ML20234B017
| ML20234B017 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Waterford  |
| Issue date: | 06/26/1987 |
| From: | LOUISIANA POWER & LIGHT CO. |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20234B002 | List: |
| References | |
| PROC-870626, NUDOCS 8707020174 | |
| Download: ML20234B017 (36) | |
Text
.,5 NUCLEAR PLANT ISLAND STRUCTURE BASEMAT SURVEILLANCE PROGRAM i
Revision 1 June 26, 1987 i
i e707020174 070626 DR ADOCK 05000' 2
,4 BASEMAT SURVEILLANCE PROGRAM-A.
GENERAL A surveillance program for the Nuclear Plant Island Structure (NPIS)
Common Foundation Basemat was established to provide continuing assurance of basemat integrity.
The elements selected for monitoring are those for which measurements will reflect any unusual behavior of the basemat and which will be useful in addressing the significance, if any, of such behavior.. Action limits were established for the monitored elements whereby, if the measurements reach a limiting value, action will be taken to identify the cause of the changes and an evaluation made as to the effect of such on the integrity of the basemat.
B.
PROGRAM OVERVIEW The Basemat Surveillance Program is divided into four major areas.
These will provide overall assurance that changes in relevant observable and measurable phenomena will be detected and that sufficient data will be available to evaluate significant changes, if any, and their implications.
The program elements are:
1 1,
Basemat Elevation which is the primary method of identifying:
the gross response of the basemat to loading l[j implied soil consolidation and environmental changes flexural variations within the basemat.
2.
Ground Water Chemistry to detect any long term changes from the current absence of significant rebar corrosion potential within the basemat.
3.
Groundwater Level to detect any correlation of fluctuations in the ground water level with measured basemat movements or measured I
changes in crack width.
q I
4 1
NS20648
)
lo
t 1 4.
Crack Surveillance to provide an indication of changes in the state of strain at the top surface of the basemat.
Crack maps which have been prepared previously, will be retained and will provide a baseline document for future reference as to location and extent of cracks.
The baseline crack maps are expected to be useful in the event of unusual behavior of the basemat as identified by the l
programs outlined in items 1-4 above.
The program, as described herein, will be implemented using approved Plant Operating Manual procedures to conduct the cecessary surveillances C.
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION The four elements of the surveillance program are described below:
1.
Basemat E7evation.
This program is essentially an extension of the data measurements takenduringseveralyearsintheconstructionphaseandinvolvesthe
(
collection of elevation data by a level survey conducted on selected monitoring points. The Master Benchmark used as a reference for the level surveys is a monument located to the east of the Waterford site on an abandoned transmission tower foundation representing a stable base elevation.
The basemat is expected to exhibit continued long term settlement at t
a very low rate decreasing with time.
This type of settlement is expected to be primarily rigid body and involve little strain in the basemat.
Short period (eg:
seasonal) cyclical movements of the basemat can be expected.
These will result in negligible accumulation.
They may involve rigid body displacements and rotations and may also imply strains within the bar'emat.
Two sets of monitoring points, namely " Primary Monitoring Points" and
" Secondary Monitoring Points", were selected as illustrated on Enclosures 1 and 2.
The primary monitoring points, were a set of 2
NS20648
f: 4'.
6 Il ten (10). points located on the east and west exterior walls and shield bu',1 ding wall approximately 60.ft. above the basemat.
These points were monitored to measure the basemat differential settlement and to provide a. ready comparison with the acceptance limits.
The
' differential settlements. represent the difference in elevation between monitoring points at the basemat center areas near the shield building and monitoring points at the boundaries of the NPIS.
Calculations of the basemat stress condition rasulting from
-differential settlement have been made considering the basemat as a plate and subject to uniform longitudinal (north-south) flexure from the differential settlement.
These calculations indicate that a differential settlement of 2.5 inches from the center of the basemat to the north and south ends will result in a tension of 3200 psi in the top reinforcing steel.
This amount of tensile stress is insignificant (less than 10%) when compared to the code allowable stresses.
An action limit of one (1.0) inch was selected for the changes in differential settlement from the baseline. 'This provides a conservative limiting value for the differential settlement.
Secondary monitoring points were established with a sufficient number and distribution of settlement points on the basemat to portray the state of flexure of the basemat and nature of the settlement of the basemat as a whole.
The intent of establishing both primary and secondary monitoring points was to establish a correlation between them and then monitor only the primary points since they, being at grade, are relatisely easy to access for monitoring.
The primary points, however, required verification that their movement re9ected the basemat movement.
A factor considered in selecting the monitoring point locations was to minimize, as much as possible, the number of surveying " setups" required to determine the monitoring points elevations, thus minimizing the errors associated with the measurements.
3 NS20648
,r A baseline date of July, 1984 was established for this monitoring, and readings were, initially taken quarterly.
The surveillance interval'after the first three (3) readings was lengthened to'become semi-annual as per the applicable plant procedure because there were-no significant changes observed and no adverse or unexplainable data had been obtained.
'The basemat movements s'ince the basel'ine date have not exhibited unusual behavior.
There has been a slight amount of-settlement of the basemat as a whole with some slight differential settlements within the basemat.
These differential settlements have displayed some symptoms
.of being cyclical as they increased then decreased.
However, sufficient time has-not elapsed'to see a recurrence of another cycle of increase and decrease.
