ML19322A065
| ML19322A065 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Yellow Creek  |
| Issue date: | 12/28/1978 |
| From: | TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19322A063 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 7901020151 | |
| Download: ML19322A065 (110) | |
Text
{{#Wiki_filter:. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _. _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ U<m rN U YELLOW CREEK NUCLEAR PLANT PRELIMINARY SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT AMENDMENT 13 Instruction Sheet i Af ter filing this amendment into the PSAR, this instruction sheet should be filed in the front of Volume 1, behind the amendment checklist. TEXT Remove Insert Front /Back Front /Back Figure 2.1-9 (T) /- Figure 2.1-9 (T) /- Figure 2.1-10 (T) /- Figure 2.1-10 (T) /- Figure 2.1-10a (T) /- Figure 2.1-ll(T) /- Figure 2.1-ll(T) /- Fi gure 2.1-12 (T) /- Figure 2.1-12 (T) /- Figure 2.1-13 (T) /- Figure 2.1-13(T)/- y Figure 2.1-14 (T) /- Figure 2.1-14 (T) /- Figure 2.1-15 (T) /- Figure 2.1-15 (T) /- Figure 2.1-15a (T) /- Figure 2.1-16 (T)/- Figure 2.1-16 (T)/-
-s Figure 2.1-17 (T)/- Figure 2.1-17 (T) /-
Figure 2.1-18 (T) /- Figure 2.1-18(T) /- Figure 2.1-19 (T)/- Figure 2.1-19 (T) /- Figure 2.1-20 (T)/- Figure 2.1-20(T)/- Figure 2.1-21(T)/- Figure 2.1-21(T) /- Figure 2.1-22 (T)/- Figure 2.1-22 (T) /- Table 2. 2-1(T) /- Table 2.2-1(T) /- Table 2. 2-1(T) (contd. ) /- -- 2.3-9/2.3-10 2.3-9/2.3-10 2.5-11/2.5-12 2.5-11/2.5-12 2.5-12a/- 2.5-13/2.5-14 2.5-13/2.5-14 2.5-14a/- 2.5-14a/- 2.5-23d/2.5-24 2.5-23d/2.5-23e 2.5-24/- 2.5-37/2.5-38 2.5-37/2.5-38 through through 2.5-41/2.5-42 2.5-55/2.5-56 Table 2. 5-5 (T) /- Table 2. 5-5 (T) /- t Table 2. 5-10 (T) /- Table 2. 5-10 (T) /- Table 2. 5-15 (T) /-
-- Table 2.5-16 p') /-
Table 2. 5-17 C') /- , Table 2. 5-18 (T) /- ' Figure 2.5-18/- Figure 2.5-18/- Figure 2.5-18a/- Figure 2.5-18a/- ('% -- Figure 2.5-58/- !
\
.-- through Figure 2.5-80/- l l
790102019 i s t
Remove Insert
~ .. Front /Back Front /Back 3.2-3 3.2-3 3.3-3/3.3-4 3.3-3/3.3-4 3.5-1/3.5-2 3.5-1/3.5-2 3.5-3/3.5-4 3.5-3/3.5-4 3.5-5/3.5-6 3.5-5/3.5-6 3.5-7/3.5-7a 3.5-7/3.5-7a 3.5-8/3.5-9 3.5-8/3.5-9 Table 3.5-1/ Table 3.5-2 Table 3.5-1/ Table 3.5-2 3.8-29/3.8-30 3.8-29/3.8-30 3.8-30a/-
3.8-33/3.8-34 3.8-33/3.8-33a 3.8-33b/3.8-34 3.8-37/38-38 3.8-37/3.8-37a 3.8-38/3.8-38a 3.8-39/3.8-40 3.8-39/3.8-40 3.8-41/3.8-42 3.8-41/3.8-42 3.8-45/3.8-46 3.8-45/3.8-45a 3.8-46/- 3.8-47/3.8-48 3.8-47/3.8-48 f
. 3.8-48a/-
6.2-46b/6.2-46c 6.2-46b/6.2-46c 6.2-46d/6.2-46e 6.2-46d/6.2-46e 6.2-46f/6.2-46g
)Ci 6.2-46f/6.2-46g Table 6. 2-15 (T) (contd. ) /
Table 6.2-17 (T) Table 6. 2-16 (T) (Contd. ) / Table 6.2-17 (T) Table 6.2-41(T)sh. 1/- Table 6.2-41(T) sh. 1/- Table 6. 2-41(T) sh. 2/- through Table 6.2-41(T) sh. 3/- Table 6.2-41(T) sh. 7/- Table 6. 2-41(T) sh. 4/ sh. 5 . Table 6. 3-1(T)/ Table 6. 3-1(T) (contd. ) Table 6. 3-1(T)/ Table 6. 3-1(T) (contd.) Table 8.1-2 (T) sh. 1/sh. 2 Table 8.1-2 (T) sh. 1/sh. :2 9.2A-3/9.2A-4 9.2A-3/9.2A-4 9.2A-5/9.2A-6 9.2A-5/9.2A-6 9.2A-9/9.2A-10 9.2A-9/9.2A 9.4-1/9.4-2 9.4-1/9.4-2 9.4-7/9.4-8 9.4-7/9.4-8 9.5A-13/9.5A-14 9.5A-13/9.5A-14 9.5A-15/9.5A-16 9.5A-15/9.5A-16 10.4-19/10.4-20 10.4-19/10.4-20 , 11.3-5/11.3-6 11.3-5/11.3-6 11.3-7/11.3-8 11.3-7/11.3-8 Table 17.1A-3 (T) sh. 1/sh. 2 Table 17. lA-3 (T) sh._1/sh. 2 Table 17. lA-3 (T) sh. 3/- Table 17.lA-3(T)~sh. 3/sh. 4 i l l O l
1 l i i NRC QUESTIONS ( l Remove Insert . Front /Back Frort/Back l l 110.9-1/110.9-2 110.9-1/110.9-2 , 110.9-3/110.10-1 110.9-3/110.10-1 , 130.13-1/130.13-2 130.13-1/130.13-2 4 130.30-1/130.30-2 130.30-1/130.30 2 130.30-3/130.30-4 130.30-3/130.30-4 130.30-5/130.30-6 130.30-5/130.30-6 130.30-7/- -- . 362.1/362.2-1 362.1-1/362.2-1 1 372.32-1/372.32-2 372.32-1/372.32-2
- 372 32-5/372.32-6 372.32-5/372.32-6 i 372.32-7/372.32-8 372.32-7/372.32-8 372.32-9/372.32-10 372.32-9/-
421.5A-2/421.6-1 421.5A-2/421.6-1 ! 421.7-1/421.7-2 421.7-1/421.7-2 421.9-1/- 421.9-1/- -
- 421.10-1/- 421.10-1/-
421.11-1/421.11-2 f i 422.1-1/- !O l l O [ i [
N NNW NNE 100 NW 3o , NE o s5 25 "3 ENE WNW igs rs
'O .
- #o
' g5
\0
$ /g 'o s ,
43 - ~ b 10 ' 20 [ - 15 5 120 E g 120 - - 30 ,s .- s 30 % 1 g 20 15 to - 2o 4 e e . G /o s00 #60 3
+ e ,,
WSW g 4 , ESE
$5 e %,
SW # i.u0 SE SSW ig SSE S Revised by Amendment 13 YELLOW CREEK NUCLEAR PLANT ~ PRELIMIN ARY SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT 1970 POPULATION DISTRIBUTION WITHIN 10 MILES OF THE SITE FIGURE 2.1-9(T)
d(s N NNW NNE NW - 9, , NE O WNW ENE
- s
- o
- p
'o .
~ 9 s *
\0 is '
20 - b s 4 & - so #. s g 180 - - 10 l 25 s - 15 1 - 5 130 E p . .~ s Jo 20 30 % 1
~g \0 ,
20 f $ 4 '
)
e 0 .
% e go 3 ??s
@ @ 20 WSW g 4 , ESE 65
,n o s SE SW i.e0 SSW ig SSE S
Added by Amendment 13 YELLOW CREEK NUCLEAR PLANT PRELIMINARY SAFETY AN ALYSIS REPORT 1987 POPULATION DISTRIBUTION v WITHIN 10 MILES OF THE SITE FIGURE 2.1-11 (T)
O N NNW NNE
*2 NW o , NE S
Yo @ 30 ENE WNW
. g 5 . .
233 \b
'O ,
a b
/$ ' Ib
- 5 3 /s **
+ .
So - - S E g 155 - - 10 ' 20 .
- 15 - -
5 120 30 - ,,- , 5 30 % 1 so 20 g 20 g ,, p 2 . G /s
\b p p 3 .
'60 15 9
WSW g 4 , ESE 60
, 5 s, e
SW i.38s SE SSW SSE in S Revised by Amendment 13 YELLOW CREEK NUCLEAR PLANT PRELIMIN ARY SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT CN 1980 POPULATION DISTRIBUTION b WITHIN 10 MILES OF THE SITE I FIGURE 2.1-10(T) 4 -$
O N NNW NNE NW 'o,
- NE 0 D
, 33 WNW o ENE
, s '
28o
\ ps
'O .
#s ,
go
'S i,' 20 '
so , b ss . '~ s ns E W - - i i 25 s p , .,,- .
; is s
s 130 9 s 1 Jo 20 20 2$ gw ,, , so ~ . o is sto 3 ##0 20 WSW g 4 , ESE 63
$ OO S 'b i SW i.343 SE i
SSW in SSE S Revised by Amendment 13 1 YELLOW CREEK NUCLEAR PLANT PRELIMINARY SAFETY ) ANALYSIS REPORT j 1 1990 POPULATION DISTRIBUTION [V^') WITHIN 10 MILES OF THE SITE FIGURE 2.1-12(T)
( N NNW NNE 150 NW c& n NE
#G s h 40 WNW % '
ENE 5 30$ 200 to . j - fg *
\0 is *
- b 1
, p, ' o ,
SS ~ {'y b g 240 - - 10 l 20 - 20 1 - - 5 135 E
.. s f n '1 4 20 50
,'e 20 C) $ /s '
1b
's c s" .
s2S 3- #95
@ @ 20 5 '
WSW g 4 , ESE 70 o /s 8 % SE SW i.620 SSW jo SSE S Revised by Amendment 13 YELLOW CREEK NUCLEAR PLANT PRELIMINARY SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT 2000 POPilLATION DISTRIBUTION s WITHIN 10 MILES OF THE SITE FIGURE 2.1-13(T)
O N NNW NNE NW G,
- NE o h
, 40 G
ENE WNW 5 Y '
- no 33g
'O .
~
- 's 20
\O l0 2n '%s b 3 '->
53 . 10 20 s i3s E 35 ' - - W 2' ' - 2o '. p '
,8s' 10
* #3
\0 -
f% ,
& & $ 's -
2 e e . 's /, 0 ##0 3 e e 25 5 - WSW 4 g ESE g 10 s#
' % SE SW voo SSW jo SSE S
Revised by Amendment 13 YELLOW CREEK NUCLEAR PLANT PRELIMINARY SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT l l fT d 2010 POPULATION DISTRIBUTION WITHIN 10 MILES OF THE SITE FIGURE 2.1-14(T)
O N NNW NNE I65 NW L e NE
's
%o Y A5 WNW ' '
ENE ho 2\o
'O ,
~
. 93 *
\O
]$ . 20 , y 20 O .
60 -
\0 is - 20 s i43 E W a5 - -
2 [ p .s.~ fo
@ e go .
# e . % /,
9 3 UO O e 2s 5 ' WSW g 4 g ESE 70 5 pf 's 2 s
' 8 SE SW u3o SSW SSE in S
1 Revised by Amendment 13 YELLOW CREEK NUCLEAR PLANT l PRELIMINARY SAFETY j ANALYSIS REPORT j , 2020 POPULATION DISTRIBUTION \- WITHIN 10 MILES OF THE SITE FIGURE 2.1-15(T) l l
N NNW NNE 8 675 e e
% s" NW u e, NE
% Y ~ [
D s 2.875 [
~%
- WNW ENE e ,, j j
?spo 'q "'*** $ sess tofg % 145
$ \ .4,o g g
/.cco go p s5 a
260 QD W 3.690 4.i25 2.58o 17.385 l 155 1401 925 4.790 9.645 8.840 E g90 290
\ .37 Ow # J# #50 e 8 #o
- s. 3.315
. *p to <q, fooo 2.sss
$ 2
S 6
92 ,, WSW
, .3 is j 20 e,'3 4 6,,
ESE S
@ 2.045 vg 30 g
$ G %,
SW 6.775 8 "O % e 5 2,595 SSW 3o SSE S Revised by Amendment 13 YELLOW CREEK NUCLEAR PLANT PRELIMINARY SAFETY AN ALYSIS RE, PORT C' 1970 POPULATION DISTRIBUTION b) WITHIN 50 MILES OF THE SITE FIGURE 2.1-16(T) l
N NNW , g , ,, NNE
% 2
$ 2 NW 4. iso NE
%s % f $*
?., ups e
E dp WNW > ENE
#3'o '?o
< 10.39s h sV E220 Q 3.hD Jso3 /o 8 3,365
< 170 l/
23 Sp Or ?o bib 305 \9b W 3 ass 4. s am 20.380 l i% l i40 , m s.3 % i i.360 ioo2s E q\ D 290
\.6\b %
hQ# IS$ 19 $ ib < '4$ 0 'ps T g <
#0 7,'*S %.) N 2.22s ~*s q.1b N WSW +h' 2o /"o N23$
ESE p 5 % - %, 3 2. l?5 'J 30 3~ $ SW 7.s
- SE p 40 g e t 2.690 SSW 3g SSE S
Revised by Amendment 13 YELLOW CREEK NUCLEAR PLANT PRELIMINARY SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT
/ 1980 POPULATION DISTRIBUTION Q] WITHIN 50 MILES OF THE SITE FIGURE 2.1-17(T) i
N NNW NNE 10./%
$ f NW 4.390 NE
% % ! [
'e,s s. 4.105 g*
WNW ENE E885 e'90
^
- 11,615 h s,s@
E 6/g , ^Q h 3@ 4//0 b \ .h3D s 195 o lIlo 3 Q p $ h3 20S E W 3.385 4,190 3.080 24 2 220 150 1 1.065 8.355 11.930 10.635 220 Jos I y,b7b %& %l63 ls 2.s* po 10 %, 'Es s
'\ q k3 h j Qe OE. Ipg (j ,y 2.325 e '0 ro .9 +$ i 02s ESE WSW 20 s'3 /
v
- S % >
69 2.215 #v,
~
SW f* f s.2
% 49 SE R ** %r,.
-?
- 7. nt, SSW SSE 3o S
Added by Amendment 13 YELLOW CREEK NUCLEAR PLANT PRELIMINARY SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT 1987 POPULATION DISTRIBUTION p WITHIN 50 MILES OF THE SITE , ( , FIGURE 2.1-18 (T)
J' N NNW NNE
,,g,,
$3 v 8
NW g 4.480 NE "es % h $
e,, r o
4.32s z f WNW e ENE
#O
'll$ - 12.190 4a 4, 8 3.#
443 s O' \-
' -?oo eag o, ?
$ s2O 355 grO 26.s80 l 10.900 E W 3.34 3 4.iw : 095 233 l 15o I i.i m 9.350 12.17s 210 310 s.# fgo '85 m 2.1 * $ 10 <s, 330 2.k1 0
~
$ 2 3IO o #3.293 ssO q 1 03,5 WSW *4+> 20
#3 ESE o o f ~ 2.255
#6 3
p 30
/,'a w
v
~
847o s s SW SE 40 y
$ t 9
2,740 SSW 3, SSE S Revised by Amendment 13 YELLOW CREEK NUCLEAR PLANT PRELIMIN ARY SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT
.r N 1990 POPULATION DISTRIBUTION (f)'
i WiTHIN 50 MILES OF THE SITE Fl6tJRE 2.1-19(T) i
' N N
NNW NNE 11.580 p 0 N 5, 4 NW u,.n > NE
'q,
'Os ,, l $
%, 5,
* * 's
/
ENE ' WNW '6ss s's's - gg # s* o
'spo No $ s?
,o Jara ,n $
tecs s,q 2 9 go 38o 22'> W 3. iso 4.cas 343s 30.52o l 27s iso I i.160 t i.230 13.60s 11.545 E 1so , 4s
\N O h%# 8/s 29 $ ib %, '909s 7* '#
2 1
$ ,g "o 330 WSW -
20 '* ESE
?
$ ~
2.290 '% %,
/ p 8 855
\ ,
SW SE y 40 s 8 5 2.690 SSW 50 SSE S Revised by Amendment 13 YELLOW CREEK NOCLEAR PLANT PRELIMIN ARY SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT [ 2000 POPULATION DISTRIBUTION ! .s . WITHIN 50 MILES CF THE SITE FIGURE 2.1-20(T)
I v N NNW NNE 12.125 5 e NW u 4.90s NE
'%s %.
s 8 v# 9p n Y, 4.580 8 h WNW #8 'o# ENE
//o ' #o - 13.800 'd
'sss ""o ,? #
,*o Je9o , 230 s .6*
1 1 63o 6,9 N o o ss'> 4o5 0 2'5 W 3.ms 3.9ss 3 s20 34230 '.3io - ico i 1.18o 13.115 14.970 12.055 E 11b 330
\.$ 0> fo EES 1.9 Olo
(~ $ 10
*o,,
,*9 3o G 2\ ,$ 2,s,, %
WSW 12 ?
@$ l e," . is o 2o ESE
?
/ ~ n2, '% %o
- v f '
E e %,, SW 9 27s SE g 40 g n-2.645 SSW 50 SSE S Revised by Amendment 13 YELLOW CREEK NUCLEAR PLANT PRELIMIN ARY SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT l C1 2010 POPULATION DISTRIBUTION ( ) WITHIN 50 MILES OF THE SITE l FIGURE 2.1-21'T)
rm (s. ) j - y NNW NNE i2.483 Yo v 8 a3 NW s o85 NE
'e, % 8 $~
D J,g
- s. 4.615 g
o WNW /0 ENE E 06]$ AJ g
- 14,440 o h sh
'300 , 'h h % .0&
49,9 #O 9 $y%b
- o E.695 420
's, #@c ~f q%O
@O 3726s 1 i70 1.23s 13.200 16.283 12.473 E W 2.833 3.sio 4.23o 343 2%b 350
\,Y h8ka
- b O
#3 855 2.0 1
@ 10 a, #J9s
-o
\s' @* [ 2,333 g ozo r2.@ 'd s 4ras WSW +?" 20 ESE o -
E o g9 2.360
* *e ,
R .
?,$
w$- g eg SW 9.620 g 40
$ s
,~,- %
2.560 SSW 3o SSE S Revised by Amendment 13 YELLOW CREEK NUCLEAR PLANT PRELIMIN ARY SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT 2020 POPULATION DISTRIBUTION
\s WITHIN 50 MILES OF THE SITE FIGURE 2.1-22(T)
YCNP-13 m . g Table l'.2-1(T)
\- k%
V. Q llA"AIU ul:: MATKH I Al.:: ilAlulED A::T TMilfl10;;;EM HlVEli 111l.M Pl's 9 ~ Calendar Year l'f/7 9 Estimated Number of Commodity- Net Tons Barges Toxic Itating* CilH1ICALS
-Caustic soda; alcohols; benzene-and toluene 131,639 101 Toxic.
Crude' products from coal tar, petroleum, and natural gas 149,h01~ 115 Slightly toxic Basic chemicals and products, nec;" and miscellaneous chemical-products" 896,041 689 b Nitrogenous, phosphatic, and potassic chemical. fertilizers '141,052 109 b l' [] Total 1,318,133 1,014
> Q'.
PETROLIM1 PH0iUCT3 Gasoline, jet fuel, distillate fuel oil, residual fuel oil, and 11bricating oils and greases 1,049,073 617 Slightly toxic l Naphtha, mineral spirits, nec; and crude petroleum 13 173 9 Slightly toxic Asphalt, tar and pitches h31,255 ~ 173 Practically nontoxic Total 1,493,501 799 l l GRAND TOTA'L 2,811,634 1,813 . I "U.S. Coast Guard, Navigation and Vessel Inspection Circular flo. 10-6h. a'. ; Not further identified. b ~. Unknown 1 nec - Not:-elsewhere classified.
"(m%,) .
l' SOURCE: - Corps of Engineers, Department of Argy. ; Added by Aironia:nt 13 { i i l
\
c. l 9
--. . , . . . - ~ . , , . - - , . ., , . . . . . . . ,.
YCNP-11
/'
's Monthly .and annual temperature means and extremes for Yellow Creek- (33- feet) , Corinth (concurrent year) ,17 and Corinth (1893-1960)to are presented in Tables 2. 3-13 (T) , 2.3- 14 (T) , and 2.3-15 (T) , respectively, and in ~igure 2.3-9 (T) . Comparison of 1 Yellow Creek data with that vt Corinth f or the same period of record indicates that nrinthly raan daily maxima were cooler at
, Yellow Creek than at Cocinth, with the dif ference varying from 2.90F in November to 7.20F in July. Similarly Yellow Creek monthly mean daily minima were warmer than Corinth (except in Ja nua ry-- 0. 50 cooler) , with the differences varying from 0.30F in May to 3.20F in October. The diurnal variation was therefore
'less at Yellow Creek than at Corinth, with the average differences varying from 2.60F in January to 9. 30F in October.
Extreme monthly maxima were also cooler at Yellow Creek and extreme minima were generally warmer. These apparently moderated temperatures may be attributed to several causes: Yellow Creek temperatures are probably moderated by the water influence f rom the embayment; the Yellow Creek sensor is higher than that at Corinth (33 feet vs approximately 4 feet); and the Yellow Creek sensor is probably better shielded and aspirated than that at Corinth. The Corinth temperature data for the period July 1974-June 1975 also compared with the long-term record for Corinth. Overall, the July 1974-June 1975 period appears to have been relatively normal, with the annual mean and 4
/h mean maximum temperatures within 10F of the normals and the (m / annual mean minima only 1.50F cooler than normal. The winter months were comparatively mild with January averaging 3.30F warmer than normal. The fall was quite cool, with September temperatures averaging 5.80F below normal and October's mean daily minimum of 6.50F below normal, which combined with a mean daily maximum of 1.00F above normal gave October a monthly average diurnal variation 7.50F greater than is normally experienced at- Corinth. This tends to explain the unusually high frequency of stability Class G in October (33%) , and contributes to conservatism in X /Q calculations for which ground level release is assumed.
2 Humidity Comparisons of one year (May 1976 - April 1977) of site-specific humidity data with concurrent and long-term (1968-1975) data from Memphis and 'Huntsville are documented in TVA's response to NRC Question 372.08.3* Supporting data from that response are given in Tables 2.3- 16 (T) (mean monthly dewpoint and dry-bulb tem pe rat ures) and 2. 3- 17 (T) (relative frequency of saturation deficits -less than - 1 gm/kg) . The data given in Table 2. 3-17(T) 11 show that the-Yellow Creek site was more humid (a greater frequency of low saturation deficits) than either Huntsville or Memphis; this difference is attributed in part to differences in
- site characteristics that af fect the rates of evaporation and fx evapotranspiration.- ,
U)
--i 2.3-9
YCNP,13 Precipitation 13 Precipitation was not measured at the Yellow Creek temporary meteorological facility. The availability ot a long period of precipitation record for a location within 7 miles of the Yellow Creek Nuclear Plant site (Pickwick Landing Dam - 39 years) 10 provided representative long-term data for site evaluation purposes. Precipitation monitoring at the permanent meteorological facility was begun on March 30, 1977. Monthly and annual rainfall data (means and extremes) from TVA's facility at Pickwick Ianding Dam are presented in Table 2.3-18 (T) . t ' Winter j is normally the wettest season, and fall usually experiences the least precipitation. Monthly and annual snowfall means and extremes tor Memphis are shown in Table 2.3-19(T) .6 Mean return periods for rainfall intensities over various time periods are presented in Table 2. 3-20 (T) . 2 0,21 Monthly and annual joint frequency distributions of wind direction and wind speed during ) precipitation conditions are included in Table 2.3-21 (T) An annual precipitation wind rose appears as Figure 2. 3 - 10 (T) . Wind directional patterns during precipitation are more similar to overall wind direction patterns than might be expected. Generally, more northerly and less southerly flow is associated with precipitation than is otherwise the case. Wind speeds during precipitation are considerably faster than during non-precipitation conditions. Foq Table 2. 3-22 (T) presents the mean number of days per month during I h which heavy fog (visibility 5 1/4 mile) occurred at Memphis during a 24-year period 6 and at Huntsville during a 7-year period. A more extensive discussion of the fog climatology of Memphis, based on a 17-year period of record (1948-1964), is included in the Environmental Report. During that period, heavy fog occurred on an average of about 10 days per year for a total of about 26 hours per year with its longeet duration being 12 hours. Both the mean and median duration of heavy tog were approximately two hours. Atmospheric stability Monthly and annual frequency distributions of atmospheric stability class for Yellow Creek (150-33 ft. T) , Memphis (concurrent year, Pasquill-Tu rner) , and Memphis (1590-1954, Pasquill-Turner) are presented in Tables 2.3-23 (T) , 2. 3-24 (T) , I and '. 3-25 (T) , respectively. comparison of Yellow Creek stability class distributions with those for Memphis for the same period of record indicates a consistently and significantly higher frequency of stable conditions (inversions) at Yellow Creek than at Memphis. Whether this is due to differences in classification technique, local influences, or synoptic weather has not been determined. O 2.3-10
YCNP t^\ (_) 2.5.4.5.1 Earthfill The term earthfill refers to soil which is obtained from onsite borrow areas and compacted in multiple lifts to form a fill meeting specified standards. Where the term earthfill is followed by a bracket, () or [ ], the characters found iaside the bracket indicate the level to which the earthfill is compacted. The level of compaction associated with each character is shown in Table 2.5-5(T) . 2.5.4.5.1.1 Investigation The soil to be used in the placement of earthfill will te obtained from excavations required for plant structures and from excavations required to establish plant grade. Field exploration was conducted from spring 1975 to the fall of 1975. Fifty auger borings were made to obtain samples for laboratory testing. The borings were drilled to bedrock (area G) or to the proposed final grade elevation of the area being investigated (areas A, E, and F) . The soil recovered from the auger borings for compaction and chear testing was placed in plastic bags. Representative samples of each bag sample were sealed in glass jars immediately upon removal from the auger boring for laboratory index tests. Graphic logs of all torrow borings are shown on Figures 2.5-2 (T) through 2.5-5 (T) and 2.5-22 (T) through (s)
- 2. 5-2 5 (T) . Figure 2. 5-21 (T) shows the location of all borrow borings made during the field investigation program. Auger borings for borrow sampling are identified with a prefix of "PAH." The borings in area A indicate, as described in subparagraph 2.5.4.2.1.2, the majority of the soils available are alluvium deposits from the Eutaw Formation. The borings in areas E, F, and G indicate similar material to that found in area A.
The soils obtained from the borrow investigation were tested by family type groups. Soil classes were selected for each area upon completion of the compaction tests. Seven soil classes were designated from the borrow materials (74 percent of the total) that had little or no gravel [see Table 2.5-4 (T) ]. The borrow soil class that each borrow soil sample represents is shown on the graphic logs [ Figures 2.5-2 (T) through 2.5-5 (T) and 2.5-22!.T) through 2.5-25 (T) ). The roman numeral that represents the torrow soil class is shown on the graphic logs at the location of each borrow sample for that class. To determine the borrow soil characteristics and to aid in establishing the soil classes in the borrow areas the following index tests were performed on each typical terrow soil:
- 1. Atteberg Limits (ASTM D 423 and D 424)
- 2. Grain size (ASTM D 422)
-Classification (ASTM D 2487) f}
U 3. l 2.5-11
YCNP-13 In order to establish design properties and compaction control for earthfill (A) soil materials to be used in foundation, settlement, and stability analyses of Category I features, the following tests were performed on each soil class in addition to those tests listed above.
- 1. Specific gravity (ASTM D 854)
- 2. Moisture - Density (ASTM D 698)
- 3. Moisture - Penetration (Standardized TVA Procedure)
- 4. Unconsolidated - Undrained (Q) Shear Strength ( ASTM 2850)
- 5. Consolidated - Undrained (R) Shear Strength (Standardized TVA Procedure)
- 6. Consolidated - Drained (S) Shear Strength (ASTM 3080)
- 7. Dynamic Response (Resonant Column Tests)
- 8. Consolidation (ASTM D 2435)
- 9. Permeability
- 10. Clay Dispersion Tests
- a. Sodium Adsorption Ratio Chemical Test
- b. Pinhole Dispersion Test one unconsolidated-undrained (Q) triaxial compression test, one consolidated-undrained (R) triaxial compression test, and one consolidated-drained (S) shear test were perfcrmed on each torrow soil class with test specimens compacted to 95 percent standard compaction. Three different confining pressures were used in each of these tests. The Q test specimens were remolded at 2 percent above optimum moisture content. The R test specimens were saturated prior to shear and pore water pressures were measured during' shear. S shear tests were conducted in either a direct shear test apparatus or a 4-inch diameter triaxial shear apparatus. The direct shear apparatus was used on all samples where maximum particle size limitation did not require the 4-inch diameter triaxial shear apparatus. S test specimens were submerged prior to conducting the direct shear tests. The dynamic response of the borrow soils was determined from the resonant column test using R type loading conditions with confining pressures varying from 0.25 to 5 tons per square foot.
Additional testing for earthfill (A1) is discussed in Subsection 2.5.5. 13 0 2.5-12 4
4 i 4 YCh?-13 2.5.4.5.1.2 Test Results and Selection of Desian Properties i- Laboratory soils tests were made during the summer of 1975 and 4 into early 1976. 2 i \- i 1 1 i. J d, r i i l' d i I i-i j ii - l 5 I i i i P i 1 4 i l l i 1 8 2.5-12a , _ - . . - . _ _ . .--..._. u.- _ ,_ .,..--._ .~ _ _ . , . . _ _ _ . . _ . _ _ . _ . . _ _ . - . , _ _ .
