ML20091L220
Text
.
e
- ~.
.'.)
u
./
.W) LLLj :.
s
'JN11 ED ST AT LS NU LE AR REGULATORY COf.**.*!3'2;W 7
REGION lll HIBIT
. n ",,..f, j 5
m RoOSEVE L1 ROAo 1,
4.
,?
t.
'[
oLIN (LLYN ILLINots 40137 4
hit./t.te Pt f
(
October 27, 1980 MEMORANDUM FOR: Ray Sutphin, Reactor inspector FRCM:
E. J. Gallagher, Reactor inspector
SUBJECT:
INPUT FOR SALP APPRAISAL ON MIDLAND 1 AND 2 The following is to inform you of the Inspector's input for the -
SALP appraisal on the Midland 1 and 2 project. The Inspector has been associated with the Midland project since October 1978 to the present In the civil / structural area. The following items have been designaced for SALP appraisals:
1.
Adecuacy of management controls Consumers Power Co. has not provided adequate management control for the construction of the Midland project.
Management has not been properly Informed or Involved in s I gn I f I cant. cons t r.uct.1 on, I tems..
- 2.,
1 2.
Communication within functional aroue oroviding technical suoport Comunication and technical support between CPCo and design organization has been poor. The design organization (Bechtel) has not provided clear. technical direction.
s 3.
Adequacy # comittee and superviserv reviews and audits Audit findings have been made with CPCo management not directing attention to the " root cause" of the deficiency.
Improvements are needed in.this area.
4.
Adequacy of records and record control systems in-process inspection records have not been maintained adequately. Findings have been made where In-process inspection records have been determined to be Incorrect.
Final review of these records have been taking place too far into the work activities to prevent poor records throughout a work activlty.
1 840517 RICES 4-96 PDR
l i
J P.ay Sutphin October 27, 1920 2
/
5 Qualificatten and trainine of licensee eersonnel Findings were made where the licensee did not adequately control the qualificaticns of the contractor's quality control personnel for the post-tensioning work activity.
In general, CPCo performance in the area has not been adequate. The civil QA supervisor for CPCo has been in need of more staff to control the civil work activities for some time. Management has not supplied this personnel as of this appraisal.
6.
Overall effectiveness and attitudes CPCo in conjunction with their contrar. tor has a poor attitude in compliance.
In addition, CPCo has been reluctant to give the NRC requested documents without first clearing it with upper CPCo management. This has been considered as an inhibiting factor in our inspection
. _,.__. p ro g ram,
n
. _g= ---; - ;,
c...
.w at E. J. Gallagher s 4 00-.
1 v
cc:
G. Florelli D.W. Hayes R.C. Knop i
h
)
I L
. ~
- s'.
/" C f y s.
- ge f d s,q'C e
UNITED STATES
- j. f gr(,}
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
+-
.EYy.
'I4' ' * ~
nEason sus
~
, c..g/ !
' ~
' " * * * * * ' ' " ^
EXHIBIT si.ca ca.tva. itumois un g
I p./f id I/l/
February 15, 1979 j./Cf G b ( ' :'
/
. i.
,(g*/[ p.
f e.,
i_ _
MEMORANDUM FOR:
H. D. Thornburg, Director, Division of Re ctor Construction Inspection, IE
,v
(;./);')
8
. ' ~ -
FROM:
James G. Keppler, Director
\\. n
'7 g/
f SU3 JECT:
MIDLAND St}D:ARY REPORT k#
/
t D bI The attached report, which represents Region III's overall assessment of the Midland construction project to date fro = a regulatory standpoint, vas discussed with you and representatives from your staff, NRR, and CELD during our meeting at EQ's on February 6,1979. During that teeting, it was conclude _d_.tha.t._this_ report _should_be..providpd to OELD lcs_ uancitral_to._thelicensing Board and the various canies to the N#1 e
learing. As such, this infor=ation is being foryarded for your action.
pi tc[,,
l 41
$ W8 h'
( /
- n'e believe the neeting was quite useful in receiving feedback from the various NRC people involved relative to our position on the status of this facility.
Please centact ce if you have any questions regarding this =atter..
h1 Md
[/JamesG.Kep'pler Director N~
attachcent:
s
.,~
s' Midland Su= mary Report N..
'f.
r' L
- ;r t '.
f 4-g\\
4 ty
,j
(.
I m
Y' d
m
4 7
MIDI >XD SUM".ARY FI? ORT Facility Data Docket Nuchers 3'29 and 50-330
. Construe: ion Per=its
- CPPR-81 and CPPR-82 Per=fts Issued
- Dece=ber 14, 1972 Type Reactor
- PWI; Unit 1, 492 MRe*; Unit 2, 818 MWe NSSS Supplier.
- 3abcox & Wilcox l
Design /Cens tructor
- Bech:el Power Corporation Tuel Load Da:es
- Uni: 1, 11/S1; Unit 2, 11/80 S:atus of Construction - Uni 1, 522, Unit 2, 56;; Ingineering 80%
- A;prcxi=ately one-half the staan produe:1on for Unit 1 is dedicated, by contract,
(
to be supplied to Dov Chenical Corporation, through apprepriate isclation heat exchangers.
Capability exists to alternate to Uni: 2 fer the stea= source upon de=and.
Chren:lo:ical Listint of Ma$cr Events July 197'O Star: of Cens: rue: ion under exe=p:1cn 4
9/29-33 &
Si:e inspec: ion, four items of nencenpliance identified, 10/1/70 ex:ensive review during CP hearings
'1971 - 1972 Plant in =othb' alls pending.CP 12/14/72 C? issued 9/73 inspection at Bechtel Ann Arbor offices, five ite=s of nonco=pliance identified 11/73 inspection at site, four itens of noncompliance identified (cadveld proble:) precipitated the Show Cause Order l
12/29/73 licensee ansvers Show cause order ce==its to i=p:$vements on QA progra= and QA/QC staff 12/3/73 Shev Cause Order issued suspe.nding cadwelding operation 12/6-7/73 Special inspection conducted by RIII & HQ personnel 12/17/73 Show Cause order =adified :c allow cadwelding based on inspection findings of 12/6-7/73 l
[
/,
i
.. ~.
+
I 12/5/7d CP reported that rebar spacing out of
- specification 50 locations in t' nit 2 containment 3/5 & 10/75 CP reported that 63 f6 rebar were either missing; or misplaced in Auxiliary Building.
i.
3/12/75
,RIII held management meeting with CP e
,e D
a I
1 4
k i
l i
I s
e i
4 4
S I
e t
I j
+
r i
d 4.h g
4
\\
I j
e e
2 4
m
.. m
~
t -
+
s,
~
[.
8/21/75 CP reported that 42 sets of #6 tie bar's were':r.issing j
j in Arx111ary Building.
3/22/76 CP reporte'd that 32 #8 rebar were omitted in Auxiliary Buildins.. A stop-uprk order was. issued by CP 3/26/76 RIII inspector requested CP to' inform RIII when stop-verk order to be lif ted and to investigate the cause and the extent of the. problem.. Additional rebar problems identified j-during site inspect. ion
~
l
~3/31/76 CP lifted the stop-vork order
- 4/19 thru RIII performed in-depth QA inspection at Midland j
.5/14/76' t
5 /1.'./ 76 RIII t;anage=er.t discussed inspec": ion findings with-site personnel 3/20/76 RIII manage =ent meeting with CP President, Vice President, and others.
s 4
4
[
6/7 & 8/76 RIII follow up meeting with CF manager.ent and discussed g
4 the CP 21 correction comitments 6/1-7/1/76 overall rebar o ission reviewed by R. I. Sheu.r.akt.r 1-
)
J 7/25/76 CP stops concrete placanent work when further rebar' placanent errers found by their overviev program.
l PN-III-76-52 issued by F.III i
j 8/2/76 RIII recemends HQ notice of violation be issued 1
s I
j
&/9 - 9/9/76 Five week full-time RIII inspection conducted 2
2
- 8/13/76 Notice issued
(
10/29/76 CP responded to HQ Notice of Violations l
12/10/76
- CP revised Midland QA progran accepted by NRK 2/28'/77' tinit 2 bulge of containment liner discovered i
4/19/77 Tendon aheath omissions of Unit i reported 4/29/77 IA1. issued relative to. tendon sheath placement errors 4
[^r i
3/3/77 Managenent meeting at CP Corporate office relative to j
,1AI. regarding tendon sheath problem-h g
a
~
~
y
-.. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ' - ~
- 5/24-27/77 Special inspection by RIII, RI and F.Q personnel to determine adequacy of QA program implementation at Midland site 6/75 - 7/77 Series of meetings and letters between CP and NRR on i
applicability of Regulatory Guides to Midland.
Co itments by CP to the guides was responsive
~
7/24/78 Construction resident inspection assigned 8/21/78 Measurements by Bechtel indicate excessive settleman't of Diesel Cerierator Building.6f ficially reported to RIII on Septe ber 7. 1978 1.
-12/78 - 1/79 Special investigation / inspection conducted at Midland sites Bechtel A=n Arbor Engineering cdfices and at CP corperate offices relative to Midland plant fill and Diesel
)
Generator building settlenent proble:
1 1
a j
e f
e i.
('
4 f
i
\\ *:/
1 e
e g.
9,-
s i
i g
.m x
_ Selected Maior Events
_ Pas: Preblens s
1.
Cadveld Solicint Problem.and Shev Cause Order A routine inspection, conducted on Nove=ber 6-8
.of four nonce:pliance items refative to rebar Cad
, 1973, as a
-: baw 4
operations.
These ite=s were su:=:.arized as :
Cadweld inspectors; (2)' rejectable Ciduelds accepted by QC (1) untrained' inspectors; (3
~
' require =en:s; a)nd (4) inadequate procedures. records inadeq p[
f As a result, the licensee stopped work,on cadveld operations on Nove=ber 9 3 e licensee a, greed not1973 which in tum" stepped rebar installation 4N and accepted their corrective ac':fon.tci resh=e kork until the NRC revieved Order was issued on Dece=ber 3,1973, suspending CadHowever, Shev e
operatiens. On Dece=ber 6-7, 1973
- welding, conducted a special inspection a RIII and HQ personnel activi:y could be resumed;in a =g deter =ined that construe:icn 4
The show cause order was modified en Dece=ber 17 ant'e
. criteria.
1973, allowing resu=ption of Cadwefding operations based the inspec:icn results.
on The licensee answered the Show Cause 'Ordei en Decerh and =ake QA/QC personnel changes.cen=1::ing :o revise and s
er 29., ic73, ures and the hearing began on JulyPrehearing ccnferences were Ne.*v
, 'l 74, the Hearin 16', 1974 On $spee=ber 25, 1914, QA progra:g Board found that 6
the licensee was i=ple=enting i:s in co=pliance vidh regulations and thtt. construe:Lo=
should n:: be stopped.'
2.
Rebar 6._ission/ place:nents Errors Leadine to IAL
~
Initial identification and rep'Ert of reber nonconfo:
occurred during an NRC inspectica condue:ed on Dece=ber 11 13
- ances 1974.
' ' ~ ~ "
The license's informedst$e inspector tha:
identified rebar spacing prcble=s at el QL&-
an audit, had-652' - 9" of Unit 2 centainment.
evaticas 642' - 7" to
' ~
ncnce=pliance in repor:reper:ed per 10 crK 50.SS(e) and was iden
- cf.
j
'Nos. 50-329/ 74-11 a.nd 50-330/74-11.
j Additienal rebar deviatiens and 'e=issiens' vere id
\\-
+
\\
March and August 1975 and in April, May and June 1976; entified in-
., report Nos.
50-329/76-04-and 50-330/76-04 ider.:
~
Inspection 1
noncenpliance ite=s regarding reinforce =en:- steel defici 1;
_.; p;y y 'a; bd 1fied five fY.
en:ies.
i
\\
pW c
a,j A;z.
l, g
~_
~
.y
.. v, n
..,_h
, _ _ _. - - - - - - - - ~ ~ '
l l
i l
i Selected Major Events Past Proble=s 1.
Cadveld Snlicint Proble=.and Show Cause Order
~
A routine inspection, conducte'd on ove=ber 6-8, 1973, as a result of intervenor inforeation, identified eleven exa=ples
,of four nonce:pliance items relative to rebar Cadweldir.g operations. These ite=s were su==arized as :
(1) untrained Cadweld. inspectors; (2) reje,c:able Chdvelds accepted by QC f '{ '
inspectors; (3) records inadequate o establish cadvelds =et pC
' require =en:s; and (4) inadequate procedures'.
p tf i
As a result, the licensee stopped work on cadweld operations kk j
on Nove=ber 9, '1973 which in turn stopped rebar insta11ationQ
{
The licensee agreed not to resu=e work until the NRC reviewed t
and accep:ed their corrective action. However, Show Cause Order was issued on Dece=ber 3,1973, suspending Cadwelding operations. On Dece=ber 6-7, 1973 RIII'and HQ personnel conducted a special inspection and deter =ined that construe:icn activi:y could be resu=ed in a =anner consistent with quali:y
(
. criteria. The show cause order was modified on Dece=ber 17 1973, allowing rest =ption of Cadwelding opera: ions based on the inspection results.
The licensee answered the Show Cause Order en Dece=ber-29., 1973, ce==it:ing :o revise and i= prove the QA =anuals and procedures and =ake QA/QC personnel changes.
? rehearing cenferences were held en March 28 and May 30, 1974, and the hearing began on July 16, 1974 On Sep:e=ber 25, 1974, the Hearing Board found that the licensee was i=ple=enting i:s QA progra: in ec=pliance with regulations and that construe:1o=
should not be stopped.
2.
Rebar 6=ission/ Placements Irrors Leading to IAL
~
Initial identification and repor: of rebar nonconfor=ances occurred during an NRC inspection conducted on Dece=ber 11-13, 1974. The licensee infor=ed the inspector that an audit, had identified rebar spacing proble=s at elevations 642 ' - 7',' to '
652' - 9" of Cni: 2 cen:ain=ent. This ite: vas subsequently reported per 10 CTR 50.55(e),and was identified as a ite= of nonce =plian:e in repor: Nos. 50-329/74-11 and 50-330/74-11.
( l/
Additional rebar deviations and o=1ssions were. identified in March and August 1975 and in April, May and June 1976.
Inspectica
.,repor: Nos. 50-329/76-04 and 50-330/76-04 identified.five ncnce=pliance ice =s regarding reinforce =en: steel deficiencies.
5~..
Licensee response dated June 18, 1976, listed 21 separate ite=s (co==1:=ents) for corrective action. A June 24, 1976 let:er provided a plan of action schedule for imple=en:ing the 21 it e=s. The licensee co==itted not to resume concrete place =en: vork until the ite=s addressed in licensee's June 24 letter were resolved or implenented. This co==it=ent was docu=ented.in a RIII letter to the' licensee dated June 25, 1976.
Although not sta ped as an IAL, in-house =emos referred to it as such.
Rebar installation and concre:e place =ent activities were res==ed in early July 1976, following co=pletion of the items and verification by RIII.
Additional action taken is as follows:
a.
Bv the NRC (1) Assig=nen: of an inspector full-:1=e on site for five weeks to observe civil verk in progress (2)
IE =anagecen: =ee:ings E1:h the licensee at their corporate of fices (3) Inspection and evaluation by Headquarter personnel b.
By the Licensee (1) June 18, 1976 le:ter co==1::ing to 21 ite=s of corrective ac:ica (2) Establish =ent of an overview inspection progra: :o provide 100 reinspection of e= bed:ents by :he licensee'following acceptance by the con:racter QC personnel c.
Ev the Contractor (1) Personnel changes and retraining of personnel (2)' Prepared technical evaluation for acceptability of each identified construction deficiency (3)
I= prove =ent in their QA/QC progra= coverage of civil work (this was i= posed by the licensee) 3.
Tendon Shea:h Place =en: Irrors and ?.esultine I==ediate A::ien Le::er (IAL) l-?
' On April 19, 1977, the licensee reper:ed, as a Par: SC, See:1en 50.55(e) ite=, the inadver:en: e=irsion of reo he:p tenden shea:hs fro: a Unit 1 cen:ain=en cenere:e place =en a:
6
-l
\\
elevation 703'.- 7".
located at an elevation in the next higher concretTh
- part, placement lift, placement lift to pass under a steam line penetratiexcept t e
,it was where they were oni:ted.
on and personnel, con:ributed to the o=ission. proper source on
.Jul 1AL vas issued to the licensee on April 29 spelled out six licensee co=nittents for corre,e:1on 1977, which included:
expansion of the licensee's QC over view program; which
...n, -
to procedures and training of constructio (3) revisions personnel.
n and inspectica g
A special QA progra: inspection was conducted i The inspectien tea vas cade up of persennel fr n early thy 1977.
hQ.
was the concensous of the inspectors tha:Although five entified, it pregra vas an acceptable program and thatthe licensee 's construction ac:ivi:1e the Midland construction projec:s.s were ec:p' arable to nest other The licensee issued its final report on Augus review en site was condue:ed and documented in repe :
t 12, 1977. Final 50-329/77-03.
r So.
Curren:
Preb}e:s 1.
Plant
.em --
Till - Diesel Generator Suildine Se::lemen:
of per require =en:s of 10 CTE 50.55(e) tha:The lic e=ber 8, 19 72, diesel genera:or founda: ions and structures settle =ent of the expec:ed.
were greater.than Fill =hterial in this area was placed betw vith construction starting on diesel generator b ild nid-1977.
een 1975 and 1977,
'vi:h the spring run-off water. Tilling of the cooling pond began in early u
ing in has increased approxi=ately 21 feet and in turn iOver the year the w I2[2 the site gound vater level.
ncreas'ing
~3EEU effect It wha:
is not kncun at this ti e had on the plan fill and excessive settle:e(if any) the high evel has Generator Building.
nt of :he Diesel initially the PSAR indica:ed an underdrain sit is interesting to no installed to =aintain the ground vater a: yste: vould be level but that it later was dele:ed.its normal (pre pend) 1,'*
Aw. s r...w-h O
7-(.
.- l The NRC activities, to date, include:
Transfer of lead responsibility to NRR from lE by memo a.
dated Nove=ber 17, 1978 b.
Site =eeting on Dece=ber 3-4, 1978, between NRR, II, Co:su=ers Power and'3echtel to discuss the plant fill proble= and proposed corrective action relative to the
' Diesel Generator Building settle =ent c.
RIII conducted an investigation /inspec: ion relative to the plant fill and Diesel Generater Building se::le=ent The Constructor / Designer ac:ivities include:
a.
Issued NCR-1482 (August 21, 1978) b.
Issued Manage =ent Corrective Action Report (MCAR) No. 24 (Sep:e:Ser 7, 1978)
Prepared a preposed corrective action op:ica regarding c.
place =ent of sand overburden surcharge to act 1.e ra t e and achieve proper ce=paction of diesel generater building sub soils
(.
Preli inary review of the results of the RIII investiga: ion /
inspec:icn in:e the plan: fill / Diesel Genera:cr Building se::le=ent proble: indicata =any even:s cecurred be:veen late ic73 and early 1978 which should have aler:ed 3ech:e1 and the licensee to the pending proble=. These events included nence fer=ance repor:s, audi: findings, field =e=es to engineering and proble=s with the ad=inis::a: ion building
~
' fill which caused =odificatien and replacement of the already poured footing and replace =ent of the fill =aterial with lean concrete.
2.
Inssection and Quality Docu=entation to Establish Acceptability of Ecuio=ent This proble: consists of two parts and has just recently been identified by RIII inspec: ors relative to Midland. The scope and depth of the proble: has not been deter =ined.
The first part concerns the adequacy of engineering evaluz:icn of' quality doce=entation (test repor:s, etc.) to de:er=ine if' the docu=entation establishes that the equip =ent =ee:s specifica:1on and enviren= ental require =en:s.
The licensee,
(?
Y e
v
b Ne. llcencecsk wwies pagam
'l f
on Nove=ber 13, 1978, (10 CyR 50.55(e)) relative to this matter. issued a construction deficienc
- rig;ered by RI!! inspector inquiriester by IE CircularWhether the recor;___
va.
or Bulletin is not known.
1978 var received and stated Consumers Power was pursuing matter not only for Bechtel procured.equipcent but also for NSS' supplied equipment.
recent" The second part of the preblem concerns the adequacy of equipment acceptance inspection by bechtel shop inspectors.
Exa:ples of this proble: include:
(1) Decay Heat Re=o.al Pu=ps released by the shop inspector and shipped to the
,. site with one pump asse= bled backwards, (2) electrical pene: rations inspected and released by the shop inspector for ship =ent to the site.
Site inspec: ions to da:e indicate about 25% of the vendo vire terminations were improperly cri: ped.
Inseectien Eistorv The constructien inspection progra= fo: 13dland Units 1 and 2 i 500 cc:ple:e.
1 - 520; Unit 2 - 56%)This is consistent with sta:us of constructien of units.
(Uni:
and 56 have not been initiated. procedures approximately 25 have bee Jhe routine inspectica progra: has no:
ite=s.
identified an unusual. number of enforce en:
only c e is directly a:tributable to RIII enforce en:Of the selected major eve splicing).
u through :he deficiency reper:The other vere iden:ified by :he licensee and repor:ed ac:1vity (Cadwald
",y,,ym, syste (50.55(e)). The 12dland data for 1976 - 75 is tabulated below.
Nu=her of Number of Yes-Inspec:or Hours
}; onco:sliances
'_Insoections 1976 On Site 14 1977 9
S 646 1978 12 11 648 18 706 A resident inspector was assigned to the Midland site in July 1978
,..w.
7 Stil The on site inspection hours shown above. does not include his i
,4;gh%k.i
~
ti=e.
nspection by II inspectors.The licensee's QA progra has repeatedly been subject to'in d Included are:
- epth review l.
July 23-26 and August 8-10, 1973, inspection report Nos. 50-329/73-06 and 50-330/73-06:
1:p!etentation of.the Consu=ers Power Co:pany's QA manual a
'A-n echtel 4M*!
Corporation's QA progra t
for design activities at the 3echtel Ann s
_ Arbor office.
relative :o the Par:The identified concerns vere reported as discrepancies 50, Appendix 3, criteria require =en:s.
T, '
r-*-o, lam-
_[4-i
2.
September 10-11, 19'73, report Nos. 50-329/7'3-08.and 50-330/73-08:
A detailed review of the Bechtel Power Corporation QA program for Midland was perfor=ed. Noncompliances involving three separate Appendix B criteria'with five different exa:ples, were identified.
3.
February 6-7, 1974,' reports No. 50-329/74-03 and 50-330/74-03: A
,follovup inspection at the 11,censee's corporate office, relative to the 1:e=s identified during the September 1973 inspection (above)
'along vith other fo11ovup.
4,
[ June 16-17,1975, report Nos. 50-329/75-05 and 50-330/75-05: Special inspection conducted at the licensee's corpora:e office to review the new corporate QA progra: =anual.
5.
August 9 through Septe:ber 9,1976, repor: Nos. S0-329/76-08 and 50-330/76-08: Special five-week inspection regarding QA progra=
1:plementation on site pri=arily for rebar installation and other civil' engineering work.
6.
May 24-27, 1977, report Nos. 50-329/77-05 and 50-330/77-08:
Special
. inspection conducted at the site by RIII, IE and RI personnel to exa=ine the QA progrz: 1 plarentation on site by Consu=ers Power Co:pany and by Bech:e1 Corporatien. Although five exa=ples of nonce =pliance to Appendix B, Criterion V. vere identified, the consensus of the inspectors involved was that the progra= and its
(
1 ple:entation for Midland was considered to be adequate.
/
A1:houEh the licensee's Quality Assurance progra: has under gene a nu=ber of revisions to streng: hen its provisions, no current concern exist regarding its adequacy. Their Topical QA Plan has been reviewed and accepted by NER through revision 7.
I:ple=entation cf the pregra= has been and continues to be subjec: to further reviev vich the =id-constructicn progra= review presently scheduled for March or April 1979.
Ccnse:ers Pever Ctepany expa coverage to provide extensiv,nded their QA/QC audi:ing and surveiliance e overviev inspection coverage.
This began in 1975 with a co==itzent early in their experience vi:h rebar inst'allation proble s and was further co= itted by the licensee in his letter of June 18, 1976, responding to report Nos.~ 50-329/76-04 and 50-330/76-04.
This overview inspection activity by the licensee has been very effective as a supple ent to the constructor's own progra=.
Currently, this prograt is functioning across all significant activities at the site.
Enferce:ent P.istorv Approxi=ately 6 months after restart of construction activities (11 months af ter CP issuance) an inspec:1on identified four nonce =pliance ite=s regarding cadwelding activities. This resulted in a show cause order being issued on Dece=ber 3 1973. This enforce:ent ac:fon was aired publicly-during hearings held by the Ato:ic Safe:y Licensing Board
.a.g in May 1974 The hearing board issued its decision in Sep:e=ber 1974 l
/0
+a-w e
3 s
--a e
wa~-
.. l s
\\
\\
l that concluded that construction could proceed with adequate assurance
~
1 of quality.
Identification of reinforcing bar prcble=s began in Dece=ber of 1974 vith the l'icensee reporting i= proper spacing of rebar in the Unit 2 contain=en:
vall.- Further reinforcing bar spacing and/or'o:ission of rebar was identified in August 1975 and again in May 1976 with the cita:1cns of 5 nonce =pliances in an inspection report.
An II:EQ notice of violation was issued regarding the citations in addition to the licensee issuing a stop verk order. The licensee issued a response letter dated June if, 1976 co==it:ing to 21 ite=s of corrective action. A Bech:e1 prepared technical assessment for each instance of rebar deficiency was sub=itted to and review by IE:HQ who concluded that the structures involved vill satisfy the SAR criteria and that the function of these structures will
'be =aintained during all design condi:fons The RIII office of NRC perfor=ed a special five week inspectien c assess the corrective action i=p;e=en:atien without further cita:1cn.
The licensee reper:ed that two hoop tenden sheaths were o=itted in ccacrete place =ents of Unit 2 contain=ent vall in April 1977. An I==ediate Action Letter was issued to the licensee on April 29, 1977 lis:ing six ite=s of licensee ce==1:=ents to be co pleted. A special C
inspecti'en was perfor=ed en May' 24-27, 1977 vi:h four NRC inspectors (1-EQ, 1-RI, and 2-RIII). Although five ite=s of nence=pliance vere iden:ified 1: vas the ceasensus of :he inspec: ors that the QA/QC progra= in effec: vas adequate. The constructors =enec=for:ance reper:
previded an alterna:e =ethod of installation for the tenden sheaths that was accepted.
The F.III office of inspection and enforce =ent instituted an aug=ented on si:e in'spection coverage progra: during 1974, this progra= has con:inued in effect ever since and is still in effect. I: is neced that the nonce =pliance history with this progrg= is essen:ially the sa e as the history of other RIII facilities with a co= parable status of 2
construction.
Further on site inspection aug=entations was acco=plished kith the assign =ent of a full ti=e residen: inspector in August, 197S.
The nonce =pliance history for the Midland Project is provided in the following table.
e (s.
d e
e fl.
- ENTORCD2h7 ACTIONS i
Nonconpliances Criteria (10 CTR 50 A.ppendix B)
( )
Nu ber of Occurrances V, X, x1,.XVI 1
Construction haulted pending CP l4g.yrumagw aw.*mw+:iin..
II V(5) XIII. IV. XVII
. :...-- -- :c.
V(2) y;I
': :=-
.n ;
. ~ - -. -
- ~
.I V(4)
X, XII, XV, xy7, xyy7, xy777 V(5) 10 CTR 50.55(e) 1:e-V(4)
VI(2), VII, Ix(3), yyy ocedures Dra -ing Centr:1 Verk l
31 he.m.9mesmmvWh*EW. -:W*
hased y.aterial
-=* Processes s
s 38 - Test Equipnen:
sg3 e --i e.
-c -w:~w res
---~- a w s.o.: ~. w-s: 4;."..s
'e
- .-e*.*
e... w ;
ew - -
n3
- % 4..
. ' iw, vs.
...s*a e.,..%,a.'
- ' t,8., - p N..
.g%4. '. ;~
I
- ;....; 4.; ; y
..e,..m.~,.
.,; h.
.. ~..,
N t.*/.SM-AkrM.4..w %dCcd.a;%a*,6454.s a:.
. = =
{ %9 **
- 7 FM". 7.
.- { S.*-j '
r-u. ; r.rr, mss
~ ' ' * *
^
4 6
3.a
.,,em m ene...
M.
ENFORCEMINT ACTIONS Nonco=pliances Criteria (10 CFR 50 Appendix B)
Year
- Total
( ) Nu=ber of Occurrances 1970 4
V, X, XI, XVI 1971-1972 O
Construction haulted pending CF 1973' 9
II V(5) XIII, IV, XVII 1974 3
V(2) NVI
,1975 0
1976 10 V(4)
X, XII, IV, IVI, XVII, IVIII 1977 5
V(5) 10 CFR 50.55(e) ite:
1978 11 V(4) VI(2), VII, IX(3), XVI
~
Criteria-II QA Progra:
V Instructicns Procedures Drawing Control Verk VI Docunen: Con:rci VII Cen:rol of Purchased Material i
IX Control of Special'? recesses X
Inspection-
~
ZII Control Measuring - Tes Equipnent i
'IIII
.Eandling - Storage IV Nonconfo'r=ing Par:s XVI Corrective Ac:fons IVII QA Records
- ITIII
' Audits
(:
/1
\\
l Su=an and Conclusions Since the start of construction Midland has experienced so=e significant proble=s resulting in enforce =ent action.