Detailed evaluation and analysis of the monitoring data indicated a few areas in the surveillance plan which can be, and are being, enhanced as described below:
It was determined that accurate settlement measurements can be obtained only from the secondary points on the basemat.
The monitoring points located at higher elevations (i.e., on the shield wall and east and west exterior walls) appear to be influenced by movements occurring in I
the superstructure (thermal effects, wall rotations).
The primary monitoring points, as well as four secondary monitoring points located on the shield wall at higher elevations, were therefore deleted from the settlement monitoring program.
Further, it was determined that it would be desirable to obtain settlement data at additional locations near the edge of the basemat for a better distribution. shows the location on the basemat surface of the set of monitoring points which will be utilized for future settlement measurements.
Equivalent July, 1984 baseline readings for recently added points will be estimated from the first available survey readings by incorporating the settlement in those areas during the applicable 4
NS20648
o surveillance period.
The settlement at these points will be determined by interpolating the data for the corresponding surveillance period from the other secondary monitoring points located on the surface of the basemat.
- The calculated differential settlements obtained for the primary monitoring points for each surveillance period are recorded in Table 1.
I The maximum baseline / calculated differential settlement of 0.040 ft.
or 0.48 in.
occurred in January, 1985.
The maximum differential settlement has since reduced to 0.024 ft. or 0.28 in.
No values have exceeded the one (1) inch acceptable limitation.
'The survey. elevation data for the secondary monitoring points were also analyzed and basemat settlement contours plotted for each surveillance period as well as overall accumulated settlements for various period with reference to the baseline of July, 1984.
These contour plots are contained in Basemat Monitoring Program Special Report-(Reference 1).
The data reveals that the basemat has under-gone slight movement during this time, with no distinct trend being identified, but cyclical movement being suggested.
An example of the contour plots generated from the secondary monitoring points data is shown in Enclosure 4 which represents the total basemat settlement as of December, 1986 since the baseline of July 1984.
Presently the elevation data is taken through surveys conducted on a quarterly basis.
Quarterly measurements will be conducted for four consecutive quarters.
Following the four measurements the interval may be extended.
Similar to other equipment monitoring programs such as Steam Generator Tube Inspection (Technical Specification 3.4.4) and Snubbers (Technical Specification 3.7.8) the monitoring interval will be lengthened provided no significant changes are observed and no adverse or unexplained data has been observed.
Three consecutive, satisfactory surveillances are required to extend the interval to the next interval stated below.
The intervals are:
(as used within Technical Specifications) 5 NS20648
8 -... L
- J i
.]
l Q
- Quarterly - At least once per 92 days SA
- Semi-annually - At least once per 184 days A
- Annually - at least once per 12 months R
- Refueling Interval - At least once per 18 months i
Basemat settlement measurements shall be conducted concurrently with surveillances or measurements associated with the crack width measurements and ground water level measurements.
- 2.
Seasonal Groundwater Levels The variation in groundwater-level affects the magnitude of the upward buoyancy force on the basemat and norizontal soil pressure on the portion of the peripheral walls below the groundwater' table.
The groundwater levels at two wells located approximately 6 ft. from the east and west exterior walls of the NPIS (Enclosure 5) are measured.
quarterly.
The water level readings are intended to provide data which may indicate correlation with measured settlement or measured changes in crack width, therefore no action limits are specified.
The groundwater elevations obtained during the past surveillances are listed in Table 2, and also plotted on Enclosure 6.
The seasonal variation of groundwater is very similar between both wells. 'The overall variation is small, approximately one (1) ft., with no definite seasonal trend yet observed.
This maximum 1 ft, variation is less than 2% of the total hydraulic head and therefore would not i
be expected to create any si2nificant effect on the buoyancy or the net soil pressure.
No measurable effect would be expected on the basemat settlement, due to groundwater level variation, during the period of surveillance to date.
These measurements will be taken on a quarterly basis.
The measurement interval for level measurements will be maintained on a quarterly basis and shall not be subject to interval extension as in 6
I NS20648
other portions'of the monitoring program. -The quarterly measurements shall be performed concurrently-with surveillances or measurements for I
other portions of the program scheduled to.be performed during that I
quarter.
3.
Groundwater Chemistry This. element of the surveillance program is intended to provide information relevant to the corrosion potential to the reinforcing steel (rebars) embedded in the concrete. _The corrosion possibility would be associated with groundwater entering into. cracks and coming in contact with the rebars.
The corrosion of rebar'is very unlikely to occur as the rate of seepage of groundwater through the 12 foot thick basemat is small, which restricts the access of dissolved oxygen, chlorides and carbon dioxide to the rebar-concrete interface..The slow movement'of water'through the basemat causes the
. water.to become alkaline (pH-12.5) by contact with tne calcium oxide and calcium hydroxide content of the concrete.
The corrosion rate of steel by alkaline water is low, thereby further diminishing the already remote likelihood of rebar corrosion.
The only mechanism identified which could alter this corrosion potential is a significant increase'in the chloride content of the groundwater.
The two wells shown in Enclosure 5 were driven for the purpose of periodic sampling and testing groundwater for chloride content.
The chloride corrosion threshold of steel in the presence of oxygen is 710 ppm (Reference 2).
The acceptable chloride limitation for the surveillance program was conservatively taken as 250 ppm.
