ML20041E555

Limited Site Review Report for the San Joaquin Nuclear Project,Los Angeles Department of Water and Power Project Number 499

ML20041E555
Person / Time
Issue date:	06/30/1977
From:	Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:
References
NUREG-0284, NUREG-284, PB-271-541, NUDOCS 8203110074
Download: ML20041E555 (75)

Text

{{#Wiki_filter::)qgphwnug991ENMEF?'MMWWFT:"M MM w_ a ^:] J's 2, T ~-

t

H n

n. g I' l' 7, s ? F L* r, u.s. neARTMDif 0F QEMDE' ) M NationalTsha.ultelonratisaW i PB-271 541 I ~ g e,

• a

)s! l Limited Site Review Report inr the San Joaquin k Nucloor Project, Los Angeles Department of b Water and Power Project Number 499 N .s n m b Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, D.C .s., 1 I fd lt str 9 a.%.j td L,W . q I.' ';f l ~ I n. V. s s Jun 77

J

\\ .~s l ..g i s a, %s i l

.c e

+ Y(' t 1 L l J 2....... . -.. -. ~ -~:-----"----- -'"^*~~'~~- '"~~ ~ " e203110074 770630 PDR NUREG 02B4 R PDR

5 W;BalmusihW"K W % W P'WTMT.:?!!"W.w

============-w ..PB 271 541iTE. l i p.. .q1': vq 3 O,3 ,t. ,-.e ~,t NUREG4294 .y s

i

(, 4. w< ( s., t i 4 eb .a* [ k'*. + .J LIMITED SITE REVIEW REPOR-c.. FOR THE ,'/ SAN JOAOUI'd NUCLEAR PROJ:M ,t.,'- ,s' 2,'- I LOS ANGELCS DEPARTMENT OF WATER f40 POWER ,,3,. ,-.3 t t ,,; (, \\ 1 3; moJECT 6a.dec

g

,,n ; I L l w I' l: l r 1 i U.S. NUCLEAR REGULA123Y COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D. C. .) .. ammto ti JUNE 1977 ( l NATIONAF.TECHNICA!. N SERVICE ' NFORM.a.ATIO.i on ce= ext 1 t, i t n. i, m. w m u m. p I 3 4 -e -.4 +4-m. .w-a.. e-e 4 . ms d en-,.m-- .g g>. w.a v4,, m. Ms 6 6.s.

1. .p4

, #, w w ou g j,w

UF@@T@w%,y.y y.; cw. .;, 9, M y Y. :'. '.s> %. g:w;.:; g);-,. ; y,: .,.:.%lQy.j!. h E. g.;.... :. _ 97 ~:. ;u.%t,.f.; r . - y ".:.;.,;, h . ~ +,.. . v:.... ...e<- e. ,..r g j 32 .m m .y:

,e

' Q,., t '~ [- p<.u r ~ ...W.

,c'of '

~m1 v. '4 [v* c ;' 6 -4 :, i V ..s.. - e-ra ~. 'Ul. .:.y 4 % ^< ~ ~ ~ ~ < l .y ; I 3.,e,1 i .j c i r 1 i .f.

s,,,

N [' \\ < - ;i < L:, e 0., t '1 Available from National Technical Inferr.ation Service Springfield, Virginie 22161 Price: Printed Copy $4.50 ; Microfiche $5.00 _g The price of this document for requestors outside of the North laarican Continent can be obtained from the National i*chnical Infomation Service. i S e i i k i I ~ .............,...-.--a-.:-~~------------"-----"-'

i j y m m a _.:. o, g - - f,$?Nf \\hN [.~ %?F?ff' Q.}Ik] Gf.:. ~."3 k[ 94,._.I T..? StSt.tOGRAP HIC D ATA

l. P erest No.

2

3. Re:ipiear's Accessene No.

1HEET WUREG-0284 ,) e

4. T ute a w 5.i,..l.

3. xepe,i paie June 1977 9

w

• I Limited Site Reilew Report for the San Joaquin Project 4.Pesi

..as tsaa.ne.= ser<. o

1. Am.nortal N s.

a

t. Pee:e,..as U<se**ution be=* ad Aweena 3 0. P* ** ent Analysis. lie. De scr.pioes a..

.j b I t I i l b 17L I4eatifiers/Open E'oJed Terms r r e I. s [ 17c. COS ATl FeelJ ' Croup h

19. Sec urit y Clas s (I bst 2). No et Pag *a

[l$. Ae aalab61 sty Statesu at ) R e geril Dgf 2i i n i..a y c."a s s o"n.. wt

• MM l

Availability Unlimiped i

7. P,.ce l

"'%r OOkAd a <sivii n TH15 toksa WAY pt Rt PROL%ciD u s c oeam uc e a ss p r e p o. v a. as a m a v. is t a' LWut.D tty AMI A.ND L;MM. 0 0 [ 2.-.. -iaw-#__.-

..,a c% y-m i 7., -7. =,

7. 's 7 5 :

- r;' 'PMW ':",1 , 7,z.,,.... u. w. - ; < -.... rweaMf - >.:. - -... a. g ..y + e. '. mi 4 .;/. v] l - ... 1 vi.: 3 . s. ~;,. A.y - f.:,; I!

vs l

z., t t-( l n w. c. S -a, _:,y ...,,d,1 %iu ,.,.'.1 .l 6 ;.1 3 L1HITED SITE REVIEW .,-r, BY THE Sjp ' OFFICC OF HUCLEAR REACTOR REGULA"!ON '.;. T, '., U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION , ~,; y FOR THE i '?,f?:, SAN JOAQUIN tmCLEAR PROJEC'** PROJECT NO. 499 8 9 s 1 f) I ik e' ' j . 1 1 JUNE 1977 ..g _. _....w-4 -.a i g l l l l

'~ _-=x q - p y- ..; z p y ; . _ -. -3.,,mM..f . y_ ( p-_. pg %:Q n. '. ml %.r;- p. '~. ~ r %., ?. g? .O m .c,. v.l t v,. - ' V htd 4 -y .1 ..e 3 .l N. TPRE OF C0fTTut$ ~~ t$ ,,~.. Pew 4 d*' ". 4 1.0 IN1RCCUCT !fM AMD CtK RM M5Ca ! Pf lan........................................... I ;'H 11 .A 11 I 'j 1.) IatrvtuctIo............................................................... 16 s 1.2 Cener al Descr i p ti on o f the Si te...........................................

9.. '

1.3 Identi ficati on o f Agents and Contrac tors.................................. 14 17 7 1.4 t umu ry o f Pr i nc i pal Rev i ew Me

• te rs.......................................

21 ,d 2.0 StTE CMA R*TERISTICS......................-.................................... .i <.j j h 'i 2*1 2.1 Hydrology.................................................................. e, e j; ." ' [4 21 . j 1 2.1.1 Hy ca ol o g i c De sc r i p t i on............................................. 22 a 2.1.2 Floods............................................................. 24 6( t.1.3 Ground Water....................................................... 2.e.4 Con 6 sions........................................................ 25 26

2. 2 Geo l ogy a nd S e t.nol ogy....................................................

26 j 2.2.8 Pegional Geology........................... 2 12 i 2.2.2 fite Geology.................................................... i 2 14 2.2.3 Subsidence......................................................... 2 17 2.2.4 ntbratory Grour.d Hotton............................................, 2 19 2.2.5 Conc 1us1ces........................................................ 3.0 DE s!GN CR ITCRI A FDP STRUCTURES. SYSTEMS AND COP'A*ENT5......................... 31 31 3.1 Setssic Design........................................................... 31 3.1.1 Sei alc Input...................................................... 32 3.1.2 Conclustens....................................................... 4.0 REVII'J BY THE A!!VISORf COHITTEE ON pr...U.1 SAf!CUARDS......................... 41 5-1 5.0 ComCLUSICW';.......... i r t .4 _ _.. L. _. m u _... \\.._..._ _a _ _ a , ;, _m _ a

• W W g.W.r. w :-jtT.'$,,S v.,s./;;,v.'..

... N..r...,-f"* ;3 712,n' BUCM,. '_ '; 7,,7..... MS,,,., F,,, J

y. >.

s

g. -. g p;

>p .. _. ;,,,-.s

o. - e.

A - - '- y ha s-o . r i :. p_ s v.1; e ,t

4;'

-p,w, -

i. t

, g.. . s,i. ~ '; y ', ':n _.,;; ', e-4 %, %. a. AretC1tts

K

,,e L,: AFPt CIK A CH30# LOGY 08' RI V I D.................................................. 71 . I'[ 43's . a,*, AlPD 0!X B B1BL10GRAPMT.......................................................... 81 ] Cj..L.: L'. ~,, t .i C.). t ; p. < APPECIX C RIP 0tf 0F TM U.S. GC0 LOGICAL SURYtY.................................. . v,.,, s r]. APPt CII O IIPoti 0F Ok. ALF RID J. tim 000N, J4................................... D.1 .;*,,f h 6 ./ ~.=s.' r f Y,. p 1

• v, t

,d ,4 y I ?,., , m Q s., - k .a9,... ' y q U l ? ,4 l o.s I. 41 A .e P f I i ) + l l 5- "s 1 g 1 ...e I r .ps ', =,

• l il

/ /,. 4da h ammee-Ade h men.e M.8 masseis Me.ked L as.

e. amme n a4m b esp. #,+ E 5m* 4

.ee-.' .J.,*w-we.m=+.-- e, .4e4 A n w. "me 't+ h 4.e.- ...**'.4

m 4 4 .s n, 1 l y-., M + *. e, -r L. e i ~, 'M.. 1 .x -.d .1, .3 i,,, LitT or r!GURES - 'i P- 'l r f: ) t f ~ FIGU2E I.i GthERAL SITE LOCATION................................................. 1-2 s FIGURE 1.2 LOCAL S I TE N I E NT AT ! tW................................................. I-3 ) w FICURI 1.3 GECMORPHIC MAP, SOUTHE D 5AN J0 Q HN VALLEY............................ 14 j FICunt 1.4 TYPICAL fJUR UN!? SITI DEYEi0t KMT..................................... 15 ] ~.. \\ e ,\\ / t E' ), s .i +. \\ I I l - 1 1 1 o s'k i i i 1 I i 1 A 4 ^ l !j ..t i 'i i I i I a 1 1 f A. i N N s m.- t L m u A 7 4 mm-4 -. .*-s-.m.+-4.,*e. a

• 4

<. se. ee ae

w. aa. 's 4. w.meM 'h w h h. ems...e w

es s. -mae4J e, m.. w is e a m s,mm-

.< m w r r w ~~~*'Y'% .m- -{ i '. I s 4 hb'k 3-A.: M 1.0 IN19000CTl04 AMD Cfhf RAL DCSCRIPTICet N- .mg 1.1 Introluction i } This eeport is the Nuclear Regulatcry Countssion's (Commissfos) safety evaluatloa of the tuttattlfiy of certain site characteristics of a propmed sita

• ear i

Bakersfield, California, on which the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power (app 1tuat) iA AssoClation with a mus6er of other organtrations as Itsted in j, ' [ ' i,; 1,- Section 1.3 of this report, proposes to build a nuclear fact 11tr at a future date. A construction per att application has not teen filed hat the appihant 2 ha* Infomed us of its 1.tention to sutelt an Envirorumental Report during ,s Februtry 1980 and a Preltainary Safety Analysis Report during its.v80. l ) The San Joaquin farly itte Review P.erort was submitted by the applicant on Aprl) 4 y 1174, in support cf a request for an evaluation of the suf tability of the proposej st.e for the San Joaquin leuclear Project with respect to Itaited issues. The scope ' P '- of the submitt41 aW our review was Italted to avaluating the settability of the site with respect ts (1) hrjrology (2) geology and seismology, tecledtag seismic input ' 3 critarta and stattlity of subsurface materials as to the potential for substience, a without consideration of a specific plant design or layout. Ee;ther the nuclear stese <m. tupply system, the type of contstrument, nor the actual plant layout has yet been select- ,d ed. The cpplicant has statt4 tbst his intent is to stek a deterutnetton on the pa-t of the S *ff ano the Advisory Ccemittee on Beactor Safeguards (Act3) as to the i suitability of the a lte frors the staMpoint of these issues alore. This repv t ] represents ot.r findings. The conclusions as stated herein (as Sac 1tfled by the l limitations spectf tcally addressed where appropriate) are t.ased ce currtet criteria for accept:bility of these spect'ic site characteristics. These conclusions ~ will be utilf red to the eatent appropriats di.rtng the construction permit review J after docketing of t'. application now estimated in early 193J. th ever, new l Infomation that may become available concerning these spectitc O.aracteristics or possible revisions in our acceptance criteria over this time seriod may warrant reevaluation of these conclusions during the construction perutt review. "N3 7 I During our evaluation of the infomation contafned in the site report, we requested s the applicant to provide furtt.er information. 'The additional infomation was provided in Anendments I through 19 to the farly Site Review eeport. The site -epert S and amendments are available far pubite inspection at the t).5. Nsclear Regulatory Coemission. Public Doctment Room.1717 H Street, ft.W., Washington. D.t'. and at the Kern County Lttrary.1315 Truxton Avenue. Bakersfield, Californf a 93101. 1 1-1 I ,gQg W PM4% h' ' ^ ' 9

y_-., i 1 }j Rt ' [1 I -i R I (g ~kk 3 1 b_ ) I stocurom g Y SAN i 1 A l ANCl5Co p , bi q SAN Jost .*4 , f/ 1. \\ s \\ o ,s rat 'No I S.p e. g D T '. '~.,. e 'g ' /. n \\. E), ' Or

1. l

'. n: 4 \\ <. r \\, = S* 4 , 5" \\= g =

s. =

sittg. i y-e.se 9968 I *e

• y g

t n me WASco j

• $'.7

~ s A n t astitLo S.e tv.s ees s ee e, w 4 ,q o., Y *. O ) l SANTA et -W e aangAAA l g y RR * ... u 3 acer * ~ wutstut I 3 acumca..c.m.u.as c una LOS AN GE L E S 4 SAN Promo Lows i stACM M FICURE 1.1 CLM SIE LOCATIGi ) 1 i 1-2 / / r 1 [ ..__..._.__-...,..m...._._.__..~~..-~...mm-..._s...a -. _ ~. l

_ -- -.,,as.tuadrx } A s s g i I g KIN G S C O. s-TULARE 00. i p I KERh CO. es cances wwy DELANO,_ l r wt 3 wrirem Pc d PON D O PChD 3 O PCTt4904 I RS = J. < .-l O o S d D = o I 3 i surnwooo N i i 7 5 M. 8 s:TE s s.r. =.=.a*

• sist E R RD
• k

,a.t u t, s = l u O staCa j' a 9 '? wecouss M v I i 9 \\ T t h Q T A = l 3 TS, 't E WASCO o g d JACN104 Avt a iQ 5 I y 5 43 = i w

iver a u =

ao w ? c. 2 l -l l %r E ai s i r s g O g =:-- \\ { 3 '" 5 w, m, .~ 8 LtaM stav 4 g SHAFTED i k [. ~ i; m x - =i 1 . ~ l l

.; - r...* e.ay - /< w.- c.,. a ms s . Nl +% ' & t. V p. 'y .M..t i, % r ,g ,g n.. ?. m / ,a.., v. s .. ~ ~ T _,n *. ; :,(:,. [. .p \\ s-t g t.e :,... .e t_ s l M,. ;.,. a p /la,1.. \\.. j..,. 3 .y0.. y /!" i

c....,...,.a

,..) i .} 1j Q.,.,*::::,* + /~~ \\ e A e ,,..... 3 .x P 'P "I k k.. '., '. ~ g j h \\ ~ L l -_ t w n+s 'A i iff% %:w?q.nuo,ea... M 7.'ll * '.*. e f\\ ~ &y.%\\}y. i.C j ' ", }xx:.:l:f.f<. j$h - . :.r ? \\g y( e,fX 4. b.y$- y 'J~~L.E.[: *, .g, s )hhi.'5h *. -?E, t v-- -~\\.;.,. h....., o s .[%y c. .. /.. ., J ,1 y...... Me.,, tiR.x. 3 l-g&)/ h-e. V.', :.1.: 9 QW Qr L a< -.~ a - -- , %'o,:, t.71 'O n..,. " * ~ .\\ mt.Qwdhr D % ' ' t , E,.. yh nn'- ~ hNt 1 .a s. s. ,n, 4 s. ..s + W,N.,+,.s.. W,...,. - _' N ' 'a_ '. / m ':/., 1 s (M4 ' yM *WLD;. j 9

g.,(;;

+ n. j ;..m,3 g o *.:-Q:. ~- : s.j', Ei 2 e%;gex.p . f. g r= K s. 1

• s;.;.:Ql A,

,,p):;y:

• , *l

). t *r s m. s *o~ '%$. p N. O O J.~.,s gy,3 -y'... '~~ "::L~ Q:g. .,J e e j,t g.,, k*.'**.* ,%x.

s s..

El as i " r, 7:. .J. h. (I 4 - * * * = = ':9 _.f -1 ' ' ' " '"" m e i s. ew w e "f ' \\ '% O O / * */yd ' ".d.>:;2.I'% - ' f. : - ...;+ > ?g&.f)y 3,fiq'.!us..... N';;&:j,-f.j,:..'.'.:p& H :::::W ~~ A.,. ". of.. r i,

t H.:

T ' 9,: m .l,-~p tM:< +,.py$,,,,,,. . :e s. 's FIG 211.3 ClounUC MP. Sobn22N SAN.DQUIN r,u.!.n 14 .1 1 f -6 '- " W M -4^ he-amb .e+ame es 4 . M e. -s e.S - enAm e om.W as _-

7g , q) -,- 7,.- ; ,y,.7' 1_ -,_-,7,f -,, - 7,- 3 1 e i. h 9 4, g \\, 2 NJ i }'. _- y .2 ,.g - vi f, yn- .3 A ' 0,- gW 'k Mr..sgen.e .e.6 .e=-- _. _ V __ + ^^ .-m .1 N *8 e j 'I N, \\ M h %2 4 r h.a c _.T.....,R)...D

h.,

.e, .e q 6 ,u a -~---- ..I s.7. a.e o ._a o 8' av I w= y _.- _. - _ _ 0n \\ o 4, mvm::u., ,N ll 7, 7 v 's. e g f l MI'* l' f f eemet y _j _ '#*:)_{,_w. e )-c 0_.0 U l c a L-x r 7 ' 3,,,..-h ,c ..g -......g,. 7,- u use se p ?- i j t i i r A i gs i....... ~ a. - a-.e.......:L .i &a L i = FIGrI 1.4 TYPICAL IUR LD.TT SITE IOTIIINLTT 15 - : - ~' ~.a-- r - ~~ ~ >-=" a ..a.. s.. e 9, w.. _..wm aag w ss

• 7

%7 '5 W'v:~7'W53-g :

~m'.- g; 7. ;;

