CONSUL-.ING ENGINEERING 0 GEOLOGICAL INVESTIGATION 0 ENGINEERING INSPECTION HEMPHILL CORPORATION 4834 SOUTH 83RD EAST AVENUE OFFICE.-918) 022-5133 TULSA. OKLAHOMA 74145 AFTER HOURS 587-5822 CLIENT: Mr. James A. Pierret Project Manager Fansteel, Incorporated Ten Tantalum Place Muskogee, Oklahoma 74401 September II, 1978 ii REPORT OF RETENTION POND STUDY FANSTEEL, INC. MUSKOGEE, OKLAHOMA TABLE OF CONTENTS: Part One I. Geotechnical Engineering Review 2. Appendix a. Boring Location Plan b. Boring Logs c. Laboratory Test Results COPIES : 9-C i lent I-Engi neer ,I~ ~& G-1
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
OFFICE.-918) 022-5133 TULSA. OKLAHOMA 74145 AFTER HOURS 587-5822
CLIENT: Mr. James A. PierretProject ManagerFansteel, IncorporatedTen Tantalum PlaceMuskogee, Oklahoma 74401
September II, 1978
ii
REPORT OF
RETENTION POND STUDY
FANSTEEL, INC.
MUSKOGEE, OKLAHOMA
TABLE OF CONTENTS:
Part One
I. Geotechnical Engineering Review
2. Appendixa. Boring Location Planb. Boring Logsc. Laboratory Test Results
COPIES : 9-C i lentI-Engi neer
,I~ ~&
G-1
RETENTION POND STUDY - PART I
RESPONSE TO: FANSTEEL METALS - RENEWAL
OF SOURCE MATERIALS LICENSE
DOCKET NO. 040-07580
PROPOSED WASTE RETENTION POND
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REVIEW
REVIEWED BY: RICHARD W. TURNBULL, G.E.S., G.B., D.S.E.
INTRODUCTION
Before a detailed response to the two questionnaires is offered, it isfelt to be in order to describe the basic design concept for the retentionpond, and to present the construction procedure that will be used to build
the pond.
Based on information available from previous soils investigations, andfrom data accumulated from nearby observation wells, it was suspected thatthe proposed pond bottom would be below the present water table. This sus-picion was confirmed by data obtained during the soils investigation for thisproject. It was found that the present water table remained consistentlyaround EL. 513. The bottom of the pond was planned to be located at EL. 505.Another possible problem was identified also. A sand stratum was identifiedthat extended below the. water table. A great deal of difficulty would beexperienced in excavating this sand, unless the water table were lowered.
It was decided that the first priority would be to install a dewateringsystem that would lower the water table to below construction limits for easeof excavation. This dewatering system would need to be a permanent systemso that after the pond was constructed, a rising water table would not possi-bly harm the pond liner.
The system that is planned is a French drain system that will extendaround the perimeter of the pond. This system will externally intercept allground water tending to flow toward the pond. Trapped internal ground waterwill flow to the drain and be removed. Some internal ground water will dis-charge to the atmosphere. With no source of external recharge, the soil in-terior to the French drain will rapidly become dewatered. Construction canbe accomplished in the dry, and the proposed pond liner will not be exposedto external hydrostatic forces.
FANSTEEL COMMENT
The revised location of the pond and drainage system is shown onDrawing No. 6413, 2A1-R, revised on August 21, 1978. The answers to theoriginal question presented in the report dated March 21, 1978, are modifiedih this report to show the change of plan. The answers to the additionalquestions posed by 0. Thompson, B.B., D.S.E., N.R.R., are presented in thelatter part of this report. As a result there may be some repetition.
ITEM 362.1 Foundation and Embankment Materials
Four test borings were drilled around the perlmeter of the pond area.All four holes were drilled to refusal (100+ blows per foot from standardpenetration tests). After refusal was reached, ten feet of NX-size rockcore were cut in each bore hole. In the upper levels of the overburden,Shelby tubes were taken as directed by Mr. Lloyd Young, the Fansteel repre-sentative. These tubes were retained by Fansteel and are not considereda part of this investigation. After the dike, or fill soil, had beentotally penetrated, Shelby tube samples were taken at each stratum change,or at five foot intervals, whichever came first. These bore holes areidentified as BH I - 4.
Two test borings were drilled through the old dikes to natural soil,which was 12 feet below the crest of the dikes. Shelby tube samples weretaken at five foot Intervals and composite bag samples were obtained from0 - 6 feet and*6 - 12 feet in both bore holes. The purpose of these twoborings was to obtain samples to determine If the old dike soil is suitablefor use in the construction of new dikes. These two holes are identifiedas DI and D2.