The data of groundwater chloride contents obtained from the two wells is listed in Table 3, and also plotted on Enclosure 7 The range of the chloride contents varied from 14.4 to 46.0 ppm, all well below the action limit of 250 ppm.
7 l
NS20648
l Extension of the interval of chemical samples in the same manner as the basemat settlement may be followed provided the chloride content i
is below the threshold and shows no significant chango (50 ppm) from the previous sample.
This provides assurance that long term natural changes, should they occur, will be detected.
.The intervals for chemical sampling need not be concurrent with' performance of the surveillance activities associated with the remainder of the monitoring program.
4.
. Crack Surveillance The cracks in the top surface of the basemat have been shown to be a result of the differential settlements experienced during the early stages of construction.
The differential settlements are believed to have resulted from a combination of the soil conditions and the sequence of concrete block construction for the basemat.
Although any future additional settlement is expected to be minimal some of the parameters such as changes in hydrostatic pressures and long term soil consolidation, are still existent, indicating that the movement of the foundation mat and some minor growth of the cracks may continue.
In order to collect accurate information about development and propagation of cracks, the following crack surveillance programs were implemented:
a.
Basemat Crack Inspection A visual inspection of the basemat cracks in accessible areas was made in 1983 and observable cracks were mapped.
Not all of the cracks could be mapped due to inaccessibility, painted floor areas, difficulty in crack detection due to crack fineness coupled with concrete surface roughness.
The surveillance program required inspection of cracks once per eighteen (18) months and its evaluation against the following action limit:
i)
No cracks greater than 15 mils (.015 inches) in width are visible in the accessible areas of the basemat surface.
8 NS20648 l
I
3 i
1
)
ii) - No new cracks are visible, in the accessible areas of the basemat surface, which are essentially continuous and ten i
(10) feet or more in length.
ACI 224R-80 and ACI 318 recommend a calculated tolerable crack width of 16 mils in flexure. for an internal flexural' member.
ACI J
224R-80 also states that isolated cracks in a-flexural member can
- occur' which are twice the calculated width, 32 mils.
Since a 32 mil crack could be expected to have no detrimental effect on the reinforcing steel, an action limit of 15 mils was selected to maintain a conservative limit.
The first basemat crack inspection since Waterford-3 has been in operation was conducted in May/ June, 1986.
The inspection was conducted using the baseline crack maps from the 1983 i
inspection.
During the inspection, several cracks longer than 10 ft. were detected which had not been identified in the baseline crack maps.
Detailed evaluation by LP&L and NRC resulted in a consensus that:
o.
The previously unmapped cracks in the basemat existed during the 1983 inspection but were not mapped due to inaccessibility or because they were extremely fine hairline cracks and, hence, either not detected due to the concrete surface conditions at the time of inspection or considered to be superficial.
o The previously unmapped cracks were judged to be similar in age and character to those cracks previously identified and appear to be members of the same family.
They were considered to be structurally insignificant and have no detrimental effects on the integrity of the basemat of the NPIS.
9 NS20648
i
.It was also concluded that mapping of cracks was a subjective process due, in part, to the presence of extremely fine cracks which have been described previously as " superficial".
A totally accurate crack map, even.in areas without floor finish and accessible to examination, was judged not.to be feasible due to these superficial cracks being difficult to observe (some were only detected by one of two inspection teams, and in some cases, a consensus of whether a crack was present was not easily obtained).
Because the " superficial" cracks have been judged to be insignificant to the issue of basemat structural capability and because of the impracticality of accurate mapping they now have been judged not to be relevant to the monitoring program.
Such mapping will therefore be discontinued, and the existing crack maps retained for possible future use if the other surveillance program elements identify unusual basemat behavior.
b.
Crack Width Measurements Since state-of-the-art NDT inspections, calculations, and evaluations have determined that the existing cracks do not imply any degradation of the designed structural integrity of the basemat, the objective of the monitoring program is to detect significant changes in the state of the basemat. To provide further assurance that basemat integrity is not degraded from some unanticipated mechanism or postulated event, the crack surveillance program includes obtaining quantitative data on basemat strains across cracks.
This program consists of taking precision measurements across representative cracks that were chosen based on location, visual appearance, crack depth (from NDT measurements) and accessibility.
The points of crack width monitoring were selected so that several major cracks, cracks in areas of computed compression and cracks in areas of computed tension on the basemat top surface are gaged.
These cracks have been instrumented similar to that shown in 10 NS20648
i I, which provides an indirect measure of changes in crack j
width.
Each selected crack has three (3) sets of measurement plugs with two (2) bridging the crack and one (1) control in an j
uncracked region adjacent to the crack.
Measurements are obtained f
for all three devices on each crack when a surveillance is performed.
Initially, four (4) representative cracks were selected.
The program involved taking quantitative precision measurements using mechanical strain gauges (Whittemore type) which can detect the variation in gauge length to 0.1 mil (.0001 inch) accuracy.
The crack width monitoring readings were to be taken at quarterly intervals with the base reading taken in August, 1986.
The number of cracks instrumented has been increased to fifteen (15).
The locations of these cracks are shown on Enclosure 9. Measured changes in crack width of greater than 15 mils (.015 inch) was selected as the action limit, based on the reasons indicated previously, beyond-which further evaluation and inspection of the basemat is required.
Results obtained from the Basemat Confirmatory Analyses have indicated areas of the basemat are subject to bending creating tension at the top surface of the basemat.