In evaluating these proble=s they have occurred in clu=ps:
(1) in Septe=ber 1970 relative to improper place:en:, sa=pling and tes:ing of' concrete and failure of QA/QC to ac:
on identified deficiencies; (2) in September 1973 relative to drawing con:rol and lack of or inadequate procedures for control of design and.
procure =ent activities at the Bechtel Engineering offices ; (3) in Neve=ber 1973 relative to inadequate training, procedures and' inspection of cadveld activities; (4) in April, May and.7une 1976 resulting fre:
a series of RIII in-depth QA inspections and =eetings to identify underlying causes of weakness in the Midland S progra= i=ple=entation relative to e: bed:en:s.
(The nonce =pliance 1:e:s iden:ified involved inadequate gesli:y inspection, corree:ive accion, procedures and
- docu entation, all pri=arily concerned with ins:allation of reinforce:en:
steel); (5) in April 1977 relative to tendon sheath o=issions ; and (6) in August 1978 concerning plan: soil foundations and excessive se::lenen: of the Diesel Genera:or Building.
Fellowing each cf these proble: periods (excluding the las: which is still under investigation)_t the_. licensee has been responsive and has taken ex:ensive action to evaluate and correct the proble: and c up-grade his QA pregra: and QA/QC staff. The most effective of these licensee actiens has been an overview progra: which has been s:eadly expanded to cevar als:st all safety related activities.
The evalua: ion beth by the licensee and IE of the structures and equip en: af fected by these proble=s (again excep: the las:) has es:ablished tha: they fully meet design requirements.
Since 197/.* these proble=s have either been iden:ified by the licensee 's quality progra or provided direction to our inspectors.
Locking at the underlying causes of these' problems :vo ce==en threads energe:
(1) Consu=ers Power historically has tended :o ever rely en Bech:el, and (2) insensitivi:y en the part of both Bechtel and Consuners Power to recogni:e the significance of isolated events cr failure to adequately evaluate possible generic application of these events either of which would have led to early identification and avoidance of the prcble: including,the last on plant fill and diesel generator building set:lesent.
No:vithstanding the above, it is our conclusion that the pr'ble=s o
experienced are not indicative of a broadbreahdeva in the overall quali:y assurance progra:. Ad ittedly, deficiencies have occurred which should have been identified earlier by quali:y control personnel, but the licensee's pregra: has been ' effective in the ulti= ate identification and subsequen: correc:icn cf these deficiencies. Vnile ve cannot dis iss the possibili.cy that proble=s =ay have gone undetected by the licensee's overall quali:y assurance progra=, our inspec:1cn pregra: has no: iden:ified significant prcble=s overlocked by the licensee --- and this inspec:1cn effor: has utili:ed =any different inspec:ers.
g The RIII project inspectors believe th&c continuation of:
(1) resident site coverage, (2) the licensee overview progra= including its recent expansion into engineering design / review activities, and (3) a continuing inspection program by regional inspectors vill provide adequate assurance that. construction vill be perfomed in accordance with requirements and that any significant errors and deficiencies will be identified and corrected.
e 9
4 1
e 5
4 4
O e
e O
e e
O 9
6 1
\\
O e
e t
b($ {
. ?, mov%
'.;^
.q UNITED STATES
, ' / '..,- p cl.,.r A
. 'k NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION v.
.w I
',f.
REGION 111
', A.l.h; ' /
EXHIBIT
' GLEN ELLYN,ILLINOls 60137
' ' " ^
l-5 r
,_g t
.,,,. ~
d k,,s V
.: I n r ~-
,?
g.g.fo pf p >
October 18, 1979
...; s.
....,....,. n MEMORANDUM FCR:
R. C. Knop R. Cook
- u. W. Hayes T. Vandel
- 7. H. Danielson F. Jablonski K. Naidu _
E. Lee G. Maxwell' G. Gattaoher W. Hansen K. Ward P. Barrett I. Yin FROM:
G. Fiorelli, Chief, Reactor Construction and Engineering Support Branch'
SUBJECT:
MIDLAND CONSTRUCTION STATUS REPORT AS OF OCTOBER 1,~1979
- - - ~ ~ - ' " - ~ "
The attached report was finalized Lased on your feedback requested in my memo of October 5,1979.. If you stil'l' feel adjustments are necessary please contact me.
If you consider the. report characterizes you'r current assessment of the Midland project, please can' cur and pass it along promptly.
'2/
~
s G. Fiorelli, Chief Reactor Construction and
Enclosure:
As stated Engineering Support Branch ec:
J. G. Keppler e
//
1
--A
d u
MIDLAND
SUMMARY
REPORT UPDATE Facility Data Docket Number 329 and 50-330 Construction Permits
- CPPR-81 and CPPR-82 Permits Issued
- December 14, 1972 Type Reactor
- PWR; Unit 1, 492 MWe*; Unit 2, 818 MWe NSSS
- Babcock and Wilcox Design / Constructor
- Bechtel Power Corporation Fuel Load Dates
- Unit 1, 4/82; Unit 2, 11/81 Status of Construction
- Unit 1, 54%; Unit 2, 61%; Engineering 82%
- Approximately one-half the steam production for Unit 1 is dedicated, by contract, to be supplied to Dow Chemical Corporation, through appropriate isolation heat exchangers.
Chronological Listing of Major Events July 1970 Start of construction under exemption 9/29-30 &
Site inspection, four items of noncompliance identified, 10/1/70 extensive review during CP hearings 1971 - 1972 Plant in mothballs pending CP 12/14/72 CP issued 9/73 Inspection at Bechtel Ann Arbor offices, five items of noncompliance identified J1/73 Inspection at site, four items of noncompliance identified (cadweld problem) precipitated the Show Cause Order 12/29/73 Licensee answers Show Cause Order commits to improvements on QA program and QA/QC staff 12/3/73 Show Cause Order issued suspending cadwelding operation 12/6-7/73 Special inspection conducted by RIII and HQ personnel 12/17/73 Show Cause Order modified to allow cadwelding based on inspection findings of 12/6-7/73
~
s.
i.
e 12/5/75 CP, reported that rebar spacing out of specification SC c
locations in Unit 2 containment 3/5 & 10/75 CP reported that 63 f6 rebar vere either missing or misplaced in Auxiliary Building 3/12/75 RIII held management meeting with CP 1
s e
d <
8/21/75 CP reported that 42 sets of #6 tie' bars were missing in Auxiliary Building 3/22/76 CP reported that 32 #8 rebar were or.itted in Auxiliary Building. A stop-vork order was issued by CP 3/26/76 RIII inspector requested CP to inform RIII when stop-work order to be lif ted and to investigate the cause and the extent of the problem. Additional rebar problems identified during site inspection by NRC 3/31/76 CP lif ted the stop-work order 4/19 thru RIII performed in-depth QA inspection at Midland 5/14/76 5/14/76 RIII manage =ent discussed inspection findings with site personnel 5/20/76 RIII management meeting with -CP President, Vice President, and others.
6/7 & 8/76 RIII follow up meeting with CP management and discussed the CP 21 correction co _.itments 6/1-7/1/76 Overall rebar omission reviewed by R. E. Shewmaker 7/28/76 CP stops concrete placement work when further rebar placement errors found by their overview program.
PN-III-76-52 issued by RIII 8/2/76 RIII reco= mends HQ notice of violation be issued R/9 - 9/9/76 rive week full-time RIII inspection conducted s
~8/13/76 Notice issued 10/29/76 CP responded to HQ Notice of Violations 12/10/76 CP revised Midland QA program accepted by NRR 2/28/77 Unit 2 bulge of containment liner discovered by Licensee 4/19/77 Tendon sheath omissions of Unit I reported 4/29/77 IAL issued relative to tendon sheath placement errors 5/5/77 Management meeting at CP Corporate Office relative to IAL regarding tendon sheath problem
, l-I 1
~
a
~
5/24/77 Special inspection by RIII, RI and HQ personnel to determine adequacy of QA program implementai. ion at l
Midland site.
)
6/75 - 7/77 Series of meetings and letters between CP and NRR on applicability of Regulatory Guides to Midland.
Commitments by CP to the guides was responsive.
7/24/78 Construction resident inspection assigned.
8/21/78 Measurements by Bech*el indicate excessive settlement of Diesel Generator Building.
Officially reported to RIII on September 7,1978.
12/78 - 1/79 Special investigation / inspection conducted at Midland sites,Bechtel Ann Arbor Engineering offices and at CP corporate offices relative to Midland plant fill and Diesel Generator building settlement problem.
2/7/79 Corporate meeting between RIII and CPC to discuss project status and future inspection activities.
CPC informed construction performance on track with exception of diesel / fill problem.
2/23/79 Meeting held in RIII with Consumers Power to discuss diesel generator building and plant area fill problems.
3/5/79 Meeting held with CPC to discuss diesel generator building and plant area fill problems.
3/21/79 10 CFR 50.54 request for information regarding plant fill sent to CPC by NRR.
5/5/79 Congressman Albosta and aides visited Midland site to discuss TMI effect on Midland.
S/8-11/79 Mid-QA inspection conducted.
f -.
N
[' ~
Sionificant Maior Events Past Problems 1.
Cadweld Splicing Problem and Show Cause Order A routine inspection, conducted on November 6-8,1973, as a result of intervenor information, identified eleven examples of four noncompliance items relative to rebar Cadwelding i
operations. These items were summarized as:
(1) untrained Cadweld inspectors; (2) rejectable Cadwelds accepted by QC l
inspectors; (3) records inadequate to establish cadwelds met requirements; and (4) inadequate procedures.
As a result, the licensee stopped work on cadweld operations on November 9, 1973 which in turn stopped rebar installation and concrete placement work. The licensee agreed not to resume work until the NRC reviewed and accepted their e.orrective action.
However, Show Cause Order was issued on December 3,1973, suspending Cadwelding operations. On December 6-7, 1973, RIII and HQ personnel conducted a special inspection and determined that construction activity could be resumed in a manner consistent with quality criteria. The Show Cause Order was modified on i
December 17,1973, allowing resumption of Cadwelding operations based on the inspection results.
The licensee answered the Show Cause Order on December 29, 1973, committing to revise and improve the QA manuals and procedures and make QA/QC personnel changes.
Prehearing conferences were held on March 28 and May 30, 1974, and the hearing began on July 16, 1974. On September 25, 1974, the Hearing Board found that the licensee was implementing its j
QA program in compliance with regulations and that construction should not be stopped. '
2.
_Rebar Omission / Placements Errors leadino to IAL Initial identification and report of rebar nonconformances occurred during an NRC inspection conducted on December 11-13, 1974 I
The licensee informed the inspector that an audit, had identified rebar spacing problems at elevations 642' - 7" to 652' - 9" of Unit 2 containment. This item was subsequently reported per 10 CFR 50.55(e) and was identified as a item of noncompliance in reports Nos. 50-329/74-11 and 50-330/74-11.
+
}
Additional rebar deviations and omissions were identified in l
March and August 1975 and in April, May and June 1976. Inspection 1
report Nos. 50-329/76-04 and 50-330/76-04 identified five noncompliance items regarding reinforcement steel deficiencies.
i l
f ;
i r-e.-
e y
9 v
.--+wr-p r
-ra
.g e
v
---T
--ww------=m44
---m*-w-""e-m M
~
Licensee response dated June 18, 1976, Listed 21 separate items (commitments) _for corrective action. A June 24, 1976 letter provided a plan of action schedule for implementing the 21 items.
The licensee suspended concrete placement work until the items addressed in Licensee's June 24 letter were resolved or implemented.
This commitment was documented in a RIII letter to the licensee dated June 25,1976. Although not stamped as an IAL, in-house memos referred to it as such.
Rebar installation and concrete placement activities were satisfactorily resumed in early July 1976, following completion of the items and verification by RIII.
Additional action taken is as follows:
a.
By the NRC (1) Assignment of an inspector full-time onsite for five weeks to observe civil work in progress.
(2)
IE management meetings with the licensee at their corporate offices (3)
Inspection and evaluation by Headquarters personnel b.
By the Licensee (1) June 18,1976 letter committing to 21 items of corrective action.
(2)
Establishment of an overview inspection program to provide 100% reinspection of embedments by the licensee following acceptance by the contractor QC personnel.
c.
By the Contractor (1) Personnel changes and retraining of personnel.
(2) Prepared technical evaluation for acceptability of each identified construction deficiency.
(3)
Improvement in their QA/QC program coverage of civil work j
(this was imposed by the licensee).
3.
Tendon Sheath Placement Errors and Resultino Immediate Action Letter (IAL) on April 19, 1977, the licensee reported, as a Part 50, Section 50.55(e) item, the inadvertent omission of two hoop tendon sheaths !
from a Unit 1 containment concrete placement at elevation 703' - 7" due to having already poured concrete in an area where the i
tendons were to be directed under a steam Line. The tendons were subsequently rerouted in the next higher concrete lift.
An IAL was issued to the Licensee on April 29, 1977, which spelled out six Licensee commitments for correction which included:
(1) repairs and cause corrective action; (2) expansion of the licensee's QC overview program; (3) revisions to procedures and training of construction and inspection personnel.
A special QA program inspection was conducted in early May 1977.
The inspection team was made up of personnel from RI, RIII and HQ.
Although five items of noncompliance were identified, it was the concensus of the inspectors that the licensee's program was an acceptable program.
The Licensee issued it's final report on August 12, 1977.
Final review onsite was conducted and documented in report No. 50-329/77-08.
Current Problems 1.
The Licensee informed the RIII of fice on September 8,1978, per requirements of 10 CFR 50.55(e) that settlement of the diesel generator foundations and' structures were greater than expected.
Fill material in this area was placed between 1975 and 1977, with construction starting on the diesel generator building in mid-1977.
Review of the results of the RIII investigation / inspection into the plant fill / Diesel Generator Building settlement problem indicate many events occurred between late 1973 and early 1978 which should have alerted Bechtet and the licensee.to the pending problem. These events included nonconformance reports, audit findings, field memos to engineering and problems with the administration building fill which caused modification and replacement of the already poured footing and replacement of the fitt material with Lean concrete.
Causes of the excessive settlement-includes (1) inadequate. placement method - unqualified compaction equipment and excessive lift thickness; (2) inadequate testing of the soil material; (3) inadequate QC inspection procedures; (4) unqualified quality control inspectors and field engineers; (5) over reliance on inadequate test results..
-v
The proposed remedial work and corrective action are as follows:
(1) Diesel Generator Building - apply surcharge load in and around building to preconsolidate the foundation material.
Continue.to monitor soit response to predict long-term settlement.
(2) Service Watcr Pump Structure - Install piles to hard glacial tiLL to support that portion of the structure founded on plant fill material.
(3) Tank Farm - FILL has been determined to be suitable for the support of Borated Water Storage Tanks. Tanks are to be constructed and hydro tested while monitoring soit response to confirm support of structures.
(4) Diesel Oil Tanks - No remedial measure; backfill is considered adequate.
i (5) Underground Facilities - No remedial work is anticipated with regards to buried piping.
t i
(6) Auxiliary Building and F. W. Isolation Valve Pits - Installed l-a number of caissons to glacial tiLL material and replace i
soil material with concrete material under valve pits.
(7) Dewatering System - Installed site dewatering system to provide assurance against soit liquidification during a seismic event.
The above remedial measures were proposed to the NRC staff on July 18,1979. No endorsement of the proposed actions have been issued to the Licensee to date. The Licensee is proceeding with the above plans.
The NRC activities, to date, include:
Lead technical responsibility and program review was transferred a.
to NRR from IE by memo dated November 17, 1978.
b.
Site meeting on December 3-4, 1978, between NRR, IE, Consumers Power and Bechtel to discu:s the plant fill problem and proposed i
l correctise action related to the Diesel Generator Building settlement.
RIII conducted an investigation / inspection relative to the c.
plant fill and Diesel Generator Buildi9g settlement.
Findingt are contained in Report 50-329/78-20; 330/78-20 dated March 1979.
d.
NRC/ Consumers Power Company /Bechtel meetings held in RIII office to discuss finding of investigation / inspection of site settlement (February 23, 1979 and March 5, 1979).
~~i
~<
~
e.
NRC issue of 10 CFR 50.54(f) regarding plant fitL dated March 21, 1979.
- i. Several inspections of Midland site settlement have been performed.
The Constructor / Designer activities include:
a.
Issued NCR-1482 (August 21, 1978) b.
Issued Management Corrective Action Report (MCAR) No. 24 (September 7,1978) c.
Prepared a proposed corrective action option regarding placement of sand overburden surcharge to accelerate and achieve proper compaction of diesel generator building sub-soils.
d.
Issued 10 CFR 50.55(e) interim report number 1 dated September 29, 1978.
e.
Issued interim report No. 2 dated November 7, 1978.
f.
Issued interim report No. 3 dated June 5, 1979.
g.
Issued interim report No. 4 dated February 23, 1979 h.
Issued interim report No. 5 dated April 30, 1979 i
- i. Responded to NRC 10 CFR 50.54(f) request for information orsite settlement dated April 24, 1979. Subsequent revision 1 dated May 31, 1979, revision 2 dated July 9,1979 and revision 3 dated September 13, 1979.
- j. Meeting with NRC to discuss site settlement causes and proposed resolution and corrective action taken dated July 18, 1979.
Information discussed at this meeting is documented in letter from CPCo to NRC dated August 10, 1979.
k.
Issued interim report No. 6 dated August 10, 1979 L.
Issued interim report No. 7 dated September 5, 1979 2.
Review of Quality Documentation to Establish Acceptability of Equipment t
The adequacy of engineering evaluation of quality documentation (test reports, etc.) to determine if the documentation establishes that the equipment meets specification and environmental requirements is of concern. The licensee, on November 13, 1978, issued a construction deficiency report (10 CFR 50.55(e)) relative to this matter. An interim report dated November 18, 1978 was received l
-9_
i
and stated Consumers Power was pursuing this matter not only for Bechtel procured equipment but also for NSS supplied equipment.
3.
Source Inspection to Confirm Conformance to Specifications The adequacy of equipment acceptance inspection by Bechtet shop inspectors has been the subject of severat noncompliance /nonconformance reports.
Consumers Power has put heavy reliance on the creditability of the BechteL vendor inspection program to insure that only quality equipment has been sent to the site. However, the referenced nonconformance reports raise questions that the Bechtel vendor inspection program may not be effectively working in all disciplines for supplied equipment. Some significant examples are as follows:
(1) Jecay heat removat pump being received with inadequate radiography.
The pumps were returned to the vendor for re-radiography and repair. The pumps were returned to the site with one pump assembled backwards. This pump was again shipped to the vendor for reassembly. CPCo witnessed a portion of this reassembly and noted in their audit that some questionable techniques for establishing reference geometry were emptcyed by the vendor.
The pumps had been shop inspected by Bechtel.
/ (2) Containment personnel air Lock hatches were received and instatted with vendor supplied structural weld geometry which does not agree with manufacturing drawings. The personnel air Lock doors had been vendor inspected.
(3) Containment electrical penetrations were received and installed l
with approximately 25% of the vendor installed terminations showing blatant signs of inadequate crimping. These penetrations were shop inspected by 3 or 4 Bechtet supplier quality representatives (vendor inspectors).
(4) 350 McM, 3 phase power cable was received and installed in some safety related circuits with water being emitted from one phase.
(5) A primary coolant pump casing was received and instatled without all the threads in one casing stud hole being intact. The casings were vendor inspected by both Bechtel and B&W.
Additional IE inspections will be conducted to determine if CP has thoroughly completed an overview of the Bechtel shop inspector's function and that equipment already purchased has been reviewed to confirm it meets requirements.
4.
"Q" List Equipment
, There have been instances wherein safety related construction components and their installation activities have not-been-4dentified on the "Q" list..
.c This shortcoming could have affected the quality of work performed during fabrication due to the absence of quality controls identified i
with "Q" List items. Examples of non "Q" List activities identified which should be "Q" listed include:
Cable Trays Components of Heating and Ventilation System The licensee wiLL be advised to review past as weLL as future construction activities to confirm that they were properly defined as "Q" List work or components.
5.
Management controls a.
Throughout the construction period CPCo has identified some of the problems that have occurred and reported them under the require-ments of 10 CFR 50.55(e). Management has demonstrated an openness by promptly identifying these problems. However, CPCo has on repeated occasions not reviewed problems to the depth required for full and timely resolution. Examples are:
Rebar omissions (1974)
Tendon sheath location error (1977)
Diesel generator building settlement (1978)
Containment personnel access hatches (1978)
In each of the cases Listed above the NRC in it's investigation has determined that the problem was of greater significance than first reported or the problem was more generic than identified by CPCo.
This incomplete wringing out of problems identified has been discussed with CPCo on numerous occasions in connection with CPCo's management 4
of the Midland project.
b.
Tnere have been many cases wherein nonconformances have been identified, reviewed and accepted "as is."
The extent of review given by the Licensee prior to resolving problems is currently in progress.
In one case dealing with the repair of airlock hatches, a determination i
was made that an incomplete engineering review was given the matter.
Inspection History The construction inspection program for Midland Units 1 and 2 is approximately 60% complete. This is consistent with status of construction of the two units.
(Unit 1 - 54%; Unit 2 - 61%). The licensee's QA program has repeatedly been subject to in-depth review by IE inspectors. The following highlight these inspections.
i 1.
July 23-26,and August 8-10, 1973, inspection report Nos. 50-329/73-06 and 50-330/73-06: A detailed review was conducted relative to the implementation of the Consumers Power Company's QA manual and Bechtel Corporation's QA' program for design activities at the Bechtel Ann Arbor office. The identified concerns were reported as discrepancies relative.to the Part 50, Appendix B, criteria requirements.
r,
e,
w
-r
-,,.-.m..
m-
.o 4
2.
September 10-11, 1973. report-Nos. 50-329/73-08 and 50-330/73-08: A c
detailed review of the Bechtel Power Corporation QA program for Midland was performed. Noncompliances involving three separate Appendix B c.*iteria with five different examples, were identified.
3.
February 6-7, 1974, report Nos. 50-329/74-03 and 50-330/74-03:
A.
followup inspection at the Licensee's corporate office, relative to the items identified during the September 1973 inspection (above) along with other followup.
4.
June 16-17,1975, report Nos. 50-329/75-05 an'd 50-330/75-05: Special inspection conducted at the Licencee's corporate office to review the new corporate QA program manual.
5.
August 9 through September 9,1976, report Nos. 50-329/76-08 and 50-330/76-08: Special five-week inspection regarding QA program implementation onsite primarily for rebar installation and other civil engineering work.
6.
May 24-27, 1977, report Nos. 50-329/77-05 and 50-330/77-08: Special inspection conducted at the site by RIII, IE AND RI personnel to examine the QA program implementation onsite by Consumers Power Company and by Bechtel Corporation. A,Lthough five examples of noncompliance to Appendix B, Criterion V, were identified, the consensus of the inspectors involved was that the program and its implementation for Midland was considered to be, adequate.
7.
May 8-11,1979, a mid-construction QA inspection covering purchase control and inspection of received materials design control and site auditing and surveillance activities was conducted by a team of inspectors. While some items wiLL require resolution, it was concluded the program was adequate.
The Licensee's Quality Assurance, program has undergone a number of revisions to strengthen it's provisions. The company has expanded it's QA/QC auditing and surveillance coverage to. provide extensive overview inspection coverage. This was done in 1975 with a commitment early in
~
their experience with rebar installation problems and was further committed by the Licensee in his letter of June 18, 1976, responding to report Nos. 50-329/76-04 and 50-330/76-04 This overview inspection activity by the Licensee has been a positive supplement to the constructor's own program, however, currently our inspectors perceive the overview activities cover a smaLL pe. centage of the work in some disciplines.
This has been brought to the Licensee's attention who has responded with a revised overview plan. RIII inspectors are reviewing the plan as weLL as determining it's effectiveness through observation of construction work.
A specific area brought to the attention of the Licensee was the Lack of overview in the instrumentation. installation area. The Licensee has responded to this matter with increased staff and this item is under review by RIII inspectors. 1
I L-The RIII office of inspection and enforcement instituted an augmented onsite inspection coverage program during 1974, this program has continued j
in effect until the installation of the resident inspector in July 1978.
Enforcement History a.
Noncompliance Statistics Number of Number of Inspector Hours Year Noncompliances Inspections Onsite 1976
'14 9
646 1977 5
12 648 1978 18 23 1180
- 1979 to date 7
18 429 A resident inspector was assigned to the Midland site in July 1978. The onsite inspection hours shown above does not include his inspection time.
- Through August 1979 b.
An investigation of the current soils placement / diesel generator building settlement problem has revealed the existence of a material false statement.
Issuance of a Civil Penalty is currently being contemplated.
Summary and Conclusions Since the start of construction Midland has experienced some significant problems resulting in enforcement action. These actions are related (1) to improper placement, sampling and testing of concrete and failure of QA/QC to act on identified deficiencies in September 1970; (2) to drawing control and lack of or inadequate procedures for control of design and procurement activities at the Bechtel Engineering offices in September 1973; (3) to inadequate training, procedures and inspection of cadweld activities in November 1973; (4) to a series of RIII in-depth QA inspections and meetings which identified underlying causes of weakness in the Midland QA program implementation relative to embedments in April, May and June 1976.
(The noncompliance items identified involved inadequate cuality inspection, corrective action, procedures and documentation, all primarily concerned with installation of reinforcement steet); (5) to tendon sheath omissions in April 1977; and (6) to plant soil foundations and excessive settlement of the Diesel Generator Building relative to inadequate compacted soil and inspection activities in August 1978 through 1979.
Following each of these problem periods, the Licensee has taken action to correct the problems and to upgrade his QA program and QA/QC staff.
The most prominent action has been an overview program which has been steadly expanded to cover safety related activities.
i The evaluation both by the licensee and IE of the structures and equip-ment af fected by these problems (again except the last) has established that they fully meet design requirements.
Looking at the underlying causes of these problems two common threads emerge:
(1) utilities historically have tended to over rely on A-E's (in this case, Bechtel) and (2) insensitivity on the-part of both Bechtel and Consumers Power to recognize the significance of isolated events or failure to adequately evaluate possible generic application of these events either of which would have led to early identification and avoidance of the problem.
Admittedly construction deficiencies have occurred which should have been identified earlier but the licensee's GA program has ultimately identified and subsequently, corrected or in process of correcting these deficiencit The RIII inspectors believe that continuation of (1) resident site coverage, (2) the licensee overview program, (3) the licensee's attention and resolution of identified problems in this report, (4) ceasing to permit work to continue when quality related problems are identified with construction activities and (5) a continuing inspection program by regional inspectors will provide adequate assurance that construction will be performed in accordance with requirements and that any significant errors and deficiencies will be identified and corrected.
I
\\
i 3
l t
l
la.L h '* /*9#%.
UNITED STATES
~
2' NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION EXHIBlf l
'f ! '3 REGION lli
, g/6 f'
"/
f 799 ROOSEVELT ROAD aten etevn. ittisois sois7 L//-u * #/
,/
OCT 1 1979
- .s
. v. ' -'. - -..
Docket No. 50-329 Docket No. 50-330 j
Consumers Power Company ATTN:
Mr. Stephen H. Howell Vice President 1945 West Parnall Road Jackson, MI 49201 Gentlemen:
This refers to the inspection conducted by Mr. E. J. Gallagher of this office on September 11-14, 1979, of activities at the Midland Nuclear Power Plant construction site authorized by NRC Construction Permits No. CPPR-81 and No. CPPR-82 and to the discussion of our findings with Mr. B. J. Marguglio and others of your staff, and others of the Midland site staff at the conclusion of the inspection.
The enclosed copy of our inspection report identifies areas examined during the inspection. Within these areas, the inspection consisted of a selective examination of procedures and representative records, obser-vations, and interviews with personnel.
During this inspection, certain of your activities appeared to be in noncompliance with NRC requirements, as described in the enclosed Appendix A.
This notice is sent to you pursuant to the provisions of Section 2.201 of the NRC's " Rules of Practice," Par't 2, Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations.
Section 2.201 requires you to submit to this cffice within thirty days of l
your receipt of this notice a written statement or explanation in reply, including for each item of noncompliance: (1) corrective action taken and the results achieved; (2) corrective action to be taken to avoid further noncompliance; and (3) the date when full compliance will be achieved.
