ML20023A821

Forwards Responses to Questions 241.1 Through 241.6,in Order to Expedite Geotechnical Review.Info Will Be Incorporated Into FSAR Amend

ML20023A821
Person / Time
Site:	South Texas
Issue date:	10/18/1982
From:	Goldberg J HOUSTON LIGHTING & POWER CO.
To:	Novak T Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
ST-HL-AE-891, NUDOCS 8210200052
Download: ML20023A821 (77)

Text

{{#Wiki_filter:1 The Light SOE Uf Houston Lighting & Power PO. Box 1700 llouston, Texas 77001 (713)228-9211 October 18, 1982 ST-HL-AE-891 File Number: G9.15 Mr. Thonas M. Novak Assistant Director of Licensing Division of Licensing U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission Washington, D.C. 20555

Dear Mr. Novak:

South Texas Project Units 1 & 2 Docket Nos. STN 50-498, STN 50-499 Responses to NRC Geotechnical Engineering By letter dated Septenber 18, 1981, your office transmitted Hydrological and Geotechnical Engineering Branch Questions to Houston Lighting & Power (HL&P). In order to help expedite the geotechnical review for the South Texas Project, we are providing the attached advance copies of HL&P's responses to Questions 241.1 through 241.6. These responses will be incorporated into the FSAR in a future anendnent. If you should have any ouestions concerning this natter, please contact Mr. Michael E. Powell at (713) 877-3281. Very truly yours, h J. H. Goldberg Vice President Nuclear Engineering & Construction McB/ng Attachment dN 8210 200o5a 4 A

. g.. -.. Houston Ughting & Pbwer Company cc: G. W. Oprea, Jr. October 18, 1982 J. H. Goldberg ST-HL-AE-891 J. G. Dewease File Number: G9.15 J. D. Parsons Page 2 D. G. Barker C. G. Robertson R. A. Frazar J. W. Williams: R. J. Maroni J. E. Geiger H. A. Walker S. M. Dew J. T. Collins (NRC) D. E. Sells (NRC) W. M. Hill, Jr. (NRC) H. D. Schwarz (Baker & Botts) R. Gordon Gooch (Baker &Botts) J. R. Newnan (Lowenstein, Newman, Reis, & Axelrad) STP RMS Director, Office of Inspection & Enforcenent Nuclear Regulatory Comission Washington, D. C. 20555 G. W. Muench/R. L. Range Charles Bechhoefer, Esquire Central Power & Light Company Chaiman, Atomic Safety & Licensing Board P. O. Box 2121 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission Corpus Christi, Texas 78403 Washington, D. C. 20555 H. L. Peterson/G. Pokorny Dr. James C. Lanb, III City of Austin 313 Hoodhaven Road P. 'O. Box 1088 Chapel Hill, North Carolina 27514 Austin, Texas 78767 J. B. Poston/A. vonRosenberg Hr. Ernest E. Hill City Public Service Board Lawrence Livermore Laboratory P. O. Box 1771 University of California San Antonio, Texas 78296 P. O. Box 808, L-46 Livernare, California 94550 Brian E. Berwick, Esquire William S. Jordan, III Assistant Attorney General Hamon & Weiss for the State of Texas 1725 I Street, N. W. P. O. Box 12548 Suite 506 Capitol Station Washington, D. C. 20006 Austin, Texas 78711 Lanny Sinkin Citizens for Equitable Utilities, Inc. Citizens Concerned About Nuclear Power c/o Hs. Peggy Buchorn 5106 Casa Oro Rnute 1, Box 1684 San Antonio, Texas 78233 Brazoria, Texas 77422 Jay Gutierrez, Esquire Hearing Attorney Office of the Executive Legal Director U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission Washington, D. C. 20555 Revision Date 08-23-82 J

l ATTACHMENT i RESPONSES TO NRC QUESTIONS 241.1 - 241.6 TABLE OF CONTENTS Contents Page(s) I. Response to Q241.1 1 thru 3 Table Q241.1-1N 4 Table Q241J1-2N 5 and 6 II. Response to Q241.2 7 III. Response to Q241.3 8 IV. Response to Q241.4 9 V. Response to Q241.5 10 thru 12 Table Q241.5-1N 13 thru 18 Figure Q241.5-IN }.ResponsetoQ241.6 19 thru 28 VII. FSAR Change Pages FSAR Section 2.4.13.2.4 2.4-76 FSAR Section 2.5.4.6.4 2.5.4-63 and 64 FSAR Section 2.5.4.6.8 2.5.4-65 FSAR Section 2.5.4.10.2 2.5.4-89 and 90 FSAR Section 2.5.4.11 2.5.4-103 thru 104a FSAR Figure 2.5.4-65 ~ FSAR Figure 2.5.4-65A FSAR Figure 2.5.4-o6 FSAR Figure 2.5.4-66A FSAR Figure 2.5.4-70A FSAR Section 2.5.C.4.4.1 2.5.C-6 FSAR Section 2.5.C.4.5 2.5.C-10 FSAR Section 2.5.C.4.6 2.5.C-11 FSAR Section 2.5.C.5.5 2.5.C-14b FSAR Table 2.5.C-38 2.5.C-23 thru 25 FSAR Figure 2.5.C-9 FSAR Figure 2.5.C-10 FSAR Figure 2.5.C-11 FSAR Figure 2.5.C-12 FSAR Figure 2.5.C-13A FSAR Figure 2.5.C-138 FSAR Figure 2.5.C-14 FSAR Figure 2.5.C-14A FSAR Figure 2.5.C-19 FSAR Figure 2.5.C-20 FSAR Figure 2.5.C-20A FSAR Figure 2.5.C-21 FSAR Figure 2.5.C-21A FSAR Figure 2.5.C-22 FSAR Figure 2.5.C-22A FSAR Figure 2.5.C-23 1 i

j Centents Page(s) FSAR Figure 2.5.C-25A FSAR Figure 2.5.C-24 FSAR Figure 2.5.C-25 FSAR Section 3.8.5 3.8-91 thru 92a and 3.8-95 and 96 FSAR Section 3.8.5.1 3.8-91 thru 92a 4 4 i 11 J

I l i Qu stirn 241.1N i The measured settlement data given in Appendix 2.5.C of the South Texas Project FSAR is provided only up to June 1979. Provide time vs. settlement plots of up-to-date settlement data obtained for all category 1 structures where settlements are being monitored. Tabulate values of the measured =mwi=um differential settlements and show comparisons of the measured data with anticipstod settlements assumed in the analysis of these structures and their appurtenances, and evaluate the impact of any differences between the measured and anticipated settlements on the design and construction cf these structures.and, appurtenances. Staff requires that the settlement of safety celated structures and appurtenances be monitored for a period of at i leavt !Lve years after the issuance of the operating license and the Lspect j + of observed settlement, if any, on the design limits of category I structures be evaluated periodically. (6 months, 2 years and 5 years after OL issuance).

Response

The following response was prepared based on settlement data through f' December 1980. RL&P is in the process of evaluating later data. This ' evaluation is expected to be completed, and submitted to NRC as a revised response to Q241.lN in the first half of 1983. ~ FCAR Appendix 2.5.C has been amended to update tne evaluation of settlement i monitoring data through December 1980. Subsections 2.5.C.4.5 and 2.5.C.4.6 ) have been amended accordingly. Figures 2.5.C-9, 10, 11, 12, 13A, 13B, 14 [ and 14A have been updated to include the settlemfat monitoring data through j December 1980. j r i t The experienced differential movements between buildings are plotted on the amended Figure 2.5.C-11 for Unit 1, and on Figure 2.5.C-12 for Unit 2. The differential movements within individual buildings are shown on plots for representative dates on the amended FSAR figures 2.5.C-13A and 135 for Unit l 1 and on Figures 2.5.C-14 and 14A for Unit 2. 1 The design criterion for allowable differential movements between buildings is defined in Section 2.5.4.11 (item 1) as one-inch, which is applicable . af ter the pipe installation. No Category 1 piping has been installed from one structure to another as of December,1981. Furthermore, recording of . differential movements between buildings started when adjacent portions of two building foundations had been completed. The dif ferential movement plots and tabulations should therefore not be directly compared with the design criteria, and they only provide geotechnical information of the relative settlement behavior of the adjacent foundations and allow evaluations of the trends of movements. (Note: The previously described evaluation of Unit 1 Essential Cooling { Water System piping installation at the MEAB has been deleted (see amended section 2.5.C.4.6) as the pipes have been disconnected), t I I 1 h t

The design criteria for allowable tilt across individual buildings are defined in Section 2.5.4.11 (item 3). The tilt criteria applies to piping l after final installation and connections. The tilt is also considered for the structural design. However, as a uniform tilt would not induce any I stresses, the buildings are actually designed for a deformation curvature defined by an array of settlement calculation points (see Section 2.5.4.10.3.3.2.2) based on the movements predicted to occur after the i' buildings are half-complete. As stated in the FSAR, settlements occurring before the buildings are half-complete will have negligible effects on the j buildings. The dif ferential movements within the buildhas, shown on the amended FSAR figures, have been determined using the foundation mat elevation at the time of completion of mat construction in one section as l base line which is significantly prior to half-completion of the building. Notwithstanding that the design criteria are not applicable in the early l part of building construction and before installation of interconnected j systems, as described above, it is an objective to minimize deviations I throughout the construction period in order to avoid adverse tra.:.7 which could affect the structures or systems at a later date. For this reason l f the ef f ects of actual settlement behaviorhave been analyzed for the Unit 2 Mechanical-Electrical Auxiliary building (see amended figure i 2.5.C-14A,section Q, June 1980). The tilt and curvature of the l 3 foundation have been conservatively derived, as described above, and this case is recognized as the most severe situation experienced. However, the { dif ferential movements were found not to have any detrimental of feet on the building. An amended structural criteria for allowable temporary dif ferential movements occurring during the construction period (i.e., movements which will have been reduced to within the design criteria for piping systems before final connections) has been established equal to 1.5 l I times the calculated differential settlement between adjacent points j defining the sat curvature. l t The excursion within Unit 2 MEAB, as discussed above, was corrected by load modifications as described in letter to NRC on February 3,1981 (ST-HL-AE-616). An excursion is also noted within the Unit 1 MEAB in June j 1979 which was "self-correcting" in the normal ecurse of construction. i i Category I piping systems were only partially installed in the Unit 1 MEAB f in 1919, and no piping installations had been made in Unit 2 MEAB in 1980. Any ef fects of differential movements on the piping will be evaluated upon completion of the installations. The predicted heave / settlements are shown in comparison to the actual l movements for the Reactor Containment, Fuel Handling and Mechanical-Electrical Auxiliary Buildings of Unit 1 on amended figure 2.5.C-9. The actual heave / settlement for the Unit 2 buildings are shown on amended figure 2.5.C-10; however, the predictions have not been updated yet due to changes in construction schedule. All time descriptions given in section 2.5.4 regarding pipe installations and building (half) completions will be updated based on the revised construction schedule. I I I 2 -. ~.

Settlement monitoring for safety related structures and appurtenances af ter the issuance of the operating license will be performed as requested. Existing Table 2.5.C-1 in the FSAR defines the monitoring frequency which meets the requirements of Question 241.1N. The following Subrections, and Figures have been revised. . Subsections: 2.5.4.11 2.5.C.4.5 2.5.C.4.6 Figures: 2.5.C-9, 10, 11, 12, 13A, 13B, 14, 14A 2.5.C-13 (deleted) 9-3

I MEASURE DIFFERENTIAL SETTLEMEh7 TABLE Q 241.1-1N r UNIT 1 DATE STARTED BETWEEN BUILDINGS MEASURED DIFF. SETTLEMENT (in.) l OCT. 1978 JUNE 1979 DEC. 1980 l l t FEB vs RCB July 1976 0 0.2 0.1 l MEAB vs RCB Oct. 1977 0.1 0.3 0.3 i MEAB vs FHB oct. 1977 0.1 0.1 0.6 j MEAB vs DGB Dec. 1979 0.2 l IVC vs RCE Dec. 1977 0.6 0.6 0.1 i i f UNIT 2 i l DATE STARTED BEIVEEN BUILDINGS MEASURED DIFF. SETTLEMEhT (in.) DECDiBER 1979 DEIDiBER 1980 i i FEB vs RCB March 1977 0.3 0.6 l MEAB vs RCB April 1979 0.4 0.1 MEAB vs THE May 1979 0.1 0.2 NEAB vs DGB (1) i IVC vs RCB July 1979 0.3 0.2 I I i i NOTEF. (1) No construction of DGB-2 as of Deoe.ber 1980. (2) See Figure 2.5.C-11 for Unit I dif ferential movernent plots. (3) See Figure 2.5.C-12 for Unit 2 dif ferential move-ent plets. i (4) No Cat. I pipe connection has been cade between buildings as of December 1981. i, i l 4 L i

MEASURED END-TO-END TILT TABLE Q241.1-2N UNIT 1 BUILDING' DIRECTION MEASURED END-TO-END TILT (in.) OCT. 1978 JUNE 1979 DEC. 1980 RCB L-W 0.3 0.4 0.3 RCB WS 0 0.1 0.2 FHB E-W 0 0 0 FHB WS 0.3 0 0.4 MEAB E-W N Portion 0.6 0.6 0.5 MEAB E-W S Portion 0.3 0.2 0.4 MfAB N-S E Portion 0.4 0.7 0.5 MEAB N-S W Portion 0 0.1 0.1 DGB E-W (1) (1) 0 DGB WS (1) (1) 0 UNIT 2 m BUILDING DIRECTION MEASURED END-TO-END TILT (in.) Dec. 1979 June 1980 Dec. 1980 RCB E-W 0.2 0.3 0.2 RCB N-S 0 0 0 FHB E-W 0 0.1 0.2 FHB N-S 0.2 0.7 0.7 MEAB E-W N Portion 0.1 0.2 0.2 MEAB E-W S Portion 0.2 0.2 0.7 .NEAB N-S E Portion 0.7 0.7 0.1 MEAR N-S W Portion 0.1 0.1 0.1 DGB E-W (2) (2) (2) DGB 16 - 5 (2) (2) (2) I 5 1

MEASURED END-TO-END TILT I TABLE Q241.1-2N UNIT 1 i NOTES: ('1) DGB, Unit 1, construction started in December 1979. (2) No construction of DGB, Unit 2, as of December 1980. (3) See Figures 2.5.C-13A and 2.5.C-13B for dif ferential movement profile within Unit 1 buildings. i i (4) See Figure 2.5.C-14 and 2.5.C-14A for dif ferential movement profile vi:hin Unit 2 buildings. (5) No Cat. I pipe connections has been made between buildings as of December 1981. i t I i L I i t 6

Qu stion 241.2N The data used for evaluating the performance of foundations of category I structures given in "FSAR appendix 2.5.C - Geotechnical Monitoring" has been updated only up to June 1979. Please update this instrumentation information and evaluate its impact on the expected performance, and stability of foundations of all Category I facility structures. Also indicate, using tabular form, how much settlement of the structures has occurred since the connections between structures and safety-related utilities were made. Evaluate the effect of the past and anticipate future settlement of structures on safety related utilities and connections.

Response

The following response was prepared based on settlement data through December 1980. ELEP is in tha process of evaluating later data. This evaluation is expected to be completed and submitted to the NRC in the first half of 1983, Appendix 2.5.C and groundwater-related Subsections in 2.4 and 2.5 have been amended to update the evaluation of the geotechnical monitoring data through December 1980 for settlement sud plant area groundwater and April 1981 for regional subsidence. The settlement related information is pr'esented as a part of the response to Question 241.1N. It should be noted that no safety-related pipe connection between adjacent buildings has been constructed as of December 1981. Temporary movements ~ prior to pipe connections will have no af fect on piping design. Tae following Subsections. Tables and Figures have been amended: Subsections: 2.4.13.2.4 2.5.4.6.4 2.5.4.6.8 2.5.C.4.4.1 2.5.C.5.5 I Table: 2.5.C-3B Figures: 2.5.4-65, 65A, 66, 66A, 70A. 2.5.C-19, 20, 20A, 21, 21A, 22, 22A, 23, 24, 25 & 25A. Note: In addition pages 2.5.C-10,11 have been amended as a part of the l response to Question 241.1N. 7 ,-.,,-.-,--.---wc-- -e----=~~we

Question 241.3N In Section 3.8.5 " Foundations and Concrete Supports", you indicate that a cathodic protection system is planned for corrosion protection of the embedded foundation reinforcing steel and liner plate. Provide details of this cathodic protection plan for staff review. Include a discussion of the procedures for inspection for corrosion and design measures to minimize the potential for corrosion.

Response

Refer to Section 3.8.5.1. 0 8

Question 241.4N For Category I structures other than the containment, you indicate that a factor of safety of 1.1 has been used for checking the overturning and sliding of the structures against service and nonservice loads. Verify that, for the load combinations given in Section 11.3 of NRL Standard Review Plan Section 3.8.5 - Foundations, you meet the acceptance criteria for minimum factors of safety against sliding and overturning given in Section II.5 of this SRP for all category I structures. Verify that, for determining the overturning moment due to seismic loads, the three components of the earthquake were combined in accordance with methods given in Standard Review Plan 3.7.2. Describe and present your analyses to show that the soil bearing and shear strength margins are conservative under these load combinations.

