ML17276A470

Soil Backfill Testing Program, Vol 1,Text,Tables & Figures & Vol 2,Apps

ML17276A470
Person / Time
Site:	Columbia
Issue date:	11/30/1981
From:	BURNS & ROE CO., ERC/EDGE (FORMERLY GEOLOGIC ASSOCIATES, INC.)
To:	WASHINGTON PUBLIC POWER SUPPLY SYSTEM
Shared Package
ML17276A465	List: ML17276A460 ML17276A470
References
NUDOCS 8112210421
Download: ML17276A470 (95)

Text

EVALUPT1OH OF QUALITY CLASS NILE'Y BACKF1LL VWP-2 HAHFOROt AASH1HSTOH GA F1LF 81-605~D~CX 8'<>~~o42 osooo PDR TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 SCOPE 1.1 Introduction 1.2 Objective 2.0

SUMMARY

3.0 METHODS OF TESTING 3.1 Indirect Methods 3.l.1 Drilling and testing 3.1.2 Standard Penetration Tests 3.1.3 Pressuremeter Tests 3.1.4 Down-Hole Nuclear Density Tests 3.2 Direct Methods 3.2.1 General 3.2.2 Washington Densometer 3.2.3 Sand Cone 4.0 FIELD TEST RESULTS 4.1 Subsurface Conditions 4.2 Standard Penetration Tests 4.3 Pressuremeter Tests 4'Down-Hole Nuclear Density Tests 4.5 Direct Method tests 5.0 LABORATORY TESTS 5.1 Grain Size Analysis 5.2 Natural Moisture Content Determinations 5.3 Triaxial Compression Tests 5.4 Maximum and Minimum Density Determinations 6.0 FACTORS EFFECTING TEST RESULTS 6.1 Gravel Size Material 6.1.1 Effects on Standard Penetration Tests 6.1.2 Effects on Pressuremeter Tests and Down-Hole Nuclear Test Results 6.1.3 Effects on Direct Tests 6.2 Percent Passing No.200 Sieve 7.0 CORRELATION OF TEST RESULTS 7.1 General 7.2 Indirect Methods Correlated to Relative Density 7.2.1 Standard Penetration Tests 7.2.2 Pressuremeter Tests 7.2.3 Down-Hole Nuclear Density Tests 7.3 Indirect Methods Correlated to Engineering Properties 7.3.1 Standard Penetration Tests 7.3.2 Pressuremeter 7.3.3 Down-Hole Nuclear 8.0 TEST RESULTS AS RELATED TO DESIGN FUNCTION 8.1 Liquefaction 8.2 General 8.3 Static Conditions 8.4 Dynamic Conditions 9.0 RECOMMENDATIONS 10.0 ACKNONLEDGEMENTS

11.0 REFERENCES

TABLES 1.2.F I GURES l.2.3.5;6.7.Boring Tabulation Laboratory Testing Predidted Dynamic Settlements Boring Location Plan Photo's P.lots of Lab Data Correlation plots Soil Profiles Cross-Sections thru Utilities Settlement Plots

-~

APPENDICIES I.Procedure for Soil Backf i I I Testing Program II.Boring Logs III.Pressuremeter Plots IV.Down-Hole Nuclear Density Results V.Laboratory Tests Vl.Direct Test Results

/4Q lee eel aweer BURNS AND ROE P)i.O SCOPE 1.1 Introduction The Quality Class I fill at the WNP-2 site that was placed prior to May 1976 was installed in accordance with FSAR requirements to approxi-mately elevation 438 (see appendix of FSAR for report by Shannon and Wilson accepting all fill placed prior to May 1976).Subsequent to May 1976, excavations were made in this fill for placement of the remote air in'take piping, the remote air intake structure, and the standby service water pipeline with parallel duct banks, (see Figures 1 and 6 for utility locations).

It was found that the backfill used in these excavations did not conform to Quality Class I specification requirements for grada-tion and compaction.

These nonconforming items resulted in the writing of 50.55(e)Condition 146.It is significant to note that none of the fili in question is beneath Category I buildings; five years of settlement monitoring of Category I buildings has shown without exception that structural settlements are very small and well within the range previously predicted from elastic analysis: i.2~Ob'ective In order to resolve this nonconforming condition discussed in 1.1, a testing program was undertaken to determine the pertinent engineering properties of the insitu backf i I I.This was accompl ished by relating indirect testing method results (Standard Penetration Tests, downhole pressuremeter testing and downhole nuclear density testing)to those engineering properties of the backfill which were used in design.After l4 LW NCIC$%%UPO%IF/BURNS AND ROE P)these properties were determined they were used to predict the long-term performance of the backfill for both static and dynamic conditions.

/A LW NCICIO OtSCIJ RIP/BURNS AND ROE P)2.0

SUMMARY

I In order to assess the effects of the nonconforming backfill (subject of 50.55(e)Condition 146)a comprehensive testing and evaluation program was Initiated.

The testing program consisted of measuring various pro-perties of the backfill using primarily the Standard Penetration Test, the downhole nuclear density test, and the downhole pressuremeter test.The results of this program indicate a good correlation between the various test methods.Furthermore, the correlations between test methods and engineering properties developed during this study agree well with similar correlations previously reported by others.Relative densities measured in ihe field near the safety related utilities were found to be lower than those required in the Specification.

Nevertheless, both dynamic and static settlement analysis performed to determine The effects of these lower relative density values on safety related utilities have shown thai over-stress of these utilities will not occur.

BURNS AND ROE/4 1%NWDll a+ac%SF/3.0 METHODS OF TESTING 3.1 Indirect 3.1.1 Drillin and Testin General The test program utilized the standard penetration tests (SPT), downhole pressuremeter tests (PMT), and downhole nuclear density tests (DNDT)in selected areas beside the standby service water pipeline and the remote air intake structures and piping.The borings extended to whichever of the following depths was greater: (1)a minimum of three feet below the Category I utility, or (2)the bottom of trenches where backfill was placed for circulating water and storm sewer Class II systems that cross under the area of investigation, or (3)until two consecutive SPT values were each equal to or greater than 15.Initially, at each boring location an SPT sample was taken beginning from the surface and extending to a depth of 18 inches.The split-barrel sampler was then removed to obtain the sample and the sampler was relowered to the bottom of that hole.A second SPT sample was taken to create a hole extending to a total depth of three feet.Subsequently, an aluminum casing (2" O.D.and 1.9" I.D.)was inserted in the open hole created during the SPT sampling in preparation for the downhole nuclear density testing.The nuclear probe was then lowered down the casing in order to determine the wet density of the soil.

/jIL'I IIPDII IIDPN%%11 BURNS AND ROE P)ŽAfter the nuclear density testing of the upper level soils was completed, the aluminum casing was removed, the hole was augered to the I'epth of three feet (to the bottom of the zone previously tested), and two consecutive SPT samples were taken below the augers, (creating'a hole with a bottom depth of six feet beneath the surface).As before, the aluminum casing was placed in the open hole created beneath the augers so that the nuclear density testing could again be performed.

