ML20078D624

Analysis of Cracks & Water Seepage in Foundation Mat

ML20078D624
Person / Time
Site:	Waterford
Issue date:	09/19/1983
From:	Du Bouchet A, Harstead G, Unsal A HARSTEAD ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC.
To:
Shared Package
ML20078D572	List: ML20078D593 ML20078D624 W3P83-3289, Forwards Independent Safety Engineering Group Review of NRC Concerns & Harstead Engineering Assoc Rept, Analysis of Cracks & Water Seepage in Foundation Mat, in Response to NRC
References
8304-1, NUDOCS 8310040573
Download: ML20078D624 (119)

Text

_ . . _ _ . . _ _ . . _ . _ _ _

Attachment IV-1 118 Pages H

f HARSTEAD ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES

• INC.

169 KINDERKAMACK ROAD, PARK RIDGE, N.J. 07656 e Phone:(201)3912115 Project No. 8304 September 19, 1983 W3-HE-LP-007 e

Louisiana Power & Light Waterford III PO Box B Killona, La. 70066 Attn: Mr. George B. Rodgers, Jr., Site Director

Subject:

Waterford III SES Analysis of Cracks and Water Seepage in Foundation Report No. 8304-1 73

! j

Enclosure:

Three (3)' copies of subject report.

Dear Mr. Rodgers:

Please find enclosed three copies of the subject report.

If you have any questions, please contact us.

f Very truly yours, y j -L-c e sit?,_ / / 1 ; . / ,; /. 1 GAH/jl GUNNAR A. HARSTEAD r, President cc: B. W. Churchill c/o Shaw, Pittman, Potts & Trowbridge (w/ Attachment) fI l l w ./'

. Su A

M f oE S !!

7

H E-

^ HARSTEAD ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES

• INC.

O 169 KINDERKAMACK RCAO, PARK RIDGE, N.J. 07656 e Phone:(201)3912115 1

Project No. 8304 September 21, 1983 W3-HE-LP-008 l

l Louisiana Power & Light

, Waterford III P.O. Box B Killona, La 70066 Attn: Mr. George B. Rodgers, Jr., site Director

Subject:

Waterford III SES j Analysis of Cracks and Water Seepage in Foundation -

Report No. 8304-1 O

Enclosure:

Three (3) copies of Appendix M to subject report.

Dear Mr. Rodgers:

Please find enclosed three copies of Appendix M to the subject report.

If you have any questions, please contact us.

Very truly yours, ,

l in - - 2.

Gunnar A. Harstead President i 4 .

GAN/tm '

cc: B. W. Churchill c/o Shaw, Pittman, Potts & Trowbridge *

(w/ Attachment)

O e .- --

H E

A HARSTEAD ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES

• INC.

(y ,

I's) 169 KINDERKAMACK ROAD, PARK RIDGE, N.J. 07656

• Phone:(201)391-2115 WATERFORD III SES ANALYSIS OF CRACKS AND WATER SEEPAC3 IN FOUNDATION MAT LOUISIANA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY REPORT NO. 8304-1 g

SEPTEMBER 19, 1983 L O 8

l l

t Prepared by:

A. V. du Bouchet Reviewed by: n W A. I. Unsal.

Approved by: '

p.A. n'arstead l

l l ,.

^' V ~ .,.

(

a 4 $

? Y TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 Introduction 1 2.0 Site Inspections and Interviews 2 3.0 Foundation Mat Design Concept 3 3.1 Site 3 3.2 Design 3 3.3 Construction 4 i 4.0 Significant Events During Construction 6 1

4.1 Stop Work Order No. 1 6

4.2 Concrete Placement of the Mat 6 i 4.3 Change in Allowable Soil Bearing 7 E

Pressure During Construction 4.4 Site Settlements 7 4.5 Cracks Observed in the Top of Mat in j the Containment Area 8 l 4.6 Cracks in Mat Outside of Containment 9 Area 5.0 Analysis of Waterford III Structural Foundations 11-5.1 Structural Concept 11 6.0 Review of Engineering Design and Construction 13 l

6.1 Geologic Studies 13 l

g.

4

- g

I TABLE OF CONTENTS (Cont'd.)

6.2 Development of Engineering Properties 14 6.3 Foundation Design Concept 15 6.4 Design of Combined Mat 17 6.5 Earth Pressure Considerations 18 6.6 Groundwater Environment 18 6.7 Excavation Sequence 19 6.8 Dewatering Systems 20 6.9 Subsurf ace Instrumentation Program 21 6.10 Construction of Mat 21 6.11 Summary of Movements Recorded During Construction 21

(

( ,1 7.0 Evaluation of Cracking 24 V

8.0 Corrosion Potential 29 8.1 Passivation Mechanism in Reinforced Concrete 29 8.2 Job Specifications' 30 8.3 Laboratory Testing 30 8.4 Steel Containment Corrosion 34 l

9.0 Steel Containment Stability 35 9.1 Ebasco Calculation 1352.063 35 l

10.0 Conclusions and Recommendations 38 10.1 Containment Vessel 38 10.2 Foundation Mat 38 r

9 -

-f L/

,~

TABLE OF CONTENTS (Cont'd.)

REFERENCES 40 APPENDICES A Basemat Crack Maps B. Properties of Subsurface Materials Design Values C Synposis/ Introduction of State-Of-The-Art of Floating Foundations by H. Q. Golder D Generalized Site Cross Section E Effects of Soil Modulus on Shear and Moment

- O( / F Design Envelopes of Mat Shear and Moment G Effects of Foundation Stiffness on Dynamic Shears and Moments H Abasco Services Letter F-16919, W3-NY-1 dated June 29, 1977 I Composite Foundation Mat Differential Settlement Contours J Composite Foundation Mat Settlement K Crack Width Calculation L Steel Containment Stability Calculation

e i

'til -

i

,g l

• * ~

I

m._ . _. _ . . _ _ _ _ -.___ _ ._

f 1.0 Introduction -

This report summarizes a study undertaken by Harstead Engineering Associates on behalf of Louisiana Power and Light Company. ,

The following major evaluation items are addressed in this report:

a) The engineering criteria employed in the prepara-tion of the site and in the design and construction of the Waterford III Nuclear Power Island Structure (NPIS) basemat.

b) Cracking and leakage in the basemat.

c) The laboratory tests performed on water and leachate samples extracted from the surface of the basemat.

d) The stability calculations performed for the Steel Containment Vessel. -

As required, relevant source material is either refer-enced or contained as an appendix to this report.

i l

I 5

l l

l I

N t

i 1

("'N jQ L

2.0 Site Inspections and Interviews HEA personnel have visited both the New York office of Ebasco, Inc. and the Waterford III site.

These visits are summarized in HEA Trip Reports Nos.

1-6 (References 1-5), and were conducted in order to meet with key. personnel familiar with the design bases of the Waterford III NPIS basemat, to document first-hand the-extent of cracking and leaking at the surface of the base-mat, to gather pertinent reports and drawings, and to confirm a scope of work and corresponding schedule.

e r

P

)

. f'h .

U.

3.0 Foundation Mat Design Concept 3.1 Site The site of the Waterford 3 plant is located next to the Mississippi River. Natural grade is at about Elevation

+ 15.0 feet. To a depth of about 55.0 feet from grade, the soil consists of alAuvial deposits which are relatively soft. At greater depth are the Pleistocene Age soils. The upper parts of these soils are stiff.

3.2 Design The Safety class structures are supported on a con-tinuous mat 270 feet wide, 380 feet long and 12 feet thick.

The bottom of the mat is at a depth of about 60 feet below natural grade. Support for the mat is provided on the stiff Pleistocene clays, where the natural soil pressures

were about 3300 psf. After the completion of construction, n

'\'

the soil pressure under the foundation mat is about 3100 psf. These pressures cons'ist of the weight of soil and construction above the mat less the buoyant pressure due to ground water. The water table is generally at an ele-vation of + 8.0 feet; therefore, the buoyant pressure is about 3400 psf. The weight of the soil which was excavat-ed was about 5700 psf, while the weight of the construc-tion now in place is about 5500 psf. The interesting feature of this is that the soil below the plant is exper-iencing almost the same pressures that it has in recent history. Therefore, increased consolidation of soil and the accompanying settlement that often occurs when new construction weight is added to soil does not occur in this case.

Inasmuch as the water table is at about Elevation

+ 8.0 feet or almost at natural grade, walls were erected V')

v

- _ , . . - , . - - _ _ - , .-._,4-

- . - - . . ._ - , , . . . , , - ,,m, --3,-y,,y - - , , . - , -, c-~ - , - . ,, ,- -- . - - - - . - . - , , ~

_ [Qv'-

-around the perimeter of the mat. These walls must resist the lateral pressure of the surrounding backfill soil and the hydrostatic pressure of the ground water. These walls extend up and provide flood protection up to Elevation

~

+ 30.0 feet, which is 22.0 feet above the normal. water table.

The mat and the walls form a reinforced concrete box structure, with interior _ walls and concrete placements referred to as counterforts providing additional stiffening.

The mat and the exterior walls are monolithic and there-fore prevent water flow through joints and in the sense-that ground water is prevented from collecting inside the structure, the structure'has been called a floating struc-ture.

c 3.3 . Construction The steps involved were:

a) Dewatering the site

b) - ' Excavation-down to-Elev. - 47.0 feet f

c) Construction of-the mat d) Construction of superstructure e) Gradual release of Dewatering f) . Backfill.of excavation' surrounding the construction The soil pressures existing at Elevation - 47.0 feet vary considerably during construction. After dewatering the pressure increases to the weight of the soil above due to loss of buoyanc/ and then after excavation the pressure, of course, reduc; 'ero. When the pressure is reduced, ,

the soil heaves or rises *o the removal of the weight of the overlying soil.

As construction proceeds, the d. 'mral weight causes the soil pressure to increase and the soil 'ns to re-settle. In order to provide additional compaction, the

. )

4  % ~ 8

. ~ .. ... . ~ . _ . . - - . ~ . . . - . . - --. . - . . . -. -- -

4 soil bearing pressure is allowed-to increase. The pressure was allowed to increase'.to 4500 psf. As construction con-l tinued, the gradual release of dewatering offset the in-creasing structural weight.

The construction was planned to maintain a maximum differential soil bearing pressure of 2000 psf. In the final condition, a maximum differential soil pressure of

! 1000 psf was established by the designers (Reference 6).

t.

During construction, settlement and water pressure readings were taken in order to ensure that control was l

' being maintained over differential mat settlements.

6 4

6 e

I' i

1 I

e l <

1

.._m. . , . - . ~ _ . . - - . . . . - - - ~ . _ _ _ _ _, , . . , _ - _ - _ . _ - . . _ . , _ . _ . _ - - - - . . . . . . - . . - . . . , . _ _ - . . . . . . _ _ . . . - - .!

, - ~ . , _

eO s

4.0 Significant Events During Construction 4.1 Stop Work Order No. 1 LP&L issued SWO No. l'on December 16, 1975-in' order

to correct'. deficiencies and nonconforming work in the in-spection and control of concrete mixing, transporting and

. placing of concrete, and curing and finishing. This

! resulted from observation of Placement No. 6.

4.2 Concrete Placement of the Mat During placement of Section 10B, a rain storm broke-out. The-placement was completed; however, because the concrete quality _was unknown due to dilution with rain water, NCR No. W3-39 was filed.

A repair program was established which included cor-ing,-strength testing, pressure grouting of drilled holes, repair of-surfaces, and waterproofing of the west face..

Discrepancy Notice C-13 dated 12-16-75 noted cracks

-in the west face of-. Placement No. 2. Cracks were chipped

~

out and surface roughened prior to making adjacent Place-

)S mant No. 4.

During placement of concrete in Placement No. 19, concrete was placed over a previous layer while it was no longer plastic. This surface was raked:and fresh concrete-was placed. Concrete was later shipped out in certain areas to'a depth of 6 inches to 12 inches below the mat top rebar and replaced with fresh concrete. Still later, 11 cores were taken to a minimum depth of 5 feet. The cores were tested and the core holes grouted.

The " cold joints" and dilution of concrete are undesir-able because of voids and weaknesses. The extensive and methodical repair program that took place as indicated in the documentation and subsequent observations of the foun-dation mat indicate that the repair was effective and that nv -

' ~

MT 1-_

~

m__ ~ . ,_J  :. _ . : : . . _ L. L. , J . _ _ . _

i O m -

there is no-concern about the strength or corrosion pro-E i

.tection of-the concrete.

'4.3 Change in Allowable Soil Bearing Pr assure During Construction On March 15, 1977, Ebasco req 1ested that the maximum f temporary bearing pressure during. construction be increased

[ from 4000' psf to 45'0 0 psf. -This recommendation was based Hon the fact _that the maximum allowable bearing pressure of

[ .the soil is 15,000 psf,- the-desire to accelerate recom-3 pression of the soil.that heaved after dewatering and excavation, and the need to permit backfilling under the ,

Turbine Building.'

~

Due to' scheduling difficulties, the dewatering system was not in ~ place during the initial removal of 20 feet of soil. The remaining soil heaved between 1. 5 and 3.5_ in-ches.- After the dewatering was under way and about 1.0

. inch of the heave was recovered, the-job was shut down.

() '

The dewatering was not operating _ long enough to balance the total heave.

In November'1974, the_ dewatering was reinstated. In January 1975, the_ remainder:of excavation was restarted and the heave increased to betweer. 4.0 and'9.0 inches.

When concrete construction proceeded, the heave reduced to between 1.0 and 6.0 inches.

l The above compares to a heave projected as 2.0 inches.

1 l Rebound is a function of both load removed and time of I load removal. The differences in schedule and loading were cited as reasons for the difference.

In order to ensure full recompression of the rebound, I a greater soil pressure was recommended.

f 4.4 Site Settlements

! In September 1978, a report " Review of Site Settle-h ments" by M. Pavone and J. L. Ehasz, was issued (Reference 4-1 j'

z ,

i _._ . . _ _ . . _ . . _ _ . . . . _ . . _ _ . . _ _ . _ . ., _ _ , _ , _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ .

-t

u_ - _.-.__. _ _ . .__ .. _ _ . . _ . . _ -. _ . _ . . ___ _ . _ . _

l' I

. 7) . It was noticed that there was a total settlement of about 11.0 inches from the maximum-heave position.

! Since the maximum heave was previously noted as'being between 4.0 and 9.0 inches, the overall settlements were i'

therefore beyond the original zero position of the soil.

The settlements have remained constant since early 1979.

A curvature in the North-South direction was noted, the center of the mat being 2.5 and 1.5 inches higher than the south-and north edges respectively.

4.5 Cracks Observed in' the Top of Mat in the Containment Area Nonconformance Report NCR W3-535, dated August 3, 1977 reported that cracks were discovered in the top of mat,

~

which were weeping water. The rate of weeping water was enough to show the crack and to moisten the surrounding f

(; concrete. A crack map was prepared (Reference 8) and the crack widths were noted as being between 2-to 5 mils. The piezometer level was -kept below Elevation - 50.0 feet since

, the start of 1975, until September 1977. The concrete in f this region was placed in December of 1975 and January of 1976.

The lower concrete ring of the shield building was i also-in place. The cracks were chipped out to a 1.0 inch

[ depth and-to 12 inches on either side and repaired with

' epoxy grout. It was hypothesized in Ebasco Letter of f July _27, 1977 (Reference 9) that the general curvature of the mat caused tension in the upper portion of the mat.

f Locally the lower ring wall of the shield building would l have caused tension in the lower portion of the mat. This

f. was_ termed as a stress reversal and the possibility of an intertie between cracks could exist providing a direct

[

leak path. It was also stated that leakage of water through

( the mat was undesirable because:

l 1

I r

l .

. /'T (v

a) a film of water could be presumed to develop be-tween the mat and the fill concrete beneath the containment vessel. This could require a reanalysis of containment stability (see Sec-tion 9.0).

b) if the leakage increased and water found its way out of the fill concrete it would be collected in the mat drainage system and run through the waste treatment system (see Section 5.1) .

The repair apparently stopped further leakage.

4.6 Cracks in. Mat Outside of Containment Area Ebasco Nonconformance Report W3NCR-16143 (Reference

10) noted that: "there are concrete cracks in the base mat of the Reactor Auxilliary Building. This is evidenced by the percolation- of water in small amounts, up through

) these cracks. These cracks are located in the Gas Surge

() '

Tank Room, Waste Gas Tank Room, and Waste Gas Compressor "B" Room, all at elevation - 35.0 feet.

These are examples of where cracks were found:

f

, G. Harstead of HEA observed the above-mentioned loca-tions where cracks had been observed, as well as other areas, during the period of July 11-14, 1983 (Reference 1) .

All accessible areas of the basemat were subsequently inspected and any cracks found were mapped during the period of August 30 - September 2, 1983 by A. du Bouchet of HEA with the assistance of LP&L and Ebasco personnel (Reference 5).

The crack maps generated during this inspection are contained in Appendix A. The reference points employed to locate these cracks accord with the geometry detailed in Ebasco Drawings LOU-1564 G-499 S01, -02 and -03.

, w -----,r.,,. < , , , - - - - ~ , -,---,,.,-a - - . , , , , - , - --r-, ,e- ,-

l l

l In. addition to mapping the orientation and extent of -

'each crack, notations were made concerning.any prior re-

' pairs to the crack,. floor finish or lack thereof, evidence l j of dampness or seepage, and crack width.- l As noted in Reference 5, " Crack width dimensions could 3

l not be quantified, but are designated throughout as

' hairline'. In several instances, the existence of a crack could only be inferred by the' darker coloration

, caused by_the presence of moisture. No actual gaps were noted."

The amount of moisture noted during this inspection period was minimal. In some instances dampness / moisture were present. There was, however, no evidence of seepage or migration that might have been deduced by the presence of stnnding water or draining along the local slope of the basemat.

s h

1 C

t

s'N b

5 ~. 0 Analysis of Waterford III Structural Foundations 5.1 Structural Concept The foundation concept is an ingenious solution of the site problems in meeting the safety criteria estab-lished for the nuclear safety related structures. The most significant factor in assessing the adequacy of the design is that the final soil pressure after construction is actually less than the soil pressure which existed prior to the start of construction. The stability and safety that this implies has been demonstrated, in that, the settle-ment has not changed for the past several years except for changes that would be expected by changes in the water table.

As part.of this concept, the mat and exterior walls were to remain watertight. If water could readily flow in g s- and no provision was made to pump water out, conceivably

(- the water inside would increase the effective soil pressure and result in further soil settlements, although the effec-tive soil pressure would still be less than one half of the f

i maximum allowable. For many reasons, flooding would be in-tolerable; however, there would-probably be little detri-mental effect upon the structure. The differential hydro-static pressure on the exterior walls would be liminated, thereby reducing the lateral load on the building. The l

loading on 'he mat would remain approximately the same l

because the . creased effective soil pressure would be l

l equal to the weight of the water which leaked into the l structure. There would be long term settlements in this

! case and perhaps some differential settlements, which is not an unusual situation in many structures.

