ML20112B468
| ML20112B468 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Waterford  |
| Issue date: | 01/04/1985 |
| From: | Churchill B LOUISIANA POWER & LIGHT CO., SHAW, PITTMAN, POTTS & TROWBRIDGE |
| To: | Johnson W, Kohl C, Wilber H NRC ATOMIC SAFETY & LICENSING APPEAL PANEL (ASLAP) |
| References | |
| CON-#185-987 OL, NUDOCS 8501100410 | |
| Download: ML20112B468 (77) | |
Text
{{#Wiki_filter:7 t
^Q l i
1Y RELATEm e , ,m~w, a:Nc i SHAW, PITTMAN, PoTTs & TROWBRIDGE a paaTNsaswie or poortescNAL compoM4 TONS 1800 M STRECT. N. W. ] WASHINGTON, D. C. 20036 l ( mauPAY o. ports, p.c. cuante s o. TrumiN. e c. bW r JowN u.envsoa.n* sown w. woor v TEuamT L, peTTMaN, e c, G "o#GE r. Toowegiogg, p.C. STEPHEN o. HyTTLg wtNTM Ro* N. S now*.m, P C. C. G\' GEomGE r. ate.mooMT, Jm.** wENoELIN a wMITE STANLEY M mamG
. p , ;> e % oavio J. CvNa,* oM C
- E.c'[a E"cRa:2Tirt."pd. Al".E*L i "^r"d'.%"c*' " C o " a f8C"si u ". "a"Twcws b'25'Aif's*E"uoce C
- "4'i'!T .,"?A?dC"#c'. "8:l"M '^o".'!,"s"Re. W2) 822-**m22-"** !*I"LT "?c Jf40Y " O s* O "o "1 a
Mf"1' "TTLtaa? "" "" !!'7J".." 3!^bff:,c. . m-- ###~'3"J2 *" 8 # "i"'**"'#^"" sonN e. nuiNataNoce ec. onuce w. cwuncueLL. p c. w Tias r.vnaverso-oiaz. p.c. 85 vectomia a. prame=s. p.c. h"'4Do A10 :21 -- L a- ~c ~ ~u - ra'D'"'cm L. MLEIN ",'~' [o",'oo-~"'Ma5"2Caum TD hi*nT*NI"m*E4"LL'YE' "*' "' saw t. sitecno. p c. dAv"25pST"i!D.',' serrEnv L. vastpoe, p "c?' .c. - (aoa) eaa-sofa IIEi Em"o"J'Ea'EnSNo rLLrNa racocL q','[",',v gg,, e j. a.g gen s
,L,,,,,,
I^o"YoI'v"E[N's2[cb raro omasNea ec. ens"aE"$'i[EkNoteToa 0FF ;7y wanov w. i,6asspecort E ' 'gte, r.le 02E'S o8'eLLI#a"* Twomas c. w d h'fet,f,,s"w',' L';* ,,, ora j g; - f ggggu s NaNINIsI'p**nE[a!In., e c w"LU'[I E' e" LEO **" " ouaEr*cYs"r $2,$" y 's2".5e **" wamesavogNeLICR,p C. CMARLEs w. MoNTaNGC e33(sNw'Li.w<
- w. F* t w wsw) MICH AEL M. MaooIN r sowooiN Taase.
***"~'"^*'^",, !""'No';; l'^o*: "s">"c' d5'", T- 2^hh **. **""Tt".* ~st.o *J""'"
I"i"*!#n"7,1;Ge. :"1M *^o'7EoM -
'"c "A*oi. ita" :177,".*T:,111;&"*",.
^na? ",ct'a*o ,oM ,,
M'7"Jn "n",'A".% e. "80' Jot *f.!Ir/A-aN v'"
- a'^ orr'c' !"c "'*Jafo" 8"'" "*- u""'o'"wistn",i'#"
di!!" ku"'c',!.'!"c * *- EEE 7"'"atcTo"c'Ja" 'So' *" c"'o" *"' OIII" tile""*"" 2^24?Eo"2^." orc.c. i ","#?/h,!ic io, a c.. MC??'s.a'n's'*" - n 'aa v'a m a'^ 22 =2 **".,!N,?,1*J'L7?.**"**
"s JT"!."'J"d"c'.7a':.' lN JoMN r.otaLY.
- acus *Ts. m viseena
- e. scott CusTEn.Jm.
RICMapo s. StaTTY couNscL January 4, 1985 ...T..so,..cvo.4L .... (202) 822-1051 Christine N. Kohl W. Reed Johnson Administrative Judge Administative Judge Chairman, Atomic Safety and Atomic Safety and Licensing Licensing Appeal Board Appeal Board U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 Washington, D.C. 20555 Howard A. Wilber ~ Administrative Judge Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Board U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 In the Matter of Louisiana Power and Light Company (Waterford Steam Electric Statign, Unit 3) Docket No. 50-382 0 /_
Dear Administrative Judges:
Enclosed for your information are the following documents relating to the Waterford 3 basemat which have been submitted by Applicant to the NRC Staff.
- 1. Letter ~ dated November 13, 1984 from K. W. Cook to D. M. Crutchfield transmitting Appendix 6 of the Muenow Report which was provided to you on October 29,-1984.
850110y*10850104M *
?" ^ J<o
4 - SHAW. PITTMAN, PoTTs & TROWCRIDGE A PARTNERSHIP OP PROFESSIONAL CORPORATIONS Administrative Judges Page Two- - January 4, 1985
- 2. Letter dated. November 28, 1984 from K. W. Cook'to D. M. Crutchfield transmitting " Summary Evaluation -
Structural Significance of Basemat Nondestructive Testing Results," Revision 2, November 27, 1984.
- 3. Letter dated November 30, 1984 from K. W. Cook to D. M. Crutchfield transmitting requested design /
analysis information.
- 4. Letter dated December 7, 1984 from K. W. Cook to G. W. Knighton regarding monitoring and surveillance programs and confirmatory analyses.
- 5. Letter dated January 3, 1985 from K. W. Cook to D. M.
Crutchfield regarding basemat crack mapping. Respectfully submitted, l~k uce W.N hurchill Counsel for Applicant Enclosures cc: Service List attached (:
e i UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Before the Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Board In the Matter of )
)
LOUISIANA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY ) Docket No. 50-382
)
(Waterford Steam Electric ) Station, Unit 3) ) SERVICE LIST Christine N. Kohl Sheldon J. Wolfe Administrative Judge Administrative Judge Chairman, Atomic Safety and Chairman, Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Board Licensing Board U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 Washington, D.C. 20555 W. Reed Johnson Harry Foreman Administrative Judge Administrative Judge Atomic Safety and Licensing Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Board Board U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Director, Center for Population Washington, D.C. 20555 Studies Box 395, Mayo Howard A. Wilber University of Minnesota Administrative Judge Minneapolis, MN 55455 Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Board Walter H. Jordan U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Administrative Judge Washington, D.C. 20555 Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Sherwin E. Turk, Esquire 881 West Outer Drive Office of the Executive Oak Ridge, TN 37830 Legal Director U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Docketing & Service Section (3) Washington, D.C. 20555 Office of the Secretary U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Atomic Safety and Licensing Washington, D.C. 20555 Appeal Board Panel
-U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Atomic Safety and Licensing Washington, D.C. 20555 Board Panel U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commisst.n Washington, D.C. 20555 n
e k LP&L S3rvic3 Lict-ASLAB Page Two . Mr. Gary Groesch 2257 Bayou Road New Orleans, LA 70119 Carole H. Burstein, Esq. 445 Walnut Street New Orleans, LA- 70118 Lynne Bernabei, Esq.
~
Government Accountability Project 1555 Connecticut Avenue, N.W. Suite 202 Washington, DC 20009 . O 4 0 I e
.e 6
- LOUISIANA f ,.2 ce u nano. S m er POWER & LIGHT / P O. BOX 600s . NEW CateANS LOutSIANA 70174 . (5041 368-2345 Ufu$1svS November 13, 1984 W3F84-3214 3-A1.16.07 A4.05 Director, Nuclear Reactor Regulation Attention: Mr. D. M. Crutchfield, Assistant Director for Safety Assessment Division of Licensing U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C. 20555
SUBJECT:
WATERFORD 3 SES ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ON BASENAT HAIRLINE CIACKS
Dear Mr. Crutchfield:
At a neeting on November 2, 1984 held in the USNRC offices in Bethesda, Maryland, your staff requested additional information concerning the basemat cracking at Waterford 3. The purpose of this letter is to provide the re-quested information. Enclosed is Appendiz No. 6 prepared by Muanow and Associates, Inc. entitled,
" Cross Sections Illustrating The Most Probable Crack Depth And Orientation For Internal Discontinuities Under the RCB And Their Relationship To Cracks On The East And West Sides Of The RCB." The cross-hatch shaded areas represent the vertical face of each crack and its associated depth in feet. The "long" continuous cracks are indicated by vertical shading or cross-hatch shading from upper left to lower right. The "short" non-continuous cracks are indi- . cated with cross-hatch shading from upper right to lower lef t. Over shading as shown on Crack Nos. 4 and 7 indicate two (2) cracks (one continuous and one non-continuous) in close proximity, on the order of 18 inches, to each other.
The dashed cross-hatch shading on Crack No. 3 indicates Muenow and Associates, Inc. "best estimate" hypothesis for Crack No. 3 because it does not emerge on the east side of the RCB. During the November 2,1984 meeting your staf f requested plan views for the seven (7) major cracks under the RCE both from a " conservative" and a "best estimate" perspective. Af ter careful re-evaluation and re-analysis of the non-destructive test results it was determined that the transducer data is based on substantial and confirmed readings therefore only the "most probable" crack maps are provided. The enclosed "most probable" illustrations are
. considered by Nuenow and Associates, Inc. to represent both the " conservative" and "best estimate" view of the crack depths and orientations.
B
r ' D. M. Crutchfield W3P84-3214 Page 2 We trust that the information provided adequately addresses your information request, however, should you have any questions or wish to discuss this estter further, please do not hesitate to contact me. Very truly yours, f M. M4 . K. W. Cook Nuclear Support & Licensing Manager KWC:WAC:pe Enclosures cc: E. L. Blake, W. M. Stevenson, G. W. Knighton, J. H. Wilson, J. P. Knight, G. L. Constable. J. T. Collins i i l l t .
.. . _ _ _ . . . _ . . . _ . _ . . _ _ _ . _ . _ . _ _ _ _ . . _ _ .__ _. , . _ _ _ . _ _ _.._______________________n
4 bec: 1. S. Leddick, F. J. Drummond, D. E. Dobson, R. P. Barkhurst, T. F. Gerrets, W. A. Cross (LP&L Bethesda Office), R. A. Savoie, Project Files, Administrative Support.
-w- -+ .c,_ _ _ _ _ , . ,.
meme andad>>m->, One. inannus me monoastwuctw nstne 3900 HUNTCUFF DR. CMesu2TTT.NORTM CA80uma 5211 00al 377mt . 0048 542 2223 APPENDIX NO. 6 CROSS SECTIONS ILLUSTRATING THE NUST PROBABLE CRACK DEPTH
- AND ORIENTATION FOR INTERNAL' DISCONTINUITIES UNDER THE RCB AND THEIR RELATIONSHIP T0' CRACKS ON THE EAST AND WEST SIDES
' ' '0F T.H E R C B i
l l ' a
i I i l 1 i m m N
/ .
. 6
% ~ ~ __ ___ f ~~~ 2 f
l
- -~_._ .- --
f --- _ ._ &
- e
-~~
l
- L I i
i I
. MUDOW AND ASTICATES, INC. CHARIDITE, NORIH CA110 LINA IIXIISIANA l'OWER AND LIGfr WATDU10RD NO. 3 M30E31RlLTIVE TEST EVALUATIGi OF B,VSE MAT CDtCRETE CRACX DEFIH NO ORIDfrATION GRAPHIC SHEET 60' TRANSDt.CER 1
284 l.
RCB y NORTH 300TH WALL CENTE RINE 35 45 55* 65
. 30 40 50 60 73 25 l l 1 1 1 I l l I 1 -
\' -
-k-AA \ \ \_\d \ \ \ \-V-A-N-A-\ \ \ \ \ \ \ ', l
.j --
\ \ \ \ \ _ t. t_ W,- \ 'g 'g 'g 'g \ \ \, i \ \ \ \ i WEST I '
' M '
~~
12' SIDE E? h
\ / /// / s's'/ s'/ / s n e,ROSS SECTIONS ILLUSTRATING PROPOSED CRACK DEPTHS NORTH SOUTH UNDER RCB AND THEIR CONNECTION WITH CRACKS ON THE CENTE (LINE v EAST AND WEST SIDES RC8 75e 70e 65e 60y 55e50g45ggg53g, dALL
. I I i 1 i i 1 .I I Q\,W
$${-Q$-\M w __'
n '~_ \. \- N--\T.-
~
MS~ ~ - ~ ^ '- _/ 12'
~~'- - ' ~- -~~ ~ -~
EAST 1 SIDE
~
\
LOUISIANA POWER AND LIGHT CO. WATERF0ftD N0 3 Scale Icm=5 feet Each horizdntal line equals Shaded areas represent muenow and associate's, inc. one foot of depth vertical face of crack charlotte, north carolina Darkened line at 10 feet of and depth in feet depth is top of lower R/F CRACK NO. 6 3 .
