ML20093C079
Text
.
un
.o UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
- 3 I
wasHWGTON, D. C. 20556 7
j
+....
MAY 101982 r
P MEMORANDUM FOR: Robert L'. Tedesco, Assistant Director for Licensing Division of Licensing f*
FROM:
James P. Knight, Assistant Director for Components & Structures Engineering Division of Engineering
SUBJECT:
MIDLAND PLANT UNIT NOS. 1 AND 2 The applicants 'submittals regarding Phase 2 of the underpinning repair work at the Midland Plant have been reviewed from the standpoint of Structural and Geotechnical engineering. We conclude that the Phase 2 program is acceptable
.provided that certain modifications and requirements are incorporated. The enclosure to this memo entitled " Midland Plant, Provisions for Acceptance of Phase 2" lists the modifications and requirements we believe ncessary. Based on discussions with your staff we understand that the transmittal of these
- ~
provisions to the applicant will include specific instructions to document the accomplishment of these ~ actions and infonn Region III as that documentation is available for the inspectors examination. We believe that this approach is y
appropriate.
%M\\
Y
[', James P. Kni.ht, Assistant Directorfor C Division of Engineering s
cc:
R. Vollmer D. Eisenhut R. Purple E. Adensam D. Hood R. Hernan F. Schauer G. Lear 1
_ _ _ _ - ~
e
/w^>
M906QLO W xg
+
Midland Plant Provisions for Acceptance of. Phase 2 1.
Deep-seated bench marks DSB-ASl and DSB-AS2. DSB-ASl and DSB-AS2 shall be installed at a distance not to exceed 5-feet from the wall of the Main
- Auxiliary Building which is founded at Elevation 562. Actual locations of 4
these installed bench marks and any modifications in tolerance criteria
~
required on Drawing C-1493(Q) due to changes from the original DSB-AS locations shall be documented.
'1 2.
Monitoring ' devices required to be installed. The following devices shall be properly installed and operating prior to drifting under the turbine building or FWIV pit.
DSB-lW DSB-ASl DMD-lW DSB-1E DSB-AS2 DMD-1 E DSB-2W DSB-AN DMD-11 DSB-2E DMD-12 DSB-3W DMD-13 DSB-3E 3.
Strain gage installation. The following revisions shall be made to the proposed instrumentation shown on drawing C-1495, " Instrumentation -
El. 695 - 0 5/16" for Bldg. Settlement Monitoring".
a.
With reference to drawing C-1495 Sectional View - Wall at Col. Lines 5.3 and 5.6.
Reorientate the proposed vertical strain gage installation between Elevations 646 to 659 to a slope similar to lower gages between Elevations 584 to 614.
9 vJ4
. 4 s
. b. 'With reference to drawing C-1495, Sectional View-Wall at Col. Lines 7.4 and 7.8.
Change orientation of proposed lower strain gages between Elevations 584 to 614 to be perpendicular to orientation shown on Drawing C-1495 in 'the March 31, 1982 submittal ~ (Figure 3). On this same sectional view add an additional strain gage between Elevations 646 to 659 at an inclination similar to the above recommended orientation.
(The labeling of column lines H and G is reversed on the copy of this sectional view submitted to the staff.)
4.
Pier load t st procedures. The following modifications and additions shall be made to the pier load test procedures provided by the April 22, 1982 submittal from J. Cook to H. Denton entitled " Response to the NRC Staff Request for.
Additional Information Required for Completion of Staff Review of the Borated Water Storage Tank and Underpinning of the Service Water Pump Structure."
(It is the NRC Staff's understanding that, although the procedures were submitted for underpinning work for the Service Water Pump Structure, the procedures are applicable to the pier load test to be conducted during Phase 2 underpinning verk for the Auxiliary Building.)
Page 12. The maximum required test load should be equal to 1.3 times a.
the maximum anticipated design load. As an alternative, should there be structural difficulties in developing the required reaction load for the pier test, the NRC Staff would accept a procedu.re where the maximum test.
load for the pier load test was equal to 100 percent the max. anticipated design load and a plate load test (ASTM 01196) was performed to a maximum test load equal to 130 percent of the maximum anticipated design load.
r w
~
3-b.
Page.12. Significant modifications to the specified ASTM D1143-81 test procedures, as'the Applicant may deem appropriate, require early notification and the. approval _ of the NRC Region III Office, c.
Page 12. The rate of settlement shall not exceed 0.003 inch per hour when controlling the length of time that the 100% test load increment is to be maintained.
~
d.
Page 12. In order to provide a more positive reduction of skin friction, plywood sheeting coated with 1/8-inch thick bitument or equivalent shall be installed-on all test pier sides prior to perfoming the pier load test as a replacement for the plastic sheeting proposed by Consumers Power.
To permit correlation with the previously approved measures proposed e.
by the Applicant to demonstrate the adequate foundation capacity of the other installed piers, a minimum of two in situ density tests and five cone penetrometer tests shall be performed on the soil at the bottom of the pier selected for test loading.
e W
\\
u---
u-L 9
9 w
w y
m
,e w
y w
w
-p.4
t 4-5.
Construction Dewatering. During underpinning of the Auxiliary Building area, the upper phreatic surface shall be maintained a minimum of 2 feet in-depth below the bottom of any underpinning excavation at any given time.
The final plan for the dewatering system shall be established and implemented in advance of drifting under the turbine building'or FWIV pit. The dewatering 4
plan should include the locations and depths of the dewatering wells-and piezometers (observation wells).
Installation details and criteria for monitoring loss of soil particles due~ to pumping shall be the same as those previously approved by the staff for the dewatering of the Service Water Pump Structure.
6.
Monitoring movement of Feedwater Isolation Valve Pit (FIVP).
Jacking of the FIVP back to its original position shall be required if.the relative settlement between the Reactor Containment and the FIVP or between the
' Turbine Building and the FIVP reaches a total settlement of 3/8-inches since the time piping connectiom were made.
4
--w
,-mg e
m
metMD - um.. Bus - Puse 2 3 of r. g7 RO'JTING AND TRANSMITTAt. SLIP m '.,1
,,;}!
i t = n -- -
(
J TO: (Name cMee symbol, room riumber, Instrels Date buildsag, Agency / Post)
. \\
th 1.
-m.
3.
4.
E.
W File Note and Retum Spec,4 For Clearance Per Conversation As Requested For Correction Prepare Repy Circulate For Your information See Me Commer t investigate Signature
'* - dinetton Justify REMARKS 5 6D C Ch y(CM65 tan % d.(,k WR (k5CV b h
.L 4R CC.D I
L3 W6 bb it,gl0f y
\\ f trs 3 Ab C4 rru 4.ltch C,vid t*,0gge f
/
3 wyd b,.m SE,E. I%* pm,ckJ a.> e,hm ccn
- 3CJ Mhb W bh ICVitd CA/ \\np'I,
h lon bpcmcAl se>,d A k L?h %rv y
CR h w 4 YCddsard" t% M b4 *
$6;y-rTQ 3 j W E C k St et d C =* Ws Mtm h Q Q
(. A wkl b b cc:m.c v and h hwe n,.c 3
3
.c kCDR. TtC.C.rnryggvghM).
