ML18003A993
| ML18003A993 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Clinch River |
| Issue date: | 12/15/2017 |
| From: | James Shea Tennessee Valley Authority |
| To: | Office of New Reactors |
| Fetter A | |
| References | |
| TVACLINCHRIVERESP, TVACLINCHRIVERESP.SUBMISSION.4, CRN.P.PART08, CRN.P.PART08.1 | |
| Download: ML18003A993 (30) | |
Text
APPENDIX 0.2- Seismic Reflection Survey Report No Change for Rev. 4 Clinch River Data Report Rev. 4 CRP-1112.16 Page 0.2-1 of 38
DOCUMENTATION OF TECHNICAL REVIEW SUBCONTRACTOR WORK PRODUCT Project Name: Clinch River SMR Project Project Number: 6468-13-1072 Project Manager: Steve Criscenzo Project Technical Leads: AlTice, Carl Tockstein The report described below has been prepared by the named subcontTactor retained in accordance with the AMEC QAPD. The repott has been reviewed by an AMEC technically qualified person.
Comments have been appropriately addressed or incorporated by the subcontractor. The report is accepted for use on the Clinch River SMR Project.
MATERIAL: Report, Seismic Reflection Investigation, Clinch River SMR Project, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, report 13354-01, Rev. 2 dated AprillO, 2014 SUBCONTRACTOR: GEOVision Geophysical Services DATE OF REVIEW AND ACCEPTANCE :_~A~p~ri~ll"---'0'-'-,=20,_,1'--'-4_ _ _ _ _ _ _ __
TECHNICAL REVIEWER: J. AJlanTice ~ 1-- --(J ...-(d.
PROJECT TECHNICAL LEAD: J. Allan Tice ~ 4- '/D*/ (4-
.ame 420 I SliiTllp Creek Dr. Dt>rl>run, NC 27703 RCN: CRP-1306.0 Clinch River Data Report Rev. 4 CRP-1112.16 Page 1 of 1 Page 0.2-2 of 38
AMEC Environment & Infrastructure, Inc.
Clinch River SMR Project AMEC Project No. 6468131072 GE~flStOn geophysical services REPORT SEISMIC REFLECTION INVESTIGATION Clinch River SMR Project Oak Ridge, Tennessee Report 13354-01 Rev 2 April 10, 2014 Geovision Report 13354-01 Clinch River Reflection Geophysics Rev 2 Page 1 of 36 April 10, 2014 Clinch River Data Report Rev. 4 CRP-1112.16 Page 0.2-3 of 38 RCN: CRP- 1213.1 Page 1 of 36
AMEC Environment & Infrastructure, Inc.
Clinch River SMR Project AMEC Project No. 6468131072 REPORT SEISMIC REFRACTION INVESTIGATION Clinch River SMR Project Oak Ridge, Tennessee GEO Vision Project No. 13354 Prepared for AMEC Environment & Infrastructure, Inc 4021 Stirrup Creek Drive, Suite 100 Durham, NC 27703 (919) 381-9900 Prepared by GEO Vision Geophysical Services, Inc.
1124 Olympic Drive Corona, CA 92881 (951) 549-1234 Report 13354-01 Rev 2 April10, 2014 Geovision Report 13354-01 Clinch River Reflection Geophysics Rev 2 Page 2 of 36 April 10, 2014 Clinch River Data Report Rev. 4 CRP-1112.16 Page 0.2-4 of 38 RCN: CRP- 1213.1 Page 2 of 36
AMEC Environment & Infrastructure, Inc.
Clinch River SMR Project AMEC Project No. 6468131072 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................................................. 5 2 METHODOLOGY ............................................................................................................................................................ 6 3 EQUIPMENT AND FIELD PROCEDURES .................................................................................................................. 9 3.1.1 Seismic Reflection Equipment ............................................................................................................................. 9 3.1.2 Field Procedures and Standardization Testing ..................................................................................................... 9 3.1.3 Site Preparation .................................................................................................................................................... 9 3.1.4 Parameter Testing .............................................................................................................................................. 10 3.1. 5 Data Acquisition Parameters and Procedures .................................................................................................... 10 4 DATA PROCESSING ..................................................................................................................................................... 12 5 INTERPRETATION ....................................................................................................................................................... 13 5.1 OVERVIEW ..................................................................................................................................... 13 5.2 SEISMIC REFLECTION SRL-1 ......................................................................................................... 14 5.3 SEISMIC REFLECTION SRL-2 .... ....... .. ...... .. ...... .. ...... .. ...... .. ...... .. ...... .. ...... .. ...... .. ...... .. ...... .. ...... .. .... 15 6
SUMMARY
...................................................................................................................................................................... 17 7 REFERENCES ................................................................................................................................................................ 18 8 CERTIFICATION ........................................................................................................................................................... 18 Geovision Report 13354-01 Clinch River Reflection Geophysics Rev 2 Page 3 of 36 April 10, 2014 Clinch River Data Report Rev. 4 CRP-1112.16 Page 0.2-5 of 38 RCN: CRP- 1213.1 Page 3 of 36
AMEC Environment & Infrastructure, Inc.
Clinch River SMR Project AMEC Project No. 6468131072 LIST OF TABLES TABLE 1: SEISMIC LINE GEOMETRY TABLE 2: AMEC SELECTED ASBUILT BOREHOLE LOCATIONS TABLE 3: SEISMIC REFLECTION, P-WAVE DATA ACQUISITION PARAMETERS TABLE 4: SEISMIC REFLECTION, GENERALIZED P-WAVE PROCESSING SEQUENCE LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE 1: SITE MAP FIGURE 2: SEISMIC RAYPATH GEOMETRY FIGURE 3: PHOTOGRAPHS OF SEISMIC REFLECTION EQUIPMENT FIGURE 4: SRL-1: P-WAVE WHITEFX SEISMIC SECTION WITHOUT INTERPRETATION FIGURE 5: SRL-1: P-WAVE WHITEFX SEISMIC SECTION WITH INTERPRETATION FIGURE 6: SRL-1: P-WAVE WHITEFX SEISMIC SECTION WITH INTERPRETATION AND ARTIFACTS FIGURE 7: SRL-2: P-WAVE WHITEFX SEISMIC SECTION WITHOUT INTERPRETATION FIGURE 8: SRL-2: P-WAVE WHITEFX SEISMIC SECTION WITH INTERPRETATION FIGURE 9: SRL-2: P-WAVE WHITEFX SEISMIC SECTION WITH INTERPRETATION AND ARTIFACTS FIGURE 10: EXAMPLES OF TUNING EFFECTS FIGURE 11: SRL-1: ANOMALY A-2 INTERPRETATION EXPLANATION Geovision Report 13354-01 Clinch River Reflection Geophysics Rev 2 Page 4 of 36 April 10, 2014 Clinch River Data Report Rev. 4 CRP-1112.16 Page 0.2-6 of 38 RCN: CRP- 1213.1 Page 4 of 36
AMEC Environment & Infrastructure, Inc.
