ML20127M965

Generation Plant Recommended Earthquake Criteria

ML20127M965
Person / Time
Site:	Monticello
Issue date:	01/24/1967
From:	GENERAL ELECTRIC CO.
To:
Shared Package
ML20127B696	List: ML20127B692 ML20127M965
References
NUDOCS 9211300523
Download: ML20127M965 (50)

Text

y- <

c5

L 6. 3

\\<-

q'a, La.

s s

t GENERAt ELECTRIC COMPAN Y b

ATOMIC POWER EQUIPMENT DE PARTME N T

' ~

% fySup $pgg 4

[r Q V.

,c MONTICELLO NUCLEAR GENERATION PLANT v

RECOMMENDED EARTHQUAKi CRITERIA l

u_

t

,}

g J

f'

, ~- ;

+

l l,-

s x

'. 1 i

..i.' '

N h, ;d \\\\ ! E '

r'*

t gg101967"p?

1. AA A f AI il l d A b i

i j

f

"'d[h,i$

2[4 4l?

l A

A D ASSOCI ATES, ENGINEERS AnTd(g/a,yMp!BtUMEwMui 1V(" [ q{

t 9, r p l

j p, q

f 3

)

SAN F R ANCISCO lI 1 l

i

'\\$l k

k I

b

}

6 l;C3 92113o0523 670207 PDR ADOCK 0500 3

T e e...

g J. 7. II"Mt !!6 '

1 9

H. J. ' i r f 0's

• - t5"*"'

JOliN A. BLUME & ASSOC l ATES, ENGINEEl'S e >

D. R ulxts* A

• 612 liOWARD $1REET e $Ati F R ANCl$CO, CALIFORf41A 94105 e (4tl) 397 2525

(

January 24, 1967 General Electric Cominny Atomic Power D:uipment Dept.

175 Curtner Utecet San Joao, Calirornia 95103 Attention:

Mr. R. B. Gile MC-750 SUDJECT:

Earthquake Decicn Criteria for the Monticello Nuclear Generation Plant Gentlemen:

'I e

.Bercrence 10 unde to our report on the cart.hquake design criteria fer the cubject project dated July 15, 1966.

In thin report vc recom-'

d monded that Type 2 otructures he designed for a minimum horizontal coefficient of 0.10.

We have reviewed this requirement on the bacio of valuco recom-monded by the Uniform Duilding Code, and it 10 our opinion that the appropriate coefficient for' Type 2 otructurco chould be 0.05

.Our -

recornmendation for a one-third allowable incroace in basic streno still-applico.

Very truly yours,

'J01UI A. BLUME & ASSOCIATID, IO1GINEERS 5~~

c.

L J. Keith Acciatant Vice Prcoident.

EJK/hp 4

M %

f m

gg

.-.. -.a..-

-./.

,vg; t

t Johni t.. MUt/K J' P. H' ICOLL1tl A

H. J. S t a f 0 N JOHN A. BLUME & ASSOCI ATES, ENGINEEIIS

'5"^"'

]

62 HowARD sTRiti e $AN FRANCllCO, CALIFORNIA 94155 * (415l 397 2525

0. W. uirtiaA

. g#1 i

r l

s July 15, 1966 Gene ral Electric Cornpany 175 Curtner Street San Jose, California i

w h

Attention: Mr. R. B. Gile

Subject:

Earthquake Design Criteria for the Monticello Nuclear Generation Plant i

Gentlernen:

de Transmitted herewith is our recommended earthquake design criteria for the subject project.

Since not all field data have yet been made available it will be necessary that we review the findings presented herein. We do not however, expect drastic changes in these criteria.

.i Very truly. yours,

~

J011N A. BLU_ME 4 ASSOCIATES,. ENGINEEl?S Eft-

11.,J.

Sex t on, -

y Vice President and Chief Engineer g

l' )

3

N *er *.

ew ew.- -- em an

. er..

i I

W PREl,lMINAR.Y EARTIIOUAKE DESIGN ClllTERIA a

e

.FOR TI_IE-MONTICELLO NUCLEAR GENERATION PLANT F

-NEAR M

-_O_N_TICELLO, MINNESOTA F

p Tids report is based on preliminary geologic and soil data furnished by Darnes and Moore, foundation engineers, and the assump-tion that the reactor-building is founded in a 15-foot layer of stiff clay r

immediately above sandstone, When final earth science reporta are available this report will be reviewed and revised if necessary.

.s The proposed site is located near the right bank of the Mississippi River in Wright County, Minnesota at about latitude 45' 20' North and Longitude 93' 50' West, approxiinately 30 miles northwest of Minneapolis r

ii.

'I' e,

.g M

m M

4 5

l W

9

.j I

E

?

5

• $bh $('l b, l $$ k }l435 (k

O'e i Q.lAl(,?h g.th3 tnt i i g*

4 mg=g.77 _-

_..u m 4

_ ;mm 3

~

.-wp

__*j _

~~~ _ ' *,

3

('_g f, },,

,{

O

).-

4 t

q

\\

• • e 'g',., % 1' :;/.s, j}1

-s:._.

~~~~' gr 3. r., tp,=f*'-

y

.*-~r' r

+ g,,

O'

. s?

i., s..

.?

• \\./

, 't,3 N.g%.t, ', '., _

%s a,s.

(.,

y c.

c

),

- g,

oz m

> S __._,f, ' ', ft, a y.

am

'" L n \\ *

, ($..'r'[4h. - + # dO%.~~~.. g

.g

} m m

.a

.,. d i..

w O, 7.,

{

t a 1

y

\\0 q

% i k.* s w

=

~",.h hf,, 9.,,g. h'1 ' .

• I t

./ JJ s '

.x

%s &, (J 'r.~[c'4.,.

,g

',Y ){(

H t

/ ~ Y, l': ~

8 h;V1n['b.,:. - ?.1., d'.x), gd .G.\\&cYxg

}

g 9

. )+

.-,J

}

ts *'

y [* 'N ' ',,_.,, n h.

• j m

1

!n s

..n

a. n

.A s,

r

. : j,,

-g

~_,,- a. %'n s, j

r... q s,

z o

a.

s o

g.

ui

.z__a y

..t

,r

'S o-e

)

y,

.d

..i 1~7k ^> {,

\\

^A

('. ~ ~ '

f..; y.i [w. ' r di llI M M} e\\ Wn%

5 y" y R-k

t

' h.

1' y "4 I I

h,,enx;**'.;{

' t *i,

s g

' O

[.,jfi 7

1

.4 on v.

't.

m,.,.. y.

=

a.

r s

f-e 7.

-w:-*-*" p i

, > [" M )=y.g

.g. 4,,

(

,'I I

%' y

%j I 0-f

. k

,.,.,;,,\\

.a,.

p,MQ g (' T 'A s g.x. w t[s[i4 jf,, e.- 1.1d@, -}=Q, -i,'dC %Q @4 3"

1 4i!

k.,. 4w i

wn %e.0 0M.7N M

.s.

m

n.,

,1 c.;,; g,. M, v J

n 6.: 1, n

. (m 3

. ;,j3..pnu s'hhya -

h.

(, c )4 g s i e...p s%s [ %)

,.m 4[,

}.

._ c-h.

g-(h.Jif) c "p>

\\;

n w y{

g 1

c i

v

.a.~ o b n M.m 4q e.

p y

.w

. ;; s

=y

]-

.. t 9.'

.! s

^/. C,, L sd<.

. :i.g,r.-. *q.. v,. e-j b;,f WQf_1 y

.m-s 9

-q

, 3 2 _._. -

w.)

.,&?Q l,

.y

+

4

__ pc o

n

. r+-

... t. p o

..: tv

, -i o n~!

s

'--. I' 4 '. g'm 5 '

the7 *g t.'N.I -

f.s 3,d. g --

.j"!'

w.. s 4. :.jlp. T W;. p y@ w Q g m ; y

,,*][)..]

- y 1

.L-

.IN f

{

f.

f~

f.-

./

q ;.7 p

C

. h.J~k%-ff O=.v.? r.4 M co W

% ; &.. i ba S

b 4

- a 99 8

h4tq m

4 g f 3. 7._}! #,,;s.m n

, s

' wq,4..>

u

^

J '.

1.%. sV~ W / V Y.

If1. N g'Yg,4-**

tdjJ j.:

.8 o.+ i

v. 4 - if '

+.

i f 3

x v

, - U,.

,, 9.;,, f,

-e c s 9.

,s, u, 3 0.. y I

g

. % d.1_ c 3.

b tsc - 9 p,4-g m

)

fY f

.&V

't, l,y L $ ( / I[$ u. W W l' pw %-..,Y,k M%

,?

g n %e.u;

\\

o l'r

,4 q a-l,p; 1l 4.., q 7

!!n _.3.b t

, 4, b n1

> c.;r

( s.

a,, o.

F

. g s

,.3

• . 1 a

r

" p$

l.

i n

~~

t

.. / p'

,u S

'-~.02._,, ).a ~

Ir j '"

_C E'

)

l

~ '

i, " - - d...

l -=.,

Q f) 4

~\\ {

j j

~y es 1

6

~ - ~

' T rr%

, n. s m,.g ;0,, c' Q ;

y y3 wib

. l_.s.' w -

N

bI A.... o

+

'n.i Y

e

.,g g

.,. u

(

h t

t

[

'N*

,[

7.,

\\

.i

.; \\ '

._e,9 3yf.

(

\\

,(

s s

d Iy t

\\4% :L % V

+_

(Y,3 ;J 4

I s

s-

'n y.

