Text

Part 22 of 22, Diablo Canyon Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation, Submittal of Non-Proprietary Calculation Packages, Attachment 7.2 to Caculation 52.27.100.739, Revision 0
	ML020290396
Person / Time
Site:	Diablo Canyon
Issue date:	12/21/2001
From:	Womack L F; Pacific Gas & Electric Co
To:	; Document Control Desk, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
	+sispmjr200505, -nr, -RFPFR, DIL-01-004 52.27.100.739, Rev 0
	Download: ML020290396 (123)
	v • d • e

{{#Wiki_filter:69-20132 03/07/01 NUCLEAR POWER GENERATION CF3.ID4 ATTACHMENT

7.2 Index

No. 402 Binder No.TITLE: CALCULATION COVER SHEET Unit(s): 1 & 2 File No.: 52.27 Responsible Group: Civil Calculation No.: 52.27.100.739 No. of Pages 3 pages + Index (4 pages) + 1 Design Calculation YES [x] NO [1 Attachment (60 pages) System No. 42C Quality Classification Q (Safety-Related) Structure, System or Component: Independent Spent Fuel Storage Facility

Subject:

Determination of Seismic Coefficient Time Histories for Potential Sliding Masses on DCPP ISFSI Transport Route (GEO.DCPP.01.29, Rev. 0) Electronic calculation YES [ ] NO [ x I Computer Model Computer ID Program Location Date of Last Change Registered Engineer Stamp: Complete A or B A. Insert PE Stamp or Seal Below B. Insert stamp directing to the PE stamp or seal REGISTERED ENGINEERS' STAMPS AND EXPIRATION DATES ARE SHOWN ON DWG 063618 Expiration Date: NOTE 1: Update DCI promptly after approval. NOTE 2: Forward electronic calculation file to CCTG for uploading to EDMS.1 Page I of 3 69-20132 03/07/01 CF3.ID4 Page 2 of 3 ATTACHMENT

7.2 TITLE

CALCULATION COVER SHEET Rev Status Reason for Revision Prepared LBIE LBIE Check LBIE Checked Supervisor Registered No. By: Screen Method* A oyal Engineer Remarks Initials/ Yes/ Yes/ PSRC PSRC Initials/ Initials/ Signature/ LAN ID/ No/ No/ Mtg. Mtg. LAN ID/ LAN ID/ LAN ID/ ________.___ Date NA NA No. Date Date Date Date 0 F Acceptance of Geosciences Calc. AFT2 [ ] Yes [ ] Yes [ ] A N/A N/A N/A No. GEO.DCPP.01.29, Rev. 0. / 1 Calc. supports current edition of [ ] No [ ] No [ ] B 1OCFR72DCPPLicense [x]NA [x]NA [x]C S 4 , S Application to be reviewed by NRC prior to implementation. Prepared per CF3.ID17 requirements. [ ]Yes [ ]Yes [ ]A [ INo [ ]No [ ]B [ INA [ ]NA []C [ ]Yes [ ]Yes [ ]A [ ]No [ ]No [ ]B [ ]NA [ ]NA [IC *Check Method: A: Detailed Check, B: Alternate Method (note added pages), C: Critical Point Check CALC No. 52.27.100.739, RO 2 Pacific Gas and Electric Company 69-392(10/92) Engineering -Calculation Sheet Engineering Project: Diablo Canyon Unit ( )1 ( ) 2 (x) 1&2 CALC. NO. 52.27.100.739 11F811 REV. NO. 0 SHEET NO. 3 of 3 SUBJECT Determination of Seismic Coefficient Time Histories for Potential Sliding Masses on DCPP ISFSI Transport Route MADE BY A. Tafoya $3 DATE 12/13/01 CHECKED BY N/A DATE Table of Contents: Item Type 1 Index Title Cross-index (For Information Only)Page Numbers 1-4 2 Attachment A Determination of Seismic Coefficient Time Histories for Potential Sliding Masses on DCPP ISFSI Transport Route 1 -60 3 Pacific Gas and Electric Company 69-392(10/92) Engineering -Calculation Sheet Engineering Project: Diablo Canyon Unit ( )1 ( ) 2 (x) 1&2 CALM. NO. 52.27.100.739 REV. NO. 0 SHEET NO. 1-1 of 4 SUBJECT Determination of Seismic Coefficient Time Histories for Potential Sliding Masses on DCPP ISFSI Transport Route MADE BY A. TafoyaJ' DATE 12/13/01 CHECKED BY N/A DATE 1- This table cross references between Geosciences calculation numbers and DCPP (Civil Group's) calculation numbers. This section is For Information Only. Cross-Index (For Information Only) Item Geoscience CaIc. Title PG&E CaIc. Comments No. No. No. 1 GEO.DCPP.01.01 Development of Young's 52.27.100.711 Modulus and Poisson's Ratios for DCPP ISFSI Based on Field Data 2 GEO.DCPP.01.02 Determination of 52.27.100.712 Probabilistically Reduced Peak Bedrock Accelerations for DCPP ISFSI Transporter Analyses 3 GEO.DCPP.01.03 Development of Allowable 52.27.100.713 Bearing Capacity for DCPP ISFSI Pad and CTF Stability Analyses 4 GEO.DCPP.01.04 Methodology for 52.27.100.714 Determining Sliding Resistance Along Base of DCPP ISFSI Pads 5 GEO.DCPP.01.05 Determination of 52.27.100.715 Pseudostatic Acceleration Coefficient for Use in DCPP ISFSI Cutslope Stability Analyses 6 GEO.DCPP.01.06 Development of Lateral 52 27.100.716 Bearing Capacity for DCPP CTF Stability Analyses 7 GEO.DCPP.01.07 Development of Coefficient 52.27.100.717 of Subgrade Reaction for DCPP ISFSI Pad Stability Checks 8 GEO.DCPP.01.08 Determination of Rock 52.27.100.718 Anchor Design Parameters for DCPP ISFSI Cutslope 9 GEO.DCPP.01.09 Determination of 52.27.100.719 Calculation to be Applicability of Rock Elastic replaced by letter Stress-Strain Values to Calculated Strains Under I 1 fl Pacific Gas and Electric Company 69-392(10/92) Engineering -Calculation Sheet Engineering Project: Diablo Canyon Unit ( )1 ( ) 2 ( x ) 1&2 CALC. NO. 52.27.100.739 11761 REV. NO. 0 SHEET NO. 1-2 of 4 SUBJECT Determination of Seismic Coefficient Time Histories for Potential Sliding Masses on DCPP ISFSI Transport Route MADE BY A. Tafoya V DATE 12/13/01 CHECKED BY N/A DATE Cross-Index (For Information Only) Item Geoscience Calc. Title PG&E Calc. Comments No. No. No. DCPP ISFSI Pad 10 GEO.DCPP.01.10 Determination of SSER 34 52.27.100.720 Long Period Spectral Values 11 GEO.DCPP.01.11 Development of ISFSI 52.27.100.721 Spectra 12 GEO.DCPP.01.12 Development of Fling 52.27.100.722 Model for Diablo Canyon ISFSI 13 GEO.DCPP.01.13 Development of Spectrum 52.27.100.723 Compatible Time Histories 14 GEO.DCPP.01.14 Development of Time 52.27.100.724 Histories with Fling 15 GEO.DCPP.01.15 Development of Young's 52.27.100.725 Modulus and Poisson's Ratio Values for DCPP ISFSI Based on Laboratory Data 16 GEO.DCPP.01.16 Development of Strength 52.27.100.726 Envelopes for Non-jointed Rock at DCPP ISFSI Based on Laboratory Data 17. GEO.DCPP.01.17 Determination of Mean and 52.27.100.727 Standard Deviation of Unconfined Compression Strengths for Hard Rock at DCPP ISFSI Based on Laboratory Tests 18 GEO.DCPP.01.18 Determination of Basic 52.27.100.728 Friction Angle Along Rock Discontinuities at DCPP ISFSI Based on Laboratory Tests 19 GEO.DCPP.01.19 Development of Strength 52.27.100.729 Envelopes for Jointed Rock Mass at DCPP ISFSI Using 1 2 Pacific Gas and Electric Company 69-392(10/92) Engineering -Calculation Sheet Engineering Project: Diablo Canyon Unit ( )1 ( ) 2 ( x ) 1&2 CALC. NO. 52.27.100.739 REV. NO. 0 SHEET NO. 1-3 of 4 SUBJECT Determination of Seismic Coefficient Time Histories for Potential Sliding Masses on DCPP ISFSI Transport Route MADE BY A. Tafoya 1 DATE 12/13/01 CHECKED BY N/A DATE Cross-Index (For Information Only) Item Geoscience Calc. Title PG&E Calc. Comments No. No. No. Hoek-Brown Equations 20 GEO.DCPP.01.20 Development of Strength 52.27.100.730 Envelopes for Shallow Discontinuities at DCPP ISFSI Using Barton Equations 21 GEO.DCPP.01.21 Analysis of Bedrock 52.27.100.731 Stratigraphy and Geologic Structure at the DCPP ISFSI Site 22 GEO.DCPP.01.22 Kinematic Stability Analysis 52.27.100.732 for Cutslopes at DCPP ISFSI Site 23 GEO.DCPP.01.23 Pseudostatic Wedge 52.27.100.733 Analyses of DCPP ISFSI Cutslopes (SWEDGE Analysis) 24 GEO.DCPP.01.24 Stability and Yield 52.27.100.734 Acceleration Analysis of Cross Section I-I' 25 GEO.DCPP.01.25 Determination of Seismic 52.27.100.735 Coefficient Time Histories for Potential Siding Masses Above Cut Slopes Behind ISFSI Pad 26 GEO.DCPP.01.26 Determination of Potential 52.27.100.736 Earthquake-Induced Displacements of Potential Sliding Masses on DCPP ISFSI Slope 27 GEO.DCPP.01.27 Cold Machine Shop 52.27.100.737 Retaining Wall Stability 28 GEO.DCPP.01.28 Stability and Yield 52.27.100.738 Acceleration Analysis of Potential Sliding Masses Along DCPP ISFSI Transport Route I 3 Pacific Gas and Electric Company Engineering -Calculation Sheet Project: Diablo Canyon Unit ( )1 ( )2 (x) 1&2 CALC. NO.69-392(10/92) Engineering 52.27.100.739 11111'1l,10 REV. NO. 0 SHEET NO. 1-4 of 4 SUBJECT Determination of Seismic Coefficient Time Histories for Potential Sliding Masses on DCPP ISFSI Transport Route MADE BY A. TafoyaP DATE 12/13/01 CHECKED BY N/A DATE Cross-Index (For Information Only)Item Geoscience Calc. Title PG&E Cale. Comments No. No. No. 29 GEO.DCPP.01.29 Determination of Seismic 52.27.100.739 Coefficient Time Histories for Potential Sliding Masses on DCPP ISFSI Transport Route 30 GEO.DCPP.01.30 Determination of Potential 52.27.100.740 Earthquake-Induced Displacements of Potential Sliding Masses Along DCPP ISFSI Transport Route 31 GEO.DCPP.01.31 Development of Strength 52.27.100.741 Envelopes for Clay Beds at DCPP ISFSI 32 GEO.DCPP.01.32 Verification of Computer 52.27.100.742 Program SPCTLR.EXE 33 GEO.DCPP.01.33 Verification of Program 52.27.100.743 UTEXAS3 34 GEO.DCPP.01.34 Verification of Computer 52.27.100.744 Code -QUAD4M 35 GEO.DCPP.01.35 Verification of Computer 52.27.100.745 Code DEFORMP 36 GEO.DCPP.01.36 Reserved 52.27.100.746 37 GEO.DCPP.01.37 Development of Freefield 52.27.100.747 Ground Motion Storage Cask Spectra and Time Histories for the Used Fuel Storage Project 4 Calculation 52.27.100.739, Rev. 0, Attachment A, Pg. I of 60 FILE No. 078 11z27 '01 17:02 ID:PG&E GEOSCIENCES DEPT 415 973 5778'OM : Cluff -San Francisco FILE No. 077 11Z27 '01 16:51 ID:PG&E GEOSCIENCES DEPT PG&E Qeoscienees Department Departmental Calculation Procedure, NOU.27.2001 6:22PM P 2 PHONE NO. : 415 564 6697 415 973 5778 PAGE 3 Number: GF.O,00I ki Revision: H- it-to(k Title: Design Calculation Cover Sheet PACMPIC JGA AjqND EL2CTIUtC CONDANy GEOSCEENCES DEPARTMENT CALCULATION DOCUME'NT cair- Number GEO.DCPP.01.29 Revision 0 Date 11/2f/2oo0 Calc Pages:

5 Verification Method: See q,.tm-mz.

-& Verification Pages: See Summeary: -_ 1, I -t,1.0&I a,111bo li TITLE:_ Determinatio. o'FSjiarnji CoofAitnTh, HJjt.urlcs lotb Porete. Eiding Masses on DCPP ISPSa Transport Route PREPARED BY: VERIFIED BY: APPROVED BY: I DATE I I/q/~ Prdimnecd Name Onation aOrganization Q n DATE n DATr2 z/ ?~rinz~anieOrganization SS. CLUPF N- -'. -%°.. .., ./ -.CERTIFP ",. .P ENGINEER .-7 =." 0, GECLO...I PAGE 2 Calculation 52.27.100.739, Rev. 0, Attachment A, Pg. Z of 60 PG&E Geosciences Department Departmental Calculation Procedure Title: Design Calculation Cover Sheet PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY GEOSCIENCES DEPARTMENT CALCULATION DOCUMENT Calc Number GEO.DCPP.01.29 Revision 0 Date 11/24/2001 Calc Pages: 5 25 Verification Method: See Summary: A, Verification Pages: See Summary _ I ,'TITLE: Determination of Seismic Coefficient Time Histories for Potential Sliding Masses on DCPP ISFSI Transport Route PREPARED BY: DATE 1 1 /Z /ZHriL ta WName Printed Name O"rgania -To R IX Organization VERIFIED BY: APPROVED BY: Organization Printed N4ame Printed Name DATE Organization Number: Revision: GEO.001 1+DATE Calculation 52.27.100.739, Rev. 0, Attachment A, Pg. 'S of 60 CALCULATION PACKAGE GEO.DCPP.01.29 REVISION 0 Calculation Title: Determination of Seismic Coefficient Time Histories for Potential Sliding Masses on DCPP ISFSI Transport Route Calculation No.: GEO.DCPP.01.29 Revision No.: 0 Calculation Author: Zhi-Liang Wang Calculation Date: 11/21/01 PURPOSE The purpose of this calculation package is to provide the seismic responses and seismic coefficient time histories for potential sliding masses along DCPP ISFSI transport route. Representative locations along the transport route were identified in calculation package GEO.DCPP.01.21, Revision 1 (see Attachment 1). The calculations reported in this package were performed in accordance with the requirements of Geomatrix Consultants, Inc. Work Plan, Revision 2 (dated December 8, 2000), entitled "Laboratory Testing of Soil and Rock Samples, Slope Stability Analyses, and Excavation Design for Diablo Canyon Power Plant Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation Site." The analyses include two dimensional finite element analyses of two representative sections along the transport route. The results of these analyses will be used in calculation package GEO.DCPP.01.30, Revision 0, to estimate earthquake-induced permanent displacements and seismic stability of potential sliding masses along the transport route. Results of estimated ground motions also will be used to evaluate the stability of the transporter to vibratory ground motions. ASSUMPTION Not applicable. INPUT 1. Plan and three cross sections along the transport route (Sections D-D', E-E', and L-L'): Transmittal from PG&E Geosciences, dated November 12, 2001 (Attachment

1) 2. Five sets of rock motions originating on the Hosgri fault: Transmittal from PG&E Geosciences dated September 28, 2001, as confirmed in Attachment 3.1:\Project\6000s\6427.006\geo.dcpp.01.29\GEO.DCPP.01.29.doc Page 1 of 58 Calculation 52.27.100.739, Rev. 0, Attachment A, Pg. +/- of 60 CALCULATION PACKAGE GEO.DCPP.01.29 REVISION 0 3. Azimuths of three cross-sections along transporter route: Transmittal from PG&E Geosciences, dated November 12, 2001 (Attachment 1). 4. Orientation (azimuth) of the strike of the Hosgri fault: Transmittal from William Lettis & Associates dated August 23, 2001, as confirmed in Attachment

7. 5. Direction of positive fault parallel component on Hosgri fault (Attachment 6). 6. Rotated motions from Sets 5 and 6, from calculation package GEO.DCPP.01.30, Revision 0. 7. Reduced peak bedrock acceleration of 0.15g (Transmittal of additional inputs for DCPP ISFSI Transport Route Analysis):

Transmittal from PG&E Geosciences dated November 19, 2001 (Attachment

8) Selection of Sections for Dynamic Finite Element Analyses Three cross sections along the transport route (Sections D-D', E-E', and L-L') were provided by PG&E Geosciences (see Attachment 1). These are the powerblock section (section L-L'), the warehouse section (section D-D'), and the parking lot section (section E-E'). The powerblock section L-L' represents the typical slope profile above power block unites I and 2. This section also has a thick colluvium deposit on the slope, and was selected for the dynamic analyses to estimate the seismic amplification effects along the colluvium slope. The parking lot section E-E', between elevation 180 feet and 220 feet, is generally similar to the profile in the vicinity of the transport route at section D-D' (the warehouse section).

