ML20093C104
Text
_
^
IA 4 z w 2e, m /m/em Jx6 Woe 45
- 4. Km 74u es,k.sm.,,a i,,,
+,.
- n#
ad a a
- a. m !
I f
UNITED STATES
]
7, '
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
/f N p
{
1 wasmmoron,n.c.acess
/
e, Docket Nos. 50-329/330 MEMORANDUM FOR: Elinor' Adensam, Chief Licensing Branch #4 Division of Licensing l
U FROM:-
George Lear, Chief L.
Hydrologic and Geotechnical Engineering Branch Division of. Engineering i
SUBJECT:
QUEST!_0NS;T 5 AND REVIEW COMMENTS ON CONSUMERS IL 22 ITT Plant Name: Midland Plant, Units 1 and 2 Licensing Stage: OL Responsible Branch: Licensing Branch #4, D. Hood, R. Hernan, LPM's Review Status: Continuing
<l We have er. closed the review conenents of the GES staff and its Consultants on the April 22, 1982 submittal by the Applicant concerning the Borated' Water Storage Tanks and Service WaterPump Stmeture underpinning work.
1 (Letter to H. Denton from J. W. Cook dated April 22, 1982).
The enclo'sure indicates the staff's two major areas of difference with the Applicant are (1) having measured vertical deflections (differential settlements) control the under large strain criterion and (2) pinning work rather than an unreasonably the Applicant's apparent reluctance to fully comply with the staff's past recommendations on construction de-watering that were previously transmitted in the April 2,1982 letter from R. Tedesco to J. Cook on construction dewatering for the Service i
Water Pump Structure underpinning work We recommend contact with the Appilcant to resolve these differences following a reasonable period for Consumers and its consultant to review the enclosed evaluation.
This input was prepared by Joseph Kane.
=; [8.
.Geo,ge Lear, Chief Hydrologic and Geotechnical Engineering Branch Division of Engineering
Enclosure:
As stated i
cc: See next page j
g g ()& W l C gOf
~
.=
Xer W.
~
e,.
= -.
.y cc w/o encl:
R. Vollmer cc w/ encl:
J. Knight ^
G. Lear F.-Schauer L. Heller i.-
M. Fliegel R. Gonzales.
D. Hood R. Hernan H. Singh, COE S._Poulos, GEI J..Kane
=
e i
i
-I
.a
.~ +. < ~ ~ ~ -
~i l
eb,.
+
l Midland Plant, Units 1 and 2 Docket Numbers: 50-329/330
Subject:
Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation of Reference 1 Prepared by: Joseph D. Kane, HGEB, DE NRR Reference 1: April. 22,1982 letter from J. W. Cook to H. R. Denton on Responses to the NRC Staff Request for Additional Infomation Required for Completion of Staff Review of the Borated Water Storage Tank'and Underpinning of the Service Water Pump Structure The following comments and questions are based on the reviews of Reference 1 by the Geotechnical Engineering Section Staff, NGEB, DE and its consultants, Dr. S. Poulos, Geotech.'1(.a1 Engineers, Inc. and H. Singh, U. S. Amy Corps of Engineers.
i 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 placanent and compaction.
QM (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 over the 20-foot length is recommended. The M
l Staff's concern with the single 20-foot gage length is further discussed in Q.5.
Y jj 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-j, 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
- j 1 and 2 are inadequate with respect to the basis fot adopting the soil l!
. spring stiffness of 4,000 KCF and with respect to detemining the effects
'i
!s'
. ~.
a.
~=..-.c.
- n. ~ ~.. u.
. mn
.muz
, of differential settlement on the existing SWPS. The Applicant should either justify the adoption of the soil spring stiffness value of 4000 KCF or alternately use a stiffness of X = 400 KCF for the glacial till, a value which is~ considered reasonable and acceptable to the Staff and its consultants.
9 Q.5 (Issue 3 Page 6). The proposed 5/16-inch displacement (extension) criterion over a 20-foot gage' length is not acceptable to the Staff or its consultants. More gages of shorter lengths would be preferable e
to pemit identification of the more highly stressed sections. The Staff and its consultants recognize the advantages of the proposed strain monitoring program but consider measurenent of the vertical differential settlement, similar to what is being carried out for the Auxiliary Building underpinning work, to be the more positive and sensitive construction control that would pemit corrective action 4
to be taken before overstressing the SWPS would occur.
For these reasons the Staff requires that underpinning of the SWPS be controlled by monitoring of vertical differentia 1' settlement to tolerable limits i
established before starting this work.
Q.6 (Issue 6 Page 7). The Applicant's response to issue 6 does not provide l
the calculations for sliding resistance of the SWPS under seismic loading which were requested at the March 16 through 19, 1982 design Ii audit.
For this reason Item 2.2 of Enclosure 8 to the May 25, 1982 letter from D. G. Eisenhut to J. W. Cook again requests this infomation.
ii I
l-
~
, u..
=....
,=..,. n: :_an,,
. l Q.7 (Issue 13~, Pages 10-12). The following changes and additions should be made to the Applicant's response to issue 13.
a.
On 5th line, Page 10, the word " solely" should be deleted.
b.
On 2nd line, Par. 3. Page ll, 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, Last paragraph, Page 11, should be revised to incorporate the c.
following changes. The zone of influence should"be defined by extending lines downward at a slope of 1 horizontal (H) to 1 vertical (V) frem the edge of the footing into the foundation soils.
If the foundation soil is cohesionless, a braded exca-ben c ea vation is required if the excavation must proceed more than l
6-inches below the adjacent pier or, if not an immediately adja-i cent 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 i,;
procedures modified if measured movements are larger than anticipated.
- 1 o
,I 0
\\
t t
c
-.-.r-.
.:.-.=
. n e. a.-:
w_ w,.
.j 2
.. Q.8 (Issue 14. Page 12). The modifications and additions which were required for the pier load test procedures for.the Auxiliary Building (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 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 foundation material.
Q.9 (Issue 18, Pages 13-15). The following comments and questions are numbered in identical order to the numbering of the contingency plan items given in response to issue 18:
1.c.
What procedure is to be followed that will pemit a single well i
failure to be identified from the total system?
2.b.
It is unclear what level will be equalized and the time it will take to complete this action. What occurrence (e.g., settlement measurement, etc.) triggers this reaction to uncontrolled groundwater flow?
1 3.a and 3.b.
Is the equipment for carrying out techniques such as 1
j forepoo(ling or sp/eling or grouting to stop ground loss in I
readiness at the plant site? If not, what time frame is required to make it available?
t 4.a.
Include limits on maximum depth of excavation and zone of influence and requirements for bracing.
i o
l
- vm i 4 4.e.e.
e.
_n..
_5-4.b.
A required increase in bearing area of underpinning piers is a significant change that requires nottffcation of Region III.
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 bench-marks were restored and elevations confinned.
8.
Prior to implementing the li.sted 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 i
into the notes controlling the checking or adjusting of Jacking loads.
\\t Jacking will be controlled to limit settlements to acceptance criteria values identified on SWPS-14 (Still to be established by the Applicant h
and evaluated by the Staff). Wedges and plates will be used to prevent ii unacceptable movement in the event of a jack failure, both during pier construction and during app 1tcation of final jacking loads.
I-l
e.a._
m.
~w.
~-
~
" " " ~ " * * "
z;.
-E-j[
During the construction of Piers 1, 2 and 3 the jacks will be monitored at least at the start of every shift 'and daily during
. holidays and weekends. More frequent checking and jacking is
,4i required until the rate'of load decrease is small_ enough and q,
sufficiently stabilized to permit checking once during each shift.
Q.11
' (Issue 20,- Page 16). The above comments on jacking control and
- m. b l Q,wA monitoring frequency are applicable to the transfer of the jacking 3
load 16tN na
=r.t ar,A. pt="19; gil.
Provide the actual vilue of the "predetemined rate".
Q.12 (Issue 24, Page 19).
It is unclear from the Applicant's response 4
7.
whether or not Consumers intends to comply with the Staff's recom-mandation (April 2,1982 letter from R. Tedesco to J. Cook, " Staff Concurrence for Installation and Operation of Construction Dewatering i
and Observation Wells for the Service Water Pump Structure". Enclosure i.
- 3. Page 4)' to require extension of the six previously proposed piezometers to at least elevation 570. The Staff does not have a problem if the Appitcant chooses to add piezometers to the original six and teminate these additional piezameters at "an elevation no lower than approximately 1 foot above the undisturbed natural soil."
j, However, the Staff still requires that the bottom elevation of the original six piezometers be drilled to at least elevation 570 j
- 1 i
l3-The Staff does not accept the Applicant's statements on controlling d
the grouadwater level in the SWPS area during underpinning ccnstruction 4.
for the following reasons:
V s.
MS
_'4"
- O S SWM" *
-.....,-.-....___--m-..-.
-, _,,..... _.._,,,_ _,,, - --,,. ~., _...
s_._
m_m-_ o
-.asm e
- 7. -
s
- a.. Drawing the water level' down~to approximately the interface of the fill and natural soil is not a realistic control. Completed borings show this interface surface and soil conditions to be highly variable in the immediate area of the ur.derpinning 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 l
address the problem of pervious layer stratification and continuity and impervious layers of insufficient thickness.
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 phreat'ic surface being controlled i
by dewatering and the bottom of any underpinning excavation at any given time. As a minimum, the six originally proposed piezameter locations are to be used to verify that the groundwater is being l1 maintained to this level during underpinning.
It is recognized that 1:
- {
localized tenporary dowatering techniques such as sumping may be necessary to produce hydrostatically relieved conditions in areas of
,1 entrapped water.
l-j.
Q.13 (Fig. SWPS-14). A correction to Note 9 is needed to indicate that all instrumentation and material identified in the Monitoring Matrix
.. - _ _ - _ -, __~._
_,.,._.:. _ a
_...,=_a.
_ =:u-..
..w
~.a
..e e
8-is to be Q-listed unless otherwise shown not to be required. A separate request of the Applicant to provide the following drawings 4
identified on Fig. SWPS-14 has been made.
Drawing Nos.
Subject C-2040 thru C-2043-11 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
9 5
t I
A* ah % ( me m ma-e N.pae a.o.. w --
- t
& veu e M unbislEm.memu.Me%:~ Sivwse* e%n...
1
)
e uw=ws.ts -mek.%amenwen,%ae,.
<!. i kes.r *r m e*waseemacwaLoree 5.r-e va*.
+ -. " '.E.L%le
.o E."
U /_.
_m_,,.,,_,__~.,,,
- ~..
..n
\\)
\\ C 1.
Lo v
)l UNITED STATES i
i
' Q, a I
/pa"cuq'o
,"\\
RY-
,i
- T NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION c
WASHINGTON. D. C. 20S55 f (f 'b
')% ?
LJ -,, J 't, 'f; y;
, s:
g.o Docket Nos. 50-329/330 g g2 4 %,
7 HEMORANDUM FOR:
";';rt L. Ted 500 S :i;t =t Dir^'t^"
fe, :. ;m.. i..;-
fM # 4
/
Division of Licensing
"-f;ht, ;,n wi; ant, uirect.or
-T :"JJ.
J=c: "
far enr a---t s- Structure E-?x-ing 04"4:!: ;f Eny neering FROM:
George Lear, Chief Hydrologic and Geotechnical Engineering Branch Division of Engineering Pssiit w t Am faswwSg
SUBJECT:
CCT """L..L :::C:ZERUe REVIEW COMMENTS ON CONSUMERS APRIL 22, 1982 SUBMITTAL 6dland Planhunits 1 and 2-Plant Name:
Licensing Stage: UL Aj Responsible Branch: Licensing Branch No. 4, D. Hood LPM,s.
3 "ag.c;ted--Cuu.,,1 t f = D:t :
- t Sc mdaled R.w a.s s % : 6=7% %
V We have enclosed the review comments of the GES staff and its Consultants on the April 22, 1982 submittal by the Applicant concerning the Borated Water Storage Tanks and Service Water Pump Structure underpinning work.
(Letter to H. R. Denton from J. W. Cook dated April 22,1982).
The enciosure indicates the staff's two major areas of difference with the Applicant are (1) having measured vertical deflections (differential settlements) control the underpinning work rather than an unreasonably large strain cHterion and (2) the Applicant's apparent reluctance to fully comply with the staff's past recommendations on construction dewatering that were previously transmitted in the April 2,1982 letter from R. Tedesco to J. Cook on construction dewatering for the Service Water Pump Structure underpinning work.
