Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout5.10.22 Board Correspondence - FW_ Compliance Directives issued in FERC P-619-000 (2) From:Paulsen, Shaina To:BOS Subject:Board Correspondence - FW: Compliance Directives issued in FERC P-619-000 Date:Tuesday, May 10, 2022 1:33:24 PM Please see Board Correspondence below. Shaina Paulsen Associate Clerk of The Board Butte County Administration 25 County Center Drive, Suite 200, Oroville, CA 95965 T: 530.552.3304 | F: 530.538.7120 -----Original Message----- From: 'FERC eSubscription' <eSubscription@ferc.gov> Sent: Tuesday, May 10, 2022 1:25 PM Subject: Compliance Directives issued in FERC P-619-000 .ATTENTION: This message originated from outside Butte County. Please exercise judgment before opening attachments, clicking on links, or replying.. On 5/10/2022, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), Washington D.C., issued this document: Docket(s): P-619-000 Lead Applicant: Pacific Gas and Electric Company Filing Type: Compliance Directives General Correspondence Description: Letter to Pacific Gas and Electric Company providing comments on the Construction Design Package for the Spillway Rehabilitation Project at Lower Bucks Lake Dam, part of the Bucks Creek Hydroelectric Project under P-619. To view the document for this Issuance, click here https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://elibrary.ferc.gov/eLibrary/filelist?accession_num=20220510- 3073__;!!KNMwiTCp4spf!GFIrQVn76UDciuHgNPfpXKOETkS725CF4AIshmf0XCvYrmzCpf0W4i-PHPUO8g2OJTgA9wtXuMBsidFVKVy3o2LEWyCPuCxIWu2W$ To modify your subscriptions, click here: https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://ferconline.ferc.gov/eSubscription.aspx__;!!KNMwiTCp4spf!GFIrQVn76UDciuHgNPfpXKOETkS725CF4AIshmf0XCvYrmzCpf0W4i- PHPUO8g2OJTgA9wtXuMBsidFVKVy3o2LEWyCPuNjqSvaG$ ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Please do not respond to this email. Online help is available here: https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://www.ferc.gov/efiling-help.asp__;!!KNMwiTCp4spf!GFIrQVn76UDciuHgNPfpXKOETkS725CF4AIshmf0XCvYrmzCpf0W4i- PHPUO8g2OJTgA9wtXuMBsidFVKVy3o2LEWyCPuDFj7zqh$ or for phone support, call 866-208-3676. Comments and Suggestions can be sent to this email address: mailto:FERCOnlineSupport@Ferc.gov FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION Office of Energy Projects Division of Dam Safety and Inspections San Francisco Regional Office 100 First Street, Suite 2300 San Francisco, CA 94105-3084 (415) 369-3300 Office (415) 369-3322 Facsimile May 10, 2022 In reply refer to: Project No. 619-CA Mr. Jan Nimick, Vice President Pacific Gas and Electric Company Mail Code: N11E PO Box 770000 San Francisco, CA 94177-0001 Re: Construction Design Package for the Spillway Rehabilitation Project at Lower Bucks Dam Dear Mr. Nimick: This is in response to a letter dated January 19, 2022, from Mr. Robert Ellis that submitted the Construction Design Package for the Spillway Rehabilitation Project at Lower Bucks Lake (Bucks Diversion) Dam, which is part of the Bucks Creek Hydroelectric Project, FERC No. 619. We have reviewed PG&E submittal and have comments in the enclosure. Within 45 days of the date of our letter, please address our comments or provide a plan and schedule to address our comments. eFiling system at https://www.ferc.gov/ferc-online/overview. For all Dam Safety and Public Safety Documents, select Hydro: Regional Office and San Francisco Regional Office from the eFiling menu. The cover page of the filing must indicate that the material was eFiled. For assistance with eFiling, contact FERC Online Support at FERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov, (866) 208-3676 (toll free), or (202) 502-8659 (TTY). 2 safety program. If you have questions, please contact Ms. Eunhye Kim at (415) 369-3321. Sincerely, Frank L. Blackett, P.E. Regional Engineer Enclosure (1) cc: Ms. Sharon Tapia, Division Manager CA Dept. of Water Resources Division of Safety of Dams P.O. Box 942836 Sacramento, CA 94236-0001 Enclosure for Construction Design Package for the Spillway Rehabilitation Project at Lower Bucks Lake Dam FERC No.619 Supporting Design Report 1. Per Section 8.5.4, the contractor has the option to use shotcrete in place of Cast-In- Place (CIP) concrete. Constructing a new spillway using shotcrete is not a standard of practice currently used in spillway design standards. Provide a justification on the suitability and durability of shotcrete in lieu of CIP concrete. Your justification should discuss the ability of the shotcrete to withstand the design flows. 