Q wt,61.l, '",

n k3

,e, "; -

% (

)I

/. /,..

J 1

s

.; yg :j '

,ul 11,.

[

[

r 4

y i..

- -, ~ -..

.,i-

• g s

Ia

.aJ GEOLOGY dJ Regional Geology -

The basement rocks of Minnesota, some as old y

as Precambrian, generally are covered by Pleistocene glacial debr4s and younger alluvial deposits.

Volcanic rocks occur in some areas.

Sediments of these types rest on glacially-carved bedrock of sandstone and shale in turn underlain by weathered granite rocks.

surface slopes cast to southeast.

The bedrock

^"

The Minnesota area here discussed is pa rt of a deep, southerly-trending trough in which were deposited sediments and volcanics dur-ing later Precambrian and Paleozoic time.

Paleozoic rocks are exposed in the southern part of the trough and, in the Minneapolis-St.

Paul area, form an artcalan basin.

Regional Faulting -

The results of regional geophysical surveys indi-

~

cate that a major fault system of Precambrian age may be present in the region.

Displacements of thousands of feet are believed to have occurred on the faults in Precambrian time and displacements of lesser magnitude in Paleozoic time.

in the last few million years.

There is no evidence of faulting e

Two lobes of ice, both of the Wisconsin glacial stage, advanced,

the reeion, the older from the Lake Superior area and the other 4

Se sor-Both left te rminal moraines, the moraines of the we st.

if the lobes being immediately south of the present-day Missise-

+.r

+

rer.

w The depths of stream channels ct.t in the area in pre-glaciatioa time not only may be greater than that of the Mississippi River but they also bear no directional relationohip to present-day channel.

a The lomating of these old channels in hindered by lack of bore-hole information.

a Site Geology -

Decomposed igneous rocks of Precambrian age lie at 7

a depth of about 70 iset at the site.

These rocks are overlain by 10 to

.J 15 feet of sandstone which, although in places weathered and friable, is in general moderately well cemented.

The sandstone is in turn over-lain by approximately 50 feet of glacial and alluvial debri's co;tsisting of sando and gravels.

s lain by clay of variable thickness.In the reactor-building area, the sandstone is ove the building will be founded in this clay,It iu not presently known whether or not J

e Borings and well information in the vicinity of Monticello - about 2-3/ 4 miles ea st of the nite - indicate that that locality is underlain by s

150 to 200 feet of unconsolidated alluvium and glacial drift which in turn JOHN A. rn.UMl; ik ASt >OCI ATCH. 1:NdlNI.l :6." s

4J c i

overlie saridsto ic and shale; granite at that locality lies at a depth preater than 500 feet.

, The indication is therefore, that the rock and soll units at the site slope eastward towa rd the sedirnentary basin and its artesian ground-water aquifers

.s 4

• d

• d m

ma d e

~,

'A 3

J w

M r

W w

w

, =

d e

.J JOi IN A i It t ' All (L A t o '.i % I A I i. t., t Ns. tnt I i;

q o

SEISM

- -- -- O L O G Y.-

Seismic llistory -

Table A nume rically lists the earthquakes in the gene ral region in and a round Minnesota, Those more applicable to the site are plotted on Plate I.

The earliest earthquake on record oc-curred in 1860 in central Minnesota, thus the record here is for only some mnety years, During that period the historical carthquakes have N

had little effect at the proposed site.

Faultine in Area -

Eault - is 23 mIIes southeast of the site (Plate 2).The nearest known o N

According to refe renced geological information, there is no indication that faulting has affected the area of the site in the last few million years.

The

~~

major fault system of Precambrian age, which is associated with the Precambrian structural trough, is also seen on Plate 2.

Major move-ments of thousands of feet along this system appear to have been restricted to Precambrian time, with minor displacements having oc-curred during the Paleozoic.

Faulting within recent geologic time is not in evidence.

Richter's Seismic Regionalization Map (Plate A, Appendix) rhows the area of. the site in a probable maximum intensity of VIII, Modified Mercalli. This intensity has been based o'n the area's rela-tionship to the Canadian shield. Stable shields in other continents are usually fringed by belts of moderate seismicity, with occasionally large ea rthquake s.

llistorically, this area is too young to prove or disprove such seismic activity, The Coast and Geodetic Survey's Seismic Probability Map of the

_ United States (Plate B in Appendix) assigns the area to Zone 0 - no dam-a g e.

1t is our opinion that neither the regionalization nor the probability map is catisfactory in determining a proper seismic factor if considered alone.

Each, however, in based on judgment and fact which, when weighed with other data, become more meaningful. In the case at hand, e

the assignment of an VIII as the largest probable intensity for general

,y area must be tempered by the fact that the intensity at or near the sand-stone will be much less than that experienced in areas of less competent material, where invariably the maximum damage is sustained.

s Earthquakes can and do occur in this region away from faults, and probably result from residual stresses due to recent glaciers, y.

A quake simila r to Nos. 12 and 24 was postulated near the site and using the

~*

! J, dynamic response data obtained insitu, the 161 ea rthquake of July 21,1952

.s i

bk

1. k. k )k.,k I l

O k i t

- Ob

. WW e e

s.

o.

North _69 West component with an applied factor of 0. 33 was selected

]'

as best representative for the design' earthquake.

Plate 3 shows single-mass spectra when averaged.

Recommended design criteria follow which utilize this earthquake record.

4 4

'4 l

l i

t e 4

e n >> is & i iu n.,,

n

y...,c, y, r.,

i s o,~,;,

,3 3[Yd

~J.T

, Nh ~ $ _-

~

A

= --

__a m. --

"~55 25 O'2 Met::t '-4=

~

. r=u 1. %...w.

c l

t a 5 E M g' m., c

,. 1.

-V

-i-L

+. : " 1, -[.

,u.o.,in,tc ei c,ies.

- i

~ " ~ ' ~

. " "\\

d'

'$ ;Y652 r _,

~ 1 poorly known a,

f f

/. /

l q

gi' :y 2

y e"3"];:

'h.

, e

-g _ -

1

(

k

• < 39. y

.g.

4:7 ;, /

y/ *A

.t-

/

/"

M>}$

f f

s,'

%r' e

y /

/ ;l j

,e,

.Mf

/

,<~ r t

/

,-,r m - L, i p,,".

hs /. l_/,,(,,

o p

j

- e.

Q

?

>l c a

y a..y/

4/, -

4r d.- - n:.

4 v

,7.1_.

p/

r

,r

+

Y kf/g h' f. j'

~

us b6

. %, w 'y

. a : x;5

~/, /

.ff d

a

' ',y&?.:

, ow i

.~'

'~

l,.

\\

s h

n/

9' yA..L,.y+.n k

c, ~.v,.w. 35,.

... w n

j%yy.

p 2_

~

'r'g g g.

. -@f;ypp.w:.

u.

_.3

.f. f

...t '.s %,.

,N T

o.

_,f % f+@ M,.eif &,=,,

M.}G,v,,d2 Api

• g s.

lo,'

4

,4' w.,..

l$$hdh ' k Ap' $g.

W;

w -

o$

$.u$$ yaws.W' l h,.? ' f.

t

!h i+

v

,...'E4.dNN. b /a Nd@gtlf c csrid, 7

i u du.m...m. eg o : m..z,#.3 e

m

/,','.

).

r

,/

..f$

r

..f %.;.m,m'kN h.thf>MWsY',

<h

~*

'e,

>:: + s06a u

s i

4

~

• Q.... ' 7, ;

,/v-

. l wnyr:se

. t /_. _y y

ss no y

+

,. /

y ;

w).. : 1 N'

%- - \\ - + 3 +'-

j

/

._4' 3

j =[/q pq q p p{,W A iALLS '!kOIli(iiQ.

'b

_ ifNN POLIS

)

/N m

(7w

$,3 GT PAbL l

g j

J-w

,w i

,e ou i

p si

.. so - : 9 4L i?

-?'~ j?

m

\\ &

t! Ry; p

w g

q.

.y pr%g. G o

s N

{

j r

A g ca,

.L, y

~,s) s 1,

n i

,7) g

--J

. > /_ 2,.)4,"^3^roy_ % + -__

citokEE Q,

e4e s

T Ett

/

.,,,__.._____G...

\\s p,, g_'sD

.' <t c

7 y

3

)x

,2 i

.'.i' j,,

/,/

g g

i

~%

g s

s

\\

• % p~ '* < ',} " *. -

l

_ql 1

Uf fl:,

,/(

t

. ;/

\\

5 l o, o

g, i

s., {

s g

s,

er,,,ne....em A, ;!

4z it s

./

j.

\\

g,,, o e n

49,

. + m\\ a\\q(...

y-j

('+ - ---x-._

r N

. + -

ro, & m o-

,7.c a/

(

N, l

j o

u

-r w

,L r

i x-

=

+s w

. 2 a,..-

r.._

w..L

" l y'f OF MINNESOTA REGION TECTONIC MAP l

, g2 qb 4,

e c r,o o oc t'

./ y !i[.

PLATE 2

aa ~ *<m l

o..,, m. u 8**:

U$G' u ns d th A p G

~_

-_w% _

,""'*"w

1. rr re 1 _.

T a

-P RECOhthlEND10D EARTilOUAKE DESIGN PROC N,

divided into two classes:For purposes of design, structures (building ent) are

-u Type I.

thus might cause a nuclear incidentThose structures whose fai o

ent and Type II.

Those structures whose failure could cause no nucle

^~

ncident.