DO NOT use this form as a RECORO of approvels. concurnences. di%
clearances, and similar actions HIOM:(Name, org. symbol. Agency / Post)
Room No.-Bldg.
Phone No.
T)R.
e_ -8 iS3 sost-ter OFDONAL FORM 41 (Rev. 7-76) e cro i seso o.- its.tse ts) gg IU d2
..9..r..a....-
a., w.2y.\\,,,,t.c.g ;,_.
9,,
U. L t..
.e :
1.
. ;. +,,,,,, y, 3, ' '
is os<-
. L a,- m gu, % L.
,,, j
,g-
.,,i s
b
~
.a O
i Docket Numbers: 50-329/330 MIDLAf(D PLANT, Units 1 and 2
SUBJECT:
AUXILIARY BUILDING UNDERPINNING - PHASE 2 Prepared by: Joseph D. Kane, DE, HGEB, GES 1.
Deep-seated bench marks DSB-ASl and DSB-AS2. The NRC-staff requires that DSB-AS1 and DSB-AS2 be installed at a distance not to exceed 5-feet from the wall of the Main Auxiliary Building which is founded at Elevition 562. Actual locations of these installed bench marks and any.aodificaticns in tolerance criteria required on Drawing C-1493(Q) due to changes from the original DSB-AS location) are required to be provided to NRC Region III office at least two weeks in advance of the start of Phase 2 underpinning work.
2.
Monitoring devices required to be installed. The Applicant is required to notify the NRC Midland Resident Inspector and document in writing that the following devices are properly installed and operating prior to the start of Phase 2 underpinning work.
~ ~ -
DSB-lW DSB-AS1 DMD-1W DSB-lE DSB-AS2 DMD-lE DSB-2W DSB-AN DMD-11 DSB-2E DMD-12 DSB-3W DMD-13 DSB-3E i
,- x t 3.
Strain gage installation.
The NRC staff requires the following revisions to, drawing C-1495, " Instrumentation - El. 695 - 0 5/16" for Bldg.
Settlement Monitoring", prior to installing the strain gages on the Auxiliary Building.
a.
Sectional View - Wall at Col. Lines 5.3 and 5.6.
Reorientate the proposed vertical strain gage installation between Elevations 646 to 659 to a slope similar to lower gages between Elevations 584 to 614.
'~3 l '" " 4
- "" ?"' u
- 3
" ' ' ^ '
^ i..p.u ) w e o, h.
.s b.
Sectional View - Wall at Col. Lines 7.4 and 7.8.
Change orientation of proposed lower strain gages between Elevations 584 to 614 to be perpendicular to orientation shown on Drawing C-1495 in the March 31,
."IL 1982 submittal (Figure 3).
On this same sectional view add'an n:mll'd'.u.s L
at additional strain gage between Elevations 646 to 659 at an inclin'iNon YN
'u..v.* s. 3 similar to the above reconsnended orientation.
The labeling of column r 4...A
.L lines H and G is incorrect and should be reversed on this sectional y$
e
...,,,_ 1 7
4.
Pier load test procedures. The NRC staff requires the following modifications and additions to the pier load test procedures provided by the Applicant in the April 22, 1982 submittal from J. Cook to H. Denton entitled " Response s.
to the NRC Staff Request for Additional Infonnation Required'for Completion of Staff Review of the Borated Water Storage Tank and Underpinning e
,.-.y
g l
gi u..i.... g
- w
/ y' es
+s.
v.s s ei,,
,,,1
, c
,$ +!
_ 4. _. ) 4 6 h, tr ' g..... s 1..
n,,~i k i n g,.s..r 1'.
.. a - ),.,3., L i.
. s
-. 3 g
,,.1 3
a. g1 t I....c l a ( 1 0 n i b n o i %.; y, b..... d 4.,.....
t A. }, 'L.. & ~ d i. i....'. ' a sy., v l i...... i.. A... 3 il. s. s.. > s. r,.
.. ' ' ~ '.. '
...\\
t: t *.,
~
a w,s 3 y
t'..... p.... t ' ' ( d.,... !..d (
l L.
s Y d ' d
~
of the Service Water Pump Structure."
It is the NRC Staff's understanding that, althob.1h the procedures were submitted for underpinning work for the Service Water Pump Structure, the procedures are applicable to the pier load test to be conducted during Phase 2 underpinning work for the Auxiliary Building.
a.
Page~12. The maximum required test load should be equal to 1.3 times the maximum anticipated design load.f The Applicant is
~
required to provide the actual value of the maximum test load and its basis to the NRR Staff at least two weeks in advance of beginning Phase 2 work.
b.
Page 12. Significant modifications to the specified ASTM 01143-81 test procedures, as the Applicant may deem appropriate, require early notification and 'the approval of the NRC Region III Office.
c.
Page 12. In recognition of the sensitivity of the rigid plant structures to differential movement, the NRC Staff requires that the
- M-rate of settlement not exceed 0.003 inch p'er hour when controlling
-A. tJ!.
i3 the length of time that,100% aN = test load increment) are to be maintained.
d.
Page 12.
In order to provide a more positive reduction of skin
.m
,-,w friction, the NRC staff, W 9es that plywood sheeting coated with 1/8-inch thick bitumen be installed on all test pier sides prior to performing the pier load test. The bituminous coating is the-Staff's recomended replacement for the plastic sheeting proposed by the Applicant.h d O, MJd etn3,d<c G v uj'pe u.a.1 c h,,,,, t,3,,.,
S d
- j..i I.-
yi.:.jc.ed k b INyjhu.,d h., elimim.k. 3
$3)
- 30.,
i
... e.
To pennit correlation with the previously approved measures proposed
,by the Applicant to demonstrate the adequate foundation capacity of the other installed piers, the NRC staff requires a miriimum of fwc two in situ density tests and two cone penetrometer tests be performed on the soi.1 at the bottom of the pier selected for test lcading.
5.
Construction Dewatering. During underpinning of the Auxiliary Building area, the Applicant is required to maintain the upper phreatic surface a minimum of 2 feet in depth below the bottom of any underpinning excavation at any given time. The Applicant's plan for dewatering is required to be provided to the NRR Staff at least two weeks in advance of beginning Phase 2 work. The dewatering plan should include the locations, depths and typical installation details of the dewatering wells and piezometers
- 4..b.rt p. h... i m.1 y.. 'r a, 3 d< t,: J%.b.r.3 p..y m; :.kU k (observation wells),pcriteria-to be-requireFfor-mon 4-toring-loss-of-t the NN) 9. 8d 2-p w. w d e q g. N. o i k.