The bending has been evaluated and found not to affect the structural capability of the basemat, however, the presence of such bending does indicate a potential for crack growth and initiation in those zones.
The use of a 15 mil action limit for further evaluation on the instrumented cracks in these zones is adequate to assure that structurally significant changes have not occurred and that minor cracking, as may be expected in these zones, does not unneces-sarily initiate evaluations and investigations.
The areas of the basemat subject to negative moments in relation to the basemat cracks are indicated on Enclosure 10.
11 NS20648
The baseline readings for the four representative cracks selected for crack width monitoring were taken in August, 1986.
Subsequent to the baseline readings, readings were taken at 3 month intervals.
The change in crack widths, with respect to the baseline readings with and without temperature corrections, are listed in Table 4.
The maximum change in gage length across the cracks has been well below the action limit of 15 mils requiring further evaluation.
Quarterly measurements will be performed for four consecutive quarters before interval extension will be considered.
- However, subsequent measurement intervals may be extended in the same manner as described for basemat settlement.
Crack width surveillance measurements shall be conducted concurrently with basemat settlement measurements and ground water level measurements.
c.
Wall Crack Surveillance This portion of the program involved a photographic survey, every 18 months, of the lower portion of the Shield Building and selected exterior walls in the east and west cooling tower areas.
The fourteen (14) walls selected for survey are listed in Enclosure 11.
A portion of the wall in proximity to the basemat (up to 10 feet height from the basemat) was included in the photographic survey.
A photographic survey in lieu of mapping of cracks was adopted because the NDT examination of Shield Building wall cracks indicated that they were shallow cracks (indicative of shrinkage cracks) and no correlation was found between the wall cracks and the basemat cracks.
12 NS20648
..n II The photographic surveys are utilized to determine whether significant char,Ju are' visible, in which case the areas will be subjected to further investigation.
The first complete photographic' survey of the selected shield building and east and west cooling tower walls was conducted in June, 1986.
The surveillance met the acceptance criteria that no cracks greater than 15 mils in width are visible.
However, a visual inspection of the wall cracks and comparison with the original 1984 wall crack sketches revealr.d that additional cracks in the walls, below the action limit, existed which were not shown in the original mapping..
The original crack sketches were developed to characterize the wall cracks,.in particular, those cracks appearing to be connected to cracks'on the basemat, and to select wall cracks on which NDT would be utilized to define the crack depth and width.
They were not originally intended to serve as a baseline for future monitoring efforts and they should not be considered as complete.
There is ample evidence that many of the newly identified wall cracks were present in 1984.
An examination of the photographs taken at that time reveals that some of the cracks, identified by leachate deposits on the well, had a leachate depcait present in 1984.
Other cracks presently extend through leachate deposits, mapped in 1984, and do not exhibit cracking of that leachate showing a lack of activity of that crack since 1984.
In all cases, the cracks and leachate deposits are dry indicating no further water flow from the cracks; hence they have filled with leachate themselves and cannot be presently or recently active.
Several of the newly identified cracks are obvious linear extensions of previcusly mapped cracks.
In many cases cracks now identified on a wall surface had a mapped counterpart on the opposite surface of the same wall in 1984.
These cracks are most probably the result of thermal cyclin'g, shrinkage, light vibrations, or slight readjustments of the walls to load.
It is 13 NS20648
~.
. normal for cracks 'in' concrete to propagate for these reasons.
Once concrete cracks,.the location'of the limit of the crack is tenuous and the. state of stress at the limit is that of high tension with incipient crack extension.
Such a delicately balanced condition can trigger a small extension of the crack q
from any of the.above mentioned mechanisms.
J It is' planned to continue the photographic survey of the selected I
walls for two (2) additional cycles (based on current 18-month j
surveillance intervals for wall cracks) and then discontinue the survey provided no significant changes are noted during the two
- surveys, q
D.
REPORTING REQUIREMENTS Reports required via the basemat surveillance program can be classified as I
"Special" and " Interim-Special" reports.
Special reports are required approximately every eighteen months.
Flexibility of the eighteen month time frame is intended-to allow a short delay to include all elements of the monitoring to be performed per the specified i
intervals and provide coverage for each element'in the report.
Special reports will include data sheets from each of the elements of the monitoring program as well as the results of evaluatic,ns to show compliance q
with the acceptance critaria.
Should LP&L determine that the data indicates an undesirable trend or otherwise is deserving of further evaluation,.the evaluations and conclusions will be provided as part of the special report.
LP&L Licensing & Regulatory Affairs will coordinate with Nuclear Operations Engineering in development of the special report utilizing the data gathered by plant staff in performing the elements of the program.
The j
report will be' transmitted to the NRC document r,esk with copies for the NRC Project Director sufficient for a distribution determined by the Project
)
Director.
l 14 NS20648 1
1 Interim Special reports are those that are associated with an engineering evaluation of the significance of observations, measurements or calculations
)
from performance of the elements of the basemat monitoring program in which an acceptance criteria is violated or appears to have been violated.
Plant procedures which govern the performance of the surveillences associated with the monitoring program require plant staff to notify LP&L Licensing when an acceptance criteria is violated during performance of the procedure.
Notification can be delayed until the next regular work day if the observation is after regular work hours.
