ML20041F146

Forwards Revised Response to FSAR Question 220.15 Re Shear Wave Velocities Per 820203 Request

ML20041F146
Person / Time
Site:	Clinton
Issue date:	03/02/1982
From:	Wuller G ILLINOIS POWER CO.
To:	John Miller Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
L30-82(03-02)-6, L30-82(3-2)-6, U-0429, U-429, NUDOCS 8203160232
Download: ML20041F146 (11)

Text

O U-0429' L30 ILLINDIS POWER 00MPANY SO4'01(03'0E5'O bib 5 500 SOUTH 27TH STREET, DECATUR, ILLINOIS 62525 March 2, 1982 Mr. James R. Miller, Chief a (f21 Standardization & Special Projects Branch 9' ,,

Division of Licensing esy;} . t Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation ky , ' C C;m U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 2[ * %p2 8' 'D 'g Washington, D.C. 20555 2 A

Dear Mr. Miller:

Sh ,

'S Clinton Power Station Unit 1  :

Docket No. 50-461 In response to the verbal request made on February 3, 1982 by Mr. B. Jagannath of NRC/HGEB, we are sending you the revised response to FSAR Question No. 220.15. This revised response in-corporates the following:

1) Basis for revising the shear wave velocities (FSAR Table 2.5-46 and Figures 2.5-369 thru 371) and corre-sponding soil properties at low strain (FSAR Table 2.5-48). -

2) Basis for revising structural fill properties in FSAR Table 2.5-48, together with a copy of the Consultant's letter.

3) Evaluation of plant structures and earth structures for the revised soil properties.

We believe that this submittal of the attached revised re-sponse together with the previously submitted material (see letter Illinois Power Co. No.'U-0417, dated February 17, 1982) should satisfy the entire request of Mr. Jagannath.

We will include the attached revised response in the next amendment to the FSAR. 7 Sincerely, 4

. f G. E. Wuller Supervisor-Licensing Nuclear Station Engineering HBP:mr cc: J. H. Williams , NRC Clinton Proj ect Manager, (w/o attach)

H. H. Livermore, NRC Resident Inspector, (w/o attach)

B. Jagannath, NRC HGEB (w/ attach) 8203160232 B20302 PDR ADDCK 05000461 A PDR g

[ . _

r.

Revised Response to FSAR Ouestion 220.15 l

Variation in soil properties at the site has been taken into account in the soil-structure interaction analyses using soil spring method. A detailed review of the dynamic soil properties was undertaken. The goal of the review was to define the upper and lower bound curves of soil shear modulus values. At the same time it was decided to develop site specific response spectra for Clinton site to resolve the entire seismic soil-structure inter-action issue identified by NRC staff in questions 220.14, 220.21, and 220.26. For this purpose an estimate of shear wave velocities

. for soils present below the foundation mat was required. A review of the shear wave velocities given in FSAR figures 2.5-369 thru 2.5-371 suggested that in light of the knowledge gained from recent geophysical tests conducted at various sites of comparable soil deposits, the shear wave velocities given in these figures were high. The shear wave velocities given in the FSAR were computed from the measured compressional wave velocities and estimated Poisson's ratio. In view of the current knowledge,the estimated values of Poisson's ratio are considered low.

Based on the above, a thorough review of the shear wave velocities and the low-strain soil moduli, was performed by Dames & Moore.

Based on the results of this review, FSAR figures 2.5-369 thru 2.5-371, and tables 2.5-46 and 2.5-48 were revised in Amendment 12, dated January 1982.

w p ,, - nm. nw ~ . v ~ -- - _ .--,_. n - ., .,

/

Page 2.

~

The rationale and references that were used to estimate the shear velocity for the glacial soils are summarized in the attached Table 1. This table summarizes the geophysical measurements made at five nuclear plant sites. In all cases, both the compressional and shear wave velocities were measured in the field. As shown in the table, Poisson's ratios for glacial soils range from 0.45 to 0.48 based on the values calculated from the measured velocities presented in the table. As a result, it was estimated that Poisson's ratios for the Illinoian glacial till and Wisconsinan glacial till are 0.46 and 0.48, respectively. These values, along with the measured compressional velocity, were utilized to calculate the estimated s' hear wave ve16 city ~at Clinton.

For structural fill, the normalized shear modulus factor (k ) versus 2

shear strain relationship was established from the laboratory test data. In addition, k was calcualted using the Hardin and 2 max Drnevich equation, Reference 1. Since the k 2 max value obtained from the lab data is less than the k 2 max valu calculated from the Hardin and Drnevich equation, Professor Drnevich was consulted.

