ML20198B060

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Summary of 850920 Meeting W/Gpu Nuclear Corp in Bethesda,Md Re Foundation Design of Expanded Safety Sys Facility Planned by Licensee.List of Attendees & Viewgraphs Encl
ML20198B060
Person / Time
Site: Oyster Creek
Issue date: 11/04/1985
From: Donohew J
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
NUDOCS 8511060284
Download: ML20198B060 (27)
v • d • e


Text

o, UNITED STATES 8

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION o

5 p

WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 e

NOV 0 41985 J

Docket No. 50-219 LICENSEES:

GPU Nuclear Corporation Jersey Central Power and Light Company FACILITY:

Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station

~

St'8 JECT:

MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 20, 1985, ON THE STATUS OF THE EXPANDED SAFETY SYSTEM FACILITY On Friday, September 20, 1985, a meeting was held at NRR Headquarters, Bethesda, Maryland, to discuss the status of the Expanded Safety System Facility (ESSF) planned by GPU Nuclear (the licensee) for the Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station. This meeting was held at the request of the licensee. Attachment 1 is the list of the individuals attending the meeting. Attachment 2 is a copy of the material presented by the licensee at this meeting. The following is a sumary of the significant items discussed and the actions taken or proposed.

The ESSF was preposed to be built at Oyster Creek by the licensee in its letter of March 11, 1985.

In that letter, the licensee described the ESSF and stated that the ESSF would enhance the safety capabilities of Oyster Creek, improve its overall operational capability and reliability and help enFore that Oyster Creek can achieve its expected full licensed lifetime.

The licensee requested the staff's comments on the ESSF, including design criteria, use of surplus equipment and implementation as not involving an unreviewed safety question under 10 CFR 50.59.

The staff responded in its letter of April 16, 1985. The ESSF is not required by the staff.

In its letter of March 11, 1985, the licensee stated that it intended to keep the staff up-to-date on the progress of the ESSF. This first meeting on the status of the ESSF is to provide information on the progress of the ESSF since the licensee's letter of March 11, 1985, and to allow the staff to make any comments on the material preserted by the licensee at the meeting.

This meetino is to discuss the design of the foundation of the ESSF.

The licensee will have a two-phased approach to the construction of the ESSF building. Phase I is a pile supported fcundation supporting a concrete mat and steel frame superstructure with metal siding.

Phase II is pouring cencrete walls for the building.

The licensee has made 16 horings (shown in Attachment 2) in the area where M-o lldg the building will be constructed.

The generalized subsurface profile of the subsoil which was drawn from these borings is in Attachment 2.

The loose to medium dense sand fill, in the drawing showing the profile, came fromfillingintheholesexcavatedforconstructionoftheReactnrandpNoM Turbine Buildings.

8511060284 851104 pR umo5 age

The licensee developed criteria for evaluating different designs for the foundations. The reference to licensability in the table of criteria for foundation evaluation is not a reference to requirements of the staff to license the building.

It is referring to what the licensee must address under 10 CFR 50.59.

The list of foundatier alternatives considered by the licensee is included in Attachment 2.

The board of geotechnical consultants used by the licensee in its evaluation of foundation alternatives is also included.

The licensee's conclusion from its evaluation is that the foundation should contain piles with vibroflotation to compact the soil. This design offers the least impact on the existing plant and this design is common for nuclear power plants.

A generalized subsurface profile of the subsoil with the piles shown in the soil is in Attachment 2.

The dynamic response analysis, desipr loads, and foundation design were then discussed by the licensee.

The next effort by the licensee is pile load testing at the site for the ESSF. This is to verify pile design capacities and results of the analytical design work. The objectives, test plan, scope of testing and construction secuence of the testing were discussed by the licensee.

The licensee discussed the effect of vibroflotation of the soil near the Reactor Building for the construction of the ESSF on the existing' soil pressure on the walls of building the Reactor Building. The pile tests which include tests of the vibroflotation of the soil should show this effect.

The licensee is considering at this time a zone of isolation--uncompacted soil--between the Reactor Building and the area of vibroflotation of soil for the ESSF.

The licensee summarized its presentation in this meeting for Messrs. D.

