ML20091L157
Text
'
i fh' 5 -~
M
'9 UNITED STATES
[/h - A/c NM p
j n'
,,7 4 NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
../I-(
WASHINGTON, D. C. 20005 gg i,;..), /
January 15, 1979 MEMORANDUM FOR:
G. W. Reinmuth, Assistant Director Division of Reactor Construction Inspection, IE FROM:
J. B. Henderson, Division of Reactor Construction Inspection, IE
SUBJECT:
MEETING IN PREPARATION FOR MIDLAND HEARING DATE:
February 6, 1979 TIME:
9:00 AM LOCATION:
East / West Towers, Room 322B j
PURPOSE:
To discuss the current status of Midland 1, 2 inspection and IE input to the hearing.
PARTICIPANTS:
S. Varga NRR D. Hood, NRR W. Haass, NRR J. Keppler, RIII R. Heishman, RIII D. Hayes, RIII R. Cook, RIII T
T. Vandel, RIII l
W. Olmstead, ELD /
Q R. Shewmaker IE/
4 i
4 l
J B. Henderson D
sion of Reactor Construction Inspection Office of Inspection and Enforcement L < m m :. e.ferer 52 51&12.o w's Af7ty xs Arri+cyn
(
84 6 g 50 840517 g/
RICE 84-96 PDR
/-rf.y 93
- ' ' - - ~
1--
a s
u,
,__m.._
maamum
'h
.h_
1.
l' MM
,;L h' ~ *' .' _
y
/
- s;- piou====
=== n-O ====== e'-
===== sv-O ==== = = a-O==Y 1:"4s>':y
-t or c
~:,: :.
ar c. -
g O rt
=-
Om O mau = ~ M M
,j.
= h
O = =arr== to =,.
_j O
0 ====
0 = = = ^=,=v==j O===
wrv co d sia.
O w'** a ^***'a=",
n O =rva==== =
'r..
[g?,
)
C N7 n
4 A+
o w 1, a$.cpa
' '7 "
l l
gh o
he c
- i. _..x a. K h a
_ u,. s
~
d)
Es%f
. #. v..... g / / 4 e,,,. D d -- u p ~r
.,(
- 8. ->u
~.
~.
. =... ~m
- Egr,gsx;,a.
a
%$s
' f. AO A'J M l
- } Ares % 44j.s,,pgy
=A e >: a - w@ f/4]2
~ w gg
?.f M*/Ri
~
64 b
j
- h. 9dhz6 /sf-a N.J 3:::"Q-Qn+%.
kvAs t a/d ~ #s a sa,.a;z x* k ' %hn u t
%J
.) M i ~
h
- y s.ee4 a g-j'Aa7~wm/ eda m i y$ ;
. m
)t a
>rujema ha/#NXQ#mv
,, A % "
(
a < sue 4 g Q fas;2g n y y
%]%
m\\
A...i 7
9
- ,. I.
. j
... x g,.
777y:j7,..E...y w
a su-
-.m u
O 6
s-/9e Nu A ye u
4 Mk M
L J
',) q L a l L A t J q, + L
- 2) o A y a o t# i M -
,) 1 4 e p co d o - A
,i ahA
, a.rw,n-m% Ju p # e&
c e
y p
M y as-<p. s - m - u nelfNab
.l U A/E & y+ =
is d~ e L m y J
i W L. p ok
~;L l
u a 9aan
~.
~
w 'o g +- nysk a A t 6 n(
i k
AML-u d & L n(2c %0h bhw
~A 1
s f k' 6m*L g
k a
fe fat 1+ A %;- AJ H J k yg4,g awn a
- um a ks
'g..6 i
9+
f l
l l
f@r
\\
-e.
Sab 6do APA A a;40v Am__& h zwn, R mr # rJL_ _
O c-c-CO SL.
~: I fa e 4 L U
~Qau~ 6EV hss L1 ap LL4.1_S W _L 4 & A
^
. M n M C h As k d l// W r
. e ~D L D. "
o az 6 W~
s ~
r
_Av_.qv-AA m wJ-L' p
' fro.ra M n.:
J.25,42
. k w1-+
D_n% '
r 1-i m _a/A.4
% _ &c - hq.js
! h L%.13
?
- s. _
1l :. cR,
'f 4s ye
~
~
l
/
~~
l
. _... ~
~
U
~
.h..
- eM=e* @h e w+
em mw.me d ee w
e g
en g M, e n as ak 1
l
a u u~a
-mp, F K j d u i,. ~ 4 a /
/ A n +/r q-Q xz cv,~.
v/d O/4 AQ sa k >bts ~~p a
~
G// d. N 6/sr/79 I
2/
l-If-Yf (Z
j
.e f
-l
'/G/?9
/
y' Q1 yof
,hl Y
ow n
ma
~Sk as. +
W7 g
- 3. s.4 3,1r.6 JexJ soA
- m A # ~fJa
- i. 5 4
40 AF'.
v a uy # g"~'9 w.I v 8 - NA 4p.
a.
a am L fn Aan s/eJJ 84 alheael L, M y C.-// d y am
- a. Ad
.1/dJ AMA w
A sne
- n. 4 ack, ad a
%f
. Ark d ic/e' p ~s~.e.