This procedure of conti'nuous SPT sampling and nuclear density testing was followed throughout the borings.At selected intervals within each borehole, the aluminum casing was removed after the density testing was completed, and BX-Size Steel casing (2-7/8" O.D., 2-3/8" I.D.)was driven to the bottom of ihe hole and then removed.The BX casing was used to enlarge the hole three feet beneath the augers to allow insertion of the pressuremeter probe and subsequent pressuremeter testing.The following paragraphs discuss the indirect testing methods in more detail.3.1.2 Standard Penetration Tests Standard Penetration Tests were performed using an 18 inch split-barrel sampler in accordance with ASTM D 1586.All borings were advanced by means of a Mobile B-61 drill rig equipped with hollow stem augers.Photograph 2.1 shows the drill rig during the performance of the Standard Penetration Test.Representative portions of each split-

/AIL%acacaa reacts WVF/BURNS AND ROE P)1 barrel sample were preserved'in a glass sample jar clearly labeled with I the project title, date, number of boring, sample number, depth between which sample was taken, soil classification (ASTM D 2487)and SPT values.The samples are stored at the WP-2 site and are available for examina-tion.All field testing was monitored by a Geotechnical Engineer, who maintained detailed boring logs, which are contained in Appendix II.3.1.3 Pressuremeter Test A Menard pressuremeter was'used to measure the insitu defor-mation modulus of the soil.Generally, a downhole probe which consisted of inner and outer expanding tubes was lowered to the desired depth;a coaxial cable connected the probe to the volume measuring panel board (see Photograph 2.3).Nitrogen gas was forced under pressure in the outer part of the coaxial cable while water under the same pressure was (forced down the inner part of the coaxial cable.The water under pressure caused the probe to enlarge and deform the borehole wal I, and the amount of volume change was measured on the panel board.A separate nitrogen system kept the water system from expanding beyond the test limits so that a controlled interval 210 mm long could be tested.Photograph 2.4 shows a pressuremeter test being performed.

The pressuremeter used in the testing was manufactured by Menard, Inc., and procedures generally followed were those described by Louis Menard in the equipment operation manual.Testing was performed in 210 mm segments at locations shown on the Profiles, Figure 5.

NDCSO eeaae BURNS AND ROE CD 3.1.4 Down-..Hole Nuclear Densit Tests The wet density of the relatively undisturbed soil in the borehole was determined using the DNDT;the nuclear gauge was calibrated Q~for use in thin-walled aluminum casing.The nuclear gauge and probe used in the density testing is a Campbell Pacific Nuclear Model 501 calibrated and operated as described in the CPN Operator's Manual dated 1980.Generally, wet and dry densities were determined at three foot intervals.

The density determined at each three foot interval is that which is contained in the volume of influence of a sphere having a diameter of 10 inches.Figures 2.5 and 2.6 show a DNDT being performed.

In order to convert the wet density determined by nuclear methods to dry density, the moisture contents of SPT samples were deter-mined in accordance with ASTM D 2216.Further,, at selected locations, test pits were excavated adjacent to the boring locations and the insitu densities at the bottom of these test pits were determined using a Washington Densometer and/or the sand cone.The corresponding relative densities are included in Figure 4.4 and, the insitu densities are included in Appendix IV.These values of'inplace density were compared with the densities determined by nuclear methods at adjacent depths.as shown in Figure 4.1.In addition, DNDT results were ccmpared to other test results (see Section 7.0).3.2 Direct Methods 3.2.1 General In conjunction with the indirect test methods the direct methods discussed below were used to determine insitu densities.

/JOIE OCIRS IICIPN'L%1/BURNS AND ROE 2)3.2.2 Washin ton Densometer The insitu density was determined

'in accordance with ASTM D 2167, Standard Test Method for Density of Soil in Place by the Rubber-Balloon Method.Density test results obtained using the Washington Denscmeter are included in Appendix Vl.3.2.3 Sand Cone In conjunction with the Washington Densometer, the insiiu density was also determined at selected locations in accordance with ASTM D 1556, Density of Soil in Place by Sand-Cone Method.Results of these tests are included in Appendix VI.

/JILL VI P/BURNS AND ROE 4.0 F I ELD TEST RESULTS 4.1 Subsurface Conditions Subsurface conditions at the, WNP-2 site generally consist of a layer of dense, pre-1976 sand fill overlying the very dense Ringold Formation.

As mentioned, the soils that are the subject of this study are the backfill for trenches excavated into ihe pre-1976 fill.At the locations drilled, the deepest extent of the backfill was found to be elevation 413 feet (MSL).Both the post-1976 backfill and the pre-1976 fili consist of sand containing varying percentages of silt and gravel;This sand is known to be glacial outwash in origin and was found to range in description (Unified Soil Classification System, USCS)from a poorly graded clean sand (SP)to a well graded silty, gravelly sand (SW-SM).The majority of the backfill encountered by this testing program was found to be poorly graded (SP), and was found to contain from four to ten percent fines (i.e.material passing a f200 sieve)and from 10$to 20$gravel.The density of,the sand backfill under investigation was found to be erratic and varied from loose to very dense.However, most of the backfill ranged from medium dense to dense, and moisture contents ranged from 3$to 10$.The soils that are the subject of this study are N well above the present and expected future groundwater table at Elevation 405;therefore, groundwater will have no.effects on the engineering pro-perties of the backf i I I.

,.x BURNS AND ROE j'4'DDll ILDDd Wll YP The photograph included as Figure 2.2 shows typical backfi I I soil in the sides of an excavation.

4.2 Standard Penetration Tests The results of the Standard Penetration Tests are reported in the form of an N value (i.e.ihe number of blows required to drive the sampler the final 12 inches);the N values measured during the con-tinuous SPT are.shown on the Profiles (Figure 5).Further, the soli'ecovered from the split-barrel samplers during the SPT was classified in the field by a Geotechnical Engineer and these descriptions are contained in boring logs included in Appendix II, which is included in Volume 2 of this report.The N values for the sand backfi i I are erratic and range from extremes of 5 to 100 blows per foot, which indicates that the relative compactness of the sand backfill varies from very loose to very dense.However, most of the N values are in the range of 20 to 40 blows per foot indicating that the relative compactness ranges from medium dense to dense for most of the soil.At borings where loose fill was en-countered, additional borings were drilled on approximately 20 foot centers on either side of the initial boring until the extent of the loose zone had been defined in both horizontal and vertical extent.It was found that, at those locations examined, the loose sand fill ls contained in discrete and discontinuous zones which are surrounded by denser fill.The predicted effects of these loose zones of fill on the respective utilities are described in detail in Section 8.

BURNS AND ROE/AD, RCSDR%tl CIN 4.5 Pressuremeter Tests Graphs of pressure versus volume change were developed during the pressuremeter testing and these graphs are included in Appendix III.The deformation modulus, which is proportional to the modulus of elasticity (Young's modulus), was caluclated from the pressure-volume change data for each pressuremeter test.The calculations for the deformation moduli are included on the pressuremeter plots;these values are'ummarized on the Prof iles included as Figure 5.The deformation modulus measured for the WNP-2 backfill ranged from extremes of 8 Kg/cm to approximately 800 Kg/cm;however, most values 2 2.were in the range'of 150 Kg/cm to 250 Kg/cm.Specif ical ly, in the area 2 2 of influence, the deformation modulus values were above 50 Kg/cm, and 2 conservatively this value was used to calculate the static settlements of the various utilities as discussed in Section 8.Further, the data from the pressuremeter tests were used to evaluate the at-rest pressure coefficient (K)of the soil.0 4.4 Down-Hole Nuclear Densit Tests Appendix IV contains a summary of the wet (moist)densities determined in the boreholes using nuclear density methods;the corresponding dry densities are also included in Appendix IV.Dry densities were calcu-lated after determining moisture contents in the laboratory according to ASTM D 2216.The relative densities of The soil at these specific locations are summarized on the profiles included in Figure 5.These relative densities were determined by comparing down-hole nuclear density 04CSS OCOCfN%II'/BURNS AND ROE PD test results to maximum densities determined in the laboratory, and by using the correlations shown in Figure 4.2.The dry densities of the soils at the site ranged from approximately 98 pcf to 138 pcf.These dry densities correspond to relative densities from approximately 30$to 100$.4.5.Direct Method Tests I.*'Near surface (0-10 feet)density test results obtained by using the Washington Densometer and sand cone are included in Appendix VI.Generally, these dry densities ranged from 100 pcf to 135 pcf;these values correspond to relative densities of 30$to 1004.