Based on our telephone discussion with you on September 21, 1979, it is our I
I understanding that the personnel performing inspections of the prestressing system whose qualifications we consider do not meet the provisions of Regu-d-
latory Guide 1.58 and ANSI N45.2.6 have been relieved from such duties until JY, further evaluation of the requirements and further discussion with the W
Region III office. Please include in your response your plans to reconfirm the qualifications of other personnel performing quality control inspections on the Midland project.
j f
K e,
pd 3
..a
- yya -
g.
f 00, I C7s Consumers Power Company
- In accordance with Section 2.790 of the NRC's " Rules of Practice," Part 2, Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations, a copy of this letter, the enclosures, and your response to this letter will be placed in the NRC's Public Document Room, except as follows. If the enclosures contain information that you or your contractors believe to be proprietary, you must apply in wrining to this office, within twenty days of your receipt of this letter..to withhold such information from public disclcsure. The application must include a full.
statement of the reasons for which the informetien is considered proprietary, and.should be prepared so that proprietary information identified in the application is contiined in ac enclosure to the application.
We will gladly discuss any questions you have concerning this inspection.
Sincerely, Gaston Fiorelli, Chief Reactor Construction and Engineering Sup' port Branch-
Enclosures:
1.
Appendix A, Notice of Violation 2.
IE Inspection Reports No. 50-329/79-19 and No. 50-330/79-19 s
cc w/encls:
Central Files Reproduction Unit NRC 20b PDR Local PDR NSIC TIC Ronald Callen, Michigan Public Service Coc: mission Dr. Wayne E. North Myron M. Cherry, Chicago u
RIII
- III, RIII..
RIII RIII,'ji p-[Y Wf 37 W
Gallagher/bk, Hayes Fiore li Cook Vaadel 1 9/24/79 I
,%p s
l l
Appendix A NOTICE OF VIOLATION Consumers Power Company Docket No. 50-329 Docket No. 50-330 Based on the results of an NRC inspection conducted on September 11-14, 1979, it appears that certain of your activities were not conducted in full compliance with NRC requirements as noted below. These items are infractions.
1.
10 CFR 50, Appendix B, Criterion III requires, in part, that appro-priate quality standards are specified and included in design docu-ments and that deviations from such standards are controlled.
CPCO Quality Assurance Program Policy No. 3 states, in part, that "the assigned lead design group or organization assures that the design and material are suitable and that they comply with design criteria and regulatory requirements."
[/
Contrr.ry to the above, Specification C-211, sections 8.1.2 and 8.2.4 AO'f Permits the use of lean concrete as a substitute of safety-related structural backfill and compacted sand material while stating that
" lean concrete shall be made of non-Q material and workmanship".
This permits the use and installation of non-Q (non-safety related) material in safety-related areas without benefit of the licensee's quality assurance program. Non-Q (non quality) lean concrete has been used in various areas of the plant fill including observed areas in the safety-related tank farm area.
2.
10 CFR 50, Appendix B, Criterion II requires, in part, that the quality assurance program pro' vide for indoctrination and training of personnel performing activities affecting quality as necessary to assure that suitable proficiency is achieved and maintained.
CPCO Quality Assurance Program Policy No. 2 complies with the require-ments of Regulatory Guide 1.58 and ANSI N45.2.6, " Qualification of Inspection, Examination, and Testing Personnel for the Construction Phase of Nuclear Power Plants". In addition, the licensee's contractor, Bechtel Power Corporation, procedure G-8.1, section 5.2, requires specific education and experience requirements to be satisfied to be considered for certification as a I.evel I inspector. Those requirements include: Two years related experience or high school graduate plus 1
one year related experience or college level work leading to associates degree in related discipline plus six months of related experience D
b 5
mul/M,W y
C'
?1979
~
Appendix A,
in equivalent testing, examination or inspection activities associated with power plants, heavy industrial facilities or other similar facilities.
Contrary to the above, five QC inspection personnel performing measurings, tests and examination of the containment prestressing system were not qualified in accordance with the above prerequisites in that they had no prior related education nor prior related work experience in equivalent testing or inspection activities.
\\
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMEh7 REGION III Report No. 50-329/79-19; 50-330/79-19 Docket No. 50-329; 50-330 License No. CPPR-81; CPPR-82 Licensee: Consumer Power Company 1945 West Parnall Road Jackson, MI 49201 i
Facility Name: Midland Nuclear Power Plant, Units 1 and 2 Inspection At: Midland Site, Midland, Michigan Inspection Conducted: September 11-14, 1979 E
Inspector:
T Gallaghe f/Af~b9 Approved By:
D.
. Hay s, Ch U
Engineering Support Section 1 Inspection Summary Inspection on September 11-14, 1979 (Report No. 50-329/79-19; 50-330/79-19)
Areas Inspected: Containment prestressing system work procedures, work activities and quality records (units 1 and 2); QC inspector qualifications; status of soils work activities and 50.55(e) reports relative to contain-ment prestressing system and concrete expansion anchors. The inspection involved a total of 27 inspector-hours by one NRC inspector.
Results: Three areas were inspected. Two items of noncompliance were identified in the areas inspected. (Infraction - inadequate design control -
Paragraph 2.a; Infraction - inadequate QC personnel qualifications - Para-graph 1.c).
4
, /> r, m
/ A n 00' g 7/ / /,/_ / L/U d o
. \\
l 1
DETAILS Persons Contacted Principal Licensee Employees (CPCO) t
- B. W. Marguglio, Director Quality Assurance
- D. M. Miller, Site Manager
- T. C. Cooke, Project Superintendent
- G. T. Black, Quality Assurance Engineer
- R. Wheeler, Staff Engineer
- J. L. Corley, Section Head - IE & TV
- D. Horn, Civil QA Supervisor i
Bechtel Power Company
- J. A. Rutgers, Project Manager
- W. L. Barclay, Project Quality Control Engineer
- A. J. Boos, Project Field Engineer
- W. J. Creel, Quality Assurance Engineer
- L. A. Breisback, Project Quality Assurance Engineer
- Denotes those in attendance at exit meeting.
Licensee Action on Previously Identified Items (Closed) Noncompliance (329/79-10-01; 330/79-10-01): Inadequate control of design interfaces; (a) Specification C-2 specified material for pre-stressing system sheathing to conform to ASTM A-366-66 or 68 while FSAS Section 3.8.1.6.3 required ASTM A-513, type 1, Grade 1010-1020 or A-53 type E or S, Grade B.
FSAR Section 3.8.1.6.3 has been revised via amend-ment 22 to be compatible with specification C-2 requirements.
(b) Speci-fication C-49, Section 6.2.2 specified the chemical limitations for prestressing system corrosion protective grease to be a maximum of 5 ppm chlorides, nitrates and sulphides while FSAR table 3.8-25 required 2 ppm (chloride), 4 ppm (nitrates) and 2 ppm (sulphide). Specification C-49 has been revised via change notice 9004 to meet the commitments in the FSAR.
(Open) Unresolved (329/79-10-02; 330/79-10-02): Unavailable quality records relative to performance tests on prestressing system; items 1 and 2 of the unresolved items remains unresolved since the quality records are being researched. Item 3 relative to buttonhead rupture tests quality records were made available and reviewed for tendon V-79, V-77, V-82, V-83 and found acceptable. Items 1 and 2 will be pursued during subsequent inspections.
Functional or Program Areas Inspected
~
During this inspection the containment prestressing system procedures, work activities, quality records, and inspection and testing personnel qualifications were inspected. In addition, significant construction deficiencies reportable in accordance with 10 CFR 50.55(e) relative to containment prestressing system, concrete expansion anchors for component supports and site soils and settlement were reviewed.
l 1
1.
Containment Prestressing System (Unit 2) a.
Procedures The inspector reviewed the following procedures for containment prestressing work activities:
(1)
C-2, Revision 12 (May 10, 1979) including FCR C-1986 (revised stressing sequence), FCR C-2046 (calibration of stressing jacks and gauge). INRYC0 had approved the changes.
(2)
C-2-146-9, Field Installation Manual, including FCR Nos.
2062, 2049, 2048, 2047, 2041, 2042, and 2020.
(3) PQCI-9.10, Inspection of Post-Tensioning System (4)
C-49, Revision 2, Tendon Sheathing Filler Material and FCR 2069 SCN 9003, and SCN 9004.
The inspector indicated to the licensee at the exit meeting that PQCI-9.10 had not been revised to the revised requirements of C-2-146-9.
The licensee informed the inspector that the changes would be incorporated and that the QC inspectors are aware of the field changes in effect.
b.
Reportable 10 CFR 50.55(e) on Prestressing Tendons Notification in acccrdance with 10 CFR 50.55(e) was made by licensee on July 26, 1979 that a number of containment pre-stressing tendons were fabricated and shipped to the site with indeterminant wire lengths and in violation of the 1/8 inch maximum wire differential. MCAR 33 was issued on July 27, 1979 documenting the deficiency. NCR 2373 was also issued placing the 7 vertical tendons already installed in the Unit 2 contain-I ment and 10 horizontals received in storage at the site on hold.
Inspections by the licensee at INRYCO's Melrose Park, Illinois facility and Wiremill facility in Florida were performed to
. l
investigate the cause and which facility is responsible for the fabrication of the deficient tendons. It was determined that the tendons fabricated at the Wiremill facility produced the tendon with differentiated wire due to the following reasons:
(1) back tension device was switched off and not operating resulting in varying wire lengths, (2) catcher clamp was found to be damaged due to veld fatigue, and (3) limit switch had excessive travel. These three mechanical deficiencies contrib-uted to the production of differential wires in the tendons'
{
fabricated.
A total of 38 tendons have been fabricated at the newly opened Wiremill facility. Tendons traced were as follows:
Seven vericals installed (on-hold)
Ten horizontals on-site in storage (rejected and shipped back to INRYCO)
Seven verticals (on-hold at Wiremill)
Ten horizontals (on-hold at Wiramill)
INRYC0 has submitted a salvage procedure for the seven verticals installed in Unit 2.
Procedure F-365-9.2 Revision 1, was currently under review and comment which proposes a method -to field cut and modify to satisfy requirements.
Bechtel has performed two quality program verification surveys of the INRYC0 facilities. Results are documented in QPVS No. 9Q and 10Q. In addition, a Bechtel inspector is stationed at the Wiremill facility to perform continued inspection of the tendon fabrication.
The NRC regional office will review the final 50.55(e) report upon receipt.
s c.
Qualifications of QC Inspectors for Prestressing Work Activity During a May 14-17, 1979 inspection (report No. 329/79-10; 330/79-10; page 4) the NRC inspector had indicated to the licensee that none of the Bechtel QC inspectors to be assigned the inspection and testing of the containment prestressing system has any prior related work experience on prestressing systems nor construction of power facilities. At this time no work had begun on the installation of the prestressing system.
The inspector, indicated that this matter would be reviewed during followup inspections.
~.
n
,n e
r--
During this inspection the matter of qualification of' quality control inspection and testing personnel was once again reviewed.
The personnel qualification and training records of eleven quality control personnel were reviewed and compared to the requirements of Regulatory Guide 1.58 and ANSI N45.2.6.
It was concluded that five of the individuals certified as level I inspectors were not qualified in accordance with the above standards as well as Bechtel program requirements contained in PSP-G-8.1, Qualification, Evaluation, Examination, Training and Certification of Construction Quality Control Personnel.
Section 5.2 (Education and Experience Requirements) of G-8.1 requires that one of the following requirements be satisfied in order for an individual to be considered for certification as a level I inspector:
(1) Two years related experience in equivalent testing, exami-nation or inspection activities associated with power plants, heavy industrial facilities or othet similar facilities.
(2) High school graduate and one year of related experience in equivalent testing, examination or inspection activities associated with power plants...
(3) Completion of college level work leading to an Associate Degree in a related discipline plus six months of related experience in equivalent testing, examination or inspection activities associated with power plants.
It is important to note that the above requirements are also included in Regulatory Guide 1.58 and ANSI N45.2.6 and requires education in a related discipline (i.e. technical, engineering, etc.) and prior work experience in a related field of testing, examination or inspection activities (i.e.
concrete, soils, prestressing,etc.)
The personnel qualifications of five of the QC inspectors certified as level I indicated no prior related education nor prior related work experience nor prior related construction experience. A summary of the individuals qualifications are contained in Appendix I.
These individuals have performed various QC inspections on the Unit 2 containment prestressing system. It is important to note that the remaining six QC l
inspectors have not had any prior axperience with prestressing systems, however, they have had prior construction experience.
S L
5-l
- l Discussions with the licensee's contractor Project Quality Control Engineer (PQCE) indicated that an attempt was made to secure fully qualified personnel through the corporate office.
4 However, that office was unable to supply the requested per-sonnel based on comments by the PQCE.
t The licensee's contractor (Bechtel) informed the NRC inspector that Section 5.1.2 of program G-8.1 states, "The_ education and experience requirements specified below shall not be treated as absolute. These requirements may be altered when other factors provided reasonable assurances to the supervisor responsible.- --
for certifying a lower level candidate that the person can competently perform a particular task." The license indicated relaxation of the education and experience requirements was exercised based on the above provisions.
The inspector informed the licensee that while it was fully recognized that the requir.ments for education and experience are not absolute, the fatent of the Regulatory Guide 1.58 and ANSI N45.2.6 was that the individual has prior related education and related experience while perhaps not the exact length of time.
The inspector indicated to the licensee that the liberal inter-pretation of the requirements were unacceptable and considered j
to be an item of noncompliance with 10 CFR 50, Appendix B, Criterion II.
(329/79-19-01; 330/79-19-01) i d.
Observation of Prestressing System Work Activities (Unit 2)
The inspector observed selected work activities relative to the Unit 2 prestressing system. The following specific items were observed:
(1) Tendon D124 stressing using calibrated Jack No. I and Gauge No. 191; Bushing ID MW-303, Beaning Plate GM-257; lock off load and tendon elongation were within predicated range.
Gregse tank,F. temperature 152"F; required temperature is (2) 140 to 210 (3) Tendon D-112 stressing; Field Anchor ID HQ-120; Bearing Plate GS-136.
(4) Completed Tendon D-124 and D-312 The above work was observed to be performed according to the prescribed work procedures.
i i
i
- - i I
,,,.y
--->.--.-a
e.
Quality Records for Prestressing System (Unit 2) 1 The following prestressing system gyality records were reviewed:
(1) Nonconformance Reports NCR-2205 (0 pen) Lack of acceptance / rejection criteria for rust and bent wires on tendons H13-252 and H13-24.
NCR-2505 (Open) Tendon D-301-2 had 5 wires broken during.
stressing.
NCR-2372 (0 pen) Issued 50.55(e) on differential wire lengths.
NCR-2382 (Closed) One wire on shop-end buttonheaded but sent to site - wire repaired.
NCR-2383 (Open) Tendon H21-234 and H21-236 inspected with "E" rust status - unacceptable rust - wires pulled for testing.
The above NCR's will be reviewed when fully dispositioned by the licensee.
]
(2) Buttonhead Repair Log This log tracks the buttonheads inspected and indicates the number defective and repaired in order to meet speci-fication requirements on permissible number of buttonheads defective. Tendon V-90 indicated six buttonheads were defective after repairs made. Specification C-2 permits only four. The licensee indicated V-90 is being reviewed and repairs to be recommended by engineering.
(3) Stressing Gauge Dia'l Comparison The stressing gauges are compared,to a master gauge once daily. If the gauge is determined to be out of calibration the last tendon stressed is completely restressed with a calibrated gauge. The new stressing valves are then compared to the work performed with the uncalibrated gauges ar.d evaluated to determine if other tendons require i
work.
Tendon D-321, V-28 and D-121 were restressed due to gauges being out-of-calibration.
l 7
l
l
-(4) Field Buttonhead Records - Tendons V2-2, V3-2, V13-2, J
V14-2 and V54-2 were reviewed and found acceptable.
+
The inspector indicated to the licensee that the quality l
for the tendons completed to date have not been completely assembled in order to perform a complete review o'f each tendon. Various inspection and quality documentation is located in various files without a complete review of an individual package as required by the Field Inspection-report.
The licensee indicated the completed tendon package would be assembled and reviewed prior to final acceptance of the work.
2.
Review of Fp Soils and Settlement 1
i a.
Backfilling Procedure Specification C-211(Q), Revision 7, Structural Backfill, Section 1
8.1.2 and 8.2.4 permits the use of lean concrete in lieu of l
structural backfill and sand backfill material. This specifi-l cation is used for placement of safety-related soils. The above sections state, " Lean concrete shall be made of non-Q (non-safety related) material and workmanship."
The inspector observed lean concrete material placed adjacent to the borated water storage tanks in the tank farm area which is designated as a safety-related "Q" area. The licensee f
informed the inspector that previously placed lean concrete material in safety-related areas were also designated and placed as non-safety related material.
l 10 CTR 50, Appendix B, Criteria III requires that appropriate e
i quality standards'are specified and that deviations from such l
ag'O standards are controlled. Contrary to the above, materials U
being used in safety-related structures were specified and permitted to be of non-safety related material and workmanship.
The quality assurance program has not provided control over i
this safety-related work activity.
This is considered an ites of noncompliance with 10 CFR 50, Appendix B, Criterion III (329/79-19-02; 330/79-19-02) b.
Placement of Soils l
Specification C-211, Section 8.5.1 requires that equipment being used to compact soils be qualified prior to use. Quality l
control initiated NCR 2492 on August 30, 1979 due to Bechtel l
(
3
T, construction use of an unqualified type of handheld compaction equipment ("po-go stick") in safety-related "Q" areas. The Bechtel project field engineer dispositioned the NCR as not being valid while being aware of the specification requirement.
The "po-go stick" was again later used in safety-related areas.
Bechtel QA department subsequently issued Stop work report No.
6 for use of such equipment until such time that the nonconfor-mance was resolved.
The licensee has indicated that Bechtel Geotech has directed the field to qualify the equipment as required prior to any further use.
The NRC inspector questioned the licensee why the project field engineer was peraftted to disposition the NCR as invalid and again permit the use of the equipment in violation of the requirements. The licensee indicated that the quality management personnel would take appropriate action to preclude such events and that QA acted promptly in issuing the stop work report.
c.
Status of Site Settlement The surcharge load in and around the diesel generator building has been removed as of the end of August, 1979. Soil response to the removal of the surcharge is being monitored. Discussion i
with the licensee, Bechtel Geotech and DR. Dunnicliff indicated that the soil has rebound approximately 3/16 of an inch; expected rebound is predicted to be on the order of 1/2 inch or less.
Temporary dewatering system in the vicinity of the Unit 1 and 2 i
valve pits have been installed, however no pumping or drawdown of the ground water had begun at the time of this inspection.
Pile tests are being planned in the vicinity of the service water pumphouse structu're. Tests are to begin in early October by Bechtel Consultants.
Excavation of soft-material in the borated water storage tank i
farm was in progress with placement of sand material inside and around the tank foundations. Sand was being placed using i
qualified handheld compaction equipment to 85% relative density i.
for support of structures and 80% relative density for areas other than under structures, j
3.
Review of 50.55(e) on Concrete Expansion Anchors Specification C-305, Revisica 9, Section 6.2.2 requires shell type expansion anchors to be tension tested to the specified loads. In o
1 4
N i '
addition, in-process inspection is required. Because in process inspection had not alwys been performed it was requested to randomly select 60 anchors to verify adequacy of past installations.
After testing 32 of the anchors, the results indicated nine. failures where the anchor slipped prior to achieving the test load. At this time MCAR 34 was issued on August 21, 2979. Results are documented on NCR-2461 and NCR-2481.
Engineering requested another 100 anchors to be inspected ( TVX-5383 dated August 24, 1971) for proper setting and tension tests. The results of the additional tests are documented on QCFM-6560/AI-667 dated September 6, 1979. Visual results indicate 20 acceptable and 8'! unacceptable (i.e.
not fully set). Twenty-three (23) could be reset. Sixty (60) 3/8 inch anchors were tension tested of which two failed while 371/2 inch and five 5/8 inch were tensioned and found acceptable.
The licensee indicated that approximately 900 of the shell type anchors have been installed prior to identifying the deficiency.
Because of the above information the licensee reported the defi-ciency in accordance with the requirements of 10 CR 50.55(e).
The licensee is continuing to evaluate the results of the testing and what corrective action is required to resolve the deficiency.
The final 50.55(e) report will be reviewed upon receipt by the NRC.
Exit Interview The inspector met with the licensee representatives (denoted under Persons Contacted) on September 14, 1979. The inspector sunsnarized the scope and findings of the inspection. The findings were also discussed via telephone with Mr. B. Marguglio and management of RIII NRC on September 17, 1979.
The licensee acknowledged the findings as reported.
Attachment:
Appendix 1 s
e h
\\
~
,7 APPENDIX I PRESTRESSING SYSTEM QC PERSONNEL QUALIFICATIONS Bechtel Certified Related Related On-Site Areas of Individual Employee Level 1 Education Experience Training Inspection A
7-12-79 8-6-79 none-none-janitor, 25 hours2.893519e-4 days <br />0.00694 hours <br />4.133598e-5 weeks <br />9.5125e-6 months <br /> Tendon insertion, high school cook, ICA buttonheading, stressing, gressing (1st shift)
B 7-12-79 8-6-79 none-none-23 hours Tendon insertion, high school Ramada Inn, buttonheading, printer stressing, greasing (1st shift) s.
4 C
7-12-79 8-6-79 none-none-26 hours Tendon insertion, 3 year student buttonheading, college last stressing, gressing(2nd shift)
D 16-79 8-6-79 none-none-26 hours Tendon insertion, B. A.
student buttonheading, Business last stressing, gressing (1st shift)
E 7-12-79 8-6-79 none-none-28 hours Terminated on 8-10-79 high school bar tender b
t
[s ong%,
UNITED STATES ff y }+,,7f. '-*/ ('j NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
/g,
, y:
r REGION lli f
799 ROOSEVELT ROAD j'
GLEN ELLYN,ILLINOls Go137
@M g // c k SEP 1 5 S80 g g,p v/fe i
l p;
s.. -
Docket No. 50-329 7
Locket No. 50-330 Consumers Power Company ATTN:
Mr. James W. Cook Vice President Midland Project 1945 West Parnall Road i
Jackson, Mi 49201 Gentlemen:
This refers to the inspection conducted by Messrs. E. T. Gallagher and R. B. Landsman of this office on August 27-29, 1980, of activities at the Midland Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2, authorized by NRC Construction Permit Nos. CPPR-81 and CPPR-82 and to the discussion of our findings with Mr. J. L. Corely at the conclusion of the inspection.
The enclosed copy of our inspection report identifies areas examined during the inspection. Within these areas, the inspection consisted of a selective examination of procedures and representative records, observa-tions, and interviews with personnel.
No items of noncompliance with hPC requirements were identified during the course of this inspection.
In accordance with Section 2.790 of the NRC's " Rules of Practice," Part 2, Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations, a copy of this letter and the enclosed inspection report will be placed in the NRC's Public Document Room, except as follows.
If this report contains information that you or your contractors believe to be proprietary, you must apply in writing to this office, within twenty days of your receipt of this letter, to with-hold such information from public disclosure. The application must include a full statement of the reasons for which the information is con-sidered proprietary, and should be prepared so that proprietary informa-tion identified in the application is contained in an enclosure to the application.
i g h/A7 w u~ '
'I o
~.
Consumers Power Company $EF 1 5 '.3:
We will gladly discuss any questions you have concerning this inspection.
Sincerely, 4
G. Fiorelli, Chief 1
Reactor Construction and Engineering Support Branch J
Enclosure:
IE Inspection Reports No. 50-329/80-25 and No. 50-330/80-26 cc w/ encl:
Central Files Reproduction Unit NRC 20b PDR Local PDR NSIC TIC Ronald Callen, Michigan Public Service Commission Myron M. Cherry, Chicago s
i J
g RIII IIJ RIIIg RIIIgf RIII RIII 4\\df
- Ltd,
(
4c s'N Cookhr.
Sutphin Knop Fi velli d man
/ Gall gher/cw ayes s
9/11/80 gge p
.t U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT REGION III Report Nos. 50-329/80-25; 50-330/80-26 Docket Nos. 50-329; 50-330 License Nos.
CPPR-81; CPPR-82 Licensee: Consumers Power Company 1945 Parnall Road Jackson, MI 49201 Facility Name: Midland Nuclear Power Plant, Units 1 and 2 Inspection At: Midland Site, Midland, MI Inspection Conducted:
gust 27-29, 1980 b
/4 b&
Inspectors:
E. J. G4flagher R. B. Landsman
/
e f 8
9 /2[h Approved By:
D. W.
- ayes,
/
Engineering Support Section 1
'/
Inspection Summary Inspection on August 27-29, 1980 (Peport Nos. 50-329/80-25; 50-330/80-26).
Areas Inspected: Containment prestressing system work activities, procedures, and quality records; meeting held on August 29, 1980 regarding Midland soil issues. The inspection invo(ved a total of 40 inspector hours by two NRC inspectors.
Results:
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified in the areas inspected.
i i
$1 -
)/s,9.p p
l YUh / UV J L /
o DETAILS p
Persons Contacted Principal Licensee Personnel (CPCo)
- J. L. Corley, Site Quality Assurance Superintendent
- D. J. Vokal, Supervisory Engineer, PMO Bechtel Power Company
- R. Sevo, Quality Assurance Engineer
- E. Smith, Project Field QC Engineer
- P. Corcoran, Resident Ass't. Project Engineer
- J. L. Hoekwater, Resident Civil Engineer
- J. Betts, Field Civil Engineer
- J. E. Russell, Ass'T. Project Field QC Engineer
- P. Van der Veer, Quality Control NRC Resident R. Cook
- Denotes those in attendance at the exit meeting held on August 29, 1980.
Licensee Action on-Previously Identified Items (Closed) Unresolved Item (329/80-01-07; 330/80-01-08); Inryco had not included complete calibration records for prestressing system Jacks.
Inryco has now supplied the required calibration records for Prescon jacks #1 and #3 and Dugdeon jack #'s 8780, 8778, 8783, and 8784.
In addition, Bechtel letter LAD-1551 states that the jacks are considered "Q" equipment and records are required to be maintained in permanent QC files. Spec C2-146, Section 12.1 has been revised to specify the Jack calibration as "Q" and records reYiewed accordingly. This item is con-sidered closed.
(Closed) Unresolved Item (330/80-09-01); Tendon H-21-234 had 2 button-headed wires that had not seated upon restressing. NCR No. 2964 was issued and required the tendon to be removed and replaced.
It was veri-fied that tendon H-21-234 had been replaced. This item is considered closed.
(Closed) Unresolved Item (329/80-04-01; 330/80-04-01); Unit 2 pre-stressing system quality control records were found to be inaccurate in a number of cases where incorrect anchor head identification was noted and incorrect tendon elongation calculated. A review of the completed Unit 2 stressing cards was performed and correction has been completed. This item is considered closed, i
l l
1
- (
Tunctional or Proaram Areas Inspected During this inspection, the containment prestressing system procedures, work activities and quality records were reviewed. In addition, the inspectors attended a public meeting held at Consumers Power Company offices in' Midland, MI. The meeting concerned CPCo's appeal the NRC staff's request for additional soil borings in the plant fill and cooling lake dike. The appeal was made to the Director and Assistant Director of Engineering in the office of Nuclear Reactor Regulatory (NRR).
1 Containment Prestressina System a.
Prestressina System Work Activities (Unit 1)
The inspector observed selected work activities relative to the tendon insertion and buttonheading on the Unit I contain-ment. The following specific items were observed:
(1) Tendon Insertion: ' Tendons V-34-1, V-107-1, V-105-1, V-28-1, V-83-1 and V-85-1 were observed being installed.
The tendons were in acceptable conditicn with no signs or corrosion along the tendon lengths.
(2) Tendon Buttonheadina - Tendon V-14-1 was observed being buttonheaded in the Unit I tendon access tunnel.
Bechtel QC inspector was present and was performing 100%.
buttonhead inspection with calibrated GO-NO-GO gauge, dial indicator, and optical comparator.
Tendon stressing and greasing operations were not in progress during the inspection.
'b.
Prestressing System Material Records (Unit 1)
Material certification tecords for Unit I vertical tendons observed being installed were reviewed and compared to the material requirements of ASTMA-421 BA wire. The following tendon records were reviewed:
V-84-1 thru V-89 V-80-1 thru V-83-1 V-107-1 thru V-110-1 The material records were found to be in accordance with requirements.
\\ J
e c.
Review of Nonconformance Reports (Unit 1)
{
The following nonconformance reports were reviewed in order to verify adequate resolution of each identified deviation:
NCR NO.
Status 2933 Closed 2974 2979 2981 2984 2994 3032 3035 3081 3093 3100 Open nonconformance reports are to be reviewed during a sub-sequent inspection. The NCR's closed were identified and resolved in an acceptable manner.
d.
Stressing Sequence - Inryco drawing C-2-170, Revision 4b was reviewed. It was noted that the stressing sequence has been modified a number of times to accommodate field installation due to availability of tendons. FSAR Section 3.8.1.6.3.2 states, "a detailted sequence of tensioning each tendon is developed by the tendon supplier". The prestressing system supplied at Midland is Inryco. FCR 2412 requrested engineering to revise the stressing sequence. Bechtel letter dated May 19, 1980 requested Inryco concurrence on the change.