We recommendrth! ;cr'~---a call ha - x;;d with the Applicant to resolve these differences following a reasonable period for Consumers and its consultant to review the enclosed evaluation.
O 1
1
'e A+=..r.e-%.e.
,... ~ _.,.
.l
~.,
wN'N
_=
_m
~
= - -.
~
-/
"'
- R:b rt L. Ted:sco.
/
s e
s-This input was prepared by Joseph' Kane.:..2 -:._ Lmm., vuv. J :,m mu
. u ac.o.
y n ar of rlapp K. - (
t/ n
(
. g,'
"<< n l0,
$br*
W= e,
x
- 7. k
,,,, N Gcorge Lear, Chief 7
Hydrologic and Geotechnical Engineering Branch Division of Engineering g
N
Enclosures:
s
[
As stated 4.c Y
?
cc: w/o enclosures
/
R. Vollmer C. Lo wn.
w/ enclosures _yg,l7 d G. Lear F. Schauer 1.
a.
AUG E. AindiG1 L. Heller
_r
- e.. m.. _ _
M. Fliegel R. Gonzales D. Hood R. Hernan H. Singh, COE S. Poulos, GEI J. Kane
'+
b h
.l 9
I t
t
.,g. - ~ = ~. vaumf :.~..;;:::.^,, m=- '.... pggy:-. ~~.~_,
a.n,
..: :.-. =.......
7L.
=. * - r '. '\\ ;- v.~,
'~~ " ~. "
- - - ~. -
~ ~ ~
-. w_ _
..... _.,.=
.w
. :- _ = _ -
/
./
- t:
/
A Midland Plant, Units 1 and 2 Docket Nurabers: 50-329/330
Subject:
Geotechnical Engineering Evaluat'15n of Reference 1 Prepared by: Joseph D. Kane, HGEB, DE, NRR Reference 1: April 22,1982 letter from J. W. Cook to H. R. Denton on 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 The following comments and questions are based on the reviews of Reference 1 by the Geotechnical Engineering Section Staff, HGEB, DE and its constif tants, Dr. S. Poulos, Geotechnical Engineers, Inc. and H. Singh, U.S. Array Corps of Engineers. T pplicant's response to Conf 1 ory Issues 4, 5, 7, 8,
' blo,11,12,22and r the Service Water Pump Stru res are related
- 4 to struc 1 engineering and i anticipated that review of t responses will be performe y Struct' ural Engineer g Branch, DE.
Q.l.
(Issue 1, Pam 2, Par. 3) Provide the, range in layer thicknesses that the oil-imp'regnated 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 i
i shorter length gages 5." r M.;;th s' " Te) over the 20-foot length is recommended. The Staff's concern with the single 20-foot j
gage length is further discussed in Q.5.
+
~I 9
p*
E,' ( p.
4 "' " '**PFNf#
"# $[1() W # Dff3M M M MT I@ $g's h- ~. -.
yNk
%MD,((Y. /
18 YN * - -
.\\.
.,p ei :. g
-p;
- 4 : -....--
t '.:
~-- --- -
~v
--,A.
.aq.c
.. ;mt wene.tensets-easoe==,s;=e..s
' ^ $k**02.*%6.* 4= s *w Ab*** *, ' ^' E* M M *k M u
\\..,l.ak.5s.iwid:i Asd.,=*Ld',
'l'
~ ~,.
~,. -
m._
m..
i'
,?
'/
'Q.3..
(Issue 2 Page 3, Par. 3) As a miniri,uin, t.he BWST ring beams should be
-e l]
monitored for increasing strains at a frequency of at ' east once a ' year, l
t.
following the initial 5 year period of plant operation.
1 l'
Q.4.
(Issues 1 and 2, Pages 5 and 6). The Applicant's responses to issues p:
l' 1 and 2 are inadequate with respect to the basis for adopting the soil
,3 l-spring stiffness of 4,000 KCF and with. respect to determining the effects of differential settlement on the existing SWPS. Ti.c #mpu cauce
}
4"
- 1; :. 3-caese inaaequacies wico f.;;1 ' a + 4e danan/ ant an uom 0 :...m uu. ai cngineering dranun 2 evaluou:u.. of C;nn :r;
't.,
7, 1;;2
-"'-i. 1 e.,
uc iimic anaiysis or the swPs.
If Consumers s a cemenc
- - th: M:y 7, 1;;2 auL...:tt:1 i fe">i =erap += hl a hv sra t ha t the Rt.fD R 1
-fr nnt nuove+ ere~4 cy-- 4r t'e - 7th :;;7h;7,; pert 4nn enmnln+=1y warm
' f[
\\
y ur "ppe-t a, vy cue pianc 4:_...
- . c ;..
- 70 '^aa"- 2..-
44, u m..
ou
.cavive i
th: r:n;:
- il.
- .iff =
- di'ftr^^^^" ha*waan the chr4 =1 +411 end p+ect ".
If, h;
+ha raci1+- cf th; 1;....
... 1 :
re 3-7
@+4-'+^'y f:=d rcr rcept91: 5., C, %ee ghe Applicant should either justify the adoptior, of the soil spring stiffness value of 4000 KCF or i
alternately use a stiffness of K = 400 VCF, for the glacial till, a value which is considered reasonable and acceptable to the Staff and j
its consultants.
i 1
1 Q.5.
(Issue 3, Page 6). The proposed 5/16-inch displacement (extension)
I
~I
/
criterion over a 20-foot gage length is not acceptable to the Staff or its
(,
consultants.
5/15 #n-' =t=:fr,4# it -:r-a *n ner'ir nuar =
eha-+
'^-at'
'itnir, u e 2u-root vasc la..;th, ':294 i=rly very 'igh ;tr; n c; i.. sl,o t x T--
t i
t' j
c.'fdS'4~ 1. 4..~.VA v=d :.. n.. S. Gde \\ -NE-.E M ~ ~ ^ ~
-I"aa A M #
E
- E*
M
~l
- m c.m ~ -
~ -n~-
a.==&
~
/
~
. s s
i
~ More gages of shorter and,;;;1d. m u in vaWegduri;;J&cpir'ag..
i lengths (c.g.,. ;ai..- I; ;S
^# 5 #^S.') would be preferable to pennit identification of the more highly stressed sections. The Staff and
}
j its consultants recognize the advantages of the proposed strain monitoring program but consider measurement o'f the vertical differential
(
settlement, similar to what is being carried out for the Auxiliary i
,l Building underpinning work, to be the more positive and sensitive construction control that would permit corrective action to be taken before overstressing the SWPS would occur. For these reasons the Staff requires that underpinning of the SWPS be controlled by monitoring of vertical differential settlement to tolerable limits established */
-"'^ 'n:hsi.s before starting this work.
Q.6.
(Issue 6 Page 7). The Applicant's response to issue 6 does not provide the calculations for sliding resistance of the SWPS under seismic loading 1
which were requested at the March 16 through 19, 1982 design audit. For this reason Item 2.2 of Enclosure 8 to the May 25, 1982 letter from
.j D. G. Eisenhut to J. W. Cook again requests this information.
i Q.7.
(Issue 13, Pages 10-12) The following changes and additions should be t
made to the Applicant's response to issue 13.
On 5th line, Page 10, the word " solely" should be deleted.
a.
i 4
g i
.,..n
- ~ -- ~
.T.si ;. *.1 w..G..,u
- Z. : oD k -e '
^'n 5 ^~ W *
'* S ".
~
.'"~"'
' " " " ~
~o.-
w:n.~.
N~-=~~~~~~~'-~
n
~,
b'.
On 2nd line, Par. 3, Page 11, the' word " generally" should be p
. 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 i
of the bearing stratum.
- i
- l c.
Last paragraph, Page 11, should be revised to incorporate the
[j 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.
f 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 lH 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 Building (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 t
+
~
i i.
=
_ _......... =
l
. p 2 Q Q W I.D C 2. M.?t3;.y C 2 K :,". Q -w., a..,y. = ; ;+,.,:.9
=... m.-, g.~,~
5 2.= =: _ :.a.. g
.,u g
.,, _. 2u,,,.m
.g.A.,
,y
_.. -~
- w w_.__, u y
{A-
- . f -
_ b yw 5
}
~
. s:
l1.[;:/
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
[
' foundation material.
-[
,Q.9.-
(Issue ~18, Pages 15). The following comments and questions are
[j:
numbered in identical order to the numbering of the contingency plan items given in response ~to issue 18:
- l.
J 1.c.
What procedure is to be followed that will permit a single well failure to be identified from the total system?
's
- t-2.b.
It is unclear what level will be equalized and the time it will take to complete this action. Whatoccurrence(e.g., settlement measurement, ete'.) triggers this reaction to.. uncontrolled i
i groundwater flow?
it ll 3.a. and 3.b.
Is'the equipment for carrying out techniques such as Sy eelin l
forepoling or AP:;; gor grouting to stop ground loss in
=
readiness at the plant site? If not, what time frame is required to make i't available?
4.a.
Include limits on maximum depth of excavation and zone of influence
! ?
and requirements foi bracing.
4
[!
4.b.
A required increase in bearing area of underpinning piers is a I
r significant change that requires notification of Region III.
1l l
i f
I
- i i
1
+
-..,_,,..,----..._..m,-,
..,m.-
.-.-_-v-,-,,..,
,--,.,-.,-.,.m--
..--.,,.- -,,._e-
,-..,r
g
?^
5.
Recording of excessive pier set'tlement requires an evaluation of
,r 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 and elevations confirmed.
8.
Prior to implementing the listed items of 8a, 8b and 8e 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 co t n rolling the checking or adjusting of Jacking loads.
Jacking will be controlled to limit settlements to acceptance criteria values identified on SWPS-14 (Still 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, OWO
+-
O 4
- o. y'. gg%mg &t.6W $d. bed
- M'OI
' ggg
& Ot YO I q_
e,
...a.
- n. m -
?.,i g.
4 During the construction of Piers 1, 2 and 3 the jacks will be monitored
.at least at the stai't 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 to permit checking once during each shift.
Q.ll.
(Issue 20,Page16). The above comments on jacking control and monitoring frequency are applicable to the transfer of the jacking load into the permanent underpinning wall.
Provide the actual value of the "predetemined rate".
Q.12.
(Issue 24,Page19).
It is unclear from the Applicant's response whether or not Consumers intends to comply with the Staff's recommendation (April 2,1982 letter from R. Tedesco to J. Cook, " Staff Concurrence 4
~
for Installation and Operation of Construction Dewatering and Observation Wells for the Service Water Pump Structure," Enclosure 3, Page 4) to 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 terminate these additional piezometers 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.
- r.t- :.--~~. m.
- n.....
..........,..,r...........
, ~. A,,s s. u
_ w w --
- =..........._........._ _..........,..,
,,...g.....-
,,_m.,..ee.~.*.~.
, - = - - - -
m
.,;r
.. ' ~
~
f
,,f
- ! * /
4 d
The Staff does not accept the Applicaht's statements on controlling
~
~
(;
?
the groundwater. level in the SWPS 'arsa during underpinning construction q
- l for the following reasons
o.
1 a.
Drawing the water level down to approximately the interface of the fill and natural soil is not a realistic control.
Completed borings'show this interface surface and soil conditions to be highly variable in the imediate area of the underpinning work i
with the interface level ranging from Elevation 605 to Eldvation 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 4
address the problem of pervious layer stratification and continuity and impervious layers of insufficient thickness.
z For the above reasons, the Staff reiterates its position that there should be a control on the upper phreatic surfhce which requires a t'
minimum 2-foot depth between the upper phreatic surface being controlled by dewatering and the bottom of any underpinning excavation at any 1
given time. As a minimum, the six originally proposed piezometer locations are to be used to verify that the groundwater is t.eing maintained to this level 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.
i l-(:
t -
- ** ser%* * '}
+
- g W ***e ** 4 Nhyg espe e eto..=.e e y
4 4'[as b Y=a
' i.Mw.A2,O
- /e-id E
- Y.'** h 4 A-Y
,- E....... -,-,.ed a w b d
...N?
M-
,,---<,,4 e
-,m r--.
ynn
,a,-,y m
s,,
a
_ f---
__.m 1
I
[,
- l;.
t s
.Q.13 (Fig.SWPS-14). A correction to Note.9 is needed to indicate that
<v i
/
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 4
identified on Fig. SWPS-14 has been made.
Drawino Nos.
Subject C-2040 thru C-2043-11 Crack Monitoring Requirements C-2003 and C-2004 Building Settlement Monitoring Requirements.
C-2035 and C-2036 Details of Wall and Pier Settlement Monitoring t
9 e
4 4
i, O
9
- ~.