Section E-E' also has a thicker colluvium deposit than that at section D-D', and was selected for the dynamic analyses. It is estimated that seismic amplification effects at section E-E' could be higher than those at section D-D'. Dynamic Properties for Finite Element Analyses Properties required for the dynamic finite element analyses include the unit weight, shear modulus at low shear strain, G., and relationships describing the modulus reduction and damping ratio increase, with increasing shear strains. Unit weights Unit weights of rock mass were based on field investigations for the ISFSI site as reported in Attachment

6. The unit weights for the colluvium fan underlying the slope above Unit 2 (section L-L'), and the marine terrace deposit underlying the colluvium at sections D-D'I:\Project\6000s\6427.006\geo.dcpp.01.29\GEO.DCPP.01.29.doc Page 2 of 58 Calculation 52.27.100.739, Rev. 0, Attachment A, Pg. 5 of 60 CALCULATION PACKAGE GEO.DCPP.01.29 REVISION 0 and E-E', were reported in an assessment of slope stability near Diablo Canyon power plant (PG&E, 1997). These unit weights are presented in Table 1 (from PG&E, 1997). Shear Wave Velocity and Shear Modulus at Low Strain Shear modulus values at low strain (Gmax) can either be measured in the laboratory using resonant column tests or obtained from field shear wave velocity measurements.

When available, estimates of Gm.a based on field shear-wave velocity measurements are preferable to laboratory test data. The shear modulus at low strain is related to the shear wave velocity by the following relationship: G.. x= -L( V, )2 g where: = shear modulus at low strain y = unit weight of material g = acceleration due to gravity V, = shear wave velocity Results of shear wave velocity measurements performed at the power block area were presented in the Long Term Seismic Program report (PG&E, 1989). Additional shear-wave velocity measurements were made in the slope behind the ISFSI pad during the current investigation. The results of these field measurements are presented in calculation package GEO.DCPP.01.21, Revision 1. A copy of the vanation of average shear wave velocity with depth in two borings on the slope above the ISFSI pad is shown in Attachment

6. Based on the results of these investigations, a shear-wave velocity distribution with depth was selected for use in the dynamic analyses, and is shown in Table 2 (reproduced from PG&E's 1997 study) and on the finite element representations for sections L-L' and E-E" in Figures 1 and 2, respectively.

Shear wave velocities for the Pleistocene colluvium and the marine terrace deposit were estimated based on values reported in PG&E's 1997 study, and are presented in Table 2. Modulus Reduction and Damping Relationships with Strain In the iterative equivalent-linear procedure used in QUAD4M, relationships of the variation of modulus reduction factor and damping ratio with shear strain are used to select IAProject\6000s\6427.006\geo.dcpp.01.29\GEO.DCPP.01.29.doc Page 3 of 58 Calculation 52.27.100.739, Rev. 0, Attachment A, Pg. (, of 60 CALCULATION PACKAGE GEO.DCPP.01.29 REVISION 0 strain-compatible shear moduli and damping ratios for each element. The variation of shear modulus reduction factor and damping ratio with shear strain for rock in the vicinity of the power block area was estimated on the basis of cyclic triaxial and resonant column tests performed on rock cores in 1978. The data are presented on Figures 3 and 4, from Attachment 6, for the modulus reduction factor and damping ratio, respectively. The modulus reduction curve shown on Figure 3 (identified as rock curve from the manual of the program SHAKE) was selected for the current analysis, and roughly corresponds to the middle of the range obtained from tests on the DCPP rock cores shown on Figure 4 (reported in the LTSP 1989 report). For the variation of damping ratio with shear strain, the curve defining the lower bound of the shaded zone for the DCPP rock, was selected for use in the current analysis. Modulus and damping curves for the Pleistocene colluvium and marine terrace deposits were based on relationships for similar soils published in the literature and reported in PG&E's 1997 study. These relationships are also listed in Table 2. METHODOLOGY Earthquake-induced seismic coefficient time histories (and their peak values k~x) for potential sliding masses within the selected profiles were computed using the two dimensional dynamic finite element analysis program QUAD4M (Hudson and others, 1994). This is a time-step analysis that incorporates a Rayleigh damping approach, and allows the use of different damping ratios in different elements. The program QUAD4M was verified in calculation package GEO.DCPP.01.34, Revision 1. The program uses equivalent linear strain-dependent modulus and damping properties and an iterative procedure to estimate the non-linear strain-dependent soil and rock properties. Selection of Input Motions Geosciences department of PG&E developed five sets of possible earthquake rock motions for the ISFSI site (Attachment 2 as confirmed in Attachment

3) to be used as input to the analyses.

These motions are estimated to originate on the Hosgri fault about 4.5 km west of the plant site. Both fault normal and fault parallel components were determined for each of the five sets of motions. The fault parallel component incorporated the fling effect and its I:\Project\6000s\6427.006\geo.dcpp.01.29\GEO.DCPP.01.29.doc Page 4 of 58 Calculation 52.27.100.739, Rev. 0, Attachment A, Pg. q_ of 60 CALCULATION PACKAGE GEO.DCPP.01.29 REVISION 0 positive direction was specified in the southeasterly fault direction (see Attachment 5, as confirmed in Attachment 6). The fault normal component has a direction normal to the fault, and its polarity can be either positive or negative depending on the assumed location of the initiation of the rupture. Based on Attachments 1 and 4 (as confirmed in Attachment 7), the direction of movement along cross section L-L" (which as shown in Figure 5 has an azimuth of 67 degrees) is 91 degrees (counter-clock wise) from the direction of the strike of the Hosgri fault. The fault normal component can be at + 90 degrees from fault parallel direction, that is 91+90 = 181 (or 91-90 = 1) degrees from the direction of section L-L'. From these relations, the ground motion component along section L-L' can be determined from the specified components along the fault normal and fault parallel directions. Similar computations are made for section E-E' that has an azimuth of 35 degrees, and thus is 123 degrees (counter clock wise) from the direction of the positive fault parallel component of the Hosgri fault. The computed motions along the directions of sections L-L' and E-E" will be referred to as the rotated components. The rotated component along each of the specified section is the sum of the projections of the fault normal and fault parallel components along the direction of the section (Figure 5). The formulation is as follows: Rot' = F, cos(0) + FN sin(o) and Rot- = Fp cos(0) -FNsin(0) in which the Fp and FN are fault parallel and fault normal components of the acceleration time-histories, Rot' is the component along the section when considering the positive fault normal component, and Rot is the component along the section when considering the negative fault normal component. 0 is the angle between up-slope direction of the section analyzed and the fault parallel direction (to the southeast). The five sets of earthquake motions on the Hosgri fault are now rotated to earthquake motions along the up-slope direction of cross sections L-L' and E-E'. For a given angle between the analyzed section and the fault direction, there are 10 rotated earthquake motions, because for each set, the positive and negative directions of the fault normal component are considered separately. I:\Project\6000s\6427.006\geo.dcpp.01.29\GEO.DCPP.01.29.doc Page 5 of 58 Calculation 52.27.100.739, Rev. 0, Attachment A, Pg. '_ of 60 CALCULATION PACKAGE GEO.DCPP.01.29 REVISION 0 The response of the slopes were computed using, as input, control motions specified at the horizontal ground surface in the free field away from the toe of the slope. The originally developed five sets of earthquake motions all fit the ISFSI design spectrum. These motions were first rotated to the directions of the two cross sections analyzed as described above. Then, approximate earthquake-induced displacements were initially computed for each set using a rigid sliding block model based on the Newmark approach (see calculation package GEO.DCPP.01.30, Revision 0). The set of rotated motions that produced the highest deformation in the rigid sliding block analysis was selected as input motions for the two dimensional dynamic response analyses. For an assumed yield acceleration of 0.5g (based on the results from calculation package GEO.DCPP.01.28, Revision 0), rotated motions from sets 5 and 6 (both with a negative fault normal component) provided the greatest deformation. Thus, two ground motion sets (5 and 6) were selected as the input motions and used for the dynamic analyses. The results of the dynamic response analysis as described in this calculation and the subsequent deformation analyses (described in calculation package GEO.DCPP.01.30, Revision 0) indicated that the input motion for set 5 produced the largest deformations of the two sets. Accordingly, the detailed results for ground motion set 5 are only presented in this calculation. However, because the direction of section L-L' is 91 degrees from the direction of the fault, the rotated component along this section is almost identical to the fault normal component (with a reversed polarity). The rotated acceleration time histories (from set 5) along the directions of sections E-E' and L-L' are presented in Figures 6 and 7, respectively. The positive values indicate motions in the up-slope direction of the section. The acceleration response spectra of the two motions are presented on Figures 8 and 9, for sections L-L' and E-E', respectively. In these two figures, the response spectra of the original fault normal and fault parallel components of set 5 are also shown for comparison. The rotated motions along the sections show some variations from the originally developed fault normal and fault parallel components. Because the base of the finite element mesh is at a depth of 300 feet, and because the QUAD4M program only allows the input motion to be applied at the base, the base motion I:Project\6000s\6427.006\geo.dcpp.01.29\GEO.DCPP.01.29.doc Page 6 of 58 Calculation 52.27.100.739, Rev. 0, Attachment A, Pg. I of 60 CALCULATION PACKAGE GEO.DCPP.01.29 REVISION 0 was first computed by deconvolving the surface ground motion. The control motions specified at the ground surface (in the free field beyond the toe of the slope) were deconvolved using a one-dimensional wave propagation analysis, SHAKE (Schnabel, Lysmer, and Seed, 1972, Geomatrix version, 1995, see SOFTWARE section), to obtain input motions at the level of the base of the two-dimensional finite-element model. Calculation package GEO.DCPP.01.34 shows that, when using the base motion developed from SHAKE, the program QUAD4M can produce reasonably similar surface ground motions in the free field. This calculation package verified that the deconvolved motions could be specified as input (outcropping) motions at the base of the two-dimensional model. The rock below this depth was modeled as an elastic half-space that has the same shear wave velocity as the rock just above it. Finite Element Model and Boundary Conditions Finite element representations of the slope profiles along sections L-L' and E-E' are shown in Figures 1 and 2, respectively. The minimum thickness of the mesh layer (8 feet) was selected to allow propagation of shear waves having frequencies up to 25 Hz. The bedrock underlying the slope was modeled to a depth of about 300 feet below the horizontal free field near the toe of the slope. The base of the finite element mesh is treated as an elastic half space. For the nodes at the two lateral boundaries, the dynamic displacement is only allowed in the horizontal direction when the horizontal input motion is applied at the base. A better choice is to use transmitting boundaries on both sides to avoid wave reflections from the vertical boundary. However, the program QUAD4M does not have this option. In order to avoid unrealistic reflections from the lateral boundaries, the lateral boundaries were extended horizontally to a significant distance on both sides of the transport route. The finite element mesh was extended in the horizontal free field, a distance of about 600 to 700 feet from the toe of the slope. In the up-slope direction, the profiles were modeled for a distance of about 1000 to 1100 feet beyond the edge of the transport route (Reservoir Road). Beyond that point, the ground surface was leveled-off and extended horizontally an additional 550 feet (for section L-L') and 800 feet (for section E-E') where the lateral boundary was placed. Because the response is needed for potential sliding masses in the vicinity of the transport route, the laterally extended portion of the mesh does not I:Project\6000s\6427.006\geo.dcpp.01.29\GEO.DCPP.01.29.doc Page 7 of 58 Calculation 52.27.100.739, Rev. 0, Attachment A, Pg. to_ of 60 CALCULATION PACKAGE GEO.DCPP.01.29 REVISION 0 accurately match the topography beyond a 1000 feet from the edge of Reservoir Road. The extended boundary was used only to improve the numerical accuracy of the response in the immediate vicinity of the transport route, and not to model the response of the entire hillside. SOFTWARE Computer program QUAD4M was verified in calculation package GEO.DCPP.01.34. Computer program SHAKE (Schnabel, Lysmer, and Seed, 1972, Geomatrix version, 1995) was used to compute base motions in this calculation package. Two modified versions of SHAKE, i.e., SHAKE91 (by I.M. Idriss and Joseph I. Sun, 1992), and SHAKE96S (by Tseng and Hamasaki, 1996) were also used to calculate the base motion from input motion set 5 for verification purpose. The results from the above three slightly modified versions of the program SHAKE were almost identical. The results of these verification runs are included in the enclosed compact disc. ANALYSES RESULTS Dynamic analyses were performed at sections E-E' and L-L' for three purposes: (a) to estimate earthquake-induced average accelerations within the profiles for evaluating the stability of typical slopes along the transport route at the full level of ISFSI design ground motions; (b) to estimate rock-to-soil amplification of ground motions at reduced levels of ground motion; and (c) to estimate the profile response at reduced levels of ground motions for evaluating the stability of the road fill wedges including the transport load. The reduced levels of ground motions were specified as ISFSI input rock motions scaled to a peak ground acceleration of 0.15g, based on the results of calculation package GEO.DCPP.01.02 (see Attachment 8). Response at ISFSI Design Ground Motion Levels The results of the dynamic analyses provide a distribution of the earthquake-induced accelerations at all nodal points of the modeled slope profile. The analyses also provide I:\Project\6000s\6427.006\geo.dcpp.01.29\GEO.DCPP.01.29.doc Page 8 of 58 Calculation 52.27.100.739, Rev. 0, Attachment A, Pg. it of 60 CALCULATION PACKAGE GEO.DCPP.01.29 REVISION 0 estimates of the time history of the average induced acceleration within a specified potential sliding mass. Using the rotated input motion developed from set 5, peak accelerations within the slope (in the vicinity of the transport route) were computed. The contours of peak accelerations in the soil deposit are presented in Figures 10 and 11 for sections L-L' and E-E', respectively. As expected, the input motion was significantly amplified in the colluvium deposit within the slope, with computed peak surface accelerations of about 1.7g and 2.Og for sections L-L' and E-E', respectively. Acceleration time histories were also calculated for a number of locations within the specified potential sliding masses as shown in Figures 12 and 13, for the two sections analyzed. These sliding masses have the least computed yield accelerations as estimated from calculation package GEO.DCPP.01.28, Revision 0. Acceleration time histories were averaged for each potential sliding mass (using the acceleration time histories computed at locations inside the mass) at sections L-L' and E-E" and are presented in Figure 14. The computed peak accelerations are of the order of 1.1 g to 1.2 g. This shows an amplification of peak acceleration of about 32 percent compared to the input bedrock motions. The time histories shown in these figures will be used to estimate earthquake-induced deformations within these potential sliding masses as described in calculation package GEO.DCPP.01.30, Revision 0. Response at Reduced Ground Motion Levels Dynamic analyses similar to those described above were performed, but in this case the ISFSI design rock motions were scaled to a peak acceleration of 0.15g. The computed peak accelerations along the surface of the slope are presented in Figures 15 and 16 for sections L-L' and E-E' respectively. The input motions were amplified mainly in the colluvium zones along the slopes of both sections. The greatest computed surface accelerations are of the order of 0.26g and 0.31g at sections L-L' and E-E', respectively. For comparison, the computed peak surface accelerations for the response using the full design input motions are also shown in Figures 15 and 16.IAProject\6000s\6427.006\geo.dcpp.01.29\GEO.DCPP.01.29.doc Page 9 of 58 Calculation 52.27.100.739, Rev. 0, Attachment A, Pg. 3i of 60 CALCULATION PACKAGE GEO.DCPP.01.29 REVISION 0 Amplification factors for peak accelerations along the slope surface (normalized to the peak input bedrock acceleration in the free-field) were computed for the two slope surfaces and are presented in Figures 17 and 18 for section L-L' and E-E', respectively. For section L-L', the maximum amplification factor is less than 2. For section E-E', the maximum amplification factor is less than 2.2. For comparison, amplification factors were also computed for the response using the full design input motions and are shown by solid lines in Figures 17 and 18. The maximum amplification factors for the full ground motions are of the same order of magnitude as those computed using reduced input motion with peak acceleration of 0.15g. Because the computed peak accelerations for the reduced input motions are lower than the estimated yield accelerations for the potential sliding surfaces (computed in calculation package GEO.DCPP.01.28, Revision 0), the expected earthquake-induced displacements will be negligible. Accordingly, there was no need to compute the corresponding acceleration time histories for potential sliding masses for this level of input motion. REFERENCES

1. Geomatrix Consultants, Inc. Work Plan, Laboratory Testing of Soil and Rock Samples, Slope Stability Analyses, and Excavation Design for Diablo Canyon Power Plant Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation Site, Revision 2, dated December 8, 2000. 2. Geosciences Calculation Package GEO.DCPP.O1.21, revision 1, Analysis of Bedrock Stratigraphy and Geologic Structure at the DCPP ISFSI Site. 3. Geosciences Calculation Package GEO.DCPP.01.28, revision 0, Stability and Yield Acceleration Analysis of Potential Sliding Masses Along DCPP ISFSI Transport Route. 4. Geosciences Calculation Package GEO.DCPP.01.30, revision 0, Determination of Earthquake-Induced Displacements of Potential Slides Masses Along DCPP ISFSI Transport Route (Newmark Analysis).

5. Geosciences Calculation Package GEO.DCPP.01.34, revision 1, Verification of QUAD4M computer code. 6. Hamasaki, D., and Tseng, W.S., 1996, SHAKE96S, CEC.I:Project\6000s\6427.006\geo.dcpp.01.29\GEO.DCPP.01.29.doc Page 10 of 58 Calculation 52.27.100.739, Rev. 0, Attachment A, Pg. Q of 60 CALCULATION PACKAGE GEO.DCPP.01.29 REVISION 0 7. Hudson, M., Idriss, I.M. and Beikae, M, 1994, QUAD4M (program and User's manual) Center for Geotechnical Modeling, Department of Civil & Environmental Engineering, University of California, Davis, California.