Based on the. discussions with Professor Drnevich, it was concluded that the k 2 values btained from the laboratory tests should be multiplied by a factor of about two, resulting in a k 2 max f 100.

The recommended values for use are given in FSAR Table 2.5-48. A letter from Professor Drnevich, which is attached for reference, indicates that a k 2 max f 100 is realistic.

f 4

Page 3.

In the soil-structure interaction analysis of the plant structures using soil spring method, a range of soil properties has been used.

Attached Figures 220.15-2 thru 220.15-5, extracted from Reference 2, show the upper bound and lower bound soil properties curves used.

A comparison of these curves with the values given in FSAR Table 2.5-48 (Amendment 12) shows that the moduli values given in Table 2.5-48 are bounded by the curves shown in these figures. Since the structural evaluation has used the curves shown in the above figures, it is concluded that there is no effect of the revisions in Table 2.5-48 on plant structures. The two earth structures, i.e., the natural slopes surrounding the ultimate heat sink and the submerged

~

dike,'have also be'en reevaluated using the revised moduli values given in FSAR Table 2.5-48, and have been found to have adequate factors of safety.

References

1. Hardin and Drnevich, " Shear Modulus and Damping in Soils:

Design Equations and Curves", ASCE J. of the Soil Mech.

and Foundations Div., Vol. 98, No. SM7, July 1972.

2. Illinois Power Co. letter no. U-0374, from J. D. Geier to J. R. Miller, NRC, dated December 3, 1981.

• , 8L N

• *

• 9 8" Ln r=

, e- e 4

e*

• 1.L. 44

. O C Nee N rJ 42 L L (N W D CJ 4

L 4J CL

%// 3 U O Cn 3 L

= L O.

LL 4J f I i 3 -m .

• t l

-4 I . r 4 & i

/ C

y -.

• , , r P.

I {,

y 1 -

.[ .

(..- __y. - . ;. ; : _ - . . j :. .

H tu - t/  :

4 ...: - . O : , _. , - .- ~.:: .{ . :.  :=.= ; -j .: -

-1 _ : l ... ;/ c - :

v ', t t -- - '

n i

___. I ,

/'- . j,. _

M o .

4 I -

I s

l.  ; -

-1 2 ;-.

1 i /-

.1 6- ;g H # -

i .) : -j. .-:: ... .

~

Z Z

me __- -

'} ~" : 1. . .)

O-43  :.L -~ : ==f=-' = -T= == =-I= O = =-f =  :=-r-H^iE-

.:=_--t-~-=* V= =#Nl:.

E,

~

O2 -N- M-;lN - N - } L_:_.

F %. . . ; F. .- .; i. .. . .. , - . _ '. l' _ . . ; - .- . .' :.. ...

. . . r

.--.R_..-3.._-...,fl'.

'; . . _ , t, [

). 4*

b; a _ . ._..~. W . . ~.CO~}CCE 1--

. . -i - - ' - -

a: a ..

, . , _ . 7.r.in_. -&= = ==2 1=:=  : :: - - -I , =:.. =t- . q __-- . p . _ _- P - . . t ... = _;.}

;n .-W....

- ; ._ _ = l_= :-

-...........6__..

ac$ _._ . . ....... a .. -

u.s__.__.__.___._ . . ._ . r _ _ t . _ .

._ __p ._ . . ..._ . _ i ___. . __. ._ _._,.

u . _. u . : , . . ,

n, a 2___.c. ,... a._. a [_____ _ ___ __. ;; ._..._. l___..,. _ L.._._.-_ _ .__..,____.._!..__.. ._.

. ..s m U .;_ _ . O--<r-- O-4 ._ _ _ _. . _ .

