ML20210S566

Responds to 760116 Request for Comments Re Testing of Cohesionless Soils for Max Density,Per ASTM D-2049-69.Listed Summary & Assessment Should Be Provided to Licensee During Next Insp

ML20210S566
Person / Time
Site:	Washington Public Power Supply System
Issue date:	01/26/1976
From:	Seyfrit K NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE)
To:	Spencer G NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION V)
References
CON-WNP-1414 NUDOCS 8605290299
Download: ML20210S566 (2)

Text

, __ . ._ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ .

[ ,

i e

/' ~~

/ / s / /

( jyM u */..~-

D H 2 ( 1976

, Y /

3U G. 8. Speseeni Chief, Beector Geestructiam and Engineering Support Bremeh, II V TESTIEG OF CORESIDELESS SOILS 301 MAIDEBi DERSITY BY ASTM D-2049-69 AT maurucTOM EUCI2AR PLANT 1 AND 4 (AITS F50151E1)

)

This is in reply to your letter dated Joseery 16, 1976 which requested l j

any comesats er suggestions reistive to the inforesties enclosed with '

that letter. l We have revissed the material - 1 ==d with the letter ubich Ameledad the following: e note to T. Cam, LIR-1, frem MFP3s est11miar the test i

precedures; a record of pheme eenveramei - of 1/13/76 between A.Eseler of WFFSS and T. Can; a reeerd of phoes esavermati== ef 1/10/76 between D. maaharger, T. Esechine, M. Streed and C. Organ of EFPSS and W. Albert, j II V; and the =4-*= ef en internal WPSS meeting of 1/10/76. In addi-tien a meeting une held (1/23/76) heeseen a. sh--ah-r, Irian; T. Ces, LER-1 and L. heller and D. Gallen both from Site Techoslogy of MER.

Our samenery and assessment of the situatima are entlined below. This informaties may be provided to the lia===== duries the sozt taspection.

1. Region Y obould review this item under the guidance provided in IE Procedure No. 351005 (3/31/75), specifically in Section III, Item 7 entitled " Corrective Acties." This describes'the require-meats for determining whether the actimme of the licensee have been proper with regard to esaformance with 10 CFR 50.55(e).

From the informatima available in your tramanittal it appears that the li - hee r._- " ' in an orderly mesmer an is la  ;

esep11ames with the rag =1=*i ==. Their activities from 12/8/75 ,

when a "ENA" wee placed en all Class A hoekfill activities until 1/12/76 ubem the "EDIA" wee relemmed wee opent eseducting their

- 1==*4== ef the problem. Their da*4ae== that the iten was met reportable es a deficiency under 10 CFR SS 55(e) appears to be bened am their study effort and alae appears to be correct.

Motification to the Region see, however, made sa this item, apparently to keep the ERC f=11y taformed. It usald appear that in this case the liesasse shemld be given recognities of proper performance and a high degree of speamese in respeeding to this matter if the region determines the current understanding by MQ to be suotained spea any further lampesties.

1 8605290299 DR 760126 ADOCK 05000460 PDR -

s

- , , - ,..n,.,nn. . . , _ _ , . - , , , . , , , - - - - - - - _ - . . - , , .

~.

d Jc t, 2 m:

C. 8. Spencer .- 2- ~

J 1

f

2. In consultation with MER inn era .recessmanding that as s I miniman three data points be used to establish the relationship between density med vibration amplitude for each gradation. This clarifies the suggested plan contained in the 1/12/76 minutes of the internal WPSS meettag of 1/10/76.

The part pertinent to this amene is quoted below with unders' core.

"Obtain a productica test machine with a mini- variable range from .007 inches to .015 inches (m-p). Take sieve samplea and  ;

determine _the density-amelitude surves for each tradatime.

Determina the setting for the maximan demaity and run the production tests at this amplitude. The density-amplitude curve would be rechecked every two weeks. If any sanFlas fell outside the gradaties range, a special density-amplitude I

curve would be run. For past teste, run at 0.0044 inches, we would correlate with new samples. ,

3. The frequency of sieve sample taata for material taken from the stockpiles which is being used for Eackfill is daily. This is defined os page 2P-34, Section 7.4.3.2 of the F8&R. la order to assure that the correct density-amplitude curve is being uti-lised sieve sample testing should be performed on material removed et the location of sampling for in-place field samples. Sampling is performed on a frequency of once per 750 cu. yds,for Type A areas and once per 1500 su.yde. for Type B areas. This is described on page 2P-36, Section 7.4.3.6 of the PSAR.

4. Material belag placed and centro 11ed by utilizing the correlation concept will be placed at the licensee's risk until the correlation studies are completed and approved by MEC as supporting the original design and construction concept for the scil foundation materials.

5. Thare has been some informal indicaties by the 11causes that a i

written report on this item will be available in the future.

l Drigind d8"'d D K,V. Seyfrit Earl V. seyfrit, Chief ,

Reactor Technical Aasiatence Branch, IE cc C. V. 307, IE T. Cox, MRR C .515/r5015111 o r ,.c .

• gs ..

'" ~ ' "

• ltEShewaaker:sah KVSeyfrit navs > .9jgjg 9fyfy- .. _ . . . . . . .

~

Form AEC 314 (Re. 9-53) AECA 0240 W u. o. sovanmus=v en.=m.a orrecas i.s4 sas.coe o, C

9 i'

v

'\.

UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMisslON REGION V

$UITE 202,. W ALNUT C RE EK PLAZ A 1990 N. C ALIFOR NI A SOULEVA RD W ALNUT C RE EK, C ALIFOR NI A 94596 E1 e ig7g Karl Seyfrit, Chief, Technical Assistance Branch, IE:HQ WASHINGTON PUBLIC POWER SUPPLY SYSTEM (WPPSS)

WNP-1 DOCKET N0. 50-460, CPPR-134 Attached is a copy of various memos and meeting minutes describing a recent problem at the subject facility relating to soil compaction.

This material was received from the licensee by IE:V on 1/16/76. Please refer to daily report items of 1/12 and 1/15.

IE:V will be making a routine inspection at this facility during the last week of January 1976, therefore we would appreciate receiving any coments or suggestions relating to the problem prior to that tir.e.

W. G. Albert is the IE:V principal inspector and phoned corcents should be directed to him. ,

g/W & @-

G. S. Spencer, Chief Reactor Construction a d Engineering Support Branch

Enclosure:

As Stated j

1. 2 76 19

.g b ,,

1/13/76 ,

Tom:

E The total procedure is as follows:

1) Dig out about i ft3 of recompacted material.

2) Line hole with rubber liner, fill with water, pump out -

water and determine its volume. ,

Dry and weigh sample.

3) ,

4) -Calculate the field . density, DF, from 2 and 3. .

5) Put sample on table and shake. .

6) Determine volume of shaken sample. ,

7) Calculate the test density, DT, from 3 and 6.

8) Calculate the relative compaction from ,

RC = D7 , x 100%; must be 2 97%

DT ,

3 The problem first appeared when PTL calculated PT about 112 lb/f t

. whereas S&W had obtained 120 lb/f t 3 for the PSAR work.

4 L _

v-

. . , ~ . . . . . . . . - . ' -

' F 'ORD OF TELEPHONE CONVERSATION To be confirmed hte Time ( ) No TO FROM Name Tom Cox Name _ Alan Hosler Co.y . - o 3- 7 s

_ Company or Dept. NRC. Bethesda

' Company or Dept. WPPSS WPPSS Nuclear Pro.iects No.1 & 4. Soil Dansity Testing SUBJECT (S) DISCUSSED REMARKS t

' Mr; C6x was informed that we are having difficulty meeting ASTM-D2049 for our Soil Density Testing. I explained that the standard requires among other things that the sample be vibrated on a table that was capable of vibration of 60 hertz over a range of 0.002 to 0.025 inches '

of_ displacement, mean to peak.

Pacific Testing Laboratory (PTL), who is responsible for the field work, initially purchased a Syntron VP-86-B1 which had been calibrated and ,

certified to comply with D2049. Later however the calibration was with-drawn when it was realized that the table did not satisfy 02049 in regards ~

to the anplitude of vibration. PTL then purchased a Syntron VP-181-Al which the catalog information said complied with D2049 and which was certified to provide an amplitude range of from .002 to .025 inches mear.

to peak, i.e. it satisfied D2049 in regards to the amplitude of vibration.

However,after delivery when the table was calibrated,it was found that it did not meet the amplitude requirements. .

• .UE&C then called the chairman of ASTM Committee, who is responsible for D2049. He stated that he was aware of the problems with D2049 and that it is planned to revise the standard to specify an amplitude of probably 0.015 inches peak to peak. I explained that in other calls UE&C learned that the Bureau of Reclamation uses .0075 and the Corps of Engineers

-uses 0.015 inches. I was not able to tell Tom if these were mean to peak or peak to peak values.

Af ter the failure to have the new PTL machine satisfy D2049, I explained that soil samples were sent to the University of California, Berkley, for tests on a Syntron VP-200 which was a machine capable of vibration up to 0.025 inches mean to peak. The results of these studies showed I

a maximum density essentially independent of amplitude for a range of

.007 to 0.015 peak to peak. Above and below these values the densities 3 was l

i decreased. A slight variation in densities of about 1 lb/ft measured which is normal and is admitted to in the PSAR. .

I explained that with these results it was decided to adjust the PTL machine to run between .007 and .015 inches and then continue with the production testing. This was attempted on the evening of January 9, t.ew C1 G4 l

l t .

l l

[

r 1 Record of Telephone Conversation (continued)

From: Alan Hosler To: Tom Cox 1976. However these amplitudes could not be obtained by modification to the machine. I said that the machine was then restored to its original condition and was to be recalibrated.and certified for the maximum amplitude cbtainable.

I told Tom that we were not at this time in a position to tell him what '

the final resolution of the problem would be. We are currently attempting to purchase a vibration table that would have the capability to provide the required amplitude. I did not go into detail in terms of our plan ,

of action for the next few days. I did tell Tom that I would telecopy to him a copy of Duane Ren*uercer's Telephone Conversation Record to Bill Albert and also a copy of my meeting minutes of January 10, 1976.

Tom replied that he was not sure what action he should take but it did n:t seem like a stop in work was required. I replied that we would continue with the recompactions but no concrete would be placed over the backfill until the problem was resolved. The NRC would be informed of our final plan of action. I concluded by making the following points:

-1. We are naking six recompaction passes and all evidence indicates that the soil is reaching in maximum compactness after only 2 passes.

3

2. Data to date shows that we are within 1 to 2 lbs/ft of the maximum densi ty. ,

3. Everyone contacted is running tests at about 0.0044 inches peak to peak and we have found no one that complies with D2049 in this regard.

