ML20126F968
| ML20126F968 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Marble Hill |
| Issue date: | 03/18/1981 |
| From: | Stello V NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE) |
| To: | Dattillo T SAVE THE VALLEY - SAVE MARBLE HILL |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8103240598 | |
| Download: ML20126F968 (5) | |
Text
!
fievg 5 a -$ H b c
UNITED STATES
!] ),( [o, 9
g NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON. D. C. 20555 y
- w. ]
I,'
<b Docket Nos. STN-50-546 8
8
'd-l STN-50-247 MAR 1 S 1981 Ly 1
~
M,8.lyJggg M Thomas M. Dattilo, Esq.
311 East Main Street 4A
^
Madison, Indiana 47520 4
f/
iti j r
Dear Mr. Dattilo:
On May 23, 1980, the Commission referred two documents, entitled "Save the Valley Comments Regarding the Consideration of the Reopening of Marble Hill" (docketed May 7, 1980) and "Save the Valiey Additional Comments to Commissioners Concerning Resumption of Work at Marble Hill" (docketed May la,1980), to the NRC staff for consideration under 10 CFR 2.206 of the Commission's regulations.
You had filed these documents with tne Commission on oehalf of Save tne Valley.
In these documents, you proviced information on wnicn you based your request that the Commission take.certain actions relatec tc construction quality and j
site suitaoility of the Marble Hill project.
Your requests concerning site l
suitability matters were cenied in a decision issued by Harold R. Centon, the Director of the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, on September 2, 1980.
00-80-27, 12 NRC 381 (1980).
These site suitability matters will not be considered further in this letter.
Under 10 CFR 2.206, a request for Commission actio must set forth the action requested by tne petitioner and the facts that constitute the basis for the l
requested action.
As I understand your filings, Save the Valley requested that the Commission take three basic actions in determining whether construc-tien should be resumed on the Marble Hill project:
1.
Take steps to assure that Public Service Company of Indiana (PSI) and its contractors conduct material receipt inspection in a proper manner (May 7th document, at 3);
2.
Take into account affidavits submitted by Save the Valley in determining whether PSI has " properly rehabilitated" its quality assurance and control program (May 14th document, at 5); and 3.
Permit an independent examination of concrete in the Marble Hill project (May 7th document, at 5).
In support of Save the Valley's request for these actions, you submitted a number of affidavits by workers on the Marble Hill project.
I note that all of these documents hec been received by the NRC and have been considered in the NRC continuing investigation into deficiencies in constru: tion of the Marble.9i11 project.
Mr. Cutshall's deposition was specifically mentioned in the Order which formally suspended construction at tne site.
Investigation of the allegations of your client, Mr. Henry, required issuance of a Commission subpoena and pursuit of its enforcement in Federal court before we were able
'810324.0 %
C,
Thomas M. Dattilo, Esq. M 18 @
to more fully investigate Mr. Henry's allegations.
The NRC Region III office acknowledged receipt of Mr. Hutsell's affidavit in a letter to you dated August 28, 1979.
I? my view, we have essentially taken the actions that you requested in Save tae Valley's two documents.
As you know, construction of the Marble Hill project was formally suspended by an Order confi ming suspension of constuc-tion that I issued *on August 15, 1979.
The Order confirmed PSI's cuspension of. safety related construction and barred resumption of construction pending satisfaction of certaio conditions.
Issuance of the Order was based on NRC investigation of construction practices at Marble. Hill.
The investigation included inspections at the site as well as inquiry into workers' allegations and PSI's own findings regarding construction practices on the project.
The results of the NRC investigation substantiated instances of improper repair of defective concrete, use of untrained personnel, improper placement of concrete, and improper testing, which were alleged in the affidavits you provided.
Many of these findings are documented in Investication Report No. 50-546/79-08.
NRC inspections and investigations continued after the Order was issued.
These efforts included investigation of Mr. Henry's ellegations.
NRC inspectors were finally able to interview Mr. Henry in June 1980.
The results of this investigation are discussed in Investigation Report No. 50-546/80-04.
As a result of the seriousness of the breakdown in PSI's quality assurance and quality control program, which was confirmed by NRC investigations and werkers' c
allegations, I determined that any resumption of construction at Marble Hill should be permitted only in a gradual fashion to assure that PSI's corrective actions and revised quality assurance program were effective and effectively implemented. Accordingly, after briefing the Commission in early May 1980, I issued on May 15, 1980 a " Graduated Rescission of Order Dated August 15, 1979." This plan permits gradual, step-wise resumption of construction activ-ities with review by the NRC at appropriate stages.