/AIL%uacao OC7PO BURNS AND ROE 5.0 LABORATORY TESTS'5.1 Grain Size Anal sis In order to classify the soi I according to the Unified Soi I Classi-ficationn System (USCS)the particle size distribution of representative soil samples were determined in accordance with ASTM D 422.Table 2 contains a summary of the USCS classification and Appendix V contains the grain size distribution curves.5.2.Natural Moisture Content Determinations In order to convert wet densities into dry densities the natural moisture content of the SPT samples were determined according to ASTM D 2216.Table 2 contains a summary of the moisture contents for the site.As stated, the moisture contents of the backfill ranged from 3$to 10$, and accordingly these low values of moisture content have no significant effect on the engineering pro'perties of the backfill.5.3 Triaxial Com ression'.Tests The shear strength and modulus of elasticity of selected soil samples were determined by unconsolidated undrained triaxial compression tests (similar to ASTM D 2850).The modulus of elasticity and angle of internal friction, determined from these triaxial compression stress-strain curves, are shown in Appendix V and are further summarized In Table 2.

/BIER~ICSCI%messier%%I/BURNS AND ROE P)The modul i of elasticity determined in the laboratory ranged from 150 Kg/cm to 250 Kg/cm.'The angles of internal friction were 31 and 2 2-0 34 for soils remolded to 25$and 40$relative density respectively.

These values were used to verify the correlations of field'est results to engineering properties as described in Section 7.0.5.4 Maximum and Minimum Densit Determinations In order to calculate relative density, in the test sections, the maximum and minimum densities were determined in accordance with ASTM D 2049.The maximum density varies from 111 pcf to 135 pcf, and the minimum I density ranged from 87 pcf to 105 pcf;a summary of The maximum and minimum density results are.included in Table 2.

/VIEW NDDO O&C7%%%rl BURNS AND ROE P)6.0 FACTORS AFFECTING TEST RESULTS'.1 Gravel Size Material 6.1.1 Effects on Standard Penetration Tests The coarse gravel and cobble size particles contained in the subject backfill locally affected the results of the Standard Penetration Test.However, because these coarser particles were found to be isolated throughout the backfill, the majority of the SPT results were not affected.For those SPT results which were judged to be affected by coarse gravel particles, appropriate notes were made on the field boring logs and those values were subsequently not included in the development of correlations or in the evaluation of ihe backfill.The following list contains the general criteria which were used to define SPT's which were judged to yield erroneously high N values: (1)Greater than 10$coarse gravel size material was found in the split-barrel sampler, (2)A loss of split-spoon sample occurred, indicating that a coarse particle may have been lodged in the end of ihe sampler, (5)Angular gravel fragments were'found in the split-spoon, indicating to the geotechnical engineer that a particle had been broken during driving, and/or-(4)Comparison of SPT values with other borehole test methods, indicating that SPT values were unusually high due to the presence of gravel.

PCS la%~lOOO BURNS AND ROE g)6.1.2 Effect on Pressuremeter Test and Downhole Nuclear Test.Results Coarse gravel size material was judged not to have a signifi-Pt cant effect on evaluation of pressuremter testing'data or on the downhole nuclear density testing data.This results because the length of the area of influence along the borehole wall for both of these devices was approximately 10 inches (measured vertically);, Therefore, In the vast P majority of cases, the effect of the gravel particles was smal I relative to the larger size of the area being tested.In addition, these methods tend to"average" The soil properties in the area being tested, thus permitting the PMT and DNDT to approach a truer value of the insitu properties than the SPT value which only measures the resistance in the area of the spoon tip.6.1.5 Effects on Com arison of Indi rect Tests to Direct Tests In areas where gravelly soils are present, it is believed that the PMT and DNDT measure soil properties at least as accurately as those obtained from insitu tests such as the sand cone or the Washington densometer.

This results because metho'ds measure average properties within ihe influence zone of the probe without removal and disturbance of The soil in ihe area being tested.I&6.2 Percent Passin No.200 Sieve Occasionally, localized zones of appreciable fines (material with greater than 104 passing the No.200 sieve)were encountered in the 0

BURNS AND ROE NCI CIO~le Ctlt%IF/borings.However, th'e percentage of material passing the U.S.No.200 sieve was not a factor in evaluating the test results.

lA 1%uaarL aaae%I Pr BURNS AND ROE P)7.0 CORRELATIONS OF TEST RESULTS 7.I General In order to develop a correlation between the various indirect methods and relative density, three test fills were constructed using soils typical of those used for trench backfill.One fill was con-structed by placing the soil in a loose condition, one by placing and compacting the soil to a dense condition, and one by placing and com-pacting the soil to a very dense condition.

As these test fills were being constructed, numerous Washington Densometer and/or sand-'one inplace" density tests were performed concurrent with the fill placement.

After the test fills were completed, borings were drilled and SPT, PMT, and DNDT tests were performed.

Further, after the drilling was com-pleted, test pits were machine excavated into the test fills so that insitu densities and subsequent relative densities could again be deter-('ined using Washington Densometer and/or sand-cone devices.After preliminary test method correlations were developed from the test fill data, several borings were drilled outside the Class I utility areas in Class II piping backfill to furnish additional data for correla'-tions.This testing consisted of continuous SPT, DNDT, and PMT.In addition, during the drilling and the testing of the Class I utility backfill, additional results of SPT, PMT, and DNDT were compiled and compared against each other to further enhance these correlations.

Moreover, at selected locations, additional test excavations were made BURNS AND ROE/ILL ODDS'ORCIN to again allow correlations between relative density determined by both indirect and direct test methods.7.2 Indirect Methods Correlated to Relative Densi 7.2.1 Standard Penetration Tests A correlation between Standard Penetration Test N values (corrected for overburden pressure as described in reference 13)and relative density.was developed based on the data obtained during this study..The results of this correlation are presented in Figure.4.4, k where a wel I defined, correlation between the N values and relative density is shown (using both the Washington densometer and the DNDT to measure densities).

The results of many studies have been published which corre-late Standard Penetration Test results with relative density.Scme of the most widely accepted of these are the studies by Gibbs and Holtz (1960), Peck and Bazaraa (1969), and Marcuson and Bieganousky (1977)which are referenced in Section I1.0.The data developed at the WNP-2 site closely approximate the correlations reported by Peck and Bazaraa and primarily for that reason, their work was selected for comparison with this study.7.2.2 Pressuremeter Tests As shown on Figure 4.6 a correlation was developed between the deformation modulus and relative density of the soil at the WNP-2 site.However, because this correlation was not as well defined as those shown.-

/ÃLW seas 0CI OO%%K/BURNS AND ROE IC In Figure 4.4 and Figure 4.7, we elected noi to use this correlation in the analysis.7.2.3 Down-hole Nuclear Densit Tests The relative density of the backfill was determined using the downhole nuclear density device and at selected locations, test pits were excavated adjacent to the boring locations and the insitu wet and dry densities at.the bottom of these pits were determined using a Washington Densometer and/or a sand cone.These values of in-place density and calculated relative density were used to compare with the densities determined by nuclear methods at adjacent depths as shown in Figure 4.I, and as can be seen a good correlation was developed.