:

~~~'~~9** a ..,M,., . p, v. 4,

y

x..

O ',).* R.~, _ ?,%, 1. r 1.2 Ger.eral Description of the Site c. T u. 'c ,. %y g aLacg .% ~ - a r < w c.. r -. The site located in Kern County' in tnt swttern San Joaquin Valley of California ~, g,w 7g as shewn nr. Figures 1.1,1.2,1.3 and 1.4 is located appe.fmetely 10 miles c,, fQ y@!' nceth.est of the City of Wsco (1970 powlation of 8,2C8) and approstaately 33 .'*a miles norttasest of the City of Bakersfield (1970 population of 6v.515). Bakersfield ,-a w;'cn + is the closest population center of greater than 25,000 persons. .h,+,.% b The site aM tts environs coasist primarily cf untsproved and isproved fars .;((.4 The untsproved fars lands ccastst of native vedtation, which includes ' ,,' ". [$., s - lands. dromht. resistant small shrubs and grasses, and a signt/1 cant po*tton of this yg 1 m is used for sheco and cattle grazing. The total Wra of the site is appront. Mfs,V ~ mately 2500 acres. The site topography is relattvely fat witn a gentle slope, ,Mh pg &=m towards the northwest aM has se average elevation,of approntantely 230 N fff0 feet above mean sea level. 'rt y y j t l G) n l.3 Itentliltatien of AQeets and Contracters f r.'j fi..; i v ,s J j;.- .Tlie Los Mge. s Department of Water and Power is the Project Manager under the p.. j;x..d% San Joaquin Nclear Project Feasibility Study Agreement dated September 11,1973, r and is responsible for the design, construction and operation of the project.' 4 Unf 9... The following is a list of the Wtial participants in the Feasibility Study f/h Agreteent: y y Departwnt of Water and Power of the City of Los Argeles = 5.mthern Califorcia Edison Compans .+. M.( Pacific Cas and Electric Company San Diego Gas and Electric Company y . 9 g,, State of California Departunt of Water Pasources City of ktaheim ..;. N: .e - City of Burbank 'I.[ City of Glendale '[ City of Pasadena 'l ^ %. City of Riverside n4y v.) l ,t l l t' R.1 in addition to the above partici;;r.ts, the Northern California Power Agency has s t also indle.wl an interest. in partici ating in the project. t

• ,H Subsequent to the ene:ution of the abo,e Teasibility Stady Agreenent, the City

.j of Burbank and San Diego Gas and Electric Coereny I. ave determined that they w'11 t .t - i not be Articipating in the San Joacuin Acteo Project. +i l 4 7 , n 4 h 14 ? t E ..- ~,_ __..m.-_-- .m.-.-._ ._s.aJ.~ a h i l t ~ a ^ 1 l

7 m...~ -.--r-,xe m.- -.--. _y =w_ ~q, p.y o }}f

j-'

E ~ t my

• ^8f; k-The following consultants were retained to perform investigat'ons for and to W

[ .- ih setmit repris and recomunendations to the Los Angeles Departesnt of Water and . ~. 'Yh y s ' I' $ J Y 6h.'C 4 d .I, Power: i ,n - A s. b. .c ). y* vg4 4 (1) Fugrocincorporated. Consulting Engiuer? and Celogistl. Long Beach. N-l.] 3< . 3 qu o 44'. ! California. X; p 4 (2) Keith', Fetbusch Associates. Eng1ders of San Franscisco Caltft,rnia, e '. W I substdtary of EDS Iluclear. (. m,4 n .h (3) Etone & Webster Engineering Corpuration of Boston. Massachusetts. p] - ~ yp 'i: < < g tinited Engineers and Constructors, lac., of Philadelphia. Pennsylvania. g 9.-d -(4) . U P, 1 .m Fugro. Incorporated, was retained to assist is evaluating the groun,hester hydrology.

m. am geology and seisanicgy of the site and its environs, and perfereed the field j

j Keith. Felbusch Associates. Engineers was retaired to assist in .g j totestigations. .b h evaluating the seismic input criteria for the site. The 'itone and Webster v. >i Engineering Corporation wat retsined to assist in evaluattry the surface hydrology of - j c l of the site and its environs and to provide an overall support to the Early .,[ Site Revteu Report. United Engineers asd Ceestructors. Inc., has been selected g,, as the Consulting Engineer for the project and is espected to provide the project 62lj y } with additicnal various Architect-[pgtneering services. ~~ ^ . K. u a 9 (*/ 5 1.4 Smary of principal Review Matters e .g 7 y p [ Our review was 11::ited to evaluating the suitability of the site with regard to: n T 1 Hydrology - with mphasis on the methods employed to evaluate site flood jy 1 (1) h, potential and limited issues relating to groundwater. .T (2) Geology and $elsrology - including setssic input criteria and stability of j subsurface materials particularly as to the potential for subsidence. "y A With regard to teology and seismology, our review was conducted to that depth s and detst) as for a full construction permit review. Except as noted below, mj j little or no additional Morr.stion with respect to these areas should be needed j in the review of an appitcatten for a construction serait for a nuclear facility j ) proposed to be located at this site. Howver, while we conclude that subsidence 3 will not represent a barard for the site, se will require that the app 1f tant sutralt for we review at the constr + tion permit stage, detitled criteria for }j remedial action in the unittely ev t of excessive subsidence together with additional i w! L 1 6 { \\ 1-1 f I f

• ' s m

m mm_ 1 l l f i (*; I* [-' ( [ F 4

• j '^-

8 s] r m: -e y v ,.c c a. t e. w y ; 2- ? ,. ", _,3 [4 ./ T,[% b* M' A ^A

y

• T-'- p. a5@

,c., o g --.,. . -(... SG.,~,N,M.^ W9.M W S, g <.,. y .~ e 'w .v pg, o : ',h$ t 4 C .i A.i - - p*,

, i

.s,,. . %y c.. ~A a ,..m.. c,.e g. a ?m..k N? b Hi ; date on water level,-subsidence, and soll properties that will te developed during .7 the' construction permit review (see section 2.2.3). In addition._we will requ1_re' [ } d, ' that the applicant address in the Preliminary Safety Evaluatios Report his' treatment"', , O S r,

t.. ?N,g'y

, "[;i. lo of.the accidental to stonal and rocking seismic Inputs in'the facility design (see, 3 .' A%.,cr . c N.'i: Section3.1.2).

w. ;g

. C. pm tilth regard to the hydrologfc engineering aspects of the proposed site, we need no k.. r*$ -a6ditional infor4ation to support our conclusion that a.wcleer power plant rAld be 4 3 located on the proposed site with little risk of floodf..g vovided that e;.peopriate c.y ,j. M-and feasible speciffc design features are incorporated into the plant. 251eilarly. /.E*.9 e s b tno ground water considerations at the site do not pose any geester problems than G' \\ hose we have toerittfled at other sites that were found acceptable aftsr review of N b I ' the specific factitty design features at those sites for minialzing the potentf al for pr grownd wetsr contmeinatica. However, as indicated in Section 2.1.4, we intend to TI M .c revfew t.4e proposed plant facilities during the construct;on permit re.ios to assure , tp sy { t

?

.j, e 9 M .that such fac11ftfes do not constitute unacceptable rists fh groundwater contaal. - @m - '.M y nation. An independent evaluation of site flood potenttal and grownd water considera. 9 / tions at the site will be conducted by the staff at the construction permit reviev r-a + 'E stage to verify the applicant's results. In addition, as frdicated in Section 2.1.4 1 j 4 l certain specific hydrologic concerns not appropriate for the purposes of this report j{ fr will need to be addressed by the appittant in his Preliminary Safety Analysis Iteport , QM - - and reviewed by tha staf f during the construction permit stage of rettow. Finally. .. M, A u the source of the water supply for both normal operation and, safety-related features l p ].y has ret been deterutned. The applicant is investigating several sources, and we will lMM review the adequacy of his selected source during the constrw: tion permis review. [] wc 3 Any new or different information or evaluations that become available or appear 4 7eq apprfpriate concerning the issues discussed in this report will have to be subaltted M' by the applicant at the time of the construction pemit app 1fcatten and evaluated by h.1 + - Nd the staff. hdk. V y.L.ntO WR v. w ei.o p r., h,-' I i {Qf,' ) l.

. ni.' hh d'

J. i (V M' ( \\ ') ; '-+ ii. F Al a t-l " h f / g e i j 4 4 b ri* % 7.q 1- ~' l . 1 4 7 J ' 4 1-8 'I. l ~ -+s g g '. _ [ -d a t _f k 'O %Mw AeMm 4-," g M

• 4 -wei hh9me4

- a sum.e.w4 uc'+ e a.4 ma-e

4. MW l

l gg * ' ',,i a e p y.? _', - V

• g p Q,,,'

/. Q . Q ~' ;, ;y7 j. g g ,g ? lL, - d u. I

f ~]Q ~j l z ,d' ".'.~ ; ~ f g 3, y~ 4 ,.~Y ~~y ,.~.[T~.".- r

• ~

A.,.'< - - e c ~,. - e:~ y". 1 -\\ j,_ .y A~ ' L.,...,~, ~ .J ej ~ ' v* "i '[

, 3 eQ

p. ;

i,1 /3' s s e '...

• 1 ): '"4

. a. ~ fi:. ' {t.,, ; s. m r-a*

• ",., ~ c,,

, - p,.- J..n h 'y k y' P e f % :/ - Q ',f). w. ' - l' W .c' y /' " og '... g c.t n e. .e. y n. . r;,

• c e t ' w.

b' ^[ S N 'c!.i #'$ i f ii ~ c .. a ~ Q F 2.0 '$1?F CHARAcf[eISTICS -G'* 7:t 5' * = ( :- 3r-e- VM N' Q j ...y',,. 1 y e }./H ~2.1 ,Wd rol_o2Y. ' y l 2.1.1 Hydrotnic t'escriptig ' N J

1. I':

y g D The scope of ovr' review het been limited to analyttag the methods uployed by the les - y,p j. } Angeles Cepers-ent of Water eri Power to evaluate the generel site flood potent'a1. ~,~ 'and liettei tssues relating to ground water. Informaties regarding site drainage { ' requirements, safety related water supply, or disperston. Atletion and travel times l(f 'Y i' nf itquto effluents due to accidents will be trovided to ')e Preliminary Safety ~ )[J - Analysts peport. Information regarding plant prctectlen for the design bests flood 1evel will also be provided in the Prelleinary Safety Analysis Report.' [ s.W r> ,c the depth of our review of the Los Angeles Department of teater and Pomer's Early $tte ' f- .pf1 g 1 p 1,( i Revtew Resort has consistad of considering the app 1fcability of methods employed to. .n ) eva14 ate site flooding potentf al. the ground water regime, and the material necessary '.C. 'b4

• ! * ~

to support such studies in the Preliminary Safety Analysis Report. 'Ito independent l t evaluation of ti.e design bests flood level es.s undertanen by es except for a copert. r, o I, son t f tt.e Los Angeles Departatnt of Water and Pceer's estinated peak discharge rates E} k i with comparable estimates in the regions an independent analysts wi1* be undertaken ,yb -q. j by us during the Prellatnary Safety Analysis Report review. [ r. Streamflow in the site region is primarily dee to runoff from the mountains ringing 1 ,p the eastern, western, and southern portions of the Central Valley of California. ~ s.

• Ground water on the valley floor is not consideved to Supply a significant portion of l

streamflow. ,1 F6atures within the region surrounding the site include the Southern racific and the ,p li Santa Fe Ra11 reads. averaging about sin feet above estural ground level to the east, s Highway 46 to the south. Peso Creek and the Kere Natural W11dif fe Refuge to the north,and the Kern River Flood Channel to the west. Interstate Highway 5 and the {4 . 4% California Aqueduct, are located westerly of the Kern River Flood Chanrel. , y t << y The topography of the valley flone in the site vicinity is %.arelly flat with natural ground levels near the propoted reactor locations of about 230 feet above 7 mean sea level. West of the site the ground generally slopes downward towar( the Q I Kern River Flood Channel. Southwest of the site are tus topographic highs in the j ] valley, called the Semitropic Ridge and Buttonwillcw Ridge, that tend to channeltre ] flood runoff frce the valley to the south toward the northwest and into Tulare Lake. The valley floor is crisscrossed with numerous roads and irrigation car.als. Buena f Vista Lake, southeast of the proposed site.15 used fer water supply and recreation. [' and during wet spring seasons is called on for some flood control. However. the site l t 1 ,8 .. j 2-1 c> N\\ l e.:.= = ~. _ _ 2 x ? y z.. y...? 3 m.-- y v. 7 3rm; m ~~' m

g.,z i. ,y 7 - 3 7, me v+ -.ep.~ l ~~ ,., 4., Qg .1 e o N" r O j, Aq z-

],g'

$h 1 1 w f' .t y <- e ng nto ~ ( j .E.,y = A ~ '.h and location of the lake does not allow its effective 'ese for severe floods. Poso Creek drales the Sierre Nevadas and part of the volley floor guerally east of the M .f i site. The strema has leen channelfred and provided witf. levees acvoss most of the ' y, + j valley floor. but has overflowed, historically. A das it proposed on ?cso Creek for MWL future construction in the foothills of the $lerra Nevadas..pprosisately 30 alles

f 7y,9., M

'~ o] ' east of the site. .(*. a ,c.a ' ( '8 ju

• v' ' f;

) Cround water it used on the valley floor for trrigation and other forms of wati- 'S* [h supply. Estensive use of grourd water since ahmat 1880'has resulted in a decifne in : both the unconfined water table ard the sfetametric surface of the confined equifers' '[g jh . teneath the site. The result of this ground meter depletion has been subsidence 'n 'Sh t M /ES the arm. f-m ,a

7%

• 9;m s -

$ [N@ Poso Creek has a dratnage area of eSout 465 square miles. Conside-Ing adjacent ' 'y -streets which ceuld overflow into the Poso Creek during severe floods, a dretnage M am ~- area of up to 1108 sware miles has been estimated by the Los Angeles Copertant of '.y Water and Power to possibly co6tritnte to flows past the site in the *Poso Strome I" *,9 du Group *. The Eern River flood Channel drains an area of about 5.700 sqwre alles. .y g Several dans are located in the mountains and foothills for flood control, power ' 4}. generation. recreation and water supply purposes. Upstrees of the site are eight E-t j .entsttrg or proposed dams; the major dam is Isabella Den on the Earn River, some 30 wh g lQ'; i miles northeast and upstream of Bakersfielo. ' D; M 2.1.2 FlotAs p During most of the year the tern River and t?'e rest of the stream channels on' the J'r a valley floor are either empty, or contain batar t.'.at has been used for irrlption

i., %

purposet. Major floods in the areas have been oberved in 1943.1950.1955,1966 end .f. a 1%9. To the r. orth, the historic flood stage of Tulars hh et eecorded in 1854 g.[ 1863 and 1868 at a water elevstion of 216 feet above mean sea level. A3 M ew The Los Angeles Department of Water and Powr has evaluated the potential for alte g. flooding from precipitation events and seismica*1y induced events, for the anal,sts

J,f of precipitation events, studies were undertaken of Prchable Maziam Precipitation

[.7 over the Poso Creek contributing drainage area, the Kern River basin upstream of the k-[ site and the Kern River bestr' as far dom stream as Tulare Lake. No detalled studies -Q of locally intense precipitation over the site dratnage area vere performeds this i% i. subjcct util be considered in the Preliminary Safety Analysis Peport since effects .h! ere dependent on site drainage design. For an evaluatten of seismically induced 7) 'i flooding the Los Angeles Department of Water and power hypothesized the coincident occurrer:ce of das failures with floods of aMut half the prctable uantam flood. ~$ neglecting the structural capability of suct' dans to resist sefssfc activity. i t The Los Angeles [4partment of Water and Power modeled Oe runcff characteristics s 'i . of the entire southern central valley as far north cs Talare take by dividing the drainage area into 16 subareas and estimating individual subarea runoff am O 22 e - _ ___ _ - _ __ u A. ~ ~ - w =_ = - - -. -, 7 ,7

,7 m.r ,~

..3

,,.g ,pg ,m yc kJ I < ' ;g ; ~ ',. - - n ,;g , + _ l / ~ p O characteristics; To esttute the rvreff respor.se within the seteestes, the Los ' c;.! M d Angeles Cepartment of hter and Power first estfested the runoff res;sse at nine ' ': j' different strean gegieg station locattert within portions of the 16 suttasins by N ar41yring the historical rainfall runoff response during up to four,htsterte floods .(Q q i Q I I,at each gs)*. ~ For ungaged areas the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power chose

• ruroff' characteristics based upon synthetic unit P#ographs that w re developed from G.f[j f

gerecallred studies 'n the eastern United States.'- Deservoir routings used the Modified ~ Puls method and strearflow routings were gerfors.ad by the Nskingus method with 1 j . travel tises estfeated by a Cattfornia Olvision of Pig *nssys forwula. Ratefall loss

G

- 4 5 raten were estimated based upon reconstitution of htstr.rtcal floods at the nine "hl ha stress gajtn3 statfor.s. ?4 /' [Jd Probable Maatsa practpttation estimates were distributed in time as sug;tsted in { l- ' rtet of toeperce. heather Bureau. Hydresneteorological Report Ito. M. " Interim Report. [@j] . referenced Ntional Ocrranic and Atmospheric Administration setblication. U.S. Depart. u 7 f Probable Nxtenar Proctpttation in Califernts." Octeter 1961. Washingtse. D.C., and .y.y O distriboted spacially osing the January 4ebruary 1969 storm isohyttal seps. (;g*; < 19 @sj i The Los Angeles Department of Water and Power postulated a 100-year snowpack concur-p rently with the Probable Menimum Precipitation in t mennet sletter to that used by 'gu others fer evaluating a Probable Watsua Flood where snonsuelt could be a large contri. )p 4" butor. $nowreck wa* fistributed according to elevation based on historical snow cJ.7 ,a r survey records. t!. -Q ,e .,v. Estating and proposed dams were esalvated for their capability to" safely pass floods f@ 4 as severe as a Probable Penisus Flood and, where insufflctent capacity was noted. + fatture of such structures was included in the Probable Naimun Flaod computation. 7 .w.n Because the topography and flood chaenels in the valley floor are comptes an accurate g.j estimate of flood levels is extremely difficult. The Los Angeles Department of Water W and Power estimated flood levels by postulating a division of flow caused by the 13., ' 5eiettropic and BJttonwillow Ridges southwest of the site, and used flood plain geometry %] l derived < rom U.S. Geological furvey slaps. Y).% The Los Angeles Departrent of Water and Power esttasted the peak Probable Mtatus M Flood flow from tra Poso Creek Streain Group at 184.?00 cubic feet per secN and a 1.680.000 cubic feet per second for a costined Kern River and Po'o freek Probable ] Maatswa Flood. The Poso Creek btem C~r., Probable Nateus Flood did ret consider y y* O the proposed Po;o Creek Das because its spillway capacity will be otsigned to pass a Probable Maktnum Flood without failure. The Los Angeles Department of Water and f; ' \\y Power's asalyses of a Probshte Maximum Flood from the castined Kern..'ver and Poso y Creek drate sge aree included consideration of a p.t%ttal fatture et Isabella D.m due i to inadeouate spt'.1way capacity, 1 e 1 The Los Angeles Department of Water and Power's ana'ysis of arbitrarily asswned 4 seismically induced f ailures if individu1 dans upstream of the site colacident with 2-3 4 ,a gg j' l J-b -. g J - hm**Oa eelllhw h h_aeems. h m.e J $gg. w tea 4 h p,g hww w.4 p 44 w- ->y<=-g p--- 7,- w-g; y.-.-- ' } ~~ o g ,y-- C

• (

r U -__w. s au _ in ~

..m_ ._._7-

q. m j - -.

y-.- c. ,o .Wlq l floods about half tte wanttude of a Prot.abla Maximaa Flood indicated only a fati:n ' ! j ' ~ ' 4, y ;- l .x .*p - of the prop) sed Foso Creek Dee would produce a higher ped discharge 018.000 cubt:- ,w y S r.. feet per secord versus 164.230 cubic feet por second) than a precipitatten induced;. f., ~m, h ., s W *A,

~ s e <.

W;'. ! t. ' ' Prttable Mantsus Flood frce the respective dratnage. area.,, %..w -r ' ..a e J.yy,m.., ',.. ,..f W -L ( f.y. r he Los Angeles Department of hter,and Power conciated that's runoff.typ flood with ~ . M.M as associatad fatture of Isabella Das due to tasofficient reservoir'ad sptthey ,[- t&. I I

u.37

. capacity muld constitute the design bests flood for the site.. Tre Los Angeles a j ','l . Gepartment of Water and Power's estimate of tte cortasponding stillester level at the 24 feet above rean sea level, and is equivalent to a depth of five feet. l U,jM center of the site for such an event, exclustre of'possible weve actice.'15 elriation (_' Ty jM V. ' -y .fq g - t w 'To the calculated flood level the Los Angeles'

Deartaant'of Water and Power added [,

,, T[

• m effects of wind induced setus ard waves. The Los Argeles Department of Water ard

,b

• • H Poner estimated satup at ap;eostr.ately 2.5 feet above elevatten 235 feet above sec.n

.My .e

X;3 sea level and a aminue wave height of 3.0 feet on top of the setu.. The resulting -

dests water level at the plant site will be dependent on final grading for which >,@*[o runup osast be estlestad. 1;%o W ..s fy As irrigation canal is being constructed from the California Aqueduct west of the ',,'i 7 $. ~' @ a site to the farm region northeast of the site. The ca.t11s to be excavated below. the surrounding ground level and provided witt ~ vees several feet high along its

f..M l

banks. Portions of the canal are be.ing geologically sepped and will provide valuable dM M [!%@, ~ information concerning geology.iear the site. V fv e x 2.1.3 Ground W ter J,r s ) y g", Ground water occurs 19 two distinct aquifer zones beneath tte site. The upper aqutfors are chiefly fluvial deposits of gravel, sands and stits appearing as dis-conttaa.s ler.ttcular beds. Beneath the site the aquitard betwen avifer zones is ^ esttrated to be atout 40 feet thick at depths between 250 to 290 feet below the }! ground surface. Water in the upper aquifer zone is unconfined and appears et about ,t . ?j 80 feet below tre ground surface. The conflaed aquifer beneath the aquitard exhibits ""p...

