ML20210S490

Trip Rept of 771026 Site Visit & Insp of Faults Discovered in Unit 3 Excavation Site.Faults 1-3 & 2 Considered Incapable.Decision on Capability Reserved Until Addl Info Received & Site Inspected Again

ML20210S490
Person / Time
Site:	Satsop
Issue date:	11/03/1977
From:	Bournia A, Budge D, Lefevre H NRC, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:	Gammill W Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Shared Package
ML20210S475	List: ML20210S471 ML20210S490
References
CON-WNP-1565 NUDOCS 8605290210
Download: ML20210S490 (14)

Text

,

. -~.~. -.

..-:=

--y is.

,.N C

7 UN! TED STATES O"

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMIS$10N WASHINGTON, O. C. 20s55 5

% '.> 2.4 yg g7y i

+

1 i

g MEMORANDLH.FOR: William P. Gamill, Assistant Director for i

Site Technology, DSE i

l~

FROM:

A. Bournia, LWR Branch Nc. 3, DPM D. R, Budge, Site Safety Standards Branch, SD

~;.

H. E. Lafavre, Geosgiances Branch, DSE t

SUBJECT:

SITE VISIT TO INSPECT THE FAULTING IN THE EXCAVATION FOR WNP-3 i-DOCKET NO.:

STN 50-508 and STN 50-509 APPLICANT:

Washington Public Power Supply System FACILITY:

WPPSS Nuclear Projects No. 3 and No. 5

Background

By telephone on October 13, 1977, Washington Public Power Supply System (applicant) infonned the staff that several shear zones (faults) were uncovered in the excavation of Unit No. 3.

On October 14, 1977, the staff held a cenference call with the applicant wherein more details were discussed.

In these discussions the applicant indicated that minor faulting was noted in the east and west walls continuing across the floor of the excavation.

An additional conference call was held between the NRC staff and the applicant on October 17, 1977, and as a result,we concluded that further investigations should be performed with regards to these faults and that a site visit should'be made.

The site visit was made on October 26, 1977.

A list of the meeting attendees is enclosed (Enclosure A).

Discussion i

Safore going to the site to inspect these faults, the applicant reviewed the field work performed and reported in the Preliminary Safety Analysis P.eport.

As part of the discussion, the applicant indicated that faulting had previously been exposed and investigated in a trench 2300 feet south of the plant facility.

The NRC staff, in their review of the WPPSS No. 3 and 5, applications concluded that movement on these nearby faults was i

pre-Pleistocene based on regional relationships, i

o 0605290210 771103 PDR ADOCK 05000508 O

PDR i

.a._

- -... -.. - ~...

l'*

']

')

t William P. Gammill NOV 3 377

• .j Site Excavation Inspection of Unit 3

~

., i i

The applicant's detailed mapping of the well-lithified early-middle Miocene Astoria(?) Formation (predominantly sandstone with some silt-stone, conglomerate and tuff) indicates two reverse faults in the

. l Reactor and Reactor Auxiliary Building excavation for Unit 3.

Specifics j

(as determined in the excavation) relative to these faults follow:

)

i Fault Strike Dip Apparent Offset Approximate Length of

^ }-

Exposed Fault

1. 1-3 N40*-50*W 20*SW 0.5' (East wall) 400' 2.8' (West wall)

1. 2 N60*E 60'SE 2.2' (East wall) 150' Fault #2 (designations assigned by the applicant) intersects but neither crosses nor offsets Fault #1-3.

The NRC staff's initial impression, subject to additional documentation, is that the two faults are probably not capable within the meaning of Appendix A to 10 CFR 100 and as such should pr'esent no hazard to the facilities now under construction.

The NRC staff reserves a final decision relative to the nature and approximate time of occurrence of movement along the faults until an early submittal by the applicant of relevant documentation, and review and concurrence of the applicant's findings by I

the NRC.

Meanwhile, the staff sees no reason to suggest curtailment of LWA construction activities at the WPPSS, Units 3 and 5 site.

The NRC staff bases its preliminary conclusions on the following data which we feel are suggestive of antiquity:

1.

Structure - Similarity of the nature (reverse faults), amount (several feet or less of displacement), and fault trend (north-east and northwest striking) with other geologic structures seen previously by the NRC staff in the near-site area.

Movement en these nearby structures, as noted in our February 1976 Safety Evaluation Report, most likely ceased in the late Tertiary (at

?

least 12 million years ago) and appear to be as the result of northeast crustal compression. We have seen no indication, in our examination of the currently visible exposures, that would cause us to alter our previous conclusions.

2.

Lithology - The sediment types (predominantly sandstone with lesser amounts of tuff, conglomerate and siltstone) exposed within the excavation are consistent with those noted in the PSAR.

4

e s

)

9 i

William P. G---411 '

NOV 3 E77 l

3.

Absence of S11ckensides - Slickensides (polished and striated f

surfaces that result from friction along a fault plane) appear to be absent along the planes of both faults (Fault #1-3 and

1. 2)..The lack of slickensides implies to the NRC staff that fault movement could have occurred early in the lithification process of the Miocene Astoria(?) Formation, which was most

{

likely several millions of years ago.

}

4.

Fault Trace - The trend of the faults is sinuous, implying thac movement may have occurred prior to consolidation of the Astoria(?) Formation during late Tertiary time.

5.

Lithification - The well-consolidated (relative to other Tertiary sandstones) nature of the Astoria(?) Formation suggests burial beneath many hundreds, perhaps several thousands, of feet of overburden sometime during the geologic past.

This accumulation process requires a considerable length of time, again attesting to the presumed antiquity of the faults.

In addition, the fault zones are very thin, devoid of brecciation and clay souge, and are well-healed.

The integrity of the material along the fault traces appear to exceed that of the surrounding rock.

The fault planes, being well-healed do not appear to be likely candi-

. dates for renewed activity.

l The NRC staff suggested to the applicant, during a phone conversation on October 17, 1977, a number of items to be considered in their investigation and documentation of the Unit 3 faults.

A copy of this phone conversation is included as Enclosure B.

With respect to the October 17, 1977, suggestion that a reasonable determination of the length of the two faults be made we conclude, following the field observations of October 26, that mapping need not extend beyond those areas where the faults are presently exposed (Reactor and Reactor Auxiliary Buildings and the trench to the northeast of Fault #2). As excavation progresses, however, continued mapping is required of these faults as well as additional faults that may be found at any other-i site location. We were informed by WPPSS on our site visit of October 26, 1977, that an attempt is being made to develop these data at an early date.

Included with this documentation to be provided by WPPSS will be i

letter reports by two geologists familiar with the WPPSS area.

These reports, according to the applicant, are to be transmitted to the NRC by Friday, November 4, 1977.

Additional documentation relative to the fault assessment is to be submitted to the NRC as' expeditiously as possible.

