Comments from NuMI Infrastructure Review

**Part I**

**July 12, 2001**

# Water Inflow

# Presenter: J. Sollo

1.  ([Reviewer: D. Capista]{.underline}) The ground water collection and
    discharge designs leads me to several concerns: First, I think the
    under drain system using the geocomposite strip and PVC will plug up
    with mud and silt over time. When this drain saturates with water
    the water will end up in the tunnel. It my be better to consider a
    drainage pipe that would run the length of the tunnel. One could
    then collect the water at various locations and pump it into the
    pipe. Secondly, the discharge of the ground water is located at the
    deepest part of the tunnel. This is good for collection but will
    have about 175 PSI of head pressure. I know it is possible to pump
    with this head pressure but the pumps must be expensive and costly
    to maintain and operate. If possible consider a second pumping
    station at the target hall. I believe the initial investment will be
    worth it in costs later.

2.  ([Reviewer: S. Childress]{.underline}) No drip ceiling is currently
    specified for electronics racks (for muon monitoring, absorber,
    control) near the upstream of the access tunnel to the absorber.
    Possibly this might be dry; if not we need equipment protection from
    water.

3.  ([Reviewer: J. Hylen]{.underline}) Since overhead drip shields in
    the absorber vacuum pump area are not in Healy contract, must
    remember to put them in outfitting contract.

4.  ([Reviewer: D. Johnson]{.underline}) Since the ground water is
    mostly directed toward the MINOS hall, I think it may be a good idea
    to reconsider the third high level sump. We have had two bad sumps
    in a pit in the past.

5.  ([Reviewer: D. Plant]{.underline}) I have some questions and
    concerns about the water inflow mitigation for the NuMi tunnel. At
    one time I believe , there was at least one additional sump pumping
    station at the downstream end of the Carrier pipe. This pump was
    located around the target area and the water was exhausted up the
    target shaft. Using your numbers for water inflow, a pumping station
    there would alleviate \~33% of the total water inflow. The water
    pumped would be more easily removed at this depth, than if it were
    allowed to run clear to the end of the enclosure. Also in case of a
    total pumping failure at the far end, a pumping station at the
    target area would give you 33% longer "dry" time before we start to
    flood down in the MINOS area. If there are any problems with this ¾"
    water passage, they would not be near as severe if there were this
    upstream sump station.

6.  ([Reviewer: D. Plant]{.underline}) We may need to think about the
    mechanisms that may clog up this ¾" drain-way. We know we have brown
    micro organism that grow in and clog up many of our slower moving or
    intermittent lines regularly. Initial construction waste may also be
    a source of material that will plug up this system.

7.  ([Reviewer: D. Plant]{.underline}) I would suggest complete
    redundant systems at the MINOS area for the sump system. Completely
    separate pumps, feeds, piping, and circuits. This my be a weakness
    in the system that will be exploited by mother nature and Murphy's
    law. We have seen many "off beat" failures with pumping, piping and
    electrical system here in the last 25 years. It would not be to
    difficult to come up with a scenario that would flood the MINOS area
    without this complete backup system. One other possibility to
    mitigate this would be a larger/deeper sump area. We may consider
    enough water retention(sump pit) for 8-12 hours of sump system
    failure using the predicted inflow numbers.

8.  ([Reviewer: D. Plant]{.underline}) If all of the ground water is
    pumped out at this one point it will generate 1acre/ft each 40
    hours. Do we have a place or permits to dump that much water?

9.  ([Reviewer: D. Plant]{.underline}) There was mention of areas of the
    tunnel where no drip roof was to be installed and that stainless
    water pipes were to be installed. In the past we have experienced
    small water leaks that have leached through concrete and literally
    eaten holes in our SS vacuum and water pipes. I would strongly urge
    that no piping, cable tray, or bracketing be placed in what would be
    predicted to be a "wet" environment with N% wet wall or ceiling
    predicted. Also no lighting was to be installed in some of these
    same areas. If there is one pipe, one cable, one cable tray, or one
    piece of conduit in a tunnel, it will need servicing. We should
    consider some minimal incandescent lighting be installed. Workers
    may still be forced to carry there own light when any work or
    inspection access is done, but some minimal service should exist.

10. ([Reviewer: R. Rucinski]{.underline}) It was mentioned that the
    natural level of ground water at Fermilab has dropped due to NUMI
    water in-leak. It should be considered if this is having a
    collateral effect on other Fermilab cooling systems that use
    retention ponds. Is the level of cooling ponds dropping also,
    pulling silt or muck into the water which is accelerating the
    clogging of filters and equipment? I have heard one mention of the
    need to dredge the cooling water system that goes around the ring
    and an observance of more plugging problems in accelerator
    components. It should be considered whether it is related to the
    Numi tunneling activity.

11. ([Reviewer: R. Rucinski]{.underline}) I worry about the construction
    phase right now, before all the pump redundancy and back up is in
    place. Can a failure now cause flooding and drowning of workers?

# HVAC

[Presenter: L. Hammond]{.underline}

1.  ([Reviewer: D. Capista]{.underline}) The air system looks like it is
    about all that can be costed in this project. I am concerned that in
    order to meet the design of this system, the tunnel is assumed to
    have 3% wetting. I suspect this number represents the best the
    tunnel will be and during wet seasons I am concerned the wetting
    will be much higher, 10-15%? The backup plan for humidity is to
    install dehumidifiers. Where will this water discharge to? If it is
    put on the floor it will only evaporate back into the air. These
    tunnel environmental issues are very important and should be further
    reviewed. If the humidity in this tunnel is high, Magnet, power
    supply, and vacuum failures will occur at a much higher than normal
    frequency. The reliability of the experiment will suffer if the
    tunnel humidity design is not met.