Ik MM W
t.<>e+4_.
O M
M 4A AM '[%_ M M d M r
6 pk co-ku udqdd 4 & M rs
- U Nff Ae W M N.
J w
e&, 4 u %luu m lee A.
- @a 4 x Ars t
n ka_. k c14L a+.
c a
Y' M
Nu hek ah u " Y W k $,; $ 4' &
7
,-u m__
m a
-~
b
-a_
n
_a-sC/.. u ln
}
r-in 9
-=
[
ILD N
~
~
n..,
s w w a Ja CV.
a t if
.uA J:5,,
Ym$AL.
44 4k 3 ki fdr M2'r+I a
T b M e Il'[ b o
Gle:. M a_A t.
i
^_e m
m r + w pu 1
- 6. Me to A4%4t ti66 A$
k Q b $ & a% DOS i
A6r AAA J'l w
A som k n M x n
\\
X.oc 6 h a b p !-
r 4 wl Me2.
i, I% ane w
A padgu Ad-l M M /2 A ( 4 % e %,. 4
) eg
.Yk'
}
-k i
M.
I j
Y (' T r.
.J sa nees
/
8 UNITED STATES
[',
g NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION wasenna rou. o. c rnm 8
- ^s MEMORANDUM FOR:
H. D. Thornburg, Director, Division of Reactor Construction Inspection, IE F. Schroeder, Acting Director, Division of Systems Safety D. Skovholt, Assistant Director for Quality Assurance and Operations, Division of Project Management FROM:
D. B. Vassallo, Acting Director, Division of Project Management
SUBJECT:
REQUEST FOR FIflDIf1GS REGARD!f4G 10 CFR 50.54(f) REPLIES ON MIDLAND 1 & 2 SOILS SETTLEMENT On April 24, 1979, the NRR staff issued requests to Consumers Power Comp.1ny regarding the Midland 1 & 2 soils settlement matter pursuant to 10 CFR 50.54(f).97 These 10 CFR 50.54(f) requests on the adequacy of the fill and the applicant's quality assurance program were made in order to determine whether the Constructinn Permits for Midland should be modified, suspended or revoked. Your findings to this end are requested. Background documents are identified in Enclosure 1.
Because the various remedial actions proposed by the applicant are either under-way or are soon to be initiated, this matter requires our prompt attention. A reply by August 21, 1979, is requested. Should you desire a meeting to discuss your findings, contact the Licensing Project Manager, Darl Hood, on 492-8402.
D. B. Vassallo, Acting Director Division of Project Management
Enclosure:
As stated cc:
H. Denton J. Murray J. Keppler, Region III M
.",10 CFR 50.54(f) is made applicable to construction permits by 10 CFR 50.55(c).
(s
/- tf4/
b
?
/
ENCLOSURE 1 Background Documentation, o
Background documentation, relevant to NRR's 10 CrR 50.54 f) requests include t
the following: The applicant's reply dated March 21. 1979, was revised May 31.
1979 (revision 1), and July 9,1979 (revision 2).
Further information was supplied by the applicant during meetings attended by both I AE and NRR on March 5 and July 18, 1979.
In addition, certain information was requested by NRR technical l
branches as part of the FSAR review prior to issuance of the 10 CFR 50.54(f) requests i
and are replied to through FSAR amendments. Site visits by NRR staff to observe settlement were made March 6 and June 7,1979, and December 3,1978. NRR participation with I&E results from a transfer of lead responsibility forwarded by a technical assistance request dated November 27, 1978.
(
Background documentation di_rected to 1&E includes a 50.55(e) notification by tho applicant dated September 29, 1978, for which six interim reports have been i
issued to date (November 7, 1978; December 21, 1978; January 5,1979; February 23, l
1979; April 30,1979; and June 25,1979).
I&E has conducted a preliminary 4
investigation and has documented its sunenary findings, along with the applicant's i
discussion of these findings, in a letter to the applicant dated March 15, 1979, i
I Enforcement actions due to potential material-false statements in the FSAR as may be applicable to some of these I&E findings are presently under internal review,
- assisted by NRR staff as appropriate.
1 i
4 l
Should you require copies of any of the above documents, contact Darl Hood (2-8402).
r 1
r l
f l
i
.nll,.f.,'.
'2
O O
t
.._ _. -...~.....
,4 6mW M
'-e'
.46
- W_
w dA 1.
l.
_ _ :-_pis n pd y
-e.
h g 7Au de-rN @66 m
M
+6 8'*
NM'
&6h 1
e
&_de_ce +uh.__
q A
a a. _ L w L...wa W..
