ML20084L626

Questions J Keppler Statement That Util Projected Schedule for Finishing Unit 2 by Dec 1986 Attainable & No Caseload Forecast Panel Evaluation Planned.Objective Caseload Forecast Panel Evaluation Requested

ML20084L626
Person / Time
Site:	Midland
Issue date:	05/10/1984
From:	Sinclair M SINCLAIR, M.P.
To:	Palladino N NRC COMMISSION (OCM)
References
OL, OM, NUDOCS 8405140554
Download: ML20084L626 (13)

Text

{{#Wiki_filter:. 5711 Summerset Drive Midland, MI 48640 May 10,1984 00CKETED .b o/h PROD. f, UTIL. FAC..d.,. Qra. 00 CITT l'Uf *"ft Sb 330 0/(M '84 tiAY 14 A10:02 Chairman Nunzio Palladino Nuclear Regulatory Commission 1717 H Street ,7, n u. t Washington, D.C. 20555 i. l

Dear Chairman Palladino:

If you are ever to get the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's (NRC) house in order, then you cannot allow the kind of actions that Mr. James Keppler has taken on the l Midland nuclear plant issues go unquestioned. l Last Friday, at a public meeting in Midland, Mr. James Keppler, Regional III NRC director, stated that he believed Consumers Power Co.'s (CPCo) projected i schedule for finishing Unit 2 of the Midland nuclear plant by December,1986, was t " attainable". He then said that there would be no Caseload Forecast Panel evaluation of the plant's completion by the NRC at this time as has always occurred in the past I when the utility has made its forecasts. Needless to say, the utility has never been right. Thus, at a time when an objective evaluation of possible construction completion is most needed by the public, he is deliberately withholding it. l He has made this statement without confronting significant problems at this nuclear plant that are a matter of record, and that not only raise questions about l l whether the plant is licensable, but whether the plant can be completed at all. i Before Mr. Keppler could have, with any degree of integrity, told this community that the CPCo completion schedule was " attainable", he should have had answers to at least the following serious problems, some of which I had in my April 28;" 1984 f . statement to the Commission. Some of these problems are insurmountable in the l time period from now until Deceder,1986.

1) The diesel generator building (DGB) does not meet FSAR requirements, accord-t ing to the report of the special task force selected by the NRC to study it, the Brookhaven Task Force. Previous to their study, Dr. Ross Landsman, chief soil inspector at l

- Midland, and the Army Corps of Engineers, consultant to the NRC at Midland, both stated the building is inadequate. This makes that building unlicensable, if the NRC i l follows its regulations. l r

2) During underpinning, the soils bearing capacity under the concrete piers was found to be 1/2 the bearing capacity that was set out in the original analysis--

the basis on which the engineering design for the underpinning was made. This is causing significant unanticipated problems on site. 8405140554 840510 n PDR ADOCK 05000329 U l g PM

Page Two Chairman Nunzio Palladino May 10,1984

3) NRC standards for underpinning the auxiliary building called for holding the movement of the building to 1/8" tolerance. Yet there are now so many cracks i

developing in this building, that it has been necessary to establish criteria for which [ ones are to be mapped and reported to the NRC. (Stone and Webster Public Meeting, i February 9,1984).

4) Almost at the same time that the Construction Completion Plan (CCP) was approved last October, there were 9 Stop Work Orders that affected all safety sys-tems because of design and document problems. This held up its implementation until the end of February,1984

5) At the present time, only 2% of the CCP has been implemented.