4 RCB y NORTN liOUTH WALL.
CENTE.tLINE 35 45 55 65 30 40 50 60 70 5 Ii 1 i i l l l I kMk%
g 'g g.'g 'g g ' ---k - - WEST SIDE
'k '
,,WA 'N 12'
,S 's ' ,' / / , '1 % %
\--- F,'/,',','ffm ' -
i 1 CROSS SECTIONS . ILLUSTRATING PRnPOSED CRAEX DEPTHS l NORTH SOUTH UNDER RCB AND THEIR CONNECTION WITH CRACKS ON THE 1 CENTE (LINE - v , EAST AND WEST SIDES - RCB 75e 70e 65e 60e 55e WALL I I I I I 50g45ggg5)i, I I J ! 55 55-5515 2 3 3'. -b .'.: 55 z-3k x C _. I ~ ~
~ -
j E l m _. _wpe_ex
/ . /
t , ... _. .
+ _ _ _ _ _ . . _ . . . . . . . . _ _ _ . _ . . m .
AY
. . . . ...... ..-. ;~ _=.
_ _ . _ //////// '/fA \ LOUISIANA POWER AND LIGHT CO. WATERFORD N0 3 Scale Icm=5 feet Each horizo'ntal line equals Shaded areas represent muenow and associates, inc. one foot of depth vertical face of crack charlotte, north carolina Darkened line at 10 feet of and depth in feet depth is top of lower R/F CRACK NO. 2 a
o . RCB b NORTH 'iOUTH WALL CENTE tLINE 35 45 55 65
. 30 40 50 60 73 75 l l 1 1 1 L l I l, . l- . -
S
, ' 'sm \s'gs 'ss -\ 'y \ \ _. _ _ -\-A-\--\;-\
'g s\ s\ 's
_y. 1- s \y s ggggggggggggggg;g,g
\ \ 'g 'g 'g 'g \ 'g 'g 'g 'g 'g 's s'gs 's s s s s s s s s s s s \ \ 1 s
\, l f s a if
' ~
WEST M \ \ \ \ \ ', \ \ \ \ \ ', \ ',', i x \ 12' SIDE (
' 1 \ \ 's 's \ '\ \ \
's'
\\
_,,.,x -m 'A CROSS SECTIONS ILLUSTRATING PROPOSED CRACK DEPTHS NORTH SOUTil UNDER RCB AND THEIR CONNECTION WITH CRACKS ON THE CENTE ILINE v EAST AND WEST SIDES RCB 65e 60e 55e 50445ggg530e dALL 75e
'0e
~
. l- . l .1 I I I I I I I
' g \ 'g 'g 'g \ \QM 7
~f..\._\ \ \ 'g.,_'g 'g 'g h,'g, 'g . , ,,
'g 'g 'gr.'g,-'g,'g, 'g 'g 'g 'q 'g \)
, - }
( 1 \ \ \ \~~ \ \ \ \ % _ _. \A\ \ \ \ \ \ s ' m 12' M \\\\\' - ' EAST
, g'g'g'g'g'g i V .
TV . . _ . . . . . _ . _ . _ SIDE W- _._ ._ ns 7 / v n
.- ----1
/////////A
--1 1
1 ?
! LOUISIANA POWER AND LIGHT CO.
WATERFORD N0 3 Scale Icm=5 feet Each horizo'ntal line equals Shaded areas represent muenow and associates, Inc. one foot of depth vertical face of crack charlotte, north carolina Darkened line at 10 feet of and depth in feet depth is top of lower R/F CRACK NO. I l i I
O s RC8 b NORTN :iOUTH WALL CENTE tLINE 35 45 55 65
. 30 40 50 60 70 75 l 1 I i i l_. ; -s -11 i 1. 1 -
_g = g _y g_ - v v . - - - _g% gyyggy3 1 -\- $ g g' . .e xe ,x - vi r v - - \- \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ ' m-- 1 - m .--. s s 1 s w-- 1 s s 1 s s 1 s s WEST --
's A-A ', i \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ ', \ \ \ \ \ 'M.1's \ \ ', 's i' 12' SIDE -
A " k~ k\ -
\ \ \ 'I's t \ \ \ \ \s \ \ 't _\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ 's \ \ \ 's 't
( y my 1 1 s _ s .x_w - - -
- - g CROSS SECTIONS ILLUSTRATING PROPOSED CRACK DEPTHS NORTH SOUTH UNDER RC8 AND THEIR CONNECTION WITH CRACKS ON THE CENTE (L I'N E v EAST AND WEST SIDES RCB 75e 65e 55e 506 46Iag5303 70e 60) dAll l l l 1- 1 I I I l 1 Y-A-N--N-X- _-
\-\-\-A-X _\_g-pf 's N 's ; \ \ \ i; g
*=h=\-N \--A -N- V -\ \ -s N
- ^ '
s s s s -- - m '- 1V \_\.~ \ \ \ \ '< \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ ' ' - 1 x s 1 s s s s 1 x .1 v1. x x 1 s s s 1-s x x x x s s s s s s s s s ' s-12* N-\ \ \ \ 'c-A--V--\ \ \ \ ~ \ -\ -\- \,--b\--\- \~-\ \ ' 's
\xs\ s
\ '- -- m' M \_\ D EAST
\ '.\'s,7' s s s
.'J\~\1_\ 1\ \ \ \ \-\ \
~1 s s 1 s s s s 1- s 1 1 p'
-N- W ~-
-\- A--VS-' "
's i SIDE
' "Q\ .\. \ \ _\_-)--\--L'
\
LOUISIANA POWER AND LIGHT CO. WATERFOBD N0 3 Scale Icm=5 feet Each horizo'ntal line equals Shaded areas represent muenow and associateI, Inc. one foot of depth vertical face of crack charlotte, north carolina Darkened line at 10 feet of and depth in feet depth is top of lower R/F
- CRACK NO. 7 8
RCB b NORTH :iOUTH . WALL CENTE tLINE 35 45 55 65
. 30 40 50 ~ 60 73 IS I I I I I L l l I i ..
_ _ . _ _ _ _ 'A-A \ \ \ \-\ x \ \ \ \ ! ( A\\\\\\\\\\\ l WEST ,,f',',3% \'\A\N\\N\\ 12' SIDE -S" ' ' ' ' ' N "x \ \ \ 's .X \ \ \ ' q y,',',',',',',',',N x', ' '. '. \ \ -. CROSS SECTIONS ILLUSTRATING PROPOSED CRACK DEPTHS NORTH SOUTH UNDER RCB AND THEIR CONNECTION WITH CRACKS ON THE CENTE tLINE y EAST AND WEST SIDES RCB 65e 55e 75e 70e 60e- 504 45ggg53 , WALp i l I i i i iiii A\,\,\ \x'V,-yYX;'AMT 2 -
- -\;$igy\[NQ\'i ' i
-\'\V-3 . gag 4
s s 1 s s 1 1 1 1 s 1 s s s - -- 12' ' ' \ \ \' '\-\-\~~\ Y \'\ u' EAST A \d i y' - U\ '\ '\'\'\ ' 7 N T \'b' --- -- - - t SIDE
~y g s LOUISIANA POWER AND LIGIT CO.
WATERFO.RD N0 3 Scale Icm=5. feet Each horizontal line equals Shaded areas represent muenow and associateh, inc. one foot of depth vertical face of crack charlotte, north carolina Darkened line at 10 feet of and depth in feet depth is top of lower R/F CRACK NO. 3 s
RCB b NORTH 'iOUTH -
~
WALL CENTE ttINE 35 45 55
' 65
. 30 40 50 60 70 i l I i.I ! 75
' L I I 1 -
S s\ \ \ --\ X
\_\ \-4 gyMh-s m - m m . ^ s s s s l
i
' - ewe'1 e'- e' ^e's x - '
4 1 s s s s \ 't \\\'\\' \ s,
' w, M 'A 's \ s m \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ ', 's 's X *
-k'~ ' ~ ' ',\ At sk \ ' ', \ M i X ', \ \ \ \ \ \ '^ L \ ', ', ', \ \ \ ', ', '. 1 WEST SIDE
~
\ 's Y- \\ 's '\\ \ \Y '
12' ( _ _ wy-g 'y , 3 s x x .y N 's 't' u .\ t' .\ 's 's \
. t -
, CROSS SECTIONS ILLUSTRATING PROPOSED CRACK DEPTHS NORTH SOUTH UNDER RCB AND THEIR CONNECTION WITH CRACKS ON THE EAST AND WEST SIDES RCB 65e 75e 70e 60e 55e 50g45{gg5$0e #4LL l l I I I I I I l 1 5' [ $'~ ~~~~ [h f
- -% 'i d d ' ^-
12' - lt\ f \8 ^ A ,1 -- - - . v Pi--\ -\_y' -- EAST tw- ' h \ \ ~ 1 ~ 7- -\ \ V SIDE V -
- 'A -\ X _\ \--\--\ '_ #
t
\
LOUISIANA POWER AND LIGlT CO. WATERF0ftD NO 3 Scale Icm=5 feet Shaded areas represent Each horizo'ntal line equals muenow and associa teh, inc. One foot of depth vertical face of crack charlotte, north carolina Darkened ifne at 10 feet of and depth in feet depth is tcp of lower R/F CRACK NO. 4 3
e
~
RC8 b HORTH 100TH - WALL CENTE tLINE - 35 45 55
' 65 30 40 50 60 70 1I I t i l 25 -
i I L i
\' '\ \ \ \ \ \-\ \ \ 's ' .
~
's \- \ -V-V-\ \ \ \ i\ \- \\ \-M _' \v1 'g \-\ \ \ 's\ \ \ \ g'g x \\ \\ 's\ i\-\'s \ X-\ _\ \ \ \ \
1 1 's 1 1 \-\ \ \ \ \
-\ \ M '\ '\T'\ \' \%\ '\' W \ \ '\ '\A'\\ \_'\ NMN'\ '\ '\ \ '\ '\ \ '\ '\ '\ 'i
' k hs \ R '\ \',\' I UN ,
N x'\'\'\ \'s i \;
' ' ' 12' s e - . - .
CROSS , SECTIONS . ILLUSTRATING PROPOSED CRAEK DEPTHS NORTH SOUTH UNDER RC8 AND THEIR CONNECTION ' LITH CRACKS ON THE CENTE tL1HE - v EAST AND WEST SIDES RCB 65e 75e 70e 60e 55e 50g45{gg5g, JALL x_ x -g 1 1 1 1- I i i i I (_g -g _g_ _ _ .g.. , , ,. ..g._g _s x . :_--c\-\-\ q.y x vx_\q\ \
.x -x- -g_x..g +g._i ,. x y s, x x._g___ y 3 1 x s s x x _1 \ \ \ \ g \s 1 s1 s s X g -g 12* M\\\\-Y v s -
1 1 e3 x s s
- \~\- \ ~ \ ~' ' ' \ - \ ~\~-\-\
x x x s
\~~v' . ' A- %
1 1
\\ A- 4\-N--\--\-------
& &s 1s -{'
EAST N--V-\-\N s\ #s-s 1- 1 ms s s , , s - s s s 4--\ \ \ --i y
- M \ \ - \ \ \ N--\ -V ~ -
- %~b.\ ~ ~\%s-A -\-\ g SIDE W\ \ \ \ 'm X -\ \ \ p-- \
LOUISIANA POWER AND LIGHT CO. WATERFORD N0 3 Scale Icm=5 feet Each horizo'ntal line equals Shaded areas represent muenow and associates, inc. one foot of depth vertical face of crack and depth in feet charlotte, north carolina Darkened line at 10 feet of depth is top of lower R/F CRACK NO. 5 ?
*
- i y
.0UISIANA < - e ====== '
T O W E R & Lt G H T / w- om - or MM November 28, 1984 7a* 74 ooce * (.oal m.m. essa W3P84-3319 3-A1.16.07 A4.05-Director of Nuclear Isactor Regulation AITN: Mr. Dennis M. Crutchfield Asst. Director for Safety Assessment F'7'O Division of Licensing NUC'.UAii 6& ODDS U.S. Nuclear Eagulatory Commission Washington, D. C. 20555 DEC 6 1984 d
SUBJECT:
[/ WATERFORD 3 SES ILNL ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ON BASEMAT __ BAIRLINE CIACES Inferences: Letter W3P84-3142 K. W. Cook to D. M. Crutchfield, dated November 7, 1984.