Inryeo re-sponded on July 7, 1980 with acceptance of the revised sequence.
In addition, Bechtel had available the supporting documentation in evaluating the revised stressing sequence with reference to the original design guidh.
Review of Quality Records (Units 1 and 2) e.
The inspector reviewed the quality records relative to contain-ment prestressing system for Units 1 and 2.
The records con-tained completed inspection report, tendon pulling card, button-heading card, stressing records and greasing card. The following specific records were' reviewed:
(1) Unit'1 - Dome tendons D-301-1 thru D-306-1, D-201-1, D-202-1, D-309-1, D-311-1 and D-312-1.
\\
4
)
r (2) ' Unit 2 - Tendons D-212-2, D-209-2, V-74, 75, 82, 78, 79, and 109, V-80, V-85, and V-77.
The above records were complete and in satisfactory condition.
No items of noncompliance were identified in the above areas inspected.
2.
Meeting on Soils Issue at CPCo Office A meeting was held between Consumers Power Company and NRC staff on August 29, 1980 to provide CPCo the opportunity to appeal to the NRC Division Director of Engineering a staff position requiring addi-tional exploration and testing of soils at the Midland plant site.
The CPCo consultants provided a statement to the NRC staff which indicated that further soil exploration would not be necessary since the engineering properties of the fill material have been identified since the surcharge in the Diesel generator building area. The NRC staff also made a presentation indicating the reasons for requesting the additional tests. Af ter the two presentations were completed, the NRC Division Director indicated that a final decision would be made after the licensee submitted additional information that had I
not yet bebeen submitted to the NRC staff for review. This informa-tion would be made available by September 15, 1980 at which time a final decision regarding the licensee request not to take any addi-tional soil borings or tests would be made.
Exit Interview The inspectors met with licensee representatives (denoted in the Persons Contacted paragraph) at various times during their inspection activities.
The scope and purpose of the inspections were outlined alang with the findings of the inspection. The licensee representatives acknowledged the indicated results.
\\ 4
v1, f,
C'!.N.E'!.b*'.*, c.(.ny:.
f O.
~
.a f ".
(
m..u.
- ,_ ; l,
- l,,
l 4.j,,..
s g',,ga%
e.
.., w UNITED sfATES
'*\\
i 5
.. e e NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMeisDEi,
',7 7...
} 'r,}.&ff), f **.',l'"'.
~-
HEGlon ist g"
Q z.. g 1Q, er Pso acosavstr noao gg
[/{g
($,*.
O' "
- ,,j,,'
oLEN CLLYN. ELL Nois 40137 7_
WAR 2 31979
/^ Ne 77$
i.
- v. <.
. 6, c.
Docket No. 50-329
'y![f Docket No. 50-330 Consumers Power Company ATTN: Mr. Stephen H. Howell Vice President 1945 West Parnall Road Jackson, E 49201 Gentlemen:
This refers to a special announced" Inspection meeti ith corporate management condu Id on February 7, 1979, Mr. J. G. Keppler and sta f members of this offi ith you, oembers oC your staff and bars of your actors t
staff at the Midland site.
The purpose of the meeting was to review the Midland project status, the settlement of the diesel generator building, inform you of changes in the organization of this office and to confirm commitments regarding continuing Quality Assurance, Quality C.crol coverage for the Midland project.
The enclosed copy of og,r inspection report summarizes the discussion.
In accordance with Section 2.790 of the NRC's " Rules of Practice," Part 2, Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations, a copy of this letter and the enclosed inspection report will be placed in the NRC's Public Document Room, except es follows.
If this report contains information that you or your contractors believe to be proprietary, you must apply in writing to this office, within twenty days of your roccipt of this letter, to withhold such information from public disclosuro.
The app 1Leation Eust include a full statement of the reasons for which the information is considered proprietary, and should be prepared so that proprictory information identified in the application is contained in an onclosure to the application.
@ 53.t.8 9 i.
-?j, g
g Consumers Power MAN 2 0 073 Company We appreciate having the opportunity to coat with members of your corporate manage:nent and Midland staff. We will gladly discuss any questions y'ou have concerning this inspection.
i Sincerely, s.k A$
i
}
G. Fiore111, Chief Reactor Construction and Engineering Support Branch
Enclosure:
IE Inspection Rpt No. 50-329/79-04 and No. 50-330/79-04 cc w/ enc 1:
Central files Reproduction Unit NRC 20b
~
,NSIC
~
\\
Ronald Callen, Michigan Public a
Service Comission Dr. Wayne E. North i
Myron M. Cherry, Chicago i
i I
i e
l 1
l 4
.m,.,_.
y
.. h -
._y-
- + -
,s"
'.y U.S. NUCLEAR RECLL\\ TORY CO?^1ISSION OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND DiFORCEMDir Report No. 50-329/79-04; 50-330/79-04 Docket No. 50-329; $0-330 License No. CPPR-Sl; CPPR-f.2 Licensee: Consumers Power Company 1945 West Parnall Road Jackson, MI 49201 Facility Namet Midland Nuclear Power Plant, Units 1 and 2 Inspection At: Midland Site, Midland, MI InspectionCobnduced:%A-sc-Yfn/ H February 7, 1979 Inspectors:
R. J. Cook I'
/
& c b i., ~, ~
.5 -2.s w W
nsen JbzN]
T. E. Vandel J - M 7'f Anme kw
@/n Approved By: R. C. h op, Chief
[/
Projects Section Inspection'Su==ary Inspection ota February 7.1979 (Repor Mos. 50-329/79-04 and 50-330/79-O'.i.
Areas Discussed: Special, announced meeting between NRC, RIII inspection staf f, Consuners Power Conpany corporate managenent representatives, and Bechtel Power Corporation Midland staff representatives to discuss the project status, concerns regarding recent developments onsite, and upcoming inspection activity. The meeting involved 28 manhours of regional staff time at the Midland construction site by NRC representatives.
Results: The project status and major problems vers discussed.
...s'
,,_ J v ~ l W.,
0 0
~
.x, -
DETAILS Persons Present durine Manscemenc Heating Consumers Power Company S. H. Howell, Senior Vice President C. Keeley, Project Manager D. B. Miller, Jr., Site Manager B. W. Marguglio, Director Quality Assurance W. R. Bird. Section Head QA Engineering J. L. Corley, Section Head I.ELT Verification Bechtel Power Corporatien P. A. Martinez, Project Manager R. 1. Castleberry, Project Engineer J. F. Mevgen Project Superintendent John Milandin, QA Manager Len Dreisbach, Project QA Engineer
- Howard Wall, Vice President Ann Arbor
~
- part time U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Ce: mission J. C. Kappler, Regional Director R. F. Heishman, Chief, Reactor Operations and Nuclear Support Branch R. C. Knop, Section Chief, Reactor Projects Section 1 D. W. Hayes, Section Chief, Projects Section R. J. Cooke Resident Inspector-W. A. Hansen, Reactor Inspector T. E. Vandel, Reactor Inspector Results of Inspection Meeting 1.
Mr. Keppler described the upcoming changas in the' NRC organization in that Mr. R. F. Heishman, Chief, Reactor Construction and Engineering Support Branch will become Chief, Reactor Operations and Nuclear Support Branch and Mr. C. Fiore111, who presently has that' position will become Chief, Reactor Construction and Engineering Support Branch; Mr. R. L. Spessard, Chief, Construction Engineering Support Swetion i vill becoce Chief, Reactor Projects Section 1 of the Operations Branch and Mr. R. C. Knop, who presently has that position vill becone Chief, Construction Projects Section; and Mr. D. W. Hayes vill becone Chief, Construction Engineering Support Section 1.
These changes are_ effective February 11, 1979.
I~
t 7
' ", l 0
2.
Mr. Keppler discussed in broad terms the inspection status.
The construction program. although starting slow and haltingly (with work stopped in 1973 in the concrete area) has proceeded with no problems so severe that construction was stopped.
Two serious problems exist however, and each has the potential for regulatory action up to stopping work.
The diesel generator building sinking is the most sericus a.
problem that Consumers Power Company must face and has the potential of drastic regulatory action.
b.
The next most serious problem is to insure that material received for use meets the purchase specification.
Material must be adequately inspected to insure that it is acceptable.
i 3.
Other topics discussed were as follows:
Mr. Hayes concented on the importance of upcoming work a.
such ass (1) Installation of, the Reactor Yessel Internals.
(2) Piping work.
(3) Electrical cable installation and connecting.
~
(4)
The seismic and environmental qualification of equipment and material.
b.
Mr. Heishman conmented regarding the Quality Assurance, Quality Control program in that
, l) A Quality Assurance program review will be performed
(
by NRC, RIII in the near future. The intent is a thotough review of quality assurance / control activity.
(2) Consumers Power Company inspection overview was'an important part of the quality program at Midland.
The overview program was then the subject of a general discussion which included (a) Consumers Power Company performed co=plete overview inspection of structural concrete reinforcenent installation and concrete placement.
(b) Consumers Power Company is performing and intends to continue an overview of the mechanical and electrical
, areas of work.
The decision was made to inspect these areas during the initial phase of work so -
that faulty work could be detected and. corrected early in the work phase. The plan was to inspect more work in the electrical and mechanical areas '
[
h
.a early in the work process than had been done
-1 initially in the structural concrete phase of construction. The intend is to act early enough to avoid problems and then be forced to increase the overview program in the mechanical and electrical areas. The NRC ce=enced thet it appeared that there would be a$ problem if ih7 ove:-7J' i.
fr'y ram was char.Ked7 0 reduce inspection in'that
/ most of the signiiicant problems identified at '
Midland were a _re,sule aF 9e==z:Yiew program.
~
Conclusion Mr. Keppler stated in.conclusiod that the Midland units.were greater
/
50% coc:plete, the nu::ber of t;oncompliance iticss found by' NRC inspectors was comparable to other construction sites,. '
/
although significant problems vere identified years ago, with the f
exception of the diesel building, most of the problems appeared to be i
resolved. The Consumers Power Cc=pany Quality Assurance overview
/
is very important and Consumers Peer Company has done a good job of I
reporting the 10 CFR 50.55(e) items. This reporting de:onstrated an openuess in the program rather than attempting to hide any deficient conditions that' vere fcund.
L
\\
N.
P "cnyt M
3 Weyac <w cuvM 7[W W0 W pc#
U" M 9" D iu. >
'l 5
\\
l
^n.
t 4
4I s
N 4
1 g
h.
s s
\\ )1
\\
,g A
'A.
I
, O 6
"* *f. r
\\
L ww
\\
(
EXHIBIT l
E $/dc l EUGENE J. GALLAGHER, P.E.-
/##
civil EllGillEER EDUCATION BS IN CIVIL ENGINEERING, VILLANOVA UNIVERSITY, 1973 HS IN STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING, POLYTECHNIC INSTITUTE OF NEW YORK,1974 REGISTRATION: PROFESS 10t1AL E!!GINEER STATE OF ILLINOIS, NO. 37828 STATE OF FLORIDA, NO. 29114 STATE OF LOUISIANA, NO. 16376 PROFESS 10flAL RECOGNITION AMERICAN SOCIETY OF CIVIL ENGINEERS AMERICAN CONCRETE INSTITUTE TAU BETA PI NATIONAL ENGillEERING H0fiOR SOCIETY PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE 1978 - PRESENT U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION, OFFICE OF INSPECTI0ff AND EteFORCEMENT, REGION li t, GLEN ELLYN, ILLINOIS 1973 - 1978 EBASCO SERVICES, INC., CIVIL ENGINEERit G DEPT.,
NEW YORK, N.Y.
1972 - 1973 VALLEY FORGE LABORATORY, CONCRETE AND SOILS LAB, VALLEY FORdE, PA.
SUMMARY
OF EXPERIENCE DESIGil 0F REltlFORCED CONCRETE AND STEEL STRUCTURES.
FOUt:DATI0tt DESIGil AliD 50lLS lilVESTIGATIONS.
LABORATORY TESTitlG Atl0 INSPECTION OF CONCRETE, STEEL, Aft 0 SOILS.
INSPECT 10!( OF URAtllUM Mille EARTH EMBANKHENTS AllD DAMS.
lilSPECTION OF S1RUCTURES UtlDER C0!lSTRUCTl0?l.
ItiSPECTION OF MATERIAL SOURCES.
DESIGil 0F HYDRAULIC At:0 UATER SUPPLY SYSTEMS.
DESIGN AtlD liiSPECTIO!l 0F PIPilM3 SYSTEMS.
RESIDENT CIVIL Et GiliEER Oil POWER PLAf T C0f;STRUCTION PROJECTS.
REVIEW OF hat:AGEMEllT C0!!TROLS FOR CONSTRUCTI0tt PROJECTS.
QUALITY ASSURANCE PROGRAM REVIEWS.
DEVELOPMEllT OF BUILDit;G CODES, STAf:DARDS, AllD REGULATORY GUIDES.
o 2
ADDITIONAL TRAINING FUNDAMENTALS OF lHSPECTION, NRC, FEBRUARY 1978 (40 HOURS)
BWR FUNDAMENTALS COURSE, NRC, MARCH 1978 (40 HOURS)
CONCRETE TECHNOLOGY AND COCES, PORTLAND CEMENT ASSOC., MAY 1978 (80 HOURS)
QUALITY ASSURANCE COURSE, H.RC, AUGUST 1978 (40 HOURS)
NONDESTPUCTIVE EXAMINATION AND CODES, ROCKuELL INT'L., AUGUST 1978 (120 HOURS)
PWR FUNDAMENTALS COURSE, NRC," NOVEMBER 1978 (40 HOURS)
WELDING HETALLURGY, OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY, SEPTEMBER 1980 (80 HOURS)
+k i
t E'
D
.g 4
S-0
/
k O
._,.r 6
4' Y r
/
L-_-_.
---a
_r-
^
7-
- - " ~ - -
(
)
Mc s
e f
- h *W@wh g,. g 9 4 4 B.de,
'
- O 4 *- e m' a m _
~ ~. _4 f
& Jy &a./p,
' * * *~'
$X/
/)-/d -[d
\\
/.
iuuus wau:.9 2/r /uJ 1
o,.,,,
,)
ail En'aincer rhie' c ct Assiiit Anu
talADE I
Eng. - Soils unaAt;\\t:.1to:t 1. Lu::.tl st.
45/31/B37 - Son francisco
,.m 2.u2 utossv tuRTuuATF 4/12/24 U.S.A.
citizgt,Saty _
oaicifiAL arCin E t Lui t uy:: Eta nA rt C/03/59 I;L E!.tPLOYt. !?iT DAif(S)
SPOUSE S t;A'.:E Alnirah Janette ferris
" dan" Pit 010 UATE CillLOREtt BlHTHDATES _
- t. llifARY SERVICE & IIAt K PROFESS 10tJAL LIC[t:SES AfJD SOCIETIES California State (14233) Civil American Society o'f Civil Engineers Minnesota (12201)
Civil Boston Society of Civil Engineers U. S. Conunittee on Large Dams International Society for Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering
(
EDUCAT10f4 AtJD PEitSOf!AL DEVELOP!.iEtJT PROCHAf.tS o cole c t. C CH TIFIC AT F., CTC.
sci t O O t.
74 AJOR (OIt SUDJCCT)
DATC B.S.
Queens University, Belfast, Ireland Struc t.
flydraulics June 19ht:
S.M liarvard Univ.,
Soil Mechanics June 190 Cambridge OTHER SIGtJiFICATJT ltJF0Rt. TAT 10tJ (Refer to instructions before cornplating]
I i
l r
L-
4-
!...*e t s-p *.....
.1
,j 4
,e
[
i l
I'.l3C ',UPPL'.f.*C r!'I AL PAGE. If" It EOutitE t; i
WO RK lilSTORY d
16.S t.t o..Y tt.
C OMI' A f a Y. DIV Wlot4 O f f PostTiON HCL.D.
SU f-t r.t AH Y 0 3* 8t CSPO NSt u t t.tT I CS A PI D D Cl* Ait TtA CNT:
Sic.n i r ic a rrr a c cora ni.i sH,.t en Ts m
ro 1.ocaTiors 4,in St ecn:On t
,CL' 1%l ;Jan 194/g Royal Engineers (UK)
Released as Captain (1948)',
W M tegn l Mar.i")S2 Sir Ura. Italcrow & Partns.
Designed two concrete dams and a side i
London, U.K.
channel spillway on !! orth of Scotland Ilydro Works (Design Engineer)
(-
Apr '52 :4ar ' 53 Feuer Curp of Canada Designed Fishway and Bridge.on New lientreal Brunswick flydro Project (Design Engineer)
Mar '53 sep 'S4
- 11. G. Acres t. Co.
Designed a high rockfill dam in Quebec, liiagara Falls, Canada investigated a landslide in British Columbia, and was in charge of inspecto:
on construction of 7 mile of dikes for..
hydro project in ttanitoba.
Participa(r :
in investigations of foundations for a highway and for a sugar refinery. (Desig.
s Engineer)
Sep 'S5 July '59 ilarvard Univ.
On faculty of Div. of Eng. and Applidd Science. (Lecturer)
Participated in wor:
I connected uith consulting Assignments of A-L Casagrande and K. Tarzaghi.
1!ork included scepage and settlement of dams in British Columbia, setting up soils laboratory for railroad fill exploration
.and design (Great Salt Lake), ovaluation 1
of anchored bulkhead, and building foundation investigations for several la '
buildings in Boston including the Prudential Building.
.(
w..
8, (UsE SUPPI Ct. TENT AL PAGE.IF RCOutli 2-6
e g. A r Lii t.* t s.._Y f t f
Cf8'"'AN Y.fs4Vlft*>re(8H l'O it T e ord I s t;t.t).
- ti n'r' A te s'kt t'?l T; 118 s ' t ' '.3r Y O l* st E '.f ord t.l f t t t.1 f 4 C. A t4 D p pitys.
IU~
' t.UC A l LOP 4 A till ? tllT is tse:
i 1.lf.?lt F f C A f 4 't A C C Ut4f*t t*;s t s.t t,r41 $
I Aut;~ 'b9 i Prese'i t Pechtel,,1nc.
Pt'rfort. d r. oil and foundation analyses liteCF D#v. Siir. I'r.:n. i.c9 f or dxer. in California, Ure:gon, MinnesnU-and Colorado.
Perforrnd soil and founidation analyses h a icasibilir.y study for the BAP.T Trans ita" Tube.
6 recionacd soil and foundaf. ion analyses 3
ai;d prepare! and/or revicued soils sectit i
of Safety Aaalysis Reports for at least 1.
nur.lcar pn.:er plants in the USA.
Prep' red soil reports for siting studies -
for ne:cicar power plants in the south-eastern, central and northwestern USA.
Carried out studies and prepared designs for. foundations-for structurcs at taconit plants in liichigan and flinnesota and for copper facilities, in tiichigan, Utah, f!ew licxico and Arizona.
This included tailings dam design, thickener and orc storage facilities.
Performed soil and foundation analyses fo.
fossil fuel plants in the tiestern USA.
Presented soils information to Atomic Encrgy Conm. on a~ number of nuclear planL h
e ttk.
'3-g I
V y
^
f y
4'
+6 1,
[S $
M BB SOIL S. ROCK INS I HLJMEN IATION l
GEOTECH 8t07tCNHCA1 149444fEASD3R OfY!$10N Of 80LDHqi 2OM$104ta!gfygATIS.
1C.
October 19, 19M'8 8^ cran,cim tinir
/l File No. D-201C ca5L. '
I
-af sci i
sfc
)
i W
/Wi A*6 Dr. Sherif Afifi, t.T 1 G/
Bechte1' Associates Professional Corporation, I
P.O. Box 1000,
"' *l i
Ann Arbor, Michigan 48106
(
I
/WO
.m 9 r20 > eu $ cmp Re:
Midland Units l'9 9 l-Diesel Generator Building Settlement Measurements
Dear Sherif:
t In response to your request r.I have reviewed your plots of initial elevation versus settlement at the 14 Borros anchor and settlement platform clusters sent to me on 9/20/79.
The last date on these plots appears to be 6/15/79.
Cluster Plots My approach has been:
s (a)
To look for irregularities in the cluster plots, recog-nizing particularly that, unless arching is taking place, settlement kt a particular elevation must be greater than settlement at a point below that elevation.
(b)
To judge irregularities on the basis of instrument plan positions:
1.e. we should not expect a smooth cluster plot if the instruments are widescread in plan.
(c)
To judge irregularities on the basis of anomolies noted on the installation record.
My review is summarized on Table 1.
Note that I can in no case provide a conclusive explanation, but I believe the review does provide input to judging data quality.
-I 30 TOWER RO. NEWTON UPPERJALLS MASS. 02164 617-965-3700
~ - -
j'0S[h l
1 Qy m..
f Page 2 - Bechtel Assoc. Prof. Corp. - October 19, 1979 - File No. D-2010-(
~
Settlement Below Elevation 600 Ft.
During a telephone discussion on 9/20/79 you gave me the following data:
Elevation Number of Anchors Settlement Through l
7/27/79 599' 2
0.8",
1.3" l
592' 3
0.7",
0.7",
1.3" t
585' 2
0.4",
0.5" and questioned the scatter of data.
I have evaluated as follows.
Judge data on basis of regularity on cluster plot and notes on installation logs, and then assess data validity.
The review is summarized on Table 2.
As can be seen, there is reason to favor the smaller value=
of settlement and question the 1.3", 0.8" and 1.3" measurements.
Sincerely LtA.
/M JD:me Q
/ John Dunnicliff Geotechnical Instrumentation Consultant Walter R. Ferris, Bechtel, San Francisco)This letter supersedes ec:
William R. Beloff
)my review dated October 11, 1979.
\\
f es ec44. mesmuMErmmCN ENGNNEEPS.
Sna02196
j
}[.5$?-
.. l l
T TABLE 1.
REVIEW OF CLUSTER PLOTS l
.. CLUSTER IRREGULARITIES POSSIBLE EXPLANATION NO.
- l l
1 None l
2 BA-40 Error in computation of initial i survey data (1) 2 PL-22, 45 Platforms not settling with top of fill (2) 3 PL-23, 46 Platforms not settling with top of fill (2).
Note also that BA-59 is noted on instal-lation log as " readings may be less accurate than normal", but for marginal reason of smaller than normal anchor drive.
BA-59 data appears to be rea-sonable.
4 BA-47 Error in computation of initial survey data (1).
5 BA-44 Error in computation of survey data (1), downdrag on outer pipe (3).
6 BA-19 Minor survey inaccuracy.
on 2/16/79 6
pL-16 Platform not settling with top of fill (2).
7 BA-49 Noted on installation log as
" readings may be less accurate than normal", due to anchor prongs being expelled only 1.5".
7 PL-17,'48 Platform not settling with on 2/16/79 top of fill (2).
8 BA-4 Noted on installation log as
" readings may be less accurate than normal",'due.to grout in outor pipe.
9 BA-22,23,24 BA-24 is not at same plan loca-l tion as BA-22,23.
- Bowever, I
BA-22 and 23 are close together, and data are inconsistent.
No explanation for this but suggest l
you check computations from survey data (1).
10 BA-12 Error in computation of initial survey data (1), downdrag on outer pipe (3).
12 BA-53 Noted on installation log as
" readings may be less accurate than normal", due to anchor l
prongs being expelled only 1".
59802197
4 saom 1
%sep./
CLUSTER IRREGULARITIES POSSIBLE EXPLANATIONS No.
. 12 BA-51 on 2/16/79 No explanation, but subsequent and 3/15/79 data appear reasonable.
13 BA-6 on 6/15/79 Minor survey inaccuracy.
14 Throughout Large spread of cluster in plan.
Justified only in com-paring BA-55 with BA-56, and that comparison appears rea-sonable.
Interesting to note that the cluster with largest spread in plan gives the most Arregular plot, as would be expected.
NOTES:
(1)
I recommend you check calculations, going back to raw data in the survey books.
The initial readings appear to be the most questionable, because later incremental settlement generally look reasonable.
If that does not reveal an error, I can think of no explanation for this irregularity.
(2)
I understood that some settlement platforms were seated on the structure, some on the mud mat, some on the fill.
If any of these platforms were not seated on the fill. and the fill settled
_away from the platform. data would be as shown on the cluster plots (i.e. platform settlement less than lower anchor settlement).
I do not have enough data to evaluate this, but you can do so on the basis of (a)
Platform elevations with respect to structure elevations -
see Table 2 in SRI DGB draft instrume.nt report dated February 1979.
(b)
Platform size.
Platfokms were 6" x 6",
l' x l',
or 2' x 2', depending I believe on underlying material (check with Austin Marshall).
Sizes of platforms in question are:
PL-22 2' x 2' PL-45 2' x 2' PL-23 6" x 6" PL-46 2' x 2' PL-16 Not noted on log PL-17 2' x 2' PL-48 2' x 2' (3)
This is merely lookine for a hypothesis that fits the data, and is not a sure explanation.
If the bottom of the outer 1" pipe does not slide freely over the inner 1" riser rod (i.e. if the greased hose plug does not prevent the annular space being plugged by soil), downdrag on the outer pipe will result in anchor settle-ment, and if the anchor is deep it will indicate large settlement.
DS 59802138 l
s ng.3Iys ~
T if i t
M TABLE 2.
REV.
OF SETTLEMENT DELOW
~
ELEVATION 600 FT. AS GIVEN DY DORROS ANCllOR DATA
\\
ANCHOR ELEV.
CLUSTER i
EVALUATION OF DATA ON BASIS OF APPROX.
NO.
FT.
NO.
Cluster Installation
~Overal1 SETTLEMENT -
(1)
Pattern log TilROUGli 6/15/79 Inches 49 509.5 7
bad bad bad 1.3 44 509.1 5
bad (2) good bad (2) 0.8 53 598.0 12 good bad questionable 0.7 i
59 505.5 3
good questionable pmbably goodf 0.2 8
594.3 13 good good good 0.6 12 501.5 10 bad (2) good bad (2) 1.3 42 591.4 2
good good good 0.7 j
52 586.0 9
good good good 0.5 i
\\
17 584.5 6
good good good 0.4 ta 4
NOIE: (1) In decmasing elevation order, (2)
May ti sble to detenaine niore reliable value of settlenent if review of raw survey data and conputations lwveals an ermr. See notes in Table 1.
+
i i
J.3 J
C (J
'A i
o W
r I
e g
f
~
a
[(
s (a
\\
A N
s o
s.
.m.
s.__,___....
g,,,,..,_,,,,,,,%,,,.,
1 d
/
/
C E-o
.,., r.q r f [7 -
i l )
{ { ~ i t)
RESUME THIRU R. THIRUVEllGADAM
~
2124 Glencoe Hills Dr., Apt. 9 Telephone: Home:
(313)971-8051 Ann Arbor, Michigan 48104 Office: (313) 760 0700 M 4-1170 OBJECTIVE Structural Engineer; Supervisor-Lead Engineer EMPLOYMENT Bechtel Corporation, Ann Arbor, Michigan:
M From October 1973 -- continuing at present (BT months).
Lead Engineer of the Containment Subgroup.of the Reactor Building for the Midland Nuclear Power Plant.
Complete responsibility for the analysis, design and production of working drawings for the Prestressed Concrete Containment.
In addition, responsible for supervision of engineering /draf ting personnel assigned to the group, project correspondence in tems of client-vendor-construction _ comunication, specifications, preparation of bids, bid evaluation and writing of purchase order s, PSAR/FSAR participation and AEC corinunication,' project scheduling, manpower estimates, drawing control and personnel evaluation.
Sargent & Lundy, Chicago, Illinois:
From August 1971 to September 1973 (26 months).
Senior Structural Analyst in the 1ecial Structures 5
Group of the Structural Design and Draf ting Division Responsibilities included complete analysis and design of Prestressed / Reinforced Concrete Contairinents for both PWR and DWR Reactors, Seismic Analysis of Class I structures, PSAR/FSAR documentation and other special problems such as Cooling Towers, Pipe Whip Effects and Restraints and Tornado Effects and supervision of the three to six engineers assigned to the group.
Names of the projects actively participated in are:
Byron /BraidWood. Illinois; Zimer, Ohio; LaSalle County, Illinois: Bailly, Indiana; and Enrico Fenni II, Michigan.
Skidmore, Owings & Merrill. Chicaoo, Illinois:
From March 1969 to July 1971 (30 months).
Structural Engineer -- equivalent in position to Assistant Project Engineer. Responsible for analysis and design of several concrete and steel highrise buildings.
Member of a group of four engineers who were responsible for the complete design of Sears Tower, Chicago (109 It E C E I V E D stories -- steel framed building -- tallest in the world).
Juli 0 21978 ree w om ta,PLOYMEPtf Orr>*,g N
QQf; y $WNT.WG.W'N5
^ ' -
'Y'
~
THIRU R. THIRUVENGADNi Pagt 2 EMPLOYMENT Other projects personally participated in are: One (cont'd)
Shell Square, New Orleans, (50 stories, stocl-concrete composite); First Wisconsin Center, Milwaukee, (40 stories, steel-braced building); and Bond Court, Cleveland.