4. We have no reason to believe we have any soil recompacted to less than 97% relative density, but to prove this we will require additional testing on other machines.

Tom asked some questions on the basic testing procedure which I could not answer but said I would investigate. (This was done and telecepied to Tom on 1/13/76).

AGH:vh I .

RECORD OF lELEPHONE CONVERSATION m, 1-10-76 m, y:r; / ^ "

to te ccci.rma:

( ) No FROM c@ TO

+

Name DL Renberger, ?D S.tTand,

/ t. H50 chi ~ns,~ CIFOrjian-u,,, _ W. Albert Com;3ny or Dept. h PSS. Company or Dept..._.N RC,__ Region V SUBJECT (S) DISCUSSED

• TELEPHONE REPORT 'IO NRC REGION Y REG-1RDING SOI,L RECOMPACTION STA _, __

REMAns 1 and 4 was contacted at his hone on Saturday, JanuaryMr. Al 10 1976 for .tfie purpose of reporting the status of the recompaction situation at the hNP-1 and 4 Projec s.

Mr. t_1bert was informed that the hNP-1 and '4 PSAR' conmited to measure-ments of soit densities, utilizing the ASIM Standard No. D2049-69, and that this Standard specified that a vibratory table be provided with an amplitude variable between .00f and .025 inches (actual ninimum specified amplitude is .002 inc He Standard further says that for detemining maximum density, that the vibrator control should'be set at maxirm amplitude. Mr. Albert was infomed that the density actsurements taken by Pacific Testing Laborato He maxinn densities were ,n:nning lower with the Pacific Test Lab machine. Mr.

Albert u 's infomed that the shaker tables were calibrated and foun late with the ASD1 Standard. L e variability of maximum density with amplitude of the table was described to Mr. Albert with the point being made that a literal compliance amplitude, with the whereas the.ASDI Standard would mean operating.the table at .025 inch maximum amplitude. density could be down'in the range of .007 inche ;

dard was not desirable or necessary.We have thus pretty well conclu Mr. Albert replaced thewas inforced shaker table that at the that did r>t Supply System's request, Pacific Testing Lab Wilson tabic with a new cne an/ rett d ta from the new table did correlatecorrela ever, sampics were taken and t N: . How-

v. :he Shannon and Wilson table, the new PTL machine and a machine at Berk.k ', r < i had a yariable amplitude which permitted running the entire density curse as a knction of amplitude. These correlation tests shcwed agrement between the Shannon and Wilson machine and the new PTL machine and indicate'd that the maximum density was about two pounds higher as measured on a Berkeley machine than as shown on each of the other two machines.

He Supply System indicated that work on recompaction had been on " Hold" this time being of investigation of calibration of the machines, but that plans were made to proceed with further recompaction in the hNP-1 Spray Pond area starting ?bnday, January 12, 1976. The basis for proceeding would be the corre-lation now known between the machines, the fact that compaction is done with an eight-inch lift and six passes and it is known that maximum densities are reached

. CO:

ooNe m

/ .

a t

• e @

1

-,6 Telecon to W. Albm, .WC, Region V -2. Janum y 10, 1976 after about the second pass. 'Iherefore, the Supply System has good confidence in the actual density of the material being compacted. It was indicated that the machine at' the site was being certified today as to the actual amplitude on the machine, so that all data will be traceable to a given amplitude. It was also indicated that the Supply System would have NCR control over the activities and won't put in any grounding grids or mud mats on top of the recompacted areas until such time as further definition of the testing technique to be actually used is obtained.

WPPSS indicated that we were attempting to purchase a variable amplitude machine similar to that at Berkeley in order to pemit a full curve of density versus amplitude to be developed, and then rechecked at about two-week intervals during the compaction process. This would allow us to continusouly insure that compaction densities are measured against the peak density that would be reached at optimum amplitude.

Mr. Albert asked if we had placed any mud-mats on compacted material that was questionable. We indicated "No, the only mud-mats that had been installed, or were under installation, were in the Containment Building, and there was only a two to three inch leveling layerof sand which was proof-roled over the Ringold."

~

"Ihe Supply System emphasized that this was not a reportable deficiency under 10CFR50 since at this time, we have no evidence that material of inadequate density has been actually placed.

Mr. Albert requested -that the Supply-System communrcate the situation to the Bether office of Division of Reactor Licensing on Monday, January 12, to secure a more technical review of the situation associated with the ASIN Standard and our existing measurement techniques and plans.

Follot<ing that contact, we will get back in touch with Mr. Albert to discuss possib1 letter report to Region V.

DLR:ho cc: WD Blair NO Strand RE Dellon JP Thomas AG llosler OE Trapp TJ llouchins Dli Walker '

CE Love JE Woolsey CB Organ hNP-1/4 Eng. Services DL Renberger ER Rybarski raron6ii -

I .

\ ~

s a . .. . .

W, scrox Ihmuc Poma Surety SrsTru 4 -

Dbtribadon: JP Thomas January 12, 1976 CB Organ RE Dellon OE Trapp Distribution .

JE Woolsey AG Hosleri;(2) 3 V8140dy TJ Houchins A. G. Hosler - 3L Kemp CE Love 2 4 -st. n Eng. Files (4) ER Rybarski 1: f4EETING Mit:UTES - REVIEW 0F WNP-1/4 50Il NO Strand DENSITY TEST!f;G - JA*iUARY 10, 1976 RA Chitwood WD Bainard DH Walker Attendees: J. P. Thomas T. J. Houchins C. B. Organ C. E. Love , .