YCNP-9 s ('#) Approximately 26 percent of the borrow available at the site has some significant percentage of gravel size (chert) material. The gravelly borrow is primarily derived from the Fort Payne Cherty Residuum and will not be used as earthfill around any Categcry I structures. The residuum will be readily identifiable from the fine grained alluvium soils that overlay the residuum. The balance of the borrow (74 percent) has lesser percentages of gravel and is suitable for possible use in Category I earthfills. Material specifications of these soils are discussed in Subparagraph 2.5.4.5.J.3. Test results for earthfill suitable for Category I structures are summarized in Table 2.5-4 (T) . The properties of the earthfill to be used for design are found in Table 2.5-2(T) . Earthfill for Category I structures has to serve two purposes. The first is for earthfill to satisfy the requirements for use as a liner for the spray ponds and the second is for earthfill to satisfy the requirements for use as backfill around Category I structures. Each soil class was tested for its dispersion characteristics and none were found to te susceptible to the problem of clay dispersion [ see Table 2. 5-7 (T) ]. Borrow classes I through VII will furnish suitstle borrow for the spray pond liner and as backfill around Category I structures. All classes were selected for use as borrow, because the alluvium, which is the major source of borrow, is deposited in relatively thin layers that are not continuous over large areas. (s_/) Thus it is impractical to isolate any particular borrow class in order to take advantage of its strength, permeability, or any other particular soil characteristic. Also due to this layering there will be some mixing of the soil classes during excavation, which would eliminate large pockets of any particular soil class. The liquefaction pctential of borrow clac9es is evaluated in Paragraph 2.5.4.8. The strengths selected for design, shown on Table 2.5-2 (T) , reflect a low average of the borrow classes. Figures 2.5-26 (T) through 2.5-28 (T) show the graphical plots of the strength tests for the borrow classes. Class I was not plotted on the graphical plots, since this borrow class provided less than one percent of the total borrow material available at the site. The permeability of the borrow adopted for design using a weighted
- average of all borrow classes is shown on Table 2.5-2 (T) .
2.5.4.5.1.3 Materials specifications The following material specifications have been tentatively adopted for fill which is to be placed for various Category I i features. All materials shall be suitable for compaction to a 9 dense, stable mass. h
,,) \..
2.5-13
v YCNP-13
- 1. Material for EECE spray pond liner shall consist of svila classifying as ML-CL (Class I) , SC (Classes II, IV-VI), SM (Class III) , and CH (Class VII) and shall be compacted to a minimum of 95 percent of maximum dry density. Moisture content of the material being compacted shall be controlled within two (2) percent, above or below, of optimum moisture.
Materials with classifications other than those listed above shall not be used for EHCW spray pond liner.
- 2. Material for backfill around Category I structures shall consist of soils classifying as ML-CL (Class I) , SC (Classes II, IV-VI) , SM (Class III) and CH (Class VII) and shall be compacted to a minimum of 95 percent of maximum dry density for earthfill (A) and 100 percent of maximum dry density for 13 earthfill (a1) . Moisture content of the material teing compacted shall be controlled within two (2) percent, above or below, of optimum moisture. Material with classifications other than those listed above shall not be used as backfill around Category I structures.
- 3. Material for the Slick Fock Branch embankment shall consist l of soils classifying as ML-CL (Class I) , SC (Classes II, IV-VI) , SM (Class III) and CH (Class VII) and shall be compacted to a minimum of 95 percent of maximum dry density. 9 Moisture content of the material being compacted shall te controlled within two (2) percent, chove or below, of optimum moisture. Material with classifications other than those listed above will not be used as fill for the Slick Ecck Branch emtankment.
2.5.4.5.1.4 Fieldwork The extent of Category I earthfill is shown in plan view on Figure 2. 5-18 (T) . Note that material specifications and compaction requirements for fill material vary with location. - Typical sections are shown on Figures 2.5-16 (T) and 2. 5-18A (T) . The estimated quantity of each type of material is listed below. 9 Earthfill (A) (Liner) 300,000 Cubic Yards Earthfill (A) (Backfill) 230,000 Cubic Yards 20,000 Cubic Yards 13 Earthfill (A1) Earthfill (A) (Slick Rock 200,000 Cubic Yards Branch Embankment) The required quantities of suitable material for earthfill is available from the earth-cuts associated with plant area excavation and grading. Earthfill borrow areas will be worked in a manner which ensures a suitable material for compaction. Any conditioning which the soil requires will normally be accomplished in the borrow areas prior to hauling it to the earthfill site. This conditioning includes control of moisture content and removal of deletericus materials. All borrcw areas will be maintained such that adequate drainage of ground water and surface runoff is provided. Drainage will be accomplished by 2.5-14
YCNP-13 , ) sloping excavations, crowning, channels, dikes, sumps and pumping, as necessary. Compaction of large areas of earthfill will ncrmally be accomplished using tamping rollers. Soils in areas of limited access will be compacted with small power tampers or rollers. Compaction and all other earthwork will te suspended during periods of inclement weather.
- Compaction requirements f or Earthfill (A) and (A1), will require that soils te placed in compacted layers not more than 6-inches 9 13 thick.
O e 2.5-14a
YCNP-13 I
) In summary,-the actual physical differences between the two schemes are minimal except for the shape, surface area, and l excavation slope of the ponds. As such, it is appropriate to update or ccnvert the square pond analyses to accommodate the ,
circular arrangement by reanalyzing only the more critical cases. l 2.5.5.1.2 Slick Rock Branch Slope t The Slick Rock Branch slope is located to the west of the general ! l plant area between stations 12+00 and 17+00 and ranges E and H, see Figure 2.5-30 (T) . The slope will be created by the filling I of Slick Rock Eranch and the construction of a 4.5 horizontal to' l 1 vertical clope extending from the perimeter plant road at I elevation 520 west to the intake pumping station at elevation l
- 424. A typical section is shown in Figure 2.5-18A(T) . l The Slick Rock Branch is presently a canyon with gentle side l slopes ( see Figures 2.5-58 (T) and -61(T) ]. Examinations of the ;
subsurface exploration data for the general plant area and the ?
- additional bedrock probing data for the Slick Rock Branch area indicated that the Branch is underlain by hard massive silty limestone to siltstone_ (hard bedrock) of the Fort Payne Formation l except in the southeast and northeast corners where a layer of the residuum with a thickness increasing from 0 to 40 ft toward the corners of the branch overlies the bedror. Contours of the top of the bedrock and residuum in the brar a area are shown in j Figure 2.5-60(T) . i 9
The Slick Rock Branch Slope will be constructed by placing the compacted earthfill in the Slick Rock Branch. The limited amount of alluvium soils present in the branch will be stripped from the bottom and slide slopes. Also, the delta deposits where the , branch empties into the embayment will be removed. The slope will be constructed of earthfill (A) and (A-1) . The earthfill 13 4 will be compacted to 95 percent of maximu dry density t earthfill(A) ] above elevation 493 and to 100 percent of waximum i dry density [ earthfill (A-1) ] below elevation 493. Typical
. longitudinal (A-A) and transverse (E-B) sections of the slope are ' ;
shown in Figure 2.5-61(T) . The transverse section shown is through the crest of the slope and the longitudinal section is ! through the thickest layer of the compacted earthfill. The ' thickness of the earthfill through Section A-A decreases frcm !
. approximately 72 ft. near the crest of the slope to 25 ft. at d
the toe of the slope. As shown in Figure 2. 5-61 (T) , the Ciesel Generator Euilding and the Control Building of Unit 1 are located on Section A-A beyond j a distance of approximately 120. f t. from the crest of the slope, i The Contrcl Building will be situated on bedrock and the Diesel 8 Generator Building will be founded on a compacted fill extending to bedrock. The intake pumping station to be founded on bedrock will be situated approximately -200 f t. beyond the toe of the {}( s m, slope. 2.5-23d
YCNP-13 After long-term operation, the water table in the general plant area is assumed to rise to elevation 519.0 feet (see section
- 2. 5. 4. 6) . Plant grade is elevation 420.0 feet. As a result, the ground water levels are postulated to be at elevation 519 in the plant area and near the crest of the slope and at elevation 424 in the embayment beyond the intake pumping station. For this study, it is conservatively assumed the slope will be fully saturated and the ground water level will be at elevation 424 at the toe of the slope and will gradually drop to elevation 424 beyond the pumping station in the erbayment. The assumed ground water condition is shown in Figure 2.5-61 (T) .
The existing site and subsurface conditions have been defined by geologic and soils investigations and are described in Sections 13 2.5.1.2 and 2. 5. 4. 2, respectively. The in situ soil static engineering properties are given in Section 2.5.4.2.1.2 and the dynamic properties are given in Sections 2. 5. 4. 4. 2 and 2.5.4.7. The compacted earthfill static engineering properties are given in Section 2.5.4.5.1.2 and Table 2. 5-2 (T) . The dynamic laboratory testing is discussed in Section 2.5.4.7. The dynamic properties used for the earthfill are given in Section 2.5.5.2.2.1.3.1.1 and 2.5.5.2.2.2.2.1. The bedrock static r 'erties are given in Section 2.5.1.2.2, f h 2.5.1.2.7, and 2.5.1. and the dynamic properties are given in , Section 2.5.1.2.11. I l O 2.5-23e
YCNP-13 r\ ( ,) 2.5.5.2 Design criteria and Analysis The design criteria discussed below is applicable to either the circular or square spray pond arrangement. The analyses and the analysis results reported below, in Section 2.5.5.2.2.1, are for the square spray pond scheme except as noted for the circular schere. However, since all the cases %<ich were reanalyzed were required due to changes in the excavatfor slope (3:1 vs 2:1), rather than due to changes in the pond's geometric shape (square vs circular) these sections are indicated by reference to the excavation slope rather than to the square or circular scheme notation. 2.5.5.2.1 Design Criteria The pond slopes are designed to remain stable under the loading conditions with the corresponding minimum factors of safety shown in Table 2.5-10(T). The Slick Fock Branch slope will be designed to remain stable under the loading conditions with the corresponding minimum factors of safety shown in Table 2.5-10(T), except for the sudden drawdown cases which are not applicable. s 2.5.5.2.2 Analysis
\
(N /' The analyses of the spray pond and Slick Pock Branch slopes are discussed separately. The spray pond slopes are discussed in Section 2.5.5.2.2.1 and the Slick Rock Branch slope in Section 2.5.5.2.2.2. 2.5.5.2.2.1 Spray Pond Slope Stability Analysis The stability analysis and evaluation of the spray pond slopes and foundation were performed for the six design cases given in Table 2. 5-10 (T) . For the two static cases (Ccnstruction and Normal Pool) conventional methods of slope stability analyses for analyzing potential failure surfaces were used. For the remaining cases, 'oth dynamic finite element analyses and conventional ps 3 static slope stability analyses were used. Briefly, the analyses consist of the following:
- a. Slope Stability Analyses for Static Cases (Construction and Normal Pool) : These analyses were made using conventional methods of slope stability analysis of potential failure surfaces including circular arcs and wedges. Strength parameters for these analyses were defined by laboratory tests.
- b. Definition of Dynamic Material Properties: Strain-dependent jT dynamic materia} properties (shear moduli and damping
(_,) ratics), for usy in subsequent dynamic analyses, were defined i 2.5-24
YCNP iO) approximately 70 percent exceed 100 blows per foot. Eased on the above information, it is felt the residuum is at least comparable to a very dense cemented sand with a relative-density of 90 percent or higher. Current research on dense cohensionless soils indicates only limited cyclic shear strains can develop regardless of the magnitude of the cyclic stresses or the number of stress cycles applied. For freshly deposited sand tested in the laboratory having relative densities of 80 to 90 percent, the limiting strain ranges between approximately 5 to 10 percent " " . For older in situ soil deposits values of limiting cyclic shear strain have been estimated by Seed" . For soils having a relative density of 80 percent the limiting strain is unlikely to g exceed 5 percent and would decrease to virtually zero percent strain for soils at 100 percent relative density. Compariron of Induced Cyclic Stresses and Cyclic Strength Characteristics Figure 2.5-56 (T) presents a comparison of the SSE inluced shear stresses (based on 25 cycles) and the cyclic strength characteristics (based on a0 = 0.5are at 300 cyclers of the compacted earthfill. For the dike and' perimeter s_ pes, the cyclic strength characteristics are based on anisotropic (K = 2.0) test results to account for the initial static shear stresses present in these areas. For the bottom of the pond, the f~'/) x_ cyclic strength characteristics are based on isotropic (K = 1. 0) test results since no initial shear stresses are present in these areas. As shown in the figure the induced stresses are less than the " cyclic strengths." It should be remembered the strengths shown do not represent failure by any definition, they represent only the stress required to cause CG = 0.5 DE at 300 cycles. The actual stress required to cause 5 percent strain (a commonly accepted criterion) in 25 cycles would be considerably higher than the values shown. Thus, it is concluded the compacted earthfill has a more than adequate factor of safety based en this approach for the SSE loading conditions. Since the cyclic strengths of the soils are the same for either
~
SSE or OBE conditions, and since the CBE induced stresses are taken as 60 percent ~of the SSE induced stresses, cyclic strength comparisons are not made for the OBE case. The corresponding OBE results may be obtained by a simple ratio of the SSE results. Thus, the compacted earthfill is also judged to have a more than a dequate factor of safety for the OBE loading conditions. Since the residuum is concluded not to develop significant cyclic strains (less than 5 percent) or to reduce strength during either SSE or OBE, it is concluded the residuum also has a more than adequate factor of ' safety for both the SSE and OBE loading conditions. 2.5-37 k l l l l
YCNP-13 Further, the comparisons described above are appl. cable to both conditions of normal pool and sudden drawdown tecAuse: (a) the effective stresses in the compacted earthfill wculd not change immediately following a sudden drawdown, therefore the cyclic ctrengths would not change; and (b) the dynamic properties cf the compacted earthfill or residuum would not be significantly offected by a sudden drawdown, thus the stresses induced by the CBE or SSE would not change significantly. Based on the above discussion and the loading conditions given in Table 2. 5-10 (T) the spray pond slopes are determined to te stable under all prescribed seismic loading conditions. 2.5.5.2.2.1.4 Discussion of 2:1 vs 3:1 Excavation Slope The stability analysis results presented in Sections 2.5.5.2.2.1.2 and 2.5.5.2.2.1.3 are for an excavation slope of 3:1. Selected critical cases were reanalyzed for a 2:1 excavation slope. These selected cases are:
- 1. Static slip circle analyses for the construction and normal 9 pool loading cases.
- 2. Dynamic finite element analyses of the dike section with the lower variation set of material properties.
- 3. Pseudostatic slip circle analysis for the SSE+ Drawdown l loading case.
In these three cases the factor of safety is greater for the 2:1 cxcavation slope than for the 3:1 excavation slope. Since these are the more critical cases and since the factors of safety j actually increase, it is concluded the cases not reanalyzed also l possess adequate factors of safety. [ 2.5.5.2.2.2 Slick Fock Branch Slore Stability Analysis The stability analysis and evaluation of the Slick Fock Eranch slope and foundation were performed for the four applicable design cases given in Table 2.5-10(T) . For the two static cases (Construction and Long-Term) conventional methods of slope stability analyses for analyzing potential failure surfaces were 13 used. For the seismic cases (SSE and OEE) , dynamic finite element analyses were used. The post-earthquake stability was also investigated using conventional method of slope stability analysis. 2.5.2.2.2.1 Static Slope Stability Evaluation The static stability of the Slick Fock Branch Slope was evaluated for the construction and long-term conditions. The analyses were made for cross section A-A in Figure 2- 5-61 (T) . Section A-A was selected because it is a section through the thickest layer of g 2.5-38
YCNP-13
/~N the compacted earthfill and would be the most critical section
('~) for the entire slope. For the long-term condition, the ground water tables shown in Figure 2. 5-6 (T) were postulated to te at elevation 519 and 424 in the plant area and at the toe of the slope, respectively. For the postulated ground water tables, the slope was assured saturated, and the piezometric head in the slope was conservatively assumed in the analyses to be at the surface of the alope. Thus, the pore pressure at any point within the slope was calculated as a product of the unit weight of water and the height of a water column directly above the point of interest. For the construction condition, no ground water tables were assumed. As shown in Figure 2.5-58 (T) , a two-lane perimeter plant road (10 ft wide per lane) is located near the crest of the slope. To incorporate the live loads on the perimeter plant road, the AASHO's truck loading designated as H-20-S16 was used. The centerline of this lane surcharge was located at a distance of 10 ft frcm the crest of the slope. Procedure The computer program STABR44, was utilized in all static slope 13 stability analyses. The program uses the modified Bishop's method
- and searches for the critical sliding cricle for
()/ (_, specified condtions. The required input parameters are the geometry, the material properties including unit weight and strength parameters, and the applicable pore pressure distribution. Soil Parameters The unit weight and strength parameters and permeability used are summarized in Table 2. 5-15(T) . For the ccmpacted earthfill, the strength parameters were based on test data on samples prepared at 95 percent standard compaction. For the compacted earthfill placed at 100 percent standard compaction, the etatic strength parameters were conservatively assumed to be the saae as these of the compacted carthfill placed at 95 percent standard compaction. For the construction condition, total stress analyses were l performed using moist unit weights and total stress strength parameters obrained from Q tests. For the long-term condition, ef fective stress analyses were performedusing saturated unit weights telow the water table and moist unit weights above the water table and using effective stress strength parameters obrained from S tests. l Analysis Results i The result of the static stability analyses for the construction (f-~) and long-term conditions are summarixed in Figure 2. 5-62 (T) . 2.5-39
YCNP-13 Figure 2. 5-6 2 (T) shows the location of the critical circles and the minimum factors of safety for each analysis case. 8 Dased on a comparison of the calculated factors of safety , presented in Figure 2.5-62 (T) and the required minimum values listed in Table 2.5-10 (T) , the Slick Rock Branch slope is determined to be stable under all prescribed static loading conditions. i 2.5.5.2.2.2.2 Seismic Stability Evaluation The procedure utilized in evaluating the seisaic stability of the! Slick Fock Eranch Slope during the postulated earthquakes involved the following sequence of operations:
- 1. Development of input base motions consistent with the seismic input defined for the plant site.
- 2. Determination of the induced shear stresses in the slope during the postulated base motions by means of a dynamic finite element analysis and representation of these induced' stresses by means of equivalent series or uniform peak stresses.
- 3. Determinatica of the static stresses existing in the slope prior to the occurrence of the earthquakes by means of a static finite element analysis.
13
- 4. Assessment of the cyclic strength characteristics of the material comprising the slope, for the state of static '
stresses determined in (3) above.
- 5. Comparison of the cyclic strength characteristics with the equivalent uniform shear stresses induced by the earthquake motions to evaluate the stability of the slope during the postulated earthquakes.
2.5.5.2.2.2.2.1 Dynamic Material Proporties Dynamic material properties must be assigned to the compacted earthfill and granular fill materials. The properties of greatest significance are shear modulus and damping ratio including their variations with strain. Other properties required for the response computations are total unit weight and Poisson's ratio. Compacted Earthfill The compacted earthfill will consist of all borrow materials (Classes I through VII) placed at 95 percent standard compaction in the slope and in the plant area, except that below elevation 493 in the plant area (behind the crest of the slope) the compacted earthfill will be placed at 100 percent standard compaction. Laboratory resonant column data were obtained from 2.5-40
YCNP-13 () tests on samples placed at 95 percent standard compaction. The dynamic properties of the compacted earthfill placed at 100 l percent standa d compaction may be slightly different from those of the compacted earthfill placed at 95 percent standard compaction. As subsequently described, the response analyses were perforned for parametric variations of dynamic material properties. Thus, the sensitivity to the response due to differences in dynamic properties cf the compacted earthfill i placed at 95 to 100 percent standard compaction is accounted for l in the parametric variations of dynamic properties. ; i The dynamic properties of the compacted earthfill are presented j in Section 2.5.5.2.2.1.3.1.1. These properties are summarized in i Table 2. 5-16 (T) . ! I Residuum i l The dynamic properties of the residuum are presented in Section ; 2.5.5.2.1.3.1.1. ; I Granular Fill The granular fill material will be a well-graded material, , consisting of crushed stone, or sand and gravel, with the grain + size distribution given in Section 2.5.4.5.2. The granular till 13 will be placed to an average reltive density of 85 percent or (~') greater, with a minimum relative density of 80 percent as
\_ / determined by ASTM standard D 2049..
The shear modulus of the granular fill material assigned in the , response analyses was based on the general characteristics of the j material and published data 20 ** of similar materials. The adopted relationship between the shear modulus at very low ! strains, G max , and the ef fective mean normal stress,5%(, is expressed ty: f I Gy ,x = 110,000(&')1/2
, l where both Gmx and 9; are in psf.
Values ofCTk are computed with Ko estimated to be 0.4 and the ef fective vertical stress, CU , computed from the effective overburden pressure and increase in stress due to effective , wilghts of the Diesel Generator Building. The variation of shear modulus with strain utilized in response computations is shown in Figure 2. 5-63 (T) . The relationship was based on the average relationship for granular soils published by Seed and Idriss *" . I 4 The variation of damping ration with strain used in the response computations is shown in Figure 2.5-63(T),. The relationship was based on the average relationship for granular soils 80 i b)
- V r
t 2.5-41
1 1 YCNP-13 l l s Values of total unit weight,g , and Poisson's ratio,il . assigned to the granular fill for analyses are surmarixed in Table 2.5-16(T). Parametric Study l' In order to evaluate the sensitivity of the response to variations in dynanic properties the values of shear noduli fcr the compacted earthfill and the granular fill material were increased by 50 percent (called upper-bound variation) and decreased by 40 percent (called lower-bound variation). The basic set of properties should provide the most likely response e' the slope. The upper-bound variation results in a stiffer tem than expected; the lower-bound variation results in a more tiexible system than expected. The parametric variations are summarized in Table 2. 5-16 (T) . 2.5.5.2.2.2.2.2 Input Motion The free field artificial accelerograms are discussed in Section 3.7. The response spectra for the artificial accelerograms H1, H2, and V are shown in Figures 3.7-1 (T) through -15 (T) . For this study the OEE is taken as one half of the SSE. For the basic response analyses of the Slick Rock Branch Slope, horizontal component H1 and vertical component V were used. As described 13 subsequently, the horizontal compcnent H1 yellds slightly higher - response than that of H2 in one-dimensional column studies. At the Yellow Creek Nuclear Plant site, the design response spectra and associated artificial accelerograns are defined at finished grade (elevation 520) in the free field. However, for the dynamic finite element analyses, input motions at the base of the model (at bedrock) are required. Therefore, it is necessary to obtain base motions that are compatible with the artificial accelerograms defined at finished grade. For this study, +*J e compatibic tase motions were obtained by free-field deconvolution analyses using the computer code SHAKES s. The deconvolution analyses were made using a soil column representative of the compacted earthfill layer (65 ft thick) in the plant area behind the crest of the slope. The acceleration time histories and response spectra (5-percent damping) of the input base moticns, corresponding to accelerograms H1 and V, are shown in Figures
- 2. 5-6 4 (T) and -65 (T) for the analysis using the basic set of dynamic properties and in Figures 2.5-66(T) and -67 (T) for the upper-bound variation cf properties.
2.5.5.2.2.2.2.3 Finite Element Analysis The finite element representation used in the analysis is shotsn in Figure 2. 5-68 (T) . The finite element mcdel corresponds to cross section A-A shown in Figures 2.5-59 (T) -61 (T) . For this study, the intake pumping station located approximately 200 ft beyond the tce or the slope was not modeled. However, the lateral boundaries of the model were extended at suf ficient 2.5-42
YCNP-13 /N I () distances away from the slope so that acc<2 rate response of the slope can be obtained. the model shown in Figure 2.5-68 (T) incorporates the Diesel Generator Building and its granular fill foundation base. The effects of the Control Building were ! accounted for in the model by assigning a column of elements as j concrete (approximately 25 ft thick and extending to the bedrock) ! immediately adjacent to the Diesel Generator Building (see Figure i 2.5-68(T)). An additional model which is not presented was also analyzed. This model represents a section not passing through the Diesel Generator Euilding and its granular fill foundation base. The dynamic finite element analyses were made for the horizontal l component (H 1) and vertical component (V) of base motions applied , simultaneously. The analyses were conducted for the SSE using i the computer code QUAD-411 The analyses were performed for the basic set and for the upper-bound variation of material properties. For the OBE, response values were estimated based on the results of the SSE analyses as well as the results of one-dimensional column studies subsequently described. The output of the dynamic analyses included values of peak acceleration at each nodal point, peak dynamic stresses in each element, and time histories of acceleration at selected l ' locations. Computed horizontal and vertical acceleration time 13 histories at the crest of the slope for the basic set of , f~'} properties are shown in Figures 2.5-69(T) and -70 (T) . l \_- l Generally, the dynamic stresses and peak accelerations obtained , in the analyses were rather insensitive to variations in dynamic l material properties. The analysis using the basic set of material properties yellds slightly higher values of peak shear . stress beyond the toe or the slope than those obtained using the ! upper-bound properties (averaging 10 percent higher) . However, l the analysis using the upper-bound properties yeilds slightly ' higher values or peak shear stress in the deeper parts of the l fill than those obtained using the basic set cf properties j (averaging 7 percent higher) . Based on the results of one-dimensional column studies subsequently described, the analysis using lower-bound prcperties is expected to yield slightly lower response than that using the basic set of properties. 7 i i 2.5.5.2.2.2.2.4 one-Dimensional Column Analyses t i One-dimensional dynamic response computations were performed to I supplement the results of the dynamic finite element studies and , to determine free-field response of the compacted earthfill in ! the plant area away from the slope as subsequently described l (Section 2. 5. 5. 2. 2. 3) . The analyses were conducted for a one- , dimensional column of the compacted earthfill in the free-field. ' The analyses were made using the computer code SHAKEAR. The , purposes of the one-dimensional column studies were: (a) to i < s. obtain the ratio of response values of CEE and SSE; (t) to assess ! -v) ( the effects on response of using horizontal component H2 instead t 2.5-43
YCNP-13 of H1; and (c) to assess the effects on response dce to variations in dynamic material properties. Details of the free-field column studies are presented in Section 2.5.5.2.2.3. The overall results of the one-dirensional studies were the following: l
- 1. Values of induced shear stress during the OBE are approxinately 50 percent of the values during the SSE.
- 2. The ef fect of using horizontal component H2 instead of E1 was i insignificant. Values of induced shear stress are practically identical from the ground surface to a depth of approximately 20 ft for both components. Below a depth of 20 ft, component H1 gives slightly higher response. !
- 3. The computed response varied slightly with variations in dynamic properties. Values of induced shear stress are essentially the same from the ground surface to a depth of approximatley 20 ft. Below a depth of 20 ft, values of induced shear stress obtained using the icwer-bound variation are slightly lower than those obtained using the basic set of properties; values of induced shear stress obtained using the upper-bound variation are slightly higher than those obtained 13 using the basic set of properties.
2.5.5.2.2.2.2.5 Static Stress Analysis As part of the seismic stability evaluation of the Slick Rock Branch Slope, an analysis was made to determine the static state of stress in the slope prior to the earthquake excitation. These static stresses were then utilized in conjunction with the cyclic strength of the compacted earthfill at various locations in the slope. The static stresses within the slope were determined using nonlinear static finite element procedures described in references 9 and 35. Obese procedures permit the simulation of the construction sequence of the slope and incorporate a nonlinear representation of the stress-strain characteristics of the compacted earthfill. The effects of seepage within the slope was also accounted for in the analysis. The analysis was performed using the computer code ISBILD3e. The nonlinear material properties used in the analysis are selected based on consclidation test results for the Classes I, II, and III borrow soiln and data for similar materialsze 35 43 The nonlinear material properties are summarized in Table 2.5-17(T) . Typical results of the static stress analysis are shown in Figure 2.5-71(T). 2.5.5.2.2.2.2.6 Cyclic Shear Stresses Induced by SSE and OEE The cyclic shear st resses induced in the compacted earthfill slope by the SSE and OBE were obtained using the results of the dynamic finite elenent analyses and one-dimensional eclumn 2.5-44
YCNP-13
.fm
) studies. The cyclic shear stress at any point consists of a time history of stresses having varying peak amplitudes. These irregular stress time histories are to be compared with the cyclic strength characteristics which are based on laboratory tests conducted using cyclic stresses of uniform peak amplitudes.
