ML20093C035
| ML20093C035 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Midland |
| Issue date: | 02/05/1982 |
| From: | Hood D Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Harold Denton NRC |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19258A087 | List:
|
| References | |
| CON-BX21-002, CON-BX21-2, FOIA-84-96 OL, OM, NUDOCS 8203020050 | |
| Download: ML20093C035 (37) | |
Text
./'
A
_~
tyne wy :..,,, _..
h UNITED STATES h'.
5[ [
3,( (
,n NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
/"' g_,,h i.
WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555
,y FEB, 6 3182 p/o Iya A/D/
- i.2_.
Docket Nos. 50-329 b
DIPA?!
File APPLICANT: Consumers Power Company FACILITY:
Midland Plant, Units 1 and 2
SUBJECT:
SumARY OF OCTOBER 6-7,1981 MEETING ON UNDERGROUND PIP!hG On October 6 and 7,1981, the NRC staff met in Bethesda, Maryland with Consumers Power Company, Bechtel, and consultants to discuss underground piping in inade-quately compacted plant fill at the Midland site.
A sussiary of this meeting is provided by Enclosure 1.
e I
[,,h\\ } !.00 ' k ; ' '-
Darl S. Hood, Project Manager Licensing Branc't No. 4 Division of Licensing
Enclosure:
As stated cc: See next page f
g FEB 181982 yuwws t
9g
~
e, 7
o s;
MIDLAND Mr. J. ib Cook Vice President-Consumers Power Cogany 1945 West Parnall Road _
Jackson, Michigan.49201 cc: Michael I. Miller, Esq.
nMr. Don van Farrowe, Chief Ronald G.? Iamarin, Esq.
Division of Radiological Health Alan S. Farnell, Esq.0 Department of Public Health P.O. Box 33035 Isham, Liacoln & Betle 2
Suite 4200i Lansing, Michigan 48909 1 First National Plaza Chicago, Illinois 60603 William J..Scanlon, Esq.
2034 Pauline Boulevard James E. Brunner, Esq.'
Ann Arbor, Michigan 48103 Consumers Power Conany i
. 212 West Michigan Avenue U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission Jackson, Michigan' 49201 Resident Inspectors Office Route 7 s
Myrin M. Cherry, Esq.
Midland, Michigan 48640 1 IBM Plaza Chicago, Illinois 60$11 Ms. Barbara Stamiris 5795 N. River Ms. Mary SinciairI d Freeland, Michigan 48623 5711 Summerset Dr. lie i
Midland. Michigan 48640 Mr. Pauf A. Perry, Secretary Consumers Power Cogany Stewart H.' Freeman 212 W. Michigan Avenue s
Assr; tant Attorney General Jackson, Michigan 49201 1
State of Michigan Environmental Protection Division Mr. Walt Apley c/o Mr.' Max Clausen 720 Law Building s
Lansing, Michigan 48913 Battelle Pacific North West Labs (PNWL)
'i Battelle Blvd.
Mr. Wendell Marshall SIGMA IV Building
?
Route 10 Richland, Washington 99352 Midiand, Michigan 48640 Mr. I. Charak, Manager NRC Assistance Project Mr. Roger W. Huston Saite 220 Argonne National Laboratory 7910 Woodmont Avenue 9700 South Cass Avenue Bethesda, Maryland 20814 Argonne, Illinois 60439 James G. Keppler, Regional Administrator Mr. R. B. Borsum U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission, Nucleae: Power Generation Division Babcock ;& Wilcox Regi.on !II 7910 Woodmont' Avenue, Suf te 220 799' Roosevelt Road Bethesda, Maryland 20814?
Glen E1?yn, Illinois 60137
'\\
r i.
t g\\
h k
~w'*
i -
F,,,e e
.m.
a
,y,,
Mr. J. W. Cook '
cc: Commander, Naval Surface Weapons Center ATTW:
P. C. Huang White Oak Silver Spring, Maryland 20910 Mr. L. J. Auge, Manager Facility Design Engineering Energy Technology Engineering Center P.O. Box 1449 Canoga Park, California 91304 Mr. Neil Gehring U.S. Corps of Engineers NCEED - T 7th Floor 477 Michigan Avenue Detroit, Michigan 48226 Charles Bechhoefer, Esq.
Atomic Safety & Licensing Board U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C.
20555 Mr. Ralph S. Decker Atomic Safety & Licensing Board U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C.
20535 Dr. Frederick P. Cowan Apt. B-125 6125 N. Verde Trail Boca Raton, Florida 33433 Jerry Harbour, Esq.
Atomic Safety and Licensing Board U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C.
20555 Geotechnical Engineers, Inc.
ATTN: Dr. Steve J. Poulos 1017 Main Street Winchester, Massachusetts 01890
f d
I.
Fire w.16
[
V l
CONSUMERS Frca GSKeeley, P-14-113B
- /
POWER Date October 23, 1981
/
COMPANY Subject MIDLAND PROJECT -
Internal UNDERGROUND PIPING MEETING WITH -
Correspondence 4
STAFF ON OCTOBER 6 AND 7, 1981 -
FILE 0485.16 SERIAL 14704 CC JWCook, P-26-336B (w/o att)
DFlewis, Bechtel-AA (w/att)
AJBoos, Bechtel-AA (w/o att)
MIMiller, IL&B (w/att)
JEBrunner, M-1079 (w/att)
DESibbald, Midland (w/att)
WJCloutier, P-24-611 (w/att)
_DMBudzik/TJSullivan, P-24-624A (w/o)
(t6EeY Nostbd7Esningr,a&_it. con"" OIntt1 '
I.
Introduction - G S Keeley (CP Co)
The meeting is intended to provide an update for the NRC Staff regarding activities related to underground piping at Midland. A previous meeting on this subject was held May 5, 1981. This meeting addressed actions taken since the earlier discussion in January 1981 when results of profiles taken in 1979 were discussed as well as stress calculations resulting from these profiles.
It is Consumers Power Company's belief, based on the work done to date, that the piping in its present. configuration does not present a safety problem. CP Co's approach includes proposed acceptance ' criteria in-tended to show that the piping is capable of performing its intended function over the plant's design life. This performance-based accep-tance criteria is similar to that recently accepted in a board decision on North Anna.
The specific discussions principally concern the Service Water Piping.
Previous activities included a profile of one line in each trench (1979). A reprofiling and ovality check of the B Train Service Water Supply and return lines was completed on September 23, 1981. The i
techniques used for this reprofiling allowed for a more accurate measurement (2 1/16 inch). Reprofiling and ovality measurements on the A Train are scheduled to start the week of October 12 and should be completed by November 15 for turnover to Consumers Testing.
We will also discuss the problem of modeling since we have difficulty interpreting profile readings as being due to 100% settlement that has occurred since installation.
W J Cloutier (CP Co) indicated that telephone conferences were held between CP Co, ETEC and NRC on August 10 and 25, 1981. In the first of these conferences, it was noted that CP Co's intent was to show the piping is not in distress and adequate for use as a Class 2 safety grade system.
II. Intent of Current-Efforts W J Cloutier (CP Co)
It was noted that Standard Review Plan Section 3.9.3 allows alternatives to an acceptance based on evaluation of stress calculations provided ic1081-0873a102 s
9
-v+-r, a
yor-w
.w,- - ~,, -.,,.. - - - - -
w- -,,,
-,,-----.,w-,,-,r,,,e,,,,m s ---
---.,,....,,,,,_--.,---,m,,--,ene-a
. w,,
wewnw
-w--w..,
emmm,,s-,
.ep 2
dimensional stability and functional capability can be maintained. Upon review of this position, NRC MEB personnel responded in the second tele-phone conference that the principal concern is assuring system function-ality.. Discussed during the telecon was using a hydro, sizing pig and performance (functional) tests to determine functionality. It was re-ported that the current availability of the piping (system being open) had prompted efforts to obtain ovality measurements as a more accurate indication of the current condition of the piping, rather than passing a sizing pig through the piping. The acceptance criteria to be used to assure functionality throughout life was addressed in this meeting.
Soil Sattlement is a long term, noneyclic process. The concern, therefore, is to demonstrate that settlement loading will not cause pipe
' collapse reducing the flow area to below that required for function-ality. The effect of settlement loading on pipe is principally a bending action and thus measurement of out-of-roundness (ovality) was chosen as an appropriate indicator of pipe distress. A criteria of 8%
is being used for acceptance; this value is based on ASME codes for installation and fabrication (NC3642 and NC4223.2) and is widely used throughout industry (ASME B31.1, B31.2 and B31.3).
Proposed Continuing Testing Program - D F Lewis (Bechtel)
There was a discussion on the construction hydro test.
i Flow verification test - A full flow verification test will be conducted annually. A requirement to perform this test will be proposed for in-clusion in the Technical Specifications (Assuming NRC acceptance of this approach). The continuing monitoring program will include a trending evaluation of this test data to detect any decreases in flow even though acceptance criteria are met. The proposed testing is expected to be performed during plant operations.
_This type of testing will not explicitly s'how that no pipe deformation -
is occurring; rather, it demonstrates that deformation sufficient to i
reduce the flow below that necessary is not occurring. It was noted that deformation considerably greater.than the 8% ovality acceptance
. criteria being used would be required to cause any appreciable decrease in flow. Slides were presented (see attached) on location of flow measurement devices.
D Gupta and A Cappucci (NRC) questioned the appropriateness of this type of testing. Their concern is that small deformations go undetected. It is not apparent that pipe deformation could not progress so far by the
+
time any flow effect is noted that collapse might be imminent. Such collapse might then occur between testing periods and go undetected for some period.
In Service Inspection - ISI will initially be bcsed on ASME Section XI
.1980 Edition with Addenda.through winter 1980. ISI fespections present an additional check on functionability of this piping (see attachment).
ic1081-0873a102
~..
+;.
a (A correction to.the slide on acceptance criteria was noted; the entry reading 0.5 gym should read 0-5 gps.)
III. Analytical Difficulties - W"J Cloutier (CP Co)
There have been difficulties in analyzing the piping to determine l
j The problem is not the computer codes, it is the availability stresses.
and reliability of input dats. Field data is input by placing artificial rigid restraints at locations measured; this has resulted in artificially high bending and stresses being calculated at these locations.
Measurement inaccuracies also affect these results. In 1979, profiling A
was done to i 1/4 inch accuracy with measurements every 10 feet.
parametric study over a 20 foot span using worst case measurement errors The current
. (1/2 inch deflection) yields a calculated stress of 55 ksi.
reprofiling is being done to i 1/16 inch; this helps the problem of
" artificial" calculated stresses but current measuring techniques intensify the effect of local discontinuities. Fitup and installation differences (" discontinuities") result in very high calculated stresses unless the curve is " smoothed."
SMA has performed calculations (results on attached slide) to determine the soil loading which would have been required to cause the observed
(
deformations if settlement were the only deformation mechanism.
This study showed soil loadings necessary to be as much as three times the conservative estimate of th,e soil capacity. The limited information available about presettlement, as-built conditions thus is shown to provide an unreslistic calculational solution. H Singh (COE) questioned i
i the assumptions used in this analysis; specifically that of a uniform It was explained that the analysis showed that in soil spring constant.
order to force the pipe into its present condition the soils could not j
apply enough force-to do this.
D Hood (NRC) questioned whether the nonsafety grade piping was installed I
and fit up to the same requirements. CP Co and Bechtel personnel present were not sure this was the case and committed to check this (A subsequent check indicates point and inform Mr Hood of the answer.
that nonsafety grade pipe was installed per ASME B31.1 which requires the same alignment tolerances as safety grade.) The QCIs for safety l-grade piping showed that the pipe was installed per the spec with no actual measurements on the QCI. It was pointed out that fit up f
measurements are made. prior to welding and that discortion occurs during L
Hood asked why we don't remove the pipe, surcharge the welding process.
We said we don't the soil,' then replace the pipe at pecper elevation.
believe we have a problem with the pipe that warrants this.
Basis for Acceptance Criteria - J Tsacoyeanes (TES)
Some members of the working Previous calculations were done to 3 S.
group on design codes felt there would*be no real problem involved in There is reasonable assurance that the pipe would exceeding this.
function and not fail if stressed beyond this limit since it is based on i
ic1081-0873a102 l
.._._m
..a 4
Settlement is a
'f a fatique concern which is not present in this case.
strain limited or deflection controlled problem and does not have a t
continuous force to drive the pipe to failure once a maximum bending A theoretical calculation using BOSOR indicates no stress is reached.
pipe failure with a 50% increase in stress; such.a calculation a l
The uncertainties involved with L
pipe movement caused by the soil.
predicting-failure based on stresses, combined with the dif that an acceptance criteria on deformation was more applicable.
It was The 8% limit used is based on fabrication codes as noted above.
noted also that the existence of ovality on out-of-roundness does not in itself imply a structural failure of the pipe.
Measurement Techniques - D Sibbald (CP Co)
IV.
Profiling and ovality measurement has been completed for the Water Train.
Measurements at some at a minimum of 5 foot increments for measurement.
locations, particularly in elbows, were as close as 1.5 ft.
Measurements were also taken 2-1/2 inches on either side of pipe welds.
The Pipe Evaluation Profile Measurement System developed by SWRI for The device ases a pressure
[
this effort was described (see attachments).
(as transducer moved within the pipe and positioned on the pipe bottomThe measurement is determined using a bubble level on the transducer).
of the differential pressure between a reference water column and aThe column ending at the. transducer.
(In 1979 the but involved a visual measurement rather than sensed dp.
pipe was not completely drained leading to possible additional uncertainties in the preciseness of locating the pipe bottom.)
4 The 20" condensate piping to be profiled will be measured by a similar This will basic-method utilizing a " crawler" being developed by SWRI.
ally be a fully automated version of the technique used on the SW piping measured to date.
to be measured using personnel in the pipe.
Ovality is measured at the same locations as elevation and using another
-The device uses rotating arms to obtain both maximum Their azimuthal orientation is also recorded SWRI instrument.
d along with the azimuthal location of the longitudinal fabrication wel.
and minimum diameters.
Fittings were measured using the same measurement arm, however, this d in required removing it from the rolling platfoon (dolly) which was use straight pipe sections for accurate positioning.
The preliminary (reviews not yet completed) results of a portion of the The 1981 measurements were reviewed (drawings provided to NRC Staff).
f purposes.
.1979 data was plotted on the same drawings for re erence They Ovality measurements were also presented (see attachments).
generally were less than 2% compared to a required manufacturing (Approx 1.7 tolerance in straight pipe of approximately 1%.
ic1081-0873a102
...~
s fittings.) The ovality measurements have not yet been plotted but will be shown along with the profile data in future plots.
The Staff expressed concern "regarding the unavailability of stresses calculated from this data. CP Co agreed to provide such calculations.
V.
Overburden Loads - D F Lewis (Bechtel)
A question has been raised regarding overburden. loads where live loads could be present at the surface. It was noted that this issue was addressed in Question 34 of CP Co's 50.54(f) responses. Mr Lewis pointed out that the fuel oil line at approximately 2-1/2 ft depth is a small diameter line; some SWS piping is at apprcximately 5-1/2 ft depth but most piping is below 6 ft obviating major concern for live load overburdens.
VI.
Other lines - W J Cloutier Fuel oil lines to the diesel generators were installed after the building surcharge. They were installed on unistruts imbedded in concrete and their actual elevations were measured. CP Co concludes J
that this treatment implies no settlement concern with these lines.
Kane (NRC) questioned this conclusica since no survey data exists since the original measurements in 1980; since no calculation of stresses assuming worst case settlement has been made, this conclusion may be inappropriate.
The 8" and 10" lines near the east side diesel generator building which have not been rebedded previansly will be rebedded.
(OKBC 27, 2HBC311, 2HBC310) since this effort is more straightforward than data collection would be on these lines.
A sizing pig will be used to detect deformation in the remaining 8" lines which will not be rebedded.
(8"-IHBC-310, 8"-1HBC-311, 8"-2HBC-82, 8"-2HBC-81.)
Lines associated with the BWST will be rebedded from the valve pit to The service water system pipes will be repositioned at the dike area.
the SWPS where it enters the structure. It was noted that a question This remains open regarding the rattle space at this penetration. (The write-problem will be corrected as part of the SWPS underpinning.
up on the history of this issue has been provided to the NRC subsequent to the meeting.)
VII. Summary The data on installed profiles and ovality measurements indicate that the SWS piping is not presently in distress. Plans for a post-construction hydrostatic test, periodic flow monitoring and the required ISI program will demonstrate continued functionability and provide adequate assurance of safety.
ic1081-0873a102
i m.,
6 The Staff and the Corps of Engineers questioned the problems posed by seismic considerations. They requested that a stress analysis due to seismic events considering post-settlement piping conditions be documented. Concern was rai4ed that a seismic input could lead to a pipe failure due to a prestressed condition which might go undetected by the proposed testing regimen. CP Co responded by stating that the ASME Code equations for combining stresses do not require settlement stresses to be combined with seismic stresses. The staff restated their concern was principally with the effect of the present and future profile curvature on the seismic analysis.