I a pieronstric (or free surface) level about 280 feet below the ground surface.

Information supplied by the Los Angeles Departsent of n;ater and Power indicates the j' water level in the upper unconfined aquifer has receded from approntantely elevation - )/ 205 feet above mean sea level in 1987 to as low as eldation 30 feet above sean sea 1evel in 1968. hter levels in this ree were reported to be higher at appectsetely 'N 60 feet above mean see level in 1973. ' he pterosetric level in the confincJ lower aquifer has receded from about 220 feet above mean sea level in IM6 tJ as low as p 1 about elevation 20 feet above mean sea level in 1973. The Los Angelst Department of Water and Power also reports extensive use of surface water delivered to the lower 4 I Central Valley and points further south by the Califoenta A19 educt free reservoirs to [.s ' ~ the north, ard states an irrigational caul, senticM in the previous section.15 to )- i be utilized near the site to augwnt and replace exisiting irrigetton canals and the s use of ground meter. The Los Angeles Departmes.t of hter and Power is investigating - 4 7 4

• • D 2-4 i

e s ..._E e *. ,( [ h _,....~4 ...g...umam. % g.mm u g_,,, % m. g.___ Edh.. - g 4

• *" e
• ** r

- "' * "'r***5

• g

, yi .. g -,.z,# v.o-W ., d 'g'W r. "% s ^ -m-- 'g, 4 1r ,n ( 4,- t 8 r,

1 1 1 p-*~' "'" severei altenative tources *1 meteep water.79se revierorsefety-relateoseter"*- l~5.p g gyg ', supply etti be'urdertaken Juring the Prelfainery Safety Analysts Report reviewt y '.c 1Q Review of makeup water for.wrvel operstten will be canducted erfog,the [rstroonental Report review i

• h,M Jz

,]i}.Na) 2/ w kia, <nr j,

+j;$w

.g safety-related water is water e squired for emergency stutdows and osthtenance'of s 'f pA safe shutdoen. The requirement is for a 30-day supply and can ases;1y be stored, . > ^ entita since the '.;a.1 volum te not verma11y large. hteep water for rams) h"j Y,b e. opprettort is water required tc[ replenish that which is lost'dee 6 evaporation x; J. % n"r -A to netntain contaelnants in the cooling water systects to acceptable levels and is generally used oc a continuous basis. 'N ~~ .W,h 1 The Los Argeles Department of Water and Powe expects the increesed 1scortation /Q of su face water in the site region to result in a reduction of the rete of f, N,Y r drew $we in tM confines aquifer and a recharge of the'enewefined equiffer. The HQ los Angeles Departrent of Water and Power has installed four ossite wells for water }[ ~ quality an$ water level sonttoring purposes an2 has indicated a future network of i' 4 g wells will te installed to suppleaont informtion fross the entsttag four wells. Our review of groJM water consideraticas at the site has indicated no greater j j poteettal for contesinattor. than we have toestified at other sites for reactors yg} of the general site and type prctosed. We inteM. however, to review proposed -(a plar.t fact 11 ties during the construction permit revine to assert such fact 11 ties do ) [' <M cet constitute unacceptable potential ft r ground water contamtmation. ,1 o,y s : l 'T - i '- 2.1.4 Concluster.s ~ U( '. q i ~ . 4 We have fut undertaken an independer.t review of site flood potential or groun'd water

J$*

cor.siderations et the site. Der review of the los Argales Department of Water .g.f[ snd Power's Early $tte Review Peport has o.onsist+d of a deterniastion of whether the sethcd of evaluation euployed by the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power are consistent with Reggiatory Guides 1.59, " Design Basis Floods for Nuclear Power Plants." and 1.70. *$tanerd Format and Content of Safety belysts Reports for Nuclear Power Plants." and whether the data necessary to support the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power's analyses in a Preliminary Safety Analysts Report are adequate. We have determined that the Los Angeles Departnest of Water and Power's estisiate of a design bests stillwater level (five feet above natural ground levels o in the center of the site pl. s wave action) is of the right magnitude based upon D compartson of Probable Maxime Flood estimates elsawhere la the general region. We conclude that a nuclear power plant could be located on the proposed site with 3< little risk that safety related fact 11ttes would be flooded, vstag the criteria suggested in Regulatory Guide 1.59. provided that safety related fact 11ttes are

• nardeced* to or are above, the controlling design bests flood stillwater level plus wind wave effects; and that the site poses no greater potential for

,b* grounduster contamination than at other site t'.t's appropriate design of the s facilities for reactors of the general size projected. 'We else conclude, based upon the design of other nuclear power plants, that such a design is feestble and practical. Further we conclude that the Los Angeles Department of Water and 25

• K

( L _ _._.._.- _ _ _._ _ _.- .--r.---* q -r , ~f. m -x ~ ~ " ^ j d g.2 _ ,.j.

emg ,,q - 7, 737-~.- -..,,7 gy, 7 7- .,w s, .... ~, ~. v$ [l:,Powr's flood evaluation technispas are gevrally a:ceptab12 but that w till urder, ' l( $h. take as independent analysts during the Preiteinary 5afety Analysts Report review to ' h, n ,O,~f verify the Probable Mesteun Precipitatfor. 'a d esttented flood level for desten pur-' x[ f 4 . ~ l { } 'fG'$'., Nf * &l .Sf ? f '~ O

• M: fAE?4 fe y 4(

g( 4 r N 2.- . v4 gl l.l.7. f, she following list identifies certate hydrological concerns that s>euld be. addressed - f. n- ,.!.J i in detall,in a Preltalnary Safety M1ysit Esport:,. m .3,. ay, j y: <,.c Qp [. ~ w<, + _,..o (1). The historical snowpeck and rainfal) distributton, and *.he tases.'esed le the s,. W ~., reconstitution of historical floods should be presented. 6' .s.

o w.

$p% h d ] -[,, } ii i. f,.? ; (2) ~ Since the computer tachique used to estimate unit hydrogreghs for gaged areas e . y s t. 'f' it at least partially based upon optimitleg Clark mit hydrMraph coefficients. 4/ i f l.. .. the resulting optinfred and selected unit hydrograpns for gcged areas should be {,. ; coopered with the corresponding unit hydrographs that have been selected using N> y S s ,the Snpler synthetic eethod for ungaged areas. 'g g: 1 n, ~.?>.j,. (J) It is n3t clear whether the 6crtions of subbasins for which unit hydrographs ~

q /e m l were derived. ard subsequently adjdsted were usef directly 13 the Protable W'9 Maats o Flood ruroff mudel. This subject should be clartfled to the Preliminary 4'f@

Safety Analy W s Report. The applicability and conservatise of the referer.ced %.'.i California Divt!. ton of Higtweys formula for flood routing coefficients should be fr 9 % n.. 1,, m,. /

• fr,9 discussed.

3, - ?'. d' ,.pa j, g 1 (4) A map showing isopleths of a 100-year trcwpack (in equivaletit water depth)

q. c I

s e' o s -

1. should be srovided.

w. ,.e. (5) Itate variations in temperatures assumed for snownc't during the Pre 11sinary ' U Manisus Flood should be pref.ented. ' d, '. t p. 4 s m.+ '? (6) Cross sections used to estisate water surface elevations f.hould be provided. ~3, r 1 s (7) Considerations of multiple das failures which could be causec by the sase seismic event (Poso Creek Das and Isak11a Dan) should be considered in detall. ,R. ] (8) Any leprevement in the Poso Creek levees. Irrfgetton canal levees, or other 'p.t embankents cot 1d increase the site flood potential from either diversion of a f greater proportion of flood waters toward the site, or by cau.Ing substantial 'y dynamic effects from flood-Induced failures. This subject stnuld be discussed . Y' " in detail in the Prellainsry Safety Analysis acport. i + ~ i.') 2.2 Geoloqy aad Seismology ', y.. 2.2.1 Regfonal Geology ...C.. Th propose,' site is located in the Great Yelley physlographic province of Call'ornia. i The Great Valley trends northnorthwesterly tetween the Sierra Nevada and Coast Ranges 1 i 2-6 e f / _/ s 3 m mee a b e. en.w.m aha m -a.s w s.,.aE sm ee.o. som s.es.w mas.o Nam e,eLes. nee _ O e.e e ' A h h -- - m. ooe s ~ w w

w. ~

m- - - r-, -g----- e,- -,e ..e,., -. mm., . wm -,ww ,-~.n - --

n Q

= w. n a__ n

~. - -, 7;,, ,,W,'.d. % ..-,,wy ry - The province caa be s% divided into the Secrasente Valley s4 ',' ' W.h for abst 450 c11M. -r y provtre:e on the north and the San Joaquin Valley subprovince on the south. The s e " 9 s,.. provinces are physlographically separated by the deltas cf the San Joaquia and ? t ._ ages 31 miles in width, it is a depotittoral basin with a nearly flat floor. At th @n,.,0] sacramento Rivers. The See Joewin Valley is appromisetely 250 arties long and ever-t J.g present time. drainage in the site victatty is internal to Tulare and Beena 11sta 5? Q. Lakes. la proffle the valley is assmtrical wit 4 alluvial fans abetting the ranges on the west steeper than on the east. The surfa:e of the volley floor,is charactertred ' L;F a ty a verle*y of geeneretc feetsres 41ch represent past, and to a limited f.egree. seesett sedinertary environnents. These geomorphic features include dissectM islands. l </j tow alluvial plains and fans. river ficod plains and ekreels, overflow lands and . y, ; 3; S late bottor:5. p,pi j Althcugh the region ncv occupied by the San Joaquin Valley is close to the active '.V] western.argf a of the morth Merican plat 2. its structural evolution since Mesozoic M, 4 :D-m time has teen charactertzed by only relatively mild tectonism. During late Mesornic C% M early Tertiary tisie. the grantile rocks of the Sierra hevada tetho11th were 7 p[i p espland in a volcano-plutonic arc to the east of the present San Joaquin Valley. '{ g The region of the San Joaquin Valley itself was one of a fortarc basin or unrfne shelf. To the west. subduction at the intersection cf an oceanic tretch with the N./ ,i Ib,., u continatal slope produced the Franciscan complex. The ancestral western side of the -a J C,r4j San Joavatn basis was formd during the early Tertiary when these Franciscan rocks m j f,.. were elevatest in the Coast p.anges. w , W.y r .,67 Uefoming stresses during the tut &ction phase of structural evolution were primarily - comeressive. howver, sore tensional failure occurred in the marine shelf. la the <[k.h 'N' sewt.em San Joswin Valley this tensional fatture produced the G eeley. Pond-hso Creek cod Semitropic Antic 1tne norul faults. In middle Tertiary tise, a major };,. -oorgant.-. cn of plate sotions tock place which largely terminated ccucressive L ceformattoi and resulted in the formation of a transfore boundary. This transfors -c H I boundary was tM ancestral San Andreas fault. i -1. 4 Since sid. Tertiary, the sejor structural change in the San Joaquin basin has been induced by regional tilting initiated in the lower Tertiary. This tilting of.the saa i' ' l Joaquin-5 terra hevada block has caused upitf t of the Sierras on the east and depres. ( ston of the San Joaquin taasin on the wst. Post-Miocene regional tilting of the ^- 'q / basta-filling sedtsents has also been accorpented by folding of these sediments along a the western margin of the basin and contiwued tensional failure on faults in the ) eastern testa. Howver, the central area of the basin where the proposed site is .,,'( g located tas been tectonically stable since Pitocene time. The stratigraphy of the $j San Joagain Valley is characteristic of a trough Witch tes subsided through time and j been subjected to intemittent marine incursions. The basement of the trough is d ' - formed by the granttic. metaserphic and volcante rocks of the $1erran couples on the east and the mafic and ultramafic rocks of the Coast Ranges on the west. The thick-ness of the sediments deposited in the trough as it subsided has been estiested fres " ~' geophysical data to be as such as 40.000 feet souttn.tst of Bakersfield. Depth to 2-7 T .,1 +

• e- ****.
• M e*eid-
• mM -

.* s.am er e .e - ~ e*

• 4

-.~.#w# m4m s. e eenw ~,~a.-. - 1 e - q w w m 3.;,c-m - ~ m 5.,x &c-s =x_- f ki e,m b ' - m*%.edh mum. l l

,a g ;;.. p. g y p-w w,. -.m w -v - gd d besweit 15 alpet 20.J00 feet beneath the site and decreases to zero 12 the $lerran _ @' y. t ,~.. W 'Yfo3thills. The bes41 sedfeents are tipper Cretaceous merire and are everlain by e- // l lertiary and Qaaterrary shallo.-water marine and 'non-marine sediments." The non. hN sortres sectissats were deposited in lacustrine and fluvf al environments.~.The F11c? ~ ^ hh j h Pleistocene deposits derf red frts the Sterras and found on the east side of the San 3 17 a., 3-haguta Valley are assigned to the Kern River formation. Sediments of equivalent age <; gg gy,i;q ' on the west side of the San Jcaquin Valley and derived from the Coast Ranges are, h<j ] essf gned to the Tulare formation. These formations interfinger in the central bassa.

p. _ p _

An eatensive ald-Pleistocene focustrine clay is interbedded with the Tulare and Kern ) tiver Forinations in the central and southern San Joaquin Valley. This clay is herein j' j referred to as t% E. clay. miocene sediments are peesent in the San Joaquin Valley . ; j, but have ret comucely teen differentiated free the wderlying Pleisterene eaccpt at ). N 'I U '; the valley sargins dere small unce formities entst. y ,y,. ~ Strv:ter 11y, the San Joaqsto Valley is a part of the Great Valley 5 terra Nevada , 'a i 'N structoel t,tece. This bloct is bounded on the west by the highly deforverd rocks of ,1 'O the Coast Panrjes structural province and on the east by the hersts and grabens of the ' ,/ : Basin and Range provtace. 1he Coast panpes and the ster a Nevadalt.in at tte Tehachapt Nuntains at the soutMastern enf of the San Joaquin Valley. The Creat Valley-

.f}

51erran b1rck has teen temocilnally tilted to the southwest. The tilting was acccupa. ] .f,., nled tg normal faulting with a predominant northwest trend. The result of tilting f, b.s to depress the southwestern stdu of the blett allowing a wast thickness of sedt.wts r ,a. to accumulate and to uplift and expose the batho11thic rocks of the $lerras on the $N'g.. northeast. Archleg of 14 baseccat transverse to the trend of the San Joaouin iM bj Valley, has occurred at the northern snd southern ends of the San Joaquin Valhy. 01 the north, the Stockton arch separates ths San Joamin basin from the Secrearnto , N I' '

• basin. On the south, the takersfield arch separates the San Joaquin besin into 5.' '

Tulare and Maricopa basins. C. ] ,1 i Quaternary deforvetton. In some cases centfnuing at present is widespread 'n the region surrounding the site. Several active iault ros es are known within a 200-elle ~ radius of the site. These include the San Andreas. White W1f, Carlock, Owens Valley aM Death Valley fault zones. Of these fault tones the closest to the site is the Sar,Andreas. The closest approach of the San Andreas fault zone to the site is 32 ..s isles, the taitte im1f, Cariock. Oser.s Valley aM teeth Valley fault zones are appront-mately 50. 65,100, and 150 miles respectively free the site. All of the acttee faults within the 2%e11e radius are ret discussed herein oecause of the dominant influence of the tan Andreas and san 11er faults within the San Joaquin Valley and tamediately adjoining areas. Deformation of the bastn-fillfrv; sediments of the San Joaquin Valley is evident at the surface n-sr the tasin margins and is interpreted from geophysical data in the .s' central basta. Izaeples of both plastic and brittle '/ allure are found througinout the valley. The topographic highs of the Baena Vista. Elk and Lost Hills which rance fras 15 to 35 attes from the site are the surf tetal capression of folding which is l believed to be more prorounced at depth. Other folds in the San Joaquin Valies with I l 2-6 ./ 1 i l - ~ - ~ ~-- e v - ~. ~ --.. ~ ~ . I._J B

N y 4 MQ* *TMO w-WW - w --y-- - - -

• ' %M
• jWW M 1:st.er or no wrfato espression inclue.a the Trics. Buttuavillow. ILMeravo. Semitrctic ' '. -..

,.+ y

• [.

7 Q ', [ '{ asd Greeley asticlined. 'Of these folds only the Se=1 tropic enticline is as close es y k 1* ftve st16s to the site. '+ 'v O i %= of the faults la tk ian.leaquin Valley and adjoining areas have teve associated g4 wit!s histcric selssletts. Others. alttough not known to te seismically ' ctive, than p. $E a geslogic evideme of ytang displacesent. Recognition that centesverary *.ectonism is N ,jg,, oc:orting in the area of the proposed site has prompted an eWestf ve lavestigation d.f 7 of the geologic stractw:. Areas of nnown fagiting w e levesttuted as well 45 .# y ,- h art as bellered to be urifagiteJ.

A

..t 'o, C.. $ itet investigetfon was fatilltated oy estenstre att and gas emploratica and developnent m, ,,j ie the San Joaqain falley. Consequently, an entensive body M ;,s:1sted literature ses available for t4chground with a great deal of supplementary detall available from 9 d.f f,elsste and well cata iAlch eere obtained on a proprietary casts. Where additional j h'] clartf tcatios was needed, mew seismic lines vert shot as necessary. 'In addition to twr review of the $ata presented try the Los Angeles D6partment of nsater and Power. - y discussions were held with lool petrSleum geologists who are latimately familler yj j with the region. Tu tos legeles Department of Water ard Power's investigation and .G5 ,.,p our review have resulted in the delineetton of those faults and fault tones iAtch are 'a of signtf tcance to tM proposed site. The investigations have shown that surface

• D'i displaucent dse to faulting is not a potentist hazard at the site. Tee most important Qf faults considered ta our e talsation are described below.

~ .g' o . V.} j In the San Joaquin Ya11ey significant fasittag occurs on the southeast near the [ ~ i foothills of the Sierras and in the Tehachapt m>untains, on the west in the Coast sm 7.anges and in the subsJrface of the San Joaquin Valley itself. A complicated pattern d of faulting entsts in the area 30 -Ne mtheast of the propo*ed site. Faults in .' ].;,l.] ^" this area include the Mount Poso. Kern Ce-;.. hwett. Par.1 tbuntain. Kern Front. Premier and (dison faults. krmg these faults, the ev>st displaccment his occvtred on if, ' the Kern Gorge and Edison f aults. Other faults in tre area are of lessor significance '9 to the site and are not des:rtbed here. The Kern Corge fault, also known as the een River fault is a norttwest trending rernal fault which fones a prominent scarp between the relatt= gly upthrown 5terran rocks and the downtheomn Teetiary sediments. The a I fault has treea traced for 15 miles and estimates of vertical displac mert on it range ~ from 2.000 5.000 feet. The Keen Corge favit brs been descrited as active during the 1 Pleistocene (Reference 3).* howver, these are no known Pleistocene deposits overlying i tre f ault to deterwine offset. + 4 p v g i it -Q 4 References are Itsted in Appendia 8 of this report. 29 [ e A ?a ., _ ~ _.., - ~., _. -...,,.. -.,. - -.. -- m b m- - -w - u - -4.m^ ^- hw w

"W -... m... ee. - ~~,~ wr"; f r, *" - x- _s V r. I' '-;,, ; ; l#' 4 f' l p

.~~.y The (dtson fault trends west and northwest fo* simt 15 sriles and juxtaposes

, crystalline a 4 sedtserntary rocks at its eastera end. It is estimateo *.o have a 4 d total displacement of 5,000 feet at the San Joaquin W11ey i.wrgin and 1,500 feet of displaceanent in the Tertiary sediments in the San Joew;g Valley. The Edis w fault is descrit+d as being inactive since Pitocene time (f eference 4). Tha enrth-I easterly trendtra; White bolf f ault displaces rects of the letscht>l sountatas 52 q miles southeast of tre site. [stimates of the 1er.sth of the fault range tetween 32 ] ard 45 miles. The predoetrant sevement on ;t has teen reverse witt, apprestaate's q ID.CCO feet of offsat strce Mfocene time. Reverse seve=nent has beeg accorpasted by 6 f atcut 2,0n0 feet of left-lateral shearing. The 1952 Arvis Te.ictopt earthquate (Riceter sissnitJe 7.7) occurred on the imite Wolf fault. Several s:411 faults at the southern end of the San Joaguta Valley snow evidence of scuecent by seismic creep. Two of these, the tern frsat fault N slles southeast of the site) and the bena Vista thrust fault (35 stles seath O the a site) are apparently Leving as a result of s*uid tall) wittwirawal. Creep alorr; 'f 169 ken hope faults (20 ralles southeast of the site) is ret as,ociated wit.9 fluid withdramal and 15 therefore assumed to be tectonic. The sense of displace- [ ment on the New Hope faults is norms), coun to the nest. 4 ..y 9 le the west of the site, the rocks of tre Coast Sanges are strongly e4 formed and = e cut by numerous faults. Altt: ugh there are several acttre favits asseg the -h faults of the Coast Rannes, the significance of these to tre site te greatly 4 well cef tried in the southern Coast Ranges. At its closest approach to the site ' '[ overshadowed by the length and prestetty of the San Andress. The San AMreas is it is J2 miles to the scut Nest. In this area, as rech as 3 C00 feet of late S Quaternary, right-lateral displaceN9t is interprete$ frce of fse* s'.rese chanrels. L 1hree faults of significant length occur althin the Tertier/ section of the southern San Joaquin Yalley. These are the Seattropic Antic 1tne fault, the y G eeley fault and the Fond-Poso Crees fault. Tre rorthwest trending 5.anttropte i Anticline fault is approstretely 28 attes lory. The closest approach to the site of the surface projection of the fault is 6.5 miles. This fault does ro' displace sedtnents atove a depth of 10.000 feet in tN site vicinity and is not capable. The Greeley fault is cresent at depth termath tre northeast cor.wr of the site property and is not capable. Because of the prostet ty of the Gs eeley I to the site and tre evident capability of the Fond-Poso Creek, these tot f4ults i were studted intensively. The Greavi fault ts separable irto three segments who,e certined len;tt is approntmately d alles, fhe rcrthern teget passes tentath tre rortheast corner on the site and terairates ato.t five attes ncrth of t** site. The 3 central segment is r.osprised of two parallel fealts. f te souttern seyent forss the northeastern toundary of oil production in the Greeley cil field. 2 19 .o m L, _ w '_ _ d m. m.