Dear Mr. Crutchfield:
The purpose of this letter is to supplement the-additional information provided in the referenced letter. This internation was requested by the NRC and Brookhaven National Laboratory personnel at a meeting in Bethesda, Maryland on November 20, 1984 i Attached is Revision 2 of the report entitled " Summary Evaluation Structural Significance of Basemat Nondestructive Testing Rasults". This revision addresses > guestions discussed among parties at the November 20, 1984 seating. Further infor-mation regarding the degree of confidence in NDT results, probable causes of cracks, i i mechantmas slip resistance, for etc. deep narrow cracking, construction controls, shear considerations, Louintana Power & Light remains firmly convinced that the cracks, as defined by NDT have no adverse affect on the structural integrity of the basemat. The basemat is fully capable of functioning as required by the design in accordance with the pertinent codes. Very truly yours,
- f. /0. N Gy K. W. Cook Nuclear Support & Licensing Manager KWCapic ATTACHMENT m
- , - - - - - .----,,----n- ,---,__,,_.,.,.-..,,,.,__.,,,.m,.-, . , ,.-.,,_,.,.e,- _-w,,,__...,,-_-n--_
W3P84-3319 Nr. D.M. Crutchfield
. . Page 2 cc: E.L. Biska, W.M. Stevenson, G.W. Knighton, J.M. Knight, J.H. Wilson G.L. Constable. Project Files, Administrative Support, Licensing Library
- l 1
1 O
l
\
l i l LOUISIANA POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY
%ETERFORD STEAM ELECTRIC STATION UNIT NO. 3 -
SUMMARY
EVALUATION STAUCTURAL SIGNIFICANCE OF BASEMAT NONDESTRUCTIVE TESTING RESULTS REVISION 28 November 27, 1984 Ebasco Services Incorporated - l Two World Trade Center l New York, NY 10048 l CIncludes revisions, clarifications and additions to the Revision 1 Report of November 1984 based on the November 20, 1984 seating with NRC staff and Brookhaven National Laboratory. I
..-.ms.--, .,,,-,,.,y,., -
- . - . ..- .7--.-y,, 3,,m, vy- ,-,y. , . . - , w~,,+-w.-..---.-,--,-+-,-+-.-
. LOUISIANA POWER AND LIGNT COMPANY WATERFORD STEAM ELECTRJ.C STATION UNIT No. 3 t
SUMMARY
EVALUATION STRUCTURAL SIGNIFICANCE OF BASEMAT '
, NONDESTRUCTIVE TESTING RESULTS l
TABLE OF CONTENTS
.F,,agg 1.0 FURPOSE 1
2.0 SCOPE - 1
3.0 BACKGROUND
1 4.0 NUT RESULTS
SUMMARY
2 5.0 F10BABLE CAUSES OF CRACKS 9 6.0 SIGNIFICANCE OF CRACKS AND EFFECTS ON STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY 13
7.0 CONCLUSION
23 REFERENCES 24 , TABLE 1 -
SUMMARY
OF CRACKS WEST SIDE OF RCB TABLE 2 -
SUMMARY
OF CRACKS EAST SIDE OF RCE TABLE 3 -
SUMMARY
OF CRACKS BENFJL7 RCB i TABLE 4 -
SUMMARY
OF' CRACKS IN RC3 WALLS
' FIGt1t3 1 - BASEMAT CRACKS - PLAN VIEW l FIGUP.2 2 - BASEMAT CURVAIURE (From Reference 2).
l l APPENDIX 1 - REINFORCING STEEL STRESSES AS DEFINED BY CRACK WIDTN (CALCULATION) 5 t - 11 i
, .. . _ - . _ - . - . - . . -- - - . - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ' - - - ^ 'E
- ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
L
- . - s .e ; ;,n. ..d .Ta ~
~~
ETIRFORD STEAM ELECTRIC STATION
)
, UNIT NO. 3 .
I
SUMMARY
EVALUATION STRUCTURAL SIGNIFICANCE OF RASEMAT f NONDESTRUCTIVE TESTING RESULTS l k 1.0 PURPOSE The purpose of this report is to review the results of nondestructive ' testing (NUT) of Nuclear Plant Island Structure (NFIS) baseast cracks ' t
- and to evaluate their significance with respect to the structural !
integrity of the NPIS. 2.0 SCOPE The scope of this report covers the following:
- 1. Review and interpret data and results of NDT related to basemat as presented in the Muenow and Associates, Inc. Report of October 1984 and Appendiz 6 of that report which was issued November 13, 1984.
- 2. Evaluate the significance of the cracks on the structural integrity of the NPIS basemat.
- 3. Study the crack patterns as defined by NDT, such as inclination, depth, spacing, and width in order to determine the probable causes of baseest and wall cracks.
3.0 BACKGROUND
An NDI program of the basemat cracks was performed by Muenow and Associates, Inc. to Jetermine the following:
- 1. Inclination of the cracks - whether the basemat cracks are vertical and/or diagonally inclined.
1 O
_ _ - = . - .__ . . _ . - - - - - -
, 3.Q BACKGROUND (Cent'd)
. 2. Estimato d:pth, length, and width cf the basemat crccks.
As an auxiliary study, the depth of some cracks of the Reactor Containment Building (RCB) wall surfaces above the basemat was svaluated. .
- r This NM examination was performed at the Waterford 3 Site mainly during the months of July and August 1984 4.0 NDT RESULTS SID9 FART l
4.1 CRACKS IN BASEMAT (Tables 1, 2 and 3) The majority of the cracks are oriented in an east-west direction and located within a distance of thirty (30) feet from the east-west centerline of the RC3. Based on their appearance and nearness to each other they are grouped into 10 families:* 4 on the east side of the RCS and 6 on the west side of the RC3. Seven cracks beneath the RCE were also identified by NDT, four of these cracks (Numbers 1, 4, 5 and
- 7) appear to coincide with east-west cracks on either side of the RC3 and probably are interconnected (Figure 1). .
Cther cracks are oriented in a northeast / southwest or northwest / southeast direction (diagonal cracks) and they are grouped into a total of 7 families. Of these families, 4 were evaluated by NDT: 3 in the northeast and 1 in the northwest corners of the RC3. These cracks are also referred to as East or West Diagonal cracks in the Muenow and Associates, Inc. Report. Two of the cracks beneath the RCB (Numbers 2 and 6) appear to coincide with the East or West Diagonal cracks and probably are interconnected (Figure 1).
*The grouping by families is somewhat arbitrary and intended only to present 1
an overview of the sat cracking. No analyses or conclusions are dependent ' upon the grouping. 2
4.1 NAIRLINE CRACKS OF BASDfAT (Cest'd) One crack, number 3, appears to be independent of all others and is relatively short in length. ' Ebasco review indicates that within the above families of cracks, the data show most cracks originate from the' top surface of the 'basemat. I (top cracks), that a few noncontinuous cracks originate from the bottoa surface of the basemat (bottom cracks), and a small number lie within the middle portion of the basemat (siddle cracks). l l Tables 1 and 2 present a summary of the NDT anmination of the basemat cracks on each side of the RCB. This includes length, depth, group spacing and inclination of cracks which originate from the top surface of the baseest. In addition, a summary of cracks in the middle or near the bottom of the baseest is included. Table 3 presents a summary of cracks beneath the RC3. These cracks are oriented mainly in the E-W direction. 4.'1.1 Depth East-West Cracks outside RC5 i The depth of the top cracks varies depending on the locations of the cracks. Generally, individual cracks do not extend into the bottom region of reinforcing steel located approximately ten (10) feet depth from the top surface. The neutral axis for positive bending (tension at top surface of the basemat) is calenlaced to be approximately 10'-6 from the top surface. The total basemat thickness is 12'-0. The bottom cracks are found mostly in the vicinity of the east-west centerline of the RCB and their depths range from 2 to 3 feet, naasured from the bottom of the baseast. Within this area a possible local interconnection between top and bottom cracks is indicated for Cracks J and Km. 3 _ . _ _ _ _ _ , _ _ _ _ _ __c_ n
. . 4.1.1 Depth (Cont'd)
East-West Cracks outside RCB (Cont'd) ;
)
The middle cracks are randomly distributed. In general, they are not interconnected with top or bottom cracks.. . Cracks Beneath the RCB i The interpretation of the crack depths beneath the RCB reflects the i difficulties of ext == Hag the NDE technique to such long distances. Differing interpretations have identified these cracks as being noncontinuous and variable in depth, and also as being continuous and rather continuously extending to near the bottom of the basemat. Dissonal Cracks (Northeast / Southwest and Northwest / Southeast) The depth of these cracks, which in plan view run diagonally to the plant grid,~is generally less than six (6) feet. A few bottom and niddle cracks are present, however, there are no indications of interconnection between the top and bottom cracks. 4.1.2 Inclination All cracks in the basemat evaluated by nit! are essentially vertical. In Page 2, of the Muenow and Associates, Inc. report it is stated that "there is no evidence of diagonal (shear) cracks; either occurring singularly or as a connection between two individual cracks within the areas investigated." l 4.1.3 Lensch The cracks are variable in their length. The east-west cracks outside the RCE extend between the exterior wall of the ECB and the wet cooling tower walls. In the one case where visible and accessible for NDT examination, family VI-cracks U, Y, X, the cracks extend to the area of the external walls of the NPIS. The diagonal cracks extend from the 4 o
. .. 4.1.3 Lanath (Cont'd) I a
l
. i
, exterior wall of the RCB but end well before they reach the exterior l
. wall of the NPIS. When'the cracks intersect with a construction joint l they go through the construction joint. It appears that there are !
6 cracks that extend from the east to the west side of the. NPIS basemat since many~of the individual families'1ocated in three areas.(east, west sad beneath the RCB) coincide and are probably joined. 4.1.4 Specins l The east-west crack families have an average spacing of approximately 11'-0. The diagonal (north-east / southwest or northwest / southeast) crack families have an average spacing of approximately 15'-0 at the l exterior wall of the RC3. 4.1.5 Width The NDI evaluation has estimated the crack width to be less than
.007 in. and all the cracks are tight. Our recent field surface esasurement of crack L, done coincidentally with NDT examinations found .
the nazimum crack width to be .003 in. The crack was observed to be filled with laitance and there was no actual open crack. Our field surface asasurements in 1977 found the crack widths beneath the RC3 to be between .002 and .005 in. Cracks of this width are coanonly referred to as " hairline" cracks. Field measurements were made using a i Bausch & Losh optical comparator. 4.1.6 Evaluation of Confidence in NDT Results As a result of a consideration of the techniques used in performing the NDT examination of the basemat cracks and the procedures utilized in evaluating the data derived from the NDT with respect to confidence in l the accuracy of the reported crack information we conclude:
- 1. Outside RCB l
l l l The ability to work close to the surface crack indication leads to a high confidence level in the location and orientation of the 0 n
... 4.1.6 Eveluation cf Cnnfidenco in NDT Rnsults Cent'd) tested cracks. A somewhat lower, but still high, confidence level is associated with the location of the bottom of the cracks and a slightly lower confidence in the crack width measurements.
"a. Location and'crientation of Crack The location and orientation of the cracks is dependent upon the accuracy of the location of the transducer and the accuracy and precision of the measurement of time. Since both of these can be, and were, closely controlled and not subject to great variation or subjective interpretation there is high confidence that the location and orientation of the cracks are as defined by the NDT.
l
- b. Depth of Cracks Due to the divergence of the sound waves used in the testing, a precision of 1 ft in the location of the bottom of the cracks is recognized by Muenow(1) . This, since the cracks generally extend down from the top of the sat, leads to a conclusion that the actual bottom of the crack can be as such as one foot above -
the botton as defined in the Muenow Report, where the latter is defined at the center of the diverging cone. Therefore, the depth of the cracks outsi'de the RC3 are no deeper than and
- . could be as much as one foot less than the values reported by Muenow.
- c. Width of Crack The measurement of crack width is not an exact measurenant according to the Muenow report, but is an estimate only.
Muenow assigns an accuracy of 20% to the value he reports ( $ 7 ails), which essentially means he is reporting the cracks (1) Muenow Report, p. 16 6
. 4.1.6 Evrluation of Cenfidence in NDT Raruits Cent'd)
- c. Width of Crack (Cont'd) to be less than 8-1/2 mils. This together with the independent measurement of the surface crack width of 3 mils gives confidence that the cracks are all quite narrow (on the order of 5 mils). )
1 i l
- 2. Beneath RC3 The technique used beneath the RCB involving greater distances from !
transducer to crack and requiring several reflections from the top and bottom of the sat results in a lower confidence level for some of the results derived therefrom. I i a. Location and Orientation of Cracks l l The location and orientation of cracks using a 60* transducer and several reflections from the mat top and bottom is dependent upon the accuracy of the location of the transducer sad the seasurement-of time. Since these were closely controlled, the confidence in the NDT defined location and orientation is high.
- b. Depth of Crack The confidence level in the validity of the data defining the depth of cracks beneath the RC3 is substantially below that for the cracks outside the RC3.- There appears to be a large
, measure of subjective analysis and intuition injected into the interpretation of the raw data to determine the crack depth. i i r 7 l
-___.________.__e,- _--,,,e..
4.1.6 Evaluation af Crafidenco in NDT R7sultn Cent'd)
- 2. Beneath RC3 (Cont'd)
- b. Depth of Crack (Cont'd) ,
' As with the 45' transducer data, the divergence of th's sound -
waves causes a diminishing of the precision of the data. A 2 to 2-1/2 ft precision is quoted by Muenow which any be enhanced by inte'4retation of frequency content and amplitude. The precision quoted is open to question and the nature of the mahmacements is not clearly defined. While such refinements are theoretically possible, they are not demonstrated, and hence must be discoated, resulting in less confidence in the accuracy of the depth of cracks as reported is valid. This lack of confidence renders uncertain whether the cracks are truly as deep as reported. However, for reasons cited earlier, whatever the uncertair.ty regarding interpretation of the crack depths, the cracks are never deeper than reported. In summary, the location and orientation of the cracks, which are the aspects of greatest significance, are known with a high degree of confidence. The width and depth, which are of lesser significance, are known with a lesser confidence. l 4.1.7 Crack Model for Evaluation l As a result of this evaluation of the confidence in the reported NDT tasting and evaluation, the following model of the basemat cracks can be drawn: l l 8 l l n
4.1.7 Cr ck Mod,1 far Evaluation (Cont'd) The basemat cr:cko are vertical, er nearly so, and gn0 rally extend
- down from the top of the mat at locations where there are top surface indications of a crack. This orients them generally in an east-west direction.- They appear to extend in many cases almost completely across the mat. They extend down a variable depth', in some cases to the region of the bottaa reinforcing steel. The actual depth of the
, cracks is questionable along auch of the length beneath the RC3, and 1 hence an assumption for conservatism will be made, in the evaluation of i their significance, that they extend from the top to the bottom of the mat. It is cautioned that this simplifying conservative assumption is demonstrably not the case for a significant portion of each crack and such assumption is made simply for purposes of ease of evaluation. The crack widths are quite narrow, on the order of 5 mils, and, by visual 4 observation at the top of the sat, filled with a laitance material and l not open. 4.2 CRACKS IN RCE WAI.L Four hairline cracks on the exterior surface of the RC3 wall near the basemat (Elev -35. ft) were evaluated using NDT. All of them were found to penetrate less than one (1) ft of the 10 ft wall thickness (Table 4). 5.0 PROBABLE CAUSES OF CRACKS Th's causes of the top cracks were evaluated in 1977 and 1983 (Reference 1) and the conclusion was that they were mainly due to flezure of the basemat from initial loading (prior to the completion of superstructure). The NDT evaluation has determined th'at all of the top cracks are vertical, extremely narrow and do not generally extend below the neutral axis. Although the predominant cause of cracks has been concluded to be flexure, other factors such as thermal and/or shrinkage strains probably contributed to their development. Also, the early placement of the lower portion of the RC3 ring wall apparently influenced the 9 s , n
3.0 PROBASLE CAUSES OF CRACKS (Ccut'd) i . cracking crientction es evidenend by the rev':.a1 nature of th2 aost northerly and southerly cracks. 5.1 CRACK PAITZitN i l l l From the summary of NDT results, it is clear that tile top cracks are i greater in number than the bottom cracks. This reflects that the crack i pattern generally followed the basemat flexure, which was found to be predominantly convez shape throughout the construction stages. The top cracks are located primarily in an east-west hand centered on the RCS i centerline. This matches closely the area of anzimum convez flexure of l the basemat in the early stages of construction as shown on Figure 2. ' The causes for the convez flexure of the basemat during construction were the sequence of construction of the basemat blocks for the basemat and the different rates of settlement of the foundation soil beneath each placement block. While the soil beneath the entire basemat is uniform, the loading imposed upon it was placed in segments at different times (each placement block being a loading segment). Thus, the soil beneath each placement block followed the same time-consolidation curve but at a different location on the curve because of
- the different placing times. As a result, the differential settlement between the 1sse block placed and the first placed was greater than that between those placed earlier and the first. This caused a convez shape to the mat with the earliest blocks placed, at the center of the RC3, being at the top of the convez shape (see Fig. 2). The present convexity is very small being 2-1/2 inches over 380 feet. To prevent any excessive or eccentric differential settlement of the basemat, engineering controls on the placement sequence of the superstructure were utilized. This assured nearly uniform superstructure dead loading on the sat at all times during construction.