. Lo-M4_wan i.
.Alu..j y.
&> 6Aye..Y4
.-A
- - Au
..._..-s 9. A 97
. J. Mea, -
a k.
~
M h.
hn& n f&'-
.../
h.es adt - --.
s-y--
-,,- _ +, -
y
DNITED STATES
.' % y,',i t NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION I
' I-REGION lli
, a.w:.p[,, f
'f.d j' 7M moostvfLT ADAO t,.
'v g
GLEN ELLYN. 8LLINOls set 37 s
M 29, /977
%EMORAT O! FOR:
George C. Gower, Acting Executive Officer for Operations Support, IE FROM:
James G. Keppler, Director, Region III
SUBJECT:
MIDLAND - REC 01^JENDID CIVIL PENALTY Attactad for Headquarters use is a proposed letter to Consumers Power Compacy with attached Notice Of Violation and proposed civil penalty. The civil penalty is recosamended only for the material false statement. Other*
items of r.oncocpliance are also identified for which no civil penalty is proposed. Unis proposed civil penalty is patterned af ter and is consistent with the civil penalty action taken regarding the D. C. Cook facility in May 197E.
Please let uw k.,ow if you have further questions.
C% gA
[JamesG.Kepper Director cc v/At ach=ents:
H. D. ~he:nburg, IE 3
k 5 SCd t'
7
/./6& & %
l l
tr u.3 O"l 9
1 1
1
UNAPT Eschat No. 50-329 L:ciet No. 50-330 Ccesu=ers Power Company r:TI: Mr. Stephen E. Howell Vice President 1945 %*est Parnall Road Jackson, MI 49201 Gectlezen This refers to the results of an investigation conducted during December 1978 and January 1979 into the settlement of the diesel generator building and the adequacy of the plant area fill at Midland Nuclear Plant limit Nos.
I and 2.
The findings of this investigation were discussed with you in enetings in our Region III office on Taoruary 23 and March 5, 1977 A copy of the investigation report was transmitted to you by Regic: III by letter dated March 22, 1979.
I The irvestigation determined a statement made by the licensee regarding fil; =aterial was false. Furthermore, it has been determined that the i:.for=ation presented regarding the type of fill was material in that the fill is of the vrong type and was not sufficiently compacted. This' catter is further described in Appendix h, and we propose to assess a civil penalty of $5,000 for this iten, as-set forth in Appendix B.
I: addition, there are two areas of concern. First, information and s.ste=ents relative to load density calculatons, index of compressibility calculations, the type of mat foundations and estimates of settlement vere reviewed and incorrect information was found.
While the incorrect Md 9
e
.-,--y,
--._,,,._,--c,,-,,----_---,m--
~
DRATT Cer.suzers Pcver Co=pany -
i inferr.ation was a matter of concern to the NRC because the information
{
i furnished was false, it was not material because it did not affect a
)
safety conclusion by the FRA staff.
Seco:d, during this investigation four items of noncompliance were identi-i fied which are contained in Appendix C which is a separate Notice of j
Violation. This notice is sent to you pursuant to the provisions of Section 2.201 of the NRC's " Rules of Practice," Part 2, Title 10, code of i
Tederal Regulations. Section 2.201 requires you to submit to this office i
within twenty days of your receipt of this notice a written statement or explanacion it reply, including for each item of noncompliance: (1) corrective aetica taken and the results achieved; (2) corrective action I
)
to be taken to avoid further noncompliance; and (3) the date when full cc..pliance win be achieved.
1 i
It is recoscized that there has been extensive consunications between you and the NRC regarding the diesel generatdr building settlement since the 1
l cccelusion of our investigation which may. contain information pertinent i
j to the itens of noncompliance.
Therefore, where appropriate, you may wish 'tc include specific references to those communicstions as a means of facilitating your response to this notice.
1 t
,s' l
l
/
DRATT
- a ::rs Pever Csepany..
TE: E" regulatory program is, of necessity, based on the premise that information provided by the licens,ees is factual, complete, and technically stgpertad by data, records, calculations and judgments of technically i
q'.alified ir.dividuals.
The review, evaluation and inspection processes i= solv:d is the regulatory program are therefore designed to function on that premise; that is, a program based on sampling and auditing techniques.
Inaccura.e information could result in decisions which adversely affect the hesi-d and safety of the public.
It is, therefore, imperative for li:ecsees to exercise the utmost care in verifying information furnished to the N?.C.
This burden of accuracy must be stressed throughout licensee c riacizatice.s.
)
(
L'e viev =s crial false statements as serious matters.
In all cases where stdsta-tive material false statements are identified, we shall take s t:s=.: er. fore,emant action.
.s.'Zmv ze.: w:iM<mmuer&d% sovif:'ucdrhrtervriterwNukesnV"~
de.s. ir.e fi further encalated enforcement action is required to assure fu m e compliamee.