t,$.';. i ~. * 'N $.' Y^? * 'q f,'l _} L& M' 5 4 r7 p p ', c ., c s fy ~ .. n 4 Although prior to this investigatios it was generally accepted that tfe age of q 1ast movvownt on tM Greeley fault nas no younger than Miocene, deflattive - 4 q I '9 evidence was developed during this study for the purpose of evaluating fully its [bd I safety significa%e to the 5'n Joaquin site. This included its structural (' a k relationship to other known faults. type of displaceae t and definit 1re evidence I for sost recent movement. Such evidence was eswattel in light of the recent tectonism in the surrounding region sad particelirly alwg the San edreas s ,s f aul t. It can reasonably be postulated that the valry fault is within the ,I p ii . c, - region of strain accumulation occurring cn the San Andreas and tMt some strain yj could be retteved by strike. slip sheering along it. Such shearing would be .c,o difficult to detect even on the high quality seismic recoris obtainable for this - -; y area. In v.ition to developing evidence to eltsinate th possibility of strike-. W,Y t-1 slip movement on the Greeley it has been necessary 46 to cleerly define its southeasterly entent in order to assure its isolation from tectonic ectivity 4 along the White Wolf fault. 4 ye-); s With regard to the possibility of strthe.silp faulting on the Greeley, the most definitive evidence against such displacemant comes from isopach maps of various WO

q well. defined sedimentary units within the Tertlery section. In particular, the

,0 ' Miocene 01cese Sand and Upper Greeley channel sands cross the trend ef the 'U.- Greeley fault without any indication of offset. Additionally, selssic and well data indicate that two previously unmapped faults cut acrosa the projected trend

J of the Greeley at its southeastern termination and are not offset by the Greeley.

these faults have teen nawd Faultt ' and B for purposes of this investle.tton. Where Fault B crosses the trend of the Greeley, it is located approntmately 25 q miles northwest of the White Wolf fault. It is a normal fault dow'i to the northwest. Contours on the fault plane cross the projected trend of the Greeley and show no evidence of offset. The configuration of Fault B and 'ts distance ^ fron the White Wolf fault show that the Greeley does not extend southeast of T295.R26E Section 34 as shown in the applicant's submittal, and is not related to active faulting farther to the southeast. J In the absence of any indication of strike-slip movement along the Greeley [ fault, it is possible to place high confidence in the seismic profiles for defining the actual upward extent of faulting. Interpretation of the profiles i reveals that the various segments of the fault are all normal faults, down to j the = rtheast. The faults are overlain by a progressively thicker and older 4 2 l section of sediment going from southeast to northwest. In the Greeley cil fleid the f ault is overlain by 100 feet of sedirents =hich are Upper Miocene and younger. In the site area the fault is overlain by 12.000 feat of sediments t uhtch are lower Miocene and younger. This evidence for the antiquity of the fault combined with that which shows the fault is not associated with any active i faults desonstrates that the Greeley fault 15 not capable. L 1he e,sen* f al characteristics ne..ted for the v aluation of the Pond-Poso Creek L faalt were the length, crfentation, and arount cf recent displacement. From L l 7 11 p, { .__._..._w%------- ---S-- ~ * * * - - - * ^ ""*""~'

Y ypstr W / m% :.W. W i g4 a:. % WUA%QRWWf9W M WY? %. mow ~W: S: m M :.* %>. T - c f c) - ~ .. i,. m, - 4 -

• a,a e

e~ lls # .:.l. u}i -)

• , 'e

-QQ~ ' -l}',. f }g..& f. ~'. e }. + y,g, L:, a t y,, ?. . n. . ~- . +m... selsmic profiles it has been deterstned that the capable h*tth of the Pond-Poso "), !?g.. h 'M.. I ~ Creek fault is about 37 miles. It esternis ncrthwesterly from the foothills of the 5 terras to ?.5 miles south of the Earn County 11rae.. Faults with a stellar orientation are firesent north of the county line but de. sot appear to cor.nect o l with the Pond-Poso Cree 4

• alt and d3 not fisplace sedisents younger than Pliocene.

g. -

6 g ' The Pond-Poso Creek faue' is a zone of normal faulting which dips 50-70 degrees y, to the southwest. f ault displeceneet decreases to the rcrthwst and upeerd in / the section. A selsate p.mfile s;st ta the aree of the closest approach of the W fault to the site showsfat the fault consists of four breals in a zone 2/3 of gj a elle in width. The w. 'em break shoes tre greatest amount of offset. The "I offset on tab break decr:ases from apprestaately 250 feet at the 3600 foot T dasth to 50 fett at a dep.h of 815 feet. Geophysical togs of a clayey zone at 250 feet in the Pr.3 area (p otiably ccrrelative wik the t-clay) show a cumula-tive displacement across tf.e fault zone of secut 80 Q. Trenches across the y projectioe of a ground crack in the tone showed afee taches of displacement at a d depth of ten feet. .h. .. d. e-. .s. i 2.2.2 51te Galo og i,. '{ ,h p) The proposed site is located in the southcentral area of the %an Joaqufn Valley. j In the site vicinity (ff ve-mile radius) the valley floor is composed of alluvial t plains and fans which dip 5-10 feet per mile to the northwest. the Seeltropic and Buttonwillow ridges (3 and 5 miles respectively from the site) reach rnly about 50 feet above the valley floor aM form the only topographic highs in the [W site victntty. Goose tale t.ed occupies the low area between these ridges.

f. /

r Tulare take bed is located 15 miles northwest of the site. Dratnage patterns in the site vicinity which prodJce prominent photo linestfont, are oriented northeast-I y f southwest and northwest southeast. The northeast strikin$ lineations have been produced by shoreline processes and depostts associated with the Holocene Talare b ;a take. The northwest st.tking lineations have teen formed by distributarles of the Poso Creek alluvial fan. Trenching of both sets of ifnears has revealed undisturted sedimentary strata across the trend of the lineations. 4 The sedtrientary section underlying the site prtperty has been investigated in ) detal' to a depth of 500 feet by boring aw by geophysten1 logging techniques. This part of the section is composed of sand, silt and cla) deposited in a continental envircrwent. Based on weathertog characteristits, the section has been divideo into upper and lower caldlied zones separated 6y a middle reduced I zone, further subdivista of the section has been possible based on delineation 3 I of various units by geophysical 6 **cration techniques. This si.tdivision recog-nizes sta renes labeled Geophysical Zrces I-VI. The configiration of strata .l beneath the site has been deterntned largely from correlations based on distinc-I .i l tive 11thological characteristics and geophysical response of sediments within the middle reduced Jone. J t } 2 12 l ij 4. J m m,. _.. ._ --~~~..--- --- -- " ~ " - ' -.. _..

pN(MJP'Q NGQ~]vTY@ % QQ M M Q KNM M 3f$.5[*[ [N

y. T

, [ W g ij M + + ., ;.~. yt gy .s e. . ~. 9 .Ay ' n (, pg l The afddle reduced rene cecupfes the depth interr:1 twtween 240 and 290 feet. Q lt is composed of two sand / silt sequtaces separated by 0 distinctfre clay unit. y The clay within the middle reduced to..e at a depth of 2(4-282 feet has an unusually ,j high gasma-tpma response. This high gamma-game response is due' to the high

• • ][

g, ,. Inrosity cf the zone and the reduction in gewis attenuation caused by the hfoh 5;[ carbco content of tre 2cae. The @per and lower limits cf this_ cheretteristicelly high gema gama response are very clear end heve been sesed to deffne Geophysical ':t Zone V. The mineralo2y and fauna of the clays within Ceophysfcal Zone V cor. f{ relate with the i-clay of Crcft (Reference 2) tefch has teen recorpf ted in M numerous wells throughout the southern San Joaqu'a bestn. The age of this clay 1 has been estaS11shed by several dating methods. The aethods esployed inclued '7 paleontological, radimetric and plaeonagnetic techniques which indicate a mid-O Plixene to mid-Pleistecene age for the clay. Thus, it has been possible to j. construct structure contours on the upper and laser surfaces of Geophysfcal Zone V and to use these contours to interpret the type and amount of any deformatten ' \\.,. ' beneath the site since mid Pleistocene time. These strwCture Contours show that '9 v the sediments of Geo#ysical Zone V dip gently to the north st stat 18 feet per {h mile and thin from about 25 feet to 10 feet free southeast to nortbest. The-yy1 lack of abrupt thinning and changes in dip of the unf t as a whole combined with )

i the consistently small changes in elevation (2 3 feet) of the geoeysical picks between adjacent borings indicate this mid-Plefstocene Horfron has not been displaced by faulting. The irregulartty of the upper and lower surfaces of the

, j clay f s most probably due to initial differences in dewsttfonal features. Scee gentle folding may also have taken place as suogested by the northerly dip and a } -+ spatial coincidence of highs in the upper and lower surfaces of the rene in the south-central site area. 1 Several hortrons older and deeper than Geophysical Zone V have been contoured in the site vicinity. These contours show that 'he site is located over a broad synclinal trough tetween the Semitrepte and Tricu anticifnes which ntents to a depth of approxle.ately 8000 feet. Below 8000 feet the Rio Bravo Greeley antic 11ne becones the princips1 structure beneath the site vicinity. This fold is most pronounced on the basement at a depth of approximately 20.000 feet. The northern segment of the Greeley fault which cuts the foid has a ranimum displacement of 2000 feet at the acoustic basement. Dfsplacement on the fault decreases to less than 150 feet at a depth of 16.000 feet and is not apparent at all in the lov<r ] Miocene 01cese Sand Horizon at a depth of 12.000 feet, t In addition to the Greeley fault, two faults of elatively small displacement have trea postulated to occur within the 5-mile radfus of the site vicinity. These faults have been postulated (by Churc'. in Reference 1. and personal cecrunf-cation to FUGR0.1975) to displace the northeastern flank of the Semitropic f Antic 1fne. These postulated faults are distinct from the Senf tropic Antic 1fne i fault which is recognfred on reflection profiles. The Sanitropic Antic 1fne I fault occurs on the southwestern flank of the antic 1tne and dfes out telow j 10.000 feet. The longer of the two faults postulated by Church is sawn about 4 } l l 2-13 1 lx .... - - - - -- - ~ - - - - - - l A 1 I 1 l

p ' S [ 9 5. % w M ;7 @ @ ! M g f R S M Q @ g y q:. J @y%> h 'Qgg3 [ j? n. ' y: m, h :. n. ' c hq. h l s' y

,.* y ".t v g;( < L.c. yyy 7. q.

f ~ ,e 9.fDQA p W V, ..k .yT y , yl.@e.. 2p l m ., s g g i _. elles southwest of the site and st-ikes nortlesest through T285.*R24E.'ahd T275 3.. Q ' %[ 7. ',pjg [ R23( as shown in the app 11 cant's submittal for a distance of about 20 miles. f .( p Evidence for the fault is based on predactico characteristics and centouring of

-W p the displacement horizons. Displacawnt (dasa to the nortfnest) is indicated to' g

,I be 100 feet in Mfocene strata at a depth of it.C00 to 13.000 feet, decreasing to g. less than 100 feet in pitocene strata at a depth of approximately C.000 feet. The f ault does not displace an upper pliocene torizon (First Pya $and) at a .'.n.t ' Ws 4 depth of about 2.200 feet. ~ Q_., .s' . g-g e The second fault postulated by Church lies in the eastern portions of Sections ~ ~ 4 g ,{M 15 and 22. T275. R23E as shown in the appitcant's submittal about 5, miles from .y the site. Evidence for the fault is found in E-logs which suggest a missing J section in three wells. The missing section appears to be about 30-35 feet "8 thick at a depth of 3600-4000 feet in two wells and 15 feet thick in the third s M/ 1 .s:ff i o well at a depth o' 2000 feet. This postulated fanit is considered to be a very g(-4 l'tattred feature dated on its small displacement and absence in surrounding y A / -

4

.e ,,n g, s. W ,rti u We have found no evidence to indicate that surface faulting is a potential q g ~ gbq hazard at the proposed San Joaquin sita. q O.: 2.2.3 Sut < f d**.c e ,) 9w . v.. This section presents the results of our review of the potential for subsidence /,j caipaction, the withdrawal of hydrocarbons, and the wlthdrawal of grou%ater. ~ [@. and related near surface ground failure at tre San Joaquin site caused by hydro-Our consultant. Dr. A. Hendron, has reviewed the potential effects of ground %j subsidence caused by gro %' water withdrimal and the Los Angeles Department of } Water and Power's prcposed subsidence monitoring program. Dr. Hee.dron has . /'.,,,,; ; ' reported his findings and conclusions to us and his report is incibded as Appeedix D .(,1 j u to this report. Q During the course of our review, we addressed the subsidence phenomena which are ,i l ktown to have occurred in the San Joaquin Valley and which could pose potential 'y problems at the site. Our evaluation included: lb (1) Subsidence becau;e of hydrocempaction. (2) Subsidenca because of the w'Wrcel of hydrocarbons. 3 1 (3) Subsidence because of the.i *. Pasti of groundwater, i M (4) Differential subside m eV ,fn (5) Surface tension ' : m a V g Hyococenpaction may occur hc loose sont teccees saturated for the first time. D f j A reduction in volume caused by saturating the lase soil may result in ground l g subsidence. Hydrocorpaction has occurred recently near the margins of the Great f Valley in loose alluvial soils. Borings ar.d labcretory tests demonstrate. A ,g Q 2-14 L / r.- 4., / - w ,L 2. m. mm t l t

I .lQ lm&&k $%bfhlf5S f,' b* ~_ im c }l., j ~;; -- c 2:

p

( 8 u ' 4,.

e y5 s

g ~ h ~ t

m?

hd.; however, that 'solls tecesth the San Joewin site are comected sad not subject to significant reduction in volume on saturation. ' We have conclud.) therefore that subsidence because of 6drocompactica will mt be a probles at the site. 60 '*d 's N:m The raiarest significant all or gas fleids near the site are the Trico antic 1tne about 8 miles north of the site. and the Sceltropic antic 1tre field 3 utles n~,%S south of the site. Production at these locations is from thin. leaticular sands -$ 3.< at depths between 2.000 and 7.500 feet. Structural conditions to a depth of .,. 4 7.5CC feet below tfe site do set show suitable 011 traps, and forsetton perne. O i-abilities to a depth of over 12.000 feet are nct favorable to hydrocarbon'produc- [ tion. The Los Angnies Departzent of Water aM power has committed to obtain f j (+i, l mineral rights to a Jepth of 10.000 feet teneath the site prior to submittal of - an appitcation for a construction perutt. Potential oil prodsetton zones beneath U the site are the Vedder sand at about 13.!40 and the Eocene sands telow 15.000 c ' feet. The greatest potential local subsidence from all and gas pro &ction sculd 'eS J be espected to occur because of withdrausi of hydrocarb ns frca rele*1vely 5351 shellow tones (2.000 to 7.000 feet). Production in the Creeley field from a h*j i C i eepth of 9.000 feet over the period 1953 to 1965 resulted in osly 0.03 feet subsidence. The Los Angeles Department of Dter and power, using data by Vesic [n,.' } and C1tmgh (Reference 6). deterutned that stallar pumping from the Vedder and j Eocene sands be10w the site would retutt in sabsidence of IP*i then one inch. We conclude that subsidence because of hyorocarbon withdrauel is not a problem. tecause of the great depth to a potential reectica zone. any subsidence would .h be spread over a very broad area and would mt cause a hattrd to the site. Subsidence because of groundeter withdrawal is known to have or.curree within large areas of the San Joaquin Valley since pumping began la 1890. At the site. H records (Reference 5), and the Los Angeles Departet of Water end Power survey . ;, j results from 1962 to present) show that about 3.0 feet of subsitence has occurred at the site during the past 25 years. l The Los Angeles Departsent of Water and Powr surveys indicate am average rate of 0.1 feet per year since 1962. Substantiating data was pubits%ed by Lofgren and Elausing in 1969 (Reference 5) who indicate that the rate of subsidence is [ 0.01 feet per foot of pterometric surf ace decitne for the area in wMch the site j ts located. The total decline in pietoretric head has been apprusiastely 280-f 1 290 feet with a total subsidence of 2.9 feet. Lofgren and KlausIng show that for a constant rate of groundwater draudcmat. 75 i ( percent of the compaction takes place witt.in 10 years following increase in .s 1 ground.ater withdrawal. This rate applied to the site suggests that appront-mately 80-85 percent of total subsidence that can be expected to occur if purcing is not increased has already occurred and that total subsidence v1.* be on the j i order of three to five feet. Subsidence senttored between March,1974 and December,1974. has shown that 0.1 f eet of subsidence occurred at the site. 2 15 e a..s..+- a. com ~w.s<*. --=~e.-=E%=e-- --w"e~w"-^'"'" ""***-~~*"""*d** "'d " " ~ * ~ ~ ~ - ' ~ " - - l 1

aya. c__.m y : = _- r, - v --,. - ,7-, y w. 1 -r ,7-- e , c p a.. b; e ;- y ' l~ ~ y- ~ ;v.: .., fi 'p s ( t m ,m "1. s ? p, j

a'

.l }I t e t . (. q ,M]3~

• J

.m } {'

$6tesurface investigations at tne site indicate that the underlytng stratteraphic g

t petts are rearly hortrontal and laterally discontinuous over short distances. V.py l _(Me earter hortron, which is laterally continuous throughout the site area is h"ll j .the E-clay at a depth of 240-290 feet. The continuity of tJtts hortron and other ' 'fy C ' hortions shown on seisste reflection profiles to a depth of 12.000 feet beneath ' e 'y the site dmonstrate that there are no apparent perreability barriers which /,,9.,1 q, coald prc4vce differential compaction and consequert soil failure in the shear Mi h;N mode. gu ' i. '. )

1. ~4 Three ground tension cracks have occurred about 22 miles na.theast of the site.

, n.> iW The fissures are Ifnear or tilghtly arcuate and their trends roughly paralle) .a hj')3 j groundwater drawdown contours. Two of the fissurts are located west of Pf aley

• [5 and one is located southeast of Pf aley. The forser trend northeast, are 1/8-

.M alle long are sa much as three fcet wide, and three to five feet deep. The i f fissures occur in relatively continuous sandy soils. The latter is 1/2-mile 6-s y{[C D l long and *.rsads north 30 degrees west. Here, a wedge of soll about sta to eight Q feet wide has been dowdropped about sta feet. There is no vertical or lateral ) displacement of strata on either side of the fissure. The agitcant investigated e I. S 4 ~ . this featavle by two large trenches, borings, and several bucket augar holes. ,pp Undisturbed samples of soll were taken from opposite sides of the fissure for -py{

• +

gc q i testing. The fissure is made up of two vertical soil filled cracks 1/4-inch to r two inches wide. The cracks are filled with horizontally and vertically stratt-gh MM fled sand and tilt. d, ".4 U The fisserts are believed to have formed because of subsidence bowl downwarp. l'. h W',w 1 generating grour.d surface tension at the edge of the subsidence bowl profile. i +r Typically, highest tenston forces occur on the convex upward curvature c. ear the [( 5 edge of the steepest gradtent of the subsidence bowl, causir.g Cracks to fone. k, The surface Cracks provided pa'hs for surface water, which enlarged th6 fissure .il, , ~e y by erosion, 9) 4 Ground surface fissuring is not expected to occur at the site because of the q density of 50115 beneath the site and the small surface gradient and curvature toward the center of the bowl. Present rates of subsidence will probably coa. 4 L tinue during the next 40 or 50 years. The Los Angeles Department of Water and 1. Power predicts this will result in an additional three to five feet of subsidence. The mantum gradient or tilt is esttaated to be about 0.5 feet per 1005 feet which is expected to be well withtr. the design of the plant. ( .I As an added precaution, the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power wl)1 Jk I (' I measure horizontal strains in the site area during the operating Itfe of the i factitty. We believe that the reoposed program will idtntify any potential t ~s i ground failure that might develop because of currently unanticipated changes in groundwater dravdewn. To detect and continually observe changes in groundwater .I levels and subsidence throughout the life of any promsed plant at this site. the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power has proposed the following: (I) i 2-16' e j e -~# w,s hacia pere.+, S p qq,-s mb%e w, M 33gmy ge.A. 334.4 3._J M.e g M g _ gr' hm'.Mh hM k e@M he 4 .e eS.= .# dd _'@4Aedith4 %. *.e e e +-m.. 'em. %J4.4 b. sE40. M,gs s

