ML19030A313

Part 02 Ssar (Rev. 2) - Part 02 - Ssar - Chapter 02 - Site Characteristics - Section 02.04.12 - Groundwater

ML19030A313
Person / Time
Site:	Clinch River
Issue date:	01/18/2019
From:	James Shea Tennessee Valley Authority
To:	Office of New Reactors
Fetter A
References
TVACLINCHRIVERESP, TVACLINCHRIVERESP.SUBMISSION.6, CRN.P.PART02, CRN.P.PART02.2
Download: ML19030A313 (163)

Text

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report SUBSECTION 2.4.12 TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Title Page 2.4.12 Groundwater ............................................................................. 2.4.12-1 2.4.12.1 Description and Onsite Use .................................. 2.4.12-1 2.4.12.2 Groundwater Sources ......................................... 2.4.12-12 2.4.12.3 Subsurface Pathways ......................................... 2.4.12-21 2.4.12.4 Monitoring or Safeguard Requirements .............. 2.4.12-22 2.4.12.5 Site Characteristics for Subsurface Hydrostatic Loading ............................................................... 2.4.12-23 2.4.12.6 Construction Dewatering .................................... 2.4.12-25 2.4.12.7 References ........................................................ 2.4.12-25 2.4.12-i Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report SUBSECTION 2.4.12 LIST OF TABLES Number Title 2.4.12-1 A Selection of Oak Ridge Reservation Published Bedrock Aquifer Testing Results 2.4.12-2 Summary of Hydrogeologic Properties on the ORR 2.4.12-3 Clinch River Breeder Reactor Project Investigation Packer Test Results 2.4.12-4 Well Construction Summary 2.4.12-5 Groundwater Withdrawals from Five Counties Surrounding the Clinch River Nuclear Site by Use Category 2.4.12-6 Summary of Water Systems Using Groundwater for Supply 2.4.12-7 Nearby Public Water Systems Using Groundwater for Supply 2.4.12-8 Horizontal Hydraulic Gradients 2.4.12-9 Vertical Hydraulic Gradients 2.4.12-10 Borehole Packer Test Results Summary 2.4.12-11 Well Slug Test Results Summary 2.4.12-12 Clinch River Nuclear Site Constant Rate Aquifer Pumping Test Results 2.4.12-13 Rock Effective Porosity Measurements on the Oak Ridge Reservation 2.4.12-14 Representative Soil and Rock Properties 2.4.12-15 Field Geochemical Results 2.4.12-16 Laboratory Geochemical Results 2.4.12-17 Groundwater Linear Velocity and Travel Time 2.4.12-18 Characteristics of Individual Wells Located Within a 1.5-mile Radius of the CRN Site 2.4.12-ii Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report SUBSECTION 2.4.12 LIST OF FIGURES Number Title 2.4.12-1 (Sheet 1 of 2) Location MapOak Ridge Reservation and the Clinch River Nuclear Site 2.4.12-1 (Sheet 2 of 2) Location MapOak Ridge Reservation and the Clinch River Nuclear Site 2.4.12-2 Physiographic Provinces in Tennessee 2.4.12-3 Preconstruction Topographic and Geologic Map and Cross-Section 2.4.12-4 Current Site Topography and Observation Well Locations 2.4.12-5 Clinch River Breeder Reactor Project Fill and Excavation Areas 2.4.12-6 Cambrian and Ordovician Aquifers 2.4.12-7 Typical Cross-Section of the East Tennessee Aquifer System 2.4.12-8 Water Use Study Area 2.4.12-9 Site Area Hydrogeostratigraphy 2.4.12-10 Bethel Valley Chickamauga Group Stratigraphy 2.4.12-11 Sole Source Aquifers in EPA Region IV 2.4.12-12 Oak Ridge Reservation Vertical Flow 2.4.12-13 Oak Ridge Reservation Historic Bedrock Hydraulic Conductivity Test Data 2.4.12-14 Oak Ridge Reservation Aquifer Pumping Test Results 2.4.12-15 Clinch River Breeder Reactor Project Bedrock Packer Hydraulic Conductivity Tests 2.4.12-16 Groundwater Levels Adjacent to the Clinch River 2.4.12-17 Groundwater Use by Category in the Study Area for 2000, 2005, and 2010 2.4.12-18 Bethel Valley Flow Conceptualization 2.4.12-19 Potentiometric Surface Map for September 24, 2013 2.4.12-20 Potentiometric Surface Map for December 20, 2013 2.4.12-21 Potentiometric Surface Map for January 13, 2014 2.4.12-22 Potentiometric Surface Map for March 16, 2014 2.4.12-23 Potentiometric Surface Map for May 15, 2014 2.4.12-24 Potentiometric Surface Map for August 18, 2014 2.4.12-25 Potentiometric Surface Map for November 4, 2014 2.4.12-26 Potentiometric Surface Map for February 12, 2015 2.4.12-27 Potentiometric Surface Map for May 19, 2015 2.4.12-28 Potentiometric Surface Map for August 10, 2015 2.4.12-iii Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report SUBSECTION 2.4.12 LIST OF FIGURES (CONTINUED)

Number Title 2.4.12-29 Snapshot in Time Showing Equipotential Lines in the Vertical Plane Along the Strike of the Bedding Plane on June 13, 2014 2.4.12-30 U.S. Geological Survey Regional Hydrograph 2.4.12-31 U.S. Geological Survey Hydrograph Near the Clinch River Nuclear Site 2.4.12-32 (Sheet 1 of 14) Hydrograph of OW-101 Well Cluster 2.4.12-32 (Sheet 2 of 14) Hydrograph of OW-202 Well Cluster 2.4.12-32 (Sheet 3 of 14) Hydrograph of OW-401 Well Cluster 2.4.12-32 (Sheet 4 of 14) Hydrograph of OW-409 Well Cluster 2.4.12-32 (Sheet 5 of 14) Hydrograph of OW-415 Well Cluster 2.4.12-32 (Sheet 6 of 14) Hydrograph of OW-416 Well Cluster 2.4.12-32 (Sheet 7 of 14) Hydrograph of OW-417 Well Cluster 2.4.12-32 (Sheet 8 of 14) Hydrograph of OW-418 Well Cluster 2.4.12-32 (Sheet 9 of 14) Hydrograph of OW-419 Well Cluster 2.4.12-32 (Sheet 10 of 14) Hydrograph of OW-420 Well Cluster 2.4.12-32 (Sheet 11 of 14) Hydrograph of OW-421 Well Cluster 2.4.12-32 (Sheet 12 of 14) Hydrograph of OW-423 Well Cluster 2.4.12-32 (Sheet 13 of 14) Hydrograph of OW-428 Well Cluster 2.4.12-32 (Sheet 14 of 14) Hydrograph of OW-429 Well Cluster 2.4.12-33 Fracture Frequency Histogram 2.4.12-34 Example Acoustic Televiewer Geophysical Log 2.4.12-35 Clinch River Nuclear Site Borehole Packer Test Results Box and Whisker Plots 2.4.12-36 Scatter Plot of Clinch River Nuclear Site Packer Test Hydraulic Conductivity Results with Depth 2.4.12-37 Slug Test Results for the Clinch River Nuclear Site 2.4.12-38 Comparison of Slug and Packer Test Results 2.4.12-39 Piper Trilinear Diagram 2.4.12-40 Plan View of the Profile Model with Grids 2.4.12-41 Maximum Hydrostatic Pressure 2.4.12-42 Individual Well Locations Within a 1.5-mile Radius of the CRN Site 2.4.12-iv Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report 2.4.12 Groundwater This subsection contains a description of the hydrogeologic conditions at and in the vicinity of the Clinch River Nuclear (CRN) Site.

Regional and local groundwater resources that could be affected by the construction and operation of small modular reactors (SMRs) are described below. The regional and site-specific data on the physical and hydrologic characterization of these groundwater resources are summarized in order to provide the basic data for an evaluation of impacts on the aquifers in the area.

Regional and local surface water features are described in Subsection 2.4.1, a geologic overview is presented in Subsection 2.5.1, and a geotechnical description for plant construction is presented in Subsection 2.5.4.

Note that all references to elevation given in this subsection are to North American Vertical Datum of 1988 (NAVD88) unless otherwise specified.

2.4.12.1 Description and Onsite Use This subsection contains a description of the regional and local physiography and geomorphology, groundwater aquifers, and groundwater sources and sinks. Onsite uses of groundwater and groundwater requirements are also described. Information regarding geologic formations (e.g., Blackford and Rockdell) is provided in Subsection 2.5.1.

The hydrogeologic conceptual model presented in this subsection was developed from multiple conceptual hydrogeologic models that vary in scale and hydrostratigraphic framework.

Considerations of the scale and framework were not mutually exclusive, but were intertwined during a series of steps designed to develop a tenable site hydrogeologic conceptual model. Five steps were involved in the development of the scale-dependent conceptual models, and include:

A regional desktop study based on published state; Federal, including Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) and the Department of Energy (DOE) Oak Ridge Reservation (ORR) studies; and other sources; A review of documentation addressing the former Clinch River Breeder Reactor Project (CRBRP), including site-specific studies performed for the purpose of the CRBRP (Reference 2.4.12-1);

Review of preliminary SMR site layout, plot plans and excavation plans for the CRN Site; A site-specific geotechnical, geologic, and hydrogeologic field study conducted for the proposed CRN Site (Reference 2.4.12-13);

An evaluation of site-specific data in conjunction with regional and local information.

The first step of site model conceptualization involved formulating an understanding of the hydrogeologic conditions near the CRN Site including the ORR and surrounding areas. Regional geologic and hydrogeologic information available from the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), the state of Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation (TDEC), DOE, TVA, and other sources were reviewed to identify the hydrogeologic framework of the area. The second step involved a review of documentation addressing local hydrogeologic conditions such as that available from DOE and the subsurface studies performed in support of the demonstration CRBRP previously proposed at the CRN Site. The third step was a review of the preliminary 2.4.12-1 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report SMR site layout, plot plans and excavation plans developed for the conceptual placement of the SMRs that could be constructed at the CRN Site.

During the fourth step, a site-specific subsurface investigation (SI) was implemented at the proposed CRN Site. The hydrogeologic aspects of the SI were based on the preliminary conceptual model (developed as described above) and were modified when appropriate during the field program (as field data were collected and evaluated), as the understanding of site-specific conditions for SMR construction evolved.

The fifth step involved analysis of the SI field data with the regional and local information. From this effort, site-specific data were integrated with existing CRN Site information and local and regional information to formulate the conceptual site model described in the following sections.

The conceptual model was then evaluated to determine potential changes to the hydrogeologic system as the result of constructing and operating the SMR units.

2.4.12.1.1 Physiography and Geomorphology The CRN Site is located in Roane County, Tennessee (see Figure 2.4.12-1). The CRN Site is approximately 10 miles (mi) southwest of the center of the City of Oak Ridge, with the site and the city center separated by the ORR. The City of Kingston is approximately 7 mi west of the CRN Site. The closest major metropolitan center is Knoxville, approximately 25 mi to the east-northeast of the CRN Site.

The site is located on a peninsula formed by a meander of the Clinch River arm of the Watts Bar Reservoir between approximately Clinch River Miles (CRM) 14.5 and 19.0. Headwaters of the Clinch River are in Tazewell County, Virginia. From its headwater, the Clinch River flows approximately 350 mi in a southwesterly direction to its confluence with the Tennessee River near Kingston, Tennessee approximately 6 mi west of the CRN Site. The Clinch River basin lies in an area of comparatively narrow parallel ridges and somewhat broader intervening valleys oriented in a northeast-southwest direction. The northwestern boundary of the basin is formed by the Cumberland Mountains, which range up to 4200 feet (ft) in elevation; the southeastern boundary follows Clinch Mountain and Black Oak Ridge with elevations ranging up to 4700 ft.

(Reference 2.4.12-1)

Water levels in the Clinch River arm of the Watts Bar Reservoir, which surrounds the CRN Site to the east, south, and west, are regulated by TVA. The normal summer pool water level elevation of the Clinch River arm of the Watts Bar Reservoir at the site is approximately 740 ft (Reference 2.4.12-1). Plant grade is at approximately 821 ft, placing the SMRs about 81 ft above the water level of the river.

The CRN Site is located in eastern Tennessee near the western boundary of the Valley and Ridge Physiographic Province. The Valley and Ridge Physiographic Province is characterized by folded and faulted sedimentary geologic units of Paleozoic age, which produces a series of valleys and ridges. This province extends south through Georgia and Alabama and north to Pennsylvania and New Jersey (Reference 2.4.12-2).

In eastern Tennessee, the processes of folding, faulting, and erosion have resulted in a series of northeast trending ridges and valleys. As described by Reference 2.4.12-2, compressive forces from the southeast have caused these rocks to yield, first by folding and subsequently by repeated breaking along a series of thrust faults. This successive faulting has resulted in several outcropping units in the area that occur in parallel belts aligned roughly with the topography. The folding/faulting process has produced a repeated sequence of outcropping units. Major units present in the area include, from youngest to oldest, the Chickamauga Group, the Knox Group, the Conasauga Group, and the Rome Formation. All are composed primarily of Ordovician and 2.4.12-2 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report Cambrian carbonate rocks. The dip of these formations is to the southeast. In nearby Melton Valley in the ORR (east of the CRN Site), Reference 2.4.12-3 reports that rock units generally strike between 50 and 60 degrees northeast, while dips vary with proximity to faults. Dips in Melton Valley are more gentle (10 to 20 degrees) away from the fault and steeper close to faults (45 to 90 degrees) (Reference 2.4.12-3). The extent of the Valley and Ridge Province in eastern Tennessee is shown in Figure 2.4.12-2.

The topography of the site has been altered by anthropogenic changes. In 1972, the site was selected for permitting and construction of the CRBRP (Reference 2.4.12-4). Site preparation for the CRBRP began in September 1982. A Limited Work Authorization was granted by NRC in May 1983. Excavation for the nuclear island was completed in September 1983. Approximately three million cubic yards of earth and rock were excavated from the site (Reference 2.4.12-4).

The Secretary of Energy issued a statement in October 1983 that the department would terminate the project. In November of that year, an agreement was reached by DOE, TVA, the affected utilities and project stakeholders to begin an orderly termination of the project (Reference 2.4.12-4).

The topography of the site prior to alteration as the result of the CRBRP site preparation is described in the CRBRP Preliminary Safety Analysis Report (CRBRP PSAR)

(Reference 2.4.12-1). A representation of the pre-construction topography and site geology is shown in Figure 2.4.12-3. The site was characterized as a series of parallel ridges separated by long, narrow valleys extending in a northeast-southwest direction. It was reported that there were no perennial streams on the site; however, after a heavy rain, surface water flowed from the ridges into the valleys and subsequently into the river. It was anticipated that construction of the CRBRP would not significantly alter the drainage pattern of the site (Reference 2.4.12-1).

The topography of the approximately 935-acre CRN Site is shown in Figure 2.4.12-4 as a hillshade map based on a recent LiDAR (Light Detection And Ranging) survey of the site current area. Areas of disturbance as the result of CRBRP site preparation and excavation can be seen by the flattened hillshade areas in Figure 2.4.12-5. The ground surface elevation varies from approximately 740 ft at the Clinch River arm of the Watts Bar Reservoir to over 1100 ft along Chestnut Ridge at the northwestern Site Boundary. At the power block area (Figure 2.4.12-4), the ground surface elevation is approximately 800 ft with the exception of the CRBRP partially backfilled excavation area.

A more detailed discussion of the regional and local surface water features and geologic descriptions, including landforms, is presented in Subsections 2.4.1 and 2.5.1, respectively.

2.4.12.1.2 Regional Hydrogeology and Groundwater Aquifers As previously stated, the Valley and Ridge Physiographic Province is characterized by a sequence of folded and faulted, northeast-trending Paleozoic sedimentary rocks that form a series of alternating valleys and ridges. The Valley and Ridge Province in the eastern part of Tennessee is underlain by rocks that are primarily Cambrian and Ordovician in age. Minor Silurian, Devonian, and Mississippian rocks also are present in the province. In general, soluble carbonate rocks and easily eroded shale underlie the valleys in the province, and more erosion-resistant siltstone, sandstone, and some cherty dolomite underlie ridges (Reference 2.4.12-2).

The arrangement of the northeast-trending valleys and ridges and the broad expanse of the Cambrian and the Ordovician rocks are the result of a combination of folding, thrust faulting, and erosion. Compressive forces from the southeast have caused these rocks to yield, first by folding and subsequently by repeatedly breaking along a series of thrust faults (Reference 2.4.12-2).

The result of this faulting is that geologic formations can be repeated several times across the 2.4.12-3 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report faults. In eastern Tennessee, the thrust faults are closely spaced and are more responsible than the folds for the present distribution of the rocks. Following the folding and thrusting, erosion produced the sequence of ridges and valleys on the present land surface.

The principal aquifers in the Valley and Ridge Province consist of carbonate rocks that are Cambrian, Ordovician, and Mississippian in age as shown in Figure 2.4.12-6. These aquifers are typically present in valleys and rarely present on broad, dissected ridges; and underlie more than half of the Valley and Ridge Province in Tennessee. Most of the carbonate-rock aquifers are directly connected to sources of recharge, such as rivers or lakes, and solution activity has enlarged the original openings in the carbonate rocks. Other types of rocks in the province can yield large quantities of water to wells where they are fractured or contain solution openings or are directly hydraulically connected to sources of recharge (Reference 2.4.12-2).

Groundwater in aquifers primarily is stored in and moves through fractures, bedding planes, and solution openings in the rocks. These types of openings are secondary features that developed after the rocks were deposited and lithified. Little primary porosity and permeability remain in these rocks after the process of lithification. Some groundwater moves through primary pore spaces between the particles that constitute the alluvium along streams and the residuum of weathered material that overlies most of the rocks in the area (Reference 2.4.12-2).

In the carbonate rocks, the fractures and bedding planes have been enlarged by dissolution of part of the rocks. Slightly acidic water, especially that circulating in the upper 200 to 300 ft of the zone of saturation, dissolves some of the calcite and dolomite that compose the principal aquifers. Most of this dissolution takes place along fractures and bedding planes where the largest volumes of acidic groundwater flow (Reference 2.4.12-2).

Groundwater movement in the Valley and Ridge Province in eastern Tennessee is localized, in part, by the repeating lithology created by thrust faulting and, in part, by streams. Major streams are parallel to the northeast-trending valleys and ridges, and tributary streams are perpendicular to the valleys and ridges. Older rocks (primarily the Conasauga Group and the Rome Formation) have been displaced upward over the top of younger rocks (the Chickamauga and the Knox Groups) along thrust fault planes, forming a repeating sequence of permeable and less permeable hydrogeologic units. The repeating sequence, coupled with the stream network, divides the area into a series of adjacent, isolated, shallow groundwater flow systems (Reference 2.4.12-2). Within these local flow systems, most of the groundwater movement takes place within 300 ft of land surface. In recharge areas, most of the groundwater flows across the strike of the rocks. The water moves from the ridges, where the water levels are high, toward lower water levels adjacent to major streams that flow parallel to the long axes of the valleys as shown on Figure 2.4.12-7. Most of the groundwater is discharged directly to local springs or streams, but some of it moves along the strike of the rocks, following highly permeable fractures, bedding planes, and solution zones to finally discharge at more distant springs or streams.

Although fracture zones locally are present in the clastic rocks, the highly permeable zones, which are primarily present in the carbonate rocks, act as collectors and conduits for the water (Reference 2.4.12-2).

The most important aquifers in the Valley and Ridge Province in eastern Tennessee are the carbonate rocks underlying the majority of the province. The Knox Group is the most important aquifer in eastern Tennessee. Of particular interest, near the CRN Site, are the Chickamauga Group and the Knox Group (Reference 2.4.12-1).

Most of the carbonate-rock aquifers are directly connected to surface water such as rivers and lakes. Other types of rocks can yield large quantities of water to wells where they are fractured, contain solution openings, or are hydraulically connected to a source of recharge (Reference 2.4.12-2).

2.4.12-4 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report Secondary porosity features, in the form of bedding planes, fractures, and solution openings, comprise the primary flow pathways in the Valley and Ridge Province, as most rocks in the province have low primary porosity. Regolith layers are composed of clayey soils and saprolite.

Typical conceptual cross-sections in the province consist of a stormflow zone near the surface, a less permeable vadose zone, and a groundwater zone consisting of fractured bedrock with fracture density decreasing with depth (Reference 2.4.12-5). Groundwater flow is generally from recharge areas at high elevation (ridges) to local streams and rivers at lower elevations.

Long-term average annual precipitation is approximately 50 inches (in.) in the vicinity of the CRN Site, with an estimated long-term average runoff of 25 to 30 in. (Reference 2.4.12-2). Most of the precipitation that percolates downward becomes groundwater recharge to the shallow aquifers; a small portion enters the deep aquifer. Mixing at depth in carbonate formations has been studied as presented in Reference 2.4.12-6.

Well yields in the Valley and Ridge Province vary from 1 to 2500 gallons per minute (gpm)

(Reference 2.4.12-2). The largest yields are from wells completed in Ordovician and Cambrian carbonate rocks (e.g., the Knox Group). Wells completed in the middle and lower parts of the Chickamauga Group, the Knox Group, and the upper part of the Conasauga Group have reported yields around 500 gpm in some locations. The median yield of wells completed in the principal aquifers range from about 11 to 350 gpm (Reference 2.4.12-2).

Spring discharges also vary greatly across the Valley and Ridge Province, ranging from about 1 to 5000 gpm, with median discharges from the principal aquifers varying from 20 to 175 gpm (Reference 2.4.12-2). The largest spring discharges issue from limestone formations of the Chickamauga Group; springs from the Knox Group have reported discharges as high as 4000 gpm (Reference 2.4.12-2). Spring discharges can be highly dependent on rainfall with some springs discharging as much as 10 times more water during high precipitation events as compared to periods of little rainfall (Reference 2.4.12-2). Wet-weather perched water tables and intermittent springs have been noted to occur (Reference 2.4.12-5). Fresh groundwater withdrawals from aquifers in the Valley and Ridge Province in eastern Tennessee totaled about 82 million gallons per day (mgd) in 1985 with public supply as the leading use (Reference 2.4.12-2). In the five-county area near the CRN Site (green shaded area in Figure 2.4.12-8); fresh groundwater withdrawals during 1985 were between 0 and 5 mgd per county in Loudon, Roane, Morgan, and Anderson Counties and between 5 and 10 mgd in Knox County (Reference 2.4.12-2).

Groundwater on the ORR, which is adjacent to the CRN Site, occurs in the unsaturated zone as transient, shallow subsurface stormflow as well as within the deeper saturated zone as summarized in Reference 2.4.12-7. An unsaturated zone of variable thickness separates the stormflow zone and water table. Adjacent to surface water features or in valley floors, the water table is found at shallow depths where the stormflow and unsaturated zones are undistinguishable. Along the ridge tops or near high topographic areas, the unsaturated zone is thick, and the water table often lies at considerable depths (greater than approximately 50 ft).

Recharge of the groundwater system is reported to be strongly seasonal at the ORR. The amount of water that recharges the groundwater zone is highly variable depending on the shallow soil characteristics, permeability and degree of regolith fracturing, and the presence of dolines and man-made paved or covered areas. Higher recharge is expected in areas of karst hydrogeology such as the Knox aquifer. In the ORR aquitards, groundwater is transmitted through fractures (Reference 2.4.12-7).

The chemical quality of water in the freshwater parts of the Valley and Ridge aquifers is similar for shallow wells and springs. The water is hard, a calcium-magnesium-bicarbonate type, and typically has a dissolved-solids concentration of 170 milligrams per liter (mg/L) or less. The 2.4.12-5 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report ranges of concentrations are thought to be indicators of the depth and rate at which groundwater flows through the carbonate-rock aquifers. In general, the smaller values for a constituent represent water that is moving rapidly along shallow, short flow paths from recharge areas to points of discharge. This water has been in the aquifers for a short time and has accordingly dissolved only small quantities of aquifer material. Conversely, the larger values represent water that is moving more slowly along deep, long flow paths. Such water has been in contact with aquifer minerals for a longer time and thus has had greater opportunity to dissolve the minerals.

Also, water that moves into deeper parts of the aquifers can mix with saltwater (brine) that might be present at depth (Reference 2.4.12-2).

The chemical characteristics of the groundwater in the ORR aquitards range from a mixed-cation-bicarbonate water type at shallow depths to a sodium-bicarbonate water type at deeper depths, to sodium-calcium-chloride water type as evidenced from very deep wells. These chloride-rich waters appear to be a zone of dilution on top of deeper saline sodium-calcium-chloride brines, similar to those encountered within the Conasauga Group at depths greater than 1000 ft in Melton Valley (Reference 2.4.12-6). The Knox aquifer is characterized by a calcium-magnesium-bicarbonate water type.

The hydrogeologic conditions at the CRN Site are similar to those observed at the ORR with the exception of land disturbance areas resulting from earlier site work performed for the CRBRP where excavations and fill material are present.

2.4.12.1.2.1 Bedrock Formations Figure 2.4.12-9 presents a stratigraphic column of the bedrock formations present in the site area. The following sections briefly describe these formations.

Chickamauga Group The Middle to Upper Ordovician age Chickamauga Group consists of limestone, shale, and siltstone. In eastern Tennessee it is subdivided into upper, middle, and lower parts. The upper part of the Chickamauga consists of 700 to 1000 ft of limestone and shale. The middle and lower parts, together, range in thickness from about 2000 to 6000 ft, consisting of limestones, shales, and siltstones (Reference 2.4.12-1). However, due to thrust faulting, the entire sequence is frequently not present (Figure 2.4.12-6). The lower and middle parts of the Chickamauga Group are generally considered to be better aquifers than the upper part (Reference 2.4.12-1).

Figure 2.4.12-10 presents the subdivisions of the Chickamauga Group based on the stratigraphy of Bethel Valley in the ORR as defined by Reference 2.4.12-8. The unit designations shown on the figure were developed by Reference 2.4.12-9 and were used during the CRBRP investigation. The formation names shown on the figure are the names used in this investigation.

Groundwater in the Chickamauga Group is largely restricted to fractures which have been enlarged by solutioning. The fracturing of the formation by folding has resulted in a system of cavities which are more or less interconnected. The quality of water in the Chickamauga Group is varied and is influenced by local topography, local land-use patterns, depth below ground surface at which the formation is encountered, and small scale geologic considerations (Reference 2.4.12-1). Many springs occur at the shale-limestone contacts and where solution-widened joints or fractures extend to ground surface in topographic lows. In the lower and middle parts of the Chickamauga limestones, small springs are common, and several can yield more than 450 gpm. Wells in these rocks usually have low yields when located on hills or other topographic highs and have larger yields when located near permanent streams. In the upper part of the Chickamauga limestones, some springs can yield more than 100 gpm (Reference 2.4.12-1).

2.4.12-6 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report Knox Group The Upper Cambrian to Lower Ordovician age Knox Group is the most important aquifer in eastern Tennessee. The Knox Group consists of 2000 to 3000 ft thickness of dolomites, limestones, and sandstones. The Knox Group in eastern Tennessee is subdivided into five formations (Reference 2.4.12-8):

Mascot Dolomite Kingsport Formation Longview Dolomite Chepultepec Dolomite Copper Ridge Dolomite The occurrence of water is controlled by the extent of solution enlargement of fractures (that are the result of ancient folding and faulting). Numerous springs are found in these rocks and the water is generally of good quality. The yield of water to wells ranges from small to large.

Generally the largest fractures and thus greatest well yields are found in the first few hundred feet of formation depth (Reference 2.4.12-1).

Conasauga Group The Middle to Upper Cambrian age Conasauga Group shows lithofacies changes along north-south trending belts from clastics in the west to carbonates in the east. The site area falls within the central area of the group, which exhibits an interfingering of clastic and carbonate deposits. Six formations can be identified within the group:

Maynardville Limestone Nolichucky Shale Dismal Gap formation (formerly Maryville Limestone)

Rodgersville Shale Friendship formation (formerly Rutledge Limestone)

Pumpkin Valley Shale The Conasauga Group has an average thickness of approximately 549 meters (m) (1801 ft) in Melton and Bear Creek Valleys. The Maynardville Limestone is associated with the overlying Knox Group and functions as a single hydrologic unit known as the Knox aquifer. The remainder of the group is considered to be an aquitard (Reference 2.4.12-8).

Rome Formation The Early Cambrian age Rome Formation is the oldest bedrock unit exposed in the site area.

The Rome Formation consists of mixed siliciclastic and carbonate rocks. The lithologies represented in the formation include sandstone, siltstone, and shale with dolomite and dolomitic sandstone intervals. Studies have suggested that the true stratigraphic thickness of this formation is between 90 and 125 m (295 and 410 ft). This formation is considered to be an aquitard (Reference 2.4.12-8).

2.4.12.1.2.2 Unconsolidated Deposits The unconsolidated deposits in the CRN Site area typically consist of four types: residuum, colluvium, alluvium, and anthropogenic materials.

2.4.12-7 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report Residuum The residuum is composed of the remains of bedrock weathering. In the site area, bedrock weathers to a clayey residual soil, which locally contains chert gravel. During the CRBRP investigation, the thickness of the residuum was found to vary from 1 to 78 ft, depending on the type of underlying bedrock (Reference 2.4.12-1).

Colluvium Colluvium is an unconsolidated deposit sometimes found at the toe of a slope, and it represents material that has been moved by gravity. Colluvial deposits are generally identified by a lack of residual rock structure (bedding or joints) with disoriented rock fragments. This material tends to have more rock fragments than either residuum or alluvium. Colluvial deposits may be reworked by surface water action resulting in a hybrid colluvium-alluvium mixture (Reference 2.4.12-8)

Alluvium The alluvium includes deposits by the Clinch River and smaller tributary streams. During the CRBRP investigation, alluvial terrace deposits were identified on the site. These deposits consisted of silty clay with thin layers of rounded quartz, chert, and quartzite gravel. Additionally a sand and clay alluvial layer was found to occur in the Clinch River floodplain, with a thickness of approximately 32 ft (Reference 2.4.12-1).

Anthropogenic Materials Anthropogenic materials are primarily associated with artificial backfill. These materials include overburden and shot-rock (i.e., rock that has been excavated by blasting). Materials were excavated during site preparation for the CRBRP. These materials were moved and placed to facilitate laydown and parking area construction and to implement the site redress plan, when the project was canceled (Reference 2.4.12-4).

2.4.12.1.2.3 Sole-Source Aquifers A sole-source aquifer is defined as the sole or principal source of drinking water that supplies 50 percent or more of drinking water for an area, with no reasonable available alternative sources should the aquifer becomes contaminated. Figure 2.4.12-11 shows the location of sole-source aquifers in EPA Region 4, which encompasses Tennessee. The identified sole-source aquifers in EPA Region 4 are beyond the boundaries of the local and regional hydrogeologic systems associated with the CRN Site. Therefore, the CRN Site does not impact any identified sole-source aquifer.

2.4.12.1.3 Local Hydrogeology Description of the local hydrogeology is based on information from the adjacent ORR. The hydrogeology of the ORR (Reference 2.4.12-11) is defined by two broad hydrogeologic groups:

the Knox aquifer consisting of the Knox Group and the Maynardville Limestone and the ORR aquitards, which include the Chickamauga Group, Conasauga Group, and the Rome Formation.

In the vertical dimension, the Knox aquifer and the ORR aquitards include:

The stormflow zone, which is a thin region near the surface where transient, precipitation generated flow accounts for 90 percent or more of the water moving through the subsurface.

2.4.12-8 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report The vadose zone (the unsaturated zone above the water table) which varies in thickness from nearly non-existent along stream channels to greater than 100 ft beneath ridges underlain by the Knox aquifer.

The groundwater zone, which is continuously saturated and is the region where most of the remaining 10 percent of subsurface flow occurs. This zone is typically encountered near the top of bedrock.

An underlying aquiclude within the bedrock, within which water movement, if it occurs, probably is on the scale of thousands of years or more.

Figure 2.4.12-12 shows the vertical relationship of these subdivisions for the Knox aquifer and the ORR aquitards. The figure indicates that fracture frequency decreases and the concentrations of sodium and chloride increase in the groundwater with increasing depth.

Numerous groundwater investigations have been performed at the ORR providing hydrogeologic property data for the bedrock units. Testing has included slug tests in wells, packer tests in boreholes, aquifer pumping tests, and tracer tests. Table 2.4.12-1 presents a summary of selected tests performed to determine the hydraulic conductivity, transmissivity, and storage coefficient of the bedrock units. Figure 2.4.12-13 summarizes the hydraulic conductivity test results (box and whisker plot and hydraulic conductivity versus depth) by geologic formation and by depth below ground surface. The hydraulic conductivity by depth graph suggests that at approximately 100 ft below ground surface, hydraulic conductivities decrease with depth, although this trend is less obvious in the Knox aquifer, since both fracturing and solutioning are active in this unit. Figure 2.4.12-14 summarizes the results of the aquifer pumping tests identified on Table 2.4.12-1. The statistics presented on the table indicate a geometric mean transmissivity of 32.5 square ft per day (ft2/d) and a storage coefficient of 5.9 x 10-4 for the Conasauga Group tests.

Additional hydrogeologic parameters for the stormflow and groundwater zones on the ORR are summarized on Table 2.4.12-2 and are based on information presented in Reference 2.4.12-12.

The information presented in Table 2.4.12-2 suggests the transmissivity values for the ORR aquitards are approximately one order of magnitude less than those of the Knox aquifer.

2.4.12.1.4 Site-Specific Hydrogeology Site-specific hydrogeology has been investigated during the CRBRP licensing effort and preparation for the ESPA.

2.4.12.1.4.1 CRBRP Investigation As part of the licensing activities for the CRBRP, the site was investigated by drilling 129 borings, installing 37 observation wells, installing 11 piezometers, and performing 117 bedrock packer permeability tests in boreholes. The investigation also included collection of groundwater level data and performing a survey of local groundwater users (Reference 2.4.12-1). Abandoned wells from the CRBRP were identified on site. The identified CRBRP wells will be evaluated for closure in accordance with applicable TVA and TDEC requirements.

The CRBRP SI (Reference 2.4.12-1) identified four bedrock joint set orientations at the site:

N52°E 37°SE N52°E 58°NW N25°W 80°SW N65°W 75°NE 2.4.12-9 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report The predominant joint set is oriented N52°E 37°SE, which corresponds with the bedding plane partings in bedrock. The N52°E 58°NW joint set has a joint spacing of between one and six ft (Reference 2.4.12-1).

The results of the packer hydraulic conductivity tests are summarized on Table 2.4.12-3.

Figure 2.4.12-15 presents summary plots (box and whisker and hydraulic conductivity vs. depth) of the packer test results. The results can be classified in three groups: the Chickamauga long interval tests (test section length 40 ft and greater), the Chickamauga discrete interval tests (test section length less than 40 ft), and the Knox Group tests. The CRBRP packer test derived hydraulic conductivity results are similar to hydraulic conductivity test results from the ORR. Both sets of results indicate a decreasing trend in hydraulic conductivity at depths greater than approximately 100 ft below ground surface.

Water level measurements on the CRN Site indicated as much as a 20 ft fluctuation in water levels. Maximum water levels were observed in January and February and minimum water levels were observed in October and November. Movement of groundwater is described as generally from topographically high areas to topographic lows; however, this pattern is modulated by the extent of weathering in the bedrock. Ultimately, the Clinch River arm of the Watts Bar Reservoir acts as a sink for site groundwater flow. The investigation concluded that major ridges on the site may be regarded as approximate locations of groundwater divides (Reference 2.4.12-1).

The groundwater use survey performed for the CRBRP determined that present groundwater use is limited primarily to agricultural and single-family wells. The study concluded that due to the abundance of surface water supplies and the relatively low yield of bedrock aquifers, future groundwater use is unlikely to be significantly different than the present groundwater use (Reference 2.4.12-1).

2.4.12.1.4.2 CRN Site Investigation The CRN Site field investigation included drilling 82 borings, 3 test pits, installation of 44 wells, and in situ/ex situ tests on soil, rock, and groundwater. Additional information on the borings, test pits and testing of soil and rock are presented in Section 2.5. Groundwater characterization activities included groundwater level monitoring, performing packer tests in boreholes, performing slug tests in monitoring wells, performing an aquifer pumping test, and groundwater geochemical sampling. Groundwater level monitoring is discussed in Subsections 2.4.12.2.2 and 2.4.12.2.3, aquifer properties are discussed in Subsection 2.4.12.2.4, and geochemical results are discussed in Subsection 2.4.12.2.5. The locations of observation wells installed during this investigation are shown on Figure 2.4.12-4 and well installation details are provided on Table 2.4.12-4. The figure and table include permanent observation wells (OW prefix) and supplemental wells (PT-OW and PT-PW prefixes) installed for the aquifer pumping test. Well suffixes of U, L, and D were assigned to wells to designate the upper, lower, and deeper monitoring zones, respectively. The screened depth intervals for the site observation wells for the upper monitoring zone range from 15 to 105 ft below ground surface, the lower monitoring zone range from 89 to 178 ft below ground surface, and the deeper monitoring zone range from 176 to 297 ft below ground surface.

A three-well cluster was installed east of the OW-101 well cluster, at boring location MP-422 (OW-422 U, L and D). During well completion, groundwater contamination was observed in OW-422L, and TVA notified TDEC and provided it with results of well sampling. The contamination was determined to be non-radiological petroleum products (gasoline range organics). Due to the contamination in OW-422L, this well cluster (OW-422 U, L and D) was not developed; however, it remains in place, locked and under TVA control. TVA has no plans to perform any additional work in the location, and TDEC will make a determination regarding the disposition of the well. Because the wells were not developed and monitoring of water levels in 2.4.12-10 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report these wells was not performed, the OW-422 well series is not included in the discussion of site observation wells. Well clusters OW-428 and OW-429 (installed north and south of the OW-422 cluster) were installed to provide replacement geological/groundwater data.

Additional as-built information for the site wells is presented in Reference 2.4.12-13. Some permanent observation wells at the CRN Site were sampled after well development and no evidence of petroleum products (gasoline range organics) was observed in the wells. The contamination seems to be restricted to the immediate well OW-422 area since no evidence of petroleum products (gasoline range organics) were observed before and after the 72-hour pumping test conducted near the OW-423 U, L, and D well cluster (up dip of OW-422L). Water quality sampling in discharge water from 72-hour pumping test showed no detection of volatile organic compounds. Gross alpha and beta radionuclides were below minimum detectable concentration levels in the discharge water from pumping test.

The hydrogeology of the CRN Site is expected to be similar to the hydrogeology of the ORR as a result of the sites physical proximity and similarity in geology. The primary differences are in the stormflow and vadose zones at the CRN Site. The extensive excavation and reworking of unconsolidated and weathered bedrock materials associated with the CRBRP site preparation has either significantly modified or obliterated these zones at the CRN Site.

2.4.12.1.5 Groundwater Sources and Sinks This subsection describes the regional, local, and site-specific discharge and recharge areas, mechanisms, and characteristics of the different aquifer units.

2.4.12.1.5.1 Groundwater Recharge Groundwater recharge is derived primarily from precipitation. Although periodic recharge from the Clinch River arm of the Watts Bar Reservoir during high stages of the reservoir may also be occurring, this is not considered to represent a significant part of the recharge to the aquifer.

Recharge is most effective in those areas where the overburden soils are thin and permeable.

Recharge may also occur through sinkholes that penetrate relatively thick and impervious formations (Reference 2.4.12-1).

2.4.12.1.5.2 Groundwater Discharge Natural discharge of the Valley and Ridge Province aquifers is primarily through streams, rivers, springs and evapotranspiration. In the area of the Clinch River Site, the Clinch River arm of the Watts Bar Reservoir acts as a sink to which all groundwater at the site migrates (Reference 2.4.12-1).

Studies performed by DOE for the Melton Valley offsite monitoring system (Reference 2.4.12-14),

which is located approximately 2 mi east of the CRN Site, investigated the groundwater flow relationship with the Clinch River arm of the Watts Bar Reservoir. Figure 2.4.12-16 presents a section through the river showing the head distribution. This head distribution suggests discharge to the Clinch River from the surrounding groundwater system.

2.4.12.1.6 On-Site Groundwater Use Groundwater flow occurs at the CRN Site primarily through fractures and joints, with active flow primarily at shallow depths (generally at the interface of soil and weathered bedrock) where fractures/joints are denser and closely spaced. Groundwater flows from the ridges at higher elevations north of the site toward the Clinch River arm of the Watts Bar Reservoir. The reservoir 2.4.12-11 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report abuts the site on the east, south, and west sides and acts as a main discharge point for the active flow system and is generally considered to be a hydrologic boundary for the site.

Borings performed for subsurface investigations at the CRBRP site and in the river (Reference 2.4.12-15 and Reference 2.4.12-1) show that the elevation of the top of continuous rock lies at about 700 ft National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929 (NGVD29). The frequency of fractures/joints decreases significantly at depth and the predominant groundwater flow at the site occurs close to the surface, as has been reported for ORR at large (Reference 2.4.12-11). As such, surface disturbance at the site is not expected to affect the recharge zones for those nor any private wells across the river from the site or past the site boundaries.

2.4.12.1.6.1 Current Site Groundwater Use There are no current groundwater users at the CRN Site.

2.4.12.1.6.2 Plant Groundwater Use The CRN Site plant design does not require groundwater as a source for cooling water, potable water, or other plant needs. Makeup water for the closed-cycle cooling system will be sourced from the Clinch River arm of Watts Bar Reservoir, while potable and other water will come from the Oak Ridge Department of Public Works. As such, there are no anticipated plant operation impacts to local groundwater resources due to plant use.

2.4.12.2 Groundwater Sources This subsection contains a description of the present and projected regional groundwater use at and in the vicinity of the CRN Site. Specifically, the description contains information pertaining to existing users, historical groundwater levels, groundwater flow directions and hydraulic gradients, seasonal and long-term variations of groundwater levels, horizontal and vertical hydraulic conductivity and total and effective porosity of the geologic formations, reversibility of groundwater flow, the effects of water use on hydraulic gradients and groundwater levels beneath the site, and groundwater recharge areas. This information has been organized into five subcategories: (1) historical and projected groundwater use, (2) groundwater flow directions, (3) temporal groundwater trends, (4) aquifer properties, and (5) hydrogeochemical characteristics.

2.4.12.2.1 Historical and Projected Groundwater Use Historical, current, and projected groundwater use in the vicinity of the CRN Site is evaluated in the following subsections using information from TVA, EPA, and USGS.

2.4.12.2.1.1 Historical Groundwater Use In support of the CRBRP licensing activities, TVA conducted a survey (completed in June 1973) to locate wells and springs within a 2-mi radius of the site. The TVA survey reported that 110 wells and springs were located within 2 mi of the CRBRP site. All of the wells were located across the Clinch River arm of the Watts Bar Reservoir from the site, and nearly all of the wells inspected were small domestic wells of limited capacity (Reference 2.4.12-1). Reported well usage rates were generally less than 10 gpm, and reported well depths ranged from approximately 20 to 700 ft below ground surface. Publicly available data regarding current and projected future residential well/spring use were not found at this time.

Water use in the Tennessee Valley, which includes the Clinch River watershed, has been estimated for the years 2000, 2005, and 2010 (Reference 2.4.12-16; Reference 2.4.12-17; and 2.4.12-12 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report Reference 2.4.12-18, respectively). These reports tabulate water use on a variety of scales and serve as the primary basis for the estimation of present water use in the area of the CRN Site.

To characterize groundwater use in the area surrounding the site, data from these reports were totaled for Anderson, Knox, Loudon, Morgan, and Roane Counties (henceforth referred to as the study area). Figure 2.4.12-8, adapted from Reference 2.4.12-18, shows the location of the site and the five counties that comprise the study area for water use characterization.

Surface water is by far the predominant source of water for all uses in the Tennessee Valley at large (see Figure 2.4.12-8 for Tennessee River watershed extent), accounting for 98.3 percent of total withdrawals in 2010 (Reference 2.4.12-18). Groundwater provided the remaining 1.7 percent, or about 205 mgd of withdrawals in the Tennessee Valley. In the study area, surface water accounted for 99.7 percent of total withdrawals in 2010. Because surface water is abundant in the area, EPAs Sole Source Aquifer Program has not identified any sole source aquifers in Tennessee as shown in Figure 2.4.12-11 (Reference 2.4.12-10).

Thermoelectric power generation, which uses water exclusively from surface water withdrawals in the Tennessee Valley, is the dominant use category in the Tennessee Valley, as well as in the study area. Excluding thermoelectric power generation, water withdrawals in 2010 for other use categories (i.e., industrial, public supply and irrigation) were 97 percent from surface water and 3 percent from groundwater in the study area.

In the study area, total groundwater withdrawals for 2010 were 3.5 mgd (Reference 2.4.12-18),

up from 3.3 mgd in 2005 (Reference 2.4.12-17). This also reflects a decrease in groundwater withdrawals relative to the estimates of withdrawals for 1985 given in Reference 2.4.12-2, which indicated withdrawals of at least 5 mgd. Table 2.4.12-5 presents groundwater withdrawals for the five counties in the study area for 2000, 2005, and 2010 by category (industrial, public supply, and irrigation); total withdrawals by category are shown in Figure 2.4.12-17. The largest category of use for groundwater withdrawals for 2010 was public water supply (66 percent), followed by industrial use (33 percent), and irrigation (less than 1 percent) (Reference 2.4.12-18).

