ML20091L222
Text
_ -_ -_ _.- __._ _
I I
3-
'..,.k%,,
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY l
27, -. !:J%
ccTwoir oisraicT. cone s or encinccas
(,k eox son
~ q q*.v'.t2 7
7;. e ) h ocinoir. MicMIGAN ASUI 2
i w.w a n w NCEED-T SU3 JECT: Interagency Agreement No. NRC-03-79-lS7, Task No. 1 - Midland Plant Units 1 and 2, Subtask No. 1 - Letter Report (IN M IH)
TRRU:
Division Engineer, North Ct.ntral ATTN: NCDED-Q (Ja=es Simpson) i l
- i TO
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Co=nission j
A'l"rN :. Dr. Robert E. Jackson Division of Syste=s Safety Mail Stop ?-314 Washington, DC 20555 1.
The Detroit District team which provides geotechnical engineering support to the NRC has reviewed cost of the available documents concerning plant fill j
The teas met with the NRC staff, the applicant-at the Midland Plant.
Consumers Power Co:7;ny (CPCO) and its consultants, partici;sted in a site a
?
visit to observe site conditions and discussed the proposed remedial measures planned for Category I structures placed on plant fill. Since final design co:putations have not yet sheen provided for remedial censures, we feel it uou,ld_be most expeditious for all pa gies teg uh=1; this INTERIM letter report l
-M ofAt-nIct, eeiaf=UYuYes adaco:Em'e5!d~d to$ 1 5 coe-44tM C -:--
m
\\
7:0 222: to settlephiy^unresolvedphWderns and questions.
The Bistrict also fcels it is important to acec=plish a thorough review which just '3 cannot,be donc quickly.
2.
The Olstrict's investigation to date has been centered mainly around the proposed recedial measures or other action for the Categocy I structures placed on fill materials. The review to date includes at least a preliminary look at all data received through Ac'cndment 74 The initial indication of issues unresolved to date fall under the following four general types with subtopics as noted:
I.
Soilsh CQCd,,h, a go,l$
- D k a 4 /,.hc w i
--.~-w.-
l 3oeings and testing i
O b.
Settleccat/ Consolidation i
~
[.4. RAM.s} Q C-Seismic cessaans j
kk0hh85840517 RICEB4-96 PDR
~-.
1 l
t
~
4 YAR $80 NCZED-T
SUBJECT:
Interagency Agreement No. NRC-03-79-167, Task No. 1 - Midland Plant Units 1 and 2, Subtask No. 1 - Letter Report (INTERIM) t crc:23 in 2=.eer # ~'
d, e. 4t$scr structiirds' constructed on fill.c :
4esew 4., f. Quality control s
Re=edial Measures for Category I' Structures on Fill II.
j a.
0;;;;;;ing-1.. b.
Diesel generator building
(
k d. Service water building k
t.. d. Borated water tanks V
o.f Underground diesel fuel tanks r--
4.h. Undesground utilities
[
- . g.
Aux. building - Feedwater valve pit e
4
-III.
Geology e
.. ~.=....m
)
- a. + r ^ *^ -~2k.
f gb. _!.afe f:- ::in
. c. --Tault oad seismic '.i"*^U p
( l d.---Cru' sealYdbisIird j
i e Intespretation--of-borings---eest-pi;., lab-eests7 erte.
y
. h C ] h-w h -2 w y IV.
rianeous or General.
Kd A a
.ac:-* *' Mix.ad unresolved issuest are stated in the following Qce: :i ;...,
3.
These are in addition to the responses a N to be received from pages.
the applicant concerning additional design support information to the 10 C n 50.54 (f) questions concerning structures on plant fill. The source of each prix, __....u w issue is indicated,at the end. W.
q, Q h - - ______ M '
I.
Soils a
.h Borings and testing (1) Who and what are the qualification
- of the persons (s) who classified samples of all horings, driller or geologist? Were samples tested in a lab? Are samples still available? Where are the results, many appear to be missing? Source - site visit, various documents and general concern.