In addition to the investigative suggestions offered to the applicant on October 17, 1977, the NRC staff indicated, during the site visit of October 26, 1977, that appropriate sampling should be made along the two fault zones prior to additional construction activities in those I

~

mm-.__-,.

., - - __,_,a M

j.

~ N q

b 4-N0Y 3 1977 i

William P. Gansnill t

I i

i areas.

The NRC staff secs no reasca for the applicant to curtail l

slope protection efforte on those excavation walls (north and south)

_l unaffected by faulting.

1

{

Conclusion

(

Based upon our field observations in the Unit 3 exc:avation on October 26, 1917, coupled with our previous evaluation of the near-site and regional geology duying the PSAR review, we provisionally consider the two faults (Fault. #1-3 and #2) to be not ecpable. We raserve a final decluton on the capability mattet. Thic decis' ion will be based upon information and documentation yet to be provided by the applicant.

Considering the multiple periods of deformation to which the area has been subjected, it would not be surprising to encounter additional faulting at lower depths wit.5in the Unit 3 excavation or udjacent t

excavations at Unit $ and support facilities.

Based on the additional information submitted, the NRC staff will, if considered approptlare, inspect, when available, those sections of the two faults not. visible cc the current excavation level.

0d&( 0ni Anthony Bountia LWR #3 Branch, DPM Oi &. W Un-yCz,

David Budge Sito Safety Standards Branch, SD fh Harold,E. I.efevra Geosciences Branch, DSE

Enclosures:

As etated cc w/encis:

R. Boyd S. Swanson R. DeYoung J. Jackson O. Parr H. Lefevre A. Bournia D. Budge N. D. Strand (WPPSS)

R. Jackson K. Othberg (Wash. Dept.

R. G. Ryan of Natural Resources)

F. J. Williams J. Stepp PDR R. Hoffman Local PDR D. Vassallo ACRS (17)

Encl: ura A'

')

'}

LIST CF ATTENDE23 WPPSS 3 AND 5 SITE VISIT OF OCTOBER 26, 1977 Name Af*1}istion 1

i M. L. Jones KPPSS

}

Richard L. Roannelli kTPSS 1

FCC

}

Yred 3. Convell 1

C. R. Swan Ehaeco Robert B. Vorbes WPPSS i

David 8. Tillson WPFS3

{

C. 3. Tatuu Ebasco G. C. Core 6gan WPPSS M. S. Ray?. olds D&L A. S. ratwardhan WCC B. F. Burton Paget P;rwer L7.oyd S.'Cluff WCC Don Tocher Roadward C7.yde donsultancu

'oannta McCrunL Wocdw rd Clyde Consulcsa".s L

Ron Sanford TV News - Clympia Dave Jitovec TV News - Olympia N. R. Tilford Ebasso R. J. Pate USNRC Bob Douglas WPPSS David Budge NRC Robert Burk CASE Kurt Othberg Department of Natural Resources Ben M. Page ACRS Consultant George A. Thompson ACRS Consultant John E. Ross Bschtel E. Bodholt b*FPSS Robin Lloyd King TV Richard DePartre King TV Anthony Bournia USNRC

l

. - ~...

l 3

o j.l 1

l Name Affiliation l

John Kalleher NRC Harold E. Lefevre NRC John C. Maxwell ACRS Consultant G. Quittschreiber ACRS Staff Richard Milne Daily World Bernard W. Giestman Elma Resident Margaret A. Giestman Elma Resident S. Ph11 brick.

ACRS Consultant i

\\

.=

.~ ~,. w,-e g + m g 3 ;.y. w.

-~~ m ge.yra m.-.,

..m a

+,. -~

a.

~

ny.~~ ~

s py.

u,...

e,.,.,,,

.w i

,e s.

1 e

...s.,

i

. L,.

~,,

~..

I w,:.

. c:

.,c l

ce L

~'

e

~

. ~

~

NOV 3 WM

~

, e;..

c c

s.

- " Q, f.. *...mwM.: g Q K.o g. ys g,y..y. g.. _

}

,.6%,i

.z j

J.

. ;e, t

3,

( <J a - *..

,Q*5 m, /, W 3 ?g;; m o a a A.~' y[. M,w/ b ?:* u.g,i- >f.,,f.n..,M., :f.

..c ia..

..l... 'm.,

m

.d J V J {,' '

. +d.4[

.p

> w.'s',ym',',.,,. ;,.a

a.. 3 -c.,,

n.,,.y. m: x,.q:,,;. y..

../ t.

j s,

_. ~. w-

- A:,,

e.

I

e. n a..

..s,gy pppg 3.y;.y~y g, y,,g.,..

-m e,

?

' 4. ;, q g?d,..y.>MNi T 4 p %p.~.'.5'?legosaupung ytas ;pmim y.'G h..l7,c;[$.

3, th f

69M6 4 site t ' h M

)

pf$;y :.4%.g 3

7

,W/.y*.p

.ar

~ l % MP9y)$,7.W;. $ A.?Bournia,L LUBE Bram'eh Es. 3

.l.M) ' i4*S ' R 1 17.E ' O. fk C

I

' b '. 4"N i;

. Bedge, Site Safety. Standards Brameh,'SD y Jf x.n:.y m n. y.M E,.,75. la.pj g:e Gemeeiences Braneh W

?.

> v.

.. %.. J<.P...

fevre DSE

-..N.C,

. ' %, %).

s l

n e

..~ m. y.

e r.

n.a w w.:

.,..ie : n,; x..

m r

I

. '. ch.5, 0BJEL"f C %.WSITH TISIT TO INSFECT_TER FAULTIMG IN TER RECAVATION j.,.;dt

, p ?.

.'.5,fe.t Insp-3.,. ;

.c,,.-

', f. ',@

s t

., je g.,~

l DOCKET NO.: STN 50-508 and STN 50-509 iW l

,.:AFpLICANT:

Usekinsten Feb11a Power Supply Syntam I

. " '.. FACILITY:.

WFFSS Neslaar Projoets No. 3 and No. 5 i

..nJ.~ly Q f$. Q L y,o; 3, L.q j ~,;..

[

r: t.

y

Q:.< 4,.m. e,...u-w.n,.

i-l

, ~;_

9 <

...n n

c.

- n er

. % ">.,,. a ;A4;,A.-, agf*W' 4 q e, s. :

%t-;

W..

,([7.t.' By, telephone en 'Onteber' 1371977, unshinsten Fehlii Power sepply

._... r 7.w 1 -

.w

.w

%'W

, ' System (applicent) infessed the staff that several shear sonas (fanits)

"l" l

uere unaevered la the emaavaties of Unit No. 3.

On October 14, 1977,

'the staff held a eenforenes cal 1~with the app W = t wherein more details i -

were discussed. In these disemoeians the applicant indicated.that admos' faulting ens meted in the east and weet wella contiaving aeroes j

D,; {, ;g the floor of the ausses, ties.,,

.. g

.. c.