Licensing will contact LP&L Engineering and the two organizations, in conjunction with Ebasco or other consultant assistance, will perform an initial assessment.
The initial assessment will be limited to a one day assessment or less and may be limited to an expression of engineering judgement of the significance of the criteria violation.
The NRC Project Manager will be notified by telecon no later than the following day of the details as known and the initial assessment result.
LP&L Licensing, Engineering and other organizations, as required, will develop an engineering evaluation following the initial notification of the NRCProjectManager.
A written report will be developed and submitted by LP&L within 30 days of the initial notification.
This report may, of necessity, be preliminary in nature but will provide preliminary results (or final results if available), description of remaining work, schedule for submittal of a final report and justification for continued operation of the facility pending completion of the evaluation.
The written report will be submitted to the document control desk with copies to the NRC Project Director as specified for special reports above.
15 NS20648
REFERENCES 1.
"Basemat Monitoring Program Special Report," prepared for Louisiana Power & Light Company by Ebasco Services Incorporated, New York, NY, dated December 30, 1986.
2.
" Materials Protection," D. A. Hausmann, pgs. 23-25, October 1969.
NS20648
z.
TABLE 1
~
NUCLEAR PLANT ISLAN0 STRUCTURE BASEMAT OIFFERENTIAL SETTLEMENT WITH REFERENCE TO JULY, 1984 (ACTION LIMIT = 1.083 FT.)
OIFFERENTIAL SETTLEMENT (FT)
MONITORING OCT.31 JAN.31 MAY 2 OEC.5' JULY 9 NOV.29 POINTS 1984 1935 1985 1985 1986 1986 (SP-CS)-(SP-M2)
.021
- 040
.006
+.007
.023
.008
.011
.008
+.007
.017
.013
.018
.009
.003
.019
.017
.032
.005
.004
.020
.003
.010
+.011
.012
+.013
+.005
+.008
.009
.013
.013
+.000
+.010
.012
+.004
.018
.006
+.017
.006
+.003
+.003
+.003 NOTES:
- 1. For location of Monitoring Points, see Enclosure 1.
- 2. Negative readings imply reduction of differential when compared to Baseline Differential of July, 1984.
i NS20648
4 TABLE 2 NUCLEAR PLANT ISLAND STRUCTURE GROUNDWATER ELEVATION (FT.)
(N0 ACTION LIMIT)
LOCATION DATE EAST WELL WEST WELL 6/13/85 11.50 11.50 9/21/85 10.70 10.97 11/25/85 11.65 11.52 3/6/86 11.57 11.70 6/2/86 11.67 11.80 9/5/86 11.75 11.91 11/20/86 11.90 12.11 2/6/87 12.00 12.01 i
NS20648
'T-MTF
/
- M eiyE a
=W'a 4Edir e de=.M-se A
r'm-p I
l l
TABLE 3 NUCLEAR PLANT ISLAND STRUCTURE-GROUNDWATER CHLORIDE CONTENT (ppm)
(ACTION LIMIT = 250 ppm) i LOCATION DATE EAST WELL WEST WELL 8/29/84 22.0 17.5 11/29/84 35.0 28.5 3/4/85 37.0 25.0 4
6/13/85 35.0 22.0 9/21/85 23.0 14.4 i
11/25/85 46.0 18.0 3/6/86 35.0 16.0 6/2/86 33.0 15.0 9/5/86 33.0 20.0 11/20/86 31.0 20.0 2/26/87 38.0 15.0 NS20648
1 TABLE 4 NUCLEAR PLANT ISLAND STRUCTURE BASEMAT CRACK WIDTH VARIATION (MILS)
(ACTION LIMIT = +15 Mils)
Reference Baseline Date = August, 1986 CRACK WIDTH VARIATION (MILS)
MONITORING-Without Thermal Correction With Thermal Correction STATION CRACK' i.
NO.
DESIGN.
Nov.4, 86 Feb.25, 87 Nov.4,86-Feb.25,87 3
L
-0.4
-0.2
-0.5
+0.2 5
DW1
-0.1 0.0 0.0
+0.4 (WestDiagonal) 11 De3
-0.1
+1.5
-0.5
+0.1 12 Ke
+1.3
+3.5
+1.2
+3.7 NOTESi 1.
For location of Monitoring Stations and Cracks, see Enclosure 9.
2.
Hegative readings imply reduction in apparent crack width with reference to the baseline of August, 1986.
1 NS20648
1 MASTER BENCHMARKl I
/)
RIVER ROAD (LA 18)
( )
f I
h TOWER 1:
?HB ir e
SBM 1 a
sp.c SFc5 SERVICE SeM.3 CTA RCB l CTA BLOG.
