ML20065Q220
| ML20065Q220 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Midland |
| Issue date: | 10/25/1982 |
| From: | Boos A, Burke E, Gould J, Shunmugarel P BECHTEL GROUP, INC., CONSUMERS ENERGY CO. (FORMERLY CONSUMERS POWER CO.) |
| To: | |
| References | |
| ISSUANCES-OL, ISSUANCES-OM, NUDOCS 8210260504 | |
| Download: ML20065Q220 (80) | |
Text
c --
Di hr PC UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION g .,%
BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING B g TA In the Matter of )
) Docket Nos. 50-329-OM CONSUMERS POWER COMPANY ) 50-330-OM
) 50-329-OL (Midland Plant, Units 1 and 2)) 50-330-OL TESTIMONY OF ALAN BOOS, EDMUND M. BURKE, JAMES P. GOULD, AND PALANICHAMY SHUNMUGAVEL CONCERNING MIDLAND PLANT SERVICE WATER PUMP STRUCTURE f
VOLUME 1 - TEXT
)
)
8210260504 821025 PDR ADOCK 05000329
'~
1 1
i
/
T PDR .
I SERVICE WATER PUMP STRUCTURE TABLE OF CONTENTS Page #
1.0 BACKGROUND
1 1.1 SCOPE OF TESTIMONY l 1.2 STATUS OF DESIGN EFFORT FOR REMEDIAL MEASURE 1 1.3 FUNCTION AND DESCRIPTION OF BUILDING 1 1.4 IDENTIFICATION OF POSSIBLE UNSATISFACTORY FOUNDATION CONDITIONS 3 1.4.1 Test Borings 3 1.4.2 Measurement of Building Settlement 3 1.4.3 Significance of Cracks 5 2.0- CORRECTIVE ACTION 6 3.0 CONCEPTUAL DESCRIPTION OF CONTINUOUS PERIMETER UNDERPINNING 6 4.0 CONSTRUCTION OF THE UNDERPINNING WALL 7 4.1 HISTORY AND APPLICATION OF UNDERPINNING CONCEPT 7 4.2 CONSTRUCTION SUPPORT ACTIVITIES 8 4.2.1 Post-Tensioning Ties 8 4.2.2 Dewatering 8 4.2.3 Access Cofferdam 8 4.3 INITIAL UNDERPINNING 10 4.4 FINAL UNDERPINNING 13 4.5 WALL CONTINUITY 15 4.6 INSTRUMENTATION OF UNDERPINNING PIERS 15 4.7 BUILDING MONITORING DURING CONSTRUCTION 17 4.7.1 Existing Building Vertical Movement Monitoring 17
II Page #
- 4. /.2 Strain Monitoring 18 4.7.3 Building Crack Monitoring 18 4.7.4 Acceptance criteria 19 5.0 ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA 20 5.1 UNDERPINNED STRUCTURE 20 5.2 UNDERPINNING WALLS AND CONNECTORS 21 5.3 MATERIAL PROPERTIES 21 6.0 DESIGN OF THE UNDERPINNING WALL 22 6.1 JACKING LOAD 22 6.1.1 Initial Jacking Load 22 6.1.2 Final Jacking Load 23 6.2 BEARING PRESSURES 23 6.3 INTERFACE CONNECTORS 23 7.0 STRUCTURAL EVALUATION 24 7.1 ANALYTICAL PROCEDURE 24 7.1.1 Determination of External Loads 24
, 7.1.1.1 Dead Loads 24 l
7.1.1.2 Live Loads 25 l
I 7.1.1.3 Wind and Tornado Loads 25 7.1.1.4 Buoyant Load 25 j 7.1.1.5 Seismic Loads 25 7.1.1.6 Thermal Effects 26 7.1.1.7 Jacking Preload 26 i 7.1.1.8 Settlement Effect 26 1
I 7.1.1.9 Construction Loads 26 7.1.2 Internal Force Distribution 27 7.1.3 Comparison to Allowable Stress 27 L
III Page #
7.2 METFOE .I' ANALYSIS 27 7.3 RESULTS 28 8.0 GEOTECHN'ICAL CONSIDERATIONS 29 8.1 CHARACTERISTICS OF THE UNDERLYING SOILS 29 8.1.1 Stratum F, Fill 30 8.1.2 Stratum A, Alluvium -
30 8.1.3 Stratum T, Undisturbed Glacial Till 31 8.2 BEARING CAPACITY OF UNDERPINNING PIERS 32
'8. 3 ESTIMATE OF SETTLEMENT OF THE UNDERPINNING PIERS 34 8.4 DIFFERENTIAL SETTLEMENT BETWEEN UNDERPINNING
. AND MAIN SWPS 36 8.4.1 Filling SWPS Reservoirs 37 8.4.2 Dewatering and Drawdown 38 8.4.3 Summary of Differential Settlement 39
9.0 CONCLUSION
39 i
i I
I
IV REFERENCES TABLES SWP-1 Table of Reinforcing Bar Maximum Stresses - FSAR Load Combinations SWP-2 Summary of Test Boring Series in Vicinity of Service Water Pump Structure Underpinning SWP-3 Service Water Pump Structure Underpinning-Properties of Fill and Sandy Clay Till FIGURES SWP-1 Site Plan of Midland Units 1 and 2 Power Plant SWP-2 Plan of Service Water Pump Structure at Elevation 634'-6" SWP-3 Typical Section of. Service Water Pump Structure (Looking West)
SWP-4 Boring Location Plan SWP-5 Service Water. Structure Settlement Marker Locations SWP-6 Service Water Pump Structure Settlement Marker Plots SWP-7 Dewatering Events in Service Water Pump Structure Area SWP-8 Service Water Pump Structure Concrete Placement
- j. Sequence l SWP-9 Service Water Pump Structure Construction Survey Control Point Locations SWP-10 Service Water Pump Structure Changes in Elevation SWP-ll Service Water Pump Structure Underpinning Plan and Sections i SWP-12 Service Water Pump Structure Underpinning Sections
( and Details - Sheet 1 l
l SWP-13 Service Water Pump Structure Underpinninng Sections l and Details - Sheet 2 l
l l
V SWP-14 Service Water Pump Structure Tension Ties SWP-15 Boring Location Plan and Geological Section i.
Midland Plant Units 1 and 2 Public Hearing Testimony o.-
SERVICE WATER PUMP STRUCTURE
1.0 BACKGROUND
1.1 SCOPE OF TESTIMONY This testimony presents evidence regarding the remedial measures to be undertaken at the north end of the service water pump structure (SWPS) as a result of the detection of certain areas where the fill material which was placed for foundation support under the overhang section at the north end of the building was insufficiently compacted.
1.2 STATUS OF DESIGN EFFORT FOR REMEDIAL MEASURE The design and analysis procedures and details for the remedial measure for the SWPS are described in detail in Sections 5.0 through 7.0 below. The status of the under-pinning design and structural reanalysis is discu.ssed in Section 7.3. The information herein provides an adequate and reasonable basis for assurance that upon complation of the proposed remedial action the SWPS will be fully capable of performing its intended safety function under all postulated conditions.
1.3 FUNCTION AND DESCRIPTION OF BUILDING ,
The SWPS is a reinforced concrete structure located approximately 500 feet east of the diesel generator building.
(See Fig. SWP-1.) The structure contains three water-filled reservoirs and five pumps which together provide cooling water for various components during normal plant operation
and which supply several safety-related cooling systems which are required to function during a design basis con-dition, such as a postulated safe shutdown earthquake (SSE). Because of its safety-related function, the SWPS must maintain its structural integrity during and after a design basis condition. Contaquently, the building is required to be designed as a Seismic Category I structure.
The SWPS is rectangular in plan, with upper and lower sections of different plan dimensions. The upper section is 106 feet long and 86 feet wide. The lower section is approximately 72 feet long and 86 feet wide. The upper section thus has an overhang section at the north end which is supported by a separate base slab. The lower section base slab is situated apprcximately 47 feet belo'w grade level. The upper section base slab is situated approximately 17 feet below grade level. The structure me.asures about 69 feet in to*al height from the lower base slab to the roof, with approximately 22 feet of the building extending above grade. (Figs. SWP-2 and SWP-3). The water-filled reservoirs are located in the deeper section of the structure. The south wall of the deeper section abuts the cooling pond.
The two reinforced concrete base slabs supporting the structure are located at elevations 587' and 617'. The lower slab is 5 feet thick and is constructed on undisturbed glacial till. The upper slab is 3 feet thick and is con-structed on a triangular wedge of backfill soil with a
maximum depth of 30 feet. Both slabs are locally thickened near sumps.
All walls and slabs are of reinforced concrete.
Exterior walls are 2 to 4 feet thick and the interior walls vary from 1 foot, 6 inches to 2 feet in thickness. The roof slab is 1 foot, 9 inches thick.
1.4 IDENTIFICATION OF POSSIBLE UNSATISFACTORY FOUNDATION CONDITIONS As a result of settlement measurements on another building in August 1978 (see G. S. Keeley, prepared testimony following Tr. 1163), the Applicant undertook a subsurface soil investigation in the vicinity of the SWPS utilizing soil borings. On November 7, 1978, the Applicant submitted a 10 C.F.R. S 50.55(e) interim report that disclosed that soil borings had been made in plant fill areas in the vicin-ity of the SWPS.
1.4.1 Te_st Borings Eleven soil borings were taken in the area of the SWPS. Two borings were taken inside the building and nine in the surrounding area. (See Fig. SWP-4.) These borings indicated that some localized areas of the heterogeneous backfill material underneath and adjacent to the overhang section of the structure had not been sufficiently compacted.
1.4.2 Measurement of Building Settlement The Applicant established a Foundation Data Survey Program (FDSP) to monitor settlement of Seismic Category I "
buildings at the site in May 1977 in anticipation of a com-mitment to do so in the Midland Project Final Safety Analysis Report (FSAR) .
Pursuant to the FDSP, settlement markers were attached to the four corners of the SWPS by the summer of 1978. (See Fig. SWP-5.) Field personnel have surveyed the elevations of three of these markers bimonthly from about July 1978 to December 1980 and biweekly from January 1981 to the present. The initial reading for the fourth marker occurred in September 1978 but bimonthly resurvey did not commence until November 1979. The accuracy of these measure-ments is approximately +0.005 foot (1/16 inch).
Fig. SWP-6 shows plots of observed settlement ,
against time for the four SWPS settlement markers. Figure SWP-7 shows dewatering activities in the vicinity of the SWPS during this period. As this figure indicates, the maximum movement since initiation of the FDSP occurred at marker SW-1 attached to the northwest corner of the building.
This movement is about 1/2 inch.
In order to relate the net 1/4-inch settlement since program initiation to the total settlement experienced since essential building completion, additional measurements of markers other than those in the FDSP have been under-taken. Six construction survey control points were installed at elevation 639.5' a short time after concrete placement.
(A complete history of the placing of concrete in the SWPS is shown in Fig. SWP-8.) These construction control points have been resurveyed in an effort to determine total changes in elevation.
The six control points were originally installed using bench mark PBM-1, which is a stable bench mark located outside the dike area, as a reference. The locations of these points are depicted in Fig. SWP-9. Four of these points, numbers 1, 3, 4 and 6, lie on the inside faces of the concrete walls in the same general regions as the four permanent settlement markers which are located on the out-side of the building walls. '2he six construction control points were resurveyed in October 1982, using PBM-1 as a reference control bench mark. The net changes in elevation as of October 1982 for the six construction control points are shown in Fig. SWP-10. The accuracy of these measurements is +0.01 foot (1/8 inch).
Several important observations can be made from examination of these data. First, the values from the six control points are, as expected, generally larger than the values from the four permanent markers, which were placed 2 to 6 months later than the control points. Second, within the tolerances associated with the readings, the two sets of data correlate well. Third,'the north-south differential building settlement is minimal; as determined by the six control points, the maximum differential is 0.02 foot (1/4 inch); the maximum value from the four FDSP settlement markers is .03 foot (approximately 3/8 inch). These measure-ments indicate that the building is very stable by conventional standards.
1.4.3 Significance of Cracks For a discussion and evaluation of the significance of cracks in the SWPS, see the testimony of W. Gene Corley.
2.0 CORRECTIVE ACTION
+
The Applicant chose to undertake a remedial struc-tural measure which would compensate for unsatisfactory compaction of backfill material rather than to attempt to demonstrate satisfactory fill material under the overhang portion of the building. The Applicant selected a remedial measure involving supporting the overhang section with a continuous perimeter underpinning wall founded on undisturbed
- /
~
glacial till soil as the preferred measure for assuring 4
proper foundation support for the SWPS.