p _.- 49er"TRTbmm..Wmm7.mMT P M N eU++9" m rM CIMI/7.- ] ~ ..... %,. m; ;.<,..., w, w., 4 e, ??NW'< c wl4 f 4 t,,- .y,. . q.. s

f t

9 i s.m g y vl : l.I L

9,,

.( .L w,. p.c u .. p'. w$.' ;O,. m groandmater senitoring wel'.s to measure.wete,r levels in both 'the unconff'ned 'and, s,. f e. V i . rg c ':-- coefined aquifers. (2) compaction recortiers installed at depths of 350 feet and, Dq.,(J.s - ^? 1000 feet' to record subsidence in underlying st[ rata. (3) a beech marl [tfed in ) ' ,V fg with t>e 14atinal Geodetic Survey netmort, ar.t' (4) additional vertical control ,y. g-y Yk bench sarts around the site. The Los hgeles Department af listay and Power he's. Ii sonuments within and around the stte. and in the isseediate vktnity of the',, _.., f. N,h.] cwitted to estabitsh numerous additional s.econd order levelini, vertical control g, f,g y rcactor compleses. A network of horizontal control monunents_ to meeture hort. - t. sental strain will be in operation throughout the site area dur,ing construction > ,.,f d R fs.;Q ar<! throughwt the life of any proposed plant. With thft elaterate networt we W' believe that subsidence will be dete*ted far in advance of any potential ground ' . c. j 'N,., ~ failure. Detailed criterf a for possible remedial action [ta the event of erces. stve sutesidence have not been developed at this time, bu'c will be addressed %h during the Preltaincy Safety Analysis Report review stage when more water 2 level substdence, and soll property data are available. It is, therefore, our N. .MO; ! Tt, ccnclusion that subsidence will not represent a hazard for the, site. s A i.. [ j A'f // - 2.2.4 1/ibratory Crnund Mction

j. g

.fg ~' The d<rsign bests vibratory ground notion for the San Joaquin site is 66 sed en an @e evaluation of the earthquske potential of faults in the vicielty of the stte 'M mhich wert determined to be active and the potential for an earthquake is the 'Tj site vicinity not associated with knout active faults. The appitcant proposed ,t destgr. basis ground rction based on the following: 'i)h r: c;u ,.~ y (1) An earthquake similar to the 1857 Fort Tejon earthquake (magnitude 81/2) centered on the San hdreas fault. 51 kilometers from the site. .~Q ~,. R.y 1 (2) An earthquake similar to the 1952 Kern county Earthquake (magnitudt 7.7) _, y;;;,.r centered on the White idolf fault 84 kilometers from the site. M7 (3) An earthquake of magnitude 7 centered on the Pond-Poso Creek fault.18 -'O kilometers from the site. (4) An earthquake of magnitude 5 assumed to occur near the site. f T'i' As discussed in Section 2.2.2 of this report, our review concluded that there !f l are no other earthquake sources in the vicinity. Other more distant sources ',Hj l s s e, i would not be expected to control the ground motion at the site. Because of its 1 distance (84 kilometers), the White Wolf fault is not considered to be a controllag i earthquake source for the site. l l Our review of the maximum earthquakes credible for tne remaining three soarces 3 i considered the historic seismicity and geologic evidence for fault movement. { s. i 2-17 j i m W. e .e.-e= .ee s. Mw M e MR.-r @me-e es.=^%+ 4# 4 0 M'

• M '

A#*

• W b

l l

Nmv m- ? P yC W~ p*c'&v W:- n m c ;"*k ; Q ;4 .v .m.,9Qap .~ y 'nr qK' t,gramama'm emanna. i}"p3 Q, ;?y%e y:)w w w cQgRXT [ s, :, s saa, - m; f 99 .,.3 ^ - - - a p i

s.,

B

i.

p;,,

-,? p; . )L u,p / u (d ) r 'L ~ Q + s %+4.;

[y v

Tao ea'rthquakes of me;9f tude 8 or greater have occurred on the san /adreas fault [*' ~ daring the historic record; the 1857 fort Tejen earthquake, and tM 1906 San rc a-3, .y Frar4fso earthquake. Because of their large length of rupture, these events are Qf , [, !j considered to be maximum for the $ai hedreas.' We, therefore, consider the segnitude 81/2 earthquake postulated fer this fault to be contenative. y 2; p. Earthquake ahtletty in the vicinity of Pond-Poso' Creek fault during tSa his' toric 3,. l reccrd is extremely low. Ilo earthquake larger t>an about magnitude 4 appears to - [.b, ( [ be associatd witn tM fault. The applicant Fostulates s'analsun earthquake of l 'angnitete 7 csi tM fad 1t based on a total c:,pable length of 60 km. Based on the .f. lov lew1 of earthqake activity elch can be associated with this fault and the 5f 104 level of movement on f t Indicated by the geologic data, we consider this to ,j be a censervative value. \\- . M. -8 The largest historic earthquate within 32 kilomete of 'the site had a maximum g,I intensity of VI-VII; the largest instrtmentally located event within 32 kilo. meters of the site had a segnitude of 4. Based on these data and the low level ~ ij,7 of earthquake activity in the site vicinity we constder the applicant's postu-E.h lated magnf tede 5 rad:we earthquake to be oaservative. l5. 1 ny y lhe applicant deteretned the ground motten at the site from the identf ffed earthquake sources by use of the

• App 1tcants Procedere.' This procedure involves D

mtching as r.early as possible the site source conditions being pastulated with MH available accelerogress such that minimum scaling on earnitude arti df stance is required to model the postulated earthquake. Tte required sr.aling is accesp11shed ~

• by taking the most conservative path through several attentuation curves avail.

able in the literature. Application of this procedure to the San Joaquin site resulted in a proposed selsmic design basis vibratory ground sotton described by Regulatory Culde 1.60

• Design Response spectra hr Nuclear Power flants* scale 4

!{ (at 33 Hz) to a reference acceleration of 0.35g. L, We consider the

• App 1frants Procedure" to be a somd sethodology for detervining Sefssic design growd sotton. It suf fers, however. from the lack of an adequate observational data base (as do other approaches) for large carthquakes. It is W

dif ficult, therefore, to assess the conserv:tism of the resulting cosputations. 2: f In an effort tc evaluate the conservatism of the proposed seismic Jesign basis. l the app 1tcant presented additional analyses la Asenhnt 19. We cmsider the analysis contained in Anentent 19 to satisfactority demonstrate the conservatise 5 of the applicant's proposed seismic design basis with respect to the earthquake o C hazard of the Pond-Poso Creek fault. r E N With respect to the San Andreas fault. however, we consider a more conservative ) ground setton to be appropria :t. We therefore, require the seismic design o N bests vlbratory ground action for the San Joaquin site for the saft shutdmen n fi m 2-18 p L f___

---

.D..

... a X.. ;; ~ W~ tw

' N f'~ ~' P.q c A % 7 0 T, D.' .c ' m --Z-:f'p/. T 7;TM%WF- ~ my st. Af f i Y x 'N:

1. ... g Mhs,,mu y&...)

i yiW zpg) pq. c-OWM I earthake to be described by Regulatory Calde 1.60 scaled to a refuence accele-gg rat 1m of 0.45 based on 'a conservative 1aterpretation cf Schnabel and !eed tW 3 2 (1973) and Seed et al (1976). This ground motion is to be taput at the free.

.1 field finished grade. By letter of May 12, 1977 the applicant agreed to this

~ G D. y requt roment. a, m;r-

• J r,;;

2.2.4 Conclus1oris +* ~% We have reviewed the safety related geologic aspects of the prcposed San Joaquin ..Z: 1 - site. During the course of the review me have visited the site and its environs ~ .j$;. JU .. 3 ED' and consulted with local geologists and the U.S. Geological Servey (U%5). The U.S.G.5. report is A;5endta C to this report. We conclude that the geological end seismolog1 cal date developed for the proposed site provide en adequeto bes1s N,g. Y 'i (1)forestabitshingthatnocapablefaultsexistintheplantsiteareawhich I 4 'e cos1d cause earthquakes to be centered there. (2) that subsidence will not s '.,4 represent a hazard for the site, and (3) for detefulning the vibret " ground 'q ( sotton for the siwate design of the proposed facility in accord with the guide- ,6:W Ifnes of Appendia A of 10 CFR Part 100. Ti%': y,:+, Vt 4 '*g i:,1 ? l_ .i d 4 e d s -6 g E .i 1 i d#Mg' N 2-19 4 iN i \\ ^ o..- ...e,-. .~..e... ',, w. _. m... .w.a_,,..a.. > _ ,m, am.,,,,,, m.s_ .g g gy.wsg wm,. f w

p, m.,--.c --., m. _ ' -- -~ < rr-~-r w 7w y -m rrm -- n-r g.g +( i g'

5.., { ' '

jI, dg :h< l f h: b8 i 7 '. ' I W @in + t 'j 4 L.p I.Q-Q 3.0 Dt5101 CRITreg FOR Sit 9CTUnis SYSTtr, Am ComppTS , vr b.o gfi

• [

i ~ .X 3.1 SetsafrDesth ',.N 3: p n cc 3.1.1 Schair lapq f f,%

bi Sohmic respcase spectra proposed by the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power for both horfrontal and vertical untions confors to Regulatory Guide 1.60 g,- t '

- Design Kessorise Spectra for Nclear Po.er Plants

• regatremerts, and control

$ f. ~ notions are correctly applied in the frie ffald at the finished grade level. Use of tiefe procedures assures that es..hquake sotloos see properly defined. . Y;, q, ;g n i,;4 line histories of eart%ake sottons used try the Los Angeles Department of Water '[ and Power produce response spectra etch, over sost frequenchs, exceed or equal Aegulatery Gufde 1.f4 respor.se spectra, thereby giving an acceptable and conserva- .f;E,.] l l 7] ttve input for ttee history selsaic destge or analysis for the proposed fact 11ty. ~py; "f [h 2 E useping values for 'elsaic analysts comply with Regulatory Guide 1.61 'Despir? ^ Values for Set mic Analysis of Nclear Poner Plants

• provisions and are accept-d;4 able.

7, yf. 3 W A finito element representation is proposed for soll-st%cture interaction j acalysis. This approach is acceptable in all cases dere soll structure Inter- .f action is involved. The los Angeles Department of Water and Power has properly treated the question of location of side and botton boJndartes. Moreover, the Les Anceles Departrent of Water and Power has committed to a suitable variation of soll properties and also to inclusion of struc*ve to structure interaction ef fects mAen significant. s-~" The decmvolution procMure required for soll structure interaction is accept-able. The Los Angeles Departrent of Water and Poser has agreed to vertfy the appropriateness and conservatism of its decevolution procedure witn respect to: (1) Use of an iterative lineer procedure to represent nontfnear sof t behavfcr. (2) Treatment of the three-dimensional soil structure system with a two-dteens1onal model. . i_< l (3) Charactertration of horizontally propagating seismic inputs by vertically w 1 1 propagating shear waves. i This verification will create a high order of confidence in the seismic design of the proposed San Joaquin nuclear factif ty. e 3-1 C) m "M*+E-4% M 4#we M t.4. M EDdf' .b h

• gg a

l Ag 6 mg.pum g.g 4$ _w q pA g gy g g,,p j, g gg g, gg j,.l,.

3.apvyggg* ~ q -u .g w = y - e x. p.w.s y m.. p x - p a. J p; (* .I I. .,+ e- $*{g {  ; '..j, ,, ~ ') '} ~ {; e

j

.,3, v,-:x liea f.u

• -1.'

'.2n 60 percent of the ~ RI, 1 ' surface response spectrum la the free field regardless of the respont,e spectrue M,a prod.eced by his deconvolution procedure at the foundation level. @D Mi.1 qu / > q 3.1.2 Conclusions &f We conclude that the seismic leput criteria established by the los lajeles' l'@b "f Cepartment of l'4ter and Power are acceptable for the early site review, In the / Freltainary Safety Analysis Report, the Los Angeles Department of Watse and ".k ' Power will be required to address accidental torsional and rocking seismic. '? . inputs. In addition in the Fre11minary Safety Analysis Report. two statistically - 2)'y ' ' 'H indeper.$ent horfrontal time histories nay be rewired if the Los Angeles Depart- '( ment of Water and Fower employs a time history seismic analysts for equisment and structural loads. Finally, the staff has underway a program of review and 'd;

• reevaluation of several generic matters related to soll-structure interaction

!1 !.l and the appropriate response spectrum for use at foundation levels of nuclear

7. D,

power plants. Completion of this reevaluation any result in same change la the I~ ' d l ' development of the appropriate desiys response, and this matter will be resolvM t <f [ prior to completion of the review of an application for a construction permit ' 2 L '. f a' for use at this site. .L a t-f, e,* 3 ' F. w. d w a-a i 6 ~..j a i 1 1 t-t ji n e e 3-2 ii I i ' S i I =-- - * ~ ~ ~ 3 u-u...~._,----.-------.u~-

- ' ' - ~ ^ '

.y

,g_ - gy-- pq r ifl1 ~ 4

• rj, 9.s

~ ./ J;*) n V, l P' n lI,.? g g,

Q,

p' 4.0 ptvitw BY THE Amtwn CostiTTtt ou POCT32 sutetARos 'Q. f., ') .o-The San Jcaquin Nuclear Project Early $1te Review Repcet is being revtew*d by the 2,3 Mviscry Comittee on Reactor Safeguards (Cousittee). We 1.htend to issue a ,a .upolement to our Limited Early Site Recort af ter the Censittee's etport to the

4. T )

3 Ctsntsston relative to this review is available. TM saplesent will e;oed 4 l n. cosy of the Conelttee's report and *t1I eddress coweea made by the Comtt'.ee

j ;,.

, !!,'l, -! and will also describe steps taken by t*4 staff to reselse any issues reited as C'.,

• i a result of the Cormittee's review.

,s +or C, '.' ~i s /e ll i , i.y, .ft!T, 8 i + t r ts! f;. s; 3a4 -sp 'l

'l 2

'5 i I ,h h \\ d.' y f-( l i I 3 [. 4-1 i m~w-e

4.. g a ne o p..ermem a 4-WS gMb d M M NbO-O l

~ . wn,w w m wa-, ,,-.,.y. m y, mm,,, y 7 'f_'.Q -, -;[1 y,_ .l- .~ t s 3 , Ry -~ i q e.n .462 v ~-

• : ~. h_ l l'

,s._ .m - L P' .y 5.0 c>atttMIONS Q> ':. ' .a s9 p ]J ] The following are the staff conclustus for this 11 sited early site review: q e ' q Hydraulle Inqineertas (Section 2.4) a j.s I<' 4 conclude that a nuclear powr plant could be located cm the proposed site with little risk that safety-related features i.suld te floodef or that groundeater secrce,s would be contae.inated, provided that apprcpriate design features are included in the i 3 1 4, ,o; J.q plant design. ,e T' ':r-l f Geoloqf. Seismoloqy and Setsmic Input (Sections 0.0 =ad 3.7) --c'i , f.,G. We conclue that the safety-related geological and seismological data developed for' @'. W the proposed site provide an adequate basis for (1) establishing that no capable j ..: n faults entst in the plant site which could cause eartPWhes to be centered there. Y.*;- f ] and (2) detereining that the vibratory ground motion for the satssic deston of the S,[;; Y Ql proposed facility is in accordance with the guideltnes of Appendix A of 10 Cf1t Part 100, and for concluding that (3) subsidence will not represent a hazard for ,J ~2 " the site, and that (4) the selsmic input criteria estabitsbed by the los Angeles 1 Depart; ment of Water and Power are acceptable for this early site review. l 9 I s +Y I l t _g O. 1 I i 4 5-1 I ( P -~n g m m

.y.. ~.m y;-.7..p - - y p o-~. m ,m m m ~~ m-77 !"' M7 W ":"Q-Q'M}R '[5W . :g <. ~>,. - 7 'f 5 s.' '.{ E: G 1: { !' i, I .jj e u 1., 3}: e l 2.- ,7,

i; ApPCA0!I A j

3 CHRONOL 0Gf - ;ECULATORY REVIN CF T4 futY $1tE PtVl[*J 9(POR?

2. (

FOR SM J0A711N ffJCl[U F900fCT 'Q DOCafT rd: P.4Q V s July 24.1973 Meetfry held at fienlo Park. California between representativns of the At:nic Energy Cocasission. Los Angeles Depart:atnt of Water and Power. Southern Callfornia Edison. San Diego Gas and Circtric Company. Pacific Gas and Electric Crepony. U.S. Geological Survey. i, . and the 8tational Oceanic e4 Atmospheric Adsf nistration. The purpose of the oesting was to allow the Los Angeles Department of j Water and Poiwr the oppertunity to discuss its Investigation of the San Jcaquin Valley area in carmection with a proposed nuclear power ) - + a plant. which will be jointly owned by the Los Angeles Department of hter and Power. the Southern California Edisor. Cnoeny, see San I. ';9 Diego Gas and Electric Company and the Paciffc G.1 and Electric Company. t i Aagost 16. 1973 Meeting held between representatives *)f the Atomic Energy C~ssission. the U.S. Geological Survey the Los Angeles Decartnent rf Water and Power, the Southern California Edison Company, the Pa:lff c Gas and - N, - ['.lectric Comoany, and the San Diego Gas and Electric Company to I ' discuss a procosed early site review for the San JcaQuin Nuclear Project. s August 20. 1973 f*: mary of meeting held on A; gust 16, 1973. t August 21. 1973 Los Ant. % Department of kater and Foner letter suhaittirq overall y schedule for the San Joagnin Octear Project. lncluding tarly site considerations. ( September 20. 1973 The Los Angeles Departme*it of bater and Powe 1etter surviarizing the topical reports that it plans to.ubatt in corme:tfor. with the I proposed San Joaquin Nuclear Project. ~ o 4 o October 9. 1973 Letter confirstry telephone discussion between the los Angeles 7 Departrent of hter and Power and the staff on Oct0bor 4.1973. October 12. 1973 The Les Angeles Departrent cf Pater and Pcwer letter transmitting a topical report entitled *Geccaysical logging Carabilities and Procedures for Boreholes in txlear Pcwer Plant Site Investiga. tions.* which suppor*s tN forthcoming early sita review of the San Joaquin hi. clear Project. A-1 N' s .-m ~~ *~^ .m

• h.

- amh3 1 ^

I ~ .,,Ng.1,.,.g sw g. ~ aM;e5 s. r u. Il ~ . 3*v,

m., ;.y.g -y <. N, p..,,g Qp.)f g,.y;. C J Nc

,w J g, . g; j , ;J y: _S p> : y c. q.m f L.x,pn _q t ~ u _ .g y

/;

e. -*.

4 M,x, ~ \\ Ag

x. 'c.y **, : L. ;, %; -

2 ' ' j; 'hyn Q. , y:, t -u C%tober 19, 1973 The 1.05 Angeles Department of Waterfaid Powr latter tramitting ' . $.s,.T s s a topica? report entitled *Princiale*,of Magnetostrctigr4phy ,.,,+ f y %[fh

• - (Paleoma9netic Dating).* iAlch supports the fortt6:catre Sam.'oaquin

.i Nuclear Prohtt. ,A hy J h,. g,y s i. A. D. ' 1 .The Los Angeles *)epartment of Wter and Power letter tranmitti.ng a

h.,3 November 27, 1973 4

u

1. .6 i

repor' entitled *5dsidace freri Subsurface Withdrawal of Dil. Gas - and Water in the San Joegela Valle). California." datawi Movester 26 7 .U ' 1973. d,h r. at w a-A.. January 15. 1974 The Los Angeles Depart =et of hter and Power letter requestif 9 [ m pidance on L proprictary seismic profiles, relating to tia]5an . Or,,

i.,

y Joaquin projut cceld be submitted. _.' f. a hy -1 g .i iW;.D Janary 22. 1974

Meet'ng held in Bethesda bete the staff arvi the les Angeles q.7);;j

.[ ' Department of Water and P>ec representattves to discuss proceduits 1., - relt trg > two-week utal review of the Early Site Review Report.' y f' ' ,k jlj .\\[ resuaryf,.1974 Letter resmfing to the Los Angeles Lepartment of hter and Poker ,[ 1ette* dat< $.1anuary 15. 1974 ,.j-{ Feb-w..y 25. 1914 Letter confirming March 13. 1974 setting in Bethesda. . Ii february 28. 1974 The Les Angeles Department of Wter and Power letter requesting a two-wed mini review of t** Early Site Review Keport for detemining whether it is ec:eptable for review. t, .'.g re. ^ March 13,1974 Peeting held between tM staff and the Los Angeles Leartment of j; -,g Water and Fower representatives ror the purpose of the Les Angeles I;. 7

• l Department cf Water and Poser making a presentation of their Early Site Re' slew Report.

,1 waren 13.1974 TM Los Angeles Departreet of Water and Fower letter transmitting [ l proprietary seismic proflies and a location map in support of their ,' j c Early Site Review Report transaltte.1 by lettse dated February 28 -] 19.'4. 1 'I March 29.1974 Letter advising the Los ANeles Department of Water and Power that j tie Early Site Review report is sufficiently co@lete tor the staff l. i 1 l to initiate a review to determine the suitability of the San if .] f Joaquin site with rest +ct to Ilmited issues. 1 1 I t April 4. l.74 Los Angeles Department of Water and Power letter sutaltting the Early Site Review Reports for review with respect to siting issues limited to by4 clogy geology, seismology and seismic it.put ') criteria. [ A-2 -i -l __._m_. ~ L 2. J _.; ut

s [. .he y_: 'ffh50"l $0.%$[UE&AN'D 2% <*' M V 5 NT D" A"^ ' VQ 1., P nO ~:,W: D~ yQ ~ g . ];F 4'f ' l f. MW ,7 ) f s _n N ,. 3 ,M q 4, _. t;w 7 f:..

.. e

.,s. ~y 6 Artl 16.1974 - Letter g.enting the witWolding ot the setaatc proUles sutaattted df t I . by the Los Angeles Department of hter and Poser's letter dated N L s '.o4, : 4 March 13,1974, in accordance with Section 2.790(b) of 10 CFR. Part 2. .-e p 3, 79 ~l

?;

kril 18/19,1974 Site visit by the staff for the purpose of (1) viewing the site

.o.

with respect to itsited issues on geology and saiseslogy; and (2) ,'/ providtN connents on topical reports and discusstog draft questions, ffi A>ril 25. 1971 Amendmeat No I to tie Early Site Review Report, Alch updates. ..M 4 J

9. n Section 3.7.1 (selsatc input).

v. ' q v:r 01 1 l m y 1. 1974 MeetlN between the Los An2eles Department of Ideter and Power and .L, g% ', staff representatives to discuss basis for safe shutdown earthquake. ^ jj j P, .g o t N y 20, 1974 ,, Summary issued of uneting held on May 1.1974. D .y- .;,Yj h 4 ' 1;j ^ May 21, 1974 Samary issued of site visit and seeting held on April 18 and 19 1974 n I May 21. 19'4 Surmary issued of meeting held em March 13, 1974 May 21. 1974 Meeting between the Los Ageles Department of Water and Power and staf f representatives to discuss draf t lemendment No. 2. s May 23,1974 Letter requesting additional information retutred in connection ,f with the Itatted siting issues.

