pdf Page.4 TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)
Pa-ze No.
- 7.
SPILLWAY ADEQUACY 12
- 8.
STRUCTURAL STABILITY 13 8.1 Visual Observations 13
[
8.2 Analysis 13 8.3 Evaluation 13
{
- 9.
ADEQUACY OF OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE 14
- 10.
CONCLUSIONS 15
- 11.
RECOMMENDATIONS 16
- 12.
CERTIFICATION 17 REFERENCES FIGURES APPENDICES 1.
Richard Emch - HYDCT-OPS-002.8.2.1.pdf......
age5 F
LIST OF FIGURES
- 1.
General Layout of Plant
- 2.
Details of Spillway
- 3.
Powerhouse & Switchyard
- 4.
Section of Powerhouse Units 1 - 4
- 5.
Section of Powerhouse Units 5 - 8 f
- 6.
Section of Powerhouse Units 9 - 10 LIST OF APPENDICES A.
Instrumentation B.
Vernon Neck Cross-Section Surveys C.
Inspection Checklist, May 12, 1992 D.
Inspection Photographs, May 12, 1992 E.
Spillway Rating Curve F.
Spillway Gate Operation Report G.
Stability Summary H.
Letter from FERC Accepting Independent Consultant i
I Richard Emch - HYDCT-OPS-002.8.2.1.pdf_
_ r-age b I.-.
- 1.
SUMMARY
The Vernon Project is located on the Connecticut River in the Towns of Vernon, Vermont and Hinsdale, New Hampshire. The licensed project consists of a 600-foot-long spillway and a powerhouse (Fig. 1). The east abutment is a long natural soil ridge called Vernon Neck. The project was constructed between 1907 and 1910. A powerhouse addition was constructed between 1918 and 1921.
The effective date of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) license is June 1, 1979 and it expires on April 30, 2018.
Previous FERC quinquennial safety inspections for this project performed in accordance with Federal Power Commission (FPC) Order No. 315 were dated November 1967, November 1972, and November 1977. The 1982 and 1987 quinquennial inspections were conducted in accordance with FERC Order 122.
This report contains the findings of the Sixth Quinquennial FERC Safety Inspection of the project and was performed in accordance with Part 12 of FERC Order No. 122 effective March 1, 1981 and FERC letter dated March 18, 1992, Appendix H.
There have been no federal, state, or independent consultant reports relating to safety of project structures since the 1987 Quinquennial Safety Inspection Report.
The project structures are in very good condition and well maintained. The powerhouse superstructure is in good condition and all mechanical equipment, except decommissioned Unit No. 8, is well maintained and serviceable.
The project spillway structure and powerhouse intake have been modified extensively to improve spillway crest control, obtain access to Vernon Neck, and to improve trash rack cleaning procedures.
The project structures are founded on hard massive gneiss. There are no adversely oriented bedding planes or joints observed at the site and there are no known active faults in the project's area.
Project instrumentation consists of an extensive powerhouse crack monitoring program.
Until the 1987 Quinquennial Safety Inspection, there has been no indication of changes or trends other than seasonal (thermal) cyclic variations in the crack dimensions. It was recommended in the 1987 safety inspection report this program can be terminated; howevir, the gages should be maintained and read after major floods, or felt earthquakes.
A survey of four Vernon Neck cross sections is conducted at five-year intervals to detect upstream/downstream changes its configuration. No changes indicating any significant reduction in cross section have been detected to date. This program should continue at five-year intervals or after major floods (Q >_ 150,000 cfs).
Richard Emch - HYDCT-OPS-002.8.2.1.pdf.
Page 7i1 L
The project spillway can pass up to 51 percent of the Probable Maximum Flood (PMF) at zero freeboard. The flood of record is 185,000 cfs or 32 percent of the PMF in March 1936. The estimated PMF is 567,100 cfs. At PMF, significant damage to project structures would result due to overtopping flows.
I Stability analyses show the powerhouse structure meets stability guidelines for normal operating reservoir, ice loading, and zero freeboard using procedures, formulations, and criteria currently accepted by FERC (2, 4). Additional stability analyses were performed in the 1987 inspection report (5) to include 0.10 g earthquake loading, and analysis of the modified spillway structures. The structures satisfied FERC stability criteria for the loading conditions investigated. At PMF, the spillway structures become submerged weirs and the powerhouse will be damaged heavily.
Based on the information available from prior inspection reports and the observations made during this inspection, we conclude no emergency remedial actions are required at this time.
[
The rock scour downstream of the deep tainter gates should be evaluated, and the tree and brush growth on the Vernon Neck be controlled to aid annual inspections.
r 1*
Richard Emch - HYDCT'O-PS.- 002.8.2.1.pdf Richa d...h...................
Page8ý I 2. DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT 2.1 General The Vernon Project was constructed by the Connecticut River Power Company and is presently owned and operated by the New England Power Company (NEP). Construction began in 1907 and was completed in 1910. The power plant was put into commercial operation on December 1, 1909. In 1910, the final three of the eight original generating units were placed in operation. An addition to the powerhouse and the installation of two additional generating units started in 1918 and was completed in 1921. These units were put into commercial operation on March 12, 1921.
The project is located on the Connecticut River in the towns of Vernon, Vermont and Hinsdale, New Hampshire (Fig. 1). The project structures include a gravity concrete spillway section equipped with stanchion bays, radial gates, hydraulic panels, tiedown anchors, and sluice gates, and a non-overflow section comprised of a trash sluice, fishway head works, and powerhouse.
2.2 Project Data The following project data are taken from References 1 through 4. The gross drainage area above the project is approximately 6266 square miles. The reservoir extends upstream above the project for approximately 30 miles and has a surface area of 2550 acres at El. 220.13 NGVD. For reference, elevations are given as NGVD with equivalent project datum in parentheses.
Other statistics are as follows:
Normal Maximum Reservoir Elevation Normal Operating Reservoir Elevation Normal Tailwater Elevation Usable Storage (8 feet drawdown)
Spillway -
Length - clear Crest El.
- 10 x 50 gates (4)
- 10 x 10 panels (10), flashboards 3 (bays)
- 20 x 50 gates (2)
Discharge Cap. - W.S. El. 220.13
- W.S. El. 228.13 220.13 feet 218.00 feet 184.80 feet 18,300 acre feet 542.50 feet 212.13 feet 212.13 feet 202.13 feet 83,200 cfs 127,600 cfs 2.3 Powerhouse The project powerhouse contains 10 generating units consisting of eight units rated at 2000 kw and two units rated at 4200 kw. The installed capacity is 24,400 kw. The
Ricnard Izmcf - HYDCT-OPS-002.8.2.1.pdf I - - - -1 In 61 powerhouse has an integral intake structure with intake gates, trash racks, and trash rake.
See Figs. I through 5 for location and details. An upstream trash boom protects the F
structures against floating debris.
Unit No. 8 (2 mw) was removed from service in November 1991 due to mechanical failure. This original 1909 unit and units 5, 6, and 7 are proposed to be replaced by two 14 mw units in 1997.
2.4 Trash Sluice A 7-by 9-foot trash and ice sluice abuts the left (east) side of the powerhouse and is controlled by a motor-driven drop gate, Fig. 6.
F 2-5 Spillway The project spillway is 600 feet long. See Fig. 2 for spillway configuration and details. In 1990, stanchion beams and stoplogs were installed in the spillway to replace the three bays of flashboards. The modified spillway consists of the following:
Type..
Number Height (ft)
Width (ft)
Shallow Tainter Gates 4
10.0 50.0 Hydraulic Steel Panels 10 10.0 10.0 Stanchion bays 3
10.0 50.0 Deep Tainter Gates 2
20.0 50.0 Sluice Gates 8
9.0 7.0 2.6 Vernon Neck The Vernon Project is located on a bend of the Connecticut River. Vernon Neck is a natural soil ridge that extends approximately ! mile to the east of the project spillway. See Fig. B 1 in Appendix B for additional information.
2.7 Spillway Warning Devices In 1990, spillway warning devices and signage were installed to comply with C1989 FERC order. The safety warning consists of fluorescent orange "drums" connected with cable to anchorages. Warning signs were installed upstream of the spillway cables.
2.8 Standard Operational Procedures The Vernon Project is operated as a daily cycled reservoir hydroelectric project. Flows in excess of station generation requirements are released by operating the project spillway crest control structures.
k I.
I.
Richard Emch - HYDCT-OPS--002.8..2-.1.pdf Pag i. 3. CONSTRUCTION HISTORY AND DEVELOPMENT The construction history of the Vernon project is summarized in Section III of the 1987 Quinquennial Inspection Report (5).
In 1987, concrete and riprap were installed along the spillway's east abutment to control erosion. Safety rails and related items were installed along the intake trash rake forebay area in 1988.
In 1990, stanchion beams and stoplogs were installed in the spillway to replace the three bays of flashboards, and a downstream migrant fish by-pass conduit was installed between units No. 4 and 5. See Fig. I for location of project features.
Richard Emch - HYDCT-OPS-002.8.2.1i.pdf Page 1:Wf1 4. GEOLOGY I
The geologic conditions at the Vernon project site are summarized in Section IV of the 1987 Quinquennial Inspection Report (5).
There has been no significant seismic activity at the project site since the 1987 safety
[
inspection.