Therefore, it is necessary to convert the induced stress tire histories to equivalent series having uniform peak stresses. Values of equivalent uniform cyclic shear stresses were obtained by multiplying the raximum shear stresses froa the analyses by a factor of 0.65. This factor is in accord with the method proposed by Seed et ala' for obtaining an equivalent series of uniform stress applications. The number of cycles of equivalent uniform stress applications was selected based on the ' characteristics of the design earthquake. As described in Section 2.5.5.2.2.1.3.3, 25 cycles were conservatively selected for the SSE and OBE. [ For the SSE, the induced equivalent uniform cyclic shear stresses were obtained using the peak shear stresses from the dynamic i finite element analyses and the procedure described above. For 3 the OBE, one-dimensional column studies were used to estimate the . reduction in stresses as compared to the SSE. As described j previously, the results of these studies show that stresses ' during the CBE will be approximately 50 percent of the SSE stresses. 1 [~)
\__/
The equivalent uniform stresses induced by the SSE on selected horizontal planes in the compacted earthfill slope for the rodel 13 i illustrated in Figure 2. 5-68 (T) are shown in Figure 2.5-72 (T) . l The stresses shown in the figure are for the basic set of i material properties. The dynamic analysis using the model which I represents a section not passing through the Diesel Generator i Building and its granular fill foundation base resulted in slightly higher stresses (averaging 7 percent higher) in the area (' immediately adjacent to the granular fill behind the crest of the ; slope. In other areas, the induced stresses are essentially I identical for both models. ' 2.5.5.2.2.2.2.7 cvelic Strength Characteristics A criterion of 5 percent strain is generally used for evaluating i the stability of embankments subjected to earthquake shaking. ' This criterion has been established on the basis of correlaticns ' between the results of seismic stability evaluations and the performance of earth dams which have been subject to significant ; earthquake loading 25 26 These case histories show that if the computed strains in the. embankment are smaller than 5 percent, the earthquake has no significant effect on the stability and
'ntegrity of the dam. However, it should not be concluded that the stability and integrity of the embankment is impaired if the computed strains exceed 5 percent at some locations within the embankment. The effect of computed strains exceeding 5 percent
(~ ( ,S depends on the zone. of the embanknent in which they may cccur, J and on the relative extent and location within a specific zcne. 2.5-45
YCNP-13 Compacted Earthfill The ccupacted earthfill at the site will consist of all borrow materiali (Classes I through VII) placed at 95 percent standard compaction except in the plant area (behind the crest of slope) below elevation 493 where the earthfill will be placed at 100 percent standard compaction as subsequently described. Among these borrow materials, Class III material (silty sand) is considered to be relatively more susceptible to cyclic straining d ue to earthquake loading than the other classes of borrow materials which are more clayey and plastic ** * . A series of cyclic triaxial tests was conducted on the Class III material. The reaults of these tests, summarized in Table 2.5-18 (T) , were used to develop the cyclic strength characteristics of the compacted er:thfill. A total of 18 cyclic tests has been conducted on both isotropically consolidated, (K "c C sc = 1. 0 ) and anisotropically con co .l i d a t e d (Rc =2.0) specimens. The lateral consolidation pressuren,C5c, employed in these tests ranged from 500 psf to 8000 pet, representative of the anticipated effective vertical strennen in the slope. The five tests at0ic =500 psf and 1000 psf were conducted in connection with the ERCK spray pond ( stability evaluation (Section 2. 5. 5. 2. 2.1) and were described in : Section 2.5.5.2.2.1.3.3. All test specimens except Test No. 10 ' in Table 2. 5-18 (T) were prepared at 95 percent standard I 13 compaction. Test No. 10 was prepared at 100 percent standard compaction. l The results of the cyclic triaxial tests are summarized in Table i
- 2. 5- 18 (T) and Figures 2. 5-73 (T) and -74 (T) . Figure 2. 5-73 (T) ,
shown the relationship between peak cyclic deviator stress and the nmter of loading cycles to induce 15 percent axial strain for isotropically consolidated (Ec = 1. 0) samples. Figure 2.5-7 4 (T) shows the relationship between peak cyclic deviator stress and tb, number of loading cycles to induce 5 percent axial strain for anistropically consolidated (Ec = 2.0) samples. It is noted in Table 2. 5- 18 (T) that for isotropically consolidated (Kc = 1.0) samples, the number of loading cycles to reach initial liquefaction (excess pore water pressure, , equal to lateral consolidation pressure,Czi ) is approximately equal to or greater than that causing 15 percent strain for all except two tests. For the anisotropically consolidated (K = 2.0) sanples, the number of loading cycles to reach initial liquefaction is much greater than that causing 5 percent strain. The cyclic strength characteristics of the Class III material placed at 95 percent standard compaction are summarized in Figure
- 2. 5- 7 5 (T) . The cyclic strength of the earthfill placed at 100 percent standard compaction was estimated to te 40 percent higher than that of the earthfill placed at 95 percent standard compaction based on limited test data. Additional cyclic triaxial tests are being performed on specimens of the Class III material placed at 100 percent standard compaction to supplement 2.5-46
YCN P- 13 (O
' ') the test data presented herein. A limited number of cyclic triaxial tests are also being conducted on Class II borrow i material, which represents the largest volume of all materials, to verify that the other classes of borrow materials are less ,
susceptible to cyclic straining than the Class III material. Residuum The nature of the residuum in the plant area and the cyclic strength characteristics of the material were described in detail in Section 2.5.5.2.2.1.3.3. As described there, the residuum at the plant area is a geologically old, dense, and rocky material. Based on recent researchas 3' of the cyclic strength characteristics or dense cohesionless soil deposits, it is concluded that the residuum would not have a potential for significant cyclic strains during seismic loading. Granular Fill The granular fill material will consist of crushed stone, or sand and gravel. The granular fill will be compacted to an average relative density of 85 percent or greater, with a minimum relative density of 80 percent as determined by ASTM standard D 2049. Based on recent researchte 39 on the cyclic strength characteristics of cohesionless soils, dense soils have a limiting cyclic strain which probably cannot be exceeded /~' regardless of the size or duration of the carthquake. For (_)T freshly - deposit sand tested in the laboratory having relative densities of 80 to 90 percent, the limiting strain would range between approximately 5 and 10 percent . Soils characteristics other than relative density have also been found to significantly influence the potential for cyclic straining and sof tening during earthquakes. The strain potential of an in situ 13 granular fill (gravelly soil) would be lower than that of a freshly - deposited sand for the follcwing three reasons:
- 1. Time effects - The cyclic strength characteristics are sigr;ificantly improved by aging of the compacted fill as comrared to a freshly deposited sand ,
- 2. Lateral earth pressure effects - Higher lateral earth pressures induced during compaction would significantly increase their resistance to cyclic deformationste 27 so 3:
- 3. Grain size characteristics - Gravelly soils appear to be more resistant to development of large strains than fine sands **
Based on the considerations discussed above, it is concluded that the dense granular fill would not have a potential for significant cyclic strains during seismic loading. /~'\ iv ! 2.5.5.2.2.2.2.8 Results of seismic Stability Analysis 2.5-47
YCNP-13 The stability of the Slick Rock Branch Slope during the SSE was l evaluated using the procedure described previously. The induced l at any location within the i equivalent slope were uniform comparedshear stresses,2,, to the stresses,7 f, , required to cause 5 l percent strain in 25 cycles at that location, based on cyclic triaxial test data on the Class III borrow material. I Comparisons of the cyclis shear stresses induced by the SSE with the cyclic shear stresses required to cause 5 percent strain, based on the cyclic strength characteristics of the Class III borrow material placed at 95 percent standard compaction, are l presented in Figures 2.5-76 (T) and -72(T). These figures show values of local factors of safety,2', /f;, against 5 percent ' strain along selected horizontal plans and vertical sections through the slope. These values were obtained based on the i induced shear stresses computed in the analysis of the model i shown in Figure 2.5-68 (T) using the basic set of dynamic material properties. Very similar results are obtained for the case using the upper-bound variation of properties. The results shown in Figures 2. 5-76 (T) and -77(T) indicate that ! the compacted earthfill placed at 95 percent standard compaction , on the slope has an adequate factor of safety during the SSE. , 13 Figures 2.5-76 (T) and -77 (T) show the strain potential in a localized zone located beyond the toe of the slope and below I approximately elevation 414 may exceed 5 percent strain. , However, post-earthquake stability evaluations described in S ection 2.5.5.2.2.2.3 indicate the overall stability of the , entire slope would not be affected by potential cyclic strain in this localized zone. Comparisons of the induced cyclic shear stresses with the cyclic _ shear strength are not inade for the CBE case. However, since the' OBE induced stresses are approximately equal to 50 percent cf the SSE values and the cyclic strengths of the earthfill are the same for either the SSE or OBE conditions, the compacted earthfill would also have an ample factor safety for the OBE loading condition. Analysis section A-A shown in Figure 2.5-68 (T) incorporates the Diesel Generator Building and its granular fill foundation base. Thus, the ef fects of the granular fill on the response of the i slope were accounted for in the dynamic analyses. In addition, based on the cyclic strength characteristics of the compacted granular fill (average relative density of 85 percent or greater) , the granular fill would not have potential for developing significant cyclic strains or reduction in strength during the SSE or OBE. Thus, the presence of the granular fill , would not af fect the overall stability of the slope during the SSE or OPE. ' The preceding comparisons were made for Section A-A through the deepest layer of the compacted earthfill. This section is considered to be the most critical section for both static and 2.5-48
YCNP-13 7 T seismic loading conditions as described previcusly. As described j elsewhere, the residuum at the site is a geologically old, dense I, and rocky ' material, and it would not have potential for *
' developing significant cyclic strains or reduction in strength during the SSE or CEE. Thus, any sections through the residuum should have an ample factor of safety during the SSE or OBE.
2.5.5.2.2.2.3 Post-Earthquake Stability Evaluation As described 'in Section 2.5.5.2.2.2.2.8 comparisons of the cyclic , shear stress induced by the SSE with the cyclic strength characteristics of the compacted earthfill indicate a possibility of a localized zone with 5 percent strain potential located beyond a distance of approximately 50 ft from the toe of the slope and below approximately elevation 414. The location of the localized zone is shown in Figure 2.5-78 (T) . The effects of the localized zone with 5 percent strain potential on the stability of the slope were assessed by performing total stress stability I analyses using the ground water levels for the long-ters , condition and reducing the consolidated-undrained soil strength parameters of the compacted earthfill in this zone to 20 percent of the original static strength. The reduction in the strength values was conservatively estimated based on published data. The results of stability analyses show that the locaticn of the critical circle and the minimum factor of safety are the same as 13 ,' O. those with no reduction in soil strength, indicating the the oveall stability of the slope is not affected by the localized zone of 5 percent strain potential located beyond the toe of the i slope. A reduction in the factor of safety due to the reduction of static shear strength (post-earthquake conditions) was also calculated for a selected potential sliding surface passing through the localized zone of 5 percent strain potential shown in Figure 2. 5-7 8 (T) . The analysis results show'that the factor of safety decreases from 6.5 (pre-earthquake condition) to 4.6 (post-earthquake condition) . 2.5.5.2.2.3 Free-Field Response Analysis A ' number of free-field one-dimensional column studies of a compacted earthfill profile were conducted for the Slick Rock Branch slope stability evaluation to supplement the results of
. the dynamic finite element studies and to determine f ree-field response for assessing liquefaction potential in the plant area
, away from the slope. The purpose of these studies were: (a) to obtain the raio of response values of CBE and SSE; (b) to assess the effects on response of using horizontal component H2 instead of H1; and (c) to assess the effects on response due to variations in dynamic material properties. Analysis Procedure l .(T One-dimensional _ column studies were made using the computer program SHARE 18 l (,/ The SilAKE analyses are performed to ottain l.
'2.5-49 I
i
YCNP-13 f utrain-compa tible (equivalent linear) soil properties for each ' u011 layer. For cases involving vertical excitation, the constrained modulus is selected and iterations are not required. Input motions for SilAKE analyses consists of three artificial accelerograms (hcrizontal components 111 and 112 and vertical component V) applied at the finished grade (elevation 520). For each input motion, analyses were made for the basic set and the upper-hound and lower-bound variations of dynamic material p roperties. A total of six response analyses were made for the SSE. Unsulty of Response Analyses Desponne analyses were conducted to evaluate the response of the compacted earthfill profile due to the SSE and OEE. For the SSE, input motions of both horizontal components 111 and 112 were used. For the OEE, the horizontal component til was used. The resFonse analysis for the OBE indicates that the induced shear stresses are ansproxinately 50 percent of those due to the SSE. The results of the response evaluations for the SSE are presented in Fiqure 2. 5-79 (T) . The results indicate that the values of the induced stresses due to 111 and 112 for the same set of dynamic properties are essentially identical from the ground surface to a depth of 20 ft. Below a depth of 20 ft, the component H1 yields 13 slightly higher stresses. Also shown in Figure 2. 5- 79 (T) are the effects of the soild response dee to variations in dynanic properties. The upper-bound variation in dynamic properties results in higher stresses and the lower-bound variation in lower stresses as compared to those ottained using the basic set of properties. Evaluat_lon of Results As described above, the use of dif ferent input motions and parametric variations in dynamic material properties results in a slight variation in induced shear stresses. Conservative values of shear stress (equal to the mean plus one standard deviation of the six values) were selected and used in the evaluation. The selected values of induced shear stress are shown in Figure 2.5-80(T). The cyclic strength characteristics of the compacted earthfill are described in Section 2.5.5.2.2.2.2.7. These data, relating the cyclic uhear stresses required to cause 5 percent strain in 25 cycles to the ef fective overburden pressure for the compacted earthfill placed at 95 and 100 percent standard compaction, are used in the evaluations of the compacted earthfill in the plant a rea . Using the cyclic strength characteristics of the compacted earthfill and the variation of the ef fective overturden pressure 2.5-50
YCNP-13 l'\_/) with depth, values of cyclic shear stress required to cause 5 percent strain are computed and plotted in Figure 2.5-80(T) for 95 and 100 percent standard compaction. The ratio between the available shear strength,',% , and the induced stresses,'f4 , which defines a factor of safety against excessive cyclic straining is also shown in Figure 2.5-80 (T) . Comparisons of the induced shear stresses with the cyclic strength of the compacted earthfill shown in Figure 2.5-80(T) indicate that the compacted earthfill placed at 95 percent standard compaction should have an adequate 13 factor of safety against excessive cyclic straining frem the ground surface (elevation 520) to a depth of 27 ft (elevation 493). Eelow a depth of 27 ft, the compacted earthfill placed at 100 percent standard compaction should have an adequate factor of , safety against excessive cyclic straining. ' 2.5.5.3 Loos of Borinos , See Paragraph 2.5.4.3. 2.5.5.4 Comcaction specifications See Paragraph 2.5.4.5. ; o a 2.5-51 l 1 l l
YCN P- 13 2.5.6 Embankments and Dag 13 There are no embankmnets or dams at this site. l l l O 1 l O 2.5-52
YCNP (m) 2.5.7 Peferences
- 1. Mooney, H. M., 1973, The Handbook of Engineering Seismology:
Bison Instruments, Inc., Minneapolis, Minnesota, 105 p.
- 2. Foundation Engineering, G. A. Leonards, McGraw-Hill Pook Ccmpany., 1962
- 3. TVA Feport 68-7, Yellow Creek Nuclear Plant, Foundation Investigation, Test Trenches to Inspect, log, and Sample the Residuum of the Upper Fort Payne Formation, TVA, DED, CEB.
- 4. Early Site Review Report, Yellow Creek Site, Tennessee Valley Authority Fevision 1, December 1975.
- 5. Arai, H., and Umehara, Y., 1966, " Vibration of Dry Sand Layers," Proc. Japan Earthquake Engineering Symposium, Tokyo.
- 6. Bishop, A. W., 1955, "The Use of the Slip Circle in the Stability Analysis of Slopes," Geotechnique, Vol. 5, No. 1.
- 7. Brooker, E. W., and Ireland, H. O., 1965, " Earth Pressures at Rest Related to Stress History," Canadian Geotechnical Journal, Ontario, Vol. 2, No. 1, pp. 1-15.
- 8. Clough, R. W., and Chopra, A. A., 1966, " Earthquake Stress i
[\) Analysis in Earth Dams," JEMD, ASCE, 92, No. EM2, Proc. Paper
\m / 4793, April, pp. 197-212.
- 9. De Alba, P., Chan, and Seed, H. Bolton, 1975, " Determination of soil Liquefaction Characteristics by Large-Scale Latoratory Tests," Earthquake Engineering Research Center, Report No. EERC 75-14, University of California, Berkeley, May.
- 10. Hardin, B. O., and Drnevich, V. P., 1972, " Shear Modulus a9 Damping in Soils: Design Equations and Curves," JSMFD, ALLE, 98, No. SM7, Proc. Paper 9006, July, pp. 667-692.
- 11. Idriss, I. M., Lysmer, J., Hwang, R., Seed, H. E., 1973, "QUAC-4--A Computer Program for Evaluating the Seismic Response of Soil Structures by Variable Damping Finite Element Procedures," Report No. EERC 73-16, Earthquake Engineering Research Center, University of California, Berkeley.
- 12. Idriss, I. M., and Seed, H. B., 1967, " Response of Earth Banks during Earthquakes," ASCE, Journal of Soil Mechanics and Foundations Division, 93, No. SM3, Proc. Paper 5232, May, pp. 61-82.
- 13. Idriss, I. M., Seed, H. B. , and Serf f, N. , 1974, " Seismic
'~] Response by Variable Damping Finf te Elements," ASCE, Journal (O
2.5-53
l YCNP of Geotechnical Engineering Division, 100, No. GT1, January, pp. 1-13.
- 14. l.o w , .l., and Moragiath, L., 1959, aStability of Iart h Ears upon Drawdown," Proceedings, 1st Pan-American Conference on Soil Mechanica Foundatn Engineering, Mexico, 1959,
- 15. Schnabel, P. D., Lysmer, J., and Seed, H. E., 1972, " SHAKE --
A Computer Program for Earthquake Response Analysis of Horizontally Layered Sites," Report No. EERC 72-12, Edrthquake Engineering Research Center, University of California, Berkeley.
- 16. Seed, H. Bolton, 1976, "Some AGFects of Sand Liquefaction under cyclic Loading," Proc., Conference on Behavior of Offshore Structures, Boss '76, Trondheim, Norway, August.
- 17. Seed, H. Bolton, 1976, Personal Communication.
- 18. Seed, H. Bolton, Arango, L., and Chan, C. K., 1975,
# Evaluation of Soil Liquefaction Potential during Earthquakes," Earthquake Engineering Research Center Report No. EERC 75-28, Univerbity of California, Berkeley, October.
- 19. Seed, H. Bolton, Idriss, I. M., Makdisi, F., and Banerjee, N., 1975, " Representation of Irregular Stress Time Histories by Equivalent Uniform Stress Series in Liquefaction Analyses," Earthquake Engineering Research Center, Repcrt No.
EEhc 75-29, University of California, Berkeley, October.
- 20. Seed, H. Bolton, and Idriss, I. M., 1970, " Soil Moduli and Damping Factors for Dynamic Response Analyses," Earthquake Erigineering Roscarch Center, Report No. EERC 70-10, University of California, Berkeley, December.
- 21. Seed, H. Eolton, Lee, K. L., and Idries, I. M., 1969,
" Analysis of Sheffield Dam Failure," Journal of Soil Mechanics and Foundations Division, ASCE, 95, No. SM6, Froc.
Paper 6906, Novemter.
- 22. Seed, H. Bolton, Lee, K. L., Idriss, I. M., and Mahdisi, F.,
1973, " Analysis of the Slides in the San Fernando Dams during the Earthquake of February 9, 1971," Report, Earthquake Engineering Research Center, University of California, Berkeley, March.
- 23. Seed, H. Bolton, and Martin, G. R., 1966, "The Seismic Cdefficient in Earth Dam Design," ASCE, Journal of Soil Mechanics and Foundations Division, Vol. SM3, May, pp. 25-58.
- 24. Seed,,H. Bolton, and Peacock, K. H., 1970, " Applicability of Laboratory Test Procedures for Measuring Soil Liquef action Characteristics under Cyclic Loading," Earthquake Engineering 2.5-54
YCNP-13
\
Research Center, Report No. EEFC 70-8, University of [!
\- California, Berkeley, November.
- 25. Silver, M. L., and Seed, H. Dolton, 1969, "The Echavior of Sands under Seismic Loading Conditions," Earthquake Engineering Research Center, Report No. EERC 69-16, University of California, Berkeley.
- 26. University of California, 1973, " Computer Program for Slope Stability Analysis (STAER) ," Civil Engineering Department, University of California, Berkeley.
- 27. Castro, G. (1975) " Liquefaction and Cyclic Mobi.e.ty of Saturated Sands," Journal of the Geotechnical Engineering Division, ASCE, Vol. 101, No. GT6, June. l l
- 28. Duncan, J. M. (2977) personal communicaticn.
l
- 29. Duncan, J. M., and Change, C. Y. (1970) " Nonlinear Analysis l of Stress and Strain in Soils," JSMFD, ASCE, 96, No. SMS, Proc. Paper 7513, September, pp. 1629-1653.
- 30. Finn, W. D. L., Bransby, P. L., and Pickering, D. J. (1970)
"Effect of Strain History on Liquefaction of Sands," Journal of the Soils Mechanics and Foundations Division, ASCE, Vol. l 13 96, No. SM6, pp. 1917-1934, November. l O' 31. Ishibashi, I., and Serif, M. A. (1974) " Soil Liquefaction by Torshional Simple Shear Device," Journal of the Geotechnical Engineering Division, ASCE, Vol. 100, No. GT8, pp. 871-888.
- 32. Janbu, N. (1963) " Soil Compressibility as Determined by Oedometer and Triaxial Tests," European Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation-Engineering, Wiescaden, Vol. I, pp. I 19-25.
l
- 33. Kondner, R. L. (1963) " Hyperbolic Stress-Strain Response: l Cohesive Soils," JSMFD, ASCE, 89, No. SM1, Proc. Paper 3429, !
January, pp. 115. I
- 34. Kondner, R. L., and Zelasko, J. S. (1963) "A Hyperbolic ,
Stress-Strain Formulation for Sands," Proc. 2nd Pan Am . Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, Vol. I.
- 35. Kulhawy, F. H., Duncan, J. M., and Seed, H. Bolton (1969)
" Finite Element Analyses of Stresses and Movements in Enbankments during Construction," Report No. TE 69-4, off. of ;
Res. Serv., Univ. of Calif., Berkeley. ,
- 36. Lee, K.,L., and Fitton, J. A. (1969) " Factors Affecting the .
, Dynamic' Strength of Soil," vibration Effects of Earthquakes ! f-~g on Soils and Foundations, ASTM, STP 450.
! 2.5-55
YCNP-13 I l
- 37. K. L., and Walters, H. B. (1973) " Earthquake Induced Cracking ;
of Dry Canyon Dam," Fif th Eorld Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Rome, Italy. l l
- 30. Ozawa, Y., and Duncan, J. M. (1973) "ISBILD: A Computer l Program for Analyses of Static Stresses and Movements in l Embankments," Report No. TE73-4, Office of Research Services, l University of California, Berkeley.
- 39. Seed, H. B. (1976) " Evaluation of Soil Liquefaction Effects !
on Level Ground During Earthquakes," Proc. Symposium on Soil l 1,19uef action, ASCE National Convention, Philadelphia, Cctober 2.
- 40. Seed, H. B., Makdisi, F. I., and De Alta, P. (1977) "The ;
Performance of Earth Dams During Earthquakes," Report No. UCD/EERC 77/20, University of California at Berkeley, August.
- 41. Seed, H. B., and Peacock, W. H. (1971) " Test Procedures for Meanuring Soil Liquefaction Characteristics," Journal cf the Soil Mechanics and Foundations Division, ASCE, Vol. 97, No.
SM8, pp. 1099-1119.
- 42. Thiers, G. R. and Seed, H. B. (1969) " Strength and Stress-Strain Characteristics of Clays Subjected to Seismic Loading Conditions," Vibration Effects of Earthquakes on Scils and 13 Foundations, ASTM STP450, American Society for Testing and Materials.
- 43. Wohg, Fai S. and Duncan, J. M. (1974) " Hyperbolic Stress-Strain Parameters for Nonlinear Finite Element Analyses of Stresses and Movements in Soil Masses,"
Geotechnical Engineering Report No. TE-74-3 to National Science Foundation, Of fice_ of Research Services, University of California, Berkeley, July.
- 44. Kong, R. T. (1970) " Deformation Characteristics of Gravels and Gravelly soils under Cyclic Loading Conditions," Ph. D.
Thesis, University of California at Berkeley. l O i 2.5-56
TCNP-13 1 TABLE 2.5 5(T) v LEVELS OF COMPACTION FOR EARTHFILL Earthfill Density Moisture Uses l A 955 2% Fills for Category I l structures i Beckfill for Category I t. stnictures Fill for nonqualified structures Al 100% +2% Fill for Category I structures B 90% 13% Backfill for nonqualified structures C As compacted No Spoil deposit.s by hauling equipment control i Notes:
- 1. Density is based on percent of maximum Standard Proctor Density as y
determined by ASTM D698. l
- 2. Moisture control is bcsed on a percentage above or below optimum moisture content.
j J Revised by Amendment 13 O
- + > ~
YCNP-11 Table 2.5-lO(T) REQUIRED MINIMUM FACTORS OF SAFETY Water Elevation Surface Strength Factor Loading of Elevation Value of Condition Water Table in Pond from Test Safety For ERCW Spray Pond Slopes Construction Empty Q 1.25 Normal Pool 518.O* 519 0 S 1 50 SSE and Normal Pool 518.O* 519 0 R 1.10 SSE Drawdown 518.O* 506.0 R 1.00 OBE and Normal Pool 518.O* 519 0 R 1.25 OBE Drawdown 518.O* 506.0 R 1.10 For Slick Rock Branch Slope Construction At Bedrock - Q l.25 Long Term 519 0** - S 1 50 SSE 519. P - R 1.10 OBE 519.O** - R 1.25
- Elevation of water table outside the spray ponds is assumed to be 518 except in the dike area where 519 is assumed.
** Elevation of water table in the main plant area is 519, elevation 424 at the toe of the slope and gradually decreasing to elevation
- k14 beyond the pumping station in the embayment.
Revised by Anendment 13 , t']
O YCNP-13 Table 2 5-15(T) SOIL PARAMETERS OF COMPACTED EARTHF USED IN STATIC SLOPE STABILITY ANALYSES ") (Section 2 5 5.2.2.2 - Slick Rock Branch Slope) Permeability (cm/sec) } Unit Weight (pcf) -{ Moist 125.0 l Saturated 130.0
- Submerged 67.6 4.7 x 10
O Strength Parameters C %' C' Type of Test (*) (psf) (*) (psf) Q or UU 13 1600 R or CU 14 400 S or CD 30 200 (a) Soil parameters are average values for the compacted earthfill placed at 95 percent standard compaction. For the compacted earthfill placed at 100 percent standard compaction, the unit weights should increase approximately 5 percent and values of the strength parameters should also increase slightly. However, the permeability would decrease slightly. (b) Weighted average for all borrow materials (Classes I through VII). Added by Amendment 13
O O O YCNP -13 Table 2 5-16(T) SOIL PARAMETERS USED IN DYNAMIC FINITE EIAv2Nr ANALYSES (Section 2 5 5.2.2.2 - Slick Rock Branch Slope) Maximum Shear ( } Variation Saturated Poisson's M dulus of Shear Parametric Variations
"#""* D@g Unit Weight (a) Ratio 8 "8 Ratio ,;
Material (pcf) o max n ^ # max 2 max s max s Compacted Earthfill 130 1.5 0.48 346(") 0.30(*) (d) (f) 519( ) -- 208(*) -- Granular Fill 143 0.4 0.40 llo 0.50 (e) (g) 165 -- 66 -- (a) K = Ratio of horizontal effective stress to vertical effective stress (b) G =K (Tr )" with Tr, in psf, and G in ksf (c) Applicable for Tr, >. 2000 psf For ir $ 2000 psf, basic set of properties, K = 840, n = 0.18 Upper-bound variation, K = 1260, n = 0.18 Lower-bound variation, K = 504, n = 0.18 (d) As shown in Figures 2.5-38(T) and -39(T) (e) As shown in Figure 2.5-63(T) (f) As shown in Figures 2.5-40(T) and -41(T) (g) As shown in Figure 2 5-63(T) Added by Amendment 13
C ycNP-13 ( Table 2.5-17(T) , 1 SOIL PARAMETERS USED IN NONLINEAR STATIC FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS, (Section 2 5 5.2.2.2 - SlickRockBranchSlope) Soil Parameter Symbol Moist Earthfill Saturated Earthfill Unit Weight Y (pct) 125* 67.6** Cohesion c (ksf) 0.2 0.2 Friction Angle p(des) 30 30 > Modulus Number K 200 200 Modulus Exponent n 0.7 0.7 Failure Ratio R f 0.7 0.7 O G O.35 0.35 Poisson's Rati Parameters F OJ OJ d 5 5
- Moist unit weight
** Buoyant unit weight where: Primary Loading Modulus, E , Initial Tangent Modulus, t
. _ E , and Unloadind-Reloading Rf (1-sin %)(cy -7 3 ' "'
E t 2c cosp + 2 i 3 81"9 . n E =E g =Kp, Tangent Poisson's Ratio,#t, Initial Poisson's Ratio,// ,
/d 6 t" d(c v ) 2 i
= 0 - F log p
3 1 n- - Rf (T -73)(1-sinp)* Kp 1 2e cosp + 213 '1"N; Added by Amendmont 13
t YCNP-13 l (N. l Table 2.5-18(T) RE3t1T3 or CTRES-COffrRoLLED CYCLIC TRIAIIAL TESTS or CLASS III COMPACTED EARTIFILL U"I" Dry Unit Confining Consolidation y Mer of cycles, N to Cam Weight, Pressure, Deviator
#8" Test Compaction Id #e3 K = Initial 22.$ 1% tion No. ($) (pcf) (psf) *
#c 3
#d SP'I L1quefac+ ton Strain Strain 8 train 1 95 106.2 2000 1.0 1920 du/a 3, = 0.57 at . Loco cycles 4 95 106.4 2000 1.0 3350 2 3280 53 3110 12 3230 9 7 95 106.4 2000 1.0 2590 22 2500 29 2200 57 24ho 34 2 95 106.2 4000 1.0 3620 19 352o 24 3320 38 352o 24 5 95 106.4 4000 1.0 3670 24 357o 29 3370 43 3570 29 O. 3 95 106.2 8000 1.0 7360 7140 6900
- 1. 4 2.7 53 7140 3 6 9$ 106.2 8000 1.0 6220 ' 35 6160 5 59 4 9 6160 4 8 95 106.4 8000 1.0 4540 135 kh80 141 h420 151 4550 132 9 95 106.4 2000 2.0 r/o d u/r3, = 0.5 at 1000 cycles 13 95 106.3 2000 2.0 3554 51 3519 73 3459 88
- > 111 11 95 106.4 4000 2.0 5680 h 5600 7 5k80 11 5520 10
~
12 95 106.3 A000 2.0 5050 35 503o 56 5010 yr
- r226 10 100 112.3 Looo 1.0 '496o 19 4880 32 >
4720 100
' Ol - ->100 Added by Amendment 13 w e w- e +v + w ,<
e<-
_I O i 2 i ~0' s e t G i s ! 6 iI l wro s = wrr e , er ofn a erroa ope:macn e ed!rn ano vrerseero n- nor s we a ef f ouwo tw were wo* w k9t A It? f*4 9 G9 t3r rSn tno n> TR Werf iIPO9f D MKR "F K" A* N6 00 k'*hlO 4 ivM50 L !A** 0 *
- Of F *'l Aar4 4 # At4 ## # a & dF4't.7 Aes tar d'd O d5 Si tC*dht# #54' l 49 NEAbwA*'N f 9 6 49 Of Thnt l'$AR afe a- . ore w wre v-4lr ew*r fraPints 440 4 5, ns ide r* Pt1 f4 M O< mad o S F8r(f t
- af arowf gr$ rad (4fefhsmfg or gderiir deO erAra(
see 4 W9 k el n't tarf Grev o I Ae r anr it t coereer 999 09 \n estier't A % 580e4 094 A.t e/ frMWW Nu it t #****f 0* 4e*8T f**f9 Mt # car'telM,4*er Nr4f WCN 4 TQ fouf ff gV 93v63PXM Ved 6 9t eC 90 1997 A* Li eti $df kelF6EndanA9n f 9 4 3 r 3 09 fad 04 '4 e4 60eNL& AR 98 4 e4 ine,14 age (g,whe{ rff es ,rf gc44' 98 en 4% d 4 t neA J f*A t at?vt e.*nt e 1, orseg,7 Ge&4nt 900 AM 9l et L t Aoero e ww 14 9ltRdGe&PM f 9 4 S 2 Of tnt P9&M W 'E "i , L Oennes rff h Yad 9t &lf l1f ?'d *F eVv9ffD's
*f Mrdi . Of s't 4 % r 00 Vnq et t svar r agavt tot ni s t s.er is $ rt s gsyg ege
~
*f em W FOP 4,.ug J+ts At is wgAt esser e 4g 70 Pop y y sg erg As ry e f ac a,e.ereg Op apAg e / S f8Br4 F arf f t gy , , q, gg gy,,,,, ,py 7mgg, y,,, y jng e j, g,a
. **W
- Fo*
- enev 41 Setade F=f t #9 a # / d rf t,0** / W d6a.urt4F e5 FO F# 8f epNi # DC#4 f J fA8f *f .984AW we e og y gp a , ay q m a r-3 r,ma p 94 0 A*!**ii L'in0%9r'f 9 0 90 f e'V k' g i 6f,, M, t w di1 eQ'%'14 !*t uoA%4*i &W f G i eli M (Oef94C'fl' e i MSCMdFI O de f dip Ct14 pear f(0 70 f ref 3' a fgA peier gg ggg qq # S W d*ae#A88r/3'44f8d#f8T #'d# ge yogagap Ag,gg4 g s, syy p, gspsernpimer swAg,ggatv sygggAqs
%w ng sesgag e fso g ree -
09 9 TO is i me!!W SPO tt $LBnleM&s&d*** 19 4 9 s J J p 14RT>n 4 L LW59C'9 0 *D in90 *A
- C f tf L %f f W f** "f4* 2509I3 LW t hi PSAO
.q-w -ee-.- . _ _ . _ - _ . .