2.  ([Reviewer: S. Childress]{.underline}) For the carrier tunnel, it
    would be very good to control condensation to the extent possible
    for equipment protection - especially the thin wall stainless
    carrier pipe. My understanding is that currently planned is a
    ventilation air duct moving air to an exhaust upstream of the
    carrier tunnel. Can we instead use the carrier tunnel itself as the
    duct? This should greatly control water in the lined portion.

3.  ([Reviewer: S. Childress]{.underline}) Do we have a back-up
    capability for tunnel heating - such as electric unit heaters - to
    keep above dew point when air circulation system is down?

4.  ([Reviewer: J. Hylen]{.underline}) Target Hall needs a humidity spec
    which will preserve crane. The current baseline air handling system
    may do this, but it would be good to clean up this spec.

5.  ([Reviewer: D. Plant]{.underline}) Is it a fact ( I may have missed
    this) that no humidity control will be implemented in the bypass
    tunnel. If equipment such as vacuum pumps are placed there it would
    be very rough on the equipment.

6.  ([Reviewer: D. Plant]{.underline}) The numbers used for wall
    wetting, 2%. Is this number generated by testing or calculation or
    supplied by an outside consultant? I the number is really 10% the
    existing humidity removal system may not keep up.

7.  ([Reviewer: R. Rucinski]{.underline}) Should there be a concern of a
    bad type of mold growing in the moist tunnel that could cause health
    problems?

8.  ([Reviewer: R. Rucinski]{.underline}) I would think it would be
    prudent to have some permanently mounted air sampling monitors,
    (like the kind used for confined space entry, ie. TMX410) in the
    areas or on the exhaust from areas that will be inhabited. There
    could be some unknown source of oxygen depletion or poisoness gas,
    or flammable gas. Expect the unexpected.

# Fire Protection

[Presenter: L. Hammond]{.underline}

1.  ([Reviewer: R. Rucinski]{.underline}) Will radiation interfere with
    the smoke detectors?

# Electrical Plan

[Presenter: B. Ducar]{.underline}

1.  ([Reviewer: D. Johnson]{.underline}) There was concern raised about
    being in complete darkness until the generator kicks in. We have
    used the "glow in the dark" paint or tape in a few areas around the
    lab and it seems to work well. It is charged by the normal lighting
    and is there when you need it. The cost was high years ago, but it
    may have come down by now. Once again, we have had backup
    generators/transfer switches fail when needed and during their
    scheduled test periods.

2.  ([Reviewer: R. Rucinski]{.underline}) From a simplistic point of
    view, water and electricity don\'t mix. Water and oxygen accelerate
    corrosion and water can conduct electricity. Basements are required
    to have ground fault circuit interupters to prevent electric shocks
    to users. What precautions are taken to prevent shock hazards to
    personnel?

# Enclosure Access

[Presenter: B. Ducar]{.underline}

1.  ([Reviewer: D. Johnson]{.underline}) I have been in several meetings
    with Bob Ducar and other where we have discussed the access
    requirements. We have made some progress, but need defined
    parameters to make decisions. I other words, see Phil's comments.

2.  ([Reviewer: P. Martin]{.underline}) There are two issues associated
    with the recommendations of Gage Babcock. The first is occupancy
    limits...that the total number of personnel working below grade in
    any area should not exceed the capacity of two elevator loads. There
    was brief discussion of when this requirement would become
    effective. In my opinion, there is no doubt that it should be at the
    time the NuMi project receives beneficial occupancy of the
    underground areas. That is, at the time the installation activities
    begin. However, this will place restrictions during the installation
    phase, and it is important for the project to understand these
    issues. The integrated installation schedule that has been discussed
    at previous reviews should be completed, with estimates of manpower
    for each installation task, by area (MI area, target area, etc.) so
    that the access issues can be understood.

3.  ([Reviewer: P. Martin]{.underline}) The other issue was the method
    of recording entry and exiting from the underground enclosure. This
    also needs to be in place at the time installation begins, and the
    means by which this will be done needs to be agreed upon among the
    various groups, including DOE, ES&H Section, and the NuMI project.

4.  ([Reviewer: D. Plant]{.underline}) Should cameras be use to inspect
    some of the more remote areas like the access for the carrier pipe?

# Radiation Safety

[Presenter: N. Grossman]{.underline}

1.  ([Reviewer: S. Childress]{.underline}) Projections for tritium
    levels in the horn raw systems exceed Lab guidelines by a very large
    factor (\~ 30,000). As I believe is already underway, detailed plans
    for working with these levels need to be compiled and input to a
    formalized review process. It is important to preclude major
    surprises occurring as we approach operation.

2.  ([Reviewer: J. Hylen]{.underline}) The second permanent stack
    monitor may more sensibly be placed on the hadron absorber vent than
    the primary beam carrier pipe vent.

3.  ([Reviewer: D. Plant]{.underline}) Some power supplies are cooled by
    the RAW water system. I would suspect that the rooms where these
    supplies are located will need to be radiation interlocked.