-f I"
I.
I Richard Emch - HYDCT-OPS-002.8.2.1,.pdf Pagej 12!1 5. INSTRUMENTATION 5.1 Powerhouse Numerous cracks in the project powerhouse are monitored for activity by use of trammel points, and tell-tale gages.
New Avongard Calibrated Crack Monitoring gages were installed in 1980 to determine if any progressive expansion of the cracks was occurring which would warrant remedial repairs. Readings taken until 1987 indicated no significant changes or trends were discernible in the trammel points or Avongard gages other than seasonal (thermal) cyclic variations.
Avongard gage readings taken from November 26, 1988 to June 1, 1992 are presented in Figs. Al to A18, Appendix A. Readings using other devices are presented in Fig. A19, Appendix A. These data continue to show no significant changes in the crack dimensions other than seasonal temperature variations.
Water leaking through cracks in the sluice gate operator gallery has been monitored since 1984. Measurements of the total seepage are given in Figs. A20 to A21, Appendix A. A total seepage of 1-2 gallons per minute is measured when the trash sluice gate is opened, and leakage occurs in the stairway. There is negligible seepage but damp conditions exist when the trash sluice gate is in the up (closed) position.
5.2 Vernon Neck IAt five-year intervals, NEP conducts cross-section surveys at four locations on Vernon Neck. The most recent surveys were taken on June 3, 1992 (See Fig. B-1 in Appendix B).
When superimposed on surveys taken since 1924, no significant changes are indicated in the main neck section. Some continuing minor changes at the downstream toe caused by seasonal river erosion and deposition during flood flows is considered insignificant since the toe is protected by riprap. Future surveys of Vernon Neck should be conducted as part of the next quinquennial safety'inspection or following a major flood (Q>150,000 cfs).
5.3 Adequacy The current program of instrumentation and monitoring of project structures is adequate, and no new or supplemental programs are required. The original data are on file at the project office.
The crack monitoring and sluice gate operation gallery leakage monitoring programs be terminated. However, the gages should be maintained so they can be read following major floods or felt earthquakes.
l
Richard Emch-- HYDCT-OPS-002.8.2.1.Ddf
(
- 6. FIELD INSPECTION 6.1 General The project structures were inspected on May 12, 1992 by Messrs. Alton P. Davis, Jr., and William H. Walton of GEl accompanied Mr. Denton E. Nichols of the NEPSCo and Messrs.
Hugh W. Sullivan, Charles M. Harrington, and Brian R. Dame of NEP. Water surface elevations at the time of inspection were approximately as follows:
r Headwater Elevation 219.6 NGVD Tailwater Elevation 185.6 NGVD
(
An inspection checklist is included as Appendix C while inspection photographs are included in Appendix D.
In general, the various project features contain many detailed points of interest and significance relating to their current condition, such as cracks, seepage, instrumentation
[
performance, and concrete spalling. In previous inspection reports, these conditions have been discussed in detail, and, to avoid repetition, only changes or previously unreported conditions are highlighted in the following subsections.
6.2 Powerhouse and Intake The powerhouse superstructure brickwork, structural steel, and roof are in very good condition. Refer to Figs. 3, 4, 5, and 6 for powerhouse features. The gantry crane appeared in good operating condition. The El. 226.38 generator floor was in very good condition (see Photo No. 1), with only minor floor cracks.
The substructure was observed with no evidence of structural displacement or severe cracking. The unit wheel pits are in generally good condition.
Unit No. 8 turbines (triple runner style) are no longer operational; therefore, the unit is decommissioned leaving nine operational turbine generators at this project. The turbine pits appear unchanged from conditions noted in the 1982 Quinquennial Inspection Report (4).
The El. 189.13 walkway over the draft tubes was observed. The 1987 observed concrete erosion on the downstream piers at the water line was not visible due to high tailwater.
However, the piers for Units 1-4 are scheduled for concrete work before the next 5-year inspection. On the exterior wall of the tailrace gallery at Units 7 and 8, the concrete is heavily spalled with patterned cracks and efflorescence (see Photo No. 2). These conditions are surficial and have not changed since the 1987 Report. In 1991, NEP installed a new downstream migrant fish by-pass conduit between Units 4 and 5 in the old exciter unit draft tubes (see Photo No. 3).
Richard Emch - HYDCT-OPS-002.8.2.1.P_.
-+Pageq 14.I The powerhouse intake structure has been modified since the last inspection to include installation of safety rails and related items along the intake/trash rake area.
The intake/trash rake structure is in excellent condition (see Photo No. 12). The trash and ice booms are in place and observed free of debris.
The right abutment upstream and downstream training walls are in good alignment, and the earthfill behind the wall is stable with no signs of sinkholes, settlement, or erosion.
6.3 Trash Sluice The sluice was operational during the inspection (see Photo No. 4 and Fig. I for location).
The El. 226.38 deck, upstream and downstream piers are in good condition. The 1987 inspection reported a light to moderate spalled ogee, and chute and concrete erosion on the powerhouse wall below the stairs was not observable due to discharge flows.
6.4 Spillway The spillway ogees, piers, and concrete along the upstream waterline appeared to be in good condition. See Fig. 2 for spillway location and details. The spillway chutes show light to moderate spalling and erosion. There was heavier concrete erosion along the toe of the shallow tainter gate spillway chutes Nos. 3 through 6 at the tailwater line (see Photo No. 5).'
The two east deep fainter gates (Nos. I and 2) were closed. The gate, seals, mechanical
- equipment, and hoisting mechanism are in good condition. In 1990, NEP installed stanchion beams and stoplogs in the three former pin flashboard controlled spillway bays. The beams, release mechanisms, and timber boards were in good condition (see Photo No. 6). Nominal leakage was observed between the boards and at the concrete spillway contact. The six hydraulic controlled flashboard spillway bays were in closed position and showed no signs of significant leakage. The gates, seals, and mechanical equipment were in good condition (see Photo No. 7). The steel grated and plate girder spillway bridge was in good condition.
The spillway inspection tunnel and sluice gate operator gallery were observed. The two easterly gates (Nos. I and 2) have been plugged with concrete.
See Fig,- 2 for gate locations. The eight remaining gates were reported operational. The sluice gate operators appeared in good condition (see Photo No. 8).
At the west end of the sluice gate gallery is a room with storage tanks containing hydraulic fluid for operation of the gates.
The right wall of the room has a heavy buildup of efflorescence.
Seepage continues to emanate from cracks in concrete near the access stairwell from the powerhouse to the gallery. Along the downstream crown of the gallery, a lift line continues to make seepage and show efflorescence. There is a lift line on the upstream wall approximately 1 foot above the gallery floor that makes light seepage (see Photo No. 8). Seepage locations and quantity of flow have not increased since the 1987 Inspection Report.
Richard Emch - HYDOT-OPS-002.8.2.1.pdf.__
Page 15 ]
I According to NEP reports, all mechanical operated gates were operated during 1991.
Emergency power was used to operate the gates in 1991, as reported in Appendix F. An emergency gasoline driven generator provides power for the tainter gates. Standby power for the spillway tainter gates is any one of the nine operational generating units, which are capable of "black start."
The east abutment upstream and downstream spilway training walls are in good alignment.
The wall concrete is in very good condition. Since the last inspection, NEP installed new concrete (see Photo No. 9) and riprap downstream of the east spillway training wall to retard erosion.
6.5 Fish Ladder The fish ladder was not operational during this inspection. Figure 3 shows a plan of the fish ladder system. However, the structural and mechanical works appeared in good condition.
The fish ladder was placed in service in 1981 and has operated seasonally since that time.
6.6 Vernon Neck Vernon Neck is a natural soil ridge of high ground between the reservoir and the downstream river channel and forms the east abutment the reservoir and spillway. No toe seepage was emanating from the slope, and there was no evidence of upstream or downstream sloughs or wet areas. Minor erosion and deposition was noted at the toe of slope due to seasonal river flooding. The area is inspected regularly by NEP personnel and{.
no significant changes have occurred to date (see Photo No. 10). Brush control on the Neck is scheduled as a periodic basis.
6.7 Emergency Action Plan The Emergency Action Plan (EAP) is visibly posted in the control room and the Station Supeiintendent knowledgeable of its contents. The EAP was updated in September 1991.
The Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station is sited 'A-mile upstream of the Vernon powerhouse (see Photo No. 11). The EAP has provisions of evacuation in case of a declared radiological emergency condition at the Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station.
6.8 Miscellaneous Items The required summertime spillway warning control devices (i.e., floats) were being installed immediately upstream of the spillway during the inspection (see Photo No. 12) and safety signage was observed in place. These were installed based upon the FERC 1989 order.
NEP reported there are no state or federal inspection reports since the 1987 Inspection Report.
Richard Emch - HYDCT-OPS-002.8.2.1.pdf Page 16 ]
Richard Emch - HYDCT-OPS-002.8.2.1.pdf Page 16 I NEP reported there are no state or federal inspection reports since the 1987 Inspection Report.