Four probe holes were drilled in the proposed borrow area in order toobtain samples to determine the suitability of the borrow soil for use onthe new construction. All probings were drilled to a depth of four feetand composite bag samples were obtained from 0 - 4 feet in each hole.
All these bore holes were drilled with a rotary rig using compressedair to return the cuttings to the surface. It is felt that this method ofdrilling produces the most reliable subsurface Information as well asreturning the cuttings to the surface at their natural moisture content.
The places where these holes were drilled are shown on. the boringlocation plan, whilch Is contained In the appendix to this report. Detailsfor each of these borings are recorded on the boring logs, which are alsoa part of the appendix.
ITEM 362.2 Laboratory Investiqatlon
The Shelby tube samples, bag samples and rock cores were brought toour soil mechanics laboratory where the samples were compared with thefield logs to insure logging accuracy. Each sample was then classifiedby the Unified Classification System using the results of the washed sieveanalysis and the Atterberg limits to make these classifications.
After the samples were classified, they were separated into soiltypes according to classification, color and texture. This yielded threedistinct soil types which were then tested for required soil properties.
The strengths of the soils in BH I - 4 were determined by directshear. Two of these specimens were placed In consolidometers and incre-mentally loaded. These specimens were then rebounded. It was necessaryto measure the specific gravity of solids in order to make the necessarycalculations. While the specimens were In the consolldometers, fallinghead permeability tests were made on each sample. The grain size distri-bution for each of the soil types was completed by running a hydrometeranalysis on each type. The compaction characteristics of each soil typewere determined by making standard Proctor density tests on them.
The results of these tests are summarized In the appendix.
ITEM 362.3 Moisture - Density Determination
The optimum moisture content and maximum dry density of each typesoil to be used as borrow soil was determined by making a standard Proctordensity test (ASTM D-698, Method A) on them. The composite sample fromthe old dike has a maximum dry density of 110.5 pounds per cubic foot ata moisture content of 15.0 per cent. The composite sample from the pro-posed borrow area has a maximum dry density of 106.6 pounds per cubic footat a moisture content of 16.6 per cent.
ITEM 362.4 Local Seismic Conditions
The Fansteel site Is In seismic zone I. Even though there has neverbeen any recorded seismic activity in the area, the U. S. Corps of Engineershas recently started using a seismic coefficient of 0.025 g In their leveeevaluations Instead of the previous zero.
op
ITEM 362.5 Slope Stabillty of Embankment and, Foundation
The entire pond area is supported by a gray shale formation of unknownthickness. Above the shale is a thin layer of sandstone about five feetthick. The upper two feet will be excavated during construction. Theremainder will form the bottom of the pond. The newly constructed dikewill be supported by alternating layers of silty clay, clayey silt, andsilty sand. The silty clay is the uppermost formation and will directlysupport the dike. The silty sand overlies the sandstone, and carries alloverlying formations plus the dike.
No cracks, faults, or fissures were detected during the entire fielddrilling program. Although no rock strength tests were made on these rockcores, it is felt that the rock strength is very much greater than theembankment soil, and would not fail under any anticipated combinations ofload. It is also felt that no combination of anticipated loads wouldcause measurable consolidation of. this rock.
The method to permanently dewater the-project area has already beendescribed in -the introduction to this response to the questionnaire. Thepond will be lined with a water tight liner. The dike will have no wateror pond liquid. It is felt that these two facts result in a conditionwhere the embankment can never become saturated; and, hence, there cannever be any pore pressure build up. All cases for embankment and founda-tion stability were analyzed with excess pore pressure equal to zero.
The method of analysis used for the embankment was the graphical'integration method outlined in Appendix VI of Engineering and DesignStability of Earth and Rock-Fill Dams, Corps of Engineers Manual EM 1110-2-1902, dated I April 1970. The analysis was checked by the method ofSwedish slices described in the same reference.
Two different soil sources will be used as borrow for embankmentconstruction. The first source will be the soil excavated during con-'struction. This soil will consist of In situ soil from the reservoirplus soil used to construct the old dikes. After that source Is exhausted,soil from the borrow area southwest of the reservoir will be utilized.
The physical properties used in this analysis for these soil sourcesare: cohesion = 720 psf, angle of internal friction, ý = 150, dry density =
103.2 pounds per cubic foot, moist density = 122 pounds per cubic foot,moisture content = 16 per cent.
A summary of calculations for the method of Swedish slices for thecritical circle is presented for Informational purposes as Fig. I ofthis report.
