ML19327B626

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Submits Remaining Issues to Be Resolved in Completing Lakeview Project.Info Required Before NRC Can Prepare Final Concurrence of Remedial Action.Issues Include Stability Analysis & Proposed Remedial Action
ML19327B626
Person / Time
Issue date: 10/18/1989
From: Randy Hall
NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV)
To: Matthews M
ENERGY, DEPT. OF
References
REF-WM-64 NUDOCS 8911030010
Download: ML19327B626 (4)


Text

.

3 m

r4-l j

6

({

  • - } msg
  • uNat3 siAtts

)

o NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION l

./

f,'

g X

.<N-3 J

mtGloN iv s

l N UnANium nicovtRY Fl(LD OFFICE sox asas DENVER. CoLORAoo Botas

[;d i

'i OCT I 81980 w

URFO:ROG l

Cocket No. WM-64 l

U.S. Department of Energy ATTN: Mark L. Matthews l-Albuquerque Operations Office P.O. Box 5400 i

Albuquerque, New Mexico 87115

Dear Mr. Matthews:

As the Lakeview project nears completion, it is appropriate to identify the remaining issues that need to be resolved.

These issues have been discussed with you.and your.stsff on numerous occasions in the past and were specifically identified in our dratt Technical Evaluation Report (dTER) which was sent to j

D.W by tetter dated February 7,1986.

For your ready reference, they are identified below.

l 3

'I.

Ft,a Section 2.2. Page 3 of the dTER.

The. RAP 'and the DSCR rh not provide a site specific discussion of the propc, sed disposal site and its relationship to the regional tectonics, i

Considering the active nature of the region, additional information to

(

,4 demonstrate that faulting will not adversely affect the site must be i

provided prior to' approval of the RAP.

2.

From Section 2.3, page 4 of the dTER.

No informatinn was provided in the DSCR to evaluate the impact of

[

geothermal activity on the Collins Ra.ich site.

This information must be f

l provided prior to approval of the RAP.

1 L

3.

From Section 2.5, pages 4 and 5 of the dTEP.

t yr The DSCR does not discuss the Collins Ranch alternative site ai.d its i

location with respect to site specific faulting, the determination of the design acceleration, or the site's relationship to the KGR 1herefore, the RAP should provide a detailed discussion of the site specific geology, seismology and geothermal activity for the Collins Ranch l,

site which includes, but is not limited to, the following:

The relationship between the regional tectonics and the site specific structural geology.

j)fc}

L i

s s

S 8911030010 891018 l

-PDR WASTE m o m

}

W p.

I l

OCT I 81989 2

)

The relationship between the regional and site specific seismicity and the determination of the MCE and the resulting horizontal ground j

acceleration.

p 4.

From Section 5.3, page 19 of the dTER.

f l

The stability analyses conducted by DOE indicate that the proposed design exceeds the minimum factors of sefety recommended in Regulatory Guide 3.11.

In addition, the staff concludes that the stability analyses performed by the DOE utilized methods which are widely used in engineering practice and are therefore acceptable.

however, additinnal information regarding the seismic aspects of the disposal site is necessary before that portion of the staff review can be completed.

If the additional i

information results in an increase in the maximum surface acceleration i

associated with the MCE, a reevaluat:on of the pseudo-static stability of the proposed design will be necessary.

5.

From Section 5.4, page 20 of the dTER.

The staff basically concurs with the analysis conducted by the DOE.

Howevor, a review of material properties indicates that come of the j

evaporation pond soils are of very low dentity and high water content.

It 1

is not clear what percentage of the contaminated layer, which could be up to 20 feet thick depending on required exccvation depths, consists of the low density inaterial.

It is siso nct clear what assu ptions DOE made with regard to the amount of low density material in performing the settlement calculations.

This information has been requested.

Until the information is received and reviewed, the sattlement analysis will remain an open item.

i 6.

Frois Su tion 5.7, page 21 of the dTER.

l The staff generally concludes that the proposed remedial action should meet the EPA criteria with regard to geotechnical stability.

However, a reevaluat*on of the pseudn-static stability and settlement 6nalyses will be performed by the staff upon receipt of additional information requested from the DOE.

If these open itents have already been addressed, please provide references to i

the submittals in which they were addressed.

Since the dTER was written, there have been several desig.: che.nges proposed in tee form of Project Interface Documents (PIDs) for NRC review and approval.

l The following dacuments our review and conclusions:

g In PID 13-5-29, you propose to use 3-2 bedding in lic. of B-1 bedding for the 7Dron key trench and ditch.

Based on a review of your proposal, the NRC staff finds that using B-2 bedding in the indicated locations is acceptable.

le L,.-

5

[

n*

d DCT I 8 1989 3

A second pror.osal is to provide a trench drain ir the energy dissipation i

area of the diversion ditch.

The purpose of this drain is to prevent ponding of water which could seep into the cell.

This proposal is discussed in PID 13-5-30.

The staff fus reviewed your proposal and finds L

it acceptable.

l As a last item, pleaw '>e advised that we have not received PID Nos.13-5-27 and 13-5-28.

PID Nos. 13-5-29 and 13-S-30 discussed above have been received.

However, these were faxed to us and the quality of the copies is not adequate for docketing.

We therefore request that PIDs 27 through 30 be formally submitted to NRC so that they can properly be docketed in our files.

i T%nk you for this information as it will be required before we can prepare our l

.f).ial concurrence of the Lakeview remcdial action.

i Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to coni act Ray Gonzales of my staff at FTS 776-2815.

1 Sincerely, i

I

~

[.

( [.

N U

Ramon E. Hall Director l

s'.

t l

l l

~

r

'e '

(f'*J 2 e

'I W-64/ROG/89/10/03/L q

DISTRIBUTION l

i I

Docket File WM-64 c.

LPOR/DCS,

'ABBeach, RIV Rgonzales DJacoby BGarcia, RCPD, NM DS11fer, EID, NM LLO Branch, LLWM URFO r/f i

i i

l i

i t

1 v

f CONCURRENCE:

0 ATE:

/4h,7 _7 RGonzales/URF0/1v D3acoby/UAFO

)li jd/f/ff i

/ 7)/f f [/

EHawkins/URF0 REHall/URF0 Y_^ c h O /[

I il 1

i r

t 7

1