B Sincerely, i
l l
DRAFf.
- = = = =.
~ '
Appendix A NOTICE OF VIOLATION Consumers Power Company Docket No. 50-329 Docket No. 50-330 This refers to the investigation conducted by the Office of Inspection and Enforec=cnt at the Midland Nuclear Power Plaat, Units 1 and 2, Midland, Michigan, at your offices in Jackson, Michigan, and at Bechtel Corporation.
- Ann Arbor, Michigan, of activities authorized by NRC I,icense No. CPPR-81 and No. CPPR-82.
During this investigatio= conducted on varicus dates between December 11, j
1978 and Janua n 25, 1979, the followiss apparent item of noncompliance t
was identified.
The Midland Final Safety Analysi), Report (FOAR) contains the following:
.~'
j z
T Section 2.5.4.5.3, Till, states: "All'. fill and backfill were placed
's according to Table 2,5 9."
7
\\
\\'
s k
Tabic 2.5-9,Nints:tsCompactionCiteSia,'contatesthefollowing:
5
\\v
~
g 1
s.
s
'r, E
g 1
4
\\ ( ~, % ', s. m 's s
j r.
n
- ) %
1 te h
,)N a
\\
I s
- - -. ~ ~ - - - - -
r*v
- - -+ -- +-
- s. ~ '
- ~ ~ "
DPA2"2 -
1 1
A pendix A,.
(3)
Cervaetion Criteria
"!-unrtion resignation Tyge Degree ASTM Designation Sc; port of Clay 95%
ASTMD155{gj6T strurtures (modified).
- 1) Ic zese designation see Table 2.5-10.
(2)
~he neth-d vus codified to get 20,000 foot pounds of compactive energy per eabir feet cf scil."
Se::ics 2.5.4.10.1, Bearing Capacity, s,tates:
" Table 2.5-14 shows the stress be:eath footings subject to static and static plus dynanic ec:.ac
_c4 dings, the fou:dation elevation, and the type of supporting medium for
.arious p'a=
s r.racture s. "
Ta:Le 2.5-14, 5 - sry cf Contact Stresses and Ultimate Bearing capacity g
ict.ts: Ic: datices Supporting Seismic Category I and II Structures,
\\.
- tains, i= yart: the following:
" Crit Supportina Soils Citsel Ger.erator Controlled compacted Suildt:s cohesive fill."
This infor:sti:n is false, in that construction drawing C-45, Class I 71.1. Material Areas, specifies the foundation material for Class I structure to te 2:ne 2 caterial which is identified in FSAR Table 2.5-10 Gradatte: It:res fer Till Eaterial, as Random Fill and is described as i
"A. y material fres cf hu=us, organic or other deleterious r.sterial." It l
vas accertatnei tla =aterials other than " clay" or " controlled conpacted tiesive fil".*
ere used for support of structures.
4
./
4
-p-
DRAFT A;ps:: dix A 3-
...s s
a Centrary to Section 186 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 as amended, this false statement was made under oath in careless disregard of the true circu= stance.
(Civil Penalty - $5,000) 9
~
k m.
?
i
(
M
, +-,
W
DRAIT -
, -~ \\
Appendix B NOTICE OF PROPOSED IMPOSITION OF CIVIL PENALTIES Consumers Power Company Docket No. 50-329 Docket No. 50-330 This office proposes to impose civil penalties pursuant to Section 234 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, (42 USC 2282), and to 10 CFR 2.205 in the amount of Five Thousand Dollers ($5,000) for the specific item of noncomp1f ance set forth in Appendix A to the cover letter.
In proposing to impose a civil penalty pursuant to this section cf the Act and in fixing the proposed amount of the penalty, the factors identified in the Statements of. Consideration published in the Federal Register with the rule making action which adopted 10 CFR 2.205 (36 FR (q
16894) August 26, 1971, and the " Criteria for Determining Enforcement Action,"
which was sent to NRC licensees on December 31, 1974, have been taken inte account.
The Consumers Power Company may, within ' twenty (20) days of receipt of this notice pay the civil penalty in the amount of Five Thousand Dollars
($5,000) or may protest the imposition of the civil penalty in whole or in pa'rt by a written answer. Should Consumers Power Company fail to answer within the time specified, this office will issue an order i= posing the civil penalty in the amount proposed above.
Should Consumers P:ver Company elect to file an answer protesting the civil penalty, such l
answer nay:
(a) deny the iten of noncompliance listed in the Notice of l
\\
Viclation in whole or in part, '(b) demonstrate extenuating circumstances, f
1 l
DRATT i
1 A;;endix A.. - -.
(c) :h:w error is the Notice of Violation, or (d) show other reasons why the penalty should not be imposed.