Section 11.2 of the Waterford III FSAR '(Reference 11)

. details the capacity of the Waste Management System (WMS).

I' r-l I

e

. 4

):

J i

P i

l.

o -

Table 11.2-4 specifies a total expected waste flow of l

c l'425 gpd based on the following flow sources:

Containment Building - sump (40 gpd) , Auxiliary Build- .

[ ing. floor drains (200 ' gpd) , laboratory drains and waste

- water (400 gpd) , sampling drains (35 gpd), miscellaneous l (700 gpd) and blowdown (50 gpd).

Table 11.2-2 specifies a total useful internal vol-ume for the two WMS waste removal tanks of 7200 gals.

HEA therefore concludes-that the capacity of the Waste

Management System as detailed above effictively eliminates ,

the possibility of ground water accumulation within the 1

NPIS.

i L

t O- .

I e

1 t

1 i

i I

I I

(- ,

-f*

1 1

4 1

i.

(

, t

- . , - . _ . . . .m..~._,.,,_ _ , - _ , - - . . , _ . . . . - - . . _ . , . . . ~ . - - _ _ , . ~ . . _ . - - . - . . ~ . , - . , - , . . _ _ . - . . - . - . - - - . . - - . - - -

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

~

6.0 Review of Engineering Design and Construction To determine if implementation of the unique floating foundation concept resulted in excessive differential move-ments during construction, documents pertaining to the design, engineering, and construction were reviewed. Data included related sections of the FSAR, instrumentation re-ports, calculations related to the design, formulation and application of the foundation design principle, and rele-vant correspondence. The following specific areas were addressed:

a) Geologic studies b) Development of engineering properties for founda-tion soils c) Foundation design concept d) Design of combined mat e) Earth pressure considerations g

() f) g)

Groundwater environment Excavation sequence

! h) Dewatering system i) Construction of mat j) Summary of movements recorded during construction.

Pertinent data related to the above will be analyzed to establish that the design concept was developed and imple-mented successfully.

6.1 Geologic Studies The Waterford Nuclear Power plant is located on the west bank of the Mississippi River about 20 miles from New Orleans. The site consists of over 3,000 acres with sur-face elevations ranging from approximately sea level in the (h

U

, _ _ . _ _ _ . _ . . ~ _ _.. _ _._ . - - , . . _ . , .~ __ _

~

southwest to about elevation plus 14 feet MSL at the base of the flood control. levee.

The. crest of the levee is the highest-point of the

- site and is about_ elevation plus 30 feet MSL. The Mississippi River is 110 feet deep and about 2,200 feet in width' adjacent to the plant.

Geologic studies conducted at the site included review and interpretation of geologic literature, subsurface bor-ings, geophysical logs, cross-hole data and laboratory tests. The. stratigraphic sequence is described as follows (FSAR ~ Section 2. 5. 4.1) ;

~

Sequence- -Depth (Feet)

Recent alluvium deposits 0 - 50 Pleistocene sands _and clays 50 - 1,100 Plio-Pleistocene interbedded sands and

. clays. 1,100 - 1,900 Pliocene. alternating sands and clays 1,900 - 4,900 Massive sandstone interbedded with shale 4,900 7,500 j Shale alternating with thin sandstone layers 7,500 -10,500 j; . Marine shales 10,500 -40,000 This review will be confined to the upper 500 feet of i soil strata.

( 6.2 Development of Engineering Properties

! A total of 74 soil borings were drilled at the site to r

! determine the detailed stratigraphy applicable to the upper

!. 500 feet of subsurface materials. Static and dynamic

! engineering properties were established based on laboratory tests on selected samples and in situ geophysical measure-ments. A brief~ visual description of the principal soil strata is provided below:

i 4

, ,,--._~w.- .c_.,, e gy < , ,, y ~m w m ~ , w , - ,,,,,,,,,.,.,meneew.,, __ w-,,e,-w-.,-e., , we m en ww

_m 2._ -

______c.._-m .

__ .. .. _ . - _ . . . ~ - ~

O,_ .

Sequence Depth-(MSL) 1 Soft' clay and silty clay with silt and sand GS to -40 2 Stiff tan.and grey. fissured clay -40 to -77 3 Very: dense tan silty sand 17 to 4 Medium stiff grey clay with silt lenses -92 to -108 t.

~

5 Stiff dark grey clay - organic -108 to -116 l 6 Soft'to medium stiff tan-and grey clay -116 to -127 7 Very stiff clays with silts and sands -127 to -317 8 Very dense sands and silty sands -317 to -500 Design values applicable to each stratum are defined in Appendix B (FSAR Table 2.5-14).

6.3 _ Foundation Design' Concept In reviewing the consolidation characteristics of the potent'ial foundation bearing strata it is apparent that excessive settlement could be anticipated if the Nuclear.

Plant Island structures were founded directly in the! stiff

( -Pleistocene deposits (layer 2) unless the total' bearing pressure from the structures were reduced-during construc-tion by buoyancy effects. Of particular concern are the clays- with relatively Low Overconsolidation Ratios ~ (OCR) ,

such as layer 4, which has an OCR of 1.4.

By excavating a depth of soil approximately equal to the weight of the structure, the effective pressure at the base remains unchanged, thereby reducing the potential for

(- underlying clay layers to settle. The floating foundation l principle has not been used previously in nuclear power plant-design; however, historically, many large structures i

! have been constructed using this concept. See, for example, j an extract from a paper entitled " State of The Art of Floating Foundations" by H. Golder, which is contained in l-Appendix C.

1 .

='t

7w _..~ . .__.2._. & _

V p3 '

N The following is a brief summary'of the significant control parameters developed for.the Waterford Plant incor-

- porating the floating foundation principle.

a)- -All Category I. structures.were combined in a nuclear plant island on a common mat.

b) Base of mat foundation is in the stiff Pleistocene clays at Elevation - 47 MSL.

- c) Effective bearing pressure of the Nuclear Plant struc-ture is 3,100-psf. compared to the existing overburden pressure of 3,300 psf.

d) Dewatering systems were required to minimize potential for heave at base of excavation, control pore pressure in layer 3 and stabilize excavation slopes.

e) -During' construction.the total pressure.at base of mat may have increased to 4,000 psf resulting in an

'm It was estimated 4 .

additional pressure of 700 psf.

that the heave after excavation would.be in the order of 2 inches and recompression from this additional' k pressure would be' complete by the end of construction.

f) A filter' layer of compacted sand and shell (18 inches) was placed at base of excavation underlying mat to permit distribution of pore pressure in.the underlying clay' on application of load.

- g) As soon as the total load from the Nuclear Plant ~

Island and surrounding granular backfill reached 4,000 psf, segments of the dewatering system were released in stages to achieve buoyancy of the struc-tures and backfill and permit construction to continue.

Details of the proposed Recharge Program were devel-oped during construction related to well efficiency and piezometric response.

h) A maximum differential loading of 1 ksf was applied

~

/~N

(

to base of structures to minimize tilting, heaving, and settlement.

i). A detailed instrumentation program was required to monitor movement of structures and groundwater levels, j) Long term settlement was anticipated to be less than 1 inch due primarily to local pore pressure adjust-ments in the clays.

A generalized site cross-section showing the Nuclear Island structures and adjacent non-Category I Turbine Building is outlined in Appendix D (FSAR Fig. 2.5-80).

6.4 Design of Combined Mat Details of the parametric and sensitivity studies con-ducted to establish the appropriate mat thickness and re-quired reinforcement for static and dynamic loading condi-tions are outlined in Reference 12. The selection of the

[

subgrade modulus applicable to the foundation soils and

\_-) mat geometry is judgemental. The values used to estimate impact or mat thicknesses of 10, 12, and 15 feet (k =150 s

pci and 125 pci) are considered reasonable. The twelve foot thickness finally selected was bastd on an economic compromise between the cost of additional concrete to elim-inate shear reinforcement and providing some shear rein-

! forcement in local areas.

The influence of a constant or variable modulus on the shear and moment diagrams is shown in Appendices E

! and F (Figures 7 and 8 - Reference 12) . The design en-l velope selected covers all possible support conditions.

! An inherently conservative approach was also adopted in analyzing the mat for seismic loadings resulting from

the SSE (0. lg) and OBE (0.05g). As shown in Appendix G (Figure 9, Reference 12) the total shear and moment in-creases rapidly with increasing foundation stiffness to h u -

t l

.,, < w . . , - , , - . , , - - - - . - . , . , - - , - . , - - - - - - -

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

j3 W..

approximately G = 3,000 ksf where G = the Dynamic Shear Modulus.

Although the indications of soil stiffness based upon geophysical site measurements' indicated that the value of'G should be 1000 ksf, the seismic responses in the plant structures would be greater for increased soil stiffness. In order to be very conservative, the' seismic analysis was based upon a dynamic model using a G = 3000 ksf which resulted in peak seismic response and therefore peak moments in the mat.

The seismic analysis mathematical model contains ,

. elastic springs representing the stiffness of the soil.

The results of the analysis include soil spring deforma-tions which represent soil movement with respect to some origin point of earthquake. The peak horizontal deforma-tions were used to calculate the passive earth pressure on j ) the perimeter walls. .

, 6.5 Earth Pressure Considerations The procedures outlined in section 2.5.4.10.3 of the FSAR related to determination of static and dynamic earth pressures on the structural walls were reviewed. An "At Rest" earth pressure coefficient of Kg = 0.5 was selected for the compacted granular fill.

l This highly conservative approach adopted in determin-ing the earth pressure for dynamic loading conditions (cor-relating movement of structure from dynamic analysis with j strain obtained from a typical earth pressure diagram) combined with static loads results in a heavily reinforced l

! perimeter wall.

6.6 Groundwater Environment Evaluation of piezometric response in the Recent allu-vium to fluctuations in the river level indicated that the

! y-tD -

o l

l i

i

(')

QJ l

l clays, silts, and sands were discontinuous and unresponsive. l Average permeability of these deposits is estimated to'be in the order of 1.5 x 10 -6 cms /sec (FSAR Fig. 2.5-12).

~

. Similar conclusions were reached regarding the trans-missibility of potential sand layers in the Pleistocene clays. Below the stiff clays at Elev. -77 MSL it has been stated that all strata are responsive to river level fluc-tuations. The major source of recharge fo'r the granular backfill surrounding the Power Plant is expected to be from rain and run-off, possible interconnections with dis-continuous sand layers extending to the river and the tan silty sand layer at Elev. -77 MSL.

Water quality has been analyzed and no corrosive ele-ments were detected which could impact the reinforcing steel

cmbedded in the concrete mat (see Section 8.0). The pos-sibility of the water becoming saline at some future date

(~

\/ was considered; however, lack of oxygen would prevent cor-rosion from this water source.

The greatest potential for corrosive elements to be

, present in the groundwater immediately adjacent to the concrete mat would be from the Mississippi River; however, the-seepage path required in the assumed continuous silty

( sand stratum at Elev. -77 MSL, relatively low permeability, l

estimated gradient of 0.008 and probable filter medium

! would result in a groundwater environment surrounding the i

Plant with all corrosive elements removed or highly diluted.

l

6.7 Excavation Sequence Unfortunately due to schedule and legal problems it

. was not possible to complete the required excavation for the Plant Island structures until October, 1975. The fol-lowing is a brief summary of the major excavation phases commencing with the initial excavation in April, 1972

~

(FSAR Section 2.5.4.5.1).

g01 v -

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

\,/

Excavated Stage From To Started Finished Phace I Grade -5 April 72 July 72 II -5 -22 January 75 June 75 III -22 -40 April 75 August 75 IV -40 -48 October 75 March 76 Turbine Bldg. Grade -40 January 77 March 77 Concurrent with the excavation phases, extensive dewatering systems were installed and operated.

6.8 Dewatering Systems The dewatering systems were installed by Moortrench-American Corporation based on performance specifications prepared by Ebasco. A total of 251 dewatering wells were located around the perimeter of the excavation with 217 pumping from the Recent alluvium and the remaining 34 from

(~)

\_/

the Elev. -77 Pleistocene sands. A second series of 12 deep pump relief wells were located around the combined structure mat and pumped from the Elev. -77 sands. No de-tails were provided on the design of the well systems. It is assumed these studies were performed by Mooretrench. On evaluating the Instrumentation Reports covering the monitor-ing of the dewatering operation it appears that the sys-tems generally performed as intended. It was noted in a letter from Ebasco to Boh Bros. dated June 29, 1977 (Ap-pendix H) that significant operational and maintenance problems had developed. Corrective action was taken by the contractor and it is understood that the wells were stabilized and instrumentation readings were obtained in conformance with specifications. An extensive Recharge Program (required to achieve buoyancy of the structures) was implemented successfully in October, 1977 and completed by July, 1979 when normal groundwater pressure levels were

/3s n i achieved,

)

f

-l u-..- - . - _ . - . _ ."^

I xj

.6.9, Subsurface Instrumentation Program The scope of the Instrumentation Program consisted of monitoring piezometric levels, foundation soil heave, settlement, excavation slope movements and potential site subsidence *due to dewatering. A total of 24 piezometers were installed to measure groundwater response in select-ed soil strata. Five additional piezometers were located i in the filter layer underlying the combined mat. A total of nine (9) heave points, two (2) extensometers, six (6) inclinometers, and twenty-eight (28) settlement monuments were installed to measure movement of structures and ex-cavation slopes.

6.10 Construction of Mat The excavation for the combined mat was performed with backhoes by making an eight (8) foot vertical cut in the stiff Pleistocene clay from Elev. -40 to Elev. -48. The excavation was performed in strips. The initial strip was b' ') located under the Reactor Building area approximately 120 feet wide running- to the full width of the mat. Subse-f-

quent strips '(No s . 2 and 6) were cut north and south of i strip No. 1 as shown in Appendix I (Fig. 2.5-118). Con-crete placements were made simultaneously in alternate l

strips. All exposed vertical cut faces were gunited I

within 8 hours9.259259e-5 days <br />0.00222 hours <br />1.322751e-5 weeks <br />3.044e-6 months <br /> of exposure to prevent dessication prior to concrete mat placement.

6.11 Summary of Movements Recorded During Construction on completion of excavation in October, 1975 for the common mat it was noted that the clays had heaved a total of 5 to 10 inches with the maximum amount occurring at the north end closest to the river. This magnitude of f

heave was considerably greater than anticipated in orig-inal design (approximately 2 inches) and was due primarily l r

%J l

l

[ !I

to general relaxation of the clays due to the number of excavation phases and the stop/ start operation of the de-watering systems.

To compensate for the additional heave, the permissible overload of.700 psf was. increased to 1,200 psf in order to accomplish most of the recompression during construc--

tion. .This increase permitted the load from the structures and backfill to be increased to 4,500 psf prior to com-mencing the Recharge Program to achieve buoyancy. By July, 1977 recompression of the heave had occurred due to loading from: structures and backfill, assisted by larger and more efficient dewatering pumps. The dewatering system was con-tinued until October, 1977 when the average net settlpment was:approximately 2 inches., During the period October, 1977 to. July, 1979 the rate of movement was controlled by re-leasing the dewatering system in stages, permitting con-

~

~

struction'of the plant to continue._ The average net settle-g Lment increased to approximately 5 inches during this period.

I- Readings have stabilized at that' level-for the past four

- years with oniy minor. ' fluctuations noted due to change in river level. The composite foundation mat settlement is shown~in~ Appendix J-(FSAR Fig. 2.5-117).

Detailed' review of the instrumentation records cover-

' ing construction of the Plant indicated that the applied structural load was sufficiently controlled so that the permissible maximum differential loading of 1 ksf across the base of mat was not exceeded. Adherence to this cri-

'terion resultied in minimum deflections and minimum cur-vature (for the mat geometry) at the surface and base of mat. Maximum differential movement was- recorded at 2.5 inches with the maximum. settlement occurring at the north and south ends.

~

2. A.en g 1

~-

. .Q . y ,. '

L , .:

&, y . , . , ,

Although the maximum recorded heave and subsequent set-tlement was considerably in excess of original design estimates, careful control had been exercised in applying load from structures and equipment in a uniform sequence.

By conforming to the maximum differential loading criter-ion of 1 ksf recompression of the heave and consequently rate of strain was controlled. This procedure minimized unusual and severe distortions of the mat.

O r

i I

I l

-23 i

en I . L,

-_.--_,__..._.__.___-_..__.~___._,..__

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

1 l

l

^l  !

7.0 Evaluation of Cracking l While it is not possible to precisely predict stresses 1 in reinforcing bars,.an upper bound estimate is possible by estimating'the strain as the crack width divided by l crack spacing. ' Assuming crack widths of- 5 mils spaced 10 f t.

on center, it may be shown (Appendix K) that the approxi-mate stress in the top rebar is 1200 psi. The actual l

crack width and spacing would indicate a much lower stress.

Nevertheless, if the conservative value of 1200 psi ten-sion in the top reinforcing bars.is conservatively assumed to be constant for the : entire 330 feet of length of the mat, the indicated differential settlement would be some-what less than 1.0 inch. This provides added assurance

.that differential soil _ pressures were very well controlled

during construction.- This also indicates that the mat is.

quite tolerant of such differential settlements.

Furthermore, settl'ement stresses are considered-E secondary - stresses in that they- do not ' impair the struc- .

f _tural capacity to carry other imposed loads.such as dead load _and seismic loads. This is possible provided that there is.no failure of the supporting soil. In the case of Waterford III the.soll is loaded at about one fourth of the design. load and in fact, less than the previous in-situ condition. When this'is compared to the reinforcing f  ;

bar yield stress of 60,000 psi, it is clear that these

. cracks did 'not give any evidence at all of any structural

i. distress.

Cracks are expected in reinforced concrete structures, ,

and are caused by many factors, such as:

application of tensile forces, drying shrinkage of concrete thermal gradients, e and dif ferential settlements.

D v -

5 ' -

l l

(~N .

ku-] \

l The last three effects are the result of geometric l 1

constraints, which do not limit the ability of a properly  ;

designed reinforced concrete structure supported on com- 1 petent soil to carry imposed loads. By " properly designed" j it is meant that sufficient reinforcing steel is placed in the concrete-to prevent large tensile cracking of the concrete, crushing of concrete, or diagonal tension shear failure.

-1 The cracks that were reported are of little concern with respect to the structural adequacy of the mat; there-fore, the precise cause of the cracks is not important.

The cracks could be the result of:

shrinkage temperature gradient, settlement, or

{

a combination of the above.

O sj- However, it.is concluded that the origin of the cracks detected during construction .was not due to severe dif fer-I! ential movements occurring during or immediately after application of loads from structures and equipment.