1:
SP.M8' '
, S P-M5 a,,
RAB NUCLEAR PLANT
, ISLAND STRUCTURE sp.Mi SP M4' o
i i
- SBM.. SUPPLEMENTARY BENCHMARK PRIMARY MONITORING POINTS 1
ENCLOSURE-1 i
SP-WI m
'~
- SP-MIO [
d U Se.M9 SP-E l h
S P-E 2 S P-W 2 FHB 1
SP-w3 j
O S P-W 4 SP-E 4 o
e SP-W5 r
o o SP-Mit A gp l0SP-MI5 RCB o
SP M12 o
o P. W 7 SP-E7 SP-C 3 o SP-C2 o
SP W8 SP-EIO' SP-W 9 S P-Ell S,P E 8 SP,E9 r
S P-8 j
I o S P-A RAB I
S P-C o
S P-F c l
S P-D S P-E o
o y
SECONDARY MONITORING POINTS ENCLOSURE-2 j
{SP-El o
S P.M 9 n
SF-W10 12 S P-E 2 e
SP W2 FHB 1
SP-E13 o
w S P.W 4 S P-E 4 0
o SP-W5 SP-ES]
o SP.Mll A jo Sp. gig e
RCB
~
.o SP-W 7 SP-E7 S P-W 8 Sp.EIO SFW12 0
0 o
o SP-W 9 S P.g gi SP-E 8 SP-E3 e
o L
S P-F e S P-D S P-E o
o O EXISTING MONITORING POINTS e NEW MOtllTORING POINTS NEW SETTLEMENT MONITORING POINTS ENCLOSURE-3
4.
~,, g 660'o*
iso'- g" gn c
1 l2A 7,
y 1
OJ
[#/,g j l
l L
r sp.,e,
SM $
f O
h)'
IFM g.
L 6P-C2
~
D C.,
f 1
i lN f
GFW g E-3 O
5ea @.
1 i W BB26.00 g
~
T
~
'"9
~
\\
SFM 61 l
2FM 3
(F4 g k,
sp.c.4 2
~CD i
1 y
/y'p N
dr SP-Mit*
2x j O
\\
(u is c
- g\\
3
-y y
J 1.. sb;wy~pQjj I
l i
i b'-o _
'f i
i
.20'-O. 27tG _ Is'-G. to'-G,.t@(o.22'-0,.24to
.24' G. 24'- G. tl'-o L GB'-o.
1 Pi N
M d
W
\\)
U T2 Ti s
R bREACTOR i
ewe.
l i
BASEMAT ABSOLUTE e PERIOD: JULY '84 TO !
29 MONTHS
.5-22s-e K" ?
N-I 9.
1 w
\\
l'2A, ti>.e o
(,-30) i)v') Q
-m 0
'h tioA O
0
'o e
v '%
9 SP E,
y '-b A
(.2 j) i oR 74_ _y o dNcm o
i 15Lom.
-s
-%(pr J
9 N
MOTES *.
Pg6
'[
(~ )
CONTOURS IN o.ool PT h
(-) : DowM c4g 0
SPs MOMITORJN4 PolNTra LP = C, O
y
- ( SS e
k.
w 11
'2 A APERTURE SP A o l-13 U
CARD-L
d g
5'- c,
. _a Also Available On i
62'-o
. 62'-o..st o
_ontto.,'
Aperture Card i
K J
u 6
sq07020/14- 0I l
ETTLEMENTS
(
DEC '86
. ENCLOSURE-4 a-
PROTECTOR I
L o
CAP ADMIN.
E BUMPER
~b y'
\\
y '6
.$ d POSTS o
6 cu
- r l
TYP 26'-O FROM '
~
l pgg ls A_
g p
- gA 4
y WI C
RCB
.] g RAB TURBINE i.
1
+1 4 DIA. PVC o
4 i
c i
_ CEMENT PLAN GROUT 4
1 6
SAMPUNG WELL a
BENTONITE
.6,6 SEE DETAIL 1 PLUG O
3 E
!l
-d
.T.
2 3
PVC SCREEN I_Y/(10/1000" OPNG'S) f.C l GROUNDING
^
h]
f/ C ABLE I
,5
.9 EL d
1 SA ND 3
6,,1 40.01 G i
!j FILTE R EL. - 35.00 s
u 7
. p..a'
~
LEISTOCE NE
.t CLAY 8,,
SECTION A
\\
DETAIL 1
GROUNDWATER SAMPLING WELLS ENCLOSURE-5 e
i
1 8
8 I
l
=
S N
7 O
I 8
T a
- 1 A
I R
l A
7 V
TS N
m A
O E
I T
H T
T L AV R
E O E E
S N W L
W E
1 i
-H R
T L E
R L T
O E A
N W 6
8 W
D 1
N U
l O
R G
f V
hx 5
8 3
2 0
1 i
i 1
1 1
1 ES Sdw z S b1o$eo mZOh C2*.
N
8 8
il I
i e
y \\
78 S
1 N
s l
O I
T A
I n
R A
V 7
TN i,
ETN O
C n
(
E 6
D 8
I R
O l
L l
H C
R g i E
T T
T S
S A
A EW W
E s
I D
H N
H
' NO T L U
TL R L O
RL E
R O E N W I
N W, G
D i
5
/
s 8
1 f
l f
/f 4
8 I
0 0
0 0
0 o
o 4
O 6
5 4
3 2
g 3$ s6 z8 ai35 $$3oZ o8 m*
OiC2m f
3 n
il llll l11
!l1
i
\\
~
4-t/4 DIA. STAINLESS STEEL N
g ' '
EXR ANCHORS (HAN0 TIGHTEN)
I
\\/
\\
NON-CRACK N,
MONITORING POINTS l
/.
_ PLATE C p
/
PLATE B e
'N
/
If b
\\\\
@No N
-s
~
\\
/s'
\\
4
\\n
\\
y PLATE A s
g
/
</
+
'N N,'
d
/\\
s
~
%))
/
r r
eg '
s
[' ')' \\s N,-
j
, g' s'
/
INSTRUMENTED ARRANGEMENT AT CRACK WIDTH MONITORING STATION ENCLOSURE-8 I
i
. y.
o 1,.:
'i.