The reservoir rim was scanned in the vicinity of the Development. There are no areas observed which appear to present a potentially hazardous condition relating to the overall safety of the development. There are no observed changes in the river channel downstream of the dam and spillway.
f"
Richard Emch - HYDCT-OPS-002.8.2.1.pdf Page 17:j Richard E~mch - HYDCT-0PS-002.8.2.1_.pdf Page17 ý 7. SPILLWAY ADEQUACY Spillway adequacy is addressed in the first four inspection reports and their supplements (I through 4) and summarized in Section VII of the 1987 Inspection Report. Conversion of the three pin flashboard spillway bays to stanchion stoplog sections does not change spilway geometry or the spilway rating curves.
Appendix E contains the spillway rating curve and the 50 percent PMF flood hydrograph for the project (2). The project spillway can pass up to 51% of the PMF at zero freeboard.
[
The flood of record in March 1936 was 185,000 cfs or 32 percent of the PMF. The estimated PMF is 567,000 cfs. At PMF. significant damage to the project powerhouse and J
spillway superstructures would result due to overtopping flows.
F
I I~r~h~,rd I~mr 4,
LJVfl('Tf'~DO rrn
'~.4 rage I
- ~* '.~
~
I -
II I L/'.J I
~JI ~
I UUI I-L J_
I. 8. STRUCTURAL STABILITY 8.1 Visual Observations As noted in Section 6, the project structures continue to be well maintained and are in very good condition with no significant deterioration or structural distress observed.
8.2 Analysis The results of analyses on project structures for various loading cases are summarized in Appendix G. The change from pin flashboards to stanchion stoplogs for three spillway bays does not alter the structural adequacy of the piers and spillway ogee. For convenience, the stability analysis summary from the 1987 Inspection Report is included as Appendix G herein.
"8.3 Evaluation.
From the results of the analyses summarized in Appendix G, GEI concludes that the project structures meet stability guidelines for loading conditions up to zero freeboard flood using procedures, formulations, and criteria currently accepted by FERC. Although the structures meet stability guidelines for the PMF, the spillway structures would become submerged weirs and there would be substantial damage to the powerhouse and spillway superstructures.
Richard Emch -
0HYDCTPS-002.8.21 Pa 9. ADEQUACY OF OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE Operation and maintenance methods at the project are well planned and executed. The condition of all facilities is of a high order.
There are no observations made during this inspection requiring any emergency actions or repairs.
On October 1, 1991, Aqua Tech, Inc. conducted an underwater survey of the spillway sluice I
gate chambers. Aqua Tech, Inc. reported some minor erosion downstream of the sluice gate guides due to cavitation.
No action is required at this time. *The concrete plugs in abandoned sluice gates No. I and 2 (Fig. 2) were reported to be in good condition.
I 1
(7 I-
Richard Emch.- HYDCT:OPS-002.82.1.pdf I..
page 20J 10. CONCLUSIONS Based on this inspection, the results of monitoring programs, and review of prior inspection reports, GEI concludes the project structures do not require any emergency remedial work at this time.
The project structures meet stability guidelines for loading conditions up to the zero freeboard flood using procedures, formulations, and criteria currently accepted by FERC.
The spillway is adequate to pass approximately 51 percent of the PMF at zero freeboard.
The flood of record in March 1936 equaled 32 percent of the PMF. At PMF, the project will experience overtopping flows up to 18 feet above the top of the spillway piers. Heavy damage to the project structures is likely at PMF.
Project instrumentation consists of numerous crack monitoring gages in the powerhouse.
This program has shown no significant movements in crack widths to date except for seasonal (thermal) cycles. In our opinion, this program may be terminated. However, the gages should be retained to permit reading after high flood flows or felt earthquakes. No additional instrumentation is required at this time.
The Vernon Neck surveys show no significant changes in the cross section of the neck.
These surveys should continue on a 5-year basis and after major floods exceeding 150,000 cfs.
Project-maintenance is very good. Surveillance and operational procedures are adequate.
The EAP was posted in the control room and was updated in September 1991. Plant personnel receive an annual EAP training program. The plan includes a Radiological Response plan for the Vernon Nuclear Plant 'A mile upstream. There are no changes in the downstream channel.
The spillway gates are operable and were used during the April 1992 spring freshet.
Standby power is provided by any one of the nine operational generating units. The eight spillway sluice gates are operable. An emergency generator provides power te operate the
- tainter gates.
The spillway toe erosion previously observed downstream of the sluice gate and tainter gate sections is of less concern since the spillway has been modified and post-tensioned to bedrock. This area should be inspected after major floods and at 5-year intervals to detect any changes that might warrant future remedial work. Concrete repair work is scheduled to repair the tailrace piers in the draft tube area.
NEP has compiled with all recommendations from prior inspection reports for the Vernon Project.
Richard, Emch - HYDCT-OPS-002.8.2.1.d Richrd rnc-HDCTOPS-02..2..pf
_Page,ýIj 11. RECOMMENDATIONS Based on the information available from prior inspection reports and the observations and analyses made during this inspection, we conclude no emergency remedial actions are required for this project at this time.
Based on the visual inspection reported herein and review of past inspection reports, we have the following recommendations for the Vernon Project:
Evaluate the surficial concrete erosion downstream of the right tainter gate Nos. 3 through 6, sluice gates, draft tube piers at Units* 1 through 4, and schedule for repair.
Routinely clear the tree and brush growth on Vernon neck to permit annual inspection of the upstream and downstream slopes.
Maintain and read the powerhouse and spillway inspection gallery crack monitoring devices after major floods or felt earthquakes.
tF
[
I.
(
I I,
Richard Emch - HYDCT-0PS-002.8.2.1.pdf Page 22
[ r
- 12. CERTIFICATION This report covers our inspection of the project carried out in accordance with Part 12 of FERC Order No. 122. The project inspection and preparation of this report was done under the direction of the undersigned. The assistance of NEP project staff in conducting the inspection and assembling project data is gratefully acknowledged.
We certify all work performed in connection with the inspection and investigation of this project and preparation of this report has been done in compliance with Part 12 of FERC Order No. 122 dated March 1, 1981. All conclusions and recommendations in this report I
are made independently of the licensee, its employees, and its representatives as required by paragraph 12.37(c)(7) of that order.
Respectfully submitted, GEI CONSULTANTS, INC.
Alton P. Davis Jr., P.E.
Vice President Design Division Manager
Richard Emch - HYDCT-OPS-002.8.2.1.pdf Page 23.
REFERENCES I.
Main, Chas T., "Inspection Report of the New England Power Company Vernon I
Project, FPC Project No. 1904," November 1967.
- 2.
Main, Chas T.. "Inspection Report of the New England Power Company Vernon Project," FPC Project No. 1904," November 1972.
- 3.
Main, Chas T., "Inspection Report of the New England Power Company Vernon Project, FPC Project No. 1904," November 1977.
- 4.
Main, Chas T., "Fourth Five Year Safety Inspection of the New England Power Company Vernon Project, FERC Project No. 1904," November 1982.
- 5.
Geotechnical Engineers, Inc., "Fifth Quinquennial Safety Inspection, Vernon Project, FERC Project No. 1904," October 30, 1987.
u f,
- ".I
71 ~
zLrzt-m m
3 0
iT, 90 CL fl/i J
, Is s"-'fhd Aý
,~.
i.A -
A Aý*n IA. IWO ArW ENGMND foffff CWA1NIYV
I 2
PLAMGIM&,,h n-srcSio-C-,
5tTIA I*
SP4LLWAow ctemf 0A
.tTO FG R 1904-88
/1-4237
0.=r C,
0 0
C/)
N) b3
SI rip -N
~J'
-,~ ~ ~~
A AeA, thh1.
10 A'(W FN'6L4ND POW(.' COMRAM1 OAfl
-0~ Of NE1W MC8AND POWER CCOMP,
- VERNON1 PROJIc1 NO. iqo SfCtiOI OIL POW(INsOUSt U11TI FIGURE 4
.0 CL 0
C,3
'o 0n H-'2.31S
CL m
16 0
6 C)
Richard Emch - HYDCT-OPS-002.8.2.1.pdf Fi I..
I.
.. page 301 APPENDIX A Instrumentation I
Richard EmCh--HYDCT-0PS-002.8.2.1.pdf Page31 11 Richard Emch - HYDCT-OPS-002.8.2.1.pdf Page 31 II F.
APPENDIX A LIST OF FIGURES Figure AloA18 A19 A20-A21 Title Avongard Gage Readings Trammel Point, Feeler Gage and Tell-Tale Gage Readings Sluice Gate Operator Gallery Seepage Measurements
I Ri(*haird Emch -HYDCT-OPS-002.8.22A.pdf
_Page_32!1I Richard Emch - HYDCT-OPS-002.8.2.1.~df Page 32 II I-.
f.
I..
I:
LAv ngard AVONGARD CALIBRATED CRACK MONITOR CRACK PROGRESS SHEET Project: \\/- :J7'.J Location Of Monitor 7,
¶~fA-
@3~)Y.-wt Zp Indicate on the diagrams below the "Monitor" movement at each reading:
20m "1.0 2_
"10 Date of Reading:
C A'--.-%.
~!i~iW~ir I
ll 11Tr JillrwjnI!*
2=n l 10 10 7n 10 20 10Mg IM.. I A
10 n
~-~-
U I
m 3-Date of Reading:
7-at,-ff I---77717-I Date of Reading:
"-I-'70 F3 T111.
