ML20126H474
| ML20126H474 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | 05000000, South Texas |
| Issue date: | 11/18/1980 |
| From: | Crossman W NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV) |
| To: | NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML17198A238 | List:
|
| References | |
| FOIA-84-393 NUDOCS 8506100343 | |
| Download: ML20126H474 (2) | |
Text
. Q._.
.L.
=
?
%d 4.n.a')
t,7
- p,'
UNITED STATES y p,,,q NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION q
E j;;,
/f REGION IV 0,
8 811 RYAN PLAZA DRIVE. SUITE 1000
,g e
ARLINGTON. TEXAS 70011 Novenber 18, 1980 Docket No. 50-498 50-499 MEMORANDUM FOR: File THRU:
W. C. Seidle, Chief, RC&ES Branch FROM:
W. A. Crossman, Chief, Projects Section
SUBJECT:
MEETING WITH HL&P AND B&R MANAGEMENT TO DISCUSS WELDING AND CONCRETE RESTART PROGRAMS FOR SOUTH TEXAS PROJECT, UNITS 1 & 2, DN 50-498; 50-499 A meeting was held at the Region IV office at 3:30 p.m. on September 12, 1980, at the request of hl.&P management, to discuss the restart programs for welding and complex concrete at the South Texas Project.
The following persons were in attendance:
l Houston Lightina and Power Comoany (HL&P)
G. W. Oprea, Jr., Executive Vice President D. G. Barker,' Manager, STP R. A. Frazar, Manager, QA 4
Brown and Root, Inc. (B&R)
J. R. Geurts, Vice President and Project General Manager K. H. Leasburg, Deputy General Manager and Site Manager J. L. Hawks, Engineering Project Manager R. J. Vurpillat, Power Group QA Manager W. J. Friedrich, Site QA Manager M. D. Muscente, STP Welding Program Manager A. D. Fraley, Jr., Project General Superintendent NRC.
K. V. Seyfrit, Director, Region IV W. C. Seidle, Chief, Reactor Construction and Engineering Support Branch W. A. Crossman, Ohief, Projects Section R. E. Hall, Chief, Engineering Support Section H. S. Phillips, Resident Reactor Inspector - STP W. G. Hubacek, Reactor Inspector, Projects Section J. I. Tapia, Reactor Inspector, Engineering Support Section D. P. Tomlinson, Reactor Inspector, Engineering Support Section 1
4l
\\
e506100343 e40620 i t' PDR FOIA OLASSPIS4-393 PDR
m
- \\ _ _. _ _.
]
s
.. v.-
File - DN 50-498; 50-499 Neve-ce-18, 1980 The meeting was to provide the NRC a detailed progra= for tne re-exa=ination, repair and restart of AWS and ASME welding and restart cf corolex concrete placement.
Re-examination. Repair and Restart of WS and ASME Weldinc The program for reinspection, repair and restart of MS and ASSE welding was scheduled to coerence en September 22,19fD, and October 15, 1980, respectively.
The licensee's program for AWS and ASME walding war described in tne following dectsnents:
"Interin Report Review of Safety-Related Welding," dated July 28, 1980 (Attacnment 1)
"Re-examination, Repair and Welding Restart Plans," dated Septes>er 8,1980 (Attachment 11)
" Welding Program Description," dated Septesoer 8,1980 The licensee's discussion of the welding program essentially paralleled tne program description in the above documents, except for Attachment 11 which contained some inaccuracies and was being revised. The licensee c:rm:itted to providing RIY with the revised Attachment 11.
Comolex Conente Pours The program for restart of complex concrete pours was scheduled to corrience on October 13, 1980. A licensee mpresentative verbally oescribed 'Jw program for implementation of coemitments in order to resume placement of complex con-crete. The licensee agreed to provide RIV with a documen+ad description of the pmgram.
Other Matters In addition to the information the licensee agreed 'a provide conceming ne welding and concrete programs, RIY requested information regarding interim controls that are in place to process MCRs and FREAs until new sys'ans an implemented.
The licensee was informed that resumption of worit would be dependent on favorable evaluation of corrective actions by RIY inspectors on site. No -
commitments wem made as to when AWS and ASPE welding and complex concrete placements could be restmed.
W
=
W. A. Crossman,-Chief Projects Section 4
w.
ns
-ammgsumi ene _ _
_ -i-w
-.W w=
- m'
,e
~4 n+*1pe--
e.e====-i-+-7=-
.:..-.......1*..
......a...a....-._....,...-.-....
. -..... ~
- s3. j
- "'%q UNITED STATES 8
1 je NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION g
E O
811 RYAN P lVE. SUITE 1000 j
ARUNGTON. TEXAS 76012
'%.,,,. **'f
, April 16, 1981 In Reply Refer To:
RIV Docket Nos. 50-498 50-499 Houston Lighting and Power Company ATTN: Mr. G. W. Oprea, Jr.
Executive Vice President Post Office Box 1700
. Houston, Texas
-77001 Gentlemen:
This confirms the discussion between Mr. D. G. Barker of your staff and our Mr. W. C. Seidle on April 15, 1981, regarding your letter to Mr. K. V.
Seyfrit. Director, dated April 2,1981, (ST-HL-AE-647) concerning your request to expand complex concrete work activities.
Specifically, with regard to your request to expand limited complex concrete placement based on comitments contained in your letters ST-HL-AE-555, 572, and 647, we understand that:
1.
Management systems and special procedures controlling the limited work
~
have been established.
2.
Training of personnel has been completed.
3.
Adequate staffing exists to both perform and manage the limited work.
s 4.
- Corrective actions for previously identified noncompliances related directly to concrete placement are complete.
5.
Concrete correlation testing actions have been completed per ST-HL-AE-572.
1 6.
Specifically, the expansion of complex safety-related concrete work activities will be accomplished as outlined in the attachments to your l
letter of April 2,1981, referenced above and in the Brown & Root Concrete Restart Program, Revision 0, dated September 18, 1980.
Our inspectors have verified your corrective actions through the review of records and the witnessing of corcrete placement and concur with your plans to expand complex concrete work activities as. set forth in the attachments
. CERTIFIED MAIL I
p i
/
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED e
?
mn.
~
V.__
~
Houston Lighting and Power Company 2-April 16, 1981 of your letter (ST-HL-AE-647) and the Restart Program with the exception of the three RCB I dome placements (CSI-R1, R2, and R3). We understand that you will infom this office of your method for verifying the location of dome tendon sheathing within specified radial tolerance. This notification (by letter) should be sufficiently in advance of your plans to continue complex concrete placement beyond the eleven pours identified in the above references in order for us to evaluate your program for controlling such work.
9 If your understanding of this matter is inconsistent with the above, please contact this office innediately.
Sincerely,
&$rfdm /
ohn T. Collins Deputy Director
..<wep.-em-e+
.e-+.w-.-
,-eme--
.,..m,.
,,m
,--------,--y--.----
-h4m@g,,
.-a, 4
" k ~- y.
48M6%
e f
b
~
Y Ak l
{ h-yu
,uk/.n 74.:e d g we %%f can-,ce a
- o f L g r -. z 1 C d e s ( -.
bEm67f -
o 6i d 'li t so
)
% mwg
- - = - - -..... _..
e., I,
' ~
mg. s ic o t.A - m e....
bC. Post Ofnce Box Three, Houston, Texas 77001 a
n FebnJary 25, 1980 Houston Lighting & Power Company P. O. Box 1700 ST-BR-HL-28932 Housten, Texas 77001 SFN: 0-0540 CR-0241 Attention: Mr. A. J. Granger Project Engineering Manager South Texas Project Electric Generating Station
Subject:
Structural Backfill Test Fill Program
~
Gentlemen:
Attached please find a memorandum (GM-61356) documenting observations and results from the Category-I Structural Backfill Test program con-ducted between 2/6/80 and 2/13/80. The program was initiated and coordinated by Mr. T. K. Logan, HL&P QA.
Mr. R. Landsman from NRC observed placements of the first lifts and he requested special test information, which is also contained in the memorandum.
The test program demonstrated that the vibrating rollers used for STPEGS structural backfill placements in unrestricted areas have effective compaction influence well in excess of the specified lift thickness. However, several conditions were noted during the test program and described in the memorandum, as having adverse effects on the results. These irregular conditions render specific details of the results potentially non-valid. The hereby transmitted information
- hould therefore be considered "For Information Only", and the data pages and figures have been stamped accordingly.
B&R Construction has also reviewed the program and has concluded that "certain data were effected by irregular procedures and con-ditions which are not typical for nonnal operations" (BC-24037-LET, attached).
It is furthennore the stated opinion of B&R's Construc-tion management that a second test section should be constructed.
B&R Engineering concurs with Construction and recommends that a second test fill program should be conducted. The concept of the second test should be the same as for the first test, except that a larger number of in-place density tests should be obtained. Con-struction will work to normal operational procedures and B&R Engine-ering will observe the work, evaluate the information and provide a final test fill report.
,,_,,m
....e,
--*-e--
""1*-a
- 'N,**
- = * * ~ * " ^ *
'I~
'~
..j...
- l.
.m _.
.m-BrtWmCTRbot.inc.
7ebruary 25, 1980 Page 2 ST-BR-HL-28932 The second test fill program will be implemented upon HL&P's instructions.
Very truly yours, BROWN & ROOT, INC.
l~
Y
/. L. Hawks
~
v Engineering Project Manager South Texas Project Electric Generating Station JLH/HSC CSP /tw Attachments File No.: Y3105 cc:
T. K. Logan (HL&P)
L. R. Jacobi (HL&P)
W. C. Jones (HL&P)
J. R. Geurts l'. D. Douglas L. E. Tolley G. T. Warnick R. A. Witthauer R. W. Peverley R. G. Withrow Y-31-Q(1) Santillan i
i
~--:-
-+._.;
a-
==_.=---.=..u:.-
s
-l 1
2 e
TO:
Files JOB NO.: CR-0241 j
FROM:
R. N. Jennings DATE:
2/19/80
SUBJECT:
Structural Backfill Test CORRES. NO.: GM-61356 I
Fill Program Results i
Introduction A test fill program was conducted at the STPEGS jobsite during the period of 02/06/80 through 02/13/80 (Reference ST-BR-E-28534, J. L. Hawks to A. J. Granger, attached). The procedure employed for the test fill
, program is described in the attachment to the ST-BR-E-28534 correspondence.
The specifics of the test fill program methodology and field conditions are included as an attachment to this correspondence, entitled " Test l
Fill Program, Field Procedure."
i Conclusions The test fill program successfully demonstrated, for unrestricted Category 1 structural backfill production, the compatibility of the specified maximum loose lift thickness (18-inches, reference B&R Specification 3YO69YS029) and the corresponding compaction equipment. However, certain conditions existed during the test fill program which may have contributed i
to randomness of observed density data.
A discussion of these conditions is included in the attachment to this correspondence, " Test Fill Program, Field Procedure." Conclusions described below should be qualified by an awareness of these conditions, in conjunction with an understanding of the relatively small amount of acquired Relative Density (R.D.) data.
l s
Density Distribution Both lift 1 and the surface lift were compacted to approximate thicknesses j
af 14-inches from 18-inch (approximate) loose lifts. The most dense portion of each lift, as determined by in place sand-cone method density tests conducted by Pittsburgh Testing Laboratory (PTL), occurred in the lower 6-inches of the lift. Conversely, the least dense portion of each lift occurred in the upper 6-inches of the lift.' There was one exception to this least dense portion generalization, in the lift 1 Step B series 1 tests, in which dry densities of 119.3 p.c.f. and 119.2 p.c.f. occurred in the O to 6-inch and the 2 to 8-inch test depths, respectively. See Figure 1 for a tabulation of the density test results and Figures 2 through 4 for plotted density points and fitted curves.
1-
- 7. r-m
i.
~Z M ~
- u 2 2 " =-
~
Fchruary 19, 1980 Gti-61356 No isolated zones of low density were observed in average R.D. curves.
The average densities obtained from each testing series-generally increased from the lift surface to a maximum in the lower 6-inches of the lift, then decreased to a minimum in the upper 6-inches of the underlying i
i lift. See Figure 2.
Increase In lift 1 Density Average R. D. densitites in lift I were significantly increased by placement and compaction of the surface lift, with the greatest R.D.
density increase of 18.6% (average) occurring in the 4 to 10-inch test
' depth from the surface of lift 1.