As shown in Figure 2.4.12-17, there has been an increase in industrial use and a decrease in use for public supply since 2000. These changes have primarily occurred in Knox County, which increased industrial use from 0.13 mgd to 1.13 mgd from 2000 to 2010 while reducing the use of groundwater as a source of public supply (Table 2.4.12-5). Only Roane County has seen a significant increase in reported groundwater withdrawals since 2000, almost exclusively for public supply. No groundwater withdrawals were reported for Morgan County.

2.4.12.2.1.2 Current Groundwater Use EPAs Safe Drinking Water Information System (SDWIS) database was queried for the five counties in the study area to identify public drinking water systems that utilize groundwater for supply (Reference 2.4.12-19). The database uses results as of July 2013 and classifies water systems into three categories:

Community water systems, which serve the same people year round (e.g., homes)

Non-transient non-community water systems, which serve the same people but not year round (e.g., schools that have their own water supply)

Transient non-community water systems, which do not consistently serve the same people (e.g., rest stops, campgrounds)

The results of the queries are provided in Appendix 2.4.12A and summarized in Table 2.4.12-6.

2.4.12-13 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report Three community water systems in the study area were identified that use groundwater as the primary source of supply (Table 2.4.12-6). The town of Norris, Tennessee, located more than 20 mi northeast of the site in Anderson County, serves the largest population of the three systems, while Johnson University, located east of Knoxville and Creekside Mobile Homes in Loudon County serve the next two larger populations. Two water systems were classified as non-transient, non-community water systems that rely on groundwater, both of which appear to be industrial users in Knox County. Four transient non-community systems were identified consisting of two campgrounds, a marina, and a yacht club.

TVA has identified additional groundwater users that were not included in the results obtained from queries in SDWIS. These are also provided in Table 2.4.12-6.

TDEC produced a source water assessment report in 2003 (Reference 2.4.12-20), which was submitted to EPA in compliance with the 1996 Safe Drinking Water Acts Amendments.

Appendix A of the assessment report lists water systems and sources by county (Reference 2.4.12-20). This list indicates whether a water system uses multiple sources of water as opposed to the SDWIS database, which only reports the primary water source. However, Reference 2.4.12-20 does not indicate in what proportion the water sources are used. The community water systems that use groundwater (as of 2003) via wells or springs for at least part of their water supply are listed in Table 2.4.12-7.

A later report by TDEC published in 2009 (Reference 2.4.12-21) assesses Tennessee drinking water sources and potential threats to drinking water quality and quantity. The report states that a recent drought impacted 30 groundwater systems throughout the state, including the Oliver Springs Water Board in Roane County. The town of Oliver Springs is located approximately 2 mi northwest of Oak Ridge, Tennessee, and utilizes Bacon Spring for a portion of its water supply (Reference 2.4.12-21).

The report also notes the complicated geology of Middle and East Tennessee (karst, faulting, etc.) and urges additional assessment of groundwater resources in the state. In addition, the report notes the close interaction of surface water and groundwater in the region (Reference 2.4.12-21):

Approximately 2/3 of the community public water systems using ground water in Middle and East Tennessee have had at least one source determined under the direct influence of surface water. This means that these sources of groundwater are located close enough to a source of surface water to receive direct surface water recharge and are thus considered at risk from surface water contaminants and pathogens.

Information pertaining to individual wells in the vicinity of the CRN Site was obtained from TDEC, Division of Water Resources, Drinking Water Unit. This information was derived from water well driller reports submitted to TDEC following completion of water well drilling. Such reports include well location by either latitude and longitude or street address, date completed, static level, total depth, estimated yield, proposed use of well, casing depth, and finish type (i.e., open hole or screened). Figure 2.4.12-42 shows the location of individual wells within a 1.5-mile radius of the CRN Site, all of which are located in Roane County. Table 2.4.12-18 lists for each well the proposed use, estimated yield, total depth, casing depth, expected geologic unit in which the wells are completed, and finish type. There are 32 residential wells, three commercial wells, and one farm well for a total of 36 individual wells. Estimated well yields range from 0.5 to 75 gallons per minute (three wells had no estimated well yield). Total depths range from 42 to 900 feet below grade, while casing depths range from 20 to 190 feet below grade. Twenty-eight of the wells are finished as open hole wells, while no finish type information was available for the remaining wells. The geologic unit in which wells are completed was inferred from regional geological mapping, as this information was not available from TDEC. The actual geologic unit(s) 2.4.12-14 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report from which a well obtains water may differ from what is shown in Table 2.4.12-18, depending on the exact well location and the well and casing depths.

2.4.12.2.1.3 Projected Groundwater Use General future water use projections are provided in Reference 2.4.12-18 through 2035, which predict a decrease of 21 percent in total withdrawals (surface water and groundwater), mostly due to the retirement of aging power plants. Industrial and public supply water uses are expected to increase by 31 percent and 30 percent, respectively. Groundwater uses may not increase in kind since the vast majority of users in the Tennessee Valley rely on surface water as a primary source. No groundwater-specific projections for water use are available in Reference 2.4.12-18.

The CRN Site SMR plant design does not require groundwater as a source for cooling water, potable water, or other plant needs. Makeup water for the closed-cycle cooling system will be sourced from the Clinch River arm of Watts Bar Reservoir, while potable and other water will come from the Oak Ridge Department of Public Works. In addition, surface disturbance is not expected to affect the recharge zones for those users shown in Table 2.4.12-7. As such, there are no anticipated plant operation impacts to local groundwater resources due to plant use.

2.4.12.2.1.4 CRN Site Groundwater Use Summary Groundwater is not a primary source of water in the region as surface water is abundant and provides nearly all of the supply for users in the area.

Total groundwater withdrawals in the five counties surrounding the CRN Site have been fairly constant from 2000 to 2010, though the uses have changed and evolved in each county. The leading use of groundwater in the study area is for public supply, followed by industrial use. From 2000 to 2010, industrial use has increased while public supply withdrawals have decreased in the five counties surrounding the CRN Site.

The current CRN Site SMR design does not rely on groundwater for any part of its operating supply. Thus, there is no groundwater demand due to the CRN Site SMR plant. There are no active groundwater current or projected users for the CRN Site.

2.4.12.2.2 Groundwater Flow Directions Groundwater flow directions in the ORR are generally characterized as from the ridge tops to drainages within the adjacent valley or as a subdued replica of topography. Figure 2.4.12-18 presents conceptual block flow diagrams for Bethel Valley, which has similar geology as the CRN Site (Reference 2.4.12-22). The figure indicates localized influences such as springs, discontinuity orientations (fractures and bedding planes), man-made features (pipelines, tank farms, and building basements), and solution features have an impact on flow directions.

Groundwater flow directions were evaluated during the CRBRP PSAR by preparing two groundwater contour maps, one for December 24, 1973 and one for January 2, 1974 (Reference 2.4.12-1). Both maps indicate a general flow direction toward the southeast or southwest in the area of the proposed nuclear island. An average hydraulic gradient of approximately 0.007 ft/ft is reported for the two maps (Reference 2.4.12-1). It should be noted that these maps were prepared using water level measurements from observation wells with long screened intervals and thus the equipotentials represent a vertically averaged head.

The CRN Site investigation included synoptic measurements of groundwater levels in the site observation wells. These measurements were used to prepare maximum potentiometric surface maps for the site. The maximum potentiometric surface maps used the maximum groundwater 2.4.12-15 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report level elevation at each well cluster. Figure 2.4.12-19 through 2.4.12-28 present the potentiometric surface maps. The maps indicate a southwest to southeast flow direction in the area of the power block area. Hydraulic gradients were measured along selected flow lines on each figure. Table 2.4.12-8 presents the horizontal hydraulic gradients for the ten potentiometric surface maps. The horizontal hydraulic gradients range from 0.03 to 0.12 ft/ft. Horizontal gradients were also evaluated using just the upper site observation wells for the eight quarters of December 2013, March 2014, May 2014, August 2014, November 2014, February 2015, May 2015, and August 2015), resulting in horizontal gradients ranging from 0.05 to 0.17 ft/ft. For comparison the average, hydraulic gradient between the maximum water level at OW-101U and OW-202U and the Clinch River arm of the Watts Bar Reservoir is 0.05 ft/ft. This is derived based on a shortest distance of 1400 ft from the reactor locations to the edge of the Clinch River arm of the Watts Bar Reservoir; lowest stage of the reservoir at 735 ft NAVD88 (during the monitoring period); and the maximum water levels at OW-101U and OW-202U of 798.99 and 800.30 ft NAVD88. Due to the complexity of the subsurface hydrogeologic conditions at the CRN Site, the maximum potentiometric groundwater elevation at each well cluster is used, representing a single hydrogeological unit. Given that the U, L, and D wells generally screened within different hydrogeologic units, the maximum potentiometric surface maps do not represent a true potentiometric surface. These maps can, however, be considered bounding in terms of depicting the maximum groundwater elevations at the site.

Vertical hydraulic gradients were determined at each well cluster to evaluate the potential for vertical movement in the subsurface. Table 2.4.12-9 presents the vertical hydraulic gradients for the well clusters. The average vertical hydraulic gradients range from -0.69 to 1.03 ft/ft. A negative vertical hydraulic gradient indicates an upward flow potential and a positive one indicates a downward flow potential. The upward flow potential would suggest groundwater discharge and the downward flow potential would suggest groundwater recharge. A majority of the wells with upward flow potential are located on the western and eastern sides of the site suggesting discharge towards incised site drainage features or to the Clinch River arm of the Watts Bar Reservoir. The exception to this is well cluster OW-409U/L, which is located near the center of the site. This cluster may be indicating groundwater discharge to the adjacent CRBRP excavation. The cluster with the highest downward flow potential is OW-429U/L, suggesting a recharge area. Figure 2.4.12-29 represents the spatial variation of equipotential in the vertical plane in a cross-section along the strike of the bedding plane based on June 13, 2014 observations. Groundwater discharges from the higher equipotential area (at OW-202) to the Clinch River arm of the Watts Bar Reservoir, with OW-202 at the center of the CRS peninsula as a likely location of the groundwater divide.

2.4.12.2.3 Temporal Groundwater Trends The USGS maintains a network of observation wells in Tennessee to monitor trends in water levels. The closest permanent observation well is approximately 48 mi southeast of the CRN Site as shown on Figure 2.4.12-30 (Reference 2.4.12-23). This observation well is screened in the Great Smoky Group aquifer and is approximately 220 ft deep. The well indicates typical annual fluctuations of between 1 and 3 ft. The USGS also presents data from a manual water level measurement well located approximately 0.5 miles east of the CRN Site as shown on Figure 2.4.12-31 (Reference 2.4.12-24). This well is screened in the Valley and Ridge aquifer and is approximately 610 ft deep. The period of record is only approximately 3 months; however the hydrograph shows an approximate 5 ft range of water levels fluctuations. Neither of these USGS wells monitor the hydrogeologic units relevant to the site.

During the CRBRP investigation, periodic water level measurements were made in the site observation wells and piezometers. Examination of these measurements suggests an annual fluctuation of 10 to 25 ft with maximum water levels occurring in January and February and minimum water levels occurring in October and November (Reference 2.4.12-1).

2.4.12-16 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report The CRN Site hydrogeologic characterization program included measurement of groundwater levels in the site observation wells. This included continuous measurements with a recording pressure transducer in select wells and periodic manual measurements in all wells (except the OW-422 well cluster). The water level measurement program collected two years of groundwater levels. The following well clusters were equipped with recording pressure transducers:

OW-101 OW-202 OW-409 OW-417 OW-423 The recording pressure transducer logs were started on November 23-24, 2013.

Figure 2.4.12-32 presents hydrographs for the site well clusters, along with Clinch River arm of the Watts Bar Reservoir stage and site precipitation data for comparison. Water level responses from wells OW-101D, OW-409U, OW-416U/L, OW-420L, and OW-421D show correspondence to the Watts Bar Reservoir stage with periodic deviations that appear to be associated with precipitation events. All of the site wells show a response to precipitation events, with OW-417L and OW-421U showing the most subdued response to precipitation. The location of well clusters OW-417 and OW-421 in proximity to the Clinch River arm of the Watts Bar Reservoir may explain the subdued responses in these wells. Further, OW-417U/L wells are closest to the Clinch River arm of the Watts Bar Reservoir and lie in the topographically low area where groundwater discharges to the river, resulting in upward flow of groundwater from OW-417L to OW-417U.

OW-421U/L is screened within the Blackford formation whereas OW-412D is screened within Newala formation, which has slightly different hydrogeologic properties than the Blackford formation. The combination of different hydrogeologic properties and close proximity to the Clinch River arm of the Watts Bar Reservoir results in subdued water level response at the OW-421 well cluster. OW-423U is screened within the Eidson formation and OW-423L/D is screened within Blackford formation. The difference in hydrogeologic characteristics of the formations in which the wells are screened is likely to result in a different groundwater level response. The tighter formation (with lower hydraulic conductivity) may result in higher groundwater levels than the formation with higher hydraulic conductivity. The heterogeneity within the formation, both laterally and vertically would also result in different water elevations in wells screened at different depths within the same formation. Thus, the upward vertical gradient in OW-423 well clusters is a result of wells screened in two different formations and the effects of heterogeneity within a formation with depth.

Observation wells: OW-202L, OW-421L, OW-421D, OW-428U, OW-428L, and OW-428D show water level artifacts from well installation, development, and water sampling; these wells are excluded for the purpose of characterizing the range of fluctuation. The range of water level elevation fluctuations in the site observation wells was from approximately 1 ft (OW-421U) to 25 ft (OW-409U). These fluctuations appear to be associated with precipitation events. The large magnitude of fluctuation at OW-409U may be further indication that this well is located in a recharge area.

2.4.12.2.4 Aquifer Properties Aquifer properties at the CRN Site were determined by in situ testing and from laboratory testing of rock core and soil samples collected during the investigation. The following sections present the results of this testing.

2.4.12-17 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report 2.4.12.2.4.1 Hydrogeological Properties The primary hydrogeological properties of interest at the site are the hydraulic conductivity and effective porosity of the bedrock. Hydraulic conductivity was evaluated qualitatively through fracture frequency analysis and quantitatively through in situ testing. The in situ tests performed were borehole packer tests, well slug tests, and an aquifer pumping test. Effective porosity is based on a series of studies performed on the ORR.

Fracture Frequency Analysis Fracture frequency analysis was performed by plotting the open fractures identified on the acoustic televiewer borehole geophysical logs. Figure 2.4.12-33 presents the resulting frequency distribution histogram. The histogram shows three general areas: 1) from elevation 812 to 712 ft, a pervasively fractured zone; 2) from elevation 712 to 612 ft, a moderately fractured zone; and 3) from 612 to 487 ft, a slightly fractured zone. It should be noted that the upper elevation of the pervasively fractured zone is somewhat biased, since most boreholes were cased into the top of bedrock prior to performing the geophysical surveys, and thus the number of open fractures at the top of rock is not accurately represented and likely under-reported. Figure 2.4.12-34 presents an example geophysical log demonstrating this bias.

The fracture distribution identified at the CRN Site is consistent with observations at the ORR.

Information presented in Reference 2.4.12-11 indicates that in nearby Melton and Bethel Valleys, the transition from fractured to less fractured bedrock occurs at approximately 45 m (150 ft) below ground surface. Figure 2.4.12-13, which is a plot of ORR hydraulic conductivity test results, indicates a generalized decrease in hydraulic conductivity at approximately 100 ft below ground surface.

Borehole Packer Tests A borehole packer test is a constant head test of an isolated interval in a borehole to determine the hydraulic conductivity. For the CRN Site investigation, a double packer arrangement was used to isolate the test zone. A total of 41 packer tests were performed in 12 open boreholes during the field investigation. Of these tests, 5 exhibited evidence of flow by-passing around the packers and 14 had flow rates less than the quantifiable rate for the test, and thus were not analyzed. The flow by-passing is a result of hydraulic connection between the packer isolated test interval and the borehole (i.e., communication with the borehole above and/or below the packers). Fourteen test intervals were not able to achieve quantifiable flow ( 10 gallons per minute during the test) using a standard flow meter. Table 2.4.12-10 presents the test results.

The tests were performed and interpreted using Reference 2.4.12-25 method 381-80. The borehole packer test results were arranged by geologic unit and are presented in a box and whisker plot on Figure 2.4.12-35. Summary statistics for these tests are included on the figure.

The results were also compared with the packer tests performed during the CRBRP investigation as shown on Figure 2.4.12-35. In general the two data sets agree; however, the CRBRP Chickamauga long interval and CRBRP Knox tests exhibit an order of magnitude, or more, lower range of values. This may in part be due to the deeper test intervals selected during the CRBRP investigation. The upper range of values is similar for both data sets.

The CRN Site packer results were plotted versus depth below ground surface as shown on Figure 2.4.12-36. The results show a similar pattern as the CRBRP tests (Figure 2.4.12-15) and the ORR hydraulic conductivity tests (Figure 2.4.12-13). The hydraulic conductivities decrease below 150 ft below ground surface. This is most probably the result of the decreased frequency of open fractures below this depth.

2.4.12-18 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report Well Slug Tests The slug test method involves creating a sudden water level displacement in the observation well and observing the water level change as it returns to the pre-test level. Slug tests were performed in selected site observation wells. Observation wells excluded from testing include OW-202U, OW-402U, and OW-429L because of low water levels in the wells and OW-428D because the well was still recovering from development activities. Slug tests used either a solid slug or pneumatic slug to induce the water level change. Two tests were performed in each well, one where the water level was raised in the well and allowed to fall back to the pre-test level (falling head) and one test where the water level in the well was lowered and allowed to rise back to the pre-test level (rising head). A recording pressure transducer was placed in the well to monitor the water level changes. Slug test results were entered into the AQTESOLV (Reference 2.4.12-26) computer program and the Bouwer and Rice (Reference 2.4.12-27) method was used for interpretation.

The slug test solution is a porous medium method and is applied to fractured bedrock.

Reference 2.4.12-28 compared porous medium slug test method results with discrete fracture interval method results. Their comparison found that using porous medium methods, the results were on the same order of magnitude as the results for the discrete fracture interval methods.

Reference 2.4.12-29 indicates that a porous medium assumption is appropriate in highly fractured materials and where fluid exchange between the fractures and the rock matrix is either very limited or very rapid. The observation wells were located in the most fractured intervals identified in the borehole logs. Information from the ORR on Table 2.4.12-2 indicates that a matrix hydraulic conductivity of 8.7 x 10-8 m/d (2.8 x 10-7 ft/d) is representative of the ORR Aquitards, which includes the Chickamauga Group. This matrix hydraulic conductivity suggests that the rock matrix is not contributing significantly to flow. These studies suggest that the use of the porous medium assumption is reasonable for the CRN Site tests.

Table 2.4.12-11 presents the results of the slug test interpretations. Examination of the table indicates that the test results from four wells (OW-202L, OW-401D, OW-415U, and OW-421D) could not be interpreted. Additionally, the results from five wells (OW-409U, OW-415L, OW-421L, OW-423D, and OW-429U) had one test (falling or rising head) that could not be interpreted. For those wells with one test, the average hydraulic conductivity is equivalent to the results of the test (falling or rising head) that could be interpreted.

Figure 2.4.12-37 presents the slug test results graphically. The figure includes a box and whisker plot of hydraulic conductivity by observation well monitoring zone and a scatter plot of hydraulic conductivity versus depth below ground surface. The box and whisker plot indicates that the hydraulic conductivities in the upper and lower zones are similar, while those in the deep zone are lower. The scatter plot of hydraulic conductivity versus depth below ground surface in general shows a pattern of decreasing range in hydraulic conductivity with depth similar to plots in Figure 2.4.12-15 and Figure 2.4.12-36. Figure 2.4.12-38 is a box and whisker plot comparing the slug test results with the CRN Site packer test results for the two major geologic units (Chickamauga Group and Knox Group) present at the site. The figure indicates a similar central tendency in the results of both tests, but the slug tests have a much broader range of values. The may be due to the longer test intervals for the slug tests as compared to the packer test intervals.

Aquifer Pumping Test An aquifer pumping test was performed at the CRN Site and a description of the test and interpretation of the data is presented in Appendix 2.4.12B. The aquifer pumping test array consisted of a pumping well (PT-PW) and nine proximal observation wells (PT-OW-U1, PT-OW-L1, PT-OW-U2, PT-OW-L2, PT-OW-U3, PT-OW-L3, OW-423U, OW-423L, and OW-423D) as shown on Figure 2.4.12-4. The completion data for these wells are included on 2.4.12-19 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report Table 2.4.12-4. The pumping well was screened in the Fleanor and Eidson members of the Lincolnshire formation and the Blackford formation. The upper zone observation wells were screened in the Eidson member of the Lincolnshire formation and the lower and deep zone observation wells were screened in the Blackford formation. A constant rate pumping test was performed in the pumping well for a period of 72 hours8.333333e-4 days <br />0.02 hours <br />1.190476e-4 weeks <br />2.7396e-5 months <br /> with an average pumping rate of 14.5 gpm.

Pumping and observation well responses were reviewed and diagnostic plots of each well were prepared. Based on a review of the observation well water level responses, a portion of the observation wells were discarded from further analysis due to inadequate or erratic response as explained in Appendix 2.4.12B. Interpretation of the diagnostic plots for the results that were retained indicated that a leaky aquifer model most accurately represents the observed response.

The water level response and pumping rate data were entered into the AQTESOLV (Reference 2.4.12-26) computer program for analysis. The solution method used was that presented in Reference 2.4.12-30.

Table 2.4.12-12 presents the results of the constant rate pumping test interpretation. Examination of the results suggests the maximum transmissivity and hydraulic conductivity is observed at OW-423L, which is oriented with the N52°E strike of the bedding planes (the principal flow direction) relative to the pumping well. The observation wells (PT-OW-U2 and PT-OW-L2) oriented perpendicular (N38°W) to the strike of the bedding planes show approximately an order of magnitude lower transmissivity and hydraulic conductivity. Comparison of the results of this aquifer pumping test with tests performed on the ORR, as shown on Figure 2.4.12-14, indicates that the transmissivities are within the same range, but the storage coefficient values have a greater range for the CRN Site aquifer pumping test.

Effective Porosity Petrophysical testing of rock samples to determine the effective porosity of rock from the Conasauga and Knox Groups on the ORR were reported by Reference 2.4.12-31 and Reference 2.4.12-32. Table 2.4.12-13 summarizes the results of these tests. The test methods used include helium, mercury, and immersion-saturation porosimetry. The authors indicate that the immersion-saturation method would produce the results that most accurately approach the true value of effective porosity. The mean effective porosity of bedrock determined from these tests is approximately 4 percent. This is similar to the bedrock effective porosity (1 percent) used in Reference 2.4.12-33 and Reference 2.4.12-11.

2.4.12.2.4.2 Geotechnical and Geological Properties During the CRN Site investigation, soil and rock samples were collected and tested as described in Subsection 2.5.4. Interpretation of the test results has resulted in best estimates of properties of the different materials that are present or may be present in the future at the site.

Table 2.4.12-14 summarizes the representative soil and rock properties.

2.4.12.2.4.3 Summary of Representative Properties of Hydrogeologic Units Hydrogeologic testing information for the CRN Site area were obtained from: 1) published bedrock aquifer testing from the ORR area; 2) CRBRP investigation packer tests; 3) CRN Site packer tests; 4) CRN Site slug tests: and 5) the CRN Site aquifer pumping test. The Conasauga Group, Knox Group, and the Chickamauga Group are the three major geologic strata in which the hydrogeologic testing were undertaken. Evaluation of these results suggests that hydraulic conductivity, in the bedrock, generally decreases with depth irrespective of the lithology.

2.4.12-20 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report Additional petrophysical testing, such as bulk density and porosity has been performed at the ORR and at the CRN Site. The results of these tests show generally uniform properties in the bedrock units.

2.4.12.2.5 Hydrogeochemical Characteristics The hydrogeochemical characteristics of the groundwater were described in general terms in Subsection 2.4.12.1.2 and summarized on Figure 2.4.12-12. The shallow groundwater is characterized by mixed cation-bicarbonate type water, intermediate depth sodium-bicarbonate water, and deep sodium-chloride type water. The transition to sodium-chloride type water occurs below approximately 100 m (328 ft) and thus is not intercepted by on-site monitoring wells. A study of groundwater circulation in the deep system was conducted on the ORR (Reference 2.4.12-34), which included one well adjacent to the site (GW-214). This well appears to be at the top of the saline zone (sodium-chloride type water) at a depth of 126 m (413 ft) with a total dissolved solids measurement of 1693 mg/L. The results of this study indicated that some active exchange of water from the shallower groundwater is occurring. This exchange was characterized as highly variable as a result of the paucity of vertically interconnecting fractures. A more recent study performed as part of the Melton Valley exit pathway monitoring program (Reference 2.4.12-14) indicated a similar depth to saline groundwater (385 ft for monitoring well OMW1c).

Site-specific groundwater chemistry data were collected from selected on-site observation wells (Reference 2.4.12-13). Table 2.4.12-15 summarizes the field parameter measurements for the selected wells. Table 2.4.12-16 summarizes the analytical results. Regional groundwater chemistry information was obtained from the USGS National Water-Quality Assessment Program (NAWQA) website (Reference 2.4.12-35) for groundwater analyses from Roane, Anderson, and Knox counties to compare with the site-specific data. The results of these analyses are presented on Figure 2.4.12-39, which is a Piper trilinear diagram. The site groundwater ranges mostly from calcium-bicarbonate to magnesium-bicarbonate type. The water is generally near neutral pH with a total dissolved solids concentration of less than 500 mg/L. Examination of the figure indicates that, in general, the site groundwater chemistry is similar to the regional information from NAWQA. A notable exception is OW-202L, which is based on water chemistry, appears to be associated with the intermediate depth groundwater zone as defined on the ORR with a sodium-bicarbonate water type, alkaline pH, and higher total dissolved solids concentration.

OW-202L was purged dry during sampling and had the highest field turbidity and pH measurement of the wells sampled (Table 2.4.12-15).

2.4.12.3 Subsurface Pathways 2.4.12.3.1 Exposure Point and Pathway Evaluation The CRN Site is surrounded on three sides by the Clinch River arm of the Watts Bar Reservoir, which is interpreted to be the discharge area for site groundwater. The most likely pathway for groundwater flow is recharge in the upland areas of the site with discharge to the Clinch River arm of the Watts Bar Reservoir. An alternate groundwater pathway is recharge in the upland areas with seepage to onsite drainages and surface water discharge into the Clinch River arm of the Watts Bar Reservoir. It is very unlikely that there is shallow groundwater flow underneath the Clinch River arm of the Watts Bar Reservoir and exposure to water users on the opposite side of the Reservoir. This conclusion is based on 1) the absence of cavities and contiguous fractures below elevation 720 ft, 2) the head relationships observed at the Melton Valley Exit Pathway monitoring wells (Reference 2.4.12-14), and 3) the observed vertical hydraulic gradients demonstrate that the Clinch River arm of the Watts Bar Reservoir acts as a hydrologic sink. This is further supported by the following observations:

2.4.12-21 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report There is no evidence of contiguous cavities or fractures originating from the power block area and extending below the Clinch River arm of the Watts Bar Reservoir, based on geologic core analysis from subsurface investigations; The CRBRP excavation, completed to an elevation of 714 ft NGVD29 and 6 ft below the invert elevation of the Clinch River arm of the Watts Bar Reservoir, showed no evidence of any continuous groundwater flow; this is likely due to an absence of cavities and continuous fractures below elevation 720 ft; Only 5 percent of the observed cavities fall below elevation 718.4 ft with the average elevation of observed cavities being 782.6 ft; An analysis of site-specific geologic core analysis, fracture frequency analysis, and groundwater vertical gradient data provides no evidence supporting a pathway for radionuclide transport occurring underneath the Clinch River arm of the Watts Bar Reservoir within the shallow groundwater system.

2.4.12.3.2 Advective Transport Advective transport in groundwater is assumed to occur in an equivalent porous medium. This assumption is based on the findings of the aquifer pumping test and other hydraulic conductivity tests and is restricted to the shallow groundwater system. In the deeper groundwater system, that is not pervasively fractured, discrete fractures control the movement of groundwater.

However, as discussed in Subsection 2.4.12.1.3 and shown on Figure 2.4.12-12, greater than 90 percent of groundwater flow occurs in the shallow zone.

The porous medium flow is represented by Darcys law, when written in terms of linear velocity (Reference 2.4.12-36) is:

v = -K/ne x dh/dl Where:

v = linear groundwater velocity [L/T]

K = hydraulic conductivity [L/T]

ne = effective porosity dh/dl = hydraulic gradient (change in head over change in length)

The travel time (T) is determined by dividing the distance to the receptor (D) (Clinch River arm of the Watts Bar Reservoir) by the linear groundwater velocity (v):

T = D/v Table 2.4.12-17 presents a summary of these parameters and the linear velocity and travel times determined from these parameters. Using the representative parameter values, a travel time of 359 days is determined (Table 2.4.12-17).

2.4.12.4 Monitoring or Safeguard Requirements Groundwater levels at the CRN Site were determined through the use of groundwater observation wells installed in 2013 as part of the site subsurface investigation. Consistent with Regulatory Guide 4.21, Minimization of Contamination and Radioactive Waste Generation:

Life-Cycle Planning, and the Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) groundwater initiatives (Reference 2.4.12-50), the existing groundwater observation well network is evaluated and an 2.4.12-22 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report environmental monitoring program developed as part of detailed design activities for the CRN Site. The groundwater monitoring program considers the following components:

Periodic water level measurements in observation wells and geochemical sampling and analysis are made to detect changes in the bedrock aquifer and granular backfill that may impact groundwater levels or the accidental release analysis.

Operational accident monitoringthe effluent and process monitoring program is addressed in the combined license application.

Groundwater level measurements in bedrock aquifer and granular backfill observation wells (existing or future) are made during construction and operation. Selection of observation wells included in the program is made before the start of operation based on well condition, position relative to plant site and other observation wells (provide optimal spatial distribution for potentiometric map preparation and vertical hydraulic gradient assessment), and long-term viability of the observation well (likelihood that the well will not be damaged or destroyed).

Geochemical sampling and analysis of the bedrock aquifer and granular backfill wells are performed during construction and operation. Analysis includes field parameters (pH, temperature, specific conductance, oxidation-reduction potential, and dissolved oxygen), major cations, major anions, total dissolved solids, silica, and any additional water quality parameters as needed.

Operational accident monitoring is initiated in the unlikely event of a release of liquid effluent from the plant. Quarterly groundwater samples are collected from downgradient bedrock aquifer and granular backfill observation wells as needed to identify impact. Selection of downgradient observation wells is based on flow directions determined from the most recent groundwater level measurements.

Safeguards are used to minimize the potential for adverse impacts to the groundwater caused by construction and operation of the CRN Site. These safeguards include the use of emergency cleanup procedures to capture and remove surface contaminants, and other measures deemed necessary to prevent or minimize adverse impacts to the groundwater beneath the site.

2.4.12.5 Site Characteristics for Subsurface Hydrostatic Loading 2.4.12.5.1 Groundwater Flow Model Two-dimensional, vertical profile, groundwater models (profile models) were developed along the geologic strike of the bedding planes (principal flow direction) at the CRN Site. The purpose of the profile models is to evaluate maximum groundwater level as a result of construction and operation of the units at the CRN Site.

Two profile models were developed - one within the northern sector and the other along the southern sector of the power block area, both oriented along a strike of the bedding planes. Both profile models encompass the Chickamauga Group of interbedded siltstone and limestone, which includes the Fleanor Shale member (in the northern profile model - Profile A) and the Benbolt Formation (in the southern profile model- Profile C), Figure 2.4.12-40. A detailed discussion of the groundwater flow modeling is presented in Appendix 2.4.12C and summarized as follows.

The profile models were developed based on the conceptual understanding of the hydrogeologic features of the site. This included interpretation of the hydrogeologic subsurface investigations at the CRN Site; modeling studies conducted at the ORR area; and an understanding that the site 2.4.12-23 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report has undergone significant disturbance as a result of CRBRP site preparation activities. A total of six active layers were simulated: Layer 1 was simulated as a fill layer based on CRBRP land disturbance; Layer 2 was simulated as a soil layer representing the vadose zone; Layer 3 represents the highly fractured bedrock encompassing the interface between soil and competent bedrock; and Layers 4 to 6 represent the competent bedrock with fracture density deceasing with depth.

The profile models were calibrated by matching the simulated heads against the maximum observed heads within the power block area measured during the subsurface investigations at the CRN Site. Sensitivity of model parameters (hydraulic conductivity and recharge) to simulated heads was evaluated during the calibration phase of the model. Alternate conceptual models were also simulated: 1) a preferential flow zone in Layer 3 was simulated by assuming a very high hydraulic conductivity for this layer; 2) the impact of spatially variable recharge rates was assessed; and 3) the impact of using a uniform recharge rate was assessed. A uniform recharge rate of 8.76 in./yr provided the most conservative estimate for the maximum groundwater heads at the power block area. This pre-construction model with a uniform recharge of 8.76 in./yr served as the base for the post-construction model simulations. The hydraulic conductivity values assigned in the model layers were within the range of values obtained from the packer, slug, and aquifer performance tests at the CRN Site and from literature studies at ORR.

The post-construction model included a surface elevation of approximately 821 ft NAVD88 and is based on the CRN Plant Parameter Envelope (PPE) conceptual design grade in the power block area. The post-construction models included two embedment depths: a shallow reactor building embedment depth of about 50 ft below grade, and a deep reactor building embedment depth of about 140 ft below grade. The grade elevation at the power block area at the reactor building was assigned a value of 821 ft NAVD88. A uniform recharge of 8.76 in./yr was assigned in the post-construction models except at the power block area and part of the turbine area (which are comprised of paved areas and buildings). Model sensitivity to variation of granular backfill hydraulic conductivity with regard to simulated groundwater heads was evaluated. Higher granular backfill hydraulic conductivity resulted in lower groundwater heads at the power block area. The model simulated groundwater heads underneath the foundation embedment structure ranging from 802.3 to 810.9 ft NAVD88 for Profile A and from 807.3 to 816.1 ft NAVD88 for Profile C.

2.4.12.5.2 Hydrostatic Loading Subsurface hydrostatic loading estimates for plant structures at the CRN Site were evaluated using the range of simulated maximum groundwater heads underneath the foundation. The maximum hydrostatic loading is estimated using the following formula:

pw = zw x w Equation 2.4.12-1 2.4.12-24 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report Where:

pw = hydrostatic pressure (pounds per square ft) zw = depth below groundwater level (ft) w = unit weight of water (62.4 pounds per cubic ft)

Figure 2.4.12-41 presents a graph of structure elevation versus hydrostatic pressure for structures within the PPE.

2.4.12.6 Construction Dewatering No permanent dewatering system is employed to lower design basis groundwater levels; however, temporary dewatering is required to maintain dry excavations for the construction of the required foundations for the CRN Site plant structures. It is anticipated that dewatering will be accomplished using similar techniques as were used during the CRBRP excavation activities.

This included installation of horizontal gravity drains in the excavated rock faces and pumping from sumps located around the perimeter of the excavation and at the base of excavation.

Grouting of localized areas would be performed if higher water inflow is encountered (Reference 2.4.12-1). These methods are localized to the power block area excavation and therefore would limit the impact of dewatering and associated drawdown to the areas immediately in the vicinity of the power block area excavation and within the CRN Site.

As indicated in Subsection 2.4.12.1.6, there are no current groundwater uses at the CRN Site and the CRN Site plant design does not require groundwater as a source for cooling water, potable water, or other plant needs.

As discussed in Subsection 2.4.12.1.6, groundwater flow occurs at the CRN Site primarily through fractures and joints, with active flow primarily at shallow depths where fractures/joints are denser and closely spaced. The frequency of fractures/joints decreases significantly at depth such that the top of continuous rock lies at about 700 ft. Groundwater flows from the ridges at higher elevations north of the site toward the Clinch River arm of the Watts Bar Reservoir. The reservoir abuts the site on the east, south, and west sides and acts as the main discharge area for the shallow groundwater flow system, thus forming a hydrologic boundary for the site. Given these hydrogeologic considerations along with measures taken to mitigate the influx of groundwater to the excavation, the areal extent of any drawdown resulting from temporary dewatering would be limited to the CRN Site; therefore, recharge zones for existing or future offsite groundwater users, either across the river or past the site boundaries, are not expected to be impacted by temporary dewatering.

2.4.12.7 References 2.4.12-1. Project Management Corporation, 1982. Clinch River Breeder Reactor Project, Preliminary Safety Analysis Report, Volume 2, Amendment 68, May 1982.

2.4.12-2. Lloyd, O.B., and W.L. Lyke, Ground Water Atlas of the United States: Segment 10, Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Ohio, Tennessee, USGS Hydrological Atlas 730-K,

p. 30, 1995.

2.4.12-3. Tucci, P., Hydrology of Melton Valley at Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Tennessee, USGS, Water-Resources Investigations Report 92-4131, prepared in cooperation with DOE, 1992.

2.4.12-25 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report 2.4.12-4. Breeder Reactor Corporation, 1985 Final ReportThe Clinch River Breeder Reactor Plant Project, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, January 1985.

2.4.12-5. Moore, G.K., Hydrograph Analysis in a Fractured Rock Terrane Near Oak Ridge, Tennessee, prepared for DOE, Office of Environmental Restoration and Waste Management under budget and reporting code EW 20. Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, under contract DE-AC05-84OR21400, 1991.

2.4.12-6. Saunders, J.A., and L.E. Toran, Evidence for Dedolomitization and Mixing in Paleozoic Carbonates Near Oak Ridge, Tennessee, Ground Water, Vol. 32, No. 2, pp. 207-214, 1994.

2.4.12-7. Parr, P.D., and J.F. Hughes, Oak Ridge Reservation Physical Characteristics and Natural Resources, prepared for DOE by Oak Ridge National Laboratory, managed by UT-Battelle, LLC, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, under contract DE-AC05-00OR22725, October 2006.

2.4.12-8. Hatcher, R.D., Jr., P.J. Lemiszki, R.B. Dreier, R.H. Ketelle, R.R. Lee, D.A. Lietzke, W.M. McMaster, J.L. Foreman, and S.Y. Lee, Status Report on the Geology of the Oak Ridge Reservation, prepared for DOE by Oak Ridge National Laboratory, managed by Martin Marietta Energy Systems, Inc. under contract DE-AC05-84OR21400, ORNL/TM-12074, October 1992.

2.4.12-9. Stockdale, P.B., Geologic Conditions at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory (X-10)

Area Relevant to the Disposal of Radioactive Waste, ORO-58, DOE, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, 1951.

2.4.12-10. EPA, Sole Source Aquifers in the Southeast. Available at http://www.epa.gov/

region4/water/groundwater/r4ssa.html, accessed November 17, 2014.

2.4.12-11. Solomon, D.K., G.K. Moore, L.E. Toran, R.B. Dreier, and W.M. McMaster, A Hydrologic Framework for the Oak Ridge Reservation, Status Report, ORNL/TM-12026, prepared for DOE under contract number DE-AC05-840R21400 by the Oak Ridge National Laboratory Environmental Services Division, May 1992.

2.4.12-12. Moore, G.K., and L.E. Toran, Supplement to a Hydrologic Framework for the Oak Ridge Reservation, prepared for DOE, Office of Environmental Restoration and Waste Management, by the Oak Ridge National Laboratory Environmental Sciences Division under contract DE-AC05-85OR21400, ORNL/TM-12191, November 1992.

2.4.12-13. AMEC Environment and Infrastructure Inc., Data Report, Geotechnical Exploration and Testing, Clinch River SMR Project, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, Rev. 4, dated October 16, 2014.

2.4.12-14. Bechtel Jacobs Company LLC, Melton Valley Exit Pathway and Offsite Groundwater Monitoring Results: July 2010-March 2011, prepared for DOE Office of Environmental Management under contract DE-AC05-98OR22700, June 2011.

2.4.12-15. Project Management Corporation and TVA, Clinch River Breeder Reactor Plant, Draft Environmental Statement, Docket No. 50-537, NRC, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, Washington, D.C., 1976.

2.4.12-26 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report 2.4.12-16. Hutson, S., M.C. Koroa, and C.M. Murphree, Estimated Water Use in the Tennessee River Watershed in 2000 and Projections of Water Use to 2030, USGS Water-Resources Investigation Report 03-4302, 89 pp, 2004.

2.4.12-17. Bohac, C.E., and M.J. McCall, Water Use in the Tennessee Valley for 2005 and Projected Use in 2030, TVA, River Operations and Renewables, 2008.

2.4.12-18. Bohac, C.E., and A.K. Bowen, Water Use in the Tennessee Valley for 2010 and Projected Use in 2035, TVA, River Operations and Renewables, 2012.

2.4.12-19. EPA, Safe Drinking Water Search for the State of Tennessee, Safe Drinking Water Database. Available at http://iaspub.epa.gov/enviro/sdw_form_v2.create_page?

state_abbr=TN, accessed October 23, 2013.

2.4.12-20. Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation, Tennessee Source Water Assessment Report, August 2003. Available at http://www.tn.gov/

environment/water/water-supply_source-assessment.shtml, accessed November 17, 2014.

2.4.12-21. Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation, Protection of Potable Water Supplies in Tennessee Watersheds, TDEC Division of Water Pollution Control and Division of Water Supply, 2009. Available at http://www.tn.gov/

environment/water/water-supply_source-assessment.shtml, accessed November 17, 2014.

2.4.12-22. SAIC, Engineering Study Report for Groundwater Actions in Bethel Valley, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, DOE/OR/01-2219&D2, prepared for DOE, Office of Environmental Management under contract DE-AC05-98OR22700, November 2005.

2.4.12-23. USGS, National Water Information System: Web Interface, Groundwater levels for the Nation, USGS 3539220833345600 SV:E-002. Available at http://nwis.

waterdata.usgs.gov /nwis/gwlevels?site_no=353922083345600&agency

_cd=USGS&format=gif, accessed September 8, 2014.

2.4.12-24. USGS, National Water Information System: Web Interface, Groundwater levels for Tennessee, USGS 355332084220301 Ro. M-021, TDEC HD2. Available at http://nwis.waterdata.usgs.gov/tn/nwis/gwlevels/?site_no=355332084220301

&agency_cd=USGS&amp, accessed September 8, 2014.

2.4.12-25. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Suggested Method for In Situ Determination of Rock Mass Permeability, Rock Testing Handbook Method 381-80, Geotechnical Library, Rock Mechanics Branch, U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Mississippi, 1993.

2.4.12-26. HydroSOLVE, Inc., AQTESOLV for Windows Version 4.5 Users Guide, Glenn Duffield, developer, Reston, Virginia, 2007.

2.4.12-27. Bouwer, H., and R.C. Rice, A Slug Test for Determining Hydraulic Conductivity of Unconfined Aquifers With Completely or Partially Penetrating Wells, Water Resources Research, Vol. 12, No. 3, pp. 423-428, 1976.

2.4.12-28. Shapiro, A.M., and P.A. Hsieh, How Good Are Estimates of Transmissivity from Slug Tests in Fractured Rock?, Ground Water, Vol. 36, No. 1, pp. 37-48, 1998.

2.4.12-27 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report 2.4.12-29. Butler, J.J., Jr., The Design, Performance, and Analysis of Slug Tests, Lewis Publishers, CRC Press, Boca Raton, Florida, 1998.

2.4.12-30. Hantush, M.S., and C.E. Jacob, Non-Steady Radial Flow in an Infinite Leaky Aquifer, Transactions, American Geophysical Union, Vol. 36, No. 1, pp.95-100, 1955.

2.4.12-31. Dorsch, J., T.J. Katsube, W.E. Sanford, B.E. Dugan, and L.M. Tourkow, Effective Porosity and Pore-Throat Sizes of Conasauga Group Mudrock: Application, Test and Evaluation of Petrophysical Techniques, ORNL/GWPO-021, prepared for DOE under contract DE-AC05-96OR22464, Oak Ridge National Laboratory Environmental Services Division, April 1996.

2.4.12-32. Dorsch, J., Effective Porosity and Density of Carbonate Rocks (Maynardville Limestone and Copper Ridge Dolomite) within Bear Creek Valley on the Oak Ridge Reservation Based on Modern Petrophysical Techniques, ORNL/GWPO-026, prepared for DOE under contract DE-AC05-96OR22464, Oak Ridge National Laboratory Environmental Services Division, February 1997.

2.4.12-33. Toran, L.E., and J.A. Saunders, Geochemical and Groundwater Flow Modeling of Multiport-Instrumented Coreholes (GW-131 through GW-135), Y/TS-875 (ORNL/GWPO-0004), prepared for DOE under contract number DE-AC05-84R214000 by the Health, Safety, and Environment Division of Oak Ridge National Laboratory, July 1992.

2.4.12-34. Nativ, R., A. Halleran, and A. Hunley, Evidence for Ground-Water Circulation in the Brine-Filled Aquitard, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, Ground Water, Vol. 35, No. 4, pp. 647-659, 1997.

2.4.12-35. USGS, National Water-Quality Assessment Program, NAWQA Data Export.

Available at http://water.usgs.gov/nawqa/data, accessed April 4, 2014.

2.4.12-36. Domenico, P.A., and F.W. Schwartz, Physical and Chemical Hydrogeology, John Wiley & Sons, New York, p. 360, 1990.

2.4.12-37. Webster, D.A., and M.W. Bradley, Hydrology of the Melton Valley Radioactive-Waste Burial Grounds at Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Tennessee, USGS Open-File Report 87-686, 1988.