O 10 4
, 5.0 PROBABLE CAUSES OF CRACKS (Cont'd) 5.2 CRACK WIDTH AND DEPTH The present crack widths are well within the allowable crack width of the ACI Codes. Section 1508.6, ACI 318-63 Code for control of cracking states that "....the avarage crack width at service load at the concrete' surface of extreme tension edge, does not exceed 0.010 in. for 4
exterior members..." Section 10.6.4, ACI 318-83 Code commentary for control of flexure cracking states that "...for interior and exterior exposure respectively, ... limiting crack widths of 0.016 and 0.013 in." l h NDT e==4=9 tion performed at service load conditions has established the estimated crack width to be less than .007 in. and the actual field esasurements of crack "L" less than .003 in. When the basemat cracks were first observed under the RCB in mid-1977, the crack widths were observed to be between .002 and .005 in. h tensile stress in the top reinforcing steel which would correspond to these observed crack widths (approximately .005 in.) is small, on the order of 11 kai, well within the allowable design limits (App ==di- 1). The i design yield strength of the reinforcing steel is 60 kai. In Reference 1, it was stated that "...The sat, as are all other reinforced concre:e structures, is designed to carry loads and in so doing depends only on the compressive and shear strengths of concrete and the tensile strength of reinforcing steel. No credit is taken in the dasian for the tensile strength of concrete, ...... Thus, as 194== on the foundation est causes flexure and resultant tension of the concrete, cracks are expected to form. This. cracking enables
- transfer of the tensile load from the concrete to the embedded reinforcing steel as contemplated in the design of all steel reinforced concrete structures."
The positive and negative bending capacities of the sat are in no way diminished by the presence of the flexural cracks which are essentially vertical and which are of very modest width. Neither are the bending capacities in any way diminished by the depth of cracks, even if the cracks are assumed to extend completely thr. ugh the sat thickness. 11 n
. , 5.0 PROBABLE CAUSES OF CRACKS (Cont'd) r A single application of bending soment sufficient to crack the sat from the top surface down and to the saali observed crack width would not of itself, produce as deep a crack as has been observed. Mechanisms [
exist,.however, which in' combi'acion n with flexural strains, can produce , deep, narrow cracks. One such machenisa*is the combination of flexural
'and thermal strains. The sat, a placement of concrete of substantial '
volume, will experience considerable temperature increase in the niddle due to hydration of cement followed by cooldown over a lengthy period of time. This thermal cycle can result in substantial (on the order of several hundred psi) concrete tensile stresses in the middle and compression stresses at the top and bottoa. These stresses in combination with flexural stresses can create a narrow crack extending to substantial depth. During the early stages of construction the sat experienced time-varying relative displacements; i.e., time-varying flazural curvatures. As shown by Figure 2, flexural curvature of the sense that is associated with tensile strain at the top of the sat was of a larger angnitude at an earlier time than when the cracks were first observed and measured. Corresponding to these earlier larger sat curvatures, I there may have been larger crack widths than have been measured at any time since the cracks were first discovered. Presently observed crack depths may reflect these possible earlier crack widths. As construction continued, the est relative deflections changed, decreasing the curvature and tending to c. lose the cracks. If, as reasoned above, crack widths at the top of the sat were larger at an earlier time, present crack widths serve only to indicate the maximum possible value of the present reber tensile stress. If earlier crack width and associated rebar tensile stresses were substantially larger, and particularly if any rebar tensile yield strain was experienced, the present actual tensile stress aust be less than implied by the present modest crack width and as escinated in Appendix 1, 12
----m,,~- , - - - . , . . , w m e w- c..-,-m-_--,--w,. _
,,...-.-%, - - - . - . _ . - - - - ~ < - -------~-~-M
~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~~
a.v ravaua uuse.s ur saAdKS (dent'di There io no ralieblo
- suo for dstcraining what actual mariana valuan of crack widths and associated rebar strain may have occurred during early stages of the met construction. Different mechanisms have been identified which could account for the presently observed very modest crack widths together with substantial crack depths. A mechanism
. involving thermal strains can explain the presently observed condition without postulating earlier crack widths wider than at present. The other mechanism involves only flazure and postulates larger crack widths at an earlier time in the construction sequence. The actual sequence of events probably involves both of thase mechanisms but the stress / strain conditic.as during construction are of no consequence to the safety of the structure in its completed state.
The validity of the construction process, including the sat displacement monitoring program, is evidenced by the completed structure not by crack widths and associated reber stresses during the early construction stages. The earlier conditions are not relevant to the structural integrity of the completed structure, but they serve to { explain, qualitatively, the depth of cracking. 5.3 WALL CIACKS l The cracks in RCB walls are found to be superficial by NDT and, therefore, appear to be caused by shrinkage. These cracks are
- i. apparently not related to adjacent basemat cracks, which were caused by sat flexure.
6.0 SIGNIFICANCE OF CIACKS AND EFFECTS ON STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY The following conclusions are of importance in the determination of the significance of the cracks in the Waterford 3 baseast and their effect upon the structural integrity of the basemat:
- 1. The cracks are flezural cracks probably influenced in some cases l
with thermal strains. The consistent vertical orientation of the cracks is the evidence of this. l 13 1 L_ ____ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ . - _ . _ - _ _ _ _ J
.. 6.0' SIGNIFICANCE OF CRACKS AND EFFECTS ON STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY (Cent'd)
- 2. There are no inclined cracks within the basemat. This provides evidence that no excessive diagonal tension, hence no excessive shear, exists or has existed within the basemat.
- 3. There are no 'through cracks from tosi to bottom of the basemat with the possible exception of a very few localized areas. The cracks -
are primarily extending down from the top surface of the basemat. This is evidence that the cracks are primarily the result of l flazure and that the flexure was of an upward convez nature which agrees with the observed deformations of the basemat during construction.
- 4. Presently there is virtually no water seepage or wetness present at any of the observed cracks and the amount of water seepage in the past has been minimal causing only a wetness of the basemat in the immediate vicinity of the cracks. The cracks are believed to have filled with a laitance derived from the parent concrete material.
The general stress condition at the top of the basemat has become compression since the occurrence of the original cracking. This condition will not change during normal operation, hence, the continued =*af==1 water seepage condition during the operation of the plant is assured. Therefore, the amount of water seepage presently meets, and will continue to meet, the original design intent for minimal water leakage.
- 5. The width of the cracks indicates a low present rebar stress I
(Appendiz 1).
- 6. The crack pattern is predominantly in an east west direction (Figure 1), localized in a band running east-west and centered near the RC3 centerline. This band is within the region subjected to 4
4 J 14 v
6.b SIGNIFTf*DCE OF CRACKS AND EFFECTS ON STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY (Ccut'd) the most extreme convez curvature during the early stages of construction (Figure 2). This evidence indicates that the cracks resulted fros.early settlements of the baseast occurring during placement or shortly thereafter. The cracks lying in a northeasterly or northwesterly direction were influenced by the rigidity of the early placements of the RCB wall.
- 7. Tha cracks in the RCE wall are shallow, shrinkage induced and are not related to the cracks in the basemat. The existence of cracks in the basemat and the wall at the same, or nearly the same, location appears to be coincidence.
- 8. The concrete quality is uniform and there are no significant voids and/or honeycombs within the mat. This indicates that the concrete consolidation was more than adequate during construction. The concrete strength is indicated to be 5,000 to 7.,000 psi by NFf, which is higher than the required design strength of 4,000 psi and which is consistent with the strengths seasured during the construction inspections.
FLEXURAL CONSIDERATIONS "It is well known that load-induced tensile stresses result in cracks in concrete seabers. This point is readily acknowledged and accepted in concrete design. Current design procedures.... use reinforcing steel, not only to carry the tensile forces,'but to obtain an adequate 4 crack distribution and a reasonable limit on crack width."(1} The cracks in the Waterford 3 foundation basemat are to be expected considering the flexural situation. They have no negative effect on the structural integrity or strength of the baseast or on the ability (1) Causes, Evaluation, and Repair of Cracks in Concrete Structures - ACI 224 ACI Journal - May-June 1984, Paragraph 1.J.9. 15 n
~
6.0 SIGNIFICANCE bF CRACKS AND EFFECTS ON STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY (Cca
. of the basemat to resist adequately any dcsign load combinations, nor can they significantly alter the design response of the structure to 3 seismic vibrations. The cracks, being quite narrow and tight, viu not !
increase the flexure of the basemat and hence win not cause any ! additional transier. o'f load to building members than that already accounted for in the design. ,
. (
Reinforced concrete members subjected to flexural loads are designed to accept cracking of the concrete in the tension zone. The ACI code for desigr. of reinforced concrete structures states that " tensile strength of concrete is to be neglected in flexural calculations,"(2) and that l au tensile stresses are to be directed to the steel reinforcing. This is normal concrete cracked section analysis and the concrete must crack since it has a low tensile strain at fracture. Therefore, the steel is the structural component in the cracked tension zone. ; t When reversal of stresses occur and a previously cracked tension zone ; becomes subjected to compressive forces, the cracks close and the adjacent sides of the cracks bear against each other. The concrete-erack surfaces in the Waterford 3 basemat are well able to bear against each other since they are tight and have been filled with laitance and under flexural loading the basemat win react the same as a normal concrete cracked section. Therefore, the flexural strength has experienced no degradation for bending in either direction and no significant increase in the flexure of,the basemat win occur. SHEAR CONSIDERATIONS I
"If a (vertical) plane under consideration is an existing crack or i
interface, failure usually involves slippage or relative movement along (2) Building Code Requirements for Reinforced Concrete, ACI 318-63, Paragraph 1503(e). i l 16
u.61
. 'sivaulteur Or CRALM AND EFFECTS ON STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY (Ccat'd) l tha crack or plane."(3) "If an initicily cracksd specimen is tacted,
{ shear can be transmitted only if lateral confinement or transverse steel exists. The irregula'rities of the surfaces of the two sides of the crack ride up on each other and this tends to open the crack and create forces in the transverse steel ...... In a heavily reinforced
' shear plane'or one subjected to a normal compressive stress, the' shear resistance due to friction and dowel action may reach the shear '
correspa=M as to failure of an initially uncracked specimen having the same characteristics. In such a case the crack locks and the behavior and strength are similar to those for an initially uncracked section."( The Waterford basemat vertical cracks are both heavily reinforced and under " compressive stress."( In addition they are very narrow, do not extend through the basemat,, and are filled with laitance. Essentially they are " locked." In actuality, they resemble construction joints and respond sinfimely. The Potential for " Shear Slip" on Mat Crack Planes If vertical shear on the basemat crack planes could produce " shear slip" (ie, a step change in vertical deflection across the crack i plane), and if such shear slip were large, it would be appropriate to j (3) The Shear Strength of Reinforced Members - ACI-ASCE 426R-74, ACI Manual cf Concrete Practice, 1983, Part 4, Paragraph 2.2.2. I ( (4) Ibid - Paragraph 2.2.2b. (5) Review of Waterford 3 Basemat Analysis Structural Analysis Division, Dept. of Nuclear Energy, Brookhaven National Laboratory, July 18, 1984,
- p. 21.
17 r
J l-i
.. 6.0' SIGNIFICANCE OF CRACKS AND EFFECTS ON STRUCTURAI, IFIEGRITY (Cont'd) 1
. investigate its possible significance to the dynamic response of the structure. For the reasons discussed below there is no basis for believing that slip will occur.