_..i

-p T-

. 1o og gg e i

, - 5, . _. 7 '-'

3 m , a .-  ;-- -

- .: .. v .:i .- . ,

q

- _. p ~-:_. :-

g f. . g .  ! g s,, ,

,.2

._. . :. . :.: t . . _ . _, Q ,._-

.... .:_l: :n * - :.- :.-l : }- : ; . _.;:.. ;.j. _ : _ _ . . y . - }q;/  : -;q:; . : -. q ,f  :

jc m

-i---- -v- 7(-- A. .. 1 + ;---/ja f'~-

1

,-

m .. . _t. _ . . . g ., . - a .% g 7 . ,_ = .=- --

1.,-=. w c ; 4.=. n - -

u

-W-Nd ---5-5 #II -- . k .5-% . 4 : . - [-'9. 4E E X E :_-~~ 3 -%_-"- b h: _--1l .N-- ~=UT*J -

Z

!.2._T . i;iK - ~_. ctn M .M. 2=. _- -[__ =;_3.;i_-.-.i=_.iD. 3

== ==. ;2~ ~_-b. 5; __ _ _j- =. ;.n -- .;;-'; 4.':~

-. .-] h_

.Q - M - ---- -~ }. _- - - -

~_ [ '~-'-~ ' ~_.: . % : " ---- - s q, ~y__.-/,T

. w _p __;

.~.q --- ; -'. .- G

> g D ,f._. __._.y . __ ___; n1-Cd -

' a__ --=- j J-S r ic i / .

i -

-i I

t

-_ E i g .,_

_ i l - .

f

.,  : /2 3

. t tg

-f, . _

~I O_.

4

. . . . . . f. - - . . ..

9..

- =---

..g, L .&. . f. _y

.._.}..._...

-# = ~=- t_ a= y/ -* =M= /=h=_._?- r- = e=~= : : =-- ^ L =-5:M:= :'_l. ._-.

i

E t-Vl

N= =] Ni [

j

_ .:r, .%==5&i-'i=

i ' -- '

. _l, S

_ -)

y i . _ . _ ..a . ,

. j ._ [; .: q.- sz.-.

,~_.

,, a g 3 . .; .

y = a. i .w :- . -+==w =. =. = - . n = 8-:: = . g _=o-.

n- - m = .

h- =i=i : =t: =

r :M= ':"--h .h=r. . . - d.55 w -:=&_TE a r (26.=~ ;_ : : = T :j=-i~- r:- - .:1

- - =_== = z :: = ;= :== :-

--- _ = ::i~ . : = _ - ._.;==--===:=_-=__... -= s= __ = - - . L.:

u =__ . - 2,. _ __ = :==- .m- =_ . .,2:. : -~-)

- r- = -- . :f _: = :

k D-- l .. - . . . . - - _ , . .

~ .=_ L= W--~5 6 = =--

~_.Y=....._.-_-._.__.=.._.N.--.-.__==....._._.--..~_... -

. C __ s= . . y g r3 3

,_{

, . . . _ _ . _ _ . _ _ ,_ ...i

( %

• ln n

1

.r-. --- ': __ f - I

~m c

d s

gA r f ,

i i -**"-M ' ,s ~

g f N / . _ .

.p

.t .

r.

%\

~

f j..,

.. 4

- c r s . -;. -

w l .. .  : - ; _ _ - -. -

. - - . . -  :=L .

-: - l w .;_ :- . . - - ,. -

h og f" ? I s 7

yL.-- - 22 Ni -

_;_ t '

-l -  : L1

-"l-V -- 3 V = b T - -=; #'=": '=2'- =

, ._.,- m ,. +

c. e  ! . . .a g .,i m

e

. .l

._ I a_ -

.'- - .___Nv, f a.

b . - . _

_.=__.___.

/_

s. o .l-s.

% f i . .

N *_

. j -- ' :' - 3' -- 2 l. : J ..!'* . $ i U :l $$ I ~. I'}** U . -[ : '-' .

$.M. N : . ".5'

}

c w

-~

..::.~.fM-~j~ :- _f }. :;Q=j.Q' G_ =.:j q : '. i_j g_EG _~5i.'.' l

..,l & Q_-h _Q_~_=h ..~' . * [:-T=}f l;.l

-I_._....

M . . . . _ - -

. 1 :.~.. Z '- ..~.__~'_.i'.-_. ---

u -

. _ . '. ' - - " ~ .....

. ' :- _ !* '-- ' 2--'._ . T . t " 'J = --- - I.

. . .d

, ~~----.-m4

• i .W -__

y :- - . _ _ _ . .. . _ _ _ . . i ._. _ _ .

__i ._ . . . _ _

p. _

_.__...l....__..

._.p.._..,,.

- - -. . . .. .. 4 - . _ . _.-__.. p1 . . .

g *3  ; ___._g_ _.

