ML20010C091

Forwards Request for Addl Info Re Geotechnical Engineering. to Remain on Schedule,Response Required by 810910

ML20010C091
Person / Time
Site:	Wolf Creek
Issue date:	08/07/1981
From:	Tedesco R Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:	Koester G KANSAS GAS & ELECTRIC CO.
References
NUDOCS 8108190109
Download: ML20010C091 (7)

Text

- _ - _ _ _ _ _ _.

l g

y e-DISTRIBUTION:

iDocket File bcc:

LB#1 Rdg.

TERA AUG 7 1981 DEisenhut PDR JYoungblood LPDR Docket No.: STN 50-482 GEdison NSIC MRushbrook TIC

~ " -

SHanauer ACRS (16)

Mr. Glenn L. Koester RVollmer Vice President - Nuclear TMurley

~

" ~ ' ' - " ' - "

Kansas Gas and Electric Compini"' "' '~ ~"' "' ""* *"- RMa ttson

' RHartfield, MPA 201 North Market Street Wichita Kansas 67201

".~~.~.."..".*.."."..,~~.~."....".~".0 ELD 0IE(3)

Dear Mr. Koester:

,4,..

BJagganath

Subject:

Request for Additional. Info,rmatipn, for.,,the Review of the Wolf Creek Plant, Unit 1 Regarding Geotechnjcal. Engineering.

As a result of our continuing review pf the.Wo,1f Creek Plant,. Unit 1 FSAR, we find that we need addi.tional. in' formation.. to comple_te, our, evaluation. The specific information required is in the. area _ of geo. technical, engineering and is presented in the Enclosure.

To maintain our licer. ing review schedule fpr the, Wolf Creek Plant FSAR, we will need responses to the enclosed request,by September 10,1981., If you cannot meet this date, please inform us within.seyen days after._ receipt of this letter of the date you. plan to submit your_ responses so that we may review our schedule for any.necessary changes,....;,,.

Please contact Dr. G. E. Edison. Wolf Creek you desire any discussion or. clarifica.tfon Li.c.en, sing Project Manager, if of_ the_ e,nclosed re,q.uest.,....

Sincerely, Originnt signed by fg B. J. Youngblood RobertL.gTedesco, Assistant Director for Licensing Division of i.icensing

Enclosure:

As stated

. C. [2[

,[ -

d:

NV V

p f(.

~~

cc: See next page 27 f,in.171981 *g m

.- 8 8108190109 80807 PDR ADOCK 05000 v.a. g g "

A N

N t

I D;

w DL,:LB#1 y DL:

g omer >

i aa=> GEEdisoM,1.tt., BJY,

' o.od R(T e.s c.g.,

our) 8/7/81 8

/8f 8/ /81

uac rosu sia nc ece wncu oza OFFICIAL RECORD COPY

' - maa e24

=

a

}

Mr'. Glenn L. Koester Vice President - Nuclear Kansas Gas and Electric Company 201 North Market Street i

P. O. Box 208 Wichita, Kansas 67201.

cc: Mr. Nicholas A. Petrick Ms. Wanda Christy Executive Director, SNUPPS 515 N. Ist Street i

5 Choke Cherry Road Burlington, Kansas 66839 Rockville, Maryland 20750 Eric A. Eisen, Esq.

J Mr. Jay Silberg, Esquire Birch, Horton, Bittner & Monroe Shaw, Pittman, Potts & Trowbrioge 1140 Connecticut Avenue, N. W.

j 1800 M Street, N. W.

Washington, D. C.

20036 Washington, D. C.

20036 4

Kansans for Sensible Energy i

Mr. Donald T. McPhee P. O. Box 3192 Vice President - Production Wichita, Kansas 67201 Kansas City Power and Light Company 1330 Baltimore Avenue P. O. Box 679 Kansas City, Missouri 64141 1

Ms. Mary Ellen Salva Route 1 Box 56 Burlington, Kansas 66839 Ms. Treva Hearne, Assista it General Counsel Public Service Commission P. O. Box 360 j

Jefferson City, Missouri 65102 i

Mr. Tom Vandel I

Resident inspector / Wolf Creek NPS clo U.S.N.R.C.

1 P. O. Box 1407 Emporia, Kansas 66801 Mr. Michael C. Kenner Wolf Creek Project Director i

State Corporation Commission State of Kansas

]

Fourth Floor, State Office Bldg.

}

Topeka, Kansas 66612 i

4

ENCLOSURE 241.0 HYDROLOGIC AND GE0TECHflICAL Ef4GIf1EERIflG BRAf4CH 241.1 WC In figures 2.5-97a thru 2.5-97e show the data points used in developing (Figures 2.5-97a these curves. Also plot the mean and the standard deviation thru 2.5-97e) curves.