8. Idriss, I.M., and Sun, Joseph I., 1992, User's manual for SHAKE91, program modified based on the original SHAKE program published in December 1972 by Schnabel, Lysmer, and Seed, Center for Geotechnical Modeling, Department of Civil & Environmental Engineering, University of California, Davis, California.

November 1992. 9. PG&E, 1989, Diablo Canyon Long Term Seismic Program, Response to NRC Question 19 dated December 19. 10. PG&E, 1997, Assessment of slope stability near the Diablo Canyon Power Plant, Response to NRC request of January 31, 1997. 11. Schnabel, P.B., Lysmer. J. and Seed, H.B., SHAKE, A computer program for earthquake response analysis of horizontally layered sites, EERC Report No. 72-12, University of California, Berkeley, December. ATTACHMENTS

1. 11/12/01, PG&E Geosciences, Robert K. White, Re: Forwarding of approved plan and cross-sections D-D', E-E', and L-L' for DCPP ISFSI transport route stability analyses 2. 09/28/2001, PG&E Geosciences, Robert K. White, Re: Confirmation of transmittal of inputs for DCPP ISFSI slope stability analyses.

3. 10/31/01, PG&E Geosciences, Robert K. White, Re: Confirmation of preliminary inputs to calculations for DCPP ISFSI site. 4. 08/23/2001, William Lettis & Associates.

Inc.. Jeff Bachhuber, Re: Revised Estimates for Hosgri Fault Azimuth. DCPP ISFSI Project.

5. 10/18/2001, PG&E Geosciences, Joseph Sun, Re: Positive direction of the fault parallel component time history on the Hosgn fault. 6. 10/25/2001, PG&E Geosciences, Robert White, Re: Input parameters for calculations, 7. 11/1/2001, PG&E Geosciences, Robert White, Re: Confirmation of additional inputs to calculations for DCPP ISFSI site.I:\Project\6000s\6427.006\geo.dcpp.01.29\GEO.DCPP.01.29.doc Page 11 of 58 Calculation 52.27.100.739, Rev. 0, Attachment A, Pg. 14A of 60 CALCULATION PACKAGE GEO.DCPP.01.29 REVISION 0 8. 11/19/01, PG&E Geosciences, Robert K. White, Re: Transmittal of additional inputs for DCPP ISFSI transport route analysis.

ENCLOSURE CD, entitled, "Data Files for Calculation Package GEO.DCPP.01.29" TABLE 1 SOIL PARAMETERS FOR STABILITY ANALYSIS SLOPE SECTIONS A-A' AND C-C' DIABLO CANYON POWER PLANT SITE (From PG&E, 1997) Density Shear Strength Geologic In-Place Parameters Unit Description (pcf) Topsoil Organic CLAY, silty (CH) 115 S 0 = 1200 psf (section B-B' only) Qc Young colluvium, soft to stiff 115 S, = 1500 psf CLAY, silty and sandy (CH-CL) Qpf Pleistocene colluvial fan deposits, 115 Su = 3000 psf CLAY to SILT, gravelly and sandy Qptm Pleistocene marine terrace deposits, 130 c = 0; poorly graded SAND to =400 GRAVEL Tofb Miocene Obispo Formation, sandy 140 C = 4000 psf; siltstone and silty sandstone, local = 350 chert, blocky, Bedrock I:\roject\6000s\6427.006\geo.dcpp.0 1.29\GEO.DCPP.0 1.29.doc Page 12 of 58 Calculation 52.27.100.739, Rev. 0, Attachment A, Pg. 15 of 60 I I:\Project\6000s\6427.006\geo.dcpp.01.29\GEO.DCPP.01.29.doc CALCULATION PACKAGE GEO.DCPP.0 1.29 REVISION 0 TABLE 2 MATERIAL PROPERTIES FOR DYNAMIC FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS, CUT SLOPE EAST OF UNIT 2, PROFILE A-A', DIABLO CANYON POWER PLANT (From PG&E, 1997) Layer Unit Shear Poisson's Modulus and Damping Material and Weight Wave Ratio Relationships Thikness' (pcf) Velocity (h) _ (fps) Qc -Recent Surface 115 600 0.35 Clay (PI= 15), Colluvium Layer Vucetic & Dobry, 19912 Qpf -Pleistocene below Qc 115 1200 0.35 Clay (PI=15), Colluvium Vucetic & Dobry,1991 Qtm -Marine between Qpf 130 1500 0.45 Sand (Upper Bound Modulus and Terrace Deposit and Tofb Lower Bound Damping), Seed & Idriss,1970 3 Tofb -Obispo below Qpf and 140 2000 0.4 Rock, LTSP SSI analysis, Formation Qtm, h=15 feet PG&E, 1988 Bedrock Obispo Formation h=20 feet 140 3300 0.4 Same Bedrock Obispo Formation h= 125 feet 145 4000 0.37 Same Bedrock Obispo Formation h=100 feet 150 4800 0.35 Same Bedrock I _I Obispo Formation h=200 feet 150 5900 0.22 Same Bedrock Elastic Half Space below 150 5900 -linear Elevation. -300 feet Thickness below horizontal ground surface in free field 2Vucetic, M., and Dobry, R., 1991, Effect of soil plasticity on cyclic response: Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, American Society of Civil Engineers, v. 117, Paper No. 25418 3 Seed, H. B., and Idriss, I. M., 1970, Soil moduli and damping factors for dynamic response analyses: Report No. EERC 70-10, Earthquake Engineering Research Center, University of California, Berkeley. Tinal report of the long term seismic program submitted by PG&E to the NRC. On July, 1988.Page 13 of 58 Calculation 52.27.100.739, Rev. 0, Attachment A, Pg. of 60 CALCULATION PACKAGE GEO.DCPP.01.29 REVISON 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 760 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700 1800 1900 2000 Horizontal Distance, feet Figure 1. Finite Element Representation of'Cross Section L-L Page 14 of 58 0 .4-0 2A WL1 Calculation 52.27.100.739, Rev. 0, Attachment A, Pg. 17 of 60 CALCULATION PACKAGE GEO.DCPP.01.29 REVISION 0 0 tLL 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000 2200 2400 2600 2800 3000 Horizontal Distance, feet Figure 2. Finite Element Representation of Cross Section E-E'.Page 15 of 58 .k"lU3tLU UL1 I Calculation 52.27.100.739, Rev. 0, Attachment A, Pg. t% of 60 CALCULATION PACKAGE GEO.DCPP.01.29 REVISION 0 Page 31 10" 10.4 2.0 Shear Strain (%) 1 0.z 10"1 1.8 1.6 CD -C cl E 0 z 1.4 1.2 1.0 0-8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0 Variation of shear modulus with shear strain for the site rock based on 1978 a Pacific Gas and Electric Company laboratory test data. Diablo Canyon Power Plant Long Term Seismic Program Page 16 of 58 1 Question 19 Calculation 52.27.100.739, Rev. 0, Attachment A, Pg. tj of 60 CALCULATION PACKAGE GEO.DCPP.0 1.29 REVISION 0 Page 32 Shear SIrain (N/) 10-2 10.3 25 20 0 Is CD .C: r E (a 10 0 a 1 ritio o p t4, t Variation of damping ratio with shear strain for the site rock based on 1977 laboratory test data.L F-Yoe AatD4tw4 6)Diablo Canyon Power Plant Long Term Seismic Program a Pacific Gas and Electric Company Page 17 of 58 10" 1 Calculation 52.27.100.739, Rev. 0, Attachment A, Pg. 2.o of 60 CALCULATION PACKAGE GEO.DCPP.01.29 REVISION 0 N Section E-E'Az= 3380 Az= 350Section L-L' to/ Az= 670 Motion, A Figure 5. Orientations of Sections E-E', and L-L', relative to the Hosgri Fault.Page 18 of 58 1.0 r- 0.5 0 IT 0.0 0-0.5 Component along section L-L', used for analyses -1.0 I 0 10 20 30 40 1.0 S0.5 0 0 -0.0 0-0.5 Fault parallel component with fling effect -1.0 > L 10 20 30 40 P 1 .0 > 0.5 > 0.0 a) 0.5 Fault normal component C UQ -1.0 0 10 20 30 40 Time (second)

00 Figure 6. Acceleration time histories of fault normal, fault parallel, and rotated L-L' componenets of Set 5.'"M ,Ra (1.0 "- 0.5 0 T 0. 0 0) U-0. 1.0 1.0 -0.5 0 E 0.0 Q) 0-0.5 10 -1.0 C 0 1 .0 a) "U-0.5 1.0[0 I I I Fault parallel component with fling effect 10 20 30 40 10 20 30 Time (second)4 4 0 Figure 7. Acceleration time histories of fault normal, fault parallel, and rotated E-E' componenets of Set 5.(0 10 20 30 10 C>, Co 0 0 z C'jO "r,4 C) 02 Calculation 52.27.100.739, Rev. 0, Attachment A, Pg. L3 of 60 CALCULATION PACKAGE GEO.DCPP.01.29 REVISION 0 Section L-L': 91 degrees from FP direction

---.-.--- Fault normal (FN) component

Fault parallel (FP) component (with fling effect)0.1 Period (sec)Figure 8. Acceleration response spectra of input motion set 5 for cross section L-L'.Page 21 of 58 4.0 3.5 3.0 0) CZ 0 C.)2.5 2.0 1.5 1.0 0.5 0.0 0.01 I Calculation 52.27.100.739, Rev. 0, Attachment A, Pg. __of 60 CALCULATION PACKAGE GEO.DCPP.01.29 REVISION 0 Section E-E': 123 degrees from FP direction

Fault normal (FN) component Fault parallel (FP) component (with fling effect) 0N 4 4 Il / N ---- --, Ill" \0.01 0.1 Period (sec)1 Figure 9. Acceleration response spectra of input motion set 5 for cross section E-E'.Page 22 of 58 3.5 3.0 D 2.5 0 t-6 2.0 Cz 0) C. 1.5 1.0 0.5 0.0 4.¢ 'ROW Dashed line: potential sliding surface 100 1 I1 300 350 400 450 500 550 600 Horizontal Distance, feet z 0 Figure 10. Contours of peak accelerations in coluvium zone, cross section L-L'300 280 260 240 220 CU *.o 200 180 160 140 120-> -.4 .-4 C) > k" >,-N--N 250 200- ~Dashed line: potential sliding surface S00.2 M0 TOO 751005-9O 90 100 00 10 15 20 15 0 Hrot 15 Fiur 10 otuso ekaceeain nclvu zncosscinEE 0 Oh5 240 S220 2200 180- HE 070 160 140 1 2 0 --------------- 300 320 340 360 380 400 420 440 460 480 500 520 540 560 580 600 Horizontal Distance, feet Figure 12. Potential Sliding Mass and Node Points of Computed Acceleration Time Histories for Cross Section L-L'. Z CtD O 1 S00, ( I I I I I I 240 220-200 S180 , 160 S140 120-100-650 700 750 800 850 900 950 1000 1050 1100 1150 1200 1250 Horizontal Distance, feet Figure 13. Potential Sliding Mass and Node Points of Computed Acceleration Time Histories for Cross Section E-E'.0 U'> C', ; 0" C)0 56 "lww 1.0 0 .5 0 s... 0.0 8 -0.5 Average acce ration in sliding mass of section L-L' -1 .0 > 0 10 20 30 40 t-r4 1 .0 > S 0 .5 o 0> "Eý 0.0 0 o -0.5 < Average acceleration in sliding mass of section E-E' 0 a\ -1.0 0 10 20 30 40 Time (second) 4 Figure 14. Average acceleration time histories of potential sliding masses using input motion set 5 (w C Full input motion -- ----------- Reduced motion (scaled down to 0.15 g) Surface elevation of section L-L'--------------------------------)600 400 200 0 0 500 1000 1500 2000 Horizontal Distance, feet C: Z C)O z. o' " Figure 15. Variations of computed peak accelerations along slope surface of section L-L'.2 1.5 1 0.5 0 CO Q) M W a_0 00 0 tIA C*-500 (I I I 2 Full input motion ------------ Reduced input motion (scaled down to 0. 15 g)S1.5 Surface elevation of section E-E' 0 CO .-o--IL 0 .5 -I I- --I "-- ---------------800 I-600 I2 400 z 200 00 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 Horizontal Distance, feet Figure 16. Variations of computed peak accelerations along slope surface of section E-E'.( (Full input motion -- ----------- Reduced input motion (scaled down to 0.15 Surface elevation of section L-L' ,II 0 500 1000 1500 2000 Horizontal Distance, feet 600' 400 200 0 0 z Figure 17. Variations of computed amplification factors of peak accelerations along slope surface of section L-L'.2 -L 0 CZ) U CL 0 E 1.5 0.5 tA U.g)-500 C) C) C) or 0 C) w 2 Full input motion --- -Reduced input motion (scaled down to 0.15 g) Surface elevation of section E-E' 1.5 0 U S0 .5 0 800 600 0 ~0.5 6- 00 t I 200 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 Z Horizontal Distance, feet Figure 18. Variations of computed amplification factors of peak accelerations along slope surface of section E-E'.( Calculation 52.27.100.739, Rev. 0, Attachment A, Pg. 3t of 60 CALCULATION PACKAGE GEO.DCPP.0 1.29 REVISION 0 ATTACHMENT 1 Page 32 of 58 Calculation 52.27.100.739, Rev. 0, Attachment A, Pg. 3ý_ of 60 CALCULATION PACKAGE GEO.DCPP.0 1.29 Pacific Gas and Electric Company Geosciences REVISION 0 245 Market Street, Room 418B Mail Code N4C P.O. Box 770000 San Francisco, CA 94177 415/973-2792 Fax 415/973-5778 DR. FAIZ MAKDISI GEOMATRIX CONSULTANTS 2101 WEBSTER STREET OAKLAND, CA 94612 November 12, 2001 Re: Forwarding of Approved Plan and Cross Sections D-D', E-E', and L-L' for DCPP ISFSI Transport Route Stability Analyses DR. MAKDISI: Please find enclosed the following approved plan and cross sections from Geosciences Calculation GEO.DCPP.01.21, rev. 1: Figure 21-3, Geologic Map of the ISFSI Site and Transport Route Vicinity Figure 21-17a, Cross Section D-D' through Patton Cove Landslide Figure 21-18a, Cross Section E-E' Figure 21-25, Cross Section L-L' for your use in DCPP ISFSI transport route stability analyses. These figures supersede those transmitted to you in draft form by Rich Koehler of William Lettis Associates on October 25, 2001. Also for your use, we have determined the azimuth of each section from Figure 21-3, as follows: Section D-D': 38 degrees Section E-E': 34 degrees Section L-L': 67 degrees If you have any questions regarding this information, please call. ROBERT K. WHITE Enclosures page 1 of I ltr2fm6.doc:rkw:11/12/0l Page 33 of 58 IC oc ]G C'Artificial fill (engineered) Quaternary deposits -alluvium, debris flow, colluvium, landslide, Holocene cofluvial fan NOTE: Only surficial aeposits greater tian about 5 feet thick shown=1 I Pleistocene colluvial fan = Pleistocene marine terrace deposit (inferred) Volcanic rock (middle Miocene), diabase intrusive sills and dikes Obispo Formation (lower and middle Miocene) 05 Member Tof, Unit b -sandstone, dolomritic sandstone. Sbdcolomite and minor limestone; gray, yellow-brown, brown, and bluish gray;, medium to very thick bedding, some units , massive; moderately hard to hard; medium density; calcite and quartz veins; very blocKy to blocky.S Member Tot, Unit c -siliceous claystone and Siltstone. with lesser sandstone 0 1 Memoer Tor -volcanic rock. zeolitized and silicitied tuff----71 Explanation Geologic contact, solid line where well-defined, dashed where approximate, queried where uncertain. Landslides, arrows indicate direction of moverent, hacthures define head scarp region Cdl Debris flow path Axis of synrnie, solid arrow Shows plunge, dashed where approximate -Axis of monocline, solid arrow shows plunge, dashed where approximate 290 Buried shoreline, angle of marine terrace wave cut platform; elevation indicated Footprint of 500 kV tower 85j, 10 e 60 ,.,_:-ME -Axis of antidine, sld arrow shows plunge, dashed. where approximate NOTES: 1i This toograPhhc map predates constructio oft 4LUo Caitysr, Power Plaint and facilities are only approsma tely located. 2- Topogregpny southeast Of power Pilent in par, pre Construction geurnd urtuac(ISFSI cut slogp eisscemauic).

3. The ISFSI, CTO. and Transport Route are located by placing tMemn " oosely as possie to lopog-phc and cultural features ard ate not consicerea precise.Strike and dip of fault Strike and dip of bedding Horizontal bedding Bedrock fault with atttude; dcashed where approximate, dotted where covered, queried where uncertain.