~

The water reported to have surfaced through the cracks is probably ground water under a pressure head. Based on records of dewatering, there does appear to have been suf-l ficient hydrostatic head available to force water through I the cracks observed in the mat. Regardless of the hydraulic

! process, very little water was observed. It was described l

l as "not resulting in generally enough water to form a sheen but enough to definitely show the cracks and to moisten I

surrounding concrete". With the low rate of water weep-ing and the~rather limited cracking, there is no reason for l

concern.

In 1983, additional cracks in the mat were reported in eb U -

~'

(~\

Q ,)

areas outside of the Reactor Building (see Section 4.6 and Appendix A). These cracks probably developed several years ago. During an interview with Mr. J. Sleger, he stated that one crack was observed with evidence of seep-age during the late summer of 1979. It is very probable that all of the cracks discovered in 1983 were present for some years. 'Indeed, several of these cracks gave in-dications of epoxy repairs.

All of these cracks appear to be the same; namely, a crack which is either a hairline crack or which is invis-ible to the naked eye. Many of the cracks are associated with "leachate", moisture and/or evidence of an epoxy re-pair at the top surface of the mat. Both "leachate" and -

moisture are observed in very small quantities. These cracks are not indicative of any high stress in the rein-i forcing bars. In fact, based upon the observed cracking,

() ^

one could conclude that the foundation mat is virtually unloaded. If the foundation mat was actually loaded as k assumed in the design calculation, one would expect con-siderably more cracking. This tends to confirm the statement that the calculations for the mat are indeed con-servative.

Crack widths of anywhere from 10 to 80 mils, depend-i ing upon crack spacing, which would not be beyond expecta-tion, are not cause for concern of the structural integrity of the mat.

While cracking of concrete is expected, it is, of course, important to evaluate the cracking for several reasons:

a) If the crack width becomes very large and there are corrosive chemicals and oxygen present the rein-forcing steel may be subject to rusting.

i.

h]

U ~

.q V_

b) Large and e'xtensive cracking may be indicative of-forces acting on the structure which can cause damage such that the ability of the structure to resist loads, due to service, is compromised. ,

c) For the case of the Waterford III mat in particular, seepage of water from cracks may invalidate the

" floating mat" concept and affect the containment vessel stability.

The cracks in the mat have widths that are so small that there is no chance of intrusion of corrosive materials and that corrosive materialc are not in the enviranment within the plant or outside. In the Commentary to ACI 318-71 Section 10.6 it is stated that "To assure protec-tion of reinforcement against corrosion and for aesthetic reasons, many fine hair cracks are preferable to a few wide cracks." From the observation of the Waterford III O

(_j mat, one would have to describe the situation as one of a

, few hair cracks much less than the many fine hair cracks f

envisaged as a preferable condition.

The observations of the cracks indicate the seepage of water up through cracks carries with it "leachate" which contains primarily calcium carbonate and magnetic

. ' iron. The leachate apparently seals the cracks because many of the cracks show leachate deposits which are now dry. This self sealing process may eventually eliminate leakage; however, seepage is still in evidence even though the process has probably been underway for several years.

Nevertheless,'the present seepage is minor and poses no difficulties.

Since the advent of Portland cement in construction, it has been known that steel reinforcing bars embedded in Portland cement concrete are protected from corrosion. l l

e

,C .  !

N.

F

~ ,

. . - . - _l-

L - . .:_ . :_..___.. . . . . _ . . .

i

, s

, Quoting from the Commentary to ACI-318-71 Sectiott 10.6

(

. "Recent extensive laboratory work involving modern de-formed bars has confirmed that crack width at service I

loads'is proportional to steel stress." As noted above, the observed cracks indicated a very low stress in the re-inforcing steel.

g I'

l L

1

~

O lQ .

l l

e

{

[3

'M 8.0 Corrosion Potential 8.1 Passivation Mechanism in Reinforced Concrete In order to assess the potential for corrosion in the reinforcing steel of the NPIS basemat, several references concerning corrosion of steel in concrete were reviewed (References 14-18) .

As noted in Reference 14, "the corrosion resistance of steel in Portland cement concrete has been recognized for more than a century. The protective mechanism, not des-cribed until recent years, is due to a passivating film of gamma ferric oxide which is formed and maintained in the alkaline environment produced by cement hydration".

As noted in Reference 15, " Iron and steel are not thermodynamically stable in water. Either acid or neutral water corrodes iron and forms a ferrous solution. This solution, in contact with oxygen, oxidizes to form hydrated

() ferric oxide -- a major constituent of rust.

is sufficiently alkaline, at pH 8 to 14 for example, the If the water t

Fe23 O and Fe34 0 which form are relatively insoluble and-deposit a protective film on the metal surface. The metal is then said to be passivated".

The passivating mechanism, therefore, requires an alkaline environment (pH of about 12. 5) and an absence of oxygen in order to form a protective film on the surface of the reinforcing steel.

The alkalinity of the water derives from the hydra-tion of the cement, which generates calcium hydroxide.

A relatively oxygen-free environment is generally insured by careful control of' the concrete mix and its subsequent placement. Depth of concrete cover is also a factor.

As noted in Reference 16, "In addition, concrete of e

\ ~

V- .

D low water-cement ratio and well cured has a low perme-ability which minimizes penetration of corrosion inducing factors -- oxygen, chloride ion, carbon dioxide, and water."

8.2 Job SpecificationsSection I, Paragraph 7.3 of the Ebasco Concrete Masonry specification (Reference 19) stipulates that: "The aggre-gate, sand and water combined in the same amounts as in the concrete mix shall not contain a total soluble chlor-ide ion content of more than 250 ppm water when water is

extracted from the combination after being thoroughly mixed, unless the Engineer allows a deviation in writ-ing...".

Section I, Paragraph 9.7 of that specification further requires that: "No admixture containing chlorides to an extent that the requirements of Paragraph 7.3, with the admixture mixed with the water, are exceeded shall be ac-b.

.x /

ceptable unless the Engineer allows a deviation in writ-ing...".

Section II, Paragraph 8.4 of that specification also

. stipulates that: " Calcium Chloride shall not be used for accelerating the set of the cement in any concrete con-taining reinforcement or embedded metal parts".

The limitation on the maximum allowable soluble

! chloride contained in the concrete mix defined in the Reference 19 specification is subsequently verified by l the sampling and testing procedures mandated by that l

l specification.

! 8.3 Laboratory Testing In order to deduce any evidence of corrosion in the f

i. basemat reinforcing steel, several water samples and a solid (leachate) sample were subjected to laboratory analysis.

r- i l ,

-. m . _ _ - . , , s-rm-.,, ---g - --,-. ,.-r -- - -

%/.-

The three water samples subjected to laboratory analysis were obtained at the following locations:

a) Water rising in Conduit No. 33074, which rises near the West Temporary Electrical Pit, runs to the southeast for approximately 90 feet, and again rises above the basemat. At the south end, no water was rising, indicating a blockage to the flow of water. The conduit is located approxi-mately 3 feet below the top of the basemat.

b) Ground water flowing through conduits which extend from the side of the mat to the East Temporary Electrical Pit.

c) Water collecting at a crack in the Waste Gas Tank Compressor B room.

The solid sample was collected along the top surface of a

(

- crack located along an east-west axis between column lines

() R and Q 1, and straddling column line I '

M -

3 The laboratory report summarizing the results of the 4

analyses performed on these samples is contained as Ap-pendix M.

As noted under ' Testing Methods and Results' each of the three liquid samples were subjected to analysis for l

pH, chloride, alkalinity, iron, calcium and sodium. The results of these analyses are subsequently tabulated on page 2 (note that samples designated 'l', '2' and '3' accord with the order in which the sample locations are l defined herein).

The value of the pH obtained for sample 1, 12.5, ac-cords with the pH of concrete, as previously noted. The pH of 7.5 obtained for samples 2 and 3 is due to the car-bonation process which normally occurs at the surface of l concrete exposed to open air.

1 l

I i

. . . _ . , . . . , . . . . _ . . . . , _ . . . . _ , - . . - - , . . _ , _ .d .

.. -  :~ ' ^ ~ ":~ '

~

~ ~. -- :

^ ~~ ^ ' ~

i As noted in Reference 14, " Free carbon dioxide re-

[ .

' duces pH by carbonation, but.only to a depth of a few

' millimeters in sound concrete" .

l The report results indicate the virtual absence of f iron in the threefliquid samples, a clear indicator that the chemical constituents of rust are not present. The ppm of chloride are also well within the maximum allow-able 250 ppm mandated in the Ebasco Concrete Masonry specification (Reference 19), as previously noted.

4 The solid'(leachate) sample was subjected to spec-trographic and X-ray diffraction techniques. Iron and Calcium are identified as the two major chemical consti-

. tuents contained in the solid-sample.

As noted in.the appended laboratory report under

' Remarks', the calcium hydroxide liberated during the hydration of Portland. cement will form calcium carbonate in the presence of carbon dioxide; the iron content con-tained in the solid sample is identified as magnetite.

l l

l~

\

V w . e

[

n The results of the testing of the water samples and leachate are consistent with the process of corrosion pro-tection of the steel reinforcing bars embedded in the concrete. As a matter of interest, it should be noted that the reinforcing bars.are large. In general, the top reinforcing bar diameter is 1-3/8 inches while the bottom reinforcing bar diameter is 2-1/4 inches.

These properties accord with the properties of the iron compound which (under properly controlled conditions) forms a passivating film on the surface of the reinforc-ing steel (see the initial extract from Reference 15).

It is interesting to note that this deposition mechan-ism also occurs in boilers, and is succinctly stated in Section 6, page 129 of Mark's Standard Handbook for Mech-p anical Engineers (Seventh Edition) :

,f-j "At saturation temperatures above moder-(_) ately low pressures, a second mechanism j predominates, in which iron removes oxygen

! from water or steam, forming iron oxide and releasing hydrogen:

3 Fe + 4H 2O --- Fe 03 4 + 8H

_It is notewcrthy that this mechanism does not l

l require the intervention of dissolved gaseous oxygen in the water, which is often the rate-limiting factor in the electrochemical l corrosion' discussed earlier in this sub-section.

l l The stable oxide at boiler temperatures in a non-oxidizing environment is magnetite, Fe 340 (ferrous ferrite). A normal protective l skin of magnetite is formed from the underly-l ing steel".

i j

k -

L. a_..... . . _ . . . .

I i

?

l l On the basis of the feregoing evaluation, it is

! therefore concluded that there is no evidence to infer the existence of basemat rebar corrosion in the vicinity of a crack.

8.4 Steel Containment Corrosion As noted in HEA Trip Report No. 6 (Reference 5), an inspection of the annular area between the Containment Vessel and the Shield Building revealed some surface cor-rosion at the base of the Containment Vessel, which might be due to the presence of water generated by construction activity.

As soon as this area can be adequately controlled j with respect to the presence of such construction-related j water, it is the recommendation of HEA that a program be l

1. _

implemented to clean and field paint the base of the Con-I -

tainment Vessel to insure that the corrosion process has

, '( ) been eliminated in this area.

4 l

l l

l' 1

l-.

l -. ._ _ _ ._ . , . _ . . . _ - - _ - - _ . . . _ __ ._____ _ _ . . _ - _ . . . . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

./

b_/

9.0 Steel Containment Stability 9.1 Ebasco Calculation 1352.063 Ebasco Calculation 1352.063 (Reference 13) was ex-

, ecuted as a consequence of Ebasco Nonconformance Report W3NCR-16143, dated May 11, 1983 (Reference 10).

Attachment III to that NCR notes that "The effect of postulated widespread hairline cracking of the basemat has been investigated by Civil Engineering for stability of the Containment Vessel against flotation and overturning under buoyant conditions caused by postulated groundwater intrusion...".

An attached memorandum from P.-C. Liu to B. Grant dated May 24, 1983 specifically indicates that the stabil-ity of the Containment Vessel has been reviewed for a postulated hydrostatic infiltration to Elev. -1.50 feet.

An examination of Ebasco Drawing No. 1564 G-817, Rev. 13,

/- - dated 02/03/83 designates El. -1.50 ft. as Top of Pier, j 4.5 feet below the tangent line of the cylindrical shell i and the ellipsoidal base of the Containment Vessel.

Ebasco Calculation 1352.063 (Reference 13) assumes that the base of the Containment Vessel is flat, and com-putes the safety factors against uplift, sliding and over-turning due to the effects of E-W DBE, vertical DBE and buoyancy.

The factors of safety against uplift, sliding and overturning initially computed are 2.44, 2.51 and 6.77.

- At a meeting held at Ebasco's New York office (see Section 2.0) it was agreed that Ebasco would revise the f stability calculation to reflect the SRSS of the E-W and N-S DBE's, and to reduce the dead load of the Containment Vessel by the magnitude of the buoyant force.

- _. .. . - ~ - . . - - . - . ..

5

('N -

Aj' The Revision 1 calculation, dated 07/28/83, computes revised factors of safety against sliding and overturning

. of 1.17 and 3.16.

In order to confirm the stability of. the Containment Vessel, a simple stability model was formulated by HEA (Appendix L) which takes the curvature of the base of the Containment Vessel into account.

This stability model is formulated on the basis of two intrinsic properties of the ellipsoidal base of the Containment Vessel: that sliding and translation of the base of the Containment Vessel with respect to the mass concrete support cannot be uncoupled, and that any dis-placed configuration of the base of the Containment Vessel will result in " two-point" contact (points designated 'j'

y. and 'k' on page 3 of the Appendix L calculation). The lat-e'3 ter assumption derives from the fact that the radius of N/ curvatur'e of the ellipsoidal base of the Containment Vessel is not a constant.

)

~

As shown in the computation, the critical stability mode for the Containment Vessel is overturning and not i

sliding. The factor of safety computed against overturn-l ing is 2.34.

HEA therefore confirms the stability of the Contain-ment Vessel under the action of the postulated earthquake and buoyancy forces.

The HEA computation also confirms the structural l adequacy of the underlying mass concrete supporting the l Containment Vessel as shown in Detail "B" of Ebasco Draw-ing LOU-1564-G-502, Rev. No. 6, dated 12/17/78.

Factors of safety against uplift, sliding and over-turning were also computed for the Shield Building with respect to the top of the Mat. The respective factors of

~

L

- . - . ._ .- - - -.____-. _ _. _ _ _ . . - _ _._ ._ .__ _ ... _..-_-.,,..i_

i 44 , J.4 M_-. .m., _____ -4. .:. # al S ,.

sh.. , e t mL. 3 1-safety calculated were 3.23, 1.35 and 1.32, which do not take into account the additional shear and axial restraint that would~be generated by the reinforcing steel tieing the Shield Building and the Mat together.

HEA therefore additionally confirms the stability of

the Shield Building with respect to the top of the mat.

4 e

i 1

l

-Q r

e f

I i

l i

i

.~.

.N r .-v--~.,e-m+, nee o e~+< -. sw ,,,.w.,,-+-w,m..e., .,,,y_,_ ,,, , . . _,,_ ., . ,,,,,,, _ , _ , , . ,, ,,_p. ,

._. _ -. ~ _ - _ _ _ _ _ - _. . ._. . . . . . - _ . . . .. . _ .

.~,.-..a.-,...._.. . a. .- - -. . . .._ .-. _ .. .

a 10.0 Conclusions and Recommendations 10.1 Containment Vessel

~

-The steel Containment Vessel is seated on a concrete dish.' - If it is assumed that hydrostatic pressure develops on the interface between the bottom head of the Contain-ment Vessel and the supporting fill concrete, there would l'

! be a reduction in stability. Calculations were performed <

which indicate.a more than adequate margin of safety.

l Therefore, it can be concluded that the cracking and seep-

[ age in the foundation mat could extend into the supporting fill. concrete without causing any' concern about the Con-tainm'ent Vessel stability.

Quite independent of the cracking in the foundation mat,-some surface corrosion was noted on the lower cylin-p .drical portion of the containment vessel. This surface r^ ' L corrosion has not affected the strength of the Containment

( '

f -

Vessel. .However, this surface corrosion should be cleaned i and the steel protected to prevent future corrosion.

)

i 10.2 Foundation Mat l While certain difficulties were encountered during construction and procedural changes were made, they were resolved in a controlled manner so that there were no ad-verse effects upon the structural integrity of the founda '

tion mat.

I Cracks in the mat were reported in 1977 and again in 1983. However, it is likely that the cracks reported in 1983 were in existence for some time but were only noticed

~in-1983. In fact, if it weren't for the moisture associ-ated with the cracks, the cracks might not have been noticed at all. The extent of cracking is minor and is certainly within expectations for a structure of this

i. type. The specific causes of the cracks are probably a i

9%

lD .

l l

L 1

, , - - . . . - . - = - - - - . - . - - .. - .

. ~ _._ _ . _ . _ . - . - . - .._._- _. . - . _ _ . ._ .- ._.

__ +

i JJ x-combination of temperature effects, drying shrinkage and

. differential soil settlements under imposed loads.

While the cracking can be considered minor, the seep-age of water through the foundation mat contrasted with statements that the foundation mat was a " watertight barrier". However, the limited amount of water seepage does not invalidate the fundamental assumption that the foundation mat can support and maintain the imposed hydro-static pressure of the groundwater.

It was also determined that there is a self sealing lof the cracks by the leachate. The leachate has two major 4

components; calcium carbonate and magnetic iron. This

magnetic iron is probably magnetite, Fe340 which is the passivating oxide which forms on and protects the steel embedded in the concrete from rusting. The water taken from a crack is not very dissimilar to water taken from O)

(, the ground surrounding the foundation mat. In neither

, case is the water considered aggressive.

h Furthermore, visual inspections of cracks reveal no evidence of rusting. If corrosion of reinforcing bars in the concrete were a problem it would be expected that the cracking would be extensive. This is because corrosion products of iron occupy a much larger volume than that of the iron. The rerulting expansive forces would cause addi-tional cracking and open up existing cracks and a rust discoloration would appear. The inspection and testing revealed no indications of such a corrosion process.

As a matter of fact, the cracking in the foundation is minor and there are no corrosive agents within the NPIS nor are any expected in the future. Therefore, there is no need to perform a program of crack repair or peri-odic inspection. Indeed, the leachate appears to provide

.w_-_. . ._ __. . . . . ~ . . - -- . .

P

,A  :

!-. A/

[ for a self sealing process.

r While the laboratory test results indicated that j there was iron in the leachate, the sample of pit water in-dicates virtually no iron. This strongly suggests that the l iron is not currently waterborn and therefore is not now-coming from the reinforcing bars. While the source of the iron is not known, it probably occurred over the past seven years of construction. Possible sources include pipe threading and sweeping of the floor with steel bristled brooms.

In conclusion, there is no evidence of any process which has been or could be detrimental to the structural integrity.of.the foundation mat.

I

, LO l t.

k i

l i

i G

J

?