ITEM 362.5 Continued
An impervious liner is to be provided for the interior (upstream)surface of the dike; and a permanent dewatering system is being providedto preclude ground water from outside the pond entering the dike area.The two provisions result in a dike that will never be in a saturatedstate. The only two stability cases that will apply will be the endof construction state and the earthquake state under the same conditionsas were used for the end of construction state.
The project area has never had a recorded earthquake. Until veryrecently, zero acceleration was used In analyses of river levees for thisarea. A few years ago, this acceleration was increased to 0.025 g, whichwas used in this analysis. The non-earthquake factor of safety Is 3.2,and the earthquake factor of safety is 3.1. Both these safety factorsgreatly exceed the allowable factor of safety of 1.3 for non-earthquakeconditions, and 1.0 for earthquake conditions.
The north dike, at the northeast corner of the pond, has the highestmanufactured dike height. This area was analyzed for settlement. Thehighest dike is 18 feet high. The foundation soil under this area isabout ten feet thick. Based on the analysis, it was found that the follow-ing settlement will occur during the life of the dike:
Foundation settlement 0.69 inch
Dike settlement 0.97 inch
Total settlement 1.ý6 inches
All other sections of the dike should have a settlement less than theabove values. It was further determined that this magnitude settlementwill not impose any detrimental stresses on the liner.
The liner and French drain system will prevent ground water or pondliquid from being a source of pore water for the dike soil. Hence, thissoil does not have a source of water, liquificatlon never becomes a pro-blem. It is'further felt that no additional provisions need be made toprevent liquiflcatlon.
SLOPE STABILITY ANALYSIS
NORTH DIKE
9CL + ZTAN bZ T
0.720 ( +C0.) ÷ 55.4 TAN 1'
20.2
0 - 3.2
20. z
[TOcE~ .. CtS
Ffl.RE I
ITEM 362.6 Assess Erosion and Piping Potential ofEmbankment and Foundation Materials
Since the system foundation will be sound, intact shale, which hasa very low coefficient of permeability, there is no danger of pipingbeing developed within the shale mass. In order for piping to developwithin the embankment soil, there must be a source of water. A lineris being provided to prevent seepage from the Impoundment Into the embank-ment mass. Under normal operating conditions, there will be no seepagethrough the embankment.
In the event of a major disaster, such as a violent wind ripping anentire panel of liner off, seepage can start. It has been assumed thatif this happens, the pond will be dewatered, and repairs made. It hasfurther been assumed that corrective action will take 30 days to be com-pleted. An analysis was made to determine how deeply seepage would pene-trate Into the embankment In 30 days under a full head of water. Since,in reality, this head will be rapidly reduced as the pond is drained, theactual seepage penetration will be somewhat less.
The theoretical maximum penetration during this 30 day period hasbeen calculated to be 0.03 Inch under the above assumed conditions.. Theactual penetration will be even less, It Is felt that no problem existswith respect to seepage.
A ten foot wide crest Is provided around the perimeter of the dike.A layer of crushed limestone will be used to surface this area. Thestone blanket will be six inches thick. It will be used to minimizeerosion, to prevent dust from high winds, and to serve as a driving sur-face for maintenance equipment. Recommended gradational requirements areas outlined In Table I, below.
TABLE I
Gradational REquirements
SIEVE SIZE PER CENT PASSING
I inch 1003/4 inch 95-100No. 4 5-75No. 20 0-30No. 200 0-10
In order to protect the downstream face of the embankment againstpossible erosion, this face Will be sprigged, or slab sodded, with Bermudagrass in those areas where riprap Is not provided for flood protection.
The embankment soil has sufficient natural cohesion so that additivessuch as Portland cement will not be required for additional stabilization.
ITEM 362.7 Gradational Requirements forUpstream Erosional Control
The entire upstream face of the embankment will be lined. The fullsurface area of the pond is so small that there is insufficient fetchfor wave generation.
If crushed stone were provided for erosion control, this stone mightpossibly puncture the liner and allow seepage to occur.
Based on these conditions, it is recommended that crushed stone notbe provided for upstream embankment erosion control.
ITEM 362.8
Drawing DC-3-102-2, Pond 3 Contour, gives details of the finalcontour of the area of the Pond. The run-off from about twelve (12)acres of the Fansteel Plant site discharges through at 48" in diameterculvert under the railroad tracks to a flat plain located between thetracks and the West dike of the pond. A cross-section is given onthe drawing identified as E-E 1 . The water will flow North to intersectthe flow from another .30" in diameter culvert. The combined flow ofrun-off water will then flow along the North side of the new ponddirectly to the river. A typical cross-section of the North Side ofthe pond is present and identified as F-F 1 . The entire area aroundthe new pond will be seeded with grass and appropriately maintainedto protect against erosion per the construction specification.
