ML17276A204

Forwards Revision 1 to Procedure for Soil Backfill Testing Program & Provides Info Re Quality Class I Backfill Program Purpose & Scope,In Response to NRC Request for Addl Info Made During 811007 Meeting.Boring Location Plan Encl

ML17276A204
Person / Time
Site:	Columbia
Issue date:	11/12/1981
From:	Bouchey G WASHINGTON PUBLIC POWER SUPPLY SYSTEM
To:	Schwencer A Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Shared Package
ML17276A206	List: ML17276A204 ML17276A209
References
GO2-81-462, NUDOCS 8111200672
Download: ML17276A204 (13)

Text

REGUL'AITQR'NFORM'AiT'IO>>V~ O>>ISTR>>IBUTION>> STEbll (R'IOS')

ACCESSXOiur NSR'81 1 12'095V2'. DOC ~ OAiTEI)-'1/4 1/L2". NOTARIZED': NO'OCKKIl'I¹ FACXLr:50: 307 WPPSS'uclebri Pro Je'ct'j, Ung ti 2'~. Washiington>> Pub>>lie'bwel 05090397 A UTERI, NAMEI AUTHORI AF F IL>>IAlTIION BOUCHEI(<G>OI.: Washling,ton>> Pubil i,c Powel'r SUpp:1 y Systeml REC.IP'Ab1EI SCHWENCER~eAI,: 'ti RECKPZENil'r AFFILrI'AiTiIDNl cehsq ng, Bl'anch '21 SUBJECII",:: Forwar ds>> Reuision>> 1>> tor "ProceUurel forr Soil 8'ackfi 1>> Teht>>ing. 1 Progpampl andr provi des. in>>f o>> rel G'ual I ty Cll ass'l backf i li 1 programl purposel 3'copes~.in>>, responsel toi NRC; r eguestr fori addi>>

in'i mpde>> during, 81 1 007. me'e'trlng,,B'or>>ing, 1 ccats on pl an>> shel >>

Q

>>

DESTRESUTEONi CODEI:: DORIS COPZESL RECEEVED~>>LITRi 'NCl.l 'IZE>>: '

PSARVFS'ARI A>>HOTS'nd R'eel ateU>>'orrespondehcel 'IIiTLEI::

NOTES".2'. copi e's>> alii m'at'1 CPS">> ~ 05090397 REC lPX EN'TI REC'IPXKNTI ,COPZEB>>

1 COPIES'.iTq IOr CODE>>/NAMEI R ENCL( ,IOi COOEYNAHEI L6'll'RI ENCLI ACITlION:: A'/Dl LIICKNSNG. 1>> 0 LOCI BRI 82'Cl 1* 0."

LOCI BRl ¹2!, LA>> 7 7 AULUCK>>z R ">> >> 1>> f>>

INTERNALr.: ELOI 0 IKI 06>> 3>> 3r

• I KYDEP'/KPDBI 35[ f>> IKYOEP'/EPLBI 3>> 3r MPAI 1>> 0 11 36'RR'/DEYCEBI 1

NRRVDEYKQBit 13r 3r 3>> NRRYDE>>/&BI 2S, 2>> 21 NRRYOEVHGEBI 30! 2>> 2>> NRR'/DE>>/>>SEBI 18. 1 NRRYOKYHTKBI fT: f>> 1 NRR'/DE</QABI 2'1>> .1 1>>

NR ROOK>>/S'AB>> 24 "6 iVRR>>/DK>>/SEBI 25I 1 NRR{/OHFS'/HFESAO.

NRRPOHFS'/t)LB~ 34 NRRYDSIVAEBI f>>

1>>

1>>

1 f>>

i.

>>VRR'/DHFS>>/LQBI 3i?!

NRRYDHFS'/PTRB20:

NRRr/DS'I'/AS BI 2V 1'>>

1.

f>>

1>>

10: f>> f>> NRRYDSI>>/CSBI 0'4'>> 1>> 1>>

2%'RRI/OSIVCPBI NRRVDSIVKITSBI 12! fE f. 09'VRRYDSI>>/XCSBI 1 1>>

>>VRRI/OS% YPS Bl f ~s>> f ~ 22>>

16'RRYDSIYRAB<

1 1>>

Bl 25>> 1>> 1 NRR>>/DST>>/LGB> 3Br 1 fi EG>> i>> 1 ENTERNALt ACRB>> 4'f < 16'6'z BNLt(AMOR'O'NL>>V) f. f>>

FERA.'REPl OIV'9. LPORI 03r 2>> 2>>

iVRCI PORl 02'. i NSXCI 05r f ~ f>>

u T>>LS NQP P PF

~g

+Z (p TDiTAL NUMSERl OF; COPIES'EQUIRED:: Lll'TR',

Q ENCL( PS'