2.4.12-38. Moore, G.K., Quantification of Ground-Water Flow in Fractured Rock, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, Ground Water, Vol. 35, No. 3, May-June, 1997.

2.4.12-39. Rothschild, E.R., D.D. Huff, C.S. Haase, R.B. Clapp, B.P. Spalding, C.D. Farmer, and N.D. Farrow, Geohydrologic Characterization of Proposed Solid Waste Storage Area (SWSA) 7, ORNL/TM-9314, prepared for DOE Office of Defense Waste and Byproduct Management under contract DE-AC05-84OR21400, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Environmental Sciences Division, December 1984.

2.4.12-40. Jacobs EM Team, Feasibility Study for Bear Creek Valley at the Oak Ridge Y-12 Plant, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, prepared for DOE Office of Environmental Management under contract DE-AC05-93OR22028, DOE/OR/02-1525/V2&D2, November 1997.

2.4.12-28 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report 2.4.12-41. Bechtel Jacobs Company LLC, Field Summary Report for Drilling and Installation of the Melton Valley Offsite Monitoring Wells, September 2009 to August 2010, prepared for DOE Office of Environmental Management under contract DE-AC05-98OR22700, BJC/OR-3483, September 2010.

2.4.12-42. Moore, G.K., and S.C. Young, Identification of Groundwater-Producing Fractures by Using an Electromagnetic Borehole Flowmeter in Monitoring Wells on the Oak Ridge Reservation, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, ORNL/ER91, prepared for DOE Office of Environmental Restoration and Waste Management under contract DE-AC05-840R21400, Oak Ridge National Laboratory Environmental Sciences Division, March 1992.

2.4.12-43. Golder Associates, Inc., Contaminant Transport Model Validation, Geohydrologic Site Characterization, and Groundwater Flow Computer Model Application, ORNL/Sub/88-SA706/5/V1, prepared for Oak Ridge National Laboratory for DOE under contract DE-AC05-84OR21400, September 1988.

2.4.12-44. SAIC, Decision Document for Performing a Long-Term Pumping Test at the S-3 Site, Oak Ridge Y-12 Plant, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, Y/ER-210, prepared for DOE Office of Environmental Restoration and Waste Management under contract DE-AC05-84OR21400, February 1995.

2.4.12-45. SAIC, East End VOC Plume Pump and Tracer Test Technical Memorandum, BJC/OR-103, prepared for DOE Office of Environmental Management under contract DE-AC05-98OR22700, August 1998.

2.4.12-46. Jacobs EM Team (Garrett Weiss), Task Order 125-Documentation Regarding Slug Test Data and Analysis, White Wing Scrap Yard and East Bear Creek Valley Sites Task 35H83125, JE/OR/97-01839, Memorandum to Steve Lampkins, September 29, 1997.

2.4.12-47. URSlCH2M Oak Ridge LLC, Final Zone 1 Remedial Investigation and Feasibility Study for East Tennessee Technology Park, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, DOE/OR/01-2561&D1, prepared for DOE Office of Environmental Management under contract DE-SC-0004645, March 2012.

2.4.12-48. Hem, J., Study and Interpretation of the Chemical Characteristics of Natural Water, 3d ed., USGS, Water-Supply Paper 2254, pp.1-272, 1985.

2.4.12-49. TVA, Preliminary Information on Clinch River Site for LMBFR Demonstration Plant, report to the Atomic Energy Commission, August 23, 1972.

2.4.12-50. NEI 07-07, Industry Ground Water Protection Initiative - Final Guidance Document, Rev. 0, August 2007.

2.4.12-29 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report Table 2.4.12-1 (Sheet 1 of 16)

A Selection of Oak Ridge Reservation Published Bedrock Aquifer Testing Results Hydraulic Hydraulic Top Bottom Interval Cond. Cond.

Data Depth Depth Midpoint Test Interpretation Kavg Kavg Transmissivity(d) Storage Well Source Geologic Unit Group (ft bgs) (ft bgs) (ft bgs) Type Method (cm/s) (ft/d) (ft2/d) Coefficient(d) 55-1A A Nolichucky Shale Conasauga 14.3 19.3 16.8 Slug Hvorslev 4.2E-04 1.2 NA NA 55-1B A Nolichucky Shale Conasauga 33.8 38.8 36.3 Slug Hvorslev 3.9E-04 1.1 NA NA 55-1C A Nolichucky Shale Conasauga 70.7 75.7 73.2 Slug Hvorslev 1.2E-04 0.34 NA NA 55-2C A Nolichucky Shale Conasauga 71 76 73.5 Slug Hvorslev 4.9E-04 1.4 NA NA 55-3A A Nolichucky Shale Conasauga 9.3 14.3 11.8 Slug Hvorslev 6.0E-04 1.7 NA NA 55-3B A Nolichucky Shale Conasauga 33.1 38.1 35.6 Slug Hvorslev 1.6E-03 4.6 NA NA 55-3C A Nolichucky Shale Conasauga 72.5 77.5 75 Slug Hvorslev 6.7E-05 0.19 NA NA 55-4B A Nolichucky Shale Conasauga 20.5 25.5 23 Slug Hvorslev 4.6E-04 1.3 NA NA 55-4C A Nolichucky Shale Conasauga 67.6 72.6 70.1 Slug Hvorslev 1.7E-04 0.49 NA NA 56-1A A Nolichucky Shale Conasauga 14 19 16.5 Slug Hvorslev 4.9E-05 0.14 NA NA 56-1C A Nolichucky Shale Conasauga 70.3 75.3 72.8 Slug Hvorslev 6.7E-04 1.9 NA NA 56-2A A Nolichucky Shale Conasauga 10.1 15.1 12.6 Slug Hvorslev 8.1E-04 2.3 NA NA 56-2B A Nolichucky Shale Conasauga 33.8 38.8 36.3 Slug Hvorslev 3.0E-04 0.84 NA NA 56-2C A Nolichucky Shale Conasauga 72.3 77.3 74.8 Slug Hvorslev 1.6E-04 0.45 NA NA 56-3A A Nolichucky Shale Conasauga 12.8 17.8 15.3 Slug Hvorslev 2.8E-04 0.8 NA NA 56-3C A Nolichucky Shale Conasauga 50.5 55.5 53 Slug Hvorslev 5.6E-04 1.6 NA NA 56-4C A Nolichucky Shale Conasauga 71.3 76.3 73.8 Slug Hvorslev 1.3E-03 3.6 NA NA 56-5C A Maynardville Limestone Conasauga 66.6 71.6 69.1 Slug Hvorslev 2.5E-02 70 NA NA GW-1 A Dismal Gap Formation Conasauga 14.4 25.7 20.1 Bailer-Rec Not Specified 2.6E-05 0.074 NA NA GW-2 A Dismal Gap Formation Conasauga 47.8 60 53.9 Packer Not Specified 1.1E-05 0.03 NA NA GW-2 A Dismal Gap Formation Conasauga 38.9 60 49.5 Packer Not Specified 4.9E-06 0.014 NA NA GW-2 A Dismal Gap Formation Conasauga 39.6 46.7 43.2 Packer Not Specified 9.5E-06 0.027 NA NA GW-2 A Dismal Gap Formation Conasauga 34.8 41.9 38.4 Packer Not Specified 2.8E-06 0.008 NA NA GW-3 A Nolichucky Shale Conasauga 23.9 35 29.5 Packer Not Specified 5.1E-05 0.145 NA NA GW-3 A Nolichucky Shale Conasauga 20.9 32 26.5 Packer Not Specified 4.1E-05 0.115 NA NA GW-3 A Nolichucky Shale Conasauga 18 23 20.5 Bailer-Rec Not Specified 1.3E-05 0.038 NA NA GW-4 A Nolichucky Shale Conasauga 17 27.2 22.1 Packer Not Specified 1.1E-03 3.23 NA NA GW-4 A Nolichucky Shale Conasauga 27.2 50.6 38.9 Packer Not Specified 7.2E-04 2.05 NA NA GW-5 A Nolichucky Shale Conasauga 3 12.5 7.8 Bailer-Rec Not Specified 2.0E-04 0.575 NA NA GW-6 A Nolichucky Shale Conasauga 35.7 46.8 41.3 Packer Not Specified 6.7E-05 0.189 NA NA GW-6 A Nolichucky Shale Conasauga 15.3 31.5 23.4 Bailer-Rec Not Specified 3.1E-05 0.088 NA NA 2.4.12-30 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report Table 2.4.12-1 (Sheet 2 of 16)

A Selection of Oak Ridge Reservation Published Bedrock Aquifer Testing Results Hydraulic Hydraulic Top Bottom Interval Cond. Cond.

Data Depth Depth Midpoint Test Interpretation Kavg Kavg Transmissivity(d) Storage Well Source Geologic Unit Group (ft bgs) (ft bgs) (ft bgs) Type Method (cm/s) (ft/d) (ft2/d) Coefficient(d)

GW-7 A Nolichucky Shale Conasauga 8.7 16.5 12.6 Bailer-Rec Not Specified 1.9E-04 0.548 NA NA GW-8 A Nolichucky Shale Conasauga 13 21.9 17.5 Bailer-Rec Not Specified 1.5E-04 0.438 NA NA GW-9 A Nolichucky Shale Conasauga 51.5 55.3 53.4 Packer Not Specified 6.8E-05 0.192 NA NA GW-9 A Nolichucky Shale Conasauga 39.6 49.8 44.7 Packer Not Specified 9.0E-05 0.255 NA NA GW-9 A Nolichucky Shale Conasauga 30.4 40.6 35.5 Packer Not Specified 7.9E-04 2.25 NA NA GW-9 A Nolichucky Shale Conasauga 20.5 30.7 25.6 Packer Not Specified 2.8E-04 0.795 NA NA GW-10 A Nolichucky Shale Conasauga 9.6 15 12.3 Bailer-Rec Not Specified 8.0E-05 0.222 NA NA GW-11 A Nolichucky Shale Conasauga 27.8 39.5 33.7 Packer Not Specified 2.4E-04 0.685 NA NA GW-11 A Nolichucky Shale Conasauga 19.7 31.4 25.6 Packer Not Specified 4.6E-04 1.29 NA NA GW-11 A Nolichucky Shale Conasauga 48.7 60.8 54.8 Packer Not Specified 5.0E-05 0.137 NA NA GW-11 A Nolichucky Shale Conasauga 39 50.8 44.9 Packer Not Specified 4.2E-05 0.118 NA NA GW-12 A Nolichucky Shale Conasauga 8.7 14.7 11.7 Bailer-Rec Not Specified 3.4E-05 0.096 NA NA GW-13 A Nolichucky Shale Conasauga 6 14 10 Bailer-Rec Not Specified 3.3E-05 0.093 NA NA GW-13 A Nolichucky Shale Conasauga 22.5 33.9 28.2 Packer Not Specified 5.8E-04 1.64 NA NA GW-13 A Nolichucky Shale Conasauga 15.6 27.4 21.5 Packer Not Specified 6.0E-04 1.7 NA NA GW-43 A Dismal Gap Formation Conasauga 28.6 35 31.8 Bailer-Rec Not Specified 5.0E-05 0.14 NA NA GW-44 A Dismal Gap Formation Conasauga 27.1 38.7 32.9 Packer Not Specified 1.3E-04 0.381 NA NA GW-44 A Dismal Gap Formation Conasauga 58 64 61 Packer Not Specified 2.1E-05 0.06 NA NA GW-44 A Dismal Gap Formation Conasauga 47.5 64 55.8 Packer Not Specified 6.3E-05 0.178 NA NA GW-44 A Dismal Gap Formation Conasauga 47.6 64 55.8 Packer Not Specified 1.8E-04 0.521 NA NA GW-44 A Dismal Gap Formation Conasauga 35.3 46.9 41.1 Packer Not Specified 8.7E-05 0.247 NA NA GW-58 A Maynardville Limestone Conasauga 21.5 33.2 27.4 Packer Not Specified 3.7E-04 1.036 NA NA GW-58 A Maynardville Limestone Conasauga 30.2 41.9 36.1 Packer Not Specified 2.0E-03 5.81 NA NA GW-59 A Maynardville Limestone Conasauga 18.2 27 22.6 Packer Not Specified 4.1E-03 11.63 NA NA GW-62 A Maynardville Limestone Conasauga 22.5 32.5 27.5 Packer Not Specified 3.3E-03 9.3 NA NA GW-62 A Maynardville Limestone Conasauga 34 44 39 Packer Not Specified 8.9E-05 0.252 NA NA GW-62 A Maynardville Limestone Conasauga 44 54 49 Packer Not Specified 4.6E-05 0.129 NA NA GW-131 A Knox Group Knox 120 147 133.5 Packer Homer Semi-Log 4.6E-04 1.3 NA NA GW-131 A Knox Group Knox 240 267 253.5 Packer Homer Semi-Log 1.3E-03 3.67 NA NA GW-131 A Knox Group Knox 290 317 303.5 Packer Homer Semi-Log 7.0E-08 0.0002 NA NA GW-131 A Knox Group Knox 370 397 383.5 Packer Homer Semi-Log 4.4E-05 0.124 NA NA GW-131 A Knox Group Knox 450 477 463.5 Packer Homer Semi-Log 1.9E-04 0.544 NA NA 2.4.12-31 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report Table 2.4.12-1 (Sheet 3 of 16)

A Selection of Oak Ridge Reservation Published Bedrock Aquifer Testing Results Hydraulic Hydraulic Top Bottom Interval Cond. Cond.

Data Depth Depth Midpoint Test Interpretation Kavg Kavg Transmissivity(d) Storage Well Source Geologic Unit Group (ft bgs) (ft bgs) (ft bgs) Type Method (cm/s) (ft/d) (ft2/d) Coefficient(d)

GW-131 A Knox Group Knox 490 517 503.5 Packer Homer Semi-Log 1.1E-06 0.003 NA NA GW-131 A Maynardville Limestone Conasauga 665 692 678.5 Packer Homer Semi-Log 1.0E-05 0.029 NA NA GW-131 A Maynardville Limestone Conasauga 765 792 778.5 Packer Homer Semi-Log 3.5E-06 0.01 NA NA GW-131 A Maynardville Limestone Conasauga 892 919 905.5 Packer Homer Semi-Log 7.0E-08 0.0002 NA NA GW-131 A Maynardville Limestone Conasauga 988 1015 1001.5 Packer Homer Semi-Log 3.3E-04 0.932 NA NA GW-132 A Friendship Formation Conasauga 145 172 158.5 Packer Homer Semi-Log 1.1E-08 0.00003 NA NA GW-132 A Pumpkin Valley Shale Conasauga 305 332 318.5 Packer Homer Semi-Log 3.5E-06 0.01 NA NA GW-132 A Pumpkin Valley Shale Conasauga 347 374 360.5 Packer Homer Semi-Log 3.5E-06 0.01 NA NA GW-132 A Pumpkin Valley Shale Conasauga 490 517 503.5 Packer Homer Semi-Log 2.1E-06 0.006 NA NA GW-132 A Pumpkin Valley Shale Conasauga 557 584 570.5 Packer Homer Semi-Log 1.5E-05 0.042 NA NA GW-132 A Rome Formation Rome 642 669 655.5 Packer Homer Semi-Log 3.9E-04 1.1 NA NA GW-132 A Rome Formation Rome 690 717 703.5 Packer Homer Semi-Log 3.2E-07 0.0009 NA NA GW-133 A Dismal Gap Formation Conasauga 105 132 118.5 Packer Homer Semi-Log 1.1E-07 0.0003 NA NA GW-133 A Dismal Gap Formation Conasauga 148 175 161.5 Packer Homer Semi-Log 1.1E-06 0.003 NA NA GW-133 A Dismal Gap Formation Conasauga 230 257 243.5 Packer Homer Semi-Log 1.8E-07 0.0005 NA NA GW-133 A Dismal Gap Formation Conasauga 305 332 318.5 Packer Homer Semi-Log 1.4E-06 0.004 NA NA GW-133 A Rogersville Shale Conasauga 428 455 441.5 Packer Homer Semi-Log 7.1E-07 0.002 NA NA GW-133 A Friendship Formation Conasauga 543 570 556.5 Packer Homer Semi-Log 2.1E-07 0.0006 NA NA GW-134 A Maynardville Limestone Conasauga 75 102 88.5 Packer Homer Semi-Log 2.4E-04 0.67 NA NA GW-134 A Nolichucky Shale Conasauga 173 200 186.5 Packer Homer Semi-Log 2.8E-06 0.008 NA NA GW-134 A Nolichucky Shale Conasauga 270 297 283.5 Packer Homer Semi-Log 1.8E-06 0.005 NA NA GW-134 A Nolichucky Shale Conasauga 360 387 373.5 Packer Homer Semi-Log 3.5E-08 0.0001 NA NA GW-134 A Nolichucky Shale Conasauga 450 477 463.5 Packer Homer Semi-Log 3.2E-07 0.0009 NA NA GW-134 A Nolichucky Shale Conasauga 560 587 573.5 Packer Homer Semi-Log 3.5E-07 0.001 NA NA GW-134 A Dismal Gap Formation Conasauga 730 757 743.5 Packer Homer Semi-Log 7.1E-07 0.002 NA NA GW-134 A Dismal Gap Formation Conasauga 793 820 806.5 Packer Homer Semi-Log 1.4E-07 0.0004 NA NA GW-135 A Knox undifferentiated Knox 190 217 203.5 Packer Homer Semi-Log 5.6E-06 0.016 NA NA GW-135 A Knox undifferentiated Knox 324 351 337.5 Packer Homer Semi-Log 7.2E-05 0.203 NA NA GW-135 A Knox undifferentiated Knox 397 425 411 Packer Homer Semi-Log 9.6E-05 0.272 NA NA GW-135 A Knox undifferentiated Knox 446 473 459.5 Packer Homer Semi-Log 7.8E-05 0.222 NA NA GW-135 A Knox undifferentiated Knox 588 615 601.5 Packer Homer Semi-Log 3.5E-06 0.01 NA NA GW-135 A Maynardville Limestone Conasauga 710 737 723.5 Packer Homer Semi-Log 1.8E-06 0.005 NA NA 2.4.12-32 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report Table 2.4.12-1 (Sheet 4 of 16)

A Selection of Oak Ridge Reservation Published Bedrock Aquifer Testing Results Hydraulic Hydraulic Top Bottom Interval Cond. Cond.

Data Depth Depth Midpoint Test Interpretation Kavg Kavg Transmissivity(d) Storage Well Source Geologic Unit Group (ft bgs) (ft bgs) (ft bgs) Type Method (cm/s) (ft/d) (ft2/d) Coefficient(d)

GW-135 A Maynardville Limestone Conasauga 832 859 845.5 Packer Homer Semi-Log 1.8E-05 0.052 NA NA GW-135 A Maynardville Limestone Conasauga 945 972 958.5 Packer Homer Semi-Log 3.5E-07 0.001 NA NA GW-135 A Maynardville Limestone Conasauga 990 1017 1003.5 Packer Homer Semi-Log 2.5E-06 0.007 NA NA GW-135 A Maynardville Limestone Conasauga 1124 1151 1137.5 Packer Homer Semi-Log 1.5E-04 0.411 NA NA GW-135 A Maynardville Limestone Conasauga 1185 1212 1198.5 Packer Homer Semi-Log 2.5E-06 0.007 NA NA GW-157 A Knox undifferentiated Knox 145 157 151 Packer Homer Semi-Log 8.5E-05 0.24 NA NA GW-157 A Knox undifferentiated Knox 215 227 221 Packer Homer Semi-Log 1.8E-04 0.502 NA NA GW-157 A Knox undifferentiated Knox 265 277 271 Packer Homer Semi-Log 1.1E-03 3.03 NA NA GW-157 A Knox undifferentiated Knox 282 294 288 Packer Homer Semi-Log 2.0E-04 0.561 NA NA GW-157 A Knox undifferentiated Knox 314 326 320 Packer Homer Semi-Log 3.2E-06 0.009 NA NA GW-157 A Knox undifferentiated Knox 326 338 332 Packer Homer Semi-Log 3.1E-04 0.89 NA NA GW-157 A Knox undifferentiated Knox 344 356 350 Packer Homer Semi-Log 7.1E-08 0.0002 NA NA GW-157 A Knox undifferentiated Knox 392 404 398 Packer Homer Semi-Log 2.8E-07 0.0008 NA NA GW-157 A Knox undifferentiated Knox 432 444 438 Packer Homer Semi-Log 7.4E-05 0.209 NA NA GW-157 A Knox undifferentiated Knox 468 480 474 Packer Homer Semi-Log 1.5E-04 0.417 NA NA GW-456(a) A Nolichucky Shale Conasauga Not Specified Not Specified Not Specified Pump Theis 9.2E-04 2.6 180 0.0021 GW-457(a) A Nolichucky Shale Conasauga Not Specified Not Specified Not Specified Pump Theis 1.2E-04 0.34 24 0.00046 GW-458(a) A Nolichucky Shale Conasauga Not Specified Not Specified Not Specified Pump Theis 1.1E-04 0.31 13 0.00088 GW-459(a) A Nolichucky Shale Conasauga Not Specified Not Specified Not Specified Pump Theis 2.5E-03 7.1 530 0.0048 GW-460(a) A Nolichucky Shale Conasauga Not Specified Not Specified Not Specified Pump Theis 3.3E-04 0.96 61 0.0013 (a)

GW-461 A Nolichucky Shale Conasauga Not Specified Not Specified Not Specified Pump Theis 9.9E-04 2.8 138 0.0018 GW-462(a) A Nolichucky Shale Conasauga Not Specified Not Specified Not Specified Pump Theis 5.6E-05 0.16 17 NA GW-427 A Maynardville Limestone Conasauga 38 48 43 Pump Theis 3.5E-02 99 7690 0.000056 GW-428(a) A Maynardville Limestone Conasauga Not Specified Not Specified Not Specified Pump Theis 1.6E-02 45 NA NA GW-463 A Maynardville Limestone Conasauga 45.8 55.8 50.8 Pump Theis 8.1E-03 23 950 0.0004 GW-464(a) A Maynardville Limestone Conasauga Not Specified Not Specified Not Specified Pump Theis 7.4E-03 21 1037 0.00083 GW-465 A Maynardville Limestone Conasauga 31 41 36 Pump Theis 2.2E-03 6.2 372 0.0023 GW-466 A Maynardville Limestone Conasauga 32 42 37 Pump Theis 5.3E-03 15 631 0.00046 GW-467 A Maynardville Limestone Conasauga 38.5 58.5 48.5 Pump Theis 7.4E-03 21 NA NA 1063 A Nolichucky Shale Conasauga 20 70 45 Pump Theis NA NA 12 0.00024 1062/OB-4 A Nolichucky Shale Conasauga 20 70 45 Pump Theis NA NA 68 0.0066 1061/OB-5 A Nolichucky Shale Conasauga 20 70 45 Pump Theis NA NA 51 0.0041 2.4.12-33 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report Table 2.4.12-1 (Sheet 5 of 16)

A Selection of Oak Ridge Reservation Published Bedrock Aquifer Testing Results Hydraulic Hydraulic Top Bottom Interval Cond. Cond.

Data Depth Depth Midpoint Test Interpretation Kavg Kavg Transmissivity(d) Storage Well Source Geologic Unit Group (ft bgs) (ft bgs) (ft bgs) Type Method (cm/s) (ft/d) (ft2/d) Coefficient(d) 1060/OB-8 A Nolichucky Shale Conasauga 20 70 45 Pump Theis NA NA 38 0.0006 1059/OB-1 A Nolichucky Shale Conasauga 20 70 45 Pump Theis NA NA 19 NA 1058/OB-3 A Nolichucky Shale Conasauga 20 70 45 Pump Theis NA NA 18 0.00013 1057/OB-7 A Nolichucky Shale Conasauga 20 70 45 Pump Theis NA NA 17 0.00019 1056/OB-2 A Nolichucky Shale Conasauga 20 70 45 Pump Theis NA NA 18 0.00025 1055/OB-6 A Nolichucky Shale Conasauga 20 70 45 Pump Theis NA NA 25 0.0007 1002/AP-2 A Dismal Gap Formation Conasauga 35 45 40 Slug Not Specified 7.3E-04 2.08 NA NA 1003/AP-3 A Nolichucky Shale Conasauga 27 37 32 Slug Not Specified 9.4E-05 0.266 NA NA 1027/BG-1 A Dismal Gap Formation Conasauga 20 30 25 Packer Not Specified 1.0E-04 0.296 NA NA 1027/BG-1 A Dismal Gap Formation Conasauga 30 40 35 Packer Not Specified 6.7E-04 1.9 NA NA 1027/BG-1 A Dismal Gap Formation Conasauga 40 50 45 Packer Not Specified 1.3E-04 0.381 NA NA 1032/BG-6 A Maynardville Limestone Conasauga 43 53 48 Slug Not Specified 2.3E-04 0.66 NA NA 1032/BG-6 A Maynardville Limestone Conasauga 43 53 48 Slug Not Specified 1.8E-04 0.507 NA NA 1035/BG-9 A Pumpkin Valley Shale Conasauga 20 30 25 Packer Not Specified 2.3E-05 0.066 NA NA 1035/BG-9 A Pumpkin Valley Shale Conasauga 30 40 35 Packer Not Specified 1.2E-04 0.334 NA NA 1035/BG-9 A Pumpkin Valley Shale Conasauga 35 45 40 Packer Not Specified 9.8E-05 0.279 NA NA 1035/BG-9 A Pumpkin Valley Shale Conasauga 35 45 40 Packer Not Specified 1.2E-04 0.331 NA NA 1035/BG-9 A Pumpkin Valley Shale Conasauga 40 50 45 Packer Not Specified 1.2E-04 0.331 NA NA 1035/BG-9 A Pumpkin Valley Shale Conasauga 40 50 45 Packer Not Specified 1.0E-04 0.29 NA NA 1051/OD-4 A Nolichucky Shale Conasauga 18 28 23 Slug Not Specified 6.0E-04 1.69 NA NA 1051/OD-4 A Nolichucky Shale Conasauga 18 28 23 Slug Not Specified 3.7E-04 1.06 NA NA 1095/SD-1 A Knox undifferentiated Knox 108 118 113 Slug Not Specified 3.1E-04 0.874 NA NA 1055/OB-6 A Nolichucky Shale Conasauga 20 70 45 Pump Theis 1.9E-04 0.54 10 0.0009 1056/OB-2 A Nolichucky Shale Conasauga 20 70 45 Pump Theis 1.7E-04 0.48 16.7 0.0072 1057/OB-7 A Nolichucky Shale Conasauga 20 70 45 Pump Theis 9.4E-04 2.66 4.7 0.00041 1058/OB-3 A Nolichucky Shale Conasauga 20 70 45 Pump Theis 4.9E-05 0.14 NA 0.00053 1059/OB-1 A Nolichucky Shale Conasauga 20 70 45 Pump Theis 1.7E-04 0.48 32.2 0.0013 1060/OB-8 A Nolichucky Shale Conasauga 20 70 45 Pump Theis 9.2E-04 2.6 20.7 0.0017 1061/OB-5 A Nolichucky Shale Conasauga 20 70 45 Pump Theis 1.3E-03 3.67 NA 0.0047 1062/OB-4 A Nolichucky Shale Conasauga 20 70 45 Pump Theis 8.6E-04 2.44 39.4 0.0054 1044/BG18 A Maynardville Limestone Conasauga 100 160 130 Pump Hantush NA NA 16 NA 1031/BG8 A Nolichucky Shale Conasauga 37 47 42 Pump Hantush 1.1E-07 0.0003 41 0.0003 2.4.12-34 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report Table 2.4.12-1 (Sheet 6 of 16)

A Selection of Oak Ridge Reservation Published Bedrock Aquifer Testing Results Hydraulic Hydraulic Top Bottom Interval Cond. Cond.

Data Depth Depth Midpoint Test Interpretation Kavg Kavg Transmissivity(d) Storage Well Source Geologic Unit Group (ft bgs) (ft bgs) (ft bgs) Type Method (cm/s) (ft/d) (ft2/d) Coefficient(d) 1034/BG5 A Nolichucky Shale Conasauga 35 45 40 Pump Hantush 3.2E-09 0.000009 20 0.000009 GW-104 A Nolichucky Shale Conasauga 51 74 62.5 Pump Jacob NA NA 37 NA GW-245 A Nolichucky Shale Conasauga 30 75 52.5 Pump Theis NA NA 13.4 NA GW-246 A Nolichucky Shale Conasauga 30 75 52.5 Pump Theis NA NA 28 0.001 GW-247 A Nolichucky Shale Conasauga 30 75 52.5 Pump Theis NA NA 16 0.0004 GW-122 A Maynardville Limestone Conasauga 92 142 117 Not Specified Not Specified 9.7E-06 0.0274 NA NA GW-120 A Nolichucky Shale Conasauga 130 180 155 Not Specified Not Specified 1.9E-06 0.0055 NA NA GW-117 A Nolichucky Shale Conasauga 480 530 505 Not Specified Not Specified 7.1E-08 0.0002 NA NA GW-123 A Nolichucky Shale Conasauga 525 575 550 Not Specified Not Specified 1.8E-08 0.00005 NA NA GW-473 A Not Specified Not Specified 30 45 37.5 Pump Chow 7.0E-05 0.1984 NA NA GW-132 A Friendship Formation Conasauga 850 Not Specified 850 Packer Not Specified 1.02E-06 0.0029 NA NA GW-132 A Pumpkin Valley Shale Conasauga 720 Not Specified 720 Packer Not Specified 3.75E-06 0.0106 NA NA GW-132 A Pumpkin Valley Shale Conasauga 650 Not Specified 650 Packer Not Specified 4.04E-06 0.0115 NA NA GW-132 A Pumpkin Valley Shale Conasauga 520 Not Specified 520 Packer Not Specified 1.99E-06 0.0056 NA NA GW-132 A Pumpkin Valley Shale Conasauga 450 Not Specified 450 Packer Not Specified 1.47E-05 0.0417 NA NA GW-132 A Rome Formation Rome 380 Not Specified 380 Packer Not Specified 4.08E-04 1.1565 NA NA GW-132 A Rome Formation Rome 320 Not Specified 320 Packer Not Specified 3.05E-07 0.0009 NA NA GW-133 A Dismal Gap Formation Conasauga 920 Not Specified 920 Packer Not Specified 1.0E-07 0.0003 NA NA GW-133 A Dismal Gap Formation Conasauga 850 Not Specified 850 Packer Not Specified 1.07E-06 0.003 NA NA GW-133 A Dismal Gap Formation Conasauga 760 Not Specified 760 Packer Not Specified 1.7E-07 0.0005 NA NA GW-133 A Dismal Gap Formation Conasauga 680 Not Specified 680 Packer Not Specified 1.49E-06 0.0042 NA NA GW-133 A Rogersville Shale Conasauga 550 Not Specified 550 Packer Not Specified 6.42E-07 0.0018 NA NA GW-133 A Friendship Formation Conasauga 450 Not Specified 450 Packer Not Specified 1.98E-07 0.0006 NA NA GW-134 A Maynardville Limestone Conasauga 920 Not Specified 920 Packer Not Specified 2.37E-04 0.6718 NA NA GW-134 A Maynardville Limestone Conasauga 800 Not Specified 800 Packer Not Specified 2.87E-06 0.0081 NA NA GW-134 A Nolichucky Shale Conasauga 650 Not Specified 650 Packer Not Specified 1.74E-06 0.0049 NA NA GW-134 A Nolichucky Shale Conasauga 560 Not Specified 560 Packer Not Specified 5.14E-06 0.0145 NA NA GW-134 A Nolichucky Shale Conasauga 500 Not Specified 500 Packer Not Specified 3.17E-07 0.0009 NA NA GW-134 A Nolichucky Shale Conasauga 400 Not Specified 400 Packer Not Specified 4.26E-07 0.0012 NA NA GW-134 A Dismal Gap Formation Conasauga 240 Not Specified 240 Packer Not Specified 5.55E-07 0.0016 NA NA GW-134 A Dismal Gap Formation Conasauga 200 Not Specified 200 Packer Not Specified 1.33E-07 0.0004 NA NA GW-135 A Knox undifferentiated Knox 950 Not Specified 950 Packer Not Specified 5.49E-06 0.0156 NA NA 2.4.12-35 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report Table 2.4.12-1 (Sheet 7 of 16)

A Selection of Oak Ridge Reservation Published Bedrock Aquifer Testing Results Hydraulic Hydraulic Top Bottom Interval Cond. Cond.

Data Depth Depth Midpoint Test Interpretation Kavg Kavg Transmissivity(d) Storage Well Source Geologic Unit Group (ft bgs) (ft bgs) (ft bgs) Type Method (cm/s) (ft/d) (ft2/d) Coefficient(d)

GW-135 A Knox undifferentiated Knox 820 Not Specified 820 Packer Not Specified 7.15E-05 0.2027 NA NA GW-135 A Knox undifferentiated Knox 750 Not Specified 750 Packer Not Specified 9.61E-05 0.2724 NA NA GW-135 A Knox undifferentiated Knox 700 Not Specified 700 Packer Not Specified 7.84E-05 0.2222 NA NA GW-135 A Knox undifferentiated Knox 550 Not Specified 550 Packer Not Specified 3.55E-06 0.0101 NA NA GW-135 A Maynardville Limestone Conasauga 400 Not Specified 400 Packer Not Specified 1.69E-04 0.0048 NA NA GW-135 A Maynardville Limestone Conasauga 300 Not Specified 300 Packer Not Specified 1.83E-05 0.0519 NA NA GW-135 A Maynardville Limestone Conasauga 150 Not Specified 150 Packer Not Specified 4.30E-07 0.0012 NA NA GW-135 A Maynardville Limestone Conasauga 100 Not Specified 100 Packer Not Specified 2.30E-06 0.0065 NA NA GW-135 A Maynardville Limestone Conasauga 50 Not Specified 50 Packer Not Specified 1.45E-04 0.411 NA NA GW-135 A Maynardville Limestone Conasauga 100 Not Specified 100 Packer Not Specified 2.55E-06 0.0072 NA NA 458 B Not Specified Conasauga 150 203 176.5 Slug Not Specified 1.06E-05 0.03 1.6 1.50E-08 458 B Not Specified Conasauga 190 203 196.5 Slug Not Specified 1.06E-05 0.03 0.3 1.60E-12 458 B Not Specified Conasauga 150 203 176.5 Pump Not Specified 1.06E-05 0.03 1.6 1.60E-05 459 B Not Specified Conasauga 100 150 125 Slug Not Specified 7.06E-08 0.0002 0.011 1.60E-04 459 B Not Specified Conasauga 136 150 143 Slug Not Specified 2.86E-05 0.081 1.1 1.60E-05 460 B Not Specified Conasauga 44 100 72 Slug Not Specified 7.06E-06 0.020 1.4 1.60E-04 460 B Not Specified Conasauga 84 100 92 Slug Not Specified 5.29E-06 0.015 0.2 1.40E-04 460 B Not Specified Conasauga 44 100 72 Pump Not Specified 1.06E-05 0.03 1.6 7.50E-04 439 B Not Specified Conasauga 24 34 29 Slug Not Specified 2.05E-04 0.58 NA NA 440 B Not Specified Conasauga 26 36 31 Slug Not Specified 1.87E-05 0.053 NA NA 472 B Not Specified Conasauga 15 20 17.5 Slug Not Specified 1.16E-04 0.33 NA NA 464 B Not Specified Conasauga 6 11 8.5 Slug Not Specified 2.68E-04 0.76 NA NA 468 B Not Specified Conasauga 10 15 12.5 Slug Not Specified 1.73E-04 0.49 NA NA OMW-01A C Not Specified Conasauga(f) 210 258 234 Slug Bouwer-Rice 1.05E-05 0.03 NA NA OMW-01AA C Not Specified Conasauga(f) 120 170 145 Slug Bouwer-Rice 8.91E-06 0.025 NA NA OMW-02A C Not Specified Conasauga(f) 200 250 225 Slug Bouwer-Rice 1.20E-05 0.034 NA NA (f)

OMW-02AA C Not Specified Conasauga 120 170 145 Slug Bouwer-Rice 1.49E-05 0.042 NA NA OMW-02B C Not Specified Conasauga(f) 300 350 325 Slug Bouwer-Rice 9.84E-06 0.028 NA NA OMW-03A C Not Specified Conasauga(f) 60 120 90 Slug Bouwer-Rice 2.46E-04 0.697 NA NA OMW-03B(b) C Not Specified Conasauga(f) 152.7 177.7 165.2 Slug Bouwer-Rice 4.12E-05 0.117 NA NA OMW-04A(b) C Not Specified Conasauga(f) 30 90 60 Slug Bouwer-Rice 5.81E-04 1.646 NA NA OMW-04B C Not Specified Conasauga(f) 119 164 141.5 Slug Bouwer-Rice 4.40E-06 0.012 NA NA 2.4.12-36 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report Table 2.4.12-1 (Sheet 8 of 16)

A Selection of Oak Ridge Reservation Published Bedrock Aquifer Testing Results Hydraulic Hydraulic Top Bottom Interval Cond. Cond.

Data Depth Depth Midpoint Test Interpretation Kavg Kavg Transmissivity(d) Storage Well Source Geologic Unit Group (ft bgs) (ft bgs) (ft bgs) Type Method (cm/s) (ft/d) (ft2/d) Coefficient(d)

OMW-04C C Not Specified Conasauga(f) 182.7 217.7 200.2 Slug Bouwer-Rice 1.58E-04 0.448 NA NA (c) 7-1 D Not Specified Conasauga 60 120 90 Slug Hvorslev 3.86E-06 0.011 NA NA 7-2(c) D Not Specified Conasauga 35 95 65 Slug Hvorslev 5.10E-05 0.145 NA NA 7-3 D Not Specified Conasauga 68 88 78 Slug Hvorslev 2.98E-04 0.845 NA NA 7-4 D Not Specified Conasauga 70 90 80 Slug Hvorslev 1.05E-05 0.030 NA NA 7-5 D Not Specified Conasauga 76 95 85.5 Slug Hvorslev 3.84E-05 0.109 NA NA 7-7 D Not Specified Conasauga 18 28 23 Slug Hvorslev 1.12E-04 0.317 NA NA 7-8 D Not Specified Conasauga 20 30 25 Slug Hvorslev 2.29E-05 0.065 NA NA 7-9 D Not Specified Conasauga 20 30 25 Slug Hvorslev 6.59E-05 0.187 NA NA 7-11(c) D Not Specified Conasauga 38 86 62 Slug Hvorslev 1.42E-05 0.040 NA NA 7-12 D Not Specified Conasauga 60 70 65 Slug Hvorslev 1.13E-06 0.003 NA NA 7-13(c) D Not Specified Conasauga 10 28 19 Slug Hvorslev 1.47E-04 0.417 NA NA 7-14 D Not Specified Conasauga 60 70 65 Slug Hvorslev 8.21E-06 0.023 NA NA ETF-1 E Dismal Gap Formation Conasauga 24.8 28.7 26.7 Slug/Pump Hvorslev 3.10E-04 0.879 24.6 5.12E-04 ETF-2 E Dismal Gap Formation Conasauga 27.9 31.8 29.8 Slug Hvorslev 2.30E-05 0.065 NA NA ETF-3 E Dismal Gap Formation Conasauga 26.9 30.8 28.9 Slug/Pump Hvorslev 5.00E-05 0.142 67.6 0.01 ETF-4 E Dismal Gap Formation Conasauga 26.8 30.8 28.8 Slug Hvorslev 1.30E-04 0.369 NA NA ETF-5 E Dismal Gap Formation Conasauga 26.3 30.2 28.3 Slug Hvorslev 3.00E-04 0.850 NA NA ETF-6 E Dismal Gap Formation Conasauga 26.2 30.1 28.1 Slug Hvorslev 3.90E-04 1.106 NA NA ETF-7 E Dismal Gap Formation Conasauga 26.5 30.4 28.4 Slug Hvorslev 2.00E-04 0.567 NA NA ETF-8 E Dismal Gap Formation Conasauga 25.8 29.8 27.8 Slug/Pump Hvorslev 3.10E-04 0.879 58 0.03 ETF-9 E Dismal Gap Formation Conasauga 27 30.9 28.9 Slug/Pump Hvorslev 5.10E-05 0.145 19.4 0.01 ETF-10 E Dismal Gap Formation Conasauga 27.1 31.1 29.1 Pump Theis NA NA 27 3.34E-04 ETF-11 E Dismal Gap Formation Conasauga 41.7 49.6 45.6 Slug Hvorslev 2.40E-04 0.680 NA NA ETF-12 E Dismal Gap Formation Conasauga 42.2 50.1 46.2 Slug Hvorslev 4.10E-04 1.162 NA NA ETF-13 E Dismal Gap Formation Conasauga 240.9 250.7 245.8 Slug Hvorslev 1.70E-05 0.048 NA NA ETF-14 E Dismal Gap Formation Conasauga 84.7 94.6 89.7 Slug Hvorslev 2.30E-05 0.065 NA NA ETF-15 E Dismal Gap Formation Conasauga 36.9 46.8 41.8 Slug Hvorslev 6.60E-06 0.019 NA NA ETF-16 E Dismal Gap Formation Conasauga 234.6 244.5 239.6 Slug Hvorslev 2.90E-05 0.082 NA NA ETF-17 E Dismal Gap Formation Conasauga 12.8 18.7 15.8 Slug Hvorslev 9.60E-06 0.027 NA NA ETF-20 E Dismal Gap Formation Conasauga 15.9 21.8 18.9 Slug Hvorslev 2.30E-04 0.652 NA NA ETF-21 E Dismal Gap Formation Conasauga 14.5 20.4 17.5 Slug Hvorslev 1.10E-05 0.031 NA NA 2.4.12-37 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report Table 2.4.12-1 (Sheet 9 of 16)

A Selection of Oak Ridge Reservation Published Bedrock Aquifer Testing Results Hydraulic Hydraulic Top Bottom Interval Cond. Cond.

Data Depth Depth Midpoint Test Interpretation Kavg Kavg Transmissivity(d) Storage Well Source Geologic Unit Group (ft bgs) (ft bgs) (ft bgs) Type Method (cm/s) (ft/d) (ft2/d) Coefficient(d)

ETF-22 E Dismal Gap Formation Conasauga 16.6 22.5 19.6 Slug Hvorslev 4.50E-05 0.128 NA NA ETF-23 E Dismal Gap Formation Conasauga 14.4 20.3 17.4 Slug Hvorslev 6.00E-05 0.170 NA NA ETF-24 E Dismal Gap Formation Conasauga 15.7 21.7 18.7 Slug Hvorslev 6.00E-04 1.701 NA NA ETF-25 E Dismal Gap Formation Conasauga 15.7 21.6 18.6 Slug Hvorslev 7.60E-05 0.215 NA NA ETF-26 E Dismal Gap Formation Conasauga 15.3 21.2 18.2 Slug Hvorslev 4.70E-05 0.133 NA NA ETF-27 E Dismal Gap Formation Conasauga 14.5 20.4 17.5 Slug Hvorslev 2.20E-05 0.062 NA NA ETF-28 E Dismal Gap Formation Conasauga 14.4 20.3 17.4 Slug Hvorslev 9.20E-06 0.026 NA NA ETF-29 E Dismal Gap Formation Conasauga 14.8 20.7 17.8 Slug Hvorslev 2.20E-05 0.062 NA NA ETF-31 E Dismal Gap Formation Conasauga 11.4 17.3 14.3 Slug Hvorslev 2.40E-05 0.068 NA NA ETF-32 E Dismal Gap Formation Conasauga 13.9 19.8 16.9 Slug Hvorslev 2.90E-05 0.082 NA NA ETF-33 E Dismal Gap Formation Conasauga 14.1 20 17.1 Slug Hvorslev 2.38E-03 6.746 NA NA ETF-34 E Dismal Gap Formation Conasauga 16 21.9 19.0 Slug Hvorslev 2.10E-05 0.060 NA NA ETF-35 E Dismal Gap Formation Conasauga 14.7 20.6 17.7 Slug Hvorslev 1.50E-05 0.043 NA NA ETF-36 E Dismal Gap Formation Conasauga 15.3 21.2 18.2 Slug Hvorslev 3.00E-05 0.085 NA NA ETF-37 E Dismal Gap Formation Conasauga 15.5 21.4 18.5 Slug Hvorslev 7.90E-05 0.224 NA NA ETF-38 E Dismal Gap Formation Conasauga 16.1 22 19.1 Slug Hvorslev 9.70E-05 0.275 NA NA ETF-39 E Dismal Gap Formation Conasauga 16.3 22.2 19.2 Slug Hvorslev 4.30E-05 0.122 NA NA ETF-40 E Dismal Gap Formation Conasauga 14.8 20.7 17.7 Slug Hvorslev 5.60E-05 0.159 NA NA 668 F Not Specified Conasauga 11 13 12.0 Injection Not Specified 5.21E-05 0.148 0.301 NA 668 F Not Specified Conasauga 13 15 14.0 Injection Not Specified 1.40E-06 0.004 0.080 NA 669 F Not Specified Conasauga 7.5 8.5 8.0 Injection Not Specified 9.84E-05 0.279 0.28 NA 739 F Not Specified Conasauga 25 27.5 26.3 Injection Not Specified 4.75E-04 1.345 3.34 NA 741 F Not Specified Conasauga 15 21 18.0 Injection Not Specified 2.31E-04 0.656 3.98 NA 747 F Not Specified Conasauga 16 24 20.0 Injection Not Specified 3.82E-05 0.108 0.872 NA 748 F Not Specified Conasauga 14.5 23.5 19.0 Injection Not Specified 5.09E-05 0.144 1.292 NA 749 F Not Specified Conasauga 14 16 15.0 Injection Not Specified 1.97E-05 0.056 0.118 NA 749 F Not Specified Conasauga 18 21 19.5 Injection Not Specified 7.64E-05 0.217 0.646 NA 756 F Not Specified Conasauga 18 20.5 19.3 Injection Not Specified 2.55E-03 7.218 18.3 NA 757 F Not Specified Conasauga 12 16 14.0 Injection Not Specified 2.78E-05 0.079 0.312 NA 757 F Not Specified Conasauga 16 22 19.0 Injection Not Specified 6.94E-05 0.197 1.184 NA 758 F Not Specified Conasauga 14 23 18.5 Injection Not Specified 9.72E-06 0.028 0.248 NA 759 F Not Specified Conasauga 14 15.5 14.8 Injection Not Specified 4.05E-04 1.148 1.722 NA 2.4.12-38 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report Table 2.4.12-1 (Sheet 10 of 16)

A Selection of Oak Ridge Reservation Published Bedrock Aquifer Testing Results Hydraulic Hydraulic Top Bottom Interval Cond. Cond.