Recommended Procedures for Type I Structures and Equi pmen t 1

tural design shall first be executed based onFor structures o

, a struc-estimated seismic shears, moments, and displacements.

be subjected to a dynamic analysis using the spect aThe structures ing values from Table 1 on Plate 3 and damp-r participation of all modes having a period greater than 0 08 Su vertical ground acceleration of two-thirds the ho i second. A tion shall be applied to the structure and resulti r zontal ground accelera-zontal and vertical accelerations shall be considered tng stresses due to hori-and shall be added directly.

o act simultaneously the resulting stresses shall comply with applicabiWhe 6-conditions, without the usual fractional increa se for short-te rm l c codes design shall be reviewed for compliance with local j

oading. The final puterized methods of dynamic analysis are used requirement 3 If com-may be subjected to an excursion through the Taft carthquak, the math y

1 1952 North 69 West component with an applied factor e of July 21, has been satisfied, the structure shall be examined und of 0. 33 After this those given in Plate 3 or a dynamic excursion th y

er values of twice of July 21, 1952 North 69 West coi..ponent, rough the Taft carthquake As befo re, with other appropriate loads., horizontal and vertical seismic com y

n side red Under this loading condition there shall be no shall be 0. 08g.

n could cause injury or prevent a safe shutdown during o a

quake.

r after the earth-2 equipnu'nt a re pla ced into three cat ego rie s ba sed c ures or and the predominant frequency of the supporting structure:e r natural f reque (1)

Rigid category:

- [ *-.

' 2. 0 (2)

Resonance category:

0. 7 < fnl <

2. 0 4

I i

(3)

Flexible ca tegory: I"_

0. 7 i

.JulIN A I ILUM t. f4 At H >O li A I t!U. E Nr.INC (J 45

.-n.-.

3 4

W he re :

y fm is the natural frequency of the mechanical structtare

%a or equipment, and f is a predominant frequency of sup-porting structure at the location of installation, s.

(1) For Rigid Category: 13ecause of the high frequency, the design shall be based on an acceleration corresponding to the maxi-mum accele ration experienced by the supporting structure at the loca-tion of equipment support.

(2) For Resonance Category: Elimination of resonance phenomena is one of the principles of the design. In order to eliminate resonance vibration some modification of the natural frequency of the supporting structure may be required. In case the resonance vibration

^

cannot be avoided, prevention of large amplitudes by means of damping devices is requiredor dynamic design considering resonance vibration is required. In case the mass of the object is such as to produce an

" Appendage" condition with large deflections and accelerations, a thorough dynamic study will be performed. Should the restriction of vibration be enough to make the object rigid, examination for rigid category is also

^' required.

(3) For Flexible Category:

Those items which are de sig-nated as flexible will be designed using induced accelerations correspond-1 ing with their f requencies. Careful examinationn will be made concerning objects coming into contact because of excessive displacements.

3.

For structures and equipment too complex for direct analytical procedures, vibration testa should be pc rformed to establish the earth-quake-resistant capabilities, Ni,

^1 o

e

-JOHN A.. LILLJMEI ik ASkiUCl ATtEO,. ENGINE ll'*

7

,e TABLE 1 a

RECOhih1 ENDED DAhiPIhG VALUES

.J Ite m Percent Critical Damping Reactor-building (mas sive const ruc-

5. 0 tion with many cross walls and equipment and providing only secondary containment Thin-shell and prestressed concrete

2. 0 structures Steel structures

2. 0 Vital piping systems 0, 5 Ground rocking modea of vibration 10.0 s

Recommended Procedures For Type II Structures and Equipment It is recommended that Type 11 structures and equipment be de-signed on basis of a minimum seismic horizontal coefficient of 0.10

-.6-with a one-third allowable increase in basic stress.

~

Allowable in-crease in soil stresses if any, must be taken from recommendations of the Soils Engineer. - All equipment should be so bolted or fastened that its displacement will not occur if friction is non existent.

di r

4

<6 f

1 a

3 I

e 4

d jot 4N A t lL.LJ P.it. ek A t i t *Os ' t \\ TI- ' +. C N s '.IN i

.c-

' W. _ _, w wav.. -.

1I

.._y4 4

'~

4.

g go nk 7

en i

+

%J i *.

Q)

Q g

y.

y9 z

2 e

s g

b, s

R q

Fv 2

o M.

Q) 43

~,

to-

/-

d y

y y u,

o Q

r J

O' U N S k i

w v

D U

k j

b 7

Pd 11 IJJ q;

.o.. A o-T m/ o + x } ~ %Q a / / \\ oO l / y i i + -6 i i 1 i ,/. O 4 .m**

• + <. - -

x y.. - N -O . _ _ __..] O. rn N N OO d. .d O' O f ~5;6 Ni Y9 WOU Vo2923DV; 2SNOdS2W a %9l y*. _ REFERENCES 1. Nuclear Power Plant near Monticello, Minnesota. June d , 1900. - ~ 2. Monticello, Propoced Nuclear Plant for the Northern J'ower Company, July 7,1900 r 3 Power Company, FebruaryMonticello Soil Boring Data, Sheetc 1, 17, 1966. o j, 4 Hough, Jack, L., Geolocy of the Great Lakes, University of Illinois, 1950. 5 and Geodetic Survey,1956 reviced. Heck, N.H., Earthquake History of the United Stateo, U S Coast 6. logical Society of America, Vol. 49, No. 2, AprilRichter ~ amo-d 1959 7 Building Code, National Research, Council, Ottawa ' a onal 6. Blume, John A., Earthquake Ground Motion and Engineering Proc d e for Important Installation Near Active Faulto, Third World C e ures on Earthquake Engineering,1905 onference 9. Vissino, John H., Jr., Effect of Site Conditions on Earthq Intensity, ASCE, Vol. 90 No. uTa, Part 1 (1964) ~ uake 10. Intensity RatingcHerchberger, John, A_ Comparison of Earthquake Acce vitt3 America, Vol. EUI,1956. Bulletin of the Seicmological Society of 11. Seed, H.B., Soil Strength During Earthquakes, Second Wo ld E quake Conference, Tokyo,1960 r arth-i i a JOHN A. OLUMt : ik A SSOCI ATES, E NGINE t. I J, I <4 n v ~ e .4 T -1 .d wiI 7 -d -a w. -t A - _P_P_E.N D. _I_X d a w e + I ai 4 -7 J + k t'+ ~ e O d 4 a ^I jot IN A, t ILUMil 26 At i' OCIA'I i t-i, I?NGIN t t p,' ~ - ~ ~..... l g NO A TABIE A SEISMIC llISTORY OF TIIE REGION r r Iocation .No. Date Fluce Intencity N. la t W.l.ong (M.M.) Remarks

• Indicatea epicenter

~ not plotted on map ^

• 1 1860 Central Minn.

Unknown 2 10/9/ld7./ Slo 2x City, 42 7 97 0 V Felt over 3,000 square 1 -wa mileo. 3 11/15/1677 Eaut Heb. 41.0 97.0 V11 Felt over 140,000 square M milen. 4 7/d:3/1902 Ea :.. t Men. 40 5 97 5 V Felt over 35,000 square m11ca. b 7/26/1905 Cal et, Mich. 47 3 66.4 VII Felt over 16,000 square milco. 6 5/9/1906 Wachabaugh 43 0 101.0 VI County, S. D. Felt over 8,000 square milen. 7 5/26/1906 Keewenaw Peninsula, Felt over 1,000 square Michican 47 3 68.4 VIII miles. 8 5/15/1909 Canada, relt to 50.0 105 00 VIII-Felt over 500,000 square Uouth miles. 9 5/J6/1909 Dixon, Ill, hd.5 09.0 VII Felt over 40,000 square milen. 10 10/JU/1909 Ste rling, Ill. bl.6 09.0 IV-V ~ 11 6/2/1911 South Dak. 44.2 93.2 V Felt over 40,000 uquare - mileo. 12 9/3/19/7 Minnesota h6 3 94 5 VI Felt over 10,000 square milen.

• 13 2/3B/19d5 C w ula 40.0 70.6 VIII Felt over 2,000,000 square l_h 10/6/19J9 Yan[. ton, S.D.

h2.6 97.h V (cut.) 15 3/17/1931 White Inhe, S.D. h3.0 93 7 V (cut.)

• 16 11/12/1934 Rock Iuland &

bl.4 90.5 y Moline, Ill. Davenport, Iowa l'( 3/1/1935 Eact ern Neb. 40 3 96.' V1 Felt over 50,000 :,quare mileu.