3.0 CONCEPTUAL DESCRIPTION OF CONTINUOUS PERIMETER UNDERPINNIhG In this concept, a continuous perimeter under-pinning wall will be constructed under the north end of the existing structure. The underpinning will consist of three reinforced concrete walls which will be connected to one
-*/ As is more fully described in Sections 8.1 and 8.2, the underlying glacial till is typically located at and below elevation 590'. The underpinning piers will be founded at or below elevation 587' and, therefore, it is anticipated that the foundation material for these piers will be the glacial till. However, it is possible that small pockets of sandy very dense alluvium (see Section 8.1.2) may be encountered at that elevation.
As described in Section 4.3, if sandy alluvium material is encountered in shallow layers, Applicant will remove the sand and replace it with concrete. If the layers are determined to be deep, Applicant will remove any disturbed sand, but will otherwise construct the pier footing on undisturbed alluvium. The sandy alluvium, as described in Section 8.1.2, is an acceptable founda-tion material and, in fact, has strength characteristics equal to or greater than those of the undisturbed glacial till. All references in this testimony which refer to the bearing material as undisturbed glacial till should be read to include the possibility of sandy alluvium.
another and to the main building to form a box structure.
The reinforced concrete underpinning wall will exte . from the underside of the upper foundation slab to undisturbed glacial till (approximately elevation 587'). The under-pinning walls will be 4 feet thick. Because the largest fraction of the applied load is on the north wall, the base of the underpinning wall under the north wall will be en-larged to 6 feet to maintain bearing pressures within allow-able limits.
When the underpinning structure is complete, pre-determined jacking forces will be applied at :he interfaces between the overhang perimeter and the underpinning wall to provide for load transfer from the structure to the under-pinning and thence to the undisturbed glacial till. As soon as predetermined settlement criteria are met, the spaces between the tops of the walls and the bottom of the base slab will be firmly wedged and groute'd, and the walls tied to the overhang structure and to the deeper section of the existing building. (See Section 4.4 below.) The completed underpinning wall structure will provide a structural foundation resting on. undisturbed glacial till. (See Figs. SWP-ll, 12, and 13).
4.0 CONSTRUCTION OF THE UNDERPINNING WALL 4.1 HISTORY AND APPLICATION OF UNDERPINNING CONCEPT The general rationale for and procedures used in the technique of underpinning are set forth in Section 4.1 of the prepared testimony of Burke, Corley, Gould, Johnson,
and Sozen on the Auxiliary Building (following Tr. 5509) and will not be repeated here.
4.2 CONSTRUCTION SUPPORT ACTIVITIES 4.2.1 Post-Tensioning Ties As a preventive measure against possible building distress due to loss of buoyancy during construction, post-tensioning ties were installed along the tops of the east and west exterior walls of the SWPS in November 1981 (Fig.
SWP-14). These ties, which consist of two tendon groups on each side of the building, apply a compressive force of about 500 kips to th'e upper portion of each east and west exterior wall. This force is intended to compensate for additional loading on the overhang section resulting from
, the loss of buoyancy which will be caused by the temporary
(
dewatering required to construct the underpinning.
4.2.2 Dewatering An important consideration in constructing the underpinning wall is the necessity for dewatering the underpinning construction area. To lower the water table temporarily within the construction area, construction dewatering wells will be installed in the immediate area of the SWPS. The plan for water level control and monitoring fines will be as described on p. 2-51 of Supplement No. 2 to the Midland Safety Evaluation Report (NUREG 0793, September 1982).
4.2.3. Access cofferdam An access cofferdam will be constructed adjacent to the northwest corner, the north wall and the northerly 34
feet of the east side of the SWPS. The access cofferdam will be constructed to provide access for workers and equip-mont for the underpinning work.
The cofferdam will be excavated in two stages for underpinning access purposes. Initially, it will be excavated adjacent to the building, to elevation 618' to permit installa-tion through approach pits of the initial underpinning piers Numbers la and 2a on the west side and Numbers 1 and 2 on the east side beneath the SWPS base mat. When this initial underpinning is completed, the access cofferdam will be lowered locally at the northwest corner to elevation 609' to provide access for excavation of a tunnel beneath the west wall of the SWPS.~*/The unde 1 pinning piers along the remainder of the structure will be constructed from Elevation 618' by means of approach pits.
The cofferdams typically will be constructed using standard methods. First, auger holes ab'out 2 feet in dia-meter will be excavated down to elevation 600'. The top 6 t,o 8 feet of each hole will be lined with a steel casing. The holes will then be filled with a slurry mixture, and steel beams, called soldier piles, will be inserted into the hole.
Concrete will tnen be tremied into the hole to displace the slurry mixture. In some locations on the north side, where congested areas of underground utilities are encountered, hand-excavated and lagged piers will be constructed, a steel
-*/ A tunnel must be used along the west wall because of the location of the circulating water intake structure.,
The details of the tunnel construction are shown in Fig. SWP-12.
soldier beam inserted, and the pier filled vith concrete.
The distance between soldier piles will be about 5 to 7 feet around the access cofferdam perimeter. As excavation pro-gresses downward, flat tubular steel lagging will be in-stalled. The trimming of soil, trimming of the lean concrete in the auger holes, placement of lagging, and backpacking behind them with soil will be done by manual labor. At t
i predetermined intervals, horizontal beams, called wales, will be installed to support the soldier piles. Support for the adjacent earth around the perimeter is provided in'this manner at the same pace as the excavation in the cofferdam
- progresses downward. The excavation progress will be coor-dinated with the groundwater removal so that the measured ,
j groundwater levels will always be at least 2 feet below the i
! permitted exc.avation level, including that encountered in the hand-dug pits.
4.3 INITIAL UNDERPINNING Wall construction will begin from the access 7
l cofferdam at the northeast and northwest corners of the st~ructure. Working from the cofferdam, construction of three piers at each corner and five piers at the center of the wall will be performed. The piers will be constructed in the sequence indicated in Plan Section A of Fig. SWP-ll.
A typical pier is 5 feet long, 4 feet wide, and 30 feet deep. The piers along the north wall will be belled to six feet at the bottom. The pier areas will be excavated j to undisturbed hearing material. The full depth of the pit
l l excavation will be supported by steel tubular lagging which l -
forms the sides of the pier (see detail in Fig. SWP-12).
It is anticipated that glacial till will be encountered at final subgrade. However, pockets of alluvial l
L sand may be encountered. In such cases, it is anticipated that the' sand will be removed down to undisturbed glacial till, provided that the excavation of the sand will be relatively shallow. The shallow pockets will be filled with concrete. If deep alluvial sand is encountered (deeper than 18' inches), it will be accepted for the foundation footing, provided it is undisturbed and of the quality described ir.
Section 8.2 below. The onsite geotechnical engineer will determine when suitable foundation material has been reached using a combination of visual inspection, probing and penetro-meter readings. (See Section 8.1.3.). After the foundation material for the pier has been approved, a lean concrete mat will be placed. Then reinforcing steel bar with couplers will be placed, pier instrumentation (see Section 4.6) will be installed, and concrete for the pier will be poured. The concrete will be cured to 2000 psi minimum strength before the initial jacking load is applied.
The principal consideration in the first stage of the construction is to provide initial support to the north end of the building. To compensate for the possible loss of support under the base slab caused by the underpinning operations and to further counteract loss of buoyancy, the underpinning construction procedure requires jacking an initial load into each pier.
4 The initial jacking load will be maintaine'd as follows:
i) The pier will be loaded to 125% of the speci-fied initial jacking load and continued at that load.until the relative movement between the top of the pier and the underpinned structure is less than 0.01 inc'h for a con-tinuous one hour period. When this condition is satisfied; ii) The pier load will be reduced to 110% of the specified initial jacking load and continued at that load until the relative movement between the top of the pier and the under-pinned structure is less than 0.01 inch in a continuous 24 hour2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> period. When this condition is satisfied, the jacking load will be reduced to 100% of the specified jacking load.
For pier 1, however, a load test to 130% of the load corres-
! ponding to the maximum allowable bearing pressure will be a
conducted prior to reducing to the specified jacking load for this pier. In addition, if any piers are to be founded J
on alluvial sand, then the first pier to be so constructed i
j will also be load tested. After jacking a pier, the underpinning i
work will be advanced to the next pier to be constructed.
Each group of three corner piers (Piers 1, 2 and l 3, on the east and 1A, 2A and 3A on the west) has been assigned a total of 465 kips of load. However, the piers.
and underlying glacial till have the capacity to support at least 2,000 kips at each corner, with a factor of safety of 2.0, should additional unplanned load be transferred to these piers. Based on calculations, it has been determined that the north structural wall above the underpinning ir sufficient to transfer these loads safely to the end groups of piers.
After the corner piers are completed, the remaining
- .-. , _ - ~ -- .. _ -_,.- ._ -- - ,--- --- - -,---m . , - - - - , _ - -
piers which receive an initial jacking load are constructed in the sequence shown or. Fig. SWP-ll.
The initial jacking load for each pier has been calculated so that most of the initial load will be distri-buted evenly along the north wall. The remaining load will be distributed to piers 3 and 9 on the east and piers 3A, 8 and 9A on the west wall. The loads will be monitored and adjusted for any shift of load caused by pier settlement.
During the period that the initial jacking load is maintained on the piers, frequent checking of jacking load will be performed, and the wedges will be periodically retightened.
In effect, the tight wedging will be a safeguard for the structure's support should a jack or its hydraulic line fail while loaded. In addition, screw collars which can be tightened on each jack after stressing will be installed as an added safety factor against sudden downward jack movement should the jack pressure lower inadvertently.
4.4 FINAL UNDERPINNING After Piers 1 through 9A (refer to Plan Section A of Fig. SWP-ll) have been initially jacked, the final jacking forces as specified in the jacking load table (Fig.
SWP-ll) are applied. The final jacking loads will be applied by simultaneously jacking all piers and sustaining this load long enough to assure that pier deflections are occurring at a satirfactory rate. (See Section 8.3 for a description of the criteria for acceptance of final jacking.)
After the above acceptance criteria have been met, the wedges will be driven tight and welded in place (See Detail 2 of Fig. SWP-12) . The jacks will then.be removed and the space between the top of the piers and the underside of the SWPS base slab will be closed with concrete and grout.
While the final load is being maintained in the jacks, the two pier areas at the interface with the main portion of the SWPS (Piers 10 and 10A), as well as Piers 11 and llA, can be excavated. Reinforcing bar dowels will be drilled and grouted into the vertical face of the lower portion of the existing structure. (See Detail 5 of Fig.
SWP-12.) After the final jacking is completed, the casting of Piers 10 and 10A will encase the dowels, thereby tying the vertical face of the underpinning wall to the existing structure. At the same time, Pier 11 and the portion of Pier llA up to the bottom of the tunnel can be placed.
To tie the top of the underpinning wall to the existing structure, anchor bolts embedded in the concrete of I
the piers will extend through holes drilled through the upper foundation slab of the SWPS.
When pier interfaces are completed, the access tunnel at the west side will be filled with lean concrete.
(Because the north end of the structure will be entirely supported by the underpinning, a nonstructural c.oncrete can be used.) The tunnel will be filled and an exit made at Pier llA. The remainder of Pier llA is then cast, and its jacking load applied.
^
The top of the underpinning wall will then be fastened to the existing structure by tightening and grout-ing the previously placed anchor bolts (See Fig. SWP-13).
Because concreting of Piers 10 and 10A and tensioning of the anchor bolts do not occur until after the final jacking load ~
is locked off, these connectors do not transfer dead loads i
or jacking loads at the interfaces at the time of lockoff.
At this stage, the underpinning of the SWPS is complete.
4.5 WALL CONTINUITY The underpinning wall is constructed in pier segments and the piers are jacked at different times. To i
obtain wall continuity, the piers must be tied together with continuous reinforcing steel and. shear keys. Splicing the reinforcing steel with reinforcing bar couplers placed at the interface of adjoining piers will provide continuity in the reinforcing steel. (See Detail 1 of Fig. SWP-12.)
Shear keys lock the concrete of adjoining piers together to enable the piers to act as a structural unit.
The keys are created by forming a void area at the face of the first of the two piers constructed. This void is filled by the concrete cast in the second pier. As a result of the use of shear keys and coupled reinforcement, the piers
?
together form a continuous wall which will resist lateral and vertical forces in the same way that a continuously constructed wall resists those forces.
4.6 INSTRUMENTATION OF UNDERPINNING PIERS During underpinning installation, each pier will be instrumented to monitor deflection of the pier tops and
bottoms. Pier top movcment is monitored by an extensometer dial gage with. readings taken between the underside of the foundation slab and the pier top. Monitoring will begin the day after pier concrete is placed and will include measure-ments during and after initial jacking.
Pier bottom movement is monitored by devices called telltales to help differentiate between the deflection in the underlying soil and deflection of the top of the pier due to shrinkage and creep. The te11 tales consist of the following instrumentation. A steel plate with an attached rod will be placed at the base of the pier (see Section D of Fig. SWP-12). The rod will be enclosed in a small diameter pipe sleeve to allow free .novement. The rod and sleeve, which extend to the top of the pier, will be put in place before the pier concrete is poured. The top of the rod is connected to an extensometer dial gage which.also indicates movement relative to the Lase slab. Rod movements will be recordca simultaneously wita monitoring of the pier top.