Data Depth Depth Midpoint Test Interpretation Kavg Kavg Transmissivity(d) Storage Well Source Geologic Unit Group (ft bgs) (ft bgs) (ft bgs) Type Method (cm/s) (ft/d) (ft2/d) Coefficient(d) 759 F Not Specified Conasauga 20 23 21.5 Injection Not Specified 1.74E-04 0.492 1.507 NA 760 F Not Specified Conasauga 14 23 18.5 Injection Not Specified 6.37E-05 0.180 1.615 NA 766 F Not Specified Conasauga 10 13.5 11.8 Injection Not Specified 2.20E-04 0.623 2.153 NA 767 F Not Specified Conasauga 38 40 39.0 Injection Not Specified 5.09E-05 0.144 0.291 NA 768 F Not Specified Conasauga 7 15 11.0 Injection Not Specified 1.09E-05 0.031 0.248 NA 774 F Not Specified Conasauga 8 10 9.0 Injection Not Specified 6.83E-03 19.357 38.75 NA 775 F Not Specified Conasauga 39 40 39.5 Injection Not Specified 2.89E-04 0.820 0.818 NA 775 F Not Specified Conasauga 40 42 41.0 Injection Not Specified 8.45E-05 0.240 0.474 NA 777 F Not Specified Conasauga 37 38 37.5 Injection Not Specified 3.59E-05 0.102 0.103 NA 779 F Not Specified Conasauga 39 41 40.0 Injection Not Specified 3.36E-04 0.951 1.938 NA 779 F Not Specified Conasauga 41 43 42.0 Injection Not Specified 7.99E-05 0.226 0.452 NA 781 F Not Specified Conasauga 29 33 31.0 Injection Not Specified 3.70E-05 0.105 0.431 NA 781 F Not Specified Conasauga 33 35 34.0 Injection Not Specified 2.66E-04 0.755 1.507 NA 782 F Not Specified Conasauga 12 14 13 Injection Not Specified 5.90E-04 1.673 3.552 NA 783 F Not Specified Conasauga 28 29 28.5 Injection Not Specified 4.51E-04 1.28 1.292 NA 904 F Not Specified Conasauga 41 44 42.5 Injection Not Specified 1.62E-03 4.593 13.993 NA 905 F Not Specified Conasauga 36 37.5 36.8 Injection Not Specified 2.78E-04 0.787 1.184 NA 1118 F Not Specified Conasauga 8 12 10 Injection Not Specified 6.60E-05 0.187 0.743 NA 1119 F Not Specified Conasauga 24.5 27 25.8 Injection Not Specified 2.55E-04 0.722 1.830 NA 1119 F Not Specified Conasauga 30.5 33 31.8 Injection Not Specified 1.74E-04 0.492 1.184 NA 1121 F Not Specified Conasauga 8.5 9.5 9 Injection Not Specified 7.18E-04 2.034 2.045 NA 1121 F Not Specified Conasauga 9.5 11.5 10.5 Injection Not Specified 2.20E-04 0.623 1.184 NA 1122 F Not Specified Conasauga 38 41 39.5 Injection Not Specified 3.36E-05 0.095 0.280 NA 1122 F Not Specified Conasauga 41 42.5 41.8 Injection Not Specified 2.08E-04 0.591 0.883 NA 1122 F Not Specified Conasauga 44 46 45 Injection Not Specified 4.17E-05 0.118 0.237 NA 1126 F Not Specified Conasauga 48 49.5 48.8 Injection Not Specified 8.91E-04 2.526 3.767 NA 1126 F Not Specified Conasauga 56 57 56.5 Injection Not Specified 3.36E-04 0.951 0.947 NA 1127 F Not Specified Conasauga 17.5 19 18.3 Injection Not Specified 3.24E-04 0.919 1.399 NA 1127 F Not Specified Conasauga 20.2 21 20.6 Injection Not Specified 5.21E-04 1.476 1.184 NA 1128 F Not Specified Conasauga 46 52 49.0 Injection Not Specified 6.13E-05 0.174 1.055 NA 1128 F Not Specified Conasauga 56 57 56.5 Injection Not Specified 4.63E-05 0.131 0.129 NA 1129 F Not Specified Conasauga 32 33 32.5 Injection Not Specified 6.25E-05 0.177 0.172 NA 2.4.12-39 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report Table 2.4.12-1 (Sheet 11 of 16)

A Selection of Oak Ridge Reservation Published Bedrock Aquifer Testing Results Hydraulic Hydraulic Top Bottom Interval Cond. Cond.

Data Depth Depth Midpoint Test Interpretation Kavg Kavg Transmissivity(d) Storage Well Source Geologic Unit Group (ft bgs) (ft bgs) (ft bgs) Type Method (cm/s) (ft/d) (ft2/d) Coefficient(d) 1129 F Not Specified Conasauga 35.5 36.5 36 Injection Not Specified 2.20E-04 0.623 0.614 NA GW-404(b) G Dismal Gap Formation Conasauga 26.5 38.5 32.5 Packer Multiple 1.90E-05 0.054 NA NA GW-404(b) G Dismal Gap Formation Conasauga 38 50 44 Packer Multiple 9.40E-06 0.027 NA NA GW-404(b) G Dismal Gap Formation Conasauga 50 62 56 Packer Multiple 9.36E-06 0.027 NA NA (b)

GW-404 G Dismal Gap Formation Conasauga 62 74 68 Packer Multiple 7.00E-06 0.020 NA NA GW-404(b) G Dismal Gap Formation Conasauga 74 86 80 Packer Multiple 4.30E-05 0.122 NA NA GW-404(b) G Dismal Gap Formation Conasauga 86 98 92 Packer Multiple 5.42E-06 0.015 NA NA GW-404(b) G Dismal Gap Formation Conasauga 98 110 104 Packer Multiple 6.57E-05 0.186 NA NA GW-404(b) G Dismal Gap Formation Conasauga 110 122 116 Packer Multiple 1.72E-04 0.488 NA NA GW-404(b) G Dismal Gap Formation Conasauga 122 134 128 Packer Multiple 2.90E-05 0.082 NA NA (b)

GW-404 G Dismal Gap Formation Conasauga 134 146 140 Packer Multiple 5.86E-05 0.166 NA NA GW-404(b) G Dismal Gap Formation Conasauga 146 158 152 Packer Multiple 5.44E-06 0.015 NA NA GW-404(b) G Dismal Gap Formation Conasauga 158 170 164 Packer Multiple 4.07E-05 0.115 NA NA GW-404(b) G Dismal Gap Formation Conasauga 170 182 176 Packer Multiple 2.77E-06 0.008 NA NA GW-455(b) G Nolichucky Shale Conasauga 65 87 76 Packer Multiple 6.47E-05 0.183 NA NA GW-455(b) G Nolichucky Shale Conasauga 87 109 98 Packer Multiple 1.60E-05 0.045 NA NA GW-455(b) G Dismal Gap Formation/ Conasauga 109 131 120 Packer Multiple 4.64E-07 0.001 NA NA Nolichucky Shale GW-455(b) G Dismal Gap Formation Conasauga 138 160 149 Packer Multiple 2.61E-05 0.074 NA NA GW-455(b) G Dismal Gap Formation Conasauga 152.8 174.8 163.8 Packer Multiple 6.41E-05 0.182 NA NA GW-471(b) G Dismal Gap Formation Conasauga 33 45 39 Packer Multiple 3.09E-04 0.876 NA NA (b)

GW-471 G Dismal Gap Formation Conasauga 45 57 51 Packer Multiple 2.29E-04 0.649 NA NA GW-471(b) G Dismal Gap Formation Conasauga 57 69 63 Packer Multiple 4.61E-05 0.131 NA NA GW-471(b) G Dismal Gap Formation Conasauga 69 81 75 Packer Multiple 5.80E-06 0.016 NA NA GW-471(b) G Dismal Gap Formation Conasauga 81 93 87 Packer Multiple 5.39E-06 0.015 NA NA GW-471(b) G Dismal Gap Formation Conasauga 84.4 96.4 90.4 Packer Multiple 7.10E-05 0.201 NA NA GW-403 G Dismal Gap Formation Conasauga 306 328 317 Packer Multiple 4.90E-08 0.0001 NA NA GW-403 G Dismal Gap Formation Conasauga 387 409 398 Packer Multiple 1.37E-07 0.0004 NA NA GW-455 G Dismal Gap Formation Conasauga 157.7 185.8 171.8 Slug Hvorslev 4.57E-05 0.130 NA NA GW-471 G Dismal Gap Formation Conasauga 89.7 103.4 96.6 Slug Hvorslev 1.18E-06 0.003 NA NA GW-473 G Dismal Gap Formation Conasauga 68.4 94.4 81.4 Slug Hvorslev 3.93E-05 0.111 NA NA GW-474 G Dismal Gap Formation Conasauga 27.9 45.1 36.5 Slug Hvorslev 3.33E-05 0.094 NA NA 2.4.12-40 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report Table 2.4.12-1 (Sheet 12 of 16)

A Selection of Oak Ridge Reservation Published Bedrock Aquifer Testing Results Hydraulic Hydraulic Top Bottom Interval Cond. Cond.

Data Depth Depth Midpoint Test Interpretation Kavg Kavg Transmissivity(d) Storage Well Source Geologic Unit Group (ft bgs) (ft bgs) (ft bgs) Type Method (cm/s) (ft/d) (ft2/d) Coefficient(d)

GW-475A G Dismal Gap Formation Conasauga 86.4 99.7 93.1 Slug Hvorslev 7.85E-07 0.002 NA NA GW-475B G Dismal Gap Formation Conasauga 49.9 62.9 56.4 Slug Hvorslev 6.96E-05 0.197 NA NA GW-476A G Dismal Gap Formation Conasauga 69.9 83 76.5 Slug Hvorslev 6.61E-06 0.019 NA NA GW-476B G Dismal Gap Formation Conasauga 36.9 49.4 43.2 Slug Hvorslev 7.96E-05 0.226 NA NA GW-477A G Dismal Gap Formation Conasauga 54.7 68.7 61.7 Slug Hvorslev 1.37E-05 0.039 NA NA GW-477B G Maynardville Limestone Conasauga 22.3 34.9 28.6 Slug Hvorslev 1.12E-05 0.032 NA NA GW-478A G Dismal Gap Formation Conasauga 66.9 81.3 74.1 Slug Hvorslev 9.81E-06 0.028 NA NA GW-478B G Dismal Gap Formation Conasauga 35.2 47.2 41.2 Slug Hvorslev 2.35E-05 0.067 NA NA GW-480A G Dismal Gap Formation Conasauga 33.6 37.6 35.6 Slug Hvorslev 2.86E-06 0.008 NA NA GW-480B G Maynardville Limestone Conasauga 28.6 32.6 30.6 Slug Hvorslev 5.23E-06 0.015 NA NA GW-481A G Dismal Gap Formation Conasauga 31.4 35.1 33.3 Slug Hvorslev 1.81E-04 0.513 NA NA GW-481B G Maynardville Limestone Conasauga 28.6 32.6 30.6 Slug Hvorslev 6.76E-06 0.019 NA NA GW-482A G Dismal Gap Formation Conasauga 32.7 36.7 34.7 Slug Hvorslev 1.82E-06 0.005 NA NA GW-482B G Maynardville Limestone Conasauga 26.2 30.2 28.2 Slug Hvorslev 2.29E-05 0.065 NA NA GW-483 G Maynardville Limestone Conasauga 18.4 28 23.2 Slug Hvorslev 3.27E-05 0.093 NA NA GW-474 G Dismal Gap Formation Conasauga 27.9 45.1 36.5 Pump Multiple 2.66E-05 0.075 2.26 NA GW-475B G Dismal Gap Formation Conasauga 49.9 62.9 56.4 Pump Multiple 2.88E-05 0.082 2.45 1.35E-04 GW-476B G Dismal Gap Formation Conasauga 36.9 49.4 43.2 Pump Multiple 6.47E-05 0.183 5.50 2.38E-04 GW-477B G Maynardville Limestone Conasauga 22.3 34.9 28.6 Pump Multiple 7.48E-05 0.212 6.36 7.92E-04 GW-478B G Dismal Gap Formation Conasauga 35.2 47.2 41.2 Pump Multiple 3.54E-05 0.100 3.01 1.64E-04 GW-471 G Dismal Gap Formation Conasauga 89.7 105.6 97.7 Pump Multiple 1.28E-05 0.036 0.72 1.47E-04 GW-473 G Dismal Gap Formation Conasauga 68.4 94.4 81.4 Pump Multiple 1.01E-05 0.029 0.57 NA GW-475A G Dismal Gap Formation Conasauga 86.4 99.7 93.1 Pump Multiple 1.23E-05 0.035 0.70 1.65E-03 GW-476A G Dismal Gap Formation Conasauga 69.9 83 76.5 Pump Multiple 1.14E-05 0.032 0.65 3.60E-05 GW-477A G Dismal Gap Formation Conasauga 54.7 68.7 61.7 Pump Multiple 1.63E-05 0.046 0.92 1.51E-04 GW-478A G Dismal Gap Formation Conasauga 67.9 81.3 74.6 Pump Multiple 1.00E-05 0.028 0.57 1.62E-04 GW-136 H Nolichucky Shale Conasauga 53 80 66.5 Packer Log-Log 6.10E-06 0.173 NA NA GW-136 H Nolichucky Shale Conasauga 113 140 126.5 Packer Log-Log 4.40E-06 0.012 NA NA GW-136 H Nolichucky Shale Conasauga 175 202 188.5 Packer Log-Log 4.50E-06 0.013 NA NA GW-136 H Nolichucky Shale Conasauga 216 243 229.5 Packer Log-Log 1.50E-06 0.004 NA NA GW-136 H Nolichucky Shale Conasauga 221 248 234.5 Packer Log-Log 2.80E-07 0.001 NA NA GW-136 H Nolichucky Shale Conasauga 283 310 296.5 Packer Log-Log 2.40E-05 0.068 NA NA 2.4.12-41 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report Table 2.4.12-1 (Sheet 13 of 16)

A Selection of Oak Ridge Reservation Published Bedrock Aquifer Testing Results Hydraulic Hydraulic Top Bottom Interval Cond. Cond.

Data Depth Depth Midpoint Test Interpretation Kavg Kavg Transmissivity(d) Storage Well Source Geologic Unit Group (ft bgs) (ft bgs) (ft bgs) Type Method (cm/s) (ft/d) (ft2/d) Coefficient(d)

GW-136 H Nolichucky Shale Conasauga 288 315 301.5 Packer Log-Log 3.90E-05 0.111 NA NA GW-136 H Nolichucky Shale Conasauga 420 447 433.5 Packer Log-Log 1.00E-05 0.028 NA NA GW-136 H Nolichucky Shale Conasauga 501 528 514.5 Packer Log-Log 4.20E-07 0.001 NA NA GW-137 H Nolichucky Shale Conasauga 337 364 350.5 Packer Log-Log 1.40E-04 0.397 NA NA GW-137 H Nolichucky Shale Conasauga 675 702 688.5 Packer Log-Log 1.30E-07 0.0004 NA NA GW-139 H Nolichucky Shale Conasauga 195 217 206.0 Packer Log-Log 5.90E-06 0.017 NA NA GW-139 H Nolichucky Shale Conasauga 300 322 311.0 Packer Log-Log 1.70E-06 0.005 NA NA GW-139 H Nolichucky Shale Conasauga 382 404 393.0 Packer Log-Log 2.70E-07 0.001 NA NA GW-401 H Nolichucky Shale Conasauga 125 147 136.0 Packer Log-Log 8.20E-06 0.023 NA NA GW-401 H Nolichucky Shale Conasauga 244 266 255.0 Packer Log-Log 1.50E-06 0.004 NA NA GW-401 H Nolichucky Shale Conasauga 266 288 277.0 Packer Log-Log 6.50E-06 0.018 NA NA GW-401 H Nolichucky Shale Conasauga 317 339 328.0 Packer Log-Log 7.80E-07 0.002 NA NA GW-401 H Nolichucky Shale Conasauga 386 408 397.0 Packer Log-Log 1.00E-05 0.028 NA NA GW-401 H Nolichucky Shale Conasauga 266 273 269.5 Packer Log-Log 9.50E-06 0.027 NA NA GW-401 H Nolichucky Shale Conasauga 273 280 276.5 Packer Log-Log 5.30E-05 0.150 NA NA GW-401 H Nolichucky Shale Conasauga 280 287 283.5 Packer Log-Log 3.00E-05 0.085 NA NA GW-401 H Nolichucky Shale Conasauga 386 393 389.5 Packer Log-Log 1.60E-05 0.045 NA NA GW-401 H Nolichucky Shale Conasauga 393 400 396.5 Packer Log-Log 2.70E-05 0.077 NA NA GW-401 H Nolichucky Shale Conasauga 400 407 403.5 Packer Log-Log 4.80E-07 0.001 NA NA GW-401 H Nolichucky Shale Conasauga 448 455 451.5 Packer Log-Log 3.80E-05 0.108 NA NA GW-402 H Nolichucky Shale Conasauga 110 137 123.5 Packer Log-Log 1.30E-05 0.037 NA NA GW-402 H Nolichucky Shale Conasauga 150 177 163.5 Packer Log-Log 2.50E-05 0.071 NA NA GW-402 H Nolichucky Shale Conasauga 192 219 205.5 Packer Log-Log 1.20E-06 0.003 NA NA GW-402 H Nolichucky Shale Conasauga 243 270 256.5 Packer Log-Log 2.40E-06 0.007 NA NA GW-402 H Nolichucky Shale Conasauga 270 297 283.5 Packer Log-Log 2.90E-07 0.001 NA NA GW-402 H Nolichucky Shale Conasauga 302 329 315.5 Packer Log-Log 4.60E-08 0.0001 NA NA GW-402 H Nolichucky Shale Conasauga 333 360 346.5 Packer Log-Log 5.50E-08 0.0002 NA NA GW-402 H Nolichucky Shale Conasauga 373 400 386.5 Packer Log-Log 1.20E-07 0.0003 NA NA GW-402 H Nolichucky Shale Conasauga 403 430 416.5 Packer Log-Log 2.70E-07 0.001 NA NA GW-402 H Nolichucky Shale Conasauga 525 552 538.5 Packer Log-Log 2.00E-07 0.001 NA NA GW-402 H Nolichucky Shale Conasauga 559 586 572.5 Packer Log-Log 4.40E-08 0.0001 NA NA GW-403 H Nolichucky Shale Conasauga 92 114 103 Packer Log-Log 1.60E-03 4.535 NA NA 2.4.12-42 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report Table 2.4.12-1 (Sheet 14 of 16)

A Selection of Oak Ridge Reservation Published Bedrock Aquifer Testing Results Hydraulic Hydraulic Top Bottom Interval Cond. Cond.

Data Depth Depth Midpoint Test Interpretation Kavg Kavg Transmissivity(d) Storage Well Source Geologic Unit Group (ft bgs) (ft bgs) (ft bgs) Type Method (cm/s) (ft/d) (ft2/d) Coefficient(d)

GW-403 H Nolichucky Shale Conasauga 160 182 171 Packer Log-Log 7.80E-06 0.022 NA NA GW-403 H Nolichucky Shale Conasauga 234 256 245 Packer Log-Log 9.10E-05 0.258 NA NA GW-403 H Nolichucky Shale Conasauga 275 297 286 Packer Log-Log 3.50E-05 0.099 NA NA GW-403 H Nolichucky Shale Conasauga 306 328 317 Packer Log-Log 4.90E-08 0.0001 NA NA GW-468 H Nolichucky Shale Conasauga 109 131 120 Packer Log-Log 1.70E-05 0.048 NA NA GW-468 H Nolichucky Shale Conasauga 138 160 149 Packer Log-Log 9.00E-05 0.255 NA NA GW-468 H Nolichucky Shale Conasauga 210 232 221 Packer Log-Log 3.40E-06 0.010 NA NA GW-468 H Nolichucky Shale Conasauga 279 301 290 Packer Log-Log 1.40E-06 0.004 NA NA GW-468 H Nolichucky Shale Conasauga 355 377 366 Packer Log-Log 1.80E-05 0.051 NA NA GW-468 H Nolichucky Shale Conasauga 413 435 424 Packer Log-Log 9.40E-09 0.00003 NA NA GW-468 H Nolichucky Shale Conasauga 465 487 476 Packer Log-Log 1.00E-07 0.0003 NA NA GW-468 H Nolichucky Shale Conasauga 109 116 112.5 Packer Log-Log 4.40E-05 0.125 NA NA GW-134 H Nolichucky Shale Conasauga 173 200 186.5 Packer Not Specified 2.87E-06 0.0081 NA NA GW-134 H Nolichucky Shale Conasauga 270 297 283.5 Packer Not Specified 1.74E-06 0.0049 NA NA GW-134 H Nolichucky Shale Conasauga 360 387 373.5 Packer Not Specified 5.14E-08 0.0001 NA NA GW-134 H Nolichucky Shale Conasauga 450 477 463.5 Packer Not Specified 3.17E-07 0.0009 NA NA GW-134 H Nolichucky Shale Conasauga 560 587 573.5 Packer Not Specified 4.26E-07 0.0012 NA NA GW-381 I Maynardville Limestone Conasauga 46.3 60.4 53.4 Pump Theis 3.33E-03 9.45 2834.78 2.78E-03 GW-153 I Maynardville Limestone Conasauga 49.5 59.5 54.5 Pump Theis 1.08E-02 30.52 9156.35 6.00E-03 GW-223 I Maynardville Limestone Conasauga 80 90 85.0 Pump Theis 1.51E-03 4.28 1284.16 1.62E-03 GW-151 I Maynardville Limestone Conasauga 86 96 91.0 Pump Theis 7.94E-04 2.25 674.68 4.72E-04 GW-750 I Maynardville Limestone Conasauga 61.2 72.7 67.0 Pump Theis 6.53E-04 1.85 555.62 1.93E-03 GW-735 I Maynardville Limestone Conasauga 67.9 78.1 73.0 Pump Theis 5.86E-04 1.66 498.92 1.50E-03 GW-734 I Maynardville Limestone Conasauga 59.4 Not Specified 59.4 Pump Theis 1.20E-03 3.40 1020.52 1.40E-03 GW-168 I Maynardville Limestone Conasauga 104 135.4 119.7 Pump Theis 2.65E-04 0.75 223.95 9.50E-05 GW-733 I Maynardville Limestone Conasauga 240.1 256.5 248.3 Pump Theis 1.48E-04 0.42 125.30 3.80E-04 GW-722 I Maynardville Limestone Conasauga 333 333 333.0 Pump Theis 9.17E-05 0.26 78.52 1.69E-05 4434 J Rome Formation(f) Rome(f) 49.75(e) 83.35(e) 66.6(e) Slug Bouwer-Rice 4.57E-04 1.30 NA NA 4435 J Rome Formation(f) Rome(f) 62.41(e) 79.9(e) 71.2(e) Slug Bouwer-Rice 7.70E-04 2.18 NA NA 4436 J Rome Formation(f) Rome(f) 46.17(e) 65(e) 55.6(e) Slug Bouwer-Rice 5.83E-05 0.17 NA NA 4437 J Rome Formation(f) Rome(f) 43.47(e) 63.77(e) 53.6(e) Slug Bouwer-Rice 8.33E-04 2.36 NA NA GW-838 J Rome Formation(f) Rome(f) 19.12(e) 35.45(e) 27.3(e) Slug Bouwer-Rice 7.58E-04 2.15 NA NA 2.4.12-43 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report Table 2.4.12-1 (Sheet 15 of 16)

A Selection of Oak Ridge Reservation Published Bedrock Aquifer Testing Results Hydraulic Hydraulic Top Bottom Interval Cond. Cond.

Data Depth Depth Midpoint Test Interpretation Kavg Kavg Transmissivity(d) Storage Well Source Geologic Unit Group (ft bgs) (ft bgs) (ft bgs) Type Method (cm/s) (ft/d) (ft2/d) Coefficient(d)

BRW-115(b) K Not Specified Knox(f) 88.8 98.8 93.8 Slug Bouwer-Rice 1.08E-03 3.06 NA NA (b)

BRW-116 K Not Specified Knox(f) 45 55 50.0 Slug Bouwer-Rice 3.73E-03 10.56 NA NA BRW-117(b) K Not Specified Knox(f) 38.1 43.1 40.6 Slug Bouwer-Rice 2.35E-02 66.76 NA NA BRW-118(b) K Rome Formation(f) Rome(f) 45 65 55.0 Slug Bouwer-Rice 6.48E-05 0.18 NA NA (f)

UA-1 L Not Specified Conasauga 41.6 50.5 46.1 Slug Cooper 2.26E-05 0.064 0.57 NA UA-2 L Not Specified Conasauga(f) 142 169 155.5 Slug Cooper 3.88E-09 0.00001 0.0003 NA UB-1 L Dismal Gap Formation(f) Conasauga(f) 25.9 35.5 30.7 Slug Cooper 1.48E-04 0.420 4 NA (f)

UB-2 L Dismal Gap Formation Conasauga(f) 101 126.1 113.6 Slug Cooper 5.29E-07 0.002 0.037 NA UC-1 L Rome Formation(f) Rome(f) 77 86.2 81.6 Slug Cooper 9.17E-05 0.260 2.4 NA UC-2 L Not Specified Chickamauga(f) 188.2 206.7 197.5 Slug Cooper 8.11E-06 0.023 0.42 NA UD-2 L Pumpkin Valley Shale(f) Conasauga(f) 180 205 192.5 Slug Cooper 3.32E-09 0.00001 0.00023 NA UE-1 L Dismal Gap Formation(f) Conasauga(f) 69.2 76.7 73.0 Slug Cooper 1.59E-04 0.450 3.4 NA UE-2 L Dismal Gap Formation(f) Conasauga(f) 175.7 197.7 186.7 Slug Cooper 3.88E-08 0.0001 0.0023 NA UF-1 L Dismal Gap Formation(f) Conasauga(f) 16.5 23.5 20.0 Slug Cooper 8.47E-04 2.400 17 NA UG-1 L Nolichucky Shale(f) Conasauga(f) 25 32 28.5 Slug Cooper 3.03E-04 0.860 6.1 NA UG-2 L Dismal Gap Formation(f) Conasauga(f) 242 300 271.0 Slug Cooper 1.73E-09 0.000005 0.00028 NA UG-3 L Dismal Gap Formation(f) Conasauga(f) 180 200 190.0 Slug Cooper 1.09E-06 0.003 0.063 NA UH-1 L Nolichucky Shale(f) Conasauga(f) 19 26 22.5 Slug Cooper 1.06E-04 0.30 2.1 NA UH-2 L Nolichucky Shale(f) Conasauga(f) 231 288 259.5 Slug Cooper 3.53E-09 0.00001 0.00059 NA UI-1 L Nolichucky Shale(f) Conasauga(f) 18 25 21.5 Slug Cooper 2.65E-04 0.75 5.2 NA (f) (f)

UI-2 L Nolichucky Shale Conasauga 188 210 199.0 Slug Cooper 5.29E-08 0.0002 0.0034 NA HHMS1B L Not Specified Conasauga(f) 182.3 201.2 191.8 Slug Cooper 2.01E-05 0.057 1.1 NA HHMS1C L Not Specified Conasauga(f) 63.7 101 82.4 Slug Cooper 2.82E-05 0.08 3 NA HHMS2A L Not Specified Conasauga(f) 380 400.6 390.3 Slug Cooper 1.38E-07 0.0004 0.008 NA HHMS2B L Not Specified Conasauga(f) 180.6 200.6 190.6 Slug Cooper 2.29E-06 0.007 0.13 NA HHMS2C L Not Specified Conasauga(f) 62.3 81.1 71.7 Slug Cooper 1.34E-05 0.038 0.72 NA HHMS3A L Not Specified Conasauga(f) 380.5 399.1 389.8 Slug Cooper 1.90E-07 0.0005 0.01 NA HHMS3B L Not Specified Conasauga(f) 189.7 211.6 200.7 Slug Cooper 2.36E-07 0.0007 0.0015 NA HHMS3C L Not Specified Conasauga(f) 62 80.6 71.3 Slug Cooper 1.48E-05 0.042 0.78 NA HHMS4B L Not Specified Conasauga(f) 174.3 215.3 194.8 Slug Cooper 1.13E-05 0.032 1.3 NA HHMS5B L Not Specified Conasauga(f) 196.1 219.5 207.8 Slug Cooper 4.23E-06 0.012 0.29 NA HHMS5C L Not Specified Conasauga(f) 42.1 63 52.6 Slug Cooper 5.64E-05 0.16 3.4 NA 2.4.12-44 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report Table 2.4.12-1 (Sheet 16 of 16)

A Selection of Oak Ridge Reservation Published Bedrock Aquifer Testing Results Hydraulic Hydraulic Top Bottom Interval Cond. Cond.

Data Depth Depth Midpoint Test Interpretation Kavg Kavg Transmissivity(d) Storage Well Source Geologic Unit Group (ft bgs) (ft bgs) (ft bgs) Type Method (cm/s) (ft/d) (ft2/d) Coefficient(d)

HHMS6B L Not Specified Conasauga(f) 145 165.4 155.2 Slug Cooper 5.64E-06 0.016 0.32 NA HHMS6C L Not Specified Conasauga(f) 40.8 60.8 50.8 Slug Cooper 4.59E-05 0.13 2.7 NA (a) Not included in analysis because depth information is missing (b) Average of rising and falling tests or geometric mean of two interpretation methods (c) Multiple zones screened (d) Where multiple aquifer pumping test interpretations are available, the Theis method results are reported (e) Depths are relative to top of casing (f) Geologic unit and/or group estimated based on available geologic information Notes:

NA = Not Available Maryville Limestone has been re-designated Dismal Gap Formation and Rutledge Limestone has been re-designated Friendship Formation Repeated Test Results Corrected Well Number or depth Sources:

A Reference 2.4.12-40, Table F.10 B Reference 2.4.12-37 C Reference 2.4.12-41, Table D.1 D Reference 2.4.12-39, Table 14 E Reference 2.4.12-38, Tables 25 and 26 F Reference 2.4.12-42, Table 2 G Reference 2.4.12-43, Tables 4.2, 4.3, 4.4, 4.5, 8.1, 9.1, and 9.2 H Reference 2.4.12-44, Tables A.1 and A.2 I Reference 2.4.12-45, Table 4.2 J Reference 2.4.12-46 K Reference 2.4.12-47, Appendix B L Reference 2.4.12-3, Table 2 2.4.12-45 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report Table 2.4.12-2 Summary of Hydrogeologic Properties on the ORR Residuum/Stormflow Zone Property Conditions Value Grassland 0.2 to 0.4 m Stormflow zone thickness Forest 0.6 to 2.0 m Grassland 1.1 m/d Infiltration Capacity Forest 8.8 m/d Total porosity General 0.4 Specific yield General 0.035 Hydraulic conductivity General 9.2 m/d Hydraulic gradient General 0.075 Discharge rate General 0 to 110 L/s*km2 Groundwater Zone Property Knox aquifer ORR aquitards Thickness Permeable interval - 1.5 m Low-permeability interval - 12 m Water table fluctuation 5.3 m 1.5 m Total porosity (matrix) - 9.6 x 10-3 Fracture porosity - 5.0 x 10-4 Specific yield 3.3 x 10-3 2.3 x 10-3 Fractures Spacing - 35 cm Aperture 0.25 mm 0.12 mm Unfractured rock matrix hydraulic

- 8.7 x 10-8 m/d conductivity Low-permeability intervals Transmissivity - 1.1 x 10-3 m2/d Hydraulic conductivity - 4.0 x 10-4 m/d Permeable intervals Transmissivity 1.0 m2/d 0.12 m2/d Hydraulic conductivity - 0.068 m/d Continuum Transmissivity 7.0 m2/d 0.75 m2/d Hydraulic conductivity - 0.18 m/d Hydraulic gradient 0.02 0.05 Average recharge 65 mm 20 mm 2

Maximum discharge 1030 L/min*km 280 L/min*km2 Average discharge 120 L/min*km2 38 L/min*km2 Adapted from Reference 2.4.12-12 ORR = Oak Ridge Reservation Dash (-) = No information.

2.4.12-46 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report Table 2.4.12-3 (Sheet 1 of 6)

Clinch River Breeder Reactor Project Investigation Packer Test Results Total Hydraulic Hydraulic Hydraulic Test Test Flow Head Conductivity Conductivity Conductivity Section Length Cp Q H K(a) K(b) K(b) Geologic Boring Date (ftbgs) (ft) (ft2/gpm-yr) (gpm) (ft) (ft/yr) (ft/d) (cm/s) Horizon(c) Geologic Strata(d) 10/2/1973 24-298 274 320 8.9 68.6 42 0.12 4.06E-05 U.A.S.S. Chickamauga Group 9/28/1973 30-298 268 325 10.1 64.7 51 0.14 4.93E-05 U.A.S.S. Chickamauga Group 9/28/1973 50-298 248 350 8.4 64.7 45 0.12 4.35E-05 U.A.S.S. Chickamauga Group 9/29/1973 70-298 228 380 8.6 99.4 33 0.09 3.19E-05 U.A.S.S. Chickamauga Group B-26 (g) 1973 90-298 208 420 4.9 61.7 33 0.09 3.19E-05 U.A.S.S. Chickamauga Group 10/2/1973 110-298 188 450 5.5 67.1 37 0.10 3.57E-05 U.A.S.S. Chickamauga Group 10/2/1973 150-298 148 540 7.2 67.1 58 0.16 5.60E-05 A.L.S. Chickamauga Group 10/2/1973 220-298 78 920 6.9 67.1 95 0.26 9.18E-05 L.A.S.S. Chickamauga Group 11/8/1973 35-245 210 410 3.5 47.6 30 0.08 2.90E-05 A.L.S. Chickamauga Group 11/8/1973 60-245 185 460 2.8 47.6 27 0.07 2.61E-05 A.L.S. Chickamauga Group B-27 11/8/1973 80-245 165 500 2.3 70.7 16 0.04 1.55E-05 A.L.S. Chickamauga Group 11/8/1973 100-245 145 550 1.1 70.7 9 0.02 8.69E-06 A.L.S. Chickamauga Group 11/8/1973 120-245 125 620 0.8 70.7 7 0.02 6.76E-06 L.A.S.S. Chickamauga Group 11/13/1973 16-25 9 5300 8.7 44.6 1040(e) 2.85 1.00E-03 U.A.S.S. Chickamauga Group 11/13/1973 19-28 9 5300 8.8 41.6 980(e) 2.68 9.47E-04 U.A.S.S. Chickamauga Group B-28 11/13/1973 27-36 9 5300 3.1 55.6 298(e) 0.82 2.88E-04 U.A.S.S. Chickamauga Group 11/13/1973 50-271 221 390 0.47 65.1 2.8 0.01 2.70E-06 U.A.S.S. Chickamauga Group 11/13/1973 90-271 181 470 0.96 65.1 6.9 0.02 6.66E-06 U.A.S.S. Chickamauga Group 11/12/1973 30-335 305 290 2.5 61.1 11.9 0.03 1.15E-05 U.A.S.S. Chickamauga Group 11/12/1973 40-335 295 300 0.21 84.2 0.75 0.002 7.24E-07 U.A.S.S. Chickamauga Group B-29 11/12/1973 50-335 285 305 0.76 107.3 2.2 0.01 2.12E-06 U.A.S.S. Chickamauga Group 11/12/1973 80-335 255 340 4.45 130.4 11.6 0.03 1.12E-05 U.A.S.S. Chickamauga Group 2.4.12-47 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report Table 2.4.12-3 (Sheet 2 of 6)

Clinch River Breeder Reactor Project Investigation Packer Test Results Total Hydraulic Hydraulic Hydraulic Test Test Flow Head Conductivity Conductivity Conductivity Section Length Cp Q H K(a) K(b) K(b) Geologic Boring Date (ftbgs) (ft) (ft2/gpm-yr) (gpm) (ft) (ft/yr) (ft/d) (cm/s) Horizon(c) Geologic Strata(d) 12/4/1973 11-20 9 5300 11.3 39.6 1510(e) 4.14 1.46E-03 U.A.S.S. Chickamauga Group 12/5/1973 20-253.5 233.5 370 14.8 68.1 80 0.22 7.73E-05 U.A.S.S. Chickamauga Group B-30 12/5/1973 65-253.5 188.5 450 9.9 68.1 65 0.18 6.28E-05 U.A.S.S. Chickamauga Group 12/5/1973 88-253.5 165.5 500 2.2 91.2 12 0.03 1.16E-05 U.A.S.S. Chickamauga Group 12/5/1973 144-253.5 139.5 560 0.5 91.2 3.1 0.01 2.99E-06 A.L.S. Chickamauga Group 11/1/1973 82-91 9 5300 12.5 89.5 740 2.03 7.15E-04 A.L.S. Chickamauga Group 11/1/1973 92-101 9 5300 12 89.5 711 1.95 6.87E-04 A.L.S. Chickamauga Group B-31 11/1/1973 101-110 9 5300 12 89.5 711 1.95 6.87E-04 A.L.S. Chickamauga Group (e) 10/21/1973 110-252 142 560 1.8 89.5 112 0.31 1.08E-04 L.A.S.S. Chickamauga Group 10/30/1973 45.5-54.5 9 5300 12.2 73.1 885 2.42 8.55E-04 A.L.S. Chickamauga Group 10/30/1973 54.5-63.5 9 5300 12.1 82.1 781 2.14 7.54E-04 A.L.S. Chickamauga Group 10/30/1973 56-65 9 5300 11.5 83.1 733 2.01 7.08E-04 A.L.S. Chickamauga Group A.L.S./

10/29/1973 92.5-248 155.5 520 6 84.1 37 0.10 3.57E-05 Chickamauga Group B-34 L.A.S.S.

10/29/1973 105-248 143 550 2 84.1 13 0.04 1.26E-05 L.A.S.S. Chickamauga Group 10/29/1973 130-248 118 660 1.8 84.1 14 0.04 1.35E-05 L.A.S.S. Chickamauga Group 10/29/1973 165-248 83 880 1.6 84.1 17 0.05 1.64E-05 L.A.S.S. Chickamauga Group 10/29/1973 172-248 76 950 4.5 84.1 51 0.14 4.93E-05 L.A.S.S. Chickamauga Group A.L.S./

10/27/1973 51.5-284 232.5 375 6.2 34.6 67 0.18 6.47E-05 Chickamauga Group L.A.S.S.

10/27/1973 95-284 189 450 4.9 41.6 53 0.15 5.12E-05 L.A.S.S. Chickamauga Group 10/26/1973 130-284 154 525 4.8 51.6 49 0.13 4.73E-05 L.A.S.S. Chickamauga Group B-35 10/27/1973 169-284 115 670 3.3 51.6 42(e) 0.12 4.06E-05 L.A.S.S. Chickamauga Group 10/27/1973 218-284 66 1080 2.7 51.6 57 0.16 5.51E-05 L.A.S.S. Chickamauga Group L.A.S.S./ Chickamauga Group/

10/27/1973 238-284 46 1450 2 74.7 39 0.11 3.77E-05 Knox Knox Group 2.4.12-48 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report Table 2.4.12-3 (Sheet 3 of 6)

Clinch River Breeder Reactor Project Investigation Packer Test Results Total Hydraulic Hydraulic Hydraulic Test Test Flow Head Conductivity Conductivity Conductivity Section Length Cp Q H K(a) K(b) K(b) Geologic Boring Date (ftbgs) (ft) (ft2/gpm-yr) (gpm) (ft) (ft/yr) (ft/d) (cm/s) Horizon(c) Geologic Strata(d) 11/1/1973 36.5-274.5 238 365 3.9 123.2 12 0.03 1.16E-05 L.A.S.S. Chickamauga Group 11/1/1973 50-274.5 244.5 385 4.4 123.2 14 0.04 1.35E-05 L.A.S.S. Chickamauga Group B-36 11/1/1973 70-274.5 204.5 420 3.1 123.2 11 0.03 1.06E-05 L.A.S.S. Chickamauga Group 11/1/1973 90-274.5 184.5 460 2.6 123.2 10 0.03 9.66E-06 L.A.S.S. Chickamauga Group 11/1/1973 110-274.5 164.5 500 3 123.2 12 0.03 1.16E-05 L.A.S.S. Chickamauga Group 10/4/1973 41-47.5 - - 0 - 0 0 0 B Chickamauga Group 10/4/1973 44.5-51 - - 0 - 0 0 0 B Chickamauga Group 10/3/1973 70-380.9 - - 0 - 0 0 0 B Chickamauga Group B-38 10/3/1973 100-380.9 - - 0 - 0 0 0 B Chickamauga Group 10/3/1973 140-380.9 - - 0 - 0 0 0 U.A.S.S. Chickamauga Group 10/3/1973 170-380.9 - - 0 - 0 0 0 U.A.S.S. Chickamauga Group 10/3/1973 190-380.9 - - 0 - 0 0 0 U.A.S.S. Chickamauga Group (e) 11/9/1973 20-29 9 5300 4 87.8 242 0.66 2.34E-04 U.A.S.S. Chickamauga Group (e) 11/8/1973 28.5-329 300.5 290 7.5 64.7 33.5 0.09 3.24E-05 U.A.S.S. Chickamauga Group 11/8/1973 50-329 279 310 5.5 64.7 26.4 0.07 2.55E-05 U.A.S.S. Chickamauga Group B-39 11/8/1973 65-329 264 330 5.1 64.7 26.0 0.07 2.51E-05 U.A.S.S. Chickamauga Group 11/8/1973(f)85-329 244 360 1.03 87.6 4.2 0.01 4.06E-06 U.A.S.S. Chickamauga Group 11/8/1973(f)85-329 244 360 2.32 110.9 7.5 0.02 7.24E-06 U.A.S.S. Chickamauga Group 2.4.12-49 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report Table 2.4.12-3 (Sheet 4 of 6)

Clinch River Breeder Reactor Project Investigation Packer Test Results Total Hydraulic Hydraulic Hydraulic Test Test Flow Head Conductivity Conductivity Conductivity Section Length Cp Q H K(a) K(b) K(b) Geologic Boring Date (ftbgs) (ft) (ft2/gpm-yr) (gpm) (ft) (ft/yr) (ft/d) (cm/s) Horizon(c) Geologic Strata(d) 9/25/1973 30-39 9 5300 9.8 59.6 871 2.39 8.41E-04 A.L.S. Chickamauga Group 9/25/1973 36-45 9 5300 5.8 65.6 471(e) 1.29 4.55E-04 A.L.S. Chickamauga Group 9/25/1973 46-55 9 5300 9.1 75.6 637(e) 1.75 6.15E-04 A.L.S. Chickamauga Group 9/25/1973 57.5-66.5 9 5300 2.1 87.1 128 0.35 1.24E-04 A.L.S. Chickamauga Group 9/25/1973 68.5-77.5 9 5300 9.5 106.9 470(e) 1.29 4.54E-04 A.L.S. Chickamauga Group 9/24/1973 81-90 9 5300 2 125.2 85 0.23 8.21E-05 A.L.S. Chickamauga Group B-40 9/24/1973 91-100 9 5300 0.5 102.1 26 0.07 2.51E-05 A.L.S. Chickamauga Group 9/24/1973 101-110 9 5300 2.1 105.1 108(e) 0.30 1.04E-04 A.L.S. Chickamauga Group 9/23/1973 110-314 204 420 5.5 124 19 0.05 1.84E-05 L.A.S.S. Chickamauga Group 9/23/1973 140-314 174 480 6.1 101.6 29 0.08 2.80E-05 L.A.S.S. Chickamauga Group 9/23/1973 184-314 130 600 6.1 101.1 36 0.10 3.48E-05 L.A.S.S. Chickamauga Group 9/23/1973 220-314 94 800 5.2 106.1 39 0.11 3.77E-05 L.A.S.S. Chickamauga Group 9/23/1973 259.5-314 54.5 1250 3.2 106.1 38 0.10 3.67E-05 Knox Knox Group 11/5/1973 60-301.5 241.5 360 2.92 101.1 10 0.03 9.66E-06 B Chickamauga Group 11/5/1973 85-301.5 216.5 400 0 - 0 0 0 B Chickamauga Group B-42 11/5/1973 140-301.5 161.5 500 1.22 101.1 6 0.02 5.80E-06 B/U.A.S.S. Chickamauga Group 11/5/1973 150-301.5 151.5 530 1.54 101.1 8 0.02 7.73E-06 U.A.S.S. Chickamauga Group 11/6/1973 30-78.9 48.9 1380 6.24 77.9 111 0.30 1.07E-04 U.A.S.S. Chickamauga Group B-46 11/6/1973 65-78.9 13.9 3900 0.15 101 6 0.02 5.80E-06 U.A.S.S. Chickamauga Group 12/4/1973 83-92 9 5300 6 83.7 380 1.04 3.67E-04 A.L.S. Chickamauga Group 12/3/1973 89-98 9 5300 4.8 83.7 304 0.83 2.94E-04 A.L.S. Chickamauga Group 12/3/1973 98-107 9 5300 11.0 83.7 697 1.91 6.73E-04 A.L.S. Chickamauga Group B-47 11/30/1973 108-370 262 340 3.7 83.7 15 0.04 1.45E-05 L.A.S.S. Chickamauga Group 11/30/1973 115-370 255 340 3.1 106.8 10 0.03 9.66E-06 L.A.S.S. Chickamauga Group 11/30/1973 140-370 230 380 1.1 106.8 4 0.01 3.86E-06 L.A.S.S. Chickamauga Group 11/30/1973 150-370 220 400 1.2 106.8 4 0.01 3.86E-06 L.A.S.S. Chickamauga Group 2.4.12-50 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report Table 2.4.12-3 (Sheet 5 of 6)

Clinch River Breeder Reactor Project Investigation Packer Test Results Total Hydraulic Hydraulic Hydraulic Test Test Flow Head Conductivity Conductivity Conductivity Section Length Cp Q H K(a) K(b) K(b) Geologic Boring Date (ftbgs) (ft) (ft2/gpm-yr) (gpm) (ft) (ft/yr) (ft/d) (cm/s) Horizon(c) Geologic Strata(d) 9/20/1973 33-114 81 900 2.5 52.4 43 0.12 4.15E-05 B Chickamauga Group 9/20/1973 43-114 71 1000 1.4 53.1 27(e) 0.07 2.61E-05 B Chickamauga Group B-48

-- 56-114 58 1200 0.7 60.9 14 0.04 1.35E-05 B Chickamauga Group 9/17/1973 85-114 29 2000 0.5 68.6 15 0.04 1.45E-05 U.A.S.S. Chickamauga Group 11/7/1973 57.5-144 86.5 860 10.8 94.9 98 0.27 9.47E-05 B Chickamauga Group 11/7/1973 70-144 74 980 2.2 118 18 0.05 1.74E-05 B Chickamauga Group B-49 11/7/1973 85-144 59 - 0 - 0 0 0 B Chickamauga Group 11/6/1973 110-144 34 - 0 - 0 0 0 U.A.S.S. Chickamauga Group 11/2/1973 78-241 163 500 2.7 91.1 15 0.04 1.45E-05 B Chickamauga Group 11/2/1973 90-241 151 535 2.6 91.1 15 0.04 1.45E-05 B Chickamauga Group B-50 11/2/1973 100-241 141 560 2.6 91.1 16 0.04 1.55E-05 B Chickamauga Group 11/2/1973 201-241 40 1650 1.4 91.1 25 0.07 2.41E-05 U.A.S.S. Chickamauga Group 11/20/1973 31-40 9 5300 1 60.6 91(e) 0.25 8.79E-05 A.L.S. Chickamauga Group 11/20/1973 36.5-45.5 9 5300 0.46 66.1 37 0.10 3.57E-05 A.L.S. Chickamauga Group 11/20/1973 45.5-54.5 9 5300 0.11 75.1 8 0.02 7.73E-06 A.L.S. Chickamauga Group B-51 11/20/1973 34.5-63.5 9 5300 17.2 82.1 1110 3.04 1.07E-03 A.L.S. Chickamauga Group 11/20/1973 83-338.5 255.5 340 2.67 105.2 9 0.02 8.69E-06 A.L.S. Chickamauga Group A.L.S./

11/20/1973 100-338.5 238.5 365 1.86 105.2 6 0.02 5.80E-06 Chickamauga Group L.A.S.S.

