ML20040E237
| ML20040E237 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Seabrook  |
| Issue date: | 01/12/1982 |
| From: | Miraglia F Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Tallman W PUBLIC SERVICE CO. OF NEW HAMPSHIRE |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8202040050 | |
| Download: ML20040E237 (7) | |
Text
^
_.vf.
.g 4
s DISTR ud:
Docket File 50-443/444 D
LPDR
'N PDR
,Q, -
JAN 121982 NSIC 9
_C 7/" 9 TERA B'
l
~
LB#3 Files i
W;,
p &. -;, ' I i992% -
Docket Hos.:
50-443/444 RTedesco DEirenhut/RPurple w,.,Lp SHanauer
.Y,, ~" ?
Mr. William C. Tallman RVollmer
'O h/T1TD,3 7
Chairman and Chief Executive RMattson Officer HThompson Public Service Company of OELD New Hampshire MPA 1000 Elm Street FJMiraglia Manchester, New Hampshire 03105 LLWheeler GLear
Dear Mr. Tallman:
ACRS (16)
IE (3)
Subject:
Request for Additional Information - Seabrook Station Enclosed is a list of additional information required by the Geotechnical Engineering Section, Ilydrologic and Geotechnical Engineering Branch for the review of FSAR Sections 2.5.4 through 2.5.6.
Your responses should be received by the Seabrook Project Manager, Mr. L. Wheeler, not later than February 10, 1982.
If there are any questions regarding this request, you should contact ifr. Wheeler at (301) 492-7792.
Sincerely, Frank J. Miraglia, Chief Licensing Branch No. 3 Division of Licensing
Enclosure:
As stated cc: See next page, i
8202040050 820112 PDR ADOCK 05000443 A
PDR A, / /
"'c'>
...pl.:LB#.3..,.DL '
..gheeJ,e{p,q
{,,1i[aglia lL 5""">
r
)J/82 om) 1/jt/8382
...(.
. p.
nac rosu aie no eoincu o240 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY
- "o =-32"2'
s SEABR0QX William C. Tallman Chairman and Chief Executive Of ficer Public Service Company of New Hampshire P. O. Box 330 Manchester, New Hampshire 03105 John A. Ritscher, Esq.
E. Tupper Kinder, Esq.
Ropes and Gray Assistant Attorney General 225 Franklin Street Office of Attorney General Boston, Massachusetts 02110 208 State House Annex Concord, New Hampshire 03301 Mr. Bruce B. Beckley, Project Manager Public Service Company of New Hampshire The Honorable Arnold Wight P. O. Box 330 New Hampshire House of Representatives Manchester, New Hampshire 03105 Science, Technology and Energy Committee State House G. Sanborn Concord, New Hampshire 03301 U..S. NRC - Region I 631 Park Avenue Resident Inspector King of Prussia, Pennsylvania 19406 Seabrook Nuclear Power Station c/o V. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Ms. Elizabeth H. Weinhold P. O. Box 1149
~
3 Godfrey Avenue Seabrook, New Hampshire 03874 Hampton, New Hampshire 03842 Mr. John DeVincentis, Project Manager Robert A. Backus, Esq.
Yankee Atomic Electric Company
-~
O'Neill, Backus and Spielman 1671 Worcester Road 116 Lowell Street Farmingham, Massachusetts 01701 Manchester, New Hampshire 03105 Mr. G. F. Cole, Project Manager
~
Norman Ross, Esq.
United Engineers and Constructors 30 Francis Street 30 South 17tW Street Brookline, Massachusetts 02146 Post Office Box 8223 Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19101 Karin P. Sheldon, Esq.
Sheldon, Harmon & Weiss Mr. W. Wright, Project Manager 1725 1 Street, N. W.
Westinghouse Electric Corporation Washington, D. C.
20006 Post Office Box 355
~
Pittsburg, Pennsylvania 15230 Laurie Burt, Esq.
Office of the Assistant Attorney General Thomas Dignan, Esq.
Environmental Protection Division Ropes and Gray One Ashburton Place 225 Franklin Street Boston, Massachusetts 02108 Boston, Massachusetts 02110
- 0. Pierre G. Cameron, Jr., Esq.
General Counsel Public Service Company of New Hampshire P. O. Box 330 Manchester, New Hampshire 03105
Geotechnical Engineering FSAR Review Questions l
Seabrook Station Unit 1 and 2 Docket Nos. 50-443/444 Prepared by:
J. R. Pearring, GES, HGEB 241.1 In accordance with Reg Guide 1.70, provide, in Section 2.5.4.2 of the (2.5.4.2)
FSAR, a detailed and quantitative discussion of the criteria used in determining that rock samples taken and tested from the boring locations identified sufficiently define the appropriate properties used in the design of Seismic Category 1 foundations at the site.
Include discussions of the considerations given to field RQD values and the results of field seismic surveys and laboratory sonic tests in your projection of rock properties throughout the site.