These instruments produce measurements relative to the position of the base slab. Absolute pier top and bottom movement values'can be obtained by adding the measurements-of movement, if any, of the base slab obtained from the deep bench mark monitoring.
Carlson-type stress gages will be embedded 11: the concrete of the three piers in each corner. These gages will be monitored during installation or the corner piers and the remaining north wall piers. This information, in
addition to other monitoring instrumentation, will be used to adjust the jacking loads.
4.7 BUILDING MONITORING DURING CONSTRUCTION 4.7.1 Existing Building Vertical Movement Monitoring For the past several years, level readings have been used to monitor settlement of the SWPS at four loca-tions. (See Section 1.4.2). In addition, the Applicant has established additional settlement reading points at the mid-span of the north side of the building and on the east and west. side at the mid-point of'the deeper portion of the structure and at the location of the vertical interface with the main part of the structure. These points will be observed by means of optical level runs before and after significant events which may affect the settlement of the structure and, during the underpinning operation, on at least a weekly basis. Readings are made with an accuracy of approximately
+0.005 foot.
In addition, a minimum of four deep bench marks will be installed to monitor SWPS movement during under-pinning. Two will be installed at the north corners, one along the east wall near the depth change and one at the southeast corner. These deep bench marks will extend to a depth of at least 150 feet below grade level (elevation 634')
and will be grouted into the undisturbed glacial till. A steel bracket arrangement will be attached to the SWPS to position a dial gauge or linear variable differential trans-ducer (LVDT) above the two deep bench marks. ,
s For a. period prior to underpinning work, the instruments will be read daily or more frequently to provide-a base.for subsequent readings. After the underp 'nning contractor begins his work, the instruments will be read daily or-more frequently to monitor. effects of construction on the building displacement. By plotting the measurements made along a north-south line of bench marks, the structural deflection of the building will be monitored, as well as the rotation of the SWPS during underpinning.
4.7.2 Strain Monitoring s Extensometers will be placed at two locations on the exterior east and west walls straddling the junction of the overhang and the main portion of the structure to monitor strain during the underpinning operati$n. Four 5' long extensometers, which will span a minimum of 20 feet, will be installed near the roof line of each wall and four 5' long extensometers will be located-on each wall at Elev. 628'-0".
Each 5' long extensometer will measure the strain primarily with a,LVDT and secondarily with dial gages. Reading fre-quency with be as described in Section 4.7.1.
4.7.3 Building Crack Monitoring i
4 During various stages of the underpinning work, accessible areas in the critical locations in the over-hanging portions of the SWPS resting on fill will be monitored for cracks. The critical locations are the exterior east j and west walls of the overhang and the roof slabs at the junction of the overhand portion of the building with the deeper portion of the building.
. - - _ , - - . , . , . - ---. . , , , . ~ , . . . _ , ,
4.7.4 Acceptance Criteria The acceptance criteria for relative displacement, strain monitoring and crack monitoring, as discussed earlier, are as follows:
Alert Level Action Level (1) Relative displacement [ex- 50 mils 70 mils cluding rigid body motion]
in the north-south direction.
(2) Strain monitoring. .001 in/in .002 in/in (3) Crack mapping. New cracks Any crack exceeding reaching 60 10 mils or mils.,
any crack exceeding 30 mils The terms " alert level" and " action level" are defined as follows:
Alert Level:
All values up to the alert level are considered to be within normal working ranges.
Settlement, strain and cracking information will -
be reviewed by the resident structural engineer daily. In general, for readings below the alert level, attention should be focused on the value of the readings versus the construction progress and any indication of trends that would indicate the alert level will be exceeded.
Once the alert level is exceeded, the site resident structural engineer must inform engineering in Ann Arbor of the situation. All available data should be evaluated in total. Where trends exist that indicate the action level is
. likely to be reached, plans will be evaluated to remedy the situation. (Note: it is recognized that the evaluation may conclude that no changes are warranted.)
Action Level:
~
Values in excess of the action 1evel must be reviewed by the resident structural engineer and by en-gineering in Ann Arbor.
Plans would be initiated to modify the condition that caused the reading to exceed the action level. Con-sumers Power Company must be informed of the revised plan so that the NRC can be advised of the situation. (Note: it is recognized that the evaluation may conclude that no changes are warranted.)
5.0 ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA 5.1 UNDERPINNED STRUCTURE As discussed in Section 1.3, the SWPS is designated as a Seismic Category I structure. As such, the underpinned structure is analyzed in accordance with the design criteria and applicable loads and load combinations described in FSAR Section 3.8.6.3, Rev. 44. This includes checking for stability against overturning, sliding, and flotation. The operating basis earthquake (OBE) and safe shutdown earthquake (SSE) loads for the existing structure are specified in Section 3.7 of the FSAR.
The existing structure is also analyzed for various conditions corresponding to the construction of the under-pinning wall.
The underpinned structure is required to satisfy the stability criteria as'specified in the FSAR. The existing portion of the underpinned structure must satisfy the allowable stresses specified in the ACI 318 Code and AISC codes, as specified in the FSAR.
5.2 UNDERPINNING WALLS AND CONNECTORS The design of the underpinning walls and connectors complies with the design criteria, loads, and load combina-tions specified in the ACI 349 Code as amended by NRC Regulatory Guide 1.142. The underpinning and connectors are designed to withstand the effects of the site-specific response spectra (SSRS) ground motion. The structural forces resul. ting from the FSAR SSE ground motion were multiplied by a factor of 1.5 for the design of the under-pinning and connectors. The response from 1.5 times the FSAR SSE envelops the final SSRS response.
5.3 MATERIAL PROPERTIES The underpinning wall will be constructed of reinforced concrete. The wall is constructed in segments and assembled into a continuous wall by utilizing standard Fox-Howlett couplers to splice the reinforcement where necessary. The walls are attached to the existing structure with grouted-in reinforcing bars and anchor bolts. The specified minimum strength of the materials used in the underpinned structure is as follows:
Concrete (existing structure) f'c = 4,000 psi Concrete (underpinning walls) f'c = 6,000 psi Reinforcing bars (ASTM A 615) fy = 60,000 psi Anchor bolts (ASTM 540) fy = 120,000 psi
f'c is the compressive strength of concrete. fy is the minimum yield strength of steel.
Fox-Howlett couplers comply with requirements of ASTM 576.
6.0 DESIGN OF THE UNDERPINNING WALL The underpinning wall is designed for the loads and load combinations discussed in Section 5.2. Included in these loads is the jacking load -- a load which is not unusual in underpinning work.
6.1 JACKING LOAD The jacking load fulfills two objectives:
- 1. The initial jacking load supports the overhang portion of the existing structure during construc-tion of the underpinning.
- 2. In combination with the anchor bolts, the fina) jacking load provides a means of adequately transferring loads from the existing structure through the underpinning to a suitable bearing stratum following completion of construction.
6.1.1 Initial Jacking Load The construction of the underpinning wall requires a limited amount of excavation under the structure. To compensate for the possible loss of support, an initial level of jacking force is inserted between the top of each underpinning pier and the SWPS. A total initial stage jacking load of 3,130 kips is applied with 2,500 kips dis-tributed to the north underpinning wall and the remainder to
. 1 e 8 f the side walls. The value of 3,130 kips compensates for the possible loss of support during pier and tunnel construction.
6.1.2 Final Jacking Load In addition to providing the load transfer capa-bility of the underpinning system, the final jacking load of 4,600 kips reduces the loading on the lower base mat. The final jacking load, ccmbined with the building dead and live loads, produces a more uniform distribution of soil pressure, thereby improving the overall capability of the existing structure.
6.2 BEARING PRESSURES The thickness of the underpinning wall is set at 4 feet, with the base of the north wall enlarged to 6 feet.
Using the results of the finite-element analysis (explained in Section 7.2), bearing pressures at the underpinning walls and at the lower base slab are calculated and are shown in FSAR Table 2.5-14.
6.3 INTERFACE CONNECTORS After the final jacking load is locked off, the underpinning wall is attached to the existing structure. At the vertical interface, #9 reinforcing bars are grouted into the existing structure and embedded in the underpinning wall. The attachment at the horizontal interface is made with 2 3/4-inch diameter anchor bolt assemblies, which connect the foundation slab of the existing structure to the underpinning.
ACI 349 load combinations, including the increased seismic forces referred to in Section 5.2, are used to
obtain the shear and axial forces that the connectors must transmit. To more adequately transmit these forces, the contact surfaces of the existing structure are to be rough-ened in compliance with the ACI 349 code. For details of the described connections see Figures SWP-12 and 13.
7.O STRUCTURAL EVALUATION An evaluation is made to verify that the existing structure, underpinning walls and connectors, and the t5tal underpinned structure meet the acceptance criteria explained in Section 5.0. .
7.1 ANALYTICAL PROCEDURE There are three steps in a structural evaluation.
The first.is to determine external loads that represent actual loads to which the structure may be subjected during its service life. The second stage involves calculating the magnitude and distribution of internal forces and displace-ments within the structure caused by application of the external loads. In the third stage, forces are converted to stresses and compared to allowables or directly compared to section capacities.
7.1.1 Determination of External Loads The external loads are briefly addressed in this section. .They consist of many common types of loads, such as dead, live, wind, seismic, and some special loads from the effects of jacking forces and differential settlement.
7.1.1.1 Dead Loads Dead loads are determined from the self-weight of
, L the structure, the weight of permanent equipment, and hydro-static pressures.-
7.1.1.2 Live Loads Design live loads consider probable load varia-tions during the normal function of the building and are applied to the floor and roof slabs. Lateral soil pressures on the walls are also included in the live load category.
7.1.1.3 Wind and Tornado Loads Wind and tornado loads are determined from the external velocity pressure which varies as a function of the wind velocity and the shape of the building. The effects of tornado missiles are also included.
7.1.1.4 Buoyant Load The buoyant load is determined from~the volume of a submerged portion of the building during various condi-tions including the probable maximum flood.
7.1.1.5 Seismic Loads The seismic accelerations are determined using a lumped-mass model with the response spectrum modal super-
~
position technique. The computed reismic response accel-erations are multiplied by the structural element masses to provide the seismic forces for the structural analysis. -
Further information on the seismic analysis ~cri-teria, such as ground response spectra, damping values, etc., is contained in FSAR Section 3.7. The details of the dynamic model for the seismic analysis and associated soil-structure interaction formulation were addressed by Dr. R.
P. Kennedy in previous testimony.
The resistance of the underpir;ned SWPS to earth-quake loads associated with the SSRS will be evaluated in the seismic margin evaluation program. As stated in Section 5.2, the underpinning walls and connectors are designed to withstand the effects of the SSRS.
7.1.1.6 Thermal Effects Thermal effects result from the existence of thermal gradients within the walls and slabs.
7.1.1.7 Jacking Preload Before attaching underpinning to the existing structure, jacking loads are treated as external loads.
After the underpinning is attached to the building, jacking preload effects consist o'f internal forces, moments, and deformations retained in the structure.
7.1.1.8 Settlement Effect The long-term differential settlement effect is included in the analysis for sustained loads, using ap-propriate soil springs to reflect settlements predicted in Section 8.4 of this testimony.
7.1.1.9 Construction Loads Construction loads are temporary and are applied to the existing structure during construction of the under-pinning walls. They include post-tensioning loads, dewater-ing effects, reactions from struts placed against the struc-ture during excavation, and jacking loads during various stages of underpinning wall construction.
I
7.1.2 Internal Force Distribution Internal force magnitude and distribution and structural displacements are determined by solving a series of force-displacement equations. The three-dimensional, finite-element model representing the elastic behavior of the SWPS under load serves as the basis for the equations.
The finite-element model is explained in Section 7.2. Fur-ther details of the analytical procedure are set forth in Appendix B of the previously submitted testimony of Burke, Corley, Gould, Johnson, and Sozen for the Midland plant auxiliary building.
7.1.3 Comparison to Allowable Stresses Calculated stresses are compared to allowable stresses by selecting locations subjected to the highest internal forces and moments. Two options are generally used to verify adequacy:
- 1. Forces and moments are converted to stresses and compared to allowable stresses.
- 2. Forces and moments are compared to section capac-ities.
7.2 METHOD OF ANALYSIS The underpinned structure is analyzed by the finite-element method using the Bechtel Structural Analysis Program (BSAP). The existing structure and underpinning wall are modeled by a set of finite elements. The model consists of approximately 1,200 elements. Plate elements representing the floors and walls of the structure form the
largest group of elements. Plate elements are also used at the interfaces of the underpinning walls and existing struc-ture to simulate the connection detail. Beam elements are used to represent beams and columns. Soil support to the structure is represented by boundary elements that act as springs. Different spring values are used to simulate different settlement and loading conditions.