Crutchfield and J. Zvolinski of the staff. The licensee explained that the purpose for the meeting was to keep the staff apprised of accomplishments on the ESSF and provide a means to receive comments from the staff. The differences between the ESSF described in the licensee's letter of March 11, 1985, and that described in this neeting were presented. They are the following: there will be two-phase or step approach to the construction of the ESSF, the ESSF will be a tyc-story building without the control room i

ventilation equipment and not a three-story building with the control room ventilation and the second phase ray not be completed. The design allows l

for adding the third floor and contrcl rcom ventilation equipment later if it is needed. The foundation will be desioned to be able to accommodate this l

and the poured concrete walls of the second phase. The licensee stated that Stone & Webster Engineering Corporation (SWEC) is designing and constructing the building.

The SVEC ouality assurance progrem will be used for the

construction of the building. This program is consistent with programs for safety systems at nuclear power plants where one cannot go back 'to verify

~

work that has been done. The licensee has reviewed and approved the SWEC quality assurance program.

OD

/

k N. Donohew, Oyster Creek Project Manager N Operating Reactors Branch No. 5 Division of Licensing Attachments:

1.

List of Attendees 2.

Licensee Handout cc:

D. Crutchfield J. Zwolinski G. Lear H. Kister, Region I J. Chen K. Leu N. Chokshi t

50V 0 4 M5

, construction of the building. This program is consistent with programs for safety systems at nuclear power plants where one cannot go back to verify work that has'been done. The licensee has reviewed and approved the SWEC quality. assurance program.

l 3

4 k N. Donohdv, Oyster Creek Project Manager Operating Reactors Branch No. 5 Division of Licensing Attachments:

1.

List of Attendees 2.

Licensee Handout cc:

D. Crutchfield J. Zwolinski G. Lear H. Kister, Region I J. Chen K. Leu N. Chokshi DISTRIBUTION-CM[3 NRC POR LPDR ORB #5 Reading JZwolinski l'

JDonchew OELD l

EJordan BGrimes I

ACRS (10)

NRC Participants f

f\\

0 p

DL:0RB'#5g DL:

b DL:0RB#5

  • bd CJanerson JD
tm JZwolinski 1p/P /85 10

/85 14/ly/85 4.[

h'

cc:

G. F. Trowbridge, Esquire Resident Inspector Shaw, Pittman, Potts and Trowbridae e/o U.S. NRC 1800 M Street, N.W.

Post Office Box 445 Washington, D.C.

20036 Forked River, New Jersey 08731 J.B. Liberman, Escuire Commissioner Bishop, Liberman, Cc.ok, et al.

New Jersey Department of Energy 1155 Avenue of the Americas 101 Commerce Street New York, New York 10036 Newark, New Jersey 07102 Eugene Fisher, Assistant Director Feginrel Administrator, Region I Division of Environmental Quality U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Department of Environmertal 631 Park Avenue Protection King of Prussia, Pennsylvania 19406 380 Scctch Road Trenton, New Jersey 08628 GVP Licensing Manager Mr. P. B. Fiedler GPU Nuclear Vice President & Director 100 Interpace Parkway Oyster Creek Fuclear Generating Station Parsippany, New Jersey 07054 Post 0#fice Box 388 Forked River, New Jersey 08731 Deputy Attorney General State of New Jersey Department of Law and Public Safety 36 West State Street - CF 112 Trenton, New Jersey 08625 Nayor Lacey Township 818 Vest Lacey Road Forked River, New Jersey 08731 D. G. Holland Licensing Manager Dyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station Post Office Box 380 Forked River, Ker Jersey 08731

ATTACHMENT 1 MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 20, 1985 ON THE ESSF Name Affiliation J. Donohew NRC/NRR/DL M. Laggart GPUN*