6.
e.ni. k< t N soi-1--particles due to-pumpingp*mdtedo b. hemeu eniq. d i-y 'm ;.o.@ uf DV.20!Q4'MC RIdNw.,N.6'uk.., (.m C yn.ha o ey Lun J. J.c.. h.e.k NbOd (St. ney kuw. A.,. I $1.,A
... 3..-d Ci. c. n.ra.
W.ii, h. N e..
Monitoring movement of Feedw%.ater Isolation Valve Pit (FIVP). Based on 6.
the Applicant's consultant statement at the February 1-5, 1982 design i
be u. k it...i).....) p ila audit, it is the NRC Staff's understanding that jackin.g of the FIVP.,will be required if the relative settlement between the Raactor Containment u hA..*Nhbrv.bleiierid-N iibP
-;in.. m: i....s e i,..s, u... a...,... ed and the FIVP, reaches 3/8-incheiJhT5 pr5cEdure is acceptable to the NRC k a M tJ u he..
.,r q Staff. Any modifications to this procedure and limits by the App,lic, ant j
" ~ i l
~
will require the approval of the NRR Staff.
.v 4 ;
e) / t. !..
kgih I*
1 g
.,. f x g.'
C*
- .i ! " '
5 /~ B f n
RECORD OF TELEPHONE CONVERSATION DATE: May 11, 1982, 1:00 pm PROJECT: Midland RECORDED BY: Joseph D. Kane CLIENT:
-TALKED WITH: CPC Bechtel NRC J. Schaub N. Swanberg F. Rinaldi J. Mooney J. Anderson D. Hood C. Russell J. Kane B. Dhar W. Paris J. Kane ROUTE T0:
J. Knight H. Singh G. Lear S. Poulos L. Heller R. Landsman, Region III D. Hood J. Kane F. Rinaldi MAIN SUBJECT OF CALL: To discuss Phase 2 Issues - Auxiliary Building Underpinning ITEMS DISCUSSED:
Consumers arranged this conference call to discuss review items related te Auxiliary Building underpinning. These items had been identified in a brief call on May 7,1982 by J. Kane to J. Schaub where the NRC Staff had expressed their recommendations on the following items:
1.
Location of deep seated benchmarks DSB-ASl and DSB-AS2. The current hold on construction and field installation of monuments prevents the actual locations from being established. Consumers will provide actual locations when these benchmarks are installed and recognize these monuments are to be installed at a distance not to exceed 5 feet from the wall of the Main Auxiliary Building which is founded at Elevation 562.
2.
Strain gage installation. The NRC Staff's comments for correction of drawing C-1495 were accepted and the drawing will be revised.
(Lower strain gages at Elev. 584 to 614 on Sectional View-Wall at Col. Lines 7.4 and 7.8 are to be reorientated 90 degrees and column lines H and G will becorrected).
Bechtel will check why strain gage at Eley. 646 to 659 range was not proposed for Wall at Col. lines 7.4 and 7.8 and will get back to Staff. The vertical alignment of strain gage on Col. Lines 5.3 and 5.6 at Elevation range 646 to 659 is being controlled by the need to avoid equipment obstructions on the wall. Consumers will make an analytical correction for the vertical alignment when evaluating strain gage readings.
y
-n.-,
4 A
2-4 y
- 3. -Pier test procedures. - Consumers indicated the dead loa'd available in the existing structure for the reaction load in the pier load test is approximately 90 percent of the maximum design load.. Consumers wished
. to further consider the Staff's recommendation to perform a plate load test where the maximum test ~ load would be equal to 130 percent of the maximum design load and a pier load test' at 90 percent of the maximum
-design load.
Consumers accepted the Staff's recommendation for performing two-in situ
' density. tests and a minimum;of five cone penetrometer tests on the soil at the bottom of the pier selected for load testing.
Consumers also agreed to use bituminous coated plywood sheeting for reducing the l'
effects of skin friction during the pier load test.
Consumers' wished to further consider the Staff's recomendation for requiring a rate of. settlement that would not. exceed 0.005 inch per hour '
when controlling the length of time that the 90 percent test load 1
increment would be maintained.-
- ^
^
To better explain what the Applicant intended when it indicated that it would make modifications to ASTM-01143 as deemed appropriate, Consumers will provide the Staff with.the pier load test procedures that identify the proposed modifications.
i _
4.
Construction dewd'tering. The Applicant indicated its-plan for construction dewatering during underpinning is nearly complete _ and will be :provided to the, Staff within a week.. Most of the dewatering wells are already
~
, installed but additional wells are planned. The additional wells are to be installed with Q/A procedures that-are similar to' the pennanent i
dewatering wells which were previously approved by the NRC Staff.
Monitoring for loss of soil particles due to pumping will be conducted according to the agreements reached for construction dewatering of the SWPS.
(April 2,1982 letter with enclosures, R. Tedesco to J. Cook).
Consultants to Consumers indicated the already installed construction dewatering wells extend to the natural clay layer at approximately.
El 585. The Staff indicated that the anticipated plan for construction dewatering to be provided by Consumers should address the problem of 1(
handling seepage on the~ sides and bottom of pier excavations which exteno j-below the bottom of the already installed wells.
l S.
Movement of Feedwater Isolation Valve Pit (FIVP). Consumers indicated its intent to assure transfer of the FIVP loading to the Turbine Building and l
Buttress Access Shafts by jacking the installed support system.
It is not the intent of this jacking to restore the FIVP to its original position but L
f, i
f
=
.-....w.
.v y,w--
--w.-,-
v,
- w--,
.-.r.
,-,-m,--,.,
+-.---e,
. - -, ---- - -...- =
.~
~
rather assure transfer of the _ load. The procedure for future jacking which Consumers indicated they would follow at the February 1-5, 1982 design audit-and which was found acceptable by the NRC Staff requires jacking of the FIVP back to its original position if the relative
. settlement between the Reactor Containment and the FIVP reaches a total settlement of 3/8-inches since the date that the piping connections were made.
4 e
E 9
I d-0 "4
c e
g
m---
e
f-}
G Q 2.
' s <= 4
[
o UNITED STATES f
g g
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSI,0N l
g, j
WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555
...../
,i Docket Nos.: 50-329 i
Cook Vice President Consumers Power Company 1945 West Parnall Road Jackson, Michigan 49201
Dear Mr. Cook:
Subject:
Approval Status for Construction Wells and Monitoring Instruments, and Staff Concurrence on Deep-Seated Benchmarks Your letter of May 10, 1982 states that when the Memorandum and Order of the Licensing Board was issued April 30, 1982, Consumers Power Company was proceeding with certain-soils remedial work with full awareness and concurrence of the Staff; however, explicit written' approval for that work had not been obtained.
You also noted that this work has been stopped in accordance with the Order, and requested that the Staff verify its concurrence so that the work can
'be reactivated. The three work items you identified in this category are:
(1) installation of deep-seated benchmarks, (2) installation and operation of construction wells that were not previously operating, and (3) installation of monitoring system instruments and mounting.