N(2)Are final fill elevations available at completion of fill placement and prior to construction? Vere additional borings taken prior to start of construction? If so, where are they? Source - Incl to CPCO letter.2 Nov 79.
(3) Have all investigative borings for the plant fill problen been completed? If not, what are the locations of the remaining borings to be taken? Source - site visie 28 Feb 80.
2
2 4 w.AR 1980 NCEED-T Interagency Agreement No. NRC-03-79-167, Task No. 1 - Midland Plant SU3 JECT:
Units 1 and 2, Subtask No. 1 - Letter Report (INTERIM)
Settlement / Consolidation c.
Why have allowable soil bearing stresses not been discussed?
(1)
What are the related soil spring constants so that settle =ent vs. load is quickly discerned? Source - site visit 27 Feb 80.
Has the bearing value of the glacial till been determined and (2) have settlements been esti=ated for this bearing stratum based o.. all building loads, particularly the reactor building? Source - site visie 27 Feb 80.
d.
Seismic concerns g
New soil properties or new materials used for backfill should (1) be used in the revised seismic analysis for determination of structural adequailey. Has this been acconplished and documeated? Source - Question 262.13, Q&R 2.5-22.
Misc. structures constructed on fill not covered in Paragraph II e.
below.
(1) Sand pockets have been noted in cooling pond dikes which lead What are the adverse impacts (groundwater piping, leading taward the river.
to dike failure)? Was the dike properly compacted? Source - general concern.
(2) Have all structures on fill be investigated for settlement?
if not why not? Have all buildings on fill been checked for cracking? Source g
- interim SER.
]
j (3) The design of the Water Service Building retaining wall is I
t critical and partially categ'ory I.
This design should be provided for CofE What is the cause of the wall settlements noted during the 27 and 28 I
review.
Feb 80 site visits? Source - site visit 28 Feb 80.
c.
f.
Quality control (1) Why are there so nany shrinkage cracks (assuming these are shrinkage cragk,s)? Is this simply poor quality control? Will cracks be repaired in same Source - site visic 23 Feb 80.
II.
Remedial Measures for Category I Structures on Fill a.
Dewatering (1) Why not utilite a slurry cutoff wall or trench across the primary recharge zope near the service water building in addition to punped wells plarned? Use of clay slurry wall would provide positive cutoff. Source
- site visit 27 Feb 80.
3
~
l
.x e
24 MAR 1380 NCEED-T Interagency Agreement No. NRC-03-79-167, Task No. 1 - Midland Plant f
, SU3JE.CT:
Units 1 and 2, Subtask No. 1 - Letter Report (INTERIM) l Does it vary is the dewatering well gravel pack design?
- (2) What Source - site visie 27 Feb 80 (dewatering).
with soil layer type?
(3) Will groundwater piping occur from cooling pcud to well What about points over time? Any preventative measures proposed to stop this? Source - site visie 27
)( piping along piles, building foundations or caissons?
Feb 80 (dewatering).
/' (4) Will weep holes in retaining wall at the service water i
.silding be plugged since these are no longer necessary with the dewater ng This could be a likely source of possible groundwater piping in the j.anned? Source - site visic 27 Feb 80 (dewatering).
future.
/' (5) What are the test results concerning incrustation of the dewatering system as well as fines removal (additi:nal settlement) concerns?
Source - site visit 27 Feb 80 (dewatering).
What is the final dewatering plan; number of wells, spacing,
/(6) location, depth, diameter, pumping races, recharge rates, back-up systems, Source - site visit 27 Feb 80 (dewatering).
etc?
Are there any known problems of operations of the dewatering
.' (7)
What about fire / explosion system due to presence of gas pockets in the area?
Source - general concern, prior 1( hazards with the electrical controls?
experience.
/ (8) Has the need for localized dewatering in sand fiil lenses Source - site been analyzed for structures other than the D.C. building?
visit 27 Feb 80 (dewatering).
< (9) Upon reaching a steady state in dewatering, a geophysical survey should be cade to confirm the position of the water table and to insure Source - site visic 27 Feb 80 that no perched watar tables exist.