X. Tosch State of New Jersey **

J. Chen NRC/NRR/SGEB

-K. Leu NRC/NRR/SGEB N. Chokshi NRC/NRR/SGEB J. Clapp GPUN J. Posusney Stone & Webster Engineering G. Brown Stone & Webster Engineering M. Masucci Stone & Webster Engineering E. Wallace GPUN D. Crutchfield NRC/NRR/DL J. Zwolinski NRC/NPR/DL l

l GPU Nuclear Corporation Departrent of Environmental Protection 1

i 4-

~

0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ESSF - EXPANDED SAFETY SYSTEMS FACILITY e 140 X 70 FT BLDG. AT GRADE o 2 - DIESEL GEN + FUTURE SPACE e NORTH OF AND IMMEDIATELI ADJACENT TO REACTOR SWEC SCOPE e ENGINEER AND DESIGN ESSF FOUNDATION DESIGN e PILING WITH VIBROCOMPACTION OF SOIL

.BETWEEN PILES e SEISMICALLY DESIGNED Ppaa. M IPsAfC, Ajugg

i MEETING OBJECTIVE e PROVIDE OVERVIEW OF ENGINEERING AND i

DESIGN CONCEPTS FOR THE FOUNDATION e PRESENT DESCRIPTION OF THE FOUNDATION DESIGN APPROACHES

l PRESENTATION TOPICS e SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS l

l e DESIGN CRITERIA AND CONSTRAINTS e FOUNDATION EVALUATION AND SELECTION e APPROACH TO RESPONSE ANALYSIS l

e BUILDING INTERACTION ANALYSES e DESIGN LOADS AND SAFETY FACTORS o FOUNDATION DESIGN APPROACH l

l e PILE LOAD TESTING l

l

~

I D

h 7

N l

g

~3 i

/

l

-x x-x Q

l L.

J g

l RADWASTE 4

TORUS

^l g

\\/

I TANK I

1 x

l OUTSIDE MAINTENANCE l

STORace e

suitDino BUILDING 1

x D

i x

\\

O*

I I

PROPOSED Ox x/*

ESSF g

g BLDG l

x TANK

\\

l l

o 1

x

&xm i

-rum,

+ 1u

~<t g

g

_J I

r

=

l I

l-1 I

REACTOR

=m TURBINE BUILDING yl BUILDING 1

l I

i l

, _ 30- 'i I

1 l

I EPGM2 l

ll u

BUILDING LOCATION PLAN I

i I

o

'~

4 4

=<

a w Wq 30 35 a,

E g

_ht FILL

,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,;,,,,,;,,;,,; N,,Ly,,

,;,,,,~,;,, ;,,,

2a 5

......~,,~,,....,,,,,r,,,.~,.,,.~,.,1o',,: 7 17,27 17,27,~,,.,,.~,,.,.,.,., ~, ~,-~,.

~.,.:,

,a.~,..

  • ?li.?'~i CAPE MAY FORMAT lON :(,5*y;ylylc,~,y;27,:T,27,27, T,2 RANGE = 2 TO jy
, 7,17 27 2 7,.'Tn ?? r'?s A 7. ' ?. ' ? ' ? ,

o yly yly,'yl{ AVERAGE = 29

'l[jj'.l~,,' -l.,C,?,'T, c*

_L

.: - t:.,-.-,-,-.,-,- -,,

. A.: '.: ' :,, : ;: ' :,, :,72,,-:,-:~

o_,2 of,,,,1 o;,' n o:. : o:,' o:a o:,' o:?.:n r:?y? r:i,.:

a= 1s

~

,-.L.

o r

i

-(

p' = 1c.12 TON /FT' UPPER CLAY LAYER

_.l.

10

.p:4 r9

, N VALUES 2

f.

'3

~

7

-...g..

, m

_3, cm-2.

.t..

i.7 UPPER COHANSEY FORMATION AvgRAas. 47 20

,. 2, w..sym H7 77 l

7 y, g iq,-.

E-

-30

e' t

z r v o

i G

  • i

~

.40 4

w

- e N VALUES W

M.

e<

3 l

50 I

$in0WElk COHANSEYIbRMATION "^"",.','3,'.

A gR ae

....~ws,

~,

a s s7 x

t.

/ :-

i

~

-60

'7 i.