. ~ -
.:-t-
- ^'
--->~;- _
a
' -. _ _ ; - z--- -- -,-
EsT \\ su)?S Mmu>
d Q, Jr., h N b i.
consumen 7 7 gg-
.i Power mm company m,~
,-~y-1 a
and ca w=creen
!.j
-m--
i== w.n p.,
n n e. J = n. m 4eso. (sm 7se o4ss j
hpril22,1982]
]
1 f
Harold R Denton, Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation US Nuclear Regulatory Commis.sion Washington, DC 20555 MIDLAND PROJECT MIDLAND DOCKET NO 50-329, 50-330 RESPONSE TO THE NRC STAFF REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REQUIRED FOR COMPLETION OF STAFF REVIEW OF BORATED WATER STORAGE TANK AND THE UNDERPINNING OF THE SERVICE WATER PUMP STRUCTURE FILE: 0485.16, B3.0.8 SERIAL:
16656 ENCLOSURE: RESPONSE TO THE NRC STAFF REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REQUIRED FOP. COMPLETION OF STAFF REVIEW OF THE BORATED WATER STORAGE TANK AhJ UNDERPINNING OF THE SERVICE WATER PUMP STRUCTURE During the Staff audit held at Bechtel's Ann Arbor offices on March 16-19, 1982, the NRC Scaff identified various concerns for our response. We are responding to these Staff requests by forwarding the enclosed document which addresses each individual NRC Staff concern identified for the Borated Water Storage Tank and the Service Water Pump Structure.
We believe the enclosed information combined with the discussion of these responses at our March 19, 1982 meeting, and the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board hearing testimony for borated water storage tank, responds to the request and individual concerns identified for us by the Staff. The responses contained in the enclosure to this correspondence lend further support to our conclusion that the design issues related to the service water pump structure l;
and borated water storage tank have been adequately resolved. With the physical completion of the confirmatory issues open items noted in the enclosed document, we believe that the Staff should be in a position to concur with our request to proceed with the work.
i' 3UdC co n
JWC/RLT/mkh oc0482-0075a100 L
?G?"
' q S'N.
- p M
~-
--- - - - - --l
g.
- a:.-.._.--- -...... =-. : :
r~,.
2 u
i f:
CC Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Board, w/o CBechhoefer, ASLB, w/o MtfCherry, 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 WIDiarshall, w/o JPMatra, Naval Surface Weapons Center, w/a W0tto, Army Corps of Engineers, w/o WDPaton, Esq, w/o SJPoulos, Geotechnical Engineers, w/a FRinaldi, NRC, w/a HSingh, Army Corps of Engineers, w/a BStamiris, w/o 1
]
i 5
i i
oc0482-0075a100
__.--.__,c_,.-
,.r---
..,-.._m--,
,_, _ - - -., _,.,.-_. _-_,,y
,-w9.
~_
l ;.p 7-2.
,.,m,
,,,. s x
- i.
Fl;-
NIDLAND PLANT UNITS 1 AND 2 l!.
RESPONSE TO THE NRC STAFF REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORNATION
!I REQUIRED FOR CONPLETION OF STAFF REVIEW OF THE BORATED WATER STORAGE TANK AND THE UNDERPINNING OF THE
, ' ' ~
SERVICE WATER PUNP STRUCTURE.
BORATED WATER STORAGE TANR(S) FOUNDATION REPAIR CONFIRMATORY ISSUE 1 f
Provide a detailed releveling procedure for the Unit 1 tank.
RESPONSE
,j~;
A detailed procedure has been developed to define a plan of
- G action to relevel BNST IT-60.
The tank will be lif ted, the ring beam and the sand below the tank bottom will be leveled, and the tank will be reconnected to the foundation.
A
- l ~'
summary of the procedure is provided below.
This procedure is supported by an analysis which demonstrates that the tank will not be overstressed during this operation.
Strain gaging of the tank will be used as a backup to this analysis.
1.
Lifting Procedure The anchor bolts will be disconnected from the tank by removing the nuts, and strain gages will be mounted on the tank wall and bottom.
]
Protected steel cable will be looped about the three heater tubes, strung through the nozzle G vent, and fastened to provide support as well as to minimize deflection,of the heater tubes during the lif t.
l Fourteen hydraulic jacks (see Figure BWST-1) will be located beneath the anchor bolt chairs and sequentially raised to lif t the bolt chairs beyond the top of the i
bolts.
The tank will be supported by wooden dunnage.
h At this point,14 electromechanical jacks placed be-i; tween the hydraulic jacks will be connected to complete the lift (see Figure BWST-2).
The electromechanical l[i jacks will be controlled from a central panel allowing the jacks to operate in unison to raise and lower the tank.
The total tank lift will be at least 3 feet.
p Wooden dunnage will be placed between the tank bottom and ring wall for stable support during subsequent ji work.
Strain gages will be monitored to confirm that lt y
the tank stresses remain within allowable limits.
L h
h 1
l:
.i
\\;
jL
. = -
n
p, w.= =
=--
.: ~
,=7-n. : n..
.:a 4 :..
II.
4 IO*
i Hidland Plant Units 1 and 2 lM-Response to NRC Requests for
-Additional Information for Review ii of BNST and SWPS Underpinning
!b 2.
Leveling Procedure for Ring Wall i N Leveling will be accomplished by use of shims adjusted e'
i,.
to a datum plane at least 1-1/2 inches above the lowest' 1:
point on the original ring wall.
The level datum plane will be determined using a transit and the benchmark 4
~
leveling procedure. -Forty numbered, prefabricated, 1-1/2 inch thick shima (see Figure BNST-3) will be placed between anchor bolts on the existing ring wall.
(At j,j least a 1-1/2-inen gap must exist between the botton
.. E plate and the original ring wall to permit flow of i:
grout (see Item 3 below).
The top of the shim on the highest point on the ring wall will determine the
) 2
- 9
. elevation of the datum plane.
The transit will be used to establish how much the other shims must be
! ' 'r raised using prefabricated incremental shins.
Final J
shin placement will be checked and documented.
Results T
will be recorded as elevation compared to a suitable i
l8 t
1 site benchmark.
The leveled shin differential elevation shall be within +1/8 inch within any 30 feet of circum-i forence and withTn +1/4 inch of the established datum
!' ?
over the entire circumference in accordance with Amer-ican Petroleum Institute ( API) 650 requirements for foundations (API 650, Welded Steel Tanks for 011 Stor-i age, Fifth Edition, July 1973 and Supplement 1 of October 1973).
The shims will be-fixed in place by i
l.
packing grout around the stack of shims (see Fig-ure BNST-4).
Five-Star Grout manufactured by the
)
American Grout Company will be used; this grout meets site specification requirements.
3.
Foundation Preparation and Tank Set-Down l
Because the bottom of the tank will be elevated above 1:
the previous foundation due to the shims, additional
}-
sand must be added and contoured while the tank is i
J:
supported by the dunnage.
First, a cofferdam made of asphalt-impregnated fiberboard (Colotex) will be in-stalled around the inner diameter of the ring wall to it dike the additional sand (see Figure BWST-5).
Oil-g impregnated sand will be added up to the lip of the cofferdam and evenly sloped so that the center of the crown is 3-1/4 inches higher than the sand at the edge.
i A Colotex pad will be placed on the shins.
Because the ji tank will be elevated 1-1/2 inches, coupling nuts and threaded rods will be used to lengthen anchor bolts as j
required.
Dunnage will be removed and the vessel j:
lowered, ensuring the anchor bolts are aligned with the d
bolt holes.
Anchor bolt nuts will be reinstalled.
The l-original ring wall will be cleaned in preparation for 1
i l'
i fi 2
l$
n
- - -.- l= = =
^
.~n.
l Midland Plant Units 1 and 2 Response to NRC Requests for Additional Information for Review
- =.
of BWST and SWPS Underpinning pouring grout.
A form will be set up 4 inches outside the edge of the tank bottom (see Figure BWST-6).
Grout will be poured and allowed to set at a level no higher than the lip of the tank bottom plate.
This procedure will fill the void between the Celotex cofferdam and the bottom of the tank, providing a uniform level support.for the tank.
Af ter the grout has cured, the anchor bolts will be sequentially tightened.
L C0NFIRMATORY ISSUE 2 Provide strain monitoring details, procedures, and accep-
[1 tance criteria for new ring beam.
te-Y
RESPONSE
Af ter the new ring beam is constructed, the maximum strain areas of each foundation, which are the transition zones between the ring wall and the valve pit, will be monitored using a strain gage system.
A summary of this strain gage j
system is provided below.
1.
Locations of Monitoring During the plant construction and operation periods, the strain measurements will be taken at the locations on the ring beam of both tanks as shown in Figure BWST-7.
i 2.
Apparatus and Procedure for Monitoring Figure BWST-8 shows details of the strain monitoring bb (M apparatus installed at each monitoring location.
This igy*' igL
'~; V d apparatus consists of a stainless steel rod embedded at one end in the ring beam and positioned inside a struc-tural steel tube.
The other end of the rod protrudes into a square structural tube through a hole in the i
side.
The tube is attached to the new ring beam with embedded studs and has a conduit attached to it; this conduit provides access for the expanding gage block shown in Figure BWST-9.
The expanding gage block, when lowered into the structural tube, will fit onto a small positioning rail welded to the tube, which holds the gage block in place.
The gage block can be expanded to fill the gap between the end of the rebar protruding into the tube and a small section of rebar welded to the opposite face of the tube.
By removing the gage block and measuring its width with a micrometer, the j
gap length can be determined.
By comparing the l
3 E
,--..n.
-n
.--.,...,n...,m
,,,,.,. ~,., _.,., - -. -. -,. - - - -. -
~.
-w.
Midland Plant Units 1 and 2 C
F Itesponse to NRC Requests for
- Additional Information for Itaview 9
of BNST and SNPS Underpinning
)
o 4
measured gap length to the initial gap length as in-i ~E stalled, the average strain in the 20-foot gage length r--
can be determined.
P 4
f 3.
Frequency of Monitorinq The strain monitoring frequency of selected locations
'is every 60 days during plant construction and every Q::6 y
- g.
90 days during the first year of plant operation.
G'",y
! L Subsequently, it is planned that the frequency of measurement will be established af ter evaluating the
/
measurements taken during the first year.
As a mini-mun, the BNST ring beams will be monitored annually for i
the next 5 years of plant operation and then at 5-year ' '
intervals thereafter.
r
- ':j j[j 4.
Acceptance Criteria f'
a.
Allowable Strain If the cumulative increase in gap width exceeds 0.4 inch at any time during the j
monitoring period, at any monitoring location, the l
monitoring interval will be increased to at least every 60 days to permit evaluation of the strain.
If it is determined to be necessary, observation pits will be made to expose the ring beam for t
inspection of possible cracks.
t b.
Absolute Strain:
The absolute strain, as a mea-sure of the cumulative increase in gap width, during 40 years of plant life, for all the refer-ence monitoring locations is 0.5 inch.
l,'
Strain monitoring procedures, including frequency of moni-
! ~
toring and acceptance criteria, will be included as part of the technical specifications in the final safety analysis j-report.
s Y
l t
4 i
4
- a*
6
... - -.. - _ _,.,... _ _ - _ _ _. _.. _., _. _,.. _ _ _, _ _ _ _, _. _ _ _.. _. _ _.. _., ~ - _,, - -, - _ -.,...., ~, -.. _ -, - -
.. n:_ _:
.. = _
_a_.__
a.l. a Midicnd P1Cnt Unito 1 cnd 2 Response to NRC Requests for i
Additional Information for Review of BWST and SWPS Underpinning i
SERVICE WATER PUMP STRUCTURE CONFIRMATORY ISSUE 1 Provide basis for establi.shing existing structural stresses.
RESPONSE
The overhang portion of the service water pump structure (SWPS) rests on fill.
Part of the load from the overhang is supported by the fill while the remainder receives its support from undisturbed natural material under the lower basemat.
Load transfer for the overhang load is primarily through the outside north-south walls to the lower basemat and then to the undisturbed natural material.
i~
The loading on the fill under the overhang portion of the building is indeterminate because of the soil conditions.
(;st-Therefore, it is not possible to calculate the existing stresses in this portion of the building.
Evaluation of the building in its current state, however, has not revealed any structural distress.
During the underpinning installation, the structure will be jacked to transfer the load from the overhang to undisturbed natural material under the base of the underpinning wall.