Meeting Continuation - October 7,1981 This meeting was reconvened briefly on October 7,1981 to permit the NRC Staff to provide comments on the October 6, 1981 meeting after their in-house caucus The Staff indicated the following:
with their Branch Chief (Bosnack).
A quantitative evaluation is needed demonstrating that a safe shutdown 1.
earthquake will not rupture the pipe and how to separate settlement from installed conditions.
Appendix A of 10 CFR 100 requires that it be demonstrated an OBE will not 2.
impact operation.
Quantification of stresses sufficient to permit Staff acceptance is 3.
lacking.
4.
A seismic margin analysis will also be required.
The primary The scope of NRC concern is all safety Class I buried piping.
5.
concern is the SWS piping. Some Staff personnel.believe the data Others believe presented indicates this piping is presently overstressed.
the ovality shows no problem. Input is still needed relating pipe _ ovality to a predicted pipe failure.
6.
Seismic and settlement loadings cannot be decoupled.
The piping must meet code and must be shown to meet functional require-7.
stress limit If enough good data is available, use of the 3 S ments.
could possibly be waived. Likewise if we met 3 S as piping is now, then would-have a better argument of future acceptabi1[cy of pipe.
!~
The major concern remaining is the effect of earthquakes and whether a margin l
to seismically-induced failure can be established from ovality measurements.
The staff asked, and we agreed to provide results of BOSOR as to where buckling takes place.
If the ovality reduction which will be acasurable by flow verification can be defined and it can be demonstrated that such a reduction is not a concern There has to be more during an SSE, this issue could likely be resolved.
technical justification on this, t-j-
i ic1081-0873a102
9.
7 In conclusion, the Staff noted that reprofiling was done externally at Summer j
Plant with stress calculations showing 1/2 code allowable.
When questioned whether the Staff would reconsider curve fitting as an approach, Mark Hartsman indicated he would talk to ETEC and let us know.
t l
l l
l L
i
{
t l
l l
I ic1081-0873a102
NRC MEETING AGENDA I. ~ Introduction A.
Meeting Purpose B.
Previous Activities and :lestings C.
Schedule and Activities D.
Recent Telecons II. Proposed Demonstration Solution
-A.
. Acceptance Criteria
.1.
Ovality Measurements 2.
Construction Hydro 3.
Periodic Verify of Acceptable Flow 4.
Inservice Inspection III. Limitations of Analytical Solution A.
Difficulty in Truly Modeling the Problem.
B.
SMA Study on Soils Forces Required C.
No as Built Dimensions of Installed Conditions.
D.
QCI Requirements I.
Basis of Acceptance Criteria IV.~
Preliminary 1981 Measurements Results A.
SRI Measurement Techniques 1.
Profiling 2.
Out of Roundness 3.
Data Presentation 1.
Profiles for 1981 Data Compared with 1979 Data 2.
Ovality Measurements Results V.
Miscellaneous Concerns A.
Overburden loads - 50.54(f) Question 34 B.
Tuel oil-lines
'C.
Rebedding and Realignment 1.
10"-OHBC-27, 8"-2HBC-311, 8"-2HBC-310 2.
36" Service Water Header Fix for Adequate Rattle Space D.
Sizing Pig Operation 1.
8"-1HBC-310, 8"-1HBC-311, 8"-2HBC-81, 8"-2HBC-82
-E.
BWST Lines VI.
S - ary
,---n
--,w.,em
-,m.-e-nw, m
- ~,--,
w w-w-vvy y
e-w--
,, - - -e
+ >. -,g,s nw ere,-,~-,- - we.r w-n e y, e-e
.. h' l
r 10/4/d)
& ~~i"Ti' ~cJ D/3 & C d
.l I
I Bsc ne z.
'. o.
f.
t.s a i 4 l
\\
ae rue /J spa.
- s. c %je.,
- re-b i
l i
- 12. 51
/llD3 I/C ;
C-fC.6
'. E 8, O'Is t rh)/,. IJKCl1'E //E8 A rAb -t w 10 r.-e./g c /M6 M
faecJw./i-M6 l A.T.'aC.2. ;- c.c.I I
5: 7. d-C -
\\
~
. Cv,Ne lu. D cu Melc @.'/nca.n,/mym Sen.
a H. L.
u m
it. rw
- Bit y ct.'.ed77E/Cl CPc, Nac/As.
C,.J.-~6
-rEh SatuYAN j
R
~
l 'pme}L.
I-Iva-ea Tlec Ba h K
uc ce es i
. m s # are.
l15t. vs A A c. W ( d y u civ< n o Na
Conservative Soil Capacity Estimates 6
e Indicates Pipe Settlement at Survey Points l
o
!!plift a 10 K/Ft
- Pipe Displacement Profile Bearing = 75 K/Ft
-- Soil Settlement Profile yprial=28K/Ft
- Pipe bending stress in ksi at measuhement point (typica 1
- Soil spring forces (typical) i 1
l l
l i.
LINEAR ELASTIC ANALYSIS RESULTS FOR UPPER BOUNO SOIL PROPERTIES i
l i
1 Basis von Accermuc.s. Cnirenie 1
LmiTs ow syness.
a 3 bg, (NC-3te52.1) - SEteNbpRY ST1tt%%
- SASGb CN RVcxuN(a - 60504.
- REFT.FCT Lo%b-C.0MT12.ott,Eb SITUATs chl J
IMIT5 ON DE.FOR M AT'804 I
- MEAsuR.FD SY CVALITV
= CO DE u n t? 6 */o
(.NC.- %41., N< -ya.t.1.1) l f
i 4
,,_,a_
__c-,w,mw
_ w en,
.----a
.{ ~
.t.:
9
/_
PRESSURE TRANSOUCER READOUT METER l
y REFERENCE WATER COLUMN fj/5 1 /j WATER LEVEL % 3 TRA50NIC TRANSOUCER
/
/
CONOUCTOR WATER COLUMN a.j F HOSE CABLE
/ WONITORINSTROMENT-g g
}pri i
~
/
~
>a l:
WATE3
~ q COLUtreA0JU3T y LEVELGAUGC e
}lT/ '//7 MAGNET
~
d p _-
g i
%i I
PRESSURE / g "L
TRANSOUCER (pesilleninpipeI g
~
- n s nre
. p os.-
MAGNET
'l
"'E.
e f
20.000 saa n
-3 EIN j
~
I 10000
= a,!.
=.0 owo$7 l
e-* e-n ROEHEHCE CALIBRATION ULOCM REFERENCE CALIBRATION SLOCM
~
O FOR HEIGHT FOR ileCNNESS SCilEM ATIC-PIPE ELEVATION PROFILE MEASURMENT SYSTEM i
i 1
l' T
/
)M AE R
A M
D U
R A
E TS L
(
N
/
1 n
=
M I
7 E
A R
N
)A !
E
/b A X
C M
c W. S E
o) t la R
Bp (M
U
/7 S
Rm P
1 K
E 0
O A
~
C). D (n O
5 k E
7 I
M
)
LA L
/
/ S m
BP 2
A p
e c
S r.
2F 1
6 9 k S.
A LA s
1 E
D M
/N.
N
^
L l
1[
(
L S~ (
l D
P P
J a
~
E' N
3 b
l T
l L
U S
1
,)
1 I
Q A
b 1
1 l
C e,
1 S
l l
1 F-1 1
1 A
(/
/
D 133 D
1
=
7 0
m 0
I
!I 12 2
M 1 (()*
R
=
T A
2 c
TE S'K
~
- 1
,!f\\
}i!j!
- sll I1 }
Ili),
Ii
\\4ll
' ' lJ,,
j l
/
VJC j
4"'
OIR OF POUNDNESS j
% = 100 DMAX - DMIN s
I'
/ -
Do PIPEI.INFi. SD11* ICE WATE2 FITTINGS,
Do 2 Average I.D. = 25.25" Do = 64.135cm
.DW.X = Maxinum I.D.
a DMIN = Minimum I.D.
/
I
. /
A Pipe Pipe Pipe
~
Position Ovalness Position Ovalness Position Ovainess 26-OHBC-56
,13A 1.87 13B
- 1.40 13C ^
-1.56 12D
^1.56 21D' j
,0.78
'~
22A 1.09 j-22B
'0.9
.22C 0.9,
26"-OHBC-55
/ 38D 1.09
/ 39A 1.40' 39B 0.9 '
39C
.0.47' 47D 1.56' 48A 1.87 g
48B 1.25 48C 2.03 26"-0EBC-20 95A 1.72 94C 1,40 945 1.72 94A 1.72 86A 0'. 9 85D 1.09 85C O.9 85B 2.09 8SA 0.6 26"-OHBC-19 r
134A 1.56 133C 1.09 133B 1.56 2.03 133A 124A 102 123D 1.56
' 17.3C 1.72
='
123B 1.09 123A 1.40 t
miO981-0728a100
,m-
-v,-
m
-r
.--.v--
C' WJC 9/20/81 t-OUT OF ROUNDNESS 7
% = 100 DNAX - DMIN Do PIPEI,INE: 26/36"-0HBC-20 Do = Avera8e I.D. = 25.25" Do = 64.135cm DNAX = Naminus I.D.
DMIN = Ninimum I.D.
Do = 35.25 = 89.535cm Pipe 1.
Pipe 1
Pipe Position 0;ainess Position Ovainess Position Ovalness 74C 1.72 98A 0.9 908 0.9 70A-1.09 97D 0.9 9'0A 0.6 703 1.09 97C 0.9 89D 0.78 70C 1.25 97B 0.9 89C 0.9 70D 1.09 97A 0.78 89B 0.78 71A 1.40 96D 0.6 89A 0.9 71B 1.87 96C 1.09 88D 0.78 71C 1.56 965 0.9 88C 0.78 71D 1.56 96A 0.9 888 0.78 72A 0.6 95D 0.78 88A 1.4 723 0.78 95C 0.6 87D 0.9 72C 1.25 95B 0.6 87C 0.9 72D 0.9 93D 3.12 87B 0.9 73A 0.9 93C 1.87 87A 0.9 73B 0.78 93B 1.09 86D 0.78 73C 0.78 93A 0.78 86C 1.09 73D 0.78 92D 0.78 868 0.9 74A 0.6 92C 1.09 84D 0.6 74B 0.78 928 1.09 84C 0.6 100D 0.6 92A 1.09 848 0.9 100C 1.40 91D 0.6 84A 0.16 1005 1.40 91C 1.87 83D 0.78 100A 1.40 91B 1.25 83C 0.9 99D 1.25 91A 1.72 838 1.25 99C 1.56 90D 1.56 83A 1.25 995 0.9 90C 1.40 76C 0.78 99A 1.25 80A 0.6 768 0.47 98D
'0.9 79D 1.09 76A 0.6 98C 0.78 79C 0.9 75D 0.78 983 0.78 798 0.9 75C 0.6 82D 1.25 79A 0.9 75B 0.9 82C 0.78 78D 0.6 75A 1.09 823 0.9 78C 0.9 103A 1.79 82A 0.78 788 1.09 103C 0.78 SID 0.9 78A 0.9 103D 0.34 81C 0.16 77D 1.25 104A 0.45 SIB 0.47 77C 1.09 1048 0.67 81A 0.78 77B 0.78 104C 0.78 SOD 0.78 77A 0.47 104D 1.12 80C 1.25 76D 0.78 105A 1.12 105B 1.23 805 1.09 miO981-0728a100
I~
e :i
.a.,,
s 4
- i. t 3-OUT OF ROUNDNESS, l
(
. j:
1 Pipeline: J6/16" OHBC-201 (ccnd'd) i
.t t
Pipe
~
\\ Pipe Pipe
^'
Position Ovalness Pos'ition Ovalness Position Ovainess
+
105C 1.90 105D 2.90
?
106A c2.79 106B 2.12 106C 1.56
106D.1 1.1.5~'
s 107A 1.23 4
107B 1.45 107C 1.45 e
p.
s
'k g
i 1
s 1
r
/
t
\\
\\
i i
i
. s l
t
\\
d N
miO981-0728a100
j WJC
^
OUT OF ROUNDNESS
% = 100 DMAX - DMIN Do PIPEI.INE: 26-OHBC-56 Do = Average I.D. = 25.25" Do = 64.135cm DMAX = Maxinum I.D.
DMIN = Minimum I.D.
Pipe Pipe Pipe Position Ovalness Position Ovalness Position Ovalness IA 2.49 11D 0.78' 1B 0.60 12A 0.9 1C 0.78 12B 0.9 1D 0.78 12C 0.9 2A 0.9 14A 1.87 2B 0.47 14B 1.40 2C 0.9 14C 1.40 2D 1.09 14D 0.6
'3A 1.40
- 15A 0.9 OB 0.90 ISB 1.09 3C-0.6 15C 0.9 3D 0.78 ISD 0.78 4A 1.09 16A 0.78 4B 1.25 16B 0.9 4C 1.40 16C 0.9 4D 0.78 16D 1,09
-5A 0.9 17A 1.09 5B
.1.09 17B 0.6 5C 1.09 17C 0.6 5D 0.78 17D 0.9 6A 0.9 18A 0.78 6B 0.78 18B 0.78 6C 0.9 18C 1.40 6D 0.6 ISD 0.78-7A 0.78 19A 0.3 7B 1.25 19B 0.6 7C 1.09 19C 0.47 7D 0.47 19D 0.47 8A' O.9 20A 0.6 8B 0.9 20B 0.78 8C' 1.09 20C 0.6 8D 0.78 20D 1.09
-9A 0.9 22A 0.78 9B
'1.40 21L 0.47 9C 1.40 21C 0.47 9D 0.9 23B 0.6 10A 0.9 23C 0.6 10B 0.9 24A 1.09 10C 0.9 24B 0.47 11A 0.9 24C 0.6 115 0.78 24D 0.78 11C 0.78 miO981-0728a100
e e
v-,
e-,---,e
,v
,.--.eww-w,,
.m
,<,m---->vo,v..m n,nw,~,n+m-e.
m
-gn--esw y
,,, egg y+.,,,we,w,q-,smm-e a w,y
,--w-,,-,m---,a y
\\
VJC
~
OUT OF ROUNDNESS
% = 100 DMAX - DMIN Do PIPELINE: 26-OHBC-55 Do = Average I.D. = 25.25" Do = 64.135cm DMAX = Maxinus I.D.
DMIN = Minimum I.D.
Pipe Pipe Pipe Position Ovainess Position Ovalness Position Ovalness 25A 0.78 37B 1.40 25B 1.25 37C 1.72 25C 0.78 37D 0.3 25D 0.78 38A 0.6 26A 0.48 38B 0.6 26B 0.6 38C 0.78 26C 0.6 40A 0.9 26D 0.6 40B 0.9 27A 0.3 40C 0.6 28A 0.3 40D 0.6 29A 0.48 41A 0.78 29B 0.60 41B 0.6 29C 0.48 41C 0.78 29D 0.60 41D 0.6 30A 1.09 42A 0.6 30B 0.6
- 42B, 0.78 30C 0.48 42C 0.78 a
30D 1.40 42D 0.9 31A 1.40 43A 0.78 31B 0.9 43B 0.78 31C 0.9 43C 0.6 31D 1.09 43D 0.47 32A 1.25 44A 0.78 32B 0.9 44B 1.09 32C 0.6 44C 1.09 32D 0.6 44D 0.9 33A
~ 0.48 45A 0.78 33B 1.09 45B 0.9 I
33C 0.78 45C 1.09
.33D 0.78 34A 0.9 45D 1.56 34B 1.56 46A 0.9 34C 1.09 46B 0.78
[
34D 1.09 46C 0.6 35A 1.09 47A 0.3 35B 1.25 47B 0.78 35C 1.25 47C 1.09 35D 0.6 49A 1.40 36A 0.78 49B 1.40 36B 0.9 49D 1.25 36C 1.09 50A 0.78 36D 0.47 50B 1.09 37A 0.6 50C 0.6 l
50D 1 56 miO981-0728a100 l.
-m---
e v,,q y
e-wadv p--
,,,y-aw
-e,-,
--p---
,s%.-,.+%-,
aw,-
c-
WJC 9/20/81 l
OUT OF ROUNDNESS S
% = 100 DMAX - DMIN Do PIPELINE: 26/36"0HBC-19 Do = Average I.D. = 25.25" Do = 64.135cm Do = 35.25 = 89.535cm DNAX = Maxinum I.T.
DMIN = Minimum I.D.