- - r _ .-. . _ _... . ..,.__.._.__.,_...$._-. .. _ _ _ _ . . . . _ _ . ^

• I g

_ - . _ . . . - ._ .____ _ 1_ _ . _. . __.t....._---_~_l.--*-

_---.1 C

'* M O O O C O O O (s O O O O C n N e+ 0 04 03 6 o 6-) v M N e-t O 5 , ei 4 c4 e=4 *-4 y p.. a p p. 4m . , r r os .-. r.r _: m.. _ m u.

- . s a . , a.

}

.-,,...,r.%, _ . . - + m._ .- -.=_# 4-. - * - ~

4 w e*r -

-*--'*w"* *'

C( J '"U' D.*.N.1 y-) .v "' v '

• REVISIONS -

1 C.HLCKED Y GY M / [' N d 't' N TILE O

" cy .

eATg [,_) .

s

//4'* ' *?f -

FIGURE 220.15-3 ILLINOIAN TILL PROPERTIES s

t 2 3 4 t A 7F4 ,

1 2 3 4 % 6 7F*. .

l . 3 4  % GFr" .* . . . . .

I 2 J 4 5 6 7R9. ,

. g.

{

J-1j'f.-l.

r :.

- - ~

r --

e . . .

- r T--

i. Y, r* ' .l... -l .m, ' l. . [ . i ..

..i..;.

]:....l... " , ,r

.. :~

i l1Ji!.- O P-14 at 624.3 j il. o. P-32 at 651.4

• j . .

..).

6 1. u , )- I 5

. I' ..

j .

.j . .g.

.t.

t: -

O P-32 at 617.4

'l' ll-j.l; lj- i- i  : ,

--E

!l O P-36 at 578.7 g:

4

!  !:. .? ' ' l t . . -

l 1 V P-38 at 6 3't. 9 8

i

, i. I l :t

-  ! ..  !  ! 'j l*,lA i' P-33 at 588.9

! 8

.l' l

, j i O D-6 at 577.0 7 .

I  ! lI 1 '

l l, .! '

! l' .l'l'.._.'. 'l l.',: i A D-11 at 609.8

+

I i FSAR

' l ^

s "i  : '

t ; El D-11 at 599.8 f ',(.DEjICNj CURVE,I' 'I' i  ! l ;I ' .j Nl Il ,

~ h f' [UPPEIi BO,UhD?

I

• O 11-6 at 619.3 I Cf# . ... .' l, t .

.{.

l lI

! T 11-14 at 635.3 1 j '

,; .. 4 Il-20 at 672.3 I'-

(' l'-2 3 a t 677.8

' .' LOWER I;0UND

. g

'I ' ; A.  !  ;

I i i  ;.  ;  ;

(j.

A .. i. .{'  ! O '

l. ' ' ' -

i. !

il 3 , ..

.g .l .

IlI!-36 at 622.7 il 4 .

je f

..l '

h!. g l! g! ' , t . !l .

G 11-32 at 656.1 i - -

lfl ! .' l lf't@

1

.o Q 'fj i I ..(. ! i -

. 6 D-31 at 652.7

. .I  ;

4 'A D D-31 at 643.7 l ,

l : .

t u

i

! 6

. ,*il.- l j  ; O

% O-0, jn 4 e k  ; !

h O t!

igo  ! .

"kg7

• j !f!,e j e *% ak -

f:*',

l

l l-lrl o o 0

; t v 00

-l . .

.  ;- , '; m* -

1

.' 'I l i l .l  ! @. . 'S i b$ 0 .

$ i,  !

' li

' b@g l .

l . ! :..i' . . ' iiY  ! I I O. i. !  !

jl!

5 l I

.? .

Oa' G

i .

j lt  !

a .

r I

l l

l

. ]. l .l j!

g..

. ,8 F A+g*

100 '.I  ! l' -

't

r. .i.t .I _  !

._i. l .. .. l '}

hF1

+

o 10_4 10 't 10 '- 10

-1 o c

10 SIW'LE AWLITimE SilEAR STRAIN, (%)

L_.

w,, m-- c f[ r i .' ' RCvtSIOns

% [8 P'< le I DATE '

.g

' LCKED M st f b* 4<

• r t - gggg p@ SY Carg Gg* .

//-44 0'/ .

)

1 FIGUPI: 220.15-4 LACUSTRINE D!-: POSIT PROPERTIES ... ..

s a ., < s o n .o ;

4 sa7s9. . . . . .

7.,.,.,....'

a r 3 .

, . , . . . . . . t  ! \. - . .

- .. ; g ...,..p...

, , .. , .,,,... , ] . , ', .

.,,_...1,..,,-,.- .