241. 2 In accordance with Reg. Guide 1.70, provide, in Section 2.5.4.2 of the (2.5.4.2)
FSAR, a summary of the results of field compaction testing to include results of field density and moisture content tests performed in conjunction with Quality Control of backfill placement under and adjacent to safety related structures.
Present the results in a format that will allow ready verification of compliance with compaction specifications for each type of fill and backfill material used.
Present separate data for each type of backfill material including separate breakouts of data for materials placed in conjunction with Seismic Category 1 structures, electrical duct banks, manholes, pipelines and for safety related flood protection structures.
L 1
, 241.3 In accordance with Reg. Guide 1.70, provide, in Section 2.5.4.2 of (2.5.4.2) the FSAR, a summary of RQD results obtained in the core drilling operations at the site.
Provide an evaluation of the significance of the results related to your assessment of the quality of the bedrock at the site after completion of excavation.
241.4 In accordance with Reg Guide 1.70 present in Section 2.5.4.5 of the (2.5.4.5)
FSAR, on plot plans and on geologic sections and profiles, the location and limits of excavations, fills and backfills associated with the PreAction valve buildings, the enclosure for the Condensate Storage Tank, Tank Farm (tunnels), including dikes and foundations for refueling water storage tanks (RWST) and reactor makeup water storage
~
tank, and the protective structures addressed in Section 2.4.5.5 of the FSAR.
241.5 In accordance with Reg. Guide 1.70, provide, in Section 2.5.4.5 of the (2.5.4.5)
FSAR, figures showing plans and cross sections of typical as-constructed sections of Seismic Category 1 pipelines and electrical duct bank runs.
Indicate limits of excavation and include a soil profile indicating e
depth of each type of fill and backfill material used.
Limits of special embedment materials such as sand cement mixtures should also be identified.
l s
- 241.6 In accordance w!th Reg. Guide 1.70, present, in Section 2.5.4.5, full (2.5.4.5.b) details of the monitoring measures used in making the observations identified in subsection 2.5.4.5.b.
Present a summary of the data collected to date and describe the criteria used in your decision to terminate the vbservations.
241.7 In accordance with Reg. Guide 1.70, identify, in Section 2.5.4.7 of the (2.5.4.7)
FSAR, the design values of the dynamic properties of the soils and rock for each soil profile used in your analysis of the response of soils to dynamic (seismic and wave) loading conditions.
Discuss and justify the process used in selecting each design value and the appropriateness of the selected design value in relation to its compatibility to the analytic model used in the analysis.
Include ':nformation for typical soil profiles associated with each foundation for Seismic CategoFy 1 structures as identified in Table 3.2-1 of the FSAR and the foundations of the four safety related protective structures as identified in Section 2-4.5.5 of the FSAR.
241.8 In accordance with Reg. Guide 1.70, exparJ, in Section 2.5.4.8 of the (2.5.4.8)
FSAR, the discussion of Liquefaction Potential of Foundation Materials and structural backfill under and adjacent to Seismic Category I and safety related structures to provide support and justification for the position taken that the backfill materials used at the site are not now, nor in the future will become, susceptible to liquefaction.
Discuss
~
o
.a.
how compacting the structural fill and backfill to 95% maximum dry density detennined by AST11 Test Method designation 1557-70 will preclude liquefaction and/or excessive settlement of the fill and backfill under SSE loading by referencing studies or analyses by others which w.re used to support your determinations.
241.9 In accordance with Reg. Guide 1.70, identify, in Section 2.5.4.10 of (2.5.4.10) the FSAR, the design values of the static properties of the rock and all backfill materials used in conjunction with Seismic Category 1 and protective facility design analyses.
Discuss and justify the process used in selecting the design values.
Describe in detail the methods employed in the analysis of bearing capacity and settlement and justify the applicability of the method to the site conditions. Present information in this subsection to describe the type of foundation for each Seismic Category 1 and safety related structure, the size of each mat and the static bearing pressure exe' rted by the mat on the foundation
~
material.
241.10 In accordance with Reg. Guide 1.70, describe, in Section 2.5.4.10 of (2.5.4.10) the FSAR, the methods used to estimate the dynamic lateral earth pressures
(
on subsurface walls of the plant facilities.
Provide the maximum pressures calculated and the vertical distribution of those pressures on subsurface walls of Seismic Category 1 structures. Substantiate the soil strength design parameters used, based upon as-built data presented in Section 2.5.4.2 of the FSAR.
, t
. 241.11 In accordance with Reg. Guide 1.70, present, in Section 2.5.5 of the (2.5.5)
FSAR, information concerning the static and dynamic-(earthquake and wave) stability of slopes associated with the protective structure identified in Section 2.4.5.5 of the FSAR.
Include effect of SSE loading in the dynamic stability analysis and provide an estimate of slope displacements anticipated during an SSE.
Present this information.under subsections 2.5.5.1 through 2.5.5.4, as appropriate.
9 4
m
- gw--,