Items (1) and-(2) are addressed by Enclosures (1) and (2) respectively.
With respect to item (3), your letter notes that work on the monitoring system instruments and mounting for the auxiliary building is presently stopped' because Region III concurrence has not been obtained. We are advised that Region III will provide explicit written confirmation of NRC approval following resolution of existing QA deficiencies. The Office of NRR has no additional requirements for approval of item (3), beyond those needed for Region III approval.
Sincerely, Robert L. Tedesco, Assistant Director for Licensing Division of Licensing
Enclosures:
As stated cc: See next page
~
}
~
MIDLAND
- s Mr. J. W. Cook j
Vice President I
- Consumers Power Company i
~1945 West Parnall Road Jackson, Michigan 49201 cc: Michael I. Miller, Esq.
Mr. Don van Farrowe, Chief 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 Conpany 212 West Michigan Avenue U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Jackson, Michigan 49201 Resident Inspectors Office 4
Route 7 Ms. Mary Sinclair Midland, Michigan 48640 5711 Summerset Drive Midland, Michigan 48640 Ms. Barbara Stamiris 5795 N. River Stewart H. Freeman Freeland, Michigan 48623 Assistant Attorney General State of Michigan Environmental Mr. Paul A. Perry, Secretary Protection Division Consumers Power Conpany 720 Law Building 212 W. Michigan Avenue Lansing, Michigan 48913 Jackson, Michigan 49201 Mr. Wendell Marshall Mr. Walt Apley Route 10 c/o Mr. Max Clausen Midland, Michigan 48640 Battelle Pacific Nort.h West Labs (PNWL)
Battelle Blvd.
Mr. Roger W. Huston SIGMA IV Building Suite 220 Richland, Washington 99352 7910 Woodmont Avenue Bethesda, Maryland 20814 Mr. I. Charak, Manager NRC Assistance Project Mr. R. B. Borsum Argonne National Laboratory Nuclear Power Generation Division 9700 South Cass Avenue Babcock & Wilcox Argonne, Illinois 60439 7910 Woodmont Avenue, Suite 220 Bethesda, Maryland 20814 James G. Keppler, Regional Administrator U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Cherry & Flynn Region III Suite 3700 799 Roosevelt Road Three First National Plaza Glen Ellyn, Illinois 60137 Chicago, Illinois 60602 Mr. Steve Gadler 2120 Carter Avenue St. Paul, Minnesota 55108
Mr. J. W. Cook cc: Commander, Naval Surface Weapons Center ATTN:- P. C. Huang White Oak Silver Spring, Maryland 20910 lir. L. J.' Auge,- Manager
-Facility Design Engineering j
Energy Technology Engineering Center i
P.O. Box 1449
{
t Canoga Park, California 91304 Mr. Neil Gehring U.S. Corps of Engineers NCEED - T 7th Floor 477 Michigan Avenue l
Detroit, Michigan 48226 i
Charles Bechhoefer, Esq.
Atomic Safety & Licensing Board 1
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission l
i l
Washington, D. C.
20555 Mr. Ralph S. Decker Atomic Safety 8. 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
?
~
ENCLOSURE 1
-STAFF CONCURRENCE ON INSTALLATION OF DEEP SEATED BENCHMARKS 1
J Consumers has provided the NRC Staff with 'information on the installation i
of1 deep'-seated-benchmarks and relative-absolute instrumentation beginning with the design audit of January 18-19, 1982 and continuing through the submittal of March 31,1982 (Letter from J. Cook to H. Denton, Response to the NRC Staff Request for Additional _Information Required for Completion of Staff Review of Phases 2 and 3 of the Underpinning of the Auxiliary-Building and Feedwater Isolation Valve Pits). The information for the Auxiliary Building underpinning work which has been provided includes locations, depths, elevations, instrumentation accuracy and typical installation
' details of the proposed instruments. This information is contained in the
-following documentation:
- a. 7 Technical Specification for Monitoring Instrumentation 'for Underpinning Construction, Specification 7220-C-198(Q), Jan.18,1982 Rev. 0 -(Provided at the Feb. 3, 1982 Design Audit)'
i b.
Drawings C-1490(Q) and C-1491(Q), Auxiliary Building, Instrumentation Location for Underpinning, January 20, 1982; Revision 1 (Provided at the Feb. 3,1982 Design Audit)
I c.
Drawing C-1493(Q), Auxiliary Building and F.I.V.P., Instrumentation System and Monitoring Matrix, May 29. 1982, Rev. A (Provided by l
applicant's letter of March 31,1982) d.
Sketches of Carlson Stres's Meter and Telltale Installations, Midland Plant Instruments for Pier Measurements, Jan. 15, 1982 i
On the basis of review of the above information by the Staff and its
{
Consultant's, the NRC Staff concurs with Consumers proceeding with the installation of the deep-seated benchmarks and relative-absolute instrumenta-tion for monitoring the Auxiliary Building underpinning work.
Your letter of May 10, 1982 states that installation of deep-seated benchmarks is being carried out by Woodward Clyde Consultants, which is subject to its own quality assurance program and procedures approved by Consumers and -
previously subject to NRC Staff inspections. We are adv.ised that these NRC inspections have resulted in a finding that these activities are,being conducted to an acceptable quality assurance program.
{
On the. basis of the technical review by the staff and its consultants of the
)
information in the above documents, and on the basis of Region III's favorable finding with respect to the quality assurance program, the NRC Staff concurs with Consumer's~ proceeding with the installation of' the deep-seated benchmarks and relative-absolute instrumentation for monitoring the Auxiliary Building l
underpinning work. This acceptance should not, however, be construed by you to restrict racional inspection or enforcement in any area where the Region identifies safety related activities they consider to fall under their purview.
4
+
e 4
e
,w.-
9._-9.,.
-~
m,.-
p
__w.
w.
--y.
,m_,,
__.],,,..,,
~
s
/
u.
ENCLOSURE 2
- 2 CONSTRUCTION DEWATERING WELLS i
In the past Consumers position with respect to temporary or construction dewatering has been that this work was not permanent, it was being conducted to enable performace of construction activities and, therefore, the work did not require NRC Staff approval. Consumers did not provide the details of the construction dewatering design and' installation and did not seek NRC Staff approval for these activities.
More recently the Staff has concluded that certain aspects of construction dewatering activities related to underpinning the Service Water Pump Structure (SWPS) and Auxiliary Building could potentially affect the foundation stability of these 'nearly completed structures. The Staff has actively reviewed the Applicant's temporary construction dewatering plan for the SWPS and has reached agreement with Consumers on an acceptable plan (April 2,1982 letter with -
enclosures from R. Tedesco to J. Cook *, Staff Concurrence for Installation and Operation of Construction Dewatering and Observation Wells for the Service Water Pump Structure). The Staff is presently attempting to obtain and evaluate the Applicant's plan for construction dewatering during Auxiliary Building underpinning and intends to issue a letter of concurrence when all review issues related to the plan are resolved.