Pipe Pipe Pipe Position Ovalness Position Ovainess Position Ovainess 108A 0.6 125A 1.09 113B 0.6
~
108B 0.3 124D 1.09 113A 1.09 108C 0.78 124C 1.09 139D 0.78 108D 0.3 124B 1.72 139C 1.25 109A 0.48 122D 0.6 139B 0.9 1098 0.16 122C 0.9 139A 0.78 109C 0.3 1223 1.09 138D 0.9 109D 0.16 122A 0.78 138C 0.6
.110A 0.3 121D 0.6 138B 0.9 110B 0
121C 0.78 138A 0.9 110C 0.6 121B 0.9 137D 1.25 110D 0
121A 1.4 137C 1.72 Illa 0.9 120D 0.9 137B 1.87 IllB 0.6 120C 1.25 137A 1.40 111C 0.16 120B 0.78 136D 1.25 111D 0.16 120A 0.9 136C 1.09 112A 0.48 119D 0.9 136B 0.48 112B 0.3 119C 1.72 136A 1.09 112C 0.48 119B 1.87 135D 0.9 130D 1.25 119A 1.72 135C 1.72 130C 1.56 118D 1.40 135B 1.56 1308 1.56 118C 1.25 135A 1.87 130A 1.56 118B 1.72 134D 1.25 129D 0.9 118A 1.09 134C 1.40 i
129C 0.78 117D 1.09 134B 1.40 1298 0.78 117C-1.40 132D 1.87 l
129A 0.78 117B 1.09 132C 0.9 l
128D 0.78 117A 0.9 132B 1.25 128C 0.6 116D 0.6 132A 1.72 128B 0.78 116C 0.6 131C 0.9 l
128A 0.9 116B 0.9 131B 0.9 l
127D 0.78 116A 1.09 131A 0.78 127C 1.40 115D 1.09 142A 0.89 127B 1.72 115C 1.25 142B 1.45 127A 1.25 115B 0.9 142C 1.79 126D 1.56 115A 0.3 142D 0.89 126C 1.25 114D 0.3 143A 1.01 126B 0.6 114C 0.3 143B 1.56 126A 0.78 114B 0.9 143C 1.79 125D 0.6 114A 0.9 143D 1.23 125C 1.40 113D 0.9 144A 1.23 125B 1.40 113C 0.6 144B 1.34 miO981-0728a100 I
k
.,w,,
.,n-.
TT '
o 1
-; 3.'f OUT OF ROUNDNESS e
PIPELINE: 26/36" OHBC - 19 (Cont'd)
Pipe Pipe Pipe Position Ovalness Position Ovalness Position Ovalness 144C 2.12 144D-2.12 1453 2.35 145B 2.01 145C 1.90 146A 1.80 146C 1.12 k
miO981-0728a100 v-k
.,y,
,-,,_,_,,.-,ys---
,.,.,, -. -,~,,,
,--,,,_,,_,.__,,,y--,,,,,
s.m...,,,,., _ _ _, -
-,_r,_
ie
\\
i i
1
.1 l
1 LN
. !l e.
l-l3 e
m,t
-~
g eg
.g 1 ig di i
1
- F -
a g
7,.
mqf. - -
4 1;
~
..g.
g j
e[.
k
/-.
I.,i. E g
'l:.
g m m ii I '
- % Wr? !ww".l j
W,
(
g %j s
~
3 'E 'glE
- U E
i l I
.4
,E O-8 j
.,]
.g,-ll - h_ g i...}
s
~
,.e
..13
.i.
c,.
. 5
}...... ).sa.
.7.
'j.
-.-5--
...r-
.-~ _
I
'I bf
~' **
f.,o --
I k
g s
..x.
t
& wei-
'N l'
- t-
_5
, we 1
r c
n..;
i i,+
I.
3
-+'-
I 6
>y a
~
,1 la g
i w
w i,
-.,wA t.
~
..j,.,
4
. j.
q b.
eM i
Mh.j
. S,..
i
- .. e.
,+
k:.
kg.
'?.
h
.. r a-
,,s
~
[
.v, t-T +. q
. " f d.* i
- i
=
j a-sw
,,a..,.
4 I
s
.*y
.,g.
. t...
l egg.*
spege ' ds J r
'r,
't
[
+
9f*d88'f 't. Ms'aW*'
"If 1**
4 m>
I f
a
- NOI p
e h,
e 1y,,W n
T
(
d
(
n l,=
j l
w.
.4.,.
%1 i
i 1
}
\\
{.
s 6
r s.
~ ~ ~ ~
=*
J
~
. 4.,.. %,
i:i:1
" ~ ~
' ~
- ,n h.h.
). '.i ni, a
,e/
ra i
. /,o..
/
{.t13j'it l
s l'
f 3
I l' I'!
Underground Piping: Slide 1.
y j
[T/@,O P iii 10i i 'iU T
4 @ J.F.C -
.,: :sP 3
ip. ;g<
- i.,
..-.i.
t n
4
,i s
I I g,lI.!
u.
.v Consumers Power Company -
Mr. Marguglio. Mr. Kcppler replied that such an organization would represent a further erhancenent to the previous MPQAD which he had found acceptable, and would meet the Staff's criteria for establishing depth in an organization.
~
Mr. Cook stated that this change would be documented by letter shortly and an implementation date will be provided. The responsibilities of Mr. Bird with respect to HVAC will also be addressed.' 'Mr. Cook also announced that due to reasons of health, far. Gil Keeley was being repl aced by Mr. Jim Mooney.
QA Plan for Underpinning Mr.'W.' Bird reviewed 'the general Quality Plan and the quality plans for the activities associated wit.h the underpinning 'of the service water
. pump structure and auxiliary building. Viewgraph slides used during the presentation.are provided~ by Enclosure.3.
The presentation consisted of a review of the information in Consumer's letter of January 7,1982.
l.lgQ Y~D
/k. n L Darl S. Hoo3, Projeqt'Manao'r
-Licensing Branch No. 4
. Division of Licensing
Enclosures:
As stated cc:
See next page e
2 s
W O
h 8
I
+
.}
+r MIDLAND Mr. J. W. Cook Vice President Consumers Power Conpany 1945 West Parnall Road Jackson, Michigan 49201 Mr. Don van Farrowe, Chief cc: Michael I. Miller, Esq.
Ronald G. Zamarin, Esq.
Division of' Radiological Health Alan S. Farnell, Esq. -
Department of Public Health Isham, Lincoln & Beale P.O. Box 33035 Suite 4200 Lansing, Michigan 48909 1 First National Plaza
- Chicago, Illinois 60603 William J. Scanlon, Esq.
2034 Pauline Boulevard James E. Brunner, Esq.
Ann Arbor, Michigan 48103 Consumers Power Coapany O.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 212 West Michigan Avenue Jackson, Michigan 49201 Resident Inspectors Office Route 7 Myron M. Cherry, Esq.
Midland, Michigan 48640 1 IBM Plaza Chicago, Illinois 60611 Ms. Barbara' Stamiris 5795 N. River Ms. Mary Sinclair
. Freeland, Michigan 48623 5711 Summerset Drive Midland, Mi.chigan 4864~0~
Mr. Paul A.,Per.ry, Sec.ta ry Consumers Power Compans Stewart H. Freeman 212 W. Michigan Avenue Assistant Attorney General Jackson, Michigan 49201 State of Michigan Environmental Protection Division Mr. Walt Apley 720 Law Building c/o Mr. Max Clausen Lansing, Michigan 48913-Battelle Pacific' North West Labs (PNWL)
Battelle Blvd.
Mr. Wendell Marshall SIGMA IV Building Route 10 Richland, Washington 99352 Midland, Michigan 48640 Mr. I. Charak,. Manager Mr. Roger W. Huston NRC Assistance Project
-Suite 220 Argonne National Laboratory 7910 Woodmont Avenue.
9700 South Cass Avenue Bethesda, Maryland 120814 Argonne, Illinois. 60439 Jaaes G. Keppler, Regional Administrator Mr. R. B. Borsum Nuclear Power Generation Division
. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
' Region III Babcock & Wilcox 7910 Woodaont Avenue, Suite 220:
799 Roosevelt Road Bethesda, Maryland 20814, Glen Ellyn,' Illinois 60137 S
d
<}
.9 j
j
\\
Mr. J. W. Cook 1 cc: Commander, Naval Surface Weapons Center ATTN:
P. C. Huang White Oak Silver Spring, Maryland 20910 Mr. L. J. Auge, Manager Facility Design Engineering Energy Technology Engineering Center P.O. Box 1449 Canoga Park, California 91304 Mr. Neil Gehring U.S. Corps of Engineers NCEED - T 7th Floor 477 Michigan Avenue Detroit, Michigan 48226 Ch arles Bechhoefer, Esq.
At3mic Safety & Licensing Board U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C.
20555 Mr. Ralph S. Decker Atamic Safety & Licensing Board U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C.
20555 Dr. Frederick P. Cowan Apt. B-125 6125 N. Verde Trail Boca Raton, Florida 33433 Jerry Harbour, Esq.
Atomic Safety and Licensing Board U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C.
20555 Geotechnical Engineers, Inc.
ATTN: Dr. Steve J. Poulos 1017 Main Street Winchester, Massachusetts 01890
]
t
p n.
s*
ENCLOSURE 1 ATTENDENCE SHEET CPCo - NRC MEETING W. R. Bird CPlo
.B. W. Marguglio CPCo J. G. Bloom Isaiam, Lincoln & Beak
-J. Cook CPto D. C. Boyd
- NRe, R. J. Cook Nki.
W. D. Paton NRi.
D. Hood Nk, M. Wilcove N R',
G. Gallagher NRt; R. Landsman NR.;
C. Noseline NR; L.'Spessard NR';
J. Keppler NR, D. E. Horn CP;o R. E. Sevo Be:htel 1
m n
-ENCLOSURE 2 s
NIDLAND' PROJECT QA. ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE ~
1 '<
LPRESENTATION TO >
~
REGION III.AND'N'R QA BRANCH
~
R e 4 g,
' GLEN ELLYN, lLLINOIS -
JANUARY.12,.1982 6
B W MARGUGLIO CONSUMERS POWER COMPANY w
19e
m
- e 1
1 L
DUTLINE OF PRESENTATION I
PURPOSES OF THE CHANGE DESCRIPTION OF THE CHANGE RESPONSES TO NRC QUESTIONS / CONCERNS OTHER BENEFITS FROM THE CHANGE DISCUSSION l
NRC POSITION O
i o
i I
v -
.e 2
PURPOSES OF THE CHANGE ADD SENIOR EXPERIENCED QA MANAGEMENT ACCOMMODATE THE GROWTH IN THE NUMBER OF QA PERSONNEL LOCATED AT THE SITE FULLY ADDRESS THE QA NEEDS OF THE JOB IN ITS FINAL STAGES UPGRADE LEADERSHIP AT THE' SITE G
s Q
r
.y.
e e
9.
t 3
' C*2 se=2== eTr"~*
T!3 FPM Ft&C J W Casa na sh a.a se.7 isasLI?e a.*:Emnect W"
emaa.se
(=#
u 8 Bare E.J b Steentes (See*pl F4s2 38 e a esettles it.8 L Peteesee (Ses*,1 I
I vt is t rev a aprEpistSEENT t.8 8 8 Turemell*
s amese es.,1 c.s 1
I~
l l
"TI*W e "s
i Wm ' A' as TalBS 6 8E4hJIC46 Elv1L en 5 " Ties stas ste!! 1 stA:
SET 19e esas 82
- b eepe*
C.4 mt see.ee es SIKT1ee sine
- EETanA E88 C.4 3 3 tore t.3 e J Sremetter e e.i
- tets-t-
'tt T*.s W 4ewher 49t#1)
A* N '
- N 88'E* M' *N M#D '
..1 gr e a
r.nu.
.we=.
- ~*-
en m urma; ma E ertrit.
.,,,,ei.
- e. -n.w
&,B,. Baga e.,e e.,i m J 3emoet,r,ee.e.-
f.4
.J A screen 19/363 fa e,g g g,p,
(.3 e4
- g. g
_ e f whatea.e e,s.,.e..
...e,..
e4 ete--
e..
.... e.,.
M,
- =-
~
et-
...e.
e
. reiser es.e
.. se e
~
e..
e---
C.S E SeF9e g
f.s T streedt B-4 P tira.aos Se i, Sutene 84
$ Tesepees 34 s seate
!? a Te D.A g gergoper ee.p.F 8&a'. &o4 N
MIBMW e
e.g g g p g,3g g..e t* !*J AfrWetERS 8=8
_ e f ease pyggy
- *O D-e
- 3***
pgy,ygg 43 L 9 wt M
J y gey
- .8 9 7
- met te 388 8 89 M
J f Amt 1 i #'*""" ' '**d I
- e,g g,
e.s O E allee
- *8 e.4 4 3 streous eg gg, e.s e emgeger e.g 3 g heerse
=
Etis t ar i,ortr' 1
- .6 9 7 Westette' g.6 0 9 Asserves e.g
^ t a aseeJose e.s a torno g.g
, J gas,,,,
j e.s f stret inatell 83eettisen Groep t.e D e meet (Leest e.g ""TWeere s.
W' i gg a -..,
84 m Sease
- t E 6 smlak e.e g g me,ee gggfggg f**ERIRt
- pp9 supeelsen t.
12 waar surpe'Sup
- .S
- v *t. t ee t.
8 8 Deene tJ
- L *==8'
.8 T smies N u K I"'"8"I g.J g g eyees e.g J pese 6s T 8 therette 46 9 R 8ettemme
- 8 L Se84*ese 54 T 8 Seeresessen m.
- .S
- 6er e.e J gemee&&.
- .4 9 b serenegg3pg66 t e Ote p.,;
D e spettaa
- tsaareas tapipse
'A,rtPe.lf,t*
4 e.0.se i
,. ~.s ee.
.,.,,,,e
~-
e.e s. eeneessor.ess, servers
- e,..e, m e
te.,
-.e.
.e.
. t es.o.,
' **t ene 5S$32165
... P,',",'..!i. d}-
9 e
s s
N
- uum e
.mm J.
7.-
a e
e e
, e k
b e
u!DLAfD pmrner efftar TIS PRESIDENr Plac J W Coat stIECTUS WTTRosENTAL Am SEL:TT assuRA33 8 W merges 11e aEIRAsn Pea:ET SIALITY AaSSA33 suramrKTr Stisetta t.e 3 y merges 11e e4 3 Aronune (See*F) ensanW
$4 W 3 Bir$
04 L Bleterte (See'F) 7448 a.e a A asstrict it.e
& Peterees (see*F)
Aspr it,a. A:seII &
WEIAL PRC.*IOS C=4 9 N fursteL1 I
I I
I I
QA ED'* :!I3 D AI J E.DB & AECEASICAA.
Cria &&
ggggggg SAD r.l mI r :g a OE SETI0I EIAO 1
gggg g 3,'a$, %'. s y.,J C'J J L M*
8 St" Ins BA8 C.4 D 8 Bare C.4 m J Beaserter so.e e Asener a.a: u A F **"
- E y D-*1triac GA 3G'!PIIP ;):
M MINI *
- MM8 J grgpv ' AS E
cp37 31JFtPT1309 SLTUrT1XS
- 8
- I'# '"
h3T13t3
- 4 WaVI
$lT EFT 1.g se e r=,.,
C.e A no,see C.A a a wie
,e.,
a Desse, u
a a maan, C.4 m tutterrtete p 3.A g g.ag (See'y)
, g,,
e.g
? 3 im e.g g g ggygeg g4 e gege c,e g, g,,g g, pn.e C A Chies ASST. SL773.
,c 4 J Ly e,e,,,
e.4 J Dommelt Cs 3 Perrise 8 8 8eearece 84 yy, J Deveen D-A D 8 Dele
' t.
D A Te
- .4 J Tetteet ed C.a.
re..$
C. Sees e.
a nera g g,c,e,se C.s
? MeseLI 8 S-A N Etralmed eg 3
13 g n C.g C Theepose S-4 L SWL8ue e.$
ea 34 J seeste 2an ys t!1:A2 ;.5
'Y SL7BT!sup 3.,a g,,,,,,
e h 3 Fle A A** IT D 6.s 1 1 teve 3r:1rffSCA
..A y gggggag i stee E,,,,,,c, e.4 r t 3--
u
,,,...ooeu a4 e L Allee S4 J C Stat incOrwp e.8
? E e in 3g p geneleeteter e.e C E Sarne,
e4 r L Jma f tmed ie J,,t,,,,,
e.g a g as M
3 B Ameereen e.4 S Fw e4 3 g goedrgs JmiaL mn*5 e.s a r 2 et eeere.
n.e
- p.een C.a o peneae e.s a A useeane C4 A e neerree E1ertrieel Grows i C.S D a Dett 4 Lead) a=4 D Goehrase
} E a WI JISC e.e a Lesen EE 4 5FN Wr
- 3i SVFWT1808 M
J R teeker a
..e g g g,,g, pre.,ctss ts gg, surtPTIScP e8 9 v
- iller 84 a 9 Beste C4 J t vmee M
T B Charette e.4 9 8 Soltanes RFI*1AL AS:MEPGES I C4 5 S hk
- .9 DW 3e T t Setreenesee L C-8 7 a &,eamas M
' ~
4 or e.s La B L Siemey t. Epte S
- Seeste!