DIABLO CANYON ISFSI S- Boring from 1967 power block study 1977 boring DDH-D at power block Boring from previous HLA and HLM studies S- Boring for ISFSI investigations, WLA 1996 to 2001 B B' Geologic cross section STransport route FIGURE 21-3 GEOLOGIC MAP OFTHE ISFSI SITE AND TRANSPORT ROUTE VICINrTV Si i-i r\ 0 'Si Si 10 It" lý, () i Calculation 52.27.100.739, Rev. 0, Attachment A, Pg. $7 of 60 CALCULATION PACKAGE GEOD RE VISION LL z 0 z C-) 0 0 Page 148 of 171 Page 35 of 58 s 0 -o z 0 LO ý40 ,r 04O w 0 w 0, o I1 C _K ci V Matchline See Figure 21-17b 4 .\e C C El-- (I.q 4., mi'-- I Matchline See Figure 21-18b .................. 0 0' Calculation 52.27.100.739, Rev. 0, Attachment A, Pg. L of 60 CALCULATION PACKAGE GEO.DCPP.0 1.29 REVISION 0 ATTACHMENT 2 Page 38 of 58 Calculation 52.27.100.739, Rev. 0, Attachment A, Pg. ý_I of 60 CALCULATION PACKAGE GEO.DCPP.0 1.29 and Electric Comranv Geosciences REVISION 0 245 Market Street, Room 418B Mail Code N4C P.O. Box 770000 San Francisco, CA 94177 415/973-2792 Fax 415/973-5778 page 1 of 2 trans2fm 1.doc:rkw:9/28/01 Page 39 of 58 Pacific (S..... Iv ----d I Dr. Faiz Makdisi Geomatrix Consultants 2101 Webster Street Oakland, CA 94612 September 28, 2001 Re: Confirmation of transmittal of inputs for DCPP ISFSI slope stability analyses DR. MAKDISI: This is to confirm transmittal of inputs related to slope stability analyses you are scheduled to perform for the Diablo Canyon Power Plant (DCPP) Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation (ISFSI) under the Geomatrix Work Plan entitled "Laboratory Testing of Soil and Rock Samples, Slope Stability Analyses, and Excavation Design for the Diablo Canyon Power Plant Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation Site." Inputs transmitted include: Drawing entitled "Figure 21-19, Cross Section I-I'," dated 9/27/01, labeled "Draft," and transmitted to you via overnight mail under cover letter from Jeff Bachhuber of WLA and dated 9/27/01. Time histories in Excel file entitled "timehistories_3comp revl .xls," dated 8/17/2001, file size 3,624 KB, which I transmitted to you via email on 8/17/2001. Please confirm receipt of these items and forward confirmation to me in writing. Please note that both these inputs are preliminary until the calculations they are part of have been fully approved. At that time, I will inform you in writing of their status. These confirmation and transmittal letters are the vehicles for referencing input sources in youir calculations. Calculation 52.27.100.739, Rev. 0, Attachment A, Pg. 6L!-of 60 CALCULATION PACKAGE GEO.DCPP.01.29 REVISION 0 Confirmation of transmittal of inputs for DCPP ISFSI slope stability analyses Although the Work Plan does not so state, as you are aware all calculations are required to.be performed as per Geosciences Calculation Procedure GEO.001, entitled "Development and Independent Verification of Calculations for Nuclear Facilities," revision 3. All of your staff assigned to this project have been previously trained under this procedure. I am also attaching a copy of the Work Plan. Please make additional copies for members of your staff assigned to this project, review the Work Plan with them, and have them sign Attachment

1. Please then make copies of the signed attachment and forward to me. If you have any questions, feel free to call. Thanks. ROBERT K. WHITE Attachment cc: Chris Hartz page 2 of 2 Page 40 of 58 Calculation 52.27.100.739, Rev. 0, Attachment A, Pg. 4 of 60 CALCULATION PACKAGE GEO.DCPP.01.29 REVISION 0 ATTACHMENT 3 Page 41 of 58 Calculation 52.27.100.739, Rev. 0, Attachment A, Pg. 60 Pacific Gas and Electric Company CALQdS.6TAaT PACKAGE GEO.DCPP.01.29 245 Market Street, Room 418BREVISION 0 Mail Code N4C P.O. Box 770000 San Francisco, CA 94177 415/973-2792 Fax 415/973-5778 DR. FAIZ MAKDISI GEOMATRIX CONSULTANTS S2101 WEBSTER STREET OAKLAND, CA 94612 October 31, 2001 Re: Confirmation of preliminary inputs to calculations for DCPP ISFSI site DR. MAKDISI: A number of inputs to calculations for the DCPP ISFSI slope stability analyses have been provided to you in a preliminary fashion. This letter provides confirmation of those inputs in a formal transmittal.

A description of the preliminary inputs and their formal confirmation follow. Letter to Faiz Makdisi from Rob White dated June 24, 2001.

Subject:

Recommended rock strength design parameters for DCPP ISFSI site slope stability analyses. This letter recommended using f = 50 degrees for the preliminary rock strength envelope in your stability analyses, and indicated that this value would be confirmed once calculations had been finalized and approved. Calculations GEO.DCPP.01.16, rev. 0, and GEO.DCPP.01.19, rev. 0, are approved and this recommended value is confirmed. Letter to Faiz Makdisi from Rob White dated September 28, 2001.

Subject:

Confirmation of transmittal of inputs for DCPP ISFSI slope stability analyses. This letter provided confirmation of transmittal of cross section I-I' and time histories, and indicated that these preliminary inputs would be confirmed once calculations had been approved. Calculation GEO.DCPP.01.21, rev. 0, is approved and section I-I' as described in the September 28 letter is confirmed. A copy of the figure from the approved calculation is attached. Calculations GEO.DCPP.01.13, rev. 1, and GEO.DCPP.0 1.14, rev. 1, are both approved and time histories as described in the September 28 letter are confirmed. A CD of the time histories from the approved calculations is attached. page 1 of 2 Itr2Fm3.doc:rkw:10/31/01 I*. .. .Page 42 of 58 Calculation 52.27.100.739, Rev. 0, Attachment A, Pg. *__ of 60 CALCULATION PACKAGE GEO.DCPP.01.29 REVISION 0 Faiz Makdisi Confirmation of prehirfinary inputs to calculations tor,.( site Email to Faiz Makdisi from Joseph Sun dated October 24, 2001.

Subject:

Ground motion parameters for back calculations. This email provided input for a back calculation to assess conservatism in clay bed properties in the slope'. Inputs included maximum displacement per event of 4 inches and a factor of 1.6 with which to multiply ground motions for use in the back calculation analysis. This letter confirms those input values, with the following limitation: these values haveot been developed under an approved calculation, therefore should not be used to directly determine clay bed properties for use in forward analyses, but may be used for comparative purposes only, to assess the level of conservatism in those clay bed properties determined in approved calculations Letter to Faiz Makdisi from Jeff Bachhuber dated October 10,2001.

Subject:

Transmittal of Revised Rock Mass Failure Models -DCPP ISFSI Project. This letter provided you with figures indicating potential rock mass failure models as superimposed on section I-I'. This letter confirms PG&E approval to use these models in your analyses. These figures are labeled drafts and are currently being finalized in a revision to Calculation GEO.DCPP.01.21. Once this revision and the included figures have been approved, I will inform you in writing of their status. ROBERT K. WHITE Attachments Page 43 of 58 Calculation 52.27.100.739, Rev. 0, Attachment A, Pg. *_-_of 60 CALCULATION PACKAGE GEO.DCPP.0 1.29 REVISION 0 ATTACHMENT 4 Page 44 of 58 Calculation 52.27.100.739, Rev. 0, Attachment A, Pg. t' of 60 CALCULATION PACKAGE QEO.DCPP.01.29 REVISION 0 7William Lettis & Associates, Inc. .. Botelho Drive, Suite 262, Walnut Creek, Clifornia 94596 Voice: (925) 256-617fl FAX: (925) 256-6076 MEMORANDUM TO: Dr. Faiz Makdisi -Geomatrix Consultants, Inc. FROM: Jeff L. Bachhuber -William Lettis & Associates, Inc. DATE: August 23, 2001 RE: Revised Estimates 'for Hosgri Fault Azimuth, DCPP ISFSI Project FAJTZ.: This memorandum provides a revised strike azimnuth of 338" for the Hosgri fault for evaluation of ground motion directional components for slope stability analyses at the PG&E DCPP ISFSI site. The revised azimuth presented in this memorandum supercedes the previous estimated azimuths (328' to 3350) presented in our memorandum dated August 8, 2001, and is based on a re-evaluation of fault maps in the PG&E LTSP (1988), and ISFSI project Calculation Package GEO.01.21. The revised estimated average strike for the Hosgri fault nearest the ISFSI site (bctwccn Morro Bay and San Luis Bay) is 338'. Figure 21-23 of Calculation Package GEO.01.21, which previously showed an azimuth of 340' for the Hosgri fault, will bc revised to correspond to this re-interpreted average strike. Discrete faults and local reaches of the fault zone exhibit variations in strike azimuth between about 328' and 338', but the average overall strike of 338' is believed to be the best approximation for the ground motion modeling. Please call me if you have any questions or require further input for this issue. Jeff Bachhuber Cc: Rob White/Bill Page -PG&E Geosciences I Page 45 of 58 Calculation 52.27.100.739, Rev. 0, Attachment A, Pg. Z of 60 CALCULATION PACKAGE GEO.DCPP.01.29 REVISION 0 ATTACHMENT 5 Page 46 of 58 Calculation 52.27.100.739, Rev. 0, Attachment A, Pg. 4_ of 60 CALCULATION PACKAGE GEO.DCPP.01.29 REVISION 0 pacific Gaas & Electric Company Geosciences Department P.O. Box 77000, Mail C-.. Sari Francisco, CA 94177 Fax: (4,15) 973-5778 TELEFAX COVER SHEET REMARKS: f- Per request 2] For re A-? ~ C~&4 4zi&L <4 Number of pages including cover sheet: 5 view Reply ASAP C] Please comment Page 47 of 58 To: Company' (6nenrr, .tr/ix Phone: 03 *66 Fax: r5-/e) CT -(4-"f cc: From: Company: PG&E Phone: J415) 973-5478 Fax: _4415) 973-5778 (- 7 1 4 -1 L*Cý031p(aý-ýW ý.,Acc:17a Calculation 52.27.100.739, Rev. 0, Attachment A, Pg.-so of 60 CALCULATION PACKAGE GEO.DCPP.01.29 REVISION 0 PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY GEOSCIFNCES DEPART.ENT CALCULATION DOCUMENT Calc Number CFF,, " / Revision Date 0c-(Q- /!E/ 2- '.Cakc Pages;: 2 4, Verification Method: A VerificaTion Pages: /7 +d PREPARED BYY: DATE Org r z -i Printed Name Organization VERU=ED BY: APPROVED BY: 16 a P-rin-ced*4ame 7/i}:': LLO "D ', L. _L: , \LUF -i.. ,- ., -. ( lrke-. :o z, -'-.DATE 60 0 1ew- .t Organization D,,rE /'/ /1 DATE Orgamzatu~on"LLOYD '-.- S. CLUFF 2 No. EG567 -0= CERTIFIED ENGINEER1ING .GEOLOGIST .., .-: .... .......... P-age48of58 ---r Ace P-jr: 1--Ig ý/o -.L Calculation 52.27.100.739, Rev. 0, Attachment A, Pg. 5j of 60 CALCULATION PACKAGE GEO.DCPP.01.29 REVISION 0 Calc Number: GEO.DCPP.01.14 Rev Number: 1 Sheet Number; 4 of 26 Date: 10/12/01 6. BODY OF CALCULATIONS Step 1: S-wave arrival times The approximate arrival times of the S-waves is estimated by visual inspection of the velocity time histories (Figures 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5). The selected arrival times are listed in Table 6-1. Table 6- 1. Time of Fling Set Reference Time History Approximate Arrival Time Polarity* Arrival time of of fling (tj) S-waves (see)' I Lucerne 8.0 7.1 -1 2a Yarimca 9.0 8.5 -1 3 LGFC 4.0 1 3.4 -1 5 El Centro (1940) P-5L ý 0.01 6 Saratoga 4.5 37 -.

The polarity is applied to the fault parallel time history from calculations GEO.DCPP.01.13 (rev 1) to cause constructive interference between the S-wave and the fling (eq. 5-2). A fling arrival time is selected by visual inspection of the interference of the velocity of the transient motion and the fling (Figures 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5). The selected fling arrival time are listed in Table 6-1. Since DCP is on the east side of the Hosgri fault and the fault has right-lateral slip, the permanent tectonic deformation at the site will be to the southeast.

In the time histories the fling has a positive polarity. Since the tectonic deformation will be: to the southeast, the positive direction of the fault parallel time history is defined to the* southeast. Step 2: Flinp Time History Using the values of A, o, and Tfiig given in input 4-1, and the values oft 1 given in Table 6-1, the fling time history is determined using eq. (5-1). The computed fling time histories for the 5 sets are shown in Figures 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5.Page 49 of 58 Calculation 52.27.100.739, Rev. 0, Attachment A, Pg. 5__of 60 CALCULATION PACKAGE GEO.DCPP.01.29 REVISION 0 ATTACHMENT 6 Page 50 of 58 Calculation 52.27.100.739, Rev. 0, Attachment A, Pg. 5_Uof 60 CALCULATION PACKAGE GEO.DCPP.01.29 Pacific Gas and Electric Company Geosciences REVISION 0 245 Market Street, Room 418B -Mail Code N4C P.O. Box 770000 San Francisco, CA 9417 4 15/973-2792 Fax 415/973-5778 DR. FAIZ MAKDISI GEOMATRIX CONSULTANTS 2101 WEBSTER STREET OAKLAND, CA 94612 October 25, 2001 Re: Input parameters for calculations DR. MAKDISI: As required by Geosciences Calculation Procedure GEO.001, entitled "Development and Independent Verification of Calculations for Nuclear Facilities," rev. 4, I am providing you with the following input items for your use in preparing calculations.

1. The shear wave velocity profiles obtained in borings BA98-1 and BA98-3 in 1998 are presented in Figure 21-42, attached, of Calculation GEO.DCPP.01.21, entitled "Analysis of Bedrock Stratigraphy and Geologic Structure at the DCPP ISFSI Site," rev. 0, and can be so referenced.

These profiles were previously presented in Figure 10 of the WLA report entitled "Geologic and Geophysical Investigation, Dry Cask Storage Facility, Borrow and Water Tank Sites," dated January 5, 1999. 2. The average unit weight of rock obtained from the hillside has been determined to be 140 pounds per cubic foot, as documented in a data report entitled "Rock Engineering Laboratory Testing -GeoTest Unlimited.'

3. Regarding the time histories provided to you on 8/17/01, since the tectonic deformation will be to the southeast, the positive direction of the fault parallel time history is defined as to the southeast, as described in Geosciences Calculation GEO.DCPP.01.14, entitled "Development of Time Histories with Fling," rev. 1, page 4. 4. The source of the shear modulus and damping curves are Figures Q19-22 and Q19-23, attached, from PG&E, 1989, Response to NRC Question 19 dated December 13, 1988, and can be so referenced.

Regarding format of calculations, please observe the following: lrr2fmnl.doc:rkw: 10/25/01 Page 51 of 58 Calculation 52.27.100.739, Rev. 0, Attachment A, Pg. W of 60 Faiz Makdisi CALCULATION P ions REVISION 0 Contents of CD-ROMs attached to calculations should be listed in the calculation, including title, size, and date saved associated with each file on the CD-ROM. If the number of-files is considerable, a simple screen dump of the CD-ROM contents is sufficient. If you have any questions regarding the above, please call me. ROBERT K. WHITE Attachments Page 52 of 58 Borings 98BA-1 and 98BA-4 I-0-- Vs , ,, .. , -,JuUu J UU U 4UUU 0 r--370 -... ..R1-R2Vs GBA 98-04 370

i , S-RIVs8BA98-04

---SRIVp8BA 98-04 20 ..-" _ _ _ _ _ " j --- RI -R2V s B A 98-01 " i i' J ! i I+ R-R2VpBA98-01 35 S" S-Ri Vs BA 98-01 -S-R1 I Vp BA 98-01 -'--RI-R21Vp BA 98-04 40 330-IR2pAQO 60 I", " a grade at 310- + ' .............. -..Ti S... : : ... ;' :"......."' ....!............... ... 80 -............. 290 -* ...... :.......... ................. ..... .. .... ............. .'.. .... .... :.. :....... S. .... .... ...... .. ... .... ... .... .... 1 ... ... ..... 270 160 _"____250 ............ .... 240. 130.- . ,- -120 ... 'l.... S.. ..* ... .: .......- ....' ' ' .23 ....... ": ' *. ......... ,..., .............. r .......... .. .............. i...: 1 ... .. ' ... ......... " 200 .... i -i" l i ! " ~~~~.... :. .. ..i ............... ": ..:J .! i ........... ................. 2 2 0 ......... ...... .. ..... ............. Average velocity pro:file* Vs' .-- 150iy p ofi 'p "-;" :" ; ' ": : I .ve.rage: .e ... ..."....... ..... i. : I .: , * ; ':... : ..................... I ... i! ... ";.......... : .. ... i ' *...:..... 240 13 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 Velocity (feet/second) 10000 12000 14000 0 500 1000 1500 Vs Vp 2000 500 300 350 40 0 Padgrade at310' 320 20 R0-R2Vs l ~ i -, .. .......... 40 ... : : --U--R1-2Vp : : ! ;: 4 : : 1 .R V 280 60 "260 S".. ii ::!" ., i.. .. .... ....-....

. -,.... ..... ... 8 0 ....... ....... ... .. ... ... ... ,2 4.0.. . 80 .. ,.. ........ . 1002 0 * .ii." ..i .... !.............