Backaround Renardine Shear Strenath and Shear Slip on Crack Planes The matter of shear strength along a crack plane, or a potential crack plane, has been relevant to reinforced concrete design. This is of interest primarily at the junctions of precast concrete members (where large shear forces must be transferred across such planes), in short I reinforced concrete (R/C) brackets (where large shear forces sometimes acevated by tensile forces must be transmitted across such planes), and in 1/C amabranes subjected to concurrent large shear and tensile forces acting on transverse crack planes. In contrast, for beams and slaba designed to resist internal transverse shear force and bending acaents rather than membrane forces, the question of shear strength across potential transverse crack planes normally does not arise. Also, the evaluation of shear resistance across these planes is not normally a part of the design process. This is true even though transverse (flexural) cracks can develop in besas and slabs, particularly when there are bending soment reversals. It may be noted that provisions for shear reinforcement focus on inclined crack planes. The requirements for such reinforcement may be satisfied by transverse bars (which do not cross any potential transverse crack) and such a reinforcing pattern is acceptable for very substantial magnitudes of transverse shear stress. The validity of this practice for conventional bemas and slabs reflects (a) the absence of large tension forces on actual or potential crack planes, which could imply large crack widths; and (b) the great shear strength and slip resistance along a crack plane if the crack is closed (or of small initial width), and if " clamping" (compression) force of adequate 18
angnitudo 10 cvcilablo. This comproccion forco any be provided cither by the compression component of a bending acaent acting on the section, by tension (flexural) steel crossing the section, by both, or by an l externany applied compression force. l l Much of the prssent understanding of shear strength and slip.on crack planes was developed by research studies stimulated by the design of R/C containment shaus for nuclear power plants. Such shells are subjected to very large membrane forces (i.e., large tension and shear i forces) acting on transverse crack planes. The tensile forces can l cause cracks of substantial width, and both shear strength and shear ' slip are matters of design interest. This is a very different condition than exists in the Waterford 3 basemat, but some of the results of the research on the aesbrane probles are relevant to this discussion of the basemat. In particular, we refer to a report of tests conducted at Corne n University (Reference 3), which for crack ; planes with initial crack widths of 0.01 in., and subjected to cycles of shear stress reversals of about + 180' psi, demonstrated the fonowing results:
- 1) clamping forces developed in the bars that were used to restrain crack width growth did not exceed 20 percent of the applied shear !
t force; and 1
- 2) total slip, after 25 cycles of shaar reversal, did not exceed 0.01 !
in. ' l It should be noted that the clasping forces developed here were from reinforcing steel responding to the shear slip displacement, an active clamping force only present when slip occurs. Baseest Strenzth and Slip Resistance on Crack Planes The cracks in the basemat are predominantly east-west oriented, and are everywhere less than 0.01 inch in width. Of major importance is the 19 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ n
[ o.v a4waar w o ve caacAs Aau c.str.CIS ON STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY (Conc'd)
~
fcet that tha crcck planes era g t cubj:ct:d to any tencilo forco. Indeed there is a very substantial compression force (exerted by soil and water pressure on the north and south boundaries of the sat and t;he van s above), which is conservatively neglected for purposes of computing shear strength on the crack plane. With regard to its influence on slip, the effect of this compression force, conservatively ignored for strength, is particularly relevant and will be accounted for. Any north-south bending accent, whether positive or negative, which may be acting on the crack plane does not diminish the shear strength of the crack plane. Bending soment which causes tension force in the bottom rebars aust cause an equal and opposite compression force in the top few feet of the section. Similarly, bending moment which causes tension force in the top rebars must cause an equal and opposite compression force in the bottom few feet of the section. Thus, diminished resistance in the botton (or top) is offset by an enhanced resistance in the top (or bottom). i In the regions of interest the top rebars are in 6 6", i.e., 3.12 2 in /f t, and the minf === bottom robars are in G 6" + in 6 12", i.e. , 4.68 in 2ffg,- Over a representative crack plane length (50 ft) the maximum total shear forces on any crack plane are found at either end of the East-West r==aing cracks. The maximum total shear forces on these 50 ft representative lengths correspond to the fonowing values: Total Unit Loadina Condition Shear Force Shear Force
'1.5 x Gravity Load 42 K/ft 27 psi 1.1 x E-W EQ* 96 K/ft 61 psi 1.1 x Vert EQ 5 K/ft 3 psi 1.1 (Vert EQ + E-w EQ) 101 K/ft 64 psi
'1.5 Gravity + 1.1 (Vert EQ + E-W EQ) 143 K/ft .91 psi
, *N-S EQ (earthquake) gives saaner shear forces.
20 4
. A
, 6.0 SIGNIFICANCE OF CRACKS AND CFFECTS ON STRUCTUK/J. IhTEGRITY (Cont'd)'
It should be noted that averaging of forces over a 50 ft crack length is very conservative since this is only about 4 times the sat thickness. The average shear forces would decrease rapidly with , increase in the crack' length considered. It also should be noted that the corresponding shear forces on any other 50 f t length of any othe'r cracks are less than the values tabulated above. l Shear capacities Using shear provisions of Section 11.7.4, ACI-1983, shear strength of the entire section is given by: ' V=
- V, = 4 A,g fy #
vhere V = available shear strength at section
* = strength reduction factor = 0.85 V, = nominal shear strength A ,g = area of shear-friction reinforcement f
7
= specified yield strength of reinforcement = 60 kai
- # = coefficient of friction = 1.4 A A
= correction factor related to unit weighc of concrete = 1.0 therefore, V = 0.85 (3.12 + 4.68) 60 x 1.4 x 1.0 = 556.9 K/fe ;
I which corresponds to an average unit shear strength of: l y = 556.900 = 352 psi ! 12:11x12 1 Eecause the rebars are concentrated near the top and bottom of the section, rather than distributed throughout the depth of the section we conservatively reduce the above shear capacity by 50 percent, i.e., to 278 K/ft. This is 1.9 times the 143 K/f t shear demand.
- _ . _ . - - . . . _ - . - - . - . . _ . . _ . - - - - . _ _ _ - - - . - . ._ .n
, . , 6.C'
, SIGNIFICANCE OF CRACKS AND EFFECTS ON STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY (Ccat'd)
It is clear that the shear strength along the crack plane, even ignoring the inescapable active compression force, is such in excess of the demand. Slip Resistance As reported in Reference 3, for an initial crack width of 0.01 inches, sad cycles of shear stress reversal to 180 pai a slip of about 0.004 in was developed at the end of the first cycle increasing to 0.01 in. after 25 cycles. Moreover the maximum clanning force developed during this cycling was only 20 percent of the applied shear force. In the sat we are interested in an applied shear stress of 91 psi, for which a 20 percent clamping force would be 18 pai. i
- The compression acting on the cracked section, due to horizontal soil and water pressure on the sat and walls, is 50 psi. Based on the finite element model, this compression exists in all areas of the basemat during earthquake loading conditions with the small exception of a very narrow band immediately adjacent to the north and south walls. It is not credible that this compression stress, reduced as may be reasonable for the effect of an earthquake, would not still be substantially in excess of 18 pai. This means that more than the 1
required clasping pressure of 18 psi is available from the outset; 1.e., no rebar tension is required to provide the required clamping force. Since, the clasping force is a passive force, the friction resulting from it is available without shear slip and is a static friction. 22
/
eiv ',
~ ~
. - slGSN 4CANCs. 0F' CRACKS AND EFFECTS ON STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY (Cent'd)
~
Tha conclusion thes io drawn that tho shear rasistanet. cero:o the cr:ck is a state of static friction wherein the available static friction must be overcome prior to the occurance of any shear slip. Since the available friction is a't least equal to and undoubtedly for.in excess i
.of"the applied shear stress we conclude that the shear. resistance would 1
develop without any significant slip. Therefore, there is no change in j the rigidity of the est and no effect upon the dynamic response of the basemat to the earthquake.
7.0 CONCLUSION
Considering each of the above items individually and in concert, we i conclude that the cracks in the Waterford 3 basemat, as defined by the mondestructive testing, have no adverse influence on the structural '
. integrity of the basemat. It is fully capable of functioning as required by the design in accordance with the pertinent codes.
i e 1 l i 23
. . _. _ _. _ ._ __ _ __ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ n
, REFERENCES ,
h
- 1. Affidavit cf Jcseph L Ehass, Ebasco 53tvic03 .'.acarporated, subaitted before the Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Board, USNRC, September 1983.
- 2. . "NPIS Wall Hairline Crack Evaluation," by Ebasco Services Incorporated, April 1984
- 3. J P Laible, R N White, and P Gergely, " Experimental Investigation of Seismic Shear Transfer Across Cracks in Concrete Nuclear Containment Vessels," ACI SP S3-9, Reinforced Concrete Structures in Seismic Zones, 1977.
l [ l 24 l a
TABLE 1 -
SUMMARY
CF CRACKS WEST SIDE CF RCS , Trp Crack Frreemen af Subsurfac7 Crrckn (Se7 Notm) Botton Crack Middle Crack Test Length Depth (ft.) Family Below Through Family Crack I.D. Lines (exposed) Specina Botton Re-bar Botton Re-bar I n. Min Has Average I A 7 7'- 6 1 -2 2 * *
- v.
B 7 9'- 0 '2 3 3 * *
- v.
C 12 16'- 6 1 3 2 * *
- vi l
a e a 110e y,
~
i II D 5 6'- 0 2 5 4 e see _e y, E 1 2'- 0 3 3 3 e e en v.
- F 6 9'- 0 4 10 5 en ne .
e y, C 4 6'- 0 1 5 4 e a e y, 116' III 1 4 3'- 0 7 10 g me se a y, H 6 9'- 0 5 10 8 en me e ,, J 20 28'- 0 3 12 9 een eene se ,, K 10 13'- 0 3 11 8 ee ese e ,, 110' IV L 10 28'- 0 6 10 8 en em a y, 18' Notes: *None
** Presence of crack la not probable since only at one or two test line location (s).
*** Presence of crack is probable since indication at several test locations but not interconnected with top cra
****Sinitar to e** except probably laterconnected with top crack.
(Sheet 1 of 2)
TABLE 1 -
SUMMARY
OF CRACKS WEST SIDE CF RCS (Cont'd)
~
Top Crack Presence of Subaurface Cr. cko (Sea Notm)
. totton Crack Middle Crack .
Test Length Depth (ft.) Family Below Through .
; Fm ily Crack'I.D. Lines (emposed) Spacing Botton Re-bar Bottee Re-bar Inclinatt l
Nin Max Average
*
- vertical V N 4 ~6'- 0 4 5 4
* *
- vertica; N 3 5'- 0 2 6 3
* *
- vertica 2 3 5'- 0 1 3 2
] *
- vertica j 3 9 12'- 0 1 5 2 m.
8 10 9 e se
- vertica.
j P 9 14'- 0 e a e vertical-1 R 1 2'- 0 2 2 2 3 5 4 * * -* vertica l Q 3 8'- 0 e a e vertica,
- S 3 4'- 0 4 4 4 3 10 6 e ses
- vertica l T 14 20'- 0 e e a vertica
- Y 3 6'- 0 1 1 1 ! -+ 6' . I 4
* **
- vertica V1 U 9 14'- 0 2 10 5
* * * .srtica V 5 13'- 0 2 5 '3 e e
- 25'- 0(+) v rtica X 22 1 5 3 l
h 4 3 ** ese
- vertica i VII West plagonal 19 27'- 0 1 i
l I l l Notes: *None
** Presence of crack is not probable since only at one or two test line location (s). ,
*** Presence of crack is probable since indication at several test locations but not interconnected with top crack.
****Similar to see except probably interconnected with top crack.
6 l (Sheet 2 of 2) l . l E
Trp Crrck Pr: sanco ef Subsurfacq Cr ck a (Se7 Notbn) Botton Crack Middle Crack Test Length Depth (ft.) Family Below Through - Fastly Crack I.D. Lines (exposed) Specing Bottes Re-bar Botton Re-bar In Min Max Average Ae 4 6'- 0 1 1. 1 * *
- v.
Is Be-Ce 5 6'- 0 1 4 3 * *
- v De 2 4'- 9 1 1 1 * *
- v le 2 3'- 0 3 3 3 * *
- v 110' IIe Ee 4 4'- 6 1 1 1 e a e ,
Fe 8 '12'- 0 2 10 6 e see e ,.
+13' IIIe lie 5 6'- 0 2 3 2 ** * *e y, Je 5 7'- 0 2 4 3 ese e se ,,
Le 8 13'- 0 3 12 y een se e ,,, 111' IVe Ke 15 26'- 0 4 12 8 en seen e y, 116' . Del 3 4'- 0 1 1 1 e a e ,,, Ve De3 15 23'- 0 1 6 3
- a e ,,
- De4 5 10'- 0 1 1 1 *
- ee ,,,
115' . Notees *None
*arremence of crack is not probabit annce ontf at one or two test line location (s).
aaan c cnce ut crack in probable since indication at several test locations but not interconnected with top cra !
*** *Sint tar to *** except probably interconnected witle top crack.
t es...> s e r s 1
TABLE 2 --
SUMMARY
'UF CRACKS EAST SIDE CF RCB (Co t'd) , Tep Crack Prraenc7 ef Subsurf.sc, Cracko (Sen Notc7) Botton Crack Middle Crack
- Test Length Depth (ft.) Family Below Through . ' . . .