. .; , . ,I .i .s ,.

I 4 . -

[. ..; ,

1

..'  ; ~

,I I , .

t -1

!.f.

i e

I ..i ..

.L. i

'r ijr

!l ' y -d

-l'.. O, P-33 at'573.9', .tt:I 9 ' '

5 5 -j+  ! j-4 - .j i . : ,. - 1 l l ., . . li  !  :

i i i  :: i' . i  !

...g

.J.,, -

- 4

= I l  : '

p: . i,:.

.t..-  : .

i .  ; - .

l .

ii..

,,; p 1 i .'i . . .

i j '

f j jl - -l- -b ; - *

'j.

F

.!Ii  !:j 4 i t.

j. 1.-.

ii. .

I 6

1.

,i

,, .I '

i. ..

li '.. li.

jl 8

I .: t; .

6 1  !

..l' -

Ii i

i DESIGN CURVE j g' f aco - .p (

t .

p [i ;- -

!, g.>y 6a FSA.

! '(UP,PER BOUND) "~ '

i 1I .._.i .

I- t .; : ',

> r

' ,1  ! ; l I,i;- . i ' ' .

. i ;!' i. .I .

! ' i j  ; .. e ,

t i e i 'I i

l

1. i: ' .i

.i l i ;g 't._.  ;

i j ,i !'

U

-j

/ ,

!' i I

- i

'. l . ;' LO'e'ER a LOUND 1

O' O

' i:ii i

{ l l ;i i ! l i

!g -

4. n f .

!i l ;t ili-  ! - !i '. !il:.

t i i .

' 'i

: l . ,-

. , , e

/  : ,e i* : i

, } i . . .

-f i .

1 i

.i;I .; i acco .

I i

.e.'- . . i. -

i, 3 i i i

. . i '

i

.I i . .  !.i i .

l!.I!, ...

. i  : .

l .

';si. '

!  ! .i i f t *'

. 's ', .

l .

t,

! . j i e i.

. i .

. l

,' ! i i ; * '

!i -

,8 ;i' .i l'i..i' 4 '

s

.: i  ;

i

j l[ -

?

. . .i . . i .':.e-i e

'i j -l.

i: ii i ,

e. .

!, ,j-e .

i

[ l.,

l !I I+ -

i :

i c :u ~

/. -3 -2 -1 0 7

10 10 10 10 10

[

ST'mi.E AMPT.ITlinE SitEAP. STRATI ( (;:)

f.-

w

'- s -

U

.* e O **

• 3

.*= ~ -

• I.4 s ,.. C....J ' ,

pg .p .. D.aJE

[4...u . -

s.,Y s

~

FIGunE 220.15-5 .

PRE-ILLIIOIAN DEPOSIT PROPERTIES 1 s m s. r c e .

i .

,4 . , . . . .

i .4 *. 4 1Yb. - ' , .

l i i a ?

. 4 . i .i .. . . .- - -

i I  ; : -

• . . . - . . ,.a. ,. e , ,; . . . , eg.-- g

4 .

g.

4 ,

.. .; i .

t , .

>  : . i . ,

!. ,l

'. . . j .

,;,  ; . -! i .

l..

. . -C: P '12 a t 547.4 ;i . ' . L I , , i .i . .

i'

.. l i . ,. s' t A P-36 at 519.7 ' .. , .

s.

.~.N l i .

,  !', P-38 nt 558.9; j ,

,. . e , s i ' a *

.. , e. ... -

.' ~~ -

t,.

e

?

t

, 3

v. '

,../,. ,FSAR DESIGN CURVE ' I;'[ll

? . *1-l .i l l !lt1, I{

. -

• I t ,- I - '-

... t ..

locca l

i

,(UPPER BOUND) '

'N , \

l

.fx y '

,]. .

3 .

A

. LOWER BOUND

i

.,  ! gI. f o r , .  :

- * . .., j P i *

• a rJ ,

! et . .

, i .

= i

. g '

i i

. i

' I 3 [O l

t

=

. . s  : .

. i -

+

.  ; .A. ,

i

, l .#' a j -

p d

i ' ,

i JCCG -t t.' - .

l , '. .

gG ,

• 3 o

G .

m C.s A-s .

. . e

• li -

, l. .

4 , *

' \

i

. [.;

f 2

6 i I:I 11 g .

., , ,. , i ,

r.: .

l -l .

g l

(. .