4

- ,,-m., , .E.c.,,. ,-...M....mg - , . - _ _.,m_, ...s--_.._,,... .y ,, ,....,.,_.._,,,_.,_,,,,_m.m.m....

t _ . _. _ ..

l-l- /^\

'V:

, REFERENCES l

1. HEA Trip Report No. 1, W3-HE-LP-001, July 15, 1983.

2. HEA Trip Report No. 2, W3-HE-LP-002, August 1, 1983.

3. HEA Trip Report No. 3, W3-HE-LP-00 3, August 22, 1983.

4. HEA Trip Reports Nos. 4 & 5, W3-HE-LP-004, August 24, 1983.

5. HEA Trip Report No. 6, W3-HE-LP-006, September 6, 1983.

6. Foundation Design of the Waterford Nuclear Plant, by l-J. L. Ehasz and E. Radin, December, 1973.

7. Review of Site Settlements, by M. Pavone and J. L. Ehasz, September, 1978.

8. RCB Foundation Crack Map, Ebasco Drawing No. SK 1564-4.1-Y r G-28, August.17, 1977.

[ 9. Ebasco Letter. Doc: CH-039-77, File: R-4, July 27, 1977.

H S- 10. Ebasco Nonconformance Report W3NCR-16143, May 27, 1983.

( ). l . WSES-FSAR-UNIT-3, Section 11.2, Liquid Waste Management System.

12. Compatibility of Large Mat Design to Foundation Conditions, 1-by J. L. Ehasz and P.-C. Liu l

13. Ebasco Calculation OFS No. 1352.063, Steel Containment Stability, Rev. 1, July 28, 1983.

14. Steel Corrosion in Concrete, by D. A. Hausmann, Materials Protection, November, 1967, pp. 19-23.

I 15. The Mechanism of Steel corrosion in Concrete Structures, i-by C. T. Ishikawa and B. Bresler, Materials Protection,

, r March, 1968, pp. 45-47.

n- v.,- -, , a y , , _. , --,,..--.n.,-

, - , - - , , ~-n,, s ,, -. ,n,,,- m., , , , , . . , , , . . , . - _ , . _ , --

. . . _ _ _ . _ . . . . . - _ . ~ . _ . .

16. Mechanisms of Corrosion of Steel in Concrete, by G. J. Verbeck, ACI Publication SP-49, June, 1975, pp. 21-38.

J

17. Criteria for Cathodic Protection of Steel in Concrete

Structures, by D. A. Hansmann, Materials Protection, October, 1969, pp. 23-25.

18. Cathodic Protection of Steel in Concrete, by R. C. Robinson, ACI Publication SP-49, June, 1975, pp. 83-93.

19. Ebasco Specification Concrete Masonry, Project Identifica-tion No. LOU-1564.472, Issue Date: December 31, 1971.

e i l 1

e O .

a l

i O .

.,,,,a...

=-

- - ~ . . ._... _ . ._ _ e-- -

t i

I APPENDIX A l

I i

Basemat Crack Maps i

(O

,)

I l

t l

I l

l l

i

,r l

1 ~

---,,ee- - - - ,,. ,. ,, --

APPENDIX A NOTES

{~ }

The basemat crack maps contained in Appendix A indicate the extent and orientation of cracks observed at the surface of the basemat.

" NOTES" on Basemat Crack Maps additionally indicate:

1. Any prior repair to the crack 4 2. Presence of floor finish

3. Evidence of dampness or seepage

4. Crack width

l

{

.O -

l l

PR J. NO.

y HARSTEAD ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES o INC. l A 169 KINDERKAMACK ROAD, PARK RIDGE, N. J 07656 C- - -

l U . S BDW. SHEET l ROJECT IENT " F L '-

PREP. BYM4 ATE I/f///3 SUBJECT E A ! E '/ A - C E ^ C T- '/ A P CHCKD.BY Ad b DATE 08/3 L /2 3 Mo E3: 1. U0 .

2. M O

3. SLl6H T AMOUM T - 3'-O LE. AIGTH )

M EAR W E ST & M O , '

i l l 4. H4 I A LIM 8 cAAcM. l i

\

N i l

l 1 ,

1 (OA IIA l ,

y+ @

a

, a p 0 .___\

! O

! l' l l  !,

i

' N .__..\_

6-O l i! i

( . . . .

e*n 7..'. 3. .,'  !

I i 8

0 l

!S 'e:

3 I J , W"

's e

- L .

i -

l 1

1

~

l t

PROJ. No.

H HARSTEAD ENGINEERING ASSOCIA TES o INC.

$ 169 KINDERKAMACK ROAD. PARK RIDGE. N. J. 07656 C- - - -

ROJECT D N. SHEET 1ti LIENT PREP. B[/MDATE //////5 SUBJECT 7. l. ! 5 t/. A - c 1. A c T. I '. A P CHCKD.BY Adi DATE 0 8/51/g 3 H0TES: 1. QO

2. Te S Fit 0 M C RA cad. Ibs6 tM MI M 6 -

600TH (SHA DE 0)

5. F10

4. niis A R.rEA ct.E: A F E I D F o i2.

\

InfS P E C Tl0 Fl . C R A CM. MAY '

\ E y TFJ D iSe.4CM G WoTe O ARSA UdoeR p t oo R, p 9.r:P A tl A T I O kl.

, 6. H A IR.Llu E. CAACM RA [0A t

G~

x r ,..

..s

. .g I . g s..... -

I L T_l . __,

L

, cr T -

I 1

., C.J.1:

l i

( '( q _ .Y J .3 L ,

, , _ ___6' O

'T NOTE b

- \

,

g ,

.e < - - - - IO-O

g. ,

I

\. .

.:... .. . : .w: ,

91

'e .l I k .

H + i f

I 1

y HARSTEAD ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES o INC.

A 169 KINDERKAMACK ROAD. PARK RIDGE. N. J. 07656 C- - -

S 81 SU SDN. SHEET ROJECT F1- I LIENT PREP. BY(((DATE /57//3 SUBJECT E A ! E '/. A - C r. A c r. v. A P CHCKD.BY Adb DATE o8/3:/23 s: 1. Exeosso AR cEA - gl0 ao j 2. . Y E S - S H AD e 0 ARCA

[ 3. Mo A VW AlbLa. TO O S.T E R MI Al nL. IP c pact < is dpocR c.dRt3

\

5. H AI R.Ll M E C.RAc44.

\

4A 5A l

9 O A

l

_+

t.

I P

l, i

T7'

- Y

's ' i

-0 h.i - f-'

W "

. ?]p),tf f Illl' I! al hh

\ g f;L.- - . . . g. -

. -.paWee f y- t - x-.- 1 m .

e  :

-l ,

% l

~

\_ . ,

g I

+.s .

?\ , f

~

J

PROJ. NO.

$A HARS EAD IGINEERING ASSOCIATES oINC. C- - -

169 KINDERKAMACK ROAD. PARK RIDGE. N. J. 07656 SUBJ. SU BDIV. SHEET ROJECT LIENT 'T4'

-PREP. BYMDATE /[////d SUBJECT E A 5 5 '/ ^ ~ C 1 A C T- 3/ A P CHCKO.BY Ad L DATE 0 9/31/t 3 H0TES: 1. M O i

g. Q S - S H AD E D A R.fEA

[ 3. DL'T - S H ADE D A REA DA M P - 09 S HAD fE I) A A. E A 4 , H A l ft L1 N E.- Cll A C44

\

\

$A SA k

[ l U). . . . .

t i ,.[-S J l

, tor v.,

. ' ', 4 _ _ :- !II: I

. g. m. .^.. .

i-- --

! ~ -

. s. .

4'. O _?l

. , , , . .n 3- -

\

• i k. ._' , :.

p,# __ _

l

. e g , ,

. 4  ? e

! .3 j l ,q .-

I-K '4-

, 6A5 su%e nur Pmq -

l n,~ <.

b

~

i l

~. \

y HARSTEAD ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES

• INC.

169 KINDERKAMACK ROAD. PARK RIDGE. N. J. 07656 C- - -

l

}A SU BJ. SU BDIV. SHEET

, 'ROJECT

' CLIENT F t '- PREP. BY(([DATE 81//J5 SUBJECT 1 l ! ? '/ A ~ C 1. A C T. V. A F CHCKD.BY Adt DATE 9 8/31/23

~

l 407!3: 1. d o 2 Ye 5- S HA0s o

b. 3. DA M P

4. PR5VIO USLY 6 R.I 40 e D A Q.E A FO R. t M S f"C.c TI O M

\

5. O PA idi is to ca rsRMids.

WHETHPA cR.Ac# RUMS l Op ot ia, Pc ois sTA L.

l '

6. HAigLIME C42.A Cd .

g'A 3A c' (

)

L, x. ) . .t c*4... . s. %

4 g =%

~ ~

lf i kloTE 4 l l A

• 1 l ,

l .

I

., t"606 5TA L 8

• .! _?

(Lf 0TE 5)

.  :.. .' g s

_- _. 1 .

f

./*' " _ . ,

I 1

i l

l K +i V> Acre 64r ComPRessa'. Pa:ct 4

~

i ,

(=- -

PR OJ. No.

y HARSTEAD ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES o INC.

s3 169 KINDERKAMACK ROAD l'APK RIDGE, N. J. 07656 C- - -

' SUBJ. SU BDIV. SHEET POJECT _

COENT. IIi _ _

' PREP.B ATE //#/3 SUBJECT E A ! & '/ A - G T. A C T- VAP CHCKD.BY /3d L DATE c thr/g3

,4 .

t 40TEt; t Llc L PA10T PRP_vlotj$LY f4FMOVED pop ip 5PGCTlod

, [ 3. dame is rse_ sioots. - q"ceiac,Ta

4. U 4 ( qu p F.:. c,tAcx

\

\

~

i SA  ?; 4A g...y - -.....-

- . -- -(

, . l ..

T l O _'  : a-c, _

b 1

t';

" s.

(N 1

I

' d i

l l

i I

l

! J 4-

\1)t.ST E h--

ost- . C,.. R a Is i

r t

. l l I p.

y HARSTEAD ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES o INC.

A 169 KINDERKAMACK ROAD PARK RIDGE. N. J. 07656 C- - -

SUBJ. SU BDIV. SHEET p OJECT

/ IENT Fl- PR EP. BY.I5/G W DATE Y8/d SUBJECT 1 A ! ; '/. A - C 1. A T. 7/. A F l CH CK D. BY Ad I, D' ATE 09/o.t/8 3 NOTES: 1, tJ O 2 , rJ O -

L 'f iT. 5 f . H A I ALi bl E. CAA y

\

\

. ~-

IN SC ,$y . ,f.

1 i 9-o - . . . . _ , __

h -

t .'"

• O N .'

q / .. y' S' .

,qR _ /.;.

f.t

~

~ -

.. x y% -

A x-

~

.9  %, ...

\,\

f '# '*

r crX y ~gsw ' O m

h ry y'r L 9(

r-o --

w -

p 4.

1

/'

l I

'l

HARSTEAD ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES o INC.

$ 169 KINDERKAMACK ROAD. PARK RIDGE. N. J. 07656 C~ ~ ~

SUBJ. SU BDIV. SHEET M OJECT iglENT Ft. PR EP. BY ff/G W DAT E 'l/ #/O SUBJECT 1 A 5 i '/. A ~ C 1. A : T. 1/.A F CHCKO.BY Ad5 QATE 09/02/83 HoTE3: 1. REPAIR ATTtMPico

2.. No FLobf2. FINISli i b. 3. SEEP %E E'Al575 4 H A il2.t I M t=. c.A A m l

. \

\

i l

l s .

Ik IM I

v p -

,1

.1- / f  :

5 '- >; 3.' l y ( \

3'. o 4,

. s .

O < ,

?

-- - - - -Wer C . J. N

p. ,, - ,. l .-_-

~

. -M - ~ _A '

.' l'- 0 T

.l l  !?- m l

~

l k )

e I

'L - - - - - - - . -- - - . - - - - -- ---

i

" PR*"**

HARSTEAD ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES o INC.

$ 169 x:NDERKAMACK ROAD. PARK RIDGE. N. J. 07656 C" ~ ~

SUBd. SU BDIV. SHEET ROJECT

< IENT Fl- PREP. BYU/G w/ DATE '////13

-6UBJECT 1 A ! ; '/ A - C t. A : T. l/. A F CHCK D. BY A4 L DATE 09/01.f 83 407E3: 1 REPAIR ATTEMPTED Z. NO FLOCR' FINISH 3, No EVIDENCE of SCCPAC{

4. H4 ti2 LIME CRA CSL

\

\

t .

Ik IC 4'c t

e- - i

{ ,

g'- c ,

~ - - -

3 l_ l'.

i

.- 6..L,O 9 _

l = t .@

h y . . _. J

- _T( . . .. . . _

r ., . . _

_T w T, -

I s3

.'L . ,.

~

~ga

&k O ~ ~ .

O 9.d s

-s i 2

?

e G1 &- *

, h\ ,

L >

l

'H '"'"*'

HARSTEAD ENGINEERING ASSOCIA TES o INC. C- - -

$ 169 KINDERKAMACK ROAD. PARK RIDGE. N. J. 07656

~

SUBJ. SUBDIV. SHEET OJECT J

LENT Y t '. . PR EP. BY A'C/0 4 DATE 4/'/M i C 1. A ; T- 8/ A V CHCKO.BY Ad6 DATE0?/0&/ 83 l

l SUBJECT 1 a ! I '/ A -

l l

l 40TES: 1. REPA)R ATTCMPTED 2- No fl00fd FIMISH l h 3 SEEPAGE E%ISTS

{ 4 Ef A f G L i kis_= cg, A cg.,

\

l \ -

s, IC NC

's .

( .E ,

'4 f L.  ;

p I h2 :- '

o '\

r /. .. -y

~ - - - '

} j1 l O A}4 P J_s l \

i -

l 7 '- 0  ?"

n

?- -

l 'E

, *h*

I

! N l

l l

e Pg 4-- --

.c I

I

. J I

1 H

HARSTEAD ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES olNC. O~ ~ ~

$ 169 XINDERKAMACK ROAD. PARK RIDGE. N. J. 07656 SHEET

- SUBJ. SU BDIV. l

,'"']OJECT _yt. PREP. BY 4 5 /WDATE 9/'/83 L4 TENT SUBJECT 1 ; i ; Ix A - C t. A 0r. 7/.A F CHCKD.BY Ad 6 D ATE 07/0L/r 3 l

40 NorE5: 1

2. U O 3.40 4 H W L' A 'WK

\

\ .

5 IUA 9:A m

/s n

, u. . . . _

y i

,y el I t .

8,[\ t

\ _.. .

i O

/-

d-

/

33 DAMP h

l n 7L

. o. . ,.-

l f '. C ,-m r .- ..-.

l 9

K + --

r l

~

5 1

1 I

J 1

y HARSTEAD ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES o INC.

A 169 KINDERKAMACK ROAD. PARK RIDGE. N. J. 07656 C- - -

SUBJ. SU BDIV. SHEET OJECT LENT EEI PR EP. BY5 f/ d

• DAT E 7/'/D SUBJECT 1 A ! ; '/ A ~ C I. A : T. V. A F CHCKD.BY Ad E DATE 01/02/r 5 407ES: 1. M G z . Jo h.g o

{' 4 H M P,L lN E C R A C K,

\

\

l -

1A liA p

4 O A . _ _ .'

I U ' -

4:4, E -

e.- .i . ,

J.

. ~.

(;\l

! .- ' ,. -q-l 1i l . -

T ;f , 5L o

1. s'/

4

[

l

' kl= 0 , 2l 0 t  %

l 1 ,

4

. s- , .

d.  !

S o ', l.

k. 7 r4 .

,e 7

7, m - v

% l Q ""

M l i t

-l l

l i

{ h i i i __

r e

~

f '.

I

' J t

""U"*-

y HARSTEAD ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES oINC.

A 169 KINDERKAMACK ROAD PARK RIDGE. N. J. 07656 C~ ~ -

SUBJ. SU B DIV. SHEET ROJECT d IENT IL- PR EP. BY f5/66/DATE 9/1/J3 SUBJECT 1 a ! ; '/ A - C L A C T. V.A F CHCKD.BY Ad6 D ATE 07/02/8?

HGTG5; I, rJ O

2. . M c

5. M c 4 ,- -

\

\

l .

IA 2A y

.x ( .. ~.

y .- ': , --- _....)

y i Ol65EL b' ,,, oil STcPA(,G ,2 l ^

l TA 4 4 l

1 l

l

• l L +- 4 i

l<

12 l I l .t  ;

" """"U-HARSTEAD ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES oINC.

A 169 KINDERKAMACX ROAD. PARK RIDGE. N. J. 07656 C~ ~ ~

SUBJ. SUBDIV. SHEET ROJECT IENT 'Fl'-

PREP. BYRR/G UI DATE 9///(3

/

- SUBJECT 1 A i ; '/. A - C f. A C T. l/. A F CH CK D. BY I.d i. DATE0?!02/23 H07ES: 1. No REPolr2.

2. - NO Flooil FINICH

3. SECPAGC AS 19DICATCO 4, H AIR Ll d E c.A A 4 4

\

\

l .

Ib 4C Y .

A l

l l 3 c:- d 9l y F--t ---

G Qz 9p-k_ _

^ N, ~

i Wer

~~

• i .

? I l-O .

O S :,

- - 56 l

l 4-- 4-

% =

PH UJ. No.

y HARSTEAD ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES oINC.

A 169 KINDERKAMACK ROAD, PARK RIDGE. N. J. 07656 C- - -

SUBJ. SU BDIV. SHEET OJECT IENT 'Fl-

- PR EP. BYR8/5 DATE 9////3 SUBJECT I A ! I '/. A - C I. A C T. V. A F CHCKD.BY Ad8 OATE 09/o al8 3 4 0 'T E S : 1. Mo RcpAiq

?- - WG FOR Fiw19)

1. SEEP %E E%ISTS

4. t/A I tlLi F1C. c (2ACK

\

\

l 6-0 f

[ .;

h" i O

i.

s

+

-5 s t

4 gl,4

(. DRAlu l

A l

l s .

l 3

62. 4-- = z

(

\

~

2 l

. J l ,

l H """'"*'

HARSTEAD ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES o INC.

$ 169 KINDERKAMACK ROAD. PARK RIDGE. N. J. 07656 C- - -

. 80W. SHEET PROJECT ENT *Ft.

PREP. BY RN/G A DATE 9////3

,. sSJECT 1 A ! 5 t/. A -

C 1. A T. F/. A F CHCK D.BY !.db D ATE 0'!/c2/23 H0TES: I. td O REPA I R

2. . M C F L.cott F i N ISH

%. bl O Cut OcucC. of SEEPMC

4. HA( R.Ll M E cRAC4

\

\

As e i

2. , ~j IFH roc

, ,e -

' - ~~ - - ~~

dJ.  ? .' .\~

~ ^' - . - -.3.-

-t- .  :

,s I 3. ' o .. . ,

I b2. --

\

l O

_i N

. .- )

_. 7._ L. _ o. . . _ . , ,

i si +. +

1 i~

?O

=

.e a

A HARSTEAD ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES o INC. PR*'*"**

$ 169 nNDERKAMACK ROAD. PARK RIDGE, N. J. 07656 C- - -

SUBJ. SU BDIV. SHEET PROJECT LIENT .}t1 PR E P. BY M/E1 4 DATE 4///O SUBJECT 1 A i ; I/. A - C t. A c T. 1/. A P CHCKD.BY M c DATE 09/02/83 40i!3: .