---*..r-%
-i.- e p,.m
'l j sy i
// ) i\
C ,1 ; e ,
\\
lt
+!
\t'1 l
.! g _.c y G
o \. *
>< - w t .,a I [."'
j' 4.-14 OFW l fJ $ 6 -) 0 , ~ G m . N U
~~
L i Il l\ - _ _ . _
.-- -.. . - . . . . . . ; : ~,. . . . . .
l{ _ . . . . , l
/
\ ! ,' / l ll l
, y
'I n
i m
;/
, ; t.
f :{ l
/ [I
~
1 ., f, _~ - - .
, ?._ _ . _ _
-..j_-
.j i
_<) f d 199
/1 >
p g]- wri c , I,3 1;/ Y-g }I 'sru I
, lI.D. ] N.,r l'! !
.r % i
./ pg (,
N l i th ij gl! j G";2 '
' ' " ~ ^ = I r h .h 3
_ . , _ _ _-. _ _ _ , .m. m_unpr a em ~ _1
*, Min >%
a i s,--- [ -- y ll ' ,' 3 ! 3
-i -
l i cd . H~ gl were a su nwo o.m J,, , ,, !"
$ er V(n yse.4 lt', oLa
;'. - t
, -< e erskre eq qr '
^j
}
BA L4%G L{ _
}. .g, r y, 0 !
3 . _q _ - _ . , _ C1 h- ^ , l m'% l ," , ;
';4l FJW84f AA CAG h I
[ l /.':\! j fd 'nn
.* J"',%Y,, i x .
~r -
me en, ,,,4 \ii) y N eq*M We_ t' , .. am j h it !. . u g l ("O% P l!
,- - ~A r
.l
(., i ,' t. , , (,& r mee t.8W =, x .
.r, nx'y H q(j s ww ,r M7) f'f' --%xxn , byC ,,,,,,.c.
_x j .
'a
./.-- ._ ,4 h ' n 's
~ . l
,fk ! ! h),/ .[ 1-f y ' x 1 l
j
.// %
- jY .x _
, V' r
,/
,/, ,~
/P s// ,;\ a j -__ n / ,,
' ' /' j ' ,/ l C
J ./, '
' ' /,
t
- - - . _ . ' /,
2r , .'
- - _ - . ~.. . _ _
_, ' Y$ C] e fj- - he7[ N N- . gs ._1 y /, ,/ 1
.uam an g sN. etagrar gtwt MF Wi % 'a ,
K Qk O mu. o_n s
7 i e i o. i ,
. to , i , . 11 : .n.
A nr2 w>
. D R " v 4 ""'", -
- /*'
M=*. s C wrrs
' Dl1'"r.'J.'0'r*l'u "<'Ja?T274%
~
' {.,"}Yoy,'!cl:'iMi 'n:L""&I?l*
' 'e;;5M'lll? air %:',' w* 1:n': "
O m = .u= . _ .. n .. -
,s ,
, w w,,
s
- ~ . ,
N a n. s, - - \, \ i <; i \ , sectw - l } srextsers ro uww wrt Yamas
\ j e s wao -. . _ j y srmtruas roemen wis 'o *ames
;.53 sr*xitms ro emw wir T'ames
\ ,.'
s r ~, sinverunts ro *~co wrr s'ames r mare -
~
-~- o p
e s
/ x
\
__ @II -
, /,l aa.s ,eoa Qg
\ '
D W)
\ . a m . ' y' H
\ Q x .-
~ y ,/
s..__.-
%~ - JJ
/
Revised by Amendment 13
^ E._1_ _'1 co YELLOW CREEK NUCLEAR PLANT EXCAVATION AND BACKFILL CATEGORY 1 STRUCTURES FIGURE 2.5-18 7 l 8 l 9 l - ,
' 8 l,,,,2. , , I,,,,s,,,,t,, , 4, ,,,,,,,s,,,,i,,,,6,,,,il ooo m ecs am
**0... . - _ . - _ _ - . , - . . .. - , - - - , ...- -- -- - - - - - - - - - .- - - - . - -------- - --
sw ----. _ .. .. _ _ ..-[.._ _ . .- . - - _ - - - _ - - . -
-c, ,.---.me-. nu ._. ..ae. ..w4..m ,. .,.r. - --w-w - + - . w -w--e-o-++ .-e --._w.4,------------.-*-w-*-*-1 ~4 5 '" - - - ' ' ~ ~ ~ - '~ - ' ' - ' ' ~ - - - - - - * - ---~-
~
~~'-'^~~-{~~~-*-----'--~~--'---- ,
I l l g l l ,_. __ =4-m.. j. . - _ _ . . _ _ _ _ _ . _ __._ . . . . _._._ . __ _ _ . _ _e.2 _.__=_- l
.**o . __ .__ __ ____ . _ _ _ . _ . _ . _ _ _. _ _ _ . .__.- _. +_-
>==
c ---+ -- -
, l
- m. .. __ ._ .- _._ -- - _ _ - , . - - _ _ _ - - . _ _. _ _ _ _ - -
- m N__ -. - m. g i I aanno a F o " < 9 A s H
&e K
e m
,,, ,7,,,, I...,s.,,,t,,,,*,,,,I. 1
,m....t,,,,3,, , t,, .n, ,
a m ra as us_w a s a == ara a-r o A
.g ,_ , .__ _...m.
2ll%7' + r ~< _ == -
- -- ~.
-~
llllll; - a, -TJ_^".- .
-o
.n-n.
/__ . m.
ai.
/
_) _
.~*-
.~ -
-. _a .
.i.
( . _-s L__
% rns eauwwr mmsem tw aw anar trair
.._ . no.
c Ni er' N !rn'$ w"$ ar** bet"T$ SYN E 5 U_rN *
, anae .ro l
.__ l . ___ _ _
. . - . . - - - . - - - - . . m.
D ETTA0N M-A4 ge r so w E
)
\\O ho p W,
9 e
\D 9
O LEMw aWrfs h Strt/ (MFW _ M uwrrs - ,=, kQ awres caren *a l_ ,] awres caruawr o smrws H l' ' l awres raren ar= Revised by Amendment 13 YELLOW CREEK NUCLEAR PLANT EXCAVATION AND BACKFILL CATEGORY 1 STRUCTURES l FIGURE 2.5-18 A t- l ' () ' l 9 l. _ _
A9 AI g 3 9 % g 3 J . J . .DnL=
,. h~, q =,g
. um.~r
*/ IQ in y 3pe
- 3 6j gp t -
=>
e p j
- a e 8
a 4 g g r,j q ,
. i l
. C'*,*g . l ****'*8
'- _^ : -- u.44 i
'""./
i
'""hke'
- x. " -~-N
-. w
~
- p' ,,o/*
E s ,% ./ ,f [ % y,_^'..f'\' ,/ , g > .c . f(
, ,. sbool ' ' sto f
)\\ f L/ )a
^
.t. c h
..,i { j' .,..- j
,' u.
\ .
9_).L.z.(. r., , _. . . mm~r . .
.s ,o. _ .,I,,
. j//. 7 ,,. -l ~~.' ,- .,
s s N- M l .< ' ! l . .I .' E"# ' '-g !/ < 3 Y l-K. . y' , 1 p-lh) 4 - +t W.' - ( . , y' . U *^*"*
)
,n,,t
%. '^ . '620
,.. s Q' y -
/-
/ .
(1 ~ 8" 8'"*** t { f h
/ . ......> $ ,y
.-- - D y .Pr
..b . *^C f- .. ]'
y( 7mmt' 3 . _ _ I; \ 4--
-* *~
q 1 j4, . ,. 4y I ' ,
',- a me - . ' '
l u d MW; .l j i
} .
..._..g., I i
't. ,
i: w._ p ,fe
'i.. .
.Q r e j ..
./ .w }/_. _ f%
1
, m
\_}
@W "7 .jf '[,1
."1 :f,.h
~4' & ' O -
%u } .. .[
p, . 3. I
. L.'.
~
.'h,i x::e , , 'i', ,,c, , , 4 ,
/ 5( 'N.
-4 . sf.- 'b-. .g s
- ;*;g-';,,
. i,,3 m a.
rv.,
, +
t f .ff - gi %. .e . .. _ \ '.\" . i .i > F- , _= a.wr ..se
'Y[
~
$?*$* '
. . . ,,jp*9M 4 1
\__a 6
-am, s. jp
, .!i. 1 1 I
's n -
I. s t . ( -.
. - - -.7.h,, - b >
s - --
.A
'A 3 : 4 b('. *
***M d
~ --- --.
n 1 b ... b>'
" 5% g , . . 4 4 'K \C.
...,,,,.,-~ 'I js= ew new "S
. . f, g --- ,
i y_ smery
\
#,5.,[ _h.%
k
,~ '
i pi ./ { - j, # [D.Mi _~ ~ r{ ' o, . ,- my f$ S. , .
~;s
.m .m..
's Ty s.,
A.. (. K \,
- J'1 4g[.'
.%; y
-- *,:.,;.r s.,9m/ - ,f. %z , ,s,"( _
+ M'^ '
h
, , .J k ' 'i ' i' 'i ; -
i ., l ,
\
amor s.
'- i 4 J t e,96
), '/'
. .o . .
%:r x - r r. ..-, 9..
~~
n . .- ;
- -~~ ****
. [,I ;-
f,.,,.- ')
~
t, ... r,"
.')#g _.s .' ,. e , , ,
t , Slick Rock ~ ' '/ ' i3 s! '" \ ' 't ' ! ' #.,,'i
\
a . , . . s s g Nf' s., . y' ; -j Branch Slope /- ./ ,, q \, ', -.. , ,
\
; (, %
s -- o : ; ,- -t 4-t 7$ .- 2
, Y i.>
(;[' j
~
-~
/ Intake Pumping 4 Station ' <'
l [' , 1
.. g . g '[.
.....# ****I' As M .f. ~
1 s J . --.. . ;:.c . a-= :- **'* 7s i
/-',7 ; .gl . . , .
;jf ~.fr ;
~
,. /' -( "
f:;g: ;
- p-SYMBOLS:
YELLOW CREEK NUCLEAR PLANT
/
/ PRELIMINARY SAFETY
- - - A soil borings ANALYSIS REPORT 0, 400 Feet # Soil borirNs with pierometers installed.
FIGURE 2.5-58(T) , O Soil borings, delayed due to possible Added by Amendment 13 archeological interference. j q I ' (N/ ) O Soil probings i
<> Test trenches GENERAL SITE PLAN AND TOPOGRAPHY OF PLANT AREA
b 7% I (>'
- - - - - - - - - - _ . _ _ _ . , g
.I I 1-
\ m
?
\ w Finished Grade
'8 \ El.620 N
N
\'
4
~
N N s N ~a - k 'N % Hs
' w ~. 'N
% i
,e m 'w ~4a0, ' N ( s %s
% J) ~~~ ,
N
'44 %s N s
~. M 60-
' 450
' 440 -
%~ \
~'
~430
' 424
\
\
\
\N [ YELLOW CREEK NUCLEAR PLANT
/ PRELIMIN ARY SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 2.5-59(T) 0 so Added by Amendment 13 100 ' ,, ,,
,.s, i )
(j l.EGENO:
-- 500 - ---- Final contours on the Wp PLAN OF Slim ROCK BRANCH SLOPE
i
'NN >
~"
l' "A ' N-S Bas.s. ione j ,, .
/ (
Is 'w f/l I
. \g s .\ \
k
\ \,\g g\ \ \
s\Q. \\ \ ., I\ N ., N \
\ g\ \ ,
\
s '\ \( ., \ . 6 \
\\ \\ g\ \ \ \b \ \
\
g
\\ '.
g g I 'l )f \ I 's\ \
#,I /' l,$
)/l, ' ;.. '\ s
\
/. T \
s y
\
s
' l*h J
.f 1J 0, l/ ,t'_
h\ s ~~ ,, / 4 Q V f l'// 6 ,A.Io g %, /,
,.}/
jfhl/ '(y' g$ g i - (
, \ \
\ 3
. V.,
\
g.\ y g
\
\14
- l l
\ ' l g
- 1 g \
. \
\ f, h
'\7 ./ '
\ ~
., g %
\ "'o YELLOW CREEK NUCLEAR PLANT
',S PRELIMINARY SAFETY
,^,
.% AN ALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 2.5-60(T)
Contour on of bedrock son ._ _. contours o. - m of teenouwm
~
RE$1DOLW AND BEDROCK CONTOURS IN SLICK ROCK BRANCH SLOFE AREA l l l'
t
~
t D i 500 Cr paced Earthfdl 9 eso 400 8EDROCK I a 1 i i i 1
-3o0 -20 -200 -iso -100 -so o DISTANCE FROM E-W BASELil SOCliOG i
O Deewi Generator Budding A Fi a f nised Grade El. 620.o g Aw
.2, _ C-l
/ _ /wmed Grant Waw u sin u.pn, y .
,- N 4s y4gn _
~'
=
h % g - , E~mrau , p Smoe eeo { - M "" 300 - a e i i i e i i I e i i i
-400 -aso -300 -2so -200 -iso -100 -so o so 100 iso 200 DISTANCE FROM TOP OF SLOPE - FEET Section "A-A"
'. ha i l i I I i
i Fwwshed Grot. EI. 520 520
' .?,
{/
. . - _ . - - p 8EDROCK 460 W
sE - FEET 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 a$ ' B-B" l 520 500 480
- n. -
4eo N rm. o c,.o. in d. ; . Pumpmg Staten [El. 424
- + -
_ _ _ _ . - - _ - - - - - - - - -._ 8, , ___ , ,s y ,,, 1 420 E mb.ym.nt _ g 8EOROCK [g I I E I I l I . . 1 1 l g 250 300 35C 400 450 500 550 600 650 700 750 800 850 900 YELLOW CREEK NUCLEAft PLANT LONGITUDINAL ("A-A") AND TRANSVERSE ("B-B") SECTIONS THROUGH SLICK ROCK BRANCH SLOPE Added by Amendment 13 FIGURE 2.5-61 (T)
./ \
AN A LYSIS CASE CONSTRUCTION SOIL STRENGTH O or UU C2RCLE A F ACTOR OF_ SAFETY 2.93 LON G- TE rid S or CD 8 1 Tl
/ \\\
\\ x
\ \ \
\ \\ 9%$
\
\\\
\\ \\
\
\\
\\ \
\\\\ -M
\\\
M
\\ -
M - E - ,. -
\\ \ v i~
C 3-- --
- - - + - - - _ _ _ 1 1" ~ ~ - ~_" ~ ~_
_ v W.S. El. 414 D 400 8EDROCK _ ago M M 3% M 4% M % M 6% M M M M M YELLOW CREEK NUCLEAR PLANT RESULTS OF STATIC STABILITY Added by Amendment 13 AN ALYSIS, SLICK ROCK BRANCH SLOPE FIGURE 2.5-62 (T)
- - - . _.a - -_. a __ ,__4 _
/
/
O A
=,-- , _ _ .
El. 520.o /
/
/
= E 9
__) */ I
=:, .
{ E ?J ...,
,o i
E - _
~
l* ~
, ___wm j ; ~
- 1 ~~ ( ,,7 OROCg
.20 -
.00 -
l 300 - I
- - , . , , , , , i , , ,
-doo -360 -Joo - 250 -200 -iso -too _so o so son ,, f, ,
DISTANCE FROM TOP OF SLOPE - FEET l l O 1 l l
30 - e_< .
. .e . 0 , , e. , o ,. ,4 .
.,l. .. . - .... , ,, ..-
y ..
.I. : 4 .J. j [...d.<.
l J, ,. . _J. em. ,, in 4 . L. # m .. - .+
. . . .. . p1 .. -. . 4 o . a. .
.t l \
i l,
,,i
... .e.
F i q !
.4 m
, . .!i u.
6- 4
, y l
n i a,. e
-+ .,i m ... ,
- 4. . ..4.. .a .
.. +,m ,! . d. + . .A -
t( i:# -~L-
..,&.. ..e , < <
.i .i,p...
n m, L...,. ..%
,j ,. ... , ,. . . , _., - .
.g ,. ma. J ..
6 ~. .
... .i -
, . q. - 6 .).. ...,
j
. p 4 . ,
1, , ;
, p .
I ,-...,,...
- o. ,4, 4 .g . . ip :.i..
...+
ljg ,., F.b 1 .. 4 i{,, t . J....,+ 4 4 i7 9
.i ., 4 4 .
{ .
!j; i 4. .a
.vi 6 . ..+ . I --
. , i, jf4l 6, gi .4
. f,.
,{. . . , , .
l1. .}. e <
.q , < ,t: 636, p ,44 9 4
+ - .1;
.. i
..... 4 . h.
L - i, .4-.h r
- 4. ) }. { .
es . t u
,n , ,. o. ~ 4 ,.. ...g . , n. . o, .4 , ,...
gj I i4 #
.j. g 4 .. . ,4, 4 . .
{6 .p. q 4
,n hln, j, . e .[.
']
tp 6,l . l
*{ <
f. 1 .,
.j,
..+
4 p pff
~ .
i.- .4p
-.g .
i , ,i i l .. .,.< d t. ll.
< ; ,t .-
,i-
- e. r ,. .
6 l4 j l
.,6. -p --
g 9 j.-, e di. ij
,L ti 4 ; ',i r
,r . t . f, fl. d,
. .. .n d..o. - l ,,
i 4, , e
. y d ,
i
, n 4 ;
i. 4 a
+' 4
- r. d
+.!,! ,
7Q 4*a e
,.n. r . .l.
j., f...p .-.- - . r4 .4..-r --
, .y. . ., .
, h, y. ,.
n .. t s
,.,f
.. 11, . ; ,u, ,
.m,
.'.l.,
.i.. ,y ., il ,
h
.L , , . 5 !lli : .
)
x h,lo. i,
. . . .h i iy
.T
..,J.... . .s.
o Ln
. t.
I i.i .o ..[ 1n j ji ... . .m
,j q i. j t . .ii l g , ,. 6.. .
. I on 1~.
,1..
, -l..:, *
. t
}- i . , , . .
,,4 #n. . , .
i 4 . . ,
+,--r.
15 : g g n, a.
- 4. ,.
i .
. .g .
... . . Lm p .-.
. . ,j i
.n o
}t
, c yo i.
o 4 3 n, . . . , 1,-,p.j ..
,i
, r . ,,.,
4.,. , . . .
....L. _, .
..t ,
..n o -
-,3-, .. ._ . .n...
, . . ,.m.7, ; :
3
,, a 4.a a . ., .
] i,
.a. 1, a.
y ..4 i p ,.. ..- 4, i.a f ,... < I t.,. _4 4 .{ .
. e..;4 .. -
i
.i .J y,4 l ,: +.
.,4 ..:4,.
l . .,p $i {.. > !--- i {,. 4 4 ++ j. 4a, ej ,ii 6
-t , g j i, ., i ,.
,4 4. .
i . i, ..'j.n. 4 o 4 ~ l { o. l,, i' i
- j. . .g <
l i e . 4<. .
.u 10 w-w
. ,. ., r +, . .
, n, ,1
,[,d
. . -, n #. .
p,. .,, . 4 ,i
,' -j . . 4 .
9 . h..
- 4. ll 9 Ji . ; L p .. -
>m l l.. l.. a ..#.. . ...
..-a
.p q. .y , -p-
~..+ ,,n .,
, r.4, I1 .. ..o. ..,i. + . .1 i
h.
. . - ,.m. ... .
!, h ... .p. %
m ...._ . .i% *~
. n,,
-.! 4
.N... . i -._
. . i .. .. -
4 4 -
,, . _ - : .m . ... x i ig, 4 p ..{. , . . , ii.
. . . .. q.. ~; .,. t< <
9i3 4,T'.. - ,. .. q . 4 tg{. .p . Il1
- o. n. .n. i r, .1 _-
4,
..L,. ,4
. i ,,,.
y ,..e .t , c, . . . 4 . . oJ _ - ._ .. 5 -
.. . . 4. . , ,..
.m .,.
/w, ,1, , , a, 4 4
- 4 .
=.-- .m.,.
, , , , b,, s .
I . e. ,
..~
i
.j. .-
a. p ,it, m I , , gj.
.i:9 -
-p .
,,n,
..I.. v, n .ut,
., i,n7 , .
.. . 1 <
l . . 4 3.,-
. . ..J-l4.
n d,s.. f 1
+ y. . i .
m p
,m. ,d .
,. 4 1 ,t 4
ts,. . n; 4 i...'.] i. r a 1
. 4:
o
.J . fl,- 4 4 e.d<
i ni.o.N { j 4 4 e .gjgjl't. j . ;' . + -. (, n :j.
+' . ' 8' l-4, o .
i
; i.e- .t.. . +.,+ . 4,e; ;, . F. .
- 3. , <q t. l- . . .+ .. ,.
0 , 10 to 10-2 10'I 1 10 lA
\
\
1.0
'"/ "
% .ff. 4 . M, H; ;"!:
.l, i... p..g ; i jM ._ ,3, 1_1 , '.:
q
" 1. t '
kn . M. .,.J .,,p. iH.p. J{,,.
, u . -.. v ..r no j
{l'I:
,pn
.... a. +. . . .i
. f.
M} .& n. i -
.p
- .j - , .
yj.. yl i , p . .
. ig, L .j ,(. . i .- A. . .F
(
.d
..[
, - ,.i - .
4
.n.
- p. r,.. .- ,p.
, I ., , . , .
l .; ai, ..,,.. I i 4 . .. .- , i e . . , 9 . < l , , . , o H ,! ,
... , .,, . n . . e.ae
. go. , ,, i . .
i. 4.
.._ , _ .- Ig 0.8 a 1 . e 9 .
-li:
++
i o b -r.
- q -l4, i ...,,4 p .
l . o .,
% h .j.l.ip
..i . , , i o ;o p , .g, .. .
O y .< . o , .l ., . . .i . e , l .m .t. ,i , .1. Lo i
.oJ.-
, i i ..I .
- 1. j : p; l ,,i , i p. % ;
4, e.. , , M,. . t ,i
...i I
,y
.4ii
.+ ... , o l. 1
..u. e.. g. p. ~. . .i .o..a . 4.
,,a 1
.e , . . . - - . i. , . . ,
- l. .a - ..+ s_.
h i .p .r.
. i l, T. . T +4 i c. . . a ..
,i- .%
, i .
. ~ -..
1.1 4 ' , m, - -}.. ,...- i ., ,
!.ai
,i
. 1 n. 4 .
l6 . i . l -q,. e o .: l 3,,, m 1 ,l .! i Lo + . <
- d. ,
t.. .. ,61 , l ,n, . i
, 4 <!.
4.- (-i.
- l. i ii 3U 0.6 c +
,, .n 4- ,,o ;
,j ..,. ,
je ., inI
, 4 ., -.
- a. . ,j ,. .. ,. .
- q. .. .
j fr 4 . il ji. lq
'f f ,,.
, . .. . . - i. .... a.. i
,p v. l
?. .$., t j {i . p a, I ,,.-a
. ..,. .f
. . '..+
,,s
,p., a l , , ,. . ,
t4
, 4
,_ .,. ! ,. , i,
. . .i,m .. - -1, i,
.o..-
4 , a+
. i .. ..
i
. .. ._ 4,, _
at g .n ; _4 .i .o p .q. n ,,.m.. .. 4 q. g 3 ..p . ..p .]: [ , i m ,i, 3, p ,,. ..+,p , ..
.; , q ..
i n q... a..<
.l.,p. r .. , .,
.4,
..3...
5 g o.1.
+ r t.,
o , e i.
.L ...o n . , ,l3.. 4 . . .
n! .
+
.# L.. .,
L,# ,.. %, .
...o_
- 0.4 o.
- 1- , i ,, ,
a-- n
.4,.
% (. : n l . ,, .
,n , ,. ...~ 4 ...
-+ a..', p
., ~. lp1 . j,...e. a.o . .$.,
,, a. . ni,r .
- c. 9- #
.~ .
3 l
,n + ,. e i i ,# . Li ., 1
.,g .
6
.... .e % . - -
,. ,on.. . ., ... . %
4 w
..e J.: ,
.< d. :.
.I 4 w. ,...
1., or
, . n..#.
t. 4.. 4. ..
., ..ps., _- ., .,
m
, .., ~%.. .
gi - .
~
n.. a,
,w
+ ._ .n ...,
..:. e 4 #
u... ..r i . 4 , ~ , , ,
+,. , ._
+
1
.r
!p
.i,, o
,p +
ul,
..4...
%,a.+. .
l, m, 4. 4, .
. . L,.
.1.a.-r.
4 ...s l.. (o ,. i, < q. i ., .. ia. # a n.. .p
, - ,i, qi o..p .- , r+ , , 4. ,. ,
j . 90 ...J.;.. .4<.w.. 0.2 - !,,.- , p r ..g ,o m ,- ,. , .
+
J.
,,. . ,1 .,n , ,
, , - ., .. . .. - , ,o. , -,.
. ., }. . . ..
l
, m ... . .
i;l- , 1, ;e ,oe, ,. l- oo . .
.. c#.1~
- 4. '. 1 .a ' .
,l Ig , . .. , , b. + 1,. l . .
b 4., _ { ..e.... i q 7 r. -
, - ,..4
- n. .hg.
m :4.y i ._.4 4
.; . .. _.. 4, _ u .
,{
. F.
;41, ll1 4 -
1 ,e ,,
. . , . tjy <>
..= e g .t g; g % %p-nqip- ...r. *c{ .
d
- 2 .
- q. a j,o 3 1 l
o 6.
.%p. ..
q ;4,o i it44 ....
.. t, .
4- o
,,4 q m.o.g.,
g
.. .. ~ ., ..
- o. .
- 9. , n. a .m
- m. _ , , .
a . 10'4 10'3 10-2 10 4 1 10 SHEAR STRAIN. 7 (1) SHEAR MODULUS AND DUMPlNG RATIO VARIATIONS WITH STRAIN FOR GRANUL AR FIL t. M ATE RIAL (AFTER SEED AND IDRISS,1970)
/n.\
YELLOW CREEK NUCLEAR PLANT !(d PRELIMINARY SAFETY l , ANALYSIS REPORT I 1 7l Figure 2.5-63(T) 9 l i
.be #
Added by Amendment 13
(y ~ LJ L.) O a.0 APPLIED 8 ASE MOT 60N - HORIZONTAL COMPONENT - SSE BASIC SET OF DYNAMIC PROPERTIES I 0.25 -- - --
$ , i l
i I l j 0 00 l 14 ? p.4%.j$
! L 5. .)