The second greatest average density increase, 15.2%, occurred at the 0 to 6-inch test depth from the surface of lift 1.
See Figure 5 for a plot of R.D. increase for lift 1 due to
' Step B compaction. From this figure, it is concluded that the self-l propelled vibratory roller is effective in densifying the Category 1 structural backfill fsor loose lift depths in excess of 18-inches.
Low Density Tests Some tests were observed within lift 1 after placement and compaction of the surface lift (lift 2), which were less than 80% R.D.
These tests did not occur at isolated depths within a given testing location; they occurred very specifically in the Step B lift 1 series 1 testing.
Possible contributing conditions are discussed in the " Test Fill Program, Field Procedure," attached.
This anomaly is viewed not as potential for low density stratified 4
zones, but rather as a localized area of low density due to the specific adverse boundary conditions referenced above. It is further noted that such a condition would not occur during typical production placement.
During the test fill program, restricted backfill conditions were ignored and areas of uncompacted sand existed in close proximity to the Step B series 1 testina. Lower densities were anticipated at this location.
Of 5 lift 1 Step B series 1 tests, 3 were between 75% and 80% R.D., and two were between 80% and 90% R.D.
Of 5 lift 1 Step B series 2 tests, located further from adverse boundary conditions, 1 test was between 80%
and 90% R.D., and the remaining 4 tests were above 90% R.D.
A plan view of uncompacted fill locations is provided in Figure 6.
I Surface Compaction, i
Acceptance tests for Step C were taken in the central portion (4 to j
10-inch test depth) of the surface lift. Though the density in this zone increased to exceed the required 80% R.D. after 14 one-directional
-passes, tests in the surface (0 to 6-inch test depth) indicated a decrease in relative density with increasing number of passes. Figure 7 4
exhibits this behavior..
n, Z T~~~
~
-- - T CE -
J
~
~
o Fcbruary 19, 1980 Gti-61356 i
l i
In conclusion, the test fill program demonstrated that the compaction equipment used for STPEGS backfill operations can achieve 80% R.D.
throughout backfill loose lifts of 18-inch thickness. PTL, in testing the upper 6 inches of t e underlying lift, has consistently tested the zone of low density. Hence, when 80% R.D. has been attained, as determined by PTL, in the upper 6 inches of a lift, in general, densities in excess of 80% have been achieved throughout the remainder of the lift, m A 2 20 90 R. 3 p nnings
(/ '
File No.: Y310s cc:
J. L. Hawks R. A. Withauer R. G. Withrow P. S. Jordan H. S. Cameron D. A. Robertson E. J. Thormaehles Y-31-Q (1) Santillan 1
4 i
I 3-4 e e me < + a'.e*v^
9'"'4
~ '
- t-i 9
p.
-rw m,
yyv w
l 7,. -.
- _@s Brown & Root.inc.
SOUTH TEXAS PROJECT ELECTRIC GENERATING STATION UNIT NO.1 & 2 SHEET N4 QF HOUSTON LIGHTING & POWER
,, ua.
Ca.o24, cucuT Ah %e.1-1
<M - 4 I 95G sumneT Bases oN cateutanon na COMPUTER CHICD. SY DATE 7
- IN tgb i
Shp A '7es4,3 - Esolfs AC+e,- lo Posse.s S
~M rea 1.o.
C V 4,h.
IdCrence seg, Cr@y.h SIWiv, Cudy 3 g
-r.. ~
Accep+4nce
-3 nw
~
MR2tSoct 14-2c
'20.0 I20.5
- 81. 2 UR2m R t 8-(4 st 12c. 9 84.2 L-te s i l
l E
MR 2LS4 EC 0-G
+20.o (19.6 77 7 O
- m. -
NR 21ssEc.
4-to I18. 3
- 71. l
>m l21.3 86.2 g
UR2t8sEc Q-I4 MR2183EC 14.?D l18.7 73.2 k
l 6e,tes 2 UR2tsscc.
4-10
- 20.0 120.3
- 81.2 O
ur2159EC 0-6
//6.3 40.7
.g W 219ccc 8-l4 Il9.1 75.2 g
Utll91EC 14-20 ll7.5 47.0 mamm n
' M S+ee C. Tes#,,3 - ReseI6 AF4E.f 4 Passes
.. O 54.
Tes+ l.D.
DepA In.
E**"* renu Es.* Dr3.c.ni.g Feld,a %,,;D 8 De
- /.
2 5+. W P
F.
MR2257E r--
c.c,
< ?. g. 2 toq. l l 9. l MK27.34Ec 4-10 I20. 7 53.2 NR225EC- 0 -G l13. 9 47.7 kV 22.u,Ec 4-to l22.0 69 6 (h
.D F,'a oe-t p I g e I o F ?.
,._.,........_............._._...___._z.
~
l'.
G@ Brownf5 Root.inc.
SOUTH TEXAS PROJECT ELECTRIC GENERATING STATION UNIT NO.1 & 2 gug g7,o, o, _
HOUSTON l.lGHTING & POWER Ca.om cucur
,, NO.
A# ache.,A A u -Gn m sumect sasso oN cAi. cut.ATION NO.
COMPUTER CHIC D. 8Y DATE 2*I9 d
i SQ B T&4 9 - Resul4s AN-8 Passes-u s.o.
Deys,t~ BQa3 w. Q ph 1Pe% L%cq, r.
E
>=
4&"
~
a MRt209EC IA-20 t 21. 2 12.1.. l.
BS2.
Z NR2208EC 8 - 14
/ 2 l. d 86.7-Li.,1.
uR 22socc 4-10
+ 21. 2 ll4.0 A8.2 N
121.2 85 7 O
ne 2zitGc 8 -I4 ll4.3 86.2.
~
MR22tzEc I4 20 ll'l. 2 i 75.7 g,
MR2213Ec 16-22 l20.fo
.. 8,2.7 MR2214EL 16-24 ug22tsEc 20 26 17.0.o
!.79.7.
M
' h.i nezzsec 22-28 12I.4 Ol 2
ll9.8 78.7 nezznec 28.Sd m
%., 2 g;
UR 2215EC 4-IO
+21,2 ll7 8
.. 68.6
.ml Ng2219sc 8 - 14 ll6. l
- 59. cs l20 7 88 2.
M NK22.wst 14 20 126.0
/08 3 C
22221ec 16-22 m2222sc
/8-24 1238 96.I u
l Ng2223ec 20-26
~
I23. 0 94.4
/22 9
'13 9 ne2224E4 22-2 ug22artc 28.%
l18 0
- 49. G a
l
%s;hLi ResulI 5 Roon. i b" z 'f E
' @.w Brown &Rootlnc.
SOUTH TEXAS PROJECT ELECTRIC GENERATING STATION UNIT NO.1 & 2 magy no, o, _,
1 HOUSTON LIGHTING & POWER CR Om Cu NT
.,os No.
susxCT A N x L e 4 4 6A4-4I M6 BAS D ON CALCULATION NO.
2*I9 19 8 COMPUTER CHM"D.av DATE e
I o
g.
~
.s --._w t _.
.. _e...
~... _ _.
g Od i
. 4. -
c.
.y.
y
. g __.
u
~
t
. _ ~.
.... _ u __. _.
.7 g
o i
v
~
k..
E
.M I_!_'
I i
i i
!.{
' =_'...j._ 4
- ._. L
. _. l.. _ __ !
g
.t l
O a
X-
. 9.'_
p.
m.
l i
. y._
y'
-q
. __ !_._ __. p.._..
i.
l i
t i
., _. w.!.
l
?
l l
i k
i._
i._i..
I I
,..m.
i 1
g
-D l
' _.,+_
I l
l I
g,.
6 l
t 4
l i
i i
~ ' - '
~ ~ - ~ ~ ~ ' ~ ~ ~ ~
i l
t 6 0 i
/ _i l
I I
I u
i
.v
. _g_.._._
l i
3 1
O
,. 7 i
l l
b:
i o
i l
j i
e i
I l
s a
ie i
i I
t I
..'. e _6 N '..
=
i e
~
l k
l' s
M.
I i
- l. A l i
i i.
, it i
i i
j
O '
- l l
~
8 Y
h k
I t
1 o.
s-j g.._._._.
6 g 1....
i t
_ b, 1
.L..
. l. f"
-5..'-..
1 WIWIRees 4+-
. L...
r w
y t
W i
i I
i O4 3
$a
.% 6 ;i
_IW i
i
=
j Q
._w p
p e
3
.Q 7
M
...Q.
I L.
m q.
4 q
e
.gh w
Z 'Ie i O '029 9 '91 >
~IS W ' ' f.~f '
4&$$
fgGogg } _
I
L
.-..x.
~.. ~..
6.- Brownf5 Root.inc.
SOUTH TEXAS PROJECT ELECTRIC GENERATING STATION UNIT NO.1 & 2 mg7 no, o, _
'~
HOUSTON 1.lGHTING & POWER Ca.o24,
- o. uo.
CuruT suuse, A H., MJ -k-4 Ai-61 m, BASED ON CALCULATION NC.
l 1
D*I9 13N COMPUTE R Chit'D. SY DATE lf y
o M
i
.. L...'..
enn o
w c
._.._ ;_ _;... g y}g g
. s....
g; f:
S
$ M. . a t g C ....J.m Jie L _:.- .... i i ii M3 l 1 i i a O g y i i e ,l l - (; j c: i a
- s....
I i l l [ ul . 9. T. 4.._ H i i _i I __ . ~ g.. i o 3g,,., i i l b
- i..
l i
- d
- Mg...
,g uJ y J 3 _,j j i i L' i i ._. __n .._1.' i .j l I i T-l j 1 g o3 f .._ _!. i _ i. {.... ,2g .a._....... .I %h l _.. g.1._ y. .. 4._.1 _. l \\.y - I 4 e e2v i C l I. 2 d W e i i d .l.... t l j i ' O.. W Y (_] p (Q. OJ us l 5W I w A } e.. y g 2 e _2 Q 5 L 3 .. g n q 3 i
- v. !
.f .J O l. 88 yo_' S S b e 7 L-F i'q .g{ g O V a Z 'IE e - O 'c2 r g '91 + ' #'wospe9f t _f-I S, G S s's -c w
1 dF3E5% BrownffRootinc. SOUTH TEXAS PROJECT El.ECTRIC GENERATING STATION UNIT NO.1 & 2 SMEET NO. 07 _ a. HOUSTON l.lGHTING & POWER .,o. No. C a.o n, CutNr ANAMM 4e AM -G IM6 suanCT BASED ON CALCULATION NC. ~ COMPUTER CH KO. 8Y DATE O*f9 133 .J T V )f ..... o i i
- 6. _ ;_ L _. *
.......... 7 M.,...' i %"g% y 2 l 24 ,._9.._.'.... y3 i u g I L._. _..O t-i i o e, __i ' _. N. _. 3..h ..0, LI
- -e.J l
i J j i L ... a.. __p.... 4 . :__ ;d - hl f! !.h. _1.. i i i o: \\, cc i , _._ __f[.k s !I N* .2 p l i i i N i T- ---- / 1-Y F-( I .a .a / i 2 l i _.;o ~ l l a3 : h i i i l .i j-f. -6 i . L gi,.f ... u. ./. 1 ii l i G:._,.___.__. l 0 ,l h'i: u T1 _ I.. ;.._., _... ...i .1__ 1 f L. ._g,4' c a ....,._4__ g-. l l J l l. _._.i i f 'ii i i i d C- .3 u =.w.:_. _. y p l 5 ' I i ] E #~ 35 t-O i._ ; ~,, i o I
- a. 5..
s_ w }- . n.... + lwh l l 4 2 - -e i 2 '- @' i '.L i t I l-'O. q+ -. s = =j u. . s I u 1 i j 6 {' b ~. 4NO[ i --. h-3eb' .d +, ~ .u 3 Q _p g
== N d .i c. s S S j @.U. 3o_k N 7 b y t *I2 o - .O *m r 8 '81.* ...l._. _... C,., _ A
@p Brownf5 Root.Inc. ~ SOUTH TEXAS PROJECT ELECTRIC GENERATING STATION UNIT NO.1 & 2 Sassi no. or _ '~ HOUSTON llGHTING & POWER Ca.om Cucur ,,o. uo. E MM b b <M - b l2 D SUBJECT SASED ON CALCULATION NO. COMPUTE R CH K'D. BY DATE 19 _. j .L. o u ~e i i i i __i.. - ...._....._...g... ga g """y'"' 4.s i w w unmL ._i.-> k_ i ~ o $l l btl.. o -.. s._..... g i i i i
- w
..i 1 v0 j i __. - i 8 o f_. ~Ol e l l ..\\- i i s I . }..J.. : '.k... l ..jpuum i i i l l _M., i . __,! _i __. _.. L, i j_.'O ' 7 X l -coj _L i t i i 1 t .e ' \\ t t '_O.,.. i i i i
- t i
e i e -..a l l l l l i l ... / "I i w: i._7 4._";. Imani i l,i o U / /
- ,. ;:g n
?_. 4 I-..-... qa ) m v _. r l l l l l I i i 9i i 'I i O i 7'..u p_.. 1 1 I, z.-. I I I l P. i i i i 0 = -u y yt ._.._!._ :n.o s . _._ L..... :. d g i.p I g
- g. ;
g. 2 w g.._.... ....7... i u ,g Q 12 i a 'e JQ I s a. TW 4J. oy = 4 f.