l May 23. 1974 Meeting between the Los Angeles Department cf Water and Power and staff representatives ti discuss draf t questions and scoping problems associated with the Early Site Review Report.

g

4ay 26.1974 knendment ho. 2 to the Early Site Review Rep >rt, which provides information related to the scope of the Earl,s 5tte Review Report and information concerning Ground Monitors.

Jut! 3. 1974 Surmary issued of meetig held on Ksy 21. 1974. 1 i bene 3.1974 Se nary issued of meeting held on May 23, 1974. J .l

• b

{ Jere 4. 1974 Letter requesting additional information with regard to limited j siting issues. ] + 4 June 12, 1974 Amendment No. 3 to tre Early Site Review Report, which responds partially to Atomic [nergy Camtssion letter dated May 23, 1974 A-3 - - - - - - ~ - - - ~ " ~ ~... - --~

l f YA D l' ><t. 2~ 5,, 4, ,p. .g .g 1 + ..- l M .it 6 _ ', b. ' N ;,'.. 'C , y. u ?. _ 7 '( .4 _;g ,y n - Q 7. - <; i-... ,,4. e s y. y ~- Amendment Nos. 4' and 5 to the Early $1te Review Report, which' 3 June 12,1974 provide further response to the Atomic Energy Ccarlssion's'tetters; Q< Q idated May 23, 1974 cedJune4;1974. m.d A a h June 18,1974 Los Angeles Departnent of Mter and Power letter transmitting fj further instructions related'tolent ho. 5 E () g- ' Jose 27,1974 Los Angeles Department.cf Water and Power letter transmitting nit.: (9) proprietary seismic profile lines located in the vicinity of g p. ) the proposed San Joaquin site. [ ,;\\ lA Los Angeles Department of Water and Power letter providing infor-O June 27,1974 motion related to a Limited Work Autnortration. s' s Q Supplement to Asendnent No. 5 to the Early 5tte Review Report,' July 1, 1974 which is related to the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power's h ' N . letter dated June 27. 1974. L July 3,1974 Meeting held between the Los Aa9eles Departsent of Water and Power l and staff representatives to discuss the Los Aegeles Department of j f' Water and Power response to information rtretsts. + ^j Juli 5,1974 Los Angelts Department of Wat:r and Power lette submitting loc:tton j maps in connection with the selsaic proflies sutaittif *lth letter dated June 27,1974. July 9, 1974 Summesy issued of meeting held on July 3,1974. i July 10,1974 Meeting held between the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power ~ and staff representatives to (1) utscuss sethods for estabitshing l g-value based on Pond PC,so f ault as source; and (2) present seismic I profiles as they relate to defining the Greeley Fault. (.' ( July 10, 1974 Ammbent Mos. 6 and 7 to the Early Site Review Report submitted providing information on geophysical Interpretations. i l l Amendment No. 8 to the Early 5f te Review Report Sutaltted providing i July 18,1974 information on hydrology, geolegy, seismology and seismic input. Amendient No. 9 to the Early Site Review Report sutaitted providing July 19, 1974 information on hydrology, geologr, seisrology and seismic input. J f August 7, 1974 Los Angeles Department of Water and Pca,er letter stsumarizing a .} telephone discussion between Mr. Robert Morris of the U.S. Geological .j j Survey and Los Angeles Cepartmert of Water and Power representatives J, l regarding the Greeley Fault. 't 4 a 0 A-4 / .A --/ .a a- . -... a =... - =

l 1 $$f-WY?'OYE Y y.,.~.g..q ;.; v c,: 2 I 4 s. S_ u. g ga. , g' y .s g.- g,. g ,R,Q . u..'. l: '..". ~ r ' &J M ;'s ?, t,' ~, ' ; ,. ~, ' 33 m "y p . g y.,, _ 3 yg .. t; y 9,; q.: n ' ' - J., : .,w

, -y..

n,.- w su u r ~ e M. ., %f}. 's . ) f :. ' l, ~ "'fa 'U I -['hll ; _Q +.** + o" ' "4 ..' El,* Ampust'15. 1974 ;- Advisory Ce mittee on Anecter 5efoguards h ittee meeting held g .+. p.( i ,.c . in sakersfleid. Ca11fornfo. ,,+ n

c. j ;

7 .'y _r 3 3 i'. g m 6 {m w y> .s e ,....a. t .. 15. 2974 < ,.. > - Les Angeles Department'of thter and Power letter subeltting ant! '- T.i August ' trust information. "t,. -v ~ ~ < n c , Q

M.

n, ?;; e s: 4 fD-dr t - twaust 16. 1974 Letter.to applicant esploring ways to facilitate early identift.. E. ,[ M+3 .2 '4 . cation and resolution of major siting considerstlens.~.,, ~; pi- ,i .s. .t ; J o.- 4 e. l.

c-W.,

~ M,r, August 28.1974 g ;. ~ 5ummary isswed of Aira.ust 15,1974 Advisory Caurittee on' Reactor 1 - '^- p Safeguards w r - f toe meetime. l'

k. A s

L .a r September 6, 1974 ' ~ Amendhent No.10 to the'tarly'55te Review Esport sutesitted containing f $.af information regarding the Greeley Fault. + + N.p. ' 5eptased 6.1974 hstieg held between the Les Angeles. Department of lister and Power.' <*. c 3 the U.S. Ecfrogical Servey and staff tupresentatives in Denver. : ~ L Jj ~ ' Coloredo to discuss'faviting at the site. [6E gS v, % ti } September 24. 1974 Letter responding to the Les Angeles Department of Water and Peuer ,h { 1etter dated June 27. 1974 regarding a Limited Work Authorization. p o.. f 5epteuter 26, 1974 Meeting held between the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power, j the U.S. Geological Survey and staff representatives in Bakers- ,.,' 1 4 fleid California for the purpose of Inspecting site trenching and 4 i discussion subsidence, jf#' f Septes6er 27,1974 5fte meeting held for tlw purpose of reviewing trench work and Q t subsidence. '* J q s October 1.1974 Los Angeles Department of Water and Power letter submitting selssic D } profile lines. U 1 OctoLer 3.1974 Los Angeles Department of Water and Power letter responding to our h lette* dated August 16. 1974, requesting siting inistmation. )l} t 6 October 7. 1974 (, Meeting held betwe e the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power and staff representatives to discuss preliminary determination of Greeley as a capable fault. October 31, 1974 Sweary issued of meeting held on Septenber 6.1974. Noveeter 1. 1974 Meeting held to discuss additional requests for information based t on recent staf f and U.S. Geological Survey meeting. + 1 I a i; A.5 I. gb f ' s=No..has ee seessushamamph ' ^ - - ^ ^' k .s.. s. -s.a me e AasaA.< -ana. e ss.s w eame.- 1 l

m. - _ -. _ _ _ _

' We,".L M '! h b,l& X W 2 d U h1 F %'T^-V W W M 7 % Cl%?"- @ ? V.-- %. W,A.r. M.m B ~ -. m m 4, % flf..k.j ?.W; f;l' g by%g{ h., r

L.

30 .a 7 f,," w-

s g

-p .,,m. J, > ; ',+ @l ;. 8_,yr, %q R..f,< : n;..-[.;f ;-G ~ ~ C. J, L,,- l , l ~ - i {:3 t

9. "

p +

N* q n ' O '?b >*-Q'. ~:a " ' a r '4 i s f w '. x y ,)* ,.J. ;:.,; p e; - w rJ 1 y q l..g. - :h f-y 'fnovember8.1974

Summary issued of meeting held on'$aptember 26,1974.

i ~~ ' fC' - 54mmary issued of meetim0 held on Octche 7.'1974.' .g. ., h. j, luventer 8. 1974 , c,. O 1 7 noventer 11. 1974 Letter conffrateg discussions held at the Novest,er 1,1974 meetics. p? v. u,3 wt 5 r 'o (n hoverber 18. 1974, Los Angeles Department of Water and P<wer letter containing a restsed schedule for the submittal cf.the construction pers.it @?[ e , 7 appitcation. l {.

• )

hovember 06. 1974 Heeting held in Bethesda. Maryland betxeca the Los Argeles Depart-r%..! U [ of clarifying additional information required and establishing a * .]) ment of Water and Pcwer ar.d staff representatives for the purpose I [f, g a 1> v. i pew Early Site Review Report issuance schedule. ( Ap P 1

p

(

[ Novseber 28, 1974 U.S. Geological Survey letter posing'o estions relating to uty N,j further substdence may not occur at proposed site. 'JM~ s'7 o December 6. 1974 Ameneent No.11 to the Early Site Review Report sutaitted. which. contains further Greeley Fault information. l i i January 8. 1975 Letter issued reqsetting addittenal information and containing a revised cceslatica schedule for the majcr milestones. [ January 21,1975 Summary issued of meeting held on Novaaber 26. 1974. .fd e February 6. 1975 Letter issued granting the withholding of the proprietary setsste profiles sutaitted with the Les Anoeles Department of Water and Power letters dated June 27.1974. July 8,1974 ard October 1 1 1974 y i . d. - February 10. 1975 Los Angeles Department of Water and Power letter providing consents related to our letter dated January 9.1975. i L' February 10. 1975 Los Angeles Department of Water and Pater letter sutaltting addf- ] 5 tional seismic profile lines and a location map. l a 3 Los Angeles D*partment of Water and Poner letter transmitting a i a February 24. 1975 jI revised selsmic profile Ilne 1901 which replaces that sutritted by letter dated February 10. 1975. y Amenevnt No.12 to the Early 5tte Review Report sutmitted, which February 28. 1975 contains responses to questions posed in our letter dated Jan ary 8 l. ) 1975. m 0 I 3 J A-6 m .'.) / i g h .) L E.. _ _ _ _._. _ ......... _. 2 _. _.. _ _ _ _. ___ _n_.,w

mfg M== c.;nM'*p y n.,.. w w. m r. 2 2 m m v y, m.n . g. - _..n x ~. - - ' '. %%,E : '1%C i ^ '.., ',, h.s $ , ? ,, :t } ',.:f'.. ~ h, j'f.,n(S WV 'f, 7+h.m; {&} .t -( 'J ~ iIf l sy ,. ; y :. ..y w. . n.m.,. ~., wy un w.,. .n, x. v y y-i ..- 7s- .s. -*d,. y -s p g.;w .mitted with letters dated February 10 and 24,1975.E vj p Lettee issued granting the withholding of the proffle lines sub-March 19.1975 if[f,.; M c pp i { March 20. ' W S, Meeting held in Denver Colorade between the Los Angeles Department.. s of Water and Power, the !!.5. Geological Smey and staff represents M Wl tives for the parpose of ditcsssing knendment ha.12 to the Early .*W -~ e

• s

v

~ i EP site Review Report. i ,'A',.' W ~, ' ' ; r., 3 i Marcti 28, 1975 Septement to Amendment No.12 to the Early Site Review Report ,,7 3:] received submitting editorial formt changes. M y s 7 + g. . t.y ,L, s [, April 7.1975 Suenary issued of anettng held on March 20. 1975. ~ ,y/ 7 c j d p. + e s April 10,1975 Meeting held in Bethesde. Maryland betmen the Los Angeles Depart-g[ ..b, }- ment of Water end Power, the U.S. Ecological Senvey and staff = fi.j representatives to discuss soll structure interactice saalysis to' u-- ~* s 6.3 F~ be used to e.nalyre tre site. L, g;' MfC -a April 14. 1975 Amendment me.13 to the Early $tte Review Report submitted which .s 3,; b'. d ^ l.' responds to questions posed at the fierch 20. 1975 meeting. .g ( s 0;. 4 e c April 14. 1975 Ame@ent No.14 to the Early Site Review Report submitted which h' responds to questions posed at the March 20. 1975 meeting. 'b i. a f, April 23, 1975 Summary issued which corrects the meeting swanary issued on April 7. .) 1975. ( May 6, 1975 $ m mary issued of erettag held on April 10. 1975. ~; ; May 19/20/21,1975 Meeting held in Los Angeles California between the Los An9eles e[ Department of Water and Power and staff representatives to conduct an overall review of the project to date and to discuss alternate interpretations of certain oil and gas data. [.; r 'a 6 May 21. 1975 Antthst information sutaitted. ,s. June 13. 1975 Notice of app 1tcation pertaining to antitrust matters pubitsned in the FEDERAL REGISTER. Ju e 24, 1975 Suunary issued of meetings held on May 19, 20. and 21.1975. n i July 23/24/25, 1975 Meeting held in Los Angeles and Bakersfield Califormta between Lcs Angeles Department of Water and Power and the staff representatives. to discuss the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power's position with respect to the absence of strikes 11p on the Greeley Fault. t A.7 + i. e e i i -~n--."s---~~=a~- ^'- us==LL~ M4 u..w . -... ~.,.....~ ~ - -....- .n~->- ~ - -~~<

y g , --..,,7 y..,, wy q.g.g, y,yg.g,. f.g g,5.y q,,"-" j-. - - -. u,- _ 1 'r ~; .8

• - l

. x... ,.j. l ~ ' 'Y,,q: :;p-g W r,'W . p:.;m,. : ?p_ *'y _l.f.Q'& q_ L',f l v w s;;g q_g; .,,.p ',-. y 4. '6- -- e,..;.. r.. g y-( a,,,,. c [,.. -,~,mg _ y. f. %_....s ,;s. + m. ~'~ ~ ~ .,+. t m, ' "- 1 % . ' Septester 25. 1975 Amendment No.15 to the Early Site Revise Report 'sutaitted eith

• 1." ~ W 2

J. t p; t responds partially to questions posed et the May 21.1975 oceting. + c 3 _f ;c #-s i e ...e-JJ ?p = t g. Asendment No.16 to the Early Site Review Re9ert sdottted *1ch-- ,g; j ' Octraer 30. 1975 i responds to tne remainder of the questfons posed at the my 21.' $@;+. g WJ 11975 meeting. J-Y.i r '. ..y r '..y. i;, Novancer 12. 1975 Los Aegeles Department of Water' and Power letter s@ef tting seisatc' I I-y ~ ,,4 profiles. A i-1 3- .;.,.~ j~ meventer it.1975 - Septement to Amendment No.f 16 to the Early 5f te P.sview Report. ) l received sutaltting a reprint of Ftpre 2.5.1-7A.' l j 1 t f hys6er 18.1975 Ameedser:t No.17 to the [arly Site Review Report submitted etch y provides information related to the Ptpd-Poso investigations. ~ i q moverber 21. 1975 Los Angales Department of Water and Power' letter forwarding Pfj photographs requested by the staff and the U.S. Geological Survey ( at the July 23,1975 meeting. sq ^ f 9 Novesber 24. 1975 Attorney General's letter rendering antitrust advice issued. t 1 ~ Letter requesting photographs in addition to those submitted in c.] l December 8. 1975 the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power letter dated d. November 21. 1975. d p i ..,w 6 December 16/11,1975 Meeting held in Golden. Colorado between the Los Angeles Department of Water and Pwr and staff representatives to discuss soll , w, structure interaction analysis and recent amendsents and field 7 studies. t December 23. 1975 Amendment ko.18 to the Early itte Review Report submitted cont; ning information requestef at the December 16. 1975 meeting. u March 22. 1976 tetter issued regarding schedule for Early Site Review Report. March 30. 1976 Meeting held in Bethesda to discuss the Early $1te Review Report. 5 2 March 30. 1976 Meeting held in Mr. Rusche's office to discuss schedule concerns i regarding the Early Site Revied Report. I I l April 19, 1976 Summary of Meeting held on March 30. 1976. I I April 29. 1976 Letter justifying seismic profiles owned by Standard 011 Ccapany l I f andFugro(Consultants)asproprietaryinforzationandwithholding thee f rom public disclosure, j i A-8 l h / .tl / . b 's b4 me. msbe.m .-s.a. eO _w b -.apsuse a. _. m a- +Mhh*%re eh w w w.m.as.p.omo aw .%,%ggh he**-N-N M A* * % 4-MH4WJM h MMe.mM4 ^

y9 men,d. ??"?rtCmamawamesmas:.asih "==

• • =c*'""

Ky.23&yghy. _ .h?- =%9f mm ;. r "%% ~ a. [. - 'y.-u . ?.w t- ,t x y i

r-c-,

,e' /S2t'- <el }g)' ( _s 3' g- } ~ . s ~, ( - 'f - ll

1.,

4; . r h,, W ,N,. P ~ k June 25,1976 ' Meeting held in Long Beact. California, among representatives from' 'd ( de~ Fugro (Consultants). State of California Les Argeles Department of ?> r Y Water and Power and staff to revfew the proposed San Jocquin $lte kh 4 Geology and Seismology with t% Catffornia Division of Mires and Dh t a 1 k, Geology. 9m.. 4, i; y' S June 29.1976 Los Angeles Departsent of Water and Power letter transmitting a f l ' schedule for swbelttal of thef r appitca' ion. 'Q w 's'

i. s

'N.,- Letter issued tran:mitting the U.S. Geological Survey letters of 'K July 20. 1376, June 15.1976 sed June 17. 1976. b .J g.n .;. } July 30, 1976 Los.%ngeles Department of Water and Power letter concerning estending ,m ) the review perlud for the Draft rnvironmental Ispect Report - h 'l 'i ] Revised for the San Joaquin Nuclear Project. ,g t ;( . l, , f *, n', (- ~ August 3. 1976 Meeting held in Munio Park, California, among representatives from Los Angeles Department of Water and Power. U.S.' Geological Survey. . a Western Geophysical ami staff to tiscuss Seismology of the San .Jg Joaquin Nuclear project. b sj August 20. 1976 Summary of Meeting held with Los An9eles Department of Water and Power to discuss the Selsrciogy of the San Joaquin Nuclear Project ] Site. wn y1 i$ Septeeter 2. 1976 Los Angeles Departrent of Water and Power letter concerning their June 2*.1976 letter on the schedule for submittal of the applica-tion. Preliminary Safety Analysis Report and Envirornental Report. J". October 4.1976 Los Angcles Department of Water and Power letter concerning an Early 5tte Rawlew Report. hovember 1976 Letter issued regarding security plans. 1 [ November 23, 1976 Letter issued regarding the Pesponse to the Les Asgeles Lepartment of Water and Power letter of October 4,1976. j Decenter 14, 1976 Meeting held in Bethesda, Md. among representatives from Los Angeles Department of Water and Power. U.S. Geological Survey and staf f to review the seismology for the preposed San Joaquin Nuclear Project. January 12. 1977 Sunnary of Meeting held on Decent.er 14. 1976 to Review the Setsaology for the Proposed San Joaquin Nuclear Project. 1 A-9 I l a ~ ,s 4 ~'~~"--'"s~~~'*"=*A "~-= A L_.,._ s.....n-. J.~~-.. n ->.- ~ ~.- ~ -

$ i l k. M i} N ? I D W " ~9<n # '~'.~ W -:'tO "M < ' a m.;=l5 xO 'M;4;~, mq

cy.*r1 g

r., y;y: q rS ~ s .w.

m -

p.

p.,,... s....g,.,., yg y. g. ;q.7;.,;,, 1

... ; q :g - ~ - n ....... s ... c.. _ . g. ., a. %.,,,, g,:.....,

e

^ ..3 s. 4, st. o - ; s. + we r., y y . ~,,, e -. y;,,., ,, k.u ' s 3, i - 's. n y~<- e, t. 3,,,. 4 . :.y,....,,. n.,a, ; n .f' o -- -..; = t.~ ' r _,.., 6. Og 1 .s.;. v, 7 b I %,,.. * -M t . Amen'knt ho.19 to the Early Site Review Report sutmitted etch. - a ', " ^ - Nrch 9l 19[7 provides addittor.a1 infomettom regarding the Pond-POSO Creek' 4....e 3 ~ c. e' fault. 4 I N. '[.';& tetter issued regarding Standard Forest for Meteorological Data ' C /. r Aprill 22,1977 on Magnetic Tape. Los Argeles Departzent of Water and Power letter ad.istng that the f Ny 12.1977 San Joaquin nuclear Project will be designc$ to withstanJ a safe " f','c '-7 ) Shutdown Earthquske represented by the Regulatory Guide 1.60 spectre ,./,. l normeltzed to 0.45g and an Operatteg Basis Earthquake repreteated t y by the Regulatory Gelde 1.60 spectra nomall:ed to 0.2249 r... i ?l i1 -.4 p 3 1 6. g i ( ~ ,(# L,.. O, ,4 1 ? ..( ,,w-1 "~

• fa

.,)

,. j s

s e (.] ,{F r . i, ..p P L 4 i' s f t ..t i b -J e h 1 b 4 t L i i I / 4 e A-10 .e b h. 4 m m&Le 4 -e e s d% + cmemb.ga ,,A.A.,eg. .,e v 4

y. e s,e,,,4.g,,.s g,.e,

g,,, a4 g,,,., j g ,g a i I

vy .=7 m] F,- ' 7O ~ ,"~ m 7{.7, - - - m w.m ,2.. > r [.u Q g' -. /... t .,% >.[y hfy,. l;; ;(

-g

,~> + y* y:q Y ._.f ^ a. \\- n. -i K'. .l %y, + 5; r

$ W r.

• .:,1:

ll ' ^

• APPCM0!r 3 I

L; j 3!St103APHY 'Y'v 'N., PEFER mCES WM ,P ';q 1. Ciner1. M. V. 19f,5. Plfucene Gas and Gil in the semitropic-Trico Area. San Joaquin Valley. (OT 1 s California: American Association of Petroleus Geologtsts. Paciflc Section. 40th Annual M. - 9 pletting in 8atersfield. Calif. "J 'Q.O 2. Croft. M. G.,1972. Subsurf:ce Geology of the Lake Tertiary and theatermry Waterbearing -(( Deposits of the Scutwa Part of the San Joaquin Valley Celtfernfa: Geilogical Survey. ( b] Water Supply Par.er IM9-H. . i. % '.6 e y,- 3. DILblee, T. W., Jr. 1955. Geology of the Southeastsrn Mergia of'the San Joegin Valley. N CalifJttle, la Carthquakes la Kern County, C411forefa. During 1952: California Division of 6$'. Mines and Leology Bulletin 171. - C l) ' N+s < } 2'd ) i 4 Dtbblee. T. W.. Jr., and Chesterman. C. W.,1953. Geology of the Breckenr;.;ge Mountain pcq Quadrangle. California: California Department of hetves1 Resource. Division of Mines ., g.; .'"'..a , - f tulletin 168. fW. N g., -- 5. Lofgren. S. [.. and Klausteg. R. L.,1969. Lano Subsidence Due to Grounesater WitMraus). .) Tulare-Wasco Area. California: U. 5. Geological Survey Professional Paper 437 8. 6. Veste. A. 5.. and Clough. G. W. 1968. Pohavior of Granular Materials Under High Stresses: 4 Proceedings of the American Society of Civil Cngineeriv;. Volume 94. Section 3 of the Journal of $111 Mechanics. Four.tations Division. Page 661. '<Q'.% J .a b -.J ,4 -M

• 'o i

,e* \\ e, d p o .,1 i .1 1 i i i ( ..i i i w ,g4ye %ey& pm.MA'* %WO*HO O

.. c m m m w.e_ w y n w w ~ n

.: v ~ m - p y 7q n

b. /.

~

pu 4 y .. sn '? i M's J.^! APPDtDIX C T: T i tg United States Department of the In.terior ~ a I Q, H u w [j d. GEotocICAL s';mY ';'? RESTON, VIRGINIA WM J,t g su h . In Reply Refer To: EGS-!4ati Stop 905 T',41 IW 23 yy ,c 'Mr. Edson G. Case , 7.3 4i i ' Acting Director of the Office of 'e / Nuclear Reactor Ecgulation U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission 'c liashington, D.C. 20555 O - !O

Dear Mr. Case:

.y .O '~ i Transmitted herewith, in response to your request, is'a revised rtview o '[ ; of the scologic and scismologic data relevent to tha San Jocquin IMclear Project Early Sito Raview (HRC Project No. 493). This; revision results from the review of additional data provided by the Lor. Angeles i;:.l. Departrent of Water and Power. This reirlew was prepared by Mr. P.obert H. Iberis. Ocology, and Mr. Stanley R. Broclzun. Seisralogy. 14r. Brocknan was assisted by Dr. Robert A. Page and Mr. Jcmes F. Devine. _n Sincerely yours, 0 ^ ...n.$cultw net, ins Director a enclosure t i I i' f; 5', a-g i W 5 s 0 \\ / J.- %.e. N .g e:s --_a L--.,..-....-.--~.--.--._.-- . ~. - - . ~ - - -

.y

.7,y,_7 g.3 -.n.-,rm-m - 7. m. y -, g y.. . m3 m 7 o

l Final' Pavfew. i l

" :ll.

• d :M San haquin. Calif.'. '

~ JS!; . Ikbert H. Morris. Geology. ~ i J. T 7

Stanley R.' Brockun Seismology ~

g May 7.1976 ' ~ p. w: x? .j dd.l l Les fg;eles Departar.t of kater & Pi ar j San Joaquin Nuclear P oject Tf,;

1. 1 Kain Ccunty California KRC Project No. 493

?!'

Q..] 1 Introductica 3 .'. s, i >-w ~ ~ 77 The geological and seismlogical aspects of the Early Site Favfe((:".. '7)6. Report (ESRR) and acent.ents 1-18 for the San Joaquin Mc1 car Project' have