. :;. ~

,w -

n, n

.c.

.. e..

.n.

i,

9 An addittomal eenforense call was held between the NRC staff sad the

v. T%

_ applicant on Osteber 17. 1977, and as a result we concluded that further

'"S JJ Investigations should be performed with rdSards to these faulte and that

', S ' 1, s Y a site visit should be made. The site visit was ande en October 26, 1977.

i

.W 4fGM,:A list of.the meeting attendese is a=1 = ad (Enelosere.A).

5, :. ~ 3. 4. 4

~ r '.Q gd;;

1

s. w

~.. w., n.

ca m

~

'. w y p,rr;<. v r s

.u q n.g.-;

M. c,

t 5,. N 9:q s ~ s 9 vp~.,... ; ~.., &. ' N...

.6,,, ~, e A

.%,;; ; ~4;.e. ip<.y.

,m-i y

,,.g. R meentem

.g

.y

..y q

N.

3 0e. 5...,.%,.,M ar..wf y,s v

r'.

+c.. m.,

u -.~.,,1 a...

.D M,.cBefore going ee'the site'te inspeet these feelte, the'applienst reviewed. Ig~.

.,3 p es.&

,, o <'

s s

".]

' i <,'f';Ra9ert.the field work performed and repetted is the Pr=1t=4 = ry Safety Analyets j

1 '.,7 l As part of the discussion, the appliaast indiented that faulting c

had previessly beam aspeeed and investigated in a trensk 2300 feet sooth y

.,, of the plant famility. The NRC staff, in their review of the WFPSS No. 3 i

'and 5, applications esmaledad that movement on these nearby faults was.

. pre-Plaistocene based os ragh=1 relatimeships.

3, 7

s.

s

[

>k-

.,),; [ q '.. 1,*

.a

'\\,

,t t -

(

,- i i

, t.%. m..,.

4 t.

T

r. -... u 3 %p, s. n,.c; z

. c, a, +

n.....,e.w.m,, m, L ;.....

.x.

, t.., s y N..

I

.K ' i " Q.

,a Q;...., e

.n n.

. -. -.. ~,

'.N v'?,f,i,

. {. )N.

d

..'J' 6 q

..p' e '.

..f ;, : g s, ;.,,

{ ~,.y.

, f)

i. l ~

f

'li,

.,. <}

p

, orries >

I es

j '.;

Y o.

s ev. a e >

g-s

.c

, h. a. < j o.

.a

,,i-

.. < ~

.. +

v

^

> ' esses.

Qia.,,;,,',L.,

i lac roax sis m74) Nacu 02 0

'?-

Mcmc3covo crroeaa.vc3occn3 oco.c~m il ' '

O

.,,. __ x

,_,f

\\

w, 3,

9 A,

>r William P. Camm111 NGv 3 1977 s

Sita Excavation Insp_acjjint of Unit 3 h applicaat's detailed mapping of the well-lithifien early--middle Mimeesne, Astsris(?) Tornatios (predoeninantly waridatoes with some silt-steen, conglemarsta and tsff) fawitentes two reverse faults in the Emmeter and Beactor Aantiliary Building essavation for lhtit 3.

fpecifica

' (as' detow=f mad in the sammvetien) talative to theme faults follow:

' Fault Str Da

D_lp,

,, Apparent Offset Approximate Lazgth of i

E*P*1*d Fault j

k

.g,

a24

1. 1-3 N40*-S0*u 20'sJ 0;5' (East lvall) 400'

^'

c 2.'S' { West well)

1. 2 N60*E

$0.*SU 2.2' (East vall) 110' I

Famit #2 (designatione assigned by the applicaat) intersects but neitner

~

ll erossen nor offseta Pault #1-3.

, h h~2C staff's initial impression, subjost to additional documectation, f-

'.is that the two fanits are probably not capable within the meaning of Appendix A to 10 CFR 100 and as isech should pressac no hasard to the facilities aos under construation. h NEC staff raservers a final decision relative to the nature and approaimate time of occurrence of secrrement along the favite until em early malanittal by the applicant of relevant deemmentatise, and revies and senewrrenes of the applicant's findings by the Etc. %ssawhila, the staff sees no reason to ooggest curraf1=-et

~

of INA construction activitime at the VFPSS, Unita 3 and 5 site.

N Mtc staff banet its preliminary conclusions on the following data which we faal are suggestive of antiquity:

1.

Structure - Similarity of the nature (reverse faults), amount (several feet or less of displernt), and fault trend (north-

! east and northwest striking) with other geslegit. acructures seen previously by tbe NRC staff in the near-cita at,ta.

Movement on these neariry structurne, se metod in our February 1976 Safety

'

• O Evaluation Report, noet Likely esamed in the late Tartiary (at f Immat 12 milliam ::sars ans) and appear to be as tbs result of mertheast ernatal compression. We have seen no indication. ir.

i i

etar examination of the currently visible exposures, that veuld amuse us to alter our previous renelusions.

l 2.

Lithology - h sediment types (pram-sly sandstor.e with 1

lesser anotries of tuff, conglomerate and miltstone) exposed within

! pj the excavation are consistent with those noted in the PSAR.

L <w

]h' i ;

ff

• uaaa**

y

_.=

l' m c m u. ii.,v.> m u. m,

3*,................._..

qp

..-c a r.s y,u y y,v.,.7.c-7.. y 7 3y m.n,~ ~.-

.-. ;-.m7. p wy.ny,.

q..,.. y aq,.

p n.

~

s s

m

?-

- e w

M.

t m.

~

_,-r<

{

. William P. Gammill

'.u'~ NOV 3 1977 c,

s

.y v

~

3.

Absence of slinha==1 des - 311ekensides (polished and striated Q'_

p^1surfacesthatresultfromfrictionalongafaultplane) appear i

cb

<. M[gM *(.M;;M te be abeest along the p

~*A M.

L*

l M1). ;The lack of eliekanoides implies to the ERC staff thatWj 1 -

• d Q My.912multmovementees14haveoceurredearlyinthelithification

..N?

-i

'T?pueeses of ths Miseems deteria(f)' age 9.zG 2 '!,%j.j f. [ ^ %

• (

Formation, which was most 1 7

'IdQh,jf[fyyy:

1ikely samuralf mm= of yeare J I i

1 yd2 p pQ i.

