ML20049J567

Forwards Requests for Addl Info Re FSAR Review.Response Schedule Requested within 7 Days of Receipt of Ltr

ML20049J567
Person / Time
Site:	Limerick
Issue date:	03/03/1982
From:	Schwencer A Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:	Bauer E PECO ENERGY CO., (FORMERLY PHILADELPHIA ELECTRIC
References
NUDOCS 8203180385
Download: ML20049J567 (7)

Text

,_

s DISTRIBUTION:

Docket File bcc : 'TEliA LB#2 File NSIC MAR 3 Igy DEisenhut/RPurple NRC PDR RTedesco Local PDR ASchwencer ACRS (16)

HAbelson

[Osak'et"Nos.{50-352/353 ~ ]

EHylton Lewis, OELD OI&E g

o Region I VO.

Resident Inspector P.

Y 'N Y}1, SHanauer s

"fa (p, ',

i RMa ttson f'

,N e Q 5 Mr. Edward G. Bauer, Jr.

HThempson Vice President & General Counsel RVollmer

/>

ec Philadelphia Electric Company RHartfield, MPA h, tQ [).

2301 Market Street BTurovlin (CEB)

\\A '

.g6

'h'

,Q0 Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19101 JPearring (HGEB) jy i t \\p

Dear Mr. Bauer:

i Request for Addit onal Information - Limerick

Subject:

The Geotechnical Section of the Hydrologic and Geotechnical Engineering Branch has reviewed Sections 2.5.4 and 2.5.3 of the FSAR and requires the additonal information delineated in Enclosure 1.

Furth2rmore, a review of Section 9.1.2 by the Corrosion Section of the Chemical Engineering Branch indicates a need for the information specified in.

Please provide us, within 7 working days from receipt of this letter, with the date(s) on which you plan to respond to the above. Any questions concerning this information request should be directed to Dr. Harvey Abelson (x29774), the Licensing Project Manager.

l l

A. Schwencer, Chief Licensing Branch No. 2 Division of Licensing l

Enclosures :

As stated cc: See next page l

i f

8203180385 820303 PDR ADOCK 05000352

}

j A

PDR L%. L..$..

../B C DL:i E 4/PM

?

o mce>

i..

........ ~.

~ -

~

~~

suzume >

H A,y,y,},s,on :ptA@l,y,e,nc,e(,,

. 31.h2..

. 31h.6.2........

~.

- ~

~ ~ ~ - -

omy OFFIClAL RECORD COPY usom im-meo unc ronu sia oo-soi nacu om L

n. _ _ _

s Mr. Edward G. Bauer, Jr.

Vice President & General Counsel Philadel shia Electric Company -

2301 Mar tet Street Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19101 cc: Troy B. Conner, Jr., Esquire Charles W. Elliott, Esquire Conner & Wetterbahn Thomas & Hair 1747 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW 123 North Fifth Street Washington, D.C.

20006 Allentown, PA 18102 Mr. Robert W. Adle'

• Judith A. Dorsey, Esquir~e r

Assistant Counsel Limerick Ec-logy Action.

Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, DER 1315 Walnut Street, Suite 1632 505 Executive

• House Philadelphia, PA 19107 P.O. Box 2357 Harrisburg, PA 17120 Mr. Karl Abraham Public Affairs Officer Honorable Lawrence Coughlin Region I House of Representatives U.S. Nuclear Regulitory Commission Congress of the United States Washington, D.C.

20515 631 Park Avenue King of Prussia, PA 19806 Roger B. Reynolds, Jr., Esquire Mr. Jacque Durr 324 Swede Street Resident Inspector Norristown, PA 19401 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission

~

P.O. Box 47 Joseph A. Smyth Sanatoga, PA 19464 Assistant County Solicitor County of Montgomery James M. Neill, Esquire Courthouse' Associate Counsel for Del-Aware Norristown,.PA 19404 Box 511 Dublin, PA 18917 Eugene J. Bradley Philadelphia Electric Company Joseph H. White III Associate General Counsel 11 South Merion Avenue 2301 Market Street Bryn Mawr, PA 19010 Philadelphia, PA 19101

~

.Dr. Judith H. Johnsrud Mr. Vincent Boyer Co-Director Senior Vice President Environmental Coalition on Nuclear Operations Nuclear Power Philadelphia Electric Company 433 Orlando Avenue 2301 Market Street State College, PA 16801 Philadelphia, PA 19101 Thomas Gerusky, Director

~

Mr. Marvin I. Lewis Bureau of Radiation Protection

~

6504 Bra'dford TeFrace Dept. of Environmental Resources Philadel phia, PA 19149 Sth Floor ~, Fulto.n Bank. Bldg.

~

Third & Locust Streets Frank R. Romano, Chairman Harrisburg, PA 17120 Air a Wa'ter Pollution. Patrol

~

61 Forest Avenue Director, Pennsylvania Emergency Ambler, PA 19002 Management Agency Basement, Transportation &

Safety Building Harrisburg,.PA 17120 9

____. m _ _ _ _ _.

i 2-

~..