S.... .. " i/ / i. ii........ ...... .... .. ..... .. "I:' 180 .....180 -i * ..--.... ...... .. ..... .. ...L..i. ......,....... " -i .. ........ 200 --t ---{ -..:' : : '...... ..... 0120 220 Average velocity pr t of ile Vs Average velocity profile Vpj10 .......... -"1.. 0 0 2000 .4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 14000 Boring 9813A3 Velocity (meters/seco 2000 2500 Calculation 52.27.100.Z39, Rev. 0, Attachlment A, 11g. _,sof f, ()fldP)C ft" , 3 V~ rind) 3000 3500 4000 Q, 0 CD w, Note: Average velocity profiles interpreted from data. RI .R2 = Receiver-to-receiver velocity (3.3-foot spacing) S-R1 = Source-to-receiver velocity (10.3-foot spacing)Velocity (feet/second) Modified from GeoVision (1998), DCPP ISFSI SAR Section 2.6 Topical Report Appendix C DIABLO CANYON ISFSI FIGURE 21-42 ISFSI SITE SUSPENSION LOGS AND INTERPRETED AVERAGE SEISMIC VELOCITIES .Egc 163 of 21 October 15. 2001 Velocity (meters/second) 0 500 1000 1500nn onnn snn (.innn\*1 4n II Anrin r-Calculation 52.27.100.739, Rev. 0, Attachment A, Pg. S_. of 60 CALCULATION PACKAGE GEO.DCPP.01.29 REVISION 0 ATTACHMENT 7 Page 54 of 58 Lalculation z2.2/.1 U.'/39, Rev. U, Attachment A, Pg. (_ of 60 I JU CALCULATION PACKAGE GEO.DCPP.01.29 Pacific Gas and Electric Company Geoscicnccs REVISION 0 245 Market Street. Room 4181B Mail Code N4C P.0. Box 770000 San Francisco. CA 94177 415/973-2792 Fax 415/973-5778 SDR. FAIZ MAKDISI GEOMATRIX CONSULTANTS 2101 WEBSTER STREET OAKLAND, CA 94612 November 19, 2001 Re: Transmittal of additional inputs for DCPP ISFSI Transport Route Analysis DR. MAKDISI: As part of the scope of your analysis of the stability of the transport route for the DCPp ISFSI, you are assessing stability of the route at various sections using both unreduced ground motions previously transmitted to you (reference my October 31 2001 letter to you) and reduced ground motions based on incorporating results of a probabilistic seismic hazard analysis and the estimated exposure interval of the transporter on the route. A probabiistically reduced peak bedrock ground acceleration of 0.15g has been derived in calculation GEO.DCPP.01.02, and this value has been approved for further analyses. Accordingly, please scale the peak acceleration of the unreduced ground motions to this level for your transport route analyses. In addition, you are assessing the stability of transport route road fill wedges at reduced ground motion levels and with the transporter load previously transmitted to you (reference my November 5 2001 letter to you). The exact subsurface configuration of any fill wedges along the access road is currently unknown, and is shown in only a general way on sections provided to you (reference my November 12 2001 letter to you) based on general descriptions provided in the road construction specification. However, given that the density of any compacted fill derived from the native material is likely to be at or above the density of underlying native material, fill strength is likely to be comparable to the native material, and the exact configuration of the fill is therefore not of consequence. Please proceed with near-surface stability analyses with this assumption. If you have any questions regarding this information, please call. ROBERT K. WHITE page 1 of I Itfm3Odoc:rkw:11/i 9/01 Page 58 of58 Calculation 52.27.100.739, Rev. 0, Attachment A, Pg. s1 of 60 CALCULATION PACKAGE GEO.DCPP.01.29 Pacific Gas and Electric Company Geosciences REVISION 0 245 Market Street, Room 418B Mail Code N4C P.O. Box 770000 San Francisco, CA 94177 415/973-2792 Fax 415/973-5778 DR. FAIZ MAKDISI GEOMATRIX CONSULTANTS 2101 WEBSTER STREET OAKLAND, CA 94612 November 1, 2001 Re: Confirmation of additional inputs to calculations for DCPP ISFSI site DR. MAKDISI: Additional inputs to calculations for the DCPP ISFSI slope stability analyses have been provided to you by Jeff Bachhuber of William Lettis Associates. This letter provides confirmation of our acceptance of those inputs in a formal transmittal. A description of those additional inputs and their formal acceptance follow. Letter to Faiz Makdisi from Jeff Bachhuber dated August 3, 2001.

Subject:

Ground Motion Directional Components. This letter recommended using an azimuth of 302 degrees plus or minus 10 degrees for the orientation of the most likely failure surfaces, coinciding with Section I-I'. We concur with this recommendation based on the discussion on page 53 of the approved Calculation GEO.DCPP.01.21, rev. 0, and verification of the orientation of Section I-I' on Calculation Figure 21-4, attached. Letter to Faiz Makdisi from Jeff Bachhuber dated August 23, 2001.

Subject:

Revised Estimates for Hosgri Fault Azimuth, DCPP ISFSI Project. This letter recommended using an azimuth of 338 degrees for the orientation of the average strike of the Hosgri fault. We concur with this recommendation, based on verification of the orientation as presented in the LTSP plates and as shown on Figure 21-36, attached, of Calculation GEO.DCPP.01.21, rev. 0. ROBERT K. WHITE Attachments page 1 of 1 1tr2fm4.doc:rkw: 1/1/01 Page 55 of 58 Calculation 52.27.100.739, Rev. 0, Attachment A, Pg. E of 60 CALCULATION PACKAGE GEO.DCPP.01.29 (from PG&E, 1988)Explanation --- Fault: dashed where approximately located; teeth indicate dip direction of reverse fault; arrows indicate relative sense of displacement .'Syncline axial trace f 0.14 Late Pleistocene (post 120,000 years ago) uplift rate (meters/1 000 yr) 0.16* Uplift rate (meters/1 000 yr) based on the altitude and estir age (560,000 years) of the Q7 marine terrace I'EB- Estero Bay Subblock IH"] Irish Hills Subblock EF'D Edna Subblock FR Newsom Ridge Subblock GEO.DCPP01.21 REV 0 October 15, 2001 "age 157 of 162 Page 56 of 58 SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT DIABLO CANYON ISFSI FIGURE 21-36 REGIONAL STRUCTURE MAP Calculation 52.27.100.739, Rev. 0, Attachment A, Pg. ?1 of 60 CALCULATION PACKAGE GEO.DCPP.01.29 REVISION 0 ATTACHMENT 8 Page 57 of 58 Calculation 52.27.100.739, Rev. 0, Attachment A, Pg. !._ of 60 WJ u u:! CALCULATION PACKAGE GEO.DCPP.01.29 Pacific Gas and Electric Company Geoscicnccs REVISION 0 245 Market Street, Room 418B Muil Code N4C P.O. Box 770000 San Prancisco. CA 94177 415/973-2792 Fax 415/973-5778 SDR. FAIZ MAKDISI GEOMATRIX CONSULTANTS 2101 WEBSTER STREET OAKLAND, CA 94612 November 19, 2001 Re: Transmittal of additional inputs for DCPP ISFSI Transport Route Analysis DR- MAKDISI: As part of the scope, of your analysis of the stability of the transport route for the DCPp ISFSI, you are assessing stability of the route at various sections using both unreduced ground motions previously transmitted to you (reference my October 31 2001 letter to you) and reduced ground motions based on incorporating results of a probabilistic seismic hazard analysis and the estimated exposure interval of the transporter on the route. A probabilistically reduced peak bedrock ground acceleration of 0.1 5g has been derived in calculation GEO.DCPP.01.02, and this value has been approved for further analyses. Accordingly, please scale the peak acceleration of the unreduced ground motions to this level for your transport route analyses. In addition, you are assessing the stability of transport route road fill wedges at reduced ground motion levels and with the transporter load previously transmitted to you (reference my November 5 2001 letter to you). The exact subsurface configuration of any fill wedges along the access road is currently unknown, and is shown in only a general way on sections provided to you (reference my November 12 2001 letter to you) based on general descriptions provided in the road construction specification. However, given that the density of any compacted fill derived from the native material is likely to be at or above the density of underlying native material, fill strength is likely to be comparable to the native material, and the exact configuration of the fill is therefore not of consequence. Please proceed with near-surface stability analyses with this assumption. If you have any questions regarding this information, please call. ROBERT K. WHITE page I of 1 Ix2fmO-1do-:rkw:il1/9/oi Page 58 of 58 69-20132 03/07/01 NUCLEAR POWER GENERATION CF3.ID4 ATTACHMENT

7.2 Index

No. 402 Binder No.TITLE: CALCULATION COVER SHEET Unit(s): 1 & 2 File No.: 52.27 Responsible Group: Civil Calculation No.: 52.27.100.740 No. of Pages 3 pages + Index (4 pages) + 1 Design Calculation YES [x] NO [] Attachment (48 pages) System No. 42C Quality Classification Q (Safety-Related) Structure, System or Component: Independent Spent Fuel Storage Facility

Subject:

Determination of Potential Earthquake-Induced Displacements of Potential Sliding Masses Along DCPP ISFSI Transport Route (GEO.DCPP.01.30, Rev. 0) Electronic calculation YES [ I NO I x Computer Model Computer ID Program Location Date of Last Change Registered Engineer Stamp: Complete A or B A. Insert PE Stamp or Seal Below B. Insert stamp directing to the PE stamp or seal REGISTERED ENGINEERS' STAMPS AND EXPIRATION DATES ARE SHOWN ON DWG 063618 Expiration Date: NOTE 1: Update DCI promptly after approval. NOTE 2: Forward electronic calculation file to CCTG for uploading to EDMS.1 Page 1 of 3 69-20T32 03/07/01 CF3.ID4 Page 2 of 3 ATTACHMENT

7.2 TITLE

CALCULATION COVER SHEET Rev Status Reason for Revision Prepared LBIE LBIE Check LBIE Checked Supervisor Registered No. B Screen Method* A oyal Engineer Remarks Initials/ Yes/ Yes/ PSRC PSRC Initials/ Initials/ Signature/ LAN ID/ No/ No/ Mtg. Mtg. LAN ID/ LAN ID/ LAN ID/ ___.___._ _ NA NA No. Date Date Date Date 0 F Acceptance of Geosciences Calc. AFT2 [ ] Yes [ ] Yes [ ] A N/A N/A N/A No. GEO.DCPP.01.30, Rev. 0. l[ Calc. supports current edition of [N.- y , 10CFR72 DCPP License [x]NA [x]NA [x]C Izb ? Application to be reviewed by NRC prior to implementation. Prepared per CF3.1D17 requirements. I Yes i ]Yes I IA I No [INo [ ]B [ ]NA [ INA [ ]C [ ]Yes [ ]Yes [ ]A []No []No []B [ ]NA [ ]NA [ ]C *Check Method: A: Detailed Check, B: Alternate Method (note added pages), C: Critical Point Check CALC No. 52.27.100.740, RO 2 (2 t-,acitic cias and Ilectric Ulompany 69-392(10/92) Engineering -Calculation Sheet Engineering Project: Diablo Canyon Unit ( )1 ( )2 (x) 1&2 CALC. NO. 52.27.100.740 REV. NO. 0 SHEET NO. 3 of 3 SUBJECT Determination of Potential Earthquake-Induced Displacements of Potential Sliding Masses Along DCPP ISFSI Transport Route MADE BY A. Tafova kd DATE 12/13/01 CHECKED BY N/A DATE Table of Contents: Item Type 1 Index Title Cross-Index (For Information Only)Page Numbers 1-4 2 Attachment A Determination of Potential Earthquake Induced Displacements of Potential Sliding Masses Along DCPP ISFSI Transport Route 1-48 3 Pacific Gas and Electric Company 69-392(10192) Engineering -Calculation Sheet Engineering Project: Diablo Canyon Unit ( )1 ( ) 2 (x) 1&2 CALC. NO. 52.27.100.740 REV. NO. 0 SHEET NO. 1-1 of 4 SUBJECT Determination of Potential Earthquake-Induced Displacements of Potential Sliding Masses Along DCPP ISFSI Transport Route MADE BY A. Tafoya V DATE 12/13/01 CHECKED BY N/A DATE 1- This table cross references between Geosciences calculation numbers and DCPP (Civil Group's) calculation numbers. This section is For Information Only. Cross-Index (For Information Only) Item Geoscience CaIc. Title PG&E Calc. Comments No. No. No. 1 GEO.DCPP.01I.01 Development of Young's 52.27.100.711 Modulus and Poisson's Ratios for DCPP ISFSI Based on Field Data 2 GEO.DCPP.01.02 Determination of 52.27.100.712 Probabilistically Reduced Peak Bedrock Accelerations for DCPP ISFSI Transporter Analyses 3 GEO.DCPP.01.03 Development of Allowable 52.27.100.713 Bearing Capacity for DCPP ISFSI Pad and CTF Stability Analyses 4 GEO.DCPP.01.04 Methodology for 52.27.100.714 Determining Sliding Resistance Along Base of DCPP ISFS1 Pads 5 GEO.DCPP.01.05 Determination of 52.27.100.715 Pseudostatic Acceleration Coefficient for Use in DCPP ISFSI Cutslope Stability Analyses 6 GEO.DCPP.01.06 Development of Lateral 52.27.100.716 Bearing Capacity for DCPP CTF Stability Analyses 7 GEO.DCPP.01.07 Development of Coefficient 52.27.100.717 of Subgrade Reaction for DCPP ISFSI Pad Stability Checks 8 GEO.DCPP.01.08 Determination of Rock 52.27.100.718 Anchor Design Parameters for DCPP ISFSI Cutslope 9 GEO.DCPP.01.09 Determination of 52.27.100.719 Calculation to be Applicability of Rock Elastic replaced by letter I Stress-Strain Values to 1 Pacific Gas and Electric Company Engineering -Calculation Sheet Project: Diablo Canyon Unit ( )1 ) 2 (x ) 1&2 CALC. NO.69-392(10/92) Engineering 52.27.100.740 I 1410101 REV. NO. 0 SHEET NO. 1-2 of 4 SUBJECT Determination of Potential Earthquake-Induced Displacements of Potential Sliding Masses Along DCPP ISFSI Transport Route MADE BY A. TafoyaV6 DATE 12/13/01 CHECKED BY N/A DATE Cross-Index (For Information Only) Item Geoscience Calc. Title PG&E Caic. Comments No. No. No. Stress-Strain Values to Calculated Strains Under DCPP ISFSI Pad 10 GEO.DCPP.01.10 Determination of SSER 34 52.27.100.720 Long Period Spectral Values 11 GEO.DCPP.01.11 Development of ISFSI 52.27.100.721 Spectra 12 GEO.DCPP.01.12 Development of Fling 52.27.100.722 Model for Diablo Canyon ISFSI 13 GEO.DCPP.01.13 Development of Spectrum 52.27.100.723 Compatible Time Histories 14 GEO.DCPP.01.14 Development of Time 52.27.100.724 Histories with Fling 15 GEO.DCPP.01.15 Development of Young's 52.27.100.725 Modulus and Poisson's Ratio Values for DCPP ISFSI Based on Laboratory Data 16 GEO.DCPP.01.16 Development of Strength 52.27.100.726 Envelopes for Non-jointed Rock at DCPP ISFSI Based on Laboratory Data 17 GEO.DCPP.01.17 Determination of Mean and 52.27.100.727 Standard Deviation of Unconfined Compression Strengths for Hard Rock at DCPP ISFSI Based on Laboratory Tests 18 GEO.DCPP.01.18 Determination of Basic 52.27.100.728 Friction Angle Along Rock Discontinuities at DCPP ISFSI Based on Laboratory Tests 2 ! Pacific Gas and Electric Company 69-392(10/92) Engineering -Calculation Sheet Engineering Project: Diablo Canyon Unit ( )1 ( ) 2 (x) 1&2 CAMC. NO. 52.27-100.740 REV. NO. 0 SHEET NO. 1-3 of 4 SUBJECT Determination of Potential Earthquake-Induced Displacements of Potential Sliding Masses Along DCPP ISFSI Transport Rni MADE BY A. Tafoya 11 DATE 12/13/01 CHECKED BY NIA DATE Cross-Index (For Information Only) Item Geoscience Calc. Title PG&E Calc. Comments No. No. No. 19 GEO.DCPP.01.19 Development of Strength 52.27.100.729 Envelopes for Jointed Rock Mass at DCPP ISFSI Using Hoek-Brown Equations 20 GEO.DCPP.01.20 Development of Strength 52.27.100.730 Envelopes for Shallow Discontinuities at DCPP ISFSI Using Barton Equations 21 GEO.DCPP.01.21 Analysis of Bedrock 52.27.100.731 Stratigraphy and Geologic Structure at the DCPP ISFSI Site 22 GEO.DCPP.01.22 Kinematic Stability Analysis 52.27.100.732 for Cutslopes at DCPP ISFSI Site 23 GEO.DCPP.01.23 Pseudostatic Wedge 52.27.100.733 Analyses of DCPP ISFSI Cutslopes (SWEDGE Analysis) 24 GEO.DCPP.01.24 Stability and Yield 52.27.100.734 Acceleration Analysis of Cross Section I-I' 25 .GEO.DCPP.01.25 Determination of Seismic 52.27.100.735 Coefficient Time Histories for Potential Siding Masses Above Cut Slopes Behind ISFSI Pad 26 GEO.DCPP.01.26 Determination of Potential 52.27.100.736 Earthquake-Induced Displacements of Potential Sliding Masses on DCPP ISFSI Slope 27 GEO.DCPP.01.27 Cold Machine Shop 52.27.100.737 Retaining Wall Stability 28 GEO.DCPP.01.28 Stability and Yield 52.27.100.738 Acceleration Analysis of I 3 rtaacmc Uas ano t-jectrc uoompany 69-392(10/92) Engineering -Calculation Sheet Engineering Project: Diablo Canyon Unit ( )1 ( ) 2 ( x ) 1&2 CALC. NO. 52.27.100.740 REV. NO. 0 SHEET NO. 1-4 of 4 SUBJECT Determination of Potential Earthquake-Induced Displacements of Potential Sliding Masses Along DCPP ISFSI Transport Route MADE BY A. Tafoya 4I DATE 12/13/01 CHECKED BY N/A DATE Cross-Index (For Information Only) Item Geoscience Caic. Title PG&E CaIc. Comments No. No. No. Acceleration Analysis of Potential Sliding Masses Along DCPP ISFSI Transport Route 29 GEO.DCPP.01.29 Determination of Seismic 52.27.100.739 Coefficient Time Histories for Potential Sliding Masses on DCPP ISFSI Transport Route 30 GEO. DCPP.01.30 Determination of Potential 52.27.100.740 Earthquake-Induced Displacements of Potential Sliding Masses Along DCPP ISFSI Transport Route 31 GEO.DCPP.01.31 Development of Strength 52.27.100.741 Envelopes for Clay Beds at DCPP ISFSI 32 GEO.DCPP.01.32 Verification of Computer 52.27.100.742 Program SPCTLR.EXE 33 GEO.DCPP.01.33 Verification of Program 52.27.100.743 UTEXAS3 34 GEO.DCPP.01.34 Verification of Computer 52.27.100.744 Code -QUAD4M 35 GEO.DCPP.01.35 Verification of Computer 52 27.100.745 Code DEFORMP 36 GEO.DCPP.01.36 Reserved 52.27.100.746 37 GEO.DCPP.01.37 Development of Freefield 52 27.100.747 Ground Motion Storage Cask Spectra and Time Histories for the Used Fuel Storage Project 4 Calculation 52.27.100.740, Rev. 0, Attachment A, Pg. __ of 48 FILE No. 079 11z27 '01 17:08 ID:PG&E GEOSCIENCES DEPT 415 973 5778 JM : Cluff.- San Francisco