It is the Staff's position, with respect to the remaining construction dewatering wells that are already installed and operating, that these wells be monitored for the loss of soil particles dug to pumping similar to the requirements agreed upon and recorded in Enclousre 3 to the April 2,1982 letter.
The specifications for a construction dewatering well are dependent upon the specific application. Consequently, approval for typical field practices, on other than a case-by-casecbasis is not meaningful. Therefore, for the
+
future, the design and installation details of construction dewatering wells that have not yet been operated or installed should be addressed on a case-by-case basis following appropriate notification of the staff by the applicant. This procedure will permit an assessment of the safety significance of the proposed well. However, any construction well for which the procedures for installing and monitoring the loss of sofi particles are equivalert to those previously approved for permanent dewatering wells may be considered
-acceptable, provided also that the upper phreatic surface is maintained two feet below the bottom of any excavation or as otherwise approved in advance by Region III.
I p.
9
k T
~
mk k Nt 'l J-@"b'-
i y T ih,
,, s\\(o I
fu J 5. b b Midland Plant, Units 1.and 2 Docket Numbers: 50-329/330
Subject:
Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation of Consumers' April 22,.1982 Submittal (Response to the NRC Staff Request for Additional Information Required for Completion of Staff Review of the Borated Water Storage Tank and Underpinning of the Service Water Pump Structure)
Prepared by: Joseph D. Kane, HGEB, DE, NRR The following comments and questions are based on the reviews of the subject submittal by the Geotechnical Engineering Section Staff and its consultants.
- Dr. S. Poulos, Geotechnical Engineerh Inc. and H. Singh, U.S. Army W
Corps of Engineers. The Applicant's response to Confinnatory Issues
(, 5, 7, 8, 9,10,11,12, 22, and 23 for the Service Water Pump Structures are structural engineering issues and are not' discussed in this evaluation.
Q.1.
(Issue 1, Page 2, Par. 3)' Provide the range in layer thicknesses that the oil-impregnated sand will be placed beneath BWST IT-60 tank and the construction controls to be required for its placement and compaction.
Q.2.
(Issue 2, Page 3, Par. 2) Averaging the strain over a 20-foot gage length is not acceptable to the Staff because this averaging could lead to underestimating stresses and unacceptable cracking.
Installing shorter length gages (maximum length of 5 feet) over the 20-foot length is recommended. The Staff's concern with the single 20-foot
+
gage length is further' discussed in Q.5.
wy 9
y
--w e m
--m-p
s
- Q.3.
(Issue 2, Page 3, Par. 3) As a minimum, the BWST ring beams should be monitored for increasing. strains at a frequency of at least once a year, following the initial 5 year period of plant operation.
Q.4.
(Issues 1 and 2, Pages 5 and 6). The Applicant's responses to issues 1 and 2 are inadequate with respect to the basis for adopting the soil spring stiffness of 4,000 KCF and with respect to determining the
. effects of differential settlement on the existing SWPS. The importance in resolving these inadequacies with the Applicant is dependent on Structural Engineering Branch's evaluation of Consumers May 7,1982 submittal on the limit analysis of the SWPS.
If Consumers statement in the May 7, 1982 submittal is found acceptable by SEB, that the SWPS is not overstressed even if the north overhang portion were completely unsupported by the plant fill, then there is no longer a need to resolve a
the range in soil stiffness differences between the glaci,1 till and v
plant fill.
If, however, the results of the limit analysis are ultimately found not acceptable by SEB, then the Applicant should either ju~stify the adoption of the soil spring stiffness value of 4000 KCF or alternately use a stiffness of K = 400 KCF for the glacial till which is considered reasonable and acceptable to the Staff and its consultants.
l Q.5.
(Issue 3. Page 6), The proposed 5/16-inch displacement criterion over a 20-foot gage length is not acceptable to the Staff or its consultants.
A 5/16-inch extension, if it were to occur over a short length within the 20-foot gage length, would imply very high stresses in the steel i
i 1
l l
l
- [
~
' $elilC
~
~~
~
^
~
~~
a,,
m u n
w
. v Y
' N.3 Y
' % 1 fand would result lin ' cracking during underpinning.. More gages of shorter y
s M -lengths (e.g.,4 maximum' length of 5 feet) would be' preferable to permit
- n..
identificatio'n:of the'more highly stressed-sections. :The Staff and
'its consultants recogni'ze the' advantages of the proposed straint
(('b.&.
monitoring program but consider measurement of the vertical differential settleme.'
K -s "1
.\\
. _ nt similar to what is being carried out for the Auxiliary M
y,
' Building underpinning work,.to be the'mcre positive and sensitive
, s.
construction control th'at wodld pennit corrective action to be
. t
- k.
$y
[ ^'
taken before overstressing the SWPS would occur.1 For-these reasons the Staffirequires that underpinn'i'ng of the SWPS be controlled by
-lo i.
monitoring of vertical differentia ~1 settlement mbene tolerable 1Imits
+
^ W established appio'priate' analysis before starting this work. C 4
t Q.6.
(Issue 6page7). The ' Applicant's. response to issue 6 does not provide t'
the calcu'latiyns for sit' ding resistance of the SWPS under seismic loading whichwererequestedattheMahh16through 19, 1982 design audit. For this reason Item.2.2 of Enclosure 8 to the May 25, 1982 letter from P
D. G. Eisenhut to J. W. Cook again requests this infonnation.
..s Q.7.
(Issue 13, Pages 10-12) The following changes and additions should be x
made'to the Applicant's response to issue 13.
a.
On 5th line, Page 10, the word " solely" should be deleted.
w
(
~
'~,
h N.,
- %.p,
,t S
n C,
R
'2
^
.m j
- m,K m>
s s
u<
-S.,
\\s I
s y
-* 7 T" *[,
7" * * ',_ l ; ;--n, _ __ _
n
, ~
s b.
On 2nd line, Par. 3, Page 11, the word " generally" should be deleted. At the end of this paragraph add the following: The correlation between the pier.or plate load test results and the penetration tests performed on the foundation soils will be used to correct the correlation graphs and to judge the suitability of the bearing stratum.
c.
Last paragraph, Page 11 should be revised to incorporate the following changes. The zone of influence should be defined by extending lines downward at a slope of 1 horizontal (H) to 1 vertical (V) from the edge of the footing into the foundation soils.
If the foundation soil is cohesionless, a braced excavation is required if the excavation must proceed more than 6-inches below the adjacent pier or, if not an immediately adjacent pier, then 6-inches below the intersection of the pier footing with the 1H to IV zone of influence slope. Movements of adjacent piers shall be monitored as the excavation proceeds to 18-inches or less.
Excavations shall be stopped and construction procedures modified if measured movements are larger than anticipated.
Q.8.