In addition to protesting the civil nazity in v*nole or in part, such answer may request re=ission or mitiga-tien of the penalty. Any written answer in accordance with 10 CFR 2.205 sh:.dd be set fer:.h separately from the state:ent or explanation in reply purscast ts 10 CFR 2.201, but you may i= corporate by specific reference (e.g., giving page and paragrapf. numbers) to avoid repetition.
Cocst:ers Power Cocpa=y's attention is directed to the other provisions cf IC CF?. 2.205 regarding, in particular, failure to answer and ensuing c:dars; a:sver, :c= sideration by this office, and ensuing orders; requests f:.- hearings, hearings and ensuing orders; co: premise; and collection.
I Upes faihre to pay a..7 civil penalty due which has bee: subsequently deter = iced in ac-rdance with the applicable provisions of 10 CFR 2.205, the catter =ay be referred to the Attorney General, and the penalty, u:less ec prordsed, remitted, or mitigated', may be collected by civil
- actic: pursuan
.o Sertion 234c of the Atomic F.nergy Act of 1954, as a:: ded, (!2 USC 22S2).
f
. /
___-___________-______.__-_.-____-_..___.____.__d
l DRAIT
^
Appendix C l
NOTICE OF VIO'.ATION C:nsc=ers Pever Cocyany Docket No. 50-329 Docket No. 50-330-l I
This refers t.o the tsvestigation conducted by the Office of Inspection and Inforce:ent at the Midland Nuclear Power Plant, Ur.its 1 and 2, }iidland, Michiga, at ycur offices in Jackson, liichigan, and at Bechtel Corporation, -
Ann Arb:c, ::ichiga: of activities authorized by NRC License No. CPPR-81 and Nc cpi?.-32.
3ased c-tis rest.lts cf the investigatics conducted during the period le ct.-b e: II.1978 thrcugh January 25, 1979, it appears that certain of 7:ur a: ivi-ies were not conducted in full conpliance with KR:: require-re: s as nc ed belc.. These items are infractions.
1.
1C C37,50, Appe= dix B, criterion III requires, in part, that measures shall *:e established and executed to assure that regulatory requirenents a:1 the desig: basis as specified in the license applica' tion for stru'et:res are correctly translated into specifications, drawings,
'preced:res and instructicas. Also, it provides that measures shall he established for the identification and control of design inter-faces and for coordination among participating design organizations'.
.. /
DRAfi Appendix C 9 CPC: Tepical Report CPC-1-A policy No. 3, Section 3.4 states, in part, "the assigned lead design group or organization (i.e., the ESS5 supplier ASI supplier, or CPCo) assure that designs and materials are suitable and that they comply with design criteria and reg:latory requirementa."
CPCc is committed to ANSI N45.2 (1971), Section 4.1, which states, in ; art, "nessures shall be established and documented to assure tt.at the applicable specified design requirements, such as a design basis, regulatcry requirenents... are correctly translated into s;ccifica ions, drawings, procedures, or instructions."
i Cc trary to the above, measures did not assure that design bases were included in drawings and specifications nor did they provide fer d e identification and control of design interfaces. As a resuln, incensistencies were identified in the license application and in etter design basis document's.
Specific examples are set forth belev:
i
' a.
The ISAR is internally inconsistent in that FSAR Figure 2.5-4B i=dicates settlenent of the Diesel Generator Building to be on the crder of 3" while FSAR Section 3.8.5.5 (structural.secept-anre criteria) indicates settlements on shallow spread footings
.-r t
l l
DRATT t
t A;;endix C 3-
.y founded on compacted fill to be en the order of 1/2" or less.
The Diesel Generater Building is supported by a continuous shallow spread footing.
b.
The design settlement calculations for the diesel generator and borated water storage tanks were performed on the assumption of unifom mat foundations, while these foundations were designed and constructed as spread footing foundations.
The settlement calculations for the Diesle Generator Building c.
indicated a load intensity of 3000 PSF while the ISAR, Figure 2.5-47, shows a load intensity of 4000 PSF, as actually
(
cons tructed.
d.
The settlement calculations for the Diesel Generator Building were based on an index of com' ressibility of the plant fill p
between elevations 603 and 634 ef 0.001.
These settlement values were shown in FSAR Figure 2.5-48.
However, FSAR, Table 2.5-16, indicates an index of compressibility of the same plant fill to be 0.003.
?SAR, Amendment 3, indicated that if filling and backfilling e.
eye. rations are discontinued during periods of cold weather, all s_
a r
,.+--,
-,-n.
y.
Appendix C,
frozen soil would be removed or recompacted prior to the resusp-tion of operations. Bechtel specification C-210 does not specif-ically include instructions for removal of frozen / thawed compacced material upon resumption of work after winter perioda.
i f.
PSAR Amendment 3 inMcates that cohesionless soil (sand) would be compacted to 85% relative density according to ASTM D-2049.
Ecwever, Bechtel specification C-210, Section 13.7.2 required cohesicaless soil to be compacted to not less than 80% relative density.
