ML20128C071
Text
n A
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY 50-424 orrica or THe cHier or ENGINEERS
$Q.42$
WASHINGTON. D.C. 20314 50-426
^
I
= =,,
-p MEN-CWE-S h,
6 June 1973 0
g[ pap 1
e 2q % (
s d
" 8, Mr. L. Manning Muntzing Director of Regulation
..s
/..,.
e Atomic Energy Comission
\\, * ' .*ht g
Washington, D.C.
20505 y af t>
=j/
s Dear Mr. Muntzing At Mr. Thomas Cardone's request, we have reviewed the eight volume Pre-liminary Safety Analysis Report on the Alvin W. Vogtle Nuclear Plant.
Our review covered only the soil mechanics and geology features of the proposed structures. There are no eartt. dams in the proposed system, e
so the cocunents pertain only to the analysis of static and dynamic sea-i bility of the foundations of structures and of earth slopes.
I I
Inclosed are review coments that have previously been informally given I
to Mr. Cardone.
In addition to these, we suggest that additional borings on 100-foot centers be made around the circumference of the four condenser cooling towers, to determine if there ar1 any significant variations in founding level that would be required by the effect of solution cavities in the marl.
l Table 2C-4 and Figure 2C-6 show very wide variations in strength and density of the clay bearing stratum. The borings in the founding ares of each structure should be reviewed to determine if there are soft or weak zones large enough to cause much lower bearing capacities or much largar settlements than those calculated on the basis of the average values used in Table 2C-8.
Sincerely,
.43
/
2 Inci JAMES L.
LLY As stated Brigadier General, USA Deputy Director of Civil Works 8505200175 841015 khhb 4
62 PDR 48C'd WI. Ud. U '* '.'
ue.1h!!>
3S82 re, 'em 6
r-
.u '
L
..I.
j,.
w..:.;
- e. _,
'Q.
I
%,/
t.
c g
I'.
DAEN-CWE-C 14 May 1973 SU MECT: Comments on Alvin W. Vogtle Nuclear Plant, Savannah River,
..., ~ ~. 9, Georgia Power Company "3.
Category T. 17ater Wells to Supply Cooling Water During Emergency Ebut-Down of Reactors.
)
. a.
Project Reouirements. The client proposes to drill four water i.
. wells (one for each reactor) to supply emergency cooling water to the t.
, reactors for a minumum period of 30 days during emergency situations.
i.-
In these instances each of the wells must simultaneously b4 capable of
)I psoducing a sustained 1000 gallons per minute yield for the 30 day period.
,s
'j b.
Test 11 ell Results and Analysis Performed. The test well was drilled and tested for 48.5 hours5.787037e-5 days <br />0.00139 hours <br />8.267196e-6 weeks <br />1.9025e-6 months <br /> at 1200 gpm, then an additional four hours at 1800 spm. At neither of the above discharge rates were stabil-p
,W imod drawdown conditions achieved. All analyses from the test results 1
were phgfore based on nonequilibrium conditions. Total well depth is neerl zeet I
c.
Pecom. ended Additional tJell Test Procedures. The client's tests and analyses appears to nave oemonstrated that a potentially ample supply of emergency water of 1000 gpm for at least a 30 day period will be available from each well. However, this office does not believe that the
. test data presented in the report fully supports such a sustained yield b
t.
at a pump setting at only 150 feet depth for these interfering well i *)
systems. Therefore, as a check on both adequate pump setting and adequate sustained yields we recocmend that a we.11 pumping test also be perfor=ed t-uder stabilized or equilibrium drawdown conditions in order to verify the client's nonequilibrium testing procedure and analyses, upon which g
seek important well design decisions were entirely based, j,
d.
Descriocion of Recomended Eouilibrium tiell Test and Analysis.
In order to perform an approx 1= ate equilibritra pumping test on ene present test well (or on one of the other future three wells), a reduced pu= ping
.}
rate as for example, 300 spm should be run until no appreciable creeping I.,
drewdown continues to occur in either the pump well or observation wells.
.e A second and third pumping rate at two then four times the original rate is perfomed, both to similar stabilized drawdown conditions.
(See sketch). The three stabilized drawdown rates can then be plotted against their c::... ponding three stabilized drawdown depths as shown in the fourth graph on the sketch.
From this empirical curve, a safe and con-servative depth then can be selected (by interpretation or extrapolation) for a pump bowl setting which can deliver 1000 gpm yet be safe from
" pumping air" due to drawdown all the way to the pump bowl level.
If, as is likely with these wells, a small creeping drawdown continues to F
occur during the pu.: ping test at one or all of the above recornended yumping races, the approximate stabilization depth can still be approxi-mately determined (for this special case of limited 30 day pumping) by O
t 2
t*
i l ;,,..
6 '
6 y,.,*,
3
.o BAEN-CIE 4 14 May 1973 l
SUBJECT:
Comunents on Alvin W. Vogtle Nuclear Plant, savannah River, l
Georgia Power Company.
........ lotting drawdown against time and picking off drawdown depth just below p
the flatter portion of the curve.
(see three upper graphs in sketch).
}
4.
