ML19336A547
| ML19336A547 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | La Crosse File:Dairyland Power Cooperative icon.png |
| Issue date: | 10/27/1980 |
| From: | Gallen K, Heistand O, Hiestand O DAIRYLAND POWER COOPERATIVE, MORGAN, LEWIS & BOCKIUS |
| To: | COULEE REGION ENERGY COALITION |
| References | |
| ISSUANCES-SC, NUDOCS 8010300044 | |
| Download: ML19336A547 (14) | |
Text
_
A* \\
.b-
[
- " M q
(m.vn' 1
e UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
- l. ~
O C 7 2 7 % f*=
- b 'h Q
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 5
i
\\
p
- ci 54 In the Matter of
)
)
DAIRYLAND POWER COOPERATIVE
)
Docket No. 50-409
)
(Liquefaction)
(La Crosse Boiling Water
)
(Show Cause)
Reactor)
)
LICENSEE'S RESPONSE TO INTERVENORS' INTERROGATORIES DATED OCTOBER 2, 1980 Pursuant to 10 C.F.R. $ 2.740b(b), Dairyland Power Cooperative (Dairyland or DPC), the holder of Provisional Operating License No. DPR-45 for the La Crosse Boiling Water Reactor (LACBWR) and the licensee in the above-captioned proceeding, hereby submits 1/
the following answers and objections -
in response to the inter-rogatories propounded on October 2, 1980 by consolidated intervenors i
--1/
Dairyland is furnishing these responses in the hope of expediting this proceeding.
In doing so, Dairyland has pur-posefully limited its objections only to the most obvious cases and, unless otherwise indicated, Dairyland does not concede either (a) that the information sought by any of the subject interrogatories is relevant to the issues identified in the Director of Nuclear Reactor Regulation's Order to Show Cause, dated February 25, 1980, and the Licensing Board's Prehearing Conferenca Order dated September 30, 1980, which have been ad.nitted as matters in controversy in this proceeding and to which the inquiry in this proceeding is limited, or (b) that this information is even reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of ad-missible evidence.
Cf. 10 C.F.R. $ 2.740(b)(1).
s clos 000%4 gli
__._.7y,--
-2 Coulee Region Energy Coalition (CREC) and Frederick M. Olsen, III:
Objections to CREC Interrogatories Nos. 1 - 13, 18, 19, and 22 and Olsen Interrogatories Nos. 4 - 6, 10, 15 and 16 Dairyland obj ects to CREC Interrogatories Nos.1 - 13, and 19, and Olsen Interrogatories Nos. 5, 6, 10, 15 and 16 on the grounds of relevance and materiality in that the information sought through these interrogatories concerns issues which go beyond the scope of the issues admitted as matters in controversy in this proceeding.
As noted by the Licensing Board in Allied-General Nuclear Serviees, et al. (Barnwell), LBP-77-13, 5 NRC 489, 492 (1977),
the NRC Rules of Practice only permit discovery of information or documents
' relevant to the subject matter in-volved in the proceeding,' and then further qualifies and limits the term
' subject matter' to the contentions admitted by the presiding officer in the proceeding.
See 10 C.F.R.
S 2.740(b)(1).
On page 14 of its September 30, 1980 Prehearing Conference Order, the Licensing Board specifically stated that discovery in this proceeding at this time was "not to include
. the matter discussed in part II of this opinion" (i.e., the magnitude of the safe shutdown earthquake (SSE) and the corresponding ground accelera-tion design value for the LACBWR site).
See also Tr. 65-66.
All of the above-referenced interrogatories seek information concerning the derivation of the SSE and ground acceleration value for the LACBWR site.
These interrogatories therefore seek information which
-3 goes beyond the scope of discovery permittcd under the Board's Order establishing the discovery schedule.
Accordingly, under the NRC Rules of Practice and case law precedents, these inter-2/
rogatories are objectionable and must be denied. -
In addition, Dairyland also obj ects to Olsen Inter-rogatory No. 4, CREC Interrogatory No. 22 and part of CREC Inter-rogatory No. 18.
Olsen Interrogatory No. 4 and the second part of CREC Interrogatory No. 18 request information concerning the costs j
associated with the various liquefaction analyses performed at the LACBWR site and the design and installation of a dewatering system at the sicd.