1 I. REPAIR ATTCMPTED

[

2. No Ft.00R FINISH

! 3. No EUlDEt3 CC of SCCPEC i 4. H A I RLitjs_ CRACK i

lA IM w

k O5 + '

+

,, q p s .... .-...

i (

h.. . o J q

-s ,

8'- 5 i, l'- G

+i  :

I

-a CRACK 'l

\ i

, 3'-10t ,

J. j-

~

l 3

l l

t R + h l

l [ PLAN EL - 34.7 5' l l l l

" PR OJ. No.

HARSTEAD ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES o INC.

$ 169 KltvCERKAMACK ROAD. PARK RIDGE. N. J. 07656 C- - ~

. SU BDW. SHEET PROJECT fi I CLIENT ' Y 'l '-

PR E P. BY Sf/El* DATE V1//3 /

SUBJECT E ; ! $ 1/. A - C 1. A C T. V. A F CHCKD.BY Ad E DATE09/02/83 H0i[S:

i f I. ilo RCPAIR.

2. No flooft FINISH

3. No EVIDENCE OF CECMGC

\ 4 . HA II2. LIM CAAC4 N

3c 6cI J J R _L, . . r < +

l l 3

e i

~E

! _h

• ~'Y i @ ,

i s 4 CJ1

(_____ _

_ __ _ __ _ _] ,

1

__L

- , i

=-

l _

+-8: ,

CRACK [0g l

CONT BLDG -s 9

ai 4- --

r .

PLAN AT EL -34.75' s

t

1 1

" PROJ. NO.

HARSTEAD ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES o INC.

k 169 KINDERKAMACK ROAD, PARK RIDGE. N. J. 07656 C- - -

SUBJ. SU BDIV. SHEET PROJECT A ICLIENT 'FI"-

PR EP. SY #f/6 M DATE WP3 SUBJECT ! A 5 5 '/. A - C 1. A C T- V. /. y CHCK D. BY Id f> DATE99/02/23 I

H07iS: 1 1

)

i NO REPAIR 2 NO FLOOR FINI5li 3 soMC SEEPAGE

\

4. H4t RLIME C PAC 4 N

12M f -t- -

+

k l l < -

l J.

k CONT WALL

.r.o b

i 4

, ~ -

_ _- y  ;

_g l , 4 ' 9 _+

~

O , 4'- o t  %

% s

) '

=

4

3. s e

l _3 W

\ , .

F l . W ,_.

n..

- w~ _=

O

h. y.

p _p - __ ,

o 4

J^

h > .

PLAN AT EL -34.75 '.

PR*"**

y HARSTEAD ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES o INC.

A 169 KINDERKAMACK ROAO, PARK RIDGE. N. J. 07656 C- - -

SUBJ. SUBOlv. SHEET OJECT Y LENT 'Yl-PREP. BYf 4/0 W DATE 9///f3

, ' SUBJECT 1 A ! I '/. A - C L A C T. V. A F CHCKD.BY Ad B DATE 09/02183 M075:;

i i NO RCPAR 2 11 0 Floor. FlWIS H 3 Ho tVI DEME. OF S.EEFAGE

4. HAIPtthia c RACX

\

\

l

• l i 12m

?

?

[ A i

s

% \

we ,

g v

v

_? .

ito '.

o s.

pa . * *

,g g

.? v

-s t

( "

s

- ^--

f a.hCollT WALL

w i-t i

e l

l .

. J

+

PR OJ. Nu.

y HARSTEAD ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES o INC. _

~ ~

A 169 KINDERKAMACX ROAD. PARX RIDGE. N. J. 07656 C_~

SUBJ. SU SDIV. SHEET PROJECT LENT

• Ft1

- PR EP. BY #f/G W DATE 9////3 8 JECT 1 A ! I '/. A - c t. A c r. 1/.A F CHCKD.BY Ad B OATE09/02/&.1

, . .a i

No75S: .

t. No REPA)R'-

7. f Looft IS FINistlCD

\

3. SEEPAGC Exists

\  !

4. t1 A t l%L-I N G. C (L.A %

O NH 4hH

, O z, .

o j .

k

\-

\D '

e (R).

\ . } \'- 6 ) T3

~V

. j. .

. u' .= '

, o a. ,

r -i- - --

J 2

?

. . . - . . . . _ . - . - .~..

HARSTEAD ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES o INC.

y A 169 KlHDERKAMACK ROAD. PARK RIDGE. N. J. 07656 C" ~ ~

SUBJ. SU BDIV. SHEET PROJECT "N

IENT Fl- P R E P. B Y 4 4',I E W DATE8 /r/8 lx7;d8 JECT 1 A ! ; '/ A - C I A C T- '/ A F CHCKO.BY/Af- DATE oi/02I23 NO7ES:

(. t10 RCPAlft

7. Floor 15 F r N15HE l>

( q 3. SECPAGC EXIST.S

4. HAIILLlWE C-RAC#

SH A5H

-v E 'i

\- .

- -a - - - - - --

It '-0 o

b  !

D, l 4b6 i

I - O I .

x -

.s i

6 U 4-- x L. -

.I

=

e a 1

P"""**

y HARSTEAD ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES oINC.

A 169 KINDERKAMACK ROAD. PARK RIDGE. N J. 07656 C- - -

SUBJ. SU BDIV. SHEET j PROJECT

'FL-PR EP. BYUd" N DATE 9/'/O l

/hlENT C L A C T- 1/. A F

- 6UBJECT 1 A ! l '/ A - CHCKO.BYIdl D ATE 01/02I23 )

1 1

407ES:

l l

1 NO REPAIR 2 No FINISH

\ 3 40 SEEPAGE

\ 4. H A I R.LI M E c RW 12n Y .

l t

~

. - p

i 1

.Y ,

,- CONT WALL l CR A C.K ,-

- / , .

o

-4

~

y

. 5 ~

,, 3 HEAT EXCHANGER

],

g 4

-1 3 i PLAM AT EL -34,75'

~

l I

i

.L J

PR OJ. NO.

I HARSTEAD ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES o INC. C" ~ ~

i 169 KINDERKAMACK ROAD PARK RIDGE. N J. 07656

-~

S8. S BDW. SHEET OJECT

it- P R E P. 8Y R/ R ts W DATE 1/'//3 IENT SUBJECT i A i 5 '/ A ~ C I ^ : T. V.A F CHCK O. BY lAl D ATE 07/02./8 3 MOT 5S:

I tio REPM2 2 MO FINISH 3 SOM E EVIDEfJCC OF SECpg[

\ 4. H A l ll L i ttis cg4g N .

7rn Rm CRACK lu MAT HEAR,

( f HEAT EX,cilA%EIR g

,/

, , ( ,

) I'-4, '

-1 S

/ -

g

(,

,9'3: d THE Wall.-) st Ti, *i a . /. --

7 e

.v.c. / v'

, '\ 7.j t c;

~Q  : y l .

s is v ' -

l  !

3 -

i _

CRACE U\,, ,

l CONT WALL .

, - _ 3

- 'CRALK -

de. ..

N Z. ,/ ' R'.<

f M9 /

L.-

N N .

l

/p  %* ' i' l l

? Rs,,/ _f/HEAT EXCHANGERS) A.xN'TL.

- p . l 6.

. (Tve)

/  ;

E i PLAN AT EL - 34.75 ' y

! l l l l .

l J

PR ' ' " -

y HARSTEAD ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES oINC.

A 169 KINDERKAMACK ROAD. PARK RIDGE. N J 07656 ,

C- - -

SUBJ. SU B DIV. SHEET

' 'w_;iENT F OJECT -T l-PREP. BYRC[$ SJ DATE 4/'/d SUBJECT 1 a ! 5 '/ A - C 1. A : T. f/ A F CHCK D.BY AdB O ATE 09/04 / ?3 MO7ES* .

I No PIPMR 2 M0 TLOO R FlhfESil 3 SotiE. EVIDCrKE oF SCEPMC

\ 4. H A I RLI M f5. CAACK

\ d.#h

\'

7m i  ;; itM

(

i I '

~

..j '

- 1.0.'3!

- . - . . - , ,9l

e. /

/

?

F 'l -

/. -

gl '

i-l p

+g 7

, 12' O ! ,t'- oi 0 4 u

. vee ..

I 9>-

e N

i ,

. __-N \ i ca t s. ,

_.....4 ,

T>

..i-

. .r j

/[ .9

, t r

[

I s'-9 :

m l' u 3 :

• PL A N AT CL - 34. 75 '

l r > .

PM. m.

t na3h p l

v. ~ .s o...e > ~

f

,7 .

~ PLAM AT EL - 34.75'

. c .

hA HARSTEAD ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES INC.

169 KINDERKAMACK ROAD. PARK Rt0GE. N J 07656 C- - -

SUBJ. SUB0tV. SHEET PbEC CLIENT .)t- PREP. BY 25/GW OATE '/5/O SUBJECT E ! 1 5 V. A - C f. A c f. V. A P CHCKO.BY Ad 2 O ATE 01/04/8 3

-cp yo E s~ : l. FJ O

2. . $10 j 3. V E S - DA M P 4 , I/ A IR Lill E C M o d

\

N l0 l0A

( O g + ~ .' 4 o

\

+

s'-o 9

7 1 3

/

V O I

, N

-i \ e-4 \ g/ -

6 '- 6._ __ ..-. -

1 i

- 1 h

L l

/ g' O

/

s L

. L '

A HAPSTEAD ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES

• INC.

A 169 KINDERKAMACK ROAD, PARK RIDGE. N J 07656 C- - -

SUBJ. SU B DIV. SHEET h0 JECT CLIENT IL- PREP. BY 15/6 # DATE 9/ '*/h SLBJECT 5 A 5 5 V. A ~ C I. A C T. V. A P CHCKD.BY Ad6 D AT E 09.'s :/8 3 H0TES: 1. M 0

2. U Q

'5. A S F1 0 T GE.()

3

/

4, t/AI(2LIde cm

( ;i s N -

,. i.. ' -

. . - ~ _ . . . . . --. -- .

't .;/.

w' f i

.A',,

l l

DAMP -

1.

, (c'- 0 U

- .g' ;

l 1 ._ ._

G '

N .'3 I

,t-o ass.4) .

~ ~ .

A N l 0 ci c- ,

m b' .I _ . . .i . - _ . i 1.

, t >

L l

Y J

HAHsibAU ENGINEERING ASSOCIAMS o INC. ""*"*-

f 169 KINOERxAMACK ROAD. PARK RIDGE. N J. 07656 C- - -

3ROJECT SUBJ. S U S CIV. SHEET

UENT 'L-P R E P. 8Y &[G'W DATE T/5/8 T i* * ; '/. ' CIA f. .' /. A ' CH CK O. SY Ad f. D AT E 04/02/83 l l

l 407iS:

l i  ! No REPAIR i k

2 N0 FLOOR FINISl1

.3 CRACK IS PARTIALLY DAMP 4 NAIRLINE CRACK .,

N l

i I

3A 43 L

• J_ -

e 1

1

? ,

, 0 01 -

, 9' 0: .

4 l t

- VALL ( l Et1 BED ft 8 W  : _-

\N

,, CRACK'

." (0- 00t '

o .,

l J 'N _4 J i

\ ..

. t

~ * ,

-2, CRACK

\ ,

. 4 7 -

i i l o I

,U j .

i I

l PL Ah! A T EL - % 75 '

I

PR N**

HARSTEAD ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES

• INC. C~ ~ ~

A 169 KINDERKAMACK ROAD PARK RIDGE. N J. 07656 SUBJ. SU BDIV. SHEET PROJECT CLIENT *Ii-

- PREP. BY Rf/G"W DATE 7/'/0 c1.AcL V. A P CHCKD.BY Ad 6 D AT E S V02,'g 3 SUBJECT & A 5 5 v. A -

M0i5S:

.1 NO R EPAIR l 2 NO FLOOR FINISil 3 DAMP AS INDICATED 4 WAIRLINE CRACK

\

N O Q, " - , 6..'v S

l ) lo ,

-y L -WALL y,? . DAMP tRAtg ,

6,,0 ,

~~ '

[ I'

/ /

N _

w

- 4 t v'

• DR'i CRAtk -

/

' ' 4'- O i 4. ,

o CONT WALL

~N

-/ - -

l

! PLAN AT EL -34,75'

HARSTEAD ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES

• INC. C~ ~ ~

l l A 169 KINDERKAMACK ROAD. PARK RIDGE. N J. 07656 PROJECT CLIENT -)t'- PREP. BY Ayf W DATE 9/2/O SUBJECT & ! t 5 v. A - c 1. A c t. V. A P CHCKD.BY Ad & DATE 0?/01/a 3 40TES:

1 No REPAIR I 2. NO FLODR FINisil 3 DAMP AS INDICATED

+ IiAIR LINE CRACK

\

, s- V '

3'A 4A ,

T.

• ~

l l id --

g

.. , -t-DRY CflACKg  %

a

/

_?

e

_, s 1

5'- 0 : V s

l

(

4'02

• DRY -

CRACKm A .'-

L g 6 COMT WALL ,

i l

\

}'T\ ..

i _? i t

l 3 DAt1P ,

e CRACK

-Fl  ! ,

O , 5(fo r '

l.( ,

PLAN AT E L - 34.75' 1

~

W . ___ .-. ~ -_

'J

_ - . _ . _ _ _ _ - - . - . = . . - . .- . _ _ _ . . .- .

A t

1 i

i t

i 1

i 1

i

! APPENDIX B '

i Properties of Subsurface Materials i- Design Values i

r r

i I

,O e l'

-b .

WSES-FSAR' -

UNIT-3 TABLE 2.5-14 FROFEPTIES OF SUBSURFACE MATERIAlf x s DESIGN *JALUES '

,, i (('

Visual Unified Coeffielent Unconfined Overcon- -' Average .'%,,

Stratum Soil Specific Natural of Fermea- Compredsive Undrained Drained solidatlan Shear. Young's Fols-Descrip- Descrip- Cravity Density bility Strength Shear Shear Ratia

~3 2

Modulus Modulus son's tion Elev.(MSL) tion (Cs) (FCF) (k) - cm/see _Su(kaf) Strength Strength (OCR) Coas(ksf) E (haf) Ratio - **

Clay and sitty Crade to CH 2.70 1.5 10~

clay with sitt -40 Ill l.0 e = 0.5 KSF c' = 0 KSF  !.5 1296 3600 0.48

+0 and sand (Recent / = 0* p = 25* 'Z.0 ' material **) ' ,

                                                                                                   -                                                                    s.
                                                                                                             ~

Stiff tan and -40 to 2.72 -8 CH  !!9 1x10 3.0 c

• 1.5 ILSF c' ? 0.8 KSF 3.4 3900' 11,600 0.49 gray fissured -77 p = 0* pa 12.5*

2) cisy - 's

3) very dense can -77 to --

2.70 125 3x10 -5 .. .. ,, a O KSF -- 3900 11,500 0.48

               ,itey ,,na        _,z p _ . 4t o Hedium stiff      -92 to        CH       2.74    119         --

2.4 c = 1.2 KSF c' = 0.8 KSF I.6 3900 11,600 0.49 i

4) gray clay -108 p' = 12.5*

with salt f=0 ' tensee sa L. 5) Stiff dark -108 to MH & CH 2.68 104 -- 3.6 e = 1.8 KSF c' = 0.8 KSF 1.7 3909 11.600 0.49 gray clay - -116 t' = 12.5*

      $        organic                                                                                     f = 0*

i Soft to me- -116 to HL & Cl. 2.69 119 -- 1.4 c = 0.7 KSF c' = 0.8 KSF 2.0 3900  !!,600 0.49 '; g) dium stiff tan -127 I = 0* p' = 12.5* and gray clay with sand

lenses very stiff -127 to CH & CL 2.71 119 4.0

                                 -317 c = 2.0 KSF c' = 0.8 KSF 1.5                   3900    11,500 0.48 I           7) clays
               .iic, with
                      ,,4                                                                                            o to sands y.o            p.       12.5        2.4 very dense        -317 to       --

2.70 119 -- -- -- -- -- 10,000 29,000 0.45

                                 -500 to

0) sendo and sitty sands 125

• Computed from field Vp and Vs measurements

                                                                      **Encavated and replaced with compacted backfill Note:

The average ahear moduli values are averaged from maximum shear moduli obtained from field geophysical test results. They are repre- , sentative only for low shear strains of approximately 10' in./in.

l e f APPENDIX C Synopsis / Introduction of State-Of-The-Art of Floating Foundations by H. Q. Golder 4 9

    .            O                                                                                        .

g) A9 h O

               /

V s._.) 5+1 SETTI.EMENT CONTitOL dottritil! E91 (!!L' datines as supported partly by the ahcar strength und partly by " buoyancy."

i. e., the founilation is partly flualmg. The lanut to a lluating lousul tson as a St )ll. .\113.C1 l A.N*lCS .\ NI) 110L'NIMTIONS I)lVISION ship m water.

This anatugy of a sinp unlicates trataus usclui taa ts, oaiswly: l'e s erertlits p. ul ll16 .\taterir;ist 5,s H*iety ed (...tvil I.,ligillects .

                                                                                                       -               1. The ship alaspiares a volume of waer equal to ash weight;

2. alter the initial settlement tlwre is no hartner settlement;

3. the pressure on the horizontal trase is unafurm;

1. if the water level reases to be husfosin. ( s. e., wave artson) the pres-STATl*-H V-Till:- AltT OF I l.OATING l'OtlNI)A'llONSd sures change amt tlw hull as subjes ted to tienetua/. aant slwar lorren;

5. there are lateral pressua s* en the side of the hull; ily llugli (J. Golder.I M. .' SCli b.. Iln. water has no htwar staa.neth, t. e.,

shear strength as not necess.ary for supines s ; .uhl

7. tlw hullis inmple te w henlauswlwd intu ttw u. iter .uul 1.aunrenug st resses

            ,                                                                                                    may tw hsgh.