5 ; I .
@! *. I h2 umu t .
g
-0.25 _ , ._ _. . _ _ _
-0.50 . . . , , , , , , ,
0 4.0 8.0 12.0 16.0 20.0 24 0 28.0 32 0 36 0 40 0 44.0 0.50 APPLlh> 8ASE MOTION - VERTICAL COMPONENT - SSE 8 ASIC SET OF DYNAMIC PROPERTIES 0~25 s 2E55 h, J 0 k s dd !I
, &N i dd6 6dhiMthf.g*,la,m PV'
6Ag 5 .I El } l l Q l' l' J
] l l' kT pIlll]
6 u i l
*'- hD c
-0.25 - d==)
h=' IF= 1
- 5 5 5 g y , g W 5 O 4.0 8.0 12 4 16.0 20.0 24.0 28.0 32.0 36.0 40 0 44 0 TIME - SECONOS TI'E HI5ICRIEc CF AIPLIED 3ASE :05C:!S FO.:. ELIOK EOCK FPxiCH t;CIE, REIhEEE:iT!!G SAFE SHUIDGW:; EAR 7d'UAKE, PASIC 3E CF CY:P.:GC "ATERI/U. FRCTE:!IE YELLOW CREEK NUCLEAR PLANT PRELIMINARY SAFETY AN ALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 2.5-64(T)
Added by Amendment 13
im u
/ ll*' !!i i'll J ~
l} th! 3.:: .M .tl%"'t"
~
h' i '1.. , ,,. ;',Z . : 7
.J... .. g*l'* usoWit *tt*t'M t t tc tenoet Moni t t tt:f:*~t-* *:tt"i. e.rid.
l t m U.oll ,:['.l m.-'. sAsa morm, omm. stat cowoment - su.o-x . . . . . . .. eme sat o arics
, 3" .- llt l " :l.:.: 1: s,=ve onwas - n in p h'm..t}.l u. . . h'.py.
.a ..
+T l'_ty ': *
, .' ;*m; m . .. *..'""'~ A'-{;'ft _a' y e- "4..y, i "i u !
, 7, 1 t . -
. ~.
...4.. 1I
< u w iH_
! ,,,.,. ,. l .. . .
.t, . .., , ... . -.
- o. .. *l. ,I ,n ,. ..... ._ .- . ,,
.o.
t
..o,,.. .o .n... l ., ., , . , . .
1 t.,. .f..
. . . .. . .- ~ !
..-..~_ u. m, .,.. . _. .t
. ., ..t ! .
o., E t
, t..
. ,,, ., . ,. . . . o . . . .o.._ .. . -. ., ,..
, i
- a. , ., , ,n .... .l,, ,,
., 1,.
- o. ..o.... ... . . . _ . - #
., o,
- t. . . l,,1. . . L. ,, ,.-
t .,, - n
, J,.. I t h. .
v -. .o.h. . :
, . -. ,,a. ,..
m, .!x. . e .. Ie _ 1i . .
,1
, .i 1 ... ..i ,.,.
I.
- o. .
- t. ., .s ! . ,
- l. ,n
.on n.I.,.,.. ,i ,.1. .i._ ...,.. . . l.
I . . . .
.i, . , , .
, . ,1., . ,,.,. . . ... ....
,I ...
... .. . . - . .o. I ....
1 .+.,.
,l .t...i Lv. , a!
. . . . . ...4 . . . ...
+, L. + .
. ~
.t4 .t tt . . . . .
g
. , , . . . . . . . . ..... !1t ...
'lt.
. . o. .
..q ,
j .. 'gg . . . ... ... .... f' g ';g g. ' u ,'gx, " . . " -' , '" . ' ' " ~ P'
.--,- ,'.4."..'..
g - g', .'
..sI u... (l.
I .i .o..., ,.. o..,.
..A,., ._._,.
o o .....
, t,.. . h..
,6
. ~
# . a*t. ., .. , . u,... i ~ .
. t.;
I i1 ..n.... 1. .,. . . , - ! !,
. ~~
t... . . . .
- n. _
l .. .; -!., ..
;, .;g
.o.... no g.. !. .{.,. .1 . .. .. .. o.., . .... . .
.g g ~. , .
-.., g g o. . . . . . . . .... . .
... ~..
g .. .. ..
.. a ,t..
4 ,
- a. .p... ...t . .. . . ..
.~;
- 6. .. . . , .
q . . . , 4..
- f. ... o o6., .I o
. ,a
.a .
n . 19 . .. + . ..-.o
.--,- , t ., I t. },, .,. . . .
. ..} ..e.
4...4 ... .e ( .. . .i. ...... . . . ..
. .. 6 4, ... . . . .. .'O..
I e. + - I 6.e .. o .eu,4 + *. . ... ae i
....i , n...
.... ... ,1, . .....! ,..t n . o$ m e.
L,. .
., .1. ....i.-h. . .
... . . . - .,. ,t. .. .
.. .m
...n,g.- ..
g
.. . . ho ..o.. ~ . -gg.. u..-.. .. .! ; g .6 .
, ..y g ..!., .. ..u. . .
_ 3
. ..7. - ..
~
y 7 _... _y . .. .. J.1-t .
.n.o.. ... ..... .. .. .. .. !. . , ,..t.
.t t.. ! ., ..4.. .,
....t, . , . , . ..
..~ 1 o. , . . .
.+. !t++
1 4.+1., ..
... u.,t
, ,. . t .,.......
. ..t. e.-
....p .._- .. ---
.... g 4. .r
..- 1 ... . . . . . . ......
o.....
., ~
.I.+t
- .,o.
-} .
- p. .. .. ..,. - o ~ g ,. ..!.! I . Y.-.,.
I t t..' H, . . +
. {a.
+
i _- t t. '~ ~1 u +
" ,'*r**- * -' Mo'
-t: i. m' ' &' " ' -
- ; ++
.o..
. . ..+. . . ,
.,- i 1,1,
... f..j. t 41~ . . .. , ,,.i. , , . .
. . ,, ,j .M.
.. t t.. ,
.h,.i..'".
l t.. .,,,
~.
. !.,q. ...* . .... . . ..,
-._ t .. .. .. ...
. . n.
.e-
.-t t. . ,... t.... ..
r, . . .m, .n. .o. . , L. t ,. . . . . . . ,. " '
- 1,
.. ..4.
. . ~
". .1- I .1 .
... i ... .
tJ -.. , . , . . . . . m. . .
't "' t - t'^'**'l....I..,u....
'Il' **a..=+ t *' +* *< " * **-* *"*' '* ** *1t I.'
'- * " ' *** ' *- ++ '
' " *ttt t **-
u '
'- .. ' ~ .'~ . ' ..-' ' * . * ' i . ,. ,e.
....I'..**-'".*'.'e+-
. ,. ..'.'~
r'"'4
' 4 .,+M' '. '-'*1i".d_ .+-
I.--{s.'
! i I, +, .,l..
. . .. . . . . l +. , .o.. .o.. .. ,
{ ..., ,
.... .u-.
.l a .
. i
!.1, .
...o.. ,
~.w I ( ... .o .. . . -- .
4 .... .. .. .. .g .m u .l.... . , ,,
.. ... q n. .
.. s,
%_ ...o.
- o. ..r. ...
.,i
.. .... .,......, w.. on
.!.. t ..... , .m l
... p, ... l1.. .o .. . . . .. . .,
of-
.p-. s 4 , , , ..,4,. . ..
. . - g1 ..
,., 1.,
. p. . .o
.. p . _ . . .... ... ,w ,.p. . . ....!
g!. .: .a.. ...-
! l 4 01 W (L10 QJO IJS Sm 1W 8
v/ 12 .
,gi,,.- o . . ,. ..i i - > . > > i . .
;U '. ,hp!; :.: .;.; j i, . . . .: ,g, ;"
I
./..; .j..@a,; '?"
.t :.
- a. n. . ;.j] .yuu. .:: .APPUED Bast MOTION - VERTICAL COWONINT - $$$
.i , ... !.!"r.
.. l., t' u. ,
. ,.._- .,,. , n. . . . . . .
. m. . . sAsic sats,,, or o,VNAmC . o.,,,,,,, . n PROPERTit$
,;g .'*t"" . . . ,".. . ". a." . a g 3 * .d .o. . h .. o. . i... a. m . n ..
i
. . . ~
.p". ' ~.~F
,. q.1.
u '
'~'
g ;.t t p p "...
- -i . n, o.., ' . ' ' .o,' n,' .' . ' ' . ' ~.'.'.t , . . .. -. .i.. , ' '. .. *,;..* *.. . 3 ' ' .~'~
...l. .
s.
- o. . .
. 1. ,... .o.
. !, .n... A
.m- .--
i ,... .,. o, !
. ~ Z
%, . ,.e ... . 4. .i.h.,.
4
.J . ..,_ . . .-
~ . . ..
v o,.
.. m -ft
.... . , . .!h . n. . . l l .,
.g. . . -
tI i , . . . . , . , .
,,n . . .. . _
g j .n ,. .I.3 o. ... o.. ... ., . ., l 4 .!
. g-. ..
1
. .,....p.
.. ~.- 4
.g,
.- o. ). n 6 .n . ..- .
9g ; . g .. . .
- 3. 9 , ,. 4__. o. .
.~~
EgF g
+
8
,.n...n... o
....t....
- u. . . . , 1, 1 . . .
{i.! .!., o . . . ...
.pa.... .
.L,,.
..,n. .
i
- u. ,, . .. . . . . . .
t o.
. . . . . g.,
,1, . .. o. . . ......
._.- w g o
<Wg ^
gu 44t ;... . ~ .. . , . . .,.. . . . ,
. . u. ,.. . ,
,. .. ..~ .. .
e._1.!. , . . 1 .. . y a p
=
, 14 h.. -.
,., . . , . .3..
u
. a.
..t... !....
- t a..
.1, 1.m iI .o. , . l,, .,.!.. . . . . . JU mW 4 a. m o c E
' g t.,t , " ' ' * ** * '
1 , 7 - _ g ", i , . g
' ' , '. g ..
al -' .' ' ' '" ' " .."I. 'd u '. 3>E
~' ' ' ~~
'...m' ..o. o' ' '
.,' ,"..', e'. c n o. m .o .. ' . ' l .
~
ZEm j ...
!! t . .
e
- i , 10.
i i,il ... oi ,
..i .....w i l, 11 ,. ., ..
g4_ m n
.o. .o.. o, . o. p. . .
. .n. ... . .. . .
...._. _.1...n.
..-o.:..
o. a. w Z y.
-.. .+
t,.
. ,1, .. .
. . .n .... _ . .
.....~ w
.,g ?..t. ..,1,.,
M '""' I.t.
.. . -. , .. ., ... .- . o t 'I..
..{. H"
*E.2 <d aE .0*
.. . ... . . - . . ..- .f '**'
?P! ' ' * ' I >t "...
jte Cm
-t; p+ 9 A t 't 't
- ~
u 't
+ .'. .*.. -. ,
- .1 4 . c1 . .. .'. .. .. ;.. .h.;, .# . ' .. .'..,
. s--..;,
. . 3. gu. .,*I ... UaZ
~. . _ ., . . . . .. .. . ,
e .o 1t h .. .... . ..,. n. .~.
..s. . - ..
s N. -. . . ,
. ++.-
s w
; 1!. . . . ... 4...
.m 1.,4.
o .. 4t . . . ... ... - ra, .o
..n...
> a O ,,, <
It4.o .4..... . .. . . . . m,,
...... . _....~
+g _t..
...... , .... .,. .o.1.5 .,..
4, g ,. !. ....
+1t y.....
.o
- n. o
. y9 ;, - 99.. .
. u- +g+... ... , . . . .3........ . . ....
..~ . ..~.< g
.g. . 7_ ,o, . . .
.u.
- e. 6
.gt .3.+. e
.o..~ .--
4 . .n . ... .
... . . g p. o... .. . .-- J ag
,#- +.. .n..
. ,o, ,..,.l...
+n . . ,.o..
4 . . - .. .o. . w..
.,.l.. . . . . . .. .t; ..
!+. ..,o 9 .... .
.. ,n.
ou 1. o.
,,. . N.
.. W n.
o n . . .
..n. ... ~~.., ..
- u. o a.r-1.-,.. , . .. . . 4 , ...- .-
%~.1w . o. , .m _ .
on - 4 t o. . . 1.+n+. ). .
.n. ..a,, .:
,, . . . t %. ..a o. w .... . .:.-
++- +
%,..as. .
. . .. l ... . , . . , . u. . ..,+l-. .uo
. ,o, . . .
.o._.. .... .,.. .I. . . . .. .. . .,
4 + m .. . . . . . . . m + . . . . . .J. t gu..
...t. . o +. ... ip.r
. . . . . ... .... ,.-E
.~ . -
- 4 1
.o..,.. !+,... .... .o... ... .. .. . . . .. d- 4... .~J t ..o. u". t. < ;. !---m -o i ..% ..1.
- ! 4 - 11
. . .g.. ..
h.. 8 L..o. . 0 = Lat M (L10 0.30 1Ao app tm PE R100 - StCopet RESPONSE SPECTRA (SPf CTRAL DAMPING RATIO: 5*/,) OF APPL IE D , e
/ \ BASE MOTIONG FOR SUCM ROCW BRANCH SLOPE, REPRESENTING SAFE
,l SHUTDOWN E ARTHOUAME basic SET OF OYNAMIC MATERIAL PROPERTIES
- \* _/
~
D 7 90 *D P'Y A
.h J\\ e dm 1 o
O O O 0.50 - ER uNO v AT cY YN M RO ER IES g } 4 50 . . . . . . . 0 4.0 8.0 12.0 16.0 20.0 24.0 28.0 32.0 36 0 40.0 44.0 0.50 R-4 R T NA C R ERTl5 l Cc@ l d f h ! l ; b it .du A i u - c@ n
] i 8 '
Eil
- c.25 4 50 . , . . . . . . . . .
O 4.0 8.0 12.0 1&O 20.0 24.0 28JD 32.0 38.0 40.0 44.0 S E Sf 7 R3Q I, b ~O UJ CP IL , YELLOW CREEK NUCLEAR PLANT PRELIMINARY SAFETY Added by Amendment '.3 FIGURE 2.5-66(T)
g 1A dh . o.d
'il ;jM !. .'; (; ; '. 'I'l"J h i d i ij !t1.'I~ .:I. T .I
/' Il l,
, , ..i. ....i ...
i JUl ;1..; s...6 . . ..., .,1-... . . . , APPutD 4A$t MoisON = MORT 20NTAL COMPONINT UPPER 40UNO W ARIAflON OP dynamic PROPERTitt
' h d. i.951h . .
v +. . +. ..
. u .
,NM 'j(l ;; ;.: .1: !! P 3.. ";4 '., ' . . . s
~'~'
,..t ! ' .M. 1. , ; . .,z . ,semos o.mp.,is,= 6%.
.I
" " + * *8'6 y?" *;.....* * * * '
. , ,_~
i .
;*;; g.
*g6g , .
l.;{.. ... - ..-
".~
8 ' y
. . b. . . . ,... . ~ . .. p, . , .... . . . , . ,
. . +
+4
, . . ,i., .
46.: ..p, ec. . -
- o. . . . . ~ . ..i.,, .u. .... +4,.
..:~+ ..o...-
+
, , te , . .
,1 ...,i, i 9..
I4 4. .. . 4. .p. 4
.,.44.+. .+e,. w
. . . . . . . - - 4 .
. 4.o. .+ t - ' , + + . :":? **** : :***-****
- 6. +6 , .
++
*. .. , . +.i .
.en. .
..t,. ,. .
9 .,.i .......r
..l .
. ..r..,
i
' ' .,p. . . ...,. } l . .e., s.-.. .-. .. .* '
li .,.j g . .
.i. .=..
t- ,..
-..a
.i e
. . J.-
- i
.. . i ..
.e
. m
..o.. . .s -.o.
. . .. ,, .I.. .
^ --
lJ .+.%,s : : : i.di.n.. . i.
- n. .
I o, g
- o. i
., i ., .
a ... p.t
,g
,1 o, .
,eil
. a
.. a
,61 p
r
._..+, ...
, ..i..i . .
il y . . . 9,
...,. ..t.._. . .4-_ _ .,y.. ....,.,i.
. L.- ...t. ,.~. .
$ .1... .. . . .,..
- .. !.j-
.- ,. t. n. . n ...,
!, .,, , .. .. .~ .
1...n.4. 8 u - o ..,
.,i . .. .
!. .,..,. 1., 5, ,,o ... . . ... . ~. I ,,
.,. ! l. .. .,u,,.., ..
,6 m...
-. o 4 ,
I i! a
. , ... t .,. . ....
4. 1 , ..t. ... I-, , L ... .. ... .... 1,. . . .. - 4,.. . . +, .... .. _ . o _
, s. .., .... . _
n,
.mo, , , .. . .
I ~, , ,- . . ..
., o.
., t ,
,n
, , ,, p. . . c. . g. . _
3 , _. .
. .f,... . .. -. y ; , ,
y .... . . . . .. . . .
,o... ,. ...... .. .. , .. .. .
. .. . . ,u.,..
- m. ..
. . . . ...,4.,.
44.1, i. . .. _ . . . .. . .
+..
+ . . ... . . . . . . . . .o. . . - -.. ...y . . . . . . . -
+.w..
of . * :
.o..., ... . . .&,... -w m. 4 .-.%.
.ir 4 + ., .. ...,
i .......-
..,e -u4. . , , . ., 4 .. .
....e.....
... o . .... ..r. . . . . . , . ,
_ . ... 4... ,.o! ..y
.o - o. . ., .,
.. +. . .
. . i . .
.. n. .o
. q . . .a y.
m
~
. .., .. . . . 9. . ., . n.~o.+ ..n.o : . g #. , . ... .e.., . , ,,l 7. .4.i,...q, .. ji ..g.j .q..
o + g . .. .j,. p
#1. + .
. ,..n, .,,o ... .. .
. o. .o..,,,,..
o n+ r,. g ... . . . I. t.6 4.Il.! . .
.1... .--. . . .... .. .. .
1., . .
...4... ,... .
..-. 1, ,,..n.
. .. f . .. .4 14 ,
- _ u
- : : #+++ . . .
- 4. .
,e 7... . ,.
4 44
.,t,.,.,...
1,.-o. . . .. . . .. - , - . .. 4 . o.
...m.
.ggo ...m.-. . . g. .. 4 ..
4
,...,!+. ,
. . , .. . .p. m .- . ....1.
u,. .. .. .. ........ o. ..l.
.... o... , ..
. 34, - +m. . . ... .- . . .. . . -
4 . . . . ...-. .
.g4 _4 . , . , . ,
..o
. - ,4..,. , u, . 6., a..
o.... . ... u.. .. . . . . . .o. .og _.- fr ... . .... .
,4+ ! _.
...4...-. .i.n . . . .
. o. . .
... .,o
. o. 6 . - .. . 4..,- ..... .. .
- .... . . .~ . . ...
+
. .i . . . - !. 4! o.r . l .i .. . . . . ....
4.,,.4. .. . . 4 u, ,.m +. + + + .
...u..,..... m...,... .
.... ,.e.
,~., .,. . . . ., ...
++a
+..
. , . .o.. ,
.. . ~ . ..
6.. p... . o ,.
.n... .o... .
.~. .- .- .
... 4.~.-
. .o . . .
... .~ .7 . .... (. . .... .m..
...~ .+o .. . .._
.. . .o. ,,
- o. .. . .
+ .,
. n,.e ., ...
. . ..o. 3
. a, .
o .. . .. .,, . .... .. .... ,
..oa ....,.
..I n. . ., .. g
.n..
.I
+.
.,. .o...
. . . . . ,s.
u, o....
..g4 .! o.
... i!..
+;..
.., .g . .1. . o. . . .. . .. .o.
,o
- o. o ..
.+ .,.. . .
.,f.
.. ,..i. ..... . . .
\
6 03 ale que tsB 3ae itse
'[O 4 01
-n.... , ., .,o .. . . . . . .
.-- . --o ,, ..
- n. .,-,. -. q- . .. .,
3.., g ...& T L.t r.,6 . ..i. . . . . .. .. .. -
,o o...,. - . . ...... ,. -.,, . , , o, .. .,.
o APPuto EASE MOTI -V L -
. + ++* u., .c.
o ...
.* * . UPPER-GOUNO VARIATION OF DYNAMSC PROPERTitS .
..o,.~c. ....-.4, u .o
. e..... oo u,.
- m. ... .
. .- ...a. . "r I 4.. o ,. , o, 6 1, . i I . no .. . ,
, ,$.serwe.i . . , , D.e.mp.no =n m: ,%6 .
..Ii .... ..
+o .p . '!
o m, . ..
..yt .
..-~~
.p. .. i..
i
- gttt "" "' ~ "" * * ~ ~ ~
Mg . .
.". ' ' '. t. " . ."'".'
u 3;; e ?!+ .M i *. . o,. ".' . . ,, . ". ". W . , . . .... -- ie.+..; . . o. ....!
=
- o. . , 6.
, o, o. ...e. , +..
+ + . - . .
. . . ..o I. o, o. 6 . . ,i .., ...... .
, . . -o,. . ,.
p 4 4 ..,. . . . . .
..., p 1,...
.o. .
1 ! .- .
. . . . . . . .c h +,+. 4
+..
. . , . ....o.
. .+,. ,, .
- .. .o..., .,,
.,...,..o..
. .49 ... .. +
. . . .. . . . o, o, .
.. ~ . . ,. 6 ._., , ,.... .
_4 .,!...... u..
++ ,- ,.
.... . no,
.r..
sm + . . . I ,. . . . .-
..t,
. . .o o.
4 o. +
- 9. ,e.
g . I ,+ ... ...-4..
. . u. .
. . .a. - . . .
I 0A &
,- . us. , ,- ....----
..no .- .
.o$4
- .: . . .c . .. - , -
1,, +...
. . . on no ....e
.o' ,* .,.. .-.. ... .
. .o p . . .. .. . . 4 .. .
'.".g " . . ' .. .*o".. " , , ' . ' ' ' . . '.. '.o"'. . ~ '. . " . . '
..~ ~ '_~
~
w ! 1,w+ "o.u ".um l ~~'.
. '. ~ . ' .~ .w'..~ ' .' "
o,. - - -n. . o . , + -;- . n .. .. , . . ... .. , ....
+ o+ y.. o
,. ..... ... o .. .
..a n o.
- o. ... o.. . . . .. . + . . .
n, . , , m.. r. _ .
- o. . , ..... ..o
, 4.. w.
+
.. ... . ~.. .. 4.... . . . .......-
...... -u.
u n .
- s. -
. ...e... .
GA .- 4
,o'... ..u. . -.. ,. 4 g.o ....
. . n.
. . f .-. .. o, a +o, .
4 ... , -. .. .. . ._
. . u. .4... 4 .. ..
,....i.... .
- o. ,4. e... ..,.
- n. .i. p o
(. ..~
.Iew. p. . o.m.,-.
4 . 6 ,. 4, .... ... . 4 :..
.v,... +. , \.. ... .,
. . . , . 1
. n t. ..,p... .... .
,. o-r . p-s i..
4
- t. po, ....
g 4 + y 3_ ..S4 , p . ... , .
+.. ...,4 .,.e... . . ...,
6, . 4.. ,n q. .... .. ... . . . i .6 .. .. , u4 .... . . o.m 4. .s ,, , . .. .. . . .
- 4. ....
+ ,,. I
+ . . . .u m. . a* .
. , '-i,,",4 .. .
..L. . ... .. .. .
- .. . . + .. . . .
.. 4, . .. .
9 +.4 ..++u, .. .. .. .. .
'~i..
- 4. ,
o I+. , . . spu ! . .
.i I, .: , . , , ... .,
. 46 .., 44.....
I- ., . .s 9 f r4
, .i ....
; .n. . ..,4.. .
... . . .e 9e. a .i
...s .n.,
g) ,. :.. .,- ol. _ . .. .. ..~..
. n. _
- c. .o.
6.. . . .- . . . .
..o-6.
4.. . .o. . .. .
.o ..
,... . . . . _ . 4.o.
9
...n ..
. ..I .4 .- .. ...
~ . .. ,. .-...... . , . .... .- -.
N,m. .., .-
+ . . .
6..
.o
. , ..o.
.+ . .
. : .,_ + .1..
.9.- . s ,o. .. .
4+..4, . : .
. . .g9 . ... .+..
. - . .i.u. o....
. i _ . g- ,e i.-%l.. IH
.3-.r .1,.l. .g. He-,
031 0.03 4 10 (LM 1Je 3m tem Pt RB00 - etCONOS YELLOW CREEK NUCLEAR PLANT RESPONSE $PECTRA (5PECTRAL DA MPING RATt0 * $%) OF APPUE D PRELIMINARY SAFETY
/^g
- BASE MOTIONS FOR SUCK ROCM BRANCH $ LO PE , RE PRESE NTING ANALYSIS REPORT
\ / SAFE SHUTOOWN E ART HOU AKES UPPE R- BOUN D VARIATION OF v
onAuic urTERiAt PRcPERTits FICURE 2.5-67(T) Added by Aniendment 13
D.eees Geneestar tvilene A m FwePed Grete
. EI. 6J0 0 N Aeaumed Grensnd Water
\ m- -
g'g -
+s-[surfare El. lit 0 600 -
, ?'% '
e46
. m y ,
h480 8 400
~
~
\ N rg ul
% rn s
~
Crvehed $ ten *
*~ 8EDROCx sw 42. - - -
, 400 ~
~
=-
, , , , , , , . I i > > >
-e -aw -m - 250 -m -150 -1" -58 8 '8 '" '" "
D15YANCE FROM TOP OF SLOPE - FE ET C) 9 (j N* i b '*
\ N 600 '
\ N 1
p \ % % w aeo - i g N s aeo - \ x 5 ~
~_
- 4.o .-
v % %
$ 420 .--
w a
- 380 -
, , , , , e i e ! a ' ' '
. _m -m -2.o -m _ iso -im -so o so im tw =
DISTANCE FROM TOP OF SLOPE - PEET
\ .U
l s20 sm 4e0 p ._ 4e0 N nn ~ o, inm, _ 0 EL 424 Pumpeng Station
~
.-__T Z ZZ_$e w s. Et 414 .
' ~ "
8EDROCK j 380 f E I 1 3 i j g g g [ g g g 250 300 350 400 450 500 %0 600 650 700 750 800 8% 900 h\ g\Jgg I 1 l l 4 s20 l 5m
~
*8 s
460
*x _
440 420
~_
~ _
400 3eo t ! I ! f l 3 g g l 250 300 350 400 450 500 s50 600 650 700 YELLOW CREEK NUCLEAR PLANT FINITE ELEMENT REPRESENTATIONS OF SECTION "A-A" THROUGH SLICK ROCK BRANCH SLOPE Added by Amendment 13 FIGURE 2.5-68 (T)
0 60
'\j A - CREST MOTION - HORIZONTAL COMPONENT 0 25 - .. _ . __ .
}
G I i l
.' l '..
l i Ono .; f .. k -.o l ll I d 8 A- .
.(s W
{df jr'"mer' l , J
; H L! i I j g a
V j c W. 13 i
)i o _ -__ ._ _ _ _ _ _ _
-o 50 ,
0 4.0 80 12 0 16.0 20.0 24.0 28.0 32.0 36.0 40.0 44.0 TIME - $$CONOS
. .Z f = f N n We"~
~
g q( ID (h uI
-m
= 4 llf ff%: ... =
}
-N:M. .
> N. ,**N m
{ g _ 3 *= .... --
*=
+ - -
n Na'
"' ~
~ " ~
i."....n. o. m m "... , " ~ ** * *
- 0.50 APPLifD BASE MOTION - HORIZONTAL COMPONENT 0.2s -- --- - - - - - - - - - -
0.00 - i .)
, l h
- u. . . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
l
-o.60 ,
0 4.0 80 12 0 16.0 20 0 24 0 28.0 32.0 36.0 40.0 44.0 TIME - SECONOS TIME HISTORIES OF APPLIED BASE MOTIO N AND COMPUTED CREST MOTION, HORIZONTA L CO MPONE NT OF SC BASIC SET OF DYNAMIC MATE RIAL PROPERTIES p l ( ) PRELIMINARY SAFETY
\s' ANALYSIS REPORT FTCliRE 2.5-69(T) l Added by Amendment 13
[ \ 0.50 i / b A - CREST MOTION - VERTICAL COMPONENT 036 - -- - F j 0.00 v y 4<3
, r m' an nl
$ I I l ' kI vu w n I J !I ! l-v' L'e-
-0.29 -
-4.50 ,
0 4.0 8.0 12.0 16.0 204 24.0 28.0 32.0 38.0 40.0 44.0 ow
-- . -{ tll'.'**7 :=~..'=. -
D
*~
me 5 .se--
, ~~ _ ,,,
- '" y, ***~% 7a _
7_j .=-
.ae -
.a Ns me -
especca ,m
'*~~.v."w..., o o, so,, ...,
0.50 APPLIED B ASE MOTION - VERTICAL COMPONENT 0.25
$ l i !
a o,00
- w. .j i.J w f I w-L -
"O bl a
- k ' h-l
-0.50 0 4.0 s.0 12 0 16.0 20.0 24.0 28 0 32.0 38.0 40.0 44.0 TIME - SECONDS TIME HISf0 RIES OF APPLIED BASE MOTION AND COMPUTED CREST MOTION, VERTICAL COMPONENT OF SSE, BASIC SET OF DYNAMIC MATERIAL PROPERTIES
('~) YELLOW CREEK NUCLEAR PLANT PRELIMINARY SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 2.5-70(T) Added by Amendment 13 l
Densi Generator SM
/
' j n
Fwushed Grae i EL 620.0 c t A ~ .-
-{ _ [ Surface EL 619.0 y_
g v 7 - - ,, ,,, x . b# ~
~'-
= -p * '
st des I 400 -
'_ =
* '88 g 1
V g% l .4 .