Clinch River SMR Project AMEC Project No. 6468131072 1 INTRODUCTION A seismic reflection survey was conducted at the Clinch River SMR Project site near Oak Ridge, Tennessee from November lOth through the 20th' 2013. The purpose of the seismic reflection survey was to interpret the layer contact between the Knox Group and the overlying Chickamauga Rocks, interpret the dip of bedding between borehole locations and to interpret other possible subsurface structures, such as faults, beneath two (2) reflection profiles to at least a depth of 1,100 feet at the southeastern end of each line. The P-wave seismic reflection technique was the geophysical method used during this investigation.
Data acquisition was performed by a GEO Vision and Bird Seismic Services (subcontractor to GEO Vision) field team led by William Dalrymple and Ken Bernstein, respectively. Data processing was performed by Sterling Seismic Services under subcontract to GEO Vision. Data analysis and interpretation was performed by John Clark ofCoronaResources, LLC (subcontractor to GEOVision) and William Dalrymple and reviewed by John Diehl ofGEOVision. Report preparation was performed by William Dalrymple, verified and reviewed by John Diehl and Antony Martin, ofGEOVision. The work was performed under subcontract with AMEC Environment & Infrastructure, Inc. (AMEC E&I) with Steve Criscenzo serving as the point of contact and Al Tice as the technical lead for AMEC E&I. The work was performed in accordance with Procedure CRP Clinch Seismic Reflection Procedure Rev. 2.
Data acquisition was completed under Work Instruction 071, processing under Work Instruction 074, and reporting under Work Instruction 07 5.
Subsurface geologic conditions at the site consist of a layer of soil or compacted fill comprised of gravel, sand and silty clay overlying siltstone and limestone bedrock with variable degrees of weathering. Seismic reflection data were acquired along two (2) lines (SRL-1 and SRL-2). The locations of the seismic lines were established and surveyed by AMEC E&I at 100 ft intervals. The locations of the seismic lines and boreholes in the site vicinity are shown in Figure 1. The coordinates of the surveyed line endpoints are presented in Table 1. The AMEC E&I as-built surveyed location coordinates of boreholes within 175 feet of each seismic line are presented as Table 2. All final coordinates were provided to GEO Vision by AMEC E&I through a submittal. Geologic borehole logs were provided to GEOVision by AMEC E&I through a submittal.
The following sections include a discussion of methodology, equipment and field procedures, data processing, interpretation and summary relating to the geophysical investigation.
Geovision Report 13354-01 Clinch River Reflection Geophysics Rev 2 Page 5 of 36 April 10, 2014 Clinch River Data Report Rev. 4 CRP-1112.16 Page 0.2-7 of 38 RCN: CRP- 1213.1 Page 5 of 36
AMEC Environment & Infrastructure, Inc.
Clinch River SMR Project AMEC Project No. 6468131072 2 METHODOLOGY The seismic reflection technique is detailed in numerous geophysical texts and, therefore, only a brief synopsis of the technique is included in this report. The seismic reflection method involves projecting a wave down from the surface, and then recording the returning wave back at the surface as it reflects off formations at depth. In accordance with Snell's Law, seismic energy will be reflected, refracted and diffracted at boundaries in the subsurface (Figure 2). The main design consideration for a successful seismic reflection survey is the ability to separate the reflected energy from other arrivals in processing.
A seismic reflection occurs when an acoustic wave front encounters an impedance boundary in the subsurface. Seismic impedance depends on both the velocity and density of a rock and impedance boundaries occur where these rock properties change abruptly, usually due to changes in lithology. The reflection coefficient, R, across an interface, is expressed by a function relating the acoustic impedance of adjacent layers. R determines the relative amplitude of the reflected wavelet.
R = 0"2V2 -O"~~
0"2V2 +O"~~
where, R =reflection coefficient 0"1, 0"2 = mass density of the material on each side of the interface V1, V2 = seismic wave velocity on each side of the interface.
The sign of the reflection coefficient determines the polarity of the reflected wave. The magnitude of the reflection coefficient is critical to obtaining usable data. The seismic reflection technique will not work if the acoustic contrast is not sufficient to produce a clear reflection, regardless of the survey parameters or processing techniques employed. The ability of the seismic reflection method to detect an individual sedimentary bed is not only a function of the acoustic impedance at the top and bottom of the bed, but also depends on the layer thickness. The minimum resolvable bed thickness (vertical resolution) is generally accepted as one quarter of the wavelength at the target depth.
VR=..1=I_
4 4f where, VR =vertical resolution
.A= dominant wavelength of the reflected energy V =seismic wave velocity above the reflector f = dominant frequency of the reflector Geologic discontinuities, such as faults, are generally clearly discernable providing the offset is greater than the vertical resolution. Faults with offsets smaller than the vertical resolution can often be interpreted by diffraction patterns aligned along the fault plane, providing noise levels in the data are not too high.
When a reflecting boundary exists, it is important to optimize the field procedure and acquisition parameters to maximize the quality of the final processed data. Choosing the best field parameters Geovision Report 13354-01 Clinch River Reflection Geophysics Rev 2 Page 6 of 36 April 10, 2014 Clinch River Data Report Rev. 4 CRP-1112.16 Page 0.2-8 of 38 RCN: CRP- 1213.1 Page 6 of 36
AMEC Environment & Infrastructure, Inc.
Clinch River SMR Project AMEC Project No. 6468131072 involves determining the relative importance of several competing objectives, such as site constraints, equipment capabilities and processing needs.
In all geophysical surveys, the objective is to extract the usable data (i.e., in this case, reflections from various lithologic boundaries) from the unwanted background information (source generated and ambient noise). In reflection seismology, it is desirable to record high frequency, high signal-to-noise ratio reflection events from the boundary of interest. The frequency of a reflection event is largely determined by the source input frequency and the filtering effect of the ground. Often, the target reflector frequency is similar to that commonly recorded for coherent noise (in particular, the noise from ground roll), making it difficult or impossible to selectively filter out the noise. Isolation of the reflection events requires careful design of field acquisition parameters, such as the source/receiver geometry, choice of source and receiver types, as well as recording parameters, such as sampling rate and filter settings. With modem 24-bit AID acquisition systems it is very unusual to apply acquisition filters (filtering before data is stored), except for automatic anti-alias filters.