2.
10 CFR 53, Appendix B, Criterion V requires, in part, that activities i
affecting quality shall be prescribed and accomplished in accordance with doe =nented instructions, procedures or drawings.
CPCo Topical Report CPC-1-A Policy No. 5, Section 1.0 states, in part, that, " Instructions for cont' rolling and performing activities affecti:3 quality of equipment or operation during design, construc-tien and operations phase of the nuclear power plant such as procure-i
' cent manufacturing, construction, installation, inspection, testing l
... are documented in instructions, procedures, specifications..
. these documents provide qualitative and quanititive acceptance criteria for determining important activities have been satisfactorily acec=plished.
i
DRAIT' Appendix C.
CPCo is comnited to ANSI N45.2 (1971), Section 6 which states, in part, "activit,ies affecting quality shall be prescribed by documented instructions, procedures, or drawings, of a type appropriate to.the circumstances and shall be accomplished in accordance with these instructions, procedures, or drawings."
a.
Contrary to the above,. instructions provided to field construc-tion for substituting lean concrete for Zone 2 material did not
)
address the differing foundation properties which would result in differential settlement of the Diesel Generator Building.
b.
Also, contrary to the above, certain activities were not, accca-plished according to instructions and procedures, in that:
(1) The compaction criteria used for fill material was 20,000 ft-lbs (Bechtel modified proctor test) rather than a l
compactive energy of 56,600 ft-lbs as specified in Bechtel Specification C-210, Section 13.7.
(2) Soils activities were not accomplished under the continuous l
l supervision of a qualified soils engineer who would perform in place density tests in the compacted fill to verify that all materials are placed and compacted in accordance
/
\\._'
-,,w--.
, -, y
-~,v-*,.
...--<c,, - -,
(
i
(
' DRlJT l
\\
Appendix C i with specification criteria.
This is required by Bechtel Specification C-501 as well as PSAR, Amendment 3 (Dames and Moore Report, page 16).
3.
10 CTR-50, Appendix B, Criterison X requires, in part, that a program for inspection of activities affecting quality shall be established and executed to verify conformance with the docu=ented instructions, procedures and drawings for accomplishing the activity.
CPCo Topical Report CPC 1-A Policy No.10, Section 3.1, states, in part, that "vork activities are accomplished according to approved procedures or instructions which include inspection hold points
(
beyond which work does not proceed until the inspection is complete or written consent for bypassing the inspection has been received from the organization authorized to perform the inspections."
CPCo is conclited to ANSI N45.2 (1971), which states, in part, "A program for inspection of activities affecting quality shall be established and executed by or for the organization performing the
' activity to verify conformance to the documented instructions, procedures, and drawings for accomplishing the activity."
3
l DRAFT A.:pendix C.
1 Ccutrary to the above, Quality Control Instruction C-1.02, the Program for inspection of compacted backfill issued on October 18, 1976, did not provide for inspection hold points to verify that soil work was satisfactorily accomplished according to documented instructions.
4.
10CFR50,AppendixB,CriterionXdIrequires,inpart, that mea-sures shall be established to assure that conditions adverse to quality such as failures, deficiencies, defective material and nonconformances are promptly identified and corrected.
In case of i
significant conditions adverse to quality, measures shall assure 7
that corrective action is taken to preclude repetition.
\\
2 CPCo Topical Report CPC-1-A Policy No.16, Section 1.0 states, in part, " corrective action is that action taken to correct and pre-clude recurrence of significant condit1ons adverse.to the quality of ite=s or operations.
Corrective action includes an evaluation of the conditio:s that led to a nonconformance, the disposition of the nonconforman:e and completion of the actions necessary to prevent or reduce the pessibility of recurrence."
l Centrary to the above, measures did not assure that soils conditicas l
of adverse quality were promptly corrected to preclude repetition.
For example:
l i
.\\
l
. ~... - -..
~
DRATI i
Appendi.x - /9 a.
A.s of January 25, 1979, moisture control in fill material had
.ces been established nor adequate direction given to implement this specification requirement. The finding that the field was not performing moisture control tests as required by specifi-cation C-210 was identified in Quality Action Request SD-40, dated July 22, 1977.
b.
Corrective action regarding nonconfor nance reports related to
- 1 ant lill was insufficient or inadequate to preclude repeti-tic
- as evidenced by repeated devist. ions fron specification requirenents. For example, nc,nconlorzance reports No. CPCo
- F-29, QF-52, QF-68, QF-147, QF-174, QF-172 and QF-199 contain f'
nebercus examples of repeated nonconformances in the same areas cf plant. fill construction.
D
('
Y 8
m p 0\\
Fox I
C afso/n a.