• 18 11/1/1935 Canmla h6.6 79.1 IX &

Polt over 1,000,000 cquare ( over milen d elt in Minn. o + t I JOHN A. DLUMC (L AtiGOCIATC G. ENGINCCfhi J o 7I d), T ~~ ~~~ gj Location _flo. Date Place Intencity N. la t W.Lon6 (M.M.) Rencrks p _19 11/1/1935 Ecan, S.D. 44.0 96.6 y (ect.) is 20 10/1/1936 Slox Fallo, 43 5 96.6 y S.D. Felt over 3,000 square n 21 1/28/1939 Detroit Inke, 46 9 95 5 y (ect.) miles. -d Minn. __ 22 6/10/1939 Fairfax, S.D. h31 98.8 VI (ect.) 23 7/23/1946 Weccington, S.D. 44.5 95.7 VI (ect.) 24 5/6/1947 Milwaukee Area ha.9 07 9 VII Felt Sheboyson to ~ Kenosha. ,_2 5 2/15/1950 Alexandria, Minn. 45 7 94.8 V-VI(cat.) 26 1/6/1955 IIancock, Mich. 47 3 88.4 y 9 27 12/3/1957 Mitchell, S.D. 4.8 98.0 y 3 28 1/12/1959 Doland.,. f_ D. 44.9 98.0 y 29 12/31/1961 W. Pierre, S.D. h4.4 100 5 VI 9 6 O i 8UI' IN A, Lit t>N11 it at, ,A AJ4 A~1 t. IJ Nt.ilNt

1. J,'

+ $4 l TABLE 2 ] u c) t MODIMED MERCAl.L1 INTENSITY SCALE Oi' O.31 o b), (Abridged) 1. Not (cit exot pt by a very few under especially favorable circumstances 7 11 [ objects may swing. Felt only by a few persons at rest, especially on upper flo Delicately suspended III. Felt quite noticeably Indoots, especially on upper floors of buildings ?,. recognize it as an carthquake. , but many people do not of truck. Duration estimated. Standing motor cars may rock slightly. Vibration like pass 1j Dunng the day felt indoors by many, outdoors by few. I V. doors disturbed, walls make creaking sound. At night some awakened. Dishes, windows, rnator cars tot ked notlecably. Sensation like heavy truck striking building. Standing 7 V. t elt by nearly everyone, many awakened. of crocked plaster; umtable objects overturned.Some dishes, windows, etc., broken; a few instances ,,g Pendulum clocks may stop,Distmbance of trees, poles, and other tall object sometimes noticed. VI. I cit by all, many frightened and run outdoors. Some heavy furniture ruoved; a few Instances of w fallen plaster or damaged chimneys. Damage slight. Vll. Eve ybo fy runs outdoors. rm ders e in well-built ordinary stru( tutes; comiderable in poorly bui 4 some cnimneys broken. Noticed by persons driving motor cars. y designed structures; Vill. partial collapse; great un poorly built structures.Darnage slight in spe k* s antial buildings with Fall of thunneys, factory stacks, colutans, monuments, wallsPanel walls thrown out of frame s Sand and mud ejected in small amounts. . licavy furnitute overtumed. Changes in well water. g Cars. Disturbs petsons driving motor , e e IX, plumb; great in substanual buildings, with parual collapse. D me structures thrown out of Ground crac ked <.onspicuously. g Underground pipes btoken. 11oildings shifted off loundations. t' X. Some well-built wooden structures destroyed; most masonry and t soundanous; ground badly (. racked. rame structuies destroyed with itails bent. y Landslides coulderable from river b.mks and steep slopes. Shihed sand and mud. Water splashed (slopped) over banks. XI. I cw, il any (m.nonry), structures remam standing. litidges destroyed. Bro.nl fissures in ground. UnJergtound jupe lines < utnpletely out of service, ltat h bent grcally, 1:arth slumps and 1.mJ shps in soit ground. a X11. Damage total. Waves ;,een on ground surfaces. thrown upward into the ast. 1.tnes of sight and level distorted. objects ) l I e A,

s. a tra A t n t nr o n

\\'. .4 u i At 4 L.Nt UNI e,/ f u ~'=U e e. my 'J 4 f9esg m.. h 4 ~l Q4% s F<.y,: j ' &,4.b e : o O .C tu n . b.~ Q.yf . $$w' u l, H e U 1,YQTO U ks5t[Q::Mf6'Ni:: Q ( s w ,,l. I NSI; N as g ig j s E t M_W,1. J+ A. m%wpWw$kt'.<' 'f'i#h x (,h. En 4.dM, E R ~ < ' ' ' %.e. - J v y.:. :. ' icW f: ! *,, 9:gd'bi,st.f'.ITf [. {i : ; : - gg,q N't :b d f.:)h,p 8, *-k:$ ' ' l Y ': Ic ....g N f hl' .g,;_ ,e w.c,.., -a.w._,.:. ye,lg, w -Q g M zgd w m

g

+

\\ ljj @ r v @ m% $9'e, N,e,. c y;ef @d -@ a,M : M s

y 1 Ro

g m

3, y

al u m<.;.

A i

+~ q' 4 X ' ; i ~- Q:M] ':2/r 'N*}:e,,f)f }Y k psi f \\:. g.vR55$i' ll a m"@u..,w% z.gqu?q;~~'sWQfj + J,[.\\ t Q j ~ } c l.,, w: &y y m;pw Sj "m t L i 4;p e a :op p,../. ( o o c'4:+f; / w, 2 gw...p & Mrs o,a o v4w Lw e m. w,., ,o nxw'rd$ 4;. %q p y:p:; eNh S $y4 '*% Iff' ' ( , ; s. s * $:f ?! < - -,d? .?. m'v e. h.a. s E., , _Ih

8 istY N: y'e;y,, : p\\

xd:;;mp,n' '+y;w:;

g g 9;a9, n'} %'" ' R[t; yg g a j,s.

'@, M*,,w 1 I Js3 j,f*

g. :x %y&'hi

n A

+.: 4p{y v;R M,.f,, y'.h e ~vu ug- ~

; 5 > g' 'pg;$;p;;@?,-

h ,g. y g,3 'e g g s m.% p$ - < ;; -.._ p ., y, + : c.:;p'g:q. e t c- ~,.. _ ' SI;l ,,l%

~,p,')E f@%

. ); ml SV: lV y;;. cl;J V;.',' m'Qy m,,,, y;f/ e a gy p,..; -> w. : .s 3-

v. m

~J:

s, aR n ey, w&

w' %~g4,y;' g. e , #qs./7. ye,... & .{:

/

apWp %,T.Y;,y, 8 14t.w:k'kk :Lwh Nm. w@w%%i + . s,. :} h Q;ie M.s,

u W $i

,9,7 2 stW e s v.;-a,r'/w,.;9, s. a 34, g?my::(>,:,,- '; y,n. 9,.p. g.. w. y..,;- ,e t/, y o,. ~o ':q e ,,&_ m n ,,, c;q k4

.l97*

+ l ' m$ _h$$ <f s_ Q' w 'n'h; $a'$.;hwww wp am y~ v w p d'# u w w a m' s a,I ' n'm, *w :w'y. <t ..y.t a gn:n.c.un: p x. w w. ,' Yy)* 'kk. $ :)N; f( ff : h,; s y s

tm '

,' : }MM%gnM. '~"* D - g .%*',(',i'gQ1Me:, T5 .W,% -v grcme '.'+$i'Q gjl 7 "i g%: .m4 + %. . K, 3 . :[9; U ,. N. f ,c, ' fiq'QQ;t syy .$% +tf ~ c : Q' .l m ' L l Wp% 'y 's % - ;dN (

l. W 'M n ",,

1: ; :, :,, }i Mdgn l ;., 7 k.' h

I k

Oh.s. r. :. :;: ^ WMggp% & gpy. p *. ^~ o 6. c 09'-

• ')

O %^f *"y4*,yk.A'y}N * &g N.h, , M a4 [ E y n u m., ;,7 gs g E E, ..e*./ =- ,o. n E m v. p. e a ' '-'" *

• 9Fgra e s e ge't a.p-.4.y

nilv- ,ap 4+ 4 e y tI P g M E.. R Q. g g.. (., ';#- Li \\ ~ ~~;~~ 'Je y m p .a \\/ i 99 .J h k; ^ b ._ W h k -J

• el go r

3 a ? c3 i A' t._ %,,;,.V 1 g ~ g,_._. .~', f-,.#I a 1 s 1 u -4 p 1 e t i \\,< b ;4 y _ r i ,T ,i r, 3 .? I \\ 's - y h s

• 4

. -1 p_.-- -,- ey-- 3 L.- i +1 I

<-]a"'

pr_,._ ..4*4 , t ~ -~sjg N 0f; 3 l p jW 3! i ~~~ ,f ge e i e, i pro i o_____[...__.,- N.' 1 -t i _e o J, _a - - + - - - \\ I ., = j / { - :O rw / N', / > i i

/./ ~Jh 1

Y- 'W- . },. = =: t)% 4-a_ l o l e ^ S f i / .r [ 1 { c w ]N7-...,, ,h y -4._,,,,' e r I H f h{ / M l I --~7 ~ ~V y a n m 'W i l ~ '5%~, u 3 l : .,,l t -q~I ~~q. g ; gg5 't.x' D] j.) l lN ^;y y 0 yw ~X4x / [ ~ g a53 4 o x,. U 74 / ' cts N g h,/