Response

The acceptance criteria for satisfying the minimum factors of safety against overturning and sliding for all Category I Structures are: Loading Category Minimum Factor of Safety Service 1.5 Non-se rvice 1.1 The minimum factor of safety against buoyant force is 1.1. Section 3.8.5 is amended to be consistent with the Standard Review Plan (SRP) requirements. j For the load combination delineated in Section 11.3 of SEP Section 3.8.5, Category I structures meet the acceptance criteria for minimum factors of safety against overturning, sliding and buoyancy: The analysis for determining the factor of safety against overturning is performed using the classical (retaining wall) approach for each of the two horizontal directions at a time. The " resisting" and the " overturning" forces are, however, derived from a dynamic analysis of the structures, wherein the three components of the earthquake motion are simultaneously combined. Subsection 2.5.4.10.2 has been amended to describe the analysis for foundation bearing capacity and shear strength margins under the load combinations given. i 9

Question 241.5N In Section 2.5.5 of the South Texas Project Safety Evaluation Report dated August 1975, it is stated that the staff will require periodic monitoring of leakage from the emergency cooling pond to assure that an adequate supply of water will be available for emergency conditions. We require that you make a commitment in the FSAR to comply with this staf f position. Also, provide the following information: (i) Assumptions, analytical model, permeability values of the soils and the method of analysis used for estimating the magnitude and rate of potential seepage loss through the pond. (ii) The extent, location and classification of al'. pervious sand or silt lenses encountered along the perimeter and' bottom of the pond during the pond excavation. (iii) The procedure and results of any field permeability tests performed to evaluate the magnitude and rate of seepage lo~ss through the pond. (iv) Details of the procedure to be used for periodic monitoring of the leakage from the emergency coolieg p'ond and your proposed Technical Specification for plant operation.

Response

(i) The Essential Cooling Pond (ECP) seepage analysis was performed for one water level case, (pond water surface at El.(+)25 feet MSL and ground water level at E1.(+)17 feet MSL.) The ground water level used in the analysis is the extreme drought condition (lowest expected ground water level) which would produce the maximum seepage from the ECP. Forty-three borings,16 test pits, and part of one test trench were made in the ECP area during the design phase (together with laboratory testing) as described in Section 2.5.6. Fifty-nine shallow test pits were dug within the ECP bottom during construction for the geolegic mapping of the ECP. Based on the logs of these shallow pits and the geologic mapping, it was established where in the ECP silts, clayey silts and sands occured in the top two feet below the pond bottom [i.e., below elevation (+)17 feet MSL]. The entire area of the ECP East of the end of l the center dike was treated by removal of at least two feet of the silts, clayey silts and sands and replacement with compacted clay, as shown on Figure Q241.5-IN [ addressed in answer (ii) below). The logs of the pits are summarized in Table Q241.5-1N and those entries showing silts, clayey silts and sands are marked with an asterisk for easy reference. 10

. E Response (Continued) Based on the test borings, test pits, geological mapping and ECP construction records, the most representative stratigraphic model simulating the existing ECP area condition was established. This condition is a two foot layer of in-situ or controlled compacted clay overlying an in-situ clay stratum area and a sand stratum area. The clay stratum area was established to occur over four-fif ths of the area beneath the top two feet of clay. The remaining area was considered to be underlain by the sand stratum. x 10~p seepage analysis the clay was assigned a permeability of 1.8 For t cm/see which is a greater than one magnitude gneresse frot ~ the value established by laboratory tests, 5.0 x 10 em/sec. This allows for possible slickensides in the in-situ clay and seams in the coggacted clay. The sand strata was assigned a value of 1.0 x 10 cm/see which allows for free drainage of seepage that i comes through the upper two foot clay ECP bottom. The analysis was made using Darcy's Law equation, Q=Kia. This approach indicated a seepage rate of 1.2 cfs. Present available data show this seepage rate of 1.2 cfs to be conservative. As discussed in answer (iii) below, the limited water balance n.onitoring conducted in 1980 indicated that the actual seepage rate may be closer to 0.3 cfs. (ii) Forty-three borings,- sixteen test pits, and part of one test trench were made in the ECP area during the design phase field exploration, as reported in the FSAR. Fifty-nine shallow test pits were dug within the ECP bottom during the geologic mapping of the ECP performed during r.onstruction. The results of the geologic mapping vill be presente1 later in Section 2.5.B. The pits were dug and logged for the segments VA01 through VA07 as shown on Figure 241.5-1N. The summary of the logs is shown on Table Q241.5-1N. The following is a summary of the segment test pit locations. Segment No. Pits VA01 P-33 P-34, P-36, P-37, P-38, P-3 9, P-40, P-41, and, P-43 VA02 P-24* P-25, P-26, P-27, P-28, P-29, P-30, P-31, P-32, P-44, and P-47 VA03 P-18*, P-19*, P-20*, P-21*, P-22*, P-23*, P-42*, P-45*, P-46*, P-4 8, P-53, P-60*, and P-61* VA04 Area not mapped. It was logged visually as silt (MS) throughout entire surficial (El. +17) depth of 2 or more feet thickness. 11

Response (Continued) Segment No. Pits VA05 P-14*, F-15*, F-16* and F-17* VA06 P-2, P-3, F-4, P-5, F-6 F-7. P-8*, F-9*, F-10. P-11, P-12, F-13*, P-49. P-50, F-51, P-52 and P-54 l VA07 P-1. P-55 P-56. P-57 and P-58 i Note:

• indicates test pits with silt layers in the upper 2 f t below E1.

+17. ] The area where predominatly silty soils were encountered is defined on j Figure Q241.5-lN. The silts, clayey silts and sands were removed to a depth of at least two feet and the area was backfilled with compacted clay. (iii) The seepage rates derived from the geotechnical investigations and analyses described in items (i) and (ii), above, will be verified by ( waterbalance monitoring during the initial filling of the pond and ) for a sufficient time thereafter to allow determination of the equilibrium conditions. The waterbalance monitoring consists of the measurement of water elevation in the pond (from which the imponded volume can be determined ) pumpage into the pond, evaporation and precipitation. l The piezometric surface near the pond is observed during the same l time as a part of the regular groundwater monitoring program, as i described in Section 2.5.C. i The waterbalance monitoring program was in effect during a period f in 1980 when the pond was fillai to a depth of 2 f t. l The maximum calculated seepage rate obtained from these observations was about 0.05 cfs, which is comparable to the lower range of estimated seepage described in item (1) if consideration is given to the small hydraulic head differential existing during the monitoring period. l (iv) As described in item (iii) the seepage rate will be observed by l ~ l waterbalance monitoring upon initial filling of the pond. The l piezometric pressure in the shallow aquifer will be monitored during plant operation. It is expected that the ambient groundwater table will be stabilized near the normal operating level of the pond i (elev. +25.0 ft. MSL). A pre-established periodic seepage l monitoring program would not be meaningful as the flow gradient will i be too small to allow feasible routine measurements, considering the minute volume of water loss due to seepage. Furthermore, there is no I 1. potential for a sudden or unexpected increase in water loss due to seepage as the impondment is entirely below the groundsurface, thereby preventing the opening of flow paths (for example due to piping )to a free marface. i 12

Refpon n (continued) The operating requirements for the Essential Cooling Pond, which ensures that an adequate water supply is available for all operating conditions, are described in Section 9.2. The STP Technical Specification will be provided 18 months prior to issuance of the operating License for each unit. TABLE Q241.5-1N LOGS OF TEST FITS DUG AT THE ESSENTIAL COOLING POND FLOOR SEGMENT VA01 PIT ELEV AT TOP DEPTH SOIL NO. OF PIT, IT FT TYPE P33 +17.5 0 to 2.5 SILTY CLAY (CH) 2.5 to 3.0 CuYEY SILT (ML) W/ SILT OR SILTY SAND LENSES P34 +17.0 0 to 2.0 SILTY CLAY (CH) 2.0 to 2.5 CuYBY SILT (ML) W/ SILTY SAND LENSES P35 +17.1 0 to 1.8 SILTY CLAY (CH) 1.8 to 2.6 VERY SILTY CLAY (CL) 2.6 to 3.0 CLAYEY SILTY (ML) P36 +16.5 0 to 2.5 SILTY CLAY (CH) 2.5 to 3.0 CLAYEY SILT (ML) W/ SILT AND SILTY SAND LENSES P37 +19.0 0 to 2.0 SILTY CLAY (CH) i 2.0 to 4.0 VERY SILTY CLAY (CL) 4.0 to 4.5 SILTY CMY (CH) P38' +18.9 0 to 3.9 SILTY CLAY (CH) 3.9 to 4.3 SILTY CLAY (CL) W/ CLAYEY SILT POCKETS P39 +19.6 0 to 4.6 SILTY CMY (CH) 4.6 to 5.0 CLAYEY SILT (ML) P40 +19.6 0 to 1.6 SILTY CLAY (CH) 1.6 to 3.6 VERY SILTY CLAY (CL) 3.6 to 5.0 SILTY CLAY (CH) P41 '*7.8 0 to 2.8 SILTY CLAY (CH) 2.8 to 3.6 VERY SILTY CLAY (CL) W/ CLAYEY SILT PATCHES 13

TABLE Q241.5-1N (Continued) LOGS OF TEST PITS DUG AT THE ESSENTIAL COOLING POND FLOOR SEGMENT VA01 (Continued) PIT ELEV-AT TOP DEPTH SOIL NO. OF PIT FT FT TYPE P43 +17.1 0 to 0.5 SILTY SANDY CLAY (CL-CH) 0.5 to 1.5 $1LTY CLAY (CH) 1.5 to 3.0 VERY SILTY CLAY (CL) 3.0 to 4.0 SILTY CLAY (CH) SEGMENT VA02 PIT ELEV AT TOP DEPTH SOIL NO. OF PIT FT FT TYPE P24* +17.1 0 to 2.0 CLAYEY SILT (ML) W/ LENSES OF SILTY SAND P25 +17.4 0 to 2.5 SILTY CLAY (CH) P26 +17.2 0 to 2.5 SILTY CLAY (CH) P27 +17.3 0 to 2.3 VERY SILTY CLAY (CL) 2.3 to 2.5 SANDY SILTY (ML) P28 +17.6 0 to 2.6 SILTY CLAY (CH) 2.6 to 3.0 CLAYEY SILT (ML) W/ SILTY SAND LENSES P29 +17.6 0 to 2.6 SILTY CLAY (CH) 2.6 to 3.0 VERY SILTY CLAY (CL) P30 +17.2 0 to 2.2 SILTY CLAY (CH) 2.2 to 2.5 CLAYEY SILT OfL) W/ SILT LENSES P31 +16.9 0 to 0.9 VERY SILT CLAY (CL) 0.9 to 1.9 SILTY CLAY (CH) P32 +16.9 0 to 1.4 SILTY CLAY (CH) 1., to 2.0 VERY SILTY CLAY (CL) P44 +16.7 0 to 0.5 SILTY SANDY CLAY (CH) 0.5 to 2.0 SILTY CLAY (CH) 2.0 :o 3.5 VERY SILTY CLAY (CL) Note: Asterisk denotes pits with silt, clayey silt or sand in upper 2 feet. Materials in area subsequently removed and replaced with compacted clay. 14

l l TABLE Q241.5-1N (Continued) l l LOGS OF TEST PITS DUG AT THE l CSSENTIAL COOLING POND FLOOR SEGMENT VA02 (Contninued) ELEV AT TOP DEPTH SOIL ?IT NO. OF PIT, FT FT TYPE P47 +17.4 0 to 3.0 VERY SILTY CLAY (CL) W' CLAYEY SILT FINGERS 3.0 to 4.1 SILTY SAND (SM) SECMENT VA03 PIT ELEV AT TOP DEPTH SOIL NO. OF PIT. FT FT

TYPE, P18*

+16.9 0 to 1.5 VERY SILTY CLAY (CL) W/ SILT LENSES 1.5 to 2.0 CLAYEY SILT (ML) ,P19* +17.4 0 to 2.5 SILIY SAND (SM) OR SANDY SILT (KL) P20* +17.0 0 to 2.0 SILTY SAND (SM) OR SANDY SILT (KL) P21* +17.3 0 to 2.5 SILTY CLAY (CL) W/ FINGERS OF CLAY SILT (KL) P22* +17.0 0 to 2.0 CLAYEY SILT (KL) W/ THIN SILT BEDS P23 +17.0 0 to 2.0 SILTY CLAY (CT.' P42* +17.3 0 to 0.8 SIL f CLAY (CH) O.8 to 3.2 CLAYEY SILT (KL) AND SILTY SAND (SM) INTERBEDDED P45* +16.8 0 to 1.2 SILTY CLAY (CH) AND CLAYEY SILT (ML) 1.2 to 3.0 SILTY SAND (SM) P46* +18.0 0 to 1.0 SILTY CLAY (CH) 1.0 to 2.0 SILTY CLAY (CL) 2.0 to 3.8 SILTY SAND (SM) Note: Asterisk denotes pits with silt, clayey silt or sand in upper 2 feet. Materials in area subsequently removed and replaced with compacted clay. 15 l e ---,----,

---

~ ---,

y,

TABLE Q241.5-1N (Qontinued) LOGS OF TEST PITS DUG AT THE ~ ESSENTIAL COOLING POND FLOOR 1 SEGMENT VA03 (Continued) PIT

• ELEV AT TOP DEPTH SOIL NO.

OF PIT, FT FT TYPE P48 +17.4 0 to 1.0 SILTY CLAY (CH) 1.0 to 3.6 VERT SILTY CLAY (CL) W/ THIN SILT OR SILTY SAND LENSES 3.6 to 4.5 SILTY SAND (SM) PS3 +17.3 0 to 1.0 SILTY CLAY (CH) ~ 1.0 to 2.4 VERY SILTY CLAY (CL) W/ SILT AND SILTY SAND LENSES 2.4 to 3.3 SILTY SAND (SM) P60* +20.4 0 to 2.6 "EILL" SILTY CLAY (CH) 2.6 to 4.5 SILTY CLAY (CH) 4.5 to 5.4 SILTY CLAY (CL) 5.4 to 6.0 CLAYEY SILT (ML) P61* +17.8 0 to 2.5 ATLTY CLAY (CH) 2.5 to 5.0 SILTY CLAY (CL) 5.0 to 5.4 SILTY SAND (SM) SEGMENT VA04 No pits were dug as pond bottom area was silt and fine sand. Silts and sands were removed to a depth of 2 ft and the excavation backfilled with clay and compacted. SEGMENT VA05 PIT ELEV AT TOP DEPTH SOIL NO. OF PIT, FT FT TYPE P14* +17.2 0 to 1.2 CLAYEY SILT (ML) 1.2 to 2.2 SILT (ML) P15* +17.0 0 to 2.0 CLAYEY SILT (ML) P16* +17.0 0 to 1.5 CLAYEY SILT (ML) Pl?* +17.0 0 to 2.5 CLAYEY SILT (ML) Note: Asterisk denotes pits with silt, clayey silt or sand in upper 2 feet. Materials in area subsequently removed and replaced with compacted clay. 16 l

TABLE Q241.5-1N (Qontinued) P LOGS OF TEST PITS DUG AT THE j ESSENTIAL COOLING POND FLOOR SEGMENT VA06 l PIT ELEV AT TOP DEPTH SOIL j NO. OF PIT. FT FT TYPE P2 +21.1 0 to 1.1 SILTY CLAY (CH) { 1.1 to 6.5 SILTY CLAY (CH) 'P3 +20.7 0 to 0.8 SILTY CLAY (CH) 0.8 to 6.0 , SILTY CLAY (CH) P4 +20.6 0 to 0.9 SILTY CLAY (CH) ) 0.9 to 6.0 SILTY CLAY (CH) { i P5 +19.9 0 to 5.0 SILTY CLAY (CH) P6 +19.5 0 to 5.5 SILTY CLAY (CH) P7 +20.3 0 to 0.5 SILTY CLAY (CH) i 0.5 to 5.0 SILTY CLAY (CH) ~ P8* +19.1 0 to 3.6 SILTY CLAY (CH) 3.6 to 4.1 CLAYEY SILT (ML) W/ STRINGERS OF SILTY SAND f r P9* +17.8 0 to 3.0 CLAYEY SILT (ML) W/ SILTY SAND LENSES P10 +17.3 0 to 2.3 SILTY CLAY (CH) l 2.3 to 3.0 CLAYEY SILT (ML) W/ SILT AND SILTY l SAND LENSES i Pil +17.5 0 to 1.5 SILTY CLAY (CH) 1.5 to 2.5 SILTY CLAY (CL) l 2.5 to 3.0 CLAYEY SILT (ML) I P12 +17.6 0 to 2.6 SILTY CLAY (CH) 2.6 to 3.0 CLAYEY SILT (ML) W/ SILT INTERBEDS l P13* +18.0 0 to 3.0 SILT AND CLAYEY SILT (ML) INTERBEDDED i i 2 Note: Asterisk denotes pits with silt, clayey silt or sand in upper 2 feet. Materials in area subsequently removed and replaced with compacted clay. 17

TABLE Q241.5-1N (Continued) LOGS OF TEST PITS DUG AT THE ESSENTIAL COOLING POND FLOOR SEGMENT VA06 (Continued) PIT . ELEV AT TOP DEPTH SOIL FT TYPE NO. OF PIT, FT P49 +18.4 0 to 3.3 SILTY CLAY (CL) W/ SILT AND SILTY SAND STRINGERS 3.3 to 5.0 VERY SILTY CLAY (CL) W/ SILTY SAND POCKETS IN LOWER 6 TO 7 INCHES P50 +20.0 0 to 1.0 SILTY CLAY (CH) 1.0 to 5.0 SILTY CLAY (CH) IN 5.0 to 6.0 VERY SILTY CLAY (CL) AND SILTY SAND LENSES P51 +17.9 0 to 3.0 SILTY CLAY (CH) W/ CLAYEY SILT LENSES PS2 +19.4 0 to 5.0 SILTY CLAY (CH) P54 +20.2 0 to 1.0 SILT" 'LN! (CH) 1.0 to 6.2 SILTY CLAY (CH) SEGMENT VA07 PIT ELEV AT TOP DEPTH SOIL NO. OF PIT. FT FT TYPE P1 +18.7 0 to 1.3 SILTY CLAY (CH) 1.3 to 5.5 SILTY CLAY (CH) P55 +20.2 0 to 0.8 SILTY CLAY (CH) 0.8 to 4.8 SILTY CLAY (CH) W/ CLAYEY SILT LENSES 4.8 to 5.6 VERY SILTY CLAY (CL) W/ SILT LENSES P56 +20.4 0 to 0.5 SILTY CLAY (CH) 0.5 to 6.0 SILTY CLAY (CH) P57 +20.2 0 to 1.0 SILTY CLAY (CH) 1.0 to 6.2 SILTY CLAY (CH) P58 +20.6 0 to 1.0 SILTY CLAY (CH) 1.0 to 6.0 SILTY CLAY (CH) Note: Asterisk denotes pits with silt, clayey silt or sand in upper 2 feet. Materials in area subsequently removed and replaced with compacted clay. 18

gp

:g 3. i si te S,

se c: !.!$5 Sm I *i ! !. l

l i N

g! < :ljl5. O! l3 a m-

l

<n 8 r d e - 345j.!r,: x =l,!s-WI a Ig x o : I'. a I[-l ~ g38i s ! l 1 =:.nsi i _sa. t m .e gr gr q !; E, ir.g 5.! .Z s .f -zw o e 5g ss a 3 x i=:=ss 5.I, al s= i- ...1 8. . 5.: 85 : d.5 r,5 a o r E1

I i

y 5,..r.r : 45;. ef r: es :x 8 i 1 E-:Es :1,: 2 12 lc!"ka; iI I I I i i 1 i i p,y A a -m 1-yQ \\ s' , Il5, \\ 'j / 1 \\. a grl if*: N ,' 8* s !j y' '\\, / j!! h s I \\ i !. f- [T W/' Q i

. j

-\\ f .. :1,. /4 s,,s x ./ ' ) f\\ :.').3 P!- \\ .h V f,. l f I': 5 ~.. - i s. \\. fc e / / ,j / r. E', ' ' r. i

f. f ly/

\\. h 8 f E . \\. / g / / u si ( ,-/ /3 N, g. j' ' / a l '. e' i r- / l l / E g ^ ti 8 k / / I f' . I.r n I /y i g, l,' 3 ,i - / !. !. ;.,/ - td!L 4 g 1 t i. se

Question 241.6N You have not provided suf ficient information for staff review regarding Category I buried piping and electrical duct banks. Provide the following information using Regulatory Guide 1.70 Standard Format and Content of Safety Analysis Reports in Sections 1.7. 3.5, 3.6, 3.7.3 and 3.8.4. (i) Two copies of large-scale drawings (approximately 22 in. x 34 in.)