11/29/1973 53-200 147 540 0.15 131.7 0.6 0.002 5.80E-07 Knox Knox Group B-53 11/29/1973 90-200 110 700 0.15 108.6 1 0.003 9.66E-07 Knox Knox Group 11/29/1973 37-101 64 1100 0.12 92.9 1.4 0.004 1.35E-06 Knox Knox Group B-66 11/29/1973 50-101 51 1350 0.08 92.9 1.2 0.003 1.16E-06 Knox Knox Group 11/29/1973 73-101 28 2200 0.12 92.9 2.8 0.01 2.70E-06 Knox Knox Group 2.4.12-51 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report Table 2.4.12-3 (Sheet 6 of 6)

Clinch River Breeder Reactor Project Investigation Packer Test Results Total Hydraulic Hydraulic Hydraulic Test Test Flow Head Conductivity Conductivity Conductivity Section Length Cp Q H K(a) K(b) K(b) Geologic Boring Date (ftbgs) (ft) (ft2/gpm-yr) (gpm) (ft) (ft/yr) (ft/d) (cm/s) Horizon(c) Geologic Strata(d) 11/17/1973 24-33 9 5300 0.08 76.3 5.6 0.02 5.41E-06 Knox Knox Group 11/17/1973 33-42 9 5300 0 - 0 0 0 Knox Knox Group 11/17/1973 42-51 9 5300 0 - 0 0 0 Knox Knox Group B-67 11/17/1973 51-60 9 5300 9.1 59.7 807(e) 2.21 7.79E-04 Knox Knox Group 11/16/1973 40-100 60 1180 9.2 59.7 182 0.50 1.76E-04 Knox Knox Group 11/15/1973 61-100 39 - 0 - 0 0 0 Knox Knox Group Explanation:

Q (a) K = Cp H

(b) Hydraulic conductivity in ft/yr (Table 24-17 of Reference 2.4.12-1) converted to ft/d by dividing by 365 and converted to cm/s by multiplying by 9.6590 x 10-7 (c) Geologic Horizon from (Table 24-17 of Reference 2.4.12-1)

U.A.S.S. = Upper Unit A Siltstone A.L.S. = Unit A Limestone L.A.S.S. = Lower Unit A Siltston B = Unit B Limestone Knox = Knox Group (d) Geologic Strata nomenclature used in current investigation (e) Yellow highlighted values indicate discrepancy between values reported on (Table 24-17 of Reference 2.4.12-1) and values calculated using the formula shown above (f) Orange highlighted values are duplicate teststhe maximum value is used in hydraulic conductivity analysis (g) Exact date unknown Notes:

Dash (-) = No information 2.4.12-52 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report Table 2.4.12-4 (Sheet 1 of 2)

Well Construction Summary Top of Top of Top of Bottom of Bottom of Bottom of Bentonite Seal Filter Pack Screen Screen Well Cap Borehole Top of Top of Ground Depth Depth Well Depth Depth Depth Depth Casing Concrete Surface below below Casing Well Screen below below below below Northing Easting Geologic Elevation Elevation Elevation Ground Elevation Ground Elevation Diameter Casing Well Slot Size Ground Elevation Ground Elevation Ground Elevation Ground Elevation Well (NAD 83) (NAD 83) Unit(a) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (ft) (NAVD88) (ft) (NAVD88) (inches) Schedule Material (inches) (ft) (NAVD88) (ft) (NAVD88) (ft) (NAVD88) (ft) (NAVD88)

OW-101U 570235.5 2448339.3 Benbolt 803.72 800.73 800.58 15.0 785.6 21.4 779.2 2 40 PVC 0.020 26.0 774.6 46.0 754.6 46.5 754.1 50.0 750.6 OW-101L 570262.0 2448370.8 Rockdell 803.48 800.81 800.66 126.6 674.1 133.6 667.1 2 80 PVC 0.020 138.0 662.7 158.0 642.7 158.5 642.2 161.0 639.7 OW-101D 570274.9 2448386.4 Rockdell 803.57 800.82 800.65 219.2 581.5 225.8 574.9 2 80 PVC 0.020 230.5 570.2 250.5 550.2 251.0 549.7 261.5 539.2 OW-202U 570946.0 2448081.1 Fleanor 815.38 812.11 811.83 4.3 807.5 11.1 800.7 2 40 PVC 0.020 15.7 796.1 35.7 776.1 36.2 775.6 39.0 772.8 OW-202L 570934.2 2448064.9 Fleanor 815.05 812.23 811.97 141.1 670.9 147.0 665.0 2 80 PVC 0.020 150.5 661.5 170.5 641.5 171.0 641.0 173.0 639.0 OW-202D 570909.7 2448033.7 Eidson 815.00 812.21 812.10 260.0 552.1 273.0 539.1 2 80 PVC 0.020 276.4 535.7 296.4 515.7 296.9 515.2 303.0 509.1 OW-401U 571967.9 2447619.9 Newala 820.48 817.55 817.39 5.2 812.2 10.5 806.9 2 40 PVC 0.020 15.2 802.2 35.2 782.2 35.7 781.7 37.5 779.9 OW-401L 571973.8 2447628.0 Newala 820.57 817.47 817.22 126.7 690.5 130.8 686.4 2 80 PVC 0.020 135.2 682.0 155.2 662.0 155.7 661.5 159.3 657.9 OW-401D 571941.2 2447589.7 Newala 821.28 818.41 818.17 215.6 602.6 221.9 596.3 2 80 PVC 0.020 226.6 591.6 246.6 571.6 247.1 571.1 251.7 566.5 OW-409U 570557.1 2448130.3 Rockdell 809.70 807.12 806.91 44.4 762.5 52.4 754.5 2 40 PVC 0.020 54.9 752.0 74.9 732.0 75.4 731.5 78.0 728.9 OW-409L 570570.8 2448143.3 Rockdell 809.51 806.82 806.67 82.7 724.0 86.6 720.1 2 40 PVC 0.020 89.1 717.6 109.1 697.6 109.6 697.1 112.0 694.7 OW-415U 569590.2 2448180.2 Bowen/ 787.22 784.41 784.13 19.5 764.6 24.1 760.0 2 40 PVC 0.020 28.1 756.0 48.1 736.0 48.6 735.5 51.1 733.0 Benbolt OW-415L 569564.4 2448148.1 Benbolt 786.75 783.93 783.65 146.9 636.8 151.9 631.8 2 80 PVC 0.020 154.9 628.8 174.9 608.8 175.4 608.3 177.4 606.3 OW-416U 569990.0 2447535.9 Rockdell 812.82 809.82 809.54 67.6 741.9 71.8 737.7 2 40 PVC 0.020 75.4 734.1 95.4 714.1 95.9 713.6 97.5 712.0 OW-416L 569965.2 2447504.9 Rockdell 812.73 809.72 809.43 98.4 711.0 107.6 701.8 2 40 PVC 0.020 110.6 698.8 130.6 678.8 131.1 678.3 133.0 676.4 OW-417U 569927.1 2446646.9 Fleanor 775.03 772.36 772.20 40.4 731.8 46.7 725.5 2 40 PVC 0.020 50.0 722.2 70.0 702.2 70.5 701.7 73.1 699.1 OW-417L 569903.0 2446614.6 Fleanor 775.71 772.78 772.65 81.8 690.9 91.5 681.2 2 40 PVC 0.020 95.0 677.7 115.0 657.7 115.5 657.2 118.0 654.7 OW-418U 570526.8 2447065.0 Eidson 812.94 810.30 810.01 78.0 732.0 90.1 719.9 2 40 PVC 0.020 95.0 715.0 105.0 705.0 105.5 704.5 108.0 702.0 OW-418L 570506.0 2447038.8 Blackford 814.41 811.80 811.44 124.9 686.5 133.6 677.8 2 80 PVC 0.020 136.8 674.6 156.8 654.6 157.3 654.1 160.0 651.4 OW-419U 571283.4 2446716.1 Newala 803.13 800.21 799.98 48.8 751.2 54.4 745.6 2 40 PVC 0.020 57.2 742.8 77.2 722.8 77.7 722.3 79.6 720.4 OW-419L 571257.7 2446683.4 Newala 802.72 799.89 799.75 90.5 709.3 101.0 698.8 2 40 PVC 0.020 104.5 695.3 124.5 675.3 125.0 674.8 126.5 673.3 OW-420U 572009.6 2446886.0 Newala 805.70 803.10 802.85 15.0 787.9 21.2 781.7 2 40 PVC 0.020 26.0 776.9 46.0 756.9 46.5 756.4 48.5 754.4 OW-420L 572021.1 2446902.0 Newala 806.15 803.31 803.07 120.0 683.1 127.4 675.7 2 40 PVC 0.020 130.9 672.2 150.9 652.2 151.4 651.7 152.4 650.7 OW-421U 570557.7 2446471.7 Blackford 808.27 805.55 805.36 41.2 764.2 51.4 754.0 2 40 PVC 0.020 55.0 750.4 75.0 730.4 75.5 729.9 78.0 727.4 OW-421L 570544.2 2446455.6 Blackford/ 807.81 805.05 804.78 92.4 712.4 101.0 703.8 2 40 PVC 0.020 104.8 700.0 124.8 680.0 125.3 679.5 128.0 676.8 Newala OW-421D 570520.1 2446424.4 Newala 805.20 802.63 802.49 165.2 637.3 172.8 629.7 2 80 PVC 0.020 175.7 626.8 195.7 606.8 196.2 606.3 198.0 604.5 OW-422U 570450.2 2448763.8 Benbolt 804.90 - 802.40 9.7 792.7 17.9 784.5 2 40 PVC 0.020 21.0 781.4 41.0 761.4 41.5 760.9 44.0 758.4 OW-422L 570438.1 2448748.1 Benbolt 803.70 - 801.70 147.3 654.4 155.2 646.5 2 80 PVC 0.020 158.0 643.7 178.0 623.7 178.5 623.2 181.0 620.7 OW-422D 570444.3 2448756.2 Rockdell 805.40 - 802.10 281.2 520.9 286.2 515.9 2 80 PVC 0.020 290.0 512.1 310.0 492.1 310.5 491.6 313.0 489.1 OW-423U 571494.1 2448309.5 Eidson 800.21 797.53 797.41 31.5 765.9 39.1 758.3 2 40 PVC 0.020 42.2 755.2 62.2 735.2 62.7 734.7 65.0 732.4 OW-423L 571481.6 2448293.2 Blackford 801.13 798.33 798.02 127.9 670.1 136.6 661.4 2 80 PVC 0.020 139.6 658.4 159.6 638.4 160.1 637.9 163.0 635.0 OW-423D 571457.9 2448262.0 Blackford 802.86 800.13 799.89 236.9 563.0 244.2 555.7 2 80 PVC 0.020 248.1 551.8 268.1 531.8 268.6 531.3 273.0 526.9 OW-428U 570781.4 2448710.6 Rockdell 807.78 804.57 804.33 24.4 779.9 34.4 769.9 2 40 PVC 0.020 40.4 763.9 60.4 743.9 60.9 743.4 63.0 741.3 OW-428L 570767.9 2448696.6 Rockdell 807.06 804.18 803.86 100.5 703.4 110.2 693.7 2 40 PVC 0.020 115.2 688.7 135.2 668.7 135.7 668.2 138.0 665.9 OW-428D 570741.9 2448666.5 Rockdell 807.03 804.02 803.73 172.2 631.5 185.2 618.5 2 80 PVC 0.020 190.2 613.5 210.2 593.5 210.7 593.0 213.0 590.7 OW-429U 569989.1 2448606.2 Bowen/ 799.17 796.41 796.21 27.8 768.4 31.8 764.4 2 40 PVC 0.020 36.8 759.4 56.8 739.4 57.3 738.9 60.0 736.2 Benbolt 2.4.12-53 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report Table 2.4.12-4 (Sheet 2 of 2)

Well Construction Summary Top of Top of Top of Bottom of Bottom of Bottom of Bentonite Seal Filter Pack Screen Screen Well Cap Borehole Top of Top of Ground Depth Depth Well Depth Depth Depth Depth Casing Concrete Surface below below Casing Well Screen below below below below Northing Easting Geologic Elevation Elevation Elevation Ground Elevation Ground Elevation Diameter Casing Well Slot Size Ground Elevation Ground Elevation Ground Elevation Ground Elevation Well (NAD 83) (NAD 83) Unit(a) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (ft) (NAVD88) (ft) (NAVD88) (inches) Schedule Material (inches) (ft) (NAVD88) (ft) (NAVD88) (ft) (NAVD88) (ft) (NAVD88)

OW-429L 569965.3 2448576.5 Benbolt 799.49 796.52 796.26 136.1 660.2 140.1 656.2 2 80 PVC 0.020 145.1 651.2 165.1 631.2 165.6 630.7 168.0 628.3 PT-OW-U1 571512.5 2448235.3 Eidson 801.52 798.71 798.55 19.8 778.8 36.8 761.8 2 40 PVC 0.020 41.8 756.8 61.8 736.8 62.3 736.3 65.0 733.6 PT-OW-L1 571493.2 2448235.2 Blackford 803.13 800.09 799.77 129.7 670.1 134.9 664.9 2 40 PVC 0.020 139.7 660.1 159.7 640.1 160.2 639.6 163.0 636.8 PT-OW-U2 571489.5 2448182.4 Eidson 805.31 802.60 802.19 32.9 769.3 37.0 765.2 2 40 PVC 0.020 42.0 760.2 62.0 740.2 62.5 739.7 65.0 737.2 PT-OW-L2 571478.7 2448192.1 Blackford 804.32 801.22 800.89 124.8 676.1 135.0 665.9 2 40 PVC 0.020 139.8 661.1 159.8 641.1 160.3 640.6 163.0 637.9 PT-OW-U3 571418.4 2448310.6 Eidson 801.65 799.31 799.17 24.6 774.6 34.1 765.1 2 40 PVC 0.020 42.6 756.6 62.6 736.6 63.1 736.1 65.0 734.2 PT-OW-L3 571420.6 2448290.2 Blackford 803.12 800.41 800.07 127.5 672.6 135.5 664.6 2 40 PVC 0.020 140.5 659.6 160.5 639.6 161.0 639.1 163.0 637.1 PT-PW 571432.2 2448229.1 Eidson/ 804.03 802.41 802.06 29.4 772.7 34.6 767.5 6 40 PVC 0.020 39.3 762.8 169.3 632.8 171.8 630.3 173.0 629.1 Blackford (a) Geologic units from Table B.1.2 in the Clinch River Data Report (Reference 2.4.12-13)

Notes:

Dash (-) = Measurement not taken due to contamination of well 2.4.12-54 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report Table 2.4.12-5 Groundwater Withdrawals from Five Counties Surrounding the Clinch River Nuclear Site by Use Category Total Groundwater Industrial Public Supply Irrigation Withdrawal County Year (mgd) (mgd) (mgd) (mgd) 2010 NR 0.22 0 0.22 Anderson 2005 0.12 0.28 0.12 0.52 2000 NR 0.96 0.01 0.97 2010 1.13 NR 0.02 1.16 Knox 2005 0.67 0.67 0.04 1.38 2000 0.13 0.93 0.1 1.16 2010 0.01 0.8 NR 0.81 Loudon 2005 0.02 0.35 NR 0.37 2000 NR 1.2 NR 1.2 2010 NR NR NR NR Morgan 2005 NR NR NR NR 2000 NR NR NR NR 2010 NR 1.28 0 1.28 Roane 2005 NR 1.03 0.01 1.03 2000 NR 0.2 NR 0.2 2010 1.14 2.3 0.02 3.5 Total 2005 0.79 2.33 0.18 3.3 2000 0.13 3.29 0.11 3.5 Notes:

Data for each county for the years 2000, 2005 and 2010 come from Reference 2.4.12-16, Reference 2.4.12-17, and Reference 2.4.12-18, respectively; total values (shaded) are computed.

NR (None Recorded) indicates that no value was recorded. NR is treated as zero for the purposes of summation, as was done in the source documents listed above.

Figures for individual categories may not add up to totals because of independent rounding.

2.4.12-55 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report Table 2.4.12-6 Summary of Water Systems Using Groundwater for Supply Water System County System Category Norris Water Commission Anderson Community Sequoyah Marina, LLC Anderson Transient non-community Modine Manufacturing Company Anderson NA Oak Ridge Country Club Anderson NA Johnson University Knox Community CEMEX Construction Materials Atlantic Knox Non-transient non-community NYRSTAR TN MinesStrawberry Plains, LLC Knox Non-transient non-community Fort Loudoun Yacht Club Knox Transient non-community Cornell Dubilier Foil, LLC Knox NA Panasonic Knox NA Rinker Materials South Central Knox NA Tamko Building Products, Inc. Knox NA Vinylex Corporation Knox NA Creekside Mobile Home S/D Loudon Community Sweetwater Valley KOA Loudon Transient non-community Cross Eyed Cricket Campground Roane Transient non-community Notes:

NA = Not available 2.4.12-56 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report Table 2.4.12-7 Nearby Public Water Systems Using Groundwater for Supply Community Water System County Population Groundwater Source Norris Water Commission(a) Anderson 1801 Spring North Anderson County Utility District Anderson 10,653 Spring First Utility District Of Knox County Knox 64,230 Spring Hallsdale Powell Utility District Knox 57,732 Springs Creekside Mobile Home Subdivision(a) Loudon 51 Wells Lenoir City Utility Board Loudon 16,686 Spring Loudon Utilities Board Loudon 10,297 Springs (a) Roane 82 Well Helton Estates Mobile Home Park Kingston Water System Roane 8384 Spring Lewands Water System(a) Roane 61 Wells Oliver Springs Water Board Roane 5323 Spring (a) Reference 2.4.12-20 indicates that the system uses exclusively groundwater for its supply (i.e., no other source is listed)

Notes:

The listed county reflects the location of the water system users, which is not necessarily the county from which all of the systems water is sourced due to intersystem transfers.

Source: Reference 2.4.12-20 2.4.12-57 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report Table 2.4.12-8 (Sheet 1 of 3)

Horizontal Hydraulic Gradients Elevation at the Elevation at the Horizontal Well or Contour Well or Contour Head Hydraulic Length (upgradient), (downgradient) Difference Gradient Direction (ft) (ft NAVD88) (ft NAVD88) (ft) (ft/ft)

September 24, 2013 Potentiometric Surface Map Section 1 266 810.0 780.0 30.0 0.11 Section 2 582 810.0 760.0 50.0 0.09 Section 3 162 810.0 798.7 11.3 0.07 Section 4 830 770.0 740.0 30.0 0.04 Section 5 273 790.0 760.0 30.0 0.11 Section 6 700 800.0 750.0 50.0 0.07 Note: Based on Figure 2.4.12-19; Maximum Water Levels in Each Nested Well Cluster December 20, 2013 Potentiometric Surface Map Section 1 227 805.0 785.0 20.0 0.09 Section 2 423 795.0 765.0 30.0 0.07 Section 3 332 805.0 795.0 10.0 0.03 Section 4 650 775.0 745.0 30.0 0.05 Section 5 96 775.0 765.0 10.0 0.10 Section 6 351 795.0 765.0 30.0 0.09 Section 7 253 785.0 775.0 10.0 0.04 Note: Based on Figure 2.4.12-20; Maximum Water Levels in Each Nested Well Cluster January 13, 2014 Potentiometric Surface Map Section 1 266 810 790 20 0.08 Section 2 629 800 760 40 0.06 Section 3 389 810 800 10 0.03 Section 4 646 780 750 30 0.05 Section 5 189 790 770 20 0.11 Section 6 398 780 760 20 0.05 Note: Based on Figure 2.4.12-21; Maximum Water Levels in Each Nested Well Cluster March 16, 2014 Potentiometric Surface Map Section 1 401 810 780 30 0.07 Section 2 653 810 760 50 0.08 Section 3 339 810 800 10 0.03 Section 4 707 790 750 40 0.06 Section 5 128 780 770 10 0.08 Section 6 686 810 760 50 0.07 Section 7 306 780 770 10 0.03 Note: Based on Figure 2.4.12-22; Maximum Water Levels in Each Nested Well Cluster 2.4.12-58 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report Table 2.4.12-8 (Sheet 2 of 3)

Horizontal Hydraulic Gradients Elevation at the Elevation at the Horizontal Well or Contour Well or Contour Head Hydraulic Length (upgradient), (downgradient) Difference Gradient Direction (ft) (ft NAVD88) (ft NAVD88) (ft) (ft/ft)

May 15, 2014 Potentiometric Surface Map Section 1 329 810 780 30 0.09 Section 2 564 810 760 50 0.09 Section 3 318 810 800 10 0.03 Section 4 588 780 750 30 0.05 Section 5 85 780 770 10 0.12 Section 6 539 810 760 50 0.09 Section 7 191 780 770 10 0.05 Note: Based on Figure 2.4.12-23; Maximum Water Levels in Each Nested Well Cluster August 18, 2014 Potentiometric Surface Map Section 1 394 810 780 30 0.08 Section 2 696 810 760 50 0.07 Section 3 356 810 800 10 0.03 Section 4 591 780 750 30 0.05 Section 5 97 780 770 10 0.10 Section 6 948 810 750 60 0.06 Section 7 255 780 770 10 0.04 Note: Based on Figure 2.4.12-24; Maximum Water Levels in Each Nested Well Cluster November 4, 2014 Potentiometric Surface Map Section 1 319 810 780 30 0.09 Section 2 736 810 750 60 0.08 Section 3 275 810 800 10 0.04 Section 4 430 780 750 30 0.07 Section 5 120 780 770 10 0.08 Section 6 841 810 750 60 0.07 Section 7 286 780 770 10 0.04 Note: Based on Figure 2.4.12-25; Maximum Water Levels in Each Nested Well Cluster February 12, 2015 Potentiometric Surface Map Section 1 399 810 780 30 0.08 Section 2 609 810 760 50 0.08 Section 3 335 810 800 10 0.03 Section 4 492 780 750 30 0.06 Section 5 107 780 770 10 0.09 Section 6 609 810 760 50 0.08 Section 7 259 780 770 10 0.04 Note: Based on Figure 2.4.12-26; Maximum Water Levels in Each Nested Well Cluster 2.4.12-59 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report Table 2.4.12-8 (Sheet 3 of 3)

Horizontal Hydraulic Gradients Elevation at the Elevation at the Horizontal Well or Contour Well or Contour Head Hydraulic Length (upgradient), (downgradient) Difference Gradient Direction (ft) (ft NAVD88) (ft NAVD88) (ft) (ft/ft)

May 19, 2015 Potentiometric Surface Map Section 1 293 810 780 30 0.10 Section 2 693 810 750 60 0.09 Section 3 243 810 800 10 0.04 Section 4 349 780 750 30 0.09 Section 5 208 780 760 20 0.10 Section 6 929 810 750 60 0.06 Section 7 285 780 770 10 0.04 Note: Based on Figure 2.4.12-27; Maximum Water Levels in Each Nested Well Cluster August 10, 2015 Potentiometric Surface Map Section 1 296 810 780 30 0.10 Section 2 682 810 750 60 0.09 Section 3 230 810 800 10 0.04 Section 4 250 770 750 20 0.08 Section 5 111 780 770 10 0.09 Section 6 520 810 760 50 0.10 Section 7 260 780 770 10 0.04 Note: Based on Figure 2.4.12-28; Maximum Water Levels in Each Nested Well Cluster Notes:

Mean Horizontal Hydraulic Gradient = 0.07 ft/ft Minimum Horizontal Hydraulic Gradient = 0.03 ft/ft Maximum Horizontal Hydraulic Gradient = 0.12 ft/ft 2.4.12-60 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report Table 2.4.12-9 (Sheet 1 of 26)

Vertical Hydraulic Gradients Upper Zone Lower Zone Deeper Zone Top of Bottom of Elevation Top of Bottom of Elevation Top of Bottom of Elevation screen screen Midpoint of Water screen screen Midpoint of Water screen screen Midpoint of Water Well Pair Date (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) z h iv 24-Sep-13 774.6 754.6 764.6 790.71 662.7 642.7 652.7 768.33 - - - - 111.9 22.38 0.20 1-Oct-13 774.6 754.6 764.6 784.18 662.7 642.7 652.7 766.37 - - - - 111.9 17.81 0.16 9-Oct-13 774.6 754.6 764.6 783.14 662.7 642.7 652.7 761.90 - - - - 111.9 21.24 0.19 26-Oct-13 774.6 754.6 764.6 782.73 662.7 642.7 652.7 756.89 - - - - 111.9 25.84 0.23 5-Nov-13 774.6 754.6 764.6 782.69 662.7 642.7 652.7 753.48 - - - - 111.9 29.21 0.26 12-Nov-13 774.6 754.6 764.6 782.84 662.7 642.7 652.7 749.60 - - - - 111.9 33.24 0.30 23-Nov-13 774.6 754.6 764.6 783.95 662.7 642.7 652.7 762.05 - - - - 111.9 21.90 0.20 9-Dec-13 774.6 754.6 764.6 798.42 662.7 642.7 652.7 773.47 - - - - 111.9 24.95 0.22 20-Dec-13 774.6 754.6 764.6 790.65 662.7 642.7 652.7 768.74 - - - - 111.9 21.91 0.20 OW-101U/L (Upper /Lower) 13-Jan-14 774.6 754.6 764.6 795.74 662.7 642.7 652.7 771.52 - - - - 111.9 24.22 0.22 16-Jan-14 774.6 754.6 764.6 795.38 662.7 642.7 652.7 771.11 - - - - 111.9 24.27 0.22 18-Feb-14 774.6 754.6 764.6 791.86 662.7 642.7 652.7 768.70 - - - - 111.9 23.16 0.21 16-Mar-14 774.6 754.6 764.6 785.52 662.7 642.7 652.7 766.01 - - - - 111.9 19.51 0.17 15-Apr-14 774.6 754.6 764.6 788.72 662.7 642.7 652.7 767.45 - - - - 111.9 21.27 0.19 15-May-14 774.6 754.6 764.6 792.69 662.7 642.7 652.7 768.01 - - - - 111.9 24.68 0.22 16-Jun-14 774.6 754.6 764.6 791.90 662.7 642.7 652.7 768.62 - - - - 111.9 23.28 0.21 16-Jul-14 774.6 754.6 764.6 783.11 662.7 642.7 652.7 762.61 - - - - 111.9 20.50 0.18 18-Aug-14 774.6 754.6 764.6 789.18 662.7 642.7 652.7 767.59 - - - - 111.9 21.59 0.19 4-Nov-14 774.6 754.6 764.6 783.64 662.7 642.7 652.7 764.05 - - - - 111.9 19.59 0.18 12-Feb-15 774.6 754.6 764.6 786.53 662.7 642.7 652.7 766.59 - - - - 111.9 19.94 0.18 19-May-15 774.6 754.6 764.6 782.96 662.7 642.7 652.7 763.31 - - - - 111.9 19.65 0.18 10-Aug-15 774.6 754.6 764.6 783.54 662.7 642.7 652.7 764.88 - - - - 111.9 18.66 0.17 0.20 2.4.12-61 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report Table 2.4.12-9 (Sheet 2 of 26)

Vertical Hydraulic Gradients Upper Zone Lower Zone Deeper Zone Top of Bottom of Elevation Top of Bottom of Elevation Top of Bottom of Elevation screen screen Midpoint of Water screen screen Midpoint of Water screen screen Midpoint of Water Well Pair Date (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) z h iv 24-Sep-13 774.6 754.6 764.6 790.71 - - - - 570.2 550.2 560.2 743.45 204.4 47.26 0.23 1-Oct-13 774.6 754.6 764.6 784.18 - - - - 570.2 550.2 560.2 743.03 204.4 41.15 0.20 9-Oct-13 774.6 754.6 764.6 783.14 - - - - 570.2 550.2 560.2 741.77 204.4 41.37 0.20 26-Oct-13 774.6 754.6 764.6 782.73 - - - - 570.2 550.2 560.2 741.33 204.4 41.40 0.20 5-Nov-13 774.6 754.6 764.6 782.69 - - - - 570.2 550.2 560.2 740.52 204.4 42.17 0.21 12-Nov-13 774.6 754.6 764.6 782.84 - - - - 570.2 550.2 560.2 739.89 204.4 42.95 0.21 23-Nov-13 774.6 754.6 764.6 783.95 - - - - 570.2 550.2 560.2 739.25 204.4 44.70 0.22 9-Dec-13 774.6 754.6 764.6 798.42 - - - - 570.2 550.2 560.2 749.39 204.4 49.03 0.24 OW-101U/D (Upper/Deeper) 20-Dec-13 774.6 754.6 764.6 790.65 - - - - 570.2 550.2 560.2 741.05 204.4 49.60 0.24 13-Jan-14 774.6 754.6 764.6 795.74 - - - - 570.2 550.2 560.2 745.15 204.4 50.59 0.25 16-Jan-14 774.6 754.6 764.6 795.38 - - - - 570.2 550.2 560.2 744.49 204.4 50.89 0.25 18-Feb-14 774.6 754.6 764.6 791.86 - - - - 570.2 550.2 560.2 741.50 204.4 50.36 0.25 16-Mar-14 774.6 754.6 764.6 785.52 - - - - 570.2 550.2 560.2 739.22 204.4 46.30 0.23 15-Apr-14 774.6 754.6 764.6 788.72 - - - - 570.2 550.2 560.2 740.92 204.4 47.80 0.23 15-May-14 774.6 754.6 764.6 792.69 - - - - 570.2 550.2 560.2 743.81 204.4 48.88 0.24 16-Jun-14 774.6 754.6 764.6 791.90 - - - - 570.2 550.2 560.2 743.33 204.4 48.57 0.24 16-Jul-14 774.6 754.6 764.6 783.11 - - - - 570.2 550.2 560.2 742.43 204.4 40.68 0.20 18-Aug-14 774.6 754.6 764.6 789.18 - - - - 570.2 550.2 560.2 743.45 204.4 45.73 0.22 4-Nov-14 774.6 754.6 764.6 783.64 - - - - 570.2 550.2 560.2 742.16 204.4 41.48 0.20 12-Feb-15 774.6 754.6 764.6 786.53 - - - - 570.2 550.2 560.2 739.98 204.4 46.55 0.23 19-May-15 774.6 754.6 764.6 782.96 - - - - 570.2 550.2 560.2 742.70 204.4 40.26 0.20 10-Aug-15 774.6 754.6 764.6 783.54 - - - - 570.2 550.2 560.2 743.18 204.4 40.36 0.20 0.22 2.4.12-62 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report Table 2.4.12-9 (Sheet 3 of 26)

Vertical Hydraulic Gradients Upper Zone Lower Zone Deeper Zone Top of Bottom of Elevation Top of Bottom of Elevation Top of Bottom of Elevation screen screen Midpoint of Water screen screen Midpoint of Water screen screen Midpoint of Water Well Pair Date (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) z h iv 24-Sep-13 - - - - 662.7 642.7 652.7 768.33 570.2 550.2 560.2 743.45 92.5 24.88 0.27 1-Oct-13 - - - - 662.7 642.7 652.7 766.37 570.2 550.2 560.2 743.03 92.5 23.34 0.25 9-Oct-13 - - - - 662.7 642.7 652.7 761.90 570.2 550.2 560.2 741.77 92.5 20.13 0.22 26-Oct-13 - - - - 662.7 642.7 652.7 756.89 570.2 550.2 560.2 741.33 92.5 15.56 0.17 5-Nov-13 - - - - 662.7 642.7 652.7 753.48 570.2 550.2 560.2 740.52 92.5 12.96 0.14 12-Nov-13 - - - - 662.7 642.7 652.7 749.60 570.2 550.2 560.2 739.89 92.5 9.71 0.11 23-Nov-13 - - - - 662.7 642.7 652.7 762.05 570.2 550.2 560.2 739.25 92.5 22.80 0.25 9-Dec-13 - - - - 662.7 642.7 652.7 773.47 570.2 550.2 560.2 749.39 92.5 24.08 0.26 OW-101L/D (Lower/Deeper) 20-Dec-13 - - - - 662.7 642.7 652.7 768.74 570.2 550.2 560.2 741.05 92.5 27.69 0.30 13-Jan-14 - - - - 662.7 642.7 652.7 771.52 570.2 550.2 560.2 745.15 92.5 26.37 0.29 16-Jan-14 - - - - 662.7 642.7 652.7 771.11 570.2 550.2 560.2 744.49 92.5 26.62 0.29 18-Feb-14 - - - - 662.7 642.7 652.7 768.70 570.2 550.2 560.2 741.50 92.5 27.20 0.29 16-Mar-14 - - - - 662.7 642.7 652.7 766.01 570.2 550.2 560.2 739.22 92.5 26.79 0.29 15-Apr-14 - - - - 662.7 642.7 652.7 767.45 570.2 550.2 560.2 740.92 92.5 26.53 0.29 15-May-14 - - - - 662.7 642.7 652.7 768.01 570.2 550.2 560.2 743.81 92.5 24.20 0.26 16-Jun-14 - - - - 662.7 642.7 652.7 768.62 570.2 550.2 560.2 743.33 92.5 25.29 0.27 16-Jul-14 - - - - 662.7 642.7 652.7 762.61 570.2 550.2 560.2 742.43 92.5 20.18 0.22 18-Aug-14 - - - - 662.7 642.7 652.7 767.59 570.2 550.2 560.2 743.45 92.5 24.14 0.26 4-Nov-14 - - - - 662.7 642.7 652.7 764.05 570.2 550.2 560.2 742.16 92.5 21.89 0.24 12-Feb-15 - - - - 662.7 642.7 652.7 766.59 570.2 550.2 560.2 739.98 92.5 26.61 0.29 19-May-15 - - - - 662.7 642.7 652.7 763.31 570.2 550.2 560.2 742.70 92.5 20.61 0.22 10-Aug-15 - - - - 662.7 642.7 652.7 764.88 570.2 550.2 560.2 743.18 92.5 21.70 0.23 0.25 2.4.12-63 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report Table 2.4.12-9 (Sheet 4 of 26)

Vertical Hydraulic Gradients Upper Zone Lower Zone Deeper Zone Top of Bottom of Elevation Top of Bottom of Elevation Top of Bottom of Elevation screen screen Midpoint of Water screen screen Midpoint of Water screen screen Midpoint of Water Well Pair Date (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) z h iv 24-Sep-13 796.1 776.1 786.1 798.65 661.5 641.5 651.5 766.92 - - - - 134.6 31.73 0.24 1-Oct-13 796.1 776.1 786.1 796.31 661.5 641.5 651.5 766.17 - - - - 134.6 30.14 0.22 9-Oct-13 796.1 776.1 786.1 792.89 661.5 641.5 651.5 765.36 - - - - 134.6 27.53 0.20 26-Oct-13 796.1 776.1 786.1 788.51 661.5 641.5 651.5 762.86 - - - - 134.6 25.65 0.19 5-Nov-13 796.1 776.1 786.1 787.32 661.5 641.5 651.5 761.76 - - - - 134.6 25.56 0.19 12-Nov-13 796.1 776.1 786.1 786.75 661.5 641.5 651.5 761.12 - - - - 134.6 25.63 0.19 23-Nov-13 796.1 776.1 786.1 797.43 661.5 641.5 651.5 705.78 - - - - 134.6 91.65 0.68 9-Dec-13 796.1 776.1 786.1 800.15 661.5 641.5 651.5 778.27 - - - - 134.6 21.88 0.16 OW-202U/L (Upper /Lower) 20-Dec-13 796.1 776.1 786.1 798.10 661.5 641.5 651.5 773.58 - - - - 134.6 24.52 0.18 13-Jan-14 796.1 776.1 786.1 799.47 661.5 641.5 651.5 776.79 - - - - 134.6 22.68 0.17 16-Jan-14 796.1 776.1 786.1 798.96 661.5 641.5 651.5 776.08 - - - - 134.6 22.88 0.17 18-Feb-14 796.1 776.1 786.1 798.84 661.5 641.5 651.5 772.85 - - - - 134.6 25.99 0.19 16-Mar-14 796.1 776.1 786.1 795.76 661.5 641.5 651.5 771.33 - - - - 134.6 24.43 0.18 15-Apr-14 796.1 776.1 786.1 796.29 661.5 641.5 651.5 772.92 - - - - 134.6 23.37 0.17 15-May-14 796.1 776.1 786.1 799.44 661.5 641.5 651.5 768.85 - - - - 134.6 30.59 0.23 16-Jun-14 796.1 776.1 786.1 798.71 661.5 641.5 651.5 766.50 - - - - 134.6 32.21 0.24 16-Jul-14 796.1 776.1 786.1 795.66 661.5 641.5 651.5 764.40 - - - - 134.6 31.26 0.23 18-Aug-14 796.1 776.1 786.1 796.22 661.5 641.5 651.5 770.31 - - - - 134.6 25.91 0.19 4-Nov-14 796.1 776.1 786.1 795.68 661.5 641.5 651.5 766.10 - - - - 134.6 29.58 0.22 12-Feb-15 796.1 776.1 786.1 796.03 661.5 641.5 651.5 772.22 - - - - 134.6 23.81 0.18 19-May-15 796.1 776.1 786.1 795.47 661.5 641.5 651.5 767.00 - - - - 134.6 28.47 0.21 10-Aug-15 796.1 776.1 786.1 795.67 661.5 641.5 651.5 768.56 - - - - 134.6 27.11 0.20 0.20 2.4.12-64 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report Table 2.4.12-9 (Sheet 5 of 26)

Vertical Hydraulic Gradients Upper Zone Lower Zone Deeper Zone Top of Bottom of Elevation Top of Bottom of Elevation Top of Bottom of Elevation screen screen Midpoint of Water screen screen Midpoint of Water screen screen Midpoint of Water Well Pair Date (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) z h iv 24-Sep-13 796.1 776.1 786.1 798.65 - - - - 535.7 515.7 525.7 759.34 260.4 39.31 0.15 1-Oct-13 796.1 776.1 786.1 796.31 - - - - 535.7 515.7 525.7 758.96 260.4 37.35 0.14 9-Oct-13 796.1 776.1 786.1 792.89 - - - - 535.7 515.7 525.7 757.50 260.4 35.39 0.14 26-Oct-13 796.1 776.1 786.1 788.51 - - - - 535.7 515.7 525.7 755.67 260.4 32.84 0.13 5-Nov-13 796.1 776.1 786.1 787.32 - - - - 535.7 515.7 525.7 754.85 260.4 32.47 0.12 12-Nov-13 796.1 776.1 786.1 786.75 - - - - 535.7 515.7 525.7 754.28 260.4 32.47 0.12 23-Nov-13 796.1 776.1 786.1 797.43 - - - - 535.7 515.7 525.7 755.05 260.4 42.38 0.16 9-Dec-13 796.1 776.1 786.1 800.15 - - - - 535.7 515.7 525.7 763.64 260.4 36.51 0.14 OW-202U/D (Upper /Deeper) 20-Dec-13 796.1 776.1 786.1 798.10 - - - - 535.7 515.7 525.7 762.41 260.4 35.69 0.14 13-Jan-14 796.1 776.1 786.1 799.47 - - - - 535.7 515.7 525.7 764.04 260.4 35.43 0.14 16-Jan-14 796.1 776.1 786.1 798.96 - - - - 535.7 515.7 525.7 764.76 260.4 34.20 0.13 18-Feb-14 796.1 776.1 786.1 798.84 - - - - 535.7 515.7 525.7 761.97 260.4 36.87 0.14 16-Mar-14 796.1 776.1 786.1 795.76 - - - - 535.7 515.7 525.7 760.31 260.4 35.45 0.14 15-Apr-14 796.1 776.1 786.1 796.29 - - - - 535.7 515.7 525.7 761.88 260.4 34.41 0.13 15-May-14 796.1 776.1 786.1 799.44 - - - - 535.7 515.7 525.7 759.74 260.4 39.70 0.15 16-Jun-14 796.1 776.1 786.1 798.71 - - - - 535.7 515.7 525.7 758.67 260.4 40.04 0.15 16-Jul-14 796.1 776.1 786.1 795.66 - - - - 535.7 515.7 525.7 757.06 260.4 38.60 0.15 18-Aug-14 796.1 776.1 786.1 796.22 - - - - 535.7 515.7 525.7 761.01 260.4 35.21 0.14 4-Nov-14 796.1 776.1 786.1 795.68 - - - - 535.7 515.7 525.7 757.89 260.4 37.79 0.15 12-Feb-15 796.1 776.1 786.1 796.03 - - - - 535.7 515.7 525.7 760.11 260.4 35.92 0.14 19-May-15 796.1 776.1 786.1 795.47 - - - - 535.7 515.7 525.7 758.58 260.4 36.89 0.14 10-Aug-15 796.1 776.1 786.1 795.67 - - - - 535.7 515.7 525.7 758.68 260.4 36.99 0.14 0.14 2.4.12-65 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report Table 2.4.12-9 (Sheet 6 of 26)