. Family Crack I.D. Lines (exposed). Spacing Botton Re-bar Botton Re-bar Inc' Min. Max Average vie De5 17 24'-0 1 10 3 see e see ,e De6 5 7'-3 2 6 4 **
- a ve-1 15' De7 9 12'- 0 1 6 3 * ** *ee y, VIIe De8 8 10'- 0 1 3 2 * *** *** ve :
l De9 11 15'- 0 1 5 2 as a ese . ,e : i 1 4 i i \ l 1 i 3 . Notes *None l ** Presence of crack la not probable since only at one or two test line location (s). l an* Presence of crack to probable sinc.e indication at several test locations but not interconnected with top cras sameStallar to *** except probably interconnected with top crack. (Sheet 2 of 2) t
TABLE 3 -
SUMMARY
CF CRACKS SENEATN RCB Correlation gp cg,g - Crack I.D. 'with 1977 Happing Depth Inclination G C.L. BCE - None 6 (Note 1) ' Variable Vertical 18' None 2 (Note 1) 12' 1 Yes
- 9
~7 Partial '
6' 3 Yes 9 5 Partial 13 . ! 4 Yes Average Spacing = 11' i N:ta 1 - This crack was not identified during 1977 napping of cracks beneath RCB. 2 i i I l l (Sheet 1 of 1) i
TABLE 4 - StBtMMtY CF caarrs IN RCB l&I.LS Creek I.D. T-t Line7 Maximum Dept af Penetretton'(ft.) Inclination Remarks RCB 1- .3 1 Perpendicular Wall thickness P 10.
, to wall surface RCB 2 3 1 Perpendicular Wall thicknesi = 10-to wall surface ,
RCB 3 3 1 Perpendicular ' Wall thickness = 10 to wall surface MCB 4 3 1 Perpendicular Wall thickness = 10! to well surface \. l l (Sheet 1 of 1) p - -- _._ __ --
, APPENDZX 1 REINFORCING STEEL STRESS AS DEFINED BT CRACK WIDTH ,
Gergely & Lutz Fduation ("Causes, Evaluation and Repair of Cracks in Concrete," ACI 224 ACI Journal May-June 1984, p. 218). - 3
~
w = 0.076 A f, d,A1 x 10 Ay = 6 x 8.5 = 51 in
# = 10.5 = 1.04 10.125 d, = 4.25 in w = 5 mils (crack width) f, = 10,500 psi = 10.5 kai I
l I
~
t (Sheet 1 of 1) L n
1 5 .=-
'j d
.s n=
g- W w g s~
"! O
~~
.o e e e
*i r .. .. 6 6 .
,g . . s :
=
, g-I, .
i. g [ i- ,gl
~
g l. , - i - s u. d -
.' nw 4. ' '
] ~' -
'"'fr?:. '
y
- i fe / +
g 4; ,.,;. I ' '
. i -
- : /
8 l '$ - - I, ' PC) { ,f4
. 3' (, , *. . . J. .,.W
* ** ~* #
. :. g- .:. -
.. min
- esse s.
,.*, . .,M. . >
i@ - a l -ve-- ' g s' ' . .
%' ' .i .*
- ,, . ..a
- i: N2 t , ., -4 '-- h
' ~ ~~ i ~ '
g . i $.9-(*
,j,ji :'ri:.7 . '-}
y f
;.. );/ s.
1 M- f- ( -
,1r 6g[g ,ig 4 t ,, - -
3 g I ,,- -; i /- I i i :l,T.4 c-m :-.. f :. g 9 4 f 1 ' '
- q a .
s 2
, 7: .
i a , y,j1:ti j s: -
;i:pr 3
'j>
i
,.G i
3, s e i.i i - t ji , a-2 j@ g, i,7 Q .a..: I : 7l. 4. '. g., +j
!" i
- y. . . . --. -- . . . - - -
E . - - .a - - -. , a i.
, .=
- -I
~ s
. s }\ .: g i'tn,t 1 3 3~ , ;_ , i j i i ei .i . 1 ~C7.' '
! .,. . . Ts,* / 'i r L ; ',.3 $ ,i . .t I ". I - q >, ;il g N,%. - ,
. . . ,. ,i i 4, i
~.3.,. 3_ , -%2. , i,.kl
. ,,,,,.:. . . ,,-. e .
2=*. c-e i
. ..- - . - - - .=
4.,,-1
,.- ,i v,. i_ . . u. .m , . , -- -
fy, .i e, . g1 1'l . v- , . ,
* ' l i
--4/;' .f A- -s D;:
i_1.fE(l,7f,' p ,. 3.... --
*4 -+ 5 s i ,
L- : :
= a
.v ?, n.. . u . ..,*
i; y. ' 3,. 2. f' .. M M , 7
- u' .. _
88<
*.I .. .
w '3 3 @a 8
- g. y-f g e . a..'
.s . , N l". - ,s s L ,gt .. . .: sr-
. h., =- 2 e
.,..:. ; g.n - . .~.
s ; .. _b
. . y, .
- 2- 2
=.. v.
!i
- i i
i i Cy* [ a;
*U . wi.v-$r
. , a.:. p i.l
@ i t l @ ii t""* I '. 4 ..
.'.. G E is '
j 1- i : .j ko.- ' ', :.-_ n(r h i I l :'th.l-rH
.-e .r-- -.
s 4 . _ .
. - . ~ . - . . - . . . - - . . ~ . . _ - , ~ , _ . . . , - - . ~ - ~ . -- .- --n-,, - - , ~ . - - -
A
l , *.
] .
m * :E 4 amr I o 23 o WE
" 1. r 52 i-Ey@*!E .
4 gg4 . ! 9 l l i 7 2 (REACTOR BUILDING j F '
- 2 -
"8
! 0.0 JUN. '76 #,.[ Q.%
- y -
W ,_ , K j g@. APR.78 - m - 2.0 Ex' l 0 "8 3.0 I E i 5
)
m ase 4 m N S CROSS SECTION OF BASEMAT l NOTES: ! VERTICAL EXAGGERATION = 300 1 l DeFFERENTIAL SETTLEMENT IS FROM OAV OF I PLAC4NG ANO BNCLUDES SETTLEMENTS AT VERY EARLY AGES OF EACH CONCRETE PLACEMENT l 2 i M N y a a _ _ _ _ -__
e 4 M
=
LOUISIANA 2..o. - er-..r e o eoxeoos
? O W E R & LI G H T ! N.W OnL.M Louewa 70174-8003 9 (804)3es4345 reRanWu November 30, 1984 W3P84-3337 3-A1.16.07 3-A1.01.04 A4.05 Director, Nuclear Reactor Regulation ATTN: Mr. D. M. Crutchfield, Assistant Director for Safety Assessment Division of Licensing U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555
SUBJECT:
Waterford 3 SES Docket No. 50-382 Additional Information on Basemat Cracks
Dear Mr. Crutchfield:
Or November 16, 1984, Dr. John S. Ma of your staff requested certain design / analysis information regarding the foundation basemat for Waterford 3. The information requested by Dr. Ma related to place, ment of the reinforcing steel in the mat and diagrams for the North-South bending moments using both constant and variable soil springs. The responses enclosed in Attachments I and II to this letter were provided to Dr. Ma on November 16 and 20, 1984 respectively. Subsequently, on November 26, 1984, Dr. Ma requested additional information with respect to soil spring distributions and North-South bending capacities l in both the positive and negative directions. Attachment III to this letter contains the information provided to Dr. Ma on November 27, 1984 in response to his request. We trust that the information provided adequately addresses Dr. Ma's questions, however, should additional information be required or should you wish to discuss this matter further, please do not hesitate to contact me. Very truly yours. K.W. Cook Nuclear Support & Licensing Manager l KWC:WAC:sms ATTACHMENTS l l cc: J.T. Collins, NRC Region IV T.A. Flippo, NRC Resident i ! G.W. Knighton, NRC-NRR INPO Records Center (D.L. Gi"11spie) l J.H. Wilson, NRC-NRR E.L. Blake l G.L. Constable, NRC Resident W.M. Stevenson 1 1-b l R
S . ATTACHMENT I 11/16/84 (RO) Sheet 1 of 6 RESPONSE TO DR. J MA's QUESTION OF 11/16/84 01. basemat under and outside of the Reactor Building. Prov! Ans. As-built Building,N-S re-bar along locations Section under A-A, are andinoutside shown of the Reactor the attached sketches (SH 2/6 to 6/6) SH 2 Plan of the basemat - showing top and bottom reinforcement distribution, and areas of concern, Areas I, II and III along E-W centerline of the Reactor Building (Section A-A). SH 3 N-S top re-bar locations for Areas I, II and III
.SH 4 N-S bottom re-bar locations for Area I SH 5 ,N-S bottom re-bar locations for Area II SH 6 4 N-S bottom re-bar locations for Area III Q2. '
Provide N-S bending moment diagram along Section A-A of the basemat for the following load conditions:
- a. Constant soil springs with side soils
- b. Constant soil springs without side spoils
^
, c. Variable soil sprin y with side soils
- d. Variable soil springs without side soils Ans. Information will be provided ASAP.
1 i ~ s f
._... .... . .. '*H A /c.
-. 3
,j . ,,,
I: !!! .
- h.o= = p g
. . p" :g
( .
. i
' -a.ie.
n.e.s -=i: a,ar win .......-w, .e <, . . , - o I
; ...eseu w r> v. nasus w 1 t :
i - I .
. r g
h r- ' , r n a 7 g[
- , .1 1 .
_.E J . -
=
'!i :
- j,, E
' 2 1 8
. - - i(
1 E.
. i 3
! : 5 s . .
lip != - N-
.I
-4 Te e, :iJ:3 A .
1 t
.-/-
/
;l r* . -
i W L 5 :
.i
,6 i n !i g : .
i .i I1: f . w- ii. i.
, Q :>. .,; it ./ :.
b r ig
- 1. s '
u
~ I I i e it 49 -
c j ' T' ,j -
' mm
'E
- 1.-
' ) i
- o i f83 li\ ?
f-
.;i t';
x-j - 5
, e a
*
- i s
- l z .
=.
-1 1 ! ! ' si.
i
.gw .i s*g.ei R g
, , e -
. i 5
- \x _
/
i K 8 p i.
. .= La i
- u. . , g :. -
D'i . .
.- =
- :;c 1, ! . .a i. 11 11( me gs i.,. ... t
.- ,7 = - - te.,e =; .
j'y
- Me A A .AAEA 2 . Anti .t .A tea 1 . Ants n ,' .
g.g - 3 I 1 . i
'i B
n" _ l ; . I .t
. p t
. . : a g, y
- G f ear' 1N = (,)
1 .
.,8
.- i i :
.n
e j W.5 /g
- I .
h. 4 8 g
. O
- Y g
s ( C 6 . 4 **I i A
- C . .
V
)[~
q T- . C <
% L 9 k $
w v .
=
' \ U
< .a
- w. N 1
f l
- h. w a
~
q
~ '
o . ,
- D s ,,
w
.=.
q .W , I t su .
.T p.
~, _ .
.. p C '
DN s l
\
~
- N. , .
i x L n
a. t
\g '
.\
N u.5 eus I
- 18 @ 9 n n
_ti n n ti ti ti t> -
*/go q'o.c. -
y rge ps .y s'n. '
. spi e G ,, '
U - -
~~
perseum-co *Iss.4'oc. t ' = = u o a 'u o -- 3 _ (cwnst nM e s'o.1. y _ cyg 6'oc, Q 3 U p ,f */f9 VMw m:s
< g - - - = 9 , y x - , M6/E40V'// WCC n
4-necg- .. ..
-o j y,_. m t - -
. +, . xmowm .
o <,
=
s {.
~
g g w pomb@9CMG 4e J , _ f . fifV -4Zld
. ' $ *.n.
ses es'oc-1 L-.,.
- e
-J l BOT SA RS (AREA.E) Ar SECT. A -A ty
) m scu e
.see oirau w b
+.
eD
e 4 1
~
i
+ ! . \
- \g
\
\
I x.s m s
)
*18 OSS n j
o ti n_ t1- . ._ L1 /% L' f% - */gelio C.
- t2 o
g,,,,gg y 4 g 4, I ll G G ,, ' U - f4#$estsac'EO 814t*4'Oe*
;- m
(
= u g u '_ o a 'u o ' ' ' s' o servi c d a t a s *O .!
#fd 6'or.
1
$ 2 0- ,f #/fp weresp **wn
' < g
$ ~ N 6 /E 4 0 p '// * /'a c '
- - - f x N
4- "'I60" g 6-- 7 41 - -
+:. x s o es o % W o.
i . u = a o _ r i _. u?u.- y M6? g g. umus
; Q
- j_._
4 . fifV -4700,
, ,; _ _ , , \ ts 6425 e$'Or
*L -
1
. .L .
) BO T 6A RS -J . ( AREA X ) AT SECT. A -A ag '.
- M SChi&
! . $ g g h A ff '4 ' I f l , 4
. 4 s _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ - ~
, ,, Il )
ct c e%,w Go 3
'a 're
_. c. -
- u
/m v 'S
*A er T. .
/ s
/'W P '
_#E e6 qDMM
.g Q A 'A
. t t
g E C pd. A
/ T -
4WpWW. gw,d E o #A Ma# w
. n l ,n f4MlT; . E
. M- -
a d -
.. X !
a,... _ u. t z . _ m
- a. ^
A uI* [ _
- o
/ -
/ 1 (L-. 4
~ 1 o ' .
,q&m
' R :
A 6 u :
._ 'm -
.* . S
_ a N v .A-r a A
/
7 8 b b' C
" E
. ' G J
.G n / T et *
/
A i . s ,g M R ) E . L . A H C
\ <
S --
\
. \.. $Ny' A )
t h g g\ g _ g 5 _ g A 8 2 7 0 8 t1l ! , ,j>l;4:kii!i { iIi ! ,41 l;:* . \ j,;;
ATTACHMENT II 7 pages 11/19/84 (RI) Sheet 1 of 7 i . RESPONSE TO DR. J MA's QUESTION OF 11/16/84 Q1. Provide locations of N-S top and bottom reinforcement of the basemat under andoutside of the Reactor Building. Ans. See R0, responses provided on 11/16/84. Q2. Provide N-S bending moment diagram along Section A-A of the. basemat for the following load conditions: 1 a. Constant soil springs with side soils
- b. Constant soil springs without side soils
- c. Variable soil springs with side soils
- d. Variable soil springs without side soils Ans. asc See Sh 2 of 7 bad see Sh 3 of 7 D
i
)
i EBASCO SERVICES INCORPORATED '
, ,, .T. Y"4 ,,,, th. lf B4' '
i C.eMO. SY NW* # S*.tt T d O r __ ) OATE
- OFSeso. ,,
cusar - T.0UISIANK POWER & I,ICHT CO. .. -
-asa .w w.w-s a m.am r t.r,4 4 MIG 5TATIUll senosect 1977 1165 llW INSTA!,f.ATimt - trutt s suesact N#N W O U b gl O st 4 7 . N O.
ee a e o m e en q4 @ we a ** e
- oe inte el o gRc6 *e e+ 9 t, g .