• showing category I piping and duct bank locations and routing, connection details at structures, bends, anchors, essential appurtenances, and typical cross-sections showing the details of l

bedding and cover material used in construction. Details may be l shown on separate drawings. (ii) Barrier design features and procedures used to resist the missile hazard to buried pipes and conduits. Identify the protective structures and barriers on plant arrangement and elevation drawings. (iii) Provide RG 1.70 information about protection of systems or components against dynamic effects associated with postulated rupture of buried piping, if applicable to your plant design, and discuss effects of soil erosion due to buried pipe rupture. i (iv) Provide ap<ropriate references used by you as bases for your discussion in Section 3.7.3.12, regarding seismic response of buried piping, and provide justification for the assumptions made therein. Provide details of the procedure used, piping sections analyzed and results of axial and bending stresses in buried pipes, bends and pipe penetrations. Provide your criteria for tolerable stress limits and factors of safety. Provide similar information for category I electrical duct banks. 1 (v) Provide the information required by RG 1.70 to be given in Section 3.8.4 for category I buried piping and electrical duct banks. Include the procedure used to obtsin the design loads, the analysis cross-sections, the values of soll parameters used in the analyses, the bases of obtaining the soil properties, the acceptance criteria, the results of analyses, the factors of safety and details of program for testing and inservice inspection of buried piping and duct banks. 4 } I e e 19

Response

(i) The following list of Class IE electrical duct back and piping drawings were provided to the NRC by ST-HL-AE-800: CLASS 1E ELECTRICAL DUCT BANK LIST OF DRAWINGS 0-E-2100-13 Electrical general arrangement station underground duct banks Unit No. 1 & 2 0-E-2152-6 Electrical Class 1E manhole and duct bank sections and details Unit No. 1 & 2 0-E-2153-5 Electrical Class IE manhole plan and duct bank sections, Unit No. 1 & 2 0-E-2154-6 Electrical Class IE manhole plan and duct bank sections, Unit No. 1 & 2 0-E-2155-4 Electrical Class 1E manhole plan and duct bank sections, Unit No. 1 & 2 0-E-2156-6 Electrical Class IE mschole plan and duct bank sections, Unit No. 1 & 2 0-E-2157-5 Electrical Class 1E manhole plan and duct bank sections, Unit No. 1 & 2 0-C-5032-6 Concrete class 1E underground electrical raceway systems general plan Unit No. 1 & 2 0-C-5033-6 Concrete Class 1E U.E.R.S. duct bank section and details Unit No. 1 & 2 0-C-5036-1 Concrete underground duct banks Class 1E plan and sections Unit No. 1 & 2 0-C-5037-0 Concrete underground duct banks Class 1E sections and details Unit No. 1 & 2 0-C-5038-1 Concrete underground duct bank plan and sections Unit No. 1 & 2 I I 20 l l

Response (Continued) CLASS 1E ELECTRICAL DUCT BANK LIST OF DRAWINGS 0-C-5039-2 Concrete underground duct bank section and details Unit No. 1 & 2 0-C-5041-1 Concrete Class 1E U.E.R.S duct bank section and details Unit No. 1 & 2 CATEGORY I PIPING LIST OF DRAWINGS 0-R-0001-A Stress isometric, ECW loop 1A supply 0-R-0002-A Stress isometric, ECW loop 1B supply 0-R-0003-A Stress isometric, ECW loop IC supply 0-R-0004-A Stress isometric, ECW loop 1A return 0-R-0005-A Stress isometric, ECW loop 1B return 0-R-0006-A Stress isometric, ECW loop 1C return 0-R-0007-A Stress isometric, ECW loop 2A supply 0-R-0008-A Stress isometric, ECW loop 2B supply 0-R-0009-A Stress isometric, ECW loop 2C supply 0-R-0010-A Stress isometric, ECW loop 2A return 0-R-0011-A Stress icometric, ECW loop 2B return 0-R-0012-A Stress isometric, ECW loop 2C return i 0-R-0013-C Stress isometric, ECW supply system 1 A, Unit I 0-R-0014-B Stress iscmetric, ECW supply system IB, Unit I 0-R-0015-B Stress isometric, ECW supply sys'.em IC, Unit I 0-R-0016-A Stress isometric, ECW supply system 1A, Unit II 0-R-0017-A Stress isometric, ECW supply system IB, Unit II 21 i

Response (Continued) CATEGORY I PIPING LIST OF DRAWINGS 0-R-0016-A Stress isometric. ECW supply system IC, Unit II l 0-R-0019-B Stress isometric, ECW system 1A strainer back-flush, Unit I 0-R-0020-B Stress isometric ECW system IB strainer back-flush, Unit I i 0-R-0021-B Stress isometric ECW system IC strainer back-flush, Unit I 0-R-0022-B Stress isometric, ECW system 1A strainer back-flush, Unit II 0-R-0023-B Stress isometric ECW system IB strainer back-flush, Unit II i 0-R-0024-B Stress isometric, ECW system IC strainer i back-flush, Unit II l 0-P-0041-5 Composite piping, yard plan Area 61 I 0-P-0042-4 Composite piping, yard plan Area 62 l 0-P-0078-0 Composite piping, ECW intake structure plan at operating floor 0-P-0080-0 Composite piping, ECW piping layout 0-P-0081-1 Composite piping ECW piping layout 0-P-0084-0 Composite piping, ECW discharge structure (ii) Electrical ducts are buried in reinforced concrete blocks. The clear distance between the duct and the surface of the concrete is i 11-inches for 4 in. ducts (reference dwg. 0.E-2153-5). Depth of i i penetration into the concrete is computed as 9-9/16 inches for a missile which has the most penetration capacity using the Modified l Petry Formula. Since the penetration depth is less than the cover provided for the ducts in the concrete block, there is no need for a missile barrier or a protective structure against tornado generated missiles. The only category I buried pipes are essential cooling water pipes and they are buried in Catego y I structural backfill with a minimum l protective soil cover of 6 ft-0 in. The depth of penetration of a l 22

Response (Continued) most penetrating missile ~1s determined by using the modified Petry Formula as given in Ref. 1. The penetrad on depth is less than the soil cover of six feet. Reference 1:. Young, C. W., " Depth Prediction for Earth-Penetrating Projectiles". Journal of the Soil Mechanics and Foundations Division, ASCE, Vol. 95, No. SH3, Proc. Paper 6588, t sy 1969, pp. 803-817. (iii) There is no high energy buried Category 1 piping outside of Containment ; therefore rupture of buried piping is not applicable to STP. (iv) 6 (v) CATEGORY I ELECTRICA:. DUC7 BANKS 1. Description of the syste: This is described in Section 3.8.4.1.6 of the TSAR. 2. Applicable codes, standards and specification These are described in Section 3.8.4.2.1 and 3.8.4.2.2 of the FSAR. 3. Loads and load combinations a) In designinE the Class 1E buried electrical duct banks the following loads are considered: 1. Dead load (D) 2. Live load (L) due to surcharge, crane and/or railroad 3. Missile due to t0rnI$) Seis=ic loads (E E 4 o 5. Hydrostatic (flood) load (H) Dif ferential sef)tlement (D ) 6. Thermal load (T 7. 3 b) Procedures for obtaining the design loads: 1. Dead Loads (D): Dead load of the system includes weights of conduits, cables, and soil on top of ductbanks and sanholes in addition to its own weight. Hydrostatic loads are considered as dead loads. 2. Live Loads (L): Surcharge, lateral soil pressure loads and railroad loads are considered as live loads. During construction, cranes may travel over the ductbanks. Thus, the ductbanks are checked for a crane load of 240 tons which is the weight of a 4600-Series 3 Maintovoc Crawler Crane. 23

Response (Continued) \\ 3. Operating Basis Earthquake (OBE) (E ): During a seismic event, the ductbanks are assumed to develop strains and deformations the same as the soil media due to friction between soil and ductbanks. The following are the two types of seismic waves that are considered for the design of ductbanks: a) Compression waves (P-waves) b) Shear waves (S-waves) Stresses in the ductbanks are obtained by multiplying the strains (due to waves) by the modules of elasticity (E) of respective materials ( either concrete or reinforcing steel.) Since maximum stresses due to various seismic waves do not occur simultaneously, the representative maximum stress is computed by taking the square root of the sum of the squares of stresses due to all seismic waves. Maximum ground velocity as also required for computation of stress due to seismic vsves is taken as 48 in/sec,for lg ground acceleration (see reference 1) for Operating Basis earthquake. horizontal and vertical acceleratl8)s are twice the OBE. Safe Shutdown Earthquake (SSE) (E

Maximum 4.

n 5. Tornado Loads (W ): No tornado load shall be t applicable since the ductbank system is an underground structure. Nevertheless, tornado generated missile loads are considered for the design of manholes and ductbanks. 6. Thermal Loads (T ): Temperature in the ductbanks shall be 75'C at the operating condition. A linear variation of temperature gradient from the conduit to outside face of concrete is assumed. Temperature in the soil shall be 75'F. 7. Differential Settlement (D ): A differential settlement of 1.5 inch. in'the ducts (about 50 f t long) adjacent to the MEAB is considered. From this deflection, an equivalent concentrated load is determined assuming that each ductbank is a semi-infinite beam resting on an elastic continuous support having one end free and subjected to a j concentrated load at the free end. c) Load combinations All the loads (i.e., 1 through 7) are considered in accordance with Table 3.8.4.1 of the FSAR. It is to be noted that construction and railroad loads are not combined 24

Response (Continued) with seismic or flood loads. The railroad load is combined with differential settlement load only. Also note that the equivalent concentrated load as calculated from differential settlement is added with all other loads with a load factor of 1.0.

4.

• Design and Analysis Procedures A.

Construction materials and their strength The structural materials used in the construction of ductbanks are in compliance with the following: Normal weight concrete vill have a 28-day compressive a. strength of 4000 psi. b. Reinforcing steel will be deformed billet steel bars conforming to ASTM A 615, Grade 60 (f = 60 ksi). B. Ductbank Design Ductbanks have been designed as beams on elastic foundation. Since the dead load (own weight and soil load) is uniform, no significant stress is induced in the ductbanks. Surcharge load is also uniform and thus induces no stress. Crane load and railroad load have been considered. A tornado generated missile has been considered to determine the concrete cover to protect the cable ducts. During operation, the cables will slowly heat up to an operating temperature. There will be a temperature gradient between the outside face of concrete and PVC ducts. Hence, the ductbanks are designed for this temperature gradient. Ductbanks are designed according to ACI 318-1971. The values of soil parameters used in the analysis are es follows: 1. Coefficient of Subgrade Reaction = K, The Category I Electric Raceway Ducts are located between the Unit 1 MEAB and the Essential Cooling Water Intake Structures. The ductbanks are constructed both in the structural backfill and the clay A -1*I'#* 2 The structural design of the electric raceway duct is based en a coefficient of subgrada reaction of 150 kcf in the structural backfill and 15 kcf in the A clay y layer. 25

Response (Continued) The 150 kcf is conservatively taken as 0.25 times kai value of 600 kcf as recommended by Terzaghi (Ref. 2, also FSAR Ref. 2.5.4-47) for dense submerged sand, which is the same derivation as described in FSAR Section 2.5.4.10.4.2. The 15 kef is taken as 0.25 times kai value of 60 kef as recommended by Terzaghi (Ref. 2, also FSAR Ref. 2.5.4-47) for stiff clay. This was checked by Vesic's method (Ref. 3) with an average value of 2.20

• ksf for A clay's elastic modulus. This elastic 3

modulus ds conservatively taken from results at 0.5% strain of laboratory unconsolidated-undrained triaxial tests. These K values are applicable to short term loading conditi8ns. 2. Shear Wave Velocity = V, Peissors Ratic =s00 A shear wave velocity (V ) of 610 fps is used for the s structural design of the Category I Elastic Raceway Ducts. The 610 fps is based on the results of field cross-hole shear wave tests (see FSAR Table 2.5.4-21 & 22). A poisson ratio 004) of 0.42 is selected for the design, which is based on published data by Barker (Ref. 4, also FSAT Ref. 2.5.L-4) and Leonards (Ref. 5, also FSAR Ref. 2.5.4-26). 26

... ~. - i l l Respoose (Continued). CATEGORY I BURIED PIPING i Strain and stress calculations discussed in FSAR Section 3.7.3.12 I regarding seismic response of buried piping are based on thei paper " Flexibility Analysis of Buried Pipe", by E. C. Goodling (ASME Publications 78-pvp-82.) The assumptions made in that FSAR section are also referred.to the same paper. The analysis of the only is divided l buried seismic, category I piping system, the BCW system, l vall penetration, straight run and elbow / tee 'into three (3) types: Analysis procedure, stress limit and factor of safety for each type are provided below: section. Stress at unil penetration is calculated on the basis of a beam f 1) on elastic foundation. An equivalent stiffness of soil j (t:alculated according to Eq. 9 of Goodling's paper) is The j incorporated in the mathematical model of the piping. maximum seismic anchor movement (minimum slippage length times l aeismic soil strain) is input at th'e location of minimum slippage length dere soil and pipe have no relative movement. l The resultant seismic stress must satisfy Eq. 9 of ND-3650. Computer program SUPER-PIPE is used to perform the analysis. l l Stress in straight run is calculated by the fundamental I 2) equation a- =E E where E. is the seismic soil strain, dich is calculated according to Eq. 5 of Goodling's paper. Eq. 9 of l ND-3650 is used to check tolerable stress limit. f

3) Axial force and bending movement at elbow and tee sections are l

calculated according to Eqs. 16, 17, 29 and 30 of Goodling's Axial and bending stresses are combinad according to Eq. paper. 41 of the same paper. Eq. 9 of ND-3650 ir used to check tolerable stress limit. i Factors of safety are already built in the Eq. 9 of ND-3650. The buried piping at the MEAB penetration areas has been analyzed. Design loads used in stress analysis are based on ND-3650 and ND-3133. The values of soil parameters used in stress analysis are same as used in Category 1 Electrical Duct Banks. The acceptance criteria for stress analysis are ND-3650 and ND-3133, factors of safety are already built in the code equations in ND-3650 and ND-3133. I 27

REFERENCES:

1. R. C. Gwaltney, " Missile Generation and Protection in Light-Water-cooled Power Reactor Plants". ORNL NSIC-22, Oak Ridge National Labo ratory, Ock Ridge, Tennessee, for the U. S. Atocic Energy Cocaissien, Sept. 1968. 2. K. Terzaghi, " Evaluation of Coefficit.- ^ a# Subgrade Reaction," Geotechnieue. Vol.,5, No. 6 (lvi5) 3. A. B. Vesic, " Bending of Beats Resting on Isotropic Elastic Solid," Jcurnal of Mechanics Division. ASCE, ~Vol'.' ~C!2-37, (1961). 4 D. D. Barker, Dynamics of Bases and Ferndatiens, McGraw-Hill (t;ew York,1962). G. A. Lenonardo (ed.) Foundation Engineering. McGraw-hill 5. (New York,1962). 09 6 6 28