2. We note that the spillway rehabilitation is designed to pass the former Probable Maximum Flood (PMF) based on Hydrometeorological Report (HMR) 36 rather than the current PMF based on HMR 58/59, which we accepted in our letter dated February 16, 2020. Provide additional justification for not designing the spillway to pass the currently-accepted PMF. 3. Our February 16, 2020 letter requested that you evaluate potential adverse impacts associated with overtopping during the HMR 58/59 PMF, develop a plan and schedule for remedial options, and evaluate the necessity of implementing Interim Risk Reduction Measures (IRRMs) for the dams overtopped in projects P-619, P- 803, and P-2105, which includes Lower Bucks Dam. By letter dated April 2, 2021 you submitted a plan and schedule to submit a summary of your completed and ongoing efforts to mitigate the risks of potential overtopping at the subject dams by September 30, 2021. Our records indicate that the summary was not submitted and our comments were not addressed. Your response to our comments is overdue and must be submitted immediately. The response should provide additional engineering justification why it is acceptable that the current remediation does not address the inadequate spillway capacity and how this deficiency will be resolved in the future. 4. protected from thermal changes (heat and freezing) by the 2-foot-thick minimum c However, the referenced USBR DS No. 14 recommends insulation be provided to protect drainage systems associated with spillway slabs and walls. Provide justification for deviating from the referenced design standards or revise your drainage design to incorporate insulation material for the drainage system in accordance with the USBR DS No. 14. 5. Section 5.3 of your SDR indicates that the potential for headcutting erosion progression from the plunge pool toward the spillway toe is low for the selected alternative (i.e., Geometry 05). However, the CFD results in Appendix C of the Page 1 of 5 Enclosure for Construction Design Package for the Spillway Rehabilitation Project at Lower Bucks Lake Dam FERC No.619 SDR show velocities around 30-40 feet per second or more into the tailrace pool for the design flood. In Appendix F, GENTERRA Consultants note that it is uncertain as to the erodibility of the rock at the end of the spillway if flow directly impacts the rock slope. This is more likely to occur at lower discharges and at lower tailwater elevations. We concur with their suggestion that it may be necessary to perform a rock erodibility assessment once the condition and characteristics of the rock in this area is exposed. Consider the effects of the tailwater in the analysis and/or other energy dissipating measures, the addition of rip rap and/or other mitigation measures if it is found necessary to further reduce headcutting erosion potential. Please consider performing an erodibility assessment before construction commences and submit the report to us for review and comment as soon as possible. If it is determined that additional work is required that changes the design, the design changes must be submitted for our review and comment. Appendix F Geotechnical Memorandum 6. We note that no subsurface information is available for the new spillway foundation or the left side of the spillway, which was specifically noted as potentially problematic. This could place the spillway construction in the precarious position of not being completed prior to winter and subsequent spring runoff if redesign efforts are required to address unforeseen subsurface conditions encountered during construction. PG&E acknowledges that there is no information available and references a report by GENTERRA that states that they must be on site during construction to evaluate the subsurface conditions. The standard of practice would be to perform subsurface investigations to evaluate conditions and obtain design parameters for the construction of a new spillway. This did not occur for this project. PG&E chose to address these issues during construction. Describe what measures PG&E has taken and will take, to evaluate the possibility of leaving the project without a completed or properly constructed spillway during spring runoff. Include possible interim risk reduction measures to be implemented in the event the project is left without a completed spillway prior to winter shutting down construction. 7. Include justification that the assumed friction coefficient of 0.45 (source: page 12 of the GENTERRA report) is suitable at the interface between spillway slab or spillway wall footing and the supporting bedrock foundation. 8. Provide the effective peak ground acceleration used to determine the seismic coefficient of 0.17 that was provided in Appendix F Geotechnical Memorandum and determine if the seismic coefficient used in the analysis requires updating based on the most current seismic study. Page 2 of 5 Enclosure for Construction Design Package for the Spillway Rehabilitation Project at Lower Bucks Lake Dam FERC No.619 Appendix I: Structural Design Calculations 9. Please review the structural calculations provided in Appendix I for accuracy. We noted several errors in the calculations and some examples are as follows: a. On page 54 of 112, P should be considered as a trapezoid instead of a rectangle for the weight of a plinth block for rock dowel check per the sketch. b. On page 107 of 112, for the anchor design analysis, the weight of concrete (or shotcrete) should be calculated with three-dimensional values (considering 4.5 ft spacing of the anchor), but it only uses two dimensional values (only cross section area of the concrete block). Also, please include ice loading accordingly per the three-dimensional calculation. 