Sufficient data redundancy or fold, which is related to depth and the number of individual source receiver pairs with a reflection occurring from the same midpoint (common midpoint or common depth point) on a geologic horizon, is also an important survey design parameter. Maximum fold is equal to the number of live channels divided by twice the shot station spacing. The maximum fold also relates to depth which, in tum, would also be a related to geophone spacing. Therefore, shot locations at every station (geophone spacing) with 400 to 600 channel recording capability results in a maximum fold of 200 to 300 at a depth of 2,000 to 3,000 feet. Data quality always degrades at the ends of a seismic line because the fold on the first trace of a processed seismic section is one (i.e. only 1 source receiver pair used to generate the trace), with fold increasing incrementally with increasing station numbers.
The seismic reflection technique can be divided into two categories based on the type of source used.
Compressional (P) waves propagate through the earth as a change in pressure and are the same as the sound waves we hear. Particle motion for P-waves is parallel with the direction of propagation of the wave. Shear (S) waves propagate through the earth by shearing adjacent particles. Particle motion inS-waves is perpendicular to the direction of wave propagation. This project utilized P-wave reflection.
The frequency content of seismic reflection data is a function of both the energy source and the medium through which the energy travels. Vibratory sources have control of the frequency input to the ground, unlike impulsive sources such as a hammer or explosive. With a vibratory source the frequency input into the ground is a function of the beginning and ending frequencies of the sweep, the length of the sweep and ground coupling. The second factor is the transmission and attenuation of various frequency components in the subsurface, often termed the "earth response". In general, there are two primary objectives in designing a sweep for high-resolution reflection surveys:
- To record useful seismic signals at the geophones with as high a frequency as possible.
- To start the low end of the sweep such that the appropriate depth of penetration is achieved without generating intolerable ground roll.
Processed seismic sections present two-way travel time on the vertical axis versus station/distance along the horizontal axis. Borehole velocity logs, if available for the entire time section, can be used to approximately convert time to depth. These depths, however, are only accurate in close proximity to the borehole and lateral velocity variation, dipping geologic layers, etc. will lead to variable time depth functions along the seismic line. However, while time to depth conversion was not required by Geovision Report 13354-01 Clinch River Reflection Geophysics Rev 2 Page 7 of 36 April 10, 2014 Clinch River Data Report Rev. 4 CRP-1112.16 Page 0.2-9 of 38 RCN: CRP- 1213.1 Page 7 of 36
AMEC Environment & Infrastructure, Inc.
Clinch River SMR Project AMEC Project No. 6468131072 Procedure CRP-5, in the case of this project we can demonstrate adequate depth of penetration for the Knox group by using average velocities of the overburden, and multiplying the two-way travel time in the time section, and dividing by two.
Geovision Report 13354-01 Clinch River Reflection Geophysics Rev 2 Page 8 of 36 April 10, 2014 Clinch River Data Report Rev. 4 CRP-1112.16 Page 0.2-10 of 38 RCN: CRP- 1213.1 Page 8 of 36
AMEC Environment & Infrastructure, Inc.
Clinch River SMR Project AMEC Project No. 6468131072 3 EQUIPMENT AND FIELD PROCEDURES 3.1.1 Seismic Reflection Equipment Key equipment used to collect the high resolution seismic reflection data, as shown in Figure 3, included:
- Seistronix EX-6 cable-based seismic acquisition system
- Seismic Source Company Force Two Universal Encoder and Force Two Vibrator Controller
- lVI Enviro Vi be vibratory seismic source
- Sunfull PS 28-Hz vertical geophones (P-wave)
- Seismic cables The Seistronix EX-6 system includes the central system, which consists of a multi-processor computer, multiple monitors and multiple output devices; data acquisition software consisting of project management and data quality control modules; and ground equipment consisting of 24-bit 6 channel EX-6 Modules, seismic cables and sealed batteries for each module.
For this project, an lVI EnviroVibe (Figure 3) was used as the P-wave energy source. Vibratory sources function by oscillating a mass through a user-defined range of frequencies, which are transmitted into the ground. This is known as a "sweep." At the instant the vibrator begins its sweep, the seismograph begins recording the signals received from the geophones. Simultaneously, the sweep being produced by the vibrator is recorded on an auxiliary channel within the seismograph. The seismic record is obtained by cross correlating the recorded signals from the geophones with the known sweep generated by the vibrator.
3.1.2 Field Procedures and Standardization Testing The seismic reflection survey was conducted in accordance with the Procedure CRP-5 -Clinch Seismic Reflection Procedure Rev. 2, which references ASTM D7128-06 "Standard Guide for Using the Seismic-Reflection Method for Shallow Subsurface Investigation", and is available from ASTM International (http :1/www. astm. org/).
Self testing and geophone testing were conducted in accordance with Procedure CRP-5. The Seistronix EX-6 system includes self-testing for noise levels, harmonic distortion, crossfeed, timing accuracy, phase and amplitude distortion and missing sensors. These checks were automatically performed at the beginning of each day's field work. In addition, the geophones used in these tests were hand selected and subjected to standardization testing before the start of the field work, as reported in a separate submittal.
3.1.3 Site Preparation AMEC E&I surveyed each seismic line at 100 ft intervals. Using this survey control, each seismic line was marked by AMEC E&I and GEO Vision personnel at the appropriate group interval (station/geophone spacing) using a fiberglass tape measure and surveyors paint with every 101h station Geovision Report 13354-01 Clinch River Reflection Geophysics Rev 2 Page 9 of 36 April 10, 2014 Clinch River Data Report Rev. 4 CRP-1112.16 Page 0.2-11 of 38 RCN: CRP- 1213.1 Page 9 of 36
AMEC Environment & Infrastructure, Inc.
Clinch River SMR Project AMEC Project No. 6468131072 labeled for reference during data acquisition. The beginning of each reflection line (position of 0 ft) was labeled as Station 1001 with proceeding stations sequentially numbered along the profile. A 5 ft group interval was used for the P-wave reflection survey. The locations of the seismic reflection lines are summarized in Table 1. The elevations and horizontal locations of each station were collected by AMEC E&I. Geophones were generally spiked into the soil or gravel at the appropriate group interval and cabled into each EX-6 module. Seismic equipment was then set up for parameter testing and data acquisition as discussed in the following sections.