Consideration of such costs goes beyond the scope of this proceeding.
CREC Interrogatory No. 22 requests the " names, titles, and roles of all NRC personnel instrumental in NRC Staff decision not to request a dewatering system for LACBWR."
This inter-rogatory calls for speculation on Dairyland's part and this type of information could more appropriately be obtained from the NRC Staff.
Remaining CREC Interrogatories No. 14 The grounds on which Dairyland contested the conclusions contuined in the WES study are set forth in (1) Dairyland's Answer to Order to Show Cause (March 25, 1980), (2) the Response to NRC
-2/
See Boston Edison Co. (Pilgrim 2), LBP-75-42, 2 NRC 159 IT775); Allied-General Nuclear Services (Barnwell), LBP-77-13, 5 NRC 489 (1977).
See also Glass v. Philadelphia, 64 F.R.D. 559 (E.D. Pa. 197ET (interrogatories subj ect to objection when they exceed the scope of discovery sug-gested in court order).
f
-4 Concerns on Liquefaction Potential At La Crosee Boiling Water Reactor (LACBWR) site near Genoa, Vernon County, Wisconsin, pre-pared by Dames & Moore in consultation with Dr. H. Bolton Seed (March 21, 1980), (3) an earlier Dames & Moore Report on the Liquefaction Potential at the LACBWR site (Sept. 28, 1979), (4) the Dames & Moore Report entitled Response to NRC Questions (July 11, 1980), and (5) the Dames & Moore Report entitled Final Assessment of Liquefaction Potential at the LACBWR Site.(July 25, 1980).
No. 15 The WES Report caused neither Dairyland nor Dames & Moore to change their original conclusion that the LACBWR site is safe from liquefaction.
Any WES studies on the LACBWR site were per-formed for the NRC Staff, not Dairyland.
Copies of "any and all" such studies are presumably available for inspection and copying from the NRC Staff and/or at the NRC Public Documant Room in the La Crosse Public Library.
No. 16 Counsel for Dairyland was making the argument that, inas-much as Dairyland had shown cause to the satisfaction of the NRC Staff, Dairyland and the Staff had effectively agreed to settle the proceeding pursuant to the procedure set forth in Section 2.203 of the NRC Rules of Practice entitled " Settlement and Compromise."
No. 17 Pursuant to 10 C.F.R.
$ 2.741(a)(1), Dairyland will per-mit CREC to inspect and copy at the standard per page rate all pertinent reports and correspondence concerning the liquefaction
l
-5 potential of the LACBWR site at its offices in La Crosse.
Please contact Mr. John Parkyn (608-689-2331) to make the necessary arrangements.
No. 18 The Dames & Moore Report to Dairyland (subsequently submitted to NRC) entitled " Preliminary Report, Proposed Measure to Mitigate the Potential for Liquefaction at LACBWR Plant Site near Genoa, Wisconsin" dated November 29, 1979, contains a detailed discussion of the dewatering methods studied and proposed by Dairyland and Dames & Moore.
No. 20 During the course of technical discussions between the NRC Staff (and its consultant, WES) and Dairyland (and its con-sultant, Dames & Moore) concerning the liquefaction potential at the LACBWR site, Dairyland and Dames & Moore thought that it would be helpful to have the opinion of a third party.
Dames & Moore felt that Dr.'Sead was Jn expert whose opinions would be respected by all parties involved in the technical discussions.
A review by Dr. Seed.was sought only when several aspects of the liquefaction question remained unresolved after lengthy discussions between Dames & Moore and the NRC Staff.
The liquefaction question arose in connection with the NRC Staff's systematic evaluation program i
(SEP) under which all earlier site analyses for LACBRR and ten other operating reactors are being reviewed.
The NRC Staff had not questioned Dames & Moore's earlier analyses of the LACBWR site, and l
c..~
- - -. - - ~. _ _
-6 therefore, before the liquefaction question arose in the SEP program there had been no need to consult Dr. Seed.
No. 21 Dr. Seed is regarded as a pioneer in the field of soil liquefaction research by geotechnical engineers, and the pro-cedures developed by Dr. Seed and his co-workers are extensively used to analyze liquefaction potential.
Dames & Moore also utilized other independently developed (yet sLmilar) procedures (used by Japanese engineers) in their analyses and arrived at essentially the same conclusions as those arrived at using Dr. Seed's analytical techniques.