0. E. Trapp E. R. Rybarski

., A. G. Hosler N. O. Strand tir. Renberger opened the meeting by stating that the purpose of the -

meeting was to review the status of the WNP-1/4 soil density testing and~

then determine if we had a 10CFR50.55(e) incident.

fir. Organ' then presented the following summary of the activities concerning soil testing to date: ,

ASTli-D2049 requires that the sample table be capable of vibration at 60 Hz over a range of 0.002 to 0.025 inches mean-to-peak (m-p), and that

• the maximum density be determined at the maximum amplitude.

In Appendix 2P of the PSAR (Pg. 2P D-7), it is stated that the maximum and minimum density testing for the Site investigations, and the development of the ccmpaction control were done in accordance with ASTM-D2049-69.

The Shannon & Wilson (S&W) vibrating table, a Syntron model VP-86-B1, has been recently calibrated for a maxicum mean-to-peak amplitude of about .00F inches. Therefore, the information presented in the PSAR was not developed in accordance with D2049 in regards to the amplitude range for vibration. ,

Pacific Testing Laboratory (PTL) initially purchased a Syntron model VP-ES-B1 which was calibrated and then certified by Boecon to satisfy D2049. Boecon later withdrew the certification when they realized it didn't satisfy D2049 in regards to the amplitude of vibration. This table provided maximum densities about 8 lbs/ft3 lower than that obtained ,

by SSU. S&W determined (by accelerometers) that the table's maximum amplitude with a 250 lb. load was 0.0019 inches m-p. This low amplitude explained the inability to obtain correlation between the S&W data (i.e., the PSAR data) and the PTL data; that is, the 8 lbs/ft3 difference.

,' PTL then purchased a Syntron VP-181-Al which the catalog information said complied with D2049 and woud-provide an amplitude range of 0.002 to 0.025 inches m-p. When tested by S&W with accelerometers, however, this machine could only provide about 0.004 m-p with a 250 lb. load. At this time all Class A backfill activities were placed on "hol'd" (approximately 12/3/75).

bk }-

x- .

e .

_ -.-___--.a

[ Distribution . January 12, 1976 UE&C then called the Chairman of the ASTM Committee responsible for D2049, Al Hussaini, (UE&C telecon 1590). He stated that he was aware of the problems with D2049 and th'at it is planned to revise the standard to specify an amplitude of 0.015 inches, probably p-p. In other calls, UE&C learned that the Bureau of Reclamation uses .0075 and the Corps of Engineers uses 0.015 inches, both m-p. .

After the failure to have the new PTL machine satisfy D2049, soil samples were sent to the University of California, Berkeley, for tests on a Syntron VP-200 and a Material Testing System table. The VP-200 machine

. has a vibr'ation range up to 0.025 m-p (i.e., satisfies D2049 in this

. regard). The results of these studies showed a maximum density essentially independent of amplitude for a range of .007 to 0.015 m-p (S&W indicated 0.003 to 0.016 inches). Above and below these values the densities decreased. A slight variation in densities (about t i lb/ft3 was measured which is normal. The PSAR admits to about a 2 lb/ft variation (Pg. 2P D-4).

With these results, it was decided to adjust.the PTL machine to run between 0.007 and 0.015 inches. Production runs would then be run at

-the amplitude determined by the Berkeley test to give the maximum density. ~

On the evening of January 9,1976, Soil Testing Company attempted to modify the PTL Syntren VP-181-A to provide a maximum amplitude of 0.015 inches. However, the maximum obtainable amplitude obtained was determined

. optically as 0.0055 inches. It was then decided to restoie the machine to its original condition and have Soil Testing Company calibrate and certify the machine for the maximum amplitude obtainable in this condition (probably about .0044 m-p).

. Mr. Organ then suggasted the following plan:

Release the " hold" on Class A backfill activities on 1/12/76 and .run production tests on the certified PTL table. Control the processes by liRC to prevent concrete being placed in Class A backfill areas.

Obtain a production test machine with a minimum variable range from .007 inches to .015 inches (m-p). Take sieve samples and determine the density-amplitude curves for each gradation. Determine the setting for the maximum density and run the production tests at this amplitude. The density-amplitude curve would be rechecked every two weeks. If any samples fell outside the gradation range, a s'pecial density-amplitude curve would be run. For past tests, run at 0.0044 inches, we would correlate with new samples.

Should the efforts to purchase a new machine of acceptable range prove futile, then an identical approach itculd be used except that families of curves for significant gradations would be run at Berkeley and data run at the 0.0C44 inch amplitude would be correlated to the Berkeley data.

Production tests would continue to be run on the present VP-181-Al at maximum amplitude. Correlation control would be by periodic calibration of the PTL VP-181-Al combined with periodic reverification of the Berkeley curves.

'1((

C_

O

~

' bistribution January 12, 1976 l' ,

It was also decided that Region V should be informed of the problem that day, if possible (this was done). However, it was agreed that this was not a reportable deficiency under 10CFR50.55(e) since at this time we have no evidence that material of inadequate density has been placed.

It was also decided that NCR control over the activities would continue and that no mud mats would be placed over the recompacted areas until the problem is resolved. .

Mr. Organ made the following concluding statements: -

1) We are making six recompaction passes for each 8 inch lift and all ,

evidence indicates that the soil is reaching its maximum. compactness after only 2 passes.