• n l'

s. l ii 2,! >- fs= g m ,f u. e rs ~ ~%s h} } } f:w l J s' / r z i a a) pgN/. ..,r/ ,/,4 2 8 % 2 2 v , u u, A f%! Qf Gy va gg Q yf a2 mN s e a N !b v N 5 y m Nln y Y.' = 3 o a 4 or O i b A Q:,.y -. -.. e )3 y nyg 3 't"

i

)-Q., s .~ y V, }, l %'fatcry supp 7;;s Cy; l , g_ _ wa _ __. .au m u.;Ac son sout r ono iocano.o en acon m m w e 7*7-47 GCol1Gi LF t. t' A D i ' ff L JAMrG 1 THOMPLL W tuelves wAJr October 17, 1966 Bechtel Corporation P.O. Box 3965 San Francisco, California 94119 Attention: Mr. G. L. Parkinson, Proj ec t Engineer Gentlemen: Seventh Supplement Report of Foundation investigation Proposed Nuclear Power Plant-Uni t Number i Monticello, Minnesota For Northern S tates Power Company This letter presents our opinions and data pertinent to questions asked by the Bechtel Corporation concerning dewatering operations to be per-i formed at the site of the Proposed t4uclear Power Plant-Unit flumber I in Monticello, Minnesota. We understand that the main dewatering system will large diameter wells installed around the periphery of the of consist proposed construction and penetrating into the underlying sandstone forma-foilowing questions regarding dewatering operations were asked: tion. The 1 - Will the dewatering operations at the site affect the performance of privately owned wells existing near the site? We understand that the dewatering system is designed to remove 400 pillons per minuto during low water conditions and up to 3.500 gallons per minute during high water conditions (A high water level assumed at Elevation 916 is anticipated during flooding of the Mississippi River.) The dewatering system is designed for a maximum capacity of 6,000 gallons per minute. l .u ~ e-fo ', 4 ot, t -Occhtel Corporation-October 17, 1966 page - 2 2 - Will-limiting the soilds content in the ground water removed from the site by the dewatering' system to ten parts per million (10 ppm.) be sufficient to pre-l vent detrimental loss of ground in the v!cinity of the excavation? 3 - Will the ground water removed f rom the site by the de-watering system be suitable for use in concrete mixing operations and usable for plant sanitary and drinking purposes? Based on our knowledge of the subsurface condi t!ons_ in the vicinity of the site, we estimate that, during high water conditions, the zone of. in-fluence of ground water drawdown in the~ vicinity of the site will.be on the-order of 2,000 feet or'less. Hence, wells located 2,000 feet or more from the proposed excavation should not experience measurable drawdown in their normal water levels. Due to the variability of subsurf ace permeability-characteristics, our estimate of the zone of influence is considered subj ect ' t to some uncertainty. We therefore recommend that pumping and drawdown data obtained during test pumping operations at the site be provided to us so that we may review and modify our conclusions if necessary.. It is our opinion that limiting the sollds content in the ground water removed from the site to ten parts per million will be sufficient to prevent detrimental loss of ground within the. construction area. We recom- ~- mend that the contractor be required-to provide substantiating data'through-out the dewatering program to veri fy that-the solids content of the pumped water does not exceed the limiting value. Ja if the total solids content of the water to be removed f rom the excavation is limited to ten parts per million, the water will-not contain an amount of total-solids which would preclude-its use for concreto mixing-1 and for plant sanitary and drinking purposes. iwever, we recommend that samples of the ground water be obtained and subjected to laboratory chemical analyses to insure that its chemical composition is suitable for these pur-poses. 1 y p 9,,--q-y e g

1. i e--

-y- .e ,.-ai' u g --- .O

• Bechtel Corporat ion -

Oc'tober 17, 1966 ,Page ' - 3 ~ We trust that this supplement provid3s the information required at this time, it is requested that this letter be bound with and become a part of the subject report. Yours very truly, DAMEi & N00RE .wfw ~ William G. Paratore a,< M./ George D. Leal GDL:WGP:mf Twenty Copies Submitted ,,.y "//J G ! c tc. e .u [, , 3 ~~ h m-x .c3 -. ,ou t r m.m c.4,c u o. .a mcm. e' A 6 - ' $1 G JAM ( '4 T 91 Q M. * 'a e G [ O f< L L!AL october 7, 1966 Bechtel Corporation P.O. Box 3965 San Francisco, California 94119 Mr. G. l.. Parkinson, Project Enginecr At tention: Gentlemen: Sixth Supplement Report of Foundation Investigation Proposed fluclear Potor Plant - Unit Number 1 MonticeI!n, Minnesola For the 11orthern States Power Company letter presents estimated maximum settlements for the Reactor This Building, the Turbine Generator Building, and the intake Structure assuming imposed on the underlying soils equal to one-third the bearing pressures soils underlying each unit. We are also ultimate bearing capacity of the for the Reactor Building assuming providing the estimated maximum settlement l to one-fifth the imposed to the underlying soils equa a bearing pressure ilding. The ultimate bearing capacity of the soils underly!ng the Reactor Bu d ultimate bearing capacity of the soils underlying each unit were presente to you in our Second.upplement, dated August 16, 1966. for the uni ts Presented l>elow are the estimat.d maximum settlements for the units are in accordance assuming that the in:,i allation of foundations with the recommendations provided in previous reports.

9s s.

i' .OUNDAll0N FOUNDMI ON I ST IMATED I 0'.tNDA110N _ UNIT alMENSIONS E LE val l0N MAXIMUM I BE AR ING l'RESSURE SETTLEMENT g EET X FEE 1) 3EE TT WdQ^ _{lNCHES)~ 1 Ri; actor Building 138 X 138 890 16,700 1/2* Reactor Building 138 X 138 890 10,000 1/4* Turbine Building 110 X 238 { 905 10,000 1 1/4 Intake Structure 80 X 90 893 10,000 I Assumes that ' tiff.o hard cl a s underly ing the foundation will be renoved and replaced with ' anular fil! material compacted to mum density as det mnined by 100 percent of maxi-ve American Association of S tate liighwa Officials Test De>,anation T

0-57, y

We trtit (F a t this su: itement provides the information which you require at this time. It is rei es ted that this letter be bound with and become a part of the obj ec t re; er t. Yours very truly, DAMES & MOCRE knye George D. Leal GDL:WGP:mf Twenty Copics Su%Itted g. ,j ~ i -- g-~ h -; _ ^ ' $.A at; 3 s 7 3 309 wcm menson .out " Aun. co, e,o i t u m ocoou. :m- ,v a -i na '~ PintNcnt .,s e M c c o. r u o u t, u r 4 .rqHGE C- . AL September 30, 1966 Bechtel Corporation P.O. Box 3965 San Francisco,. California 94119 Attention: Mr. G -L. Parkinson, Proj ect Engineer P Gentlemen: Fifth Supplement Report of Foundation-Investigation Proposed Nuclear Power Plant-Uni t Number 1 Monticello, Minnesota For Northern States Power Company This letter presents dynamic response data for the foundation-material which will immediately underlie:the Reactor-Building at thelsite-of the Proposed Nuclear Power P1 ant-Unit Number I to be constructed in- ' Monticello, Minnesota for Northern States Power Company. We recommended in previous reports that the stiff.' silty clay layer which would be present below the mat foundation of-the Reactors Building'be removed and replaced'with compacted. granular fill.. IL was further recommended that the granular l fill be compacted to a. dry, density of at least--100 percent-of the maximuip dry density-as determined by the-American. Association of State Highway Officials -T 180-57 Method of - Compaction. We understand.that ou'r recommendations will be. utilized and that" the clean granular soils. obtained from the excavating' operations wl'Il be used as fill-material below the Reactor Dullding.. i t-is antic-ipated that the fill material will consist of a medium sand with some- - gravel, h a, w * ~- rn-9 e e- -r er m e w vr v,-w ,==v +--e9-e- -w ++r* --vv ww v *- r e - "t..y o 4 Bechtel Corporation September 30, 1966 Page - 2 We present below dynamic response data for a medium sand with some gravel compacted to 100 percent of the maximum dry density as deter-mined by the American Association of State Highway Of ficials T 180-57 Method of Compaction: . REPRESENTATIVE PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS FOR COMPACTED MEDIUM SAND WITH _SOME GRAVEL: Compressional Wave Velocity (V )' 2,000 e Feet Per Second Shear Wave Velocity (V ) 1,000 s Feet Per Second Poisson's Ratio (r) 0.33 Dimensionless Modulus of Elasticity (E) 78,500 Pounds Per Square Inch Shear Modulus (G) 29,500 Pounds Per Square Inch Density (y) 135 Pounds Per Cubic Foot Should you have any questions regarding the information contained herein, please contact us, it i s requested that this letter be bound wi th and become a part of the subject report. Respectfully submitted, DAMES & N00RE b 4 Y-D. Leal 8 GDL:WGP:mf Twenty Copics Submitted 4 -s ~ o }< ~d 6 _____,,m. ~- +--** 4e< .e o c.... s.o.m , x o c. u .a: me m onto. mn o w on omu o, u september 20, 1966 Bechtel Corporation P.O. Box 3965 San Francisco, California 9!119 6 Attention: Mr. G. L. Parkinson, P roj ec t Engineer Gentlemen: Fourth Supplenent Report of Foundation investigation Proposed Nuclear Power Plant - Unit Jumber 1 MonLiceIlo, Minnesota For the Northern S tates Power Compan/ This letter report presents recommenda tions regarding the location of low capacity plant sanitary water wells. We understand that two - 100 gallon per minute water wells will be installed; however, both wells will not operate at the same time. One of the two wells will act as a reserve wel1. It is our opinion that the wells should be located a suf ficient distance from the plant structures such that if accidential spillage of effluents occurs at the plant, the ef f luents wou ld not contaminate the wells. Based on our knowledge of the subsurface conditions in the vicinity of the site, and the results of engineering studies regarding the drawdown char-acteristics related to the subsurface conditions for a 100 gallon per minute well, we recommended that the wells be located upstream (west) and a minimum distance of 300 feet from the plant site. It is our opinion that a well located at the reconwended minii,um dis tance will not cause subsidence to occur in the vicinity of the proposed plant area. I i _.. e-o $, t,

• Bech t e l Corporat ion September 20, 1960 Page - 2 j.