70 T

Pp = 10 20 TON /FT8 l

LOWER CLAY LAYER

.0 3 ypst,/fs,ficJr n g, ? y~e,,i.?EYMd??,;g+ ',7;~.e.m'7.. ~m : ~,,

evy m-

~,, 4 QC,',}pid'CE. VI,

. Nn !,', :4

. k ?',

_ > 100

gi k

,,g N VALUES M:,,,' KIRKWOOD FORMATION 3; J

$N;iAbiS?NM)W?b1 $,$bbfl@d5&'$$4nkO,V,..-

zm,r zw:;; <

'3 t.?:

.. 3 l

~f' s

,,g,_

NOTES:

i 4

o = STANDARD DEVIATION I

p = ESTIMATED PRECONSOLIDATION PRESSURE i

P 1

1

.i

}i GENERALIZED. SOIL PROFILE - RADWASTE BUILDING j

(After Woodward-Moorhouse,1975) 1 1

l

~
t f

,ll ii

,b

'l i J.

E EG

/

D GN K

I AI D S R N

E T

L OI A

T U TU T

S O SB A

j i-

i W

N D

n

~

AR J

j g

L ll I l lls t

\\'OO'0 d RG l

x i

- a f

ON

.. l G S

3 TI 0

P R G l

2 C D 3

G O N

C I

I L

,~lD FD AI I

EU N L RB OU I

B I

T AE 0

f 0

3 VN 2

l AIB C

I I

R X

m $ mo E U T

F E-O D f

N

_l EA TAR 0

MO T

E O,

G TC I

i N

S A C

E E I

NG D

R I

L AN I

NID U

f E L B

TI 7

E g_

N NU y

B IA IB M

l jI, R

UT P

1 I

=

=

m

=

r-

=

=

s I

K u

\\a N

n i

A l

O T

T t)

>III

,i'1 l s{J!

i1j;l jil1I 1j l,

!1 Iil!Iil!

P I

h 7

N l

l

~3

~~

/

4

=

a 1

l L 1

1

=

RADWASTE l

l l

\\/

TORUS l

l l

TANK I

l l

STon7Ge x

MAINTENANCE is is 8

BUILDING BUILDING O

148 '

1 e6 x

l

>13

\\

es 012-O" 3.PFiOPOSED Os I

l

,/*

[,ESS?

g' eo e

/

j j

BLDG 1110 9 l TANK j

e m

se x

.l

\\,

r-=

l l

1 O

._,,,,,..]

I l

g

=

_r

_ _J ouse I

I t

I REACTOR

=

lc TURBINE BUILDING

$Ii BUILDING m

g O

l

,, 3 0' 1

l

'l l

i DEM;2 i

I BORING LOCATION PLAN 7

4

4 6

GENERALIZED SUBSURFACE PROFILE

~

NORTH SOUTH ESSF suitoiNo O

O

'f xtSTING

[

g

(

E N

s 7 REACTOR

% /

BUILDING I

l l

l l

\\

N N /

N

% /

% /

\\

g U

g

/

  1. ,p" s

mp MEDIUM DENSE TO DENSE SAND

%l

,e" (CAPE MAY FORM ATION)

N 10 i-20 E Siirr OnaANic CtAY I

e/

I--

s 1

'S "' L"" '"*"

e_'_____________--------------------------- 30 a;

/,

Q

  1. p' DENSE SAND p#,

(UPPER COHANSEY FORM ATION)

" gn

'U "N

N e

  1. p#

d,#

e a-----*------------------------------------------------------------------ 50

'p VERY DENSE SAND (LOWER COHANSEY FORMATION)

SCALE (FT) 0 10 20 l

1 4

4

CRITERIA FOR FOUNDATION EVALUATION OBJECTIVE: TO SELECT A FOUNDATION SCHEME WHICH MOST CLOSELY MEETS ALL THE DESIRED CRITERIA e MINIMlZE IMPACT ON EXISTING PLANT WALL PRESSURES VIBRATIONS SETTLEMENTS C

MMON HNIQUE ANALYTICAL COMPLEXITY PAST PRECEDENCE QC AND INSPECTABILITg MM Mdag,.dke. %

ww t. muass e CONSTRUCTABILITY i

  • COST AND SCHEDULE

4 FOUNDATION ALTERNATIVES l

CAISSONS DEWATERING, EXCAVATION, AND BACKFILL i

GROUTING l

PILES STRUCTURAL SLURRY WALLS l

VIBROFLOTATION COMBINATION SCHEMES EG.