These are just a few of the many serious problems at Mi_dland that make it questionable whether the plant can be completed. If Mr. Keppler says publicly that CPCo's December,1986, schedule is attainable, isn't it essential that he explain how he will resolve these intractable issues in recommending that an operating license be given for this plant? A good example of Mr. Keppler's own predictive powers can be found in his ( hearing testimonyon May 3,1983, a year ago, in which he thought.that the CCP would be approved within 3 weeks of that date and that within 6 months of the date they.would know how it was working (see Attachment 1). That would have been last October--the date when the CCP was finally approved. One year later, the project is only 2 ~ months into its implementation. In their lawsuit terminating their steam contract, the Dow Chemical Co. charged [ that CPCo kept 2 sets of books on construction completion and costs,-one for the public.and Dow, and the other, an internal set, that reflected reality. Given these charges, why is Mr. Keppler so ready to believe CPCo at this late date on their construction completion date? Dow also charged CPCo with having the knowledge that the soils were poorly l compacted sitewide in 1977, and that, in fact, the soils' testing techniques were r deliberately altered to provide favorable results (see Attachment 2). Mr. Keppler should explain why he did not vigorously pursue this information which was also disclosed during the hearings several years ago, lie should also explain to the Commission and to the public how such a key sitewide problem can be overcome and corrected to get this nuclear plant on line by December,1986 In my statement before the NRC on April 28, 1984, I asked that the Commission i personally involve themselves in assisting the pu'ilic to get a realistic assessment of the construction completion date for the Midland nuclear plant, if indeed it can be completed. F r ,,.,-,n -,--.---n-,

t Page Three Chairman Nunzio Palladino May 10,1984 r It is hard for us to believe that you have sanctioned and that you support Mr. Keppler's position that he stated here in Midland on May 4. I am asking you to require Mr. Keppler to reply to the issues discussed here and to explain to you and to the public how they can be resolved. I am asking you again to give us an objective Caseload Forecast Panel evaluation l of the Midland nuclear plant that takes into account the issues we have set forth here. l l I deeply appreciate your attention to this problem. t i Yours sincerely, Mary Sinclai l-MS/jt r j Enclosures (2) l cc: Commissioner Victor Gilinsky Mr. James Keppler , Won '~/T/g/ n /c-( Commissioner James Asselstine .5'e 8a y/ / ev Commissioner Frederick Bernthal .Sem. Commissioner Thomas Roberts g, ,,,,5 mn % A /hoS/d Judge Charles Bechhoefer -g g m,4,/,Q /9. //a e.s i Judge Frederick P. Cowan ,j, gA 7;/,,, re e h-t Judge Jerry Harbour l Secretary, U.S. NRC l Michael I. Miller, Esq. i William Paton, Esq. l Mr. Wendell Marshall e Ms. Barbara Stamiris I James E. Brunner l Governor James Blanchard h Attorney General Frank Kelley l Roger Fischer, PSC Joe Tuchinsky, Michigan Citizens Lobby l Lynne Bernabei, GAP l 1 I i

ATTACIIMENT 1 W /7 p 7 15674 1 be met in order for you to provide reasonable 2 s assurance that the Midland plant can be completed 3 consistent with regulatory requirements. In your 4 n opinion, how long will it take for these programs 5 to be implemented so that you can judge their 6 effectiveness? [ 7 j g yould say that we'd probably be in a k 8 good position to judge their effectiveness within l 8 six months. 10 i i 11 { 12 l t I 13 i 14 15 i 16 i 17 l I t 18 I i l 19 i

I 20 !

i { l W l } 22 I 22 . e., I 23 i ( 24 l I 25 5 I f

/Clo75~ 1 O Within six months. Within six m'onths of 2 the beginning of the program? 3 A Well, within six months from now. I 4 Q But some of the programs.have not yet been 5 either begun'or implemented, is that correct? 6 A That's correct. But I believe tha t the --~ 7 I believe that the staff is close to approving the 0 IDVP-ICVP programs, and I think that Region III I 9 should be in a position to -- well, let me qualify 10 it by saying that depending upon the acceptability I 11 9 of the an swe rs provided by Consumers Power Company, l 12 g which the staff really hasn't reviewed yet', that 13 if the ' ues tions that we'v.e asked are answered we q should be in a position to approve the cons truction 15 completion program in another three weeks or so. l 16 That will give a period of five months us 17 or so to observe how things are going, and I would 18 6 like to think that that would be a at least give 19 us an indicator as to how things are going. g But, by my answer, I'm not proposing that 21 we would stop any overview programs at that time, 22 or anything else. No qualifica tions on that n statement. 24 j Q But in six months you could determine u whether the programs are performing as you would