- ,3 5 jV, j
w4 .3 c .. p eM I h4 uo g. n g .c 3 e.7 f q w a r hO_. L 4w e b b l 'Ie o O*ozo 8 *8 * ... t.. > ' w, t m.i s e C;,..s_ C,
= T~v Erennf5 Root.inc. sceniTExAs PRc:E,.T ELE..cac GENE.uracG STAno'd tJ?a7 foc.1 & 2 x,. e y _,_ ~ -HOUSTON LIGHTING & POWER e=.nc
- z. m o.
M J
- m. i 4 < e - c-u n
,_ m m.a tan tlps
- ~tir.:llpa c m.m a one. sr cz
?** d 3s: Fz: : Ac:s M.Q-
- 2+m
'O (=G.Ted Sni %% L
- = '
N c f m.. (- a a -z 1 gr 1j f p/ _c: i 1 I I _w x l Sam 45, y, t y g ,-f I
- g. y A 5 !
t wM j tur y2 n a K b 'A. t ^^ W x :- il l A a , _ N_ kl g I'. rte A V tm. Pczax gg l l mv, .y ~ l l M /t d ph %g A l N LN) !7 r.l ' a'#* . s - em i b W s3 a2 l I M J_, r, / s,- ([ V e. i A=, h= tv 1 9-C A /m ~ j' s v ..[ l %y ,1 \\~%.e 9 ^ l 8 N-g l f, Y v. w n l N. r 'l; v O; 2 72 -/.l /-.,",, [ V z. ) u a1 "* ( 4 A. e /*.* MS Of b)ATM WACTCO **86 M O ~ -t 8 t L'NC.e4w f ~ 4*Or :afc,; S t r.nc-f.- 'D ' U A*.%IC. bD\\~~a :'AS $
. _ _... _.. Z_. 1 _ _._.- - ....._._._.__. _ _ i c l @F95 Brown &Rootlnc. ~ SOUTH TEXAS PROJECT ELECTRIC GENERATING STATION UNIT NO 1 & 2 SMEET NO. CF - HOUSTON UGHTING & POWER Ca.o241 CuENT m O. bO'UF"E 50 M* b IWS SUBJECT t SASED ON CALCULATION NO. COMPUTE R CHK*D.SY DATE 7
- l9 sgh
.8 8 N F - U,>,, u 0 M l o m M i ao 4 C El N 8 E 4 C d e ami 3 p., 2" e .q O e o 4 .., 4 e 4 ~ G. k C .h ua 3 n.a. A a 1 E .2 a- } @4 -c i x GhlhHI 'II. 4 t 4 k 0 O
- 1 O
k 7 T O VI El Ol f GI 2s ol 9 3 *s5Pd '*]l *g ;$0 ' oft svss t=g ssjjey,;lo 'ofy
w.., ___..____ 0 (;) ArrAwMe a r to GA1-61366 Brown &RootInc. east arrice sox Taree, souston, Texas 7700, February 7, 1980 ST-BR-HL-28534 Houston Lighting & Power Company SFN: 0-0540 P.O. Box 1700 i Houston, Texas 77001 Attention: A. J. Granger Project Engineering Manager ' South Texas Project Electric Generating Station
Subject:
Backfill Test Program Gentlemen: A test program fdi evaluation of bacxfill compaction was outlined in discussion between messers T. K. Logan, HL&P QA, W. C. Jones, HL&P Geotechnical Engineering and C. B. Pettersson, B&R Engineering on February 5,1980. The intended purpose for the test fill is to obtain field density data demonstrating to NRC that the compaction equipment used for STPEGS backfill operations in-fact can achieve 80 percant relative density throughout backfill lifts of 18-inch thick 6ess. The details of the program are defined in the attachment, which hereby is furnished for your information. ~ Very truly yours, BROWN & R T INC. ./ J. . Hawks Engineering Project Manager South Texas Project l Electric Generating Station JLH/HR / CSP /ke File No.: Y3105 T g cc: T. K. Logan (HL&P) R. G. Withrow W. C. Jones (HL&P) D. A. Robertson J. R. Geurts R. W. Jennings U. D. Douglas Y-31-Q(1)Santillan R. A. Withauer R. W. Peverley - ~ l
...7.. - - - - - ~ - - - - - ~ ~ ' ' ~ ~ ~ O O S* TEST PROGRA!i: COMPACTION OF CATEGORY - I { STRUCTURAL BACKFILL The purpose for this field test program is to verify that 80-percent relative density (R.D.) can be achieved throughout lifts of Category I Structural Backfill placed in 18-inch loose lifts and compacted by Dynapac 'CA-25SD vibratory roller, working in unrestricted areas. The density achieved in final surface lifts shall also be verified. The program must implemented with a' high degree of accuracy, specifically as regards determination of lift thickness and depth of in-place density tests, in order to assure that there are no thin layers (i.e. less than 6-inches thick) that have less than the required density. The field testing shall be conducted according to the following outline. B&R Geotechnical Site Engineering (the Engineer) will provide additional detailed directions in the field. The test fill shall be placed and com-pacted in accordance with the Construction Procedure (A040KPCCP-2, Rev. 2, 7-12-79). Steo d' In an area where the surface lift (test base lift) previously has been approved for continued placement, place a test lift with.18" loose thick-ness. Roll this lift according to standard procedure, until the lift passes based on regular testing (by PTL) at 12 to 18-inch and 18 to 24 ~~ inch depth. The density testing shall start after 8 passes (one-way), and continue in steps of 2 additional passes until satisfactory density has been achieved. Select then two other locations and obtain density tests (base line tests) at 6-inch interval from the surface to 24-inch depth. (It is expected that the surface-near tests will not meet to the 80t R.D. acceptance criteria, 1 j however, this should not be a bases for rejecting the compaction of the lift or to perform additional. rolling provided that the tests between 12 and 24-inches are acceptable, i.e. verifies PTL's results). The results shall be evaluated by the Engineer and two re-tests, shall be cbtained for any apparent non-valid test. The end result of Step A, shall be a minimum 1 of 8 valid tests. k e
- f//aclimen/ f 7" 22-Al-28559 ~
~ GA1-G!35A ~
- .,L u...,
c...
- :L....
.-.....L-...-.......
- l L
.x L- ~ - O O Page 2 Test Program (con't) B-Step B Place an,18-inch surface lift over the test lift (test surface lift) and roll this lift according to the construction procedure until it passes based on PTL's regular acceptance testing at 12 to 18-inch and 18 to 24 inch depth. As in step A, the testing shall start after 8 passes and the rolling shall continue in steps of 2 passes until satisfactory density has been achieved. Obtain verification. density tests between 6 and 42-inch depth at 6-inch intervals with two extra tests at 21-inch.and 27-inch depth. These tests. shall be obtained 1-n the vicinity of the base line tests (but well out-side the hole dug for these ' tests). The results shall be evaluated by the Engineer. and two re-tests shall be obtained for any apparent non-valid test. The end result of Step B shall be a minimum of 16 valid tests. Steo C The surface lift shall be subject to additional compaction after completion of the verification testing per step B. The lift shall be completed with a total of 12 passes, including the rolling of step B, and the density shall thereafter be determined at 6 to 12 inch depth for acceptance in accordance with PTL's regular procedures. Further compaction, if required, shall be performed in steps of 2 passes until satisfactory density has been obtained at 6 to 12 inch depth. Verification testing shall thereafter be performed between the surface and 6-inch depth and between 6 and 12-inch depth, at two locations. The end result of step C shall be 4 valid tests. Note: ' All depths defthed above for steps A, B and C, must be adjusted to agree with actual compacted lift thickness. The actual compacted lift thickness and actual testing depth must be recorded. i e f .-.G Nt-L,t3 %
h..
- ~
.~...... - J O Pese 2 Test Program (Con't) .e, The results of the in-place density tests shall be evaluated based on PTL's relative density acceptance criteria used for production placement control at the time of the testfill. However, the criteria shall be verified by two relative density laboratory tests performed on samples obtained during Step A df the testfill density detemeinations. The Engineer shall, together with QC-inspectors cont'ino'usly inspect the placement and compaction of the test lift and overlying surface lift in the test area. The inspection shall include all pertinent work items and methods, such as; condition of fill surface before and after placement, type of material (incl.' gradation tests), method of placement and spreading, loose lift thickness before start of compaction and compacted lift thickness upon final acceptance, operation of compaction' equipment including speed and vibratory frequency; number of passes (note:one-way or round-trip), moisture control and apparent uniformity of density and moisture. The Engineer performing the inspection shall document his observations in a memo-report, with all test results as attachments. ] i 4 i I i .j ~ l k12 N bT= k h a f .-. 6 +t -. 6 n < s
..? 2.2. .. -- -. ~N - -- - ---E-- - - - - - - - - - - ~ ~ ~. February 19, 1980 Attachment to GM-61355 TIST FII.E PROGRAM, FIELD PROCEDURE d Introduction l The following is a description of the methodology and field conditions of the test fill program conducted at the STPEGS jobsite 2/06/80 through l 02/13/80 (Reference ST-BR-E-28534, 02/07/80). Eocation The area for the test fill program was mutually selected by 3&R Construction and E&P Quality Assurance, and was located north of the Unit 2 Mechanical- . Electrical Auxiliary Building in a non-Category I backfill area. Material The backfill material used was a tan, well graded sand, with individual Particle sizes ranging from fine gravel to fine sand (using the Unified Soil Classification texture description). The material was typical of the Category I backfill used at the STPEGS site and met all requirements for Category I structural backfill of B&R Specification 3YO69YS029. The j asterial was site generically known as Thonstenberg-2 backfill sand. Reference Procedure The procedure followed in the test fill progras is outlined as an attachment to ST-BR-E-28534. E.guip,s,e.n.t A D-3 dozer was used for spreading the test fill loose lifts, and a Dynapac CA-255D vibratory roller, B&R I.D. T-279, was used for compaction. Subgrade Including the base lift, approximately 4 ft. of Thonstenberg-2 structural backfill overlaid the in-situ A-2 layer clay subgrade. Roller Pattern The roller pattern used on the base lift, lift 1, and the surface lift was parallel lanes in the north-south direction, with approximately 1 ft. of overlap between adjacent lanes. Field density tests were generally taken in areas not subject to roller overlap. J d a 4 .-1,.. ~
.,.m,. .m.
- 3..