V i

47 been revicwed by the U. S. Geological Survey. ~ The San JoaqJin hetear. .n Project site t' located about 31 miles (50 k:s)'r.orthwest of Bakersfield, O5 s Calif., in the scuthern part of tha San Joaquin Valley suix!1 vision 'of the;... G.. WP c .s gd .o Crest Valley provir.ca of California. ThA southern San Joagain' Yality '5 $ ,y occupies cost of a large structural bicek thiidid'on'the west by the San . ~, Andreas fault on the southeast by the Ehite Wolf fault, and on the east by ' I} -E a cocplex feult zone alcng the west frent of the Si rra Nevada. Left-j 7 lateral creep of abcut 12 en (0.5 in) per year on the White Wolf fault and w historic right-lateral movement along the San Andreas fault indicate that this structural block is currently undergoing north-south ccepression. Tertiary and Quaternary sediments fill the basin fotmed by downward move-f ment of the block and, in the southern part, attain a thickness of over 3 3.950 feet (12,000 m). In tre site area Cenozoic strata are about 16.500 ft (5,000m) thick. The basement rocks beneath the basin are Sierra Nevada granite and Cretaceous and pre-Cretaceous meta = orphic rocks, which have been offset by a series of northwest-trending faults. Cenozoic strata are in places faulted along these same axes or folded in broad anticlines and i synclines. 1 o C-1 i a w j 4_.~___ .-.-.~ u --u

gTg r-"m"5"m R Mnv rggpac7eg;q;e . w yn, ppg 9, :, 9,j. ~. ', ;T. e m" l . +:

3.,. a_ u., '

x,- s.eg .r- ~y c. ~.- .g 3 ,3 ^ } } y,[ M pg;; 4 a y :. ., w. /,'.~+i u @i,0

Geology,

- / [,,, 4;.. ' j.[ During the course of 'the geologic review'several field trips to the' i w site were nade and numerous meetings were attended with the EC and with i y .n. the applicant. Los Angeles Departnent of Water & Power, and its consultants, 'M R'GRO, Inc., In addition to consultations with personnel w$ thin the Geological M.,; V;: ,k Survey the reviewr has also consulted with personnel of the Bakersfield A.5 r f office of the California O! vision of 011 and Gas ar.d several independent M' gg 4 e and ccepany geologists who have had broad experience in petroleum explor,ation,,, pf r w. ,. i in the Bakersfield area. The ESER for the San Joaquin fluclear Project 1ite is based on original -h geological and geophysical field investigations as well as on the extremely 1 3 / voluminous subsurface geologic data both published and proprietary. Numerous T geophysical logs on file in the California Division of 011 and Gas office at Bakersfield and over 500 miles (800 km) of proprietary seismic reflection' un n surveys have been incorporated.with the applicant's seismic reflecticn survey and geophysical log data into a comprehensive interpretation of the subsurface stratigraphy and structure of the site area and the southern San Joaquin Valley region. Also included as part of the geologic docu=entation are logs of i l numerous trenches excavated across specific geologic features and geologic ,{ logs of rore than 12 miles (19 k::2) of a recently excavated irrigation canal t [ which is located near the site and which extends in a generally "L"-shaped ,:). ccnfiguration prallel to, but several miles distant from, the east and south l borders of the site respectively. n r,, 3 <p 3 1 l C-2 9 e [ 7. a l

e-,, 7..,- ---~ ~ 7 ~ v- ~ ~ ~ ~ -~'" " m ~"** "f'? l / - i g (in cg c i r; , d yt Dg;5 s s yq The applicant appears to have decons'. rated with this abundance of ,/ 2 .g data that the San Joaquin Nuclear project site is feasible on geological C y.] 3 grounds and that there'are no capable 'aults at or underlying the site' . }. 4^ O During review of the ESRR the following topics in particular were ,... q l bro 0ght to the attention of the applicant'during meetings end through the 'S .- \\ formal subnittal of questions by NRC and USGS geologists: s g-1. Recognition of the Pond-Poso Cree 5c' fault as being capable. ,j TD 2. Extent and history of the Greeley and Semitropic faults. l,, "<5.' 3. The prob 1cm of subsidence due to fluid withdrawal. 4. Regional tectonic tuodel as it appites to the Sesitrepic and . Tjj Greeley faults. J' I ~' 5. The extent and structural relationship of linear feattMs on i the grcund surface. . d, i 6. The areal extent and significance of soil failure fcatdres that d were observed and inapped after the 1952 Kern County series of earthquakes. .{ Each of these tcpics is discussed below in more detail. 1. Pond-Poso Creek fault l Formal questions regarding the fault resulted in extensive and l 1 comprehensive field surveys by the consultants. The fault was detemined { l te be capable and to extend from the basement rocks up to the ground surface and to have a lateral extent of at least 37 miles (60 km) in a northwesterly

1 trend from Round Mountain area T. 28 S., R. 29 E., to Pond T. 25 S., R. 24 E.

Maximum measured vertical displacceent of the basenent rock (accusti: baserent) f, s l surface is 2,370 feet (72f, m) west side down; fault displacement diminishes r C-3 l s's -w.n. ~

u l. M.n..Qs.@h...Eh- $$..h<. bk.k. 4 L;p'Em-T. HQp,7. {*.S'S.. N.;..W C..%$K@4O .s. .m s, p .y 3 , ~ *.

i ti i' '

$h:. C Y:. '. n. .,. w.k: ,,,. ' f., 7 m ' j,, J (; J r- ,. a v i t ', ^h: t:q ;b;p. "'< .q: _ . ; 9 e.. y .,1 h?;. i s l ,r A. ,o t.,, ,a .jp -s ,,, t.(. ' e ..f.' -*'1 q - .e 3 q 7.' . ' ' ~ } y'y p with deceasing depth of stratigraphic units and to the northwest. At the ~ ) Tularc-Kern County line there is nc. evidece for displaca:ent of acoustical n ' l c-units above a depth of 6,200 feet (1.890 m). ',0n seismic profile GSC-1 j'Y, [ ,.~ about 50 feet (15 m) of vertical displacement is $pparent at a depth'of about 875 feet (267 m) (p. 2.5E-36 and 2.5.1-24A, caerenent 12)._ Oeophysf 4! 1 T. J w&. I log correlations across the fault zone s::ow cumulative vertical displacement of shallow subsurface units to be about 80 feet (24 m) (p. 2.5.1-248,, amendment f. '17) and less than 1 foot (.3 m) of displacement is Ifident in strata at a ~ ,; a. depth of 10 feet (3 m) exposed in a trench across the fault. Displacement ..J s. is norsal and appears to be principally nearly vertical in direc'.fon } u, (p.2.5.1-248). The applicant postulates an earthquake of wgnitude 7 on u 3 the closest (about 9 mi or 15 kn) approach to the site of the Pond-Poso Creek fault.

2. Extent 'and history of the Semitropic and Greelcy fault zones

-w Two other major northwest-trending normal faults re" quired extensive evaluation regarding the structural setting of the San Jcaquin Nuclear I Project site: (1) The Semitropic fault and (2) the Greeley fault. ,.i p)c .a k t, 1 i f ) C-4 ..m._

c. : =- e = =- -:- y g? Psmemamasuww-.ns., w..4 p v g y3.~y

= 7 1 y g a g-(. kU .M: 0 f., h f. [ l'

)

s ) ~; (- p. c i .. o.

g l

The'Sem,itropic fault (or Semitropic antic 11ne fault), a normal-fault with the west side down, has been 1:'entified.by interpretation of L -e drill holn logs and geophysical reflection surveys'as' extending from 4J's e . T. 30 S., R. 26 E., northwesterly through T. 26 S., R. 22 E.~ The - i.f j fault plane dips steep 1y to the southwest. The section illustrated in ~~ i . figure 2.5.1-8, amendment 17, indicates that the youngest stratum cut ..a ~ ' N by the fault-is in 'the lower part of the Reef Ridge Formation of Hlo-Pliocene age. Farther to the scutheast in T. 29 S., R. 25 E., s n] the upper part of the Reef Ridge Formation is cut (plate 26,' amendment 18). H .' a Because faulting is restricted to strata older than the Fliocene - Etchegoin Fors:ation, the unit overlying the Reef Ridge 4rmation, the 2 6 s n Semitropic fault is considered not capable by the' applicant..The USGS ( [ ^ L P concur:.. The Greeley fault is a normal fault with the east side down, the 4 fault plane dips steeply to the northtast, and trends northwesterly J from T.30 S., R. 26 E., to at least T. 25 S., R. 22 E. (projection .j to the northwest is limited by lack of data). Thus the Greeley fault forms the east boundary and the Semitropic fault the est boundary of fl a relatively uplifted fault-block or horst. The trace of the Greeley fault at the acoustic basement depth passes directly beneath the San Joaquin Nuclear Plant site and the fault was, therefore. of great concern regarding site suitability. h The applicant was requested to provide detailed geologic data in order to determine, within the technical limits of resolution of seismic reficction surveys and other methods of investigation, the f. t .. y' j I <j l I 5 j , l.' j C-5

...._._.m._m_

u

• w3MwMr,mAy,y,anm-.adym a.e,w,;.,m 77,,

,.... '. p r-F. :s ;l. ~',':7.%.,;, W. i j. a 'p n e v. ,\\,. a;.;q,.. _. _g, q. 1.1 .. -.. y. ..,q' 4 O ; J..v.. : < - x . x, n; m -*

• n z

. w. 8 .~s i.: gr . l ^' g g y ;if g. g s ~

n, c,. _,y. P >',,

.m

.a.

.c c,

+ e extent, history and conponents of movement ~of the Greele'y fault.;,;.t ~jb ]h [ , C Hueerous seismic reflection profiles and geophysical 'and 11tholoDic. @y l logs of delli holes were used in a stratigraphic analysis of the fault.' ~ 7,4 sc-s Displacceents interpreted frca sets:ste reflection data are sunnarized [. J' In plate 6, amendment 17, where the youngest acoustic horizon cut by-the fault and the oldest acoustic horizon apparently not cut by'tte 9 I Drill hole geophysical logs such as shown on plates 11, is fault are shown. .s l through 17 (appendix 2.5E, acendment 16) also have been interpreted _ a l to show the apparent upward limit of displacement on the Greeley fault ( i The t in the vicinity of the Greeley anticline, T. 29 5. R. 26 E. C I p l analyses, presented in appendix 2.5E, led the applicant to conclude that i i Furthermore, f ^ f~ the Greeley fault does not cut strata younger than Miocene. the applicant has conducted extensive shallow subsurface exploration f r in the site area which confirms that no structural dislocations occur innediately beneath the site. Figure 2.5.1-10, a structure contour map, indicates gentle warping of the E clay particularly along the h.3 axes of the Semitropic and Trico anticlines. The age of the E clay is ,f interpreted to range from 540,000 to 600,000 years (p.2.5.1-29). Continuity of the E clay through the site area suggests no structural O dislocation other than the minor warping. Several trenches were The j excavated across the projected surface trace of the Greeley fault. 4 t. 6 0 C-G fl C .<t m.,a wmy .__.g,,4 ._.=%.6.-s. _%w

9Uw M S ?[h j .m. n v +. v 4 ' s f ,j. - ?, ~ ' 'c, ' .yp,j logs' of'these trenches (appendix 2.~~), along with the log'of. the frrigationcanal(' plates 2.5Q-1thredh-13),shownostructural k& b. 4 ' hi;j l discontinuities 'in the shallow subsurface which could be related 4 .gb to deep structure. The applicant concludes frc.a these data that g g.j , the Greeley fault is not capable and that there is no potential,", y 7 y(j) y ~ 1 for surface displacement due to faultir.g in the site area. The

n. <

d 4,1 l jf.g USGS concurs.. 'w 3. Subsidence due to fluid withdrawal W, yg J The applicant has analyzed the subsidence due to withdrawal tr,f L,. ,N_ ,. ~ l of underground fluid (primsrfly water) and recosnfzes that sub-m.g sidence is continuing and confoms essentially to the subsidence. $$ l .f t.- I model of Poland and others (1975). A compaction meter has been, ,j: I r. W in;talled in the site area and a leveling net has been established. N I The appitcant has cocinitted to the imC to monitor and interpret the data obtained (p. 2.5.1-48, amend =ent 13). 4. Regional tectonic model as it applies to the Semitropic and Greeley Tw ,)y faults l h8$ b As stated earlier, the southern San Joaquin Valley is under-H ? .1 Going north-south coepressive stress; there is historic right-lateral movement on the San Andreas fault and left-lateral movement on the [', l White Wolf fault. Under these conditions, movement on the northwest-I 1 trending Semitropic and Greeley faults might be expected to be predominantly strike slip. However, the appitcant's analysis in '? l appendix 2.5E, p. 67-0-1 through 67-0-7, shows that the povement en .i these faults is predminantly dip slip. This interpretation is based a l on structure contours of seismic reflection horizons and on stratigraphic e 7 C-7 x L ~... -. : :..:nn . w a, a - - e -s uw.m. w,xas -mm~~ w L l l l

p -or- ~ - ~ a _,,. c _.m.. r.. m.,,,awwuny .m,..-g, m,. [* 9, t.. y a...1

m.. s.l ;,y q, yg g

9.,.m.gp. f f W lf' f..., _ '., ; . g ,3 2 y i x tg 's 5 '$,n 4

• > <**s.e.

.~- r! 3 T ,s ,-m e ^., t $.' r 1",p [ a I 4 ,e m

• .'A-

p,. ', j;J ~ r _.. .4.. :,., '. : / : /f.f, t e I-ad .o. ,*, i g .y - a.,. '. a p", hg,

4 y

.,.s. g. y j [ r v. t i p-. ,-fr.... s !, ; a,,, : Q c, i.- ~ ~ w - o .~ m Q. y:,ag,,q n.g, yip,.....y 7,j.yf...r@2 a t. .:( j, - {,,.+ 7, g i- .:~u 8,y . a..w. . s v. [ ,i-k- k [,2v$$1.Iri.j%hyl M [. h ,N" }; j i ?@ 7g f fl. y g, q;,g;g j WM, interpretations based on ' drill-hole'information. Plates 29/30?aInd .S ~ m ' '3i (amendment 16)l in particulari show various sthittpaphic and", ~ - *: % sa: ~i fS ~ C W l 'stmetural interpretations that appear to indicate movement has not

1. c; m

/ W 4 O, y' Wf"'. M been.of strike-slip nature. F. q v Q 5. The extent'and structural relationship of lir. car features on'the

+,,%;

t c 1 + e ..L' b-4 .y e' Wg f.. W grcund surface .i .us. 3 -Appendfx 2.5P is the response to review questions regarding.. ~ r, certain linear features that can be recogn12cd on aerta1' photographs '.s ;yy ~ e wn ~ ' of the site area'. The applicant concludes that these linear features I ~H t? !i are related to: (1) old Lake Tula m shorelines (northeast orientation). ' %.x+o s ~ g r L' 'and (2) distributary channels wtth a predomitiantly northwest orienta Tld j n 4 tion. Trenches across the northwest lir.eaments and the irrigation .a canal excavation ubstantiated the applicant's interpretation. 2,4 l/ 6. Areal extent and significance of soll failure features observed and * ' e.- . m. sapped after the 1952 Kern County earthquakes .h. s Marne (1955) described and mapped soII failure features that 9 W, resulted frera the 1952 Kern County earthquakes. The applicant J." l excavated and logged trenches as nearly across the area of these M l features as it was feasible to do and concluded that the surface l features most probably resulted from liquefaction of soil (p. 'd M o l 2.5-0-36, amendment 16) and that there appears to be no relationsMp . i between the apparent linear trend of occurrences and the orientation [ t l .. u of deep-seated structures or faults.

• M 1

J 9

v. '

1 C-8 l ,_7 emeed eie,e ds.a.e e w sein e.e -e h. he/ M Ai &M.me4. 4 -.es.aedm* k.4 w w.. w, &a 4.e.h yw as

a. m4.,...wJ aw we.sa

.S

s. 4 l

g*:" :

,;@K) gj.:;ffijf s i i y~ ~,.,. ,y _ z y m,A.,,,. P, a, m.. fA a< i.y g. ~ k. ! '; ; s, 1 l + g 1 . From tNr foregoing citations of concerns and responses it say i _. 6; L m. w pertinent f2cets of coology. The analyses of regional tectonics f be concluded that'the applicant has addressed thorotr.,hly the many os .p,4 5,% i 'a. -V.4 4 Identify the San Andress fault as the doutnent tectonte structure. o ';;.. I T Seismolog -t ,s c., ; 3 l' l 4 'Ihts sefsrologic review is based on exsatnation of. the ESRR ' augmented -.,.y,g i W i by several meetings with the app 1tcant, study cf the related literature,

J

[' r.y he j and discussions within the Geological Survey. .g t W s. r Ilhen located on Algermissen's (1969) Risk Hap, the site lines within f"3 q Icce 3 (the highest risk category shown on the map) which indicates that ..,y intensity VIII* or greater is expected at the site. Numerous historical Q -r. s s earthquakes have affected the site victntty resulting in intensitt,es ,, ] - s [' as high as VII at the site. Some of the earthquakes and their estlanted W GW intcasities at the San Josquin site are the 1906 San Francisco (about IV),

.j 1933 Long Beach (III or less),1952 Kern County (VI), and 1971 San

'.C Fernando (IV to V). D'otblished USGS studies see;n to conf t..n tha ' a i. ~ app 11, cant's belief that the Fort Tejon earthquake on the San Andreas fault ~ ,,)

• All intensities are Modified Mercallt

[ t 4yG e .4 . 1 I t i

, ' ^.

9 [,. C-9 t ,s L.....-.-..--.---~.--.~---...------...~..-w--~L-~~*"'~~-

=. ..,m-_= ( _ s

• s%

/ J c .w v. ' ' i 'n ; r, .sy i-4 i t- ,n l,! 3,> r $ly . b{ C

f.

-;.g y "~ } ; L.h y . v + ~ Q. n y,,. i; :.~ ;!; li s.n t'. 2 '.t:;; l would have produced intensity,VII at the site. The largest preinstrumental g,

• • 'q earthquake within 32 km of,the site occurred December 23.1905 (Coffman and

]s. 6co . g, Yon Hake,1973) had a r.axir.ta i.ntensity of VI-VII, and was about 30 ha__ a 3 t. i from the San Joaquin site. The largest instrueentally located event [W O within 32 km of the site had a magnitude of 4. This event was located 7 w 32 b from the site (not 22 km, or 14 miles."as' stated'by the applicant Eth i r a, oniage2.5.0'.3)andoccurredJanuary 23, 1935.- After a relocation .W procedure (discussed later) the earthquake nearest'the site Eas about ' 'fP 4 km away but had a location uncertainty of 2.9 km (ESRR Table 2.5.2-12). M It. occurred on August 17, 1971 and had a magnitude of 3.3 (Hileman...

Qd

,%,.r. l i etal.,1973).

,,.. _ J.. %. m e,

Although there are 10 fault zones within 320 km of the site which M ?; are considered capable (ESRR page 2.5.2-4A), only three warrant further .j' : v 3' investigation because of the hazard they r.ay represent to the site. /c. y. They are the San Andreas, Vaite Wolf. and Pond-Poso Creek fault zones. '[,' ') a y. Major earthquakes have occurred on the San Andreas and Whitellolf fault [.f 3 J w The Pond-Poso Creek fault, previously discussed in the Geology 9 tones. section, is the nearest capable fault. The Geology section also discusses the Greeley and Semitropic Antic 1fne faults, two nearby faults which are considered noncapable by the appilcant and the USGS. 1 I All earthquske locations in the Caltech catalog whic.h were within 32 km of the site were relocated by the applicant using the U.S. Geological Survey co:nputer program HYP071 and Berkeley data, whenever possible .'a T \\i 13 C-10 / ._g.l i t

m m 7 m.~ v ~n m.-":v v a u--.u T'= T ~1s y - Q ' ~; W % 'A ...d ge ~ 1 + s ' Q9 g*, -4 1 'F -f 5 .5, jk

• g (ESRR page 2.5.2-2).. The appitcant did not state whether new data J.y u

q G n (other than the Berkeley data) or, reanalyzed data were used in the ' A'/ Df. "22 l relocations. In any event, the solutions do not appear improved to ~ c such $n extent'that(the earthquakes c'an' be' definitely'show to ' occur. .j.

• k D

i or not to occur, on the Pond-Poso Creek, Greeley, or Sesittupic Anti '

W

.~. } ~.. cline faults. A subparallel aligmsent of epicenters with the Pond-Poso 'A ,j Creek falt is suggested in the 'ESRR figure 2.5.2-5 shich"the applicah ~ g .s

,c

( accepts 'as possibly representing seismic activity on the fault (ESRR ' ~ ', 3 cr j page2.5.2-2A1). The' horizontal errors of the solutions for the M N b relocated epicenters nearest the Greeley fault are such that it does b,

p: <

q .not appear reasonable to associate' any earthquakes specif'ically with yh c t p the fault. There seccs to be no suggestion'of an association of ept-

ff a

u. [ ..o L centers with the Semitrepic Anticline fault. Insufficient' data exist' 4 .j, '. 4 8".. v l to obtain meaningful focal r.echanism solutions (ESRR page 2.5.2-23). ty~ ~~ (I In assessing the maximum expectcd carthquake the applicant postu'tates: ~^ I ~ i

1. An earthquake similar to that of the 1857 fort Tejon earthquake

.v g on the San Andreas fault (a strike-slip fault) 52 km from the site with

U a magnitude of 81/2 (the estimated upper bound magnitude of the Fort

,,1 Tejonevent). ,,m< 2. A magnitude 7.7 carthquake similar to the 1952 Kern County i event on the White Wolf fault 84 km from the site. Ja .h

3. 'A rupture length of 40 km on the 60 km Icas Pond-poso Creek 7 1 I

i fault (a norm 1 fault) and a magnitude of 7 at a distance of 18 km i 3 from the site, g I A P i 11 l C-11 A. 3., 4. m .4 4 -4.m ee = .h e 8h.*b*w ='*'N***""'*4 l

7 m 7-- ,.. vr y,yrr,, ang,y,y ;e,p ;,,7.w.; ,,.i. m,_.,.s

v,.

~. a. ~ . ~. ..n J e. . r j w;;?,p u } y 7 !!~ ','" ;. d,., T, ' j?,%alis] %{qy;M; Qj;,{ l' n n :; c .c-4,,s \\;' _ ' ;l :: LQ s .? ^ l J' 1 - - y tn t A randora earthquake of magnitude' 5 in'the stie'vkinth Y b ^ 4.

s. ;

v., .m 5 ~- . ~.1 ,., r; p The Appiteant's procedure involves the use of:the attenuation.,, c h 7 y, relaticas of Schnabel and Seed (1973). Heusner (1965),'and Donovan _(1973)- .to derive scaling factors to nomatize selected acceleregram spectra ~ ] to the magnitude and distance parameters of the maximus,earthquaka being i studied. The sost consemttve of the three scaling factors derived is 3 e h then applied to each spectrum and a spectral envelope is fitted to the, y gYouped data. o ,,,..y,. g,,,, 5 The applicant tclieves that the magnitaje 7.7 Kern Ccunty earthquake l t l!' m:y have txen very nearly the greatest earthquake on the White Wolf ' 2,, .l A [ fault (ESPR page 2.5.2-7). An earthquake of this magnitude on the White Wolf fault will produce ground notions at the site that are less i j~ than ground motions possible from an earthquate on the San Andreas fault. Thus, the applicant dees not con:ider the White Wolf fault further, pi The final three earthquakes postulated are a' magnitude 7 on the .s I Pond-poso Cre=k and a magnitude 81/2 on the San Andreas, center' d ' e at their closest approaches to the site,18 6 and 52 6. respectively; i h the third postulated event is a magnitude 5 near the site. Dased on a critical review of existing instrumental strong-motion data, the IJSGS (1976) estimated the levels of the mean-plus-one-standard-deviation peak horizontal ground surface mottens that could be' expected for the three postulated events. The appitcant has argued (ESRR page 2.5R-21) ?3 r t i 12 C-12 l e 9 ._.._.._ _..__ -._ ~._ _ __ _.__. _...___ _ _.._ m_