1 4

PILES W/VIBROFLOTATION CAISSONS W/ GROUTING f

DEWATERING AND EXCAVATION W/ SLURRY WALL CUTOFF / TIEBACK

l

l BOARD OF GEOTECHNICAL I

CONSULTANTS

~

A.J. HENDRON, JR.

UNIV. OF ILL.

i E.KAUSEL M.I.T.

I W.F. SWIGER - CONSULTING ENGINEER MEETINGS ON:

1.11/1/84 GENERAL OVERVIEW OF EVALUATION 2.12/17/84 REFINED CONCEPTUAL DESIGN OF l

3 SCHEMES

3. 4/4/85 APPROVAL OF FOUNDATION EVALUATION SELECTION l

=

CONCLUSIONS

-l l

1. SELECTED PILES W/VIBROFLOTATION 1

i

2. DEVELOP PROGRAM FOR ADVANCED i

ANALYSIS AND DESIGN OF PIL.E FOUNDATION

3. CONFIRMED DESIRABILITY FOR PILE LOAD TESTING PROGRAM

a._.

s

$1 GENERALIZED SUBSURFACE PROFILE I

NORTH SOUTH g

ESSF BUILDING 7

s a '

O O

O O

O

(

EXISTING

, [ COLUMN tlNES g

N / BUILDING l

l l

l l

N REACTOR s y

/

s /

n U

s

/

"s

_ *#j#MEDluM DENSE TO DEhSE SAND 1

,s (CAPE MAY FORMATION)

\\

10

]

,.e___

s

+-

50' PILES s

h

\\

- ME

~l

,/

Sm OuAm u 3,. PILES

-+

I e'

30 g LOOSE TO MEDIUM DENSE p

j'___,,..

SAND riLt a

,/

  1. ,e DENSE SAND gg 7v p#j (UPPER COHANSEY FORM ATION)

N

"\\

v e

  1. p

\\

,,# j #

e a____

._.. :.-------------------------------------------------------------7-- 50 VERY DENSE SAND (LOWER COHANSEY FORMATION)

SCALE (FT) 0 10 20

DYNAMIC RESPONSE ANALYSIS l e TWO INDEPENDENT ANALYSES 4

e STEP WISE SOLUTION - LUMPED MASS MODEL SHAKE - SOIL PROPERTIES PILAY2 - FOUNDATION IMPEDANCES (SINGLE PILE X GROUP FACTORS)

FRIDAY - STRUCTURAL RESPONSE e DIRECT SOLUTION - FINITE ELEMENT MODEL FLUSH (BUILDING INTERACTION ALSO)

\\

DESIGN LOADS

~

AVG. VERTICAL LOAD

=

65 TONS AVG. LATERAL LOAD

=

17 TONS i

l DESIGN VERTICAL LOAD

= 100 TONS DESIGN LATERAL LOAD

=

25 TONS SAFETY FACTORS NORMAL LOADS 2.5 SEVERE ENVIRONMENTAL LOADS 2.0 EXTREME ENVIRONMENTAL LOADS 1.5

^

\\

FOUNDATION DESIGN e DESIGN STRESSES luaA h N INERTIALLY INDUCED ANGL'ed KINEMATICALLY INDUCEDk e COMPOSITE SECTION ACI 349 e CORROSION PROTECTION COATING SACRIFICIAL THICKNESS e CONNECTION DETAILS FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS 2D EMBEDMENT FULL FIXITY li

l

~

I OBJECTIVES OF PILE LOAD i

TESTING l

e VERIFY PILE DESIGN CAPACITIES l

e VERIFY RESULTS OF THE ANALYTICAL l

SOLUTIONS i

l e CONFIRM INSTALLATION AND SOIL DENSIFICATION TECHNIQUES

~

e DEFINE AREAS FOR POSSIBLE DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION OPTIMlZATION CRITERIA: DUPLICATE PRODUCTION J

MATERIALS AND CONSTRUCTION

.AS CLOSE AS POSSIBLE

PILE TEST PLAN I I I I I 8 I

I I I I 1 8 3 3

+ +

3 I g I o

o

'Ir--

i- -

+ +

i is ll i 5 lli

+ + + + + t, i

Il l ll I

3 O

-~

l l

+ + + + + +

l l

l I h ESSF m

4 +

g!!