Vertical Hydraulic Gradients Upper Zone Lower Zone Deeper Zone Top of Bottom of Elevation Top of Bottom of Elevation Top of Bottom of Elevation screen screen Midpoint of Water screen screen Midpoint of Water screen screen Midpoint of Water Well Pair Date (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) z h iv 24-Sep-13 - - - - 661.5 641.5 651.5 766.92 535.7 515.7 525.7 759.34 125.8 7.58 0.06 1-Oct-13 - - - - 661.5 641.5 651.5 766.17 535.7 515.7 525.7 758.96 125.8 7.21 0.06 9-Oct-13 - - - - 661.5 641.5 651.5 765.36 535.7 515.7 525.7 757.50 125.8 7.86 0.06 26-Oct-13 - - - - 661.5 641.5 651.5 762.86 535.7 515.7 525.7 755.67 125.8 7.19 0.06 5-Nov-13 - - - - 661.5 641.5 651.5 761.76 535.7 515.7 525.7 754.85 125.8 6.91 0.05 12-Nov-13 - - - - 661.5 641.5 651.5 761.12 535.7 515.7 525.7 754.28 125.8 6.84 0.05 23-Nov-13 - - - - 661.5 641.5 651.5 705.78 535.7 515.7 525.7 755.05 125.8 -49.27 -0.39 9-Dec-13 - - - - 661.5 641.5 651.5 778.27 535.7 515.7 525.7 763.64 125.8 14.63 0.12 OW-202L/D (Lower/Deeper) 20-Dec-13 - - - - 661.5 641.5 651.5 773.58 535.7 515.7 525.7 762.41 125.8 11.17 0.09 13-Jan-14 - - - - 661.5 641.5 651.5 776.79 535.7 515.7 525.7 764.04 125.8 12.75 0.10 16-Jan-14 - - - - 661.5 641.5 651.5 776.08 535.7 515.7 525.7 764.76 125.8 11.32 0.09 18-Feb-14 - - - - 661.5 641.5 651.5 772.86 535.7 515.7 525.7 761.97 125.8 10.89 0.09 16-Mar-14 - - - - 661.5 641.5 651.5 771.33 535.7 515.7 525.7 760.31 125.8 11.02 0.09 15-Apr-14 - - - - 661.5 641.5 651.5 772.92 535.7 515.7 525.7 761.88 125.8 11.04 0.09 15-May-14 - - - - 661.5 641.5 651.5 768.85 535.7 515.7 525.7 759.74 125.8 9.11 0.07 16-Jun-14 - - - - 661.5 641.5 651.5 766.50 535.7 515.7 525.7 758.67 125.8 7.83 0.06 16-Jul-14 - - - - 661.5 641.5 651.5 764.40 535.7 515.7 525.7 757.06 125.8 7.34 0.06 18-Aug-14 - - - - 661.5 641.5 651.5 770.31 535.7 515.7 525.7 761.01 125.8 9.30 0.07 4-Nov-14 - - - - 661.5 641.5 651.5 766.10 535.7 515.7 525.7 757.89 125.8 8.21 0.07 12-Feb-15 - - - - 661.5 641.5 651.5 772.22 535.7 515.7 525.7 760.11 125.8 12.11 0.10 19-May-15 - - - - 661.5 641.5 651.5 767.00 535.7 515.7 525.7 758.58 125.8 8.42 0.07 10-Aug-15 - - - - 661.5 641.5 651.5 768.56 535.7 515.7 525.7 758.68 125.8 9.88 0.08 0.08 2.4.12-66 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report Table 2.4.12-9 (Sheet 7 of 26)

Vertical Hydraulic Gradients Upper Zone Lower Zone Deeper Zone Top of Bottom of Elevation Top of Bottom of Elevation Top of Bottom of Elevation screen screen Midpoint of Water screen screen Midpoint of Water screen screen Midpoint of Water Well Pair Date (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) z h iv 24-Sep-13 802.2 782.2 792.2 810.96 682.0 662.0 672.0 783.49 - - - - 120.2 27.47 0.23 1-Oct-13 802.2 782.2 792.2 810.52 682.0 662.0 672.0 781.71 - - - - 120.2 28.81 0.24 9-Oct-13 802.2 782.2 792.2 810.19 682.0 662.0 672.0 780.43 - - - - 120.2 29.76 0.25 26-Oct-13 802.2 782.2 792.2 809.94 682.0 662.0 672.0 778.67 - - - - 120.2 31.27 0.26 5-Nov-13 802.2 782.2 792.2 809.82 682.0 662.0 672.0 778.16 - - - - 120.2 31.66 0.26 12-Nov-13 802.2 782.2 792.2 809.78 682.0 662.0 672.0 778.20 - - - - 120.2 31.58 0.26 23-Nov-13 802.2 782.2 792.2 809.63 682.0 662.0 672.0 780.61 - - - - 120.2 29.02 0.24 9-Dec-13 802.2 782.2 792.2 813.14 682.0 662.0 672.0 791.75 - - - - 120.2 21.39 0.18 OW-401U/L (Upper/Lower) 20-Dec-13 802.2 782.2 792.2 810.63 682.0 662.0 672.0 787.29 - - - - 120.2 23.34 0.19 13-Jan-14 802.2 782.2 792.2 811.60 682.0 662.0 672.0 795.55 - - - - 120.2 16.05 0.13 18-Feb-14 802.2 782.2 792.2 810.86 682.0 662.0 672.0 788.69 - - - - 120.2 22.17 0.18 16-Mar-14 802.2 782.2 792.2 810.41 682.0 662.0 672.0 785.22 - - - - 120.2 25.19 0.21 15-Apr-14 802.2 782.2 792.2 810.56 682.0 662.0 672.0 788.03 - - - - 120.2 22.53 0.19 15-May-14 802.2 782.2 792.2 811.11 682.0 662.0 672.0 784.36 - - - - 120.2 26.75 0.22 16-Jun-14 802.2 782.2 792.2 810.66 682.0 662.0 672.0 784.03 - - - - 120.2 26.63 0.22 16-Jul-14 802.2 782.2 792.2 809.9 682.0 662.0 672.0 780.40 - - - - 120.2 29.50 0.25 18-Aug-14 802.2 782.2 792.2 810.33 682.0 662.0 672.0 784.45 - - - - 120.2 25.88 0.22 4-Nov-14 802.2 782.2 792.2 810.01 682.0 662.0 672.0 780.60 - - - - 120.2 29.41 0.24 12-Feb-15 802.2 782.2 792.2 810.25 682.0 662.0 672.0 784.05 - - - - 120.2 26.20 0.22 19-May-15 802.2 782.2 792.2 809.78 682.0 662.0 672.0 781.11 - - - - 120.2 28.67 0.24 10-Aug-15 802.2 782.2 792.2 809.76 682.0 662.0 672.0 780.44 - - - - 120.2 29.32 0.24 0.22 2.4.12-67 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report Table 2.4.12-9 (Sheet 8 of 26)

Vertical Hydraulic Gradients Upper Zone Lower Zone Deeper Zone Top of Bottom of Elevation Top of Bottom of Elevation Top of Bottom of Elevation screen screen Midpoint of Water screen screen Midpoint of Water screen screen Midpoint of Water Well Pair Date (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) z h iv 24-Sep-13 802.2 782.2 792.2 810.96 - - - - 591.6 571.6 581.6 781.67 210.6 29.29 0.14 1-Oct-13 802.2 782.2 792.2 810.52 - - - - 591.6 571.6 581.6 782.70 210.6 27.82 0.13 9-Oct-13 802.2 782.2 792.2 810.19 - - - - 591.6 571.6 581.6 780.97 210.6 29.22 0.14 26-Oct-13 802.2 782.2 792.2 809.94 - - - - 591.6 571.6 581.6 777.33 210.6 32.61 0.15 5-Nov-13 802.2 782.2 792.2 809.82 - - - - 591.6 571.6 581.6 772.88 210.6 36.94 0.18 12-Nov-13 802.2 782.2 792.2 809.78 - - - - 591.6 571.6 581.6 777.09 210.6 32.69 0.16 23-Nov-13 802.2 782.2 792.2 809.63 - - - - 591.6 571.6 581.6 780.49 210.6 29.14 0.14 9-Dec-13 802.2 782.2 792.2 813.14 - - - - 591.6 571.6 581.6 786.87 210.6 26.27 0.12 OW-401U/D (Upper/Deeper) 20-Dec-13 802.2 782.2 792.2 810.63 - - - - 591.6 571.6 581.6 781.23 210.6 29.40 0.14 13-Jan-14 802.2 782.2 792.2 811.60 - - - - 591.6 571.6 581.6 794.33 210.6 17.27 0.08 18-Feb-14 802.2 782.2 792.2 810.86 - - - - 591.6 571.6 581.6 791.44 210.6 19.42 0.09 16-Mar-14 802.2 782.2 792.2 810.41 - - - - 591.6 571.6 581.6 787.87 210.6 22.54 0.11 15-Apr-14 802.2 782.2 792.2 810.56 - - - - 591.6 571.6 581.6 792.09 210.6 18.47 0.09 15-May-14 802.2 782.2 792.2 811.11 - - - - 591.6 571.6 581.6 783.04 210.6 28.07 0.13 16-Jun-14 802.2 782.2 792.2 810.66 - - - - 591.6 571.6 581.6 783.31 210.6 27.35 0.13 16-Jul-14 802.2 782.2 792.2 809.9 - - - - 591.6 571.6 581.6 780.86 210.6 29.04 0.14 18-Aug-14 802.2 782.2 792.2 810.33 - - - - 591.6 571.6 581.6 788.07 210.6 22.26 0.11 4-Nov-14 802.2 782.2 792.2 810.01 - - - - 591.6 571.6 581.6 781.55 210.6 28.46 0.14 12-Feb-15 802.2 782.2 792.2 810.25 - - - - 591.6 571.6 581.6 785.60 210.6 24.65 0.12 19-May-15 802.2 782.2 792.2 809.78 - - - - 591.6 571.6 581.6 780.82 210.6 28.96 0.14 10-Aug-15 802.2 782.2 792.2 809.76 - - - - 591.6 571.6 581.6 780.66 210.6 29.10 0.14 0.13 2.4.12-68 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report Table 2.4.12-9 (Sheet 9 of 26)

Vertical Hydraulic Gradients Upper Zone Lower Zone Deeper Zone Top of Bottom of Elevation Top of Bottom of Elevation Top of Bottom of Elevation screen screen Midpoint of Water screen screen Midpoint of Water screen screen Midpoint of Water Well Pair Date (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) z h iv 24-Sep-13 - - - - 682.0 662.0 672.0 783.49 591.6 571.6 581.6 781.67 90.4 1.82 0.02 1-Oct-13 - - - - 682.0 662.0 672.0 781.71 591.6 571.6 581.6 782.70 90.4 -0.99 -0.01 9-Oct-13 - - - - 682.0 662.0 672.0 780.43 591.6 571.6 581.6 780.97 90.4 -0.54 -0.01 26-Oct-13 - - - - 682.0 662.0 672.0 778.67 591.6 571.6 581.6 777.33 90.4 1.34 0.01 5-Nov-13 - - - - 682.0 662.0 672.0 778.16 591.6 571.6 581.6 772.88 90.4 5.28 0.06 12-Nov-13 - - - - 682.0 662.0 672.0 778.20 591.6 571.6 581.6 777.09 90.4 1.11 0.01 23-Nov-13 - - - - 682.0 662.0 672.0 780.61 591.6 571.6 581.6 780.49 90.4 0.12 0.00 9-Dec-13 - - - - 682.0 662.0 672.0 791.75 591.6 571.6 581.6 786.87 90.4 4.88 0.05 OW-401L/D (Lower/Deeper) 20-Dec-13 - - - - 682.0 662.0 672.0 787.29 591.6 571.6 581.6 781.23 90.4 6.06 0.07 13-Jan-14 - - - - 682.0 662.0 672.0 795.55 591.6 571.6 581.6 794.33 90.4 1.22 0.01 18-Feb-14 - - - - 682.0 662.0 672.0 788.69 591.6 571.6 581.6 791.44 90.4 -2.75 -0.03 16-Mar-14 - - - - 682.0 662.0 672.0 785.22 591.6 571.6 581.6 787.87 90.4 -2.65 -0.03 15-Apr-14 - - - - 682.0 662.0 672.0 788.03 591.6 571.6 581.6 792.09 90.4 -4.06 -0.04 15-May-14 - - - - 682.0 662.0 672.0 784.36 591.6 571.6 581.6 783.04 90.4 1.32 0.01 16-Jun-14 - - - - 682.0 662.0 672.0 784.03 591.6 571.6 581.6 783.31 90.4 0.72 0.01 16-Jul-14 - - - - 682.0 662.0 672.0 780.40 591.6 571.6 581.6 780.86 90.4 -0.46 -0.01 18-Aug-14 - - - - 682.0 662.0 672.0 784.45 591.6 571.6 581.6 788.07 90.4 -3.62 -0.04 4-Nov-14 - - - - 682.0 662.0 672.0 780.60 591.6 571.6 581.6 781.55 90.4 -0.95 -0.01 12-Feb-15 - - - - 682.0 662.0 672.0 784.05 591.6 571.6 581.6 785.60 90.4 -1.55 -0.02 19-May-15 - - - - 682.0 662.0 672.0 781.11 591.6 571.6 581.6 780.82 90.4 0.29 0.00 10-Aug-15 - - - - 682.0 662.0 672.0 780.44 591.6 571.6 581.6 780.66 90.4 -0.22 0.00 0.00 2.4.12-69 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report Table 2.4.12-9 (Sheet 10 of 26)

Vertical Hydraulic Gradients Upper Zone Lower Zone Deeper Zone Top of Bottom of Elevation Top of Bottom of Elevation Top of Bottom of Elevation screen screen Midpoint of Water screen screen Midpoint of Water screen screen Midpoint of Water Well Pair Date (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) z h iv 24-Sep-13 752.0 732.0 742.0 744.72 717.6 697.6 707.6 771.91 - - - - 34.4 -27.19 -0.79 1-Oct-13 752.0 732.0 742.0 742.84 717.6 697.6 707.6 770.47 - - - - 34.4 -27.63 -0.80 9-Oct-13 752.0 732.0 742.0 741.31 717.6 697.6 707.6 764.45 - - - - 34.4 -23.14 -0.67 26-Oct-13 752.0 732.0 742.0 740.84 717.6 697.6 707.6 760.40 - - - - 34.4 -19.56 -0.57 5-Nov-13 752.0 732.0 742.0 740.79 717.6 697.6 707.6 759.02 - - - - 34.4 -18.23 -0.53 12-Nov-13 752.0 732.0 742.0 739.77 717.6 697.6 707.6 758.21 - - - - 34.4 -18.44 -0.54 23-Nov-13 752.0 732.0 742.0 739.10 717.6 697.6 707.6 768.26 - - - - 34.4 -29.16 -0.85 9-Dec-13 752.0 732.0 742.0 762.56 717.6 697.6 707.6 779.22 - - - - 34.4 -16.66 -0.48 20-Dec-13 752.0 732.0 742.0 741.99 717.6 697.6 707.6 773.06 - - - - 34.4 -31.07 -0.90 OW-409U/L (Upper/Lower) 13-Jan-14 752.0 732.0 742.0 756.04 717.6 697.6 707.6 777.13 - - - - 34.4 -21.09 -0.61 16-Jan-14 752.0 732.0 742.0 753.35 717.6 697.6 707.6 776.43 - - - - 34.4 -23.08 -0.67 18-Feb-14 752.0 732.0 742.0 743.63 717.6 697.6 707.6 774.07 - - - - 34.4 -30.44 -0.88 16-Mar-14 752.0 732.0 742.0 738.31 717.6 697.6 707.6 769.68 - - - - 34.4 -31.37 -0.91 15-Apr-14 752.0 732.0 742.0 741.14 717.6 697.6 707.6 771.70 - - - - 34.4 -30.56 -0.89 15-May-14 752.0 732.0 742.0 746.09 717.6 697.6 707.6 769.67 - - - - 34.4 -23.58 -0.69 16-Jun-14 752.0 732.0 742.0 743.56 717.6 697.6 707.6 770.54 - - - - 34.4 -26.98 -0.78 16-Jul-14 752.0 732.0 742.0 741.15 717.6 697.6 707.6 761.63 - - - - 34.4 -20.48 -0.60 18-Aug-14 752.0 732.0 742.0 743.10 717.6 697.6 707.6 770.31 - - - - 34.4 -27.21 -0.79 4-Nov-14 752.0 732.0 742.0 740.91 717.6 697.6 707.6 760.74 - - - - 34.4 -19.83 -0.58 12-Feb-15 752.0 732.0 742.0 738.39 717.6 697.6 707.6 766.10 - - - - 34.4 -27.71 -0.81 19-May-15 752.0 732.0 742.0 741.10 717.6 697.6 707.6 756.67 - - - - 34.4 -15.57 -0.45 10-Aug-15 752.0 732.0 742.0 741.84 717.6 697.6 707.6 756.68 - - - - 34.4 -14.84 -0.43

-0.69 2.4.12-70 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report Table 2.4.12-9 (Sheet 11 of 26)

Vertical Hydraulic Gradients Upper Zone Lower Zone Deeper Zone Top of Bottom of Elevation Top of Bottom of Elevation Top of Bottom of Elevation screen screen Midpoint of Water screen screen Midpoint of Water screen screen Midpoint of Water Well Pair Date (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) z h iv 24-Sep-13 756.0 736.0 746.0 758.80 628.8 608.8 618.8 763.83 - - - - 127.2 -5.03 -0.04 1-Oct-13 756.0 736.0 746.0 757.81 628.8 608.8 618.8 765.02 - - - - 127.2 -7.21 -0.06 9-Oct-13 756.0 736.0 746.0 756.09 628.8 608.8 618.8 765.46 - - - - 127.2 -9.37 -0.07 26-Oct-13 756.0 736.0 746.0 755.21 628.8 608.8 618.8 765.40 - - - - 127.2 -10.19 -0.08 5-Nov-13 756.0 736.0 746.0 754.89 628.8 608.8 618.8 765.26 - - - - 127.2 -10.37 -0.08 12-Nov-13 756.0 736.0 746.0 754.78 628.8 608.8 618.8 765.19 - - - - 127.2 -10.41 -0.08 23-Nov-13 756.0 736.0 746.0 756.38 628.8 608.8 618.8 766.13 - - - - 127.2 -9.75 -0.08 9-Dec-13 756.0 736.0 746.0 772.02 628.8 608.8 618.8 771.91 - - - - 127.2 0.11 0.00 OW-415U/L (Upper/Lower) 20-Dec-13 756.0 736.0 746.0 764.40 628.8 608.8 618.8 770.87 - - - - 127.2 -6.47 -0.05 13-Jan-14 756.0 736.0 746.0 767.22 628.8 608.8 618.8 NM - - - - 127.2 NA NA 18-Feb-14 756.0 736.0 746.0 763.22 628.8 608.8 618.8 769.68 - - - - 127.2 -6.46 -0.05 16-Mar-14 756.0 736.0 746.0 760.06 628.8 608.8 618.8 767.15 - - - - 127.2 -7.09 -0.06 15-Apr-14 756.0 736.0 746.0 762.12 628.8 608.8 618.8 768.06 - - - - 127.2 -5.94 -0.05 15-May-14 756.0 736.0 746.0 762.46 628.8 608.8 618.8 767.42 - - - - 127.2 -4.96 -0.04 16-Jun-14 756.0 736.0 746.0 760.81 628.8 608.8 618.8 768.16 - - - - 127.2 -7.35 -0.06 16-Jul-14 756.0 736.0 746.0 756.13 628.8 608.8 618.8 766.02 - - - - 127.2 -9.89 -0.08 18-Aug-14 756.0 736.0 746.0 760.70 628.8 608.8 618.8 769.69 - - - - 127.2 -8.99 -0.07 4-Nov-14 756.0 736.0 746.0 756.24 628.8 608.8 618.8 766.51 - - - - 127.2 -10.27 -0.08 12-Feb-15 756.0 736.0 746.0 759.92 628.8 608.8 618.8 767.63 - - - - 127.2 -7.71 -0.06 19-May-15 756.0 736.0 746.0 756.84 628.8 608.8 618.8 766.55 - - - - 127.2 -9.71 -0.08 10-Aug-15 756.0 736.0 746.0 757.09 628.8 608.8 618.8 766.77 - - - - 127.2 -9.68 -0.08

-0.06 2.4.12-71 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report Table 2.4.12-9 (Sheet 12 of 26)

Vertical Hydraulic Gradients Upper Zone Lower Zone Deeper Zone Top of Bottom of Elevation Top of Bottom of Elevation Top of Bottom of Elevation screen screen Midpoint of Water screen screen Midpoint of Water screen screen Midpoint of Water Well Pair Date (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) z h iv 24-Sep-13 734.1 714.1 724.1 741.44 698.8 678.8 688.8 741.48 - - - - 35.3 -0.04 0.00 1-Oct-13 734.1 714.1 724.1 741.04 698.8 678.8 688.8 741.08 - - - - 35.3 -0.04 0.00 9-Oct-13 734.1 714.1 724.1 740.06 698.8 678.8 688.8 740.13 - - - - 35.3 -0.07 0.00 26-Oct-13 734.1 714.1 724.1 739.89 698.8 678.8 688.8 739.92 - - - - 35.3 -0.03 0.00 5-Nov-13 734.1 714.1 724.1 739.74 698.8 678.8 688.8 739.79 - - - - 35.3 -0.05 0.00 12-Nov-13 734.1 714.1 724.1 738.85 698.8 678.8 688.8 738.90 - - - - 35.3 -0.05 0.00 23-Nov-13 734.1 714.1 724.1 737.22 698.8 678.8 688.8 737.29 - - - - 35.3 -0.07 0.00 9-Dec-13 734.1 714.1 724.1 745.93 698.8 678.8 688.8 745.56 - - - - 35.3 0.37 0.01 OW-416U/L (Upper/Lower) 20-Dec-13 734.1 714.1 724.1 738.50 698.8 678.8 688.8 738.56 - - - - 35.3 -0.06 0.00 13-Jan-14 734.1 714.1 724.1 742.62 698.8 678.8 688.8 742.60 - - - - 35.3 0.02 0.00 18-Feb-14 734.1 714.1 724.1 739.24 698.8 678.8 688.8 739.30 - - - - 35.3 -0.06 0.00 16-Mar-14 734.1 714.1 724.1 736.64 698.8 678.8 688.8 736.75 - - - - 35.3 -0.11 0.00 15-Apr-14 734.1 714.1 724.1 739.02 698.8 678.8 688.8 739.08 - - - - 35.3 -0.06 0.00 15-May-14 734.1 714.1 724.1 741.99 698.8 678.8 688.8 742.00 - - - - 35.3 -0.01 0.00 16-Jun-14 734.1 714.1 724.1 741.19 698.8 678.8 688.8 741.24 - - - - 35.3 -0.05 0.00 16-Jul-14 734.1 714.1 724.1 740.70 698.8 678.8 688.8 740.72 - - - - 35.3 -0.02 0.00 18-Aug-14 734.1 714.1 724.1 740.92 698.8 678.8 688.8 740.98 - - - - 35.3 -0.06 0.00 4-Nov-14 734.1 714.1 724.1 739.92 698.8 678.8 688.8 739.97 - - - - 35.3 -0.05 0.00 12-Feb-15 734.1 714.1 724.1 736.89 698.8 678.8 688.8 736.94 - - - - 35.3 -0.05 0.00 19-May-15 734.1 714.1 724.1 740.44 698.8 678.8 688.8 740.49 - - - - 35.3 -0.05 0.00 10-Aug-15 734.1 714.1 724.1 741.15 698.8 678.8 688.8 741.18 - - - - 35.3 -0.03 0.00 0.00 2.4.12-72 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report Table 2.4.12-9 (Sheet 13 of 26)

Vertical Hydraulic Gradients Upper Zone Lower Zone Deeper Zone Top of Bottom of Elevation Top of Bottom of Elevation Top of Bottom of Elevation screen screen Midpoint of Water screen screen Midpoint of Water screen screen Midpoint of Water Well Pair Date (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) z h iv 24-Sep-13 722.2 702.2 712.2 746.97 677.7 657.7 667.7 750.41 - - - - 44.5 -3.44 -0.08 1-Oct-13 722.2 702.2 712.2 746.77 677.7 657.7 667.7 750.17 - - - - 44.5 -3.40 -0.08 9-Oct-13 722.2 702.2 712.2 746.41 677.7 657.7 667.7 749.89 - - - - 44.5 -3.48 -0.08 26-Oct-13 722.2 702.2 712.2 745.93 677.7 657.7 667.7 749.15 - - - - 44.5 -3.22 -0.07 5-Nov-13 722.2 702.2 712.2 745.58 677.7 657.7 667.7 748.74 - - - - 44.5 -3.16 -0.07 12-Nov-13 722.2 702.2 712.2 745.09 677.7 657.7 667.7 748.44 - - - - 44.5 -3.35 -0.08 23-Nov-13 722.2 702.2 712.2 744.30 677.7 657.7 667.7 747.77 - - - - 44.5 -3.47 -0.08 9-Dec-13 722.2 702.2 712.2 748.15 677.7 657.7 667.7 748.61 - - - - 44.5 -0.46 -0.01 20-Dec-13 722.2 702.2 712.2 747.39 677.7 657.7 667.7 750.11 - - - - 44.5 -2.72 -0.06 OW-417U/L (Upper/Lower) 13-Jan-14 722.2 702.2 712.2 749.18 677.7 657.7 667.7 752.28 - - - - 44.5 -3.10 -0.07 16-Jan-14 722.2 702.2 712.2 749.42 677.7 657.7 667.7 752.53 - - - - 44.5 -3.11 -0.07 18-Feb-14 722.2 702.2 712.2 747.71 677.7 657.7 667.7 751.87 - - - - 44.5 -4.16 -0.09 16-Mar-14 722.2 702.2 712.2 746.82 677.7 657.7 667.7 751.44 - - - - 44.5 -4.62 -0.10 15-Apr-14 722.2 702.2 712.2 746.63 677.7 657.7 667.7 751.29 - - - - 44.5 -4.66 -0.10 15-May-14 722.2 702.2 712.2 747.35 677.7 657.7 667.7 750.56 - - - - 44.5 -3.21 -0.07 16-Jun-14 722.2 702.2 712.2 745.42 677.7 657.7 667.7 749.38 - - - - 44.5 -3.96 -0.09 16-Jul-14 722.2 702.2 712.2 744.94 677.7 657.7 667.7 748.66 - - - - 44.5 -3.72 -0.08 18-Aug-14 722.2 702.2 712.2 745.17 677.7 657.7 667.7 748.55 - - - - 44.5 -3.38 -0.08 4-Nov-14 722.2 702.2 712.2 744.94 677.7 657.7 667.7 748.32 - - - - 44.5 -3.38 -0.08 12-Feb-15 722.2 702.2 712.2 745.80 677.7 657.7 667.7 750.96 - - - - 44.5 -5.16 -0.12 19-May-15 722.2 702.2 712.2 746.05 677.7 657.7 667.7 750.79 - - - - 44.5 -4.74 -0.11 10-Aug-15 722.2 702.2 712.2 745.92 677.7 657.7 667.7 750.16 - - - - 44.5 -4.24 -0.10

-0.08 2.4.12-73 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report Table 2.4.12-9 (Sheet 14 of 26)

Vertical Hydraulic Gradients Upper Zone Lower Zone Deeper Zone Top of Bottom of Elevation Top of Bottom of Elevation Top of Bottom of Elevation screen screen Midpoint of Water screen screen Midpoint of Water screen screen Midpoint of Water Well Pair Date (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) z h iv 24-Sep-13 715.0 705.0 710.0 750.96 674.6 654.6 664.6 748.21 - - - - 45.4 2.75 0.06 1-Oct-13 715.0 705.0 710.0 751.02 674.6 654.6 664.6 746.88 - - - - 45.4 4.14 0.09 9-Oct-13 715.0 705.0 710.0 750.61 674.6 654.6 664.6 745.77 - - - - 45.4 4.84 0.11 26-Oct-13 715.0 705.0 710.0 749.38 674.6 654.6 664.6 744.96 - - - - 45.4 4.42 0.10 5-Nov-13 715.0 705.0 710.0 748.53 674.6 654.6 664.6 744.31 - - - - 45.4 4.22 0.09 12-Nov-13 715.0 705.0 710.0 747.83 674.6 654.6 664.6 743.54 - - - - 45.4 4.29 0.09 23-Nov-13 715.0 705.0 710.0 747.17 674.6 654.6 664.6 742.98 - - - - 45.4 4.19 0.09 9-Dec-13 715.0 705.0 710.0 761.40 674.6 654.6 664.6 750.56 - - - - 45.4 10.84 0.24 OW-418U/L (Upper/Lower) 20-Dec-13 715.0 705.0 710.0 754.59 674.6 654.6 664.6 752.07 - - - - 45.4 2.52 0.06 13-Jan-14 715.0 705.0 710.0 757.14 674.6 654.6 664.6 753.03 - - - - 45.4 4.11 0.09 18-Feb-14 715.0 705.0 710.0 755.36 674.6 654.6 664.6 751.43 - - - - 45.4 3.93 0.09 16-Mar-14 715.0 705.0 710.0 754.81 674.6 654.6 664.6 749.21 - - - - 45.4 5.60 0.12 15-Apr-14 715.0 705.0 710.0 755.25 674.6 654.6 664.6 749.83 - - - - 45.4 5.42 0.12 15-May-14 715.0 705.0 710.0 752.70 674.6 654.6 664.6 748.58 - - - - 45.4 4.12 0.09 16-Jun-14 715.0 705.0 710.0 750.61 674.6 654.6 664.6 747.88 - - - - 45.4 2.73 0.06 16-Jul-14 715.0 705.0 710.0 749.86 674.6 654.6 664.6 745.04 - - - - 45.4 4.82 0.11 18-Aug-14 715.0 705.0 710.0 750.95 674.6 654.6 664.6 750.26 - - - - 45.4 0.69 0.02 4-Nov-14 715.0 705.0 710.0 749.93 674.6 654.6 664.6 745.07 - - - - 45.4 4.86 0.11 12-Feb-15 715.0 705.0 710.0 753.45 674.6 654.6 664.6 747.99 - - - - 45.4 5.46 0.12 19-May-15 715.0 705.0 710.0 751.81 674.6 654.6 664.6 746.24 - - - - 45.4 5.57 0.12 10-Aug-15 715.0 705.0 710.0 752.26 674.6 654.6 664.6 746.41 - - - - 45.4 5.85 0.13 0.10 2.4.12-74 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report Table 2.4.12-9 (Sheet 15 of 26)

Vertical Hydraulic Gradients Upper Zone Lower Zone Deeper Zone Top of Bottom of Elevation Top of Bottom of Elevation Top of Bottom of Elevation screen screen Midpoint of Water screen screen Midpoint of Water screen screen Midpoint of Water Well Pair Date (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) z h iv 24-Sep-13 742.8 722.8 732.8 757.40 695.3 675.3 685.3 756.40 - - - - 47.5 1.00 0.02 1-Oct-13 742.8 722.8 732.8 753.19 695.3 675.3 685.3 752.89 - - - - 47.5 0.30 0.01 9-Oct-13 742.8 722.8 732.8 749.58 695.3 675.3 685.3 749.68 - - - - 47.5 -0.10 0.00 26-Oct-13 742.8 722.8 732.8 748.62 695.3 675.3 685.3 748.72 - - - - 47.5 -0.10 0.00 5-Nov-13 742.8 722.8 732.8 748.41 695.3 675.3 685.3 748.52 - - - - 47.5 -0.11 0.00 12-Nov-13 742.8 722.8 732.8 748.31 695.3 675.3 685.3 748.45 - - - - 47.5 -0.14 0.00 23-Nov-13 742.8 722.8 732.8 751.16 695.3 675.3 685.3 751.07 - - - - 47.5 0.09 0.00 9-Dec-13 742.8 722.8 732.8 767.70 695.3 675.3 685.3 763.57 - - - - 47.5 4.13 0.09 OW-419U/L (Upper/Lower) 20-Dec-13 742.8 722.8 732.8 759.76 695.3 675.3 685.3 758.77 - - - - 47.5 0.99 0.02 13-Jan-14 742.8 722.8 732.8 763.71 695.3 675.3 685.3 761.86 - - - - 47.5 1.85 0.04 18-Feb-14 742.8 722.8 732.8 758.78 695.3 675.3 685.3 758.00 - - - - 47.5 0.78 0.02 16-Mar-14 742.8 722.8 732.8 755.60 695.3 675.3 685.3 755.12 - - - - 47.5 0.48 0.01 15-Apr-14 742.8 722.8 732.8 757.75 695.3 675.3 685.3 757.09 - - - - 47.5 0.66 0.01 15-May-14 742.8 722.8 732.8 753.90 695.3 675.3 685.3 752.49 - - - - 47.5 1.41 0.03 16-Jun-14 742.8 722.8 732.8 757.11 695.3 675.3 685.3 755.99 - - - - 47.5 1.12 0.02 16-Jul-14 742.8 722.8 732.8 748.44 695.3 675.3 685.3 748.59 - - - - 47.5 -0.15 0.00 18-Aug-14 742.8 722.8 732.8 759.19 695.3 675.3 685.3 757.84 - - - - 47.5 1.35 0.03 4-Nov-14 742.8 722.8 732.8 748.77 695.3 675.3 685.3 748.84 - - - - 47.5 -0.07 0.00 12-Feb-15 742.8 722.8 732.8 753.79 695.3 675.3 685.3 753.23 - - - - 47.5 0.56 0.01 19-May-15 742.8 722.8 732.8 748.18 695.3 675.3 685.3 748.34 - - - - 47.5 -0.16 0.00 10-Aug-15 742.8 722.8 732.8 748.46 695.3 675.3 685.3 748.53 - - - - 47.5 -0.07 0.00 0.01 2.4.12-75 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report Table 2.4.12-9 (Sheet 16 of 26)

Vertical Hydraulic Gradients Upper Zone Lower Zone Deeper Zone Top of Bottom of Elevation Top of Bottom of Elevation Top of Bottom of Elevation screen screen Midpoint of Water screen screen Midpoint of Water screen screen Midpoint of Water Well Pair Date (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) z h iv 24-Sep-13 776.9 756.9 766.9 758.87 672.2 652.2 662.2 742.13 - - - - 104.7 16.74 0.16 1-Oct-13 776.9 756.9 766.9 757.99 672.2 652.2 662.2 741.38 - - - - 104.7 16.61 0.16 9-Oct-13 776.9 756.9 766.9 757.04 672.2 652.2 662.2 740.97 - - - - 104.7 16.07 0.15 26-Oct-13 776.9 756.9 766.9 Dry 672.2 652.2 662.2 741.01 - - - - 104.7 NA NA 5-Nov-13 776.9 756.9 766.9 Dry 672.2 652.2 662.2 740.66 - - - - 104.7 NA NA 12-Nov-13 776.9 756.9 766.9 Dry 672.2 652.2 662.2 740.05 - - - - 104.7 NA NA 23-Nov-13 776.9 756.9 766.9 758.61 672.2 652.2 662.2 736.59 - - - - 104.7 22.02 0.21 9-Dec-13 776.9 756.9 766.9 760.58 672.2 652.2 662.2 744.97 - - - - 104.7 15.61 0.15 OW-420U/L (Upper/Lower) 20-Dec-13 776.9 756.9 766.9 758.88 672.2 652.2 662.2 739.99 - - - - 104.7 18.89 0.18 13-Jan-14 776.9 756.9 766.9 759.04 672.2 652.2 662.2 745.43 - - - - 104.7 13.61 0.13 18-Feb-14 776.9 756.9 766.9 759.13 672.2 652.2 662.2 741.77 - - - - 104.7 17.36 0.17 16-Mar-14 776.9 756.9 766.9 758.33 672.2 652.2 662.2 739.83 - - - - 104.7 18.50 0.18 15-Apr-14 776.9 756.9 766.9 758.69 672.2 652.2 662.2 741.64 - - - - 104.7 17.05 0.16 15-May-14 776.9 756.9 766.9 759.28 672.2 652.2 662.2 743.53 - - - - 104.7 15.75 0.15 16-Jun-14 776.9 756.9 766.9 759.23 672.2 652.2 662.2 741.98 - - - - 104.7 17.25 0.16 16-Jul-14 776.9 756.9 766.9 758.02 672.2 652.2 662.2 741.21 - - - - 104.7 16.81 0.16 18-Aug-14 776.9 756.9 766.9 758.72 672.2 652.2 662.2 741.75 - - - - 104.7 16.97 0.16 4-Nov-14 776.9 756.9 766.9 758.06 672.2 652.2 662.2 740.67 - - - - 104.7 17.39 0.17 12-Feb-15 776.9 756.9 766.9 758.67 672.2 652.2 662.2 739.28 - - - - 104.7 19.39 0.19 19-May-15 776.9 756.9 766.9 756.92 672.2 652.2 662.2 741.72 - - - - 104.7 15.20 0.15 10-Aug-15 776.9 756.9 766.9 757.12 672.2 652.2 662.2 741.62 - - - - 104.7 15.50 0.15 0.16 2.4.12-76 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report Table 2.4.12-9 (Sheet 17 of 26)

Vertical Hydraulic Gradients Upper Zone Lower Zone Deeper Zone Top of Bottom of Elevation Top of Bottom of Elevation Top of Bottom of Elevation screen screen Midpoint of Water screen screen Midpoint of Water screen screen Midpoint of Water Well Pair Date (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) z h iv 24-Sep-13 750.4 730.4 740.4 753.23 700.0 680.0 690.0 709.27 - - - - 50.4 43.96 0.87 1-Oct-13 750.4 730.4 740.4 754.36 700.0 680.0 690.0 737.20 - - - - 50.4 17.16 0.34 8-9 Oct-13 750.4 730.4 740.4 754.48 700.0 680.0 690.0 746.66 - - - - 50.4 7.82 0.16 26-Oct-13 750.4 730.4 740.4 754.12 700.0 680.0 690.0 747.92 - - - - 50.4 6.20 0.12 5-Nov-13 750.4 730.4 740.4 754.14 700.0 680.0 690.0 748.04 - - - - 50.4 6.10 0.12 12-Nov-13 750.4 730.4 740.4 754.18 700.0 680.0 690.0 747.90 - - - - 50.4 6.28 0.12 23-Nov-13 750.4 730.4 740.4 754.15 700.0 680.0 690.0 688.34 - - - - 50.4 65.81 1.31 9-Dec-13 750.4 730.4 740.4 754.23 700.0 680.0 690.0 744.68 - - - - 50.4 9.55 0.19 OW-421U/L (Upper/Lower) 20-Dec-13 750.4 730.4 740.4 754.45 700.0 680.0 690.0 749.45 - - - - 50.4 5.00 0.10 13-Jan-14 750.4 730.4 740.4 754.55 700.0 680.0 690.0 750.43 - - - - 50.4 4.12 0.08 18-Feb-14 750.4 730.4 740.4 754.45 700.0 680.0 690.0 750.26 - - - - 50.4 4.19 0.08 16-Mar-14 750.4 730.4 740.4 754.51 700.0 680.0 690.0 750.11 - - - - 50.4 4.40 0.09 15-Apr-14 750.4 730.4 740.4 754.70 700.0 680.0 690.0 750.39 - - - - 50.4 4.31 0.09 15-May-14 750.4 730.4 740.4 754.51 700.0 680.0 690.0 750.30 - - - - 50.4 4.21 0.08 16-Jun-14 750.4 730.4 740.4 754.30 700.0 680.0 690.0 750.11 - - - - 50.4 4.19 0.08 16-Jul-14 750.4 730.4 740.4 754.31 700.0 680.0 690.0 749.88 - - - - 50.4 4.43 0.09 18-Aug-14 750.4 730.4 740.4 754.31 700.0 680.0 690.0 749.93 - - - - 50.4 4.38 0.09 4-Nov-14 750.4 730.4 740.4 754.06 700.0 680.0 690.0 749.98 - - - - 50.4 4.08 0.08 12-Feb-15 750.4 730.4 740.4 754.57 700.0 680.0 690.0 749.86 - - - - 50.4 4.71 0.09 19-May-15 750.4 730.4 740.4 754.12 700.0 680.0 690.0 750.06 - - - - 50.4 4.06 0.08 10-Aug-15 750.4 730.4 740.4 754.10 700.0 680.0 690.0 750.10 - - - - 50.4 4.00 0.08 0.11 2.4.12-77 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report Table 2.4.12-9 (Sheet 18 of 26)

Vertical Hydraulic Gradients Upper Zone Lower Zone Deeper Zone Top of Bottom of Elevation Top of Bottom of Elevation Top of Bottom of Elevation screen screen Midpoint of Water screen screen Midpoint of Water screen screen Midpoint of Water Well Pair Date (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) z h iv 24-Sep-13 750.4 730.4 740.4 753.23 - - - - 626.8 606.8 616.8 629.04 123.6 124.19 1.00 1-Oct-13 750.4 730.4 740.4 754.36 - - - - 626.8 606.8 616.8 669.54 123.6 84.82 0.69 8-9 Oct-13 750.4 730.4 740.4 754.48 - - - - 626.8 606.8 616.8 703.13 123.6 51.35 0.42 26-Oct-13 750.4 730.4 740.4 754.12 - - - - 626.8 606.8 616.8 733.19 123.6 20.93 0.17 5-Nov-13 750.4 730.4 740.4 754.14 - - - - 626.8 606.8 616.8 739.70 123.6 14.44 0.12 12-Nov-13 750.4 730.4 740.4 754.18 - - - - 626.8 606.8 616.8 741.91 123.6 12.27 0.10 23-Nov-13 750.4 730.4 740.4 754.15 - - - - 626.8 606.8 616.8 743.40 123.6 10.75 0.09 9-Dec-13 750.4 730.4 740.4 754.23 - - - - 626.8 606.8 616.8 744.02 123.6 10.21 0.08 OW-421U/D (Upper/Deeper) 20-Dec-13 750.4 730.4 740.4 754.45 - - - - 626.8 606.8 616.8 745.20 123.6 9.25 0.07 13-Jan-14 750.4 730.4 740.4 754.55 - - - - 626.8 606.8 616.8 719.16 123.6 35.39 0.29 18-Feb-14 750.4 730.4 740.4 754.45 - - - - 626.8 606.8 616.8 744.70 123.6 9.75 0.08 16-Mar-14 750.4 730.4 740.4 754.51 - - - - 626.8 606.8 616.8 745.90 123.6 8.61 0.07 15-Apr-14 750.4 730.4 740.4 754.70 - - - - 626.8 606.8 616.8 745.78 123.6 8.92 0.07 15-May-14 750.4 730.4 740.4 754.51 - - - - 626.8 606.8 616.8 742.91 123.6 11.60 0.09 16-Jun-14 750.4 730.4 740.4 754.30 - - - - 626.8 606.8 616.8 746.18 123.6 8.12 0.07 16-Jul-14 750.4 730.4 740.4 754.31 - - - - 626.8 606.8 616.8 746.47 123.6 7.84 0.06 18-Aug-14 750.4 730.4 740.4 754.31 - - - - 626.8 606.8 616.8 746.53 123.6 7.78 0.06 4-Nov-14 750.4 730.4 740.4 754.06 - - - - 626.8 606.8 616.8 746.59 123.6 7.47 0.06 12-Feb-15 750.4 730.4 740.4 754.57 - - - - 626.8 606.8 616.8 745.48 123.6 9.09 0.07 19-May-15 750.4 730.4 740.4 754.12 - - - - 626.8 606.8 616.8 746.55 123.6 7.57 0.06 10-Aug-15 750.4 730.4 740.4 754.10 - - - - 626.8 606.8 616.8 747.10 123.6 7.00 0.06 0.08 2.4.12-78 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report Table 2.4.12-9 (Sheet 19 of 26)

Vertical Hydraulic Gradients Upper Zone Lower Zone Deeper Zone Top of Bottom of Elevation Top of Bottom of Elevation Top of Bottom of Elevation screen screen Midpoint of Water screen screen Midpoint of Water screen screen Midpoint of Water Well Pair Date (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) z h iv 24-Sep-13 - - - - 700.0 680.0 690.0 709.27 626.8 606.8 616.8 629.04 73.2 80.23 1.10 1-Oct-13 - - - - 700.0 680.0 690.0 737.20 626.8 606.8 616.8 669.54 73.2 67.66 0.92 8-9 Oct-13 - - - - 700.0 680.0 690.0 746.66 626.8 606.8 616.8 703.13 73.2 43.53 0.59 26-Oct-13 - - - - 700.0 680.0 690.0 747.92 626.8 606.8 616.8 733.19 73.2 14.73 0.20 5-Nov-13 - - - - 700.0 680.0 690.0 748.04 626.8 606.8 616.8 739.70 73.2 8.34 0.11 12-Nov-13 - - - - 700.0 680.0 690.0 747.90 626.8 606.8 616.8 741.91 73.2 5.99 0.08 23-Nov-13 - - - - 700.0 680.0 690.0 688.34 626.8 606.8 616.8 743.40 73.2 -55.06 -0.75 9-Dec-13 - - - - 700.0 680.0 690.0 744.68 626.8 606.8 616.8 744.02 73.2 0.66 0.01 OW-421L/D (Lower/Deeper) 20-Dec-13 - - - - 700.0 680.0 690.0 749.45 626.8 606.8 616.8 745.20 73.2 4.25 0.06 13-Jan-14 - - - - 700.0 680.0 690.0 750.43 626.8 606.8 616.8 719.16 73.2 31.27 0.43 18-Feb-14 - - - - 700.0 680.0 690.0 750.26 626.8 606.8 616.8 744.70 73.2 5.56 0.08 16-Mar-14 - - - - 700.0 680.0 690.0 750.11 626.8 606.8 616.8 745.90 73.2 4.21 0.06 15-Apr-14 - - - - 700.0 680.0 690.0 750.39 626.8 606.8 616.8 745.78 73.2 4.61 0.06 15-May-14 - - - - 700.0 680.0 690.0 750.30 626.8 606.8 616.8 742.91 73.2 7.39 0.10 16-Jun-14 - - - - 700.0 680.0 690.0 750.11 626.8 606.8 616.8 746.18 73.2 3.93 0.05 16-Jul-14 - - - - 700.0 680.0 690.0 749.88 626.8 606.8 616.8 746.47 73.2 3.41 0.05 18-Aug-14 - - - - 700.0 680.0 690.0 749.93 626.8 606.8 616.8 746.53 73.2 3.40 0.05 4-Nov-14 - - - - 700.0 680.0 690.0 749.98 626.8 606.8 616.8 746.59 73.2 3.39 0.05 12-Feb-15 - - - - 700.0 680.0 690.0 749.86 626.8 606.8 616.8 745.48 73.2 4.38 0.06 19-May-15 - - - - 700.0 680.0 690.0 750.06 626.8 606.8 616.8 746.55 73.2 3.51 0.05 10-Aug-15 - - - - 700.0 680.0 690.0 750.10 626.8 606.8 616.8 747.10 73.2 3.00 0.04 0.07 2.4.12-79 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report Table 2.4.12-9 (Sheet 20 of 26)