1: We hope that the information contained in this supplement is that which you require. It is requested that this supplement be bound with our report of foundation investigation and previous supplements and become a part thereof. Yours very truly, DAMES & MOORE 6Dff ' ^ George D. Leal GDL:WGP:mf Twenty Copies Submitted cc: (5) Nor thern S tates Power Cor pany 414 Nicollet Avenue Minneapolis, Minnesota SE401 Attention: Mr. Arthur V. Dienhart, Manager of Engineering n y-.- - .+ f 1}7 ~ ~ - - n ccson -autrs .o -miv-on n o n v m, me,- I-G E O r4 G - L. t.' A l-l' A ' si ff L JAMEL U l ii o u ' S t; i

• I September 14;-1966 Bechtei Corporation P.0, Box 3965 San Francisco, California 94119 Attention:

Mr. G.~L. Parkinson, P roj ec t. Eng i ncer Gentlemen: Third Supplement Report of Foundation investigation Proposed Nuclear Power Plant - Unit Number i Monticeilo, Minnesota For t he Northern S ta tes Powe r Company - This letter presents recommendations regarding methods for re-stricting the swelling of the silty clay layer which will be exposed during the excavation operations to be performed along the common boundary between the Reactor Building and the Turbine' Generator Building. We understand that it is desired to complete the earthwork operations during fall of. 1966 such that the construction of the proposed nuclear 1aciIity.may be started early in 1967. -The. foundation grade in the Turbine Generator-- Building area will be established at elevation 906 and in the Reactor-Building area at elevation 890. In previous reports submitted, we indicated that a stiff to hard' silty clay layer is present near the proposed foendation grades. This . l aye r i s subj ec t to swelling should a ' source of water-be present for the silty clay to absorb. We reconwended t hat ' a' minimum conf i ning1soi l~ pres-sure on the order of 600 pounds per square -foot be provided over the silty; clay layer.in order to restrict. swelling. It was' recommended that the= ini t ial excavat lon be discont inued, prior to the flooding of the excavpJon. -at olevation 905. Howeve r, ' the-d i scont inua t ion o f the excavat ion at-. cleva-tion 905 will delay the construction of the Reactor Building. Therefore, 1 t f i i a. e. yJl Bec :el Corporation Sep*. ember 14, 1966 Page - 2 r L in order to attain the final grades in the Reactor Building and Turbine Generator Building areas in fall of 1966, certain procedures will be - required to restrict swelling of the exposed silty clay layer. We have evaluated the problems associated with exposing the silty clay and it our opinion that one of the following three methods should be considered is to restrict the swelling of the exposed silty clay layer along the common i boundary between these buildings: 1 - A temporary bern fil!, approximately ten feet in heignt, could ce placed on top of the exposed silty clay layer along the common boundary subse-quent to the complet ion of the earthaork opera-tions and prior to flooding the excavation during the vinter months. This temporary berm will pro-vide the minimum recommended confining pressure and could be removed in the spring of 1967, after the excavation is dewatered. 2 - A continuous dewatering operation con be maintained subsequent to the completion of the earthwork opera-tions throughout the winter months and until the sub-structures are completed. The continuous dewatering operation would remove the water source and thereby prevent swelling. 3 - The silty clay layer could be entirely removed from under the lurbine Generator Building and replaced with compacted granular fill. of the Griffin Well PointWe have discussed the earthwork operations with a represen Corporation, dewatering system will be required for it was his opinion that a two stage the Reactor Building in order to complete the earthwork operations in this area. We were informed that the lower level of well points could be installed along the bank of tion near Building and thatthe common boundary between the Reac tor Building and the Turbine the e xcava-The lower well pointthese well points could be burled within the berm Iill. of the berm fii1, allowing the excavation to besys tem could be shut-of f subsequen to the placement during spring 1967 to dewater the Reactor Building areafIooded, and then re-s tar ted Preliminary cost data regarding the operation of the well point months, were provided to us bysystem should it be continually operated the Griffin Well Point Corporation repre-sentative. These cost data are presented below: 'N i l t y ,p.* Bechtel Corporation 4 S ept embe r 14, 1966 ip Page 3 Operation of well point system during the winter mon t h s........................................ $ 13,000 Pe r Mon t h Olsmantling of tumps. and discontinuation of dewatering during the winter, with well points being left in place........................... $l,000 Per Month L i We trust that this supplement provides you with the information required at this time. It is requested that this supplement be bound with our report of foundation investigation and our previous supplements and become a part thereof. Yours very truly. DAMES f, MOORE Yt<syt < <v George D. Leal COL:WGP:mf 20 Copics Submit ted p aph & _*W-"'t T b =g_ - uswi i i insii ,i t o ,.e i t 8 ', 14 4 ,g e s/. o ' i t. August 16, 1966 } ? Bechtel Corporation P.O. Box 3965 San Francisco, Collfornia 94119 L Attention: Mr. G. L. Parki. son, Proj ec t Engineer Gentiemen: Second Supplemert Report of Founoation investigation i Proposed IJuc le r Power Plo:.t-Uni t IJumber 1 Monticello, Mi,' esota For the IJorttern 5tMcs Power Compa.y This letter presents information supplementary to that presented in our Report of Foundation Investigation dated July 27, 1966, and our Supplement dated August 5, 1966 We have evaluated the ultimate bearing capacity of the Iearing materials which wlll support the varicus major units of the Prep; sed fluclear Power Plant. tlc following bearing cap cities en be developed f:r n'ai a foundations of the dimensions indicated below, pr'avided that i r.s t a l l a t i:'n of fcundations is accomplishc d in accordance with the recoi'vnendatiens pre-serted in our report and supplement: FhUNf'/ T104 FO UNDAT I D'1 LIL- ' r te t pjMENSIONS, ELEVATION, , BEAR;kG EAPAC!fy .l)lJ].T rLEr X FECT rEET MS./5Q,FT. Reactor Building 138 x 138 890 50,0006 A Turbine Building 110 x 238 905 30,000 1 4 Intake Structure 80 X 90 893 30,000 i g,

• Assumes that stiff to h.ird < lay underl,-

g the loundatlan ulll be rens ved and replaced wi th granular 1 i ll snateri-.I compac t cJ to 100 percet; er maximum dena,l ty as deteniini d by the A cr ican At. oc i at ion o f S t.at e liighway Of ficials Tes t her.l. mat ion T 1H0-57. l _J

• r'.*

,J y l- ,s..#t.l i [ .,,.a Patic - / The above bear ir.g t apac i' ics are u l t le a t e va lues ar.-) t Ji t able f at ters of safety should be opplic,I, it it s r op i n ion t h a t a f oc ' r.,r o f safety of 3 is satisfactory for dead plus live loads, a.d that a factor j of safety on the order cf 2.5 is sm isfactory for dead, live ar.d seismic loads. Settlement limi t ations may impose ncre severe restrictions on the I choice of a sultable bearing capac1'y for the various structures. We trust that thit suppl <>:ent prcvides the Ininrnation yo': re-quire at thl: t line, it is reque t<d that this supplement be l/Jr.d Wi t h our Report of four.dation Investigation and previcus supplene; t and become j a part '. h e r eo f. Ycurs very truly, DAl1ES t.1400Rt dW/t 4 George D. Leal GOL:mf Twenty Copies Submitted t -- 1 o

4. f *,

e ~. s 6 i 1 l 2'-C ,.i. ~ ~.. _ _ a v.. m.i s. ,,o,< noi.,,,, n, c a c c,,,, g o o n,, o c o c,, u ,,,,,,,y nun.. o-atun ,,,t,.uc ,,, r o s v., 4 i r eu August 5, 1966 Bechtel Corporation P. O. Box 3965 San Francisco, California 94119 Attention: Mr. G. L. Parkinson, Project Engineer Ge n t I ernen : Supplement Report of Foundation investigation Preposed Nuclear Power Plant - Unit Number 1 MonticeIlo, Minnesote for the Northern Stat"s Power Company iNTRODUCT104: This letter report presents data supplementary to that presented in our " Report of Feundation inve'>tigation, Proposed Nuclear Pcwer Plar.t A Unit Number I, M"A t ice l lo, Minneso t a, for the Nor t hern S t at es Power Conpany" subr'i t t ed on Jul y 27, 1966. We unterstand that the Reactor Building may be deepened and that the base of the >iat foundation for th:s 1:vilding may be established at elevation 890. Retommendativns presented in subsequent sections of this report will consider that the bottom of the mat frondation will be established at elevation 890. a iisr is i i i iam _ -.-.~. . - - - -. - -.. -- - -~.--. p 7 1 2-I e PROPOSED RE ACTOR BUILDif[G: is our opinion that the Prcposed Reactor it )l roundation Design Data - established at eleve-i

)