7.3 Correlations to En ineerin Pro erties 7.3.1 Standard Penetration Tests I In addition to developing correlations to relative density, ihe field testing program was developed such that correlations could be developed between N, relative density, and actual engineering properties reported in the literature.

For example, Schmertmann (1970)published a correlation between N and Young's modulus.Figure 4.7 shows Schmert-mann's correlation between N and Young's modulus as compared to the N and deformation modulus correlation developed at the WNP-2 site.Further, Peck (1974)developed a correlation between N (corrected for overburden pressure)and the angle of internal friction for cohesionless II44CSO IID Cllt%%K/BURNS AND ROE PD soils.This correlation is shown on Figure 4.5 which also shows the relative density and N correlation developed during this study.In order to substantiate this correlation, the-.angle of internal friction was calculated from data obtained in the triaxial testing of WNP-2 soils remolded to boih 25$and 40$relative density.Results of the trlaxial tests are plotted on Figure 4.5 and in both cases, the actual angles of internal friction were slightly higher than predicted in the corrhlation.

Thus, based on these two cases, there is a def Inite correlation between N values, relative density and ihe angle of internal friction for the WNP-2 soils.7.3.2 Pressuremeter The pressuremeter was used to determine the deformation modulus at different locations within the backfill., The deformation modulus was used in conJu'nction with the SPT N values in developing correlations with Young's modulus,.and as described in the previous section, this was compared with Schmertmann's correlation between N and Young's modulus (Figure 4.7).Further, Martin (1977)used the pressuremeter in predict-ing settlements of structures founded on silty sand and sandy silt in residual soils.Martin reported in his studies thai the deformation modulus obtained from the pressuremeter was equal to Young's modulus based on comparisons of predicted and actual settlements.

The Schmertmann correlation and the results reported by Martin both substantiate the'f correlation shown on Figure 4.7 between N and the deformation modulus.Finally, the data developed during this study and the data reported by BURNS AND ROE ALW ODD%%RCIN%%I/others indicate that the deformation modulus is equal to Young's modulus'or the WNP-2 soils.7.3.3 Down-hole Nuclear Densit The nuclear density gauge was used to determine insitu densities from which relative densities could be calculated.

The relative densities determined in this manner were used in conjunction with the SPT N values in developing correlations with the angle of internal friction as described in Section 7,.3.1.

0

/JjLW DDCSO oescra BURNS AND ROE cD-8.0.ITEST RESULTS AS RELATED TO DESIGN FUNCTION It has been found that liquefaction is not possible in the soil placed after May 1976, because the present and future position of the water table is well below all of the backfill.The highest predicted elevation of the water table is elevation 405 and since the lowest extent of, the backfill in question is elevation 413, liquefaction cannot occur in ihe dry to moist soil conditions.(Note: elevation 405 has been predicted conservatively as the maximum future elevation of the water table at the WNP-2 site if the Ben Franklin Dam is constructed).

8.2 General Determination of the adequacy of insitu conditions relative to the design function of the standby service water pipeline, and the remote air intake structure and piping has been accomplished by considering stress conditions that may result from potential static and dynamic settlement in the lowest relative density zones found.Zones of low relative density were found in the following areas: (1)at line WOA 51A of the remote air intake pipi ng, low relative densities ranged from 45K to'0$in Boring CT-43;(2)at I ine WOA 51B of the remote air intake piping, low relative densities ranged from 30$to 40$in Borings CT-3 and CT-40.Boring CT-40, however, reflects the condition of the.backfii.l around the manhole; BURNS AND ROE NDD1 ODON%%1/(5)at the standby service water pipeline, the lowest relative density was 45$in Boring CT-11.None of these low relative density zones were found to be continuous from one boring to'another.

Moreover, observation of excavations made in these safety related areas indicate that the loose zones are limited from 5 to 10 feet in extent.However, for design purposes a horizontal extent of 20 feet was conservatively selected for the length of any loose zones (refer to Section 4.2).This distance is consistent with the requirement in the testing procedure to add an additional boring offset 20 feet from any boring where a loose zone (N value less than 15)was found.8.3 Static.Conditions For the static case, settlements were determined using elastic-f half-space theory employing Young's modulus determined from actual field measurements, made during the backfill testing program (after Schmertmann, 1970).Figures 7.1 and 7.2 show the settlement plots resulting from thi s ana I ys i s.Conservative I y, these p lots were deve loped us ing the lowest deformation modulus found at each utility;the respective values used are shown on Figures 7.1 and 7.2.It has been conservatively estimated that the net contact pressure under the foundation of the remote air intake lines, the remote air intake structures, and the standby service water pipeline is less than 0.2 KSF.For this value (0.2 KSF)of net stress, total settlements of less than 0.I inches are estimated.

For purposes of calculating piping stresses this total static settlement was conservatively selected to I

BURNS AND ROE/4 jx ODDS ODDN C)O CD reprBsBnt ihe differential settlement that may occur ai the center of/any 20:foot.section of safety related piping.Using this value of settlement, it has been determined that negligible stress increase in the piping will occur;it is therefore concluded that for the static case, soil conditions near the safety related piping will have no detrimental effect on the integrity of these systems.8.4 D namic Conditions For the dynamic case (SSE conditions), two determinations were made: first, the potential for less dense backfill near the pipe to cause an overstress in those safety related systems;and second, the adequacy of the safety related piping to accommodate seismic settlements in less dense backfill.For the first condition, the effect of less dense backfill adjacent to buried piping has been found to not affect the seismic wave passage (particle velocity)for the total plant.On The contrary, less stringent compaction will result in the potential for slippage (between the pipe and the backfill)which is beneficial as sBBn from the equation by Newmark in the FSAR reference 3.7-12.For the second condition, seismic settlements of the fill were com-puted using the cyclic shear strain method.This is generally similar to the cyclic strain approach to liquefaction of saturated sand proposed by Dobry, et al (see Reference No.2).

BURNS AND ROE 14LL ODDS ODDO%%I/Util izing this method.in representative zones of lowest relative I density, and using the corresponding lowest values of K , calculations were performed to determine"best estimate" settlement for the remote It't,1 air intake piping I ine WOA 51A, and WOA 51B, of 1.1 inches and 1.5 inches, respectively.

Similarly, for the standby service water pipeline Dr.Dobry has calculated settlements of OL3 inches (see Table 3).I For purposes of calculating piping stress, these total seismic settlements were increased to three inches and were conservatively assumed to represent the differential settlements that may occur at the contour of any 20 feet section of safety related piping.Imposing these conditions on all buried safety related utilities has shown that pipe stresses are well within the allowable IImii.It is therefore concluded, that insitu soil conditions near the piping have no detrimental effect 4 during SSE conditions.