February 19, 1980 Attachment to Qf-61356 The vibratory roller made 2 one-directional passes per lane before changing lanes. The approximate roller speed varied from 1 ft. per second in reverse gear to 1.6 ft. per second in forward gear. Elevations Elevations used to determine individual lift thicknesses were seasured by the Pittsburgh Testing Laboratory (PTL) inspector, by means of a hand level and a folding rule, using elevations marked on !!anhole 55 as datus. Ease Lift - The required density, as determined by PTL acceptance testing, was achieved within the base lift after 8 one-directional passes with the vibratory roller. Prior to placement of lift 1, the base lift experienced some surface } drying (the surface moisture content changed from moist to damp using the Unified Soil Classification description) of less than 1/2-inch in depth. Also, the area was subjected to pedestrian traffic such that approximately 30 to 40*. of the surface area was disturbed to depths ranging from 0 to 2-inches. The undisturbed portions of the base lift surface were tight, firm, and damp, with elevations varying as much as l _0.1 ft. + I The compacted surface exhibited ridges of 1 to 2-inches in magnitude along adjacent north-south roller lanes. Lift Surfaces The compacted surfaces of lift 1 and the surface lift were similar to that of the base lift, except that the effects of surface drying and pedestrian traffic occurred gradually after completion of a given set of roller passes. Loose lift surfaces varied as such as +0.1 ft., in general, with individual dozer tracks of 0 to 3-inches depth. Lift Placement Lift placement was accomplished by means of F-9000 dump trucks and/or payhaulers along the western border of the test fill area, and spread with the D-3 dozer to loose lift thickness of 18-inches +0.1 ft. The moisture content of the lifts during placement was uniforaly noist, with ~ i visual estimates of 5 to 67, noisture. e 4 -2 . _. ~ _ _. _ _
w February 19, 1980 Attachment to GM-61356 1 1 1 Density Testing In place density tests for Relative Density determination were accomplished by the sand-cone method in accordi.nce with ASTM D-1556 and PTL Procedure. Moisture Conditioning i During normal backfill operations at STPEGS, water is added to the fill to aid in the compaction process. Construction added unmeasured amounts j - of water to the base lift, lift 1, and the surface lift as part of j normal placement activity. 4 Step A 4 Test fill lift 1 was moisture conditioned until several small pools of water (less than 1/4-inch deep and 2 ft. long) were observed on the surface prior to and during compaction. Acceptance criteria were not met after 8 one-directional passes, and additional water was added until small pools of water again formed in the low areas of the surface. Acceptance criteria were met after 10 one-directional (2 additional) passes with the vibratory roller. The compacted surface of lift I was tight, firm, smooth, and moist to wet prior to density testing. Lift 1 was compacted to an average thickness of 14-inches in the areas where density tests were conducted. Step B Compaction of the surface lift was initiated after moisture conditioning to a similar degree as in lift 1. The acceptance test density criteria were met after 8 one-directional passes with the vibratory roller. i The compacted surface was tight, firm, smooth, and moist to wet prior to density testing. The average observed compacted thickness was 14-inches. Step C The surface lift was moisture conditioned in a similar manner prior to compaction for surface testing. The acceptance criteria were not met after 12 one-directional passes. Additional moisture conditioning and 2 additional one-directional passes (14 total) provided adequate acceptance test density. The surface of lift C was similar to prior lift surfaces i before density testing. NRC Requested Testina NRC Representative, Mr. R. Landsman, requested series testing after 8 one-directional passes on both lift 1 and the surface lift, and after 12 4, j e 8 .. - =:
..a - <~ ~ ~ February 19, 1980 Attachment to GM-61356 one-directional passes on the surface lift. The results of these density tests are depicted in Figure LA, and individual test values are tabulated in Figure 2A. ~- Factors Influencing Test Results ~ Several conditions were observed as having the potential of adversely affecting the density testing and are listed below. i Moisture Conditioning . The amounts of water added to the test fill area were excessive, as judged from previous experience with typical STP backfill production. - This judgement was supported by the observance of small pools of water on the lift surface prior to and during compaction. This is an indication of locally saturated conditions, which would adversely affect the compaction process. ] Base Lift Moisture Condition The base lift exhibited a decrease in density in all tests subsequent to the passing lift 1 Step A acceptance test. After placement and compaction of lift 2, the average densities of tests taken within the base lift increased, but still remained below the required 807, Relative Density. 1 It is felt that the excessive moisture conditioning noted in the preceding 4' section, in conjunction with the shallow depth to the relatively impermeable subgrade, contributed to areas of saturation within the base lift. Vibratory compaction of these saturated soils could result in lower densities than those observed prior to compaction in the saturated state. Size of Test Area-The test section was conducted in a relatively small area-65 ft. long by 35 ft. wide. When the initial attempt to moisture condition lift I was made, a payhauler water wagon was driven onto the west-central portion of the test fill area. Because of the limited maneuverability, the payhauler repeatedly bogged down and severely rutted the western half of l the test section. Some ruts were observed in excess of 18-inches. It i was decided to limit testing to the eastern half of the test section, which effecti'vely reduced the surface area to 17 ft. in width. ) Subsequent methods of moisture conditioning were accomplished with a water wagon adjacent to the test section, and water dispensed by means i of a fire hose nozzle. 4 -4 i . -. -, ~ ~,. -.
, w.. -. : - - - = - - February 19, 1980 Attachment to Gtf-61356 t O l d' i - Areas of Uncompacted Fill In addition to the limited size of the test section, a great deal of testing-was required by the referenced procedure and by NRC requested testing. Backfill material was replaced in the test excavations (which 4 averaged 4 ft square) loosely, with no compactive effort. No compaction was performed to avoid the potential for increasing density beyond that achieved solely by the vibratory compactor. This resulted in localized areas of extremely low relative density. A duct bank comprising the eastern border of the test section resulted in an approximately 2 ft. wide strip of loose material. Normally, restricted work conditions would have dictated hand-operated compactors j in this zone, but again the material was left loose to avoid the potential for increasing density beyond that achieved solely by the Dynapac CA 255D vibratory compactor. Test Locations As a result of the limited size of the test area and the number of low density areas of uncompacted fill, density tests were taken in areas t which would'have otherwise been considered marginal due to boundary conditions. i Conclusion Conclusions based upon data acquired during the test fill program are discussed in Gtt-61356, 2/19/80. l 4 i s a ?.,-. .~ .i-.- - - ~ -_..g e,.,n-
- ..w e
- W
.y m,, ...p 4& g.pg4 .p,g M M. g. ,,a a 4=~lf_sb Brownf5 Root.inc. 1 SOUTH TEXAS PROJECT ELECTRIC GENERATING STATION UNIT NO.1 & 2 swear uo._ _.or- _ HOUSTON l.lGHTING & POWER CR.0241 .,o. uo. Cucur A %w, : L " M =,a P m - n ; e ta P~ e-a v., su m e, J BASED ON CALCULATION NO. ~ COMPUTrR CHafD.SY DATE 2N 13b o ~ < ?.. e': jf, i__ t. O - 3 mand o 5 ( 4 .s..... 3 g i .<-2C, i ... e. ; o es ab ...._ __ p. < f ___.._. ;_, c~ f I i -r, 'i 7 F. "M -- " p ' - - '...lisme' j ,c T-i a i ..l. L.
- . _ 3 u
o e, i i, .e - i. /- ._ g [.. l t 4 a t ( < h' i s O e u l t. f-w n ._...i. w j i u. i i g .T 5 i.._.. e il i j j i i I ._ i wM 'Y +4 4 3( g c H _' ' '___,i l_ 'o I E .. l .o........ 1 2 bo" F,gh i i y...... a g..e. i ... __. i. _ i ... _z. - :.% aM.. S-i
- 1..s.2.
.. _.. Q. . q+ T. e. i o 3 ) ['.
- g i
o j. i ' m._ -J u - s 2 3 e (;..$E Gk Q M J s. C. L L79 N-u t$ M1
- 3 7
[fy, 5. " $ @. S y a __ Y ( E3,' f5 k b l 7 ed q y qL cs w 7,, d 'IE o 0 *CZ r 9 '8H e.
.L ~.. ~ :-- ;. ~ 7. 1 M_a Brown & Root.inc. SOUTH TEXAS PROJECT ELECTRIC GENERATING STATION UNIT NO.1 & 2 sHE ET No. _.. 07 HOUSTON 1.lGHTING & POWER Cn.o24, Cu,xT suene, k42eha k *Tes4. Wat P<caee,n. Rt.Id 'Peoee.dare BASED ON cat. Cut.ATION NO. COMPUTER CH K'D. SY DATE 3 IN tab Minimum $ss YesH3 >= Tew I.o. Dep+6,In. Refgee On3,0ys N @;ge, q,gq, 'r. y se,. 6 Z 8 95se.s O ser,es i he.J g MM 2f72Ec. 12-18 + 2o.o /20./ 80.2 O 122.9 93 9 MR2173Ec 6-I2 anum. Mt 2174EC lb-22 /25.0 l0 3.7 W Ale 212 rec 0-G l/7. S* 47.0 Yl Seres 2 %l OneA I g MR2137 EC 0 - fo V 20. o il6.fo fo2.3 Q ~ //8. / 70 1 E. NRZi78 rs 4-/2 I/5.0 53 7 Z' AIR 2179rc II-Ic, AIRZIBoec /4-22 //9. / 75,2 Shp 3 8 Aser Su. Rgore ZA, g, 2.F 2. h ~ %p c r 2 s,- NR2210Ec O ~le & Zl. 2 ll2. Q 375 MgzzsIEc l-10 /ls, f , 72. '7 nez232Ec 6 -l4 ll8. co~ 73 2
- ChWed pec reque si ef MRC rep esm+ eke. hir. R. Landsroen b Ste.ps A and C
l @7Z 59 Brown &Rootlnc. SOUTH TEXAS PROJECT ELECTRIC GENERATING STATION UNIT NO.1 & 2 3g,,7 uo, o p,,,, i HOUSTON LIGHTING & POWER cR.0241 CuEur
- O. NO.
h %% s-u - Tea c;a p.- , c:e u T; %.edoc. suaae7 SASED ON CALCULATION NO. COMPUTE R CH IC D. 8Y DATE O
- I9 19N Sh 8 les4.'$ - Re.se Ah-8 Pasm Tea 1.o.
D:p+h, In. I?prege Elu. Dn3gylAj fPe.bMe Dusit 3 k 7-mum 4"P= 2 MRZ209Ec 14 - Zo + 2 1. 2 / El. l. 852. O NT!22cesc 8-14 12I.A 86.7 61 E uR 22toEc 4-10 + 21. 2 ll4.0 98.2 O - ue:znte 8 -I4 l21. 2 85.7 p".,, MR2212EC 14-20 ll4.3 .'76. 2. g nRzzi3Ec k,-22 II9. 2 .75.7 MRzzi4Ec 18-2 4 /20.(, 82.7 l20.0
- 79.7 U
NRZzlSEc 2 0 - 24, ~ MR22ti,1c 22-28 l21.4 86.7 O II9.8 78.9 O nczzigec 28-M _E S crics 2 UR 22tBEc 4-10 + 21, 2 l17 8 68.4, Ng?2t9Ec 8 - 14 I/6.I
- 59. co Nl m zz.u c l4 20 lzo.7 88 2 O
126.0 108 3 ag22ziec 16-2 2 n um22:25c /8-24 l23.8 96.I ~ Mezz2sEc 20-?& l23.0 94.4 /22 9 13 9 NezzzqEc 2 2-25 us2:arEc- '73-31 ll 8.O
- 69. G
[,h % u ce. 2A Ne-2 AE J } _ ' - ~ i**~~'******'*
- * ~ ~ ~ *
'*-. ~ ~ ~ * * * * * * * * * *
- 9..~
- ^-- ~~ ~~. - ' - -.... _ _ " _ ~ ~~~ ~' ~ ~ ~- x... .. m. .y 35-1197 2-21-80 Brownf5RootJnc. no., esce so. 993 s., a,y, re s 774i. d= W /Ir %, SOUTH TEXAS PROJECT gg f. " 4 ELECTRIC GENERATING STAT' ION -C TO: ,J. L. Hawks DATE: February 21,1980-FROM: U. D. Douglas JOB No.: 35-1197 ~ SUBJ.: Report of Results of Structural MEMO NO.: BC-24037-LET 1' Backfill Test Fill Program The aubject report has been reviewed, discussed and evaluated by con-struction personnel involved with backfill operations on the STP site. There are several cosuments which in the Construction view are necessary to put the test-fill program into its proper prospective. f I. - A TLAs test section was not a typical representation of i Category I backfill operations at the STP in that: 1. The complete area w s not compacted so that the 3 l boundaries would not affect the tested zone. i 2. Excavations for tests constitute'd a much larger area / volume ratio of disturbed material to com-i pacted material than would normally occur. l 3. Moisture conditioning is more uniformly controlled in normal operations and it is obvious that the test fill became partially saturated preventing gaining normal density. j l 4. Outside influence from investigating authorities and undue time pressure was apparent. Backfilling operations are normally directed by construction B. 2 supervision on a scheduled basis with inspection incorporated as a routine function for acceptance / rejection. i The report of results verifies that acceptable conditions are derived from the performance of operations in accordance with procedures using specified equipment. II. - A Figure 5 demonstraces that an average fifteen percent gain in relative density is obtained in the next lower life, which demonstrates that the rollers have effective influence with j l
"..c.. r, ^ - - - 7 p....... ;.. _.... J Brm.Wfkoot.ltt::. d* l J. L. Hawks BC-24037-LET Page 2 depths twice the lift thickness. 1 B. Figure 1A confirms that through making eight (8) passes of s'pecified equipment the average relative density ex-caeds the eighty percent (80%) necessary for acceptance. The program as carried out provides evidence that the procedure being used is adequate in obtaining the desired results. However, since certain data were affected by irregular procedures and conditions which are not typical for normal operations, it is the position of Construction management that a second test section be constructed. During this test the items listed above, which made the completed test one not representative of normal operations, should be controlled as is normally done. The results should then be analyzed and evaluated. ^ Z. 2.l* $0 U. D. Douglas / t i Construction Project Manager 1 UDD/LET7pd cc:
- 1. A. Withauer R. G. Withrow a
P. S. Jordan H. S. Cameron ) D. A. Robertson j j E. J. Thormaahlem Y-31-Q (1) Santillan - M. Wood (Site) J. Magner (Site) W. Atkinson (site) FILE NO.: A010K O 0 ] .s - r. :- -
, s ..e e t >... m s 6. - - ~ - ' ' ~ ~' -u@':;p Brown &RootJnc. SOUTH TEXAS PROJECT E' ECTRIC GENERATING STATION UNIT NO.1 & 2 SHEET NO. - 5F HOUSTON llGHTING & POWER ca.o2 cucui
- co No.