2.4.13.2.4 Flow Direction and Gradients: In central and western Matagorda County, groundwater in the deep aquifer zone generally flows westward. Under relatively static conditions, the piezometric surface forms a trough that trends southwestward from the Bay City vicinity and into,which water moves from virtually all sides. As depicted by elevation contours for 1973 on Figure 2.5.4-70, deep groundwater moved in a uniform pattern westward in the project area at an average gradient of about 6 ft/mi. Elevation contours for January 1981 (Figure 2.5.4-70s) indicated a decreased average gradient of 5 ft/mi to the northwest. Before significant deep-well withdrawals began in western Matagorda County, piezometric levels normally sloped southward toward Matagorda Bay at a very flat gradient. Subsequent irrigation pumping lowered the artesian head to well below sea level in the western portion of the county, creating a gradient from all directions toward that area. Locally, the gradient has been reversed from Matagorda Bay on the south toward the area of withdrawal; the result has been a northerly advance of saline water in the aquifer system. The intruding saline interface was interpreted by the state in 1967 to be in the vicinity of the Matagorda Bay shoreline (see Figure 2.4.13-12). The very flat gradient and relatively low permeabi-lities near the coast allow only a very slow rate of groundwater movement; thus, the additional advance realized since that time has probably not exceeded a few hundred feet. The piezometric data for the lower portion of the shallow aquifer zone have been contoured (see Figure 2.4.13-17) and show a southeasterly direction of flow, virtually opposite to that of the deep zone. Movement is indicated from the north, west and southwest into a trough that directs the water flow to the southeast as it passes from beneath the site. Gradients are relatively flat, ranging froc about 1 to 3 f t/mi. 2.4.13.2.5 Effects of Potential Future Use: Quantitatively, the shallow aquifer zone is utilized only to a minor extent in the region north of the site and is virtually unused within and downstream of the site. Future use of groundwater from this source will not increase significantly, primarily because of poor water quality. Therefore, no significant, future usage downstream of the site is anticipated, and associated piezometric levels and flow patterns in the site area should not be affected by future shallow aquifer development. Potential future groundwater usage from the deep aquifer zone is expected to follow the course described in Subsection 2.4.13.2.2, in which possible increases in industrial and municipal requirements may create a correspond-ing videly distributed increase in well withdrawals. Limited and controlled groundwater pumping is carried on from wells within the site for plant use (see Subsection 2.4.13.1.4). These wells are located and designed to have minimum influence on groundwater conditions. No sustained pumping is permitted within a 4,000-f t nonpumping exclusion radius from the plant area. Regional piezometric levels are likely to decline progressively in response to possible future pumping increases. Any lowering of artesian levels in the site area from this usage will be regional and broad in nature. Potential lowerings at the plant site will be further buffered by the wide nonpumping land strip surrounding it. Any future zones of drawdown 2.4-76

I i i areas and also in the backfill to allow monitoring af ter construction of l the building foundations. 2.5.4.6.4 Groundwater Recordings During Construction: The actual I responses of the piezometers located in the C, E, G, and H 1ayers are shown on Figures 2.5.4-65 and 2.5.4-65A for Unit 1. Figures 2.5.4-66 and ] 2.5.4-66A for Unit 2. l r The perimeter system pumping rate was initially 2,900 gal / min, and a ~ steady-state condition was reached af ter about 6 weeks of pumping at a rate [ of about 1,300 gal / min. Both units, local systems discharged initially at a rate of about 500 gal / min each. The long-term combined pumping of the Unit I local system plus the perimeter system was 1,300 gal / min. The { combined pumping of Unit 2's local system plus the perimeter system was 1,500 gal / min. This indicates a significant drop in perimeter pumping as l the local systems reached a steady-state condition. P The C-layer artesian pressure was relieved after about 75 days of pumping, at which time the piezometric surface was just below the top of t'.e layer. i There was insignificant drawdown in the C layer af ter this point due to the very low permeability of the layer. Layer E responded rapidly to the perimeter Dewatering System pumping, and the piezometric pressures were reduced to about El. -30 ft MSL, i.e., near the top of the E layer in less than 5 days. The piezometric level in the E layer subsequently dropped to about El. -46 ft MSL over a period of 50 i days. This period represents the actual devatering (lowering of the phreatic surface) in the E layer. The local Dewatering Syste=s, as they became operational, further reduced the piezometric level to about El. -50 ft MSL, which is near the bottom of the E layer. f The piezometric levels in the G and H 1ayers also responded to the perimeter pumping system, which demonstrates that the G and H layers are hydraulically connected with the E layer some distance frem the plant The piezometric levels in the G and H 1ayers were d:>. m down to f area. about El. -20 f t MSL over a 120-day period. i The G and H 1ayers respectively responded very rapidly to the local pumping, and the peizometric pressures were drawn down to about El. -70 f t MSL, i.e., near the top of the G layer, in less than 10 days. It is i evident from the similarity of response that the G and H 1ayers are hydraulically connected. The recharge of the G and H layers was very rapid l upon termination of the local dewatering, system for Unit 1 in November, 1976..The increase in piezometric level within the H 1ayer (note that the G layer does not exist in Unit 2) was likewise very rapid when the pumping of the local dewatering system for Unit 2 was terminated in February of l .1978, which demonstrates that there had not been any significant depletion l of the lower portion of the shallow aquifer zone due to the construction devatering. j l The pumping of the perimeter devatering syctem has been gradually reduced i since early 1978, to allow for a controlled increase in groundwater l elevation within the plant area as the building construction and backfill i proceeds. The pumping rate of the perimeter system was 600 gal / min in l l l 2.5.4-63 1 2

February, 1979. The groundwater elevation increased during 1978 at a typical rate of 4 ft per month within the E layer due to this reduction in pumping rate. The piezometric level in the C layer has only increased by.a nominal amount (i.e. less than 10 ft) during the same time period. 2.5.4.6.5 Permeability Determinations: The design of the Dewatering System for construction was primarily based on a series of three pumping tests performed at the plant site. Three additional pump tests, two in the shallow aquifer and one in the deep aquifer, were conducted in wells located 1 to 3 miles from the plant site. The properties of the upper section of the shallow aquifer zone were determined by a pump test run in layers B and C. The lower section of the shallow aquifer zone consists of three separate layers (E G, and H) at the plant site. Two pump tests, one short term (5 days) and one long term (12 days), were performed to determine the properties of this lower section. i Both of these tests were run in layer E, and the hydraulic properties of layers G and H were considered to be essentially the same as those of layer E. The estimate of similarity between layers E, G, and H was based on a comparison of grain size, density, fabric, and piezometric response during i the long-term pump test. On the basis of the pump test results, the permeability, transmissibility, and storage coef ficients of the two sections that constitute the shallow aquifer zone were computed. A summary of the aquifer characteristics is given in Table 2.5.4-33. The results of laboratory permeability tests on the structural backfill materials are also included in this table. 2.5.4.6.6 Groundwater History: The groundwater elevations in the general plant area within the shallow aquifer zone for the period September 1973 to just before initiation of the plant area Dewatering System in Nove=ber 1975 are shown on Figures 2.5.4-67 through 2.5.4-69. The piezometer locations are shown on Figure 2.5.4-50. The piezometric response within the shallow aquifier zone during devatering operations to December 1980 is depicted on Figures 2.5.4-65, 2.5.4-65A, 2.5.4-66, and 2.5.4-66A. The groundwater in the lower portion of the shallow aquifer is expected to return to its normal preconstruction elevation at 17 ft as controlled by the ambient piezometric pressure in the E, G, and H layers. The piezometric pressure of the C layer, i.e., the upper zone of the shallow aquifer, will be similar to the pressure of the deeper part of the shallow equifer zone in the immediate vicinity of the plant structures due to the interconnection of the i upper and lower zones by the pervious backfill. However, the pressure is expected to increase in the upper zone to the general ambient elevation near 26 ft MSL at locations beyond 200 ft from the plant structure limits (to be supported by piezometric data obtained after plant backfill and natural recharge). The probable maximum flood (PMF) is described in Section 2.4.3. The postulated maximum runup for which the plant structures are designed varies around the perimeter of structures and is discussed in detail in Section 3.4. The groundwater piezometric pressures will rise to the PMF elevation for a short period of time because of the direct hydraulic communication through the backfill. The increased piezometric pressures will dissipate 2.5.4-64

estimated to be lowered an additional 87 f t below the observed elevations described above, in the period between 1973 and 2020 (see Subsection 2.5.1.2). 2.5.4.6.7 Monitoring of Groundwater Elevations: The piezometric elevations in the plant area were recorded on a weekly basis during con-struction (see Subsection 2.5.4.6.4 above). The regional groundwater conditions in the shallow and deep aquifer zones are being recorded on a monthly frequency. i 2.5.4.6.8 Groundwater Flow: The plant area groundwater flow coincides l with the regional flow as described in Subsection 2.4.13.2.4. The groundwater movements are westward in the deep aquifer and toward the southeast in the shallow aquifer. Figure 2.5.4-70 and -70A show the gradient in the deep aquifier zone at various times between 1951 and 1981. PSAR l Figures 2.4.13-11 and 2.4.13-14 show the preconstruction gradient of the lower and upper shallow aquifier, respectively. The gradient in the deep aquifer zona is approximately 5 f t/mi towards the northwest (January,1981) which is somewhat less than the 6 f t/mi gradient described for earlier periods in Subsection 2.4.13.2. Localized steeper gradients are observed in the vicinity of the plant wells (figure 2.5.C-18), due to construction pumping at rates ranging from 150 gp= to 600 gpm. Normal operational pumpage will be 250 gpm. 2.5.4.7 Response of Soil to Dynamic Loading. The soil properties used in the dynamic analyses of structures and buried pipelines were obtained from dynamic laboratory tests and geophysical field tests. The dynamic laboratory tests are discussed in Subsection 2.5.4.2.6 and the geophysical field tests are discussed in Subsection 2.5.4.4. The results of the soil / structure interaction (SSI) analyses for the Category I structures are presented in Subsection 3.7.2.4, in which the method of analysis, the analysis cross-sections, the dynamic soil properties, and the computer program used in the analysis are described. As also described in Subsection 3.7.2.4, the SSI studies were conducted for vide parametric variations in dynamic shear moduli. The " average" soil properties were defined as described in Subsection 2.5.4.7.1. "Upperbound" soil properties for the SSI studies were defined by increasing values of maximum shear modulus by 50 percent; " lower-bound" soil properties were defined by decreasing values of maximum shear modulus by 40 percent. These large variations in modulus are required to comply with the criteria that the envelope of response spectral values at the foundation levels in the free-field be at least 60 percent of the spectral values at the finished grade level in the free-field. 2.5.4.7.1 Dynamic Soil Design Parameters: The dynamic soil pro-perties were determined from field shear-wave velocity measurements and laboratory cyclic loading tests. The shear-wave measurements were made at 5-f t-depth intervals to a total depth of 305 f t at both Unit 1 and Unit 2. l The procedures are described in Subsection 2.5.4.4. The results of the shear-wave measurements are summarized in Tables 2.5.4-21 and 2.5.4-22 and are shown graphically on Figure 2.5.4-71. The cyclic triaxial tests are 2.5.4-65

of structural backfill of cignificcnce to the baaring capscity cro chsvn en 4 Figures 2.5.4-53, 2.5.4-53a, 2.5.4-54 and 2.5.4-54a. The soil parameters for l these layers were obtained from laboratory test results reported in J Subsection 2.5.4.2 and from field investigatioc data reported in Subsection 2.5.4.3. The soil parameters selected f rom Table 2.5.4-5 and Subsection 2.5.4.2.2 and used in the bearing capacity analyaes and tabulated below for all Category I Structures: Total Stress Ef etive St ss Total Unit Buoyant Unit ht 6b 0 Soil Weight,6 t Weiffth (psf) (deg) (psf) (deg) Layer (1b/

• }

(1b 0 43 Structural 134 72 Backfill Layer B 125 63 1,430 9 1,370 12 Layer D 125 63 1,040 16 940 23 0 41 Layer E 122 65 Layer F 125 63 450 18 360 29 For clayey soils, effective stress parameters were used for determining the bearing capacity during long term, normal service loading conditions, and total stress parameters were used for short term, non-service (extreme environmental) loading conditions. The parameters used are based on the data contained in Subsection 2.5.4.2, and conservatism has been added in the analysis by reducing the cohesion of clayey soils by 20 percent. 2.5.4.10.2.2 Loads - The load co=binations used for the structuralIn the analysis are defined in Section 3.8.1 for all Category I structures. geotechnical analyses, the bearing capacity for normal service conditions was based on dead plus live load. The bearing capacity analysis for non-service conditions was based on dead plus live load in combination with the seis=ic loads (SSE) of the extreme environmental case. The bearing capacities were also checked for other extreme loading conditions, such as tornado loading however, these were found to be less severe loading conditions. The groundwater level was conservatively assumed near the ground surface for the bearing capacity analyses performed using the above defined soil parameters. 2.5.4.10.2.3 Analysis - The ultimate bearing capacity of the mat foundations was computed by the method proposed by Meyerhof (Ref. 2.5.4-29). The level of the Fuel Handling Building was computed by Terzaghi's method (Ref. 2.5.4-59). Safety factors against bearing-capacity failure are tabulated hereunder: Factors of Safety Structure Normal Non Service Condition Service Condition Reactor Containment Building 17.4 3.7 2.5.4-89

Fuel-Handling Building Lower Level 16.8 5.1 Middle Level 9.1 3.5 Upper Level 31.3 12.7 Auxiliary Building 13.9 5.7 Diesel + Generator Building 14.4 5.0 Condensate Tank 18.9 8.1 Essential Cooling Pond intake Structure 4.6 2.3 Discharge Structure 13.5 10.6 2.5.4.10.3 Settlement Analysit: The settlement analysis performed during the design phase of the plant is addressed in this subsection. Geo-technical parameters identified herein are those applied in the precon-struction analysis. An extensive monitoring system has been implemented ,,during construction. An evaluation of monitoring data in consideration of the actual construction load application rate and conditions is being made to verify the parameters, settlement model, and predictions of the future behavior of the plant structures. The monitoring program, data evaluation, and updated predictions are presented in Appendix 2.5.C. The structures are affected both by short-term elastic deformation and long-term consolidation settlement. The in situ granular soils as well as the structural backfill will undergo only short-term deformation, and the cohesive soils will undergo both short-term and long-term deformations. The short-ter= deformations have been considered in determining the sub-grade reaction coefficients for design of mat foundations and allowable bearing pressures of spread footings. The long-term consolidation settlement affects the total deformation of the mat foundations, differential movements between individual spread footings, and piping between adjacent structures. The consolidation settlement is caused by foundation loads that develop pore pressures exceeding the original hydrostatic pressures in the co=- pressible fine-grained soils. As pore pressure gradients force water from a compressible soil, its volume decreases, causing settlement. The time required for consolidation settlement is dependent on the permeability of the compressible strata and the length of the drainage path. The settlement analysis considered the type and sequence of loading on the foundation soil during and af ter construction. Heave and settlement will result from three conditions imposed on the site by the sequence of construction. These conditions are: o Changes in groundwater levels due to groundwater control e Removal of load caused by excavation 2.5.4-90

SU MR I l ultimate passive pressure exceed the structural design limits, and the design passive pressure values assume a frictionless wall (according to the Rankine thecry). Neglecting wall friction and using an effective angle of internal I friction of 41 degrees, the computed passive pressure coefficient, K, is p 4.8 for the compacted structural backfill. As in the case of active and i at-rest pressures, passive pressure of cohesionless soil assumes a triangular distribution. 2.5.4.10.5.4 Surcharte Pressure - Pressures in addition to those exerted by the retained soil act against the building walls as a result of external loadings from adjacent facilities at higher elevations. These loadings can be represented by either large-area, small-area, or line-load sources. Borizontal pressure resulting from large-area loads situated adjacent to rigid nonyielding retaining structures is considered to be uniform pressure equal to 0.35 times the vertical pressure for compacted sand backfill and 0.60 times the vertical pressure for compacted clay backfill. A 2 uniform area-vide surcharge load of 200 lb/f t has been applied to all walls in addition to the specific, defined loads from builefugs or other j facilities. Analyses have been made of the lateral pressures resulting from small-ares and line-load sources according to elastic theory and compared with concepts l first presented by Terzaghi (Ref. 2.5.4-48) and later summarized in NAVFAC DM-7 (Ref. 2. 5.4-54). The elastic analyses were performed using the H-SPACE computer program developed by Lysmer (Ref. 2.5.4-27) and checked with closed-form elastic solutians presented by Poulos and Davis (Ref. 2.5.4-34). Horizontal stresses computed by elastic analyses were increased by a factor of two in order to' account for rigid retaining structures. 2.5.4.11 Design Criteria. The criteria for selection of design parameters and the various design methods are based upon established geotechnical engineering procedures and have been discussed in the relevant i i sections. The computed factors of safety, assumptions, and/or conservatisms l in each an'alysis are also addressed. Design criteria have been established for long-term settlement, differential settlement, and tilting of i structurer. These criteria are discussed herein. The settlement analysis conducted to provide a basis for the criteria is described in Subsection 2.5.4.10.3. The monitoring program used to ensure that the design criteria are not exceeded is defined in Subsection 2.5.4.13 and discussed in Appendix 2.5.C. To assure that differential settlement or tilt will not cause overstress of seismic Category I structures and/or piping systems, the following design criteria were established: 1. One-inch differentf al settlement between adjacent structures, except one and one-half inch for the non safety-related piping systems between the Isolation Valves Cubicle and the Turbine Generator Building (TCB). 2. One and one-half inch dif ferential settlement applied over 50 ft of j piping between a structure and the adjacent ground e 2.5.4-103 9 ~ --+a=- e, e,0-m .---m-v--m------~m-- - - - * - - - - - --e--.-e-me, m - m -w mw -m--w-e-v~nwn v ue,\\

e. l I \\ Tilt across individual Category I structures as follows: 3. ) Containment Building - 0.5-in. tilt across the Containment mat a. along any axis in the Mechanical-Electrical Auxiliaries Building - 1.0-in. tilt l b. east-west direction and 0.5-in. tilt in the north-south direction. The allowable movements before final pipe connections may exceed l I these criteria by 50%. Fuel-Handling Building - 0.5-in. tilt in the east-west direction l c. and 1.0-in. tilt in the north-south direction d. Diesel-Generator Building - 0.5-in. tilt in both the east-west and north-south directions Condensate Storage Tank - 0.75-in. tilt across the foundation mat e. En0rgency Cooling Water Intake and Discharge Structures - 0.75-f. in, tilt across the foundation mat in both the east-west and north-south directions for each structure The above dif ferential settlement criter'ia are applied to Category I piping l systems at the time of penetration connection sr final pipe installation; temporary movements prior to pipe connections will have no ef fect on piping The piping system is installed such that there are no induced design. stresses in the piping due to previously occurring differential settlement. Therefore, the dif ferential settlements as they apply to the above criteria are zero at the time of final piping installation and connection. Settlement records were reviewed prior to final connection of Category I Results of these piping to confirm predictions of residual settlement. The NRC studies and monitoring observations are presented in Appendix 2.5.C. will be advised should the dif ferential settlement values approach the settlement design criteria limits during the life of the plant. Following installation of the Category I piping system, any settlement of buildings and piping supports will be gradual and at an ever-decreasing the maximum design movement was to be approached rate. In the event that lifetime, there would be ample time to take corrective during the plant action, such as adjustment of piping and equipment suppor ts. The piping systems and piping supports are designed to allow for such adjustment. Regional subsidence is expected to affect the STP site; however, such The maximum subsidence will develop slowly and uniformly over a wide area. 2.5.1.2.9.6.3.2) regional subsidence of 3 f t is calculated (see Subsection based upon an assumed additional regional groundwater drawdown of 87 f t (approximate El.110 f t MSL). Tilting effects due to regional subsidence have also been evaluated and the maximum calculated values are well unde those established above for design. for. the site was based on the The maximum expected horizontal ground movement The horizontal strain conservatively assumed vertical ground movement. Horizontal strain and produced by the ground movement is negligible. 2.6.1.1.6.6.7.2. Because movement at the site are discussed in Subsection 2.5.4-104

t ? I the resulting structural stresses would be insignificant when compared with thermal and seismic stresses, no design limits have been established for horizontal movement. [ r 1 \\ + t I t i i i 1 t i t 1 i T r t 1 i F b I i 1 2.5.4-104a ..,__..~,,,,.c