No. 23 Dairyland is not familiar with the term " flaring" in this context.
Copies of the technical specifications prepared by Sargent & Lundy are available for inspection and copying in accor-dance with the procedure set forth in Dairyland's response to Interrogatory No. 17.
No. 24 See response to Interrogatory No. 17.
Remaining Olsen Interrogatories Nos. 1 and 2 l
Dames & Moore's analyses have shown that there is no potential for liquefaccion even in the free-field conditions at the LACBWR plant site, (i.e., the soils around the plant site).
However, the potential for liquefaction immediately below and immediately around the plant is of greater concern.
Because the
-7 sands at LACBWR are highly pervious and the probable duration of strong motion shaking will be less than 8 to 10 seconds for the SSE, the excess pore pressures that may be generated during the SSE will be dissipated fast enough to preclude any harmful
" spreading" effect of liquefaction, even during the highly unlikely event of free-field liquefaction at the LACBWR site.
No. 3 No direct correlation was possible because the predictions were made for N values under the reactor containment of the LACBWR plant and blow count data were obtained under other areas of the plant.
Hokever, the data obtained in connection with the samples taken since that report was submitted indicate that the trend predicted by Dames & Moore is correct.
See the July 25, 1980 Dames
& Moore Report.
No. 7 i
The methods use: 'f Dames & Moore were developed on the basis of performance of sands during past earthquakes.
A direct verification of Dames & Moore's predictions cannot be maas until liquefaction can be observed to occur or not to occur during an earthquake.
However, such observations have been the basis for the research that has led to the development of the analytical procedures used by Dames & Moore.
No. 8 l
The Dames & Moore predictions are based upon generally accepted analytical procedures which are employed to predict the r
-8 occurrence or non-occurrence of liquefaction.
Dairyland believes that these procedures are accurate and that the predictions based upon the use of these procedures are correct.
No. 9 The average groundwater conditions existing at the LACBWR site were used in the various analyses performed to assess the liquefaction potential.
If fluctuations in water levels are taken into account, no substantial changes will result in the conclusions drawn.
No. 11 It is unclear what is meant by the area of geologic in-fluence exerted by a driven pile at the LACBWR site.
Soil profiles of the LACBWR site obtained through test borings are contained in the Dames & Moore Reports described in Dairyland's Response to CREC Interrogatory No. 4.
No. 12 No.
No. 13 The answer to the first part of the interrogatory is yes.
The second part of the interrogatory is not clear, but as shown in the various Dames & Moore Reports, the increased density of the soils at the LACBWR site in the vicinity of the driven piles provides ndditional assurance against the occurence of liquefac* ion in those areas.
e
-9 No. 14 No significant movements are expected to occur as a re-sult of the occurrence of the SSE at the LACBWR site.
No. 17 Dairyland and its consultant do not believe that the liquefaction potential at the LACBWR isite will be affected by the water chemistry of the Mississippi River.
No. 18 No.
Res ectful y submitted,
[.
J_,
b O. S. Hiestand i
Attorney for Dairyland Power Cooperative OF COUNSEL Kevin P. Gallen Morgan, Lewis & Bockius 1800 M Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C.
20036 Dated:
October 27, 1980
l l
UNITED STATES OF AMERIth NUCI. EAR RBGUIJt'IORY COMMISSION In the Matter of
)
3 Docket No. 50-409 DAIRYIAND POWER COOPERATITE 1
2.iquefaction
)
(Show causel (Z;a Crosse Boiling Water Reactor)
?
AFFIDAY2T OF JOHN D. Paarvu i
State of Wisconsin County of Veracat John D. Parkyn, being first duly sworn, an oattr says as follous:
1 That he is employed by Dairyland Pouer Cooperative, 2615 East Avenne South, La Crosse, Wisconsin, as Assistant Super-intendent.
2.
That he is only authorized to answer the Interrogatories numbered CREC 14, 15, 17, and OLSON IS, propounded by consolidated Intervenors on October 2, 1980, on behalf of the Applicant Dairyland Power Cooperative.
3.
That the above-mentioned and attached answers are true i
l and correct to the best of his knowledge and belief.