Before construction may resume in its entirety, PSI and its contractors must satisfy the items listed in the rescission document.
This process of graduated rescission incorporates steps to assure that PSI and its contractors have revised and adjusted their quality assurance programs and have prepared themselves adequately for resump-tion of construction.
These are basically the actions that you requested in Save the Valley's filings before the Commission.
To date, I have issued three letters under the rescission program that permitted PSI or its contractors to resume certain activities:
1.
July 7,1980:
I'found that PSI had developed a satisfactory quality assurance program and had completed the prerequisites for PSI's resump-tion of receipt inspection; i
2.
November 13, 1980:
I found that PSI's contractors, Cherne Contracting Corporation (CCC) and Commonwealth-Lord J.V. (CLJV), had completed the prerequisites necessary to resume receipt inspection; and i
l l
Thomas M. Dattilo, Esq. MAR 1o lgg1 3.
December 5, 1930:
I found that CCC and CLJV hac satisfied tne prerequi-sites to pt.rtially resume mechanical, piping and electrical work.
With respect to renewed receipt inspection, NRC inspectors have found that PSI's corrective actions have generally been effective and that PSI has taken appropriate measures to correct deficiencies in the conduct of the receipt inspection program.
PSI has employed additional personnel to conduct surveil-t lance of the program and to monitor storage of safety related equipment.
NRC will continue its independent inspection of PSI's activities.
As the graduated rescission program makes clear, confidence that PSI's quality assurance program and that of its contractors is, in your words, properly
" rehabilitated" depends on a gradual process through which PSI must demonstrate that its program is effectively implemented before construction resumes in its entirety.
In this way, my determination that PSI's program has been brought into conformance with the Commission's requirements is not based on a single finding at one point in time, but is based instead on a series of finoings, many of whicn are yet to De mace, tnat PSI can properly conduct construction of the Marble Hill project.
Througn this cradual process, I believe that NRC has taken action to satisfy your requests to assure PSI's appropriate conduct of receipt inspection and a revised quality assurance prcgram.
NRC will continue its inspection and review of PSI's construction program.
I also emphasize that NRC will take appropriate enforcement action if we find that PSI or its contractors fail to adequately implement the quality assurance program or otherwise fail to adhere to the Commission's requirements during construction of Marble Hill.
Save the Valley also asked that the Commission permit an indepencent exam-ination of concrete in the Marble Hill project by a qualified third party. You first suggested such an examination during the public meeting on the Marole Hill project held in Madison, Indiana, on March 25, 1980.
Because we believed that an indeoendent examination of the in place concrete would assist NRC in reviewing information concerning the integrity of existing structures, NRC agreed tnat independent consultants would be centracted to conduct this exam-ination.
While your May 7th filing speaks in terms of "an independent examina-tion of concrete o'y Save the Valley," it is my understanding that you agreed that selection of the consultant from a pool of qualified candidates would satisfy your concern that an independent examination of concrete be conducted.
The NRC staff consulted with you in the selection process.
Mr. Alfred L.
Parme, a consulting engineer from San Diego, and Mr. Roland C. Hamm of Hamm Engineers, also from San Diego, were selected for the task.
On a related matter, NRC also asked the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to conduct an independent review of the testing program of U.S. Testing. Results of this review are documented in Inspection Report No. 50-546R9-16.
Mr. Henry, whose affidavit was included with your documents, had made allegations of improper construction practices by U.S. Testing.
PSI has terminated its contract with U.S. Testing and has assumed direct responsibility for that work.
PSI must demonstrate to the satisf action of NRC that its concrete testing program is adequate before concrete work may be resumed.
We will consider tne assessments by the independent consultants before permitting further concrete olace?.ent.
Thomas M. Dattilo, Esq. MAR 1 g 793; As a basis for your requer' that NRC permit an independent examination of concrete, which wu granted as described above, you raised a number of matters regarding a Sargent and Lundy evaluation of in place concrete.
In the remainder of this letter, I would like to respond to those concerns.
The methodology used in the statistical evaluation of concrete, which formed the basis for selection of test locations in Sargent and Lundy's evaluation, is described in the Sargent and Lundy report.