Inst a xy ;
e. Centreet Repletoe N'I308 e. Oste
- 8 LklkWtB %===
i e 4ee6eem 4
- Ana Areer e.g g geigs,ee
- Deal Cepeelty e.S 9 temaers
- . Aanteistretive $wygart e.g 3 g.ee 8st es Lone e.4 0 th rese (1,peeted Seporties Date)
- e. 3 p T:detoe 9. toegererf e.$
T Tote breited 3/11/62 LH.kT ees.11. M '
e.s [ s s tenais l
- 8
, Cfb
{
.p 5
JWC SPECIFICATIONS FOR BWM ASSIGNMENT-DIRECT LINE RESPONSIBILITY-FOR MPQAD THREE-FULL DAYS AT SITE--MINIMUM CONTINUE TO OVERSEE PREVIOUSLY ASSIGNED FUNCTICNS, BUT WITH DELEGATION e
g.
_.-%>~ry-r-
--.-w-,-,---m,----yv.-w,
o-6 DELEGATION BWM IS SENIOR QA PERSON WRB IS BWM's DEPUTY BOTH BWM AND WRB HAVE LINE RESPONSIBILITY AND AUTHORITY l
T10 MORE EFFECTIVELY MANAGE QA:
ON A DAY-TO-DAY BASIS, THE HVAC SECTION AND THE QUALITY ENGINEERING SERVICES SECTION WILL REPORT TO WRB.
ON A DAY-TO-DAY BASIS, THE OTHER SECTION HEADS AND THE ASSISTANT MANAGER-ADMINISTRATION AND SPECIAL PROJECTS WILL REPORT TO BWM.
ON A DAY-TO-DAY BASIS, THE P0AE WILL COMMUNI-CATE AND INTERFACE WITH EITHER WRB OR BWM, DEPENDING UPON THE AB0VE-NOTED DELEGATION OF SUPERVISION.
9 (CONTINUED) e
m l*
7 DELEGATION (continued) li ADDITION, ON A DAY-TO-DAY BASIS, WRB WILL C)NTINUE TO SUPERVISE ALL ACTIVITIES ASSOCI-ATED WITH 50.55(e) AND PART 21 REPORTS (ie, DITERMINING REPORTABILITY, PREPARING REPORTS
- AND FOLLOWING-UP FOR PROBLEM RESOLUTION).
INADDITION,ONADAY-TO-DAYBASIS,WR5WILL CONTINUE.TO SUPERVISE THE REMEDIAL S0ILS WORK.
IT IS' INCUMBENT UPON EACH SECTION HEAD, THE PQAE AND THE ASSISTANT MANAGER TO NOTIFY EITHER WRB OR BWM OF ANY SIGNIFICANT ITEMS IN ACCORD-ANCE WITH THE ABOVE-NOTED DELEGATION OF SUPER-VISION.
~
s e
L
8 r
l-FULL-TIME MANAGEMENT SITE TIME SHALL EE WHATEVER IS REQUIRED l-TO D0 THE JOB HIDLAND PROJECT BJSINESS AT ANN ARBOR, AND JACKSON i
MANAGING EVEN WHEN AWAY FROM MIDLAND--
MANA'GING FULL TIME O
DELEGATING OTHER : UNCTIONS--EXCEPT FOR ENVIRONMENTAL, SAME AS ORIGINAL RESPON-SIBILITIES l
j
17 9
LINESOFCOMMUNICATIbN~
SAME DEGREE OF INVOLVEMENT FOR JWC SHORTER LINES OF COMMUNICATION FROM SITE QA SECTION HEADS TO JWC EQUAL BWM AND WRB ACCESS TO JWC
_e e
s e
e
r c-1 10 ORGANIZATIONAL AUTHORITY BWM IS SINGLY ACCOUNTABLE BWM HAS FULL-LINE AUTHORITY ASSIGNING DAY-TO-DAY SUPERVISION IS' NOT DELEGATING AWAY FINAL RESPONSI-bit,lTY AND AUTHORIIY 0
'll OTHER BENEFITS
. ADDITIONAL SENIOR EXP RE IENCED QA MANAGEMENT CONCENTRATED / SPECIALIZED EFFORT ADDITIONAL MANAGER ADDITIONAL SITE PRESENCE--WRB CONTINUES
~
TO SPEND SAME AMOUNT OF TIME AT SITE, EVEN WITH BWM's PRESENCE AT SITE l
l i=
l l
12 CONCLUSION STRONGER QA ORGANIZATION O
0 I
I l
Q U A L I T.Y.
P R- 0 6 R A M -
FOR U H -D E.
N N l'N G b
ACTIVI~ TIES,
~
O a
- e e
d,
e e,
9 m
O E
~
.n FO vt C
lEP fTt 4
63 m-9 h
\\
G 9m.
t---
w-
=
tv---v--
' ~ = = -
- - + -
--,=+--=w w
--v---7---'-----
w-w
-<- m -
v
"'-e w~w=
r------*=--
---=------d
r 4
~
~
2 i
UJ QUALITY PLAN FOR UNDERPINNING ACTIVITIES PURPOSE PRESENT 00ALITY PLANS, FOR THE UNDERPINNING ACTIVITIES TO HIGHLIGHT l
ORGtJ:IZATIO!S !WOIWII SPECIFIC RESPONSIBillTIES AND THElR l:
INTERFACING l
THOSE UNIQUE ACTIVITIES OR REQUIREMENTS THAT 00 BEYOND THE ESIABLISHED QUALITY PROGRAMS i
COMPREHENSIVE TOTAL QUALITY INVOLVEMENT AND CONTR01.S ON THE
!~
QUALITY RELATED ACTIVITIES PROVIDE A STATUS ON:
L x
(t STAFFING 0F THE QUALITY ORGANIZATIONS t
~
l IMPLEMENTATION OF THE QUALITY PLAN
~ -
x
~
~-
~
PROVIDE AN OPPORTUNITY FOR FACE TO FACE COMMUNICATION ON Tile UNDERPINNING QUALITY PROGRAM e
O E
g 9
3 i
l OUTLINE OF THE PRESENTATION i
CPC0 AND BECHTEL ORGANIZATIONS SUBCONTRACTOR AND CONSULTANT ORGANIZATIONS QUALITY PLAN CONTENT DESIGN CONTROL FOR UNDERPINNIrlG ACTIVITIES DESIGN DOCUMENT INTERFACE FLOW CHART PROCEDURE REVIEW APPROVAUFLOW CHART QUALITY RELATED ACTIVITIES LIST SUBCONTRACTOR REQUIRED "4" PROCEDURES STAFFING 0F QUALITY ORGANIZATIONS ADDITIONAL QUALITY PROGRAM DOCUMENTS REQUIRED TO SUPPORT THE UNDERPINNING WORK SUfflARY Af!D CONCLUSION
B
,L
.q
~
i CPC0AND.BECHTELORGANIZATION$L' ELEMENTS
~
~
~
THE EXISTING r0MPANY. ORGANIZATIONS AS PROVIDED'BY-ORGANIZATIONALC'~
CHARTS AND-DESCRIPTIONS IN THE TOPICAL REPORTS,AND LOWER TIER
'~
DOCUMENTS REMAIN FULLY APPLICABLE
^
L ORGANIZ TIONS INVOLVED IN THE UNDERPINNING F
CPC0 PROJECT MANAGEMENT'
~
~
CP,C_0 DESIGN PRODUCTION c
' cCPC0 SITE 11ANAGEMD;T c
BECilTEL PROJECT MANAGEMEtlT BECHTEL PROJECT ENGINEERING
~'
I BECHTELPROJECTGE0TECHNICALENGINEER l
BECllIEL CONSTRUCTION (REMEDIAL S0ILS GROUP) j GE0 TECH SERVICES i
RESIDENT GE0 TECHNICAL ENGINEER l
BECHTEL QUALITY CONTROL C0C)
MIDLAND PROJECT GUALITY ASSURANCE DEPARTMENT (MP0AD) 3 THE QUALITY Pl.AN FOR UNDERPINNING ACTIVITIES PROVIDES A BRIEF SCOPE STATEMENT FOR EACH ORGANIZATION AS RELATED TO THE UNDERPINNING ACTIVITY i
^
5 e
ORGANIZATIONS SUBCONTRACTORS AND CONSULTANTS SUBCONTRACTORS / CONSULTANTS SCOPE OF DUTIES MUESER, RUTLEDGE, JOHNSON DESIGN INPUT FOR THE UNDERPINNING OF THE AND DESIMONE SERVICE WATER PUMP STRUCTURE UNDER A TECHNICAL SERVICE AGREEMENT ALSO, CONSULTANT FOR THE UNDERPINNING OF THE AUXILIARY BUILDING UNDER A TECHNICAL
~
SERVICE AGREEMENT SPENCER, WHITE AND
. SUBCONTRACTOR FOR !HE UNDERPlNNING OF THE PRENTIS, INC (PROPOSED)
SERVICE WATER PUMP STRUCTURE MERGENTIME CORP /HANSON JOINT VENTURE TO PROVIDE DESIGN INPUT FOR i
ENGINEERS,INC THE UNDERPINNING OF THE AUXILIARY BUILDING UNDER A TECHNICAL SERVICE AGREEMENT
~
l MERGENTIME CONST CORP SUBCONTRACTOR FOR THE UNDERPINNING OF THE AUXILIARY BUILDING a
5 ORGANIZATIONS
~
SUBCONTRACTORS AND CONSUETANTS (CONT)
SUBCONTRACTOR / CONSULTANTS SCOPE OF DUTIES WISS, JANNEY, ELSTNER AND PROVIDE THE DESIGN FOR THE SETTLEMENT ASSOCIATES, INC MONITORiiiG EQUIPMEi;T, PROCURES THE MONITORING EQUIPMENT, INSPECTS THE INSTALLATION OF THE MONITORING EQUIPMENT, AND PROVIDE DATA TO PROJECT ENGINEERING U S TESTING COMPANY, INC
' SUBCONTRACTOR FOR TESTING CONCRETE PRODUCTION MATERIALS (CEMENT, FLYASH, WATER, AGGREGATES), SOILS, CONCRETE, GROUT, FINES MONITORING OF S0ll PARTICLES, TENSILE TESTING 0F REINFORCING STEEL AND REINFORCING SPLICES.
9 4
l 4+
~.
i REMEDIAL SOILS WORK QUALITY PROGRAM 1
~
l e CPCo QUALITY ASSURANCE PROGRAM j
MANUAL FOR NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS I
Volume 1 - Policies (Topical CPC-1-A)
Volume 11 - Procedures for Design and l
Construction
\\
l
- e. BQ-TOP-1, REVISION 1 A i
Bechtel Nuclear Quality Assurance Manual e
l
68 5
QUALITY PLAN CONTENT l
PROVIDES ORGANIZATIONAL RESPONSIBILITIES AND RELATIONSHIPS ESTABLISHES A SPECIFIC Q-LIST OF DESIGNATED QUALITY ACTIVITIES PROVIDES A NARRATIVE OF TiiE MAJOR PROGRAM ELEMENTS PROVIDES UNIQUE QUALITY PROGRAMMATIC CONTROLS WHICH ARE NOT IN THE STANDARD EXISTING PROJECT QUALITY PROGRAMS
]
PROVIDES ADDITIONAL DEFINITION TO THE QUALITY REQUIREMENTS IN THE TECHNICAL j
SPECIFICATIONS i
l PROVIDES A LIST OF THE SPECIFIC SAFETY RELATED (Q) PROCEDURES THE.SUBCON-l TRACTOR MUST PROVIDE FOR PROJECT REVIEW, APPROVAL AND RELEASE l
I I
I 5.
i i
l
7 r
l DESIGN CONTROL FOR UNDERPINNING ACTIVITIES l
l l
QUALITY PLAN FOR UNDERPINNING ACTIVITIES PROVIDES A DETAILED DESCRIPTION i
0F THE DESIGN CONTROL PROCESS AND REFERENCES THE DETAIL PROCEDURES j
CONTROLLING THE BECHTEL AND CPC0 DEPARTMENT PROCEDU.RES QUALITY PLAN INCORPORATED IN EACH SPECIFICATION PROVIDES THE DETAIL i
FLOW PROCESS FOR PREPARATION. REVIEW AND RELEASE OF DESIGN DOCUMENTS UNDERPINNING SUBCONTRACTOR (S) WILL BE REQUIRED TO HAVE A PROCEDURE TO CONTROL THE PROJECT ISSUED DESIGN DOCUMENTS AND PROCEDURES i
i 1
i i
g-DESIGN DOCUMENT INTERFACE FLOWCHART 4
TECHNICAL PROJECT ENGINEERING INTERFACING CONSULTANTS PROJECT ADMINISTRATION CIVIUSOfLS GROUP GROUPS
- ORIGINATEfSU8MIT LbGSIN AND
- I REVIEW EDPI 4.1.1 i
l EDP 4.37 ROUTES TO CIVfL CALCULATIONS I
- AinL GTsAWINGS SOILS GROUP
- lNTERFACING GROUPS (as defined by EDPI 4.25.1 or approved ellematel N APPROVAL
- DISCIPLINE ENGINEERING GROUPS e CHIEF ENGINEER (per EDP 4.34) e GEOTECHNICAL SERVICES e CONSULTANTS e OUALITY ENGINEERING (drawinge end specificellons) i l
e MPOA (drawings and specificatione)
REVISE AND
^
' LOG OUT
[
APPROVED FOR RESUSMIT I
I DESIGN INPUT YES EDP 4.37 GENERATE DESIGN 1
CALCULATIONS.
REVIEW AND EDP 4.46 DESIGN DRAWINGS, COMMENT j
l AND TECHNICAL EDP 4.49 -
SPECIFICATIONS i
COORDINATE WITH i
INTERFACING EDPl 4.25.1 GROUPS 5
INCORPORATEl RESOLVE COMMENTS i
i SIGN OFF AND 4
l ISSUE FOR USE i
i 4
k -:,
PROCEDURE REVIEWIAPPROVAL FLOWCH ART f
BECHTEL FIELD PROJECT CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENT PROJECT ENGINEERING '
INTERFACING SU N RACTOR REMEDIAL SOILS CONTROL ADMINISTRATION EDPI 4.25.1 GROUPS GROUP FID 1.100 EDP 5.16 EDP 5.18 ORIGINATE / SUBMIT
== % RECEIVES h
e LOGS INISTAMPSI LOGS INISTAMPSI REVIEW AND REVIEW AND
.l DRAWINGS l
DISTRIBUTES AS
-=*
DISTRIBUTES AS COORDINATION COtsasENT (MPOA PROCEDURES SPECIFIED SPECIFIED and OC approvel) l 1
RESOLVEl INCORPORATE COMMENTS l
j ASSIGN APPROVAL l-STATUS l
1 1,
NO REVISE AND NOTIFY SIC TO WH LOG OUT hM LOG OUT yus RESUBMIT REVISE AND
- f. 2,3 RESU5MST BEFORE i
USE
}
I YES i
STATUS 31 WORK MAY "
l CONSTRUCTION PROCEED. REVISE
% LOG OUT hy LOG OUT j ACTIVITY PROCEEDS AS INDICATED i
STATUS 21 WORK MAY 1
PROCEED. SUBMIT FINAL DOCUMENT
]
CONSTPUCTION ACTIVITY PROCEEDS
}
I STATUS IfWORK M AY **
}
] PROCEED 1
i
l Precsdurso To Be Submitted By The Subctntracter' Orgcnization Raspensible Fer Precedura Rsview & Appreval-4
$ A '.
.c w
u u
aa te u
.0
,nn-si EC 12 O kt
,9 " -
a
.a 1 uu umu
.c.
.c ~ u eu O
en o onoona cy ac M
28 aona&o ao IProcedure for general underpinning - This procedure X'
O 0
X' X
0 lchs11 include the overall concept of the work
'invs1vid, including the interface of all,the
- operctions listed below.
)
IPrecadure for load transfer.
X 0
0 X
X 0
Precadure for placement of lean concrete backfill in X
0 X
X ichaftc and tunnel.
i Praczdure for installation of (including mixing)
X 0
X X
4!cndpressuregrouting.
4 i Precedure for placement of pier concrete.
X 0
X X
! Procedure for acquiring and maintaining calibration' X
0 X
X
- of Jacks and gages.
} Precedure for mechanical splicing of reinforcement)
X 0
X X
1 Precadure for threading of reinforcing steel.
X 0
X X
t i
j Precadure for installation of anchor bolts and rock X
0 X
X j
LEGEND
- ecchsrs.
i X
0 X
X REVIEW & APPROVAL.- 2.