2) Data to date shows that we are within 1 to 2 pounds of the maximum .

density. .

3) Everyone contacted is running tests at amplitudes less than .025 inches and we have found no one that complies with D2049 in this regard. .

4) We have no reason to believe we have any soil recompacted to less

- than 97% relative compaction but to prove this we will require additional testing on other machines.

'AGH:km .

DISTRIBUTION:

LWR 2-3 Rdg Docket Nos.: 50-460 and 50-5 OCT. 2 ; $73 $ketFiles(

A. Schwencer, Chief, Light Water Reactors Branch 2-3 DRL WNP EXAMINATION OF EXCAVATIONS Our SER, Section 2.5.2, page 2-34, states that "a staff geologist will examine the open excavations at the appropriate time."

Applicant has notified the LPM Tom Cox, of dates the WNP-1 excavstion will be available for examination. LPH has accordingly informed R. McMullen, SAB.

After about 11/1/75. WNP-1 spray pond excavation will have been backfilled as necessary, the GSB will also have been backfilled, but in the containment excavation the Ringgold fomation will still be exposed. The containment mudmat will be poured starting approximately 11/13/75.

Copies of consnunications from applicant, dated 10/16 and 10/17, are attached.

odehnt signed ni T. Cox, Project Manager Light Water Reactors Branch 2-3 Division of Reactor Licensing

Attachment:

1. Ltr to R. Boyd dtd 10/16/75

from N. Strand i

2. Record of Telephone Conversation to T. Cox from A. Hosler l

ces: R. McMullen l C. Stepp W. Gamill -

t 1

0-I-_., t O

d'Yff '/ &

o,,se =

• x7886/ LWR 2-3 -

.o n . - . * .TCox:rm- - -.- -

o. ,.

• _10/_/ 75 _ -

Form AEC 318 (Rev. 9 53) AICM 0240 W u. s. sovannansm? Paintime arriese ser..saa.sas

i h

,y IP "y Washington Public Power Supply System A JOINT OPERATING AGENCY

p. o. n o, . . . 3ooo cio wn cro,. wu menumi. wo moron ..m ruo,m<so., u....

October 16, 1975 Docket Nos. 50-460 G01-75-227 50-513 fir. Roger Boyd, Acting Director Division of Reactor Licensing

.0ffice of fluclear Reactor Regulation U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C. 20555

Subject:

WPPSS flVCLEAR PROJECTS HOS. 1 & 4 WilP-1 EXCAVATION

Dear Mr. Boyd:

In response to PSAR Question 2.54, the Supply System committed to notify the Regulatory Staff when major excavations were completed and logs and maps of these excavations were available. The major excavation for the UNP-1 Containment and General Services Building (GSB) is 'now complete. The logs and maps of these excavations will be available by October 24, 1975.

The installation of the ground grid under the Containment and GSB will begin about November 3 and the pouring of the Containment and GSB mud mats will begin about flovember 13, 1975. If the Staff desires to view the exposed Ringold Form'ation, they will need to be at the site before this time. The backfilling around the lflP-1 Containment and GSB will not begin until mid-1976.

We expect the excavation for the WNP-1 spray pond to be completed by November 4,1975, and the logs and maps to be available about two weeks later.

Very truly yours,

[d kMpv N. O. STRAtlD Assistant Director Generation & Technology cc: CR Bryant - Bonneville Power Administration TH Coxl- fluclear Regulatory Commission JB Knotts - Conner, Hadlock & Knotts 8/ r 1 C m O fI ' U O #g '.

' ' # ,5 EG Ward - Babcock & Wilcox HW Phillips - United Engineers & Constructors 0 W L-( 9 F ( W '

b-

" WASHINCTON PUBLIO POWER SUPPLY SYSTEM

.' R"'XtD OF TELEPHONE CONVERSATF .

Date 10-17-75 Time 4:00 p.m. ( )*

To be confirmeo

( ) No F R O t.1 TO Name A. G. Hosler Name T. H. Cox L d 4[/?34 IL = e ) . 7)~

Company or Cept. WPPSS Company or Dept.  !!RC SUBJECT (S) DISCUSSED MflP-1 EXCAVATI0tt REMARKS I explained to Tom that on about October 22 backfilling under part of the GSB would begin. If the Staff visits the site on flovember 11, they can examine the exposed Ringold formation under all of the Containment but under only part of the GSB.

Also, the latest schedule for the excavation of the spray pond is to have it completed by October 29. Backfilling would begin immediately af ter density checks and proof rolling; about h to 2 days.

AGH:km '

cc: JP Thomas JE Woolsey DD Tillson Til Cox - IIRC J. King - UEEC ,

G. Valentenyi - UE&C

'AG Hosler (2)

Eng. Files (4) e 0

A h

~

+.

g

[i )

l .

70-f/3 DISTRIB'JTI0il:

Docket Files (2) W IRR Reading File DCT 15 575 FIN Reading File e ,: .