2 156h i I l expect or as you hope? 2 A That's my guess at t'h is point. 3 Q Now, how long do you think i t would take 4 a construction verification program to determine t 5 the problems at Midland? l 6 A To do the whole program? Oh, I have no 7 idea at the moment. 8 I O Well, given your experience at Zimmer and f t 9 your estimate of the comparison between the two I l 10 plants, how long would you estimate th a t process i I 11 would take simply to identify the exis ting problem? 12 A I can't say in case of Midland because 13 it's really a comparison of apples and oranges right { 14 now. a .15 i Q Has your staff ever given you an l 16 indication of how long they believe it will take?' i !l 17 A No. 18 O Now, in answer to one of Judge Bechhoefer's I 19 questions you mentioned that Midland would be i in { any comparison of plants in Region III would be 21 considered poor in QA performance. I believe that' a2 was your tes timony ? I I 23 l MR. PATON: I object. 24 MR. MILLER: I don't believe that's a fair i 25 characterization of his testimony. I believe he said

2-3 I I 15677 1 ( it would be one of the lower plants. 2 BY MS. BERNABEI: 3 0 I Okay, one'of the lower plants? \\ A Yes. 5 Q Now, y$u're familiar with the Commission 6 meeting in the summe r of 1982 in which the 7 Commission examined the quality assurance performance 8 of -- well, quality assurance ques tions with 8 the i staff, are you not? Quality assurance problems 10 in the industry. 11 A Yes. 12 Q And, at that meeting, five plants were 13 mentioned as the five I don't know how'd you say 14 i it I five bad plants in the United States in terms A I l of QA i performance, is that correct? I 16 A In the tes timony by the NRC to I t Congressman Udall I 18 months ago there were five - 18 i plants that were singled out hs i I8 having major quality assurance difficulties. Q And Midland was 21 b one of those plants? 1 A That's correct. 22 f Q Mr. Keppler, I believe your testimony was 23 l j th a t do you believe the third party overview 24 i programs should -- well, I believe the - one of u the -- well, two of the major factors in giving i d

tECAt DEPAaTMENT ATTACHMENT 2 t.w cu a, o.* E c.,in

• w J,a, e..ac.. x c.,t.a,

.nJ Cearrat C.enn.ed J E Bewaa.e Ju.h. A C ph.mt.qq J u. a .yp h H . C .a,

• J AN.a S 5.u Ch.ee.s D O.weaa 1l O K P.e.e..a J.ai.. W D.enpoey a

f 188 I J Wdb.a. E we.a.e Jona P oect., y,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, c,,m,,,, u as C' f[t$]l3 gU G eg., Hsu naU$ W8IJ R.b.ri.J By.e. taur.a. H Hoes..ny M.w.e E Chet Swsea E.rt 6.e.a W.ya. A K.ekty o.wi .y E H.g.a A M.hes.a.. ,r.ak n Ka.a 3rse.oe Aasurarys J. a. W K.es.8w At c.a.<.I oft.c : 212 West M.chisea Av.aue, Jacuoa. us 4s2oi. cst 7: 788 osso Z,,^o"*,*c',,,,,, wrii.< o.r.ct Deal Numb.c. (517) 788-1257 P.ul. H Mell. n,i m u si.. via. P P,. a..a. o.a a n. Gr. gory A E.ad. April 30, 1984 '*;*u,'.'""' o.ani r rn t v.o .,. J v g.: M.cs..i G w.e Aseoraryn Dr. Frederick P. Cowan Atomic Safety & Licensing Board Panel 6152 N. Verde Trail Apt. B-125 Boca Raton, FL 33433 Mr. Charles Bechhoefer, Esq. Dr. Jerry Harbour Atomic Safety & Licensing Atomic Safety & Licensing Board Panel Board Panel U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Conmission U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission East-West Towers East-West Towers Room E-413 Room E-454 4350 East-West Highway 4350 East-West Highway Bethesda, MD 20014 Bethesda, MD 20014 Centlemen: Consumers Power Company has become aware of apparent discrepancies in records of several borings made during the 1977 investigation of the settlement of the administration building at Midland. I have attached copies of records illustrating the dif ferences. The documents attached have I previously been provided or made available to the parties either in the soils l l hearings or by inclusion in responses to questions under 10 CFR 50.54(f) or in the FSAR. At least two of the bocing records in question were introduced into evidence by Mrs. Stamiris in the soils proceedings in 1981. (Stamiris Ex. 27, identified at Tr. 4290, introduced August 13, 1981 at Tr. 4339 and l Stamiris Ex. 19, ID at Tr." 3437, introduced August 13, 1981 at Tr. 4339)