John Shniper Lawrence Brenner, Esq., Chairman

• Meeting House Law Bldg. & Gallery Administrative Judge

~

Mennonite Church Road -

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Schuylkill Road (Rt. 724)

Washington, D.C.

20555 Spring' City, PA 19475 Dr. Richard F. Cole

• Robert L. Anthony Administrative Judge Friends of the Earth of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Delaware Valley Washington, D.C.

20555 103 Vernon Lane, Box 186 Moylan, PA 19065 Dr. Peter A. Morris

• Administrative Judge Alan J. Nogee U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission The Keystone Alliance Washington, D.C.

20555 3700 Chestnut Street Philadelphia, PA 19104 W. Wilson Goode Managing Director City of Philadelphia Philadelphia, PA 19107 William A. Lochstet 119 E. Aaron Drive State College, PA 16801 Walter W. Ccnen Consumer Advocate Office of Attorney General' 1425 Strawberry Square Harrisburg, PA 17120 Steven P. Hershey, Esquire Consumers' Education & Protective Association Sylvania House Juniper & Locust Streets F

Philadelphia, PA 19107 Sugarman & Denworth Suite 510 North Americ'an Building

^

121 South. Broad Street.

[.

Philadelphia, PA 19107 j

• L..-

. Donald S. Sronstein, Esquire The National Lawyers Guild Third Floor 1425 Walnut Street Philadelphia, PA 19102 l

N i

i "B

_m _

m

=

~

FSAR Review Questions - Geotechnical Engineering Limerick Generating Station Units 1 & 2' Docket Nos. 50-458/459 Prepared by:

GES, HGEB 41.1 In accordance with Regulatory Guide 1.70,' provide, in Section 2.5.4.2 2.5.4.2) of the FSAR, a detailed and quantitat.ive discussion on the criteria-used in determining that rock samples, taken and tested from.the boring locations identified, sufficiently. define.the appropriate rock mass properties used irIthe design of' seismic Category 1 foundations at the. site.

Include discussions of the consideration given to:

1) RQD values recorded in the area of seismic Ca.tegory 1 structures, 2) the results of field seismic surveys, and 3) the results of.. laboratory sonic tests on intact cores in establishing the specific rock mass property values used in the design of seismic

~

Category 1 structures.

41.2 In accordance with Regulatory Guide 1.70, provide, in Section 2.5.4.2 2.5.4.2) of the FSAR, a summary of the results of field compaction testing.

Include results of field density and moisture content tests performed in conjunction with quality control of all backfill placement under and adjacent to safety related structures.

Present the results ih a format that will allow ready verification of c6mpliance 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, as appropriate.

141.3 In accordance with Regulatory Guide 1.70, provide, in Section' 2.5.4.2

{2. 5~. 4. 2 )

of 'the FSAR, a summary of RQD results obtained in the core drilling operation at the site.

Provide an evaluation of the signifidance of the results related to your assessment of the quality of the bedrocks at the site after yuu had completed the excavation.

41.4 Figure 2.5-18 is incorrectly titled.

The "p-q" diagram presented 2.5.4.2).

is a summary of-consolidated undrained triaxial test results rather than unconsolida'ted as reported.

The ordinate axis incorrectly identifies the value of "q" as 5)+ T rather than 63-6.

Based upon information 2

2

~

2 2

presented i.n the PSAR, it also. appears that the stress point plotted

~

at p = 10.2, q = 5.2 is incorrectly plotted.

Please revise this figure as appropriate, and, if necessary, present revised design curve values of6r and V.

~

t

("\\,

~.

i n

-24 g

41.5 In accordance witIi _ Regulatory Guide 1.'70, present, in Section '2.5.4.5 I.5.4.5) of the FSAR, on plot plans and on geologic. sections a'n'd profiles, th'e 2

location and limits of excavations', fills and backfills associated with each seismic Category 1 structure.

For the electrical duct

~

bank runs and seismic Category 1 pipel'ines\\ indicate limits of

, excavation and include a soil profile indicating depth of each type of fill.and backfill material used.- Limits and specifications.for special embedment materials for pipes should also be ~ identified as appropriate.

,41.6 In accordance with Re'gulatory Guide 1.70, expand the discussion of 2.5.4.5) structural fill and backfill materials presented in Section 2.5.4.5 of.the FSAR to include information related to' the design : strength properties of the concrete fill materials used at the site.

Cite standards and specificatio.n that govern the mix proportioning of the concrete. materials and the mixing, transportation and placing of the backfill materials.

Also cite the appropriate testing, standards used in conjunction with Quality Control of backfill placement to assure compliance with the established specifications for these concrete backfill materials.

Present the results of the testing in a format that will allow ready verification of compliance with >

specifications for each type of fill concrete use'd.

Sl.7 In accordance with Regulatory Guide 1.70, present,'in Section 2.5.4.5 2.5.4.5) of the FSAR, details of any instrumentation program used in monitoring rock heave and rebound.