FIN Subject File t..z..'-- DJSkovholt, RL: ADQA0

': " ' ' ' >i J I 3 RWCioni, RL: FIN /QA0 AHMeltz, RL: FIN /QA0 i'e s:, '

. .;.,re, ' .i t,t a r,i ';i rcc t:.*r fcr L i

'.! ..:: tur ~.c;t t;rs-2, .'L

.n. . . . . .. < , . .

u....,,r u ,.,. . .z .,. r ,t.n . . . ,

. ,.i.,..,

. , .. . , . , . . . L.,.,0

. , t, t T , , ,. e, . 1 , . , .,,

.f T"

.5 r c' ' .: 5 ' : 'N, t r Ci s'i'. 5 i 5 1.

i; ' " t. C '.' t t', t N YJMy O f '.'I Ci*

f ir. .. ! c f o ff r. "'ii. t. ' fi. trial alificatims of "niair atcr; l lit i' ' 't'

, l 'l . 90 .i J !; , '^ r ~< ., r ; c ' ti. i r,;b;p;ct {.rjjj7j ;,

i. 0. ., ii e r,' i"

• 1 r .  ! .

1;i*'  : l'i -

• T b .dl . ' f ,7 V' C .* I l , i J ., .

. ';.n l . .. Sir,v' .! t mic w. . - c ~. r er,- .,r. l i t v

.'?' " .7 ! / ; *C t . :, i r M '3

. i ti:. iun cf ;?ctor Lic..m itu

.' t.? I ' i .. F. :

. 5 S te'. i r,

CC: [. . S C .' M r i ...s L. Lar;l!.conm C. '. tcW i, Fir -

J. i:.ters.n

. , , . . . ?L:. QA.,9. / F..i t' J f. /...

a_wRL:

1414 ADQA0.. . . . - . .

1. 1. .!.31,,, pgj,7jqy ;, .

,, #) !,7 '.:.5).. DJStovholt-tiers > 1,.0/ I':: /. 75

. 10.. /.. . - / 73.. 1. 0../.. . ./. 7.. 5 Torra AN.Jia (Rev. 9 51) .C C. l 0;eJ W u. s. ses to r we ese,=rews er rices sere.sas.ses

~ . . * * ~ * : k' .

+.

. 4 i

)-

OCT 15 W5 Fil!A'!CI AL QUALIFICATIO:;S The Financial Analysis Staff prepared testimony in July 1975 for the:

August Supplement to the SER, which concluded that WPPSS is financiaily qualified to design and construct WHP-1 and)S;P-4. The staff has updated

-its review of- the financial condition of the applicant and determined that there have been no financial developments to alter its favorable conclusion for IU;P-1. -

On October 8,1975, we were informed by UPPSS of a delay in signing participation agreements (contracts to purchase a certain percentage of the capability of the facility) with the participants for WHP-4. This is the result of intervention under a Washington State Environmental Protection Act, which apparently requires individual utilities participating in pro-jects of this nature to file environmental impact statements prior to entering into participation agreements. WPPSS has decided that the Participants could be subject to suit under the provisions of the Act if they signed participation agreements in WMP-4 at this time. Accordingly, WPPSS will sponsor the preparation of environmental impact statements for the participants in WMP-4. WPPSS estimates the May-June 1976 time period for completion of the filing of the environmental. impact statements and the execution of participation agreements between WPPSS and the respective participants. .

Additionally, in order to obtain permanent financing for WMP-4, WPPSS is' required to have signed participation agreements covering the capability ,

of the facility. Thus, WPPSS has slipped its present plans to sell revenue bonds and wi,11 drastically limit current expenditures for WUP-4 until llay or June of 1976. WPPSS has a financial limitation on expenditures of $100

%,y.. m .h ,_g, og

p-2., m ._ _. _.

g  : .

3 -, 3 i

million total for Ht;P-4 a id WP-5. The$100millionhasbeenobtainbdby the issuance of revenue bonds secured by option agreerrents. The option agreements give the signer an option to obtain a specific share of the facility capability by signing a participation agreement and provide an interim vehicle for initial project financing to a maximum level of $100 million prior to the execution of participation agreements. WPPSS has submitted an application for HilP-5 which is pending. Because of the schedule differences between WP-4 and WilP-5, most of this money is avail-able for U!!P-4, but it is not certain at this time if it will be sufficient to cover all commitments. One significant cost item is the Energy Research and Developnent Administration enrichment services contract which increases from a few million to over $25 million upon receipt of a construction permit for W'iP-4.

Based on the preceding analysis and a change in the original assumption that HitP-4 participation agreements would be signed by the time of the hearings, as reported by UPPSS in its May 1975 financial information sub-mittal, we have determined that the applicant has not provided sufficient evidence at this time ' to demonstrate to the Commission their financial qualifications to carry out the design and construction activities for WNP-4pursuantto10CFR50.33(f). However', the foundation for this evaluation is solely that the applicant failed to obtain signed partici-pation agreements which are necessary to obtain permanent financing

• for ,

WilP-4 due to a recent interpretation of the Washingto'n State Environmental Protection Act reouiring WPPSS participants to file environmental impact e

- * * " 466  % ,

. Ol O- 4 qa

W ' '.. .

4-: -_ ...

• ^ I

'Y

- 3.-

r statements. Over its long past history, WPPSS has issued revenue bonds, rated "AAA" by Moody's, based on similar contractual arrangements to

. permanently finance its other projects. When the applicant obtains the

' signed participation agreements, we feel submittal of such information will be sufficient for the Financial Analysis Staff, to find the applicant financially qualified to design and construct WHP-4.

1

~

4 r-h e

p, --m ~- - - - - - . , .g , , , ,,

8* h 2- %

Y O

P

3. . . :t.

?

y t .

I s1..

• . r' ..

e re sa . ' .1 1.i .