10. The structural calculations noted the seismic inertial forces from self-weight of the left and right chute walls are calculated internally by RISA software. Explain what method is used by RISA to calculate seismic inertial forces and what design standard is utilized. Also, include an output file or image from RISA that shows the calculated seismic inertial force values. 11. On page 54 of 112, the rock dowel calculation check assumed a 30-degree sliding plane. However, per Figure 2 in the GENTERRA report, the dip angle of structural and exfoliation joints near the spillway varies from 7 to 77 degrees with Please provide the assumptions for estimating rock mass (or joint/bedding information) for the dowel calculation (where the dowels would be drilled into rock) based on the information provided in the GENTERRA report and verify that the assumptions are appropriate for the rock dowel design for the existing rock mass. 12. Provide the rock dowel installation angles relative to the surface and check that these angles would provide sufficient anchorage for the characteristics of the target rock mass. 13. Provide/summarize details of all rock dowel design criteria with justification of how these parameters represent sufficient safety factors considering actual conditions of the site. Quality Control Inspection Program (QCIP) 14. Provide a construction schedule. Please note that the schedule should contain milestone dates established for the construction contractor. Page 3 of 5 Enclosure for Construction Design Package for the Spillway Rehabilitation Project at Lower Bucks Lake Dam FERC No.619 15.The name of the person on the resume before Mr. the QCIP, please provide the name of the person. 16. Section 3 should include responsibilities of the quality control manager. 17. Please provide a revised Erosion and Sediment Control Plan per Chapter 7 of the to be incorporated during construction. 18. The proposed plan and schedule of the submittal of Temporary Construction Emergency Action Plan (TCEAP) upon securing a contractor is acceptable. Please provide the TCEAP at least 60 days before starting construction and ensure that it is prepared in accordance with Section 6-9 of Chapter 6 of the FERC Engineering Guideline. 19. The QCIP should clearly state who will be onsite full time during construction. These individual(s) must have stop work authority. 20. For the testing frequency in the QCIP, please clarify who (PG&E or independent testing agency) will perform these tests. Briefly describe what quality control testing, if any, the contractor will perform or whether PG&E will be responsible for all quality control and quality assurance. 21. The resumes of the field inspectors do not include specific experience commensurate to the work being proposed. Update the resumes to include additional specific experience, or alternatively, propose alternate field inspector(s) that have the necessary experience. Drawings 22. The spillway chute includes two types of joints (contraction and control joints) spaced at a maximum of 30 feet apart in both directions along the slope. These types of joints may not be appropriate for the thrust block overlay as they will typically create unbounded surfaces separating the adjacent concrete placements. Evaluate whether using construction joints over the footprint of the thrust block overlay is appropriate or provide additional explanations/justifications regarding the selected joint types. 23. Sheet 3102110, Detail 5 shows a thrust block repair overlay to be constructed on the existing concrete thrust block. Evaluate the potential of differential settlement Page 4 of 5 Enclosure for Construction Design Package for the Spillway Rehabilitation Project at Lower Bucks Lake Dam FERC No.619 along the thrust block overlay to the spillway slab and determine if a joint would be appropriate to avoid potential concrete cracking. 24. Concrete anchors per Detail 1 on Sheet 3102109 may extend into the foundation rock near the toe of the left thrust block. Evaluate if the design and specification of the concrete anchors would also be applicable as rock anchors or provide additional clarification for this scenario. 25. Revise Detail 5 on Sheet 3102110 to show two drainage pipes in a drain trench and provide additional details for the locations where there will be three and four drainage pipes in a drain trench as shown on the Spillway Structure and Drainage Plan on Sheet 3102102. 26. Revise the Right Wall Developed Elevation A on Sheet 3102106 to include stations and top of wall elevations at wall joint locations. 27. On sheets 3102108, 3102109, 3102110, 3102116, 3102118, and possibly others filter material membrane, drain that geofabrics, geotextiles, and other similar materials are not acceptable for use in any structural or filtering purpose when they are not easily accessible for maintenance and/or replacement. Specifications 28. Please provide the Low-Level Outlet Instream Flow Diversion for our review and comment as it is available. 29. Update Section 310000 Part 3.3 Foundation Preparation to provide the FERC, and any other appropriate personnel (e.g., Engineer of Record, DSOD), at least 72 hours of advance notification before foundation inspections and approvals. FERC staff will participate in foundation approvals for all foundations prior to the placement of any material that covers the foundation. Page 5 of 5