10 10O 10 10 10 Date of Reading:
47-I-
.[
I 4V XS Jl l l~ ill! 1,,11
, i li i i.,ll 1 1
-I I, 1 I Date of Reading:
j illll~~llIl~ll m
Date of Reading:
FIGURE Al
[Richard Emch - HYDCT-OPS-002.8.2.1.pdf Paae 3311
[_Richard Errch - HYDCT-OPS-O02.8.2.1.pdf Paae 33*1
-,= -.
7 *...
.TT -
r"...
.. i... ' = *. '*-' ', ---',......,r"....a-e-3 3-1.1*
AVONGARD CALIBRATED CRACK MONITOR CRACK PROGRESS SHEET Project:
Vij'tnoi..
Location of Monitor lay o
i IOg "
Indicate on the diagrams below the "Monitor" movement at each reading:
20m 10 10 20 Date ofI ReaIII gII I1f2-Daeof Reading:
o'*-o,-q2-Date of Reading:
Date of Reading:
- lllllll lainl IIII111,,1 I
2fkM 10 I 1°111 1 l1 11 1 111 __
0 10 0
10 L
1
,I fll 11 11 1 1, Date of Reading:
Date of Reading:
Date of Reading:
rm i m imi 0
10 03Mn 0
I 10 Date of Reading:
Date of Reading:
FIGURE A2 Avongard ProdJuCtS USA 2836 Osage Waukegan. Illinois 60087
1* Richard Emch - HYDCT-OPS-002.8.2..pdf Page 34 ]
I Richard Emch - HYDCT-OPS-002.8.2.1.pdf Page 34]
I r
FR Avpn~ga AVONGARD CALIBRATED CRACK MONITOR CRACK PROGRESS SHEET Project:
r t Location of-Monitor c)..
B1c Indicate on the diagrams below the "Monitor" movement at each reading:
20rmn 10 01 20ori 16 01
.10 20
_tIL --
Date of Reading:
h
.I "*
Ir /-"t.
- 1.
'4-,.*,.*
10M. 4+11!I2I2J2II 1I 10 2?
F.
10 Ii i"
ON.
I i..
.I "n
I Date of Reading:
1 Date of Reading:
Nt* 111" 11
-IIi I II
[, !
10 Date of Reading:
eL.,r 4;,^WC Date of Reading:
I/--;z.2--91 Date of Reading:
1211 0
10 iI Z
I- -
t I-I-I-i *t-1* t-,~
=
I -
I, 1 ;11 1,..
- 1.r 11111111112
-0 10 Date of Reading:
I Date of Reading:
FIGURE A3
Richard Emch - HYDCT-OPS-002.8.2.1.pdf P
AVONGARD CAUBRATED CRACK MONITOR CRACK PROGRESS sHEET Project:
vtIirIcf-Location of Monitor 6e.--
-'(
Indicate on the diagrams below the "Monitor" movement at each reading:
20ffm 10 in I n
', n Ai Date of Reading: C. q.7 11 IM o'*'
11U I II" 1""
1111 if Date of Reading:
IIIIIIJil IIIIIIIII1ll It L*
lill I I I I I 0
10 0
l l l
Ir IIIIIIl l Date of Reading:
10 01Mm IIIIIIIII llllllIll I11".
0 10 DIM Date of Reading:
1a[
llf *l-m T[B I J
0 10 Date of Reading:
Date of Reading; Avongard ProductsUSA 2836 Osage Waukegan. Illinois 6 *-7
- FIG UR E A,4
ý Richard Emch - HYDCT-OPS-002.8.2.1.Ddf Page 36 ýl Rioh~rd Emch - HYDCT-OPS-002.8.2.1.odf l-'age ;ibl F
i..
AVONGARD CALIPRATED CRACK MONITOR CR.ACK PROGRESS SHEET F =H Project:
V Tr2' tJ,."
Av ngard Location i-.
Eer tu2(:Jq!-
i J
(
I Indicate on the diagrams below the "Monitor" movement at ezch reading:
-1; 5"-- ý-A
- kS -M* FA.,
.,P,-
Er
,J
.-J4tzeep "Or Fic.coT ZjzJ
ýV 20ram
- 10 10 r-V.# 20 l,20rm 10 l
l It.N. Hit II IHl HII H IIIIH H low 11 M
'I HI HI in gn 1ll t
T ti 44
.-.i-~-II II I~LII~
I I 0
10
~TT1~I
ý-. ilh 1111111111111 11'fl.1111 111111[ 1111 it.--
Date of Reading.:
I I l"
I
-L ------------ =A-11 Date of Reading:
ý, II 111 1111111111111 10 leon Dal' Rof eading:
PC-9
- t Date of Reading:
q-J-- (l I
of i
Date of Reading:
TII i
i I I i
Date of Reading:
5--I-O U
10 I
U
.1 it.. 4Jc~
10 Date of Reading:
I It11 11 I fII FIGURE A Date of Reading:
- I I I -%- Cit 5
micnara -mcn - HYDCT-OPS-002.8.2.1.pdf Page37 AVONGARD CALIBRATED CRACK MONITOR CRACK PROGRESS SHEET Project:
Výefn.r'..
Location U fl"l
" o p of Monitor t
Indicate on the diagrams below the "Monitor" movement at each reading:
20m 10 10 20 2CkM m 0
0 in 10 Date of Reading:
oI0 -o,-q*..
I 1 U Iill IlllIlfll I1__#
Date of Reading:
Date of Reading:
_11 I I I LU IIII-I 111 11
~!IIThI~22IWIZ2122]222JLL~
0 I
liiiI liiiI
II~
Ilil 10 IIII11*1*
IIII1*
I I
I Date of Reading:
0 10 0
Date of Reading:
W1 LL W
llll Ill Date of Reading:
iti:lf I!!1111111:11 fi, Ill p l 1 q1*__
- rfrnlm~f
'Si F.
10 ii 0
i 10 Date of Reading:
Date of Reading:
Avongardl Prodlucts USA
- 2836 Osage v
Waukegan, Illinois 60087
- FIGURE A6
IRichard Ench - HYDCT-OPS-002.8.2:Ipf.1...*ot R
c r.....
dPage 38]
F AVONGARD CALISRATED CRACK MONITOR CRACK PROGRESS SHEET Project:
V:170.I ?.t.
Location of Monitr L
_1_
Indicate on the diagrams below the "Monitor" movement at each reading:
20m"-10 10 10 20 20=
1 10 20 1=-11 Jil 11! 1(
,=.-I!.
+H-Lý.
0 Date of Reading:
0
~I~~iI 1111111111111 Jil I' 1
ITI. II~
10 Date of Readino:
at " I
Po i
- /-
I =
= -
i -4 i
-A I
r DaItIof R iI
- Date of Reading: 1 7'-$-
0 10 I =1 Date of Reading:
II-.----9!
1111111 Jill~
Date of Reading:
PH
'11
. -4
- 4 ;,;;r4 I
I Date of Reading:
l--
0 711E
- 4VK iiar §Jr 0
10 0
10
'7~IIiIIIIiJjjj liii 11111 H1111liit 119.
Date of Reading:
Date of Reading:
FIGURE A7
Richard Emch -RHYDCT -OPS 002.8.2.1.pdf Page 39 -i Richard Emch - HYDCT-OPS-002.8.2.1.pdf Pa~ie 39]
AVONGARD CAULBRATED CRACK MONITOR CRACK PROGRESS SHEET Project:
Tf-r McAw,,
Location of M onitor
-I Indicate on the diagrams below the "Monitor" movement at each reading:
20MT 10 0
0 20 fT TFfFF #
TW L[' wii iiuwmuu]l',]',,l!l Date of Reading:
o
-o,-o'-q;
_* i iJ~
lill~lll~l*JllJ 11l[l Date of Reading:
- 11 Jil '"'r"""i'"
Date of Reading:
£Y_2I Alnfll T
in A
in
~fl Q
0 10 1111i* J ill/
Date of Reading:
IJJi l Ull Jll Jill WIl1 0
10 Date of Reading:
0 10 1rmm 0
__I T rnrrni ltnIII 111 iII 111 1 ____
II 611II1111111 11l 11 lU I IL III I1III 10 Date of Reading:
Date of Reading:
Avongard Proaucts USA FIGURE A8 2836 Osage Waukegan. I llinois60087*
I
I.Richard Emch - HYDCDT-OPS-OO2.8.2.1.pdf
_Page 40 1.1 Richard Emch
- HYDCT-OPS-002.8.2.1.pdf Page 40 AVONGARD CALIBRATED CRACK MONITOR CRACK PROGRESS SHEET F-3 1 Project:_______________
Avlngard Location 7
of Moan it.or
_=
T_,_
Indicate on the diagrams below the "Monitor" movement at each reading:
6:
- 0J 20mn 10 10 20 207' 10 10 20 II I
-- " T,,,,
-M ýi i
I I
ilZ 10cm.
-0 10 Date of Reading:
11jlii11111 liili ipilil 11Jil11111.tIIi
~. -
U Date of Reading:
10 1lrx M
.__--. I I*
Date of Reading:
- 2-/
-iI *I=
Date of Reading:
I q -
-i I I: I I I-
",l,,,,1,,111,Ji ll, 1,,l1,I111 Date of Reading:
-I1M L-I~.
I 1. 11 fl...........