The test locations were selected randomly, but with a deliberate inclusion of greater volumes of concrete in areas with greater congestion of reinforcing steel and embedments. Such areas often pose greater difficulty in the proper placement of concrete. We see no basis to categorically reject the judgment and explanations by the Newberg personnel that contributed to the conclusions made in the Sargent and Lundy report.
Moreover, 25% of the path analysis tables that you questioned in your May 7th filing were verified by coring the concrete to examine the nature of any internal discontinuities.
No discrepancies were found between the coring samples and the prior reports of sonic examination.
Witn respect to inaccessible concrete areas, the following information i
highlights the methodology and time frame for PSI's evaluation Of inaccessible areas.
The inaccessible areas comprise a rela-ively small portion of the concrete that is to be evaluated.
PSI plans to inspect or evaluate such areas when it is permitted by the NRC to conduct such activities uncer PSI's construc-tion program.
There are two categories of inaccessible concrete surfaces:
1.
Inaccessible owing to engineered backfill:
Accessible concrete patches and unrepaired concrete imperfe:tions, which have been identified through section 5.0 (SSP-5) of PSI's Construction and Material Verification Program, will be evaluated.
Based on the results of this evaluation, PSI will determine the extent to which inaccessible surfaces in this category are acceptable or require repair.
2.
Inaccessible owing to temporary construction equipment or in place form-work:
PSI intends to remove the obstructions, then evaluate and repair these surfaces as necessary under section 5.0 (SPP-5) of its Construction and Material Verification Program.
Finally, you asked whether "through transmissions or reflected ultra sonic tests" were performed on the core samples taken from the concrete and compared with the in situ concrete tests.
While sucn a comparison was not performed, it is not evident to us what value such a comparison would have.
The results I
of the core testing, when compared to the results of the in situ concrete testing program, demonstrated that the concrete was of the quality expected as a result of the in situ tests.
In summary, I believe that the Commission has taken essentially the actions requested by Save the Valley in your filings of May 7 and 14, 1980.
This letter will conclude, therefore, the NRC staff's consideration of these filings under 10 CFR 2.206.
Copies of the inspection reports referred to in this letter are available for public inspection in the Commission's public
._, __.~. _._ _ _. _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Thomas J. Datillo, Esq. MAR 181981 document room in Wasnington, D.C., and in t.re local public documer.: room in Madison, Indiana.
A copy of this letter will also be placed in these public document rooms.
Thank you for your interest in the Commission's inspection and enforcement efforts at Marble Hill and your contribution to there efforts.
Sincerely,
/
'}
Victor Ste)io, Jr.
Director s Office of Inspection and Enforcement cc:
Puolic Service Co. of Indiana ATTN:
Mr. 5. W. Snields Senior Vice-Presicent Nuclear Division P. O. Box 190 New Wasnington, Indiana 47162 Harry H. Voigt, Esq.
LeBovef, Lamb, Leiby & MacRae 133 New Hampshire Ave., N.W.
Washington, D.C.
20036 1
i l
t
/s'.S. i l. ( A. -
~
f j.
.g.m
~
s.
- n. %...R.o J
bav
. a ~)
- e_. v.._r
~.r ycrs
.:. e.r gm s. - -:.- C ^1.'. '.. *.C ?. C "..'.."..C
.w...
w M g. s. :*,..
k:n.
W:i e.,..
..s.-. ~ 2. 2..d,.. e.,n,..m.. 5= _. ; u....t., )
.s e. ~...r.
.f.
- e..
f r,.,.
a s..,
,f c,.
.. :. e..
.e,.,.,
a" 4
s J e.,.r.a. : C.
- , -.,,,,.:n, ev::.a
)
.... \\a./
u:
.T &.*v*.*?J.,. n. C 7 s".c e r.
)
t i
.c e..=."s.Y,. C.?
m,.
L, a, c.r 'v - ~.. - -
...,.y s v,.-..- u...e.
ee vs..
.ar....). s u.
C wM. c a =_.=.e*...' O l <* O.= ~..=.=.=..= * = = 2". n' -
r.'.=s**.=..=..'..=
. =. - -'
a.-
. eave N..e Vc.ev, a...,.-
.#.'.. ~. a.... ". k.)- C w.,,~.~.-..' c.. *.*' '..". c '.#.# - "..
4 w
i s
-e
- -a
.d
- . A.J.. g,
... g 3 m.