Z & cia,_,asco Fm p g),,,,j,,pcz S' A)'cf ' L -t d Afauao 6pme p
I fr 4
l l
ww gj i
(,
p
~ ()/
002f i-
t t
O 0
D i
i Stop all work on;
$ri9 auy placintu compaction or evocavatins of safety related soils.
1.
N h
all construction vorb. related to the Diesel Generator h:11 ding and 2.
the tank farm area.
A M
f5 Phyalcal impicunntatie of' any prepnaed solution for correction of 3.
rd N f.
soils pruh2em imeluding much itsens as but not limited tog
$5 F'
I.
Dewatering system i.
!v Underpinnin5 of service water building
(
s' Caissoas in valve area C
I' N field r
new conneruct4.on work in safety ratated soila area auch 4.
inatallation of conduits and piping.
r m'1 4 3.,J/s @ 4 f
h.
c p'l, ear,m,s >t ti7 -r
_;.;...-i saaeeisted with the n
b The Order wuld not apply to any
(
Mea.m tl< assc s il peop4:+ o @m: r_rnor wuld it, preclude any==n4=== rima s
w il. w.i.ii i :
j
~
work associated with the peuposed fix of the soils probles.
w
[
\\
r i
i i
4 i
l
W%9' W.
D.m g : 4,,y f:y;w.~ w,V.; W;:7 m :g@v,m
- w R W "1:.?:y::
...,c m y77.*f p m wvC.;;W*M:,c%e m-w M.%
CZW c Y A k.
^J C c,T < Q Q f R
. : -y
-_;a q.Q y:p.wn L
w
%.g. mj '; : -,+ g n
, v'., 3 (
.~ c
~
34/4?
,,3. M. %
y, p,.,, - * '
. g[.; y
..%yau;" y)J M...C ;y;;(W.,. Q.g % 3-.1.! wm w.. V' m'.s >
C e
v g,-
3
< u = f. ' n: K k.'t r'
- )y,
c n.
15;. 4
% A;+,
t ;*, ' 'v.
L.a >-
.s s,
3.y gg'.jp @,.9 4 4-
.9 :
s 1, 3.
..,. @ ; 3,
qr at e r.
9, s, -
ia
.y
,,.s d2
- I
. >v..
9 s
..y-y b./.
b '; l ' y
(~j,
)'
' IC Ik[
. Y '. g e
i
,J..
Q,
- L; #
a.
7,.
N7.. u
,..a
' f.4.r.
'T
- j..'.-.
4 F.;, ^.
s, 9
^
,-s s,,.
- ~
'L'
. ';,-~:,.
f nw 2 s
.sm
%.jg. p.w. q :.
r x
a
@TN.f O n'j[d+g.Mg.g %.;k
. : &,'rN @f[< T 4 *.
y.;f[0*.,}y ;
, t.: s..
, +,;;W/; o y n.
v -
. >:,. u, wm. <m.. a
~., [
d s,C ggg[\\.
Q/
e t
v. 46f Mf;=y.1*x..* w w. %. M.. m* Ig
- n,m* m v
q ; e 4 M,@w. > f w.+g.
e E's.,p~, d' ? ".
.v,..
~ w* a 2 -
so -e s,
i. D. s w-t
,n Im+7 'Pf f.
??
N,%.7 N.
[.
,)
9e st) x ww$h hY;g@'y
.f *
- u. hhY(Y(hh s
f.o q'. m, M Q#+...
m., L.. w,.. a. w, h%
kh bhh.h8 Y,:.h bk v.qq:,w,- %w. a m.ew..
- m.. as)..
c
.. f m. p - wh-.42V *o}:e.1 Pq';e,* &i&g,W ^ O h hm.x.r M. c' &
wm.so.,,a.
g y
-'4 a2$hW ga A Q ~n @. p %q-. G G l M y, eG..
afm.h d
l Q(
- n. a.H..:y v
k ~&'f ' ~g&.
dh.. y.
4; p i.?Y.? Q *,Q Q,'>. Q % n R. %e %.9.r.tQ w/.
y7 wy
-f 2 -
-1 r.. -
a
- .,: W 6 & s, Q W M:; M % & ' Q)M % y#l % M @ M.M % l% W W u A'
c
- h. m m w w[,T h
w
,A gu ammer
- p pwgings m a Rd@mm%@qkM
- MMMMhk$%
s +;ggq w
g S
h m%ga%,3Em,am m4M n
ne n% w meag g
e
. - e m:, w m w w ~ w w w. a,y=, n n
m a
- n '" : 9. ~ wd& v
- 2.?.; & q :.ai: m W unn 4.x.
m, ps>:,
.:.. n :
q.pqq$
h a s%w.,ym;k' b
v.
~
. w.w+n e. n m a pMwmaw,.
h g/ % w$ Eb y,7 % w w n'; g.
a :g p[.Q:p yw c. ;a%a a,
,w n
w Mm-m QMj, mx l,f}
e
'nS3 QQ g
y t'
,.-r%m.x $.