bU%dL M C *I V W * d V" sus >ECT a BASED ON CALCULATION NO. COMPUTER CH K'D. BY DATE O*N 1 O. i h ~. 4M v. e i ..L. 7.. .tI _. i. g -.. _.. _,.0 Q i '7 .,._4 .... _ :. i i _v........... I !,_..,;. H i...i _;... ....... 5] g I '.O es Sb C', T i ~ . ) , _1.. J.. 4,... (_ I I l l l. 'Y / I ^ j)._ i ..w }f, ...e.... c e i l t ie i I F.
- ...ti a -.
- ~ '
3 _L.'o - 3 j l l .O : i y. _. . q. l I e t e ... ~ .4 ._ __.i l g i \\ O ^ e2.P.i .f;
- .5 l
i P*. i sd .a w D l l e i e c n . f. Y Q +i i i 3 i m. n i l l l . p t g 1,1 e 3 W I0 n. .. f e "' I h- .. i
- f. o 2
i i t e., ,u O-i 1 g j ~ i fv .o ...u. ....r._.. 2,s. 9,: ,C J I. 7 o a. .,(+.,3, r.. p. g;.) t w _3 a0 o e , gw - r. 2 ....i f,. {<., j @ Wk -} w4 e-e ti
- .y d U.7s g3
~. a. 3 5 t 0G+@ 3 3 o -@% g3 7 4 4 c-o
- L
,K 4m-t M e. 2' 'I E r .O*02r Q.* 81 <.. f.... ' u,e s e c e s f '
@. n. -. A.: v. r@ Brown & Root.inc. SOUTH TEXAS PRO.iECT ELECTRIC GENERATING STATION UNIT NO.1 & 2 33,g7 uo, e, HOUSTON 1.lGHTING & POWER Cn.ov Cucur ,,o. uo.
- l. 1 S ~ O. me L & $A/1. L 1 *2 C"(,
gygjggy RASED ON CALCULAT!QN NO. I COMPUTEft CHicD. BY DATE I r s ,...O ...I _i. I i 3 l l wi e.. .w s.-. 4J 'i t g, {} g .d_ d.. '...... hM $ .-..i..._. i s 1 s n .V y h hl. D I ,g O.! . N....... ww a. .i I h a... l i a: l yO I c l + J .\\. . ummus .p .j. .._g..
- .g
..J.. 1_. _... .( .4 _yi i !_..'o - i i w a r l 03 i i. .Q.,,,. i t. 9 d l l 6 i i i .' E ' l,V* l i y i i i 4... o . (_ /, '.,.-.' ,_. y... l l l l l l U_ 6 = i e O' 9 / A i e i i ^ 3 l l l h i t i i _l... G ..I ._.'_..t t, h{ l 1 l l . n T.. y l i i i i i 6 i .g l l q. ! I I i i@i i I . l S..g_'_..I 1 i l l I .O NI N e l [W 70Z n 0 i. I I
- 4. *
--- o s. "I l l t .i-W < ,g c,, 2 p_ I 4 . _ _..u l i i. = a E :t. 0 t m._.J s,, 3 4 +J. ogc = Q y li v . 3. ".Cg," tjM p% s. Q o o s q 3 b. b4 U u M Q a q. u s 2 s\\. O - (, 4 L a r : - u < g. s-e- f ( a %.s + 'l 'li! o 5 'O.' t G ' 81.
- WW ' '.s.4.'. *!.n'* *3 I.~.2
& r. n r* r h
s i Brown & Root,Inc. east orrice Box Ts,ee, souston. Texas 7700, February 21, 1980 R ~ Houston Lighting & Power Company 0 P. O. Box 1700 Houston, Texas 77001 Attention: Mr. A. J. Granger Project Engineering Manager South Texas Project
Subject:
Resolution of Backfill Problems, Unit 2
Reference:
ST-BR-HL-28690 Gentlemen: We have formulated a program to resolve the areas of concern identified in our letter ST-BR-HL-28690. This program for resolution is defined in the attached GM-61320. We request your review and approval to begin this work imediately. Very truly yours, BROWN & ROOT, INC. t / . L. awks Engineering Project Manager South Texas Project Electr nerating Station JLH/ Attachment File No.: Y310S cc: C. B. Pettersson R. G. Withrow J. R. Geurts D. A. Robertson R. A. Witthauer E. J. Thormaehlin R. W. Peverley File Y-31(Q-1) Santillan P. S. Jordan .o
, _. r. _ _ _.. _ _ _ _ _ ~ ~ ~ __ _ _ 4 a , o-i. INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM 1 TO: J. L. Hawks DATE: February 18, 1980 4 FROM: H. S. Cameron JOB NO.: CR-0241
SUBJECT:
Plan for Resolution o'f Backfill CORRES. NO.: GM-61320 Density Problems, Unit 2 Potential problem areas within the Unit 2 backfill were identified in letter to HIAP (ST-BR-HL-28690), based on field investigation results j . provided by WCC. Two locations, both west of the RCB, have been confirmed as having backfill densities below the acceptance criteria, at least i within some limited areas. Non-conformance reports for these two i locations were initiated on 2/7/80. There are two other areas in which the backfill densities are questionable. 1 These areas are located east of the MEAR and west of the FEB. The l progras described herein includes further investigations of these areas. l Description of Potential Probles Areas 1 J 1. Low density (less than 60% Relative Density, R.D.) backfill material was encountered near the subgrade at a depth of about 70 ft. west of the RCB (boring 204, see attached plan). The low density was confirmed by two additional horings (204A and B). .i We consider this to be a localized condition caused by problems encountered in working close to the troublesome excavation slope. 3 The backfill had to be reworked repeatedly due to sloughing of the slope. Further investigations and remedial work will be difficult due to the proximity of the C.W. pipes to the suspected area. 1 1 i 2. Low density (70 to 75% R.D.) backfill material was encountered at a depth of about 34 ft. west of the RCB (boring'205). The low density was confirmed by one boring about 5 ft. to the north (205B), but a boring about the same distance to the south showed satisfactory i density (205A). The present interpretation is that a lift has been encountered with marginal density within a localized portion. 3. Low density indications (possibly 65 to 67% R.D.) were reported by WCC in areas east of the MEAR (borings 208 and 209). The depth to the suspect material was approximately 30 ft. B&R's geotechnical' 1 engineers do not consider the indications conclusive as the tests l may have penetrated inta the subgrade, or may have been influenced by the. vicinity to the groundwater table. -.,e_. ..__-. ~..,.......-.... _ _,. _ _. - - -,.
- 7.._7 __ i u._ _.,.- _ _. ___. ~ i ~
_i - _i _ L - t i This vill be a combined 3&R and WCC activity. B&R Geotechnical Engineering vill need the active support from the Site QA department i and PIL for identification, retrieval and review of the earthwork quality control records. Scheduled duration time is 3 weeks (3/7/80). 2. Develop a field investigation program; establish bcring locations, testing intervals, etc. WCC will recommend the boring program subject to B&R/EI&P review and approval. WCC to mobilize drill rigs and crews (2 rigs). Scheduled duration time is 2 weeks (3/24/30). 3. Drill an estimated 30 borings with standard penetration tests. The program vill be modified as necessary as the work proceeds to assure that the extents of the questionable zones have been fully determined. WCC will provide field supervision and geotechnical 4 engineering inspection of the dri1H=g and field testing, subject to BER Engineering coordination and general surveillance. B&R Construction support is required for access to drilling locations. Scheduled duration time is 3 weeks (4/11/80). &a. WCC will submit a report on the boring program with logs (4/25/80). 4b. WCC and B&R Geotechnical Engineering evaluation of the results from the boring and field testing program to determine the properties of the investigated backfill areas. The significance in regard to the integrity of the structures considering possible safety, operational, or maintenance problems will also be determined. ' A decision vill be made before 4/25/80 whether or not an expert on liquefaction problems should be consulted (II&P, B&R and WCC i decision). The consultant will approve a continued field and laboratory investiga-tion program and the analytical concepts (leading into the resolution / remedial work phase) should the problems be detemined to be signifi-cant. WCC and B&R will conclude the analysis by further statistical evaluations and simplified liquefaction analysis should the problems be determined not to be significant, which would lead to closing the particular subject. WCC will provide a letter report, including evaluations by any . liquefaction experts. Scheduled duration time is 3 weeks (5/2/80). e 5. Decision by HI&P/BER to accept the conditions or to perform additional analysis, or to proceed with remedial wort. Scheduled duration time is 1 week (5/9/80). l .i +
- y a..,,,
wm,,a..