T I Date of Reading:
5"- 1 L1+/-
I@:11I-S 10 0n 0
10 Date of Reading:
FIGURE Date of Reading:
11-CA-Clb A9
Richard Emch - HYDCT-OPS-002.8.2.1.pdf
-Page 41 AVONGARD CALIBRATED CRACK MONITOR CRACK( PROGRESS SHEET Project:
vre Avdingard Location IJI of Monitor (k-
/ck.
~-~
I Indicate on the diagrams below the "Monitor" movement at each reading:
L 20mm 10 TmimTIT9Im]10 FF 20 111l4 2cmn in n
Date o f Reading Date of Reading:
Date of Reading:
t 11 )IIII IIJ ll 1111 I I l 1 __
+,,,,,,
~ I,,,,
i i,.,,,,
,,, lilt, III 10 20 iN
-0 10 0
10 lQTm 0
10 Date of Reading:
- _ 11 1l l i t111 11 11111 III i
ltIII Date of Reading:
Date of Reading:
UIII LliltLL m l ii 1
Date of Reading:
I
[
I.
[
ii 0
0 10 Date of Reading:
AvongardProcuctsUSA 9
2B36Osage Waukegan. Illinois60087 FIGURE A10
uL LI',-rV n ~c-nnV: Q' 0 nrif
_ __iPage42j I1Ic;icarr[U
.lull I 1 LJ.J I -
U[-I o
Averngard AVONGARD CALISRATED CRACK MONITOR CRACK PROGREES SHE=T Project:
- ,Z ;." "
LocationitLr of Monio I.
Indicate on the diagrams below the "Monitor" movement at each reading:
I 0
20n'n 10 10 20 2(Or,,
1(3 a
IN
- 'a 107 1
2
.1, l1l ill I, l lII I
Ji ll ',,111
,,1111 l*_
~II_
lIi!I~
Date of Reading: IC,-,
10 1 Et n,i Date of Reading:
I' ;-rf Date of Reading:
5; 0
- ,,IjN~~IUllll lll~,ii l,
-I I 1H: ":i!
=H-lII an Date of Reading:
10
-iIii,l Iuiiu Date of Reading:
l! I___ I I-Date of Reading:
- 2 ý-II-2,*.
Dat I iolf eadingl Illi Date of Reading: I i
-1.1 I!::: I I-
-0 10 S
1 10 Dae of RdIII I 1 IGUR Date of Reading:
FIGURE All
An A I Rirklhrd Fmch - HYDCT-OPS-002.8.2.1.Ddf rage4.3ii AVONGARD CALIBRATED CRACK MONITOR CRACK PROGRESS SHEET E/
Project:
Av g
- ,o yo.
FAvd~higaard Locaton Fkr Indicate on the diagrams below the "Monitor" movement at each reading:
20nmm 10 1
10 20 Date of Reading: 'v6-oz-q,7 Date of Reading:
,,,,III"uiiI,,,,,i,,,i, Date of Reading:
Date of Reading:
'r~mii IA A
10
?n 10 0
10 Mrn 0
10 Date of Reading:
Date of Reading:
Date of Reading:
i bI ci'f i
d ZI T 111i 1i1--
L II
[
t
[
[
I I.
0 10 Date of Reading:
tuti1 I -
Avongard:ProductsUSA 2836Osage Waukegan.linois 60087.
FIGURE A12
Richard'Emoh - HYDCT-OPS-00 28.2.1.Pdf PageA44 AVONGARD CALI-RATED CRACK MONITOR CRACK PROGRESS SHEET Project:
Location
'.ý(*,,.
I=
-*.(
of Monitor *-*t' Indicate on the diagrams below the "Monitor" movement at each re-ding:
Ino
- I In nI ni i in go
- O3-n 10 10 p0 Date of Reading:
I l It -
r*
' '... =*c,
I,
0 10 n
Li I I Date of Reading:
"---,*/
- tll~ll~llllll ll I=
ll~ll ll]i
- I~ I* - II 11111 n 1
_i~
Date of Reading:
- 5-
-?
10 0
10 owl"l'*l,.
10 aJ~ll'l~llll II......
I I*
Date of Reading:
I
-7TH 11 1 1111iff l t Date of Reading:
I/
Date of Reading:
u f[iFllI 1111 0
0 10 D,
,aI F IGURE Date of Rea~ding:
FIGURE Date of Reading:
J II-c -it, A13
rz 1 Livr-Ar'r rDQ MO' Q 1) 1 ntlf IJ rflicUI dI EIIU C
- r-
./~ V
-'J
- --~.'.
AVONGARD CALIBRATED CRACK MONITOR CRACK PROGRESS SHEET zl Project:v-a L*,
AEvvdhgard Location of Monitor 4-JL ue'~
- R t
- D(,j 7b
~~j~TA rocu-c:.
Indicate on the diagrams below the "Monitor" movement at each reading:
20Mn 10 0
I0 20
- l Jll Ji ll Jill:
1 1111 1111111 it*
Date of Reading:
6 O-o
-q,7, Date of Reading:
Jill l l l l~ ll I!1111111 1
1111 1 Date of Reading:
- t1,,ill
,,l1rl Jll 1111Jll llýJiJ zL
-I I.
I*
Date of Reading:
Avongard Products USA 28360sage 2rimi in n
in.
20 lom 10 10rm 0
10 Date of Reading:
Date of Reading:
Date of Reading:
[11 mill Jl willl Hmu Date of Reading:
E F.
[
F I
I I[
I 0
10 L
0 10 Waukegan. Illinois60087 FIGURE A14
Richard Emch - HYDCT-OPS-002.8. 2.l.pdf Avongard AVONGA.D CALIBRATED CRACK MONITOR CRACK PROGRESS SHEET ProjEc::
\\ /I _PIJ Location 4* 1`3016~ LMri Indicate on the diacgams belcw the "Monitor" movement at each reading:
F_.ST iSET Cd z-'.
2rm 14 9 C -#rj wAy.1).6
.10 20
- 10cr~
A I
20M 10 0
10 20 I IhTT:::
I I
- ,illIII ll!!!4lIH~l i
i U
I 1 14 V
D-t-of Reading:
,3-f
_Hate1 oI Date of Reading:
I**
"F8
.=.ll-ll I
.l llli l li !
10
- b ~~tHi,,I i1i1H,,!'ll-,,, il i*
0 10 Date of Raadirxc:
I "Z-/'-?"7.
.ip I
Date of Re-ading:
I*
F. -c.n, 0
R5M..I I
I U-I*
l°.
Njlll lil
,,,,,,,I,,
U 10 i
i I~,'
1 ill'llll II I i i ll i Illillll -
ý,
.1 1
1 11 1
1 1,11 1
1 1
Date of Reding:
I
-FI
ý
ýt 1
A15 Date of Reading:
II ~9t~
ate ofi lil
- iIii Date of Reading:
FIGURE
rDl~l:;kI k
l
- JV
-re 4..nP A.9 A 9 1 nr.f Page 47.]
rlicul U LII'm,
1f~'.*~-*-
f.
o.
AVONGARD CALIBRATED CRACK MONITOR CRACK PROGRESS SHEET Project:
varror,.
Location of Monitor itb.-"
6
\\\\./-N 2
m3 FI Indicate on the diagrams below the "Monitor" movement at each reading:
20mn 10 b0 20 J~mT11Tm((
JilTlr 1_1 Date of Reading:
t" O-ox-qa.
- 11_
111 1
, III I II II IIIIII IIII II#
M III ((11 ((
q Dae!!IIIIII Io!ed11i Date of Reading:
_* *llml ltPIT IT llllllll _
Date of Reading:
lOm 0
10 lam 0
10 0
10 20rnm 1 0 0
10 20 AMUM I I-I Date of Reading:
Date of Reading:
__ LU LU]
I III IIII WIII__.
Date of Reading:
Date of Reading:
L
[
[
F I
r L
"1 0
Date of Reading: II 111111111 I,, Id =a 10 Avongard ProductS USA 2836Osage Waukegan, Illinois60087 FIGURE A16
I Jor~dEmch -o HYDCT-OPS-OO2:.8:2.1..pdf R ichard..E...h......................
.Page 48 1 AVONGARD CALI-RAT-D C=.ACK MONITOR CRACK PROGRESS S-HET I,.
"i Pr3ject:
- 'Ar 0,c0 0, Location
-G - f"
,-zL of Monitor
'-77-,(z'-t
-TVh/
Indic--te on the diagrams be!ovw the "Monitor" movement at each reading:
. j 20-,m
" 10 10 20 2C r.
10 oI l n0 n
~iiii~~
~iII777.iI 0
i KIZ:EVVV~K j~l J**~*il I 111 111.I'
- i. 1*1!
t:
sf Ra d in :
1 n,
D -t-of R_-adinc:
I.
- r-1?
I 1:111 I
Io Date of Reading:
I II; i.
C W1--I,
, 11 L _!
I I~Li I~
10 Dz!t of Reading:
It-CS-o nll 1 -..
I'
= I I rrL=i I
,,D,,at1e11 of l,,,i,
P ;
Date of Reading:
7-10 r=.~'.LL~L.IL.L.+/-!i.I~'
1111111 IIhI tII Date of Reading:i
- 7 7 111 IIII III*1 I I III !