ITEM 362.9 Location and Installation Detailsof Vent System
Details of the vents are given on the "Liner Layout" drawing, Sheet 2.Vents are located at the top of the inner slope of the pond wall 6" to 9"from the berm. A simple flap type cover is placed over each 1" in diametervent opening. The flap is rectangular piece of liner material attached tothe liner on'hree sides to prevent rain from entering the vent.
ITEM 362.10 Location and Elevation Map of Basin
The elevation, location and contour of the drainage area is shownin two drawings:
DG-3-102-2 - Contour Map - Revised 9-8-78 and
DC-3-102-1 - Pond Ground Water Drainage System - Revised 9-11-78
~1
ITEM 362.11 Typical Cross-Sections
The crest of the embankment will be at Elevation 533. The floor ofthe pond will be at Elevation 505. Both the upstream and downstreamslopes of the embankment will be a constant of three horizontal to onevertical. The embankment crest will be ten feet wide.
The embankment will be constructed from a combination of soil removedduring excavation of the pond plus the soil excavated when the old dikesare removed. After these sources of soil are exhausted, dike soil willbe obtained from the borrow area located southwest of the project.
Two typical cross-sections are presented to illustrate excavationand fill for the project. Section A-A is through embankments in an east-west view. In this presentation, It may be seen that very little dikewill be required on the west side. A double dike will be constructedon the east side. This dike will separate the existing full Basin 2,and the new basin. Old Basins 3 and 4 (which are empty) will be eliminatedduring construction of the new basin. The double dike on the east sidewill provide more than adequate lateral restraint as It separates theold Basin 2 and the new basin.
Section B-B is a view of the north and south embankments. Thesouth side has a minimum embankment, while the north side has the maximumembankment for the entire project. This north embankment was the one forwhich the slope stability analysis was made. The north side view alsoshows the French drain that prevents ground water from entering the pro-ject area as well as the relocated drainage ditch which handles surfacewater runoff from the west.
In both sections are shown the existing water table. After theFrench drains are completed, the interior portion of the overburdensoil will be dewatered, and the area will be dry; hence, there will beno water table or fluctuation thereof.
A P P E N D I X
BORING LOG HOLE NO. BH I
PROJECT Retention Pond Area SHEET I OF
DATE 12-7/8-77HOLE LOCATION See borina location plan
/Hole CavedG.R. ELEV. 525.0 WATER TABLE/ BOCa ED BY Lane LOGGED BY HImphl II
(After 24 hours)
DESCRIPTION OF MATERIAL(TYPE. COLOR, TEXTURE, CONSISTENCY)
CASING INFORMATION
SIZE I :T-RUN FT-PUuLLID FT-LEFTt
r, Sandy, Brown
SI LT,Sandy,CIayey,Tan,?4olst
4" 11 28 0
"DRILLING MUD
TYPE NO. SACK
PENETRATION TEST
SILT,Sandy,Clayey,Tan w/Some Gray
SAND,FIne Gralned,Sl1ty,Clayey,Tan,Moist
CLAY,S I I ty, Red-Brown
NOTE: Hole caved In to 13.0'. Nowater at 13.0'.
CLAY,Silty,Sandy,Tan,Gets Wetter wýDepth 010. 1 FROM I TO
Fansteel-I 1.0 2.0
FPnC+n IA A r
SANDSTONE,Poorly Cemented,Tan 15.0 16.0
AlR5 N 0 5
CORING
SHALE,Dark Gray FROM TO RE COVEWY
28.0 33.0 98%
33.0 38,0 94%
WATER, LOSS
CEMENT (NO. SACKS)
AOn7 r
Bottom of hol
REMARKSNOTE: Hole caved to 13.9'-No water at 13.0'.
HOLE LOCATION See borina location plan DATE 12-8-77
GR.ELEV. WATER TABLE 0.0 BORED BY Lane LOGGED BY Hemphl I I(After 24 hours)
DEPTH 0 DESCRIPTION OF MATERIAL CASING INFORMATIONELEV. AND zSCALE A (TYPE, COLOR, TEXTURE , CONUIITENCY) SIZE FT-RUN FT-PULLED FT-LEFTS I " SILT,Dark brown,Moist
?._,,___, CLAY,Mo Ist,Tan
CLAY,Moist,Light Red DRILLING MUD
4.0 _ _ _ __ _ *P. ,SACXS
Bottom of hole PENETRATION TEST
SHELBY TUBE SAMPLES
NOTE: Bag samples taken at0.0-4.0.