- e. .; w. *e mee
- es o w o* e- e oe r w..: *m *4
- co
+ = 4 m 4e-' e - Q- . u ar- -
- e. Y ven+ w e
*en*+w.m;w;9 .a +
ll 8
! i t '
1:lt i
'.8' i:?*l!
,,,' 1 l .
. 8 7e ,
. . . .s I { .
t i ! '
; i -
*: l - I !
. n j ,
i . . l El.-4 Mo ' 2000 l. : $a i j '!-
. : l
. . . (e yl 'O tlt 6 - 1 I - i
{ r 1 l 1:500: - I -
- '300
.i ; l 9 e e ! .
t '
. e j;
.it : l.. . ' .'
i
. . t
- t. !;1; I
i! l
- i' i
4 8 lj h' ! g. l !. l l ! f600- -t-i . ; i.' ;--- -- ~; - + - + - -
$4. . ;
. 4. . ,4 ; .
e
. .8 . .- } l i
b .; . . . u .. t. . A.e i j s!*. i : . . - i 1 -
.l e . . . - .
q ,: **i , ..
- i i* .. , .. . .
s
~.
< - 4 00 .L I' .
- p . .
i
. o 1 !
1 m;. ... :, h, . i , . : . 8
.is s.,: i.
i
-$ i ..r..:.- .
s
.' : .g .
g r*( s . .
* .J.*e : 4 -
,, 9 ..j. - A.,. - -
l
.;< >> . . . .l. : . . . . . . . . e ,/
4-.I. s. : 9- ;
'.j. s .3 e I
-/404- .g gl - - . .
.t '
;e
'ti8
- t 3
.' - *- . 8 l:g
**i i.
a i
, I. .! 6
!8 8
. 1i1: -
- l .- . 8I: I j !
.g ; - 6 i *.
I - I - i i ig.e
. I- ,ii .I :. .., :
- i
+ i ; . : -
[
, ,. . ie.
* -. i. . i .. .!
-2404 -
~
i,I - e :* s ..' l 1 '. I : . l ! :. ; a l - i, , 1 e i 1, *: , si :
- 1
- i. :
e. l.6 8 j! l
, .- 'l
.i l . ; .i t ;.
u
.gi' , 4 s - l l ,,j .
l..:
- i - .
N '"* \ prortsar Cusvi .:1 ' C T A ~A i M S JE"U'M ) coNST Moculu.s
- ..vppi,wlt **
hor ofSR C = M ( 0 4 t ') +/.6 (L + 5') +10 6
. .i. .
. EBASCO SERVICES INCORPORATED
"' c G L c t 0^TE i1-i9-Pt' cHuo. er T f*6 S*tti d or_ 7 oave //-/f M ors wo. ot, v._,,
C Le t.e 7 _ LOUISIANA POWER & LIGHT CO* wA a z.rtr uzw 5 4 z.AM ELot,rigIC STATION PaoJccv 1977 1165 WW TV.tT1f f. Atinv t ... . .e suestct @T MD&!EM Gd6S ce em o e- t.*iat 4 T NO. ama w~ ~ s e
- m. ,. s e.ao vaco =
wieint o o.u- o -i eI o . w ee i,- mo" m s + - 4 c. 4 .o : 4y, se.i w ar-m:~, .e-. v. *w* ,e k= w ce*. es o e es ,
- m + ,e. . ; * . =; 4 4 o, i' il i l! l s' .': ! ll
' ; II
.1l ,
l 7 ; . i !I ,
'e
; . , i 4?
i .
* ** tl 3
' l cl.-4 7. co '
i; , 2000 .
' j.- 1 1: i
_ ' ; &'7 A0!
.4;
, l l t'S' / ' o
- $I !
i,. S4'o . m . 6 g
-Q s
g fopp . . .
- w. ' . . .
I
- i. ; .i . . '
g ... .
.L .
t i
. . . i i
a -. . - ; . .
.. . . A :
i OLi' o oo m4 S i .
~
; is '
- a. .i!
. - 3,'.
t -
' .J
. t .-
. : s.
t e .
.q..: .
6 ..
, . j. .
t '. .
- 'i , :
, .?
,a / .
.s. . . .,
p- - -4. ;_...-s I .
- /000 - _. : . . . . . ; . . .. ; ..
l-i ;
.i I
- i l ! * .i :4 '
l
. . . i-I . j .
;. l.. .
! , r I ; i
. .i -
. !. ,. i ,
e 1l! . .. .
... I l.l'...
4
- pgog l ;.
' . i l1 .
- l: -
li
.i..l
.l .
i* i: I I
,-l
.jg . .
i , l i j i. . l . L t 4tHD cont o* alopast sof
. . - - . .. O nn ett ..
plOMCHT Cud'Vi - 3.'. C T A ~A i N$ U s*"D ' %
- D ( DEAD LOAD) ONLy
~
_.__e
EBA5CO SERYlCES INCORPORATED
, , _ C G 4c'i ,,,, _ 't /-/ 9-/d
, , ,g. b/4 ,,,, //* /f *N sacer- M or__ 7 ors ao.
C *"*"' DOUISIANA' POWER & I,IGHT CO.
'N. -
maev ' WAu.nFURD
* " * "" n IAN ELECTRIC STATION
' "" ' " ^ ? ! ^" ::7 -
_ ,,, M.4 r McMcNT c enCTAMT -.Monu_uS J/.3 8ENDM4. MOMENT ' $n d..o fcM C.E./. 51.D t1.*) t h E.( l + 5 t b.0. 5 -, ( 6 Sic 7 A - A 1 w a. . kNo Me s: emf b ~ A. 40 -
' ~ MbMsvT '%
2 4.( p4
.g41
.. . _ . _ . ... -408 . . .2 3 0 .._ .......
- i94 . -4*f ~ / 1. 5 142
.- 394 .
foi - A9
.1w . . - 372
. 4 67 . -- U
.sJ') -/G3 --
uf -2s? . 17o - sf . HI 13 1 . ffo /40
'( eft -t6/
o 941 -103
. tot - l2 2 14c -
a4 493 -
#7
...Iav - 51 .
\
..[.03 -5S
+44
. -60 .
419
- by .
.301 -104
.re f -too 417 -141 .
_.491 .. -/+2 . .. ref -t3? . i 318 -13 /
.+ o o - sd .
4 /4 -toz \*; 101
-2 s 4 417 _
,74
** ':W
_ _ _ _ , , . . - . . - - - - - - , - - _ _ - . - - - - - - - - - - - - ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ^ ^ ~ ~ ~ ~ ______-- J
EBASCO SERVICES INCORPORATED
,, C G L C- E o,,, t/-/ / U caso,ey oave N*
* *atti d or _ -7
{ ,, LOUISIANA POWER & LIGHT CO. va4z.nr vrw Q & LAM LLLUTHIG STATION cea wo. _, O' enoJact 1977 11 dis MW INSTif.Y. Atfou . tratte *
,u.,,c, AlA 'T M Oste n'i vM/A BLC A!OOulVJ 6/ S QPDin'4 McMiel..; pion. ofit. c a1. 5( Pt.L ') + /.P.t L + s ') +i. o S c6 SEc7 A- A ) -
k Ho - . . - . . . . . . MouwT *8 su '
- A. Ho -
-M usv7 %
-g4 ..
. . . 4o8 -200 2(.2 - i/ 4
.242 4df /37
.-394 ..
k1
..zaa
- 49
- 3 st .
4 67 I'!
.1L43 /22 uf -272 .
- 3-7* - 54 941 -282 ffo -40I
( Fft - 474 . V4f -547
. tot -s9s -
44C - 495 493 - 907
.sro i2o top -y22 .
+44 .
720 . 4H - 714
.. Col - 422 ref .rr e .
417 -s#4 .
. fjf -42# . .
!~0f -3oi 340 - 232
+*o 3 4./1 2. i 9 u 4*/ -2to 417 -307
EBASCO SERYlCES INCORPORATED
, ., C G Lt{ ,,,, }i-19./u saae ,
c==o. ev I Ya"4 ..,, //-/f-fe y 4_,, 7 C '"'"'~ I4013IANA POWER & LIORT CO. - "- ecosect - iais.ni&&ia 3 M 2 2 R : G :.7:3 1977 1165 WW INSTALLATION - UNIT ? suesecs - JVl4 7 A /CMi N[ N.S BfNDIN4. MD.H2.N* : . cowsT H D D u tttJ (6 $&c7 A -A ) 3 g zepp..Logoy..oyty . .. k NO .i MeM9Mf b ....
- f 40 .: - M 0 M s.y*T ' Y
.t 6s
_. . _ , s _ _ _ .. 4o6 141
. _ .. . l + 2
. . . 27 -
46Y 1 42
. 42 2.3 zR, fot 10.5
--. 4 # .. . . .
@7 7 fo
_245 13 7 .
.1.41 33 .
37o 2& .
..y 41 -/r4 .. .
490 - 140 - OfL ~
/9/
94$ - 1S T
. tot -t74 .
44C -t44 493 -/43 fro . . . t4/
- . .E.03 - t 3 S~
+44 . - 140 .
414f . - t By
..C o l
-t.rf .
Cef '
-l43 ,
417 -/70 .
. t$1
. . . . .- t 3 4' . . . .
. !"Of
-t37 _ . . .
398 .i o 4
+oo .P z 4}+ /32 4 *l- 70 kil t3S M t/s.e t }
G
ESA5CO SERVICES INCORPORATED
. , c G L E[ ,,,, l ' ~ 19 'E" cano.evI b ears //~ #I saaav 7 o,_ 7
( cuent-p ac, _ 14UISIANA POWER 4 LIGNT CO. ors no - _**Q__ to77 ilan uwors.Au wasa.navna ruemtRETMIC aerm _STAT ve.,IOR. w use, - MAY pro M e n T" M. .S 0E^'.?M.4 "#"'*'T : VARIA6L4 mod"LUS g _g__p,g, p___go,p y____y3, ((C $ECT A-A) l kNo m _ . - - - . . ... MeM**T 'N
~ ~ ~
t .
~ A 4* ' ' ' - mom nasT '
- t'S 23
.Mt . 3S
_. 408 - . .. 1.4.5 . . ---.
.. 24& . . . . 2.0
. 46Y .... 4.7
.1Jto . - . . 6. 0
.bef . . . . .
t.5 7 ... . 243 i73 4 67 . . II4 .... . M1
/3 . . . .
27o 32 ,
-HI ~3 # # . ..
490 -427 . .
~( ..ffL -507 949 -cos ..
. tot
\ .
-4sr i
19(
~ 7 75 i
49J -7#7 _Ipp . -#o7
.. 50) -6e7 41$
-799 ..
419., - 741 .
..C o l ,
- 4(3 Df ~ 424 . ..
417 - SOE ..
. _f$1 l
-427. . ..
\ . P0f .299 .. i 345 -23o
$90 I/O
/ 4 14 35 y 4 00 /25 47 22 l
= v.+ ;
n
e ATTACHMENT III 11/27/84 ir (RO) 1,' . RESPONSE TO DR. J MA's QUESTION OF 11/26/84 Ql. Provide soil spring distribution related to the basemat N-S bending moment. Ans. The soil spring distribution is shown in attached Revision -1 of Sh 2/7 and Sh 3/7 of which were submitted previously on 11/19/84. Q2. Provide N-S bending capacity of the basemat. Ans. The N-S ultimate bending capacity of the basemat is calculated to be as follows: '
- a. Positive ultimate bending capacity (Tension at top), Mu ist 1929 ft - kip /ft.
- b. Negative ultimate bending capacity (Tension at botton), Mu is:
Area I 6,251 ft-kip /ft Area II 5,605 ft-kip /ft
- Area III 2,766 ft-kip /ft For location submitted of the basemat previously areas see revised Sh 2/6 which was on 11/16/84.
Q3. Revise Sh 3/6 to include til 4 12 re-bars. Ans. See revised Sh 3/6 attached. I
-. -- . . . _ . . - . _ - - - ~ - - ..___- -__ . - . . -
" 'e y g tDASCO SERYlCES INCORPORATED ev L Y*"4 car:r tk./f A4 s set - 2 _o,_ 7 custo. ev 00 cave NOV. # f a 8#4 8 ers see. mh __
cusar LOUISIDA' POWER &
------u-w-- vsw -- .a. oas. .m _ _ L IGHT CO.
na_IK1U 5TATIUN esiosect 1977 1165 WW INSTALLAffoy . Intre s suence - MAT McMguT t.URVES ( Poss riv& uoug 1 Tuce.d g yo p ) . e4 es e e- g;osw r No. g is o N N " f6
- e* eo g .
'9 4 jf NCd "6 'e- Th wielal o - t ,, v.
mo m o oso. N ew . 64 s *
*e T 4'%1
. es e e . .a t o.4. .e .e.'..e, 4Ci m. e.st.-
*wat,% 9 w m af 4 g. ,. est at 919 al. t iI .I '
,I .
.ll . I e* l I. ;) i I
- i -
. g l
<.!ll-t . g
- l,
. i e .j. .I I
- i ll .
i , .. 1 . ee . i
. l g .
t .