• .= : '

Q W 4.pPf. 7eelt Trase - The :: read of the fanits'io siamous, implying that

• ? %,f.y:

y 7

l g>Of CM

.d:i'a@P3l uevament may have oesurred prior to eensolidation of the l

5 Astoria(?) hemation during 1ste Tartiary time.

'. 3 ~ ^ /.f, ' 7.' 7 y@MWWM NfQ Ql70,. y;. w&

?,. c: G.e y,

Jff ' b :5:., 7,c i.,. ' -3.N Lithificaties '@- The well-eassolidated (relative to other Tertiary '

j, a

j j

seedstones) asture of the Astoria(f) Forustion suggests burial

., l.[

beneath many hundreds, perhaps several tha=a==da, of feet of i~

"~

S 3 overborden sometina during the geologia past. This accommiation 3

j;':c 5.,,/ prosess requires a emeniderable lansth of time, again attesting l

F ;..

~ z to the presumed antiquity of the faults. In addittaa, the s. ;

3 7 6 5 fanit osmos are very this, devoid of breesiation and eley gauge,".'

.i i

i

. M@c Q e g-and era well-heelas. ethe integrity of the material along the A'

3 v.

l l

M..m femit trases appear to anseed that of the surroundles roek. The W

9. M M femit planea, being well-haalad do not appear to be likely candim g h i dates for renewed activity..

^.

y i

e. u :

V n. 6,:

'. ~

^

~

".);. em OsteberThe M C staff suggested to the applicant, during a phone conversatism l

n l

17, 1977, a member of itane to be somaidored la their 1

investigation and docementation of the Unit 3 faults. A copy of thtm pheme aseversation is insiedad as h aleears B.

With roepeat to the

~Ostaber 17, 1977, suggestion.that a reasonable determination of the

'M l

1eagth of the two faults bslseda we comalade, following the field I

ebeervations of October 26,'that mapping need not arteed beyond those j.,,2 ' areas where the faults are presently suposed (Resetor and Reactor n '., ? o I 4,b Amminary ag41A4-- and the,tronsh to the northeast of Feelt #2). As " '

N

"_f(.~faultaaswealasadditionsifaultsthatmaybefeendatanyother/ R. 'esseratism p W l mism leasties.. He were taformed by WFF18 en our site visit of Osteher 26,

[?, dets.; faminadad with this documentaties to be provided by WFFS8 "1977, that. an attempt is being made to develop these data at se early

~

i t

u O letter reports by tue geolesists familiar with the WFFSS area. These 8 6 reports, seeerding to the applienet, are to be transmitted to the NRC

,3. by Friday, November 4, 1977. Additional documestation relative to the

.c'

., fault assessment is to be submitted to the NRC as expeditiously as

".. possible. In addition to the investigative outgestions offered to the l

applicant om October 17, 1977, the NRC staff indicated, during the site f

visit of October 26, 1977, that appropriate sampling should be made along the two fault zones prior to addittomal oometreetion activities in those

. w. + s -,. ; s,..

a

~

'd W. ' ' i.<

a g.,

I

'y summass >

I s

r

,j y

onta >

s h.-

NRC 70RM 3te (9 74) NRod o240

. L W.

.t

_* va m sovsammenv ra' anne orrica. cere -eas es4 D

• ' ' * ~

..,. D

..L?i " ~

- -L M.

+

~_

n.;,. ; g n

.g.. -. y.n 3;p.,. g y c - -- p.--.y--~ ~ 7.y

~-,

. v' n y,,.3 e.

.~.y.

.?.w, s.

/'

y,<:'

z" 4

n s.

c

.\\

g T

i g

y

..g

+

v NOV 3 1377 j

William F. Commill

f -

y

~'$..

1 '

w..'. *

+ }l t.

,, f

" - I, t

. areas. The NBC staff sees no reason for the applicante co curtail

~

d'a

, 80. )

I

['

~

slope protection efforts on those ameavation walls (:wrth and south) l ruseffseted by faulting.7

. e,. W,Q M ',.6 W'

.M-y v. n y g.Q:; g.luotoa'7 4 n,A. w.n,4., % d M 1,x s." Q;

,'u,,::

l

• . -s w,v. w. y 0...e.g. rgy Qm

,... T;,w*4 W.2c 1.l

, m,v

,,g wg f.. a.,.p :,.y, Coma n

2;s.m g

.n.

, J, n.,;p.w...

qjqp&rn&w.&; y :.c.. ~2 0.',Q. @,Q

. ';. y a.. n.m c.

p

~ -

Maaned upsa sur&' field observa@ttees fa'the Unit 3 estavstion 4 w ri W;yfT 1MMQC':

[- Q.g%"% seelegy during the PEAR revient, we provista j ;9a Jr-,.i 4

. m W'f

[

%c, y fanits (Feelt #1-3 and.#2) to be not espeble. Na.reseres a final

?.

y%pl

e. E deeision se tha capability matter..This decision will'hw besad spoe "

W~

informaties and deemmastation yet to be provided by the' applicant.

.I

" 'i J d l

,.,..Considering the multiple periods of deformation to whiela the area ham

i ;. f

been embjected, it we,uld not be surprising to encomater additional

'qw fam1 ting at lower depths within the Unit 3 excavation or adjacent l'"-t

.sacavations ok Unit 5 and espport facilities. Based on the additiemal l

information submitted, the NRC staff will, if considered appropriata.

.,j

,'. inspeet, when available, these sections of the two feelta set visible i

j y at the, amerset essavation level.. y,@;Mj.;;.n,4 l.

a. e s.

[

.;. w f. N,f W : e.. w v.*.5, Q (C W W y W N Q "b "S 7. *"**['l' $

'.*' ', ' "di $,/

~

e hw

,, _ m 7.. v.

.g - %, v. 3 mp?C.' ' '. ~ f L.

i 1

8.'. r..

's.d Q,ep..

m i

. [s (

,HM**

% T

~

p.g

^'

• i n

s.

.v

. ' dathony Bournia

. 4L J,yee $.g ly '

.a,;

r

^

l a

INE #3 3 ranch, DPN g '2.. ' ' ; N

~~f,.

-,,. & z' 'x c ', '. -

I

.,s.....

.,,.~.d e

.&.,,}

V. G y.,.;

t

• ., Q,-l. ' Q,f. :?l~T :. -

N 1

m..

3 David Budge l

'p.,,? -

.. ~

..a

• ' DISTRIBUTION:

P'

31tm Safsty Standards 3rsash, SD 7

i Docket File (50-308/509

}

NRR.Rdg

..;p d

(

[,'

, % *. y:%,,t., l $.,,p'

,,3 t

.DSE Rdg h

l";. u.G..,. '.h., : L.

. ~

a a.3..

. h..

L..[. h..h[ yf.i " Gooseiseees, Rysa,ah, DSX.9'a3

- f,c. 4,&

s,

_. n,.

. CB 3dg

~

.~

. s..

97 Q:.g;>f p Marold E. Lefevne l<., f +,.

p; q

.n

. Eemlesurest? 4 @.,

2.:,;.;dQ..@b.. o$ 1 ~ hj&.&,/ 'y M s

',8.,..,, i - b '.'.. }'!O.,.