Vertical Hydraulic Gradients Upper Zone Lower Zone Deeper Zone Top of Bottom of Elevation Top of Bottom of Elevation Top of Bottom of Elevation screen screen Midpoint of Water screen screen Midpoint of Water screen screen Midpoint of Water Well Pair Date (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) z h iv 24-Sep-13 755.2 735.2 745.2 761.43 658.4 638.4 648.4 771.60 - - - - 96.8 -10.17 -0.11 1-Oct-13 755.2 735.2 745.2 760.46 658.4 638.4 648.4 769.65 - - - - 96.8 -9.19 -0.09 9-Oct-13 755.2 735.2 745.2 760.36 658.4 638.4 648.4 765.89 - - - - 96.8 -5.53 -0.06 26-Oct-13 755.2 735.2 745.2 758.49 658.4 638.4 648.4 763.72 - - - - 96.8 -5.23 -0.05 5-Nov-13 755.2 735.2 745.2 757.93 658.4 638.4 648.4 762.85 - - - - 96.8 -4.92 -0.05 12-Nov-13 755.2 735.2 745.2 757.29 658.4 638.4 648.4 762.13 - - - - 96.8 -4.84 -0.05 23-Nov-13 755.2 735.2 745.2 758.68 658.4 638.4 648.4 763.36 - - - - 96.8 -4.68 -0.05 9-Dec-13 755.2 735.2 745.2 765.60 658.4 638.4 648.4 780.29 - - - - 96.8 -14.69 -0.15 20-Dec-13 755.2 735.2 745.2 760.92 658.4 638.4 648.4 774.24 - - - - 96.8 -13.32 -0.14 OW-423U/L (Upper/Lower) 13-Jan-14 755.2 735.2 745.2 762.28 658.4 638.4 648.4 776.65 - - - - 96.8 -14.37 -0.15 16-Jan-14 755.2 735.2 745.2 762.00 658.4 638.4 648.4 777.16 - - - - 96.8 -15.16 -0.16 18-Feb-14 755.2 735.2 745.2 761.51 658.4 638.4 648.4 775.23 - - - - 96.8 -13.72 -0.14 16-Mar-14 755.2 735.2 745.2 761.17 658.4 638.4 648.4 774.00 - - - - 96.8 -12.83 -0.13 15-Apr-14 755.2 735.2 745.2 761.26 658.4 638.4 648.4 774.83 - - - - 96.8 -13.57 -0.14 15-May-14 755.2 735.2 745.2 762.04 658.4 638.4 648.4 772.85 - - - - 96.8 -10.81 -0.11 16-Jun-14 755.2 735.2 745.2 760.81 658.4 638.4 648.4 771.24 - - - - 96.8 -10.43 -0.11 16-Jul-14 755.2 735.2 745.2 759.71 658.4 638.4 648.4 768.64 - - - - 96.8 -8.93 -0.09 18-Aug-14 755.2 735.2 745.2 760.62 658.4 638.4 648.4 773.19 - - - - 96.8 -12.57 -0.13 4-Nov-14 755.2 735.2 745.2 759.97 658.4 638.4 648.4 770.46 - - - - 96.8 -10.49 -0.11 12-Feb-15 755.2 735.2 745.2 760.89 658.4 638.4 648.4 774.03 - - - - 96.8 -13.14 -0.14 19-May-15 755.2 735.2 745.2 760.34 658.4 638.4 648.4 771.95 - - - - 96.8 -11.61 -0.12 10-Aug-15 755.2 735.2 745.2 760.49 658.4 638.4 648.4 771.38 - - - - 96.8 -10.89 -0.11

-0.11 2.4.12-80 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report Table 2.4.12-9 (Sheet 21 of 26)

Vertical Hydraulic Gradients Upper Zone Lower Zone Deeper Zone Top of Bottom of Elevation Top of Bottom of Elevation Top of Bottom of Elevation screen screen Midpoint of Water screen screen Midpoint of Water screen screen Midpoint of Water Well Pair Date (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) z h iv 24-Sep-13 755.2 735.2 745.2 761.43 - - - - 551.8 531.8 541.80 775.52 203.4 -14.09 -0.07 1-Oct-13 755.2 735.2 745.2 760.46 - - - - 551.8 531.8 541.80 775.77 203.4 -15.31 -0.08 9-Oct-13 755.2 735.2 745.2 760.36 - - - - 551.8 531.8 541.80 774.88 203.4 -14.52 -0.07 26-Oct-13 755.2 735.2 745.2 758.49 - - - - 551.8 531.8 541.80 772.06 203.4 -13.57 -0.07 5-Nov-13 755.2 735.2 745.2 757.93 - - - - 551.8 531.8 541.80 771.19 203.4 -13.26 -0.07 12-Nov-13 755.2 735.2 745.2 757.29 - - - - 551.8 531.8 541.80 770.81 203.4 -13.52 -0.07 23-Nov-13 755.2 735.2 745.2 758.68 - - - - 551.8 531.8 541.80 772.70 203.4 -14.02 -0.07 9-Dec-13 755.2 735.2 745.2 765.60 - - - - 551.8 531.8 541.80 782.28 203.4 -16.68 -0.08 OW-423U/D (Upper/Deeper) 20-Dec-13 755.2 735.2 745.2 760.92 - - - - 551.8 531.8 541.80 782.42 203.4 -21.50 -0.11 13-Jan-14 755.2 735.2 745.2 762.28 - - - - 551.8 531.8 541.80 784.91 203.4 -22.63 -0.11 16-Jan-14 755.2 735.2 745.2 762.00 - - - - 551.8 531.8 541.80 786.36 203.4 -24.36 -0.12 18-Feb-14 755.2 735.2 745.2 761.51 - - - - 551.8 531.8 541.80 782.40 203.4 -20.89 -0.10 16-Mar-14 755.2 735.2 745.2 761.17 - - - - 551.8 531.8 541.80 780.98 203.4 -19.81 -0.10 15-Apr-14 755.2 735.2 745.2 761.26 - - - - 551.8 531.8 541.80 783.21 203.4 -21.95 -0.11 15-May-14 755.2 735.2 745.2 762.04 - - - - 551.8 531.8 541.80 778.91 203.4 -16.87 -0.08 16-Jun-14 755.2 735.2 745.2 760.81 - - - - 551.8 531.8 541.80 776.92 203.4 -16.11 -0.08 16-Jul-14 755.2 735.2 745.2 759.71 - - - - 551.8 531.8 541.80 774.48 203.4 -14.77 -0.07 18-Aug-14 755.2 735.2 745.2 760.62 - - - - 551.8 531.8 541.80 778.31 203.4 -17.69 -0.09 4-Nov-14 755.2 735.2 745.2 759.97 - - - - 551.8 531.8 541.80 775.30 203.4 -15.33 -0.08 12-Feb-15 755.2 735.2 745.2 760.89 - - - - 551.8 531.8 541.80 781.84 203.4 -20.95 -0.10 19-May-15 755.2 735.2 745.2 760.34 - - - - 551.8 531.8 541.80 777.84 203.4 -17.50 -0.09 10-Aug-15 755.2 735.2 745.2 760.49 - - - - 551.8 531.8 541.80 776.72 203.4 -16.23 -0.08

-0.09 2.4.12-81 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report Table 2.4.12-9 (Sheet 22 of 26)

Vertical Hydraulic Gradients Upper Zone Lower Zone Deeper Zone Top of Bottom of Elevation Top of Bottom of Elevation Top of Bottom of Elevation screen screen Midpoint of Water screen screen Midpoint of Water screen screen Midpoint of Water Well Pair Date (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) z h iv 24-Sep-13 - - - - 658.4 638.4 648.4 771.60 551.8 531.8 541.8 775.52 106.6 -3.92 -0.04 1-Oct-13 - - - - 658.4 638.4 648.4 769.65 551.8 531.8 541.8 775.77 106.6 -6.12 -0.06 9-Oct-13 - - - - 658.4 638.4 648.4 765.89 551.8 531.8 541.8 774.88 106.6 -8.99 -0.08 26-Oct-13 - - - - 658.4 638.4 648.4 763.72 551.8 531.8 541.8 772.06 106.6 -8.34 -0.08 5-Nov-13 - - - - 658.4 638.4 648.4 762.85 551.8 531.8 541.8 771.19 106.6 -8.34 -0.08 12-Nov-13 - - - - 658.4 638.4 648.4 762.13 551.8 531.8 541.8 770.81 106.6 -8.68 -0.08 23-Nov-13 - - - - 658.4 638.4 648.4 763.36 551.8 531.8 541.8 772.70 106.6 -9.34 -0.09 9-Dec-13 - - - - 658.4 638.4 648.4 780.29 551.8 531.8 541.8 782.28 106.6 -1.99 -0.02 OW-423L/D (Lower/Deeper) 20-Dec-13 - - - - 658.4 638.4 648.4 774.24 551.8 531.8 541.8 782.42 106.6 -8.18 -0.08 13-Jan-14 - - - - 658.4 638.4 648.4 776.65 551.8 531.8 541.8 784.91 106.6 -8.26 -0.08 16-Jan-14 - - - - 658.4 638.4 648.4 777.16 551.8 531.8 541.8 786.36 106.6 -9.20 -0.09 18-Feb-14 - - - - 658.4 638.4 648.4 775.23 551.8 531.8 541.8 782.40 106.6 -7.17 -0.07 16-Mar-14 - - - - 658.4 638.4 648.4 774.00 551.8 531.8 541.8 780.98 106.6 -6.98 -0.07 15-Apr-14 - - - - 658.4 638.4 648.4 774.83 551.8 531.8 541.8 783.21 106.6 -8.38 -0.08 15-May-14 - - - - 658.4 638.4 648.4 772.85 551.8 531.8 541.8 778.91 106.6 -6.06 -0.06 16-Jun-14 - - - - 658.4 638.4 648.4 771.24 551.8 531.8 541.8 776.92 106.6 -5.68 -0.05 16-Jul-14 - - - - 658.4 638.4 648.4 768.64 551.8 531.8 541.8 774.48 106.6 -5.84 -0.05 18-Aug-14 - - - - 658.4 638.4 648.4 773.19 551.8 531.8 541.8 778.31 106.6 -5.12 -0.05 4-Nov-14 - - - - 658.4 638.4 648.4 770.46 551.8 531.8 541.8 775.30 106.6 -4.84 -0.05 12-Feb-15 - - - - 658.4 638.4 648.4 774.03 551.8 531.8 541.8 781.84 106.6 -7.81 -0.07 19-May-15 - - - - 658.4 638.4 648.4 771.95 551.8 531.8 541.8 777.84 106.6 -5.89 -0.06 10-Aug-15 - - - - 658.4 638.4 648.4 771.38 551.8 531.8 541.8 776.72 106.6 -5.34 -0.05

-0.06 2.4.12-82 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report Table 2.4.12-9 (Sheet 23 of 26)

Vertical Hydraulic Gradients Upper Zone Lower Zone Deeper Zone Top of Bottom of Elevation Top of Bottom of Elevation Top of Bottom of Elevation screen screen Midpoint of Water screen screen Midpoint of Water screen screen Midpoint of Water Well Pair Date (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) z h iv 5-Nov-13 763.9 743.9 753.9 765.27 688.7 668.7 678.7 NM - - - - 75.20 NA NA 12-Nov-13 763.9 743.9 753.9 764.94 688.7 668.7 678.7 758.83 - - - - 75.20 6.11 0.08 23-Nov-13 763.9 743.9 753.9 773.13 688.7 668.7 678.7 782.21 - - - - 75.20 -9.08 -0.12 9-Dec-13 763.9 743.9 753.9 790.27 688.7 668.7 678.7 787.21 - - - - 75.20 3.06 0.04 20-Dec-13 763.9 743.9 753.9 785.43 688.7 668.7 678.7 778.42 - - - - 75.20 7.01 0.09 9-Jan-14 763.9 743.9 753.9 NM 688.7 668.7 678.7 NM - - - - 75.20 NA NA 13-Jan-14 763.9 743.9 753.9 791.44 688.7 668.7 678.7 789.46 - - - - 75.20 1.98 0.03 OW-428U/L (Upper/Lower) 16-Jan-14 763.9 743.9 753.9 NM 688.7 668.7 678.7 NM - - - - 75.20 NA NA 18-Feb-14 763.9 743.9 753.9 788.43 688.7 668.7 678.7 790.14 - - - - 75.20 -1.71 -0.02 16-Mar-14 763.9 743.9 753.9 785.08 688.7 668.7 678.7 790.74 - - - - 75.20 -5.66 -0.08 15-Apr-14 763.9 743.9 753.9 787.62 688.7 668.7 678.7 791.00 - - - - 75.20 -3.38 -0.04 15-May-14 763.9 743.9 753.9 786.42 688.7 668.7 678.7 790.97 - - - - 75.20 -4.55 -0.06 16-Jun-14 763.9 743.9 753.9 782.39 688.7 668.7 678.7 790.89 - - - - 75.20 -8.50 -0.11 16-Jul-14 763.9 743.9 753.9 776.93 688.7 668.7 678.7 790.84 - - - - 75.20 -13.91 -0.18 18-Aug-14 763.9 743.9 753.9 782.16 688.7 668.7 678.7 790.88 - - - - 75.20 -8.72 -0.12 4-Nov-14 763.9 743.9 753.9 777.56 688.7 668.7 678.7 791.00 - - - - 75.20 -13.44 -0.18 12-Feb-15 763.9 743.9 753.9 785.41 688.7 668.7 678.7 791.37 - - - - 75.20 -5.96 -0.08 19-May-15 763.9 743.9 753.9 779.93 688.7 668.7 678.7 791.33 - - - - 75.20 -11.40 -0.15 10-Aug-15 763.9 743.9 753.9 779.84 688.7 668.7 678.7 791.15 - - - - 75.20 -11.31 -0.15

-0.07 2.4.12-83 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report Table 2.4.12-9 (Sheet 24 of 26)

Vertical Hydraulic Gradients Upper Zone Lower Zone Deeper Zone Top of Bottom of Elevation Top of Bottom of Elevation Top of Bottom of Elevation screen screen Midpoint of Water screen screen Midpoint of Water screen screen Midpoint of Water Well Pair Date (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) z h iv 5-Nov-13 763.9 743.9 753.9 765.27 - - - - 613.5 593.5 603.5 NM 150.4 NA NA 12-Nov-13 763.9 743.9 753.9 764.94 - - - - 613.5 593.5 603.5 629.81 150.4 135.13 0.90 23-Nov-13 763.9 743.9 753.9 773.13 - - - - 613.5 593.5 603.5 761.53 150.4 11.60 0.08 9-Dec-13 763.9 743.9 753.9 790.27 - - - - 613.5 593.5 603.5 795.98 150.4 -5.71 -0.04 20-Dec-13 763.9 743.9 753.9 785.43 - - - - 613.5 593.5 603.5 779.64 150.4 5.79 0.04 9-Jan-14 763.9 743.9 753.9 NM - - - - 613.5 593.5 603.5 788.66 150.4 NA NA 13-Jan-14 763.9 743.9 753.9 791.44 - - - - 613.5 593.5 603.5 NM 150.4 NA NA OW-428U/D (Upper/Deeper) 16-Jan-14 763.9 743.9 753.9 NM - - - - 613.5 593.5 603.5 795.60 150.4 NA NA 18-Feb-14 763.9 743.9 753.9 788.43 - - - - 613.5 593.5 603.5 797.23 150.4 -8.80 -0.06 16-Mar-14 763.9 743.9 753.9 785.08 - - - - 613.5 593.5 603.5 795.07 150.4 -9.99 -0.07 15-Apr-14 763.9 743.9 753.9 787.62 - - - - 613.5 593.5 603.5 795.60 150.4 -7.98 -0.05 15-May-14 763.9 743.9 753.9 786.42 - - - - 613.5 593.5 603.5 793.60 150.4 -7.18 -0.05 16-Jun-14 763.9 743.9 753.9 782.39 - - - - 613.5 593.5 603.5 793.43 150.4 -11.04 -0.07 16-Jul-14 763.9 743.9 753.9 776.93 - - - - 613.5 593.5 603.5 790.55 150.4 -13.62 -0.09 18-Aug-14 763.9 743.9 753.9 782.16 - - - - 613.5 593.5 603.5 795.44 150.4 -13.28 -0.09 4-Nov-14 763.9 743.9 753.9 777.56 - - - - 613.5 593.5 603.5 788.77 150.4 -11.21 -0.07 12-Feb-15 763.9 743.9 753.9 785.41 - - - - 613.5 593.5 603.5 794.07 150.4 -8.66 -0.06 19-May-15 763.9 743.9 753.9 779.93 - - - - 613.5 593.5 603.5 790.81 150.4 -10.88 -0.07 10-Aug-15 763.9 743.9 753.9 779.84 - - - - 613.5 593.5 603.5 791.22 150.4 -11.38 -0.08

-0.07 2.4.12-84 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report Table 2.4.12-9 (Sheet 25 of 26)

Vertical Hydraulic Gradients Upper Zone Lower Zone Deeper Zone Top of Bottom of Elevation Top of Bottom of Elevation Top of Bottom of Elevation screen screen Midpoint of Water screen screen Midpoint of Water screen screen Midpoint of Water Well Pair Date (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) z h iv 5-Nov-13 - - - - 688.7 668.7 678.7 NM 613.5 593.5 603.5 NM 75.2 NA NA 12-Nov-13 - - - - 688.7 668.7 678.7 758.83 613.5 593.5 603.5 629.81 75.2 129.02 1.72 23-Nov-13 - - - - 688.7 668.7 678.7 782.21 613.5 593.5 603.5 761.53 75.2 20.68 0.27 9-Dec-13 - - - - 688.7 668.7 678.7 787.21 613.5 593.5 603.5 795.98 75.2 -8.77 -0.12 20-Dec-13 - - - - 688.7 668.7 678.7 778.42 613.5 593.5 603.5 779.64 75.2 -1.22 -0.02 9-Jan-14 - - - - 688.7 668.7 678.7 NM 613.5 593.5 603.5 788.66 75.2 NA NA 13-Jan-14 - - - - 688.7 668.7 678.7 789.46 613.5 593.5 603.5 NM 75.2 NA NA OW-428L/D (Lower/Deeper) 16-Jan-14 - - - - 688.7 668.7 678.7 NM 613.5 593.5 603.5 795.60 75.2 NA NA 18-Feb-14 - - - - 688.7 668.7 678.7 790.14 613.5 593.5 603.5 797.23 75.2 -7.09 -0.09 16-Mar-14 - - - - 688.7 668.7 678.7 790.74 613.5 593.5 603.5 795.07 75.2 -4.33 -0.06 15-Apr-14 - - - - 688.7 668.7 678.7 791.00 613.5 593.5 603.5 795.60 75.2 -4.60 -0.06 15-May-14 - - - - 688.7 668.7 678.7 790.97 613.5 593.5 603.5 793.60 75.2 -2.63 -0.03 16-Jun-14 - - - - 688.7 668.7 678.7 790.89 613.5 593.5 603.5 793.43 75.2 -2.54 -0.03 16-Jul-14 - - - - 688.7 668.7 678.7 790.84 613.5 593.5 603.5 790.55 75.2 0.29 0.00 18-Aug-14 - - - - 688.7 668.7 678.7 790.88 613.5 593.5 603.5 795.44 75.2 -4.56 -0.06 4-Nov-14 - - - - 688.7 668.7 678.7 791.00 613.5 593.5 603.5 788.77 75.2 2.23 0.03 12-Feb-15 - - - - 688.7 668.7 678.7 791.37 613.5 593.5 603.5 794.07 75.2 -2.70 -0.04 19-May-15 - - - - 688.7 668.7 678.7 791.33 613.5 593.5 603.5 790.81 75.2 0.52 0.01 10-Aug-15 - - - - 688.7 668.7 678.7 791.15 613.5 593.5 603.5 791.22 75.2 -0.07 0.00

-0.04 2.4.12-85 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report Table 2.4.12-9 (Sheet 26 of 26)

Vertical Hydraulic Gradients Upper Zone Lower Zone Deeper Zone Top of Bottom of Elevation Top of Bottom of Elevation Top of Bottom of Elevation screen screen Midpoint of Water screen screen Midpoint of Water screen screen Midpoint of Water Well Pair Date (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) (NAVD88) z h iv 12-Nov-13 759.4 739.4 749.4 758.70 651.2 631.2 641.2 636.85 - - - - 108.2 121.85 1.13 23-Nov-13 759.4 739.4 749.4 762.10 651.2 631.2 641.2 638.49 - - - - 108.2 123.61 1.14 9-Dec-13 759.4 739.4 749.4 766.89 651.2 631.2 641.2 640.19 - - - - 108.2 126.70 1.17 20-Dec-13 759.4 739.4 749.4 768.22 651.2 631.2 641.2 641.29 - - - - 108.2 126.93 1.17 13-Jan-14 759.4 739.4 749.4 768.20 651.2 631.2 641.2 639.49 - - - - 108.2 128.71 1.19 18-Feb-14 759.4 739.4 749.4 766.89 651.2 631.2 641.2 642.72 - - - - 108.2 124.17 1.15 OW-429U/L (Upper/Lower) 16-Mar-14 759.4 739.4 749.4 766.17 651.2 631.2 641.2 644.89 - - - - 108.2 121.28 1.12 15-Apr-14 759.4 739.4 749.4 766.46 651.2 631.2 641.2 647.32 - - - - 108.2 119.14 1.10 15-May-14 759.4 739.4 749.4 764.73 651.2 631.2 641.2 644.54 - - - - 108.2 120.19 1.11 16-Jun-14 759.4 739.4 749.4 763.42 651.2 631.2 641.2 646.99 - - - - 108.2 116.43 1.08 16-Jul-14 759.4 739.4 749.4 762.42 651.2 631.2 641.2 649.17 - - - - 108.2 113.25 1.05 18-Aug-14 759.4 739.4 749.4 764.16 651.2 631.2 641.2 651.84 - - - - 108.2 112.32 1.04 4-Nov-14 759.4 739.4 749.4 762.46 651.2 631.2 641.2 662.02 - - - - 108.2 100.44 0.93 12-Feb-15 759.4 739.4 749.4 765.26 651.2 631.2 641.2 674.70 - - - - 108.2 90.56 0.84 19-May-15 759.4 739.4 749.4 764.20 651.2 631.2 641.2 686.34 - - - - 108.2 77.86 0.72 10-Aug-15 759.4 739.4 749.4 764.28 651.2 631.2 641.2 695.56 - - - - 108.2 68.72 0.64 1.03 Notes:

Indicates averages of the vertical hydraulic gradient for the nested well pair. This does not include the anomalies in yellow.

Indicates an anomaly or suspect measurement.

NM = Not Measured NA = Not Applicable Dry = Water level was below the bottom of the well.

z =Difference between mid-point elevations of zones h = Groundwater elevation differences between zones iv = Vertical hydraulic gradient (h/z) 2.4.12-86 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report Table 2.4.12-10 (Sheet 1 of 3)

Borehole Packer Test Results Summary Estimated Depth Estimated Hydraulic Geologic Unit (ft below Transmissivity Conductivity Boring Zone Formation ground) (ft2/day) (ft/day) Analysis Notes Chickamauga MP-101 Z1 27.5 to 35.0 7 0.9 None Benbolt Chickamauga MP-101 Z2 145.0 to 152.5 20 3 None Rockdell Chickamauga MP-202 Z1 41.7 to 49.2 Low Low Low/negligible flow suggests low hydraulic conductivity.

Fleanor member Chickamauga MP-202 Z2 153.0 to 160.5 2 0.3 None Fleanor member Chickamauga MP-202 Z3 182.0 to 189.5 Low Low Low/negligible flow suggests low hydraulic conductivity.

Fleanor member Knox MP-401 Z2 28.0 to 35.5 Low Low Low/negligible flow suggests low hydraulic conductivity.

Newala Knox MP-401 Z3 77.0 to 84.5 Low Low Low/negligible flow suggests low hydraulic conductivity.

Newala Test results indicate higher transmissivity value for higher Knox MP-401 Z4 237.0 to 244.5 3 0.4 pressures. Possible explanations for the test behavior include Newala fracture dilation or fracture washout.

High flow rates (exceeding 80 gpm) with pressure increase in the Chickamauga transducer above the test interval. The target test pressure in the MP-415 Z1 27.5 to 35.0 High High Bowen interval was not achieved and the test was aborted. The high flow rates suggest high hydraulic conductivity.

Chickamauga MP-415 Z2 162.5 to 170.0 Low Low Low/negligible flow suggests low hydraulic conductivity.

Benbolt Chickamauga MP-415 Z3 252.5 to 260.0 Low Low Low/negligible flow suggests low hydraulic conductivity.

Benbolt Chickamauga MP-416 Z2 89.0 to 96.5 1 0.2 Flow for this test was low, behavior suggests nonlinear flow.

Rockdell Chickamauga MP-416 Z3 109.0 to 116.5 8 1 None Rockdell 2.4.12-87 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report Table 2.4.12-10 (Sheet 2 of 3)

Borehole Packer Test Results Summary Estimated Depth Estimated Hydraulic Geologic Unit (ft below Transmissivity Conductivity Boring Zone Formation ground) (ft2/day) (ft/day) Analysis Notes Chickamauga MP-416 Z4 205.0 to 212.5 Low Low Low/negligible flow suggests low hydraulic conductivity.

Rockdell Some response was observed in the transducers above and below Chickamauga the test interval. Flow did not increase in highly nonlinear fashion, MP-417 Z1 61.5 to 69.0 10 2 Fleanor member suggesting an indirect connection to the borehole outside the test interval.

Chickamauga MP-417 Z2 84.0 to 91.5 3 0.5 None Fleanor member Chickamauga MP-417 Z3 210.5 to 218.0 3 0.4 None Eidson member Chickamauga MP-418A Z1 86.0 to 93.5 40 5 None Eidson member Chickamauga MP-418A Z2 139.0 to 146.5 1 0.2 None Blackford Chickamauga MP-418A Z3 240.0 to 247.5 0.3 0.04 None Blackford Knox MP-419 Z1 210.0 to 217.5 1 0.2 None Newala Knox MP-419 Z2 135.0 to 142.5 Low Low Low/negligible flow suggests low hydraulic conductivity.

Newala Knox MP-419 Z3 120.0 to 127.5 2 0.3 None Newala Knox MP-419 Z4 109.0 to 116.5 Low Low Low/negligible flow suggests low hydraulic conductivity.

Newala Knox MP-420 Z2 79.0 to 86.5 2 0.2 None Newala Knox MP-420 Z3 100.0 to 107.5 10 2 None Newala Knox MP-420 Z4 132.5 to 140.0 8 1 None Newala 2.4.12-88 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report Table 2.4.12-10 (Sheet 3 of 3)

Borehole Packer Test Results Summary Estimated Depth Estimated Hydraulic Geologic Unit (ft below Transmissivity Conductivity Boring Zone Formation ground) (ft2/day) (ft/day) Analysis Notes Knox MP-420 Z5 166.0 to 173.5 5 0.7 None Newala Knox MP-420 Z6 186.0 to 193.5 10 1 None Newala Chickamauga MP-421 Z1 57.0 to 64.5 1 0.2 None Blackford Chickamauga MP-421 Z2 99.0 to 106.5 Low Low Low/negligible flow suggests low hydraulic conductivity.

Blackford Knox MP-421 Z3 121.0 to 128.5 0.8 0.1 None Newala Knox MP-421 Z4 228.0 to 235.5 Low Low Low/negligible flow suggests low hydraulic conductivity.

Newala Chickamauga MP-422 Z1 31.5 to 39.0 Low Low Low/negligible flow suggests low hydraulic conductivity.

Benbolt Chickamauga MP-422 Z2 50.0 to 57.5 Low Low Low/negligible flow suggests low hydraulic conductivity.

Benbolt Chickamauga MP-422 Z3 170.0 to 177.5 Low Low Low/negligible flow suggests low hydraulic conductivity.

Benbolt Much higher flows in later portion of test, which achieved the highest test pressure. There was no response in the transducers Chickamauga MP-423 Z2 68.5 to 76.0 5 0.7 above or below the test interval, indicating that there was no Eidson member hydraulic connection outside the test interval. Possible explanations for the test behavior include fracture dilation or fracture washout.

Notes:

Hydraulic conductivity values were computed based on unrounded transmissivity values; both values were then rounded to one significant figure.

Low - Qualitative indication of low transmissivity and hydraulic conductivitybelow the test methods ability to determine transmissivity and hydraulic conductivity.

High - Qualitative indication of high transmissivity and hydraulic conductivityabove the test methods ability to determine to determine transmissivity and hydraulic conductivity.

2.4.12-89 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report Table 2.4.12-11 (Sheet 1 of 3)

Well Slug Test Results Summary Falling Head Rising Head Hydraulic Hydraulic Test Average Conductivity Conductivity Hydraulic Estimate Estimate Conductivity Geologic Unit Well Name Test Type (ft/day) (ft/day) (ft/day) Formation Analysis Notes Chickamauga Group OW-101D Pneumatic 0.13 0.063 0.097 None Rockdell Chickamauga Group OW-101L Pneumatic 7.6 7.5 7.6 None Rockdell Chickamauga Group OW-101U Pneumatic 0.049 0.053 0.051 None Benbolt Chickamauga Group OW-202D Solid 0.068 0.024 0.046 None Eidson Member Chickamauga Group Both tests discardedStatic water level discrepancy and OW-202L Solid - - -

Fleanor normalized head never reaches 0.3 to 0.2(a)

Knox Group OW-401D Solid - - - Not analyzedHead does not change after initiation Newala Knox Group OW-401L Pneumatic 0.059 0.092 0.076 None Newala Knox Group OW-401U Pneumatic 0.089 0.065 0.077 None Newala Chickamauga Group OW-409L Pneumatic 0.069 0.061 0.065 None Rockdell Chickamauga Group OW-409U Solid - 0.14 0.14 Falling head not analyzedIrregular response Rockdell Chickamauga Group Falling head discardedNormalized head never reaches OW-415L Pneumatic - 0.29 0.29 Benbolt 0.3 to 0.2(a)

Chickamauga Group OW-415U Solid - - - Not analyzedIrregular response Bowen/Benbolt Chickamauga Group OW-416L Pneumatic 0.61 0.48 0.54 None Rockdell Chickamauga Group OW-416U Pneumatic 1.2 1.1 1.2 None Rockdell 2.4.12-90 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report Table 2.4.12-11 (Sheet 2 of 3)

Well Slug Test Results Summary Falling Head Rising Head Hydraulic Hydraulic Test Average Conductivity Conductivity Hydraulic Estimate Estimate Conductivity Geologic Unit Well Name Test Type (ft/day) (ft/day) (ft/day) Formation Analysis Notes Chickamauga Group OW-417L Pneumatic 0.31 0.44 0.38 None Fleanor Member Chickamauga Group OW-417U Pneumatic 2.2 1.6 1.9 None Fleanor Member Chickamauga Group OW-418L Pneumatic 0.16 0.14 0.15 None Blackford Chickamauga Group OW-418U Pneumatic 0.21 0.21 0.21 None Eidson Member Knox Group OW-419L Pneumatic 2.7 3.6 3.2 None Newala Knox Group OW-419U Pneumatic 11 13 12 None Newala Knox Group OW-420L Solid 0.062 0.048 0.055 None Newala Knox Group OW-421D Solid - - - Not analyzedIrregular early-time response Newala Knox/Chickamauga OW-421L Solid - 0.00055 0.00055 Falling head not analyzedHead does not decrease after initiation Newala/Blackford Chickamauga Group OW-421U Solid 0.066 0.036 0.051 None Blackford Chickamauga Group Rising head discardedNormalized head never reaches OW-423D Pneumatic 0.039 - 0.039 Blackford 0.3 to 0.2(a)

Chickamauga Group OW-423L Solid 0.10 0.095 0.098 None Blackford Chickamauga Group OW-423U Pneumatic 2.3 0.66 1.5 None Eidson Member Chickamauga Group OW-428L Solid 0.012 0.0022 0.0071 None Rockdell 2.4.12-91 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report Table 2.4.12-11 (Sheet 3 of 3)

Well Slug Test Results Summary Falling Head Rising Head Hydraulic Hydraulic Test Average Conductivity Conductivity Hydraulic Estimate Estimate Conductivity Geologic Unit Well Name Test Type (ft/day) (ft/day) (ft/day) Formation Analysis Notes Chickamauga Group OW-428U Solid 0.0016 0.012 0.0068 None Rockdell Chickamauga Group Rising head discardedNormalized head never reaches OW-429U Solid 0.0035 - 0.0035 Bowen/Benbolt 0.3 to 0.2(a)

(a) Normalized head between 0.3 and 0.2 represents the optimal area on the response curve to analyze the test.

Notes:

Dash (-) = See Analysis Notes column.

2.4.12-92 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report Table 2.4.12-12 Clinch River Nuclear Site Constant Rate Aquifer Pumping Test Results Transmissivity Transmissivity Storage Hydraulic Orientation Pumping Period Recovery Period Coefficient Conductivity Relative to Tp Tr Pumping Period (Tp+Tr)/2/155 ft Well Name Pumping Well (ft2/d) (ft2/d) (dimensionless) (ft/d)

PT-OW-U1 N7°E 10.6 7 5.37 x 10-4 0.06 PT-OW-L1 N7°E 129.3 128.7 3.10 x 10-3 0.8

-2 0.2 PT-OW-U2 N38°W 28.4 22.2 4.83 x 10

-3 0.2 PT-OW-L2 N38°W 28.1 30.3 2.28 x 10

-4 0.06 PT-OW-L3 S7°E 11.8 8.0 2.73 x 10 OW-423L N52°E 410.1 391.1 8.1 x 10-3(a) 2.6

-10 (a) A storage coefficient of 8.9 x 10 was reported for the pumping period of observation well OW-423L and is considered a nonrealistic value; however, for the same well in the recovery period, a value of 8.1 x 10-3 was reportedthe recovery period derivative data exhibited less noise.

2.4.12-93 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report Table 2.4.12-13 (Sheet 1 of 5)

Rock Effective Porosity Measurements on the Oak Ridge Reservation Depth Depth Effective Porosity (%) Grain Density Bulk Density Data Borehole Group Unit(a) (m) (ft) Helium Mercury Immersion(b) Other (g/cm3) (pcf) (g/cm3) (pcf) Source(c)

Joy-1 Conasauga Pumpkin Valley Shale 201.2 660 - - 0.46 - - - - - A Joy-1 Conasauga Pumpkin Valley Shale 219.2 719 - - 1.1 - - - - - A Joy-1 Conasauga Pumpkin Valley Shale 244.2 801 - - 1.9 - - - - - A 05MW013A Conasauga Dismal Gap 52.1 171 - - - 0.4 - - - - A 05MW013A Conasauga Dismal Gap 52.7 173 - - - 0.1 - - - - A 05MW013A Conasauga Dismal Gap 57.9 190 - - - 1.1 - - - - A 05MW013A Conasauga Dismal Gap 58.5 192 - - - 0.4 - - - - A 05MW013A Conasauga Dismal Gap 65.1 214 - - - 0.3 - - - - A 05MW013A Conasauga Dismal Gap 66.1 217 - - - 1.5 - - - - A 05MW013A Conasauga Dismal Gap 71.8 236 - - - 0.7 - - - - A 05MW013A Conasauga Dismal Gap 73 240 - - - 0.1 - - - - A 05MW013A Conasauga Dismal Gap 77 253 - - - 2.0 - - - - A 05MW013A Conasauga Dismal Gap 80.2 263 - - - 0.8 - - - - A 05MW013A Conasauga Dismal Gap 81.7 268 - - - 1.9 - - - - A 05MW013A Conasauga Dismal Gap 83.5 274 - - - 2.7 - - - - A 05MW013A Conasauga Dismal Gap 93.9 308 - - - 1.5 - - - - A 05MW013A Conasauga Dismal Gap 94.6 310 - - - 1.9 - - - - A 05MW013A Conasauga Rogersville Shale 105.8 347 - - - 3.4 - - - - A 05MW013A Conasauga Rogersville Shale 107.3 352 - - - 1.8 - - - - A 05MW013A Conasauga Rogersville Shale 115.9 380 - - - 1.3 - - - - A 05MW013A Conasauga Rogersville Shale 116.3 382 - - - 0.9 - - - - A 05MW013A Conasauga Rogersville Shale 122.7 403 - - - 1.0 - - - - A 05MW013A Conasauga Rogersville Shale 130.8 429 - - - 2.3 - - - - A 05MW013A Conasauga Rogersville Shale 132.6 435 - - - 1.3 - - - - A 05MW013A Conasauga Rogersville Shale 135.3 444 - - - 1.4 - - - - A 05MW013A Conasauga Rogersville Shale 138.1 453 - - - 2.1 - - - - A 05MW013A Conasauga Rogersville Shale 141.4 464 - - - 1.7 - - - - A 2.4.12-94 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report Table 2.4.12-13 (Sheet 2 of 5)

Rock Effective Porosity Measurements on the Oak Ridge Reservation Depth Depth Effective Porosity (%) Grain Density Bulk Density Data Borehole Group Unit(a) (m) (ft) Helium Mercury Immersion(b) Other (g/cm3) (pcf) (g/cm3) (pcf) Source(c) 05MW013A Conasauga Rogersville Shale 141.7 465 - - - 1.6 - - - - A 05MW013A Conasauga Rogersville Shale 147.2 483 - - - 0.8 - - - - A 05MW013A Conasauga Rogersville Shale 151.5 497 - - - 0.6 - - - - A GW-133 Conasauga Dismal Gap 41.07 135 11.4 3.8 7.67 - 2.73 170 2.64 165 A GW-133 Conasauga Dismal Gap 67.18 220 12.7 4.9 11.47 - 2.78 174 2.71 169 A GW-133 Conasauga Dismal Gap 80.52 264 10.2 3.1 11.83 - 2.74 171 2.73 170 A GW-133 Conasauga Dismal Gap 114.53 376 7.6 3.4 11.51 - 2.74 171 2.70 169 A GW-133 Conasauga Rogersville Shale 138.73 455 11.5 3 10.9 - 2.72 170 2.67 167 A GW-133 Conasauga Rogersville Shale 163.12 535 12.7 3.5 11.03 - 2.75 172 2.71 169 A GW-133 Conasauga Rogersville Shale 165.56 543 19.2 4.4 9.75 - 2.81 175 2.74 171 A GW-132 Conasauga Friendship 45.95 151 - - 9.16 - - - - - A GW-132 Conasauga Friendship 65.33 214 5.1 2.9 9.39 - 2.73 170 2.72 170 A GW-132 Conasauga Pumpkin Valley Shale 90.73 298 9.3 3.8 9.24 - 2.77 173 2.70 169 A GW-132 Conasauga Pumpkin Valley Shale 102.97 338 10.7 3.0 10.35 - 2.76 172 2.72 170 A GW-132 Conasauga Pumpkin Valley Shale 130.71 429 - - 11.41 - - - - - A GW-132 Conasauga Pumpkin Valley Shale 130.76 429 6.3 4.5 9.43 - 2.82 176 2.72 170 A GW-132 Conasauga Pumpkin Valley Shale 187.83 616 3.8 3.1 11.44 - 2.78 174 2.77 173 A GW-134 Conasauga Nolichucky Shale 44.45 146 9.9 2.7 9.46 - 2.73 170 2.69 168 A GW-134 Conasauga Nolichucky Shale 58.27 191 12.2 3.4 11.52 - 2.78 174 2.70 169 A GW-134 Conasauga Nolichucky Shale 80.29 263 3.2 3.8 12.04 - 2.79 174 2.71 169 A GW-134 Conasauga Nolichucky Shale 99.80 327 2.9 4.3 13.29 - 2.79 174 2.69 168 A GW-134 Conasauga Nolichucky Shale 109.53 359 4.9 4.3 15.87 - 2.76 172 2.77 173 A GW-134 Conasauga Nolichucky Shale 151.59 497 3.9 4.0 9.16 - 2.79 174 2.70 169 A GW-134 Conasauga Nolichucky Shale 158.27 519 4.7 5.1 11.60 - 2.70 169 2.68 167 A GW-134 Conasauga Nolichucky Shale 171.86 564 14.7 4.2 11.95 - 2.79 174 2.67 167 A GW-134 Conasauga Nolichucky Shale 181.14 594 4.1 3.7 11.74 - 2.77 173 2.69 168 A GW-134 Conasauga Nolichucky Shale 201.19 660 10.4 3.2 10.57 - 2.80 175 2.67 167 A 2.4.12-95 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report Table 2.4.12-13 (Sheet 3 of 5)

Rock Effective Porosity Measurements on the Oak Ridge Reservation Depth Depth Effective Porosity (%) Grain Density Bulk Density Data Borehole Group Unit(a) (m) (ft) Helium Mercury Immersion(b) Other (g/cm3) (pcf) (g/cm3) (pcf) Source(c)

WOL-1 Conasauga Nolichucky Shale 12.04 40 - - 13.00 - - - - - A WOL-1 Conasauga Nolichucky Shale 26.67 88 4.4 4.2 3.67 - 2.83 177 2.74 171 A WOL-1 Conasauga Nolichucky Shale 38.41 126 5.3 4.1 - - 2.79 174 2.71 169 A WOL-1 Conasauga Nolichucky Shale 57.38 188 6.0 5.2 10.81 - 2.82 176 2.72 170 A WOL-1 Conasauga Nolichucky Shale 99.90 328 10.9 3.2 11.80 - 2.77 173 2.71 169 A WOL-1 Conasauga Dismal Gap 243.84 800 15.4 3.4 7.43 - 2.79 174 2.67 167 A WOL-1 Conasauga Friendship 320.09 1050 7.8 3.5 6.84 - 2.79 174 2.74 171 A WOL-1 Conasauga Pumpkin Valley Shale 352.60 1157 3.5 3.2 5.35 - 2.79 174 2.76 172 A 0.5MW012A Conasauga Dismal Gap 38.34 126 - - 5.41 - - - - - A 0.5MW012A Conasauga Dismal Gap 51.44 169 3.9 3.1 12.84 - 2.77 173 2.72 170 A 0.5MW012A Conasauga Rogersville Shale 83.10 273 11.8 4.2 4.58 - 2.81 175 2.73 170 A 0.5MW012A Conasauga Rogersville Shale 118.10 387 - - 9.59 - - - - - A 0.5MW012A Conasauga Rogersville Shale 135.13 443 3.7 4.5 7.97 - 2.78 174 2.70 169 A 0.5MW012A Conasauga Friendship 148.10 486 3.6 4.5 6.44 - 2.78 174 2.68 167 A GW-131 Knox Copper Ridge Dolomite 127.76 419 0.59 - 1.02 - 2.83 177 2.82 176 B GW-131 Knox Copper Ridge Dolomite 134.80 442 0.22 - 0.56 - 2.82 176 2.81 175 B GW-131 Knox Copper Ridge Dolomite 136.96 449 1.13 - 1.30 - 2.82 176 2.79 174 B GW-131 Knox Copper Ridge Dolomite 148.69 488 2.77 - 1.82 - 2.83 177 2.75 172 B GW-131 Knox Copper Ridge Dolomite 149.23 490 1.25 - 1.03 - 2.84 177 2.80 175 B GW-131 Knox Copper Ridge Dolomite 151.56 497 2.40 - 2.43 - 2.86 179 2.79 174 B GW-131 Knox Copper Ridge Dolomite 154.28 506 2.17 - 3.62 - 2.79 174 2.73 170 B GW-131 Knox Copper Ridge Dolomite 159.56 523 1.19 - 2.04 - 2.80 175 2.77 173 B GW-131 Knox Copper Ridge Dolomite 175.16 575 1.62 - 1.65 - 2.84 177 2.79 174 B GW-131 Knox Copper Ridge Dolomite 179.05 587 0.81 - 0.54 - 2.81 175 2.79 174 B GW-131 Conasauga Maynardville Limestone 183.72 603 0.45 - 0.45 - 2.82 176 2.81 175 B GW-131 Conasauga Maynardville Limestone 188.93 620 0.61 - 0.54 - 2.70 169 2.69 168 B GW-131 Conasauga Maynardville Limestone 195.45 641 1.12 - 0.88 - 2.78 174 2.75 172 B 2.4.12-96 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report Table 2.4.12-13 (Sheet 4 of 5)

Rock Effective Porosity Measurements on the Oak Ridge Reservation Depth Depth Effective Porosity (%) Grain Density Bulk Density Data Borehole Group Unit(a) (m) (ft) Helium Mercury Immersion(b) Other (g/cm3) (pcf) (g/cm3) (pcf) Source(c)

GW-131 Conasauga Maynardville Limestone 205.92 676 1.06 - 0.67 - 2.78 174 2.75 172 B GW-131 Conasauga Maynardville Limestone 206.35 677 8.13 - 4.52 - 2.85 178 2.62 164 B GW-131 Conasauga Maynardville Limestone 217.02 712 0.37 - 0.24 - 2.71 169 2.70 169 B GW-131 Conasauga Maynardville Limestone 231.27 759 0.37 - 0.22 - 2.73 170 2.72 170 B GW-131 Conasauga Maynardville Limestone 236.88 777 0.22 - 0.21 - 2.71 169 2.71 169 B GW-131 Conasauga Maynardville Limestone 248.26 815 0.22 - 1.45 - 2.72 170 2.72 170 B GW-131 Conasauga Maynardville Limestone 258.62 848 0.37 - 0.22 - 2.71 169 2.70 169 B GW-131 Conasauga Maynardville Limestone 266.27 874 0.37 - 0.31 - 2.71 169 2.70 169 B GW-131 Conasauga Maynardville Limestone 268.28 880 0.45 - 0.31 - 2.76 172 2.75 172 B GW-131 Conasauga Maynardville Limestone 290.04 952 0.22 - 0.17 - 2.73 170 2.73 170 B GW-131 Conasauga Maynardville Limestone 294.44 966 0.22 - 0.29 - 2.72 170 2.72 170 B GW-131 Conasauga Maynardville Limestone 301.60 990 0.30 - 0.30 - 2.72 170 2.72 170 B GW-131 Conasauga Maynardville Limestone 311.56 1022 0.52 - 0.62 - 2.72 170 2.71 169 B GW-131 Conasauga Maynardville Limestone 326.49 1071 0.22 - 0.44 - 2.71 169 2.70 169 B GW-131 Conasauga Maynardville Limestone 333.60 1094 0.22 - 0.51 - 2.71 169 2.71 169 B GW-135 Knox Copper Ridge Dolomite 155.85 511 0.21 - 0.34 - 2.84 177 2.83 177 B GW-135 Knox Copper Ridge Dolomite 177.78 583 0.48 - 0.81 - 2.83 177 2.81 175 B (d)

GW-135 Knox Copper Ridge Dolomite 184.53 605 0.55 - 1.72 0.3 2.79 174 2.78 174 B (d)

GW-135 Knox Copper Ridge Dolomite 186.23 611 1.47 - 2.91 0.5 2.80 175 2.76 172 B GW-135 Knox Copper Ridge Dolomite 189.74 623 0.92 - 1.39 - 2.83 177 2.80 175 B GW-135 Knox Copper Ridge Dolomite 193.09 633 1.53 - 1.81 1.0(d) 2.82 176 2.78 174 B GW-135 Knox Copper Ridge Dolomite 202.49 664 4.99 - 3.41 1.3(d) 2.87 179 2.72 170 B (d) 2.74 171 2.73 170 B GW-135 Conasauga Maynardville Limestone 212.24 696 0.10 - 0.24 0.3 (d) 2.84 177 2.75 172 B GW-135 Conasauga Maynardville Limestone 223.11 732 3.34 - 2.18 1.4 GW-135 Conasauga Maynardville Limestone 227.25 746 4.10 - 1.31 2.3(d) 2.84 177 2.72 170 B (d) 2.84 177 2.79 174 B GW-135 Conasauga Maynardville Limestone 234.44 769 1.79 - 1.84 1.7 (d) 2.70 169 2.70 169 B GW-135 Conasauga Maynardville Limestone 243.46 799 0.10 - 0.14 1.2 2.4.12-97 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report Table 2.4.12-13 (Sheet 5 of 5)

Rock Effective Porosity Measurements on the Oak Ridge Reservation Depth Depth Effective Porosity (%) Grain Density Bulk Density Data Borehole Group Unit(a) (m) (ft) Helium Mercury Immersion(b) Other (g/cm3) (pcf) (g/cm3) (pcf) Source(c)

GW-135 Conasauga Maynardville Limestone 249.53 819 0.46 - 0.24 0.4(d) 2.76 172 2.75 172 B (d) 2.70 169 2.69 168 B GW-135 Conasauga Maynardville Limestone 255.40 838 0.34 - 0.29 2.3 (d) 2.75 172 2.75 172 B GW-135 Conasauga Maynardville Limestone 268.91 882 0.28 - 0.26 0.2 (d) 2.75 172 2.74 171 B GW-135 Conasauga Maynardville Limestone 290.53 953 0.36 - 0.29 0.8 GW-135 Conasauga Maynardville Limestone 306.58 1006 0.24 - 0.26 0.4(d) 2.74 171 2.73 170 B (d) 2.70 169 2.70 169 B GW-135 Conasauga Maynardville Limestone 314.96 1033 0.14 - 0.24 0.3 (d) 2.74 171 2.72 170 B GW-135 Conasauga Maynardville Limestone 318.01 1043 0.56 - 0.29 0.2 (d) 2.71 169 2.70 169 B GW-135 Conasauga Maynardville Limestone 324.08 1063 0.17 - 0.60 0.4 GW-135 Conasauga Maynardville Limestone 345.49 1133 0.15 - 0.46 0.2(d) 2.71 169 2.70 169 B (d)

GW-135 Conasauga Maynardville Limestone 365.02 1198 0.06 - 0.34 0.3 2.73 170 2.73 170 B (a) Unit names for Maryville Limestone and Rutledge Limestone changed to current usage of Dismal Gap and Friendship respectively.