Two mcdel configurations are used. The first model is the disconnected model in which the underpinning wall is not connected to the structure. This model is used to analyze the construction conditions. The second model is the connected model in which the underpinning wall is con-nect'd e to the structure. The second model is used to analyze all other conditions.
7.3 RESULTS Approximately 95% of the principal ctructural elements of the SWPS are slabs and walls. The remaining 5%
are beams and columns.
The evaluation of all slabs and walls of the SWPS has been completed. The existing structure, underpinning walls, and connectors meet the design criteria contained in the FSAR and described in Section 5 of this testimony.
Typical results are given in Table SWP-1.
The beams and columns of the SWPS are being evaluated, and the results will be available for NRC Staff review by. December, 1982.
In the Applicant's response to NRC Question No. 26 regarding plant fill, the Applicant committed to check the existing structure for the load :ombinations contained in ACI 349, as modified by Regulatory Guide 1.142. This check indicates that the existing structure generally meets ACI 349 with the exceptions of some localized areas where minor over-stresses occur. In our judgment, this condition does not affect the structural intdgrity of the building.
8.0 GEOTECHNICAL CONSIDERATIONS 8.1 CHARACTERISTICS OF THE UNDERLYING SOILS The original site investigation and subsequent borings near the SWPS disclosed the presence of hard glacial till throughout the immediate vicinity. Table SWP-2 lists the successive boring programs pertinent to the SWPS, the dates the borings were made and the type of technical infor-mation developed from the boring and sampling.
. . en In 1981 an investigation by Woodward-Clyde Consul-tants (WCC) added information on subsoil conditions (See Reference 1). These WCC borings included numbers COE-14, COE-15A, COE-16, and COE-16A. Borings Nos. COE-16 and 16A, made at the northeast corner of the SWPS, provided detailed properties of the glacial till.
A plan of the immediate area of the SWPS under-pinning with locations of borings relevant to'the under-pinning design is shown in the upper panel of Fig. SWP-15.
In the lower panel of Fig. SWP-15 is a geological section developed through the U-shaped underpinning wall with the
wall unfolded.as if it were being viewed in a single ver-
.tical plane. The borings are plotted at positions projected at right angles to the line of the underpinning wall.
f Standard sampler penetration resistance.is shown at.the e
j borings where these values were obtained.
+
The borings near the planned underpinning wall re-i vealed three general subsoil strata which are described in i the following paragraphs in order of depth from the ground surface. The properties of these three strata are sum-marized-in Table SWP-3.
i 8.1.1 Stratum F, Fill i i
This stratum consists of clay with lesser amounts
! of sand, extending from present ground surface typically to ,
a depth of 34 feet, or from elevation 634' to 600'. The tests on WCC boring samples demonstrate that the fill is chiefly a clay soil of moderate plasticity with 65 percent passing the 200 sieve size. Median shear strength of the
, clay from nine undrained shear tests on clay in the WCC borings is 1.5 ksf. Beneath the overhang structure, sampler penetration resistance has a median value of 17 blows per foot in the clay and 16 blows per foot in sand fill at the 4
l southwest of the overhang. There are a number of thin layers of concrete.
t 8.1.2 Stratum A, Alluvium i
i This stratum consists of very dense sand mixed and i
i interlensed with lesser amounts of silt and clay, extending typically to elevation 590'. In some locations it is in l
1 i
i t
, ,..---.-y., 9... y w , ,-e,.-,.-, -,,w-,..,-e,---,.,._,-,---.---e-- , . . , - - . - . ,.,- .
,,-..%- %.,,n,.-e,.n,w ,e,,,..--,%w- ww ,.w. .,
A 1 pockets within the upper portion of the glacial till. It is chitfly classified as "SM, silty sand" with some amount of smali gravel, with 28 percent passing the 200 sieve size.
Standard sampler penetration resistance is medium to very high, generally between 40 and 120 blows per foot with a median of 90 blows. Test values of undrained shear strength from three CIU triaxial tests average 25 ksf under chamber pressures of about 2 ksf. Drained friction angles average I 41 degrees. These exceptionally high strength and sampler i
penetration resistance values indicate that, after deposition by water action, the alluvium was overridden by the waning continental ice sheet and is therefore preconsolidated.
8.1.3 Stratum T, Undisturbed Glacial Till This stratum, which con'sists of extremely compact sandy clay till, was encountered typically below elevation 590' down to the maximum depth explored in the borings.. The presence of undisturbed glacial till will'be determined in the field by the resident geotechnical engineer, utilizing the Waterways Experiment Station CN-973 penetrometer device.
Continuous sampling at the WCC borings indicates that the till is remarkably consistent for the full depth of those borings. Detailed testing at Boring Nos. COE-16 and COE-16A yielded the following average properties: 57 per-cent passing the 200 sieve size; liquid limit of 17; plastic limit of 11; natural water content of 9 percent. Standard sampler penetration resistance ranges typically from 50 to 120 blows per foot with a median value of 75 blows. Ten
o i
l : undrained triaxial tests performed on the WCC boring samples.
- yielded a median undrained shear strength of 18 ksf. The preconsolidation stress evidenced in several WCC consoli-I dation tests is at least 48 tons per-square foot. For the-purpose of settlement analysis, modulus of elasticity (E) of this extremely compact _ sandy clay till was. assessed based on h the following conventional correlation
- E equals 500 times
! the undrained shear strength. Thus E must be at least 6,000 to 9,000 ksf. '
I j The glacial till found at the SWPS location would have been deposited in the original advance of the contin-ental ice by being pressed directly on an underlying re-sistant surface by the thrust of the ice sheet. It is one of the hardest and most stable glacial soils encountered in f .
the northern and eastern United States. For example, its l test properties are superior to the glacial till " hardpan" 4
l of New York City which serves as a supporting stratum for many of the largest buildings in the country and which is i
assigned a nominal allowable bearing capacity of 12 tons per
}
square foot.
8.2 BEARING CAPACITY OF UNDERPINNING PIERS j The SWPS underpinning piers will be founded at or i below elevation 587' on und'isturbed glacial till. '
Ultimate l bearing capacity is that value of unit loading on a found-l i ation which will cause shear failure in the supporting soil, leading to continuous downward movement. The safety factor l against such a failure equals the ultimate bearing capacity ,
s i
1 i
divided by the prescribed combinations of applied loading.
The bearing capacity commitment in FSAR Subsection 2.5.4.10.1 for the foundation design requires a safety factor of at least 3 against dead load plus sustained live load and a safety factor of at least 2 for these loads plus the seismic load. In engineering practice these values represent a conservative selection.
For purposes of computing the ultimate bearing capacity for the SWPS underpinning it is appropriate to multiply the till's undrained shear strength by a " bearing capacity factor." Bas 9d on the testing conducted at the SWPS location as well as a review of other relevant soil boring information contained in Fig. SWP-15 and Table SWP-3,
'an undrained shear strength value of 8 ksf has been con-servatively selected for the glacial till. The shear strength properties of the alluvial material are even more favorable than those determined for glacial till.
The bearing capacity factor is a parameter which relates cohesive shear strength and ultimate bearing pres-sure. As demonstrated by A. W. Skempton in Referenca 2, it is a function of the shape of the footing and its depth of embedmont in the supporting soil. A distinctly conservative bearing capacity factor of 6.5 was selected for this anal-ysis on the basis of a depth of embedment which is at least equal to the 6-foot width of the base of the north under-pinning wall. With this bearing capacity factor and an undrained shear strength of 8 ksf, the ultimate bearing capacity is 52 ksf.
- Jul evaluation was also performed using the drained strength parameters from WCC testing' set forth in Table SWP-
- 3. (C'=0.73 ksf and # = 36*) . The ultimate bearing capacity with drained shear strength is approximately 160 ksf.
Since the undrained shear strength is smaller than the drained shear strength, the ultimate bearing capacity of 52 ksf, based on undrained shear strength, is used. Safety 4
factors are determined by dividing the ultimate bearing capacity by the various applied loads and are summarized in FSAR Table 2.5-14. These factors of safety exceed the re-quired values.
i 8.3 ESTIMATE OF SETTLEMENT OF THE UNDERPINNING PIERS The anticipated total settlement of the underpinning ,
i wall was computed utilizing elastic theory and a conservative selection of undrained modulus of elasticity of 4,000 ksf.
- The partictlar equation employed is that given on Figure 11-9 of Reference 3, which contains factors to allow for the shape and embedment of the permanent underpinning. The total settlement thus computed is estimated to be between i
0.4 to 0.5 inch over the 40-year life of the SWPS. This includes the immediate settlement, settleinent due to volume change from primary consolidation and long-term, delayed secondary compression settlement.
The underpinning scheme with its load applied by jacks will prestress the till into " secondary compression,"
- which is that long-term gradual settlement which takes place under load in fine-grained strata after the hydrostatic l
I
.,,.----~~_-----o,',e ,,,,m,. , --a.- --r-.y-_~, ,wm - . - - - , .,-w;,.-nw%7-7y----7m.nm,--e.,wyw.. .-, .- - . . - , , .
excess pore water pressures have been dissipated. It is manifested as a straight line relationship between settlement and log of time in a semi-log plot. Secondary compression has also been referred to as " secondary consolidation."
It is a fundamental provision of the underpinning scheme that the immediate settlements and consolidation, if any, will occur during the jacking phase and only the secondary compression will remain to take place in the 40-year life of the structure. It is intended that the final jacking operation be continued until the following criteria are satisfied:
- 1. The jacking load for the permanent underpinning will be maintained at the specified value for at least.30 days and;
- 2. On a semi-log time plot, the progression of settlement in the later stage of jacking will approximate a straight line,
- 3. No more than 0.05 inch of settlement will occur in the last 30 days of jacking, and
- 4. No more than 0.01-inch settlement will occur in the last 10 days as measured by extensometer dial gages.
After these criteria are satisfied, it is assured that secondary compression alone remains to occur. Once this condition has been reached, sufficient data will be i .
available to make a prediction of future settlements by an extrapolation of the straight line trend of secondary com-pression.
The secondary compression portion of the total settlement value has been estimated by weighing the following items of information:
- 1. The WCC testing report (Reference 1) yields a coefficient of secondary compression in the stress range associated with the underpinning piers equal to 0.0005 units of strain per log cycle of time.
The underpinning piers will cause significant stress increase within a depth equal to one foun-dation width or 6 feet. Therefore, the settlement from secondary compression in each log cycle of time would equal 0.0005 times 6 feet times 12 to convert to inches, a value of 0.04 inch per log cycle. In the two log cycles of time from the completion of jacking to the 40-year life of the structure, secondary compression would total 0.1 inch by this computation.
- 2. Actual observations of settlement extending over several years at the SWPS indicate that the portion of this large structure founded on the sandy clay till settled in the range of 0.2 to 0.3 inch per log cycle of time. From this it would be reasonable to conclude that the smaller SWPS underpinning units would settle typically 0.1 to 0.2 inch per log cycle.
- 3. General experience of settlement of large structures on heavily preconsolidated clay, as illustrated by data presented by A. W. Skempton (Reference 2),
indicates that long-term delayed settlement is typically one-fifth to one-third of the total settlement of the structure.
Based.on the above considerations and on experience with similar controlled loading of spread footings on glacial till, it is estimated that two-thirds to three-quarters of the total computed settlement of 0.4 to 0.5 inch will be completed in the jacking period, leaving 0.1 to 0.2 inch of long-term settlement of the underpinning piers to take place in the 40-year life of the structure.
8.4 DIFFERENTIAL SETTLEMENT BETWEEN UNDERPINNING AND MAIN SWPS Settlement measurements at the corners of the main SWPS structure founded on undisturbed glacial till commenced in the summer of 1978. These measurements defined semi-los i
straight lines which yield estimated projected settlement be-tween the present date and the 40-year life of the structure equal to about 0.2 to 0.3 inch if loading conditions remained unaltered. The present loading is essentially the buoyant dead load of the structure with no water contained in the building's reservoirs and is equal to 1.6 kst. The predicted long-term settlement for the bottom of the underpinning piers after jacking was estimated (see Section 8.3) to be about 0.1 to 0.2 inch. Hence, the potential for differential settlement between the portion of the building to be under-pinned and the main portion of the building presently founded on undisturbed glacial till is on the order of 0.1 to 0.2 inch, if the loading conditions on the latter portion of the building remain as they are now. .
The long-term loading of the main portion of the SWPS and the sequence of operating conditions which could influence this future settlement trend are as follows:
8.4.1 Filling SWPS Reservoirs The average distributed static design unit load of the main SWPS building, including dead and sustained live load, over the entire slab founded on undisturbed glacial till equals 3.2 ksf. This includes an allowance for the buoyancy from hydrostatic uplift with the groundwater level maintained at elevation 627' and it also includes the weight of the water contained in the reservoir of the SWPS.