Part of the jacking load will relieve the structural load supported on fill while the balance will relieve the load and the corresponding existing stresses being transmitted to the lower basemat by the north-south outside walls.
This then allows an analysis to determine the stresses in the structure.
CONFIRMATORY ISSUE 2 Provide justification for use of a subgrade modulus of 4,000 kcf during final jacking.
l l
RESPONSE
l As described during the March 16 through 19,1982, NRC staff audit, the effects of preload are obtained by sub-tracting the results of System 2 from System 1.
Details of these systems were described during the audit.
5
l p -
... _.. _. ~ ".~
--L
...~r.
u-
- 1..
I" Midicnd P1Cnt UlitO 1~Cnd 2 Response to NRC Requests for i
E Additional Information for Review
.frr of BWST and SWPS Underpinning
' ?- '
i n.
~
When evaluating preload, the effects of differential settle-ment are not considered.
Differential settlement effects are considered in another system and are combined with the
,3 effects of preload by applicable loading combinations.
, g,1 Therefore, it is necessary to use a stiff structural spring as a boundary element in the model when considering preload effects.
The value of 4,000 kcf is large enough to make the effects of differential settlement negligible while being
,~
acceptable in the computer analysis.
j CONFIRMATORY ISSUE 3 Provide acceptance criteria for allowable dif ferential (gh
=g; settlement during underpinning installation.
l
, y, 7 L'9 h a
RESPONSE
- e
't During underpinning installation, the effects of differen-tial settlement will be monitored by a strain monitoring program.
Four extensometers will be mounted on the east and west exterior walls (refer to Figure SWPS-14 provided with the response to Confirmatory Issue 15).
A 5/16-inch
\\
displacement of the 20-foot gage length will cause under-pinning activities to be stopped until the cause of the displacement is determined and appropriate corrective actions are taken.
The 5/16-inch criterion is based on the i
reinforcing steel approaching two-thirds of its yield strain in the monitoring area.
CONFIRMATORY IS5UE 4 Recheck tendon anchor analysis for shear at the plate and 4Qj[{j{g wall and provide results.
'l
RESPONSE
The post-tensioning anchorage has been reanalyzed for shear at the wall face, as requested during the March 16 through 19, 1982, NRC staff audit.
The resulting shear stress is 94 psi.
This is below the American Concrete Institute (ACI) allowable shear stress of 126 psi (2 gdfF") for one-way action c
and is, therefore, acceptable.
CONFIRMATORY ISSUE 5 Reevaluate the use of drilled-in dowels regarding embedment !hkbkh or use of rock bolts.
6
r-
- -- = = : :..
-..L.
Cidland Plcnt Unito 1 Cnd 2 Response to NRC Requests for Additional Information for Review
,M of BWST and SWPS Underpinning
RESPONSE
Because of spacing and capacity limitations, rock bolts have been eliminated as a means of connecting the existing struc-ture to the underpinning wall.
Grouted-in reinforcement will be used at the vertical interface.
This reinforcement will consist of two rows of No. 9 bars spaced at 12 inches center to center.
Embedmont length will be based on the splice length for a class C splice as defined in the ACI 349-76 Code.
CONFIRMATORY ISSUE 6 C
Perform sliding calculations using site-specific response spectra (SSRS) seismic loads and provide results.
b-
RESPONSE
Q/Nl t
The stability analysis calculations have been refined using
!, 4, seismic loads equal to 1.5 times the Midland FSAR safe shut-L*
down earthquake (SSE) loads.
These exceed the SSRS seismic loads.
Factors of safety against sliding are now 1.45 in i
the north-south direction and 1.5 in the east-west direction.
s These values exceed the required value oE 1.1.
Hence, the foundation is acceptable.
CONFIRMATORY ISSUE 7 Complete the calculation for an empty forebay cell and provide results.
RESPONSE
The calculation for an empty forebay cell has been com-pleted.
The structural capacities of the four enclosing walls and the base slab exceed the imposed forces.
The most critical loading, 60.1 ft-kips /ft, occurs on the east wall.
The capacity of this wall at the critical section is 70.6 ft-1 kips /f t.
ij CONFIRMATORY ISSUE 8 Provide maximum rebar stress in all elements of the base slab at elevation 620'.
7 i
p q'
... : u..:..: x. mu
- t h'
Midland Plcnt Unito 1 cnd 2 Response to NRC Requests for l@
Additional Information for Review
.p l.-
of BWST and SWPS Underpinning Ji
RESPONSE
a; The load case that causes the largest rebar stress in any fhh)l) element of the base slab at el 620' is:
'<7 U = 1.0 (D + F + L + P
+ E')
- F where it
- ;S D = dead load iid F = hydrostatic pressure p?
L = live load f
P
= preload effects from jacking
,i E' = SSE
<E Figure SWPS-1 gives the reinforcing steel stress in all ele-
~
ments for this loading combination.
The reinforcing steel stress in all elements is below the allowable value from the ACI 318-71 Code.
i e
CONFIRMATORY ISSUE 9 Identify maximum rebar stress in elements adjacent to identi-jl[gg fled critical elements and other areas of potential high j
stress.
RESPONSE
During the March 16 through 19, 1982, NRC staff audit, criti-cal elements were identified where the reinforcing steel stress exceeded 54 kai (0.9Fy).
Stress calculations for these elements did not utilize additional reinforcement that is present.
These calculations also did not utilize i,
the capacity of the concrete for resisting in-plane shear.
l (This capacity was reserved for out-of-plane shear.)
These elements have been reanalyzed using the additional reinforce-ment and the available concrete capacity for in-plane shear.
Based on the new analysis, the reinforcing steel stress in all the previously designated critical elements is below 54 kai.
- i 8
.h
- y_
, 3..
a.,.i.,w;.w 3'
~..=.:.-
- l
- .
' E_.
Midicnd Picnt Unito 1 cnd 2 KT -
Response to NRC Requests for N
P Additional Information for Review i.--
.of -BWST and SWPS Underpinning
. 'j p.
[L.
L-The areas of potential high stress in the various structural components are identified in Table SWPS-1.
The stresses jF for these areas consider the combined effect of out-of-plane E-~
shear, in-plane shear, membrane forces, and out-of-plane 1
l '4; bending.
The capacities of these components have been cal-EJ culated in accordance with the applicable ACI Code and found
[I to be greater than the applied forces.
h.U
. [3 CONFIRMATORY ISSUE 10 Complete calculations for out-of-plane shear and provide 54ttb
+..
results.
RESPONSE
-t
?
The analysis of the existing structure considering out-of-2 plane shear has been completed.
The response to Confirmatory Issue 9 addresses the capacity of the structural elements j
for this force in combination with other applicable forces.
b I id CONFIRMATORY ISSUE 11 % m c;>j d set Provide more information as to stress condition for existing lhlh h parts of structure:
$^
Maximum stresses Critical combination
~'
Identify true critical elements based on actual rebar above informatio,the behavior of the structure, provide the (To demonstrate n for a loading combination which generally gives governing stresses for the structure. )
~
RESPONSE
The building has been analyzed for all the applicable loading 4
combinations.
The various structural components have been designed for the governing load combinations.
It has been l
noted that the following load combination generally governs:
U = 1. 0 ( D + F + L + H + S + P
+ E')
where 1
H = lateral earth pressure S = surcharge E'
l l.
9 n,,--,n
l'
~*'
~
?
^
~ ?. O L. a a l i J.l
==:w 1: L Midicnd Plcnt Unito 1 cnd 2 Response to NRC Requests for
-W Additional Information for Review P
of SNST and SWPS Underpinning L
For. each wall and slab in the structure, plots of the ele-ment forces due to static, preload, and seismic forces at a vertical and horisontal line of elements were obtained to v
study the building behavior.
A copy of the graphs for the south wall are attached as Figures SWPS-2 through 10.
CONFIRMATORY ISSUE 12 i~
l Provide evaluation of interaction of the SWPS with the circulating water pump structure, retaining wall, and elec-trical duct banks.
g
RESPONSE
, ;~
The SWPS is separated from the circulating water intake structure (CWIS) and the retaining wall by 1-inch expansion joints.
4 The maximum combined east-west seismic movement of the SWPS and the retaining wall is less than the 1-inch gap.
- Hence, there is no contact.
8 An evaluation of the interaction between the CWIS and SWPS will be performed later.
The concrete duct banks contain no reinforcement at the junction with the SWPS.
The connection to the building is considered flexible.
Hence, the duct banks offer no resis-i, tance to the movement of the SWPS during a seismic event.
i l'
CONFIRMATORY ISSUE 13 l
Provide procedures for acceptance of the bearing stratum.
Include a discussion of the maximum differential elevation i
between pier bottous and t.he maximum thickness of lean f.,
concrete.
5
RESPONSE
i i
Approval of the foundation subgrade prior to placement of I
concrete for the pier will be given by the re.dident geo-I l
technical engineer for the Midland remedial underpinning j
operations.
Acceptance or rejection of the subgrade will be gL based 1sete4D on the resident geotechnical engineer's obser-vations and judgment.
LM\\.4e,n I
I t
l t
10 h
d
1 -
__u._.
e n c =.4 i
Y.
Midlcnd Plcnt Unito 1 cnd 2 1:
i Response to NRC Requests for iF Additional Information for Review of BWST and SWPS Underpinning
(
The resident geotechnical engineer's evaluation of the
, ~
subgrade will consist of a visual inspection of the condi-tion of the bearing stratum to confirm that foundation
- t.
conditions are as anticipated in the design.
In addition, for each foundation, a map of the subgrade will be prepared.
The map will includes t
a.
A visual description of the subgrade material including consistency, color, and texture li b.
Presence of any water a
i?
c.
Elevation of subgrade
- p ig once the subgrade has been approved, photographs will be r
taken of the subgrade and any exposed sidewalls.
The photo-
- [
graphs and map will serve as the permanent record.
~
To aid in evaluating the condition of the subgrade, the resident geotechnical engineer will,_..__ ;, use either a miniature static or dynamic cone penetrometer.
The static g
cone penetrometer will be used whenever cohesive soils are encountered.
The dynamic cone will generally be used if any granular soils are encountered.
Relationships between the data obtained using these devices and the estimated ultimate bearing capacity of the fou dat s are presented in Figure sf AI$d R
},g R
,,hgfjg (c,,&fccpgg M1tioIaI eote' hnic sin an Taboratory test (s) may be performed if the resident geotechnical engineer believes that initial findings require a further confirmation of conditions.
Suc.h testing requirements will be determined on l, i a case-by-case basis.
1 If the subgrade is not accepted by the resident geotechnica] I engineer, the piers shall be excavated to a depth where a f
suitable subgrade is encountered.
If such a pier is con-
'O' structed immediately adjacent to an existing pier, the maximum depth of excavation below the lean concrete mud slab l for the existing pier shall not exceed 18 inches.
If the i
lI pier is not immediately adjacent to an existing pier, it can I be extended to any suitable depth, provided that the base of i
'8 the new pier's mud mat is not more than 18 inches below the j
The zone of in-zone of influence of any existing piers.
'i fluence of an existing pier shall be defined by lines extend-k ing downward from the edge of the footing at a rate of two 3
i vertical to one horizontal (see Figure SWPS-13).
'l
- 11 i
m
~
D. _. ~1..
. J.~1. '
~~-; T
^
h E
._.~
.g.
- w i nz=
Nidicnd Picat Unit 3 1 Cnd 2
,f' Response to NRC Requests for
, q7 Additional Information for Review i l
of BNST and SWPS Underpinning
.~
'ib I
If the subgrade is not acceptable at 18 inches below the existing pier or influence sone, defined in the above para-
.. b.,
graph, the contingency plans addressed in the response to qp Confirmatory Issue 18 will be implemented.
I All over-excavation shall be backfilled with lean concrete to the original design footing elevation.
The only maximum thickness restriction on the amount of lean concrete that
j can be placed beneath a footing is the limitation imposed by W
the above undermining restriction.
. h-CONFIRMATORY ISSUE 14 Ip Provide pier load test procedures.
]
RESPONSE
3 g
A load test will be performed to 1.3 times the jacking load
~
for one of the initial piers.
In addition, a load-reload i
cycle will be built into the procedure to aid in determining ji the apparent Young's modulus of the foundation subgrade.
II
- The test procedure will follow American Society for Testing and Materials standard methods for the Test for Load-Settlement Relationship for Individual Vertical Piles Under Static Axial Load, Designation D1143, with modifications deemed -N5'"d ' g6 appropriate.
The load would be applied in accordance with D1143 in incre-ments of 25, 50, 75, and 100% of the jacking load, then with,-M j'
an overload of 1154 and finally to 1304.