3.1.4 Parameter Testing Source parameter testing was carried out prior to data acquisition. The purpose of source parameter testing was to verify the sweep design as described in the Methodology above. The receiver interval and geophone array (single geophone) had been determined before the start of the survey. Sweeps of varying frequency bandwidths were recorded into a full (600 trace) all live configuration in an effort to bracket the usable frequencies returning to the geophones from the subsurface. The initial testing, aided by frequency filtering in the recording instruments, determined that a sweep range of 20-250 Hz achieved the objective ofbroad bandwidth, reduced source noise (ground roll), good depth of penetration and maximum resolution.
With the frequency range selected, the duration and number of sweeps necessary to produce good signal-to-noise content on the shot records remained to be determined. After testing various combinations, it was determined that four, 4-second sweeps provided sufficient energy to overcome ambient noise levels, if at all possible, at the site and satisfy the data acquisition schedule. Longer sweep lengths and additional stacking did not appear to improve signal content on the shot records.
3.1.5 Data Acquisition Parameters and Procedures The data acquisition parameters for the P-wave seismic reflection survey are summarized in Table 3.
Seismic reflection data were acquired with 401 to 600 live channels. Based on the source testing discussed previously, the lVI EnviroVibe was used as the energy source with four, 4 second 20 to 250 Hz sweeps.
At the start of data acquisition, the Enviro Vi be was positioned a half station after the end geophone and nominally offset about 7ft from the seismic line to permit the buggy mounted seismic source to drive along the side of the line. A Seismic Source Company Force Two Universal Encoder linked the seismic acquisition system to a Force Two Vibrator Controller Unit in the EnviroVibe. When the seismic observer initiated the sweep sequence in the recording truck, a signal was sent to the vibrator via radio link to start the sweep and the seismic acquisition system began recording. During the sweep, a synthetic, idealized pilot trace was generated by the vibrator and sent to the seismograph. This pilot sweep is recorded on auxiliary channel 1 for correlation with the recorded data from the geophones. Data were transmitted from the EX-6 modules to the computer where the seismic acquisition software was used to display data, apply data filters and write data to hard disk. All data were saved in SEG-Y format and later copied to a flash drive and external hard disk for backup.
At the beginning of each line, a raw data stack (shot record) was displayed on the computer screen. This provided a check to ensure that the seismograph was being triggered correctly. Survey parameters were verified (e.g. source location, receiver spacing, etc.) and cable and module connections were checked.
Geovision Report 13354-01 Clinch River Reflection Geophysics Rev 2 Page 10 of 36 April1 0, 2014 Clinch River Data Report Rev. 4 CRP-1112.16 Page 0.2-12 of 38 RCN: CRP- 1213.1 Page 10 of 36
AMEC Environment & Infrastructure, Inc.
Clinch River SMR Project AMEC Project No. 6468131072 The noise monitor on the seismic acquisition system was checked to identify any ambient noise problems and to isolate and correct or document any noisy or dead receiver channels.
P-wave data were acquired along the two (2) lines (SRL-1 and SRL-2) using a 5 ft geophone spacing.
Seismic reflection line orientations are shown on Figure 1. The seismic reflection data observer (OB) logs for each line are included in a separate submittal. The geophone on each line that corresponded to the beginning of the coincident seismic refraction line was assigned a station number of 1001 and the last geophone station varied from Station 1441 to 1600, depending on line length. Lines were started with the source located a half station after the first geophone. Therefore, the first shot had 400 to 599 channels live in front of the energy source and 1 channel behind the energy source. The vibrator was then moved up at 1 station increments until the vibrator was located at a half station beyond the last geophone. Vegetation, topography, subsurface and surface structures limited the placement of some of the shot points. Omitted shot points did not affect the reflection survey in a significant manner. The amount of fold and dense shot spacing allows for some skipped shots without affecting the survey. No geophones locations were skipped on either line.
Geovision Report 13354-01 Clinch River Reflection Geophysics Rev 2 Page 11 of 36 April1 0, 2014 Clinch River Data Report Rev. 4 CRP-1112.16 Page 0.2-13 of 38 RCN: CRP- 1213.1 Page 11 of 36
AMEC Environment & Infrastructure, Inc.
Clinch River SMR Project AMEC Project No. 6468131072 4 DATA PROCESSING P-wave seismic reflection data were processed by Sterling Seismic Services of Denver, Colorado using the SeisSpace PROMAX Ver. 5008.2.3 software package. The processing flow for the data is based on a standard common midpoint (CMP) reflection processing sequence with modifications for specific conditions at the survey site. The generalized processing sequence for P- wave seismic reflection data are presented in Table 4. P-wave seismic reflection data were viewed and interpreted using the Kingdom Suite Ver. 8.8 software package by illS. Seispace PROMAX Ver. 5008.2.3 and Kingdom Suite Ver. 88.
were approved by AMEC E&I for use on this project under Commercial Grade Dedication (CGD) (see separate submittal).
The seismic section resulting from processing sequences 1 to 21 in Table 4 is referred to as the Final Stack. Additional post stack processing steps (item 22 in Table 4), consisting of application of a F-X deconvolution (an application of a Fourier transform to each trace using a unit prediction filter to reduce random noise) and spectral balancing over the 30 to 220Hz frequency range, were applied to the seismic sections to improve resolution. Band pass filters were also applied to seismic sections presented in the report.
Geovision Report 13354-01 Clinch River Reflection Geophysics Rev 2 Page 12 of 36 April1 0, 2014 Clinch River Data Report Rev. 4 CRP-1112.16 Page 0.2-14 of 38 RCN: CRP- 1213.1 Page 12 of 36
AMEC Environment & Infrastructure, Inc.
Clinch River SMR Project AMEC Project No. 6468131072 5 INTERPRETATION
- 5. 1 Overview The processed P-wave seismic reflection sections for SRL-1 and SRL-2 are presented as Figures 4 to 6 and 7 to 9, respectively. The sections are presented using WhiteFX post stack processing. For SRL-1 the raw, uninterpreted section, the interpreted section and the interpreted section with marked artifacts are presented as Figures 4, 5 and 6, respectively. For SRL-2 the raw uninterpreted section, the interpreted section and the interpreted section with marked artifacts are presented as Figures 7, 8 and 9, respectively.