Of that 3.2 ksf, a total of 1.6 ksf, or one-half of the sustained loading is contributed by the weight of
water _in the' building's water reservoirs. It is intended that the SWPS water reservoirs be totally filled before underpinning is completed. During regular operations of the l SWPS, maintenance and cleaning will be accomplished by unloading reservoirs individually. Therefore, the water reservoirs' load will never be removed or reapplied all at one. time. It is estimated that changes in loading after filling will amount to only one-quarter of the total of 1.6 ksf, or 0.4 ksf.
In April 1980 the SWPS reservoirs were filled to the extent of adding a unit load of 1.2 ksf. This loading was maintained until October 1980. The observed settlement in that period was no more than 0.2 inch. Full filling of the tanks would therefore be expected to cause a settlement of approximately 0.3 inch and partial emptying and refilling would cause up or down movement of about 0.1 inch. All of these movements refer to the main portion of the SWPS building and would be expected to have insignificant effects at the north wall underpinning.
8.4.2 Dewatering and Drawdown Piezometer observations in September 1982 indicate that a groundwater level at about elevation 612' now exists beneath the SWPS structure. It is expected that there will be a drawdown during underpinning to approximately elevation 585' along the north underpinning wall of the SWPS that could create lowering of piezometric levels in the glacial till beneath the structure. On the basis of the assumed flow
field and drawdown within the underlying glacial till, it is estimated that the drawdown for underpinning could cause a settlement of about 0.2 inch beneath the north underpinning wall and less than about 0.1 inch beneath the south wall of the main SWPS. This drawdown settlement will occur with the underpinning construction and will be recovered to some extent at the end of thet operation.
8.4.3 Summary of Differential Settlement In summary, fluctuations of the water loading in the reservoir will be the principal influence on movements of the southern main body of the SWPS whereas changes in drawdown of the plant area will chiefly affect settlements of the piers. An exact prediction of the settlements due to these effects acting concurrently cannot and need not be made. A distinctly conservative evaluation of these possible effects can be achieved by assuming a differential movement of 0.3 inch between the center of the main block of the SWPS and the north wall underpinning elements and that differential settlement could occur with maximum settlement either at the underpinning or at the main SWPS block.
9.0 CONCLUSION
As a result of these investigations and analyses as presented herein, it is concluded that the underpinning can be constructed without damaging the existing structure.
With the underpinning resting on sound foundation material, the structural analysis of the modified structure proves that the SWPS will safely perform its intended function for the 40-year life of the plant.
As previously discusped in tiiis proceeding, certain details of Applicant',s testimony may be modified as con-struction proceeds. Any major changes would be brought to the attention of the NRC Staff pursuant to the Work
\
Authorization Procedure established in August 1982.
4 O
i 1
. - . . . ~ - , , - , - - - - - . . , ---
REFERENCES
- 1. Woodward-Clyde Consultants, Test Results, Auxiliary Building Soil Boring and Test Program, Midland Units 1 and 2, Midland, Michigan,. October 26, 1981
- 2. A. W. Skempton, "The Bearing Capacity of Clays , " Building Research Conference Congress Proceedings, 1951
- 3. NAVFAC Design Manual DM-7, Soil Mechanics, Foundations, and Earth Structures, Department of the Navy, Naval Facilities Engineering Command, March 1971 9
6 0
e
7 TABLE SWP-1
Reintorcement Location (ksi) Load Combination South Wall 49.007 1.0(D + L + P +T + E')-
L o North wall, 20.378 1.0(D + L + P +T + E')
el 620'-0" L o to el 656'-0" East wall 48.410 1.0(D + L + P +T + E')
L o.
West wall 44.618 1.4(D + L + E) + 1/0(P +T)
L o Interior wall 52.638 1.4(D + L + E) + 1. 0 (P +T)
L o Roof slab 50.549 1.J(D + L + E) + 1. 0 (P +T)
L o Floor slab at 50.939 1.4(D ' L + E) + 1.0(P + T }-
el 634'-0" L o
~
Underpinning 42.752 0.9(D) + 1.7(L) + 1.0(P ) + 1.9(E) walls (2) L Base slab at 15.779 l'.0(D + L + P +T + E')
L o D = Dead Load L = Live load p = Final jacking load L
T = Operating thermal load o
E = Operating basis earthquake E' = Safe shutdown earthquake (1) Allowable reinforcement stress = 54 ksi (2) Designed for ACI-349 load combinations
TABLE SWP- 2
SUMMARY
OF TEST BORING SERIES IN VICINITY OF THE SERVICE WATER PUMP STRUCTURE UNDERPINNING Boring Date Series Performed Purpose of the Borings Technical Data C Oct. 1969 In original preconstruction Standard sampler penetration re-investigation sistance (N values) , no laboratory testing D June 1970 In original preconstruction Standard sampler penetration re-investigation sistance '(N values) , no laboratory testing SWP Oct. 1974 Preconstruction investigation N valuer, no laboratory testing SW Oct. 1978 to Investigate character of fill N values, grain size analyses March 1979 beneath and around overhang -
Test Pit June 1979 To investigate fill condition Material identification test in-at NE corner of SWPS cluding, moisture content, density, limits, sieve analysis, specific gravity, and compaction testing CH July 1979 Determir e seismic velocities N values, no laboratory testing in fill and till PD Dec. 1979 to Groundwater investigation N values, grain size analyses Feb. 1980 .
l, 4
7
TABLE SWP- 2 Boring Date '
Series Performed Purpose of the Borings Technical Data COE April 1981 COE-16 and 16A: to obtain Continuous. undisturbed sampling for to May 1981 samples for test to support identification and engineering underpinning design properties tests - See WCC Report 10/1/81 WF May 1981 Groundwater investigation for Continuous undisturbed sampling for Permanent wells identification and grain size analysis N
-f
TABLE SWP- 3 SERVICE WATER BUILDING UNDERPINNING -
PROPERTIES OF FILL AND SANDY CLAY TILL _
Stratum F: Fill
. Median values of standard sampler penetration resistance, "N" values, in blows per foot; taken in
- underpinning zone below overhang foundation:
For Clay Fill, N = 17 blows per foot For Sand Fill, N = 16 blows per foot (Sandy material concentrated at the southwest corner and west wall.of underpinning)
Stratum A: Sandy Alluvium Median Standard Penetration Resistance:
N = 90 blows per foot; 28% passing the No. 200 sieve size; Average undrained shear strength from three CIU traxial tests by WCC in 1981 equals 25 ksf.
Stratum T: Hard. Clay Till Median Standard Penetration Resistance:
N = 75 blows per foot 57% passing the No. 200 sieve size; liquid limit = 17 plastic limit = 11 Natural water content = 9%
Median Shear Strength from undrained triaxial tests Median value of Shear Strength Testing Grouping (ksf)
Three UU triaxial tests 16 Seven CIU triaxial tests 22 All 10 undrained triaxial tests 18 Average drained strength parameters:
From 2 series of CIU triaxial tests by WCC, 1981:
o C' = 0.73 ksf J' = 36
TABLE SWP- 3 l Typical Consolidation Properties:
From 2 consolidation tests by WCC, 1981:
Recompression-Ratio: C /(1 + e ) = 0.004 (strain per log cycle of pressure) r 0 Coefficient of Secondary Compression: 0.0005 (strain per log cycle of time)
Coefficient of Consolidaton: C = 0.01 cm per second.
v e
9
SS: STATE OF MICHIGAN COUNTY OF WASHTENAW UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD In the Matter of ) Docket Nos. 50-329-OM
) 50-330-OM CONSUMERS POWER COMPANY ) 50-329-OL
) 50-330-OL (Midland Plant, Units 1 and 2))
AFFIDAVIT OF ALAN J. BOOS My name is Alan J. Boos. I am Assistant Project Manager for the Midland Project for Bechtel Power Corporation.
In this capacity I am responsible for providing overall management direction for soils work for Bechtel.as well as for project services (procurement, administrative services, cost and schedule). I have a B.S. and M.S. in Civil En-gineering from the University of Michigan. I am a registered professional engineer in the states of Michigan and Cali-fornia. My resume is attached.
In connection with my role as Assistant Project Manager, I have been assigned the responsibility for the Service Water Pump Structure Testimony. I am personally familiar with the events leading up to the decision to implement remedial work on the building, and I participated in the decision process related thereto. I have reviewed in detail the proposed design of the remedial work and I am jointly responsible with Edmund M. Burke, James P. Gould and Palanichamy Shunmugavel for the testimony.
I swear that the statements contained in this affidavit, the attached resume, and the Service Water Pump Structure Testimony are true and correct to the best of my v
knowledge and belief.
,x6 1 AN J. BOOS SIGNED ANDgWORN TO BEFOFE
< me this 'J - day of 6.34 , 1982.
,, i Q, /{-(W ~
O NOTARY PUBLIC Y.1Cenmission Expires hnaary 14,1933 l
M ALAN J. BOOS POSITION Assistant Project Manager __
EDUCATION BS, Civil Engineering, University "[1 of Michigan _J MS, Civil Engineering, University -
of Michigan .
l PROFESSIONAL Registered Professional Civil Engineer DATA in Michigan p Registered Professional Engineer in California _
SUMMARY
l-1/2 years: Assistant project manager -w 4 years: Project field engineer 1-~
2-1/2 years: Area engineer ?-
1-1/2 years: Senior civil design engineer ,
2-1/2 years: Civil design engineer ,
2 years: Civil field engineer EXPERIENCE Mr. Boos is currently serving as an assistant ,,
project manager on the Consumers Power Company Midland project. In this position he is responsible for providing overall manage- -
ment guidance for remedial soils work and general project services (procurement, ,
administrative services and cost / schedule).
Prior to this assignment Mr. Boos served as hh project field engineer for the Midland project. 9 He was responsible for all field engineering t" activities at the jobsite in this position. -
Prior to his assignment as project field l engineer, Mr. Boos was an area engineer at the "m Midland jobsite where he coordinated and =
directed all field engineering activities for the construction of the auxiliary building.
d-Mr. Boos came to the Ann Arbor Power Division in December 1972 as.a senior civil design engineer. He responsibilities included &
. reviewing project civil designs and acting "r as the civil department's licensing engineer t reviewing civil safety analysis report sections 7 prior to submittal to the NRC. =
Mr. Boos joined Bechtel in July 1968 as a =_
civil design engineer for the Power and -
Industrial Division in San Francisco. His T assignments as a civil design engineer and _
a civil field engineer sent him to Russellville, --
Arkansas, and to Homestead, Florida, where, -
among other activities, he supervised the repair of a post-tensioned concrete containment dome.
~
February 1982 n
1 _
SS: STATE OF MICHIGAN COUNTY OF WASHTENAW UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD In the Matter of ) Docket Nos. 50-329-OM
) 50-330-OM CONSUMERS POWER COMPANY ) 50-329-OL
) 50-330-OL (Midland Plant, Units 1 and 2))
AFFIDAVIT OF PALANICHAMY SHUNMUGAVEL My name is Palanichamy Shunmugavel. I am a Engineering Specialist in the civil / structural department of Bechtel Power Corporation in Ann Arbor. In this capacity I am responsible for providing consultation to civil / ctructural engineers working for Bechtel and for reviewing their work.
I have a B.E. in Civil Engineering, M. Tech. in Structural Engineering and a Ph.D. in Civil Engineering. I am a registered professional engineer in the state of California.
My resume is attached.
In connection with my role as Engineering Specialist, I have been assigned the responsibility for the Service Water Pump Structure Testimony. I have reviewed in detail the proposed design of the remedial work, and the related structural evaluations and I am jointly responsib.le with Edmund Burke, James P. Gould and Alan J. Boos for the testimony.
I swear that the statements contained in this affidavit, the attached resume, and the Service Water Pump Structure Testimony are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief.
l , . .
gw' O 3/;- ,s,,-- co , ~
PALANICHAMY SHU'IMUGAVEL SIGNED ANDf WORN TO BEFORE me this AT - day of 954,. , 1982.