. e.,
. b a.
d... a.- s..e..
g. - o.. s. s.
- .-*..~ **m.*.*.o.'... s.
w.#
. w. a.
^
n..
p.
.4
.ny g
'.f
.=. b..*4.. ~.!. ' *..*!.D..*.*..*.*n Oa m
I g A,J.
w
- k.. a.
f r.y
.e a 4
=. A J. g g
- g. g 9.d y e.
a a
-a ac
,c....
ir
.w L
.c.., g ", %.. e.
- j g.*.* o. j..
.a. g.e.
- a....a..e.. a. a. e.r
...a.
- e. c. t..e..e.1 n.
.C s... a.....,
c g
.cj,
..s...
t t
.e...
.e.3.
,......e.
.e.,,.
- a..
- f e..7 e w. e.
.w.
4.a.
...s...
... c.
r.
f.
..........e..
..w..w.
_e
...,.,e.
C.s.
s 4,a.s
.w, v.. e.e..e.
- e. 4..
.e
.6 a.
E
- a. y y....* < a.
c... r.'. s ~. ~..' m....c c '.=.c.-
- c.. A.
- a..v..'.c..'.. e~-'s.'..'~.'
. ~, ~..... ~. ~.. e. y e.?
e #.
~.
a 3
y
.t s.=. C.-. e." 9 -. 4...S
.e.. 4
- 4. E i. o S e.. 4..w.
. w....
9-w - C,., a.,.. 5 c.
C.. e..e
- 4.. S,,
-.c..
a.
w....
..'"..w
.e.. cL.#.J*
- c... d
. 9..7.
- 6. a g.e J. d
- l:
- a A.,
.e o. e e A.i y,
. h o...w. a.
.e
. e....*l a.
, y E
j...
a.4 w.
C.
...V *. S *.d " a *..#C..
a... d 7..#C.-
- e.'"J e ". *.,
.dS
.'..'..y '. ; nC..#..s~
....-ca..#^
a..ts
- ~
s 3
~
- ..'c.e. 2. ~.
C.". - '.# * "g
- C...-.*.
t C S.d..' V *.
s*...'*...
C..-**~.
c a.
. g e,.
.e
,w y
s.
- ^*
. ". e aS - a 7.. #,.'... a. :
" d. e.' g..d -..e,
..'.a.
.".s V *.
- .6 c'..*.....d.".
y p
~
w
.wu
.w.
-a..
(.. ).v a. a S.
.e., cv e
%... e y.,. y.._'.= ".*. 5.
"..'*..'.';" d.' s. u.e. e. *. (.S. )
- e. ".*. s.... ' c '
< s.e.... e 4
.w4s,aa e.,
t, i
.u. e.v. a. - u.
=
.c.ao..
..e,.
c#. ?.' ". e..c e *...a
~ ~. * ~ *.. " -. '.~.s,- * ~ ~..'...
e l
1 o' s afe ty category caterials a.d cC=;:Cnents, and,
- 4. 1,.' e f
. #. *... *. e X.S.
.#. 4 m..' ".,..
e.,.# * ^ * * - *.e b.,,v e
~~
g.
.w..g Qo 3 4.
g.
-a.
ww..w.
t ac...
s.
..a w._u..a..
.e...
.ea V e..w...r..*,y
.w.
i, P
h 4
> \\
p-
.v D@
O
~
--n-~
., ~. -.. -,. - - -,..,.,.
n.,
-._...... ~.
~ -.
~_n o
e f
i I
- C C't?
1.f g - n
- g ?"C. r?
O.. r r.* -= C. m g
- t..r.a' ? O *= T.r.e c..;.g.. *. e. g.; ee;
-y j
u r.
~~~ -
i (r. m ?
- e..-=.v.... e r.l: -.. c. e..:J C c.e,n., r.. q
.. -a
.....r..
I l
On March 25, 1960, at a public ceeting in Madison called by the lac, Save The Valley presented cne Marien Hudgins as a witness.
F.
i 2
Mu '.' e,.'.s v.-k a d as a q". a.'.'. *..v c c...-- '
.d. s, e c *.c.
'c.- C'. a..-.1 e C,.,.... c- -...-
i
+
i Cc.ec c-.d..,
a s.u '.... ~..~ a... -.
4"..
.",. e.u.d.*.',. '..
."..-v.a...'.*.,
.'.c e, c f
y.e-, u.