2 The apparent discrepancies in each instance relate to a parameter used in the " standard penetration test." The Board may recall that the standard penetration test is carried out by driving a sampler into the ground with known force and counting the number of blows needed to penetrate a pre-determined distance in the soil. The number of blows is referred to as the " blow count," which provides an indication of the density of the soil. A force is administered to the sampler by dropping a weight attached to the boring mechanism from a specified height, teferred to in the boring records as the " fall." (See the space designated "saaple hammer weight / fall" five boxes down on left of boring records.) Some of the versions of the boring records show a fall of 18 inches; others show a fall of 30 inches. I an advised that the applicable ASTM specification would call for a fall of 30 inches. i The Company has reached no conclusions as to the cause or significance, [ if any, of the differences in the records, and the matter is under investigation. t Very truly yours, s J Wp <- lN'A James E. Brunner CC OL/OM Service List r y

v. BORit'G LOG

• ~~".::.,:.: >.=t> r: =

l :n.1,.1 : F i-"- l 1 f...... Ivapc' attr & Acril:ary sity. l At Tc,oting I-CA r e~ j 'y.. =.

t. 5

. se, 6.*25/77 f.*2 3 /7 7 sincleter.

• 'ri l l:.n el r*:r. 5 5 C 5*

l, l,,,j,g, _e. o.. 14 631.C Seg Nrtes l......~...... 340 lb/3r :.-ches I kone J. P. Givene ,r

!:i

.t. et NCTn aTION 1 . cows ,hl.b.::u.r s

: a :*

t r

r 5

s t a-- .s p ",,; . l.

i

i r

1 1 11li. 533.0 0 , 7c & l g 0-3.5' Silty ran,d, tan frill) !* aucer to 6 W -T Drilling w *. 5* fppj -(sP/SM) . /us; s 629.5

3. {g 3,3 4,3 c,3,7,

,,g,,,,, 4*.rac=ne ar.d fjr. a.s i a ssils is 1 3C i 15 1 19 111 57/1 4.5.t.5

• Claycy rant to se.ndy : ley, ] i' 1**in7 S yp T

yf gray, very sti*f, slight te low 'F*M EsJ16 l131 23 12 11 112 y#l./l < 2_ Flasticity, slight moisture i sC/C:.) g4, p y"s 4*5-i IIIIII 623.5 S. ** 3 8,'T4' 55816 16 33 10 l 15 l 18 10 - lllllll.9.5 12.0' Clayey silt, brnwn, pas g=4**t- "sr

• 2 4I <t lin pebbles to 1/2", rust stain, low ss i t 1 18 8 30 10 f 15 115 621.0 12,

12.0-15.5 silty clay, brown vita 4 tnoisture. Iow plasticity t w:.it rill) g_eg,4,$, 737 ,jc.g 1 U " T#* low ss!It ile15s 10 21 37 617.5 1.".w;35. ac*i s ture,.Y, lov Plasticip,hard: 1.) ',I,U ' nebbles to 1/2 C;5 (n ne. sand) p E*~

• O

""d* '#*I ss la i16 SE '13 24 32 615.0 ,I f.h' -- arrained, erosst, trace' silt, OPE =4.5+ Tsr e 614.0 very 4-75 7 55l18 121 32 10 15 17 612*5 20*t (. I / -{12.0-19.0 3rown sandy Clay, v:ta P,7=4.5+ 757 .f', 3 3 -. sear s sand (C:.) trill) pp9,4 37 -- /.fa#4 6 1115.0 20.5' (; ray _'e-d. d er.se (57) (T:ll;Opf=4.5..sy ssIls 12125 l11 f 14 f15 9 s f gi r ** 60s.5 2, a 20.5-24.5 sz1ry cley, crown wzen q. .g g ddish tint.very staff (CL) ,, 3,3. 'pf,3;,,,, .ya ssl18 121 43 10 1 21 22 607 0 D:.. e122.0'3rown (reddish tint cone)(ril 26 v..., enu