,_'--- d g 420
. 3,o _ a i i i e i i i l i i i i e
-400 -ano -aco -aso -2o0 -iso -100 -s0 0 so 100 tso 200 so !
DISTANCE FROM TOP OF SLOPE - FEET 6.0 N ) N 40 3
'\
s k
- Y N N tf N N' E 3.0 \
ti \ -\ N V D g \ y Along EL 486 i l t- y 2.0 !
. y Al
} g n i 1.0 T ong EL 405 N --l l \ i N 0 , 9$ = Alang Ei. 430.5 Q qq , s 10 --- a , %, N
! M -
a a
. s % ,,,, %
i {z 06
#p 5
EL 486 4 [ l N j p# Along EL 495 f l % > ~ j %. O ' I 0.5 k 0.4 / - Along El 486 j
/
i 0J
^*'a' E' *
/- #
p U n .. ,/ i -O /
/
Oct -- ,
- 9 0
- 130 .too -50 0 90 100 150 200 250 DISTANCE .
l l l u0
- s00 480 y -
e
- n. 7:=- a- -
~
,1. ,,--- ----+-- __ --_ r _- _ - _- -A .s. ei ei.
am
.a.
8EDROCK - 380 300 360 400 450 500 MO 600 650 700 750 800 850 900 i i l I i N 1 . S
'N j l l \ \
4
.__[_._ Q\0 $ -*% a cao. -*% a dio 30 s \
3 __ _. N _ __. p . _ _ _ g d) Ns N.N Ds W% _ -: ~ .--__ g f-Alorig EL 410
%.N w,N _
s,N. . . _ _ . _ .. _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ . ___4_._ -._ s* q % N I d m_ .
- 7 _ ___. _ _
^* " C'j 'N' ,L- Added by Amendment 13 w g-g--- --g n 410 4_ 4 [_ _,
g YELLOW CREEK NUCLEAR PLANT _ _\ _ _ _ _ .
\ STATIC STRESS DISTRIBUTION ALONG
\- SELECTED HORIZONTAL PLANS
__ . _ _ . . . ~ - ~~ \ ~~ ~ THROUGH COMPACTED EARTHFILL
\
\ FIGURE 2.5-71 (T) o = 00 0 o .0 .oo 0 100 m ROM TOP OF SLOPE - FEEY
I l O Diesel Generator '
** "8 r
i Forushes Grade El s20.o l AW Ground Water Controt Surface EL 519.o s2o . __
, .. _ __ P _,__
.-,r,, , .,
' Et 4es sm % ,,,
\. . ,
. U 480 '
)
\
2 - EL ass j i 4.o _
% % fill
$ - A i j"
est- .EO h N "" 3eo .- , i i i i i i i i l i i i i ; iso 1
-400 -sso -300 -250 -200 -iso -100 -so o so too 200 OISTANCE FROM TOP OF SLOPE - FEET 2.s -
3 2.0 fJ) d E [$ i.s Along EL 46s q a 8 [s% - s 47 i 'N [5 Along EL 49s
% I N
N o.s
! N- N'N, i
0
-250 -200 -1so -100 -so O so too Iso 200l OISTANCE FROM TOP OF SLOPE - FEET I
DISTRIBUTION OF EQUIVA 1 SELECED HORIZONTAL ' MATERIAL PR0oERIT h tc i u O~ otto
D us g 500 480 s 460 g_ _
% Firushed Grade intake -
440 _ El. 430.1 El. 424 Pumping Station .
~~~~~ ' * * - ~ ~ '
_.4______,._~
,I r W~S. El. 414 420 El. 410 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~'
8EDROCK - 380 1 I t I t t I t I E I I I I 250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600 650 700 750 800 850 900 CJong El. 43(15 Along El. 410
- ~
- g ,~
* % *N s ~
s N 250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600 t50 700 750 Added by Amendment 13 _ENT UNIFORM SHEAR STRESSES ALONG 1 M. ANES, SSE, BASIC SET OF DYNAMIC YELLOW CREEK NUCLEAR PLANT FIGURE 2.5-72 (T)
H [*h 4 Z i, i
?'
i R V i,1!HHHulnonT! G wjn g . pin J
- : ;D.gA ! id
,n.a .e gIi.i~%ti!pl di'lli :q qii W
.r.p! .: .
qq W
$ m.
dh l9p
%lllip i.O q.! y .
j l. 2tl jl i n! ; j n 5 _ n. > n WMHi ,d.i lt.p.
>l
- d. g . .
t II ot. I l, i 4 ; i h EHb ,.4 u..j j' d' b. .i '.' . ,..l..i .;.j ;tw;y. i i . -1:: i i ;l;:. :-jt lif: 111l
;ff. I.'il! l, j ,'
- [ j !. lj ! ilI- E ^
.' o's; :t,,oh's !
}is:
** . ' f:
P t-
. m
..u J. 'm . . .t"-
HM a 'i'* ( LA. O S a ta nh g!,i n
. c. ; a p:. uy W v c r ;
- * , b; u p.a h: m H; dj y r..n g ':;o 1.. .: : n a
J 4 0,, i ut: i. : w t. :m
" . .. .. . : . .tr t e en e E P'* !**"" T '
~
,$. .Rio 'df W
.=- -- ..< .-
h, O MW N E
, d .
d
, . o,. .. o ii!.: .U. , .m .g. .ii? : ..... , . . m.m :!h .fi!! IH,i
,! !.mli
. !iN- ,mdu '!!! Nii !!!! !!!! ll4 !'!ii -)> g I m 'o e lkpl' -l i: l' it'-
um i Hf li! ' I I L l . l;
- i ;
I
]i ! -
no p 'i fi yII 9' n j. E, e
. : i n;.ih 1 i d,
- l. .I qo J, .e 10 :n: e:,:t i ai '.fn t h : 1yl l
;I' . I; , 1 ll i I
- ZE M_
y<m
. 0 n.m.
... I ..::
ll!. y! N - v.i.- : h ;
. ..I.u. .. ,.! !.
i - -- 1; i i W> Z IT- S S un 9N Ol! !!'i Y!m 5'S
-"._..Ni: 5 N N i z- $! :
$.r h"p;
- i E' d 0 h.i i:+ i@fjih8
~ r M + ?? ??@t ;;?1'; g* *t-- q: trmt :$. -
i+*! 'm :ip i .:! WgJ N m M H H ! it;*i iii i H7p:lht:!m u e" iE Hi: h idilii ili ii-!
~
t
- ti on :h;i! -
E< 4 >. D .O
# ,q I- H E; **b -.
.. .... *t
.U M. IM: h . m. . j;t** , ,...
*; Mj:
*
- gJg t2 8 't .i
'*t***h d :a l
- ; ~***
+ '
! y
- .,4 _ . m. ..= . ._ , . .;m.:,m,.!=;u" v."..".
M*J: -
.9..u. .. ,u. . .$ M -
" . . ...T ". ."
gE< 94 'o
- k. W o... T.
h.
..o
,.t.
.o , .o. i . } . . .nr...
......m... . . . . . . 00 .o on .. . . , ...
.o.-. . .
..o o..
. .."'t**
. +, , , , ,
l . . ...
..o.
......... e
..+.
o. 4 4... .. . m. .
+
O o.
.o o
E E . a a
+ *.o4..
~.. . . .wa
.a
,,, .o -
d *<
.;. ... O.o
..I.. n i :,.. 1 g ..,. ...
m,
..o n.. .,.
.. . ., ; o.
J
.cl.,b....
o ~o....o w
. . o 4.
. . p.on oo.,n, . . ombn ,
.h,
.. .. j.. . .o. .
. .;.. .64 .o y
. o.
o.. ,.. ,9 ..
..o. ,
a m ..%. . .~.y.,
-.a.-
. . . .. . o ., , . .. . .
e a e i ip 4H f4' u
} @ -H.ni . 4 ' . o *. ht; 'N4 % W dp
..e "e . ,s .h.m. N, g i
, ,m . 4 .: . - l
.m .!
4'o" m.i hi lg.!jl jib % Ni' b. ' O :i M b bb e
- q. g / w;
' .p
- l. %.
di- - *
. 4
,p op IN ... . , . , .n 9,1 .
.b .o.
.. .' ."u ..'
4 eE O ' A,, :.e p< U'T,AM. . m.1,T. 8 p Jo. n r _o .u, p, r. n' . . ir ,.
; . o z.
- m. n: : n. . ,. e -
Ml ![nt. 3 ii di !ii ir n in i t
@ *i m /
up 'E ' Hit >
.i t > i e m n: "" e mi Wi .-
- y. a. ! y.
am mlinM.fi n '. id. .h: !,[ g"a lM. } h- H. i. },i i t. . r, -
- i. H. g. f. i.
- n. h e. .
.h: . . n. i. i lh:.
. i l d i. ! !!!! ! !! U! !iii !Ui a.*. W!
!, is i:! !!!/ M :'
!!! !!r so8
!! Hi j
, r a iJ:!,!
.c
.:.! h!! il! 'W. !!!!~.J. [
iii. !H :* . l,! 8 . . . :- 2 .: : '
+
.r gy t--+r . . . .r* +
1O 4 g 4 i
- ad !!E . co
....+: .se.rr h . ::-B t'-***
.-l :.
[ : *
*+tt.
1; : 77.*t r - i.i.
.:.. w wE
- i. i'
+h:
t . e
- 4 s : : : a: .:- -
f f; th H l N. i i *Hi tt. . ' ih,rM- %
- 4 H {'j r i :: ::j .
utf31-[. F,i j .a ![- 4M "i4:; - y ul. +M4s
."t, , i 11 t
9 i- t ;; Ni im 90 in HF. ;e ' u.i e :in 4 N_ hi! un r- dir W %du aY::s:' m: w 5., t r ik J u a g
- f. tit
- s 1 p n 4
4 t:t "tj 1 ! H .li Ai fit; r; i . !
.: p:p
,t 4 p: n:;
tt*?
- m im-r t*~e -
n :J
;b .:.-- e y" **--
- m .-
m i !
@. h.
! un nn %
m &- . - u a
<2 o
g $ g.3
- tO* di .!!
.t-H
!! !! i
- m t h if i Nh ! Hi! Uh - :
l',:,y .m.
- H .Hg -Hi ii:i ! .
Ph- . 4 r j :. ;p: m rn: .o ,: m. M I a: n..::b.i: 4 :;n :
... n ma
.m:n: !!/ :;:q " 'o
.Lo a-
.u.: : _. -.p "t :p: ..!
. .a e..a . . ,.a..i :..: n h.:.
- n :n: :!m u
(- .n:L9 : : w
. ; .m.: .: .! . :.a: r. '...-o..n. .
- .nn:". n> . ; ".
- o-o so
- o. .o. J,.m, . n.n. :. p l, . .
...., . h.
.n.;
.,.1 .. i. .:. u.n. .u..n.. n.,_u:._. .. .. a... . . . . ....
s m. t. d".b. i . . . .n.L: . .
-.. .. 1. . . . .T1
,.... 3 U
3 yz oi d, .l t. bo o. m ch., .m o,..
.o
. . . , ..,o .o?,4;.%. .. . .
.c
.o. . r. ...
. ..+- z u*
i"s p I e it i 4Hf "4 ttH H, i.t?14 *i i '*d He- * .o* - . v. D . h* "b .e~ on . O b. 6.h ., +to 49 he p' o - ,e * .e. ". o n. oo
," .m
'j o q.o u 4++. ~o 4
w. o .. m .o .
..,t i ..!.
+
i
- h. ..
=
.H. o . . . .o.
i . do at. o ~ W d a8
,: H.e pl's i ; H t'F," - t .
wo. e : e,y i H t HH H 'H; :W m' do 4j o qu; ol; 4
; t i o. '"
- l, l H f d' i: nn di ",
s m'ne
,. . .+
da i # p q i 9 ou n. q i H2 a ei 6.. on ". .m r. , . m. en. ol. e c.t. = bI !p l i
.9 .
.o * *!
l
.! f Ik < 0 lli N.! d ! 'i! ! '
"r :i': .b h ;
b' ' h ."t" . . ' ' N$n
!,d 'j 6.i! ;;!'.',
i ij j ll ij i 'l i i Hji ' .i ii
!: Hi o t : l'ji :!; il ' s i i i ';i! ii! ji i : p ;' i:l .. 8:. - u. 4
;y: i fll .
d' N l ' Ft
+F i k' 't t--*+~ .'
'8'.
.i .'I:.
. i: M 3 'E"'
f ! H f ! 8 'it-ft I'h' :; f..,R. I. 'I 9l'
.! !. : h.4+
? it;f ; ii ~ 8 b. M
, ., . = ; . -t* : l. l ' 7I' iF 5 :
,!e' e
.. i ta8 4
;,n . . .
g uj (( t us t .:
. . 'h. ;; .
+- l g! 'I ip .
- .g.,a :
- 1. n
..U.
i ; ; .
.:.;. nj::j h:: i.81:
- t
-- 'j! to +- :jl "
1:: -
- ". . l- E W g e
;6 t : :; .. : ; t ; : ::.
! r- .' ; nr . u ::j:
W n: :*:n z;; : ,, ":t :
... :nt*.m;. e
. .;. : ;a
.n
- : L'! 4.: :
r
.:a -
.h: !':n ::.r
" " .:f un ::[. : $so
- ?
*t+tM~;;f 1: Sr*.+. * .- . .
- . "."'.p'.
M:; *; - . . .... . . . .
.. . ... .. k eo "
...[...1: iM* :':- *:: d.
-. d. 'o
-. l ,..
. t. M.3. " - .
- m. . . . . . 2 . M. :a':: ' .: ' ';*t '.: *_ .
;3. !-
1 .2 r* t,.. O si i dt ' j +! i : ll i I ' il :1!! +j }fi: i [ d .l i s 'li .1 - jii! O i - A 1 .;l : :, iii! r.it ?! *! ily s[j' f i 4'1i 5 h'i H~! ; w. Hb yi .: to: r yl .a % t ro s H' ! -+j
.e+p :-,ol p.. . il j, Ind *
- js idtp as .j 4 }hi 4+ + uF +F F+ ir{HE
&p' re.- 4t. o 4f.;. ..r4 .[+! -:4! w v:1 , .i i -:if
;. ! 5 ;
- . . i t.,.: '-
ri : l <..r i..: 8: ; -p ,- at: :: t. rJ'- - -
- r
- j :n: d *m .,:
.m ,
!!' INI 4++f
*i t *4 I' f f *t -
Nl Mt 1*h 'p +I NI i Nl
++ r!
i! ! ! l l! i I! II'
- r il: !! .
+ t-t :***
,!d l p!El bh f $ !.h fi j' t t **4+ yt;****r+t.. dl3
- f blIll i : t i p w "3, **
a: U W k
=
*tp!-"? ? ***t t .,i
- 3 *h H llH H/ih! l lit: HD** hb it 7' t' M"d"** *H : i n.. iH HH ih :
!!.! !Hi it!i i!U :iH
' M 'H! !Ni **il! f!!:
.... i...... M
. pg y. p.g un un ap :, *]a. .
. .L..[i.p d, IH:, !m' *< !H'
' A, ,
k: n! u. .:. 1p". d, b. .- :d, a. . . .n.an
- p,:::"n: ; H a, . d.:. ."p.* d. .:
u u:M u unu a"unw 1,i- n .-
+ *-
au ?- - n a, n.q' ,n.".:
..u.n, .7
, . m. .v.
, u rl:. : r. T m " . " ..n".
.u. o n ;.T : .:.
"h.r!.d. n.
. . . . .~. o. .un. . .oo . a. 1. .;.:
.. .... . . . o . o. , '.n..
o
. m
- 2. . . .N.
.h. o o.
i.' r a.t': n..r, .L.r.;;.
. . o..
=
.o;
. , . .n
,o r n . . . .
,. .i . o . . h, Io .4, . .o..r.. . . .
.,o
..o
. . . . + .. . . . .... ..n . . . . ., ,
it} i .I,f i i, aj) ie o m 4ql. d. . . 4n. o .i a: on . , o. op . .. b. ! . on .o.- o m. .or , . ., ,
.a. . . . , ...
o n, 5.o
.n. t 4
~ e J e i , 4 is hg. ,it h ..ti id6j i.t .tle 'ti. . f.4jth op H .ni i o o.
.H .tv .., on tit H H. a .tf h, .?*
e
.q.I 41,s '"a
.g
. } .1,{ .t.%h $ 1.4 ., .!.$ .
4 .
.'.'.i ._h.'..l . .i i.f.5 )...
; 6 . 1 1.u.
.. .ii ,~. ;.'(. 68 4 4 J.!' *p
.Y.t.f. 6 . (46 .'l. lje. Itf (s ga 49. .4t 99i e4 llll.ml4 0 0u.f.s II 5lfi fiht .li? i !! ttf[ 'f>4 lif 4!ilq,I ' 8 hit fs ' l' 8 Ala? *!i * 'f. bH dth 'H8 *bl '3*A f f*t'
- tit 4 *h *ty $ht '
.l:- .' de .i .i 9 ti
~} ,d,t d.i.f .t.p .i, lodun 3o .ti' Hf dr ! nh '% m HP ":;r oP e'*h' ", "
M b'i h M + k'! tt ";+t ' n-lh-
'@ * " ' ith M' 'M 'm itt tttt ++
r* r- ** y* " ' + 'd+ ** ** P +9-if
+ + -
IE H, th{M itM 4"! bb 2 i h t' ti ; IlO hit @t- 'M @
' * "M di 'iIt O" 'tN"ii *tt' i" M I!!'-@ 'itt OP 'f"tf'$' t +tt' 4 i Nt*
a r- e m oc n N - o 151 - 805 'SS381S 801VIA30 38'l3A3 I
- k
- \vl 4
,/ t g (
} ii J
\ v
/
O. > grp m. l lHHIHHlIHi ij ( h' i g UN i .[.I g w g n i no ,i n i'itM t' ue mmQ[i n . d oln]
,1 i!
'n M
f I t@ no 4 u. o g g
~
i i , a : : i 1 1 , ! w li iii! agW a. y . ,8 _ i I U.T
. 4 it ittiWEii.iiWi - :i_ n a i
W i. : !
!! i
- - - i ; i ! :
o l l dh ! l ,0 Ipb dh hh _00 ih H~ h L II dd ib. I i ! ii ! d i db ! l !
"") > E Ij
, *t .
*** ; i --J .. .. ; .. . ,- , .. .... .
--j ; ; ; gg g it)
,i e!
I
$, ,$.;..d.. .',U. . ; .H,y--.i-np .! li:. lI!! Pii; .l,i.!e+ Oh; n. j il . ,H. i !! ! !!d d,i l il
'l.H.ih Hh ! !! h M 4-M
-Hle a m .. ; ,. :- ;
,,, ;. m.
N
'I l I1 lg li b l l l !I ! IM ifhj[ I I l W I,
iid'i i . h'lfNa i n !, a w e, .
,, n t' d ,t i I i h+: v.
, e.++ n .i.
4.,h t4*- .44 -*++ .'
, 4
- i w3J 84 ,g3
+': i I i l l 8 i; i I 90 y+ jh iq =H p,j iht E -- 4 p f.- 4 t .
l
+
; I
- t- E i; t~f t
btyi tj h, 1 p , t l-ij-7t'+--p h= l l f t iltti t t*+t
; i ljn I :
hi di *-j h. yh vdZ C 84 1 [ ! I l . 5.2 l !!N h]! i ! i ! ! If ' ! {- i . I f !N I g 4 (
'O
! lli .ijji !lp I!p :!jli !!!! Fii H H!i ?iii Hi!!!!Hlypa :"!it}uti "" :!!! :iii :n: o a.
.$ aQ. .
! ;!U
.lm:e .tn. .n nu d" Ip M u;l'd i
{ t up Mh ;U; ti U 1H aE
"!" '" unc r
L
".' n: UM q tpt :" 'r r""Enn
. . ' "U n" ntnin:
mmmmau== .: U;i :13 Un :iG
- in
;!n J <
o J 1g d m: yh* na uh':= = an @ _ m: s n:' an a j"h:
,i un :m da:w:{itnu. n "' "r r .a un ne w 49t ph t op t g o. .t:S" , y .- o. 49 .+u np +. oo o mo qo y" >"
+i Ie ti 1 tj i
. o i ,
- ,He I 1.& o- o,:ti .1 ; i. '. ,.!'u -n. q o to Fo em no o, + un o . } ". o. i h, a! so n
- i. : e n d, 4+ ob i ,! HP b.d n8! I th' 4.
t i t It 8 4 ! t , 5
- P- > i i ut. t b H4+ 9o h
+
- o. I .h..i.!..,.t.mh.pl.i lH.- qH un H nn Ho ol 101 9.- 49 9t
'u H e
.H. . 1 1 i hit m.i O .i.; 4
%. o, w f..i.nn. Nsb.! ., . : : . .
,m tlo p i i n nd i ..:1 ilo .q. On 4 . ,.o ,,il is, .m nh qu gh i
' . 4 oh do W
4 .m N i,b 4, H ij *8 lil i D' h } i Hd ini 90 go pti ia un $p, gil g i H i bb MM l l i il !! in i l :: b ib- a o t i de ici ,ht WH nh od . h 90 .h a i,; b jb o ib IlI l i li
} ! . O M 4 M $' $ W M !Ib "I hl I hl 0t ' i hb bh 1h l' Ih "h % I 4 NF r5 O
H. h, . p,T' l j r
.+4. w.m. .i .o* s .d i is Hi dij ihi in iiii li i i i jib
- r. +L.lU.n' ! u. ". i l 11 ;+H
=
ijj ll1 il! l' l. ! jj; i h l il 1 l l l ll l!l li i t i'l fM+et it itti ul1 :l : t'-;h' ! l
, ; ,- W l 11 ftti ill: l ! {! l
+4 1 W+4 ,f t+ l l "
4; e o l l' :.! i' l l : !i 3 l ! I. fii Hil H. .W.dii
;; -. - '.li
' !. dD i W l I!! l li l ll HI -
i !!!! W b l l l f $ ! ! ! j I! l ! *
! i' ! g R5 i
,.i iii!
Ii !. I. .li o!! .") ;}! !. !!.! WF !iAo UU *
- 'i l :.P: r..,1 ii :s ti t.
.... F.HU .h U. .. .t. a. u. .. .i t.!.! .a io H
.i.h n F.i.! !!. L'iii iifi.
t . . . i ! .. o 1
,I ..*
..F <2 7'
t .. . . , .. (f) M
! F l l bi d. dM. . M. un a
; . .ji.. H,,Hi 0}, }, -
- k. h I IM. !!! [ 0 l h'ni g 55
- t. j l a i :
.-i ai t.
p ,
.g:#p i H p i m sg n n ip i. l i p, i ,m m*F i j ; i i *g >.
u ef w! t . hy dn n ;q i j l .
. ! ! ! _ ! til !ii hit i H:: ac U o : s! uh i l !
n 4 ! Hii u i m ae g r :. I ! r ol. :eL t o o n :< :i hh :.a 9 :p: ;gi
- ... !.cp, an L a: .:.. wm u w .n.n am x
- fu m :n !n m n:, .. nn m yp! ..: nn ph m: :n un u! !.. nu w :. :.n. . :n.
qi. w R u.o v i t- . c =-mmJ,. .." . . -:d,: .cc 8a# t i c .... ., . .... .... m V d..p; E ,! .1 b.d M, ,-[.oh. [1,. .;. .;'u m' o* I
.r.l.e;3o.4,. M.J':. .. .: e3
.o 4 f.d. .o .
4 .h.: o.
;.U
". M.J..:. d". ;. .to oo !a!!!.'.u. .o. : :. h.::.:o:::a. . ... ."n2. . o M o ". a. . :id. u :..
.o e ,_
. , i . i u .
h.,ni , n, o,- in . o , . ..o ,.e . . . . ..o -)
.m ,. ti; *a z i o . [I . n 4. . . n. . ..,. z oq an on
. . , ni % m n u. . . og no . .,1, 1, i.., .
. . . i}y o4 ,.o.
.n.
...p i
.a. H .o..
.I i .4# q o . h> oo q4.. ob 8 i .. i$ .-o .n.
t ..it + i , I l1 o , il .i 1[4 i o + a. a. . ., .oJ
# .p.;
.a o
.n o..a.
qo n 4. nn ,os u o. y hi
.. nu in. +n. d, o..o .ni ao ao
% ., 4 -,a .. . 4 _ _ - -
_- A g a< ( og s i d..o. _M i .} o q l j i U i i ,
% ob on o hi no qq or ye oo oi no a ;;
+, o mi . qi f t t ,f
@n . "',q .m
.-] I
- i ,
, i i
a q i l e u a, nh
.W n. c;p, . "
He vo . m.p p nr o :4o n.. hp
.nd. no ne t .a. i.Fi ','o o o! '
,; i@4 o i i 1.
q! 4.-
# =e
.- o l g
; l O,!.'N ht $ g l !
! i t l li ! l I hl ji [! iN $ H hWH M Hi! $ h0 % dh dh O " y$
3 o [*E HiL [iUeu 1
; i 'l I i t i i i< "n !hj # iin di ! o I i 'Hi ii H i i4 ih ! i ii Hi i i H Ogg i i ! I ii i lH @ du Hn h H4 HU t' ! H i H!
H t i ! H! i i !H i H 0 4 4+i. - 1! 4 ! ((iI[I6 9I.I.p :iv hi % "; d9 op hi .*t ! i !! : ; !! ! ! ! O i i ii (! g"Iah o-m' m*. ]. d., Uh iD'. D
-l ll 0h !!
1 I Hi !
'. . ! $ :.a 4h h 0h hi B ! :
! hl hi ! O 14 !! ! j. !I I !! Eu
- n , c j' j n
+-
_. . m Io.'. lj y u a" m
. . . .m .
jj :q n: :' in: '
- !d Ml ++!jH
!! Un "::i t""h. .: : ,'
l H :jn" [
?"
i i " t g!.s/w , .4y m L .ni . 1 9 g:.l ; "-
- 1..!
." ";j ad h.r. .
n :"
! l"h.
f ] !' b 1 f f Nh. fNhN!! !h b N.fIh h- k.' fb.hh fk ] l i f, ;h f. fh..I HU 1 u.2 - I i HH Hj H; Hj ' i l ! !P .i; .u. U - HU .i. tu2: i -
; : i i i !
.i. 4 L .i.W i 4 . .
.H..U 4 un :.4 ' -
1 a _ d.-2.:, i i I. I ll l .i
$ ; H. b ! m! M. W! h.!! h. lh.
N '__i!!l
!!U ! .
!I. f. b !! H. i. ! ji. h. II!i ! l .
l ! l- ;: i :. Ij i i .i l ! li !!! Hji !!!i H[:.;:1. i H: gun1 a.p HpU u ii ! ij i !!! !!+' ! .i'. Qj dl. O!! i !!!! Hj: l"! :lH ![*!. !.!
':::u.: nun: ljja ii".!!!!
u
;. : j 4,1L.h :n
- p;aJ:gt;;.
n" 4f :. - r - "* tj M . t :
" *M; Mjj in: : .h: culU;; M0 pc. M p'M"4 ..i: pH tj{:: .nu up: n: :n! u" nu up : a un un ;u
- !! : ;.t. _ y;tp
- y. u iM ft" th. J tt "U !th !lM.h HM U+03M "U 31 C H}! d" un :9 'itn *h MT ut:3'd ::: +:tti ; ..it *:nn"
.i
+
ll $ f I 1 i I l. Il 1l i 3
,1 ,i. ,lhi l !
i
- n. ...
i3. i 8 oJ no i;, i l! ! ith on ,n. o h,
.. gi j op o 4
.lIi n.. . , t . ..
qu
.,}l g ,i p4,
,+ad u 4 6 4
.o ,o, . , h.
- n. , 4j ,1 o n,
e 4i( ,i
. o, !
o,6 46
.o
, p!
ii , oh
.i i .
.n.
.u.pi n y..
6 Im .th 9! $ (4 Ml.I
.jp t t I
_o . nni 4r .o .d fIl3 n 1 .i .n. ..+q' {n. isp ip i .+ lta ni H e ip .
- u. ~.199.t.i .o i- ,. a i i
.m .i 0 - -
- - --: m ,
t.
-w iHi ,!D 4" @.1D. 54 fu t 4 aII.l 1" 9 u! ;Fi !H ,W i 94 pH ii OH po ' i H Hi H' q !jHi. ,q! di>
.pl - +1 h -.
h j{ !"h n t ; e q+ . e ! gb tyt ny pn , p- ! i p q p t My' a'
" opt
; i il f 1 h n H f h ; 4 N. +T 1H HH ; , i t ti b d -
Ft-li ! tth"ftl f I"h M" O"p
'n. l]!' H. h ipb t+ pr.t. t @'
-1
+
tr; . t; It . H : . -
.t Off f h""
. h I hM. titi. t _
t' ! l.i. it+ t[ H e n o so w es n n .o 151 - 80; 'SS381S HQt.VIA30 On3A3 ,/ \
/
v
O m n
/ \ \'
N.,lI & Q] 5000 i iiiiiiiiiiiiei*i iii i,iiiiiiiiii i III!!IIfllIll ! 'IIt il4 l 1 !!!1IJ} } , f i , , i A Q = 0.0 Extrapolated Test Results (Cyclic ! p i shear stresses required to cause .l '. . . g !- e Q - 0.34 ao,-oc in3 300 cycies) , i
.l: ! it w i i!
N 4000 ! l
' I ' ! !b E .__.
; ! 1 i ii 1 , l '4-i*
y-- e wE i;'i ! fitt l i i i^
! ! t-y i r 1 ---1 ,,l '! __
g, I _ __;_L ij p - i d o ' 1 i
>= M. 3000
' i O3 Ey _._._.