.a, o, n c 7.e..
... =. a a.,. c c '..c. =..~ ~. c. d '-.,~ ~.~.,. = ~.c... c e- *. c.*
_c a.* *.. -f 2.
i C..pec
. e a.n s.m.d e,,.
. g
.s, a
.t
- p. *
...42 R
a..e y
.n.
....g, a
no.
4-a.1
.c c.a.' s..,,
c..
+
..f.......
F y n. 1. y a..e.
1'?.
.u... s. a.. s r. o. A.rC c
a.
_ a.r. - - o.
..u. a c
e.
{.n /.~..~....u.
. s,.
~,
A 1
,._82 C'
~."..*.'.*..s-.*****.
."'.s'.'.'..e.
2..**<"..'*.**.*'I..'.'.'
f..y..
.a yc.. s..,... s e s e *. "
.*. f e C. #.'
c.'. ' y"
... -
- s c #. *. ~vy~
C n*.e..s"
...c-.*.*_#c
.e.
c..-
e f
e.... e. s..e.. s.
b I
A.. ~.. c..'... = d "w.*.. g ".. _' s e ~ c.' e. f.' ~~..... = s l '..."." ".~ '.. s s".,. =.
g.
1 1
,. r.,. s.
c..f C.
u..ss - e s.4. 4,..
.e...
e e...,. g
,4 e
.e...,-.
s.
i r
f.
6e.......
s a'e,.y e, y. n. e.. *. s c. d..-...-
- a.' s wa. -.
. v e.
a-. a. d u c.. e.' *.*.e - xv.
C'..*....=.
r y
i er PSI.
A.nd at all times the N?.C was available suppcsedly :c atten--
.c c
ec.,,
n,.
.<4...
i 1
t
- u.... a s >.s 1 15.
n.<.,.s.
- e,,. a. s c '..... - c.... c. a.. =..- =,.
.~ ~. s c.'
t r.
IGC I & I inspec crs ' rem July 20, 19 5, to and thrcugh M2. ch 29, '!! :
..w.. c.,.....e,.
- ..w -. ad c.' e v_' d a..n c e
..x -
t.... u al.i c '.'.e s *..- =., o.- ~. s.
c_..' ' e ;
~
~.
si= ply that the IEC can have no ecn'idence that ?SI and/cr its s t. x, - c c.. a *. c. c =.....e.
ara c cf a a.
c '..- *.. ed vd e..-
.= a.'.. v ^. a. a. sc. y x'
I
=aterials a.d cc=penents at the Ma-ble 2.111 site in the ne a.- future.
f L
I
. c.6 - 2*
,,.g
'e-wMTF
--.4*""-""
.*4d--"7- - - - *
- w e'"+=r* * **+w-*
- -'*******^*+'"d~
- - - - - - - - - - - - ~ ~ - - - - -
~ ~ = _-
_ ~ _ - -
r e
i e
i 9
.t.e w-
.r a..
,.<.a..
. u. s..
t.
.e.,,
- e..t.e.- 8. /
r C.-
- u.,.
t n
.. ~
,4-.
- e..
w.....
.y
- n.. r.
C
,CC..r. c..
c..#.,.
m C.w. e 8 2
,4. 4 43 s,
e
. cs
.4C.6 C..
.w
..w.
. g,.
6 6
6 5
C.# d *.'.' ar S C.# **e".# -* *.*. * '.' # ".k.. s,v be.'*
e
- ,,ti-*.
S a*. *e*a ~ e d"w e
- w w* ',~..~C,.5 w
s r.....
a d 3. e. a,s..a, s e w. e d e. s.
t. # *
- t.' v e '.*/ S e e
- .b. s- ~.
- y. O p *..=
6
- h e M., C s~.." 'n' ~.
- 6
.s
..y...
a S *- w*. G.6 *. 4**..'*..*.
C.~*..'.~~....'&'*.*'.y" k., e.' ~. g~
^ ~ ~. *..
~~
~
w.
i t
5,1 s. g *.
.C..
..n
...,.,-.,t.
.e C.... =. =..
- e.r
..4
...w.*
w.
w p.
q 5
c.'w s.e.=.=.e.*..#.. A M.
,e.
b * # *
- K&.*.*.#*.*
- b. 3.e.
I
/'%..
.f,'t c. h.
cZ,
.S c. 2 A, -
. b. a.
w.
a d
- Je*
a
.3, e
r
.e. g. c.. J e..g p.*,..
