ML20009F195
| ML20009F195 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Allens Creek File:Houston Lighting and Power Company icon.png |
| Issue date: | 07/27/1981 |
| From: | Pearring J Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20009F186 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8107300112 | |
| Download: ML20009F195 (4) | |
Text
_
v I
07/27/81 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THr. ATOMIC SAFETY AND LI_ CENSING UOARD (Doherty Contention 29).
i In the Matter of
)
)
HOUSTON LIGHTING 8. POWER COMPANY
)
Docket.No. 50-466
)
(Allens Creek Nuclear Generating
)
Station, Unit 1)
)
TESTIMONY OF JER0ME R. PEARRING, PH.D., P.E.
Q1. Please state your name and present position with the NRC.
A1. My name is Jerome Pearring.
I am employed as a Geotechnical Engineer, Hydrologic and Geotechnical Engineering Branch, Division of Engineering, U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, D.C. 20555. My l
work involves the application of Geotechnical Engineering principles in the Safety Evaluation review of nuclear power plant sites and structures.
Q2.
Please describe your educational background and previous positions held.
A2. A resume of my educational background and employment experience is I
attached.
Please state the nature of the responsibilities that you have had with Q3.
respect to the review of Houston Lighting and Power Company submittals concerning the Allens Creek Nuclear. Generating Station Unit 1 ultimate heat sink structure.
A3..My involvement with the Allens Creek Nuclear Power Generating Station project began in June 1980. At that time I was assigned review responsibilities for Geotechnical Engineering matters associated with-that project, In familiarizing myself with this project I reviewed the applicant's past submittals of Geotechnical Engineering data l
8107300112'810727-
' ~ ' " '
PDR ADOCK 05000466 T
PDR l
i o
L
4 g
s
-2 including results of subsurface investigat, ions, results of laboratory tests, and estimates of soil properties determined by the applicants consultants, which relate to the ultimate heat sink and causeway soils.
I also reviewed cross sections of the ultimate heat sink slopes and the results of the applicant's analysis of the stability of the proposed slopes as presented.
I have also evaluated the applicants recent modifications to the previous submittals which we,e submitted as a part of Amendment 58 to the pSAR in May 1981.
Q4. What is the purpose of your testimony?
A4. The purpose of my testimony is to respond to Doherty Contention 29 which alleges that there is insufficient assurances that postulated failures of ultimate heat sink structures will not lead to unacceptable blockage of the submerged intake canal. These insufficiencies allegedly would present a risk of meltdown of core if residual heat removal system water is insufficient after a core damaging accident. Doherty's contention 29 appears to be based upon information contained in subsection 2.5.4 of Supplement No. 2 to the Allens Creek Nuclear Generating Station, Unit 1 Safety Evaluation Report dated March 1979. That report concluded that, at that time, there was insufficient assarance that postulated slope l
failure would not lead to unacceptable blockage of the submerged' intake l
l Canal.
I QS. What has the applicant done to remedy this?
A5. Since NRC issuance of Supplement No. 2 to the Safety Evaluation Report the applicant has performed additional study of the causeway slope stability features.
Its analysis, as described in Amendment No. 58, to the PSAR, resulted in an estimate of causeway slope soil movement of less th' an 4 inches under seismic loading conditions.
I have independently i
l' 1
e.
reviewed the potential for slumping of the lakefront causeway slopes under SSE and OBE earthquake loading and concur with the finding of the applicant that expected slope deformation would be minor.
i i
Q6. Has the applicant done anything else to increase confidence that the alleged problem will not occur?
A6. Yes.
In order to positively restrict potential causeway and/or ultimate heat sink slope soil movement into the intake canal, the applicant has committed to the construction of a concrete retaining wing wall structure at the intake forebay, lakefront area, to provide containment of the causeway ultimate h;at sink slopes. The presence of such a retaining structure, which can be readily constructed using standard engineering design and construction principles and procedures, would provide very high confidence that tae flow of cooling water into the intake structure from the lake would not be adversely affected by a postulated failure of the Ultimate Heat Sink causeway slopes.
Q7.. Is it therefore your engineering judgement that the commitment of the
. applicant to construct a concrete retaining wing wall structure at the concourse of the ultimate heat sink causeway and submerged intake canal is acceptable assurance that postulated failures of soil slopes would not lead to unacceptable blockage of the intake canal?
l Of course it will be necessary before actue.1 construction to A7.
Yes.
review the final design of the retaining wall structure and its interface with the causeway at the ultimate heat sink forebay canal before final acceptance can be made. 'I would not expect problems, however, as the.
design of such structures is a straight forward relatively common engineering procedure.
I l
I
I:.ny: da no R. Pe.n ring
.Addr< ss_:
1713 I archmont Drive, Annandale, VA PPD 03 Telephone:
(703) 941-7438 Education:. B.S. Civil Engineering - 1.oyola University, l.os f ngeles, CA (1955)
- 1 aster Civil Engineering - Texas A8li University (1963)
Ph.D. Civil Engineering - Texas A&M University (1968)
_Il08. E,xge r i e n c e.. ( Maj o r/ Sia n i f i ca n t _ fmp_1_oyige n_t].:
Year (sl Title / Function 1980 - 1981 Geotechnical Engineer - flRR 1976 - 1980 Program lianager - Presidcnt's Economic Adjusti:ient Comanittee Consultant to Director on Engineering Matters - DDD 1956 - 19/6 Civil fngineering Of ficer - U.S. Air force A, sign.nents encomp.v. sod planning, developing and n.tnaging piojects and programs associated yit h Civil Engir.ccring Rescarch and Development (Rf.D) and i.onstruction
- ri habili-tation of Air force Operational fc cilities. !iajor
-assignments included:
Program manager - Air force Civil Engineering Research & Development.; Program lianager Air force R&D Technical facility l'odernization pregram; Joint' Service Command Combat Civil Engineer Duties - Vietnam; Chief Geotechnical Engineer Missile Siting Programs; and Assistant Profe sor Geotechnical Engineering - Air force Institute of Technology.
1955 - 1956 Assistant District Materials Engineer. Idaho Dept. iiig'anys Publications:
"A Study of Pasic Mineralogical, Physical-Chemical a'nd Engineering Index Prnperties of Laterite Soils," (AlWL-lR) i P ro fes s i o na l Soc i e t i es / Ac ti v i l l e.s_:,
Member - !!alianal Society Professional Engineers Registered Professional Engineer - Dhio (1959), Virginia (1980).
?
'c
+
l L