(20 stories, steel frame).
University of Illinois, Urbana, Illinois:
From June 1966 to August lW (27 months).
Civil Engineering Department. Research Assistant in the Project " Dynamic St_resses in Highway Bridges"--
Developed several Computer Programs for Dynamic Analysis of Single Span'to Three Span Bridges under Moving Loads.
Tarapore & Company, Mad _ ras, India:
From December 1963 to September 1%4 (10 months).
Design and Supervision of several Structures (e.g.
of fice buildings,' factory and industrial buildings, airport pavements and shell roofs).
I Amy School for A.M.I.E. (India) Madras, India:
From February 1964 to July 1964 (6 conths).
Part Time Teaching in the Evenings for Licenstate Pract.cing Engineers preparing for A.M.I.E. (India) i Examinations.
Madras State Electricity Board, Madras, India:
From January 1963 to July 1963 (6 months).
Practical Training as a Partial Requirement for Masters Degree in Power Engineering.
Assigments in various Division of Hydroelectric Power Projects involved in Analysis and. Design of Power Plant Structures, such as Penstocks. Surgetanks Transmission Towers and Power Station Structures.
EDUCATION University of Illinois. Urbana, Illinois: Frcrn 9/64 to 3/69 Ph.D. Degree in Civil Engineering (Structures);
Ricipient of Government of India Scholarship (64-66);
Research Assistant in Civil Engineering Department (66-68).
Indian Institute _ of Science, Bangalore, India: From 8/61 to 12/63 M.E. Degree in Power Engineering (Civil & Hydraulic);
Passed with Dist_inction University of Madras. Madras, India: From 6/57 to 4/61.
B.E. Degree in Civil Engineering; Passed in First Class with Honours.
A.l-J t
O
lHIRU R. lillRUVEIL\\DNi Page 3 PROFESS 10NA1.
Anerican Society of Civil Engineers -- Associate Hanber SOCIETY American Concrete Institute -- Member
/
MEMBERSHIP PERSOfML Date of Birth:
December 15, 1940 DATA Height:
S feet, 8 inches Weight:
175 lbs.
P'.arital Status:
Single Health:
Excellent Sex:
Male Indian Citizenship:
s (Imigrant to U.S. A.)
REFERENCES Available on Request-SALARY Open AVAll. ABILITY Four weeks af ter ' acceptance; carlier, if necessary.
6
\\
t l
I i
?
T-y 9
- MM4 4 Se wom ea..e
$&bM@i$%%iu.'%inEs.:w::.w.-: :.u.. :..:.:.... :.
N "l
X/. :tc,
..:. sy; 9.o
.=q you ll l } - /0 -
N 43 T.g 1
gr g
k
?
i.
(
(
PLAN)
~
~
i ij.
1 L
r l
h a
\\
i J
f P'
0
(
~.
t 1
s O-O s
._._.4_
a-
_;__m,,.__,_,,__
,a Q
-4
~
~
t RESUME OF JAMES W. SIMPSON Sunniary of Work Experience Positions Held DATES Pl. ACES Work Years WORK Soil & Mat.
Struct.
Civil Engr.
1949-1956 Indiana Resident Engineer Bridge and Highway Const.
1956-1957 Thailar.d Highway Location and Construction 6
1958 Creenland Construction and Material Engineering 2
1959-1962 Thailand 1
Soils and Material Engineering 1962-1967 Indiana 2
Structural Engineering, Bridge Designer 1967-1969 East Africa Soils and Haterial Engineer 5
1969-1971 Chicago Soils and Fo'undation Engineer 2
3 Mr. Sin.pson joined the Corps of Engineers in 1971.
1971-1972 Chicago Dist. Soils and Material Engineer, CS-11 1972-1974 Chicago Dist.
2 Supervisor Soils and Material Eng., CS-12 1974-1978 HCD 2
Soils and Haterial Engineer, CS-13 1978-Present NCD 4
Chief, Geotechnical Branch, CS-14 2
Total 18 5
_ Years 8
TOTAL: 31 Years Work Experience-CP n(%x,nb.a m /
m ea.m or Ali1kn L
/
Sunsuary of Work Experience Positions lield Work Years DATES Pl. ACES WORK Soil & Mat.
Struct.
Civil Engr.
1949-1956 Indiana Resident Engineer Bridge and liighway Const.
6 1956-1957 Thailand Illghway Location and Construction 2
1958 Greenland Construction and Material Engineering 1
1959-1962 Thailand Soils and Haterial Engineering 2
1962-1967 Indiana Structural Engineering, Bridge Designer 5
1967-1969 East Africa.
Soils and Haterial Engine -r 2
1969-1971 Chicago Soils and Foundation Engineer 3
Mr. Simpson joined the Corps of Engineers in 1971.
1971-1972 Chicago Dist. Soils and Material Engineer, GS-11 2
1972-1974 Chicago Dist. Supervisor So11a and Material Eng., GS-12 2
1974-1978 NCD Soils and Material Engineer, GS-13 4
1978-Present NCD Chief, Geotechnical Branch, GS-14 2
Total 18 5
8 Years TOTAL: 31 Years Work Experience 1
s
/
RESUME OF ENGINEERING EXPERIENCE AND EDUCATION NAME:
JAMES W. SDfPSON ADDRESS:
951 Cedar Street i
Deerfield, Illinois 60015
}
TELEPiiONE NOS:
Home:
312/945-5967 Office:
312/353-5734 PERSONAL INFORMATION:
BORN:
11 Feb 1923, in USA DEPENDENTS:
Wife and three children EDUCATION:
B.S.C.E. from Purdue University in 1949 Numerous courses at Universities of Purdue, California and Wisconsin, Corps of Engineer schools and elsewhere.
SPECIAL SKILLS:
Computer programming training and use.
MILITARY SERVICE:
U.S. Marines, Staff Sergeant.
REGISTRATION:
Registered Professional Civil Engineer in States of Indiana and Illinois.
EMPLOIMENT RECORD:
Date:
1978 - Present Employer:
Corps of Engineers
Title:
Chief of Geotechnical Branch North Central Division Chicago, I11$nois Grade:
GS-14 Work
Description:
The Chief of Geotechnical Branch provides general supervision and has responsibility for all soil mechanics, geology and construction materials of five Districts including Detroit, Chicago, Rock i
Island, Buff alo and St. Paul. These Districts include a ten-state area (sometimes only a portion of states) extending around the Greai: Lakes from upstate New York to Western North Dakota. He acts as a consultant to the Districts on major problems.
l l
~
l 1
RESUME OF JAMES W. SIMPSON (Cont.)
Date:
1974 - 1978 Employer:
Corps of Engineers Ti:le:
Civil Engineer North Cancral Division Chicago, Illinois Grade:
GS-13 Work
Description:
Served as secff specialist in soil mechanics and materials, reviewing all work documents, including plans and specifications within the North Central Division. Acted as consultant to Districts in the North Central Division.
Date:
1971 - 1974 Employer:
Corps of Engineers
Title:
Civil Engineer Grade:
GS-11 and GS-12 Work
Description:
Developed designs plus plans and specifications for the Chicago District in the soil mechanics and foundations area. Types of projects Laciuded dams, levees, highways, buildings, water front structures, retaining structures, breakwaters, etc.
Date:
1969 - 1971 Employer:
Soil Testing Services Chicago, Illinois
Title:
Soil Mechanics Engineer Work
Description:
Worked with this well-known consulting engineering firm on many Chicago building foundations and foundation problems including several high rise buildings insChicago.
Date:
1967 - 1969 Employer:
Tippects-Abbett-McCarthy-Stratton (Consulting Firm)
Title:
Soils and Material Engineer Grade:
Supervisor Work
Description:
In charge of soils and material program (up to 25 men) with regard to 410 miles of new highway and 67 bridges in East Africa.
t 2
l a
je RESUME OF JAMES W. SIMPSON (Cont.)
Date:
1962 - 1967 Employer:
Indiana State Highway Commission
Title:
Structural Engineer i
Work
Description:
Designer of bridges and highways.
Date:
1959 - 1962 Employer:
Transportation Consultants Inc. (Consulting Firm)
Title:
Soils and Material Engineer Grade:
Supervisor Work
Description:
In charge of soils and material program for 100 kilometer highway project (including several bridges) in Thailand.
Date:
1958 l
Employer:
Greenland Contractors
Title:
Survey and Material Engineer Work
Description:
In charge of surveying, construction material and control testing.
Date:
1956 - 1957 Employer:
Sverdrup and Parcel Engineering Company (Consulting Firm)
Title:
Location and Survey Engineer Work
Description:
In charge of location and surveying for new highway in Thailand.
Date:
1949 - 1956 Employer:
Indiana State Highway Commission
Title:
Resident Engineer Work
Description:
In charge of construction control of various s
]
large bridge and highway projects.
t 3
l l
(
1 1
\\
i
\\
~
+e
^~%
I o
l t9Cr k -c h a no.2.
ro.
A odiII9hsO L i,
O
-e--
n
~
-n
---,e
a.o3.
c_Sg ' glllI'1.fWn' mamand W
M' '
' ron 10.,
.W DIVISIONS AND DISTRICTS for CIVIL WORKS ACTIVITIES dr,m [
Is 42;-j NORTH PACIFIC s 2.
N NEW; I
bsta'"5 ll 4
NORTH CENTRAL ENGLAND
/.
runitAhn d'
. ( Tl g
d
{
WAI L A l
g r
i s
',Hus t uN WAt t A/
g g
,]
. f
= -
S st raus,,
/
~ ' - ~ ~
\\
i t-----_-_
j nunai
,,Qi Q y
kl viam
~
l l
MISSOURI RIVER.
s
_.i
. _ _.- _. _ _ _ _ _ j -
_f L
3, _
miw vou j
i
. m mmn nui,ut i,m, au o,,,,k
/
- e,' NORTH sacnAid=io l
l_ ' r -
r--
/ ' ': ATLANTIC c,, c,,,,,,,
e 4,
l nuYason uhuisviuk, nn$
l l
j an s
4 uu ucion e nancisco l_
l ilo s:,
/ 'QHI RIVER l
\\ is,
'f-u4suvin.f
'l l -
7,
'uism e ' i,,u g,,
I t os usurinsh ~
Wit M8 ngl oN i
ANcu ts
/
l g
j 4
,'r s,
e 8
At suour nout, g
-___j g AllANIf
's LHAnt(sION i
e y._dxsau'an i.
'e 3, y,,,,,,,
SOUTH PACIFIC,l oanas i
.p
/
l i
SOUTHWESTERN
=tw onitans ", I '-,,;,
e oni wo niu kc,3g,y,,,,
i Y
O SOUTH ATLANTIC caivisin.
Th. Al k. 6isi,6ci n.wyo.ri.,s.
LOWER Anchorage, Alanka, is, included irr MISSISSIPPI stie Nosth Pacific Davision.
VALLEY DISTRICT t!OUNDAfilES The State of llawaii and lilands in The Tenitory of Paerto flaco and W DIVISION HE ADOUAllTEIIS I
the Pacilac are included in lionolulas sutgaceni Islasuis is encludeal in i
Destrici Pacifsc Ocean Davision. with Jacksonville Destrict, Souti, e DISTitlCT ffEADOUARTERS l
llemahguasters at lionolielu, if awaii.
Atlanuc Division A DIVISION AND DlSTHic T lil ADOUAHTEHS
. g.
s 4
S'.1*EC:
i Interagency Agreenent so. NRC-03-7.o-167 with the NRC
,CICI CIVI:
The cbjective of this Interagency Agreenent is for the CCE t Engineering Section in their areas of responsibility in thse o furnish the c n cal 1 and 2 near Midland, Michigan and the Bailly Generat e reviev and r Plants Indiana, near Gary.
a on, Bailly, SPECIyIC NA".'UEE OF WCRK:
Thegeotechnicalengineeringaspectsofproposehnuclear to be evaluated generally include the stabilitytand s ttlplant facilities related structures such as earth enbankments and roc e
enest of safety n, safety-veirs, intake and discharge structures, and pipelines
, canals, dynanic conditions, including the sbj ection of ^=", under both static and down and Operating 3 asis Earthquakes.
, etc., to the Safe Shut-The evaluation typically censists of:
1.
A review of the site investigation progrs=, both field to assure that an adequate deter:ninstion of all sub and laborato q,
has been achieved including consideration of borrow sou surface conditions require recc=nendations for additional investigatiens to obtain th rces. This may required data; e
2.
Evaluations and reconnendatiens pertaining to the propos d d esign criteria; e
3.
A review of the stability and settlenent analysis perfor deternination that the applicant has presented adequata med by the applicant nalysis. A design parameters used in his analysis; e bases to support the h.
An evaluation of stabilization techniques proposed by appli foundation proble=s.
stabili::stion; The COE could be asked to provide reconnendations for cant to solve site 5.
Field trips by COE personnel are necessary to inspect th techniques and equipment.sa=pling and testing of soil and rock, and to ev e site, to observe y of i
( 90-f
- b. ex. wo. 4 res, to As or N/Ob K
- o
t.
ti t
J t t
-2{ubjujnsosv;osuw g w n arvu~ q )
s
(.~2y>s n !aysp)yv.wagtx,aff cJ!MJ l f M M hp./
.M ?
- &>i l wop
- neix imp
,oma.mc pypq >yf wyr. r>r uyaadesd
- ur : '. 'Ay :tp:.gim x.e.zus:::. w.no :- :!ric:s! Svipticy.royem6
..~gysx p
.a. y p.9 ' vs.affe d rs w.pyp r: 73/
g ix.; p-3.772 ~.
etep cl<7: pjwdudde pue ny ! notes C %e/worar yp. m.s owsy/x cryp jo unf egena ur puessy p :3 'v d a vi j o sj,rj p yp fx snp simo 11:in m2 pues,'.m'dn syf jo b.uung svorpejnp e}
monap:j: y::tn 24 ing 3,eriptii en2M2J j
r:.isd-i < py, <~yy.un />>_.usd :i,i>>;;;assi fu.rurgpe: pintige pyf o./
t f.no <w f 7./ sm s>Ae/ px::.i.nVn rff jo punvytop /vnpv> rg
'f
- i k"'tV.'!?
'*/*"5
/PC2.
="'/ w D twu"Itt T
.e
A
~
lle'/'M'/) il
&stSg/r nkhi h k/)BlyS/.h h e*s5'/ f~,,,y m f,, g j h/yrmar'f
/?..
-e.beni fac 9eest<= 1
% pef sis wn i u rare cce 3 wi.c i, ina caae.-
y
'3C llcmen/ 4luc llC bailel.roy /tM$.
l s'at :ci//en;cair Jnel7 si:
> p.,n,a,.e
' concc-sect wlJh /Ac itsidal, ce bmt -re/elec/,.sedless en, s0er s
.w.. r....
sc //ilo. *
- s:nelysd w attlel c c.Xselemah arcI nel per-lEne** ' b su y.~rd r -.
b c m ajorry a lac by l59 144 c'. h it p. h.*:
cI be ltric :<c //ictiscs i', as Cconegce is/y hi.L &ns jso%
<.adeguaey c.
r.: c
.~.rci,as, c o
.re-e.n u r: ht ye= e.. m
.:nci e s,.n. v e:
ru ren....... ; w. or...e.
h.
..o l Buten e-:: /t.:.s > #:9,
. /r u..a.e.y.
a y
f.,~$c 20 /$a. M
( / : // 0,.c. picci.c: J. w rasar:=.a
- sn
co! 2200 p.
c u er* ti; cir::t ejs * : #e'er i. t.. r:-.
. As seh.cr
'*:.ca.e -es.
.gj (2)rc% :-d} th' it, 7 54 8..r 5
/*3 A Co.
gerdeco'
- e re c C* *.
<!: *,: 1. - * /r>
,,;e r lh J.t ft:.*ar;; cic, rre e. gc,..:
dE cr y:
- 'o;* vt 6*
s e
.2
/codor
/ic c/ce:~.~-
- .v '. ~.
Ces:Cr..c%.o ri. ?.cc, t :-r.
? '- -
.a l'orjlel w.
, rs..... '..
//;( dW1,t-assura.cd
.r.
0-
?r. C ei.
e
/1< eatwalig i::: :/retx:
ihe clay layer ascei :: acep.-
s e:..::
a wn.
c/ 4e c/c,.4 el /r: ci-f.
s
)s91/k W $ $-
'Je sff. - fa
- fg
- 14, 'q; d*,
der io:Aa,b'e ociiaen,. :/ t a.: /o, isyae J.a./ oce<< red,..m.
.e o
fic carce;d/rlie). }j /k :.~,r:n:y:.
Xs
- /ey /a,e
>'e :
a.*.'<..
?
be /CC% Sabi'*.frai Sh. dccC<:f per. ' /evel tva.s 5 escui i: c.
/vp c f & C /s y isyce (c/ev. 6tY) cckrc J.iiia- <. c,. i..
l Seca,ud-i.i le'a, yea:ce,'.
7de cce/Scadi/ ol.secc.c/sey ecnyessaoh, l a : / 2 S for DG %,
cosparabic wi/h cley: al /osi le enert-
- co,,<4ey compress;s.t.Is, is ud Ikrefore is oc'eguale k evolumic & settleswns y ]aye id
. S -s a p..C W coa,soika/,c:. a u illir ily;< cA y i.,.. ci S
/AGl/CBYfG Yi1C! /?ffd $U !(Z! $ C l0lf 0f(!.!O cifI" Lad
- Ihe n r ll1C f*CtVjC C
CalUtlclfc Clll? nit {
r,'llc Surebarrjt*
Catbs~r.Y ~' $ ;,;,'t:s':f.s W.* i
~
a,c.ucs e,i, tur,c sci.u <,.N"c,/ja ic,,
an.a.,r c
tuovic! he $e b TNonda7 compresso<><1 anct nc/ h.;a'dici -i s
conse15aheh e/ /lel/ay.
.~
N k
b
+
7 =..
[c:kh'.i Sc///tmla;",.t /.t.t.Q.7ar d "I w?e1" u a
w
- e
/1.*( *f()
fll$fiIf*.!
Y
~,5)
Cf $ a~e /* l%/& CY
/
\\
wouts A6e. ahes Yr.<<i y a l ? a.: lire 2 / r k j,.yce/. ~~si
~
s ype ol st/!kmrW e sb:s.5 inQu!c keconi6ns c.:<rNr: -
~
l w
/ g N
h de ec 'y :</
6po/p,<yicn}::,~.,.ki.
v clay. '4 e
WJin ty:
and doet ^noI s p <.< in /le, reyci::.1.' \\
L g
N
\\
\\u k
'N g
O 8,.e,.,6 i S1,ls,,o 5
' i'
~~
' ~ ~ ~
~,
~/4. magem a.y" y..se...<.nkp,.
h i icca..
s y
- w. t..
pe,/b] :Yc :.? -<, e.
1'Es... cles4i cjco.rl-lrr bus /da) $ rd f,
- i. c..
Jlhi<n, a u.i /.m i,,.;' A. 4,mir, x-il p,;/de J u
.sc.
1
_s
.60illl1 Ur ll
. ffj t $lt9'
- S e />C l~Kll Wit <Af h.orrey $Us C/1er[(, C.pt$'Iot r.,
dec.wsc W
-;;ilieldm-tuas /4J. sT, h,s /,k1).=l / sow,locad.a,.
2.
s NUtheel kg.
nff (*/? /
fg,
Q)2 pf
- M Ot f*
C3 l
W
).
g e
c,,
r-o 1.
- k. T
'\\N i
,N
$.s Q... ' l's 7, i
h "'
'{
,,, \\'.s ? *
. - i s s
\\
\\.
i1 w s p
s
' ' %, s....
s / w,
',\\
9 g
j"~S Y
(,,
^ '
t
\\.
<?
w 7g*
. x(J,) v....
~,
=
%,N,'
q'
/ _
3 y
.~
' [* '
\\
,1
/
A i
,,.n e --
f
~k.
w l*' '
'\\ Nx.
m
[/
z
_a
.2.m s
s W
I e
9 9
$aruWmeM AA h r k.<(
DG D ba LG-L (CG ~l ne. k i%
. ". \\. e ')
y Tb 6 u 6u 4
.o M.a.
l
%q fn M*>
C~A
. 'g,
- ! c.en w.t y
wi.<< k,4'9 i
',?-[
f e
1
.)
b ed T
>.4 +e. e p,ea I
- O EZ M *ges.
- g..;
)
' d.
t I
y 1. __
e v
f e
g 4
- 2 1
3_
r%pt..(.cA ',
o sie 3
3
- i r
't g
i mi i
(
6
.e w e I*
l t
ll e
d '
l l
l
(
i
,a yl V;
p j
d
,Y
.v.
]
k
/
/
s*
/,
e
~
~:
l cao, sng _,.
.r'.
s.
,c t
7 us w
. )s e
(
e r
N, s
/.
s r
Qoa.,. 4%
- 2.s, ta
, f, [Y s.
.n
]
a
.e s
a s
4 N
4 3g Pbu d e. u...' ( 2 L-A s.
,,, - y:,
h v
s y
.m r
.,'k'h'V.
2 e
, h]
-f W; * **
- N
A w-4 y
l l/
1 <
s
)( /
.J, r,\\%.
'c y,, c *.,
I*.
g~
Co :f 1.
e,,,. e ~ *.a v~
s
.i 1
,(
- t.
j
/
a
?-
~r,-
~
g
~
s \\
A CCTJ } '.'f. y
.l~ N
" ~ LM C f.'.C.
'l1.<'ve j = $ 4 )
/
<f
~
j g
.: 3 L
-: w
~ ~,_
y
+
OW.t'.
N%; E.. c.
- o *=. s.. e t,
.*
- s e.-
Ilsh-
".g*
L) x
" /- ! u
{,
g
_ t
- , '/
- 4. p e
y.
y E~~;,,U.ye e'c%e *,
4*.'.. n y. y c '5'
, ' ' s t'%\\ Ls %
- = a.&
. L g,.*
s*k ;
.a y
y y
-r t'. -
o c' '
'~.e.
. e s, m...
- ; c.c... Cs, d v( a
,. W.; ~
s
(
)
l f.i
/
( rW + m..
.y
- .s,.., a n s
m
. b..
,s.
un. :
u c.-
.,.w-er s
a h^
k
'7
-,, e#
- I
=
a S
.j. f.,- '
t.
r
.j
/
y *
.+ ) 4
,s?'
^*
9 Z.o J
y
~,
<r,.
5 8
I' g
g
.O
's
/*,
_.,d+,
of(
(
2 l'
1,
,.. J f * *. G * *.* u
/* ~ ~..
- . p
-r C,TC)#. C pi ( * *dT.hrt g M 'r*.' J'.
== -c,,$4 QP.'# *
. N -1.
/'
- l,
h k*
W
_.,'W n
s
,nn mu.m-l y t
.,.<-.r'j l
\\
?
.V.
y
\\,gk k D.* * **
g y.
[ %,
(,,,24 pc I'4Z*i 9-
,. Il 'd y. -
['
f w+
aa. r v t. n,/.
i
~
+
'),x.
<., /~
- n*'s,y, V s
i^
1
. - f u =., y
'd
'q.
e r*. aw d$ %
y
\\N r
L_
p w
-)
- 0 Y
s,
, P ~-
J -. ~,l g _qy J
.'.r.-
? -4, 4 - /
t' y c#
w y
4 s tv gn, t o.-
fv,.
'- r
.]
+
_p.
ss _
~
f 7
r..
e "
/
p#
./
si 7.
- .m-w.
.?***
cr;
//,$
f* **
f, _f s%
1 // _
o s
~,.
a
?
3
~
u s
%! /
e6 p' '
""% { ' **"Y
-)
ge.
> J*
y' f
".\\ ' h *, "
f y
f jr 9
Y p2
(
~
~ >f. l'.,
,s.. Y
.zw.
7(
- q gj
,s m
-,e 4
t 2
y
.~
s 1
.e -
1.. tyq,r.W
- G' w
,)
4
- 'y}
' w. -f
. f,7 G
' g' t,,**
r M
. h
/
,"^$,
,?
1 wfy~
f
'f s
aJ*,
p e* m s.
x h
g
[,
.,)
r, t:.
.,!" '..w
_as*
r /;r..
..e - ~.
e '
w'i "
,e-
'y L' e -
[
['
4
,, p p ' N
- 8,Y a s\\
- /..'_, f.
4
- 4 "_ ','
.f J / P, '* '
~.
t
~[
_/
~
l'- W'f[ (_ g[k & '
-[
4g 63,r 4
W ff'?l1${7 El,,_ * ^
- q 1 r ___.
9 m
s g
..._7 l IS*
li4.h o4 wechva,e -
9
{
e i
- --.140' -....--
t "D es'6 Gen b8dg 2
J'9 o
70
,h *.
-~
w.-
l 1
5 j.
CG-S k',
v
. d v'c.r Lie a i Sirev.
e ee 2 C, ::
h h,;4.<,.
.i; y C. '.,.. t.
p.Mem. u u,e.
M O
( W...e :::*l. :,, o s n,, :u
.:-)
$om 'coi.d. v) (cid g
c, 2 hs.;
3 iac 6 e, 2
D: b Ib
~ b
- l' O
~
La 0 ?. 4 h: O sS.- e.
r 2.7 k s ',
(rorn Surch Ergc,
=
3 p
5 m-zo = LO n:
- p. $ t.c 1,. : ::. 3 s-
.Z9
- I o
.ec (1) m: zo, v.h'.
Q c re.
c.:.:
e:
8-16c m: E - 4.26 n:
To : 3.:
.,3 c.zs q.
,;,.;g To g, = 4.2 5 T, :
o.to (p
.;4 m: rir, - t.o n:
u Qst : l.61 kr.
- 4.4 k.s f Tohl load clunAg succ.Lacege Toki verl c,st 36% at clq[ey.e 20<.3 Su,ckarege =
?.5 4 h d i
086 kd (kig l.41 kd (%A
- 2.44 k.d 9
O
i M.IsonaI Verkical 5 cf% duc cwder.
(s' aM 3 red edev )
o n
- S tt.7. pd=
o.81 hL coe Acda.1 area.
born Operelioo l h(dg Io3 g ":
- 8) O k c.17 kb J*( = C.z 4
<fg "Ic4 al Ver(c al T.,{f<W junnc) opers,I *cs o.61 k.E d.~7Z k
- - l55 1%
- cla; lager 65 % :
leial ver' ice.! eluss A r. u, s u n.:s.c.
on The a'cese enal i.s assumes t'nai. any cer.seticialidq he? ~_. Ec 3
'c lanced ' q 4ke e.<:.
e-
= d s'c !.9,[c -
ev 41.43 cverbortica (bac.kf. i' ) is a
e Mound:Mm cy ede 6 Iec.1 tael w cy.v ! s uduc. A.se, s it hac.L0 ts,naun. i
- r. n.
.rn h a.;. -
- s. - s e. c d
- :: s. c *.
e s
C. * *f.C 'l M **
- e4 S*,
e e' Ol g,o 0 6 f s' k
1004 C dWe 4 agS%%
i8
- 4 c T>
en b ies.
(. 6 :
in.. i t eue..,icc ; ec s.. c.
(l % nd ) u. ge.,ci 2
fnen c're ch.'c duv., en clasg twgce,ccye.,d im.ii c,< <., c. c c pre.....,
cke.44 surderge lead 3 (LM k5i).
)i*
d
r t
I l'd.
lpkic/r />.tssl l1.sg ltrn <Xb.c.../ by WCk?rj e.~
Ogpe: cl cot:Sc is e
l d _ =
g,_'.
/
I
$~' A Vs l0 f
witcic
- L) = deyer.!::.*--
-.a f.r sft o.s*
fa;.:
/ [* *
.~-r<.:
G * ;~rrr.-
e rv !!!" t. '
,.ur.'o; e r,?::
r
/
y YO 294 l
/TS~c elrryatre nl ccsae/ /a/r ro r dssume 6*O */o a:
I
- A2 /s1'
- ra
/
ier u:** r.I /siets'J's :'.;
e'c 4:n s*. u
.s n.ci s):s j :r.s/
o, o.,. :. 4se e-t
.o re'gurtr..-.::cftre as ccs:.s:idaIr '. ol AZ 6,s.
6 c :;.:r-
.n). :'.: I
- - re
- >=..
/i:.6 cndp h. i:c..c a r <-
rs a
},,
iem
.:e.. u a c..- -
e.r
/ir li:ia.s'ar:,.,. i:
s-ec,,rg,e ie.r
,,e Yr'C/ 4a didG.
^
/
e
sanc/
fas,4e/.se i//c n,en/
m
?$c r'n.I c leitssp V n /
C //Yrntr,.*/ o f /de JW /eyc r aMoiclC t
j kui
&. o / /1e e-lo a4/
, kdi.4 :v/.L.,<. ://, :.i. c. :,-i.
s
.:.i-5p. Q
( #!<ye.1,n// 6y. /..>, : )
0
=
- rt-/4s C A
g
.:lte:: beA.>
AS* j r,.
E.:s,s-taere f
=
- ir... :.