The figures are presented with two-way travel time in seconds on the vertical axis, the station number on the bottom horizontal axis and the distance (feet) on the top horizontal axis. A station number of 1001 corresponds to the zero position of each seismic reflection line. Station numbers are converted to distance in feet by subtracting 1001 and multiplying by 5 feet.
The Kingdom Suite was used to display the seismic sections, apply a band pass filter, as necessary, and output the seismic data to an image file for input into graphics software used to generate figures.
Typical applications of the seismic interpretation package includes: filtering, displaying of seismic data in either a wiggle trace format or as a color/grey scale image, seismic attribute calculation, digital picking of seismic horizons, mistie analysis, GIS mapping of seismic data, fault tracking, contouring of seismic horizons, etc. All processed P- wave seismic sections shown in the figures listed above were generated using Kingdom Suite As is typical with seismic reflection data, data quality decreases on the edges of the section due to a decrease in data redundancy (fold). Seismic lines SRL-1 and SRL-2 had lengths of2,995 ft and 2,000 ft, respectively. Noise contamination, out-of-plane reflectors and spatial aliasing effects are typically mitigated better in areas with increased fold, due to the statistical effects of signal enhancement associated with such increased fold. These noise effects, are therefore, more pronounced at the ends of each line where the fold decreases. Orange, near vertical or dipping lines are presented on each interpreted feature to delineate areas where the fold is significantly decreased and the effects of noise contamination (e.g. 60 Hz noise), out-of-plane reflectors and spatial aliasing do not permit accurate interpretation for each seismic section. These sections are referred to as non-interpretable boundaries on each interpreted figure.
Spatial aliasing can give rise to steeply dipping features on the processed seismic sections that are remnants of low velocity events in the field data. Typically, spatial aliasing may be reduced by decreasing the geophone spacing to increase resolution of the low velocity layer. For this site, a geophone spacing of 5 ft was already being used and the geophone spacing could not be decreased while concurrently maintaining the required offsets to achieve the desired depth of investigation.
Borehole seismic velocity data that extended into the Knox Group were not available in close proximity to either of the seismic lines. However, a general determination for the seismic horizon in the reflection data can be verified using the average velocities of the overburden, and the two-way travel time. The depth to the Knox at the southeast end of the line in the interpretable data zone, at about 2200 feet or station 1450, is about 0.18 seconds. Using an average and conservative P-wave velocity above the Knox of 12,500 ft/s, we calculate an approximate depth to the Knox of 1,125ft.
Geovision Report 13354-01 Clinch River Reflection Geophysics Rev 2 Page 13 of 36 April1 0, 2014 Clinch River Data Report Rev. 4 CRP-1112.16 Page 0.2-15 of 38 RCN: CRP- 1213.1 Page 13 of 36
AMEC Environment & Infrastructure, Inc.
Clinch River SMR Project AMEC Project No. 6468131072 To gage the overall depth of investigation to the bottom of the image, using the P-wave velocity of the Knox of 20,000 ft/s, we calculate over 3,500 ft.
5.2 Seismic Reflection SRL-1 For SRL-1, the raw, uninterpreted section, the interpreted section and the interpreted section with marked artifacts are presented as Figures 4, 5 and 6, respectively. The boundaries defining the interpretable regions of each seismic line are shown with dipping, orange lines near the ends of each interpreted seismic section. The boundary on the northwestern side of the SRL-1 is approximately located at station 1050 and is approximately located at station 1430 to 1550 on the southeastern side of the line. These boundaries delineate the areas where interpretations could not be completed due to the contamination of noise, out-of-plane reflectors and/or spatial aliasing. Selected processing artifacts associated with spatial aliasing or out-of-plane reflectors are marked on Figure 6 with purple dashed lines, illustrating the effects of non-source contamination at the ends of the line. Additional discussion of these is provided in the Overview above.
Three (3) horizons are presented on the interpreted seismic section for SRL-1 (Figures 5 and 6). The horizons are designated with a yellow line at the top of the range, a cyan line at the middle of the range and a green line at the bottom of the range. The top of the Knox Group is inferred to be within this range. While the horizons for the reflectors are continuous within the interpretable area, some variations of these reflectors, relative to the scale of the reflection section, is noted. These variations can be attributed to relief on the reflector. The reflectors also indicate that the overall dip of the bedding is trending to the southeast.
There are three anomalous areas interpreted along the range of horizons, labeled A-1, A-2 and A-3.
Anomalies A-1 and A-3 are denoted with blue dashed lines at about station 1070 and station 1425, respectively. These anomalies represent areas where the reflectors have a relatively abrupt change in dip. However, as seen in Figure 6 "Example Artifacts" (purple dashed lines); it is likely that the out-of-plane reflectors or spatial aliasing are contributing to the changes in the seismic reflectors and that structural changes in the reflectors themselves are less likely. These two anomalies are not interpreted as faults, but are interpreted as being artifacts associated out-of-plane reflectors or spatial aliasing. A structural case for these two anomalies cannot be completely discounted. Additional intrusive investigation or seismic lines located such that high fold data could be acquired in these regions would be necessary to further investigate the anomalies.
Anomaly A-2 is located approximately station 1220 along the interpreted horizon. This anomaly is located where the seismic horizons interpreted as being associated with the top of the Knox Group diverge. Reflection horizon matching determined that the horizons are not discontinuous in the area that would be indicative of a fault or other similar feature. The parent horizons from the left side of the anomaly and on the right side of the anomaly do not show any offset. This anomaly is likely caused by the effect of tuning in a wedge-like geologic structure, such as may be present for this site. The tuning phenomenon occurs at wedge-like geology (Yilmaz, 2001) from resonating dominant frequencies. The tuning phenomenon distorts the reflectors at these interfaces and gives the appearance of moving upward, whereas in reality the surface is relatively flat (see examples in Figure 10).
While one possible interpretation of this zone would be to simply draw a line through this anomalous area and thereby making the reflections "continuous" between stations 1180 and 1250, reflection Geovision Report 13354-01 Clinch River Reflection Geophysics Rev 2 Page 14 of 36 April1 0, 2014 Clinch River Data Report Rev. 4 CRP-1112.16 Page 0.2-16 of 38 RCN: CRP- 1213.1 Page 14 of 36
AMEC Environment & Infrastructure, Inc.