I I~::::.:II H
~i i-~I U
10
-FI GURE I,
A17 1
I D--t'e o-F Readinc:
.*I -qo" D-te of Readino:
I 1-;2a-91 "
I
~ ~ ~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
I I'll L
t,~rrrroAr,0'1.-H
~
AQ 0
- 1) 0 0 1 Af
- II t~ 1 j naro m hn - H Lw I,I Lr O -U vJ.u.
.I 4 Y i--
AVONGARD CALIBRATED CRACK MONITOR CRACK PROGRESS S-EET
[
Project:
I Location of Monitor Ouwir SN.,;CM, k0
._/O I-I..
[
Indicate on the diagrams below the "Monitor" movement at each reading:
7nr(y in 1 n 2
9n in n
in f
Ill LU 20ffm 1 0
¶r1uq
---i-A
,J:
llll)!
J Dat o R[ading:
Date of Reading:
Date of Reading:
at of Re IIaIIdin 10 0
10 M d li I I I I II[ I I (I i I I I I III II Date of Reading:
__IM I-v Date of Reading:
Dat of Rea!Ing i
- I F.
F F
I I
i
[
V 10 I
0 10 Date of Reading:
Date of Reading:
FIGURE A18 I ";
Avongard Products USA 2836 Oage Waukegan. Illinois 60087
~rta-rD MO O
A(V 0
1 r~if Page 50j1 rucriard Emch - H i To
-rOm MCfUMMNUUM CO-PAN OR
. QCATIO" C OkflV 0,. t.OCAT6O.
File Subject VERNO STATION CACKS CION
'l-189 Gallery Elevation
'05.5, East side entrance METHIOD OF CHECKING
. C ITICN FOUND, EPANSION ON CE*
ItO r-MAI*E, r4pfvJLreb ro o.
ic.('
fran 4
4.
'2 - 189 Gallery Elevation
.89.0, near #7 discharge in "tailrace.
p,,L To
,ni I
- 3 - 205 Gallery on South wall xtween#1 and #2 units Tram
!4 -- Bus R= South wall..between Emv-.
r 0.oxt."-
Aid and new buildings ( gauge inLevel & feelers
)ffice closet )
Tr. m & "" mike...
___I_.._
15
-Generator roan #1 Trans bay Southern wall
-Fast of window Vanguard Tell-Tale Gauge
,6 - Generator Rcxn, East wall
)elow window Vanguard Tell-Tale Gauge P7 - Generator room, Worth wall Vanguard" Tell-Tale iear East window Gatue A
IS - Split between old and new M+/-ilding, South wall above tail Vanguard Tell-Tale
-ace Gauge L
s/U-UN
-M W U104CrJ., OVCI. M AIK S-M t
1 i-L To':ýf "IA 'Gc;A-D-T'hu.-*ALE?
GA~UG5 27 ii FIGURE A19
SRichard Emch - HYDCT-OPS-002.8.2.1.pdf Page 51 APPENDIX B Vernon Neck Cross-Section Surveys 0
KW4 4*0 ZT=
M 00f11 Wie 4
FIGURE B-S H- ?.-54-,J
I Richard Emch - HYDCT-OPS-002.8.2.1.pdf Page 53 ý1 I Richard Emch - HYDCT-OPS-002.8.2.1.pdf Page 53j APPENDIX C Inspection Checklist May 12, 1992 4"
I ~.
Riuchard Lrncn - HYUU I-UlS-'0-2.8.2.1.pdt P~qricn '!A~
Inventory No.
7Stg 1-04 Sheet.
I f-VISUAL INSPECTION CFECKLIST I.
2.
3.
5.
Name of Dam:
\\evi Inventory No.:
- 7EV_.
t_.P
.9o 4 Fazard Category:
1*.k Si:e Classification:
Owmner:
Z* **,-*L
':-Ve
- v*-~o~d'1,AA (2> 5B 2 6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
Date Inspected:
A 1*C-Pool Elevation:
2_cj.(.
Tailwater Elevation:
Purpose of Dam: W kp&JCA Weather:
0, Directiens:
Mark an -X-in the "YES-or "NO-column.
If item does not apply, vrite 'N/A-in
-- %AEMJ*S" column.
Use "0:her Commen:s-space to amplify "RLXAP.-S.
I%
MEM YES NO REMARKS
.R=S1RV O--<-
IN' I.
A-.v U--s:r.eam Develovment?
N11 -
inventor-No.: -V.\\jZE
- 2. 1Any Uvstream lr.Doundments?
IzabaZ-.£ r
v~o -
=iVC 1~55S
- 3. Shoreline Slide _otential?
- 4. Simi*_1ean: Sedi=en:za:on?,
S. Any Trash Boo=?
- 6. Any Ice Boom?
- 7.
Oaerz:'.n,-roeedc're Chanres?
"-a" DSc.'.;-L*1 CIL-1
- a. Lroding cr Zakc~ing?
-'--]L.-j-
£Y4.J Na A
- c. 0*:St:-"jct 1ns ?
d - Bridging ?,
2.
D O,:S -R -A.9 *tO 0_
- a.
Occunied Hous.mr?
._Recreation Areas?
7><
'F_
- d. Changed _
F:ard_-oten-zial?
- e.
New Develovme=:?
I.
Are there
- a. Plezometers?
I_
- b. _ eirs?
- c. Settlement _Pns?
- d.
Observation "ells?
- e. 0:her?
C
,1-
.1 e
t A'
- 2.
Are reedines
- a. AvaIlable?
- b.
Plotted?
- c. _aken _Period!caly?
{*GECOTrrICA.L r.-*oz,-ERs IN:C.
Richard Emch - HYDCT-OPS-002.8.2.1.pdf Pane 55S Invontery No.-I(C P(v30. 1 t 0'4 Shoot 2..
f 4
F I
7' "1
V V--~'~
ITEM YES NOREAK
- a. Trash Racks?
- b. Trash Rake?
.A
- c. Miechanical Soui-iDent QOerable?
- d. 1Thtale Gazes?
- e. Ate R2cks and Cates Mpintained?________________
- f. A~re Cate Overators Ooerable?
- 2. CONCR=r SR7RACTES
- a. Amv Crackint?I V. Amv Deterioratibrn?
- c. -rosion?
er lWxto d._?x"osedRe~nftreetent?________________
e._AxejointsDist1aced?________________
f.- Ar~e Joints 'Leakine?
- 3.
CO?C-R=':r ECO,0DL'7S________________
a.- Am" Crackintr?
~~CA
-b. A.=- Detericratien?
- c. T.rosictt?
- e. sxooeed 'Reimcreeent?
- f.
A~re JoInts.eakinz?
H UEM CO1NDU-ITS
____r~
(3-114
- a. is M'e:?, Corroded?
- b. :s Conduit Cracked?_________________
- c. Atre Joints Dis-ilaced?
- d. Aej.'nts Leaking?
?
b.-e Comments:l I.,
F..
.° 5
J I
J
.1 SECOTECHNICAL 1NICINER.S INC.
0
-* -Is-Sg.J5Cts
IRichard Emch - HYDCT-OPS-002.8.2.1.pdf Page 5611 r
Ifl',lory No.
VFE(L-c lcloL Sheet
-3 of
-4
°*!
i
-I i
-j
-I
.1
.4j ITEM YES NO REMARKS SILVAS YPE? 4
~Y'rgh-a.
Anv Settlements?
%s v
-^%%c~~1-.~I~~
- d. niv Djeterioration?
AA; M~A t
A-.r k
- e.
r-n cate Re 4 ntarenent___________________
- b.
l
~
Gat" uz4ntalre r-A t...-
N.gl7Rln
-4
_____k G,!
!'?I:
W/4 (t_
Apl--kc Other Comme nts:
.1 I
II CEOTECHNICAL rESCINEERS INC.
W4c.4syl
-- ssC..UýslVs
Richard Emch - HYDCT-OPS-002.8.2.1.pdf 0-Pa 0e71 VF-P-MOO PAMJ Sc.r Invenory
- o.
C
~1
-I
-I ITEM YES NO REMARKS
-LOW LEVEL OUTLET ME?~
9.~c ~c.
- 1. GATES
- a. 4echanical Ecuip~ent Operable?
b._AreCatesRe~otelyControlled?_________________
c._AreCatesMainrained?____________________
- 2. COiNcREz-COhMUI=S
- a. kiv Crackini:?
d AC LOAA10
- b. Any Deterioratien?___________________
- c. Erosion?
t-&
- d. Exvosed Reinforcinc?
- e. Are Joints DisDiaced?
- f. Are Joinats Leakinr?
~'
- 3. ýC-TL COhrDUI-.S It. is Metal-Corrodee?
"NrVA C\\p:<-
- b. is Coniduit-Cracked?
.e. A-eJo~.n-s Dist)laeed?
- d. Are Joints Leaking?
T*?)ýT*CV DISETVLTO!.S
- b. t' COlc-C, Tyoe e-Otp g.~
- a. Creakare 7
Othet Comments:
CEOTECHNICAL rNOINEERS INC.