Other Recommendations. Prior to permanent construction of Sneflities it is recommended that at least two adjacent wells be pump 5
gested simultaneously in order to (1) verify full drawdown amounts under interfering well conditions where each well is pissping at the design rate of 1000 spa and (2) verify that any ground settlements near structures from aquifer compaction will not be detrimental. It is also reeoannended that submersible pumps be installed in the permanent system for greater operational safety and reliability under emergency conditions.
[.
Sese pumps and wells should be group tested every six months or so to insure reliability in time of needed use.
I..
ps N A*. DIXON 1 Inal 1
Skateh Staff Geologist, Geology granch Engineering Division Directorate of Civil Works O
6 0
e 6
e O '
I o
I
'3 j
l g
L
- ,. E[WU 1 L_I U1 \\ l UlV/
M t J H U L1
~~
' o.
- m. m.T ffs%,
b.,.4 L,
..,...I
.. =y /
8
~ ' ' 300 GF!d V 6C0 GPM ('>
>~
1 2 0 0 G P.
.\\.
m % ~- -
p.-
<g-(- - -- -
(
s
.c)
Jbb,:adSweC?.i I
\\
I I f o*. - - - -. - % -
2 N
- 3.- - - - - - ~ -
- -!LZ Mhs
=4-w w
y
.C,. '.
77mes '
//m u
'Thr;o ta A c ll6 h e Lm/
' '. ' ~
s i
S O - \\.
t'...
r.
- g. g
} -)
p
\\
o I.
,s,t i.
- -.. g y.
4
.........N......g,.
- .-...~.. :
- g...
,,4
,p (p i i
.\\
.: cJ ' '
g
[
'm =\\ h' $
p)
.4
/
- *f,
g
- e. e
},f N
4
' ql i
l.
x n
s g
x p
,,o-
' s
..s d-l
- >6. B e,o A l. D 0'
\\
4
-e.,
i i.
l y
y Q.
o'
.\\.
s-
'SW7$wie 0/>pmg 72a.Ic.,
e, u
m
+-
g g
. US Ed.!,/,H N, aVi, V,,,F c u q,_..
--o V
d.n he kk.u?r Lev.cl - - -.r - - - - -
~
~
m.
i s
h 300 GPM \\
600 GPM I2c3GPb
\\' % ~
\\
. )
l t
t
.\\
Jbshmed Av;r w?.i Y'
\\
-(>*2 l
48 3- - - _
_t --
.24/$
M hxT
.24A u
w
/ H !? u i//m u fyryo i
$hbC bb*kr
!V&!
o
\\
\\
&v4
\\
G h#
)
\\
4 x
g 4
3 p (,0,
\\
I
\\
i S
N e
s
+n
/
E s
,.3 f
g (y Rep B.aul Deth.- - -. -2
- 1.,L k
p j
+-
k-t
~
~
sw M J V3oya,,rsr 1 O
O e
n
~
1.
. i,
[
nhiN-cW-G 14 May 1973 I
MMrJBANDUM TO DAEN-CWE-S SUBJECI Conssents on Alvin W. Vogtle Nuclear Plant, Savannah River, Georgia Power Company 1
1.
During the course of conducting exploratory work for siting the nuclear power plants and auxiliary structures, a substantial number of borings were drilled over a large area and corresponding large amounts of test data eseumulated. From these deployed investigations, the client has constructed
-a geological model of the subsurface conditions upon which complete founda-tion and seismic design has been based. It is agreed by this office that the general geological conditions at the selected sites are basically as described in the report. However, it is also felt that more specific details of the foundation conditions, pertinent to design, could have been overlooked, due to the resulting vide not spacing of borings covering eritical structures at the selected sites. For example, some solutioning of the calcareous clay (marl) bearing stratum can not be entirely ruled out.
If, for example, as stated in the report, the marl samples tested contained 50 percent calcium carbonate, then other nonsampled (due to wide spaced borings) areas of the foundations may contain higher percentages of this soluble mineral. As a result of these or other formational and erosional
+
phenomena, unexpected voids, channelways or localized weaknesses could now exist within zones of foundations influenced from some of the heavier structures.
2.* The two borings shown in each of the two 160 foot diameter reactor oo'ntainment structures (Figure 2.5-11-Vol. I) or relatively few borings shewn in the turbine buildings and control structures are not believed to be sufficient to develop all latent foundation conditions which could be of significance to design. It is therefore reconenended that at least for the heavy and critical structures which contain the nuclear reactors, borings be placed on a minumum grid of 50 feet on centers and penetrate at least 40 feet into the marl foundation stratum. This criterion would average about eight evenly spaced borings per reactor containment structure.
The other important structures such as control buildings, turbine buildings, etc., should have an avecage spacing of no more than 100 feet on centers or less, depending upon the reliance that can be placed on geologic inter-pretation between borings.
e 6
i
,I I
BAIN-CWE-G 14 May 1973 SUMECT: Cosmaents on Alvin W. Vogtle Nuclear Plant, Savannah River, j
Georgia Power Company 3.
Emersency Coolina Water Wells, gecause of the inmaediate availability of the large backup source of emergency cooling water from the Savannah River, the emergency water supply from water wells is not considered a w 'tricical item. Therefore, no comument is offered on the emergency supply welle.
l t
A. DIXON Staff Geologist, Geology granch Engineering Division, Civil Works l
gp a e
v 5
e e
d
%g 4
o
~
9 0
e e
l 2
l
. f.
l
....