~:
ne..,e,, w ce,,.. -. : r.
i s...- = n Q: c:rrc:t..m /Zcice.,*,. dep. i e.'.?,:n-'
- C. -
C, = 6,rxe t e.e'r.sc.W l'ho :y,c, 3
i.b
~
12.=
.-cn.,.n tk..es-5
=
i
,5 -
6'. O. : ?)
/.. S C. ff, isk.:
s
(/2 M i c.??.*5.'
s.e,c.hv/4 9a..& p<ce'.c s ::.iear...: s i; c o. vary :.<,, c ? s i.... : : J...
- a e scle,a! :co.?,,~ i.% - ave <4,,,, ii.,,.,
u,,,,,,,:..e...,..
'r Co.,:
[:.,;ca, r. <!,'
as
.%:i.gi;a, 4.L.
Er.g. cen..., 4.,
. e..
~ e, r *o *!>:f,.
.?btab.
l.e!. 0$ t'l
?!.
i.i *..
- L.
+.
7s.c isiol,.1,0c.se//4,, :. - a/ o'Ac race / /eyce, a.: :e < a e:
- />y 4 e.,
- r. s y
wes aswnaed 4 noac cacirred c/we9 //e,.i..di ca<> 4ticne: pline c.J
//pc g*bfl*f/ fliC/dlCr build /*,G kW i,- l0 :C il/fts'ft?l /7'fa Surfta r.':
fet
.v:d /dfrcle,c is p:dep<ntfris' d/43 m/ysis-
.---_---_u
- . g I
/
- b EIIemenk b
C a w w {i a h o Ch5 (asgcf e
1 l
I l
l e.
k
- O CC7 (LL-10 Y* )
D um an. s *<.
g C
- 0 ce *> (LL. ic%)
Pea,,,,
+
I
% E leg P 1
log ?
-1
_k.han -
e-
=
c.se e
k*
I10c) ps i
P=
cl/ak :w<:
. : ce
,e
- <vc.n c.
c.-
e s
LL ?
C e ee ;
( u -io )
- c. is o.
e :s
=
e C.cc")
( % s c.,
C. tS
}
3=
SH e,,
r. <,
r.
f e
a t
+
e c-
f
.o f
e DJ C e mN. A of Comdeld.d. bid ks (C.$we t.s-sa)
LL Yg llo
( Cw3v'tc E 6-33) 20*4
( 0.pc 2.5. % )
w
{
ogg;
!! It s 3
l' 0 ~~f s
l e
c47
. iio aw 4
- 2.72
.h.,4e -
r
- -.L --- - -
cco.,y :
,.., a 4,,,.,.c...
1.-....
{. v
,?
c
- c. u.
.r.
p re,. *O CJ*
micsyc..C'
"' C O 7.*
c-
=
0 614 sep es gre,,e*
N
\\
r 6
L. Gu i.t. * (.kg.s,se N (644 4 l,-) in c.
t LS.c,,,.
W.L. h. fc.s 9... c.4e 3 s s
a Gt ( id M d'pe.k.etag.3.c (i;..g;j)O.
.(,J.i}.18gG : i J cc.
1 C 4. 6 WH, eI a h 3 Lye t
1 T F, i
,i J
t y
e
~
~
a) g 3c4kle rr ic.O due CcMci hl d.c.
Clas1 laslc.r*
c.,
c
-r bf.\\ orc ML \\ \\e me4 m e s w re m e s k :
hel( f.ca p cled usher. -M.t #f *b b*/^
I CL%unt I:,ldg t c4 I. ' Med Icac! o 5
'o l E ') -
.l QMu sic.
I t'z):.,c:...c-f=
265
- t, 4
0 00 p 1956 os*
b erg p;.-
$ t' gij g 6.'. (er 1964
- 2.n 1.40 iw e'., s s.
t 1,5 l~lCO 2d e.
s'n/-
- . r.s e,..1
- v. we.wer-.
- e t '.. e e -..:.
Y cc...,. s..,
\\
5 v e c. I = r e.,c.
4,4 <,
n i c. ci 4.
..s
- e.:. -
' d't e ' y '
t on' he gi nh.'.vg c e c.a v. i e e l e-a b reac ** O f=
noc p.
?.90 4 c ec,.
+
g..
4
.:..-i :,,os e,<, so. L.<.c.. 9 e,2 :, f ; s 5v. c.iS_
s g.. ~,
ao4o
.1. e 6.'56.aca s
.-.,3, i7co 172 l
Tr'.9 M,.J e r $.
.c,c. \\ \\ \\ < e. e. O 4 Z,5
- 8.'I.C t-12 0 (cale.ul=4ed) 5 8 8 5.edL *.
J f
1 i
r
-V 7"7 e
t
-.---,n-,
.7-.--.-
tu t
1
.Semdecy coms,esuch.
l
[de oc///emenl rs lecy /imc c.orve er/>b./s Inc c/anaa<e/
carc.
sk ct:c A< r. <
4:ensatec/dr4n
.:ccons'ary c of essi.:n
- c. -
.:acesty ens cid<tsh, Ca, h /z 5,,ah : y /c9.eyau a r A,h-(*I.'
C & - $ ).
S /6 /N/ /d.c4 e/$y laya,
c J26' d
_,,4 ytsp cyca':
f,
=
is p is,o
- 0. O O 6 S'
(;,n.se r
.c:..
C,
=
J4/b!Cl1 d.C/M/"?t: pasco
- b'l s,sN/n 0C - / rea/ ;/at. c.
Jer
. 0s <l Clay with a ku 4 <>.aAch caede'kn/ o!w.-e,-r.y maci,da /,c;:.
Ca 4 e,.s.,
ac,,.<<.e;e.i
- o. cos wq /w C. cod jous T6-5 -- ooodS s
c.cas inca,;,
.00/6 I;,nh
/
- o. o se w,y I. 9h l
0.062 e sai, < c,, i,. y, t
l
[
mia 6. n ->,.M ui es,i9,,i,s.t.,e,c.u~ w ea.i 5
va.s,.i a/ ai.6,a se wc.,, s,,c im p
g.-
k.<a-ni sy_h.
y i
i i
i y
B i
'Drwclen ny queclic&s J. Ligu'c/acdon should be e<pccled A cccur es /le backSil sands
. laome sduraled.
Se/ucelon of jsel/// = ands would a,s e.e Jr. Jeg,,,
wAen /he grec.,iidwa/ee t'ab/c <-des abouc /i= kp el/sc m/uri : arch, cleva/i00 6cC' (4 uie 21-8, &cein9 /cy D& - 28.). Rese,:
absieln 7
1 criteria or data w),i)> suppc</s ch,,aliess 6to as mwaw gravenu =ht
/er:/.
2.
Desi9n c / A'e pc. i 3. <ii, deua/eri,p :plein i.: it o. / cyci. Av major k n di. ; s c/ ) a e 7es,,,.iu-diei All -maler.aa are i,2 Ay d a..,
cann:c/,on w,vh an unn<'y, >9 dscoir/,,n.nus ded.
c / n.a..
i :-r:s,
ond (iL.Seeg,;ap. /!c.tr...//c cer),ng p oo j is res/,ieirti f /,y ;..,,
and punp e/ruc/ure a ea.
Scii per.,&: c'/;ga e 74. ),,.:c,,.,,,,g
/cs; r
linir-akcc'.m 7enpiis Sc;9ure a-is), and ploiki c,:..
..;.i...
(A ute 24-!C) inc2 cave /hel :c,:lis c/ /i: cdc:ct pi;c,.=.c< lii id,,.f 1...
9
. -j=/anL./$/L maIced/-.sc/jacen.- /o. &.cocl.,9 Joeoci n i - :n.. /l.
barr&r.lo /Ac.. inboat cl ccob.) pasive!<<:
/l%n/ve/c ec, c...
.. /. i.'
c/ //is macris/ anc/ & eke'c/ ce 1.:t p<a,a,i,, ) du : ic?. ). <,.;.>.
5elacle da' /et, espec,UI
//c ncevc y c{a4 /kr, i: i. :-
,.- ee.
,,c.
dah kn 70-6, i revic'a, C W [% & w.tx.no.In s
1 FOR 10 AS OF 1i fI 9Cf'Y.S l
19
- 5. Dund9 cocky pond l?//up /le dlbren/iel Ayc/rach heacl afdel,,9
/he 7racedwaler /ra/ woc
/rss //wr 6 fer/, and scosewki cescured by pore pres:ure inaisse and subseguen/ cisiopd&> caused by it:
loado4, 7Ee ra/c c/ tua/cr lex / nse si, ovid ie c*r c:4d
.Surcluar9e 9
i so le con:ide<auy /cs: //>an 9o day.s, A more pe,Jan edi uaiy,,1 l
/htqb/ Mdhe G/s'/sta;Q //c str oy e nj da/a ham /dc apperpr:.:ic purn,
/
fe:4.
A exw.:.n:/ysik h pardchtarA, war, anied sir voek c/,%
above guesle chs.
.5scluo'c all s'essejn c.riieria y dela, anel ca/culaje h b
44,ch suppc<l i nal answer, 4.
Xe is:-ce:epice */.:. /;c. c feen pc:inea. d eieng 4: noe%-n rice c/ /::,n/22: aidpaarp :/ruc/ures. &
'b,cuia*&:. esluna @ ~ :
c'oial grewdwa.cr ih/h.0 cuia:,, he resim:sc a:Ecs4 /ne smclur.cs as a pessIrk calor'( //cwever,,'de iscpachs c!lAC Tard gers:
5 s o /0 kl ol kn ci.I.,;f i:a';u!
(C uks ZA 9 :nd St-to ) i,rbcik l
9 Saeds be/cw lht: Sim:.uir:.. Ikt scils preble (Ce,uic EJ 2i neiIw peca nct cle..syia Alh li:,. is p.caos
/k catkuisk.:n lcb bhl b'ca',
wMh avumed pcs.Mc,cule(l, reduccd hc ten 5 c ciInc li.k.: c..rre i
c./ ihl/w l,.
'/s. IE calca/ dis.: k, & spac,,y and pot,s.n,. kg el & ax//s ascomen /hsh reducci 4/a/ J5' is 'frlcd 'l*"1 he en /ia: lencyin ci ti.c sometures. Claes 15; /Ae em siwe el supp a:..:
ric airitima, pr:cea.+ a,.pr;...p daL a:ci c.s.cutaJo,,e, anct repos,J.ch wells acce<dirfitj. Ecluar os -ic supper!..r.) <bla se assuad 6adou.n e/wabob ol /Ac liou souree elin50 (sleI e/cvahon ),
lhe igad iner luse. beford Mc inscrcrj.Jwwits,.:nd eshblsh an ope < a/od9 waler k.cl t.viih,,'u l.se in ercup/c, a e11s.
s
2.
Sller Psek sb-2.on.
Sal.ibcie y cNs91 cnlenL
,l$r o$//er pact t.uas /;o/ rebrenc<c/ w)iA ovceici con,c/,a,,cc insur s/ade-ol- /de-atJ p //A
?wele Ads 7Ec clccgn si,d fai:egece.
inslutaledi e/ /4,6 lib yeek must psen/ ren, w a/ Anc =c>,,ci
& sin,$am /4e insala nalen.h :nd o/iss '/e/y preaer.- p,y :-:
clewlopon7 4 lh caeli s, penei.
$. ifa/c el M /*-
we / i-iic_.
/Q r;;e e - at..ee a<<.. 5,.
s/scuici le re-eyatua.ra ut,dg i::c:: yce r ee.. cia la. /;e e e.
da/a it<.s> lhe puwp lesIs i7; 9m de :u i.. e.
d ),ea c.vells.
Y Nr
,b area weHs
-er. a r.:e 59 c 2,.:
D as !!b
(,L}kiCe% k$IE 8$ffo' 9 f.%'b lei 3*$
J/*.b hj.*4r y
O
- kui cltwst.
z a
I li
- }
I l
i d
24 2 Ma a,-u:,,
Goundwa/e, lave /.
Maa,,,a rouridwJe< /~/ uas e:la44:45 g
.a/ elevaJaan 6in iad.<'s appears /0 conesp<xici la is
/<.y c,*
e
/he 4act Ai/.: ranch 2c/ cia /de olere/ 9enenlo-loo ^.*e!<,p. He
/op a/ /Ae r;alord sanot appe.<:. /c le aJ ek ei,,n 6e e.
e./ AnaI.,/ aciI Mcda!.
l 62:is
/
7Ec soirce ofrecharg: la/hcbeckSi/:ssi cie:r;_- si,pe:r ja le Arnoled /o /he & ira c/ fiar :er.de userpop -i,vch, citati$li,) t<,.r:e ibide. csix/ ire 2s skies in.. rey:t::.
anc/
0'idkuc<<c kr Weli PC-5C (4 J: EJ *:, u:c 'ck:
7E: cem:
9 a rec! rage bca,carj cn he icoIn :Ec :/ t's.t cc.
, e a,
/o lhe cc o t..h p, c. 5.: r: a:c. p leares.. d se<. /.. ::
a y
.a
- n: c/ uburi>:- :/ h Ec. /Tc cinchi r e. 'p,,.... i PC to es ri)cacured is ecscrve4 e.eca pt 5
,re..
sm:w drwch...e
.:r.: c::.er. s. ca<..e
- .. - r :s.:,x (E ic 24.,a ).
p f.
Pni/ campaenv:s i 4 re, geca,
.<,a.c.
.cvc.s
,.ci.:.....-
pcnd lli/ary rr y ce ob:cureo c/ pu: pr. :u... c
.. :, si.e l
,:ab.cgexn/ cAsbpair, ;, at a resuis c- /se rur:r.vge ir. ;; ]..
/?. sin.// <dlbrei:.i l r:ydraulac Accco' cujos r.s..,..
r.;;
surlue and li.c grouirtwIcr ths/doni.y ec..,.,h p..
. i. a.y.
.4 /Le errol ol a m./bmdeu> c.;l ri.c pcros., sci.e seerAa..
.:plern d'unry phn/ oper.irosi, de d$renhai /rpriwiec I:rael wrxdd bc dzt:/ 3* /Ec! ( c t van si 617 iry,..}s : ice 4 395'), and /Ae tale oltoa/er /nelnn lo /k n?an. <~ syanr-water /en/ ucwid be Con:dcriisly pirek< fimn' So doya i
i t.
3.
Tic W a7e Vcap/A is,lArsap,0: su4<<a/ :uo' wuh l]yedcu/,i cc.necdrn /r, s'Ac }&cib// sur.cl Ca/,frali<>ii cl A.//'ucia.. Ec.en. ie c.I;J.,.
t The it yci. e e,ily:i: lo de' a r. :. per,... - s /. ly ":ay w e e u ex =:ve. -
by /dc ://a.: e-Ac wren.rp.: icacl,h. 4 mur.:p y v ~c. w p.
/de.4.n:m,'ss's,'/y el rk ::cpape,0c-p 4.:
u.cuW,4 loc se' /crm..:v' kw,, / : puny. 'r:s. 7E 4.n:w E.s.e*'t
- m *cr.. /
g n / ' w h.en. $ ~
}y Acci: st</odifes' /..bihd is sicu.. 6 5:
l i E.s..ep/i>, Jr.m:/a;c m s ce.c fdc e.,
a 20 -icci aveng:
- e. -
r;o! as.:.or s'/ lA-// day.
permcnolo
,1 19a/c of de/c. levcl eb:k.
Ejuz.!, ?.o 2 (p yc 24 i) yiite':.
9 easy:2c.$.: e'< c cu r, c)rou,x Imlee ihe/ nss k o!Ae m.:..n,,.,:. 9< cure.,,.ee /c.</. c/c:.u;.-
6/0 7E: ln::. !c clays, s's L's:::/ se c :i.7, :n=.c> a.si::. :
r e.b: 9n cellenk,
~
% XLe Ye/so'A.
/Tte.se.4.,:AA,'g S....*.a
.: <eie.ed, d-r y
vo:d e.Ah
-J ucre,c d. :,..:e a-A.;,:e:.r.- p,;c x.c >.,
yrk/ttV /rX'?.'.':2* h.h :.b'/???/ q ir$ 4..
h? f/ 0 - 55.5.*.' {.,
i:,
l l
)
+
5 l
24 b.
?cem snen/ D<wa la..;<> tPD).2ce-b_An.p,4g_fq/_s.
PD-20 A i,,.o,,y ]<s_l.
Deng peurp es/ chcinLn wati PD-3, cic /eci dos, l
piny weit sod aojecen/ /a cahp pcod, indcued i
.::rlead, des a c' a.
PD-S cAdno/m k/c.: reeA u p douartet;, cac>bn9 pa.c/, rior dc/ PD-S ins:aa'e a leer,er lounghiy, imperdeecic. ca./o. &co<e ?y ejai.;
- bon, PD-$ a cI ccoyk.h dkia Si, PD-r :da.a./
be inc?actrei,l!r reweb.
P O - /. S. s. h a;.f i;"l,E s /.
e 06:<tva4.,> well G-1 irErede:; :p;i. < ' iu.A bounc/acy ricri~ cl/a. poiy wet /.
.; 5 Lo,, s _ Dem4ng S s/en.
y
~
dea' [$ basccl d}
DcS.(jn c [ [EC perrr Snent $ c'.,.) Ur
- Ij t.g cn 4we ws.gr
- b..;. p O i _m.. e),.,-ol.,
a c t,,. n a, y.3
.i j ; j
,,oe,..s sce
.e y,,. i., 2.,..s.,1.
_...s
,. m,, &, i,,,,
i.;g1
- a. <,,J...... e.ci,,1n#ri ea-n, ene o )
3y.3 e
} ij ';
Orem Oc cool.$ penel 6 redr.cha 4o +ke in+ ate
.' - j ",e {
pvwp sleucivre area.
' 'Ac c c k v,. cla4a :s prewe-
?;
anel s
j "j;,*j
% e p.A.g C.'a.4 (2 )., n not sJf.c<nii3 cle!.1<ci j
Ao rev.eu IM 0;a.g.
_b 4G:molce We.O ~Ces.m,h,
The des f prese.i ladsch places Yhc Mecepler twelh along His landwarel e.ile a[ 4ke iAlste snel p v.., y i
1 C
druc.lvreS, C,alcv hn.I.o'nt, ho e d am&4c 4 L4. m: I a
's
.,1 4.:
C's. s 4o 4 Ls. s n4 uce t c-e tue\\\\. redueeci %.c 5; A
oh 2
b.4caust. oh nett., dtat.ber'*,
N l'topc,ce.$
8
~ ~. -
g4 c $ llt.C
% nch U.9oee:
'lA ~ % anel "le *
- G.i nr.c.csic.
L r.
f f
s C%
b 'hD lD 'CO m b?
rCma a ess.5 f % euI % s'.C'.
c cno a k
/
w i
y((
Ek e<,c
&cutAvreL.
Ikt. C r o**\\ * ".Af *' o *~-
Sc. t '. ~y e -. ~.,;
r r
-}
3 0 v L
d N
-t hroi.n,h Ofst. *MrucIr rG doce, vie l 2 o re" v
j a r d
g w at
\\".c "F h,
d % L*.- Ob&
4.'*C lu dtf-
>**e-
- '4 c
O d c @ rO*d'f
%~;i' J" ~ C '~
TC6yC Wat s'$ r\\ C g
j.;
rec A the e, h c c-e si,- - < =,
w.
z -(:,.; {. %
.. c 4* f jt c N r t.ic* - r '.
$i
- p&+ 6 b.c ows E kA. M r tacEvr(e.,
Je l
z s a>
('
[,
i f 3,.
St.r ve af. a S ig n.
- r. a c.*
Cole b, 'S'nt..; 5 i - hea 2
O' {. =5
.j j t,vells ce tv cy ccl Sc, ' n'.cr d N tr.*c'c e;. - 'N g.,
.,.s.
=2
.~.3 v r as t 'l. r.E cf(. ".
throveh i
a 1
5i s, f 1 a:.
..acecn*r;. ce G
7
,4 s
t r
E 5 0 k crott St.c.hei I
+ tra ICr.e d 's.
c*
t.v I
J b u s.-
o 1
j
$kC l$
86 fcC TC VCC c
- / C, (9-g--
, 3-
,.j ; y _g spac.uc, ct g.t. wells nuy resuN,n ; e,s;,, er
'i c
IG
< as peac' s ecer.:.
j o.ns pa s~. c i 3~1 i.m.
.. ~. :e e.
)
1
$r Q$ 0
'4 S
d.* *e s
Arc:. Mc.its.
(or I
grda w e,1 =.
-.e p.
n he.,
- ir,4 rCr vire o 6
removc Yd. C.%h aw +4 o tVark.*,C
- a> 7:4r 7s 3 ~[
M*)daqs,
.,f
.A
- .=
b
-o C
- P e 3 -
G
%e O
- ~'
\\
Well T.ksic, h n presente={
Q, Gr d.% Vt. o
% s-sis -s temake., awa Gr.~Ls, G..
e 2
Q=
- k. x
( H _ py )
,y,3 p,33 7.L w u,.e -
y :- s eo C.
s\\.t \\. q n dtskanet:
L
!60 26
-ec as scurce k =. 3 )
'/4
= max 3
per.w..... 3 M = 41 Cw I
egocI e cv 67 7 c;u cies 6ho r
h, :
16 Cs
' cperal., elev 5 % -
- e. t a eie; f' :
1"Cduc c k 'o g Y3 r Conc. % r+ieb. t e t 33 JCO b (d
- 15*) @
k7 31 0*[d ci g 7 4 6 y.-
?. ( s o C s 3 ga 4 e E.'
kT ld I _
pe M al los AA
+50 i
7y e 4
3 p a c..y.,
s s% <.
2o wei,.
=
l A
$J'I
- lh )inI
". 4 6
..\\
/go
^
cag z (isoi s t.
u 2c ~;.-%
- a. -
21.1 />
llea<l L e < > u.
D/s. [ w e ii.,
wb c Q~- M y-0 Ah,
- Q, k a_
t,% %4 4ms k a1 hh rs C.1 5 L 6,
IV-8 4=, p l4 8) y i
I
g, I
c,a '
b_
g,A 15 0.a 1440 "L L
ti i
ch
=
3 li
- > n Ycy 1At LS 2tt o. M r.
Ah, =
6.7 C.
Ah, =
- 7. o C.
3aucl 4W
- nal s4 die
$r ovnc6 d<e level es.,...
g m
ch Ik w4tts th al e ICw al e rs 6 01.7 i
h, 6 v aker.
\\ V * *'
iS, t* c" ver*.
se 9 ('ce 2nd 4k
%Ich c(tvMar "
c c e,r.4 M.,
k
- 15 0 agm e
6pSC'9,'Jeard
- si k 4 DV mC(f C
- tucit *a
("Cl'M e s ik v ri c k e t. ". C '..
.I
.Cf fau t. 'A ' ey4 g( & n g-t l'g
$ttgn..it t a '
3 4 f m.
a.; ts. C r.
It 4k clramelown M h...s -lu
.,cis s enu.4
's c 6.O t j
below N.
opn4i, leeci e t.v. 4 i,..
%S.
or l
1
\\.g.' amar s Q y,,,
Inc above. an 3 s
i,
.c.-,
.g Y.M,
Q ygg,g
- be cg ~,,,.,,,.(
CA\\06cg 4'AC 4CC s%
... s; 4*I 4 'M t',c t
(.M att M e u duo f'.... *....
g r,.,
2!@
~q t;
PC*/tsi e n 3tc :
1
(;
.r.
e.
, 37s
,An j jy6 Cs - *i 9 a. c.m
%3..;-. 4 3.-r r -
C i d u s, a 4
n.; 3,-
M3Jil (i
- k. 39 L 4,
ze C.
r9 e cI..y
's to C.
r** s o.e.
.?.
o
.r 7
- f j
{f Q.z?.4 9 i
A, S.s k
(
$3: cfE R> m ure,ty T
,A
>sJ---
44---
wr _-.
-4
-A1.
-n-4--.
n 1
A l-e O
M&
C11 teIn 35 mreseO4W'cf
~
r i
Tlsl N/elum e
- 7.2 Y l O c)al i
k O
j g
g h 22 we3 s 3.g..;
z2 a
nu, _,
i i
S
- l N
f Q(
{$ 10
& lO S
p ie
\\e u
,a.
k 4
i I
t I
b
)
s i
I
.., ~, ~ ~.,-
,,,..., u,.,, ~ -. -
y c
g.
f 24 c QUce 2/4rnal.ds In Amers and l/u/ a?es&s A act.4 the p<w p
- Jet l cr.cla9 y,,ps us,o, c
/...} ap h a :<a:4/- Jn i
yswu,,. we!/ po i/pimpt, o
pxtirage w/m si nel,pu,..p 4, /une lie adu~;.e /a. '
e.
el /Aepany J., /he dboc//Jearc//.
& p.y isr:> ix.91.- u it.*.
- 2. r -
.a.v.t-n n. /T uar:, e.
e ie! c/ ;
3.. ep - ru-ra : c c pu' t
.' ; 6 *
- G ' * **
/
u ct/ slee:.' na i tc / u.ig n.c c A,eg m.i., -o..y o+ -1.v :'. i.
/A*2 Q. ('s,c firn'r:'**
f A.
Zing t.
cliging*? to=
- 'gSta,/,,
t.
F
+0 ht'
'/d t'." f
}*g /p,,
,. j, / i,...ft y g h o'o l}p! l,'fg,-g* gg*
g *;* *i l 6:nd is ar; & ~ fi*c p;.r.op lccli. 6)p he... 9 ~/., i,. '..
relal.m' s%w n ! 4.e $//c p u.<.: :: ?::.
r <c ::
& h/:rt.. - *a
- y. t. u' bl* ts'.
s
- l l
A b.
0, uy pu.t.d,s.,in shovi.t he 'oaud en we s i :._
cgr e e, l v. c.u-#.
&ncl oc. She Wa n t sctcen cp s n.i t;3 i
e
,e 4
..l;ngo'.be, hi Nr -mhw[A[
- w. 4 h 4 y d. & rn'. '..
"; 3. - - <-
/
oe T
lee N es
- 7. b (C%
D sa ) mag e.ek h gre.EL: ( el 8 3
I
(
k TC%IridI mcs" *2 *
- k Afv.*"
+i4*
WLY svi S w.' t at. m.ge' C
A g
r-M el ICSS w. 4 *a n-M.
k. N'.
Ihc k,i IIer pck
'%' cN ic' A
- c de.c nre.
~
n
~
s as aa \\.ac. in iA q es b-3
..~ ~vy 4 -e.
- e.
c >~.
h*NI S e.p k 8 G'.'N' e '; %.
S m as. w...
s.no cc<.,,. -
cf k c.sch2rr;e Tw, as -..
Sc6 44 EO pa a,1. pc, en. i. i. n.
O.-
.1b o at3...- :.;,. p i
b c) g, e - a n ci An aver. c
'*4c.c' c cs-e. ?
e*
C T. '. 7,
.. O r -;
r CNs \\ \\a re.'\\ 0 6 %vh >cd sc d'%L t..er t :- in A *.'.
4
';t a rs.
Desq., cr..e..a W..J.n uht.v.<A de
- 54. : cv.t..- 4 r.-
%b.~evs: 1-s e. '.i ac sc;. e.*
4 b
one e e.se i
i O
i i
i I
s l.
e
(
, Lag a.
4wa A%
ea4+e A 4 ehc4
- a 2
44e 4
4 mi Jr-GR*-A-.h m.
4 M-4..-364 44.-
a A a h+Ur&nqu4.& 4 i.ete-.4Ja+4, h+L L4*N-e.44-h+5 M i w-a 4
D ad d
't 9
.O E 5
i, 5
9 I
i-I I
4 j-1 h
lA C
&/e& Nol/s as yo Isseder onl S &
y 9
f 1
hG&ts.
.$ skou
- h f)>'efb:C /.&"/Of?/ Wlf*/*j/** /:
- g. o In//s re/+d,A.y acs m ' une :n.#isos sr. i..:'s, 71;c o
/dlek & pav.~f Obeh!!!: leer CCr:na?r:d 10 &'e!*j:U.
4 h
t
}
i i
i -
I r
1 1,
t,
l 1
s 2
l l
1-4 4
/
T h
l I
i i
n e
i I-1 l
i i
i g
i i
c J
F
]
M'
..r....,-.
~.., ~.,..,.,., -
- ~ ~ -
z.4 y.
och ecy ol' ac peop:.cc/ permorc-hva/<<<.)?.;isLa.
71c p
in m.,,n /.,n :,7 /Ac 77cu v/aler /eue/ unc./4 /Ac eie
. ile
.co Na/ 17tatiter bach!IH ri2 ~ce...,
t(c/tav an asbb4ileo' /bhll arc MCl Ca}) h Cl b /!rvr r'* {r-b;c' O 'E /K /.t' a
e**
ien do,.co:4/ai.
I
/$.s' c/lDwerf CCqn d!.Tf/y.** ~ c!C RC
- reror *f * < / 3pjCrAJ rs-l tlC l.*Carsco: :*
s -. f.*.,
.., /-.*i
.. u ~' *
~*
C': r /;fl CUjs).fr
- 1 A f.