• vre o *'>

l)7]{;inoon, rod 6 (fM,'9 605.0 28 '24.5-26.0' r.andy clav to clayey 'Li &% 1 ssels 12! 59 15 24 35 / . Sand, with seams cif Tand, stones g h* 30 h 0g Lto I inch (till) ss. 18 115l 5t I12 13 '45 1 y-,de3se, trace to little crganics

26. 0-26. c ' S tity sand, dark gray, j(("r LA '" # #? (

r-600.0 3 3.- 55 e H 12 EE* 62 PE ",g yggw) gyg}gy Cesing *.o 'l.0* jy'gG I 35 . VJa 5 j28.0-31.5* silty clay, brown, hard

• *j* ['#

tsti? 12 p?. 87 P1 st, uP: (CL) ( 596.5 36.5.

29.5, rill) up sides a

.2 out 1-d h sand sear g

31.5-33.0*

hole' j Sandy Clay, brown, hard, 'Spuoj Op10 (sand) ,. (CL)._ tan sand, sean at 12.0' 33.0-36.J' rine to mediu= sand, f1711=4.5+ TsF Op12 (sand) 4.N7" brown, very dense, trnce clay, low

roisture (SP)

Opl3 (sand) '( Total Depth 36.5* Op14 (sand) rievation Botton 596.5 Water at it. 4 ' while drilling hM water level at 5.1' after drilling. l . A T,b pp: so.A. a l LO et/fD

• f.

o 95316529 t e..... Evaporatot and Auwi1iary soiler Bui3 ding E

• ._7

- ~ ~ . r., 2A-210-153 ['5.181 C?- 18 S*..*.

5 5186 E305 l 90* l Diess! Genstst*r Building l g,g, ~ uw. am e. . 1m4 ,m. (Ab31 9/29/77 9/30/77 Singleton a-esie s CME-553 5* r.a. w.A. 31.5' . m.... M.A. M.A* 12 N.A. 629.4 See notes M.A. F u. ,u 140 It/30 f r.. None Jerry B. Givens PtNCTR ATION 1; ! I i i *r i news r I g 1 [* 8, ......a y s s pl l [:j L ji i I t 8 3 629.4 0 0-4.5' Silty to sandy Clay, gray, 5" auger to 20.5',

• 119ht to low plasticity. (CL)' trill) set easing, besar drilling with 4*

b5

1. 5 i c. 9 ' 21 17 10 11 624.9 a5 yJ g

4.5-7.4' sand, tan, medium dense, tricon. roller slightly moist (rill) ($P) bit and recirc-I ulating water. 5 1d'1.f 34+ 10 10 24/4 622.0

7. 4'

,p 1 621.4 ga 7.4-s' concrete mudmat 55

1. 5' O.f 16 5

5 11 0-25.5' $11ty to sandy Clay, gray, %1=4TSr little gravel, low moist. Iow Op 2 = (sand) ss L. 5, 0. 5" 31 16 17 14 4 plasticity, very stif f to hard (CLl?p 1 = sar..ple ill) akS UP at 3.5 55

1. 5' O.F 26 10 10 16

[ ~ 15" on 4 = 4.5+ TSr ." { Op 5 = sample 5s i.F a.T 47 10 22 23 crumbles, low 55 1.5 1.2 65 15 29 36 moisture 1 20" op 6 = 4.5 T5r sh a.s A.D 27 16 23 JJ [ op 7 = 4.5 T5r ,g, Op 8 = 4.5* TSF Es A.) A.0 3E 40 JJ 23 23-24.2' Soap of clayey Sand, with Qo 9 (tio) 9 603.3 g5g [ trace organics, grayish brown 4.5+ T$r la 24.2' Tan, medium sand sear., lov Op 10 (sand) ss 1. 5' O.f 107 30 44 63 'j- -- moist. Op 11 (sand) ss

1. 3-G. 6 ', 113 35 49 64

'.E 25.5-31.5' Silty sand, brown, 7 medium grained, wet, very dense Hole caving in 30 l ss