4 ' f, j 3 0 i i i o= wN i I Ez i L'.. 0 - 0.34
",4 i i g'
8z '
---+-T- ~ . .__-f---
4 , ,- " j ,
'i Ul',!
e y2 2000 i p ,,, # i i , i , ,, , yEg i ___.__t_- p .__
--4,,-g#' i b T
t i,
,' , II
,i .Pt-.__
.b m .____g+l , e.g ._ .. _ ...
I ~T' e r Q = 0.0 _- Z'~
~
_p 7..
~
z ; , i A- =** *"~~
--*4-
=4 _
! /
M o
. I i *, , l t l. > t-i f, cf, , ~~-[r i
g=> ( .
- - > s "l
a
~
y; !r
,ooo , >
!' .p y 4_ j g _ m _.__
~~
! i li jh f [M
- ' .y 4VT" '
"~~~~~ '
l V t-b- c='=' j i ! W- "t-
- p n i r- - r-
.. i c===>
t ; i j j j
..__.__p L_
~!
, 1_; :
. ' r i t
i - "[ ! 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 EFFECTIVE NORMAL STRESS,Nd' - P'I 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 f YELLOW CREEK NUCLEAR PLANT PRELIMIN ARY SAFETY VARIATION OF CYCLtc SHEAR STRESS REQUIRED TO CAUSE 5% STRAIN ANALYSIS REPORT IN 25 CYCLES WITH EFFECTIVE NORMAL STRESS FOR COMPACTED FIGURE 2.5-75(T) EARTHFILL PLACED AT 95 % STANDAR D COMPACTION Added by Amendment 13
Q x 0.ewt Generator -
} Build ng l k_ )
Fmished Grade l El. 520.0 ; 4 f Assumed Grousd Water Control f ., / S"'f'ce El. 519 0 SM -
- m. ,,,g . . .
a I 460 -
~
Id_i.t./ El. 465 ree f _4 j . Ihfi!I n
- I i
{440 ushed Stone { BEOROCK l 400 - 380 - i e i i r i i i l i i i L 4 -350 -300 -250 -200 -150 -100 -50 0 50 100 150 87.
)
DISTANCE FROM TOP OF SLOPE - FEET l 4.0 p (*) i.,
> 3.0 h Along El. 495 2.0 I O
l1
,~ 4~
/
.- -~ ~
d- - - - - g 1.0 8 a 0
-250 -200 -150 -100 -50 0 50 100 150 200 DISTANCE FROM TOP OF SLOPE - FEET LOCAL FACTORS OF S COMFACTED EARTHFILI COMPACTION) WITH RE STRAIN ALONG SELEC OF DYNAMIC MATERIA s
p
,,,/
I g
$20 s00 480 g -
460
- -~~ei. 430 s /l;'"4$7 * eudMi ie I
---' -. 420 N__ _. EI. 410 -
__ _ # __ _ _ __ _ --_--------i i e w s. ei. ,,,
,,,,,,,m,_
BEDROCK - 380 b g g i i E I i k 330 430 sso 800 es0 im 7s0 800 aso $00 I Along fl. 430.5 h *_. - 4~, . - - c : ; % .- -
--*M*%. Aiong 430 250 300 350 400 4s0 600 550 600 650 700 750 AFETY (BASED ON CYCLIC STRENGTH OF Added by Amendment 13
_ PLACED AT 95 PERCENT STANDARD SPECT TO DEVELOPMENT OF 5 PERCENT TED HORIZONTAL PLANES, SSE, BASIC SET YELLOW Cr.EEK NUCLEAR PLANT L PROPERTIES FIGURE 2.5-76 (T)
Diesel Generr. tor Buildirig Finished Grade n El. 520.0 g u \
' f QO
[] i j i ,, Assumed Ground Water O Surface El. 519.0
\ U i J
520 -
;w.y,s..,____&___
500 - l
- 4
,, l ,4,5
'i C'
b w 480 - l l , l I M - Compacted - o ' y w'~~- , l Earthfill g 440 - Crushed Stone A' i Base I w B' I w l BEDROCK C 400 - 380 - l 1 I t l t t t 1
-200 -150 -100 -50 0 50 100 150 200 DISTANCE FROM TOP OF SLOPE - FEET Section A*- A' Section p 520 520 y 480 -
480 460 460 1 e 3 440 440 k d 420 420 400 400 q 0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 0 0.5 1.0 1.s Section D'- D' Section
$20 520 500 500 l c 1 E 400 480 1
2 9 460 4GO E 440 # 440 ~ Nv' Y 420 420 l t 400 400
/ 1 0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 0 0.5 1.0 1q LOCAL FACTOR OF SAFETY, T, /Td LOCAL FACTOR Od l
520 500 480 D- 460 l l 42 l
. _ st_ -
420 l .- D' '" 8EDROCK -- 380 l t i I I I l i 1 250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600 650 B '- B' Section C'-C' 52 i LOCAL FACTOR OF SAFETY 500 (BASED ON CYCLIC STRENGTH OF h 48 COMPACTED EARTHFILL PLACED AT 7 95 PERCENT STANDARD COMPACTION) 480 WITH RESPECT TO DEVELOPMENT OF 5 PERCENT STRAIN ALONG SELECTED VERTICAL PLANES, SSE, BASIC SET OF [ 420 DYNAMIC MATERIAL PROPERTIES 2.0 2.5 3.0 0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 E '- E ' Section F'-F' 520 Added by Amendm nt 13 500 480 YELLOW CRELK NUCLEAR PLANT 460 440 FIGURE 2.5-77 (T) 420 w 400 2.0 2.5 3.0 0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 SAF ETY, Tg/Td LOCAL FACTOR OF SAFETY, T,/Tg
ggg P 'd Omsel Generator Buildmg A 6 Firushed Grade El. 520.0 Assumed Ground Water trol / Surface El. 519.0 520 fsy u Con,d.,,, 9__ , . . j' N %, - j" : ' ' (est_ .EO 380 - t r i i i i i i I i e i i 400 -350 -300 - 250 -200 -150 -100 -50 0 50 100 150 200 DISTANCE FROM TOP OF SLOPE - FEET U i i ( l t
(\
^
/ \
\
ANALYSIS CASE SOIL STRENGTH FACTOR OF SAFETY
/ PRE-EARTHOUAKE R or CU 4.62 POST-EARTHOUAKE R or m tm 4.06
/ :: = =
/
\
/
\
/
\ --
\
/ \ i"
~
~
/ \ 'r
~
' / \ ~4;.. :* f_-_ _ltg "" x g , , , , , m
\ =< -
a 8EDROCK Zone A 380 l t t t I t I t I I I 1 i i 250 300 350 400 450 500 560 600 650 700 750 800 850 900 YELLOW CREEK NUCLEAR PLANT l POST-EARTHQUAKE STATIC STABILITY AN ALYSIS Added by Amendment 13 FIGURE 2.5-78 (T)
/O
% Y
* 'd -
INDUCED SHEAR STRESS, dT , (psd
, 519) 520 O
- vo,-- 1 I l l 9 H1, UPPER-BOUND VARIATION A H1. BASIC SET OF DYNAMIC PROPERTIES 610 - 10 -
E H1, LOWER-BOUND VARIATION . _ O H2, UPPER-BOUND VARIATION A H2, BASIC SET OF DYNAMIC PRC+ ERTIES D H2, LOWER-BOUND VARIATION 500 - gp 20 - -
\
Earthfill e g\ 4 93 - 30 -
)\ -
2 2 h 4 z' g \\
- 480 -
b 0 40 - kg \g g g - n\d hg
\\
\
470 - 50 - g\\ \ \ -
\\\ \
k\ \ 460 - 60 - We)\\\
\\ -
l b WO N me vien .nu.e Bedrock
' I I I 70 l
! EFFECTS OF PARAMETRIC VARIATIONS IN DYNAMIC PROPERTIES AND IMPUT MOTION (HI VSH2) ON INDUCED SHEAR STRESS IN I COMPACTED EARTHFILL, SAFE SHUTDOWN EARTHQUAKE YELLOW CREEK NUCLEAR PLANT PRELIMINARY SAFETY ( ANALYSIS REPORT { FIGURE 2.5-79(T) l f%f l As' Added by Amendment 13 l
/
O O O Assumed G.T. SHEAR STRESS. T. (psf) LOCAL FACTOR OF SAFETY, T/Td (El.519) 0 500 1000 1500 2000 0 1 2 3 4 5 520 _ _ 0 g g y 0 3 g ,
\ /
\ , /
510 - 10 - 10 - - ESTIMATED T, FOR 100%- g \ STANDARD COMPACTION /s.---95% STANDARD g g COMPACTION
/
500 - c,,,,c,, 20 -
\ \ -
20 -
/ -
g Earthfill \ 1 i
\ !
490 - 3 30 - % - 3 30 - - 2' $ \ \ 9 \ . 100% STANDARD E \ f COMPACTION 3'
'g -
h40 480 - h40
,8
- t
\
FOR 95% , f 50 T, STANDARD I % - ~ , ~ 470 - - COMPACTION \ r
\ >
INDUCED STRESS Td 5 I ' g_ g -
- M - -
\
\
Bedrock I I I I I I 70 70
---- Stress required to cause 5 percent strain '
in 25 cycles in compacted earthfill placed at 95 percent standard compaction.
~ --- Estimated stress required to cause 5 percent strain in 25 cycles in compactM earthfill placed at 100 percent standasJ compaction.
YELLOW CREEK NUCLEAR PLANT PRELIMIN ARY SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT COMPARISON OF FREE-FIELD INDUCED SHEAR STRESS WITH CYCUC Add b er. . 13 STRENGTH CHARACTERtSTICS OF COMPACTED EARTHFILL, SSE
YCEP- 13 \'" The codes and standards applied to TVA's Cuality Grcups A.. E , C, and D are the same as given in Regulatory Guide 1.26, Table 1, for components to which they apply.. The codes and standards applied to the mechanical components in TVA Quality Groups A. E, C, D, and E are listed in Tatle 3.2-3 (T). Components such as a steel liner in a ccncrete tank not listed in Table 3. 2-3 (T) will te designated as having a Cuality Group commensurate with their safety functions and will te 3esigned to applicable industry ccdes and standards. CE uses the Safety Class ncrenclature descrited in CESSAF Section 3.2 instead of the cuality Grcup nomenclature used by TVA. Secticns of the PSAR written by CE therefcre use the CESSAR terminology, and sections written by TVA use the Cuality Grcup terminology. Tatle 3.2-4 (T) contains a ccaparison of the TWA Quality Grcups, CESSAR designations, ANSI Safety Classes, and Regulatory Guide 1.26 Cuality Groups. Note that CESSAF Class 4 and ANSI Class NNS include ERC and TVA Culaity Grcup C plus acn-safety related Classes that TVA separates intC Cuality Grcups E, 10 Fe and S. Justificaticn: These systens are within TVA's scere and are nct covered by
N
[d CESSAF. Deleticn: The Refueling Kater Tank wi:t1 not te safety Class 2 as listed in CESSAB Tatle 3.2-1. Justificaticn: The safety class terrinolcgy does nct apply The tank will te a steel-lined concrete tank 4.s described in Secticn 3.8. Exception: Fracture toughness test methods and acceptance and exemptica criteria for materials in pressure retaining parts cf ASME Class 2 and 3 CESSAR system components will te in ccnfctmance hitt Articles NC-2300 and EC-2300 cf the ASME code Section III edition and addenda in ef fect at the tire cf order of the specific ccmponent. 13 Justificaticn: For CESSAE components purchased for YCNE, this is required for compliance with 10 CER Section 50.55a. (T l G 3.2-3
YCNP-13 O The equivalent uniform pressure in pst acting on a structure is defined as p=q C, and is assumed to be constant with height. The maximum dynamic wind pressure is given by q = 0.00256V2 where V is the maximum wind speed (rotational velocity plus translational velocity) in mph. For tornado loadings the gust factor is taken as unity. The pressure coefficient, C, , and pressure distribution on flat surfaces and round structures are determined by the recommendations of ASCE Paper No. 3269, " Wind Forces on Structures," and ANSI A58.1-1972, Paragraph 6 as outlined in Section 3.3.1.2. The method used to transform the impactive load due to a tornado-generated missile into an effective load on a structure is described in Section 3.5.4. l 13 The following loading combinations should be investigated to determine the most adverse total tornado effect on the structure. A. W. =W. B. E, =W, C. W. = W. ("} D. W, = W. + 0.5W, E. W. =W. +W. F. W. = W. + 0.5W, + W. Where W is the total tornado load, W. is the tornado wind load, W is the effective tornado differential pressure load, and W. is the tornado missile load. 3.3.2.3 Structures Designed for Tornado Loads The following structures are designed to esist wind and tornado loads. A. Reactor Building
- 1. Enclosure Structure 1
- 2. Auxiliary Area Structure B. Control Building C. Fuel Euilding D. Diesel Generator Euilding l
O [ E. Waste Management Euilding 3.3-3 l
YCNP-13 O F. ERCE Pumping Station 1 G. Refueling Water Tanks H. Emergency Feedwater Storage Tanks I. Intake Pumping Station (Non-Category I Safety-Related structure as defined in Section 3.8.4.1.11) 13 J. Pipe Tunnel between Fuel Building and Waste Management Building 3.3.2.4 Ef fect of Failure of Structures or Components Not Designed for Tornado Loads Structures not designed to resist tornado loads are located a distance apart from Category I structures (as discussed in subsection 3.8.6) such that the ability of the Category I ctructure'or system to perform its intended design function wilf not be impaired by failure of the structure not designed to resist tornado loads. 3.3.3 Interface Requirements The location, arrangement, and installation of systems and components required for safe plant shutdown will be such that the offects of winds, tornadoes, and tcrnado missiles will not prevent these systems and components from performing their chutdown functions. The severity of the winds and tornadoes to be considered, as well as the combination of the effects of these natural phenomena with normal and accident conditions will meet the requirements of Criterion 2 of 10CFR50, Appendix A. 3.3.4
References:
- 1. ASCE Paper No. 3269
- 2. ANSI A58.1-1972, section 6
- 3. NRC Regulatory Guide 1.76 Design Basis Tornado for Nuclear Power Plants
- 4. Hoecker, W. H., Jr., "%ind Speed and Air Flow Patterns in the Dallas Tornado of April 2, 1957," Monthly Heather Review, Vol. 88, No. 5, May 1960, pp. 167-180.
- 5. Hoecker, W. H . , J r. , "Three Dimensional Pressure Pattern of the Dallas Tornado and Some Resultant Implicatiotas," Monthly Weather Review,. December 1961, pp. 533-542.
O 3.3-4
YCNP-13 CT Y \' I 3.5 MISSILE PROTECTION (CESSAR) Addition: This section describes the missile protection design bases for Beismic Category I structures and Components. Missiles considered are those that could result from: a plant related failure / incident including failures within and outside of Containment; environmental generated missiles; and site proximity missiles. Included in this section are descriptions of the structures, shields, and barriers that will be designed to withstand missile effects, and the procedures by which each barrier will be designed to resist missile impact. Although the plant will be subject to the impact of a limited number of postulated missiles, where practical, seismic Category I structures and components will be arranged to minimize the probability of impact in the event of a missile related incident. To further reduce the probability of unacceptable consequences related to missile impact, key backup and/or redundant components and systems will be physically separated so that a single missile is incapable of negating the redundant f unction s. This is discussed in Section 3.12 on Physical 7 separation. / (_,,-} In addition, essentially all seismic Category I components will be housed in seismic Category I structures. are discussed in Section 3.8. of piping runs) a case by case evaluaticn will be performed to ensure no loss of functionality due to missile impact does not lead to an unsafe condition. Non-Category I safety-related structures and components that are required to be designed for raissile protection are described in Section 3.8.4.1.11. This section also defines the types of 13 missiles to be considered for each of these structures and components. The following criteria have been adopted for assessing the plant's capability to withstand the statistically significant missiles postulated in Section 3.S.2: 13 A. No loss of Containment function as a result of missiles generated internal to Containrent. B. No direct loss of teactor coolant as a result of missiles generated external to the Reactor Building. C. Reasonable assurance that the plant can be maintained in a safe shutdown condition. 3.5-1
YCNP-13 D. Of f aite exposure within 10CFR100 guidelines for missile damage O resulting in radionuclide release. 7 Justification: This information is outside the scope of CESSAR.
- Statistically significant is defined as unacceptable missile related consequences (i.e., in excess of 10CFR100 guidelines) greater than 10-7 per year that can result in unacceptable plant consequences.
/
O l O 3.5-2 ,
,e
YCNP-13 [ ]
%J 3.5.1 Missile Barriers and Loadings (CESSAR)
Addition: - Structures, shields, and barriers that will te designed to withstand missile effects are tabulated in this subsection. The specific selection of missiles and their characteristics are covered separately in Sections 3.5.2 and 3.5.3, respectively. 13 A. The structures for which the exterior walls and roofs will be designed to resist externally generated missiles are listed below:
- 1. Reactor Building Enclosure Structure
- 2. Easte Management Building
- 3. Fuel Building
- 4. Control Building (including Main Steam Valve Vault and 7
Tunnel)
- 5. Diesel Generator Building
- 6. ERCW Pumping Station
\O 7. Refueling Water Tanks and Associated Pipe Tunnels
- 8. Emergency Feedwater Storage Tanks and Associated Pipe Tunnels
- 9. Intake Pumping Station 13
- 10. Pipe Tunnel Eetween Fuel Building and Waste Management Euilding B. Internal structures which will be designed to withstand internally generated missiles are listed below:
- 1. Reactor cavity shield walls
- 2. Crane wall
( 3. Steam generator compartment walls
- 4. Reactor vessel missile shield j 5. Pressurizer missile shield r
3.5-3
I YCNP-13
- 6. Pool walls and transfer canal 0
7, Train separation barrier 7
- 8. Local shields and barriers will be provided where protection is necessary for internally generated missiles such as valve bonnets and valve stems. These shields and barriers will be identified in the FSAR.
Justification: This information is outside the scope of CESSAB. 3.5.2 Missile Selection (CESSAR) Addition: Missiles selected for the structures given in Section 3.5.1-A are 13 those postulated to result from external missile sources outside of the Reactor Building (plant related, envircnmental load 7 generated, and site proximity missiles) . Missiles selected for those structures, shields and barriers within the Reactor Building tabulated in Section 3.5.1-B are, of course, associated 13 with postulated missile sources within the Reactor Building. 3.5.2.1 External Missiles As previously discussed external missiles are considered to be the result of plant equipment failures (outside the Reactor Build ing) , environmental loads, and site proximity incidents. These three potential external missile sources are separately addressed in the paragraphs to follow. 3.5.2.1.1 External Missiles from Plant Equipment Failures The only identifiable source of significant external missiles from plant equipment failures is that due to a gross structural failure of the turbine. Turbine missiles are not considered 7 based on the discussion presented in Section 10.2.3. 3.5.2 3 1.2 Environmental Load Generated Missiles Environmental loads can result from basically four sources: seismic activity; high water level; winds; and, tornados. Since all seismic Category I structures and components will be designed to resist seismic activity, there will not be Seismic Category I structure related missiles as a result of seismic activity. Missiles related to high water level are not considered because, 7 of the maximum water elevation with respect to plant grade given in Section 3.4. of the two remaining environmental loads, only tornados need be considered since the maximum absolute velocity of the design tornado is greater than three times that of the 3.5-4
YCNP-13 '~ maximum wind velocities as indicated in Sections 3.3.2 and 3.3.1, respectively. l13 Seismic Category I and certain non-Category I safety-related ;13 structures and components are designed to resist the design tornado; hence, missiles resulting f rom effects of tornados on such structures are included. As discussed in Paragraph 3.3.2.3, tornado winds could damage nonCategory I Structures thereby producing missiles. However, integrity of the Containment and 7 capability of the essential heat-removal systems are not impaired nor is there a risk that offsite exposures would exceed the 10CFR100 guidelines since such nonCategory I structures are arranged with sufficient distance between them and the seiswic Category I structures. Missile type characteristics and parameters for the above objects are described in Paragraph 3.5.3.1. 3.5.2.1.3 Site Proximity Missiles The only identifiable source of potential missiles in the general site proximity are aircraft. Aircraft are not considered based on the discussion presented in Section 2.2.3. Justification: This information is outside the scope of CESSAP. 3.5.3 Selected Missiles (CESSAB) l Addition: The characteristics required to determine penetraticn and/or damage potential of the missiles listed in subsection 3.5.2 are described herein. The missile characteristics are presented in the same two groups; external and internal missiles. 3.5.3.1 Characteristics of External Missiles As indicated in Paragraph 3.5.2, the only postulated external missiles are tornado generated; and for the purposes of barrier design and damage assessment, seven types of objects were selected to be representative of tornado generated missiles. 3.5.3.1.1 Fotential Missiles Potential missiles and their properties are listed in Table 3.5-1 (T) . l 3.5-5
YCNP -13 3.5.3.1.2 Analytical Methods and Procedures 0 Analytical procedures for selection of tornadc missiles and velocities are discussed in TVA-TR74-1*. 3.5.3.1.3 Design Velocities for Tornado Missile Barriers The justification and analytical procedures for determining ' tornado missile velocities for design of missile barriers are described in "The Generation of Missiles by Tornados," TVA-TR74-la. The velocities to be used for missile design barriers are shown in Table 3.5-1(T) ; the vertical velocities will be used for design of flat roofs and the horizontal velocities for design of all barrier surfaces that are not horizontal. Justificaticn: This information is outside the scope of CESSAR. 3.5.4 Barrier Desian Procedures The procedures by which each barrier will be designed to resist the missiles previously described and the methods to be employed to assess related damage are described in this subsection. Since the procedures for barrier design and damage assessment depend on the basic material of construction (i.e. , concrete or steel), the corresponding procedures are presented separately. No composite sections will be used to resist missile impact. 3.5.4.1 Missile Barrier Design Interf ace Requirements A. For systems and parts of systems located inside Containment (Reactor Coolant System and connecti0g systems, Engineered Safety Features Systems), appropriate missile barrier design procedures will be used to insure that the impact of any l potential missile will not lead to a Loss-of-Coolant Accident or preclude systems from carrying out their specified safety functions. B. For systems and equipment outside Containrent, listed in Section 3.5.1 above, appropriate design procedures (for example, proper turbine orientation, natural separation, or missile barriers) will be used to insure that the irpact of any potential missile does not prevent the system or equiprent from carrying out its specified safety functions. C. For all systems and equipment, appropriate design procedures will be used to insure that the impact of any potential missile does not prevent the conduct of a safe plant shutdown, or prevent the plant from remaining in a safe shutdown condition. 3.5-6
YCNP-13 (V r
- 3. 5. 4. 2 Concrete Barriers and Targets ,
The concrete missile barrier protection design and damage assessment includes an estimate of missile penetration based on the Modified National Defense Research Committee formula. 'Ihe procedure considers: the local effects of penetration and/or scabbing; and the response of the target. The penetration depth for reinforced concrete is calculated by the following: _ __ I/2 v 1 For -p 5 2.0, X =
-4KNwd (IOOOd A 1 1.s
+
For p M.0,X= KNw( loOOdj Where X = penetration depth (inches) n d = missile diameter (inches)
,- w = missile weight (pounds) ' 7 N = shape factor, taken as 0.72 for flat-nosed missiles . K= 180 Al fc (f'c in psi)
V = velocity (ft/sec) The minimum thickness to prevent scabbing is calculated by the following: I* t/d<3 AND ( / 2 For >t s =d x/d g50.65 a 7.911g*e-5.06*-d e j l
. i . For x/d e>0.65 OR - - !
3sts/de<18, >ts= 2.12 +1.36 - de d Where t = slab thickness (inches) [ tg = minimum thickness required to prevent scatting \s 3.5-1
YCNP-13 de = e uivalent diameter of missile (inj e ; for a pipe, de = 7 0 x where A = area of metal in cross section of pipe. 7T Minimum exterior wall and roof thickness will ccmply with Table
- 3. 5- 2 (T) . For the strength of concrete required for tornado 9 12 missile protection, see section 3.8.3.6.1. The structural response of concrete barriers to missile impact will be evaluated' for ikpactive loads consistent with the requiremens in the propored Appendix C of the ACI 349 Code (see Section 3.8.3. 2) .
The minimum concrete thicknesses required for tornado generated 12 missile protection and based on the missile spectrum in Fevision 1 of BRP 3.5.1.4 and are given in Table 3.5-2 (T) . l l O O 3.5-7a
YCNP-13 G 3.5.4.3 steel Earriers and Targets For steel barriers and targets only perforation of the barrier or , target is a consideration. The Stanford Formula will be used to ! determine the required thickness of the steel barrier or 1 perforation of the target *: 1 Stanford Formula (References 1 and 5) j
, _ l P= 85.3 (1 +5 ( X2 )V2_1
*The formula has been rewritten slightly and the alength of a standard width" was taken to be four inches.
In the Stanford Formula the missile is assumed to be cylindrical where the length of the missile = L. This formula is valid within the following ranges: 10 < L/C < 50 O.1 < P/D < 0.8 0.002 < P/L < 0.05 5 < L'/C < 8 8 < L'/F < 100 () 70 < V < 400 3.5.5 Missile Barrier Features 3.5.5.1 Euildings and Structures The Reactor Building Enclosure Structure will constitute the barrier which protects the Containment from external missiles. The crane wall, steam generator compartment walls, reactor vessel missile shield, pool walls and local barrier shields will protect the Containment from internally generated rissiles. These barrier features are discussed in Section 3.8 an3 also shown in 7 Figures 3.8-9 (T) through 3. 8-18 (T) with exception of the local barrier shields which will be described in the FSAR. Waste Management Euilding, Fuel Building, Contrcl Building, Diesel Generator Building, ERCW Pumping Station, Refueling Eater Tanks, Emergency Feedwater Storage Tanks, the pipe tunnel between 13 the Fuel Building and tne Waste Management Building, and Intake Pumping Station are discussed in Section 3.8. A tabulation of Reactor Building specific internal 9tructural components assumed to be missile barriers is given ir : ection 3. 5.1. B. 7 O
.V
~ 3.5-8
-. - .. - , _ - - a.-
YCNP-13 3.5.6 References 0
- 1. R. W. White and N. B. Botsford, Containment of Fragmets f rom a Runaway Reactor, Report SRIA-113, Stanford Fesearch Institute, September 15, 1963.
- 2. F. J. Samuely and C. W. Hamann, " Civil Protection," The Architectural Press, London, 1939.
- 3. A. Amirikian, " Design of Protective Structures," Report N P- 37 2 6, Bureau of Yards and Docks, Department of the Navy, August, 1950.
- 4. C. R. Russell, " Reactor Safeguards," MacMillan, New York, 1962.
- 5. "U.S. Reactor Containment Technology," ORNL-NSIC-5, Vol. 1, Chapter 6, 1965.
- 6. "The Generation of Missiles by Tornadoes," TVA-TR74-1, November 1974.
O l
)
O 3.5-9
YCNP-l3 TABLE 3.5-1 (T)
-~ Tornado Missiles, Properties and velocities V
Horizontal Missile Weight Velocity Description (lb) Cross section Length (ft) (ft/sec) Wooden Plank 115 4" x 12" 12 272 Steel Rod 9 1" dia 3 167 6" Schedule 287 6" dia 15 171 40 Pipe 12" Schedule 750 12" dia 15 154 40 Pipe Utility Pole 1124 13-1/2" dia 35 180 12 Automobile 4000 6.5'x4.3' 16.5 194 tbtes: 1. These missiles are considered to be capable of striking in all directions and at all elevations.
- 2. Vertical velocities of 70% of the postulated
'h
[d horizontal velocities are acceptable except for the la steel rod which shall have a vertical velocity equal to its horizontal velocity (167 fps) . O l l __
YCNP-12 TABI.E 3.5 - 2(T) Hinimum Wall and Roof Thickness Requirements To Resist the Effects of Tornado Miss!le Impact 28-Day Concrete Wall Roof Tornado Intensity Strength Thickness Thickness Region (PSI) (Inches) (Inches) Region I 3000 23 18 4000 20 16 5000 18 14 O l l l l O Added by Amendment 12
YCNP- 11 3.8.3.6.2 Suality Control 3.8.3.6.2.1 Concrete Quality control procedures are followed to provide assurance that the requirements of Subparagraph 3.8.3.6.1 are satisfied. Concrete quality control begins with selection and testing of the ingredients of the mix and continues through proportioning, batching, mixing, transporting, placing, and curing. Cuality control extends from testing of specimens sampled f rom basic shapes to subsequent fabrication and installation and joining procedures. See Chapter 17 for details under Quality Assurance. 3.8.3.6.2.1.1 Exception TVA takes exception to ACI 349-76 section 1.2.1, " Copies of 11 structural drawings, typical details and specifications for all reinforced concrete ccnstruction shall be signed by a licensed engineer . . . . " 3.8.3.6.2.2 Structural Steel Quality Control for structural steel will be in accordance with the AISI Specification listed in paragraph 3. 8.3. 2. See Chapter
-17 for details under Quality Assurance.