SYNOl' SIS Tlw prereding laris nulam ate that, It.r i llo.iting temniathus, the soil must For a floating foundatiiva the so:Imust have weight but at neednut have shear have weight but it need m.: h.nc siwar strength. Tiw 4..un.latans must be able strength. The fountiation must in. abieto resist pressure an its base and sides to resist pressure sui its lease awl sides azul. il the weight or level of the sont and.if the weight or levelof the sont varies.the pressures willnus be uniform. varies, the pressures will not in. unafurm, azul alwar an i Irmlo;;t lorres will and shear ami Iwndmg forces unit art on the foundation. In practice. most act ani the foundatumi. Oswe in posittoa, the found tion will not settle turther foumlations are partly floating. and almost all so-called floating Isamdations (if fully lluating) unless further load is ad: led. In sont cf Auw shear strength are only partly floating herause a small residual pressure is usually left on constructiusici lloating foundations maylw dalliruit laat thedepth is not limited the soll. Alter a history ni their development and the reasons inr their use by shear strength af suitable construction procedures are used; however, are given, the problems to be considered in using floatine foundations are

• launching" stresses m the foundatitus may le hagli. In practice, most foun-examined. Amont: the most important problems are excavation.Indtom heave. dations are partly lloating.and almost all m tlw s*>-ralled tioating foumlations settlement and tilling and structural problem 3 are unty partly floating because a small res, ba! pressure as usually lett on the soil.

A floating soundation will i e considen ed b. i em as one a:t ulurh the greater part of the bushimg load is hal.inced av.unst the weight of excavated maternal INTi(OI)l'CTION In considering an engmeering problem at is often helpful to (n. gin with the tilSTOlW limits twtween which the problem lies, in a phystral 2.cuse although these limits are not necessarily practical in an engmecring sense. The roarept of using thaatmg foundations as m4 new. Tiwre 13 some evt-When a foundation rests on the ground surface it is supported by the shear dence that they were used tu the Ib t!t t entury, and at is protsable that they were strength of the soil or rock of which the ground is composed. Nhen the foun- used intuitively twfoge that date. dation is placed below the ground surface, for frost or drying protection, and in the discussion of a paper 1.y Casagrande'amt Fadum K.Terzaght relers the weight of the overburden is deducted f rom the applied pressure. the foun- to a German work by G. IIagenddated Itl10.an mluch there as reference: to the use of floating foundations by Johnitennte ni Lomtun at tle Albion klalls. Tiwre noa a gen reaQ kutv MW a kW fownnation was. He sJys Notet. - th cus> . wing = n emist nunust 1. !mi i l'.. en teswl ilw rioseng .l.itu osur sus. nth, a w ritten request mu*t t.e tiled a nh lie therutivu secret.irv. AsCE. This piper 6 part " . .a heavy hutidmgcan still im safelybeult lay sinking it partly mtothegroumi of the cops richteil.i.. rn et..f the soil tierh.unc> ami s aanutation Dive inn. pr.= co.img so that it actually tiuats. The complete ws ;ght of the innidmg snust not be of tin, Amencan S.ricts ..I t ivil Uncovers. Vol ut. No NM2 m rrh.sture. greater than that of the excavated snaterial." 3 This is eunt e.f the Ntate.ot.ttn.. e rt *p ogn.rs prownt.*l at the ASCE Soil Merh.nur . The reference to itennie is taken trom " A Treatise on the sacam Engine" awe roun lations thy sum C..nf. on sinien ..a ro m.Lui..ns e..r :.anrol..g Scialenmnts.- by J. Farey (1827). According to llagen. Farey.says Iml.1 at N..rthwesteren thtiv., Ev.enston. Ill . .hnae. I!nel. ttut rompel. I papers wur : pre

>cnte.1 in the Septeman r.1941, division .lourn.el 8 C.aus. Civ. Engr.. II. Q. Golder anet Am.1.td., Toronto. C.an:hta.                                             .. Tarzaghs. K.arl. shorunsson ut "A tylie stum of Suit &lorh.unes u laumagrung aluil.hng Fannulations." by A. C.an.agr:uulu aimi it. C. F.i luns. Tr.md.syi6 mm AdCE. Vol. Iou, Iu a 8

p. 427.

3 it.agen. G., "It.uullan:Islur W.ammerh.aukun>t." Ernst U. Korn, llorina. Ia7u.

                                   -     . .. _. - -        .    .- -       --                       - . . - . ... _ . . . - . _ _ _ - - _ - .                   . __ .-. . _ _ . _ ~ _ ..

l l l O t i I ( APPENDIX D f Generalized Site Cross Section i 4 l l i I , . l l l i 1 I 1

         . O                                                        .

I t

   . - . - - -,.,,,c, ,,--,--..,-,,,,vr.             .,-,,,.n.,           ..~_,,,n.v_,_____,__._____                                           ____n_ _ _ - -- -- _ - - ~_,

S U !_ i

                                !!RG@i:'M@n$$

m a nn I! I ' N9 bt?: 'Nd N ' l5 % 4is@at..j e  :% s ! EJ D s sehy  !!  ! Qkg

                                               $$3 m
                                                            $$$x

. x

                                                                                                                    !!! :  s-ga g     a r             /                    %g A

S t: s o' 's<r w-J ji - u 'N s q: :j': N w .a s%:q N w: 4gN x e =""g = g m::: is - N' S:id'x' A'q m ~ ~ _ . , x ss xx ...,.. t h 36,04

                                               'Nx
                   %                                        y Ax[\ N                      =. ": 3 a                        y Ns           w y

x .e

                                                                                    \ .* *:$[$

iii Isa sg ( 4'3 @ s d SS s s x %cs=~o

                                                                                          -ye -
                   'Ns           !"           '

k t 3:%\\Z$35 i>!, N x% w:2R3$h'x's$3%e:....

                                                 %                        s   ~

c. ,-

O r . . _o' 1a

                         .n Wx ssc     NN s

s N ." .a N p* y ...

                                                                                                 -  - 3 x.

hhb [

                                                 % es'x'x   :::
                                                                                    ; v'    &.,
                            .             s S$3                      x s m.: - ;
                           ;;g                   A ss       c::'s
                                                 \x Q:j
                           -.                                                     s gf-(

s: \'Ns\\\

                                                                    ~

s

                                          -                                          s'      'Y;; -e r . l k
              !3 h             N A 4         ti!        x' N    N    N  x   s:

s ($$hd n ,., %. .. . ,

                                    / \x g                     s                         . s   .

M \s N 5 : , \ x' N\

                             /-                               s i is                                '%
                                                '\ i!!

s e

              ~ /e                i A% N     ,
  <i              !k!,!

2,!, i

                                .s .a.s.u.
                                                  !!,    N.b, mim

s: . : :

                                                  ==.e.=gx'N:s,%x
                                                                              !!k
                                                                             .. x o:.,

m!.- h i 9 Y I. !. E. E. ,, -

l 1 I i I i l l l. APPENDIX E Effects of Soil Modulus on Shear and Moment 1

                                =

I l i l l l I

 . i
     - , . . - ,--                                 ,. e,,-e, ww.,---%, , . - - --,yr.,,              , . . , ,  ,,,,,.r.,,--     -r..,,,,..._.r.my.,,.,,,,w.,.

i

• 2 i

4 1 3 e o - U

                                    /                              d                                         #
                                   /                ad                                 l                     3         t'-

el

                                                    ~

O  : r~ s 2 2 I i Q1 :. e J - [D - E_.J4 $ -! 0E i _) =j o o t! L l O

1 ou

                           /                                                \                d.              ..
           ,                                                                \                 d              E a

a l l g t i

                    \
                                                                                            \,5

(

                                                                                                    \

I j

                               \                     l                                               \
                               /o                    l                                                 \

O 3 6 i ! O

                                                                                                           \
                                                                                                             \

J . 2 W j u

                              )s 1,

2 4 3 g O e 3 a I O * ' o I{ Y ' 1 f 1 o d f u w y 2 l d - r / d \ 3 }r / l  : (Y u /

                                                                                                  /

s V W f -

                                                                            \

O N \ iiii iiii

                           \     .

iiii ... .... i g

           ~

g a g a

                                                    ~

g

                                                                          -o                -~ m +*

(u/x)avaas my,a do ino (u/u-Noi) inmow

t 4 i r i i l l APPENDIX F l Design Envelopes of Mat

• Shear and Moment f

l O i l l l O eere-,v-, .,w n.m-w , -emn , -v,-m ,---~ ,, w - ---,w-,m,_u--am,,,,-,-,new,,,,-._n.. w._._-,. , - - - - , -e--ne-,,mw =- -. --- ,, - -.---. ~ w m--

l O Or I h k 2 e

           "             %                                                      3j                          a
                 -                                                              g sq                          *nw      I
           <                    7-                    g                         OS                          h k Oi 3       -,         ~
                                                '                                                           a. 2 O f                         3
                                                ,     a                         o$                          31 $

o =2 0

                               \ .__            ,

d i M 10V93 2+3

                          ~                                                                                          l l                                          oc
                                  /                                                                                  ,

s

               /                                                    h N                ~

N

              \                                                                      \
                \                                                                         \
                    \                                                                         \                      l 4 x-A
                                                                                                \9 l       <

g ,3o ) ta . 1 2 O - ,I o 1

                                                                              ~ f-
      +                                                                                         .1 0             <

J 3

                                                  &                                0   1 h4 e'                 e               .

I a 1 M, - e <  ;

                         +             \          -

4 0

                                        \         -              I                 &    o                            l S

o S >y'

                                         \
                                          \     se o'1
                                                                                   % )f                  m)
               $8' o I
                                            \                    ,
                                                                                                       .h G

0 4

                                                                            /
                                                                              /                         0            l l

7 * / $ t n / 7 / i  ; h&a

               < i r<

5 7 s l _3

               &     .a 4            .
                                                           \.                                          $             l
                                                               \                                                     l l$        ,

2 8-i s, i a -

                                      ~ Or*

h _ o - ay  ; , ( wo awn 4t,,,e 40 3c ( l'8 / Lt - 2 g or ) ,1,pq gg l l- -

l . t APPENDIX G Effects of Foundation Stiffness on Dynamic Shears and Moments O e l 40 . e

     --e , ~ -- .- ,. ,- , ,- - ,     --- . . - - ,,----,n----,,~,,,---r-             ,-,-,,-e----   , .- ---,.-- , - - - - , - - , , - , -- -w-, , - - -- e,n_.- , -- , - - - , - , .

z o SO G rl 4 II su T E g C. 8 W 4 $ e 0 n Ix 10 9 T I

• 1 Qi a -8 o r7 L d cL oi 9 =e 2 a.

3  ! 4 1 NY s i 4 04 4 l o 35 Q

• E .
• s _9 E"

        ,s6~

I e E

• r

        $                               I                       o I                                                      8' g

8 I

       '5                            I                           a.                 o a

I N o l ,, e _gg o 'e 0 w' su E 4 m3 $ es i r, E. i

                                   \

o O 'l _A' o I o \ O 5 \ OE O o3 \- $ Id" a \

                                                                                 *E"

4 O

as.

• ss
• N 1 O

w 5 e

                                                   \\          qy t-          I                                                            o

\ o= g 6-- c 4 o N

                                                    +\ N          m$

o o e -- e8

                                                                 =6 4                                   %N       yo l

i o E N 4E e R NNEs 4 h.. N s N o

               ,..                                          +\. g       N. s      O

_. o

                                                               ,J,~               -

(ig.541'4eCl)kNIWOW o e * , 7 i l Nr-- s h cs ,,co m e s

i I

l APPENDIX H l

Ebasco Services Letter F-16919, W3-NY-1  ; l dated June 29, 1977 I t l l l l l l e 5 t

   -- . . - - . . . - ~    -,
                              ......_.____m.v   . . , . - - - . . _ _   .._,____._._,.c,,,..         ...._       _ _ _ _ _ _ _ , . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ - , _ _ . __ _ _ _      _

          ._        . =                .                   .                                           . . -

EBASCO SERVICES , INCDRPQRATED UTILITY c O N S U :.T A N T S - E N GINEE R S - CONSTRUCTORS P. O. Box 70 K111ona, Lcuisiana 70066 June 29, 1977 F-16919 W3-NY-1 Boh Brothers Construction Company P. O. Drawer 53266 New Orleans, Louisiana 70153 Attention: Mr. R. J. Drueding . LOUISIANA POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY WATERFORD STEAM ELECTRIC STATION 1980 - 1165 MW INSTALLATION - UNIT No. 3 CONTRACT W3-NY-1, EXCAVATION AND DEUATERING , Ref: (1) Ebasco letter F-7419, dated May 18, 1977 i (2) Boh Brothers letter (H. G. Chapman to J. O. Booth), dated May 27, 1977 Gentlemen: O As you ara aware, the efficiant cperatice ot' the entira dewatering system (ejector wells and pumped relief wells) is critical to continued unhampered construction of the Waterford Nuclear Project.- During the last few' months, it appears that the maintenance of the dewatering system and monitoring of the

site instrumentation has deteriorated to a point that the dewatering system cannot support the recharging effort. This situation is totally unacceptable e

and corrective action must be taken immediately. The implementation of the Recharge Program is dependent on two primary factors.

             .       First, the effective foundation loading on the underlying Pleistocene soils must be controlled within certain limits as established by the PSAR (Preliminary Safety Analysis Report) and the job specifications. This will be accomplished                                       by controlling the hydrostatic uplift or buoyant weight of the nuclear plant island s tructure.- Second, the foundation soil response of the clay strata will be monitored with the site instrumentation and adjustments made to the Recharge Program as necessary to meet the design intent with respect to controlling heave and settlement of the combined structure. The Recharge Program will be im-plemented at the direction of and will be coordinated by the Ebasco Site Soils Engineer.                               -

Due to the uncontrolled rise in piezametric levels beneath the nuclear plant island during the last two months, initial implementation of the Recharge Program must now be delayed. The rise in piezometric levels has been attributed by , Moretrench-American to be entirely the result of water used for compaction of the Qc backfill. Although evidence has shown that the compaction water from the r-w, -g--- -r -- - -

                                         --,---,-,,---,,r-       .e-,.,p.-,,-r-n     ,-  ~,er

                ~,*                                                                                                   r EBA5CU SERVICES

• incearenATCS Boh Brothers Construction Company June 29, 1977 backfill has infiltrated the slotted casing of the pumped relief wells which extend through the backfill, we do not believe that this is the total cause for the rise in piezometric levels.

. We note that the flow rate of the primary dewatering system (ejector wells), as report,ed to Ebasco by Boh Brothers, remained essentially unchanged at 180 gym.from January 9, 1977 (when the new south leg of the system went into operation) until June 9, 1977. On June 9, 1977 Bob Brothers reported the flew rate of the primary system was 82 gpm, a drop of more than one-half from the readings of nha previous five months. Subsequent checks of the system by Boh Brothers and by Ebasco indicate that the primary system is presently operating at an average. rate of 100 to 110 gpm, or a little less than two-thirds of the flow rate that has been reported for the last five months. On the basis of the above information, it is obvious and was admitted by Moretrench-American in i a meeting on June 16, 1977 that maintenance during that time period has been minimal. We find it difficult to believe that there has been no reduction in ! the efficiency of the system as contended by Moretrench. The apathy indicated " ! by such performance is intolerable. Implementation of the Recharge Program is scheduled to begin in early August. The entire program will take from 6 to 11 months, depending on the criteria , stated above. It is imperative that the entire devatering system (both the . l' ejector system and pumped relief walls) remain in top working order until the Racharge Prostam is completed and you are . directed to remove the system. 2 In addition,.as noted above, monitoring of site instrumentation and reporting of results has been very poor throughout the proj ect. The following table indicates the frequency of readings reported by Boh Brothers from March 1977 to thy 1977: r Instrument - Date Total March April May Required Actual i 1. Observation Wells 15 16 16 65 47

2. Piezometers 1-10 0 3 3 13 6

3. Piezameters 11-22 4 4 5 13 13

4. Extensometers 4 3 1 13 8

5. Heave Points 4 3 2 13 9

6. Dewatering Flow Race 15 11 9 65 35

7. River Elevation 14 12 12 65 38

8. Inclinometers (Compressions) 1 0 1 13 2

      ,     [}

9. Inclinometers (Deflections) - 5 . 2 4 13 11 1 Total 62 54 53 273 169 The above tabulation does not reflect data transmitted incorrectly or late.

                    . - - . . - , . . _                          .~ , , , , _. , . _ . - . - . . , . _ . ,     ,._,,..,__-.,,...-,._,_,,.m.c.._.m.-                        _ . . - , _ , - - , . . ~ , _ _ , _ . - -

EBASCO SERVICES INC98PetATE8 i Bob Brothers Construction Company June 29, 1977 A quick review of the table indicates only 62% of the required readings were

taken during the three month period. This frequency of monitoring is un-acceptable. This problem has been addressed before (Ebasco letter F-7419, dated May 18, 1976) and acknowledged by Boh Brothers letter dated May 27, 1976. The effectiveness of the Recharge Program depends on timely collection and com-pilation of the data. It is expected that all instrumentation will be read on time and the results reported within 24 hours as required by Contract and as committed to by Boh Brothers Construction Company.

1 In conclusion, it is apparent that the caliber of service has diminished with respect to the dewatering ' system and the site instrumentation. Implementation of the Recharge Program cannot start until control of the piezometric pressures

has been re-established. A successful recharge program is essential to this project and all parties must adhere rigidly to the Contract requirements and responsibilities.

Yours very truly, e  :

                                       ~
                                                                                             .J. O. Booth
                                                                                     -        Project Superintendent GFG/jah cc:               J. M. Brooks

. L. Elliott - ! E. Henderson i e R. Dawes E. Boyd S. Shallcross R. Watt D. Mallette / i ' G. Goodheart J. L. Ehasz P. C. Liu E. Foss 4 e b O - e e ,-.- , i.e,.. , , , , , . , ...,,,,,.,,...-.--,.,-..,_,m,w..

O 4 l APPENDIX I 4 Composite Foundation Mat Differential Settlement Contours O l l l I O . l

       ~----~,--r,,-,--r-,,.

I MAT DIFFERENTIAL SETTLEMENT CONTOURS l j lll INCHES VERSUS BLOCK 6 MOVEMENT o 4 1.50 i 8'8 4-1 76 4-15-76

                                                                        @\

5-4-76 N- 1.50 1.00 ~.;_ _ y e ,\ x \4-13-76

                                       <                                ,N                                         4-23-76
                                                                /                              x
                                      -'            7A                           8A                                 N --

5 1.00 50 1-13 76 1-29-76 1-c -76 A 2-3-76 K 2-9-76 12-22-75 ri) 12-11-75 12-2-75 Q1\ /12-10

12. -75

                                                                                                                    '\@
                                                                                                                     -         1.00
                          .,0 /                        ,                                                     ,/,//          -    sa 8

2 5-7e

                                                  @\

122-74 1-30-ze f

                                                                                                         '/         '@

2-1e-7e j / . 2.0 l 1.00 ----- N m

                                                                       \N               /      / [1-27-76
                                                                                 ~

, I 'N s ~~~~ / ,/ l

                                                                                                                     /

j / l ' 1.50 3-17-76 3-30-76 4-9 76 3-19-76

                                                                                                       /

N, ,/

                                             @               @                        c   @                      @
                              /          4 21-76           5-25-76                       5-11-76              4-28-76 2.0                                                                                                                  .