' .f.
?. & l I .
n
. . l l 5e l ? * #
i f
- 1 fl..* 4f e6
. e ; j l! s .
8080 . l l .e ! l! . ' ll l
- do ?!O _
l t l pff.0: ; I *s 34 Le a i - - i al l I i ; :: i .
.I i
- r,
- s. i! ,
; I
, I la1 -
. .l i
m * -
. . ., . I
. t t ll L .
. .l' i
k R l I l. l. l 'f , g j . s,, l000- -
- g
.. s -
g . f
; If 8
- i a 3
9 --- - 4 L. *
,' ! . i. _ j ..3 . . .
L._ 1 j . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . 1! l lt ; i *
- . .j p .
i
.;.....j .
i ?. . l.. 3 ...' . 4..:.j . i
. . . *I..
g 1.*
,..,Il.
II l* .i l
. . . . . .. ~ . . ..j . . ,' + n .
! i r.
. . a8 -
e . i. T .! : l. .
. . j . .t . .-
. g pgg *.. : : , __,
l_ g y.0M$7iPAW4(e.so*ba.._5) t ?
- t
, }
f _ .. .! l ., . , _.4 i........ f t * ,. m 1 t : i .s (
- I . .
- g e g l l . .: .. . .
*.s* g .
). ! .
.p. g. 3*. ...l.. .:. . l6 g - _. . y _ .4 e
.I
- q. 4 i
t j . .o . 4 . 7........ . - ! l ,t VA nsA 6 ft , sp',noa4 f
, I?
- p . .) _..
l
- / 0 04 -H.
- .. _ - a .... - .. 4..
. ., j . ~.. ; :. . i . , .
l \ $ i ss's t,n - sto %) l l 'i , l %. */,a s llkYan e%,s vania ett y
. . .l c.
! t. ,,- 4 i
ll
- 1: i '
I -
. i i... it i
'I j! ,jii i
!i:..,];
- ..;.1
, , j ,
i l t t
. ; l i .. . . .. . .
l , , . t i ,.
-2404 : i i I ' r: '
l I ,. l. i l. ,!g e; ' .i
, !. i. . . l e
.i . . .
- l. ,
l l> - - -
.Il',:~!
I f ,! l . i ll l i i i: !' : i t ' i. . I; . .* g s ;\t i t l Ii , 1: .. t LtG sooo ? MOMfHT CUA'Vi - jf(7 A *A C H.S J(^!OM4 ) 1 Co457 MoDulu.s
-- - - - - . . Vantall on hor of 6R C s l C ( D 4 L') +/.6 (L + $') + /.0 6 esire .
C
f DM EBASCO SERYlCES INCORPORATED
,,C G l.EE OATE I l- 19-Pil 3 s.e g e ? - 7 l parg //-If W OF-CMWD.sv[.fd '
ors wo_ 007 i no, _ curar UISIANA POWER 4 LICHT CO. PsioJact vaiurufw arsJun rmrtuc sTATIOlt 1977 1185 IfB f MRT A T.f. A t tnar . i.v e , 5 suoJact M4 7~ MMNM UM83 rue r so. ( 905'T'N NM ~ TEAL 4eod AT T e* d es 9 e. en o =g 94 4 4 W% #6 e g N * " '9 9 esi ,e to e M! [NC$ 9$ W 4 4' O -
** os w er* me P- e.
4 i1 en o es w es M se tA y 4 4 oe A -Ode*at.e. p 8 48
- e. th ht ee ,e' N.N e# &4 p9 ,, ; 9 ;
Sd M T w a. .
, yg g (4 I
! l l I; im .
- * ; . I . !
1 i : 'L
- i. . i !
. . a : I . ! ; l.
I i ' l l5 Arl.*dy. oO # s l .- 11 2000 f.ll i ir i l i l! II i l i; sll'. ! ! - 4 . . g fj,/)Co J ' *i e ,- d j g,M4,
,. i) i ll, .
's ?
- . I ;: ; I . r ;
i:
. , s.
Ii . . t . j. .l
.! ,. l . u - ! [,
es I . . t !,: : .
, . 1 I;
. I ' .
1I
;, i I -
. . t i g ? t ;
=
4 :.- :: I 8
.! , l.
l
. j g jepp- . , . a -~+ - .
.. _ a .
t li
'4. * '
i v - m I
*l lr ,
=
l - s rl' 8 l l l3, i s T -- w g ;
. I : . .
i l. . l .'. i -
, : . . i
< a ; ;.
. i. -
i.
.'i!.
ggg l j CDNST SPMe"4 L '50 */n a) - * &,,.
; j '
1l,
.-i h.m_.. . ,
. . I a
.4
; 3 : .
i
.a. . _... .
,s
_L 8 (..;..
; 7 _, pl .? a .
.i s . . . . . . . 4 s - ,
e , - A .. j .. . ..l... Q I _ _. 4 1. j . ,
. s1._
, ,a . ..
. t , ~ . ,: .r ,
.r_ .r.m
,ggg j
.. 4
^ l VEmAalg .Q.-9 synt% .- .. .
=_
7
,r ~~ l I I e j ,.,
- t .
I :$ f,a s sic Yet ' 1 t 7to JLA I . It0 l.' IS$h ;
!.i
' i ,l ,-
t . i I l l
. ,i . l i
t . .
,. . l ,8 :
18 . e
.' t . g.
l;.. ....l ; i
. ii.l.!
. I ,, - '
l l,? I
-2400 l *5 : 1 .
!! i : 1 .i I j.; Jl ii. -
lI i i , i , .
, ll i
. .i . ;
jj .; ! . , , .
.I .
. .s i !. . -
LtGtND C o **t *~ *f
- D ut ses
. . . . . o gis ets ., MOMfM1' CUPv6 . $! c7 A -A .
i N S BtNOoN6 ) D (DEAD LOAO) ONLy ge t re 4. <_ n
u .
.tw
#ik a .
I 22 2 . aa . _ . . . . . . l q e
. ? .
E . I
. .... j sv ,
- I.
I, V
. l 33, *
~
\
l t
- g
,,,,< 1. -
._ _.,u, _ , ..
.t._a E
.G .
=.
.au li
- 3
?' >
l
~
7, - hN h
- j r *
=
[e* Ns . s - ;
, *1= . . .
g
*=* .
1 Y ' h en I
.a "Y""
, . s i
j 2 . e iV s
* * / I WF
.- 7N w-g l t.
av;f t:"9 F ~- -
!.3:
=
4
.n MD _ .
~ ~
a' $'
. e . , e g i *a . - _
e
,e
- 1 I \, .,
i- ,
- 3 -
1 - L , s : > - - - 1 0 < I e j*.!. . t! d I
% mesi. can, n, , se e.
31 l .
.m.m n3,ei -
m .n . . a .. . frem.in. t e n us ,s.e. esi.' i < i L g 4 j eeve wvvowp I
- i ! ,;
.l* . .
. P .I
. . . . . . . . . . _ _ _ _ _ _-- l -
i 1/t #;
- e
,---,.e-----,,-__.,.....,~..<__,....,m..,.,_.
O 1 n i W.3 /,t M e
- i =
o' D 1 o m N gg* . 8 ai 4 5 g -
%. = t! -
i ;i; e ' g .* G e . t 1 4 n . f
. Q .
g . 7U N $9 g u Q w b u i
'h f %
Ns . A
\ 0 %.
/ ,
6 w ~ e .
,= .
S-
,__ A 3 0 Q- %
pff' W
. o . s alt, D V y
~
e * -
- w .=. -
g ,3 ,f, , . R y t. .
. a -
k'( ( n s 'c . <
~.
'.Nx .
n
e t n
; e i* a.... , _ _ _ __ . _ _.
P OW E R S U G M T / New- - i.awsomem n n m e mum o superasseone "M EEEO December 7. 1984 W3P84-3414 3-41.01.04 , A4.05 ' Director of Nuclear Reactor Regulattaa Attentism: Nr. C. W. Enighton. Chief Licesofag 3 ranch No. 3 Divietoe of Licensing U.S. Ihselaar Regulatory Commission Washington. D.C. 20555 !
}
Subject:
Waterford 3 SBS Docket No. 50-382 ! i BASEll&T IIDWI20EING AND C05FIEN420EY ANALYSES -
Dear Mr. Knightos:
Two areas have been identified by the EEC Staff as requiring LP4L action with regards to the 1sene of cracks fa the Neelear Plant Island structure i. Commes Doendaties Benemst. This 1strer defines the required settone and ! provides emmaitammes for completiam af thsee actione. ! The MC Staff filings with the Arande safety and Licanelag Appeal Board ' have indiented the need for a semitoring and surveillance progens and esafirmatory analyses. LF4L will submit to the NBC Staff, prior to 'l amiceeding SI power. a maatterlag and surveillanos program for the basemat. Fo11 swing NBC Staff review and approvm1. LPAL will not modify the presten ',.* without prier approval of the ERC Staff. This program will addrase, at a * ) stataus, the foIIowing elementst ,
. I, -
1 t settleasut of the basemat 2 : ,'.! changes is ground water chemistry that could effect corroeiam of retaforcing steel ' 5 ,
- 3. esseenal vertattee la greemd water levels ,, i 4 .:
mapping of sigaffisant cracklag in the beoemst and adjacent walls. Li prior to euceedlag 52 power. LP4L will submit for NEC staff review sad
.y approval a detailed commitment to perform confirmatory smalyses for the basemet. The couaiteent will addraos the following elsmester -
1 dynamic couplies between the reactor building and the base ant for seismic stresses resultias from the vertical earthquake input
- 2. dynamie effects of lateral soil / water loadiass 1 i
l i __, _____.,_,~,.mm.w~~M=""*~V
Mr. G. W. Katghton W3r84-3414 j.
- 3. artificial boundary cometrainte in finite elemente models 1
' 4. finenees of base mat element mesh h t S. or131a of cracke in the vertteel walle. !! i t' These confirmatory analyses will be embaitted for review by the Rac staff 5 prior to reecart after the first refueltas eyele, p t If you need further information regarding these commitments pinese contact .$ as. Very truly years. ! L E Cook mselaar support a Liceaefag Meneger , INCreme ~I co R.D. Martia. IWIC-Engfan IV > D.N. Crutchfield. NRC-M R . J.E. Wilson. NRC-WER ' EEC Seetdent r- ;; h e Office INp0 Records Center (D.L. 41111spie) , LL. stabe - EM. Stevoueon ,- 1
!l
* ;[
a 1
'l i
k 3
.I
=
^
.a t
e ' V3P64-3414 l
! i :
t' -
.< t
*> f bec:
B.S. Leddick. F.J. Drummond. R.F. Barkhurst. T.F. Cerrets. D.E. Dobson P.N. Backes. L.L. Base. R.F. Burski. S.A. Alleman, L.F. Stors, J.E. Woods, R.M. Nelson, K.R. Iyengar, W. A. Crose, R. A. Savoie. C.E. Maller Project Files, u=inistrative Support (2). Licensing Library, Onaf ta Licensing Files ; i Ebasco - M.K. Yates. A.M. Cuttona, J. Hart. C.C. Nofar !. CE - J.W. Veire i j l l e . j g II 1 l l
- l '
, i I il
.. )
' ' I, i j! i i ir r! _ __ am----~-----= - " "- ^ ^ ~ ~ ~ " '
a i b Louissama ...oem c~oe. ... e . .c .cc. P O W E R & L 1 G H T ! New cateaNa Loue4Na 7o174exe e (so4: see-asas "SSN s*vsYE u January 3, 1985 W3P85-0025 3-A1.16.07 3-A1.01.04 A4.05 Director of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Attention: Mr. Dennis M. Crutchfield, Assistant Director for Safety Assessment Division of Licensing U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555
SUBJECT:
Waterford 3 SES Docket 50082 Additional Information on Basemat Hairline Cracks
Dear Mr. Crutchfield:
The purpose of this letter is to set out the current extent of our knowledge of the existence of cracks in the Waterford 3 basemat. Following the discovery, mapping, evaluation and repair, in 1977, of the cracks in the area of the basemat now under the Reactor Containment Building (RCB), the next crack mapping effort occurred in 1983. The documentation and mapping of cracks in 1983 was suggested by the NRC Staff following the discovery of cracks in the Reactor Auxiliary Building (RAB) in areas being cleaned up for application of epoxy floor covering (painting). That mapping effort included a thorough examination of the accessible areas of the basemat and documentation of visible cracks, as well as any evidence of cracks or crack repair if the crack itself was not visible. In 1979, the Ebasco concrete specification was changed to provid.e a method to repair surface cracks in the basemat prior to painting concrete surfaces. Because the cracks i-t
P W3P85-0025 Mr. Dennis M. Crutchfield Page 2 were not considered to have structural significance, the repairs were considered to be cosmetic in nature.and were not required to be documented. It was recently brought to my attention, however, that some such repairs may have been documented, so I directed that a records search be conducted. The search yielded only three instances of crack docu-mentation. These include two cracks within the RAB (October 13, 1977 and November 23, 1982) and one in the FHB (March 23, 1982). A comparison with the 1983 crack map was inconclusive. The three cracks correspond generally with cracks identified on the 1983 crack map, and probably are recorded on the map. However, because the location of the three cracks was not documented in detail, we cannot state with absolute certainty that they had been recorded. In any event, the cracks discovered in the RAB and FHB are not considered to be structurally significant or pertinent to the basemat evaluations. If you have any questions regarding this transmittal, please contact me. Very truly yours, K. W.-Cook Nuclear Support & Licensing Manager KWC:cp cc: E.L. Blake, G.W. Knighton, G.L. Constable, W.M. Stevenson, J.M. Wilson
-}}