(Issue 14,Page12). The modifications and additions which were required for the pier load test procedures for the Auxiliary Buf1 ding (Enclosure 2 to the May 25, 1982 letter from D. G. Eisenhut to J. W. Cook, Par. 4) are also required in the procedures for the Service Water Pump Structure.
In addition, if the very dense sandy alluvium is ultimately accepted as l
A y t ). "
t 3 :. - j ['%
O I
l
~
i, 9
i a
\\
5-t g
k the foundation for_ a portion of the SWPS underpinning piers, then either a pier or a plate load test'should'also be conducted on this 4
foundation material.
4 s s
$L Q.9.. -(Issue 1k,7 ages 13-15). The following coments a5d questions are D
'w numbered in identical order. to the numering of the contingency plan
~
j ;%
s items given in4 response to issue 18:
i p
1.c.
6
~
What procedure is to be followed that will pemi,t a single well I:
failure to be. identified from the total system?
l L
aL" j2.b. /It is unclear what level will be equalized and the time it will l
/
- take to complete this action. What occurrence (e.g., settlement 7
\\<
t's i measurement,etc.)triggersthisreactNn;touncontrolled groundwater flow?
T
~
(
r
-3.a. and 3.b.
Is the equipment for, carrying ou techniques such as forepoling or spieling oi arouting to stop ground loss in
}
t ^,
i j
j readiness at the plant. site'?-
j 1
i 4.a.
Include limits on mximum depyh of excavation and zone of influence and requirements for bracing.
t1
' 6 4.h.
A required increase f.ih yearing area of underpinning piers is a'
.-3 significant change that requires notification of Region III.
t
}'
e u
l
,h k
g f,
l n
h'
.//:
i n
. y
'},
N 4I. ;
'-. N A
e e.-
s s
__l-__-------------~
^ - ' - - ' - ^
~ ~ ' ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~
5.
Recording of excessive pier. settlement requires an evaluation of its cause and notification of Region III before proceeding with
.other piers.
6.
The use of wedges and plates would be the routine method to stop movement in' the event of a jack failure.
7.
A loss in functioning of the important northerly benchmarks would require underpinning work to be stopped until the benchmarks were restored.
8.
Prior to implementing the listed items of 8a, 8b and 8c the underpinning work should be stopped and the existing excavation faces carefully supported.
The contingency plan should be revised to incorporate the above Staff's comments and Applicant's responses.
Q.10. (Issue 19, Pages 15-16). The following comments should be incorporated into the notes controlling the checking or adjusting of jacking loads.
J Jacking will be controlled to limit settlements to acceptance criteria values identified on SWPS-14 (To be established by the Applicant and '
evaluated by the Staff). Wedges and plates will be used to prevent unacceptable movement in the event of a jack failure, both during pier construction and during application of final jacking loads.
am- - -.
,-g
.-,g.
-,e
-e-
.Q
. '.DuringconstructionofPiers1,2Ind3thejackswillbemonitored at least at the start of every shift and daily.during holidays and weekends. More frequent checking and jacking is~ required until the rate of load decrease is small enough and sufficiently stabilized V
% e.
to permit checking,during each shift.-
l Q.11 '(Issue 20, Page 16).. The.above comments'on jacking control and monitoring frequency are applicable to the transfer of the jacking load into the pennanent underpinning wcll. Provide the actual value of the " predetermined rate".
Q.12 (Issue 24,Page19).
It is unclear from' the Applicant's response whether Consumers intends to comply with the Staff's recommendat'fon (April 2, 1982 letter from R. Tedesco to J. Cook, Staff Concurrence for Installation and Operation'of Construction Dewatering and Observation Wells for the Service Water Pump Structure, Enclosure 3, Page 4) and require extension
[
of the six previously proposed piezometers to at least elevation 570.
The Staff does not have a problem if the Applicant chooses to add piezometers to the original six and tenninate theseffezometers at "an elevation no lower than approximately 1 foot above the undisturbed natural soil. However, the Staff still requires that the bottom elevation of the original six piezometers be drilled to at least elevation 570.
~* '
The Staff does not accept the Applicant's statements on controlling the
' groundwater level-in the SWPS area.during underpinning construction for the following reasons:
a.
Drawing ~ the water level down to approximately the interface of j
i the fill and natural soil is not a realistic control.
Omnpleted l
borings show this surface and soil conditions to be highly variable in the innediate area of the underpinning work with the interface level ranging from Elevation 605 to Elevation.583.
b.
Identification of the soil type at the bottom of the dewatering well does not provide assurances that blow outs will not occur at the base of pier excavations because this information does not address the problem of pervious layer stratification and impervious layers of insufficient thickness.
l l
For the above reasons the Staff reiterates its position that there should be a control on the upper phreatic surface which requires a minimum 2-foot depth between the upper phraetic surface being controlled by dewatering and the bottom of any underpinning excavation at any given time. As a minimum, the six originally proposed piezometer locations are to be used to verify that the groundwater is acceptably being maintained during underpinning.
It is recognized that localized temporary dewatering techniques such as sumping may be necessary to produce hydrostatically relieved conditions in areas of entrapped water.
n ;;,. -.
t 9_
Q.131(Fig.'SWPS-14). A correction to Note 9 is needed to indicate that all instrumentation and material identified in the Monitoring' Matrix is to be Q-listed unless otherwise shown not to be required. A separate request of the Applicant to provide the following drawings identified on Fig. SWPS-14 has been made.
Drawina Nos.
Subject C-2040 thru C-2043-ll Crack Monitoring Requirements C-2003 and C-2004 Building Settlement Monitoring Requirements C-2035 and C-2036 Details of Wall and Pier Settlement Monitoring 9
.re, y
7 r.,
r-
&~
_%? WAMR$*N MOL~
..._. Q M % % '= "
[:;
7%T[G ;;c -JJ.NQ:M&7f-TTWQ?MMoW't ? CE p,;p
~, -
I O
A
~
ma J,a t
n,;;r.
Q
-billU.h l ' '
cam k Mt b n 5d icAnki " h g ytk U b u b st b k (MC
~
g R. SWPS
~
CoWAf.MNiotN E5u E MO. 4 i~
. -. a g.5 GET. -- ksu b< Aesses a SE6 wocc.
i
'J,[c coE. - En% st%.s vwd h. twiewn -We. emh iht or 3
k % n.k<.sduk16 A : -
n%
L.li ac.- Ed Lk Aw 6Wi anewi h 43 yon +.p A O b s.wai) M,, M walAm *= &
y atut.
- . 4
.\\cof,k<yi,,n y a.,16.n.,d pm.4 e,M b(-4 7 f r's will feheve. sWh/nl look ced h seb.,.. t 77 wm u
A yum.t -
b %j ao.%.<4 skems, m shkee b k Me CW
- x. a;. q,.