- ...a.
".".b. g b G.. a.,;
- a...* s..e
- a. 4 G.==.
.d.*. 4. s..* a..*. J. e. *. "." a Z s..is.
- f,i
- 4 i
4.g-w.
==c..
g y
. -.. s.t s..e. c...a.
"..u. a.
.*.?.a...
j
. c.
. u. a.
..,.e c.
,.. a. =.,. _ y a -.
u., j,..
c.
- c..
.s s
.,.-,e.
..g.<u..
....e.e.-~.e..
.-,..e.,.,e.
- s. c. y.
c.s 9
.. e,. e a.
c e.
i...
- e
~
1.<..
co.a.n.,
. u.,.
.u. a. c.a.C.
..u. a..:~
.r...e a.
.a.e..
Is s
p
-.-w.-....a~..
w.a.. a.e..
n f
,,s........<c.4...
,.r
- u. a.
. u.. o..e..e a
.a
- o..u..zS
...i.,
e.
..,e..,a.
,e n.
.y-.-
. e, C 5 Ce C,w
- r..-.. t a
.t.a w9
- 491 w.,
- e?
g
.-.$g..a*.#V *.*
c.d "Y
~*
t y
F t
.t.*.:. a.
i i
e.r
. u. a.
cg..-. $ 9.... s. y
- =m. t e....e o. g.-
,a.: a..-.
a a a..a.
. y. a. e.
e.4.
a
.v w
i r
t
~*.
p' '. a ^ t
- ww*
C -*.*- -
n........"-.#""*
C.
gr., 1 c. =/ :.-. s c.- a s - -
gg..s m....w.-
- c--
w n <.....
v
- w..-6
- c. c.,,.. u..n....
..., ~. \\ & ) y s.~... e.
c..a.
c SC s.
w s Y C.,..
c.-
..e r..,..
p w..
w.~
l C.e S.e s.i ).
..w.,,
.~,.4.. e..e 4
.s...'/.t c.
e.-.
4 1 c a.,. g. a4 C,...e
.,C.
.v 6 -
c--. -.--
s..
i
)
2.i ; g4A
- r.. y.45.*.
C.-
cV*.
'. ' '. *.'v'a'.' *. V ~. ^
P..S V e 5 " #..#.#. C.' e.*. *. *..#.~ e
- ~
~a
.w
- ^
.4*. *.* '.. - C '. -
a d a. a " a. *.' y C"...*..*.*.
.-
- e c ~ d.# * "
"..a.*-
- e.-
- e* e.. *. S r". -.-
~~
.. a
.6 v
t
,P h
g.. 3. 4 S.'..# ". e. S C "..... S.~. c. ~. e..
i
~~
4 f
i f
O
.a
.cc.
I r
e h
s
--e.c.
.--,,....ym..
,,.,.r.,,,..-,,.--.w.,.
...c..
_.--.-,+v..n,,,7,yv v,,,,
m,
.-e.-,+mn--g-,,m..,,,..-.ey, w-
,,.y.----w,--
i i.e
.n,t o..
.c a *c.ca.A.
.e. sad s a.. u.
.- r.
.u. e.e a
- a...~ & =..n I.
.,e.~..% a.
s s
20 report and the UFtC Inspection F.eport 80-02 Save The Valley has s
several relevant comments that shculd certainly aid the Cc:.:issic.e:
- 1. =aking their determination en the concrete issue.
1.
There seems to be no way en the basis of the Sa gent & 1.u..
No". =..~b e.- 2 0
, e7e -.,, e.-
.- ~d c..
- w. as 4 s c '
- h. a.
'C h spac-*cr ta -
80-02 to deternine whe:her er no: :he 60 a eas chosen by Sa gen: L Lu.dy were prcper a.re as fer a study of the exist'.n. concrete placc..i
.f *..- 'u _, e * *.d 1 _7.,
c.
-.u...-,.
e e,....g u.c.
e c...,_.... e.. e, _... e c.
.=
c.
c s,.e a..,.
u, a.n. _a,
....., _ e _.
e s. u,u-e,e c..e
- v.,,,
. ~...
s
..s
- a.
. e... c e 3e
- y.....e.~e e s-e3.. -
.ec c_4..-
c.
u.,.
w
...., =.,,
e,,.
concrete and reba or cther obstructicns were accurate ; were such
.. e..... o.