Richard Emch - HYDCT-OPS-002.8.2.1,.pdý Page(58 I Richard Emch - HYDCT-OPS-002.8.?.1.pdf Page 581 APPENDIX D Inspection Photographs May 12, 1992 i
Page 59l I ich-It Emrh - HYDCfT-OlPS-00%2 821ndf lae5 I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
Photo No. 1 Vernon Project Powerhouse Gener-ator Hall Photo No. 2 Vernon Project Concrete Spaling in Tailrace Gallery
Richard Emch_- HYDCT-OPS-002.8.2.1.pdf Page.6Oi I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
1 I
I I
a Photo No. 3 Vernon Project El. 189.13 Power-house Tailrace Gallery - Note:
Migrant Conduit Photo No. 4 Vernon Project Operational Trash Sluice Flow Down-stream
Richard Emch - HYDCT-OPS-002.8.2.1.pdf, Page 61 )1 R~hard Emch HYDCT-OPS-002.8.2.1.pdf Page 611 1
I I
I I'
I I
1 I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I Photo No. 5 Vernon Project Typical Concrete Erosion at Bottom of Ogee (Nos. 3 to 6)
Photo No. 6 Vernon Project New Stanchion Stoplog SpiIlway Bay
-~
.1I P~hr f--th - WYDCfT-OlPS-002 8 21 nd Page 62 l Photo No. 7 Vernon Project Westerly Tainter Gate Spillway Bay Photo No. 8 Vernon Project SIk Gate pm-ar in Inspeclicw Gallery Note: Seepage from Lift Joint
1,.Ric'hard Em'ch - HYDCT-OPS-002.8.2.1.pqf_
Rihr_..
fPage63]I Photo No. 9 Vernon Project New Conxe at Left Downstream Spill-way Training Wall Photo No. 10 Vernon Project Downstream Slope of "Vernon Neck" I
I I
I
r~
I
,r7aq6_qL+-!]
6i hairllr Emrh - HYDCT-OPS-009.8.2.1 nDfif~
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
U I
U I
Photo No. 11 Vernon Project View Upstream of Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station Photo No. 12 Vernon Project Spillway Warning Devices and Intake Structure/Forebay
I Richard Emch - HYDCT-OPS-002.8.2.1.pdf Page 65 ;i I Richard Emch - HYDCT-OPS-002.8.2.1.pdf Page 65 1 FL I.
I.
II APPENDIX E Spillway Rating Curve Source: Chas. T. Main, Inc., "Inspection Report of the New England Power Company Wilder Project," November 1972.
I l
e
. 19
[_ýicýiýrcýEmch - HYDCT-OPS-002.8.2.1.gqf Richrd Ench-HYDC-OPS002..2.1pdfPagE 67 i Ii F.
I.
I.
APPENDIX F Spillway Gate Operation Report I
I r-icnara tmcn -
YOCT.OPS.002.8.2.1.pdt Pg 8
F New England Power Company 33 West Lebanon Road New Engand Power P.O. Box I:
Lebanon. New Hampshire 03766-0528 I
December 11, 1991 Mr. Anton J. Sidoti Regional Director Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 201 Varick Street, Room 664 New York, New York 10014 Re:
NEPCo 1991 Spillway Gate Test Reports/Minimum Flows, L.P. 's 1855. 1892. 1904, 2077, 2323. 2669
Dear Mr. Sidoti:
In compliance with FERC Order 122, Section 1244, we submit our annual report on spill gate operation for the year 1991.
Attached documentation verifies that each gate has been operated at least once during the preceding 12 month period.
Gates that 11 have emergency power available were also operated via emergency power.
In regards to minimum flows at our projects, there have been no instances in the past 12 months where the minimum flow was not maintained through our projects.
Records of these flows are part j
of our daily log records and are available for inspection.
Sincerely, H. W. Sullivan Director -ydro Droduction RWS: lw FEnc JUL 3,ngn9
,1 vl m
A New England Electric System company
I RichardEmcfi - HYDCT-OPS-002.8.2.1 pdf Page 69 1 Richard Emch - HYDCT-OPS-002.8.2.1.odf Paoe 6911
[
APPENDIX G Stability Summary Source:
Chas T. Main Inc., "Fourth Five-Year Safety Inspection of the New England Power Company Bellows Falls Project, FERC Project No. 1855," November 1982.
Spillway and Revised Earthquake Loading Case Geotechnical Engineers Inc.
"Fifth Quinquennial Safety Inspection, Vernon Project, FERC Project No. 1904,"
October 30, 1987.
RichardEmch-HYDCT-OPS002.8.2.1 d-.pdf
.Page LIST OF FIGURES GI.
Stability Summary G2.
Stability Summary G3.
Stability Summary G4.
Stability Summary, Sluice Gate Section G5.
Case 1, Normal Operating Pool, Sluice Gate Section G6.
Case V, Flood of Record, Sluice Gate Section G7.
Stability Summary, Deep Tainter Gate GB. Case 1:
Normal Operating Pool G9.
Case V:
Flood of Record
Rich ardEmch - HYDCT-OPS-002.8.2.1.pdf
.Page 71 F
APPENDIX G STABILITY ANALYSIS
- 1. Values and Assumptions for Stability Analysis of Concrete YSections A.
Nomenclature:
Effective Length - uncracked portion of base FH Summation of Horizontal Forces - kips FV -
Summation of Vertical Forces - kips (including uplift)
Mr - Summation of Resisting Moments - kip-ft Mo -Summation of Overturning Moments - kip-ft Mr
- Factor of Safety Against Overturning FH - Coefficient of Sliding B.
Unit Weight of Concrete:
150 lbs/cu ft C.
Unit Weight of Water:
62.4 lbs/cu ft D.
Uplift Pressure:
The base pressure was assumed to vary linearly from full headwater pressure at the upstream side to full tailwater pressure at the downstream side taken over 100 percent of the base area for each case analyzed.
Uplift on any portion of the base or section not in compression is assumed to be 100 percent of the-headwater..
pressure for any case with no foundation drainage systems.
Due to the transient or short-term nature of earthquake loading, the uplift is not changed from the pre-earthquake condition due to further propagation of a tensile crack.
E.
Lateral Water Pressure:
Headwater pressures were computed using the full heights of water to headwater elevations over the projected height of the structures.
Tailwater pressures are taken atifull' cailwater elevation for non-overflow structures.
ýForý overflow structures, tailwater back pressures are based on Figs. 14 through 18, Ven T. Chow Open Channel Hydraulics, 1959.
Chas.
T. Main, Inc.
Richard_Emch - HYDCT-OPS-002.8.2.i_.pd
-Page 72.
F.
Ice Load:
5 kips per linear foot at normal water level.
G.
Earthquake:
Accelerations of 0.10g were applied in a horizontal direc-tion.
To obtain the worst case, the resultant force action on the structure due to earthquake is taken in the downstream direction.
The hydrodynamic force was determined using a method presented in Design of Small Dams,
- USBR, pages 336-337.
H.
Resistance to Sliding:
Where the ratio of FH/FV is greater than 0.65, the shearing resistance of the foundation to horizontal movement must be investigated using the Shear Friction Formula.
The factor of safety against sliding is determined by the Shear Friction Formula as:
Ss-f - f V + c A where:
f - coefficient of the angle of internal friction of foundation material (Tan 0 -
0.65)
V - summation of vertical forces c - unit shearing strength at zero normal load on foundation material (0.192 ksi)
A - area of potential failure plane (area of base in compression)
H -
summation of horizontal forces Typical values of "f" and "c" were taken from "The Sliding Stability of Dams" by Harold Link in Water Power Magazine, March, April and May 1969.
The following factors of safety are generally r-quired for'--
the calculated stress and shear-friction factor of safety within the structure and at the rock-concrete interface, assuming a planar failure surface.
High or Significant Hazard Potential Dams Usual Loading Combination 3.0 Unusual Loading Combination 2.0 Extreme Loading Combination 1.0 Chas. T. Main, In
Richard Emch - HYDCT-0PS-002.8.2.j.pd!
Pinp 73i RicardEm.........P-00.8
.2..
PT*
_:_ri, I Low Hazard Potential Dams Usual Loading Combination 2.0 Unusual Loading Combination 1.25 Extreme Loading Combination 1.0 Loading Conditions to be Investigated a)
Usual Loading Combination:
Normal Operating Condition b)
Unusual Loading Combination:
Flood Discharge Condition c)
Extreme Loading Combination:
Normal Operating Condition with earthquake The applied loads should include the appropriate concrete, water, earth, silt, ice, earthquake, and uplift forces appli--
cable to the loading conditions being investigated.
I.
Bearing Pressure:
Maximum bearing stress -
20 tsf on bedrock (278 psi)
J.
Factor of Safety Against Overturning:
The minimum factor of safety against overturning is 1.0.
K.
Strength of Vertical Connections:
For structures connected to adjacent structures via keyways, the maximum shear strength used across the key - 250 psi.
- 2.
Cases Used in Stability Analysis CASE I Normal Operating Water Levels H.W.L.
218.0 (123.9)
T.W.L.
184.8 (90.7)
CASE II Normal Operating Water Level with Earthquake H.W.L.
218.0 (123.9)
T.W.L.
184.8 (90.7)
CASE III Normal Operating Water Level with Ice H.W.L.
212.1 (118.0)
T.W.L.
184.8 (90.7)
CASE IV Normal Flood Conditions (3'
over flashboards and prior to flashboard collapse)
H.W.L.
223.1 (129.0)
T.W.L.
185.1 (91.0)
CASE V Flood of Record Q -
185,000 cfs H.W.L.
231.4 (137.3)
T.W.L.