BURNS AND ROF J'AIL%OD CI%OOOlt%%F/

9.0CONCLUSION

S AND RECOMMENOATIONS In the previous discussion, it has been shown that stress con-ditions resulting from potential static and dynamic settlements in loose soil zones will have no detrimental effects on buried safety related piping.Based on ihe conclusions made during the backfill testing program ii is our recommendation to accept the backfill placed after May 1976 around these safety related utilities.

BURNS AND ROE jill oaall aaao%1IPI 10.0 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 10.1'Field and laboratory testing performed by or under direction of Geologic Associates, Inc.10.2 Correlations of data and static settlement analysis by Geologic Associates, lnc.10.5 Dynamic settlement analysis was performed by R.Dobry.10.4 Determinations of seismic and settlement general stress effects on piping by Burns 8 Roe, inc.10.5 Conclusions and recommendations by Burns 8 Roe, Inc..10.6 Preparation of text jointly by Geologic Associates, Inc., and Burns 8, Roe, Inc.

'II.O REFERENCES

/ILL N4Clll mesa'%F8'URNS AND ROE 1.2.3.AmericanrSoclety for Testing and Materials (1980), Philadelphia, PA.Dobry, R., D.H.Powell, F.Y.Yokel, and R.S.Ladd (1980),"Liquefaction Potential of Saturated Sand-The Stiffness Method," Proc.Seventh World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Istanbul, Turkey, September, Vol.3, pp.25-32.Dobry R., Stokoe K.H., Ladd R.S.and Youd T.L.(1981)"Liquefaction Susceptibility From S-Wave Velocity," ASCE Conference St.Louis, Missouri, October.=4.g.Fardis M.and'Veneziano D.(1981),"Estimation of SPT-N Relative Density," Journal of the Geotechnical Engineering Division, ASCE, Vol.107, No.GTIO, October."I Gibbs, H.J., and Holtz, W.G., (1957)"Research on Determining the Density of Sands by Spoon Penetration Testing," Proceedings of the Fourth Internationa I Conference on Soi I Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, London, England, Vol.I, pp 35-39.6.Lacroix, Y., and H.M.Horn, (1973),"Direct Determination and Indirect Evaluation of Relative Density and Its use on Earthwork Construction Projects," ASTM STP 523, pp 251-280.7.Lee, K.L.and A.Alvaisa (1974),"earthquake Induced Settlements in Saturated Sands," Journal of Geotechnical Engineering Division, ASCE, Vol.100, GT4, Apri I, pp 387-406.8.Lee, K.L., and Singh, A., (1971)"Relative Density and Relative Compaction,".Journal of the Soi I Mechani cs and Foundations Division, ASCE, Vol 97, No SM7, July, pp 1049-1052.9.Marcuson W.and Bieganousky W., (1977),"SPT and Relative Density in Coarse Sands," Journal of the Geotechnical Engineering Division, ASCE, Vol.103, No.GTII, November.10.Martin, R.E., (1977)"Estimating Foundation Settlements in Residual Soils,"Journal of the Geotechnical Engineering Division, Vol.103, GT3, March, pp.197-212.Oweis, I.(1979),"Equivalent Linear Model for Predicting Settlements of Sand Bases,"'Journal of the Geoiechnical Engineering Division, ASCE, Vol.105, No.G3 12, December.12.Peck, R.B.and Bazaraa, A.R., (1969)discussion of"Settle-ment of Spread Footings on Sand," by D.D'Appolonia, E.O'Appolonia, and R.Brissetie, Journal of the Soil Mechanics and Foundation Division, ASCE, Vol.95, No.SM3, Proc.Paper 6525, May, pp 905-909.

0 13.14.JALAP aCSmO OttttO%%11 BURNS AND ROE~ŽPeck, R.B., Hanson, W.E., and Thornburn, T.H., (l974)Foundation Engineering, 2nd ed., John Wiley and Sons, Inc., New York, NY.'o~-,',-Pyke, R., H.B.Seed, and C.K.Chan (l975),"Settlement of Sands Under Multidirectional Shaking," Journal of the Geotechnical Engineering Division, ASCE, Vol.IOI, GT4, April, pp 379-398.15., 16.Schmertmann, J.H.(I970),"Static Cone to Compute Static Settlement Over Sand," Journal of the Soil Mechanics and Foundation Division, ASCE, Vol 96, No.SM3, Proc.Paper 7924, May, pp IOII-I043.

J'I Schultze E"..and Melzer K."(!965)"The Determination of the Density and The Modulus'of Compressibility of Non-cohesive Soi ls by Soundings," Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation.

Engineering, Vol.I, Montreal, l965, pp 354-358.1,7.Se I i g.E., and Ladd R., (I 972)"Evaluation of Relative Density and Its Role in Geotechnical Projects Involving Cohesionless Soi ls," Symposium at Seventy-fifth Annual Meet i ng f or ASTM, Los Ange I es, Ca I i f orn i a, J une.~1*41 1

~~I I I~I I I'I~~~'-~i I~I~I~~~~~~~~~~I~~e I I~~I i I~I~I I)I~~~~~~~~)I I~~e II~~~'I~~I 4 0~~)~)~~~~

~I I~I~I I~~I~'I'~I~~I~~~I I I~~~I-I~~I I~~I I~I I'I~I 0~~~I I~'I~I'I I I I~I~I I~~-I~I~~~~e~o.I II~~I.-I I~~~

~~~I I I S S I~I~~I~J~~~~0 I~~~~I'I I I~I-s~~I-s s I I~~I~~I i I~I~~I s I~~~~I~I I~I~~~~~~~I~~~~~~~I~~

~I~I~I I~s.I-s I~~I~~~~~~~~~~~I~~I I~~~~~~l I I~

~~~~~~~~~~<~~$~I'I~i~I~~~~I~s~I-t~I l.s~I I I'~~0~~l~~~~l 0~~~J~

~~I~~s s~I s~~~s 0 0~s I'~'I~I~~I s I'y'~I~'I>I~'I ss I I I I'II~I~s$y~~s 4 I i f s$a~a s I>I'~'~~'~~

TABLE 2

SUMMARY

OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS Relative Density Standards Modified Proctor TRIAXIAL SHEAR TEST OTHER TESTS Project Pro ect No Date o 0 xz 0 0 o o o O E C X Q K E D E C K E+p o III XO c ct L 8 ZOO I E+~-lA+~c5.O OZ z 0 C lJ O ill~a.~lh zan D vl D~4~O~z mzo gg Q Ill~z z ac z 0 U~Vl Z a 0 VV O)c: D Ul (V 0>E>--cI I Cl CD ID 0 hC~~Soil Description TS 3.0-4.0 126.8 99.7 130.7 5.8 SM-See Lo s-TS 6 4.0 SP-SM TS 5 TS 4 TS B~5.0 B 6.0 B 7.0 SP-SM SP-SM SP TS..2-B 8.0 SM D-DIRECT SHEAR TEST T-TRIAXIAL TEST'T-SHELBY TUBE SAMPLE, SS-SPLI'T SPOON SAMPLE, B-BAG SAMPLE"TEST RESULTS REPORTED ON OTHER SHEETS>C-CONSOLIDATION S-SIEVE OR GRAIN SIZE ANALYSIS U-UNCONFINED COMPRESSION TEST GEOLOGIC ASSOCIATES, INC.