/ Ci*.r.
5 r*.. '#r. ***
- ?*
A O .
?:. c..<*
Ac /cr9., o/ /;<c ciu E
% is ju:il0:' dx cau.i4.': elAr'si 44 '
i
- / ar A4ke s/ruc4are elbAJ/j <sLie'/s
- eep ;e L,:,4 /1< l;;;
[..
c///k.n/w al :a<w/
,Jd~ e pW icn'.
i
- a
. <c i..~ -
l
[
ac//s, o /;icic ct*4<.t;*
ani / in :A n.;'." r c & 4 -l in/. /a.n,.:: --
/
l e.
,?l: }
2n..lyds v,1 seccapan,..y e5.,.nWeiic r.e zisp ri u c,: s -c.- i:
?
.f
,;mid bc cosacts:*rs/tr' ic<.4wis/ c* ' /Je iElaxt &no -ws, as:c' a f
.rpei.y :l ED.kel fouri, arti: woud i. :... </;,. > : r': i.ca..,
At //00' anc! me~4s/.
- n.. <> v'r ? 'A * 'l'<c.no i ra:.'..c
/c~...reJ<.a, h ',% '.
//c /r7tresj.hr;rn: liu i;.:' e e o yos. <...
<e. :sc-..
e....u e
)y ss:uid:l cc.:n7e ;. A.
shi>*No.usic, 2n.,.res a,: -
j b 'j h.
tric)ti/c wt dqree c:.' pes..<.a.* - tuoIA ~ in c:<l.;'l
~
or: ww.es kt p a n cl 4oll maderial alory ll. nerJL 6aa sl ILt. Cahy pc:ri
~Nk4
/
(cicss-set ren A-A,5 vM ZJ t ea' U 2). Groon.we,*er mewund 7
d4roesjs /A4 arca msy reguei acicOreba/ iir/recep/ce 2,,d rewac we //6.
i
\\
T F
c
1 2d /
Wh.h he dewde,q sy:kw :.ncJef nne r:c ekc/c.,-
?.
.'> e XNa a a n.ccc: 4 J,- ( A r t,ar b u r d <, h e c
,,,c.r. /
by Cbkr/cAron 4t:cl/ ( -) )
bj?C Cretall !ld:T=
o r' ry c : s,a'er."
~
/
/
===*
Zsrfl 3lutr/ /Fri;t.si ital /s /* *, +~ /;C t' lffs: d/ */t. i'fr/.
<f *.
q
.e*
f,,
/~'f!albe et FCCkary: 4lce lC C,,C:n Ja c 'r*
C.4 us- ~: 6.C ts
- f k*$
/'
4 nwr.ruy kove ::ine er r*-
.s,.,
ra pw:,,..c
- 9. < ;
\\
/f
.ss**
'f Cr ti15 C)&ritsc-e is cc).
s,:: As:st.'s. s :s-.i..~. s:e.i : e i.:s ~~
1 bh
- l wele- /Ar=a9 h acco..:o.r:evde14: :r. : :.
.'1:..'s; i. a '
e o
kk ecstd hs1. :l ra g eo;.:,,L.,.e, laval t<.;c. ic-cc.<
..
- r s.-
c![ec i :I *h C.ccio. - po,d s h.c h.ce.: c c.*
!a-t'* :*ew <.
J 1
3
- \\
a
\\
l i
Serviie W ate-st Lee Pile 1.rr,l Q v e l <. a -
.. 1.
A yehhin.q revico of Ue pro,, cud pde v7rero spie-
,cr 'ac norm wati al N serviu. water dn.c 4 ec.Ada.t..s 4kc :.p' ~ 6 ;nade,,y,.c.
v
~
%o sepp ert N ruguirid lecet./r..
Tne i,/,c, tea,,;fe,.......
u a... t ic C,,
3 L.!
7 c..,:.e: n. g... Mc.ne. 24
..... A 2 ' r **
- 6.
muscia anahpi, was A dela. icd pile desi9, bae d vpc Jeailacle e ct. c =4 = s r. c o. <: es ce.c :. c a
e ih Order k Wre k cc k tw d' g EVNJ tt C hnc ys*Cpt;er.
{'.c Sq Fe d " '.' f r's C
piese b lO3d ICSkina, et es't p. 4.
J 4
5 l
i C9Cn$,.m
. a a Il m n,la i dia h r te,,
Ir-l i
L
,p-
1 bevic'e
\\ Ale.lcr Meuc.lu re Tilc Lyyor b T e.
"Cr4h Wall c'(
[.
k.c o ce.:cI lor n.
h
d Serve <c w se s teut a r c ts p\\anned -i o b
.ee hc\\ b p.;tes. egian at l.a\\
escaust 7,
g e(
Sk.s. idclery e compacl,h ci 4,.c. hae c,'; b w.a4eci l.
"e. e d
i ebl loaa b be evype<ked c.t fr.: 7.es is 2es 16eo loc s. ec C O. <...
~
fi pe< p.le :,
i6
- p. tes.
the pitc5 Ac c.:
- f. ;rc e.'.nce.
- o. : -
E.ic bac kiitt n oke.41, be drivce
. i a. c)laa. b11
- 2. Aliou.bie l e ge.. e..
s'e r t ico, di-pi <.c a.ce.e s :( the ; r:de. :. -,..
c. :.
'c c Srn.u Jnet 4herc[e rc ea 5 6 w,..i., bests s,,cg. d cc
- c..: s. p g i, alce,
A N sk.h neove r.
4,.e c.anh a vr.. ice.U,.
Cce.+ir eci s....c e c..+ ::
- e. e P
e swo (c cre;ce
+k.e sc u se ~.r,..:e d. le <..,...
s3<.
.. o:..
- r. e dou,n de.$ (ney.+.Je s k..s - c i. 4,e
, c.o v:J c c u e.e p a io..q 4 m.
pi.e s,. : -
tr.c-ias.A3 N
- lead, 4 'r.c pile. TJew. e.e.u; c.:aci b a ia..:c ar.
on g.n [es'- cm scetcyce, e.g drv..; he pi.c ie*e u.a. cp.a + 4.; 6.
site :si.iaric a!ccq b..c g.3,..
u..
c,
. hc u
no accurnul24 w.e.
7eceu dc.c;n u.asic' ee a pein-her 3 p;te(p. 4.
. r. c ;;.. c n7...e hea< 3 vale 4 q)acias fill
[',t.,,, rec,. cli %;ia.ng ecJe.,5 e c, s
cy:. ice u.a io hC.
9.
H o pucI cles,a n.
3 x: p.In ar:,o ce :es.y.c:.
3,.c ansuco es oe4limd en Ac I 9%.
A loaci 4c51 ci a
- re.. poe
.s 1 c, t.c conducted AIle-,+g & qu.Selin,s el Astm ci o 43 Nc. etcoc.,.-
has 6n s's.m. Hed lo cla4c.
J.
ecIsteIed C!fsich. ~Yht Clf.! ail C[r u.i.'.c) cn be 0 % (6 M ande t '(%
gvec e
.3 7empeud pile weeld Ice enc. [ t c6-e%:, wk.<.h 7eWides a cress of ab
.,4
- c. b y,e M I.
Lainx
+k< propewel
$ccl.. Aa i are a TT
'.l r
I
,. '.., _ v
,.s.. / -
s s-
.1
,T s
s s,.
\\,
N. -
g\\
,s
(
s 3
- g
, /g (N
s hi.,
}.'
i j
s
.. a n
- u.,.
5 i \\>
s'.
y - c' s
n
',._.s.
IcacNg d p /,' p ;I c, di,, cein),J, y,c,f, g 4 yg_
1CO ns
~
s
... oI pe.p.le becc.c4 17.,5
{}
"Q,, c;,, g
,e y,.g s[ g y
N Ses.
\\(.v s i
s 1
s s
\\,_s i
8.,
~.7, Q'
3 tp.
A pcINYatsj be
. gl 5
.),u g g
,y r
yde s, 7eh,\\
L s
eher'dymics o warraw(.y to c}.,Jg,,,,,g ge er 5
hen
. I. L.
of cordwcl..j :.lcae led f I 2 'le(,I p, le,*'.jn y,[r y,,,j.,
Ye65'd{.') c( a pile tjslem al4.g.%er.
%c,n[ord.. ;,
b y
o.
as g,,/r, 'er,g,,cl,,, g, g,,,,,;.,., g, ;.,
carece.ec perci ).tes g
tnd*ci.lc % ~3 U.ce piick' u;c,Id net o e,,, c, lo' s.,,g,,,,
.,4,,,, c,.,.;,
a..
perped.'et e p,le load es it,e ne ed s d es,p c
- m. /,h... i.c ; s.
ikt s
'T
/.a. led @ eel h.on Ev l u l,,3;,
7;,e ug,;;4,c.qn;g g an s
s i AclLi elv al' pier ( peccle. ! cci q,,,,,., J, ;l'3 p se)
,g m
s.. -
- e...
s m
O Wc kg f h, l(' c.
\\'
k ',, gdeaiO M.<rq w tc.i 't id,g.;
\\:
d e;' * *,c cI J.,[
,g g
S ggf
,.h* $ 3
\\
s t,s,
-Q
, 'M N C M 5 2. ted her L. w res 2 f.
(s'.'
%: 1
. s. w er, ;
'* s ' \\
t( Y****$.3 Y **'t ( N e.
D ( Cy b,
c\\
C-
"~
ca. e ' ar%,
i f,..... y,fp% im ire = of k.p E 3 y o*'s c.7 c) >
g
..s-o
- 84 7 C D '7(t.' f acci h g{,((q, g gyg,,
.t.'C
.e s
g,,,g,.,
g,,
\\
~ B\\C. h Yr bf e T, s' [
\\
t we f'
s'c c,,o,i+,..a a..:..i..,, 4 :. /
.,c 3
g ?\\'
,giag5'E v
I penphical arts s -gn fa.i TT Q O 22 h I
',s s
y
\\
i i
p
'v s -
g h
w
- ,\\
\\
,o m
- \\*
35 g
tw I
'I v.
y t
., Pt 4I
'98
(
\\(4 g
y j
t I
"h
\\
@M
\\
,=
'I, e
\\
t I; 4 i
-e*h I
p 4
l.
i,
. g ',..
T 4.
is i
%*% N.'
I'
.~
Q
= { wrJ. A > e C,A C.. - 6 (i)(9) ca9 !.2. ( c.6 1. W 22 f.'
c.s r.s Q=
6 6.c4 le n s e
L r.e.
n ow.,L ie load s ar. idelv. ded p.Er
.s epv e.
Q.
=
CVC.s.
C.S. - fad e,.[ L.',. > 2.
wrece I
23 Jes
+.s. s ia <..s. e.
Qa t
1 U: A co w.. h. a r oy4 A
)
m ccr49 3
i
.: cree 4 A [';,c...
=c6 wh 2
Os
- O h esk
{cig'..:I\\c,
..r4:
4s:
7 D L < i; ( '. )(4'6)
- 4%
2.'
s 4
a C. 6 '
O.=. !,[ ( n i.')
Id. g z i,.,,
b.de..
s s
- _ a...
Q., =
c.s.c a - 9.u. 4 3.,z
- 2 4 L.,.,
Q.
12 Los p,p.i,_
k I
4 l
-w
m r
m an
+
a a.
,y g
^,
)
n
+.,
e e
4
,i p,
w,
..x.
.~ /
/
% nidceelha/ 24./a ii very gene.aAred aid is in/ena: cn/y 7
p:/.m u-ry rericht ol pc, c:=/ pales.
t%e alues A-so.e
.. -. 3 s o/ /Ac sc.h pra<>>c/ers ' wer: c Adtal it.:w sp, cca:.;y:
4 ne' he st~:ulls cl ic:b. an :m.c.e hv/eria/.
/TL.cnal &s y
pc,Ms hu/ /Jal lAe frpe::cpas.e: :: ino4ce/r/ 4..<+>.<. 4e serie~. ~, : ri:
nai }c ade'guzi.: whes. in,ce ine.g.,;:..or.:. s, ans/ redse wcasrict snod $ca Ac... :rAca/c' Ac bOc,.icc prior Joy Ic.v' /c:'.
e>
7.
[oncfc.iel:.
inkn. duce,::eehin.a.j
'ia sc.;i: per.ye,e: :sc so in,/4$se.:/ /ce d e h a...
.~e... c '
/h yespc:c:/ po le sys4r:
a;s Easeen
,& 2ns/ys.>
i ap.ea' are 9es.cr.,. -. d l.,
ine a
.c.
,e.ac.
y c,:
woin i /Ac pen.:ad iE.c.a...
a /w<. y. i..:,n.p ;. c., y. te :, : <<.
A supe,/ /4c. nce+wi :I he :<.7me u<.ici : n<:.< is p <. :
skcec/ ci
- a ni/c'ni.-..e): prov>Ucc/.
ll/Aryvr pec/e# ist: prie: 'p' eh. '
> <c uuc/ //e cai;i.e. i.c,. ;/ ra pail />:6 ' <ic ic.ww...c..: n i.s..c, os l
/sycr mwcai:
wA.cA wou/c/ cLc/c,..:s a < ecass a/ii.:. is:c....:.'. '
eccen 4lc.J..
/
4[(St#*h4 188
- . M.
.b
+
f*.= A e i s~J' 3 F
- E
- 9 e
/*d #4
/;
e.
_t bb69 JY E* 6 e' So sC l V.a1 ce e Ad /3 A 'l~r o.r*l.
T
. lL.,
2 27 K3y 1980 Mr. Otto, I am sending completed analyses of Scrated Water Tae.ks, Soil Structure Interaction Analyses, and 1*nderpinning of Auxiliary Building. Also included is typed sheets of previous analyses of Deuatering System, Diesel Gener tor Building, and Service Water Structure.
A more c.'mprehensive analysis of the underpinning of the auxiliary building was accampted but contractor's proposal is not suf ficiently detailed to date.
Interim Raport S states that this undarpinning shall he addressed in subsequent reports. A copy of the chapteJ cn underpinning froc Foundation Engineering Handbook is included.
I c.njoyed this assignment and working with you and your staff. If you need any assistan,ce please don't hesit te to call.
Thank 'fou, WILLIS WALKER s
e S
e h
e Cor/ seek,a.w.I2.
ren n.Is.E//#? Fe L
/. 1-
..y l
-~
o DE;.'A1 r.F.IZ-QUF.37 ION S 1.
Lfquefaction should be expected to occur as the backfill sands become saturated. Saturation of backfill sands would appear to begin when the preundwater table rises :bove the top of the natural sands, elevation g;;,,(Fi;ure 24-8, bering log D -25).
Present design criteria or data which scpports elevation 610 as maxieue groundwatsr levtl.
2.
Design of the permanent dewatering syste: is based upon two =ajor findings:
(1) The granular backfill caterials are in hydraulic cen-nection with an underlying discontinuous body of natural sand, and (2) Seepage from the cooling pond is re'stricted to the intake and pu=p structure area.
Soil profiles (Figure 24-2), pumping test time-drawdown graphs (Ticure 2a-14), and plotted cones of influence (Figure 24-15) indicate that south of the diesel generator building the plant fill material adjacent to the cooling pond is not an effective
~
barrier to the inflow of cooling pond water. Reevaluate the petmeability of this material and the effect on the permanent devatering systet.
Include data, especially the recovery data fro = PD-3 and complete data from PD-5, for review.
3.
During cooling pond filling the differential hydraulic head af fecting
[
the groundvater level was less than 6, feet, and somewhat obs, cured.te t
' pore pressure increase and subsequent dissipation caused by the sur-
- r chaFTE~1Eadl?.c. The race of water level rise should be expected to be
(
considerably less than 90 days. A_por,e peptinent analysis might involve g
utilizing the recovery data fro the appropriate pump tests. A new
(
analy. sis. is particularly warranted in view of,the_abcVe questions.
4 Include all de, sign criteria, data, and calculations which support final
_ answer.
l 4.
The interceptor wells havo been positiened along the northern side of the intake and pump structures. The calculations estimating the total groundwater inflow within the response indicate the structures serve as a positive cutoff. Howeve'r, the isopachs of the sand (Eigures 24-9) and 24-10) indicate 5 to 10 feet of remaining natural sands below these structures. The soils profile (Figure 24-2) neither agrees nor disagrees with the isopachs. The calculations for total flow, which assumed positive cutoff, reduced the length of the line source of inflow by 2/3.
The calculations for the spacing and positioning of'the wells assumed this reduced total flow is applied along the entire length of the structures. Clarify the existance of seepage below the structures, present supporting data and calculations, and reposition wells accordingly. Include
- in the supporting data the assumed drawdown elevation of the line source.
of inflow (slot elevation), the head increase beyond the interceptor wells, and establish an operating water level within the interceptor wells.
5.
The filter pack design should be based upon the size of the well s
screen openings and on the gradation curve of the aquifer. Present the gradation curve limits *of the designed filter pack with sufficient gradation curves of the insitu material and with the design screen 9
~.
openin-c. Also include a propoacJ method of sampitar and testing at the individu.11 well inrations which will verify the filter pack dcrign.
The installation of an observation wc11 within,the filccr pack could greatly reduce the effectiveness of the filter pack thereby inducing piping of the sfit and fine sands. Reevaluate the proposed well men-itorin; syrte: as well as the activs: ion systc. Turbulence created by an S to 10 gp= subnersible pump within a 6-inch dis eter well should not be bothersemeduring dire:: monitoring of the well. A sedinent content monitorin; procrae should be conducted, but the filter pack design and installation criteria should be zero sedi=ent content in the discharge water.
e 9
9 9
t 4
6 4
d-1
\\
M O
s.
e e
h eA, d
L-
24 s.
Eeximum Crnundwater Level. Paximun vroundwater level was established at elevation 610 which appears to correr. pend to the top of the backfill sands below the diesel generator building. The top of the natural sands appears to be at elevation 605.
Basic of Analvtical Model.
1.
The seurce of recharre of the backfill sands does not appear to be limited to the area of the service water pump structure and circulatinp water intake structure as stated in the response. The cone of influence for Well PD-SC (Figure 24-15) indicates a recharge boundary on the south side of the cone, adjacent to the cooling pond. This recharge boundary is verified by the cone of influence of PD-20.
The drawdown of pump well PD-20 as measured in observation well PD-3 indicates steady drawdown and neither a barrier nor recharge boundary (yigure 24-15).
l 2.
Direct comparisons between groundwater levels and cooling pond filling may be obscured by pore pressure increases, and subsequent dis-sipation, as a result of the surchage, loading. A small dif f erential hydraulic head existed between the cooling pond surface and the ground-water level during cooling pond filling.
In the event of a =alfunction of the permanent dewatering system during plant operation, the differential hydraulic head would be about 32 feet (elevation 627 minus elevation 595),
and the race of water level rise to the v.aximum groundwater lesel would be considerably quicker than 90 days.
3.
The seepage flowpath is through the natural sand with hydraulic connection to the backfill sand.
Calibration of Aeoarent Permeability.
The response analysis to deter =ine perreability may have been obscured by the ef fects of the surcharge loading. A more appropriate analysis would involve the transmissivity of the seep.ge flowpath as determined i
frc= the pump tests. The transmissivity as determined by Jacob's Modified Method is about 1650 gpd/f t which, for a 20-foot: average flow depth, translate to a coefficient of permeability of about 11 feet / day.
s Rate of k'ater Level Rise.
Equation 2 (page 24-3) yields over 90 days before the grounlwater level rises to the maximum groundwater level, elevation 610. This time, 90 days, is based on unsupported data and/or design criteria.
Shear Wave Velocity.*
The equation relating shear wave velocity to void ratio and average correctequationisV,=(159-53.5e)7,)4d[
effective confining pressure (pege 24-5, is printed incorrectly. The 7
J (lT1-Dfelk.
G 0
g
J 24 b Permanent D(vnterine (?D) Series Pumpin-Test -
PD-20 Pu,nping Test.
During pu=p test, observation well PD-3, 210 feet from pump well and adjacent to cooling pond, indiented stesdy dravdevn. PD-3 did net indicate a rechare.c boundary, cooling pond, nor did PD-3 indicate a barrier boundary, impermeable soils. Recovery data from PD-3 and cocple:e data frc= PD-5 should be included for review.
PD-15A Pu= ping Test.
Observation well 0-1 indicates a sigrificant barrier boundary north of the pumo well.
Permanent Dewatering System.
Design of the permanent dewatering system is based on two major findings: (1) The gesnular backfill materials are in hydraulic connection with an underlying discontinuous body of natural sand, and (2) seepage from the cooling pond is restricted to the intake and pump structure area. The back-up data as presented suoporting finding (2),
is net sufficiently detailed to review this finding'.
Interceuter k* ell Desien.
The design presentation places the interceptor wells along the landward side of the intake and pump structures. Calculations to esti-mate the total flow to the interceptor wells reduced the flow 2/3 because of these structu'res. The isopachs of th. sands (Figures 24-9 and 24-10) it.dicate 5 to 10 feet of remainins natural sands below these structures. The corss-section soils profile through these structures does not agree with the isopach. The soils data included within the response is not adequate enough to support or refute the existance of a significant seepage path below the structures. If the structures serve as a significatn cutof f, shouldn't the wells be moved southwest to intercept seepage through the natural sand deposits indicated on the cross-section? If the length of the slot is indeed reduced by 2/3, the 20-foot spacing of the wells may result in a major head increase downstream of the wc11s or may result in overloading the capacity of th'e wells.
Area Wells.
The time required for 22 area wells to remove the estimated quantity of water is 139 days.
i l
1
Well Design - as presented Q, Gravite T1ov T:: 5-SIS-5 Devatcring and Groundvaccr Control I
s $
9 Q = KX (H~-h,~)
IV-3 p.123 2L Where: X = 400 ft = slot lencth L = 150 f t = distance from source K = 31 ft/ day = max permeability H = 47 ft = pond elevation 627 - base elev 580 h = 15 ft = operating elev 595 - base elev $80 reduce Q by 1/3 for cone. structures 31 ft/dav 400 ft (47 -15 )ft day 7 38 galp/
Q
=
~
2 (150 ft) 3 1440 min ft 141 gpc total flow use 150,g7m Q
=
Spacine:
assume 20 wells 2
3 31 ft/dav a (47~-15")ft 7.43 gal /ft 150/20
=
2 (150) 3
\\
21.1 ft.,/
/
a =
Head Increase D/S of wells r%
o a
where ou = 7.5 gpm dN.:: Ah[ = g in Ek An r k = 31 ft/ day,,
I y
a = 21 ft i
~'
Eq. IV-84, p149
- v = 0.25 ft r
ah
= 7.5 gal / min 1440 min / day in 21"ft
= 38.4 31 ft/ day 7.48 gal /ft 0.25 ft-ah
= 6.2 ft ah = 7.0 ft o
m m - - - - -
B'ased on this analysis the groundwater level downstream of the wells is at elevation 601.2.
in Equation IV-3 is reduced to 9 feet, and the slot elevation becomes 589', Q = 159 gpm spacing, well size, number of wells remain unchanged.
The significant item which is brought,out-is that the drawdown within the wells must be 6.0+
f eet below the operating level or elevation 589. '
The above analysis assumes Q s n my stributed along the 400 ft TOTAL E'
' TOTAL is assumed to' be distributed along 1/3 of the slot 7
i (intake structures act ar positive cutof f) the revisions are:
HEAD I?CD. EASE DO W TREMt.
h, FLO'w' AT WELL Q,,
x = 13 5 f t 0,= 22.5 gpm a = 20 ft h = 9 ft o
r = 0.5 a = 20 ft Q = 22.5 gp=
h, = 0.1 fc Q pump capacity Area Well Design - as presented Total Volume = 2.2 x 10 gal Pumping time = 2.2 x 10 zal
- dav
= 139 days 22 wells 5 gal / min 22 wells 1440 min 2 additional wells for surf ace infiltration and pipe leakage.
24 wells total.
Other alternatives to ti=crs and float devices to acitivate the 24 c pumps:
1.
Self-cooling pumps with cooling systems similar to vacuum well point pu=ps.
2.
Discharge valves at each pump to tune the discharge flow of tne pump to the inflow of the well.
Turbulence The pump well might be monitored within the well riser.
created by a 8-10 gpm submersible pump in a 6-inch diameter well shc 21d not be bothersome during monitoring of the well. This could eliminate.the small diameter observation wall to be placed within the fi,1cer pack to monitor the general condition of the pu p well. Elimination of this intrusion and related distrubance of the filter pack will reduce the potential of failure of the well filter.
24 d: The filter pack design should be based on the size of the well screen Filter material with openings, and on the gradation curve of the aquifer.10) may not be graded a uniformity coefficient less than 2.5 (C
=D D
60 sufficiently-to restrict movement of aquifer fines without causing major.
head loss within the filter. The filter pack should be designed as out-i lined in TM 5-818-5 Devatorine and Groundwater control for Deep Excavations.
The maximum sand content of the discha'rge water is set at 20 parts per At a constant pumping rate of 5 gym and an average sand content i
million.
l of 20 ppm, one cubic yard of sand would be discharged in less than 4 l
1 years.
Design criteria which established the sand content and total sand removed-i should be referenced.
=
Retaining Walls as regardin; Dewaterine Systee 24 e rely on integrity of retaining Dewatering syste: design does not considered in analysis. The intah and walls - retaining walls not pump structures were considered in analysis.
While the dewaterinr, system should have no effect on the Tittabawassee 24 f.
ll Q-1), the
~
tiver (barrier boundaries were indicated by observation we l
d overall ef f ect of the eurof f and slurry trench walls have not been eva uate.
The reduction in recharge free the groundwater systen to th'e river =ay The have some effect upon the quantity'and quality of river channel flow.
the analysis should include loss of water t.Srough cooling use and the effect of tne coolin; pond which would be a lower elevation.
cooling pond.
without The adequacy of the proposed permanent devatering systen in main-site 24 g taining the groundwater level beneath.the plant subjected to liquefaction limit so that granular backfill materials are not during the SSE has not been demonstrated.
The following design assumptions are not verified by supporting data:
The data presented does not support 1.
Location of seeoate oath.
supperr the location of the seepage path, cr, mere accurately, does notReducing the le the location of the interceptor wells.
by 2/3 is lusil.f.ied,,for,qalculation of total flew if the intake. structure,
For eff f ectiygiv restricts seepage down to the base,of the natural sand.
positioning of the interceptor wells, a more detailed analysis should tu The response analysis and accompanying data indicate the major seepage flow would be concentrated south'.est of the intake structure, attempted.
and a spacing of 20 feet between wells would not be adequate to intercept Reiterating.
the flow and maintain minimum head rise beyond the wells.
h med the interceptor wells have not, been positioned in relation to t e 1
some degree of per=cability within the backfill and till material clong the seepage p.th.
24-2).
north bank of the cooling pond (cross-section A-A, Figures 24-1 and this area may require additional interceptor Groundwater movement throught and reserve wells.
Satisfactory design criteria for filter 2.
Filter pack desten.
patk was not referenced which would insure compliance w d
must prevent removal of fine sand and silt from the insitu materials an art guidelines.
ultimately prevent pipes developing to the cooling pond.
The rate of water level rise should be 3.
Rate o'f water level rise.
Recovery data from the pump tests re-evaluated using more pertinent data.
l might be sufficient.
j The area wells require 139 days for devatering, which 4
Area wells.
may present problems during d-watering af ter a shut down.
1
Service b'ater Structure - Pile Support - Questions 1.
A prelieinary review of the proposec pile support systen for the north wall of the service water structure indicates the system is inadequate to support the required loading.
Th' limited information available for review analysis was fcund primarily in MCAR 21 Interin l
Report 6.
A detailed pile design based upon available soils wta should be developed in order to mere effectivelv evaluate the proposed pile f
suppert system trier to lead testing of a test pile.
Service k'ater Structure - Pile Support 1.
Pronosed loadine. The north wall of the service water structure is planned to be supported by piles to glacial till because of the inadequate compaction of the backfill material. The total load to be supported by the piles is about 1663 tons, or 100 tons per pile for 16 piles. The piles would be predrilled through the backfill material, then driven into the glacial till.
2.
Allowable loadinz. Vertical displace =ents of the predrilled pile would be small and therefere no shearing forces vould be mobilized along the shaft through the backfill material. Continued secclement of backfill.
should be greater than settlement or deformation of the pile, and dovndrag (negative skin friction) could develop along the pile shaf t increasing the load on the pile. Downdrac could balance any skin friction developed by driving the pile into the glacial till. If no accumulative side resistance along the shif t develops, the proper design vould be a point bearing pile (pier). The presumptive bearing value fer' glacial till from regional building codes is not greater than 10 esf.
3.
Proposed desien The piles are to be desicned and installed as outlined in ACI 543. A load test of a tes: pile is to be conducted follwoing the guidelines of ASTM. D 1143. No design has been submitted to date.
4.
Indicat ed desien. The detail drawing on Figure 83 (6R) indicates a proposed pile would be one foot diameter, which provides a. cross sectional area of about 0.8 square foot. With the proposed loading of 100 tons per pile, the contact stress at the bottom of the pile becomes 125 esf.