3

.s M, i

..,4A a'

Y

,y,n'seogsteg r.y;y.fy QW. * :(. c '

Ji-

'W % ~*

t' 1 Q *b,(,, 'r..... ~

... s. -.

' es wfemein s :,,;m,,. yph..;w,,3 u. g ]. g.,' u..;k2, P

. d '; 1 w ;

3. f;7 3.

.g

., t, r dr9 J.

s.

.N C

w, +q. y, v,, s:;.y,' ;. yCp "e...- *. Q,:

F 4

a w

sf y p

~s x

s R. Boyd c

,p.W. Swanson b

~

?

'R. DeYoung

. * " h J. Jacksom

,o l

O. Parr f' X. Lefevre

..i A. Bourais D. Budge i

i

, N. D, Strand (WFFSS)

R. Jacksom

^

K. Othberg (Wash. Dept.

R. G. Ryan

'of Natural Resourees)

F. J. Wil11ame

... ;., ?, *. FDR.

/.y.f:SEEIRSVIOUSYELLOWFORCONCURRENCES&

i, J. Stepp

. SIGNATURES i

1 Ma -

N.a um o,, M assallo,,

. -E,,3,ERS (W

-QE :ST:@

SD D5]NST:CB DPM HEtefevre;-B1..,~. u a,,M

.. m..

i ABournia DHudge JCStepp ODParr

, RHoffman

.v n.m..

t 11/J

/77 11/-

/77 11/

/77 11/

/71 11/

/77 11/.

/77.

i I

pac ronx no &74) NBCM 0240 d ~ l &% v%*h? M ',

'..au

.. <.a. %,, h. '?

. W u. s. oovenseertser posofine orr6aan eers

.s a.

.- O

~"6#

n.

.. - o,

s w

-.~. v. s. n w. a n w h.a

.v.+ >

W *-

3. < y.m.~m.~p,s~.v-.~,pe: w a m.p.u : y.

-m. -~ ~ -, - ?v,~~. m e -

p e. w

• +,.,

4 i ".

3

.t

m. s -.

4 a

t.

- u.

.gs

.,i -

'4...

=

p c;

-A w

.s c

e r,.

s,,,

~

a i

8 Af

,,, (3 e, '

d.

d,a-t.* #

y s y,

,. +. _ m. < $,.

, w.

.,m a

'n'

, ; s, :, -

t e.

s I

'-g-(

• f.

n n~,

ac

~

t

.y,

• 4.

(, g,.

v.

2 J

r 4..i, s

s 3 t.

. m s m.3,.

4 61.. = A 4, ', vq t -

1,,

a *..

f..

7

- %.,, ~ - )

a * 's,s m., w% M ;:c. x,.

..s p

n ;%a c-7?.. wq:% y w;_

., m 4.=.

n V

A,; % :.,.,y v M V :

...^

'.a i.

1

+

.y

. u ~U+. 7.

w

. n et

.+

d, >n<.O ne&.,fjg; 7 ^,dy. j 4:w.p.p.w,.

n Q.s.:

.n,.

. ;,r

]

~

.W*.~m v,2,. -i. s"..,

p

• sy

• s 2

rNf

.+.d

.p O~

_ pm, 4.. -.w -

an,.4 mp~w,q:f;.s 3w n y :.

n. if

n

_W A%p.yme1meRAMNat s.- Willima F.(Gemmill. Assistant Direst n...,.

i MM. r.... g.M....,.

CFh WQii.

9 for E ta Ta*ha=lesyn DSE

,:- N f%:,3:v4..M,rrQs%;y$n:&.n

.~~I

.:c..w. T 'kT8 % "X i

. : y. p, %

w

. ~a r w ~ ~ y a M.n :* ' - c h; -

.;,n @

~ ~

Q p.ry..

i s

-~

nq v-.-

,r

=g v

g w M ;f.- 333,g:C.,, e + < p j, %. a...,

,ga. A.

,.gS

' L.WR Bransk No.3,

' '. FG W

• J.

V M. ' i T..

S RW

1.

eV Site Safety S s Branch, SD .. V V '. -

.'; G Q.T/ O f f. & h;,sa w,.

QE E.

ei. 8 e r ranah, D82 x.,- m W

l

w. w~..m. y

. -n 9

'. g< = m.::

%.y,- -

y,-

,.y 3. y z.,

j

., O@ SWRJET O't,.y{EURWMF-3.>.

SITE Y151T INSFBCT FAULTING IN '1AJ IICAVATION

?' '.+

i

- M..,; N

u. ;. - ;

.c.

3

-t-DOCKET NO.: STN 30-508 and STN

-509

~

AFFLICANT: Mashington Feb11a Supply System 4

,j FACILITY: WFPSS Nualear Fra ta

. 3 and No. 5 4

~

r i

l w.

t.

-. s.' :,.. : w a. 6,.

.~

.a

[

$ N M,Retkagound' $ 9d b M M 4. M d 4 '. [ d $ i $ 4 W ~ I bl1 w-.

p

..axw. ~. x - me.iv a+rk%p e ~.me \\ ? mmr.fy s

t

. t " G By telephone'on ce 13,1977h ton Public Power Supply,'

" P ' Bystem (applicant) ormed'the staff tha several shear zones (fanits) i j

.. were uncovered in' suosvations of Unit

. 3.

On October 14, 1977,

,' the staff held's enferanse sail with the a cant where more detaHe i

were discussed.

In these' discussions the app at indicated that minor fanitia wee noted in the east and west i

' the f1mer of he esestaties. 9 :

ils continuias aeroes d',

t ecoference%n :.: +. ; b.,%e.1 y

=.y.,

w.e

~

+

l':

y

. c./*.

I

' r.

taff and the

.F i

An additi sell was held between the appW on October 17, 1977, and as a result the a ff eensluded

.d that.

ther investigations should be performed on th a fasits and i

.. 7.ra that ' ette visit should be unde. ? The site visit was h om M ^ ); i @

! L J M oe 26,'19770'. A list?ef the adettas attendees is - 4d

~

h qg., a urs A) M, @ w n.1wVs TflSt %,m 3

ti h

2 N

$ p.f.4 G k.<.

o p mt.r.-

.G..n v 3.M;.

4_ 7:,L etas M

,2 &,.:.c >

,3 a

t

.g...,,

l.,.

g 3

WeJ%$.

4 I s.. r C. y a

Q/l.N.S qJ. Q w~;w:;^.h a

M.M@MVJF ;:h x /,- -n

. 4. p.s.

I,.y 4 't a[Anfore soing to the' site visit to'taspeet these fanits, the opp r-9 r

.n ;;

n i#

.u

+

t.

cant

.e -

i

,8 f' pheld a meetias for the perpeee of reviewing the field work performed

^

a" Ker impet into the FraH=4aary Safety Analysis Report. As part of the I

presentation, the appitaant indiaated that faulting had been exposed and investisated in a treech 2300 feet south of the plant facility.