An intermed ate rebound-reload cycle would be included at 100% of the acking O i
- \\
i-load.
A sufficient length of time shall be allowed for the 100 and 130% test increments so that sovements are educed k
to rates not exceeding A01_inettper__ hour.a-o.c boyhow-i Jf 1;
Carlson'piessure cells will be installed near the top and bottom of the shaft and measures vill be taken to reduce l'
skin friction effects.
The gaps between lagging and any b'-
corrugations will be filled and the pier will be lined with it thick plastic sheeting to minimize effects due to n3de:
%McW phnbb. S]he%y'5 friction.
Cde6A u synerer i
e wyrbbnuSQ/Mcc) d fuMc,ho)Q:,2,fa,3 F
i e
12 t
= -.
__[Jg_-
~.-._:..
.a
- a.
,3 Midland Plcnt Unito 1 cnd 2 Response to NRC Requests for Additional Information for Review of BWST and SWPS Underpinning CONFIRMATORY ISSUES 15 AND 16 1
I' Provide strain monitoring criteria matrix.
(h @f-Provide drawings on strain monitoring and Carlson meters, including locations and details.
RESPONSE
l Figure SWPS-14 provides the requested information.
Also refer to the response to Confirmatory Issue 3.
j CONFIRMATORY ISSUE 17 Identify critical construction stages and critical measure-
- ments, j
RESPONSE
During construction of the SWPS underpinning, two stages are considered most critical.
The first stage occurs during construction of corner Piers 1, 2, and 3.
Af ter the construction of these corner piers, the entire weight of the overhang can be supported without depending on the fill support.
The second stage occurs during adjustment of the jacking load from initial
()E<{,
to final loads.
During the construction of Piers 1 through 3, the extenso-meters, which monitor strain, and the settlement indicators (refer to Figure SWPS-14) shall be read twica each shift.
In addition, during this stage the load-measuring indicators located in Piers 1, 2, and 3 shall be monitored for an increase in load twice each shift.
When the final jacking load is applied, the existing structure is subjected to the maximum jacking load.
The extensometers on the east and west exterior walls will be monitorod for strain twice each shift.
L CONFIRMATORY ISSUE 18 l
Provide contingency plan and discussion of possible remedial actions.
1 13
.2
- y ; --~~ n
-a.
m --
. r-3.
Midland Plcnt Unito 1 cnd 2 Response to NRC Requests for
,,7 W
Additional Information for Review
.ar
-of.BNST and SWPS Underpinning
'n IL"
~
RESPONSE
Postulated situations that might occur during underpinning
- n construction and the appropriate remedial measures for such i
situations are listed below.
In any situation, one or a E.
combination of measures may be adopted.
These measures will f-be included.in a project specification.
!~
1.
Failure of Dewatering System
?
a.
If power fails, use the required backup power
??
system
, 5F b.
If the system is inadequate, correct it with L
additional wells / pumps 6
l_-
c.
If monitoring indicates excessive fines:
u E
1)
Repair well 2)
Replace well 3)
Evaluate effect of total quantity of fines lost during construction g
i.
2.
Uncontrolled Groundwater Flow into Excavation kj y
a.
Identify the source of uncontrolled flow and correct it b.
Equalize water level in pier excavation and initi-ate dewatering as determined by the resident geotechnical engineer 3.
Ground Loss' a.
Use techniques such as forepoling or spieling l
(sheeting) to stabilize ground b.
Use chemical or cement grouting 4.
Unacceptable Bearing Stratum l!
a.
Excavate below planned elevation and backfill with i
lean concrete i4 P
b.
Increase bearing area of piers i.
5.
Excessive Pier Settlement a.
Hold load until criteria defined for pier accep-i j.
tance is met b.
Increase embedmont of future piers I
l 14
,,, )
Midland Plant Unita 1 and 2 a-Response to NRC Requests for Additional Information for Review of BWST and SWPS Underpinning c.
Increase bearing area of future piers d.
Increase jacking load to accelerate settlements (individual piers only)
- u e.
Install additional pier (s) ji f.
Remove pier, excavate to acceptable material, and replace pier concrete
?-
6.
Jacking System If the hydraulic system is defective, use the
(, V a.
required backup system b.
If the jack malfunctions, replace the jack 7.
Loss of Monitoring - Extensometer a.
Use backup dial gage b.
Reestablish monitoring point 8.
Structural Damage to Existing Structure a.
Determine the cause b.
Remove the source of the problem c.
Repair the damage l
CONFIRMATORY IS$UE 19 Provide summary submittal of specification or drawing notes to cover frequency for checking and adjusting jacking loads.
RESPONSE
l The following note will be placed on the construction drawings:
During the construction of Piers 1, 2, and 3, the j
jacks shall be monitored every day, inc1'4 ding holidays and weekends, and adjusted if necessary.
Af ter attaining the initial jacking load for Piers 4 through 10, each jack shall be monitored and adjusted, if necessary, each working day.
e 15 i
ne w~.
.... m m Nidland Plcat Unito 1 cnd 2 Responsa to NaC Requests for Additioul Information for moview of SNST and SWPS Underpinning 3
During the adjustment of the jacking load from 3
initial to final load, all jacks shall be moni-tored every day, including holidays and weekends.
l After the level of the final jacking load is attained, each jack shall be sonitored and ad-jested, if necessary, each working day unt.11 the wedges are driven and the jacks removed.
t l
CONFIRMATORY ISSUE 20 i.
!. U Provide method to be followed for transfer of jacking load t ;.
into permanent wall.
RESPONSE
i Upon completion of Pier 10, the structure is fully supported by initial jacking loads.
At this stage, the load is trans-l '*
ferred from the initial to the final design jacking load.
The final design jacking force shall be simultaneously applied to Piers 1 through 10 in three groups of jacks.
Bach grony is connected to a separate hydraulic system.
The increase in force to reach the level of the final jacking 1
force shall be applied incrementally.
The increments shall i
not escoed 25% of the additional force up to 75% of the increase.
Thereafter, increments shall not enoeed lot, up i
to 1004 (+54, -04) of the required additional force.
The l
acceptance criteria for the final jacking force shall be i
when the rate of movement of the underpinning relative to i
the upper base slab (el 417') is less than 0.01 inch for i
1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br />.
This force shall be maintained, monitored every i
working day, and, adjusted if necessary until the rate of j
settlement has reached a.predatermined rate.
At this stage, 7
the wedges shall be tightly driven and the ijacks ryved.
l b%Lbgf CONFIRMATORY ISSUE 21
~'
i i
Novide decision on tunnel location prior to hearing.
I
RESPONSE
As indleated in a report, Summary of Soils-Related Issues b
at the Midland Nuclear Plant, dated April 19, 1982, access h
to the north and east side underpinning piers will be from l
the outside of the building by use of open excavation.
i Access for piers on the west wall will be provided by an i
access shaft from grade and a tunnel under the west side of l
the el 617' base slab.
i
}
16 I
~ ~ - 1r4 $
~ --
....-..- =
.=
(.,_
Midicnd Plcnt Unito 1 cnd 2 Response to NRC Requests for
~..
nr Additional Information for Review
};
of BWST and SWPS Underpinning
. li -
~
CONFIRMATORY ISSUE 22
{3 Provide a report on crack repair.
RESPONSE
F>
A report discussing the evaluation and repair requirement Y.
for cracks in structures for the Midland Nuclear Plant has been submitted to the NRC.
h CONFIRMATORY ISSUE 23 bf Perform a limit analysis on a wall considering the effects Q
of cracking.
- e..
h
RESPONSE
El The following is a brief. status report on the limit analysis being conducted by the PorcAana Cement Association, consultants to Consumers Power Company.
7;
===1.
Background===
_f In a previous report submitted to the NRC staff, cracks observed in the SWPS were described and their signi-ficance was evaluated.
Cracks observed in the structure
-i were primarily attributed to restrained volume changes that occur in concrete during curing and subsequent drying.
No evidence of structural distress was ob-served.
Although the possibility of settlement-related cracking could not be completely eliminated, crack patterns di'd not support the conclusion that settlement bi was a primary cause of cracking.
As a measure of significance of observed cracks relative 4
to future integrity of the structure, the tensile stress that uncracked concrete may be assumed to carry was compared to available tensile capacity provided by structural reinforcement causing the cracks.
This calculation was made for sections in the vicinity of cracks that had a measured width of 0.01 inch or greater.
In the calculation, concrete is assumed to carry a principal tensile stress of 4 g/T'-~ where f' is the c
specified concrete compressive stfength.
4 17 f
w n--
,,---e
,,--,,,.--n
~,,-,,-.-a,
m
..z 4M1J
--- m -ma 3 1
7m i:
Midicnd Plcnt Unito 1 cnd 2 I Ii Response to NRC Requests for
! E.'
- !O Additional Information for Review i }$ -
-of BWST and.SWPS Underpinning l,-{.
~U Based on this calculation, it was determined that available horizontal reinforcement in the east and
- w west walls of the SWPS provided a resistance of approxi-mately 97% of the tensile stress assumed to be carried 11 by concrete.
Resistance provided by vertical reinforce-ment exceeded the tensile stress assumed to be carried by concrete by a significant margin.
It was reasoned that if cracks in these walls had inclination of at least 15. degrees from vertical, both vertical and r
horizontal reinforcement would be sufficiently mobilized so that the. resultant forces would exceed the stress I"'
attributed to concrete tensile strength.
Therefore, it was concluded that resistance provided by the rein-
,. _A forcement was sufficient.
EE After review of the report on evaluation of cracking in the SWPS, NRC staff members requested that a more
!j -
detailed analysis be made to evaluate the capacity of
,i -
the east and west walls of the SWPS.
Therefore, the i
limit analysis described in this status report was initiated.
2.
Methodology t
The approach being used to evaluate the capacity of walls in the SWPS is to estimate forces that can be 4
induced in the structure.
This is being done by evalu-ating capacities at selected sections of wall members.
Capacities are being calculated using representative stress versus strain relationships for material proper-ties, and using section geometries determined from engineering design drawings.
Af ter sectional analyses are completed, the capability of the structure to resist hypothesized applied force distributions is calculated.
These calculations will indicate the maximum level of shear force and moment that can be induced in the walls under idealized support conditions.
Calculations will provide a ' worst case" estimate of
,j forces that the walls must resist.
Once this estimate is known, the capacity of the walls to resist applied forces can be evaluated.
3.
Expected Results Results from limit analyses will provide an estimate of i
the maximum in-plane bending and shear forces that can be induced in walls of the SWPS for assumed force i j distributions.
This will provide a conservative estimate of whether capacities of the walls are sufficient to resist applied forces.
It is expected that the final
~{.
calculation would support the hypothesis that the walls have sufficient capacity to resist the applied forces.
flL 18 i
e
-.---,..-~-r.._..-..,,,_..,.-,m.-m_.
.._,__v.,.-e-,,,,._
_.,nm,-
..,,-w-w-,,
.g
. m._g j_.. ;._. _,,
m--
2-
- 71 _ _
+3-e '
i J.
Midicnd Plcnt Unito 1 cnd 2 V
Response to NRC Requests for
= [{
Additional Information for Review ip-of BNST and SWPS Underpinning-h f" 4.
Current Status 1
jb-As of April 22, 1982, analyses have been completed for
~jf vertical and horizontal sections through the SWPS.
The north overhang of the building has been analyzed for
' I.
the conservative assumption that it is unsupported by
,c backfill or underpinning.
Calculations are in progress to evaluate horizontal shear forces that could be induced in the structure. - In addition, a report on
^
limit analyses is in progress.
It is estimated that the calculations will be completed and the report will be submitted to the NRC by the first week of May 1982.
CONFIRMATORY ISSUE 24
'l Provide a commitment for monitoring fines from construction j ~"-
wells in 0-listed areas using a 0.005 mm filter and for monitoring the performance of the construction dewatering system.
RESPONSE
l The constr Iction dewatering system is a temporary system and, therefore, is not subject to as rigorous a criterion (0.005 mm particle size in well dischargt water) as would be 4
applied fer a permanent well installation.'
Conseqdently, the syste's operation test procedure for the construction 4
dewatering system will be based on a 0.050 mm filter media.
If the quantity of soil particles retained on a 0.050 mm filter is greater than 10 ppa during well operation, the
{,/
well will be ratested and removed from the system if retests coniirm that the' criterion is exceeded.
The well discharge will be monitored for the 0.005 mm size for information.