1 I, Procedure for installation'of compressible material.
X 0
X X
REkIEW & COMMENT.- O' Jl Procedure for placing reinforcement including ac applicable i brnding steel reinforcement (hot and cold).
Precedure for core drilling.
X 0
X X
I 3
?
4
~
r Crg*:mizctica Rssp:ns'ible For. Prac26 ara Czview & Ap'prevn1 1
Precedxceo To Be Submitted By The Subcsntrccter-38
.f
.S u
=
u
..-e n
15 t
ou is eo e f.
,-e D es a
c.c e
pE o
.e. < u g
.o.
uu E
Y o' dEo$5 o
c o
R 33 28Qabo k
28 X
0 X
X Precsdure for c h rete repairs.
X 0
0 X
X Pr:ctdure for ert:4vation "Q" structures and the installation of lagging.
X 0
X X
Precedure for procection of underground utilities s
X 0
X X
'Precedure for preparing, submitting, and revising Q precedures.
X 0
X X
Procedure for handling, stor'ing, and controlling Ccatrcctor-furnished materials.
X 0
0 X
Precaduce for design document control.
X 0
0 0
X Pracsdures for interface and coordination
~
batwetn the Subcontractor and the Contractor fer cctivities covered by the QA Program.
he,ced -
far ennstruction of temporary supports X
0 X
X 0
including grillage.
X 0
X X
LEGEND Precedureforgelding.
Procedure for', certifying subcontractor personnel X
0 X
X REVIEW & APPROVAL - X spacifically for AVR weldine and mechanical splices.
. REVIEW & COMMENT - O X
0 X
X as applicable Precedure for. Training Program of subcontractor personnel for the Q-Procedures covering the subcontractor eccpe of work.
~
s 4
10 C.,
QUALITY RELATED '(0-LISTED ACTIVITIES)
{-
1.
DOCUMENT' SUBMITTAL, INTERFACE AND CONTROL (1) 2.
PROCURING 0-LISTED ITEMS AND MATERIALS
?
3.
STORAGE, HANDLING AND CONTROL OF Q-LISTED MATERIALS 4.
FURNISHING A.ND INSTALLATION OF LAGGING AND BRACING UNDER "Q" 1
STRUCTURES 5.
EXCAVATION' LIMITS, CONTROL AND SEQUENCE UNDER "0" STRUCTURES l
6.
CRACK MAPPING AND EVALUATION i
7.
CALIBRATION, MAINTENANCE, CONTROL AND INSTALLATION OF GAGES AND j
SETTLEMENT MONITORING INSTRUMENTATION 8.
MONITORING 0F BUILDING MOVEMENT INSTRUMENTATION AND PIER l
PRESSURE GAGES l
9.
FINES MONITORING 0F DEWATERING WELLS IN "0" AREAS 10.
LOCATION AND PROTECTION OF "0" UTILITIES f
]
11.
GE0 TECHNICAL ACCEPTANCE OF SUBGRADE 12.
FABRICATION OF. STEEL GRILLAGE FOR. TEMPORARY SUPPORTS FOR "0" STRUCTURES l
13.
FABRICATIONS AND INSTALLATION OF TEMPORARY SUPPORTS FOR "0" STRUCTURES j
14.
WELDING.OF TEMPORARY AND PERMANENT. SUPPORTS FOR "Q" STRUCTURES l
l SUBCONTRACTOR HAS TO HAVE PROCEDURES APPLY ONLY TO AUXILIARY BUILDING l
UNDERPINNING i
L
~
q 10-QUALITY' RELATED'(0-LISTED ACTIVITIES)-
(CONTINUED)
L l
15.
FABRICATION AND INSTALLATION OF-REINFORCING STEEL 1
16.
CERTIFICATION OF PERSONNEL PERFORMING SPLICES 1
17.
THREADING OF REINFORCING STEEL AND INSTALLATION OF MECHANICAL SPLICES j
j 18.
DRILLING IN "Q" STRUCTURES FOR THE INSTALLATION OF ANCHOR BOLTS, ROCK l
ANCHORS AND DEWATERING WELLS- @
l 19.
INSTALLATION Cl AND INSPECTION OF ANCHOR BOLTS AND ROCK ANCHORS 20.
COMPRESSIBLE MATERIAL CONFIGURATION AND IN'STALLATION I
21.
TESTING 0F REINFORCING STEEL AND MECHANICAL SPLICES l
22.
INSTALLATION h INSPECTION AND TESTING-0F' STRUCTURAL _ CONCRETE, LEAN CONCRETE,' GROUT AND DRYPACK 23.
REPAIR OF CONCRETE IN "0" STRUCTURES @
24.
CALIBRATING, MAINTAINING, INSTALLING AND CONTROLLING 0F HYDRAULIC JACKS l
..AND PRESSURE GAGES 25.
LOAD TRANSFER ACTIVITIES 26.
BACKFILLING @ AND ACCEPTANCE TESTING FOR ACCESS SHAFTS AND TUNNELS IN l
"Q" AREAS SUBCONTRACTOR HAS TO HAVE PROCEDURES l
APPLY ONLY TO AUXILIARY BUILDING-UNDERPlNNING i
l l
5
- 115
+
~'.
i
. SUBCONTRACTOR REQUIRED "0" PROCEDURES r
LIST IS TAKEN DIRECTLY FROM THE QUALITY PLAN FOR SPECIFICATION C-195 PROCEDURE LIST PROCEDURE FOR GENERAL UNDERPINNING - THIS PROCEDURE SHALL INCLUDE-THE OVERALL CONCEPT OF THE WORK INVOLVED, INCLUDING THE INTERFACE.
0F' ALL THE OPERATIONS LISTED BELOW 4
PROCEDURE FOR LOAD TRANSFER PROCEDURE FOR PLACEMENT OF LEAN' CONCRETE BACKFILL IN SHAFTS AND l
TUNNFlS l
PROCEDURE FOR INSTALLATION 0F (INCLUDING MIXING) AND PRESSURE l
GROUTING PROCEDURE FOR PLACEMENT OF PIER CONCRETE j
PROCEDURE FOR ACQUIRING AND MAINTAINING CALIBRATION OF. JACKS
{
AND GAGES l
PROCEDURE FOR-MECHANICAL SPLICING 0F REINFORCEMENT l
~
PROCEDURE FOR INSTALLATION OF ANCHOR BOLTS AND ROCK ANCHORS PROCEDURE FOR THREADING OF REINFORCING STEEL f
PROCEDURE FOR INSTALLATION OF COMPRESSIBLE MATERIAL i
II
- 7 SUBCONTRACTOR REQUIRED "Q" PROCEDURES (CONTINUED) i PROCEDURE FOR PLACING REINFORCEMENT INCLUDING BENDING STEEL REINFORCEMENT (HOT AND COLD)
PROCEDURE FOR CORE DRILLING PROCEDURE FOR CONCRETE REPAIRS PROCEDURE FOR EXCAVATION "Q" STRUCTURES AND THE INSTALLATION OF LAGGING i
PROCEDURE FOR PROTECTION OF UNDERGROUND UTILITIES PROCEDURE FOR PREPARING, SUBMITTING AND REVISING 0~ PROCEDURES 1
PROCEDURE FOR HANDLING, STORING, AND CONTROLLING CONTRACTOR-i FURNISHED MATERIALS PROCEDURE FOR DESIGN DOCUMENT CONTROL PROCEDURES FOR INTERFACE AND COORDINATION BETWEEN THE SUBCONTRACTOR AND THE CONTRACTOR F.0R ACTIVITIES COVERED BY THE DA PROGRAM 4
PROCEDURE FOR CONSTRUCTION OF TEMPORARY SUPPORTS INCLUDING GRILLAGE P0 URE F R R
YING SUBCONTRACTOR PERSONNEL SPECIFICALLY FOR AWS WELDING AND MECHANICAL SPLICES
~
PROCEDURE FOR TRAINING PROGRAM 0F SUBCONTRACTOR PERSONNEL FOR THE 0-PROCEDURES COVERING THE SUBCONTRACTORS SCOPE OF WORK i
\\
i a
~
~
l ORGANIZATION CHART.0F MP0AD IN SUPPORT OF UNDERPINNING MIDLAND PROJECT OFFICE
~
MPQAD MANAGER
}
W R BIRD CIVIL QA SECTION HEAD D E HORN 1
l QA ENG 'NEERING i
SUPERV SOR R L AKERS M C BUTTERFIELD R C HIRZEL 1
J DONNELL 1
THOSE INDIVIDUALS j
i IE&TV/ SUPERVISOR
.WHOSE PRIMARY RE-SPONSIBILITIES AND l
R.E SEVO I
TIME ARE FOR SUPPORT j
0 HE UNDERPINNING J C SHAH p
C E HARBOUR 1
I f
ADMINISUA M ELY A
1 UNDER QUALITY EN-GINEERING SERVICES DQAE - ANN ARBOR 2
SECTION L SUTKUS 1
1
E 1128 t
BECHTEL QUAllif CONTROL CIVIL DISCIPLINE LEAD 2ND SHIFT (1)
I I
IINDFRPINNING C0ATINGS CONCRETE-STRUCTURAL S0ILS, DEWATERING SETTLEMENT MONITORING (6)
(8)
BATCH PLANT / LAB (2)
NUMBERS IN THE BLOCKS SHOW THE NUMBER OF QUALITY CONTROL ENGINEERS ASSIGNED AS OF JANUARY, 1982 PRESENT STAFF AS SHOWN IS ADEQUATE TO COVER NEAR FUTURE SCOPE OF WORK CERTIFICATION FOR SPECIFIC UNDERPINNING QUALITY CONTROL INSTRUCTIONS IS ACTIVITY PENDING
12c l.
i
?
GE0 TECHNICAL SUPPORT l
r H & CF PROJECT ENGINEERING i
GEOTECHNICAL SERVICES SOILS civil SOILS RESIDENT GROUP SUPERVISOR PROJECT ENGINEER GROUP SUPERVISOR E'
l I
I I
I E
E a
g PROJECT l
GEOTECHNICAL I
t ENGINEER l
I
[
4 I
l-1 3
i-RESIDENT i
""""""E GEOTECHNICAL i
ENGINEER 8" " " PROJECT DIRECTION N TECHNICAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE DIRECTION
13' l=',
~
QUALITY PR0 GRAM DOCUMENTS QUALITY PROGRAM DOCUMENTS THAT WILL BE REVISED OR PREPARED TO IMPLEMENT PROGRAM CHANGES IN RESPONSE T0 THE QUALITY PLANS EDPI_- 4.25.1 DESIGN INTERFACE CONTROL
-(OR APPROVED ALTERNATET EDPI - 2.14.8 RESIDENT G50 TECHNICAL ENGINEER FOR MIDLAND REMEDIAL UNDERPINNING OPERATIONS
~
E'P - 5.16 SUPPLIER' DOCUMENT CONTROL D
FPD - 1.000 D'ESIGN DOCUMENT AND.CDRRESPONDENCE~ CONTROL (OR APPROVED ALTERNATE)
SPECIFICATI0N'C-198 QUALITY PLAN FOR SETTLEMENT MONITORING AND INSTRUMENTATION FINALIZE IND0CTRINATION AND PROGRAMMATIC TRAINING 0F' SUBCONTRACTOR PERSONNEL e
4 r
1
^
y 8
SUMMARY
REVIEWED THE MAJOR ELEMENTS OF THE QUALITY PLANS PROVIDED THE STATUS OF IMPLEMENTATION OF THESE PLANS EMPHASIZED THE UNIQUE ASPECTSLOF THESE ACTIVITIES AND THE WAYS THE
' QUAL'!TY PROGRAM RESPONDS T0 THESE ASPECTS
~
1 1
i 1
e I
h
t.
g
' t-a-.[
COIISum8FS POW 8r James W Cook Vice President - Projects, Engineering and Construction General offices: 1945 West Pernell Road, Jackson, MI 49201 + (517) 788 0453 January 25, 1982 Pr n U > T. ruvF HR l~ 3l 4
7/D i
f.., i.
.fy l I
c m
Harold R Denton, Director
"!]
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
&Igl534 R US, Nuclear Regulatory Commission anc.ej
- tic Washington, DC 20555 MIDLAND PROJECT MIDLAND DOCKET NOS 50-329, 50-330 EVALUATION REPORT FOR THE FEEDWATER ISOLATION VALVE PITS FILE 0485.16 SERIAL 15493 ENCLOSURES:
(1) EVALUATION OF FEEDWATER ISOLATION VALVE PITS AT MIDLAND PLANT (2) FEEDWATER ISOLATION VALVE PIT CRACK MONITORING PROGRAM On December 10, 1981 and January 11, 1982, meetings were held with the Staff and its consultants to discuss concrete cracks in the auxiliary building, the service water pump structure, the diesel generator buildings and the feedwater isolation valve pits. During the January 11, 1982 meeting, Consumers Power agreed to provide the NRC with an evaluation of the significance of concrete cracks relative to the design strength of the feedwater isolation valve pit structures.
In response to this commitment, we are providing the enclosed report (Enclosure 1) entitled " Evaluation of Feedwater Isolation Valve Pits at Midland Plant" by Messrs W G Corley and A E Fiorato of Construction Technology Laboratories, a Division of the Portland Cement Association. This report presents an evaluation of the significance of cracks observed in the feedwater isolation valve pit structures. The information, measurements and test data presented in Enclosure 1 lends further support to our conclusion that:
(1) cracks in an adequately reinforced concrete member do not prevent the member j
from developing its expected strength, and (2) cracks in the feedwater isolation pits are the result of restrained volumetric changes which occurred during the curing and drying of concrete and are not due to structural distress.
In addition, a program for monitoring structural integrity during the implementation of remedial measures is outlined.
l During the underpinning operation, cracks in the feedwater isolation valve j
pits will be monitored and recorded by mapping at the time of specific construction milestones. These construction milestones, at which time crack mapping will be performed, are identified in Enclosure 2.
The frequency of JAN 2 81982 oc0182-0013a100, Ri B V0 W I
e.
\\.
2 e
crack monitoring identified in this' enclosure is based upon our discussions with the Staff and-its consultants during the recent January 19, 1982 audit held in Ann Arbor, and this crack monitoring program incorporates the Staff's concerns.
Based upon the information contained in Enclosure 1, we conclude that the present cracks in the feedwater isolation valve pit structures are of no structural significance, and any changes in their condition during the underpinning operations will be monitored and, if necessary, evaluated.
M\\ot Mooney Executive Manager Midland Project Office For J W Cook JWC/RLT/dsb CC Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Board, w/o CBechhoefer, ASLB, w/o MMCherry, Esq, w/o FPCowan, ASLB, w/o RJCook, Midland Resident Inspector, w/o RSDecker, ASLB, w/o SGadler, w/o JHarbour, ASLB, w/o GHarstead, Harstead Engineering, w/a DSHood, NRC, w/a (2)
DFJudd, B&W, w/o JDKane, NRC, w/a FJKelley, Esq, w/o RBLandsman, NRC Region III, w/a WHMarshall, Esq, w/o JPMatra, Naval Surface Weapons Center, w/a W0tto, Army Corps of Engineers, w/a WDPaton, Esq, w/o SJPoulos, Geotechnical Engineering, w/a FRinaldi, NRC, w/a HSingh, Army Corps of Engineers, w/a BStamiris, w/o oc0182-0013a100 i
m o:
j '
4 4
ENCLOSURE 2 FEEDWATER ISOLATION VALVE PIT i
CRACK MONITORING PROGRAM During the underpinning operation, cracks in the feedvater isolation valve pit structures will be monitored by mapping at the time of the following construction milestones:
l'.
Prior to extending the access shaft belov Elevation 609' for the purpose of taking baseline measurements.
2.
During.the tunneling to Pier W 9 (ie, Pier N on Figure 8 of Enclosure 1.)
3 After completion of tunneling to Pier W 9
- h. ' After completion of all excavation under the feedvater isolation valve pits.
5 At two-month maximum intervals after completion' of the excavation under the feedvater isolation valve pits, or at increased intervals if settlement becomes significant.
- 6. - Prior to jacking of the permanent underpinning.
7 After jacking of the permanent underpinning.
'8.
After any rejacking of the temporary support system.
a L
',. ) '
c ENCLOSURE 1 Report to CONSUMERS POWER COMPANY Jackson, Michigan EVALUATION OF FEEDWATER ISOLATION VALVE PITS AT MIDLAND PLANT by W. G Corley A. E. Fiorato i
Submitted by CONSTRUCTION TECHNOLOGY LABORATORIES A Division of-the Portland Cement Association 5420 Old Orchard Road Skokie, Illinois 60077 January 1982
c-r-
.I
~.