(dewatering).
b.
Diesel generator butiding (1) Provide additional verification that surcharge loading has indeed solved the settlement problem. Additional borings, if taken, should indicate higher blow count s when compared to borings taken prior to Secclement analysis should be made on samples from application of pre-load.
new borings.. The drop in groundwater *.evels, implying heavier soil unit N(
weights, and diesel plus scismic vibrations should be considered in the f
Fource - Q&R 2.5-22 and site visie 27 and 28 settlement and seismic analyses.
Feb 80.
Was it
- (2) How was sand surcharse placed inside D.C. building?
l compacted? How was it removed? What was in place unit weight of sand used?
s I
r 4
i
.-r.
~
$80 2 4 MAR No.1 - Midland Plant s
Taskt (INTERIM) 2 5-21, No. NRC-03-79-167,No.1 Letter Repor Source - Q&R
/
eragency Agreement 2, Subtask cracking?
e and Units 1 and hea y equipment caus of constructioni ations).
w 7"
v emoval of sand by a functiond's (Anal. Invest g history as27 Feb settlement n 362 12
?
Establish crackingSource - site of the ' hump" insouth side of the building visit the
- .~,
~=
/ (3) activities.
explanation on the f
~7 bays compaction 7-
.rge is the-most generatorv 79 d propera hedge l
4 hat
~
(4) en the two desternO letter 2 No surcharge pro ideCorps, and asestablished by h
v
- e Incl. to CPC certainty thatdemonstrated to thecould be
?
'\\
the 4
Since structure vailable?
E"_
(5) satisfactorilyd nce in the27 Feb p.
80.
data a
liquefaction, confi e and related test been visit
~
not yet v 79 Source - site borings letter 2 No lab cepinning.
Are post surchargeSource CPCO Will a floating s Cnst
/
f building?
d
/ (6)should be pro ide.no floor in D.G.
v y
ttlement
_4 80.
1/2" of additional serequested. WES.
28 Feb so, these Why is there visit The.
y'
%ey
/ (7)
Source - site of the 1 watering) is wed by re ie v
later?
Further, explanationstatic load andearthquake loads be 1/4" de must e placed
'E
/(S) earthquake, 3/4 due to lement 1/2" additional sett2.5-34, Q362.17 w is this load
( A.
Discuss the Ho Source - Q&R water building are to be 100 ton p iles. count?
p$ ~ D [6
,_N or blowof possiblesupported end and Service vation 7
Corrective pileslished, by tip ele Resolve the problembetween the pile c.
80 (Da isson
'5 v
(1) veloped and estab) to be perfothat could occur visie 28 Feb rmed.
- site lateral stability is to be de pile load test (sdifferential settlemel ced on fill.
nt Source Source - site w that sufficientlding?
.y, '
- the portion p a piles by the bui sho presentation).
What computations h
posed underpinning ).
ved by plugging t e Source -
(2) visson presentationlateral stability bewatered cond impro
?
pro ided to the provisie 28 Fe's 80 (DaWould bu de v
(3) heles wall weep 80 (Davisson presenta should be the tank farm lace Nretaining 23 Feb repec. atbe determined from pSource -
visit
- d. ' Borated water tanks investigation site d
shouldshould be determine.
Bearing capacitieshe foundation soil test r
The
- (1) w revie.
The yield point of t80 (remedial work).
our
/
provided for load tests..visie 27 Feb
/
5
/
site
/
/
!!!!III) 2 4 MAR 1980 NCIED-T
SUBJECT:
Interagency Agreement No. NRC-03-79-167, Task No. 1 - Midland Plant Units 1 and 2, Subtask No. 1 - Letter Report (INTERIM)
- (2) Why has the ring foundation cracked? Is this crack in the area of the reported broken air line? The diagonal crack did not appear to be a shrinkage crack. Source - site visit 27 and 28 Feb 80.