If the amount of soil particles retained on a 0.005 mm filter is greater than 10 ppm, an engineering evaluation will be made based on actual pumping rates, etc, to determine the significance of the condition.
The NRC
,j will be made aware of.any such situation.
i li The dewatering system will be monitored by a series of observation wells.
The wells will consist of 1/2-inch diameter slotted polyvinylchloride well screens with 1/2-inch diameter riser pipes.
The wells will monitor the I
groundwater levels in the fill and the undisturbed natural J
soil.
The bottoms of wells used to monitor the water level in the fill will be installed at an elevation no lower than approximately 1 foot above the undisturbed natural soil.
lc 19
~
7 1---
-r
-..,-----i.
-r-..
..-...m
-.__w.r.__n.m_,.m,,,._.,.%._
m,,.~,
,%__y-
,,_.,p
l
,~:~
.u,. 1_cic-
..a.
- neu z_..: e
~ ~
Midicnd'P1Ent Unito 1 and 2 l'M Response to URC P4 quests for
- L-t Additional Information for Review of BWST and SWPS Underpinning l i @- -
?,
!ll' The bottoms of wells used to mor.itor the water level in the l,
undisturbed natural mil will be installed such that the bottom of the well screen is at approximately el 570' and the bottom of the bentonite seal will be approximately j
2 feet below the interface of the fill and the undisturbed natural soil.
lc.
The construction dewatering system will be installed so that the excavation and construction operations can be performed i,.
under stable soil conditions.
The resident geotechnical ltl _
engineer will observe groundwater conditions as part of his responsibilities.
The walls will be installed so that the hhtt
- f-waterlevelinthefillwillbedrawndowntoapproximate1[in B W5 ht3
~
the interface of the fill and natural soil.
If the natural M4 4
a soil at the dewatering well location is cohesionless, the e.go\\ g wells will be installed such that the water level in the natural cohesionless material will be drawn down below the b4 %4 depth of any excavation made in that material.
Where such situations occur, the groundwater level will be lowered to eJM6 CA-4 approximately 2 feet below the base of the excavation, 51% C4-5 provided,relatively. pervious soil exists below the exca-
~
tion.
If the material below the base of the excavation is va cohesive and relatively impervious, the water in any cohesion-less material may be drawn down by localized dewatering techniques such as sumping.
e e
is r
l t
F r#%
20 m.u i
=
,,,. - - - - - ~ - - -,..
n,......
.,..m
~
L.-
,2 7
7=.
l
.5'
,1 ij-I i
r't i
!~
4 5%"
f' gr W'
E IE.. I I
6+
.=.
~
)
r
/
f HYDRAULIC JACK i
s l
i i
A
/
CONSUMERS POWER COMPANY MIDLAND UNITS 1 AND 2 l}
PLACEMENT OF ll HYDRAULIC JACK i i l;
FIGURE BWST-1 o('
l l
G-1986-50 1
. _. _,w
e
..n_...~~..
. - ~ -, - - _.
i l
i 1
'l-cg
\\
N 3
l 1'
i i
s E
i
=
s
=
1 (f
,e 1,
'I
- s a
S i
=
1 t
/i N
CONSUMERS POWER COMPANY 4
s i
/s
- =
MIDLAND UNITS 1 AND 2 w
i FIGURE l-2 ELECTROMECHANICAL JACK 1
l FIGURE BWST-2 t
l i 6 i
G-1986 85
- = =
- z:.
~~:mm-
~ ~ -
l !
4 ii I
o
.. T" v
12*
304 SIS t p 3"
TYP 1
)
3" 1
4 "T"
- Each 1-1/2" thick shim shall 1132 "
be identified with a numerical
- i stamping sequentially from 1/16,,
- 1 through #42.
4 118 "
1/4" S
1/2"
$ 11/2" CONSUMERS POWER COMPANY o
MIDLAND UNITS 1 AND 2 I
STAINLESS STEEL SHIMS i
FIGURE BWST-3 G-1986-51
.l
W: " ~ ~ ~
'. : :.x '
,- _ -,. ~
I s
j
.i '
i'
%" TYP
,A A
GROUT s
RINGWALL
/
A r"
+
l '
O 4
I 1
a
- i I
CONSUMERS POWER COMPANY MIDLAND UNITS 1 AND 2
(
l DETAll OF SHIM 1
I STACK FIXED BY GROUTING I
FIGURE BWST ;
G-1986-52 i
l-
.. ~.
m...__,,__g.
,. p.
12" BOLT
=
=
CELOTEX COFFERDAM
,ll n
12" ta" i g,,
, 3,,
4 y
OlL IMPREGNATED h
SAND n
.. t;
. g-
-y,
,j 12" 1
_Il"
, if p,g(
.',,: 9,?
a
.g y
3.
..i T
EARTH
=--
j.,.. pg..
- y.
1
.m;..
r...
I.
ADDITIONAL EXISTING RINGWALL RINGWALL l
t 18"
=
CONSUMERS POWER COMPANY MIDLAND UNITS 1 AND 2 COFFERDAM AND OIL IMPREGNATED SAND PAD FIGURE BWST-5 G-1986 58
~
. ~
-- -., y,.,7 e
i I
BOLT
[
TANK WALL GROUT CELOTEX WOOD g
j
, g OIL IMPREGNATED m m@l SHIM
- 9. ' *:-
SAND 7
f
'i SHIM t
t
.d!?.p':..::@'qlI
. M.....
i;
- . ty.
'l ' :
I FILL--*
1l
. c:-
i ll 0/."a h
4.i
.o-j,p6l.
.:/fi' --
l:l 1
EXISTING ADDITIONAL
- l RINGWALL RINGWALL
.I t
i.
E CONSUMERS POWER COMPANY MIDLAND UNITS 1 AND 2 TANK AND FOUNDATION AFTER POURING OF GROUT l
FIGURE BWST-6
[
G-1986 57
=;.
=-
-mw q
l BoR m o STORAGE TANK 1T-80
~
e i
E go 4
I s 4eas.so 2
M
\\m.
BORATED WATER g
- g af'#
STORAGE TANK 2T-60
+d I
40-f y
~
h,,
q o
g
/
u
~-
\\
'D b
g
/ \\ 24eas.e7
~~-
l VALVE PIT
.4,
<o x-
L 6 I t C
18-i
..,itp i ;%
.A is.
- w
'I
. ?*
M-Ai ty, [j.
x x-1 i
7'
'\\
/
M E'I I.
7[,, *,
I t
' t I i,
- i i
i i I, 6 5
- t t
\\. I I e
\\
/
.. 4 i i.
e e i I-i',, t i i N
, e..
N i i i i
%f E-I HyEM j
/: e t i *
,.T X
- i e
, e.
, e e
t.
/lE
.'t
\\-
t
. i
_a -
e i i
- i If
\\
l t t t t t
t\\ *
' t i i
t i i II I 64 I i t i
} '
f I t i '. 6 I. I i i/I i
\\r I t
t
\\i i
i e Ii t i i t
t t 6 'A*
i
, N' N
I
\\
i
/
i lw 6V l
/
i i 66 I 6+ 1 t i i4Iii i,X i
N 1[3.. D t
Na\\
9
!K
' ' 6 I i i
- ' 4 i 3 '
/
\\!_
i Air
/
i i t I i
i i e
\\' hi
/
r i i
/
6 6 i i
h !\\
i e
3 6
\\t X
/
I i.e i!'
t i e
i
\\
/
a i
!I 6
4 i
I
/A if I'
\\
if,
/
'NI I
. l h
4'
/
\\
l
\\
/
)
J t
8 j.C.l]
1 4
I t
4
/
\\
I i
\\ /
h I
t
\\
. 1 di
\\
J l3 1
I i
\\
I i
j i
,. 3
.\\
f f
j i
L
/
t i
.I i
1 1
I i
I e t,
' di
, ii t
i 3
a i,
i
.o
.4 j
< num.mo.
l CONSUMERS POWER COMPANY r{
MIDLAND UNITS 1 AND 2 I I t
t t
I
! I i l l
iil,,,',
l, l.
ll';
SERVICE WATER PUMP STRUCTURE i
i i i
SOUTH WALL i
i
, i
. i....
, i i.
i l
8 l
8 e
1 I
.- i.
i,,
e, i,
FIGURE SWPS-3 i
, i.,,
i.
,.. i i,.
t t
9 t
G-1906 76
. ~...... -.
a_.
e e
.-.=_a
.=
_a
_a n-i.-
, -*. s
+w...u,-m, w.."
. e.
..~
. _. - _.._....s u.
....m.w_.._,.-
w
_m
.3
_,e.,
(b.l.
i '
I-l:.
f e '
6 ei e
t t t 4 e
i t
t t +
t i n 8 f*
M MEMMM 6,
4 6
6 I I e
t i
e t t i
<0 1
i i i ' ' '
N M IN THE NORTH SOUTH
+ '
'-TTELL a t t !
I a
't I
6 JtJLJ1 M 9
y:
DIRECTION WHICH CONTR8UTES 89%
i t t i
e i 6. i,,
t t i t i
OF THE TOTAL NORTH SOUTH FORCE
,g,gM
, 'fy'aC l.f.d :/ s, t l e i 6. e i i i f i t
I i 6 e i
6
_ i !
' i * -' _
i T F
a E Ad lir N TYh t i 4
i i
i NKyng =NT AE !LINE. DP*
- ell
' ' t I i
6 l
t i
e i 1
9,
i 6
e i
A X
.A t %'I ATI L - LDAD
+ t i
+ e a
i
- t * ' I e i i
i t
, 6
.,4 i
e rumLono
' i * ' ' t l
I i 6 6 I i t i
, I e
e et 3EI 3 AE R G u rm D - a t
4 e,.
t I
i
+ r i i e t i e
i t i l
i I
I
- r t i l
'El0 I D.N %Irmiif Aff FLF15 r's m
e 4
1 4
i I
t
'Fa1.EE i
l I
l i
t t
l !
lD.
LP _
I '
t i
l 6
i i
t 4
1 e
f f
j A
m 184 ad aR
'l m
'I, kJ f
658 8
n s
sw
=
.*=r
'r
- 1r s 't Aj{
i g;, g,y.
..qa 3
8 9 e
,A 7
t 1
- w i,
i r
e v
'M '
e r i
T*
EI C g[+
te t
>,e
I
, f, e e t
, t 4 e t i i i
i 5
t } l l, )
i e t } t e i f If il 9
t
/
a4 t 6 t t I
' t 5 i e
i a I f
.\\
t 9 i i t
- I i i e
'k-
'k 6,,
e g g
,,f 9
1/
g i
- e g
e i
1 l l 1 I
i i /
Alt
. i f1 4 i et ! l !
A t i
1 a
4 i #
im===Jf 1
ei e
t t al t t
\\
' e i/
/
\\
I e
t II i t
i i
)
N 4
- /
)
l' I i
- EEr a LI i
L I
/
\\
Y i t
e i
\\
I
/
e t w
\\
s 1 1
Iv e l
4*
4t h
i I
/
- i T
11 ~
t _
e i
l'
, i
\\+
F Il i
V
\\
t I
'i t 4 i
\\
J
/
\\
1 t
if t a
'l i
i i
i I
n
\\
1 f
/
's
/
1E 1
\\
l I : I i
/r a
\\
T F
/
\\
Ir e i I, t
/
t 2 1 1
I I
N t
'/i II j $'
L i=== O f
\\
X
/ 1 I
I i
""rhLP 1
J 1
iT
_dP6,
It i
l
- j 1
I i
LF L
f
\\
5 J
F\\
/
l}
1 I
I N
- F 1i L
F t t1 /
n e t
\\
i sl i
\\
I t
t l 14 ir_
i j
1 I g,
r
+
'I
.pMe U X
J fj 1
I 1
L
/
CONSUMERS POWER COMPANY
?
MIDLAND UNITS 1 AND 2 l
1 dig,. ',
SERVICE WATER PUMP STRUCTURE
,,, i u4 -. t wr
,mm u-,
SOUTH WALL
+
t i
t
.,,t t 1 t t i
I f
}}
9 t t
- l,i l,i l'
FIGURE SWPS-4 t t,
..g 4,
44 t,
i t i
e e t.
i 6
6 G.tges.77
[i c.
_-r.....__.,m_--.
....,__._,,,-,,,._,m_w.-,m.,-.www+,w,,ow.--,,w-.%,,,,,,--.m.-.,.,-.wm,
_.m_%.ww,
,,_r
~ v.