TABLE 3 ESTIMATED SEISMIC SETTLEMENTS OF UALITY CLASS I UTILITIES Seismic Settlement, S M=6-1/2 Area Boring Zf (x)Z (x)Estimated Range.Best Estimate Best Estimate Air Intake-Line WQA 51A I Air Intake Line WQA 51B CT-43 CT-40 CT-3 6'6'2 I 30'5'8II 2ll 1 II 31I 0-0.5" 1.1" 1 5 0 1.4" 8ll 0-0.5" Standby Service Water Pipeline CT-11 8'2'1 II Q BII 0 3I I 0.4"'(x)Z=Depth of faci I ity f Z=Maximum depth of boring M=Richter Magnitude A REMOTE AIR INTAKE STRUCTURE CT-4 GT-55 BURNS AND ROE 4DDO ODD4 AIR INTAKE CT"5 LINE V(OA 5IA CT-45 CT-H TURBINE GENERATOR BLDG.CT-56~CT" 27 CT-8 CT-6 RADW.CONT.BLDG.REACT.BLDG.c CT-28~SEE DETAIL I 4 AIR INTAKE LINE 51 B~CT" 9 CT-4l GT-52~WOA 51 B GT-31 CT-39 CT-46 CT-5 STANDBY SERVICE WATER TRENCH GT-48 II~CT-Sl I~8T-50 IL CT-47 CT 49<<DETAIL I B CT-II FACT-4 INTAKE STRUCTURE GT-25<<I I GT-l2 CT-R I<<CT-Sr<<~'T-26<<CT-54 SPRAY POND IA CT" l6<<COOLING TOWERS GT-2><<SP.RAY POND IB CT-IB CT-I'T-2 2B CT-24 GT-I5 GT-22 CT'42'CT 7<<>CT45 CT-29'<<REMOTE AIR 2A G-~GTH9<<GT-2I<<~GT-Is IA<<CT-20~CT" l4 2C IC GRAPHIC SCALE 0 IO0 200 500 4 I=200 FIGURE I BORING LOCATION PLAN 0-BURNS AND ROE/4 KL OCSCIO ORCIO Elle/PHOTOGRAPH 2.1 (at left).Drilling crew performing Standard Penetration Test using Mobile 8-61 drill rig.XA k I I'I 5S rI-Q, I t~(2 Vli'A~U p'gIQV 4 I PHOTOGRAPH 2.2 (at right).Typical sand fill at sides of trench.

IJI&W OC1D&@aalu%%V/BURNS AND ROE cD PHOTOGRAPH 2.3 (at right).Pressuremeter testing equipment.

Expanding probe (on right)and volume measuring panel (on left)connected with coaxial cable.%a\~-S PHOTOGRAPH 2.4 (below).Pressuremeter test being performed.

//J LW acomia QDE7JJ%%JJ'/BURNS AND ROE ZI PHOTOGRAPH 2.5 (at left).Downhole nuclear density test probe being lowered down aluminum casing.ggp 1 PHOTOGRAPH 2.6 (above right).Downhole nuclear density test being performed.

I I I I t N 2'3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Normal Stress (KSF)MOHR DIAGRAMS-4 f 8 0 0>4 Q Cl 4 JI5 IS 6 (og)7 8 9 STRESS-STRAIN CURVES TRIAXIAL SHEAR TEST 10 11 solL DEscRIPTIGN See I o s CLIENT PROJECT PROJECT NO., COHESION (<<)350 PSF 8ORING NO.: SAMPLE Nos 31 ANGLE OF INTERNAL FRICTION (1r')UNIT WEIGHT, PCF 110 4 WATER CONTENT,%CT-15 BA ELEV.OR DEPTH November 16, 1981 SPECIFIC GRAVITY VOID RATIO Figure 3.1 Plots of LeboretprY Dete GEOLOGIC ASSOCIATES, INC.

I I Vl-8 Vl a6 C 0 I lh 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 Normal Stress (KSF)IVIOHR DIAGRAMS-(I)"8 V)L 0>~6 CL 3 4 Axial Strain (%)SOIL DESCRIPTION coHFsIQN ()300 PSF ANGLE OF INTERNAL FRICTION (t')UNIT WEIGHT, PCF WATER CONTENT,%1 3~3 ELEV.OR DEPTH November 16, 1981 DATE SPECIFIC GRAVITY VOID RATIO STRESS-STRAIN CURVES TRIAXIAL SHEAR TEST See lo s CLIENT PROJECT WNP-2 PROJECT NO.: 5 0 39 8ORING NO.CT-17 SAMPLE NO.: BAG Figure 3.2 Plots of Laboratory Data GEOLOGIC ASSOCIATES, INC.

OOQS OCJCJN XII II BURNS AND ROE~ŽLEGEND 0 FIELD CHECK DATA (WNP-2)FACTORY CALIBRATION CURVE 0 l55 I50 l25 h.O Q.0 120 I-CO II5 I-Ul FACTORY CALIBRAT CURVE ION I I 0 IO5$0 COUNT RATIO FIGURE 4.l..-FIELD VERIFICATION OF FACTORY CALIBRATION CURVE FOR DOWNHOLE NUCLEAR DENSITY GAUGE i II l t I

/BIER OPC1%oaop LW P/BURNS AND ROE cD LEGEND WNP-2 TEST SECTION(AVERAGE 10 DETERMINATIONS)

Qe WNP-2 80RINGS CORRELATION BY LEE 8 SINGH(l97I) 100'Vo COMP-.=80+Q2 DR (LEE 8 SINGH~197I)0, 60 Ld cL'l 40 0 20 80 90 IOO COMPACTION

>7o FIGURE 42.-RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN RELATIVE DENSITY AND PERCENT COMPACTION

/VIEW NODS%LCO&N%%1/BURNS AND ROE cD LEGEND 0 WNP 2 TEST SECTION DATA POINT(WASHINGTON DENSOM~TER DENSITY)WNP-2 TEST EXCAVATION DATA POINT (WASHINGTON DENSOMETER)

BEST FIT CORRELATION Cg00 I-O U CO O~~az t5 hl I 60 O hl 0 o C3 40 0~g~~0 0 po 20 pe 0 0 20 40 60 80'l00.120 1A RELATIVE DENSITY~7o FIGURE 4.5.-RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN RELATIVE DENSITY 8 CORRECTED"N" (FOR DENSITIES DETERMINED WITH WASHINGTON DENSOMETER)

BURNS AND ROE PAIL%IICICIS oaas%%II LEGEND WNP" 2 BORING (NUCLEAR GAUGE)WNP-2 TEST SECTION(WASHINGTON DENSOMETER)

BEST FIT CORRELATION (WNP" 2)CORRELATION BY BAZARAA (l969)(AT I KSF OVERBURDEN PRESSURE)I-IOO O O b.CO 80 m A 60 I-lal K K~o 0)~0 S'~~~0 Qo 20 Qo p.0 0 0 20 0 QO 60 80 100 I20 RELATIVE DENSITY>7o FIGURE 4.4.-RELATIONSHIP 8ETWEEN RELATIVE'ENSITY 8 CORRECTED"N" (FOR DENSITIES DETERMINED WITH WASHINGTON DENSOMETER 8 DNDT)

A T h'P k BURNS AND ROE RBBBRN 02222N LEGEND WNP-2 FIELD CORRELATION BETWEEN N R DR(BEE FIGURE AA)(ee WNP 2 LABORATORY DETERMINATION OF 6 8 DR NOTE: N VS 6 CORRELATION BY PECK ET AL (l974)I-IOO O O 4.CD eo CO 2 2'60 I-LU CL 40 20 0 lQ.O I-45 La.4l Ul 59 4-C7 55 ul 35 5I 29 80 IOO I20 RELATIVE DENSITY>7o FIGURE 45.-CORRELATION BETWEEN N, RELATIVE DENSITY, AND S.