0

~ " t"I l I l i I, f I) t tt I' tl lt 'I I I

II I'\

E Il I, g lt q<'C' s I II I I 1"

l I

I It

Si ii 200672 Si i i f 2 PDR ADOCK 05000397, A

PDR, Washington Public Power Supply System P.O. Box 968 3000 George Washington Way Richland, Washington 99352 (509) 372-5000 November 12, 1981 G02-81-462 Docket No. 50-397 Mr. A. Schwencer, Chief Licensing Branch No. 2

= ~K(r~'-;

Division of Licensing NOV1 S 1981 j Nuclear Reactor Regulation {6 s pgg> ~lcm% IQcULAIQRT U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission COAVhlSS CN Washington, D.C. 20555 Dear Mr. Schwencer; a

Subject:

SUPPLY SYSTEM NUCLEAR PROJECT NO. 2 UALITY CLASS I SOIL BACKFILL TEST PROGRAM On October 7, 1981, representatives of Washington Public Power Supply System and Burns and Roe met with the NRC to discuss the program underway at WNP-2 to determine insitu densities of guality Class I backfill in isolated areas where specification requirements for compaction and gradation may not have been met. The guality Class I soil in question is confined to backfill for the standby service water system piping and electrical conduit, and the remote air intake piping and structures. At the October 7th meeting, the NRC re-quested additional information on various aspects of the test program. Fol-lowing is a summary of the purpose and scope of the program, as well as a response to the NRC request for specified additional information:

A. Statement of Problem The guality Class I backfill at the WNP-2 site placed prior to May 1976 was installed in accordance with FSAR requirements to approximate eleva-tion 438 (see report by Shannon and Wilson confirming the acceptability of backfill placed prior to May 1976, FSAR Reference 2.5-127, and NRC guestion 362.1). Subsequent to May 1976, excavations were made in this backfill for placement of the remote air intake piping, the remote air intake structures, and the standby service water pipeline with parallel duct banks. Backfill used in these excavations was found not to conform to guality Class I specifications with respect to gradation and compac-tion. These nonconforming items resulted in the writing of 10CFR50.55(e)

Condition No. 146. (See Figure 1 and Section 1 8 2 for locations of the backfill in question). It is significant to note that none of the fill in question is used for support of Category I buildings. In fact, five years of settlement monitoring of Category I buildings has shown, without exception, that structural settlements are very small and well within the range previously predicted from elastic analysis.

gyOt i/i

gA il

<<f. )Il+

J 4 E A'1 "

I'

Mr. A. Schwencer November 12, 1981

'Page Two G02-81-462 B. Objective of Test Pro ram To obtain information for resolution of this nonconforming condition, a testing program was undertaken to determine insitu fill proper ties by relating indirect testing method results (standard penetration testing, pressure meter testing and downhole nuclear density testing) to relative densities and to fill properties previously used in de-sign.,

The results of this testing program and the resolution of the 10CFR50.55(e)

Condition No. 146 will be furnished in a separate report scheduled to be submitted by December 15, 1981.

C . Res onse to NRC Re uest for Information Following are the questions asked by the NRC at the October 7th meeting, and our responses. For some of the questions, the complete response must await the final report scheduled to be submitted by December 15, 1981.

1. "Extent of areas and depth of backfill in areas of concern as identified by 10CFR50.55(e) Condition No. 146"?

The horizontal extent of these areas in relation to other plant components are shown on the accompanying Boring Location Plan, Figure l. Except as described below, the lowest extent of any of the backfill for these safety related systems is elevation 430 feet. The maximum rise in ground water that may occur Ben Franklin Dam is constructed is 420 feet, above which liquefac-if the tion is not a problem. However, some of the backfill placed under these systems was to a minimum elevation of 413 feet where the Class II circulating water and storm sewer systems cross under the safety related utility. (See section 3.1.12 of the "Procedure for Soil Backfill Testing Program", attached, for discussion of boring depth).

2. "Procedure used to identify the above concern"?

Earlier in an attempt to respond to a Supply System generated Corrective Action Report (CAR No. 1490), five test areas were sel-ected for retesting of previously placed Class I backfill around the service air intake structures.

The purpose of the retesting was to verify acceptability of pre-vious testing equipment and technique (subject of CAR 1490), and ultimately to close CAR No. 1490. However, while attempting to obtain this verification it was discovered that this backfill pro-duced unsatisfactory compaction and gradation tests which resulted in the writing of 10CFR50.55(e) Condition No. 146.

I II 1

Mr. A. Schwencer November 12, 1981 Page Three 602-81-462 The concerns of CAR 1490 were limited to Class I soils work per-formed after Hay ll, 1976, since prior to that date all Class I fill had been found acceptable in a separate report by Shannon and Wilson (FSAR Reference 2.5-127). As discussed, the present soils investigation program has been limited to only Class I fill that contains Class I 'systems. Those areas are the remote air intake structures and piping, and the service water pipe line with its associated Class I duct banks.