TC E E M I J T O S C 3 A.5 r a e i~ O-1 I' _O I' ase e e g R2 V 5 s e. oos o 8

• 4o

,3 e eO. P L nU g.?eif U

• 5 :.

stsr s t 4 u aa a gh R vva v S v l E 5 i va A L t 2 aa t l E cc ca Y

usc, S

n m s X T C e t A t(t( EI n u u n e L eI tt, TN I, r el si E F G e e s, U M ss s H D 'f IM N UUse,, Ug T 2 s 9 I rf r E i py,,- S oofo U I o o P s ',.fp N G aM O g I tft S D nus( S o0e

e5t, A

c E 7 7 R aeee 9 ttig Iilg e Mttt( M a s s. R nee. T E oroo i E tttg G ttti j E e e a i 6 M L PPPp 7 2 + 9 = 0 I e E P s i 3 2 s o 0 o o o o 0 o 0 0 e , 0 o 8 2 3 d S 6 F 8 9 r s - - 8 B e0 F . [b 8d yg,yoNtaR nL ss 8 / 8 ls/ E eP 7 3 1 ia: 5 t / D3Jg1) 'a, - e c~ o_ I' ,0 I' / tc g n l S e m a s n n / O o 0a i i< C p, a E* f,.-} o,o 7 i D 0 f S"Ds s 2 c I H lp i Wl]m 19 E t Po E' R e i T e F D R fa t 2 uO t 9 E a r Y D t f 0e ., h C T" . O a A E S S a r . H st R T S ll L R s S s t E (A " ! 1 e n oo a a l T ~ 2 E T q u u s f S an E !f N u M Co M l Ift H F d I 8 t t D n h f 0 E i i ( W S S U s 9e f S Y Y t 3 2 i G M S S o4 E Ol2 i M I T G o PI N E F S S~ H~ D S 8 g 42 A l e 8 7 S f R 6s Y e t e fc t 7 l E t E - o 9 d R o a7 k8 n oms 0 i6T 4 i n 5a lu/ m/ u/ 2 c N d 2 2 i r i e C p t4 f t I t I O8 ts t/ O# R I t2 t oe Ul w_a / se a L a eps ut M i e ae r rn CD CeDD m sa ( i = R Di D 7 = W Ro tn t t t t 6 LD D o E v r r IE 2F

a. a a a 9

e D 0tL 2 S te oN om 1 I t t t t e E E s t s r et I' ao s ( I T ea IR tS c t c M P 0 m e e tf t m e f e ?* t s s f s h Es es s' E i P a L a U* f ao 3 2 s o o 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 0 t 2 3 4s , 0 o s 2 3 4 5 6 F. 8 9 8 8 dW U d,_t uE **bNW n - - a I' G, 3>3 In g ~ e~C o t 'd.~ i ~ o_ s - e O _3 Jg a - g a e n 71?a=V y g-

• 9 ' $ *,? *;J.,0o 5
• zygm _a o eo" e

d m: R R h E 9 E 9 Y 7 Y r a b,M f8 H A 9 A g L e g U t l j C e n IN f8l] I e N r r 1ld G S 9 r G e S i N N I -{d I D D A A F E , s r P R 7 a 7 ,'a s R s 9 C I e C e f R NL I R T T E E M f. M 6 0 s 0 r r 9 [i 2 9 2 n E i p I .' j' a E s Ihi P l P I s i I r f:l , o o 3 t s o 9 o 0 0 o Myo o 0 o, O o c 0 0 o, o, 0 ja3 [$'as j s. og a.3Nw a - 9 I s. 2 3 d 3 2 3 4 S G .7 s 4 5 gi g w,," o a w3 E

• E a

m s-U I w 9 f g C3 Af ii,d Ile lUl o l -[ w 'l i l@lh g E8El E = s N CEC g [1 l4: Q-e 4 tJ 335 hotadatawC3 uCJ e i.I "

• N a

auou M M l w C =R " c' un e = w. J -z g 3 .t.i.l.l z o g 00oo PJ z-EE T E k .5 E.*I wa aaes Y C 5 E Z I "W W O Q 2 w WTTT O -s &6 ** N e .} W i e a, (. g R2 %88?8888 cfI g g 3 g3 ,s n ua3,3 oe. 23 d I _l *J l0}w 93AT19G El I l E lUl o l 8* 83 es ~ I. I lid 33% NCIAT%i4%C3 WCJ E o wI* +PT1 w = < B a.8 e 3 d44 = I :i a 2 a

-25 w

i z a 3 : ja O w ^ ~ 3 '. Eg$ 2 I b E

j ga e

o aj..,. c m c d w I %', f a; 3 E c C O S ws.I! *a e' ' 5

• 4 z

O = % N O-

• e S ;

z g o 3g f sl e -s ,a W3 3% s e c c5 00 5 e -a w ) I I'I b 4,3 (of 2 2e ,o -e w f i l? s E O_ $ 3 see 2-a ao 2 E --3 ', C-O l L '. z ggso -[p "gg g g* o5 ,wm 8 8' -' a * ** n u - o e o o

o. o e o o o o

- s n e o ~ 13n '15-I373 Oitf13nCZ3td ~ ' m3n'ia!3j I l c lol ol -{ - lolJ e>vi9:cs!El 2 l c lul o i '.-] .: laI.'lxj w m "Std 335=0tv% ANc3u0s tes 335 noiav%i A=CO aCs w y a f I o E --F==., 2 ~= 2 "2 = v-o, O, W z 9 e g-E e- .c. c; e-w w 2 2o O -k U ) 9 E i". w 6 G-o- C t- - k.gggggp6g I =m ggo pgg ggyo kkgo gg o ...f f 13n le A313 Ole 13nCZ3id 'TS n '1J-^313 Die 13n0:3id I

.I.I 5 5

• U M i,t W

I 3330 O 00"" gN g 3 4 ~~~~ es a m3*v7 9 es !4- # t = 10 8 o Iw j (rl

• e.

e., ns =e.4. =.4 e s.e, 15gg g. y.c 3g*l g 88Bb EI e Ih-z" y e i SS*f M 2 M =~ c m r v -- V_ 9 ~8.5..!. ~8 'i g o w rew= 4 66Lb jjij m 1_3 o 4+33 E. m w i i' 8 t e~-_ w c. RE2 2 2RyESe3S 2. 7Sn 1s $n3 3eJ3n323 J ' ' 8 E U' ck2 2 3g g g! w34v, es Li !e iv i e 6 m i 5 45 I 's 3 3 5 hCi Avq='. 3 o c _- o g @. $ b 3 r 2 s = 3 E y o "o C, g n e a. a 3 g3 ,m_ m e {3 Q08 3 s A I -r $ g g,,* t er I s e a e z

• e 1".

[ 7 E. 6 *a .G a =

• y' e r.. y r-n g-it a. e.

~6 5 'c. 2 E' ~2 * { E Pw3 d ' 3 is m 2 u 5 E 2 4 [' E E EsECI55 e $0 -E *o s 1 a C e. g g a -E E t u [Esis_ s =a -y = c f @ r!~!I~lli $ EE ~*'ed aEea eeg;gsess 73w ~43-A313 3re13n323f e u14v1 1105 li i I e lvi i j o ! k w g-c u m %c u = un. c mc; 5 a a ly ( k t M-W c; a 3 E T EEK -l': El Q u E' 3t! + = -w u E M m E ^1 e

g. *:-

i = E V$ i.= aGlj y g -7 7 5 w h i'*i E w ji 0 y @ 3 'Y'! N E gg I I y E *{'"6 i f o 4 4 4. ? U Y Y Yl ~$4 E "

• 1 i

c enxu 2???8288 A2S

• 1Sn 18 33'3 3't 13nO73'd

>U M I* e34,17 esT 2 l e I o f a l- ..l kl E {l85 = 88 W~; g e:g .a sis ns woiami4%:s ecs Q !. !.v] v] v c g ~ .xg N] 1 ~ z w. ~~~~ -z e _r ...e 3 181 x [ B o.. 5 m o r, z y oo 6

• 8..

E 5.. a*I w m aaae Ol 5 p 55 m E E see(( ZII j w ~ s:I = - t 2 wl aaa o C N C w r c E ii ts RR9* 9 22 ?. S. S. 2 S. S. C O, Es p5 '1 S n w A373 Dis 136023td

A eO w e.

g b [5 e3 Avl lle$. lE f4j o f ' ' d 'w'e I~. ES 3~ e w in eu ~ u.c2 se. e o a: s-

e M

!N O

• a.!

=a t i ;n gii j g +! d : x E Y e e w .a

• s IE 85 w

e "IY

• ~

2 w m Y Ab.. ol' U_*' s g s N $ " 5,..I w N sr g g o -= 4 o U"4 . e W 4 g en U = W 2 i; g 2 5 e, = e z, g g s'3=,g ; { o z q.. o z

rg.t.

m-8* 8 8,= s_s.. e m g d 3 sg O. 'a M.o -e -8 t = s.g e.k. Oo O 8

• d'
• C rr G

N .g2

s. e.

s w w =.g w c e r :3 u o ;9 o e = c 2.= E. 3 z6 . e ,mm "~ * * *

• a2 o e22e gSegg 1s n ie43,3 Oie1 Maid ' '

m3*vi 9_cs!Tr 2le I dI o F ;%:. :l w an =eu m.i=co=, 5>< =f u ~ _Z N-1 6< Y 9m C .-w 2 2 o w. w { ,5 E y R2

• 9 2. R. ?. R. S. 2 E. F.

l S n 13 'A313 Ole 13n023id

5 7 T "LO C L E 5 L L L J t E E R O u W W t t E L = a R2 0 N O O B S m. O T T M P C 2 E I B a a. D T T C S / 7 i 5 I f r E N N E A f t 0 S RVl l e T 0 u 7 Y 0 A E E D .sE X S f c C C N t a r s B A A E 9 F 7 E ET e i A I P p J J E A TN l e r 9 8 S 1 t ra M p s. T D 0 W ,5 Y eZ - t t 0 t 2S .A A s U o s4 8 0L T .R 9 U 4 N A D D E .E H o r I O T O g A S VE E S e o T 5 S P-T '2 m J W R T T s E U s E EE A A E T O e a p. .E T C C V S V C6 S A L I E. lo EINO O I l T oO .w L# L L e P A o s E o *.n s L P. A R S S R. .P

• , g~

Z luP I a0 4 S PeZe iL E LT 0 t i 0s.oeE I 3 EN me W e 6 S E s J5 VO T. I O ,a E Au L*F S LC* " S t t O S L R R WJ A R C T Z H S E E ET E .E, s S MT T SOTS T g 8 A P T E* M EN E E S_ E s sE s s A e eH t sT e e eE0 0 L 0E 0 T 0 /, E Z EZ Z LsZR Z R E T EF E E Wi,EE, W P p E T, e0 O MS M PI s M S G e Z ) l ) ) 1 . 5 4. u s 1 97 u 9t. l yJ 9 e 2 MA = J Z05 ~ ~ V m.g g 5 i D 0 s 6 Z2 g E4 i A i EP-N'/0 P T 'f I S 6 92 T y 6 Z4 N A 0 M E4 L 4 S .E PP e P p S [g" [ 0 T LE s TET NT' 4,

i. EE C VI F

S v 8 1 t , a E 6 9 S Re LP eZ 9 I T DCS s 8 Z s'. E 1, 0 s V.6, ,hyES 6 W NN 8 T'". 4 8 I A OTTA O I '(~J ZE DE es s N cE E a P-EM N T

• I S

A Qg /[4 LiZ ,J AZO S P GN i BEZ 5 l I Y a 3 O 0 EPR .Em,Z-2 R s j# Z1 RFE Z_ 4 A F E4 AOl D u ,E P 0 ,f E N E I STc U E'P - T G NA Ne E S 9 S OsP 6 /'n 2sT tE 0 A EE 0 E N ERD T o I ZeA RU f s S .E EP gE = SE L S LAH s Z, 4 R W

M 0

[/,'M.T E3 P LET A 4 F f- /t O i E q T O N ll, lll l

l

llj;l(e jil

I b. Responsiveness, i.e., that the observed movements correlate positively with known stress changes and that the movements are in the expected direction. c. Representativeness, i.e., assessment of the mass of soil represented by the instrument and the correlation of the observed movement to this defined mass. Parametric studies are conducted by deriving the constrained modulus of elasticity from the construction stress changes together with the deformat ions of individual layers as obtained from the instruments or sets 4 of measurement points that demonstrate satisfactory reliability and validity (see Subsection 2.5.C.4.4.3). 2.5.C.4.4.1 Reliability Evaluation: Criteria were established for the overall accuracy of the observations at the outset of the monitoring program.' The accuracy of the individual observations may be influenced by the precision in instruments and measurements and by errors in surveying, instruments, observations, recordings, and data processing. The objectives for Sondex and BHP instrument observations were that 90 percent of all data points should be within 20.01 f t of the "true" value and 98 percent of all data points should be within t0.02 f t of the "true" value. The "true" value was defined as a value coinciding with a smoothed curve fitted to a continuous series of observations, as shown on Figure 2.5.C-5. It was found that the reliability criteria generally were satisfied for Unit 1 (January 1978) as 88 percent of the points were found within 0.01 ft and 98 percent within 0.02 lt as determined from evaluation of an arbitrarily determined set of observations. In February 1981, 98 percent of the points were found within 20.02 f t of the smoothed curves and 67 percent were found within 20.01 f t. The slightly increased scatter in the data points was principally contributed to the increasingly dif ficult survey conditions as the plant construction proceeded. The actually implemented monitoring schedule provided observations at one or two weeks intervals. The absolute number of reliable observations therefore exceeds significantly the requirements of Table 2.5.C-1. All deviations appeared to be random, and no systematic errors in accuracy of the measurements were detected. 2.5.C.4.4.2 Validity Evaluation: Valid comparisons of the behavior of different observation points, for assessment of how reasonable the observations were, can be made based on the anticipated settlement movements, since soil conditions are essentially the same at all instrument installations. This argument is also satisfactory for the heave cycle, considering that the dif ference in time to reach a given excavati'on depth between two instrument locations was typically 20 days or less, and considering that subsequent to reaching final excavation depth, 70 to 100 days elapsed before any significant new load was applied. A more stringent assessment of the time dependence of deformations was applied in the representativeness studies described below. The analysis proceeded with systematic comparisons of the behavior of BRP to BHP, Sondex to Sondex, and BHP to Sondex. First, only one Sondex ring located near the excavation bottom was used, and vertical movement profiles 2.5.C-6

. -q that is, heave and recompression of heave. The third regime, net settlement, is being approached and the model will be confirmed as the construction work proceeds. The results of the construction phase settlement analysis described herein' are further addressed in Section 2.5.C.4.5 below. Prediction curves for the behavior at the foundation elevations are shown on Figure 2.5.C-9 superimposed on the actual observations. 2.'5.C.4.5 Predicted and Actual Movement. l 2.5.C.4.5.1 Unit 1 Area: The actual movements for the Reactor Containment, Fuel Handling, Mechanical-Electrical Auxiliaries, and Diesel-Generator Buildings are shown on Figure 2.5.C-9. These curves have been tsken directly from Sondex, BHP, and Structural Bench Mark j i observations at points near the foundation elevations for the buildings, as noted on the figure. Predicted movement curves based on the settlement model, boundary conditions, and compressibility parameters derived from the geotechnical monitoring data as described in subsection 2.5.C.4.4.3, above, have been superimposed on the observed movement curves for each I building. These predicted movement curves are based on the settlement j model established for actual construction loads to April 1978 and will be [ updated and extended as the construction work proceeds. The predicted movement curves show a reassurable agreement with the actually observed magnitudes of heave and recompression. The overall rate of recompression is considered the most important parameter. The actual average rate of recompression is 0.38 in. per 100 days and the predicted rate is 0.42 in. per 100 days after mid-1977. This variation corresponds to a difference on the order of 0.1 in, between August 10,1977 (day 700), i and April 1978 (day 934), which is well within the accuracy of measurements and analysis. 2.5.C.4.5.2 Unit 2 Area: The actual movements for the Reactor Containment, Fuel Handling, Mechanical-Electrical Auxiliaries, and Diesel-Generator Buildings are shown on Figure 2.5.C-10. These curves have been obtained directly form Sondex, BHP, and Structural Bench ' Mark l observations at points near the foundation elevations for the buildings as noted on the figure. Predicted movement curves will be provided for the Unit 2 building areas upon completion of monitoring data evaluation and updated settlement analysis based on actual construction load applications. The only l significant difference between the Unit 1 observations (Figure 2.5.C-9) and the Unit 2 observations (Figure 2.5.C-10) occurred in the period April 1976 through February 1977. The excavation for Unit 2 was left open during this period to evaluation -15 f t in the area of Category I structures. The excsvation to elevation -40 f t for the Containment and Fuel Handling Building was subsequently conducted in February 1977 (see Section 2.5.4.5.3). l 2.5.C-10

~ r..-- 2.5.C.4.6 Conclusions.