Punching failure probable under this stress.
S.
Design. A preliminary design of a support structure, whether piles, piers, or other devices, is warranted to determine the feasibility of.
conducting a load test of a test pile or, to determine the feasibility of a pile system altogether. The information concerning the proposed piles as _given or implied in the various reports indicate _that these piles would not be adequate to support the structure. The purpose of-a pile load test is to refine a' design not initiate it.
i m
u
6.
Indicated Desfen Evaluation. The ulti ate load of,an individual pier (prodrilled pile) is given by:
Q
=C WX A +wC A,
g k*here : C = undrained strength of soil belov base = 4tsf (S = 8 ksf from Figure 2.5-33)
W = coefficient for fissures = 1 (ne fissures)
N = bearing capaci,ty factor = 9 (deep foundation C
f*II"#')
2 A = area of tip = 1/4 n D = 0.7'9 ft' g
- o. = correction factor for dif ference between adhesion and undrained shear = 0.6
~
C, = undrained adhesion along shaf t = 3 tsf A, = periphical area of shaft = r DL = 22 ft Q
=C WN A +
C A u
e e s s Q = 4 tons (1) (9) 0.79 f t2 + (0.6) 3 tons 22 ft 2
2 it ft
,Q
= 68.04 tens The allovabic load of an individual pier is given by:
Q = Q /F.S 3
Where F.S. = Factor of Safety > 2 Q < 34 tons'without dovndrag 3
l' With dovndrag:
Downdrag =
C, A, d
Where
= correction factor = 0.6 C, = 0.3 est (backfill material) 2-A, = 6 DL = n (1)(43) = 43 ft 2
Downdrag = (0.6) 0.3 est (43 fc ) = 24.32 tons then, Q = 68.04 - 24.32 = 43.72 < 44 tons 22 tons per pile Q
=
~.
y
A This mathematical analysis is very generalized and is intended only as preliminary review of proposed piles. Ine values for some of the soils paraneters were estimated based upon scils type and the results of tests on similar material.
This analysis points out that the proposed piles as indicated within the various reports would not be adecuate without majcr modifications, and these modifications should be adopted prior to any load test.
7.
Conclusions.
Infor.ation pertaining to soils properties and to the proposed pile system was insufficient for detailed review. Research and analysis of implied and generalized data indicates inadequacies within
/
the proposal. The feasibility of using the implied. pile system to support the northwall of the service water structure is questionable, a
based on _the infor=ation provided.
If larger predrilled piles (piers) are used the connection at the wall may not be adequate to resist the
~
larger moments which would develop as a result of the increased eccen-tricity.
O e
9 6
e S
s
~
4 9 o
k e
A 1
4
?
9 ensW
Dicac1 Cencrtor Building - Settlemer.c - Questions 1.
The residusi settlement of the upper rand layer was not considered in the future settlement predictions presented within the respense.
Calculations durint review indicate about 1/2 inch of settlement of the upper sand zone vill eccur during the life of the project. Present an evalustien of this settlerent with accompanying calculations and appropriate soils dats.
2.
The settle. ment patterns, or dif f erential settlement, of the diesel generator building indicate a direct correlation with soils types and properties within the backfill material. Comprehensive boring logs are required to review the settlement (differential settlement).
t e
6 i
O s %e e
f b
4 O
e d.
s
~
Settlement (Con.alidation) Analysis of Diesel Generator tufiding Summarv This analysis was for settlerent marker DG-3 which indicated the greatest settlerent due to the building lead. The settle:ent analysis is prinarily concerned with the residual, or ti e-related, settlement. An in=ediate settlement analysis would be academic and not pertinent to a prediction of future settle-ent, as the =ejority of cl.c buildin; load is in-place.
Consequently this analysis determines the cdecuacy of the surcharge pro-gran and estimates the renaining settlement.
Adequaev of Surcharece Loadin;.
The 20 feet of sand ( ; = 110 pcf) produced a surcharge loading of 2200 psf over the diesel generator building. As shown by calculations (sheets 2-5) the load would have only needed to have been in-place for 42 days to achieve the necessary degree of consolidation for the final 1bading. Therefore no additienal consolidation is expected as a result of the final leading. The 1analvsis. assumed a rigid. eat foundatien fot,
. evaluating the stresses wichth the clay layer and is adequate beer. usa,of, the depth of the, clay.
~
Immediate settlement of elav laver.
An immeidate seccle=ent of the clay layer had occurred prior to ghe consolidation by the surcharge. The elay layer was assuced to be 100%
saturated; the cooling pond level was at about the top of the clay layer (elev._632) %efore filling began.
Secondarv Coceression.
The coefficient of secondary compression, C = 1.25 for DG-3, is com-parable with clays of low to mediu: secondary compressibility and therefore -
is adequate to evaluate the settlement due to secondary compression.
Consolidation of Clav Laver.
The simplified consolidation analysis of the clay layer indicates that measured settlements are with'in the range of calculated settlement for the surcharge loading. This censolidation analysis indicates that future settlements of the cisy layer would be due to secondary compression and not to additional consolidation of the clay, f /
Residual settlement of the sand laver.
The time-related settlement of the upper sand layer would be about 1/2 inch over the lif e' of the project. This type of settlement in sand is comparable to secondary compression within clay. This is the only' settle-ment not previous computed, and does not appear in the response.
Differential Settlement.
The major influence upon settlement for any. location within the diesel -
generator building is the properties and depth of the different soils at that location. As nn example, DC-11 (middle of south wall) registered'the
/
most settlement during surcharge loading because the clay stratus was thick-est (26 feet) at this location. In order to sufficiently review the
's settlement data, comprehensive boring logs are required.
y e
4-
Settlement Parker DC-3 Boring DC-1 (DG-7 nearby is similar) 4.n...
.r..,
- 4..:.:
R-;.m..2 M
k 4 M2"
_3D_g Fdn
< a.77_e,s:
- 3
.. ter table before 4 A Il 6?7 a r-devats rir.;
- )
- 2. '
i b-Water table before __,
.MEl6??
pod rise du.-tr.r x,
surcharge loading T
A.ax a
Midpoir.t cf clay El 61h -
I A
e t
No, i
s s d
u e
s
.c -
l El 606 I
~
Bottee. cf backfill 11 6*h
- e e
o e
s O
. 3 l..
J Loadint from cabic 2.5-14 Buildinc Lead =
Dead 6 Live load = 4500 ps! generater b1dg 1500 psf generator b1dg or 3000 psf average (table 4-1A)
~
This assuces a mat foundation, which for settlement analysis of clay layer is a proper design assumption. Pressure bulbs of
' individual footings would. affect clay layer at this depth similar to raft foundation. (Not true fer shallow or.very deep layers)
Surcharee 20 feet of sand ( 1( -110 pef) = 2200 psf Increase in effective cressure as a result of devatering Y,g (existing w.t. - midpoint of clay layer) 62.4 pet (627-614) = 811.2 psf a
1 s
j Se 6
(
k e*
I.
7-________.
I 1
4 I
"i i
I i
4 I
I lh_C '
g I
I
. I g
I i
LIISEL OI!;I..ATC.; 3'CI~.~';3 l
5 I
I I
6 20' I
1 20'
~
l I
- - - -i i
r - - - --
3 i
~
l a
I t _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ L _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _g. :
N-i
. _1__J Determination of vertical stress at DG-3 by Beussinesq Method From building. load, ( = 2.2 ksf (bidg not 100'; complete do not use 3.0 ksf)
3.3 I = 0.24 7 = 0.53 ksf m
7.0 A
g From surcharge, = 2.2 ksf 20 20 II) *
- H = 1.0 n = 2d = 1.0 Ig = 0.175
(: = 0.38 n=10 = 8.0 4 = 0.20.
(. = 0.44 (2) m=
= 1.0 9
C m=h=4.25 n=
= 8.0 Tv = 0.25 6=0.55 (3)
(4) m=
1.0 o
= 4.25 Tr= 0.20
- 62. = 0.44 Total = 1.81 ksf Total load during surcharge = 4.4 ksf Total vertical stress at clay layer during surcharge = 2.34 ks!
0.53 ksf-(bidg) + 1.81 ksi (surcharge) = 2.34 ksi
Additionp1 vertical stress due to dewatering (infinite areal extent) 811.2 psf = 0.81 ksi over total area.
from operational b1dg lond
= 3.0 ksf 1,
= 0.24 G'_ =.0.72 ksf Total vertical stress durin; operation 0.81 ksf + 0.72 ksf = 1.53 ks!
65% of total vertical stress' on clay layer during surcharge.
The above analysis assuees that any consolidating effect of the existing overburden (backfill) is balanced by the ef fect of establishing foundation grade 6 feet below ground surface., Also, all i==edicte settlement of backfill material has occurred.
The above analysis indicates final effective stress on clay layer.(1.53 ksf) beyond initial overburden pressure is less (65%) than effective stress on clay layer, beyond initial overburden pressure, during surcharge leading (2.34 ksf).
Degree of consolidation which must hav'e been achieved by surcharge 1!-
1 U
=
=
f[ ' C:
1+b/c[
Where: U = degree of consolidation of clay layer 6[=effectivestressoffinalloading=1,53ksf is = stress developed by stucharge = 2.34 ksf s
40%
1 U
=
=
z It ps; i
Assume 50* as degree of consolidation t
= 42 days SO because of inaccuracies which may exist in analysis use to I
achieve required degree of consolidation of 42 days.
This analysis indicates that the required degree of consolidation for pre-loading the foundation by the surcharge for the final load was achieved during preloading.
.s j
i l
^7 i
Residual settlement on sand The time-dependent settlement of the sand layer would be about 1/2 of the estimated immediate settlement of the sand layer, or S=
'o C
(Meyerhoff Equation)
(5-1. 5/ CBA k'her e : p = stress below footing = 4.5 ksf = 2.25 tsf N = average blow count of sand layer
- 12 0.95 C = correction factor for depth of influence (6ft)
=
3 C = time rate factor (40 years) - 1.5 t
A = average factor = 3 0.55 incaes S = 5 (2.25) 1.5
=
(12.1.5) 0.95 (3)
Meyerhoff's equation predicts settlements which vary frem 0.9 times to 7 times the actual settlement - averaging factor to compensate for this.
from Duncan, J.!!. and Buchignani, A. L. Eneineerine Mbnual for Settlement Studies. University of California, Berkeley, 1976-The im=ediate settlement of the sand layer, as well as the clay layer, was assumed to have occurred during the initial construction phase of the deisel generator building and prior to settlement measurecents and therefore is independent of this analysis.
\\
e 4
+
h 6
4 1
6 e
-,9
J o
Settlement by Consolidation of Clay 1.ayer N
C 0.M 7 ( LL - 1CT ) runcar., et e
Ce : 0.0'o ( LL - 1CT ) Feck. et:
I Icc F.
Variables:
lot F e
= 0.55 o
Po = 1700 psf P
= ef fective stress related to sequence of events.
LL = 36 C
= 0.007 (36-10) = 0.18 USE 0.18 C
0.009 (36-10) = 0.23 S=
Ce H log 10 1+e Po o
a e
M a
ss G
M-
~~
a.
Determination of Consolidation Variables LL = 36 (Tigure 2.5-30)
T
= 110 (Figure 2.5-33) d
= 20'; (Figurc 2.5-33) v 4
~
e = 0.55 i
f i
C.39 22kbr G = 2.72 (Calculated) j i
s (Compares favorably 7
I a
for clay material)
C. W 130 lbs I
t t
P, = overburden pressure at midpoint of clay layer = 1700 psf E1. 634 -
Top of ground-El. 622 -
Top of clay layer (634-622)110= 1320 p w.t. before pond rise N
N N
_ 622-614)(110-62.4
(
El. 614 _
ltidpcint-clay layer s
+ 1320 = 1700.E N
N s
- El. 606 -
Bottom of clay layer
=
Settlement due to Consolidatier. of Clav Laver Before settlement ceasurements:
assu=e b1dg half co:pleted when measurements began assume 1/2 of final dead load of b1dg.
P = 265 ps! + 1700 ps! = 1965 psf 1.40 inches,
S = 0.18 16ft log 1965 12 in
=
1.55 1700 ft Add this amount to measured settlements for comparisen After surchcrge lead was removed:
(f rom beginning of construction to removal of surcharge) l P = 1700 psf + 2340 psf = 4040 psf Total stress during surcharge (2.34 ksf), p 3 8.38 inches S = 0.18 16ft log 4040 12 in
=
1.55 1700 ft f
measured settlement 4.25 + 3.20 + 1.40 (calculated) = 8.85 inches i
i s
e i
6 e
)
i-L 1
p 7'
's w
i Secondary Comores.gion.
The settlement vs log time curve ex'hibits the standard consolidation-secondary compression curve. The coef ficient of secondary consolidation, C., is 1.23 inches per log cycle of time (for DC-3).
For 16-foot thick clay layer, C. = 1.25 in ft per log cycle
- 16.ft 12in C. = 0.0065 (dimensionless)
Which compares favorable with the typical values for C. of clay with a low to medium ceefficient of secondary consolidation.
C*
Secondarv compressibilitv 0.002 very low 0.004 low DG-3 -* 0.0065 0.008 medium 0.016 high 0.032 very high 0.064 extreme y high Table from Duncas,J.M. and Buchigani, A.L.,
Engineerine Mbnual for Settlement Studies.
- University of California, Berkeley, June 1976.
i s
e
+
h 48 MMB
c Borated Uater Stornac Tanks - Scttlement Analysis Two borated water stoza3e tanks, a utility tank, and l.
Structural Ar.nects.
Of these, only a primary storage tank are located in the tank farm area.
Each the horated water storage tanks are safety-related, Seismic Category 1.
borated water storage tank has a espacity of 500,000 gallons, is 52 feet in diameter and 32 feet in height.
A short concrete ring girder foundation with a Foundation Structure.
~
2.
The tank is strip footing is provided for each borated water storage tank.
The tank supported on the ring girder and the soil within the foundatf on.
by itself is quintflexible.
3.
Foundation Materials, "The borings indicate that the material below 7.
a.
Interim Recort is satisfsetory and consistent with previous investigations the top 4 feet The top 4 feet of material at the locations of at the tank far= srea.
borings T-22 thrcush T-26, placed as temporary fill to allow access for The inspection pit shows poor material drillin;" rigs, will be removed.
from elevation 628 to 624, and marginal material from elevation 624 to 622, which is localized to the area of the inspection pie due to previous excava-tion and construction activities in this area. The material was satisfactory from elevation 622 to 616 and consistent with previous material noted in the subsurface investigation at this area. The inspection pit showed no evidence of any undermining due to air bubbles. All unsuitable material, as determised by soil testing, in the tank farm area willite resoved and replaced by fuit-
~
abla compacted fill under the supervision of the onsite geoccchnical soils
~
engineer."
b.
Borins Lors. The boring logs T-22 through T-26 are in disagreement with the above su==arization from Interim Report 7.
Boring logs T-22, T-23,
,p" T-25, and T-26 indicate a layer of low p'lasticity clay immediately below thick. Elow elevation 622. The layer varies from about 5 feet to 10 feet counts within this layer fremsstandard penetration tests are as low as 2 blows per. foot of penetration and indicate a very soft to gof t consistency of the clay.
4.
Plate Lead Test.
a.
Procedure. Two plate load tests were performed in accordance with Using a standard reference of 0.5 inch of settlement, ASTM D 1195-64 (1977).
analysis of the dats indicated 4.8 ksf and 7 ksf for place load tests 1 and 2, respectively. The diameter of the plate was 30 inches.
i b.
Evaluation of Testing Procedure. The tests as outlined in ASTM D f
1195-64 (1977) are " repetitive static load tests of soils and flexible pave-j ment components, for use in evaluation and design of airport and highway 0 1194-72 t
Equally appropriate tests are as outlined in ASTM pavements."
(1977) and are used to. determine " bearing capacity of soil for static load on spread footings." the procedures are identical for the above ASTM
(
/
~ ~
,a I
standards. Itowever, in ASTM 1194-72 (1977) the scope o.f the tecting procedure states that the tent "gives information on the soll only to a depth equal to about two diameters of the hearing plata, and takes into account only part of the effect of time."
The soft clay layer is from 8 to 10 feet below the ground surface while twice the diameter of the bearing plate is only 5 feet.
If ecst pit was excavated to a. depth less than 3 fect, test would have no relavence to clay layer. Also settlement of the clay will be '
the result of consolidation which is a time-dependent settlement.
With the majority of the settlement expected to occur within the clay layer, the results of the plateload tests are not appliccble to setticment ' analyses at the tank farm area.
I 5.
Full-Scale Load Test.
a.
Procedure. To determine the suitability of the backfill material to support the borated water storage tanks, the tanks shall be constructed and filled with water in order to conduct a full-scale load test of the foundation soil. This proposed load test shall be conducted on only one tank at a time.
I b.
Evaluation of Proposed Procedure.
(1) Loading. Filling the tank will increase the load approximately 1 tsf. Borated water, depending upon the concentration, will have a specific gravity 5 to 10 percent greater than that of water and will produce a corresponding 5 to 10 percent increase in the future loading.
(
(2)
Influene'e of Second Tank. The influence factor of the loading of one tank on the other is shown by the. following diagram.
i B = 2b = 52 feet b = 26 feet Z = 35 (maximum depth)
Z/b = 1.35
= 26 + 130 = 156 (center of one tank to side of the other) r/b = 6.0 s
1
~
s s
I I
. ~.
.. - ~
s.
4 I
Innu<me valw./p!n0)
-o. Cs.
0.1 10 IO 100 0
.f si.
3 1.25 1.0 a0
[' 0.25 2
g
/*y f 0.5
~
3
~
3 i
O.75 E. Note:Numtiers on ones 4
g 4
5 g,'
. indk.ts valse dr/b d
6
}
,fj h.*. 5 a
d I
6 S
/
./l!
9 7
10 mmTa p
g
}V e
- t,p b
s t
9
((
I 10 Fig. 4.17 Inffuence diagram for vertical normal stress a, at various points within an elastic half-space under a uniformly loaded circular eres.
l (After foster and A.Wn,1954.)
a
~
t From diagras, I = 0.000c e
3.
Conclusions. Settlement during a full-scale load test i)f the borated water storage tanks would be primarilly by consolidation of the clay' fill.
Data obtained could be used to estimate the final settlement under the actual Icading in the same mannar as data obtained by laboratory consoli-dation testing. This full-scale load test should not be considered a sur-charge loading program. Filling the tanks with water cannot be expected to -
consolidate the clay fill to the extent. that future loads would cause uta -
additional settlement, as in the case of the surcharge program for the diesel generator building.
Instead only consolidation data can be expected with which the settlements under future loads can.be estimated.
No.
problems should be expected because only one tank is filled at a ' time.
The influence factor of simultaneously loading the second tank is minimal because of the reltaively large distance between the,two tanks.
p 6
\\
i m -
.y
.7 y
w.p, 3,x
. 'l
"\\
l
?
t t
s
.2 w
7 6.
Bearine C13 city.
T!'- Qearing capgelty of the backfill material g
may lie determined tron d.f.a 'uht..ined ddring the p,hte load tests. The bearing capacity of cle.y is essentially independent' of the footing size and the bearing capacity of sand, increases linearly with the. footing size. The ultimate stress for the tosc place corresponds to the yield point on the load-settlement curve of'the test' data.
I.
..}
n 1
,s 4
O e
e L
g e
e w
b s'
m.
e V
T I
- Balated 1:ater Storage Tanks - Questions 1.
In Interim Report 7 tha pone caterJal fron elevation 628 to cicvation 622 within the inspection pit was said to be " localized to the area of the inspection pit due to previous excavatian and construction activitics."
Explain uhy the inspection pit was located in this arca and detail other areas in the tank f ars which may be as disturbed.
2.
Provide load-settlement data obtained during plaa load test. Also include depth and dimension of pit which was excavated for the test place and the type of material encountered during excavation.
3.
Filling the tanks with water will serve as loading for a full scale consolidation test of the insitu material. Provide locations of settle-ment markers and outline procedures to monitor the test.
e t
I s.
s-
~
Settlement - Soil Structure Interaction.
Soil-structure interaction, based on the theory of elasticity, can be used to compute. settlements of soll for which consolidation theory does not apply, such as p-c soils, nonssturated clays and silts, granular soils, and the immediate settlement of saturated cohesive soils.
Settlements must be elastic deflections fully recoverable upon removal of loading. Soll-structure interaction analyses would not be applicable to Midland because of the backfill conditions. Any previous soil-structure interaction analysis may be deleted because actual settlement, or the majority of the actual settlement, is not clastic. Any future analysis should be reviewed cautiously for the type of settic=cnt bein;; computed. Any previous soil-structure interaction analyses probabily assumed the backfill material would be sufficiently compacted that consolidation would not occur, and therefore, any settlement would be elastic.
No questions are warranted at this time.
l I
e e
e 6
4 e
e 9
a
_~
k
..' ;.... - =-
Date ROUTING AND TRANSMITTAL SLIP s
9 M A.Y Bo TO: (Name, office symbol. room num0er, initials Date Duilding, Agency / Post) b i e s'8 S e Al C e.k bc oTEC8 3c.
1.
IM
- -..
- _.-- Gi~~ E.T
.u
- i.., -
~
-. ~. -
~
~
.1 4.
5.
! Action l i File INote and Return
'Aporovat
! l For C:aarance her Conversation lAs Recuested l l For Correction l Prepare Reply
' Circulate M For Your Information lSee Me Domment t l Investigate lSi nature 6
ICoordination l l Justify l
REMARKS me.sa
(,,3 3 5 y y
- .it by u s c..
S h i\\*
- *4 C O C** * ^4 gv% %r.
.a....
Mb b e.c1 ro s ces yoo eop e.s e E %\\ i
- .9 Q ey.m, t M c. h%
o
% 6 s T % s.. wgv.4,
- ..----.....=-+-~"'*5 DO NOT use this form as a RECORD of approvals, concurrences, disposals.
3.-
= !
clearances, and similar actions
,.: e.
-- wm.ema _ _ _ e. n. _ - -
-.4 FROM:(Name, org. symbol. Agency / Post)
Room No.--81dg.
pnaa, y,,,
e4 beit 4d M C.E' F b "T*~
b la ~7 8 i CK CW
. CL E $ 3 3041-102 OPTIONAL. FORM 41 (Rev. 7-76)
..//!/O FPMR (41 CFbGSA101-11.206
/
Presenbee tr
.A/'
FOR 10., AS C
++*.'*-enes.:
M: *.M@,,.r.'*'*a % 2..@. h*F..a?Y.,f' f.q..-e>J.yy.tt rja ys.m t,.,*
n T.
a...cge s',w,.Mia,:(*Qag.,, u.,c,,,q. tag.,e,y*g.j-f -
g p.-- wv.t,&,,73n,.we8W*'.
w e
f,.
+.g.,,,
n e.,,g.
..,,,g
--. s
.N,;,.
yy,.,gx 7.,.,.
2 &.nW.%r.' -R -L%.5 t= W 'k~- s.;. 3
[.,.. -
g y ;ggg3-;g g gggpq f
R.
w-4%
e.
e##. af*Je. w - C j
6'
"u=
2
.M. *a.
.,r 4 - :'t. 'mq. _.
7= m ~.. _ _ _ -
e 1..r y
a n
-...e m
6
,..i
.-.'*r.
/
(-
N
..=hsenmaammensed.
- -_ __ 7.nm
~ % 6
=:.v C m.p Q M,"';R'"lll.".tr&.
4
. :. ?
,.,-l ~~~h~:~? E.'r
..]b. i..'0*
~ ~. :..eu ; -. ' ~ ~ '. _
'..q.:-~**
[y. *
- ' ~ ' '
~
s I
a l
~N i
e.
.h
.i x
....n m.m FAC3 tulle HEADER $HEET (ER 105-2-5)
QSb1/fp /> ffy o
F ROM (Nassej OFFICE SyMact T EL EPMQN E NQ.
R EL E ASER'S $4GN ATU RE
/
't) *E. b :
m e-C 6 - h} C h F l') - G-1 E '2 - S'734.-
%, c.~ t s..
u ~.
,1-s.--f i
. to rpeme; o rrtCE SYueCL TEL EPwcN E NO.
- P4 3
PRECEDENCE QTG 4w Klen f G e.,M e? r
,c. hl C E L n 7 7 6. - C, 7 4 3 4-Om SUSJECT Q
e ina i
.g-
-- -,- Nef,
..,.-..,-.. de s.,,4' E g'.y.
1
- .. ;.. - -====v a==
e - v.,,-s
~f r.-
"'t-mtam{%.KM *O%*@ *..'* **8"-*y * * ***.-
4 " sa f.'
- ..g'.
,...e.=
w
.m.,_wm __ ~ ~ _-
_.y
- _.qna
--~___,.;_-_.-__-_.,r.3.-
w-mang 5
I 6 W. E O
~
rorrce orif/n /m b mmm, n<.y-ev;am.;;,,**., r:' m " 7.m-* +.n:w.m..,m.~.,.wJL :cS, 4'%n..ua.n.um.a. w
.e-sh9 - n v"-* *_.w y. x a
._a.
~~~'-n ~ m. vxe
~e n.
-o..
.w: _._.-
-~
..--=.(vT~'***""""".,-:-......
,u_--
3
. y',)
m'-
??6 g -
- g.,.g,-
.g
.y -
i*.
e 4-4.-
t
.....rp.n-.
g,'
N ss E ~ ' ' e -es y p. ~ .,,'r'f.
j.g.
. g h* e
(.,
~s..
f M......
.'y - --
T *
- 3.>~~%~
.. % <*~-.
- =-
m..:
+
1 of 2 Sheat NORTH CINI?.AL LT/ISION JAMES W. SIMPSON Ext. Nc.
35734 Branch / Office NCDED-c Reviewer JOHN F. NORTON Interagency Agree =ent No. NRC-03-79-167, Task No. 1 -
DATI 21 May 90 SUNIOT:
Midland Plant Units 1 and 2, Subtask No. 1 - Letter Report (INTERIM)
--c. -
"*SF.Q. CY.T. W z. cr CCEENT Wo.
No.
Ipara. Ne.
he paragraph / sentence heading and numbering system is confusing 1.
General. Tand should be revised.
The The unresolved issues are not the missing information.
2.
Page 1 issues are unresolved, in many instances, becausia of missing Para 3.
information.
3.
Page 1,2, All expanding sentences under the number headings should be Para 3.
deleted here but included elsewhere, since the listing is to show " general" categories only.
4.
Page 3,
" Comprehensive" borings logs are not going to reveal much that Para 4b, is not already evLdent. Specific test data relevant to the (1).
problem should be requested.
~
~
5.
Page 3, The paragraph does not specifically point out that consolidation alvsis. It is tests are required for a conclusizatsettlemen Para 4b, implied that N values are important h M valuesjdo not (2) (a).
~
have a reliability level commensurate with data quality Eliminate required for resolution of the settlement problem.
the 2nd sentence.
6.
Page 3, Cite the data source that generated these questions.
Para Ab,
~
(2)(b,c) s 7.
Page 3, (a) It is doubtful that residual settlement would be a Para Ab, factor. Upon initial loading of the sand three things (2) (d).
probably happen; grain rearrangement, grain fracture and/or crushing and grain movement or shea'r failure. These processes i
take place almost immediately, probably during construction, l
providing the sand is reasonably clean and pore pressures
(
quickly dissipate (this seems to be our case). Unless the l
intensity of the contact pressure is later increased there would be no addition ~al force present to again trigger these mechanisms. Rescu y this paragraph and reword and/or eliminate it.
NCD VCM Me acIma's emis I
20 Mar 75 l
2 2
Shest cf NORIM CENTP.AL DITI5 ION JAMES W. SIMPSON ext. NC. 35 7?4 Branch /Dffice McDED-G Reviewer Jomi F. NORTON SUiLIECT: Interagency Agreement No. NRC-03-79-167, Task No. 1-DATI 21 Mav 80 Midland Plant Units 1 and 2, Subtask No. 1 - Letter Report (INTERIM) p3:3-31.a
. er cm.,
NC Mo.
No.
(b) Do not list finite settlement values computed by C.O.E.
or make concrete statements of what is going to occur in the future.
8.
Page 4, Pipe piles.ith a capacity up to 200 tons + are,possible if Para C driven to rock (see inclosure). Change this paragraph to (1) (a).
read, "A detailed pile design should be submitted so that the proposed pile support system can be evaluated prior to load testing a pile."
NOTE: Don't discount the consultant's plan until its submitted and studied. These guys are pretty sharp.
.9.
Page 4, Change "underpining" to " underpinning".
Para 4C, (1)(c)
~10.
Page 6, Statement that liquifaction should be expected to occur Para 41 should be deleted or qualified.
(1) 11.
Page 6, Consult with WES on the necessary depth of dewatering.
Para 1 (1 l
~12.
Check with WES'concerning the possible need for other information on the seismic situation and include in this report.
JAMES W. SIMPSON Chief, NCDED-G FJns m
8:ne's ca"5:5
_.