. The staff, in their review of the WFPSS No. 3 and 5 dockets concluded

.1 -

that nowmaamt on these nearby faults was pre-Flaistocene based on tesisaal ralationships.

's ;..

l L

-e

~6

~. kmi-i.c

,- l. '

i-

! S he; 4*

4 ).h'D

• y s;l

. c. - y', J,F

(.n Wu,6.di.ad;t's.' &

• i,,.,_

.,_t-s** p.*

haktW?andlh.%gy y,,.y'f

" a.%en.d,4 7 y {$ti1.s'.:aA1 h'.;y, p1. ac,",a,8 s E waledt.MM.

.d o

v.f,,

'y.

q s;

y

,,t.

g, simGtt

. ;.6$o, LW i

~y 4

.u. ;

+.g, f

6.

,s,.

i s

,x, y % p',1, ;,,**:

.4

eL

~,

'

• p.. >

.. _ J ' :.

y.. l;

~ ~ ~ -

[

W gguq,, y; c,4g f g'q.

,g

- w.;,

v" a.

e.

I r

.: m

.~

..m,

,I.

, </. h

..~,.,. ? r g..,s,

- 51 5e 8

M.. A.

s

. e..... n,. i <.. :g; w_c,, a.,.,

,1.,e,iSits Ensavation'Inssection of Unit 3 '..M,;:R G..,;.V;.

i.

c

.., + c

~.n...

.e A v:. w.,.1. x n n..

o

+

r u,,

,.. %;.. l 1

'. ' ~.

.o J. F. e.

n

,3,w n.ry., m.m-r%3%cg&.%g:fMU,M,m$.s., *paiddle % 4 l,j.

i-1;.3%s,:

y

!S

,, A -

h MipkO@g.hs App 11emat's detailed sappig of..the yell MMimesma' Astoria(?) De-*4= (g ---alylaandstema'with silt-ir@@!g3.g]

4 4.Wr stems, 'eseslaxeratefend tiff).indienten eso, reverse faal in the,lA $

i n

' M ff M ; Bees and Emmeter'AmusMary Building ansavation for-t 3.

spesi.fiss'..

4 d

. A n p.-.(.as mQ ta the ~eansvatime)m "lative.to.the seto follo:wa m.A. d re

'i.

c,..

s n

~

9' +m. s..

%. h ",p ';,$ w.'v d d.:N.@agy.e.

3,e,.:.;

N'

& Q -f,<

,;.g t->

L l

r k y

' L'

• e T. ".- (.. f,f

';'v ' /@B813,'

w;M E, $ h l offsee ', ;.

to Length of-l.' :W M

+

,,.. :s

.g.Q.....:,%p-;r.. w w. d.Q~,. 4j'-

a

.. ~. q.

Tam 15-h.y,M;m y g=.

,- ~ i M;.y%.%

~.p;g 7.m:n s..

w2 r s,;y

.w.: -

t n

.y y

(

y i

l

- #1'-3 ' 2 360*-50*W

• SW 0.5'"(East wall 400' t

- :,;;s <:.

~,

3.8' (nmet

[L'

~....

l. 'l','

~ ".'

.;) m %;

ff 1.' EGO *E.2.M M/3:( P

..:...t.

<2

. ~

s 460*S 2.2(Eas

)...((,7150".'

.., :.. A.;, r': +,,, ' " ~.: -

"E s

'c l

,t

. n.mv _c:

.n-n ~ 2-

~ s

.,wc w

L,,. az ' W 'Foult it.(desisestions the Applisent) intereest: but asither "

.g eresses mor

• MFJ ~ ~

Jm l

, f %,,? wr pn u,., offsets Fault t 4T,q.: w m h N:c w n:S Q A.~;?* 7~

n e.n,p..yy m.

.. -. ~,. 6,.

u m u.w u n'

w,. r

.w m. n. v e. -: 3 v

i

1. .%%s atC staff's initia19 z- --G sejest to:ndditional documentation, c.

< ' 'is that the~ two f.,ults probab not espeble within the meaning of

,~,

9.

p..' Appendia A se 10 CFR as hould pressat no hasard to the

" ' t..

facilitiaa now under e truettom.-

stal..f reserves ~a final.desleien

'. 4 ' relative to'the matar sad appresimate.

,ef neeurramos of movement

,p.

V.!falens ths famiss.ua an early submith1..

, the Appliaast of relwant j

j l

,'

[Tdocumentation,aan

' - acasurrence of.

Applicant's findings by S,

W.

r,the ERC. Meanskf'

, the Staff sees as teeses e suggest eartailmer.t 7-jg of LuA constrece%a activities at tLa UFPSA 3 and 5 sita. Se m;

- T B Cl staff bases ta preHaimary enaciusioca en "following data.,.

s.,j

,,w d i whiek we feel suganative of;antiquityt _

9. WE 7..

T'J, T34CI{ '..W,..M:.Q T.P 5 e t 1.5 yWNW4* @MNA.WDWSDMWt 4

4 M i X.1 W stres

'- GiMlarity.ef the nature'{ reverse f ta),enount.

cy, i Q,

. W W's.y r..:.;. fees QQ(

feet or less 'of disphoemaat),'and fasit Jad (north ', J

. 4.s

. y. y porthwest striktas) with other 'Seelegia s tures seen

~y j-4 %.MJYQ ly by~the '9C staff ta.the semita ares; en 1N }'

j s

?d ;My meashy structures. an'ested;fa the. Staff's Pubteary 1976.g., A,,

f u.

i Sugl0.{';O.Q' ety Boulmation Berert, aset Mkaty seemed in the late y

^et

'l s

l X...

h'.'.tartiary (at least 12 millica ye.are ase) and appear to be.... s.

e

,.. M @ Mf$ Jtesult of morstsaat ernstal compression.

i-y l

[

We have been no 4.-

Q l

i A "*? W jindisation, in our azasianties of the earrantly visible exposures,

' & E'{*-l -

N

'T

" h s

. D.

l l "2i'. 2. ! LitholoEF - He sediasat types (predominently sandstone with F

,Vt 11asear amounts of' tuff., re=P- -.te and siltstone) ozposed within l

I

.T,M'.i.'. the emeavation are eensinte.st witti those noted in,lthe PSAR.

. : :;. 3,, j (;

s 1

m.

r

,; - w

<.. w n

y. z. g. q,M ; M fff' d;. y

-n.

/. c.r.

1 h,' T ( Y..e**)." ' iM Y,N., p m t....

7-

[ ik, 9.o OLSM'*" M~

,..<v,

,9

%.vy'J'f

..~4*

4 7

t.

'W!Y'Y5 N* Asis?S*Y,.f

.m 3... %., m, --

.x 4

~

kML.etE, hk.*S.

kh.

$$$$?