(3) Why not increase the test load for the tank by a surcharge in
/
addition to filling the tank with water? Source - Interis SER.
v-(4) Since applicant agreed that broken air line may have degraded the foundation material, the tests taken in this area must be conclusive.
i Source - NRC 28 Aug 79 Memo.
v/(5) What are the residual settlement predictions and the l
consequences thereof ? Source - Interis SER.
Underground diesel fuel tanks e.
(1) What are the settlement predicticns on these tanks anc will h/ these then function properly? Any differential settlement expected? Source -
Interis SER.
(2) Does differential settlement reduce the fuel storage
\\(f capacity? If so, how much? Source - general concern, Interis SER.
(3) Are these tanks designed against "bouyancy?" Source -
Interis SER.
f.
Un.terground utilities (1) Why not inspect the interior of water circulation piping with
)( video caners with sensing devices to show pipe cross-section, infiltration and slope? Source - site visit 27 Feb 80.
l (2) Rave electrical duct banks at D.G. building been da= aged?
Direct Have these been inspected after it was shown they were severly loaded?
observation of the western-sc at duct would sees appropriate and easy at this I
time. Source - site visit.I and 28 Feb 80.
(3) Rave all Category I underground utilities, ducts, pipes etc.
been profiled? This would seem to be the only positiva way to be certain no What about corrosion to danages to pipes or utilities have been sustained.
What about buried pipes or chemical attack of concrete pipes underground?
stress induced by differential settlement? Are sll stress levels below Source -
allowable and what about added stress due to res.iual settlement?
site visit 27 Feb 80 (evaluation of piping).
(4) Will all utility settlements be monitored throughout the plant lifeti=e, particularly at connections? Source - site visie 27 Feb 80 (evaluation of piping).
i 6
l
7 z4 W EE0 NCEED-T SU3 JECT: Interagency Agreement No. NRC-03-79-167, Task No. 1 - Midland Plant Units 1 and 2, Subtask No.1 - Letter P.eport (INTERIM)
- 15) Passing a " rabbit" through conduits is not a suitable s safeguard or insurance chat conduits are undamaged. Source - Interim SER.
/(6) During our site investigation on 28 February 80 it was noted that the " rattle space" had been reduced at several buildings. How will these defects be corrected? Source - site visit 28 Feb 80.
51
[ll
/(7) The category I pipelines (outlets, inlets) for return water at the e=ergene; heat sink could be covered by a slope failure during a seismic event. The applicant should anlayze the sideslope to determine if a sufficient factor of safety exists. Source - site visit 27 and 23 Feb 80.
g.
Auxiliary building - feedwater valve pits (1) Seismic analysis of thia area is needed concerning change from fill to lean concrete. Source - Questions 362.13 Q&R 2.5-23.
II.
Geology c.
Fault and seismic history (1) Canadian faulting of major magnitude exists at Sault Ste.
Marie and Sudbury, Ontario. Why were these not considered in the FSAR?
Source - FSAR Figure 2.5-27.
E e.
Interpretation of borings, test pits, lab tests, etc.
(1) Many undisturbed soil samples were taken, yet no test results or reports are available for many of these. Why not? Source general review of documents.
s IV.
Miscellaneous or General (1) Why are there so many shrinkage cracks, especially in plant area structures placed on fill? This appears to be more than a coincidence.
Source - site visit 28 Feb 80.
(2) Will C.P.Co. consultants Peck, Davisson, Gould & Hendron submit
/ summary statements to NRC concerning their presentations at the 28 Feb 80 site visit? Source - site visie 28 Feb 80.
(3) ~ Cooling pond dikes have been repaired due to erosion. This dike design should be provided for CofE review. Source - site visit 28 Feb 80.
(
(4) Will tne applicant provide minutes of the 27 and 28 Feb 80 l
=eeting?
l l
l 1
!!!!!!bi.
Z 4 Y.AR 1S80 NCEED-T
, SU3 JECT: Interagency Agreement No. NRC-03-79-167, Task No. 1 - Midland Plane Units 1 and 2, Subtask No.1 - Letter Report (INTERIM)
(5)' The entrance road to the plant appeared to be below cooling pond Would access to the plant be impaired for emergency vehicles in elevation.
the event of a dike failure? Source - site visie 27 and 28 Feb 80.