1
_hI AM Nasse l
Subscribed and sworn to before um this.24 d day of October,1980.
d-
.'. /
1 y
i D
'g,
' ~ -
wA _
1
_1
',~
, My Commission Empires [M g[a, /ffy D"P]D *g'9'}
l aJW J.A o +Ju
-.--___y
P'2 I
1.
'Q
/
UNITED STATES OF AMERICE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COBOCISSION l
l In the Matter of I
I Docket No. 50-409 DAIRTLAND POWER COOPI:RATIVE
)
I.iquefaction
)
(Show Cause)
(La Crosse Boiling Water Reactor)
)
h AFFIDAVIT OF BUGE A.TOWSIZY State of Wisconsin:
County of Vernen Bugh A. hiey, being first duly suara, on eeth e as followes 1.
That he is employed by Deiryland Power Cooperative, 2615 East Avenue South, La Crosse, Wiscansin, as Quality Assurance Supervisor.
2.
That he is duly authorized to anseer the IntarroJatory numbered CREC 23, propounded by consolidated Intervenors on
- Cctober 2,1980, on behalf of the Applicant Dairyland Power Cooperative.
3.
That the above-seentioned and at+mr-hd answers are true and correct to the best of his knowledge and belief.
l 7-
$0 h
s-
~
r
'- i' E[pme g.j subscribed and esom to before me this dMM day of A.taber,.1988.
.'"o' Nogiery PubIlc Jty. h salon expires M A 4, I
?.
~w-
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION In the Matter of Docket No. 50-409 DAIRYLAND POWER COOPERATIVE Liquefaction (Show Cause)
(Lacrosse Boiling Water Reactor)
AFFIDAVIT OF Dames & Moore State of Maryland: County of Montgomery:
Mysore S. Nataraja, being first dufy sworn, on oath says as follows:
1.
That he is employed by Dames & Moore, 7101 Wisconsin Avenue, Washington, D.C.
20014.as Principal-in-Charge (Acting)._
2.
That he is duly authorized to answer the Interrogatories numbered 18, 20, and 21 by CREC and 1, 2, 3, 7, 8, 9, 11, 12, 13, 14, and 17 by Frederick M. Olsen,_ propounded by Consolidated Intervenors on October 2,1980, on behalf of the Applicant Dairyland Power Cooperative.
3.
That the above-mentioned and attached answers are true and correct to the best of his knowledge and belief.
b
-wi ys re S. Nataraja Name Subscribed and sworn to before me on this twenty-fourth day of October,1980.
O Robert B. McDonough Notary Public My Comission expires July 1,1982.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION In the Matter of
)
)
DAIRYLAND POWER COOPERATIVE
)
Docket No. 50-409
)
(Liquefaction)
(La Crosse Boiling Water
)
(Show Cause)
Reactor)
)
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE Service has on this day been ef fected by personal delivery or first class mail on the following I'
persons:
Charles Bechhoefer, Esq., Chrm.
Docketing & Service Section Atomic Safety and Licensing Office of the Secretary Board Panel U.S. Nuclear Regulatory U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Commission Washington, D.C.
20555 Washington, D.C.
20555 Atomic Safety and Licensing Mr. Ralph S. Decker Board Panel Route 4 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Box 190D Commission Cambridge, Maryland 21613 Washington, D.C.
20555 Dr. George C. Anderson Atomic Safety and Licensing Department of Oceanography Appeal Board University of Washington U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Seattle, Washington 98195 Commission Washington, D.C.
20555
6
~ ' ~ ' '
~ ~
-2 Steven Burns, Esquire Office of Executive Legal Director U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
20555 Karen Cyr, Esquire Office of Executive Legal Director U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
20555 Richard Shimshak Plant Superintendent Dairyland Power Cooperative La Crosse Boiling Water Reactor Genoa, Wisconsin 54632 Fritz Schubert, Esquire Staff Attorney Dairyland Power Cooperative 2615 East Avenue, South La Crosse, Wisconsin 54601 Coulee Region Energy Coalition P. O. Box 1583 La Crosse, Wisconsin 54601 Attn:
Anne Morse Mr. Harold Denton, Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
20555 Mr. Frederick M. Olsen, III 609 N. lith Street.
La Crosse, Wisconsin 54601 p.
h0.S.Hiestand s
October 27, 1980 l
l
.--