ILE No. 077 11,27 '01 16:52 ID:PG&E GEOSCIENCES DEPT SPG&E GeosCiences Departnent Departmental Calcailation Procedure NOU. 27.2001 6: 2sPr PHONE NO. : 415 564 6697 415 973 5778 p Number: CiEO.0- I Revision:

1-Title: Design Calculation Cover Sheet PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY Cale Number GEO.DCPP.01.30 GEOSCIENCES DEPARTMENT Revision 0 CA LCLULATION DOCUMENT Date 11/21/2001 Calc Pages: Verificagtion Method: See Summary -N, Verification Pages; See Surm mury: -,14 'fITE: Determination of Potential EarthqUake-hIduced Displaceents of Potential Sliding Masses along DCPP rSFSi Transport Route PREPARED BY VERTFIED BY: APPROVED BY: DATE V /e, ZV- LiA~ Printed Name &A:T RU Organization Printed Najne Organization DATEniz tion Mrntecl Karne Organization .&<: S. C"OL -G r .,. ... 3'. .n ............

I AGE 1 P 4 AGE 4 A-1 p ,r. ° Calculation 52.27.100.740, Rev. 0, Attachment A, Pg. -.z of 48 PG&E Number: Geosciences Department Revision:

Departmental Calculation Procedure Title: Design Calculation Cover Sheet PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY GEOSCIENCES DEPARTMENT CALCULATION DOCUMENT Calc Number GEO.DCPP.01.30 Revision 0 Date 11/21/2001 Calc Pages: Verification Method: See Summary Verification Pages: See Summary -..TITLE: Determination of Potential Earthquake-Induced Displacements of Potential Sliding Masses along DCPP ISFSI Transport Route PREPARED BY: VERIFIED BY: DATE I\7.T4 2141 I AN- WA -- r Printed Name Printed Name/,of Cr F0 M%4 sT RI )Organization DATE Organization APPROVED BY: DATE Printed Name GEO.001 4~-Organization Calculation 52.27.100.740, Rev. 0, Attachment A, Pg. 3 of 48 CALCULATION PACKAGE GEO.DCPP.01.30 REVISION 0 Calculation Title: Determination of Earthquake-Induced Displacements of Potential Sliding Masses along DCPP ISFSI Transport Route (Newmark Analysis) Calculation No.: GEO.DCPP.01.30 Revision No.: 0 Calculation Author: Zhi-Liang Wang Calculation Date: 11/21/01 PURPOSE The purpose of this calculation package is to estimate earthquake-induced permanent displacements of potential sliding masses along DCPP ISFSI transport route using Newmark type analyses. The calculations reported in this package were performed in accordance with the requirements of Geomatrix Consultants, Inc. Work Plan Revision 2 (dated December 8, 2000), entitled "Laboratory Testing of Soil and Rock Samples, Slope Stability Analyses, and Excavation Design for Diablo Canyon Power Plant Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation Site." ASSUMPTrlONS Not applicable. INPUT 1. Five sets of rock motions originating on the Hosgn fault: Transmittal from PG&E Geosciences dated September 28, 2001 (Attachment I as confirmed in Attachment 7). 2. Plan and three cross sections along the transport route (Sections D-D', E-E', and L-L'): Transmittal from PG&E Geosciences, dated November 12, 2001 (Attachment 2). 3. Azimuths of three cross-sections along transport route (Attachment

1) 4. Orientation (azimuth) of the strike of the llosgn fault: Transmittal from William Lettis & Associates dated August 23, 2001 (Attachment 4 as confirmed in Attachment 8). 5. Direction of positive fault parallel component on Hosgri fault: Transmittal from PG&E Geosciences dated October 18, 2001 (Attachment 5as confirmed in Attachment 6). 6. Yield accelerations and locations for potential sliding masses from calculation package GEO.DCPP.01.28, revision 0. 7. Average acceleration time histories in potential sliding masses from calculation package GEO.DCPP.01.29, revision 0.IAProj ect\6000s\6427.006\geo.dcpp.0 1.30\GEO.DCPP.01.30.doc Page I of 46 Calculation 52.27.100.740, Rev. 0, Attachment A, Pg. -of 48 CALCULATION PACKAGE GEO.DCPP.01.30 REVISION 0 METHODOLOGY Development of Rotated Motions along Sections L-L' and E-E' Geosciences department of PG&E developed five sets of possible earthquake rock motions for the ISFSI site (see Attachment 1, as confirmed in Attachment

7) to be used as input to the analyses.

These motions are estimated to originate on the Hosgri fault about 4.5 km west of the plant site. Both fault normal and fault parallel components were determined for each of the five sets of motions. The fault parallel component incorporated the fling effect and its positive direction was specified in the southeasterly fault direction (see Attachment 5, as confirmed in Attachment 6). The fault normal component has a direction normal to the fault, and its polarity can be either positive or negative depending on the assumed location of the initiation of the rupture. Based on Attachments 3 and 4 as confirmed in Attachment 7, the direction of movement along cross section L-L' (which as shown in Figure 1 has an azimuth of 67 degrees) is 91 degrees (counter-clock wise) from the direction of the strike of the Hosgri fault. (i.e., to the southeast, see Attachment 2). The fault normal component can be at + 90 degrees from fault parallel direction, that is 91+90 = 181 (or 91-90 = 1) degrees from the direction of section L-L'. From these relations, the ground motion component along section L-L' can be determined from the specified components along the fault normal and fault parallel directions. Similar computations are made for section E-E' that has an azimuth of 35 degrees as shown in Figure 1, and thus is 123 degrees (counter clock wise) from the direction of the positive fault parallel component of the Hosgri fault. The computed motions along the directions of sections L-L' and E-E' will be referred to as the rotated components. The rotated component along each of the specified section is the sum of the projections of the fault normal and fault parallel components along the direction of the section. The formulation is as follows: Rot' = Fp cos(0) + FN sin(0) and Rot- = Fp cos(0) -FN sin(0)l:\Project\6000s\6427.006\geo.dcpp.01.30\GEO.DCPP.01.30.doc Page 2 of 46 Calculation 52.27.100.740, Rev. 0, Attachment A, Pg. 5 of 48 CALCULATION PACKAGE GEO.DCPP.01.30 REVISION 0 in which the F, and F,, are fault parallel and fault normal components of the acceleration time histories, Rot' is the component along the section (for a positive fault normal component) and Rot is the component along the section (for a negative fault normal component). 0 is the angle between up-slope direction of the section analyzed and the fault parallel direction (southeast). The five sets of earthquake motions on the Hosgri fault, are now rotated to earthquake motions along the up-slope direction of cross sections L-L' and E-E'. For a given angle between the analyzed section and the fault direction, there are 10 rotated earthquake motions, because for each set the positive and negative directions of the fault normal component are considered separately. Procedures for Permanent Displacement Calculation The procedure used to estimate permanent displacements is based on the concept of yield acceleration proposed by Newmark (1965) and modified by Makdisi and Seed (1978). It involves the following steps: 1. A yield acceleration, ky, at which a potential sliding surface would develop a factor of safety of unity, is estimated using limit equilibrium, pseudo-static slope stability methods. The yield acceleration depends on the slope geometry, the ground water conditions, the undrained shear strength of the slope material, and the location of the potential sliding surface. The analyses are presented in calculation package GEO.DCPP.01.28, revision 0. 2. The seismic coefficient time history (and the maximum seismic coefficient, kmax) induced within a potential sliding mass is estimated using two-dimensional dynamic finite element methods. The seismic coefficient is the ratio of the force induced by an earthquake in a sliding block to the total mass of that block. Alternatively, the seismic coefficient time history can be obtained directly by averaging acceleration values from several different nodal points within the sliding block at each time interval. These analyses are presented in calculation package GEO.DCPP.01.29, revision 0. 3. For a specified potential sliding mass, the seismic coefficient time history for that mass is compared with the yield acceleration ky. When the seismic coefficient exceeds the yield acceleration, down-slope movement will occur along the direction of the assumed failure plane. The movement will decelerate and will stop after the level of the induced acceleration drops below the yield acceleration, and the relative velocity of the sliding 1:\Project\6000s\6427.006\geo.dcpp.01.30\GEO.DCPP.0 1.30.doc Page 3 of 46 Calculation 52.27.100.740, Rev. 0, Attachment A, Pg. (- of 48 CALCULATION PACKAGE GEO.DCPP.01.30 REVISION 0 mass drops to zero. The accumulated down-slope permanent displacement is calculated by double-integrating the increments of the seismic coefficient time history that exceed the yield acceleration. The program DEFORMP (see software section below) was used to compute the permanent displacements. The results of these computations are presented below. SOFTWARE The program DEFORMP was validated in GEO.DCPP.01.35, revision 1 and used in this package for the displacement computation. ANALYSIS The earthquake-induced deformation was initially estimated (in an approximate manner) using a Newmark type (Newmark, 1965) analysis for a sliding block on a rigid plane. An estimated yield acceleration of 0.5g (based on estimates from calculation package GEO.DCPP.01.28) was used to calculate the deformation of the potential sliding masses. The displacement was computed for the negative direction (representing down-slope movement) only. The down-slope permanent displacement of the sliding mass was integrated by using the input rock motions in the positive direction (representing up-slope direction) only. These preliminary displacement estimates were used to help in selecting the ground motion time histories that provided the largest permanent displacement, for subsequent use as input to the dynamic response analyses. Table 1 shows the calculated down-slope permanent displacements (for the five sets of rotated rock motions) using the program DEFORMP, following the Newmark rigid block approach described above. Details of the DEFORMP calculations including the input and output files are included in the enclosed compact disc. The results indicate that, on average, ground motion sets 1, 5, 6, provided the largest displacements (0.30 feet to 0.51 feet) for yield acceleration of 0.5g. Set 1 motion, when combined with the negative fault normal component, produced 0.30 feet of displacement at section E-E', however when combined with the positive fault normal component, produced much smaller displacement than that from sets 5 and 6. Accordingly rock motion sets 5 and 6 were selected as the input motions for the dynamic finite element analyses that are described in calculation package GEO.DCPP.01.29. Both motions are I:\Project\6000s\6427.006\geo.dcpp.01.30\GEO.DCPP.01.30.doc Page 4 of 46 Calculation 52.27.100.740, Rev. 0, Attachment A, Pg. -1 of 48 CALCULATION PACKAGE GEO. DCPP.01.30 REVISION 0 rotated relative to the orientations of sections L-L' and E-E' using the fault parallel and the negative fault normal components. TABLE 1. DOWN SLOPE DISPLACEMENT CALCULATED BASED ON ROTATED INPUT MOTIONS ALONG SECTIONS L-L' AND E-E' (DISPLACEMENT UNIT: FEET, YIELD ACCELERATION: 0.5g)Set No. Description Polarity ky=0.50g of FN E-E 1 2 3 L-L91 Set 1 Lucerne FN- 0.05 0.11 FN+ 0.30 0.16 Set 2a Yarimca FN- 0.10 0.23 FN+ 0.08 0.03 Set 3 LGPC FN- 0.09 0.09 FN+ 0.08 0.06 Set 5 El Centro FN- 0.24 0.18 FN+ 0.13 0.15 Set 6 Saratoga FN- 0.51 0.38 FN+ 0.07 0.05 RESULTS Earthquake-induced Displacements at full ground motions The results of stability analyses were reported in calculation package GEO.DCPP.01.28. Using the yield accelerations for potential sliding masses having the lowest factor of safety obtained for section L-L' and E-E' in calculation package GEO.DCPP.0 1.28, the potential for permanent displacements was evaluated using the concept of yield acceleration and procedure described above. The potential sliding masses and the node points where the computed acceleration time histories were used to develop average-acceleration time histories for each sliding mass, are presented in Figures 2 and 3, for sections L-L' and E-E', respectively. The computed average acceleration time histories for the potential sliding masses are presented in Figures 4 and 5 for sections L-L' and E-E', respectively. The computed peak seismic coefficient, kmax, for the potential sliding masses at sections L-L' and E-E' are listed in Table 2.:\Project\6000s\6427.006\geo.dcpp.01.30\GEO.DCPP.01.30.doc Page 5 of 46 Calculation 52.27.100.740, Rev. 0, Attachment A, Pg. % of 48 CALCULATION PACKAGE GEO.DCPP.01.30 REVISION 0 The seismic coefficient time histories shown in Figures 4 and 5 were then double integrated, using the program DEFORMP, to obtain earthquake-induced displacements for any specified yield acceleration. Details of these calculations including the input and out files are included in the enclosed compact disc labeled GEO.DCPP.01.30. Note that the positive direction (shown in Figure 1) of the rock motions is consistent with the coordinate system selected for the dynamic analysis, i.e. the horizontal coordinate increases in the up-slope direction. As mentioned before, the integration was made for the ground motion amplitudes exceeding the yield acceleration in the positive direction only, and the resulting displacement in the down-slope direction was computed for each potential sliding mass. The relationships between calculated displacement and yield acceleration, ky, for each of the two potential sliding masses considered, are presented on Figures 6 and 7 for sections L-L' and E-E', respectively. The normalized relationships between calculated displacement and yield acceleration ratio, ky/kmax, for the potential sliding masses considered, are presented on Figures 8 and 9 for sections L-L' and E-E', respectively. The yield accelerations estimated for potential sliding masses at sections L-L', E-E', and D-D' are also presented in Table 2. These results were presented in calculation package GEO.DCPP.01.28, revision 0. For the yield acceleration values listed in Table 2, the earthquake induced down-slope displacements for the potential sliding masses at sections L-L' and E-E' were estimated from Figures 6 and 7, and are summarized in the same table. For the potential sliding mass at section D-D', the average acceleration time histories for potential sliding mass at section E-E' were used to calculate earthquake induced deformation (i.e. Figure 7). This is because that the seismic response of section D-D' was not analyzed, and it is estimated that it could be similar to those at section E-E'. Computed permanent displacements using set 5 motion as input, range from about 0.5 foot, for the potential sliding mass at section E-E' to about 1.3 feet for the potential sliding mass at section L-L'. Computed displacements using ground motion set 6 as input, are lower and range from 0.3 foot for the sliding mass at section E-E', to about 0.9 foot at section L-L'.l:\Project\6000s\6427.006\geo.dcpp.01.30\GEO.DCPP.0 1.30.doc Page 6 of 46 Calculation 52.27.100.740, Rev. 0, Attachment A, Pg. cl of 48 CALCULATION PACKAGE GEO.DCPP.01.30 REVISION 0 Earthquake-induced displacements at reduced ground motion levels Peak accelerations computed along the slope surface at sections L-L' and E-E', using reduced input bedrock motions (scaled to 0.15g), were reported in calculation package GEO.DCPP.01.29, Revision 0. The computed peak accelerations in the vicinity of the potential sliding masses at the two sections analyzed were of the order of 0.3g. The estimated peaks (kmax) of the average acceleration time histories within the specified potential sliding masses are expected to be less than 0.3g. The computed yield accelerations shown in Table 2 for the corresponding sliding masses are of the order of 0.5 g. Therefore, because the earthquake-induced peak accelerations are less than the yield acceleration, the potential for downslope displacements are expected to be negligible. TABLE 2 COMPUTED DOWN-SLOPE DISPLACEMENTS USING SET 1 AND SET 5 INPUT MOTIONS Sliding Input Factor of Yield Peak Seismic Down-slope Mass Motion Safety Acceleration, Coefficient, Displacement, Location k, (g) k. , (g) feet L-L' Set 5 1.60 0.46 1.15 1.3 E-E" Set 5 3.38 0.57 1.07 0.50 D-D" Set 5 2.21 0.45 1.07 1.1 L-L' Set 6 1.60 0.46 0.97 0.90 E-E' Set 6 3.38 0.57 0.91 0.32 D-D' Set 6 2.21 0.45 0.91 0.85 REFERENCES

1. Geomatrix Consultants, Inc. Work Plan, Laboratory Testing of Soil and Rock Samples, Slope Stability Analyses, and Excavation Design for Diablo Canyon Power Plant Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation Site, Revision 2, dated December 8, 2000. 2. Geosciences Calculation Package GEO.DCPP.01.28, Revision 0, Stability and yield acceleration analysis of potential sliding masses along DCPP ISFSI transport route. 3. Geosciences Calculation Package GEO.DCPP.01.29, Revision 0, Determination of seismic coefficient time histories for potential sliding masses on DCPP ISFSI transport route.l:\Project\6000s\6427.006\geo.dcpp.01

.30\GEO.DCPP.0 1.30.doc Page 7 of 46 Calculation 52.27.100.740, Rev. 0, Attachment A, Pg. to of 48 CALCULATION PACKAGE GEO.DCPP.01.30 REVISION 0 4. Geosciences Calculation Package GEO.DCPP.01.35, Revision 1, Verification of computer code -DEFORMP.