Bu4lding may be earth supported on a mot-type foundat on l l layer the variable thickness stiff to hard slity c oy 1 t tion 890 provided that foundation is excavated and replaced [ which would be present,below the mat i n-p l ace, Should the silty clay layer be left i with compacted granular fill, uniformly. The i foundation fcr the Reactor Buildinj would settle rg:em p-g y y mye -'59 4 p-w-*-g.a.e $frW' W NTW '9'-frW@ Y .__7 e 3 e. at elevation 884, be constru:ted f urther r ecommend that the toe of the slope, (cundation. l from the outer edge of the proposed mat 4 d to accomplish approximately five feet i Dewatering by a well-point systen will be re i the excavation to elevation 884. deeper excavation. ginal report will be applicable for the jor excavating opera-The clean granular soils obtaincJ from the ma ilized a fill raterial in the over-tion above elevation 890 may be ut All fill placed below the 884 and 390. excavated area between elevations 100 percent least dry density of at Reac tor Building should be cc>mm t ed to a '"e American /issociat ion of Hi gh- >y the maximum dry density as > me fill material should be of r.m way Officials T180-57 Method or a: Sly six to eight Inches wy In Icose placed in the dry and in lif ts approxnulior nly compacted in acco thickness and each lift should be un the Proposed above recommended criteria, ing that Settiement analyses iave been performed assumfound -upported on a nat Reactor Building will be earthinmediately underlain by com lar fill. elevation 890 and will be impose a dead plus live load pressu 0 The Reactor Building will We do isot anticipate that li solls. pounds per square foot on the under y ngTurbine Generato the foundation pressures from the Our engineering of the Reactor Building. cantly influence the settlement foundation will undergo essen-the carth supported mat indicate that he order of one-eighth of an inch or analyses tlally a uniform total settlement on t lain by granular solls d The Reactor Building will be essent ially un er less. i ei ..,...4 l .,m ,_.-,._.,.,m_ ..__,_,,,m. a e e. e 4 which.ili! consolidate during the inittal*opplication of the load. Ouring carthquake loading, we anticipate negligible additional settlement. The icwering of the Reactor Building foundation f rom the previously planned elevation 893 to the presently planned elevation 890 will redu e the influenc e of t he foundat ion pret tures of this building on the settierent be-It is estinated that the havior of the adjacent Turbine Generator Building. elevation 905 on an earth supported Turbine Generator Building established at mot foundation impos1rg a dead p'us live load of 3,500 pounds per square foot total settlement on on the urderly Hg soil wil undergo an essentially uniform the order of cre-quarter inch oc less. Dur i ng car t hqual.e loading, we estinate that an additic,al settlement en the order of one-sixteenth of an in:h or less to consolidation of the granular soils which urderlie the -at could occur due foundation. The carthquake loading will be of such short duration that no consolidation of the silty clay layer is anticipattd. The rarth wall of the i:cactor Building will be subjected to the load plus horizontal components of the adjacent Turbine Generater foundation the lateral pressures due to fill and water. We present on Plate I the mag-nitude and distribution of the i rlzental components of the foundation load of the Turbine Generator Bulldlog plus the lateral pressures due to fill and water. RE SUt TS Of CONSC8.lDATl0N TESTS: Several consolidation tests were performed on representative undis-turbed satplcs of the various f<undation soils which will underli.e the pro-posed s t r uc t ures. At the time 41 submission of our original report, the ..........i........ e, 0 e 4 . e,. consolldat ion tests I ad rot betn completed. Thebe test, have s irice been co9-pleted, and we present en Plates 2, 3 and 4 the results of the consolidatic') tests. These tests were performed in accordance with t' method described on Plate 6, Methed of Performing Consolidation Tests. Additional descriptions of the procedures used are presented on Plates 2, 3 and 4. In order to evaluate the swell characteristics of the stiff to bard slity clay, we performed loadit" tests to approxlhate the field conditions which will be imposed on the silty clay layer. The results of these loading tests are presented on Plate 4. POSSiblE WELL LOCATI0t 11 has been requested that we c omment on poss it;le locat ions for water wells to be installed within the plant area, The g' und water gradient in the vicinity is relatively flat, shallow ground water n:ves gercrally to-ward the Mississippi River in the immediate vicinity of the ptcpcsed plant, and deep grour'd water moves br( adly towar d the southeas t in the river sedi-ments overlying the site, Ground water in t h e '. i c i n i t y o f the plant 'ay be developed from either the Mississippi River s< diments, predominar.t ly sard with gravel, or from the underlying sandstone tormation. Wells penet rat ion ei ther of these aquifers wili cause localized (one-shapeti depresslen', in the 9 ound water

table, it is anticipated that !be area l '1 the immediate vicinity of thesc wells may undergo some surface subsidence due to the insieuse in inter-granular soll stress caused by the lowering of the wates table.

the depressed-water table will also cause a baalized nround water gNdient toward the wells. I ,,,#3., m, y..,.__ . (,. Because the ground oater graditmt will Le directed toward the i. ells, the ucils I should be located-a suf ficient distance f om the plant structures such t'at local subsidence will not affect plant operations and, if accidental spillage 1 of effluents occurs at the plant, the effluents would follow the natural j ground water gradient rather than flowing toward the wells. 1 in view of the above, we suggest that plant water wells be installed a subs tan t ial dis tance upst rear. f rom the plant s tr ucturcs. -It is retccrended that a test well be installed upstream frc, the plant to deternloc draw-dcwn characteristics, and to evaluate water quality and yloid potential of the wel1. ..o03.. .... a. 4 n w.n..... 3 _.,e mr,..- ver. -,,z,, -r,m-- x -m- o. e 7 The fcitowing Plates are attached and complete this supplerient: i Lateral Pressure Design Data k Plate 1 Consolidation Test Data Plate 2 Plate 3 - Consolldation Test Data Consolidation Test Data Plate 4 Consolidation Test Data Plate 5 Method of Performing Consolldaticn icsts Plate 6 Respectfully submitted, t DAMES & HDDP,E William G. Paratore Project Manager this su,plemantary report was prepared under I her eby certif y that n my direct supervision and that I am a duly registered professional engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota. It is requested that this report be bour.d wIth and becone a part of our Repori of foundatIan investigatton dated July 27, 1966. / hayg I' r George D. Leal Registratlor ilumber 8131 August 5, 1966 GDL:WGP:dh 20 copicr. submitted i ...,....,,.3 4 - BO.T TOM OF MAT 1 TURBINE-GENERATOR BUILDING - DEAD + LIVE -+- LOAD 3500 LBS./SQ,FT. 2 n WALL h i a e% 14 g g, _ v v v v y , v y --c c k / //// l/// c 3500 LBS./SO.FT.f* W k goo h 4-O s k gg5 _ - g - BOTTOM OF MAT-i. REACTOR Q BUILDING - ggo/ / / // / 4000 LBS./SO,FT.b l 3 0 2000 4000-6dOO-- C LATERAL PRESSURE IN LBS./SO.FT. NOTES: + I) ELEVATIONS REFER TO MEAN SEA LEVEL DATUM. 1 .a 2) L/sTERAL f'RESSURES Sil0WN. ABOVE ARE THE SUM Of O 7 THE PRESSURES 00E TO Soll, VATER AND THE DEAD AND LIVE LOADS IMPOSED DY Tile TURDINE GENERATOR -00lLDING. O-S 8:: w u LATERAL PRESSURE-DESIGN; DATA-FOR NORTH -WALL' OF ~ REACTOR BUILDING SDA M W S 43 MOOME a - e.~e : s ; i.m e, i-1 PL. ATE = l r; -.,3-..- ,.ww-. ,r,vm,-. v,.- ,,m.,- y...._. ,,~.-,,,-.m,,,- e,.. em, ..,,,_,,..c,-., .r.,o,,r--, e e I 4 f e

59i

,,.. s i e 9 r K g.1 g .s --. w..,. 3,,. -.. 4 i , [} '%.y. 4,w., 1 < 4 e. s c e w t. t .,,. ee s .f3 .i, l s, y ; ; ort. s.or \\ Di +f%, , g 4 4 . -- + -4..f. 4 ). - s l N.( ' %,' ~ 'q !jtt l 's.}

t. 's, !

s. 1 ill l +! s,. i, i t a;, y,., _..,. s.s.

a...

.,_.s,_ W.s i ). s s q' t i % a' l e i -(' !--h%.'*1 ts, !\\ 09 ~-

• g

• i

.t- - -- l[,'h,it\\- 4 *,* ? ~ ~ - --+ ~ } -- +) 'k + 'y .) l \\'s. i N. e4:. 3_ j .t! 3 -;.d' .i. .i-,_. s, i p; a, s w... I s, i s l l s.

i 1

• l s

l*4 .\\- g 2 i s' { i r -s l r i i ! i .i.. (ya - y.-.. g,.6

6. -

_-.t. , ??b .h.4. + \\, -, . *y\\ i ! t - + ~. -+ 4 'I 3 j }- 's !}' j j i 's i s i p N <</ -s .- \\. s-7 p. {q a h e. t 8 . o. u, i s g s v. nm 1 ~ j inm m o.o, 4 u e s. t s o m, .,, u,. \\ ~ l X -y =, s,, y. nj ur { 1 .)- i j e i I -l Ii: l t t / (,W6 s--*-.*-- ) f9 4 9, i y ) I i i i i ij I i i m 4 I .i. l ? i ( Q l j i i l i 3 i.L . ; 7 ; 9.. l p. 4 4 '(r i i l' l t 1 3 i.,j. p .i i. ~ i t = ,l,. i__ .,,) Mg ?: 1 4 t 4 -- i 4 38, it -J r. n -4 ii ~ i .4 g - 4 l t 4 i l iIt 1 {; { n i j, .,x, f f 't t 4' i e f % 4 5,41 + A tg h .'. 9 L. 4 's t in i. s -.. is n i,, v n, aw...,, .! i l l i ! i l., -. -. ..,, u. s.i i ,4 . 4 m,. n.. - s+ .or .._o l mi. ,,... v. < n . o.ar.i e - jx;, n. < m,,....,.,o on. ...,,,,-,,n y CONSOLIDATION TEST DATA .-.u.,~~... s PLA1C=2' 4 4 ~., -...,.,..,. -.. _ ...,m -,m .,,4 4 4 e p g+,mi im,. o. 4 i. 4 4. - - -,- ~. 'l } l l 4 l i I l I, i . Ii m.. __ l._ ; _ j _. 4$ --t- --.i,I '-. - t -t tt ! j g e.m.u...o..,,, un a u..... n.o - +t ,1 i I l' l v.; a.-

aw ** t.*'en l

n I rmoa is e { l i i g ... n, s, m, o m m o, n or q.._ _. A. 4.