TABLE OF CONTENTS Page INTRODUCTION 1
DESCRIPTION OF STRUCTURES 1
EVALUATION OF CRACKING 8
Feedwater Isolation Valve Pit Unit 1 (West Unit) 9 Feedwater Isolation Valve Pit Unit 2 (East Unit) 10 SIGNIFICANCE OF CRACKS 12 REdOMMENDED' PROGRAM.FOR MONITORING STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY DURING IMPLEMENTATION OF REMEDIAL MEASURES 15 Displacement Monitoring 17 Crack Monitoring 20
SUMMARY
AND CONCLUSIONS 23 REFERENCES 24 APPENDIX'A - STRENGTH OF CRACKED REINFORCED CONCRETE MEMBERS construction technology laboratories
r.
~
i e.
4 EVALUATION OF FEEDWATER ISOLATION VALVE PITS AT MIDLAND PLANT by W. G. Corley and A. E.
Fiorato*
INTRODUCTION
.This report presents an evaluation of the significance of cracks observed in the Feedwater Isolation Valve Pits located at Midland Nuclear Power Plant Units 1 and 2.
Observed cracks in.these structures are described and significance of the cracks with regard to future load carrying capacity is discussed.
In addition, a program for monitoring structural integrity during implementation of remedial measures is described.
Remedial measures are being undertaken to underpin selected structures.
DESCRIPTION OF STRUCTURES A. site plan for the Midland Plant is shown in Fig. l. III *
- Feedwater Isolation Valve Pits are located at the ends of.Elec-trical Penetration Areas for Reactor Building Units 1 and 2.
These penetration areas are located on either side of the Auxiliary Building Control Tower.
The plan of the Auxiliary Building, shown in Fig. 2,I1) gives the location of the Feedwater Isolation Valve Pits.
As can be seen in the figure,,
the pits are bounded by the Electrical Penetration Area, the c
- Respectively, Divisional Director, Engineering Development Division, and Manager, Construction Methods Section, Construc-tion Technology Lacoratories, a Division of the Portland Cement Association,-5420 Old Orchard Road, Skokie, Illinois 60077.
- Superscript numbers in parentheses refer to references listed at the end of this report.
-1~
construction technology laboratories
b l
l l
_ TITTABAWASSEE RIVER i
COM NATION N
EVAP AND A
AUX BOILER-BLDG i
BORATED WATER COOLING TOWER j
TANK
\\ V O
I SOLID RADWASTE l
AUX BLD O
i i
REACTOR BLDG UNIT 1 A E k l:
REACTOR BLDG l
O uNir 2 ADM S
T N AND-*
CONTROLTOWER PUMP TRUCTURE i
(
DIESEL GENERATOR
- l l
s_____,___
,'~s DLOG IRCULATING WATER i
O INTAKE STRUCTURE
~s OE
's N
l.
\\
EMERGENCY COOLING
\\
[}
\\
WATER RESERVOIR
\\
AFFLE DIKE s
,, _ /
a ima COOLING POND i
F I G. '.
SITE PLAN I
i i
i
~
=
.,, c J.
. ',h 7j-j.
W lL )
S s
7 p/ 26 tsiy-3 5 7
//
/
f ' g{
1.
h
///[/y
/
l-O I g
JA z
6-
, w
/ /ff Gi.
i r.
,=
s l
lQ L.
9
/
?
g
'f, j 9
mitta w w surar~^aEA
/4 j
j N
o
,/
f t,-
'h 0
-~
s, ;l i
- v. r<
~
h
(;
j'~ *
/
f, <
7
, fu
^
p,, >
a
.x n.
~
+.
D 1
(
/
'f 1
),
n~
hl j'
\\'
l Y/ ~
8 s
,/
(
i b,,.t
(
EM^C
g Ngl gp f
.c 2
/.
],
j
\\\\,
ruet poot ;-
s PLPE%ff//-
I.
o l
/
e anu
- an e -,
UNIT K
4 grr pgg)3 'gp gggg(h,g,
' ' / ~j q i
a 1 ',
t l'
. ON, fill.
A ~
f>.
\\.
k.-
hL k.
)1. --.((
(REACTOR j
- Y
/
2, f
e BLOG
/'
gtgyy % --
j 4g y-
.j 77f ACCESS f
i
/
$.4 EUT T RESS f
BUTTRESS
, \\ /-
e, S.TAIRwor
\\
ACCESSSHAFT 4
/
SHATT
\\\\
i e
/ FEEDWATER h,/*/
]
N{T-TA N
'A
.s s
C1R; CAL {y CONTROL
.P j' ^
// 150L AllON N i f-2.,,
[.
I f / VALVE PI T
~%',:// (ON FILL)
\\p e
v f L C T RICAL' / 7 T E f
REA 77We--
=c-- '
e <
.'T WNELN' b 4
I-I' j
FEEDWATER ISOL ATION
..s Q TUNNEL VALVE Pli ( TURBINE (ON FILL) BUILDING) l'l6, 2 AUXILIARY BUILDING PLAN (TURBINE BUILDING) i i
=.
Reactor Building, a Buttress Access Shaft, and the Turbine Building.
The function of the Feedwater Isolation Valve Pits is to enclose Seismic Category I feedwater pipe isolation valves.
Each pit is C-shaped with the open end toward the containment bu.ild ing.
The pits are structurally isolated from surrounding structures, are constructed of reinforced concrete, and are supported on backfill soil.
Figures 3, 4, and 5 show the general reinforcement arrange-ments for the walls, floor, and roof of the Feedwater Isolation Valve Pits.
These figures are based on Bechtel Construction Drawing C-429, Revision 4, 10/1/79.
Additional reinforcement details are given on Drawing C-429 as well as Drawing C-442, Revision 1, 4/6/77.
Feedwater Isolation Valve Pit walls adjacent to the Buttress Access Shaft and the Electrical Penetration Area are 2-ft 6-in.
thick.
Vertical reinforcement in these walls is No. 10 bars spaced at 12 in. on centers at each face.
Horizontal rein-forcement consists of No. 11 bars spaced at 12 in. on centers at each face.
Concrete compressive strength is specified at 5000 psi for the entire structure.
The Feedwater Isolation Valve Pit wall adjacent to the Turbine Building is 3-ft 6-in. thick.
Vertical and horizontal reinforcement in this wall consists of No. 11 bars spaced at 12 in. on centers at each face.
The " exposed" wall of the Feedwater Isolation Valve Pit is i
3-ft 6-in. thick.
This wall runs between the Buttress Access i
construction technology laboratories
^
/
/
r
- r
+ s elz y
/
(BUTTRESS -
S)
- 'O
- 8el2 e
i ACCESS e/
L F
e.
SHAFT)
,b a
@/
=
- ll
<-2'-6'.
b D
r flel2 e
e N+
E
/
nB I
o 9
N
( m t *s
- 3'g Od
- is e12 E.E PENETRAT 0N 5
A AREA) h
,reu u
, #10 i
[;
j
$12 l
_tj a
i T,+
~.
g,b 2- # I!- +
A 3,,
i
/
l I
(TURBINE A
auitoino) m Fi'g. 3 Reinforcement:in Feedwater Isolation Valve Pit Walls -~ Plan View
.E F
1 1
.I. - -
EL 642-O" -G b',
b N
S s
A A
A
.(BUTTRESS (TURBINE ACCESS BUILDING)
SHAFT) u:0
- 11 y
Cdl2
=
0
=
4
- 10
=
612
- ll 612-
.. - # 11612 P
d if r-# II 612 l
If EL 619-6" -G-1 h
p
-4 #8%
w e "
w.w i'
ga
- 11 3"CLR.
6 12 SECTION A-A Fig. 4 Reinforcement in Feedwater Isolation Valve Pit Walls 2 and 4 - Vertical Section l
l l i
n.
/
- m. EL 642'-O" NUs
-'J-g g
2" C L R.--.-
(ELECTRICAL PENETRATION
^
^
- 10
- 10
=
=
6 12 6 12 u.;
g.
w N
U T
=
- ll V
V
,. EL 619'-6"
=
a 7# 8 N
W
- 8 -.
_A
\\- # 8 s
k,,,
- 10 612 SECTION B-B 2
1 4-# 8-
-\\ - # 8 e12' Fig. 5 Reinforcement in Feedwater Isolation Valve Pit Walls 1 and 3 - Vertical Section.
y g-
o Shaft and the Turbine Building.
Vertical-reinforcement consists J
of No. 10 bars at 12 in. on centers at each face.
Horizontal reinforcement consists of No.11 bars at 12 in. on centers at each face.
The roof of'the Feedwater Isolation Valve Pits is 2-ft thick.
Bottom reinforcement in the roof slab is No. 8 bars spaced at 12 in. on centers in each direction.
Top reinforce-ment is made up from No. 10 or No. 11 vertical wall bars bent at 90 into the slab.
This steel is supplemented by No. 8 bars spaced at 12 in. on centers.
The floor slab of the Feedwater Isolation Valve Pits is 4-ft th ick.
Primary reinforcekent consists of No. 11 bars spaced at 12 in, on centers in each direction at top and bottom of the slab.
Dowel bars for vertical reinforcement are also anchored in the base slab.
The floor slab is thickened along the wall adjacent to the Electrical Penetration Area.
EVALUATION OF CRACKING On January 12, 1982, personnel of the Construction Technology Laboratories inspected the Feedwater Isolation Valve Pits, Units 1 and 2 (west and east units).
The inspection included a visual survey of interior wall, ficor, and roof surfaces.
Except for a small portion of one wall in each valve pit, exterior surfaces were not accessible for inspection.
In addition to visual observation, widths of selected 1
(
cracks were measured using a 50 power crack microscope with a manufacturer's rated sensitivity of 0.001 in.
Approximate crack locations were measured using commercial quality steel
~
construcilon technology laboratories
... _. ~. _, - _ _ _ _ _.. _. _ _ _ _,...
r tape measures.
Because of difficult access to many wall areas,
" exact" crack-locations could not always be obtained.
- However, the accuracy of the measurements is well within that required to draw conclusions based on the results.
Weather on the day of the site visit was cold with tempera-tures ranging from approximately 15 to 20 F.
Sky conditions were mostly cloudy with intermittent snow flurries.
Feedwater Isolation Valve Pit Unit 1 (West Unit)
Although access was not ideal because of congested construc-tion scaffolding and piping, most wall areas in Unit 1 could be inspected.
Some areas were blocked by temporary supports put in place prior to start of remedial foundation work'.
Natural light into the pit through the top hatch was blocked by con-1 struction scaffolding.
Therefore, primary light for inspection was provided by portable electric lights and hand held flashlights.
Interior wall and roof surfaces in Unit 1 were covered with a glossy clear coating.
This coating was sufficiently trans-parent to permit observation of formed surfaces.
Most formed wall surfaces contained craze cracks which are fine random cracks that commonly occur as a result cf surface drying of concrete.
Craze cracks were also observed on interior roof surfaces.
Because the floor was covered with construction equipment, dirt and debris, there was only limited access for visual inspection.
The clear coating observed on walls and i
roof was not seen on floor surfaces.
l l
construction technology laboratories
m e
Figure 6 shows cracks mapped on interior floor and roof surfaces in Unit 1.
Primary access to all areas was from construction scaffolding located in the unit.
Upper portions of the wall adjacent to the Buttress Access Shaft (Wall 4) and parts of the exposed wall (Wall 3) were inspected from a ladder.
Cracks observed in Unit 1, shown in Fig. 6, are indica-tive of cracking that occurs as a result of restrained volume changes.
Maximum measured crack width was 0.006 in.
Vertical cracks in walls near the floor are attributed to volume changes caused by temperature and shrinkage of wall concrete combined with the restraining effect of the floor slab.
Cracks observed around the wall penetration and in the roof around the hatch opening are indicative of types of volume change cracking that often occur at discontinuities in concrete members.
The hori-zontal crack in Wall 3 did not penetrate through the clear coating.
Feedwater Isolation Valve Pit Unit 2 (East Unit)
Lighting conditions for inspection of Unit 2 were essentially the same as those encountered in Unit 1.
Primary lighting was provided by portable electric lights and hand held flashlights.
Since construction scaffolding was not available in all areas of Unit 2, access to most walls above eye level was obtained using ladders.
As was the case in Unit 1, all interior wall and ceiling surfaces were covered with a glossy clear coating.
Some crazing was observed on all surfaces of the walls and the roof.
Although the floor area in Unit 2 was covered with some construction technology Isboratories
r
't
\\
g'
\\
\\
/
\\
l t
(a) Plan @ EL 619'-6" (b) Plan @ EL 640'-0" H
1 H
i I
-@- EL 642'-O" 1
-@- EL 640'-O" 0
0 I
Limited I
Access f
0.005" 0.006" 0.003" o
-@- EL619'-6" 4
e i
j (c) Interio'r of Walls Fig.6 Feedwater Isolation valve Pit - Unit 1 (West Unit) 1
o debris and dirt-it was more accessible for inspection - than that in Unit 1.
No clear coating was visible on the floor surface, nor were any cracks seen.
Figure 7 shows cracks mapped on interior wall and roof surfaces of Feedwater Isolation Valve Pit Unit 2.
Maximum measured crack width was 0.007 in.
As was the~ case for Unit 1, observed' cracks are. attributed to restrained volume changes.
Wall cracks were observed near penetrations.
A vertical crack was seen at the intersection of Walls 2 and 3.
Vertical cracks
'were also observed in Wall 1.
The horizontal crack seen in Wall 3 did not reflect through the clear coating.
SIGNIFICANCE OF CRACKS Cracks observed on January 12, 1982 in Feedwater Isolation Valve. Pit Units 1 and 2 are attributed to volume changes that occur in concrete during curing and subsequent drying.
No evidence of structural distress was observed.
As a measure of significance of observed cracks relative to future integrity of the structure,* the tensile stress that
-uncracked concrete is assumed to carry was compared to avail-able tensile capacity provided by structural reinforcement crossing the cracks.
Available structural reinforcement was i
determined from Bechtel Drawings No. C-429, Revision 4, 10/1/79 and C-442, Revision 1, 4/6/77.
l Table 1 summarizes results of this comparison for members in which cracks were observed.
In the calculations, concrete
- A general discussion of strength of cracked reinforced concrete members is given in Appendix A.
~
~
construction technology laboratories
/
g i
)
/
O I
(a) Plan @ EL 619'-6" (b) Plan @ EL 640'-0" H
l Y
b EL 642'-O" -@-
I EL 640'-O" -@-
0.007" Limited Access I
1 O
O.002"1 O
0 0.003..
/
EL 619'-6" -@-
(c) Interior of Walls Fig. 7 Feedwater Isolation Valve Pit - Unit 2 (East Unit) i
4
. TABLE 1 - AVAILABLE " MEMBRANE CAPACITY" FOR FEEDWATER ISOLATION VALVE PITS Element Location 4
A- (kips)
Af (kips)
- g sy Wall 1 Wall Adjacent to Elec-trical Penetration' Area 101.8 152.4 Wall 2 Wall Adjacent to Turbine Building 142.6 187.2 Wall 3
" Exposed" Wall 142.6 152.4 Wall 4 Wall Adjacent to Buttress Access Shaft 101.8 152.4
' Roof I;ouf 81.5 94.8
- Minimum value when different reinforcement areas used in orthogonal directions.
~14~
,,,,,,,ggg,, y,,gnag,yy,g,,,q,,g,,
g
s isassumedtocarryaprincipa'ltensilestressof4/f[.where ff = specified concrete compressive strength.
This assumption is consistent with Section 11.4.2.2 of the ACI Building Code.I2)
For vertical and horizontal directions, where cracks were observed in the walls and roof, resistance of reinforcement was calculated as A f, where A
= area of reinforcement and f
=
sy s
y specified yield stress of reinforcement.
If resistance pro-vided by reinforcement crossing the crack exceeds 4 f[, there
/
is sufficient reinforcement to carry the stress attributed to the concrete.
As indicated in Table 1, resistance provided by available reinforcement in the walls and roofs of the Feedwater Isolation Valve Pits exceeds tensile stress assumed to be carried by the concrete.
RECOMMENDED PROGRAM FOR MONITORING STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY DURING IMPLEMENTATION OF REMEDIAL MEASURES As part of remedial measures to eliminate the possibility of unsatisfactory foundation conditions, selected areas of the Auxiliary Building will be underpinned.( }
Figure 8 shows the underpinning construction sequence plan as outlined in public hearing testimony from Midland Plant Units 1 and 2.III The underpinning plan includes construction of access shafts imme'diately east and west of the two Feedwater Isolation Valve Pits and adjacent to the Turbine Building.
The location of the west access shaft is shown in Fig. 8.
The east access shaft will be symmetrically located.
During construction of shafts and subsequent access tunnels, it will be necessary to monitor movements of existing structures
-15~
construction technotogy laboratories
Tm mm"I BUTTRESS ACCESS SHAFT
'k
's,,,.
FEED WATER ISOLATION VALVE PIT
'\\
(
TEMPOR ARY SUPP.