F M , "

% [^ f. .f. I ]I,. ' . . I g 1. . ,

I%v ,e. . 5 ,#.S .

s.l,. :,-

is.~.'.',. L.i.1<. ..

, . , s , , - ,6

< e'- ~ t

,, .4

,a. s%, w.-

et waa g . . 4'.'

l t . $

i

.. '; . I a ' '-

• t --, , *. ., e n '* .. -

, 4 * ,

i g g .h 4

& }$ e & n 4 I f

• • T

• 4

(

E - I e

.(

..), , --; - .

9 6

s .

• s

• 9 I i

$ 's I s

a 4

4 t

9 5

)

k p. - g h* g'Ns b s %

f(, .j 2., ,,

g f'

C +. .

% t

. . 'l .

9

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

___..3 I, I

. s i l

$ I*tC C D

, O,7

.t . . . . - - , - . . . . . . . . . . . . . _ _ . . . .~ - - . . - . .

,\ . +4

$ a t 4

' q. ' 3.+.=.

e , P o m 6 >- -1.]r

.I)

• l *3 DAtab , , . .. .

. -.._ w.- .. b t._ _..4.u-

. . . . J,v.S.)..,atat014)

, r v . . ,: ., n- - or r,m .s.o,. ..i:9.1t<.

[f' a P.. Ileinanan, Dimetor, Division of Technical Review, NRR TEGEiICAL ASSISTNG RIS. T.ST Your assistance is requested for the following:

PIAVT NA'!E: EP-1,4 e '

DOCKLT W CCS: 50-450,(50-513 IISPGiSIBLE B%'U!: 1)C 2-3 CTWCr: T aaas Cox. Prt> ject ' tanager (x7806)

TECC;ICAL RD.'IDi B'Not: Contalment Systeres Branch

'!cchanical Digineering Branch (others as specified by irrn)

TARGIT C0!PLETIGi DATE: October 15, 1975 Docenber 1, 1975 (see Description of Request)

IT.SCRITTI0'I Or PTQfr5T: Review and evaluate applicant's su'nittal (WPPSS letter to staff dated 9/3/75) concernin.c loads on reactor vessel support structure for certain postulated IDCA's. As part of the report on the generic concern for reactor pressure vessel ,

supports, WPPSS las presented a revised su'i-carapartment pressure differential analyses l based on their recent addition of guard pipes on reactor vessel hot an1 cold legs within the reactor capartment. Projectstaffrequests prompt review of guard pipe design and sub-com;nrtment differential pressure analyses in order to avoid carrying this issue as an open itan into the post CP period. A radiological l

safety hearing an this application has been tentatively sche &aled by ASLB for 11/4/75, with testin ny required by 10/15/75.

G/) 7 Y>>r a t nD .

ototp ac gc Qc,J l)lh -

r

l

- l EL :

it, licincixut i j To meet hearing requirasents, the requestal target dates are staged: 10/15/75 for review of sutoxr,urtment differential pressure calculations and guard pipe design; and 12/1/75 for report to DRL on overall report.

I t Ortdn:1S::m ',

A s ch e. - - ~ -

! A. Schwencer, Chief Light h'ater l'eactors liranch 2-3 Division of P.cactor Licensinc cc: L'. "cionald J. Pan:arella

... Tedesco G. Lairar.

J. Kair.ht Distrilution:

Doci,et File m - -

Lh"! 2-3 File TCox VA' bore IWKlecker M.filliams S/arra

!!Berhou 1

I i

l l

i RL:lEl 2-3 '1L:IR 2-3 j TCox:pga Acchwencer

! 9/ /75 9/ /75

-5 9

007. O I 1375 -

n. Ibinemn, Director, Division of Technical Review, CJ1 D. Siryholt, Assistant Director for Quality Assurance R Operations, ML TE0MICAL ASSISTANCE IGQUEST Your assistance is requested for the follouing:

PIX.T E iE: hNP-1,4 IUCKET hUS: 50-460 mal 5 PISPONSIBLE BRAN 01: Lh'R 2-3 CCNTACE: Thoms Cox, Project ihnager (x7836)

TEGINICAL PJNIEN DRANCES: Mechanical Engineering Dranch liffluent Treatnent Systeas Branch Ecactor Systms Branch Padiological Assessnent . Branch TAWf CC:PLI: TION DATES: October 15, 1975 lbvmber 4,1975 (see Description of Request)

DTECPJPTIO. 0F ITQJEST: Ihdiological safety hearing for 1 NP-1,4 is tentatively set for 11/4/7S in Richland, h'ashington, with ASLB expecting all staff testimony in by 10/15/75.

At ASLB nceting with parties on 9/29/75, Boanis wishes were expressed regarding safety areas they intend to probe during hearing.

As pointed out in terro to R. I!cinemn frca A. Schwencer dated S/13/75, additional areas of Board inquiry t.uuld be pointed out as

• identified. This ner.c is to identify those nreas and request appropriato tecimical assistance.

_ . . t.ha 0 0{%fbh96 tu &

L_

0;i. O i '_25 H. !b ineata ,

D. Skovholt ,

1. /gpendix I - Testimony is baing preparmi uith PAB as lead branch, nist be plarre.) .

to obtain all required staff approval-including OEIS, in time to be sent frca OI1D to 1513 on 10/15/7 >. Attendance of appror,.iato technical reviewer is required at the hearing.