241.2 WC Provide a sumary of the results of field density and moisture content (2.5.4.5.1.5) tests used for quality control during construction of structural fill under and backfill around the Category I structures. Present the i

results as a statistical distribution plot or by other convenient method's) to be able to verify that the specified compaction has been attained. Provide the above data for each type of fill separately I

f ar the Power Block Unit, the ESWS pumphouse, the ESWS discharge structure and the seismic Category I pipelines and electrical duct banks.

241.3 WC Provide details of the six different types of backfill and the bedding (2.5.4.5.1.

5.1.3) materials used in the construction of ECCS seismic Category I piping and electrical duct banks including gradat*on and plasticity index requirements, and principal construction criteria.

241.4 WC For the ESWS discharge structure, submit drawings showing plans and typical

'(2.5.d.5.2.1) cross sections of the limits of excavation and types of fill and backfill materials.

. 241.5 WC 1.

In Figure 2.E-47 show locations and limits of soft material, if (2.5.4.5.3) any, that was replaced by competent material during construction.

2.

For the ECCS pipeline, provide typical transverse cross section showing the excavation limits, pipe, bedding, and different kinds of backfill materials.

3.

Provide typical longitudinal section and cross section details of excavation and backfill near the interface between the ECCS pipes and the structures.

4.

What are the estimated total and differential settlements of the ECCS pipe and the structures at their interface due to both static and dynamic loads?

5.

What is the estimated settlement of the ECCS piping due to both static and dynamic loads?

i 261.6 WC Provide a copy of the Bechtel Topical Report, BC-TOP-4A, referenced (2.5.4.7) on page 2.5-199 of the FSAR.

241.7 WC Provide a plot of the magnitude and distribution of lateral earth and j

(2.5.4.10.1.3) i water pressures used in the design of subsurface walls and, on the same figure, plot the dynamic lateral pressures computed from the i

soil-structure interaction analyses due to the building and soil response under dynamic loading conditions. Provide such plots for the main powerblock structures, the ESWS pumphouse, and the ESWS discharge structure.

. 241.8 BC Revise FSAR 'igure 2.5-111 to show the location of sections GG and (Fig. 2.5-111)

HH.

241.9 WC In Figure 2.5-112 show the following missing information.

(Fig 2.5-112) a) The water levels and the piezometric surfaces used in the stability analyses for all conditions analyzed.

b) Show the minimum factor of safety and the corresponding critical sliding wedge.

241.10 WC 1.

In Figure 2.5-113 show the following missing infonnation:

(Fig.

2.5-113) a.

Subsurface soil profile and the soil parameters for each soil layer that were used in the slope stability analyses.

b.

Show the water levels and the piezometric surfaces used in the stability analyses for all conditions analyzed.

c.

Show the mininum factors of safety and the corresponding critical slip circles for each of the cases investigated.

2.

Discuss the validity of using slip circle method of analysis, particularly for the side slopes of the pumphouse intake channel (3H:lV), considering that a) the hard rock layer is in the immediate vicinity of the toe of the slope, b) for the UHS slope you choose to use the sliding wedge method of analysis. Justify the validity of the slip circle method of analysis or investigate the stability of the slopes of the ESWS pumphouse intake channel using the sliding wedge method.

! i 3.

For the cross section presented in Figure 2.5-113 explain why 1

the minimum factor of safety for the stability of (3H:lV) slope is

~

higher than the minimum factor of safety for the stability of 1

(SH:1V) slope.

241.11 WC Show the critical slip circle and the corresponding minimum factor

.(Fig.

j2.5-115) of safety for the cases investigated in the stability analyses presented I

on Figure 2.5-115. Also, correct Detail A that shows the fine filter l

layer between the coarse filter layer and the riprap layer.

i i 241.12 WC Provide a description of the monitoring system that is being used to i (2.5.6.8.4) i measure the movements of the UHS dam. Sumarize the data collected to 1

date and compare the results with the estimated movements of the UHS l

dam. Comment on the results of this comparison and its safety i

implication.

i i 241.13 WC Provide a sumary of the results of field density and moisture content

(2.5.6.4.2.4.3) tests performed in connection with quality contro' during construction of the UHS dam. Present the resu'ts as a statistical distribution plot or by other convenient methodf'. to verify that the specified compaction

)

j has been attained. Compare the compacted insitu density and moisture content of the embankment fill with those of the test specimens from which the l

design strength parameters have been determined by laboratory testing.

j Based on the above comparison, comment on the validity of the physical 1

t and strength parameters used in the design.

4 1

j

l 241.14 WC Identify the local and federal agencies that have regulatory authority (2.5.6.5.1.1) over the main dam, and the license or permit number (s); provide a brief description of the safety inspection program required and confirm your commitment to meet these requirements.

1 i

i I

i 1

I i

l i

I l

1

,