I 4 t

>>CIA>>>>OCt>>%>>>>/BURNS AND ROE~ŽLEGEND 0>>WNP-2 BORING (NUCLEAR GAUGE DENSITY)Q WNP-2 TEST SECTION (WASHINGTON DENSOMETER DENSITY)0>>LABORATORY DETERMINATION OF YOUNG S MODULUS OJ 500 E OC Vl 400 O O I-300 K O U 4l O 200 0 0 0 8~~6'00 0 8 0 0>>25 50 75 IOO 125 Rf LATIVE DENSITY>7o FIGURE 46.-RELATIVE DENSITY DERIVED FROM PMT DATA P

QQQ 4'50 425 420 4I5 CT32 440 4 I 20 2 4 3 4 14 5 43LS NO REF!CT5 459,7 II I 20 2 l6 15 4 22 5 KN 6 looe r KNS 8 Noe 9 NO+NOS u KXI 12 NOS 15 N04 4172 lNRKF 95 I 50 I NO I SAND 440.'5 II I 12 2 5 5 10 4 30 4 tg SAND EXIS'I, GROVND likE 440.3 52 4 19 5 N e 100 7 28 4 14 15 10 N 12 It 12 I 28 51 15 4161 NORE 150 ST I Iq Sr l50 48 I 210 ef SAND RENOTE AIR INTAKE UNKSIA RENOTK AIR INTAKE STRVCTVRK 440.4 Io I 17'211 TO I Sr 5 260 80 I I 4314 C74 440.4 14 I)5!2l 4 e 5 e r 12 8 9 250 80 I I 73 33 I 15 I I 20 12 14 15 26 14 21 0 150 52 I I 4124 NOREF."!I 440 430 425 420 4I5 0+00 0+50 I+50 2+00 2+50 PROFILE=A.A AIR INTAKE UNE 5IA-.NOTE VERTICAL EXAGGERATION

~2X NOTE~ALL HOLES DRY VPON COMPLKTION

!4 440 430 425 420 4I 5 Ol 0 CT9 441.7 16 I 21 2 9 5 lo 4 42 5 62 6 98 8 100 9 90 78 II 48 I 40 I 14 47 15 4182 95 50 I I 750 NO I I 320 82 I I SAND CT 41 4428 91 I 7 2 14 5 42 21 5 N 4276 NO REF 50 I 175 I 456 J 49 100 EXISIGROVND UNK REIKITE AIR INTAKKLINKSIB 4425 K 27 48 2., 44 ee 2S 5 44 7 390 4501 OR'0, I!!24 I 41 2 5 10 12 20 14 10 5 8 17 411.7 NOR EF tl IS 6'7 16 8 98 54 I 40 I CT47 44 I.S 25 I 44 2 40 5 80 4 19 5 16 6 7 75 8 25 9 SI 10 2$I I 18 12 2S 15 It 26 15 27 IS 25 17 N 13 IS Zl I 370 53 I I, 17 I 2 NO 5 220 50 I 440 I 190 67 I I.49 NO 560 95 I 8 4269 NO REF, 170 55 43 531 60 4408 34 49 2 22 5 4 T!57 441.2 58 100 2 370 58 I I 41.e!52 6 163 46 Q NO 71 7 97 8 429 2 NOREf, RENOTK AIR DITAKE STRVCTVRK CT 3 44IO 12 I 29'28 5'7 4~<7 5 15 e 5 7 50 8 68 9 77 I I 87 It 54 15 47 14 60 4ITO No REF 150 65 I I 57 51 I 500 100 I 3+00 I 440 435 430 425 420 415 0+50 I+00 I+50 2+50 NO'TES'SEK SHEE T 52 FOR LEGEND 2.SEE APPENDIX II FOR GOR1N 0 lOGS 3 SEE FIRSEI FOR PROFILE IDCATNNS PROFILE B B AIR INTAKE LINE 5IB, NOTE: VERTICAL EXAGGERATION 2X WASHINGTON PUBUC POWER SUPPLY SYSTEM WNP-2 PROFILES RICHLAND,WASHNGTON SCALE: AS SHOWN BURNS 5 ROE, INC.ORADELL, N.J.GEOLOGIC ASSOCIATES, IN., IRANKIWTENN KlNGSIORT.

TENN KNOXnlIE, TENN PROL 61-605 DATE 11/6/6.1-flGURE 5.1.

0'4 i II'it r' L YARD COO RO, z CT'7 440.3 CT.4R 440.0 440 a 40 I I'R 69 3 70 4.64 40 6 66 7 245 75 1 530 IRO 62 T 150 1 14 3 435 3R 61 5='63 6 46 7 SII 1 430 54 82 9 37 10 42505 NO REF.49 5R 64 I 52 I I 655 SS 3 ISO 1 425 97 1 61 Se 63 75 I 420 416.8 NO REF, 4I5 410 I+00 0+00 CT 28 44L4 440 77 I Ia 32 3 32 1 100 1 CT-R5 4344 48 I 42 5 FO ON 6 67 7 58 8 20 51 2 45 305 9S 1 430 72 56 5 67 9 59 IO 251 75 I I 58 4255 NO REF.100 1 ee e 48 49 66 547 100 1 420 eR 419.5 415 4IO NOTES".LSEE APPENDIX 3 FORLOGS OFSORINGS 2 SEK flGVRE I FOR PROFILE LOCATIONS CT.Ra 440.3 CT.4 44a4 CT 44 440.NOTEIHOLE CT 44 IS OFFSET'OR CLARITY CT 11 437k I E 78 I 39 2 44 3'35 4 30 62 75 Sa 370 1 BI 2 90 5 15 15 67 2 13)454 IOO 3'5 5 38 6 33 76 8 60 5 451.3 NO REF, 76 N=-.-'G43 T4 354.52 5R 100 1 SOO 1 100 1 IIO IOI 60 68 135 370 99 85 50 9 61 IO 86 I I 62 25 I 36'I 58 15 4129 41 8 23 9 150 els IB I SANO 12 15 I 19 I 29 33 II 24 120 500 1 IOO 1 16 15 27 14 IOOP 15 4I5.4 IHL NO I REF NO REF 3+00 2+00 PROFllE C C ANDBY SERVICE WATER PJPE NOT: VERTICAL EXAGGERATION