5. Makdisi, F.I., and Seed, H.B., 1978, Simplified procedure for estimating dam and embankment earthquake-induced deformations:

Journal of the Geotechnical Engineering Division, American Society of Civil Engineers, v. 104, no. GT7, July, pp. 849-867.

6. Newmark, N.M., 1965, Effects of earthquakes on dams and embankments:

Geotechnique, v. 15, no. 2, p. 139-160. ATTACHMENTS

1. 09/28/2001, PG&E Geosciences, Robert K. White, Re: Confirmation of transmittal of inputs for DCPP ISFSI slope stability analyses.

2. 11/12/01, PG&E Geosciences, Robert K. White, Re: Forwarding of approved plan and cross-sections D-D', E-E', and L-L' for DCPP ISFSI transport route stability analyses 3. 11/9/01, William Lettis & Associates, Inc.. Jeff Bachhuber, Re: Azimuths for Analytical Cross-sections

-ISFSI, e-mail transmittal to F. Makdisi.

4. 08/23/2001, William Lettis & Associates.

Inc., Jeff Bachhuber, Re: Revised Estimates for Hosgri Fault Azimuth, DCPP ISFSI Project.

5. 10/18/2001, PG&E Geosciences, Joseph Sun, Re: Positive direction of the fault parallel component time history on the Hosgri fault. 6. 10/25/2001, PG&E Geosciences, Robert White, Re: Input parameters for calculations, 7. 10/31/2001, PG&E Geosciences, Robert White. Re: Confirmation of preliminary inputs to calculations for DCPPISFSI site. 8. 11/1/2001, PG&E Geosciences, Robert White. Re: Confirmation of additional inputs to calculations for DCPP ISFSI site. 9. 11/19/01, PG&E Geosciences, Robert K. White. Re: Transmittal of additional inputs for DCPP ISFSI transport route analysis.

ENCLOSURE Compact Disc (CD), labeled, "Data Files for Calculation Package GEO.DCPP.01.30" with input and output files for computed earthquake-induced displacements of potential sliding masses.:\Project\6000s\6427.006\geo.dcpp.01.30\GEO.DCPP.01.30.doc Page 8 of 46 Calculation 52.27.100.740, Rev. 0, Attachment A, Pg. j_ of 48 CALCULATION PACKAGE GEO.DCPP.01.30 REVISION 0 N Az= 3380 Section E-E' Az= 350 Section L-L' Az= 670-Motion, A Figure 1. Orientations of Section E-E', Section L-L' and Hosgri Fault.Page 9 of 46 I K 280 260 240 220 a, .o 200 U, w 180 160 140-K I I I I I I 120 T I r -I I 300 320 340 360 380 400 420 440 460 480 500 520 540 560 580 600 Horizontal Distance, feet Figure 2. Potential Sliding Mass and Node Points of Computed Acceleration Time Histories for Cross Section L-L'.K, 0 C) n C-) C) n rn 0 0 00 w w 4? 180 C" .o 160_. 140 uJ 120 100- -3 80- -.-r-T--650 700 750 800 850 900 950 1000 1050 1100 1150 1200 1250 Horizontal Distance, feet z 00 0 Figure 3. Potential Sliding Mass and Node Points of Computed Acceleration Time Histories for Cross Section E-E'. b 0 <0 C/) C) z. o (-qqw /1.0 S 0.5 ' -0.0 a) (D O-0.5 < -1.0 L _j_ Average cbeleration inpotential slidipg mass using set 5 motion 0 10 20 30 40 30 40 1.0 0.5 .2 . _O 0.0 8 -0.5 Average acceleration in potential sliding mass using set 6 motion -1 .0 m- , 0 10 20 30 40 Time (second) > mo& 0 Figure 4. Average acceleration time histories of potential sliding masses at section L-L'. Z R Q 0 1.0 C 0.5 S o o-F c..) Z 0.0 -0.5 = Average apceleration in eotential sliding mass using set 5 motion -1.0 i 0 10 20 30 40 1.0 0.5 0.0 8 -0.5 > n Average cceleration in potential slidipg mass using set 6 motion , -1,0 > > 0 10 20 30 40 -e Time (second) Figure 5. Average acceleration time histories of potential sliding masses at section E-E'. zL. 00O Calculation 52.27.100.740, Rev. 0, Attachment A, Pg. IL of 48 CALCULATION PACKAGE GEO.DCPP.01.30 REVISION 0 100.00 10.00 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 ky Figure 6. Permanent displacement versus yield acceleration from average acceleration time histories, section L-L'.Page 14 of 46 a) E 1.00 a) C., C 0.10 0.01 1.0 I 0.2 0.4 ky 0.6 0.8 Figure 7. Permanent displacement versus yield acceleration from average acceleration time histories, section E-E'.Page 15 of 46 100.0 10.00 Calculation 52.27.100.740, Rev. 0, Attachment A, Pg. L- of 48 CALCULATION PACKAGE GEO.DCPP.01.30 REVISION 0 0 _ _ Potential sliding mass in section E-E' -... ..------ from set 5 motion, kmax = 1.07 g --from set 6 motion, kmax = 0.91 g NN \\\\ _ -N-\E C.) CZ CL) 0 1.00 0.10 0.01 0.0 1.0 100.0 0.2 0.4 ky/kma x 0.6 0.8 1.0 Figure 8. Permanent displacement versus yield acceleration ratio from average acceleration time histories, section L-L'.Page 16 of 46 Calculation 52.27.100.740, Rev. 0, Attachment A, Pg. q of 48 CALCULATION PACKAGE GEO.DCPP.01.30 REVISION 0 03 Potential sliding mass in section L-L' ,, -------- -from set 5 motion, kmax = 1.15 g ,,-from set 6 motion, kmax = 0.97g \ , \ -___ \ 7N 10.0(a) E a) CD ci5 1.00 0.10 0.01 0.0 Calculation 52.27.100.740, Rev. 0, Attachment A, Pg. tq of 48 CALCULATION PACKAGE GEO.DCPP.01.30 REVISION 0 100.00 10.00 E 1.00 D 0 CuL C', 0.10 0.01 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 ky/kmax Figure 9. Permanent displacement versus yield acceleration ratio from average acceleration time histories, section E-E'.I Page 17 of 46 Calculation 52.27.100.740, Rev. 0, Attachment A, Pg. 70 of 48 CALCULATION PACKAGE GEO.DCPP.01.30 REVISION 0 ATTACHMENT 1 Page 18 of 46 Calculation 52.27.100.740, Rev. 0, Attachment A, Pg. IA of 48 Pacific Gas and Electric Company CALCULATION PACKAGE GEO.DCPP.01.30 Geosciences REVISION 0 245 Market Street, Room 418B Mail Code N4C P.O. Box 770000 San Francisco, CA 94177 415/973-2792 Fax 415/973-5778 page 1 of 2 trans2fml .doc:rkw:9/28/01 Page 19 of 46 I I IDr. Faiz Makdisi Geomatrix Consultants 2101 Webster Street Oakland, CA 94612 September 28, 2001 Re: Confirmation of transmittal of inputs for DCPP ISFSI slope stability analyses DR. MAKDISI: This is to confirm transmittal of inputs related to slope stability analyses you are scheduled to perform for the Diablo Canyon Power Plant (DCPP) Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation (ISFSI) under the Geomatrix Work Plan entitled "Laboratory Testing of Soil and Rock Samples, Slope Stability Analyses, and Excavation Design for the Diablo Canyon Power Plant Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation Site." Inputs transmitted include: Drawing entitled "Figure 21-19, Cross Section I-1'." dated 9/27/01, labeled "Draft," and transmitted to you via overnight mail under cover letter from Jeff Bachhuber of WLA and dated 9/27/01. Time histories in Excel file entitled "timehistories 3comprevl.xls," dated 8/17/2001, file size 3,624 KB, which I transmnited to you via email on 8/17/2001. Please confirm receipt of these items and forward confirmation to me in writing. Please note that both these inputs are preliminary until the calculations they are part of have been fully approved. At that time, I will inform you in writing of their status. These confirmation and transmittal letters are the vehicles for referencing input sources in your calculations. Calculation 52.27.100.740, Rev. 0, Attachment A, Pg. 2V of 48 CALCULATION PACKAGE GEO.DCPP.01.30 REVISION 0 Confirmation of transmittal of inputs for DCPP ISFSI slope stability analyses Although the Work Plan does not so state, as you are aware all calculations are required to.be performed as per Geosciences Calculation Procedure GEO.001, entitled "Development and Independent Verification of Calculations for Nuclear Facilities," revision 3. All of your staff assigned to this project have been previously trained under this procedure. I am also attaching a copy of the Work Plan. Please make additional copies for members of your staff assigned to this project, review the Work Plan with them, and have them sign Attachment

1. Please then make copies of the signed attachment and forward to me. If you have any questions, feel free to call. Thanks. ROBERT K. WHITE Attachment cc: Chris Hartz page 2 of 2 Page 20 of 46 Calculation 52.27.100.740, Rev. 0, Attachment A, Pg. _7 of 48 CALCULATION PACKAGE GEO.DCPP.01.30 REVISION 0 ATTACHMENT 2 Page 21 of 46 Calculation 52.27.100.740, Rev. 0, Attachment A, Pg. gý of 48 Pacific Gas and Electric Company CALCULATION PACKAGE GEO.DCPP.01.30 Geosciences REVISION 0 245 Market Street, Room 418B Mail Code N4C P.O. Box 770000 San Francisco, CA 94177 415/973-2792 Fax 415/973-5778 DR. FAIZ MAKDISI GEOMATRIX CONSULTANTS 2101 WEBSTER STREET OAKLAND, CA 94612 November 12, 2001 Re: Forwarding of Approved Plan and Cross Sections D-D', E-E', and L-L' for DCPP ISFSI Transport Route Stability Analyses DR. MAKDISI: Please find enclosed the following approved plan and cross sections from Geosciences Calculation GEO.DCPP.01.21, rev. 1: Figure 21-3, Geologic Map of the ISFSI Site and Transport Route Vicinity Figure 21-17a, Cross Section D-D' through Patton Cove Landslide Figure 21-18a, Cross Section E-E' Figure 21-25, Cross Section L-L' for your use in DCPP ISFSI transport route stability analyses.

These figures supersede those transmitted to you in draft form by Rich Koehler of William Lettis Associates on October 25, 2001. Also for your use, we have determined the azimuth of each section from Figure 21-3, as follows: Section D-D': 38 degrees Section E-E': 34 degrees Section L-L': 67 degrees If you have any questions regarding this information, please call. ROBERT K. WHITE Enclosures page 1 of 1 1tr2fm6.doc:rkw: 11/12/01 Page 22 of 46 Artlificial fill (engineered) Quaternary deposits,- alluvium, debris flow. Colluvium. landside, Holocene colluvial fan NOTE: Only suricial deposhs greater than about 5 ftet thick shown Pleistocene colluvial fan Pleistocene marine terrace depost (inferred) Volcanc rocx (middle Miocene) diabase intrusive sijll and dikes. Obispo Formation (lower and middle Miocene) Member Tof. Unit b -sandstone. dolomitic Sandstone, dolomite and minor linestone: gray, yellow-brown, brown, and bluisn gray; medium to very thick beading. some units massive: moderately hard to hard; medium density; calcite and quartz veins; very blocky to blocky.1 Member Toft Unit c -slitCeOus claystone and sillstone, with 9 esser sandstone 7r Member Tor -volCanhc rock, zeolitized and tuff Odl Explanation Geologic contact. solid line where well-defined, dashed where approximate, queried where uncertain. Landslides. arrows indicate direction of maverent hachures define head scarp region Debris flow path Axis of synclne, solid arrow shows plunge, dashed where approximate Axis of solid arrow snows plunge, dashed where approximate NOTES: i, This topograshic map predates constructiont o Diablo Canyon Power Plant ano fc-ilities are only approxvanaery located.

2. Topography southeast of power plant rellects, in pant, pre-. constructon ground surface(lSFSl cut slope is Scematic).

3.IThe ISFSI, CTF, and Transport Route ater ocamed by placing 11em as closely possible to topographic and culural features and are not consi"ered prectsie-Axis of monocine, solid arrow shows plunge, dashed where approximate 290' Buried shoreline, angle of marine terrace wave cut platform; elevation indicated SFootprint of 500 kV tower Strike and dip of fault Strike and dip of bedding 85k.. 10 60 , -.=A-: Horizontal bedding 0 , Transport route Bedroct fault with attitude: dashed where approximate, dotted where covered. queried where uncertain DIABLO CANYON ISFSi FIGURE 21-3 GEOLOGIC MAP OFTHE ISFSI SITE AND TRANSPORT ROUTE VICINITY-9 Boring from 1967 power block study 1977 boring DDH-D at power block Boring from previous HLA and HLM Studies "Boring for ISFSI investigations, WLA 1996 to 2001 B B' Geologic cross section[pJm Tiolb ! F-I 0 0 '0 0 on I Calculation 52.27.100.740, Rev. 0, Attachment A, Pg. i_ of 48 CALCULATION PACKAGE GEO.DCI REV 7IN77 SION 0 F15 LL Clt z 0 z 0 -j IM LO z 0 n 0 rrW (1)(1-0 .1-1l3 Page 148 of 171 Page 24 of 46 0 0a (0 >o 0 rr CL: C) 0 w (D i/ ..-_ i \~ SI /g ._ _ I_ I .--------L - n 4m c 2 ----i I ------ ...... ~i2 C / >0 ---- -----------------.- ---.---.--- --- D-- 7, I -..--5.............. ..... -.. -.............. l ij MZ 21 " ! J.................. . -T, -H .. ... .....-...... ....-.4 S/ ,. See Figure 21-l 8b .. ... ...-\ ------ Calculation 52.27.100.740, Rev. 0, Attachment A, Pg. 2A of 48 CALCULATION PACKAGE GEO.DCPP.01.30 REVISION 0 ATTACHMENT 3 Page 27 of 46 Calculation 52.27.100.740, Rev. 0, Attachment A, Pg. 3-_ of 48 CALCULATION PACKAGE GEO.DCPP.01.30 REVISION 0 Faiz Makdisi From: Jeff Bachhuber [bachhuber@lettis.com] Sent: Friday, November 09, 2001 9:42 AM To: Page, William Cc: FMakdisi@geomatrix.com

Subject:

AZIMUTHS FOR ANALYTICAL CROSS SECTIONS -ISFSI Nov. 9, 2001 Bill: Per your request, we have calculated azimuths for cross sections used for stability analyses for the DCPP ISFSI project. The azimuths were determined using a protractor and the WLA (2001) Geologic Map of the ISFS1 Site and Transport Route Vicnity (Figure 21-3 from Calculation Package 21). The following azimuths were determined: Section D-D': above transport route -0290 below transport route -0380 average total section above and below transport route -032' Section E-E': below elevation 600' -035° above elevation 600' -0190 Section I-I': 300' Section L-L': 0670 Please call me if you have any questions regarding these azimuths, or require additional information. WILLIAM LETTIS & ASSOCIATES, INC. Jeff Bachhuber Jeff Bachhuber William Lettis & Associates, Inc. 1777 Botelho Dr., STE 262 Walnut Creek, CA 94596 bachhuber@lettis.com (925) 256-6070 TEL (925) 256-6076 FAX l1 Page 28 of 46 Calculation 52.27.100.740, Rev. 0, Attachment A, Pg. 3_ of 48 CALCULATION PACKAGE GEO.DCPP.01.30 REVISION 0 ATTACHMENT 4 Page 29 of 46