~
~
3._-_
r-
-- m,
. t
- i i
t,
t
,., t i i,,
i 1.eiii,i+
l l, '
SEISMIC LOAD IS BASED ON THE i
i 1
DOMINANT MODE IN THE NORTH-SOUTH w' Uu' m' ' ' 'w' ax' t
i
. i DIRECTION WHICH CONTRIBUTES 89%
i i,.,
i i
i 1
I OF THE TOTAL NORTH SOUTH FORCE r'iu - ro' n'ar' mee'r.'m x i ruu m 3 v' v'i
- '3 i
I i e j g 9 e e e I
4 t
f f f
I I t
i
{
t t
_?
MDRj'5 6,,_'_8 l_I N Ei. ' O P Es w aa EN T 3
(
_ l I
i 1
i i
i t ' siI
+
i i i
. i i i
i t
e i i
X e 't I A l lL flMD i t l I e'It I t - J t. i
' i t
'I ei i i * *
- ,t 1
i
! e I VM k 1 OR IJ f I 6
! I I !
I i
, t t i i
O 2
0 e
t
- T i
t *,
i.
i t
i i et *6i i
% E.I T LA ll'-
1 OAD e
' i i i t i t
t ei t
I i
+
e
.e' a
3 8
I I t i 9 i
if I
I i
t f
f t
i 1 $
' f e
3 l
{
I f l
_a 6
4 j
I, e
i L
i !
litaI5 Idi{
[
EllgEF yI f
%Ii1 U t
i
g
+
f 1,
I i
t.
e 4 t
e t 6
t TTO
- t
~
I i
f I
i 7q,
l
, g T
I i
II i
. I 3,
Ile I
t m
3 lum u
'A
!X J.1 i
t
- M. 1 I
'l I
t i
t i
liu e
I ft tl I
\\
r t
e I il i
i 8
f }
N 4>
8 8
f
'k I
g-
' i i\\
ar
\\
i 6 I
\\
L EI
/t I
'k i
t I f
I lkh f
fili
[ !
1
'dw-I t 1 i
i
- M i
li%
(
t i
Y Y
- I I'
t I F ab J.L. '
i i
A aJ e
i i
.i '
\\M._
JT
- ep _*
a r
3 3V
'E 5
iW EM P
[], f}
'g
_ f t/ -
3^
t abe -
. M 1 F\\
Y u
Fl._A'l E r
i 1 _ i i
/ i) i*
e ! t i
e X
e
'l Lt,
e e - w: t i
\\
e i k.
in.
s' ti
/\\'
EL EMNTT(
e
. e t
t
\\\\i l 1
/
)
\\
a
- }
}
l
}
h \\l
! Mi i
Il
\\
i\\ i i
e 6
e i
i N
!/d i 4
J
\\
l Ni.
I e
i
\\! 1 If6 61 I
k 4 6 Y
, t i i e t
i t%/
f i l J
\\
lA
=m.D I i i
k8 "
I t
L
/
't
!I ik*
I t
, e r t\\ '
I t ti
/
\\f I i X
i t
i 6 t l(
f jf, p
1
? g ?
9 %
e i
1 1
1L
\\
l, i e i'ue i
e i
i i i
1 i
i i
\\
l ir i
t
\\ f.
N ib
+
I I
(
- 11 1 l ! !
\\_
i i
f l,
(
l m
I
- LD<f' lt t
e
.4 N
JE 1
I.
N i #
\\ ef i
<.g l
I t
I i
1 8 l 1
e
)
l s
I i
l i I
f !
I '
k
- X] a O I l f
f
, I I
i.
I I i
! ?
a j j j
t t
t l l 6
1 LEMPRkb1IDN i
CDNSUMERS POWER COMPANY 11 MIDLAND UNITS 1 AND 2
,e
't
, 1,,,,,
t t
' ~
l
.. i., t,i
, i,
,, i 1
PUMP STRUCTURE j
i i,.
t i i i i i i
li i.
l':ll.
i SOUTH WALL i
4 ii t i t iI I
i t
i i t t FIGURE SWPS-5 i
- ll';
l l
-t-1 G 1986 78 '
A
,,,,r-
,,,., + -,, - -, - - - -
._____y,.-,.,,,__e---w..m.
,,y
,,_.-._,w,,_.,,,,,_-,_.-y,
i
, ~ _., - -. _,
_ ; 2. m
- 7_ _
_.___n_.___.
qc.g,3
.b l !
[4' l SEISMIC LOAD IS BASED ON THE
,'l*,;,,l l l.
i 4
DOMINANT MODE IN THE NORTH SOUTH l
l;;;'
5g,.;.w,,
t DIRECTION WHICH CONTRIBUTES 89%
i I
,,t
+ 1 i i i OF THE TOTAL NORTH SOUTH FORCE
+.'r
'''''NIW MF, " A BU MT i %l@O' ' ]
~
+
t 6
DR,N Ul B W i.
+.
6 i, e i i t i i 6
. t i i 4
i
+
- i te l-
_ i >
i e 4 e i
. t I re I t I
,I t
e t t i e 1 MOR I_I N R, - D r ELJuMENT5
' e i
,(
t
. t i,.
i r
- i e i,
e
' I 6 i e
i i i t i *
, i e i..
1 i
+
- i
'e
' I e i e *,
i.. t +. t _
e I t t
X X
- M
'5T KT I C.
tLflAD i
i
- e i ! f I i.
i Il i i t i e r!
I i i e e i I
t I i
C C
3 I V rtTa l DAD t
i a e
i i
- i i
, e i
, i i i
e 6e t
i 6 6 LD i
i e i
+
i
- i e
1 1 6 i e "1
i
. t t
' i
- t
. t iRINMic I IL
, i i. t ii 6
i e, 6
t
)
i 3 e 1 !
! ! l
- t i
r t
e t
i f 9 9 0 t I f f I t t t
t.
l 8 ' !
8 f
I I i e i e
t 6
- ffMr71%N_ ' IdG"" " I_
l l l
f 1 I t I l i I
' 4
. 4. *.
fl[*FT I FT 1
r I i I i
e t t t 6 LL D a
7 6
ei f
f it i
I '
t i
e i f t
t
?
I I
I U.
3 i i i
i l
I r
I t i 1 I
t 8
! 8 9
i i e a p i t I f
- f I
e I,
ei m
J l
i, 6
,e j
6 =U i !
9 i
! i i i P
t t
t t
8 i I ! t i 9 6 r
t t
. 4 e 6 I
I e 8 4 i e.
6 I
i
., e l
j 6 e
+
t t
i 1
t I I
I I I
i t 6 ! '
t t t I t i
t t
t i e t I f
i I t I
{
, 9 9 6 i g
! I I
,(b, g,
,,. g,
,3,
- M, A e 4 6 6 (Qi g
4 6,R,1 gg-O_O 9
Nl_"
3I m ' 3'"
A \\'
a' 3 3/ IM#
3J I 'P F
.I G '
n
~'
1 c
w m
+*
\\'
i i
PL AT L
/
i
, e
- e
\\_
l 6
i i r
i
- r I-kLEP="M D e
6
'/
i +
\\
+
e t
I'
- at..
6 e\\
i
! f f i
t l I i !
/t t i
/
Dd I
1!
t t t I t '
t I
t 3.A i
J' J
sJ 7I
\\
! t ? !
I f. i e
t i
6
\\:
1 I
i/
\\
\\
l 8 e r
J 8
P f
/
\\
ik !
t 4 f I
- ?
t i
'I i/ I
'\\
ki a e e i e.
6
- 4.
,/
i A6
+
I ' ' f f
/ i
'kt t
\\?
4 i
- 1 t !
e *
- I
\\
i i
\\ i li e
iI I
I i \\.
t 1
e
- t t ?
a e
i <p
\\
4 I a
ti
/,
i
\\' 9 e
\\_
I t t + Ii Ilt
'\\
e
\\'
t l._
t i
i e
i. 6 i
\\e et i
! t /-
/
e
\\i t
1i e i i
I, i e t e e
i i
\\ ! 1i t
I #
,1
\\t
%i i
- I' I t t
6X! i \\'
iJ f
u_
et
.f.
6 i
\\l 1 I
/
\\
\\
eIi N
6\\
F f
A PL I: i I
"LW 56 2 Jr f
N tt Ie i i
mait E
/
X i1 e
I: e i 1mi M
1.
i\\
l t
I* ! it T,
,/
u I V. _8 T
!_2*.i
' l i
I s
i 1 1,.
,1 i
\\
)
Ni i 6 i i 1 )
- 1 1
T
/
%u < i t,
i i
~i
, s.,
s,
i,
t
. i
. 6,
6.
., m I
4.
6
. t. i.
i i,..,
-a m
r 6.,
i CONSUMERS POWER COMPANY
]
MIDLAND UNITS 1 AND 2 i
i, t l';l.,'i l'li l'l ll lli;;,
l SERVICE WATER PUMP STRUCTURE 1,,.
e ii,e e i.
ie t i i i i I *
- i 4
a SOUTH WALL
. I t,,
,,, t,
, 6 i i
..., i 3
i a
e e e e i t t I l 8 !
i ' f t f
J FIGURE SWPS-6 t
hj M l
. _ _, ~...,,
..,z
- 4..
.9
. - ~ _
..._.m t.
1 ii i.
i - i
! # 1. i ir i
i,,,,
r SEISMIC LOAD :S SASED ON THE i i,,
4 t
' ' i
. l' 1
DOMINANT MODE IN THE NORTH SOUTH s:uonH WA L_ L..-. i i
i i
i DIRECTION WHICH CONTRIBUTES 89%
i
. i!
, i..
- A KI Rl H]WM IKwwl.
i wn =narEAE i
OF THE TOTAL NORTH SOUTH FORCE iI r i i _
i
_5 s
- t i
I i l j i
. i e
i.,
i 1
- 4 i..
iMkn afM _ : 1 I AJE '/ E hth MP Mh -
. i. 6 1
, i i e
i i
. i i
i i [
i # i i t
i.
, 4 i _
t i
e t I
X X
-(TATIC ID fm
~* ~
t t
-FKr Ln' AD i
i i i..
t 1 i t
, t i i i t ! t t
' I i e i
i
, 6 i
i i
i i e O
d'2 wo t #
j
? t t a t
i t
t. l I
3 l I ie i i i I IA&D i t
! i e
-e-5 ER E M I C.
+
t i.. t 6
i i
)
i. t i. 1 i 1 t,
i,
,.. r i.
i i i
e 4
i i
e i
i i
(
, t ! I.
e 3
l i i l i i 3
I I i i
i Al i.1 i !
j _
,i _ _s
' f gn,n Ihh XI D N I Tltni A UT J i i t i i i t + i y
i
, t. t j
i 1
i I
I 6 6
?
! f i FiUC I
e i i i
! l I f
e t I t
t t
t e
f
! l 8 I
t t I ! t f Kl. b f I i f i i
t t
6 1
e i e i
I I
1 i i i
t I
, i I
i
[
t t
i i i i i t i I i l i I i
f I
f f
I 1
t r
i La e=0 a
A i i 8
I t i i
2
-- a7 6 1_.
- t i! l !.
mg d.H FLK l t.
aa w.
"aA
'd1
. _ a
'4
/
'l I _
'ee
", 'N,
. 7 te f 93 UW 6
l'
- W M MIAM
- */
'=
, as em.,
i. /
/
i
,7 i
/
i,
i e
i f
f I
- E. f I I
'f, r
i e i I i t t a f
. I !t 6 I
i i
?
t ! I t\\!
IL/
l 1 t I t1
.h 4 t t i I
I r
i i e i l t
e
! Tm s
"JU. U i
i i N i
/'
e i
- ?
t t t i
'A i
[1 i
i t I t
t I
t t t
i l I i
t i
i T i
! I f
4 i l f
f f
i t
I t
! j l
t t I j
i i
- I r
t i
i i
l I
l t I Li i_i i
i I 4
- LU.U i
i I
i i
e 8
i e
f I
t i f
j l
i t i
. t 1
- i i l
i i
]
I t
I I
i i
t i
I I
i t
. i j
- un i
i i
., i,
4.
i i
- t~
l i
I I t 1 i t
' I I
I t ! I t i i
l i fMll% MM lMhI.
t
' l
' l i I t CONSUMERS POWER COMPANY MIDLAND UNITS 1 AND 2 3,
ie i g a t
j.
g i
j t
e s
,..,, i i
,, i.
. e PUMP STRUCTURE
,,,, i i i.
l
. i
..,,, i i i
SOUTH WALL i
eiis i
, i.
i l t 1. f e t l
i [ i.
i li l',;:
FIGURE SWPS-7 i
M M
_ _ _ _.. _ _. _ _ _ ~.