2. 5. C. 4. 6.1 Behavior of Foundation Soils and Structures: The current geotechnical instrumentation data show that the foundations soils in the plant area did heave and recompress in good agreement with the predictions.

The predictions have been updated during the construction period to reflect actual load history, as shown on Figure 2.5.C-9, for Unit 1. The response to the load changes was rapid, and only a minor fraction of the total movement attributed to the discrete construction events remained after about two months after the load change. The movements were deep-seated, with two-thirds of the deformations typically occurring below the upper aquifer zone (i.e., below the J layer), which is 200 f t or more below the ground surface and the settlement analysis model as described in Section 2.5.C.4.4.3 includes the stratification to 1720 ft depth. As a result of the comparatively deep location of deformations, very little differential movement has been observed between the buildings during the construction period of Units 1 and 2 (i.e., as of December 1980), as shown on Figures 2.5.C-11 and 2.5.C-12, respectively. ) 2.5.C.4.6.2 Predictions of Dif ferential Movements During Plant Operation: The design criteria for differential settlement affseting piping systems are defined in Section 2.5.4.11 and are applicable af ter the actual pipe connections between the buildings have been made. The pipe connections between the buildings have not been made. However, it is ~ concluded that, basea on the very small ditterential movements observed during construction, the future differential movements will be nominal in l comparison to the design criteria. Data shown on Figure 2.5.C-11 demonstrates that very little differential settlement has occurred between the buildings since the adjacent portions of the foundations were constructed. The observed dif ferential movements within buildings for Unit 1 are shown on Figures 2.5.C-13a and 2.5.C-13B; Unit 2 snd Figures 2.5.C-14 and 2.5.C-14a. It is again concluded that the future differential movements will be nominal in comparison to the design criteria contained in Section 2.5.4.11, for dif ferential settlement between buildings and adjacent ground. 2.5.C-11

STP FSAR at 6-month intervair (October and April), construction conditions permitting. Figures 2.5.C-23 and 2.5.C-24 show the combined movements for regional horizontal strain and near-surface subsidence monuments. The ( - recorded movements are within the criteria for accuracy of the measurements (1:10,000) except between monuments G and J where a difference of -0.134 f t l. was observed over a distance of 740 f t on June, 81978 (See Table 2.5.C-3A). This anomaly has subsequently fully recovered and is being attributed to a survey inaccuracy. The overall evaluation is that the recorded differences in distance between the survey occasions appears to be I random and no trends can be discerned. j 2.5.C.5.5.4 Regional Shallow Aquifer Monitoring: Locations of the piezometers are shown on Figure 2.5.C-18. The piezometers located in the shallow aquifer zone are identified in Table 2.5.C-2. Time history plots of shallow aquifer groundwater fluctuations commencing in 1973 are provid i on Figures 2.5.C-20 and 2.5.C-20A for the upper zone, and on Figures l 2.5.C-21 and 2.5.C-21A for the lower zone. As can be seen, there is no evidence of sustained regional groundwater table lowering during the preconstruction and construction monitoring periods. The decline in the lower zone of the shallow aquifer starting in November 1975 was caused by plant construction dewatering, and a corresponding recovers has occurred since the dewatering pumping rate has been gradually reduced beginning in early 1978 (see Section 2.5.4.6.4). 2.5.C.5.5.5 Regional Deep Aquifer Monitoring: Locations of the piezometers are shown on Figure 2.5.C-18. The piezometers located in the i deep aquifer zone are identified in Table 2.5.C-2. Provided on Figures 2.5.C-22 and 2.5.C-22A are time-history plots of deep aquifer groundwater l fluctuations commencing in January 1975, which show that during the rice irrigation season the piezametric level is lowered, particularly at the northern site boundary. The piezometric level increases again during the winter non-growing season. The decline of piezameter No. 604 during the beginning of 1976 was caused by start of pumping in the adjacent deep well used for plant construction purposes. Similarly, piezometer No. 613 and to some extent No. 614 are affected by deep well pumping for construction purposes. This localized drawdown is temporary and will partially recover when the construction withdrawal is reduced to the quantity for normal plant operation. The construction dewatering system is described in Subsection 2.5.C.6.1.2. The groundwater conditions are also further described in Subsection 2.4.13.2.3. 2.5.C.5.6 Conclusions. The regional shallow aquifer monitoring demonstrates that piezometric levels within the shallow aquifer zone have remained near their 1973 ambient levels outside the area of influence fren i e construction dewatering. This substantiates the PSAR conclusion that this aquifer zone is little used. The construction dewatering effects in the plant area on this aquifer zone are addressed in Subsection 2.5.4.6. ] There have not been any significant regional changes in the groundwater conditions of the deep aquifer during the monitoring period of 1973 through January 1981. The relative decline varies between the irrigation pumping and non-pumping seasons. The average yearly decline is about 1.8 ft per f 2.5.C-14b .._,,._..,--____,.,_m,

TABLE 2.5.C-3B REGIONAL HORIZONTAL STRAIN MONITORING DATA Between Initial Distance (f t) Monitored on 4-4-79 Monitored on 10/11/79 Monuments Monitored on 3-30-76 Distance (f t) Distance Change (f t)# Distance (ft) ' Distance Change (f t)# B-C 1,457.749 1,457.729 -0.020 1,457.705 -0.044 C-J 741.098 741.091 -0.007 741.116 0.018 J-L 1,120.640 1,120.65 0.010 1,120.622 -0.018 E-C 1,921.247 1,921.206 -0.041 1,921.187 -0.060 C-F 977.849 977.826 -0.023 '977.830 -0.019 F-H 1,431.962 1,431.923 -0.039 1,431.923 -0.039 { b ? M-B 832.907 832.908 0.001 832.892 -0.015 0 h M-C 2,290.519 2,290.638 0.119 2,290.597 0.078 Distance changes are relative to the initial distance determined either on Narch 30, 1976 or June 8,1978. a by ,'M" was installed in April,1978 as a backup for "R"; Initial distances between "M" and "B", and "M" g and "G" were monitored on June 8,1978. Note: For locations of the horizontal near surface monuments, see Figure 2.5.C-1. e -e, --r-w .-v,- ,--y-4

TABLE 2.5.C-3B (Continued) REGIONAL HORIZONTAL STRAIN HONITORING DATA Between Initini Distance (f t) Moni tored on 4-23-80 Monitored on 10-21-80 Monuments Monitored on 3-30-76 Distance (ft) Distance change (f t)" Distance (ft) Distanec Change (f t)* B-G 1,457.749 1.457.722 -0.027 1.457.759 0.010 G-J 741.098 741.079 -0.0 91 741.077 -0.021 J-L 1.120.640 1,120.641 0.001 1,120.635 -0.005 E-C 1,921.247 1.921.194 -0.053 1,921.145 -0.102 C-F 977.849 977.854 0.005 977.866 0.017 F-H 1,431.962 1,431.919 -0.043 1.431.937 -0.025 I b ? M-B 832.907 832.900 -0.007 832.887 -0.020 b M-G 2.290.519 2.290.621 0.102' 2,290.646 0.127 " Distance changen are relative to the initial distance determined either on March 30, 1976 or June 8,1978, bMonument "M" was installed in April,1978 an a backup for ' P"; Initini distances between "M" and "B", and "M" and "C" were monitored on June 8,1978. Note: For locationin of the horizontal near surface monuments, see Figure 2.5.C-1. I a

4 TARI,E 2.5.C-3B (Continued) i l REGIONAL HORIZONTAL STRAIN MONITORING DATA Between Initial Distance (f t) Mon f tored on'4-16-R1 Monuments Monitored on 3-30-76 Distance (f t) Distance Change (ft)" e B-C 1,457.749 1,457.698 -0.05l C-J 741.098 741.066 -0.032 J-L 1,120.640 1,120.638 -0.002 E-C 1,921.247 1,921.111 -0.136 C-F 977.849 977.854 0.005 w F-H 1,431.962 1,431.928 -0.034 'w b

• n M-B 832.907 832.866

-0.041 h M-C 2,290.519 2,290.564 0.045 " Distance changes are relative to the initial distance determined either on March 30, 1976 or June 8, 1978. bMonument "M" was installed in April.1978 as a backup for "B"; Initial distances between "M" and "B", and "M" and "G" were monitored on June 8, 1978. Note: For locations of the horizontal near surface monuments, see Figure 2.5.C-1. e

>v 5t W nW O ay I g-i E ".e iV i 44 .a o

• e

-r eye ~ Xw l w-gg 8w w 5 g 3._ g rj -2 g, g :n lg s l )l; t I I' r =_4 l .)___ t g [ 5 m W.. s E _r e T li i g a Y 'I-r.' x 3 a a i 1 i I t 3; E, i -t I b m j b '--~'~f l f{~ [~ =- 3 3- =t = nL., r M f 2 t e --m 2-p g Y Y I I I I I I k ! Y i $ I I $ e

• • • =

s.>.=> .n.= e.>.=> m.'n re l I -gr ~ i l ' l 3 j I [i g J r Y 7.gl 3^ I' olof b. b gf p d; er 5 i i i i l i t* a $j! 89 8 s s E I bk E8 "j I" I 'I I n, a j a' u,,, E E ug -t h-y o 5 ut _ 5,._ y j . :;7 .2 .E E=}- .____L fI, fV 8 i EL i , -s'_. E = m; --- -E l g~ gE r S".$h ~ i ! 5 I ---'- $r -,r-f Ea m p _1 e Y ~ y I i y y I I y i YY Y I Y '8' E = = = - ame= e>= e mo,- e mess.es a> muss.n i e

v 5 ar o

y EN 1E~o I

i e fg .a s e w. {~ (g i x_ .s < e- _-z 7:s $,t er 3r l t I I i i 1 m'isi- - g i i e s i,gl I f i t gl I rli 3_ s = i sii"" r a i _- s t x, r s} t ss 5sy r -=_ 6 d

N t

a sh -m T I i l 1__-. _~.

; ; i i i t i

iiii i

i .s, sm. i i I l I A j= -B h lt - r [,

g

<g I u g1 E c I iE =i E g! $*S e r t 1 I e f, F !===f- $g =3 g y{ El:_. _._J-5 lE$ W,' gE-gg 7E v r r. y I 1531?p ! =- - *- u.# "r 't

• 3._4 y

9 --Q, r ri ey ~g

==:;;;u e ii h "I I ; E 8 4 e w a -A e' o$ ~ (- __-_- g - aY I a i

== = t t -*% $_E8> E8 r r tY r* gwg w% .g ,,_=._ i 4 I ,g i i i 4 4 i i y t 4 Y 4 i 4 I i s>= .mm emm. e>= a= > me.ssass n= > m.sv.se

e- ....,,,,,i... .. i o o [_lEW55M@ lH ll ll ~l lll11 I l ~[lill IWI i i I i i= c.; -"- = - - - m.lilll!'E:,, nminmJlllEN!!ll ' o'" I* eerNndp ..bq l flmib V i,,o lin i. !i' ,W _"M n,,:::t.,.::= 1 i i i i dni p liitn o i i 1 l s., I o. il i .l o 3, i,it.! !!h !!H1 1 1 I i ,l N I A H I 11 l l l l i FUEL HANDLING BUILDING MECHANICAL AND ELECTRICAL ISOLATION VALVES CUBICLE VERSUS AUXILIARY BUILDING VERSUS REACTOR CONTAINMENT BUILDING VERSUS REACTDR CONTAINMENT SUILDMG REACTOR CONTAINMENT BUILDING o .,1 =. [lk i; l I l l l !i l ._._.;ll! ,i l -"- 7,'m m=.'a x-f=mwi d{- 3". *."3 " "S""""E""-"'i um I I pIl-f l ? i.m.mn. ....u.i l l, E.l:.".'nf*nm lill I !!I ! di 5 h!1 i ,s.. .,,_.o.., MECHANICAL AND ELECTRICAL Mr.CHANICAL AND ELECTRICAL ISOLATION VALVES CUBICLE l AUXILIARY BUILDING AUXILIARY BUR. DING VERSUS VERSUS VERSUS TUR81NE C-C*fRATAt SUILDMG 1 l FUEL HANDLING BUILDING DIESEL GENERATOR BUILDING ff0TES: l com,not pose,s s 4 ,o ,s ,e , set,=may-e ron toca, ion or anause SOUTH TEXAS PROJECT wan =ces,we.,n. 4. .. 4 -,.-. 4 , ros.,,vt num.cn sota,ts settttww,. UNITS 182 LEGEIEL Dertatwtiat asovtuturs v neonca,rs s,an, or.erraen. at isowerm, consaameos, 3 SETWEEN BUILD.,GS UIST 1 r,eust,5C-1I f

t Q 1 1 io r. nn nreI.on l neo .se. I ner .on I art I are an =eo asi iner 'on att I an an

• eo

=

hbf5h' bf l l i A I M I l I h hd Y 'l l bLlilil ]l i l we.=vs= -i N It ann-""" l i i' l -i ' _, Y hl % a'i o o i I h l IllllllIIllll I 5 M' j j , 6 i.n .o.. : I =,*g*J;" g77' = => ==== a i

c 5

l kk l s : - l l 0 l b I.l I l i i e e i FUEL HANDLING BUILDING MECHANICAL AND ELECTRICAL ISOLATION VALVES CUBICLE VERSUS AUXlLIARY BUILDING VERSUS REACTOR CONTAINMENT BUILDING VERSUS REACTOR CONTAINMENT BUILD 94G i iREaciosi cos T. si.os. rixEo REFERENCEI REACTOR CONTADAENT BLE.DDIG (RE ACTOR CONT. St.00. FIXED REFERENCE) ets ett este sets seco sees mer sets sort sto mTo seco sees seet este sett sete are seco sees seer l q Il i l .i I 5 l l j l 5 I -i==== l g- =..m...,_.a.. y t ',",,",,,,'h"", k

'esecu ~e rtec'aese at'ee iiinn wa#I i=

11 i ' I: j 4 I ! l E I I H li Ed i.- I'- e 'j = : E il t ll a n tRouni' 'i"l E 3,'il u l" i o u' lo ' 'h nih '.L' a i l I MECHANICAL AND ELECTRICAL MECHANICAL AND ELECTRICAL ISOLATION VALVES CUBICLE AUXILIARY BUILD 24G AUXILIARY BULDING VERSUS I VERSUS VERSUS TURBINE GENERATOR SUILDelG { FUEL HANDLING BUILDING DIESEL GENERATOR BUILDING NOT M SOUTH TEXAS PROJECh conneos. pourts ss se et se se so se er es se et se -s ran tocarme or annome e-grauet w.w v cssim,,, t e, -,,.,-e. -a, -si -.o e, e, UNITS I 8 2 z.rositivt muusta sescarts scrittwat LEENil. DFrERENTial MOVEMENTS Y tesoscattS Stadte OF BIFFrettertIAL se0wrestest conspamm SETWEEN OUILDING$ UNIT 2 l FIstet t 9 C-Et

1 i is si 85 so - il ':.*.. 't

• E

-f"la*.....-:".* o' *.,, * .. a, - l *

• l

.,; ; - %, y.. ;-J.?._ :s... a swnynv^vynvav^vnvnvAT w v^vavev gv^vavavave NOTES v-e e set roount a s C-es ron Locafsores or L S-TT assaLT$ss Coesinot PosnTS. $_,y / a x2 7 2. SueSCmrt sounsets suoscafts gustosse 2-re # E 2-Fed g" 3 so-Te A so-rs LtotNo ta,-a l. 3 Coot as S?tonse ses asGuset 2 SC-sS E so-Fe d # -F9 S *" '-'7 - S S rs7 s.ao 7 10-79 T e_ 3. esovrestnf Snowse setntise esoscafts p 7 h ~ Stf TLtest47 oF sNosysoUat assaLYSsS w$ CoNTesol Posesi susCE asaf CoasSinUCTuous. w ~d!so f _.,t2 - 80" THE Total spovenstNT wsLL sesCLUot a s wrowPatsSea or wavt tavtnast l 4 sesCME$1 PLUS a Mc T StTTLEtotisT y T tavanact smCwSt. 4. STeeUCTUssas, etssCMasames af assaLTsss CoNTaot Poest og was sesSfaLLEo SECTION A,-A, SECTION C,-C, ses oCToeta,s,re. REACTOR CONTAINMENT BUILDING . LEGEND _ 85 amaLTSs3 CossfesoL Pous? 2-Te oaTE setaouses wtat fastte M"^$'.__.,i, Tes. s "'S' hvgpv, comb"E-- ' L m7 g m'd"* ' * ~ - ' " ~ o o ex, .-,, s = w so-To, T,-,e x we g 1 s.r,, s - rs,, rs I* 8 st-so - y g sr. 7,._.7 c.sr.co w l 5S S SOUTH TEXAS PROJECT i UNITS I 8 2 1 t ostrtswTeat esovtestmi cuoritt