O W NE l3 l lII 3

l O

O e

+ +

eII 3 l 3 II l

3 I g li I I l B I l

I e

I I

,1

i. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ c12-SERVICE (W ATER i,i 9 i

IN I

I e

I I

3 2l lg 3

~s" SEWER 3

gI g

I I 9l g SO LTEST BORING IIC 3 I

(Typ.)

l in CONST. WATER (8.O.P. EL 19' 3, gi l

,_____________g_________________-6,1) l g l] l Il 4* FORCED MAIN ii ii ll l il,._____.;_'_______________________________L____________

,g.J II l gg 3g BI I 3 3 l ! _l lg gl.7_ _ y _ _ _ _ _ _ _

.. _ _ _-81)I !,

4* TO RUS TAN K (q ELEV. 18' _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _.l._ _ __ _ _ _ _ _

p l_

TEST PILE (TYP) l gI gg,

gg 8 I Il II si i i s si

+

+ +

+ +++++1+++

t gg g3 o

o

)+

l!!

t

+

+

+

+++

+ + +

5 gg a

a O

a l

+

+

+ 1+

+} + + +

g g!l l l #

+ +{t

+ +

g O O 8 li 3g I I O

i jgl i s e si

+

+

+

+

+ + +

+ +

++++

I I I O

l t 15

+!+8+

I I I I2!3g

+ +

1 s

I

+

+

+

+

+

+e +

+

l 3

a O

O =

=

! pl8l :l ll

+

+

+

+ + + + +++

t 3:

I I

~

I l IB I I

+ + 4g+

e i I YlBROCOMPACTION POINT I 3 l t

!! l ll

<na >

l lllilll8 i

2.

l I

ru' I8 I (

!!la(I-______)._,___,

i

~

is l l

B E a

II I

I

%% _ _ & _-- _4* F_OR_C_ED_M_AIN (Q E_ LEV. 2_1*_81_)

l s

3 8 l g

a__

_w__________

I I I

I e

I 8 l 8

3 gI r----------

_ q _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _-------

T--

2 " S ERVICE W ATER (B.O.P. EL 15'-2)

II l l

..c_ -

i; I __ _ _ 2._ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _,g_ _ _ __ _ _1 _ ___ _ _ _

i OFFIOE 8LDG.

REACTOR BLDG.

~

g SCOPE OF TESTING

~

e NORTH PROFILE SINGLE PILE STATIC COMPRESSION AND LATERAL e SOUTH PROFILE SINGLE PILE AND PILE GROUP STATIC COMPRESSION AND LATERI.AL DYNAMIC COMPRESSION AND LAT5RAL,

CONSTROCTION SEQUENCE e EXCAVATE TO PILE CAP GRADE AS REQUIRED e PREAUGER AND DRIVE CLOSED-END PIPE PILES l

e PERFORM VIBROFLOTATION IN TEST AREAS e VERIFY DENSIFICATION e INSTALL CONCRETE AND REINFORCEMENT IN PILES e CONSTRUCT PILE CAP e PERFORM LOAD TESTING e DEMOLISH PILE CAP MMXf[PM DAdkf& '& gQ

(-

i I

DYNAMIC PILE LOAD TESTING E

SETUP MASS ADDED TO TOP OF PILE; ATTACHMENT OF LOADING MEMBER; MISC. SUPPORT OF VlBRATING EQUIPMENT METHOD

1. IMPACT TESTING, LOW FORCE LEVEL
2. STEADY STATE VIBRATION,0 TO 27 HZ
3. IMPACT TESTING, LOW AND HIGH FORCE LEVEL MONITORING TIME HISTORY OF FORCE LEVEL AND PILE RESPONSE; BY ENGINEERS; AUTOMATIC RECORDING PRODUCT DYNAMIC VERTICAL AND LATERAL STIFFNESS AND DAMPING, GROUP EFFICIENCY

- - - - - -

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML20198B060&oldid=4102982"