KEY: BLOCK NUMBER BLOCK PLACEMENT [ 3-30-76 DATE AMENDMENT NO.19. (6/81) LOUISIANA COMPOSITE FOUNDATION MAT Figure POWER & LIGHT CO. DIFFERENTI AL SETTLEMENT CONTOURS Waterford Steam 2.5 118 Electric Station

    , ..--.--.-..-a. >- - . -._  --    --a - - a.- -.-- - .._. a . - - - u.. ,-. u --.-

4 1 O i' i l 1 APPENDIX J i Composite Foundation Mat Se ttlement l l O

o

                                                                                                                                                                =          u           v. m a       e d           M5           s                       (*
            ~

w

                                                                                                                                                                           =           gS           r,,

U .I -

8. 8 .,

ma w r .. 2

       ,                                                                                                                                                                   5e          #W                                   I o au r                       d'f        d 'i                                                                                                                                   -
                               - c.

de de

                                                .                                                                                                                          w-,    e u  c .-
                                                                                                                                                                                           .-                               ..a              _
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  ~
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  ==
            -                                                                                                                                                                    -c e w             w                               ..       >>
                                                                                                                                                                           **ta                      .a                     ed      W        <z ai ow N 5 $ 5 w' ;                    .

m *J [g ".  :: w D' G * ' m (139 Ni N!)

                                                                 ~

4' V $'*Ev4 # .M M 55!O, ,g "Md*'z 8~  ; c. "2 ,, - o

• IN3w311135 mi-!N01 t r.,'

                                                                                                                                                                                    '...* rw 5 4' g 5
                                                                                                                                                                                                                            <m               -W a

oo i i 2 m iE F l .E w W - < Jo% d 4. ,, mx0 w W 8..F.' .5'.

                                                                                                                                                                           '6                            z       %       z
                                                                                                                                                                                                                         -  2*

E 2 m. 0, a5 i w .d - w" W E. or . M r Edi a a g k

                                                                 -                           N                   o.- , ,                       .                           .P. w.,
                                                                                                                                                                                 . 1.
                                                                                                                                                                                        -c. k, O .. ud   .

N u* v

• 6x

                                                                 $                           $                    '~                                                        .:         r.

A

                                                                                                                 =8                                        -
                                                                                                                                              .d                              .

o t. .. EE U

                                                                                                                 $2
                                                                 ?>                           Q
            .                                                    $                            a                  s!                                       i se v-t       I E

r ..t E SM ll I-

            -                            24                  2, v ,
                                                                                                         .a,,                                  .

E s --

                                                                                                                                                         -E
            ~                                                                                                                                          i t

l ir w 0 M < 1 -

            -      5                                                                                                                       '

-e c  :

g ,/ , . E 4: a g -

                                                                                                                                                 /[                             E
                   -                                                                *.!                                                       y.                                m           -       n         n       T    e         o 8                                                                                                                   _

I *

                   @                                                                                                               , jJp l:l m       w                                                                                          .

e n .1 m e O

• ll 5 E 2 : :

g a r

                                                                                                                                             .!                                                    , = ., = ,

O' Os m M - N g o - e e. o.,. . = , e m ., . . z ef

                                                                                                                               - .;                                             w v
                                                                                                                                                                                           -       ,e
                                                                                                                                                                                                   .. ~

en 2 0 . w

            ~                            C e
                                                      '                                                                            I                                            3 a

e a

                                                                                                                                                                                                                  $     =           w
                                         ~

w y :: l

                                                                                                                       '/7 w                                                                                  ,=                                                                l
                                         =                                                                          /                                                                         :
                                                                                                       . /./ ,.'                                                                                                                       -

w  : ll g m m E . I l C Ic

             ~
                                                                                                                                                                        )

G N

                                                                                          .~

l/ .

                                                                                                                                                                                                  =                           $

If ,f, ' C 5 c f /l:l - o e- . =a , ,, e

                                               /
                                                         . /
                                                                  /

p m ow -

                                                                                                                                                                                    ~             =               m.
                                                                                                                                                                                                                  -            ==

r i l ., rw

                                                            /                                                                                                                                                                     a
                                          /
                                                                     '*                                w   z                                                            n     m            m              e                       o n                                            p                                                                                                                    c-                          =            e E  w                                                                                                              ~        ~

a / ,. i g ' p;.- v M

        %                    f /*y // **.-
                                     .                                                                 m a                                                                -
                                                                                                                                                                               -          -.              u-             y        .,
                . ,,.,/ /              j        .-                                                       1
                ~

Q_" ,e 9' .. n ., - ., o < o

                ._ _                                                                                                                                                          P            .ps             e            %

i N e T W f- .( O

                 *****                                                                                                                                                           e,-            s            f                    ..
        ~

e

                                                                                                                                                                   .J ~
                         ~             ~          ,             .,            .., ,       .e         ~

e m m m s n m , m oi f6I f

l l 4 s , i , O 1 l l l APPENDIX K T l Crack Width calculation O F h l 1 I i l ? I t F O . d S

    ,-%-.3.

v.- .,.-y-m,,.-.m_,.%,7,,r__,,r%%o,,,,wwm,,-.. ..-.--...,,....--w. . _ _ . _ . - ,,, ~ - . - - - . . _ - - - ,

HARSTEAD ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES o INC. PR J.No. 83O & A 169 KINDERKAMACK ROAD. PARK RIDGE. N J 07656 C- \

                                                                                                #2. ~     l SUBJ. SUBDIV. SHEET Ph0 JECT          WNT6K Fc R.D               R        SES
 'I    I CLIENT                LPd L                                             PREP. BY M f DATE q-l?.-t3 SUBJECT           dPACk WtDT14                                          CHCK D. BY Ei l DATEM.':*2.'8 3 G F2A GK.        SPAG.t M G                @ l0 Fr                    52. C 6,        '

e' oN S Ett V trT t s v VSE Io Fr

                         /_ F AcW5        Fo R.        7 To .5 M IL5 IM WipTH 6 O M S E AVArT (SM                   USE         5 Mit5                  ,

as: = ' #O b - O. Coo o f 17 1'2.O 120bfSi

                                                                               ~

N  : 29410 (40 F IO  : STFEL g l .oooo4b7'n Y)GG l h \] _... p , - 3 2 U I=I r,

                                      /              Tw
          =                                                                                                     ,

O tl

                           /

l 2L_ M Igg (o ~7. L.AYFR S As= 16.0 QVp7 W s A t E c.T 4 o McRETE l kJ T E M s lo U l. c o4 Fremu i I I P EEA5cN ASLE 5lhicE -

                                                                      .B o r T 5TL            > > To F 57 /

1 L J

hA HARSTEAD ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES o INC.

                                                                                    '"*"*'       8 'b 'Y 169 KINDERKAMACK ROAD. PARK RIDGE. N J 07656                  C~      \   ~1        -
                                                                                                                 ?-

SUBJ. SU BDIV. SHEET 4 PROJECT W A T E R- Fo G- D A SEC ( l CLIENT LPTL PR E P. BY A(f DATE9 lZ T) SUBJECT CRAGK W \ D 'T ll CH CK D. BY lil D A T E W !'i.'2 3 go77 g, ,opoo4 L t 2. , g, ooo o o g g S

                                                                        \ u. . o A M g;,L s       c W A rJ cm e        Ps e- io cu
                                                      .coooA' .000o0t\\        ._

t h)/,4 I q ' O 4l3 y I D ,- ./q

                     ~TdTAL A M GL E-                       C h AkJcr E            lF t o e s. rn er O U E P--          E NJ TI FLE               LE N cnTH O F M A- T e        >
                                  &=           3 3cCl'?) b              :     O. 0016 3 4 gx p
                               . . . eg                                            7 0,o 9o 75 6j5 bk"                  ^
                      ...._/

Ihso2) s

                     ;%                               g-                                   = n,4      2424u    c     s K 33f'           ,

94- (.o453723) ft. c o s(, o4 s 37 ej) a .424 2416 % Io ' l 6= R - g co s t.o4ss76 = o.2 i 1 14 I 3 I E

e a

l i t 4 i 1 i l l i l 1 i APPENDIX L 4 Steel Containment Stability i Calculation l [ l.

  ,     O                                                                           .

w arp.y--mwww----.--- -s-w- r---$--e-werew ww mm---=-r* -w- ---m-- - - - s+wwe--s o-------www-en-w-e--was->+e--w ----m-w-a-*==*----==--w- - -- - - - - - '-'

r- , PROJ.NO. ? ? o y HARSTEAD ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES o INC. A 169 KINDERKAMACK ROAD. PARK RIDGE. N. J. 07656 C-\ -1 - 1 SUBJ. SU BDIV. SHEET 5 PROJECT W3 - M AT l l CLIENT

                            -   1 'l : " ; # 4#      M Y1 ! 1-      i i;'                                      PR EP. BY AdI           DAT E 03/os's 5 SUBJECT         r:'        u:
                                          . A ; ; </ : :t -          nAt*.

CHCKD.BY d N DATE 9[of ff3 i i ll i r. o D U C T ! o '! 'Ih[

                                                                                                                                                            .]

THi! C A L C 9 t i.* f i ll c o tA f u ! !

• ty; :Afg;v  ; A c + o r, A G A [ tj j ; ji

                   ! f P i ll C<

li i

                                                                                                                                                    'i ;

C 0 4 ? /,I d 84 #1 r O F 17, il O 'J i ! /. : C3 ;' t.f. ti : 11 G l 0 0 - 1 5 ; y - G - 8 [ 7, , { J

                                                                                                        '                                                 t F. I V - ( 3 , 9 A Ti t              01'03/?$                 ( 1. I F f f ; I! G C    ;),                                           [ j'_
                                                                                                                                                  '*I 4 raf        t i A ! ' '. : - ~        '7 F ^F;           ;!!!            ~. 01; T / ( 1.1/. ! tl T ,/ ! R I I '. P            ,'     t t fJ : ! L : li G        "Il ' r F       7. [ : ?    O'           0      7FG       'o? 0;           7I        !A A 7                      s I;       f. *      ')   G A : ; '; ' 8. * !t                                                                                               f,
                                                                                                                                                    .I
                                                                                                                                                    \ .

h p 0 ; ! ! 1 tl A L ; U F S t. l/. A T 1 00 I: ACC:JIC  ; r. $ l/  ; !. A ! ? O

                                                                                                                                              . Il cAtcutAr: )u                    tor:rtrt.                  ' ;; r s t c o u r A r y v. s u r               s: A. t : :. n , ,            ;

0F5 110 155 0G3 O E T T. 40 0,50, DATED 0 5,/ 10/23, 7 P r. ,

                                                        /                                                                                                 f (LIfEt& MCI 7.).
                 .                                                                                                                                  . [- t
                                                                                         '                                                               I

( )

1. ; / utt' llG 1 1 t C- Ar E E A : 00 : TFFtct on 17/17'23  ;

r W A: AG1r T 7#A' THL V. / 0 d !

• If (/ f r SF TEf E-W DIT ,

f - AcciL;tA*;34: TAI 9'.1  : I ON t e '- : 5 7F i ir a y_ F ; I J. E ri r. F

                                                                                                                                                         'i
               ?,     G A I '. 9 '. A T f o H        it o U. t C        T. I    1/. 9 : ! ! T i !I C      IT     [I     AS A                                 '

Cou s t t v a t iv: rouet o .i t t:: ,: :  : r-w Act c-s ' {

               . s u o i. : e               rt: r,n:s              :rec           r. A .

i  : l . i I l . I l l 1 l Z J

k A HARSTEAD ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES oINC. 169 KINDERKAMACK ROAD, PARK RIDGE. N. J. 07656 PR*"*'** C-I - 1 - 2. SUBJ. SUBDIV. SHEET

   ,- ,     PROJECT J   l CLIENT        i 0 U : : : / 81 1.    . WI(l 4 i;GE7 PR E P. BY Ad &          DATEo8/02/8 5 SUBJECT ::::- cou i:1v:si; : Ar;;. '                                                                   CHCK D.BY4((             DATEB[1((f3 1....

t J _:... . f f. ) I/. P. 4 'F  ! .' E 7. f F . 2. EEA$CS " A !. '. 0 !. A T ! 0 11 , TAE [~]

                 't '4 '< A 1. A 11 b & 1 ft (< l 8l G IA 0 IA I il T DUf 70 1 '// IEE AT                                                              ,      ,]

t- t.s 15.  !

                                                                                                                                                          '!~[!

F=  : L E S ! r.

! { .8 t

f/, s "53032'?>

                                                                  .               t                                                              .

Ii y y, y L r I f :. 7 t il G LT f A1 A c. o 81 ; F 1. '1 A : iVi IJ P f F T '! \ t o u s' t to I if E S 1. 0 ; 0F E - Y1 /.11 L: 53 - 5 PIE I[ . i  ;. F= [T.x: 2. 5 5 ' = 17 7 5 0 h  !! 9 -t M=dX'4GQ009= c9'jo 2h{ fl i j I t E I T F. E l I ", P. I tl G T if ; I 1. [ '! k T I S 11 0F f 0 I !! i r/ 3 8J fIf ,

l. '

s y. i i C I! ' 'f A > u . '/.' =  : o s' 7 - o: w - 7. s o'

                                                  =    1'. 7z.9' C S FA P t> T 181 G            !FE         :: A * . ', A .

• Y . I q. 0 ; 'I A .' E il i V. 0 fA E IJ I e rt .  %' .

1

                                       ". 5 9 0 ',0.     - M 'T 5 0 x / 77. 1 t 1. 5)                                                                           '

MA

                                        -GGl5%8 ("fr. '.                          L E ri s h ')

l 4 1 - l k _J

HARSTEAD ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES o INC. PR OJ. NO. 8'50 4 C- 1 -

                                                                                                               \
                                                                                                                    - ?

A 169 KINDERKAMACK ROAD. PARK R DGE. N. J 07656 SUBJ. SU BDIV. SHEET PROJECT W ~5 - M A T I I CLIENT LPdL PREP. BY 4[- DATES /S[f3 SUBJECT S T A 91 L l ~f'Y CHCKD.BY /d E D AT E12 '92,'2 3 M - 66I56 e> .-.. elk 72 A . IF STEGL. vesset was

                                                      (lNL"~P=\'75~
                                                                + Q foo Moveo gosur,                              l'Zo -J          ,                   c
                                                                             - - W,= 26542 wcr9au v                                              i TiPFINct; TWo
                             ~

l . \ Pol Mis of ' 1 4 0NTACT fAM 'o *Y M 'A

                                                              /'N l

l 6 E i n s A Liz E D () p r. s;

                                                         ^          >

yso a GN f. l PT K is 0 ;l

             & oMSEttVATIVE'y                           

l A%0MECA5 , FF-t(TtoN t.Ec,5 / l l EI.. - 7.50 l. lR g\ - R --

                                    .4=0           -*

3 L A > ~ ~. 8j' xw, l (_P r M : - M + 4 i L-t F cos fo*(tos) NSh48[lo5) = (>

                                     ~ 6 /o 15 4 8 -t 8 I L + 1,42 7,715,- 1,74 2,74 / = c L = l 2.6 74 v)'- L e os \ 2 *- g. co s 50* + T & 5 **

(1 ) S \ / u s e V2 I.7.5(, 9 7 e 1) R (. 6428.) + 7 (,746) = c-

                      . . . , .             'I 4 I 6,4.        - . 64 2 8 R 1 . 744 T e o                               (r)'
             @ 19 .-                 F .+- L 96 d "- R. W Bo "- Teo s 50"

• O 17 750 k'2 fo75) G2 071) .'M6.R t . &428 T = 0

       \  '

w sas .,si<2- .s42g7:o @

PR OJ. NO. $~bo & HARSTEAD ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES o INC. A 169 KINDERKAMACK ROAD. PARK RIDGE, N. J. 07656 C- 1, 1 -4 SUBJ. SUBDW. SHEET

     . PROJECT               W3- M A'T i   > CLIENT               L P4 L.,                                              PR E P. BY 4t N     DATE 8/5/f3 SUBJECT               GTAOILITY                                            CH CK D. BY AdI DATE18/08/23
                                 \41/,4              , 6 4-2.8 g_. t . 744 T = o                         (p '
                                 '2.o 3 8 5           ,7 6 6 R               .&e28T=o                       @/       ,
          @'( %w i .

i las c . n 9 4 g. t,G4 2 t Te o @" g'/ 4 (33)' 3 2:2. 7 ) ~ 1 3 o s 1 (2. = o E* '247'2-1 (2. I N T O ([) # 14164- IG890+-7M T' r " 3= r 12.5q A h =M'07 WME L f 5 'HomzoNTALLy GTAt3 LEj 't IF Fs 4 di Oddu RS WHEM L= 0 A > FI N D K ( M + 00'43 F) #<>' '=o '" (D I , , el 2., , A l K: -

                                                                                      '?_ 3 4

( \ 4 i7 7 tG - 6/,l568) F ird B e {2) N CREASE

             @"             2.'34 (i 7 7 so) - rz. (,7 6 5) - T (. 64za) = o 4 ~153 4
                                                       . % 6 R.      -
                                                                             , 64 2. S' T = c
           @                    2656'2            -
                                                         ,64 2 8 R         -t       ,7 6 4 T = o
                                                          . 912P P             - 764      T=<-
                 <>/

4g49 (2)Q'" 7605 6 - I 5 5 Sh P '" F2 = 48891-

         ,     f@              2.6 5 4 2 - 3 / 42 2.+ , 76 4 7 - c2 3

s T = -t- 6 M (, IF 14 = '2 .3 f T i P P ti a 5 t cW.T-'2 q 4344 g ST I L L Ho St O 'u en SuacE Ti g ggq i j 3

                                                                                                                  *l ,

r- 1 PROJ.NO. 3 ' O " y HARSTEAD ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES o INC. ' A 169 KINDERKAMACK ROAD. PARK RIDGE. N. J. 07656 C' . 5 SU BDIV. SHEET PROJECT W3-MAT --_ SU BJ.

   .h SUBJECT P I I ' ' ' ': 5 : I t't
    . CLIENT
                            ' '3 '1 ; ; 1 13 / F  '< I i I::?!!
                                                                            -    :4 ' ; ' .                  

PR EP. BY A'I E DATEoa/ogfa g CHCKD.BY 6 N DATE 8/8/83

                                                                                                                                                                        ,      . 4..
                                                                                                                                                                     ,i.     .     .

f! E /.