('
6Esa<w A(l Ot.m NOTARY PUBLIC M7 Canisslan Expires knuary T4.1933 s
Octobsr, 1982 PALANICHAMY SHUNMUGAVEL POSITION Engineering Specialist, Civil / Structural Staff EDUCATION BE, Civil Engineering, Madras University, India M. Tech, Structural Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology, Bombay Ph.D., Civil Engineering, University of Illinois, Urbana PROFESSIONAL Registered Civil Engineer in California DATA Member, American Concrete Institute Member, American Society of Civil Engineering
SUMMARY
4 years: Engineering Specialist, Civil /
Structural Staff' 1 year: Senior Engineer, Civil / Structural Staff 1 year: Senior Engineer, Pilgrim 2 Nuclear Project 3 years: Senior Analyst, Sargent & Lundy,'
power projects 1 year: Analyst, Sargent & Lundy, power projects EXPERIENCE: Dr. Shunmugavel is currently a member of the civil /
structural staff in the Bechtel Ann Arbor Power Division. His primary responsibilities, in connection with fossil and nuclear power plant structures, include providing consultation to civil / structural engineers
. engaged in the performance of design and analysis and in the preparation of specifications, reports and draw-ings; reviewing typical project work; develeping methods and procedures for the solution of special structural prob 1 cms; solving special structural prob-lems; and supervising three staff engineers. He is the chairman of the e;ruc tural committee, the main purpose of which is to establish and maintain a good technical quality with ut.iformity among various offices of the Bechtel Power Corporation. He has participated in an extensive concrete masonry shear vall test program.
His areas of responsibility include containment, seismic analysis, computer analysis, computer applications and other general structural analysis and design.
Previously, Dr. Shunmugavel was assigned to the Pilgrim 2 Nuclear Power Plant project in Bechtel's San Francisco office. His responsibilities included the performance of containment analysis and design, the preparation of related specifications and drawings, the evaluation of contract packages, and the supervision cf about ten engineers and drafters.
Prior to joining Bechtel, Dr. Shunmugavel had about 4 years experience in fossil and nuclear power projects. His assignments included the development of computer programs for seismic analysis of power plant structures, components and piping systems; the application of statistical and probabilistic methods to structural problems; the analysis and design of special structures such as nuclear steam supply system supports, machine foundations, pipe whip restraints, and buried pipes; and the analysis of structures for extreme loads such as tornado, explosion, aircraft impact and hydrodynamic effects in boiling water reactor containments.
p o.
O
l .c l
DOE'dETED v?tFC f,7 [$ 23 fl0 2b I
L i l
' I Y,
l 1
1
[ l' t
i t
b s
>i c
l
_ _ - _ - _ - _ - _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ - - -_ - - _ _M
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD in the Matter of )
) Docket Nos. 50-329-OM l CONSUMERS POWER COMPANY ) 50-330-OM
) 50-329-OL (Midland Plant, Units 1 ) 50-330-OL l and 2) l TESTIMONY OF ALLEN J. BOOS, EDMUND M. BURKE, JAMES P. GOULD, and PALANICHAMY SHUNMUGAVEL CONCERNING MIDLAND PLANT SERVICE WATER PUMP STRUCTURE Vdume 2 - Figures
-> % V .
w -
s, b, ,,- I 3 7 h{ // , O'U * - f
' ::'T.% i C "' " . _/ '
N- .
ca.etera N:7-s e, n,.. . , .
-t: -
s*'OP (vaposaigt an10 5.
~
s n. seo *J
' " Austtlaaf 80lLE4
"'" \.
e
\l }
^ 1,G , < o l
,.. - - . . . . ~ . - O =o < '_ N -
' s -
t ,N m w .,
, j - 1 p.e= = l l- '
(, , -,,
J '
m a vu .n g l U c-]*;;..,, E. ;@WP1, . l s,g 3 ,w
_ . _ ';'- 2: ,
O..*
I 3, ,i _ l. t.yt.:
y;;, "'--
,y;;'
. n.-,
4 4 , g' . '
1
O.".3 I
mst a l e
...t l!'*'$y/t vm as l i w s ..
/
't., a r A 4., ... . o, ..n .
'7'. lI LL sotto nacusrt sunen.c
- Na . ,.s t
- st.
n....->
' actit iatY
'I
' 5f 'l*'
i a
[
w.' : . a f ' m
'hs
- tatf 0R BLCC
, MD.' c '. ,
stacTC9 f.!C '.s**
[ * !
bI 8 mM2 ,5s,, rts -p,,,, ?
Pe0Jtti F1ft0 08fItt
[* . __ _
' s team.as 7",88g57 8'ag ~ 7 yg, ; se,Q,
[ \ s :. ., [,g , n, ,,
i , , .7 g,i,c
" - sn=
a wa.m U, . . w,N,,'s m
.- n. .......,
1 j
a sc. x
- m. ... m ., sm.,um. '~
(, a - -' "
c=2 -
l su,ca. c
- e 8
g': : y 5 5 tuastut euttoI=c -- -
r e . _
t
"" *" ' I " ' " " ' '""'" '
ett0tRs h f ,
ll' i
-f--
_ _ _ _.r="*m -
.- itsi snoe --- gi >r--,r-~v-'---
SEE -
g.l__. -
y w i. '" ro , ,,,,,,,,m im O orf RE rtw ,,,,,
[
l Ua_e * .a m ( .. r,,,, gs -
r--. t.it i > l - . *- / % -'". ru a, e 'r 0 { c %-m. p',!.s0 (/ :: :
y j 0.l..Rl.sl' 0.gstt crataaroa - ,. ..:n j i g= i y ,. _ .__ I ,
- r. - -
Buf L0issG ":..* -
st".it.,t.*s.*
v., r s.
g... 9J w 1 s.
= ot .p g ,,, .. im a
\
"'""3'""
cuapo n.s.,
\,c p_ _. 9J1 fp
"*2 "5
[
'(( Q;--
n_o_ust j --tc,cj,.j; fyf']
- h , ( p y j ] ] ]_ j j
- - . . ._/
p \ O! me 0 - (3di
- _a . m. ._a, s. .
/ '%f s .--
s- %o fy
_<< = r _
..m...
i 3 4p. -_.T y m.. ~ ss m. <
l p ===
ojp -
kN LJ \
J -,
[g /- / x-
\ _ _ _ _ -
7(, s ..c.....
vv .s vums-yx l
-k -- ~ ~ ~ 17. . g \ / I Y
x ...
9,: . n ,,, .
SITE PLAN OF MIDLAND UNITS 1 AND 2 POWER PLANT FIG SWP-1 G 2811-01
- " ' ~" "
.[,_- .' ~' ] <.; ] , ' " ' I . I ' , ,i [ [; '
~
.y. ..,, [r. ; )~ i ;. l' " 'l ').1.N 4
.. /.' y;[ -' I
~
. , .' g .
. _ ;- ; y'l t .
.- ,y ,... . - ,
%- . .'6, . y
. .. . : .. .t..
" . . 4;. . : . ? ?- 1*
. .~ . .n e . - . +..
. . ' . .l \ ,.
O ' .
. ' . i. ' gend, ',
-Ls' V'
.',., . . ., .,,.,r m _;
y ..- , . < _
-; _... .. (' * *
~
t -
r x
'. ,.v
.5L' ' e.
' $ ..w * *. N .. , '. $. --. ' ' sc
1
., 8 6'- O' 3
. 43'- o' .
(
- l. SYM A BOUT (UN.)
_ __ o e It -
d w
v>
.n_ _ __ __.__ _ __ _ _ ____ . __ _.
_ _ _ _ . __ _ _ __ __ ._ _ _ . _ _ - _ o FOUNDATION WALL D l
~
T o s
l I
w i t i
PLAN OF SERVICE WATER PUMP STRUCTURE AT EL 634'-6" FIG SWP-2 G-2611 -02
i TOP OF GRADE E L 6 3 4'- O "
TENSION TIE l ROOF E L 65 6'-O'S a__ _ _ _ _ _ _L. _ _ _ ___ _ _ ___ _ _ __ __ _ __ p i
f i
E L 64 3'- 6' 1 y zum BOT OF MAT EL 617'- 0"J 6" \
-h r
BACKFIL L m
x / ,
o a www/x- - -
BOT. OF M AT $
E L . 5 8 7'-O '
< 71'-11" > < 3 4'- 1 "
- NATURAL M AT E RI A L 1
TYPICAL SECTION OF SERVICE WATER PUMP STRUCTURE (Looking West) l l FIG SWP-3 G-2611 03 i
jlI lllllllll l 1 l ll llllllljll L
L A 4- 4 L
W P 0
1 G
NI W 1 6
N S 2-L N
I GG I
I P F O R S E L D A N R U U D Y
L AT ES N N O O
D L L -OP N L L s E F F PR I I i
- G w
S EO@E L
O 2-w S
O s-wA S 5 g w-4-
OS W ' E S ' E R
@ s- -
C I ER PU T
w VT M C r S / RAU U N N O EWP R O A
/ S T S
P L
9- G W 's N P SO U
/, O N o O c I T
/ A C
O s- / O 7- w L S
W S 0 G N
I R
0 O 1
- B 0S W GE 3- KE N
I AR W T TU S ANT L I C URU CE R IRTAS T CW l'
E SW-1 SW-2 G G SERVICE WATER PUMP CIRCULATING WATER STRUCTURE i O G i SW-4 SW-3 COOLING POND SERVICE WATER STRUCTURE SETTLEMENT MARKER LOCATIONS FIG SWP-5 G-2611 05
0 0 0 0 , 08 07 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 9 9 ,
6 5 6 5 9 8 6 6 5
5 3
6 S
5 3
6 5
3 6
4 5
3 4
6
- ,8 3
6 8
3 3
6 8
J 3
6 3
4 S
4 4
6 3
4 6
3 4
6 3
P 2
4 3
2 4
3 3..
2 4
3 0
1 1
4- U 0 - 0 E 6 K 2-C RS UT A
B TO C
G T
N U Ft t R SR 6 NG T g 2 2 AN 2 E-
, 0 0 MR 8 PK P 9
3' 1 E -RU 1 AR 9
1 PU i AW 1 t
- 3
- P g 2 2 2T R 2 f MS g 0 8 8 A 8 R TG
- 9 g 0 91 S T
0 E NI T
EF
'y g C 2 0 %
2 3 A 8.S YL L 2 8
AM V
EL E
- MM A,'
I N
2 2 RE e" A8 p H 8 E S
'l g
- j-I 6 4b -
S 6
y 2 2 2 g l1l.
0 1 8 8
'/] / 3 3' - 3
) 3 A,_ y g -r 2 0
- 2 - 2 8-3 , _ I' 1 1
1 t 1 e
4r I
8 -
18 8-n i
l W 9 1 1 8' 8- 8' N 8
- -~
N8- "
9 9 9 - 9 N -
1 O 1 1 1 TI 3 8 8
- Cs I 1 7-7 7 M
d7 LSEO T
T S
N C
V f PU OK SA
- C B
1 8 P; S K t
N 1 8
5 C
L h.
S A 1
N 1 B 1 6 E R @TE - 8 T 8 -
- SE 3 N 3 NE 3 b38 4G 1 D
0 . 8' ER AG MN R 1 8- MI NG AN 1 i
" l 1
&R N l l 1 PMU 1P 1
R E
P U P
M 8-1
- - P ,
0 00M 0 8T
- 8 M
- 3R -
P l
8 1
1 8S 9 N 1 A
.T 0
8 8O W
1 P 9T 1
_ 0 8-1 1O 9
4T 1 S T L 4L 0
8 T$ 0 P L 0 8 8 L 0 8
l 9- 2S 2 .l 9ESM 9 FM E -
d 0ESW T
P L L
E 9
0 8-0
] 0 9
w
^
f - l l 8 8
^
7 0
4 Y l' 7
0 8
7 0
8 7-0 8
S S S S
\ O M
0 8- -
0 6t 0
8 3 3 3
~
y)1 0 0 E 0 8- l 9 E
- 8 1
1 1 9 9 7
9 7 9 7 -
1 1
} 7 MN 1 1 7
9 M
O 9 TC I
s 9 VL 9 7
- U P 7 N g 7
9 R 9 9 E 9
9- CO 7
T S
N s 9 7- 9 T
N U 9 7 -
II 7
ll 7 7 D y 7
5 E
-v T A 9 R 9 9 7
L 9 4 E '- E 7-S S l
S S D S 0 G 0G 9 N 9
7 4 N 7 9
7 N 9
- 7
&I A 3
- 0M 0L 3 3
=
3 9 3P 9 7 - T 9 L 9
'- 7 A 7
- 0R
~
-l- i -
T 1
8A 1 1 1 p 8 6 7- 2S 9T
- 1. L )e M
8 7
8 7
4 e
B _
L L 3 1 1
1 EEL L2 11 g 1 M FW U E 7 8 0 8 8 8 l
7
- 9 7- c. 7 -
7 9 n 9 s 9 9 1
\
7 7
8 8
7-i 1~ 8 7
7 78 m
m e
v B 7
7 8
7-8 7
8 7
0 C C 0S .l0S 0 C c cS 1
5
)
K 9
4 8
4 8
6 8
M 4 Re s S 4
C 9
2 0
8 5 n%
3 6 o 3 6 6 S
3 o6 3
3 6 6 3
6 6 3 mM 8 6 MM e 6 2
-. ES4 3
6 y
- N *3* : Mg Yh.