-t r-,
r r,
r 3
,h g DW17 FHB 3
m 6
E' O
O i
WEST
/
9 OlAGONAL
/
]
0, 6
c'b t
10 5
OF 7
_g Ke v
~
L RCB 4
[
De572
<?
?
i Sel7 RAB 4
~~~
- CRACK IN B ASE M AT O ~ouiroRino station v
CRACK WIDTH MONITORING STATIONS l
ENCLOSURE-9
f b
b b
kb b
h, Oh t
u q
11,,0,
11} 0,,,
1110
,,N8'
.._11!0 _
11 ' O.,_,,_. _
71'O i-h
{
"~ gg) b.(p/
A9 y
g yy w;pp4 e
n:t s
~
2 -,
. k.1Y ',.b k
lc b,;;P <
hn
/
m, r.n o
~
w l,,f h
M.l O
a w' d M k'f '//gM e
1 y
C j $
~
n;3 4-n a.7z j - -i o. _ _. _ _ _ Q. _
1 tz w-
\\
~g n
/n m
I
's' Jtn*M'g 1x'** ' a
- A' E \\
UES-hs,d/,',//
gg'_.'s.
e.,,,,;g./
1 s
y g,
FL w A TM
/l_-'
?f'b9L w &. y' &y&
e {
y;m4 a
s W/ /V1
';5tC D
//
r' 5f n./ mg-y-
.x 2
i n/
n;+sx>x,wn w,
-+y y
. :;yygm:mqqq q 7; /
w ~
~-
,R $ y>'Gy N :. ' ~.
2, w>Q
/,/ /
- fL y q. 4* y s
- <.'
/
v
/
1 Y/
.' c.h l~9; w
,,f f
L 4
w 7 -y-,/7 q
i
-s - -/o hhN'$b;<h;(/ h$hY _h
) _ *klNCrc'/6<kikh?', if'4'M'DK)
,33
~
/X
- gyg, ygg3 r
1 x
7
=m u,'
w,8
/w( '
, '16 6'// -i l %
/;g@k Id3'kkbCh'hdN[y l
/
/
y
/
y
~.->
/
'~3 g- /::mnsecw m
&. n-r, j
&P,' -2 MiP M'*%'X1M>e9. 7/<'y'p&g Q
%.m%~ g' W,m z v&-dd- @.MM<
w/
vn
/m/
J.
/'&Am p
1
/ hay@ w w 3a 6:y 'uZM dss
- B
- 1A JAxAM4 QiR
'N A
<Ajsgg l
s
- L l'
/
u sa sr a
ur r
PLAN AT EL.
AREAS OF BASEMAT N (TOP TEN
l
' " m:.-...
9 m.
,u,
__n,,
a.
1I 0
, _. 11' e 16' o 16'o i t'.e g
,Y
- ^2 e,n w bl j-D$$$D~~;
f'f, I"7/ [-
/' / ;/' &
-t 4 %ry c.,
,o.
4
, /-
,x eI
?c..x:wsAA =
x
\\~ n, M_-
43yf&'%
4 d
&g&
t; l
3 g;;g:xp'3p fa
~U"
' ',f b.
f
?
~
4
.. i { ',
1 jhQ'~s, i
A
- ,'_ yR: ~, x e
u
- - - ~ =
m bt - -- - - - - - :=.-. j 3
[._ f& -^
7l 7
f/
Y YY 7,/
v, c'y.
'qg
-/,/,.-
' ca,~:Q~,/ /, '3/,,f-Q Q,x
// /
4
, _N.
,/
x h,/(f-%>'y/,n
- &Jf g?1? &'>
- '?
f j&[;
3 v.
' 3 y&
/
- T
L,-c
. _ /'7,'{w//,/ ' 2 m:-Xx
>. tf 4
g% & 3 : / }{J3
- - - - 4,/,' /,-
- .,/ ]
e
. f s',
/
' [
[
4
', /
~
fy
/y/f
~}
.f n
8, ac*no
. ;,_ of; ;~A
/3,,// l, ' -
p /'/,/,,J
-,7
)
mind G s, _ = _ x,, _~
=
+
f/}&'.
'].Qhf hf/ wm (3 kW6Y
~
./
a'/'/
..- /
g
~ " " ~ ~ ~ * - '
.n
~ :w ~ -, ~..~.
. c._.
c..
/
v
-.v x
-eu sy y-
/,,- l4 '/..-/ /,
s ',K /
y--==y 4
C a=...
./
.n-
, /'r'X/,y,/, /,f/-'l/8py ~,
n 3; 7
- /,>.
/y,
/
h,/
- ~
,'ff/h'hh
.. @%y/,/c~
9
/
z., w y/g- /,[
Mkf M <
- /g '. -/y;er
/'/
Ay
,/
/t/c h? f,
, /, a'f
, f TI gy,xjj/ -
cc.
& e i /w</'t 4; W -
- p
- APERTURE, s-
,,4 /. g,.;.,/
/,
/,/,.,,-
caxy9.
, ke<
)/
m/q.m > ~ ~
/-
/y
~.