(6) What provisions will be made to insure the dewatering system will sf, be saintained in proper operating condition? Source - site visie 27 Feb 80 1
(dewatering).
(7) Some of the cracks noted appear to be enlarging with time. The width of these cracks would be already in excess of a shrickage crack. Source
)q
- site visie 27 and 23 Feb 80.
m
'-~~~~4.
The District's recommendations concerning questions, uncertainties and unresolved issues presented above are given when possible and appropriate below in a like numbered paragraph:
1.
Soils Miscellaneous structures constructed on fill not covered in e.
Paragraph II below.
(2) All structures, including utilites should be checked for bk settlement and cracking.
f.
Quality control (1) Undertake a comprehensive analysis on cracked structure.
7 q
Statements that all cracks are due to shrinkage or do not effect structural integrity are not sufficient.
II. Remedial Measures for Category I Structures on Fill.
a.
Dewatering
')
(1) Consider benefits of using clay slurry cutoff wall in conjunction with pumped dewatering.
(3) Analyze possible groundwater piping along the paths 3
indicated.
1^
>l
'4)
Analyze pros and cons of plugging weepholes.
t I5) Consider a control panel in control tower area to indicate plant groundwater level in the critical plant areas so that monitoring can be easily acconplished.
8 i
e
24 MAR 1980 NCEED-T
SUBJECT:
Interagency Agreenent No. NRC-03-79-167, Task No. 1 - Midland Plant Units 1 and 2, Subtask No. 1 - Letter Report (INTERIM) b.
Diesel generator building
^
(1) Take additional borings and tests to prove surcharge worked.
f.
Underground utilities (2) Conduct an visual inspection of at least one (the westeranost) electrical duct bank at the D.G. building.
L (3) Investigate any category I utilities not investigated.
L (5) Provide additional assurance the category I utilities have k.
not been over stressed.
(6) Establish nininun rattle space criteria and restore as necessary.
7 (7) Analyze outlet pipes '.ocated in heat sink pit side slopes for seisnic event (SSE & OBE).
[
5.
If you have' any questions concerning this interin letter report, please contact Mr. N.A. Gehring at FTS 226-6793.
702 7C DI:02ICT E::GI::Ct:
1
..;iUNR %
o
?. McCALLIST33 p,,ter,,graincorins Did sien s
E l
E-h a
f 9
m E
B
EIP12"IElf? C7 OEI ARN!
l ET33IT DI5 oIOT, COUs 'C7 2IGIIIIIS l
P. O. 3CI 1027 OH3"II. MIOZIGAN 48:31
,~,
N In-?
O $ M.
4 e.
g Ee. tiTC 3)=73-1d7, 31-:;ceth17 h ttac' Ep "
Interogesc= Agree sest 3
C'(+ b 7
. M 4.e.....
~
,.Dre habert I. Jackses ble J%elaar Rsrulatory Countasica
?".iDivtatea ef 17stens T.afetv a
+
" Hall Stes ?-314 W e%isctoe, DC 2C3.45 i
Ce ar 3r. Jacksent This is t.as fourth of the bi monthly letters required by esbject ist er a,an et a gr a--sen t.
The statas of the iteam reque ste 1 tr. the ag reepet4t ts ;: rov ti.c ' 1.3 the fallowing 3 ragra$ e.
- f fort e Cen.tetel Parint t-a Period 20 :W to 28 J nir 14'."
't t 414 sd.
The sets. ale analyf ts use received fran the USA 5 h*eterwars %uerl. nest tation (WS) on 3 June lh, RAa tev&oloa no. IS eas ressived te. 2 Jww 19d';.
Da 14 May and 'C June 196G, traf t letter reporte unce tafeccaliv f urnisheJ to 23. and sur '! art'. Central aivision CJCO) ottise for seri. seat.