Clinch River SMR Project AMEC Project No. 6468131072 correlation on either side of this anomaly does not bear this out. Taking a section from station 1160 that runs approximately from 50 ms to 225 ms and correlating this against a section from 100 ms to 275 ms at station 1260 shows that all events are nearly identical within the two boxes (see Figure 11). Further, there is an event through 26 ms below the reflection highlighted by green which is continuous beneath the entire apparent disruption which constitutes anomaly A-2. This event is the uppermost of a package of four reflections that exhibit continuity across and outside the boundaries of this anomaly. Therefore, anomaly A-2 is considered to represent the effects of tuning or of interference from events outside the plane of the seismic profile. If it is tuning, it would be representative of overlap of another formation on top of this horizon. However, this does not appear to be the case because of the excellent correlation from the left side of A-2 to the right side as discussed here.
There is good reflectivity below the interpreted Knox Group with multiple, continuous dipping reflectors and no offsets or other structural features that could be associated with faulting.
5.3 Seismic Reflection SRL-2 For SRL-2, the raw, uninterpreted section, the interpreted section and the interpreted section with marked artifacts are presented as Figures 7, 8 and 9, respectively. The boundaries defining the portion of the seismic line that could be interpreted are shown with near vertical, orange lines near the ends of each interpreted seismic section. The boundary on the northwestern side of the SRL-2 is approximately located at station 1065 and is approximately located at station 1360 on the southeastern side of the line.
These boundaries delineate the areas where interpretations could not be completed due to the contamination by noise, out-of-plane reflectors and/or spatial aliasing. Selected processing artifacts associated with spatial aliasing or out-of-plane reflectors are marked on Figure 9 with purple dashed lines, illustrating the effects of non-source contamination at the ends of the line. Additional discussion of these is provided in the Overview above.
Three (3) horizons are presented on the interpreted seismic section for SRL-2 (Figures 8 and 9). The horizons are designated with a yellow line at the top of the range, a cyan line at the middle of the range and a green line at the bottom of the range. The top of the Knox Group is inferred to be within this range. While the horizons for the reflectors are continuous within the interpretable area, some variations of these reflectors, relative to the scale of the reflection section, is noted. These variations can be attributed to relief on the reflector. The reflectors also indicate that the overall dip of the bedding is trending to the southeast.
There are two anomalous areas interpreted along these seismic horizons, labeled A-4 and A-5.
Anomalies A-4 and A-5 are located at about station 1105 and station 1175, respectively. These anomalies represent areas where the reflectors appear to be disrupted. Anomaly A-4 is defined by a gap in the imaged reflector. This gap is an attenuation or disruption of the otherwise continuous reflections that are approximately 100 ms beneath the targeted reflections (yellow, blue and green horizons). This is the area where the fold is reduced and therefore has increased noise. There is no apparent offset of the reflectors for portions of the line before or after this gap or structure in underlying reflectors that could infer the presence of faulting. This anomaly could have some other geologic source or could simply be the result of out-of-plane reflectors or spatial aliasing, rather than any significant change in geologic structure. Additionally, there are no imaged diffractions in the seismic horizons below and above this anomalous area.
Geovision Report 13354-01 Clinch River Reflection Geophysics Rev 2 Page 15 of 36 April1 0, 2014 Clinch River Data Report Rev. 4 CRP-1112.16 Page 0.2-17 of 38 RCN: CRP- 1213.1 Page 15 of 36
AMEC Environment & Infrastructure, Inc.
Clinch River SMR Project AMEC Project No. 6468131072 Anomaly A-5 presents itself as stair step feature in the interpreted seismic horizons. The feature appears to be associated with interference between the seismic reflector and linear noise bisecting the reflector.
The anomaly does not have similar disruptions in the overlying and underlying horizons that would be indicative of a fault-like feature.
The interpreted seismic horizons and the multiple seismic reflectors imaged at greater depths are horizontally continuous. No obvious fault-like features are interpreted in the marked Knox Group horizon or seismic horizons at depth.
Geovision Report 13354-01 Clinch River Reflection Geophysics Rev 2 Page 16 of 36 April1 0, 2014 Clinch River Data Report Rev. 4 CRP-1112.16 Page 0.2-18 of 38 RCN: CRP- 1213.1 Page 16 of 36
AMEC Environment & Infrastructure, Inc.
Clinch River SMR Project AMEC Project No. 6468131072 6
SUMMARY
A seismic reflection survey was conducted in Oak Ridge, Tennessee at the Clinch River SMR Project site. The objectives of the seismic reflection survey were to interpret the layer contact between the Knox Group and the overlying Chickamauga Rocks, interpret the dip of bedding between borehole locations and to interpret other possible subsurface structures, such as faults, beneath two (2) P-wave reflection profiles, located by AMEC E&l, Bechtel and GEOVision, to at least a depth of 1,100 feet at the southern end of each line. The P-wave seismic reflection technique was the geophysical method used during this investigation. The locations of the seismic lines, designated SRL-1 and SRL-2, and nearby boreholes are presented in Figure 1.
For each P-wave seismic reflection line, three (3) horizontal horizons were interpreted. The top of the Knox Group is inferred to be located within this range of horizons. Nearby velocity logs and stacked velocity sections for the seismic lines were used to determine that the depth of investigation did exceed the required 1,100 ft depth of investigation in the southern portion of the area. The seismic interpretation confirms that the Knox group dips consistently to the southeast.
The only changes in amplitude in the Knox reflections are explained as the effects of tuning.
Additionally, several anomalies were imaged in the interpreted horizons for the top of the Knox Group.
These anomalies were determined to be likely caused by contamination from noise (e.g. 60Hz), out-of-plane reflectors and/or effects of spatial aliasing. These anomalies are not likely caused by significant subsurface structures. The horizons imaged at greater depths also appear to be continuous. No major fault-like features were imaged along the interpreted Knox Group horizons or the horizons at depth.
Geovision Report 13354-01 Clinch River Reflection Geophysics Rev 2 Page 17 of 36 April1 0, 2014 Clinch River Data Report Rev. 4 CRP-1112.16 Page 0.2-19 of 38 RCN: CRP- 1213.1 Page 17 of 36
AMEC Environment & Infrastructure, Inc.
Clinch River SMR Project AMEC Project No. 6468131072 7 REFERENCES Dobrin, M.S., and Savit, J., 1988, Introduction to Geophysical Prospecting, McGraw-Hill Co., New York.
Yilmaz, 0., 2001, Seismic Data Analysis: Processing, Inversion, and Interpretation of Seismic Data, Volume II, Society of Exploration Geophysicists, Tulsa.
Scheidegger, A., and Willmore, P.L., 1957, The use of a least square method for the interpretation of data from seismic surveys, Geophysics, v. 22, p. 9-22.