'/]LYS $ h.g &N 'i /' Y lf A
lNMN' Q4%q x' Also Available On e
Aperture Card 4
5 a4 ior n,
n, 35.00' 87070M/7
~b2>
o
@GATIVE MOMENTS
@lON)
ENCLO SURE-10 SHEET 1 of 3
~
--_--_A
i
--,,-.wg-IA I
I pe.
C.
2,4 b
M p,
re 7
\\
,0-6,
ns.
+r ze s s Mr so-s
.l tv s_.
[
4-6 i
f
,,g:
j-
- _ _p_7
]
_ __r
< r, I
s
. x,,;
4 q
i
,s, l
s s
L, i
' t _ a...
/ ]cN A.h ? b,$,
r;y.E'i
/l M
/f{'..
y, 7 /yg/
r.
m
//
g'f
///'/
4
.,, /
w,/ /
s i
,x
. $/,,
/
/
/
s s'-
/
a y
,7, 6
i)',hfk[
&' :h'h
.., e m/,-
- . mry n
~
,,, ; y n
.+
h, I
a E
~
' <*L D:
%l q,
^
/
,,,w%lW%&
+
'" ~, )t k
o**r gir 9
- 1 i --JM,,.
o
$(
7:
g- - - - -
p
, _ h g
i 1,
..j.. _
, %. 4 I
_c,,,,
m__.------________-._
9_
,t I
_eg gw yt y/ m
,/
,4 7
- ; _.=
y n-u
.i. 4 n
~
4
/.
A gg g
", %~
a 74 bg.
~
-_u J
n, i;.-
t i), q}=
x.
.,+ a l
im i
n I
p* yy g)
~ A g (*. e*5c-
+
_' v ' _. '..
l --
y-t 3 - '* M --=
-.~
- _ a, m,n, s o _ n m a
i.r-7
/.
N m
/
rtr4+ g3 Lg-e Wei s
t i
xg j
y
.m g5
- !?w;'-Wh. x..
1 N
w.
]
M g
l r ej
>;t
,! - - - i p
t r i.
(
ac
,, tez s y 1,;
3 -
.e a, - --
o, i i-w42L' 11 d j$pf I.
-y--
.,s _
l t
l N.C U N
ek-i 2
g, Aqh
' t a
I.
G i
A 8
s
',j
?
7,r-wo
_p+_
- W 3 -3
.,-~~fs w
q p.5 e.
f {,g s
s x
e j
h l,.__.
l Il F~
C M\\ !
i 4
~
r.
l m
~
-x i
'2
, k 4'f> f_
[.$.?.:Y%
AE Y, wy m
~
N -+
mx4 (A
A PL AN AT EL.- 3 5.00' AREAS OF BA@
(TOP TENSIOND a.-.mi.
...i-_..--..i _ __.... _ _
,~
~
~
~
~
i roo.__ _
__ p.
e+
re e 7- ---
gcn, -
'g
. - 't 3,
7-m'sv:;.y s
q s
~ "
(;&$,/. W gg'Y'/h ~
~
',,-w,.,,/
c -,>
v
-V w/Z.
a(7ujff 96 g.M !
g n,a ys.
m, /, 8 4,
.,1,j-u m, 2,,,e u e, s w -
a,nw n
~
>m_e._m,. s..
g o,
w#
z
, e._
$ +,,,
./
Q~*.dy A.y U ^% 4hfeQ c'/,-ah
\\
A =-
,%,,, p-rp, y
..i f.
.. g_ t y }f
?..
.m p a
'sf i C La,#
y.
l Y
-a
._._ t :
>![a/,,,,,O_.ju.ja, R'
~Li
/.
(CTEb e
4 k J,,- --, /-
1 e
+,
- w====a
's *.
. n, g y r, j
%w_ _.-<q, g g4y ;;-KV 7
~"~_~ "~~
_u
-%. u-g w;;;;.= mg.7 g
m
_.=
M,/ a(Q/.&u,_
~
v s
u w g
/ -
w:q$ g: < -(yy3r
- _
s n: n m
- /- - /,/ q s"
lano2 9
y
. j1- -. q qg 4
w cw==u e
y
- g. m
,= m
,.3.2_.
t 4.,],.-
g,'a'***
,m g w - e,-
4r
{
\\s
'L1 l.
l s
g. emar. ein io A' s, '
',V,
t
() m ev e -
m,..,o].
V O, mccee memo awe
_ - - - - ---- y - ~. s g,.,
p 'f.
[
- h.,
M Wit *,.fr M J J h
. "3 j
,s m.
N~. M'
- .'N'N
_3_.?^,7*m_'*4 't.r*,W t*,#_
a :
~
)
=, - - -
{
%y%dN <x h...
i u,
r-#J 'q@h[s. s'K n @ ' 4 4
[
% t'
.N '
-g
?
A3
[
L-2 s x.
n.
p 4-f y 'y c**
l f
i W# &
^
?
eed 8707020/W-63 i
i
~
(N r#tl q um._ _
{f s
TI j jf;ff*
Af ' $& "?$"
I
<dDee.J i c.,
ce EMAT NEGATIVE MOMENTS tz.@ Amu l t o aie n
Aperture Car <1 l
N L
U U
p FHB J
/
N b
1
/
l
/
=e 3C ihC _ _
O
.--_W9 W8 N
RAB s-SELECTED W ALLS FOR PHOTOGRAPHIC SURVEY ENCLOSURE -11