Ihe latter report, subtask ag. 1, ima an tled to **.C threer,S 903 on 7 Ju17 lye.'.
ht!!v. 6n 27 ::sf and 1.5 Jess 1Sh0, draf t letter resorts were Laforaelly f ornise.at to 39C and "C2 f or esenest. 4: 10 Jelt 1950, the let ter report, r
i eustasi sa. 1, was smilu to stC the gb EE.
N :) aw. 30 May 19 %, ittsc.'
r sponded ta ROF's and requests for 1sformaties 301.01 t:womch hl.24 am.:
i i
362.30, res peet t veit were reenive h Cs 3 Jwse 198c, a Jr.s!t c la rit ies tle.
statecent tses tstelved fran waC to feether define the Detroit District 1serir effort required onder eneject agreenrat. John Crue.1stror., killy 1med revie==r fer Detruir T.1 strict, wes in Wshinr: ton for discwesiew vitin the A1:
eeJ to attend a ZM ey pile drivtog seetmar.
Aeoest of Fund, Ex-ende!
l Site F re.: 1 **av 10 to 3C Jus 30 Cuw la tive s
7 5][,E $ nd
$14.695.4*
$ 61,957.40 "Oi 3s42 1 13.175.ee 42.404.35
.@$'qr.7
.atal su no.a ine*,su.o
..7 e-
- m w :.
+:. 2
-t
,,y y y.
.L
- n.. s e; w.
% } **
- C_9 cob ca. no.[
s/
v'
\\
POR R. AS OF TI//T a-(i
, s
/ Y '7 n 0 W 7 M twi~<v vJ' l
t
h
{
S' 2 5 JUL 1960 tur -
"7.C-0 3-7 9-16 7, s i==to.2 r t i e Lettar 3rt'tJZ C g laters*,,e ty Agreement *;e.
Pro 8 leve Eocetatered or Aetic.!ystad.
Sub istter of 30 J eet 1989 to :X, ' 1visine of Lautra ct s, tedicat.es trat at StrCistrict's rate af at;enJttare la arch, erti and May 1990 (appesti.ata'r
$20,CC./ m etth). that se a4Jiticael $4v.G'JO ewr an.t s.svc the $14,4,600
?; iveL2mble wo414 be needef t* rom;r. the ow' of 7? ?C.
.;. 4, :
4'
~
t, -
- c'rs ee s _,.
i
--;r t. -
, M141 sed.
Pen.iing 27c acceptanes, sdtast ao. 1 (1s:ter resort) of test !
1 PWH is eemplets.
ea!!!v. Peel 1M E acceM7W m.1,. (!=tter re,wrt) of tant 2 pailly) is templeca.
~ ~.... _.,,,
Plans for the 'iest ba r'.t o.: Forte 3 21 Jal? W - 21 Se-teW r 19--
?.1114m!.
la ttiste vert en the draft Safety lealostion.:.enrt @.i-).
taitt=.
te itia t e wo rt can traft S U..
Ceners!. A ed+/ ele of suhtssa actiet tice beeed on the Listrie 's procren 30 J ua. 194V is attacS. es Isc L I ter yewr isf arencies.
~--- ' ---.. t y si.i. : _..
41acarely, 1 Isel g 7. m.4.1.If74d Schedu14 Chief Leginearia< Civisia.e Copy fe t sheef t
.'nac in e lesaletary Ceautesioe, Site <ter. Civisisa of Systeus Oafety.
i Va nbi..,t e.
- 2M 5 5, r"':.
- 3. L. Creater V.DEC-C t
l l
i i
{
c M Y.s.3.h..
f l
$hI5
.n:s ?
%.c.. /
s.s,-."g. -w:.$ t.-
t
,c.u i
, s u,7 '. -
..y
. s
>.4.*
-~ *. ;>~
\\
.s y t
[.*,. k,.~,
-[.[ },.,.e,
1 l
I I
,\\
l
~-
LiquiCv How % 4*mti\\
w E R. \\ \\ \\ 0- 2. - 1 SO(o ( So D.9,Tt )
6md adb ne [-ou
. v6._.\\ ig.
t.