• ChiO*)*.)
• 7 .4 E F A *, T 3 !. ! 9F C A F F TT A G A f!! ! ! I ;T

               *] T l.1 F T'          ' ' ' C I l1 ",        L fi i           '1 'l E 1. ~ 'I 1. !i : It i h                             TCi OE           VhT       /
                                                                                                                                                                                 1 AT 1            -35.S           F'.         CAiC'1*.A T;                               7:8f      A !; D l 7 1 0 if A '.           S if E A 1     AUD,jj M O t/ I 11 i DU1 'O                        DEE           A G r i t13                      o !!        t X f O '. D        Et);i D I U G .                  fff

(, $ F G tt. 2., 5 -( 0 ') F 1. 2 F . 2. C A L C).

                                                                                                                                                               -     : . f' ; l.lt
                                                       ..T-~~-'-                                 e
                                                                                                                                                                     il.1-5 4

P T. WE!G5T q) F -W C l *c I M) r F 01. 0 L

                                                                       't ; ., ,,
                                                                                         ' [7' n)
                                                                                                        / ; 0 r. c s ; ]I:.oG-) '/ ~] 2 L E'/

90 4-3 5.0M e to r' IA AT (e n) i I 70:o 3 4 '! : 71: 3: 0?.o' 4872  ?.70.!3 13s.!  ! ! s t,510 9 '

2. 2953 0. 'f 3 ! . ? 2. ) :. : 4 7 7 3 317- 2.07 4 459,32.(

I i 5 43:2 0. : I 52.5 1814.4".  :< C 8 0 150 7 (23.7 4 71.10 G 4 4: 0 *.! 0.394301 I;: 5 12 2.1 & 7 13 f. 0 l G 0. 0 3 71,G h 2 5 444G o. 3 G 4

• 5 2 i 012..E2 129: I ; 1. 0 i fi G. o 335,070 i

C 0141 3. 3 L9 3 G7  :.05t.*: 2. ') '  ? ". . o I L l.o 3 5 f,7 4 7 l 7 m e. 3. z. u m :3 2. 5 :es- 2 r.o n. o 18,272 8 4to4 0. 3 7 0

• ft :  :; 3 2 . I542 2 '. 3 7 G.0  !! 9' l%8 f

1 5301 0. L 9 5 2. o !

7.1 ' 22 i  !?32 1' I '! . 9 54.0 13152 to t a : 2. o.12.,112 s3a.e- los  ! o.o a s.o 3!, sos l 1: to:73 c. :.: o : S o LI:;3.o: 3o?: l -18.o 17.0 ~ 3 1, 5 2. 7 I  !

I: 17543. .i E' 3. 8 3 c, L 3 4 _ __ ._ t . .! -___ .. . _ _ ._ - 4 ', F, 0 3 ( 0 3 41 f f. 'I A 7 ;'/ E ) 0; I-W $ 11 - 3 It; . F1 ') IX P. *f oF !EE 1. E F . 7- OALC, f F= 6. t 1 7- 5 5 ! = ;7 7 E o T 1 M i3 F C - l . 5 =

6. X 4 4 G '10 2 "o

• 75903"o Xf7 l

l l I A fl *, F i 1.1. 81 G TeI! M o M C ff 7 TG 70? OF 1/ A 7 l l M 9 T o r I/. A T = G590tG i- .' 7 7 S O r. ' 3 5 - l 5 )

                                                               =!          LS3 GGl :'. r ;

1 ., {

        }                                                             '

• l 1 l L J

l H PR*"*'*', HARSTEAD ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES o INC. G

                $    169 KINDERKAMACK ROAD. PARK RIDGE. N. J. 07656                                                          C-i         -i  _
                                                                                                                                                     ~

SUBJ. SU balV. SHEET p PROJECT - - - W 3-t/AT 1 '  ; ; I 3 2. / F2'";T 1*' -! PR EP. BY Ad 6 DATE08/04/t)

    .l      l SUBJECT CLIENT *ff!'G-                                       --      LL"-          2  A!..        

CHCKD.BY 4 y DATE 8[gf83

                                                                                                                                                          . ; 4_a _:                 .

i , _.1_ _._ TRE TOTA!  ! .i f A E 1.11 D Uf o lX I li f A C f l il G AT T X- G TOP' 0F _ TRE lA A T  !~ ..

                                                                                                                                                          ,               .L        -

F :. 1775o +171"3  ; .f .

                                                              .      usoq3g                                                                                           ,!-"

2

                                                                                                                                                                   .-l'}-"

14 =. - 8SGr 1 3 L{ [r LS3 C;[ ' i I Tj r; l  : 5383?1S T. T T i ~{E

                                                                                                                                                                      . I i
                  ~75            Ir10 1 h u T               f E E [ 5 U lt f                AT       THG      70 P       OF     f45       14 4 T 15

• 1 i l-p= 'c h = 0 0 5 A 4 ( 3 s . 0 0 - : . s o) i

                                                                                                                                                               j[
                                                             =       2.o7         7.      c                                                                        ,

t t-t .' l.;. 7 T I !. fora'. L u o l h 18 i F0 T. C f IE ", l f C = 1.07 x n x 77

7. '!

1 iPi / 29 7 l'

                                                                                                                                                                           .t F 1.1 14           P. !        OF           ![

A E F. Z  ?, A L C ,  ;!E idTA! '/ d i O 14 f ',* I 0F t, o ta c i. t t 1 .i s 35A(2 CT. F T. 0 M P. 4 ') F THE T. f F , 2 , G A !. C , *!C 70tA' . WG!GRf 9F !TFFI ) :; 300] ;' , I f31 71TAL LfA' W6i;4T !! ' i

• l t '4 15 2, ! 2 X 2 7 x 0 , f s ') + 't 0 o 7 a 191G40X -

                                                                               ,                                                                                           I N                                                      I FA   a,   7 0 T.           OF

• I. F E I T A G A , fl* T U f '. T! ,j l

(1. 0

                                                                                         '1 ,!_7) x. 1 5 i G 4__o,                                                         .

38* t? .

             '                                                    =       3. L 3                                                                                           l i

i h

    \                     r                                        ,
                  ,t   E 9 0 f A fl i
                                                  ; '1 1 . C #107                  5. E I fi r- ( L        tY '/ E T. r ! ? A L DEI I

s

         ..                   i                      ~

N J (i

PFtOJ.NO. 2 5 3 4 k A HARSTEAD ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES o INC. 169 KINDERKAMACK ROAD. PARK RIDGE. N. J. 07656 C-\ ~l -T SUBJ. SU BDIV. SHEET

   ,    PROJECT                   W3- M AT j                 .,o::: An/ 7 , v/ I r } ' . r, i -                                PR EP. BY AdE      DATE3 8/04/8 b
       ) CLIENT                                                At;..       :           CHCKD.BY AN DATE 8[g/93 SUBJECT :7t:'           0' ri./ : ; 5 I: L ' :. G . :
                                                                                  ,                         , i. }1           ,      .__

TL: D I li G F A c t o rs OF 1AFITT A G A I il 3 r t

                                                                                                                   ,       L_
                                                                                                                   .       L_..
                                            = [9.2 3 x I S I G 4 0 - 3 2 9 2, 9] x 0 ,7                                    Y
                                                                                                                              '\'a u- 5 0 9 5                                                                    .

l,3 g .,I ' I- -- - i . l-

                                                                                                                   !1
                                                                                                                    ' 1.

1.1

                                                                                                                                       .1 C O RA T U T E       7 :( G   F A G r o T. Op     IAFffT           A r, A g gi ; 7  o v y 7. -                          -j t                                                                                              l T U L 11 I t.l G :                                                                                        .

s'-

1. ! G F T l 81 G 14 0 7/. ; t! T = (3 2 ?. X ( S [ G !+ 0 - 3 8 li) X 7 7 '

j - i

G. G T 4 X h G T. F T i,' f-~

                                                                                                                        . ' } _{ .
                                                                                                                       '; . L j_j F A G r o Ts     OF       CAFF+T         AGAlu: T            O V E A 7 0 T il i tJ G                           i rt
                                                                                                                       .    : !p .            ..
                                                    =   C*G3N EG                                                                    {

S.o 9 0 GG~  ; . t

                                                   ~

I.D1 I l .

                                                                                                                            .;r t      ,

i l l r  : l l i i 1 t I . m A E f10 T A Il T 7 3 7. G r ti l ! 7. 0 D 9 C F D ti Vttr! CAL C l 1: l r . ( ) H

PROJ.NO. 8 b O t. k A HARSTEAD ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES o INC. 169 XINDERKAMACK ROAD. PARX RIDGE. N. J. 07656 C-1 -! - 8 SUBJ. SU BDIV. SHEET PROJECT W 3- M AT

                       * ' ') : *: A i:          F r/l : 1 i, '. . ; ; ;                                             P R E P. BY M l-        DAT Eo 8,'oc/81

{ IClJENT .

                                                                                                                                                             /

SUBJECT ~II: ' ' t T A 3'i v. ! 'i *  : r5.t' - CHCKD.BY 6, E DATE /8 9 3

                                                                                                                                                           .j.            .

Ust4G TYG lA A c t:: ~ f1 D L S or Yi 1. t l '. I o il F o 1. C i : T, T. I { {; "~' t o v, r u ~ t t 9: rA;I y, o t t t ;. :x ; il t // g r T r i 7 ;gg s i; D r f. - , Li '1G r. t I 11 F S r. ~. E 1 ~.0 il C 1. t T r. IS  : 7 1. 'J r. T U r. A L ' T A te r G. ') A T F , j. aI 5t ,. ! . 5 0 ' ' '

                                                                                                                                                        ;,.h          +h . ,

• i i!I I i' 1:

l - l.* l p o s ; u t i. ; 5 t S t. A c g ( *,0 st : t t '4 A f I V P ! I T i E / 3 r.1 s il r A r s o u.)[ __ . I I. - 7 5 0 ' {j a r: j g.

                                                                                                                                                               . .t-
                                                                                                                                                           ?       b,
                                         ,       7 ',- ?.[__.__                             TEE 1 r. 0 T C ." 9F f !{ t. GFol/ETT.7;"lj

(: ,A : s :- F r.o vt  :: 1x.Cr.P*re Fr.oie Drrt.: 1 'L' i l I 7. 5 F . 3 D 'n G .) 3; IIA CO t t. A tj i u G tov-19 4 '4 - G - S 0 2. i T. E '/ . HO.t i i F '4/ J :* S l7d F I 4' ,' D 1. ! I t  ! 7,,' l L J 7 P (AEFfT.Ffl0E'3) ' y ;:e :2.) ,  : I stucE T, T. A K t. 00#APUT4T A5 3 T, S S OF 11 - 5 AMD G-W j D L fr , AUL S t il ? L *9E L E I, f $ r. T l '/ T,

                                                           .                                        I E A T. I il G 7o1:1 I! ALE                                   l*  ,

iO' A P A T. I ' T- 0 D 0 C k t H Te E F o T. C 4 5 IT C. F T. 3 V t. LL , T = L 2. 5 4 k / \fE

7. - zu z:i ' A 1

l l CS M fu';IJG t il t 2 3 !. t ' o p T A '. 0 1 sA f S u [ il t :  ; l

• F.
• T. 1 1 1 5 0
• 2 T Ca s S o' ,

i s I = L 4 7 L I_ x 0 . l G G o t 2.15 4 x 0. 0 4 2. 2 y g g-

                                                  - 19 3 2 5 k                     =      f44: 9k N

L a

l r- ' l PROJ.NO. 8 b 0 " y HARSTEAD ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES o INC. A 169 KINDERKAMACK ROAD, PARK RIDGE, N. J. 07656 C-! -f -8 SUBJ. SUBDIV. SHEET g PROJECT l CLIENT '

                       -     1 *> I ;

• A H A P 3 'u E 1 4': GF* PR E P. BY Add DAT EG2/06/O 3_

I I SUBJECT !T551 02 'i ~ ^ i 8 W f 8i * 'AEiLITT CH CK D. BY 6 }} DATE B/8[#3

                                                                                                                                        , , 7. j . 1. -, . . J__

i},L . .. l i dA

                           ; tt. = 2                  Assu u s r e. A r                    H = 19 4 5 4 i             !s     f lF E              ~ ,j l

I E S 'J '. T A u f OF !?E 'l H U50 i t A L L T D ;I T 1 l U T f D; I t l f l

                 .,                                   Fotti          I K O '// il Ou 7 ? E '. E F T ,                                                '
                                                                                                                                                       , .y
                                                                                                                                              -      l r
                                                                                                                                              ' I ~ ,Q is        s                                                                                                     , ,

I

                                                                                                                                                    ;.           i l(t               p                                                                                                       t - [--

l l q-o\ T F i ll tf d L ' = f ( 'J.) d /- ii!

                                                                             - f I I il O. /k d U                                                   i l

U l !' ! ' e = g; sin u mau , j

u. 3 0

• l N s h t i

1. ' s - f /t ( c o s u ) =  :. f it. -

s,to-- f= r. ' , 19 4 ; a k i In LK 10 0

                                                                                                                                                       .I f   =.

I o 3 i./ E '

                                                                                                                                                                 )

f touto :nc t2 1.s g A t  :+ts:s dr u. . 4)~g : Yu - Io3 k y 'o d 0 2 5 x ::," y. 7 ;t S X 12. Tg - o. I I C 1. .' = f (G 1;i E '/ A t u h r ' n c N u Acttu;t L Q g , . F o !. 4000t;I co u c y. I r ; (: E E il 0 T E , T. E F , 3 ) ' -

2. fu o n =  : 2 c p i > Arx a x.

e

1. 4 > .

1 c > i

_= . ._ . . . J i t I 1 i i APPENDIX M I l l b Laboratory Report O 6 I P P l l e b 1

tuaricev testano ana annan==nna smoorneoru,wx:.

                                                  ..                 Ec,QE     A j

k g'ghf , neronT or:

                                                                     ,ee sim.m IDENTIFICATION OF LEACHATE (j               LOUISIANA POWER & LIGHT PnorcT:            PROJECT NUMBER 8304                          DATE:     September 9, 1983 neronTED To: Harstead Engineering Assoc Inc                     FU RNISH ED BY:

Attn: Gunner Harstead COPIES TO: 169 Kinderkamack Rd Park Ridge, NJ 07656 LABORATORY No. 1-34799 INTRODUCTION This report presents the results of our recent testing of samples you submitted for analy-sis. We received four samples; three liquid and one solid, for testing. The samples w:re identified as follows:

1. Liquid Conduit

2. Liquid, Pit

3. Liquid, Crack

4. Leachate W2 understand the samples were taken from a reinforced concrete mat foundation. The Andation is under hydrostatic pressure from an elevated water table. The purpose of C ) testing is to evaluate the likelihood of corrosion in the reinforced concrete.

CONCLUSIONS Based on the results of our testing, it is our opinion the following conclusions are appropriate:

1. The leachate consists primarily of calcium carbonate and iron. Much of the

iron is magnetic, suggesting a form such as magnetite. The iron appears as fine wire-like pieces under magnification.

2. The water removed from the conduit is substantially different than the water obtained from the crack and the pit. The high pH and alkalinity of the conduit sample suggests the water has been in contact with the concrete for an extended period of time.

3. The chloride level in the water is sufficiently low to classify the fluid as l

not being aggressive. TESTING METHODS AND RESULTS On August 18, 1983, we received four samples for analysis. The samples consisted of

       /'qen plastic containers of liquid and one solid leachate sample.                       Each of the fluid'

(,Jles was tested for pH using colorphast indicator sticks. Also, each fluid sample was analyzed for chloride using the Standard Methods for Water Analysis, 407A. In addi-tion, alkalinity, iron, calcium and sodium was determined for each of the fluid samples

                                                                 ~

using EPA Method 600/4-79-020. The following results were obtained:

      ^** A.""4'I,"v L"*"nM,*Ed.Wh "l. 72.".ci'3.*."W%"4!# "%*. T..*."!".l.T.'*=T=*f%'""J'# .",*"."T.*! M".!A '."! 'EIU

U- cuarictv testwic

                                                         == .r ar==ma moor ==oru.mc.

E! T '1'E"U PHONE 62/645-360s f neront on IDENTIFICATION OF LEACHATE oAre September 9, 1983 LABORATORY No. 1-34799 PAGo 2 TESTING METHODS AND RESULTS (cont.) Sample Sample Sample Constituent 1 2 3 pH 12.5 7.5 7.5 Iron (ppm) ND* ND 1.7 Calcium (ppm) 375 71 31 Sodium (ppm) 2400 1400 5100 Chloride (ppm) 78 20 22 Alkalinity (CACO3) (ppm) 1300 - -

                                                        *ND = Not Detected

('; leachate sample was analyzed using a Jarrell Ash Emission Spectrograph. The sample b placed in carbon electrodes, and a film of the spectra was obtained with a 0.C. arc. The following constituents were identified: Concentration Constituent (s) Major Constituent Iron, Calcium (10% or greater) Minor Constituent Sodium, Aluminum (10% to 1%) l Trace Constituent Aluminum, Magnesium, (1% or less) Manganese, Titanium, Barium, Copper The leachate sample was also analyzed using X-ray diffraction techniques. The diffraction analysis identifies crystalline material which is present in the sanple. The sample contains a major amount of calcium carbonate. REMARKS l Scale found on the surface of Portland cement concrete is typically comprised of calcium I carb::nate. During the hydration of Portland cement, calcium hydroxide is liberated. (7 the presence of carbon dioxide, the calcium hydroxide will form calcium carbonate.

   \.lcarbonation layer is generally limited to the top 1/8" of a quality concrete.

l rateo rom ru uYv'io"= orItaNs=Se', Sow"c$ueSue"o7:Yv'n'acvI r"EYa mesa o'ius o a meNursYY "eEnY o reSoSo own$"nSe=" I L

0 tuJIr1 atY teStrX3

                                                     .no .n.n==nna =mor.coru.mc.

• 662 CROMWELL AVENUE

                                                  *e                   $7 PAUL MN 55114 PM osse 612'645 3601 napony or:            IDENTIFICATION OF LEACHATE DATE: September 9, 1983 LABORATORY No. 1-34799                                                                  PAGE:        3 REMARKS (cont.)

The corrosion of reinforcing steel may form a magnetic residue such as magnetite. This formation requires an aqueous environment where oxygen levels are low. The very low iron content of the water samples suggests the water was not in contact with steel active-ly corroding. The formation of magnetite is observed frequently when steel corrodes in a chloride contaminated cementitious material and is then exposed to air. The low chloride levels found in the water suggest the presence of the iron in the leachate is not from such a condition. The test results are consistent with the iron originating from the surface of the slab. TWIN CITY TESTING AND ENGINEERING LABORATORY INC 1 o BdudD Richard D Stehly, P.E.

                                                                                                            ' i Chief Engineer i

i RDS/st 1 O V ff.' ""'a'R"S.!l. 't.T,i';;h.T. !. 72."2 ^.':: ?;7t?,t '# a':";; ^a J"!."oa't#ta"*A".;'#.;'%' ."'J.*!a" "T*; '"" ^",'= o

                                                                                                                          .}}