~

( IN i 1 i '- 10-3 10~2 INI 10

• SINGt.E AttP'T TTI?t !'!IrAlt STRAIN

w

_ _7-

_= y- - ww- - =wmmweeem - _

a.._. c.y . sy_z. fem - 2.u i

't

. bow 0t'l O

~ -

%% Ho D\

Dr. Vincent P. Drnevich, P.E.

3310 Roxburg Drive .

Lexington, Kentucky 40503 February 23, 1982 Dames and Moore 1550 Northwest Highway Park Ridge, IL 60068 Attn.: Dr. Terje Preber, P.E.

Re: Granular structural fill, Illinois Power Company, Clinton Station, Job No. 5646-017-07 ,

Dear Dr. Preber:

I have reviewed the background information on the granular structural fill which you sent on February 10, 1982. The information was from the Clinton Power Station-Final Safety Analysis Report, Amendment '3, April 1981. The info rmation included: results of in place density test measurements, particle size distribution curves, and information on mineral content. From these data, I was able to classify the structural fill

. material and to establish the parameters from which to estimate initial tangent shear modull.

I have performed resonant column tests in the past on material similar in nature to this structural fill. In addition, a colleague at the Unive rsity of Kentucky, Dr. Bobby O. Hardin completed a fairly detailed study on the Shear Modulus of Gravels for the U.S. Air Force. The final report on Contract F29601-73-0-0064, September,1973, was used to support my calculations to estimate the initial tangent shear modulus for this structural fill.

The process of estimating the initial tangene shear modulus is necessary before one can independently establish values of K . Shear moduli 2

were calculated by use of two independent empirical equations; one from the S t a t e-o f-t he-Ar t pape r by Hardin in the ASCE Specialty Conference on Earthquake Engineering and Soil Dynamics in Pasadena in 1978 and the other from the above reference report on gravels. In both methods, the significant pa rame ters were varied to ascertain the sensitivity of shear modulus (and K y ) to the parameters. From these calculations, it is quite evident that a K -value 2

f 100 is a very reasonable and realisitic value to use for design purposes. I would expect that if .very accurate insitu seismic tests were to be perfor.:ed on this structural fill, that the values of K back calculated from the measured shear wave propagation velocities 2

would be approximately 100.

DAMES & MOOitE

. faAR 01 E32 Psk RWy, !!!A h

- _ - _ _ - - . ~. - _ _n_ -,

,' .b -..

Dames & Moore, February 23, 1982 Page 2 I as pleased to be of assistance to you on this matter. If clarification on any of the above items is needed. I would be happy to provide it.

Very Sincerely yours,

/a ctr uf r

Dr. Vin ent P. Drnevich, P.E.

e I

L  ;

5646-017

• CL1%10N .

TAMLE 1 e

FVAIIATION OF CEOPffYSICAL *Q COMPRESSIONAL WAVE SilEAR WAVE

• FLOW DEPTd VEtoCITY RANCE VFLOCITY RANCE {01SSONS RAT!c.u ,

Stir, SOIL CONDITIONS COCl? RANOT (PY) (fps) (fP9) RANCE AVERACE lernt !!!

(rtit) Till 30 - 20 0 - 30 5500 - 6900 900 - 1800 0.485 - 0.463 0.47 Sterling (r: TII) T!!! 100/6"-refusal 0 - 80 7400 - 7900 2150 - 2700 0.434 - 0.454 0.44 Attica (s: ) Cliy 4-8 10 - 40 5200 - 6400 800 - 900 488 - 0.490 0.49 Till (ML) 50 - 100 40 - 50 6600 1100 0.485 0.48 Sands (S? - CM) - 2n 50 - 65 7200 2100 0.454 0.45 Till (ML-SM) 50 - 150 , 55 - SO 8000 1300 0.455 0.49 Poi!!y U '!!.) C1 Lac Clay 5 - 30 20 - 100 5600 900 0.48 0.49 C1 lac Clay 30 - 200 20 - 120 5800 - 6200 1150 - 1400 0.47 - 0.48 0.48 C1 Lac Clay 50 - 200 120 - 140 5800 1150 0.48 0.48 Clacial Till 50 - 150 120 - 160 6200 1600 0.46 0.46 laSalle Clacial Till (f?!L) (tJisconsinan) 10 - 100 40 - 115 5500 - 6400 950 - 1450 0.45 - 0.485 0.475 Clinton Clacial Till (111tnotan) 12-200/6" 50-170 7500 2000 - 21011 n.16

1) Calenlated

2) Estimated

%