,. - p.w. - ..:.n.- . ~...... ~....... - .- c 4 Y* Additional borings will be obtained to verify the conditions. If the low density were confirmed, we would then conclude that a lift with marginal density has been encountered, and an NCR would be ~ l issued. 4. A low density indication (possibly about 65*. R.D.) was reported by WCC at one boring location (boring 203) west of the FHB, at a depth of 45 ft. .f As for item 3, above, additional borings will be obtained to. verify j the conditions before a decision regarding non-conformance can be made. If the low density were confirmed, we would then conclude that a lift with marginal density has been encountered. 4 . The conditions at the FHB appear to be similar to the confirmed low j i density condition at the RCB, at 34 ft. depth; in that, the density of a j portion of a lift within the backfill is questionable. The conditions i at.the MEAB are different as the indications of low density occurred j near the backfill subgrade interface. The conditions at 70 ft. depth of j the RCB are unique, and also most problematic due to the much lower indicated density and the special construction problems adjacent to the j sloughing slope. Program for Resolution i i All four areas of concern will require further field investigations by borings to determine more precisely the extend and properties of the ,2 backfill. The following program for resolution is, therefore, generic i i and all areas will be approached in the same manner. However, if, for example, the record search, which is step 1,.would substantiate that the i questionable tests east of the MEAB are within the recorded as-built subgrade elevation, then only one or two confirmatory borings would be deemed necessary to verify this condition and close the subject. a This program for resolution is divided into two phases; first, investiga-tions and second, resolution and remedial work. The investigation phase (Phase I) is planned to be complete 12 weeks from February 18, 1980 i (i.e., target date May 9, 1980). The details of Phase I are depicted on i the attached graph which identifies activities, schedule and decision j. points. Investigation Activities: 1. Establish as accurate a definition as possible of the existing I' conditions based on available records, which include: geologic sapping and foundation verification by WCC, and construction quality control records, specifically earthwork inspection and test reports. The subjects for study will include geometry of slopes and conditions of in situ soil, backfill placement, and compaction operations, j extent and thickness ~of the individual backfill lifts, results of 4 in place density testing and pertinent boundary conditions as interpreted from the records. l L ... m... ~
g.. .... y. ~..-.. ~ w :. ... ~.. ........ ~.... - _ ~ -. --. a
- u.. -
1 Final Resolution or Remedial Work Activities The detailed scope-of-work and schedule cannot be established until the first phase of work has been completed. The following.is only a general outline: Alternate A Only further investigation and analysis required: Additional soil parameters will be obtained, if required, by field and laboratory testing. Geotechnical analyses to determine the exact influence on the plant. Geotechnical Report FSAR Amendment Alternate B Remedial work required (methods to co'nsider may include grouting or vibroflotation: Develop engineering criteria and issue construction specification. Implement remedial work. ~ Obtain verification borings. Geotechnical Report FSAR Amendment Correlation Studies Additional density determinations by sand-cone method will be performed in conjunction with the next phase of borings as the test obtained during the 1/28-2/08/80 program were not conclusive in relating standard penetration tests to in place densities. The program described herein is based.cuz discussions between W. Jones, HL&P; C. Hedges, WCC; and B. Petterson, B&R on 2/14/80. We will proceed with the work upon your directions. i ) File No.: Y310S R. S. Camer n i cc: R. A. Witthauer D. A. Robertson R. W. Peverly E. J. Thormaehlen-P. S. Jordan R. N. Jennings R. G. Withrow Y-31-Q,1) santillan HSC/CBP/ke Attachments ,s i.. m_
T N ... \\ D..._ _ L., _ s. 4 N . -- y s O - _ _.4 { q %y ~ = ~ N 4 b b g N _ _ 3 __ g-3 3 .s N A q [ K [ t c i t Q st -b 6- 't ~~ k - &s a ~ Y' MQ u = -s .- s-r O a^. _.Q N -- gj g) w$ E hi Y m 4 c t T W~s $ g) __ d~ b V* kI - - - Q.\\ } b. 4 M M 4 = g \\ (J h 's M,. h4 _ Q _.t x g 4 R .X_g A1 N _;3 N; . y c.4 I s'g v-A-gu-w, uyI ws v .w s u 't .N y_ . h. (- Ah 4 9 V kb b gj-=
- g c.3 g j-1-(
- 3, jX) g \\ S{ - % %D -- k D Q = -. Wf'h 9 t ---hl-a %S .t D DV Cd A s s __ s... _ % --* p.-{ y A-] 4 \\1 \\. 4 N.. D.%w_. y.. _. g 5 . h.__. k. v o s v 4 - \\ S J_ s } N Elx th h 3g = M.- g 4-q 4 s N y,, - % Cld \\ .w y o+s A ---N =~ Nx e M. R, R 4 q - -. v 44 ,s. f E.. - - v + y% t y3 x yu% z k --- W k s s V u n. N Q% N' t:- m 4C Q A- \\ .. _ y yeD g$ --- y g. (w t u 'N, t.3 - -. v i y b 3* N y 4 - q%A( & M = y e 4. 1 E&d 6, ff.&/ 320_
p D. y,., s V
- f....
- E s u I i' . ll ~ y w. ll d,_.- 3 ;..;;O'}. r,,-
- j.....
N,~ p:. !:c--- 9' c.... n > < !!!!= -2===-5I! ,,D,, ' g _At_ .....I...j1(~Yy !!!I31 O@ ii.:i[ h,. 6,:g :<cf. ~ :n.,g. 1 2::< 2 ::-
- j 1
f f.@ ). iif 3 ?@ I ill! N t -
- k m
- .- 1.
205 a-h: 4 106 e iir =U lro207 u A-2 g,,es, 4q, 4 g. w iki gi ,\\ P %,992g,j(F#,% +N, ~~ 2 203 209p j gg'W_,Q_.9 f* g _4}731gg g) - 101 -- Jt 102
- c... e.
-202 , c; ._:iii
- .i.a..
i i:. .. a. n: g I#b..idMUiinX=$@.=.Y5.:.Y4A: ME=N3:!! l. till '.).h.+) l 3 l
- m
!:. !! :! ':, t i j t ~~~7 d..i!!!!!!TM i l....... c l w.; l Coeli.9 Re s er ver*r LEGEND (1) Rea.: tor Containment Building (2) Fuel Handling Building (3) Electrical Auxiliary Building (4) Mechanical Auxiliary Building (5) Turbine Generator Building o roo 400 soo (6) Diesel Generator Building hgg Wcav-203 S Soil Boring Location NOTES: SOUTH TEXAS PROJECT (1) Borings with A and B suf fix drilled in immediate vininity UNITS 1 &,2 of other boring with same boring number, eg., 205, 205A and 2058.- SOIL BORING !.DCATION PLAN (2) All boring numbers have a WCBV-FIGtJRE 1
- . -. ; -.
- . -.....L i
Brown & Root,Inc. emmce sexsee,ueston, Texas nr1 d '. b t;i mw m l'to 1 e $80 'f}. ) February 13, 1980 Houston " Lighting & Power Company A.J.GRANGi h-gt-28590 P.O. Box 1700 SFN: D-0540 Houston, Texas 77001 Job No.: CR-0241
- .,.. =
Attention: A. J. Grange 1 Project Engineering Manager
- C T-. I V. E D South Texas Project Electric Generating Station i
I
Subject:
Structural Backfill Density ~ Gentlemen: The boring program for determination of Category I Structural Backfill density, as requested by HL&P on January 25,1930 (ST-HS-BC-01461, and ST-HS-00239) has been completed. A total of 21 borings were drilled within the Units 1 and 2 structural backfill. Woodward-Clyde Consultant's (WCC) has evaluated the results and presented their preliminar report, dated 2/12/80, which is attached (ST-WC-BR-5582)y findings in a A more com-prehensive report, including final boring logs, will follow within two weeks. WCC has concluded, in summary, that 97.6% of 310 Standard Penetratien Tests indicated densities in excess of the 80% Relative Density (R.D.) specifica-tion criteria. The structural backfill was found to be homogenous, with no other soil types being encountered within the backfill and with a grain size distribution consistent with the specification criteria. WCC further states that in each instance, the percentage of tests at a structure with a relative density less than 80%, was less than that percentage derived based on B&R's statistical evaluations presented in the FSAR. B&R's Geotechnical Engineering group provided field coordination and sur-veillance of WCC's work, with results as described in the attached memo report (GM-61094). A representative from the NRC observed the boring activities during two days and requested some extra testing which was performed as described in B&R's field report. i .U.n..i. t 1 Results s The structural backfill within Unit I was found to have very satisfactory density at all test locations. Unit 2 Results The overall conditions were found to be satisfactory, however, four areas of concern were identified. ) p
._,._u._._ i February 13, 1780 Page 2 ST-BR-HL-28690 + 3 The occurences of densities below 80% R.D. have been confimed at two i locations west of the Unit 2 Reactor Containment Building. Tests in boring 204 (see location plan attached to WCC's report), with confirmatory l borings 204A and B, indicated backfill with a density of less than 60% R.D., just above the subgrade, at a depth of about 70 ft. A preliminary j inquiry has indicated that backfill placement at this particular location i The excavation may have been influenced by difficult working conditions. near the Tendon Gallery access shaft was open for a prolonged time, and l sloughing of the slope occured durinij inclement weather. The backfill i area had to be repeatedly reworked. We consider this as being a unique condition. j Tests in boring 205, also located west of Unit 2 Reactor Containment Building, gave indications of 70 to 75% R.D. at a depth of about 34 ft. The comparatively low density was confimed by one boring about 5 ft. to the north (2058), but a boring located about the same distance to the south j (205A) showed satisfactory density. Our preliminary interpretation is that a lift has been encountered which has marginal density within a i localized portion. B&R has initiated non-conformance reports for the above described two locations west of the Unit 2 Reactor Containment Building. The exact extents and conditions of the areas will have to be determined by additional subsurface investigations. J Other areas of potentially low backfill density were noted by WCC near the subgrade at the southeast corner of the Unit 2 Mechanical-Electrical Auxilliary Building (MEAB), (borings 208 and 209) and at one location west of Unit 2 Fuel Handling Building (FHB) (boring 203). BAR deems that these test indications are not conclusive. The tests at the MEAB may i have been within the subgrade, and not in the backfill as reported by WCC. The questionable test at the FHB was about 30 ft. above the subgrade, and not at the subgrade as reported by WCC. All three tests indicated possible densities between 65 and 67% R.D. Additional Backfill Studies A test fill program conducted based on NRC's request, was completed on i 2/13/80. The program included placement and compaction of testlifts and l determination of the density achieved by specific compaction efforts. This program will be used to evaluate the Construction procedures and a report will be furnished to HL&P within 10 days. I A program is being developed for additional field investigation and geo-l technical analyses to determine the exact conditions and significance of the low density indications within Unit 2, as described above. The program will also include the develppment of con,cepts for remedial work, if required. 1 h p g g 6 5 ..m..-,.,, - - ._,w -,,-..__,,n.,,.-.,..,-l.,,-.----,-,,.-.-
.,4 i
- 7..._n.._..._.;-,.._.___ l_ m..
_[,.._- ______.,__,1,__ m. Brown &Noot.inc. February 13, 1980 Page 3 ST-BR-HL-28690 In-place density tests obtained by the sand-cone method adjacent to five borings did not provide conclusive data which could be used for correlation to the Standard Penetration Tests as intended. Additional density tests will be obtained as a part of the future field investigation program. Conclusions The boring program has substantiated that the uniformity and density of i the Category I Structural backfill is much more than satisfactory as B&R previously stated in letter of January 23, 1980 (ST-BR-HL-28277). It is concluded that the construction. equipment and methods of operation has allowed successful placement and compaction of structural backfill in lifts of 18-inch thickness. Any irregularities in density due to the construction technique would have been revealed by the large number of Standard Penetration Tests as these tests are randomly distributed with respect to lift boundaries. It is our opinion that the conditions near the subgrade west of the Unit 2 Reactor Containment Building constitutes a subset of data due to the unique construction conditions and should be treated separately from the overall evaluation. The distribution of density data based on the Standard Penetration Testing provides a much higher overall backfill density than j as obtained from construction control testing even if the few deviating results (2.4". of all tests) are included. The difference is contributed to the further influence from compaction of subsequent lifts at higher l elevations. Very truly yours, BROWN & ROOT, INC. 0'}.\\ . Hawks i gineering Project Manager J South Texas Project l Elect nerating Station J JLH/ P/ddh File No.: Y3105 i Attachments cc: L.R.Jacobi(HL&P) G. T. Warnick T. K. Logan (HL&P) R. A. Witthauer W. C. Jones (HL&P) R. W. Peverley J. R. Geurts R. G. Withrow U. D. Douglas Y-31-0(1) Santi11an C. S. Hedges (WCC) D e -r