L. g " sw-uW.t. t, neud u m..ae. n< a.ym. wa.,
4 we(6tc. oc.cp ytrM %.h h ed..
h
. w.ke dowvshoi4 c.xo % ho\\4 i
m-u W cow.pte.sts6w A he m4J., hie.cwib. c.dkd wd Td,h.
9 h pro h YWe.y N u W d \\M W k. VAb b ihk N 0 'ae
dasu er e.e4<*e h is-66 9e:puhn.
A m a a s.v. t. 6. h L
bd - MG pcucedqt h.r ' n.,.% era o ( h er(.,ee.
e Lso,. cu occur 4 deY er u.e.ld w.h.rd a u.4 u sd.
-h.c O
Sc.e d - hWh 4 i%3, 9.g W..
- g. ca.w ec.c.uc sA a*v w<_. a.t a-v dwW ( Aphe.d nh (a) L w.3 W. tddi',j Ga\\.)
IO bg. oS uppe bpes, my rt.wM b ivsd.ute.5 L,q"O -h-b s
l w6a mae up
- 4. hj. cpAsedt.if cc4 hm..ue. raw.
. -. -... ~. -
1 j
...m.
em.. - en
-2. -
--m....
g
_ __. nmm Asw dal30 h i--
B 5
l r
I I
I I
l l
I i
l P
I J
4 i
1
L11 4
_A e
C.
- ( b. } 4; j
k..
~*
t (.
u v. c4. s
~
(2)l L/ \\ <. ( i!c. ; i. '\\
p.. r' 1
4.
- /
9se
}
'J
)[-
y f-ij
t'.
l 1,. ~
h
~~
h, r.d,.
r
--'~
4 i
'\\
Q,,g(d
~,
l NDI ID O
f I
i 103 P
s 4
t
~
\\
e 1
w.. s 4 Ad
-' ~.
N..
80 s.
s
\\,
~.
I s
[
~,
N
-eAa.
N'x 3 P.
l
N f
4 5
k e
s O
J
\\
\\
Ob(C N^r
~ k. I.cM.,
c 12.'ISf80 (Stbg )
b Name: Hari Narain Singh A Xb - /2 n ' c' u /*'g,[3 - /[b' Address: 34174 Koch Avenue i
I Sterling Heights, Michigan 48077 gfd,v.) C s': il M e 's
[M,/rf0/Rf}FM,tVh)
Professional Licenses:
(1) Registered Structural Engineer - Pennsylvania - 1970, 15552E.
(2) Registered Civil Engineer - Fennsylvania - 1978 15552E.
Education:
(1)
B.S. (Civil) - 1956 - University of Patna, India (2)
M.S. (Civil) - 1969 - University of Colorado, Boulder, U.S.A.
Completed 30 additional semester hours beyond M.S. degree.
(3) M (Geotechnical) - Wayne State University DEntwr (PresentlyworkingforPh.D. degree)
Professional Experience:
A.
October 1978 to Present: Civil Engineer, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Detroit, Michigan.
B.
April 1978 to September 1978: Civil Engineer (bridges & foundation)
Arizona State Highway Department, Phoe' nix, Arizona.
C.
March 1970 to March
- Civil Engineer, Pennsylvania Department of Transportation, Franklin, PA 16323 D.
September 1965 to September 1969: Graduate student and Research Assistant, University of Colorado, Boulder, U.S.A.
E.
May 1959 to July 1965: Assistant Professor of Civil Engineering, Department of Industries, Government of Bihar State, India. Posted at the Ranchi School of Engineering (1959-1961) and the Regional Institute of Technology, Jamshedpur, India.
F.
April 1958 to April 1959: Assistant Civil Engineer, Government of India (Tripura Administration), India.
G.
July 1956 to April 1959: Engineer Assistant (Civil), Government of Bihar State, India.
Summary of Experiences: Twenty-four (24) years experience in civil engineering activities which include teachitig, design, construction and maintenance. Completed design and reviewed design for more than fifty (50) bridge structures and their foundations. Carried out soil explorations and foundation investigations for structures.
\\
l