Schuster, G. T. and Quintus-Bosz, A., 1993, Wavepath eikonal traveltime inversion: Theory:
Geophysics, v. 58, no. 9, p. 1314-1323.
Telford, W. M., Geldart, L.P., Sheriff, R.E., 1990, Applied Geophysics, Second Edition, Cambridge University Press.
Wyrobek, S.M., 1956, Application of delay and intercept times in the interpretation of multilayer time distance curves, Geophysical Prospecting, v. 4, p 112-130.
Geovision Report 13354-01 Clinch River Reflection Geophysics Rev 2 Page 18 of 36 April1 0, 2014 Clinch River Data Report Rev. 4 CRP-1112.16 Page 0.2-20 of 38 RCN: CRP- 1213.1 Page 18 of 36
AMEC Environment & Infrastructure, Inc.
Clinch River SMR Project AMEC Project No. 6468131072 8 CERTIFICATION All geophysical data, analysis, interpretations, conclusions, and recommendations in this document have been prepared under the supervision of and reviewed by a GEO Vision California Professional Geophysicist and a GEO Vision California Professional Engineer.
Prepared by 04/10/14 Willia Dalrymple Date California Professional Geophysicist, P.Gp. 1072 GEO Vision Geophysical Services, Inc.
Reviewed by 04/10/14 Date essional Engineer, P.E. 30362 eophysical Services, Inc.
- This geophysical investigation was conducted under the supervision of a California Professional Geophysicist and a California Professional Engineer using industry standard methods and equipment. A high degree of professionalism was maintained during all aspects of the project from the field investigation and data acquisition, through data processing interpretation and reporting. All original field data files, field notes and observations, and other pertinent information are maintained in the project files and are available for the client to review for a period of at least one year.
A professional geophysicist's and a professional engineer's certification of interpreted geophysical conditions comprises a declaration of his/her professional judgment. It does not constitute a warranty or guarantee, expressed or implied, nor does it relieve any other party of its responsibility to abide by contract documents, applicable codes, standards, regulations or ordinances.
Geovision Report 13354-01 Clinch River Reflection Geophysics Rev 2 Page 19 of 36 April1 0, 2014 Clinch River Data Report Rev. 4 CRP-1112.16 Page 0.2-21 of 38 RCN: CRP- 1213.1 Page 19 of 36
AMEC Environment & Infrastructure, Inc.
Clinch River SMR Project AMEC Project No. 6468131072 TABLES Geovision Report 13354-01 Clinch River Reflection Geophysics Rev 2 Page 20 of 36 April1 0, 2014 Clinch River Data Report Rev. 4 CRP-1112.16 Page 0.2-22 of 38 RCN: CRP- 1213.1 Page 20 of 36
AMEC Environment & Infrastructure, Inc.
Clinch River SMR Project AMEC Project No. 6468131072 Table 1 - Seismic Line Geometry NAVD88 Spacing Location Easting Northing Name Geophones Station Elevation (ft) (ft) (US Feet) (US Feet)
(ft) 1001 0 2,448,125.9 571,414.0 807.5 SRL-1 600 5 1600 2995 2,449,765.8 568,908.0 801.0 1001 0 2,446,421.7 570,542.5 801.2 SRL-2 401 5 1441 2200 2,448,346.3 569,476.7 780.0 Notes:
- 1. Coordinates in TN State Plane, NAD83, FIPS 4100, US Survey Feet.
- 2. Coordinates provided by AMEC Environment & Infrastructure, Inc.
Geovision Report 13354-01 Clinch River Reflection Geophysics Rev 2 Page 21 of 36 April 10, 2014 Clinch River Data Report Rev. 4 CRP-1112.16 Page 0.2-23 of 38 RCN: CRP- 1213.1 Page 21 of 36
AMEC Environment & Infrastructure, Inc.
Clinch River SMR Project AMEC Project No. 6468131072 Table 2- AMEC Selected Asbuilt Borehole Locations NAVD88 Description Easting (US Feet) Northing (US Feet)
Elevation (ft)
CC-B1 2,449,632.4 569,036.1 800.3 CC-B2 2,449,759.9 568,891.0 799.8 MP-219 2,448,195.7 571,223.7 812.9 MP-219A 2,448,184.6 571,254.2 808.6 MP-220 2,448,232.2 571,146.9 813.2 MP-221 2,448,270.6 571,056.6 813.1 MP-222 2,448,308.6 570,965.5 812.9 MP-407 2,447,094.2 569,888.8 761.5 MP-410 2,448,368.8 570,774.2 809.4 MP-415 2,448,164.8 569,577.1 784.3 MP-416 2,447,520.0 569,978.3 809.6 MP-418 2,447,030.2 570,500.3 811.6 MP-421 2,446,439.6 570,531.8 803.6 MP-422 2,448, 732.0 570,423.7 799.9 MP-423 2,448,276.4 571,470.3 799.0 MP-428 2,448,681.6 570,755.5 803.8 Notes:
- 1. Coordinates in TN State Plane, NAD83, FIPS 4100, US Survey Feet.
- 2. Coordinates provided by AMEC Environment & Infrastructure, Inc.
Geovision Report 13354-01 Clinch River Reflection Geophysics Rev 2 Page 22 of 36 April1 0, 2014 Clinch River Data Report Rev. 4 CRP-1112.16 Page 0.2-24 of 38 RCN: CRP- 1213.1 Page 22 of 36
AMEC Environment & Infrastructure, Inc.
Clinch River SMR Project AMEC Project No. 6468131072 Table 3 P-Wave Data Acquisition Parameters Shot Spacing 5 ft, centered on half stations Geophone Group Interval 5ft Maximum CDP Fold 200 to 300 Maximum Offset 1497.5 ft Minimum Offset 2.5 ft Spread Geometry All Live Seismograph Seistronix EX-6 Number of Channels 401 or 600 Sample Rate 1 ms Record Length 5.5 sec (4 sec sweep, 1.5 sec listen)
Field Filters 3Hz lo-cut, AA412 Hz hi-cut lVI T15000 MiniVibe (20 to 250Hz, Linear, 4-second Seismic Source sweep, up to 4 sweeps/station)
Geophones Sunfull PS 28 Hz vertical geophone Geovision Report 13354-01 Clinch River Reflection Geophysics Rev 2 Page 23 of 36 April1 0, 2014 Clinch River Data Report Rev. 4 CRP-1112.16 Page 0.2-25 of 38 RCN: CRP- 1213.1 Page 23 of 36
AMEC Environment & Infrastructure, Inc.