1jllll
~ -s 1980 1981 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP FE DUCT BANKNALVE PIT 2/26/80: :9/22/81
~ #
4/20/81: l9/22/81 PD 37 4/22/81: l9/22/81 l
l l
l
"~ '
9/18/81; :2 PE RT.1ANENT WEL (G-2-G4 & F-1-F 11/20/81: ;2 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN l JULAUG SEP OCT NOV OEC JAN 1980 1981 w' w
f.--.-
1982 g
) MAR APH MAY JUN JU L AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC _
N u
A
~1 DEila"!N/o^SYsIEd' q/,'/'s ro.37
'd PD 27A [
olain alolo Ai 90UU O %
\p O C"
='
PONO O c8 ~)
l , y' , ,
i 1
i T I
COOLnNG
- 1 POND l PE Fir.1ANENT WELLS l (H 1-H 4, G-1-G-9, F 1-F-7) 5/6/82
- 7 SITE PLAN ^
LGCATIO?JS OF DEWATEfwdG WELLS (NOT TO SCALE)
B D
$/82 l
CONSUMERS POWER COMPANY MIDLAND PLANT UNITS 1 & 2 FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT DEWATERING EVENTS IN SERVICE WATER PUMP STRUCTURE AREA p MAR APH MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC FIGURE SWP-7
[
I l
l G-2611 -07
- g. . ,
S ,-**y,
, . g . v,: *
"b
> I. E ud 5 .
~
4
- p. 3 % mz a . --
4 4 U$ 6 . .
s, .'a $ ie g $$
m .Ib.
- B g %yNka16 e fe A. S T[
i '. * , 6 ho _. y W y
,= 20, '-
,, - 9! I' . -
gw . <.. es
%w .% u. fg k $g r w w 2 =; -' ' '
r .
3 ,
s g,;M.'q +.
k j [g fg
~
'Yl{
2 [ lN 3 [ .
+ i I5 hk N -)..
ib d) 4) l[4 $k . Id .
.9 :., .:. -
a a .
t
.ip I~ O- R. E ',4E. 5 e
n:
. g/
% 4 *%1 7 4 h Y @
k4M, . ' ... ;-
- 2 h
6 n
f c 2 b
E s 4 o --
o a s.~7p^'o h =M o . .
I 5Eh h
.* d .
.f I W 0 e*j = :'
o . N-*g I$.%@sh
~ ~ % s.
l
( c;PmN W
}-- _,
2 > < , esy n ((h> ,
< t e n .
3 t. ..
Y U '**V** G d 7 4 2 c
a s ;- o .3.
l '
? rd
& >_ ' . .: 7 R! =0 -
w ,
d d j $ ! dh , ' ' ,--- w :.- ',
k N f
1sP a I
+ 0 1 $ ,
- =
c,l <
1 :; . - , ,
t g : 4 Ol d4
~: 'Q3
,o'Tr .o , e -
7 ,
4-
.i H pp -2 # ,=
+
E) ; y
, f! a;[
k OM 3; a i
.. mms c -
- a % !,h
. ,n l
- ! .h . ~
i 4
e
- e 4 2.0 :
m; M io nos
- a --
z a
J i*:
o C
~.
,12 - .--- g i .
O. tis g %
- e. .
q- -
v y
e 4
g J l a
l J y :,
MM .
o u .-. . . .
Q 5 %
- 1 '$' ; ' s ..
Q % . ~, , f . .
s 9 ,
.;I
/+
C#
1 6 SERVICE WATER PUMP
()2 STRUCTURE 5()
CIRCULATING WATER STRUCTURE i
v
,3 4(n i
(
COOLING POND SERVICE WATER PUMP STRUCTURE CONSTRUCTION SURVEY CONTROL POINT LOCATIONS -
[
FIG SWP-9 G-2611 -09
+
SW 1(-0.04ft) SW-2(Less than -0.015ft) h M
$ 1(-0.04ft) (-0.05ft)6 $
$ 2(-0.03ft) (-0.04ft)5 $
r l
9 3(-0.03ft) (-0.03ft)4 $
II II SW 4(-0.01ft) SW-3(Less than -0.01ft)
SERVICE WATER PUMP STRUCTURE CHANGES IN ELEVATION OTE:
ttlements in ( ) at markers 1 through 6 are measured from March 1978 and indicate movement ough October 1982. Figures at markers SW1 through SW4 are measured from later dates (see ure 6)
FIG SWP-10 G-2611 10
c w-s-
$w.y PO if ,
c-si Sw-J
-$ *]3'
$ c.p
'"~'
Q,
+ c"-sa 44& c
-(S cu-a hu g, cu-s cn-a r---------
7
i sw;y Y p A-
$.f 5" '
u, Jeep,nn,,9 sw-o i-I i sw-6
$ i Crecubfor9 1%ier Inlake 3irucfure og Overhang &rison cf SWPS I y
n ,
s go gs i s _
. l l -m
~4 l l R
1 i ..
e t -
coc-/4 s., ,... , p .,. .,- ,,.
~
BORING LOCATION PLAN 3
,cecubbro eder cdoke l *
- r. <
)S, e i h 9 'E c
- 5 gn ojo l 13 [;
-4
-- 74_
.1
~1} Slob 1 ofoverhang I25 1 as % - '
ge f,on I2d Ie I3 I r3-]if _" '
'-. . II 35" l.
~
szo l l . fl !P.L. ._ I d .[I I
b.
% 1
. I(# I '6 I ;
N Is q 33 7,y i ic,c-
,,,1,2,pl'1k
}j
). / 1P FillVf3 i'i" - 1 ,4 I ,,
7 - . sI e
.,o_._._
I.]
il37 {CL/3 AND I 'o
- I" Im -f? ?
oz l I IW ; I ,
g- coucd-I'* SAND FlLL I I zz
~~
O Id Da
{ h ..L Tm Iir 1] 17z; ~I*"
i 'l E-
, 1 92 y l'd I {g Ap ;
{g p l 32 M/ /.UYlON l I 7; {, l
'Mo ---- - - - M ~- _gI ~
g --
u -,
L
- u. . . - . . . .. 1.e
" A z
g g 1 -@ SANDY y CL AV
-I riou
[
4 w -
Y -
ll69ttron of droven blon.s . per &f, sbased m _ .- E!'00" . .S*"'Pl* 20!"P!?t_fr~ttratton__rv* .tfest. -
M Wo SWP3 _ West (J_ndeepnning__. ._ bth Urderpnn,rvi Wall _
eKas/ G// Wall FOLDING LINE AT FOLDING LINE AT NCRTHEAST CORNER NORTHWEST CCRNER x __. __ _ _
DEVEL OPED SECTION ON UNMRPINNING WAl m
^***"'%
'.M
r l
l l
l 4 ,, .. - - m.
4 CH4 *C* SERIES 80 AIMS MDF IE OCT,1969 f-8 "D* SDIE180 RIES MDE It fUNE,1970
' " " 4)-0hT"18M*M?iU'***'""
ce,.4
-N. COE sulEs of .E mi. Arm A. .Y,m
{} *nF* SERIES 30RI!h5 MIE, MY 1981 EUll sw-5 1. MATims mER n w mm A E g LEVELS It CALLY A VAf' k 4
PD 37
- //or, SfvPS c&-m ,*'5
- TuTun Q h EILL, CNIEFLY OF $lLP OR SANDY CLAY BUT ALSO InCLUDIE mMn0Us ConcaFTE .18 MTS AND VERY g g [
COPFACI SAND FILL AT WE*,T.
@ <% /m,7mtleoMly o dS,d* d h LY$ ' (SWPS ste,r/vre *M*8"""58"'"'^""*
ALLME COMPACT TO EXTRUELY COPPACT h 3Ancy cf.1v titL EXTRDELY CDPP4CT CR VERY P4Rf
_ _ , __. g MIXTURE OF CLAY OF LDW PLASTICITY, StrE SAf.,
16 IRMHOUS GAAWEL FRaJEUls MY ALSO INCLUDE
{g LE45E3 Op 70CkIT3 W ALLWIAL $AiG.
I' I"Ir I ,
JA ,_._ [J '
_; a EL STRATA LIES AT THE POSITION I*.
~) OF THE UNMRPINNIE WALL WEE IF '"~~~-~## ESTIMATED BY WEIGNIE VARIOUS U 13 ITEMS OF BORIM LOG INFORMTlan gg AND CGIDITIONS EVEALD DURIM
]ts N- EXCAVATl31 FOR THE m!N S19$
FOUCATIGis.80 RIES INAT DO NOT Irr- -
atu in enca rte, eE
,,g- FM CDRSIKED EDUNDANT.
Iai g SAND .
n *~
wo s&^ * % e
~j &ctArnLL WARf% LEVEL FOR w
z f
UVDERPl/WNG AfD G FOR EXISTING MAIN SWPS. 9 3ro $
_ . _ _Eos/ unk.rp,nn,g ng, mnSWPS _ "
MIDL AND POWER PLANT JVoll Eos F .Vali 5'
SERVICE WATER BUILDING UNDERPINNING
{ IIMESER* RUTLEDGE*JONIISTOII & OESIISOldE Cosesutresve sessesersses .
708 THIRD AVENUE. NEW YORK. N Y 10037 GA APHIC SC ALE =a d d 6 vi ect
' 8'jl e-a e- >rc h t r **= o . . . 5464 "N - ' ' '
BORING LOCATION PL AN AND GEOLOGIC AL SECTION ,,,,,,s,,,
I G-2611-15
1 4.
/
I, I
l 'o 0a%
,/
/(
/
// \\
t/ \
m g
U E
// m
$m aW f/ W as s mz
// z f // 8 / 58
=
' s h-m b
g
\ s
)
t b
w f
~tf
(
eniniiini ii ,,,, inn,...11111111, ,,.uniutnnniHuln eniiiiiii:
c - 2037 l u _ . , -
atnce ,eu_ .w u,,w.v,m.wu .w
.. _ heaaaaaus.wa_.nu,u
, i i i i
jm . ,
l i
!j, ./ m I
, acuse a us ras.AAMWU3c8 I I i l 1.i '
I i G -! !. !' .. I l' 1 l- -
= M e j9 iHb4H><>-
.__w.d fihy p' ' 1_.
4 -di t 4J' .q - o i t -i F i H p.__% g, m
v 8, .i__ _ . J o h, A I ~i I
.' I l
l t ---
8 g ,K pe-). +t_.) ! A -
--% I _. . -
g
.:J I '
s--
v .". i k./--_. __ __ __ S
--e i ..,
1
= = z Q ;
J y $ L_=_
- C '. "A A E " ~^
-b ~
h 1 1 t Ce, tt-i i
A y
1 w-s_: - -4
_t y
}
I
~ ' -
I I
- I I t*
{
el. --e 3 y p ._L___ _ _ _ _ _ _ ..
_____ _ _ _____.____. _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ ______ _ ___.A -:- .[
t i -- - - - - - - s, o
a a e
^ ^
l ANCHOR BOLT PLAN AT ELEV 620*-O'
.,. . ,: o-I o$8 ir gI 1 a.=
1i3
,_) [' 3.E ]
i @
A
, ZZ.'e"o,Cr
, i' ,' '
f e,an:: n wt IM &"$$$MIE,aY.La l
- 4* eca.m % wt
,,g -
g
, lI-t$cf- &
sWea a. sesr l m-I I a i s 5 c5 s 4' sy%4 1 /
g
- y%y d s
-u' i
1 '
~ 2"-"?Ofs' r8 p -- s 4 v.i,,..
ig ...=
- "a" 4 I -
n' 2 _
, e a le l A uz _ ==w,'='
- 9 ,.
- j *.
A o n :=,~y.p. ( o
/ I
'~. q~ a*
ANCHOR BOLT DETAtt
(,h,m . n I s-l .
Q*7.oe 1- 1 s --A 1 l
4.o-
' c. . o ~ " duoaratwau C ~_'sio- _
esca_..as TYP SECTION A s. m oon
.~ v.c o- y
~~~ 8 l 7 l 6 l 5
m ! !11 fr"1 i t i !!1 1 111 ff"I I 1 11 1 I mee a
%[
0
+ H B QDe , e swas og G
nry etu.
-,_EGtE R.A.L c .NOTm E oms
.........,m.,,om-.
..m....., .. _
m... . . . . ..
me....m,.......,.
T... .-..wP.6.WE. kt ..
...m...m....
. . .. m ...
m.....m.,..m..=....
- m. . .
r
. . .m. . ..
I 4 '.:J
.u . - . , .
1.'1l*Z..".at".,.2.m*1,
<t.',3
...A*.".*".
- u. ~..
n . .. ..
.. =. u.c.
i.e e
. r. c....MC . M.f,n. . LW .. .
n . . .. . m =
t*,'.'t.72M .O.'".'i'."' ""'"
. .. m m ., v . .. .
.. ....u-on. E
.em mm.