NO. FROM TO
CORING
FROM TO RECOVEWY
WATER LOSS
CEMENT (NO. SACKS)
REMARKS
Lr CONSULTING ENGIN|ERING 0 GKOLOGICAL INVIETIGATIOd B ENOINEEUING INSPECTION
_l,. I HEMPHILL CORPORATIONHEMPIL V - 4834 SOUTH 83RO EAST AVENUE
OFFICE- I 91g) 622-5133 TULSA OKLAHOMA 74145 AFTER HOURS 587.8-22
G-24
BORING LOG JHOLE NO. 4
PROJECT Retention Pond Area SHEET L__. OF I
HOLE LOCATION Crpe hcnrlnq Incatinn plan . . DATE 12-7-7R
GR. ELEV. 523.(3 WATER TABLE 9"31 BORED BY _ _n _ LOGGED BY HiemphI Il
.(After 24 hours)
DEPTH 6 DESCRIPTION OF MATERIAL CASING INFORMATIONELEV. ANDFT - - FT-LIFTSCALE 9 (TYrPE, COLOR. TEXTURE, CONIS1TErNaCY) SIZE F IT-RUN/I r'PUILJLED F-I t
522.0 1.0 / •fl`iayey,lan w/Small doulders,Mols, 4 "I 19.0 19.0 07."- .SAND,Silty,Fine GrainedTan w/Clay I
Binders & Small Boulders,t4olst (Fill) DRILLING MUD-519.5 1 3.5 9
*COMPOSITE "V", Hole D-I from 0.8-12.0, Hole D-2 from 0.8-12.0."*COMPOSITE "P", Hole P-I from 0.0-4.0, Hole P-2 from 0.0-4.0, Hole P-3 from 0.0-4.0, Hole P-4 from 0.0-4.0.
GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION DIAGRAMU. S. BUREAU OF STANDARD SIEVE NO. HYDROMETER
-0m0mn2-4
-ni
2m
co
G)
m
0
mx
i I, I , L, L i lildild i I i I i. LL. I i blildi I i I i I i LL. I Mild.... ... .-1. 1 ... I I, , 1 1, ... I , I I I100 I0
EFFECTIVE SIZE
UNIFORMITY COEFFICIENT
FINENESS MODULUS
PERMEABILITY G.P.D./SQ. FT.
<0.001
>48
GRAIN SIZE IN MM
HEMPNIL T'
11121 I, u~n.,. lIr II Jl IJ h I I I i I I I .iOOi Ii Ii I i L~j I..= ...i. , .... Willd i Iil,! I L .,.., I. , ,,I,,, I
0.01 0.001
PROJECT : Retention Pond Study
LOCATION 'Fansteel. Muskogee, Oklahoma
SOURCE ; Shelby Tube
BORING NO, BH-I. FROM 5 .0'TO 6.0'
GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION DIAGRAMU. S. BUREAU OF STANDARD SIEVE NO.
144 3 A 6 8)Q12 16 20 30 40 50 60 100 140 200
HYDROMETER
"D
m0
-n
CD
M
Tm
C)0
,0 (f)m
*m
10
00
EFFECTIVE SIZE
UNIFORMITY COEFFICIENT
FINENESS MODULUS
PERMEABILITY G.P.D./SQ. FT.
VEmCO "A
'E IT '
PROJECT Retention Pond Study
LOCATION ; Fansteel, Muskogee, Oklahoma
SOURCE : Shelby Tube
BORING NO.BH-2 FROMI5.0' TO 16.0'
GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION DIAGRAMU. S. BUREAU OF STANDARD SIEVE NO.
~'~" 3 A 6 8 Q 12 16 20 30 40 50 60 100 140 200
HYDROMETE-R
m7
z.6
-n,
m5
CO.-4
m
mz.-4
0
.-)
10
m
ou
0- --4
0
0
00
EFFECTIVE SIZE
UNIFORMITY COEFFICIENT
FINENESS MODULUS
PERMEABILITY G.P.D./SQ. FT.
Q. 005 mm
L5~
*.~CG3POATWN
PROJECT Retention Pond Study
LOCATION Fansteel. Muskogee, Oklaho
SOURCE : Shelby Tube
BORING NO. BH-3 FROM 18. 0 'TO 19.C•'
fTIa
P CO'ULTrI" !NON"NFUPING * GEOLOGICAL INVE5TIGATION E rNGINIERING INSPECTION
HEMPHILI HEMPHILL CORPORATIONICOATr1" 4834 SOUrTI4 83RD EAST AVENUE