. a.
.... c.s va..--
ed '. v
..'.a.
r'..c. u ',
.*c_..-
T c.- *. x c*... ' a.,
.c
..s path a.alysis, Appendies 3, PCA F.epert, November, 1979, Page 11, Table s 5-5-6-7-5.-9-10-12-13-1.:-15-15-17-15-19-21 & 23.
These Tabl=r ec.e -..,
_._4c, c
..e..,.a
....i...w. -
.,e,.
_4...s e u...
....3
. c....,. e '. e... e.... '.. *. *.. c '. ~..*. e '., a.c. '.c
-., e. e e e..-.,
- u. e
,.,; g,n o.
c.
ge a.w. o v. _ c -. a. d.
s.u d.d a. s c a. c...... e..
c ".. *.. e n. ' " w.". a.. *. =. - c.... c s-=.-
4-
.a
& Lundy has ade,cuately tested the inacce ssible areas, na.ely:
- t. a...,..,, o.., a.
ar a. as *. *. *.*. c- *..h.k.e ' c... -.. =. ar. d t h e s c. e d v e d d s* #.
- x..
- _e.,.. bt 4.,c4..,.
- a..x _4,
a.
e..,
.c.
A-e..
w,-,-
w-r-+-
-wm,
-,~,,eaann.
-ew, r,----ne w--v re-a e e m e-m-n,- --w----we-s-e---
,.w,w
.-,-s
,r--
e v.
-s.-vv-w=
+-s--ws s
- ~~'
4.
Were th cush transmissions er re'flected ultra senic 4
'. e s ' s p...',....a. d.
.'. c v. e.e.
.e c... a.
..".a.
.-=..=.d_'....e, c e "..' d.
" a.
....., *. e d s-w1*h IN-SITU test recults to determir.e if cores were representative (
It should be specifically noted that at least 40% of the areas checked in the Sargent & Lundy report ma.ifested documentary evide..:
of imprcperly placed concrete and further that all*but 12'J cf the s e areas were explained away by comments frcm Newberg and/or PSI representatives.
Regarding the pulse-echo methed, several questions nay need :c u,.
.e ~. _a _n _..., o.. a. s.r.-,.
.r.
.,.,..,o.
.e 4
. 5
...sy.
.u.c.;,y,.,
e
-.. s "...# a....
4
- "'Va.
-J
-- da
- c*
- ava *** V a2.,' a.v.
.". c
- 7
- C
=' ****
-^
6-ww
~+
p.~w y-a...1y c.C
..- a.
.ey. C.<.c.'
a.,.,g..
..u...-a.~..~.*
T*
.e.%. e.
- A
'0 p C
- e C' ee 4...
C'
%. c.S Deen y.
JA.
41.*.4 e.
.y.. c c s.. e.
s n
... c..
w.u c.
e.
c#
d,.,.,.s.o we
.pe.
- c..s t....
...e
_4n c. p ~. 4 on o#.
we.. s,..-,. c..
w
.w m.
- p.. w. _ u., 3 y. e.9,...
.r..o... a w.
.e
.w.-... e d.."...- c...a.
q ". a. s '._d....-
m may arise as te the c1cseness of that pa-ticular rela-ionship ; hcwe c+
.e c..... g t,,". d v c... ". a.
w k.. i a.
.. ".. a.'.'....-. u *..-. '
- r.. ".. c ".+.. ^. u
..". e C o ' ...**
... '..".*. s *
..'.'*.a.*.
.. a c e e.. c...., x.... _. c. _ c, c.
.h e).<,.<.e,
,c..
e..
..a A
eq..,s c..
a.
4 y
concrete at Marble-Hil and an exec :icn cf it by Save ~he Valley c a.
c.C.. *y s e.-v e *..*., e...".... ~ ~ - ". *..-a.,".",-.c'..
c.'
h e u"..C C c.....d.e. s.d..a...
T. *.q ~'.",, %,..* J L.
y q9.u.m
., G & nL.. :.D,
- 7
- f.T T.V.
.C., n* 5*.=*
d'"
?
% t..
5Y:
-/d.ru
/T/ _ !b,$'
.,-., e,
- r.. r w '" s ' *,. :
- .e.,.
. m e n
. n..~..e.
F. e n..f...
Une
.L e
"e '.J./"\\.U.A.C, n..'*w..b."."V.