/
FOR EPA
'N
\\,'h' s,',
\\
-N-
'1 s
s v----t t
h
~ f.,,'s,s,
G
\\
l 7,,
i l
g
/
! I i'
L_3-b..-
5:
CCESS \\( \\ \\
00 A
SHAFT
\\ t
__ A \\ _
i
{
2'
= m
==__
.[.__ -
- T- - - T-E] L--
_E
~~
L O,
jUp CIffET, j-i_.1
.p. _ _ _ _ _ _ -. {E]TWil,7[
m' q.,__ __ T _ _ _ _:,..
_,__ _ _ T _ __ _,. __
- g 7
r
_ l _
,... _1.li
_&/ i J. " _
.s,.
[
MACCESS TUNNEL /l l,
J-g f
I-- *--~ '--
i TUFIBINE BLDG.
k
- o v
es
,,w
,, g G
G G
G e
9 PIERS FOR TURBINE PIERS FOR TEMPORARY BUILDING SUPPORT SUPPORT FOR CONTROL TOWER 1
j FIG. 8 UNDERPINNING CONSTRUCTION SEQUENCE PLAN 4
f i
t i
W
- o:
3
'that may be affected by underpinning operations.
n Isolation Valve Pit Units 1 and 2 should be monitored.
Figure 9 shows temporary supports that have been constructed
'for the'Feedwater Isolation Valve Pits.I I These supports T
will remain during underpinning operations.
The temporary l
supports are used to hang the Feedwater Isolation Valve Pits I
from the Buttress Access Shaft and the Turbine Building walls.
. Temporary supports were in place at the time of the inspection on. January 12, 1982.
During underpinning operations, structural integrity of the I
-Feedwater Isolation Valve Pits should be monitored by continuous measurement of structural displacements and by regular visual inspection for cracking.
n a.
Displacement Monitoring A continuous time history of displacements of the Feedwater Isolation Valve Pits should be maintained during underpinning operations. -It is recommended that readings be taken on a daily basis with a maximum interval of one week.
Additional readings should be taken at selected construction milestones.
Displacement measurements will be made to monitor both absolute, movement and relative distortions of structural ele-ments.
Figure 10 shows approximate locations of recommended displacement measurement points.
As a minimum, vertical dis-placements of the base slab of the structure should be measured at each of.these points.
Relative horizontal displacements
~between the Feedwater Isolation Valve Pits and adjacent struc-tures may also be measured.
Displacement measurements of the
.,,,,,,,q,,, y,,nnor,,, g,sor,q,,;,,
m.
CONTAltNENT BUT TRESS ACCESS SHAFT BEARING it EL 651-O"
- l s
a l
'}[
4 0
l SUPPORT BEAM
- FEEDWATER s
ISOLATION VALVE g
m
. PIT l
- TEN".lON RODS
~
l T
I I
2 d:t g
,==
b T
\\- El 642*-O-b l
,l
[ PENETRATION E,
, AREA h
I '
BUTTRESS ISOLATION BEARING PLATE ACCFSS I
VALVE PIT
--Wy
\\D-I.
[.
SHAFT
.f l
d '
~~..
TURBINE Dim TURBINE BUILDING M
b 10 PL AN AT EL.651'-O' SECTION M y
FIG. 9 TEMPORARY SUPPORT FOR FEEDWATER ISOLATION VALVE PIT O
e
(BUTTRESS ACCESS SHAFT _)
Q4
][
b(ELECTRICAL PENETRATION AREA) n n
(TURBINE BUILDING)
Fig. 10 Displacement Measurement Points on Feedwater Isolation Valve Pits I
19 L
]
m n.1 6
s.
base slab can be supplemented with measurements at the roof level.
Displacement measurements should be recorded as a function of time for.the duration of underpinning operations.. Signifi-cant construction milestones should be marked at appropriate time intervals.
Prior to start of underpinning, limiting dis-tortion criteria should be selected so that critical deformation limits of the structure are not exceeded.
In this way, the distortion versus time plot will provide a warning of impending structural distress.
If distortion limits are reached, con-struction should be stopped until remedial measures are evaluated.-
It is also recommended that the time history of distortions be submitted on a' regular basis to a consultant familiar with reinforced concrete behavior and design.
The consultant could then provide recommendations on trends observed in the data.
Prior to start'of_ construction and distortion monitoring, the consultant should review details of the monitoring plan.
il' Crack Monitoring As'a supplement to the displacement monitoring program, i
periodic visual inspections of the Feedwater Isolation Valve Pits should be made to determine if new cracking has developed or.if existing cracks have changed in width or length.
Crack k.
inspections should be conducted on a continuing basis by 11 qualified personnel.
In addition, a consultant knowledgeable t
in reinforced concrete design and behavior should inspect the valve pits at significant construction milestones.
Personnel
-2o-
....,-~.,.s,,,
z
\\
who monitor cracking should be instructed in crack mapping techniques by the consultant prior to start of operations.
The following criteria should be used for evaluation of
- observed crack widths:
1.
If a new crack develops that is wider than 0.010 in.,
a consultant should evaluate significance of the new cracking.
Within two hours after observation of the
~
crack, the consultant should provide a verbal report recommending whether construction should stop or con-tinue.
The verbal report should be confirmed with a written report within five days.
2.
If any crack exceeds 0.030 in. in width, a consultant i
should evaluate significance of the cracking.
Within two hours after observation of the crack, the con-sultant should provide a verbal report recommending whether construction should stop or continue.
The 4
verbal report should be confirmed with a written report within five days.
3.
If development of yield strain in the reinforcement is inferred from any observed crack, construction should be stopped immediately.
Individual criteria will be recommended by the consultant for each structure.
If criteria are exceeded, a consultant should evaluate significance of the cracking.
Within two hours af ter observation of the crack, the consultant should provide a verbal report recommending whether construction should continue.
The verbal report should be confirmed by a written report within five days.
-21~
construction technology laboratories
f*L
~
The following criteria should be used in evaluation.of
-significance of cracks-that develop in the Feedwater Isolation Valve Pits:
1.
-Geometry of member 2.
Amount and distribution of reinforcement in the member 3.
Material properties of the member 4.
Function of the member 5.
Magnitude and distribution of loads on the member 6;.
Construction technique 7.
Sequence of construction 8.
Crack location and distribution 9.
Crack size 10.
Interaction of multiple cracks.
Basically these criteria define a' procedure that requires the function'and load carrying mechanism of the member or i
structure to first be defined.
Then the influence of cracks on the. path of load distribution is determined.
In this way, the cause of cracking is defined and the influence of cracking on future load capacity of the structure can be evaluated.
In evaluating cracks in reinforced concrete structures, it is not sufficient to base conclusions on a single criteria such as crack width.
The overall crack pattern including location and direction of cracks, length and width of cracks, and inter-relationship between multiple cracks must be considered.
The pattern of cracking provides significant clues with regard to causes of cracks and their effects on future performance.
~
~
construction technology laboratories
e
SUMMARY
AND CONCLUSIONS This report presents an evaluation of the significance of cracking observed in the Feedwater Isolation Valve Pits located
- at Midland Plant Units 1 and 2.
Cracks observed in these structures by Construction Technology Laboratories' personnel on January 12, 1982 are attributed to restrained volumetric changes that occur during curing and drying of concrete.
No indications of structural distress were observed during the site visit.
Calculations based on section geometry indicate that structural reinforcement provided in the walls and roofs
- provides a capacity in excess of the tensile cracking stress attributed to the concrete.
A program for monitoring structural integrity o'f the Feedwater Isolation Valve Pits during implementation of remedial
- measures to underpin the structure is also outlined.
It is recommended that measured displacements be used as the primary means of monitoring behavior of the structures.
It is also recommended that continuous displacement measurements be sup-plemented with visual inspections to monitor cracking in the structures.
Displacement and crack monitoring should be reviewed by a consultant knowledgeable in reinforced concrete behavior and design.
construction technology laboratories
~
o.
I REFERENCES 1.
" Testimony of Edmund M. Burke, W. Gene Corley, James P.
Gould, Theodore E. Johnson, and Mete Sozen, on Behalf of i
the Applicant Regarding Remedial Measures for the Midland Plant Auxiliary Building and Feedwater Isolation Valve Pits," United States of America Nuclear Regulatory Com-mission, Atomic Safety and Licensing Board, Public Hearing Testimony, Docket Nos. 50-3290M, 50-3300M, 50-3290L, and 50-3300L,_Vol. 1-Text and Vol. 2-Figures.
2.
ACI Committee 318, " Building Code Requirements for Reinforced Concrete (ACI 318-77)," American Concrete Institute, Detroit, 1977.
~
construction technology laboratories
r-g -
4 o.
i APPENDIX A STRENGTH OF CRACKED REINFORCED CONCRETE MEMBERS construction technology laboratories w
1 s.
e.
APPENDIX A TABLE OF CONTENTS Page No.
INTRODUCTION A-1 TESTS OF STRUCTURAL WALLS A-1 Tests of " Low-Rise" Structural Walls A-2 Tests of "High-Rise" Structural Walls A-4 TESTS OF BEAMS A-13 TESTS OF CONTAINMENT ELEMENTS A-15 SUM ARY AND CONCLUSIONS A-16 REFERENCES A-23 construction technology labornforles
s -
~
APPENDIX A STRENG'Hi OF CRACKED REINFORCED CONCRETE MEMBERS by A. E. Florato and W. G. Corley*
INTRODUCTION '
cracking is an inherent characteristic of reinforced con-crete structures.
The e,xistence of cracks is'not necessarily
' indicative of structural distress. The objective of this report is to clarify the relationship between cracking and strength of reinforced concrete members.
The relationship will be demon-strated by examining the response of selected structural members that have been loaded to destruction in the laboratory.
To provide a cross-section of data, results from tests on struc-tural walls, beams, and containment elements will be considered.
TESTS OF STRUCTURAL WALLS Reinforced concrete structural walls are commonly used as lateral load resisting elements in buildings.
Both " low-rise" walls, which act as deep beams, and "high-rise" walls, which undergo significant flexural yielding, have been tested in the laboratory.
- Respectively, Manager, Construction Methods Section. and Divisional Director, Engineering Development Division, construction Technology Laboratories, a Division of the Portland Cement Association, 5420 Old Orchard Road, Skokie, Illinois 60077.
A-1 construellon technology laboratories O
e
l 1
Tests of " Low-Rise" Structural Walls Figure 1 shows the test setup used to apply reversing loads to eight.. specimens representing " low-rise" structural walls with boundary elements.III*
Principal variables in this test program included amount of flexural reinforcement, amount of horizontal wall reinforcement, l
amount of vertical wall reinforcement, and height-to-horizontal length ratio of the wall.
Flexural reinforcement was varied from 1.8 to 6.4% of the# boundary element area, Horizontal and vertical wall reinforcement were varied from 0 to 0.5% of the wall area.
Height-to-horizontal length ratio of the wall was varied from 1:4 to 1:1.
The test program was designed to deter-mine effects of load reversals.
Data obtained also provided information on the relationship between cracking and strength.
Principal test results for the eight walls are shown in Table 1.
For all specimens, except B5-4, the maximum nominal shear stress in the wall exceeded the stress at first observed shear cracking by a factor of at least 2.4.
For Specimen B5-4, which contained no vertical reinforcement in the diaphram, the maximum nominal shear stress exceeded the stress at first. shear cracking by a factor of 1.5.
The ratio of maximum nominal shear force to first shear cracking even exceeded 2.5 for Specimen B4-3 which contained no horizontal reinforement.
For each of the " low-rise" walls tested, measured capacity exceeded
- The superscript numbers in parentheses refer to references listed at the end of this report.
A copy of each reference is attached.
construction technology laboratories
o
~..
8
-y
?
- sevneer, 8ese Prestressed
, p. -
Etemeat to Test Floor et e Locatione
' 2 f 1 S 1
- r. 75 99..
N 1
sto
/
l y"
f A
k sto" y
N
[
10'- 0"
- i. 25.4 mm k
- o.o.
y s'.0*
i. o seee.
/ V Fig. 1 - Setup for Tests of " Low Rise" Walls (1)
TABLE 1 - Principal Test Results (1)
First Shear Cracking Ultimate Load End of Test Sheer Shear Shear stress
..Ct.
Deflection d
Deflection d
stress
.'ZL.
k" stress Specimen
- VariableUI sl.
hw 8[
a f, ha v
v v,
er, u
m.
psi in.
psi in.
psi 811 a = 1.8%(21 420 6.5 0 027 0.00072 1,010 15.5 0.23 0 0061 280 44 82 1 p=6.4%t2s 240 4.9 0.016 0.00043 767 15.8 0.26 0 0069 270 5.5 8}2 Controt 330 5.2 not measured 881 14.1 0.21 0.0056 190 30 l 832R Repair 190 3.3 0.020 0.00053 676 11.5 0.49 0.0130 230 4.0 l
84-3
- 4 = 0 320 6.1 0.015 0.00040 810 15.4 0.20 0.0053 160 3.0 83-4
- n=0 330 5.2 0.012 0.00032 538 8.3 0.20 0.0053 280 4.3 86-4
- n = 0.25%
280 5.0 0.013 0.00035 686 12.3 0.23 0.0061 100 3.5 875 h /f w = 1/4 330 5.4 0.006 0.00032 906 14.8 0.16 0.0085 350 5.7 w
885 h /f,,, = 1 200 3.5 0.027 0.00036 704 12.1 0.42 0.0056 150 2.6 l'I scent es ladicated below, ein specimens had the fotio*6as cherectoristics.
t Aw//w = 1/2, #h = 0.5%, an = 0.6% p = 4.1%
(21 specimens sabiected to stat 6c toeding. Alt other specimens subsected to iced reverseis.
Note' 1 in. = 29.4 mm; 1,000 psi = 70.3 kg per square centimeter A-3 l
1 1
\\
l that calculated by American Concrete Institute Building Code j
Requirements for Reinforced Concrete.
Figure 2 shows crack patterns in the " low-rise" walls at the ultimate load levels listed in Table 1.
The inclined cracks are indicative of shear stresses that predominate in short cantilever members.
It is. apparent that the presence of 2
cracks does not necessarily indicate loss of structural capa-city.
Even with the extensive cracking shown in Fig.
2, the walls were carrying maximum applied loads.
For a particular section geometry and applied loading, structural capacity is a function of the amount and distribution of reinforcement.
There was no evidence that reversing loads caused residual stresses that reduced strength of the walls.
Additional data on these tests are given in Reference 1.
Tests of "High-Rise" Structural Walls Tests reported in References 2, 3, and 4 were conducted to obtain data on strength and deformation capacity of structural walls subjected to significant numbers of inelastic load reversals.
Effects of load history, section shape, vertical and horizontal reinforcement, confinement reinforcement, moment-to-shear ratio, axial compressive stress, and concrete strength were considered.
Figure 3 shows the setup used for tests of "high-rise" walls.
The walls were tested as vertical cantilever members with forces applied through the top slab.
The behavior of one of the test specimens is described in detail in the following i
A-4 construction technology Inboratories
--4.
+.-
4
.-,_ygy
,_,,se-p,tP-m cg-meM-*
w ywN=t-N=-eNrep e='p a M e = w 973,--w+
ap.g.
y&gm+
--wi--t---e-wp
.qm w--g---
TT-
,.4 4.
..s.,
s s
w s,.
s s
s n
=
N s
9.
s-k f
m
.g,
- N ",,' $
" @ ' R O ' @ T
% \\
7-g ' \\
- 4.. >y7..mmp.m.l
. e
...s.. c'e.. c.4 m
' (...
.,. _,. ' '.. :j,A,f %
.y:
. N, s.,-
3 N
.v 9y
> a
%.. s s,
sq w.
..g.',,-
N't ' 3 r
h.34. -
'?s s
s s
'N, k-N.
. ' g,' f g"
ti' N
~,
e
\\f.
'Y.j; '
g - Ns.
i N.,,
5 vs
[*':.'., '
i g
. b,..
,bg g., :'Q\\ )
.[,
=
.. ~X, y,
-. y,
', ;,5 y, s
- 3. b. \\'s
,g-t s
-t Q q,
.- x, - :,
.,~
-I r
! L.. -
y s j...,%,
SH SS
,3
,..y f,..