M v :.q u'"~;> / T f'~ j _..n- - ., = -n. f. '{, ' y ',; ]. f.j I. ;l - d e,, .c n.:. m.n s - - a f

i A,r

.. c ,s _ s .f- 't I - 2 ,,.-t[ [.. - [f.E,,;' f.

• l ' '

+ y,' ' e ( ', - j 1 that the NRC Reg. Cuide 1.60 spectnam anchored.at 0.35, ceaservatively

f. c

'd j y@- envelopes a sulte of scaled site-spectffe respcase spectra closm ts be D: representative of the conditicns pertaining to the Pond Peso. Creek $$E ; .[. D w and that the Itkelihood of occurrente for the magnitude 7.0 SSE is ca' '7 the order 10-5 per year (Fig.10. p. 2.5R-168, Subspper.dfx 4. Appendix 2.5R). k n Although there are some detatis of the Applicant's arguments for~.,- which the presented data are not sufficient to permit an in-de;rth ' " C' - L,,.j 's revicw by us, we cencur with the Appitcant's position that the 0.35 g '] value is sufficiently conservative as ar. anchor for the NRC Seg. Guide 1.60 av; ' spectnr.: because of the sell likelihood of c:currence.. - 3 4 A esgnitude 81/2 earthquate originating en the S&a Andreas fault-a.7 7~ 2. 52 kn fres the site remains as the b&sts of the SSE. The IJSGS estimates' ,1 c.: e osan-plus-one-standard-deviation peak horizental ground acceleration cn of 0.45 g for this event. It is our understanding that the applicant .L intends to anchor the HRC Reg. Guide 1.60 spectrus in conforvence with e this estimate. We believe the App 1tcant's intention to anchor the NRC Reg. Culde 1.60 spectru:s at 0.45 g is apprcpriataly conservative. .w The ground cetions to be expected from a randos magnitude 5 near ~ the site are less than those for the postulated magnitude 81/2 on the s San Andreas fault and, therefore, are accennodated by the cagnitude .I 8 1/2 SSE. i 4 9 s 13 C-13 d k

- ~ __ s m 7.-p

# c-,

t - q .s ', s :., n ,O . r j gi 7,4 ; 05 J ',q,. ~ ' l :-l ' (' J t ' f.) ', 3, 4. i,,t 1., ~. , :N , w ; 4.,,. :3...;.y:,.: ,4

References

c

~,. .e...sr e a, 5

1. ' A19ermissen,'S. T. (1969). Selssie ?.ist St: dies.in the United States.

C, l J' .,o:.c '.Fre... dings. f the Fourth World Ccnferecce,on Earthquake' Engineering._ g t t [, cee o + .? ' ' ' ~ < i' ~

• [.?

b d * * ' Santiago,'Ch11a. " + - yi y '2.-Coffmi,% L. ar.d C. A. von l' lake (1973).' ' Earthquake Ilistor'f'of tfie. 7 ,. n United States,'U.S. De'pt.' of Coc=erce PM 41.1,' Rev. Ed ~ -[ ... ~ t (O.ro' ugh 1970),'208p. ~ 3.'Conovan,'N.C.'(1973). "A' Statistical Evaluatidn of Stieng Motion b 4:< ,~ Cata In'c1'uding th'e February 9.- 1971 San Fernando Earthquake'," ' Proceedings 5th World Conf. cn Eq. Engg..' Rome. .. ' '. y). , 'a' ^

)

' 4. ~ llil'er.an, J.' A.', C. R. Allen, and J. M. Ndrd;uist (1973). ~ Seismicity ~ ~ I - of the Soutfern California Region, I ' January '1932 to'31 Deccaber i. ' ' 1972 Contribution No. 2385,' Div'. cf Geologics1 and Planetary i i Sciences, California 1ristitute of Tecfunlogy,"3g3 gi, incl. 3 ~ ' t appendices. ~ 5. Hausr.er, G. W. (1965). Intcnsity of Earthr.ake Gitund Shaking Hear the Causitive Fault, Proc. of Third World Conf. on Earthquake Engg., Auckland and Wellington, New Zealand. 9oland, J. F., Lofgren, B. E., Ireland, R. L., akd Pugh, R. G.,1975, 6. Land subsidence in the San Joaquin Valley, California, as of U.S. Geol. Survey Prof. Paper 437-H, p. H1-H78. 1972:

7. Schr.abel, P. B. & H. B. Seed (1973). "Acceleratichs in Rock for Earthquakes in the Western United States " BSM, Vol. 63, No. 2 pp 501-516.

.[ 14

• .j C-14

? / ? / _gg L..

i . - - z. v., ;r" 7 7,-- ~;. 5..

,,,. 7 (.

, i.,. _ -

.. y ;,,,. ; _ ppy y< ~-- ,,., ~. ia.; . ; s.r,... u y.e .s t1, , + 74,j ~ n. . +:

,/

.i Wrne, A.'lt,1955, Ground fracture ;ettarns in the souttsrn San Joaquin.,, ',, u $.;,- 8. 6. ^;; ; :++ Valley resulting' fran the Arvin-Tch'achapi carthqdake.,'.[ Art.] 6 _in.. v. i W

1..

c. 3'

.e'J1 e - f g-Q?' { of Oakeshott, G. B., ed., Earthquakes in Kern Co'2nty,- m - Pt.1 ~ - 3.s. gr .(2... California, during 1952: Calif. Div. Hines Bull.171, p. 57 66.

.n.

} r: 9. U.S. Geological Survey letter (Geologic Division) to U.S. Nuclear - W ij 1 s., e i g Regulatory Comission, dated June 15, 1976.

• M

~6*f I. 4 4 e,h'* e , f -., 5 J 4 [,- ^' J,er .a ,z.,..ip ' 'bD fg 4() %/) 5 ~ ~.% w, ,M f t ', h. g..W i O 3.. j v. al ' i; e 1 \\ t E i f J c}a I ,.4 l 6 15 '( C-15 - v. e,,,,..,--m. j -e u - 4 4.u A A pedupeu. we %9e

m. e h + M-4- %m 1

( m ;.'73 n g.3" P P rD P u i., sV He-M -i~. M ie' 7,f f T E { m m. .y <, -n b ' ' <,. % T Y ~ ' ~ ~. ' Ui n kltse t r. t * ' t APPENDIX D ' x - 1 5.,9 p,,- ',,j' $c ;..; g,. i .c s e. n

w.....;

v. v. 4': ALFRED J. HENDRON. JR. - r " f f'. ~ ,c y {- Geotechnical W - + y l l + s 4 . :;*- o Atahomet,lHinois 818"A Phone: (2171 596 2782 s" '/ J164 ~ ' "". h 4 March 1977 ^ ~. cv. - l .. D4 ~ r l t U. S. Nuclear Regulatcry Cor.uissien M 'p ATTH: Dr. J. C. Stepp. Chief i Geolo2y and Seismology Branch '- P) ~~ l Washington, D.C. 20555 If f 4 s, },' 1 l RE: Sen Joaquin Early Site Safety Review ~c. v. w,o;- c 1

Dear Sir:

t - i As requested in P.O. No. CR-76-?649 I have reviewed the documents S w submitted by the applicant conceming subsidence due to groundwater withdrawal.. j Specifically 1. have reviewed. y (1) the applictnt's data sporting its evaluation of the subsidence potential; (2) the apprepriateness of the instrumentation for detecting ground water drawdown, regional subsidence, and differential subsiden:e; y

and, (3) the adequacy of the proposed instrumentation layout for detecting d

very small subsidence, t (" The applicant has not submitted shutdewn criteria o* data recorded by the 'i deep seated subsidence monitoring instruments for review in the Early Site Safety Review, but has 'ndicated that these two items will be included in J the PSAR. 'j The enclosed mecorandum sumarizes my review of the pctential subsidence i problems at the San Joaquin site with particular e:phasis en the items listed above. 5 Respectfully submitted, h'h m }., ~ Alfred J. Hendron, Jr. j AJH/jm 1 ..t enclosure J ~ +--------*.+...-w A-- JJ

I 5.M9 Memorandu:n on the Effect of Subsidence Due T$ To Grou1dwater Withdrawal on the Safety)of the .Y D.';[Af t San Joaquin Nuclear Project (SJKP c. .::r[;g , {.f ~ .;3 z~. y ~ ' ~ '[f' 'j{ Intreductici 2' ~ ' - A r; The site for the S,l'iP is. located in Kern County in the southern San 7f ) i ,1 Jcaquin Valley of Caltfurnia, approximately 10 miles northwest of the Cit;- , 1 of Wasco. The Valley fonr a great sed'rentary basin between the Sierra j ,e Nevada on the east and the Coast Ranges on the west. The site vicinity 1r ,,, -y r underlain by unlithif ted Holocene to Plio-Plaistocene alluvial fan. alluvial fj '.., ' a w plane and lacistrine deposits derived primarily from the Sierra Nevada. q nq These units are underlain by semi-lithiff e ithified r.arine and non-marine Q, d 10 Tertiary sediments. Crystalline basecent mo are believed to exist at a - s; ..H - ' s, .,3 -t depth of about 20,000 ft. g The shallow deposits u1derlying the ette are divided into three distin:t -,[ j. ,y stratigraphic units: 1) an uppar oxidized zore of chiefly light i.rmtn sar.d b an.1 clay and slit len,es to a depth of about 240 ft; 2) a saiddle reduced 1 zone of dark gray sand, silt and clay mixtures from about 240 to 290 ft depth; 9 g y

3) a lower oxidized :ene of light brown sand and silt lenses, similar to the upper zone, enecuntered to a depth of 540 ft (the maximu:a depth drilled).

p:' 1 y The.niddle reduced zone correlates with the regionally recognized E-clay a unit of the Tulare formation. ~ d The E-clay is of particular significance ta groundwater withdrawal because l it acts as an aquiclude. Although nany irrigation wells withdraw from the 3 1 unconfined aquifer above the E-clay, the mjo-ground water withtrawal is from, l and the significant piezometric reductions occur in the confined 6quifer below l l the E-clay. D-1 {l s n N te_. 1 \\ ua, .j

g M7.P,.:>ggy imc-p W< t.,@EQ,.. g~'"N' F g. -,wm~@C.'.WP3Gp.. ;A,g.wa%we qg b N-

f d. pg

.- -e A,m.z m,. g.gj,, gg + e4

)q i.

. e <o m.3 g 3,r s. .g,*.; n.y,.j, 4 3 _ ei ..6. 1 , &.ygg,

Qtyq-}yQ i.

.l ' l,' i xl ;, '.f:l;Q:in,,%w,,,.*x ;;, ,9. ~,p.q '. ;M g.4 ) ..., q. m g gm .t ,2- .m a g ._,.!, f.d y. <,,,, Q.:.q,c.,g. ;, n ' 3.,,.:, p.:j \\ 2. .o.7 .s s y,. a .pm. .yc, _.k,,r, [ '[ . M., j p,...... ,); % ; - e.C }; s. g f g - .c .a, i, i E., , Groundwater frcm wells in both' the unconfined and confined aq'ulfers,have ' -v;, +(? >y l.M been used for irrigation in the region surroundidg the site sin w t ~ H site vicinity thiaquifers in the zone above the."E" clay are, essentially. 'i.. unconfined and the free water te.ble at present is about 60 to"160.ft below ', ?. 11...%y . y. s .r+7 i ..m tM 1 1, ground surface, or'100 to 200 ft. above sea level. Contours of water 1evels'. ...: Q u I a .s,.. above the "E" clay for the site and surret.nding region are shown in Fig.. I <yg i .,P Confined water occurs belo.4 the "E" clay, and the present pie + Wk 2 4.13-2. surface in the aquifer below the "E" clay is 'at a depth of about 280 ft below y;. J . };,.. : y$ ground surface or at an elevation of about 40 ft below sea level. ' Contours. ' wd j of the piezemetric levels in the aquifer below the "E" clay are shown in F

7

, _.. + m. "M t 2.4.13-3. pu .g The total decline in the unconfined aquifer'pfezametric levels at the jir'- Mc Just east of the site is about 60 to 70 ft since the beginning of pumping. ~< ') site however the water levels in the upper aquifer have declined 7t to 100 ft [ya W-In much of this area, including the site, water levels in the since 1950. confined aquifer below the "E" clay have declined more than 170 ft since 1950. ~ Since and were at a level of 275 ft belcw ground surface in the fall of 1973. !:.i the wells were initially artesian, the total decline in water level in this aquifer is on the order of 280 to 290 ft since wells were first drilled. (- Ground surface subsidence must have deveioped simultaneously with the j i...# In the ~~ lowering of groundwater levels, but was not recognized untti 1935. ij Site Vicinity, subsidence of the order of 0.5 feet had probably occurred by 1940 (Lofgren and Klausing,1969). I By 1954, subsidence at the Site Vicinity was probably about one foot. l (Lofgren and Klausing,1969). They indicate that up to 1962 i.he toti.1 sub-sidence in the Site Vicinity was a;: proximately 1.4 feet. The surface elevations j D-2 ..__,__.,__,_) 9 l

g_. -- .m_- wm t ,m Q.. 8" i 4 ,.A k

,J [ '

a 'f d}i M 1, i{ .g c,

3. '

l- . :p ;, x 6 +; - ( p; s, . c l ,.. 3; y [ in the Site Vicinity for the period from 1962 to the present have been examined - .')

J r

!.f j i by surveyors of_ the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power. ;They fotzd ? ' N that subsidence rate; averaged 0.10 feet per year in the period IS62 to 1974. j) i ~ Other studies of the level data in the Site Vicinity (Poland and others,1973) ff Olso give a rate of subsidence of about 0.1 feet for' the period 1962 to 1970. Q g a J,1 i The total se tlement in the Site Vicinity to the present is therefore about 1 l j l 3 feet. Studies of subsidence by means of compaction recorders in the Region d, a d surrcunding the Site show that only a few percent of the total surface settle-j) { ment aretses by coe:pression of the unconfined aquife'r and most of the sub'- . 9 ^'

-t sidence is caused by consolidation in the confined aquifer and aquitards '

~ t ] (Lofgren and Klausing,1969). The relation between the arount of serface J q subsidence experienced and the decilne of head in the confined aquifer has ,.j i been studied (Lofgren and Klausing,1969) and it was found that the ratio was lj l u 4 about 0.01 feet of subsidence pt.r foot of head decline in the Site Vicir.lty. j i c 1 i I Since the total decline in water level in the confined aquifer is about 280 1 to290feetsince1890(Subsection 2.4.13.1),thisindicatesasurfacesub-l i 1 sidence due to tbc compression of the confined aquifer and confining bed ,1 1 alone of about three feet in that period. This is increased by only a few j percent by the contribution of compression in the unco 1 fined quarter. Ii If no further water level declines were to take place at the Site, j l; q j subsidence would still continue at a decaying rate because of the time lag i 1 I l involved in the consolidation process. For the soil profile to a depth of { 760 feet at Pixley in the Region surrounding the Site, it has been calculated ,j [ (Lofgren and Klausing,1969) that 75 percent of the conpaction due to an ) r i Al increase in effective strns takes pleee in 10 years following the increase. 9 j i

C This suggests that the ground subsidence which has occurred to date at the

( B)., D-3 's 1 - s

---

...h-o~--

~ - - - - -- ~ ~ d [.. . -. " 1Tl. a

= -. - -... "; p. i y.,. j y , - d.'-v,V :,; ] ? w' j,$ ;...:.,.g!$% .y 1. <^ h,- v. .c . u :.i. m ny:,,.; =% ., s, f. '.,.,,.{ 1 % "'l Q p yl b; $.,F.,.Vi [ f.- i. '4. ~ +. l.. - - a -y;, :- z. 'j

a

.k ( Q m}, *. s= L = - L - y _',.

• ,~

.e s. .. gg,,geg.p y:- cv , g,q ,.-o. y,. .,s 1- ) iSite coeprises approximately 80 to 85 percent of the total subsidence which PM.E M l . will occur. if no further water level changes'take placerThus.' the' total ' R^l$. ~ .,v; ,m s ~ ultimate subsidence which has been generated by the decline of the water' i y. m 3 M m lesels to their present values is about 3.5 feet.

f, n.).e'

^ ~n 3' Of sore irportance than the amount of subsidence is the location of O* ic - ' - the Site with rt:spect to the subsidence contours.'since it'is the sense of ', 'w b-s.9

3. r..

l-curvature of a possible subsidence bowl which determines the nature of the we, i a b; L strains developed at the ground surface. i 2 The Site lies near the' margin of an elongated and irregular subsidence %g. i ~ ^ E l w. l bowl whose center lies between Delano and pixley about 15 miles l distant from Y.u.5 [ 1 4 W% A profile' the Site. The settlement controu, are shown in Fig.,2.5.1-11. - M 1 through the Site and the center of the subsidence bowl near Delano would show 'Q .k p I that the Site is in a region where the subsidence pattern is either unifonaly O.J ~ y sloping or is slightly convex upwards. This indicates that the Site is located w in a zone of the subsidence basin where the settle-ent pattern has icposed .,. 3, horizontal strains ranging from zero to very small tensile values. d The general development of horizontal strains as a function of vertical 1 subsidence is shown in Figs. la and Ib. Note that the horizcntal strains are compressive in the center of the subsidence bowl and tensile around the edges of the subsidence bowl. The subsidence profiles shown in Fig. I resulted from f ) the extraction of sulphur as shown in Fig. 2. The location at which the obser-vations shown in Figs. I and 2 were made is about 50 mile east of Houston along the Gulf Coast. The soils overlying the sulphur are sand:, and clays similar lh to those at the San Joaquin site. As the surface subsidence developed in this 4 i area, tension cracks have developed at the surface; and, further sulphur d extraction resulted in vertical offsets a'ong these tensile cracks. It has been found that the development of these cracks occurs when the horizontal D-4 I_ f ___.,_n,_ ,,_ y ....,;.......__.-...___.m_. .-.t.... -. - ~. _ _... 1

.~~'~ =7. ' ~.pg y.;.,n :mn,,g, i ~~ -,;~ ,.~ y ,- -<j : u; _ %,v. ,r .m z ,s . v. c c.c.. l ,c +v

• '.S,Y; ' '

1 ,;e ? ...D.. trA . &,,, ( Ql s, o - ( " J w <D ','s... y ~ ~ '"* -1.. Q~ h Q ' 'G * : ', i , 'i V

g

? ,C&, y...

1 3..

[ ...;n f ,. ~, 9 :., J.: - - '{T < ,7 ,_(

• m ay; ll.,_

~.... py tensile strain is on the order.of.05 to 11,(eg;. ".0005;to.001., tension).L E ~J %n9$ ~ m m. 1 - l; 'C" For the case history illustrated in Figs.11 ar.d 2, the horizontal StrainE... ,Y..

U}M i

~ . d; ..e measurements indicated the locations at which the tension: cracks developed * ' 7 .'2/ .w,. 1 a. ..., 7 , m e. t.q v.. ;.; ifl;g 'well in advance of the time the tension cractfriould'be seen at the surface. ~ 1 s v.

.yv The same type of monitoring at San Joaquin.could be used because the rate of.

a-- ,4 subsidence due to ground water removal will.be much slower than the case cited

g

. above (4' settlement in 31 mont s.,. The gradients; associated with the sub-Qg

r w%

h) g, &y., j ..- s sidence bowl due to ground water withdrawal'will. also bo much less than tha 7'% r V. ~.~ v,.' i gradientsshowninFig.1b(about4ft/1000ft). 3, k. Ponit5ringProgram s 94 ,.s c.m -, 4 The program of piezoeetric eeasurements and the system of settlement. i 1, I' ~,C .w-conu::ents shown in Fig.1.5-1 as pruposed by the applicant a w adequate' to

,{

.i monitor the changing piezemetric levels and the subsidence which will accompany .: g _.3 the drawdown. The corr.paction recorders established at the site in March of . i; N 1974 are adequate to measure the compaction of the ccafined aquifer between the surface and a depth of 350 ft and between the surface and a depth of 1000 p ;i ft. These measurements will document whether the subsidence is due to com- , ii~ l 1 If the seat of h pression in the unconfined or the deeper confined aquifer. a 9 the compression is in the confined aquifer as expected the. differential settlement is expected to be small at the surface. The three phase network to measure horizcntal strains at the ground surface as shown in Fig.1.5-3 is adequate to measure any horizontal strains i 4 which may accc: pany any curvature of the ground surface due to differential settlement on the side of a subsidence bew1. The measurecents of horizontal 'I strains are as necessary to make as the settlement ceasurerents and should be i j made throughout the operational life of the plant. I D-5 I (\\.. l L_. _ _. _ _ _ __ _ _. __._a 1

r;w y. L(.;pSu,.. m v y yi m w-g @m % p _ y.7ze" W T w.:;,,g fw ,sq r.,.:,,, ,. ym g'q <w je G.T-i3 y apWS g;qtyg g'g v; 3.cl; - o ?W 1 p:%,l v.7:::lm C %: ,,. n )1l'. n. 6

s,n '.,

M: M' ~ .-Q a. A h ,.,..p%,. :-:; t. : e.:

s.. (h o..

'.....,.. q.

~. -

,n : 1 w' # A.e f, u

• .,. w..

t

3..

w*, e

• .)-,+.-

y. S m. -n b , a 3.'...,. 47 c. y p,.u ,.t*.'. .t a o'. ' %:.r , g 3=,4 a.,m,,753,e.:,,,,.c..ex.. c. x. w.., w,n, y %

f.,

7,.. a. .n.,. n s.; .w. 'y m :.t > s. r

.. q e,

N ' $,0 V. W ' ", L. W ' JO , - q;,:,., w u : <.. l.3,.. w_,5.. qc. n.y. 9 ':, ' y m? w ..'c c s. .f. y$' .P.a_.T.'.'M';j'ud.<1.. M ' ^.;...e, i ,/

• i p.,

- &;h,

.1

.c W p t x;. .yc w t .t' ~ ?p ru Criteria _. y:p i t x .-s ..,.9

9.,

s. ,3 (l ' The applicant ~ has not included in the early site review the criteria $m ', which wi11 be used to determine and what point tha settlenent seasurements and's '*4;, = l i t s ' ig horizontal' strain readings would indicate that' td plant should b' shut down. .?? e '1

c

[These criteria are to some extent dependent 'on the design of the st'ructures and ( v D the connections,of Class I pipes between structures.' These criteria aust be F s.. .e s f included in the PLAR for review when the design of the structures is further - Q 3: W -=1 along. .)f .4 e p 4-1 t, Ccnclusions L. LJ, 4 v' ' t m. It is sty opinion that the observaticeal approach adopted by the applicant is a sound approach and possibly the cnly approa:h to handling the subsidence [

f. m problem due to groundwater withdrawal. The instrumentation preposed is adequate r v t.

to neasure with sufficient accuracy the vertical and horizontal displacements I: - p which will occur as any possible subsidence bew1 approaches.the site. The i i I' applicent must submit in the PSAR however certain critical thresholds of the l l differential settlements and horizontal strains which will be considered to 1 r cc@romise the safety of the class I structures cr piping ar.d comit to a i I shutdown when these critical values are reached. These criteria have not been l i submitted by the applicant and therefore cannot be reviewed at this time. [ The PSAR is orobably a more apprcpriate docume-t in which to state these p_ n critical criteria. I agree with the concept of using the cbservational j' i t approach for this potential subsidence problen and feel that selection of g .m s ..+..J:- .~c . ~. -.s. u- ~. m...$ *m n-. t l l l .-_... ~

l s w .a ~. 7 y . >.s ,vf,,. .-y,3. -- i +..., n u. v c '- e pp., { -l c

w c-;

'i 2,>: .c w1 Te h, r.P [. ,yg [.. -.. s c....s. l critical shut.down values of differential settlecent and horizontal strain l ., :)+

k. :

.w r

will not re.e an insumountable obstacle at the tire of the FSAR revie.t. OE fiY.;, 1 v,,, o s t Rsspectfully su hitted, i

e' f ':

eg.w3 - q y[ l-Alfred J. Hendrco, Jr.

m; r', $, ';

MhTTE 34 x 4 b b -; [. .g .:Q 4 .,sl.' .J = r9

t' f a l

d 1 --) pi v e n; b se s, h

• ]

a. i g e 4 ' F I 9 g L b l i I l t I D-7 ,..g_ e., %i e,e mie,u-e OeW h.u-ed'% 'e* O'4E' >}}