Clinch River SMR Project AMEC Project No. 6468131072 Table 4 ProMax Processing Sequence for P-Wave Data Sequence# Description 1 SEGY (CORRELATED) TO INTERNAL FORMAT CONVERSION 2 VIBROSEIS CORRELATION 3 GEOMETRY, SURVEY IMPORT AND TRACE EDITING 4 FIRST BREAK PICKING AND REFRACTION SOLUTION 5 TRUE AMPLITUDE GAIN RECOVERY 6 TRACE TO TRACE EDITING 7 SURF ACE CONSISTENT AMPLITUDE EQUALIZATION 8 MINIMUM PHASE CORRECTION FILTER FOR VIBROSEIS DATA 9 SURF ACE CONSISTENT DECONVOLUTION:
TYPE: SPIKING OPERATOR LENGTH: 120 MSEC NOISE: 0.1%
10 SPECTRAL BALANCING: 25-250 HZ 11 ELEVATION/REFRACTION/DATUM STATICS APPLICATION:
REFRACTION DATUM: 900 FEET PROCESSING DATUM: FLOATING/NMO VC: 12000 FEET/SEC 12 COMMON DEPTH POINT GATHERS:
PASS 1: NORMAL MOVEOUT VELOCITY AND MUTE ANALYSIS PASS 1: SURFACE CONSISTENT AUTOMATIC STATICS APPLICATION PASS 2: NORMAL MOVEOUT VELOCITY AND MUTE ANALYSIS PASS 2: SURFACE CONSISTENT AUTOMATIC STATICS APPLICATION 13 SURF ACE CONSISTENT LINEAR VELOCITY NOISE ATTEND ATION 14 TRACE EQUALIZATION 15 PASS 3: NORMAL MOVEOUT VELOCITY AND MUTE ANALYSIS 16 FINAL NMO CORRECTION AND MUTE APPLICATION 17 PASS 3: SURFACE CONSISTENT AUTOMATIC STATICS APPLICATION 18 CDP CONSISTENT TRIM STATICS 19 AUTOMATIC GAIN COMPENSATION 20 COMMON DEPTH POINT STACK 21 FINAL DATUM CORRECTION:
REFRACTION DATUM: 900 FEET ELEVATION EQUIVALENT: 800FT VC: 12000 FT/SEC 22 ENHANCED STACK OPTIONS SPECTRAL WHITENING: 30-220 HZ FX PREDICTIVE DECONVOLUTION ENHANCEMENT FILTER FINITE DIFFERENCE TIME MIGRATION- 95% SMOOTHED RMS VELOCITIES Geovision Report 13354-01 Clinch River Reflection Geophysics Rev 2 Page 24 of 36 April 10, 2014 Clinch River Data Report Rev. 4 CRP-1112.16 Page 0.2-26 of 38 RCN: CRP- 1213.1 Page 24 of 36
AMEC Environment & Infrastructure, Inc.
Clinch River SMR Project AMEC Project No. 6468131072 FIGURES Geovision Report 13354-01 Clinch River Reflection Geophysics Rev 2 Page 25 of 36 April1 0, 2014 Clinch River Data Report Rev. 4 CRP-1112.16 Page 0.2-27 of 38 RCN: CRP- 1213.1 Page 25 of 36
AMEC Environment & Infrastructure, Inc.
Clinch River SMR Pro*ect AMEC Pro*ect No. 6468131072 2446000 2447200 .2448400 2449600 0 0 0 0 0 0 N N II)
II) 0 0 0 0 co co 0 0 II)
II) 0 0 0 0
<D <D en en
<D <D II) II) 0 0
~ ~
co co
<D <D II) II) 2446000 2447200 2448400 2449600 Legend 300 600 900 Borehole Location Within 175' of Each Line Selected Borehole Location Beyon d 175' of Each Li ne
- Seismic Refiection Line with Station and Distance FIGURE 1 SITE MAP Date: 21121201 4 CLINCH RIVER SMR PROJECT SITE NOTES: GV Project 13354
- 1. Tennessee Stale Plane Coordinate System, NAO 83 , FIPS 4100, US Survey Feet OAK RIDGE , TENNESSEE Developed by: W Dalrymple
- 2. Image Source: Esri, OigitaiGiobe, GeoEye, 1-rubed, US DA, USGS, AEX, Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, and the G IS user Communijy Drawn by* T Rodriguez PREPARED FOR
- 3. Survey Coordinates Provided by AM EC Environment & Infrastructure, Inc.
1-Ap
~p.;;.;ro.;;.;ved
~b-y:----'---':.;;J;.::D:-;;ie.:;h~
l AMEC ENVIRONMENT File Name: 13354_1.MXD & INFRASTRUCTURE, INC.
Geovision Report 13354-01 Clinch River Reflection Geophysics Rev 2 Page 26 of 36 April1 0, 2014 Clinch River Data Report Rev. 4 CRP-1112.16 Page 0.2-28 of 38 RCN: CRP- 1213.1 Page 26 of 36
AMEC Environment & Infrastructure, Inc.
Clinch River SMR Project AMEC Project No. 6468131072 SHOT POINT
[;('*:if;'} OVERBURDEN ~ BEDROCK Where Velocity, V2 >V1 FIGURE 2 a~~ston geophysi<:al seruU:es SEISMIC RAYPATH GEOM ETRY CLINCH RIVER SMR PROJECT SITE OAK RIDGE T ENNESSEE PREPARED FOR AMEC ENVIRONMENT & INFRASTRUCTURE, INC.
RCN CRP- 1213.1 Page 27 of 36 Clinch River Data Report Rev. 4 CRP-1112.16 Page 0.2-29 of 38
AMEC Environment & Infrastructure, Inc.
Clinch River SMR Project AMEC Project No. 6468131072 Seismic Reflection Acquisition System Typical Seismic Reflection Setup Seistronix Explorer EX-6 Acquisition Module lVI EnviroVibe FIGURE 3 G~Uston geophysi.cal seruit:u PHOTOGRAPHS OF SEISMIC REFLECTION EQUIPMENT CLINCH RIVER SMR PROJECT OAK RIDGE . TENNESSEE PREPARED FOR AMEC ENVIRONMENT & INFRASTRUCTURE. INC, RCN CRP- 1213.1 Page 28 of 36 Clinch River Data Report Rev. 4 CRP-1112.16 Page 0.2-30 of 38