1. D' O. r la2+

44 la2 997.9 v& iw-G (SM) at 22' so used "I " * " l tottom of boring at 31.5' t'ater level at 10.4' after drilling. Hole backfilled with soil after coroletion. 1 l J a ~... .. m .u. oiesel cenerator suilding n 1 l Revision 13 6/82 D.1-319 L I

r BORING LOG l nio u ac n a a e a t w.rl,22.o l i-, l c . ~.. ~.... l.. - ~ ~ .. ~ / l ptsset. GenzAn-y 8t.ac.. .S, s-j E c. S. So 5 e go f._............ 7 2/23!77,2/20.l77 SwaLET NCE! DR!L. O'c'~-SSO S" t 3/.S' ......... -.... ~... - .. ~,.-...

---

l l 2.

62.9.4 (sez no,--ts cot..) /So F// g " l Aron E s/ Erit.~/ S. GIVe>us

. s n cmrio-i.

.i:: !!,.ili.;i w$ - ~ ~. 1; ..l.... i, i., 18lIli.ji;;*'I i,1 (,zs.4 l l l .9, y..* G Aq sLoc.ar 70 a.:n tan::.r.o '.fet) s. o v r. o~~. ' 1 o '. a. L. :ss rr to :,. so. e u. * ~~ s, .\\ sc,1+.9 P* y.t..w.s -7. est *! 4., <S a M N-@ l =t e zo l17 s ia a ei

..: 1.5',c..:

- ~ <>. ren, rseos serv a ena c, r,r.,Ls.ss, c., w on w

- '.

\\*:!i1 ". *.'t ' '.*, e~ f.'- 'cwu.) (:')

.C.,e:si.c u +" ret. c.on e u s.a. , i c. ic szw L* 2. 2. g 'a A *g,'e\\ e: -~w-i r., e 5' s5 a nG 2.I..* -.Zs.,y,.g* t e..,, g, S * :n,y

. :: :.g.s. c s c..

o :au o y.:, y A"O RECIALVM

..v Ve ca cY, s.

• r rs G.t se vsL, s.ow noi:j.

c s 6 3t.o w pa(sa:, re.o ry, ydr,,.f ar;.= 5 yo ' W M'*-- . A.. t ?s /.E'ro.f1 2 1 l 14. l t7 6 la Cp W e J.y: p C 4.) j/ Z 451/.5 nc.G. 2. C. t /0 * /c I /.,__ ~ d "p }lr;A.D f 6 f g q =.h4 l/2 e Z Z. e 2 S 1 N qp."3 s as'Mr%1 f3:11.S' C.2' e +7 s s H . M Es' d.5 U r3 l Y /* <-" 5.S T3.d 'I-6S l/S 2.013 f, 1 .e ,E':ri/.5'l/. ': ~~ /*f W ~ op 4 4,g+7y Q,0 Y$ E 3/tb9/~*l l t '.* ILCl3:

• • ~~_,,,,,,,,/,'s* **-*1 I' :t t.C'.i.* c 'f 5 7

.~. \\ 3 -z 4,. ; p ## * %u g

• ,.._;=E2.frc.,Q.5er,.s o= c w vcY :n.*e s

W$ii!.$ $ / 0"I 53 l T. G l 33 I E $ e i",c 7N MU.C/ Wet 5t'u'*e! f.%P** LC pst :: p, f /_La C r* c nN e c. $, C.k?"7if t' Z&.A,f, y, I e e -tQ,' yz:.f'.3t.f' :oury :stsvo gyp wn, g Qpp(, 4,g73 2 : l t.C' te..',l's 10 ~1 l30 8 L.i i G 3 '& 4 s.g,g MEDIV** C r a* one o, ov s;',y.Ouf Sc.iss'?D l s a t Y 7'$5T* f9 7, e,,,d..*;.. ll*l(3Pt) l '.::S:.5' n G.lo'k //3 5.5 & l+

• l <* *f=

4

• C' C..s W$ r.( ".-+ r'.