CALCULATION PACKAGE GEO.DCPP.01.30 REVISION 0 William Lettis & Associates, inc. 1777 Bctelho Drive, Stilte 262, WaRlnt Creek, California 94596 Voice: (925) 256-6070l FAX: (925) 256-6076 MEMORANDUM TO: Dr. Faiz Makdisi -Geomatrix Consultants, Inc. FROM: Jeff L. Bachhuber -William Lettis & Associates, Inc. DATE: August 23, 2001 RE: Revised Estimates for Hosgri Fault Azimuth, DCPP ISFSI Project FAIZ: This memorandum provides a revised strike azimuth of 338' for the I-Iosgri fault for evaluation of ground motion directional components for slope stability analyses at the PG&E DCPP ISFSI site. The revised azimuth presented in this memorandum supercedes the previous estimated azimuths (328' to 335') presented in our memorandum dated August 8, 2001, and is based on a re-evaluation of fault maps in the PG&E LTSP (1988), and ISFSI project Calculation Package GEO.01.21. The revised estimated average strike for the Hosgri fault nearest the ISFSI site (between Morro Bay and San Luis Bay) is 338'. Figure 21-23 of Calculation Package GEO.01.21, which previously showed an azimuth of 3400 for the Hosgri fault, will be revised to correspond to this re-interpreted average strike. Discrete faults and local reaches of the fault zone exhibit variations in strike azimuth between about 328' and 338', but the average overall strike of 3380 is believed to be the best approximation for the ground motion modeling, Please call. me if you have any questions or require further input for this issue. Jeff Bachhuber Cc: Rob White/Bill Page -PG&E Geosciences Page 30 of 46 Calculation 52.27.100.740, Rev. 0, Attachment A, Pg. i,_ of 48 CALCULATION PACKAGE GEO.DCPP.01.30 REVISION 0 ATTACHMENT 5 Page 31 of 46 Calculation 52.27.100.740, Rev. 0, Attachment A, Pg. a-of 48 CALCULATION PACKAGE GEO.DCPP.01.30 REVISION 0 Pacific Gas & Electric Company I¶ Geosciences Department P.O- 8jox 770000, Mail C. San Francisco, CA 94177 Fax: (415) 973-5773 TELEFAX COVER SHEET To: Company: Phone: 6r'l- 4I",-Fax: 44 4-1 cc: Date: C(2c.-L ' Number of pages including cover sheet: -_ _REMARKS: o Per request C3 For review C] Reply ASAP E Please comment J f2 E~M fa Z t.Are ciu 1 11 4 t ,11'6e-i .1{ . I Page 32 of 46 From: Company: PG&E Phone: 1415) 973- :-L4' Fax: 1415) 973-5778 C:%031 ý--'Aoc Calculation 52.27.100.740, Rev. 0, Attachment A, Pg. IS of 48 CALCULATION PACKAGE GEO.DCPP.01 30 REVISION 0 PACIFIC. GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPAN-f GEOS CIENCES DEP.ARTMEENT CALCULATION DOCUMNENT Calc Number 6' °[./r Revision ._ Date Oci"o.k-i / 2',)( Caic Pages;: Z-4, Verification Method: A Verification Pages: 17 '< ~ t 7ý /O- L'/ PREPARED BY: DATE C A~1-~( 3 Printed Name VERPFTED BY: Organization DATE Orai er/on Printed Name organization APPROVED BY: DATE OrganizatiOn-L i. I LOV~D "" -, LU-F --17 " "--I.. -_., .:.. .... ... .. C -..."<", , ,"- Page 33 of 46 , , l-M.Prin-Eed*;ame ,;'¢p : ,/D % Calculation 52.27.100.740, Rev. 0, Attachment A, Pg. _3 of 48 CALCULATION PACKAGE GEO.DCPP.01.30 REVISION 0 Calc Number: GEO.DCPP.01.14 Rev Number: 1 Sheet Number: 4 of 26 Dare: 10/12/01 6. BODY OF CALCULATIONS Step 1: S-wave arrival times The approximate arrival times of the S-waves is estimated by visual inspection of the velocity time histories (Figures 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5). The selected arrival times are listed in Table 6-1. Table 6- 1. Time of Fling Set Reference Time History Approximate Arrival Time Polarity* Arrival time of of fling (tl) S-waves (see), I Lucerne 8.0 7.1 -1 2a Yarimca 9.0 8.5 -1 3 LGPC 4.0 3.4 -1 5 El Centro (1940) 1.5 0.0 1 6 Saratoga 4.5 3.7 -1

The polarity is applied to the fault parallel time history from calculations GEO.DCPP.01.13 (rev 1) to cause constructive interference between the S-wave and the fling- (eq. 5-2). A fling arrival time is selected by visual inspection of the interference of the velocity of the transient motion and the fling (Figures 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5). The selected fling arrival time are listed in Table 6-1. Since DCPP is on the east side of the Hosgri fault and the fault has right-lateral slip, the permanent tectonic deformation at the site will be to the southeast.

In the time histories the fling has a positive polarity. Since the tectonic deformation will be: to the southeast, the positive direction of the fault parallel time history is defined to the* southeast. Step 2: Fling Time History Using the values of A, o, and Tiln given in input 4-1, and the values oft 1 given in Table 6-1, the fling time history is determined using eq. (5-1). The computed fling time histories for the 5 sets are shown in Figures 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5.Page 34 of 46 Calculation 52.27.100.740, Rev. 0, Attachment A, Pg. of 48 CALCULATION PACKAGE GEO.DCPP.01.30 REVISION 0 ATTACHMENT 6 Page 35 of 46 Calculation 52.27.100.740, Rev. 0, Attachment A, Pg. u_ of 48 CALCULATION PACKAGE GEO.DCPP.01.30 Pacific Gas and Electric Company Geosciences REVISION 0 245 Market Street. Room 418B Mail Code N4C P.O. Box 770000 San Francisco, CA 9417 415/973-2792 Fax 4151973-5778 DR. FAIZ MAKDISI GEOMATRIX CONSULTANTS 2101 WEBSTER STREET OAKLAND, CA 94612 October 25, 2001 Re: Input parameters for calculations DR. MAKDISI: As required by Geosciences Calculation Procedure GEO.001, entitled "Development and Independent Verification of Calculations for Nuclear Facilities," rev. 4, I am providing you with the following input items for your use in preparing calculations.

1. The shear wave velocity profiles obtained in borings BA98-1 and BA98-3 in 1998 are presented in Figure 21-42, attached, of Calculation GEO.DCPP.01.21, entitled "Analysis of Bedrock Stratigraphy and Geologic Structure at the DCPP ISFSI Site," rev. 0, and can be so referenced.

These profiles were previously presented in Figure 10 of the WLA report entitled "Geologic and Geophysical Investigation, Dry Cask Storage Facility, Borrow and Water Tank Sites," dated January 5, 1999. 2. The average unit weight of rock obtained from the hillside has been determined to be 140 pounds per cubic foot, as documented in a data report entitled "Rock Engineering Laboratory Testing -GeoTest Unlimited." 3. Regarding the time histories provided to you on 8/17/01, since the tectonic deformation will be to the southeast, the positive direction of the fault parallel time history is defined as to the southeast, as described in Geosciences Calculation GEO.DCPP.01.14, entitled "Development of Time Histories 'with Fling," rev. 1, page 4. 4. The source of the shear modulus and damping curves are Figures Q19-22 and Q19-23, attached, from PG&E, 1989, Response to NRC Question 19 dated December 13, 1988, and can be so referenced. Regarding format of calculations, please observe the following: trt2fml .doc:rkw: 10/25/01 Page 36 of 46 Calculation 52.27.100.740, Rev. 0, Attachment A, Pg. )A of 48 Faiz Makdisi F Contents of CD-ROMs attached to calculations should be listed in the calculation, including title, size, and date saved associated with each file on the CD-ROM. If the number of-files is considerable, a simple screen dump of the CD-ROM contents is sufficient. If you have any questions regarding the above, please call me. ROBERT K. WHITE Attachments Page 37 of 46 CALCULATION at ions REVISION 0 Calculation 5 2.27lO.1 O,ý5 v. 0, Ayacisly tt Ai-Pt.,Vof 48 Borings 98BA-1 and 98BA-4P Boring 9811A-3 Velocity (mpters/second) 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 300 350700 -R1-R2VsBA98-04: 7 -O-C--s-RI Vs BA 98-04 ---R I VP 8A 96-48 _______ ____

RI1-R2 'Vs BA 98-01 . j 1-R1-R2 VpBA 98-011 5 S-R1 VsBA 98-01 ; 40 ---R 1R2Vp BA 98-01t 40 SR1 \p BA 98-0 60...Pad grade at 310' 100 10_ 1200 120 2506 140 w .... ... .. .... .... ... it2 3 0 16021 1210 190 150 10000 12000 14000 02000 6000 8000 Velocity (feet/second) c 0 500 1000 1500 4000 Pad grade at 310'32 ~R 1-R2V.31 207S-R 1Vs 300 -~S-R I Vp 40 ~R 1-R2 Vp 7- 20 60 260 80-1240 100 --n220 .... .F ........

S120 14018 16016 240. 8 Velocity (meterS/second)

0) a)i 0 Note. Average velocity profiles interpreted from data. R1 -R2 = Receiver-to-receiver velocity (3.3-foot spacing) S-Al = Source- to- receiver velocity (10.3-foot spacing)K.2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 14000 Velocity (fee;isecond)

Modified from Geo Vision (1998). OCPP ISFSI SAR Section 2.6 Topical Report Appendix C F DIABLO CANYON ISFSI FIGURE 21-42 ISFSI SITE SUSPENSION LOGS AND INTERPRETED AVERAGE SEISMIC VELOCITIES G E O .IC P P O I 2 1 R E V 0O c o e 1 5 2 0 RagTT6-1ir OtoeriS 20 ý 2a(/(4000 3000 3500 4000 4000 Calculation 52.27.100.740, Rev. 0, Attachment A, Pg. k) of 48 CALCULATION PACKAGE GEO.DCPP.01.30 REVISION 0 ATTACHMENT 7 Page 39 of 46 Calculation 52.27.100.740, Rev. 0, Attachment A, Pg. 4_kof 48 CALCULATION PACKAGE GEO.DCPP.01 30 Pacific Gas and Electric Company Geosciences REVISION 0 245 Market Street, Room 418B Mail Code N4C P.O. Box 770000 San Francisco, CA 94177 415/973-2792 Fax 415/973-5778 I DR. FAIZ MAKDISI GEOMATRIX CONSULTANTS 2101 WEBSTER STREET OAKLAND, CA 94612 October 31, 2001 Re: Confirmation of preliminary inputs to calculations for DCPP ISFSI site DR. MAKDISI: A number of inputs to calculations for the DCPP ISFSI slope stability analyses have been provided to you in a preliminary fashion. This letter provides confirmation of those inputs in a formal transmittal. A description of the preliminary inputs and their formal confirmation follow. Letter to Faiz Makdisi from Rob White dated June 24, 2001.

Subject:

Recommended rock strength design parameters for DCPP ISFSI site slope stability analyses. This letter recommended using 0 50 degrees for the preliminary rock strength envelope in your stability analyses, and indicated that this value would be confirmed once calculations had been finalized and approved. Calculations GEO.DCPP.01.16, rev. 0, and GEO.DCPP.0 1.19, rev. 0, are approved and this recommended value is confirmed. Letter to Faiz Makdisi from Rob White dated September 28, 2001.

Subject:

Confirmation of transmittal of inputs for DCPP ISFSI slope stability analyses. This letter provided confirmation of transmittal of cross section I-' and time histories, and indicated that these preliminary inputs would be confirmed once calculations had been approved. Calculation GEO.DCPP.01.21, rev. 0, is approved and section I-I' as described in the September 28 letter is confirmed. A copy of the figure from the approved calculation is attached. Calculations GEO.DCPP.01.13, rev. 1, and GEO.DCPP.0 1.14, rev. 1, are both approved and time histories as described in the September 28 letter are confirmed. A CD of the time histories from the approved calculations is attached. page 1 of 2 Itr2fm3.doc:rkw: 10/31/01 "Page 40 of 46 Calculation 52.27.100.740, Rev. 0, Attachment A, Pg. __of 48 Faiz Makdisi CALCULATION PACKAGE GEO.DCPP.01.30 Confirmation of preliminary inputs to calculations for RIDMIM,1M site Email to Faiz Makdisi from Joseph Sun dated October 24, 2001.

Subject:

Ground motion parameters for back calculations. This email provided input for a back calculation to assess conservatism in clay bed properties in the slope. Inputs included maximum displacement per event of 4 inches and a factor of 1.6 with which to multiply ground motions for use in the back calculation analysis. This letter confirms those input values, with the following limitation: these values have not been developed under an approved calculation, therefore should not be used to directly determine clay bed properties for use in forward analyses, but may be used for comparative purposes only, to assess the level of conservatism in those clay bed properties determined in approved calculations Letter to Faiz Makdisi from Jeff Bachhuber dated October 10, 2001.

Subject:

Transmittal of Revised Rock Mass Failure Models -DCPP ISFSI Project. This letter provided you with figures indicating potential rock mass failure models as superimposed on section I-I'. This letter confirms PG&E approval to use these models in your analyses. These figures are labeled drafts and are currently being finalized in a revision to Calculation GEO.DCPP.01.21. Once this revision and the included figures have been approved, I will inform you in writing of their status. ROBERT K. WHITE Attachments page 2 of 2 Page 41 of 46 Calculation 52.27.100.740, Rev. 0, Attachment A, Pg. 44,of 48 CALCULATION PACKAGE GEO.DCPP.01.30 REVISION 0 ATTACHMENT 8 I Page 42 of 46 Calculation 52.27.100.740, Rev. 0, Attachment A, Pg. of 48 CALCULATION PACKAGE GEO.DCPP.0 1.30 Pacific Gas and Electric Company Geosciences REVISION 0 245 Market Street, Room 418B Mail Code N4C P.O. Box 770000 San Francisco, CA 94177 415/973-2792 Fax 415/973-5778 DR. FAIZ MAKDISI GEOMATRIX CONSULTANTS 2101 WEBSTER STREET OAKLAND, CA 94612 November 1, 2001 Re: Confirmation of additional inputs to calculations for DCPP ISFSI site DR. MAKDISI: Additional inputs to calculations for the DCPP ISFSI slope stability analyses have been provided to you by Jeff Bachhuber of William Lettis Associates. This letter provides confirmation.of our acceptance of those inputs in a formal transmittal. A description of those additional inputs and their formal acceptance follow. Letter to Faiz Makdisi from Jeff Bachhuber dated August 3, 2001.

Subject:

Ground Motion Directional Components. This letter recommended using an azimuth of 302 degrees plus or minus 10 degrees for the orientation of the most likely failure surfaces, coinciding with Section I-I'. We concur with this recommendation based on the discussion on page 53 of the approved Calculation GEO.DCPP.01.21, rev. 0, and verification of the orientation of Section I-I on Calculation Figure 21-4, attached. Letter to Faiz Makdisi from Jeff Bachhuber dated August 23, 2001.

Subject:

Revised Estimates for Hosgri Fault Azimuth, DCPP ISFSI Project. This letter recommended using an azimuth of 338 degrees for the orientation of the average strike of the Hosgri fault. We concur with this recommendation, based on verification of the orientation as presented in the LTSP plates and as shown on Figure 21-36, attached, of Calculation GEO.DCPP.01.21, rev. 0. ROBERT K. WHITE Attachments page 1 of 1 Itr2fm4.doc:rkw:I1/1/01 Page 43 of 46 Calculation 52.27.100.740, Rev. 0, Attachment A, Pg. /& of 48 CALCULATION PACKAGE GEO.DCPP.01.30 (from PG&E. 1988)Explanation -- -Fault: dashed where approximately located; teeth indicate dip direction of reverse fault; arrows indicate relative sense of displacement ..Syncline axial trace f 0.14 Late Pleistocene (post 120,000 years ago) uplift rate (meters/1000 yr) 0.16k Uplift rate (meters/1 000 yr) based on the altitude and estimated age (560,000 years) of the Q7 marine terrace REB Estero Bay Subblock FIH Irish Hills Subblock FED' Edna Subblock "NR1 Newsom Ridge Subblock Gru.UDP-.U1.21 REV U October 15, 2001 age 1 5 7 of1 2 ge 44 of 46 I SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT DIABLO CANYON ISFSI FIGURE 21-36 REGIONAL STRUCTURE MAP I f°.. Calculation 52.27.100.740, Rev. 0, Attachment A, Pg. k1 of 48 CALCULATION PACKAGE GEO.DCPP.01.30 REVISION 0 ATTACHMENT 9 Page 45 of 46 Calculation 52.27.100.740, Rev. 0, Attachment A, Pg. it of 48 LF uuv CALCULATION PACKAGE GEO.DCPP.01.30 Pacific Gas and Electric Company Geoscicnccs REVISION 0 245 Market Street, Room 418B Mail Code N4C P.O. Box 770000 San Francisco, CA 94177 415/973-2792 Fax 415/973-5778 DR. FAIZ MAKDISI GEOMATRIX CONSULTANTS 2101 WEBSTER' STREET OAKLAND, CA 94612 November 19, 2001 Re: Transmittal of additional inputs for DCPP ISFSI Transport Route Analysis DR. MAKDISI: As part of the scope of your analysis of the stability of the transport route for the DCPP ISFSI, you are assessing stability of the route at various sections using both unreduced ground motions previously transmitted to you (reference my October 31 2001 letter to you) and reduced ground motions based on incorporating results of a probabilistic seismic hazard analysis and the estimated exposure interval of the transporter on the route. A probabilistically reduced peak bedrock ground acceleration of 0.15g has been derived in calculation GEO.DCPP.01.02, and this value has been approved for further analyses. Accordingly, please scale the peak acceleration of the unreduced ground motions to this level for your transport route analyses. In addition, you are assessing the stability of transport route road fill wedges at reduced ground motion levels and with the transporter load previously transmitted to you (reference my November 5 2001 letter to you). The exact subsurface configuration of any fill wedges along the access road is currently unknown, and is shown in only a general way on sections provided to you (reference my November 12 2001 letter to you) based on general descriptions provided in the road construction specification. However, given that the density of any compacted fill derived from the native material is likely to be at or above the density of underlying native material, fill strength is likely to be comparable to the native material, and the exact configuration of the fill is therefore not of consequence. Please proceed with near-surface stability analyses with this assumption. If you have any questions regarding this information, please call. ROBERT K. WHITE page 1 of 1 Page 46 of 46}}

ML020290396

Text

7.2 Index

Subject:

7.2 TITLE

Subject:

Subject:

Subject:

Subject:

Subject:

Subject:

7.2 Index

Subject:

7.2 TITLE

Subject:

Subject:

Subject:

Subject:

Subject:

Subject:

Subject:

Navigation menu

Search