e (' .._._1 Z i. ~ t u v DNg53', Woodward Clyde Consultants boa 52b-1154 E 1 February 12, 1980 ST-WC-BR-5582 SFN: 0-0540/P-0087 } Brown & Root, Inc. P. O. Box 3 C. B. PETTERSSON ) Houston, Texas 77001 (ROOM 802-G) 1 B&R Attention: Mr. J. L. Hawks Engineering Project Manager Re: Relative Density of Structural Backfill South Texas Project Electric Generating Station ~ Gentlemen: Woodward-Clyde Consultants has completed the field investigation per-formed to evaluate ' elative density of structural backfill at Units 1 r and 2 of the South Texas Project Electric Generating Station. Our findings, discussed below, regarding the relative density of the back-fill were developed using the results of the field investigation. E During the period 31 January to 8 February 1980, Woodward-Clyde Consul-tants drilled twenty-one borings into the structural backfill at locations shown in Figure 1. Soils within borings were typically sampled at 2b-ft-intervals during the standard penetration test. B1cw counts were counted and recorded for each 3 in. penetration of the split-barrel sampler. Borings were typically drilled to the interface of subgrade and structural backfill. The only exception to this sampling program 7 was at boring WCBV-208X which was sampled continuously to a depth of 104 ft. Results of standard penetration tests in structural backfill are plotted in Figure 2. 7 Along with results of standard penetration tests plotted in Figure 2 are superimposed lines of constant relative density. These lines were developed by Woodward-Clyde Consultants using Figure 4.14, Relative Densities ~ Calculated from Standard Penetration Resistances, from "Classi-F fication, Engineering Properties and Field Exploration of Soils, Intact Rock and In Situ Rock Masses" Directorate of Regulatory Standards, U.S. Atomic Energy Commission, Washington, D. C., May, 1974. Lines of constant relative in Figure 4.14 are after USBR,1957, Gibbs and Holtz. m r [ T l Consuneg Ervneers,Geolcgrsts and EnvvonmentalScennsts [A D OncesinNr RW C4.es
' Woodward Clyda Censultants Februar'y 12, 1980 ST-WC-BR-5582 Page 2 I Three hundred and ten standard penetration tests were performed while j drilling the 21 borings. Twenty-two tests were in soils other than The standard structural backfill and hence excluded from this study. penetration resistance of 17 blows /ft between a depth of 69 to 70.5 ft in boring WCBV-204 was judged to result from improper drilling practices The results of 287 valid and as such has been dropped from the study. .[ standard penetration tests performed in the structural backfill at Units 1 and 2 are presented in Figure.2 and 97.6% of the standard penetration resistances exceed the 80% relative density criteria for compaction' of The structural backfill was found to be homo-the structural backfill. geneous in nature with no other soil types encountered below surficial The grain size distribution of samples soils and above subgrade soils. obtained during standard penetration tests were judged by visual observa-tion to be consistent with the structural backfill being classified as a medium to coarse, yellowish brown, well-graded sand. As shown in Figure.2, 9 of 287 standard penetration tests performed in the structural backfill do not exceed the relative density criteria of 80% for compaction of structural backfill. All 9 tests were located in The relative density of two standard penetration the area of Unit 2. resistances, 55 blows /ft between a depth of 65.6 to 67.1 ft in boring WCBV-204B and 56 blows /ft between a depth of 66 to 67.5 ft in boring WCBV-204, which plot just to left of the 80% relative density line was calculated using the measured elevation (Elev. +27.25 ft) at borings with the calculation showing the relative density of both standard penetration resistances to be equal to 80% and hence they meet the criteria for compaction of structural backfill. Thus 7 standard pene-tration resistances, all located in the area of Unit 2, did not exceed the relative density criteria of 80% for compaction of structural backfill. Using standard penetration tests as a surrogate for inplace density tests, Woodward-Clyde Consultants has compared the number of standard penetration resistances in Unit 2 to the number of inplace density tests that could be statistically expected to be below a rela-f tive density of 80%. percentages of inplace density tests with a relative density less than 80% in Unit 2 were determined from FSAR 1 In the area of the Reactor Containment Building in Figure 2.5.4-62. ( Unit 2, 4 of 71 standard penetration resistances or 6.0% were below } 80% relative density. Two of 67 standard penetration tests or 3.0% { were below 80% relative density in the area of the Mechanical-Electrical Auxiliary Building in Unit 2. In the area of the Fuel Handling Building s i in Unit 2,1 of 26 standard penetration resistances or 3.8% were below g In each instance the percentage of standard 80% relative density. i penetration tests at a structure with a relative density less than 80% ? was less than the number of inplace density tests less than 80% relative ii density. k ? e
- * ""-*~
-- ~ ew W
... -..... ~ - -.. - - ~ - ru 2 1980 Woodw::rd Clyda Conruttants Page 3 1 { Examination of distribution of standard penetration resistances less than 80% relative density shows there to be three locations within the structural backfill tested using standard penetration tests in which the structural backfill did not exceed 80% relative density. One area is at the southeast corner of the Unit 2 Mechanical-Electrical i Auxiliaiy Building just above the subgrade. Tests with a relative density less than 80% were observed in borings WCBV-208 and -209 at depths of 28 to 30 ft just above the subgrade. The second location in which the structural backfill was found to have a relative density less than 80% is to'the west of the Reactor Containment Building in Unit 2. At borings WCBV-204, -204A and -2048 the structural backfill just above the subgrade failed to exceed 80% relative density. In addition between a depth of approximately 33h to 35 ft in borings WCBV-t 205 and -205B (approximately 10 ft above subgrade) a location with a relative density less than 80% was encountered. The third and final location within the structural backfill with a relative density less than 80% was at a depth of 43 to 45 ft at the structural backfill-subgrade interface in boring WCBV-203 which is on the west side of Unit j 2 Fuel Handling Building. l i Results 'of dry density determinations at depths of 24 to 30 in. and 54 to 60 in, at borings WCBV-103, -203 and -205 did not compare favorably l with results of standard penetration tests at comparable depths. Four l of six inplace density tests made by the sand cone method did not exceed a relative density of 80%. Above a depth of 24 ft, (24 to 30 in.) 13 standard penetration tests were conducted with 13 of 13 tests exceeding l 100% relative density. Between a depth of 2 to 5 ft (54 to 60 in.), i 17 standard penetration tests we made with all 17 test results exceeding . 100% relative density, t The data from inplace density tests appear inconclusive. With thirty standard penetration tests conducted above a depth of 5 ft (60 in.), Woodward-Clyde Consultants judges the results of standard penetration i tests to be more conclusive than the six inplace density test results and hence judges the structural backfill to a depth of 5 ft to have a relative density greater than 80%. We recommend the density testing procedure be reviewed and if no fault can be found in the procedure, that additional tests be performed to develop a larger data base. At this transmittal, Woodward-Clyde Consultants is finalizing the calcu-lation package which generated these findings and the FSAR prepared boring logs, both for submittal within two weeks.' If you should have questions concerning our findings please call me. Very truly yours. 1 WOODWARD-CLYDE CONSULTANTS Y310XP(12) m Distr b t ) Charles S. Hedges Project Manager ) MHZ/CSH/dn l ~
.a G t. () g, .=.3L, g - s - ~ I m: .,1, i t-- 1 s u a s I is a = 4 'i ,I __ ____ _ _. _ _ _.... _lN L' .4 x,N E r,, ,.e, ..f .:a= =.. _ _.... _ _ __.. n, \\ i '~~)n.1(.Vn
- 1. 0_n.1(Drr+1
- 7 x
~ ' Y, 3. r .:a s.. s 1 ...cw
- i!! u.t
..e .x M, I'I ID i li.i!$. III iD i: Ei.!. \\ 1 4 jis. o n i,. I.is sb p 1cs <p - f ' (iif(T.;i205 I5 Tizo7 Pfn IoWi!:i 3
- I@i P $o$ @J~kf& '
2QC k ggnV1MQik :e g_ =k ~ f c-=g : r 103c 203 m C2093 ;,o g, "~ _ s -so' c gi: a.J N -v_2011 wy 1n,.,, m 1a, 0 - - - s... -202 /. ps.- L _..a. - II
- .. m - -
r . :i:i7,4.% c,_a. i. u 9 e a I/ s <7.....____-...______s._,_____..,_,_,.:: .--,a
- -- :1
.:1:.~.- %.:.) n..~_ -~~-=: 3x l. n.u..
- !'.t!:::::-
s c 1 l 1 .I I l j;ij TiiiiiiiiV\\ 11 I / g. :.:: rv W l'aoGet Res erree'r a. I.I::I20 (1) Rearter Cont!ainment Building (2) Fuel Ban:". ling Building (3) Electrical Amriliary Building (4) Mechanical Auxiliary BuildI:q (5) n:rbine Generator Building o aco eco - eco (6) Diesel Generator Buildi=g sex.E.rtr7 WCBv-203 e sou notiny :.oc.uon NO2ES: .' SOUTH TEXA5 PROJECT m u n =s. vits A ana > urz1x arnlee in 1-.diate vi=i=ity UNITS 1 & 2 of other boring with same boring nusiber, eg., 205, 2::5A and 2C53. ls'o::, k-m ;x,'A :cs; ym ' (2) All bori..g nus:be.rs have a WCBV-prefix. FI N -1
e ' i. DEPTH,FT CD %J m m A W N O O O O O O O O O .tiqnt tai r!u attitia sinpu mit.snEsinii _1 +- i ! Li nt it r:1 1 - p-. i9 u 7}g-t em!m 1 111 p4+Hl2m iir p: t_.!!
- {t uu un== ua 1
- p:pu nu a--
t th Et t, [1,l. -4 r.I l-w.: q :!#;=l.:::= d:d.g: :p,..i!!i !!
- ni #...
-l i m.;
- =ri ill
- up :ltt u.- enn : (u
- i
-[ 'I-.1 :t 1 'Li.-n i h .i i rui ut mt '[,Il<.p".1.* t.rIilu h:ile .u :n n 3 y t -I. }, tii e ~ o _u . I [. . l li, [,23n8.,.;.. 1 :q n ~ n - 1 i .!::w..r= - d ..;p Ml 0:
- l; uli 2L $j.q
- rt n:
t .h.j"haF ILllMNi!! l(j. . l . f :l'i Il il l.. 151ME t 1 p t-TI"l-[kiini t! .! rili Ntisii l w N iiulk.F~ y a n Iiji 1.18!III' {iUllH "?J 8 1.] [xlyl ~g.jjj l' _.l -. er-n : o 1fj i" h.i is i ~1 :t '~ i gimj HiL i
- 9
.d; #' udn
- !"r.
= _8I1 e 4 Ii o '. gg-u'rVu:en$".4.l
- il"X Pr M3" F-
- j.
j' T 'I 'r- '8 0'&3-8 1 11 I -1 ~~ iI !!)ll:.._a.AL 1 .t i
- 4. tin:
x E li, 7 ,I at ..ih - tt,i t w a . it", 1 11 a,,, 'Li lle,, 1h:1pt /,,lIli!,ti;, n : l ! o 4 l
- [1l g1.g I
.i-j8l lt 1 I 1 *r, ,j 1 lx.. I in. lu:.*1,L[ .a :a..u hr. un I y ir !R {d2: u du.: - = nw m t m' 2.;- h .2-r - c t .: t w: .i I;.t]:- ]V[.. 1- - h.y :E! n ; n.P: t xm ll - l -r y ru i.F xa u 8 :: j d. mr uli ,ll i 1 + m y~a e .1};l 1i. n.; _,w..g ..t
- M
, a, f-l -t 1 M = ty,1j I;. wlll;.1I lr.:..t.t;.h i t O gj - il - i a 1 2nt [fr..; 1, j . Ii f,xf j "1 ..t mm ar J.1 1 qi- ....,,p: 2 I v t- .r- :q e!3,l u,u8,c:rk.. zu ,ht w .ll! n. i . j yR [a iz. 1
- 1....
m. l . gij y . p i 1; inj h,e 1 O i m m m ' 3p,31 p,,., ;iI:h A~ z 2;, .1 1 f; o GP Miis! [:LIy iAj! j1 l.,_ ..l . I 1 Fj_t g .j 1111:, " ./g c[. ll 2 . t. -4 w w 2 1 i!!kf L!lil;!i:'iti!!i !@r..n!!!! !!!! ilt: 5;, a. r t
- 2 l
i m --* - ciil i 4
- nT11 t'
i - m -4 ; e 1 3 pij:- o i t.;- l,i gj jnpg utungl m;; O yl ga yet..- ]i .i.. "a a. !!.1.n. ! !.1pdi t il.,ii R-t t i : u..a=..v-=. j 1Je i I: s.L.ji ! . 1 21 J x.t :].. te! L.l.il. t. t.t O q. w
- .p.
ih i .d 1 z U z .c 1 + J,1 t u 1 e a. h.: p.;n,=n=p ny u u a
- p:pa-
}.- ,i l - l-1 - t.in yh:. I. v^ xe j e; if; w{!.ji 1l 1 po lij =. n e i1 .e-1 .Er
- o; 1
1-1.1 - ti .e,1i r 2p.-e r j t 2 w..u -u n.: r; r n s e Ea llll lp -._ n... g4:...r*4.-n.c.. e.1 i_ g., 1 + 1 tz a /. i s-1-- -/ . 1 4 .o o
- . :J ; *;:
a -4 m r! ne a' 1.;.l. n:] nn g: p:nun..n vtfll.) s. ..l -t l E. n:1 o S 4jl e.V,.- r ~ e L .t J [..f n: ni: ,.t u t. u . t. j1 ,i l st-l nq.3 ~ y . t..- i r f nt 1 1 .o-di n= m .jpt. 1:. 11.%".i_1
- qp 1;g_
e e-u.1 1 -t rk2 a z t
- ,,r t
o. u L .. U.
- l
. { I 1p r I
- y h:
-l . r - k"-.Q" L: .p:< ;M-QLhllsi
- c J; :
o)d.{.[:: L -]d 1: l '. -I;,-- :4
- 1 r j
- I ol. jk f
t t j': . t. ligjr u i o nl : . j *.[. ~-l [
- 1::
p ? I .j7{3'.Edid i h1Ag I k-
- *ti-t 4-H-
p-27 p 7 o r+f 4 Il I !!il EliN in
- g; c an-
.{ ru; g;; t t .i 8 i-i.- 1 t . _t :1 3.3 . t= s l.,: 1 g
- ,7 4
y] .j~ ..j . l. j. t i.n. g~ 7-l9nf.i !,!j u $ !. Q,j. i n 1 i 1 iig i I r m f t m t Cw m I i i I
- a.