~J

::;e. c % - /.:: i.-

-.s2a* ~ ~y~: 7"G /~A L. D c?rtt A.? /. S

• QF 2(780**

EL. O o :~7e d'

• C * '7, y Q,si p,y (,,,qupy l

l 4 Opd11 D:~Aue) ~, lie:.s coven t., d) 13 ' :ss og

• /.a. 2AG Q'.:n

$2L O G.e *ed } w n ce ts w )' 8 e l A7 10.4 A fra A be/LL A,s c, l l' i i j I 3 an.c eu m d va ra so u. ure. cou p/.= rio a .i t J I l l '1 J

• 3 i

/: c)5316874 i j .o....... y ....................,.. -..l o,e m a s.,.,g,,,,,.,,, .gm, o i m.. I.

u oo, n R I,,, G L v, u,, 4 v.: =u r.,= . :.=

:::.:c:.

8 taese; sner:ter SC;d c E fl8C II ! 9t* ...a... .==........4. f t.ac; l l I , f ; g r.. ' e < !: **

• 8 I

T:wele-em

• ...I 7: 1 l..-.a..**......a

....*. -** p ~.... (29.4 1 f e,e attes 140 lb. / 13 :ntnes I '3cne i

• errv D. C* ve..

T.ii,.'.;.'. l, j PgesCTet&TtO*s .,,j.. a stows .: :;;':.: g..: l . o.......

i..

j

• * * * ' -*"*a***"-

.5

• * ~ ~

. ;: '.;.:... t ; ; ;

1. g E. s.

gi. f !.!. ! g

• II
• I.

I r!; 1: '

• !. u.! '
• l,1 s

s29.4 0 m l l l 7

0. p SL1:y se sandy Clay, gray. l1* su;e- : 1 I. l.

l l l l 5..fn to low plast: city, 10:.)fri;;;!ses :: sing.1 .; lling v:t; 624.9 i 3.5 san, med.=:. dens e.

ne ::;;

-,'* " 4. 5 7. 4 ' r a n d. s s 11. < *:. 9

! 8 !*

!" I l' 2h.3Mslign:1y cras: (71;;) (SP)

and ree.

e e i s s ' ;. 411. 4 2 4. - 1. 1C 04" (::.0

7. 4.-' ",% -.,..........,.-...... -

6.. 4 1. . lating vase 3, t.21.5'.-IL.:y se sc.:y C.r. gray,g^- 1 = 4 :s? 2s L.!4.1 e , little 5:avel. icr.r .casi...ow pp 2 = isans as I..S40.** 1; ' 18 8 - 8 *. ' I d.j p;astica y. va:y sti"* to harc (C W 1 = sa=p; (Fill) brea).s up as ss 0.5 c a.

t 4G i...i l

) sy 15 Cp 5 = sa=pi on 4 4.3 6 e..,.i 6 ; /* ss p.at..re er -2:les, Ic neist.::e ss L.hsi.:. n. 15 s 26 s M 20 Op C = 4.! - Cp7=4.57l sa p.ag...t a. ss t. 3 I.* t ss.. :.., 2

4. e as

~ 2.p5 v //,9/["1 Op t = 4.5 ~ 23 24.2' fea.v cf clal ey sa-d. with e$ !.191 =

ace c ga.:cs, greyssa 1:c.n 4.5. ;st t

603.9 5 5 C'.. S I C. f ' ic; e 3: 1 44 t 62 ! .Niy,g 13 ] M.P Tan. =e h s and se a=, M y y (sand) m m e rt. Q 1. (s ar.d: e n.4k.4 "?g a 21.4 31.k' Ee.:y Sa.u. ::sen. y* [* h*,.. ~~3 3: 'LC riediu. grained. wet, ve:/ dense 2:le :avir.g (!") at 23' se uo es c.c d.E n-4, m, 337.3 ::.. 3/4 hag q:.i: .otal depth = 31.!'

21. Sot.c= = 55 7.9 Mater leve.

35 10.4' a*tu:

d. rilling.

l Bole backfil with scil a* l cor=ple tien. i i

• In fest

=. 3 J ).. D1ese1 Ocner: tor D.:i3disi l D t ......... ~..........

n.213 104 kW'4*aon as 2/79 95316530

,, ge, m.. .g- .....m.p ^ Eh'. ^^ M N'"- - --}}