./

yi 1 4.o -. - -. +- l 'I O lj l! I 5 I I l i, ',' l { l i i c? --; - 4-+ t-- fI N ! ij i j !j t 4 -i.- - -} i_. u l l i I t i ll i I l ? I it l l 4. 4 pl-I II i L,, I. J. rrt m, - i ~,_... lai I f - x } i. l - 1, j I ; ;s t-i

4.. r 4m iyt-ii.

a a

• 6&(

-l t i t

1.,

i I. l N,. i i ,,I c ( I i. i {: y i 3; . i. j c7 i3 i l, ' i, i i j i i ( f 1 1 -' ' [ c* --t t' - ! ( l ,i

4 i

o i 1 d i 7 } ~ li }' t a . - ~. _ -9 1 4 i <, w i 4 7, l I t t i i 4 f .y 1j l l :, I I I ji i i ( ii q t. j t->, l3 o .e.4, 4 t 4 l l il i i i , l,i '8 { i I l gf !? I i j.f' I-l l t 1 .i ii >i j i I 3 ( l l h

• 'n

. i 1 s 1 j .-.s,,, ,.-t. s.. ei. ..o, j .o. o ou ei ni., i .+ j g ,,,=.i. y,... .r .i 1 14 j i i . ". ",, ' " *, ~ '.., .m.... .-i .o i..- 4 m., .m..r. -.,i i o .n.,.%.w....... i .I .....,... n u.c nn s.- mi. c., un a e i wa, I . I E.*.lA CONSOLIDATION TEST DATA naurn n moosm PLATE 3 ~ T. ( a rat skat in t M / to 't t s t 3IE 63i! ! 4 l,. 8 o 0 N j p., t. b = h.e vo t iM #* l 0 tut iv 1 i i i,* / e n a o.o. o.i <n, e o cs - - h, \\ v ite o u eoac.,n.n. f 4.nu n. t- - - - -. ~. -. -w / \\ s N m- ~ h, Os _.. ~. -. A .. _ ~ Ni .n. l oa.- ..-~. t% t .N, i ~ ... ~ I j !' t i 3 ,g I s i ( e __. ,_.,i._ . _. q _ , _ N, I +, N i i q( .__...m q., ,g _ ; q,._1 !q .l nn#

1.,__

.} l s.._ .p, j g i i N I'. \\ 1 _..j. . l, 2 s i j cr \\ _. s i ,i _. 9 g 4 s nl h -. '.h a , te s u A 1 ,.. n,,,,,. n > s,_ r 4 .eu 3 i g u e.n o.s i o. u,m.e,.ce.,n,3. n., c a, -- - i\\ .n 5 ' N ;, u o o., u.. n.n. u,.s to 4 n n i. m.. i. os ....,. ~.-..--i J.~,..:,. N.3 f i 4 i 1% '\\, g (( g 30 9.. .I"'1'% g '. < s I { g -.N 4 u .%L '\\, .g i , g'v $I 4 s %.p, a ~ ~.. i n..._. .a.i n.. i.. u , n... n.,. u. i 44 _. ,t wi n... vow w.. o,..n r.nnu e test It ' s wAt t i entite.918 vn; t h p hm 411 $ ,g n m Gua l% t '.

• f (( WA lleg M L $

test < o 14 s lwa% Pt . os, vu.at e. men o vap44 44 7 emel($ n , n m....n.t.onio Sh Fiell h CONSOLIDATION TEST DATA E k (

• 1{

nasums a moosait PLATE 4 = o O d o so, y..w e ..._._7.. a m l-I i -,i i . n. ,4 t.,, i !l ) ,m. j .s o >2a.5< . 1 i . m n, .a. l t j f". ,o t s. i. : < i l

i i

n. o a. nn ,t ./ 4., ..,4 ._4 .e. l. . 'I '{. .1 l 4 Is ; / 1 i ! 6 i I !g.t I j t [ 4 l 4, - l i I i a..ps f., < y g N \\ N N N N- \\ N N

N.

\\,, s. 1 N N: i g%N 3 %yd mm s s.,. .c erg N s4 1

u d,

h j i + -: 3 Psal Y. E i8s i kw %W 81 a ( t, ~ _.....,. _,, _--s.,_..,_. 7 I i s l l _,1 .i i <,.,es 3 i. n i 7 i s s s s s as f, g s ii., n j i i I l i, \\N ' t s r .a , \\i N 3 y. ,g,. s ..j. .v i 4 i i s. 1 ys 1 N N i N ~ i 3' N \\ N i N I h j ( i >Ni 4 i t i ! i N ' N, % ! :s 1 i .o..s ) Ql t i,, - Q, 4 4 .- j , o. i..... , s 4 i i 1 i - a. s s i a 1 I i- , 03 -.A_-.- CONSOLIDATION TEST DATA sinurs u r.copeer PLA1C b l . -...-- ~ _ _., - t!1 16#1in 8 Ji Pi61eOmP.t f<,Nud.H.Alei 11 9 g Cououh4 Tion TLsis AkO Pl.nl ORMi D To t-VALU ATL Till: vott su aimi.s of solt.((taiJrgirD W p Q lf o INatl, ei,D 1.O ADS. TIVr-COWOLID \\110N ANI) PI(13 ;t1(I AONsol !!s t11t iN tt IW1 s M4 Y ltL Pl.ol. - j l ll D TI'.oM Till: D ATA ODTAIN01 IN 1111: Ti sis, I NGINI l itlNG AN ALYSt s 16451 D oN Till.s!' CURv!T i 6 Pf RMil i A11 At4Ti S TO fil: M ADE Ol' Till PROttAltLt. MAGNITUDF ANI) RAll: Or $1 ITLLMI NT OF Tilt >NN Tl 51LD soll.S UNDER APPL!!!) 1.OA Ds. i !{ At 11 s elPl.1: 15 T131 L D t iilllN lt H A % k!NGN TSo AND ONI. 4, i 1 1141f int til 5 IN DI AMI:11 H AND UN E INCll IN Li NG111. !%Dlh f 1t'Hid D s elPl.Eh ol' IN P!ACI' Rolls \\ Hl: li STI D IN lilNb% T A KI:N 11.OM Till S AMPlJNG D1 Vl( f D, Vlfluf Till seH'LEN D yis > <, ul ki oli t alsf l>, l.oost: sAMPlys of 'o!L5 10 Ol' P' l h IN w.g,ses ' CONSTRt<llNG 1 A RTil ! ! L t.5 A RI. f.o'It' ACT I.D IN RINGE To j t / PH L DI:TI.kulNLD CONDITloNS AND ~11 STl'D. g hj \\ 'g W d IN llS11NO, Till S A M P LI. 15 klGIDL) i >Ni lNI D 1 A Ti lt Al.l.Y t u. DCAD LOAD.I'N[UHATIC 16Y Till liH ANs HING. AX1 AL 1.04D% ARI ! R A Nh41Ti l.1) 1 0 1111' (ON50L100MEftt I NIK of I III.' S Ull'l.1 ItY 10HotN !)lski Tlil: Dl%s A1.1.os I ', 4 h k, h \\ I \\ $I l b s h '3 h fl ( kI. g') )l l kh. ' kI k ) l k l\\ f kk k k k,k l f ('f kl lf teoAD int bl Atl NT P. f PPl.ll D. I:At 11-Lo\\ D !< OHlilNA Rll,Y 14101 t ill PI:t i t DINo I o g li, I Dl-tw ^ P k g\\, I - k, I h

• ll\\4 ll

\\,i l I \\(g s 4 i o ,oNDinoNs ioH siin D in, u w is in iu, PrniohuiD, t o D i,, m iN4 m so y is u i ou D D, w l y -. ? At I ()VI H AN lNII R val, t il T!Ml" id l'l NI)l N i i t% l lli -') Yl'l~~ A Nlt I i 1 l % {.e t) I lit st ij l {\\ '[j[t X' '; V i. 4-11.1, f ), i g ? EDM M E:ta al Muutt e" . w w. ,s.,s ' I'L AT E G +~w.,- w y=p-,- 3 pr 4 --e p- ,.+.*W.-,p. . ry m ~a. g y n--,,ri.e.- +.-=--**'-w,*-~ ,w.-e-iua w-t---% < =. de =_,.-4 e T~,w o,ttr setw 8 6++h s eg........--- c :r,J 4 J

• s g

k SGG [di' Reguintory Suppl File Cyi h 4 b

1. ~

t, ~ yt REPOR1 OF TOUNDATI0li lilVLSilGATION 'd PROPOSED NUCLCAR POWER PLANT - UNIT NUMDER I MotJ11 CELLO, MilJNE50T A .f r0R int M non1nonn s1ms nowER conga,u )> b. \\;. e e s i l'. T. .5 ',

• t i

(* f 9 f h I l W i< k t.j sty I% a+ ? ,) L ' 0000l2[ Nf'; 50 gc3 SLIE ENVl%NMENTAL sygogg3 9'It "," Test!a eteor (As g 7"ERegulaory Docket FiliCoif ~ oth$$f,0fANY w, tr srs /f/ @ % Cche i i I I jk: l l t4 l 5644 00;.o7 g. N j l i e4 g; -