222.9 (128.8)
CASE VI Probable Maximum Flood Q -
567,100 cfs H.W.L.
251.0 (156.9)
T.W.L.
247.0 (152.9)
Chas. T. Main, Inc.
- 0 Q.
c,n
-c:
CL, SrAOI LI TY
SUMMARY
K8LSHLIANi 1
He 1 1e
- ASE SIMS (Psi)
CONLEN f LEN s1rs fair$)
Iv p.3 001N02 1
101 t
ENL EN.
3.nN-wliajjI I1i 2.11.13o 11J UPSIREILH 0OWSN11i CASE I
- 81.
8.1 t s61?
13RS) 0.19 25.53 39.0 90.493) $0,29S 11.74 30.88 60.?.
CASF. II3 811 1-87.1 VII3 135) 0.20 24.43 38.52 510.493 36.815 10.38 29.18 62.24 CASE I3V 01.5 87.1 2163 13494 0.19 24.73 39.71 631.198 53.6"2 38.35 34.61 61.20 CASE V I71F 81.1 516 9933 0.0$
12o.17 41.03.
42l.014 8,391 41.02 27.84 31.83 CASE V1 81.5 811.5 16 818 0.01 607.I0 44.l2 688.1.7 608,072 6.83 4.2n 3.81 210.11 E,8.IANrI SINWRVS :lIA Tnsi.le crack pr.plgate thm3r.h 1..
le.delh of base.
loaIdnrt itntgs l
ts*a
..ectna(i, th.reol are based on Imcractod sectta..
Vl:klxlI 1I`II3.1T L..I.
iJ014 P~wrhouse VAIL $
SrABIL7TV S1,10LANy
-A I 12 ?0 o OII7 o4 2V Fitg.
G 3
V-
I STABILITY SUK4HARY COHDwTI
__ON_
BASE
_tI'mz FY 11'"
S RESULTANT Z Mr N
M 51Sr BASE STRESS (pot) rOT. LENC'c CO. Lt.
ITT. I.M.'
(kips)
(kips) 0 o
DOWNSTo (k-f t)
(WO
=,
ST=SAN Care It 87.5
- 67.
3333 21.853 0.24 20.4 37.5 590,493 70,537 8.33 26.4 65.6 (Ccl) lte*ile crack propagotes through fall length of bloc Loeadngs.
Now EnlOand Foer Cme oti streoes aend functiene thereof are based on uncrecaed secttion.
vogn1drover M
n Vernon Project
$TAJI ITT SU)ARy perhose Unit oroL t
.Project 87123 Oct. 30. 1987 fie.
C2
.5..
a.:
0.
3
- 0" 0C,1
- 0 C',
0CL
251.0SI S
LL. 248.0
~
LI I,,
- S
.~SS.
~*
Ii
'S "A
LOADING CONDITION NO. 6 PMF HEADWATER LEVEL 251.0
- r-FH = -96.90 7--FV x 1828.32 V-FH/:rFV = 0.05 SSF ='607.10 RESULTANT AT X a 43.38
- EMR = 688678.75
- MO = -608021.75
- MR/:CM 0 1.13 BASE STRESS (PSI) 6.20 AT X 0.00 5.89 AT X = 87.50 VERNON STATION POWERHOUSE UNIT 5 MVs s1g.:AjID llxI.:: 1,341IA1I1 S1ARIItTY SUIVLAISY
- 1 S.
OQ 0
w 0
20 40 60 80 Sctai In Feol L -ID *SISNOVEM8ERD1 LAtI A I r"jj 1'2 7
- 09 * '11 IHIM3 20 9
.J
-- I 0.
0
=r 0
0 CL STABILITY SUMARtY CONDITION BASE z r"T ty rN 3
RESULTANT iMr I No ZxH" BASE STRESS (pit)
ITCT. L[NCTN CA. j*e gyr (Alp.)
((ipe)
IT?
f rto (P.Ct)
(k.ft)
Irv aO-rtF" C.I" T.LN XNQSTREAH UPSTREAM DOSTtrAM 18*ro.t*lide Scetier ca** 1
- 52.
'52.5 1768 2695 0.66 15.8 23.4 194,021 131,000 1.48 13.3 26.2 Catm 2
- 5.
52.1 2365 2695 0.86 11.8 10.9 194,021 143,080 1.36 3.a 36.4 Ceoe 3 52.5 52.5 1460 2785 0.52 19.1 25.9 190.124 117,753 1.61 19.4 21.3 Case 4 51.5 52.5 2125 2830 0.75 13.2 19.4 203.575
!8.,640 1.37 4.5 37.0 Ceo. S 52.5 52.5
$50 2677 0.20 50.7 32.6 275,882 188,700 1..6 33.9 5.6 f
leoedwter-t 39 feet above opllecy treat.
Tlleter to 6 feet lower. 35 feet above spitlway creet.
Spillwea fe fullyeePerged derine Ptr and *tabl* by Neow Insl"nd
?e-of Cospene Vernon Project STIAILITY
SUMMARY
iespeltle,..
lleutboroe~h,
)
SLUICE CATE SECTION project # I123 Sept. 30. 1 187 1`1. C4 i
Richar-d Emc-h -HYDCT-C-TOPS-002.8.2.1.pdf.Page
R.
-,ichard Emch - HYDCT-OPS-002.8.2.1".'df" Page 79 1l F
- t 0s S1AS1L1?T SUMNNAR?
CONDITION WEl z I'm I ZV 1im 3
Z ISUtI.T?
OtT i
IO t
Hr IASC $tStsS (p.i) fOT. LINCTR C1. LEN.
ErrW.L (Nip)
(lip.)
N
(-t)
(kUft)
S O-NSTIFAM OOSUSTIrEur~(iI*SR S) root Unit 8lock Cao. 1 53.0 33.0 550 994 0.53 14.5 25.7 33.021 1.494 4.41 23.6 28.5 Cade 2 53.0 53.0 598 984 0.61 13.3 25.6 33,023 7.800 4.23 23.1 28.4 Cast 3 53.0 53.0 523 1029 0.51 15.3 25.2 33.021 7.13!
4.*4 22.9 31.0 Co.. 4 53.0 53.0 907 935 0.95 S.7 21.6 3.011 12.400 2.64 11.1 38.9 Case 5
53.0 53.0 104 1003 0.10 76.7 29.3 33,350 3.964 8.02 34.6 17.9 Case 53.0 53.0 0 Nfedooter te 59 feet bove opilltomo croot.
Tal.votor to & feot I-or., 3S tert aove epltlo.
croat.
Spti j to lolly u e
orllt o
a table by Hr England ro.
Co.pyI toopootteln ellotborog*-h YA Vernon project STABILITY StU4upl,
(.)
1 DE8E MIMS CATE
.... i "(
).............
,oc., 0.,,2, Se. 30,:
- 19. rig'7.
CI
~:5.
0.m 2
0 FT'
'0-u C,,
0 0
'3
-o 0.
- -a i r
ý'ipýaird Emch'- HYD'CT-OPS-002.8.2. 1_.pdf [Rchr E chH DC -O S00....
1...
Page 84l
[
APPENDIX H Letter from FERC Accepting Independent Consultant I
Richard Emch - HYDCT-OPS-002.8.2.1.pdf FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORYCOMMISSID WASHINGTON.0. C.20426 MAR 181992 LENG. DEPT.
Project No's. 2077, 1892, 1855, & 1904 Fifteen Mile Falls, Wilder, Bellows Falls & Vernon New England Power Service Mr. Denton E. Nichols Managler - Civil Engineering New England Power Service 25 Research Drive Westborough, Massachusetts 01582-0099
Dear rx. Nichols:
By letter dated March 4, 1992, you proposed Mr. Alton P.
Davis as the independent consultant to be responsible for the sixth Part 12 safety inspections of the Projects listed on Enclosure A.
Yr. Davis' resume confirns that he meets the Commission's independent consultant qualifications specified in Section 12.31(a) of the regulations.
Mr. Davis is therefore approved as the independent consultant for these inspections.
in accordance with Section 12, Subpart D, the approved independent consultant must either personally inspect the projects or be present during the inspections to supervise those individuals that conduct the inspections.
You are also reminded to instruct your consultant that should any condition be discovered that requires emergency corrective measures, he must immediately notify you, since you are required to submit a report to the Regional Director in accordance with Section 12.36.
Yr. William Walton may participate as a member of the inspection team.
Three copies of the inspection reports must be filed with the New York Regional Director by the-dates listed on Enclosure A.
The consultant's reports must be formatted in accordance with the enclosed outline (Enclosure B).
You are reminded that not later than 60 days after each report of the independent consultant is filed with the Regional Director, you must submit to the Regional Director three copies
Richard Emch - HYDCT-OPS-0028. 2 1.pdf Pame of a plan and schedule for designing and carrying out any proposed corrective measures for that project.
sincerely, Ronald A. Corso, Director Division of Dam Safety and Inspections Enclosure 9
,h - HYDCT-OPS-002.8.2.1.
[~j~rd Ech
-HYDC-OPS002..2.1.,d-Page 87 1 Enclosure A Project No.
2077 1892 1855 1904 Proie~ct NaMe Fifteen Mile Falls Wilder Bellows Falls Vernon DateDue January 2, 1993 November 1, 1992 November 1, 1992 November 1, 1992 M