• • 'es SECTION B,-8, SECTION Cg-C, FUEL HANDLING BUILDING j

neunt r s C-esa i i

e to t. s a e re er ar _ r,ds' - u-oo Y $$'?, o-W' jer aNir a r'r'iN,*r'm1 $ r A ,0 Y v$dY<N, N O r r=,,,,,, ~ var vm C, a' L Ti y, ..y. = $i y e-tr" -703 o-To-5 e-re s y e-re -7 s M rr 4 nr E r 5-so

n. y, _5 s-.o ~

g.y,. e,oy y

e. v gS 3

gS V. ~. i i w.I, S S SECTM A -A, SECTION 8 -9, SECTM F,-F, 3 3 l W e. a s e wt= ' mon esoa ve. Soutes - 'noarr ~~0 T ps-1, h v I" 4 W 2< W W A V . ' <<s v n v e v3 F M 13 m_ne s " o E 'A g Si; M iKf, W A O'Kv h - < ~ - - i ir-rS e-so w x 't y u-ria z-rom e- % y ,_,. ]_ Y'*~ "_ E, y, o-re_.7 A - "' y' No-re o. yy .--.w ,e f ar g '2-so w oo-g 3_,o S 15-y as w w 5 2 m* ya g, f f a S S S SECTION D,-D, SECTM E,-E, SECT M Gg-G, i MECHANICAL & ELECTRICAL AUXILIARY BUILDING DIESEL GENERATOR BUILDING SOUTH TEXAS PROJECT NOTES e. ^- --j ____ ^ ^ ^

s. Foot osof ES AssO LtetMO Stt FleURE 2 SC-IS

.ermsourn sutt se ess *

2. IsovtesENT SHowes estattee IN00 CATES SETTLttstNT oF E ACH INDMDUAL AssALTSrS Cosefftol Posef SasCE RAAT S THE SAtsE POMT M DIFFtRtNT SECTIDets IsAY Spoog Cos0STRUCTsose. THE TOTAL esovtes(NT W%L esCLUDE OFFERENt esovttetNTS Os1 Test SAest DATE.RfCAUSE IA I

THEY Apt est ASURED FNoas DWFtRtNT STARTMG "'8 j RtConspotSSaoM OF ed AVE (AVERAGE S lesCHESt PLUS A Nt T St?TLtestNT tAvtRAGE Pecut$1 oA T t S. neu.t r S C-os I

1 ? l i Al 6, 30 SS EAST .jD JUT NORIN., M NOTES. g v}v1 4WdVA'vAI4vR<h y,,g AV^O^V^g^y ^V ,"g',""'d,'["",[****" I VtNA A s I r SussC8MPT 98Uts Em INDICATES WILOWuo YI i I o-re l e-Ts 7 r-u. o Coot As suouw we resuaE a sC-es V e-re i e_ n, -er-re r-8-*o gr j g y 4.,, Lgette go,.0,L Er g f f

s. POSITIVE esovEastspi SMouse esEREng

$s -/ / i i F 1 INDICATES SETittasENT OF lesDIVIDUAL 3 g AssALYstS COWTROL PONIT SiseCE MAT w 1 d w COstsTitUCTIOes THE TOTAL MOVEWENT g4 >4 WEL IbeCLUDE RECOMPRESSION OF E MEAVE (AVERAoE s INCSEsl PLUS A J s S NET SETTLEnstetT ( AVERAGE leeCMES), e e ECTION M,-M, MCTION O,% 1 J REACTOR CONTAINMENT BUILDING LEGEND 4 es AnALTses Co=Taet remei tr-79 DATE REA0uses tutmE Tasts J en novtwa se 9 as es es so es of m--- _eim - a,, _....., se = .t____ sv 4wn v e , nynve ,sv - v 7,sv-s w a-rm s.n 3 i >-Tr i e.,e -,1.- a -,e T Yr ^

• -n 1

4-n 9 -r-a -t' , - "-no r ) y a-n 5 as 1 a-oo 24 I4 V V "Is { s SOUTH TEXAS PROJECT i o l e UNITS I & 2 7 F j esFFERENTnAL teOVEasENT PesOFILE l f ECTION N,-N, ECTION Og-0, _ i FUEL HANDLING BUILDING-- riOUnE r.s c-44 ( i ,.~,---- _. - --_.._.. -,-.._-_,..-- _ --_.-_ _..- _ __..._.-._.__...- _ .. ~.... -. - - ~

9 i 69 70 78 s, $2 62 74 T[ ",5J. L..... m '.. _. m. i.. g

$'g..;m.,,'ugiid*S nu,fg.g,

',an 1 Q-79 E S-79 8 g-r9 s e 124j = 4-79 58 rm 5' T' s a y gt g2 (NO CONSTRUCTION 82-Rol p ] 3 5 Y. 3 7 4 I a 4 w h h. h S S S I SECTION M,-te, KCTION N,-N, KCTION R i R 7, TS M TS et Se 70 74 S4 SS St ' m .,. m ' "o't?" 8B2) ',...-..-.... m _ '. m

• "O*fM 7' _ _ '

_..-- u- -- t ' m v ^ w"EIMIN, ',., _. !,,gDRIP _ _o r,__m... 'r - TeT V """ v' "a'""' v e e w an'e w' a t a i. To Ti ys y' [ I-U Y s-so '--o-n re-n s t e-so L -.-.o L-en-go 7-n 1 . co,,,,,,cy,,,,,,,,,, ,3 es I W: l l 1 i w .i 3 w. I i a -l l S S S 4 i SECTION P,-P, SECTION Q,-0, KCTION SpS, j l MECHANICAL & ELECTRICAL AUXILIARY BUILDING DIESEL GENERATOR BUILDING EII-SOUTH TEXAS PROJECT

i. ran aof tS Amo trarme See rievac r.SC-se M SI&2

2. IsowEMENT SHOWN 8EREIse.eDICATES SE7YLEMtN, eenmfomat scat a se Fga v j

OF.sDiveUAL ANALYSIS CoseTROL POINT SustE e847 S THE SAlfE POINT lue DIFF ERENT SECTiostS RBAY SHOW ,,,ggg,, gg CostSTRUCT10se. THE TOTAL tsovttsENT WILL INCLUDE OFFERE NT esovrastNTS AT THE SAtsE DATE. IIECAUSC l

1. tcouPRESSlose OF Mt Avt (AvtRAGE 2 leeCHESI PLUS THEY ARE RfE ASU8ef 0 FR088 DIFFERENT START.se 4 esET SE Tf t E nfENT (AVf RAGE Is0CHESI DATES.

j i n.we e S c-e4 A I

g 'i! n.: qi I,,,_ EM %[a t & A .i.. i. ls,lihl2[ [Ik 35 j EA AII,l. idlin h i!hld ,1 idd '? "'C $3]M2 I ,l .u g._ g. I,) AMD4A&M!I!O gI II,, NhMN:l dLhd I,..b3$Qs l' 'I '! "!! . U I .,; 6.Mb... .J.au m.L A h .,JeA.ad h o N puunmhu .. 4$$ likfMl:4 D MdibilMIMki$t hlNMib! 30 WIdiIM M I lo!Il 5h.';" -i. g i.i T. g. i ,.il I~M N l.I,~I1!DWMdl'if lf] 3. MU@r*M U,1 II_ 'M%l l f @id si niinlin lI i kkhll I/ I I Nj ,,ffl fh SD!! NIMl0 'll;fhd ,,__,L. MU4.lWW ik l l m I -i-i ~ T'T WENE.5iM IMl ll]i!M!!iN d!diin l@ g,' _.ii) @ Uf }$ l'5 l.%,,'

' I 4

,1 ~. l s. y I II .U%fhdM ltj 1l, liN2>*W4d ru. :d I,, NyA% 1 l3 N& i j ,,J !!!!Hdldk a!Mi,a $ji ,,_ d i & t h dll m i j H Elf%,. l ,, _ n i, a utiliA$dM b 1h ,a .P d ~~~~}f-1.:, '!M. O: 1 )., l 1. LEGEND !.I, < L .i,. I ? h - id lI,, Si],h!$tt' 4 iNi ) :! Y acnCavES START Or n[oe=At ...n.11 ' SOUTH TEXAS PItOJECT "'5""'""""'"* l t. UNITS I & 2 NOTES SE0000eAL IRAR-SUFACE 1 POSITfWE If0WEMENT SIDICATES SETTLElfE8tT. 2 SEE FIGUftE 2 SC-1 FOR LOCATIOess OF THE NE AR-SUIIFACE IS0sanEENTS 3 SV-E WAS lesACCES$11tLE FftOne JassuAftY 89FF. TO JUNE 19FF 80 4 ts0eamstNT "as" was toesTAlttD M AP9ML,19T8 AS A 8tf PLACEasrNT ANO RActrUP FOR tsO88UtfENT *8", pgggggg g S c.gg S asonsubstNt "ee" wAS MST ALLf D M MAY.19800 AS A IIIPL ACFteF Isi FOR t#Oediast set "I".

'YO Lu i l)l l l ili 'I! I I dI {h )$l O $3 s i i 'e gi; -[ f it EN 2a ? il \\ h ir/ l l 11 ' i :. k E u g r,1! kil k'lill i. i!lli l 1 l '. I' aj( il l m _. i j, p i h ilil! i Em j i

• ii; m

u h li ph, i' i e l. 1 ll @ h ll l[Il k j !IN,Cilill p ili'!j f <! lim itt li e n!I i ,i i u m A it it i ii z :> si E i! ! !!! I,O I'/ I !lI l I l h I l l ll 1,i ni i .i g y ,i an 1 ni i i a t'i'liif/h lill !/ l!!i

• il l

iFYl-ll!lnt " i :p :( 1ll j!: Ij'- i

ll 1, llt IV i!h l' I !i j i I

i i tIMti I El ji i i l l' Elli V lij!!I' it! Il !i il iijji I il 'I: Iiid;I I fli, ft l !

• 1.
• O.!..T, t..;..,..*. *. *..E * * * *
• f TE1i********i

$, ?.!..,. t : ..,...:...........=. !i V:i C-illll11',i 1 11 fl DI Mi!IllI i! U1 si!Illi l il f 's . M ! ' 61? l l lil > l i .!! 1l10 i t !ll ll! lill rl 4;

l. ii l

i

• it: I U b i l l !ii li l!lil!
• lil

( U Il!I6 F!!!!! it; is:/ fl i l lill:ltil'l il i Ull11lUllili l h -l l l ! i e !it i 3 Lijil9;ili'!! 11 i lli ll. j/, ! I il N 11

g E jii,! W ililLij!i

,,1_

i! il kJII Hj lli J.,.!I i.; 5. i !} j Pr i! 1' !;b 1911 vi l l il ! H lii pilIlifj n i'i 3I*h!ll;,1l':ili! li l j ih l, )'; hi l' ll }j{i i lhl! q'! !$ 8 lii ! \\N !! ! I ll ij l.lil !!Illj i; ji ! @i l #in:! N il j5 di lii ! dh l ill fl ! ! Illi i! ! W -2*I 3 * = ; '.t..t,

• 1 1 1 1 t..t a ! a f ' 5 * * * * * *
• 2

3g

• • • • • 9 1ie1

f,si 2

3*ii ?j:f. !' llV. t IlllM Il; } il

11 it NI til il I

}'i i Ir Ta I liti!I i!.

i lt 'l 91 1! il 1 l ~ si

i' !L } uli liwiiil l

t i! I 4 _il u ) isfw!Illte

• 1I v !/

II 'lL ! /li ill3 S ,it i ll fII

j i

l !! / i ti Ilji IllW! si I; I$N l iHI I il il M;. i ili / II ..i. u s: i; ij l. ) ! I. i '- - - I-I i 19 l N \\l ll geeee il I I 1. i li! P 1 Il!! !' t r il Dll! l ll r i ll 1 / E i ir siti l ll i \\l f I !i i i l I sl ) IN J u i 57l l l l it u! IW iWii ,,u...n.,.,.,.,...,-.., , u,.:.m....,....,...

l~ li n i t, b, ii;~e i i' i 'I 'I WE l.! ( l f*j s a I II M l l' i I 1 Eg i I l' i;i l il 1 22233&Af22*****.,t?,,,1,,2 8821tgdasee.*.E.,,.. 7en'.sas.am4=ais animzw 9mmu.m.4ms's as4smarse f I !!Ii I ( I i i Il11l ,i f irull.1/iill' t l ' g;t i llji l% I(I li! 'I i. I t itMd il il 11 l-E g 1 i li t / b lill li:1 11 E. I I !Il .c e $q {a li llhi lH i ',ll i l ltlll 1 !i t i l ll l 1 I tili 1 lu c en o u u u! ti !! n n !!, i muto a 1 Il\\i 4 l(lli I isllil! Il .iilil lil 11 i! ilit j}a ] Il I WM-il Ill l i' !I.t! 'il'Ill i I i i .i i 11,; i i rei sit tin i ni 1 I s,ijj i nisuiin i ll ii: j!q .nieo n u. 4-e,1,,,u,,, ..........;......,a,,4,,, ,D uo,i I iMfi G ( liW t iCa2j i i m ( lu i:

j r gjgll li I

Il g l' u gl \\ l a i! i! Weees 0 Il j E \\ M ll i )1 n1 El i! 1 E h l l I ,1 UJ (i i

• i l

i i h

• i i J M UL i

( c f u'd Pai i M) i! i c ui.n u i.s t m,,,,,,,,,: n ........e......,,,,,,,,, 'Tla *.3 . amamF13 seaumotN 9sn'.33..ussten84 Sus 43nette

4.. b U t.u ll ; hafi . l.llll!!fl l lI l h(f-Il l ll O 83 e u u mm un e. inuu. m an m ,,e t - l lll j i g'.-W:l Iil'!lii! .l ud [ (, $ 'r. t : 1 j !'! ! i plH !f 'n.' !!i. I'!; i j ^ q s .. 4 !) { k !l $11k ~!-l*6!,l! fli X (f) ! il )$ i fk'flt ~!i l 'illl

# !,!be lliil'i /

! {E* l l lii!' } Q lll'l;tijl _ h h,f 8 ij; o it! I 4 UruN/ !! iii t il h ir ll 4 n :' s p u :liliin z E= il li!/ i l 'ljf# ll [jjJ/l!! i ii l l !li gl p d:itIil!!itll (t-inM6Wu i : q. ! 16 it;; in M inihi In g th i"! !jt il T}' i: 1 i i i:iii; if I till Q!.;l i j 1 : ! ! ' i ; >

• 1 ~- i lli iy 'i I

!':lilli

• i.

il/. \\Q8N!!!. i s'! r,';,

.1 i,j ;li lf ;

,1; g l p[,5. f.p. W l:l:ll i: t i !,' '. } t i ':1 ll 81ll.? li; .il \\li t ij !i$i,illlll 3121??!2h*********t?!t!!k 2:0t??i?i*********t5ttt1 t 'il' U 1; 'l Hil!I Hl! H li!! nq!!ilalle.li Nll-I i n!.llil ,i i! n iiv o.y ii Ni ti i uq c!! li i l; tif rP it i :i illfilll 1 1'11if!!i If:q f,'tillli'ill e 3 Sl'i II;!I lt! @ :l! l. ;ll! { { *.

• l d ! r M} i, I'l lillilli i

i

if 1, aid ?!I li.ii

,':lil j;j l l! U :i Ull L 1 i! i ' li l l if ?

i'll l '} l i ;j : 1)lii::i'- !; i I li:l; ili i .l!!'lil lill'I t ,5 { :{ E ! l' : ) !, ( ) j. iit..i:1 lii! i ll l] @ 11l: p ! illi:. i.i ) ' 1. i i!! > .s;!t}de,.!!

i !il:ii z.i.

> i li; 'll,. Ilji hill!!jh.:d d l l ! ! ! i l!- ' (f g L .o o ;.: i 3: i n a ua ru. ! i i. e ! 23.1.:t ,1 r i, y .' i' li h $; ' l. 'l i li' l l ! f i i' il l l' }) c'pi l ! ! ! I l l l t ! !. ld lil l .h i ' F.. k M il l l l 14 ! }g!! } a{,, 11:12f!!f*********f2tff!!! ! ! t t t t t t f * * * '..*.*.*..*.:*:.t t ! f f ! ! 1 I $ g I. v-*h{E

• • 4I I

3 Il }l41l l ll O!l }}5i II llh N Ii l l lI' l 1 0 I hhl/ l nldl; I I I!!i i i l i bli l itti Y! I, l ' l t i lit i i i; i li ll'll l II!id;4till!!l I l lil 'i ,Ij!j tl j i' li l : '- l ~ 2 1! I bl.'t i lill ffli'll !l hl ! e eseg Sl!I I l'i it dill iI ll I ti ill l l lMt ll1! il I IU ! ! {u ;' i. i: ( pii t! i ll\\n ill! Il ti l i. II It llFt:llilitsli ii lyld ; lil l' !l 1 i rF i l i in i) !:illlil il 5: W l/i lili; il I li I h,i li.s i l ' l l I il I i ei ti l l:iill I!I I e il i ll yh i i i l '.Q ) ( k: ll l l l'.I il tlilllll! Ill 11 r i l irlW i l 11' II 1! i !n M I! i h til II41 i i I ' I I' ft ll ll ll i i d )h

• • • • I2!f'1:1 titt?ftit*****E***??ttf221 tit!!f1?f
• s e..... ec.e.,*,... ss, e ese

......,.e*,*,to.a. :,e

F-ON Be g I E 'EI*? W i! I U Ii j ,5 8i 5-l 5 i i ( E; rI ( ( i m I i II if j sp I n' i Ill l I 1 ill I il i e aaassesee.....,4,,g ;ggg; a:asee:ee*****vtt9,g,ggg; 'en.ss,-mo4mels sm.amormd 9eu Assa-an6ms's maa.mnerse t. It I I !!!1ll lil ( l i I, ! , r'.t 5l l I! l l

• lhWW !-

,t ,(I I

1. i Tal i i

E. I I 4.' I t'll I Ei i.Il

1. -i l k, i. j i

1. ll 1

I; {e e It I!- I liFitjig 11! I-1l lli { :gi{ II_ l ui !. Lfri l11 l II Ill z{ 2 li' . l l!