&$XM. $ n:
$ &~. M.m> M h:e %,$n.s.n/ f 2,N M % y p l M Q W ' Q.).a p; 8My
&% x,yy,:M m
sn m
L n w1sM % 'M JY Npap W kW2we
%. w y:,
~ f,:M$1* {,Q'W,g. n..QQ:
, q d Q ) ; g,* q. g :
W.Jx M
g
.,w y
w
&pdQ,LWy
%%gg yp 4.4
.C % D; ?s M y3
<?
r
%yk&M.
y EsQd.
492
& MW:
%.b @ W@$
.f. W W MrQSJM W hyy %
WW g
'Q Q..&,.YQ?Q Y Q. 4& % % y ' &n+ &e hi wl Q M.. y! Q.'d!?:b Wn.,9.
e?hM.,
~
- n.,,pM n
. ?.h',. Q.k;W, \\
aj, 's,.,.,.g,r t 9~. w,
- s..., %
75 -
ywng 2..n 5ff :.,f?-y; hf:.?h!
- h. me -
.t
. ~.w..,,, A.; >wwww. n.gl g..s w'h. m.f f f'.
- J w.j m;n., +a);?.+.:.p%g n,&'n -
i n. A n.~ ' a.
w,[.P% m % ;s. w.,.; *;,,,- [.
m,. %.s M,w y
v
. v
.e.
. us
.. y-7. m/*K,.}*,' W y " - f. 4w n., A,Mt 4, w'
- A,,g 0.e=
.. 7 W'
lM Q3 y
5 '
4
,.; i @
. i. e:...:f. y o 4
1
.y n.:,<.
e a
v r %.t. y:.
4. fW D,. f. a.6..p u.,
q.,
qy.. *
.7.e c
,c.
4.p.. l.> %s y
s s
.r r
a
., Air %'Y-u+
u -
g
"'U g y ' n.; y&, x %~;yp.
J
%.o.a M;4~ r y< 4 n..glg@:
R+y n 0 ',,
ww
.p
- m &p n,.W r,hyq(:.: y.f n., "
_ ?v
'?~
g
-;u f
, 7 ;
.. q y g,;;,,p*d,s.i.'.9
~~
7 n
g s
, ?.a.
.n
.a +.. e -
,u 3 ;g te.
s: e s
- v y
- m.,..zp, 4,
. u.
3-
. n. r y
y~
,x
- 7 n
,,c?,,,,w.,x;1,v f >'
fe*')A Q*
)
~ ;)-'-
f ' }'#[ -
V.;.
_ % ns l
.Q?sKf s
+;
l
.~t..
a*
r a
- a. m ;,
. w a.
~
..r s'
.f'.
f, s'
-st. '
y.
n, 3
.n.
w,y e- < r
.c.e s. j rg.
o.=.,,.
's
- r.
f.* l v -
E.
r b1
)
7 l
.n A
t t
, M.
f
- n.
.a s *;.'{ p y 4 }/ - r
.f f t,
'% f
- ' ~,7 f*.
1 1
i I
s pTE
.k I
?
i g
'e h.i
,[
t
[
t Y
n.
6 -
L,.. J.-*~~"
^
_ w --
=
W. P. Chen - Manager, Stress Analysis Unit, Energy Technology Engineering Center (ETEC) r EDUCATION B. Eng.
Civil Engineering & Applied Mechanics, McGill University,1959 M. Eng.
Civil Engineering & Applied Mechanics, McGill University.1962 Ph. D.
Theoretical and Applied Mechanics, University of Illinois,1965 EXPERIENCE 1965-1971 Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, B.C., Canada Teaching and research in the Mechanics of Deformable Media with particular emphasis on problems of limit analysis and contained plastic flow of elastic-plastic media.
1972-1974 Basic Technology, Inc., Pittsburg, Pa.
Thermal stress analysis of components.
1974-Present Energy Technology Engineering Center t'
ASME B&PVC compliance analysis of piping and components.
N NRC LWR licensing support and snubber research activities.
Technical support for Solar Central Receiver and Ocean Thermal Energy Conversion projects.
\\
PUBLICATIONS 1.
A Complementary Linear Theory of Plasticity for Plane Strain, Arch.
Mech. Stos., Vol 18, P. 731-749, 1966 2.
On Classes of Complete Solutions for Rigid Perfectly Plastic Truncated Wedges in Plane Strain, Arch. Mech. Stos., Vol. 21, p. 469-494, 1969 3.
On Uniqueness of the Limit Load for Unbounded Regions, Arch. Mech.
Stos., Vol. 21, p. 679-699, 1969 4.
On the Collapse of Rigid Perfectly Plastic Tapered Cantilever Beams Under End Shear, Acta. Mech.,1972 i
5.
On Torsion of Elastic - Perfectly Plastic Cylinders of Polygonal Cross Section (In Preparation)
N' nu mv
,