BrownCrRoot.inc. INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM TO: File DATE: February 13, 1980 FROM: "R. N. Jennings JOB NO.: CR-0241
SUBJECT:
FIELD ACTIVITY REPORT CORRES. NO.: GM-61094 ~ BACKFILL DENSITY TEST BORING PROGRAM INTRODUCTION A test boring program was conducted within the STPEGS plant area by Woodward-Clyde Consultants (WCC) during the period of 1-28-80 through 2-08-80, for standard penetration testing of the in-situ Category-1 structural backfill (reference memo no. ST-HS-BC-01461,,1-25-80, L. K. English to U. D. Douglas). This test boring program was ob-served by B&R Engineering, HL&P QA, and on 2-05-80 and 2-06-80 by NRC representative Mr."R. Landsman. 1 Fifteen test borings were drilled at approximate locations selected randomly by HL&P Engineering, HL&P QA, and B&R Engineering. A plan of boring locations, Figure 1, is attached. Five back-up borings are also identified on this sketch, as is a shallow, continuous sample boring requested by Mr. R. Landsman. The Standard Penetration Testing was conducted to provide additional assurances that the in-situ Category-1 structural backwill was com-pacted to the 80% Relative Density (RD) requirement of the Structural Backfill Specification 3YO69YS029. The. results of the Standard Penetration Testing would be evaluated by WCC to determine whether the indicated R.D. met the specification requirements. IN-PLACE CE.EITY TESTS Correlation density tests were obtained at five selected boring. locations by the Sand-Cone Method (ASTM D-1556). Density tests were conducted by Pittsburgh Testing Laboratory (PTL) at 2 to 2-1/2 feet and 4-1/2 to 5 feet depths, which corresponds with the last 6 inches of split spoon sampling for these depths. The correlation density tests were obtained to provide additional infonnation regarding the relationship between standard penetration' test. data and R.D. The location of each pair of , correlation density tests is also shown on Figure 1. ~ D12e4 o / TT-BR-NL-28G90
BrownfyRoot.inc. ~ February 13, 1980 Page 2 GM-61094 FIELD PROCEDURE Two WCC qualified inspectors and two soil boring drilling rigs arrived on the STP site on 1-28-80. Prior to the drilling operation, the standard penetration test hamer of each rig was separately weighed and certified by PTL. The drilling and sampling equipment was examined i and detemined to be inr good condition by the WCC inspectors. All drill rod lengths to be used were measured. The test borings and 1 borehole logging were performed in accordance with WCC's " Instructions for Logging Borings"(WCC-6000-1) which references ASTM D-1586-67. i Standard Penetration Test blow counts, or N-values, (the number of -blows required to advance a split-spoon sampler the final 12 inches of an 18 inch drive) which were judged to be questionable in the field, were divided into three categories. 1. An N-value resulting from an apparent invalid standard penetration test (due to sampling or drilling method or procedure nonconfomance), which indicated an equivalent relative density equal to or greater than80%(passingtest). For this case, I back-up boring would be drilled to verify that an invalid standard penetration test was the cause of a questionable but passing N-value. 2'. An N-value resulting from an apparent invalid standard penetration test, which indicated an equivalent relative density of less than 80%(failingtest). In this case, 2 back-up borings would be drilled to verify that an invalid standard penetration test was the cause of questionable failing N-values. i 3. An' N-value resulting from an apparent valid standard penetration test, which indicated an equivalent relative density of less than 80% (failing test). 'In this case, 2 back-up borings would be drilled to assure that an invalid standard penetration test was not a contributing factor to the failing N-value. RESULTS A total of 310 Standard Penetration Tests were perfomed of which 8 were judged questionable in the field, or which may indicate potentially low density. Of the 15 original borings identified on Figure 1, questionable N-values as detemined in the field, were obtained at 4 ' pecific depths in 3 horings. s In WCBV 201, questionable passing N-values were identified in the ,18-1/2 to 20 foot sample, and the 21 to 22-1/2 foot sarr.ple. It was suspected that the questionable N-values were caused by invalid standard penetration tests (the cuttings were not suffic.iently washed out of the torehole and settled back to the bottom prior to sampling). Back-up boring WCBV 201-A verified this condition.
^ l l...... _ f._ , j =.. - SnNn)cfRoot.ind. ^ February 13, 1980 Page 3 GM-61094 { in WCBV 205, questionable failing N-values were obtained in the 33-1/2 to 35 foot s, ample. 2 back-up boringt were drilled. Borin'g WCBV 205-A, drilled approximately 5 feet south of WCBV 205, indicated passing N-values in. the 33-1/2 to 35 foot sample. Boring WCBV 205-B, drilled approximately 5 feet north of WCBV 205, indicated failing N-values at the 33-1/2 to 35 foot sample. .In WCBV 204, questionable failing N-values were obtained at the 69.7 to 71.4 foot sample depth. WCBV 204-A drilled approximately 10 feet south 'of WCBV 204 encountered the in-situ clay slope in the 67 to 68-1/2 foot 3 ample. However, the 63-1/2 to 65 foot sample indicated a questionable WCBV 204-B, drilled approximately 9 feet north and 4 .failing N-value. . feet east of WCBV 204, indicated a borderline condition in the 66 to 67-1/2 foot, and questionable failing N-values in the.68-1/2 to 70 foot samples. [The significance of the questionable failing N-values resulting from ' apparent valid standard penetration tests will be evaluated by B&R Engineering in conjunction with WCC. RRC representative, Mr. R. Landsman arrived at the STP site on 2-04-80 'and observed various aspects of the subject test boring program on '2-05-80 and 2-06-80. Boring 208X which featured continuous sampling .:fr.om 0 to 10-1/2 foot depth, was drilled as per Mr. Landsman's request. 2' additional samples were also obtained in WCBV 204-B as per Mr. Tandsman's request. ,hr. Landsman noted that the I.D. of the Standard Penetration Test
- split-spoon was approximately 1-1/2 inch instead of 1-3/8 per ASTM
'D-1586. WCC will evaluate any possible effects due to this deviation. hhe test drilling program for verifying the R.D. of the in-situ Category-1 istructural backfill demonstrated that 80% R.D. has been attained at the l locations shown on Figure 1 in the STP plant area. Only 8 of 310 Standard .. Penetration Tests indicated questionable conditions, as noted in this The questionable tests identified herein, are based on pre-report. 'liminary fiald evaluations, and are subject to further evaluations by WCC. R.iN.pnnings g i., '. File Y3105 'cc: J. L. Hawks R. A. Witthauer R. W. Peverly .' R. G. Withrow lP.S. Jordan .H. S. Cameron C. B. Pettersson
- D. A. Robertson E. J. Thormaehlen
' Y-31-Q (1) Santillan 7 m m
..-..-. : a Brown &RootJnc. eos: office Box Three, Houston, Texas 77001 February 7,1980 ,S. WW ST-BR-HL-28534 Houston Lighting & Power Company SFN: 0-0540 P.O. Box 1700 Houston, Texas 77001 Attention: A. J. Granger Project Engineering Manager South Texas Project Electric Generating Station
Subject:
Backfill Test Program Gantlemen: A test program for evaluation of backfill compaction was outlined in discussion between messers T. K. Logan, HL&P QA, W. C. Jones, HL&P Geotechnical Engineering and C. B. Pettersson, B&R Engineering on February 5,1980. The intended purpose for the test fill is to obtain field density data demonstrating to NRC that the compaction equipment used for STPEGS backfill operations in-fact can achieve 80 percent relative density throughout backfill lifts of 18-inch thickness. The details of the program are defined in the attachment, which hereby is furnished for your information. Very truly yours, BROWN & R OT, INC. / J. . Hawks Engineering Project Manager South Texas Project Electric Generating Station Attachment JLH/H CBP/ke File No.: Y3105 y cc: T. K. Logan (HL&P) R. G. Withrow W. C. Jones (HL&P) D. A. Robertson J. R. Geurts R. W. Jennings U. D. Douglas Y-31-Q(1) Santillan R. A. Withauer R. W. Peverley RECE'V'D I FEt t wa QUALITY ASSJRW4 DEPARTMUU _j
.. -. c :..:... TEST PROGRAM: COMPACTION OF CATEGORY - I f. STRUCTURAL BACKFILL The purpose for this field test program is to verify that 80-percent relative density (R.D.) can be achieved throughout lifts of Category I Structural Backfill placed in 18-inch loose lifts and compacted by Dynapac CA-25SD vibratory roller, working in unrestricted areas. The density achieved in final surface lifts shall also be verified. The program must impleme,nted with a'high degree of accuracy,' specifically as regards determination of lift thickness and depth of in-place density tests, in order to assure that there are no thin layers (i.e. less than 6-inches thick) that have less than the required density. The field testing shall be conducted according to the following outline. B&R Geotechnical Site Engineering (the Engineer) will provide additional detailed directions in the field. The test fill shall be placed and com-pacted in accordance with the Construction Procedure (A040KPCCP-2, Rev. 2, 7-12-79). Steo A In an area where the surface lift (test base lift) previously has been approved for continued placement, place a test lift with 18" loose thick-ness. Roll this lift according to standard procedure, until the lift passes based on regular testing (by PTL) at 12 to 18-inch and 18 to 24 ~~ inch depth. The density testing shall start after 8 passes (one-way), and continue in steps of 2 additional passes until satisfactory density has been achieved. Select then two other locations and obtain density tests (base line tests) at 6-inch interval from the surface to 24-inch depth. (It is expected that the surface-near tests will not meet to the 80% R.D. acceptance criteria, however, this should not be a bases for rejecting the compaction of the lift or to perfonn additional rolling provided that the tests between 12 -and 26-inches are acceptable, i.e. verifies PTL's results). The results shall be evaluated by the Engineer and two re-tests, shall be obtained for any apparent non-valid test. The end result of Step A, shall be a minimum of 8 valid tests. S//ochmnr/17'-12-2-286~59
t Page 2 Test Program (con't) 2 Step B Place an 18-inch surface lift over the test lift (test surface lift) and roll this lift according to the construction procedure until it passes based on PTL's regular acceptance testing at 12 to 18-inch and 18 to 24 inch depth. As in step A, the testing shall start after 8 passes and the rolling shall continue in steps of 2 passes until satisfactory density has been achieved. Obtain verification density tests between 6 and 42-1'nch depth at 6-inch intervals with two extra tests at 21-inch and 27-inch depth. These tests shall be obtained in the vicinity of the base line tests (but well out-side the hole dug for these tests). The results shall be evaluated by the Engineer and two re-tests shall be obtained for any apparent non-valid test. The end result of Step B shall be a minimum of 16 valid tests. Step C The surface lift shall be subject to additional compaction after completion of the verification testing per step B. The lift shall be completed with ~~ a total of 12 passes,. including the rolling of step B, and the density shall thereafter be determined at 6 to 12 inch depth for acceptance in accordance with PTL's regular procedures. Further compaction, if required, shall be performed in steps of 2 passes until satisfactory density has been obtained at 6 to 12 inch depth. 1 Verification testing shall thereafter be performed between the surface and 6-inch depth and between 6 and 12-inch depth, at two locations. The end result of step C shall be 4 valid tests. Note: All depths defined above for steps A, B and C, must be adjusted to agree with actual compacted lift thickness. The actual compacted lift thickness and actual testing depth must be recorded.
Pag 2 3 Test Program (Con't) The results of the in-place density tests shall be evaluated based on PTL's relative density acceptance criteria used for production placement control at the time of the testfill. However, the criteria shall be verified by two relative density laboratory tests performed on samples obtained during Step A of the testfill density determeinations. The Engineer shall together with QC-inspectors continously inspect the placement and compaction of the test lift and overlying surface lift in the test area. The inspection shall include all pertinent work items and methods, such as; condition of fill surface before and after placement, type of material (incl. gradation tests), method of placement and spreading, loose lift thickness before start of compaction and compacted lift thickness upon final acceptance, operation of compaction equipment including speed and vibratory frequenef; number of passes (note:one-way or round-trip), reisture control and apparent uniformity of density and moisture. The Engineer performing the inspection shall docurent his observations in a memo-report, with all test results as attachments. I 6 80 m i l l l 1
- =v-%pg g
a. --m e,wm--}}