. -.u s.,i, ue
..........m
= '145.= ===>= "*.= <
t-
.ru mm
- u u5t:*1"* "'"""'***
.w.'.'.t:".t.*J.K.'.
ca.u. "mani mm .*A%.'.t'M.Ws?""
nu.= .
'8'.?.'t%'t'i'.***e.*.ItWM* T .
3 n .n. ,,..um D
,m.m.m m . .
t i
3.
J
.w w.a
.s , .
a ..
3..t.s .
,.nt CL,....-.Ta ...
j .dac.o R. .(g .. m ig.v.c g ggs3 l __.
i i C B
C :'oy/
m..... CONSUMERS POWER COMPANY MIDLAND UNITS 1 AND 2
=-- S-: :. F - -_- _
.. .??:
. rr':. .
r Og c22 o . . . . .
v... SWPS UNDERPINNING
^
SECT.'S $ DET.*S SHEET 2
~~"
FIG SWP- 13
"- G.20M 13 it 4 1 3 l 2 l t l _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ .
6-2036 c.1 J e ~
r
& v.o' t1 t
- e. I
. ..s . ...x ,v. I aN..e.s u. o,.ga.a.ra.t.w w.st to na .nt to e ... , ,=cTo.a gT
\ ^ w r,% . ..o. a
.. m, g/ 3. ...- .-
e.n.ces es. u siw.te, als ..n s.e.o n
iu m . we e.c.o.c
.s t c-r=
.w a..v.e mes evics y.
f .
h u L s f3 e
+.
t' *
- et e nre A *. '
4 saa sta 4) luec,t," E.em M
l en(**s t q,-_ ,"
ua e... . o.w, r,e ,( j.f.-
m .~ d- O b n (~) vs e... -
.m.ea a. e ,
e l y ~.%
- o. r e.
g, ;
- e. . .=e g - . j. . .
J" N '/
- m. m ._ -
. i . .
a -
, 4 1
.. e
- o v l 6 g
3 g i) r F.
L- g
".- (* n -
e3 J,% 8 i
i o
- , -se.pe asi (net
,f -
r.g . . . .. r e . .
. . r_ om u e r .
a Wi'#~ l f.# ,,I w g; m;:' =. o- .,~
t ; .
<.. > =e >=n i
i i - . . . e=m ,
, i I j ut<,,,ms ,
- g. - [ r y.j . -.. -,i 11L *
.- 't esa* a e tven) j .. I 4
<-# *3 ( g ,
' 0 sAW o *9 e* LstatfE Co $8W) 0
. ;' s *) l p Tue D0% ,
d
/.a
, e-ar , . e.ee e weer emi.6e
_ __ so 367' Wi,Ws.L maa sett 41 -v...r, - . _..
Q'8 ,
,3 e -e- i oeves t6
$(CTION M sr.ss v. seq */
TTPIC AL UNDERPlNNING PI(R sc .6s v.'e r-e*
POR 88* t.ene se e.e4 48 O b- J
, C a t0"4"% r ta.is.f.ie.e.-
" ] , -
- _.. . m[ ** l, t
%*^-
'WW W
[.-
A., Aa
.m.aa.
reabher l ,_.4_ , ;
p -o q . . . . .
.=-
h
,t e K. e.m. -> . .,.. -.,, . . b,.
.e.~,
- ~
o.<
.,.,t,.-
(n. x .... ,. m u,. ...
1, . . , i , -u
.,~c.- -
Pa or Pt us '4"*!*,f.'.*"l'.'l"* DE TAIL /TN ge,'ag,*g ay;p avaits o am,N ms f.'!!:,'rt '; " ' " vd*r scate vr.r.e- g:,'*.=*.=:hy ,2.,
arp .,
- 8'"'Q, , -
... .oo , _ . , . . . e . e.
.. w. s .<. . . rmia o TYP AC
.-,. . . . e.e .t.4 ei.C & 441 .# I "
b sdk qY
/ h l r'
.1 h ,,j .
H I 1 7
,. . ... .-...-( <..',> ,
I ~
p ..,e,c - .. ,< , ,,.
, l t
, -7 ,- rs . .. e n ecea ns $rn m.
- l. . t.rsa - s s t.4 % .
Ge nt.4T \
SECTtui. A 3 .a n m_ h '" . #3** 88' -
tu o' Q- 4m DE T AIL /h ._i c < c np Yt *' -o' D* ,
- 2:1 e swas n Hmw an., ma ame:
Ba* Jwkl de AAMF **9 9 af A1 P 9'.*
praev% ere '
- yews t 3 ***.*9 o.s veJ '.t e . Fn e
., r'e dha fa M e' tb d d a gr % % t */es t *t a t e 3 2 8 *.ar*L 4 ts Stt u*jds6'9 3*
e sss8' was.
l l
. g O' 3' F e.cu,..a r ,, .
W,$,,1,.n,.u.n. ,.
TVP.c4Lt s ..
6 p.t_s 3,34,3g g es) g% g
_..qi.s e
~.
v n, 6 g
- *T
. a me rt
"". -- L0 tat:0.e OF Ji:Fs (M10F 21 ;f .st.e,.c.TaucTb.a ev sp g
-i. .ro . v.*ttwas.es =or :,no.e)
- l. .ei .na~
.,,.h.-
8 .
w a.r.vi.a.s.m..sce.sroeru t F PGA rom & -
c'e.t Po .9 e 50.4restauttaa res P4RS Tu.a. f org: pirre OF as.tAA agy
- 3* fYP
- CTION / O coa us su DETAtt /'h 5'dE" L...- ga satt =s 4@ ys . .o- gs.
_._.s........ e ax
/-"'"'"*"*"**
\; O E P4E R AL NOTES
". - e .. = >s ee . ea es c.
. .... ..f . . . *;,:r- r . s*.= s.a r , e. . sa...u.
c.. s g;
A--
C' - 7.,.c.
ss .a.as inn .cosas
- r. eta sev.
I e
n c
c.u.t. oes..t.e.
.te i . e.
. u s .sa...
( e. u u .< . .
p Y ., .j r
-. , - uaucev ne g . . n a c..a. . , .. ... a .
son s *a c6 n * * + -
wd es. po3*e.,,,
--p --
,s J--L p '
is 6 a c.-.nes c. *-- -.- n c. ..
I
' 4- c ) n at.ena. en e.s 46 <.aame.o
- i. e.o v.e os ssamas O E TA I t/T(\ L *t. f** 4 Y I L.- I~~~~l. T ***
.TR4"GT*****^'P'"."1""**
OFIOO
- s ' e o* Q * *r! d m.o.i.ou u.ai 6vg= (ca n s w e se tr /A'\
wescowv _Jer~r P _\'t.s \v r 'r.f _ s's' _rura _t te. r,. Os ca ..re . we s-. o. =
.a w se Seas. ear..r.s e c . som
..a....i.
. e.
u,u -
-%.-,~
"n44 I ' p.
.e
. vs.
nr.m t.o aocas.it a.m.o c.ao.u.i c.o .*.e..u.w en e te or toco e se =<a c Fr'TlqN F su c. nn wa.os.<.1.o
. ei w or , ear e z x. s'.s vase
- ..s.- g
--+-
. . o.c.veo a.= p.a= i.e .
-*';. . k e. sv.w. sv vervaa I j 4. we ..tva.ssw.v
.g rsasa . a ,ar te.a or c.=cears e 6v.
g
. rw < r w,,1 evess'suus .a rum se o la L s. p ecac
- e,.rt..cr.;n,r , = = ;," s'-*
. ,.m..u a. .
... ,.u o.-u
. ,,, , ,.,uu ,
s w@ ,_ _ @ __ @ s@
= =t L'~." w.x, , .
ma -+=
i-......
n -.. m . . _
mL - * ' " * * ' " ' - -
_._, k "vciim
...o- /TN w memt .un...o......~..
<- sm <. soo
.m . . .
e4
. ...... .. ...~ ,,. ..~
.- ~ . . . c.
L .& ** MO .
Cwe.6 T.af.
o
&~.. to b1.-
o.
m mi r, S{c. .
g . :::,:::r-- >;.f,~srf,f.rt f.
.,~-,
a.c .F.mt.m = ~- . < . = = -~ b =*f, db.C,$
.m.o
-- =,vo,6,.,.&, ~ M _^ - - - -4.
ESS TUNNEL e 5.;.l.l.~JJ'@..
~ ..".%...lg*M.,
a.oae,.-r,~nr . aa e
, ra su a ..e. w r a _ ,, wr . .
1?11~ 0 hl * 'c ****Ac d.=n ,l H lV.Pl %
T-R
- Ip ,
3 y g . . .i. .
- n
,_1 .y-., es --er .HM .
- m. 1:
c .
m s..,u c-zo u M. CONSUMERS POWER COMPANY lE T All MN MIDLAND UNITS 1 AND 2 ks g.
SWPS UNDERPINNING h S EC T.'S $ D E T.'S S HE ET I FIG SW P - 12 N 1-12
m^ L-2033 -Q)l
( ----
+ 1 i \e ,_. ._.
toc AwaYio.e att Dw. C 8ete
%a-* * * .
L '%
I 3 ,. ,3.,. ,4 I . .
}r ,i 0 I
g I i U l j Qj.*y,,7 [ ~~~7 i )i _w m-----kI 1
e----- s i e i e )- -- k ,i e--.
_--s I~J
, l l i ,_.- 2Envict. wATE.e e Puesp $1euCTURE %
! % +ee ers
\. / ,
.c.o......
.. ~ . _ _ _
...Y t s Pwete.r.
uwu~ g ~ as JoaseT ,
5 PUN AT tt. 654*-0*
C ocutAfiees watte e east StevCT.#f SE8w4 watte MMP STRUCW#E
=e .
- s. r ___ m - _ro< r e ,<_r, .
, c _ _ _ ,<_,,_ m
_ _ _ . . . w ma_a_ _ m. x _ _ . [ _ .. . E_'"'_""""'"_a'_" _ l .'_ _ J '"
~
.+ 6Wy 5 W SI@l@>@4_ . . . . . . . . _- . . _@_ . . . Y . (@ a '. ;
gvw ,
~ .
_G-
~
_y
...P,_,-
em
- i y1 n: ,=,
-l' .I
~
m-
-@-a-T,
^
W .
9 g -
.x
- u. -
asustisus stoucTset r t
- g. 8 . ..Y).___._ 3.________ @,-,
g tl .... . . . .
!, M.m l .
puu sectio /TN m..w , e r g n ad
.n et .mr,
^ * '""t"t"**'* -
'T, PEAL at iW' tt t.74" e" 9 I C)T.
w ... w.. .- ..,
.. . . . . m
-m. . ..-
... . ._yy- f';
- .g
"$_4 ,,
m_ 'r i
.w~, Z.-T_--,u yn u i
. . , , . , 4:,. =
9 r bs e ee l si'e! e e ee h4,
, it,
!II ji) ses nwTsoof A
-.- i rv Mr .s . .s.r ,; * . .ii~.i .v3-M
.s w
~~> ,.h..c-.,
stcTio A r..- g n
l
e firg N c D0U.n O
,>A
. c..,a .
l ..
- p. m.
~
s L'sI. ....iJ.sss es *m.,e,.s so
./ V'\
\
f _.J L_.f '
\ *%"I'\ \
ILEY PL AN a
r i.. 1 y"
- =; . , et ..
I..._. ,
y es .- wrGi*ds' - - i
.r a.
w 81
- "~
v7 .y s u ss l
..._ . . ! ."/
- g.
- h _Acero'rtfo1 e E
- M.,E#.LA.w*A34 * *;
3
- e se i r i5e;
- e- e@
- s. Mr (82 r- .
n,,,Jr .n -
l \
_m n_as sesurrie s) e tiets,AL pf eseF ( *
- sitts.no citag' , "
5F.C.TtCar 1 ' . o= g M m smaan sevs sawween riens 41 snown saao c.c toi .
L
-, o-Y JA(dif4C LOAD TAeut ATION trme=aNceiter.a!
d,I f=:u".', Itt'.7 ht: . :i l f:m*3, n*::. .-
...i..... . . . . . ,
44 n I ., . . . . . . , ,
,l F..s w- .,,s...,
.i... .....n g ' T ,* ay.re 1 .. a+.n
- b r. .3 LEGEND
@ * . - .* s a =+ .a i
@ ~ < ~ ~ re w w. ..,..., ( . g o ,, y-f1 g ." . j,g .,,.g.-
g g......., o r .-
i...~
=
~
CONSUMERS POWER COMPANY MIDLAND UNITS 1 ANS 2 q c., ... u .oct - .,
. J. ..__ . . - 4. ..o ......, ,
) _ - " * - '
- SWPS UNDERPINNING d ' __
w c o- . . .n i
_ e- r a- - .a . PLAN 6 SECTIONS g
...>.....~.,s............,,,,,.
< *.n a F1G SWP- 1I
,G-261 1 -1 '