• 4X CT-50 44L2 CT 51 44L5 CT 30 CT-3 431LB 4396 8 I 17 IT 5 8 4 31 5 14 I (4 7 15 4 61 I 69 2 63 3 17 37 2 35 5 28 IS 55 6 450.3 NO REF.'SS 55 1 TOO+'83.5 IOOG 6 TOO+, 100 G 22 40 7 Ee 8 3R 9 15 4 N 5 I 2 6 9 T 2 61 9 lI 4 IOOP 100+100+100+6 V 257 Sl 1 8 12 4 100+100+100+100+SIS 120'38 14 419.5 NO RE 420 NOR EF;417.3.NO REF.L'OGS OF HOLES 0 S OW IN P OF ES (HOLES DRILLED ADJACENT TO PIPELINE TRENCH SHOWN IN PROFILE C.C)NO HORIZONTAL SCALE 100 1 225 1 23 30 1 70 1!5 O GG 2 7 CT-38 4383 O GG~o CT IR CT-37 43ELB 440 439.'R 7 I 45 I 435 I 3 I IO 40 1 BT 18 2 26 3 48 4 SAND 227 1 590 IOO'1 41 19 4D 15 5 e 430 8 7 85 T 270 1 7 N 150 I 69 6 28 6 4171 8 53 9 65 I 69 7 BI 8 3R 9 Rl IS I STANOSYSERVICE WATER PIPE, 4 8 4265 425 IOS 55 1 I 520 NO 1 60 ll BT 420 60 I ICO 91 1 K 420 99 4$.7 NO REF+4I5 4lO'+00 6+35 6POO 54 00 NEKDGGL 0 0 70 NOTE.ALL HOLES DRY UPON CONIPLETNN LEGEND OEFORllATNN NOaALI HOLE NVNSER CT&I RELATIVE DENSITY SVRFACE ELEVATNN'ILS 440 DRIVE SANPLE NO.I I I I WITH SLOW COVNTGD fOR I 0 FT.SICRENENT IAS PER ASTN aSSSI 435 INTERPOLATED 1 1 430 425 IO 15 NKASVRED 420 ELEVATIOII BOTTON 42QS OF HOLE NO REFVSAL OF NO REF, AVGERS OR SAllPLR TVSE 4I5 4IO WASHINGTON PUBLIC POWER SUPPLY SYSTEM WNP-2 PROFILES RICHLAND.WASIBNGTON AS SHOWN BURNS Ik ROE, INC.0RADELL~N.J.GEOLOGIC ASSOCIATES, INC.FRANKVIL TENN.KINOSIORT.

71NN.KNOKYklf.TENN.PROA 61 605 DATE 1 1/6/81 flGURE 5.2.

I'I br r'~t~I~fi Ib I",~b~I l~)I I)I a I..a C I I I lf I@i~I , I I b I)E I J i I E I"~$.E:-~-E I I e'"b I E I~g b)P h BURNS AND ROE PALS ocscao acacia%OP/200 IOO LESEND Oi DATA POINT (WNP-2)BEST FIT CORRELATION (WNP" 2)~LA I~QQA~QIQ.>J9 70~50 tL 40 CO 30 O 20 R 0 8 0 O.IO 7 IO 20 30 50 70~IOO E (DEFORMATION MODULUS))</~pP 4 FIGURE 4.7.-CORRELATION BETWEEN DEFORMATION MODULUS FROM PMT AND SPT F g I I~@" E'r'i I i'li~~-'p',r ,gP'M~)i~z'I i'~:ri"I~AI r 1 I/'QQ4 IguI'Qi Jg%~'I'I~~p I~I

/ALL NCIDI1 OWClN%W/BURNS AND ROE cD REMOTE AIR INTAKE STRUCTURE REMOTE AIR INTAKE I INE WOA g 1~'TURBINE GENERATOR BUILDING RAD.WASTE CONT.BLDG.REACT.BLDG.STANDBY SERVICE WATER~+PIPE TRENCH REMOTE AIR INTAKE LINE 5I B REMOTE AIR INTAKE STRUCTURE 2 COOLING TOWERS SPRAY POND IB SPRAY POND IA FIGURE 6.1 LOCATION'LAN GRAPHIC, SCALE 0 I00'DQ 300'N'200 400'

~~~~~~<g'rir J%%y r~C I h~

BURNS AND ROE/ILL ODCIO ODCIN POST-l976 FILL 440'YPICAL BORINGS 450'LASS II WOA DUCT BANK(TYP.)

5I A 420'ECTION I POST-l976 FILL-440'YPICAL BORINGS~am-420'TANDBY SERVICE WATER PIPES GLASS j.DUGT BANK~PRE-1976 FlLL.SECTION 2'I FIGURE 6.2 TYPICAL SECTIONS I~IP~1 h P 4 4~1 Ii C l I~~((g gr 41~I 1 1'J.4.I~4 1 W%5~PE p 4 ('I 7'(I'1 Ji~'~*~*I t~~M 4~1 4~g 4j~'i PQ i(q>~1t~I 1~.~I I rl}~I I W I~g~..I~I , t,r I~Pg~~1~I C'~'1,1 II p 440'OST l976 FILL BURNS AND ROE TYPICAL BORING/Aha DCIWtl QDM'%f/450'RE-~l976 r WOA 518 420'LASS Z STORM SEWER SECTION 5 440'OST l976 FILL TYP ICAL BORINGS 4~0'PRE-l976 F)LL 420'OA 5I 8 410'ANHOLE'5 SECTION 4 FIGURE 6.5 TYPICAL SECTIONS CLASS 3I STORM SEWER NOT TO SCALE'

• • h~)~~m v I'I~~hh I h ,I lh h V IH~.I I~~Ch\V hj I l~V V~V I~I" I Ih, I Ehh V g~I~l h'I 5 I ee V A Vth I'VV'V'V I H h'V~I~h~H k h I tf ('<<lI~jh v4 fl h T~~~~h Chh g~l JHV~.4 p4 P H'hhh*I~~II'l A'h+1g g~r~IV rg I','1.~44'I~I

+4.0'P\BURNS AND ROE TYPICAL BORING-'-'"-'976

/ah%ICICLE V%l Pf CD CD CD FILL 450'LASS I STANDBY/SERVICE WATER PIPES AND DUCT BANKS 420'SECTION'BO (I)-I PRE-l976 FILL POST I976.FILL~440'YPICAL BOR INGS 450 CLASS I STANDBY SERVICE WATER PIPES'20iAND DUCT BANKS~SECTION 6 CLASS Z PIPES~PRE-l976'lLL FIGURE 6.4 TYPICAL SECTIONS NOT TO SCALE I'l I~~~I1~)-.<i".~I":"3H.K:.'-

'l rI 4\r I I't AV~tl~TW%l~<<,j, F'4'r\4~r I')1 j f~l It I l r\~'I l'.lk'~t wl'I I I ,'.S..a i~l J ("l'I rIl)g"l f;,~~*~j r mi~~C I

/Able ODOO Ouau WllPP BURNS AND ROE CLASS I STANDBY'SERVICE WATER.PIPESAND DUCT BANKS E TYPlCAL BORlNGS POST-l976 FlLL 440'20'NOT TO SCALE h FIGURE 6.5 TYPICAL SECTIONS CLASS II~~I j l CIRC.~PRE-I976 FILL.WATER.PIPES SECTlON 7 p I r i Ivr ev vv$vG 5 4f v,'l g, t t~r V t 4~e$'I V$V'\V I 1'fiI l 1 1 r r l l V r I rr" IV'V'C a<<t I Jl'\'I~1 I~, w LMV BURNS AND ROE/8 ILW OQOll OOCIQ%OP'/'I NOTE: ,YOUN84 MODULUS VALUES USED IN SETTLEMENT CALCULATIONS ARE: K<60~km (REMOTE AIR INTAKE PIPE)E~l5&~2(STANDBY SERVICE WATER PIPE)I-0.5 AIR PK REMOTE-INTAKK Pl STANDBY SKRVIC WATER PIPE 0 0 LOAD q KSF.FIGURE 7.I ESTIMATED STATIC SETTLEMENT-LOAD CURVES FOR RESPECTIVE STRUCTURES,~.",>

k

~%%%I~~'l r~si~t s~~t 4~I~1~'C'

~C~I~~~~~~~0~0

'I 0<r i1 K N I, I~~