.m
. <;y&.~;.c..
v (N
h g
(*
~
RE%LOTid -- 3EbbM evabohc hmif a%ksu Ach show.s wo.';
W wyd a wdul'Qh}ykswes ucephk 9
+ -
nsus/ kpw,1s ne mv < wal
~
~
I y
g W VM$61 C4(I # "p g
r trSt, O n
E I
,d. d(
M T 4 n,c/
s
\\)be,
.ccgk - C 4h '
V4hbf&
, /Q W 7W 4
[ l_
hirs92.s h Ts.SLs Cnoby y cabt \\.
l e-
- k,
,,. ' ~
-m g
1 6,=-
- * ~ *
- r. e
- e
, "gj. t*j' 31 ;.
e a'
1
-w s
g 8
..,,/
Vk,
,g.y
- ejy
~
e
~'
...?
^
' i. h l e.,..
3,
,s-j
. t.
' y),)
,?y c.
...n Q.%
~
aN)
"'d
- - A;
~
,n e.
M 4-
\\,
4 9
,j'#b JG p s.
-, ny. :,, _
--,m
- m m.
. wg
,,ym
-y
'"(
4 I
7,'.'.,,
(',,[
N ;f
,b
,... -, _'~ ~ m m_,.. -.i J(
~.7.-
.a_' k '..
- a ', ', * /
I 6,. [.
m m,...
,,=,;,,
6
- =. =
r,
'1
_7
' *.a _
.1-CU
.[-},1)'
4
- 7, f
.:., s -
g
+ h'
+
1 h
^~
J. b.
p;-1 -i r ef.
i
~
x%W @
c,
a h&%
..a-
~
- t!. -
h T:
Mh$#)/%TQR,N IS$dE., M. b _
pSW GEI Usig b 4coc y.cF h hD % b d d h ) utoac) o Nor MfEW)PGE h<camphMreso 5. g>
x:.. :t.
' COE.,- M M comment
- f ebn.4ukeAevabh plead h e< k e@d.4
?.@d M " h,l* k n d d^ac Muhah w9 38 k
kI ';SA l.h t
a c.,,pwa4sw A
o a.
I *.. '"E,,
,+
_a s.
M gs woh ac
,j h Eh.
RE. Soly.TiotN).7 p Q
j.
f tu op7 en%s 4 usin o. t=4coc us Ex k d
gbsal til {evnddon. sak c nd xen cle,cmbd=I*,el remoim cysb4)c.EA c?C sLdic. mshh adoy6 L V:4 eon b b eds sohs{ ache oc
.. 2 a 6nJQ ua % G 4co tcc & A Nt J,,A is 4 59 acceyhble.$ L SQ4.
- i..
-=
~
/
~., w Qf
\\
\\ ',
&l 9
~ ~ ~
%R
,-<pe ysEs.L61 s m 4w ti su hcombw& bn%,4o,J M a j$
hm y wt ylu o r%c (p,4,cedin3 F-5.
- 2 -kpt 7 T(s6rhbu Mg h ulchb ethw v-Joint' p&
,e. werwn,q
$$~k.
~
' g-r
.,:(xR v
s
~ ~ f p*
y 4 af
-1
\\
\\
j sggw.m se.....sv.#
..ayapg m:~ m wq j
m,.
em.,..
.v
- - es
-w.s M -mm es.~, x.
.z.. m 9-w a 1., a &.u
. u, kit.'.
.,,.+.vn
~ s - _
.. _ -wm sees
-..e.
. :2:n & $ k y ^^a i W A =~ f = W # M %'F' ? & %-O- $ $ b h h $.$ W y 4.L, _ n, -
^
-c
=
L:;. : 4. y sq-ggs-W%m
}
5 $7 B7.
1
~.
- m..
g-k e
m'E 3ms
- [_,
Q%
79M2 Cc+EceToiN usue h3 Co
$th W ot t
St.-
.N hu d4 s b >>, N dut L Al pmd cre don $
...m y
m.
undupnnmg.bemme>A conbl L <n vencA\\ hFFEREU1%
3.
- f 'L.
SETA.ElveJT s%kw bo CovholTowerb A*nD ind/ctwg
~:
m, 4ecc..
[(N@,,$.
N[i 9 h IpMQl[I9 h,,,&oky
,g
'r e ces-bk oJ yob J,m. mpy draim o<er ed L c<b, u w%w..h.,,me,4 Ahq%,
?.g
.M
($menmenh) k d whb kcohon a}. mu. dam.
s bm.ns enh a k dabksW oeLu44,,,a
,A/4.,
s
- .,?
f,
)
. s a 1.
'Y c
bin, d. %
~4 - Mh %M T *
- g ~' o.ce,3,snj,, 4. % 'o.o
-~"
m 41.
E
- Sbs heu: E sh,,
3e, coa g, o,co3,
=39 sr.o..,
~.
x y1
- 2 ge.
(, p u s, g ).
n
, i n e; en :
- e n
^%
+
"= W
% ~ h u b. S M is 6 e a e.,,e., b @ d ofy 4,,3 b,P PB drain.
'.f btt g g'" % 0merY* Cygh (ggg
...(j r
u k
- ~
3 co
..e.w v3.i.A,4 e w
[jY/[
b M
M detui<tdvd M 19out J.i. t<Acdh d,s.n1 t o gege k a
bw p
M se %.,,*
- C,y M;s; 7csg an dy-w.tlemanP g gMi y cng(tq
- v b ma a n e-a,+.
g v
din Wh,tMQhk 515, H A nj x
, +
a,...
La :.lF
'*;l' "' /;'4 e g
, ?.: :A
' g\\
s, 3.
N
- Q.,
,e y :-,. :-
n-v r, - y,
, : f' gg,, -
m,:
- g ;,;,,., 7,-
y,,,
.my s.
- . a.
.a.u..u,.y : e
,,. ~,
.gm
...:x:
m ~ n
. a ngerc aw
_u m.
.<w
%.4 s 4
-..#..u.&, m ew.
I
i
~
h 5
$w.,M
.-. Nrth%eM5.b.)
f
~
A p.rr g.
M e}.
y ;e). :-
e>
-.3 f.
L ::O j, &W ' ' ',' /. >
S )4' N..
N
!j't i ns..
-[ "'
a' #
.i F.
h+.e[,[,
9tw$gcnprWM usuEs MO.G vf:lb,Wh @
f
-...-n GEI. I CCEi--kroMad (e,5ph o9 SNM(e5M etHd h hf y
f g
3., a JewyWod 64mmd A E p
s..
pyh,% bh % b wtas Rc:
(.
b -,.
% % LJ.h b 42 4%n,dt#*L.%'%
i
,.c.
~
[b p o,tt \\ G GEZ.. -WJre words 'seje A "s - A,"( a( 5* Lqktp y.lo N,b
%m..@,*.
~
L-v%.,n U,!,, *m.W,
~
e_
g.