Wfi lJii i' i i

I!! I l ll 'j 9tl I ,i } ]a I I as I: I !]e" I I tll thrJs i llll A ITi i! 5"$ {11 .i.ieei m......,4,g...,, ....eeees......,,,,g,g,,,

lp,

,e.___ ,e...._._ c

n pe

a g i 7!

l E i Ill llg 2 y tij i s i t i l J I! l ,}}r i 9 1!! gl djg]l E g t Y I Eeees ( ! T El ll l II ' il t! ( i !Lth ( l f / I L, I L I i 18 5 e g h p[d h f Bl d I 2W i ( l asiseensedadE44tte,g.nogg saatesees==+-*eevogtegegh 7We'.3Bdene.m313 3mi43meemd "Tes*.3ss.seaan313 seaanot.as

O u.s II 11 3 n

l i'I' IIi -

'3U5! 1 '!! lil d ' !N 3 8 $ / f s N/ ': bcy Ee a ' :) f f/iiT

h ji 6 '

7 #d !!

e i 3 *'

i,1< e' Vili W We s!

I I

?i i../- Ji l - p y2 by !.! s

e 4

l: i \\1. T-l1 %%\\N't i

• g i

R J m. !: L I F l < r :i E 8 . !ai f 49 j> '~ l i. l i! \\ @ (:'; ii-i i f 'l

1. <g :

m i . i i

j. ;:. -

) . :h% ; ' : ,e r ! i 1 . (.- l i: E )

f i dif b!i

.: ) i l < 4 ) i I-1 / W ii ir ! J <? < ) i-i 1 .Ni ii: ild, i st.9 04 0 ,,sa.......,,,,,r,,,,,,i ..................... =.. I Il iN I),s/g[jf*g/ l, I f Il EM.d. i ( ] i# n !' i 'i i." /! ##' : ' i .i i 11 p. a: .i iii ' i : j 1/x [(,); l' j 21 i. !6 MO i I l l ik l'l i 'E 1 [. kN 1 t il B\\\\\\ l-8 t ,1 t il WK l i 1 3 NA i

in 1 i

g E i

Nw 14-- Vi iiii !

s kt n i

i-5. i IT T ' !~ i i is: e

• i l'

) (<<i-

j j tien u

'A.i I l 'Il ' ik ' il 'I lI '} [d i 3 r - 'ij j!c-i ,% I: ole / 6: Hlii li

.4 9 ; WW :

-,r:::::::,::::,,::::::: ~,............... ~..... ~ ' '~,................a.. 33 3 i IE!E iE II .Es ] j 4f'1 II[{I*III'i f I' !, t.3/ fj. l.'/ f[g Ift l ' [ $ } }s " T u m j f'ii. t /pA l' liig i 0 ] ! N.;il!!!.li fil l i i .f)f(ii

• li i I

I M l'li!!!

• !.. li ld

/

j [ *3

• l L

t ' i lM. :O t ii ; is n,,\\ n.ili.

it i

.t ):!.$ l k_1':l! lIIll' l 8 l!I "ll M N ~ l) l! II I g iit .i!!i i.i yn lit.u" i> : 7 :i. u. o j ll. l i Q : li),I ' ' M' ! l !l l it. i l l - fj h y jeO68 i s ;I_ l I

!i.

l l l I :'1 l%,lh' !:i' '!.i -lU o!I !I I n i ./ i Ed9 i I il-l ill Il I ti I; i! Uli l iW_~i J f}_Lyi i !ili llll l i !l il l' /I 8 e i=:; :=n ::v in iisi; e

i.i = verii m ;in n;

b 5 t l I r i I,a 3 2 i l i' I e EE iIy il i I x-fl. I-I N$ E E e i! I I I! i Il l I t i ii I it I I li i 11ll: ll i lil !i l ' ! lli l ll l i .l 11 1 I! I Eid::ttistasetartissae3gjp tsi stni.iss,33*sisasssvis W.31s.amam373 De63morad

• TTB*.33s.amasm343 SuAme0Zhd 11 11-l l1 I

i I I;- I' lI l ll il i ii j j j ll l ll ll i~ l-l gi l g .l I I i !I I-11 l l fi ll 11 lll11 2 E il l Ill i l l E ill IIlIl lil-I ti! ll I I li!! .c e j '-zj { ig l i li !!i till l 'E l ll il I I I I! I -l

I i l

11 !I l!I II I I ' ll llIlill 1 'T i l i l I,I:ll: I i' 'i l 11 Il I II ilti j 8 *

i 1

I I l' l I ll I I I lil lli Ja ] aj,:# y

l i

i i u in ll i! Il II l 3**{Ijj ve== ii 3.. ,.... n, .4...........,.,64..,ii.,4

jo

_..m_ ,3...._.__ ul>

agi Il I

ll l l li I i l Illi l I II if e i, sp i e i:

l l

3}o r ,T /

l. NYff:/

M g'i' djgjf 1 t#6 W ll i!esee s l iVMt si i: ! \\ML43 it t i LMW% L / flCL2 3 J gt

• i G \\\\

[W ll s (1 fl neWC i iN 'u WG & b i en. 6,tiittensiinienn ,nnu.....,n.......n.

• ven'433d measn313 asagnetas 73B'433e-seass373 De43ss33 e

ws I E'~ fr. er sig 9 Se ? :- 5' ~ C a e2 - i*gir 1 7 1,.1 r= e _ n. 2J f" Ig .r r,c./.l./

m..

t,:.l ' i ./ C:St. 1 y; o g!l l 1,t-ici 'rir: : l li l

s..g ui.

L {t I

• • gitil I.y-1.

0 h'l lill'lat i!g t 1., I'f'l. g 1Ji i b e s e n,,,,, cue. l. i i l l l l'i All' l !! : i i: j:::,.y y,l - /,/ 5E ~... r Is' Int 's sis y:llll 't t .M s 's 1\\ lillll> ="- F. >,,, \\ b., eulit! ge s.j r; r , ' 'p[\\ +. l'- 1 '\\ 5, [ t.\\ - ,\\ D el, ;. p Vll '. i \\ p . y, g 6, S' *. l' b\\ l M f.l 8 ', '. '. ... a,p t s g I t,, A i 1 y g

1. N %ssa m-

-_.-,.9--.__y,. ,_,..y1 ,,.,-v .,.,v --.--g---, ,_,w,--

~ bU via O a4 *Y8i $5 h y$ h$l- ~ U ..t ffr l ^ r if E I ~ 7 j M

k i

1 I tll lil; l ll p .om - I' < il: ll.4 l l :l ,qi g: i s. !. l:;j l :l * : -t ie . e! . ws. E.N] ' y g. { f. g.. gC. " gi ii r .o Iji I}l;,jly:1'l!.D.: s nIhullis e s i l G6ese?sssa p! .!j f.,. ! ! l'g ..I

.*se-.

i ,Il W!i! l i "l ll!!! l! 1 l j lb ':j' , llwlli . war.. l t, l I: I / :/ l 21 ~ s,j! .. )1l z i ~l * *ll : l i l l fg ,p]l .oost.. l' s s l n!\\. \\ n ~ I ',' $ \\ l I / p. t \\.:: j. .o@s..C \\\\ 'l f l\\ i "f ' M1 '\\ \\ ' q I \\ '. c) n \\. u:: ~ ~ .xs. + u . I ,/ l- \\ til , v. ~v i i bi 1i - i: ? E~f ~,, ;- ~

r r U w w Ew g I I I I 'n !! != 2 s s < a-g r" <m .. g., ~ g,,,, - z i r -= o !M,3 D U.b z = \\ wo s a = 1 M = Y I I* a/ ? l s. =<., a w.., s s e N s / i / { s s \\ \\ 'fi s / \\ '\\ ' 'N [J '**s p;{ (i s c N's j g l \\ / 's a / a

u, 2

( y 'l A#* x x s 's // s, N s i, N i ? /s' s i \\ \\ 'Og@ ,t l 4, l, I t o_ 1,, '.w-j) 3 f . /- ,/ ,1 i erti e 'g 3 ;,. +> g s v s I C,v. - .b. * ,/ i: ,4 t l D Q l:< / / i t f

• (-I lpl s,/ y e

i. f I ;. o e l l j 'e t / ( ) /( !

• t s

~ n /, ',l' ~ e s ,s, ,D i ' O ~, ' ,5' 4 i ~,, s 3,, s s s , a=,,', s ,<g t .e. i ($ \\ C [ 1 i I \\ 'y rj g' { 1 1 k.g 3 - f \\ D L ,,, p

g. _,.y t

0-.- 1 .I l d r ; f m, fw t a s r.s ) *4:Z },e*ts -i t

• 3'"g*:

) N t M sr I m,, . Imr : e f 1 I 1 3 t.ga s E a t.h g v-s s = = :,; m a s,:-. l . _o_ c l t t m

--~---_-.-..-m.~.ws... '-~~~s.~-'.~..~.~.'~~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ h \\ h !:lI Y ., * -n a x s \\ s ~ / Jg-gi x \\x \\N N W N =~ ,!e i 'N \\a v w% f o,n g\\ / / /./ 8 8 NJ N N "S.J._.b.a/' 3 A .w.. g; j!., e r 1 ) / r3s ' "b I, r e .i - l{ g(- e-A j

j.._.,"[,{j I

l,,f ,4, %,,-- -4 - -)< - qi jijif i ~ ~ ' /F / "_{._.-(F ~ ~ ' l +. \\-ot. =( (*R ku \\]3pq 171+! i og,

[?

? ? y y xw 7,lI y, ep \\ \\ \\ 4 El :[ I Ilh i Ig ll,i IV !l I $3 l!!!ll!h '~~ gy A w e.. -n. 'l i i i l

1

u. -

-...... __. e STP FSAR 3.8.4.7 Testing and Inservice Surveillance Requirements. 4 1. Concrete and Steel Structures Other than the compliance of the requirements of Subsection 3.8.4.6 on materials, QC, and construction techniques, there will be no required planned systematic test ng or surveillance, except occasional visual i inspection. 1 2. Stainless Steel Liner The testing for leaktightness of the stainless steel liner for the spent fuel pool and CST will be performed through the Leak Chase System after the pool is filled with water. In addition, the Leak Chase System will be subjected to periodic inservice monitoring for any possible leakages from the spent fuel pool and CST. 4 3.8.5 Foundations and Concrete Supports 3.8.5.1 Description of the Foundations and Supports. The foundation j of Category I structures consists of reinforced-concrete mats supported on i undisturbed soil or engineered structural backfill material. Figure 3.8.5-1 illustrates the location and physical separation of Category I structures. Contact between adjacent independent foundations and transfer of inertia

• forces due to' ground acceleration-from one buildigg to another are avoided by providing a 3-in. minimum sap.

To prevent the possibility of groundwater or surface runoff from seeping into buildings, waterproofing membranes are applied to all exterior surfaces below finished-grade level. In addition, waterstops are provided between the mats of Category I structures. Embedded foundation reinforcing steel and the exterior of the liner plate will be protected from corrosion by concrete. A design measure to help control e rrosion will be the application of a waterproofing membrane applied to the external concrete surfaces below grade. These measures will suffice to control the corrosion of rebar and the liner plate in the Reactor Containment Building (RCB). The combination of the waterproofing membrane and the remoteness of the liner plate from the soil environment will suffice to control corrosion. The embedded steel and liner plate are connected to the plant grounding system at many points, which will drain stray corrents. The effects of floods on the building foundation have been covered in Section 3.4. Typical details illustrating methods of anchorage of large equipment and vertical structural elements to foundation are shown on Figures 3.8.3-1 and .3.8.3-3. l 3.8-91

x 1 m A discussion of the effects of dynamic lateral earth pressures on founda-tions and concrete supports is provided in Appendix 3.7.A. i s 3.8.5.1.1 Reactor Containment Building: For a description of the RCB ' foundations and supports, see Section 3.8.1. 3.8.5.1.2 Mechanical-Electrical Auxiliaries Buf1 ding: The MEAB is founded on a 6-f t-thick reinfoiled-concrete mat. The top of 'the mat is 18 ft below grade and is supported on engineered structural backfill. The sat is designed to transmit all loads from the superstructure's shear-bearing walls and columns to the soil. The superstructure is considered to be rigidly connected to the mat. Resultant reactions determined from analysis of the superstructure were applied in the mat design at the mat / superstructure interaction surface. The foundation mat is modeled as a plane grid of beams rigidly connected at their intersections, and the super-structure walls and part of the floor slabs are considered as stiffening elements. The mat is considered to be supported on linear elastic springs. Horizontal forces are resisted by soil / structure interaction. The analysis of the mat is performed using the computer program ICES-STRUDL II. Major equipment such as tanks and heat exchangers is rigidly connected to the unt by anchor bolts which transmit lateral loads to the foundation mat. 3.8.5.1.3 Diesel-Generator Building: The DGB is supported on a cat with exterior and interior bearing walls. The top of the mat is 3 ft 4 below grade. The DG's are supported on the same mat foundation. Other miscellaneous equipment is rigidly anchored to the base slab through anchor bolts whien transmit dead loads and lateral loads to the foundation. The mat is designed in accordance with the analytical method provided in ACI 336-72. 3.8.5,1.4 Fuel-Handling Building: The FHB is supported on base slabs at three different levels: under the spent fuel pool area, 57 f t below grade; under the dry cask area, 24 f t below grade; and at the railroad track, 2 ft above grade. The mat at 57 ft below grade is supported on undisturbed soil, and 'the other areas are on engineered structural back-fill. The nine caissons for pumps under the lowest mat are designed for hydrostatic, soil and surcharge pressures under normal conditions. Under the Extreme Environment Accident, the mat is designed for maximum passive soil resistance. Also, wing walls are designed to resist sliding under the accident loads. The mat has been designed according to the loads and load combination of subsection 3.8.4.3. The exterior walls which are subjected to lateral loads have been considered in the mat design. The foundation mat model consists of a plane grid of beams rigidly connected at their intersections. The entire mat is considered to be supported on linear elastic-springs supports. The stiffeners of the spring are a function of j coefficient of subgrade modulus and surrounding area. Forces, reactions and displacement are found using the computer program ICES-STRUDL II. The results of this analysis are compared with the analytical method as per ACI 336-72, and the frame analysis with mat supported on elastic springs. The major equipment in this building, such as tank, pump, and HX, is rigidly l 3.8-92 ]

connected to slabs through anchor bolts which transmit the equipment loads and lateral loads to the foundations. 3.8.5.1.5 Essential Cooling Water Intake Structure: The foundation of the ECW Intake Structure is supported on undisturbed soil. The founda-tions of the ECW Intake and Discharge Structures are physically separated from each other. The design is based on the analytical method as described in ACI 336-72. The reinforcing and stress requirements of vertical struc-tural walls and the base slab and beam-wall joints for structures comply with ACI 318-71, including a special provision for seismic design. 3.8-92a

the superstructure not included in the mod el produce statically equivalent forces and moments at the cut section of substructure. These equivalent forces are applied as basadary forces on the model. This analysis is performed by the computer program STRUDL-II which incorpo-rates the principles of the grid beams. The interface between the founda-tion and the saperstructure satisfies the equilibrium between loads and reactions, compatibility of strains and the boundary conditions. 4. Load Transfer l The loads of the superstructure and eg2ipment and the imposed forces are transferred to the foundation mat through the reactions of the structural system. The further transfer of loads from foundation mat to the supporting soil is achieved by direct bearing, surface friction, and lateral passive resistance. 5. Torsional Moments The effect of torsional moments on the mat foundations caused by the eccentric forces on the superstructure are considered for the loading combinations specified in Subsection 3.8.;4.3. 3.8.5.5 Structural __ Acceptance Criteria. The structural acceptance criteria relating to stresses, strains and gross deformations of foundation mats of buildings are described in the following sections: Containment Structure Subsection 3.8.1.5 Containment Internals Subsection 3.8.3.5 Other Category I Structures Subsection 3.8.4.5 Overturning and Sliding of Structures The following safety factors apply to the load combination B given below for j the Containment and other Category I structures. LOAD COMBINATION MINIMUM FACTORS OF SAFETY OVERTURNING SLIDING FLOATATION D + F' + E ~ O D + F' + W 1.5 1.5 D + F' + E 1.1 1.1 ss D + F' + W l*l l*l ~ t D+H' 1.1 i D, E, W. E W and H are defined in Section 3.8.4 and F' is the i Latefal eartR,prissure. l l 3.8-95

.....-a . - ~. L Factors of safety against shear failure in the soil, dif ferential settle-j ments, limiting conditions of stresses, strains and deformations in soil, and j other conditions that identify quantitatively the margin of safety against the loading combinations specified for the building are specified in Section 2.5.4. t 3.8.5.6 Material Specifications. Quality Control, and Special r Construction Techniques. The material specifications, QCP, auf special I construction techniques used for foundations and mapports are the same as f those for structures which are supportal thereon. They are identifiel in l Section 2.5.4 and in the following respective sections: containment Structure Subsection 3.8.1.6 l Containment Internals Subsection 3.8.3.6 i Other Category I Structures Subsection 3.8.4.6 3.8.5.7 Testing and Inservic_e Surveillance Requirements. There are no i i plannai systematic testing or inservice surveillance programs, other than a visual inspection af ter they are completed, for the Category I concrete found ations. The requirements for inservice surveillance of concrete aspports are the same as those for other Category I structures and are identified in the following sections: t Supports Located within containment Subsection 3.8.3.7 f l Other Category I Supports Subsection 3.8.4.7 l i r I i l i i i I f ~ l l t 3.8-96 . _. _ _ _ _ _,,.,, _ _ _}}