_m
- i, 1
i SEISMIC LOAD IS SASED ON THE l
l l'lli ll,i lt i
i
- l DOMINANT MODE IN THE NORTH SOUTH i l
."um"n_ wn u~
i i
e i
,1 DIRECTION WHICH CONTRIBUTES 89%
i. i OF THE TOTAL NORTH SOUTH FORCE i
i
.. vaso rAL. a y rA t. rcace.
.is-ie i
>I-M E R N'-(.[tl.iI m-
--fVIE W1 L i i a t i i i i i,
, i,
i i I e t 1
inh.QP liLLt i
I ! it
, i i i ei i
i e ie i
I.
't m
a t
' i
. i i
4 i 6
i, i e
! ' ! ' I i
- 1 i
i 1 I
?.
I e e
I t E
R 1
MKI R L M
AD t i o e 3 ;,
g i
)
g i
g i 9 e,,, e e >_
e t
- p q I I t ! ! '
I t
6 9
l l
1 1 1 O
_O VKEJ 1 M V e e i !
8 ' t *
- I f
f 1
! t 3 1
i i t t It P '
'm I
t
' i i i i
i i
t i t i i t
e e
13 515 M I L LIJ A D
+
- i,,,
, e i l
e i
e,
4 _
e I
4 I t I
t t
- I 1 I t
t f
f e +
8 f
f 0
1 II i
1 I
L,.
. i_
1 s
1AD
~l l'IID1 WFh i MFMPT
.I
, i c
6 e
t t i
I I i
i l I
f ?
I I i
JL.D i
i i I I e
I t
I t
t !
t l l
i i6 I t
4 e
i I f 1
i t iIfA H I
i i t
i t t l
l t
i t
i 8
i i
- t 9 p 6
i t
. e t,
4
- l t.
e I
e t
4 I
- t t
t t
i f
f I
~
l I
t f
i i
I I
f f
l !
I
' t i
I i
i t t
?
f
. f I f i t I
6 !
t t
--db-
^
f f
i e i e i
uo ou e
t
- I i h i N L{. I m.
as e-
.~.,
- DD 7
n i
j
- FtBk, n" V 'fL i
its e i 'n1
' er "ta
'dn i 2
- __. ana i
W "f
hm - ' ' "-
t i
- r JW5#
'tT Lt P.J4 LN15 s
v,
pc t
p
$~
i e
i * ' a.
t
. w#
t
- 1 i 1 e f t
! t ef' I
i e i i i I i 6
i i i
sr i ii t I i i
-m*
K' t t 8 t
t
./
1 f f I
?
I l
l\\
l I
i
./
I i t i 8 I
I
! i\\' !
,4 6
9,
d.M, alD;D i i Ai
,f
,\\.
' r s
\\
t f 1 A
' t ' s s
e i t e !
l Tv 6 3r t l e t t
? ' t r
6 t
A..
/ '
r i e e !
6 t
'u
/
4 i
i i en f
,i
.n w
)
i 6
s
-ine I
f f
1 ! t l
l
)
1 I
t I
I f f I
i e
i, e
i o
1 a
, i.
1 I
I i
f f
8 1
9 I
i I
I t t,
.t i,
. sHo i
. 4 f i i 1 ?
t i
t i I iJ t
,a-ss um.
CONSUMERS POWER COMPANY a
l MIDLAND UNITS 1 AND 2
-t i
l i I i
i
.i i
i I:
l' l
,'.i PUMP STRUCTURE L
l
ll l
l l,,';
SOUTH WALL L
i
- ;l
- :
!! ll 1.'::
FIGURE SWPS-8 L
f=
,.t li o.ises 7s lt
j
.- w + ' s q q'-
, A wwm.eWm
,.o 4
y,
,.-..w
.m 4..3.
,,u,.,,.
w...,.,
.,s_,
s 9
l'.
il' J
- jf
- ef-i e
i i
t
- i i ?
I t
M$@@M t t i i
{ -
ooummr uoon a me Nonm soum A.a..n i
I l
ie i c:':. ;
i a
i -
omecnoN WHCH CoNmBUTES 89%
i i e i
- ' i k
i i
IM 3M AK'
-N I 3R
.. i. -
ii.
.. -_Ihl= ? l A M E-M ' EMM M A fE-4,,,,
e t,,
t e t 6 6 I i t I i'f
. i r 1
' 31KI RC.
3 CMD.
e e t
e t i l
I f f. l
. t ' 8 ef i
j j
t
' i t a
2
. a i psi I - A AU
, 6 i
- t i i 6 i l
l [-
. w.senaar Lean i t
- i i.
i
- iii, 3,
iif i I '
6 9, 4
l I
e g f !
t 1 f f i,
y,
6 t
- 1 em,.
.i e
t *.
2n I
iE1.5 I
i e
y a
f t t i e t e
f
- t 3
f I
1 I
^ '
4 i
I jj ifI. [J i
t e i_
I f
t f
,la i e i i t *
- i I
t 8
i e t i 6
i
['
i f
IiF_ 0 I
l
}-
t
}'
t i
[-
t i
e 3
I t
f f
i
,t 1
I I I
. i I I
e
'thm f i ra=E '
ile liPi 17_
A
- i
.,a I 2
Ida i _
i F], I,J.
ir.
-3v *
- W i
aGiEF i iWW 6
m I EP '
A8*"T' EE._X IE' i,
e i t t i i
! e t
i. t t.
t t I e
- ^
2_
7
?. su u m g,hKI:h r
i i
i i
{
l t
{
l t 4 4 1 i (
4 6$ 1 e
' e 4, e e e i
e r'.<;,
i e
- t t
- i t *
- t t t r
.e
?.
i a
i
, 6 e,
6 i
e
.'i*"
's.
f e
f
- l s
6,
e i I.
i e
J I
t i
m7 6 I I
i *
. i 6J rA i
! l8F a'
I i
t i i eiI P
t t I !
t 8 i,
e r
- ID J &-
t 1
M J
/
l i f I t 8 f
f F
T
\\
,/'
J t
e 8
! 1 4
f 1
P i
dI
(
J[
.a-I e
i I
e I
X f
_ mas **-
r I
t i
i f
f i
?
I i
t s'8" T
epa-I; a
l' y
/
=;p"'
t i
e 3
1 A'
l
. t l,
/
,P t I t e
t i
ij
- Lil. f1 e
/
I t
t 6
-t t
8
! 'sa a
!h It" t 1 l I i
{j i t t l t
u
- o
.ma e
i i i i i ii
- o
{;
f, i i 1
!.i l
CONSUMERS POWER COMPANY P
MIDLAND UNITS 1 AND 2 J
1.
i=
{}
}
t sERVCE WATER g
i '
t t t t t l 4 ?
' l I
I 8
9 PUMP STRUCTURE g
i i r i.,
o
, i 1*
SOUTH WALL
. i i
c i
. 1 i,
i j.
, i
- l;;l l,
FIGURE SWPS-9 4
., i..
,,t 4-G-190HO
- j
_a,_,, - _,..
l
-....-u.
l q
- u _ _ ~~ yy.myy
~.,y
- n l.y,
y.
_m w
h
(
1
' e i
e l
SEBMC LOAD E BASED ON THE l
l l
,l Ill
!lll l ~ ' '
, 'e
" - '->i
DOMINANT MODE IN THE NORTH SOUTH ',
t i'**
it I
i
.J DL4 l M iWALL e
DIRECTION WHICH CONTRIBUTES 89%
i
,, i i[
OF THE TOTAL NORTH SOUTH FORCE
'll,;,
g g y w 2 g g t' p (Y4 e e I o 1 it t i 4 l t i I t i * ' - e t f I
_t I r 1 f s
l l
?
(
t i
t t t t t t t I t I
i il i
Ml I E
E-I Emy gu mugn
, i j i
e i
i t 4 i l i ! t I
i i I t
it, t 1 f..
_'l f-
' 5'I A 1 IL - LJPA D i X
I t
i t t ' i
- 1 *
- I
- t I
i
! I f f f f f i
{
t i
D.
a Wh u)A D
' ?
j e
g j
' ' ' t i
4 i
e i t t*l t e e 1 11 AD 6 '
'52,11MI C s
e t
i e
i e
.i
., 4,
e 1
e I f f 9 I i
f I 1
f 6 i f I f
I i i i I 1 !
' ?
1 I f
~~~
e e e p
- e e e i
I 1
I l l I
t t i i i t l 9
. g 3 g
, s.
I l t 8
I i 6 i 8 j
_ i.
m j
t s
m.0 FU'Yoll'1 1TE
- __._E BJ E I E-MAMi
' l I
' f i I '
i i
t,
-?
t i
e I
I i
i f
I 8 9
I hj
. g:
f f 9 !
t I l
1 1 3 1 g
f I
I f 8 9 l
)
,,,, 4
. 8 t i
4 i l
1 f f 9 f f
h l t
(
l ?
I i i.
! i i
i..
i n.n e i e
e e
e t
i a
i i
f f
f l
- l
- 9 9 6
I e i t t 6
e i
g g
l l e t
)
9, i
. i i.
t 4
... ~
v,u
-e
=
,.&.s m.._ 1
~
,m i
we
/ '.
'?
E LZM t",N
'an
'.. /-
s
.s OU
- 1 L LEM b
i F
i 34.
4D M,,4.r i
O i
e im-
.f.
i
/=
t
. i
- i s e i
!, t I
I I I I l I
I I
i t)' t t
l I I t !
It l
/
t i i
- t i i 1--
' t i Ei e
! e I
t I p
\\
j
- 19;f7 N r t
i e
'/'e i
i i
x t
i t t 4 i
. x i
I
- i
\\
i. >
I i 6 i r i t t/
l t
j
? '
' t
't I
t a
, +
n
/
i i i x
e I
A t
s' i
e t ll i
I i f f
%J i
ma e f f
T 4
- 1 37 t
d.2m_
i
.f f
i i
i
+
..s i
j 1
I i
i j
.t I I t t
i ei l
I i
i t !
I t
i i f f I 8
- 53.0
. I i
t I !
g i g 9
e 3
{. g g j
, i, t i t..
f
, t it,., t
,ums
, -m i
l}
t i e CDNSUMERS POWER COMPANY
+
MIDLAND UNITS 1 AND 2 i t !
t I t
'I I
6
- t
',, I SERVICE WATEN
, t I i
- 4 t I 8 I i
! t 9 1 1 '
- t i l
i i t t I t
, i
, i PUMP STRUCTURE
. i l
llll
ll, l
l SOUTH WALL i
i,..,
e i
i,
i i t t i i ie I# i t ie i
- r
':ll
,ll;ll FIGURE SWPS-10 G 198842
- f!i
..r -
m-..
c.-
^
c
~.
75 2
Dg 60 - $-
I E
5 E
o E
Fei 45.8
/
/
30 f
U f
/
15
. p/
0 0
100 200 300 DIAL READING ON CN-973 CONE PENETROMETER (pounds per square inch) i, CONSUMERS POWER COMPANY l
MIDLAND UNITS 1 AND 2 l
sonweeE4Ea"Aoma,cour utm"!E^s"sS5docN"SII>n venseuggnc come t
FIGURE SWPS-11 G 1986 53
, - = =. = *.
- s
?'
1 60 U
n.<
o e
45 z-]
iii E*
i ms j
UE 30 Ig ba me Q 52 3
15 1
m m
j E
cr 0
0 10 20 30 40 50 DYNAMIC CONE PENETROMETER RESISTANCE N (blows per foot)
'S t
e r
i
?
CONSUMERS POWER COMPANY MIDLAND UNITS 1 AND 2 i
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN ESTIMATED ULTIMATE
{
BEARING CAPACITY ANO DYNAMIC i
CONE PENETROMETER RES4 STANCE FOR A 6-FOOT WIDE STRIP FOOTING j
FIGURE SWPS-12 G-1966-54
_. _ _ - _ - ~..
b 1
8 e
r i
i j>
I v
i I.
I l
k i
1 U
EXISTING NEW EXISTING PIER PIER PIER LEAN CONCRETE 2
j LEAN LEAN CONCRETE i
WDMAT 1
l CONCRETE MUDMAT 2
k 18" MAX ll i
i l
I l
l ZONE OF ZONE OF CONSUMERS POWER COMPANY INFLUENCE INFLUENCE MIDLAND UNITS 1 AND 2 1
ZONE OF INFLUENCE j
OF ADJACENT PIERO FIGURE SWPS-13
>f
- n.,
~
-