- ,y
" e. y +y S %+ -
~,
. y W 's >--,
9%
' y tFA
- Q ft* ' ' '
s.Y A'
.m ~*,
g b
M
.a.J,
'.*i, 4
O&
9 O
4 4
e
+"
^
.p.
r.,,
9 b
L h(CMMY YQ on
.a. n....
j
~
O'
_9
.-.r k,,.;
- i'f "~.
.n,-
..4, J
- Mn
[. *,g, _ u n,'s.n
,...h r n i b ~ :..o. h.r+ n -
Ir..s., o e.
<f'***t5t
- a.
v
.W i Mei rss.
. 4 ~.!s.,e c
- 1 P <r
,.no,..n,s..
- v.
...,%y %;m a.
.. i.e.
/M
.e w
.,y.
s...
..s.
s
(
. g.
%N*(
.. =
.Iv%
D d [
it' 4*
.*l, j
'W
~
r; *. y" '
1 n ; ef5"h L s
.'*..',,ra-
.n',
w ". : > s yd',
~
'W. $'*=>=,.
a
- W
~.<
-, - s,,
j, pegstQ % 7g,
,,.. w-..
. 1 s. u f,N ti iA4 '=$ 8
- , A.) 3,. e e., ~
' ' e '.{Me-
- ..~ / I *$l 'f m
/
l T.,l (
f,' <
g~ n/f y ;,*
4 if, k.
g,,.;
c,,
s
- . 6 V ;.
4.., rr.,,, M s,
r
" 'T
+
..u. 0.*, t ; ',
N 'h. E :.
G s, 4*er.*
6 y,
,3 e
, l'0
.0.E le !
6 e j.
e n,
,yp,
. s,*
++
s
- f t e.k.
=
..r,. a n.
r-
., n
{ =,9,
.. se.
_J
-I
- f. p #
...,'?.
c, a :,.
p.
j O
D A
.0 7' 5. ? 'h s
.;,-.**44, a
'p8 S..
4 kf
' 'h
, M
~. ",. -, s ;,-
e..
,f.
h
.#
- d 2
(..,7
. nw;ww;.au.u. -.m w,w.u.c,..yw;,y'F,n.a a.a. y.
., m ; &-
m.m k y
n,,,
-a
,m_. __ _ _.. --
aw n
e t..
&BV v
H RECORD OF TELEPHONE CONVERSATION DATE: May 11, 1982, 1:00 pm PROJECT: Midland RECORDED BY: Joseph D. Kane CLIENT:
TALKED WITH: CPC Bechtel NRC J. Schaub N. Swanberg F. Rinaldi J. Mooney J. Anderson D. Hood C. Russell J. Kane
- 8. Dhar W. Paris J. Kane g
-H. Singh
" ~'
l ROUTE T0:' J. Knight-
~
G. Lear S. Poulos L. Heller R. Landsman, Region III D. Hood J. Kane F. Rinaldi 1
MAIN SUBJECT OF CALL: To discuss Phase 2 Issues - Auxiliary Building Underpinning 4
- j ITEMS DISCUSSED:
1 Consumers arranged this conference call to discuss review items related to
}
Auxiliary Building underpinning. These items had been identified in a brief l
call on May 7,1982 by J. Kane to J. Schaub where the NRC Staff had expressed l'
their recommendations on the following items:
1 1.
Location of deep seeted benchmarks DSB-AS1 and DSB-AS2. The current hold l
on construction and field installation of monuments prevents the actual locations from being established. Consumers will provide actual locations
,l when these benchmarks are installed and recognize these monuments are to be installed at a distance not to exceed 5 feet from the wall of the Main Auxiliary Building which is founded at Elevation 562.
2.
Strain gage installation. The NRC Staff's coninents for correction of
%l drawing C-1495 were accepted and the drawing will be revised.
(Lower L
strain gages at Elev. 584 to 614 on Sectional View-Wall at Col. Lines 7.4 and 7.8 are to be reorientated 90 degrees and column lines H and G will becorrected). Bechtel will check why strain gage at Elev. 646 to 659 range was not proposed for Wall at Col. lines 7.4 and 7.8 and will get back to Staff. The vertical alignment of strain gage on Col. Lines 5.3 and 5.6 at Elevation range 646 to G59 is being controlled by the need to avoid equipment obstructions on the wall. Consumers will make an analytical correction for the vertical alignment when evaluating strain gage readings.
Lr {W f I t
I
' 1 y
3.
Pier test procedures. Consumers indicated the dead load available in the j
existing structure for the reaction load in the pier load test is J
approximately 90 percent of the maximum design load. Consumers wished f
to further consider the Staff's recomendation to perfonn a plate load j
test where the maximum test load would be equal to 130 percent of the j
maximum design load and a pier load test at 90 percent of the maximum design load.
l Consumers accepted the Staff's reconnendation for performing two in situ density tests and a minimum of five cone penetrometer tests on the soil at the bottom of the pier selected for load testing. Consumers also i
agreed to use bituminous coated plywood sheeting for reducing the effects of skin friction during the pier load test.
Consumers wished to further consider the Staff's recomendation for j
requiring a rate of settlement that would not exceed 0.005 inch per hour when controlling the length of time that the 90 percent test load 1
increment would be maintained.
To better explain what the Applicant intended when it indicated that it would make modifications to ASTM Dll43 as deemed appropriate. Consumers l
will provide the Staff with the pier load test procedures that identify the proposed modifications.
4
]
4.
Construction dewatering. The Applicant indicated its plah' for construction dewatering during underpinning is nearly complete and will be provided to the Staff within a week. Most of the dewatering wells are already installed but additional wells are planned. The additional wells are to be installed with Q/A procedures that are similar to the pennanent
{
dewatering wells which were previously approved by the NRC Staff.
3 Monitoring for loss of soil particles due to pumping will be conducted j
according to the agreements reached for construction dewatering of the i
SWPS.
(April 2,1982 letter with enclosures, R. Tedesco to J. Cook).
Consultants to Consumers indicated the already installed construction dewatering wells extend to the natural clay layer at approximately El 585. The Staff indicated that the anticipated plan for construction dewatering to be provided by Consumers should address the problem of handling seepage on the sides and bottom of pier excavations which extend below the bottom of the already installed wells.
5.
' Movement of Feedwater Isolation Valve Pit (FIVP). Consumers indicated its intent to assure transfer of the FIVP loading to the Turbine Building and Buttress Access Shafts by jacking the installed support system.
It is not the intent of this jacking to restore the FIVP to its original position but i
I i's
-- - _= -
_ _ - ; ---- - - --- --- ----- ; :------ :-- a o.',
rather assure transfer of the load. The procedure for future jacking
'p which Consumers indicated they would follow at the February 1-5, 1982 design audit and which wa:: found acceptable by the NRC Staff requires jacking of the FIVP back to its original position if the relative settlement between the Reactor Containment and the FIVP reaches a total settlement of 3/8-inches since the date that the piping' connections were made.
1 I
\\
I
,I l
d 1
b r
C-'- -
____ m.m
~ =.
mm. ---_ _.
.