3. "Proposed types of tests, number, and location of tests"?

The boring location plan shown in Figure 1 shows the location of the various test sites. Table I shows the number and types of tests taken at various depth intervals for each boring in the areas of concern (i.e. safety related backfill placed since May 1976). A detailed description of the type of tests can be found in the attached "Procedure for Soil Backfill Testing".

4, "Correlation procedure for determining densities based on these field tests"?

Methods used for correlation testing can be found in the attached "Procedure for Soil Backfill Testing". Detailed descriptions and results of these correlations will be found in the final report scheduled to be submitted by December 15, 1981.

5. "Criteria for interpreting these test data and acceptance/rejec-tion criteria"?

Acceptance and rejection criteria for soil backfill will be estab-lished later, and will be based on evaluation of test results and their significance relative to previous design parameters.

6. "Procedure for identifying the limits of undesirable areas, if any"?

Limits of "loose zones" will be determined as discussed in Section 4.5 of the attached "Procedure for Soil Backfill Testing". Final definition of "undesirable areas" must await completion of evalua-tion of the test data obtained, as well as a design review of the significance of any nonconforming insitu soil conditions relative to the behavior of the pipe, conduit, or structure. This will be addressed in the final report, scheduled to be issued by December 15, 1981.

7. "Evaluation of the potential effects of undesirable soil proper-ties, if any"'?

See the response to questions 5 and 6 above.

II ~ 1

~ ~

Hr. A. Schwencer November 12, 1981 Page Four G02-81-462

8. "Remedial measures, for area under item 6"?

Soil backfill which is determined to be unacceptable, based on 5, 6, and 7 above, will be removed and replaced with properly graded and compacted guality Class I backfill. If such remedial measures are required, this will be addressed in the final'report scheduled to be submitted by December 15, 1981.

Very truly yours, G. D. Bouchey Deputy Director, Safety and Security EAF kJf Attachments: (a) Figure I, Boring Location Plan (b) Section 1 and Section 2 (c) Procedure for Soil Backfill Testing Program cc: JA Forrest - BSR RO RE Snaith - B&R JJ Verderber - B8R AI Cygelman - B8R RO FA MacLean - General Electric S. Smith - General Electric ND Lewis EFSEC, Olympia WS Chin - BPA NS Reynolds - Debevoise 8 Liberman OK Earle - BSR Hapo Bldg.

E. Beckett - Nuclear Projects, Inc.

WNP-2 Files

V I

1 W

4 I,

k,

FIGURE [

C T-4 IBOPI NG CT 35 SECTION I CT-36

'0 LQCATI QN CT-43 pCT-27 PLAN C T-33 I

CT 8 CT-5 TURI31NF Al R CT->2 GE NERATO R INTAKE' I3 LDG..

CT- I 0 tNE At R INTAKE WOA 5IA RADW. REACT.

CONT BLDG. CT-9 LINE 5te I3 LD6.

CT-4 l CT-48 5 ECT I 0 8 CT-6 p CT-42 CT-28 CT-40 Oi 0 CT-47 0 CT- CT->9 SERVICE WATER CT-3I "~ TRENCH CT-29 5 C g~i c T-z CT-26 CT-Z4 T-25 0 6 CT2~ 1 p

7I SP RAY POND C 00 LI N G TOWE RS CTIGO tA CT-23 SPRAY 0 CT-I3 POND C T-I I3 2I3 p I CT-2 CT-24 CT-22 T-lgp 0 OCT-l4 2A CT-2 I A I

OCT-18 REV. DESCRIPTION APPVO. DATE CT-l7 PCT-20 BURNS AND ROE, INC.

ORADELL, N.J.' HEMPSTEAO, N. Y. ~ LOS ANCELES, CAL.

WASHINGTON PUSLIC POWER SUPPLY SYSTEM 2C IC WPPSS NUCLEAR PRCMECT NO. 2 W. 0. 2808 REP-OR TABLE CON DITION 50.55e

~ l46 BACKF-tLL and COMPACTION ORWN. R,D.S. APPVO.

REF. OWG. REV. DATE: IP-27 DATE: GATE:

CO No.

I"=200'HKD.NO.

SCALE OWG. REV.

E.C.N. No.

~ ~

TYI ICP-.L BORINGS POST- I97.6. F.I..LL,

.PP:-. I976 FILL ..

CTMSS Q. "WOA "DUCT:, 5I A

~

"BANK S E.C T.l.O. N,; l-I=QST-l976 FILL ii P ICAL BORI NGS A

+Q J' /

J

/ O C2Q oR E- I976,F ICL

\

.SERVICE ..WATER ..

SECTI 0 N 2