2. Radwaste Systen Calculations - llearin.q testimony is being prepared, schedule is same as for iten I above, and attendance of appropriate technical reviewer la required at hearing.

3. .Tpplicant Organi::ation :uxl Oualification to Conduct Technical Operations - Icard has requested that parties 1,e preparmi to discuss Applicant's qualifications, preparedness, and staff evaluation of sane. I:o vritten testir.rny is repiral 1ut preseace of qualifint vit: tass is requested by roard. DPL regt.osts hearing, attendance by revicwer fron ICEp or OLB. tb tritten testinony is required.

4. l'inmicial Qualifications - roard has specifically requested qualifial witnesses in this review area. Applicant vill prasent latest financial data including bond rating, interest valuo, narket changes and current appliemit pimts.

Staff review vas completed on material received June 2, 1975. DPd. requests hearing attendance by financial .

qualifications reviewer. No vritten testimony is requiral.

O 6

-we m

4

e.

(*

k ;. OCT. 01 1.J:

e J .

R. Iloinanan b D. S'avholt B

5. P.aattor Pressure Vessel Supports - 1;ritten testi m ny is requirod on this issue to present status of identified concern, significance relative to the liPPSS

. application, staff requirenents of this cpplicant, and staff ovaluation of L applicant's ability to effectuate changes if required by future resolution of this generic issue. Ilearing attenderco by technical representative is not requested, but stritten testimny nust he suinitted to Daard, through OEID, by 10/15/75.

6. ECCS Evaluation - Testieny is noir availab10 in draft form, requires reviev and concircrer.co by P.SB on schedule comensurato uit*t 10/15/75 suinittal to Ibard. DRL requests hearin attenlance by sponsor of nSB testluony. g

• Orisal 3:wd Id y.sch::w n A. Schwencer, Chief Light Water neactors Branch 2-3 Division of Reactor Licensing cc: W. licDonald G. Lainas V. Stello V.}!oore T. ?bynk II. Denton J. Kastner R. Tedesco J. Collins R. Maccary J. Faight

11. llouston P. Collins Distribution:

Docket Fil e SVarga DG 2-3 File IBerkow TCox ECoulbourne VKbore IMKlecker

!Milliams RL:UG 2-3 RL:Ji32-3 RLt3D/#m 2-TCox:pgaM AS(jJ er[ncer 10///75 10/

hh 1

u .ac.3>, n m

.m acx ou,, _

.. f/.75_ _. 0_/..[._/ 7s. ._.

t ........ ... ....... ....u........ ...

Q ,} 5l'E

Q.

i Distribution: <r Docket Fil UR 2-3 File AU12 71975 Aschwencer EGoulixxirne David L. Wiggington, Smior Staff Assistant, Division of Factor Liceraing SIFEEt EWE BCE - SIGNIFICANP DEIAYS Crystal River-3 (OL) (Page 2-20)

Issuance of Supplement Ib. 2 to SER is being alirY=1 fzm October 1, 1975 to January 7,1976 to Mte exparded financial evaluation due to arleihig owners, to review new meteorological data ard to allcw Ta more time to emplete the ETS-EAC analysis. W.is 3 runth slip will not inpart PDD which, incidently, has been iq: roved from !by 1976 to February 7, 1976.

Davis-Besse 1 (CL) (Page 2-21)

Schahile is being a14N 1 nonth at Draft SER capletion and all rcraining milestones except PDD which will rot be inpacta3. Purpose of slip is to allow time to resolve open ittsu (over 12) and to allow TR recre time to emplete EC::S-F.N: analysis (belis r# Mal frtn Icgust 15, 1975 to January 12, 1976).

tiorth Anra The emntrolliry SER inputs will be delayed up to three runths due to htte applicant subnittals. LPM is plannirn Pre-LGS Sm supplesnent to ninimize extabla inpact. Best estirute at this time indicates SE:1, ICtS neetirn ard Post ACRS SER supphs:ent will slip 2 ncnths.

He do not plan slip start of hearirq due to these slips. Since all sukatantive issues will be kroen followirs the ACRS nectirq.

tW l & 4 DE has requested OEED efforts to nove up start of Rad Safety Uearing frcen ?kmsrber 1975 to Sq62rar 23,1975 since all safety issues c: cept 70.P will be resolved ly then. 7dvantages will be a 1 nonth irprevenent in PLV. We lave also asked OELD to assist in obtaining an early ASLB action nested to issue an cocpan!ad Um-2 to prenmt a ocnstruction stoppage den site activities tresently authorical are ampleted.

.4

) AUG.2 , Ul5

- 4.

Dewid L. Higgisuton .

Pchble Springs Primipally due to lack of timely C.P.S.G.S. review (a chronical renageient problen not confined to this review) plus late inputs frtn TR (includire a third round of requests frera I:ISC and possibly from RSB) will cause SER 4mmrce to slip at least 3 months. All =4==r=nt eilmtanes will be affected by at least 2 renths.

OripnalSigned by A.Schwencer A. Schencer, Chief Light Fater Reactors Eranch 2-3 Division of Reactor Licensing AttC L :

Iogic Netwod:s for AboveProjects cc: V. A. " core L.1:ngle R. Ferty.netm T. Ocx C. Stahle ar r.c s RL:IFR 2-3 __ _

sp ma ws >=

.M .

8/ /75 Form A20.)l3 (Tiev. 9 9 9) ASO4 02e0 W u a soweemmemv Paratisee oppeare sses.ese.s.e