Lg

,.f, NS ' '

i I

1 i

1

--m-.

4-

1

. ~":w vgp:gr v..

7.:. m. w. nm w..y o. y;.<.: m u. m,-~ ~-. m.t v r..r. g e y 2

>_ ;. y?. 2 s,.o r, c."-,.,',.., a ~ s.;. ;.

...... y;

.m o

'v

_.,...w, 4

a v

. ;...m,, ; 2,.., g. y,...

.,.c

~-

f..

~

W m

+ y

• e,j, [.

's f <,., ;'.,.,,.

,y

• qe

.'f..

~

e:

+

.f. '.

4

. ~.. ; L.

.,.* S cf %,3;: '.J T"U.

qv, m.

2 _*

William F. Commi11 J

...q,

%. w. -

_l m

z : c m, ~. c a's,

- i L g.(, -

i a. a:

.y f.;g '

y.

~.

, f:. r;p

.~

..m,,. o.... -

?

.s a <q l

O.y M.g,~, - -

1. <...-, e

.c i

x

s. g.

W.

p,.,y n:

h' i. 1,3;N.3. TAbsense of $11ekeneides_ - 311akammides' (polished and i

' W'q%,MM[$ #2)sne lask of ne.s u41.p11ee to the mac staff that,$,l.'.b( 7 #

.f f' f4to be ebeams along the planes of beth fanite. (Fault #1-3 and y;.,, ; O hyOf@$Af fam1t' movement lesu1Lhave esseste

.' M $ ' %, Presses of<the~ m===== Astorta(f).FormatiseW whfah,was most.j@k*ii' P UA Mjiffg % k.

eeveral namamp~ef ylogo.:/

W M E $ @ N.9 / k t h ' $' M 3 M.V fl

• g.. ' . W MDN YW M.

3MTMh1%

Ed,MN

%YMN4.J Trace

. The treed of,the faulte to siamoes ying that S,4p 9 J$

1 may have seeerred prior. to eeneelidatio of the; i :%,0>.tyjn

. ' 9... G, Ngr., my;@g; y..;p;, t) Formatiaat daring, late Tertiary f.1.O W As sa-y,:q,g. g y_1~r p.,,s mj : ' ';-".. a. Cst QjA s S..

.n e g y.

"8 5." Lithif fan'-The"well-consolidated 1 vi to other Tertiary t.

n 2,

eaststones nature of the Astoria(7) Fo ion satgests burial

[-

. ~ jfD..beneath undrede, perhaps several usands, of feet of

,G' i

l

.'A ( W y everborden time h 4== the'goologi past. This aseuoulation 4.preseos requir a seasiderable, of time, again attesting r

i

i..

~

x. # W J, M,.;j;.to.the presumed ti dity of the f ts..In addition.. the,. 6.

u g,gg,,,,,,,-

thin,' devoid i

f braceiition and clay songe,; 7f d

^

4

.$' & N,fd@c. ead~ere well-be l The I

of the material along'the D,M a

%lhhfaelteseemsappear emeend' t of the so m M== roek. :The' s j

,~

g.r p.d ~;n fault ' planes..being de not appear to be likely mand 4-P

.c y a u q..n.,;.g g for, r====_==, a,activ,-

MN f f.

a - e. g ~. s. r ;r.-

_% '..w-1 ': ' - ' s.

,.v.-. 0;,'?, '"-Q. < * ' c

, p:q ' p. ;

% f. ' <

m' r

e, l

's,'

,, The.ERC staff suggested,te the cent, during a phone ecoversation

. ;, p jes oetober 17;, 1977, s.

f te be considered in their

}

,,.~ -r investigatism and documen of Unit 3 faults.. A eopy of thim.

l

' " b. yheme esaversaties is se "- r _

B..With respect to the

' N;d.

,.0steber 17, 1977,-

that a d M le determination of the

,~

.9

' 1ength of the two fasi be ande the a f coeslades, following the p

(..

'..'l, ; finu observations of tober. 26,jthat' ins need not extend beyond -

fr.

^q,,gjh.itheseareaswhere' faulte"eralpressatl,

. --7 (Ramstor and Reestor i L.h,,

~ ? M, d y Asu111ary Build and the tremah as the.

t of Fault #2). Ae,

f N

I g@ausavation ses4 boeuver, aestimmed:an is required of these 4l ' '

E h bfM sfanite as well additiemal fantte that may b foemd at any other f(A M Maite h ~

Wo.wors'infonned by WPFBS em' te visit of Osteber 26;-

I M. M 1977.ths/.

attempt is.bedag unde to develop data at an early.y e

g W / g dete..'

with thie desumentation to be by'WFFS8 are ;

3 ~. (

<.

• J f.3 1etter rte by two geolestate familiar with the 5 area. These

., ?

o

. f reporte asserding to the Appliaast, are'to be transat to the NBC

[

[ "." (.by

, Eeveder 4, 1977 6 Additiemmi desmomentation tive to the j

Jfanit r _

. is to be schmitted to 'the ERC as expedi ly se C possible. vin addition to-the investigative suggestions off to the

'(,.f..

j 3'. App 11sant on October 17, 1977, the NRC staff indicated, during site visit of Ostober 26, 1977; that' rrsy.iate sempting should be made along

^

l 1

Gc-the tes fenit. aomes pr,ior to,additismal sometrustico activities in t. hose s

w. 3.r.w

.,... n2...g,c g3..,.

m.

.y

~

y

., Qy.

v&'

y. % ypk:g

. W W.

.a,.

.p.

~

r

@,*.*Y

'/ $ #

• ., }

• • 4

' (.

"r[-

N 7N%A

.r i.,

n t

r i'E.

l,

.. ; g,,

• - M.,/i 14. ; j -,. *

• I

.?

4

,4*

~y

- g.. ed.f

+

y*.-

,,, L. y

• -'**a

... w t Q f ;?

.s-c e

t.

y]

y 4

p_

.s

.Y e.$neeN e

~

.,,j,,,,,,

?

k

&l

.,. g>,,. -, _.,;. c,,'. %, c. m

,..y.,e_,..,-.m,.%.c.,:,'<,,3 g!.,. +

.g,%p. M:.

..~

'.,. r ;.

'y n *.

.s a,

-U T!,,, ce

),

Y'

?:.%

Z..

g%

'. ;d:, '&. / < t ey. 4 -y

',4q;d.i'.

f

~. c;y, y;.

. ;Q n : w. u:

i

.s;

.,r

-A

_-~

~

.e w.

., s.. -

- ~~

w-

~.. w: s.

p.

I a

... a.

i :.w

..~

.n'.,..

.t

'1 S

m William P. cammm411

' ~ N4 /~ :.

• f.t..s < v A. [., ' ;

- + q.

e. ;

. v.n

. +

m

,',~.r,

..,o. c

p,,.,. ' s:...