31 3 I,$ ,s s-e .:.. v
- %- se ggi
..... st : s.f 9 l; .a .s. c s.. B1 1 33 . C, s 821 17 B3 2 83 E6 nr~w.,.u .:. g.c.=,' W., ~~ . ' ';y eaa. " 7.%f 32g-g~,) , f.., . ' '. /'g( t' 5:l] '$,7 -1'
- . x,./
I t s h -)[ Qq...:h' _E J .)?f. ' k .~,.:. g y' e, w. .s .p" - ' A gs + .m ,,, N A F ,w I .\\ s g==. x .~ .1, d.- e f i g* ss.e is 4..- . ;. ii.-- .a. 2,4 1 Ct.'. ? L. G M. 2.. u 4< .r .c, B54 43 B6 4 63 B4 3 67 t I i
- Fw gg,.. '. ni,-
-7 .e, - s =- %1 m,... - ^ <... E .e s xf .r x w} .e }J - s a.. su tel... v. ("A. f-g- ,g, 3 ..; ; s ~- s me,-.....-.. _ g um3663d M 5e mt szA. m d*.X W,* c.t.:,:~x-~.s g B7 5 70 B8 U'56 s. I u Fig. 2 " Low-Risc" Wall Test Specimens at Ultimato Load (1) A-5 ,.. ~. - -. -,.. _. -, %.g,__,,_.___ ,,g
i i l r l I l' } 4; i ..v ~ l l n \\ 1 '. L 1 l Fig. 3 Setup for Tests of "!!igh-Rise" Walls A-6 ~
( I ~ ^ paragraphs. This behavior illustrates the influence of cracks that developed during the tests. Additional data on other specimens can be obtained in References. 2, 3, and 4. Figure 4 shows the nieasured load vs deflection relationship for Specimen B3. This was a barbell shaped specimen which represented a wall. with column boundary elements at each end. As can be seen in' Fig. 4, the wall was subjected to increasing i levels of load reversals. The test consisted of 42 complete load cycles. Initial cracking bas observed in the fourth cycle at a load of 28 kips. First yielding in the vertical flexural reinforce-ment occurred in Cycle 30 at a load of 45 kips. Maximum measured crack widths were 0.012 in. In the tension boundary element and 0.025 in, across a diagonal crack in the web. Figure 5 is a photograph of Specimen B3 at Load Stage 112. This load stage, which is marked on Fig. 4, represents a point in the test when the specimen was unloaded. There were no applied in-plane horizontal forces. Figure 5 shows the inter-secting pattern of cracks in the lower six feet of the wall af ter the first 21 load cycles. From Load Stage 112, loads were increased in a positive ) direction until Load S tage 117 was reached. Figure 6 shows the condition of the specimyn at Load Stage 117. At Load Stage 117, maximum measured crack width in the tension boundary f element was 0.07 in. and maximum measured crack width in the wall web was approximately 0.16 in. It should be noted that, at this. load stage, the wall had been pushed to a lateral deflection of more than three times its yield deflection. A-7 construction technology laboratories ~... _ _. -
v.: {ggg {[196] 80 to.d. hire sucwt= s3 r e., r,.,. 3' s. 3
- 6
....[j
- ~
-rp r,,,,,.. ....., / e l I I Cracking -- [11 2 ] A[,<, - [izs] / I i s/SM, ' ), j //// g.
- p
/ 6 -r s '3 -e 7,f ]b/ //iAr psm 7 nei.n ;m. j, 1 ..a r f n , =,,,,. r. 13 i, ..-se 34 3, 1. "~ [12 3] Fig. 4 Load-Deflection Relationship for Specimen B3
j ,-t- - w Ax y, hi.' ~ 'f! .Y k'; ? ~ /
- i.
m . 2 t. y y b. :g-W^.- l _. / l ~~] ~ i,,,;, ~ ~ s 112 201510 5 0 5 1015 20 B ~ Fig. 5 Specimen B3 at Load Stage 112 I . I. --G r x}.< y. ~ N.. [% *\\ - I'$ir s m__ . dry,jS i: 'Tj _...g , ~ y,,. -. .\\. _. Ns*.?! ' w bg $ 1 1 I l M* m. l P.e , m..... s,, ;v B3 117 20 15 10 5 0 5 10 15_20 Fig. 6 Specimen B3 at Load Stage 117 A-9
After Load Stage 117 was reache 1, the wall was unloaded and pushed in the opposite direction until Load Stage 123 was reached. Figure 7 shows the condition of Specimen B3 at Load Stage 123. At this load stage, the maximum crack width measured in the tension column was approximately 0.07 in. and the maximum measured crack width in the wall web was 0.16 in. When the wall was again unloaded, to Load Stage 125, the crack pattern shown in Fig. 8-resulted. It is clearly evident from the behavior of Specimen B3 (and from other specimens tested) that the presence of cracks did not prevent the walls from main-taining their structural integrity and developing their nominal s treng th. Figure 9 shows Specimen B3 at Load Stage 196. This load stage is also indicated in Fig. 4. The cracking pattern in Fig. 9 is indicative of severe distress in the member, yet at this stage the wall carried its maximum load which corresponded toapproximately3.1vT[. For purposes of comparison, the design strength this member calculated in accordance with the American ConcreteInstituteBuildingCodeis2.3vf[. A question that occurs in evaluating cracked reinforced concrete structures is whether residual stresses associated with the occurrence of cracks influence strength of the member. It is evident from the behavior of Specimen B3 that internally balanced residual stresses, such as those existing when the specimen was unloaded, did not influence strength. A-10 construcilon technology laboratories
A
- 7
.l n y
- f. h-L
/ 2-y 'l / -$= + -. _. /__../=' y; -y i x N - / m -w p ~~ ~ ~,5 iiG. B3 123 201510 5 0 5 1015 20 Fig. 7 Specimen B3 at Load Stage 123 k i ,-fr - l _. g _ H l-t s l ~, 0 g.; =- -l .. /.- ' I' p 2 n 7 . ~ _.' L,. l ~- ~- l -T~ ". 's, l ,7 :+- 5 _.I .K', a JPPEt> si siii s ie. B3 12$ 201510 5 0 5 1015 20 l Fig. 8 Specimen B3 at Load Stage 125 A-ll
? 4 4 \\ i 1 I i -[ky.%y..\\ , ; 6 -- - - .];'{tp s l +%_.s .. m RRh ;p* ~ w A x s .y. \\h., 2 \\ q y v _2 ~ Q l,
- h....
-. x, 1 f _. zQl \\ -.Qiz. y ~% ' - r-. b f s-c4 .g ' : f., , x. ' N.<g s m: fT pt. Y 'R. ..~,_.,,.g..~..4- -.---g-=,,,,,,,, ,9 B 3 196 201510 5 0 5 1015 20 i Fig. 9 Specimen B3 at Load Stage 196 l l A-12 1
o l TESTS OF BEAMS Background data on strength of cracked reinforced concrete members can also be obtained-from tests on reinforced concrete beams. Data from tests reported by Scribner and Wight are shown in Figs. 10 and 11.(5) Figure 10 shows the load vs displacement curve for a reinforced concrete beam element tnat contained positive and negative steel. The beam was subjected to increasing levels of fully reversed load cyc$es. Yielding occurred in the first load cycle as indicated in Fig. 10. Figure 11 illustrates crack patterns that developed during the first inelastic loading and during subsequent load rever-sals. As increasing numbers of load cycles were applied, the entire beam moment at the face of the column was carried by a force couple between the top and bottom layers of longitudinal steel. Thus, applied moments were primarily resisted by the positive and negative longitudinal reinforcement. Under load reversals a complete crack plane, labeled A-B-C in Fig 11, formed through the beam. This crack plane did not prevent the beam from transferring load. During the final stages of the test, increasing numbers of inelastic load rever-sals caused concrete near the face of the column to abrade and eventually disintegrate. This resulted in a " slip plane" along the beam at the face'of the column. The significance of such a slip plane is related to the number of inelastic load reversals and the level of shear stress on the beam. The existence of A-13 construcilon technology laboratories ,m -._y
- i j a A
p Yield p 4 2,10"-- B UV g / S / 4 2 so oj l } t; 5"-- 7 + P,6 // nHn 7 p 4 Formation of Crocks during First inclostic Loading / -15 0.5 f.,5 -2'O -O'.5 2!O 2S 3 50 p[' BEAM TIP DEFLECTION,IN !O o l -7.5" -- (i kip = 4.45 KN, t in. = 25.4 mm) ,A
- ~
e i J i-l Ba'i Fig. 10 Load vs Displacement Curve - Specimen 1 (Afte,r Ref. 5) L-V i C c J 3 i 1E 7 Additional Crocks Formed during Lood Reversal Fig. 11 Crack Pattern (Af ter Ref. 5)
a s-the crack plane did not become significant until repeated num-bers of inelastic cycles were applied. Additional data on beam tests can be obtained from References 6 and 7. In addition, tests of beam-column joints reported in Reference 8 also provide useful information. Resultc shown in Fig.10 indicate that beams can transfer flexural and shear loads even with the presence of cracks through their entire depth. Tests conducted at the University of Washington have showb that the effectiveness of web rein-forcement in resisting shear in reinforced concrete beams is not affected by axial force in the beam. OI These tests were conducted on beams subjected to combined axial tension, bending, and shear. Results indicated that effectiveness of web rein-forcement is not reduced by the presence of axial tension. In the tests, applied axial load was sufficient to cause cracking prior to the' application of transverse load. For all beams with web reinforcement, measured load capacity of the precracked beams exceeded values calculated in accordance with the American Concrete Institute Building Code. TESTS OF CONTAINMENT ELEMENTS Another series of tests that can be used to demonstrate the l l strength of cracked reinforced concrete members is reported in an experimental program to investigate shear transfer in cracked containments without diagonal reinforcement.(10) The test setup was designed and constructed to simulate boundary conditions of a wall element of a pressurized containment sub-jected to tangential shear stresses. Forces on an element in A-15 j Construcilon technology laboratories l
e .r . a containment wall are illustrated in Fig. 12.- Figures 13 and -14 show the test setup used for the experiments. The experimental program. included monotonic and reversing load tests on large-scale specimens subjected to biaxial tension and shear.- Specimens were 5-ft square and 2-ft thick with No. 14 and No. 18 reinforcement. This discussion includes a description of one of the test specimens. Additional data are available in Reference 10. . Figure 15 shows the' crack pattern observed in Specimen MEl after reinforcement in the element was loaded to obtain a ten-sion stress of 54 ksi in the steel. This stress corresponds to 90% of the yield stress of the reinforcement. Crack width measurements made on the specimen after biaxial tension was ,o applied indicated a maximum width of approximately 0.036 in. ' Figures 16 and 17 show the crack pattern and nominal shear stress vs shear distortion relationship for Specimen MBl. Shear forces were applied while constant biaxial tension was ma in ta ined.- It is evident from Fig. 17 that the reinforced concrete element was capable of transferring shear forces even though it was traversed by biaxial tension cracks through the complete thickness.
SUMMARY
AND CONCLUSIONS Test data presented in this report demonstrate that cracks in an adequately reinforced concrete member do not prevent the member, from developing its expected -streng th. Adequate rein-forcement for the test specimens was determined in accordance with current code provisions. Data presented also indicate the A-16 construction technology laboratories -e v,, ,.ev- -y --,--,,,,,,,_-,-,,.m-.,--,,%,,,.-y, _r,,,..-,--,,,.,-,w-- c-w e<,__,,,,-,,,,,--m,%w.m.,- -,,,,y-,,,,m,w-.,,%,-
l NUREG/CR-1374 l \\ I s % I / f ~~ \\ xy 1 _.y , (_ 7 s i i n . N. s' - - - 1 1%p._ < ,s I I .q
- - f_ U. __ p Y l
l I I i u_
- t. _ _
i ~- 1
- c'~,.
( tI h, I i ELEMENT OF CONTAINMENT WALL o o n o -e. _h__fld' _ _ h. L 4 ~ f ~ = 3 ,f l i 9 i I g -_= y 3 l 1 l i i l ^ -~ f -~~---- l' 1f f P 1 i a) Biaxial Tension Due to b) Shear Forces Due to Internal Pressurization Lateral Load Fig. 12 Forces on Element in Containment Wall (10) A-17 L
l u - 2 in. maxhum distortion 2Ti _l/2 in. mos. 1 a o a V / translation plus o r _--b elongation ---r r-2T } 2 g vQ Liv 1 I I t Y k 'I p I 3 l f b I g' \\ 272 L J 27: 1 u o II//////////d //////fildliif ///N I 7i= 0 to 280 kips sustained tension each *18 bor T =0 to 160 kips 2sustained tension each *ta ber V =0 to 210 kics reversing shear opplied of 3 locations ecen face Fig. 13 Loading System Capabilities (10) h .h ~ ' i. I* I h* r -j ~ ? I h .4 + w '4~ w,A IF. I %,r_ yQ 15'5e9 l:[~. '.jd ~ ~-Q Fig. 14 Test Setup for Containment Element (10) A-18
s. .9 c da h b 'b h ' )l w* J 3 N )~ / / m ,._ _(_ _ _ m~ S\\<,M _,4 ~J l 1 l m ^ i } l i W E i =DQ My @- L. ___[__I C = /Q-- = _/ I 1 61 1 l $N$ E Cracks considered to Penetrate the Full Thickness of the Specirnen. Cracks considered to -Penetrate only the Cover Layer. l f Fig. 15 Crack Pattern After Biaxial Tension of 54 ksi in Containment Element Specimen MB1 (10) l l A-19 j. l l I
2 e a r_W " s M B1-41t e <w J m, p.; D.i g,-_ a) Just Prior to Loss of Shear Capacity g gsq g % s / v. g A A_'l ^
- =:3 M
e i
- t.,
x 4 'W N^ Nf=' t ) )5K ruoa Cracks existing crict to sneer toeding. - Crecks oc::frnng efte* c:clicctica of sheer loed. b) Crack Pattern' Just Prior to Maximum Shear Load Fig. 16 Crack Pattern in Specimen MB1 (10) A-20 l l
I& Nominal Shear Stress, psi 300 - 200 Mai llII _ 4:. ;; l00 -- ll' thy L....a I I I l 0' O O.004 0.008 Shear Distortion, y, rad. Fig. 17 Nominal Shear Stress versus Shear Distortions for Containment Element Specimen MB1 (After Ref. 10) ^ A-21 i
p a w - 4.. s, level or severity of cracking associated with severe stress in reinforced concrete members. Obviously the presence of cracks in a reinforced concrete structure cannot be summarily dismissed as insignificant. The pattern of cracking and crack widths should be evaluated to determine their significance.
- However, the mere presence of a crack does not necessarily indicate that the integrity of the structure is in jeopardy, or that its load-carrying capacity has been reduced.
I i i A-22 construellon technology laboratories _1
v ..as + 1 4a & REFE RENCES 1. Barda, F., Hanson, J.M., and Corley, W.G., " Shear S trength of Low-Rise Walls with Boundary -Elements," Special Publica-tion SP-53, Reinforced Concrete Structures in Seismic Zones, American Concrete Institute, Detroit, 3977, 496 pp. ' 2. Corley, W.G., Flor ato, A.E., and Oesterle, R.G., "S tr u c-tural Walls," Special Publication, C.P. Siess Symposium, American Concrete Institute, Detroit,1979 (to be published). 3. Oes terle, R.G., Fiorato, A.E., and Corley, W.G., " Rein-1 forcement Details for Earthquake-Resistant Structural Walls," Concrete International, December 1980, pp. 55-66. 4.- Oesterle, R.G, Flor ato, A.E., and Corley, W.G., "E f f ects of Reinforcement Details on Seismic Performance of Walls," Proceedings of a Conference on Earthquakes and Earthquake i Engineering: The Eastern United S tates, Vol. 2, Ann Arbor -Science Publishers, Inc., 19 81, pp. 685-707. 5. Scri bner, C.F. and Wight, J.K., "A Method for Delaying -Shear Strength Decay of RC Beams," Proceedings of a L Workshop on Earthquake-Resistant Reinforced Concrete i Building Construction, Vol. 3, University of California, Berkeley, June 1978, pp. 1215-1241. 6. Wight, J.K. and Sozen, M. A., " Strength Decay of RC Columns Under Shear Reversals," Journal of the Structural Division, ~ { ' AS CE, May 1975, pp. 10 53-10 6 5. 7. Brown, R.H. and Jirsa, J.O., " Reinforced Concrete Beams l Under Load Reversals," Journal of the American Concrete L I ns ti tut e, Vol. 6 8, No. 5, M ay 1971, pp. 3 80 -3 90. 8. Hanson, N.W. and Conner, H.W., " Tests of Reinforced Concrete Beam-Column Joints Under Simulated Seismic Loading," Research and Development Bulletin RD012, Portland Cement Association, 1972, 12 pp. 9. Haddadin, M.J., Hong, S.T., and Mattock, A.H., "S tirrup Effectiveness in Reinforced Concrete Beams with Axial Force," Journal of the Structural Division, ASCE, September 1971, pp. 2277-2297. 10. Oesterle, R.G. and Russell, H.G., " Shear Transf er in Large - Scale Reinforced Concrete Containment Elements," Report No. 1,. NUREG/CR-1374, Construction Technology Laboratories, i a Division of the Portland Cement Association, prepared for U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, D.C., l April 1980. A-23 s. construction technology laboratories
,--,n-,-+
-+,cm.-,
A /vR 2 - gg 1 b2 hsb fxec hy T /r M Ala y //-il I ,}}