3.8.3.6.3 Special Construction Techniques The interior structure will be built using normal construction techniques. 3.8.3.7 Testing and Inservice Surveillance Requirements There will be no special testing or inservice surveillance requirements. 3.8.4 other Category I Structures The Category I structures other than the Containment vessels and the internal structures of the Containment are listed below. A. Reactor Building
- 1. Enclosure Structure
- 2. Auxiliary Area Structure B. Control Building C. Fuel Building O
3.8-29
1 YCNP-13 O' D. Diesel Generator Buildings E. Waste Management Building F. EPCW Pumping Station G. EBCE Spray Ponds H. Ref ueling Water Tanks I. Emerg'ency Feedwater Tanks J. Pipe Tunnel between the Fuel Building and the Waste Management Building 13 K. Perscnnel tunnels between Peactor Buildings and Waste Management Building 3.8.4.1 ' Description of the Structures 3.8.4.1.I' Reactor Building 3.8.4.1.1.1 Enclosure Structure The Enclosure Structure will consist of a spherical dome placed on top of a cylindrical wall, each having an inside face radius of 105 feet and a 3-foot thickness. The boundary between this Enclosure Structure and the Auxiliary Area structure will be empirically defined as the top surface elevation of the topnost slab of the Auxiliary Area structure. The steel Containment vessel will be totally enclosed by the combined Enclosure Structure-Auxiliary Area structure. The steel containment vessel will be concentric with the dome of the Enclosure Structure. The general layout and configuration of the Enclosure Structure is shown in Figures 3.8-9(T) through 3. 8-18 (T) . It will be a conventionally reinforced concrete structure. A slight negative pressure will be maintained in the air space between the Enclosure Structure and the steel Containment Vessel to prevent radiological leakage to the atmosphere. The Enclosure Structure will not be pressurized during the design basis accident. 3.8.4.1.1.2 Auxiliary Area Structure The Auxiliary Area structure will be a reinforced concrete box type structure which will support the steel Containment vessel, the Contalnnent internal structure and the Enclosure Structure. This structure will be circular in plan. The box type configuration will include a' solid concrete central pedestal, a number of concentric circumferential walls, plus an irregular or unsymmetric arrangement of radial walls. Floor slabs will cccur at several elevations. Much of the top surface of this structure will be formed to a spherical shape to receive and support the 3.8-30 l
._- _ .- - - _ . . - -- ... -..- . - .- - - - . - _ . - . - - - - . _~ . . _ . - - . . . -
i 1 s .
- t YCNP-13 l
. l !9 ]
. steel Containment vessel and the-Containment internal structure.
l The general- layout and configuration is shown in Figures 3.8-9(T) through 3.8 18(T) . 3_ i
- t. :
4 ! t 4 i > 1 I I d i i i I ' i. i l t 4 i. I i-i 1 4 i t i I I l i 1 l 3.8-30a
.c.,__.222.___._____,.._____._.,__ ,.._._ _ ....._ _ . _ . _ ..___ _._____ _ _ _ . _ ... _ ,._ _ . a .., m , , ,-
YCNP-13
/'N (v) media will be evaluated. The configuration of these tanks is shown in F,igure 3.8-30(T) .
3.8.4.1.9 Emergency Feedwater Tanks The Emergency Feedwater Tanks, as described in Paragraph 10.7.4.2, will be steel-lined, reinforced concrete, cylindrical tanks with domed roofs supported on compacted granular fill. These tanks will be separated from other structures, but seismic interaction through the foundation media vill be evaluated. The configuration of these tanks is shown in Figure 3.8-31(T) . 3.8.4.1.10 Pipe Tunnels Between the Fuel Euildings and Easte Management Building The tunnels housing the piping systems between the Fuel Buildings and the Easte Management Building will te cast-in-place reinforced concrete structures founded in rock. The only access to the tunnels will be from inside the buildings. 3.8.4.1.11 Non-Category I Safety-Related Structures 3.8.4.1.11.1 Intake Pumping Station
, r~
( ,g) The Intake Pumping Station is classified as a non-Category I safety-related structure since it is not required to remain ! functional in a seismic event. The safety-related function of this structure is to protect to cooling tower makeup pumps and associated components from the ef fects of tornados and tornado l: 13 generated missiles as described in Section 3.3.2 and 3.5.3. The j makeup pumps and associated components provide a source of water : I to the ERCW in the event that the ERCH spray ponds are disabled by a tornado. l The Intake Pumping Station will be a reinforced concrete box type structure with its foundation extending to bedrock. There will ; be several opening in the roof of the structure which willl be , l covered by either reinforced concrete hatches, or panels composed , of structural steel shapes oriented to protect the interior of the structure from tornado generated missiles and allow venting of the interior of the structure. The general layout of the Intake Pumping Station is shown in Figures 1.2-52 (T) to 1.2-54(T). 3.8.4.1.11.2 Personnel Tunnels Between the Reactor Buildings and Easte Management Euilding The personnel tunnels between the Beactor Buildings and the Waste ! Management Building are classified as non-Category I safety-
- l related structures under Regulatory Position C.2 of Regulatory O) t
\_ /
l i I l l 3.8-33 l l l
YCNP-13 Guide 1.29. This requirement is imposed to prevent groundwater leakage into the Peactor Buildings in the event of an SSE. l 13 The tunnels are cast-in-place reinforced concrete structures , founded on rock. They provide access between the Beactor Buildings and the Easte Management Building. 3 3.8.4.2 Applicable Codes, S ta nd a rd s, and Specifications 3.8.4.2.1 Cat ego ry I Structures Refer to Paragraph 3.8.3.2. 3.8.4.2.2 Non-Category I Saf ety-Felated Structures 3.8.4.2.2.1 Intake Pumping Station 13 All codes, standards, and specifications listed in Paragraph 3.8.3.2 will be used in the design and const.ruction of this structure, except ACI 318-71 will be used instead of ACI 349-76 since the Intake Pumping Station is not a Category I structure. 3.8.4.2.2.2 Perscnnel Tunnels Eetween the Reactor Buildings and Waste Management Buildinq , Refer to Paragraph 3.8.3.2. 3.8.4.3 Loads and Load Combinations 3.8.4.3.1 Loads, Definitions, and Nomenclature All the major loads to be encountered or to be postulated in a nuclear power plant are listed below. All the loads listed, however, are not necessarily applicable to all the structures and their elements. Loads and the applicable load combinations for which each structure has to be designed will depend on the conditions to which that particular structure may be subjected. Normal loads, which are those loads to be encountered during normal plant operation and shutdown, include: D - Dead loads or their related internal moments and forces, including any permanent equipment loads and hydrostatic loads. L - Live loads or their related internal moments and forces, including any movable equipment loads and other Acads which vary with intensity and occurrence, such as soil pressure. 3 To - Thermal effects and loads during normal operating or shutdown conditions, based on the most critical transient or steady state condition. 3.8-33a
YCNP-13 O Ro - Pipe reactions during normal operating cr shutdown conditions, based on the most critical transient or steady-state condition. Severe environmental loads include: 3 E - Loads generated by the Operating Basis Earthquake. W - Loads generated by the design wind specified for the plant. O i l e O l
'3.8-33b
-, , . - , - - ,--. , ,,a -4
YCNP-11 Extreme environmental loads include: E' - Loads generated by the safe shutdown earthquake. Wt - Loads generated by the design tornado specified for the plant. Tornado loads include leads due to the tornado wind pressure, the tornado-created differential pressure, and tc tornado generated missiles. Abnormal Loads. Those loads generated by a postulated high-energy pipe break accident. 3 Pa - Pressure equivalent static load within or across a compartment generated by the postulated break, and including an appropriate dynamic load factor to account for the dynamic nature of the load. Ta - Thermal loads under thermal conditions generated by the postulated break and including Tc. Ra - Pipe reactions under thermal conditions generated by the postulated break and including Ro. Yr - Equivalent static load on the structure generated by the reaction on the broken high-energy pipe during the postulated break, and including an appropriate dynamic load factor to account for the dynamic nature of the load. Yj - Jet impingement equivalent static load on a structure generated by the postulated break and including an appropriate dynamic load factor to account for the dynamic nature of the load. Ym - Missile impact equivalent static load on a structure generated by or during the postulated break, as from pipe whipping, and including an appropriate dynamic load factor to account for the dynamic nature of the load. The strength or lead capacity requirements nomenclature includes: S For structural steel, S is the required section strength based on the elastic design methods and the allowable stresses defined in part I of the AISC " Specification for the Design, Fabrication, and Erection of Structural 3 Steel for Buildings," February 12, 1969. O For concrete structures, U is the section strength required to resist design loads based on the strength 11 design methods described in ACI 349-76. The 33 percent increase in allowable stresses for concrete and steel due to seismic or wind loadings is not permitted. 3.8-34 l
YCNP-13
,~
.(v ) 3.8.4.3.4 ERCH Spray Ponds The loading conditions utilized in the stability analysis of the pond slopes are descril 3 in Paragraph 2.5.5.2. The loads used in the design of other cructural featuras are as described in 3.8.4.3.1. 3.8.4.3.5 Intake Pumcing Station i g j Loads and loading combinations shall be in accordance with ACI 13 318-71 plus load combinations (5) in section 3.8.4.3.2 and (5) in Section 3.8.4.3.3. 3.8.4.4 Design and Analysin Procedures 3.8.4.4.1 Reactor Building 3.8.4.4.1.1 Enclosure Structure The Enclosure Structure will be analyzed for the loads and load combinations as om.iined in Section 3.8.4.3 and in accordance 13 with the codes and specifications outlined in Section 3.8.4.2. This structure will te analyzed by the use of one or more of many acceptable finite element computer programs. These programs have
/T the capability to analyze the entire structure under any loading
(_,/ c ond ition. Manual calculations will re used to verify the computer results. Computer prograns available for use are described in Appendix 3.8-A. 3.8. 4. 4.1. 2 Tuxiliary Area Structure The Auxiliary Area of the Reactor Euilding will be analyzed in accordance with the loads and loading combinations outlined in Section 3.8.4.3, and in accordance with the specification for 13 steel and concrete outlined in Section 3.8.4.2. Several different decign and analysis techniques, both manual and computer, will be uced to analyze this structure. Among these will be plate, beam, and finite element analysis. These techniques will be coordinated into a joint effort that will produce a structure of the necessary strength to withstand the expected loads. The foundation of the Auxiliary Area Structure will be resting on sound rock and in the analysis of the Auxiliary Area the rock properties will be input into a finite element model to determine the overall structural response between the structure and its supporting subgrade. Load transfer, bcth shear and bearing, will be carried to the foundation by the central massive column and concentric circular walls within the structure. Computer programs available for use in the analysis of the Auxiliary Area Structure are described in Appendix 3.8-A. .sx_O)- 3.8-37
~
\
l YCNP-13 3.8.4.4.2 Control Building The Control nutiding will be designed in accordance with the loadu and load combinations outlined in section 3.8.4.3 and in accordance with the concrete and structural steel specifications 13 outlined in Section 3.8.4 2. Load transfer to the rock subgrade of the control Building will be through the interior and e i O 3.8-37a
YCNP-S \ exterior walls and columns which are also utilized as supports for the various floor slabs. Computer programs used are described in Appendix 3.8-A. 3.8.4.4.3 Fuel Building The Fuel Building will be analyzed as a reinforced concrete and structural steel structure with the loads and load combinations outlined in Paragraph 3.8.4.3 and in accordance with concrete and structural steel specifications outlined in Paragraph 3.8.4.2. The building will censist of structural exterior and interior walls, floor and roof slabs, all of reinforced concrete, plus interior top story columns of structural steel with structural steel roof slab framing. Horizontal seismic forces will be resisted by shear walls with floor and roof slabs acting as diaphragms. Computer programs available for use are described in Appendix 3.8-A. 3.8.4.4.4 Diesel Generator Buildings The Diesel Generator Building will be designed in accordance with [D Paragraphs 3.8.4.3 and 3.8.4.2. Design loads are carried to the (s,) foundation through the exterior walls and interior columns, with the walls carrying all the seismic shear forces. Due to the massive base mat of the Diesel Generator Building, all walls and columns framing into the mat will essentially be fixed at their point of connection. The analysis of the Diesel Generator Euilding will be done by combining manual and computer techniques. Computer programs available for use are described in Appendix 3.8-A. The fuel storage tanks are encased in the Diesel Generator Building base slab which serves as the concrete encasement. This concrete encasement, alone will be designed to sustain the loading combinations specified in Faragraphs 3.8.4.3 and 3.8.4.2. This will provide a level of quality equivalent to that of a similar component constructed to ASME Bciler and Pressure Vessel Code, Section III, Class 3. Since the steel liner serves no function during these loadings except to maintain leaktightness it will be designed in accordance with ASME Bciler and Pressure 5 Vessel Code, Section VIII, Division I. Ee emphasize that the design will ensure strain compatibility between the reinforced concrete encasement and the steel liner. The liner shall be ASTM A 36 steel with a system of internal stiffeners as required to maintain stability. Each liner shall be designed to prevent buckling of the steel shell due to gS external loads such as hydrostatic pressure f rom underground () water, shrinkage of the concrete encasement during construction, 3.8-38
YCNP-5 t and expansion or contraction due to temperature differentials. Joint welding procedures to be used in fabrication of the steel liner will be qualified, in accordance with ASME Boiler and Pressure vessel Code, Section IX, prior to use by TVA or the fabricator. There will be 100 percent magnetic particle examination of all 5 welde exposed to the contents of the lined vessel using properly qualified or experienced personnel and in accordance with ASME, Section VIII. TVA will require certification that all steel conforms tc the appropriate ASTM specification. Also, each steel liner will be subjected to a standard hydrostatic test in accordance with ASME, Section VIII. In addition, in the unlikely event that a leak were to develop, a low-level annunciator in the control room will indicate low fuel oil level in the 7-day tanks. 3.8.4.4.5 Easte Management Building The Waste Management Building will be founded on rock and will be analyzed as ,. multistory reinforced concrete structure. The building will consist of structural exterior and interior walls, floor and roof slabs, and columns. Horizontal seismic forces will be resisted by shear walls with the floor and roof slabs acting as diaphragms. The Easte Management Building will be analyzed and designed in compliance with Paragraphs 3.8.4.2 and 3. 8.4. 3. Computer programs available for use are described in Appendix 3.8-A. O 3.8-38a
YCNP- il { Q 3.8.4.4.6 ERCW Pumping Stations The ERCW pumping stations will be designed in accordance with Paragraphs 3.8.4.3 and 3.8.4.2 of this document. These structures will be analyzed as box-type structures with the roof slab, floor slabs, and walls resisting vertical and horizontal loads. Horizontal and vertical loads will be transmitted to the foundation by shear walls and the diaphragm action of roof and floor slats. Computer programs that will be utilized in this work are described in Appendix 3.8-A. 3.8.4.4.7 E3CW Spray Ponds The stability analysis of critical earth slopes are presented in Paragraph 2.5.5.2. The spray nozzles will be supported by steel riser pipes which will transmit all loads to the foundation. The ponds will be designed to resist the adverse effects of wave action within the pond, for extremes in local precipitation, and minimize seepage through the liner.
,O
(~') The freeboard will exceed the maximum wave runup on the side slopes. A blanket of rip-rap will protect the slope from erosion caused by water level fluctuations. The runof f associated with the Probable Maximum Precipitation (PMP) will be carried away from the ponds by the site drainage system. This runoff will include overflow from the spray ponds after the allowance for the freeboard is exceeded. The permeability of the liner will be such that the assumed seepage losses will not be exceeded. 3.8.4.4.8 Refueling Water Tanks The design of the Refueling Water Tanks concrete domed roof and walls will conform to the provisions of the ACI 349-76 Code. The sole function of the stainless steel liners will be to provide a corrosion resistant and watertight nembrane for the coverete tanks. The liners will he designed in accordance with t he AISI " Specification for the Design of Cold-Formed Stainless Steel Structural Members", 1974 Edition. The roof of the tanks will be designed and analyzed as a thin shell supported by the cylindrical tank wall. The cylindrical concrete walls will be designed to resist the internal hydrostatic and gas pressures required by the system. These pressures will be resisted by longitudinal and meridional forces in the cylindrical wall. -[-~T Vertical loads will be transmitted directly tc a reinforced V 3.8-39
YCNP-13 O concrete mat foundation supporting the tank. The discontinuity effect of the cylindrical walls at the mat foundation will te incorporated in the design of both structural elemants. Horizontal loads will be transmitted to the foundation by shear in the cylindrical tank wall. The design of the wall will incorporate the effect of h'dtodynamic forces induced by seismic e xc itat. ion. The fabrication and erection of the stainless steel liners will' conform to the requirements of ASME S0ction VIII, Division 1. Joint welding procedures will ccnform to the requirements of ASME Section IX, Division 1. Nondestructive examinations will be performed in accordance with ASME Section V, Civision 1. Computer programs that will be used in the analysis of the tank's structural system are described in Appendix 3.8-A. 3.8.4.4.9 Emergency Feedwater Tanks The design, fabrication, and erection of the Emergency Feedwater Tanks will be identical to that described in Section 3.8.4.4.8 with the exception that the watertight membrane will be a carbon 1 steel liner designed in accordance with the AISC specifications. 3.8.4.4.10 Pipe Tunnel Between Fuel Building and Waste Management Building The tunnels housing the piping systems between the Fuel Euildings and the Waste Management Building will be analyzed for the loads and load combinations as outlined in Section 3.8.4.3 and in accordance with the codes and st7cifications outlined in Section 3.8.4.2. 13 3.8.4.4.11 Intake Pumping Station The Intake Pumping Station will be designed in accordance with Section 3.8.4.2 and 3.8.4.3.5. This structure will be analyzed as a box-type structure with horizontal and vertical forces being resisted by floor slabs, roof slab, walls and columns. Horizontal and vertical forces will be transmitted to bedrock by shear walls, foundation bearing walls, columns, and the diaphram cation of the roof and floor slabs. ! The analysis of the Intake Pumping Station will be done by combining manual and computer techniques. Computer programs available for use are described in Appendix 3.8-A. O 3.8-40
YCNP-13 n
%J 3.8.4.4.12 Personnel Tunnels Between the Reactor Buildings and the Waste Management Building The personnel tunnels between the Reactor Buildings and the Waste Management Building will be designed and analyzed by the applicable portions of Section 3.8.4.2 and 3.8.4.3 in order to be 13 ir. compliance with Regulatory Position C.2 of Regulatory Guide 1.29.
3.8.4.5 Structural Acceptance criteria All structures will be designed in accordance with AISC Code 1969 Edition and the ACI 349-76 and using the loading combinations 11 13 given in Section 3. 8. 4. 3. 3.8.4.6 Materials, cuality Control, and Special Construction Techniques 13 Refer to Section 3.8.3.6. 3.8.4.6.1 Materials 13 Refer to Section 3.8.3.6.1. s 3.8.4.6.2 Cuality Control 13 (] Refer to Section 3.8.3.6.2. 3.8.4.6.3 Special Construction Techniques The Category I structures other than the Containment Vessels will be constructed using normal construction methods and techniques. 13 For the Containment Vessels, see Section 3.8.2.6. 3.8.4.7 Testing and Inservice Surveillance Requirements Refer to Paragraph 3.8.3.7.
. (~N, b'
l 3.8-41 l
l l 1 l YCNP l O 3.8.5 Fo0NCATIONS 3.8.5.1 Description of Fcundations and Supports 3.8.5.1.1 Supports (CESSAR) 3.8.5.1.2 poactor Buildinq - Internal St ructuro Foundation The foundation for the internal structure of the Beactor Building will te tanically a thin shell concrete sphere of approxiwately' 205 feet in diameter as shown it. Figures 3.8-9 (T) through 3. 8 18(T). . Support for the foundation of the internal structure will be the Auxiliary Area Structure of the Reactor Building. Support is provided by two major components within the Auxiliary Area. A massive concrete column, approximately 65 in diameter, at the center of the utilding directly will support the reactor cavity and steam generator columns and a circular wall directly telow the crane wall an shown in Figures 3.8-9 (T) through 3.8-18 (T) . Stability of the internal structures foundation will te derived from frictional contact between the foundation and the Containment Vessel, which will be sandwiched between the foundation and its support. There is no positive means of connection between the foundation and its support. 3.8.5.1.3 poactor Build ing - Primary Containrent Foundation Refer to Subsection 3.8.2. 3.8.5.1.4 Beactor Building Auxiliary Area and Enclosure Structure Foundation The foundation for the Auxiliary Area of the Beactor Euilding and the Enclosure Structure are interconnected structures and consist of a circular footing, approximately 65 feet in diameter at the center of the Auxiliary Area and several ring footings of radii 50, 65, 80, and 105 feet. These footings will all be supported on sound rock as shown in Figures 3.8-9(T) through 3. 8-18 (T) . A base slab will interconnect the footings. This slab will also be founded on sound rock. The entire foundation will te keyed into approximately 10 feet of rock. . Shear forces created by the action of an carttquake on the Reactor Building, Enclosure Structure, and the Reactor Building Auxiliary Area will be carried to rock by keying action of the structure in the rock. The Reactor Building Auxiliary Area and Enclosure Structure foundation will be independent of any other structures or 3.8-42
YCNP-13 (- N./ interaction of the tank foundation with other foundations in the area will te evaluated. 3.8.5.1.12 Emergency Feedwater Tank Foundation 1 The Emergency Feedwater Tank foundation is identical to that describcd in Section 3.8.5.1.11. 3.8.5.1.13 Pipe Tunnel Between Fuel Building and Waste Management Building Foundation The foundations of the tunnels housing the piping systems between 13 the Fuel Buildings and the Waste Nanagement Building will be reinforced concrete slabs resting on sound rock. 3.8.5.1.14 Personnel Tunnels Between the Peactor Buildings and Waste Management Building The foundations of the personnel tunnels between the Peactor Buildings and Waste Management Euilding will te reinforced concrete slabs resting on sound rock. 3.8.5.2 Applicable Codes, Standards, and Specifications (S Refer to Section 3.8.4.2. 3.8.5.3 Loads and Loading Combinations for Foundations 3.8.5.3.1 Loads, Cofinitions, and Nomenclature In addition, to the loads identified in Section 3.8.4.3.1, the 13 following loads will be considered: H Lateral carth pressures or their related moments and forces. F' Euoyant forces or related moments of the probable maximum flood (PMF) . Fb Euoyant forces or related moments due to normal ground water. 3.8.5.3.2 Load Combinations In addition, to the loads combinations identified in 13 Section 3.8.4.3.2, the following load combinations will be considered when checking foundations against sliding and overturning due to earthquakes, winds, and tornadoes, and against flotation due-to floods. See Section 3.7.2.16 for special 13 foundation analysis procedures used to check for overturning due 9 to the combined effects of hydrostatic uplift forces and fs . earthquake forces. -(v) 3.8-45
YCNP-13 O A. C+H+E 3 B. D+H+W C. D + H + E' D. D + H + Wt E. D + E' (For discussion of this loading combination see Section 3.8.5.5) 13 F. C+F b 3.8.5.4 Design and Analysis Procedures 3.8.5.4.1 Supports (CESSAR) 3.8.5.4.2 3eactor Building Internal Structure Foundation O O 3.8-45a
YCNP-13
/ N U The foundation of the internal structure will be designed for normal and accident conditions as outlined in Paragraph 3.8.5.3 and in accordance with Paragraph 3.8.5.2. Load transfer from the foundation to its supporting structure will be through shear and axial load transfer only. Since there is no positive u.,nnection between the foundation and its support, moment transfer will not be considered, support for the foundation will be assumed to be provided by two components of the Auxiliary Area of the Reactor Building. These two components are the massive column at the center of the Auxiliary Area and the circular wall directly below the crane wall.
Although monent transfer from the foundation to its supports will not be considered, bending within the foundation will be considered. Computer and manual techniques will be used to analyze this structure. Computer programs to be used are listed in Appendix 3.8-A. 3.0.5.4.3 Reactor Building Containment Vessel Refer to Subsection 3.8. 2. 3.8.5.4.4 Reactor Building Auxiliary Area and Enclosure (s) _ structure Foundation Design of this foundation will be in accordance with the loads and load combinations discussed in Paragraph 3.8.5.3 and in accordance with Paragraph 3.8.5.2. The concentric ring footings and central circular footing will te designed to their vertical reactions directly to the rock subgrade. No tensile stresses will be considered to act over the interface tetween the , foundation and the rock base. Overturning moments from earthquake motions will be converted into compressive reactions and distributed over the foundation. 4 A computer finite element analysis will be run to determine the overall structural response of the foundation and the supporting , rock. Computer programs to be used are described in , Appendix 3.8-A. 3.8.5.4.5 Control Building Foundation The Control Building foundation will be analyzed for the loads and load combinations as described in Paragraphs 3.8.5.3 and 3.8.5.2. Both computer and manual techniques will be used to , analyze this structure. Computer programs to be used are described in Appendix 3.8-A. l
^_/ l l
l 3.8-46 - i<
)
YCNP-ll O V Waste Management Building Foundation 3.8.5.4.6 The Waste Management Building foundation will be analyzed for the loads and load combinations as described in Paragraph 3.8.5.3. The interf ace between the foundation and the rock subgrade will carry only compressive and shear stresses. Manual and computer 9 calculaticns will be used to analyze this foundation. Computer programs available for use are described in Appendix 3.8-A. 3.8.5.4.7 Diesel Generator Building Foundation The Diesel Generator Building foundation will be analyzed as a simple rectangular footing on an elastic subgrade. Subgrade properties for crushed stone are discussed in subsection 2.5.4. Small settlements of the Diesel Generator Building will we tolerated and facilities connecting to the building will be designed to withstand the estimated settlements. Discussion of settlements is in Paragraph 2.5.4.10. Stress analysis for the Diesel Generator Building foundation will incorporate both computer and manual techniques. Computer programs to be used are described in Appendix 3.8-A. O) \, 3.9.5.4.8 Fuel Building Foundation The foundation of the Fuel Building will be designed to withstand both normal and accident load conditions as outlined in Paragraph 3.8.5.3. The interface between the foundation and the rock subgrade will I1 be assumed to carry only compressive and shear stresses. Overturning moments from an earthquake will be handled in a 9 manner similar to Subparagraph 3.8. 5. 4. 4. Manual and computer calculations will be used to anatyze this foundation. Computer programs available for use are described in Appendix 3.8-A. 1 3.8.5.4.9 ERCW Pumping Station Foundation The ERCW pumping station foundat.lon will be designed in accordance with the provisions of ACI 349-76. The reinforced 11 concrete mat will be designed to transmit all loads and bending moments to the foundation media by bearing and friction. The mat foundation will be analyzed as supported on an elastic media. Dead load bearing stresses will be kept low and uniform throughout the mat to minimize differential settlement. The 'b V 3.8-47
YCNP-13 O effects of settlement will be considered in the design of all electrical conduits and mechanical piping interfacing with the structure. Computer programs that will be utilized in this work are described in Appendix 3.8-A. 3.8.5.4.10 ERCW Spray Pond Foundations The ERCW pond spray nozzle riser and header foundations will te designed in accordance with the provisions of ACI 349-76. 11 These foundations will be designed as spread footings transmitting all loads and bending moments in bearing to the supporting media. 3.8.5.4.11 Refueling Water Tank Foundation The Refueling Water Tank foundation will te designed in accordance with the provisions of ACI 349-76. The reinforced 11 concrete mat will be designed and analyzed as being supported on an elastic foundation. All loads and bending mcments will he transmitted to the supporting media by bearing and friction. Only that portion of the base area in compression with the foundation media will be assumed to transmit horizontal loads by friction. Dead load hearing stress will te kept low to minimize differential settlement. settlement analyses as described in Section 2.5.4.10 will be performed to evaluate this problem. All 13 mechanical and electrical features interfacing with the tank structure will be designed to incorporate the effects of settlement of the structure. Computer programs that will be utilized in this work are described in Appendix 3.8-A. 3.8.5.4.12 Emeroency Feedwater Tank Foundation 1 The Emergency Feedwater Tank Foundation will te designed and analyzed identical to the Refueling Eater Tank foundation described in Section 3.8.5.4.11. 3.8.5.4.13 Pipe Tunnel Between Fuel Building and Waste Management Building Fcundation The foundations of the tunnels housing the piping systems between the Fuel Euildings and the Waste Management Building will be ! analyzed for the loads or load combinations as descrited in i 13 Section 3.8.5.3 and in accordance with the codes and specifications outlined in Section 3.8. 5. 2. 3.8-48
YCNP-13 D (G Personnel Tunnels Between the Peactor Buildings 3.8.5.4.14 and Waste Management Euilding The foundations of the personnel tunnels between the Peactor Buildings and Waste Management Building will te designed and analyzed by the applicable portions of Section 3.8.5.2 and 3.8.5.3 in order to be in compliance with Begulatory Position C.2 of Regulatory Guide 1.29. 3.8.5.5 Structural Acceptance Criteria All foundations will be designed in accordance with the provisions of the ACI 349-76 code and AISC code 1969 edition 11 using the loading combinations and stress limitations of Section 13 1 3.8.4.3. In addition, for the load combinations of Section 3.8.5.3.2, the following factors of safety will be used. i b d l n
\_/ ,
3.8-48a i
YCNP- 5 m i V) 6.2.4.5 Materials (CESSAR) 6.2.4.6 Possible Leakage Paths The possible leakage paths of the plant are separated into four distinct types. Each of these leakage types are defined in 6.2.4.6.1. The leakage paths are defined on several bases:
- 1. For consideration of possible leakage paths the plant consists of four major areas; (a) Containment, (b) Auxiliary Area, (c) Annulus, and (d) Outside (consisting of all other buildings and the atmosphere) .
- 2. The annulus pressure is kept at a level less than the Containment, Auxiliary Building, and outside.
- 3. Leakage through the containment steel plates or through the full penetration welds in the containment vessels and penetration flued heads are not considered possible.
- 4. Leakage through the Shield Building embedments are not considered possible.
5 The more probable sources of Containment and Shield Building leakage, such as elastomer seals, bellows, and through lines are considered as possible leak path types. (7 w) 6.2.4.6.1 Types of Leakage Paths Four types of leakage have been considered and each is described below. Type A - Leakage Path - This leakage path is from the Containment to the annulus. This type of leakage includes the following:
- 1. Through line leakage for containment mechanical penetrations where the line or penetrat i.on terminates in the annulus or where the line is provided with a leakoff into the annulus.
- 2. Leakage past double, testable, 0-ring or bellows seals which are part of penetration assemblies and form part of the primary containment boundary and are located in the annulus.
Type B - Leakage Path - This leakage is f rom outside into the a nnulus. This type of leakage includes the following:
- 1. Through line leakage in which the line is not a closed
- l system}}