(b) Some values represent the average of several tests.

(c) Data Sources:

AReference 2.4.12-31 BReference 2.4.12-32 (d) Results from a sample approximately collocated with the other results.

Notes:

Dash (-) = No information is provided in data source.

Summary of Results Effective Porosity (%) Grain Density Bulk Density

3) (pcf) (g/cm3) (pcf)

Helium Mercury Immersion Other (g/cm Number of tests 83 33 90 46 83 83 83 83 Average 3.85 3.79 4.67 1.11 2.77 173 2.73 170 Minimum 0.06 2.7 0.14 0.1 2.70 169 2.62 164 Maximum 19.2 5.2 15.87 3.4 2.87 179 2.83 177 2.4.12-98 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report Table 2.4.12-14 Representative Soil and Rock Properties Total Unit Weight Specific Gravity Best Estimate Range Group Unit Material (pcf) (pcf) Best Estimate Range Existing Fill/Residual Soil Silt and Clay 120 NA(b) 2.75 NA(b)

Unconsolidated New Granular Backfill(a) Well Graded Sand 135 NA(b) 2.70 NA(b)

Weathered Rock Limestone/Siltstone 140 NA(b) NA(b) NA(b)

Benbolt formation Limestone/Siltstone 168 163-170 2.70 2.62-2.72 Rockdell formation Limestone 168 160-169 2.69 2.57-2.71 Chickamauga Fleanor member Siltstone 168 166-176 2.70 2.67-2.83 Eidson member Limestone 168 164-169 2.69 2.64-2.71 Blackford formation Limestone/Siltstone 168 164-169 2.68 2.64-2.71 Knox Newala formation Dolomite 175 161-177 2.80 2.59-2.84 (a) Based on Tennessee Department of Transportation Type A specification (b) NA - information not available 2.4.12-99 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report Table 2.4.12-15 Field Geochemical Results pH Specific Dissolved Geologic Unit (standard Conductance Turbidity Oxygen Temperature REDOX Purge Water Well Number Date Formation units) (µS/cm)(a) (NTU) (mg/L) (°C)(b) (+/-mv) Appearance Chickamauga OW-101L 11/19/2013 7.17 620 3.86 0.05 16.5 -152.5 Clear, faint sulfur odor Rockdell Chickamauga OW-202L(c) 11/19/2013 9.58 978 193.00 5.16 17.0 -116.9 Red, purged dry Fleanor Member Knox OW-401L 11/21/2013 7.78 340 14.30 4.21 19.5 9.7 Clear Newala Chickamauga OW-409U 11/19/2013 7.10 672 49.70 45.30(d) 17.2 186.2 Clear Rockdell Chickamauga OW-409L 11/18/2013 7.80 849 25.20 3.31 16.0 30.5 Clear Rockdell Chickamauga OW-415U 11/20/12013 7.24 598 122.00 3.61 17.3 75.7 Clear to slightly cloudy Bowen/Benbolt Chickamauga OW-416L 11/21/2013 7.04 694 1.07 0.25 17.4 -188.1 Clear, sulfur odor Rockdell Chickamauga OW-417L 11/21/2013 7.21 609 2.55 1.51 16.3 53.4 Clear Fleanor Member Chickamauga OW-418U 11/19/2013 7.47 517 2.84 1.18 18.8 119.8 Clear Eidson Member Knox OW-419U 11/20/2013 6.97 532 1.27 1.15 16.3 63.0 Clear Newala Knox OW-420L 11/22/2013 7.56 472 69.90 9.21 17.7 57.5 Clear Newala Chickamauga/Knox OW-421L 11/22/2013 8.00 400 17.50 8.53 17.0 44.3 Clear Blackford/Newala Chickamauga OW-423U 11/19/2013 6.99 599 5.82 4.70 16.7 90.6 Clear Eidson Member Notes:

(a) Specific conductance in mS/cm converted to specific conductance in µS/cm by multiplying by 1000 (S = Siemens).

(b) Values rounded to the nearest 0.1°C.

(c) Well purged dry; insufficient water for field parameter testing at time of sampling. Values are last before purged dry.

(d) Suspect resultsconcentration in excess of maximum oxygen saturation value.

Adapted from Reference 2.4.12-13 Table 3.2.

2.4.12-100 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report Table 2.4.12-16 Laboratory Geochemical Results Carbonate Nitrate Nitrite Qualifier(b) Qualifier(b) Qualifier(b) Qualifier(b) Qualifier(b) Qualifier(b) Qualifier(b) Qualifier(b) Qualifier(b)

Fluoride Chloride Bromide Ammonia Calcium Iron Alkalinity Total Bicarbonate Total (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L) as N (mg/L) as N (mg/L) (mg/L)

Analytical Alkalinity Alkalinity Dissolved (mg/L as CaCO3)

Well Geologic Unit Water Error(a) Sulfate Bicarbonate (mg/L as (mg/L as Solids Potassium Magnesium Manganese Sodium Silicon Silica Number Date Formation Type (%) (mg/L) (mg/L)(c) CaCO3) CaCO3) (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L)

OW-101L 11/19/13 Chickamauga Calcium- 12 0.0054 JQ <0.020 U 0.22 2.1 0.038 JQ 42 366 300 300 <5.0 U 0.31 J 370 130 J 0.33 2.1 23 0.05 7.8 3.9 8.3 Rockdell Bicarbonate OW-101L 11/19/13 Chickamauga Calcium- 3.0 0.0099 JQ <0.020 U 0.19 2.1 0.04 JQ 43 354 290 290 <5.0 U 0.35 J 370 99 J 0.31 2.1 22 0.048 7.6 4.2 9 Dup Rockdell Bicarbonate OW-202L 11/22/13 Chickamauga Sodium- -3.2 0.028 <0.020 UL 7.4 24 0.17 JQ 93 732(d) 680 600 78 0.58 J 1100 23 19 14 9.9 0.16 280 82 170 Fleanor Bicarbonate Member OW-401L 11/21/13 Knox Calcium- 1.4 0.15 <0.020 UL 0.20 JH 1.4 <0.25 U 6.9 219 180 180 <5.0 U 0.140 J 190 40 0.14 1.8 22 0.008 0.91 4.7 10 Newala Bicarbonate OW-409U 11/19/13 Chickamauga Calcium- 12 0.88 <0.020 UL 0.25 1.8 <0.25 U 83 329 270 270 <5.0 U 0.099 J 410 140 0.22 1.2 23 0.011 4.8 7.6 16 Rockdell Bicarbonate OW-409L 11/19/13 Chickamauga Sodium- 1.1 0.12 0.0052 JQ 0.37 2.2 <0.25 U 150 366 300 300 <5.0 U 0.710 J 520 46 0.068 8.1 31 0.017 99 4.6 9.9 Rockdell Bicarbonate OW-415U 11/20/13 Chickamauga Calcium- 16 0.90 <0.020 UL 0.13 8.8 0.053 JQ 36 329 270 270 <5.0 U 0.140 J 370 150 0.39 2.4 13 0.046 5.2 7.6 16 Bowen/ Bicarbonate Benbolt OW-416L 11/21/13 Chickamauga Calcium- -1.7 0.20 <0.020 U 0.39 7.6 0.071 JQ 63 366 300 300 <5.0 U 0.120 J 420 99 0.072 0.77 13 0.020 29 5 11 Rockdell Bicarbonate OW-417L 11/21/13 Chickamauga Calcium- -0.76 <0.020 U <0.020 U 0.18 2.8 0.048 JQ 13 390 320 320 <5.0 U 0.140 J 340 61 0.041 JQ 3.4 31 0.021 22 6.1 13 Fleanor Bicarbonate Member OW-418U 11/20/13 Chickamauga Calcium- 0.019 0.68 <0.020 U 0.3 2.7 <0.25 U 20 329 270 270 <5.0 U 0.059 J 300 52 0.055 2.7 19 0.0037 40 8.7 19 Eidson Bicarbonate Member OW-419U 11/20/13 Knox Calcium- 2.0 0.43 <0.020 U 0.16 1.3 <0.25 U 17 329 270 270 <5.0 U 0.140 J 290 72 0.023 JQ 1.5 29 0.0023 0.91 3.2 6.8 Newala Bicarbonate OW-420L 11/22/13 Knox Calcium- 2.1 0.36 J <0.020 UL 0.31 JH 2.1 J <0.25 U 14 280 230 230 <5.0 U 0.110 J 270 59 0.25 1.8 26 0.033 1.2 4.2 9 Newala Bicarbonate OW-420L 11/22/13 Knox Calcium- -0.019 0.25 J <0.020 UL 0.35 2.6 J <0.25 U 15 293 240 240 <5.0 U 0.140 J 280 59 0.29 1.9 26 0.032 1.3 4.4 9.4 Dup Newala Bicarbonate OW-421L 11/22/13 Chickamauga/ Magnesium- 3.9 1.6 <0.020 UL 0.58 2.6 <0.25 U 8.3 256 210 210 <5.0 U <0.050 UL 230 38 0.23 12 27 0.01 12 6 13 Knox Bicarbonate Blackford/

Newala OW-423U 11/19/13 Chickamauga Calcium- 4.1 0.14 <0.020 U 0.090 JQ 2.7 <0.25 U 24 354 290 290 <5.0 U 0.083 J 340 99 0.076 1.3 19 0.051 8.7 7.2 15 Eidson Bicarbonate Member Notes:

(a) Analytical error is the difference between the sum of the cations and the sum of the anions divided by the sum of the cations and anion and multiplied by 100% (the anion and cation concentrations are in milliequivalents per liter). The analytical error represents the charge balance error of the analysis.

(b) Data Qualifier Definitions.

J = Estimated quantitation based on associated QC data.

JQ = Estimated quantitation; value is between the reporting limit and the detection limit.

JH = Estimated quantitation; possibly biased high based on QC data.

U = Undetected.

UL = Undetected; data biased low: the reporting detection limit is higher than indicated.

(c) Bicarbonate concentration determined by dividing the Bicarbonate Alkalinity by 0.8202 (Reference 2.4.12-48).

(d) Bicarbonate concentration is suspect due to high sample pH (pH = 9.58).

Dup = Duplicate sample.

Data adapted from Reference 2.4.12-13 Table 5.13.

2.4.12-101 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report Table 2.4.12-17 Groundwater Linear Velocity and Travel Time Representative Property Value Source Maximum calculated value as documented in Table 2.4.12-12 Hydraulic Conductivity (ft/d) 2.6 (observation well OW-423L)

Horizontal Hydraulic Gradient (ft/ft) 0.07 Mean value as presented in Table 2.4.12-8 Mean value determined in Table 2.4.12-13, using the Immersion test method results which the referenced author identified as the test method Effective Porosity 0.0467 that yields results that most accurately approaches the true effective porosity value.

Shortest distance from edge of power block area to Clinch River arm of Distance to Receptor (ft) 1400 the Watts Bar Reservoir (Figure 2.4.12-5)

Calculated Values Linear Velocity (ft/d) 3.90 Travel Time (days) 359 Travel Time (years) 0.98 2.4.12-102 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report Table 2.4.12-18 Characteristics of Individual Wells Located Within a 1.5-mile Radius of the CRN Site Estimated Casing Total Depth Well Number Well Use Yield Depth Geologic Unit Finish Type (feet)

(gpm) (feet) 14500062 Residential 10 100 25 Nolichucky Shale NR 14500100 Residential 10 92 45 Copper Ridge Dolomite NR 14500274 Residential 10 195 75 Maynardville Limestone NR 14501409 Residential 5 160 42 Nolichucky Shale NR 14501415 Commercial 2 400 25 Nolichucky Shale NR Dismal Group Formation 14501867 Residential NR 180 21 Open Hole (Maryville Limestone)

Dismal Group Formation 14501990 Residential 20 145 28 Open Hole (Maryville Limestone)

Dismal Group Formation 14502043 Residential 7 85 31 Open Hole (Maryville Limestone)

Dismal Group Formation 14502044 Residential 7 85 31 Open Hole (Maryville Limestone)

Dismal Group Formation 14502059 Residential 15 102 34 Open Hole (Maryville Limestone)

Dismal Group Formation 14502075 Residential 5 390 20 Open Hole (Maryville Limestone)

Dismal Group Formation 14502085 Farm 2 340 41 Open Hole (Maryville Limestone)

Dismal Group Formation 14502157 Commercial 2 500 62 Open Hole (Maryville Limestone) 14502179 Residential 20 275 105 Witten Formation Open Hole Dismal Group Formation 14502230 Residential 7 275 89 Open Hole (Maryville Limestone) 14509007 Residential NR NR NR Rockdell Formation NR 14509008 Residential NR 42 42 Maynardville Limestone NR 20005513 Residential 3 526 126 Chepultepec Dolomite Open Hole 20021254 Residential 9 300 62 Nolichucky Shale NR 20022808 Residential 3 575 104 Chepultepec Dolomite Open Hole 20053044 Residential 30 240 126 Maynardville Limestone Open Hole 20061323 Residential 30 160 105 Copper Ridge Dolomite Open Hole 20064090 Residential 1 320 105 Fleanor Shale Open Hole 20074093 Residential 4 900 42 Pumpkin Valley Shale Open Hole 20082006 Residential 0.5 610 126 Moccasin Formation Open Hole 20083553 Residential 7 200 63 Moccasin Formation Open Hole 20091942 Residential 50 220 190 Kingsport Formation. Open Hole 90001001 Residential 2 470 38 Nolichucky Shale Open Hole 90002790 Residential 7 373 41 Nolichucky Shale Open Hole 91002142 Residential 75 547 41 Nolichucky Shale Open Hole 92003314 Residential 4 360 41 Copper Ridge Dolomite Open Hole 92003730 Residential 3 503 104 Copper Ridge Dolomite Open Hole 93000627 Residential 1 300 62 Nolichucky Shale Open Hole 93003943 Residential 30 118 36 Copper Ridge Dolomite Open Hole 96000454 Residential 3 465 126 Copper Ridge Dolomite Open Hole 96002158 Commercial 3 305 75 Witten Formation Open Hole Note: NR denotes Not Reported and gpm is gallons per minute; the geologic units in which wells are completed was inferred from regional geological mapping; total depth and casing depth are measured from grade.

2.4.12-103 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report Figure 2.4.12-1. (Sheet 1 of 2) Location MapOak Ridge Reservation and the Clinch River Nuclear Site 2.4.12-104 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report Figure 2.4.12-1. (Sheet 2 of 2) Location MapOak Ridge Reservation and the Clinch River Nuclear Site 2.4.12-105 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report Adapted from Reference 2.4.12-7 Figure 2.4.12-2. Physiographic Provinces in Tennessee 2.4.12-106 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report Adapted from Reference 2.4.12-49 1 inch = 4000 ft Contour Interval = 20 ft Figure 2.4.12-3. Preconstruction Topographic and Geologic Map and Cross-Section 2.4.12-107 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report Figure 2.4.12-4. Current Site Topography and Observation Well Locations 2.4.12-108 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report Figure 2.4.12-5. Clinch River Breeder Reactor Project Fill and Excavation Areas 2.4.12-109 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report Adapted from Reference 2.4.12-2 Figure 2.4.12-6. Cambrian and Ordovician Aquifers 2.4.12-110 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report Adapted from Reference 2.4.12-2 Figure 2.4.12-7. Typical Cross-Section of the East Tennessee Aquifer System 2.4.12-111 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report Note: Adapted from Reference 2.4.12-18. Green shading shows the five counties included in the water use study area.

Figure 2.4.12-8. Water Use Study Area 2.4.12-112 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report After Reference 2.4.12-8 Figure 2.4.12-9. Site Area Hydrogeostratigraphy 2.4.12-113 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report Adapted from Reference 2.4.12-8 Unit Designations from Reference 2.4.12-9 Figure 2.4.12-10. Bethel Valley Chickamauga Group Stratigraphy 2.4.12-114 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report Adapted from Reference 2.4.12-10 Figure 2.4.12-11. Sole Source Aquifers in EPA Region IV 2.4.12-115 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report Reference 2.4.12-11 Figure 2.4.12-12. Oak Ridge Reservation Vertical Flow 2.4.12-116 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report A Selection of Oak Ridge Reservation Published Bedrock Hydraulic Conductivity Values 1000 Includes data from slug, packer, and Geometric Mean aquifer pumping tests conducted on the Oak Ridge Reservation.

100 10 1

Hydraulic Conductivity (ft/d) 0.1 0.01 0.001 0.0001 Parameter Conasauga Rome Knox Combined Number of Tests 413 11 30 456 Geometric Mean 0.06 0.23 0.14 0.07 Minimum 0.0000049 0.0009 0.0002 0.0000049 0.00001 Maximum 1st Quartile 99 0.01 2.36 0.17 66.76 0.02 99 0.01 3rd Quartile 0.48 1.72 0.80 0.51 Note: Only one value is available from the Chickamauga Group and is included in the combined results, but insufficient data is available for an individual statistical evaluation of the Chickamauga Group.

0.000001 Conasauga Rome Knox Combined Geologic Formation a) Box and whisker plot of hydraulic conductivity tests by geologic formation A Selection of Oak Ridge Reservation Published Bedrock Hydraulic Conductivity Values 0

100 200 300 Depth Below Ground (ft) 400 500 600 700 Includes data from slug, packer, and aquifer pumping tests conducted on the Oak Ridge Reservation. Depth represents the midpoint of the tested zone.

800 900 Rome Formation Knox Group Conasauga Group Chickamauga Group 1000 0.000001 0.00001 0.0001 0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 100 Hydraulic Conductivity (ft/d) b) Scatter plot of hydraulic conductivity versus depth Data Source: Table 2.4.12-1 Figure 2.4.12-13. Oak Ridge Reservation Historic Bedrock Hydraulic Conductivity Test Data 2.4.12-117 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report A Selection of Published Oak Ridge Reservation Aquifer Pumping Test Results 10000 Transmissivity Storage Coefficient 1000 Statistics (ft2/d) (dimensionless)

Transmissivity (ft) or Storage Coefficient (dimensionless)

Number of Results 40 40 Geometric Mean 32.5 5.94 x 10-4 100 Minimum 0.57 9.00 x 10-6 Maximum 9156.35 3.00 x 10-2 1st Quartile 2.87 1.64 x 10-4 3rd Quartile 403.73 1.76 x 10-3 10 Results are for transmissivity and storage coefficient determined from aquifer pumping tests only. All tests were performed in the Conasauga Group.

1 0.1 0.01 0.001 0.0001 Geometric Mean 0.00001 0.000001 Transmisivity Storage Coefficient Data Source: Table 2.4.12-1 Figure 2.4.12-14. Oak Ridge Reservation Aquifer Pumping Test Results 2.4.12-118 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report Clinch River Breeder Reactor Bedrock Packer Testing Results 10 Geometric Mean 1

Hydraulic Conductivity (ft/d) 0.1 0.01 Parameter Chickamauga Long Interval Chickamauga Discrete Interval Knox Number of Tests 64 31 10 Geometric Mean 0.05 0.52 0.02 Minimum 0.002 0.02 0.002 Maximum 0.31 4.14 2.21 1st Quartile 0.03 0.19 0.003 3rd Quartile 0.10 2.02 0.11 Results do not include any tests with "zero water take" 0.001 Chickamauga Chickamauga Knox Long Interval Discrete Interval a) Box and whisker plot of CRBRP bedrock packer test results Clinch River Breeder Reactor Bedrock Packer Testing Results 0

50 100 Depth (feet below ground surface) 150 200 250 Depth represents midpoint of packer test interval. Results do not include any tests with "zero water take".

300 Chickamauga Group Long Interval Chickamauga Group Discrete Interval Knox Group 350 0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 Hydraulic Conductivity (ft/d) b) Hydraulic conductivity versus depth plot of CRBRP bedrock packer test results Data Source: Table 2.4.12-3 Figure 2.4.12-15. Clinch River Breeder Reactor Project Bedrock Packer Hydraulic Conductivity Tests 2.4.12-119 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report Adapted from Reference 2.4.12-14 Figure 2.4.12-16. Groundwater Levels Adjacent to the Clinch River 2.4.12-120 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report Note: Data for the years 2000, 2005 and 2010 from Reference 2.4.12-16, Reference 2.4.12-17, and Reference 2.4.12-18, respectively.

Figure 2.4.12-17. Groundwater Use by Category in the Study Area for 2000, 2005, and 2010 2.4.12-121 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report After Reference 2.4.12-22 Figure 2.4.12-18. Bethel Valley Flow Conceptualization 2.4.12-122 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report Figure 2.4.12-19. Potentiometric Surface Map for September 24, 2013 2.4.12-123 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report Figure 2.4.12-20. Potentiometric Surface Map for December 20, 2013 2.4.12-124 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report Figure 2.4.12-21. Potentiometric Surface Map for January 13, 2014 2.4.12-125 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report Figure 2.4.12-22. Potentiometric Surface Map for March 16, 2014 2.4.12-126 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report Figure 2.4.12-23. Potentiometric Surface Map for May 15, 2014 2.4.12-127 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report Figure 2.4.12-24. Potentiometric Surface Map for August 18, 2014 2.4.12-128 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report Figure 2.4.12-25. Potentiometric Surface Map for November 4, 2014 2.4.12-129 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report Figure 2.4.12-26. Potentiometric Surface Map for February 12, 2015 2.4.12-130 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report Figure 2.4.12-27. Potentiometric Surface Map for May 19, 2015 2.4.12-131 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report Figure 2.4.12-28. Potentiometric Surface Map for August 10, 2015 2.4.12-132 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report Figure 2.4.12-29. Snapshot in Time Showing Equipotential Lines in the Vertical Plane Along the Strike of the Bedding Plane on June 13, 2014 2.4.12-133 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report Reference 2.4.12-23 Figure 2.4.12-30. U.S. Geological Survey Regional Hydrograph 2.4.12-134 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report Reference 2.4.12-24 Figure 2.4.12-31. U.S. Geological Survey Hydrograph Near the Clinch River Nuclear Site 2.4.12-135 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report OW-101 810 0.9 800 0.8 Groundwater Elevation in ft, NAVD 88 0.7 790 0.6 Precipitation in Inches 780 OW-101U (Trans) 0.5 OW-101L(Trans) 770 OW-101D(Trans) 0.4 Watts Bar Reservoir Stage OW-101U Manual 760 0.3 OW-101L Manual OW-101D Manual 750 0.2 Precipitation 740 0.1 730 0 30-Mar-14 25-May-14 22-Jun-14 9-Nov-14 29-Mar-15 24-May-15 21-Jun-15 15-Sep-13 13-Oct-13 10-Nov-13 8-Dec-13 5-Jan-14 2-Feb-14 2-Mar-14 27-Apr-14 20-Jul-14 17-Aug-14 14-Sep-14 12-Oct-14 7-Dec-14 4-Jan-15 1-Feb-15 1-Mar-15 26-Apr-15 19-Jul-15 16-Aug-15 Figure 2.4.12-32. (Sheet 1 of 14) Hydrograph of OW-101 Well Cluster 2.4.12-136 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report OW-202 820 0.9 0.8 800 Groundwater Elevation in ft, NAVD 88 0.7 780 0.6 Precipitation in Inches OW-202U (Trans)

OW-202L (Trans) 0.5 OW-202D (Trans) 760 Watts Bar Reservoir Stage 0.4 OW-202U Manual OW-202L Manual 740 0.3 OW-202D Manual Precipitation 0.2 720 0.1 700 0 30-Mar-14 25-May-14 22-Jun-14 9-Nov-14 29-Mar-15 24-May-15 21-Jun-15 15-Sep-13 13-Oct-13 10-Nov-13 8-Dec-13 5-Jan-14 2-Feb-14 2-Mar-14 27-Apr-14 20-Jul-14 17-Aug-14 14-Sep-14 12-Oct-14 7-Dec-14 4-Jan-15 1-Feb-15 1-Mar-15 26-Apr-15 19-Jul-15 16-Aug-15 Figure 2.4.12-32. (Sheet 2 of 14) Hydrograph of OW-202 Well Cluster 2.4.12-137 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report OW-401 820 0.9 810 0.8 Groundwater Elevation in ft, NAVD 88 800 0.7 Precipitation in Inches 790 0.6 780 0.5 Watts Bar Reservoir Stage OW-401U Manual 770 0.4 OW-401L Manual OW-401D Manual 760 0.3 Precipitation 750 0.2 740 0.1 730 0 30-Mar-14 25-May-14 22-Jun-14 9-Nov-14 29-Mar-15 24-May-15 21-Jun-15 15-Sep-13 13-Oct-13 10-Nov-13 8-Dec-13 5-Jan-14 2-Feb-14 2-Mar-14 27-Apr-14 20-Jul-14 17-Aug-14 14-Sep-14 12-Oct-14 7-Dec-14 4-Jan-15 1-Feb-15 1-Mar-15 26-Apr-15 19-Jul-15 16-Aug-15 Figure 2.4.12-32. (Sheet 3 of 14) Hydrograph of OW-401 Well Cluster 2.4.12-138 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report OW-409 785 0.9 780 0.8 775 Groundwater Elevation in ft, NAVD 88 0.7 770 Precipitation in Inches 0.6 765 OW-409U (Trans) 760 0.5 OW-409L (Trans) 755 0.4 Watts Bar Reservoir Stage OW-409U Manual 750 0.3 OW-409L Manual 745 Precipitation 0.2 740 0.1 735 730 0 30-Mar-14 25-May-14 22-Jun-14 9-Nov-14 29-Mar-15 24-May-15 21-Jun-15 15-Sep-13 13-Oct-13 10-Nov-13 8-Dec-13 5-Jan-14 2-Feb-14 2-Mar-14 27-Apr-14 20-Jul-14 17-Aug-14 14-Sep-14 12-Oct-14 7-Dec-14 4-Jan-15 1-Feb-15 1-Mar-15 26-Apr-15 19-Jul-15 16-Aug-15 Figure 2.4.12-32. (Sheet 4 of 14) Hydrograph of OW-409 Well Cluster 2.4.12-139 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report OW-415 775 0.9 770 0.8 Groundwater Elevation in ft, NAVD 88 765 0.7 760 0.6 Precipitation in Inches 755 0.5 Watts Bar Reservoir Stage 750 0.4 OW-415U Manual OW-415L Manual 745 0.3 Precipitation 740 0.2 735 0.1 730 0 30-Mar-14 25-May-14 22-Jun-14 9-Nov-14 29-Mar-15 24-May-15 21-Jun-15 15-Sep-13 13-Oct-13 10-Nov-13 8-Dec-13 5-Jan-14 2-Feb-14 2-Mar-14 27-Apr-14 20-Jul-14 17-Aug-14 14-Sep-14 12-Oct-14 7-Dec-14 4-Jan-15 1-Feb-15 1-Mar-15 26-Apr-15 19-Jul-15 16-Aug-15 Figure 2.4.12-32. (Sheet 5 of 14) Hydrograph of OW-415 Well Cluster 2.4.12-140 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report OW-416 760 0.9 0.8 755 Groundwater Elevation in ft, NAVD 88 0.7 Precipitation in Inches 750 0.6 0.5 Watts Bar Reservoir Stage 745 0.4 OW-416U Manual OW-416L Manual 740 0.3 Precipitation 0.2 735 0.1 730 0 30-Mar-14 25-May-14 22-Jun-14 9-Nov-14 29-Mar-15 24-May-15 21-Jun-15 15-Sep-13 13-Oct-13 10-Nov-13 8-Dec-13 5-Jan-14 2-Feb-14 2-Mar-14 27-Apr-14 20-Jul-14 17-Aug-14 14-Sep-14 12-Oct-14 7-Dec-14 4-Jan-15 1-Feb-15 1-Mar-15 26-Apr-15 19-Jul-15 16-Aug-15 Figure 2.4.12-32. (Sheet 6 of 14) Hydrograph of OW-416 Well Cluster 2.4.12-141 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report OW-417 760 0.9 0.8 755 Groundwater Elevation in ft, NAVD 88 0.7 750 0.6 Precipitation in Inches OW-417U (Trans) 0.5 OW-417L (Trans) 745 0.4 Watts Bar Reservoir Stage OW-417U Manual 740 0.3 OW-417L Manual Precipitation 0.2 735 0.1 730 0 30-Mar-14 25-May-14 22-Jun-14 9-Nov-14 29-Mar-15 24-May-15 21-Jun-15 15-Sep-13 13-Oct-13 10-Nov-13 8-Dec-13 5-Jan-14 2-Feb-14 2-Mar-14 27-Apr-14 20-Jul-14 17-Aug-14 14-Sep-14 12-Oct-14 7-Dec-14 4-Jan-15 1-Feb-15 1-Mar-15 26-Apr-15 19-Jul-15 16-Aug-15 Figure 2.4.12-32. (Sheet 7 of 14) Hydrograph of OW-417 Well Cluster 2.4.12-142 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report OW-418 765 0.9 0.8 760 Groundwater Elevation in ft, NAVD 88 0.7 755 Precipitation in Inches 0.6 750 0.5 Watts Bar Reservoir Stage 0.4 OW-418U Manual 745 OW-418L Manual 0.3 Precipitation 740 0.2 735 0.1 730 0 30-Mar-14 25-May-14 22-Jun-14 9-Nov-14 29-Mar-15 24-May-15 21-Jun-15 15-Sep-13 13-Oct-13 10-Nov-13 8-Dec-13 5-Jan-14 2-Feb-14 2-Mar-14 27-Apr-14 20-Jul-14 17-Aug-14 14-Sep-14 12-Oct-14 7-Dec-14 4-Jan-15 1-Feb-15 1-Mar-15 26-Apr-15 19-Jul-15 16-Aug-15 Figure 2.4.12-32. (Sheet 8 of 14) Hydrograph of OW-418 Well Cluster 2.4.12-143 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report OW-419 770 0.9 765 0.8 Groundwater Elevation in ft, NAVD 88 0.7 760 Precipitation in Inches 0.6 755 0.5 Watts Bar Reservoir Stage 750 0.4 OW-419U Manual OW-419L Manual 745 0.3 Precipitation 740 0.2 735 0.1 730 0 30-Mar-14 25-May-14 22-Jun-14 9-Nov-14 29-Mar-15 24-May-15 21-Jun-15 15-Sep-13 13-Oct-13 10-Nov-13 8-Dec-13 5-Jan-14 2-Feb-14 2-Mar-14 27-Apr-14 20-Jul-14 17-Aug-14 14-Sep-14 12-Oct-14 7-Dec-14 4-Jan-15 1-Feb-15 1-Mar-15 26-Apr-15 19-Jul-15 16-Aug-15 Figure 2.4.12-32. (Sheet 9 of 14) Hydrograph of OW-419 Well Cluster 2.4.12-144 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report OW-420 770 0.9 0.8 760 Groundwater Elevation in ft, NAVD 88 0.7 750 0.6 Precipitation in Inches 740 0.5 Watts Bar Reservoir Stage 0.4 OW-420U Manual 730 OW-420L Manual 0.3 Precipitation 720 0.2 710 0.1 700 0 30-Mar-14 25-May-14 22-Jun-14 9-Nov-14 29-Mar-15 24-May-15 21-Jun-15 15-Sep-13 13-Oct-13 10-Nov-13 8-Dec-13 5-Jan-14 2-Feb-14 2-Mar-14 27-Apr-14 20-Jul-14 17-Aug-14 14-Sep-14 12-Oct-14 7-Dec-14 4-Jan-15 1-Feb-15 1-Mar-15 26-Apr-15 19-Jul-15 16-Aug-15 Figure 2.4.12-32. (Sheet 10 of 14) Hydrograph of OW-420 Well Cluster 2.4.12-145 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report OW-421 0.9 800 0.8 Groundwater Elevation in ft, NAVD 88 0.7 750 Precipitation in Inches 0.6 0.5 Watts Bar Reservoir Stage OW-421U Manual 700 0.4 OW-421L Manual OW-421D Manual 0.3 Precipitation 650 0.2 0.1 600 0 30-Mar-14 25-May-14 22-Jun-14 9-Nov-14 29-Mar-15 24-May-15 21-Jun-15 15-Sep-13 13-Oct-13 10-Nov-13 8-Dec-13 5-Jan-14 2-Feb-14 2-Mar-14 27-Apr-14 20-Jul-14 17-Aug-14 14-Sep-14 12-Oct-14 7-Dec-14 4-Jan-15 1-Feb-15 1-Mar-15 26-Apr-15 19-Jul-15 16-Aug-15 Figure 2.4.12-32. (Sheet 11 of 14) Hydrograph of OW-421 Well Cluster 2.4.12-146 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report OW-423 800 0.9 0.8 790 Groundwater Elevation in ft, NAVD 88 0.7 780 0.6 Precipitation in Inches OW-423U (Trans) 770 OW-423 L (Trans) 0.5 OW-423D (Trans) 0.4 Watts Bar Reservoir Stage 760 OW-423U Manual 0.3 OW-423L Manual 750 OW-423D Manual 0.2 Precipitation 740 0.1 730 0 30-Mar-14 25-May-14 22-Jun-14 9-Nov-14 29-Mar-15 24-May-15 21-Jun-15 15-Sep-13 13-Oct-13 10-Nov-13 8-Dec-13 5-Jan-14 2-Feb-14 2-Mar-14 27-Apr-14 20-Jul-14 17-Aug-14 14-Sep-14 12-Oct-14 7-Dec-14 4-Jan-15 1-Feb-15 1-Mar-15 26-Apr-15 19-Jul-15 16-Aug-15 Figure 2.4.12-32. (Sheet 12 of 14) Hydrograph of OW-423 Well Cluster 2.4.12-147 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report OW-428 850 0.9 0.8 Groundwater Elevation in ft, NAVD 88 800 0.7 Precipitation in Inches 0.6 750 0.5 Watts Bar Reservoir Stage OW-428U Manual 0.4 OW-428L Manual 700 OW-428D Manual 0.3 Precipitation 0.2 650 0.1 600 0 30-Mar-14 25-May-14 22-Jun-14 9-Nov-14 29-Mar-15 24-May-15 21-Jun-15 15-Sep-13 13-Oct-13 10-Nov-13 8-Dec-13 5-Jan-14 2-Feb-14 2-Mar-14 27-Apr-14 20-Jul-14 17-Aug-14 14-Sep-14 12-Oct-14 7-Dec-14 4-Jan-15 1-Feb-15 1-Mar-15 26-Apr-15 19-Jul-15 16-Aug-15 Figure 2.4.12-32. (Sheet 13 of 14) Hydrograph of OW-428 Well Cluster 2.4.12-148 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report OW-429 780 0.9 760 0.8 Groundwater Elevation in ft, NAVD 88 740 0.7 Precipitation in Inches 720 0.6 700 0.5 Watts Bar Reservoir Stage 680 0.4 OW-429U Manual OW-429L Manual 660 0.3 Precipitation 640 0.2 620 0.1 600 0 30-Mar-14 25-May-14 22-Jun-14 9-Nov-14 29-Mar-15 24-May-15 21-Jun-15 15-Sep-13 13-Oct-13 10-Nov-13 8-Dec-13 5-Jan-14 2-Feb-14 2-Mar-14 27-Apr-14 20-Jul-14 17-Aug-14 14-Sep-14 12-Oct-14 7-Dec-14 4-Jan-15 1-Feb-15 1-Mar-15 26-Apr-15 19-Jul-15 16-Aug-15 Figure 2.4.12-32. (Sheet 14 of 14) Hydrograph of OW-429 Well Cluster 2.4.12-149 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report Figure 2.4.12-33. Fracture Frequency Histogram 2.4.12-150 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report Adapted from Reference 2.4.12-13 Figure 2.4.12-34. Example Acoustic Televiewer Geophysical Log 2.4.12-151 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report 10 CRN Packer Test Results by Geologic Unit Geometric Mean 1

Hydraulic Conductivity (ft/day) 0.1 Parameter Chickmauga Knox Number of Tests 13 9 Geometric Mean (ft/day) 0.54 0.44 Minimum (ft/day) 0.04 0.10 Maximum (ft/day) 5 2 1st Quartile (ft/day) 0.2 0.2 3rd Quartile (ft/day) 1 1 0.01 Chickamauga Knox Geologic Unit a) Box and whisker plot of CRN site packer test results by geologic unit Comparison of CRBRP and CRN Packer Test Results 10 Geometric Mean 1

Hydraulic Conductivity (ft/day) 0.1 0.01 0.001 CRN Chickamauga CRN Knox CRBRP Chickamauga CRBRP Chickamauga CRBRP Knox Long Interval Discrete Interval b) Box and whisker plot comparing CRN site packer test results with CRBRP packer test results Data sources: Table 2.4.12-10 and Table 2.4.12-3 Figure 2.4.12-35. Clinch River Nuclear Site Borehole Packer Test Results Box and Whisker Plots 2.4.12-152 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report 0

50 100 Depth below ground surface (ft) 150 200 250 Chickamauga Group Knox Group 300 0.01 0.1 1 10 Hydraulic Conductivity (ft/day)

Data Source: Table 2.4.12-10 Figure 2.4.12-36. Scatter Plot of Clinch River Nuclear Site Packer Test Hydraulic Conductivity Results with Depth 2.4.12-153 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report 100 Summary Statistics Parameter Upper Zone* Lower Zone* Deep Zone*

Number of Tests 11 12 3 Geometric Mean 0.18 0.13 0.06 Minimum 0.004 0.00055 0.039 Maximum 12 8 0.097 1st Quartile 0.051 0.063 0.0425 3rd Quartile 1.32 0.42 0.07

• average of rising and falling head tests 10 1

Hydraulic Conductivity (ft/day) 0.1 0.01 0.001 Geometric mean 0.0001 Upper Zone Lower Zone Deep Zone a) Box and whisker plot of slug test hydraulic conductivity by observation well monitoring zone 0

50 100 Depth Below Ground Surface (ft) 150 200 250 Chickamauga Knox 300 0.0001 0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 100 Average Hydraulic Conductivity (ft/day) b) Scatter plot of slug test hydraulic conductivity with depth below ground surface Data Source: Table 2.4.12-11 Figure 2.4.12-37. Slug Test Results for the Clinch River Nuclear Site 2.4.12-154 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report 100 Summary Statistics Parameter Slug Tests in Chickamauga* Slug Tests in Knox* Packer Tests in Chickamauga Packer Tests in Knox Number of Tests 20 6 13 9 Geometric Mean 0.13 0.14 0.54 0.44 Minimum 0.004 0.00055 0.04 0.1 Maximum 8 12 5 2 1st Quartile 0.05 0.06 0.2 0.2 3rd Quartile 0.4 2.4 1 1

• Average of rising and falling head tests.

10 1

Hydraulic Conductivity (ft/day) 0.1 0.01 Geometric mean 0.001 0.0001 Slug Tests Chickamauga Slug Tests Knox Packer Tests Chickamauga Packer Tests Knox Data Sources: Table 2.4.12-10 and Table 2.4.12-11 Figure 2.4.12-38. Comparison of Slug and Packer Test Results 2.4.12-155 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report Data Sources: Reference 2.4.12-13 and Reference 2.4.12-35 Figure 2.4.12-39. Piper Trilinear Diagram 2.4.12-156 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report Figure 2.4.12-40. Plan View of the Profile Model with Grids 2.4.12-157 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report Plant Grade Elevation = 821 ft NAVD88 820 816.1 ft NAVD 88 Groundwater Model Simulated Maximum Groundwater Head Elevation beneath Power Block foundation = 802.3 to 816.1 ft NAVD88 802.3 ft NAVD 88 800 780 Elevation of Structure (ft NAVD88) 760 740 720 700 Plant Parameter Envelope Maximum Foundation Embedment Elevation = 681 ft NAVD88 680 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 Hydrostatic Pressure (psf)

Figure 2.4.12-41. Maximum Hydrostatic Pressure 2.4.12-158 Revision 2

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report Note: (F) indicates farm well, (C) indicates commercial well.

Figure 2.4.12-42. Individual Well Locations Within a 1.5-mile Radius of the CRN Site 2.4.12-159 Revision 2