.t..l,, 'V' T
'.N. 7 y#.
TV.
a **
a**-
B,#.... ?., A,
- -O**
Lf v
. w
- r..
1/.A. ?Y C '.'".O.?? ".'
a T.
'3.i.i 7.,A.C m.
a w
w ie
- -+-'" -*O
.r h......
^,^ h.S W '
C. %
C".c C"':cc,
-1
.O.*, r a."t
.V
& 4 crw-ws--ev -.--ws,=*e*t
'- - - -r--
-ee v e w --
rewrwe+'P-w-m+--w
'+'1ew-*-
- -w sww-,7-'--e d ure=i+-t-
'--#--a~-we-T*---
w-
+=g-y M-9- - = - - + * =
=rr=
~w+-
<Ms n
nw wr w s~~ ~ ~ -
[
.e c,%.:,
- 1*10b W'A# #
~.
..a.
i...; r r
,t a
T'.'UC L E A R 'R e.W !./. i '. M V C:- * ~ !.' 5 I O N
! 4.o
.c s.
e s
.e e
- v. o u,..., v... m e.. u s
,( )
g..... e l
JUti 4 6 1350 1
i l
Mr. Thomas Dattilo, Esq.
l 311 East Main Street l
Madison, Indiana 47250
Dear Mr. Cattilo:
On May 23, 1980, the Office of the Secretary referred Save the Valley's
" Additional Ccmments to Co.TT.issict.ars Concernin; 7.esucption of Work a. Marble Hill" (docketed with the Commission en l'ay ll, :950) to the NRC Staff for treatrent pursuant to 10 CFR 2.2'.5 of t3e C:--ission's regulations.
This dccu int also incorporates by re'O ence cc.. : 's 9 ':at ed cn May 7,1950.
T h r. S '. i f f.i i be reviewing these two doct
...t!
- ' ' t
- . : nine.hethe' idditi:nal en>
- . i r.1 eisures Or cther action is ap cpriata c..n tha casis Uf
.'.e tatters r i i c ? d by ' ' e 5 2 / 0 the Valley.
The documents life.ssues in two LE! !c categc-ries: )
f :fictint c:nstructicn practices a-d ".or:: ti*e acti ns at 'ir0le Hill
. :: (P ief:7.ic 'astures of the f'arble Hill ! * *.e.
'dith respect !:
ficiar. ies,. cu attached sevEral af fidavits '.,hich ycu !.alieve
.c sn Fou'
' 2d te deter-ke whether this effice should have tor.fidance i.et Publi:
rice Crmpany of Indiana's c;uality assurance and control program is a.' w etely : '.abiiitated.
I note that trese affidavits have been previously considsred by t'e Of fice of Inspection and E.ferce ent in its investigation ed 3 tic s On ":rble Hill's castcv. tion dific' m ies.
Mr. Cutshali's affi-m it :15 g. ". ;. ly rc fen : :ad in ey snar of A_; st 15, 1979, which confi med the sespension of safety-relv d
..r rtrucci:n 2t ;'ai ble Hill.
?,' notheless, the Staf f will ; e. iew these ef fi'.v.it: :nd iesues raised in Flee U.e '! alley's fil'ngs to det.:
.c bether '..
I-
-:.~.cn !s 'iarrar.t:d rg u..:.g
~
x ? uction ; ctler s
- 'd corr ecti.e
- .5 2 "i
- C Staff vill a'.
i..;.a o
a '.
- s concerning seismicity cf ;he "ar.,
'ta.
..ordingly, % : cpriate action will be taken on 5 e the Valley's schmittals
..; thin a rea6crible time as provid:-d in 10 CFR C.ZC6.
I enclose for ycur infor stion a.t;y of the notice that :ill be filed for publication witn the CT'i.' of the 7 eral :.egister.
E i nr.a r e ' y,
/.
. s:
/
, p Y u. to r ' : w i l o, J r. '
Direct -
Cf' ice.'.:.sp ction
.., e.<
~
' c..re:
?rt ;O;o)
/
1 J
JUN 26 1930 2-Mr. Thomas Dattile Enciesure:
eti:e for Federal Register i
cc w/er. closure:
Public Service Ccapany of Indiana ATTN:
Mr. S. W. Shields Vice President-Electric System 1000 East Main Street Plair'f eld, Indiaria 4E155 1
1 l
l l
e e
_.