.v e,..

.. v.. y, s.,;

pe s

.c,,,

,.x.,.. J,, gm.

2

. r 1

~.

e y"~~.

o.

..s.;

A

, areas., he NRC staff., sees no reason for the App 1 amati to curtail g p'

[,

23 0..".,, elope preteetion efforts.es.those.easavation walls (north and south)

,6.

~

^

6*..A - W unaffected by fealting.MR4'N..km x'w3am.%.m,%,A

".WM'4WhM %ga'*r.. v %u,.N'M.l:> NO.<1 h

. w:#m.n..#..w,s >.:.Q,; m.,.,y e.m - ~~..

,+7.p m#

i pWh::

&WW'L :y Ww.w.~s%,..e,:.r W,b 2

9r

,n...

a,~

m, s-e o w

...m Camelustaa, au. h:. 4,.M.t

.j n

7 (m.~%wgp,-

m

• w ~e..y%s 1

% m w. e,. x 4:vA

.r.

v.

.p v

+-

pW!@?.h.,s. T'M.14 abe.Z.W.uoV.f.&h2%Q.tWe.:My.%.w%p@m@

u,.m d nW M

.. w mm 1

J f

ti. 4. m s e ti i,M. 0e yse.e4

.ei

.e.

u,. c w

r

' D' g.:'1977/

gy

'udth'eur previous evaluation of.the amar-site and anal & / Y i

(

geology

~ 'abe PEAR review,'se prov4=4=11y consider the U.S W

' #.f f fantes (Fault'

-3. and #2).to be not sapable. ; We reserve a

.ij j'X3%

T f M eestaisa en the ility untter.~

' y . @.T iafesmatism and teston yet.' tai be provided by the lisant.' C ' O. 1 Sie-decision will be upon 2

,?'..

. been subjected, it not be surprising to encoun additional g.

Caesidering'the is periode'of deformation to.whi the area has y @!

faulting at lower within the Unit 3 excavat n or adjacent

,' -W f,emaavattaes at amit 5 support facilities.-

NRC staff will, if '-

r j.,

a i.

',. considered appropriate,-

t, when sveitmh

, those sections of the ~,

e;,two faults not visible at, surrent j

a level..,. v... m%-lr ?a.-

e+

.c i..

4,.Mm;%m:n;4,: A,.:. a y y%,$p., 3

, q:

i 9,

..c,..,...

a Lw.P A'#q_% n

.w.enQW OO w; i:e w

+

~~

4 + b Mt.'& e;w; gage /@Mfm.c %n,p A

,e d.y'M. r:.m T.W?W3 @N " ". ~. N W

n 4.; y k.cv,. ~.

...,.;w,:::c7 w,3. a. ~. s s

=x w y.

pm.x 9s c

~-

~,.,

m; q M r:.s. f n,,i.W.s. m t %m n a

r

~

'J. #'y[,d.y v;lk;s. :+.. M. :.<.;,,M. [.yl.?.~TJ LWR nah #3. DPH g,,,i U, U. '

3.".

(,....,

g-w v

,.w. n. y.; w.

~,;

+A.E]u [y,, -

l a

~c

.t i

.~- A

.M, E.

e, i,*

f w

.',,.~;'r.2.*

,., m.

,i

.s r.

v

n..,:-

v

-a.r..-

n,..

n 3 ;,

..y 4-l 9

'q.

,.4;.

- 'y.QDISTRTBUTION:.

,b. g.:: :,:,'"W; 3. g#%.

. r,

.'..K. '

. '/,.l..In e ' * ~.2.

,. d..'s; si s.

i i

s,

-fr M DOCKET FILE-(502508/509)s,,a '

d Bud

. ',Y#>.

.b M -

i N ).-

!4

.t.NRR RDG 2); i

• JNb 0 :.%.

'. Site Safety tandards Branah, SD'

[

% r,DSE RDG

'~

'^

• ,u GB RDG

• . : P.' m.,O ~

d'

,.. e

.,2..-

L

,b M 'Y

~: "

. ;}-G,,.v.

w, w y.

A.

' M

.... 2 y

Am. %,c,

Q. :.g. a m;

c a

c.

~y.

V

w. %.

.,: ~ ' ;y-d M,g V. s 2 e: N M A % Q;~,'

)>

M. m.

, r,,

w su.

NVEarold L-Laf E

• x wA;;2.,,,M ~c xf.'. ;N.h

,c. ; e 4

f:..s.wx

' Dst'E'"w M M M, h.s M. W-M.

,7

..,tr. S M U.;, N.fd,% M.;. P-.D M.,cesentasman 3..

,r i

u

.F. $'. # u a r.

r

. a Q'A.g @% %&.M.s g.-$n:$fRsy[%.Q.ler M% %n..c DD 1 & D N6

a~

n.2 dit (W

-' i *;.

'urest

$' T "'.ld

'M 8d YINM

}.

3 j

' ~

s 1

l y,

i;3%hhq&>fQfM&.a.v. W,.%, % :Q Q+ f Wn

.n

.. s 3.gy o

.n n.

+

1 Y

T Q D:.lee wfemel

%O 1;,

I

,. b %' 4 R. DeY

'E. Boyd 3.y.c.Q'.WhtqW WJ Lefevre 9 k. $

i ' W'S$'

O: s.r :

l

+

I i

1.U d* Q f..$u$,.e. $ p V D. Budge

'@'y-M:

Ws 51 b o.,

. v ;m~ c - - g.....s u

,. r 0..

.y v~?.~.I F i'!.R. Jackson -R. E W f U, t

.e..--

.7'.n e n

.... u s :

s.

• I l

. A. burnia'~.

. s E. D. Strand (UFPSS)

J ~at' F. J. Williams..,

^

M-

.,, m;:. % 1 t

R. Othberg (Wook. DeptJ'. # D PDR _

-h

~

id ' '

J J J h; W,9 il;i

.X.of Estural Resoureas) R 5 m S ' Leeml PDR '

l J.. Stepp ;.. s a,y ;A y.4 u f '$.y ACRs._(17)

.. 'DSE:j s

RHofmann A

c. ~.' R/ Esineen

' M 1'-5.!.W. 5% ' 2.' n' 9 ' N.,"/111- / 77' y?. * -

s w.

D< 1easelle

1. 'a c ~N I' x.m

-* :N c

N e

-<5 l.. omes >..D B:ST:GB

.DSE:DPM

i F

.DSE!ST:GB '..M:DPM

-8EF -

fevre bn's ABoNia' '

Y" iC

~

',. 'j,

OParr

'N-"

w.

1,r n, %

n/2/77 n/7-/77 ' "- r

~.

n

. 'll /U

~

. - -11/ /77?J 4'1M 2 /77f _ U/L /77 -

N-

.b

.