If such a program was not implemented, provide your rationale supporting that decision.

Sf.8 7 accordance with Regulatory Guide 1.70, expand the discussion o'f 2.5.4.10) static stability' of safety related structures presented in Section 2.5.4.10 of the FSAR.to include an analysis of those safety related structures and components not founded on bedrock.

Include an analysis '

of bearing capacity of the foundation soils for each structure and estimate settlement (total and differential) of each structure.

Identify design strength values of the fill and backfill materials used in the analyses and provide rationale supporting the appropriateness of the values. selected.

Also present estimates of the b' earing pressure s

, of individual. foundations founded on soils and detaiils of the method of estimating settlements used in your analyses.

$1.9 In accordance with Regulatory Guide 1.70, present, in Section 2.5.4.10 3.5.4.10) of the FSAR, a discussion and evaluation of the static.and dynamic lateral earth pressures and groundwater loads acting on plant f'acilities.

Include information related to the method used in estimating the static and dynamic lateral earth pressures 'on subsurface walls.

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.

i l

l t

l

m i

f'41.10 In accordance with Regulatory Guide 1.70, present, in Section 2.5.4.13'

'2.5.4.13) of the FSAR, details of all instruments for surveillance of foundation settlements which were installed to validate the predictions presented in Section 2.5.4.10 of the FSAR.

Identify the type, location, and schedule for reading for each instrument.'e If instruments were not installed, discuss the rational used.in deciding against their use.

~

{41.11 In accordance with Regulatory Guide 1.70,. provide, in the appropriate 2.5.5)

., subsections of Section 2.5.5 of the FSAR, the following information:

a)

Cross sections of the seismic CaEegory 1 dikes surrounding the refueling water storage tanks and the condensate storage tank.

Include a typical section of the dike foundation to bedrock and provide engineering properties of the soils used.in construction of the dike and of the soils comprising each strata of the foundation.

Identify all slope protection features such as asphalt blankets, shoterete, or gunite.

Also include a discussion of procedures used to esthate, from available field and laboratory data, the assigned soil properties values used in design.'

~'

b)

Provide infor::1ation concerning the static and dynamic slope

~

stability of the dikes.

Discuss methods of &nalysis used, including reasons for their use, present tables of analyses results indicating design case analyzed, material strengths assumed, and type of failure surface considered.

Assumed failure surfaces should be included in the graphic display of the dike cross section.

Include in your analysis a discussion of, liquefaction potential and of potential permanent displacement due to dynamic earthquake loading.

c)

Describe the field boring and laboratory testing programs carried out in support of the slope stability studies relat'ed to the dike

analysis, provide a summary of the laboratory test results.

d)

Discuss dike construction procedures and compaction control procedures used.

Present data validating that the planned degree of compaction was attained.

Include references to:the Quality Control' requirements for these procedures in appropriate quality

'a'ssurance' sections of the FSAR.' Provide a commitment to meet the inspection provisions of Regulatory Guide 1.127 for these dikes.

l41.I2 In accordance with Regulatory Guide 1.70, provide, in appropriate 2.5.5) subsections of-Section 2.5.5.of the FSAR, tlie following information related to the' stability of rock slopes:

i

~

' ?,

a)

Describe and' illustrate all rock slopes in detail.

Provide in.

plan and in cross-section the' limits of cut, benching, retaining walls and other slope protection construction such as shotcrete or gunite.

Identifies all-are'as that required rock., b.olting.

o b)

Identify rock material types and dip o#f bedding.

Provide details of the static and dynamic engineering properties of'the rock used-in' your stability analyses.

Consider in your discussion the presence or absence of weak layers or seams and justify your selected design strengths.

Describe the me.thods use.d for static and dynamic analyses.

Present'the results of-the stability analysis in tables identifying design case analyzed,

, strength assumption for materi.als, and type of failure plane

- (i.e., single plane, joint sets, joint places etc).

Also include a discussion of the potential for. movement of rock slopes under earthquaRe loading.

c)

Include a commitment to meet the inspSction provisions of Regulatory Guide 1.127 for the slopes of the Spray Pond.

8 e

st a.

G w

4 e

.e e

O 4

0 p

e e

e

e.

= _ _ _ _ _

t 1

Enclosur_e 2 D

ENCLOSURE Philadelphia Electric Company Limerick Generating Station Units 1 and 2 Docket Numbers 50-352/353 Chemical Engineering ' Branch

~

Corrosion Enginee. ring Section

~

Request for Information 282.1 The information you have provided. in the FSAR is not sufficient (9.1.2)~

for us to evaluate the compatibility and corrosion resistance of material wetted by the spent fuel storage pool water.

Provide the type and generic specifications of the aluminum

'and stainless steels used in the spent fuel pool.and address the potential for galvanic corrosion at points of dissimilar '

metal contact.

e 6

9 e

e e

s 9

e 3

)

l 1

~

\\

t l

}

l